Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
1997-06-16_COUNCIL PACKET
AGENDA EDINA HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY EDINA CITY COUNCIL JUNE 16, 1997 7:00 P.M. ROLLCALL ADOPTION OF CONSENT AGENDA Adoption of the Consent Agenda is made by the Commissioners as to HRA items and by the Council Members as to Council items. All agenda items marked with an asterisk ( *) in bold print are Consent Agenda items and are considered routine and will be enacted by one motion. There will be no separate discussion of such items unless a Commissioner, Council Member or citizen so requests it. In such cases the item will be removed from the Consent Agenda and considered in its normal sequence on _the Agenda. * I. APPROVAL OF MINUTES of HRA Meeting of June 2, 1997 * II AWARD OF BID Improvement No. PL -3, Centennial Lakes South Pond Wall and Pond Liner RoUcaHIII. PAYMENT OF HRA CLAIMS as per pre -list dated 06/12/97 TOTAL: $7,842.17 IV. ADJOURNMENT EDINA CITY COUNCIL * I. APPROVAL OF MINUTES - Regular Meeting of. June 2, 1997 II. 100% PETITIONED PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS - Presentation by Engineer. Public comment heard. If Council wishes to proceed, action by resolution. 3/5 favorable rollcall vote of all members of the Council required to pass if improvement is petitioned for. Rollcall A. Sanitary Sewer Extension 5311 Evanswood Lalne, Charles Gits, Improvement No. SS -389 RollcaU B. Watermain Extension Coventry Watermain 4°i Phase, Improvement No. WM -380 . III. PUBLIC HEARINGS AND REPORTS ON PLANNING MATTERS - Affidavits of Notice by Clerk. Presentation by Planner. Public comment heard. Motion to close hearing. Zoning Ordinances: First and Second Reading require 4/5 favorable rollcall vote of all members of Council to pass. Waiver of Second Reading: 4/5 favorable rollcall of all members of Council to pass. Final Development Plan Approval of Property Zoned Planned District: 3/5 favorable rollcall vote required to pass. Conditional Use Permit: 3/5 favorable rollcall vote required to pass. Rollcall A. Final Development Plan and Plat Approval Four S Properties, Inc. 5229 Eden Avenue - continued from 6/2/97 Rollcall B. Preliminary Rezoning - PID Planned Industrial District to R -1 Single Dwelling Unit District, 5229 Eden Avenue, City of Edina Rollcall C. Preliminary Plat - Halla Division, 6601 Mohawk Trail, Don and Sandy. Halla Rollcall D. Final Plat - Doepke Division, 5920 West 70`' Street, Lori Baron IV. AWARD OF BIDS * A. Basketball Courts at Lewis, Utley & Weber. Parks, Contract 97 -2PK continued until 7 /7/97 * B. Park Ballfield Regrading at Braemar & Pamela Parks, Contract 97 -6PK * * * Agenda/Edina City Council June 16 1997 Page 2 C. Insurance Renewal, Workers Compensation, General Liability, Equipment, Liquor & Pollution D. Insurance Renewal, Property '•" ; •► a •• I191►1►� A. Traffic Safety Report of June 2, 1997 B. Local Initiatives Projects with MnDOT Authorization C. I- 494/TH 169 Interchange Update D. Minnehaha Watershed District Regional Ponding E. Right -Of -Way Encroachment Agreement - KMC Telecom Inc. F. Senior Center Presentation * A. Receive Petition Requesting Sidewalk on the North Side of Townes Road & West Side of Maple Road * B. Receive Petition Requesting Permanent Street Surfacing & Storm Sewer on Wooddale Glen • ► • _ • AZI VIII. INTERGOVERNMENTAL ACTIVITIES I� X. XI. Rollcall Rollcall MANAGER'S MISCELLANEOUS ITEM A. Council Communications FINANCE A. Receive 1996 Comprehensive Annual Financial Report (CAFR) and Management Letter B. Payment of Claims as per pre -list dated 06/12/97 TOTAL: $1,250,416.84 and for confirmation of payment as per pre -list dated 06/13/97 TOTAL: $425,465.01 SCHEDULE OF UPCOMING MEETINGS Mon Jun 23 Special Council Meeting 5:00 P.M. Fri Jul 4 INDEPENDENCE DAY OBSERVED - City Hall Closed Mon Jul 7 Budget Assumptions 5:00 P.M. Mon Jul 7 Regular Council Meeting 7:00 P.M. Mon Jul 21 Regular Council Meeting 7:00 P.M. Mon Aug 4 Regular Council Meeting 7:00 P.M. Wed Aug 13 Budget Hearing 5:00 P.M. Mon Aug 18 Regular Council Meeting 7:00 P.M. Wed Aug 20 Budget Hearing 5:00 P.M. Mon Sep 1 LABOR DAY OBSERVED - City Hall Closed Tues Sep 2 Regular Council Meeting 7:00 P.M. Mon Sep 15 Regular Council Meeting 7:00 P.M. COUNCIL CHAMBERS COUNCIL CHAMBERS COUNCIL CHAMBERS COUNCIL CHAMBERS COUNCIL CHAMBERS COUNCIL CHAMBERS COUNCIL CHAMBERS COUNCIL CHAMBERS COUNCIL CHAMBERS COUNCIL CHAMBERS REVISED AGENDA EDINA HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY EDINA CITY COUNCIL JUNE 16, 1997 7:00 P.M. ROLLCALL ADOPTION OF CONSENT AGENDA Adoption of the Consent Agenda is made by the Commissioners as to HRA items and by the Council Members as to Council items. All agenda items marked with an asterisk ( *) in bold brint are Consent Agenda items and are considered routine and will be enacted by one motion. There will be no separate discussion of such items unless a Commissioner, Council Member or citizen so requests it. In such cases the item will be removed from the Consent Agenda and considered in its normal sequence on the Agenda. I. APPROVAL OF MINUTES of HRA Meeting of June 2, 1997 II AWARD OF BID Improvement No. PL -3, Centennial Lakes South Pond Wall and Pond Liner RollcaIIIII. PAYMENT OF HRA CLAIMS as per pre -list dated 06/12/97 TOTAL: $7,842.17 X1303[ 0 IllZi &i:1Z PUP " I. APPROVAL OF MINUTES - Regular Meeting of June 2, 1997 H. 100% PETITIONED PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS - Presentation by Engineer. Public comment heard. If Council wishes to proceed, action by resolution. 3/5 favorable rollcall vote of all members of the Council required to pass if improvement is petitioned for. RoUcaU A. Sanitary Sewer Extension 5311 Evanswood Lalne, Charles Gits, Improvement No. SS -389 Rollcall B. Wa mnain Extension Coventry Watermain 0' Phase, Improvement No. WM -380 III. PUBLIC HEARINGS AND REPORTS ON PLANNING MATTERS.- Affidavits of Notice by Clerk. Presentation by Planner. Public comment heard. Motion to close hearing. Zoning Ordinances: First and Second Reading require 4/5 favorable rollcall vote of all members of Council to pass. Waiver of Second Reading.: 4/5 favorable rollcall of all members of Council to pass. Final Development Plan Approval of Proger6E Zoned Planned District: 3/5 favorable rollcall vote required to pass. Conditional Use Permit: 3/5 favorable rollcall vote required to pass. Rollcall A. Final Development Plan and Plat Approval Four S Properties, Inc. 5229 Eden Avenue - continued from 612/97 Rollcall B. Preliminary Rezoning - PID Planned Industrial District to R -1 Single Dwelling Unit District, 5229 Eden Avenue, City of Edina Rollcall C. Preliminary Plat - Halla Division, 6601 Mohawk Trail, Don and Sandy Halla ._ ipxoj W- 111 A. Basketball Courts at Lewis, Utley & Weber Parks, Contract 97 -2PK continued until 7 /7/97 B. Park Ballfield Regrading at Braemar & Pamela Parks, Contract 97-6PK Agenda/Edina City Council June 16 1997 Page 2 * C. Insurance Renewal, Workers Compensation, General Liability, Equipment, Liquor & Pollution * D. Insurance Renewal, Property N111119RAZOMW M I :_ •emu_ � �;_ •► * A. Traffic Safety Report of June 2, 1997 B. Local Initiatives Projects with MnDOT Authorization C. I- 494/TH 169 Interchange Update D. Minnehaha Watershed District Regional Ponding E. Right -Of -Way Encroachment Agreement - KMC Telecom Inc. F. Senior Center Presentation VI. COMMUNICATIONS AND PETITIONS * A. Receive Petition Requesting Sidewalk on the North Side of Townes Road & West Side of Maple Road * B. Receive Petition Requesting Permanent Street Surfacing & Storm Sewer on Wooddale Glen VII. CONCERNS OF RESIDENTS VIII. INTERGOVERNMENTAL ACTIVITIES IX. SPECIAL CONCERNS OF MAYOR AND COUNCIL A. Council Communications XI. FINANCE RollcaU A. Receive 1996 Comprehensive Annual Financial Report (CAFR) and Management Letter Rollcall B. Payment of Claims as per pre -list dated 06/12/97 TOTAL: $1,250,416.84 and for confirmation of payment as per pre -list dated 06/13/97 TOTAL: $425,465.01 - , SCHEDULE OF UPCOMING MEETINGS_ Mon Jun 23 Special Council Meeting 5:00 P.M. Fri Jul 4 INDEPENDENCE DAY OBSERVED - City Hall Closed Mon Jul 7 Budget Assumptions 5:00 P.M. Mon Jul 7 Regular Council Meeting 7:00 P.M. Mon Jul 21 Regular Council Meeting 7:00 P.M. Mon Aug 4 Regular Council Meeting 7:00 P.M. Wed Aug 13 Budget Hearing 5:00 P.M. Mon Aug 18 Regular Council Meeting 7:00 P.M. Wed Aug 20 Budget Hearing 5:00 P.M. Mon Sep 1 LABOR DAY OBSERVED - City Hall Closed Tues Sep 2 Regular Council Meeting 7:00 P.M. Mon Sep 15 Regular Council Meeting 7:00 P.M. COUNCIL CHAMBERS COUNCIL CHAMBERS COUNCIL CHAMBERS COUNCIL CHAMBERS COUNCIL CHAMBERS COUNCIL CHAMBERS COUNCIL CHAMBERS COUNCIL CHAMBERS COUNCIL CHAMBERS COUNCIL CHAMBERS REMINDER MONDAY, JUNE 16, 1997 AT 5:00 P.M. SPECIAL COUNCIL MEETING IN THE COUNCIL CHAMBERS TO REVIEW THE 1998 BUDGET ASSUMPTIONS. BOX LUNCH WILL BE PROVIDED BEFORE THE REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING AT 7:00 P.M. MEMORANDUM Date: 06/16/97 To: Mayor Smith & Council Members From: Kenneth Rosland, City Manager RE 1998 BUDGET ASSUMPTIONS AND ADJUSTMENTS This memorandum summarizes the 1998 Budget Assumption and Adjustments that will be considered by the City Council at its first budget assumptions meeting at 5:00 PM on June 16"'. The attached budget assumptions present three scenarios. Scenario 1 includes the budget requests as recommended by our department heads. Scenarios 2 and 3 provide alternatives for your consideration. We understand that the attached scenarios may be somewhat difficult to understand for those who are new to the process. We will use a computer and overhead projector for explaining and analyzing these assumptions at the June 10h meeting. Approximately one week ago, Governor Carlson signed into law the 1997 Omnibus Tax Bill. This law imposes levy limits on all cities for taxes payable in 1998 and 1999. Although this law does not limit the expenditures that the City may choose to make, it does limit the revenues which we may derive from property taxes. In simple terms, our 1998 property tax levy may not exceed our 1997 property tax levy, adjusted by inflation and growth in number of households. Based on this, we estimate that we will be limited to a $411,847 increase in our property tax levy, which equates to approximately a 3% increase from 1997. Some property tax expenditures are not subject to levy limits. These include special levies (e.g. levies for debt service) and the local share for matching grants received from the Federal or State government. These exceptions have been factored in to the budget scenarios. The following summarizes the various components of the budget assumptions model. This information has been supplied by our department heads in justification of their budget requests. Please note that this information addresses all components of Scenario 1. REVENUE ADJUSTMENTS 1. CITY HALL CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT FUND - At the 1996 year -end meeting, the City Council agreed to designate $250,000 for the purpose of accumulating a reserve for the renovation of City Hall. In light of the impact of levy limits, we recommend that these funds be redirected to the 1998 operating budget. 2. LIQUOR STORE CONTRIBUTION - The liquor enterprise presently contributes $400,000 to the annual City budget. We recommend that this contribution be reduced to $200,000, and the balance be directed for the purpose of supporting the Enterprise Fund System. 06/16/97 MEMORANDUM 2 1p EXPENDITURE ADJUSTMENTS GENERAL ELECTION - $82,000 is provided for the purpose of managing the 1998 General Election. 2. REFERENDUM ELECTION COSTS- $30,000 is provided to sand expenses associated with the preparation of materials for a bond issue referendum for a public safety facility and City Hall renovation in 1998. 3. PLANNING - $20,000 is requested for expenses associated with the preparation of anew City Comprehensive Plan which must be submitted to the Metropolitan Council in 1998. PARKS The Park Department requests a budget addition of $37,500 to fund additional operating expenses associated with new facilities. These facilities include four new shelter building, three comfort stations and one additional hockey rink. These facilities were constructed with proceeds from the 1996 Park Bond Referendum. POLICE The Police Department requests $54,000 to fund technology upgrades including expansion of the Department's computer network and improving the radio communications system. PUBLICNORKS A $15,000 increase is recommended for the Street Department to permit the hiring of an employee to serve as a combination mechanic and street employee. This funding partially offsets two full - time positions which were eliminated from the Department in 1992 due to budget constraints. 2. TRAFFIC SIGNAL CONVERSION - $12,000 is recommended to convert existing traffic signals to a lighted electronic display. We believe this would lower energy costs as well as reduce annual maintenance activities. 3. NEW HOIST AND DOOR - $9,000 is requested to supplement existing funds for the purpose of adding a new hoist and door in the Public Works facility. We believe that this would enhance our equipment operations at Public Works. 4. MILLING EQUIPMENT - We recommend a $100,000- expenditure for milling equipment. This equipment -is used for renovating streets., 5. TRAFFIC PAINTING EQUIPMENT - $5,000 is requested to purchase a new traffic painting system for the purpose of painting messages on streets in the City. 6. $150,000 is requested for an excavator skid loader which we believe will enhance all street utility and parks operations. 06/16/97 MEMORANDUM HEALTH DEPARTMENT The Health Department is requesting a full -time employee for the purpose of managing our recycling contract and performing other inspection functions, especially inspections related to housing violations. $45,000 is requested for this position, which we believe will be entirely offset by Community Health Service funding as well as recycling revenues. BUILDING DEPARTMENT The Building Department requests an additional $2,400 to support the Building Department computer system. FIRE 1. OVERTIME/CONTRACT ITEMS - The Fire Department requests a $55,000- increase to fund the cost of overtime due to the ever - increasing number of calls. 2. STATION #2 COSTS - $3,000 is requested to fund operating costs associated with the second Fire Station which was completed in 1997. 3. EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT - $30,000 is requested to maintain the current equipment replacement plan. We estimate that heavy equipment costs continue to rise at a rate greater than the funding capacity of the equipment replacement plan. 4. NEW EQUIPMENT - The Fire Department requests $28,000 for various items of new equipment: $10,000 is requested to fund the second phase of equipment for special operations which include confined space entry, water rescue and high -level rescue; $3,000 is requested for protective equipment for responders from our second Fire Station; $15,000 is requested for mobile data terminals for our ambulances to interact with Police and Fire dispatchers. 5. DATA PROCESSING - $10,000 is requested to fund additional software and hardware for a computer network within the Fire Department. 6. FIRE PREVENTION - $1,500 is requested for public education materials and presentation materials specifically targeted for senior populations. 7. PRE - EMPTION SYSTEM - $10,000 is requested for continuation of the Pre - emption System which involves 50"' Street, Vernon Avenue, 701i Street and other related intersections. 8. BUILDING MAINTENANCE - $20,000 is requested for facility maintenance associated with the Tracy Avenue Fire Station. COMMISSIONS AND SPECIAL PROJECTS 1. COMMUNITY RESOURCE CENTER - $8,500 is requested to help fund the $17,000 - increase in operating expenses (marketing and outreach, administration, computer equipment and software and phone). The remaining $8,500 will come from the School District. 06/16/97 MEMORANDUM 2. INTERVENTION PROGRAM /CORNERSTONE - $10,000 is requested to fund a continuation of Cornerstone's services — Criminal Justice Intervention Program —which works as a team with the criminal justice system to ensure consequences for the domestic assault and advocacy for the victim. Presently, the City of Edina funds Cornerstone's Emergency Services in the amount of $5,000 to provide safe housing and support in a crisis situation. 3. SHeRPA FUNDING - $664 is recommended to cover the increase in Edina's share of the cost of funding SHeRPA –the City's planner of human services. 4. HUMAN SERVICES - $2,256 is recommended to cover increases in human service provisions for Edina residents. 5. FIREWORKS - The Park Department recommends a $7,500- increase in the budget for the 41h of July Fireworks Celebration. CENTRAL SERVICES ADJUSTMENT OF FLEXIBLE BENEFITS - We recommend a $23,500- increase in the City's contribution to City- provided benefits for our employees. This represents a $10- per -month per employee increase. TECHNOLOGY PLAN NETWORK CITY HALL - We recommend $56,250 to network all of the PC's in City Hall, together with existing networks in the Engineering Department, the Building Department and the Police Department. This cost would include hardware, software and maintenance. The benefits in networking include E -mail capabilities among departments and with other cites, department head access to payroll and financial records, a reduction in the number of printers, high -speed Internet access, access to County records, access to common information such as State statutes, code and so forth, a centralized FAX server, better inventory of hardware and software within the City and the centralization of backup data. The City Hall network was an integral part of the City's Technology Plan which was adopted last year. RECORDS RETENTION - $15,000 is recommended for record management purposes throughout City Hall. This would include scanning equipment and other equipment necessary to store our records in compliance with State law. 3. FACILITY SECURITY SYSTEM - $15,000 is included for equipment to manage the keyless entry systems in various facilities. 6/12197 1996 Budget Assumptions - Scenario 1 1996 1997 1998 % INCREASE TAX $ 6.91% 3.51% % INCREASE IN EXPENDITURES 4.97% 3.49% • • l ' IMPACT ON TOTAL TAX BILL 1 1.110/0 USING SCENARIO: 9.00% 8.00% 7.00% 6.00% j6.00% m L v 4.00% 3.00% 2.00% 1.00% 0.00% % Change in Expenditures and Taxes 95 -98 :6.91% 4.97% 4.39 0/c 4.24% 3.49 %3.61 %d 496,883 1996 1996 1997 1998 Year ■ EXPEND. . ❑TAXES Page 1 ACTUAL BUDGET BUDGET 1996 1997 1998 SCENARIO USED TOTAL REVENUES 17,318,689 17,329,679 18,508,978 TOTAL EXPENDITURES 16,165,806 17,079,679 18,258,978 PROPERTY TAX DOLLARS 11,747,743 12,531,244 13,600,168 * Includes loss due to abatements of $250,000 LEVY LIMIT % 3.04% OVER- LEVY LIMIT 496,883 % CHANGES IN TAXES & EXPENDITURES PROPOSED 1996 1997 1998 % INCREASE TAX $ 6.91% 3.51% % INCREASE IN EXPENDITURES 4.97% 3.49% • • l ' IMPACT ON TOTAL TAX BILL 1 1.110/0 USING SCENARIO: 9.00% 8.00% 7.00% 6.00% j6.00% m L v 4.00% 3.00% 2.00% 1.00% 0.00% % Change in Expenditures and Taxes 95 -98 :6.91% 4.97% 4.39 0/c 4.24% 3.49 %3.61 %d 496,883 1996 1996 1997 1998 Year ■ EXPEND. . ❑TAXES Page 1 6/12/97 1996 Budget Assumptions - Scenario 2 * Includes loss due to abatements of $250,000 LETY LIMIT % 3.04% BELOW LEVY LIMIT % CHANGES IN TAXES & EXPENDITURES me -o l 1996 1997 1998 • INCREASE TAX $ 6.91% 3.61% • INCREASE IN EXPENDITURES 4.97% 3.490/co IMPACT ON TOTAL TAX BILL 1 0.59% USING SCENARIO: 7.00% 6.00% 5.00% -.4.00% C A t V 4.00% 2.00% 1.00% 0.00% (617) % Change in Expenditures and Taxes 95 -98 6.91% ACTUAL BUDGET BUDGET 1996 1997 1998 SCENARIO USED 3.49%.3.61% TOTAL REVENUES 17,318,689 17,329,679 18,086,478 TOTAL EXPENDITURES 16,165,806 17,079,679 17,836,478 PROPERTY TAX DOLLARS 11,747,743 12,531,244 13,102,668 * Includes loss due to abatements of $250,000 LETY LIMIT % 3.04% BELOW LEVY LIMIT % CHANGES IN TAXES & EXPENDITURES me -o l 1996 1997 1998 • INCREASE TAX $ 6.91% 3.61% • INCREASE IN EXPENDITURES 4.97% 3.490/co IMPACT ON TOTAL TAX BILL 1 0.59% USING SCENARIO: 7.00% 6.00% 5.00% -.4.00% C A t V 4.00% 2.00% 1.00% 0.00% (617) % Change in Expenditures and Taxes 95 -98 6.91% 1996 1996 1997 1 998 Year FNEXPEND. ❑TAXES Page 2 4.97% 4.43 %04.56 /0 4.3 9 % o ` _.. 4.24 /0 3.49%.3.61% 1996 1996 1997 1 998 Year FNEXPEND. ❑TAXES Page 2 6/12/97 0 SCENARIO USED TOTAL REVENUES TOTAL EXPENDITURES PROPERTY TAX DOLLARS 1996 Budget Assumptions - Scenario 3 * Includes loss due to abatements of $250,000 ACTUAL BUDGET BUDGET 1996 1997 1998 17,318,689 17,329,679 18,251,978 16,165,806 17,079,679 18,001,978 11,747,743 12,531,244 13,468,168 LEVY LIMIT % 3.04% OVER LEVY LIMIT % CHANGES IN TAXES & EXPENDITURES 1996 1997 1998 • INCREASE TAX $ 6.91% 3.61% • INCREASE IN EXPENDITURES 4.97% 3.49% 1- . IMPACT ON TOTAL TAX BILL 0.97% USING SCENARIO: 8.00% I 7.00% 6.00% 5.00% e J-4.00% 0 3.00% 2.00% 1.00% 0.00% 364,883 % Change in Expenditures and Taxes 95 -98 1995 1996 1997 Year I ■ EXPEND. ❑ TAXES Page 3 6/12/97 Assumptions Used for All Scenarios 16,165,806 17,079,679 18,001,978 % INCREASE IN EXPENDITURES 5.40% ACTUAL BUDGETED ASSUMP % PROPOSED 1996. 1996 1997 INCRSE 1998 SALARIES S STEP PROG. 8,921,002 9,319,1641 3.00% 9,618,739 CONTRACTUAL SVCS. 1,898,400 2,208,6381 2.00% 2,252,811 COMMODITIES 766,047 801,393 2.00% 817,421 CENTRAL SERVICES 3,536,880 3,690,420 3.00% 3,801,133 EQUIPMENT 1,043,477 1,060,064 2.00% 1,081,265 BUDGET ADJUSTMENTS 430,610 16,165,806 17,079,679 18,001,978 % INCREASE IN EXPENDITURES 5.40% TOTAL REVENUES * Includes loss due to abatements of $250,000 17,318,689 17,329,679 % INCREASE IN EXPENDITURES Page 4 18,251,978 5.40% ACTUAL BUDGETED ASSUMP % PROPOSED 1996. 1997 INCRSE 1998 PROPERTY TAXES 11,747,743 12,541,244 13,478,168 FEES, LICENSES & PERMITS 2,570,044 2,012,500 3.00% 2,072,875 COURT FINES /FUND TRANSFERS /ETC. 1,487,552 1,322,200 0.00% 1,322,200 INTERGOVERNMENTAL AID 1,513,350 1,453,735 0.00% 1,453,735 REVENUE ADJUSTMENTS - 75,000 TOTAL REVENUES * Includes loss due to abatements of $250,000 17,318,689 17,329,679 % INCREASE IN EXPENDITURES Page 4 18,251,978 5.40% 6/12/97 1998 New Budget Assumptions REVENUE ADJUSTMENT ITEMS SCENARIO 1 SCENARIO 2 SCENARIO 3 UNRESERVE CITY HALL $ REDUCE LIQUOR STORE CONTRIBUTION TOTAL REVENUE ADJUSTMENTS 250,000 125,000 125,000 (200,000) 0 (200,000) 50,000 125,000 (75,000) NEW PROGRAMS -98 SCENARIO 1 SCENARIO 2 SCENARIO 3 GOVERNMENT: GENERAL GENERAL ELECTIONS 82,000 82,000 82,000 REFERENDUM ELECTION COSTS 30,000 0 0 PLANNING 20,000 20,000 20,000 4 SHELTER BUILDINGS 3 COMFORT STATIONS 1 ADDT'L OUTDOOR HOCKEY RINK TECHNOLOGY UPGRADES SUBTOTAL 20,000 20,000 20,000 7,500 7,500 7,500 10,000 10,000 10,000 54,000 0 54,000 223,500 139,500 193,500 Page 5 6/12/97 1998 New Budget Assumptions NEW PROGRAMS -98 SCENARIO 1 SCENARIO 2 SCENARIO 3 SUBTOTAL 118,400 NEW PROGRAMS -98 SCENARIO 1 SCENARIO 2 SCENARIO 3 40% POSITION -EQUIP OP 15,000 15,000 15;000 TRAFFIC SIGNAL CONWENERGY CONSERV 12,000 12,000 12,000 NEW HOIST & DOOR 9,000 9,000 9,000 LR FINANCING - MILLING EQUIP 100,000 0 25,000 TRAFFIC PAINTING EQUIP 5,000 5,000 5,000 EXCAVATOR/SKID LOADER 150,000 0 50,000 HEALTH /RECYCLING FTE 45,000 45,000 45,000 CHS SUBSIDY + PRESENT RECYC CONT (45,000) (45,000) (45,000) BUILDING MAINT 20,000 7,500 12,500 ANNUAL SOFTWARE SUPPORT 2,400 2,400 2,400 SUBTOTAL 118,400 NEW PROGRAMS -98 SCENARIO 1 SCENARIO 2 SCENARIO 3 OVERTIME /CONTRACT ITEMS 55,000 25,000 30,000 INCREASED STATION #2 COSTS 3,000 3,000 3,000 EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT 30,000 30,000 NEW EQUIP- SPECIAL OPS „PROT EQ.,MDT'S 28,000 28,000 28,000 DATA PROC - NETWORK PC'S & SW UPGRADE 10,000 59000 5,000 FIRE PREVENTION 1,500 0 1,500 PRE - EMPTION SYS CONTINUATION 10,000 10,000 10,000 BUILDING MAINT 20,000 7,500 12,500 • • -• RESOURCE CENTER 8,500 8,500 8,500 INTERVENTION PROGRAM 10,000 10,000 10,000 SHERPA 664 664 664 HUMAN SERVICES 2,256 2,256. 2,256 FIREWORKS 7,500 3,000 39-000 SUBTOTAL 186,420 102,920 144,420 Page 6 6/12/97 1998 New Budget Assumptions NEW PROGRAMS -98 SCENARIO 1 SCENARIO 2 SCENARIO 3 HEALTH INSURANCE CONTRIB $10 1MONTH 23,040 23,040 23,040 INSURANCE PREMIUM REDUCTION (125,000) (125,000) (125,000) TECHNOLOGY PLAN. OPTION A NETWORK CITY HALL 56,250 56,250 56,250 RECORDS RETENTION 15,000 15,000 15,000 FACILITY SECURITY SYSTEM 15,000 10,000 5,000 TOTAL BUDGET ADJUSTMENTS 687,610 265,110 430,610 SUM OF PURPLE(ITALICIZED) ITEMS 413,000 Page 7 MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE EDINA HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY HELD AT CITY HALL JUNE 2,1997- 7:00 P.M. ROLLCALL Answering rollcall were Commissioners Faust, Hovland, Kelly, Maetzold and Chair Smith. CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS APPROVED Motion made by Commissioner Hovland and seconded by Commissioner Kelly to approve and adopt the HRA Consent Agenda items as presented. Rollcall: Ayes: Faust, Hovland, Kelly, Maetzold, Smith Motion carried. *MINUTES OF THE HRA MEETING OF MAY 5. 1997 APPROVED Motion made by Commissioner Hovland and seconded by Commissioner Kelly approving the Minutes of the Regular HRA Meeting of May 19, 1997. Motion carried on rollcall vote - five ayes. *CENTENNIAL LAKES SOUTH POND WALL AND POND LINER BID AWARD CONTINUED TO JUNE 16, 1997 Motion of Commissioner Hovland and seconded by Commissioner Kelly to continue the award of bid for the Centennial Lakes South Pond Wall and Pond Liner to the meeting of June 16, 1997. Motion carried on rollcall vote - five ayes. CLAIMS PAID Commissioner Maetzold made a motion to approve payment of the HRA Claims as shown in detail on the Check Register dated May 28, 1997 and consisting of one page totaling $74,401.53. Commissioner Faust seconded the motion. Rollcall: Ayes: Faust, Hovland, Kelly, Maetzold, Smith Motion carried. There being no further business on the HRA Agenda, Chair Smith declared the meeting adjourned. Executive Director TO: FROM: VIA: REQUEST FOR PURCHASE City of Edina Housing and Redevelopment Authority Francis Hoffman, City Engineer Kenneth Rosland, City Manager SUBJECT: REQUEST FOR PURCHASE IN EXCESS OF $15,000 DATE: 16 June, 1997 AGENDA ITEM HRA• H. ITEM DESCRIPTION: Centennial Lakes South Pond Wall & Pond Liner Company 1. C.S. McCrossan Construction, Inc. 2. Ames Construction 3. Lametti and Sons 4. Jay Brothers 5. RECOMMENDED QUOTE OR BID: C.S. McCrossan Construction, Inc. GENERAL INFORMATION: Amount of Quote or Bid 1. $516,071.10 2. $579,851.35 3. $667,579.00 4. $738,281.50 5. $516,071.10 This is the bid for the south pond wall and pond liner for the Centennial Lakes property to be developed. This project will be funded by the HRA and developer. The engineer's estimate was $631,035.75. Public Works - Engineerin4 Signatur The Recommended Bid is _ within budget not within budget J Kenneth City , Finodce Director COUNCIL CHECK REGISTER WED, JUN 11, 1997, 8:02 PM page 1 CHECK NO DATE CHECK AMOUNT VENDOR DESCRIPTION INVOICE PROGRAM OBJECT PO NUM --------------------------------------------------------------------'--------------------------------------------------------------- 13108 06/16/97 $264.55 AMBERGATE GARDENS PLANTS FOR PC 97 -269 CENTENNIAL LAK PARKS 5455 < *> $264.55* 13109 06/16/97 $1,677.50 COUNTRY CLUB TURF SOD 1753 CENTENNIAL LAK PARKS 526 < *> $1,677.50* 13110 06/16/97 $2,001.15 EARL F. ANDERSON YARDAGE MARKERS 990 CENTENNIAL LAK PARKS 5127 < *> $2,001.15* 13111 06/16/97 $35.00 ERICKSON, JAMES REFUND PARKING PERMIT 052997 50TH STREET PARKING PERMIT < *> $35.00* 13112 06/16/97 $279.24 GRAYBAR ELECTRIC CO. CENT MINI GOLF 786484 CENTENNIAL'LAK MISC 6054 < *> $279.24* 13113 06/16/97 $3,128.68 LEITNER COMPANY PENCROSS SOD MAY STAT CENTENNIAL LAK PARKS 6089 < *> $3,128.68* 13114 06/16/97 $94.50 LUNDS INC REFUND OVERPAYMENT PA 052797 50TH STREET PARKING PERMIT -< *> $94.50* 13115 06/16/97 $291.55 MILTONA TURF PRODUCTS OVERSEEDER /SOD STRIPP 166927 CENTENNIAL LAK PARKS 6703 < *> $291.55* 13116 06/16/97 $35.00 ROEMHILDT, MARJORIE PARKING PERMIT REFUND 053097 50TH STREET PARKING PERMIT < *> $35.00* 13117 06/16/97 $35.00 SMITH, KAREN REFUND PARKING PERMIT 060997 50TH STREET PARKING PERMIT < *> $35.00* $7,842.17* 1k MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE EDINA CITY COUNCIL HELD AT CITY HALL JUNE 2, 1997 -- 7:00 P.M. ROLLCALL Answering rollcall were Members Faust, Hovland, Kelly, Maetzold and Mayor Smith. CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS APPROVED Motion made by Member Hovland and seconded by Member Kelly to approve and adopt the Consent Agenda items except item I. Approval of Minutes of the Regular Meeting of May 19, 1997. Rollcall: Ayes: Faust, Hovland, Kelly, Maetzold, Smith Motion carried. MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF MAY 19, 1997, APPROVED Motion made by Member Hovland and seconded by Member Maetzold approving the Minutes of the Regular Meeting of May 19, 1997 correcting page two paragraph two to read "Member Faust" instead of "Member Hovland ". Motion carried on rollcall vote - five ayes. FINAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR EDINA PROPERTIES (3917 -3929 WEST 50TH STREETI CONTINUED UNTIL JULY 7. 1997 Affidavits of Notice were presented, approved and ordered placed on file. Presentation by Planner Planner Larsen informed Council the subject site is currently developed with a one story concrete block and brick building and is zoned Planned Commercial District -2, (PCD -2). The existing building occupies approximately one half of the site with a paved area occupying the remainder. The City's municipal parking ramp and service tunnel are located adjacent to the site on the south, the Edina Theater is east and a retail office building is west. Planner Larsen explained Edina Properties, the.proponent, has submitted Final Development Plan application to redevelop the site. The plan includes demolishing the existing structure and replacing it,with a building of two stories plus a basement. The first floor is proposed to be retail, the basement a restaurant and storage, with the second floor developed as a four screen expansion to the Edina Theatre. The theater expansion would be connected to the existing theater with a walk - bridge. The plan includes widening the walk -way alley between the theater and the proposed building and would provide direct access from the ramp. In addition, a canopy to be constructed over the walk -way is proposed as a joint project with the Edina HRA. Planner Larsen continued the Zoning Ordinance requires parking' at a rate of one space for each 200 square feet of floor area for general retail. Therefore, the proposed retail space generates a need for 128 parking spaces. The theater expansion • proposes 798 additional seats requiring an additional 80 seats (1 for every 10 seats), because the theater is considered part of a shopping center for parking purposes. Total parking needed by the proposed redevelopment is 208 spaces. Planner Larsen noted receipt of a letter from Edina Properties granting an easement to the City to be exercised within ten years, for use of the "Lunds Food Store" parking lot, to construct a parking structure. The letter detailed Lunds proposed contribution to the future parking structure. Minutes /Edina City Council /June 2 1997 Planner Larsen also pointed out the various options shown by the "Walker Study" that had been included in the Council's background packets. He noted these are options only and not being offered as a solution to the parking issues. Mayor Smith asked about the proposed canopy. Planner Larsen replied the canopy would cover the existing easement connecting 501h Street to the ramp. The walkway would be widened and improved with the canopy added as a joint HRA project. Planner Larsen concluded that the Planning Commission recommended approval subject to: 1. Design modifications as recommended by the Engineering Department, 2. Payment of Parking Assessment for use of Public Parking, and 3. Development Agreement with the Edina HRA for the canopy. Council questions included: the method and rationale used when calculating parking density, the parking survey and its limitations, holiday season parking concerns, concern over potential loss of customers to the 50th Street & France Avenue retail area because of parking & traffic congestion, potential for development of signage directing theater customers to. lesser used ramps, redevelopment plan previously approved by Council, setback from 50th Street of proposed building, exterior finish of proposed building, and the dynamics of parking demand generated by the theater's matinees during peak retail hours. Proponent Presentation John Pazahinick, Edina Properties introduced Steve Qualkinbush of the Edina Theater and Bob Lucias of RSP Design. Mr. Qualkinbush stated he is a downtown merchant and concerned..with the 50th Street & France Avenue business climate. However, the motion picture business is going through changes, (moving to a large number of screens in each theater). He noted the size of each auditorium is growing smaller while more movies are being released each year. The present Edina Theater is wonderful but in the future it will be difficult to compete with the multi- screen complexes. If Edina Theater cannot compete they will no longer be able to show first run movies. However, his opinion was that a theater with eight screens can compete very well with the other complexes. Mr. Qualkinbush explained the statistical data on attendance previously sent to Council and discussed with the Council the theater's impact on parking. He explained theater patrons arrive about % hour before the movie, the movie runs, patrons leave and %s hour is needed for clean up then the cycle repeats. Currently, the Edina Theater staggers the showing time of each screen so people are not all coming and going at, once. Mr. Qualkinbush explained his highest attendance audiences are typically the evening shows. Public Comment Betsy Violante, 4607 Arden Avenue read a statement stating her opposition to the proposed redevelopment. Her reasons included increased traffic congestion, parking issues and that the business will change the nature of the 50th Street & France Avenue area. Mayor Smith asked the City Attorney if the City has the opportunity to deny this type of business. Attorney Gilligan replied the City cannot base either approval or denial on the business type. The decision must be based on whether the proposed redevelopment meets code. Hosmer Brown, Edina resident and business owner in the 50th Street. & France Avenue District, voiced his concerns with the impact of the redevelopment on the traffic and parking in the area. Mr. Brown observed the merchants must be able to serve their customers during the peak time such as Page 2 Minutes /Edina City Council /June 2, 1997 Saturday afternoons to survive. He stated the area is not intended to be a shopping mall. Mr. Brown believes the proposed building is too large for the area and urged denial of the project: Mr. Brown requested Council preserve the ambiance of the 50th Street & France Avenue District. He also asked about staging during the construction. • Al Larson, co -owner of the doctors' building located next to the proposed redevelopment, stated the project will have a significant impact on their property. Mr. Larson stated his building is twenty years old and was built to what he thought was maximum height. Further, Mr. Larson opposes a ramp as outlined being built at the Lunds Food Store. If a ramp is required why would Lunds only pay 20 %. Mr. Larson asked where the remaining 80% would come from. Manager. Rosland explained the remaining 80% funding to build a parking ramp would come from Tax Increment Financing if it is still available, otherwise it would come from a special assessment of the 50th Street & France Avenue businesses. Meg Mannix; 4511 Arden Avenue, presented a petition circulated in her neighborhood containing approximately 70 different property owners' signatures. The petition states the neighbors oppose the Edina Properties development due to scale and traffic congestion.'Ms. Mannix urged denial of the proposal. Ann Scoggen, 4610 Arden Avenue, stated she agreed with the previous comments regarding the proposed development. Ms. Scoggen asked if the development needs a variance for height because she believes this is a four story building in disguise. Ms. Scoggen felt the reason for expansion of the theater was not compelling to granting a variance. Planner Larsen explained the building meets Edina's Code and the variance needed would be from parking standards. He added there are special parking provisions in the 50th Street & France Avenue Business District. Anne Nightingale, 4611 Arden Avenue, noted she had been before Council many times relative to traffic issues in her neighborhood. She added every change opens doors to a change in the tenor of life in the area and urged Council to preserve the character of the neighborhood. Gene Haugland, 5229 West Highwood Drive, one of the partners owning the building where The 'Lotus is located expressed concern with parking problems during the times movies are letting out and patrons for the following show are arriving. Mr. Haugland stated there is a large problem on the south side of 50`h Street. Mr. Haugland also believes there is a need for a plan to deal with trash, snow removal, deliveries, etc. before the proposed redevelopment is approved. Perry Anderson, owner of Belleson's, stated the proposed building is too large, parking is an enormous concern, traffic congestion will increase, and the 50th Street & France Avenue merchants will experience a decrease in customers. Mr. Anderson added the proposed redevelopment should include a parking plan. He submitted a petition opposing the redevelopment signed by merchants in the 50th Street and France Avenue area. Mr. Anderson asked what causes a procedural variance. Planner Larsen explained the Zoning Ordinance noted four sites in the original 50th Street & France Avenue redevelopment plan anticipated to redevelop with a maximum Floor Area Ratio (FAR) of 1.5. The subject site is one of the four sites denoted in the original plan. The other sites include the doctors' building, Hosmer Brown's property, and the Arby's site. These four sites are the only sites allowed to building to the 1.5 FAR density. Page 3 Minutes /Edina City Council /June 2. 1997 Ann Simonson, 4502 Golf Terrace urged denial of the proposal. She believes any change will change the character of the neighborhood. The neighborhood has already suffered the loss of Clancy's. Betsy Violante, asked if any guidelines exist in the ordinances regarding traffic. Staff responded no such guidelines exist. James Grotz, 5513 Park Place asked what happens in the future if the theater does not succeed, then what can the building be remodeled into. Planner Larsen stated they could remodel the same floor area that exists. If a theater did not exist the parking required for the site.goes back to 130 spaces. Council Discussion /Action Member Faust noted in her opinion the traffic study was not correct. She expressed concern over the problems arising during the holiday season when retail merchants must do 70 -80% of their annual business. Member Faust questioned the chances. of renting an additional 14,000 square feet considering the problems with Clancy's. Member Faust stated she believes the only feasible site for a future ramp is the Arby's site. Member Hovland commented judgments must be based on facts and pointed out the.importance of the "village" feel. He noted the concept of "Growing Small and questioned whether the proposed development was in tune with this concept. Member Hovland expressed concern about surface traffic congestion and the over - emphasis of one type of business. He suggested multiple types of business would be better and pointed that the needs of all the businesses in the area must be looked after in decision making. Member Kelly observed the proposed redevelopment was a good design, but noted his concerns: , theater parking, especially on Saturday, needs to be directed to the ramp between 49`h Street and 49% Street, Edina Properties should pay for more than 20% of the cost of building a ramp if the City looses tax increment financing ability, construction staging will have a major impact and needs to be planned as soon as possible, and exactly what impact will the theater expansion have on parking. Member Maetzold supported the proposed redevelopment. He believes it will bring additional customers to the 50th Street & France Avenue area. Member Maetzold continued that evening parking should not be a problem, but expressed concern with Saturday peak parking demand during matinees and holiday parking. He also noted concern with increased traffic congestion and construction staging, noting the sidewalk should not be blocked or foot traffic stopped. Mayor Smith noted the problems with traffic in the area and persons going east on 50th Street turning into the neighborhood in an effort to avoid 50th Street are challenges. He reminded that France Avenue was designed with one lane to make the area look like a small town. Mayor Smith suggested a long term parking plan be developed and put into place before the tax increment financing funds are no longer available. He reminded that two stories is not 46 feet and will not be four stories of use. Mayor Smith noted he would like to see the building set back from France Avenue , but he liked the overall design as proposed. Member Maetzold stated he would support the proposal with the added condition, the developer promulgates a plan with options to handle holiday season parking. Pege 4 Minutes /Edina City Council /June 2 1997 Member Kelly agreed he could support the redevelopment, adding the developer must provide a greater financing contingency in case tax increment financing is lost. In addition, prior to approval a construction staging management plan be developed. Member Faust stated she does not support the proposal because a building four stories in height will take away the village feel of the area. Member Hovland noted he has reservations but is willing to look at issues. He felt an analysis of construction effect on the surrounding business is needed, that the overall size of the building is perhaps too large, and there' are limitations on this site that need review. Mayor Smith directed staff to research concepts for: long range traffic in the district, parking concerns, tentative cost sharing formula agreement with Edina Properties for potential parking structure construction, parking options to solve peaking parking issues, identify and review the floor area ratio of future redevelopment sites and construction staging management plans. Manager Rosland responded that staff would bring back the requested information to the Council at their July 7, 1997 meeting. Attorney Gilligan pointed out that Edina Properties would need to agree to an extension if no action were taken until a later date. John Pazahinick, representing Edina Properties agreed to an extension from action. Member Hovland made a motion continuing action of the Final Development Plan for 3917- 3929 West 501h Street until July 7, 1997 with the consent of the proponent. Member Maetzold seconded the motion. Ayes: Faust, Hovland, Kelly, Maetzold, Smith Motion carried. FINAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN AND PLAT APPROVAL 5229 EDEN AVENUE FOUR S PROPERTIES DENIED AND FINDINGS ARE REQUESTED FOR JUNE 16, 1997 Affidavits of Notice were presented, approved and ordered placed on file. Presentation by Planner Planner Larsen noted the City has received an application for final development plan and plat approval of 5229 Eden Avenue from Four S Properties. The subject site is west of TH 100, south of Eden Avenue, contains approximately six acres and is occupied by an abandoned industrial use building. Over the last ten years a number of different proposals have been heard and acted upon by the City Council for reuse of this property and other properties in the vicinity The 1980 Comprehensive Plan called for an evaluation of the. Grandview Commercial Area to see if it met the test for a redevelopment plan. The evaluation was completed and in 1984 the City Council adopted a tax increment redevelopment plan for the Grandview Area. Following adoption of the plan, in 1985 a study by BRW recommended reuse with either a multi - family residential or office- showroom development. In 1996 Hoisington- Koegler recommended redevelopment for general office use of a combination of office and residential uses. Mayor Smith asked if the City had entertained a proposal from Rainbow Foods and Jerry's and numerous other proposals that were all upgrades from the current industrial zoning. Planner Larsen Page 5 Minutes /Edina City Council /June 2. 1997 replied the Rainbow was the only proposal receiving a denial from Council, the other proposals fell apart for various • reasons before reaching Council. He stated there have been a residential proposal, proposals that included Jerry's and the school bus garage, and most recently the office with industrial reuse of the property to the south (Kunz property), and all the proposals were in Planner Larsen's opinion upgrades from the industrial zoning. Planner Larsen noted the current proposal is a request to construct a mini - storage warehousing facility proposed for the entire Lewis site exclusive of any other property. He noted the present proposal originally needed variances in two areas: a drive aisle variance and a setback. variance from the requirement providing a ten foot planting area adjacent to the building. After the Planning Commission met the proponent revised the original plans to eliminate the drive aisle variance, and to provide the required planting area on the north side of buildings C, D, E, and F. However, the ten foot planting area variance is still needed for the remainder of the project. Planner Larsen passed out to the Council. a number of color photographs submitted by the proponent illustrating various locations in Edina not in conformance with the ten foot planting area. He also noted. the applicant's attorney requested, the packet prepared by the attorney and hand delivered to the Mayor and City Council be made a part of the official record along with a packet passed out at the May 28, 1997, Planning Commission meeting. Planner Larsen explained the history of the area is the basis for the staff recommendation and the Planning Commission recommendation for denial of the proposed Final Development Plan. If after hearing all the evidence the Council concurs with the recommendations, staff suggests Council . refer the matter back to staff to prepare findings and to continue the hearing until June 16, 1997. Mayor Smith noted the receipt sometime over the weekend at his home of legal information. He confirmed with the Planner the purpose of the hearing is to hear a development proposal. Planner Larsen confirmed the Mayor's statement. Proponent Presentation Bill Griffith, 1500 Norwest Financial Center, Bloomington, introduced himself representing Four S Properties, the applicant, in the matter. He presented a graphic depiction of the proposal to be referred to during his presentation. Mr. Griffith stated Four S is a local developer of mini - storage in the Twin Cities and they also develop projects out of town. He introduced Pat Stotesbery and Todd Jones of Four S Properties, Greg Ingraham, planner and landscape architect, Roger Anderson, engineer, and Bob Copeland, contractor for the project. Mr. Griffith reviewed the design aspects and landscaping proposed for the project, noting the developer has in his opinion, gone beyond the minimums to provide an attractive facility. Mr. Griffith pointed out the security fence encircling the project would provide access only to patrons of the storage facility. He added generally someone is on duty twenty-four hours a day. The facility is accessed through a pass key system. Mr. Griffith pointed out the proposed ponding area to provide for surface water treatment. Mr. Griffith stated his purpose was to address standards for approval of the proposal. He noted the legal packet sent to the Council over the weekend. Mr. Griffith stated he felt the legal packet necessary considering the action taken by the City Council. First, is the initiation of R -1 down - zoning of the property to use a holding zone until a determination is made what zoning designation it should have. Also in recent weeks the City has initiated condemnation proceedings placing the proponent in an adverse position with the City. Mr. Griffith pointed out these items stating they are the basis for his legalistic presentation. Page 6 Minutes /Edina City Council /June 2. 1997 Mayor Smith informed Mr. Griffith the Council would entertain a presentation relative to the development, however, it would not listen to what a Council can and cannot do in a development proceeding. He reminded Mr. Griffith that the Council had not yet voted either positively or negatively on Mr. Griffith's clients' project. Mr. Griffith stated his intent to present his clients' proposal and at the same time point out legal tenets. He assured the Mayor the City Attorney could advise the Council on the appropriateness of his presentation. Mayor Smith asked Attorney Gilligan to respond. Attorney Gilligan stated Mr. Griffith could present data pertinent to the development proposal, however, it was unnecessary and inadvisable to get into a legal argument before the Council. Mayor Smith directed Mr. Griffith to continue with his presentation including only the development issues. Mr. Griffith stated his intent to continue with his presentation as part of the public hearing record. Mayor Smith instructed Mr. Griffith to continue with his presentation relative to the proposed development and not the legal issues. Mayor Smith stated Mr. Griffith would have an opportunity to speak to the legal issues after the Council has actually voted on the proposal. Mr. Griffith protested being asked to present only the development issues at this time. Mr. Griffith went on to describe in detail the proposed mini - storage development of Four S Properties. Mr. Griffith stated all the consultants were instructed to develop a plan in compliance with existing City Code and that is what the proponents are presenting. Major elements include a low profile split face brick mini - storage facility with a significant landscape plan. Trip generation will be less than residential developments. He pointed a traffic study supporting his contention. Local residents within three quarters of a mile will be customers of the project. Site topography also contributes to the low impact of the project. The proposed project provides a market based redevelopment meeting the City's redevelopment goals for a "blighted" site. Member Kelly asked Mr. Griffith if he thought the site was "blighted" and did Mr. Griffith's client think the site was "blighted ". Mr. Griffith responded in his opinion the determination was made by the City eleven years ago and yes the site was blighted. Mr. Griffith indicated he has not discussed this condition with his client. Member Kelly requested the record reflect the developer declined to answer the question. Mr. Griffith claimed he felt he had answered adequately. Mr. Griffith stated the variance required by the City is a point of contention because allowing mini - storage as an allowable industrial use makes the requirement for a ten foot planting area incompatible. He referred to the drawing passed out earlier depicting mini - storage with planting areas. Mr. Griffith contended requiring the planting area makes the storage facility not usable. Greg Ingraham, planner and landscape architect, stated the interpretation requiring foundation planting area in Edina's Code is an incorrect interpretation of the code. Mr. Ingraham believes this because he said the code says setback not planting area, there are no projects that totally comply with the requirement. He continued there is a fundamental problem with requiring foundation planting area around a storage facility because it does not further the basic tenet of zoning (public health, safety and welfare) Mr. Ingraham stated he did not see how the public good was served by the planting requirement. He continued that applying the foundation requirement would make the facility unusable. Mr. Griffith stated his main concern in presenting his clients' proposal is the redevelopment plan of the City. Mr. Griffith contended the redevelopment plan is not reflected in the land use designation or zoning classification of the subject property. Mr. Griffith stated Planner Larsen at the last Planning Commission meeting indicated he thought industrial use would give the city the most control as it looks to acquire and redevelop the property. Page 7 Minutes /Edina City Council /June 2 1997 Mr. Griffith stated it is the City Council's job to apply the rules as written. He stated his client has a very good proposal and urged approval as presented. Mr. Griffith stated the plan deserves to be approved. Pat Stotesbery, applicant, indicated his company had been discussing a deal for a long time with Gordon Lewis before they made this purchase with the idea that there is not any mini - storage in the immediate area. He thought the project would be a good use for the City and its residents so they put together a quality plan. Member Faust asked what the exterior of the facility is .proposed and why was a blue roof proposed. Todd Jones, Four S Properties, replied the brick is a split face masonry decorative block around the entire project. The blue roof was thought by the designers to be aesthetically pleasing when tied in with the gray buildings. Mayor Smith asked about storm water ponding on the site. Mr. Jones stated the storm water pond is on the north end of the site near the Sioux Line Railroad tracks and is designed to handle all the storm water from the site. Roger Anderson, civil engineer for Four S, stated he designed the storm water management plan in compliance with the Minnehaha Watershed District guidelines. He said the Walker method of design was used to provide for both the water quality and the detention of the water. He noted the pond is located at the low point of the site and is designed in accordance with the aforementioned standards. Mayor Smith asked Attorney Gilligan to advise the Council on the next step in this process. Attorney Gilligan replied that if Council intends to proceed with the condemnation action, the appropriate action would be to deny the development and request staff to prepare findings of fact and conclusions of law to be presented at a future meeting. Then the proponent would have an opportunity to respond to the findings of fact and conclusions of law. Mayor Smith gave the proponent another opportunity to address the Council, noting he would have an opportunity to address Council on June 16, 1997 when the findings of fact and conclusions of law would be presented. Mr. Griffith declined further comment as long as they 'can have an opportunity to respond to the findings. Public Comment Walter Kunz, 5200 Eden Circle, reminded the Council they do have a legal issue currently with Mr. Lewis. He stated the lawyers are trying to decide who has the right to the land. Mr. Kunz expressed concern regarding the legal sixteen foot easement he has on the Lewis property. He stated the easement grants him twenty -four hour unrestricted access to the property for his use. If Mr. Kunz looses this easement he will have to rearrange his building. If a corner of his building is removed he will have clear access to the easement and the card lock system is not acceptable to him. Member Kelly_ made a motion requesting staff to prepare findings of fact and conclusions of law relative to the denial of the application for final development plan and plat of Four S Properties to be presented to the City Council meeting June 16, 1997. Member Hovland seconded the motion. Rollcall: Ayes: Faust, Hovland, Kelly, Maetzold, Smith Motion carried., Page 8 Minutes /Edina City Council /June 2, 1997 *HEARING DATE SET FOR PLANNING MATTERS Motion of Member Hovland seconded by Member Kelly setting June 16, 1997 for the hearing the following planning matters: 1. Preliminary Rezoning - PID Planned Industrial District to R -1 Single Dwelling Unit District, 5229 Eden Avenue, City of Edina. 2. Preliminary plat Halla, Division, 6601 Mohawk Trail, Don and Sally Halla Motion carried on rollcall vote -five ayes. ORDINANCE NO.1997 -6 AMENDING SECTION 155 DISPOSAL OF UNCLAIMED PROPERTY Police Chief Berhjelm explained staff contacted Edina organizations, but none were willing to take on the purchase the City's unclaimed property for resale. He reviewed the advantages of amending our Code to allow the change: • Reducing overcrowding in our property storage areas through more frequent disposal of Property, • Reduction of staff time for planning and conducting an annual auction, and • Revenue is estimated to remain the same or change only slightly. Chief Bemhjelm stated staff has been looking at using a non - profit organization called City Store. This organization is a training facility located in the Philips neighborhood of Minneapolis. He recommended Council grant first reading of the ordinance and staff will pursue obtaining proposals for contracts from qualified agencies. Member Maetzold made a motion granting first reading to Ordinance No. 1997 -6 amending Section 155 Disposal of Unclaimed Property. Member Faust seconded the motion. Ayes: Faust, Hovland, Kelly, Maetzold, Smith Motion carried. *BID AWARDED FOR IMPROVEMENT NO. A -181 MILL & OVERLAY OF W 70TH STREET AND GLEASON AND CAHILL ROAD' Motion made by Member Hovland and seconded by Member Kelly for award of bid, for Improvement Project No. A -181 to mill and overlay W. 70" Street between Metro Boulevard and Amundson Avenue and between France Avenue and Xerxes Avenue, Gleason Road between W. 701h Street and W. 78'h Street and Cahill Road between Valley View Road and Dewey Hill Road to recommended low bidder Northwest Asphalt, Inc. at $256,998.75 Motion carried on rolicall vote - five ayes. . BID AWARDED FOR BRAEMAR GOLF DOME REPLACEMENT Manager Rosland explained staff had concerns about wear in portions of the golf dome and decided it was prudent to replace the dome this year However, the original vendor is alleging some patent infringement. Staff has reviewed the issues. Attorney. Gilligan does not believe there is an infringement. Manager Rosland recommended replacing the fabric portion of the dome if the City could secure a hold harmless from the vendor Yeadon Fabric Dome /Airena, Inc. Member Faust moved, seconded by Member Maetzold to award the bid including all five deductions for the Braemar Golf Dome Replacement to the recommended low bidder Yeadon. Fabric Dome /Airena, Inc. at $386,205.00 contingent upon the City securing a hold harmless agreement from the vendor. Ayes: Faust, Hovland, Kelly, Maetzold, Smith Motion carried. *BID AWARDED FOR ONE TON FORD PICK UP TRUCK, CENTENNIAL LAKES PARK MAINTENANCE Motion of Member Hovland, seconded by Member Kelly to award the bid for Page 9 Minutes /Edina City Council /June 2, 1997 a 1997 One -ton Ford pick -up truck to recommended lower bidder Boyer Ford Truck at $20,387.00. TRAFFIC TRAILER REPORT Police Chief Bernhjelm stated the Police Department is recommending purchase of a speed monitor trailer. He recommended the Mighty Mover Safety View Model Trailer. Features include an 18" lighted display, flashing speed over set limit, alarm, wheel lock and one -way speed detection. The unit could be deployed around the City based on public requests and needs as determined by City staff. The trailer is intended to be an unmanned device with enough battery power to be deployed for up to six days at one time without recharging. Chief Bernhjelm added the quoted price is $9,555.04. The unit can be adapted to gather speed and volume traffic data by using a traffic counter for an additional cost of approximately $2,100. Graphics if desired could be done locally at a cost of $245. Manager Rosland advised that contingency fund could be used for the purchase. Member Maetzold make a motion authorizing the purchase of a traffic trailer as recommended by the Police Chief. Member Faust seconded the motion. Ayes: Faust, Hovland, Kelly, Maetzold, Smith Motion carried. *PETITION RECEIVED FOR WATERMAIN EXTENSION THE COVENTRY Motion of Member Hovland, seconded by Member Kelly to receive the petition for watermain extension for the Coventry Water Main V' Phase and to refer the.petition to engineering for processing as to feasibility. Motion carried on a rollcall vote - five ayes. ASSOCIATION OF METROPOLITAN MUNICIPALITIES (AMM) INITIATIVE REVIEWED Member Maetzold reported to Council the initiatives discussed at the AMM annual meeting he and Manager Rosland attended as follows: increase membership, enhance the relationship between cities and legislators, Livable Communities Act and Metropolitan Growth, and the Preservation and Maintenance of Affordable Housing. CLAIMS PAID Member Maetzold made a motion to approve payment of the following claims as shown in detail on the Check Register dated May 28, 1997, and consisting of 28 pages: General Fund $211,726.93; CDBG $379.50; Communications $3,401:24; Working Capital $17,227.98; Art Center $7,855.40; Swimming Pool Fund $1,996.72; Golf Course Fund $49,785.24; Ice Arena Fund $2,464.09; Gun Range Fund $99.49; Edinborough /Centennial Lakes $11,697.23; Utility Fund $328,031.18; Storm Sewer Utility Fund $588.38; Liquor Dispensary Fund $176,801.52; Construction Fund $5,067.50; Park Bond Fund $163,026.34; TOTAL $980,148.74 Member Hovland seconded the motion. Rollcall: Ayes: Faust, Hovland, Kelly, Maetzold, Smith Motion carried. There being no further business on the Council Agenda, Mayor Smith declared the meeting adjourned at 11:58 P.M. City Clerk Page 10 REPORT/RECOMMENDATION To: Mayor & City Council From: Francis Hoffma! City Engineer Date: 16 June, 1997 Subject: Sanitary Sewer Extension 5311 Evanswood Lane Improvement SS -389 Agenda Item # H.A. Consent ❑ Information Only ❑ Mgr. Recommends ❑ To HRA ® To Council Action ❑ 91 El Motion Resolution Ordinance Discussion Recommendation: Authorize project Improvement No. SS -389 - sanitary sewer extension to serve 5311 Evanswood Lane. Info /Background: The property owner of a new lot on Evanswood Lane has petitioned the City to install a sanitary sewer line along Evanswood Lane to service the new home at 5311 Evanswood Lane. Attached is the petition for the project and a map showing the new City sanitary sewer. The estimated cost is $12,355.00 for the project. The length of assessment would be ten years if the project is approved. Also attached is a letter from the new property owner who would like us to proceed, but reserve the option to install the work privately if prices are not as estimated. Staff does not have a problem with his proposal as the City inspects the work either done with public contract or private contract. Staff would recommend approval of the project. ❑ STORM SEWER ZSANITARY SEWER ❑ CURB AND GUTTER ONLY ❑ PERMANENT STREET SURFACING WITH CURB AND GUTTER DATE: s -q_q7 ❑ WATERMAIN ❑ STREET LIGHTING ❑ OTHER: To the Mayor and City Council: The persons who have signed this petition ask the City Council to consider the improvements listed above to the locations listed below. LOCATION OF IMPROVEMENT BY STREET NAME between and ADDRESS ADDRESS LOCATION OF IMPROVEMENT BY STREET NAME between and ADDRESS ADDRESS LOCATION OF IMPROVEMENT BY STREET NAME between ADDRESS and ADDRESS between ADDRESS aad ADDRESS LOCATION OF IMPROVEMENT BY STREET NAME IMPORTANT NOTE: THE PERSONS WHO HAVE SIGNED THIS PETITION UNDERSTAND THAT THE CITY COUNCIL MAY ASSESS THE COSTS OF THESE IMPROVEMENTS AGAINST THE PROPERTIES BENEFITING FROM THE IMPROVEMENTS IN AMOUNTS DETERMINED BY THE COUNCIL AS AUTHORIZED BY CHAPTER 429, MINNESOTA STATUTES. PROPERTY OWNER'S SIGNATURE OWNER'S NAME PROPERTY ADDRESS OWNER'S (PRINTED) PHONE circul d by: 5311 Evooswood Lh 7q 2 ADDRESS PHONE There is space for more signatures on the back or you may attach extra pages. SEPTEMBER 1890 May 8, 1997 Steve Lentz & Fran Hoffinan, We would like the city to extend sanity main sewer services to our lot. Hook up to the main sewer is approx. 60 yards west from our property to the corner bend on Evanswood Lane. Our neighbors Frank & Toby Berman own a densely wooded lot that. has trees that grow right up to the street, directly west of our property. They want to preserve these mature woods. We understand we will be assessed the city's cost incurred by patching thru the street to the sewer main. Thank you, r U11 -ic -of gnu 1c-40 r1rCK JrlrrKM INN MA NU, Ole del IWD e. U1 June 12, 1997 Fran Hoffman Edina City Engineer 826 -0390 Dear Mr Hoffman, You have my permission to allow the city to get the best possible estimate and then proceed with the city's installation of the public sewer and water to our new home. Our address is 5711 Evanswood Lane. I understand that I bear the full cost of the installation and I wil pbetta assessed for the work done. I also and vale onntrract after r do the Vins installation. .estimate 1 may decline and have my priva S 1 ere Charles J Gits rV*1 MJ�A —,S � 7(T M H [NOTE: ONLY BID ON NEW CITY SEWER PORTIONJ INV= 932. 3 =934. 00 n p 14 M. M H E V A N S W O O D L A I NV=937. 00 PROP. 6' DIPECTIOMIL BODED Litt PROP. 46' w Ep" CH1114 LIW FENCE (Pi C-3 PROP. PRIVATE BOPfD LIVE LI rl 5311 SAN. S. TIES SEE 1-3-64 ' ,LOOP ELEV. 9413 VERIFIED 6-12-97 L943.841 -R 11. ILM 951 5 PROP 15T� rLOOR ELEV. 952.S Ln CU EVANSWOO 6-12-97 T ; GROPNO TIN lH PROF . 48 MH NEW BUILDING WALL 1311 VAN WOOD LANE ' I I I I 950 TR. 953 7 1ST.1 FL OR NE CIT SA ITARY SEWER 943 940 150' 6" @ 1. 90% 940. 21 �l NV. FLO)A SLAB �--90", PRIVATE LINE n in con ractll 937. D-1 -1 I V. P OP. PAV TY INE 930 CZ) + =z, N F11 r7 f4 �7 o e REPORT /RECOMMENDATION v. ,ay To: Mayor & City Council From: Francis Hoffman City Engineer G!�� Date: 16 June, 1997 Subject: Watermain Extension The Coventry Buildings 6 & 7 Improvement No. WM -380 Recommendation: Agenda Item # II.B. Consent ❑ Information Only ❑ Mgr. Recommends ❑ To HRA ® To Council Action ❑ Motion ® Resolution ❑ Ordinance ❑ Discussion Authorize project Improvement No. WM -380, the extension of watermain on the Coventry project for Buildings 6 & 7. Info /Background: The property owner of the Coventry project has petitioned the City for a watermain extension for Buildings 6 & 7 (see attached sketch and petition). The watermain m extension is the last public improvement necessary for the Coventry project. The estimated cost is $37,227.85. The development costs are recovered as each unit is closed between the HRA and the developer. r �t�1r o` e City of Edina, Minnesota E ,q CITY COUNCIL 4801 West 50th Street . Edina, Minnesota 55424 �• (612) 927.8861 . (612) 927- 7645 -FAX • (612) 927 - 5461 -TDD PETITION TO THE CITY COUNCIL ❑ SIDEWALK ❑ STORM SEWER ❑ ALLEY PAVING ❑ SANITARY SEWER ❑ CURB AND GUTTER ONLY ❑ PERMANENT SURFACING WITH CURB AND GUTTER To the Mayor and City Council: DATE: OfW-ATERMAIN O STREET LIGHTING ❑ OTHER: The persons who have signed this petition ask the Ci the locations listed below. tY Council to consider the improvements listed above to LOCATION OF IMpROVE1btENT een ST E NAME ADDRESSr ~ �IA� LOCATION OF IMPROVEMENT . By REET ST NAME between ADDRESS Ild ADDRESS a LOCATION OF IMPROVE between ADDRESS MENT BY STREET NAME and ADDRESS LOCATION OF IMPROV EMENT BY between ADDRESS STREET NAME and ADDRESS and ADDRESS IMPORTANT NOTE: THE PERSONS WHO HAVE SIGNED THE CITY COUNT, MAY ASSESS THE COSTS OF THESE IlVIPRUVEN UNDERSTAND THAT PROPERTIES BENEFITING FROM THE MENTS AGAINST THE UNC S AUTgO�ZED BYROVEMENTS IN AMOUNTS DETERMINED BY THE CHAPTER 429, MINNESOTA STATUTES, DDAnr. OWNER'S NAME (PRINTED) PROPERTY ADDRESS z This petition was circulat r by: 4T �V � OWNER'S PHONE a% j—V NAME 7� �IAIAIUorZouG,1W ADDRESS �W-7 There is space for more signatures on the back or you may attach extra pages. PHO 7680 _ Bye. _ J —e; •O•�•� _ _ _ -r Ar is � Y _ i i THE COVENTRY AT CENTENNIAL LAKES EDINA, MINNESOTA r- - - - - -- — BLD. 1 _ I FUTURE BUILDING L_ - - - - - - - _ (TYPICAL) / °0�nrr �E KEY Proposed Watermain Improvement WM -380 •00000 00 00 00 00 COVENTRY PLACE ;FT„ to NORTH NO SCALE EK%I.= 1 1 11 � � U � a wINC. Thresher Square. 700 TLW Strut So. UkmoapoW, 1171 66416. Phone 612/770 -0700. ►&: 612/370 -IT•0 i EYI C� REPORT /RECOMMENDATION To: Mayor & City Council From: Craig Larsen City Planner Date: June 16, 1997 Subject: P -97 -3 & S -97 -5, Final Development Plan and Preliminary Plat for Four S. Properties, Inc. 5229 Eden Avenue. Recommendation: Agenda Item # III . A. Consent ❑ Information Only ❑ Mgr. Recommends ❑ To HRA 0 To Council Action ❑ Motion Resolution ❑ Ordinance ❑ Discussion Denial of proposed Final Development Plan and Preliminary Plat. Info /Background: Refer to attached Findings. CITY OF EDINA In the Matter of the Application of Four S Findings, Decision, Properties, Inc. for Final Development Reasons Plan and Preliminary Plat at 5229 Eden Avenue (P -97 -3) and (S -97 -5) The above entitled matter was heard before the City Council, City of Edina, on June 2,1997, and June 16,1997. Pat Stotesbery, and Todd Jones of Four S Properties (the "Proponents ") were present. Also present representing Four S Properties were William Griffith, attorney, Roger Anderson, engineer, and Greg Ingraham, planner and landscape architect. The City Council, having heard all of the facts and arguments presented by the Proponents, their attorney, engineer, planner, City staff,and property owners in the vicinity of subject proposal, and having heard and reviewed the evidence and law adduced by the Proponents, their representatives, City staff, and property owners, and being fully advised, after due consideration, hereby makes the following: FINDINGS OF FACT: 1. The Proponents, on February 27, 1997, submitted an application for Final Development Plan and Preliminary Plat approval for a 6.1 acre tract located at 5229 Eden Avenue. The property is zoned PID, Planned Industrial District, and is developed with a manufacturing facility which has been vacant for years. City staff reviewed the application for completeness, and accepted the application for processing on March 6, 1997. 2. The proposed Final Development Plan illustrated a redevelopment of the property with a six building mini- storage warehouse facility. The six buildings would contain a total floor area of 134,421 square feet. The site plan also illustrated 71 parking stalls and driveways to serve each building. Edina City Code Section 850 (the "Zoning Ordinance ") requires that two -way drive aisles provide a minimum width of 24 feet. A portion of one of the drive aisles had a width of less than 24 feet. The Zoning Ordinance also requires that all parking and drive aisles provide a set- back of at least 10 feet from buildings. This area is required to be landscaped. None of the buildings illustrated the required setback or landscaping. 3. The Planning Commission first heard the Final Development Plan proposal at its April 2, 1997 meeting. At the request of City staff, the Planning Commission voted to continue the hearing to its April 30,1997, meeting. Tim Keane, attorney representing the Proponents, was present. 4. The Planning Commission again considered the proposal at its April 30, 1997, meeting. The Commission received the report of the Planning Department, considered testimony by the Proponents and their representatives, and considered testimony from David Kunz, owner of the adjacent Kunz Oil -Parts Plus property who testified as to a private, 16 foot wide easement in the central portion of the subject property which connects his property to Eden Avenue. He testified that the proposed development would compromise his use of the easement. The Planning Commission voted to recommend denial of the proposed Final Development Plan and Preliminary Plat based upon the variances requested, and because the proposed land use was inappropriate for the subject property. 5. On May 23,1997, the Proponents submitted a revised site plan and revised landscaping plan. The revised site plan eliminated the drive aisle width variance present on the earlier plan. The revised landscaping plan provided the required building setback and landscaping on the northerly side of four of the six buildings within the proposed project. The required setback variance remained throughout the balance of the proposed development. 6. A public hearing on the proposed Final Development Plan and Preliminary Plat was held before the Edina City Council on June 2, 1997. The City Council received both the original and revised development plans. The City Council received the recommendation of the Planning Commission, heard presentations from the Proponents and their representatives, and testimony from Walter Kunz, owner of Kunz Oil- Parts Plus, the adjacent property. Mr. Kunz testified that the proposed security system intended to limit access to the site was in conflict with the easement through the subject property and was unacceptable. Mr. Kunz also testified that the layout of the buildings and parking within the proposed project may make the easement unusable. The City Council, after receiving the report of the Planning Commission, and after hearing testimony from City staff, the Proponents and their representatives, and a property owner in the vicinity continued the hearing to their June 16,1997 meeting. 7. Section 810.11 of the Edina City Code says the City Council may consider" The relationship of the design of the site, or the improvements proposed and the conflict of such design or improvements, with any easements of record or on the ground." 8. The City's Comprehensive Plan contains the following policies: a. Consider the redevelopment of obsolete or underutilized commercial, industrial, or public properties for multiple residential housing. b. Undertake a detailed study of the Grandview Industrial /Commercial area to determine the feasibility of a public redevelopment project. ( The subject property is within the Grandview Area.) c. The Comprehensive Plan Land Use graphic, adopted December 21, 1981, illustrates the subject property as "Industrial." The graphic was not updated to reflect subsequent land use plans for this property, or other properties within the Grandview Area. 9. The Grandview Area Redevelopment Plan was approved by the City's Housing and Redevelopment Authority (the "HRA ") in 1984 following a detailed study of this Commercial/ Industrial area (the "Grandview Area "). The subject property is included in the area subject to the Plan, and was identified as blighted in the plan. 10. In January 1986, BRW,Inc. completed a planning study of the Grandview Area for the City Council and HRA. The study suggested redevelopment of the subject property as medium density residential housing, or with office /showroom use. The City Council and HRA adopted the recommendations of the study. 11. The Purpose and Objectives subsection of Section 810 of the City Code ( "the Subdivision Ordinance ") says in part: ".... To support and further the City's Comprehensive Plan by establishing uniform procedures and regulations for plats and subdivisions to preserve and enhance the value and viable economic use of property; to protect and further, and not frustrate, legitimate investment backed expectations of property owners." 12. On October 30, 1995, the City retained Hoisington Koegler Group, land use planning consultants, to evaluate a redevelopment proposal for the subject property and the adjacent Kunz Oil -Parts property, and to study and make recommendations on possible larger redevelopment alternatives within the Grandview Area. The consultant presented recommendations to the City Council and HRA at their December 4, and December 19,1995, meetings. Recommendations for the area south of Eden Avenue, which included the subject property, included combinations of office, retail and residential redevelopment. The recommended redevelopment plan placed office uses on the northerly portions, near Eden Avenue, and residential uses in the southerly area. A key element in all alternatives was the provision of direct access to Eden Avenue for properties located south of the subject property. The Proponents entered into a purchase agreement to acquire the subject property on January 9, 1997, which was subsequent to the planning studies and recommendations adopted by the City. 13. The City Council granted preliminary approval to a redevelopment of the subject property and the adjacent property occupied by Kunz Oil -Parts Plus, a 25,000 square foot building housing an auto parts distribution center on February 5, 1996. The City Council took its action after receiving the report of its planning consultant, the Hoisington Koegler Group. Fred Hoisington of Hoisington Koegler reported that the proposed redevelopment was consistent with the recommendations contained in the land use study of the area prepared by his firm. On June 15,1996, The City Council gave Final Rezoning and Final Plat approval to a redevelopment the subject property and an adjacent property. The approved plan illustrated a development containing approximately 85,000 square feet of office space on the northerly portion of the site, and an upgraded and expanded warehouse business. A condition of final approval was the relocation and enlargement of the existing easement which allows the Kunz Oil property direct access to Eden Avenue. The Proponents agreed to purchase the property after the City had approved the foregoing redevelopment. Therefore, based upon the foregoing findings the City Council does hereby make the following: DECISION The proposed Final Development Plan and Preliminary Plat is hereby denied. The above decision is made for the following: REASONS 1. The proposed use is inconsistent with the intent of the Comprehensive Plan, the Grandview Area Redevelopment Plan, and planning studies by BRW,Inc., and the Hoisington Koegler Group completed for this and other properties in the vicinity. 2. The proposed plan requires variances from the City's Zoning Ordinance for which a hardship has not been demonstrated. The plan could be redesigned to eliminate most, if not all requested variances. 3. The proposed development results in an arrangement of buildings and lots which are detrimental to the use, development and redevelopment of other properties in the vicinity. 4. The proposed Preliminary Plat does not provide a public easement allowing properties south of the subject property direct access to Eden Avenue. Rather it would force this commercial traffic to use Eden Circle causing conflicts with residential traffic of the Richmond Hills neighborhood, and would not allow for adequate access by public safety vehicles. June 13, 1997 Mayor Glenn Smith 5717 Susan Avenue Edina, MN 55439 Councilmember Michael Kelly 6700 West Shore Drive Edina, MN 55424 Councilmember James Hovland 4405 Browndale Avenue Edina, MN 55424 Councilmember Nan Faust 5522 Highwood Drive Edina, MN 55436 Councilmember Dennis Maetzold 5110 Arden Avenue Edina, MN 55424 Re: Proposed Findings of Fact (Findings) Prepared by the City Staff for Adoption by ,the City Council in the Matter of the Application of Four S Properties, Inc. for Final Development Plan and Preliminary Plat Approval at 5229 Eden Avenue (the Property) (P -97 -3) and at (S- 97 -5). Our File No. 22,830 -00 Dear Mayor and Councilmembers: We represent Four S Properties (referred to as "Four S" or the "Applicant "). On June 11, 1997, we received the proposed draft of findings for the City Council prepared by City staff regarding denial of the above - referenced applications. We have the following comments with regard to the Findings: 1. Introductory Statement The introductory statement on page 1 states, "The City Council, having heard all of the facts and arguments presented by the Proponents ...." In fact, Mayor Glenn Smith specifically circumscribed the scope and extent of the Applicant's presentation of its case. The Mayor told Applicant's legal counsel that the City Council would not hear any legal arguments of the Applicant; that he wanted discussion of the development plan, only. Applicant's counsel stated that he had to take the opportunity at this hearing 4 AP OMAN LARKIN, HOFFMAN, DALY & LINDGREN, LTD. CI.OffrOPHERJ.HAWNSTAL GERALD H. FRIEDELL KENDEL J. OHILROGGE JAMES C. ERICKSON ATTORNEYS AT LAW BRUCE J, DOUGLAS EDWARD J. DRISCOLL VNIAM LL. GRIFFITH. JR. GENE N. FULLER JOHN R. HILL JOHN D. FULLMER PETER J. COYLE FRANK I. HARVEY 1500 NORWEST FINANCIAL CENTER A D. MARTIN CHARLES S. MODELL CI- RISTOPHER J. DIETZEN 7900 XERXES AVENUE SOUTH J ANE M FM E. BAER JOHN J. STEFFENHAGEN PHILIP G. AIDEN LINDA H. FISHER THOMAS P. STOLTMAN MICHAEL J. SMITH MICKAELC.,wnonAN BLOOMINGTON, MINNESOTA 55431 -1194 ANDREWF.PERRIN JOHN E. DIEHL DANIEL W VOSS JON S. SAAERZEWSKI TELEPHONE (612) 835 -3800 VIUBR INDE THOMAS J. FLYNN ANN M. MEYER JAMES P. GUINN FAX (612) 896 -3333 CHRISTOPHER D. JOHNSON TOM 1. FREEMAN GERALD L SECK RENEE L JACKSON CHRISTOPHER K. LARUS JOHN B. LUNDQUIST MARCY R. FROST - DAVLE NOUW ' - DOUGLAS M. RAMLER JOFN ACOTTER • STEPHEN J. KAMINSKI BEATRICE A ROTI+MILER THOMAS F. ALEXANDER PAUL ETT DANIEL T. KADLEC L KI ALAN L KILDO SHARMAA WAHLGREN M_ PI KATHLEEN M. PICOTTE NEYMAAN KATHLEEN KARIN M. NELSEN MICHAEL B.. N JOHN F. KLOS GREGORY E. KORS D C. ERIK W1WE8 - A VAN CLEVE' CLEVE LYNNE MICHELLE MOORE . DANIEL TIMOT L BOWMEN C. BRENT ROBBINS TIMOTHY J. MCMANUS KRISTIN S. WESTGARD ' -TIMOTHY J. KEANE - - JOLIE S. FREDENICKSON _ ALAN M. ANDERSON OF COUNSEL DONNA ROBACK MICHAEL W. SCH LEY JACK F. DALY RONN S. KREPS D. KENNETH LINDGREN TERRENCE E. BISHOP ALLAN E MULLIGAN USA A GRAY WENDELL R. ANDERSON GARY A REWJEJE - - JOSEPH Grt18 . ' ALSO ADMITTED IN WISCONSIN June 13, 1997 Mayor Glenn Smith 5717 Susan Avenue Edina, MN 55439 Councilmember Michael Kelly 6700 West Shore Drive Edina, MN 55424 Councilmember James Hovland 4405 Browndale Avenue Edina, MN 55424 Councilmember Nan Faust 5522 Highwood Drive Edina, MN 55436 Councilmember Dennis Maetzold 5110 Arden Avenue Edina, MN 55424 Re: Proposed Findings of Fact (Findings) Prepared by the City Staff for Adoption by ,the City Council in the Matter of the Application of Four S Properties, Inc. for Final Development Plan and Preliminary Plat Approval at 5229 Eden Avenue (the Property) (P -97 -3) and at (S- 97 -5). Our File No. 22,830 -00 Dear Mayor and Councilmembers: We represent Four S Properties (referred to as "Four S" or the "Applicant "). On June 11, 1997, we received the proposed draft of findings for the City Council prepared by City staff regarding denial of the above - referenced applications. We have the following comments with regard to the Findings: 1. Introductory Statement The introductory statement on page 1 states, "The City Council, having heard all of the facts and arguments presented by the Proponents ...." In fact, Mayor Glenn Smith specifically circumscribed the scope and extent of the Applicant's presentation of its case. The Mayor told Applicant's legal counsel that the City Council would not hear any legal arguments of the Applicant; that he wanted discussion of the development plan, only. Applicant's counsel stated that he had to take the opportunity at this hearing LARKIN, HOFFMAN, DALY & LINDGREN, LTD. Honorable Mayor and City Council June 13, 1997 Page 2 to make the Applicant's record in support of approval of the Project. Again, the Mayor stated that the City Council would hear only statements describing the proposed development, "not legal arguments." Applicant's counsel then suggested that the Mayor and City Council consult with its City Attorney as to the Applicant's right to make its full presentation to the City Council, including its legal arguments in support of the application. Mr. Jerry Gilligan, City Attorney, stated that the City Council could require that the Applicant limit its presentation to a discussion of the development. Following this statement, Applicant's counsel asked the City Clerk to record a notation in the minutes that the Mayor specifically circumscribed the extent of the Applicant's presentation to City Council. Thereafter, Applicant's legal counsel presented approximately half of his prepared slides to the City Council. At the close of testimony and discussion, the City Council voted to deny the Project. 2. Finding of Fact No. 1. The finding states that the application was accepted for processing on March 6, 1997. However, under Minnesota Statutes, Section 15. 99, Subd. 3, the time for processing "begins upon the agency's receipt of a written request containing all information required by law or by a previously adopted rule, ordinance, or policy of the agency." Therefore, the application was accepted for processing on the date of filing, which was on February 27,1997, not March 6,1997. 3. Finding of Fact No. 2 The finding states that zoning ordinance requires landscaping within a 10 foot setback area. In fact, the zoning ordinance does not require landscaping within the 10 foot setback area. The Applicant noted this fact to staff and the City Council on a number of occasions, including in correspondence to the City Council, dated May 31, 1997 (Applicant's Statement of Law). The zoning ordinance states: "No parking space or drive aisle shall be located within ten feet of any principal use building." See Edina City Code § 850.08, subd. 4. See Affidavit of Greg H. Ingraham, Certified Planner and Registered Landscape Architect, Exhibit M to Applicant's Statement of Law. 4. Finding of Fact No. 6 The finding states, "The City Council, after receiving the report of the Planning Commission, and after hearing testimony from City staff, the Proponents, and their representatives, and a property owner in the vicinity continued the hearing to their June 16, 1997 meeting." In fact, the City Council did not take the full testimony of the Applicant, but as stated in paragraph 1 of this letter, specifically limited the Applicant to a statement describing the development. In fact, the City Council voted to deny the Project before continuing the hearing to June 16, 1997 for the purpose of adopting findings in support of its action denying the Project. 5. Finding of Fact No. 8 The finding, in subparagraph c, states: The Comprehensive Plan Land Use graphic, adopted December 21, 1981, illustrates the subject property as "Industrial." The graphic was not updated LARKIN, HOFFMAN, DALY & UNDGREN, LTD. Honorable Mayor and City Council June 13, 1997 Page 3 to reflect subsequent land use plans for this property, or other properties within the Grandview Area. Under the City's Comprehensive Land Use Plan, the property is in fact guided for `Industrial" use. The comprehensive plan was not amended to specifically incorporate redevelopment discussions, and plans. Thus, these redevelopment plans are not effective in controlling the guided land use because the City did not follow the requirements of Minn. Stat. § 462.355, Subd. 2 and 3, 473.858, 473.864 and 473.865. 6. Finding No. 9 The finding states that the Grandview Area Redevelopment Plan was approved by the City's Housing and Redevelopment Authority in 1984. Similar references to the redevelopment plan are made. in Finding No. 10 and Finding No. 12. However, the record does not reflect that these plans were adopted as specific amendments of the City's official Comprehensive Plan. In fact, the City has stated that the designated land use for the Property remained "Industrial" from 1981 to the present date. As stated above, to be effective, any land use or zoning control must be officially and formally adopted as such under authority granted by the legislature (as cited in paragraph 5 of this letter) 7. Finding No. 13 The finding refers to a proposed redevelopment of the Property and the adjacent property occupied by Kunz Oil. This finding is immaterial to the present application because that proposal involved different plans to develop different property for a different land use by different applicants under different circumstances. In fact, that project was abandoned in December of 1996. Four S properties then proposed an application consistent with the Industrial land use designation and Industrial zoning classification of the Property. REASONS The Findings list the following reasons for denial of the Final Development Plan and Preliminary Plat for the Project: 8. Reason No. 1: The proposed use is inconsistent with the intent of the Comprehensive Plan, the Grandview Area Redevelopment Plan, and planning studies by BRW, Inc., and the Hoisington Koegler Group completed for this and other properties in the vicinity. The proposed use is entirely consistent with the intent of the Comprehensive Plan which guides the property for Industrial land use. The Project is consistent with the Grandview Area Redevelopment Plan which identifies the Lewis site [the Property] as "blighted" and states that "public acquisition of private property for redevelopment is to be kept at an absolute minimum." The Project proposes a market based redevelopment project which removes and replaces buildings and structures defined by the City as "blighted" without public subsidy. The City, on the other hand has commenced condemnation of the LARKIN, HOFFMAN, DALY & LINDGREN, LTD. Honorable Mayor and City Council June 13, 1997 Page 4 Property and a downzoning of the Property to R -1 "Single Dwelling Unit District" as a means to frustrate the Applicant's efforts to use the Property consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and zoning ordinance. If the City acquires the Property for redevelopment when a market -based redevelopment project is available for that same purpose, then it is not meeting its objective of keeping the public acquisition of private property to an absolute minimum. The Grandview Area Plan also states that the City should "promote and secure increased landscaping on private property and public rights -of -way to improve the aesthetics, provide identity for the commercial area and improve transitions along the area's perimeter." At the Planning Commission hearing of April 30, 1997, and the City Council hearing of June 2, 1997, the Applicant demonstrated that the Project exceeds the minimum landscaping requirements of the City Code. The Project landscape plan includes ornamental fencing along Eden Avenue using the same type of stone columns used for the City's Public Works Facility, and adjacent properties. 9. Reason No. 2: The proposed plan requires variances from the City's Zoning Ordinance for which a hardship has not been demonstrated. The plan could be redesigned to eliminate most, if not all requested variances. The Applicant has demonstrated on a number of occasions that the Final Development Plan cannot be redesigned to incorporate a ten foot landscaped setback from building foundations because this requirement makes the mini storage units inaccessible to users. This is an absurd result which the City Council could not have intended when it adopted a zoning ordinance that makes "mini storage" a principal use of land classified as Industrial. The Applicant's position was set out in detail in correspondence to the City Council, dated May 31, 1997, in correspondence to Craig Larsen, dated May 23, 1997, and in the Affidavit of Greg Ingraham, dated May 30, 1997. 10. Reason No. 3: The proposed development results in an arrangement of buildings and lots which are detrimental to the use, development and redevelopment of other properties in the vicinity. The Applicant has demonstrated in the record that the Project will not be detrimental to surrounding properties. In fact, the Project will be beneficial to surrounding properties because of the extremely low trip generation rates of this land use; the low profile of the mini storage buildings; landscaping and ornamental fencing which exceed City Code requirements; and the low activity levels associated with mini storage. Further, the Project is separated from property to the east by the existing railroad right -of- way, and from property to the north by Eden Avenue. Where the Project is in proximity to residential land uses, the Applicant has proposed significant landscaping and screening. Further, residential land uses particularly benefit from the low activity level, low profile and low trip generation of the Project, as compared to virtually every other land use proposed for the Property over the last eleven years. LARKIN, HOFFMAN, DALY & LINDGREN, LTD. Honorable Mayor and City Council June 13, 1997 Page 5 11. Reason No. 4: The proposed Preliminary Plat does not provide a public easement allowing properties south of the subject property direct access to Eden Avenue. Rather it would force this commercial traffic to use Eden Circle causing conflicts with residential traffic on the Richmond Hills neighborhood, and would not allow for adequate access by public safety vehicles. Dedication of public easements must be proportional to the increase in traffic from a development project. In this case, with eight trips in and out in the P.M. Peak hour, this land use actually decreases the historic traffic impact of the Property. Therefore, the City cannot require the Applicant to provide a public easement to provide access to Eden Avenue for properties to the south. Existing access serves these properties. Further, the Project does not conflict with the "private easement" over the Property which serves the Kunz Oil Property. The Project was specifically designed to maintain such access in a manner that is reasonably convenient to the benefited property. In other words, the Kunz Oil property will have the same level of access as anybody who uses the site. If the City desires to construct a roadway over the Property, it is free to acquire for fair value a portion of the Property for this limited public purpose. The City cannot and should not block an otherwise conforming Project to accomplish these public purposes. As I have indicated to City staff, I am scheduled to make appearances at another City Council meeting on Monday, June 16, 1997. Therefore, my partner Tim Keane, will make the presentation on behalf of Four S Properties regarding our objections to th e Findings. We request that this letter and the materials to which it refers be incorporated in the official record of decision in this matter. Thank you. Sincerely, William C. Griffi , Jr., fo LARKIN, HOFFMAN, DALY & JCGREN, Ltd. cc: Pat Stotesbery Todd Jones Kenneth Rosland, City Manager Jerry Gilligan, City Attorney Gordon Hughes, Economic Development Director Craig Larsen, City Planner 0307218.01 1�k! Iti REPORT /RECOMMENDATION To: Mayor & City Council From: Craig Larsen City Planner Date: June 16, 1997 Subject: Z -97 -1. PID, Planned Industrial District to R -1, Single Dwelling Unit District. 5229 Eden Avenue. City of Edina. Recommendation: Agenda Item # III. B. Consent ❑ Information Only ❑ Mgr. Recommends ❑ To HRA X To Council Action ❑ Motion ❑ Resolution 0 Ordinance ❑ Discussion The Planning Commission recommends approval of the rezoning. Info /Background: Staff recommends waiver of second reading. The recommended action requires a 4/5 favorable vote. vv: L . 1 aj r11♦ is -41 rAA 101404U4044 U:iKJLl 1111111\L1 LPJ0U? ORDINANCE NO. 850 -A8 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE ZONING ORDINANCE (NO. 850) BY REZONING PROPERTY TO SINGLE DWELLING UNIT DISTRICT FROM PLANNED INDUSTRIAL DISTRICT THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDINA, MINNESOTA ORDAINS: Section 1. Recitals. The City has undertaken certain studies related to the redevelopment of property in the City located at 5229 Eden Avenue (the "Property "). There is located on the Property a vacant manufacturing facility and the City Council has considered various. proposals with respect to the redevelopment of the Property. One of the policies contained in the City's Comprehensive Plan is to consider the redevelopment of obsolete or underutilized commercial, industrial or public properties for multiple residential housing. Planning studies conducted on behalf of the City by BRW, Inc. in 1986 and Hoisington Koegler Group in 1995 have recommended redevelopment of the Property for multiple residential housing or offices uses, or & combination thereof, and the City Council has previously given approval to a redevelopment .of the Property for office use. This proposed redevelopment of the Property has not yet occurred. The Property is presently in the Planned Industrial District (PID). Section 850.03, subdivision 1, of ,the Edina City Code provides that the Single Family Dwelling Unit District (R -1) may be used as a holding or open development area for those properties shown in the Comprehensive Plan as having the potential for uses other than permitted in the R- 1 District, which other uses shall be permitted only after rezoning., Section 2. Findings. The City Council believes the Property is in need of redevelopment and that at this time it is appropriate for the Property to be placed in the Single Dwelling Unit District (R -1) pending consideration by the City Council of proposals with respect to the redevelopment of the Property: The R -1 District is . being used as a holding area for the Property. and the City Council anticipates that any redevelopment of the Property approved by the City will be for uses other than permitted in the R -1 District. The placing of the Property in the R -1 District will help protect the planning process of the City in connection with the consideration of proposals as to the redevelopment of the Property. Section 3. Amendment of R -1 District Boundaries. Section 850.06 of Section 850 of the Edina City Code is amended by adding the following thereto: "The extent of the Single Family Dwelling Unit District (R -1), is enlarged by the addition of the following property: emu; iu; a i i AI 1./ ! 1 C 1J tU11u :uGOis LVAJLI NII111NL1 Lqj UU.S That part of Lot 1, Block 1, "Edenmoor, Hennepin County,,Minnesota ", lying North of the South 6 feet -of said Lot l,' according to the recorded plat thereof. AND That part of Lot 1, Block 1i Wanner Addition, lying Northerly of a line , described as beginning at a point on the East line of said Lot 1, distant 23A feet Northerly from the Southeast corner of said Lot 1; thence Westerly parallel with the South line of said Lot 1 a distance of 101 feet; thence Southerly para.Uel•with said East line of Lot 1 a•distance'of 224 feet; thence Westerly parallel with said South line of Lot 1 ' to the West line of said Lot Y and there terminating, according to the recorded plat thereof, Hennepin County, Minnesota. AND That part of Government Lot 3, Section 28, Township 117, Range 21; lying" Southerly � of the Southerly.. right--of- -way line of Eden Avenue and Westerly of the Westerly, right-of-way line of the Soo Line Railroad Company,, formerly the Minneapolis, Northfield and Southern Railway, which lies Easterly of a line described. as beginning at the intersection of theL South line of said Govenunent Lot 8 with the East line of Block 1, Wanner Addition, thence Northerly and Easterly along said East line to the most Easterly line of. said Block 1; thence Northerly along said most Easterly_ line'.and its Northerly extension to a point 25 feet Northerly along said most Easterly line and its Northerly exterssion to a point .25 feet Northerly from the Northeast comer of Lot 2, in said Block 1, thence Westerly parallel with the North lane of said Lot 2 to the East line of Lot 1, in said Block 1; thence Northerly along said East line of Lot 1 and its Northerly extension to said Southerly right -of -way, line of Eden Avenue and there terminating, according to the Government Survey thereof. - - - • .. I . • .._. - - . v - ✓ V IL\ J L l I t A l l The extent of the Planned Industrial District is reduced by removing the property described above from the PID District." Section 4. Effective Date. This ordinance shall be effective upon its passage and publication. First Reading: Second Reading: Published in the ATTEST: City Clerk Edina Sun - Current: Mayor Glum DRAFT MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE EDINA PLANNING COMMISSION HELD ON WEDNESDAY, MAY 28, 1997, AT 7:30 P.M. EDINA CITY HALL COUNCIL CHAMBERS MEMBERS PRESENT: Chairman Johnson, Helen McClelland, David Runyan, Ann Swenson, David Byron, John Lonsbury, Charles Ingwalson, Geoffrey Workinger, Lorelei Bergman STAFF PRESENT: Craig Larsen, Jackie Hoogenakker I. APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES: Commissioner Ingwalson moved approval of the April 30, 1997, meeting minutes. Commissioner Workinger seconded the motion. All voted aye; motion carried. NEW BUSINESS: Z -97 -1 Preliminary Rezoning, PID, Planned Industrial District to R -1 Single Dwelling Unit District. 5229 Eden Avenue. City of Edina Mr. Larsen presented his staff report noting the subject property is just over six acres in size and is currently zoned PID, Planned Industrial District. A rezoning of the subject property from PID, Planned Industrial District to POD -1, Planned.Office District, as part of a larger project was approved by the City in 1996. That rezoning was not completed by the proponents of the redevelopment. Mr. Larsen reminded the Commission at the last meeting staff had indicated redevelopment of this site for an industrial would not be appropriate. At this time staff is proposing a rezoning of the property to R -1, Single Dwelling Unit District. Section 850 of the City Code provides for the use of the R -1 District as holding or open development zone. Mr. Larsen concluded staff recommends Preliminary Rezoning approval from PID, Planned Industrial District to R -1, Single Dwelling Unit District, for the subject property. Mr. William Griffith, representing Four S Properties, Inc. was present to respond to questions. Commissioner Ingwalson asked Mr. Larsen if the owner, of the property was in the audience. Mr. Larsen responded a representative of the owner is present. Commissioner Ingwalson asked if this rezoning were to be approved, what would happen to the Kunz Oil property. Mr. Larsen said the plan would be for the City to acquire both the Lewis and Kunz properties. Mr. William Griffith introduced himself, and stated in his opinion the down zoning of this property was initiated by City staff, with Council consent, and this attempt to down zone the property is not appropriate, and is designed to prevent the development of the site as a mini - storage facility. Mr. Griffith noted the present PID zoning allows, mini - storage facilities as a permitted use. Continuing, Mr. Griffith commented on the chronology of events that have occurred within the past 11 years, noting in his opinion, the City has had ample time to acquire /condemn the subject property. Activity on the site is recorded as follows: • 3/86 City Council held public hearings on land use alternatives for the Grandview area. The Lewis and Kunz properties were identified as "blighted ". 9/86 Council considered a plan for construction of a four -story 210 -unit apartment project. This project was never constructed. • 7/87 Review of the Comprehensive Plan. City Council affirmed that the KunzOil /Lewis properties should be re- developed with multi - family housing, requesting staff to study the possibility. • 9/90 Jerry `s Enterprises, Inc. submitted a plan to rezone the property from PID to PCD -2. This project was abandoned. • 8/91 The Council revisited the Comprehensive Plan, and at the recommendation of City staff and Planning Commission the subject site was left designated as industrial. • 4193 A proposal was submitted to the Planning Commission and Council to rezone the subject site from Industrial to Commercial. Staff did not recommend amending the Comprehensive Plan to support Commercial rezoning south of Eden Avenue. 6/93 The City Council denied the request to rezone the property to Commercial'to develop the site for a grocery store /fast food restaurant. • 11/95 Final Development and proposal to rezone site from industrial to office by Laurent Parks. • 7/96 Final Rezoning approval PID to POD, Laurent Parks Development. Final approval received to construct an office park on the subject site and final plat approval for Cirrus Addition.. • 2/97 Four S Properties submits application for rezoning • 4/2197 Planning Commission continues the request by Four S Properties, Inc. to construct a mini - warehouse facility until its April 30, 1997, hearing. • 417/97 City Council held a public hearing to amend the Grandview plan identifying the subject site. for acquisition. • 4/7197 City Council extended the 60 -day statutory deadline for considering Four S Properties application for approval of the Final Development Plan. • 4/30197 Planning Commission recommends denial of the proposal to develop the subject site as a mini - warehouse facility. • 5/17/97 Staff recommended that the property be rezoned temporarily to the R -1 .District to allow this site to be used as a "holding zone" until the City Council can _. decide what is appropriate. Concluding, Mr. Griffith said he is very concerned the City has recommended denial of a proposal that meets all zoning requirements, reiterating in his opinion his client is not being allowed a fair hearing. It is prejudicial, and. now the City is requesting a rezoning of the property that would prohibit his client from constructing a facility that conforms to all zoning requirements. Commissioner Ingwalson asked at present who is the property owner.of record. Mr. Griffith said Four S Properties, Inc. is now the owner of record. He added he believes they closed on the, property on May.23'. Mr. Larsen interjected that presently the City is negotiating a purchase agreement with Kunz Oil, and filed for condemnation of the Lewis /Four S Properties, Inc. property. Commissioner Byron asked Mr. Larsen when the condemnation is to occur. Mr. Larsen said the initial process to condemn the property has been in the works for some time, with the initial court hearing on July 1, 1997. Commissioner Byron asked Mr. Larsen if the City requested the Council to take action to down zone the property to R -1- thereby placing it in a "holding" zone.. Mr. Larsen said the action to place the property in the R -1 "holding" zone was initiated by staff with the. consent of the HRA/Council, and referred to the Planning Commission for consideration. Commissioner Byron questioned with all the activity occurring on the site why is it so important to down zone the property placing it in an holding pattern. Mr. Larsen said the zoning places the City is a strong position to control the redevelopment of the site. Continuing, Mr. Larsen reiterated rezoning the property to R -1 provides a "holding" zone for a piece of property that has been an abandoned use. Mr. Larsen pointed out the City does not consider this rezoning to be permanent. . Commissioner McClelland asked Mr. Larsen if the City petitioned to condemn the Lewis. property prior to the Planning Commission hearing. Mr. Larsen said he is unsure of the official date the condemnation papers were filed, but he believes it was before the Commission heard the proposal. Commissioner Ingwalson said he has concern with the legal issues, and questioned if the City is within their legal right. Mr. Larsen responded in the affirmative. He stated it is the right of the City to condemn a piece of property, and request the "holding" rezoning, and in this instance it is proper. Chairman Johnson asked Mr. Larsen if the City is worse -off leaving the zoning of the subject site as PID. Mr. Larsen said City staff is unclear on that issue, but feels requesting the zoning to R -1 as a "holding" zone category allows time to ensure the site is properly developed. Commissioner McClelland told Commission Members the City has actively reviewed plans to redevelop this site, and the City has been flexible. Continuing, the City has an established history of either desiring the entire area to be redeveloped, or at minimum the Kunz and Lewis properties addressed together in some form. Commissioner McClelland pointed out the City has ,a history of allowing industrial zoning to be located mostly along the 494- corridor area. Commissioner McClelland said to her knowledge this is the only area in the center of the City that is zoned industrial. Commissioner McClelland stated in her opinion it is not good planning sense, nor is it neighborly to isolate the Kunz property, as this. proposal does. She pointed out the last project which received final rezoning and final development plan approval recognized the Kunz property would be virtually landlocked if a simultaneous development did not occur that provided them unencumbered access to their property, and also the ability to expand their building, and obtain more parking. Commissioner McClelland acknowledged this area is non - conforming, but new development should try to resolve its non - conformity, and this proposal does not address that. Commissioner McClelland acknowledged this area was discussed during hearings on Tax Increment, but in the end this parcel was not included, and it was always felt that both the Lewis and Kunz parcels were tied together. Commissioner Runyan said as he stated in April, in his opinion the use of this property as a mini storage facility is not attractive nor an appropriate use fora site located in the center of Edina. Continuing, Commissioner Runyan referred,to Mr. Griffiths chronology of 11 years, noting his assumption that the City has only now decided to. do something about this property is not correct. Commissioner Runyan pointed out the property has seen much activity throughout the 11 years, though nothing has materialized. Commissioner Runyan pointed out the process for each new development can be lengthy, reiterating this is a complex important piece of property . located in the center of our City. Concluding, Commissioner. Runyan said he wants to see that this property is developed properly, and the final result is an asset to the entire community. Commissioner Byron stated it is not difficult to conclude the City has a strategy that addresses both the Lewis and Kunz properties so there will be no future conflicts between these parcels, and that the City is being well advised by legal counsel. Continuing, Commissioner Byron stated in observing the proposal it is understandable Mr. Griffith would prefer to proceed, but Commissioner Byron stated he has a problem with the proposal, and the way it addresses the Kunz property. Commissioner Byron said in his opinion this proposal negatively impacts the Kunz site, and if developed it could virtually landlock the site, and make it difficult for Kunz Oil to operate their business. Commissioner Byron said the City has not lost the power to condemn the "Lewis" property, and in his opinion the request to rezone the site to R -1 creating a "holding" status is appropriate. Concluding Commissioner Byron said he does not agree that the City is prejudicial toward Mr. Griffith's client, and the Commission would not be prejudicial in recommending that this property be rezoned to R -1 thereby placing it in a "holding" status. Commissioner Byron moved to recommend preliminary rezoning approval. Commissioner Swenson seconded the motion. Commissioner Ingwalson said there has been much discussion on linking the Kunz/Lewis properties, and questioned if the condemnation includes the Kunz site. Mr. Larsen reiterated the City is negotiating an agreement to purchase the Kunz site along with the condemnation of the Lewis property. Chairman Johnson called for the vote; all voted aye. Motion to recommend preliminary rezoning approval approved 9 -0. # i REZONING NUMBER Z -97 -1 L O C A T 10 N 5229 Eden Avenue REQUEST Rezone PID, Planned Industrial District to R -1, Single Dwelling Unit District EDINA PLANNING DEPARTMENT EDINA PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT MAY 28, 1997 Z -97 -1 .5229 Eden Avenue PID, Planned. Industrial District to R -1, Single Dwelling Unit District . City, of Edina The subject property is just over 6 acres in size and is currently zoned PID, Planned Industrial District. The Commission will recall that a rezoning of the property, from PID, Planned Industrial District to POD -1, Planned Office District, as part of a larger'project, was approved for this property by the City in 1996. That rezoning was not completed by the proponents of the redevelopment. As reported earlier to the Commission, Staff believes the redevelopment of this site for an industrial use is inappropriate. Consequently, Staff is proposing a rezoning of the property to R- 1, Single Dwelling District. Section 850 of the City Code provides for the use of the R -1 District as holding or open development zone. The Ordinance provides as follows: "The R -1 District is also used as a holding or open development area for those properties shown on the Comprehensive Plan as having the potential for development for uses other than permitted in the R -1 District, which other uses shall be permitted only after rezoning pursuant to Subsection 850.04 of.this Section." The Comprehensive Plan of .1980 suggests a study of the Grandview area to determine the feasibility of a public redevelopment project. That study was completed in 1984, and a Redevelopment District was created. In 1985 the City and HRA adopted a planning study by BRW which identifies the subject property as suitable for redevelopment as a residential or office- showroom use. Staff believes these actions, as well as more recent studies have clearly established the City's intent for redevelopment of this and other properties in the vicinity. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends Preliminary Rezoning approval from PID to R -1 for the subject property. JAMES P. LARKIN LARKIN HOFFMAN DALY & LINDGREN LTD. CHRISTOPHER J. HARRISTHAL ROBERT HIOFFMAN f f f KENDELJ. CHOGGE DER R FRIEDEII JAMES C. ERICKSON ATTORNEYS AT LAW BRUCE J. DOUGLAS EDWARD J. DRISCOLL . WHAM a GRIFFT H JR. JOHN R HILL GENE N. FULLER PETER J. COYLE JOHN 0. FULLMER AWRY D. MARTIN FRANCA. HARVEY 1500 NORWEST FINANCIAL CENTER JANE I- BREMER CHARLES S. MODELL AGEN C RISTOPHER J. DIETZEN 7900 XERXES AVENUE SOUTH uST �P a AMEN UNDA H. FISHER - MICHAEL J. SMITH THOMAS P'STOLTMAN BLOOMINGTON, MINNESOTA 55431 -1194 ANDREW F•PFARN MICHAEL C. JACKMAN I- DIEHI. JOAN S. SWERgWSxI TELEPHONE (612) 835 -3800 DANIEL W. VOSS VIUS R. INDE THOMAS J. FLYNN AM M. MEYER CHRISTOPHER O. JOHNSON JAMES P. QUINN FAX (612) 896 -3333 RENEE L JACKSON TODD I. FREEMAN CHRISTOPHER K. LARLS GERALD L BECK MARCY R FROST JOHN B. LUNDQUIST. DOUGLAS M. RAMLER DAYLE NOUN • STEPHEN J. KAMINSKI JOHN A COTTER THOMAS F. ALEXANDER BEATRICE A ROTMNFRER DANIEL T. KADLEC PAUL B. PLUNKETT SHARNAA WM6GREN ALAN KSDOW KARIN M. NELSEN KATHLEEN M. PICOTTE HENMAN JOHN F. KILOS MICHAEL B. LEBARON C. ERIK IWYYES GREGORY E KORSTAD LYNNE MICKELLE MOORE GARY A VAN CLEVE' C. BFENT ROBBNS DANIEL L BOWLES- KRISTIN S. WEBTGARD • . TIMOTHY J. MCMANUS JO JE S. FREDERICKSON TIMOTHY J. KEANE ALAN M. ANDERSON OF COUNSEL - DONNAL ROBPCX JACK F. DALY MICHAEL W. SCH LEY - D. KET?ET N RONN B. KREPS MULLIGAN ALLAN E IRAlNDER TERRENCE E BISHOP VYEHNOEI.L.L R ANDERSON USAA GRAY JOSEPH GM GARY A RENNEKE - ' - ALSO ADMITTED N WISCONSIN May 31, 1997 Mayor Glenn Smith 5717 Susan Avenue Edina, MN 55439 Councilmember Michael Kelly 6700 West Shore Drive Edina, MN 55424 Councilmember James Hovland 4405 Browndale Avenue Edina, MN 55424 HAND DELIVERED Councilmember Nan Faust 5522 Highwood Drive Edina, MN 55436 Councilmember Dennis Maetzold 5110 Arden Avenue Edina, MN 55424 Re: Applicant's Statement of Law in Support of the Preliminary Plat and Final Development Plan Applications for Edina Storage Center Project on Behalf of Four S Properties, Inc. at 5229 Eden ,Avenue; Our File No. 22,830 -00 Dear Mayor and City Councilmembers: We represent Four S Properties, Inc. (Four S Properties) which has filed the above applications for approval of the Edina Storage Center Project (the Project). You have received a statement supporting the Project in a booklet which we prepared for the Planning Commission, dated March 28, 1997. This letter sets forth for the City Council the legal principles which support the Project. These legal principles clearly require approval of the Preliminary Plat and Final Development Plan by the City. I. FACTUAL BACKGROUND We will not restate the long efforts of the City to redevelop the property. This is set out in the letter to the Planning Commission, dated March 28, 1997, and is incorporated here by reference. Let it suffice to say LARKIN, HOFFMAN, DALY & LINDGREN, LTD. Honorable Mayor and City Councilmembers May 31, 1997 Page 2 that the City has been actively involved in redevelopment of the Lewis property (Project Site), without success, for 11 years now. Following, abandonment of an office development on the Project Site by Laurent Parks, the property became available for purchase for use consistent with its designation under the Comprehensive Plan as an "Industrial" development site, and its classification under the City's Zoning Ordinance as a site for "Planned Industrial Development" (PID). On that basis, Four S Properties acquired the Project Site for development of mini storage under the project name "Edina Storage Center Project." The chronology of Four S Properties efforts to secure approval (of what is a "principal use" of PID property) is set forth below. Chronology of Four S Properties Applications/C4 Response • January 9, 1997 - Four S Properties entered into Purchase Agreement with Gordon and Laverne Lewis to Purchase 6.17 acre site for the purpose of developing mini storage consistent with the PID zoning of the property. • January 27, 29,1997 -Representatives of Four S Properties met on two occasions with Craig Larsen, Director of Planning, to describe the proposed Project and confirm that mini storage is a principal use under the PID zoning classification of the Edina City Code, Section 850.17, Subd. 1. (Section references are to the Edina City Code unless otherwise noted.) • February 4, 1997 - Mr. Larsen confirmed that the Property is zoned PID in a letter to the property owner, dated February 4, 1997. • February 18, 1997 - Without any notice to Four S Properties, the City Council, acting as the Housing and Redevelopment Authority of Edina (HRA), adopted a resolution authorizing acquisition of the Project site. (See Resolution of the HRA attached as Exhibit A.) • February 27, 1997 - Four S Properties filed applications with the City of Edina (the City) for approval of Final Development Plan and Preliminary Plat for the Edina Storage Center Project. (See development applications attached as Exhibit B.) • March 6, and 18, 1997 - Mr. Larsen confirmed that the applications for approval of Final Development Plan and Preliminary Plat were considered complete and were scheduled to be heard before the Planning Commission on April 2, 1997. (See correspondence attached as Exhibit C.) • April 2, 1997 - The hearing before the Planning Commission was opened. Mr. Larsen requested a continuance of the hearing to April 30, 1997, "for further review the development plan." The Planning Commission voted to continue the hearing to April 30, 1997. • April 7, 1997 - Without any notice to Four S Properties, the City Council held a public hearing to amend the Grandview Redevelopment Project and Grandview Tax Increment Financing Plan, identifying the Project Site for acquisition. (See amendments to redevelopment plan, dated April 7, 1997, attached as Exhibit D.) LARKIN, HOFFMAN, DALY & LINDGREN, LTD. Honorable Mayor and City Councilmembers May 31, 1997 Page 3 • April 7, 1997 - Without any notice to Four S Properties, the City Council extended the 60 -day statutory deadline for deciding Four S Properties application for approval of a Final Development Plan. • April 8, 1997 - Mr. Larsen informed Four S Properties, by letter, that the City Council extended the 60 -day deadline for deciding Four S Properties application for approval of a Final Development Plan. The letter states, "The extension will provide the time needed to evaluate the proposal." (See correspondence of Craig Larsen attached as Exhibit E.) • April 30, 1997 - The Planning Commission conducted the public hearing for review of applications for Edina Mini Storage Center Project. Upon the recommendation of Mr. Larsen, the Planning Commission voted to deny the Project. (See staff report, dated April 30, 1997 attached as Exhibit F.) • May 16, 1997 - Four S Properties closed on purchase of the Project Site from Gordon C. and Laverne S. Lewis. • May 19, 1997 - Without any notice to Four S Properties, the City Council initiated downzoning of Project Site from PID to R -1 Single Dwelling Unit District. Mr. Larsen recommended that the . property be rezoned temporarily to R -1 District to be used as a holding zone until the City Council can decide what to rezone the property. Mr. Larsen recommended that City Council refer the rezoning to the Planning Commission for consideration at their May 28th meeting. Mayor Glenn Smith asked why it the rezoning had to go to the Planning Commission. He asked, "Couldn't the Council vote on it." Mr. Larsen stated that procedure requires that the Planning Commission bring the rezoning recommendation to the Council. The motion to refer the rezoning action to the Planning Commission was approved by the City Council. • May 23, 1997 - Four S Properties filed revised Final Development Plans for the Project to conform in all aspects with Zoning Ordinance in response to City staff report dated April 30, 1997. (See correspondence dated May 23, 1997, attached as Exhibit G.) May 23, 1997 - The HRA of the City of Edina served a petition on Four S Properties to acquire the Project Site by condemnation. (See petition attached as Exhibit H.) May 28, 1997 - The Planning Commission. held a hearing regarding the City - initiated petition to downzone the Project Site from PID to R -1 Single Dwelling Unit District. Legal counsel for Four S Properties objected on the basis that the action caused unfair prejudice to its pending applications for the Project. Based upon the recommendation of staff, the Planning Commission voted to rezone the Project Site to R -1. (See staff report attached as Exhibit I.) • May 29, 1997 - Mr. Larsen called legal counsel for Four S Properties to inform him that the City Manager has decided to ask the City Council to continue its hearing of the above applications from LARYiN, HOFFMAN, DALY & UNDGREN, LTD. Honorable Mayor and .City Councilmembers May 31, 1997 Page 4 June 2, 1996 to June 16, 1997. The reason that Mr. Larsen stated for the continuance was to allow the City Council to hear the applications on the same evening as the City - initiated rezoning of the Project Site to R -1 Single Dwelling Unit District. Mr. Larsen said that the two applications were related. Legal counsel objected to the continuance for a number of reasons, including that the continuance would be prejudicial to a fair hearing of the applications of Four S Properties. (See correspondence hand delivered to the City of Edina on May 29, 1997 attached as Exhibit J.) • May 30, 1997 - Mr. Larsen called legal counsel for Four S Properties to inform him that the City Council would hear the applications of Four S Properties as originally scheduled on June 2, 1997. • June 2, 1997 - Scheduled date for City Council action on applications of Four S Properties for the Edina Mini Storage Center Project. • June 16, 1997 - Scheduled date for City Council action on City initiated downzoning of Project site to R -1 Single Dwelling Unit District. • July 1, 1997 - Scheduled date for initial hearing in district court regarding the HRA petition for acquisition of the Project Site by condemnation. • _017 I P. - ! WT @Q _t._ 6 v i �_ a i_ �_ ' _ ' - � . oU The Project was designed from the start to comply with all the zoning criteria, dimensional requirements and performance standards applicable to development within the PID district. (See affidavit of James B. Lasher, Landscape Architect, attached as Exhibit K; and affidavit of Roger A. Anderson, Professional Engineer attached as Exhibit L.) The staff report, prepared by Mr. Larsen, dated April 30, 1997, states: The proponents have submitted complete plans in support of their request. The plans represent a development which is in general conformance with Zoning Ordinance requirements. Specifically, the plans conform with building and parking setbacks, floor area ratio, and on site parking requirements. The proposed plans would require variances for two elements of the plan. First, the Zoning Ordinance requires a 10 foot setback between building and parking areas. This space is required to provide a foundation planting area. The proposed plan does not provide this planting area. Second, it appears that the drive -aisle on the west side of the most southerly building is too narrow. (Emphasis added; See Exhibit A.) At the Planning Commission, staff stated that the Project requires variances as identified in the staff report. (See above excerpt.) Therefore, revised plans were filed on May 23, 1997, with the following modifications (See Exhibit G.): 1. The building layout was revised to add a ten foot setback area at the Eden Avenue frontage in conformance with Section 850.08, Subd. 4.; and LARKIN, HOFFMAN, DALY & LINDGREN, LTD. Honorable Mayor and City Councilmembers May 31, 1997 Page 5 2. The parking layout was revised (with resulting minor building revisions) to relocate several parking stalls in conformance with Section 850.08, Subd. 6.D. As we demonstrated to the Planning Commission, it is impossible to develop a mini storage project in strict conformance with the ten foot setback requirement of Section 850.08, subd. 4 because it would render most of the storage units inaccessible. Further, the underlying rationale for such a requirement, that is, to provide a development which is aesthetically pleasing to the public and adjoining neighbors, is not satisfied by requiring ten foot landscaped areas along interior drive aisles. The landscaped areas would not be visible from the public street. (See affidavit of Greg Ingraham, Certified Planner and registered Landscape Architect attached as Exhibit M.) As we stated to the Planning Commission, when applying zoning regulations, the Courts will rule out absurd results. Strict application of this local regulation leads to an absurd result, that is, development of a principal use of property in the Planned Industrial District (PID) which is not useable. (See graphic presented to the Planning Commission at its meeting of April 30, 1997 attached as Exhibit N.) We also explained to the Planning Commission that a survey of recent commercial development in Edina demonstrates that the City has rarely required strict adherence to this requirement, if ever. In fact, even in cases where it would = render the use inaccessible, the City has not enforced the requirement. (See photographs of 15 development sites, including the Edina Public Works building attached as Exhibit O.) LEGAL PRINCIPLES REQUIRE APPROVAL OF PROJECT We have clearly demonstrated to the City that the Project complies with all applicable requirements of zoning. Where this is the case, the Minnesota Supreme Court has made it clear that municipalities do not have discretion to turn down an application for approval of a permitted use. See Chanhassen Estates Residents Association v. City of Chanhassen, 342. N.W.2d 335 (Minn 1984) (citing Zylka v. City of Crystal, 283 Minn. 192, 167 N.W.2d 45 (1969). "A city is not afforded similar discretion [as it has for a conditional use] in reviewing a permitted use application because approval of a project complying with the zoning code `follows as a matter of right. "' Chase v. City of Minneapolis, 401 N.W.2d 408 (Minn. App. 1987) (citing Chanhassen at 340). Where a zoning ordinance specifies standards which must be applied in determining whether or not to grant zoning approval, and the applicant fully complies with the specified standards, denial of the approval is arbitrary as a matter of law. Scott County Lumber v. City of Shakopee, 417 N.W.2d 721, 727 (Minn. App. 1988); Hay Township v. Grow, 206 N.W.2d 19, 22, (Minn. 1973). Staff and Planning Commission members have stated that their opposition to the Project is because it is not what the City wants in this location and it is not consistent with the redevelopment goals of the City. LARKIN, HOFFMAN, DALY & LINDGREN, LTD. Honorable Mayor and City Councilmembers May 31, 1997 Page 6 To be effective against the Project, these objectives of the City must be implemented through zoning. The City has not done so. It cannot now use zoning to effect redevelopment goals where the Project complies with the requirements of zoning. B. The Zoning Ordinance Must be onstrued in Favor of the Pro12erty Owner. A well established rule of Minnesota law is that any ambiguity in zoning ordinances are to be construed generally in favor of the property owner, and against the city. Franks Nursery and Sales, Inc. v. City of Roseville, 295 N.W.2d 604, 608 (Minn. 1980); See also Chanhassen Estates Residents' Ass'n v. City of Chanhassen, 342 N.W.2d 235 (Minn. 1984) (to be effective, any restriction on land use, must be clearly expressed); Amcon Corp. v. City of Eagan, 348 N.W.2d 66 (Minn. 1984). The reason for this rule is that the courts recognize that zoning is in derogation of property rights and, therefore, in the case of ambiguity, construction should favor the property owner. Three rules of construction guide the courts in interpretation: (1) Ordinance terms should be construed according to their plain and ordinary meaning; (2) Zoning ordinances should be construed strictly against the city and in favor of the property owner; and (3) Zoning ordinances must be considered in light of their underlying policy goals. Franks Nursery, 295 N.W.2d at 608 -609. In this case, the Zoning Ordinance plainly allows the use. Principal uses within the PID district include: H. Mini- storage warehouse for storage of domestic supplies, recreational vehicles and equipment and other private property, if the owner of the private property is responsible for.transporting the property to and from the principal use, and further, if the owner of the principal use does not establish the use as a carrier for the purpose of a freight operation. See Section 850.17, Subd. I. Therefore, the only question is whether the City can strictly apply its interpretation of the ten foot foundation setback to make the use inaccessible. If construed according to the plain and ordinary meaning, the regulation requires setback, not plantings, and not curbing. If the zoning ordinance is construed strictly against the city and in favor of the property owner, then no setback is required because the setback renders a principal use inaccessible. If zoning ordinances must be considered in light of their underlying policy goals, then no setback is required because the setback serves no purpose other than adjacent to the public street. (See generally, discussion of Greg Ingraham at Exhibit M.) LARKIN, HOFFMAN, DALY & LINDGREN, LTD. Honorable Mayor and City Councilmembers May 31, 1997 Page 7 C. Mere Qpposition to the Project is not a Legally Sufficient Basis for Denial. It is well settled in Minnesota that denial of zoning approval must be based on something more concrete than community opposition. Norftoint Plaza v. City of Rochester, 457 N.W.2d 398 (Minn. App. 1990); Chanhassen Estates Res. Ass'n. v. City of Chanhassen, 342 N.W.2d 335 (Minn. 1984); C.R. Investments Inc. v. Village of Shoreview, 304 N.W.2d 320 (Minn. 1981); Northwestern College v. City of Arden F illy, 281 N.W.2d 865 (Minn. 1979); Inland Constr. Co. v. Blooming off, 195 N.W.2d 558 (Minn. 1972). Under Minnesota law, opposition to a.land use or its location, especially when the use is clearly permitted as a matter of right under the zoning ordinance and is in compliance with applicable standards, cannot be the basis for denial of the project. Again, the project may only be denied on the basis of noncompliance with the development standards. Where a use is permitted by right, the rule is that site plan approval cannot be used to turn down a project. (&a Volume 15 Zoning and Planning Law R por , No. 10 (1992)). In this case, opposition to the use and its location are evident in the statements of the Planning Commission and staff. City officials don't want mini storage in this location. They do not believe the Project is consistent with the redevelopment goals of the City. The City Planner said, "I thought Industrial would give us the most control. We are looking to put the City in the strongest position to acquire and redevelop the property." (See Planning Commission minutes, dated April 30, 1997, and May 28, 1997.) David Runyan, Planning Commissioner, stated, "The problem with the project is not the Industrial zoning category, it is that a storage facility is not a thing of beauty; it's not the kind of facility we want in the middle of Edina." (See Planning Commission minutes, dated April 30, 1997, and May 28, 1997.) David Byron, Planning Commissioner, stated, "I'll state the obvious - the City has been pursuing a strategy that will effectively address redevelopment of the Kunz and Lewis [Project Site] parcels. There will be conflict with this proposal in that case." (See Planning Commission minutes, dated April 30, 1997, and May 28, 1997.) It is clear that City officials want to deny this Project for reasons of their own making, not for reasons related to zoning. Why? Because it is not legally possible to turn down a principal use of property which conforms to zoning regulations. Therefore, in this case, the City is no different than a neighbor who says, "I don't care what the zoning ordinance says, I don't want this use in my backyard." CONCLUSION For the reasons stated here and at the Planning Commission, it is our strong opinion that this project has been designed in conformance with applicable zoning regulations. It does not require approval of variances. It must be approved as a matter of right consistent with Minnesota law. I said to staff, Planning Commission, and now the City Council, "How can Four S Properties get a fair hearing in the City of Edina ?" The City has recommended denial of a conforming project allowed as a matter of right. The City has filed a petition in district court to acquire the property under condemnation - LARKIN, HOFFMAN, DALY & LINDGREN, LTD. Honorable Mayor and City Councilmembers May 31, 1997 Page 8 The City is an adverse party to Four S Properties in a proceeding in district court. The City has initiated a downzoning to R -1 Single Dwelling Unit District - in conflict with its Comprehensive Plan which calls for "Industrial" development of the Project site. These actions rob the applicant of a use that is permitted as a matter of right. Can the City be a fair and impartial judge of the applications compliance with the requirements of the PID district? The only way the City Council can answer "yes" is to approve the Project. We request that this letter and the materials to which it refers be incorporated in the official record of decision in this matter. Thank you. Sincerely, 4illiam 'ffi Jr., r LARKIN, HOFFMAN, DALY & L GREN, Ltd. Enclosures cc with enclosures: Pat Stotesbery Todd Jones Kenneth Rosland, City Manager Jerry Gilligan, City Attorney Gordon Hughes, Economic Development Director Craig Larsen, City Planner 302877.01 Im RESOLUTION a e t= 4Jl rM `Q City of FAna WHEREAS, it is necessary, advisable, and in the public interest that the Housing and Rede lopment Authority of Edina, Minnesota (the `HRA "), a body politic and corporate under the laws of-the State of Minnesota, acquire for redevelopment purposes and pursuant to the redevelopment plan entitled "Grandview Area Redevelopment Plan° dated May 30, 1984, (the 'Redevelopment Plan'), adopted by the HRA on June:18. 1.984, properly within the Grandview Redevelopment Area; and WHEREAS, in order to accomplish the objectives and purposes set out in the Redevelopment Plan. it is necessary that the properties described on Exhibit A attached hereto and hereby made a part be redeveloped; and WHEREAS, the -HRA has been advised that said property will not be made available for redevelopment in a manner that would meet the objectives and purposes of the Redevelopment Plan unless it is acquired by eminent domain; and WHEREAS, in order to provide for the redevelopment of said property in a manner that would meet the objectives and purposes of the Redevelopment Plan, it will be necessary to procure the same by the right of eminent domain. NOW,. THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that in.orderto provide for the redevelopment of the property described on Exhibit A, hereto in a mariner that would meet the objectives and purposes of the Redevelopment Plan the HRA proceed to acquire. the properly descrbed on Exhibit A hereto under Its power of eminent domain; and that the att3omeYs for the HRA be instructed and directed to Me the necessary petition therefor and to prosecute such. action to a successful conclusion, or until it is abandoned, dismissed or terminated by the HRA or the Court and that the attorneys for the 14PA, the Di Director and Executive. rector of the HRA and the Chairman and Secretary of the HRA do all things necessary to be done in the commencement, proseaRlon and successful termination of such eminent domain proceeding. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that none of the foregoing actions to acquire the property described on Exhibit A hereto be started or undertaken until the Grandview Area Tax Increment Financing Plan of the HRA is amender) in accordance with Minnesota Statutes 469.175, subd. 4, to designate the property described on Exhibit A as property to be acquired by the HRA and to authorize an increase In: tax increment expendiWres to -pay the costs of acquisition and redevelopment of such property. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that it Is hereby found and declared that the acquisition of the pro r,._ described on Exhibit A hereto by the HRA under As power of eminent domain is necessal redevelop blighted and substandard areas in the Grandview Redevelopment Area. Passed and adopted by the Housing and Redevelopment Authority of the City of Edina, Winnesota this 18th day f Feb .1997 Gordon Hughes, . e Director Glenn L. Smith, Chairma City J rA[ (612) 927 -8$61 4001 WEST 50TH STREET FAX 4612) 927 -7645 EDINA, 1WNNFSOTA 55424 -1394 TDD 12) 927.5461 EXHIBTT A Lewis Prop9l y That part of Lot 1, Block 1. `Edenmoor, Hennepin County, Mmesota', tying North of the South 6 feet of said Lot 1, according to the recorded plat thereof. AND That part of Lot 1, Block 1, Wanner Addillon, Jying Northerly of a One described as beginning at a point on the East line of said Lot 1, distant 23.4 feet northerly from the Southeast comer of said Lot 1; thence Westerly parallel with the South Line of said Lot 1 a distance of 101 feet; thence Southerly parallel with said East Tine of Lot 1 a distance of 22.4 feet; thence Westerly parallel with said South line of Lot 1 to the West One of said Lot 1 and there terminating, according to the recorded plat thereof. Hennepin County, Minnesota. AND That part of Governmert Lot 8, Section 28, Township 117, Range 21. lying Southerly of the Southerly right -olLmy One. of Eden Avenue and Westerly of the Westerly right-of -wSiY fine of the Soo line Railroad- Company, formerly the Minneapolis, Northfield and Soulhem Railway, which Oes Easterly of a fine described as beginning at the intersection of the South One of said Goyemmert Lot 8 with the East fine of Block 1. Wanner Addition; thence Northerly along said most Easterly fine and its Northerly extension to a pobrt 25 feet Northerly along said most Easterly One and its Northerly extension to a point 25 feet Northerly from the Northeast comer of Lot 2. in said Block 1, thence Westerly parallel with the North One of said Lot 2 to the East One of Lot 1, in said Block 1; thence Westerly parallel with the North One of said Lot 2 to the East One of Lot 1, in said Block 1; thence Northerly along said Fast line of Lot 1 and Its Northerly extension to said Southerly right-of-way One of Eden Avenue and there terminating, according to the Government Survey. thereof. Kunz Oil L3rgp�d1Y Lot 2. Block 1. Wanner Addition, Hennepin County. Mnnesota. . AND That part of L.ot 1, Block 1 of said Wanner Addition descnbed as follows. Beginning at the Southeast comer of said Lot 1; thence. North along the East fine of said Lot 1, a distance of 23.4 feet; thence West parallel with the South One of said dot 1 a distance of 101 feet; thence South parallel with the East One of said Lot 1. a distance of 224 feet; thence West parallel with the South One of said Lot 1 to the West line of said Lot 1; thence South along the West tine of said Lot 1, a distance of 1 foot to the Southwest comer of said Lot 1; thence Fast along the South One of said Lot 1 to the point of beginning. AND That part of Govemmennt Lot 8, Section 28, Townshipl17 North. Range 21 West, Hennepin County. Minnesota. described as follows: Beginning at a point located on a One drawn between the following described points: Point One located on a One parallel with and distant 221.8 feet East of the West fine of said Government Lot 8, which point is drstartt South 259.4 feet from the intersection of the center line of Eden Prairie Road and said One; and Point Two located on the South One of said Government Lot 8,246.8 feet East of the southwest comer of said Govemmeri Lot 8, said point of beginning being 647.9 northerly from: thesouth One of said Govemment Lot 8; thence Northerly along said drawn tine 25 feet; thence Easterly and at right angles a distance of 90 feed thence Southerly and parallel with said drawn One 25 feet; thence Westerly and at right angles to point of beginning. is y 1AI.NES P. LMKKN FIEDp�LL LAR&IN, HOFFMAN,.DALY & GERALD H. LINDGREN,`iiTD. CRISTOPKERL HARRISTaL JAMES C. ERICKSON KENDgy OI'LROGGE EU~O J. DRISCOLL ATTORNEYS AT LAW BRUCE J. DOUGL45 GEM N. FULLER W411AM C. G RIFFIrH. JR JOHN 0. FU LMER JOHN R. Nll FRANK 1. HARVEY PETER J. COYLE CHARLES S. MODELL 1500 NORWEST FINANCIAL CENTER UARAY 0. LAN CHRISTOPHER J. OErZEN 411E I- BREMER LINDA H. FISHER 7900 XERXES JOHN J. VEFFENHAGEN THOMAS P. SLTMAH T7 AVENUE SOUTH OANEL W. VOW JOHN a AN BLOOMINGTON. MINNESOTA 55431 -1194 ALDEN PHILIP SWIN JON S. SWEREEIAW VUS R INDE THOMAS J. FLYNN TELEPHONE (612) 835.3800 ANOREWF. POW JAMES P. GUINN AM M. MEYER �OOO 1. FREEMAN FAX (612) 896 -3333 CHRISTOPHER 0. JOHNSON GERALD L SECG RENEE L JACKSON JON IL LWraOUKST CHRISTOPHER K. LARUS DOYLE NOUN' MARCY R. FROST JON A COTTER • DOUGLAS M. RAMLER BEATRIOEA RODNAEjLER EP1@1 Sr J. KAMINSKI PALL S. PLIINETT THOMAS F. ALETIMN06i ALAN L KILDOY DANIEL T. KAOLEC KATHLEEN M. PICOrrp NEMMAN .SHARMAA VYNLGREN MICHAEL B. LEBAROM KAMM M NELSEN GREGORY E KORSTAO C EM NAMES GARY A VAN CLEVE • LYNNE MK?FL ] E MCCRE DANIEL L BOMLES C. BRENT ROOK NS TMOTHY J. MCMANUS KRISTIN S. VIESTGARD - TM07HY J. KEA E, JOLIE S. FREDERICLSON ALAN M. ANDERSON .. DONNA L ROSACG OF M MEL MICHAEL W. SC LEY 41CIK F. MY ROM L KREPS D. ]KENNETH LNDGREN TERRENCE E BISHOP ALLMN E MULIGAN LISA A GRAY WBNDE L R ANDERSON CARY A. RE 94M JOSU" GITIS ' AM ADMRTED W WISCONSN February 25, 1997 Mr. Craig Larsen Planning Director Via Messenger City of Edina 4801 West 50th Street Edina, Minnesota 55424 -1394 Re: Application for Approval of a Preliminary Plat and Final Development Plan for Edina Storage Center Project on Behalf of Four S Properties, Inc.; Our File No. 22,830 -00 Dear Mr. Larsen: On behalf of Four S Properties, Inc., we enclose the following application materials for approval of the Edina Storage Center Project: 1 2 3 0 5 a City of Edina Application Form for Preliminary Plat and Final Development Plan executed by Owner and Applicant on February 21, 1997. ALTA Title Land Survey of the Subject Property, dated January 10, 1997 by Demars - Gabriel Land Surveyors, Inc. Site Plan: Sheet C -1, dated February 19, 1997, revised February 21, 1997, by Roger A. Anderson and Associates, Inc. Grading and Erosion Control Plan: Sheet C -2, dated February 19, 1997, revised February 21, 1997, by Roger A. Anderson and Associates, Inca Utility Plan: Sheet C -3, dated February 19, 1997, revised February 21, 1997, by Roger A. Anderson and Associates, Inc. Preliminary Plat: Sheet 1 of 1, dated February 19, 1997, revised February 21, 1997, by Roger A. Anderson and Associates, Inc. LARkAtJ, HOFFMAN, DALY & UNDGREN, L 11). Mr. Craig Larsen February 25, 1997 Page 2 7. Landscape Plan: Sheet L -1, 1 of 1, dated February 21, 1997, by LSA Design. 8. Stormwater Management Plan Calculations: Edina Storage Center Project dated February 21, 1997, by Roger A. Anderson and Associates, Inc. 9. Letter from Northern States Power Company, dated February,X, 1997, regarding "Confirmation of Electric Service availability." 10. Letter from Minnegasco, dated February 17, 1997, regarding "Confirmation of Natural Gas availability." 11. Architectural Site Plan and Project Data: Sheet A -1, dated February 22, 1997, by Architects Professional Association. 12. Elevations: Sheet A -2, dated February 24, 1997, by Architects Professional Association. 13. Elevations: Sheet A -3, dated February 24, 1997, by Architects Professional Association. 14. Perspective Rendering - color - dated February, 24, 1997. 15. Perspective Rendering - line drawing - dated February 24, 1997. Please provide notice of the date(s) of any hearings on the above applications. Please incorporate this letter and the enclosed application materials in the official record of decision in this matter. Thank you for your assistance. Sincerely, William C. Gri Lith,�Jr., for LARKIN, HOF, DALY LINDGREN, Ltd. WCG /psb Enclosures cc: Pat Stotesbery Todd Jones Roger Anderson 0279263.01 r -1 r--1 PLANNING DEPARTMENT C3TY'OF EDINA Application for: [• I LOT DIVISION [ 1 REZONING Case Number 0 ate Fee Paid 4,101 WEST FIFTIETH STREET EOINA. MINNESOTA 55424 (612)427.8861 [ I CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT [XI FINAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN [ I VARIANCE [ j PLAN AMENDMENT [X j PLAT Eden Avenue Addition Proposed Name APPLICANT: Name Foil S Properties, Inc. PROPERTY OWNER: (if Different from Above) Address 601 Carlson Parkway, Suite 350 Minnetonka, MN 55305 Name Gordon C_ Levis Address 4201 Norex Drive Chaska, iii 55318 Legal Description of Property See Attached Phone (612 ) 449-5755 Phone ( 612 ) 361 -2408 Property Address 5229 Eden Avenue, Edna, m Present Zoning Planned Industrial District Explanation of Request: For Plat and Final Development Plan Approvals (Use reverse side or additional pages it necessary) ARC'r.ITE-CT. SURVEYOR Prep^�e77rty Owner ' i 7 - Date 1/85 Name Architects Professional Association Phone ( 612) 934 -8898 Attn: Jeff Sybrant Name ors- Gabriel Land Surveyors_, Inc_ Phone ( 612) 559 -0908 Signature Applicant's Signature Date Parcei 1 riot port of Lot 1, Block 1, "Edenmoor, Hennepin County, !lil.n -,PC-Pta ", lying North of the South 6 feet of said Lot 1, occording to tr= r,- corded plat thereof. Par.: el 2 That part of Lot 1, Block 1, Wenner Addition, lying Northerly of a line described as beginning at a point on the East h*ne of said Lot 1, distant 23.4 feet Northerly from the Southeast corner of said Lot 1; thence Westerly parallel with the South line of said Lot 1 a distance of 101 feet; thence Southerly parallel with said East line of Lot 1 a distance of 22.4 feet; thence Westerly parallel with, said South line of Lot 1 to the West line of said Lot 1 and there terminating, according to the recorded plat thereof.. Parcel 3 That part of Government Lot 8, Sectioa 28, Township 117, Range 21, lying Southerly of the Southerly right —of —way line of Eden Avenue and Westerly of the Westerly right —of —way line of the Soo Line Railroad Company; formerly the Minneapolis, Northfield and-Southern Railway, which lies Easterly of c line described as beginning at the intersection of the South line of said Government Lot 8 with the East line of clock 1, Wanner Addition; thence Northerly and Easterly clong said East line to the most Easterly line of said Block 1; thence Northerly along said most Easterly line and its Nor�erly extension to a point 25 feet Northerly along said most Ecsterl,v line and its Northerly extension to a point 25 feet Nort, ^erly from the Northeast corner of Lot 2, in said Block 1; thence Westeriy parallel with the North line of said Lot 2 to the East line of Lot 1, in said Block 1; thence Northerly along scid =-s` line of Lot 1 and its Northe -!,v extension to soid Southerly ri ,},t —of —way line of Eden Aver:.,e end there terminating, according to :ne Government Survey there--(. i� r z r rSi• '). t;� I n N 17r SCALI IN f l"I , r.tu .:):w :!n6• +; ,I�flq ;�,A..p�?✓ ..r,��. ^. :.l'�:Ia:�`L. ..Ip..rtr r• .. ;v..� :r�' _ � • ... n h%VV I IA Ir'^ _ 1.If vC L,1 11 A II 1�1F1 A fl L 1/l.l \VI-IiJ nry r N.•1 '•Ir•er4 rrrl "•• •w1x•w 1 C•. ^w4'I•n 11.1. M• Car Nbr *1"9 f.—I I•A1Jre• PM114 w4Y,1•M N't"I rl.p� y11.1r1 ArnlrrA • 70 AMI 14arnA e yIM w IAM .r.r�1. >A.e . wafn".-• I UM ir•an9 r r'.bfr1 Wm,•lyh ITrdC ra• ,k✓ V Pe•4 hrlr4 rr• t1✓e Ca`w•/101 r— ne 7rPOd(CYD19, felre Mel 1r9db �rIV Vil' rr It, Gvdm C. le•Ir• four S PrMrrlkr. Mr. and r-11 Bent ..A IN, , Id e?rbfr Inal Ih,, Moo P Plel and Ixe a wy p1 .xk• d Is !'m•d .Pe ma41 (1) A, arCvdonlo .'M 'flwbmrA St,d.4 0916) PreuA?T4n1J M• Al IA /AGSM land fill• 5.rwrr,' Pkl'r ?r11rbP,hM M4 o&vtrd by At IA nn•1 ACSM 1 19P7. IPd I1iNdrr dt— 1 1.111 11, .w•frl IM % al Inbr? A rl.r•nnl, a1d (A: be,W""I to Ibe AcVwd,y Sle iwde lee 04,c led by At IA and At 54 pfd k rrrrrf en the del. or Ohl, epldw.pliarl or an IAbon SP.ey 1111? faA1m!nn?nl AM x•01961? Dole; QA?nbpr KIM Peg4lrplkw M. 77114 ALTA/ACSM LAND TITLE SURVEY ""'.h" !1 . r.nw I I•nl ral wr IN r, Aln., 1, "1 A•nn.n• -, w w fnnlr rwls, haJ 'r ✓In wI Ixt rr n 1x41 ^r r er//.r4np In Ixr 11 n•NA rMl Inr••nl 1' !.Vl1 I ,,.I W nr lel r, P'w. Ibnr AJA1✓ lrwa n. Nr#•d e Ary rbr.rr nl n xeann.we nl n —1 nn Inr rn!1 xw ..,.4 lei r, 4, l.n/ 711 11.rr nrnr4r b ^ ^• Ixr a u•x�nd t+ r . Inl 1, Ixrwrr .Yrlw•1r rsr,.r .• x 1x• Sn.l. r_ ✓r 1 •r r e drr.,a er rm rra. IxFT• � -4 r••1wr1 . +e•1 la•r e N lel I e p!1..•cr v1 1•✓✓:• n ✓1rrArl�1.n!' 1�.".r 1•dr,•ln 1+14nr wwr4.wp,l .pl�r 1•r rdre r•er r�r• ;;r 1 re p•A r 1n,e n.rrr nr . ,... ww.,�' A a - ✓, r -...w. :- ..,.r.,^ - Ali— C.— •'r I.v.,.r. r. I -h!.v, rxr.w A. ✓.er. Nax 1 1 I'w•r ••11 n - �. Tnrr .1• r•p:�•.ly 1. Ix. Inli 1• rr n•r'•1 r Pir ✓1. .�11.I.;�w, r•r,.. ✓r 1 ^r M1 %pr•••A Intl I.r 1.. r. 1 In�l�•r 1N -14 r n.r.... 11n�1,••h N1n4 1 1 Ln:rnr, 1_ 1 .1• •ra rxr'1r, .wnrwa 1•• n 1•MI ;'•r✓rl Il .'!••r✓ n•.n, 1rw rr,. r•1Mnr A•n. • N.Ixnfl to ^n' ; 1M : priA lx:N r rx ✓w ✓r Irrrl..hrr 1'rl•1 ..Iw 11.! n .,rn Inr J Iw Ixr 1 n ,r 1. r r n••I mr r ..,V . 1 ,'�1•r w.r r ✓r.•r I IAi i�r. ✓..r .Irur.✓ Ian _.•1 1 °, - GORDON C. LEIVI . ::��� ••wf it SITE � r p � ���• jl EDEN AVENUE ADDITION i._ =L���; : �0 - --� _� Po -- / { � rya■ \ �� 5''! - •t'r:. ' I d,:, .:,..,•... _ .11. , I i t -- '\1•. 1 -__lr t:L w���r• • M' -- Lr__ -_. - .�.1 /"i /1_.'1 �`A -f'�. �Jj1 "w.\, 1 � ` Ii- 1�(\1p(+ �i��¢ _�- .JThp•�y1'L'I •.. ':17, ... !-/. 1 -- ��L'�...�_. �/� 11.. �� / r� .III._ \ 7]I 17 :Irlrrlt, ^�I`i !;'r" ^:.{�','3.. _cl!1, �i;1:`I� IT'1,•�� 1' ` .ri r l Lt 1 1.J. ��•'' :. 14••T;�`�- 1- �Le�l�q�lr - . I•l •ll_StI1JJl5 POND • iL n _ .. Ft 1 i BUILDINC�D, -t: 1 •I r It rS;: C .•\.1a I• .. r -..t - - — Trari. —rc 1� R -I BUiLD/NG E NOML 1 e,R "A e. a ■u/ -Gom ■.,o W■Kial .,a ' - \ , ■ Ie ...'• .. � " f..:n -1 .. r ■0.U0 r { ■laT INrI bYl 00 N01 - -� - - -� � — .....__.. . _ . fMT.RO K rq VNR tl •Roof a Mt eR. � ♦ .I W �! r+..+Nwm vn :. , I �.� . -_. _.... , 1.<..Mr•r f M rwr,el r.w.r neon brr -W . _`\ � � BUILDING, i'.... ,., t 1 j, � 1 • •:r•••• - - -' --- +.R NJ Ic ',+.n rrU ■o' Iro4e onol.ma ' -1 I I ; frru eq nart f -1 -Y .ac+rti Mai n.7 oR ply �i'.:,:.' I PARR a� —_'- Irs.rtDrm.wra�w.nDgemnwNR.0 .•�. _- .• R_1 .e.+...r M 101 rDM w0 MM vMT. I lela In aY. R fn.af s p v wl[q • �• •� . Iwn .. '. � --�_- � +,� •r. 1 KR w ,/ to acoum nrt/ w fR N...e . o-,aR■ a It. .wf IrwK. 'I POD-1 a i" ...r .... _ P�_2 j 1. w. Y M OrIMIN R .rr.ea naYe It 4, 1 In el•Ta r. INm nw.l If Ylr lei .■t. CO.",$ w lefts a In to auu ♦ •( ' f ILMAOLAUI !Mind Us, PC-4 - \ .'•.. • JRK.Ni Jwncl: MI'�lMRll`lel wt i0 7C ,'\ lsOnp ac L II dn„ feeD'I■ 101 Yl. miff V 11i .[ In 1ar00■,R 'I,J LR 110 I.vf Ciullw M �"1 ' ■�•'o' Iff .Ife1N.Y b /IKI a /I,fY 1118 MW eT +4 W 11100 laN M.M, w 1f/4 / If<Y N—ew W pNJI -CJHI etYMJ, 4.I.tf 1 IAY7 IOOR+.rI Mp *pR0 / 6.111 V l _s ■, wl Ip K tOlwl 10 0 wsW`R.ew w M Ie0•at R b f0elrllrrl Y ,te 1 /%,Y V 1,7+1 e Ik ,uls ,,Ir4lc.r1 Jofan. D like" Roo nda .a& ruD:[D 1 136.411 It 17oq � � iaa+sr . ..ssnc Is• Iri+wl .e r.ls ..TUq rve, suR mr iIKm w i l 10.170 74•I011 I.I af:q ■4N 1014 / ■,n7 11.fY 111,111 V 1 � _� r1i•Me . rrr, R. rT M4 r4 AM OU Mrwe fr,.• M ,\OInO 'a "—it "° "°' • ° ""' ROGER A ANDERSON AND ASSOdAlES INC EDEN AVENUE ADDITION 1 . ea, „s sre Ysilel,•a I,wif. .w '•°""eY �'• "y�• -+Yf• .•.e..w:�r w.... r....,. EDINA MINNESOTA PRELIMINARY PLAT ••gy - r_• 1 _.. R "Me r, _/ 7 .. .,..... + 4. �.......Nr. e.n ..... 1 Of 1 .e t•R - - r1PI.w a ••IS4 /„ a ■. .,, p Intl FOUR ■SN PROPERTIES I - u I IAIr' _— �.. \,_ y•'r'1.'i..� lif/!.^,'!lfil. i wi �.. _ -x'1.1 f'll L!/-\ A /'1 ... . \/ tT »r.�n..]��a�•rrri -1 'ou::'^ ra ,..` ^.,�� i!' �, a.l \ �/+� L — - .r.:rurJ:rrJ:]a'1... A �A \1(3N1tY YAP POND :y _ ].J - .. • •� '•, 1 Yaw YM Y f w.l �w w, _ 7 �'V y •. r1 Na... 1- Ili '.-... H'1.41W J-11•i 1•L1 +1�-1 J-1 11 +`I� 1 Iaf:BU1LDING B i� BUILDING c IV I lei rb.l I I I U1LDW0 6 1 L, • I I ..1....... w...... ru.r lr n. -- - -• — rwnww•Y11ra r a.r I BUILDING--' aw t :.. lIKY.. IIC:fDW L •_..� .. . .............. r ........ i I I I Iii I II;y T 0 R 1 'w1NL'`'iy5tlt9Cw5- — NELL I aDr a IwrM1 Doom 1. Irll iN.c• 1• ptYY1 -Irw6 W0 VAA—% r! III r1� . > LOa �1G11: .riorncl: D•ne 7.ruM• 10. 4n, \ mans aeaa rl f 11/ r.a•,r warm r.wY1p1 N YW M Y01 \ I rl,frp n p 11,]n - Ipr •Y r10.'alwl . .rwncn •w1[f90Ya .fs0m.I1L r.w.n0 .( rw41m p •tool! A M1 04 - 1 11.W �• IIlw.1• f D[ Y.aa.l nom rprwv wmla nem aWrr•m bl- IMn.sll. r.an.¢ wrt ]b r,n c.aJO. on< •n Yr (cewwa r.rp YO'/ IroII. ona -wol c ]I.rn 1011 t01 .wf 7x1.14 Y 111 .[ w•. nw. r !aloe law nl.nl'. r fa1M Ir11cD.1 Wt ]•1•b 1 K1 a .l Mt fM1 a_m Irifl .Y -f of r>• -IeM 1 —to rrM wr a�r1.110110mgN1 411.E 0 10.010 Ibn•YY1 wpprlD •0.)11 f _ 1000 C riO ll• 1+1rw1 IbR1.Y1 41Dw0 40.rb 11 (4.1 Irt.Y:N• .MrM1[r - . IDIa rYHrl w0110m . n gran (r4 ] .rllpp 1 10.170 rM aplrn 11. 1 p011 reel rM1. r1D {0 1.15 . rp11N1 r ltIIif. I n.Mf 101Y / 1.1f - Yrx.NVM1 M bW Sv_r rrl f 1LIIAOL7AOil �peryp mop, IOI.I 11.bf 71]b 1]1,41 P f10tO1 4 frmQ101. r� ra111>al wiwR x10 M b N1Da1M,pf � 14(1 10 1w WI b wr.• Olrrl a4 w MY rY r.lrrrm n n to ; �yrp rq1 Y• DMII Yry•V1p .e Mrl R0� ANDERSON AND A550f1AlES INC. EDINA STORAGE CENTER PROJECT °"�" ar• .«.wo7lYpal�.e IwI wlkOr Ir.W EDINA, MINNESOTA SITE PLAN t I� 1u —r.11r r>M aYY1 M! n Yrrblr �, b.•y ^rr s•n -- aw+re. s r +Yen ware!eu ! 1....11L•1 we rl JI - r•a-•.r.— - r. FOUR YSY PROPERTIES, INC. C) I A �A \1(3N1tY YAP POND :y _ ].J - .. • •� '•, 1 Yaw YM Y f w.l �w w, _ 7 �'V y •. r1 Na... 1- Ili '.-... H'1.41W J-11•i 1•L1 +1�-1 J-1 11 +`I� 1 Iaf:BU1LDING B i� BUILDING c IV I lei rb.l I I I U1LDW0 6 1 L, • I I ..1....... w...... ru.r lr n. -- - -• — rwnww•Y11ra r a.r I BUILDING--' aw t :.. lIKY.. IIC:fDW L •_..� .. . .............. r ........ i I I I Iii I II;y T 0 R 1 'w1NL'`'iy5tlt9Cw5- — NELL I aDr a IwrM1 Doom 1. Irll iN.c• 1• ptYY1 -Irw6 W0 VAA—% r! III r1� . > LOa �1G11: .riorncl: D•ne 7.ruM• 10. 4n, \ mans aeaa rl f 11/ r.a•,r warm r.wY1p1 N YW M Y01 \ I rl,frp n p 11,]n - Ipr •Y r10.'alwl . .rwncn •w1[f90Ya .fs0m.I1L r.w.n0 .( rw41m p •tool! A M1 04 - 1 11.W �• IIlw.1• f D[ Y.aa.l nom rprwv wmla nem aWrr•m bl- IMn.sll. r.an.¢ wrt ]b r,n c.aJO. on< •n Yr (cewwa r.rp YO'/ IroII. ona -wol c ]I.rn 1011 t01 .wf 7x1.14 Y 111 .[ w•. nw. r !aloe law nl.nl'. r fa1M Ir11cD.1 Wt ]•1•b 1 K1 a .l Mt fM1 a_m Irifl .Y -f of r>• -IeM 1 —to rrM wr a�r1.110110mgN1 411.E 0 10.010 Ibn•YY1 wpprlD •0.)11 f _ 1000 C riO ll• 1+1rw1 IbR1.Y1 41Dw0 40.rb 11 (4.1 Irt.Y:N• .MrM1[r - . IDIa rYHrl w0110m . n gran (r4 ] .rllpp 1 10.170 rM aplrn 11. 1 p011 reel rM1. r1D {0 1.15 . rp11N1 r ltIIif. I n.Mf 101Y / 1.1f - Yrx.NVM1 M bW Sv_r rrl f 1LIIAOL7AOil �peryp mop, IOI.I 11.bf 71]b 1]1,41 P f10tO1 4 frmQ101. r� ra111>al wiwR x10 M b N1Da1M,pf � 14(1 10 1w WI b wr.• Olrrl a4 w MY rY r.lrrrm n n to ; �yrp rq1 Y• DMII Yry•V1p .e Mrl R0� ANDERSON AND A550f1AlES INC. EDINA STORAGE CENTER PROJECT °"�" ar• .«.wo7lYpal�.e IwI wlkOr Ir.W EDINA, MINNESOTA SITE PLAN t I� 1u —r.11r r>M aYY1 M! n Yrrblr �, b.•y ^rr s•n -- aw+re. s r +Yen ware!eu ! 1....11L•1 we rl JI - r•a-•.r.— - r. FOUR YSY PROPERTIES, INC. C) r/lOVt1H OONMOL SCHIOL r Or INSIALLA110H l MAINTMANCr .wr •,___wwW Z,li ej•u• I Hr w .. t t.e rata OAIAe f. Hts I i nw. raa .al. wawm . e u w In K" n. t rtwt te4 eol tae u a . Ir p=I n IY e t y K bI lr wi F nn� Ist rro� O.tne• IrAa..r u.. — — _Iygy.•�t1lSD, .i • to..$ ounrr: re• wnun tft Va e.,•re) t• •o ,.e gI1W fill. • I,.e tf..•lti t0 _ _ _ er _ _ _ ..II'li Id a K,e, . 11•e [ntrre MIIr 1• en Ir•wote ra bw• /1 •u. taro A dnn al,d i� MI ,o KW 11.L`i :� 1 }� ^;'4i;i11'!,� it�r.:::..�......da.�ill_ - - _:_.,, ...�a�i::�:1-,•�' -�'.•. icy cia z r %I{({ P.:'rj;: rw. • ;: • , _ b ! t (',: _ ... r ...... `_._-. - - _ I if l "ta.l�:ra� •f '.".Jv': �.l$'!!! � ii ..::,- !1 1 BUI N_C A Y —•_ _ —_. .. _,.a.W.L141�J -J 1.11 -LI- 411 -11-L ri1�H 1 -41-41 J BUILDWG C TV! ®0 R H H ti. L.-AL..SY)l9OLS- — ...... .. ------- `\ !'Ill •,r ..I. .. �m�'' � • ... \ \ \ `. `.. ! t I ,,' ..• ...yen —.«__ :i :BUILDING D.= • -• .'•... \�f,' ... �.. •, =r i., '!' el - r [ ; BUILDING D � •• ,...,�...� . ._. ` :• �\ ` -aY II ...................... f•�t 1:, I 1 1 :.- .�.......� �'�: • `" UILDING E :l _....• ..,.. ,,... I 1___,..., -• 1 _... ' s I K1 mat - .BY /LDING f•./ • l rm �'• t 1 /Ilr1A INMK IM• r.t. MI.) 1 ....... ' .. - .. .: •. is •r�.iy 'I I! I I eIt•Ir a – /e,b Al 1'A' ,el„Or "_ �{ `�.� ir.m no.^ care \ \ \)ii r[r. •.0 1' �..._......... Mt) WILL ROIL ran wtu K V.= .r ."t ti� •• li ., e•v •.Y. rt n+•w -eur<t •e.o w.t.an we H all \,(- . ••, .a::. t .MOC °rt�'i.i rwuu.� at� a v wwo�rw�n."'ri .rt•or \ t •.rl•rV CPMr.w rwn M.l 7,l•,� 000. -m•I -a 11nt•.t I.% l -r -.01 rOt.nt M.1 n+t 90 aJm1 1ptJltp •r,r, _, •la nomnM M[wA w , ww•. Qe•n M.1 M M r•e ryua o_•.r.wtl ora•r:e. ue ..r EDINA STORAGE CENTER PROJECT _ , W . wr w «awe..twt.a:n 1_ra ROGER A. ANDERSON AND ASSOdAR:S INC GRADING & EROSION M°" . •. -•.w.• EDINA, MINNESOTA iTt. GTCII: -if— •' e2 nn r.•r.r:..- --plat 'a s.■ . - - - -- - -avrss a.•en Ofb[n�n •.• . )nth mr...o•naw•.aYr_. ••n t FOUR •S• PROPERTIES CONTROL PLAN .1uf vl cmlAtu.ou� '.\ ,'r PLY _Y• __ ::L�•Y7�... -.. I Hr w .. t t.e rata OAIAe f. Hts I i nw. raa .al. wawm . e u w In K" n. t rtwt te4 eol tae u a . Ir p=I n IY e t y K bI lr wi F nn� Ist rro� O.tne• IrAa..r u.. — — _Iygy.•�t1lSD, .i • to..$ ounrr: re• wnun tft Va e.,•re) t• •o ,.e gI1W fill. • I,.e tf..•lti t0 _ _ _ er _ _ _ ..II'li Id a K,e, . 11•e [ntrre MIIr 1• en Ir•wote ra bw• /1 •u. taro A dnn al,d i� MI ,o KW 11.L`i :� 1 }� ^;'4i;i11'!,� it�r.:::..�......da.�ill_ - - _:_.,, ...�a�i::�:1-,•�' -�'.•. icy cia z r %I{({ P.:'rj;: rw. • ;: • , _ b ! t (',: _ ... r ...... `_._-. - - _ I if l "ta.l�:ra� •f '.".Jv': �.l$'!!! � ii ..::,- !1 1 BUI N_C A Y —•_ _ —_. .. _,.a.W.L141�J -J 1.11 -LI- 411 -11-L ri1�H 1 -41-41 J BUILDWG C TV! ®0 R H H ti. L.-AL..SY)l9OLS- — ...... .. ------- `\ !'Ill •,r ..I. .. �m�'' � • ... \ \ \ `. `.. ! t I ,,' ..• ...yen —.«__ :i :BUILDING D.= • -• .'•... \�f,' ... �.. •, =r i., '!' el - r [ ; BUILDING D � •• ,...,�...� . ._. ` :• �\ ` -aY II ...................... f•�t 1:, I 1 1 :.- .�.......� �'�: • `" UILDING E :l _....• ..,.. ,,... I 1___,..., -• 1 _... ' s I K1 mat - .BY /LDING f•./ • l rm �'• t 1 /Ilr1A INMK IM• r.t. MI.) 1 ....... ' .. - .. .: •. is •r�.iy 'I I! I I eIt•Ir a – /e,b Al 1'A' ,el„Or "_ �{ `�.� ir.m no.^ care \ \ \)ii r[r. •.0 1' �..._......... Mt) WILL ROIL ran wtu K V.= .r ."t ti� •• li ., e•v •.Y. rt n+•w -eur<t •e.o w.t.an we H all \,(- . ••, .a::. t .MOC °rt�'i.i rwuu.� at� a v wwo�rw�n."'ri .rt•or \ t •.rl•rV CPMr.w rwn M.l 7,l•,� 000. -m•I -a 11nt•.t I.% l -r -.01 rOt.nt M.1 n+t 90 aJm1 1ptJltp •r,r, _, •la nomnM M[wA w , ww•. Qe•n M.1 M M r•e ryua o_•.r.wtl ora•r:e. ue ..r EDINA STORAGE CENTER PROJECT _ , W . wr w «awe..twt.a:n 1_ra ROGER A. ANDERSON AND ASSOdAR:S INC GRADING & EROSION M°" . •. -•.w.• EDINA, MINNESOTA iTt. GTCII: -if— •' e2 nn r.•r.r:..- --plat 'a s.■ . - - - -- - -avrss a.•en Ofb[n�n •.• . )nth mr...o•naw•.aYr_. ••n t FOUR •S• PROPERTIES CONTROL PLAN ' _`La'7'L7-=�SLZ: 1�n:'. ^a! ; ... ... �r•l i.11 (•. h)nA n � 1srrr:I'rrcr:r.LCicI3r °' r, •r ..,;,:::r::r'C! •• �•/FIL✓— -- - - • �\. ;1 ' ,.i � 'IM t t::,�li. vhTI r rK IM. tawrrt,-r'1 r nl' tP.IQ � l i,s a ';�-T. [.,-J: t _ • \ 1• e , _ M l t .s.ru 1 r al IY w.l •1 •I • °.t an1.I .e n. 1yy�� BUI NC A \ _ M.j ti i .� L ao�.- -_-�,� Yt+a r�r'1.... -__ =_�I un.l• Y 1 i ' \ •a' •_ ar¢i •.. Ir -n• a oY.1 nisi i i i i t l 1'1 �'1'I 16Th •Its, 111 11111 .` — 6UILDING_ D. � \' -' ini BUILDING C ( ----• '3 rr -- - - - - - - - - I -��R •J� r' \111.1.• :�-��r .� t . �Ir.lr • n .. - — ` L,... .._.. 5 —rr -- I _ BUILDING E LiW I I I -.$ \ �t7r= Ii''iosa If • 1 tower .tor .r al IM. 'la[ r 11' KI IY ton .. BUILDING F — 1 IML CON*'$& m .aKMIUW M 1'C,.•• t K MYr IA slob CMI- -. L SWMY Iaw Y, K 1' la. „ •K a Cawttae 10 " C t W, b W. a 1. — 1s w t J. -aa Iaw M- K 1• r\YI . C'Nt ® N 0 R T H GtK'L� ,�1�CL 1YMSl110C�5_ — ..nan.•n ..I .K nr . 1 �..' EDINA STORAGE CENTER PROJECT ROOM A. ANDERSON AND ASSDpAiES INC. -. a.w M I n KI e•s. tvnl — , ,...... al ""' y �" ''!" °"K" •,_-•. ^• -•,_ -, •.••, •••••'• y EDINA MINNESOTA UTILITY PLAN «'ropy ^• •- •••++•- •'••• --�•• ^ ^" FOUR •S PROPERTIES, INC. C3 o e,n _ —. alw.a a arro.l •• o.t •t r 1,3t_ - - •...J iI..... I I Iii 1 I I 1 I IML CON*'$& m .aKMIUW M 1'C,.•• t K MYr IA slob CMI- -. L SWMY Iaw Y, K 1' la. „ •K a Cawttae 10 " C t W, b W. a 1. — 1s w t J. -aa Iaw M- K 1• r\YI . C'Nt ® N 0 R T H GtK'L� ,�1�CL 1YMSl110C�5_ — ..nan.•n ..I .K nr . 1 �..' EDINA STORAGE CENTER PROJECT ROOM A. ANDERSON AND ASSDpAiES INC. -. a.w M I n KI e•s. tvnl — , ,...... al ""' y �" ''!" °"K" •,_-•. ^• -•,_ -, •.••, •••••'• y EDINA MINNESOTA UTILITY PLAN «'ropy ^• •- •••++•- •'••• --�•• ^ ^" FOUR •S PROPERTIES, INC. C3 o e,n _ —. alw.a a arro.l •• o.t •t r 1,3t_ - - • .w w W �► �� S I . I I IL, , 'Ciff • A1� I III�II �III�01� Il�Tll�ln � Dlccu" ", IMAL •• PLANT F=M— SCHEDULE n�n.Or.•onrw...w.��i. •n �.v .`•••..•H� L S A IV SOO Ion Poo pv�ls / LINE LA q OR�, q t 1ARf RAILROAD w D E S PLL at" - -- -�._ COMPAIV 1 rAaA U• n W" SMWAn ttAl" y I G N CAL PLL cacm C / AI.(11 e.Gl � NO A SWAT MAW Wom O A OEILLA RngA D RkeD,LI/TW mvU CAL 15' m PLL acm SMU•AAYAn UAVM ` ACM rLAIAIIOO,IVOW CAL .. - •Y L- • DlRALD VAM No ll OA A..I....ly W rr..Iy �Z BU401NC C BUl.01N0 B CAL ® PLL MW r 0 g0A114tW RD nV%f 13' to I A4C1 "" m n4vw CAL "JA CMN . 0 t FAenla A!4 i i', • { i iY m AMU IIPAYAO LZADC1 _ __ _ _. -- _ _— _ 1RA." MHDTLYA/ACA rATNOI,• , .cl.ta+ cu�v+ nJr r>K w+.. Dtcr CA.a a RlMI v, 1 � M 1 IwvA.ro n K a ,rr•+ N /' m PLL PM 10 Ca"M PlT Al O1RAl0 IA.CSWl MIIA OCCC eALL1•IIONf BULON6 0 A.t)rRCI ..VIA n( l..f V rI( n.R a • G /' m am "M OOCOMALO M "WALB In ! / C((ORfWOFM V= W m a MA KWADS • .w w W �► �� S I . I I IL, , 'Ciff • A1� I III�II �III�01� Il�Tll�ln � Dlccu" ", IMAL •• PLANT F=M— SCHEDULE n�n.Or.•onrw...w.��i. •n �.v .`•••..•H� M.� y: IV OTT Ion Poo pv�ls / LA q OR�, q t 1ARf ' W 01W-AIM w PLL at" D / 1 rAaA U• n • .w w W �► �� S I . I I IL, , 'Ciff • A1� I III�II �III�01� Il�Tll�ln � Dlccu" ", IMAL •• PLANT SCHEDULE n�n.Or.•onrw...w.��i. •n �.v .`•••..•H� M.� y: IV OTT Ion Poo pv�ls _�A R.(TOLIOe'tIM 06 OW TnWWMADFO • M(ILe WMA CAL PLL at" D / VRM ow au Amu U• m W" SMWAn ttAl" NAND TYRO mw CAL PLL cacm C / AI.(11 e.Gl 13• m SWAT MAW Wom O A OEILLA RngA D RkeD,LI/TW mvU CAL 15' m PLL acm SMU•AAYAn UAVM ACM rLAIAIIOO,IVOW CAL PLL O(AN • DlRALD VAM No ll /,' m INXI SMArA4 LUM ACCT RAVA40"s Tov CAL PLL MW r 0 g0A114tW RD nV%f 13' to ITCA! IM MAP tlAMm A4C1 "" m n4vw CAL "JA CMN . 0 t FAenla A!4 Z m AMU IIPAYAO LZADC1 1RA." MHDTLYA/ACA rATNOI,• CAL - RU CAM M 1 ROM AF450" l /' m PLL PM 10 Ca"M MIIA OCCC eALL1•IIONf M 1 • FntAT•DAL AFshmmAI /' m PLL rO M 10 OMM "M OOCOMALO M "WALB In ! / C((ORfWOFM V= W m PAL to" 10 6WJV MA KWADS nl K . CLAO[ Iw VRC( O as PAL FCM 10 ow" MA CLACJ MUM N L • BLACK KU VRA;I 7 m RU rMT 10 N+0/• P0Ar.LAIICAVWATA M n N AMAPW WPER VVIA t coo IPAC7[!'OI CDnU It OWA P DJWDA OAL rl H /.OA.• 1... n�n.Or.•onrw...w.��i. •n �.v .`•••..•H� M.� y: rI V•( p ....��.lst•'T .w.l .f M e.rwn. n o .f W Ll ..'Vn MYOV� lie.' -.�T •..w.4. ]�[{ �...ttie.•n".a �ni• i n w� ~� wM.� 0 1 [S�� W W LANDQCAPE L -1 No A trap ar par noon) __— p aroly \ - -- "'•`.. u.tn Tt (alp nepn) _ _ — __ _ - - - -- __ Mao Y(mtAL) . 11 MRI) b - r /tIAM. /M Hl /,ro11/TA 1. YU)/ I 114111 • BUlDMO C ' .---`— BULdNO B� LLfla a 1131 1Loaa1 ► 1 41.!13 ar DO rtOPl) - .._....._._........ a . t ae! Sri \4AJO O (IOtrLI I /r1 WMIS. T �' 1 r.....w I.R..re •- • t_ I+DI'Wp I.nD)b AAtA • Butma.D toows Z. 1.). rl. I.Jl AI anew t•. 1>�oA 1 MAL rret rl P.+l• ..1 MALa A ;. D."r Ar. — AR.IIp. rrw1 RR IOIAI II.M , - . ( •"�' .� ' 1 BUllttro r IEaaa ar \ i .1 . . ._._._._._._._._.i._._.J W1.4 PROJECT DATA / M L.112YY1r! rAR[YAt Y.R M IDrnPNIR\!/TA MV+) . uw ;uR� r�l lW. U11Nw. r /tIAM. /M Hl /,ro11/TA 1. YU)/ AIOR[C1. - AIORtC'I/ r.PYY110b1 AnAOC />•/ GJAIMfI WE . A trRM rY4TR.1�1!/Ot1 H\./ IAMKNt /R'.nTC1 . IY WAw11C I /r1 WMIS. •..C.Ilu Drgl /IriII r AM b, Irl M.n I+DI'Wp I.nD)b AAtA • r..yl RR Y'CL.n RR aR p1b C'• 1.). rl. I.Jl AI anew t•. MAL rret rl P.+l• \r..I /I IN —rI, MALa A ;. D."r Ar. — AR.IIp. rrw1 RR IOIAI II.M r\CrOND YR • rArrw r.n.•rtp rlgll Iv1Px \IUr I.wln• roe . ro IVICINITY MAP DRAWING INDEX I A -1 SITE PLAN A PROJECT DATA A4 ELEVATION: Aa [l[rAT10N: C•t sITE PLAN i C -1 nRADINO AND DRAINAO[ PLAN C•7 UTILITY PLAN L`i LANDSCAPE PLAN G n(F",i.0Hp[,m/)nv 0 0'u'i� FIP Pars 'A`1:1 �I 910 ?S Wtv— - "I-* - ►.- to mAwA.Ww" IIOOt W* C-IM RUPNr "o. W-A MM W�ml pv� up"Aw - sm wo fr�l — -.1 @Mo I , ELEVATION VACI ClOft 11.46 r 0416 - ' t AL WLM e' --,=; irr n "I- LA.6:V,WVATI0N (PARTIAL) A VATION (PARTIAL) PR 00RD'"LI 4VITIMn4111tl 111111.eD W I M AOL@ (2)6mj,v.fj -ZAInLe 0L. II II I "' I mi Cz 0:1 PA. rprermagafAmy , LEO. rsivil-iroomo M - I(,?- ) 2 V'r 3 MRRfIrfrN MIL. O MTIM VL"W 0 W" - COLOR 'A' •A t fts" - MOR I- .— "M. ON VOMt COLOR ML �o L�M KFAMcone RMlOCRI @ I A.9 ft (g)eMtH F kRVATIOM BLDG'S C. D. 1! 4 F •P%XMCfWM ML P"L - 10 M w M A.9 Mp* VVMLwoOSTDUKPLu O—c —'A'-- M4. MtS . P. COLM N ------------------ -- nenrwO ML 0.— - to m Fhl' . ... ............ "Is., IN, I'm P.M. Ms. �OwmMMN 0� R A (Z)WESVLFVATION BLDG. F WA F; F., • IFIFIFIFICIF-I 3, � lillll �I�I 1. 13 03 KEY PLAN UTIFURABRAPA 17 AA\ 91 C1.7 ,T J1 it, I., EDINA STORAGE CENTER ponAlrflT EDINA, MINNESOTA FOUR ftS* PROPERTIES. INC. m4tor <zD 02/18/07 WED 11:55 F.Al 612 832 5301 COPE"ND BUILDING I]003 AMoRPaw amyCamaarr February 17,1997 Fax #:612- 832 -5301 Copeland Building Corporation Attn: Bob Copeland 5300 Hyland Grsehs Drive Suite 200 Bloomington, Mn 55437 Prod ect; 5229 Eden Avenue South,:. Edina Mn 55436- -- ` =- - - -- - -- 3n2 "91 This is to verify that there is sufficient supply -of-- natural gas service for the property referenced above..- - Please call me at 612 --321 -5052 if you have questions regarding your service. Thank you for the consideration of becoming a customer of ours, we appreciate the opportunity to serve you - Sincerely, j e=vlly Houde ice Asso-ciate, New Construction._ Customer Services U G!lq: r irc.y 11: a4 rr., vl� ovc o.iul 11? �urt�r\u pu1LYI1�\v ti...._ 4W 1 Northern Smtes Power Company Emma Arm 6306 WM 70th Shad EdUta. Mirumacm 55439a= lbwpham (8t2 G -+600 February 17, 1996 - -- - Copeland- Building Corporation 5300-Hyrarsd Greens• Mile - -.77. Suite 200 - Bloomington, MN 55437 To Whom'If May Concern: This -letter-is to confirm that NSP has electric power available fbr 5229 Eden Avenue South, Edina, MN and the customer is entitled to be served by.NSP.- We will extend underground lines to feed the building according to our rules and regulatlons. - Sincerely, Bob Rapacz Sales Representative J City of Edina March 6, 1997 Mr. William C. Griffith, Jr. Larkin ,Hoffman, Daly, & Lindgren, Ltd. 1500 Norwest Financial Center 7900 Xerxes Avenue South Bloomington, MN. 55431 Dear Mr. Griffith: Re: 5229 Eden Avenue 7) MAR 0 71997 ---------- -- On February 27, you submitted an application for Final Development Plan approval for the subject property on behalf of Four S Properties, Inc. I have reviewed the submittal package, and of today's date, find it complete, and in acceptable form for processing, The request will be placed on the Planning Commission agenda for their April 2,1997 meeting. Please call me if you have any questions. Planning City Hall (612) 927 -8861 4801 WEST 50TH STREET FAX (612) 927 -7645 EDINA, MINNESOTA 55424 -1394 TDD (612) 927 -5461 March 18, 1997 Mr. William C. Griffith, Jr. Larkin, Hoffman; Daly, & Lindgren, Ltd. 1500 Norwest Financial Center 7900 Xerxes Avenue South Bloomington, MN. 55431 Dear Mr. Griffith: Re: 5229 Eden Avenue — NatE M� MAR 19 1997 .� J� . K -_u City of Edina I have received the application for subdivision of the referenced property by Four S Properties. The application was considered complete on March 6, 1997. The request will be heard by the Planning Commission on April 2, along with the request for Final Development Plan approval. Sin7ly, 1114, #sen Cr aig L Planning Director City Hall (612) 927 -8861 4801 WEST 50TH STREET FAX (612) 927 -7645 EDINA, MINNESOTA 55424 -1394 TDD (612) 927 -5461 AMENDREENTS TO GRANDVIEW REDEVII.OPU= PROJECT. NO. 1, GRANDVIEW AREA REDEVELOPMENT PLAN AND GRANDVIEW TAX INCREMENT FINANCING PLAN THE HOUSING AND REDEVELOPM= AUTHORTTY IN AND FOR THE QTY OF EDINA,- MINNESOTA APPROVED APRM 7;1997 L WMODUMON The Commissioners of the Housing and Redevelopment Authority in and for the City of Edina, Minnesota (the "HRA ") and the City of Edina, Muumsota (the "City"), have previously approved a Redevelopment Plan designated as Grandview Area Redevelopment Plan (the "Redevelopment Plan"), and have approved Redevelopment Project No. 1 (the "Redevelopment Project") to be undertaken pursuant thereto. In order to finance the public redevelopment costs to be incurred by. the City and the, HRA in connection with the Redevelopment Plan and the Redevelopment Project, the HRA and the City have approved a tax increment financing -plan designated as the Grandview Tax Increment Financing Plan (the "Financing Plan') which establishes a tax. increment'frtancing district designated as Cmndview Tax Increment Financing District (Hermepin County No. ]2i)g) (the ••District,•) Certain property in the area subject to the Redevelopment has not as yet been redeveloped in a manner which meets the objectives and purposes of the Redevelopment Plan. Such property presently contains blight or blighting factors, and in order to provide for the redevelopment of such property it may be necessary for the BRA to provide. financial or other assistance. Such property consists, of the Lewis Engineering site: the Kunz Oil (Parts Plus) site and the Edina School District :bus storage facility and are identified as Parcels T, U, V, X, Y, Z, AA, CC and VV in Exhibit A to the Financing Plan (the "Redevelopment Property"). By this Amendment, the Commissioners of the BRA authorize the HRA to acquire and redevelop the Redevelopment Property and to expend tax increment revenues: derived from the District for public redevelopment costs incurred by the City .or BRA in connection with the acquisition and redevelopment of the Redevelopment Property by the BRA ::or another party. This Amendment is approved by the Commissioners of the HRA ".and the City pursuant to Mir rota Statutes, Chapter 469.028 and Minnesota Statutes, Section 464.175, subdivision 4. IL STA EHEYT _9F NEED AND OBJECTIVES The acquisition of the Redevelopment Property will aid in the redevelopment of the Redevelopment Property in a manner beneficial to the residents of the City .and consistent with the goals and objectives of the HRA as stated in the Redevelopment Project and Redevelopment Plan, which will meet the needs specified 'in in Redevelopment Project and Redevelopment Plan_ Iii AMENDMENT TO REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT A. Description of Project The amendment to Redevelopment Project consists of the acquisition and redevelopment by the HRA or another party of all or a portion of the Redevelopment Property. B.. Conditions of Blight The Redevelopment Property is blighted by virtue of the location of buildings thereon which (i) are structurally substandard because they contain defects in structural elements or a combination of deficiencies in essential utilities and facilities, including, access to public sewer and water, light and ventilation, fire protection including adequate egress, layout and conditions of interior partitions, or similar factors, which defects or deficiencies are or sufficient total significance to justify substantial renovation or clearance, and /or (ii) require substantial renovation or clearance in order to remove such existing conditions as incompatible uses or land use relationships, overcrowding of buildings on the land and obsolete buildings not suitable for improvement or convention. However, the Redevelopment Property is potentially useful and valuable for redevelopment which would contribute to the general health, safety and welfare of the residents of the City. The Redevelopment Property will, ° not be reasonably available for redevelopment by private enterprise, or redeveloped by private enterprise, . in the foreseeable future, unless the blighting conditions thereof are removed. The City and the BRA can remove, or cause or encourage other parties to remove, such blighting conditions, and to redevelop the Redevelopment Property by jointly exercising the powers conferred upon them by law for this purpose. rv. A]2 =LONAL EnTND=E OF TAX INCREMENT Parcels to be acquired consist of the Redevelopment Property. Additional expenditures of tax increment authorized by this Amendment include costs associated with the acquisition of all or a portion of the Redevelopment Property by the BRA or another party and the demolition or rehabilitation of the existing buildings located thereon and site development and other public redevelopment .costs associated redevelopment activities related to the Additional Property. While the adoption of this Amendment authorizes such acquisition and redevelopment and the expenditure of tax increment in connection therewith, it does not obligate the City or BRA to acquire any of the Redevelopment Property or to make expenditures .with respect thereto. The estimated additional expenditures of tax increment related to the acquisition and. redevelopment of the Redevelopment Property (exclusive of administrative expenses, as defined in Minnesota Statutes, Section 469.174, subdivision 14; and interest on any bonds or other obligations issued by the City or HRA to finance such expenditures) are as follows. Acquisition of Redevelopment Property $3,000,000 Demolition and Other Site Development Costs 900.000 TOTAL $3,900,000 -2 The use of tax increment derived from the District to pay the costs described above is hereby authorized. In addition, the expenditure by the BRA of tax increment derived from the District to pay administrative expenses of the BRA and City with respect to the Redevelopment Project, the Redevelopment Plan and Financing Plan as amended by this Amendment up to the limits provided in Minnesota Statutes, Section 469.176, subdivision 3, is hereby authorized Such authorization for the payment of administrative expenses also includes administrative expenses previously paid by the BRA. The expenditures hereby authorized may be paid directly from tax increment derived from the District, or may- be paid indirectly from tax increment derived from the District, by the payment of debt service on bonds or other obligations issued by the City or HRA the proceeds of which are to be used to pay such costs. Any such bonds, obligations will be repaid, with interest, from the tax increment derived from the District V. FISCAL AND ECONOMIC IMPLICATIONS OF ADDITIONAL EXPII�TDTI'LTRES It is estimated fiscal and economic implications of the additional expenditures of tax increment revenue derived from the District authorized by this Amendment will be as follows: The local governmental units other than the City which are authorized by law to levy.ad valorem property taxes in the area where_ the District is located are Independent School District No. 273, Hennepin County, the BRA, and various metropolitan area authorities, including the Metropolitan Council, the Metropolitan Transit Commission, the Metropolitan Airports Commission and the Metropolitan Mosquito Control District (the local government units). After the establishment and during the continuation of the District, as a result of the Redevelopment Project and the implementation of the Redevelopment Plan and the improvements of property in the District, there has been an increase in the tax capacity of the taxable property in the District If the tax increments derived,:f=om the District are not applied to pay the additional expenditures described herein, the District would terminate earlier than would otherwise be the case assuming ad valorem taxes are paid with respect to the taxable property in the District in the anticipated amounts. Upon such termination such increased tax capacity would be availablee for taxation by the local governmental units. However, as a result of this Amendment such increase in tax capacity will not be available for taxation by the local governmental units until a later date. However, as a result :of amendments to the Redevelopment Project contained in this Amendment the. HRA reasonably expects that there will be an increase in the tax capacity of parcels in the District_ Because the type of development to be constructed on the Redevelopment Property has not been determined the BRA is unable at this time to estimate the impact of such increase in tax capacity on the life of the District. YL bETi mrNATIONS IN ORIGTNAL FINANCING PLAN The determinations made in the Financing Plan with respect to designation of. the District as a Redevelopment District, the impact of the establishment. of the District and the implementation of the Redevelopment Plan and undertaking of the Redevelopment Project and the captured tax capacity of the District upon the redevelopment thereof ' are not affected by this Amendment and such determinations remain in full force and effect following the adoption of this Amendment. VII. ADDITIONAL AMEND EDM TO PLAN The City and the BRA reserve the right to further amend or modify the Redevelopment- Project, the Redevelopment Plan and the Finanong Plan by their joint action, subject to the provisions of state law regulating such action. VIIL ORT-GINAL PROJECT AND PLANS The Redevelopment Project,; the Redevelopment Plan and the F;na*+ri ^ -a plan, e.�ccegt to the extent provisions thereof have previously been explicitly amended or supplemented and are explicitly amended or supplemented by this Amendment. shall remain in and be in. full force and effect -4- RESOLUTION City of Edina WHEREAS, it is necessary, advisable, and in the public interest that the Housing and Redevtqopment Authority of Edina, Minnesota (the "HRA), a body politic and corporate under the laws of -the State of Minnesota, acquire for redevelopment purposes and pursuant to the redevelopment plan entitled "Grandview Area Redevelopment Piano dated May 30, 1984, (the 'Redevelopment Plan), adopted by the HRA on June 18. 1984-, properly within the Grandview Redevelopment Area; and WHEREAS. in order to accomplish the objectives and purposes set out in the Redevelopment Plan, it is necessary that the properties described on Exhibid A attached hereto and hereby made a part be redeveloped; and WHEREAS. the HRA has been advised that said property will not be made available for redevelopment in a manner that would meet the objectives and purposes of the Redevelopment Plan unless it is acquired by eminent domain; and WHEREAS, in order to provide for the redevelopment of said property in a manner that would meet the objectives and purposes of the Redevelopment Plan, it will be necessary to procure the same by the right of eminent domain. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that in.orderto provide for the redevelopment of the property described on Exhibit A hereto in a manner that would meet the objectives and purposes of the Redevelopment Plan the HRA proceed to acquire the property described on Exhibit A hereto under its power of eminent domain; and that the attorneys far the HRA be instructed and directed to file the necessary petition therefor and to prosecute such, action to a successful conclusion, or until it is abandoned, dismissed or.teiminated by the HRA or the Court and that the attorneys for the HRA, the Director and Executive. Director of the HRA and the Chaim-on and Secretary of the HRA do all things necessary to be done .'m the commencement, prosecution and successful termination of such eminent domain proceeding. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that none of the foregoing actions to acquire the property described on Exhibit A hereto be started or undertaken until the Grandview Area Tax Increment Financing Plan of the HRA is amended in accordance with Minnesota Statutes 469.175, subd. 4, to designate the property described on Exhibit A as property to be acquired by the HRA -and to authorize an increase In: tax increment expenditures to:pay the costs of acquisition and redevelopment of such property. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that it is hereby found and declared that the acquisition of the property described on Exhibit A hereto by the HRA under As power of eminent domain is necessal to redevelop blighted and substandard areas in the Grandview Redevelopment Area. Passed and adopted by the Housing and Redevelopment Authority of the City of Edina, Minnesota this 18th day f Feb my, 1997 IL Gordon Hughes, tied64ive Director Glenn L. Smith, Chairma City "1 (612) 927 -8861 �12) 927 -7645 •}001 WEST 50TH STREET FAX EDINA, MINNESOTA 55424 -1394 MD 12) 927 -5461 EXHIBrr A Lewis Procerty That hart of Lot 1, Block 1.'Edenmo r, Hennepin County. Minnesota'• hying North of the South 6 feet of said Lot 1, according to the recorded plat thereof AND That pars of Lot 1, Block 1, Wanner Adcoon, lying Northerly of a One desrnbed as begnrtmg at a point on the mast line of said Lot 1, distant 23.4 feet northerly from the Southeast comer of said Lot 1; thence Westerly parallel with the South Line of said Lot 1 a distance of 101 feet; thence Southerly parallel with said East ripe of Lot 1 a distance of 22.4 feet; thence Westerly parallel with said South fine of Lot 1 to the West One of said Lot 1 and there terminating. according to the recorded plat thereof. Hennepin County, Mmnesota. AND That part of Govemmert Lot 8, Section 28, Township ` 117, Range 21, lying Southerly of the Southerly right-of-way fine. of Eden Avenue and Westerly of the Westerly right -of way Tine of the Soo Line Rated Company, fbffrwriy the NlineapoGs, Norihttetd and Soudwm Pu&M, which ries Easterly of a One descnbed as beginning at the intersection of the South fine of said Government Lot 8 with the Fast fine of Block 1. Wanner Addition; thence Northerly along said most Easterly One and its fly extension to a point 25 feet Northerly along said most Easterly One and its Northerly extension to a point 25 feet Northerly from the Northeast comer of Lot 2, in said Block .1, thence Westerly parallel with the North One of said Lot 2 to the East One of Lot 1, in said Sock 1; thence Westerly parallel with the North one of said Lot 2 to the East fine of Lot 1. in said Block 1: thence Northerly along said East One of Lot 1 and its Northerly extension to said Southerly ri9ht-of-;hy one of Eden Avenue and there terminating, according to the Government Survey. thereof. Kunz ail P Lot 2, Block 1. Wanner Addition, Hennepin County. Minnesoha. _ AND That part of Lot 1. Block 1 of said Warmer Addition described as follows: Beginning at the Southeast I omer of said Lot 1; thence. North along the East fine of said Lot 1, a distance of 23.4 feet; thence West parallel with the South one of said Lot 1 a distance of 1ol feet; thence South parallel with the East one of said Lot 1. a distance of 224 feet; thence West parallel with the South Una of said Lot 1 to the West fine of said Lot 1; thence South along the West lane of said Lot 1, a distance of 1 foot to the Southwest corner, of said Lot 1; thence East along the South One of said Lot 1 to the point of beginning. ; AND That part of Govemmerrt Lot 8, Section 28, Township 117 North, Range 21 West, Hennepin County, Minnesota, described as.fniilows: Beginning at a point located on a Una drawn between the following d.esmbed points: Point One located on a One parallel with and dnsW 221.8 feet East of the West One of said Government Lot 8, which point is didant South 259.4 feet fro n the intersection of the center line of Eden Prairie Road and said one; and Point Two located an the South One of said Government Lot 8, 246.8 feet Fast of the soWiwest comer of said Government Lot 8, said Pont of beginning being 647.9 647.9 northerly from the south Gne of said Government Lot 8; thence Northerly along said drawn lute 25 feet; thence Easterly grid at right angles a distance of 90 feet; thence Southerly and parallel with 'said drawn Gne 25 feet; thence Westerly and at right angles to point of beginning. I v m C.:� DALY City of Edina April 8, 1997 Four S Properties 601 Carlson Parkway, Suite 350 Minnetonka, MN. 55305 and Gordon C. Lewis 4201 Norex Drive Chaska, MN. 55318 Gentlemen: Final Development Plan application, 5229 Eden Avenue, Edina, MN. Please be advised that the Edina City Council; at its April 7,meeting, granted a 60 day extension to the time period allowed for decision on your request for Final Development Plan approval. The. extension will provide the time needed to evaluate. the proposal. S' ely, Craig Larsen Director of Planning cc: Tim Keane City Hall (612) 927 -8861 4801 WEST 50TH STREET FAX (612) 927 -7645 EDINA, MINNESOTA 55424 -1394 TDD 16121 927 -5461 EDINA PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT APRIL 30, 1997 P-97-3 Four S Properties, Inc. and Gordon Lewis 5229 Eden Avenue The Planning Commission, at staffs request, continued this item at its last meeti ng to allow staff additional time to evaluate the proposed use. As the Commission is aware there have been numerous proposals to redevelop this property and the property immediately south of this property over the last 10 years. The City has also hired outside land use consultants to make recommendations as to the best and most appropriate reuse for this and the adjacent property. In 1985 a study by BRW recommended reuse for either multi- family residential or office- showroom development. In 1996 a land use study by Hoisington - Koegler recommended redevelopment for general office use or a combination of office and residential uses. None of the studies have recommended an industrial or warehousing redevelopment of the properties. In staff's opinion the proposed warehouse redevelopment of the property is inconsistent with the recommended reuses for the property and is inconsistent with prior Commission and Council decisions of the best use of the property. Based on prior recommendations and decisions, staff must recommend denial of the proposed Final Development Plan for redevelopment of the property for use as a mini - storage warehouse facility. The proponents have submitted complete plans in support of their request. The plans represent a development which is in general conformance with Zoning Ordinance requirements. Specifically, the plans conform with building and parking setbacks, floor area ratio, and on -site parking requirements. The proposed plans would require variances for two elements of the plan. First,..the Zoning Ordinance requires a 10 foot setback between building and parking areas. This space is required to provide a foundation planting area. The proposed plan does not provide this planting area. Second, it appears that the drive -aisle on the west side of the most southerly building is too narrow. Recommendation Staff recommends denial of the Final Development Plan request based upon the proposed land uses and the variances requested by the plan. I• " A - • w, s ,, � w- ` 'AA'LV, N�c�■ - -- BU4DINC C BURWHc r "Ab ": - -9—. 1 -- ff-W-1 �T \ ���'•7iL']f�t' �T'• •'•n�afiY� � T�ifi��fK -- `� - _PLANT • OR lOI8t101 • TreF RAT RDI u• �� "otriwU t+rae "RCR LFAOiR fYY.aa x411, 11'JIA • ate, CAL. ur W Ru OWN •IT•t •IRatlwt LLAMA c IL1We t M Mm btnw to �rrer ���egxe�� M�Mr O��CP� °�_.neyir.Wrd Ma .+Y1 r u'r'Mm w M • --"".— e�.ru. rra a e.et..oa.er.u..rn. "LL Crow L S A D E S I G N •rbw U}IIe.W OY dt�y W 11y �V Ir Iq Ren• 716• rrwr Ylee.el.lrn RR rail /1••••wr rISWIY •IIJr./Aff r r[•Of CIOnRYMAI 1Mf .AM'L sKNrcAr"pe M .Pert W APA� A K DA 114• M M[R 11OMFIOR AID.TMAf r W • Or►f Kfil"IA!D l/rre1CM AAA>+RCr L.CLA M Mef V M fort a "atwo ,AM Day.r..r".. rlu 5G IEDLLE Dare Re. —PLANTING NOT FS r.o rfse w r.m.n r° �:•Oe+.oe.°wa��aee•e.e. u •eLL r'..ew rYnay w�.ow•YYMUnY.enwsM � a���.repey aerrY.+.Ym'.r1•s•...referor °enec..s r 'IOIAL �- - _PLANT • OR lOI8t101 • TreF RAT RDI u• IICrT et "otriwU t+rae "RCR LFAOiR fYY.aa x411, 11'JIA • ate, CAL. ur W Ru OWN •IT•t •IRatlwt LLAMA c IL1We t M Mm btnw to �rrer ���egxe�� M�Mr O��CP� °�_.neyir.Wrd Ma .+Y1 r u'r'Mm w M • --"".— e�.ru. rra a e.et..oa.er.u..rn. "LL Crow 0 DETILA • DWAAD WINE 1141, L• CAL Lr t0 IO WCU •IRAW L LAMA Rll WAn L .I/CAl •"BATH ltAOfA , AQR "Ib1 " T?f7 • B4RALD Lb,E It4Lt CAL � RSL rw \t ��- 1mrRYaaa.e A a.awa wrrT/v s Y o •r"tuKw�ee�•v rya •p r ACM F ATU10Otl TCC A•• tx t!e "CO LL OqM tlAD[II A04 R51 aWR mm"Row 1®Kv%t trrA��. PUN •14• lfAOFA 0 •CFA ft 4" 1ORR•g7p f CA 0'� ILLL ,L M,t PAIMOId ASW rB11ITLYANTj }AnlXW IY CAL Y OJI L •IT•! •Ilrrbll Lf.1p(R N / 11CM R'4 •' m RlL 0100, Rll 104" to Catam R11lA 0CCmD/4l0'ITDIrP N • rfR4mAL AIlOgglAt t 00 Rty rcm to Game V ea RAL 104" 10 CWM IYF• FOr" • N O of ALL 104I70Cd?10 L L KtA tilM"CA DI%7AIA PCFA LALCA MNG • !LACK MUA 114%L7 yI T as PAL 104" to OIbr10 M PIQA OC+YIrA DDOATA 06 ARW]Rf WtOL71 vv" In • COW SPACE I'd CDM MNAFAA N74DA 64 L S A D E S I G N •rbw U}IIe.W OY dt�y W 11y �V Ir Iq Ren• 716• rrwr Ylee.el.lrn RR rail /1••••wr rISWIY •IIJr./Aff r r[•Of CIOnRYMAI 1Mf .AM'L sKNrcAr"pe M .Pert W APA� A K DA 114• M M[R 11OMFIOR AID.TMAf r W • Or►f Kfil"IA!D l/rre1CM AAA>+RCr L.CLA M Mef V M fort a "atwo ,AM Day.r..r".. rlu Dare Re. —PLANTING NOT FS r.o rfse w r.m.n r° �:•Oe+.oe.°wa��aee•e.e. u •eLL r'..ew rYnay w�.ow•YYMUnY.enwsM � a���.repey aerrY.+.Ym'.r1•s•...referor °enec..s r •Ara f.eMr fl If1NAR�M T•r•{ I,ea.rw � �.�r.rm urw�wv.'iy W rY.err. eyrLA Y AR b •r.{ Wt rpwrA ao Ml •rew fbr ��•� � A� � ►/A �.aoro AMeor.nrrt"ea wy e++ewea.ewee ���• .u�nw°. ° �rrarw...r..re.e.cr rnrn.w � fYY.aa \ frm -u�.a rime w rr'R•wwrerYrw ww�rw�iiie�nr e rwr oa+tt Y°a we.r..r e,e .rare nrn ro waoe". raa� r�m:wtiin. w:e�i�wre s.°u:.r Ywr eu rune .e r .ereutn r we.A.err.e.n.ae r. run...ra r e.�om ..ro.oee nor oe.v term eu t.aawa m. ro rae•M � oY. r.Kete wnerepp rue. vrrr.enurao.a oe.rea+.m net e..c �rrer ���egxe�� M�Mr O��CP� °�_.neyir.Wrd Ma .+Y1 r u'r'Mm w M • --"".— e�.ru. rra a e.et..oa.er.u..rn. NIrY" IOfY � s . b wa'A O.eYYYnea r.aYq erY Yrb. m r onta.m u ree.reew M • --��"� �a errA .aneff M eeea as .nrr eo�wrwpaw.eraYy.Ra.rrn ai4oeat.r• , .1pr.ro inwa .+YrteeeW rAm.rr our e. a�aOrm ° M IArCrM elO.rffr r M �` ��e� farticree rO b M eO�o• ° e tp pq � < rw \t ��- 1mrRYaaa.e A a.awa wrrT/v s Y o •r"tuKw�ee�•v rya •p r /yam W � - F•- f.. (f� sne� .� r0 iOnrreGreq r M YYOaaarn v M w..m:do...o.e rreoa+..o.rrt w.n.eu M een s enarea n M 1•.er eryaa.acr erer M Ou.Vrw s tort s u aerarrrt r.aYA n.rra .ran.o .0 r eeee.� awdar'1 O M Aan .rcpt Yep Y .w.Y re a� r�rw. a rs.ev ra rsr ea vrYn •vw r�..�..R Leurrr rremM M W r.ee arererrY •wae. : ■e trrA��. PUN L -1 t. I I IA,r 1: L A 1-1 7 1 1'1.7'1 ;'•' 4 A PAMMNTIM haff.L 1. I-L"'t •1 LAW SLAW'ITTI, c o. ,W,.01 10. 1007. 3 " -"�k AITLAAD NAT) .� Tw w ACT N[Tc-Im NE PAIMM ff m s Ort. 3 NE . ■A. .� (. ft•MIM 119M " .&A.m � W s M010001000 "MM A- .m$.m Y'a to-aNw.ms NAT ."mom A W. — wM.pm . . — 1— 111YWC. ) I :&macluu l ea" W& .R— L01 -E w N.K.."A I— , �l M1. NaWMT AKHTLCV; Mo r �ItCn M� ,7 I•~ ALAN" 1"rew w 1430 p A. u+�.u. nn •TWT A, .ImnYl • A� 7.n -mv. K� "a ITT L" 0003 m In M . m %1 MLIMTY UAP POND MLr-J A PAMMNTIM haff.L 1. I-L"'t •1 LAW SLAW'ITTI, c o. ,W,.01 10. 1007. 3 " -"�k AITLAAD NAT) .� Tw w ACT N[Tc-Im NE PAIMM ff m s Ort. 3 NE . ■A. .� (. ft•MIM 119M " .&A.m � W s M010001000 "MM A- .m$.m Y'a to-aNw.ms NAT ."mom A W. — wM.pm . . — 1— 111YWC. ) I :&macluu l ea" W& .R— L01 -E w N.K.."A I— , �l M1. NaWMT AKHTLCV; Mo r �ItCn M� ,7 I•~ ALAN" 1"rew w 1430 -"$ ft— -- ALLMD A. u+�.u. nn •TWT A, .ImnYl • A� 7.n -mv. K� "a ITT L" 0003 m In M . m %1 MLIMTY UAP POND —1 A—T t B A ----------- BU WWG C -r, T 4T 4 BILDG UJN Q A PAMMNTIM haff.L 1. I-L"'t •1 LAW SLAW'ITTI, c o. ,W,.01 10. 1007. 3 " -"�k AITLAAD NAT) .� Tw w ACT N[Tc-Im NE PAIMM ff m s Ort. 3 NE . ■A. .� (. ft•MIM 119M " .&A.m � W s M010001000 "MM A- .m$.m Y'a to-aNw.ms NAT ."mom A W. — wM.pm . . — 1— 111YWC. ) I :&macluu l ea" W& .R— L01 -E w N.K.."A I— , �l M1. NaWMT AKHTLCV; Mo r �ItCn M� ■N"In . WX 336 1■ ?"A AN 55MB (sis) �sm I•~ ALAN" 1"rew w 1430 -"$ ft— -- ALLMD IN,.II v ('m _4N 0 R T P r.ti� ■n.aN [ - -a. A 0 TA ■ 4E> A A. Appucal" AKHTLCV; Mo r �ItCn M� ■N"In . WX 336 1■ ?"A AN 55MB (sis) �sm am c� mw gm HINT -K o- f= C m jpv 0-1 Ina D— u+�.u. nn •TWT A, .ImnYl • A� 7.n -mv. K� "a ITT L" 0003 m In M . m %1 bAT--.w-- — — -- X.-.— WMTA.� 1� — .1 N'Tcl rl=r— I A ROOM A. ANDERSON AND ASSOCIATES INC. EDINA STORAGE CENTER PROJECT EDINA. MINNESOTA SITE PLAN or AT. A- ..1% 1-1-11 1 -u !V FOUR AS' PROPERTIES, INC. I I I tW Daow .wore . ►.M To wtW .w e.LL 1 n..Vtt=W i�L ,OtQwpH,D.�.,ptN. r'tswNm tTM „gG►.nTmt rt..teo . tl@I . cqq y ..Q..NW AWAMCnU ML ►nn. 10 w,a, tt M HDOC MC* ------ - - - - -� mom mum �MTHrEL8VAT10N ttDnc r.ct cat weave. tM,. •.mew.. taw. e• � A!. nsw..t®rm. woor ...mt,a.aeo . vel . taa, •.• __ -- .. _ -.. - 4 navwam wn. on Doow .n,nl • arrow c . \ \ .ut Doow . tw.,e . ►..w ,o w,cN.w etua � , i _.._,.--- ._.___...--- .- __._ -.. ..,.gONN.d MI. ►.WL b.,m. taow t' • �___. - _�� ►lO Mam n,L. oM Deon.,,yreat .r.itw�taa. C• iJ19LLlq 1►C.L, MOM ------------- - - -� -= V. @jgftT "VATION (PARTIAL) III I `Jr . w e !._ ._.�- ._- _- ._--- �___— ._,.tt.MalD nrL woa .r.TDt rL.aw .,wM•caow'.'�� -_ _._._..._._._ ] � I I itl // :.. . . ..... .... . _ _. _ -.__ —_ �_ r1R.MKD MC ✓,CC,IwAL wtl. ►4iL . TD wlal AOa IIU . ...... _ T near r.a sae wsowT ums ..mono taal e' , • t II � � � tarty t• __.._..— _._......._.... I \ � I t i �A6L %L TION (PARTIAL) v (Z)jR4;0 IM69VATION A BLDG'S B t A �e i mc i��1f �u4 ®<si �;;a•IpI 6ILPLAN �L��dOGAIOGq/R1G�v OMS 17 U, EL XT /nl -12 2 OF ? — —. -_ _._ .._.... _._ . .wsr..aeD M�. nea .n,tn n.aea . uew . -taat •.• PqI WKD .ttUal[CIUIµ nIL ►.Kl . f0 wID•1 tUa.H ' r / / � -- -' \�_....._._�rYm - nter..rm rrtL ►..n nuo, . taa. e• ML. ON DOele .lw.lgl.r.tR1•taalC .eL. (Z)jR4;0 IM69VATION A BLDG'S B t A �e i mc i��1f �u4 ®<si �;;a•IpI 6ILPLAN �L��dOGAIOGq/R1G�v OMS 17 U, EL XT /nl -12 2 OF ? LOC�ATION LIAP e ■ � Ion 1 ■���® ■■ 111 IIIIU = ■ ■I 1 11111 �pll 11111 11 MM =� SEEN OUR LADY �1 OF GRACE- CATHOLIC Flu"U'AL DEVELOPMEA A ELM NUMBER P -97 -3 PLAN L 0 C A T 10 N 5229 Eden Avenue REQUEST Construct Mini - Warehouse Storage Buildings EDlMI% I ; .��MiMINJG DE�ARTME i f �:G, JAMES P. LARKW ROSERTL HOFFMRN GERALD H. FRIEDELL JAMES C. ERK20M EDWARD J. DRISCOLL GENE N. FULLER JOHN 0. HTRLMER FRANK 1. HARVEY C 4ARLES S MODE LL CHRISTOPHER J. OIETZEN LNDA K FISHER THOMAS P. STOLTMAN MICHAEL C. JACK M N JOHN E DENL JON S. SAMERZEW90 THOMAS J. FLYNN JAMES P. C A N TODD L FREEMAN GERALD L S CK JON B. UANIDOAST DAYLE NOLAN' JONA COTTER' BEATRICE A. R07HWEMER PALLS. PLUM ETT ALAN L KILDOIIV KATHLEEN AL PIW RE NEVYMAN MICHAEL LFBARON GREGORY E KORSTAD GORY VAN CLEVE' DANIEL L BORAES TIMOTHY 1 LtNA US TIMOTHY KFAM ALANAL ANDERSON DONNA ROBACK _ MICHAI L W. SCH EY ROM B. KREPS TERRENCE E BISHOP LISA A GRAY GARY A RENNEKE May 23, 1997 LAM :_ ..:N, HOFFMAN, DALY & UNDGREN STD ATTORNEYS AT LAW 1500 NORWEST FINANCIAL CENTER 7900 XERXES AVENUE SOUTH BLOOMINGTON, MINNESOTA 55431 -1194 TELEPHONE (612) 835 -3800 FAX (612) 896 -3333 Mr. Craig Larsen Planning Director Via Messenger City of Edina 4801 West 50th Street Edina, Minnesota 55424 -1394 CHRISTOPHER J. K. RRI$THAL KENDEL J. OHUROGGE BRUCE& DO{KiAS VWLIJAM C. GRIFF TH. JR JOIN R. HILL PETER 1 COME LARRY 0. NMRTTN JANE E BREMER JOIN 1 PHILIP G ALDE N MICIAEL.L SMITH ANDREW F. PERRN DANA W. VOSS VIUSR. ME ANN M, MEYER CHRISTOPHER D. JOHNSON REHML JACKSON CHRISTOPHER K LARUS MARC' R FROST DOUGLAS M. RAMLER STEPHEN J. KANQNM THOMAS F. AIEYANM DANIEL T. KADUM WWMA VVAHLOtEH KARN M. NELSEN JON F. III S C. ENO( NAWES LYNNE MICHELLE MOORE C. BRENT ROBBI NS MUMN S VYESTGARD JOVE S FREDERNCCSOm OF COUNSEL JACK F. DALY D. KENNETH LI DGREN ALUM E. M WENDE1L R ANDEH90N JOSEPH GRIS ALSO ADMfiTED N MASCONSN Re: Revised Plans for Approval of a Preliminary Plat and Final Development. Plan for Edina Storage Center Project on Behalf of Four S Properties, Inc.; Our File o. 22,830 -0b Dear Mr. Larsen: On behalf of Four S Properties, Inc., we enclose the following revised plans for the Edina Storage Center Project (eight full size; 1 reduction): 1. Site Plan: Sheet C -1, revised as of May 23, 1997, by Roger A. Anderson and Associates, Inc. 2. Architectural Site Plan: Sheet A -1, revised, as of May 22, 1997, by Cluts O'Brien Storther Architects. 3. Landscape Plan: Sheet L -1, 1 of 1., revised as of May 20, 1997, by LSA Design. Basis for Revisions The plan revisions were undertaken in response to the review conducted by City of Edina Planning staff. The staff report to the Planning Commission, dated April 3.0, 1997 states: The proponents have submitted complete plans in support of their request. The plans represent a development which is in general conformance with Zoning Ordinance requirements. Specifically, the plans conform with building and parking setbacks, floor area ratio, and on -site parking requirements. The proposed plans would require variances for two elements of the plan. First, the Zoning Ordinance requires a 10 foot setback between LAL..:1v, HOFFMAN, DALY & UNDGREN, J. Mr. Craig Larsen. May 23, 1997 Page 2 building. and parking areas. This space is required to provide a foundation planting area. The proposed plan does not provide this planting area. Second, it appears that the drive - aisle on the west side of the most southerly building is too narrow. Therefore, the plans were modified as follows: a. The building layout was revised to add a ten foot landscape area at Eden Avenue frontage of the buildings; and b. The parking layout was revised (with resulting minor building revisions) to relocate several parking stalls to strictly adhere to separation requirements. As we demonstrated to' the Planning Commission, it is impossible to develop a mini storage project in strict conformance with the ten foot setback requirement of Section 850.08, subd. 4 because it would render most of the storage units inaccessible. Further, the underlying rationale for such a requirement, that is, to provide a development which is aesthetically pleasing to the public and adjoining neighbors, is not satisfied by requiring ten foot landscaped areas along interior drive aisles. The landscaped areas would not be visible from the public street. Finally, as we stated at the Planning Commission, when applying zoning regulations, the Courts will rule out absurd results. Strict application of this local regulation leads to' an absurd result, that is, development of principal use of property in the Planned Industrial District (PID) which is not useable. For the reasons stated here and at the Planning Commission, it is our strong opinion that this project has been designed in conformance with applicable zoning regulations and, therefore, does not require approval of variances. Please call me if you require further clarification of the revisions or the matters discussed in this letter. Please incorporate this letter and the enclosed application materials in the official record of decision in this matter. Thank you for your assistance. Sincerely, ill am C. riff , Jr., for �7) LARKIN, HOFFMAN, DALY & LINDGREN, Ltd. Enclosures cc: Pat Stotesbery Todd Jones Roger Anderson 0301854.01 �T SOO REQUIREMENTS LINE RAILROAD ILeA n DIVC®T AO m , BUILDING. A 1 THE WE m RImm o TWO L_ D [ I�111111111111111II II IIIIIIIIII1111111'III ICI nD0 w 0{' BUILDING C I ! KL9. !a _ 'ORltA�{Re 7'.7'CR GI$1iFR G'.LYT ! N' GTL 4FB.:lER i'CR GIff {IF\ I !OL '6 / CV (%iEilEi 7M 7� BUILDING B A!7 Oq OT�A:FR NCR 4RECrER A 1 FIL N'WOR: {iR ^ ' O'CR GRlATER OI J C4 (0 _PLANT SCHEDULE � ` I f CFlCR P'IOM \\ BUILDING D WIAW P.... RAT, rl\ MALL OrRArwT LIAM FRNG R G RLL CROIh D A SAM 514. CR:OAPRE I 61ALE IIRAIOM LEADER BUILDING E BUILDING E "M Or".11 I RKO-n ii� =9 " W-2 z �� MWO, M15�5 1 Q DKCIDUDIA TMIS TREE REQUIREMENTS LOT Pavaet ILeA n DIVC®T AO m TOTAL T:a3! THE WE m RImm o TWO "M riff DECOUO� CCNIEROI! nD0 w 0{' Cwk -IMAL !'OR LE!! I ! KL9. !a _ 'ORltA�{Re 7'.7'CR GI$1iFR G'.LYT ! N' GTL 4FB.:lER i'CR GIff {IF\ I !OL '6 / CV (%iEilEi 7M 7� PRA. A!7 Oq OT�A:FR NCR 4RECrER A 1 FIL N'WOR: {iR ^ ' O'CR GRlATER OI J C4 (0 _PLANT SCHEDULE OTT CFlCR P'IOM s•i RCOT WIAW P.... RAT, V' PD MALL OrRArwT LIAM FRNG R CAL. RLL CROIh D A SAM 514. CR:OAPRE Is' ED 61ALE IIRAIOM LEADER M1LO IPRrO trod Ct FILL CRLLM C ! WW1 6d I!. ISIS waae A lLEAOLR BMA W.RA CAL FILL CROW D I BVtAD LIETr@ MAPLE !!' DB &ALE ITRWW LEIVM ACER PLATAILN:F! P"' CAL. RAL CROW E A Eff t4D LLefm NLPLL U' BB !DALE LTRAOO LEADER ACLU PLATANOOR$ POO CAL FILL CROW F 11 -OR h-= An NAM !!' EB OAALE lfRAOM "ER AM RARIM NORRROOD' CAL RLL CRO M 6 1 PAROR A!A I!' Be 50" /TRAI(.R LEAH RDLn1q FV+6TLrR4CA PAWN' CAL RLL CROW • 1 ¢LINT AIMCRATIL A' DD PILL FORT TO ORprO rNUA OCCOEMALQ 7ECN M I A PIRA WAL ARBCR.1fM 1' .BS FILL FCR! TO 0RN0 ' TAUA CCCICWT I! PrRAPOALI! M A 1 COICTLLDO GWMD` &.14a a M FILL FORT TO coloia PIMA RIOL10 I M R 6. ELACR IRLI W%a W m IILL ran to WZ" .- POLA OLAWA DDISATA M L 1 ISLAM IRE! IA 'M - P ED P&L AM TO GAMM .... PC&A CLMY.L DBAATA IR N BO ARIIIOMT DATOMIt EPPBA 1 COW WACE !' M CE MR ..' WRAEA 9 EIPIALDA fJL PLANTING NOTES ti ro r.a+.w r...a •o .... C�.La1O MYO�`NFT Yo r.A • rOC�'•A rp ry.n, as �a +o.wv.ra a W pr�� WYw Y r/ar 4rvrC t�.u, Yirr .., rr.va.tr rw•rea.• ru r,A.�... o ro�lr�Dner re �yeaA -L..n .. _ •men v w.arD rr� •.. r ra wrrp wrw ww+a emov`arr°a° Dri ar` �"r: n�'.r o w°.�°iea�n L..RDe.w .:onr. wew �arw. e�Orra�..rr^ e.r r..0 ww ti.oewo ..o.L•.r.m rW APO mF •.wA. oM, rw wL rT m Dwe•tu •r�IR aQ.M. � W m AR�.sR Y CPIACrN '� ` wYO`L`''�'A,M wArnr •ra�,Ll .•.s.•n ro rr +e.Ae. .o.acoaro,.ro ro wnu rYrwa a•M +Aru.MPwn r run.a rrymrv, yI. w ArrAPllO,alw mr•w. ro M rwDrw ev . w r•rcrr K.a.�`.e�:Iie`rY � � .w°a rw�wairew' Biro w.La mw Mraro LrwerRrvrr +aa �� MCYRIrI�PP R `no O aL � n �e ry Rr�Opt�YwL Y Lnr�ro W rwiwroon •r .xnm w. r� Aye rrr• ..a neA,r.A� aee•ro. rwaMrt ti w rD•w ayrr..ro nueR. L S A D E S I G N EAl•ID•�AA A•DrYlr L•rreyD AI,LIWIA. AMII•al• c"d ha—ft, AW na , W1Y Im IrP" IW ""I W.LIId)fY T.NDS.w AIU3:= Ia.alWn �-MEW C[Rllh imr r,s DYn, a[DrrAIroM N A[vDRr y4t M /D•IRD n W 00 ymx. Yr Mc? SuPc rsO AMC De r : uI cn![R [ O WOEMf- yLA" OF r„[ W,TL or ywy[lDra 0.2 Apwr•r,n Me.: S[wlw• /Sw4 4M.Im• ODY e. I vn w vmin � I 111— 11 RILUART IDAT i ]t.IDr 1.lY -D' TN..a TM vrA; rs ce.ar Er. vTL RIDDDm•: \ \r7DS \OrOS-LI.D.o co H � I u uj U iy g F _ Qz� LAMA PLM L -1 L) A 11 r:f ^hh A maNITY MAP POND BUILDING A BUILDING C '�;. ` �. \\ ; as .,. ».L..p BUILDING D owl t;&o =BUISLNG E7, 'N, S PAsm' ho= 1. BASE KOKY BY DIVARI-DASRIEL LAND SIM4MIL -C- Dlm -- loo 1.0. I VK SON. KILAND .101!D41 I-) YAPS W NOT iNDIC.m w 1.11MINCS or Ne'LANDs ON m DIL w HANONAL rLm P'll,"imm "mm RoaD N`lW`tANQ[ —t NAP (�— PANEL ..3 2MM UMCWW DAR B A;Vl-a$t0tr Air LOCATED — n=A&T�tSp= .1. PM m,iDC0 - NO SPACES (NU. 3 MANOCAP) Dam BE= NEYC NM ED, ED -M. 101 LNE Itl 7b' ,901, mlINCl —TV —7 AREA SUMS"', LOT mcA 64 v 111 AIL F*01PAINT PROPOSED Mal 'n 738 TODDcAm PAUL 51ROTNER aft vadob _AN 0 R T H PLAN SYMBOLS Wr APNJCMT A1112STECT. fal LAKIS14M PASS... wa, WW"Ar4lo, MIPLACI C" M PRAM W MU4 Mal 'n 738 TODDcAm PAUL 51ROTNER aft vadob LANDSCAPE AIRMITECIN N00111 A. ANDIMASON • ASSOC. LEA orsimi M ME WAYIATA oLW- SLATE W? in mcati, m wrNat So-,= Sn-.m P., ANDERSON —CEN- ROGER A. ANDERSON AND ASSOCIATES INC. EDINA STORAGE CENTER PROJECT EDINA, MINNESOTA SITE PLAN pAN+D A0. FOUR 'S' PROPERTIES. INC. Cl 0 AM RAILROAD - - - - - - - - - - - - ----------- w B Vm .1 - -.-- ------------------- - ooj BUILDING B BUILDING c - - --------- — - t ., . " . ............... . ... . .................... . .. --Is v Pa Ibml I I 14M w 2 1ILDING D BUILDING E .. .......................... .............................. ...................... .. ...................... BUILDING F 010 40 so H STATE OF MINNESOTA DISTRICT COURT COUNTY OF HENNEFIN FOURTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT HQUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY Court Fite No. CD OF EDINA, M1NNES0TA, a public body corporate and politic, under the laws of the State of Minnesota, Petitioner, Case Type:. Condemnation VS. PETMON GORDON C. LEWIS and LAVERNE S: LEWIS,. husband and wife; Four S Properties, Inc., a foreign corporation under the. laws of Arizona; . The Kunz Oil Company, a Minnesota corporation; Laurent Parks Development Company, LLC, -a Minmesota corporation; . and The County of Hennepin, Respondents. IN TI-IE MATTER OF THE CONDEMNAxTON OF CERTAIN REAL ESTATE IN THE COUNTY OF HENNEPIN, STATE OF MDTNESOTA, TO TF-iH ABOVE- NANJED COURT: Petitioner respectfully represents and alleges as follows. 1. Petitioner is a public body corporate and politic, duly organized. and existing under the laws of the State of Minnesota. 2. Pursuant to Minn. Star §§ 117.011 and 469.012, subd. 1(6), Petitioner is given the authority and charged with the responsrbility for acquiring land necessary to carry out redevelopment projects within the City, of Edina. 3. Pursuant to Mhut..Stat. §§ 469.027 and 469.028, Petitioner and the City of Edina have adopted a redevelopment PLIn, as defined in Minn. Staff. § 469.002, subd. 16, designated .as the Grandview Area Redevelopment Plan (the "Plan "), and a redevelopment project, as defined in Minn. Stat. § 469.002, subd. 14, to be undertaken pursuant -to the Plan, designated as the Grandview Redevelopment Project No. 1, as amended (the -"Project"). Petitioner deems it necessary to acquire fee simple absolute title to .the real estate described in Exhibit A attached to and made a part of this petition (the " I,and'l for purposes of carrying out the Project. The acquisition of such interest is authorized by ll im Stat. §§ 117.011, 469.012, subd. 1(6), and other law. 4- * On February 18, 1997, Petitioner, by resolution of its Board of Commissioners, authorized. the acquisition of the L and by eminent domain proceedings:. A copy of that resolution is attached as Exhibit .B and is made a part of this Petition. 2 5- The Petitioner reserves its right to recover the costs of clean -up and testing and all other damages resulting from any pollutants, contaminants, or hazardous materials _from all, potential responsible parties in a separate legal action. 6 The real estate to be acquired through this proceeding is located within the City, of Edina, Hennepin County, Minnesota. 7- The legal description of the Land to be taken and the nitres of those appearing of record or known to the Petitioner to be owners of said Land or interested therein, including all whom Petitioner has, by investigation and inquiry, been able to discover, together with the nature of the ownership of each, as nearly as can be ascertained, are set forth as shown on Exhibit A, attached hereto and made a Part hereof as though fully set out at this point. WHEREFORE, Petitioner prays for the order of this Court as follows: 1. Adjudging that said taking is for a public purpose, is necessary, and is such as is authorized by law; �- Appointing three disinterested Commissioners, residents of Hennepin County, to ascertain and report the -amount of damages that will be sustained by the. several owners on account of the taking; fixing the time and place of the first meeting of the three commissioners; prescribing their compensation; and requiring the commissioners to file their report with the Court Administrator within 90 days from the date of the order appointing the commissioners unless said time be further extended by order of the Court; and 3. For such other relief as may be proper and pursuant to law. 3 Dated: May .1997 DORSEY & WFIITNEY 'sy � Q;a � -1� Steven K. Champlin (# 16044) David Y. Trevor (#152997) 220 South Sixth Street Milnneapolis, Minnesota 55402 Telephone: (612) 340-$718 Attorneys for Petitioner 0 Man d")- A. Legal Description: That part of Lot 1, Block 1, "Edenrnoor, I-jer nepin County, Minnesota " I , North of the South b feet of said Lot 1, according to the recorded plat thereof. AND That part of Lot 1, Block 1, Wanner Addition, lying Northerly of a line described as beginning at a point on the East line of said Lot 1, distant 23.4 feet Northerly from the Southeast corner of said Lot 1; thence Westerly parallel with the South line of said Lot 1 a distance of 101 feet; thence Southerly parallel. with said East line of Lot 1 a -distance-of 22.4 feet; thence Westerly parallel with said South line of Lot 1 to the West line of said Lot 1 and there' terminating, according to the recorded plat thereof, Hennepin County, Minnesota. AND That part of Government Lot 8, Section 28, Township 117, Range 21; lyin9- Southerly of the Southerly right -of -way line of Eden Avenue and Westerly of the Westerly right- of-way line of the Soo Line Railroad Company, ;formerly the Minneapolis, Northfield and Southern Railway, which lies Easterly of a line described as beginning at the intersection of the South lire of said Government Lot 8 with the East line of BIock 1, Wanner Addition, thence Northerly and Easterly along said East line to the most Easterly line of said Block 1; thence Northerly along said most Easterly line* and its Northerly extension to a point 25 feet Northerly along said most Easterly line and its Northerly extension to a point 25 feet Northerly from the Northeast corner of Lot 2, in said Block 10 thence Westerly parallel with the North line of said Lot 2, to the East line of Lot 1, in said Block 1; thence Northerly along said East line of Lot 1 and its Northerly extension to said Southerly right-of-way line of Eden Avenue and there terminating, according to the Government Surcrey thereof. B. Street Address: 5229 Eden Avenue, Edina, Minnesota PAR�5 A- Gordon C. Lewis and Laverne S. Lewis: fee simple title E- Four S Properties, Inc-: On information and belief, prospective Purchaser pursuant to a purchase agreement for the land between Four S Properties, Inc. and Gordon C. Lewis and Laverne S. Lewis. Exact current status of interest unknown. C• Kunz Oil Company: On information and belief, prospective purchaser of a portion of the land pursuant to an Amended and Restated Land Exchange and Purchase Agreement between Kunz Oil Company and Gordon C. Lewis and Laverne S. Lewis. Exact current status of interest unknown: D. Laurent Parks Development Company LLC: On information and belief, proposed developer of property. Exact nature of interest unknown. E. The County of Hennepin with respect to unpaid real estate taxes, if any, constituting a lien against the Land. F. All other parties unknown having any right, title or interest in the Land herein together with the unknown heirs or devisees, if any, of the parties named that maybe deceased, together with the spouses. of the parties named, if any. o;— =: �, RESOLUTION o e o • TYwhvY� . WHEREAS, it is necessary, advisable, and in the public interest that the Housing nd Redev� �F t Authority of Edina, M- mnesota the "HRA° a body g development ( ), y politic and corporate under the laws of the State of Minnesota, acquire for redevelopment purposes and pursuant to the redevelopment plan entitled "Grandview Area Redevelopment Plan" dated May 30, 1984, (the "Redevelopment Plan "), adopted by the HRA on June 18, 1984, property within the Grandview Redevelopment Area; and WHEREAS, in order to accomplish the objectives and purposes set out in the Redevelopment Plan; it is necessary that the properties described on Exhibit A attached hereto and hereby made a part be redeveloped; and WHEREAS, the HRA has been advised that said property will not be made available for redevelopment in a manner that would meet the objectives and purposes of the Redevelopment Plan unless it is acquired.by eminent domain; and WHEREAS, in order to provide for the redevelopment of said property in a manner that would meet the objectives and purposes of the Redevelopment Plan, it will be necessary to procure the same by. the right of eminent domain- NOW, THEREFORE, BE 1T RESOLVED, that in order to provide for the redevelopment of the property described on Exhibit A hereto in a manner that would meet. the objectives and purposes of the Redevelopment PEan the HRA proceed to acquire.the property described on Exhibit A hereto under its power of eminent domain; and that the attorneys for the HRA be instructed and directed to file the necessary petition therefor and to prosecute such action to a successful conclusion, or until it is abandoned, dismissed or tenrlinated by the HRA or the Court; and that the attorneys for the HRA, the Director and Executive Director of the HRA and the Chairman and Secretary of the HRA do all things necessary to be done in the commencement, prosecution and successful termination of such eminent domain proceeding. BE iT FURTHER RESOLVED, that none of the foregoing aifions to acquire the property described . on Exhibit A hereto be started or undertaken unt7 the Grandview Area Tax Increment. Financing plan of the HRA is amended in accordance with Minnesota Statutes 469.175, subd. 4, to designate the Property descn -bed on Exhibit A as property to be acquired by the HRA and to authorize an increase in tax increment expenditures to pay the costs of acquisition and redevelopment of such property. BE lT FURTHER RESOLVED, that it is hereby found and declared that the acquisition of the property described on Exhibit A hereto by the HRA under its power of eminent domain is necessary to redevelop blighted and substandard areas in the Grandview Redevelopment Area. Passed and adopted by. the Housing d Redevelopment Authority of the City. of Edina, Minnesota this 18th day of February. 1997-' f j SL An,11- t Hughes, Exec (ve Director Glenn L Smith, Chairman Cit !-1311 Y 4801 WEST 50TH STREET (612) 927 -8861 EDINA, MINNESOTA 55424 -1394 Exhibit $ FAX (6721927-7645 FDD (612) 927.5461 Le E HIBF Levi ro e That part of 'Lot 1, Block 1, "Edenmoor, Hennepin County, Minnesota ", lying North of the South 6 feet of said Lot 1, according'to the recorded plat thereof. AND - That part of Lot 1, Block 1, Wanner Addition, lying Northerly of a One described as beginning at a point on the East line. of said Lot 1, distant 23.4 feet northerly from the Southeast comer of said Lot 1; thence Westerly parallel with the South Line of said Lot I a distance of 101 feet; thence Southerly parallel-with said East line of Lot 1 a distance of 22.4 feet; thence Westerly parallel with said South line of Lot 1 to the West One of said Lot 1 and there terminating, according to the recorded plat thereof, Hennepin County, Minnesota. AND That part of Govemment Lot 8, Section 28, Township 117, Range 21, lying Southerly of the Southerly right -of -way One of Eden Avenue and Westerly of the Westetfy right-of-way line of the Soo Line Railroad Company, form" the Minneapolis, Northfield and Southern Railway, which lies Easterly of a One described as beginning at the intersection of the south line of said Govemment -Lot 8 with the East line of Block 1, Warmer Addition; thence Northerly along said most Easterly line and its Northerly extension to a point 25 feet Northerly along said most Easterly line and its Northerly extension to a point 25 feet Northerly from the Northeast comer of Lot 2, in said Block 1, thence Westerly parallel. with the North fine of said Lot 2 to the East line of Lot 1, in said Block 1 thence Westerly paragel with the. North line.of said Lot 2 to the East One of Lot 1, in said Block 1: thence Northerly along said East line of Lot 1 and its Northerly extension to said Southerly right-of-way One of Eden Avenue and there terminating, according to the Govemment Survey thereof. Kunz Qil Prope�tt� Lot 2, Block 1, Wanner Addition, Hennepin County, Minnesota AND That part of Lot 1, Block 1 of said Wanner Addition described as follows: Beginning at the Southeast comer of said Lot 1; thence North along the East One of said Lot 1, a distance of 23.4 feet; thence West parallel with the South line of said Lot 1 a clistance of 101 feet; thence South parallel with the East line of.said Lot 1, a distance of 224 feet; thence West parallel with the South line of said Lot-1 to the West line of said Lot 1; thence South along the West fine of said Lot 1, a distance of 1 foot to the Southwest comer of said Lot 1; thence East along the South line of said Lot i to the point of beginning. AND That part of Govemment Lot 8, Section 28, Township 117 North, Range 21 West, Hennepin County, Minnesota, described as.follows: Beginning at a point located on a line drawn between the following described points: point One located on a fine paralel with and distant 221.8 feet East of the West line Of said Government Lot 8, which point is distant South 259.4 feet from the intersection of the center fine of Eden Prairie Road and said One; and Point Two located on the South line of said Govemment Lot 8.246.8 feet East of the southwest comer of said Govemment Lot 8, said point of beginning being 647.9 northerly from the south line of said Govemment Lot a; thence Northerly along said drawn line 25 feet; thence Easterly and at right angles a distance of 90 feet; thence Southerly and parallel with said drawn line 25 feet; thence Westerly and at right angles. to point of beginning. EDINA PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT MAY 28, X997 Z-97 -1 5229 Eden Avenue PID, Planned Industrial District to R-11 Single Dwelling Unit District City of Edina The subject property is just over 6 acres in size and is currently zoned PID, Played Industrial District. The Commission will recall that a rezoning of the property, from PID, Planned Industrial District to POD-1, Planned Office District, as part of a larger project, was approved for this property by the City in 1996. That rezoning was not completed by the proponents of the redevelopment. As reported earlier to the Commission, Staff believes the redevelopment of this site for an industrial use is inappropriate. Consequently, Staff is proposing a rezoning of the property to R- 1, Single Dwelling District. Section 850 of the City Code provides for the use of the R -1 District as holding or open development zone. The Ordinance provides as follows: "The R -1 District is also used as a bolding or open development area for those properties shown on the Comprehensive Plan as having the potential for development for uses other than permitted in the R -1 District, which other uses shall be permitted only after rezoning pursuant to Subsection 850.04 of this Section." The Comprehensive Plan of 1980 suggests a study of the Grandview area to determine the feasibility of a public redevelopment project. That study was completed in 1984, and a Redevelopment District was created. In 1985 the City and HRA adopted a planning study by BRW which identifies the subject property as suitable for redevelopment as a residential or office- showroom use. Staff believes these actions, as well as more recent studies have clearly established the City's intent for redevelopment of this and other properties in the vicinity. RECOMM.ENDATLOl�C: Staff recommends Preliminary Rezoning approval from PID to R -1 for the subject property. RJAME P. OBERT HOFFMAN L LARKIN, HOFF'MAN, DALY & LINDGREN, LTD, C -.� GERALD H. FRIEDELL K CHRISTOPHER J. HARRISTHAL JAMES C. ERICKSON A ATTORNEYS AT LAW B BRUCE A DOUGLAS EDWARD J. DRISCOLL G GRIFFITH. R. J GENE N. FULLER W - P R. HULL JOHN D. FILLMER - PETER J R Mr. Craig Larsen Planning Director Hand Delivered City of Edina 4801 West 50th Street Edina, Minnesota 55424 -1394 Re: Applications Preliminary Plat and Final Development Plan for Edina Storage Center Project on Behalf of Four S Properties, Inc.; Our File No. 22,830 -00 Dear Mr. Larsen: This letter is written on behalf of Four S Properties, Inc. in response to your call this afternoon in which you stated that the City Manager has decided to ask the City Council to continue its hearing of the above applications from June 2, 1996 to June 16, 1997. The reason that you stated for the proposed 6.17 acres of Property located at 5229 Eden Avenue continuance is to allow the City Council to hear the applications on the same evening as the City- initiated downzoning of my client's property to R -1 Single Dwelling Unit District. You said that they are related applications. I must strongly object to any continuance of my client's applications for the following reasons: 1. The applications are separate. The development applications were initiated by my client for the purpose of developing mini storage. on the property which is a use allowed as a matter of right in the PID district. The R -1 downzoning was initiated by City staff with the concurrence of the City Council and furthered by the action taken last evening by the Planning Commission. This action is clearly designed to prevent development of the site as mini storage without regard for fact that such use conforms to the PID district. 2. Linking the two actions causes clear and direct prejudice to my client. How many applicants must attempt to make the case that their development project complies with zoning on the same evening LARKIN, HOFFMAN, DALY & LINDGREN, LTD. 'Mr. Craig Larsen May 29, 1997 Page 2 that the City Council hears its own application to downzone the property and take away the opportunity to develop the property consistent with zoning. 3. The City has delayed my client's application for its own purposes and not for reasons related to the fair and impartial review of the development applications before it. On April 2, 1997, the Planning Commission continued review of the applications to April 30, 1997, ostensibly to allow..staffthe opportunity to further review the applications. In the meantime, on April 7, 1-997, City Council held a public hearing to amend the Grandview Redevelopment Project and Grandview Tax Increment Financing Plan to clear the way for the City's proposal to acquire my client's property. Further, on April 7, 1997, City Council approved a 60 -day extension of the statutory deadline for hearing Four S Properties application for approval of a Final Development Plan.- It is quite plain that the City has improperly used its statutory authority to delay this project in manner that allows the City the time it needs to downzone the property and "take" the development opportunity from Four S Properties. This is particularly egregious given that the City has now filed a petition in district court to acquire the property by condemnation, which puts the City in a position that is clearly adverse to the interests of my client. 4. Finally, in preparing to represent my client before the City Council on June 2, 1997, as scheduled, I requested a continuance of three applications pending elsewhere to June 16, 1997. Therefore, I will not be available to represent my client in the City of Edina on June 16, 1997. Your proposal to continue this matter to June 16, 1997, just two business days before the hearing, deprives my client of legal counsel at a critical hearing of its applications. Last evening, at the Planning Commission, I asked, somewhat rhetorically, "How can my client get a fair and impartial hearing from the City of Edina ?" I must now change that question to a statement: It is impossible for my client to receive a fair and impartial hearing from the City of Edina! Nonetheless, we will come prepared to make our presentation to the City Council, as scheduled, at its meeting of June 2, 1997. Sincerely, William C. Griffit , Jr., for LARKIN, HOFFMAN, DALY & LINDGREN, Ltd. Enclosures cc: Pat Stotesbery Todd Jones Glenn Smith, Mayor Kenneth Rosland, City Manager Jerry Gilligan, City Attorney LIGHTNING LEGALtCOUR►ER Taking the Courier Industry by Storm P.O. Box 18274 • Minneapolis, MN 55418 (612) 378-2990 • FAX (612) 378-9588 Special Instructions: W-- Month Date Year 5 Delivery Round Service I Trip I � -Z C) Driver Time Ordered Time Delivered lame or Number - 7 it For Process Service, Please attach photocopy of your cover letter, (provides us with information for Affidavits, i.e., party/entity served, documents served, etc...), to this form. From: CfAL I Z-" /-.s e- -,- 15 Minute 30 Minute 45 Minute 90 Minute Received By DowntDwn 177437 x MpIs. Onty I I AFFFIDAVIT OF PROFESSIONAL CONSULTING SERVICES FOR EDINA MINI STORAGE PROJECT STATE OF MINNESOTA • • *11:1zIz1 :1 J 1z James B. Lasher, President of LSA Design, Inc., being duly sworn upon oath, states and alleges as follows: 1. My names is James B. Lasher, and I am the President of LSA Design, Inc., 126 North Third Street, Minneapolis, MN 55401. I am a registered Landscape Architect in the State of Minnesota, License No. 18849 and have provided professional consulting services for Two S Properties, Inc. for the aforementioned project. 2. Our firm completed Landscape Architectural Design for this project which met conditions set forth by the City of Edina Zoning Code, Section 850.10 Landscaping and Screening, Subd. I Landscaping, Subd. 2 Screening, and Subd. 3 Maintenance. 3. In our professional opinion, the work done by our firm on this project complies with all applicable standards and criteria for approval. AFFIDAVIT OF Roger A. Anderson, P.E. STATE OF MINNESOTA) ) ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) Roger A. Anderson, being duly swom upon oath, states and alleges as follows: My name is Roger A. Anderson and I am the Owner and President of Roger A. Anderson & Associates, Inc., a civil engineering design firm with offices at 7415 Wayzata Boulevard, Suite 107, Minneapolis, MN 55426. 2. 1 am a duly licensed Civil Engineer in the State of Minnesota, Professional Registration No. 13659. My license is current through June 30, 1998. 3. 1 have been practicing the civil engineering profession for over 20 years in the area of site engineering, municipal utilities, bridges, drainage and hydraulic calculations, and other related engineering items necessary to prepare new sites for development or re- development. 4. Our firm was retained by Four °S° Properties to provide engineering design services for the development of the Edina Storage Center Site (see attached Ediibit A) to be constructed on Eden Avenue near the CP Railroad bridge in Edina, MN. 5. The engineering plans were duly prepared by our firm in accordance with the applicable provisions of the City of Edina Land Use, Platting, and Zoning Ordinance, Section 850 - Zoning, and specifically requirements of: Section 850.17 Planned Industrial District (PUD) Section 850.08 Parking and Circulation Section 850.10 Landscaping and Screening Section 850.07 General Requirements The requirements of this ordinance were used to determine building size, building setbacks, driveway and access layouts, parking stall needs and other applicable site details as required for completion of the site plans. 7 Site utilities were designed for the project as follows: Utilit,r Design Criteria Sanitary Sewer Current City Engineering Standards/UBC Watermain Current City engineering Standards/UBC and e )pected demand of domestic and fire sprinkler system Storm Sewer, Current City engineering Standards, and Stormwater Ponding & Minnehaha Creek Watershed District Rules Stormwater Management (dated February 22, 1996) The plans and reports prepared and submitted for the project are as follows: Plan Sheet Tft Revision Date 1 of 1 Preliminary Plat February 21, 1997 C1 Site Plan February 21, 1997 C2 Grading & Erosion Control Plan February 21, 1997 C3 Utility Plan February 21, 1997 Stormwater Management Plan February 21, 1997 (Report) 8. These plans were further modified as a result of comments from both the City staff Review of the project, and the Public Housing at the Edina Planning Commission as follows: A. Revise building layout as needed to add ten foot landscape area at Eden Avenue end of buildings. B. Adjust parking layout (with resulting minor building revisions) to relocate several parking stalls as requested by Planning Commission. 9. In our professional opinion, the work done by our firm on this project complies with all applicable standards and criteria for approval. Roger WAnderson Subscribed an wom to before me this day of , 1997. JHEODORA L WUEIM NOTARY weuc «MINNUOTA A. #4Y COMMMION I'VIP23 Notary 2000 May 30, 1997 AFFIDAVIT OF GREG H. INGRAHAM Re: Edina Storage Center Project 5229 Eden Avenue City of Edina, Minnesota Case File P -97 -3 Four S Properties, Inc. Greg H. Ingraham, being duly sworn upon oath, states and alleges as follows: 1. My name is Greg H. Ingraham and I am President and Principal Planner in the land use planning consulting firm of Ingraham & Voss Inc., Suite 140, 7373 West 147' Street, Apple Valley, Minnesota 55124. I have been hired by Four S Properties to evaluate the conformance of the Edina Storage Project with portions of the City of Edina Zoning Code. I have 18 years of professional land use planning experience working as staff and consultant to Minnesota cities and agencies and private land development clients. I was the Assistant City Planner for the City of Eagan, Minnesota for three years. I worked for the City of Bloomington, Minnesota for eleven years, eight years as Associate City Planner and Senior Planner and three years as Manager of Parks and Recreation. During those 18 years, I have reviewed, planned or designed over 550 development projects comprising over 8,800,000 square feet of commercial- industrial building and over 4,500 residential housing units. I have written, evaluated and reviewed zoning codes and their application to development projects for many Minnesota cities and for private developers. I have a bachelors degree in Landscape Architecture from the University of Minnesota and Master's in Business Communication degree from the University of St. Thomas. I am a certified planner by the American Institute of Certified Planners and a registered Landscape Architect in the State of Minnesota. 2. Attached hereto as Exhibit A are true and correct copies of my review of the zoning conformance for the Edina Storage Project. Greg H. Waham Subscribed and swQrTL to before me this day of 1997. ZLO� a_� Notary WILLIAM C. GRIFFITH NOTARY PUBLIC - MU =ETA Ny.uary M. Exohe� .,�.20�OiT► -,�.. 1 N .G RA H :A M & V 0 S .S , .1:N..(_. Land Use Planning 8 Design City Planning Landscape Architecture Park Planning Exhibit A- Zoning Conformance Review for the Edina Storage Project Edina, Minnesota Case P -97 -3 May 30, 1997 For: Four S Properties, Inc. I reviewed the Edina Storage Project Site Plan, Edina City Staff Reports and portions of the Edina City Zoning Code pertaining to this project. Based on my professional knowledge and experience and my review of the above referenced document, I conclude that City of Edina's interpretation and use of Edina City Code Section 850.08, Subd. 4 , Setbacks - "No parking or drive aisle shall be located within 10 feet of any principal use building. " is inappropriate and does not apply to the setback situation cited in the Edina Storage Project staff report of April 30, 1997.. I come to this conclusion for the following reasons: 1. The City staff have interpreted "setback" to mean "foundation planting area" (April 30, 1997 City of Edina staff report to the Planning Commission). Setback is a dimensional distance requirement not a required landscaped area. The Edina City Code is specific about landscaped areas within parking lots, between parking lots and streets and between differing land uses. These landscape requirements are separate and distinct performance requirements not dimensional setbacks. 2. The interpretation of the 10 foot setback requirement to be a foundation planting area for this project is inconsistent with numerous other recently approved and constructed development projects within the City of Edina. 3. The interpretation of the 10 foot setback requirement to be a foundation planting area for this storage project or any other project which requires access to overhead doors or loading bays renders the use of overhead doors or loading docks impossible. A ten foot wide "moat" across the face of any and all building access points would prevent access to those buildings. Access must be provided to doorways. This interpretation would prevent that access. 4. Due to the nature of a storage use, the primary function of the building is access to secured storage doors and areas. The storage use is permitted within the Planned Industrial District. By interpreting the "setback" requirement to mean "planting area" the City staff would create an artificial situation which makes customer access to a permitted use impossible. 7373 West 147th Street Suite 140 Apple Valley, MN 55124 (612)431.4401 telephone (612)431- 46021ac wle Page Two Exhibit A Edina Storage Project May 30, 1997 - 5. - There is no public purpose - served by long, -linear 10 -foot wide foundation planting strips fronting all sides of each storage building. The basic intent of zoning is to "protect public health, safety and welfare." This interpretation does not accomplish that public protection goal. It only prevents access to public storage facilities. A landscaped yard area around the perimeter of industrial property and interior planting islands are appropriate for this project and are typical interpretations of the aesthetic protection of public welfare. Foundation plantings are not appropriate or possible for storage facilities or around any portion of a building that requires doorway access. 6. The typical application of a ten foot setback from a building to a parking lot is to provide space for a sidewalk or for planting in areas of public visibility. The drive aisles between the storage buildings do not function as parking areas. Their sole purpose is to provide access to the individual storage units for unloading and loading. People do not park within these locations or walk between storage units. These locations are not visible to the general public and significant planting areas are not appropriate and serve no public function. Based on this review I conclude a variance for provision of 10 foot wide foundation planting areas is not needed or required and is not called for by the Edina City Code. Interpretation of the 10 foot setback requirement to mean foundation planting area would result in creating an impossible access situation for a use (public storage) that is a permitted use in the zoning district and at this location. Sincerely, zt��_ Greg H. Ingraham, AICP President and Principal Planner mm . .... .. ... EDINA PHOTOS 4 -30 -97 NO. BUILDING LOCATION DESCRIPTION 1 WALGREENS YORK DRIVE AISLE WITHIN V OF BUILDING 2 CUB YORK PARKING WITHIN 35017 BUILDING 3 EDINA LIQUOR YORK DRIVE AISLE WITHIN 2' OF BUILDING 4 HIRSHFIELDS YORK PAVEMENT UP TO BUILDING 5 GALLERIA 70TH DRIVE AISLE WITHIN 3' OF BUILDING 6 YORKTOWN YORK PAVEMENT UP TO BUILDING 7 TARGET YORK PARKING WITHIN 3' OF BUILDING 8 BYERLYS FRANCE PAVEMENT UP TO BUILDING 9 CITY HALL 50TH PARKING WITHIN 5.5' OF BUILDING 10 EDINA LIQUOR VERNON PAVEMENT UP TO BUILDING 11 BLOCKBUSTER VERNON PARKING WITHIN 5' OF BUILDING 12 WAREHOUSE WASHINGTON AVE S PAVEMENT UP TO BUILDING 13 WAREHOUSE WASHINGTON AVE S PAVEMENT UP TO BUILDING 14 KUNZ EDEN CR PAVEMENT UP TO BUILDING 15 PUBLIC WORKS EDEN AVE PARKING WITHIN 4' OF BUILDING WALGREENS r 3 EDINA LIQUOR 4 HIRSHFIELDS 5 GALLERIA 7 TARGET . . r �► s 9 CITY HALL 10 ED N;A LIQUOR i► � s � 12 WAREHOUSE 13 WAREHOUSE 14 Kt IZ 15 PUBLIC WORKS ';; % REPORT /RECOMMENDATION To: Mayor & City Council From: Craig Larsen City Planner Date: June 16, 1997 Subject: S -97-4, Preliminary Plat Approval. Halla Division. 6601 Mohawk Trail. Don and Sandy Halla Recommendation: Agenda Item # III. c. Consent ❑ Information Only ❑ Mgr. Recommends ❑ To HRA © To Council Action ❑ Motion ® Resolution ❑ Ordinance ❑ Discussion The Planning Commission recommends approval subject to: 1. Final Plat Approval. 2. Subdivision Dedication. 3. Utility Connection Charges. 4. 40 Foot Conservation Restriction Along Mohawk Trail. Info /Background: See attached Planning Commission minutes, Staff report, Preliminary Plat and correspondence. LOCATION MAP i9 a SUBDIVISION NUMBER S -97 -4 L O C A T 10 N 6601 Mohawk Trail REQUEST Create Two Lots EDINA PLANNING DEPARTMENT ` DRAFT P.C. MINUTES 5/28. MEMBERS PRESENT: Johnson, Swenson, Lonsbury, McClelland, Runyan, Bergman, Ingwalson, Workinger, Byron S -97 -4 Don and Sandy Halla Halla Division 6601 Mohawk Trail Mr. Larsen informed the Commission the subject property is a developed single dwelling property containing an area of 87,150 square feet. The existing home is located in the northerly portion of the lot. A request to subdivide the property and create one new lot has been presented for Commission review. Mr. Larsen pointed out there are 37 lots in the 500 foot Neighborhood as defined in Section 810 of the .City Code(Subdivision Ordinance). The median size and dimensions of lots in this Neighborhood are as follows: Lot Width Lot Dept Lot Are 175 ft. 213 ft. 38,497 s. f. The dimensions and areas for the lots in the proposed subdivision are: Lot Widt Lot Depth Lot Area 200 ft. 217 ft. 43,590 s.f. 220 ft. 213 ft. 43,560 s.f. Mr. Larsen stated both lots in the proposed subdivision meet or exceed ordinance size and area requirements. Mr. Larsen concluded staff recommends preliminary plat approval for the proposed subdivision. Both lots meet or exceed ordinance size and dimension requirements. The proposed new building site is probably somewhat better than in other recently approved subdivisions in the vicinity. Preliminary Plat approval should be conditioned on: 1. Final Plat approval, 2. Subdivision Dedication, and 3.Grant of 40 foot Conservation Restriction along Mohawk Trail Commissioner Ingwalson said in reviewing the plat it was difficult to determine where the common lot line is, commenting he assumes it is in the middle of the two lines depicted on the plat. Mrs. Halla responded they have no problem in dividing the lot between the two lines indicated on the plat. Continuing, Mrs. Halla stated the house that will be constructed on the site takes advantage of the slopes by being angled sideways to achieve southern exposure. The proposed lot /house will also be served by the existing driveway. Mrs. Halla concluded by reporting the house will be built for her daughter, and the immediate neighbors have indicated they have no objection to the proposal. Commissioner Swenson stated she can support the subdivision request. The two lots meet or exceed neighborhood standards, the heavy vegetation on the site will almost camouflage the new house, and the recommendation of staff to place a 40 foot conservation easement along the street frontage further protects the unique character of Indian Hills. Commissioner Swenson moved to recommend Preliminary Plat approval subject to staff conditions and the further condition that the lot be divided between the two lines indicated on the plat. Commissioner Ingwalson seconded the motion. Mr. Richard Smith, neighbor and developer said he has a concern with the steep slopes of the subject site. Continuing, Mr. Smith said in his opinion this site, because of its slopes was designed to be one lot. Concluding, Mr. Smith reiterated he is concerned with the steep slopes, increased traffic, and potential setback difficulty. Mr. Smith stated the original developer of Indian Hills knew what he was doing in creating large unique lots, and he would like them to remain. Commissioner McClelland agreed with the uniqueness of Indian Hills, but pointed out the proposal meets subdivision standards. She added the division of these large lots began around eight years ago, and while it is difficult, the City has always placed at minimum a 40 foot conservation restriction along the street frontages to retain as much of the character of Indian Hills as possible while allowing property owners the right to divide their lot. Mrs. Halla interjected the house that her daughter proposes to construct is 2,500 square feet on each level, and it is a two level home. Mrs. Halla said the home will not be as large and overbearing as some of the new houses that have been constructed in the area. Commissioner Ingwalson said he does not have a problem with the proposal. He pointed out the house designed for the site is not overly large, and acknowledged the City does face a balancing act in this neighborhood in allowing property owners the right to divide their lots, while maintaining the unique character of Indian Hills. Chairman Johnson called for the vote. All voted aye; motion to approve carried 9 -0. EDINA PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT MAY 28, 1997 S -97 -4 Don and Sandy Halla Halla Division 6601 Mohawk Trail The subject property is a developed single dwelling property containing an area of 87,150 square feet. The existing home is located in the northerly portion of the lot. A request to subdivide the property and create one new lot has been presented for Commission review. There are 37 lots in the 500 foot Neighborhood as defined in Section 810 of the City Code(Subdivision Ordinance). The median size and dimensions of lots in this Neighborhood are as follows: Lot Width Lot Depth Lot Area 175 ft. 213 ft. 38,497 s.f. The dimensions and areas for the lots in the proposed subdivision are: Lot Width Lot Depth Lot Area 200 ft. 220 ft. 217 ft. 43,590 s.f. 213 ft. 43,560 s.f. Both lots in the proposed subdivision meet or exceed ordinance size and area requirements. The subjects property is characterized by relatively steep slopes, although the lot is not as severe as the recently approved lot to the immediate south. The proponents have indicated the new house would share the existing dirveway. This would allow improved access to the new building site, and would reduce disturbance to the property caused by development. Recent subdivisions approved in this area have provided a 40 foot Conservation Restriction area adjacent to the street in order to protect the existing character of the area. The subject property exhibits similar characteristics. RECOMMENDATION: . . Staff recommends preliminary plat approval for the proposed subdivision. Both lots meet or exceed ordinance size and dimension requirements. The proposed new building site is probably somewhat better than in other recently approved subdivisions in the vicinity. Preliminary Plat approval should be conditioned on: 1. Final Plat approval 2. Subdivision Dedication 3. Grant of 40 foot Conservation Restriction along Mohawk Trail a . �gpr�- ♦ � � -� _ ate. \ \ _�� � _r _ . � _- ` � \ \\ \ . i ISO // � y Sd-ai IYIY i -.: ! Y ! - '-i��r Pi loo:! rr. 9 9 7 On; .t �'s S Cwq D m t esl n 5tud(o bw. 6601 Mohawk Trail *,Edina, MN 55439 -1029 • (612) 941 -8422 /8C-- - ,,, �7- - - Sandy Cwayna Halla, Professional Member American Society of Interior Designers S Cjvgna, Desg'n 5tudib, Inc. 6601 Mohawk Trail • Edina, MN 55439 -1029 • (612) 941 -8422 We. are infavor of the Halla Subdivision in the .neighborhood OX \ I - \ \ V Sandy Cwayna Halla, Professional Member American Society of Interior Designers June 1, 1997 City Council of Edina Edina City Hall 4801 W. 50th Street Edina, MN 55424 Re: Subdivision of the Halla Property on Mohawk Trail Dear Sir or Madame, This letter is in response to the subdivision planned for the Halla property on Mohawk Trail, also known as 6601 Mohawk Trail. We would like to request that a forty -foot conservation restriction be placed on the property. This would be consistent with the restrictions approved by the City Council on the Ratelle Property (6621 Mohawk Trail, a 4 -acre parcel that runs between Dakota Trail and Mohawk Trail) and the Tamborino Property (Lot 4, Block 6 Indian Hills, also known as 6608 Dakota Trail, another large parcel running between Dakota and Mohawk Trails). We have been pleased to see such restrictions placed on the properties on our street in the past, as they will help to preserve the character of our wooded neighborhood. Thank you for your time on this matter. If you have any questions regarding our concerns, please feel free to call us as 829 -5349. Sincerely, Mary and Doug Watson 6620 Mohawk Trail Edina, MN 55439 JAMES P. LARKIN HOFFMAN DALY& LINDGREN LTD. CHRISTOPHER J. HARRISTHAL FREE ROBERT L. HOFF MAN . GERALD IL FRIEDEII 7 7 . 7 KENDEL E JAMES C. ERICKSON ATTORNEYS A T LAW BRUCE J. olAs EDWARD J. DRISCOLL WILLIAM GRIFFITH. G JR. GENE N. FULLER 1, JOHN R. MILL JOHN D. FULLMER PETER J. COYLE FRANK 1. HARVEY 1500 NORWEST FINANCIAL CENTER LARRY D. MARTIN CHARLES S. MODELL JANE E. BREMER CHRISTOPHER DIETffN 7900 XERXES AVENUE SOUTH JOHN J. STEFFENHAOEN ALL PHILIP G. DEN LINDA H. FISHER R SMITE THOMAS P. STOLTMAN BLOOMINGTON, MINNESOTA 55431 -1194 ANDREW F ANDREW F. PERRIN MICHAEL C. JACNMAN JACKM DANIEL W. VOSS - JOHN E. DIEHL JON S. SWERZEWSK1 TELEPHONE (612) 835 -3800 MUSK THOMAS J. FLYNN ANN M. MEYER CHRISTOPHER D. JOHNSON JAMES P. QUINN FAX (612) 896 -3333 RENEE L. JACKSON TODD I. FREEMAN CHRISTOPHER K IMUB GERALD L SECK MARCY R. FROST JOHN 8. LUNDOUI3T DOUGLAS M. RAMLER DAYLE NCOTT STEPHEN J. KAMINSKI JOHN A COTT ER' THOMAS F. ALEXANDER BEATRICE A. ROTHWEILER DHARN T.. PAUL B. PLUNMETT SWAHL HARWIA WAHLOREN ALAN L. KILDOW KARIN M. NELSEN KATHLEEN M. PICOTTE NEWMAN JOHN F. KLOS MICHAEL B. LEBARON C. ERIK IWWEB GREGORY E. D LYNNE MICHELLE MOORE GORY A VAN CL EVE EVE C. BRENi ROBBINS DANIEL L. BOWL KRISTIN S. WESTGARD ' TIMOTHY J. MCMANUS JOLIE S. FREDERICKSON TIMOTHY J. KEANE ALAN M. ANDERSON OF OF COUNSEL - A L. ROBACN - JACK F. DULLY MICH W. SCHLEY D. KENNETH LNDOREN BL ROAN B. KREPS ALLAN E. MULLIGAN TERRENCE E. BISHOP WENDELL R. ANDERSON LISA A, GRAY JOSEPH GRIS GARY A RENNEKE - ' ALSO ADMITTED M WISCONSIN May 29, 1997 Mr. Craig Larsen Planning Director Hand Delivered City of Edina 4801 West 50th Street Edina, Minnesota 55424 -1394 Re: Applications Preliminary Plat and Final Development Plan for Edina Storage Center Project on Behalf of Four S Properties, Inc.; Our File No. 22,830 -00 Dear Mr. Larsen: This letter is written on behalf of Four S Properties, Inc. in response to your call this afternoon in which you stated that the City Manager has decided to ask the City Council to continue its hearing of the above applications from June 2, 1996 to June 16, 1997. The reason that you stated for the proposed 6.17 acres of Property located at 5229 Eden Avenue continuance is to allow the City Council to hear the applications on the same evening as the City- initiated downzoning of my client's property to R -1 Single Dwelling Unit District. You said that they are related applications. I must strongly object to any continuance of my client's applications for the following reasons: 1. The applications are separate. The development applications were initiated by my client for the purpose of developing mini storage on the property which is a use allowed as a matter of right in the PID district. The R -1 downzoning was initiated by City staff with the concurrence of the City Council and furthered by the action taken last evening by the Planning Commission. This action is clearly designed to prevent development of the site as mini storage without regard for fact that such use conforms to the PID district. 2. Linking the two actions causes clear and direct prejudice to my client. How many applicants must attempt to make the case that their development project complies with zoning on the same evening LARKIN, HOFFMAN, DALY & LINDGREN, LTD. Mr. Craig Larsen May 29, 1997 Page 2 that the City Council hears its own application to downzone the property and take away the opportunity to develop the property consistent with zoning. The City has delayed my client's application for its own purposes and not for reasons related to the fair and impartial review of the development applications before it. On April 2, 1997, the Planning Commission continued review of the applications to April 30, 1997, ostensibly to allow,staff the opportunity to further review the applications. In the meantime, on April 7, 1997, City Council -held a public hearing to amend the Grandview Redevelopment Project and Grandview Tax Increment Financing Plan to clear the way for the City's proposal to acquire my client's property. Further, on April 7, 1997, City Council approved a 60 -day extension of the statutory deadline for hearing Four S Properties application for approval of a Final Development Plan. It is quite plain that the City has improperly used its statutory authority to delay this project in manner that allows the City the time it needs to downzone the property and "take" the development opportunity from Four S Properties. This is particularly egregious given that the City has now filed a petition in district court to acquire the property by condemnation, which puts the City in a position that is clearly adverse to the interests of my client. 4. Finally, in preparing to represent my client before the City Council on June 2, 1997, as scheduled, I requested a continuance of three applications pending elsewhere to June 16, 1997. Therefore, I will not be available to represent my client in the City of Edina on June 16, 1997. Your proposal to continue this matter to June 16, 1997, just two business days before the hearing, deprives my client of legal counsel at a critical hearing of its applications. Last evening, at the Planning Commission, I asked, somewhat rhetorically, "How can my client get a fair and impartial hearing from the City of Edina ?" I must now change that question to a statement: It is impossible for my client to receive a fair and impartial hearing from the City of Edina! Nonetheless, we will come prepared to make our presentation to the City Council, as scheduled, at its meeting of June 2, 1997. !nc re y, William C. Griffit , Jr., for LARKIN, HOFFMAN, DALY & LINDGREN, Ltd. Enclosures cc: Pat Stotesbery Todd Jones ✓ Glenn Smith, Mayor Kenneth Rosland, City Manager Jerry Gilligan, City Attorney Applicant's Statement in Support of the Preliminary Plat and Final Development Plan Applications Edina Storage Center Project Behalf of Four S Properties, Inc JAMES P. LARKIN LARKIN, HOFFMAN, DALY & LINDGREN, GE LDH. FERMI LTD. CHRISTOPHER J. HARRISTHAL JAMES C. SON KENDEL J. OHLROGGE EDWARD J. DRI RISCOLL ATTORNEYS AT LAW BRUCE J. DOUGLAS GENE N. FULLER WILLIAM C. GRIFFITH, JR. JOHN D. FULLMER JOHN R. HILL FRANK 1. HARVEY PETER J. COYLE CHARLES S. MODELL 1500 NORWEST FINANCIAL CENTER LARRY D. MARTIN H CHRISTOPHER RJ. D:E DIETZEN JANE E. BREMER FISH R THOMAS FISHER THOMAS D. AN _ 7900 XERXES AVENUE SOUTH JOHN J. STEFFENHAGEN DANIEL W. VOSS MICHAEL C. JACKAUW JArA%A PHILIP G. ALDEN JOHN E. DIEM BLOOMINGTON, MINNESOTA 55431 -1194 MICHAEL J. SMITH JON S. SWIERZEWSKI VIUS R- INOE THOMAS J. FLYNN TELEPHONE (612) 835 -3800 ANDREW F. PERRIN JAMES P. QUINN ANN M. MEYER TOM FREEMAN FAX (612) 896 CHRISTOPHER 5ON GERALD L NECK GERALD -3333 RENEE JOHN S. NDCN115T CHRISTOPHER K lARUS OAVLE OL MARCV R. FROST JOHN A COTTER' COTTER* DOUGLAS M. RAMLER BEATRICE A. R0T1M£ILER STEPHEN J. KAMINSKI PLNKETT U THOMAS F. ALEXANDER ALANPAUL L. L. KILDOVN OANEL T. WADLEC KATHLEEN M. PICOTTE NEWMAN SKARNAA. WAHLGREN MICHAEL B.. N KARIN M. NELSEN GREGORY E. KO KORS '�N F. I, . GARY A VAN CLEVE' C. ERIK HAVNES AWE DANIEL L BOWIES LYNNE MICHELLE MOORE TIMOTHY J. S C. BRENT ROBBINS KEANE J. KERSO KRISTIN S. WESTGARD ' ALAN M. ALAN M. ANDERSON � JOLIE S. FREDERICKSON DONNA L. ROBACK MICHAEL W. SCHLEP OF COUNSEL BONN B. JACK F. DALY N E. BISHOP E E. BI D. KENNETH LINDGREN USA A. R USA A GRAY ALLAN E. MULLIGAN GARY A RENNEKE WENDELL R. ANDERSON JOSEPH GRIS ALSO ADMITTED IN WISCONSIN March 28, 1997 Lorelei Bergman David Byron Edina Planning Commission Edina Planning Commission 5825 Long brake Trail 7433 West shore Drive Edina, MN 55439 Edina, MN 55435 Charles Ingwalson Gordon Johnson Edina Planning Commission Edina Planning Commission 4612 Arden Avenue 5837 Jeff Place Edina, MN 55424 Edina, MN 55436 -- John Lonsbury Helen McClelland Edina Planning Commission Edina Planning Commission 6716 Southdale Road 5717 Continental Drive - Edina, MN 55435 Edina, MN 55436 David Runyan Ann Swenson Edina Planning Commission Edina Planning Commission 4508 North Avenue 5701 Fairfax Avenue Edina, MN 55436 Edina, MN 55424 Geoffrey Workinger Edina Planning Commission 5224 Kellogg Avenue Edina, MN 55424 Re: Applicant's Statement in Support of the Preliminary Plat and Final Development Plan Applications for Edina Storage Center Project on Behalf of Four S Properties, Inc.; Our File No. 22,830 -00 Dear Planning Commission members: LARKIN, HOFFMAN, DALY & LINDGREN, LTD. Edina Planning Commission March 28, 1997 Page 2 We represent Four S Properties, Inc. (the "Applicant ") which has filed the above applications for approval of the Edina Storage Center Project (the "Project "). This letter is the Applicant's statement of the Project's compliance with all applicable City Code standards for approval of the plat and development plan. This statement is based upon review of the following materials: 1. City of Edina Land Use Plan. 2. City of Edina Zoning Ordinance. City of Edina Zoning Map. 4. Planning and zoning history for the Lewis and Kunz sites. Conferences with Edina Planning staff. I. PROJECT DESCRIPTION The Project will serve as the catalyst for redevelopment of the 6.17 -acre Lewis site, located immediately southwest of the intersection of Eden Avenue and Brookside Avenue in the City of Edina, Minnesota (the "Property "). The Project will contain 134,421 square feet of mini - storage within six buildings. Local residents within three to four miles of the Property will be the primary tenants of this use (75% of use); remaining users are commercial and business tenants (25% of use). II. BACKGROUND REGARDING LEWIS PROPERTY PROJECT CHRONOLOGY • February/March 1986 - City Council held public hearings on land use alternatives for the Grandview area. City Council planning consultant identified Kunz Oil/Lewis properties as "blighted" and under utilized and recommended the parcels be designated for multifamily use. September 1986 - City Council considered a proposal for Kunz Oil/Lewis properties. The proposal by the Knutson Companies called for the HRA to acquire, and write -down the cost of the land, and make the property available to the developer for construction of a four -story 210 -unit apartment project. The project was abandoned by the developer. July 13, 1987 - The City Council met to review the Comprehensive Plan. City Council affirmed that the Kunz Oil/Lewis properties should be redeveloped with the same type of multifamily housing and referred this matter to staff for the preparation of additional information and alternatives. LARKIN, HOFFMAN, DALY & LINDGREN, LTD. Edina Planning Commission March 28, 1997 Page 3 • May 1988 - Planning Commission reviewed the Preliminary Plan submitted by Jerry's Enterprises for the retail development of the Edina school bus garage facility and Kunz Oil/Lewis properties. • July 1989 - Link Road and Sherwood Road were reconstructed and signalized at Vernon Avenue. • October 1989 - The HRA adopted a resolution to acquire the Kunz Oil/Lewis properties by eminent domain. City staff was authorized to pursue an agreement with Jerry's Enterprises and Opus Corporation for the redevelopment of the property. • September 1990 - City Council held a public hearing to discuss a petition submitted by Jerry's Enterprises and Opus Corporation for the rezoning of the Kunz Oil/Lewis properties from PID to PCD -2. The matter was referred to staff and the hearing continued. The project was abandoned by the developer. • August 19, 1991 - City Council adopted a resolution that amended the Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map within three commercial redevelopment areas. The Council, based on the Planning Commission's recommendation, took the strongest position by leaving the Grandview Redevelopment Area 4 designated as Industrial, (Emphasis added.) - • August 1991 - The Scrivner Inc. Market Research Department prepared a study for Rainbow Foods to evaluate and forecast the sales volume for a Rainbow Foods facility at the location. The study evaluated the proposed site, competitive environment, and relevant area economic and demographic data. Based on the findings of the traffic and market studies prepared for this site and on the information presented in the summary, Watson Centers Inc. and Rainbow Foods stated that the development of a Rainbow Foods store and family oriented quick service restaurant on the property would satisfy the community need and be an appropriate and valuable reuse of this site. • April 19, 1993 - Public hearing was held for rezoning and Comprehensive Plan amendment for Lewis/Kunz Oil property to allow development of a grocery store and restaurant. City Planner advised the City Council about a proposal to rezone the property from Industrial to Commercial and to amend the Comprehensive Plan designation from Industrial to Commercial., Staff did not support amending, the Comprehensive Plan for the following reasons: (1) Retail development should only be allowed south of Eden Avenue with the concurrent redevelopment of the north frontage of Eden Avenue (bus garage). (2) The retail and office retail uses considered in 1988 and 1990 included redevelopment of the bus garage. (3) The only reuse of the property the City Council has supported, other than Industrial, is a multifamily residential use. (Emphasis added.) • June 7, 1993 - The Edina City Council denied the request for a Comprehensive Plan amendment and rezoning for a proposed retail center, including grocery store and restaurant. LARKIN, HOFFMAN, DALY & LINDGRF-N, LTD. Edina Planning Commission March 28, 1997 Page 4 • February 6, 1996 - Resolution approving final development plan for the Kunz Oil redevelopment plan. The Final Development Plan for Kunz Oil at 5200 Eden Circle was approved and subject to: (1) Final plat approval of Kunz/Lewis Addition, (2) Roadway /access easement (3) Proof of parking agreement, (4) Watershed District Permits, and (5) redevelopment agreement. June 26, 1996 - Minutes of the Edina Planning Commission. Re: final rezoning, 5229 Eden Avenue Laurent Parks and final plat approval, Kunz/Lewis addition, 5229 Eden Avenue and 5200 Eden Circle. Edina Planning Commission staff report stated that the City Council on February 5 approved preliminary rezoning from PID to POD -1 for redevelopment of the subject property. The redevelopment proposed five office buildings totaling 94,500 square feet of floor area. Staff recommended approval with the following conditions: (1) watershed district grading permits, (2) developer's agreement, and (3) subdivision dedication. • July 15, 1996 - Report/Recommendation of the Planning Commission to the Mayor and Council. Planning Commission recommended final rezoning and final plat approval subject to the following _ conditions: (1) public safety access easement with cross easement for Kunz property running from Eden Circle along railroad tracks to Eden Avenue, (2) developer's agreement, (3) Minnehaha Creek watershed district grading permit, (4) subdivision dedication on unplatted portion of property (assessor's value will be available at council meeting), (5) development agreement between HRA, Laurent Parks and Kunz Oil which will include HRA commitment to install Eden Avenue streetscape. • July 15, 1996 - City council Resolution approving final plat for Eden Office Park Addition stated as follows: `Be it resolved by the city council of the City of Edina, Minnesota that the certain plat entitled Eden Office Park Addition platted by Gordon C. Lewis, Laverne S. Lewis and the Kunz Oil Company and presented at the regular meeting of the city council on July 15, 1996 be and is hereby granted final plat approval with the following conditions: (1) implementation and granting of easement from Eden Circle and the southwesterly portion of the property continuing east to the railroad tracks and then north to connect out ` to Eden Avenue, (2) developer's agreement covering all public _ improvements including a maintenance easement for the ponding areas, (3) watershed district grading and permit, (4) subdivision dedication of $80,000, and (5) development agreement between Laurent Parks and Kunz Oil that would include a commitment by HRA to continue Grandview area streeetscapes on the south side of Eden Avenue in connection with the project. It would also include the public improvements part of the development." (Executed, December 11, 1996.) (The above chronology was prepared based upon materials obtained from the City Planning Department) LARKIN, HOFFMAN, DALY & LINDGREN, LTD. Edina Planning Commission March 28, 1997 Page 5 III. PROJECT'S COMPLIANCE WITH ZONING REGULATIONS A. Zoning and Land Use The Property is currently zoned Planned Industrial Development (PID). The Edina City Code, Section 850.17, Subd. 1., sets out the principal uses allowed in the PID district. (Section references are to the Edina City Code unless otherwise noted.) City Planner, Craig Larsen confirmed that the Property is zoned PID in a letter to the property owner, dated February 4, 1997. Principal uses the PID district include: H. Mini- storage warehouse for storage of domestic supplies, recreational vehicles and equipment and other private property, if the owner of the private property is responsible for transporting the property to and from the principal use, and further, if the owner of the principal use does not establish the use as a carrier for the purpose of a freight operation. The zoning is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan land use designation of the Property, which is "Industrial." Therefore, no zoning or Comprehensive Plan amendment is required to use the property as proposed. B. Final Development Plan The Applicant has submitted an application for approval of a final development plan for the Project consistent with the requirements of Section 850.04, Subd 2(C)(4). The Planning Commission must recommend approval by the Council upon finding that the proposed development: a. is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan; es o . The Comprehensive Plan guides the Property for Industrial development. The Project is aprincipal use in the PID district. The PID district is consistent with the Industrial designation under the Comprehensive Plan. Therefore, the Project is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. b. is consistent with the Preliminary Development Plan as approved and modified by the Council and contains the Council imposed conditions to the extent the conditions can be complied with by the Final Development Plan. es se: The Property was zoned "PID" by the City. The Final Development Plan is consistent with PID zoning. Therefore, it is consistent with the Preliminary Development Plan approved as part of the City- initiated rezoning of the site. will not be detrimental to properties surrounding the tract; LARKIN, HOFFMAN, DALY & LINDGREN, LTD. Edina Planning Commission March 28, 1997 Page 6 Re on se: The immediately adjoining land uses include the School District bus garage, the Kunz Oil building, and the railroad right of way. These are all industrial land uses which are not affected by the proposed mini - storage use. d. will not result in an overly- intensive land use; Response: The Project proposes a low rise profile with significant screening and landscaping elements. Because of the nature of the land use, the activity level and trip generation are significantly lower than any comparable commercial or industrial use. In fact, the trip generation rate on a square footage basis is less than residential development. e. will not result in undue traffic congestion or traffic hazards; Response: Benshoof and Associates has prepared a comparison of trip generation rates for recent proposals on the Property, including retail grocery, residential housing, and office. The Project trip generation rates are only 3 to 31 percent of the rates of previous proposals for the Property. (See attached Exhibit A.) f. conforms to the provisions of this Section and other applicable provisions of this Code; and Response: The development plan has been designed in strict conformance with all applicable provisions of the City Code. g. provides a proper relationship between the proposed improvements, existing structures, open space and natural features. Re o se: The development plan has been designed to provide the proper relationship to existing improvements and related site features. The Project is two- story, presents a low profile, is landscaped with high quality plantings, incorporates down -cast Wal -Pack lighting, utilizes monumental entry features, such as stone columns and ornamental fencing, and buffers uses to the south. The railroad right of way provides a buffer to the east, and remaining uses are consistent with the land use and zoning classifications of the Property. (See Landscape Plan, Entry Perspective, and lighting specifications attached as Exhibits B, C, and D, respectively) C. Platting Requirement According the property survey, dated January 10, 1997, the Property is comprised of three parcels, each of which is described as part of a lot and block of a plat. Under City requirements: Any land which has been previously platted into lots and blocks shall be likewise replatted to provide new lots and blocks which are compatible in size, shape, location and arrangement with the property's intended use. Section 850.07, Subd. 13. LARKIN, HOFFMAN, DALY & LINDGREN, LTD. Edina Planning Commission March 28, 1997 Page 7 Therefore, the Applicant has filed an application for preliminary plat approval, along with the application for approval of a final development plan. D. Special Requirements In addition to standard dimensional requirements and applicable performance standards, the Project will meet all special requirements for Mini- Storage as set forth at Section 850.17, Subd. 3. IV. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSION 1. In 1991, and again in 1993, the City Council affirmed, by official action, that "Industrial" is an appropriate land use for the Property. In fact, proposals for retail, commercial, restaurant, office and multifamily residential have either been denied or abandoned. So, it is clear that approval of a conforming Industrial use is the most viable redevelopment option for the Property. 2. The Vroperty is currently zoned Planned Industrial Development (PID). This was confirmed in writing by staff of the City of Edina. Under Section 850.17, Subd. 1., mini - storage is a principal use in the PID district. This means it is allowed as a matter of right. 3. The Applicant has submitted an application for approval of a final development plan for the Project which conforms with the requirements of Section 850.04, Subd 2(C)(4). 4. The Applicant has submitted a preliminary plat application as required by Section 850.07, Subd. 13. The Project complies with all dimensional requirements, applicable performance standards, as well as all special requirements for Mini- Storage as set forth at Section 850.17, Subd. 3. 6. The Project provides the City with a market -based redevelopment project on a Property that has been identified as "blighted" by the City since 1986. Unlike other recent proposals, there is no City subsidy required to redevelop the Property. 7. The trip generation rates for the mini - storage land use are substantially lower than any other land use, including residential. The Applicant has documented that the Project will generate only 20 percent of the p.m. peak hour generation of an office development which the City Council approved. 8. The Project satisfies a demand for mini storage in a convenient and central location in Edina. Edina residents within 3 -4 miles of the Property will be the primary tenants. This demand is not currently served in the City. 9. The Applicant has designed a Project which is well beyond the minimum Code requirements in terms of the quality of finishing materials, the amount of landscaping and buffering, and site plan development. LARKIN, HOFFMAN, DALY & LINDGREN, LTD. Edina Planning Commission March 28, 1997 Page 8 10. The Project is complimentary to surrounding industrial uses and compatible with nearby neighborhoods because of low trip generation, low activity levels, and low profile. For these reasons we urge the Planning Commission to approve the Project. Because of scheduling, m partner, Tim Keane will present the Project to you at your meeting of April 2, 1997. We look forward to working with you toward approval of the Project. We request that this letter and the materials to which it refers be incorporated in the official decision in this matter. Thank you. record of Si erely, illiam C. Gri r., for ' LARKIN, HOFFMAN, DAL LINDGREN, Ltd. Enclosures cc: Pat Stotesbery Todd Jones Timothy J. Keane, Esq. Roger Anderson Craig Larsen, City of Edina City Clerk, City of Edina 0286467.01 m IFBENSHOOF & ASSOCIATES, INC. TRANSPORTATION ENGINEERS AND PLANNERS 7301 OHMS LANE, SUITE 500 / EDINA, MN 55439 / (612) 832 -9858 / FAX (612) 832 -9564 March 28, 1997 REFER TO FILE: 97 -30 MEMORANDUM;::: - - TO: Todd Jones, Four S Properties, Inc. `16 FROM: James A. Benshoof and Edward F. Terhaar RE: Trip Generation Comparison for Proposed Edina Storage Center PURPOSE AND BACKGROUND This memorandum is to present the comparison of the expected number of trips generated by the proposed self storage facility to other uses previously proposed for the site. The proposed self storage facility is to be built on 6.17 acres of land in located south of Eden Avenue and east of Vernon Avenue in Edina. The self storage facility is expected to consist of 134,421 square feet of floor area in six buildings. TRIP GENERATION Trip generation rates for the proposed self storage facility are based on actual counts taken at existing self storage facilities throughout the Minneapolis/St. Paul area. The counts were conducted in February, 1997, at nine self storage facilities. Daily and p.m. peak hour trip generation rates were developed for the self storage facility based on the counts. These rates varied for each location due to different levels of activity at each of the locations. In order to be conservative, the highest daily and p.m. peak hour trip generation rates observed at the existing self storage facilities were used in this comparison. Information on other previously proposed uses for this site was obtained from the following two reports: 1) Traffic Impact Report for Rainbow Foods, Barton- Aschman Associates, Inc., March, 1993, and 2) Grandview Area Traffic Study Update ( #2), BRW, Inc., May, 1993. Both of these studies analyzed the impact of building a 65,900 square foot Rainbow Foods and a 4,800 square foot fast food restaurant on 8.21 acres of land in the same general location of the proposed self storage facility. The BRW report also included trip generation information for two other uses for the site, including a 200 unit medium density residential development and a 108,000 square foot office/office showroom development. Mr. Todd Jones -2- March 27, 1997 An important point in this comparison is the property size difference between the proposed self storage facility and the other previously proposed uses. As mentioned earlier, the self storage facility is to built on 6.17 acres of property, while the other uses were to be built on 8.21 acres. In order to account for the difference in the overall property size, the ratio of 6.17 to 8.21 was applied to the expected trip generation presented in the Barton - Aschman and BRW reports for the other proposed uses. This allows us the ability to compare the proposed self storage facility to the other uses on an equal basis. The resultant trip generation comparison is shown in Table 1. TABLE 1 DAILY AND P.M. PEAK HOUR TRIP GENERATION COMPARISON FOR THE PROPOSED EDINA STORAGE CENTER AND OTHER PREVIOUSLY PROPOSED USES Proposed Development Daily Trip P.M. Peak Hour Trip Alternative Land Use Generation Generation In Out Edina Storage Self Storage Center Facility 148' 41 41 A Rainbow Foods 62152 22.) 2 2142 A Fast Food Restaurant 22802 682 632 B Medium Density Residential 8873 543 293 C Office /Office Showroom 9623 203 1103 ' Trip generation based on counts taken at self storage facilities in 1vlinneapolis/St. Paul area. 2 Trip generation information from Barton- Aschman and BRW reports adjusted by factor of 6.17/8.21 to account for difference in overall property size. 3 Trip generation information from BRW report adjusted by factor of 6.17/8.21 to account for difference in overall property size. As shown in the table, the self storage facility is expected to generate far fewer trips than any of the other uses. Specifically, the daily trip generation for the self storage is only two percent of the daily generation for the Rainbow Foods /fast food development (alternative A), 17 percent of the daily generation for the residential housing development (alternative B), and 15 percent of the daily generation for the office development (alternative Q. Similarly, the p.m. peak hour trip generation for the self storage is only two percent of the daily generation for the Rainbow Foods /fast food development (alternative A), ten percent of the p.m. peak hour trip generation for the residential housing development (alternative B), and six percent of the p.m. peak hour generation for the office development (alternative C). Attachment A MINNESOTA MINI - STORAGE TRAFFIC COUNTS - ENTERING TRAFFIC ONLY 4 Location Brooklyn Park Coon Rapids Eden Prairie Plymouth Richfield Shorewood Hopkins Minnetonka Chanhassen Total Gross Square Feet 72,500 52,300 113,200 102,300 84,700 47,400 57,000 67,300 65,500 Total Daily Vehicles Per 1000 s . ft. 0.55 0.3 0.28 0.24 0.31 0.32 0.28 0.25 0.29 Average Vehicles Per Hour 3.04 1.21 2.43 1.88 2.04 1.16 1.21 1.3 1.45 Total Vehicles Per Week 277 110 221 171 186 1 106 110 118 132 Average Vehicles Per Day 39.57 15.71 31.57 1 24.43 1 26.57 15.14 15.71 16.86 18.86 Total P.M. Peak Hour Vehicles per 1000 s . ft. 0.022 0.024 1 0.017 1 0.014 1 0.018 0.023 0.019 0.02 0.016 Notes: Data was recorded at each site using the electronic security card system. Survey conducted for 7 days, February 18 through February 24, 1997. Average Vehicles Per Hour based upon being open 13 hours per day. CIF' y1 1 Ll'til RAILROA (DL-ANKPSGAPE PLAN - - -- -1 r a, Ay`` L S n D1 J S I j G iV WS.r SYlet6..1•a I.Paw.R. 6ww��. 6reul.el. et.Y CPpPeerYle .Pa T'I.PnI•e 1201 NarrS Th4d 5Uee1 Yluoe.P.11.. YR 60.u1 012.aaR.ei2R inlryhoP 012.aaR.i�aa 1'..•�PYI. �rtNLm Flan. . _ GPlCIr N'Tlti N >r ..Uti PREP.wCU Y. YC ^P 1`IGER YT u�Yk�r SuH RHJUN u1C Iw IIl..M.: UYDSCW: .11 ARDId1ECT UruW MC tT's[ CT rNE SIATC O< Y4 CSOrA DALE. Regarnlbn :rw. :Idrrlu e, �wi R•.WO.. 5.1. s.. ' 5.1.: xe YAxcY IRUi � sea: f =ao• -a Or..e el: PlA /%Y i checked BT: YlA eue..ve. �VTaaVTm -u o.c ' H PLANT SCHEDULE @p � Ott Df50.P- 5a R.^.OT Rev'IARG9 S gg '^ y. I PRWE55 -T PLv LS' BB 6-EE STRArali L= -'Cc1i VJ PRTLS NKrRA CAL F6.L " W 6 SPRIG BY.1Y CR<pdPPLf 15' BB 5WY E STRL.. LE.:CfR MALLS sF 51w CAL PILL c-11IN �f,f 5 RNER BIRCH 25- BB 6tW 61PA W LEADER (� 4 Wn" MCAA vvuLD L nm MAPLE CAL I5' BB E'�L CR SW.LE 5TRA6W LADER AMR PL.ITANORJES P=. C•:L RLL cRLLN A 6 E7ER:1D LLSTRE MAPLE 45' BB Sur LE STP,%WT IEAD(3i Q ACI]2 PLATMOIDE5 PO CAL. 1T CR QQQ~ 5 NLRr6w= RED r1W'LE 35' BB SPriE 5TRA4NT Lem o :DER REFe!'1 YDRr1U.GLD' CAL RLL mol '^ co c p1mG� ASM PEC— PfML'rikvE PAIYOFE' 55' CAL BB SuYiLE STRAGNT LE< R1L C TE 8' BB TO G Eli :ORS TO GRLUJ r}s'�5 Z A C4BV 15 irW<DCC�,Er1TAL15 TV MT o PTR va <Rg(R m 9' BB R51 PGTd'i TO GRGV 8 0 Tr A LCCDB/TAL16 P IDALIS T . C LORaDO GR'915PRCE z BB Rif CORt TO GRc6xD PYEA PVGETLS Mf 6 BLOC MILLS 5PREE PICEA GL".v. DENSALA IO T 55 RLL FGT TO Cf�hD I 6 Boot MUA SPRM a' w RAJ, PoR'1 To GI :56 PICW G"rY DDWIA -Irl wl p3 mwf w, 1 5 COW 5PACE 3' ON CWrM N L-1 5P-J" k °JVLI GAL _ 1 OF I A � \ UK 11 (` NNW Nis i all IBM k� up EDINA STORAGE CENTER PROJECT EDINA, MINNESOTA 2-24-97! ERTIES, INC. I'l - In. rip AN C®PELAND B U I L D I N G CORPORATION March 27, 1997 Mr. Craig Larsen Planning Director City of Edina 4801 West 50th Street Edina, NIN 55424-1394 Re: Edina Storage Center Dear Mr. Larsen: 5300 Hyland Greens Drive Suite 200 Bloomington, Minnesota 55437 (612) 832 -5302 (612) 832 -5301 Fax I am writing in regard to the exterior lighting for the above mentioned project. We are proposing to use 150 watt high pressure sodium wall packs manufactured by Lumark or equal. As you can see from the enclosed catalog cut - sheet, this fixture contains a glass lens as to concentrate illumination downward on the property of the storage center. Also, we are proposing to mount these fixtures at approximately nine feet for the single story buildings, which will produce an illumination pattern of eighteen feet left and right of the fixture and thirty-eight feet out away from the buildings. For the two story buildings, we are proposing to mount the fixtures approximately twenty -two feet above the lower level finished floor. Spacing of the fixtures will be generally sixty to seventy feet apart. Furthermore, rays of light will not pass beyond the property lines of the premises utilizing the lights at an intensity greater than ten foot - candles measured at property lines abutting streets or property zoned non - residential and not greater than three foot - candles measured at property lines abutting property zoned residential. Finally, no light source, lamp or luminaire shall be directed beyond the boundaries of the lighted or illuminated premises. Please feel free to call with any other questions or concerns. Sincerely, .00�" Robert R. Copeland, RE President The Lumark Wal -Pak wall light provides a durable and efficient exterior light source for any application demanding maximum perfor- mance and minimum maintenance. The rugged, die -cast aluminum housing, stain- less steel hardware and sealed and gasketed optics compartment make Wal -Pak virtually impenetrable to contaminants. A polished - aluminum specular reflector and field - adjustable, dual - position lamp holder promote maximum performance. Choose impact - resistant prismatic borosilicate glass or poly - carbonate refractors. Wal -Pak is easily installed over round or square 4 "junction boxes or through- wiring with surface conduit. Wal -Pak complements any environ- ment and is ideal for loading docks. under- passes. tunnels. stairways, building entrances. public garages and vehicle ramps. Design Features 314 "NPT threaded hub. Compact ballast core and coil assembly (internal access). Rugged die -east aluminum housing in a pleasing soft corner design. Field- adjustable Mogul Base screw -shell socket provides two beam patterns. 1 95 /e.. 1 Lens assembly hinged at bottom for easy 'A installation and relamping. Closed -cell, gas - filled, high - temperature silicone gasketing. UL listed for wet locations. Impact - resistant borosilicate prismatic glass or polycerbonate refractor. Dark bronze polyester powder cost enamel finish Is both weather and abrasion resistant. Mounting Details Catalog Number HPW6230 250 -Wan HPS 30.000 -Lumen Clear Lamp 5 Mounting Height 4 A B C D E to' 8.00 4.00 200 1.00 050 3 15' 3.54 1.77 0.89 0.44 017 20' 2.00 1.00 0.50 025 0.10 2 25' 1.28 0.64 0.32 0.16 0.06 1 0 1 2 4 3 2 1 0 1 2 3 4 Mounting Height Catalog Number MHW4280 250 -Watt Metal Halide 19.500 -Lumen Clear Lamp 5 Mounting Height 4 10. 3 15' 20' 2 25' 1 0 1 2 4 3 2 1 0 1 2 3 4 Mounting Height . A B C D E 6.00 4 00 2.00 1 00 050 154 177 0.89 144 017 2.00 t.00 0.50 025 010 28 0.64 0,32 0 16 006 1-1 Catalog Number Logic Voltage Lamp Type Refractor Product Family Lamp Wattage (add as suffix) H P = HPS W = Borosilicate MH =Met. Hal. Glass M V =Merc. P= Polycarbonate Catalog Lamp Number Wattage HPWL -50 50 HPWL -70 70 HPWL -100 100 HPWL -15 150 "R-200 200 HPWL -250" 250 MHWL -175 175 MHWL -250 250 MVWL -50 50 MVWL -75 75 MVWL -100 100 to MVWL -175 175 MVWL -250 250 •Uses S -55 (55 -volt lamp only). HPF '•Available in 120/277V only Merc. L= Wal -Pak 35 50 70 100 150 175 200 250 Lamp Type Ballast Type Net Wt. (Lbs.) HPS HPF 32 HPS HPF 35 HPS HPF 35 HPS HPF 35 HPS HPF 35 HPS HPF 37 MH HPF 33 MH HPF 36 Merc. HPF 33 Merc. HPF 30 Merc. HPF 31 Merc. HPF 30 Merc. HPF 33 120V 208V 240V 277V 480V Volume (Cu. Ft.) 1.48 Options (add as suffix) F1 Single Fusing 120, 277 Volts 0250 250 -Watt Quartz Restrike (DC GRY Gray Polyester Powder Coat F2 Double Fusing 208.240.480 Bayonet Base)' enamel finish Volts BLK Black Polyester Powder Coat MT Multi -Tap HPF ballast (120. 208. 0100 100 -Watt Quartz Restrike (DC enamel finish 240 & 277 volt). Bayonet Base)* WHT White Polyester Powder Coat TR Tamper- resistant screw 0150 150 -Watt Quartz Restrike (DC enamel finish Bayonet Base)' 'Quartz lamps cannot exceed wattage of HID lamps. 11 = t Accessories (order separately) TRSD- y4u20 -U Tamper- resistant screwdriver WG /WL Wire Guard (not compatible with PCS) PE /MT Photoelectric control (105V -285V) I WG /WL -Wire Guard Heavy -gauge wire in plated finish � .J■ gives additional protection. Field installed only Not for use with I Polycarbonate Shield - t E PCs Polycarbonate shield (not compatible with WG /WL) PE -480 Photoelectric control (480V) TWC Thru -Way Condulel PCS- Polyearbonate Shield Provides maximum vandal resis tance for glass lens. Does not affect photometrics. Not compatible with Wire Guard. Field installed only VS /WL Visor Cut -Off Shield WLR Replacement Glass Lens PLL Replacement Polycarbonate Lens WPL Door Only l I EFINIMMIEW mm!ft�!�Ww` VS /1111111L -Visor Shield Restricts light above the horizontal plane of the refractor. Dark bronze finish. Field installed only P- Polycarbonate Refractor Virtually unbreakable ultraviolet stabilized prismatic polycarbonate refractor provides optimum photo- metric performance and substan- tial protection from vandalism. Available on 50 -watt through 150 - watt HPS fixtures. Reduces weight of fixtures by approximately 15 pounds. To specify on appropriate fixtures. substitute P for W in Catalog Number Lumark Lighting P O. Box 824 Vicksburg, Mississippi 39181 601.638.1522 Fax 601.634.9606 F—A-8 ) o e REPORT /RECOMMENDATION 0 H�v �y • r�RBPO��E� • To: Mayor & City Council Agenda Item # III I. D. From: Craig Larsen Consent ❑ City Planner Information Only ❑ Date: June 16, 1997 Mgr. Recommends ❑ To HRA Subject: S -97 -3, Final Plat Approval. 0 TO Council Doepkes Addition. 5920 West 701h Street. Action ❑ Motion x❑ Resolution ❑ Ordinance ❑ Discussion Recommendation: Staff recommends Final Plat Approval conditioned upon: 1. Subdivision Dedication Based on Unimproved Land Value of $175=000. 2. Utility Connection Charges. Info /Background: The Final Plat is identical to the Plat given Preliminary Approval on May 19, 1997. Subdivision No. ` 7-7-3, SUBDIVISION DEDICATION REPORT TO: City Council FROM: Planning Department Subdivision Name: . L C Land Size: / N Lo Land Valu /-'� at90 (By. Date: / � The developer of this subdivision has been required to A. Grant an easement over part of the land B. Dedicate % of the land V � C. Donate $ as a fee in lieu of land As a result of applying the following policy: A. Land required (no density or intensity may be used for the first 5% of land dedicated) 1. If property is adjacent to an existing park or playground and the addition beneficially expands the park or playground. 2. If property is six acres or will be combined with future dedications so that the end result will be a minimum of a six acre park. 3. If property abuts a natural lake, pond, or stream or wetland then protected by state or federal law. 4. If property is necessary for storm water holding or will be dredged or otherwise improved for storm water holding areas or ponds. 5. If the property is a place of significant natural, scenic or historic value. B. Cash Required 1. In all other instances than above. LOCATION MAP — — V / 60, IOi7 I IW3 I 1pp2 I Q006 4001 Lm sm 6IW 1.13 out � �, eWI dWx dooe dow mm l= �-- —1 I Ime \ 6IlI \ \ \ on — U17 all S 21 — _ IW7 d01J t— I sm — 6621 ' Qm d0o IOid QOl2 eaof e an am — Im am fAl1 an 7— — — 600.5 � dW1 Id10 dO2I� On ml I IW2 IW3 _ — L- 1 —I —j— �INNIS' out : ■.: T— G= / ■.::■: ■iii W2 I tow .: ■.:: . ■: — —, Will oYli /,y i ■i ■ ■■ ■. ■i i ■ i� ' c� ■. ■ ■■ ■■I 0006 9 i■i ■■iii■i / • ■ ■ • ■ ■ ■ .... 1 IoW ■.:' 6l00 SUBDIVISION NUMBER I S -97 -3 L O C A T 10 N 5920 West 70th Street REQUEST Create Two New Lots -T sly r =!e A 6m l 1"a �— r I 64120 16dI 1 6112 ism I EDINA PLANNING DEPARTMENT DOEPKES DIVISION r—'-. -ON- LINE OFTHE MT. SO ROOC Oi TM!SR %AOL THEEx OF SCC. !. T.II9. R.SI / S B9'S3 O5� I II 2 ;I ;I it W se L.J 0 L.1 ID UG - 1 =I I `- I l v f.) 'wA i!. L.I I IN I O Lf. Y STREET ; Eo E. II l9 .D j IN _., I LEET , ........ ANC u—" I ASEA,ws l.DWR w i w D • I °dJ 1 b — —1 voC Id I _. L� L•� W 33 I ■FINIS 9.00 FILET IN W1OTR IMO AOJOINIRO I LOT LINES AND E..Q 10.00 FEET IN W IOTM O 1 AMO AOJOIRIEO REAR LOT LINES NCO RIOMT OF N `VT`s I LINES AS SHOWN OH THE FLAT. ] O% 09.11 219.82 N 89'53'05 "W WEST 70TH I -TME LW TH LINE W THE SW .OF SEC.9.T.IIE,R.EI --- --- 219.92 - -- N B94i5'OS "W 2 ;I ;I it W se L.J 0 L.1 ID UG - 1 =I I `- I l v f.) 'wA i!. L.I I IN I O Lf. Y STREET ; Eo E. II l9 .D SCALE IN LEET , E DENOTES 1O0H UO.UNE.T FOUND. O CE—Es "I INC. — I. INC. IRON FIRM OHUME.T SET ANO u.R.ED ET 1411ESOTA REOISTRAiION YVN5E9 l ll5. ORIE. i.TION OF THIS BEARING sv]TEM Ic E.sae A. AN .ss91rto DAT... TO: FROM: VIA: REQUEST FOR PURCHASE Mayor & City Council John Keprios, Director of Park & Recreation Kenneth Rosland, City Manager SUBJECT: REQUEST FOR PURCHASE IN EXCESS OF $15,000 UA 1 t: 1 ti June, i vu r ITEM DESCRIPTION: Park Regrading Contract 97 -6PK Company 1. Friedges Landscaping, Inc. 2. Matt Bullock Contracting Company, Inc. 3. Bituminous Roadways, Inc. 4. 5. RECOMMENDED QUOTE OR BID: Friedges Landscaping, Inc. GENERAL INFORMATION: /1VCIVUl1 I I CIVI Amount of Quote or Bid 1. $466,298.00 2. $507,427.00 3. $656,000.00 4. 5. $110,755.00 (Pamela Park Only) This bid is for regrading of the ballfields at Pamela Park and Courtney Fields at Braemar Park. The total low bid is $466,298.00. The Courtney Field regrading bid item is much higher than staff estimated. The engineer's estimate for Courtney Fields is $182,000. The low bid for Courtney Fields is $355,543.00. The engineer's estimate for Pamela Park is $111,000. Staff recommends that only Pamela Park be awarded. Staff will reanalyze the regrading of Courtney Fields and will be rebid to be awarded in July. Signature The Recommended Bid is within budget Park & Recreation e l not within budget Jo An Wallin, Finance Director Kenneth Roslarid, City Manag REQUEST FOR PURCHASE TO: Mayor & City Council FROM: Ceil Smith, Assistant to City Manager VIA: Kenneth Rosland, City Manager SUBJECT: REQUEST FOR PURCHASE IN EXCESS OF $15,000 DATE: June 16 1997 AGENDA ITEM IV.0 ITEM DESCRIPTION: Insurance Renewals: Workers Compensation, General Liability, Equipment, Liquor and Pollution Company Amount of Quote or Bid 1. St. Paul Fire & Marine Company 1.$397,963 2. 2.$ 3. 3.$ 4. - 4.$ 5. 5.$ RECOMMENDED QUOTE OR BID: St. Paul Fire & Marine $397,963 GENERAL INFORMATION: Please see attached - staff is recommending St. Paul Fire and Marine. The market for municipal insurance is still somewhat limited. St. Paul continues to make substantial reductions and has delivered excellent service to the City. SijrfAidre The Recommended Bid is x within budget Administration Department not within budget John Wallin, FAnance Director Kenneth Ro"sldnd, City 1 William P. Homeyer, CPCU John R. Harris, CPCU Douglas H. Crowther' David W. Crowther Timothy S. Gonsior Fk'l "S•Hoinew Conlpmw 6800 France Ave. South Suite #145 Edina, MN 55435 612- 922 -0301 Fax 612 - 922 -7547 June 11, 1997 Ms. Cell Smith City of Edina 4801 W. 50th Street Edina MN 55424 Re: July 1 Insurance Renewal Dear Cell, 1 have enclosed an exhibit showing the St. Paul Companies renewal quote and the previous 2 year's premiums. The premium is down $108,322 from last year, and down $248,117 from July 1, 1995. The only other change is that the St. Paul Companies quoted $4,572 on the equipment (their quote was $5,500 less than Fireman's Fund renewal). Two of the reasons for the reduction are the soft commercial insurance market, and your excellent loss record. Cell, you and all of the employees of the City, should be commended for your attention to safety. As 1 mentioned to you before, I received an indication from the League of Cities that their quote would be in the same range as before, therefore, they preferred not . to quote this year. Thanks, William Homeyer City of Edina 1997/1998 1996/1997 Auto /GL/Liquor /Pollution 199,847 215,453 Workers Compensation 193,544 280,705 Equipment 4,572 10,127 Total 397,963 5061285 1995/1996 215,502 420,842 9,736 646,080 TO: FROM: VIA: REQUEST FOR PURCHASE Mayor & City Council Ceil Smith, Assistant to City Manager Kenneth Rosland, City Manager SUBJECT: REQUEST FOR PURCHASE IN EXCESS OF $15,000 UA I t: June ib iuvt ITEM DESCRIPTION: Insurance Renewals: Property Company 1. Travelers 2. Fireman's Fund 3. Reliance 4. Hartford 5. RECOMMENDED QUOTE OR BID: Travelers AUtNUA I I LM Amount of Quote or Bid 1.$41,750 2. $32,909 & $15,000 3. $37,725 & $15,000 4.$68,000 5. $41,750 GENERAL INFORMATION: Please see attached - staff is recommending the lowest quote for the total coverage. Note that the value of the property has increased while the premium continues to go down. The value shown reflects the newly completed park and fire projects. i 19na re The Recommended Bid is k within budget Administration Department not within budget Jo n Wallin, Fina ce Director Kenneth Roslan , City Manage Value Travelers 1996/1997 $52, 717, 325 Premium Total $43,960 Deductibles $5,000 $15, 000 Dome City of Edina Premium Comparison Travelers Hartford Fireman's Fund Reliance 1997/1998 1997/1998 1997/1998 1997/1998 $54,782,530 $54,782,530 $54,782,530 $54,782,530 % Change, Value plus 3.9% $41,750 $68,300 $32,909 ** $37,725 * ** % Change, Premium minus 5.3% $5,000 $5,000 $5,000 $5,000 $15,000 Dome $25,000 Dome Dome Excluded $20,000 Dome "a! Itt; P.c&-P 415,00o4o ** *$5,000,000 Primary coverage ** Quote does only. Quote does NOT include NOT include Crime Dome Coverage. Q4uWA&h0Y$IS,vhp ; -� frov i v-G Cv'r ►1'� Aon Risk Services To: Mayor & City Council From: Vince Bongaarts Traffic Safety Coordinator Date: June 16, 1997 Subject: Traffic Safety Staff Review of June 2, 1997 0 Recommendation: Recommend adoption of the report. Info /Background: REPORPRECOM M EN DATION Agenda Item # V.i Consent Information Only ❑ Mgr. Recommends ❑ Action ❑ El El To H RA To Council Motion Resolution Ordinance Discussion TRAFFIC SAFETY STAFF REVIEW MONDAY, JUNE 2, 1997 The staff review of traffic safety matters occurred on June 2, 1997. Staff present included the Assistant City Manager, Police Chief, City Engineer, Assistant City Engineer, and the Traffic Safety Coordinator. From that review, the below recommendations are provided. On each of the items, persons involved have been contacted and the staff recommendation has been discussed with them. They have also been informed that if they disagree with the recommendation or have additional facts to present, they can be included on the June 16, 1997, Council Agenda. SECTION A: Requests on which the staff recommends approval. 1. Request for some kind of signing to protect pedestrians /children when walking on Timber Ridge Road. The requester has concerns regarding the safety of pedestrians, especially children, when they are walking from one point of Timber Ridge Road to another. The road is a steep, curving, narrow roadway with no sidewalks. There has been only one reported accident since 1991, and that was a situation where a vehicle backed out of a driveway into another vehicle. No injuries were reported. The staff, after considerable discussion recommends that a "Winding Road" sign (W1 -5) with an addition of an Advisory Speed plate (W13 -1) of "20 MPH" be added to the "Dead End" sign at beginning of Timber Ridge Road. An advisory letter recommending caution was also sent to all the residents and is attached. 2. Several requests for the extension of the two hour parking limits already in place at 6300 York and 6301 -05 York to the requester's building at 6304 York. In March of 1997, the Traffic Safety staff recommended, and the Council approved 2 -hour parking restrictions for 6300 and 6301 -05 York because of TRAFFIC SAFETY STAFF REVIEW June 2, 1997 Page 2 parking problems generated by the employees of the nursing homes on Heritage Drive and the bus commuters to the downtown Minneapolis area. The 6304 York building is experiencing the same problems during the day in providing parking for guests, etc., during daytime hours. The staff recommends extension of the 2 hour parking restrictions to 6304 York Avenue. 3. The request was for some kind of signing to advise motorists to slow down and watch for children on Woodland Road. The requesters are concerned about what they believe is an increase in traffic and speed on Woodland Road. They feel there is traffic cutting through to France and W. 54th Street from Wooddale. Woodland Road curves from Wooddale to Brookview which runs north to W. 54t' Street with no "Stop signs, etc., to impede the motorist. They did acknowledge however, some of the problem may be the local residents. There have been no accidents reported on Woodland Road since 1991. Radar survey and traffic counts during two afternoon rush hours came up with very little traffic other than locals, and some speeds on Brookview in the 30 -36 MPH range. The staff recommends "Reverse Curve" sign (W1-4) with a 15 MPH" advisory speed plate (W13 -1) at the entrance to Woodland Road at Wooddale and also at the entrance to Woodland Road at the intersection of Brookview and Woodcrest Drive. An advisory letter was also sent to the residents urging caution. 4. Request to keep "No Parking Anytime" signs on the west side of 7100 Lynmar. In March, 1997, two of the three residents located on the west side of the 7100 block of Lynmar petitioned to have their side of Lynmar posted "No Parking" because they feared that heavy street parking generated by the funeral chapel at 7110 France would create traffic hazards on their street. It was mistakenly assumed by the Traffic Safety Coordinator that all three residents had agreed to this. The signs were approved and put up. After the signs were in place the third resident called and said they didn't agree with the petition and wanted parking in front of the house: It was then decided and approved to take the signs back down. This led to a letter to the City Manager by the other two arguing against this decision by the Traffic Safety Committee. The City Manager asked TRAFFIC SAFETY STAFF REVIEW June 2, 1997 Page 3 the Committee to find a solution. We then received a call from the third party saying they had changed their minds and would like signs stating "No Funeral Parking" and if that wasn't possible, they would go with the "No Parking Anytime ". They were told that the "No Funeral Parking" would be unenforceable. The staff recommends that the "No Parking Anytime" signs remain in place on the west side of the 7100 block of Lynmar. SECTION B: Requests on which the staff recommends denial of request. Request for a 3 -way "Stop" sign at Antrim Road and W. 69th Street. The requester feels that a 3 -way "Stop" is needed at W. 69tt' Street and Antrim Road to slow down traffic between Valley View Road and W..70tt' Street. Presently there is one "Stop" sign for westbound W. 69th Street at Antrim Road which is a 'T' -type intersection. The requester states that the speed, especially that of heavier vehicles, causes his house to vibrate and shake. The requester lives on Antrim Road two houses south of W. 69' Street and is not affected by having to enter Antrim Road from W. 69"' Street. There has only been one property damage accident report (1/20/93) since 1991 and that was very minor and no report was made to the State. Radar survey did show some 35+ to 40 MPH speeds on Antrim Road. Traffic using W. 69t' Street to enter Antrim Road was light and appeared to have no problems entering on to Antrim Road. The staff recommends denial of 3 -way "Stop" due to lack of warrants. The requester was advised to check with Street Department if he feels there is a problem with road construction. 2. Request for 4 -way "Stop" signs at W. 61' Street and Kellogg. Requesters are concerned about the traffic and speed generated from the business area at Kellogg and Valley View Road. TRAFFIC SAFETY STAFF REVIEW June 2, 1997 Page 4 . There are already posted "Yield" signs for northbound and southbound Kellogg Avenue at W. 61st Street. There is also a sign at each end of the 6100 block of Kellogg designating pedestrian traffic. There are no sidewalks for the 6100 block of Kellogg. There has been only one reportable accident at this intersection since 1991 and that was 5/2/97. This accident involved. minor injury with no transport to the hospital. Both'vehicles had been northbound on Kellogg Avenue from Valley View Road. The first or front vehicle was making a left turn from northbound Kellogg to westbound W. 61st Street when struck by the second vehicle which was going to pass the first vehicle on the left, in the intersection as the first vehicle started its left turn. There were charges pending for underage drinking by second driver but not enough BAC for DWI charges. Several speed surveys and traffic counts were done during AM and PM rush hours that indicated no heavy traffic and no excessive speed. The surveys were as follows: 5/21/97, Wednesday, 4:15 PM to 4:45 PM, northbound Kellogg approaching W. 611, 19 vehicles, 1 @ 32 MPH, 1 @ 31 MPH and the rest under 28 MPH. 5/21/97, Wednesday, 7:20 AM to 8:20 AM, northbound Kellogg approaching W. 61st, 8 vehicles, nothing over 25 MPH. 5/22/97, Thursday, 7:30 AM to 8:30 AM, northbound Kellogg approaching W. 61st Street, 5 vehicles, 1 @ 36 MPH, the rest under 29 MPH. 5/23/97, Friday, 7:30 AM to 8:30 AM, 2 vehicles northbound Kellogg approaching W. 61st Street, 10 vehicles southbound Kellogg, all under 30 MPH. 6/3/97, Tuesday, 4:30 PM to 5:15 PM, northbound Kellogg approaching W. 61st, 23 vehicles, 1 @ 33 MPH, -1 @ 30 MPH, rest under 28 MPH. 6/4/97, Wednesday, 3:30 PM to 4:30 PM, northbound Kellogg approaching W. 61st Street, 17 vehicles, 1 @ 31 MPH, the rest at 30 MPH and under. The staff recommends denial of "Stop" signs for W. 61st Street and Kellogg due to lack of warrants. TRAFFIC SAFETY STAFF REVIEW June 2, 1997 Page 5 3. Request for 3 -way "Stop" or other signing to slow down traffic on W. 601' Street at Bernard Place. This is a 'T' -type intersection with Bernard Place ending at W. 60' Street. Bernard Place does have a "Stop" sign at W. 60' Street. There is occasional 30+ MPH speed on W. 60th Street before school in the morning and after school, in afternoon but over all it is a pretty quiet street. There is no accident history for this intersection back to 1991. There are lilac bushes that do block the view of the "Stop" sign as you approach W. 601 Street on Bernard Place. The staff recommends denial of the 3 -way "Stop" due to lack of warrants for such. Staff does recommend to have the lilac bushes trimmed so as to be in compliance with clear view regulations. SECTION C: 1. The request for some type of signing or signals to control traffic at Vernon and Gleason Avenue. As reported in the May, 1997 Traffic Safety Review, this request.was actually made for the first time in 1996. It was referred to Hennepin County for study back then as it is under their jurisdiction. Since this review in May, Hennepin County says they're having a few problems getting their internal group together on. this situation. There seems to be some disagreement internally at Hennepin County on what should be done. There also seems to be a need for a new warrant study for any traffic lights that might be considered, as the past study it now seems didn't meet the needed warrants. There is agreement however, with some of Hennepin County people that there is a problem during rush hour. The staff has decided to draft a formal letter to Hennepin County indicating the City's desire to get something going on this. 2. The Traffic Safety staff discussed the letter received by Mayor Smith from a concerned resident of Edina on May 14, 1997. TRAFFIC SAFETY STAFF REVIEW June 2, 1997 Page 6 The resident's concern was W. 70' Street between Highway 100 and France Avenue South. In her letter she described her street, W. 70' Street, as a "residential street that is becoming the quick alternate to 62 or 494 ". In essence, W. 70' Street has been a large arterial roadway since Southdale was built and was used as an arterial before then. When Highway 100 was reconstructed, W. 70th Street was designated along with W. 77' Street and W. 50"' Street, as the three arterial roadways connecting east and west Edina with Highway 100. W. 70" Street has been designed for heavy use and is considered the midpoint feeder roadway of Edina, W. 77th Street being the feeder on the south and W. 50' Street,the feeder to the north. The volume of traffic on w. 70th Street is expected to grow not diminish. The traffic control light at W. 70' and Cornelia was put in at much expense in studies and equipment at the urging of the neighborhood groups of the W. 70th Street area. The City spent a considerable amount of funds to contract a private feasibility study just to be impartial in the final decision regarding that intersection and the upgrading of W. 70' Street. The Police Department does try to monitor the speed when they can on W. 70th Street but the demand for speed enforcement has increased all over the City and their resources for enforcement have been stretched to their limits. The trailer with speed monitor approved by the Council should help a lot in educating drivers regarding their speed on roadways like W. 70`h Street. During the end of March and beginning of April, 1997, eight radar surveys were done for eastbound and westbound W. 70' Street at West Shore. These surveys consisted of four surveys between 8:45 Am and 9:15 AM in the morning and four between 3:45 PM and 4:15 PM in the afternoon one on Monday, one on Tuesday, three on Wednesday, two on Thursday, and one on Friday. During this total of four hours, there was a total of 3,156 vehicles or 789 vehicles an hour, or 13+ vehicles a minute eastbound and westbound on W. 70' Street. The survey showed the following: 901 vehicles (29 %) were 30 MPH and under 1548 vehicles (49 %) were between 31 MPH and 35 MPH 615 vehicles (19% were between 36 MPH and 40 MPH 92 vehicles (3 %) were over 40 MPH with the highest one being 48 MPH TRAFFIC SAFETY STAFF REVIEW June 2, 1997 Page 7 There were 98 more vehicles westbound than eastbound but the speeds were consistent for both directions. Since 1991 there have been 24 accidents on W. 70' Street between West Shore Drive and France Avenue that have required reports to the, State. Fourteen were personal injury type and ten were property damage only. There were an additional nineteen minor property damage accidents reported to the Edina Police Department that didn't require reports to the State bringing the total accidents reported to the Edina Police to 43 since 1991. Of the twenty four accidents requiring reports, six involved turns, thirteen were rear end type, and five were failure to yields. Adding "Stop" signs to w. 70' Street between France Avenue and Highway 100 would cause considerable disruption to the traffic flow, encourage "Stop" sign violations, and cause a .false sense of security to pedestrians and other traffic. The Traffic Safety staff will continue to monitor this situation and will try to make recommendations to the Council whenever a workable solution within the budget and limits of the City are found. W. 70th Street is doing just what it was intended and designed for; moving large amounts of traffic from one point to another as expeditiously as possible. May 20, 1997 City of Edina Dear Resident of Timber Ridge Road: It has recently been brought to our attention that Timber Ridge Road may present some hazards to any pedestrians (especially children) who might be walking from one point to another on this road. Timber Ridge Road is a somewhat unique road with its steep winding grade, somewhat blind curves, and literally no shoulder, whereupon it becomes very confining and pedestrian unfriendly. Because of this "pedestrian unfriendliness" there is an added responsibility of drivers to use more caution than normal when negotiating this roadway. It's a time to be fully aware of what we are doing and not contemplating the past or future to include talking on our car phones. By staying alert it may give us those previous few seconds to take evasive action when that unexpected situation may arise. Anyone who has ever been involved in an accident, no matter how small, knows of the trauma and stress it can produce, which magnifies when the object hit is a person. It is one of those life experiences we can all do without. Normally, I wouldn't write a letter like this. The process would be to use enforcement, suggest sidewalks, etc. Unfortunately, Timber Ridge Road with all its "uniqueness" is not exactly accessible to much enforcement and it has no shoulders to speak of for sidewalks. So I'm hoping that the implied message of this letter will be passed on by you, the residents, to your families and acquaintances that use Timber Ridge Road and maybe with everyone's cooperation we can prevent a harmful event from occurring. Sincerely, y�zez4 �1 Vince Bongaarts Traffic Safety Coordinator City of Edina VB /clf City Hall (612) 927 -8861 4801 WEST 50TH STREET FAX (612) 927 -7645 EDINA. MINNESOTA 55424 -1394 TDD (612) 927 -5461 w A . rrrtr J, June 9, 1997 Dear Resident of Woodland Road: City of Edina It has been brought to our attention that there has been occasional instances of local drivers (residents) going too fast on Woodland Road causing some concern for pedestrian safety. Woodland Road is a narrow street with sharp curves, no sidewalks, and many children. It,has the potential for problems, however, up to this point it has been a relatively accident free road. Woodland Road is also a very hard road to enforce traffic laws. That is why I am sending out this letter to the residents hoping for cooperation in making your neighborhood a bit safer. If. you have ever been in an accident you know the trauma and stress it can cause, no matter how small the accident. And, if you ever hit a child (let alone any person), can you imagine what you would go through both mentally and physically. I c_ an assure you that it is something you never want to experience. When you are driving please put your self on guard to what's going on around you, especially in areas such as Woodland Road where something or someone could pop out in front of you with no warning for you.to take evasive action. 20 MPH in the curves is too fast. Save yourself some grief and feel good when you get to your destination. I'm hoping you will pass this message on to your family, friends and acquaintances that use Woodland Road and with everyone's cooperation we can prevent a harmful event from happening. Sincerely, Vince Bongaart Traffic Safety Coordinator City of Edina VB /clf City Hall (612) 927 -8861 4801 WEST 50TH STREET FAX (612) 927 -7645 EDINA, MINNESOTA 55424 -1394 TDD (612) 9275461 o e REPORT/RECOMMENDATION o v �y To: Mayor & City Council From: Francis Hoffman City Engineer Date: June 16, 1997 Subject: Local Initiatives Municipal Agreement Program - 1988 Fiscal Year Recommendation: Agenda Item # V.B. Consent ❑ Information Only ❑ Mgr. Recommends ❑ To HRA 0 To Council Action ® Motion ❑ Resolution ❑ Ordinance ❑ Discussion Review proposed Municipal Agreement projects with Mn /DOT and authorize staff to develop a construction plan for Council approval. Info /Background: During 1996, staff reviewed potential projects for the Mn /DOT Municipal Agreement Program. This program is developed by Mn /DOT to allow local agencies (county or city) to submit projects for potential state participation. These types of projects are projects which would not reach a high priority on the Mn /DOT construction list. These typically are traffic management/ safety or capacity improvements abutting a highway or freeway interchange. Staff submitted two potential projects for review. The first project was an interchange improvement at W. 77th Street and Trunk Highway 100. This project would essentially provide five lanes over Trunk Highway 100 between the Pentagon Park Driveway (on the east) and Metro Boulevard (on the west). This would be the first leg of a traffic management/capacity. . improvement for the 77th Street corridor from Parklawn to East Bush Lake Road. This traffic corridor lies east of the recently discussed W. 78'h Street Corridor. This project has a preliminary estimated cost of $640,000 of which Mn /DOT would provide approximately $160,000 towards the project. The balance of the project would be funded by state aid funds. This project received favorable review form Mn /DOT and would be eligible for construction between 7/1/97 and 6/30/98, subject to City Council approval. Report/Recommendation Agenda Item V.B. Page Two Attached is a brief description of the projects as listed on the Municipal Agreement Program. Staff will present more detail on this issue at the Council Meeting. A second project which has received approval involves the France Avenue/ Crosstown Highway 62 Interchange. This involves'Hennepin County, Mn /DOT and Edina. The preliminary cost estimate is $400,000. The cost split would be approximately 50% Mn /DOT, 25% Hennepin County and 25% City of Edina. The Mn /DOT staff has indicated that the City should proceed with the two projects at this time. `i Y10 REPORT /RECOMMENDATION To: Mayor & City Council Agenda Item # v.c. From: Francis Hoffman J�ipJl Consent ❑ City Engineer y/0 Information Only ❑ Date: June 16, 1997 Mgr. Recommends ❑ To HRA Subject: I- 494/TH 169 0 To Council Interchange Update Action ❑ Motion ❑ Resolution ❑ Ordinance D Discussion Recommendation: Review current activity. Info /Background: The Minnesota Department of Transportation (Mn /DOT) is reconstructing the 1-494/ TH 169 interchange. The Mn /DOT project involved purchasing some land from Edina for this project. Concurrently, the Cities of Bloomington and Edina were doing a traffic corridor study along W. 78' Street. The corridor study indicated that a frontage road should be built along TH 169 to Valley View Road. The current Mn /DOT interchange project did not contemplate this City project. The Mn /DOT staff was currently purchasing land from the City. The City proposed that the City and Mn /DOT exchange land. The City would build the frontage road on Mn /DOT property and Mn /DOT will build a water storage pond on City property. The resultant effect would be to allow a building site to remain on the City property. Attached is a sketch of the City proposal. Mn /DOT is reviewing the City proposal and believes it feasible at this point of review. 1 - 1 r-W6-is- N. S. P. EASEMENT ^ i EDINA PROPERTY � —� 12.36 ACRES �'-QO ACRES ABOVE EL. 8321 �\ 116000 "SO. FT. SITE \� WOODS I \ EXCAUA D 3.0 ACRE POND BOTTOM 23.0 I NORMAL 28.0 I 1 FL 32.0 � I I \ I w � � W / I Yis / as 94 X� w T Aq Np OODS _ .MnDOT PROPERTY FOR FR. RD. 1. 45 C. �� no — b w -- ��� IUD o - - - -_ �T i o e REPORT/RECOMMENDATION �4, o �y To: From: Mayor & City Council Francis Hoffman Agenda Item # V.D. City Engineer Consent ❑ Date: June 16, 1997 Information Only El Mgr. Recommends ❑ To HRA Subject: Minnehaha Creek � To Council Watershed District Regional Ponding Action ❑ Motion ❑ Resolution ❑ Ordinance 0 Discussion Recommendation: Discuss general concept. Info /Background: During the review of the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District Water Resources Management Plan, the capital improvements program identified regional water detention basins needed to be constructed within sub - basins of the District for water quality enhancement. The plan also identified projects' needs along Minnehaha Creek for erosion control and stabilization. Staff has met with representatives of the Board and their staff to discuss cooperative projects. City staff has identified a location along Minnehaha Creek in Pamela Park which is located along W. 58' Street on the northerly end. The City will be required to develop a stormwater management plan now that both Nine Mile and Minnehaha Creek Watershed Districts have approved plans by the Board of Soil and Water Resources. It appears that a water quality pond in the Pamela Park area would also serve to reduce flood potential. Also, staff has discussed developing a long -range maintenance plan for the creek at the same meetings. �1 Report/Recommendation Agenda Item V.D. Page Two The cooperative agreement would in effect have a water quality pond ro established with the District that would be used to serve as mitigation or Cam City requirements in other parts of the watershed in which ponding could not be do i the lack of available space. This concept is similar to what Mn /DOT is doing ne due s to to creating wetland credits to be used on other Mn /DOT projects. This is thn regards behind the stormwater ponds on the Mn /DOT 1- 4941TH 169 interchange p r e idea 9 oject. Currently, staff is conducting a feasibility study on the Pamela Park area to determine if to the requirements can be met for a water quality facility. If the project is determined be feasible, staff would recommend entering into a cooperative agreement Minnehaha Creek Watershed District. The District would finance a ma'ori with the Project as identified in the District Management Plan. majority of the Staff will provide additional details at the Council meeting. IN church 5 RD S T C) �Q O w w ;� _, st peters lutheran = school W 54 TH ST GOLF TER ° 5 h P > F— V) o 3 edin u Q --j cc_ o => J J w 6 commv ity FULLER 3 ST Co �Fw LAKEVIEW ° -- DR w Q > J O luthe an w m a. _ ¢ ' x ° Y a church W 55 TH o ST �- ° --OAK DR W 55 TH w z Q ,U FyOP ° LEX I N6 0 VE S r park y m Q o o Q� W U PARK Q L A � baptist c)- Off' O SOUTH SI W 55TH 3-- 55TH ST 56TH ST X00 Q� Q HEBREW v BURIAL o W TTHI °z TOWER ST KELLOGG OO ASSN. Q -- PL �p m Q W 57TH WOODLAND RD C EN CONCORD h0O P�WOODCREST O' O PA w �p w -- SOUTH WR 5 T H S T PHI LBROOK LA Q -- < VIEW JP HIGH w L > w w GRIMES a w o CONCORD -- Q -- Q -- _ _ - Z c SCHOOL o T I AL R G w, W 59tH sr SITE L z W 59TH `` u, x Lid ° 4D Q Y w Q 60TH ST Q _ x W 60 TH I: o O = 60 6�ST Vq o Cc w sT z 61ST ST CHOWEN 0 /AG LA o O�PQ > Q F m ` W 62N ST W 52ND ST W 62 D S T z uj Q GARP\SON LA Q 3o HERI T 3RD ¢ ST NANCY w J x Z U LA — _ -- 3 U j w0 = ¢ Y p w w W Ld QD U U 7-- J Q W _ J 'IT POSE w > w > _ I-- w a 3 LAKE W � � m Y FAIRVIEW ° J SOUTHDALE c) HOSPITAL 65TH ST Q w P 3 cr STEP BY S C) -- m MONTESSQW ,1� ow e y \. f� —k lees REPORT /REC0MMFmnAT1nN To: MAYOR AND COUNCIL Agenda Item # V.E. From: GORDON L. HUGHES Consent ❑ Information Only ❑ Date: JUNE 16, 1997 Mgr. Recommends ❑ To HRA Subject: ® To Council AGREEMENT WITH KMC Action © Motion TELECOM, INC. ❑ Resolution ❑ Ordinance ❑ Discussion Recommendation: Authorize Mayor and Manager to execute attached agreement. Info /Background: KMC Telecom, Inc. is a privately -held company which specializes in development of local telecommunications networks. KMC provides alternative local telecommunication networks which offer state -of -the -art fiberoptic systems, primarily for businesses. KMC has approached the staffs of the City of Edina and Bloomington, seeking permission to install fiberoptics cable within various street rights -of -way in Bloomington and Edina. These cables would be located primarily in rightsof -way adjoining office and industrial portions of the City. According to KMC, such cable would be located within conduits that would be installed within the boulevard areas of the rights -of -way. Cables would be installed via directional boring machinery, thus limiting the necessity for open trenching. A Shortly after we received the request from KMC, Governor Carlson signed into law Chapter 123 which clarifies the rights and obligations of cities with respect to the management and regulation of telecommunications carriers using public rights -of -way. This new law clearly provides that telecommunications carriers are entitled to use public rights -of -way for their systems. Cities may regulate installations through the issuance of permits and may charge fees for actual costs associated with permit applications, inspections and restoration. Cities' fees must be competitively neutral and must be proportionately allocated among all the users of the rights -of -way. The law specifically prohibits cities from demanding in -kind services as a condition of permit issuance. For example, cities may not require free cabling or the provision of free telephone or data services as a condition of issuing the permit. (A short synopsis of the new law is attached to this report.) Staff will begin working shortly on revisions to our right -of -way ordinance to bring it into compliance with the requirements of the new telecommunications law. However, the time necessary to complete the draft and adoption of the ordinance effectively would require .KMC to postpone their proposed installation until the next construction season. Their hope is to commence construction of the Bloomington /Edina system during the summer of 1997. Therefore, KMC proposes to enter into agreements with the cities of Bloomington and Edina, which would permit them to proceed with their installation prior to the adoption of the new ordinance. The City Attorneys of Bloomington and Edina, as well as City staff, have worked with KMC to prepare the attached agreement for your consideration. Among other things, this agreement will require KMC to comply with the requirements of a new ordinance and to reimburse us for any new fees that may be established by a new ordinance. Similar agreements have previously been negotiated with the cities of Eden Prairie, Chanhassen and Chaska to permit fiberoptic installation in those cities. Staff believes that this agreement will allow KMC to proceed with an installation that will be beneficial to businesses in the City while safeguarding our present and future abilities to manage the right -of -way for telecommunication providers. We therefore recommend that the Council authorize execution of the agreement. I I i I i rized emergency vehicles must use both a siren and a light. Effective August 1, 1997. This chapter establishes that peace officers may arrest the driver if the officer has probable cause that the driver has; within the past four hours, driven a motor vehicle through a column of school children crossing a street or has driven past a school safety patrol member or adult crossing guard who is holdine awofficial signal in the stop position. In addition, passing a school bus on the right hand side when it is dis- playing its flashing amber signals is a misdemeanor punish- able with a fine of not less than $300. Effective August 1, 1997. Speed limit increase Chapter 143 increases speed limits on rural interstates from 65 to 70 miles per hour and rural non - interstate free- ways and expressways and urban interstates from 55 to 65 miles per hour. Effective July 1, 1997. Telecommunications Use of public rights -of -way by telecommunications carriers Chapter 123 pertains to local government authority to manage and recover actual costs for the excavation, disrup- tion, degradation and management of use by telecommunica- tions service providers of local rights -of -way. Local units of government are authorized to require com- panies that own or control facilities used for transporting telecommunications and other voice or data information (other than regulated cable systems) to register, obtain neces- sary permits and pay fees and provide construction perfor- mance bonds and insurance. The act also requires users to comply with installation, construction, location and reloca- tion requirements and to coordinate and time ROW projects. Cities can collect facility location data from users to develop a mapping system. . Under the act, cities can recover actual management costs, including those associated with permit applications, inspect- ing, moving user equipment during the city's work in the right -of -way, determining whether restoration is adequate and restoring work that has been inadequately performed. Fees and other obligations must recognize engineering, con- struction, operation and other related requirements and stan- dards that apply to various users and all fees must be com- petitively neutral and apply to all right -of -way users, includ- ing local units of government. ROW restoration Users are required to restore the right -of -way and sur- rounding areas or local government may require users to re- imburse them for costs of surface restoration that the local (2overnment itself carries out. Cities may impose a degrada- tion fee if a telecommunications right -of -way user chooses 1997 Law Summaries not to restore the right -of -way and may deny or revoke per - mits'if users do not comply with right -of -way regulations. Task Force Convened MPUC is also required to convene a task force composed of proportionately equal numbers of 1) engineers and other experts representing local government and 2) affected utili- ties and other right -of -way users. The task force must make recommendations to the MPUC by November 1, 1997, con- cerning standards as well as the calculation of degradation costs, establishment of mapping systems and high- density corridors, indemnification of local government by right -of- way users and the terms of a model ordinance regulating use of local rights -of -way. MPUC must incorporate those rec- ommendations into statewide construction standards to be adopted by March 1, 1998. The act does not permit local telecommunications fran- chise fees for the use of the rights -of -way nor does it permit in -kind services in lieu of payment of permit fees. In addi- tion, telephone companies which provide cable TV services are subject to the same franchise requirements, fees, and public, educational and government access obligations to which cable companies are subject under Chapter 238. If there is a conflict between the language of a cable franchise agreement and a local right -of -way regulations, the terms of the franchise agreement prevail. Use, validity and security of electronic signatures and messages Chapter 178 is intended to minimize the incidence.of forged digital signatures and fraud in electronic commerce and authorizes the Secretary of State to carry out the respon- sibilities of issuing, suspending or revoking computer -based records that identify the subscriber, the subscriber's public key, and the certification authority issuing it and its digital signature as well as notifying the subscriber listed of the contents of the certificate. Once another certification author- ity is licensed which allows a transition to private enterprise, the Secretary of State will discontinue this role. In the mean- time, the Secretary of State is to maintain a database contain- ing a record for each licensed certification authority, publish the database contents, and adopt rules and establish fees to carry out the provisions of the act. The Secretary of State is authorized to adopt rules to implement the act to be effective July 1, 1998. Telecommunication Services Purchasing Cooperatives Chapter 208 authorizes creation of telecommunication ser- vices purchasing cooperatives to provide advance telecom- munication services at reduced wholesale rates to members. No resale or sublease of those services is allowed, but the purchasing cooperative is also not required to provide uni- form rates for members. Cooperatives may be formed to purchase such services by aggregating demand and negotiat- Page 17 This Ag the City 1545 11V. 077 r. Gnu ENCROACHMENT Ar2REEMENT imentlis made as of the day of , 1997, and between Edina, Minnesota ( "City "), and KMC TELECOM INC., ( "KMC "), a corporation to doh business within the State of Minnesota, and having Its principal office at 206 „Sulte 300, Bedminster, NJ 07921.2567. RECITALS WHEREAS KMC1 is a corporation duly organized, and existing under the laws of the State of Delawa a and authorized by the Federal Communications Commission to provide . Telecommunications Services and; WHEREAS, City and KMC discussed and negotiated the terms of this Agreement during the monthi of March and April 1997 and reached agreement just prior to the May 9, 1997 effective d to ofd new State legislation (S.F. No. 442) which amends portions of Chapter 237 of MI nesota Statutes and provides additional clarification regarding municipal authority of er public rights -of -way; and WHEREAS KMCi has voluntarily chosen to enter Into this Encroachment Agreement with City and c mply with the provisions contained herein with full knowledge of S.F. No. 442 and the a endments to Chapter 237 of Minnesota Statutes; and WHEREAS City has authority to grant encroachment to its rights -of -way only as expressly specified in applicable law, however, City makes no representation, guaranty or warranty with respect to its title or interest in said rights -of -way, NOW, TH�REFORE, in consideration of the recitals and the mutual consideration contained herein!, City and KMC agree as follows: DEFINITIONS CITY mean the City of Edina, Minnesota. Fiber Votid Network Facilities or Facilities means fiber optic cables, conduits, converters, splice box I s, cabinets, handhplds, manholes, vaults, equipment, drains. surface location markers, a purtenances, and related facilities located by KMC or to be located by KMC in the Public Rights -of -way of City and used or useful for the transmission of Telecommunications Services. Law- meant any local, state or federal statute, ordinance, rule, regulation, code, license, certificate, franchise, permit, writ, ruling, award, executive order, directive, requirement, Injunction, judgement, decree or other order Issued, executed, entered or deemed applicable y any governmental authority. Public Rlgflts ey means the area on, below, or above a public roadway, highway, street, cartway, bicycle lane, and public sidewalk in which the City has Interest, including other dedicated rights -of -way for travel purposes and utility easements of the City. A public right- oflway does not Include the airwaves above a public right -of -way with regard to cellular or other non -wire telecommunications or broadcast service. Telecommunications Services shall be defined consistently with the definition found In the Communications Act of 1934, as amended. NO. 6139 P. 3 /8. ONSTRUCTION, MAINTENANCE AND OPERATION OF THE SYSTEM I - License and encroachment. Subject to the provisions. of this Agreement, and all applicable Law, the City hereby grants a non - exclusive encroachment to KMC to constr�ct, install, maintain, locate, move, operate, place, protect, reconstruct, reins II, relocate, remove and replace the Facilities in, under, over, across and along the Pu3llc Rights -of -Way for the purpose of providing Telecommunications Services, Said aIsement is not assignable without the express written permission of the City. This Agreement shall not be sold, transferred, leased, assigned or disposed of, IncludlPg but not limited to, by force or voluntary sale, merger, voluntary or involu tary bankruptcy, consolidation, receivership or other means without the prior written consent of - the City, which consent shall be unreasonably withheld. No consent from the City shall be required for a transfer in trust, mortgage, or other Instrument of hypothecation, in whole or In part, to secure an indebtedness, or for a proforma transfer to a corporation, partnership or other entity controlling, controlled by or u�der common control with KMC. The tom of said encroachment shall be for an initial period of five years commencing on the date! of the signing, of this Agreement, The parties agree that the encroachment shall automatically renew for additional five (b) year periods, unless elther arty gives a minimum of ninety (90) days advance written notice to the other of intent to terminate prior to the end of said five (S) year period. 2. No Interference. Except as permitted by applicable Law and this Agreement, In the performances and exercise of Its rights and obligations under this Agreement, KMC shall n t interfere In any manner with the existence and operation of any and all private and Public Rights -of -Way, sanitary sewers, water mains, storm drains, gas mains, poles; overhead and underground electric and telephone wires, electrollers, cable televisions wires, and other telecommunications, utility, municipal and other public !property without the approval of the owner(s) of the affected property or properties. KMC agrees to use existing poles for Installation and will not install new poles. 9. No Property Entgrest., This Agreement is not a grant by City of any fee simple property interest and I's made subject and subordinate to the prior and continuing right of City to use Ithe PUbllc Rights -of -Way as a street and any other public use and for the purpose of 'laying, installing, maintaining, repairing, protecting, replacing and removing sanitary sewers, water mains, storm drains, gas mains, poles and for other municipal uses and with right of ingress and egress, along, over, across and In said Public Riahtslof - -Way. 4. Application for Permits_ KMC shall apply for a permit for all work and each job within the Public Rights -of -Way. KMC shall furnish detailed plans of the work and other such information as required by City and by Law, and shall pay all processing, field marking, eng�lnesring, inspection, security and any other fees prior to issuance of required permits In accordance with the rates In effect at the time of payment subject to Section 16 hereof. KMC agrees to place its Facility underground In all locations where the City requires other telecommunications providers to do the same, In those areas of the City where KMC's Facilities are located on above ground transmission or distribution facilities of a public utility or telecommunications provider, KMC agrees to relocate or install its Facilities underground at its own cost and within 120 days of the City's request when; I 2 i r".4/d i a. The utility, on whose poles KMC has attached Its Facilities, Is required to relocate its facilities underground; or b. The City requires all telecommunications providers to relocate their above ground facilities underground within the Rights -of -Way subject to the i permit. Said Im'prove'ments shall be constructed and installed In accordance with the Law. i 5, issuance of !Permits. . Upon execution of this Agreement and performance of the _. __obligations contained In the Agreement- by KMC, City will Issue all permits necessary to the Installation of KMC's telecommunications system, in accordance with the City's permitting procedures as may from time to time be amended in accordance with applicIble later. 6, Manner of Construction. The construction, installation, operation, maintenance and remov I of'said Fiber Optic Network Facilities shall be accomplished without cost or expene to City and in such a manner so as not to endanger persons or property, or unreaspnably obstruct travel on any road, walk or other access thereon within said Public �Ights' -of -Way. KMC s all complete construction of its Fiber Optic Network Facilities in a timely manna . KMC shall use reasonable efforts to avoid disturbing public streets, roads or sidewalks that have been constructed by the City within five (5) years of application by KMC f9'' r Pultillc Rights -of -Way permits. KMC shall also use reasonable efforts to coordinate its construction schedule with the City's schedule of public improvements to mini mlze disruption and damage to City streets and other public Improvements. i 7. Within sixty (60) days of completion of construction, KMC shall provide the City with an accuSate map or maps certifying the location of all Facilities within the Public Rights -pf -Way. as -built In a format consistent with the City's electronic mapping system 8. Condition of Facilities.. KMC agrees to keep said Fiber Optic Network Facilities in good and safe condition and free from any nuisance. 9. Bond,.' KMC shall post and maintain a performance bond In the amount of fifty thousand dollars ($50,000) which shall remain in force . until sixty (80) days after substantial completlon of KMC's construction, as determined by the City, including restoration of Public Rights- of:Way and other property affected by the construction. The bo d shall be issued In a form and by a bonding company approved by the City. 10. Authorization. KMC shall at all times provide City with sufficient information to estaplish that it has obWned all required government approvals and permits to constr4ct and operate the Facilities and to offer and provide Telecommunications Services including any certification or other documentation required by the Public Utllitiesi Commission of the State of Minnesota or any other regulatory entity. 11. Relocation for City Purposes. KMC shall relocate, in cooperation with, and at no chargelto, the City, any Fiber Optic Network Facility Installed, used and maintained under this Agreement If and when made necessary by any lawful change of grade, alignment or' width of any Public Rights -of -Way, the construction, maintenance or operation of any underground subway or viaduct by City and /or the construction, maintenance or operation of any other City underground or above- ground facilities. i KMC a�grees;to relocate or Install Its Facilities underground at Its own cost and within 120 days of the City's request. 12. Removal and Abandonment. If any portions of the Fiber Optic Network Facilities covered under this Agreement are no longer used by KMC, or are abandoned for a periodlin excess of twelve (12) months, KMC shall notify city and City shall determine whether KMC shall elther promptly vacate and remove the Facilities at KMC's expense or abandon some or all of the Facilities in place to the extent permitted by Law. 13. Restoration of Public Rights -of -way_ When removal or relocation of the Facilities are requiredun ar this Agreement, KMC shall, after the removal or relocation of the Fiber Optic etwork Facilities, at its own cost, repair and return the Public Rights -of -Way on whlch `1he Facilities were located to the same or better condition existing before such removal or relocation. The work must be completed as promptly as the weather permits. If KMC does not properly perform and complete the work, remove all dirt, rubbish, equipment, and material, and restore the Public Rights -of -Way to the same or better condition, the City may restore the Public Rights -of -Way to the same condition at the expense of KMC. KMC must, upon' demand, pay to the City the direct and indirect cost of the work done for or performed by the City, Including but not limited to, the City's administrative costs. 14. Damage. KMC shall be responsible for damage to City street pavements, existing utilities, curbs, gutters and` sidewalks, due to KMC's Installation maintenance, repair or re oval of its Fiber Optic Network Facilities in Public Rights -of -Way, and shall . repairr,, replace and restore the damaged Public Rights -of -Way at Its sole expense and subJec to approval by City, 15. O u e ' KMC shall pay all permit and, user fees or any other fees to the City in accordance with -applicable Law. KMC expressly acknowledges and agressl that City shall have the right to impose upon KMC additional fees. and/or dama9es for; KMC's occupation. of the Public Rights -of -Way to the extent not inconsistent with applicable Law. It is intended that, subsequent to the execution of this Agreement the City will adopt an ordinance Imposing comprehensive requirements on telecommunication rights -of -way users such as KMC pursuant to recently enacted state legislation (Laws of Minnesota 1997 - Chapter 123). KMC further! acknowledges and agrees to be bound 'by any subsequent ordinance or regulation adopted by the City with respect to the City's lawful control over Its Public Rights -of- -Way and hereby agrees and acknowledges that such ordinance or regulation, in any permit and fee requirements, will be retroactively applied to all telecommunications providers, Including KMC, subject to the Minnesota Laws 1997, Chapter 123, who apply for City rights -of -way permits after the effective date of this Agreement. Any permit or user fees paid by KMC prior to the adoption of a subsequent ordinance shall be credited against those fees required by a subsequent ordinance, "if there are any inconsistencies between the terms of this Agreement and those of any subsequent ordinance or regulation the terms of any subsequent ordinance or regulation shall take precedence. KMC voluntarily agrees to reimburse the City In an amount not to exceed ;2,5000 for the City's outs of pocket costs and expense Incurred to process KMC's request. The City shall provide KMC with .copies of all Invoices relating to said costs and expenses and KMC shall only provide reimbursement for costs and expenses actually incurred by the City. 4 IS. Non-di, wvmlnatory Fees. With respect to the City's imposition of any fees or charges not sp cifically required in this Agreement, KMC shall only be required to pay any fee or cha rge to the extent permitted by law and which is imposed In a competitively neutra and; nondiscriminatory manner with respect to other similarly situated telecommunications providers. 17. Indemi contra City) a and al costs reasor or In p except omissi 18. Insurai shall i Insurai of. a. a GENERAL TERMS ificatffon. KMC, jointly and severally, for itself, Its successors, agents, tars and employees, agrees to indemnify, defend (with counsel acceptable to d hold harmless City, its officers, employees and agents from and against any clalik demands, losses, damages, liabilities, fines, and penalties, and all nd expenses Incurred In connection therewith, Including, without limitation, able attorney's fees and costs of defense arising directly or Indirectly, In whole rt out of any breach by KMC of Its obligations described in this Agreement, to the extent arising from the City's willful action or negligent acts or L KMC and/or any of its subcontractors or agents under this Agreement ntain throughout the term of this Agreement, WorkgE!g Compensation an, liability insurance with regard to all damages in the minimum amounts General Liability - public liability, including premises, products and complete operations, (1) Bodily Injury liability (2) Property damage liability or (3) Bodily Injury and property damage combined 1,000,000 each person 3,000,000 each occurrence $3,000,000 each occurrence, $3,000,000 single limit Comprehenslve - Automobile Liability Insurance, Including owned, non -owned and hired vehicles. (1) Bodily Injury liability (2) Property damage liability (3) In lieu of (1) and (2) Bodlly Injury and property damaged combined $1,000,000 each person $3,000,000 each occurrence $3,000,000 each occurrence $3,000,000 single limit 5 20. C. d. e. 1�.o» r. rio KMC agrees that with respect to the above - required Insurance, contracts will contAln the following required provisions; (1) the City and its officers, agents, employees, board members and elected officials shall be named as additional Insured (as the interests of each may appear) as to all applicable coverage; and (2) contracts shall provide ,for thirty (30) days notices to the City prior to cancellation, revocation, non - renewal or material change; The amount and conditions of liability and, comprehensive Insurance may be Increased upon 60 days written -notice by the City should the protection afforded by this insurance be deemed by the City to be insufficient for the risk created by this Agreement. At no time, however, will the amount of required liability and comprehensive insurance exceed that which Is customarily required of others for similar situations of risk. KMC 'shall furnish a certificate of insurance to the City confirming the above noted coverages and naming the City as an additional insured. - This was moved from (3) above to here. If KMC is in default of any obligations contained In this Agreement or in the perFor ancel of the. work or occupancy authorized by this Agreement or any permit grants pursuant to this Agreement, including, but not limited to, restoration requirements or fee payments for more than thirty (30) days after receiving written notice �rom the City of the default, the City may terminate the rights of KMC under this Agreer ion t and any permit granted hereunder, subject to City's absolute right to revoke at any time in the exercise of City's police powers. The notice of default must be in m riting and specify the, provisions of this agreement or any permit under which the def ult Isi claimed and state the grounds of the claim. Any notice must be served on KM by certified mall, return receipt requested at Its principal place of business. If KMC is in default In the performance of the work or occupancy authorized by this Agreement or any permit granted hereunder, the City may, after the above notice to KMC and failure of KM;C to cure the default, take such action as may be reasonably necessary to abate the condition caused by the default. KMC must reimburse the City for the City's reasonable costs', including costs of collection and attorneys' fees, incurred as a result of KMC's def ult. 21. area is health, measui comple McY Work, In the event of any emergency In which any of KMC's Facilities In, above or under any rights- of-way are damaged, or If KMC's construction otherwise In such a condition as to Immediately endanger the property, life, or safety of any Individual, KMC shall Immediately take the proper emergency es to repair its facilities, to cure or remedy the dangerous conditions for the Ion of property, life, health or safety of individuals without first applying for and Ig a permit as required by thi$ Agreement or a subsequent ordinance. )r, this shall not relieve KMC from the requirement of notifying the City of the ncy work and obtaining any permits necessary for this purpose upon Lion of the repairs. 22. Law. applies this At be uni effect. IN WITNE. ATTEST: Secretary DA' iru. ulz7 r. u/u e terms and conditions of this Agreement shall be subject to any and all e Law and shall be governed by the laws of Minnesota. Should any term of ement be determined by a court or other entity with competent jurisdiction to orceable, all other terms of this Agreement shall remain In full force and WHEREOF, the parties have duly executed this Agreement as of the date first CITY OF EDINA BY: MAYOR DATE: KMC TELECOM INC. BY: PRESIDENT DATE: 7 r 9111 'e To: Mayor & City Council From: Debra Mangen City Clerk' Date: June 16, 1997 Subject: Receive petitions REPORT /RECOMMENDATION Agenda Item # VLA. & l Consent Information Only ❑ Mgr. Recommends ❑ Action El 3 To H RA To Council Motion Resolution Ordinance Discussion Recommendation: Refer the petitions received from: Patti Eastman requesting sidewalk and Jane Ladky requesting street and storm sewer to Engineering for processing. Info /Background: The City received petitions from Patti Eastman, signed by fifteen residents of Townes Road and Maple Road requesting the installation of sidewalk on the north side of Townes Road and West side of Maple Road between 4716 Townes Road and 4936 Maple Road; and from Jane Ladky, signed by six resident of Wooddale Glen and W. 52 "d Street requesting permanent street surfacing and storm sewer. The City's normal procedure is to refer the petition to the Engineering Department for processing as to feasibility. g1NA11 cJ ow @ � City of Edina, Minnesota �/ Z i - 3 )o CITY COUNCIL o 4801 West 50th Street • Edina, Minnesota 55424 • (612) 927,8861 c� DATT .. 4,I ........ PTiT1QN T3 THE CI'FY'.:CCJUNCr... :::.::.:.:: :...........:... ❑ SIDEWALK STORM SEWER ❑ ALLEY PAVING ❑ SANITARY SEWER ❑ CURB AND GUTTER ONLY KPERMANENT STREET SURFACING V%W R ❑ WATERMAIN ❑ STREET LIGHTING ❑ OTHER: To the Mayor and City Council: The persons who have signed this petition ask the City Council to consider the improvements listed above to the locations listed below. \A V6l7C (e- ( e between LOCATION OF INIPROVEMEYT BY STREET NAME ADDRESS and ADDRESS between and LOCATION OF IMPROVEMENT BY STREET NAME ADDRES S ADDRESS between and LOCATION OF INIPROVEMEtiT BY STREET NAME ADDRESS ADDRESS between and LOCATION OF IMPROVEMENT BY STREET NAME ADDRESS ADDRESS IMPORTANT NOTE: THE PERSONS WHO HAVE SIGNED THIS PETITION UNDERSTAND THAT THE CITY COUNCIL MAY ASSESS THE COSTS OF THESE IMPROVEMENTS AGAINST THE PROPERTIES BENEFITING FROM THE IMPROVEMENTS IN AMOUNTS DETERMINED BY THE COUNCIL AS AUTHORIZED BY CHAPTER 429, MINNESOTA STATUTES. PROPERTY OWNER'S OWNER'S NAME SIGNATURE (PRINTED) This petition was circulated by: PROPERTY ADDRESS OWNER'S PHONE LiLf2R W. 51r43t 5ia9 l��000,�► E�� �N 9�:59►9� 7L•7C �) aroE �. LA �► 4Lf 2q W . 5Z' S- g�� -�cob� 0 NAME ADDRESS PHONE There is space for more signatures on the back or you may attach extra pages. SEPTEMBER 1880 o e `�� City of Edina, Minnesota. CITY COUNCIL a� 4801 West 50th Street • Edina, Minnesota 55424 (612) 927 -8861 • (612) 927 -7645 -FAX • (612) 927 - 5461 -TDD PETITION TO THE CITY COUNCIL 0 SIDEWALK ❑ STORM SEWER ❑ ALLEY PAVING ❑ SANITARY SEWER DATE: ❑ WATERMAIN ❑ STREET LIGHTING ❑ CURB AND GUTTER ONLY ❑ PERMANENT STREET ❑ OTHER: SURFACING WITH CURB AND GUTTER To the Mayor and City Council: The persons who have signed this petition ask the City Council to consider the improvements listed above to the loc- a7tions listed below. �c�'�IK i-e� -� c4. nt � 0 _ �,�ic: v-F- ?DIG L zzL between 4? ! �D % yL[_ J ?� and Lc LOCATION OF IMPROVEMENT BY STREET NAME ADDRESS ADDRESS between and LOCATION OF IMPROVEMENT BY STREET NAME ADDRESS ADDRESS between and DCATION OF IMPROVEMENT BY STREET NAME ADDRESS ADDRESS between and .,)CATION OF IMPROVEMENT BY STREET NAME ADDRESS ADDRESS 01PORTANT NOTE: THE PERSONS WHO HAVE SIGNED THIS PETITION UNDERSTAND THAT THE CITY COUNCIL MAY ASSESS THE COSTS OF THESE IMPROVEMENTS AGAINST THE PROPERTIES BENEFITING FROM THE IMPROVEMENTS IN AMOUNTS DETERMINED BY THE COUNCIL AS AUTHORIZED BY CHAPTER 429, NIINNESOTA STATUTES. PROPERTY OWNER'S OWNER'S NAME PROPERTY ADDRESS SIGNATURE (PRINTED) OWNER'S PHONE 9zs-4181 This ' ion was circulated by: NAME ADDRESS PHONE . 3 There is space for more signatures on the back or you may attach extra pages. sEFrEMBER IOW PROPERTY OWNER'S , z OWNER'S NAME (PRINTED) M a rd, 1, �.- ,f I-eOt31a%Z/ AAG GIAYNfy Kos i 2os lc( PROPERTY ADDRESS q 9r a Md pl e 2d OWNER'S PHONE 12 - 6313 9a-a sa- 4 �33� �(1r�•�P`� �( 9 ZG CoZfo,a LOA REPORT /RECOMMENDATION To: Mayor & City Council Agenda Item # XI.A. From: John Wallin Consent ❑ Finance Director Information Only ❑ Date: June 16, 1997 Mgr. Recommends F-] To HRA ® To Council Subject: Receive 1996 CAFR and Action ® Motion Management Letter ❑ Resolution ❑ Ordinance ❑ Discussion Recommendation: Recommend receipt of 1996 Comprehensive Annual Financial Report (CAFR) and Management Letter. Info /Background: Attached is the following: Finance Director's response to Auditors' Management Letter Auditors' Management Letter of Comments and Recommendations Independent Auditors' Communications Letter 1996 Comprehensive Annual Financial Report. The Finance Director's Response are those areas where we will utilize the Auditors' recommendations to make even stronger the City's internal controls. The Management Letter and the resulting comments and recommendations is by its nature, critical in that it contains only the Auditors' comments and recommendations on deficiencies. - It does not include their observations on the many strong features of the City's operations. The Independent Auditors' Communication Letter is an informational letter which discusses their responsibilities. The 1996 Comprehensive Annual Financial Report is the accumulation of all Finance 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. The Comprehensive Annual Financial Report consists of a number of sections: The Introductory Section has a listing of elected and appointed officials and letters from the City Manager and Finance Director. The Financial Section General Purpose Statements includes the Auditors' Opinion, Combined Balance Sheet and Combined Statements of Revenue Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balance, and the Notes to the Financial Statements which describe accounting policies, Balance Sheet accounts, and other details as required by the above mentioned boards and governments. The Financial Section Combining and Individual Funds and Account Group Statements are the part of the report that details the 1996 accounting for the City, broken down by fund type. The Financial Section Supplementary Schedules include various schedules of bonded indebtedness, and Auditor's Reports on Federal and State compliance. The Statistical Section has a number of schedules again required by the above mentioned boards and governments. In 1996 the City had a very successful year with an increase to the General Fund's unreserved and undesignated fund balance of almost $500,000 and the addition of $250,000 reserved for city hall improvements. MEMORANDUM TO: Ken Rosland,-City Manager FROM: John Wallin, Finance Director DATE: May 30, 1997 SUBJECT: Response to Auditor's Letter As with any accounting system, there are always improvements that can be made. In response to this year's auditor's comments, the following procedures and directions are being taken: ELECTRIONIC PAYMENTS / RECEIPTS We will be corresponding to each bank that the City does electronic transactions to require the following: All repeat electronic transactions such as the wiring instructions for an Investment Advisory Committee approved investment broker - dealer would have to be in writing and signed by both the Finance Director and the City Manager. All other electronic transactions that occur on a one time basis will require a confirmation from the Assistant Finance Director or other member of the Investment Advisory Committee before the transaction can occur. SEGREGATE PAYROLL RESPONSIBILITIES The concern of the be able to create We are looking at internal reporting controls. PROCUREMENT POLICIES Auditors is that the payroll clerk would and set up for pay a fictitious employee. the auditor's recommendation as well as systems that would ensure better internal The Golf Course decided to build the building "in house" in an attempt to hold down costs. The project for a number of reasons grew in size exceeding the original parameters and was not intended to exceed the $10,000 limit. Golf Course personnel will monitor these projects more closely in the future. I�, Mct-7 ORIGINAL PLANS Li �f MM � R .� •' •. r t.' 1 !v Fn Ox f r' ► i � r � i 1 iv• �- � t• ti � E� 'ss =�i -'�n�l , 1 111 1�f ' ►� cwa r k l Y' 1� °r Il MNDOT 2331 TYPE 41 BIT. WEAR 2* MNDOT 2331 TYPE 31 BIT. BASE 7* CLASS 5 11 LIMESTONE) V., 1 =U# 0 25 50 100 RIGHT—OF—WAY LINE «° -- LOT LINE BUILDING SETBACK PARKING SETBACK RETAINING WALL RAILROAD RIVER OR CREED CULVERT — aer....— — FENCE LINE °— X— X —x— X ---X- SILT FENCE WETLAND BRIDGE HAYBALES DITCH BALES SOIL BORING EX. CONTOUR - —Ci1 - - - - -- PROP. CONTOUR 941 E. ELEV, x 901,0 PROP. ELEV. 930.2 DRAINAGE ARROW X. CE ❑ PROP. C8 0 EX. STORM SEWER PROP. STORM SEWER EX. FES v PROP. FES EX. MFG 0 PROP. ICI I EX. SAN. -- —> PROP. SAN. EX. WATER MAIN PROP. WATERMAIN PROP. HYDRANT X. HYDRANT X. GATE VALE PROP. GATE VALVE GAS TELEPHONE —T - ELECTRIC POWER POLE OVERHEAD CABLE OR PO' RLIN RETAINING WALL DRAINAGE ARROW %KESHORE PARKWAY, SUITE 55305 C. JONES . . SE L FROM: PUBLIC /W 20' 50' INTERIOR LOT LINE 10' 20' RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT -- 00' ROOM A. ANMSON AND ASSOCIATES L<md Development Municipal Railroads 7415 WkYZATA BLVD, SUM 107, MINNEAPOLIS, MINNESOTA (612) 546-7035,1 u l i Iffi-go-m- givolol I�j I R 0 A ,ACK FILL 6"x6" TRENCH EX. GROUND NOTE: POSTS SHALL BE SPACED 4.0 APART. 11 12-21-971 SUBMITTAL SET [NO7 DATE DESCRIPTION OF REVISIONS DESIGNED: TJG 9 H CHECKED BY- 1XI 94� \VI RET. WALL )('± MAX HGT. '14 j Em ROGER A. ANDERSON AND ASSOCIATES INC. Land Dvvelopment Adunicipal Roilroods 74-15 WAYZATA BLVD., SUITE 107, MINNEAPOUS, MINNESOTA (612) 548-7035 EMA STORAGE CENTER PROJECT Eva EDINA, MINIKIESOTA FOUR "S" PROPERTIES 101 & MAIWENANfL STORM MH N8 RIM 924.5 INSPECT & MAINT. AFTER TRIBUTARY INV. 921.0 �N) N SILT FENCE PRIOR TO COMMENCEMENT OF EARTHWORK OPERATIONS. AFTER EACH RUN-OF EVENT. REMOVE SEDIMENTS AS REQUIRED. DRAINAGE AREA IS RESTORED. EQW2_lAIA;_ INV. 919.0 S) 0 PERM, POOL VOLg REQUIRED = 0.88 AF TOP BE 924.5 R OUTLET SKIMMER AFTER POND GRADING STRUCTURE IS COMPLETED. INSPECT REGULARLY. MAINTAIN AS NEEDED. PERMANENT. PERM. POOL VOL. PROVIDED = O.88 AF 3.3' 10-1 BENCH) OVERFLOW SPILLWAY 924.0 100` H&=924.O T MEAN DEPTH = 4.9' (NOT INCL. 10:1 BENCH); (INCL. UPON COMPLETION OF INSPECT & MAINTAIN NY& = 921.0 H RIP-RAP & POND GRADING, CONC. AT LEAST ANNUALLY PERMANENT. 100 YR. HV& = 924.0 FILTER SWALE CONST, AND AND AFTER HEAVY 18" RCP OUTLET INSTALLATION. RAINFALL EVENTS. OUTLET: 18" SU13MERGED PIPE FOR SKIMMING) CONNECT TO------*-,, 10:1 NW- =921.0 INSPECT & MAINTAIN AFTER HEAVY RAINFALL PERMANENT. BOTTOM ELEV. 914.0 EXISTING SYSTEM APR 0 25 50 100 DURING EARTHWORK DETENTION POND OPERATIONS. EVENTS. REMOVE TOP OF BERM 924.5 INV. 91&0± SEDIMENTS AS NEEDED. INSPECT & MAINTAIN NO REMOVAL 18" RCP .7 SEED & MULCH AFTER FINAL GRADING AFTER HEAVY RAINS. NECESSARY, (SUBMERGED FOR SKIMMING) BOT TOM =914,0 OPERATIONS. REPLACE WASH-OUT AREAS IMMEDIATELY. NOTE: CONTRACTOR IS RESPONSIBLE FOR INSTALLATION, MAINTENANCE AND NOT TO SCALE REMOVAL OF EROSION & SEDIMENT CONTROL ITEMS. PLAN SYMBOLS ---------------- RIGHT-OF-WAY UNE Iffi-go-m- givolol I�j I R 0 A ,ACK FILL 6"x6" TRENCH EX. GROUND NOTE: POSTS SHALL BE SPACED 4.0 APART. 11 12-21-971 SUBMITTAL SET [NO7 DATE DESCRIPTION OF REVISIONS DESIGNED: TJG 9 H CHECKED BY- 1XI 94� \VI RET. WALL )('± MAX HGT. '14 j Em ROGER A. ANDERSON AND ASSOCIATES INC. Land Dvvelopment Adunicipal Roilroods 74-15 WAYZATA BLVD., SUITE 107, MINNEAPOUS, MINNESOTA (612) 548-7035 EMA STORAGE CENTER PROJECT Eva EDINA, MINIKIESOTA FOUR "S" PROPERTIES I 8" X 8" WET TAP W1 VALVE 7� f� '7 8" X • WET TAP W/ VALVE I DESIGNED: LOT LINE TJG BUILDING SETBACK PARKING SETBACK — — — — — — — — RETAINING WALL RAILROAD i3 .JJ RIVER OR CREEK CULVERT > — — — — — FENCE LINE —X—X—X—X—X- CHECXED Y: WETLAND RA DESIGNED: LOT LINE TJG BUILDING SETBACK PARKING SETBACK — — — — — — — — RETAINING WALL RAILROAD RIVER OR CREEK CULVERT > — — — — — FENCE LINE —X—X—X—X—X- CHECXED Y: WETLAND RA HAYBALES REG. No. 23137 m m ROGM A. ANDERSON AND ASSOCIATES INC. Lond Nvelopment Municipol Railroods 7445 WAYZATA BL\4),, SUITE 107, MINNEAPOLIS, MINNESOTA (612) 546-7035 :'Jo LA'l A CONNECT TO E. 6" WIVI AT EDEN CIRCLE �'D ?, 10 MNA STORAGE CENTER PROJECT EDINA, MINNESOTA FOUR "�o PROPER TIE!53, ING, qpill Mal • mvmlmml�� RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE LOT LINE BUILDING SETBACK PARKING SETBACK — — — — — — — — RETAINING WALL RAILROAD RIVER OR CREEK CULVERT > — — — — — FENCE LINE —X—X—X—X—X- SILT FENCE WETLAND BRIDGE HAYBALES DITCH BALES SOIL BORING EX. CONTOUR PROP. CONTOUR —901— EX. ELEV. x 901 0 PROP, ELEV, DRAINAGE ARROW EX. CB PROP. CB EX. STORM SEWER PROP. STORM SEWER EX, FES PROP. FES EX. MH PROP. MH 6 EX. SAN. PROP, SAN. EX. WATERMAIN PROP, WATERMAIN PROP. HYDRANT EX, HYDRANT EX. GATE VALVE �A PROP. GATE VALVE GAS TELEPHONE —T— ELECTRIC —E— POWER POLE lo� OVERHEAD CABLE —OH OR POWERLINE RETAINING WALL DRAINAGE ARROW N-QIE-l- 1. B ASE DATE) 3. TH E N RATE EFFEC LOCA1 4. THE L TOTAL 5. THER! HAMN 6. AREA • 91 7. THRE! OF SL 8. SE PUBLI INTEA RESIC 9. LEGAL 10. THE A t RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE LOT LINE BUILDING SETBACK PARKING SETBACK — — — — — — — — RETAINING WALL RAILROAD RIVER OR GREEK ------- CULVERT >— — — — — — --< FENCE LINE —X—X—X—X—X- SILTFENCE - - - - - - - - - WETLAND BRIDGE HA ALES DITCH BALES SOIL BORING EX, CONTOUR 901- - PROP. CONTOUR --m-901— EX, ELEV. x 901.0 PROP. ELEV. DRAINAGE ARROW EX. CB PROP. CB EX. STORM SEWER PROP. STORM SEVER EX. FES � PROP. FES EX. MH PROP. MH X. SAN. PROP. SAN, EX. WATERMAIN PROP. WATERMAIN PROP. HYDRANT EX. HYDRANT EX. GATE VALVE PROP, GATE VALVE GAS TELEPHONE ELECTRIC E POWER POLE le OVERHEAD CABLE CH OR POWERLINE RETAINING WALL DRAINAGE ARROW m DRAWN: PSH CHECKED BY. RAA EM ROGEIR A. ANDERSON AND ASSOCIATES IN Land Deve*ment Municipal Railroads 7415 WAYZATA BLVD., SUITE 107, MINNEAPOLIS, MINNESOTA (612) 546-7035 COMM. NO. 9361 1,�4 Lr"D"', _rte 3da. x la <y $mvb ha*.'�rfdk 1,�4 Lr"D"', }r., , TW FAN! . $ W Mock T4...sf fie.,. m t d' it F k- ' ^ r $ p r j i "y p `yY m�. rr• a:E .„r y own Lot 7, Wanner AddilAnal. We WNW at 11 z p rf t feet 3. t s ::. Mom ' fix: #. i { } M s ax k,,: } .r „w £ y e 't: i x '' s. i x"s r{ Y ,„ ,,., r � ,., r .K.' � s.k , =vr '.:'n i, .. of 2 r K.a v x .:»., with i . rx t , } yi+.. j s },.,; i' :` ` ; ",a`.d .$ ''x di Y . !: ' ,�y ,.* f : ","I fi °;,,. f Pin yo' S r Part s Thom . .., .x r..v= �„ r , r, } t °c a z t t ! X` d ` x!: *` f #.° 4" �� X. " e! w Y rye. ? Y 8,� i Yom"' ";: ,ur ti `'`� w#»- {.b xfY" .. {n'r{ t J ; 4.M 5 3' 43 x� a�$� i f A ,.r L £ : 5`" x" dry' t 9 <t.}:ssxs,.t,wt v: s 's, ;. x. ":; , wX ,,e ,: :r zy `£%z".r.'?' Addition', „.. ,wa: P w:. z1 t� `. £ =s; :s. � r ` ,. _ s f. '4 �,., 5 x , � .r # r ,5: .u:,v` ; ,i' s, A-, 4, .,. ,w x,:� .,,,,,. }.., ,, r: kxr, r...i„ €}s..,, ° � �ez�r(ax tt`j 7 $ East #j,F...`fr,W ;fi Me most East e, 3t C.e, of p> i°# vx js, ?f -6l.w ei "` id ?sa''A» q a + . j .# 3 s s" fi Y < k ,.. yy �£ � d. � -ry ,n. sa 1 S , t.. v..g� Point r Ciro! ', £'x j � � t'ryr 't'Y• i 3 S . k ., k i` r n §,., � r tL a Y �� trr ».t i a s . r = . 3 &are er k r x . of . R55 Lot £ Y . ' P n* th thence t r k 4 < r Ad nij ins jowwr >r Y £ 5 S Y�3R K $h @ X:„ 41- w.. ..`up If a mom r'`. x aK ,"J,�sD z { "e, +' t s "vo- 'V4 :.. ` 5 °s�°s� ',: Out* ,:as,t".< P of : y :�M"s;m Off' W <F?*� Yx�"","'+s: $^ LAND YF x" x MoNs tome ow MW SAW MM 'rs„.'- ., }r., , TW FAN! . $ W Mock T4...sf fie.,. m t d' it F k- ' ^ r $ p r j i "y p `yY m�. rr• a:E .„r y own Lot 7, Wanner AddilAnal. We WNW at 11 z p rf t feet 3. t s ::. Mom ' fix: #. i { } M s ax k,,: } .r „w £ y e 't: i x '' s. i x"s r{ Y ,„ ,,., r � ,., r .K.' � s.k , =vr '.:'n i, .. of 2 r K.a v x .:»., with i . rx t , } yi+.. j s },.,; i' :` ` ; ",a`.d .$ ''x di Y . !: ' ,�y ,.* f : ","I fi °;,,. f Pin yo' S r Part s Thom . .., .x r..v= �„ r , } s a. Qs f fa 3 #' ss-x { '" . } ,. k. uM}. e -� aim r +, t t ! X` d ` x!: *` f #.° 4" �� X. ? Y 8,� i Yom"' ";: ,ur ti `'`� w#»- {.b xfY" .. {n'r{ t J of '"3 3' 43 x� i f A ,.r L £ : 5`" x" dry' t 9 <t.}:ssxs,.t,wt v: s 's, ;. x. ":; , wX ,,e ,: :r zy `£%z".r.'?' Addition', „.. ,wa: P w:. z1 t� `. £ =s; :s. � r ` ,. _ s f. '4 �,., � .r # r ,5: .u:,v` ; ,i' s, A-, 4, .,. ,w x,:� .,,,,,. }.., ,, r: kxr, r...i„ €}s..,, ° � �ez�r(ax tt`j 7 $ East #j,F...`fr,W ;fi Me most East e, 3t C.e, of p> i°# vx js, ?f -6l.w ei "` id ?sa''A» q a + . j .# 3 s s" fi Y < k ,.. yy �£ � d. � -ry ,n. sa 1 S , t.. v..g� Point r Ciro! ', £'x j � � t'ryr 't'Y• i 3 S . k ., k i` r n §,., � r tL l O` y trom the Northeast ¢'s n i t, { k.ff r s } 2, Y �� trr ».t i a s . r = . 3 &are er k r x . of . R55 Lot £ Y . ' P n* th thence its Northerly "r 4 g k 4 < r Ad nij ins jowwr K @ X:„ 41- w.. ..`up If a mom r'`. x aK ,"J,�sD g..v »p, Yr��`' "e, +' t s "vo- 'V4 :.. ` 5 °s�°s� ',: Out* ,:as,t".< P of : y :�M"s;m Off' W <F?*� Yx�"","'+s: $^ LAND YF x" x MoNs tome ow MW SAW MM 'rs„.'- ., }r., , TW FAN! . $ W Mock T4...sf fie.,. m t d' it F k- ' ^ r $ p r j i "y p `yY rr• a:E .„r own Lot 7, Wanner AddilAnal. We WNW at 11 z p rf t feet 3. t s ::. Mom ' fix: #. i .204 M ax k,,: } .r „w £ y e 't: i x '' s. i x"s r{ Y ,„ ,,., r � ,., r .K.' � s.k , =vr '.:'n i, .. of 2 r K.a v x .:»., with i . rx t , } yi+.. j s },.,; i' :` ` ; ",a`.d .$ ''x di Y . !: ' ,�y ,.* f : ","I fi °;,,. Pin yo' S r Part s Thom . .., .x r..v= �„ r , 3 "` p $,sue' ,£„. fi` #' pia t ,,.ri `` ” i w,£. �"fi; Y e y� r ° >°• t s a. Qs f fa 3 #' ss-x { '" . } ,. k. uM}. e -� aim r +, t t ! X` d ` x!: *` f #.° 4" �� X. ? Y 8,� i Yom"' ";: ,ur ti `'`� w#»- {.b xfY" .. {n'r{ t J of '"3 fs°y l: Y. #sr `w, 3, }. a$.:.¢.s'�*. gh i'�, ,, � „� ,.,}�'t i ' t `s=d t . k S;v Sys' £rrr' «'r :' x Lot ,.r L £ : 5`" x" dry' t 9 <t.}:ssxs,.t,wt v: s 's, ;. x. ":; , wX ,,e ,: :r zy `£%z".r.'?' Addition', „.. ,wa: P w:. z1 t� `. £ =s; :s. � r ` ,. _ s f. '4 �,., � .r # r ,5: .u:,v` ; ,i' s, A-, 4, .,. ,w x,:� .,,,,,. }.., ,, r: kxr, r...i„ €}s..,, ° � �ez�r(ax tt`j 7 $ East #j,F...`fr,W ;fi Me most East e, 3t C.e, of p> i°# vx js, ?f -6l.w ei "` id ?sa''A» q a + . j .# x y 1 r 0r2 s s" fi Y < k ,.. yy �£ � d. � -ry ,n. sa 1 S , t.. v..g� Point r Ciro! ', £'x j � � t'ryr 't'Y• i 3 S . k ., k i` r n §,., � r tL l O` y trom the Northeast ¢'s n i t, { k.ff r s } 2, Y �� trr ».t i a . r = . 3 &are er k r x . of . R55 Lot £ Y . ' P n* th thence its Northerly "r k 4 < r GORDON C. LEWIS Z- 60 -7 C CONCRETE B612 CURB- 1.5" MNDOT 2331 TYPE 41 BIT. WEAR 2* MNDOT 2331 TYPE 31 BIT. BASE 7* CLASS 5 (10OX CRUSHED LIMESTONE) MIN. =T4 7A -9 1 1 01M 1011RISF-111 11 I 5. SEIDACK EROM. PARKING BjaQ, PUBLIC R/W 20' 50' INTERIOR LOT LINE 10, 20' RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT - 100' • MINOR BLDG REMSIONS ARKING AND BLDG REMSIONS DESCRIPTION OF REVISIONS TJG DRAWN: PSH CHECKED BY: MA. -------- --- 'J N 0'03'08' 216,63 uz bi 1'52'00' E 184,14 ROGW A. ANDERSON AND ASSOCIATES INC. Land Development Municipal Railroads 7415 WAYZOA BLVD., SUITE 107, MINNEAPOLIS, MINNESOTA (612) 546-7035 Existing Buitding RIGHT—OF—WAY LINE LOT LINE BUILDING SETBACK PARKING SETBACK — — — — — — — — RETAINING WALL RAILROAD - - - RIVER OR CREEK CULVERT > — - - - -- FE CE LINE —X—X—X—X—X- SILT FENCE — — — — — — — — - WETLAND BRIDGE HAYBALES DITCH BALES SOIL BORING EX. CONTOUR 4 901- - - - _ _ . PROP. CONTOUR —901— EX. ELEV. x 901.0 PROP. ELEV. DRAINAGE ARROW EX. CB PROP. CB EX. STORM SEWER PROP. STORM SEWER EX. FES <3 PROP. FES A EX. MH 0 PROP, MH 0 EX. SAN. PROP. SAN. EX. WATERMAIN PROP. WATER Alai PROP. HYDRANT EX, HYDRANT IV, EX. GATE VALVE PROP. GATE VALVE GAS —G— TELEPHONE —T ELECTRIC — E POWER POLE Sy OVERHEAD CABLE OR POWERLINE RETAINING WALL DRAINAGE ARROW Wk n 0�1 Z- C-) 10 • 13' 0 F-1 a wj LOCATED WTHIN ANY DESIGNATED FLO• DPLAIN AREAS. 1 TOTAL PARKING PROVIDED = 70 SPACES (INCL. 3 HANDICAJ�M' 5. SETBACK FROM: AR IN BIQ Q. PUBLIC R/W 20' 50' INTERIOR LOT LINE 10' 20' RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT — 100' WEIR MM MINOR BLDG REVISIONS SUBMITTAL SET DESCRIPTION • REVISIONS " = =I Smu Sm RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN WAS PREPARED LOT LINE BY ME OR UNDER BUILDING SETBACK I AM A PARKING SETBACK — — — — — — — — RETAINING WALL THE �rS O AT F E ' ST� E OF MINNESOTA RAILROAD "I RIVER OR CREEK CHE&ED BY� CULVERT > — — — — — "A FENCE LINE —X—X—X—X—X- REG. No. 23137 SILT FENCE - — — — — — — — -- WETLAND BRIDGE HA ALES 0 DITCH BALES SOIL BORING EX, CONTOUR - 901 - - - - PROP. CONTOUR —901— X. ELEV. x 901.0 PROP. ELEV. DRAINAGE ARROW EX. CB ❑ PROP. CB Eft. STORM SEWER ----- - PROP. STORM SEWER —>>— EX. FES <1 PROP. FES -4 EX. MH 0 PROP. Mt 0 EX. SAN, > PROP. SAN, X. WATERMAIN PROP. WATER MAIN PROP. HYDRANT EX. HYDRANT �cyfl EX. GATE VALVE PROP. GATE VALVE GAS TELEPHONE T— ELECTRIC —E— POWER POLE 'J:y' OVERHEAD CABLE —GH- OR POWERLINE RETAINING WALL DRAINAGE ARROW ===> AREA SUMMARY ROG" A. ANDERSON AND ASSOCIATES INC. Land Development Municipal Railroads 7415 WAYZAU BLVD., SUITE 107, MINNEAPOLIS, MINNESOTA (612) 546-7035 a I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN WAS PREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECT SUPERVISION AND THAT I AM A DULY REGISTERED PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER UINDER THE �rS O AT F E ' ST� E OF MINNESOTA "I CHE&ED BY� "A DATE 2-19-97 REG. No. 23137 ROG" A. ANDERSON AND ASSOCIATES INC. Land Development Municipal Railroads 7415 WAYZAU BLVD., SUITE 107, MINNEAPOLIS, MINNESOTA (612) 546-7035 a B UILDING D 1 0, 3.3 SF 167, fat ol r"-Jnml� VAW� r { d EDINA t STORAGE e 4 CENTER Y B s � p r { SITE, PLAN' � P 9 . 9728 Fu ND, 9728 -:. r 43 A-45 "VIN Al SUA �� �. 0. `•= A ..fir f. l r.mt1' p i • If AA gym Na ma •dam `• =� =� "- � '�, �� • I��.R..R Iii. ^'- t� � •' j' •a11I�>L a�rTr 1� ` lam ►,;r` i� `v1 C-) 1.5* MNDOT 2331 TYPE 41 BIT. WEAR 2* MNDOT 2331 TYPE 31 BIT. BASE 7* CLASS 5 (100% CRUSHED LIMESTONE) MIN. 5. SETBACK FROM: PUBLIC R/W INTERIOR LOT LINE RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT ii 20' 50' 10* 20' - 100' SUBMITTAL SET AN DESCRIP"nON OF REMSIONS DES[GNED- TJG tti BUILDING SETBACK PARKING SETBACK DRAWN: — — RETAINING WALL PSH RAILROAD 1w, RIVER OR CREEK 23137 CULVERT >-._.. -- - --< cS REG. No. Lf-) ROO�R Ai ANDERSON AND ASSOCIATES INC. Lond Dav*lo�pment Municipal Railroads 7416 WAYZATA BLM, SUITE 107, MINNEAPOLIS, MINNESOTA (612) 546-7035 L I III- EDINA STORAGE CEN ir-IR PROJECT A ESOTA FOUR IsSis PROPE"TIES, INC. RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE LOT LINE tti BUILDING SETBACK PARKING SETBACK — — — — — — — — RETAINING WALL RAILROAD RIVER OR CREEK CULVERT >-._.. -- - --< cS FENCE LINE —X—X—X—X—X- cj - — — — — — — ty WETLAND ROO�R Ai ANDERSON AND ASSOCIATES INC. Lond Dav*lo�pment Municipal Railroads 7416 WAYZATA BLM, SUITE 107, MINNEAPOLIS, MINNESOTA (612) 546-7035 L I III- EDINA STORAGE CEN ir-IR PROJECT A ESOTA FOUR IsSis PROPE"TIES, INC. RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE LOT LINE tti BUILDING SETBACK PARKING SETBACK — — — — — — — — RETAINING WALL RAILROAD ROO�R Ai ANDERSON AND ASSOCIATES INC. Lond Dav*lo�pment Municipal Railroads 7416 WAYZATA BLM, SUITE 107, MINNEAPOLIS, MINNESOTA (612) 546-7035 L I III- EDINA STORAGE CEN ir-IR PROJECT A ESOTA FOUR IsSis PROPE"TIES, INC. RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE LOT LINE BUILDING SETBACK PARKING SETBACK — — — — — — — — RETAINING WALL RAILROAD RIVER OR CREEK CULVERT >-._.. -- - --< FENCE LINE —X—X—X—X—X- SILT FENCE - — — — — — — — WETLAND AL-) BRIDGE HAYBALES 0 DITCH SALES %f SOIL BORING EX. CONTOUR PROP. CONTOUR EX. ELEV. x 901.0 PROP. ELEV. DRAINAGE ARROW EX. CB PROP. C13 X. STORM SEWER PROP. STORM SEWER X. FES PROP. FES EX. MIS 0 PROP, MH 0 EX. SAN. PROP. SAN. X. WATERMAIN PROP. WATERMAIN PROP. HYDRANT EX, HYDRANT EX. GATE VALVE PROP. GATE VALVE GAS TELEPHONE ELECTRIC —E— POWER POLE '0' OVERHEAD CABLE —OH OR POWERLINE RETAINING WALL DRAINAGE ARROW i0k SCHEDULE QE _1N,5_IALLABDh_& MAINIENANQE Ima tKIALL&UM INSEECIlOhl &-MAINTENANCE EERQYAL STORM MH INSPECT & MAINT. AFTER TRIBUTARY RIM 924.5 SILT FENCE PRIOR TO COMMENCEMENT AFTER EACH RUN-OFF DRAINAGE AREA IS INV. 921.0 �N) OF EARTHWORK OPERATIONS. EVENT. REMOVE SEDIMENTS RESTORED. EQND_D_&I6A-_ AS REQUIRED. PERM, POOL VOL. REQUIRED = O88 AF INV. S) N OUTLET SKIMMER AFTER POND GRADING INSPECT REGULARLY. PERMANENT. PERM. POOL VOL. PROMDED = 0.88 AF TOP BERM 924.5 STRUCTURE IS COMPLETED. MAINTAIN AS NEEDED. MEAN DEPTH = 4.9' (NOT INCL. 10:1 BENCH); 3.3' (INCL. 10:1 BENCH) OVERFLOW SPILLWAY 924,0 0 UPON COMPLETION OF INSPECT & MAINTAIN NWIL = 921.0 100 YR. HWL=924�0 RIP-RAP & POND GRADING, CONC. AT LEAST ANNUALLY PERMANENT. FILTER SWALE CONST. AND AND AFTER HEAVY 100 YR. HWL = 924.0 OUTLET INSTALLATION. RAINFALL EVENTS. 18" RCP H INSPECT & MAINTAIN OUTLET: 18" SUBMERGED PIPE (FOR SKIMMING) DETENTION POND DURING EARTHWORK AFTER HEAVY RAINFALL PERMANENT. BOTTOM L. 914.0 CONNECT TO 10: 1 _ _ = N�L=92tD OPERATIONS. EVENTS. REMOVE EXISTING SYSTEM SEDIMENTS AS NEEDED. TOP OF BERM 924,5 APR IN 918.0± 0 25 50 100 110 1 migillilligol! INSPECT & MAINTAIN NO REMOVAL 111�11111111 SEED & MULCH AFTER FINAL GRADING AFTER HEAVY RAINS. NECESSARY. 18" RCP OPERATIONS. REPLACE WASH-OUT AREAS IMMEDIATELY, (SUBMERGED FOR SKIMMING) BOTTOM=91 O NOTE: CONTRACTOR IS RESPONSIBLE FOR INSTALLATION, MAINTENANCE AND REMOVAL OF EROSION & SEDIMENT CONTROL ITEMS. NOT TO SCALE PLAN SYMBOLS - ---- ----------- ----- 7, 7 :. :7 77: 77 RIGHT-OF-WAY UNE 77 - :7- I nT 1 IMP EROSION CONIROL DT E 91 926 1. GRADING CONTRACTOR SHALL VERIFY LOCATIONS AND ELEVATIONS OF ALL I \ \ �\ 1-1 � - SILT FENCE - - - - - - - - - Ole UNDERGROUND UTILITIES PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION NTH THE RESPECTIVE U11L11T COMPANIES. 11 Ole 4 WETLAND 920 _4 -J SILT FENCE {TAP.) 2. ALL EROSION CONTROL MEASURES CALLED FOR ON THESE PLANS AND BRIDGE SPECIFICATIONS, WHICH MAY INCLUDE SILT FENCE, SEDIMENTATION BASINS SILT FEN�E FIFE 927.0 FFE 927�7 ti IN THE FOLLOWING ORDER: HAYBALES OR TEMPORARY SEDIMENT TRAPS, SHALL BE CONSTRUCTED AND SERVICEABLE `.TYPE.. FFE 928.4 FFE 929.1 71 0 A. ROCK CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCES A MINIMUM OF 50 FEET. DITCH BALES B. SILT FENCE. 928.2 -CUT/NO FILL LOCATIONS. I tmP�-GR L 9 6.2 C. STRAW BALE BARRIERS AT NO D. TEMPORARY CULVERTS. Z6 SOIL BORING E TEMPORARY SEDIMENTATION BASINS AND OUTFACE FACILITIES. ONST. E TR 926's EX. CONTOUR F. STORM WATER POND CONSTRUCTION. 4 026,5 1 1 1 0 1, G. COMMON EXCAVATION AND EMBANKMENT (GRADING R.925-8 OFFICE -44A-1 44, 1-4- 1-4-14-A +-4- k4- 1-4-1 -4-1 4-4 �41' 14!1 FF _901- H. SEED AND MULCH OR SOD, [_4 I. STRAW BALE BARRIERS IN FINISHED GRADED AREAS. P 3t2 PROP, CONTOUR J� INLET AND OUTLET FACILITIES SUBSEQUENT TO STORM SEWER WORK. 926 r r qj I?, C7, 3. GRADING CONTRACTOR $HALL PROVIDE AND MAINTAIN ALL EROSION CONTROL 101 -, " EX. ELEV. x goiA) BUILDING C 932.7 - 1_\ - NORTH ----------- S C, PROP. ELEV. MEASURES AS SHOWN ON THESE PLANS AND SPECIFICA11ONS AND DRIVE'THRU ORDER TO PROTECT ADJACENT PROPERTY, Zz_ 7- IMPLEMENT ANY ADDITIONAL EROSION CONTROL MEASURES NECESSARY IN DRAINAGE ARROW 4, ALL EROSION CONTROL FACILITIES SHALL BE MAINTAINED BY TIHE ?_�- FFE 93�2 CONTRACTOR DURING GRADING OPERATIONS. ANY TEMPORARY FACILITIES WHICH Y X. CB ARE TO BE REMOVED AS CALLED FOR ON THESE PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS 5 • SHALL BE REMOVED BY THE GRADING CONTRACTOR WHEN DIRECTED BY THE 934.0 ENGINEER. THE GRADING CONTRACTOR SHALL THEN RESTORE THE SUBSEQUENTLY PROP. CB Is 7 10 DISTURBED AREA IN ACCORDANCE WITH THESE PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS. v. EX. STORM SEWER >> v 5. THE GRADING CONTRACTOR SHALL SCHEDULE THE SOILS ENGINEER SO THAT L 115-51 CERTIFICATION OF ALL CONTROLLED FILLS WILL BE FURNISHED TO THE OWNER .0 4 61 I PROP. STORM SEWER - >> DURING AND UPON COMPLETION OF THE PROJECT. EX. FES C11 PROP. FES .4 FINAL GRADING UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED. 6. ALL DISTURBED AREAS EXCEPT STREETS, SHALL BE COVERED WITH A 77� 934 MINIMUM 4' OF TOP SOIL, ALL DISTURBED AREAS SHALL BE SEEDED <11 & MULCHED AT THE PRESCRIBED RATES WITHIN 72 HOURS OF yA NOPTH 327r,7-----, I 934.8 SEED MIX: MNDOT NO. 500 50#/ACRE MULCH RET. WALL EX. MH TYPE 1 2 TONS/ACRE (DISK ANCHORED) B UILDING D FERTILIZER: 150#/ACRE I (MAX. HOT. 4±) PROP, MH 7. THE EXISTING TOPOGRAPHY AND CONTOUR ELEVATIONS SHOWN ON THE PLAN WERE TAKEN FROM A PLAN FURNISHED BY OWNER. 77 FFE 936.8 M - -_ > ------------ 8. CONTRACTORS GRADING AND EROSION CONTROL OPERATIONS SHALL TAKE ✓ R. 931� PROP. SAN. if PLACE WITHIN THE CONSTRUCTION LIMITS. R. 9353 4 _ _,_ - I "I I I . lir i, 11;Q �v 9. IT IS REQUIRED THAT SOILS TRACKED FROM THE SITE BY MOTOR VEHICLES ; --- --- fo N EX. WATERMAIN BE CLEANED DAILY FROM PAVED ROADWAY SURFACES THROUGHOUT THE v DURATION OF CONSTRUCTION, PROP. WATERMAIN A FFE 936.8 10. PROVIDE TEMPORARY SEDIMENTATION BASINS AS DIRECTED BY THE YD ENGINEER. FFE 938.1 PROP. H RANT UILDING ---------- 7.9 ll. ALL REQUIREMENTS OF THE LOCAL WATERSHED DISTRICT, SHALL BE EX. HYDRANT V DRI - RU_ MET, AS PER THE APPROVED PERMIT. .9 EX. GATE VALVE 1& 12. ALL EROSION & SEDIMENT CONTROL MEASURES SHOWN ON THIS PLAN AND FFE 93 .3 IMPLEMENTED IN THE FIELD AS DIRECTED BY THE ENGINEER SHALL CONFORM TO THE MPCA'S PROP. GATE VALVE 0 "PROTECTING WATER QUALITY IN URBAN AREAS: BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES FOR MINNESOTA". J, 3 t cj I—, C, GAS R,937.8 R.938,0 TELEPHONE -T- SILT FENCE ""J ELECTRIC -E- 04-i r. ev FIFE 939.3 POIAER POLE _OH OVERHEAD CABLE OR POWERLINE "DRIVE-THRU 20' 7, RETAINING WALL 6' WALK - 77V FFE 939.3 J DRAINAGE ARROW I I 0111"31012=2 �M !'iACK FILL 6"x6" TRENCH EX.GROUND ND-11L POSTS SHALL BE SPACED 4.0' APART. SUBMITTAL SET DESCRIPTION • REVISIONS DESIGNED: TJG 9 4 L RET. WALL N 1 (4± MAX HGT.)\1 mm ROGM A. ANDERSON AND ASSOCIATES INC. Land Dovelopment Municipal Roilroods 7415 WAYZATA OLVD., SU17-E 107, MINNEAPOLIS, MINNESOTA (612) 546-7035 MWA STORAGE CEN"TER POROJECT EDWA, M I ES01 A FOUR P GRADING & EROSION CONT 0 PLAN N A\ 8" X 8" WET TAP W/ VALVE TJG BUILDING SETBACK PARKING SETBACK — — — — — — — — RETAINING WALL RAILROAD RIVER OR CREEK CULVERT >--- — — — — — —< FENCE LINE —X—X—X—X—X- CHECKED By. - — — — — — — — - WETLAND RAA HAYBALES REG. No 23137 DITCH BALES SOIL BORING EX. CONTOUR -7 PROP. CONTOUR —901— EX. ELEV. , J, '! G PROP. ELEV. DRAINAGE ARROW '7 V -7 C8 N�H — 4 RA9., 8" X 6" WET TAP W/ VALVE DESIGNED- LOT LINE TJG BUILDING SETBACK PARKING SETBACK — — — — — — — — RETAINING WALL RAILROAD RIVER OR CREEK CULVERT >--- — — — — — —< FENCE LINE —X—X—X—X—X- CHECKED By. - — — — — — — — - WETLAND RAA HAYBALES REG. No 23137 ROGER A. ANOWSON AND ASSOCIATES IN - Lond &evelopment Municipol Roilroads 7415 VMYZATA BLVD., SUITE 107, MINNEAPOLIS, MINNESOTA (612) 546-7035,1 CONNECT TO EX. 6" WM AT EDEN CIRCLE ONA STORAGE CENTER PROJECT EMA, "NESOTA FOUR "S" MOPERTIES, INC. • smommmuntrwo RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE LOT LINE BUILDING SETBACK PARKING SETBACK — — — — — — — — RETAINING WALL RAILROAD RIVER OR CREEK CULVERT >--- — — — — — —< FENCE LINE —X—X—X—X—X- SILT FENCE - — — — — — — — - WETLAND BRIDGE HAYBALES DITCH BALES SOIL BORING EX. CONTOUR PROP. CONTOUR —901— EX. ELEV. , J, '! G PROP. ELEV. DRAINAGE ARROW EX. CB PROP. CB EX. STORM SEWER PROP. STORM SEWER EX. FES PROP. FES EX. MH PROP. MH EX. SAN. PROP. SAN, EX. WATERMAIN PROP. WATERMAIN PROP. HYDRANT EX. HYDRANT EX. GATE VALVE PROP, GATE VALVE GAS TELEPHONE —T— ELECTRIC -F- POWER POLE lcr OVERHEAD CABLE OR POWERLINE RETAINING WALL DRAINAGE ARROW VENUE DDITION �p DOI', 19 4 z