HomeMy WebLinkAbout2001-06-19 Council Regular MeetingMINUTES
OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE
EDINA CITY COUNCIL
HELD AT CITY HALL
JUNE 19,2001
200 P.M.
ROLLCALL Answering rollcall were Members Housh, Hovland, Masica and Mayor
Maetzold. Member Kelly entered the meeting at 8:OO P.M.
CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS APPROVED Motion made by Member Hovland and
seconded by Member Housh approving the Council Consent Agenda as presented with the
exception of Agenda Item 1II.A. Sound Abatement Improvement Projects SA-1 and SA-2
Contract 01-06 (Eng), and Agenda Item 1II.F. Insurance Renewal, General Liability, Equipment,
Liquor and Pollution.
Rollcall:
Ayes: Housh, Hovland, Masica, Maetzold
Motion carried.
RESOLUTION NO. 2001-46 COMMENDING SYLVESTER SCHWARTZ Mayor Maetzold
thanked Sylvester (Chip) Schwartz for his over thirty years of service to the Edina Police
Department. He presented Deputy Chief Schwartz with a plaque commending his years of
public service. I
The City Council unanimously introduced the following resolution and moved its
adoption:
RESOLUTION NO. 2001-46
RESOLUTION OF APPRECIATION
WHEREAS, Sylvester Schwartz has served on the Edina Police Department for
thirty years since January 18,1971; and
WHEREAS, Sylvester Schwartz began as a patrol officer; has progressed up the
department ranks to Juvenile Investigator, Detective, Sergeant, Lieutenant, and currently
serves as Edina Deputy Police Chief; and
WHEREAS, Sylvester Schwartz has exemplified all the characteristics of peace
officers who ”Protect and Serve”; and
WHEREAS, Sylvester Schwartz will on June 29,2001, retire from the Edina Police
Department; and
WHEREAS, through these thirty plus years of public service Sylvester Schwartz has
demonstrated his care and concern for the public welfare of his fellow citizens.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Edina City Council, City staff and
all Edina residents hereby express their thanks and appreciation to
SYLVESTER SCHWARTZ
for his tireless efforts and sincere dedication in making the Edina community an
outstanding place to live.
Passed and adopted this 19th day of June 2001.
The entire Council seconded the motion.
Page 1
MinutesEdha Citv Council/Tune 19,2001
Rollcall:
Ayes: Housh, Hovland, Masica, Maetzold
Motion carried.
“MINUTES APPROVED FOR REGULAR MEETING OF ”E 5,2001 Motion made by
Member Hovland and seconded by Member Housh approving the Minutes for the regular
meeting of June 5,2001, as presented.
Motion carried on rollcall vote - four ayes.
FINAL REZONING APPROVED - NOONAN CONSTRUCTION COMPANY - 5400
FRANCE AVENUE Affidavits of Notice were presented, approved and ordered placed on
file.
Presentation bv Planner
Mr. Larsen explained the subject property was located in the southwest corner of West 54th
Street and France Avenue. The property was currently Zoned PCD4, Planned Commercial
District. The PCD4 district allows various automotive service uses. The site was originally
developed as a gas station in 1950. The tanks were removed in 1991, and the site was
converted to a Mr. Tire. The building also housed a CAR-X facility, but is currently vacant.
Mr. Larsen said Ed Noonan petitioned the City to rezone the property to PCD-1. The PCD-1
district is a general retail district. The property immediately west of the subject property is
PCD-1. Mr. Noonan intends to remodel the building for office use. The building has three
service bays facing France Avenue and one facing West 54th Street. Mr. Noonan plans to
convert one bay into office space and leave the remaining bays for parking and storage. The
proposed remodeling would create an office area of 752 square feet with an additional 550
feet of storage area. Seven parking spaces would be required for this facility by Edina Code.
The proposed site plan illustrates 11 angle stalls, 2 parallel stalls and 3 in-door stalls. Mr.
Larsen stated that Mr. Noonan’s plan includes completely redoing the exterior of the
building. The existing fiat roof would be replaced with a pitched roofed of either cedar or
slate shingles. Exterior walls would be brick and stucco with wooden garage doors. The
proposed materials meet Edina Code. Parking and circulation would remain unchanged. Mr.
Larsen said the Planning Commission recommended approval of proposal subject to: staff
approved landscaping plan and bond.
I
Cound comment
Member Masica asked if a landscaping plan had been submitted. Mr. Larsen explained that
it was not yet submitted, but no permit would be issued until the appropriate plan and bond
were submitted and approved by staff.
Member Hovland commended Mr. Noonan for the addition to the corner.
No public comment was heard.
Page 2
MinutesEdina City Councirnune 19,2001
Member Hovland made a motion to close the public hearing. Member Housh seconded the
motion.
Ayes: Hovland, Housh, Masica, Maetzold
Motion carried.
Member Housh made a motion to adopt the following ordinance granting the rezoning to
5400 France Avenue:
ORDINANCE NO. 850-A20
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE
ZONING ORDINANCE (NO. 850)
BY REZONING PROPERTY TO PCD-1
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDINA, MINNESOTA, ORDAINS:
Section 1. Subsection 850.06 of Section 850 of the Edina City Code is amended by adding
the following thereto:
"The extent of the Planned Commercial District, PCD-1 is enlarged by the addition
of the following property:
That part of the North Half of the Northeast Quarter of the Northeast Quarter of the
Northeast Quarter of Section 19, Township 28, Range 24, described as follows:
Commencing at the Northeast corner of said North Half of the Northeast
Quarter of the Northeast Quarter of the Northeast Quarter of said Section;
thence South along the East line thereof 130.00 feet; thence West parallel with
the North line thereof 138.00 feet; thence North parallel with the East line
thereof 130.00 feet to the North line thereof; thence East along the North line
138.00 feet to the point of beginning; except the North 30.00 feet and except
the East 33.00 feet taken for road purposes.
Commencing at a point 130.00 feet South of the Northeast corner of Section
19, Township 28, Range 24; thence West 138.00 feet; thence South 25.00 feet;
thence east 138.00 feet; thence North 25.00 feet to the point of beginning.
The extent of the PCD-4, Planned Commercial District-4 is reduced by removing the
property described above from the Planned Commercial District-4."
Section 2. Effective Date: This ordinance shall be in full force and effect upon adoption
and publication according to the law.
Adopted this 19th day of June, 2001.
And also:
Attest
City Clerk Mayor
Member Hovland seconded the motion.
Rollcall:
Ayes: Housh, Hovland, Masica, Maetzold
Motion carried.
RESOLUTION NO. 2001-47, FINAL REZONING - FINAL PLAT - AMENDMENT TO
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN APPROVED - TMS DEVELOPMENT AND THORPE REAL
Page 3
Minutes/Edina Citv Counciwune 19,2001
ESTATE - 6512 VERNON AVENUE Affidavits of Notice were presented, approved and
ordered placed on file.
Presentation by Planner
Mr. Larsen explained the proposed development is located at the northeasterly intersection
of Vernon Avenue and Tamarac. The proposed development is approximately 6 acres and
the home of Chapel Hills Church. Prelirninary approval of the rezoning and plat were given
May 1,2001. The proposal requires amending the Comprehensive Plan from Quasi-public to
Low Density Attached Residential. Chapel Hills Church would retain ownership of Lot 1 and
Outlot A of the proposed plat. Outlot A includes one half of the proposed private street
allowing the church access to the street from a new curb cut. The lot size for the church after
development would be 3.3 acres which meets the 3 acre minimum lot size for a church. Mr.
Larsen added that no variances are being requested.
I
As directed when Council granted the preliminary approval the developer removed one unit
from Tamarac and increased the lot width to between 60-61 feet with a home footprint of
approximately 45 feet. The developer left the nine homes on the private cul-de-sac as
previously depicted. Mr. Larsen pointed out the pond was now larger and deeper to handle
two consecutive 100 year events improving storm water handling in the area.
MX Larsen explained that the Planning Commission recommended three Council actions: I)
changing the Comprehensive Plan designation from Single Family to Low Density
Residential; 2) approving the Final Rezoning from R-1 Single Family Dwelling District, to
PRD-3, Planned Residence District-3; and 3) approval of the Final Plat for the Abbey at
Chapel Hills. These actions would be subject to three conditions: 1) Executed Developer’s
Agreement; 2) Subdivision dedication based on a raw land value of $722,000.00 and 3)
modification of landscaping plan to meet ordinance requirements and submittal of
landscaping bond.
1
Council Comment
Member Masica asked the size of the homes on Tamarac. htr. Larsen replied the lots would
be between 60-61 feet with a house width of approximately 45 feet.
Member Housh asked when a subdivision such as proposed was approved, to whom does
the developer report. Mr. Larsen explained that staff oversees the technical issues such as the
landscaping plan and bond and payment of the subdivision dedication fees. He added that
the developer’s agreement details the developer’s responsibilities and financial obligations.
Member Hovland asked if there was adequate room on the private cul-de-sac for emergency
vehicle access. Mr. Larsen replied yes, there was adequate space for emergency vehicles.
Public Comment
Bruce Bredesen, 6000 Tamarac, asked if the name of the subdivision were a part of the action
approving a subdivision. He said the developer was referring to the subdivision as the
Enclave at Chapel Hills and stated he did not care for that name. Mr. Larsen explained that
Page 4
Minutes/Edina Citv CounciWune 19,2001
the name on the plat was a part of the Council action, but the developer could market the lots I I 1 under a name of his choosing.
Betsy Robinson, 5021 Ridge Road, stated that she used to live at 6400 Aspen Road. She said
the area flooded in 1987 and they had major problems with run-off. Mr. Larsen explained the
storm water pond area has been designed to handle two consecutive 100 year events, which
will improve run-off issues in the area.
Member Hovland stated that he believed Ms. Robinson's concerns were met at the
preliminary approval hearing. The developer, through a combination of grading and
ponding, will improve the storm water drainage to the betterment of the lots on Aspen.
Member Hovland commended the developer for addressing the drainage concerns and the
overall development.
Mayor Maetzold agreed with Member Hovland.
Member Hovland introduced the following ordinance and moved it adoption granting
final rezoning to the Abbey at Chapel Hills with the three conditions: 1) Executed
Developer's Agreement; 2) Subdivision dedication based on a raw land value of
$722,000.00; and 3) modification of landscaping plan to meet ordinance requirements and
submittal of landscaping bond.
ORDINANCE NO. 850-A21
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE
ZONING ORDINANCE (NO. 850)
BY REZONING PROPERTY TO PRD-2
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDINA, MINNESOTA, ORDAINS:
Section 1. Subsection 850.06 of Section 850 of the Edina City Code is amended by adding
the following thereto:
"The extent of the Planned Residential District, PRD-2 is enlarged by the addition
of the following property:
That part of Lot 1, Block 1, Gleason First Addition, Hennepin County,
Minnesota, lying east of the westerly 110 feet thereof and that part of the
westerly 110 feet of said Lot 1, lying south of the north ten feet thereof.
The extent of the R-1 Single Dwelling District is reduced by removing the property
described above.
Section 2. Effective Date: This ordinance shall be in full force and effect upon adoption
and publication according to the law.
Adopted this 19th day of June, 2001.
I
Attest
Member Housh seconded the motion
City Clerk Mayor
Rollcall:
Ayes: Housh, Hovland, Masica, Maetzold
Motion carried.
Page 5
MinutesEdha Citv CouncWune 19,2001
I Member Hovland introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption:
RESOLUTION NO. 2001-47
APPROVING FINAL PLAT
FOR THE ABBEY AT CHAPEL HILL
BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Edina, Minnesota, that that
certain plat entitled, "THE ABBEY AT CHAPEL HILL", platted by JMS Homes Inc., a
Minnesota Corporation and Chapel Hills United Church of Christ; a Minnesota non-profit
organization; and presented at the regular meeting of the City Council on June 19,2001, be
and is hereby granted final plat approval.
Passed and adopted by the Edina City Council this 19th day of June, 2001. Member Housh
seconded the motion.
Rollcall:
Ayes: Housh, Hovland, Masica, Maetzold
Motion carried.
Member Hovland introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption:
RESOLUTION NO. 2001-48
AMENDING THE COMPREHENSNE PLAN
BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Edina, Minnesota, that the
Comprehensive Plan of the City be amended by changing the designation from Single
Family to Low Density Residential for the property described as:
That part of Lot 1, Block 1, Gleason First Addition, Hennepin County,
Minnesota, lying east of the westerly 110 feet thereof and that part of the
westerly 110 feet of said Lot 1, lying south of the north ten feet thereof.
Adopted this 19& day of June 2001. Member Housh seconded the motion.
Rollcall:
Ayes: Housh, Hovland, Masica, Maetzold
Motion carried.
DEMOLITION PERMIT MORATORIUM ACTION CONTINUED TO TUL Y 17, 2001 -
COUNTRY CLUB DISTRICT Mi Larsen stated that the Heritage Preservation Board
recommended that a six-month moratorium on tear-downs within the historic Country Club
District be enacted. Mr. Larsen said the Board requested the moratorium to allow the City
planning staff and advisory commission to exaTnine how to protect the historic integrity of
the district.
The proposed demolition permit moratorium would not include houses or other buildings
outside the boundaries of the Country Club District - only the area that is on the National
Register of Historic Places would be affected. The proposed moratorium resulted from
concerns about "teardowns" where 1930's vintage residences in the historic district have been
torn-down to be rebuilt with larger homes. There has also been concern about the
compatibility of replacement homes with the architectural character of the district.
The proposed moratorium would allow time to study the need and desirability of regulating
the demolition and rebuilding of homes in the historic Country Club District. Staff proposed
Page 6
Minutesmdina City Council/Cune 19,2001
to survey the residents to ascertain their opinions on the possible design review standards for
additions or rebuilds in the Country Club District.
Mayor Maetzold stated he thought that the County Club's designation on the Historic
Register was honorary. Mr. Larsen confirmed this assumption stating that the Country Club
as a whole (meaning the plat) was on the Historic Register, but individual houses were not
on the Register with a few exceptions such as the Baird house. The Historic Preservation
Board thought that now was an appropriate time to consider a moratorium to study the
issues.
Member Masica asked if there were any "teardowns" pending, and if there had been
problems in the district with teardowns. Mr. Larsen said that there have been some
teardowns, but that most owners have volunteered to review their plans.
Member Housh expressed concern that a moratorium might bring more attention than
desired when it appears no problem exists. He asked if after studying the issue would
stronger zoning in the Country Club be a possibility Mr. Larsen explained that some
neighbors have expressed concern that there was the potential for a property owner to
request an "exemption" from the district and build whatever they choose. Currently, staff
does not see any problem, but added that after studying the issues, one possibility could be
establishing an historical overlay zoning area.
Member Masica stated that if no problem had occurred in thirty years, then in her opinion
the survey should be completed before any decision made on whether to adopt a
moratorium.
I
Member Hovland commented that he believed the City Council in meeting with the Heritage
Preservation Board expressed an interest in design standards for the "District". Based on
this, the Heritage Preservation Board prepared the proposed moratorium to allow time to
study the issue. He added he agreed this would be a prudent way to handle the issue.
Member Housh asked if it was typical to place a moratorium on one area only. Mr. Larsen
noted the County Club District was unique and the proposed moratorium would be
reasonable.
Mayor Maetzold stated he agreed with Member Hovland that the Heritage Preservation
Board heard the Council express interest in looking at design standards for the County Club
area when they held their joint meeting. He noted that some re-builds have not fit entirely
with the character of the District.
Public Comment
Bill Horn, 4511 Browndale Avenue, said that as a resident he would be pleased in anything
that would preserve the neighborhood and urged the Council to enact the moratorium.
Page 7
,
Minutesfidha City CouncMune 19,2001
John Deters, 311 Blake Road, said that if no blunders had happened for thirty years, why I place a moratorium. He suggested instead that the survey be completed then-a decision
made on the moratorium.
Member Masica made a motion, seconded by Member Hovland to close the public
hearing.
Ayes: Housh, Hovland, Masica, Maetzold
Motion carried.
Member Masica stated that she wanted the Heritage Preservation Board to remain a strong
advisory board, but she would be uncomfortable enacting a moratorium without first seeing
the survey results.
Member Housh agreed with Member Masica.
Mayor Maetzold noted that the Council appeared divided on the issue of a moratorium and
suggested action be continued una the next meeting to aIlow the survey’s completion.
Member Housh made a motion to continue action on the demolition permit moratorium in
the County Club District until July 17,2001, and directing the staff to conduct the proposed
survey of the residents within the district. Member Masica seconded the motion.
Ayes: Housh, Hovland, Masica, Maetzold
Motion carried.
ORDINANCE NO. 2001-03 AN AMENDMENT TO ZONING ORDINANCE APPROVED
ALLOWING CURRENCY EXCHANGE IN CERTAIN ZONING DISTRICTS Mr. Larsen
reviewed the proposed amendment to the zoning ordinance which would Emit the location of
certain types of finanaal institutions. Currently, Edina Code allows finanaal institutions in all of
the planned commercial districts except PCD-4 which is the gas station zone. Code allows them
in both planned office districts, in the industrial district, and in the mixed-development district.
The State of Minnesota has licensing requirements for several different types of finanaaI
institutions inchding banks, trust companies, savings banks, credit unions and currency
exchanges. Currency exchanges primarily serve clients with check cashing, money orders and
money wiring fees. Recently, a currency exchange business, Unbank, moved into 5125 Edina
IndustriaI Boulevard in a small strip mall. The property was zoned PCD-2 and did comply with
zoning ordinance requikements for that location. Mr. Larsen noted that staff believes there
would be a legitimate reason to distinguish between currency exchanges and other types of
finanaal institutions. The currency exchanges primarily serve large employment centers and
workers who do not use the traditional banking system. In addition, the businesses seem to
generate a significant number of police calls relative to other financial institutions. The Planning
Commission recommended that these businesses be limited to the PC-2, PC-3 and the Planned
Industrial Districts. Mr. Larsen added that the CounciI had at its May 1,2001, meeting granted
the proposed amendment First Reading.
council comments
Page 8
MinutesEdina City Councirnune 19,2001
Member Hovland asked if the ordinance were not passed would the City have any regulatory
authority. Attorney Gilligan said the proposed ordinance would allow the City to regulate the
location of the business. Member Hovland acknowledged that it would not be a matter of
allowing the businesses in Edina, but rather where they would be allowed to locate. Staff replied
affirmatively.
Member Housh asked if the check cashing businesses would place an undue burden on the
police department. Chief Siitari replied that to date the department has not received an over
abundance of calls from the Unbank.
No public comment was heard.
Member Masica made a motion, seconded by Member Hovland to close the public
hearing.
Ayes: Housh, Hovland, Masica, Maetzold
Motion carried.
Member Hovland made a motion to adopt the following ordinance:
EDINA ORDINANCE NO. 2001-3
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTION 850 OF THE
CITY CODE TO ADD CURRENCY EXCHANGES
AS A PERMITTED USE IN PLANNED
COMMERCIAL DISTRICTS 2 AND 3,
AND IN THE PLANNED INDUSTRIAL DISTRICT
THE CITY OF THE CITY OF EDINA ORDAINS:
Section 1. Subd. 3 of Subsection 850.16 of the City Code is amended by adding the
following use:
Section 2. Subd. 1 of Subdivision 850.17 of the City Code is amended by adding the
following use:
Section 3. Effective Date This ordinance shall be in full effect upon passage and
publication according to law.
Adopted this 19th day of June, 2001.
"Currency exchanges as defined in M.S. 53A"
"J. Currency exchanges as defined in M.S. 53A"
Attest
Member Housh seconded the motion.
City Clerk Mayor
Rollcall:
Ayes: Housh, Hovland, Masica, Maetzold
Motion carried.
VARIANCE APPEAL FOR 4309 BRANDON STREET CONTINUED UNTIL TULY 17,2001
Affidavits of Notice were presented, approved and ordered placed on file.
Presentation by Assistant Planner
Page 9
MinutesEdina City Council/Tune 19,2001
Assistant Planner Aaker explained that on May 17,2001, the Zoning Board of Appeals heard
and unanimously approved case file #B-01-30 for a ten-foot frontyard setback variance from
Ethel Mahoney, 4309 Branson Street, to allow the construction of a two-car garage in front of
her existing home. Ms. Aaker reported that on May 29, 2001, the City Clerk received an
appeal of the Zoning Board's decision from Dana J. Powell, 4311 Branson Street.
I
Ms. Aaker explained the subject property was located on the south side of Branson Street
consisting of a 1% -story home with no garage. The homeowner petitioned the City to
construct a garage in front of the existing house. Edina's Zoning Ordinance requires any
home addition to maintain the average front yard setback that is occurring on the subject side
of the block between intersections. The average front yard setback on the block as
established by the homeowner and her contractor is approximately 46 feet; the proposed
garage would maintain a 36-foot frontyard setback.
Ms. Aaker said the homeowner has lived in her home on Branson for nearly 32 years and
there has never been a garage on the property. The homeowner proposed building a two-car
garaged attached in the front yard area with an eight-foot gap between the front of the house
and the back wall of the garage to allow for a patio area. This would allow the homeowner
to maintain a front bedroom window.
Ms. Aaker said the setbacks along Branson street vary from 62.5 feet 0 35.5 feet from the
street. The new garage would be approximately 37.17 feet from the street. Branson Street
curves, giving the appearance of inconsistent front yard setbacks. The new garage would not
be the closest structure on the block. The architectural styles and the years the homes were
built on the block also vary. The design of the proposed addition and materials would
compliment the existing materials and architecture of the home.
-
I
Ms. Aaker stated the Zoning Board felt the request met the test of hardship and granted the
requested variance unanimously at their May 17,2001, meeting.
Mayor Maetzold asked how the garage would line up with the house to the west.
Ethel Mahoney, 4309 Branson, the proponent, presented a model and photographs depicting
her proposed garage addition. Ms. Mahoney said she has looked at several options, but the
garage as proposed was the best option.
Member Housh asked if any other home on Branson had front garages. Ms. Aaker replied
that most garages are rear detached garages, with three homes having garages located on the
side.
Member Hovland asked why the garage was being sited where it was proposed. Ms. Aaker
responded that it would be physically possible to build the garage as proposed. Building the
garage on the east side of the lot would require a retaining wall and would be extremely tight
in meeting the twelve-foot driveway requirement; and building in the rear yard would
require a lengthy driveway.
I
Page 10
MinutesBdina City Counciwune 19,2001
Public Comment
Dana Powell, 4311 Branson Street, stated he was the appellant. Mr. Powell said that building
the garage in front of the house would totally obstruct his view. He showed photographs
using a blue tarp to depict the proposed garage. Mr. Powell stated he was very concerned
that granting this variance would set precedent for other front-yard variances. The proposed
garage would be against the character of the neighborhood. He urged denial of the variance
stating that Mrs. Mahoney could build her garage in the back yard or on the east side of the
property without requiring a variance.
I
Ethel Mahoney, proponent, said that building the garage in her back yard would require the
removal of large trees, extensive grading would be needed, and a lengthy driveway of over
100 feet would be needed. Building a garage on the east side would necessitate removing a
large maple tree and also building a retaining wall. For these reasons, Mrs. Mahoney added
she believed her request met the "hardship" test.
Sharon Brenne, 4401 Branson Street, said that she chose her home because of its view. Ms.
Brenne said the proposed garage would block her view and would be out of character with
the neighborhood.
Tim Mahoney, 6241 Darcy Lane, said that the Morningside area has a really large variety of
home styles. He added that the proposed garage is really an architectural improvement to the
home. In addition, there is a 70-year old maple tree they were trying to save in the rear yard.
Cindy Egelston, 2018 Stone Creek Drive, Chanhassen, stated she did not agree that granting
this variance would set precedent. Her mother, Mrs. Mahoney had been working with an
architect to achieve a pleasing design for the entire neighborhood. The garage as proposed
will improve the property.
Sharon Brenne, 4401 Branson Street, asked what could happen in the future if this variance
were granted and someone who has their home on the market suddenly finds their view
blocked.
Member Kelly asked why a two-car garage was being proposed, and if in the opinion of staff
would placing the garage in the rear yard be a hard ship. Ms. Aaker replied that two-car
garages are required by Edina Code. She added that it would be physically possible to
construct a garage in the rear yard, but it would be more costly and difficult because of the
location of the air conditioner, the trees, and topography. Member Kelly said he would like
to see what it would look like with the garage located in the rear yard.
Member Hovland said that he was concerned granting a variance that could have an adverse
effect on a neighbor, however, he was also reluctant to overturn a decision of the Zoning
Board. He said he believes there are difficulties with the garage placement in the rear yard or I west side. Therefore, he believed the request met the test of hardship.
Page 11
MinutesEdha Citv Counciwune 19,2001
Mayor Maetzold stated that he did not believe the Council had refused development in the
past because of anyone’s view being blocked. However, he did not favor the garage’s
placement in the front of the home. Mayor Maetzold stated he thought the garage should be
located in the rear yard.
Member Masica concurred with the Mayor adding that as long as the view would be equally
an issue on the other side of the house the garage should be located in the rear of the house.
Member Kelly agreed with Member Masica and Mayor Maetzold. He added that he did not
like to grant variances, he understood the requirement of a two-stall garage, but then it
should be located in the rear yard as the other 36 homes on Branson.
Member Housh also stated he was struggling to see any hardship in this case.
Mayor Maetzold suggested continuing the issue until the July 19,2001, meeting to allow the
proponent to physically demonstrate the hardship involved in building a garage in her rear
yard. Mi. Hughes pointed out the need for the Council to grant a sixty-day extension from
action.
Ms. Mahoney indicated she still requested the two-car garage requiring the front yard
setback variance.
Member Kelly made a motion to continue action on the variance appeal until July, 17,
2001, and to grant the Council a sixty day extension from action on the original variance
request until August 26,2001. Member Housh seconded the motion.
Ayes: Housh, Hovland, Kelly, Masica, Maetzold
Motion carried.
BID AWARDED FOR SOUND ABATEMENT IMPROVEMENT PROTECTS SA-1 AND
SA-2, CONTRACT 01-06 (ENG) Member Hovland asked the award of bid for the sound
abatement improvement projects SA-1 and SA-2, Contract 01-06 be removed from the
Consent Agenda for further information. Member Hovland asked if the bid included pre-cast
concrete walls and columns. Assistant Engineer Houle said the columns are not included in
the base bid. The contractor was planning to construct two columns for a site review; and if
acceptable, a change order would come forward to the Council for approval.
Member Hovland made a motion approving the award of bid for sound abatement
improvement projects SA-1 and SA-2, Contract 01-06. Member Housh seconded the motion.
Ayes: Housh, Hovland, Kelly, Masica, Maetzold
Motion carried.
I *BID AWARDED FOR BRAEMAR NATURE PATHWAY PEDESTRIAN TRAIL
lCONTRACT NO. 00-3 (PARKS) Motion made by Member Hovland and seconded by
Member Housh for award of bid to complete the Braemar park nature pathway pedestrian
trail, Improvement No. 00-3 (Park) to recommended low bidder, Perkins Landscape
Contractors at $42,003.52.
Page 12
MinutesBdina City Councirnune 19,2001
Motion carried on rollcall vote - four ayes.
"BID AWARDED FOR PUMP REPAIR AND INSTALL FOR CITY WELL NO. 9,
IMPROVEMENT NO. PW 01-02 Motion made by Member Hovland and seconded by
Member Housh for award of bid for pump repair and install for City well No. 9,
improvement no. PW 01-02, to recommended low bidder, Keys Well Drilling at $37,035.00.
I
Motion carried on rollcall vote - four ayes.
"BID AWARDED FOR ROOF REPAIR AND REPLACEMENT FOR WATER
TREATMENT PLANT NO. 4 Motion made by Member Hovland and seconded by
Member Housh for award of bid for roof repair and replacement for water treatment plant
No. 4, Contract No. 01-03 Public Works, to recommended low bidder, SELA Roofing at
$72,723.00.
Motion carried on rollcall vote - four ayes.
*BID AWARDED FOR PROPERTY INSURANCE RENEWAL Motion made by Member
Hovland and seconded by Member Housh for award of bid for property insurance to
recommended low bidder, Travelers Insurance at $59,093.00.
Motion carried on rollcall vote - four ayes.
AWARD OF BID APPROVED FOR PUBLIC OFFICIALS LIABILITY, POLICE
PROFESSIONAL LIABILITY, GENERAL LIABILITY, LIQ-UOR LIABILITY, AUTO
LIABILITY, EOUIPMENT AND EMPLOYMENT BENEFIT LIABILITY INSURANCE
RENEWALS Member Housh asked the award of bid for Public Officials Liability, Police
Professional Liability, General Liability, Liquor Liability, Auto Liability and Employment
Benefit Liability insurance renewals be removed from the Consent Agenda for further
information. He noted St. Paul Companies was not willing to renew the Workers'
Compensation Insurance for the policy year, but did renew other policies. He asked if the
League of MN Cities (LMC) was given the opportunity to bid on the other insurance. Doug
Crowther, Harris Homeyer Insurance Agency, 6800 France Avenue, said the LMC was not
solicited for their quote. The reasons included the relationship the City of Edina has with St.
Paul Companies and that the LMC cannot package all of the other policy renewals.
Member Masica made a motion for award of bid for Public Officials Liability, Police
Professional, General Liability, Liquor Liability, Auto Liability, Equipment and
Employment Benefit Liability insurance renewals to recommended sole bidder, St. Paul
Companies at $320,688.00. Member Housh seconded the motion.
Ayes: Housh, Hovland, Kelly, Masica, Maetzold
Motion carried.
AWARD OF BID FOR WORKERS COMPENSATION INSURANCE RENEWAL m.
Hughes explained that St. Paul Companies made the corporate decision to stop providing
Workers' Compensation Insurance to the public sector. Other companies were approached to
quote the insurance. The increase in prernium was larger than normal, but was directly
related to the City's experience, which has been unusually high.
Page 13
Minutesfidha Citv CouncMune 19,2001
Member Housh questioned whether the Workers' Compensation Insurance carried a
deductible. Mr. Crowther said it was 'first dollar' coverage.
Member Hovland asked what changes there were in the new Workers' Compensation
coverages. Mr. Crowther said the increase in premium was approximately $100,000 of which
approximately $43,000 was a result of the City's experience modification. The remaining
$55,000 was a rate increase. Member Hovland asked how long the experience modification
would continue. Mr. Crowther said the modification could increase even more due to last
years' experience and could last up to three years.
Member Masica asked if the LMC self-insures or re-insures. Mr. Crowther said they re-
insure. He added that Edina is one of the last cities to insure with LMC.
Mr. Hughes explained that the City's insurance policies run from July to July yet the City is
on a January to January budget. The 'not within budget' mount would be paid for from the
contingency line in the budget which is held in reserve for situations like this.
Member Housh inquired whether LMC Might offer a deductible type of program. Mr.
Crowther said he believed that they might do this. Mr. Hughes commented that this scenario
was considered and it was found similar in cost.
Member Masica made a motion for award of bid for the annual renewal of Workers'
Compensation Insurance to the recommended sole bidder, League of Minnesota Cities
Insurance Trust (LMCIT) at $319,312.00. Member Housh seconded the motion.
Ayes: Housh, Hovland, Kelly, Masica, Maetzold
Motion carried.
"TRAFFIC SAFETY STAFF REVIEW OF TUNE 6, 2001, APPROVED Motion made by
Member Hovland and seconded by Member Housh approving the Traffic Safety Staff
Review of June 6,2001, Section A.
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
Installation of NO PARKING RESTRICTIONS for the east side of Sherwood
along Sherwood Park; and
Installation of a STOP sign on Bissen Circle at Waterman Avenue; and
STOP SIGN AHEAD warning sign be placed on West 57th Street eastbound -
half way between Beard Avenue and Chowen Avenue; and
Council resolution of approval of NO PARKING RESTRICTIONS be installed
from ten feet north of the driveway at 5624 Xerxes to ten feet south of the
driveway at 5628_Xerxes;-and
Parking be eliminated from the east side of the 6500 block of Drew Avenue to
accommodate the redesigning of that street;
Section B. and C.
I Motion carried on rollcall vote - four ayes.
Motion made by Member Hovland and seconded by Member Housh introducing the - __ following resolution and moving its adoption:
Page 14
MinutesBdina City Council/Cune 19,2001
RESOLUTION NO. 2001-49
REQUESTING THAT HENNEPIN COUNTY
BAN PARKING ON THE WEST SIDE
OF XERXES AVENUE BETWEEN 5624 AND 5628
WHEREAS, the City of Edina has received a request from residents requesting "No
Parking" in front of their residences to allow safe access in and out of their driveways; and
WHEREAS, between January 1,1997 and December 31,2000, there have been seven
accidents in this area that have been reported;
WHEREAS, Xerxes Avenue is a major collector street with heavy traffic both AM
and PM rush hours and steady traffic levels during daytime hours.
NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, by the Edina City Council that Hennepin
County is hereby requested to install of "No Parking" signs on the west side of Xerxes
Avenue from ten feet north of the driveway at 5624 Xerxes to ten feet south of the
driveway 5628 Xerxes Avenue.
Passed and adopted this 19th day of June, 2001.
Motion carried on rollcall vote - four ayes.
JOINT POWERS AND GROUND LEASE AGREEMENT FOR SOUTHWEST METRO
PUBLIC SAFETY TRAINING CENTER APPROVED Mi. Hughes said based upon his
research since the June 5,2001, meeting, he has concluded that:
0 Our training facility partners are disappointed but will continue to participate if
the Council decides to table the issue for two to three months.
No other sites currently owned by our partners are available for the training
facility.
0 Eden Prairie was negotiating the acquisition of a site they believe would be
suitable for the facility, However, MAC may not agree to this location.
0 A two or three month delay in the project will likely not jeopardize the State grant;
however, substitution of a new site for the Braemar site may be a problem.
0 Relocation of the site to another city will be of financial consequence to the City,
but would free up the site for other uses.
0 If the site were used for a freestanding field house, construction costs of about
$10,300,000 to about $12,500,000 depending upon the number of gymnasiums and
annual operating costs of $300,000+ based upon the Hopkins/Lindbergh
experience. User fees and donations could offset a portion of the operating costs.
0 Other potential uses include an air-supported dome, a multi-purpose outdoor
athletic field, a dog park and an outdoor public works/park maintenance storage
area. More research would be necessary to evaluate these uses.
Correspondence has been received from Attorney Thomas White, of Klein and White Law
Office, who wrote as Chair of the Edina Park Board, urging the council to reject the proposed
plan, and work with the Park Board in an effort to develop the land in a way that can best
serve the citizens of Edina. Richard Ward sent an e-mail encouraging the tabling of the
training facility issue until further review of City recreational facilities needs. I
Page 15
Minutes/Edina City CouncivTune 19,2001
Writing in favor of the training facility were Bob and Sue Rofidal, 7125 Bristol Boulevard,
Chris Rofidal, 5037 West 56th Street, and Todd and Karen Miller, 4804 School Road.
A Resolution of Support for construction of the Southwest Metro Public Safety Training
Center, adopted at their June 15,2001, Edina Crime Prevention Fund meeting, was presented
to the Council.
Member Kelly asked what the surrounding cities were doing for training facilities at present.
Chief Scheerer said they all wanted to partner as well but did not have the funds to do so.
Member Kelly asked how they were training their police and fire personnel. Mr. Scheerer
said currently they have live-burn training on homes ready for demolition. Surrounding
cities were planning to rent the proposed training facility. Mr. Siitari said that St. Louis Park
and Richfield both have small ranges that accommodate their departments.
Mayor Maetzold asked if having a training facility in Edina was important because of the
different way fire-fighters were hired today. Mr. Scheerer explained that in the past most fire-
fighters were trained by the military, now the City hires paramedics and trains them as fire-
fighters.
Tom White, 5705 Hawkes Drive, Edina citizen and Chair of the Park Board, said for three or
four years the Board has asked staff what was going on with the former Brian Whipperman
Gun Range. Responses were heard that a police-training site would be built on the site. Upon
being appointed to the Park Board, he asked that the gun range be put on the agenda.
Coincidentally, the State approved the funding for the training facility and all of a sudden
was a done deal. The Park Board supports the Police and Fire Departments but would be
adamantly opposed to using the site for a training facility. The Board feels selling parkland
for any price would be against what Edina was about and would be setting a precedent.
Jim Van Valkenburg, 4204 Philbrook Lane, endorsed 1) the resolution submitted by the
Edina Crime Prevention Fund; and 2) the written and oral report given by Mr. Hughes. He
stated a committee was being formed to analyze the reason the referendum lost and to make
plans for the future. He reminded the Council of the savings the City would realize if the
facility were built and asked the Council to approve building the facility. Member Housh
asked Mr. Van Valkenburg his position. Mi. Van Valkenburg stated he supports the building
of the training facility, but also is committed to find solutions for recreation facility needs.
Betsy Robinson, 5021 Ridge Road, voiced concern with giving up parkland. During the
referendum, she surveyed 33 parks in the 1996 referendum and noted a net loss of total
parkland. She requested that more emphasis be put on preserving existing park land. Ms.
Robinson questioned, 1) what was the value today of the subject property, and 2) what
would happen to the property if the partners broke up.
Greg Bjork, 6605 Field Way, President of the Edina Basketball Association, stated this was a
difficult issue. He thanked the Council for their effort with the referendum. The Basketball
Association heard that 1) there was a need for recreational facilities in Edina, and 2) that a
Page 16
MinutesBdina City CounciVTune 19,2001
joint powers agreement between the City and School was not going to happen. He stated that
while he supports the training facility, all other uses of the facility need to be explored.
Ken Rosland, 7622 York Avenue, former Edina City Manager and an Edina resident for 41
years said Park and Recreation has been his main interest. Mr. Rosland gave conceptual
history of the training center and urged the Council to approve going forward with its
construction. Mr. Rosland stated he believed a balance can be achieved as well as a creative
way found to solve the need for additional recreational facilities.
Jim Welna, 5139 West 44h, Edina resident and Director of Public Safety for the Metropolitan
Airports Commission, said each Fire Chief/Police Chief would like to have the training
facility in their city. Edina has the best site for the facility and our mutual aid response
partners would be afforded access for their training. Mr. Welna added that all residents of
Edina would benefit from well trained Fire and Police Departments.
Ted Brinkman, 7012 Carey Road, said he was developing a different opinion of the proposal
and believes the training facility will not only benefit Edina, but the surrounding
communities. He urged the Council to vote in favor of building the training facility and
encouraged the Council to continue pursuing recreational facilities.
Linda Presthus, 7104 Lanham Lane, representing the Park Board, the Edina Basketball
Association, Blue Ribbon Committee, and the Vote "YES" Committee for the referendum,
stated while she supports the Police and Fire facility her heart was with the Park Board in
their quest to keep the site as park land. Ms. Presthus stated there was a great need for not
only gymnasiums, but soccer fields, lacrosse fields, rugby fields, a dog park, etc. She
concluded that this was one piece of land that could be utilized for identified park uses and
urged tabling the issue for more study.
I
Ardis Wexler, 4913 Larkspur Lane, serves on the Park Board and Metro Park and Open Space
Commission and encouraged the Council to take the time to study the issue further. She
stated that once open space was used for construction of a facility, use of the land for open
space was gone.
Member Kelly noted the Park Board's unanimous decision to defer this decision persuades
him to concur with that decision. He commented that we can not send children to another
suburb for recreational uses as easily as sending the Fire and Police Departments to another
city for training. He suggested more time be taken to study the issue and determine
conclusively what the appropriate use of that site would be as well as the actual value of the
land.
Member Housh said he was formerly on the Park Board and believes strongly in preserving
park land. The outcome of the referendum tells him that the needs were not demonstrated to
the broader community. When long-time Park and Recreation persons come forward in
support of the training facility and still do not lose site of the fact that recreational facilities
are needed, he is convinced it can be done. Putting the project off would only put it in
Page 17
Minutes/Edina City Council/'lune 19,2001
jeopardy and he stated he would support the construction of the training facility. Mr. Housh
asked Mr. Hughes to elaborate on the valuation of the site. Mr. Hughes said the most
comparable property sold in the area was sold by the City. That site was 12 plus acres and
facilitated the construction of a 150,000 square foot, seven story office building as well as
another 10,000 square foot building. The recently sold site has better visibility, better access
and was larger than the subject site. That site recently sold for $1,100,000. The proximity to
the freeway and size of the site validates the $950,000 negotiated value of the Braemar site.
Member Housh concluded that using the site for a training facility is the higher cause and
delaying the decision would complicate the issue. He stated his willingness to work with
whatever groups are formed to ascertain recreational needs within the entire community,
and seek solutions to solve those needs.
I
Member Hovland said he considered this project complete except for affixing signatures to
the agreement. He said he believes this was the highest and best use for the property.
Historically the site was used as a gun range and the training facility would be continuing
this historic use. Member Hovland said if the Park Board were asked about the training
facility six years ago, they would have loved the idea. The Blue Ribbon Committee looked at
this site and rejected it because of the operating costs. The City, at this juncture, asked the
School District to partner with the City. The site could be used for a dog park but he said he
was not willing to spend $1,000,000 on one. Member Hovland said it seemed positive to him
to get part ownership in a $6,000,000 facility for $200,000 that will benefit all Edina citizens.
He suggested moving forward with a review of the joint powers agreement and approve
construction of the training facility.
Member Masica, said what she sees were two main questions: "what does the community
want'' and "which option serves the comunity best." She stated she believed the community
has been diminished by not having competitive athletic facilities for numerous reasons. She
came to this meeting with an open mind and concluded that she was not sure an athletic field
was the highest and best use for the site. Member Masica said if she knew there were other
locations for recreational facilities, she would vote for the faciIity to go forward. Ms. Masica
commended Manager Hughes with his ability to maintain his professionalism, and does not
know if a decision should be made tonight or if time should be taken to flush out sites for
recreational facilities.
Mayor Maetzold commented his position has not changed from the last meeting and he
remains highly in favor of the training facility going forward. After receiving Mr. Hughes'
report, he realized there were other areas in Edina that recreational facilities could be located.
He said Police and Fire training were extremely important and cited two personal incidences
where this was proven.
Member Kelly said he was not opposed to the facility but he believes further study and
public input is necessary and therefore will not support the vote.
Member Hovland indicated this facility has been worked on for six years and given carefuI
thought. Promises made should be honored.
I
Page 18
Minutes/Edina City Counciflune 19,2001
Mayor Maetzold asked what additional information would come forward if a public hearing
were held.
Mr. Hughes said it was the Council's decision whether to hold a public hearing or not.
Ultimately the Council would need to issue a conditional use permit for the building itself
and this would occur probably in the fall.
Member Masica said she believes no more information will be gleaned from a public hearing.
She suggested a short postponement allowing staff to discern whether the alternative sites
would work.
Member Kelly concurred with Member Masica that analyses of the referendum's results
would be available if the issue was tabled for a short time.
Member Housh reiterated that all avenues should be examined and additional partnerships
considered.
Member Masica said a suggestion did come forward suggesting a School Bond Referendum
where the Hopkins School District would be eliminated from the mix.
Member Housh added that maybe a currently private athletic facility might want to liquidate
their facility. He does not believe that tabling the issue for 2 -3 months would change I anything.
Member Hovland made a motion approving the Joint Powers and Ground Lease
Agreement for the Southwest Metro Public Safety Training Center as presented. Member
Housh seconded the motion.
Rollcall:
Ayes: Housh, Hovland, Maetzold
Nays: Kelly, Masica
Motion carried.
SENIOR NEIGHBORHOOD COORDINATOR FOR EDINA HUMAN RELATIONS
COMMISSION PRESENTED Greg Winter, Human Relations Commissioner explained the
goal in presenting a proposal for a Senior Neighborhood Coordinator which the Human
Relations Commission developed as a result of information provided by Senior Outreach,
was to organize neighbors and other community volunteers to provide appropriate
assistance to frail elderly Edina residents to help them remain in their community and be
effectively connected to informal and formal support system.
Initial funding commitments would be for a one-year "network assessment" phase through a
hired coordinator. During this first phase, data collection and assessment would be the
central undertaking with the following goals for the second phase:
0 Identify needs of the frail elderly that could be met by informal networks;
Page 19
Minutes/Edina Citv CouncWune 19,2001
Benchmark similar programs in other communities around methods for providing
an outside coordinating function;
Meet with informal networks to develop an understanding of the needs of the frail
elderly in a given neighborhood and develop a specific plan for meeting those
needs;
Be available to informal networks to share resources and insightslexperiences; and
Assess the outcomes from operations of informaI networks and report those
outcomes to the City.
Mr. Hughes noted that this could include a partnership with Senior Community Services, a
non-profit organization in Suburban Hennepin County. Census data just received portrays
the population of Edina at 6,000 persons age 75 and over. He added that twenty-two percent
of the population was 65 years of age and older.
No Council action was taken.
CONCERN OF RESIDENT Laurie McNarnara, Citizen Representative on the Dan Patch
Policy Committee, voiced concern with the feasibility process study that was on-going and
the indecisiveness of the committee. She explained three decisions could be made after one
and one-half years, 1) Yes, the commuter rail was feasible, 2) No, the commuter rail was not
feasible and 3) There would be no decision. Persons whose property abuts the corridor would
remain in limbo if no decision were made because of red estate disclosure laws for up to
twenty years. She asked the Council to listen to their constituents and to form a plan to
protect the citizens of Edina. Ms. McNarnara gave a brief history of the Dan Patch Commuter
Rail Corridor.
Larry Baer, 5900 Hansen Road, member of the Edina Citizens Opposed to Commuter Rail,
commented that he was not anti-railroad but was anti-retrofit. He attended a meeting of the
35W AlJiance recently. Originally a station location was to be near Vernon and Gus Young
Lane but now tentatively it would be near Cahill and 1-494. It was predicted that fourteen
trains per day would cross Edina at 35 mph with fares similar to those of the bus. Daily usage
of the whole route would be 3700 with 3400 driving to the commuter rail stations while it
was predicted that Edina would have rider-ship of 350. Little information about property
values was available. Environmental impacts were numerous. Estimated cost to consbmct
would be $440 million dollars and operating costs of $12 million annually. Mr. Baer stated
reasons for the committee's opposition were, 1) safety, 2) environmental issues, 3) freight
volume creates various other concerns, 4) trail derailments, 5) located in the backyards of $37
million dollars worth of Edina properties; 6) no savings on auto usage, and 7) no benefit to
Edina but a subsidy to surrounding communities. Mr. Baer asked the Council to take a
position of opposition to the project and that the position be presented to the 35W Alliance.
Jim Welby, 6411 Limerick Drive, elaborated on the numerous hours spent on the proposed
Dan Patch Commuter Rail. He said the committee in opposition has collected 436 signatures
from persons believing the project not to be feasible. He solicited the Council to take a
position of opposition to be presented to the 35W Alliance.
Page 20
MinutesEdha City Counciwune 19,2001
David Lillehaug, 6701 Parkwood Lane, said he is a lawyer representing 56 townhome
residents in connection with the North Star Rail project. He told that once the Commissioner
of Transportation prepared an advance corridor plan, identifying the corridor and station
locations, a very small window of 45 days exists to influence what happens. If a station is
proposed for your community, there are two choices, 1) to approve the design and location,
or, 2) disapprove it. If disapproved, conditions must be laid out that if approved by the
Commissioner would lead to approval. Based upon his experience, he suggested, 1) tell
Commission of Transportation when the plan was prepared, it must contain a full-analysis of
land-use environmental impacts; and 2) the Council must undertake a noise study of the
proposal which was an important factor for the citizens of Edina.
A discussion followed and focused on acquiring data, soliciting our elected officials, and
stating that our case would be stronger if the data was not forthcoming.
JoEllen Dever, 5101 West 70th Street, voiced concern with the lack of information being given
the public. She explained she has been networking with everyone she meets to inform them
of the proposed commuter rail system.
Mr. Hughes suggested revisiting the process to gain an overview of where the corridor plan
was headed, then come back before the Council at a future time.
No formal Council action was taken. I
"CLAIMS PAID Member Hovland made a motion and Member Housh seconded the
motion approving payment of the following claims as shown in detail on the Check
Register dated June 7, 2001, and consisting of 29 pages: General Fund $184,812.72;
Communications Fund $49.71; Working Capital Fund $6,669.21; Construction Fund
$3,632.68; Art Center Fund $2,189.41; Golf Dome Fund $4,599.85; Aquatic Center Fund
$1,660.84; Golf Course Fund $16,926.91; Ice Arena Fund $9,972.93; Edinborough/Centennial
Lakes Fund $6,624.18; Liquor Fund $135,038.30; Utility Fund $60,581.68; Storm Sewer Fund
$1,792.55; TOTAL $434,550.97 and the following claims as shown in detail on the Check
Register dated June 7, 2001, and consisting of June 14,2001, and consisting of 32 pages:
General Fund $188,954.22; CDBG $37.00; Communications Fund $15.04; Working Capital
Fund $11,518.20; Construction Fund $87,977.90; Art Center Fund $921.79; Golf Dome Fund
$3,381.10; Aquatic Center Fund $23,849.53; Golf Course Fund $33,634.49; Ice Arena Fund
$8,829.42; Edinborough/Centennial Lakes Fund $8,964.74; Liquor Fund $103,731.92; Utility
Fund $235,157.09; Storm Sewer Fund $30,687.20; Recycling Fund $29,618.50; Payroll Fund
$300,000.00; TOTAL $1,067,278.14.
Motion carried on rollcall vote - four ayes.
COMPREHENSIVE ANNUAL FINANCIAL REPORT (CAFR) RECEIVED FOR YEAR
ENDING DECEMBER 31,2000 Director Wallin explained that the Comprehensive Annual
Financial Report was the accumulation of the City's financial functions compiled in a format
prescribed by the Financial Accounting Standards Board, the Governmental Accounting
Standards Board, the State of Minnesota and the Federal Government.
Page 21
MinutesEdha Citv CouncivTune 19,2001
Following a brief Council discussion, Member Hovland made a motion accepting the
Comprehensive Annual Financial Report (CAFR) for year ending December 31,2000, as
presented.
Ayes: Housh, Hovland, Kelly, Masica, Maetzold
Motion carried.
There being no further business on the Council Agenda, Mayor Maetzold declared the
meeting adjourned at 11:05 P.M.
c/ Cityclerk
Page 22