HomeMy WebLinkAbout19991207_jointMINUTES
OF THE JOINT MEETING OF THE
EDINA CITY COUNCIL AND
THE EDINA HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
HELD AT CITY HALL
DECEMBER 7,1999 - 7:OO P.M.
ROLLCALL
Member Johnson entered the meeting at 707 p.m.
Answering rollcall were Members Faust, Hovland, Kelly and Mayor Maetzold.
CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS APPROVED Motion made by Member Kelly and seconded by
Member Faust approving the Council Consent Agenda as presented.
Rollcalk
Ayes: Faust, Hovland, Kelly, Maetzold
Motion carried.
*MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF NOVEMBER 16,1999, APPROVED Motion made
by Member Kelly and seconded by Member Faqst approving the minutes of the November 16,
1999, Regular Council Meeting.
Motion carried on rollcall vote - four ayes.
JOINT HRA/CITY COUNCIL PUBLIC HEARING HELD RESOLUTIONS ADOPTED
AMENDING GRANDVIEW AREA REDEVELOPMENT PLAN Affidavits of Notice were
presented, approved and ordered placed on file.
Manager Hughes stated the proposed amendments to the Grandview Area Redevelopment Plan and
the Grandview Tax Increment Financing Plan are necessary to facilitate the redevelopment of
properties located south of Eden Avenue. The amendments would also provide the necessary
authority for the HRA to pursue the acquisition-of privately held properties which may be included
in the redevelopment proposed by Opus Constfuctidh and Ron Clark Construction. The amendment
to the Redevelopment Project consists of (i) the acquisition and redevelopment by the HRA or
another party of all or a portion of the Redevelopment Property not previously acquired by the HRA,
(ii) the construction by the HRA, the City or another party on the Redevelopment Property of a public
library and senior center and (iii) other public redevelopment costs incurred in connection with the
redevelopment of the Redevelopment Property.
I
The estimated proposed additional expenses of tax increment related to the acquisition and
redevelopment are as follows:
Acquisition of Property $3,100,000
Construction of library 2,860,000
Construction of senior center 2,145,000
Parking & Site Development 3,940,000
Demolition 500,000
Financing Costs 175,000
Off-site Improvements 500,000
Administration 500,000
Sub-total $13,720,000
Contingency 10 % 1,372,000
TOTAL $15,092,000
Page 1
MinutesBdina Citv Council/December 7,1999
Mr. Hughes added that as prescribed by State Law; a copy of the proposed Amendments to the
Redevelopment Plan and Tax Increment Finance Plan were provided to Hennepin County and
Independent School District 273. He noted receipt of a response from Hennepin County via a
memorandum written by Sandra L. Vargas, County Administrator to the Board of Commissioners.
The Hennepin County response supports the proposed amendment. Mr. Hughes stated that no
response had been received from School District 273.
I
Member Kelly asked if the Wanner property had been included in the Grandview Area
Redevelopment Area. Mr. Hughes using a map to show the property on the eastern side of the
proposed redevelopment area, pointed out the Wanner property and said it was included in the
proposed redevelopment area.
Member Kelly stated he remained concerned regarding construction of a new library. He wants to
make sure the City does not give greater value than it receives in return. This does not necessarily
need to be actual dollars, but it should be something of value. Mayor Maetzold noted a possibility
exists that meeting or auditorium space may be constructed that the City could use for public
meetings. Member Johnson added he believed staff understands the Council’s concern and should
be allowed to negotiate the best possible deal.
Member Faust asked if the proposed amendment is what is necessary to meet the December 31,1999,
deadline with the State of Minnesota. Mr. Hughes explained the amendment must be approved in
order for the redevelopment to take place. However, the City must have a Letter of Intent with their
developer by December 31,1999, in order to use the tax increment fund in this district as proposed.
Member Faust said she had been contacted by Vernon Terrace with a request for a presentation of the
proposed redevelopment. She asked about the timing of such a presentation and if the developer
should be requested to make the presentation. Mr. Hughes replied he believed that the developer
should make the presentation and that Tom Lund could be contacted immediately and requested to
schedule a time with the residents of Vernon Terrace.
Member Faust expressed her hope that the architecture of the redevelopment be different than
Vernon Terrace. She asked if the redevelopment would follow the normal planning process per
Edina’s Code. Mr. Hughes assured her the redevelopment would follow the same planning process
as a totally private development. He added he believed it was too early in the process to know in any
detail the proposed architecture of the redevelopment.
Member Hovland commented that the Council’s desire for the redevelopment was to see architecture
signhcant for the space involved. He suggested that as the design is developed that design standards
could be legally set forth if deemed necessary. Continuing, Member Hovland stated that perhaps
actually taking legal action would be premature. Member Faust advised that in her experience,
standards need be in place before a project begins. Mr. Hughes reminded the Council that the City
owns half of the property involved in the proposed redevelopment; and therefore the City is in a very
strong position to suggest design priorities. Mr. Hughes recommended that the Council not develop
any design standards at this time.
,
I Member Johnson voiced concern over the financing for the construction and operation of the Senior
Center. Member Kelly agreed and suggested a very specific use agreement be delineated. Mayor
Maetzold reminded that the Senior Center would be a City building. Mr. Hughes reiterated the
Senior Center would be a City facility managed by the City. Member Johnson asked if the Senior
Center would be self-supporting. Mr. Hughes responded that the City currently operates the existing
Page 2
MinutesEdina City Council/December 7,1999
Senior Citizen Center located in the Comunity Center and it is not self-supporting. He said the
operation of the new Senior Center may be reviewed and a decision made regarding whether or not
the seniors should take greater responsibility in its operation.
Member Hovland commented that he saw the entire project as somewhat fluid, meaning that many
changes may transpire over time regarding the size and design of the components. He added that he
recalled the construction of a new library was recommended by staff as the best alternative to solve
some facility expansion issues for the City.
Mayor Maetzold called for public comment. NO one spoke.
Mayor Maetzold made a motion seconded by Member Johnson to close the public hearing.
Ayes: Faust, Hovland, Johnson, Kelly, Maetzold.
Motion carried.
Member Hovland introduced the following resolution and made a motion for its approval:
RESOLUTION
APPROVING AMENDMENTS TO GRANDVIEW
REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT NO. 1, GRANDVIEW AREA
REDEVELOPMENT PLAIIJ, GRANDVIEW
TAX INCREMENT FINANCING PLAN AND
MAKING FINDINGS WITH RESPECT THERETO
BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Edina, Minnesota as follows:
1. The Commissioners of the Zt-ljousing and Redevelopment Authority in and for the
City of Edina, Minnesota (the 'BRA") and the City of Edina, Minnesota (the "City"), have
previously approved the Grandview Area Redevefopment Plan (the "Redevelopment Plan") and
Grandview Redevelopment Project No. 1 (the "Redevelopment Project") to be undertaken
pursuant thereto, and in order to finance the public redevelopment costs to be incurred by the City
and the HRA in connection with the Redevelopment Plan and Redevelopment Project, the HRA
and the City have approved Grandview Tip Increment Financing Plan (the "Financing Plan"),
which establishes a tax increment financing. &strict which is designated by the HRA as the
Grandview Tax Increment Financing District (Hennepin County No. 1202) (the "District"). On
April 7, 1997, the HRA and City approved an amendment to the Redevelopment Plan,
Redevelopment Project and Financing-Plan (the "1997 Amendment"). The HRA has approved an
amendment to the Redevelopment Project, the Redevelopment Plan and the Tax Increment
Financing Plan, as amended by the 1997 Amendment, which is entitled "Amendments to
Grandview Redevelopment Project No. 1, Grm.dyi;ew Area Redevelopment Plan and Grandview
Tax Increment Financing Plan" (the "1999 Amendment"). The 1999 Amendment authorizes the
acquisition and redevelopment by the HRA of the property in the area subject to the
Redevelopment Plan and the additional expenditures of tax increment revenues derived from the
District to pay public redevelopment costs of the acquisition and redevelopment of such property
by the HRA or another party, including costs of a public library and senior center, and to pay
administrative expenses of the HRA and City.
This Council on December 7, 1999, held a public hearing on the 1999
Amendment after notice of the public hearing was published in the official newspaper of the City
not less than ten (10) days prior to the date of the hearing. At such public hearing all persons
desiring to be heard with respect to the 1999 Amendment were given an opportunity to express
their views with respect thereto.
3. This Council has previously found that the District is a redevelopment district
within the scope of Minnesota Statutes, Section 469.174, subdivision 10 and the Amendment will
Page 3
2.
MinutesBdina City Councd/December 7,1999
not change such prior findings. The 1999 Amendment further serves the original goals and
objectives of the City and HRA in approving the Redevelopment Plan, the Redevelopment Project
and the Financing Plan and the 1997 Amendment, by redeveloping property in the City in order to
prevent or reduce blight, blighting factors and the causes of blight, and by providing needed
public facilities.
4. Pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 469.175, subdivision 4, it is hereby found
that:
I
(A) The District, is a redevelopment district, as defined in
Minnesota Statutes, Section 469.174, subdivision IO, for the reasons
set forth in previous findings by this Council, and the 1999
Amendment does not alter these previous findings.
(B) The proposed development to be undertaken in accordance
with the Redevelopment Plan, as amended by the 1999 Amendment,
in the opinion of this Council would not occur solely through private
investment within the reasonably foreseeable future and therefor the
use of tax increment financing is deemed necessary.
(C) The Financing Plan, as amended by the 1999 Amendment,
conforms to the general plan for the development of the City as a
whole.
(D) The Financing Plan, as amended by the 1999 Amendment,
will afford maximum opportunity consistent with the sound needs of
the City as a whole for the development of the area subject to
Redevelopment Plan by private enterprise.
(E) The City confirms its election of the method of tax
increment computation set forth in Minnesota Statutes, Section
469.177, subdivision 3, clause (a) with respect to the District.
Passed by the Council this 7th day of December, 1999.
Attest: -
Adopted this 7th day of December, 1999. Member Kelly seconded the motion.
Debra A. Manken 0 Dennis F. Maetzold
Rollcall
Ayes: Faust, Hovland, Johnson, Kelly, Maetzold
Motion carried.
RESOLUTION ADOPTED UPHOLDING ZONING BOARD OF APPEAL'S DENIAL OF
VARIANCE REQUEST, 7133 VALLEY VIEW ROAD Affidavits of Notice were presented, approved
and ordered placed on file. .
Assistant Planner Aaker stated that the Zoning Board of Appeals, on September 16,1999, heard and
tabled Lyubov and Eduard Yamnik's variance request from the frontyard setback requirements to
allow them to locate a garage in their frontyard. Ms. Aaker explained that subject property is
characterized by steep slopes and is heavily wooded. Extensive use of retaining walls were necessary
to develop the property. The Yamnik's desire to construct an in-ground garage fronting Valley View
Road. The proposed garage would cut through the lower retaining wall beneath the existing
driveway. Due to the existing vegetation it is difficult to see the retaining wall during the summer
months.
The existing house provides a 37-foot setback. The garage door opening would be flush with an
existing retaining wall and would be the only visible part of the garage. The required setback for any
Page 4
MinutesEdina City Council/December 7,1999
new structure on the lot would be 47 feet. The proposed garage would provide a 10-foot setback
requiring a 37-foot variance. The current wooded condition of the lot is typical of the Indian Hills
area. Ms. Aaker reported that staff does not support the variance request because development of a
garage would sigruficantly alter the wooded condition to the detriment of the neighborhood. Since
the property meets code with respect to garage stalls no hardship is present.
On November 18,1999, the homeowners returned to the Zoning Board with no change in their plan.
The Zoning Board denied the requested variance. Ms. Aaker added that within the neighborhood the
steep driveway is not unique.
Proponents
Lyubov and Eduard Yamnik, 7133 Valley View Road, presented their request for a variance. Mrs.
Yamnik explained that they were not seeking the variance to allow additional garage space, but
because they feel their driveway and access are too dangerous. Since the existing retaining wall is
deteriorated and needs repair, the Yamnik felt this was the opportune time to build a garage at the
lower level. Mr. Yamnik showed a home video depicting their home, driveway, the state of the
existing retaining walls, the current access onto Valley View and the proposed location of the new
garage and driveway accessing Valley View.
Council Discussion/ Action
Member Faust said she noticed it looked like there would be room to add to the existing garage on
the north side. She stated she would possibly be willing to grant some relief for an addition to the
existing garage, but not for the requested 37 foot frontyard variance. Member Faust said the
requested variance is too large and that other homes in the neighborhood have even steeper
driveways. For this reason she does not believe an undue hardship exists so there would be no
reason to grant any kind of variance.
Member Kelly voiced his agreement with Member Faust:
Member Hovland questioned whether any option existed where the existing driveway grade could
be reduced. He thought he could support a variance if a modification to the existing driveway and
garage were sought. Member Hovland also stated he did not believe the requested variance
represented an undue hardship, therefore he would not support the variance.
Mayor Maetzold suggested that the Yamniks investigate other options, such as heating coils installed
under the surface of the driveway, or some other options to ameliorate their problem with winter
conditions. He added he also would not support the requested variance.
Member Johnson made a motion, seconded by Member Kelly to close the hearing.
Ayes: Faust, Hovland, Johnson, Kelly, Maetzold
Motion carried.
Member Faust introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption:
RESOLUTION
WHEREAS, the Edina Zoning Board of Appeals on the 17th of October, 1999, did review and
unanimously deny the request for a variance from setback to allow a garage to encroach into the
frontyard setback at 7133 Valley View Road; and
WHEREAS, the property owners Lyubov and Eduard Yamnik did appeal the aforementioned
variance denial within the prescribed time to the Edina City Council; and
I
Page 5
Minutes/Edina City CounciVDecember 7,1999
WHEREAS, the Edina City Council held a public hearing where the appellants were allowed to
state their request, public testimony was taken.
NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that the Edina City Council upholds the Zoning Board of
Appeals’ denial of the requested variance to allow the location of garage within the frontyard
setback at 7133 Valley View Road.
Adopted this 7th day of December, 1999. Member Hovlahd seconded the motion.
I
Rollcall;
Ayes: Faust, Hovland, Johnson, Kelly, Maetzold
Resolution approved.
*LOT DIVISION AT 5300 FRANCE AVENUE SOUTH APPROVED Motion made by Member
Kelly and seconded by Member Faust introducing the following resolution and moving its
approval:
RESOLUTION
WHEREAS, the following described properties are at present single tracts of land
PARCEL 1: Lots 1 and 2, Block 1, SOUTH HARRIET PARK, 2ND ADDITION, according
to the plat thereof on file and of record in the office of the County Recorder, in and for
Hennepin County, Minnesota, and
Lot 3, Block 1, SOUTH HARRIET PARK, 2ND ADDITION, according to the plat thereof on file
and of record in the office of the County Recorder, in and for Hennepin County, Minnesota,
and
I Lots 4 and 6, Block 1, SOUTH HARRIET PARK, 2ND ADDITION, according to the plat thereof
on file and of record in the office of the County Recorder, in and for Hennepin County,
Minnesota, and
Lot 5, Block 1, SOUTH HARRIET PARK, 2ND ADDITION, according to the plat thereof on file
and of record in the office of the County Recorder, in and for Hennepin County, Minnesota,
and
Lot 7, Block I, SOUTH HARRIET PARK, 2ND ADDITION, according to the plat thereof on file
and of record in the office of the County Recorder, in and for Hennepin County, Minnesota,
and
Lots, 8, 10, 11,12,13,14,15,16 and 17, and Lot 9, except the East 150.00 feet thereof, and the
Easterly 45.00 feet of Lots 19,20, and 21; and that part of Lots 22, 23,24,25,26,27,28,30,31,32,
and 33, lying East of the following described line: Commencing at a point on the South line of
said Lot 24 a distance of 63.00 feet West of the Southeast corner thereof; thence North to a point
on the North line of said Lot 28 a distance of 84.00 feet West of the Northeast corner thereof;
thence continuing North along the last described line extended to its intersection with the
North line of said Lot 33, said point of intersection being the actual point of beginning of the
line being described; thence South along the last described line extended South to its
intersection with the South line of said Lot 22 and there terminating and that part of Lot 29,
described as follows: Beginning at the Southeast corner of said Lot 29; thence West along the
South line of said Lot 29 a distance of 84.0 feet; thence North to a point on the North line of
said Lot 29 which is 81.7 feet West of the Northeast corner of said Lot 29; thence East along the
North line thereof a distance of 81.7 feet to the Northeast corner of said Lot 29; thence South
along the East line of said Lot 29 to the Southeast corner of said Lot 29 and the point of
beginning all in Block 1, South Harriet Park 2nd Addition, according to the plat thereof on file
I
Page 6
MinutesEdha City CounciVDecember 7,1999
and of record in the office of the County Recorder, in and for Hennepin County, Minnesota, - and ,1
Except the easterly 150.00 feet of Lot 10, Block 1, SOUTH HARRIET PARK 2ND ADDITION,
according to the plat thereof on file and of record in the office of the County Recorder in and
for Hennepin County, Minnesota, and
That part of Lot 18, Block 1, SOUTH HARRIET PARK 2ND ADDITION, according to the
recorded plat thereof, Hennepin County, Minnesota, lying Westerly and Southerly of a line
described as beginning at the Southeast corner of the West 33.50 feet of said Lot 18; thence
North 0 degrees 00 minutes 29 seconds East, a assumed bearing, along the east line of said
West 33.50 feet of Lot 18 a distance of 137.60 feet; thence Westerly a distance of 26.45 feet along
a non-tangential curve, concave to the North, having a radius of 38.42 feet, a central angle of 39
degrees 26 minutes 36 seconds and a chord bearing of North 79 degrees 32 minutes 39 seconds
west to the East line of the West 8.00 feet of said Lot 18; thence North 0 degrees 00 minutes 29
seconds East along said East line of the West 8.00 feet of Lot 18 to the north line of said Lot 18
and said line there terminating.
PARCEL 2: The north 100 feet of Lot 18, Block 1, SOUTH HARRIET PARK 2ND ADDITION
according to the plat thereof on file and of record in the office of the County Recorder, in and
for Hennepin County, Minnesota.
PARCEL 3 The west 100 feet of the East 244 feet of the South 150 feet and the West 19 feet of
the South 50 feet of the East 144 feet, Lot 18, Block 1, SOUTH HARRIET PARK 2ND
ADDITION according to the plat and of record in the office of the County Recorder, Hennepin
County, Minnesota.
WHEREAS, the owners have requested the subqivision of said tracts into separate parcels
(herein called "Parcels") described as follows:
PARCEL 1: Lots 1 and 2, Block 1, SOUTH HARRIET PARK, 2ND ADDITION, according
to the plat thereof on file and of record in the office of the County Recorder, in and for
Hennepin County, Minnesota, and
Lot 3, Block 1, SOUTH HARRIET PARK, %J ADDITION, according to the plat thereof on file
and of record in the office of the County Recorder, in and for Hennepin County, Minnesota,
and
Lots 4 and 6, Block 1, SOUTH HARRIET PARK, 2NJJ ADDITION, according to the plat thereof
on file and of record in the office of the County Recorder, in and for Hennepin County,
Minnesota, and
Lot 5, Block 1, SOUTH HARRIET PARK, 2ND ADDITION, according to the plat thereof on file
and of record in the office of the Cou+y Recorder, in and for Hennepin County, Minnesota,
and
Lot 7, Block 1, SOUTH HARRIET PARK, 2ND ADDITION, according to the plat thereof on file
and of record in the office of the County Recorder, in and for Hennepin County, Minnesota,
and
*.
Page 7
MinutesEdha Citv Council/December 7,1999
Lots, 8,10,11,12,13,14,15,16 and 17, and Lot 9, except the East 150.00 feet thereof, and the
Easterly 45.00 feet of Lots 19,20, and 21; and that part of Lots 22, 23,24,25,26,27,28,30,31,32,
and 33, lying East of the following described line: Commencing at a point on the South line of
said Lot 24 a distance of 63.00 feet West of the Southeast comer thereof; thence North to a point
on the North line of said Lot 28 a distance of 84.00 feet West of the Northeast comer thereof;
thence continuing North along the last described line extended to its intersection with the
North line of said Lot 33, said point of intersection being the actual point of beginning of the
line being described; thence South along the last described line extended South to its
intersection with the South line of said Lot 22 and.there terminating; and that part of Lot 29,
described as follows: Beginning at the Southeast corner of said Lot 29; thence West along the
South line of said Lot 29 a distance of 84.0 feet; thence North to a point on the North line of
said Lot 29 which is 81.7 feet West of the Northeast comer of said Lot 29; thence East along the
North line thereof a distance of 81.7 feet to the Northeast comer of said Lot 29; thence South
along the East line of said Lot 29 to the Southeast comer of said Lot 29 and the point of
beginning; all in Block 1, South Harriet Park 2nd Addition, according to the plat thereof on file
and of record in the office of the County Recorder, in and for Hennepin County, Minnesota,
and
Except the easterly 150.00 feet of Lot IO, Block 1, SOUTH HARRIET PARK 2m ADDITION,
according to the plat thereof on file and of record in the office of the County Recorder in and
for Hennepin County, Minnesota, and
That part of Lot 18, Block 1, SOUTH HARRIET PARK 2ND ADDITION, according to the
recorded plat thereof, Hennepin County, Minnesota, lying Westerly and Southerly of a line
described as beginning at the Southeast corner of the West 33.50 feet of said Lot 18; thence
North 0 degrees 00 minutes 29 seconds East, a assumed bearing, along the east line of said
West 33.50 feet of Lot 18 a distance of 137.60 feet; thence Westerly a distance of 26.45 feet along
a non-tangential curve, concave to the North, having a radius of 38.42 feet, a central angle of 39
degrees 26 minutes 36 seconds and a chord bearing of North 79 degrees 32 minutes 39 seconds
west to the East line of the West 8.00 feet of said Lot 18; thence North 0 degrees 00 minutes 29
seconds East along said East line of the West 8.00 feet of Lot 18 to the north line of said Lot 18
and said line there terminating, and
The West 8.00 feet of that part of Lot 18, Block 1, SOUTH HARRIET PARK 2m ADDITION
according to the plat on file and of record in the office of the County Recorder, Hennepin
County, Minnesota, lying northerly of the South 150.00 feet of said Lot 18, and except for:
That part of the West 49.50 feet of the South 150.00 feet of Lot 18, Block 1, SOUTH HARRIET
PARK 2m ADDITION, on file and of record in the office of the County Recorder, Hennepin
County, Minnesota, lying Westerly and Southerly of a line described as beginning at the
Southeast comer of the West 33.50 feet of said Lot 18; thence North 0 degrees 00 minutes 29
seconds East, assumed bearing, along the East line of said West 33.50 feet of said Lot 18 a
distance of 137.60 feet; thence Westerly a distance of 26.45 feet along a non-tangential curve,
concave to the north, having a radius of 38.42 feet, a central angle of 39 degrees 26 minutes 36
seconds and a chord bearing of North 79 degrees 32 minutes 39 seconds West to the East line of
the west 8.00 feet of said Lot 18; thence North 0 degrees 00 minutes 29 seconds East along said
East line of the West 8.00 feet of Lot 18 to the North line of said South 150.00 feet of Lot 18 and
said line there terminating.
Page 8
MinutesEdina Citv CounciVDecember 7,1999
PARCEL 2 The north 100 feet, except forathe West 8 feet of that part of Lot 18, Block 1, SOUTH
HARRIET PARK 2ND ADDITION according to the plat thereof on file and of record in the
office of the County Recorder, in and for Hennepin County, Minnesota lying northerly of the
South 150 feet of said Lot 18.
PARCEL 3: The west 100 feet of the East 244 feet of the South 150 feet and the West 19 feet of
the South 50 feet of the East 144 feet, Lot 18, Block 1, SOUTH HARRIET PARK 2ND
ADDITION according to the plat and of record in the office of the County Recorder, Hennepin
County, Minnesota, and
That part of the West 49.50 feet of the South 150.00 feet of Lot 18, Block 1, SOUTH HARRIET
PARK 2ND ADDITION, on file and of record in the office of the County Recorder, Hennepin
County, Minnesota, lying Westerly and Southerb of a line described as beginning at the
Southeast corner of the West 33.50 feet of said Lot 18; thence North 0 degrees 00 minutes 29
seconds East, assumed bearing, along the East line of said West 33.50 feet of said Lot 18 a
distance of 137.60 feet; thence Westerly a distance of 26.45 feet along a non-tangential curve,
concave to the north, having a radius of 38.42 feet, a central angle of 39 degrees 26 minutes 36
seconds and a chord bearing of North 79 degrees 32 minutes 39 seconds West to the East line of
the west 8.00 feet of said Lot 18; thence North 0 degrees 00 minutes 29 seconds East along said
East line of the West 8.00 feet of Lot 18 to the North line of said South 150.00 feet of Lot 18 and
said line there terminating.
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 second 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 Sections 810 and 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, hQwever, 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 7th day of December, 1999.
Motion carried on rollcall vote - four ayes.
*HEARING DATE OF DECEMBER 21,1999, SET FOR PLANNING MATTER Motion made by
Member Kelly and seconded by Member Faust setting December 21, 1999, as hearing date for
Preliminary Rezoning and Amendment to the Comprehensive Plan Map-for Haugland Company,
Tracts A and B, Registered Land Survey No 1378 Hennepin County, Minnesota. Generally located
east of Highway 169, west of Lincoln Driye and south of Londonderry Drive. Correspondence was
received from Mr. & Mrs. Larry Mosow, 6877 Langford Drive, voicing their displeasure with the
proposed rezoning by the Haugland Company.
Motion carried on rollcall vote - four ayes. I
Minutes/Edina City Council/December 7,1999
*BID AWARDED FOR GMC */2 TON SIERRA PICK-UP TRUCK Motion made by Member Kelly
and seconded by Member Faust for award of bid for one GMC Yz ton Sierra pick-up truck to
recommended low bidder, Falls Automotive, Inc., under State Bid Contract #a1925 at $20,247.00. I Motion carried on rollcall vote - four ayes.
+BID AWARDED FOR 20 ELECTRIC GOLF CARS Motion made by Member Kelly and seconded
by Member Faust for award of bid for 20 electric golf cars to recommended low bidder, E-Z Go
Textron, at $47,900.00.
Motion carried on rollcall vote - four ayes.
FREEWAY NOISE MITIGATION REPORT HEARDE’ETITION RECEIVED Engineer Hoff~nan
explained that ten years ago a study to mitigate freeway noise at Highway 100 and 50th Street North
was undertaken. The effort did not go far. In 1997, the State put out a report recognizing 800 plus
sites needing noise mitigation. The State had funding for 54 of the sites. One of the ”funded sites”
was in Edina, on Highway 100 north of 44th Street and east of Highway 100 towards St. Louis Park. In
1998, when the list was completed, residents abutting the Crosstown Highway 62 came forward and
voiced their concerns. At that time, the Council directed staff to work with the residents. The result is
the Noise Mitigation Report. Mr. Hoffman said the purpose of the study was to find ways to utilize to
engage other agencies in developing policies, and solicit funding for noise mitigation improvements.
Ten strategies were outlined in the report. Staff has mailed 860 letters to residents as well as executive
summaries of the report recently. Neighborhood meetings have been held and were well-attended.
Engineer Hoffman continued with excerpts from the Executive Summary of the Noise Mitigation
Study:
Work with &/DOT on a cost-sharing basis to provide privacy fencing and landscaping
as part of the TH 100 and TH 62 major maintenance projects that are currently scheduled.
-/DOT has indicated a willingness to participate in 50 percent of the cost of lightweight
privacy fencing in these projects where the replacement of chain link fences is scheduled
and where existing chain link fence is outside the dear zone.
Work aggressiveliwith the Legislature to establish a state funding source for retrofit noise
mitigation, privacy fencing and/or landscaping.
Determine an appropriate level of local funding for fencing and landscaping and leverage
those funds to gain higher levels of state and federal participation in projects.
Identify demonstration projects that might fit the criteria for TEA-21 Enhancement,
Livable Communities and Local Road Research Board funding and apply for grants.
These funds have not yet been successfully used for noise abatement projects.
Establish policies and procedures that ensure excess fill materials from City projects are
made available for use as noise berms wherever space is available. In addition, work with
-/DOT, Hennepin County and private contractors to obtain excess fill for this purpose.
Work with private property owners to identdy locations where excess fill could be placed
on private property for noise mitigation purposes.
Participate in the &/DOT Community Roadside Landscaping Partnership Program to
the greatest extent possible, providing supplemental funds so that more mature planting
materials can be used.
Establish policies, procedures and design standards for the provision of fencing and
landscaping in all residential areas along freeways.
Establish a local cost-sharing policy for fencing and landscaping. The following is
suggested, but does not reflect current state or federal statutes
- 50 percent state/federal funding
Page 10
MinutesBdina Citv CounciVDecernber 7,1999
- 25 percent (general city funds)
- 25 percent neighborhood (special assessments, private funds, in-kind contributions)
Involve neighborhoods in the final design' of fencing and noise walls and in the selection
of landscaping materials.
Mr. Hoffman noted that a petition had been received from neighbors in the Cascade, Laura Lane and
North Avenue area recommending a 60/30/10 split on who will pay for the mitigation.
Council Comment
Mayor Maetzold inquired to what extent levy limits impact on the City's ability to fund something
like this. Manager Hughes answered taxes could be raised enough to maintain a level of service.
Other capital improvements or maintenance items could not be funded, at this point. Mayor
Maetzold commented that a funding source would need to be found.
Member Kelly asked for clarification on levy limits for the residents in attendance. Mr. Hughes said
under current State Law, the City is limited in the amount the tax levy can be increased. In 2000, it is a
function of what it levied in 1999. Under State Law this year the tax levy was raised about 3%.
Member Kelly reiterated that the State has ham-strung us on Capital Improvement Projects. We
cannot increase taxes in an amount that is greater than the levy limit. If the project is to be funded, an
alternative means of funding must be secured. Most likely the funds would be secured from the
benefited property owners. Mr. Hoffman pointed out some residents had expressed their willingness
to pay a portion of the cost of the noise mitigation. Member Kelly added one concern is what to do
with cut-through traffic and speeding in the City. Their have been extensive talks about the
installation of sidewalks, particularly around schools but due to levy limits the funds to do this are
not available.
State Representative Erhardt commented that levy limits are in place to prevent local units of
government from levying back what the State has done to hold property taxes down. During the past
several years, the State has put in millions of dollars for property tax relief. There is a formula that
each local government uses which includes a growth factor. He reminded the Council that the
legislature has allowed cities to go to the residents to raise additional funds by way of a referendum.
I
Member Hovland added when local government aid is given to cities by the State, the State requires
accountability. Although Edina does not receive local government aid, the issue was raised whether
it would be a viable proposition to eliminate levy limits to cities who receive no local government aid
from the State. Rep. Erhardt commented the idea could be entertained in the.future. Member
Hovland stated if that concept has viability it may be worth at least thinking about it in a tax policy
possibility with the State. He said there is a boat-load of money in St. Paul and further inquired
whether the retrofit noise mitigation legislation could be brought up again as this is not only a
problem in Edina. He believes the Edina City Council would be willing to develop a comprehensive
plan including noise mitigation. He asked for Rep. Erhardt's help. Rep. Erhardt asked for a copy of
the Noise Mitigation Study and said he would do what he could to bring this issue back before the
legislature. Assistant Manager Smith gave Rep. Erhardt
Public Comment
Richard Holetz, 4905 Sunnyside Road, stated he has lived in his home since 1942. Mr. Holetz said that
Highway 100 is a State road, therefore the State is in violation of state and federal statutes. Mr. Holetz
urged that Member Hovland's comments about the nature of the noise issue be put into some formal
action and taken to the State for a response. Member Hovland noted that waiting until February is
much too long and the process should be in motion well before the session begins.
Page 11
Minutes/Edina Citv CounciVDecember 7,1999
Member Johnson asked from an intergovernmental standpoint, shouldn't similarly affected cities be
included in the comprehensive report. He asked who has funded the existing sound barriers in place
now. Member Hovland stated he believes they are partially funded by federal and local dollars.
Engineer Hoffman stated if the roadway is a new construction, sound walls are a requirement.
Member Hovland offered to poll the 1-494 Corridor Commission members to discern whether they
have noise mitigation issues in their City. He stated a joint powers agreement between the concerned
cities may be an appropriate action.
Bill Freeman, 4600 Cascade Lane, said he was a 30 year resident. Mi. Freeman noted that he lived on
Cascade Lane when Highway 100 was built. He asked if the Council had considered the use of G.O.
Improvement bonds as a method of financing the needed noise mitigation improvements.
Mike Croke, 4508 Laura Avenue, stated that if a twelve foot wall is built he would loose his view. Mr.
Croke said that the committee members in his area who circulated a petition for a potential noise
mitigation improvement proposed that his property which is abutting the highway pay $7,000.00
towards the cost of the improvement. Mi. Croke said he does not want to pay that high a level for
any improvement.
Steve Snyder, 4601 Sunnyside Road, explained that he lived east of Highway 100 and north of the
Mill Pond. Mr. Snyder said the noise level is unacceptable. He added that in his neighborhood
property owners even further from the freeway than he, would probably support contributing to a
noise mitigation improvement.
Karen Lydon, 5005 West 56th Street, thanked the City for the informational letter. Ms. Lydon asked if
a project is constructed would she be specially assessed for the improvement. Mr. Hoffman explained
that the noise mitigation study was directed by the Council approximately a year ago. He said he has
been working with ad hoc committees from various sections of Edina affected by freeway noise. Ms.
Lydon stated she does not have a problem with noise and does not want to participate in the cost of
any improvement. She urged the Council to remember that many persons who were not in
attendance may also not want any mitigation on their behalf.
I
.
Ed Kaisler, 6216 Rolf Avenue, thanked the committee for their work. He said that something is
necessary and asked if an improvement reducing th6 noise level by 5-6 dB were built what sound
level would that be correlated to. Mr. Kaisler added that he did not believe a sound barrier will
resolve the problem. He related that his home has been on the market for six weeks and that 80% of
the potential buyers brought to his home by realtors do not make it all the way to the door because of
the noise. Mr. Kaisler noted that he believes within five years the State will be improving Highway 62
to three lanes in each direction and he cautioned the Cound not to jump into anydung since the State
would most likely build sound walls when they improve the highway.
John Palmer, 5101 West 62nd Street, said he was an eleven year resident of the area of Highways 62
and 100. He has seen a significant increase in volume and intensity of traffic. Mr. Palmer believed the
increase has affected the property value of his home. He questioned whether there was a legal
precedent to proceed on, since the State was not meeting their own noise statutes. Member Kelly said
the program that is developed be presented to the State to make our case for State funds must say
there is a non-compliance issue which makes the case even more compelling. Mr. Hoffman explained
the State and the Legislature are well-aware of the non-compliance issue. Member Johnson inquired
whether there was a bi-partisan way to raise noise mitigation to a higher priority. Rep. Erhardt said
he did not know, but would pursue the issue.
Page 12
MintitesBdina <..“L . 1 City Council/December 7,1999
Tim Crain, 4952 Poppy Lane, complimented-the Engineering Department for crafting a study that
met the needs of the citizens. Mr. Crain urged the Council to move forward as per the
recommendations of the study.
Sue Seckinger, 4912 Sunnyside Road, stated she was a member of the ad hoc committee that had
suggested the proposals depicted in the study as 100- 0, N, P, Q, R, and S. Ms. Seckinger said she
would not like to see neighborhoods pitted against one another and suggested that if portions of the
suggested improvements are built, they be done in pairs to reduce the possibility of ”noise bounce’’
across the highways. She asked if there would be a possibility of capturing some type of ”gas tax
rebate” to finance noise mitigation improvements. Mayor Maetzold said that is an idea that should be
pursued. Engineer Hoffman said the problem the State looks at is the cost benefit to build something
like this. Member Faust asked how St. Louis Park got 100-R approved. Mr. Hoffman answered that
100-R is one of the 54 sections selected and has been deemed cost effective. Ms. Seckinger submitted
a copy of the information provided to neighbors prior to the meeting December 7,1999.
Dave Price, 4370 Vernon Avenue, said while he favored the proposal, the City should be careful what
they ask for from the State.
Morgan Brown, 5033 Normandale Court, urged the Council to keep the process moving forward. He
added that he is sympathetic to those residents who do not want to pay for any improvement, but
residents also need to realize that it is very dely the State would pay 100% of the cost of
improvements. He suggested that Rep. Erhardt and the City Council request the State not build the
proposed ”trolley” and instead earmark those dollars for noise mitigation.
Steve MaKredes, 4916 West Sunnyslope Road, asked if &e State has a plan to overlay Highway 100 or
the 62 Crosstown with asphalt and what ef€cyt that overlay would have on noise mitigation. Mr.
Hoffman said he was not aware of any plan to overlay the aforementioned roadways. Mr. MaKredes
said it seems like a lot of effort being expended on solving only half a problem.
I
Council Discussion
Mayor Maetzold noted closure would not be reached tonight but that the preceding comments and
discussion is a part of the total process.
Manager Hughes indicated this is not an issue that will be solved overnight. It is staff’s
recommendation to accept the report and have the issue back on the agenda in a couple of months. In
the meantime, he suggested staff craft some ideas to be passed on to our legislators prior to February
1 or prior to the beginning date of the next legi&iti?e seesion.
Member Hovland asked for resolution of whether noise mitigation should be part of the overall
comprehensive plan. He stated he liked the idea of a transportation utility being created because we
are all in this together. He explained that he too lives close to the freeway. Member Hovland
reminded the Council that during the sewer backup problem time, all the residents paid for that
cleanup. He asked that funding options be included in the staff report.
*,
Member Faust thanked the neighbors for putting forth their effort and it proves how individuals can
work together and make a difference. Mayor Maetzold echoed Member Faust’s gratitude.
No Council action was taken.
I
Page 13
Minutes/Edina CiW Council/December 7,1999
*RESOLUTION ADOPTED AUTHORIZING TRANSFER OF INDIVIDUAL SEWAGE
TREATMENT SYSTEM REGULATION TO HENNEPIN COUNTY Motion made by Member
Kelly and seconded by Member Faust introducing the following resolution and moving its
approval.
RESOLUTION
TRANSFERRING MINNESOTA
AGENCY RULES 7080 TO HENNEPIN COUNTY
WHEREAS the City of Edina has been enforcing the individual sewage treatment system Rules as
set for in the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency Rules Chapter 7080 and,
WHEREAS, Hennepin County has enacted Hennepin County Ordinance No. 19, adopting
Minnesota Rules Chapter 7080, and
WHEREAS, Hennepin County is prepared to enforce these Rules in Edina and,
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Edina finds that Hennepin County Ordinance No. 19
provides for the same protection of public health and welfare.
NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Edina hereby transfers
the responsibility of enforcing Minnesota Agency Rules 7080 to Hennepin County and,
BS IT FURTHER RESOLVED that David A. Velde be designated as the agent to act on behalf of
&e Edina City Council in transferring records held by the City of Edina to Hennepin County.
D&ed this 7th day of December, 1999.
I
Attest: Q- Q-b
Debra A. Mangen 0 c Dennis F. Maetzold
Motion carried on rollcall vote - four ayes.
‘FRESOLUTION ADOPTED AMENDING DELEGATION AGREEMENT WITH MINNESOTA
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH Motion made by Member Kelly and seconded by Member Faust
introducing the following resolution and moving its approval:
RESOLUTION
AMENDING DELEGATION AGREEMENT
WITH MINNESOTA DEPART~NT OF HEALTH
WHEREAS, the City of Edina has a Delegation Agreement with the Minnesota Department of
Health to perform Food, Beverage and Lodging establishment inspections, and
WHEREAS, the City of Edina has adopted the Minnesota Food Code, Minnesota Rules 4626.0010
to 4626.1870, and
WHEREAS, the Minnesota Food Code, Rules 4626.0010 to 4626.1870 will become effective January
1,2000.
NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Edina hereby agrees to
amend the Delegation Agreement between the Minnesota Department of Health and the City of
Edina dated August 1, 1987, by referencing Minnesota Rules 4626.0010 to 4626.1870 in this
amendment and to enforce same Rules within the City of Edina.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Mayor and City Manager are hereby authorized and
directed to execute any necessary amendment to the August 1,1987, Delegation Agreement.
Dated this 7th day of December, 1999.
Attest.
Dennis F. Maetzold
Motion carried on rollcall vote - four ayes.
Page 14
Minutes/Edina Citv CounciVDecember 7,1999
*YEAR 2000 COUNCIL MEETING DATES AND HOLIDAYS APPROVED Motion made by
Member Kelly and seconded by Member Faust approving the year 2000 Council meeting dates and
holiday schedule.
Motion carried on rollcall vote -four ayes.
*RESOLUTION ADOPTED APPROVING AGREEMENT FOR PARTICIPATION IN FEDERAL
AID PRESERVATION PROGRAM FOR RED SIGNAL BULB REPLACEMENTS AND SIGNAL
PAINTING Motion made by Member Kelly and seconded by Member Faust approving the
following resolution:
RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING EXECUTION AND
DELIVERY OF AGREEMENT FOR PARTICIPATION IN
FEDERAL AID PRESERVATION PROGRAM
WITH HENNEPIN COUNTY
BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Edina, Minnesota, (the "City") as follows:
Section 1. Recitals. Hennepin County [the "County") has prepared an agreement between
the City and County to participate in the LED Replacement and Signal Painting project, City of
Edina Improvement No. TS-29. The County will administer and inspect the performance of the
contracts.
Section 2. Approvals. The form of the Agreement is hereby approved, and the Mayor and
City Manager are authorized to enter into the Agreement on behalf of the City in substantially the
form presented to the City with such changes or modifications thereto as do not change the
substance of the Agreement and are approved by the Mayor and City Manager, such approval to
be conclusively presumed by the execution and delivery of the Agreement by the Mayor and City
Manager.
Dated this 7th day of December, 1999. I
Attest: A-
Dennis F. Maetzold
Motion carried on rollcall vote - four ayes.
*2000 PUBLIC HEALTH NURSING SERVICE CONkRACT AWARDED Motion made by Member
Kelly and seconded by Member Faust awarding the contract for Public Health Nursing Services to
the Bloomington Division of Public Health for $162,005.00 for 2000.
Motion carried on rollcall vote - four ayes.
*RESOLUTION ADOPTED APPROVING PUBLIC AUCTION OF TAX FORFEIT PROPERTY
Motion made by Member Kelly and seconded by Member Faust approving the following
resolution:
RESOLUTION
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Edina has received from the County of
Hennepin a list of lands in said municipality which became the property of the State of Minnesota
for non-payment of property taxes, which said list was dated October 13,1999, Conservatioflon-
Conservation Classification List 1106-C/NC.
WHEREAS, the parcels in said list identified as PIN No. 18-028-24-42-0030 (5007 Bruce
Avenue) and as PIN NO. 29-028-24-22-0026 (Outlot 1, Evans Addition), have heretofore been
classified by the Board of County Commissioners of Hennepin County, Minnesota, as non-
conservation land the sale thereof and has heretofore been authorized by said Board of County
Commissioners; and
I
Page 15
MinutesEdha Citv CounciVDecember 7,1999
WHEREAS, it has been determined by the Edina City Council that there is one existing
special assessment against the parcel identified as PIN No. 18-028-24-42-0030, (5007 Bruce Avenue)
in the amount of $320.65 for delinquent utility bills on said parcel, and the parcel identified as
PIN NO. 29-028-24-22-0026, (Outlot 1, Evans Addition), has no pending or levied special
assessments against it; and
WHEREAS, it has been determined by the Edina City Council that the parcel identified as
PIN No. 18-028-24-42-0030, (5007 Bruce Avenue) need not be withheld from sale pursuant to M.S.
85.012, M.S. 92.461; M.S. 282.01, Subd. 8; M.S. 282.018, Subd. I, or M.S. 282.018, Subd. 2; and
WHEREAS, it is the intent of the City of Edina to acquire the tax forfeited property parcel
identified as PIN No. 29-028-24-22-0026, Outlot 1, Evans Addition for use as public right-of-way.
NOW, THEREFORE, be it resolved by the Edina City Council that the said classifications
are hereby approved.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED by the Edina City Council as follows:
1. that, acting pursuant to Minnesota Statutes 282.01, Subd. 7a, it has determined that said
parcel 018-028-42-0030 (5007 Bruce Avenue) shall be offered for public sale according to
statute.
2. that that the City Clerk be authorized and directed to file, "Application of
Governmental Subdivision for Conveyance of Tax Forfeited Lands,'' for the following
described property contained in Hennepin County Conservation/Non-Conservation
Classification List 1106 NNC, said property to be used by the City as hereafter set
forth: Outlot 1, Evan Addition (PIN No. 29-028-24-22-0026), Public Right-of-way.
I
Adopted this 7th day of December, 1999.
Motion carried on rollcall vote - four ayes. I *LETTER OF INTENT APPROVED WITH MINNEHAHA WATERSHED DISTRICT BOARD,
PAMELA PARK PROTECT Motion made by Member Kelly and seconded by Member Faust
approving a Letter of Intent with the Minnehaha Watershed District Board of Directors for the
Pamela Park Project.
Motion carried on rollcall vote - four ayes.
*RESOLUTION ADOPTED ELECTING TO CONTINUE PARTICIPATION IN THE LOCAL
CALENDAR YEAR 2000 Motion made by Member Kelly and seconded by Member Faust
introducing the following resolution and moving its approval:
RESOLUTION ELECTING TO CONTINUE
PARTICIPATING IN THE LOCAL HOUSING INCENTIVES
ACCOUNT PROGRAM UNDER THE
METROPOLITAN LIVABLE COMMUNITIES ACT
CALENDAR YEAR 2000
WHEREAS, the Metropolitan Livable Communities Act (Minnesota Statutes Section 473.25
to 473254) establishes a Metropolitan Livable Communities Fund which is intended to address
housing and other development issues facing the metropolitan area defined by Minnesota
Statutes Section 473.121; and
WHEREAS, the Metropolitan Livable Communities fund, comprising the Tax Base
Revitalization Account, the Livable Communities Demonstration Account and the Local Housing
Incentive Account, is intended to provide certain funding and other assistance to metropolitan
area municipalities; and
WHEREAS, a metropolitan area municipality is not eligible to receive pants or loans
under the Metropolitan Livable Communities fund or eligible to receive certain polluted sites
cleanup funding from the Minnesota Department of Trade and Economic Development unless the
HOUSING INCENTIVE PROGRAM - METROPOLITAN LIVABLE COMMUNITIES FOR
I
Page 16
MinutesBdina City CounciVDecember 7,1999
municipality is participating in the Local Housing Incentives Account Program under the
Minnesota Statutes section 473.254; and
WHEREAS, the Metropolitan Livable Communities Act requires the Metropolitan Council
to negotiate with each municipality to establish affordable and life-cycle housing goals for the
municipality that are consistent with and promote the policies of the Metropolitan Council as
provided in the adopted Metropolitan Development Guide; and
WHEREAS, each municipality must identify. to the Metropolitan Council the actions the
municipality plans to take to meet the established housing goals through preparation of the
Housing Action Plan; and
WHEREAS, the Metropolitan Council adopted, by resolution after a public hearing,
negotiated affordable and life-cycle housing goals for each participating municipality; and
WHEREAS, a metropolitan area municipality which elects to participate in the Local
Housing Incentives Account Program mqgt do so by November 15 of each year; and
WHEREAS, for calendar year 2000, a #ne&cqyalitaq area municipality that participated in
the Local Housing Incentive Account Program during the calendar year 1999, can continue to
participate under Minnesota Statutes section 473.254 if; (a) the municipality elects to participate in
the Local Housing Incentives Account Program by November 15,1999; and (b) the Metropolitan
Council and the municipality have successfully negotiated affordable and life-cycle housing goals
for the municipality:
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED ThAT the City of Edina hereby elects to
participate in the Local Housing Incentives Program under the Metropolitan Livable Communities
Act during the calendar year 2000.
*,
Passed this 7th day of December, 1999.
Attest: I l/ /AflF ”.
Dennis F. Maetzoyd
Motion carried on rollcall vote - four ayes.
“BRAEMAR ARENA ADVERTISINGBDINA HOUSING ASSOCIATION PROPOSAL
APPROVED Motion made by Member Kelly and seconded by Member Faust approving the Edina
Hockey Association advertising proposal for the period December 1,1999, through November 30,
2000.
Motion carried on rollcall vote - four ayes.
“PETITION RECEIVED REQUESTING STREET LIGHT INSTALLATION AT 5001 OAK BEND
LANE Motion made by Member Kelly and &onded by Member Faust acknowledging receipt of a
petition from residents at 5000, 5001, 5004 and 5008 Oak Bend Lane, requesting installation of
street lighting at 5001 Oak Bend Lane, and forwarding the petition to the Engineering Department
for processing as to feasibility.
Motion carried on rollcall vote -four ayes.
CONCERN OF RESIDENT EXPRESSED Kathleen Godfrey, stated she was concerned about the
City’s use of Tax Increment Financing in Edina. Ms. Godfrey asked when all the debt would be
retired and whether or not a portion of the money intended for use in the Grandview TIF district was
coming from other areas. Ms. Godfrey also questioned if an early retirement of the 50th and France or
the Centennial Lakes TIF debt were possible. She questioned the HRA’s authority to be involved in
redevelopment projects and the types of projects allowed under statutes. Mr. Hughes replied that
Edina’s TIF Districts will expire between 2009 and 2013, When the districts expire all their debt will
have been paid. He added that the Grandview Area Tax Increment District is a stand alone district
and cannot be pooled with any other district in the City. Mr. Hughes added that a TIF District may be
I
Page 17
MinutesEdha City Council/December 7,1999
paid off early if sufficient funds within the district exist to pay the principal. Mayor Maetzold
explained that during the life of a TIF District the City gets the entire "increment", as opposed to 14%
of each tax dollar. Mr. Hughes and Attorney Gilligan explained briefly how projects quahfy for
inclusion as "public "projects" eligible for use of TIF Funds. I
2000 FEES; INCLUDING PUBLIC HEARING ON LIQUOR FEES REVIEWED PLAN Affidavits of
Notice were presented, approved and ordered placed on file.
Finance Director Wallin presented the proposed fees and charges set by City Ordinance for 2000. He
noted that the fees were increased approximately 3% as discussed during the budget assumption
process. It was noted that before raising fees charged for liquor licenses as proposed for 2000, existing
licensees were given a thirty-day mailed notice of the hearing and the proposed increases.
Mayor Maetzold called for public comment. No one appeared to speak. Mayor Maetzold closed the
hearing.
RESOLUTION APPROVED FOR 2000 PARK AND RECREATION FEES AS AMENDED Member
Kelly made a motion, seconded by Member Hovland, introducing the following resolution and
moving its adoption. The Council stopped and briefly discussed the fees charged at Braemar.
Concern was expressed by Council Members that Braemar was not charging adequately for green
fees. Park Director Keprios pointed out that previous Council had intentionally kept green fees low
to encourage use of Braemar. He noted the Park Board's recommendation. Council consensus was to
increase the green fee for 18 holes non-patrons to $30.00 and the green fee for 9 holes non-patrons to
$18.00. Member Kelly amended his original motion incorporating the agreed upon increases for
Braemar Green Fees. Member Faust seconded the motion.
RESOLUTION SETTING
2000 PARK AND RECREATION FEES
BE IT RESOLVED that the Edina City Council does hereby approve and set the following 2000
Park and Recreation Fees.
PARK AND RECREATION
PLAYGROUND $13.00
ADULT TENNIS INSTRUCTION $37.00
YOUTH TENNIS INSTRUCTION $37.00
PEE WEE TENNIS $26.00
TEAMTENNIS $63.00
TENNIS CAMP $79.00
YOUTH SUMMER CLASSIC TENNIS TOURNAMENT $13.00
ADULT SUMMER CLASSIC TENNIS TOURNAMENT $16.00
COACH PITCH N/A
ADULT ATHLETIC FEES
Co-Rec & Mens Classic $360.00 Team Entry Fee $55.00
League
Mens/Womens 35 & Over & $325.00
Industrial League BASKETBALL
Non-Resident Fee $26.00 5-Man C League $425.00
(Individual)
SUMMER SOFTBALL SOFTBALL POST SEASON TOURNEY
Non-Resident Fee (Team) $155.00 5-Man B League $425.00
FALL SOFTBALL HOCKEY
Page 18
Co-Rec Leagues
Mens Leagues
Non-Resident Fee
(Individual)
Non-Resident Fee (Team)
Officiated Leagues
Non-Officiated Leagues
Non-Resident (Individual)
VOLLEYBALL
Minuteskdina Citv CounciVDecember 7,1999
$235.00 4-Man League $225.00
$210.00 , BROOMBALL
$25.00 Co-Rec League $300.00
$150.00 BANDY
A-Division $120.00/h
$235.00 B-Division $120.00/h
$130.00 C-Division $120.00/h
$10.00
AQ,UATIC CENTER
SEASON TICKETS
RESIDENT FAMILY
First 2 members
Each additional member
Maximum (8 members)
RESIDENT INDIVIDUAL
NON-RESIDENT FAMILY
First 2 members
Each addition a1 member
Maximum (8 members)
Daily Admission
Admission after 6 P.M.
Aquatic Instruction
* Early Bird Special if purchased no later than May 1,2000.
NON-RESIDENT INDIVIDUAL
2000
*65.00/$75.00
$25.00
$225.00
*40.00/$50.00
2000
$30.00
$270.00
$50.00/$60.00
$7.00
$5.00
$60.00
$80.00/$90.00
ART CENTER
MEMBERSHIPS: FAMILY - $35.00 INDIVIDUAL - $25.00
CLASS FEES " (based on # of hours in class) PARENT/CHILD WORKSHOPS"
(includes 1 child and 1 adult) (Members - 10% discount)
NON-MEMBERS NON-MEMBEWEMBER
25 hours $5.00/hr 1 1/z hours $16/$14
24 hours $5.00/hr 2 hours $18/$16
14 hours $5.00& 4 hours $28/$26
12 hours $5.00/hr 5hours - $32/$29
8 hours $6.00/hr 6 hours $35/$32
5 hours $6.50/hr 7 hours $40/$36
4 hours $7.00/hr 8 hours $43/$39
*all clay and children's classes add $5.00
21 hours $5.00/hr 3 hours $22/$20
"all clay classes add $5.00
ARENA
Hourly Rate (as of 9/95) $130.00
Open skating (Youth and Adult) $3.00
Skate Rental $1.50
Skate Sharpening $3.00
RESIDENT FAMILY
First 2 members $70.00
SEASON TICKETS (set first week of September) I
Page 19
MinutesBdina City CouncilDecember 7,1999
Each additional member
Maximum (7 persons)
RESIDENT INDIVIDUAL:
First 2 members
Each additional member
Maximum (7 persons)
CLASSES
NON-RESIDENT FAMILY:
NON-RESIDENT INDIVIDUAL
BRAEMAR GOLF COURSE
GREEN FEES
18 hole - non-patron
18 hole - patron
9 hole - non-patron
9 hole - patron
GROUP FEES - 18 holes
GROUP FEES - 9 holes
PATRON CARDS (until April 1)
Individual
Executive Course
PATRON CARDS (after April 1)
Individual
Executive Course
COMPUTERIZED HANDICAPS
Resident
Non-Resident
LOCKERS
Men’s 72 inch
Men’s 42 inch
Ladies 72 inch
CLUB STORAGE
CLUB RENTAL
PULL CARTS
GOLF CARS
18 holes
9 holes
18 holes/person with disability/sgl rider
Group Car Fees
GROUP GOLF LESSONS
Adult
Junior
$5.00
$95.00
$60.00
$85.00
$5.00
$110.00
$70.00
$79.00
$30.00
$21.00
$18.00
$12.00
$40.00
$20.00
$60.00
$25.00
$65.00
$25.00
$20.00
$24.00
$35.00
$25.00
$15.00
$35.00
$8.00
$2.50
$24.00
$14.00
$14.00
$32.00
$78.00
$36.00
BRAEMAR ROOM
Resident - wedding related $675.00
Non-residents - wedding related $750.00
Other events $275 - $750
Concession Fees (an annual increase of 5O, as a general de)
BRAEMAR EXECUTIVE COURSE
Page 20
MinutesBdina Citv CounciVDecernber 7,1999
I. j,, 4,. L
GREEN FEES
Adult non-patron
Adult patron
Junior - non-patron
Junior - patron
Golf Cars (everyone)
Pull carts
Group Fees
DRIVING RANGE
Large Bucket
Small Bucket
Warm-up Bucket
GREEN FEES
Adult - non-patron
Adult - patron
Junior - non-patron
Junior - patron
Golf Cars (everyone)
Pull carts
Group Fees
Large Bucket
Senior Bucket
Time Golf l/z hour
Hourly Field Rental
League
I
Daily Passes
1t $10.00
$8.50
$7.50
$6.50
$11.00
$2.00
$13.00
$6.00
$4.00
$2.25
FRED RICHARDS GOLF COURSE
$10.50
$9.00
$7.50
$6.50
$11.00
$2.00
$13.00
GOLF DOME
$6.25
$6.00
$8.75
$110.00
$700.00
EDINBOROUGH PARK
SEASON PASSES
$4.00
Edina Family (first 2 members) N/A
Each Additional Member $25.00
Maximum (7 members) $280.00
$200.00 Edina Individual
NIA
Each Additional Member $30.00
Maximum (7 Members) $330.00
Non-Edina Individual $230.00
Skate Rental $1.50
Locker Rental $0.25
Com’l Useprade Shows
Non-Edina Family (first 2 members)
Towel Fee $1.00
BUILDING RENTALS
$2,500.00 Banners $150.00
$125.00
EXCLUSIVE RENTAL Cover Ice $400.00
Use of Rink
Area
Area
Friday Evening $1,600.00 Domestic Photo Shoot (hourly)
Page 21
Minutes/Edina Citv CounciI/December 7,1999
Saturday Evening $1,600.00
Prom $2,200.00
NON-EXCLUSIVE RENTALS (per hour)
Great Hall
Theater
Grotto
Ice Rink
Pool (swim team only)
Rental Concession Items
$300.00
$125.00
$75.00
$100.00
$14.00
CENTENNIAL LAKES
Paddle Boats
4 person boat 1/z hr $5.00
Winter sled per hr $3.00
Ice Skates $1.50
BUILDING RENTALS
Y2 day - Salon $100.00
Full day - Salon $200.00
Amphitheater Rental
Amphitheater Rental $75.00/hr
Resident Usehour
Any Park $50.00
Area Blocked
Off
Grotto $75.00
Theatre $75.00
Great Hall $75.00
Ice Rink $100.00
Commercial Photo Shoot (hourly)
Any Park $200.00
Area Blocked
Off
Grotto $200.00
Theatre $200.00
Great Hall $300.00
Ice Rink $300.00
Weekend Rental -
Full Evening (6 PM - 1AM)
Friday evening $600.00
Saturday evening $600.00
Champion Putting
9 hole
18 hole
$4.00
$7.00
Lawn Games
Per Court $8.00
PARK DEPARTMENT RENTALS
General Park Areas:
Resident Use/day
Commercial Use (i.e.
Commercial use with
ligheour
Picnic shelter/day -
Cornelia
Showmobile/day
Per field - per day
Per field - per hour
Per field - per hour
(with lights)
TVfiour
Athletic Fields - Residents Only:
Arneson Acres Terrace Room:
Per day/w/f ormal
gardens/gazebo
$35.00
$105.00
$65.00
$115.00
$105.00
$700.00
$105.00
$35.00
$55.00
$130.00
Van VallcenbwdCourtney Fields
(Residents Only)
Per field/day includes $150.00
building
Edina Athletic Associations
Field User fee/participant $7.00
Edina Hockey Association
Outdoor Hockey Rink
Field User fee/participant $7.00
Park Shelter Buildings (half-day)
Weber Park $25.00
Cornelia School Park $25.00
Todd Park $25.00 I Walnut Ridge Park $25.00
Park Shelter Buildings (full-day)
Weber Park $50.00
Page 22
MinutesEdina City CounciVDecember 7,1999
Per hour, first hour $ 50.00 Cornelia School Park $50.00
Each additional hour $ 25.00 ToddPark
up to 4 hours
Rosland Park Pathway: Walnut Ridge Park
$50.00
$50.00
Per hour
Per day
NIA $50.00
N/A $200.00
PEGGY KELLY MEDIA ARTS STUDIOS
DO-IT YOURSELF EQUIPMENT
SERVICES HOURLY RENTAL 2 DAY
FEE RENTAL
Transfer movies to video $12.00 35mm Slide $15.00
Projector
Pictures or slides to $12.00 Dual Slide $30.00
video (album) Projector
Audio Dubbing or $12.00 VHS Camcorder $25.00
Transfer
VHS Video Editing $10.00 Overhead new $20.00
Projector old $10.00
Projector
Projector
Projector
with sound
w/Dissolve Unit
35mm Photo Copies $7.00 Opaque $20.00
35mm Slide Copies $7.00 16mm Movie $25.00
VHS Video Copies $4.00 Super 8mm $16.00
(up to 3 at one time)
Foreign Conversion $7.00 8mm Movie $11.00
Laminatormeat Press $5.00 Lowell Light Kit $20.00
Audio Cassette Dupl. $l.OO/ Wireless Mike $20.00
(PAL, SECAM) Projector
copy Kit
Customer provides blank cassettes (video and audio), film and lamination supplies.
PHOTO/VIDEO STUDIO RENTAL
Studio - not staffed - Introductory pricing
(includes 2 Canon XL1 digital mini-DV video
cameras, digital editor, and digital mixer) (props and
expendables not included)
Macintosh G3 or Compaq 266 Mhz PC
(includes use of Adobe Photoshop, Pagevaker ,aans;t
Illustrator software with Epson Color SI$liii*
printing - prints purchased separately)
$30.00/hour
COMPUTER OPEN STUDIO TIME
$8.00/hr.
non-members pay
an add'l $10.00 daily
access fee
I
MEMBERSHIP
All equipment or facility rentals requires a membership.
One day/one visit pass - $10.00 $10.00
$25.00
$35.00
Annual Individual Membership (12 months)
Annual Family Membership (12 months)
Adopted this 7th day of December, 1999.
Rollcall:
I
Page 23
MinutesEdina Citv Council/December 7,1999
Ayes: Faust, Hovland, Johnson, Kelly, Maetzold
Motion carried.
RESOLUTION APPROVED FOR 2000 AMBULANCE FEES Member Kelly made a motion to
approve and adopt the following resolution:
RESOLUTION
SETTING AMBULANCE FEES FOR 2000
BE IT RESOLVED that the Edina City Council does hereby approve and set the following
ambulance service fees for 2000.
AMBULANCE FEES
Service Level Fees for Ambulance Service, including medical treatment and/or transportation to a
medical facility:
Level 1 - ON SCENE TREATMENT $210.00
Specialized medical services performed at
scene with no transport involved
Vital Signs
Level 2 - MINOR CARE (BLS) $465.00
splinting
Bandaging, etc.
Level III - MODERATE CARE (ALS)
IV, Nitrous, Nitro Spray, ASA
EKG Monitoring
Spine Immobilization
Level IV - MAJOR CARE
Medications
MAST (inflated)
Cardiac Pacing
Airway Management
Level V - RESPIRATORY/CARDIAC ARREST
Level IV plus any:
Cardio/Pulmonary Resuscitation (CPR)
Defibrillation
OXYGEN ADMINISTRATION
MILEAGE FROM SCENE TO HOSPITAL
ADDITIONAL MANPOWER OR MECHANICAL
EXTRICATION .
$570.00
$660.00
$800.00
$33.00
$9.OO/miIe
$300.00
Member Hovland seconded the motion.
Rollcalk
Ayes: Faust, Hovland, Johnson, Kelly, Maetzold
Motion carried.
RESOLUTION APPROVED FOR 2000 MISCELLANEOUS FEES Member Kelly made a motion to
approve and adopt the following resolution:
RESOLUTION
SETTING MISCELLANEOUS FEES
FOR 2000
BE IT RESOLVED that the Edina City Council does hereby approve and set the following
miscellaneous fees for 2000:
HAZARDOUS MATERIALS
Page 24
':., I 1. , .' ,.
MinutesBdina Citv CounciVDecernber 7,1999
SPILLS RESPONSE
Enginepire Company $200.00 per hour
HazMat Unit $400.00 per hour
Specialized Personnel
Limited Response $100.00 per hour
Specialized Equipment
Supplies
Disposal
Other City Resources
Cost + 15% administrative charge
Cost + 15% administrative charge
Cost + 15% administrative charge
Cost + 15% administrative charge
I
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
Zoning Compliance Letter
Member Hovland seconded the motion.
Rollcall:
Ayes: Faust, Hovland, Johnson, Kelly, Maetzold
Motion carried.
$100.00
CLAIMS PAID Motion made by Member Kelly approving payment of the following claims as
shown in detail on the Check Register dated December 2,1999, and consisting of 36 pages: General
Fund $115,665.31; Communications $12,886.15; Communications $2,250.00; Working Capital
$6,015.53; Art Center $24,217.44; Golf Dome Fund $1,205.41; Swimming Pool Fund $223.44; Golf
Course Fund $9,195.27; Ice Arena Fund $3,553.03 Edinborough/Centennial Lakes $20,854.37; Utility
Fund $301,519.28; Storm Sewer Utility Fund $14,782.82; Recycling Program $28.00; Liquor
Dispensary Fund $331,323.77; Construction Fund $122,245.95; TOTAL $965,965.77; and for
confirmation of payment of claims as shown in detail on the Check Register dated December 2,
1999, and consisting of 6 pages: General Fund $300,997.63; Working Capital $1,328.90; Art Center
$195.00; Golf Course Fund $1,855.57; Utility Fund $196.34; Liquor Dispensary Fund $122,397.99;
TOTAL $426,971.43. Faust seconded the motion.
Rollcalk
Ayes: Faust, Hovland, Johnson, Kelly, Maetzold
Motion carried.
There being no further business on the Council Agenda, Mayor Maetzold adjourned the Council
Meeting at 1O:lO P.M.
Page 25