HomeMy WebLinkAbout19971103_regularMINUTES
OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE
EDINA CITY COUNCIL
HELD AT CITY HALL
NOVEMBER 3, 1997 - 200 P.M.
ROLLCALL Answering rollcall were Members Faust, Hovland, Maetzold, and Mayor Smith.
Member Kelly entered the meeting at 714 P.M.
CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS APPROVED Motion made by Member Maetzold and
seconded by Member Hovland to approve and adopt the Consent Agenda as presented.
Rollcall:
Ayes: Faust, Hovland, Maetzold, Smith
Motion carried.
*MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF OCTOBER 20, 1997, AND SPECIAL
MEETING OF OCTOBER 20,1997, APPROVED Motion made by Member Maetzold and
seconded by Member Hovland approving the Minutes of the Regular Meeting of October
20,1997, and Special Meeting of October 20,1997.
Motion carried on rollcall vote - four ayes.
BOY SCOUT TROOP 78 AND TROOP 62 WELCOMED Mayor Smith welcomed Boy Scout
Troop 78 from Christ Presbyterian Church, and Troop 62 from St. Stephen’s Episcopal
Church to the Council meeting and invited their participation in the activities as part of
completion of their Citizenship badges.
I
PUBLIC HEARING CONDUCTED ON STREET IMPROVEMENT NO A-179, COOPER
AVENUE, COOPER CIRCLE, SPUR ROAD, CIRCLE EAST AND CIRCLE WEST;
ASSESSMENTS LEVIED Affidavits of Notice were presented, approved and ordered placed
on file. Due notice having been given, a public hearing was conducted and action taken as
recorded on the following proposed assessment.
1. STREET IMPROVEMENT NO. A-179
Location: Cooper Avenue, Cooper Circle, Spur Road, Circle East and Circle West.
Analysis of assessment for Improvement No. A-179 showed a total construction cost of
$114,492.35 proposed to be assessed against 7 lots at $1,595.89 per lot and 56 lots at $1,845.02
per lot.
Engineer Hoffman explained this meeting is a continuation of the hearing from October 6,
1997. The primary issues from the October 6th meeting were, 1) who is being assessed for the
street improvement and 2) the durability of the top paved surface.
Engineer Hoffman pointed out that Orchard Lane was shown on the map as a test section
constructed in 1995 with the costs borne by the City. In April 1996 the Council added Cooper
Circle into the project to improve all the streets in the area at the same time.
Page 1
Minutes/Edina Citv CounciVNovember 3,1997
Of specific concern was the asphalt surface on Cooper Avenue. Braun Intertec was asked to
take cores of the asphalt and their report follows:
Braun Intertec's analysis of the structure was that:
Structure and Durability Exceeded the Design Specifications Intent
Density and Sanding Was Adequate
AllofHilldaleArea
Area of Assessment:
Costs for Test Section on Orchard Lane NOT in Assessment
Ten Year Assessment
Assessment is 16% Less than Estimated Cost in 1996
Council Comment
Member Kelly inquired if any irregularities were discovered in our Public Hearing Notices or
within the assessing records in response to the resident who voiced concern at the October 6
meeting. Engineer Hoffman said the seller would have been aware of any pending
assessments but he has not examined the assessing records.
Member Faust asked for further information on the test section. Engineer Hoffman said a test
section of street was done on Orchard Lane in 1995 for two reasons; 1) it was a cost effective
way to improve low volume roadways and, 2) it has a short construction scenario.
Member Hovland asked how residents determine if they are a part of the assessment process.
Engineer Hoffman said the same legal procedure was followed for this assessment as for
public hearings in the past. If a resident received a notice with an assessment mount affixed,
it proved they were a benefited property. If the Council chose to change the assessment
amount, all affected residents would be noticed again with the corrected amount. Member
Hovland inquired whether interest was accrued on the ten year assessments. Engineer
Hoffman stated, yes.
I
Member Maetzold asked clarification on the reduction in assessment for Cooper Circle.
Engineer Hoffman explained residents of Cooper Circle were included in on the assessment
even though their street had more life left in it. Staff felt a pro-rata share, or $250.00 less
would be an equitable amount of reduction for Cooper Circle residents. Had they not agreed
with the decision, they could have petitioned themselves out of the process.
Mayor Smith asked what type of thing he should be looking for in the area. Engineer
Hoffman said of the batches of asphalt that were laid, one was too cool and was not rolled as
quickly as it should have been in order to get the proper density. While the density
requirements were met according to Braun Intertec, the asphalt company would not be liable.
Any cost to mill and overlay the area would be borne by the City. All asphalt mix follows a
state specified formula. Mayor Smith suggested staff search assessment records for pending
assessments on new residents of the area.
Resident Comment
Page 2
MinutesBdina City Council/November 3,1997
John and Julie Labosky, 3 Orchard Lane, stated proposed assessment A-179 is patently unfair
to residents of four lots on Orchard Lane. In 1995 Orchard Lane residents were told their
street would be a test section for a new method of resurfacing and there would be no charge
for this test. The work was completed in 1995. On April 4,1996, Notices of Public Hearing
were mailed to residents of Cooper Avenue, Cooper Circle, Spur Road, Circle East, Circle
West and Orchard Lane even though Orchard Lane was not listed on the Notice. To the best
of Mr. Labosky’s knowledge the legal description on the Notice did not include Orchard
Lane. He believes this is not a legal Notice for residents of Orchard Lane and they should not
be assessed for work done on other streets. A fairer way of assessing would be to charge on a
lineal foot basis. He asked exemption of the assessment for 3 Orchard, 4 Orchard, 5 Orchard
and 6 Orchard as patently unfair because, 1) no improvements were done to Orchard, 2)
proper notice was not given, 3) an area method of assessment is unfair, and 4) a fairer way to
assess would be by lineal foot. John and July Labosky presented a letter to the Clerk dated
November 3,1997, as written notice of appeal of the proposed assessment on their property.
Mr. Labosky presented the Clerk with a letter dated November 3, 1996, from Edward
Moersfelder, 4 Orchard Lane, who was unable to attend the meeting. The letter stated
objection to the proposed assessment at 4 Orchard Lane.
Mayor Smith asked how residents of Orchard should fit into the equation. Mr. Labosky
responded they should not pay anything for improvements on Cooper nor should they pay
for Interlachen or Vernon. People who live on the streets should pay for their streets.
Member Kelly said he grew up on Circle West and is very familiar with the area. Any of the
streets in Hilldale could have been chosen to be the test street but Orchard was chosen. It
concerns him that because Orchard Lane was chosen, residents feel they should not be
assessed equally. He feels the assessment is fair and would not change the direction the
Council voted in April 1996.
Mr. Labosky stated the process should have been explained and residents should not have
been told they would not be assessed for the test.
Member Hovland asked clarification from Mr. Labosky, of what he actually wanted, 1) an
exemption of the assessment for four residences on Orchard Lane, or 2) to be assessed on a
lineal foot. Member Hovland asked how lineal front footage would equate to usage. Mr.
Labosky said everyone uses the street in front of their property but usage is not a fair way of
assessing. Member Hovland asked if a resident with a corner lot should pay more. Mr.
Labosky said yes because of access from two directions. Mayor Smith reiterated to Mr.
Labosky that his receipt of the April 1996 Notice of Public Hearing is proof that the
opportunity to participate in the hearing was given.
Rhonda Altom, 6 Orchard Lane, said residents on Orchard understood their street was the
test site for all of Edina but it was not worth the inconvenience and mess it caused. A City
employee said residents would not be assessed for the Orchard test nor would they be when
all of Hilldale was assessed. Upon receipt of the April 1996 Public Hearing Notice, she
phoned City Hall and was told they weren’t sure if Orchard was included. She thought the
Page 3
Minutes/Edina Citv CounciVNovember 3,1997
Notice was just a courtesy. Adrnittedly, Orchard Lane residents use a portion of Cooper to
reach their homes but she is taxed $15,000 per year and as a disabled, single person should
be allowed to use 55 feet of Cooper Avenue to reach Orchard Lane. Ms. Altom submitted a
written notice dated October 22, 1997, objecting to Orchard Lane being included in the
proposed assessment.
I
Mark Maciejewski, 6 Orchard Lane, informed Council they purchased their home in July
1996. Before purchasing their home on Orchard, they considered a home at 5 Cooper. In
April 1996 the realtor checked for pending assessments on Cooper and found there was a
pending $2,000 assessment. In May 1996 the realtor checked for pendings on the Orchard
property and found none. At their July 15,1996 closing, the Orchard Lane property had no
pending assessments. Mr. Maciejewski said he believes there are problems with the City’s
notification process, and no listing of assessments through title searches. Deborah Linder, 6
Orchard Lane, phoned City Hall on approximately July 1, 1996, to check on pending
assessments and was told there were none. Four scenarios could have happened; 1) the title
company made a mistake, 2) they made a mistake, 3) the realtor made a mistake, or 4) the
City did not put the assessment on the property. Ms. Linder stated the Notice was not clear
that it applied to Orchard Lane and the process should be improved.
Mayor Smith commented that without further information he would not excuse residents of
Orchard Lane from the assessment. After acquiring further information he would be willing
to meet with Orchard Lane residents again.
Ms. Linder stated Orchard Lane has not been brought up to the same standard as the rest of
Edina. Orchard has no curb and gutters as well as the appearance of the street is much worse
than the greater Hilldale area. Mayor Smith informed Ms. Linder if curb and gutters are
desired, neighbors must sign a petition asking the City to install curb and gutters and all
abutting properties would pay for them.
Mr. Maciejewski submitted a written objection to the proposed assessment, dated November
3,1997.
Mayor Smith asked acquiescence of the Council to complete the assessment hearing at this
meeting and to allow the residents at 6 Orchard Lane to present their case at a later date and
time to be determined.
Council Comment
Member Faust asked procedurally if the issue was discussed and voted on April 6,1997, why
is it being revisited again. Engineer Hoffman explained, 1) a Public Hearing was held April
15,1996, where it was discussed whether the project should even be done, 2) all residents
were noticed and discussions held how the assessment would be accomplished, and 3)
opinions varied from assessments on a front foot basis to an area wide assessment. Engineer
Hoffman said tonight is the official vote for the assessment. I
Page 4
Member Maetzold pointed out he was on the Council in April 1996 when discussion was
held whether Orchard Lane was a part of the assessment or not. He believes the area wide
assessment is the fair way to approach this development.
Member Hovland believes the due process on this issue has been fulfilled with the
appearance of the residents on Orchard Lane. He wondered if one method of assessment is
more fair than the other, and he concurs with the previous Council's decision that the area
wide assessment is the fair method. Because a resident has a larger lot or bigger house does
not mean they have more means to pay a larger assessment, nor should the person be
unfairly punished because they live on a corner or a curve. He reiterated his concurrence
with the previous Council for an area wide assessment except for 6 Orchard Lane which
would be heard again at a time to be determined.
I
Member Kelly made several points; 1) he offered an apology to Mr. Maciejewski and Ms.
Linder; they should have received an reply tonight about pending assessments on their
property, 2) the Notice process is problematic and residents should not be expected to read
legal descriptions on property; that issue has been resolved by their presence at this meeting,
3) an area wide assessment is fair and the best method, and 4) the test section could have
been any street but everyone benefitted from a proportionate reduction based on the
selection of a test site within the Hilldale neighborhood.
Manager Rosland noted on the reverse side of the Notice of Public Hearing the underlined
statement reads, "Your receipt of this notice is an indication that propertv -- whose ownership -
is listed to you is among those properties which are considered to be benefited by the
improvement."
I
Member Kelly made a motion to adopt Assessment A-179 as originally proposed with the
exception of 6 Orchard Lane which will be heard at a time to be designated. (Assessment
levied by resolution as follows) Member Maetzold seconded the motion.
Rollcall:
Ayes: Faust, Hovland, Kelly, Maetzold, Smith
Motion carried.
Following the presentation of analysis of assessment and approval, Member Kelly
introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption:
RESOLUTION LEVYING SPECIAL ASSESSMENT
WHEREAS, pursuant to proper notice duly given as required by law, the Edina City
Council has met and heard and passed upon all written and oral objections to the
proposed assessments for the improvements listed below:
Street Improvement No. A-179
BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Edina, Minnesota, as follows:
Each assessment as set forth in the assessment rolls on file in the office of the
City Clerk for each aforementioned improvement is hereby accepted and shall constitute
the special assessment against the lands named therein, and each tract of land therein
FOR STREET IMPROVEMENTS A-179, HILLDALE AREA
1.
Page 5
MinutesEdha City CounciI/November 3,1997
included is hereby found to be benefited by the improvement in the amount of the
assessment levied against it.
The assessments shall be payable in equal installments, the first of said
installments, together with interest at a rate of 7.5% per annum, on the entire assessme'nt
from the date hereof to December 31,1998, to be payable with the general taxes for the year
1998. To each subsequent installment shall be added interest at the above rate for one year
on all then unpaid installments. The number of such installments shall be as follows:
NO. OF INSTALLMENTS
2.
NAME OF IMPROVEMENT
Street Improvement No., A-179, Levy No. 14140
3.
10 years
The owner of any property so assessed may, at any time prior to certification
of the assessment to the County Auditor, pay the whole of the assessment on such
property, with interest accrued to the date of payment, to the City Treasurer, except that no
interest shall be charged if the entire assessment is paid within 30 days from the adoption
of this resolution; and they may, at any time thereafter, pay to the City Treasurer the entire
amount of the assessment remaining unpaid, with interest accrued to December 31 of the
year in which such payment is made. Such payment must be made before November 15 or
interest will be charged through December 31 of the next succeeding year.
The Clerk shall forthwith transmit a certified duplicate of this assessment to
the County Auditor to be extended on the property tax lists of the County. Such
assessment shall be collected and paid over in the same manner as other municipal taxes.
Adopted this 3rd day of November, 1997. Member Maetzold seconded the motion.
4.
Rollcall:
Ayes: Faust, Hovland, Kelly, Maetzold, Smith
Resolution adopted.
PUBLIC HEARING CONDUCTED ON TREE REMOVAL (TR-97) 5801 ABBOT"
AVENUE, 4633 DREXEL AVENUE, 5016 HANKERSON AVENUE, 6308 WATERMAN
AVENUE; ASSESSMENT LEVIED Affidavits of Notice were presented, approved and
ordered placed on file. Due notice having been given, a public hearing was conducted and
action taken as recorded on the following proposed assessment.
1. TREE REMOVAL NO. TR-97
Location: 5801 Abbott Avenue, 4633 Drexel Avenue, 5016 Hankerson Avenue,
6308 Waterman Avenue
Analysis of assessment for Improvement No. TR-97 showed a total assessable cost to 5801
Abbott Avenue at $979.80; 4633 Drexel Avenue at $1,385.65; 5016 Hankerson Avenue
$639.00; and 6308 Waterman Avenue at $700.00.
Park Director Keprios explained that according to City Ordinance, when the City Forester
finds a diseased tree on private property, residents are notified and asked to remove the tree
within an allotted time period. If the resident chooses not to remove the tree in the specified
time period, the City would have the tree removed and assess the homeowner. Director
Keprios said he had not received any complaints from the residents.
Mayor Smith asked when the next tree assessment comes before the Council if additional
infomation could be included in the packet. He then called for public comment, no
comments were heard.
Page 6
MinutesDdina City CounciVNovember 3,1997
Member Maetzold introduced the following resolution, and moved its adoption:
RESOLUTION LEVYING
WHEREAS, pursuant to proper notice duly given as required by law, the Edina City
Council has met and heard and passed upon all written and oral objections to the
proposed assessments for the tree removal as listed below:
i TREE REMOVAL - TR-97
BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Edina, Minnesota, as follows:
1. Each assessment as set forth in the assessment rolls on file in the office of the City
Clerk for each aforementioned improvement is hereby accepted and shall constitute the
special assessment against the lands named therein, and each tract of land therein included
is hereby found to be benefited by the improvement in the amount of the assessment
levied against it.
2. The assessments shall be payable in equal installments, the first of said
installments, together with interest at a rate of 7.5% per annum, on the entire assessment
from the date hereof to December 31,1998, to be payable with the general taxes for the year
1998. To each subsequent installment shall be added interest at the above rate for one year
on all then unpaid installments. The number of such installments shall be as follows:
NO. OF INSTALLMENTS
SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS FOR TREE REMOVAL TR-97, I
NAME OF IMPROVEMENT
Tree Removal No. TR-97, Levy No. 14139 3 years
3. The owner of any property so assessed may, at any time prior to certification of
the assessment to the County Auditor, pay the whole of the assessment on such property,
with interest accrued to the date of payment, to the City Treasurer, except that no interest
shall be charged if the entire assessment is paid within 30 days from the adoption of this
resolution; and they may, at any time thereafter, pay to the City Treasurer the entire
amount of the assessment remaining unpaid, with interest accrued to December 31 of the
year in which such payment is made. Such payment must be made before November 15 or
interest will be charged through December 31 of the succeeding year.
4. The Clerk shall forthwith transmit a certified duplicate of this assessment to the
County Auditor to be extended on the property tax lists of the County. Such assessment
shall be collected and paid over in the same manner as other municipal taxes.
Adopted this 3rd day of November. 1997. Member Faust seconded the motion.
Rollcall:
Ayes: Faust, Hovland, Kelly, Maetzold, Smith
Resolution adopted.
"HEARING DATE SET OF NOVEMBER 17,1997, FOR PLANNING MATTER Motion
made by Member Maetzold and seconded by Member Hovland setting November 17,1997,
for public hearing for Preliminary Rezoning, R-1. Single Dwelling Unit district to PSR-4,
Planned Residence District, Opus, National LLC and Karrington Health, Inc., 7128 France
Avenue South (Lutheran Church of the Master).
Motion carried on rollcall vote - four ayes.
ORDINANCE NO. 85OA-13 ADOPTED - FINAL REZONING AND FINAL PLAT
APPROVED FOR EDINA CORPORATE CENTER (GENERALLY LOCATED EAST OF
I
Page 7
Minu€es/Edina CiW Councrnovember 3,1997
COMPUTER AVENUE AND NORTH OF WEST !77TH STREET) Affidavits of Notice were
presented, approved and ordered placed on file.
Presentation bv Assistant Planner
Assistant Planner Aaker explained the request is for a Final Rezoning and Final Plat approval
for Normandale Golf, Inc., and the City of Edina. The property is located south of Fred
Richards Golf Course and is part of the property purchased by the Cit)i in 1992 from
Normandale Golf, Inc., which consists of 27 acres. Normandale Golf, Inc., reserved an option
on a six acre site fronting on West 77th Street for the purpose of developing it for office use.
The Land Use Plan was amended in 1992 to show the site as office and a development
contract was signed at the time between the City and Normandale Golf, Inc., addressing
development issues. At the October 20, 1997, Council meeting, Preliminary Rezoning was
granted for Normandale Golf, Inc., and the City of Edina with eleven conditions. The
building will be known as Edina Corporate Center, a three story office building. There have
been no changes to the building foot print nor to the parking arrangement since preliminary
approval. Assistant Planner Aaker reminded the Council they granted Preliminary Rezoning
and Preliminary Plat Approval for the proposed office development on October 20, 1997,
with eleven conditions:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
The existing berm landscaping must be removed and the berm rebuilt. A revised
landscaping plan has been submitted which relocates the existing berm
landscaping elsewhere on the site and provides new landscaping on the berm. Staff
believes the proposed plan does not provide the level of screening requested by the
Council. The developer has agreed to increase the landscaping as directed by the
City Manager. A Landscaping Bond will be required to insure installation and
maintenance of the landscaping.
The grading plan has been revised showing the berm reconstructed five feet above
the parking lot grade.
Building, Engineering and Planning staff have reviewed lighting plans to insure no
light will wash to adjoining residential properties. The northerly most lights wiU be
timed to turn off at 1O:OO P.M.
Storm water capacity of the pond has been reviewed, approved, and permits
issued by the watershed district.
Plans presented satisfy the requirements for Final Rezoning.
Final Plat approval.
A Developers Agreement is not required since there are no new public
improvements associated with the development.
Watershed District permits were granted on October 15,1997.
Access easement to golf course will be recorded with the plat.
10. Necessary utility an: drainage easements are shown on the plat.
11. The City will remove the fence and reinstall it along the northerly property line in
On October 29,1997, the Planning Commission reviewed and approved plans for the Final
Rezoning of the project. The plans presented for Commission review and are now presented
to Council are the same plans presented for Preliminary review with the exception of the
changes to the berm height, enhanced landscaping, storm water drainage issues and lighting,
as directed by the Council. The Planning Commission reviewed the request by the developer
Page 8
the spring.
MinutesEdina CiW CounciVNovember 3,1997
to increase building height 16 inches from the top of the parapet from 861 feet to 862 feet 4
inches or 16 inches more than allowed according to contract. The reason for the request was
to accomplish nirie foot ceilings on all three floors of the building. The Watershed District and
City Engineer set a minimum first floor elevation of 824 feet, due to the establishment of
flood elevation at 822 feet. The developer cannot lower the first floor elevation below 824 feet
so the developer is requesting relief of 16 inches. The Planning Commission recommended
final rezoning and final plat approval to include satisfaction of the state of conditions and the
proposed berm be constructed five feet above the level of the parking lot and recommended
increasing the overall building height by 16 inches to a maximum elevation of 862.3.
I
Council comment
Member Faust asked if the parking lot grade is at the same level. Assistant Planner Aaker
explained the grade of the parking lot is the result of the storm water runoff and is lower in
the center than the outer perimeter.
Member Maetzold inquired whether curb cut access would be given to the Golf Maintenance
Building. Assistant Planner Aaker said no improvement is planned at this time but an
easement is needed to maintain access.
Member Hovland asked if the additional landscape trees would be placed on the north end
of the berm. Assistant Planner Aaker answered the trees would be staggered on and below
the berm. Manager Rosland explained the new trees would form a hedge type of screen. <$
J.
Resident comment
Tom Anderson, 7453 West Shore Drive, asked what the height of the berm will be on the west
end. Engineer Hoffman said the parking lot might come up but the berm will not be
disturbed with the approximate height being at 6 feet. Mr. Anderson said this seems like an
ideal time to raise the berm further to assure residents there will be no wash from lights from
cars. He further inquired if lights go off at 1O:OO P.M. what time will they go on. Assistant
Planner Aaker said typically light restrictions would be off at 1O:OO P.M. and on at 7:OO A.M.
David Menke, Opus Corporation indicated a continued willingness to work with the City to
fine tune any concerns of either the developer or the City.
Member Hovland moved approval of First Reading of Ordinance No. 850 1-13 And waiver
of Second Reading approving the rezoning the vacant lot:
ORDINANCE NO. 850-A13
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE ZONING ORDINANCE (NO. 850)
BY REZONING PROPERTY FROM R-1, SINGLE DWELLING DISTRICT TO
POD-1, PLANNED OFFICE DISTRICT
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDINA, MINNESOTA, ORDAINS:
adding the following thereto:
following property:
Section 1. Subsection 850.06 of Section 850 of the Edina City Code is amended by
"The extent of the POD-1, Planned Office District, is enlarged by the addition of the I
Page 9
MinutesEdha City Council/November 3,1997
That part of Tract R, REGISTERED LAND SURVEY NO. 1050, files of Registrar of
Beginning at the northwest corner of Tract A, REGISTERED LAND SURVEY
NO. 1218, files of Registrar of Titles, Hennepin County, Minnesota; thence on
an assumed bearing of South 0 degrees 21 minutes 00 seconds West along an
east line of said Tract R, a distance of 473.91 feet, to a corner of said Tract R;
thence on a bearing of WEST, along the south line of said Tract R, a distance
of 458.36 feet, to an angle point in said south line; thence North 65 degrees 20
minutes 45 seconds West, along the southwesterly line of said Tract R, a
distance of 159.72 feet, to a corner of said Tract R; thence North 24 degrees 39
minutes 15 seconds East, along a westerly line of said Tract R, a distance of
333.91 feet, to an angle point in said westerly line; thence North 0 degrees 10
minutes 30 seconds East, along said westerly line, a distance of 53.80 feet, to a
corner of said Tract R; thence North 26 degrees 04 minutes 37 seconds East a
distance of 90.00 feet; thence North 87 degrees 31 minutes 14 seconds East a
distance of 125.00 feet; thence North 49 degrees 51 minutes 53 seconds East a
distance of 56.09 feet; thence South 89 degrees 55 minutes 40 seconds East a
distance of 225.00 feet; thence South 25 degrees 39 minutes 23 seconds east a
distance of 80.00 feet, to the point of beginning.
Titles, Hennepin County, Minnesota described as follows:
The extent of the R-1, Single Dwelling District is reduced by removing the property
Section 2. This ordinance shall be in full force and effect upon its passage and
described above from the R-1 Single Dwelling District."
publication. Motion seconded by Member Faust.
Rollcall:
Ayes: Faust, Hovland, Kelly, Maetzold, Smith
Ordinance adopted.
I
These minutes were corrected by Council on January 20,1998. The underlined text in the
following paragraph reflected the new language from the correction.
"Member Maetzold introduced the following and moved its approval
conditioned upon, 1) Landscape plan to be augmented on the north side of
the project, and to include some plantings that remain green year round, 2)
Increase the height, size, and shape of the berm to match the west end of the
berm, 3) Lighting specifications be reviewed to ensure no wash from the
project will spill into the residential neighborhood, 4) Review plans to ensure
adequate storm water storage is provided, 5) Final Rezoning, 6) Final Plat, 7)
Developers Agreement, 8) Watershed District permit, 9) Access easement to
Golf Course, 10) Utility and Drainage Easement on the South line and Utilitv
easement on East and West line, 11) Relocation of existing fence along
northerly he, and 12) Increase in elevation to 862 feet 4 inches, 13) The
Developer shall extend an underground - storm water drainage pipe to the
pond on the golf - course and expand the pond in accordance with the
approved plan; - provided the Citv shall do final grading and fairwav and
landscaping repair on Citv properiy caused bv such installation and Citv
shall provide necessary maintenance, repair and replacement of such piping
Page 10
MinutesEdina City Council/November 3,1997
and ponds on City property upon completion thereof, 14) Citv approves
drainage - acrossithe golf - course property) and expansion of the pond in
accordance with the approved plan and in accordance with the Watershed
District Permit.”
RESOLUTION APPROVING FINAL PLAT
FOR THE EDINA CORPORATE CENTER ADDITION
BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Edina, Minnesota, that that
certain plat entitled, ”EDINA CORPORATE CENTER ADDITION”, platted by the City of
Edina, a Minnesota municipal corporation and presented at the regular meeting of the City
Council on November 3,1997, be and is hereby granted final plat approval. Member Faust
seconded the motion.
1
Rollcall:
Ayes: Faust, Hovland, Maetzold, Kelly, Smith
Resolution adopted.
ORDINANCE NO. 1997-14, AN ORDINANCE AMENDING EDINA CODE SECTION
1230 AND 900 AND MODIFYING CITY POLICY REGARDING THE CONSUMPTION
OF 3.2% MALT LIQUOR AT CERTAIN CITY PARKS AND FACILITIES Park Director
Keprios reminded Council the Park Board initially recommended Section 1230 of the City
Code be amended allowing for consumption (but not sale of) intoxicating malt liquor at
certain park locations. Staff was directed to study risks vs. rewards of the proposal associated
with the sale and/or consumption of intoxicating and non-intoxicating malt liquor at certain
park locations. Results of staff‘s findings are as follows:
0 Edinborough Park has only 4-5 Saturdays per year that the facility isn’t rented for
various reasons, 1) the lack of ability to sell any form of liquor, or 2) time of year.
0 Park facilities currently allowed to sell non-intoxicating malt liquor are Braemar
Golf Course, Braemar Golf Dome and Fred Richards Golf Course. They do not lose
potential business due to the inability to serve or sell intoxicating malt liquor
(strong beer).
In order to sell intoxicating malt liquor, park facilities would need to acquire a
wine license; all employees serving or selling intoxicating malt liquor must be a
minimum of 18 years of age and the City would have to pay higher insurance
premiums.
Approximately $30,000 in additional revenues could be realized from the golf
courses collectively through the sale of non-intoxicating malt liquor on the golf
courses, however insurance premiums may increase.
Staff believes the sale of non-intoxicating malt liquor (3.2% beer) on the golf
courses would not create unacceptable risks. Surveying other cities, problems on
other public courses have been minimal. The survey also indicated only 3.2% beer
(not strong beer) is sold on every public golf course surveyed.
On rare occasions, guests at private rental functions consume too much wine or
3/2% beer simply because no cash bar is permitted; this has not been a major
problem.
In staff’s opinion, allowing private rentals to serve their guests intoxicating malt
liquor does not present any unacceptable risks.
I
Page 11
MinutesDdina City CounciVNovember 3,1997
From the customer’s perspective, a greater demand for a cash bar (even if it is only
wine and 3.2% beer) exists than the demand for strong beer or hard liquor. From
the City’s perspective, there is no financial advantage to the City to allow guests to
sell wine, intoxicating malt liquor or non-intoxicating malt liquor.
Director Keprios said in viewing risks vs. rewards, staff‘s recommendation would be that the
Council approve the Park Board‘s recommendation to amend the City Code to allow
intoxicating malt liquor to be consumed in the following locations:
I
1. Inside the clubhouse of a golf course,
2. Inside a programmed park or indoor recreational facility located in a park,
3. Not within picnic shelters, warming houses, the ballfield complex or Van
Valkenburg Park, ice arenas or maintenance buildings.
Staff further recommends the City Code be amended to allow for sale of non-intoxicating
malt liquor (3.2% beer) on any outdoor property of a city owned golf course.
Director Keprios suggested as a housekeeping item, the addition of Section 3 to Ordinance
No. 1997-14, replacing all references to ”non-intoxicating malt liquor” in the existing Code
with 3.2 percent malt liquor. The change in terminology is a result of recent changes in
Minnesota Statutes 340A.
Following a brief discussion, Council consensus was to direct staff to clarify language on the
proposed Ordinance and that it be placed on the Agenda for November 17, 1997. It was
further suggested policies be implemented for 1) strict inventory control of beer available for
sale on the golf courses, and 2) the age limit of youth selling beer at the golf courses.
*BIDS RETECTED FOR FIRE STATION RE-ROOFING Motion made by Member
Maetzold and seconded by Member Hovland rejecting all bids for re-roofing the Tracy
Avenue Fire Station; job to be re-bid in the spring.
I
Motion carried on rollcall vote - four ayes.
BID AWARDED FOR WAC EOUIPMENT FOR ART CENTER MEDIA LAB Manager
Rosland explained the same process was being followed for the heating and ventilation
equipment for the Art Center Media Lab. It was suggested the Council waive the City’s
$20,000 bid limit and to follow the State mandate requiring bids over $25,000. Member
Hovland made a motion for award of bid for WAC Equipment for the Art Center Media
Lab to recommended low bidder, C.O. Carlson Air Conditioning Company at $23,745.00.
Member Maetzold seconded the motion.
Ayes: Faust, Hovland, Kelly, Maetzold, Smith
Motion carried.
*HEARING DATE OF NOVEMBER 17, 1997 SET FOR TREE TRIMMING
IMPROVEMENT NO TT-98 Motion made by Member Maetzold and seconded by
Member Hovland setting a hearing date of November 17, 1997, for Tree Trimming
Improvement No. TT-98. I Motion carried on rollcall vote - four ayes.
Page 12
MinutesBdina City CounciVNovember 3,1997
"I998 COUNCIL MEETING DATES SET Motion made by Member Maetzold and
seconded by Member Hovland approving 1998 Council Meeting dates other than the first
and third Mondays as follows: ' '
Tuesday
Tuesday
Tuesday
Tuesday
January 20 (Monday January 19 is Martin Luther King Day)
February 17 (Monday February 16 is Presidents' Day)
September 8 (Monday September 7 is Labor Day Observed)
September 22 (Monday September 21 is Rosh Hashanah)
Motion carried on rollcall vote - four ayes.
CLAIMS PAID Member Kelly made a motion to approve payment of the following claims
as shown in detail on the Check Register dated October 29, 1997, and consisting of 31
pages: General Fund $244,672.08; C.D.B.G. $18,381.35; Communications $1,289.66; Working
Capital; $2,483.04; Art Center $12,227.57; Swimming Pool Fund $4,254.09; Golf Course Fund
$22,036.83; Ice Arena Fund $4,336.36; Gun Range Fund $24.23; Edinborough/Centennial
Lakes $20,090.35; Utility Fund $326,795.63; Storm Sewer Utility Fund $4,754.48; Recycling
Program $42,121.55; Liquor Dispensary Fund $215,345.45; Construction Fund $22,797.98;
Park Bond Fund $453,242.45; IMP Bond Redemption #2 $22,841.26; TOTAL $1,417,694.36.
Member Maetzold seconded the motion.
Rollcall:
Ayes: Faust, Hovland, Kelly, Maetzold, Smith
Motion carried.
There being no further business on the Council Agenda, Mayor Smith declared the meeting
adjourned at 10:30 P.M. n
Page 13