Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout19930503_regular196 IlINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE ED= CITY COUNCIL HKLD AT CITY EAT& HAY 3, 1993 I ROIUAU Answering rollcall were Members Paulus, Rice, Smith and Mayor Pro-Tern Kelly. CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS APPROVED by Member Bice to approve and adopt the Council Consent Agenda items as presented. Motion vas made by Member Smith and was seconded Rollcall : Ayes: Paulus, Rice, Smith, Kelly Motion carried. *?fDm!ES OF REGTJIAR ZIEETING OF APRIL 19. 1993. APPROVED Motion was made by Meniber Smith and was seconded by Member Rice to apprave the Cauncilmtes of the regular meeting of April 19, 1993. Motion carried on rollcall vote - four ayes. *LOT DIVISION APPROVED FOR LOTS 1 AND 2. BMCK 1. BRAEMAR HILTS FIFl'H ADDITION (6124-6128 SCOTIA DRIVE) Member Bice for adoption of the folloving resolution: VBEBELLS, the following described tracts of land constitute two separate parcels: Motion was made by Member Smith and was seconded by RESOLUTION Lot 1, Block 1, BRAEMAR EILIS FIFTH ADDITION, and Lot 2, Block 1, BBLlEpIda HILTS FIFTH ADDITION; WHEREAS, the owners of the above tracts of land desire to subdivide said tracts into the follouing described new and separate parcels (herein called "Parcels"): I Lot 1, Block 1, BRAEMAR HIUS FIFTH ADDITION, according to the recorded plat thereof, Hennepin County, Minnesota, except that part lying southwesterly of the follwing described line: Beginning at a point on the southeasterly line of said Lot 1, distant 5.21 feet southwesterly of the southeast corner thereof to a point on the northeasterly line of said Lot 1, distant 69.42 feet northwesterly of the southeast corner thereof and said line there terminating. Together vith that part of Lot 2, Block 1, BRAEMAR HILTS FIFTH ADDITION, Hexmepin County, LUnnesota, lying northeasterly of the following described line : Beginning at a point on the north line of said Lot 2, distant 10.38 feet east of the northwest corner thereof to a point on the southwesterly line of said Lot 2, distant 138.39 feet southeasterly of the northwest corner thereof and said line there terminating. Lot 2, Block 1, BRAEMAR HIUS FIFTH ADDITION, according to the recorded plat thereof, Hennepin County, Minnesota, except that part lying northeasterly of the following described line: Beginning at a point on the north line of said Lot 2, distant 10.38 feet east of the northwest corner thereof to a point on the southvesterly line of said Lot 2, distant 138.39 feet southeasterly of the northwest corner thereof and said line there terminating. Together with that part of Lot 1, Block 1, BRAEMAR HIZ;[S FIFTH ADDITION, Hennepin County, Minnesota, lying northeasterly of the following described line : Beginning at a point on the southeasterly line of said Lot 1, distant 5.21 feet southvesterly of the southeast corner thereof to a point on the northeasterly line of said Lot 1, distant 69.42 feetnorthwesterly of the southeast corner thereof and said line there terminat-. WHEREAS, it has been determined that compliance with the Subdivision and Zoning 3/3/93 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 Code Sections 810 and 850. BOW, TJJEREFORE, 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 Code Section 810 and Code Section 850 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. Motion carried on rollcall vote - four ayes. *RAINBOW FOODS DEVELOPMEIW REQUEST TO CONTINUE PUBLIC HEARING TO 6/7/93 RECEIVED Council was advised that the Rainbow Foods project developer has requested continuation of the public hearing to the Council Meeting of June 7, 1993, and that formal action on the request would occur at the May 17, 1993 meeting. WECOND READING FOR ORDINANCE NO. 1993-6 (AN ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTION 220 OF THE CITY CODE TO PERMIT CERTAIN PRIZES FOR AMUSEMENT DEVICES) CONTINUED TO 5/17/93 contiwe Second Reading for Ordinance No. 1993-6 to the Council Meeting of Hay 17, 1993. Motion was made by Member Smith and was seconded by Member Rice to Motion carried on rollcall vote - four ayes. *BID AWARDED FOR NORMANDALE GOLF COURSE PARKIlrG LOT. CUL-DE-SAC AND PARKING BAY Motion was made by Member Smith and was seconded by Member Rice for award of bid for Normandale Golf Course parking lot, cul-de-sac, and parking bay to recommended low bidder, Glenn Rehbein Excavating, Inc., at $47,654.80. Motion carried on rollcall vote - four ayes. *BID AWARDED FOR STORW SEFJW IXPJLO- PROJECT NOS. STS-221. STS-222. STS-223, STS-224 award of bid for Storm Sever Improvement Project Nos. STS 221 (Tower Street), STS-222 (Parlcmmd Road), STS-223 (Schaefer Road) and STS-224 (Vernon & Gleason Intersection Overflow) to recommended low bidder, W. B. Miller, Inc., at $110,105.22. Motion was made by Member Smith and was seconded by Member Rice for Motion carried on rollcall vote - four ayes. *BID AWARDED FOR TWO GREENS MASTW 3100 Mom Motion was made by Member Smith and was seconded by Member Rice for award of bid for two Toro Greens Master 3100 Greensmovers to sole bidder, HTI Distributing, Inc., at $25,583.00. Motion carried on rollcall vote - four ayes. *BID AWARDED FOR THREE GREENS MAS= 3000 TEE AND GREENS MOW€CR!3 Motion vas made by Member Smith and was seconded by Member Rice for award of bid for three Tor0 Greens Master 3000 tee and greens movers to sole bidder, HTI Distributing, Inc., at $29,401.46. Motion carried on rollcall vote - four ayes. 1 Motion was made by Member Smith and was seconded by Member Rice for award of bid for a 124 inch Riding Rotary Hover to recommended low bidder, North Star Turf, Inc., at $24,114.79. Motion carried on rollcall vote - four ayes. *BID AWARDED FOR SIX 1993 GAS GOLF CARS AND FIVE 1993 ELECTRIC GOLF CARS Motion was made by Member Smith and was seconded by Member Rice for award of bid for six 5/3/93. -* .r 198 gas golf cars and five electric golf cars to recommended low bidder, EZ Go, Division of Textron, Inc., at $18,744.00. Motion carried on rollcall vote - four ayes. I *INSURANCE RENEUAIS AWARDED FOR PUBTJC OFPICIAIS. €IRA AND POLICE PROFESSIOHAL TJABIIXTY Motion was made by Member Smith and vas seconded by Member Rice for arard of insurance renewals for public officials, ERA, and police professional liabiliw, to recommended low bidder, National Union/Scottsdale, at $47,384.33. Motion carried on rollcall vote - four ayes. *BID AWARDED FOR INTERIOR LIGHTING FOR 50TH STREET LIOUOR STORE by Member Smith and vas seconded by Member Rice for award of bid for interior lighting for the 50th Street Liquor Store to recommended low bidder, United Electric, at $5,576.53. Motion -8 made Motion carried on rollcall vote - four ayes. *BID AWARDED FOR TURF TRUCKSTEB Motion was made by Member Smith and vas seconded by Member Rice for avard of bid for one turf truckster to recommended low bidder, Cushman Hotor Company, at $9,995.00. Motion carried on rollcall vote - four ayes. *BID AWARDED FOR ROOF REEABILTTATION - ED= EAST WATER PLANT Hotion was made by Member Smith and was seconded by Member Rice for award of bid for roof rehabilitation for the Edina East vater plant to recommended lou bidder, M & S Roofing, Inc., at $13,760.00. Motion carried on rollcall vote - four ayes. *BID AWARDED FOR ENGINEERING SURVEYING EOMPMENT and vas seconded by Member Rice for award of bid for Engineering surveying equipment to recommended low bidder, Sokkia Measuring Systems, at $13,568.10. Motion was made by Member Smith Motion carried on rollcall vote - four ayes. mRARY 3.2 BEB IZCEESE APPROVED FOR lKm"ES0TA RECREATION AND PARK ASSOCIATION Motion was made by Member Smith and was seconded by Member Rice to approve issuance of a Temporary 3.2 Beer License to the Minnesota Recreation and Park Association for an adult softball tournament on June 5 and 6, 1993, at Van Valkenburg Park. Motion carried on rollcall vote - four ayes. COHMFRCIAL DISTRICT SIGN REZTJTATIONS DISCUSSED: MORATORIUM IMPOSED ON ISSUANCE OF PERMITS FOR ERECTION AND PIACEMElW! OF SIGNS AND IXL-TED AU'NYXGS AND CANOPIES Planner Larsen said that he understood that the topic to be discussed by the Council was, specifically, the regulations regarding commercial signs in the Planned Commercial District (PCD-2), which is generally the Grandview commercial area located immediately west of Highway 100 as well as the 50th and France commercial area. Final Development Plan approval for 5113 West 50th Street (CSM Investors, Inc.) there was concern that signage issues had not been resolved. He recalled that at the public hearing on April 19, 1993 for Planner Larsen reviewed the regulations pertaining to commercial signs provided by Edina Code Section 460 (the Sign Ordinance), and specifically the following subsections : 460.03 Subd. 13 Signs on Awnings, Canopies or Marquees. Signs may be applied to an awning, canopy or marquee provided: A. Such structure shall not be considered as part of the wall area and thus shall not warrant additional sign area. B. The entire area of such structure shall be considered part of the sign area if constructed of transparent or translucent material and illuminated so as to resemble a sign panel. 5 / 5 / 9 3 '.* L 999 460.05 Subd. 4 PCD-1, PCD-2, PCD-3, and PCD-4 Districts. Specifically, PCD-2 District maximums are: 1. Wall Sign Area - 15% of wall area 2. Number Freestanding Signs: One per building per frontage 3. Area for Freestanding Signs - 80 sq. ft. for first sign, 40 4. Height - 8 feet sq. ft. for each additional sign Subsection 460.02 defines awning or marquee as "a roof-like structure of rigid or semi-rigid materials attached to and extending from the facade of a principal building." or marquee it becomes a sign panel and would be included in calculating the maximum wall sign area. in measuring sign area. Planner Larsen pointed out that if a message is placed on the awning A backlit awning with no message would not be included Planner Larsen then presented slides showing existing signage of five Blockbuster Video Stores located in the metro area and explained how the signage areas would be calculated under the City's current sign ordinance. He pointed out two slides in particular that have signage similar to what is proposed for the Blockbuster Video Store in the Grandview commercial area. Following the slide presentation, Planner Larsen showed overheads illustrating the proposed signage for the Blockbuster Video store at Grandview and presented the following description of sign permits applied for by Blockbuster: East elevation: 122.5 square feet, or 9% of wall area (15% is permitted) Blue three foot illuminated awning on entire length of wall facade with "Blockbuster Video" neon channel letters above canopy and one canted illuminated ticket logo 50 square feet, or 3.7% of wall area (15% is permitted) One canted illuminated ticket logo only North elevation: Same as east elevation West elevation: Planner Larsen cautioned that the sign permit applications were submitted with Blockbuster's initial proposal and that subsequently the store size has changed slightly (from 80' x 80' to 78' by 83'). He informed Council that sign permits would not be issued until building plans were received and reviewed. plans have submitted to the Building Department. To date, no He pointed out that the proposed awning is not considered a sign by ordinance since it carries no written or graphic message. The total area of the proposed awing would be approximately 600 square feet and would span the entire east and north elevations with a canopy return on a portion of the west and south elevations. proposed by Blockbuster, subject to final review of the building plans, would conform under the City's current sign ordinance. Planner Larsen said that staff is of the opinion that the signage Council Comment/Action Member Rice commented that he felt backlit awnings such as proposed by Blockbuster are advertising in they identify the business and should be considered as signs. During the codification process last year he said he did not fully understand the ordinance provisions concerning awnings and canopies. Personally, he said he was offended by backlit awnings and felt they should not be allowed. internally illuminated cabinet or raceway mounting for a sign. suggested that the Council revise the sign ordinance so that awnings or canopies would be included in calculating sign area because they are an attachment to and not an integral part of the building. In talking with sign companies, he said they call backlit awnings an Member Rice 200 Member Paulus commented that the wall sign area for the Blockbuster building should not include the glass frontage but only the area on which a sign could actually be attached. advertising clutter in the building windows which would become a further distraction. She said she was concerned that there would also be Member Rice asked what action the Council could take at this time to reconsider the sign ordinance if it was the consensus of the Council to do so. Attorney Gilligan opined that the Council could impose a moratorium on issuance of commercial sign permits, including illuminated awnings and canopies, while it proceeds to study and reconsider the sign ordinance. if such a moratorium would preclude Blockbuster from constructing their building. Attorney Gilligan said they could proceed with the building construction without the signage. Mayor Pro-Tem Kelly asked Member Paulus said that, because of the new businesses going into the Grandview area, it has the potential for dense signage. honest problem in the interpretation of the codified sign ordinance by the Council versus interpretation by staff. She agreed that there exists an Member Smith said he concurred with the concern of Member Paulus regarding advertising that could be displayed in windows and suggested that issue also be looked at. the sign ordinance and that clarification is needed as to the intent of the Council when the ordinance was codified before any further sign permits are issued. He agreed that there is too much confusion as to interpretation of Mayor Pro-Tem Kelly voiced concern about potential claims that a moratorium would inhibit commercial construction in the City and suggested that if imposed it be for a period of 90 days only. Attorney Gilligan noted that the Minnesota Court of Appeals deemed a recent case in Woodbury, where a broad moratorium was put in place, not a taking. I Member Smith asked how street frontage would affect permitted signage. Larsen clarified that the limitation on signage with regard to street frontage relates only to freestanding signs and permits one freestanding sign per building per street frontage. This would apply to all the buildings in the Grandview area being redeveloped. He informed Council that to date Blockbuster has not applied for a free-standing sign permit even though they could be allowed three based on the three street frontages for their building. Planner Considerable discussion following on existing regulations in the sign ordinance, interpretation, and issues to be included in the study if a moratorium is imposed by the Council. Member Smith introduced the following resolution and moved adoption: WHEREAS, the City of Edina is essentially fully developed; and VHeaEBS. the City Council is of the belief that there is an ever increasing demand for signs and illuminated awnings and canopies (as such terms are defined in Section 460.02 of the City Code), to be erected and placed in the City vith results that may be detrimental, in many respects, to the value of adjoining properties and to the quality and character of the affected neighborhood and the City as a wbole; and WHEREAS, the City Council is further of the viev that an illuminated awning or canopy constitutes a form of signage even if it does not have a message painted or inscribed thereon; and VHEBEBS, the City Council believes that the ordinances of the City may not be adequate to guide the erection and placement of signs and illuminated awnings and RESOLUTIO~ . ... 4 131 9 3 201 canopies, without detriment to the City or its residents, and further believes that it is desirable to review the ordinances of the City to determine if any changes or amendments should be made to the criteria for approving and allowing the erection and placement, including size, maxinnnn wall coverage area and number of freestanding signs for building with multiple street frontages, for signs and illuminated awnings and canopies in the City. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City staff is hereby authorized and directed to conduct studies of the ordinances of the City including particularly Section 460 of the City Code, and to give information to, and make recommendations to, the City Council relative to the need and desirability, if any, for amending the ordinances of the City relative to restricting, regulating or controlling the erection or placement of signs and illuminated awnings and canopies, and if needed or desired, the terms and conditions of such restrictions, regulations and controls. Motion for adoption of the resolution was seconded by Member Paulus. Ro 1 lcall : Ayes: Paulus, Rice, Smith, Kelly Motion carried. Member Smith then introduced Ordinance No. 1993-7 and moved adoption with waiver of Second Reading as follows: ORDINANCE NO. 1993-7 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING TBE CITY CODE BY ADDING A NEW SECTION 461 - IMPOSING A MORA!I!ORIUM ON THE ISSUANCE OF PERMITS FOR THE ERECTION AND PLACEME" OF SIGNS AND ITLlJHR?ATED AWNINGS AND CANOPIES THE CITY COlR?CIL OF THE CITY OF EDIHb, MINNESOTA ORDAINS: f ollows : Section 1. The City Code is hereby amended to provide a new Section 461 as "SECTION 461 - A MORATORIUM ON TBE ISSUANCE OF PERMITS FOR THE ERECTION AND PLACEMENT OF SIGNS AND IIlLuMHBTED AWNINGS AND CANOPIES 461.01 Purpose. Pursuant to applicable statutes the City will be conducting studies, pursuant to the authority and direction of the Council, for the purpose of considering amendments of official controls, as defined in Minnesota Statutes, Section 462.352, Subdivision 15, including amendment of Section 460 of the City Code (the "Sign Ordinance"). controls being studied will consider, among other things, the need and desirability of further regulating the size of signs, maximum wall coverage area of signs, number of free standing signs for buildings with multiple street frontages and of further regulating, controlling and restricting illuminated awnings and canopies (as such terms are defined in Section 460.02 of the City Code), and if so further regulated, controlled or restricted, the terms and conditions of such restrictions, regulations and controls. However, while the amendments and the new official controls are being considered, proposals for the erection and placement of such signs and illuminated awnings and canopies, and applications for permits therefore, continue to be made. Therefore, in order to protect the planning process and the health, safety and welfare of the residents of Edina, it is necessary and desirable to impose the following moratorium pursuant to the authority granted by Minnesota Statutes, Section 462.355, Subdivision 4. The amendments and official 461.02 Moratorium. For the 90 day period from May 3, 1993 to August 1, 1993, subject to earlier termination or extension by the Edina City Council, the City Council, the Planning Commission, the Building Official, the Zoning Board of Appeals and the staff of the City of Edina, shall not grant any permits for the erection and placement of any sign or illuminated awning or canopy." 51 31 93 .. 202 Section 2. This ordinance shall be in full force and effect immediately upon its adoption. ATTEST : Motion for adoption of the ordinance was seconded by Member Paulus. Rollcall : Ayes: Paulus, Rice, Smith, Kelly Ordinance adopted. After a brief discussion, it was the consensus of the Council that staff bring back on May 17, 1993 for reconsideration the landscape plans for the Grandview area being redeveloped so that the public plantings could be coordinated with the proposed private landscaping. *PETITION FOR SIDEWALK ON ANTRIM ROAD BETWEEN 70TH STREET AND ANTRIM COURT aEFEBRED TO ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT seconded by Member Rice to refer the petition for sidewalk on Antrim bad between 70th Street and Antrim Court to the Engineer- Department for process-. Motion vas made by Member Smith and vas Motion carried on rollcall vote - four ayes. KATY KOCH. NITUS EDITOR FOR ED= SUN--. INTRODUCED Manager Rosland welcomed Katy Koch and introduced her as the news editor for the Edina Sun- Current. Ms. Koch will be reporting on Council meetings and covering other events in Edina. PAID Motion vas made by Member Smith and vas seconded by Member Rice to approve payment of the following claims as shown in detail on the Check Register dated Hay 3, 1993, and consisting of 31 pages: General Fund $120,089.90; CDBG $9,789.25; Cable $3,738.07; Working Capital Fund $969.66; Art Center $8,840.00; Pool $315.00; Golf Course $51,991.67; Arena $9,507.33; Gun Range $36.07; Edinborough/Centennial bkes $14,030.69; Utilities $26,837.94; Liquor Dispensary $12,381.07; Construction Fund $376.32; IKP Bond $1,000.00; TOTAL $259,902.97. Motion carried on rollcall vote - four ayes. There being no further business on the Council Agenda, Mayor Pro-Tem Kelly declared the meeting adjourned at 8:55 P.M.