HomeMy WebLinkAbout19911007_regular215
HlNUTES
OF TEE BEGmda MEETING OF TEE
EDIHLL CITY COUNCIL HELD AT CITY HALL
OCTOBER 7, 1991
R0ILCAT.L Answering rollcall were Members Kelly, Paulus, Rice and Mayor Richards.
CONSEI!?T AGENDA ITEMS &PROVED Motion was made by Member Kelly and was seconded
by Member Rice to approve and adopt the Council Consent Agenda items as
presented, vith the exception of removal of Item V.A., Sign for Vernon Avenue
Liquor Store.
Ro 11 c a1 1 :
Ayes: Kelly, Paulus, Rice, Richards
Motion carried.
WlNUTES OF THE REGmda HWZTING OF SEPTEMBER 23. 1991 APPROVED Motion was made
by Member Kelly and was seconded by Member Rice to approve the Council Minutes of
the Regular Meeting of September 23, 1991.
Motion carried on rollcall vote - four ayes.
PUBLIC HJIARING CONCLUDED: SPECIAL ASSESSMENT LEVIED FOR IMPROVEMENT
NO. E-32 (BETWEEN OXFORD AV. AND BEDFORD AV.) Engineer Hoffman recalled that the
public hearing on the alley improvement between Oxford Avenue and Bedford Avenue,
south of West 51st Street had been continued from September 23, 1991, for further
review of the cost allocation.
total assessable cost of $8,348.62 proposed to be assessed against 14 lots at
$596.33 per lot, payable over 10 years.
for alley improvements.
property owners reiterating the proposed assessment and enclosing a copy of a
letter from Jon Wilbur, 5100 Bedford Avenue, which suggested that the eight alley
users pay twice as much as the six non-hsers.
The analysis which had been presented showed a
This is the normal assessment allocation
He reported that a letter had been sent to all affected
Member Paulus asked if the City has pro-rated assessments in the past and
suggested that this might set a precederit.
City has not done so in the past.
rules for assessment provide that each property be evaluated and assessed at not
more than the benefit received from the improvement and that the assessment must
be spread in a uniform manner.
should not set a precedent as the result of any given application.
Engineer Hoffman responded that the
Attorney Erickson explained that the City's
He opined that the application of those rules
Debra Strege, 5113 Bedford Avenue, filed a letter of appeal in objection to the
proposed assessment. John Wilbur, 5100 Bedford Avenue, spoke in support of his
letter suggesting the two-tier assessment.
Assessment for Alley Improvement No. E-32 approved, subject to an assessment of
$760.00 against each of eight user properties and $360.00 against each of six
non-user properties, by motion of Mayor Richards, seconded by Member Kelly and
carried unanimously.
Mayor Richards then introduced the following Resolution and moved its adoption:
RESOLUTION ADOPTING AND CO'EIPIRHtIVG
SPECIAL ASSESSlfEWl! LEVIED ON ACCOURl!
OF PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT
BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Edina, Minnesota, as follows:
1.
assessment roll for the improvement hereinafter referred to, and at such hearing
held on September 23, 1991 and concluded on October 7, 1991, has considered all
oral and written objections presented against the levy of such assessment.
2. The assessment as set forth in the assessment roll on file in the office of
The City has given notice of hearing as required by law on the proposed
216 10/7/91
the City for the following improvement:
does not exceed the local benefits conferred by said improvement upon the lot,
tract or parcel of land so assessed, and all of said assessment is hereby adopted
and confirmed as the proper assessment on account of said impravementto be
spread against the benefitted lots, parcels and tracts of land described therein.
3.
said installments, together with interest at a rate of 9.03 per annum, on the
entire assessment from the date hereof to December 31, 1992, to be payable with
the general taxes for the year 1992. To each subsequent installment shall be
added interest at the above rate for one year on all then unpaid installments.
The number of such 'armual installments shall be as follous:
Name of Improvement Number/Installments
ATLEY IMPROVHEWI NO. E-32 10 years
ALLEY IKPROVMENT NO. E-32
The assessment shall be payable in equal annual installments, the first of
4.
copy of this resolution and a certified duplicate of said assessment with each
then unpaid installment and interest set forth separately, to be extended on the
tax lists of the County in accordance with this resolution.
5. The City Clerk shall also mail notice of any special assessment which may be
payable by a county, by a political subdivision, or by the mer of any right-of-
way as required by Minnesota Statutes, Section 429.061, Subd. 4, and if any such
assessment is not paid in a single installment, the City Treasurer shall arrange
for collection thereof in installments, as set forth in said Section.
Motion was seconded by Member Kelly.
Ayes: Kelly, Paulus, Rice, Richards
Resolution adopted.
The City Clerk shall forthwith prepare and transmit to the County Auditor a
*DEF.ERF&L OF SPECIAL ASSESSMENT FOB STBET IHPBOVEKENT NO. EA-292 AGAINST PIN 30-
117-21-32-006 AFFIRMED Council was informed that the applicant qualified for
deferral of the special assessment levied on September 23, 1991, against
Outlot B, Interlachen Hills 3rd Addition, for Street Improvement No. BA-292.
Motion vas made by Member Kelly and vas seconded by Member Rice affirming the
deferment of the special assessment against Outlot B, Interlachen Hills 3rd
Addition (PIH 30-117-21-32-0006) for Street Improvement No. 3U-292.
Motion carried on rollcall vote - four ayes.
-Y REZONING FROM PCD-4 TO PCD-2 FOB PROPERTY AT 5100 VERNON AV
Affidavits of Notice were presented, approved and ordered placed on file.
Presentation bv Planner
Planner Larsen explained that the subject property, located on the north side of
Vernon Avenue immediately west of Summit Avenue, at 5100 Vernon Avenue is zoned
PCD-4, Planned Commercial District and is developed with a Union Oil Service
Station.
of the site as a Walgreen's pharmacy.
The proponent is requesting a rezoning to PCD-2 to allow redevelopment
The proposed building would have a main level of 8,865 square feet and a 2,964
square foot basement and would be similar to the Walgreen's recently opened at
49 1/2 Street/France Avenue.
square feet in area - the France Avenue site is approximately 21,000 square feet.
Both buildings will be nearly identical in size but in this case there will be
substantially more on-street parking.
parking is for 36 spaces, down from the original proposal of 40 spaces to allow
for additional setback and for more green space. That compares to 17 on-site
parking spaces that exist at the France Avenue location and to 73 spaces that
would be required by the Zoning Ordinance for a general retail development of
this size.
The proposed brick building would be residential in flavor.
westerly building elevations would be solid face brick.
He noted that this site is approximately 35,000
Planner Larsen said the proposal for
I
The northerly and
The easterly elevation
10/7/91 217 would be brick with wood trim and the southerly elevation would be brick and
opaque glass with wood trim. Additionally, a five foot high mansard parapet wall
would rise above the roof line to screen mechanical equipment as well as a
satellite dish identical in size to the dish installed at the France Avenue site.
Signage would be similar to the France Avenue store except that this development
would have a freestanding pylon sign adjacent to Vernon Avenue.
Access on the south side would remain as it currently exists, would be shared
with Norwest Bank and would coincide with the main entrance across Vernon Avenue
to Jerry’s.
replaced by a curb cut on Summit Avenue with right in/right out only with no left
exit turn allowed.
The second Vernon Avenue curb cut would be eliminated and be
The Community Development and Planning Commission considered the rezoning request
on two different occasions, with concerns focused on parking and green space.
The plan now presented was.recommended by the Commission who felt that 36 spaces,
based on other Walgreen‘s sites, would handle the development.
did feel a proof of parking agreement would provide additional spaces if needed
or for a reuse of the property where the parking may not be adequate.
Commission recommended preliminary rezoning approval subject to: 1) Final
rezoning, 2) Proof of parking agreement, 3) No signage placed on the northerly
and westerly walls and 4) Landscaping plan and bond to include replacing the
existing fence that screens the westerly property line.
The Commission
The
Planner Larsen concluded by noting that John Kohler, Runyanflogel Group -
Architects, and Craig.Christianson, Semper Holdings, the developer, were present
to respond to questions.
Presentation bv Proponent
In response to questions concerning landscaping, John Kohler, said that all but
one existing pine tree would remain on the west and north and that sixteen trees
would be added to the site.
any. outside lighting would be down lit.
All trash would be stored inside the building and
Mayor Richards then called for public comment on the proposed rezoning; no
objection or comment was heard.
Member Rice introduced Ordinance No. 825-A43 for First Reading as follows,
subject to: l).Final rezoning, 2) Proof of parking agreement, 3) No signage on
the north or west walls and 4) Landscaping plan and bond to include replacement
of the existing fence screening the westerly property line:
ORDINANCE NO. 825-A43
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 825
BY REZONING PROPEBTP To PCD-2 PLANNED COMMERCIAL DISTRICT
FROM PCD-4 PUNNED COMMERCIAL DISTRICT
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITP OF ED=, l4I”ESOTA, ORDAINS:
Section 1.
the following thereto:
“The extent of the Planned Commercial District (PCD-2) is enlarged by the
addition of the following property:
Being parts of Lots 6, 7, 8, 9 sind 10, Block 4, Grand View Heights,
BEGINNING at an iron monument at the intersection of the Westerly right-of-
way line of Summit Avenue (a 46 foot right-of-way) and the curved
Northwesterly right-of-way line of U.S. Highways No. 169 and No. 212 (a 100
foot right-of-way); thence in a Southwesterly direction along the curved
right-of-way line of U.S. Highways No. 169 and No. 212 curving to the left
and having an arc length of 169.17 feet, radius of 716.20 feet, chord
length of 168.67 feet to an iron monument thence in a Westerly direction
Section 6 of Ordinance No. 825 of the City is amended by adding
218 10/ 7/9 1
along the Southerly boundary of Lot 10 a distance of 48.8 feet to an iron
monument; thence in a Northerly direction along the Westerly boundaries of
Lots 10, 9, 8, 7 and 6 and forming an interior angle of 89 degrees 56' 30",
vith the Southerly boundary of Lot 10 a distance of 300.0 feet to an iron
monument; thence in an Easterly direction along the Northerly boundary of
Lot 6 and forming an interior angle of 90 degrees 03' 30" with the Westerly
boundaries of Lots 10, 9, 8, 7 and 6 a distance of 140.0 feet to an iron
monument; thence in a Southerly direction along the Westerly right-of-vay
line of Summit Avenue a distance of 158.11 feet to the POINT OF BEGINNING,
according to the plat thereof on file and of record in the office of the
Register of Deeds in and for Hennepin County, Minnesota.
Lot 8, and Lot 10, except State Highway No. 5, in Block 4, Grand Viev
Heights, according to the plat thereof on file or of record in the office
of the Register of Deeds in and for said Hennepin County, the same being
Registered Land as is evidenced by Certificate of Title No. 515672 dated
March 12, 1975.
I
The extent of the Planned Commercial District (PCD-4) is reduced by
Sec. 2
removing the property described above from the PCD-4 District."
and publication.
This ordinance shall be in full force and effect upon its passage
Motion was seconded by Member Paulus.
Rollcall :
Ayes: Kelly, Paulus, Rice, Richards
First Reading granted.
*PUBLIC -G ON COHPREEENSIVE PIAN ~~. P-Y REZONING R-1 TO
POD-2 AND PBELlMHhBY PIAT FOR NORHANDALE GOLF AREA CO"l!IKUED TO 10/21/91 Motion
vas made by Member Kelly and was seconded by Member Rice to continue the public
hearing on Comprehensive Plan Amendment from Quasi-Public to Public and Office,
Preliminary Rezoning R-1 Single Duelling Unit District to POD-2 Planned Office
District and Prelim€nary Plat Approval for Tract R, RIS No. 1050 (Normandale Golf
Area) to the Council meeting of October 21, 1991.
Motion carried on rollcall vote - four ayes.
FINAL PLAT APPROVED FOR RATET.LE HITL ADDITION (LOT 5, BLOCK 6. INDIAN HII;LS)
Planner Larsen presented the request for final plat approval for Ratelle Hill
Addition, Lot 5, Block 6, Indian Hills. He recalled that the Council had granted
preliminary approval on August 5, 1991, for a four lot subdivision; one lot for
the existing dwelling and three new buildable lots. The final plat is consistent
with the four lot subdivision approved earlier. Staff would recommend final plat
approval, subject to: 1) Subdivision dedication based on an unimproved land value
of $450,000.00, 2) Utility connection charges, 3) 40 foot conservation easement,
and 4) Developers agreement for extension of sanitary sewer.
Member Kelly reiterated her concern regarding traffic safety for driveways on
proposed Lots 3 and 4. Mike Gair, McCombs Frank Roos Associates, consultant for
the proponents, explained that the driveways for Lots 3 and 4 on Dakota Trail
meet MnDOT requirements for 200 foot sight distance at a speed of 30 mph.
Driveways for the two new proposed lots would not be shared with the adjoining
Tambornino property, but the curb cuts would be in close proximity. Further, he
explained that they had considered alternatives which were not feasible because
of the grade elevations.
Member Kelly asked if the City could control the placement of the driveways on
those lots.
as part of the permit application process and would be reviewed by the Building
Official .
I They felt the proposal as presented is the best answer.
In response, Planner Larsen said that information would be required
219 10/7/91
Public Comment
Speaking in opposition to granting final plat approval were Hallie Richards, 6804
Dakota Trail, who presented a petition signed by 35 residents in opposition to
the two lots being platted on Dakota Trail; Richard Meli, 6601 Dakota Trail; Greg
and Esther Felsen, 6801 Dakota Trail; and Sam Wetterlin, 6609 Dakota Trail.
Their main concerns were safety/traffic issues because of the proposed two lots
on Dakota Trail and that the character/symmetry of the area be maintained.
Speaking in support of the proposed subdivision were Virgil Hed, 6624 Iroquois
Trail; Dr. Donald McQuarrie, 6625 Mohawk Trail; and Peter Simon, 6612 Iroquois
Trail.
Dr. Joseph Tambornino, 6608 Dakota Trail, said he was concerned with traffic
safety because of the grade elevation for the proposed driveways on Dakota Trail.
Council Comment/Action
Member Rice questioned the setback for the homes, the conservation easement, the
footprints of the houses, and standards for adjoining driveways. Planner Larsen
answered that the setbacks are proposed at 80/90 feet including the 40 foot
conservation easement which would be placed of record.
footprints are purely illustrative in nature.
requirements for driveways, they may be adjoining or shared.
The proposed house -
There are no separation
Member Paulus commented that the proponents are within their legal rights to
subdivide their property and have meet ordinance requirements.
change is difficult but inevitable.
safety in that rural neighborhood.
prevents the cutting down of trees.by an owner on his property.
reasons, Member Paulus said she would support the subdivision.
She said that
One or two homes will not affect traffic or
Further, there is no City ordinance that
For those
Attorney Erickson answered Member Kelly's concern about the City's control over
location of driveways on Lots 3 and 4 by saying the building code and setback
requirements must be adhered to but that outside of considering the topography
there are no other rules. Mayor Richards observed that he looks at the issue of
density in all proposed subdivisions and would support a less dense development.
Member Paulus introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption, subject
to: 1) Payment of $36,000.00 subdivision dedication fee, 2) 40 foot conservation
easement, 3) Utility connection charges, and 4) Developers agreement for
extension of sanitary sewer:
RESOLUTION GRANTING FIHBL PUT APPROVAL
FOR RATEI;LE HILL ADDITION
BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Edina, Minnesota, that that
certain plat entitled "RATEI;LE HI= ADDITIONn platted by Alex E. Ratelle and
Patricia C. Ratelle, husband and wife, and Norwest Bank Minnesota National
Association, a United States of America corporation, and presented at the regular
meeting of the City Council of October 7, 1991, be and is hereby granted final
plat approval. Motion was seconded by Member Rice.
Rollcall :
Ayes: Kelly, Paulus, Rice
Nays : Richards
Resolution adopted.
BOARD OF APPEALS DECISION -ED: SIDEYARD SETMCK VARIANCE GRANTED FOR 5004
BRUCE AVENUE.
Presentation bv Planner
Assistant Planner Kris Aaker explained that on September 5, 1991, the Board of
Appeals and Adjustments met and heard the request for a 1.6 foot side yard
setback variance for building height for a master bedroom expansion to the home
229 10/7/91
located at 5004 Bruce Avenue.
and the applicants are now appealing the Board's decision to the Council.
The Board denied the variance request as presented
The property is developed with a two story brick single family home that has a
30 X 20 foot attached garage located to the rear of the home.
owners are proposing to add a second story master bedroom and bath above the
existing three car garage and to expand the existing family room on the main
floor. The addition has been designed so that the north building wall of the
garage would be extended to accommodate a second story with existing setbacks
maintained.
5.1 feet from the north side yard.
maintained at a minimum 6.3 feet to accommodate the height of the addition.
The property
The existing sideyard setback of the garage varies between 4.7 and
Under ordinance standards, setback must be
The most severely impacted property (5002 Bruce Avenue) is adjacent and north of
the subject property. This property consists of a one and half story home with
an attached garage located closest to the proposed bedroom expansion.
proposed expansion would be visible to some degree from the second story living
area of 5002 Bruce Avenue and a portion would also be visible from the street.
The expansion was designed to compliment the existing floor plan and to match the
existing building walls.
addition south to conform to ordinance requirements without severe changes to the
floor plan.
ample rear yard for expansion. In conclusion, Planner Aaker said staff would
recommend that the Council affirm the decision of the Board of Appeals to deny
the side yard setback variance.
The
It is evident that the applicant could shift the
The applicant could also pursue a more radical design utilizing the
Mayor Richards noted that letters in support of the proposed variance were
received from Michael and Peggy Guard, 5006 Bruce Avenue; Thomas B. Weaver, 5007
Bruce Avenue; Amy Furman, 5001 Bruce; and Bernadine Bilden, 5005 Bruce. A letter
in opposition was received from Mr. and Mrs. Wallace C. Olson, 5002 Bruce.
Presentation bv Proponent
Dick Nickel, 5004 Bruce, said they understand fully the applicable code and while
the proposed addition is technically in violation, they felt it does not violate
the spirit of the code for several reasons.
integrity of the house, 2) Two letters signed by four neighbors who would view
the addition to some degree are in support of the variance, 3) Although other
alternatives have been considered, this is the most practical when considering
the location of the house, the driveway and the floor plan of the second story.
They feel this is a reasonable addition, they are adding less than 15% to the
existing square footage, adding a master bath is a desirable feature for houses
of this size in the '90s and they intend to make it look like it belongs to the
house. In conclusion, Mr. Nickel said that by asking for code compliance the
character of their house would not be preserved but would be damaged.
I
1) The design preserves the
Public Comment
Wally Olson, 5002 Bruce, pointed out that there is no undue hardship that would
constitute this variance being granted, as stated in the Zoning Ordinance, as
there is adequate land in the rear of the property for the addition.
the character of the neighborhood will suffer and they do not wish to look at a
22 foot high wall.
recommended not granting the variance.
.
Further,
He reminded Council that both staff and the Board of Appeals
Pat Olson, 5002 Bruce Avenue, noted that the Furmans at 5001 Bruce are new to the
neighborhood and that the hearing notice was sent to the previous owners (the
Nortons) who recently moved. Mrs. Norton informed the Olsons that they would
have opposed the variance as the proposed addition would have blocked their view.
Council Comment/Action
Mayor Richards said that he was troubled by what appeared to be a miscalculation
10/7/91 221 on the initial suyey, given the existing sideyard setback which varies between
4.7 feet and 5.1 feet.
said he would support granting the variance because that would avoid the
irregular roof line that would occur if the addition were shifted back.
He felt that the intention was to setback correctly. He
Member Paulus asked if the City has granted similar setback variances where the
height of the building requires'additional setback rather than the distance from
neighboring properties. Planner Aaker said similar setback variances have been
granted because the aesthetics of maintaining the same building wall seemed more
appropriate. Member Paulus commented that she would support the variance request
as she viewed this as a site line problem because of the building height. She
added that this will be a repetitive issue because of the lot sizes in that area,
and homes lacking the desired amenities.
Member Rice said he would reluctantly support granting the variance because he
believed the building line would be better, although it may not be the best
design solution.
Member Kelly added her support for the variance, saying it did not make sense to
put a load bearing wall 14 inches from another load bearing wall.
Member Kelly made a motion to reverse the decision of the Board of Appeals and
Adjustments and to grant the 1.6 foot sideyard setback variance for 5004 Bruce
Avenue.
Motion was seconded by Member Paulus.
Rollcall :
Ayes: Kelly, Paulus, Rice, Richards
Motion carried.
*MT DIVISION APPROVED FOR 6521AIilD 6525 MCCAULEY TRAIL (LOTS 1 AND 2. BLOCK 1,
INDM HIIJS THIRD ADDITION)
Member Rice for adoption of the following resolution:
WHEREAS, the following described tracts of land constitute separate parcels:
Motion was made by Member Kelly and was seconded by
IUSOLUTION
Lot 2, Block 1, INDIAN HIIJS THIRD ADDITION, and
Lot 1, Block 1, INDIAN HI= THIRD ADDITION according to the recorded plat
thereof, Hennepin County, Minnesota, Except that part thereof which lies
southeasterly of a line drawn in a northeasterly direction from a point on
the southwesterly lot line of said Lot 1, Block 1 distant 30.00 feet
northwesterly from the most southerly corner of said Lot 1, Block 1 to a
point on the southeasterly lot line of said Lot 1, Block 1 distant 95.50
feet northeasterly from said most southerly corner thereof and said line
there terminating.
AND that part of Lot 1, Block 1, THE TIMBERS, according to the recorded
plat thereof, Hennepin County, Minnesota which lies northwesterly of a line
drawn in a southwesterly direction from a point on the northeasterly lot
line of said Lot 1, Block 1 distant 30.00 feet southeasterly from the most
northerly corner of said Lot 1, Block 1 to a point on the northwesterly lot
line-of said Lot 1, Block 1 distant 110.77 feet southwesterly from said
most northerly corner thereof and said line there terminating.
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"):
Parcel One
Lot 2, Block 1, INDIAN HII;LS THIRD ADDITION, according to the recorded plat
thereof, Hennepin County, Minnesota, Except that part thereof which lies
southeasterly of a line drawn in a northeasterly direction from a point on
the southwesterly lot line of said Lot 2, Block 1 distant 20.00 feet
northwesterly from the most southerly corner of said Lot 2, Block 1 to the
most easterly corner of said Lot 2, Block 1 and said line there
222 10/7/91
terminating.
Parcel Two
Lot 1, Block 1, INDIAN HILLS THlRD ADDITION, according to the recorded plat
thereof, Hennepin County, Minnesota, Except that part thereof which lies
southeasterly of a line drawn in a northeasterly direction from a point on
the southresterly lot line of said Lot 1, Block 1 distant 30.00 feet
northuesterly from the most southerly corner of said Lot 1, Block 1 to a
point on the southeasterly lot line of said Lot 1, Block 1 distant 95.50
feet northeasterly from said most southerly corner thereof and said line
there terminating.
AND that part of Lot 1, Block 1, THE TIMBERS, according to the
recorded plat thereof, Hennepin County, Minnesota vbich lies northuesterly
of a line dram in a southuesterly direction from a point on the
northeasterly lot line of said Lot 1, Block 1 distant 30.00 feet
southeasterly from the most northerly co-er of said Lot 1, Block 1 to a
point on the northwesterly lot line of said Lot 1, Block 1 distant 110.77
feet southwesterly from said most northerly corner thereof and said line
there terminating.
AND that part of Lot 2, Block 1, said INDIAN HILTS THIRD ADDITION which
lies southeasterly of a line drawn in a northeasterly direction from a
point on the southwesterly lot line of said Lot 2, Block 1, distant 20.00
feet northuesterly from the most southerly corner of said Lot 1, Block 1 to
the most easterly corner of said Lot 2, Block 1 and said line there
terminating.
I
VHEBEhS, 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 uith the purposes of the
Subdivision and Zoning Regulations as contained in the City of Ed- Ordinance
Nos. 804 and 825;
NOW, TBEBEFOBE, 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 regnirements and provisions of Ordinance No. 804 and
Ordinance No. 825 are hereby waived to all- 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 apprcniral of this Council as may
be provided for by those ordinances.
I
Motion carried on rollcall vote - four ayes.
*mT DIVISION APPROVED FOR 6615 BEIXORE LANE (LOTS 1. 2. 3. 23. 24. 25. 26,
BMCK 15. VEST MINNMPOLIS HEIGHTS1 Motion was made by Member Kelly and was
seconded by Member Rice for adoption of the follouing resolution:
UHELUUS, the follouing described property is at present a single tract of land:
BESOLUTION
Lot One (l), Lot Tvo (2), Lot Three (3), Lot Twenty-three (23), except the
Southerly eleven feet thereof, Lot Twenty-four (24), Lot Twenty-five (25),
Lot Tuenty-six (26), all in Block 15, West Minneapolis Heights, together
uith one half of the vacated alley adjoining said lots all located in
Hennepin County, Minnesota .
WHEREAS, the mers have requested the subdivision of said tract into separate
parcels (herein called "Parcels") described as follous:
PARCEL 1:
Lot one (1) Block 15, and Lot Two (2), Block 15, except the Southerly
fourteen feet (14) thereof, West Minneapolis Heights, together with one
half of the vacated alley adjoining said lots all located in Hennepin
County, Minnesota.
PARCEL 2:
10/7/91 223
The Northerly thirteen (13) feet of Lot Twenty-four (24), Block 15, and Lot
!twenty-five (25), Block 15, and Lot Twenty-six (26), Block 15, West
Minneapolis Heights, together'with one half of the vacated alley adjoining
said lots all located in Hennepin County, Minnesota.
PARCEL 3:
Lot Twenty-four (24), Block 15, excepting therefrom the Northerly thirteen
(13) feet thereof, and Lot Twenty-three (23), Block 15, excepting therefrom
the Sweherly eleven (la) feet thereof, West Minneapolis Heights, together
with one half of the vacated alley adjoining said lots all located-in
Hennepin County, Minnesota.
PARCEL 4:
Lot three (3), Block 15, and the Southerly fourteen (14) feet of Lot two
(2), Block 15, West Minneapolis Heights, together with one half of the
vacated alley adjoining said lots all located in Hennepin county,
Minnesota.
UJJEWAS, it has been determined that compliance with the Subdivision and Zoning
Regulations of the City of Edina will create an unnecessary hardship and said
Parcels as separate tracts of land do not interfere with the purposes of the
Subdivision and Zoning Regulations as contained in the City of Edina Ordinance
Nos. 804 and 825.
NOW THKREFORE, 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.
Member Rice seconded the motion.
Motion carried on rollcall vote - four ayes.
*HEARING DATE OF 10/21/91 SET FOR PLANNING HA!C!CER Motion was made by Member
Kelly and was seconded by Member Rice setting October 21, 1991, as hearing date
for preliminary plat approval for the Asra Ashraf Addition - North of Crosstown
Highvay and east of Vernon Court.
Motion carried on rollcall vote - four ayes.
BID AWARDED FOR SIGN FOR VERNON AVE. LIQUOR STORE Member Rice said he had asked
for this item to be removed from the Consent Agenda so more information could be
given on the type of sign proposed for the Vernon Avenue Liquor Store.
Manager Rosland explained there is a perception evenings that the Vernon Avenue
Liquor Store is closed when it is open; an illuminated awning would make the
store more visible from Vernon Avenue and would comply with ordinance
requirements.
Motion was made by Member Rice and was seconded by Member Kelly for avard of bid
for sign for the.Vernon Avenue Liquor Store to recommended low bidder, Sign
Senices Inc., at $10,880.00.
Rollcall :
Ayes: Kelly, Paulus, Rice, Richards
Motion 'carried.
*BID AWARDED FOR RANGE BALIS - BJUEMAR GOLF COURSE
Kelly and was seconded by Member Rice for award of
for Braemar Golf Course to recommended low bidder,
Motion carried on rollcall vote - four ayes.
Motion was made by Member
bid for 2000 dozen range balls
Spalding, at $11,000.00.
22 "1% 10/7/91
tt *BID AWARDED FOR PAPER SUPPLY - ABOUT Tom MAGAZINE Motion was made by Member
Kelly and was seconded by Meniber Rice for paper supply for About Town Magazine to
recommended lov bidder, Inter-City Paper Company, at $5,461.13.
Motion carried on rollcall vote - four ayes.
UPDATE GIVW ON CUI,", EXPO SET FOR 2/9/92
the Edina Cultural Expo, explained that the 1992 expo has been scheduled for
Sunday, February 9, 1992. It will be similar to the 1991 event, will be held at
the Edina High School, have multiple cultural exhibits, a multi-cultural program
and an international food buffet. She asked the Council Members for their
continued endorsement and support of this event so that the Committee could move
forward with its planning.
Dorie Barman, Committee Chair of
Mayor Richards recalled that this has been a tremendous event.
suggested that the expo committee work with the Edina schools long range global
education program and that students be encouraged to participate.
Member Paul& made a motion for Council support of the 1992 Edina Cultural Expo
to be held February 9, 1992.
Member Paulus
Member Kelly seconded the motion.
Ayes: Kelly, Paulus, Rice, Richards
Motion carried.
RESOLUTION ADOPTED REQUESTING EXEMPTION FROM COUNTY FUNDING POLICY REGARDING 1992
RECYCLING CONTRACT
October 7, 1991, regarding the Edina recycling contract process, Hennepin County
funding policy, recycling program results and contractor performance as follows.
Recycling Coordinator Chandler summarized her report dated
In July, 1989, following an RFP process, the City entered into an 18 month
contract with Woodlake Sanitary Service, Inc. (subsidiary of BFI) for weekly,
city-wide recycling collection.
at no increase in cost and included the addition of plastic bottle pickup.
Woodlake now proposes to extend the contract at no increase in cost and add
magazine collection to the service.
The contract was extended for calendar year 1991
I
I
The Hennepin County Board has appointed a task force to recommend, by April of
1992, a five year recycling funding policy, effective in 1993. It is anticipated
that this policy will require cities to obtain longer term recycling contracts
and some changes in city recycling programs may also be required.
For the interim year, a contract extension would seem appropriate and has been
encouraged by county staff.
seeking contract extensions to apply for an exemption from their current policy.
Following review of the current recycling program and contract, the Recycling
Commission and staff would recommend that the recycling contract with Woodlake
Sanitary Service be extended for one year as proposed, following the procedural
requirements of Hennepin County.
However, the County Board is requiring cities
Member Rice introduced the folloving resolutions and moved adoption:
FROM THE RECYCLII?G FUNDING POLICY OF THE
BESOUPTION REQUESTING AN EXEMPTION
HENHEPIN COUNT!Z BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
VHEBEhS, the City of Edina wishes to contirme to provide recycling service for
its residents; and
VHEBEhS, the City's contract vith Woodlake Sanitary Service, Inc. for recycling
service expires December 31, 1991; and
VHEBEhS, the City has received a proposal from Woodlake to extend the contract at ?
no increase in cost and addmagazine collection to the sevrice; and
WHEREAS, Edina's recycling contract with Woodlake was obtained through an RFP
process vith Woodlake submitting the lowest cost proposal; and
-
10/7/91 225
FJBEBEbs, the Edina recycling program is very successful, with no compelling
reasons to make changes from a service standpoint; and
WHEREW, the Hennepin County Board of Commissioners proposes to change its
recycling funding policy January, 1993; and
FJBEBEbs, the 1993 policy may cause as yet undetermined program changes for
recycling programs in the cities of Hennepin County;
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council of Edina requests an
exemption from the Hennepin County Recycling Funding Policy to allow a one year
extension of its recycling contract vith Woodlake Sanitary Service, Inc.
RESOLUTION
BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Edina, Minnesota, that it
hereby approves the 1992 Recycling Contract with Woodlake Sanitary Service, as
proposed by a letter dated September 12, 1991, and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Mayor and Manager are hereby authorized and
directed to execute the Recycling Contract with Woodlake Sanitary Service through
calendar year 1992.
Motion was seconded by Member Paulus.
Rollcall :
Ayes: Kelly, Paulus, Rice, Richards
Resolutions adopted.
APPOINTMENT HADE TO FII;L VACANCY ON PARK BOARD Member Rice made a motion for
consent of the Mayor's appointment of Andrew Herring to the Edina Park Board, to
fill an unexpired term to February 1, 1992.
Paulus .
Ayes: Kelly, Paulus, Rice, Richards
Motion carried.
Motion was seconded by Member
APP0I"T MADE TO FIIL VACANCY ON RECYCLING COMMISSION Mayor Richards made a
motion for consent of the appointment of William Brauer to the Edina Recycling
Commission, filling an unexpired term to February 1, 1992. Motion was seconded
by Member Kelly.
Ayes: Kelly, Paulus, Rice, Richards
Motion carried.
UPDATE GI" ON ANDOVER ROAD/WEST SHORE DRIVE IXI'ERSECTION DRAINAGE PROBLEM
Engineer Hoffman informed Council that after concerns were expressed at the
hearing for Street Improvement No. BA-294 on September 23, 1991, the Engineering
Department survey crew reviewed the intersection at Andover Roadmest Shore Drive
regarding the drainage problem. They reported that a minor asphalt repair is all
that is necessary to provide adequate drainage.
approximately $300.00 and would be funded from the general maintenance budget.
That repair would cost
*PETITION RECEIVED: RESOLUTION ADOPTED SETTING HEARING DATE OF 11/4/91 SET Iu;LEY
RIGHT OF WAY VACATION Motion vas made by Member Kelly and vas seconded by
Member Rice for adoption of the following resolution:
RESOLUTION CAIJJNG FOB PWUC HEARING ON
VACATION OF IWSEHENl' FOR ALLEY PURPOSES
BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Edina, Hennepin County,
Minnesota, as follovs:
1.
ovners of land affected thereby, that the following described easement for alley
purposes should be considered for vacation, in accordance with the provisions of
Minnesota Statutes, Section 412.851 and 160.29:
It is hereby found and determined, after receipt of the petition of the
Alley right of way between Lot 027, Block 002, Watershed 3, (5411 Zenith
Avenue South) and Lot 004, Block 002, Watershed 3, (5408 York Avenue
South) SEELYS 1ST ADDITION TO HAWTHORNE PARK, according to the recorded
plat thereof, Hennepin County.
10/7/91 226
2.
included in paragraph 3 hereof for the purpose of holding a public hearing on
whether such vacation shall be made in the interest of the public.
3. The Clerk is authorized and directed to cause notice of the time, place and
purpose of said hearing to be published once a week for two weeks, in the Edina
Sun-Current, being the officialneuspaper of the City, the first publication at
least 14 days prior to the date of such hearing and to post such notice, at least
14 days prior to the date of such hearing, in at least three (3) public and
conspicuaus places within the City, as provided in Minnesota Statutes, Section
412.851.
This council shall meet at the time and place specified in the form of notice
I .
Such notice shall be in substantially the following form:
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARIt?G
ON VACATION OF RIGHT OF WAY FOR AUXY PUBPOSES
IN THE CITY OF EDIHh
l€EmmIN COULJTY, METRESOTA
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the City Council of the City of Edina, Hennepin
County, Minnesota, uill meet at the Edina City Hall, 4801 West 50th Street on
Xmember 4, 1991, at 7:OO PA., for the purpose of holding a public hearing on
the proposed vacation of the following right of way for alley purposes:
Alley right of vay betueen Lot 027, Block 002, Uatershed 3,
(5411 Zenith Avenue South) and Lot 004, Block 002, Watershed 3,
(5408 York Avemre South) SEELYS 1ST ADDITION TO HAUTHORNE PARK,
according to the recorded plat thereof, Hennepin Counw.
All persons uho desire to be heard with respect to the question of whether or not
the above proposed alley right of vay vacation is in the public interest and
should be made shall be heard at said time and place. The Council shall consider
the extent to which such proposed alley right of uay vacation affects existing
easements wit- the area of the proposed vacation and the extent to which the
vacation affects the authority of any person, corporation, or municipality owing
or controlling electric, telephone, or cable television poles and lines, gas and
sewer lines, or uater pipes, mains, and hydrants on or under the area of the
proposed vacation to continue maintaining the same or to enter upon such easement
area or portion thereof vacated to maintain, repair, replace, remove or otheruise
attend thereto, for the purpose of specifying, in any such vacation resolution,
the extent to uhich any or all of any such easements, and such authority to
maintain, and to enter upon the area of the proposed vacation, shall continue.
BY ORDER OF THE EDIKA CITY COlJHCIL
arcella 13. Daehn
I
Motion carried on rollcall vote - four ayes.
*PETITION RECEIVED: RESOLUTION ADOPTED SETTING HEdzuNG DATE OF 11/4/91 FOR
VACATION OF STaET =GET OF WAY ADDITION
seconded by Member Rice for adoption of the following resolution:
Motion uas made by Member Kelly and was
RESOLUTION CATLING FOR PUBUC BEARING ON
VACATION OF EASEMENT FOR STBEET PURPOSES
BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Edina, Hennepin County,
Minnesota, as follows:
1. It is hereby found and determined, after receipt of the petition of the
owners of land affected thereby, that the following described easement for street
purposes should be considered for vacation, in accordance uith the provisions of
Minnesota Statutes, Section 412.851 and 160.29:
Harvey be, PdagvooD KN0IJ.S 20TH ADDITION, according to the recorded
plat thereof, Hennepin County.
2.
included in paragraph 3 hereof for the purpose of holding a public hearing on
whether such vacation shall be made in the interest of the public.
3. The Clerk is authorized and directed to cause notice of the time, place and
purpose of said hearing to be published once a week for two weeks, in the Edina
Sun-Current, being the officialneuspaper of the City, the first publication at
least 14 days prior to the date of such hearing and to post such notice, at least
This Council shall meet at the time and place specified in the form of notice
10/7/91 227
14 days prior to the date of such hearing, in at least three (3) public and
conspicuous places within the City, as provided in Minnesota Statutes, Section
412.851. Such notice shall be in substantially the following form:
NOTICE OF PlJBUC HEARING
IA TBE CITY OF ED=
€JEN"EPIN COTIWPICY, l4I"ESOTA
ON VACATION OF RIGHT OF WAY FOR STREET PURPOSES
NOTICE IS HEBEBY GIVEN that the City Council of the City of Edina, Hennepin
County, Minnesota, will meet at the Edina City Hall, 4801 West 50th Street on
November 4, 1991, at 7:OO P.M., for the purpose of holding a public hearing on
the proposed vacation of the following right of way for street purposes:
Harvey Lane, PARKUOOD KEIOLIS 20TH ADDITION, according to the
recorded plat thereof, Hennepin County.
All persons who desire to be heard with respect to the question of whether or not
the above proposed alley right of way vacation is in the public interest and
should be made shall be heard at said time and place. The Council shall consider
the extent to vhich such proposed alley right of way vacation affects existing
easements within the area of the proposed vacation and the extent to which the
vacation affects the authority of any person, corporation, or municipality owning
or controlling electric, telephone, or cable television poles and lines, gas and
sever lines, or water pipes, mains, and hydrants on or under the area of the
proposed vacation to continue maintaining the same or to enter upon such easement
area or portion thereof vacated to maintain, repair, replace, remove or otherwise
attend thereto, for the purpose of specifying, in any such vacation resolution,
the extent to vhich any or all of any such easements, and such authority to
maintain, and to enter upon the area of the proposed vacation, shall continue.
BY ORDER OF THE EDINA CITY COUNCIL
Marcella M. Daehn
Motion carried on rollcall vote - four ayes.
CLOSED COUNCIL mTING CBI;LED FOR 10/21/91 AT 6:30 P.M. Attorney Erickson
informed Council that to date no formal legal action has been started concerning
the crown vetch at 4404 W. 58th Street. Other cities who have had similar
situations will meet on November 7, 1991, to discuss a common ordinance that
might be applicable.
closed Council Meeting on October 21, 1991, at 6:30 P.M. to discuss potential
litigation.
It was the consensus of the Council Members to call a
WLhIHs PAID Motion was made by Member Kelly and was seconded by Member Rice to
approve payment of the following claims as shown in detail on the Check Register
dated October 7, 1991, and consisting of 27 pages: General Fund $304,742.84;
Communications $11,954.85; Art Center $4,514.96; Swimming Pool Fund $35,091.81;
Golf Course Fund $17,867.57; Recreation Center Fund $17,205.83; Gun Range Fund
$295.02; Edinborough Park $24,393.55; Utility Fund $294,992.38; Storm Sewer
Utility $3,517.34; Liquor Dispensary Fund $9,890.60; Construction Fund
$91,816.22; TOTAL $816,282.97.
There being no further business on the Council Agenda, Mayor Richards declared
the meeting adjourned at 9:20 P.M.
1. City Clerk