<br />MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE
<br />EDINA VILLAGE COUNCIL, HELD MONDAY, DECEMBER 6, 1965 ,
<br />AT THE EDINA VILLAGE HALL
<br />Answering Rollcall were Members MacMillan , Rixe , Tupa, VanValkenburg and Bredesen.
<br />MINUTES of the Regular Meetings of November 1 and 15, 1965, were approved as submitted
<br />by motion of VanValkenburg, seconded by Tupa and unanimously carried,
<br />PUBLIC HEARING ,ON PROPOSED STBEET NAME CHANG
<br />Etion, Posting and Mailing, which Affidavits were approved as to form and
<br />ordered placed on file.
<br />were requested by the Post Office in order to alleviate confusion of addresses,
<br />ladies in the audience stated that they lived on West Road and East Road and that they
<br />approved the proposed name changes.
<br />then offered the following Ordinance and moved its adoption, with waiver of Second
<br />Clerk presented Affidavits of
<br />Mr. Hyde explained that these proposed Street Name Chages
<br />No further comments were heard and VanValkenburg
<br />ORDINANCE NO. 164-33
<br />AN ORDINANCE AMENDING VILLAGE OF EDINA ORDINAiiCE
<br />NO. 164 ENTITLED I'AN ORDINANCE NAMING AND FGNAMING
<br />CERTAIN ROADS, STREETS AND AVENUES OF THE VILLAGE
<br />OF EDINA J '~-- THE VILLAGE COUNCIL OF THE VILLAGE OF EDINA, MINNESOTA, ORDAIIJS:
<br />Sectio- Ordinance No. 164 of the Village, as amended, is hereby further
<br />amended by adding after Section 48, the following:
<br />-%ection 49.
<br />of Deeds of Hennepin County, is hereby renamed Skyline D31iverr1
<br />"Section 50.
<br />of Deeds of Hennepin County, is hereby renamed Skyline Drive.'!
<br />"Section 51. Limerick Circle West as the same of record in the office
<br />of the Register of Deeds of Hennepin County is hereby renamed Limerick Drive."
<br />"Section 52. Limerick Circle East as the same of record in the office
<br />of the Register of Deeds of Hennepin County is hereby renamed W. 64th Street,"
<br />"Section 53. Limerick Drive (East-West Portion) as the same of record
<br />in the office of the Register of Deeds of Hennepin County is hereby renamed
<br />W, 64th Street.I1
<br />record in the office of the Register of Deeds of Hennepin County is hereby renamed
<br />Limerick Lane.
<br />publicat ion .
<br />West Road as the same of-record in the office of the Register
<br />East Road as the same of record in the office of the Register
<br />"Section 54. Limerick Drive (Western North-South Portion) as the same of
<br />Section 2., This Ordinance shall be in effect from and after its passage and
<br />Motion for adoption ofthe Ordinance was seco
<br />five ayes and no nays and the Ordinance was a
<br />ATTEST :
<br />Rixe and on Rollcall there were
<br />LOTS, 2. AJJD 3,. BLOCK..-= CENTER REAR
<br />RESERV,ATIONS,., Mr. Fredlund presented request of Inland Builders for Rear Yard
<br />Variance for Lots 2 and 3, Block 8, Edina Interchange Center.
<br />Planned Industrial Ordinance requires the front or rear yard of a building adjacent
<br />to a Planned Industrial District boundary to be 75 feet from the road right-of-way
<br />when the opposite side is residential, and for a ten foot grass strip between a
<br />property line and a drive.
<br />line to the projected right-of-way for State Highway 5.
<br />of the highway projects sharply north to the Edina-Bloomington boundary at this
<br />point and then continues westward.
<br />on Lot 2 was constructed 35 feet fromthe right-of-way line instead of the required
<br />75 feet.
<br />remove the curb line on the existing building and install a 10 foot driveway which
<br />would satisfy ordinance provisions. VanValkenburg then moved that the Variance be
<br />allowed providing the existing curb be removed and a ten foot grass strip installed,
<br />Motion for approval was seconded by Tupa and carried,
<br />CE APPROVED WITH
<br />He stated that the
<br />The building on Lot 3 is 135 feet from the rear building
<br />The north right-of-way line
<br />The problem lies in the fact that the building
<br />Planning Commission has recommended approval providing Inland Builders
<br />LOT 2,,~ ,B.L-OAKS ADDITION VARIANCE CONTINUED,
<br />Fequest by the State of Minnesota for a Lot Frontage Variance on Lot 2, Block 1,
<br />Broad Oaks Addition, stating that the State has used a triangular corner of the property
<br />for the Crosstown Highway-100 right-of-way, thus making the frontage of the lot less
<br />than ordinance requirements. Mr, William Thompson, attorney representing Mr, Gerde,
<br />owner of the adjoining property, requested that this Hearing be continued in order
<br />that he has time to familiarize himself with the matter,
<br />representing the Attorney General's Office, stqted that the State has no objections
<br />to the continuation.
<br />December 20 was seconded by Tupa and carried.
<br />Mr. FredLund presented a
<br />Mr. Michael Kkefer,
<br />VanValkenburg's motion that the Hearing be continued until