<br />?.:Ii!rJTES OF THE REGULN? :.:EETII"!G OF THE EDIPIA
<br />VILLAGE CUUTICIL, HED KOEDAY , AUGUST 25 , 1958
<br />AT 7:oo P.r.I., AT THE EDII!A VILLLGE HALL
<br />!.:embers ans::lering Rollcall xere Bank, Dickson, Kohler, Tupa and Bredesen.
<br />!;inUtes of the Regular I.:eeting of .iugust 11, and of that adjourned portion of
<br />the August 11 meeting held August 18, were approved as submitted by motion
<br />Tupa, seconded by Kohler and carried,
<br />FUBLIC HEARIKG OII FXPOSED ASSES§!.;EM' F@R SHTITARY SE,'ER IfIP,?OVE!EiT i?O. C-1
<br />(Construction of Sanitary Trunk Sewer and Appurtenances including Lift Station,
<br />and of Lateral Connections to said Trunk Sewer).
<br />"Tfotice of Assessnent Hearing" in Edina-Morningside Courier on July 31 and
<br />Jugust 7, 1958, v~as submitted by Clerk, approved as to form and ordered placed
<br />on file, Tabulaticn of Assessment vas read by Lianager Hyde; total cost of
<br />proSect being $1,410,314.43; it being proposed to levy assessment as follows:
<br />For the property yhich can b~ immediately served by the Trunk Sever - $3035
<br />per front foot for platted property and $675 per acre for unplatted property,
<br />for the -- Trunk Se!:ler (fncluding Lift Station). For the property abutting the
<br />Trunk SmJer, which is served in both Trunk and Lateral capacity by the Trunk,
<br />95,85 per front foot in addition to the above stated Trunk Sewer Assessment, for
<br />a Lateral Assessment.
<br />County Road 18 north of the Roushar property (which will need an additional
<br />"district sewer" to benefit from this present trunk seuer) Sl.10 per front
<br />foot for platted property, and $225 per acre for unplatted property.
<br />cases of platted property it is proposed that platted property vhich has more
<br />than 150 feet of frontage, and winich has a deed restriction against subdivision,
<br />v~Zll be assessed a maximum of 150 feet.
<br />restriction against subdividing and Which is large enough to be divided into
<br />tv:o or more legal lots will be assessed on the full frontage.
<br />Affidavit of Fublication of
<br />For the property north of Idine-ldile Creek or fronting on
<br />In all
<br />Platted property wnich has no deed
<br />The audience for this Hearing numbered 28 persons.
<br />Gr. John R. Loeqerinq, 6525 Tingdale Avenue, owner of Lots 16 to 13, inclusive,
<br />Block 17, Xormandale Second .iddition (a total of 200 front feet), stated he has
<br />been intending to put a subdivision restriction on these four lots but has not
<br />yet done so,
<br />would be sufficient to reduce his assessment to a total of 150 feet.
<br />Attorney Hasselquist replied that, if the Council wishes to make this exception
<br />it has the power so to do; but that it is always more proper to have sucl: kovenants
<br />made in advance of formal action.
<br />He inquired as to vrhether the placing of such restriction, nov,
<br />Dr. Erlinq Hansen, 6526 Tingdale Avenue, inquired about the method of assessing
<br />his property, He ot;ns Lots 5 to 10, inclusive, Block 18, Xormandale Second
<br />Addition, abutting Tingdale Avenue; and Lots 15,16 and 17, Block IS, abutting
<br />Rolf Avenue--w?nich latter street is proposed to be vacated; only four lots
<br />along the street being ovmed by a contractor vinb wishes that portion of the
<br />street improved, and it being in Park Board plans to have street vacated.
<br />f.!anager Hyde explained that because of the Park Board plans there is considerable
<br />merit to cancelling the proposed assessment for Lots 15, 16 and 17.
<br />fS. Robert Ostman, 5613 County Road #18, ovmer of acreage, protested paying "for
<br />any more than the difference in the costs of the pipe", insofar as those properties -- -- -
<br />outside the area irrmediately benefiting by this trunk are concerned,
<br />reminded of the Improvement Hearing, at which time this area had been natified
<br />of the method of assessment
<br />He vias
<br />1.k. Clarence Ostman, 5833 Olinger Road, protested paying $675 per acre for his
<br />property, when the area to the I!orth and !'lest pays only $225 per acre. It was
<br />explained to him that his property can be directly served by this Trunk, vhereas
<br />the Xorth-and-:'iest area must have an additioaal "district ser.ler" for service.
<br />Hr. Dvorak, 5605 County Road #18, asked about assessnent relief for snamp properties,
<br />and was inforned that s::lamp properties have been relieved from assessnent on the
<br />same basis as for Sanitary Sewer $53; from topographical maps on hand and where
<br />low lands can be definitely classified as "swamp" or "pond".
<br />XrO Elmer Cerna!:, oymer of ?$ acres near i'lalnut Ridge, complained that this assess-
<br />ment is taxing him beyond his ability to pay.
<br />serviced by the improvement must pay for it; that assessment is proposed to be levied on a 20-year basis in order that it might be more easily paid for, 3.
<br />Cermal: protestd he had received his mailed notice too late to get detailed
<br />information before the Hearing,
<br />only; that official notice v:as published weeks before the Hearing.
<br />It was explained that the land
<br />He was informed that mailed notice is a courtesy