Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout19931206_regularMEmTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF TBE EDINA CITY COUNCIL HELD AT CITY HALL DECEMBER 6, 1993 R0ILCAI;L Answering rollcall were Members Kelly, Paulus, Rice, Smith and Mayor Richards. I CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS APPROVED Member Kelly to approve and adopt the Council Consent Agenda items as presented, with the exception of removal of item V1.A - Collection of Garbage Refuse - City Properties. Rollcall : Ayes: Kelly, Paulus, Rice, Smith, Richards Motion carried. Motion was made by Member Rice and was seconded by *MINUTES OF REGULAR MEETRJG NOVEMBER 15. 1993 AND SPECIAL MEETING OF DECEMBER 1, 1993 APPROVED approve the minutes of the regular Council Meeting of November 15, 1993, and the minutes of the Special Council Meeting of December 1, 1993. Motion was made by Hember Rice and was seconded by Member Kelly to Motion carried on rollcall vote - five ayes. PUBLIC HEAR.ING HELD: STORM SEWER IMPROVEMENT NO. STS-226 (MCCAULEY TRAIL POND1 ORDERED file . Affidavits of Notice were presented, approved and ordered placed on Presentation bv Engineer Engineer Hoffman recalled that on November 1, 1993, the Council heard a staff presentation on neighbors’ concerns regarding flooding potential along McCauley Trail Pond. Staff and neighbors had discussed the proposed project which would result in a lower normal water level and reduction in inflow during high- intensity rainfall events. After reviewing the issue on November 1, 1993, the Council set a public hearing for December 6, 1993, to receive input from all abutting property owners. The proposed STS-226 storm sewer improvement would: 1. Lower normal pond elevation 2. Isolate the park area east of Gleason Road 3. Control pond bounce by pump system Engineer Hoffman said that the estimated project cost would be $6,000.00 and staff would recommend a financing split as follows: 50% stormwater utility 50% special assessment against 12 benefitted properties The project would also require approval of the Department of Natural Resources (DNR). DNR staff has indicated that the proposed project could receive a favorable review if the intent was to lower flood potential, and was not done for aesthetics. Other side issues are water quality and lowering the pond to a level that would encourage growth of cattails. dredging of silt on the east end would be needed. The DNR has been told that some The 12 property owners who would be benefitted were noticed of the public hearing. information purposes only but would not be viewed as benefitted properties for assessment purposes. The 12 properties are proposed to be assessed on a range of $250.00 to $375.00 per dwelling unit. Staff has received one favorable response. If approved by Council, the project would be done in late winter or early spring, subject to the DNR permit. Two high ground properties on Timber Ridge were also noticed for 12/6/93 92 Mayor Richards the project be financed. then called for public comment on the following issues: 1) should undertaken or not, and 2) if ordered, how should the project be Public Comment Arley Bjella, 6543 McCauley Trail, said that on behalf of ten of the 12 affected property owners, they felt the proposed project would help solve what they consider to be a very serious problem. Ed Noonan, 6400 Timber Ridge, stated that even though his property does not abut the pond, he has use of a 15 foot stretch of land to access the pond from Jeff Gustafson who owns the abutting property. Mr. Noonan agreed that the problem is serious and he would like to see it resolved. owners in Timber Ridge would benefit because they have view of the pond. concern would be water quality if the pond level were lowered, but he agreed that isolating the park area east of Gleason Road would be good. that, while that area is not the total water source for the pond, it should be estimated what such control would do to lower the flood potential without the pump system. He suggested that all property His Mr. Noonan observed Mayor Richards commented that, although aesthetics are important, the focus is on the pond hydraulics as it relates to flood capacity. As to other options, staff and the watershed district have looked at the project and recommend it as proposed. He added that the time is ripe for this to proceed before further flooding occurs. Member Smith introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption, subject to Department of Natural Resources approval, with intent to assess 50% of project cost to benefitted properties and fund 50% from the Stormwater Utility Fund: BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Ed-. 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 construction of said improvement including all proceedings which may be necessary in eminent domain for the acquisition of necessay easements and rights for construction and maintenance of such improvement; that said improvement is hereby designated and shall be referred to in all subsequent proceedings as: and the area to be specially assessed for a portion of the cost of the proposed improvement shall include: Lot 1 thr 7, Block 1, Indian Hills 3rd Addition and Lot 1, Blockl, The Timbers. Motion called for adoption of the resolution was seconded by Member Rice. Rollcall : Ayes: Kelly, Paulus, Rice, Smith, Richards Motion carried. RESOLUTION ORDERING STORM SEWER IHPROVEHEWL'NO. SS-226 STORM SEVER IHPROVEKENT NO. SS-226 STORM SEVER IHPROVEKENT NO. SS-226 HEARING ON APPEAL OF ZONING BOARD OF BPPEBLS DECISION FOR VARIANCE FOR SA'I'ELLITE BNTENNB AT 5712 DE\TILLE DRIVE CONTINUED TO 01/03/94 Presentation bv Planner Associate Planner Aaker explained that the subject property is located on the west side of DeVille Drive, south of Stauder Circle and north of Biscayne Boulevard. satellite dish antenna near the south side of the house on an extended pole mount to obtain an overall height of 17 feet. I The homeowner is proposing to install a 10 foot diameter black mesh According to the antenna installer, , '12/6/93 t' 93 trees along the rear and south sideyard property boundaries block access to satellite reception with the exception of the proposed south sideyard extended pole mount location. There are a number of trees on neighboring properties to the south, southwest and west which apparently block signals. Ms. Aaker presented graphics illustrating front and side elevations of the proposed dish antenna, proximity to sideyard property boundary and the mature trees. I Edina Code Section 815, which addresses radio and television antennas and towers states the following: Dish antennas shall only be located in the rearyard area (815.06, Subd. 7, A.2.), and Dish antennas shall not be in excess of 12 feet in height, measured from the ground elevation at the base of the dish (815.07, Subd. 1, C). At its meeting of November 18, 1993, the Zoning Board of Appeals denied the variance request to locate a satellite dish antenna in the sideyard area of the residential lot with the proposed height of 17 feet. The Board indicated they were sympathetic to the applicant, however, they were unclear whether adequate signals could be received in a conforming location. difficult to approve a variance that would create a hardship for immediate neighbors due to the negative visual impact created. Also, that they found it Mayor Richards asked if the property owner was present, who had applied for the variance and who had appealed the decision. applicant for the variance was James E. Aufderheide and that the letter of appeal was signed by Jim Aufderheide, Aufderworld Corporation. was representing Mike Yurecko, the owner of the subject property. The question was raised by Council as to whether the matter was properly before the Council and if Mr. Aufderheide could speak for the property owner who was not in attendance. Attorney Gilligan stated that the Jim Aufderheide said he Mayor Richards called for comment on the issue of procedure. Mr. Aufderheide affirmed that he was operating as agent for the property owner in this matter. Michael Lansky, 5717 DeVille Drive, stated that he lived directly across from the subject property. He said he did not believe the property owner needed to be present and that the owner had not appeared before the Zoning Board of Appeals either. heard and decided, that the hearing should be proceed as if the property owner chose not to appear and that the Council hear testimony from affected parties. Mr. Lansky said he and another neighbor were prepared to have the appeal Wayne Salita, 5713 Continental Drive, told Council that four neighbors were present who wanted to speak to the appeal. He suggested that the Council should take the issue of proper procedure under advisement but hear the comments of the neighbors. standing, it should then be dismissed. Subsequently, if the Council finds that the matter does not have Following discussion by the Council on the issue of procedure, Mayor Richards then ruled that public testimony would be heard on the matter of the appeal. Presentation bv Permit Applicant Jim Aufderheide, 5325 W. 62nd Street, stated he was appearing on behalf of the property owner, Mike Yurecko, 5712 DeVille Drive. Mr. Aufderheide said he did not encourage the homeowner to attend the meeting as he did not feel it was necessary. He told Council that at the Board of Review meeting there was some question as to whether the satellites could be viewed from other locations in the yard or whether the spot selected would get all of the satellites. illustrate the case, he submitted photos depicting various views from the proposed satellite dish location and signal obstruction due to mature trees. said all backyard locations that conform to the City Code are prevented from To better He 12/6/93 receiving the majority of programs. Mayor Richards asked what the maximum number of channels would be if the dish were placed within Code requirements. 22 satellites producing 200 channels. Code, because of the variables, the maximum number of channels that could be received would be approximately 20. Mr. Aufderheide responded that there are If the antenna were placed to conform to Member Kelly asked why the owner feels the need for receiving most of the 200 channels. previous home and brought it with when his family moved to Deville Drive. interests are hockey which is on about six satellites and also the entertainment channels. Mr. Aufderheide explained the proponent had the dish antenna at his His Member Paulus asked Mr. Aufderheide if he had ever approached a homeowner to remove trees so that the dish antenna could be located within the Code and if this had been discussed with the property owner in this case. Mr. Aufderheide pointed out that the two largest trees that would block most of the signals are not on the owner's property. Continuing, Member Paulus asked, if in interpreting the FCC rules, homeowners are told it is their right to receive the signals. Mr. Aufderheide said as an installer they look for the best location in each case and if the homeowner concurs and there are obstructions the homeowner is told that a variance will be needed. that it is unrealistic to expect to receive all available channels. In response, Mayor Richards interjected Member Paulus commented that, as a previous dish owner, the homeowner knew something about satellite dishes and that trees are a major obstacle in receiving signals. She asked Mr. Aufderheide if, in a case like this where there are obstacles such as trees, he informs the homeowner that there will be problems or does he say let's go for a:variance because we can push the FCC rules. Responding, Mr. Aufderheide said his company was asked to move *he dish from the previous home to the subject property. record to show that, one of the problems in not having the proponent present, was that she would have questioned the proponent that they must have known before they purchased the subject property that the trees would be a problem when installing the satellite dish. Member Paulus stated she would like the Member Rice asked what the criteria was for granting variances. Associate Planner quoted from the City Code as follows: "The Board shall not grant a petition for a variance unless it finds that the strict enforcement of this Section would cause undue hardship because of circumstances unique to the petitioner's property and that grant of said variances is in keeping with the spirit and intent of this Section. 'Undue hardship' means that: (i) the property in question cannot be put to reasonable use as allowed by this Section, (ii) the plight of the petitioner is due to circumstances unique to the petitioner's property which were not created by the petitioner, and (iii) the variance, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the property or its surroundings. Economic considerations alone shall not constitute an undue hardship if reasonable use for the petitioner's property exists under the terms of this Section." Public Comment Matt Pfohl, 5716 DeVille Drive, told Council that his home is next door to where the satellite dish will be located. magnitude of the satellite dish size and a view of the property line and existing trees. may be back in future years asking to extend the dish height to 20 or 23 feet. Mr. Pfohl said the ordinance requirements are there for two reasons: 1) aesthetic purposes (to hide the dish from the street), and 2) by limiting the antenna He presented photos illustrating the He said the trees will continue to grow in height and the property owner 12/6/93 95 location to a small envelope in the backyard it will eliminate repeated requests for variances because of future tree growth. is granted his parents may plant a large tree in front of the dish. In conclusion, he said the applicant's word is being used to determine whether this is the single and only location for placement of the satellite dish. Mr. Pfohl said he viewed this as a conflict of interest and the Council should not rely solely upon the applicant's opinion. Mr. Pfohl said that if the variance I Wayne Salita, 5713 Continental Drive, explained that the three trees bordering the proponent's backyard are his. He told Council that the subject homeowners bought the property on Memorial Day and a few days thereafter the large antenna dish was laid on the ground between the subject home and that of the Pfohls. He said he did not want to see the dish even if it were legal, for sure if it needs a variance, and particularly if it is just to watch hockey games. Mr. Salita elaborated that the satellite dish would not be in keeping with the neighborhood or Edina as a whole, would affect the value of homes in the area and is ungodly. Mr. Salita said the proponent is not denied free speech, he has approximately 14 channels on cable, radio, and the newspaper so he is being denied nothing. No good will come from the variance - only economic hardship for all the neighboring property owners. granting of the variance. In conclusion, Mr. Salita asked the Council to deny the requested variance. He submitted that Mr. Aufderheide has a vested interest for Michael Lansky, 5717 DeVille Drive, said that while he is sympathetic to persons who want to receive satellite signals, in this case two variances are requested: 1) height relief, and 2) location relief. He pointed out the location variance creates the most onerous situation for the neighbors. The issue here is aesthetic degradation and whether the burden of that degradation should lie primarily on the neighbors or on the homeowner. the dish antenna would move the degradation as much as possible on the residents surrounding the homeowner. Mr. Lansky said the FCC rules state that a homeowner is entitled to receive a signal. until such time as the courts say that they are. rules apply, the issue becomes 'reasonableness' i.e. the burden on the homeowner has to be greater than on everyone else if all things are equal. that perhaps this issue may have been resolved if the homeowner had talked with the neighbors. satellites. In conclusion, Mr. Lansky said this is a question of balancing the burden; the burden on the homeowner or the burden on the surrounding neighbors. ,He suggested that the homeowner look at what is the best location within the permitted area and if a variance is still needed it should be for height not location because the backyard is still the least onerous to the majority of neighbors. The chosen location chosen for FCC rules are not applicable to this Council Assuming the courts say the He suggested Further, no homeowner can receive all channels from all 22 Mayor Richards noted that written objections to granting of the variance have been received from Robert, Janet, David and Shannon Sullivan, 6409 Biscayne Boulevard and James D. Leary, 5716 Camelback Drive. Council Comment/Action Mayor Richards said that any decision on the variance request would be premature without hearing from the proponent. further information could be provided in response to issues raised by the Council. the Council. He suggested the matter be continued so that Further, that specific findings should be drafted for consideration by Member Smith commented that he had heard nothing that said the qualifying location is unreasonable, that this does not fall within the FCC rules and that he would support denying the variance. 96 12/6/93 Attorney Gilligan interjected that draft findings should be prepared for review and consideration by the Council before any action is taken. Member Smith made a motion to close the public hearing and to direct staff to prepare draft findings for denial of the variance request for review and consideration by the Council on January 3, 1994. Motion was seconded by Member Kelly. Member Rice said he would not support the motion because, although testimony was taken as a courtesy from the affected neighbors present, he felt the hearing should be continued so that the homeowner could be present. Mayor Richards said he concurred and asked that the City Attorney give an opinion as to whether the appeal was properly before the Council. Ayes: Kelly, Smith Nays: Paulus, Rice, Richards Motion failed. Mayor Richards then made a motion to continue the public hearing on the variance request to January 3, 1994. Motion was seconded by Member Paulus. Ayes: Kelly, Paulus, Rice, Richards Nays: Smith Motion carried. LOT DIVISION APPROVED FOR 7023 AND 7029 DOWN ROAD and was seconded by Member Kelly for adoption of the following resolution: WHEREAS, the following described tracts of land constitute various separate parcels : Motion was made by Member Rice RESOLUTION I PARCEL 1: Lot 2, Block 1, TUCKERS PROSPECT HID, according to the plat thereof on file or of record in the office of the Registrar of Titles in and for Hennepin County, Minnesota. PARCEL 2: That part of Lot 15, PROSPECT HILTS, described as follows: Beginning at the Southwest corner of Lot 15; thence East along the South line of Lot 15, a distance of 140.93 feet; thence North to the Southeast comer of Lot 14; thence West 140.93 feet to the Northeast comer of Lot 12; thence South along the most Westerly line of Lot 15 to the point of beginning, according to the plat thereof on file or of record in the office of the Register of Deeds in and for Hennepin County, Minnesota. UHEREAS the owners of the above tracts of land desire to subdivide said tracts into the following described new and separate parcels: PARCEL 1: Lot 2, Block 1, !lUCKERS PROSPECT HILTS, according to the plat thereof on file or of record in and for Hennepin County, Minnesota; and The Northerly 15 feet of that part of Lot 15, PROSPECT HILLS, described as follows : Beghning at the Southwest corner of Lot 15; thence East along the South line of Lot 15 a distance of 140.93 feet; thence North to the Southeast comer of Lot 14; thence West 140.93 feet to the Northeast comer of Lot 12; thence South along the most Westerly line of Lot 15 to the point of begirming, according to the plat thereof on file or of record in the office of the Register of Deeds in and for Hennepin County, Minnesota. PARCEL 2: That part of Lot 15, PROSPECT HILTS, described as follows; Beginning at the Southwest comer of Lot 15; thence East along the South line of Lot 15 a distance of 140.93 feet; thence North to the Southeast comer of Lot 14; thence West 140.93 feet to the Northeast corner of Lot 12; thence South along the most Westerly line of Lot 15 to the point of 12/6/93 ,I 97 beginning, according to the plat thereof on file or of record in the office of the Register of Deeds in and for Hennepin County, Minnesota. EXCEPT, the Northerly 15 feet thereof. WHEREAS, it has been determined that compliance with the Subdivision and Zoning Regulations of the City of Edina will create an unnecessary hardship and said Parcels as separate tracts of land do not interfere with the purposes of the Subdivision and Zoning Regulations as contained in the City of Edina Code Sections 810 and 850. NOW, THEBEPORE, 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. ADOPTED this 6th day of December, 1993. I Motion carried on rollcall vote - five ayes. PUBLIC HEARING HELD: VACATION OF DRAINAGEmTILITY AND CONSERVATION EASEMENT GRANTED FOR LOT 1. BLOCK 2 TAFT ADDITION (5020 SCRIVER ROAD1 Affidavits of Notice were presented, approved and ordered placed on file. Presentation bv Planner Planner Larsen reminded Council that the proposed easement vacation for 5020 Scriver Road (Lot 1, Block 2, Taft Addition) was first heard by the Council on November 1, 1993. At that time, the neighbors (Burkholders) immediately to the east objected and the Council voted to continue the matter to allow the petitioner to work out a plan for proposed use of the property if the easement were vacated. Since then, the proponent appears to have reached an agreeable compromise with the neighbors. The agreement would request the following actions by Council: 1. 2. Vacate utility easement as originally proposed. Replace existing natural condition easement with open space easement except for 20 feet along east property line, which would remain covered by a natural condition easement. Petitioner Comment Robert Holl, 5020 Scriver Road, commented that since November 1, 1993, he had met on two occasions with Dave and Audrey Burkholder, 5024 Scriver Road, to address their concerns. Mr. Holl said that by letter dated December 2, 1993, Dave Burkholder indicated that their concerns were satisfied. He said the requested action would protect the interests of the City and the adjoining neighbors and would allow his family more use of the backyard. Council Comment/Action Mayor Richards asked if the proposed open space/natural condition easement would run with the land. Planner Larsen said the intent is to create a permanent change in the easement that would be recorded and would run with the land. Member Rice told Council that he had spoken with Mr. Burkholder and had told him that although his letter had indicated acceptance of the restrictions proposed by Robert Holl, the decision on the easement vacation would be made by the Council. Member Paulus asked if a precedent would be set if this easement vacation is granted. Planner Larsen answered that what is important is that the 100 foot 12/6/93 90 conservation easement would be maintained up from the pond as required by Code Subsection 810.13 for any lots contiguous to a lake or pond. I Member Rice moved adoption of the following resolution, subject to the condition that the existing natural condition easement be replaced with an open space easement except for 20 feet along the east property line which would remain covered by a natural condition easement: RESOLUTION VACATING EASEMENTS FOR DRAINAGE, UTILITY AND CONSERVATION PURPOSES WHEREAS, a resolution of the City Council, adopted the 4th day of October, 1993, fixed a date for a public hearing on a proposed vacation of easements for drainage, utility and conservation purposes; and WHEREAS, two weeks' published and posted notice of said hearing was given and the hearing was held on the 1st day of November, 1993, at which time all persons desiring to be heard were given an opportunity to be heard thereon; and WHEREAS, the Council deems it to be in the best interest of the City and of the public that said easement vacations be made; and WHEREAS the Council has considered the extent to which the vacation affects existing easements within the area of the 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 or lines, gas and sewer 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; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Edina, Hennepin County, Minnesota, that the following described portion of the drainage, utility and conservation easements be and are vacated effective upon receipt of a new open space easement covering the vacated easement area, in recordable form, duly executed and delivered without cost to the City of Edina: That part of Lot 1, Block 2, TAFT ADDITION, according to the recorded plat "Line "Line thereof, Hennepin County, Minnesota, which lies easterly of the west 5.00 feet of said Lot 1, southerly of "Line 1" described below, westerly of the easterly 20.00 feet of said Lot 1, and northerly of "Line 2" described below. 1" : A line which intersects the west line of said Lot 1, distant 108.00 feet southerly of the northwest corner of said Lot 1 and intersects the east line of Lot 2, said Block 2, distant 228.00 feet southerly of the northeast comer of said Lot 2. 2" : Commencing at the northwest corner of said Lot 1; thence on an assumed bearing of South along the west line of said Lot 1, a distance of 168.00 feet to the point of-beginning of the line to be described; thence North 86 degrees 47 minutes 13 seconds East to the point of intersection with Line 1 and there terminating. The City Clerk is authorized and directed to cause a notice of completion of proceedings to be prepared, entered in the transfer record of the County Auditor, and filed with the County Recorder, in accordance with Minnesota Statutes, Section 412.851. Motion was seconded by Member Paulus. Rollcall : Ayes: Kelly, Paulus, Rice, Richards Resolution adopted . (Member Smith was temporarily absent when vote was taken.) BID AWARDED FOR COLLECTION OF GAREAGE/REFUSE FOR CITY PROPERTIES said he had asked that this item to be removed from the Consent Agenda to discuss the bids for the collection of garbage/refuse for City properties. Mayor Richards He asked if 12/6/93 II 99 the recommended bid by Gallagher Service, Inc. was the low bid. Sanitarian Velde explained that since the bid opening, Hennepin County has reduced its tipping fee but added a surcharge on the customer's bill. The Gallagher bid does include the 14.5 percent Hennepin County surcharge while the other bids do not. Mayor Richards made a motion for award of bid for collection of garbage/refuse for City properties to recommended bidder, Gallagher Service, Inc., at $32,773.70. Rollcall : Ayes: Paulus, Rice, Smith, Richards Motion carried. (Member Kelly was temporarily absent when vote was taken.) *BID AWARDED FOR EMERGENCY RESPONSE TRAFFIC CONTROL SYSTEM Member Rice and was seconded by Member Kelly for award of bid for emergency response traffic control system to recommended low bidder, Brown Traffic Products, at $13,390.00. Motion was made by Motion carried on rollcall vote - five ayes. *BID AWARDED FOR CONSTRUCTION OF SIX TEE OASIS - BRAEMAR GOLF COURSE Motion -S made by Member Rice and was seconded by Member Kelly for avard of bid for construction of six tee oasis at Braemar Golf Course to recommended low bidder, Perkins Landscape, at $13,985.00. Motion carried on rollcall vote - five ayes. *BID AWARDED FOR NO. 10 FTELL REPAIR Motion was made by Member Rice and was seconded by Member Kelly for award of bid for No. 10 well repair to recommended low bidder, Iayne Minnesota Company, at $8.787.00. Motion carried on rollcall vote - five ayes. REPORT PRESENTED ON DEER POPULATION MANAGEMEN!C PIAN recalled that two months ago he was directed by the Council to prepare a report and recommendations concerning deer population management in the City. that a detailed report with recommendations has now been provided to the Council Members, summarized as follows: Assistant Manager Hughes He said a Problem Identification Public Health/Lyme Disease - rarely contracted within metropolitan area; Department of Health confirms the risk as less than one per 100,000 population annually. Control of Edina's deer population as a Lyme disease preventative not warranted. Plant/Landscape Damage - public survey poll indicated many complaints concerning plant and landscape damage within the City. control program, some predation will continue. City should work with property owners in high deer population areas regarding improvements in fencing and repellent technology. Even with an aggressive Traffic Safety/Personal Safety - automobile/deer collision problem seems to be increasing, particularly on the Crosstown, Highway 169 and Highway 100. Although deer are becoming very tame, there is no evidence that deer present a personal safety risk. Pouulation Growth/Carrving - Cauacity Aerial surveys have been conducted yearly since 1984 and indicate the following: 1993 population - 100 plus deer. 1994 population forecast - 130-140 deer. Available habitat - about 2 square miles (identified as public parks and open DNR Recommended Density - 15-25 deer per square mile Recommended Population - 40-50 deer space property as well as relatively large tracts of land west of HWY. 100. 12/6/93 100 Population Reduction Alternatives Hunting - would not work in Edina. Reintroduction of predators - would not be feasible in Edina. Trapping and translocating - though advocated by residents, studies show high mortality rate. would be moving deer from Edina's problem areas to somewhere else. deer. automobile deer collision. Overpopulation could result in animal death due to disease or lack of food supply. Bloomington for the past three years by using off-duty law enforcement officers at baited sites. Braemar Park. I Because all of Minnesota is overpopulated with deer, it Birth control - still in experimental form; nothing developed for free roaming Allow nature to take its course - results in animal death mainly due to Sharpshooting - most appropriate method, has been used successfully in Method could probably be used safely in parts of Trap and kill - used successfully in North Oaks; would be appropriate in Edina. Recommendations Embark on a three year population reduction program with the following objectives : 1. Population objective - 40-50 deer. 2. 60 plus deer removed each winter. 3. Initial goal - 50 deer removed this winter (number of deer in Edina has stayed static last two years and because of late start) 4. Reduction be done by sharpshooting and trap/kill. Additional recommendations include: (i) prohibiting deer feeding, (ii) improve reporting of deer/vehicular accidents, (iii) participate with Hennepin Parks in aerial surveys this winter, and (iv) improve reporting system for deer complaints. Assistant Manager Hughes introduced Jon Parker, Area Wildlife Manager with the Department of Natural Resources, who was present to answer questions. Member Paulus asked what kind of budget would be required to accomplish the recommendations. Assistant Manager Hughes said the main expenditure would be for deer population reduction. Cost for the 1991/92 program in the City of Bloomington was $70.00 per deer removed, although real cost was closer to $100.00 per animal. $130.00 per deer. estimate would be approximately $7,500.00 to come from contingencies. In the North Oaks program of trap/kill, the cost was approximately No budget has been established for this program but the Member Rice: asked for more detail on the deer control methods. Jon Parker explained that the meat can be used if the deer are trapped and shot without drugging. Carcasses are handled under a DNR permit that requires that the meat be turned over to the DNR Conservation Officer who donates the meat to individuals/civic organizations and/or food shelves. Member Rice then asked if the proposed control program was reasonable. Mr. Parker affirmed that it would be but the City would have to come to a consensus on the deer population as a control program is both a social and political issue. Member Smith commented that the report was very comprehensive and asked if interested citizens had been provided with a copy. he felt the report should be presented to the Council initially. suggested that the report be made available to the public and that an ordinance be drafted regarding feeding of deer. Assistant Manager Hughes said Member Smith Mayor Richards then called for public comment on the report as presented. 12/6/93 101 Public Comment Vic Kreuziger, 6705 Cheyenne previously before Council to He said he was ecstatic with problem as to numbers, is easy to understand and recommends a logical solution. He urged the Council to act on the recommendations presented. Trail, reminded Council that he had appeared speak to the serious deer problem on his property. the report that has been presented. It presents the By consensus, the Council directed staff to publish notice of a public hearing on December 20, 1993, on the deer population control program and proposed ordinance to prohibit feeding of deer, and to also mail notices to residents that had responded to the deer survey. RESOLUTION ADOPTED APPROVING MINNESOTA LAWS 1993 REGARDING TRANSPORTATION DEMAND MANAGEMENT PROGRAMS (1-494 TDM ORDINANCE1 Planner Larsen recalled that during the 1993 session special legislation was passed to allow cities in the 1-494 corridor to adopt ordinances relating to Traffic Demand Management measures. Because this was special legislation, a resolution accepting the authority to adopt TDM measures must be adopted by each city prior to considering any ordinance. Planner Larsen pointed out that this resolution would not obligate the City to adopt any TDM measures; it would merely accept such authority from the state. The Joint Powers Organization (JPO) is presently reviewing a final. draft of a model TDM ordinance. The Ordinance should be ready for review by the Council in January. Member Smith introduced the following resolution and moved approval: RESOLUTION APPROVING MINNESOTA LAWS 1993, CHAPTER 230 REGARDING TRANSPORTATION DI?MAND MANAGE~J~ENT PROGRAMS BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Edina, as follows: Section 1. Recitals. The Minnesota Legislature adopted Minnesota Laws 1993, Chapter 230 granting the City of Edina authority to establish by ordinance transportation demand management programs. Minnesota Laws 1993, Chapter 230, is a special law as defined in Article XII, Section 2 of the Constitution of the State of Minnesota, and is not effective with respect to the City of Edina until approved by a majority vote of all members of the City Council of the City of Edina . hereby approved as required by Article XII, Section 2 of the Constitution of the State of Minnesota and Minnesota Statutes, Section 645.021, subdivision 2. and directed to file a copy of this resolution with the Minnesota Secretary of State together with the certificate of approval and such other information required by Minnesota Statutes, Section 645.021, subdivision 3 with respect to Section 2. Acceptance and Approval. Minnesota Laws 1993, Chapter 230 is Section 3. Piline: with Secretarv of State. The Clerk is hereby authorized the approval of Minnesota Laws 1993, Chapter 230. the Clerk before the first day of the next regular session of the M-esota Such filing shall be made Legislature. ATTEST : Mayor City Clerk Motion was seconded by Member Kelly. Rollcall : Ayes: Kelly, Paulus, Rice, Smith, Richards Resolution adopted . *HEARING DATE OF APRIL 11. 1994. SET FOR BOARD OF REVIEW Motion was made by Member Rice and was seconded by Member Kelly setting April 11, 1994, at 5:OO bY P.M. 12/6/93 102 as hearing date for the 1994 Board of Review. Motion carried on rollcall vote - five ayes. I PARK BOARD RECOMMENDATION APPROVED THAT WOODDALE PARK BWIELD NOT BE RENAMED Mayor Richards recalled that on September 14, 1993, the Park Board had recommended to the Council that, because several plaques already memorialized Philip Wesely, the Wooddale Park Ballfield not be renamed Philip Wesely Field. He said that he has talked about this matter with family members, the Park Board Chair and Park Director and the conclusion was that actions taken to date were adequate. Member Kelly made a motion to approve and accept the Park Board recommendation of September 14, 1993, that the Wooddale Park Ballfield not be renamed. seconded by Member Smith. Motion was Ayes: Kelly, Paulus, Rice, Smith, Richards Motion carried. *DECEMBW 29. 1993. SET FOR YEAR END MEETING Motion was made by Member Rice and was seconded by Member Kelly setting December 29, 1993, at 5:OO P.H. for the Year End Council Meeting. Motion carried on rollcall vote - five ayes. RESIGNATIONS FROM HUMBW RELATIONS COMMISSION AND RECYCLING COMMISSION NOTED Mayor Richards reported that he had received letters of resignation from John Lonsbury (Human Relations Commission) and William Brauer (Recycling and Solid Waste Commission). candidates. He asked the Council to submit names of interested *CLAIMS PAID Motion was made by Member Rice and vas seconded by Member Kelly to approve payment of the following claims as shown in detail on the Check Register dated December 2, 1993, and consisting of 31 pages: General Fund $388,876.30; C.D.B.G. $35.00; Communication $456.09; Working Capital $1,992.47; Art Center $13,120.48; Golf Course $75,676.17; Ice Arena $22,144.12; Gun Range $422.55; Edinborough/Centennial Lakes $30,508.25; Utility Fund $276,458.53; Storm Sewer $1,987.65; Liquor Fund $100,837.04; Construction Fund $1,669.64; IBR #2 Fund $2,175.50; TOTAL $916,359.79. Motion carried on rollcall vote - five ayes. There being no further business on the Council Agenda, Mayor Richards declared the meeting adjourned at 9:03 P.M.