HomeMy WebLinkAbout19650607_regular. NINUTES OF THE
EDLNA ViLLAGE COUNCIL,
6/7/65
REGUI;& 'PEETING OF THE 2".
HELD MONDAY, JUNE 7, 1965, AT
7:OO POL, AT THE EDlNA VILLAGE HALL
ROLLCALL was answered by Members klacMillan , Tupa, VanValkenburg and Bredesen.
MINUTES of the Regular Meeting of May 17, 1965, were approved as submitted, by
motion of Tupa, seconded by ZilacMillan and carried. . - _,
,... ~ .-
BENTON AVENUE - HIGHHAY 100 INTERSECTION PLAN REVLEG7 CONTINUED FOR TRAFFIC .VgLUPIE *
STUDIES,
the*Ninnesota Highway Department over the past several years, beginning with
Layout 6 in 1955, and progressing through to Layout 7-D, currently under Council
consideration. Mr* Hite introduced blr. * Richard Braun of the Highway Department ,
who explained that Benton Avenue was selected as the most reasonable street to
retain as an east-west artery connecting the two sides of Edina between the Nest 50th
Street interchange and the Crosstown Highway interchange,
of design, he explained, there would be a bridge at Benton .Avenue and some encroachment
on the pond in the northwest corner of the intersection.
taken under Layout 7-D because of some modifications in the exit and entry ramps.
The southbound entry from Benton Avenue to Highway 100 was moved from the south side
of the bridge to the north side to allow for a more reasonable mixing of entering
traffic and traffic exiting at the Crosstown Highway. Ik, Vernon Tew, 5012 Benton
Avenue, addressed the Council on behalf of the residents of Benton Avenue. and East
View Drive who are affected by the proposed interchange.
from the residents of the area which requested the.Counci1 to approve an overpass at
Benton Avenue, but without. access or egress facilities to Highway LOO. Mr. -Clifford
Simenson, 5825 East View Drive, stated that it was not definitely established that
the proposed interchange would be of service to only residents of the west-central
portion of Edina, but that it would probably invite the traffic of non-Edina origin,
thereby endangering the safety and atmosphere of the residential area,
5300 Benton Avenue, requested the Council to consider the need for more$ not less,
overgasses to connect the community after the severe division by super highways,
Plr. Bob Boran, 5805 East View Drive, pleaded that the Council preserve the pond as
a beauty spot and source of educational material for high school art and biology
studies. Mr. Cliff Hess, 5120 Benton Avenue, argued that the construction of a
multiple purpose overpass and interchange would endanger the school pedestrian traffic,
which was the basic reason for construction of the overpassI The direction of
greater vehicular traffic, through construction of entry and exit ramps to the
bridge, would impair the safety of school children on Benton and the bridge.
stated that entry onto southbound Highway 100 on a southbound ramp of a diamond
interchange would be faster, and consequently safer, than entry on a ramp than loops
from the north side of the overpass, which would allow an entry speed of approximately
20 miles per hour. To declare the use of a diamond interchange at Benton as being
inadequate based on the experience of the diamond interchanges at Penn Avenue and
France Avenue South on Highway 494, he stated, is misleading because Benton Avenue
does not have the present or potential traffic load that either Penn or France
Avenues do, Mr. Braun replied that Benton Avenue has long been designated by the
Village as a State Aid street and it has long been considered the most reasonable
point of access in central Edina on Highway 100. The traffic counts on which the
future traffic load projections are based were made by the Village of Edina and
furnished to the Highway Department, he stated.
change at Post Road and Interstate 494 was an inaccurate analogy, as drawn by Mr. Hess,
because there are no nearby- entry or exit ramps to conflict with the mixing of traffic
as there are with Benton Avenue+and the Crosstown Highway intersections.
Hastings, 5901 Josephine Avenue, asked whether or not the Highway Department was
prepared to handle the problems caused by the natural springs in the pond, and
whether they considered rearranging the scenic attributes ofthe existing pond area
so as not to totally void the area of its attraction.
Highway Department was not aware of natural springs in the pond until very recently.
He did not consider them an insurmountable engineering problem, but would require
further study.
Highway Department was required to employ a landscape architect for the purpose of
preparing plans and conWacts, which meet with local approval, for the best esthetic
utilization of the remaining landscape,
Avenue, disputed the calculations presented in justification of the expanded ramps
from Benton Avenue south on Highway LOO.
highway ramps similar to the proposed ramps at Benton Avenue, which indicated that
the distance required between the nose of the Benton entry ramp and the Crosstown
exit ramp was considerably less than advocated by the Highway Department.
replied that although the design is predicated on a 70 mile per hour or 60 mile per
hour basis, those speeds would probably rarely be attained under actual use ofthe
facility. This is caused by the presence of several decision factors presented the
driver upon entering a freeway.
on the entry ramp which lane he will travel to reach the desired exit point. These
decision factors substantially affect the speed at which a vehicle is able to travel
Mr. Hite presented a review of the improvement proposals submitted by
I
Regardless of the extent
Eiore of the pond is being
. .-
He presented a petition
Mr. Bob Benson,
-I He also
Braun added that the diamond inter-
Hr* Tom
Mr* Braun stated that the
*
As for preservation or replacement of esthetics, he stated that the I Mr. Frederick Matthews, '!ZXL 'Bent&*. .
He presented calculations based on actual
Mr, Braun
With a choice of three lanes, the driver must decide
6/7/65
. was adopted.
a ramp,
by stating that the Benton Avenue interchange was desired by the Council for several
reasons, primary of which were the accessibility of the area to emergency vehicles,
He further stated that he was not convinced that the details of the design were
completely justified and that more complete traffic counts and detailed projections
be helpful to him,
until an independent traffic analyst could be retained by the Village to establish
more accurate traffic counts and projections in the area,
Tupa and unanimously carried.
Mayor Bredesen answered an inquiry by John Palmer, 5813 East View Drive,
VanValkenburg then moved that the project be continued for 30 days
Motion was seconded by
PORTJON OF MOTOR STGET VACATED.
Edina-Morningside Courier on PIG 27 and June 3, 1965
1965, and Affidavit of Posting on three Village bulletin boards on May 24, 1965, of
Notice of Hearing.
abutting property owners on the north side of the street. Hite reported that the
remaining abutting property owner, Mr. Sam Heller, was aware of the proposed vacation
and was not opposed to it, One of the petitioners, Mr, Waldo Mareck, stated that
he favored the vacation of more of the street, lying west of the petitioned area,
but was informad that an expansion of the vacation would require another petition
and hearing, No other persons presented comment on the matter,
the Eollowing Resolution and moved its adoption:
Clerk presented Affidavit of Publication in the
Affidavit of Mailing on May 24,
Mr, Hite explained that this vacation was petitioned by the
Tupa then offered
RESOLUTI ON
VACATING A P0,RTION OF MOTOR STREET
WHEkAS, two week's published, posted and mailed notice of a hearing to
be held on June 7, 1965, at 7:OO P,M., on the proposed vacation ofthe street
hereinafter described has been given and made, and a hearing has been held thereon
by the Village Council;
Hennepin County, Minnesota, that that part of Motor Street beginriing at the west
line of Lot 2, Block 4, Arden Park 111 and extending easterly to the west bank of
Minnehaha Creek; all as platted and of record in the Office of the Register of
NOW, THEREFORE, be it resolved by the Village Council of the Village of Edina,
eby is vacated effective
Motion for adoption of the Resolution was seconded by MacMilLan, and on Rollcall
there were four ayes and no nays, and the Resolution was adopted,
WEST GLEASON ROAD NAME CHANGED TO "ASPEN ROAD", Clerk presented Affidavit of
Publication in the Edina-Mormingsi.de Courier on May 20 and 27, 1965, and
Affidavit of Mailing on May 18, 1965, of Notice of Hearing of Proposed Street
Name Change.
Gleason Road" be changed to "Aspen Road" because the original plat cont'aining
West Gleason Road contemplated its extension easterly to connect with existing
Gleason Road.
not include their connection,
matter, and no further discussion was heard from the Council,
offered the following Ordinance and moved its adoption with waiver of second
reading :
Mr. Hite reported that it was recommended that the name "West
The platting that has taken place since that time, however, does
No persons were present to submit comment on the
VanVaSkenburg then
ORDINANCE NO, 164-28
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING VILLAGE OF EDLNA ORDINANCE
CERTAIN ROADS, STREETS AND AVENUES OF THE VILLAGE
NO. 164 ENTITLED TIAN ORDINANCE NAENG AND RENAMING
OF EDINA
THE VILLAGE COUNCIL OF THE VILLAGE OF EDINA, MINNESOTA, ORDAINS:
son, 1,- Ordinance No, 164 of the Village, as amended, is hereby further
"Section 45.
amended by adding after Section 44, the following:
2nd Addition and Walnut Ridge 1st A-dition, as the same is of record in the
West Gleason Road, located in GLeason 1st Addition, Gleason
Motion for adoption of the Ordinance with waiver of second reading was seconded '
by MacMillan, and on Rollcall there were four ayes and no nays, and the Ordinance
6/7/65
DANGEROUS ,AND SUBSTANDARD DWELLING AT 5820 ST. JOHNS AVENUE TO BE HEARD ON JUNE 21.
Manager Hyde reported that during September, October and November, 1964, hearings
were conducted regarding the dwelling at 5820 St, Johns Avenue, and that the owner,
Mr. Earl Carlson had heen given thirty days to return to the Council with specific
proposals on how he intended to repair the building. To this date Nr, Carlson had
not reported. He was not present in the audience. blr, Hyde recommended that action
be initiated to bring the matter before the Council for removal. 'Tupa then moved
that the Health Officer or his deputy be authorized to inspect the dwelling at
5820 St. Johns Avenue, to initiate whateaer action is considered necessary, and that
June 21, 1965, be scheduled as the Hearing date on the'matter.
by VanValkenburg and unanimously carried,
Motion was seconded
BELL ADDITION EZONING TO R-2 CONTINUED.
in the Edina4forningside Courier on May 20 and 27, 1965, and Affidavits of Mailing
Clerk presented Affidavits of Publication
on $fay 18, 1965, of Notice of Hearing,
for rezoning of Lots I, 2,'3, and 4, Block 1, Bell Addition from Open Development
District to Ihltiple Residence R-2
rezoning and pointed out that the Planning Commission did 'not intend that its
recommendation of R-2 zoning for these lots was a guarantee of R-2 zoning on the
opposite side of T.H. 169, Council members questioned whether or not the right-of-
way of Nine Hile Creek had been established along the proposed multiple'lots* Hite
explained that it had not yet been established, but would probably be designated as
an area approximately fifty feet wide along the Creek.
Commission believed no final plat should be recommended until the Creek right-of-
way problem had been finally determined, however, it was determined that a preliminary
approval of the proper zoning be considered at'tfiis the. Mr. Akins, petitioner,
was present and reassured Council and Mr. Harvey Hansen, Carl Hansen Company, that
the proposed double bungalows would not be of similar architecture to the existing
structures along T.H. 169 owned by the Hansen Company.
offered, and VanValkenburg moved that the rezoning petition be delayed until the
Creek right-of-way both north and south of T.H. 169 is definitely determined,
Motion was seconded by Tupa and unanimously carried.
RILEY COET-RUCTJOrJ COMPANY GRANTED FLOOR AREA RATIO.,VARIANCE ,
Affidavits of Mailing of Notice of Hearing on Nay 18, 1965, and Affidavit of
Posting of said Notice on May 18, 1965. Pir. Hite explained that the petition requests
a variance in floor area ratio from .6, as required by Ordinance, to ,87. Petitioner
intends to construct a 23-unit apartment building on Lot 2, Block 2, Cassin's Replat,
and the requested variance would not increase or decrease the number of unLts in
the building,
variance based on the previously granted variance for the apartment building
to the immediate south of the building under consideration,
recommendations were heard on the matter.. VanValkenburg moved that the variance
be granted, seconded by 1.IacNillan and unanimously carried.
Hearing was held on petition of D. M. Akins
Messers Ekte and Fredlund explained the proposed
Hite added that the Planning
No further comment was
Clerk presented
. 'I Hite explained that the Planning Commission had recommended the
No objections or
GARAGE SIDE-YA-Il VARIANCE GRANTED AT 5825 FRANCE AVENUE SOUTH.
Affidavits of Posting and Mailing of Notice of Hearing on Hay 3.8, 1965, ' Mr. Rite
Clerk presented
explained that petitioner, 11. \?.-Lewis, proposed to build a garage two €eet from
the property Line, rather than the required five feet.
recommended approval of the variance and abutting property owners' have -submitted
their approval. No further discussion was heard,
be granted, seconded by Tupa and unanimously carried.
Planning Commission has
VanValkenbuEg moved the variance
FRpNT SET-BACK. VARIARCE GRANTED FOR LOT 1, BLOCK 1, FELLMAN'S SECOND ADDITSON.
Clerk presented Affidavits of Posting and Hailing of Notice of Hearing on Bay 18,
1965.
northeast corner of West 70th Street and Limerick Lane.
size of the lot, the petitioner, Bob Staber, has requested that the 30 foot set-back
requirement on the Limerick Lane side be reduced to 20 feet to enable the structure
to face both streets. Hite explained that the street right-of-way was exceptionally
wide at that intersection because of the junction of ~oth Limerick Lane and Hillside
Lane at that intersection.
by VanValkenburg and unanimously carried.
COPNCJL APPROVES. _FINAL PLATS ON OTTO ' S ADDITION, NORMANDALE-HAVERLY. REPLAT AND
VALLEY ESTATES.
that the Otto's I11 Addition plat was approved approximately two years ago, but
there has been a change of ownership and request for final approval anew.
Normandale-Haverly Replat was explained by Mr. Hite. Nr, Haverly , petitioner, stated
that the replat represented two lots plus a thirty foot vacated street replatted into
two larger lots. No objections or recommendations were offered on the proposed plat.
Mr. Hite then presented the Valley Estates preliminary plat, recommended by Planning
Commission for final approval, and explained that the approval recommendation was
qualified by a later review of the street names.
three plats be finally approved, the Valley Estates plat to be subject to a final
approval of the street nantes.
Br. Hite presented the proposed building lines for a double bungalow at the
Due to tlie slightly small
MacI.iillan moved that the variance be granted, seconded
Mr. Hite presented the plats on three developments. He explained
The
VanValkenburg then moved that the
Notion was seconded by Tupa and unanimously carried.
6/7/65
I LOT 17, BL0.C- NORMANDALE ADDITIOH DIVISION APPROVED.
proposed division of Lot 17, Block 2, Xormandale Addition, which represantedthe
Mr, Hite presented the
splitting of one 240 foot lot into two 120 foot by L20 foot lots, The Planning
Commission recommendation was for approval of the lot division on the condition
that a drainage swail in one of the lots was not to be interferred with, No
discussion was heard on the proposal. VanValkenburg then moved that the lot
division be approved on the condition that the drainage swail be left intact,
Motion was seconded by Tupa and unanimously carried,
DAYTON DEVELOPMENT COMPANY LEASE OF OFFICE SPACE TO. REAL ESTATE FIRM IN, l4EDICAL
BUILDING W?SED,
which requested the approval of the Council for the lease of space in the recently-
Mr. Hite preseslted a letter from the Dayton Development Company
completed Southdale Medical Building addition to a real estate firm. Mr. Hite
explained that this use is not specifically allowed under the regional medical
district zoning, but is left to the option of the Council., Mayor Bredesen stated
that on the first application for non-specified use, that of a commercial loan
office, the petitioner had promised that no other non-specified uses would be
requested.
Planning Department that this area of the zoning ordinance be clarigied.
Bredesen su-gested that the request be denied until the Planning Commission specifies
in ordinance the permitted uses in medical district zoning,
moved that the request be denied until the zoning ordinance is more clearly definede
Motion was seconded by Tupa and carried unanimously.
Nr. Elite stated that the Planning Commission had been advised by the
Mayor
VanValkenburg then
REPORT, ON J. 0.. LEG.JIS JGZONING PETITION FOR LOTS 1 AND 2, WILKINS ADDLTI,ON,
reportedTthe Council that the Planning Commission had denied= petition of
14r. Hite
&GezzGTzD
J. 0. Lewis to rezone Lots 1 and 2, Wilkins Addition from Open Development District 7/7/63'
to Multiple Residence DistrikttR-4, Lewis had proposed that a 23-unit apartment
building be constructed on the property, but the Planning Commission had advised
petitioner that it would consider a smaller structure of six or seven units for that
property ,
JUNE. 21. SCHEDULED AS, HEARING DATE ON OLSEN, SCHHELZ AND MRACHEK, VARIAIJCES.
motion of Tupa, seconded by MacMillan and unanimously carried, the following
requests for variances were scheduled for June 21, 1965: W. J, Olsen request for
side yard variance at 4220 Valley View Road; A. J, Schmelz request for front yard
variance 'on West 70th Street, and L, Mrachek request for reverse frontage on
Lot 32, Block 1, Brookview Heights 1st Addition,
ly1j~,l-z"5
On
v
PROPOSED ZONING ORDINANCE AMENDMENTS TO BE HEARD ON JUNE 21, At the recommendation
of the Planning Department, it was moved by V?nValkenb.urg, seconded .by Tupa'and
unanimously carried that public hearings be held on June 21, 1965, to consider
amendments to the Zoning Ordinances, as recommended by the Planning CommJssion,
The amendments provide for additional requirements for the zoning and construction
of buildings in the R-2 District, a new commercial district, and a definition of the
uses and restrictions in the Office Building District.
COUNCIL APPROVES -@NNEPIN ,COUNTY HIGHWAY PLAN FOR INTERCHA
mROSSTOWN HIGHWAY.
the proposed plans for the interchange at County Road 18 and Crosstown Highway for
Council approval on May 7, 1965,
property owners be given opportunity to review the plans,
were all notified that the plans would be available at the Village Hall, but none of
the property owners had been into the Engineer's office to review them,
McCauley, who owns property on the southeast corner of the intersection questioned the
pattern of service roads and approaches, and Mr. Hite explained the various means of
access and egress, Mrs, Anderson, who awns property on the northeast corner of
the intersection inquired about the method of purchase of land for the project,
stating that the land remaining after the acquisitions necessary for the interchange
are completed would be only the low and swampy areasI 14r. Hite explained that the
Highway Department would take into consideration the cost of fill necessary for the
low-lying areas if they condemn the higher areas which would otherwise provide the
fill.
but that the County may be amenable to the proposal that they provide the necessary
fill when the construction is begun,
northeast corner of the intersection stated thatit did not appear that the service
and access roads on the northeast corner were adequate to accomodate possible non-
residential development,
secondary roads at the intersection in order to protect the existing residential
development. Wo further questions or proposals were heard, VanValkenburg then
offered the following Resolution and moved its adoption:
Mr. Hite explained that the County Highway Department submitted
At the time, it was decided that the affected
Mr, Hite explained that they
Mr. John
Playor Bredesen stated that the Village was not involved in the land acquisition
Mr. Robert Hanson, owner of property at the
Mr. Hyde stated that it was not intended to install extensive
I 120 6/7/65
RESOLUTION APPROVING
BEVISED LAYOUT 8B FOR INTERCI-MGE: AT J
T.H. 169'WITH CSAHS 18 AND 62
IJHEEAS , the Hennepin County Highway Department has prepared preliminary plans
for the improvement of the intersection of T.H. 169 and Couniy State Aid Highways
18 and 62, within the corporate limits of the Village of Edina; and
WHEREAS, said preliminary plans are on file in the office of the Highway
Department, Hennepin County, being marked as Layout 8B for Interchange at T.H. 169
with CSAHs 18 and 62; and
WEREAS, copies of said preliminary plans as so marked, labeled and identified
are also on file in the office of thevillage Clerk; and
WHEREAS, the term "said preliminary plans1' as hereinafter used in the body of
this Resolution shall be deemed and intended to mean, refer to, and to incorporate
the preliminary plans as in the foregoing recitals particularly identified and
described;
theintersection of T.H. 169 and County State Aid Highways 18 and 62 within the
corporate limits of the Village of Edina be and hereby are approved,
Motion for adoption of the Resolution was seconde
THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that said preliminary plans for the improvement of
ORDINANCE - NO,. 33A-2 FIRST READING, 14anager Hyde presented to the Council a draft
of przsed Ordinance No, 338-2, which regulates the size of private dog kennels
and provides further conditions under which an animal may be impobnded and destroyed,
No discussion was heard on the proposal.
Ordinance for First Reading:
VanValkenburg then offered the following
ORDINANCE NO, 33A-2
AN ORDINANCE ANEMDING ORDINANCE NO. 33A,
RELATING TO THE KEEPING OF DOGS INLTHE VILLAGE
THE VILLAGE COUNCIL OF THE VILLAGE OF EDINA, t*iINNESOTA, ORDAINS:
Section 1.
to read as follows:
"Section 1.
person owning, harboring or keeping a dog,"
Sec. 2.
"Sec. 16,
Section 1 of Ordinance No. 33A of the Village is hereby amended
As used in this ordinance, "owner" means any Definition of Owner.
Section 16 of said ordinance is hereby amendedto read as follows:
Confinement or Destruction of Certain Animals ; Impounding .of Animals
Animals in heat shall he kept confined in an enclosure which to D.eTermine. i€. Rabid.
prevents their eseape or the entry therein of other animals.
likely to cause injury to any person shall either be destroyed or be so confined in
an enclosure that they cannot harm persons and that they cannot readily be released
therefrom by small children,
impound any animal not confined as herein required, in the manner described in
Sections 9 through 13 hereof.
least 10 days separate and apart from other animals under the supervision of a licensed
veterinarian until it is determined whether the animal had or has rabies.
animal is found to be rabid, it shall be destroyed; if it is found not $0 be rabid,
it shall be returned to the owner provided the owner shall first pay for the cost of
keeping it. If the owner does not pay such cost within five days after he has been
notified to claim or retrieve his animal, the animal may be disposed of as provided
in Section 13,l'
and destroyed, provided, however, that such animal may be immediately killed if
with reasonable effort it cannot first be taken up and impounded,
is impounded, it shall not be destroyed if the owner makes provision for a suitable
quarantine for a period of not less than six months, or proof of immunization is
furni'shed and booster injestions are given by a licensed veterinarian at the expense
of the owner."
Sec. 3.
read as follows:
"(d)
at any place, except in a licensed pet shop or licensed animal hospital,"
Sec, 4.
passage and publication according to law.
Animals of vicious habits
The police officers of the Village shall take up and
"Any animal that has bitten a person shall be taken up and impounded for at
If the
I'Any animal known to have been bitten or exposed to rabies shall be picked hp
If such an animal
I Paragraph (d) of Section 17 of said Ordinance is hereby amendedto
No more than two animals over six months of age shall be kept or harbored
This ordinance shall be in full force and effect from and after its
6/7/65 121
ORDINANCE NO. 51-B ADOPTED AFTER SECOHD READING, Manager Hyde stated that the
proposed Ordinance , which adopts the 1964 edition of the Uniform Building Code
was questioned by the Village Attorney on certain provisions regulating surface
water drainage .
Reading and adoption of.the following amendment:
as follows: "Surface Water, Denial of Permit, The Building Inspector shall deny
a permit for construction or enlargement of a dwelling on ground which is too low for
adequate drainage of surface waters .IF :
MacMillan then offered the following .Ordinance for Second
Section 6 is changed to read
ORDINANCE NO. 51B
ALTERATION, REPAIR, MOVING, REMOVAL, DEMOLITION, CONVERSION,
OCCUPANCY, EQUIPMENTy USE, HEIGHT, AREA AND MAINTENANCE OF ALL
BUILDINGS AND STRUCTURES, PROVIDING FOR THE ISSUANCE OF PERMITS
AND COLLECTION OF FEES THEREFOR, PROVIDING PENALTIES FOR THE
AN ORDINANCE REGULATING THE ERECTION, CONSTRUCTIOI? , ENLARGEMENT,
VIOLATION THEREOF, AND REPEALING ORDINANCE NO, 51A
AND AMENDMENTS THERETO
THE VILLAGE COUNCIL OF THE VILLAGE OF EDINA, MINNESOTA, ORDAINS:
Section 1. Uniform Building Code Adopted, There are hereby adopted and
incorporated herein by reference, as an ordinance of the Village of Edina, the documents
entitled "Uniform Building Code, 1964 Edition, Volume 1 ,I1 and "Uniform Building Code
(Standards )
of Building Officials, but excluding Section 203 of the main body of said Code,
1964 Edition, Volume 111 both published by International Conference
- -
See. 2. Uniform-Building Code on File, Three copies of said documents, marked
llOfficial Copy" shall be filed in the office of the Clerk prior to publication of this
ordinance, and shall remain on file in said office for use and examination by the
public. The Clerk shall furnish copies of said documents at cost to any person upon
request ,
understood to refer to
"Village Council .ll
Building Code, Volume 1:
Sec. 3, Construction of Codes . Whenever used in said Codes, ltCitylt shall be
and "City Council11 shall be understood to re€er to
Sec. 4. Changes in Code. The following changes are hereby made in said Uniform
(a)
(b)
The maximum amount of the fine provided in Section 205 shall be $LOO,
The last sentence of paragraph (c) of Section 301 is deleted and the
"When required by state law, plans and specifications shall be
prepared and designed by an architect or qualified engineer
licensed by the State of Minnesota to practice as such,"
(c) Paragraph (d) of Section 301 shall be amended to read as follows:
following sentence substituted therefor:
"(d) Information on Plans and Specifications. Plans shall be drawn to
scale upon substantial paper or cloth and shall be accompanied by specifications of
sufficient clarity to indicate the nature and extent of the work proposed and show in
detail that it will conform to the provisions of this Code and all relevant Laws,
ordinances, rules and regulations. .The first sheet of each set of plans shall give
the house and street address of the work and the name and address of the owner and
person who prepared then.
may approve references on the plans to a specific section or part of this Code or
other ordinances or laws.
"Plans shall include a survey of the 10% upon which the proposed building or
construction is to be done, prepared and attested by a registered surveyor, and
In lieu of detailed specifications, the Building Official
- -- -- the following information:
Scale of drawing.
Lot and block number
Dimensions of lot and north point.
Dimensions of front
Locations of all existing buildings on the lot,
Location of proposed building or construction ,
Location of stakes established by the surveyor along each side lot line
a distance of 30 and 60 feet from the front lot corner, The maintenance
of these stakes once established by the surveyor shall be the responsibility
of the building permit applicant,
The side yard and set back dimensions of buildings located on adjacent
lots,
The 1ocation.of all easements as shown on record plats.
Grade elevations at the following points :
a. Each lot corner (either existing or proposed).
b. Crown of proposed street at each lot line extended,
C. Proposed lawn and driveway elevations at the street side of house.
Such elevations may be based upon an assumed datum but shall be tied
by the surveyor to a specified bench mark for which the elevation has
been obtained from the Village Engineer's office,
The proposed disposal of drainage and surface waters
of surface water drainage by arrows."
rear and side yards.
indicating direction
' (d) The first sentence of
following substituted therefor:
6/7/65
paragraph (a) of Section 303 is .deleted. and .the.
llBuildingrqit. Fees .
Buildings designed
Buildings designed
Buildings designed
for Group l Occupancy - $16.00 for the first L,OOO cubic
feet plus $LOO for each additional
1,000 cubic feet or fraction thereof ,
fraction thereof . Minimum fee
of $35.00,
for A through H Occupancy - $1.40 per 1,000 cubic feet or
for J Occupancy - $11.00 for first 22,000 cubic feet or fraction
thereof plus $.50 for each 1,000 cubic feet or
fraction thereof. I For repair, alteration, remodeling or conversion of a building, a fee shall be
paid to the Village of Edina as follows: $6.50 up to $1,000.00 construction
cost plus $2.00 for each additional
$500 00 .
For demolitior of a building, a fee shall be paid to the Village in the amount
of $10.00 before work commences.
A plan checking fee shall be charged for all work with a valuation of $100,000~00
or more at the rate of one-half the building permit fee";1
(e)
.
Section 303 is amended by adding thereto a fu~her paragraph (c), reading
"(c) Refund of Fees, Upon return of a building permit to the*ViUage by
as follows:
the holder thereof, with proof satisfactory to the Building Official that no construction,
was undertaken pursuant thereto, he shall refund to the holder the building permit fee
paid by him, except that 5% of the fee paid or $25.00, whichever is greater, shall be
retained by the Village. A refund on similar terms shall be made in such cases of any
plan checking fee paid under subsection (b) hereof, except that no refund shall be
made if the Village has caused the plans to be checked."
(f) The first paragraph of Section 2202 is deleted and the following substituted:'
I'Tjrpe V buildings shall have exterior walls covered with solid' sheathing as
specified in Section 4, subsection (h), of Ordinance No, 51B of the Village of
Edina *
(9) The first vertical column of figures appearing immediately next to the
description of roof members in Table No. 23B included in Section 2305 is changed as
follows : Change 20 to 40;
Change 16 to 30; and
Change 12 to 20. I. The second and third vertical columns shall be disregarded.
Compliance with said amended roof live load capacities shall be deemed adequate for
snow loads.
In subsectiqn 4 of sub-
section (b) , delete '!Except for one-story detached buildings of Group J occupancy,
where twenty-four inch (24") spacing may be used,"
Subsection 2 of subsection (f) is deleted and replaced by the following:
(h) The following changes are made in Section 2507:
Subsection (c) is deleted,
"2. Sheathing, All exterior wood stud walls shall be sheathed
with wood boards, plywood or asphalt-impregnated wood fiber board,
Sheating, if of wood, shall be covered on the outside face with one
layer of waterproof building paper, If wood boarding or shiplap is
used, the minimum thickness shall be 5/8". If plywood sheathing is
used, the minimum thickness shall be 1/211 and if sheathing of fibepboard
is used, it shall be 25/32" thick.
nailed to each stud with not less than one nail, or to solid nominal
wood sheathing with not less than one line of nails spaced not more
than 24." on center in each piece of the siding.
located as to hold the bottom of the siding secure and thereby
to hold tight the top of the piece below. fqhere such nailing
is not possible, two nails to each stud shall be used to hold
e.ach piece
.
All siding shall be securely
Nails shall be so
. -
Sec. 5. &ointment of Board of Appeals. The Mayor shall forthwith proceed
to carry out the provisions of Section 204 by appointing five qualified members of - - the Board of Appeals'created by said Section.
Sec. 6. Surface Water, Denial of Permit, The Building Inspectar shall deny a
permit for construction or enlargement of a dwelling on ground which is too low for
adequate drainage of surface 1 wat.ers .
Sec. 7. Repeal. Ordinance No. 51A ofthe Village, known as the Building Code
of the Village of Edina, Minnesota, and all amendments thereto are hereby repealed;
provided, however, that all the provisions thereof shall continue to be 'applicable.
permit has been is'sued thereunder and
(a) to all construction not completed (or not begun),'but for which a building
6/7/65
* (b) to construction for which no building permit has been issued, but costs have
been incurred by the builder prior to the effective date of this ordinance in reliance
on the provisi6ns of said ordinance No. SLAY so that to apply the provigions of 1964
edition of the Uniform Building Code to the proposed construction would wrirrk a hardship
on the builder applying for a building permit ; however, the building permit application
and fee.s and building inspections shall be as provided in Chapter 3 of said Code
(Volume 11, as amended herein.
publication
Sec. 8. This ordinance shall take effect immediately upon its passage and
PETJTIONS RECEIVED.
carrrthe fo11;;lfSing petitions were accepted and ordered referred to Engineering
for scheduling:.
Oiling: Belmore Lane - Blake Road to John Street; Josephine Avenue - West 64th Street
to West 65th Street; Belmore Lane - Harrison Avenue to Jackson Avenue; Monroe Avenue -
Belmore Lane to Maloney Avenue; Sherwood Avenue - West 65th Street to West 66th Street;
West 65th Street - Sherwood Avenue to P.H. LOO; Wilryan Avenue - West 64th Street to
West 65th Street .
Watermain and Sanitary Sewer Extensions:
Avenue; York Avenue - West 69th Street to West 66th Street.
On MacMillan' s motion, seconded by VanValkenburg and unanimously
West 69th Street - France Avenue to York
COUNCIL GRANTS N,S.P. UNDERGROUND EASEMENT IN EDINA VALLEY ESTATES.
presented a request by Northern States Power Company for a ten foot underground
easement in a lot owned by the Village, Outlot 1, Edina Valley Estates.
discussion was offeeed and MacPlillan moved that the Northern States Power Company
request for easement be approved,
carried.
Manager Hyde
No
Motion was seconded by Tupa and unanimously
PROPOSED ,,CONTRACT WITH LAKE CONFERENCE FOR USE OF ICE A,REMA.
the Council that the Village Attorney had recently completed a revised contract
Manager Hyde informed
proposal to be submitted to the Lake Conference for high school use of the ice
arena at Braemar Park, .Originally, the proposed contract was for five years with
a five year option,
five year term with a two year option would be more favorable.
concern over allowing for an opportunity to review the proposed 70-30 per cent
split of the gate receipts.
or not the Village would be required to adjust the division of receipts as long as
the Lake Conference was not being over-charged,
The Edina-Morningside SchooL District, however, believes a
They also expressed
Manager Hyde stated that it was questionable whether
ICE.A&NA SITE GRADING AND WELL BIDS AWARDED.
of bids received on June 7, 1965, for site grading for Braemar Ice Arena. Six bids
Manager Hyde presented a tabulation
were received, Terry Bros., Inc; being low at $22,640.00; M. E. Kraft Excavating
Company, second low at $23,346.00; and J, A. Danens E Sons, Inc., high bidder at
$44,330.00.
by Tupa, and unanimously carried, that the site grading be awarded to Terry Bros, Inc.
for $22,640,00, Manager Hyde then presented a tabulation of bids received on June 7,
1965, for construction of a well to service Braemar Ice Arena,
E. H, Renner & Sons being low bid at $3,645,00; and Layne-Minnesota Co. being high at
$4,780.00,
award €or construction of the Ice Arena well be awarded to E. H. Renner & Sons for
$3,545.00.
Recommendation was for award to low bidder. MacMillan moved, seconded
Five bids were received, '
Tupa moved, seconded by VanValkenburg and .unanimously carried, that the
AWA-0. VICTOR CARLSON E SONS, INC. Manager Hyde presented
a tabulation of bids, received June 7, 1965, for permanent surfacing of various park
play areas, which reflected three bids. Victor Carlson E Sons. Inc. was low bidder
at $11,875 00 ; Black Top Service was second low at $13,162.00 ; -and Berglund-Johnson
Inc. was high bidder at $15,730.00. Tupa's motion, seconded by VanValkenburg, that
the award be made to Victor Carlson & Sons, Inc., was unanimously carried,
OAKLAFJN A,EI?UE, TURN-AROUND (E-20) ABANDONED, WILRYAN AVENUE (BA-76 ) APPROVED AFTER
CONSI,DERKTIOIJ, OF. STREET SURFACING BIDS.
bids, for bids received on June 4, 1965, which covered four different categories of
paving projects.
BA-75, BA-77, A-161 and B-77; reflected four bidders, Bury & Carlson, Inc. low at
$108,161.05; Black Top Service second low at $110,143.20; and Riegger Roadways, Inc.
high bidder at $128,439.00. Proposal B, for Improvement No. BA-68* reflected three
bidders, Riegger Roadways, Inc. low at $169,746.00; Black Top Service second low at
$176,890.00; and Alexander Construction Company, Inc., high at $177,905.10.
Manager Hyde presented a tabulation of
Proposal A, for Improvements NOS, BA-69, BA-72, BA-73, BA-74,
f I 6/7/65
Proposal C, for Improvement E-20, received three bids, Arnold Bechman low at $6,410.00 ;
Victor Carlson E Sons, Inch second low at $7,625,00; and Black Top Service high at
$7,645.00.
Service low at $7,522.50; Bury E Carlson, Inc. second low at $7b737420; and Alexander
Construction Company high at $10,240 50 .
low bidder, Bury E Carlson, Inc, at $108,L61,05; Proposal B for award to,fiegger
Roadways, Inc. at $169,746400, after having received a promise of the low bidder
that this project would be of better quality than previous jobs performed for the
Village; Proposal C for rejection of all bids because the unit price would be too
high for the,abutting property owners to accept; Proposal D for award to low bidder,
Black Top Service Company at $7,522,50, if the Council decided to continue Improvement
'
Proposal D, for Improvement No, BA476, received four bids, Black Top
Hanager Hyde reported that the recommendations were: Proposal A for award to
3A-76 4
Property owners on Vilryan Avenue, affected by Improvement BA-76, were present
to discuss the possible abandonment of the project.
dissenting property owners were present at the original Public Hearing on the
Proposed Improvement two months previously, and the Improvement was ordered at that
time.
affected property owners stating their opposition to the improvement.
speaking for the persons opposed to the improvement were l4essers Atkinson, 6336
Wilryan Avenue, Butler, 6353 Wilryan Avenue, and Juhl, 6340 Wilryan Avenue. They
explained that their opposition was not necessarily against the project, but that
they preferred to have the whole area completed in one job, not a block at a time,
which the present proposal represented. Manager Hyde and Hayor Bredesen explained
that several years ago the.Village proposed to pave the entire area but was met with
such hostile and abusive Qpposition that it was determined that only projects
petitioned for would be considered, They explained that the unit cost for thi's
project, according to the bid received from Black Top Service Company, was quite
favorable and that it was unl5kel.y that a lower price could be obtained even if
the whole area were included.
Avenue, Alrick, 6337 Bilryan Avenue and Mrs. Larson, 6329 Nilryan Avenue, spoke for
those in favor of the project.
appearance of the neighborhood could not be coprected shopt of permanent surfacing.
Moreover, they asserted, it was unlikely thst merely paving a portion of the street
next to the Crosstown Highway and leaving the lower portion of the street unpaved
would deter traffic from the street. Tupa then moved, seconded by Macklillan, and
unanimously carried, that Proposal A be awarded to Bury E Carlson, Inc. at $108,161,05,
Proposal B be awarded to Riegger Roadways, Inc, , at $168,746r00; and that Proposal C
bids-be rejected and Improvement No. E-20 be abandoned,
of Sept. 6, 1966, page 193, Minutes Book 29)
MANAG.E.R DIRECTED TO RETAIN PROFESSIONAL CONSULTANT FOR LIBRARY hip, PARKING- RAMP
IN ARE-A PF NEST.. 5OTH STREET. ,MD FRANCE AVENUE. Mayor Bredesen suggested to the
Council that the Manager be directed to retain an architect to assemble data in
preparation for construction of a new library building at the present site at
West 50th Street and Library Lane,
parking ramp to accomodate employees of, the area and possibly library patrons.
Hayor Bredesen stated that the building should be strictly a library with no
additional facility for community rooms and the like,,
that' the Hanager be directed to employ the necessary consultants to provide
preliminary data and'estimates for the construction of a new library building and
parking ramp.
bfanager iiyde reported that no
Shortly after the Hearing a petition was received from the majority of the
Residents
tiIessers Perkl, 6324 Wilryan Avenue, Kuntz, 6342 Wilryan
They stated that the dust problem and unsightly
(Corrected pursuant to Ninutes ~
Also involved would be the consideration of a
VanValkenburg then moved
SCHAEFER ROAD- JJATER AND SEWER SCHEDULED FOR HEARING ON REVISED PROPOSAL * JUNE. 21.
blr. Nark Dahlquist, 5012 Schaefer Road, requested the Council to reconsider the
proposed improvements to Schaefer Road-ordered on May 17, 1965.
that without substantial financial changes the properties on Interlachen BLvd. and
Schaefer Road could be serviced with sewer and water without. extending the. facilities
the entire lensh of Schaefer Road, He statkd that the future expansion potential
of the systems could be installed at this time, and requested the Council to
schedule a new hearing on the matter, MacMillan offered the following Resolution
and moved its adoption;
He represented
RESOLUTION PROVIDING FOR PUBLIC HEARING .- ON SANITARY SEWER AND WATERMAIN
BE IT RESOLVED by thel'Viliage of Edina, Edina Village Council:
as to the feasibility of the proposed Sanitary Sewer and Watermain described in
the form of Notice.of Public Hearing set forth below, and as to the estimated cost
of such improvements, said report is hereby approved and directed to be placed in
the office of the Village Clerk;
Edina Village Hall, to consider in public hearing the views of all persons interested
in said improvements ;
1. The Village Engineer, having submitted to the Council a preliminapy report
2. This Council shall meet on Monday, June 21, 1965, at 7:OO P.L, in the
1.
6/7/65
3. The Clerk is hereby authorized and directed to cause notice of the time,
place and purpose of said meeting to be published in the official newspaper once a
week for two successive weeks, the second of which publications is to be not less
than three days from the date of said meeting, and to mail notice to all affected
properties. not later than ten days from the date of said meeting, which notice shall
be in substantially the following form:
VILLAGE OF EDINA
HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARINGS
SANITARY SEWER AND WATERHAIN
EDINA VILLAGE COUNCIL will meet at the Edina Village Hall on Monday, June 211 1965,
at 7:OO P.M., to consider the following proposed improvements to be constructed
under the aughority granted by Minnesota Statutes 1961, Chapter 429.
cost of said improvements are estimated by the Village as set forth below:
The approximate
- - ESTIMATE OF COST
1. CONSTRUCTION OF VILLAGE SANITARY SEWER AND APPURTENANCES
IN THE FOLLOWING:
Schaefer Road from Interlachen Blvd. to 850 feet south,
and on an easement line from Interlachen Blvd. to 355
feet, more or less, north
2 . CONSTRUCTION OF VILLAGE WATERMAIN AND APPURTENANCES
IN THE FOLLOWING:
Blake Road from Waterman Aver to easement line
On an easement line from Blake Road to Interlachen Blvd.
and Schaefer Road
$26,971.11
Schaefer Road from Interlachen Blvd. to 480 feet south $11 8 896 6 22
The area proposed to be assessed for the cost of the proposed sanitary sewer under
1 above and the proposed watermain under 2 above includes Lot 1, Block 1, Wayne
Terrace; Lots 11 thru 14 incl., and Lots 19 thru 27 incl., Auditor's Subdivision
#325; Block 28, Mendelssohn Addition; Lots 4 and 5, Blo'ok 1, Harold Woods Addition;
and Lots 1 and 2, Block 1, Harold Woods 2nd Addition,
Florence Hallberg
Village Clerk
Motion for adoption of the Resolution was seco
1YIINUTE.S- ,OF. JU-1964ARRECTED. On Tupa's motion seconded by IvIacMiLlan and
unanimously carried, a typographical error in line 3lS page 130, of the Minutes of
the Regular PIeeting of June 21, 1964, relating to Storm Sewer 84, was corrected from
I.)$. 0008152'1 tQ 1'$.008152+11
FINANCIAL, ,VPORTS ACCEPTED.
Treasurer's Report of April 30, 1965 , and Liquor Fund Reports of March 31 and
April 30, 1965, be approved and ordered placed on file, was unanimously carried.
IMacMillan' s motion, seconded by VanValkenbwg, that the
A-iVNU~AL AUDIT @PORT. .WCEIVED,
Report for year ending December 31, 1964.
by MacMillan and carried,
CLA,IMS, PAID.
of the following Claims as per Pre-List dated June 7, 1965, and the following listed
Claims: General Fund, $12,781.08; Construction Fund, $2,557.75; Park, Park
Construction, Swimming Pool E Golf Course Funds, $11, 939.79; Water Fund, $14,095.90;
Liquor Fund, $83,920.86; Sewer Rental Fund, $514.11; Poor Fund, $301.00; International
City Managers' ASSOC,, $110.00; Bloomington Bus CoIY $125.00; Hallman Oil CO.,
$322.62; Village of Edina, Change Fund, $100.00; United States Rubber Company, $833.00;
Pattee Architects, Inc, $161.59 ; Contin-
ental Safety Equipment, Inc. $56,15; Animal Rescue League, $1,157.00; Xerox, $257.49;
Mildred Maxwell, $350.00; Robert J. Pugleasa Cob, $224.67; Johnson Paper and Supply
Co., $557.36; Equipment Parts and Service Company, $157.03; National Chemsearch Corp,,
$229.62; Lindig Manufacturing Co., Inca$ $33.11, Dorothy Lo and Earl L. Niederloh,
Manager Hyde presented to the Council the Audit
Tupa moved that it be accepted, seconded
Motion by Tupa was seconded by MacIYIillan for confirmation of payment
$2,000 . 00; Industrial Lighting Supply, Inc.
$2,000.00.
The Meeting's agenda having been covered, Macidillan's motion for adjournment was
seconded by VanValkenburg and carried. Meetin