HomeMy WebLinkAbout19911216_regular288
MINUTES
OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE
ED= CITY COUNCIL HELD AT CITY €TALL
DECEMBER 16, 1991
ROLTXAIJ. Answering rollcall were Members Kelly, Paulus, Rice, Smith and Mayor
Richards.
RESOLUTION OF APPRECIATION ADOPTED FOR JEAN RIFLEY Mayor Richards introduced the
following resolution which was unanimously adopted:
VHEBEBS, Jean Rifley has serp-ed the residents of the City of Edina as Board
Member of South Hennepin Human Services Council since 1985; and
WEEREAS, she has also served on the Human Services Coordinating Council, the
Senior Community Services Board, the Edina Human Relations Commission; and
VHEBEBS, Jean Rifley vas the orininal Board Member of Friends of H.O.H.E.
(Household and Outside Maintenance for the Elderly); and
VHEREBS, she has been particularly sensitive to the area of human services in
Edina as evidenced by her activities in the various organizations in which she
has been involved; and
VHWEBS, Jean Rifley is held in high esteem by the residents of the City of
Edina, as well as Members of the City Council and City staff.
NOU, THEBEFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Edina City Council, the City staff and
all the residents of Edina hereby express their thanks and appreciation to
JEBN€tIFIm!
for her tireless efforts in and sincere dedication to making the City of Edina an
outstanding community.
ADOPTED THIS 16th day of December, 1991.
RESOLUTION OF APPRECIATION
CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS APPROVED Motion vas made by Member
by Member Smith to approve and adopt the Council Consent
presented.
Rollcall :
Ayes: Kelly, Paulus, Rice, Smith, Richards
Motion carried.
Kelly and vas seconded
Agenda items as
*MINUTES OF SPECIAL MEETINGS OF NOVEMBER 30 AND DECEMBER 4. 1991 AND REGULAR
MEETING OF NOVEMBER 18. 1991APPROVED Motion was made by Member Kelly and vas
seconded by Member Smith to approve the Council Minutes of the Special Meetings
of November 30 and December 4, 1991, and the Regular Meeting of November 18,
1991.
Motion carried on rollcall vote - five ayes.
PUBLIC HEARR?G HEIB OB IMPROVEMENT NO. BA-297 (YORK AV. - U. 54TH ST TO U. 55TH
ST.) OR IHPROVEMENT NO. BA-297A (YORK AV. - U. 54TH ST. TO 200 FEET SOUTH1
Affidavits of Notice were presented, approved and ordered placed on file.
Presentation bv Engineer
Engineer Hoffman explained that, during a hearing for vacation of a portion of an
alley west of York Avenue, the Council had received comments about the condition
of York Avenue south of W. 54th Street.
be conducted to present and discuss the neighborhood issues relating to public
access.
Council directed that a public hearing
Staff has sent letters and sketches to all residents on York Avenue between 54th
and 55th Streets stating three alternatives: 1) Construct a typical road section
comparable to current standards; 2) Develop a new cul-de-sac from W. 54th Street
to approximately 200 feet south to remove the issue of non-conformance to our
City ordinances as it relates to "improved" road frontage; or 3) Leave the
current access issue as it is. Currently, all residents favor leaving the system
121 1619 1 289
as it is. Assessment for the first alternative (BA-297) is estimated at $112.97
per foot. Because of the change in grade level of the existing improved portion
of York Avenue and the unimproved north section, retaining walls from three to
six feet in height would be required.
297A) is estimated at $94.39 per foot.
would be off-set to the east side of the right of way so as to save the larger
trees.
Assessment for the second alternative (BA-
The proposed 20 foot wide cul-de-sac
Additionally, the Council tabled the alley vacation request in November and staff
has spoken to both the owner and the potential buyer of 5411 Zenith Avenue about
the issue.
appear before the Council if they wished to continue the discussion on the alley
hearing.
certain or denial of the request at this time.
Staff made it clear that either the buyer or seller would need to
Staff would recommend continuation of the alley hearing to a date
Public Comment
Robert Christianson, representing M. J. Coyne of 5405 York Avenue, said he had
discussed the alternatives with his client. In view of the cost in comparison
with the benefit to be derived, Ms. Coyne did not feel either of the construction
alternatives were viable. She would urge the Council to stay with the status quo
but felt the City should maintain the unimproved right of way in proper fashion,
i.e. preclude people from parking cars on it, clean it up, not allow dumping.
The alternative would be to vacate the right of way (half would go to the
property on the west and half would go to the property on the east).
owners could then maintain it as they saw fit.
Those
John Josephson, 5408 York Avenue, told the Council he is in the process of buying
the property which he has rented for some 12 years.
vehicle into his half of the garage which is shared with 5411 Zenith because of
the way the garage is sited.
in front on the right of way because there is no place to park in the rear. He
said he was opposed to any improvements to the area.
He said he cannot get a
Consequently, his family parks their four vehicles
Also speaking in opposition to any improvements were Gary Huber, 5406 York
Avenue; Tom Larson, 5400 York; Lyall Olson, 5441 York; Chet Curtis, 5421 York;
Rebecca Speakes, owner of 5408 York; John Munsell, 5413 York; Gary Holman,
prospective purchaser of 5411 Zenith; Kathy Knutson, 5445 York; Jeff Josephson
3113 W. 54th Street; and Eric Hand, 5425 York.
Council Comment/Action
Mayor Richards explained that the purpose of the public hearing was to get
everyone together to.discuss the issues on the table and to consider any options.
Member Rice said the best thing said tonight was that the area is a mess but a
delightful mess. After personally viewing the area he had asked public works and
public safety if the City has good access for emergencies because it is not up to
City standards. Further, the City will maintain the right of way and enforce the
ordinance prohibiting parking on the right of way which was one of the concerns
expressed.
the West Suburban Mediation Services.
He questioned if the issue of the parked cars might be referred to
Member Paulus submitted that if the residents do not want York Avenue improved
they must live with the ordinance provisions.
Mayor Richards observed that there seemed to be a consensus among the residents
that the right of way area should be cleaned up and that this issue could be
worked out between the individuals involved. He said he would support the third
alternative to leave the current access as is, subject to the residents
addressing the issues that have been identified within 30 days.
299 12/16/91
Member Kelly made a motion to maintain the status quo with no public improvements
on York Avenue, subject to the issues being resolved within 30 days, or brought
back to the Council on February 3, 1992, if not resolved. Motion was seconded by
Member Smith.
Ayes: Kelly, Paulus, Rice, Smith, Richards
Motion carried.
PUBLIC EEARJXG ON VACATION OF ALLEY BETFJEmJ 5411 ZENITH AND 5408 YORK CONTINUED
TO FEBRUARY 3. 1992 Engineer Hoffman recalled that the request to vacate a
portion of the alleyway between 5411 Zenith Avenue and 5408 York Avenue was heard
by the Council on November 4, 1991, and November 18, 1991. The hearing was
continued to this meeting so that the issue of public access on York Avenue could
be considered in a public hearing.
Public Comment
Gary Holman, prospective buyer of 5411 Zenith, said the subject alley has never
been constructed. Further, the home has little yard area, is pressed against the
creek and the unconstructed alley visually is part of the yard.
request to vacate that portion of the alley would clarify the property lines.
He said ;the
Rebecca Speakes, owner of 5411 Zenith, observed that portion of the alley
proposed for vacation is part of the back yard.
that the alley would ever be put through.
She added that it is unlikely
Mike Menzel, 5410 York Avenue, asked if vacating the alley would allow for
additional garage building space to alleviate the street right of way parking
problem for Mr. Josephson. In response, Ms. Speakes said there is a permanent
easement which provides access to the garage shared by 5411 Zenith and 5408 York.
Council Comment/Action
Mayor Richards said he was concerned about vacating a public alley right of way
without knowing the full ramifications and that it would be premature to take any
action until the access issues are resolved.
Member Paulus pointed out that if a portion of the alley is vacated, the
interests of all other residents abutting the alley right of way are affected.
Member Rice said he would not support any action without the concurrence of the
owners of 5400, 5404, 5408, 5410, 5412 York and 5411 Zenith, and without a
recommendation from the City Engineer and the City Attorney.
Member Kelly made a motion to continue the public hearing on the request to
vacate the alley between 5411 Zenith Avenue and 5408 York Avenue to February 3,
1992. Motion was seconded by Member Smith.
Ayes: Kelly, Paulus, Rice, Smith, Richards
Motion carried.
(Member Smith left the meeting at this point on the Agenda.)
PUBLIC HEBRIPJG HELD: TREE TRIMMING PROJECT TT-92/93 ORDERED Affidavits of Notice
were presented, approved and ordered placed on file.
Presentation bv Park Director
Director Kojetin explained that the Tree Trimming project TT-92/93 is proposed
for an area bounded by Highway 100 on the East, Vernon Avenue on the South,
Highway 169 on the West and the northern City boundary line on the North. The
project would consist of the trimming of boulevard trees for a total estimated
cost of $77,900.00 proposed to be assessed against benefitted properties in the
designated area. Trees would be trimmed to maintain a height of 13 feet above
12/16/9 1 291
street and ground surfaces.
dead wood, split or cracked limbs. Pine and spruce trees would not be included
in the project. Work on the trees would begin now through April 1, 1992, and
would be completed in the fall/winter 1992-1993.
property owners and a tabulation of resident response to the mailed hearing
notice was made available to the Council.
Horwath, City Forester, and John Olson of Precision Landscape and Tree, Inc., low
bidder for the project.
The work would include crown thinning, removal of
Letters had been sent to 731
Director Kojetin introduced Tom
Council Comment/Action
Member Paulus said since the Council Members had just finished receiving calls
from residents about the previous tree trimming project done by Precision Tree,
she had asked the low bidder to appear before Council to answer questions and
concerns. Since the tree trimming project is ordered by vote of the Council,
good communications must exist between the residents and Precision Tree.
John Olson, Precision Tree, responded that complaints are handled individually
and promptly and the same policy would be adhered to with this project.
Member Kelly introduced the following Resolution and moved its adoption:
BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of Edina, Minnesota, that this Council
heretofore caused notice of hearing to be duly published and mailed to owners of
each parcel within the area proposed to be assessed on the following proposed
improvement:
and at the hearing held at the time and place specified in said notice, the
Council has duly considered the views of all persons interested, and being fully
advised of the pertinent facts, does hereby determine to proceed with the said
project including all proceedings which may be necessary in eminent domain for
the acquisition of necessary easements and rights for the project; that said
project is hereby designated and shall be referred to in all subsequent
proceedings as:
and the area to be specially assessed therefor shall include an area bounded by
Highway 100 on the East, Vernon Avenue on the South, Highway 169 on the West and
the Northern City Boundary Line on the North.
Motion was seconded by Member Rice.
RESOLUTION ORDERING TREE TRIMMING PROJECT TT-92/93
TREE "G PROJECT NO. TT-92/93
TREE TRIMMING PROJECT NO. TT-92/93
Rollcall :
Ayes: Kelly, Paulus, Rice, Richards
Resolution adopted.
BOARD OF APPEALS DECISION REVEXSED: FINDINGS OF FACT ADOPTED: LOT COVERAGE
VARIANCE GRANTED FOR 6510 GLEASON COURT) Planner Larsen recalled that at the
Council Meeting of December 2, 1991, staff was directed to prepare Findings of
Fact to support approval of the lot coverage variance that had been requested by
the proponents, John and Pat Senior for property located at 6510 Gleason Court, a
double dwelling unit platted in December, 1981. The proponents are requesting an
exception to the 25% maximum lot coverage requirement to allow the addition of a
screen porch in the rear yard area.
The Board of Appeals initially heard the request on October 17, 1991, and tabled
action on the application to give the proponents an opportunity to identify a
hardship that could allow exception from the ordinance.
circumstances present on the site, the Board voted unanimously to deny the
request in agreement with staff recommendation based on lack of demonstrated
hardship.
Upon review of the
Member Rice made a motion to adopt the Findings, Decision and Reasons and to
292 121 16/91
approve the .9 percent lot coverage variance for 6510 Gleason Road.
seconded by Member Kelly.
Rollcall :
Ayes: Kelly, Paulus, Rice, Smith
Nays : Richards
Variance granted.
Motion was
FINAL DIZV'EIDm PUN APPROVED FOR 5036 FRANCE AVENUE SOUTH (BURNET RJ3AI.W)
Affidavits of Notice were presented, approved and ordered placed on file.
Presentation bv Planner
Planner Larsen advised that the subject property, located at 5036 France Avenue
South, is zoned Planned Commercial District, PCD-2 and is developed with a one
story office building having a total floor area of 3,275 square feet.
requested single story addition measures approximately 34 x 82 feet and would
have a gross floor area of 2,943 square feet. The addition would be constructed
to the rear of the existing building in an area which presently provides parking
for eight cars.
parking.
The
The proposed addition would eliminate all private, on-site
The subject property is located within the 50th and France Tax Increment
District.
a Floor Area Ratio (FAR) of 1.0 supported totally by public parking. Expansions
beyond a FAR of 1.0 up to 1.5 (the maximum allowed in the PCD-2 District) are
allowed only if supported by private parking.
in a FAR of 1.0 for the redeveloped site.
Since 1978 the City has followed a policy of allowing expansions up to
The proposed addition would result
Although City policy is to allow expansion up to a FAR of 1.0 utilizing public
parking, the Zoning Ordinance requires a variance be granted. In this case, an
addition of 2,843 square feet would require 15 spaces. Thus, a 15 space parking
quantity variance is requested.
The exterior of the proposed addition would be brick embossed block painted white
to match the existing building.
southerly and westerly property lines.
Landscaping materials are suggested along the
Property owners within the Tax Increment District were originally assessed for a
portion of the cost of providing public parking.
on the basis of their existing floor area and in some cases for additional floor
area anticipated by the Redevelopment Plan.
private parking.
floor space minus the credit for eight parking spaces.
assessment, building expansions and properties which eliminate private, on-site
parking have been assessed at a rate of $2.15, plus interest, per square foot of
increased floor. The assessment for the proposed expansion would be based on an
increased floor area of 2,843 square feet plus an additional 1600 square feet for
lost parking spaces for a total of $18,998.00.
Property owners were assessed
A credit was given for providing
In this case, the property owner was assessed for existing
Since the original
The Planning Commission and staff would recommend approval of the Final
Development Plan including the parking variance, subject to payment of the
parking assessment which would be due and payable prior to release of a building
permit.
Member Kelly introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption, subject
to payment of public parking assessment of $18,998.00: I RESOLUTION LLPPROVIXG Pm DEVELOPMENT PLAN
FOR BURNET REATXY
BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Edina, Misnesota, that the
Final Development Plan for Burnet Realty, 5036 France Avenue South, presented at
Attachment to Council Minutes of 12/16/91
Citv of Edina
In The Matter of the Application
of John and Patricia Senior
for a .9% (146.57 square foot) Lot
FINDINGS,
DECISIONS,
and
Coverage Variance at 6510 Gleason Court REASONS
(B-91-39)
The above entitled matter was heard before the City Council,
City of Edina, on December 2, 1991. John Senior and Patricia
Senior (the l1Proponentst1) were present. The City Council, having
heard all of the facts and arguments presented the Proponents
and City Staff, and having heard and reviewed the evidence and law
adduced by the Proponent and City Staff, and being fully advised,
after due consideration, hereby makes the following:
FINDINGS OF FACT:
I 1. The Proponents submitted an application dated October 2, 1991
for a variance from the 25% maximum lot coverage requirement,
(Zoning Ordinance 825 Section 12, D.) , to allow the replacement of
a 14' x 16' uncovered patio area with a screened porch in the rear
yard area of property located at 6510 Gleason Court (The llSubject
Propertyn1). The property is located within a double dwelling unit
zoning district within the 14 lot, 28 unit Gleason Court
subdivision. The legal description of the property is Lot 7, Block
1, Gleason Court.
L
2. The variance was initially identified as a 1.4% lot coverage
variance based on a survey *dated August 3, 1983 prepared by
Carlisle Madson of Schoell & Madson, Inc. and submitted by the
Proponents and based on the building plans that are on file in the
Building Department of the City offices. The survey illustrated a
14' x 16' patio area' to be converted into a screened porch, Total
lot coverage of all structures on the site was calculated to be
26.4%. The calculated lot coverage included all of the existing
patio area and the proposed screened porch area.
3. The Edina Board of Appeals and Adjustments ("the Boardan) first
considered the proposed variance at its October 17, 19.91 meeting.
Notice of public hearing before the Board was mailed Friday,
October 4, 1991, to property owners within 200 feet of the Subject
Property. The Board reviewed the report ofthe Planning Department
and considered testimony by the Proponents. No other persons
appeared before the Board to testify. The Board voted to continue
the request for variance to its November 21, 1991 meeting to give I
-2-
the Proponents opportunityto identify a hardship that would allow
exception from ordinance requirements. - I
4. The request for variance was again before the Board at it's
November 21, 1991 meeting. No new plans were submitted to the
Planning Department prior to the Board meeting; however a letter
from the Proponents dated November 8, 1991 addressed to the Board
describing hardship was submitted. A copy of said letter is
attached as Exhibit A. The' Proponents indicated in that letter
that the said Lot 7 is one of the smaller lots located within the
subdivision and that the other side of the twin home on said Lot 7
is larger than their's and therefore benefits by having more of the
permitted lot coverage. The Proponents appeared and testified as
to the letter's contents. No others appeared to testify. Upon
review of the facts and evidence presented, the Board denied the
variance request because of the potential of setting a precedent.
5. The variance denial was appealed and scheduled for public
hearing before the City Council of Edina on December 2, 1991.
Notice of the public hearing was mailed to property.owners within
200 feet of the Subject Property. The Proponent's submitted
revised lot coverage calculations which reduced lot coverage to'
25.9%. The plans continued to illustrate the same 14' x 16'
screened porch considered by the Board of Appeals, however the
Proponents had checked the as-built measurements of the twin home
as compared with the building plans filed with the City and
demonstrated that lot coverage would actually be .9% over the
-3-
maximum allowed lot coverage of 25% instead of the 1.4% as
originally calculated from building-plans on file with the City.
City Staff confirmed the recalculation and agreedthat the variance L
was a .9% lot coverage variance.
6. Therefore, based upon the foregoing findings the City Council
does hereby make the following
9
Deck ion:
The .9% lot coverage variance as presented to the Council
December 2, 1991, is hereby approved.
The above decision is made for the following
Reasons :
1. The City has been committed to protecting and preserving open
space in residential neighborhoods. It has been determined that
the proposed 14' x 16' screened porch would have no perceivable
impact on the open space provided by the Subject Property.
2. The said Lot 7 is one of the smaller lots within the
subdivision. In addition, most of the other twin homes are more
equal in size and foundation square footage whereas the Subject
Property is smaller than its common wall neighbor. The Proponents
therefore, do not enjoy the same proportion of allowable lot
, I
-4-
coverage as does the common wall neighbor and the majority of homes I within the subdivision.
3. The variance is necessary to preserve the already existing
non-conforming lot coverage.of 25.9% of total lot area, regardless
if the area in question is used for a patio or if it is enclosed
and used for a screened porch.
4. The proposed screened'porch has been approved by the Gleason
Court subdivision association and has been designed to be
architecturally in, keeping with the rest of the existing structure
and will not be visible from any adjacent property owners.
5. For all of the above stated reasons the Council hereby
determines that strict enforcement of the Zoning Ordinance would
cause undue hardship because of circumstances unique to the Subject
Property and that granting of the variance is in keeping with the
spirit and intent of the Zoning Ordinance.
I
-5-
121 16/91 293
the regular meeting of the City Council of December 16, 1991, be and is hereby
appraved .
Motion was seconded by Member Rice.
Rollcall :
Ayes: Kelly, Paulus, Rice, Richards
Resolution adopted.
PRE-Y PLAT APPROVED FOR PETW ANDREA 1ST ADDITION (6996 VALIEY VIEV ROAD)
Affidavits of Notice were presented, approved and ordered placed on file.
Presentation bv Planner
Planner Larsen explained that the subject property, located at 6996 Valley View
Road, is a developed single family lot with a lot area of approximately 4.6
acres.
the property, a swimming pool directly south of the house, and a tennis court
further south and about 40 feet lower than the ground elevation adjacent to the
house.
40 foot wide outlot.
Improvements on the property include a house in the central portion of
Access to the existing house is from Shawnee Circle via a driveway over a
The proposed subdivision would create two new buildable lots. Lots 1 and 3 would
front on and would have driveway access to the recently completed Bello Drive.
Lot 2 with a reconstructed house would continue to be served with driveway access
to Shawnee Circle.
The 500 foot neighborhood used for evaluation purposes yields a median lot width
of 100 feet, median lot depth of 150 feet, and a median lot area of 16,450 square
feet. The three proposed lots would exceed the median lot width, depth and area:
Lot Width 150 feet 205 feet 120 feet
Lot Depth 205 feet 370 feet 410 feet
Lot Area 38,500 sq. ft. 91,750 sq. ft. 71,830 sq. ft.
Lot 3 would not meet the minimum "lot width to perimeter ratio" of 0.10,
has a lot width to perimeter ratio of 0.07.
would be required.
proposed subdivision.
Lot 1 Lot 2 Lot 3
Lot 3
Thus, a variance from this standard
No new public streets or utilities are anticipated for the
The impact of the development would be caused largely by driveway construction
for Lots 1 and 3. The proposed house on Lot 3 would be constructed on what is
now a tennis court. The new driveway serving this lot would include grades of
10% or more and would require some retaining walls. The proposed pad in Lot 1
would be cut into the hill with a retaining wall to provide a small rear yard.
Although the driveway would be considerably shorter than on Lot 3, it would be
equally steep. No building plans have been submitted for any of the three lots.
Included as part of the proposed preliminary plat would be Outlot A of the
Jyland-Whitney Addition.
property and provides for frontage on Bello Drive.
Drive for the subject property was a condition of approval for Jyland-Whitney
Addition.
The outlot has been deeded to the owner of the subject
Providing frontage on Bello
Staff would recommend preliminary plat approval with the variance for lot width
to perimeter ratio. The Planning Commission considered the proposed plat at
their meeting of December 4, 1991, and recommended preliminary plat approval
subject to: 1) Final plat approval, 2) Subdivision dedication, 3) Utility
connection charges, 4) Conservation easements on Lot 1 to maintain a 35 foot
setback from the northerly property line and a 105 foot setback from the
northeastern point of Lot 1.
Presentation bv Proponent
294l 121 1619 1
Peter Knaeble, Ron Krueger &Associates, Inc, reiterated that the smallest of the
three proposed lots (Lot 1 at .9 acre) is larger than the largest lot in the
Jyland-Whitney Addition.
conversations between the neighbor to the north and the developer to preserve the
trees on the north side of Lot 1.
The easements proposed for Lot 1 were based on
Jim Deanovic, proponent, added that they are trying to preserve what Martin Peper
wished, which was to make the least change to the existing landscape.
Public Comment
George Borer, stated that he represented Daniel Spiegel, 7104 Valley View Road,
whose property borders Lot 3 of the proposed subdivision. He referred to the
concerns outlined in the letter he had submitted dated December 16, 1991, and
requested these be included in a development agreement: 1) All retaining walls
and driveways be constructed with approval of the City Engineer in order to
minimize impact on neighbors, 2) All trees shown on the developer's plan for
preservation be preserved. If disturbed, replacement be done with trees of like
kind and size, 3) No further grading be done on the property except as shown on
the plans. Further, location of building pads not be changed from the proposed
plan (Ordinance No. 804, 12 (b)(3) indicates that the location of building pads
must be shown on the plans), and 4) There will be no further lot splits or
subdivisions of the three lots to be created in the proposed plat.
Sidney Rebers, 6916 Dakota Trail, commented that he has no objection to the three
lots as proposed but was concerned that the conservation easement would be able
to handle the drainage from the subdivision because of the terrain.
Council Comment/Action
Mayor Richards observed that this Council could not bind future Councils as to
further subdivision of the plat.
entering into a development agreement that would address the concerns raised by
the neighbors.
agreement.
I He asked the developer if he would consider
Mr. Deanovic responded that he would have no problem with such an
Member Rice spoke to the issue of the proposed location of the building pads.
Planner Larsen indicated that the setbacks required by the conservation easement
would pin down the building pad location for Lot 1.
and 3 as shown on the plan are the typical and logical locations.
The building pads for Lots 2
Member Kelly introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption, subject
to the following conditions: 1) Final plat approval, 2) Subdivision dedication,
3) Utility connection charges, 4) Conservation easement on Lot 1 to maintain 35
foot setback from northerly property line and 105 foot setback from the
northeasterly corner of Lot 1, and 5) Developer's agreement:
RESOLUTION APPROVING PRETilHIXWY PUT FOR
PETER ANDREA 1ST ADDITION
BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Edina, Minnesota, that that
certain plat entitled "PETER ANDREA 1ST ADDITION", platted by Claire Peper,
single mer, and presented at the regular meeting of the City Council of
December 16, 1991, be and is hereby granted preliminary plat approval.
Motion for adoption of the resolution was seconded by Member Paulus.
Rollcall :
Ayes: Kelly, Paulus, Rice, Richards
Resolution adopted.
*-Y AND FINbL PUT APPROVED FOR REGISTERED IAND SURVEY NOS. 1171. 1366
AND 1466 GAUEKMl Motion was made by Member Kelly and was seconded by Member
Smith for adoption of the folloring resolution:
RESOLUTION APPROVING PREIJHINARY BND PINAT.. PIAT
12/ 16/91 295
FOR REGISTERED LAND SURVEY NOS. 1171, 1366, 1466, GBI;LEBIB
BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Edina, Minnesota, that that
certain plat entitled, "REGISTEBeD IAND SURVEY NOS. 1171, 1366, AND 1466,", and
identified as the Galleria Block, platted by Gabbert and Gabbert, a Minnesota
limited partnership, and presented at the regular meeting of the City Council of
December 16, 1991, be and is hereby granted preliminary and final plat approval.
Resolution adopted on rollcall vote - five ayes.
*PRELIMINARY AND FINAL PLAT APPROVED FOR SOUTH EDINA DEVELOPMENT SECOND ADDITION
(7401. 7433-99, 7501 AND 7551 FRAIUCE AVE SO) Motion vas made by Member Kelly and
was seconded by Member Smith for adoption of the following resolution:
RESOLUTION APPROVING PRELIMINARY AND FINAL PLAT
FOR SOUTH EDINA DEVELOPMENT SECOND ADDITION
BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Edina, Minnesota, that that
certain plat entitled "SOUTH EDINA DEVELOPMEN!C SECOND ADDITION", platted by the
Housing and Redevelopment Authority of Edina, Minnesota, a public body corporate
and politic under the laws of the State of Minnesota, and CLP Partners, a
Minnesota general partnership, and Norwest Bank Minnesota, National Association,
and presented at the regular meeting of the City Council of December 16, 1991, be
and is hereby granted preliminary and final approval.
Resolution adopted on rollcall vote - five ayes.
CONCERN HEARD REGARDING MORATORIUM (ORDINANCE NO. 812) REGULATING CONSTRUCTION
AND -CE OF TELECOMMlRoICATION DEVICES Nick Dolphin, EDS Electronic Data
Systems and General Motors, located at 7600 Metro Boulevard, introduced his
immediate supervisor, Miss Wilson from St. Louis. He explained that they had
believed there was to be a public hearing regarding the lifting of the moratorium
on the construction of telecommunication antennas or towers as regulated by
Ordinance No, 812.
their business which installs small (1.8 meter) satellite dishes. Further, that
the Planning Department's recommendation would be to lift the ban.
said he understood the Council's concern about towers and asked that the Council
revisit the issue.
He explained that the moratorium has had a major impact on
Mr. Dolphin
Mayor Richards explained that the City is in the process of recodifying its
ordinances and that this issue will be addressed in an orderly manner as part of
that process, with the next codification meetings scheduled for January 18, 1992,
and February 1, 1992, both at 8:OO A.M. at Arneson Acres Park.
BID AWARDED FOR TRIMMING OF BOULEVARD TREES (TT-92/93) IN NORTHGTEST SECTION OF
CITY Member Kelly made a motion for award of bid for tree trimming (TT-92/93) to
recommended low bidder, Precision Landscape and Wee, at $1.11 per dbh inch for
trees under 12 inches and $2.62 per dbh inch for trees over 12 inches.
Rice seconded the motion.
Member
Ayes: Kelly, Paulus, Rice, Richards
Motion carried.
BID AWARDED FOR REMOVAL OF DISEASED TREES Member Kelly made a motion for award
of bid for the removal of diseased trees, stump removal, and tree trimming at
various locations in the City to recommended low bidder, Precision Landscape and
Tree, at $12.49 per dbh inch for removals over 30 inches; $8~73 per dbh inch for
removals under 30 inches; $2.62 per dbh inch for trimming over 12 inches; $1.11
per dbh inch for trimming 12 inches and under; and $1.69 per dbh inch for stump
removals.
Member Rice seconded the motion.
Ayes: Kelly, Paulus, Rice, Richards
Motion carried.
*BID AWARDED FOR EMERGENCY REPAIR OF SQUAD CAR Motion was made by Member Kelly
12/16/91 -. . 296
ad was seconded by Member Smith for award of bid for emergency repair of squad
car to recommended lov bidder, Suburban Chevrolet, Inc., at $6,667.62.
Motion carried on rollcall vote - five ayes.
*BID AWARDED FOR TFJO 1/2 TON PICKUP TRUCKS Motion vas made by Member Kelly and
vas seconded by Member Smith for avard of bid for tvo 1/2 ton pickup trucks
(Public Works/Streets) to Superior Ford, Inc., at $22,152.00, through Hennepin
County Cooperative Purchasing Agreement.
Motion carried on rollcall vote - five ayes.
*BID AWARDED FOR ONE 1/2 TON PICKUP TRUCK Motion vas made by Member Kelly and
vas seconded by Member Smith for avard of bid for one 1/2 ton pickup truck
(Public Works/Utilities) to Superior Ford, Inc., at $11,291.00, through Bennepin
County Cooperative Purchasing Agreement.
Motion carried on rollcall vote - five ayes.
*BID AWARDED FOR ONE 4-vBEEL DRIVE PICKUP TRUCK Motion was made by Member Kelly
and was seconded by Member Smith for award of bid for one 4-wheel drive pickup
truck (Public Works/Utilities) to Superior Ford, Inc., at $13,732.00, through
Hennepin County Cooperative Purchasing Agreement.
Motion carried on rollcall vote - five ayes.
*BID AWARDED FOR ONE 1/2 TON PICKUP TRUCK Motion vas made by Member Kelly and
was seconded by Member Smith for award of bid for one 1/2 ton pickup truck (Park
and Recreation) to Superior Ford, Inc., at $13,122.00, through Hennepin County
Contract #205lAl.
Motion carried on rollcall vote - five ayes.
I TRBPPIC SAFETY COHMIT!L'EE MEmTES OF 12/10/91 APPROVED
reviewed the discussion that occurred at the Traffic Safety Committee meeting on
December 10, 1991, concerning items in Section A of the Minutes.
Engineer Hoffman briefly
Regarding Section A, Item 3, relating to a traffic safety study on Tracy Avenue
between Valley View Road and West 70th Street, Engineer Hoffman clarified that
the Committee's recommendation was to present to the report to the Council and
that the Council then set a public hearing date to which residents in the
affected area would be invited to attend. The recommended date for the public
hearing was February 3, 1992.
from Strgar-Roscoe-Fausch, Inc. would be available at City Hall.
Notices would be mailed and copies of the report
Member Smith made a motion setting February 3, 1992, as hearing date to consider
the report of the consultant on the traffic safety study on Tracy Avenue between
Valley Viev Road and West 70th Street. Motion was seconded by Member Paulus.
Ayes: Kelly, Paulus, Rice, Smith, Richards
Motion carried.
Member Rice made a motion to approve the following recommended action listed in
Section A of the Traffic Safety Minutes of December 10, 1991:
1.
2.
Installation of a "STOP" sign on Bello Drive at Valley View Road,
That the Committee go on record stating that the safety concerns at the
entry/exit point to Edina High School are solvable via engineering
solutions and that the School should further investigate those solutions,
3. Installation of 'IN0 PARKING 7:OO A.M.-3:00 P.M. MONDAY-FRIDAY" and
"PASSENGER LOADING ONLY" signs at the parking bay on Valley View Road
immediately south of Valley View Junior High School,
That the consultant's report be presented to the City Council at its
next meeting, and that the Council consider a presentation by Mr. Eyler,
Strgar-Roscoe-Fausch, at a public hearing to which residents in the
affected area would be invited to attend,
I 4.
12/16/91 297
and to acknowledge Sections B and C of the Minutes.
Motion was seconded by Member Kelly.
Ayes: Kelly, Paulus, Rice, Smith, Richards
Motion carried.
FOUNDATION AUDIT REPORT TO BE PRESENTED JANUARY 6. 1992
that the Foundation Audit Report would be presented to the Council at the regular
meeting on January 6, 1992.
Mayor Richards reported
EGAA ALTERNATIVE FUND RAISING RECOIMENDATIONS ADOPTED Manager Rosland re6alled
that at the meeting of December 2, 1991, the Council had directed staff to
recommend ways by which to reimburse the Edina Girls Athletic Association (EGAA)
for costs incurred on their pull-tab funding raising endeavor.
recommendations have been submitted:
1. The EGAA would assist the American Bandy Association (ABA) with securing
the rights to operate a pull-tab booth at Rupperts and Gippers in Golden Valley.
In exchange, the ABA would pay the EGAA their investment incurred to date, or
maintenance fee, which averages around $700 per year.
continue until the EGAA has received full reimbursement.
The following
2. The EGAA would be exempt from the $5.00 per participant field
This exemption would
Member Rice made a motion to approve recommendation No. 1 - that the EGAA would
assist the American Bandy Association with securing the rights to operate a pull-
tab booth at Rupperts and Gippers in Golden Valley, and in exchange the ABA would
pay the EGAA their investment incurred to date.
Kelly.
Motion was seconded by Member
Ayes: .Kelly, Paulus, Rice, Richards
Motion carried.
PUBLIC DANCE PERWIT APPROVED FOR NEW YEAR'S EVE (ARNOLD'S HOT ROXX MUSIC CAFE]
Manager Rosland advised that Michael Palm, had applied for a public dance permit
for New Year's Eve for Arnold's Hot Roxx Music Cafe, 5125 Edina Industrial
Boulevard. Dances were conducted on Saturday, November 30, and Saturday,
December 7, pursuant to the terms and conditions approved by Council on November
30, and have generally been orderly and uneventful.
number of attendees have been attending as was recorded during mid-November.
environment of the dance has been substantially changed and the police have been
removed as the focus. There is no reason to anticipate problems sufficient for
denial of the application if the same terms and conditions are adhered to. The
petitioner has requested two changes to the terms and conditions, i.e. smoking
areas and permitting the wearing of hats.
Approximately one-half the
The
Police Chief Swanson added that the applicant has an outstanding invoice for
prior police services provided by the City.
Mike Palm stated he would follow the established rules for the New Year's Eve
Dance, and would delay discussion of the smoking areas and wearing of hats until
the January 6, 1992, Council meeting when renewal of the license would be on the
agenda.
Member Rice made a motion to approve the public dance permit for December 31,
1991, to Arnold's Hot ROH Music Cafe, 5125 Edina Industrial Boulevard, subject
to the terms and conditions established previously and the payment of the
outstanding invoice by 12:OO Noon on December 17, 1991. Motion was seconded by
Member Kelly.
Ayes: Kelly, Paulus, Rice, Richards
Motion carried.
APPOINTMENT TO COMMUNITY HEALTH SERVICES ADVISORY COMMITTEE CONTINUED Mayor
12/16/91 298
Richards advised Council that he would contact the individual whose name had been
submitted to fill the opening on the Community Health Services Advisory Committee
(Turner vacancy) and that appointment be continued to the next meeting.
*FEBRUARY 3. 1992. SET FOR I-494-EIS REVIEW Motion vas made by Member Kelly and
was seconded by Member Smith setting February 3, 1992 as hearing date for the I-
494-EIS Redew.
Motion carried on rollcall vote - five ayes.
*PARK AND RECREATION FEES AND CHBRGES ADDITIONS/CORRECTIONS Motion was made by
Member Kelly and vas seconded by Member Smith to amend the Park and Recreation
fees and charges schedule adopted by the Council on November 18, 1991, as
follows :
c
BRAEMAR EXECUTIVE COURSE GREEN FEES:
Adult/non-patron $6.50
Adult/patron $5.50
Sr. & Jr. non-patron $6.00
Sr. & Jr. patron $5.00
POOL:
Daily Admission: $5.00 (includes waterslide)
Motion carried on rollcall vote - five ayes.
*PETITION FOR ALLEY LIGHTING BETFJEEN ZENITH AND 5900 BMCK OF ABBOTT REF'ERRED TO
ENGI"G FOR PROCESSING Motion was made by Member Kelly and was seconded by
Member Smith to refer the petition for alley lighting between Zenith and the 5900
block of Abbott Avenue to the Engineering Department for processing as to
feasibility.
Motion carried on rollcall vote - five ayes.
*RESOLUTION ADOPTED FOR 1992 HEEJNEPIN COUETTP RECYCLING FUNDING Motion was made
by Member Kelly and was seconded by Member Smith for adoption of the following
resolution:
RESOLUTION AUTEORIZING
1992 GRANT APPLICATION TO HENNEPIN COUPJTP
FOR RECYCIJNG FUNDING
tJHwEBs, Pursuant to Minnesota Statute 115A.551, by December 31, 1993, each
county in the metropolitan area will have as a goal to recycle a minimum of 35
percent (35%) by weight of total solid waste generation, and each county must
develop and implement or require political subdivisions within the county to
develop and implement programs, practices, or methods designed to meet its
recycling goal; and
WEEREAS, Pursuant to Minnesota Statute 1156.552, counties shall ensure that
residents have an opportunity to recycle; and
WEEREAS, Hennepin County Ordinance 13 requires each city to implement a recycling
program $0 enable the County to meet its recycling goals; and
WEEREAS, the County has adopted a Hennepin County Funding Assistance Policy for
Source Separated Recyclables on September 11, 1990, to distribute funds to cities
for the development and implementation of waste reduction and recycling programs;
VHEREBS, to be eligible to receive these County funds, cities must meet the
conditions set forth in the "funding policy;" and
VHEBEBS, the City of Edina desires to receive these County funds;
TEIEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Edina City Council authorizes the submittal
of the 1992 Hennepin County Grant application for Municipal Source Separated
Recyclables; and
BE IT F[JBTHEB RESOLVED, that the City will use such C-ty funds only for the
limited purpose of implementhg the City's waste reduction and recycling program.
and 1
Motion carried on rollcall vote - five ayes
1 I
12/16/91 299
*RESOLUTION ADOPTED APPOINTING ELECTION JUDGES FOR SPECIAL ELECTIONS Motion was
made by Member Kelly and was seconded by Member Smith for adoption of the
following resolution:
BE IT RESOLVED by the Edina City Council that the election judges listed as
follows be appointed for the Special Primary Election on December 21, 1991, and
for the Special Election on January 4, 1992;
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Clerk be and is hereby authorized to make
any substitutions or additions as may be deemed necessary:
Precinct 1 Eugenia Williams, Chair, Barbara Anderson, Dorie Capetz, Phyllis
Beadle; Precinct 2 Joan Flumerfelt, Chair, Kathleen Tierney, Lorraine Purdy,
Annette Horton; Precinct 3 Patricia Dill, Chair, Patricia Schwartz, Carol
Bucklin, Naomi Johnson; Precinct 4 Rachel Schoening, Chair, Marjory Brothers,
Shirley Renslow, Elizabeth Genovese; Precinct 5 Carol McPheeters, Chair, Barbara
Martin,'Marie Goblirsch, Mary E. Ryan; Precinct 6 Jane Bains, Chair, Catherine
Swanson, Mary Cleaveland, Carol Ledder; Precinct 7 Kathleen Engquist, Chair,
Gertrude Snoeyenbos, Ellen Nein, Jackie Lindskoog; Precinct 8, Chair, Jane Moran,
Jeanne Sedoff, Ordell O'Neill, Marian Cracraft; Precinct 9 Aileen Konhauser,
Chair, Florence Boughton, Marie Robinson, Colleen Crew; Precinct 10 Barbara
Erlandson, Chair, JoAnn Lonergan, Jeanine Westling, Jackie Silver-Wartnick;
Precinct 11 Betty Pollitt, Chair, Rita Acker, Huza Habeck, Carol Malichar;
Precinct 12 Marlys Hittner, Chair, Patricia Bates, Delphine Duff, Patricia
Murphy; Precinct 13 Doris Peterson, Chair, Elaine Tollefsrud, Annadell
Quantrell, Patricia Robbins; Precinct 14 Esther Olson, Chair, Mary Strother,
Joyce Hanson, Maxine Hatzung; Precinct 15 Carol Hanson, Chair, Florence Tretton,
Alice Rice, Jean McDermid; Precinct 16, Chair, Donna Montgomery, Doris Blake,
Lucille Ingram, Katherine Saunders; Precinct 17 Lorna Livingston, Chair, Louise
Jackson, Virginia Todd, Barbara Boyd; Precinct 18 Myrtle Grette, Chair, Betty
Lou Petersen, Virginia Stem, JoAnne Streed; Precinct 19 Ardis Dorsey, Chair,
Jean Liudahl, Anne Labovsky, Mary A. Ryan; Precinct 20 Patricia Olander, Chair,
Harriet Koch, Charlotte Bums, Catharine Abbott. ,
General Election - January 4. 1992
Precinct 1 Eugenia Williams, Chair, Lois Hallqist, Barbara Anderson, Dorie
Capetz; Precinct 2 Marjorie Ruedy, Chair, Joan Flumerfelt, Kathleen Tierney,
Lorraine Purdy; Precinct 3 Patricia Dill, Chair, Patricia Schwartz, Margaret
Hagerty, Carol Bucklin; Precinct 4 Rachel Schoening, Chair, Lois Loomis, Shirley
Renslow, Elizabeth Genovese; Precinct 5 Carol McPheeters, Chair, Marie
Goblirsch, Carol Ledder, Mary E. Ryan; Precinct 6 Jane Bains, Chair, Catherine
Swanson, Mary Cleaveland, Eleanor Westerberg; Precinct 7 Helen Peterson, Chair,
Kathleen Engquist, Gertrude Snoeyenbos, Ellen Nein; Precinct 8 Jane Moran,
Chair, Myra Hykes, Ordell O'Neill, Barbara Martin, Precinct 9 Aileen Konhauser,
Chair, Florence Boughton, Marie Robinson, Colleen Crew; Precinct 10 Barbara
Erlandson, Chair, JoAnn Lonergan, Jeanine Westling, Jackie Silver-Wartnick;
Precinct 11 Betty Pollitt, Chair, Rita Acker, Huza Habeck, Patricia Bates;
Precinct 12 Ardis Wexler, Chair, Marlys Hittner, Shirley Bjerken, Patricia
Bates; Precinct 13 Doris Peterson, Chair, Elaine Tollefsrud, Annadell Quantrell,
Patricia Bobbins; Precinct 14 Mary Jane Platt, Chair, Lael Pederson, Joyce
Hanson, Eva Bryan; Precinct 15 Carol Hanson, Chair, Joann Buie, Sharon
Soderlund, Eleanor Amberg; Precinct 16 Nathalie Person, Chair, Doris Blake,
Lucille Ingram, Donna Montgomery; Precinct 17 Lorna Livingston, Chair, Jean
McDermid, Louise Jackson, Virginia Todd; Precinct 18 Jean Erdall, Chair, Betty
Lou Petersen, Virginia Stem, Myrtle Grette; Precinct 19 Kathleen Murphy, Chair,
Sue Corsm, Linda Anderson, Roe Ann Forbes; Precinct 20 Patricia Olander, Chair,
Harriet Koch, Charlotte Burns, Anita Delegaard.
Motion carried on rollcall vote - five ayes.
RESOLUTION
Primary Election - December 21. 1991,
I
LOCAL GO- UNIT DESIGNATED FOR JlTERIM WETLAND CONSERVATION ACT
Engineer Hoffman explained that the State of Minnesota has enacted legislation
300 12/16/91
that would take effect on January 1, 1992, as to conservation of wetland
regulations.
local government unit (LGU) handling the interim provisions of the Act.
possible local units could be cities, counties, soil and water conservation
districts, and watershed or water management organizations.
The permanent program results in only cities, townships and water management
organizations administering the program in the metro area. The interim period is
from January 1, 1992, to July 1, 1993, when a permanent program is to take place.
If no LGU takes responsibility, a prohibition of draining, filling and burning of
wetlands is effective January 1, 1992.
One of the primary initial issues on this Act is who shall be the
The
It is staff's understanding that both the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District and
Nine Mile Creek Watershed District have filed a resolution with the Board of
Water and Soil Resources expressing desire to be the LGU in their geographic
area. The City of Bloomington and City of Minnetonka staff have indicated that
they desire to be the LGU in their geographic area.
Wafer and Soil Resources has not decided what happens if more than one LGU in a
geographic area desires control of the program.
At this time the Board of
Member Paulus made a motion designating the Minnehaha Watershed District and the
Nine Mile Creek Watershed District to be the Local Government Unit administering
the Wetland Conservation Act of 1991, for the interim period of January 1, 1992
to July 1, 1993. Motion was seconded by Member Kelly.
Ayes: Kelly, Paulus, Rice, Smith
Motion carried.
RESOLUTION ADOPTED OPPOSING METROPOLITAN COUNCIL WA!CER MANAGEMEJW POLICY
Engineer Hoffman reported that the Metropolitan Council has drafted a report to
the Legislature on the issue of a Metropolitan Water Supply Plan.
primary objectives was to create a fifth authority for the Metropolitan Council
similar to what occurs for sewers, airports, transportation and parks and open
space.
I One of the
Staff attended a public hearing on December 12, 1991, on the issue. Vern
Peterson, AMM Executive Director, gave testimony which provided an accurate
picture of the concerns of the metropolitan area cities.
Recommendation 3. of the report states "Water appropriation law should be
rewritten to require periodic routine review and reissuance of permits,
preparation of shortage contingency plans for all permit holders, and prohibition
of the right to waive the preparation of a contingency plan."
the most important from staff's perspective on operating the system.
the DNR manages the water appropriation law and this recommendation suggests that
permits be reviewed and potentially be revoked to appropriate water for the local
system.
total water system.
permit revocation is inappropriate.
recommendation is to force cities to develop programs that may not be in the best
interest of the local community. Additionally, staff does not believe that the
counties need to be involved in the metro area as it relates to the water supply
system.
This is probably
Currently,
Most systems are developed in a fashion so that all wells function as a
Any act to simply remove the right to utilize a well by a .
Staff suspects the intent of the
Engineer Hoffman said the main objective of the water supply plan should be to
develop emergency contingency plans resulting from contamination and/or drought,
and assist local communities in developing conservation policies for their water
supply. Metropolitan Council requires a response by December 27, 1991.
Staff would recommend adoption of a resolution which does not support creation of
301 121 16 191
a fifth authority on the metro level and would support the concerns raised by the
AMM during the December 12, 1991, public hearing.
Member Kelly introduced the folloving resolution and moved its adoption:
WHEREAS: The City of Edina has reviewed the report entitled "Metropolitan Water
Supply: A Plan for Action";
WHEREAS: City of Edina representatives attended the public hearing on this issue:
WHEREAS: The City of Edina has reviewed the Association of Metropolitan
Municipalities (AMM) concerns on the recommendations and concurs with the
position of the AMM;
WHEREAS: The City of Edina has had a local water conservation program in place
for the past decade and supports the idea of vater conservation:
WHEREAS: The City of Edina is concerned about water supply contamination and the
need for local contingency planning;
NOW, THEReFORE, BE IT RESOLVED: That the City of Edina does not support
legislative action to create a metropolitan authority for a metropolitan water
system similar to the sever or airport systems.
Motion for adoption of the resolution was seconded by Member Rice.
Ro 11 call :
Ayes: Kelly, Paulus, Rice, Richards
Resolution adopted.
RESOLUTION
UPDATE GIVEN ON 1-494 CORRIDOR COMMISSION TDM ORDINANCE
that the Joint Powers Organization (JPO) had recently contracted with a
consultant to prepare a draft Travel Demand Management (TDM) ordinance which is
expected to be completed early in 1992. The JPO will then attempt to agree upon
a model ordinance or policy which could be considered for adoption by all five
cities. The ordinance approach suggests required or mandated measures whereas
the policy would suggest voluntary measures.
reduction in trips during the peak hour for the year 2010.
the average auto occupancy rate from 1.1 to 1.6 persons per auto.
Planner Larsen explained
The goal of the JPO is a 32%
This means increasing
Most TDM efforts are now concentrated in highly congested areas of the east and
west coasts.
an example of a mandatory program. In San Diego, trip reduction targets are
established but methods are not prescribed.
meet trip reduction targets.
The consultant has used the recently adopted San Diego Ordinance as
Penalties are imposed for failing to
The JPO is considering a wide variety of TDM approaches to reach consensus on key
issues as follows:
1.
2.
3.
Should TDM be mandatory or voluntary.
Should TDM apply only to new development or to all development.
Can TDM succeed if limited only to the 1-494 corridor or must it be
imposed area wide.
The JPO is considering a wide range of TDM measures which could be implemented in
the 1-494 corridor. Most measures seek to promote car pooling/van pooling as the
best and most economical means of reducing freeway congestion in the peak-hours.
Examples of measure currently being considered are:
Provide subsidies to employees who participate in car pools or van 1.
2. Charge parking fees for single occupant vehicles.
3. Subsidize public transit users.
4. Preferential parking for car pools and van pools.
5. Guarantee ride home for employees who rideshare.
pools.
Other actions:
1. Improve access to employment centers for bikers and walkers'.
302 12/ 16/91
2. Provide on-site amenities like showers, day are, banking and food.
3. Expand use of flex-time by employer.
The JPO is looking at TDM implementation in three phases:
1.
2.
3.
Pre-1-494 reconstruction would involve site design requirements,
reporting by employers and building owners, and public education.
1-494 reconstruction would involve substantial trip reduction measures
to relieve congestion during the construction phase.
Post reconstruction would try to maintain performance of reconstruction
phase.
Planner Larsen concluded that the proposed ordinance should be completed in the
fall of 1992, and that no formal action is required at this time.
COST FOR AERIAL DEER COUNT APPROVED
attention to a recent report, dated December 6, 1991, on the control deer shoot
in the south metropolitan areas.
aerial deer count in conjunction with Hennepin Parks at a cost of $500.00.
deer shoot is under way in Bloomington's Hyland Park Reserve and Edina may feel
the residual effect from this shoot.
would begin a deer shoot.
recommending that Edina initiate one.
Assistant Manager Hughes called Council's
He explained that Edina could participate in an
A
Residents have called inquiring when Edina
Staff is awaiting results from the Hyland shoot before
Member Rice made a motion to participate in an aerial deer count for Edina in
conjunction with Hennepin Parks at a cost of approximately $500.00.
Ayes: Kelly, Paulus, Rice, Richards
Motion carried.
D *CLAIMS PAID
approve payment of the following claims as shown in detail on the Check Register
dated December 16, 1991 and consisting of 32 pages: General Fund $718,591.60;
CDBG $35.00; Co&ications $4,157.61; Art Center $14,163.40; Capital Fund
$15,005.57; Svimming Pool Fund $294.59; Golf Course Fund $285,230.28; Recreation
Center Fund $104,709.31; Gun Range Fund $1,146.03; Edinborough Park $23,016.15;
Utility Fund $45,750.91; Storm Sewer Utility $490.78; Liquor Dispensary Fund
$110,019.81; Construction Fund $63,107.26; DIP Bond Redemption #2; $338,625.00;
TOTAL $1,724,343.30; and for confirmation of payment of the following claims as
shovn in detail on the Check Register dated November 30, 1991 and consisting of
15 pages: General Fund $95,464.96; Communications $6,820.17; Art Center $214.31;
Golf Course Fund $4,832.23; Recreation Center Fund $521.93; Gun Range Fund
$157.63; Edinborough Park $469.03; Utility Fund $8.36; Liquor Dispensary Fund
$331,804.87; Construction Fund $19,512.84; TOTAL $459,806.33.
Motion was made by Member Kelly and vas seconded by Member Smith to
Motion carried on rollcall vote - five ayes.
There being no further business on the Council Agenda, Mayor Richards declared
the meeting adjourned at 10:12 P.M.
City Clerk