<br />All work performed by other than heads of departments in excess of 40 hours
<br />per week constitutes over-time and shall be compensated by compensatory time
<br />off or cash payment on the basis of time and one half in either instance.
<br />Compensatory time shall be taken within 90 days of time earned. Compensatory
<br />time in any one calendar month shall be limited to 16 hours worked (for which
<br />the employee receives 24 hours off) and aiy over-time in excess thereof shall
<br />be paid in cash payments. The Village Manage; shall designate those classes
<br />of work which shali be compensated by compensatory time off, or cash paGent
<br />for over-time.
<br />Motion for adoption of Resolution was seconde a, and on Rollcall there
<br />The meeting's agenda's having been covered, VanValkenburg moved for adjournment.
<br />Motion seconded by Dickson and carried.
<br />Village Clerk
<br />LJ 59 MINUTES OF THE REGULARMEETING OF THE EDINA
<br />VILLAGE COUNCIL, HELD MONDAY, QCTOBER 9, 1961, AT
<br />THE EDINA VILLAGE .HALL
<br />.- . __
<br />Meeting convened at 7:OO P.M., with Beim, Dickson, Tupa, VanValkenburg and
<br />Bredesen answering Rollcall.
<br />MINUTES of Meetings of September 25 and October 2, 1961, were approved as
<br />submitted, by motion Tupa, seconded by Dickson and carried.
<br />PUBLIC HEARINGS ON PROPOSED REZONING.
<br />District' to 'Multiple Residence District', 'Community Store District', and
<br />'Commercial-Bistrict'," in Edina-Morningside Courier September 28 and October 5,
<br />1961, and of Posting of said notice on Village Bulletfn Boards; and Planning
<br />Director reported the mailing of notice to affected property owners.
<br />to this notice, Public Hearings were conducted, and action was taken as
<br />follows :
<br />TO MULTIPLE RESIDENCE DISTRICT OF "THE WESTERLY 200 FT. OF LOT 4, BLOCK 2, PEACE-
<br />DALE ACRES, (4240 VALLEY VIEW ROAD). Mr. Hite presented a site sketch, showing
<br />present multiple dwelling and double bungalow locations in relation to this
<br />Clerk presented Affidavit of Publication
<br />"Notice of Public Hearings on Proposed Rezoning from 'Open Development
<br />1. PETITION OF MR. R. A. HIPPE FOR REZONING FROM OPEN DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT
<br />proposed 4-plex planned by petitioner, also showing sketch of the building and
<br />its elevation. It is plapned to have four two-bedroom units, each containing
<br />about 1,000 square feet of floor area, with provision for a single car garage
<br />for each unit. Mr. L. M. Vogt, 4238 Valley View Road, owner of the double
<br />bungalow directly to the south of the proposed 4-plex, objected, on the grounds
<br />that this large building will devaluate his property.
<br />neighbor directly to the south also objects.
<br />of September 13th was reviewed by Council.
<br />large lot is excessively large for either a single or two-family building site,
<br />and is not sufficiently large for two duplexes'.
<br />feels that because of the size of the lot and the character of the building planned
<br />the 4-plex will improve the area rather than detract from it, moved that petition
<br />be granted.
<br />Planning Commission's recommendation. (See Ordinance No. 261-62 of later in
<br />meeting). Motion unanimously carried.
<br />2. PROPOSED REZONING FROM OPEN DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT TO COMMUNITY STORE
<br />DISTRICT OF LOTS 3, 19, 20, 21, 22 AND 23, BLOCK 3, GRANDVIElrJ HEIGHTS ADDITION
<br />(5004 BROOKSIDE AVE. AND 5105-5121,INCL,, SUMMIT AVE.) Mr. Hite presented a
<br />sketch of the triangle bounded by Eden Avenue, Highway #169, and Brookside Avenue,
<br />showing present zoning and zoning proposed; and Planning Commission's favorable
<br />recommendation of September 13th was reviewed. Mr. W. I?. Olson, 5129 Summit Ave.,
<br />told Council that he has no real objection to this plan, but feels there should
<br />be some stipulations imposed; that, because No. 5105 will be either tom down or
<br />removed, the Olsons should have a wall to their North, to contain the fill, with
<br />a privacy fence above that; that drainage should go onto Brookside Avenue and
<br />not into the Olsons' driveway; and that some correction should be made on the
<br />Olsons' access to the Highway. Mr. Hyde told Council he feels that the request
<br />for a fence cannot be attached to the request for zoning; that this latter is
<br />independent, and the fence request should be attached to building permit require-
<br />ments. Mr. Hite added that drainage will be a part Of site development requirements*
<br />He told Council his
<br />Planning Commission recommendation
<br />Petitioner Hippe told Council this
<br />Truetee Beim, stating that he
<br />Dickson seconded the motion, stating that he did so in view of the