Laserfiche WebLink
~1INUTES OF THE REGULAR IEETING OF THE <br />EDINA VILLAGE COUNCIL HELD AT VILLAGE HALL ON. <br />(1 JUNE 5, 1972 <br />Members answering rollcall were Councilmen Courtney, Johnson, Shaw and Mayor <br />Bredesen. <br />MINUTES of May 15, 17 and 24, 1972, were approved as submitted by motion of <br />Councilman Johnson, seconded by Councilman Courtney and carried. <br />RIC€BIOND HILLS AREA STORM SEVER IMPROVEMENT NO. P-ST.S.-131 CONTINUED TO JUNE <br />$9: X972. Mr. Dunn secalled that the hearing fo_r Storm Sewer Improvement No. <br />P&T.S;4.31 had been continued from the meeting of May 15, 1972, to give pro- <br />perty owners the opportunity tqtry to work out a different proposal.. Mr. <br />Dyer J. Powell, 5224 Richwood Drive, said that he represented the neighbor- <br />hood Homewners' Association. He showed Council photographs which had been <br />taken of the area in question on the ,&y of a heavJ rain; <br />neighbors had suggested the possibility .of exchanging the existing easement which <br />is 20 feet from the property line for an easemefit where the water is actually <br />flowing at the present time. <br />bp&r c-ement EhlvB~rg 6r. pi@'e?.whTch :nould::ru~'~'nae"r$round back to the low spot <br />would remove the proglen of erosion caused by water rupning from the street to <br />the rear of the property. Mr. Dunn suggested that an open culvert might prove <br />to be a safety hazard although th$re was no question but that'it would handle <br />the water. He questioned whether the relocation of the' easement would permit <br />Lot 11 to E& divided at some fuqure time. Mrs. LeBaron's attorney presented <br />pictures taken earlier on che day of the rain which showed ,$onsiderably more <br />water than the pictures shown by Mr. Powell. He added that Mrs. LeBaron would <br />be willing to trade easements, provided that the new cas-ement would go through <br />the middle of her 175 foot lot, permitting a possible .fGtkre division of the <br />property. He pointed out also that the area which is now being used for drain- <br />age is only 55 feet North of the South property line. <br />discussion, Councilman Courtney's motion was seconded by Councilman Johnson and <br />carried continuing the heanig to ,June 19, 1972, so that the Village Engineer <br />could .stake the lot to see just where the gasement lies. Mrs. LeBaron's attorney <br />said'that he believed that neither the neighbors nor Mrs. LeBaron would favor <br />any type of open drainage thru Lot.11. <br />should show that the Council is considering a change which might substantially <br />change the whole atmosphere and the condition of Lot 11 and commented on the <br />different situations showed by the two sets of pictures. <br />LINCOLN DRIVE IMPROVEEENTS CONTINUED TO JUNE 19, 1972. Councilman Johnson's <br />motion was seconded by Councilman Courtney and carried that Lincoln Drive <br />improvements No. P-C-Xt2; PiBA-190 and P-SS-305.be continued to June 19, 1972, <br />as requested by one of the prqperty owners. <br />Bfr, Powell said that <br />Mr. Powell ah% 8hggesked-the possjbklitp tEakLuS5ng <br />- <br />Following considerable <br />I Mayor Brede*sen said that the record <br />VERNON AVENUE - 17-T RIDGE 3RDtADDITION IMPROVEMENTS PUBLIC HEARINGS CONDUCTED. <br />Affidavits of Notice were presented by Clerk, approved as to form and ordered <br />placed on file. Pursuant to due notice given, public hearings were conducted and <br />actiohleaken as hereinafter set forth: <br />A. CONSTRUCTION OF T~JATEREWN IMPROVEMENT NO. P-WM-278 IN THE FOLLOVING: <br />Roushar Frolitage Road and proposed Frontage Road from Lincoln Drive to <br />Vernon Avenue from County Road 1/62 to IJalnut D-rive <br />Vernon Avenue from Tamarac Drive to the West line of Gleason Third Addition <br />Vernon Avenue <br />Hr. Hyde presented total estimated project cost at $115,718.76, proposed to be <br />assessed against 2,829,960 assessable square feet at an estimated cost of <br />$0.04089 per square foot. <br />posed to serve the Edina West apdr~~ent''deveJopmen~: <br />Fabri-Tek, Inc., was assured that the only property for which Fabri-Tek would <br />I be assessed would be 82,250 square feet of property along County Road 18 and <br />that the assessment would be in the neighborhood of $3,500,' He said that <br />Fabri-Tek would have no objection to the improvement on that basis. <br />asked that the hearing be continued at least thirty days so that he could <br />study the best v73y to install the utilities for his development. <br />re&nded Mr. Hanson that he has had ample time to make his study since the <br />improvements in the area have been under consideration for some time and that <br />it might be the end of the construction season before the projects are author- <br />ized. <br />cularly concern the storm sewer in the area. <br />continuing the hearing for two weeks was seconded by Councilman Johnson and <br />on rollcall there were three ayes with Mayor Bredesen voting "Nay" and the motion <br />Nr, Hyde advised that this project has been pro- <br />An attorney representing <br />I Mr, Robert <br />Hanson, 4404 Philbrook Lane, owner of property in the.South end of the project, !. <br />Mayor Bredesen <br />Mr. Dunn pointed out that he believes that Nr. Hanson's questions parti- <br />Councilman Courtney's motion <br />I.