HomeMy WebLinkAbout19980504_regularI
I
I
MINUTES
OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE
EDINA CITY COUNCIL
HELD AT CITY HALL
MAY 4,1998 - EO0 P.M.
ROLLCALL Answering rollcall were Members Faust, Hovland, Kelly, Maetzc+ and Mayor
Smith.
CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS APPROVED Motion made by Member Maetzold and
seconded by Member Faust to approve and adopt the Consent Agenda as presented.
Rollcall:
Ayes: Faust, Hovland, Kelly, Maetzold, Smith
Motion carried.
*MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF APRIL 20, 1998, AND BOARD OF
REVIEW MEETING OF APRIL 20,1998, APPROVED Motion made by Member Maetzold
and seconded by Member Faust approving the Minutes of the Regular Meeting of April
20,1998, and the Board of Review Meeting of April 20,1998.
Motion carried on rollcall vote - five ayes.
RESOLUTION APPROVED FOR VACATION OF PUBLIC DRAINAGERJTILITY
EASEMENT (6533 PARNELL AVENUE) Affidavits of Notice were presented, approved and
ordered placed on file.
Presentation bv Engineer
Engineer Hoffman stated the property owner at 6533 Parnell Avenue is proposing to expand
his garage and the new proposal would extend onto an existing utility and drainage
easement. This request has been reviewed by NSP, USWest, Paragon Cable, Minnegasco and
City staff. The request is acceptable to all parties and staff recommends vacation of a portion
of the utility and drainage easement.
No public comments were received.
Member Maetzold introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption:
RESOLUTION VACATING EASEMENT
FOR UTILITY AND DRAINAGE PURPOSES
WHEREAS, a motion of the City Council on April 6,1998, fixed a date for a public hearing
on a proposed vacation of an easement for utility and drainage purposes; and
WHEREAS, two weeks published and posted notice of said hearing was given and the
hearing was held on the 4th day of May, 1998, 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 vacation be made; and
WHEREAS, the Council considered the extent the vacation affects existing easements
within the area of the vacation and the extent to which the vacation affects the authority of
LOT 2, BLOCK 1 - NORMANDALE-KREISER REPLAT
MinutesEdha City CouneiVMav 4,1998
any person, corporation, or municipality owning or controlling electric, telephone, or cable
television poles and lines, gas and sewer lines, or water pipes, mains, and hydrants on or
unaer 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 utility and drainage easement
be and is hereby vacated effective as of May 4,1998:
The easterly five (5) feet of the Southerly one hundred two (102) feet of the Westerly
ten (10) feet of LOT 2, BLOCK 1, NORMANDALE-KREISER REPLAT, according to
the recorded plat thereof, Hennepin County Minnesota, as donated and dedicated
by said plat of NORMANDALE-KREISER REPLAT.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the City Clerk is authorized and directed to cause a
notice of completion of proceedings to be prepared, entered in the transfer of record of the
County Auditor, and filed with the County Recorder, in accordance with Minnesota
Statutes, Section 412.85.
ADOPTED this 4th day of May, 1998. Member Hovland seconded the motion.
I
Rollcall:
Ayes: Faust, Hovland, Kelly, Maetzold, Smith
Resolution adopted.
ACTION CONTINUED UNTIL TUNE 1,1998 FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT AND
VACATION OF PORTION OF WEST 69m STREET APPROVED (CHRIST
PRESBYTERLAN CHURCH (6901 NORMANDALE ROAD) BUILDING AND PARKING
LOT EXPANSION, GENERALLY LOCATED NORTH OF WEST 70m STREET AND
EAST OF HIGHWAY 100) Mayor Smith opened the public hearing by saying that the public
hearing will focus on land use only. He quoted from one of many letters the Council and staff
have received concerning the controversy surrounding Christ Presbyterian Church’s (CPC)
request by stating, ”I would never have imagined the proposed expansion would have
inspired such vehement and what appears to be small-minded opposition. I was fearful the
naysayers would intimidate the Planning Commission and I therefore applaud the
Commission’s unanimous vote to recommend adoption of the Church’s most recent
approval. If there remain those who cannot see beyond their own backyard views, and
vehicle counts, to tolerate, if not to embrace the needs of CPC’s congregation and the broader
community groups it supports, they should be pitied for this parochialism. Edina should not
let this sort of smug ’we’ve got ours’ sentiment carry the day on this important issue.” He
reminded those in attendance again that the issue tonight is land use, not the developer’s
popularity, or the church‘s programs. Mayor Srnith pointed out the recommendation of the
Planning Commission as an advisory group to the Council to approve the Conditional Use
Permit with seven conditions. He explained he has personally sat in a Police Squad observing
the area on a Sunday morning as well as watched other Council Members walking the site
and neighborhood. The Planning Commission’s views are advisory, they are not binding on
the Council and the final decision is the Councils.
I
Mayor Smith said the process being followed will be: 1) the Church‘s presentation, 2) City
staff‘s presentation of the Planning Commission results, conditions and procedures, 3)
Council concerns and questions of the proponent, or the Planning Commission, 3) the
Page 2
MinutesBdina Citv Council/May 4,1998
Woodhill Neighborhood Association comments, 4) Resident comments and, 5) Council
discussion. Mayor Smith noted many letters have, been received, copied and distributed to
the Council .
PROPONENT’S PRESENTATION
Peter Jarvis, of Laukka Jarvis, said he is representing Christ Presbyterian Church with their
request for a Conditional Use Permit allowing building expansion on the northeast quadrant
of Highway 100 and 70th Street. Three other persons will speak to this proposed expansion.
Pollv Bowles, a member of the CPC Steering Committee and the neighborhood liaison,
would explain the process followed in the last four years culminating with the decision made
by Session (CPC‘s governing body). While programs of a church may not be the business of
Council, it is ultimately a programmatic issue that leads to a physical need for expanded
facilities. Mr. Tarvis would explain the evolution of the final site plan. Gary Tushie, Tushie
and Associates, would present the architecture of the proposed expansion and Jim Benshoof,
would present results of the traffic impact analysis completed on the area.
Polly Bowles elaborated on the chronology of CPC’s internal decision making process:
1993 - 1995 CPC studied eight long-range planning options and decided to stay at its
current site and maximize the facility usage with creative programming. (Full Informational
Booklet for the Proposed Expansion of Christ Presbyterian Church is on file in the office of
the City Clerk.)
Steering Committee formed - process of prayer, study and congregational
input to maximize facility changes to equip CPC for ministries for which it was called. Other
options tried were, e.g., rescheduled services, changed timing of youth programming and
location, adjusted use of space, fellowship held in different location, and both the renting of
Cornelia School and busing from the parking lot of Cornelia School.
January 1997 -July 1997 Session unanimously adopted Steering Committee’s
recommendation to undertake a capital campaign to expand CPC‘s facilities. Informational
communications were sent to members and neighbors of the impending process and seeking
input. Goal of the campaign was completed with initial pledges of $5.4 million.
July 1997 - December 1997 CPC developed design alternatives providing facilities to
meets needs, address concerns of neighbors, and one that would be financially feasible. The
Woodhill/Edina Association was kept apprised of CPC’s time-frame for neighborhood
meetings. Session voted in December to endorse incurring up to $3 million additional debt to
complete Phase I as soon as possible.
January 1998 - February 1998 CPCs congregation voted to pursue building the
proposed expansion and to incur the additional $3 million debt. Before approaching the City
of Edina for necessary permits, CPC, and the Woodhill/Edina Association Board, scheduled
a second round of neighborhood meetings to discuss CPC’s design alternatives. Individual
neighbors immediately adjacent to the proposed expansion met to discuss design alternatives
and any personal concerns.
1996
Ms. Bowles concluded that some neighbors still feel frustrated their expectations have not
been met. Both the Association and CPC are dealing with volunteers and matching erratic
schedules has been a challenge. She reiterated the sincerity of CPC and their efforts. One
neighborhood concern was that the neighborhood should have had the opportunity for input
I
Page 3
MinutesEdha Citv ComcivMav 4,1998
into the eight options and not a building proposal. Looking at the options and how they
affect CPC, they involve how the church worships, fellowships, educates members, serves the
comm~ty and how it budgets its resources. Those questions relate to the religious core of
the church. The only appropriate place to address those decisions is within the church. When
a building proposal came forward, that was the time to involve the neighborhood and solicit
their input. Negative comments received included: "no change is acceptable" and "why not
cap membership". Many valid positive comments were received as well. The design being
presented by Peter Jarvk is responsive to neighbors comments.
I
Peter Jarvis stated in late spring of 1997, the first preliminary site and architectural plans
were presented to the neighborhood. Mr. 3mis presented a graphic depicting the expansion
oriented to the west side of the property running in a north/south direction paralleling
Highway 100. The parking lot cascades down the hill in a north/south direction with the
southwest corner of the site the lowest point. The plan represents the relocation of 69th Street
from the curve between Brittany and Dunberry west to the frontage road. The first proposal
contemplated a parking lot expansion giving easements to the neighborhood in favor of the
City, for emergency access purposes that Mr. Jarvis referred to as a cocoon solution. The
opposition to the plan dealt with visual impact of the parking lot, protrusion north of existing
69th Street, expanse of asphalt and sanctuary size. Mi. Jarvis added this was never proposed
to be a mega-church. Three sanctuary plans were proposed with different seating
configurations. Phase I would be the sanctuary expansion. Phase I1 was included on the plan
and would be completed in 5-7 years. Phase I1 would consist of child/adult education rooms
and administrative offices and CPC wanted it included on the master plan.
Mr. Jarvis showed a graphic comparing the proposed expansion of CPC and other larger
Edina churches such as Grace Church with worship capacity at 1100 (up to 1500 expansion).
CPC's proposed expansion would be at 1092 (up to 1238 for expansion). The April 1997
neighborhood meeting dealt mainly with the mega-church. The plan was further criticized
for lack of perimeter conditions and lack of property maintenance. The design team was
resurrected, a landscape engineer was brought in as well as a traffic engineer and data began
being collected. A six month redesign process ensued with architectural, structural, size
plan/landscaping and pricing with the general contractor. Four alternatives carne from the
redesign process. The four alternatives were presented to the Planning Commission
following meetings with the neighborhood Board of Directors and neighborhood.
Mr. Jarvis explained design drawings ouwg CPCs planned two-phase expansion. Phase I
would include a new fellowship hall and associated support spaces in the lower level (12,450
s.f.) with of new sanctuary at the main level (12,GO s.f.), the new balcony above the sanctuary
in the upper level (6,380 s.f.) and a remodeling of the existing sanctuary into a new narthex
and support spaces. Phase I1 consists of mechanical and storage spaces in the lower level
(9,780 sf.), new offices, library, and classrooms at the main level (9,780 s.f.) and a new
counseling center and classrooms at the upper level (9,120 s.f.).
The architectural expansion reinforces the existing colonial character of the existing building
with both additions matching existing exterior materials such as brick, shingles, windows,
Page 4
MinutesBdina Citv CounciVMav 4,1998
dormers, etc. The simple but strong forms and details would enhance the church‘s position as
a landmark within the community and neighborhood.
In addition to the building expansion, the parking lot is reorganized with expansion to the
north - including a vacated 69th Street. The access to 70th Street has been moved as far east as
possible and is designed to allow the maximum car stacking and easy access in and out of the
church property. All four site plan options contain the parking lot layout and are essentially
the same except the north area treatment. The four options are as follows:
OPTION 1 - contains a 647-space parking lot with an eliminated 69th Street which
facilitates ease of movement in and out of the neighborhood.
OPTION 2 - depicts 647 parking spaces as well. It does not allow movement between
the church parking lot and neighborhood, except for emergency vehicles. The plan would
also eliminate 69th Street.
OPTION 3 - shows a 546 space parking lot, relocation of 69th Street to the CPC’s north
boundary. A 50’ right-of-way is provided with a new 24’ wide street posted NO PARKING
that CPC would build and publicly dedicate to the City. Access would be provided between
the new parking lot and neighborhood via the relocated 69th Street.
OPTION 4 - presents an option identical to Option 3 except the driveway from the
parking lot to 69th Street is eliminated. This would minimize traffic between the church and
neighborhood.
I(
Landscaping on the site would provide a thick border of 12’ - 14’ spruce trees at the east and
north property lines, which provides attractive screening of the parking lot from the
neighbors. Landscaped islands have been introduced into the parking lot to create pods or
smaller parking areas to minimize the impact of the entire parking area. Lighting has been
added to the parking lot as well but kept to a 19’ 6” pole height and a fixture chosen to
eliminate direct glare to surrounding homes.
I
Mr. Jarvis stated Edina staff concluded on February 25, 1998, that Option 1 and 3 were
acceptable from the Planning, Public Works, Fire and Police Departments’ standpoint. The
Planning staff report recommended Option 3 for approval to the Planning Commission.
Following the Planning Commission meeting, CPC believed they needed to revisit the site
and attempt compromises with their land. Then meet with the neighborhood Board of
Directors and ultimately the neighbors, taking into consideration their compromises before
again meeting with the Planning Commission on April 15, 1998. Following February
meetings with Steve Brown of the Board of Directors and after his meeting with the
neighborhood, the consensus was that the neighborhood wanted no change to 69” Street.
When the Board of Directors were asked about architectural or site planning changes to any
options they had seen, they suggested they would rather react to any additional plans rather
than suggest what CPC does.
Following an additional meeting between CPC and the Woodhill Association Board of
Directors, a compromise plan was drawn. The plan was presented to the Woodhill
Association Board and the neighborhood on March 26,1998. Option 5 now focuses on the
north end. Deep concern was expressed by the neighborhood regarding the removal of three
homes and creation of a parking lot. If the road was curved to the south and preserved, one
I
Page 5
MinutesEdha Citv CounciVMav 4,1998
of the two lots facing Brittany would cut the visual intrusion along Brittany in half.
Acquisition of the Marty property was required to accomplish Option 5. The plan creates two
new lots and no net loss in housing. The home owned by CPC on Brittany is also being
refurbished. This proposal reduced parking places from 640 to 540.
Mr. Jawis stated the Planning Commission and staff reviewed the plan. Two changes were
suggested, 1) eliminate access to 70th Street and relocate access to where it is today or north
of the circulation road on the west side of the parking lot ; 2) eliminate curb cut on 69th Street
and relocate it as it is today on the frontage road. Option 5 also increased additional green
space. Mr. Jarvis said he had a further recommendation for the curb cut on 70th Street from
the Planning Commission that would be discussed at a later time.
I
Mr. Jarvis presented graphic scale drawings depicting the proposed dense plantings on the
berms. Plantings depicted would be actual size at time of planting. He reminded the Council
that Phase 11 is depicted on the drawings, but CPC has no plans to build Phase I1 for 5 - 7
years.
Gary Tushie, Tushie and Associates, reviewed the proposed floor plans and exterior building
elevations of Phase I. The proposed main level would include the sanctuary to the south, a
new entrance into the old sanctuary which will be converted into a narthex. Two stairs lead
to the balcony and down to the lower level fellowship hall and additional meeting space. A
new elevator is proposed to serve all three levels and would connect to the north part of the
church. Coat room storage and a kitchenette would also be included on the main level.
Enclosed storage off the proposed west side will be used to house buses and outside
equipment.
LOWERLEVEL:
The lower level expansion below the sanctuary would be utilized for a new fellowship hall, a
relocated kitchen, bathrooms, classrooms, choir room and be re-connected into the existing
fellowship hall. The lower level would exit southerly at grade to an outdoor patio with
numerous plantings.
EXTERIOR ELEVATION.
The exterior elevation looks west towards the church with new dormers added to the sloped
roof and a new steeple.
TOP ELEVATION:
East side - looking west the plan depicts the proposed Phase I sanctuary, existing sanctuary
and existing office and classroom space proceeding north.
SOUTH ELEVATION
Depicts the proposed new porte cochere or new foyer drop-off area of the narthex.
Materials would match or compliment materials to the colonial character, Jeffersonian
influence, existing building, both in brick and siding. The new steeple would be an add-
alternate and similar to the steeple on the existing church.
Page 6
MinutesBdina Citv Council/Mav 4,1998
Jim Benshoof, Benshoof & Associates, Inc., Transpiration Engineers and Planners, presented
results of a traffic and parking study associated with the proposed expansion of Christ I Presbyterian Church.
Mi. Benshoof presented the following:
1. Background and Purpose:
Collected a substantial amount of data
Established post-development traffic and parking forecasts
Analyzed traffic and parking effects of the proposed expansion program
with focus on if expansion program can be accomplished without causing
adverse impacts on nearby neighborhoods.
Extensive data collected on 70th Street to the south; Frontage road to the
west and residential streets of 69th Street, Brittany Road and Dunberry Lane
to the north and east
0 Data collected during hourly traffic volumes for residential streets; trips
from church Sunday, Tuesday, Wednesday church activities; parking
accumulation in lots during Sunday, Tuesday and Wednesday church
activities; on-street parking during Sunday and Tuesday church activities;
and neighborhood trips through the lot to 70th Street.
0 Projected post-development number of trips to and from church and
parking during Sunday activities for four access options.
0 Projected future Sunday daily traffic volumes for residential streets north
and east of the church
0 Projected future parking demand
0 Analyzed traffic and parking projects whether functions could be
adequately accommodated without adverse impacts on nearby
neighborhoods.
2. Description of Data collected:
2. Description of Analysis Performed:
Conclusions:
0 Existing Traffic Volumes: * Brittany Road/ Dunberry Lane - Traffic volumes well within normal range
for residential streets all days of week. Volumes are higher Sundays,
Tuesdays and Wednesdays but within normal levels
70th Street (East of church driveway) - Sunday is busiest day but the volume
is still only one-half of weekday morning peak volume or one-third of
weekday afternoon rush.
*
Existing On-Street Parking * Some on Sunday and Tuesdays * Existing Congestion on 69th Street - Church users park on both sides
of 69th during peak periods which interferes with travel between
Frontage Road, the neighborhood or church.
Typical neighborhood trips through Church lot - 29 trips from Dunberry or
Brittany daily
Page 7
MinutesEdha Citv CouncWav 4,1998
Post-development traffic on 70th Street (East of Church driveway) expected to
remain well below volumes during weekday AM and PM peak hours
Post-development Sunday Daily Traffic Volumes on Brittany/Dunberry show
existing Brittany at 509 and Dunberry at 266. Option 3 would see a slight increase
to 560 for Brittany Road and 300 for Dunberry Lane. With Option 4, traffic would
be 390 daily trips on Brittany and 200 on Dunberry
Adequacy of Church Driveways to Provide Sufficient Capacity for Entering and
Exiting Traffic, 70th Street will provide adequate capacity for Church traffic for 1)
driveway upgrade providing standard traffic lane alignments and widths, 2) Police
officer will continue to provide safe/effective traffic operation
0 Other Effects on Neighborhood - Any of proposed options eliminate need of on-
street parking on residential streets; Options 1,3 & 4 preserve access between
neighborhood and Frontage Road, Option 2 does not; Options 1 & 3 preserve
opportunity for neighbors to drive through Church lot to 70&, Options 2 & 4 do
not. All four options eliminate existing 69th Street congestion.
Mr. Benshoof concluded the expansion program as presented would effectively meet traffic
and parking needs. No adverse traffic impacts would be experienced on neighborhood
streets and neighborhoods would gain a benefit from existing conditions through the
prohibition of on-street parking on the neighborhood streets by Church users.
Peter Jarvis noted that CPC is willing to enter into a Conditional Use Permit with all
conditions as recommended by the Planning Commission. As a result of the requirements
regarding deed restrictions, and to insure control of the sale of property, Attorney Gilligan
was requested to prepare a legal framework memorandum dealing with the HRA being the
City's agent with these restrictions. These restrictions would cover the sale of the two parcels
as well as the plot proposed to be subdivided.
I
Mr. Jarvis added the Church would enter into an agreement: 1) that insures reconstruction of
the relocated 69th Street meeting City standards and rededicated back to the City., 2) that the
Marty house and the house south of Brittany and 69th would be sold after they are
refurbished, and 3) Two new buildable lots would be created subject to approval of the
Planning Commission and Council.
If approval is given, the street would be reconstructed between June and September at the
new location with proper utility and service connections run to the proposed two lots.
Landscaping would need to be completed before May 30 or not until fall. The two homes and
two lots would be marketed in August/September as well. Site staging would be done in late
summer and parking lot completed in two phases. Landscaping will be on the north side of
the property first then on the easterly property line. A bond will be posted in the amount of
$34$36,000 for the relocation of 69th Street.
I Mr. Jarvis continued stating NURP (National Urban Runoff Program) affects every
development requiring rate and quantity of runoff so post development is substantially
similar to pre-development condition. Initially the pond was to be located in the southwest
corner but would have required removal of 20 oak/maple/ash trees. One suggestion has
Page 8
MinutesEdha Ci€y CounciVMay 4,1998
been to contact the Mn/DOT to check if the site could use the excess capacity on the other
side of the freeway. Staff and the Watershed District have worked out a verbal agreement
that would be acceptable if the Council concurs. Some water storage would be on site also.
Mr. Jarvis expressed his belief that CPC has responded to the neighborhood concerns.
However, it has failed to get the Woodhill Board support vote for the compromise plan. He
added the plan will have less impact especially on the immediate neighborhood. An overall
positive impact on the Edina community by: 1) improving the ugly existing parking lot with
internal landscaping, 2) expansion of lot by 200 spaces eliminates on-street parking in
neighborhood and 70th Street, 3) landscaping and a change of grade with a wall of green from
day one, and 4) dramatic re-lighting down to 19% feet with light source that is invisible off
site, similar to the lighting on Parklawn near Centennial Lakes. Mr. Jawis stated churches are
an asset to the community. He said most good realtors would say there are three important
things for a residential neighborhood: churches, schools and parks. Mr. Jarvis told about a
planned community, Columbia, developed in the east. Sociologists wrestled with developing
infrastructure to include parks, schools and churches immediately, so prospective residents
would not need to worry about them. Edina is blessed with great schools, churches and
parks. In conclusion, Mr. Jarvis urged the Council's approval of CPC's proposed expansion
allowing them to play a part in this community
PRESENTATION BY PLANNER
Planner Larsen reminded the Council that the Planning Commission recommended approval
conditioned upon:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
.L Vacation of existing West 69th Street right-of-way, and dedication of new right-of-
way as illustrated on the revised site plan (option 5).
Developer's Agreement covering cost and providing security for construction of
the new street.
All necessary permits from Nine Mile Creek Watershed district and Mn/DOT
(DNR).
Modification of curb cuts on northerly portion of the site as recommend by the
Director of Public Works.
Curb cut on West 70th Street should remain where it is today or be moved further
west as determined by the Director of Public Works.
The subdivision and replatting of lots north of the relocated West 69th Street.
No portion of Phase I1 construction can commence until replatted lots are sold with
deed restrictions.
Planner Larsen explained that certain actions have taken place addressing conditions 4, 6,
and 7 since the Planning Commission met as follows:
0 Condition 4. Site plan (option 5) has been modified adjusting the curb cuts as
recommended by the Director of Public Works.
0 Condition 6. The church made application for subdivision of the properties north
of the relocated West 69th Street. The Planning Commission will consider the
proposed subdivision at their May 27, 1998, meeting. The proposed subdivision
proposes two new lots fronting on West 69th Street.
Page 9
. .. .I Minu€es/Edina Citv Council/May 4,1998
Condition 7. A memorandum from Attorney Gilligan addresses the platting, sale
and future use of the properties located north of the relocated street has been
drafted. - I Planner Larsen concluded what is before Council tonight is action on the Conditional Use
Permit allowing the expansion of Christ Presbyterian Church physical plant and expansion of
the Church's parking lot. He reminded Council a three/fifths favorable vote would be
needed to proceed. Following action on the Conditional Use Permit, action would be needed
on the proposal to vacate West 69th street and rededicate the street northerly of its present
location. Future actions by either the Planning Commission or Council would be to consider
the subdivision north of relocated 69u1 Street.
Attorney Gilligan said responding to the Planning Commission's condition insuring that the
lots are sold for residential uses and after discussing the subject with staff he prepared a
memorandum outlining the Development Agreement that would be entered into between
the Edina HRA and Christ Presbyterian Church covering the residential lots north of 69th
Street as follows:
Development Agreement would provide:
1. Lots platted in a timely manner;
2. Church would have a reasonable period of time to sell lots for residential use (24
months or until commencement of Phase 11 whichever occurs earlier);
3. If lots do not sell within set time period, lots would be forfeited by the Church to
the HRA;
4. Lots forfeited to the HRA would be sold by the HRA for development of single
family residences and proceeds received by HRA from such sale less expenses by
HRA would be paid to the church;
5. Deed transferring title to any lot would contain restrictions which will run in favor
of the HRA and provide that the property may not be used for church purposes or
any other use which would cause the property to be exempt from real estate taxes.
The deed restriction would be recorded whether the lot is sold by the Church, or
forfeited to the HRA and sold by the HRA
I
Attorney GiUigan said the Development Agreement would be recorded in the real estate
records as a lien against the property. The Developers Agreement will provide that the
property will not be released by the HRA until the sale of such lot, with the required deed
restriction, and furnishing to the HRA evidence satisfactory to the HRA, that the purchaser
intends to construct a single family residence on the lot, and has secured construction
financing, or has sufficient available funds for this purpose.
The HRA would have broad authority to provide for housing and other development in the
City and the Development Agreement will recite that it is being entered into in furtherance of
this purpose in order to ensure development of the lots from single family housing in a
timely manner. All costs related to the Development Agreement will be required to be paid
by the Church. The provisions as to forfeiture of title to the property is similar to what was
required by the HRA in the Redevelopment Agreements for the Edinborough and Centennial I
Page 10
MinutesEdha Citv Council/May 4,1998
Lakes projects and is a fairly standard provision in redevelopment contracts with
development authorities.
WOODHILL ASSOCIATION BOARD OF DIRECTORS PRESENTATION:
Steve Brown, representing the Association, but not speaking for all of the Association, stated
the neighborhood supports the church and believes it is a community asset. This is not an
issue of religion, it is land use issues and adherence to the Comprehensive Plan, impacts of
continued growth on the neighborhood, alternative options, and real compromise. The
Association has received gratuitous updates at best from the church. The Association would
like strict adherence to the Comprehensive Plan. The Association also does not want a
relocation of 69th Street nor do they want demolition of any homes.
. .$,
Mr. Brown gave a chronology of Christ Presbyterian’s progress:
1957
1968
1973
1978
1981
1989
1991
1994
Church bought lots to build
Church expanded sanctuary
Undeveloped lots were donated to Church
Church attempted to create parking lot north of West 69&/CPC withdrew
proposal due to strong neighborhood opposition
Highway 100 changed traffic patterns
Church added 29,000 s.f. to their campus and parking agreement added 170
parking stalls - Letter from Rev. Virgil Lee, CPC’s Minister saying impact on neighborhood
will be minimal - Letter from Vic and Sally Hall stating it is not CPC’s intent to increase
membership where it would be a detriment to the neighborhood. Expansion
approved subject to conditions and was the foundation for the parking
agreement in place today. Additional parking capacity exists today within the
site within that plan around approximately 170 stalls. - Comment from Bill Hall (CPC building committee) referring to CPC’s plans
for northern lots that had been proposed to be parking lot in 1978 and the
church acknowledged this was not a good idea and was insensitive to the
neighbors. Property was held for investment and the church would consider
selling if they obtained a good offer.
Bill Hall of CPC Building Committee at July Council meeting referred to CPC’s
plan for northern lots that had been proposed to be a parking lot in 1978 - Church applied for a Conditional Use Permit for the construction of parking on
the vacant land north of West 69th Street. - Denied by the City with following comments: 1) proposal disturbs me. I
remember very clearly two years ago when CPC requested a Conditional Use
Permit to remodel their existing facility, they indicated at that time they would
not cross 6gth Street (Former Commissioner Nan Faust); 2) This is a residential
neighborhood and the church has not investigated all alternatives that were to
be implemented with their previous proposal. The growth of a church should
not ‘swallow’ a neighborhood and if the church is experiencing such growth,
maybe they should consider relocating.” (Commissioner Helen McClelland).
Four homes purchased to date for CPC‘s investment of $778,500
Page 11
Minutes/Edina Citv CounciI/May 4,1998
1997 Neighbors contacted by CPC aboqt plans
Factual Review: Increase building area to 131,084 s.f. (Phase I and II)
Membership: 54% Edina
90% 5 mile radius
5% in 55435 Zip Code
Traffic & Safety: 1) Access to park must cross 66th or 70th Streets, 2) Streets
are neighborhood sidewalks, 3) Kids play in streets, 4) Cornelia
School traffic committee formed, 5) Hilly terrain affects visibility
Daily Traffic Counts - West 70th Street
1986 - 12,100
1997 - 21,500 (66% increase in 9 years) Problems will only increase, CPC
adding to problem, CPC not primary reason, and why
exacerbate problem.
Traffic out from Brittany, 62 trips per day - projected 100 - increase 61%
Traffic out to Dunberry, 83 trips per day - projected 135 - increase 61%
Traffic in 70th from W, 441 trips per day, projected 683 - increase 55%
Traffic in 70th from E, 80 trips per day, projected 127 - increase 59%
Commercial Property in Area:
in from Brittany, 86 trips per day - projected 134 - increase 57%
in from Dunberry, 27 trips per day, projected 38 - increase 41 %
out 70th to W, 375 trips per day, projected 595 - increase 59%
out 70th to E, 147 trips per day, projected 204 - increase 39%
Industrial 900,000 s.f.
Retail 2,700,000 s.f.
Office 3,500,000 s.f.
1,000,000 s.f. planned or under construction
Mr. Brown explained that Option 5 is NOT 1) consistent with the Comprehensive Plan, 2)
consistent with "Growing Small", 3) in the best interest of the neighborhood, 4) a win-win
proposition and 5) a compromise. He added 1) no physical structure has been changed, 2) the
plan still shows relocation of West 69th Street to the north, 3) the plan is to still demolish three
homes, 4) loss of extensive greenspace for parking lot and 5) no assurances that this is the end
of CPC's expansion plans.
Recommendations by the Board of Directors are as follows:
A. Settlement of differences by arbitration or by consent reached by mutual
B. Bind by mutual agreement to adjust or settle by mutual concessions to
concessions by blending of qualities of two different things
come to agreement by mutual concession
Mr. Brown stated 200 signatures had been gathered imploring the Council that:
West 69th Street stays in current location
Expansion is allowed only on existing site
0 No church parking allowed on West 70th at any time
No church parking allowed on West 69&, Dunberry, Brittany or Normandale
except on Sundays
Homes and lots north of 69th are sold prior to construction on exiting site
Page 12
MinutesEdha City Council/May 4,1998
Restrictive covenants are put in place on all homes and lots north of 69th as single
family for 40 years
0 Landscaping ahd lighting is as3proposed 3 " -
0 Curb cuts installed as recommended by the Planning Commission
Mr. Brown asked the Council to be visionary and anticipate the long term impact of the
proposed expansion and to use common sense about the impending safety risks. He asked
that an end be put to this issue for good and that Christ Presbyterian Church explore other
solutions. He asked that the proposal receive a no vote from the Council.
I
COUNCIL COMMENTS:
Mayor Smith noted a pressing problem in this town is traffic. Where a family had one car,
now there are two. He asked clarification of Sunday traffic on West 70th Street at a projected
71% increase and evening traffic at 50%. Mr. Jarvis clarified the 71% figure is only an increase
during the weekday peak hour. Mr. Benshoof affirmed during the Sunday church peak time,
traffic is sigdicant. A need exists for Police control to accommodate traffic movements and
to insure safety even after the expansion program. He does not anticipate change in terms of
quality of service on and off 70th Street. Mr. Jarvis added the image of 70th Street is different
to each person. He asked the exhibits be examined carefully (post development Sunday trips,
to and from church section, 8:00 A.M. to 12:40 P.M. - 4 ?h hour period) and noted the number
is the percentage of comparison between the interchange with the freeway and the church
parking entrance, not east of the entrance.
Member Maetzold asked to what extent the expansion is driven by the need to contemporize
church design. What is driving the Phase I1 expansion, modernizing church design or church
growth. Mr. Jarvis said this is the first expansion proposed in 30 years and he would
anticipate it is the maximum addition for administrative and classroom space, and built in
response to anticipated growth at approximately 5%. Construction of Phase I1 is projected in
5 - 7 years. The narthex is considered a gathering space for fellowship to take place
comfortably. Gary Tushie said much of the design is not driven by expansion needs but by
programming and CPC's philosophy. Having services on a Friday or Saturday may be
common in other churches, but CPC wishes to feel more like a community with less services
on Sunday and everybody under one roof.
Member Faust reminded Council she has been looking at CPC for ten years. She asked the
present width of 69th Street; if a 24 foot road was their desire; would it include curb and
gutter, and what would be the estimated cost. Engineer Hoffman answered 69th Street is
currently a 30 foot road and if relocation of the street at 24 foot is approved, parking would
be prohibited on both sides. The road would include curb and gutter and cost approximately
$40,000. Member Faust asked if the City usually gives land away to developers. Planner
Larsen referred to the vacation of the existing right-of-way that, 1) vacate when no public
purpose exists for the right-of-way and 2) this would be a trade of existing right-of-way for
replacement right-of-way. Member Faust asked for clarification on the replacement right-of-
way is 6 ft X the length of the road less than the City's portion. Planner Larsen explained the
modest difference in the existing 69th Street right-of-way is 60 feet and the right-of-way for
the proposed street is 50 feet or 10 feet narrower in the part the public controls. Attorney
Page 13
Minutes/Edina Citv CounciVMay 4,1998
Gilligan said the City does not own the land but have a right to use if for street purposes. We
can’t sell it but we can vacate it in exchange for another dedication of another right-of-way.
Member Kelly asked what change has been made to the building footprint in response to the
neighborhood. Mr. Jarvis that answered from April 1997 to December 1997, the sanctuary
size has been reduced by 14%, the basement level reduced by 14%, the balcony size reduced
by 3%, and the sanctuary seating reduced from approximately 1100-1260 to 951 while the
architecture remains the same. The total reduction in the Phase I proposal was 12% in direct
response from neighbors input. Member Kelly asked when Options One through Four were
presented. Peter Jarvis said the Master Plan was presented to the neighborhood at two
meetings in April 1997. Changes took place on the Plan from July 1997 - December 1997 when
a complete redesign process was completed. The redesigned plan was presented to the
neighborhood and the Planning Commission in January, 1998.
Steve Brown reiterated since the neighborhood has been involved the plan for the physical
building has not changed.
Member Hovland asked how long will CPC’s growth rate be at 7-8% and what is the
projected time capacity will be reached at the present location. Ms. Bowles said an
anticipated capacity would be difficult to forecast, but the proposed facility will meet today’s
needs and allow flexibility with the church‘s programming. The church has committed to this
location indefinitely and the financial investment is huge. If capacity were ever reached,
other options would need to be considered such as relocation or satellites.
Mayor Smith inquired what regulations relate to building height and mass in this situation.
Planner Larsen said there are no regulations relating to height of the steeple. Buildings in this
zone are limited in height to 40 feet. He referred to the original staff report that pointed out
the building measures at 43 feet requiring a 3 foot height variance or similar to the main
sanctuary at the Colonial Church complex.
I
Member Maetzold asked besides the 3 foot height variance does the remainder of the
proposed expansion comply with our Comprehensive Plan, the Watershed District, etc.
Planner Larsen said the proposal complies with the Zoning Code and approval of the
Watershed District would follow Council action.
Member Faust asked what if any variances would be required on the original 6.8 acre site.
Planner Larsen said the same height variance would be required. The Code has two layers
with parking; one space is required for each three seats of sanctuary plus enough spaces to
handle concurrently occurring activities. The 950 seat sanctuary would require
approximately 317 spaces at a minimum. 350 spaces exist in CPCs parking lot now with 33
handling concurrent activities. The lot is stressed now, and spills out into the neighborhood.
He believes there may be a parking shortage and that a variance may be necessary in the
future. In staffs’ opinion keeping all parking on site is desirable and 200 additional spaces
would add the necessary cushion.
Page 14
.I f
i 4.
Minutes/Edina City CouncivMay 4,1998
Member Kelly asked if an hourly traffic study had been done on 70th Street. Mr. Benshoof
pointed out two studies were taken at the church driveway location as related to traffic on
70th Street, but nothing broken down by hour. Member Kelly inquired whether a study had
been done of traffic through neighborhoods. Mr. Benshoof said a trdfic study was done in
and out from 69th Street and traffic using Dunberry to the east or Brittany north but no count
was made exiting onto 70th Street.
Member Hovland asked how much of the east hillside would be taken to create additional
parking. Mr. Jawis said very little as the lot will be elevated approximately 3 feet. Normally a
parking lot would be placed 30 feet from the residential lot line. Today the asphalt edge is 45
feet from the property line. Code requires a setback of 10 feet and the proposal would place
the landscaping at 30 feet. Member Hovland asked Mr. Jawis if he was in concurrence with
the curb cut remaining in the same location. Mr. Jarvis said CPC would work with Engineer
Hoffman and construct the curb cut where the City wants it. Mr. Jarvis clarified that some
Planning Commission members thought the curb cut lined up with the intersection of the
frontage road. It never has lined up. The intersection is dead-on into the first lot. The
proposal is to move it one lot and would create a problem for Mr. Barck with headlights
shining into his home with every left turn. In the future he would see lights as they approach,
but CPC has offered to plant sizable spruce trees in his front yard to block headlights. An
unidentified man who lives east of Mr. Barck told the proposed change will also have an
adverse affect on his home. Mr. Jawis said the home the curb cut lines up with is to the west
of Mr. Barck’s property.
Mayor Smith asked if an inventory was done on the development as it exists or consideration
given to tearing down and reconfiguring the structure for ultimate efficiency. Mi. Jarvis
commented that in the 1994-95 analysis, an unbelievable mount of inventory has been done
of every square foot of the building, i.e. how is it used, what time of day is it used, for what
function is it used, and by what age and group type is it used. The same inventory was done
with parking and landscaping. Mr. Jarvis emphasized the building is used efficiently. Mayor
Smith asked if the first sanctuary could be razed and rebuilt as two stories. Mr. Jarvis said
code would not allow rebuilding because of the taking of land, in the 1970’s by Mn/DOT. A
portion of the east side of the building, none of which is affected by the current proposal, no
longer meets the setback requirement of 50 feet after the land was taken. Tearing down
functional space and replacing it with a taller building does not seem like more space would
be created and would be very costly.
I
Member Maetzold asked what traffic on 70th Street and the neighborhood will look like in 5 -
7 years based on CPC’s steady growth. Mr. Benshoof said forecasts for post development
volumes focus on Sunday and account for changes/increases associated with CPC traffic.
Other development in the area whether it be retail, office, or residential, the increase in traffic
volumes on 70th Street are principally weekday related traffic generation. Member Maetzold
asked if a detrimental increase in traffic would be generated by CPC in 5-7 years. Mr.
Benshoof replied not in terms of impacting 70th Street to the east. The increase would
principally occur between the driveway and Highway 100 interchange. The level of increase
of church traffic on a Sunday morning east of the driveway along the residential area to the
Page 15
p ... I
Minutes/Edina Citv Council/May 4,1998
east on 70fi, is about 100 vehicles in a 4 1h hr period from 8:OO A.M.- 12:30 P.M. 100 vehicles
spread over that time span is quite indistinguishable.
Member Hovland asked what the average traffic volumes are for streets in the Woodhill area.
Engineer Hoffman said typically volumes would be 200 - 500 trips per day. Maple Road is
1000 cars per day; Country Club area at approximately 300; Wooddale 2000; Arden and
Bruce 300 - 700. People begin to notice traffic when volumes reach 500 and at 1000 cars per
day. At 1000 residents begin talking about STOP signs, and more street control. With
implementation of ramp meters, residents are using neighborhood streets rather than
freeways. Traffic on 70th has increased dramatically. Member Hovland asked if data was
available detailing the increase has been on an annual basis in residential neighborhoods.
Engineer Hoffman said consultants the City has used say the volume has increased from 8-10
trips per household to 13-14 trips per day per household.
...
Member Maetzold asked if the CPC proposal is approved, would Phase 11 come back for
approval at a later date. Member Larsen said the proposal is for Phase I and Phase 11.
RESIDENT COMMENTS
Eugene Huntstiger, 4809 Roycar Road, asked if the proposed relocation of 69th Street includes
sewer, water and gas. Engineer Hoffman said if the vacation is approved and the street is
moved, staff would recommend maintaining rights for sewer and water and rights for
Minnegasco, USWest, Paragon Cable and NSP to maintain their facilities. If CPC wanted the
utilities moved the cost of the move would be CPC's.
John Rogan, 4720 West 70th Street, twenty year resident, suggested traffic could go east go
across Highway 100 and come down the service road onto Highway 100, or east or west on
70th. or onto the frontage road south. He further does not agree with taking property off the
tax roles. The church should build on the existing footprint. He asked why not have Saturday
services now rather than later.
Ann Oliver, 4509 Laguna Drive, 12 year resident, said there is a significant increase in traffic
during rush hour when CPC does not schedule programming.
John Hoyt, 4812 Dunberry Lane, lives in the third closest house to CPC. He has written two
letters to the Council regarding the proposed expansion. He noted, 1) no one from CPC has
visited them, 2) CPC wants to reduce Sunday services from 3 to 2, representing an immediate
peak increase in traffic, and 3) he has no objection to parking on Dunberry as long as they
don't drive on his grass.
Evelyn Ray, 4801 West 70th Street, said their objection to the proposal is traffic during rush
hour. They cannot open their front windows because of noise and traffic. If an emergency
were to occur during rush hour, it would be impossible to get out of their driveway for help.
Ms. Ray schedules appointments with clients after 9 A.M. as she could never guarantee
getting out of her driveway. When the church building is larger, larger groups can use the
facility. The church has said their property value will not depreciate but their realtor told
Page 16
MinutesEdha Citv Council/Mav 4,1998
them they made a 15 - 20% donation to CPC without a tax write-off. The four homes on 70th
Street feel ignored.
Kirsten Teaple, 4717 West 28th Street, St. Louis Park, a CPC member made a plea for
additional space the church needs. Shuttling back and forth between Cornelia and leaving
their baby in the church in order to take a class is worrisome as well as difficult juggling car
seats, etc. Socialization in the narthex is difficult at best with the tremendous overcrowding.
She asked for approval of the expansion so families can take advantage of the programs.
j ,' I E I* ,. , ," <, ; ! . *I '1. . J. t.. 1 I,' I
Kurt Smith, 6600 West Shore Drive, a twenty year resident, said he is a real estate
professional with a specialty in hotels, is licensed as a real estate broker, is a certified general
real estate appraiser and operates a division of a management company that runs hotels. On
a number of occasions he has been invited to do site location research studies. He has done a
study on membership at Colonial Church and believes a parallel can be drawn to CPC. A
mathematical model can be drawn of the service area of a church. The greatest draw to a
church is in the immediate area; 60% come from within a 5 mile radius. He examined
Colonial Church when it was on Wooddale Avenue and the new site on Tracy. The original
site attracted members in a 3 mile radius in a circular shape vs the Tracy site which became
elliptical. The expansion will exceed this community and no doubt reach south to the river
and further to the north while most traffic will come off the expressway not through the
neighborhood. The area east is primarily commercial, the north has a large recreational area
and the rest is bounded by the expressways serving as barriers. The church is fortunate with
its location. Expansion of the facility will not drive growth. In 1987 Colonial expanded 100%
and lost 50% of their attendance. Mi. Smith has attended CPC and voiced concern with the
safety of pedestrians walking in the street between parked cars on both sides and being
followed by a car looking for a parking space.
I
Mayor Smith asked who should pay for the sidewalks. Mr. Smith said residents on 66th Street
were assessed for sidewalk installation in 1997, but he believes the sidewalks are more for the
greater community than only their street.
Kristi Kuehn, 4813 Upper Terrace, and a student at Gustavus Adolphus College equated the
planned construction of the church expansion to the war-zone devastation St. Peter received
from the April tornado. She asked that the small charming neighborhood be maintained and
the neighbors be respected during construction.
Karol Schneider, 6905 West Shore Drive, works often at Cornelia School and opposes the
expansion. The common denominator in the neighborhood is traffic with the encroachment
of commercialism on all four sides as well as the unknown quality.
Bruce McPheeters, 4920 Poppy Lane, stated anyone can build parks or schools, but a vibrant
church is an asset. He noted how many Edina churches had expanded over the years where
CPC has not. The expansion will not be as large as some others and CPC's location near a
highway is a plus. What a nice problem this expansion is to make a decision out of prosperity
not out of adversity. When looking at the church across from Byerly's, a wrong message is
given that churches are dead.
I
Page 17
MinutesEdha Citv CouncivMav 4,1998
Jan Doudiet, 5800 Long Brake Trail, moved to Edina 9 1h years ago because of schools,
community, the commute, shopping and church. A plus for CPC is its location on the
perimeter of a neighborhood with access from Highway 100 and 70th. I
Rick Cornelisse, 6633 Southcrest Drive, was told by his neighbors that the expansion issue
would never get to the Council because the land issue would be resolved as it had been in the
past. They were wrong. Two hundred residents have asked for no expansion but, yes to the
dynamics of CPC. He said expansion is fine within the confines of the land.
Don Barck, 4807 West 70th Street, said four residents on the south side of CPC have a
combined residency of 125 years. The church can expand, but he disagrees with the size of
the curb cut and locating it right in front of his house. Planning Commission discussed
leaving the curb cut intact or moving it further west. Traffic exiting the lot in the winter (with
16 hours of darkness) headlights shine directly into the Back's windows. He asked that the
curb cut be moved to the east side of his property.
Unidentified resident on 4816 Wilford Way, bought their home recently as it went on the
market one month after CPC made their expansion plans known. The proposed expansion
has been a wonderful way to meet neighbors. She daily observes two signs, 1) neighborhood
meeting and a 2) Conditional Use Permit sign. She voiced concern that the safety and
livability of the area be maintained during and after the construction.
Bill Hamer, 4709 Upper Terrace, an 18 year resident, stated strong churches are essential to
the City. He quoted from the Star Tribune and the impact religion has on youth. This would
be the first land use expansion in 40 years. Traffic is a serious problem and has been
exacerbated with commercial expansion along 70th Street. He asked if the City has the
responsibility to provide this type of facility for its residents. Mayor Smith says no it is the
responsibility of the individual churches.
I
Joe Florenzano, 4712 West 70th Street, a 20 year resident, voiced concern with traffic. He
attended Council 10 years ago on the same issue. Looking at the growth in Edina and the
difficulty getting out of a driveway, where do you draw the line.
Therese Kakarias, 6825 West Shore Drive, an 8 year resident voiced concern with 1) safety
because she has small children, 2) tremendous traffic for residents 24 hours a day, 3) CPC has
the right to expand on their property, 4) neighborly of CPC to provide landscaping and use
of low glare lighting, 5) not in families best interest to add more hard surface parking, 6)
endless construction noise and dust and 7) increase in traffic affects their quality of life.
Sandy Kuehn, 4813 Upper Terrace, said her family has experienced the same growing pains
as CPC. She suggested expanding the number of services. Cars backing up in lots is
dangerous and her church asks families with small children to park on side streets near
church. While she can appreciate all CPC's concerns, she disagrees with the taking of green
space, traffic, shrinking of the neighborhood, and loss of homes. CPC have not been good
neighbors, their property has dead grass, leaves have never been picked up, downed
I
Page 18
MinutesEdina City CouncilMay 4,1998
branches from a storm were not cleaned up and there is rampant dandelion growth, The
rental home on 69th and frontage road rarely shovels its driveway, garbage cans were left in
the driveway for days;dogs roamed the neighborhood!’ Ad a car sat’on the grass with a tarp
partially covering it. The church has represented their property as an eyesore. Is it not hard to
see why neighbors are unhappy. She further asked where are the 3,000 members when it is
time to take care of their property. Ms. Kuehn said the plan discussed tonight involves only
land south of West 69th Street causing removal of three homes and building of a parking lot
and replaces nothing. Neighbors have no assurance CPC will come back with a plan. CPC
has said they purchased the Marty property for subdivision, but CPC’s representatives said a
private individual is the purchaser. The spirituality of the church has nothing to do with the
size of the building. Her husband is in real estate and has someone interested in the property
and for use as a satellite church. CPC could add services, move the administrative offices to
home they own and use office space for Sunday School. Why not smaller expansion within
the footprint. Maybe its time to look for new church home.
Skip Nelson, 4816 Dunberry Lane, said Webster’s definition of a neighborhood is an area
where one lives next to another. Growing up in a neighborhood meant a place to play
baseball and sell lemonade, today it is a comfortable place that provides security as neighbors
become friends, as well as a quality of life issue. He challenged the Council to vote on their
definition of neighborhood.
Suzanne Irene, 4817 Dunberry Lane, pointed out her home will be tremendously impacted
with the expansion of CPC. She inquired of Member Faust if the controversy tonight now is
the same as 10 years ago. Her recollection was that CPC said that they would not need
anything more. Plantings promised 10 years ago for the site were never completed, or were
never cared for and died out. When the promises were not kept there was no one from CPC
to go to for help. She inquired if the Council would be available for neighborhood input if
promises are not kept. She noted only one letter of correspondence had been dropped at her
door from the church.
Mayor Smith said he was on the Council when the previous expansion took place. City staff
monitors projects during construction and he has no recollection that residents were
unhappy with the project.
Colleen and Margaret Gallagher, 6812 Brittany Road, live next to the home proposed to be
purchased and subdivided. Their home was built in 1965 and is a 100 X 300 lot. A developer
in 1973 attempted to purchase a portion of the lot. They did not sell it. The developer donated
his property to the church. Their home has much glass and will, if the expansion occurs, look
over CPC‘s parking lot. In 1989 a planned parking agreement was put in place to protect the
neighborhood. It was never enforced.
Dean Kovack, 6817 Normandale Road, at the onset of this process, Ms. Bowles the church
wanted to reduce services from 3 to 2, allowing for coffee time and adult education. The
planned expansion would make his lot a corner lot. He did not buy a corner lot, nor does he
want a street next to him with more traffic. A strong message is sent to a neighborhood if an
entity buys homes for the sake of tearing them down. Everybody in Woodhill and south of
I
Page 19
MinutesLEdina Citv CounciVMav 4,1998
70th will be directly affected. He met with the Pastor, a family friend and CPC member, and
his wife and explained their concern with the lack of care of the rental property next door.
Over a six week period he had to make many calls.to finally get the job done. He cares for an
elderly neighbors lot now and does not want the added responsibility of more CPC property.
Mr. Kovack supports the proposal Steve Brown presented to the Council and reiterated he
does not want to live on a corner lot.
Fred Little, 4725 Dunberry, a 14 year resident. sees the key issue as organizational change.
CPC has been very successful, they have good leadership, and are projecting signifxant
growth over the next several years and hats off to them. The church has changed and they
are going through a space crunch. The Council should remember that this issue could come
up again in 5 - 7 years. He suggested a satellite church be considered. Mr. Little reminded the
Council that 200 signatures were gathered opposing the expansion.
Floyd Grabiel, 4817 Wilford Way, stated he has heard numerous comments on what CPC
should do with their services. It is not the problem of the City but is internal church stuff. In
defense of Mr. Jarvis, when he called IMr. Jarvis for a meeting, he came and explained the
program and feels the church has been responsive with respect to their proposals. He wrote
the Council in opposition to the April 1997 proposal and believe the church has moved a long
way in response to neighbors concerns in terms of landscaping, design, etc. If the proposal
presented tonight is recommended by the Planning Commission with conditions, it would be
a plus for the neighborhood and he would be in favor of it.
Marsha Kuhn, 4813 Wilford Way, said she has had concerns but the church has done a great
deal to change the minds of the everyone in the neighborhood in response to these concerns.
One thing not responding to the neighborhood is the proposal to relocate 69th Street. The
neighbors are saying expand the church on the site, but do not cross 69th Street. Parking in
front of her home is all right. Edina has a lot of parking, i.e. Cornelia School, the industrial
park, and in the Especially for Children’s lot. While these may require busing, why not teach
preservation of the environment and not over-pave the area
Tom Carrico, 4816 Roycar Road, said his concern is with stormwater drainage on the site
with the expansion from 1% to 8% of the site. Engineer Hoffman said the issue is being
studied. Mr. Carrico was disturbed CPC would still need to have police for traffic control on
Sunday mornings. He supports the petition presented and worries the parking agreement
completed in 1989 will be thrown away, that shows the spaces allowable on the site for
parking. If the 1989 agreement is adhered to CPC should have adequate space to expand.
John Mitchell, 4809 West 66th Street, after growing up in the area, the schools and churches in
the area brought him back. 70th Street cut through traffic is not compounded by the churches
use. He sees the proposal as greatly enhancing safe parking within the site and not City
streets with no sidewalks. His family has attended every meeting held and issues have
changed, in terms where CPC has tried to address concerns from of the neighborhood.
Access on 69th Street to Brittany has improved in the plan presented tonight. In terms of a
dedicated street with the relocation works for emergency vehicles and the neighborhood. At
a meeting on a Saturday, called for input from neighbors, a question was posed about what
I
Page 20
MinutesEdha Citv Council/May 4,1998
was going to happen on the north side; and would CPC continue marching up the hill. Being
a CPC member and a resident of the neighborhood is awkward, but when questioned, he
responded, 1) the church is perceivedlas a moving ttarget, residents need a solution, i.e.
purchase of Marty property and two new lots developed will only be beneficial, 2) CPC has
not been the best neighbor, but the proposed plan with irrigation is a tremendous
improvement, 3) church growth has historically taken in the same number of new members
from Edina as from neighboring communities, 4) this is an intensive process for everyone, the
Planning Commission and staff have done a good job and asked endorsement of the Planning
Commission's recommendation.
Marty Probst, 6629 Brittany Road, said many promises have been broken in the past and he
has heard tonight that all on-street parking would be eliminated with the plan presented.
CPC currently has 350 parking spots for a 300 seat sanctuary admittedly a serious problem.
Scores of people are bussed from Cornelia for 3 services. If CPC is allowed to expand by three
times to 950 plus, but only increase parking by 200 spots a problem exists today. When there
are only two services the ratio is much worse. With the current building expansion and with
2 services, CPC would be at capacity immediately, forgetting future growth. Mr. Probst
projected CPC would need to purchase 8-10 homes for their future expansion.
COUNCIL COMMENT:
Mayor Smith thanked everyone for their presentation and respect to the process. His belief is
that the City's business is done during Council meetings and he has not met with anyone
over the issue in advance. On one occasion he chatted at length with Pastor John Crosby of
Christ Presbyterian about his successful church. Mayor Smith presented pictures of a full
parking lot on a Tuesday morning at CPC and said CPC is obviously doing something right.
Pastor Crosby said the Tuesday morning group is a community-wide Bible Study Fellowship.
This would be the largest "peak" during the week for church usage.
I
Member Hovland asked if the two new lot dimensions are satisfactory to the City. Planner
Larsen said on initial review of the four lot subdivision, (two old lots and creation of two new
lots) three of the four would require lot width variances but would meet lot depths. No staff
report has been completed on the lots as the application has just recently been received.
Member Hovland asked how much of a variance would be considered. Planner Larsen said
the neighborhood standard is 90 feet width and the proposed lots are 83-85 feet in width.
Member Hovland inquired whether there are other 83-85 foot lots in the neighborhood.
Planner Larsen said he believes there are but the application has not been reviewed. Straight
north of the property, along the frontage road and Brittany lots are quite large, moving east
lots are smaller and more uniform.
Member Hovland inquired if the association has made their proposal to the church. Steve
Brown answered no. Member Hovland stated the proponents saw the association plan at the
same time the Council did. Member Hovland asked Mr. Brown the Association's view of a
parking ramp. Mr. Brown said it was suggested to cap membership at CPC, in his view it has
been capped by 69th Street as they presented. The Association has not discussed a ramp and
he personally would not favor a ramp, i.e. safety, cost and a commercial type of density.
More cars on the site is the crux of their opposition.
Page 21
MinutesEdha Citv CounciVMay 4,1998
Member Hovland asked for more information on 69th Street landscaping reaching to the top
of the hill, south. Mr. Jarvis reiterated there would be extensive landscaping and it was an
oversite that it was not depicted on the drawing. Member Hovland asked about residents on
West 70" left out of the landscaping plan. Mr. Ja~cvis said he isn't sure they were left out. The
most change is to Mi. Kovak. The next door neighbor has a driveway dead-center on their
home. The proposal, as drawn, moves the driveway one lot east taking it off that property
and aims it at the Kovak home. They believe, after conversations with Mr. Kovak, that
headlights shining into the Bar& home can be mitigated with spruce trees. If the proposal is
approved and if the curb cut negatively affects other neighbors, additional landscaping could
be provided. Mr. Jarvis noted the driveway move is in response to staff and his concern that
not enough space remains between the intersection and the frontage road to the south.
Member Hovland voiced concern with the Kovacs property being made a corner lot. Mr.
Jarvis said by moving the road approximately 80 feet north on the east side and 120 feet
north on the west, the church owns up to the Kovac property which is at a different
north/south line than all lots on the east side of the subdivision by accident of 1950's
platting. Mr. Kovacs lot does become a corner lot, but landscaping will go a long way in
mitigating intrusion. Member Hovland inquired whether the property will diminish in value
because the road is 80 feet closer to his property. Mr. Jarvis noted that many realtors believe
corner lots are larger and more valuable. He said CPC has not spoken to Mr. Kovak about the
dimhution of value of his property. Mr. Kovak said since the church purchased the home, of
the three families that lived there two have had young children which has been a plus for
playmates. He resents the loss of homes and having to drive to find playmates for his
children. The corner lot on the frontage road puts his children even closer to the street.
Member Hovland asked if the home next to his home was on the market for over a year until
the church bought it. Mr. Kovak answered no. Member Hovland asked if the new road
would be built before the old one is demolished. Engineer Hoffman noted that is the intent.
Member Hovland asked if sidewalk installation is being considered in the Woodhill
neighborhood. Steve Brown said none have been considered.
I
I
Member Faust thanked residents for their letters and interest in government. CPC is a
wonderfully respected part of the commety and she is willing to consider their expansion.
She has studied the church for 10 years and has not changed her opinion. The church should
not expand beyond 69th Street. They can expand on their site and infringing on the
neighborhood is unfair. She would vote to preserve the neighborhood.
Member Maetzold said he supports the recommendation of the Planning Commission with
the exception of the curb cut on 70th Street. Much thought has been given to this proposal
over the past year and it comes to, 1) the development conforms to the Comprehensive Plan,
2) addition of the most extensive landscaping plan he has ever seen, 3) concept of parking
cars on site and off streets is positive, 4) nothing was heard from the neighbors about the
expansion adversely affecting neighborhood regarding traffic, 5) 69th Street layout is
positive, and has no suggestion to alleviate creation of the corner lot, and 6) the plan as
presented caps the development with the proposed Development Agreement between HRA
and the Church. He supports the expansion proposal.
Page 22
MinutesBdina City Council/May 4,1998
Member Hovland said this is a difficult decision. He read the City Code regarding
Conditional Use, by definition it is, "use which is generally not suitable in a particular zoning
district, may under some circumstances and subject to conditions be 'suitable in a particular
district." He wondered what are the circumstances and conditions a permit may be issued.
Code Section 850.04 Subd. 4E has a seven part test:
1. Will promote and enhance the general public welfare and will not be detrimental
to or endanger the public health, safety, morals and general welfare. He believes
churches play a vital role in enhancing the general welfare of a community. Safety
is enhanced with the expansion, and with the parking ban proposed on the new
West 69th Street, West 70th Street and no parking would be allowed in
neighborhoods during the week, but would be allowed on Sundays.
2. Will not cause undue traffic hazards, congestion or parking shortages. He believes
CPC has adequately evaluated parking needs. He believes undue traffic hazards
will not be created with the expansion.
3. Will not be iniurious to the use and enjoyment, or decrease the value, of other
propertTJ in the vicinity, and will not be a nuisance. He does not want any property
to be diminished with the expansion. He is concerned with the Kovak property. In
correspondence received from the neighbors, they are concerned with their
property being diminished also. The assessor could find no proof homes were
diminished in value near a church in other Edina locations. Homes sold in the West
Shore area recently had regular increases in value since 1995. He believes the
location of CPC is ideal next to the freeway and on a minor arterial roadway.
4. Will not impede - the normal and orderly development and improvement of other
properm - in the vicinity. This item does not apply.
5. Will not create an excessive burden on - parks, streets and other public facilities.
Member Hovland said he sits on the 1-494 Corridor Commission and traffic
volumes are increasing all over. He feels traffic burden in the Woodhill
neighborhood is not excessive and the church will not play a sigdicant role traffic
on 70th Street.
6. Conforms to the applicable - restrictions and special conditions of the district in
which it is located as imposed bv this Section. Member Hovland felt it conforms,
7. Is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. He believes it is.
I
- -
-
Member Hovland said he was concerned about the location of the curb-cut on the frontage
road and finds there is one. The Tuesday traffic situation could have better management
internally on CPC's lot. Perhaps banning right hand turns out of the curb cut on West 69th
Street and reroute them up the frontage road to 66th Street and around, or onto 70&, rather
than through the neighborhood. The neighborhood should consider sidewalks also. He was
concerned about the lack of landscaping to protect the house at the corner of Brittany and
Dunberry after the road is moved but finds that will be done. The church has not been a good
caretaker of its property and he feels the neighborhood will benefit with the church getting
out of the rental business. He encouraged a compromise solution and would be in favor of
the proposed expansion with the conditions.
Member Kelly echoed Council comments. Many times the Council struggles with a lack of
information, this time it is not the case. He views the proposal as a land use issue and
conditional use permits should be viewed as an exception to the rule. He has to be
I
Page 23
MinutesEdha Citv Council/May 4,1998
comfortable that justification exists for an exception to the rule and that all efforts have been
taken to resolve the matter that would not require an exception. He does not believe this has
been done. Member Kelly spoke to the graphic presentei previously by Planner Larsen as
follows:
CHURCH COMPARISON
CHRIST
PRESBYTERIAN
GRACECHURCH
OUR LADY OF
GRACE
COLONIAL
ST. PATRICKS
BUILDINGS
130,000
(71,000)
97,000
103,OO 0
54,000*
85,000
70,000
SANCTUARX:"
SEATING' NO?
& SQUATXdYz
FOOTAGE
#951(648)
S.F 15,000
(10,O 0 0)
#l,lOO
S.F. 12,000
$1,000
S.F. 10,000
#1,000
S.F. 12,000
#1,200
541 (350) 8.1 ACRES (6.8)
7.3 ACRES
500 I 21AcREs
675 I 22AcRES
400 I 13+ACREs
S.F. 12,100 I
* = Church 0 = Existing Church
He said upon examination, he came up with opposite conclusions: 1) 7300 block of West
Shore Drive is not Woodhill and is not impacted, in his opinion. 2) St,. Patrick's Church is
half the size of the planned expansion of CPC on a lot twice the size, 3) CPC is asking to build
the largest church in Edina, substantially larger than Our Lady of Grace, including the school.
This is not minimizing an exception, it is over-building a site. CPC claims in order to seat 951
members, they need a sanctuary that is 15,000 s.f. which seems very generous and to him is
closer to 19,000 s.f. The square footage is more than Grace, Our Lady of Grace, Colonial, or St.
Patrick's need to seat in excess of 1000 members. He has real concern with. the design of the
facility and whether it maximizes the site. If square footage of the sanctuary and floor below
the sanctuary are added together, it is essentially two sanctuaries. Member Kelly says
meanino,oful compromise seems to be lost. The landscaping looks terrific and the 6% reduction
in gross building area is appreciated, but it needs further reduction. He has heard residents
say they do not object to the expansion, they object to having the largest church in Edina on
the smallest lot. CPC should look at the existing space and not give the Woodhill
neighborhood a Hobson's choice, each of which would be unpalatable. He could not support
the proposal in its present form.
Mayor Smith said since he has been in office, he has spoken of the idea of "growing small" or
how can we impact government. One resident asked how the Council felt about facilitating
church growth as a government official. Opportunities have come forth when City churches
have put their properties up for sale for multi-story office buildings. It is not the City's job to
help the church sell their property to maximize their return. He voiced objection with the
impact on the neighborhood. Mayor Smith said 1) he commiserates with the neighbor being
forced to have a corner house and therefore into a different tax structure, 2) it bothers him
that the promises to a resident about landscaping and cleaning up of church property have
Page 24
I
MinutesEdha City CounciVMay 4,1998
not been kept, but CPC is so honest they admit they have not been good landlords, and 3) he
is happy there is a process to follow for the Planning Commission, the residents and the
Council. The way the process has worked so far tonight, there are two votes for gnd two
votes against. Hd said he could vote not because he% noi happy witfi where we are'at this
point, there are things the church can do and suggested his willingness to allow them the
time needed. Mayor Smith said he sincerely believes a meaningful compromise can be
reached.
'
Peter Jarvis said reconsideration is better than a no vote. He said he needs a definition of
compromise. What he has heard is the church, has the support of the neighborhood as long
as nothing happens north of 69" Street. He doesn't understand how that is compromise,
unless the definition of compromise is that irrespective of property ownership either for a
year or 15 years a line 85 feet up the road is the end of the road for that neighborhood. To
continue this proposal for 60 days is like a year from a construction standpoint. Tonight was
the first time the neighborhood has presented a proposal. They suggested a two week
continuance and would return at that meeting with a status report. Extending action into
June would create a problem with the delivery of steel, and any construction would need to
be in winter, but this is not the Council's problem.
Mayor Smith emphasized that conversations be held with neighbors to the site regarding
headlights and landscaping. He offered that trees do not make a good compromise, the mass
is too big. He suggested the matter be continued to June 1.
Planner Larsen pointed out the 120 days to act on the proposal expires on June 12, 1998.
Attorney Gilligan noted approval would have to be given to extend action beyond June 12.
Steve Brown said a two weeks or four weeks would be fine with the Association to receive a
status report from the proponent but he does not know if the church will entertain any other
direction.
Member Kelly again reminded everyone that meaningful change is necessary.
Member Faust reminded Council she would not be attending the May 18,1998, meeting.
Mayor Smith suggested continuing the meeting to June 1 to receive a status report from
Christ Presbyterian Church.
Member Kelly made a motion to continue the consideration of the Conditional Use Permit
for Christ Presbyterian Church, 6901 Normandale Road, Building and Parking Lot
Expansion, generally located north of West 70th Street and East of Highway 100 and the
vacation of a portion of West 69th Street until June 1,1998. Member Faust seconded the
Motion.
Ayes: Faust, Hovland, Kelly, Maetzold, Smith
Motion carried.
Page 25
Minu€es/Edina City Council/Mav 4,1998 I-.
FINAL PLAT APPROVED FOR COVENTRY AT CENTENNIAL LAKES NINTH
ADDITION - LAUKKA TARVIS, INC. Affidavits of Notice were presented, approved and I ordered placed on file. -4
Planner Larsen explained the proposed plat would approve budding 10, a 13 unit building in
the Centennial Lakes Ninth Addition for Laukka Jarvis, Inc. Approval would mean that 87
units of the 98 unit development have been approved for construction. The proposed plan is
consistent with the approved overall development plan.
Member Hovland left the Council Chambers at 1:49 A.M.
Member Faust introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption:
RESOLUTION APPROVING FINAL PLAT
FOR THE COVENTRY AT CENTENNIAL LAKES 9TH ADDITION
BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Edina, Minnesota, that that
certain plat entitled, ”THE COVENTRY AT CENTENNIAL LAKES 9TH ADDITION”,
platted by Centennial Land Partnership, a Minnesota limited partnership, an undivided
91.43% interest, and John W. Hedberg, an undivided 8.57% interest, and the Housing and
Redevelopment Authority of Edina, Minnesota, public body corporate and politic under
the laws of the State of Minnesota, and presented at the regular meeting of the City
Council on May 4, 1998, be and is hereby granted final plat approval. Member Kelly
seconded the motion.
Rollcalk
Ayes: Faust, Kelly, Smith
Abstaining: Maetzold
Resolution adopted.
*LOT DIVISION APPROVED FOR TMS EQUITIES (4908-4910 MALIBU DRIVE) Member
Maetzold introduced the following resolution, seconded by Member Faust and moved its
adoption:
RESOLUTION
WHEREAS, the following described property is at present a single tract of land
Lot 1, Block 1, LANDMARK ADDITION, Hennepin County, Minnesota, and
WHEREAS, the owners have requested the subdivision of said tract into separate parcels
(herein called ”Parcels”) described as follows:
PARCEL A:
That part of Lot 1, Block 1, LANDMARK ADDITION, Hennepin County,
Minnesota, according to the recorded plat thereof lying northerly of a line which
bears North 53 degrees 38 minutes 06 seconds East, assumed bearing, from a point
on the west line of said lot distant 28.05 feet north of the southwest corner of said
lot. For purposes of this description the west lot line bears South 2 degrees 25
minutes 13 seconds East.
PARCEL B:
That part of Lot 1, Block 1, LANDMARK ADDITION, Hennepin County
Minnesota, according to the recorded plat thereof lying southerly of a line which
Page 26
Minutes/Edina City Council/Mav 4,1998
bears North 53 degrees 38 minutes 06 seconds East, assumed bearing, from a point
on the west line of said lot distant 28.05 feet,north of the southwest corner of said
lot. For purposes of this description the west tot line bears South 2 degrees 25
minutes 13 seconds East.
WHEREAS, 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 purpose of the Subdivision and Zoning Regulations as
contained in the City of Edina Code Sections 810 and 850;
NOW, THEREFORE, it is hereby resolved by the City Council of the City of Edina that the
conveyance and ownership of the separate above described Parcels as separate tracts of
land is hereby approved and the requirements and provisions of Code Sections 850 and
810 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 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, 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 4th day of May, 1998.
Motion carried on rollcall vote - five ayes.
"LOT DIVISION APPROVED 6608 AND 6612 PARKWOOD ROAD (WILLIAM AND
MARGARET TOAS) Member Maetzold introduced the following resolution, seconded by
Member Faust and moved its adoption:
RESOLUTION
WHEREAS the following described tracts of land constitute separate parcels:
PARCEL A
Lot 7, Block 1, PARKWOOD KNOLLS 2nd Addition, Hennepin County, Minnesota.
And
PARCEL B:
Lot 8, Block 1, PARKWOOD KNOLLS 2ND Addition, Hennepin County, Minnesota.
WHEREAS, the owners of the above tracts of land desire to divide said tracts into the
following described separate parcels:
PARCEL A
Lot 8, Block 1, PARKWOOD KNOLLS 2ND ADDITION, Hennepin County,
Minnesota, according to the recorded plot thereof
and
That part of Lot 7, Block 1, PARKWOOD KNOLLS 2ND ADDITION, Hennepin
County, Minnesota, according to the recorded plat thereof, lying westerly of a line
drawn from a point on the northerly line of said Lot 7, distant 11.00 feet
southeasterly from the most northerly corner of said Lot 7, thence southwesterly to
the most westerly corner of said Lot 7,
and
Page 27
MinutesEdha Citv CounciVMav 4,1998
PARCEL B:
Lot 7, Block 1, PARKWOOD KNOLLS 2ND ADDITION, Hennepin County,
Minnesota, according to the recorded plat thereof, except that part of said Lot 7,
lying westerly of a line drawn from a point on the northern line of said Lot 7,
distant 11.00 feet southeasterly from the most northerly corner of said Lot 7, thence
southwesterly to the most westerly corner of said Lot 7.
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 purpose of the Subdivision and Zoning
Regulations as contained in the City of Edina Code Section 810 and 850.
NOW, THEREFORE, 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 4th day of May, 1998.
Motion carried on rollcall vote - five ayes.
*HEARING DATE SET OF MAY 18,1998, FOR FINAL REZONING AND FINAL PLAT
APPROVAL - NAMRON COMPANY (51xx LINCOLN DRIVE) Motion made by Member
Maetzold and seconded by Member Faust setting May 18,1998, as hearing date for final
rezoning and final plat approval for Namron Company at 51XX Lincoln Drive.
Motion carried on rollcall vote - five ayes.
ORDINANCE NO 1998-4 ADOPTED - AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CODE SECTION
460 - SIGNS Planner Larsen indicated the proposed amendment to Sign Ordinance Section
360 addresses two different issues. First, the amendment establishes standards for
scoreboards within public parks, school properties and golf courses. The proposed standards
provide for integral sponsor panels only at Braemar Park, Van Valkenburg Park and
Kuhlman Field. Park Director Keprios has furnished a memo to be discussed later on the
agenda with additional information. Second, the amendment provides language addressing
the permitted locations for campaign signs. The proposed amendment was presented initially
at the April 20,1998, Council meeting and is before the Council with minor changes. Staff
recommends adoption of the amendment.
Member Maetzold made a motion to adopt Ordinance 1998-4, an Ordinance Amending
Code Section 460 - Signs with waiver of second reading as follows:
ORDINANCE NO. 1998-4
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTION 460
OF THE CITY CODE TO PROVIDE REQUIREMENTS FOR
SIGNS IN PUBLICLY OWNED PARKS AND TO
Page 28
I
;i I .I I
$1
I
MinutesEdha City Council/May 4,1998
REGULATE THE PLACEMENT OF CAMPAIGN SIGNS
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDINA ORDAINS:
Section 1. Subd. 1 of Subsection 460.05 of the C Code is amended by adding the
$ . '(" I,!, I I a,
NUMBER AREA HEIGHT
following regulations: *t . ,'
"TYPE MAXIMUM MAXIMUM MAXIMUM I
Public Park One per frontage 24 sq. .ft. 6 ft.
Identification
SCOREBOARDS:
A. Field#l One 400 sq. ft. 20 ft.
E. Van Valkenburg Park, One per field 200 sq. ft. 20 ft.
(Courtney Fields) (including
sponsor panels
Kuhlman Field and (including
Braemar Park except sponsor panels)
Field #1 at Courtney
Fields
C. All other public parks, One per field 100 sq. ft. 20 ft.
schools and golf courses
Public park scoreboard
sponsor panels and other
25% of scoreboard
area"
scoreboard advertising
Section 2. Subsection 460.03 of the City Code is amended by adding a new Subd. 24
as follows:
"Subd. 24. Scoreboard Sponsor Panels. Sponsor panels and other forms of
advertising on scoreboards are permitted only at Braemar Park, VanValkenburg Park and
Kuhlman Field. Scoreboard sponsor panels and other advertising on scoreboards shall be
integral to the scoreboard and shall be constructed of the same materials as the
scoreboard."
Section 3. Paragraph A of Subd. 3 of Subsection 460.03 of the City Code is amended
to read as follows:
"A. No sign shall be placed within any street right-of-way other than, i)
governmental signs which are official traffic regulatory signs or, ii) campaign signs placed
pursuant to Subd. 4 of this Subsection."
Section 4. Paragraph B of Subd. 3 of Subsection 460.03 of the City Code is amended
to read as follows:
"B. No freestanding sign or any portion thereof other than governmental signs shall
be placed within 20 feet of the traveled portion of any public street provided that
campaign signs placed pursuant to Subd. 4 of this Subsection may be placed to within 10
feet of the traveled portion of a public street."
m
Section 5. Subd 4 of Subsection 460.03 is amended to read as follows:
"Subd. 4. Campaign Signs. Campaign signs shall comply with the following
A. Campaign signs may be posted from August 1 in a state general election year
until 10 days following the state general election subject to the applicable
provisions of M.S. 211B.045. Such campaign signs shall conform with the
requirements: I
Page 29
3.; *
MinutesEdha Citv CounciVMay 4,1998
provisions of Subd. 3 of Subsection 460.03. No such sign shall be placed upon
the right-of-way without the consent of the abutting property owner.
B. Campaign signs posted in connectionwith elections held at times other than a
state general election are subject to the following I i)
ii)
iii)
iv)
Maximum Size - six square feet
Maximum Number - one sign for each candidate per lot frontage
Maximum Duration - 60 days prior to the election until seven days
following the election.
Location - Such campaign signs shall conform with the provisions of
Subd. 3 of Subsection 460.03. No such sign shall be placed upon the
right-of-way without the consent of the abutting property owner.”
Section 6. This ordinance is in full effect upon passage and publication.
Member Kelly seconded the motion.
Rollcall:
Ayes: Faust, Hovland, Kelly, Maetzold, Smith
Ordinance adopted.
*BID AWARDED FOR TRAFFIC ACTUATED CONTROL SYSTEM -WEST 76”H STREET
(IMP. TS-24) Motion made by Member Maetzold and seconded by Member Faust for
award of bid for traffic actuated control system at West 76th Street, Improvement No. TS-
24, to recommended low bidder, Ridgedale Electric, Inc., at $110,400.00.
Motion carried on rollcall vote - five ayes. I *BID RFiJECTED FOR IRRIGATION SYSTEM - WEST 66”H STREET BETWEEN FRANCE
AND YORK AVENUE (IMP. WM-385) Motion made by Member Maetzold and seconded
by Member Faust to reject the bid for the remaining irrigation system work at West 66th
Street between France and York Avenues (IMP. WM-385).
Motion carried on rollcall vote - five ayes.
*BID AWARDED FOR AQUATIC WEEK TREATMENT Motion made by Member
Maetzold and seconded by Member Faust for award of bid for aquatic weed treatment for
weed and algae control on 34 City lakes and ponds to recommended low bidder, Lake
Restoration, Inc., at $16,737.00.
Motion carried on rollcall vote - five ayes.
*RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING SIGNAL EASEMENT - YORK AVENUE AT EDINA
LIOUOR STORWCUB FOODS ENTRANCE Motion made by Member Maetzold,
seconded by Member Faust and moved adoption:
RESOLUTION
GRANTING SIGNAL EASEMENT
TO HENNEPIN COUNTY
YORK AVENUE
BE IT RESOLVED that the Edina City Council hereby grants a signal easement to
Hennepin County as follows:
”A permanent signal easement for signal purposes over the south ten meters (32.81
feet) of the West five meters (16.40 feet) of Lot 1, Block 1, YORKDALE SHOPPES,
according to the duly recorded plat thereof.”
I
Page 30
MinutesBdina City CounciVMav 4,1998
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Mayor and City Manager are authorized to sign the
aforementioned easement.
Adopted this 4th day of May, 1998. (,, I I. 14. b, ‘ , I; t Motion carried on rollcall vote - five ayes.
*WOODDALE PARK COMFORT STATION APPROVED Motion made by Member
Maetzold and seconded by Member Faust approving the Park Board recommendation as
follows: ”That per the neighborhood’s suggestion we try portable toilets this summer and
see how it works and we will review it at the end of the summer and stop construction of
the permanent facility at Wooddale Park.”
Motion carried on rollcall vote - five ayes.
BASEBALL SCOREBOARD ADVERTISING FOR COURTNEY BALL FIELD AT
BRAEMAR PARK APPROVED Director Keprios explained at the April 14,1998, Park Board
meeting, the Edina Baseball Association made a proposal to raise funds through the sale of
sponsor panels to replace four scoreboards at the Courtney ballfields in Braemar Park.
One concern voiced by staff at the Park Board meeting was the size of the scoreboard being
proposed for field #1 (9’4” x 36”). Currently the scoreboard on field # is 5’ x 16’. Following a
discussion, the Park Board voted to unanimously approve the large scoreboard and the
proposed advertising concept for all four scoreboards.
The Board’s recommendation is consistent with Council’s two-year trial basis - fund-raising
through advertising - policy. Each advertising proposal requires prior approval of the
Council, in accordance with City policy.
Previously in the meeting, Ordinance No. 1998-4, an Ordinance Amending Section 460 -
Signs, was adopted allowing advertising on certain scoreboards in the City.
Member Hovland made a motion approving advertising as a means of fund raising to
replace the four scoreboards at Courtney ballfields in Braemar Park, and to include the
large scoreboard on field #1. Member Kelly seconded the motion.
Ayes: Faust, Hovland, Kelly, Maetzold, Smith
Motion carried.
*TERMINATION OF TRAFFIC AGREEMENT FOR CENTENNIAL LAKES APPROVED
Motion made by Member Maetzold, seconded by Member Faust approving termination of
Traffic Agreement for Centennial Lakes in Edina and the Minnesota Center in
Bloomington.
Motion carried on rollcall vote - five ayes.
*TEAMSTERS LOCAL #320 (PATROL OFFICERS) APPROVED Motion made by Member
Maetzold, seconded by Member Faust approving Teamsters Local #320 (Patrol Officers)
Labor Agreement effective January 1,1998, through December 31,1999. I Motion carried on rollcall vote - five ayes.
Page 31
. .. .. 1
MinutesEdha Citv CounciVMay 4,1998
*PUBLIC WORKS OPEN HOUSE MAY 16,1998 (9:OO A.M. - 1:00 P.M.1 Motion made by
Member Maetzold, seconded by Member Faust acknowledging the Public Works Open
House on May 16,1998, from 9:00 A.M. - 1:OO P.M. as part of National Public Works Week
in the month of May.
Motion carried on rollcall vote - five ayes.
CLAIMS PAID Member Maetzold made a motion to approve payment of the following
claims as shown detail on the Check Register dated May 1,1998, and consisting of 31
pages: General Fund $361,489.34; Communications $4,054.13; Working Capital $55,194.08;
Art Center $16,639.66; Golf Dome Fund $209.36; Swimming Pool Fund $4,469.42; Golf
Course Fund $71,141.99; Ice Axena Fund $1,895.29; Edinborough/ Centennial Lakes
$14,803.61; Utility Fund $54,594.05; Storm Sewer Utility Fund $776.40; Liquor Dispensary
fund $163,353.13; Construction Fund $3,472.51; Park Bond Fund $133,550.95; 1-494
Commission $4,178.60; TOTAL $889,822.52. Member Hovland 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 2:05 A.M.
I 0 Cityclerk
Page 32