HomeMy WebLinkAbout19941205_regular135
MINUTES
OF TEE REGULAR MEETING OF TEE
EDIHB CITY COUNCIL HELD AT CITY HAIL
DECEMBER 5, 1994
R0I;LCBI;L Answering rollcall were Members Paulus, Rice, Smith and Mayor Richards.
Member Kelly entered the meeting at 7:04 P.M. after adoption of the Consent
Agenda.
CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS APPROVED
by Member Smith to approve and adopt the Council Consent Agenda items as
presented.
Motion was made by Member Paulus and was seconded
Rollcall :
Ayes: Paulus, Rice, Smith, Richards
Motion carried.
*KRWJ!l3S OF BEGulLba COUNCIL mTINGS OF SEPTEMBER 19. NOVEMBER 7 AND ROVEMBER 21,
1994. AND CLOSED COUNCIL MEETING OF NOVEMBER 21. 1994. APPROVED Motion was made
by Member Paulus and was seconded by Member Smith to approve the minutes of the
Regular Council Meetings of September 19, November 7 and November 21, 1994, and
the Closed Council Meeting of November 21, 1994.
Motion carried on rollcall vote - four ayes.
EDINA COMPREHENSIVE PIAN REVIEVED CONCERNING NORTEUEST EDIHB: NO ACTION TAKEN TO
AM0q.D COMPREEENSIVE PIAJFi
Presentation bv Planner
Planner Larsen recalled that at its meeting of October 17, 1994, the Council
authorized a review of the Comprehensive Plan as it relates to the land use and
traffic covering a section of northwest Edina including the greater Parkwood
Knolls area. Since the time that the Hoisington-Koegler Group was commissioned
to make the study a number of neighborhood meetings have been held by the
consultant culminating in a Planning Commission meeting held on November 30,
1994.
amended and the vote was unanimous with one abstention. However, the Planning
Commission recommended that the Council consider the following issues in
connection with the development of Parkwood Knolls 24th Addition: 1) critically
look at site distance problems along stretches of existing Interlachen Boulevard-
with the intent to correct those where physically possible, 2) consider placing a
median in Interlachen Boulevard were it turns to the south for safer pedestrian
access to the park, and 3) consider renaming the new section of Interlachen
Boulevard from where it dead ends today to Malibu Drive.
The Planning Commission recommended that the Comprehensive Plan not be
.Presentation bv Consultant
Fred Hoisington, President of Hoisington-Koegler Group, Inc., explained that
they, along with Dennis Eyler, Principal of Strgar-Roscoe-Fausch, Inc.,
Consulting Engineers and Planners, have been charged to complete a study of the
Parkwood Knolls area as it relates to traffic and land use.
The reason for the study is to settle the question of whether Interlachen
Boulevard should be extended to Malibu Drive.
to be extended, the Comprehensive Plan would stand.
ought not connect, the Comprehensive Plan would require an amendment.
catalyst for the study is Parkwood Knolls 24th Addition which was given
preliminary plat approval in July, 1994, and is before the Council for final plat
approval.
consistent with the existing Comprehensive Plan.
If the decision is that it ought
If the conclusion is that it
The
Mr. Hoisington pointed out that the final plat being presented is
The study area is generally bounded by Blake Road, Highway 169, the Nine Mile
Creek and Waterman Avenue. Within this study area, a smaller area was defined
12/5/94
eor the purpose of traffic analysis which has 483 existing residential units and
a potential for 60 infill units. The traffic study focused on the impact of the
proposed 91 lot Parkwood Knolls subdivision and the extent to which additional
through trips might be attracted if Interlachen Boulevard were to connect with
Malibu Drive. Also considered was the fact that the area would afford an
opportunity for apartments and an office complex at the intersection of Highway
169 and Malibu Drive. The site, the area land use, and transportation were
studied extensively and a report was developed and presented to the Planning
Commission.
The most important factors emanating from meetings with City staff, the developer
and three neighborhood meetings were, in order of importance: 1) traffic
distribution, 2) accessibility, 3) traffic volume impact, 4) pedestrian safety,
5) emergency access, 6) traffic safety, 7) congestion, 8) cost, 9) consensus on a
solution, and 10) property values.
Mr. Hoisington elaborated that three alternatives were considered and tested from
a traffic perspective:
Option 1: (contrived for sake of study, not expected to be implemented) would
cul-de-sac Interlachen from the west to determine the impact of this
circuitous route through the neighborhood;
with the current Comprehensive Plan; and
would create a convoluted connection of Malibu Drive to Highway 169
and would employ STOP signs as a means to further discourage traffic.
Option 2: would connect Interlachen Boulevard to Malibu Drive in accordance
Option 3:
Recommendation - Do Not Amend Comprehensive Plan
Option 2 would provide a more equitable distribution of traffic to, from and
within the neighborhood.
residents and better balance the impact of new traffic on primary access streets
within the neighborhood.
While Option 1 (requiring a Comprehensive Plan amendment) would have a lesser
impact on the Interlachen Road access, it would push all new traffic to the
opposite corners of the neighborhood. If value impacts attributable to increased
traffic are assumed, Option 1 would push all of the impact elsewhere.
It would organize traffic patterns for neighborhood I
Assuming the expected traffic pattern with heaviest volumes at the entrances to
the neighborhood and lowest in the center, Interlachen must be expected to carry
a volume similar to Schaefer Road and Parkwood Lane.
than its fair share of traffic if the extension to Malibu Drive were not
developed.
It would carry much less
While the volume of traffic on Interlachen would remain relatively low as
contrasted with similarly positioned streets in the neighborhood, it would still
be desirable to minimize the nyuber of through trips.
limited use of STOP signs and a change in the name of the street between Kelsey
Terrace and Malibu Drive be considered.
putting excessive traffic on Parkwood Lane and other interior residential streets
south of Parkwood Knolls 24th Addition.
It is recommended that
Option 3 would tend to over-correct,
Mr. Hoisington then presented the rationale for the recommendation, as stated in
the study presented, based on the criteria which were established
for evaluating the alternatives.
Mayor Richards commented that a motion to amend the Comprehensive
a four-fifths affirmative vote. He then opened the discussion to
as the measures
I Plan would need
public comment.
12/5/9&
137
Public Comment
Betsy Robinson, 5021 Ridge Road, stated that the Comprehensive Plan should be
amended.
congestion at the isthmus where Blake and Interlachen connect. While recognizing
that there should be equal distribution of traffic from the new neighborhood, she
saw no satisfactory solution to that intersection.
She felt the study did not adequately address the problem of traffic I
Bernie Nelson, 5008 Schaefer Road, recalled that Mr. Hoisington had presented the
same plan in approximately 1970 and it was turned down.
lived in his home since 1962 and asked what the difference is between the 1970
plan and the 1994 plan. Mr. Nelspn also asked why Mr. Hoisington was chosen to
do the study now if the plan was originally his. In his opinion, traffic going
through on Interlachen would create another 62nd Street.
that in 1970, the plan included the partial filling of the end of Mirror Lake to
make a clean, straight intersection.
He noted that he has
His recollection was
Mr. Hoisington clarified that in 1969 or 1970, he was involved in a study of
western Edina, focused mostly on Vernon Avenue and its commercial centers.
Council minutes were examined for any recommendations that might have come
forward at that time. Nothing was found except a reference that the street,
(Interlachen Boulevard) was to be a local street. Answering Mayor Richards,
Mr. Hoisington said he left City employment in 1970.
Planner Larsen explained that the master plat for the Parkwood Knolls area was
developed in 1978 and showed Interlachen Boulevard connecting to Malibu. At that
time subdivision dedication was satisfied by the developer by dedicating the land
now known as Van Valkenburg Park.
for the entire City, and the Western Edina Plan and all other neighborhood plans
were folded into the Comprehensive Plan.
Mike Miller, 6328 Interlachen Boulevard, voiced concern with the area where Blake
Road and Interlachen Boulevard cross.
the area is desirable, he felt the increase in traffic will be a great concern at
this location.
In 1980, the Comprehensive Plan was adopted
While an equitable balance of traffic in
Mary Seitz, 6320 Interlachen Boulevard, said that if the Comprehensive Plan is
not amended there are still issues that have not been addressed which are of -
great concern to the residents on Interlachen, i.e. sidewalks, STOP signs,
accessibility to the park, etc.
these.
sidewalk or a STOP sign would be installed.
for improvements such as sidewalks or STOP signs and the petition process
functions to bring those issues to the staff and before the Council.
that a master plan exists that shows where sidewalks should be placed throughout
the City. That plan has been followed and has also been deviated from depending
upon sentiments of the residents that are directly affected.
Council is the body that makes the final decisions.
She asked when the time would be to request
Mayor Richards responded that no one person can give assurances that a
Residents can petition at any time
He added
However, the
No further public comment was heard on the review of the Comprehensive Plan for
northwest Edina.
Comment bv Consulting Engineer
Dennis Eyler, Principal with Strgar-Roscoe-Fausch, Inc., stated that his firm was
asked to be the consultant for the Parkwood Knolls/Interlachen Boulevard traffic
study.
another Crosstown Highway 62, Mr. Eyler said that during the analysis process
they looked at a worse case scenario using the regional forecasting model (used
by the Metropolitan Council and MnDOT).
straight shot from the Lincoln/ Highway 169 interchange to the Interlachen/Blake
In response to the concern that Interlachen Boulevard would become
They created a new link which was a
12/5/94 1 3 Boad intersection and made it 30 MPH with no STOP signs and no impediments to see
what maximum traffic could be pulled into this area.
that a danger might exist of pulling in an additional 1000 trips per day from
Maloney Avenue that were totally extraneous to the neighborhood because of an
. improved travel route. If Interlachen were made a through connection, the idea
was not to make it better than Maloney. The largest threat for through traffic
would be the redevelopment of the Hennepin County Public Works site if that
occurs and if the City of Hopkins allows good connections from the south end of
that site down to the Lincoln Avenue interchange.
In so doing, they realized
As to existing conditions, the study indicated that traffic operations within the
study area are generally acceptable. However, the intersection of Interlachen
Boulevard/Blake Road/County Road 20 and Blake Road South currently operates near
capacity levels during the peak periods. Background traffic volume growth alone
would require the City and County to continue to monitor conditions at this
intersection.
including all-way STOP control or traffic control signals will be required.
These future traffic control improvements will most likely be required regardless
of the issues pertaining to the subject development and the extension of
Interlachen Boulevard.
the intersection since it is under the County's jurisdiction; the City would
still be expected to pay for 75 percent of a traffic signal.
It should be expected that future traffic control improvements
It was recommended that the County be contacted to study
With regard to other traffic controls on Interlachen, Mr. Eyler said it should
not be made a better route than Maloney Avenue.
the west curvature of Interlachen and a circuitous connection of Malibu to
Highway 169, the renaming a portion of Interlachen, proposed channelization with
the park entrance intersection curve to provide a pedestrian crossing to the park
and an all-way STOP at Interlachen/Schaefer and Interlachen/Green Farms because
of existing vertical curves.
Member Rice asked, theoretically, from how far away cut-through traffic could
originate.
from as far away as Highway 100 or even France Avenue as the maximum. Member
Rice commented that he was concerned that this Interlachen connection may become
something more than was ever envisioned and that he had spoken with Hennepin
County staff to review the history. He had learned that in 1959 Barton-Ashman,
Chicago, was hired to look at the whole County Road 18 plan recognizing at that
time that it was to be a modified controlled access design.
the design was held on January 5, 1972 at the Hopkins High School.
1972 a public hearing was held at Edina City Hall and the final EIS was approved
in October, 1972 with some minor changes concerning the cemetery and some swamp
areas.
Edina Plan and was approved by Edina City Council on May 20, 1974 and the
interchange opened in 1976.
today,
projected in the mid-70's.
of the developer that the maximum number of lots in the development will be 91
single family units, Member Rice proposed that the Comprehensive Plan not be
amended.
Consideration should be given to
I Mr. Eyler answered that the modeling showed such traffic could come
The first hearing on
On May 15,
The final EIS stated that the plan was in conformance with the Western
Member Rice pointed out that the traffic out there
For those reasons and predicated on the stated intent
surprisingly, is within the approximate number of vehicles that was
Mayor Richards then asked for a motion to amend the Comprehensive Plan.
motion being offered, Mayor Richards stated that a review has been conducted and
that at this time the Council does not wish to amend the Comprehensive Plan.
It was noted that the Council had received copies of all correspondence
concerning the matter of amending the Comprehensive Plan including a petition
signed by approximately 30 residents who felt the Comprehensive Plan should not
be changed.
No
I
12/5/94
139
FINAL PUT APPROVED FOR PARlWOOD KH0I.U 24TE ADDITION (OUTLOT A. PARKWOOD KN0I;IS
22ND ADDITION)
Presentation bv Planner
Planner Larsen reminded Council that this is a 53 acre plat of undeveloped land
in greater Parkwood Knolls bounded on the west by Malibu Drive, on the south by
Parkwood Road, on the east by Green Farms Road and by Van Valkenburg Park on the
north.
on July 18, 1994. The entire property will be developed incrementally. The
developer has proceeded with engineering and is now seeking final plat approval
of Phase I. This is a 33 lot plat located in the northerly part of the property
and would include completion of Interlachen Boulevard to connect with Malibu
Drive and four lots that would be served by a cul-de-sac from Malibu Drive. The
developer' agreement for Phase I public improvements has been executed. No
wetlands alteration is proposed, consequently no permits are required for this
phase.
Creek Watershed District. The permit hearing is scheduled for December 21, 1994.
The permit was a condition of preliminary plat approval.
final plat approval conditioned on receipt of the permit by the Nine Mile
Watershed District. Subdivision dedication was satisfied with the Parkwood
Knolls 20th Addition in 1978.
The Council granted preliminary plat approval for this 91 lot development I
The subject development has not received a grading permit from Nine Mile +
Staff would recommend
Member Rice asked what would prevent the developer from coming in at a later date
and asking to build, say, a 500 unit apartment house on the remainder of the
property.
to start the process over; propose an amendment to the Comprehensive Plan as it
would be a change in land use and an alteration from the approved master plan.
Planner Larsen responded in order to do that the developer would have
Public Comment
Chuck Webster, 6645 Interlachen Boulevard, stated he objected to the lot sizes,
particularly those closest to his home which do not conform to the 1992 ordinance
which spells out the required size of new lots within 500 feet of existing
neighborhoods.
approximately 13,000 square feet while the median for the existing neighborhood
lots is approximately 21,000 square feet. Mr. Webster said he assumed that the
City adopted the 1992 ordinance to protect the property values of existing
homeowners and to prevent an abrupt change in the character of the neighborhood.
He said it seems he and his neighbors are being deliberately subjected to a
probable depreciation of property values. Concluding, Mr. Webster said he hoped
the Council ensures that the lot sizes conform to the 1992 ordinance before
granting approval.
Chris Zachary, 4916 Ridge Road, said he endorsed the last speaker's comments and
told Council he recently built his home on a three-quarters acre lot.
purchasing the lot he asked the Planning Department whether his lot could be
split into two lots and was told he could not do that.
the same requirements that are expected of individual homeowners should also
apply to developers and builders.
He submitted that the median lot size for the subject plat is
Before
Mr. Zachary said he felt
Betsy Robinson, 5021 Ridge Road, asked that the name proposed by Harvey Hansen,
developer, of Park Terrace for the extension of Interlachen Boulevard be
considered at this time. Mayor Richards responded that it is generally not the
function of the Council to name streets in plats.
developer usually decides the names of streets in a plat. Mr. Hansen commented
that he believed that name has not been used for another street.
Mayor Richards asked Planner Larsen to comment on the issue of lot size.
Larsen said the lot size standards were determined in 1978 when the City asked
the Hansens to determine an overall master plan for the Parkwood Knolls tract of
land.
Planner Larsen said the
Planner
At that time they also executed a certain agreement with the City that
12/5/94
Qatisfied the subdivision dedication. From that time on the developer has been
relying on the master plan approved for this property.
recent legislation concerning wetlands has forced some redesign but the density
remains the same with the lots varying in size. The 1989 subdivision ordinance
was put in place specifically to handle small in-fill situations, and to
grandfather the subject development made sense because it was felt both the
developer and the City were relying on what was approved in 1978.
interjected that the lot sizes being proposed now are much smaller than what was
proposed in 1978.
He pointed out that
Mr. Webster
Member Smith introdaced the following resolution and moved adoption, subject to
Nine Mile Creek Watershed District grading permit:
RESOLUTION APPROVING FINAL PLAT
FOR PdaKcTooD KNOW 24TH ADDITION
BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Edina, Minnesota, that that certain plat
entitled "PbBz(v0oD K€?OIJS 24TB ADDITION" platted by Parkwood Knolls Construction
Company, a Minnesota Corporation, and presented at the regular meeting of the
City Council of December 5, 1994, be and is hereby granted final plat approval.
Motion was seconded by Member Rice.
Rollcall :
Ayes: Kelly, Paulus, Rice, Smith, Richards
Resolution adopted.
Member Rice suggested that staff look into the issues raised by the Planning
Commission in connection with the Parkwood Knolls 24th Addition plat, i.e. site
distance problems along existing Interlachen Boulevard, median in extension of
Interlachen Boulevard for safer pedestrian access to the park, renaming of new
section of Interlachen Boulevard, and also consider all-way STOP signs at the
intersection of Interlachen Boulevard at Schaefer Road and Green Farms Road as
recommended by the traffic consultant. It was the consensus of the Council to
instruct staff to take these issues into consideration in development of
Parkwood Knolls 24th Addition.
PARTJAL RELEASE OF CONSERVATION RESTRICTION ON LOT 4. HARK DALQMST ADDITION TO
BE RECONSIDERED ON JANUARY 3. 1994 Planner Larsen recalled that at its meeting
of November 21, 1994, the Council took action to reconsider the request for
partial release of the conservation restriction on Lot 4, Mark Dalquist Addition.
The matter is now on the agenda for the purpose of setting a hearing date.
said the earliest the matter could be heard, allowing for publication and mailing
of notice, would be January 3, 1994.
-
He
Edward Glickman, 5217 Schaefer Road, said he objected to setting a hearing date
that wraps around a holiday, particularly when those coming to the hearing do not
know what is being proposed. He suggested that the question of what will happen
at the hearing be addressed.
Mayor Richards clarified that the Council's initiative was to reconsider what was
denied on November 7, 1994, and the proposal would be identical to what was
considered and turned down on that date.
Betsy Robinson, 5021 Ridge Road, asked for clarification of the reconsideration.
Mayor Richards explained that on.November 7, 1994, the Council denied the request
for partial release of the conservation restriction on Lot 4, Block 1, Mark
Dalquist Addition by a 3-1 vote. On November 21, 1994, one of the three Council
Members who voted in the affirmative made a motion to reconsider the request
based on the same facts, and the motion carried on a 4-1 vote.
asked that Ms. Robinson be given a copy of the November 21, 1994, Council
minutes.
Mayor Richards
12/5/94 141
Mayor Richards stated there was a motion on the floor to set the hearing date for
January 3, 1994, and called for vote thereon.
Ayes: Kelly, Paulus, Rice, Smith, Richards
Motion carried.
*LOT DIVISION GRANTED FOR LOT 9. BLOCK 1. SIOUX TRAIL FOTJRTE ADDITION (6917-19
MCCAULEY TRAIL)
Smith for adoption of the following resolution:
WHEREAS, the following described property is at present a single tract of land:
UHJBEAS, the owners have requested the subdivision of said tract into separate
parcels (herein called "Parcels") described as follows:
Motion was made by Member Paulus and was seconded by Member
RESOLUTION
Lot 9, Block 1, Sioux Trail Fourth Addition
I
PARCEL A:
That part of Lot 9, Block 1, SIOUX TBBIL FOUBTH ADDITION, which lies
northerly of a line drawn between a point on the easterly line of said
Lot 9, distant 55.96 feet northwesterly of the southeast corner of said
Lot 9 as measured along the easterly line of said Lot 9, and a point on the
westerly line of said Lot 9 distant 53.11 feet northwesterly of the
soudhwest corner of said Lot 9 as measured along the westerly line of
said Lot 9.
PARCEL B:
That part of Lot 9, Block 1, SIOUX TRAIL FOTJRTE ADDITION, which lies
southerly of a line drawn between a point on the easterly line of said
Lot 9, distant 55.96 feet northwesterly of the southeast corner of said
Lot 9 as measured along the easterly line of said ht 9, and a point on the
westerly line of said Lot 9 distant 53.11 feet northwesterly of the
southwest corner of said Lot 9 as measured along the westerly line of
said Lot 9.
IWERIWS, the requested subdivision is authorized under Code Section 810 and 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.
NOU, THEREFORE, it is hereby resolved by the City Council of the City of Edina
that they conveyance and ownership of the above described 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 only to the extent permitted
under Code Section 810 and Code Section 850 and subject to the limitations set
out in Code Section 850 and said ordinances are not waived for any other purpose
or as to any other provisions thereof, and further subject, hovever, 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 made be provided for by ordinances of the City of
Edina or with the prior approval of this Council as may be provided for by those
ordinances .
ADOPTED this 5th day of December, 1994.
-
Motion carried on rollcall vote - four ayes.
VACATIOIO OF UTILITY AND DRAINAGE EASEH0Tl! GRANTED FOR LOT 6. BMCK 9. SOUTB
GARDEN ESTA!L!ES ADDITION
Presentation by Engineer
Engineer Hoffman informed the Council that the property owner of Lot 6, Block
South Garden Estates 3rd Addition (7120 West Shore Drive) has petitioned for
vacation of a sideyard utility and drainage easement for the purpose of
constructing a garage addition.
recommend vacation of the easement except for the westerly five feet. Also,
staff would recommend that the street light be moved per request of Northern
Staff has reviewed the request and would
9,
12/5/94 tates Power so that the power line will not be over the new garage addition. 142
Mayor Richards called for public comment on the vacation request.
ob j ection was heard.
No comment or
Member aice moved adoption of the following resolution, subject to the property
mer relocating street light per Northern States Power Company request:
RESOLUTION VACATIHG EASEMENT
FOR UT- AND DRAINAGE PURPOSES
UJJEWUS, a resolution of the City Council; adopted the 7th day of Nwember, 1994,
fixed a date for a public hearing on a proposed vacation of an easement for
utility and drainage purposes; and
UEEKEAS, two weeks' published and posted notice of said hearing vas given and the
hearing was held on the 5th day of December, 1994, at'which time all persons
desiring to be heard were given an opportunity to be heard thereon; and
VHEaebS, the Council deems it to be in the best interest of the City and of the
public that said easement vacation be made: and
WEEREAS, the Council has considered the ektent to which the vacation affects
existing easements vithin 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 and lines, gas and
sever lines, or vater 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, remve, or
otherwise attend thereto;
NOU, THEREFORE, BE IT BESOLVED by the City council of the City of Edina, Hennepin
County, Minnesota, that the folloving described portion of the utility and
drainage easement be and is hereby vacated effective as of December 8, 1994:
'I
The southern five feet of Iat 6, Block 9, SOUTH GARDEN ESTA"ES 3BD
ADDITION, Hennepin County, Minnesota, except for the westerly five feet
thereof. I 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 vi& the Counw Recorder, in accordance with Minnesota Stattltes,
Section 412.851.
Motion was seconded by Member Paulus.
Rollcall :
Ayes: Kelly, Paulus, Rice, Smith, Richards
Resolution adopted.
FIRST aEbDIHG GRANTED FOR ORDIlUANCE NO. 1994-11 - AN ORDIIU'ICE AMENDING CODE
SECTION 300 TO dI;uIv THE AJKCHAL C0"ROL OFFICER TO DECIARE A DOG TO BE
POTENTIALLY DANGEROUS
have been held on two occasions during the past year concerning potentially
dangerous dogs.
does not impose any restrictions on the dog or its owner.
thereafter bites or attacks a person or domestic animal, the Council, after
conducting a public hearing, could then declare the dog to be a "dangerous dog".
If the dog is found to be "dangerous" State Law requires that the dog be
registered, confined indoors or in a pen.
premises and the owner must obtain a surety bond or liability insurance coverage.
Assistant Manager Hughes recalled that public hearings
A finding by the Council that a dog is "potentially dangerous"
However, if such a dog
A warning sign must be posted on the
After reviewing the requirements of state law, and the practices of other cities,
staff would recommend adoption of Ordinance No. 1994-11. The Ordinance amendment
would allow the Animal Control Officer to designate a dog as "potentially
dangerous".
we believe an administrative process, rather than a formal Council hearing, is
more appropriate.
order to upgrade the designation from "potentially dangerous" to "dangerous".
In that this designation carries with it no sanctions or penalties,
The ordinance amendment requires Council hearing and action in
12/5/94
143
Member Rice moved First Reading of Ordinance No. 1994-11 - An Ordinance Amending
Code Section 300 to Allow the Animal Control Officer to Declare a Dog to be
Potentially Dangerous as presented. Motion was seconded by Member Smith.
Ayes: Kelly, Paulus, Rice, Smith, Richards
First reading granted.
*BID REJECTED FOR BITUMINOUS DISTRIBUTOR WITH HYDROSTATIC DRIVE: EQUIPMENT TO BE
RE-BID Motion was made by Member Paula and was seconded by Member Smith to
reject the sole bid for a bituminous distributor with hydrostatic drive because
specifications were not met and to order re-bid of this equipment.
Motion carried on rollcall vote - four ayes.
*AWARD OF BID FOR SKID STEW LOBDEB CONTINUED TO DECEMBER 19. 1994 Motion was
made by Member Paula and was seconded by Member Smith to contiwe the award of
bid for a skid steer loader to December 19, 1994.
Motion carried on rollcall vote - four ayes.
*BID AWARDED FOR COIJXCTION OF REFUSE FOR CITY PROPERTIES
Member Paulus and vas seconded by Member Smith for award of bid for collection of
refuse for City properties for calendar year 1995 to recommended low bidder,
Aagard Environmental Services, at $23,771.77.
Motion vas made by
Motion carried on rollcall vote - four ayes.
REPORT GIVEN ON ODOR COJ!iTROL AT GOLDEN VALLEY MICROWAVE FOODS Mike Bley,
Director of Operations for Golden Valley Microwave Foods, recalled that at its
meeting of November 21, 1994 the Council had asked for additional safeguards
concerning the equipment to be installed for the odor problem.
that Golden Vallev Microwave Foods had ordered the air scrubbing unit from Forest
He told Council
.I - Air on November 26, 1994.
In response to the issues raised, Mr. Bley referred to his letter of December 1,
1994, which reported the following:
1) Golden Valley Microwave Foods has submitted to the City a list of Rust
Environment & Infrastructure industrial ventilation/pollution control projects,
several of which deal with odor control and some which deal with wet scrubbers to
give Council a sense of Rust’s experience in addressing similar issues.
2) Regarding other companies using similar products, Mr. Bley said their fat
free product is a new one with patent pending and, to their knowledge, is not
being used by any competitors. The odor is being generated by an ingredient in
one of the flavors. On November 10 representatives from Golden Valley looked at
the odor control system used by the ingredient manufacturer and learned they use
a wet scrubbing system.
3)
problem and preliminary results look promising.
the week of December 19.
Golden Valley has tested an alternate process to help alleviate the odor
Secondary testing is to begin
4) scrubbing system which in essence is the same although smaller than the unit
Golden Valley will purchase.
that what Golden Valley will be installing will take care of the odor.
testing of the trial unit will be done during the next two weeks.
In addition, Golden Valley has ordered and installed a trial unit for a wet
This will prove out the technology to make sure
Analytic
If the trial
system does not prove to work there
a dual stack scrubber, incineration
Member Rice suggested
by Rust Environmental
that Building
to see if the
- are some other steps that can be taken, i.e.
of the odors.
Coordinator Kehoe call the references listed
systems that were installed helped with odor
121 5 / 94 14 4
problems.
Member Paulus
shutting down
problem. Mr,
commented that Golden Valley had not addressed the issue of
their fat-free process should the equipment not solve the odor
Bley said they would have a lot more information for the Council at
the meeting of December 19 following the trial unit testing.
*APRIL 10. 1995 SET FOR 1995 BOARD OF REVIEW Motion was made by Member Paul=
and vas seconded by Member Smith setting April 10, 1995, as the date for the 1995
Board of Reviev.
Motion carried on rollcall vote - four ayes.
PETI!CION FOR STOP SIGN AT BENTON AVE"E/JOBNSON DRIVE PRESWTED Engineer Hoffman
recalled that at the meeting of November 7, 1994, the issue of stopping westbound
Benton at Johnson Drive was considered by the Council.
review indicated that Benton not be stopped at Johnson drive, but a physical
change be made to the street to better protect walkers on the sidewalk by
changing the curb style from a drive over curb as currently exists, to a bridge
crossing style which is ten inches high and provides better curb protection.
Engineering staff reviewed the site and concurred with earlier comments that
speed was not the major issue but that drivers could easily drive on the sidewalk
due to the style of curbing.
at the second cunre in the road (west of Johnson Drive) where people were driving
on the sidewalk.
distances. However, a new petition, circulated by Rick Danmeier, 5600 Benton
Avenue, has been submitted.
is still an appropriate alternative.
The Traffic Safety staff
Public Works has installed two additional bollards
In addition, evergreen trees were trimmed to improve sight
The petitioners believe that a STOP sign westbound
Mayor Richards said when the issue was heard previously it received a 2-2 vote.
Because of that vote, closure should have been brought.
revisited again and again just because people do not like what the decision
makers decide.
Issues cannot be
Member Smith commented that later in the meeting of November 7, 1994, Council
discussed and reviewed the fact that this is a speed issue.
have the power to put an enforceable speed in an area less than 30 MPH even
though the geography/topography may suggest a lessor speed limit.
asked to pursue that because there is more than one area in Edina that should
have a reduced speed limit. Member Smith said he felt the STOP sign issue at
Benton Avenue/Johnson Drive was over, but the issue of speed would be further
discussed with state legislators.
The City does not
Staff was
Member Rice stated since the vote on the STOP sign was 2-2, maybe the issue
shohd have a more decisive vote by the full Council.
Rick Danmeier, 5600 Benton Avenue, spoke to the petition he had circulated in the
neighborhood with numerous signatures requesting placement of a STOP sign for
west bound traffic at Johnson Drive/Benton Avenue. He said he offices in his
home, observes the traffic all day long and is in total disagreement with the
findings of the traffic safety staff concerning the intersection. He submitted
that there is approximately 140 feet in which a vehicle could stop for the STOP
sign.
that this is a speed issue but some action needs to be taken while waiting for
some legislation to come through.
there is no signage to indicate that.
the neighborhood and reconsider the matter.
.
Mr. Danmeier said there is 100 percent agreement from the neighborhood
He emphasized that this is a school zone but
He strongly urged the Council to protect
Also speaking in favor of reconsidering installation of the STOP sign were: Greg
Hanson, 5832 Johnson; Paul Danielson, 5813 Johnson Drive; Joel Songstad, 5500
12/5/94
145
Benton Avenue; Riva Hortsch, 5417 Benton Avenue; Glenn Champlin, 5524 Benton
Avenue; Norton Saude, 5817 Johnson Drive; Mike Hogan, 5808 Johnson Drive; and
Scott Rosequist, 5817 Tracy Avenue.
Lee Raabe, 5425 Benton Avenue, said he felt adding a STOP sign will not fix
anything. Taking the Johnson/Benton corner at 20 MPH even if the roads are good,
is very difficult and if a STOP sign is installed people will attempt to brake
and will slide through the intersection in the winter. What is needed is to get
the traffic speed below 25 MPH.
I
Mayor Richards asked Engineer Hoffman to review the recommendation on the
curbing.
nothing to prevent cars from driving onto the sidewalk. Staff recommended that a
10 inch curb be installed next spring that would prevent west bound vehicles from
leaving the roadway and endangering pedestrians on the sidewalk. Staff's
position was that because of the geometries at that location some reconstruction
would be the best solution.
Engineer Hoffman said staff agreed with the residents that there is
(Member Smith became ill and left the meeting at this point - 9:20 P.M.)
Member Paulus said that, while she appreciated the comments made-by the
residents, she would have to defer to the recommendation of authorities, i.e.
State of Minnesota and traffic safety staff.
have a negative effect as much as a positive effect.
STOP sign they speed up after stopping to make up for lost time. Member Paulus
said she sees the main issues as speed, design of the roadway system and location
of the sidewalk to the roadway and would be willing to discuss those issues but
not reopen the STOP sign issue.
Studies show that STOP signs can
When a driver stops at a
Engineer Hoffman responded to Member Kelly that additional bollards could be
placed now before the proposed reorienting of the intersection in the spring of
1995.
Mayor Richards asked Chief Bernhjelm to address the speed issue.
reported that officers have been monitoring traffic in the area and prevalent
speeds are below or slightly above the posted speeds so that enforcement is
inappropriate. He said there are 30 - 40 priority speed enforcement locations in
the City and over 200 miles of roadway with an average shift of five officers and
addressing every problem is extremely difficult.. If speeding were observed in
this location it would be monitored more frequently.
Chief Bernhjelm
Mayor Richards commented that he believed the Council should follow what the
experts say in making the environment as safe as possible.
a problem but there are standards on what STOP signs will and will not do and
those should be followed.
top priority next spring and that the intersection be evaluated next summer after
the repairs have been completed.
Admittedly, there is
He suggested that the engineering solution be given
Engineer Hoffman told Council that he would present an engineering report
concerning proposed reconstruction at the intersection at the Council Meeting of
December 19, 1994. No action was taken by the Council.
*PETITION FOR STREET LIGETI1(IG OPPOSITE 5716 CREEK VdTlLEp ROAD REFERRED To
ENG-G DEPAR!L"T Motion was made by Member Padus and was seconded by
Member Smith to refer the petition for street lighting opposite 5716 Creek Valley
Road to the Engineering Department for processing.
Motion carried on rollcall vote - four ayes.
1995 CITY BUDGET AND TAX LEW ADOPTED Mayor Richards commented that he believed
12/5/94 1 4 &he proposed 1995 City Budget totaling $15,723,228 and reflecting an increase of
4.39 percent in expenditures, a 2.5 percent wage increase and $lO/month in
additional employee benefits is a reasonable and affordable budget.
Member Rice introduced the following resolution and moved adoption:
RESOLUTION ADOPTING BUDGET FOR THE CrrP OF EDm
FOR TEE YEAR 1995, AND ESTABTJSHIXG !WAX LEOP FOR
YEAR 1995 PAYABLE IIU 1995
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITP OF EDlXA l!I"ESO!CA DOES RESOLVE AS FOLTDUS:
Section 1.
adopted as hereinafter set forth, and funds are hereby appropriated therefor.
GmEmrL m
The Budget for the City of Edina for the calendar year 1995 is hereby
GENERAL GO-
Mayor and Council $ 63,058
Ahinistration 646 492
Planning 245,441
Finauce 387,805
Election 35,534
Assessing 411,783
Legal and Court Services 356.000
PUBLIC UORKS
Administration $ 133,609
Highvays 3,097,084
PROTECTION OF PEBSOHS AND PROPERTP
Police $4,282,283
Civilian Defense 31,792
Animal Control 61,503
Fire 2,457 , 491
Public Health 357,359
Inspection 357,805
TOTAL PROTECTION OF PERSONS AND PaoPEBTp
PARK DEP-
Administrat ion $ 470,126
Recreation 127,789
Wlntenance $1.380.556
TOTALGENERALGO- $ 2,146,113
Engineering 491,889
TOTAL PUBLIC UORKS $ 3,722,582
$ 7,548,233
TOTAZ PARK DEPARTMEWC $ 1,978,471
NON-DEPAR!R5NTAL EXPENDITURES
Reserve Rebuild $ 84,000
Contingencies 61,200
Specialbsessments on City Property 33,700
Capital Plan Appropriation 50 159
Commissions and Special Projects 98,770
TO!UL NOH-DEPARTMEWML EXPENDITURES $ 327.829
lV3!ALGEEIEBbz,FUND $15.723.228
Section 2.
hereinafter set forth:
Estimated receipts other that General Tax Levy are hereby proposed as
GmKRAL FUND
HACA $ 994,020
Other Taxes (310,000)
Licenses and Permits 921,710
lhmicipal Court Fines 425,000
Department Service Charges 1,305,000
Other 60,500
Transfer from Liquor Fund 383,000
Income on Investments 35,000
12/5/94
Aid - Other Agencies
Police A5d
147
268,100
250,000
TOTAL ESTIHA!L'ED RECEIPTS $ 4.332.330
That there is proposed to be levied upon all taxable real and Section 3.
personal property in the City of Edina a tax rate sufficient to produce the
amounts hereinafter set forth:
Motion for adoption of the resolution was seconded by Member Paulus.
Rollcall :
Ayes: Kelly, Paulus, Rice, Richards
Resolution adopted.
FOR GENERAL FUND $ii.390.89a
ORDINANCE NO. 1994-11 (AMENDING CODE SECTION 185 TO JXCRE4SE CERTAJX FEES)
GRANTED FIBST READING
No. 1994-11 - An Ordinance Amending Schedule A of Edina Code Section 185 to
Increase Certain Fees and to Add or Delete Certain Fees as presented and on file
in the office of the City Clerk.
Member Rice made a motion for First Reading of Ordinance
Motion was seconded by Member Kelly.
Ayes: Kelly, Paulus, Rice, Richards
Motion carried.
RESOUITION ADOPTED APPROVING 1995 PARK AND RECREATION DEPARTMENT FEES/cHbBGES,
AMBULANCE FEES AND MISCEIUNEOUS FEES
Member Paulus made a motion to approve and adopt the following resolutions:
RESOLUTION SETTING PARK AND RECREATION DEPARTMENT
FEES AND CHARGES FOR 1995
PARK & RECREATION
Playground $10.00 Pee Wee Tennis $20.00
Tennis Inst. $30.00
ART CElPTEB
Memberships
Coach Pitch $30.00 Team Tennis $55.00 I
Family $35.00
Individual $25.00
Class Fees* (based on number of hours in class)
Non-Mem/Mem
25 hrs $3.50/3.25
24 hrs $4.00/3.58
21 hrs $4.25/3.81
14 hrs $4.50/4.07
12 hrs $4.75/4.25
8 hrs $5.00/4.50 '
5 hrs $5.25/4.60
4 hrs $5.65/5.25
*all clay and children's classes add $5
Parent/Child Workshops* (includes 1 child & 1 adult)
Non-Hem/llem
90 min $15/13
2 hrs $17/15
3 hrs $21/19
4 hrs $27/25
5 hrs $31/28
6 hrs $34/31
a hrs $42/38
7 hrs $39/35
*all clay classes add $5 mal!
Hourly Rate (as of Sept., 1995) $105.00
&pen skating (Youth & Adult)
Skate Rental
Skate Sharpen-
Season Tickets (eff. 10/1/95)
Resident Family:
first 2 members
each additional member
. mnrimrrm (7 persons)
Resident Individual
Hon-Resident Family:
first 2 members
each additional member
mnrimmn (7 persons)
Hon-Resident Indivldnal
Classes
GUN RANGE
Pistol 1/2 hour
25 rotmds trap
Building/hr
Daily rental
Firearm Safety
AQUATIC CgPJTEB
Season Tickets
Resident Family
first 2 members
each additional member
maximan (8 members)
Resident Individual
Daily Admission
Admission after 6 p.m.
GO= COUBSE - Braemar
Green Fees
Aquatic Instruction
18 hole - non patron
18 hole - patron
9 hole - non patron
9 hole - patron
Group Fees - 18 holes
Group Fees - 9 hole
Patron Cards
Individual
Executive Course
Computerized Handicaps
Resident
Ron-Resident
Men's 72w
Hen's 42"
Ladies' 72"
bckers
EXECUTIVE COUBSE - Braemar
Adult - n~n-p~rrOn
Adult - patron
Junior - non patron
Junior - patron
Resident - wedding related
BRAKMAR ROOM
12/5/94
$ 2.50
$ 1.50
$ 2.50
$ 60.00
$ 5.00
$ 85.00
$ 50.00
$ 75.00
$ 5.00
$100.00
$ 60.00
$ 55.00
$ 5.00
$ 5.00
$ 50.00
$160.00
$ 6.00
$ 45.00
$ 10.00
$105.00
$ 40.00
$ 5.00
$ 3.00
$ 40.00
$20.00
$16.00
$11.00
$ 9.00
$27.00
$15.00
$55.00
$25.00
$15.00
$20.00
$35.00
$25.00
$15.00
$ 8.00
$ 7.00
$ 6.00
$ 5.00
$600.00
Ran-resident - wedding related $650.00
Other events $250-$650
Hon-Resident Family
ftrst 2 members
each add'l member
maximum (8 members)
Non-Resident Indiv.
Club Storage
Club Rental
Pall carts
Golf cars
18 holes
9 holes
Group Car Fees
Group Golf Lessons
Adult
Junior
Golf
pall
Cars/everyone
carts
Group Fees
$ 65.00
$ 10.00
$125.00
$ 60.00
$35.00
$ 6.00
$ 2.00
$20.00
$12.00
$28.00
-
$56.00
$28.00
$10.00
$ 1.75
$10.00
Concession Fees (an annual increase of 59, as a general rule)
12/5/94
149
EXECUTIVE COURSE - N~mdale
Adult - non-patron $ 9.00 Golf Cars/everyone $ 10.00
Junior/non-patron $ 6.00 Group Fees $ 10.00
Adult - patron $ 8.00 Pull Carts $ 1.75
Junior - patron $ 5.00
Large Bucket $ 5.00
Small Bucket $ 3.00
Warm-up Bucket $ 1.50
Large Bucket $ 5.25 League $675.00
GOLF RANGE
GOLF DOME
Senior Bucket $ 4.75 Hourly field rental $100.00
Time Golf 1/2 hour $ 7.75
EDINBOROUGH
Daily Passes $ 3.00
Season Passes
Edina Family
first 2 members $195.00
each additional member $ 15.00
maximum (7 members) $270.00
Edina Individual $180.00
Non Edina Family
first 2 members $215.00
each additional member $ 20.00
maximum (7 members) $315.00
Non Edina Individual $195.00
Towel Fee $ 0.75
Skate Rental $ 1.50
Building Rentals
Commercial Use (Trade Shows) $2,500.00
Category Xl
City of Edina & Boards/Assoc.
my-Oct $17/day+$12/man setup/dm
I
Category #2 (per hour)
Ed- Civic & Edina Schools (H-Th)
Great Hall $150.00
Theater $ 75.00
Grotto $ 50.00
Great Hall $300.00
Grotto $ 75.00
Theater $125.00
Category #3-General Fees(per hour)
Category #4 Non-Edina Residents & Business (per hour) Eliminate
Category X5-Exclusive Rentals
Friday Evening $1,300.00
Saturday Evening $1,500.00
Rental Amenities
hers $100.00
use of rink area $125.00
cover ice area $325.00
Domestic Photo Shoot (hourly)
any park area blocked off $ 50.00
Grotto $ 50.00
Theater $ 75.00
Great Hall $ 75.00
Ice Rink $100.00
any park area blocked off $200.00
Grotto $200.00
Commercial Photo Shoot (hourly)
1 5 8 neater
12/5/94
$200.00
Great Hall $300.00
Ice aink $300.00
cmnmmAL IAKES
Rental Concession item
Paddle Boats
2-person boat/ 1/2 hr $ 3.00
4-person boat/ 1/2 hr $ 5.00
1/2 day - 1/2 room $125.00
1/2 day - full room $250.00
full day - full room $400.00
Friday Evening (6pm-lOpm)
1/2 evening - full room $400.00
Weekend Rental Full Evening (6- - lam)
Friday Evening $600.00
Saturday Evening $600.00
Sunday Rentals/4hr increments after 2 P.H.
full room $400.00
Building Rental Monday - Thursday
full day - 1/2 room
1/2 evening - 1/2 room
$200.00
$200.00
1/2 room $200.00
PARK DEPAR- RENTAIS
General Park Areas:
commercial use (i.e. T.V.)/hour $ 50.00
commercial use vith lightsfiour $100.00
Picnic Shelter/day - Cornelia $ 70.00
Shannobile/day $700.00
I Winter sled/ 1/2 hr $ 3.00
Ice Skates $ 1.50
Athletic Piel& : baseball-soccer-football assoc/f ield/
day incl. overhead) $150.00
residents & non-residents
per day/field plus expenses $150.00
per hour/field $ 35.00
per hour/field with lights $ 55.00
per day;v/formal gardens/gazebo $125.00
per hour, first hour $ 50.00
each add'lhour up to 4 hrs $ 25.00
Per aaY $125.00
per hour, first hour $ 50.00
$ 25.00
Arneson Acres Terrace Boom
Tup Park: Cahill School & Grange Hall
each add'lhour, up to 4 hrs
VanValkenburg & Courtney Fields
Edina Athletic hsoc€ations
Edina Based Organizations
per day, includes building $100.00
per day, plus labor & mat'ls $100.00
per day for building rental $100.00
Edina Athletic Associations
field user f ee/participant $ 6.00
Edina Hockey Association
outdoor hocby rink
f ee/participant $ 6.00
BESOUITION SETTING AMBULANCE FES FOB 1995
BE IT RESOLVED that the Edina City Council does hereby approve and set the
following ardbalance service fees for 1995:
Service Level Fees for Admlance Service, including medical treatment and/or
AHBllTANCE FEES
12/5/94 151
transportation to a medical facility:
Level I - On Scene Treatment $ 160.00
Specialized medical services performed at scene
vith no transport involved
Vital Signs
Splinting
Bandaging, etc.
I.V. Setups
EgG Monitoring
Spine Immobilization
Level I11 plus any: Medications
Level I1 - Minor Care (BIS $ 355.00
Level I11 - Moderate Care $ 435.00
I
Level IV - Haior Care $ 500.00
HAST (inflated)
Additional Manpower
Mechanical Extrication
Cardio Pulmonary
Resuscitation (CPR)
Defibrillation
Level V - Cardiac Arrest $ 610.00
Level IV plus any:
Oxygen Administration $ 25.00
Mileage From Scene to Hospital $ 7.00/mile
RESOLUTIOEI SETTING MSCELTANEOUS PEES FOR 1995
BE IT RESOLVED that the Edina City Council does hereby approve and set the
following miscellaneous fees for 1995:
HAZARDOUS MATERIAS/SPII;[s RESPONSE
Enginenire Company
HazHat unit $340.00 per hour
Specialized Personnel
Specialized Equipment
Supplies
Disposal
Other City Resources
$170.00 per hour/2 hour minimum
$ 55.00 per hour/2 hour minimum
Cost + 15% administrative charge
Cost + 15% administrative charge
Cost + 15% administrative charge
Cost + 15% administrative charge
Motion for adoption of the resolutions was seconded by Member Rice.
Rollcall :
Ayes: Kelly, Paulus, Rice, Richards
Resolutions adopted.
CuTn!: PAID
claims as shown in detail on the Check Register dated December 1, 1994 and
consisting of 24 pages: General Funds $152,246.77; C.D.B.G. $416.50;
Communication $81.68; Working Capital $147.74; Art Center $10,834.93; Swimming
Pool $14,888.00; Golf Course $18,980.94; Ice Arena $4,160.18; Gun Range
$1,217.31; Edinborcn@/Centennial Lakes, $13,540.61; Utility Fund $267,387.77;
Storm Sever $2,011.91; Recycling $38,711.24; Liquor Fund $79,056.19; Construction
Fund $53,490.71; TOTAL $657,172.48. Motion was seconded by Member Rice.
Member Kelly made a motion to approve payment of the follouing
Rollcall :
Ayes: Kelly, Paulus, Rice, Richards
Motion carried.
There being no further business on the Council Agenda, Mayor Richards declared
the meeting adjourned at 9:50 P.M.
City Clerk