HomeMy WebLinkAbout19740415_regular101'
MINUTES OF THE REGULAR 1EETING OF THE
EDINA CITY COUNCIL HELD AT CITY HALL ON MONDAY,
APRIL 15, 1974
Answering rollcall were Council members Courtney, Johnson, Schmidt, Shaw and
Mayor Van Valkenburg.
KRAHL HILL PRD -3 PLANNED RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT ZONING DENIED. Affidavits of Not -
ice�,were presented by Clerk, approved as to form and ordered placed on file.
Mr. Luce pres&fited`.the. request of Mr. Melvin Gittleman for PRD -3 Planned Resi-
dential District Zoning for Krahl Hill, located gene= lly South of Vernon Avenue
and West of Arctic Way, noting that this zoning change is being reconsidered at
this time because some believe that the higher and greater use of the property
would permit development of the site with less damage to the hill. He advised
that the Planning Commission had unanimously recommended the Planned Residential
District zoning proposed by Mr. Gittleman. Mayor Van Valkenburg reviewed the
background for development of the'site and emphasized the fact that Council has
no preconceived ideas as to action to be tacen`at this hearing. He referred to a
letter from Mrs. Beverly Schiffman, 6120 Arctic Way, opposing the proposal and to
a letter from Mr. Roy H. Peterson urging that-the zoning be approved. Mr. Git-
tleman made a presentation of his proposed 72 unit condominium, advising that
the proposal will consist of three 24 unit buildings, with nine dwelling units
per acre. He said that the development would least destroy the contours of the
site as compared to single family development. Mr. Gittleman said that he, too,
is interested in solving traffic problems in the area and would not object to a
cul -de -sac on Vernon Avenue at Walnut Drive. He made a comparison of the single
family development with the Planned Residential District development and said that
less than 20% of the hill would remain undestroyed with the presently approved 20
home plat. He added that he would be willing to sign a deed restriction, if it
could be done legally, agreeing not to sell to people with children. Mr. Mar-
shall Pieczentkowski, 6535 Polar Circle, introduced Mr. Richard Seaberg, 6108
Arctic Way, who said that Mr. Gittleman's statements about the difference in the
undisturbed area of the hill under the two proposals are misleading and added
that residents on Walnut Drive, Aspen Road, Tamarac Drive, Arctic Way and Polar
Circle do not want the site developed with condominiums. Mr.,Seaberg intro-
duced Mr. James Mildes, Vice President of Edaw, Inc., specialists in environmental
planning, urban design and landscape architects, which firm was retained by property
owners in the area to study both proposals as to the impact on the site. Mr.
Mildes presented graphics which compared the cut and fill for the two proposals
and advised that, after analyzing both plans, he felt that the Council should be
aware of the impact that grading.for either tape of "ddvelopmerit::%,zouldl-cause on
the-�siteY c$ezclaf field that -he'was not supporting or endorsing either plan. For
the record, Mr. Seaberg then read from two petitions which were circulated in the
neighborhood which were worded as follows: (1) "As a homeowner in Western Edina
and in support of the Viking Hills Association, I support all their efforts to
protect our area from the encroaching multiple dwelling rezoning requests before -
the Village Council. I strongly urge the Edina Council to deny the rezoning
request for multiple units, and request that single family homes can be built on
the property known as Krahl Hill property. I recognize that the approved Krahl
single - family plan may leave less than 39.8% of the area undisturbed. According
to the Gittleman Corporation proposal, cut and fill necessary to remove 36 -40 -
feet from the crown of the hill (as required by the approved Krahl single - family
plan) may drastically reduce the 39.'8% of undisturbed area "; and (2) "As a
homeowner in Western Edina I do not support the Viking Hills Homeowners Association's
advocation of the approved Krahl single - family plan which would reportedly leave
less than 39.8% of the area undisturbed (cut and fill would further reduce this.)
I recommend approval of the proposal to change the "property to R3 zoning so that
multiple unit construction can be made. I am in favor of the Gittleman Corpora-
tion proposal to construct 3 buildings containing a total of 72 apartment units.
According'to the Gittleman proposal as presented, 63.9% of the.area would remain
undisturbed." Mr. Seaberg said that out of 114 area homes, 111 were actually
polled. 107 families signed the petition for R -1 zoning, none signed the petition
for PRD -3 zoning and four did not sign either petition. Mr. Jack Ziegler, 6012
Tamarac Drive, spoke in opposition to the proposal, stating that 'such a develop-
ment would increase traffic and change the fiber of the community. Mr. Dunn
explained calculations made which indicated that the green area on the R -1 plat
is 22.06% of the total tract and the green area on the PRD -3 proposal is 45:57%
of the total area.- Councilman Johnson pointed out that if the figures on the charts
are not accurate, Mr. Dunn's figures would not be valid. Councilman Shaw was told
by Mr. Dunn that the green area referred to did not necessarily mean "'undisturbed
area't, but an area possibly reseeded and with newly planted trees. In response
to a question of Councilman Johnson, Mr. Mildes said that he estimates that 647.
of the hill would-be disturbed with the PRD -3 plan and 59% would be disturbed under
the single family plan. Councilman Shaw made it clear that it was without prejud-
ice in any way that he moved for the reopening of the zoning within a period of _
�J
I
1
1N
4/15/74.
one year, feeling; :that the matter deserved more consideration. He spoke of
his appreciation that Mr. Krahl was willing to delay removal of the tree
cover on his property until after this hearing. Councilman Shaw reiterated
that he had no preconceived.opinion before this hearing. In response to a
question of Mr. C. J. Bodine' 6141 Arctic Way, Mr. Gittleman agreed that fewer
housing units would cause less change in the character of the hill, but that
economics dictated the number of units proposed for the site. In response_
to a question of Mr. Roy The_rnell, 6139 Arctic Way, Mr. Gittleman identified
the"high point" of the hill. Mr. L. A. Demee, 6116 Arctic Way, pointed out
that people who would be buying lots in Mr. Krahl's plat would be planting
trees to replace some of the trees that were removed. Mr. Darrell Stark, 5924
Walnut Drive and Mr. E. H. Crow, 6113 Arctic Way, also spoke in opposition to
the proposal. Speaking in favor of Mr. Gittleman's proposal were Mr. Karl F.
Diessner, 6300 South Knoll Drive, Mr. George Sedgwick, 5809 Schaefer Road and
a resident of Scriver Road who all indicated that they would like to live in
such a development when they sell their present homes in Edina. Mrs. Virginia
Scott, 6613 Southcrest Drive, recalled the apartment that Council had already
approved at 66th and France Ave, Councilman Johnson said that he is not con-
vinced that either Mr. Krahl's single family plat or Mr. Gittleman's proposal
is best and that there should be some better plan for the property: He
recalled that in July, 1973, Council had turned down a PRD rezoning for the
following reasons 1) the density was too great; 2) traffic problems in the
jv area would be aggrevated; 3) land coverage is too great for such a unique
Q site. Councilman Johnson said that he believes that the first two reasons are
t�0 still as applicable at this time as last July and then moved that the petition
for PRD -3 zoning be denied:. Motion was seconded by Councilwoman Schmidt. In
response to a question of Councilman Courtney, City Attorney Erickson clarified
W that the property would remain R-1-and recalled that Mr. Krahl's plat has
received preliminary approval. On r6l1da l:, -.' the e 'were• four.- ayes�-w th 'Conricil-
�i �i�o
man 'Q9uxfney�vptiag- t1Aay?1 and 7the.:aoniiig kegiidst: i a :n� n 'FiAhr
.ddplored,that� the hitll,won for single family dwellings and urged that
the property be purchased under the Protective Open Space Plan so that the
hill could be saved. Mayor Van Valkenburg clarified that grades for the site and
plans for tree removal must be approved by the City. Mr. Krahl protested that
the Tree Ordinance would be retroactive as far as his plat is concerned and said
that if he had not been held up for this hearing, the trees would have.already
been cut down. An unidentified lady in the audience objected that they had been-
unable to sell their property because people were unsure as to what would be
going into the open space. Mr. Pieczentkowski was told by Mr. Erickson that
the zoning of the property could not be brought to hearing again for one year
after the date of a denial.
ORDINANCE'NO. 811 -A51 GRANTED FIRST READING. Affidavits of Notice were pre-
sented by Clerk,`approved as to .form and ordered placed on file. Mr. Luce pre-
sented the petition of Lewis Engineering Company for Planned Industrial Disfr!
Zoning for Lot 1, Block 1, Edenmoor Addition, located at 5229 Eden Avenue. He
advised that this property, if rezoned as recommended by the Planning Commission,
would be zoned in conformity of adacent properties. No objections being heard,
Councilman Johnson offered Ordinance No. 811 -A51 for First Reading as follows:
ORDINANCE NO. 811 -A51
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE ZONING ORDINANCE (N0. 811)
BY ADDING TO THE PLANNED INDUSTRIAL DISTRICT
THE CITY COUNCIL OF EDINA, MINNESOTA, ORDAINS:
Section 1. Paragraph 2 of Section 10 of Ordinance 811 of the City,is
amended by adding the following thereto:
- "The extent of the Planned Industrial District is enlarged by the addi-
tion of the following property:
Lot 1, Block 1, Edenmoor Addition."
Sec. 2 This ordinance shall be in full force and effect upon its
passage and publication.
METRAM PROPERTIES REZONING CONTINUED TO MAY 20, 1974. Affidavits of Notice were
presented -by.-Clerk-, approved as to form and ordered placed on file. Mr. Luce
presented the request of Metram Properties for zoning change from R -1 Single
Family District to PRD -3 Planned Residential District for property located
South of W. 70th Street, East of Nine Mile Creek and Adjacent to the T.H.. *400 '
West Frontage Road.- Mr :.Luce advised that the proposal of a 60 unit multiple
bdilding with less than 12 units per acre is proposed to be constructed and that
a 100 foot setback - from'N ne'Mile Creek'-,be made, to providd.9. 50 foot dedication
along the creek -and a 50 foot.drainage easement. Mayor Van Valkenburg questioned
the setback along the creek and was told by Mr. Luce that the property immediately
across the street also has a similar situation. Mr. James Merrell, 5024 W. 70th
b e
Street, requested that the road be moved further South, stating that all of the
y� V
4/15/74
houses West of his property will have a cul -de -sac. He said that he has been
assessed $1,000 for the improvement of his street and now objects to the
construction of an apartment across from his house. Mr. Gary Eckhardt, 5028 W.
70th Street, said that he had spoken to Council about a year ago concerning the
noise in his area. He objected that this apartment would cause additional
traffic and that property in the area is already difficult to sell. He object-
ed that the plan of circling the church by the frontage road was never a good
design. Councilman Johnson said that this is an important rezoning because
there are no apartments West of Highway 100 on W. 70th Street except at Cahill
Road. He said that he would expect a "ripple" effect allong the South side of
W. 70th Street and suggested the possibility of PRD -2 zoning as a buffer. Mr.
Merrell protested also that he has room for only three cars in his driveway and
that there would be no place for additional guests to park. He asked if there
is any possibility that the church property might be sold. Mr. Arthur Nelson,
6628 Brittany Road, said that this is the first he has heard about this proposal.
He requested that the hearing be continued so that he could talk to Woodhill
property owners and get their reaction to the proposal. Mr. Dunn told Council-
man Shaw that the service drive should be completed this year. Councilman John-
son's motion was then seconded by Councilman Shaw and carried, continuing the
hearing to May 20, 1974, so thag Council can review the whole road plan And
so that Mr. Nelson can talk to his neighbors.
ORDINANCE NO. 811 -A52 GRANTED FIRST READING. Affidavits of Notice were presented
by Clerk, approved as to form and ordered placed on file. As.recommended by the
Planning Commission, Councilman Courtney then offered the following ordinance for
First Reading:
ORDINANCE NO. 811 -A52
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE ZONING ORDINANCE (NO. 811) TO
REQUIRE SUBMISSION OF AN OVERALL DEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR
PLANNED RESIDENTIAL.DEVELOPMENT WITHIN ONE YEAR AFTER PRELIMINARY
REZONING APPROVAL..,
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDIN.4, MINNESOTA, ORDAINS:
Section 1. Section (e) of Paragraph 8 of Section 5 of Ordinance 811 is
hereby amended by adding thereto the following two sentences:
"Such.Overall Deyelopment Plan shall be submitted to the Planning Com-
mission within one_(1) year after preliminary approval is granted. For pur-
poses hereof, the word one (1) year shall mean a period of 365 consecutive
days commencing on the date following the date on which preliminary approval
is granted." `
Sec. 2. This ordinance shall be in full force and effect upon its pass-
age and publication.
ORDINANCE NO. 811 -A49 ADOPTED ON SECOND READING. Mr. Luce reviewed the pur-
pose of Ordinance No. 811 -A49 upon the request of Councilman Johnson. Council-
man Courtney then offered Ordinance No. 811 -A49 for Second Reading and moved
its adoption:
ORDINANCE NO. 811 -A49
AN ORDINANCE.AMENDING THE ZONING ORDINANCE (NO. 811)
BY CHANGING THE PARKING - REQUIREMENTS IN THE MULTIPLE
RESIDENCE DISTRICT AND IN THE PLANNED RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDINA, MINNESOTA,ORDAINS:
Section 1. Parking Requirements in Multiple Residence District. The first
sentence of paragraph 7 of Section 4 (Multiple Residence District) of Ordinance
No. 811, as amended, is hereby amended'to read as follows:
"7. Parking. There shall be provided on the site occupied by the multiple
residence dwelling at least one and one - quarter completely enclosed parking
spaces and three quarters exposed parking space for each dwelling unit in the
multiple residence district, except.that in the R -2 District there shall-be
provided two completely enclosed parking spaces for each dwelling unit."
Sec. 2. Parking Requirements in Planned Residential District. Subpara-
graph (2) of subparagraph (b) of paragraph 6 of Section 5 (Planned Residential
District) of Ordinance No. 811, as amended, is hereby amended to read as fo116WS:
11(2) All apartment buildings: one and one- quarter completely enclosed
parking spaces and three- quarters exposed parking space for.each
dwelling unit."
-Sec,. 3. This ordinance shall be in full forckdi ffect ' ediately upon
its passage and publication.
Motion for adoption of the ordinance was seconded ilman haw and on
P
rollcall there were five ayes and no nay4nd th ce ya adopte d.
ATTEST:
City C
Mayor
1
u
4/1,5/74.
Ii a
ORDINANCE NO. 811 -A50 ADOPTED °ON SECOND READING. Mr. Luce reviewed the purpose
of Or No. 811 -A50 for Councilman Johnson. Councilman Courtney then
offered the following ordinance for Second Reading and moved its adoption:
ORDINANCE NO. 811 -A50'
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE ZONING
ORDINANCE '(NO. 811),BY PROVIDING FOR LAPSE OF
TRANSFER OR VARIANCE BY NONUSER
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDINA, MINNESOTA, ORDAINS:
Section 1. Paragraph 7 of Section 12 of Ordinance No. 811 is hereby
amended to.read as follows:
117 -. Lapse of Transfer or Variance by Nonuser. Whenever within one
year after the granting in whole or in part of a petition for the
transfer of land from one district to another, or a variance, the owner
or occupant shall not have commenced the erection or alteration of a
building or structure as described in such petition, then the transfer
or variance shall become null and void unless a petition for extension of
time in which to commence the proposed construction or alterations_ has
been granted as provided herein.
Such petition to extend time shall be-in writing and filed with the
City Clerk fore than 20 days before the expiration of one year from,the
date the original petition was approved, shall state facts showing a
.. good -faith attempt to use the transfer or variance, and shall state the
Q additional time requested to commence construction or alteration. Such
petition, if it relates,'to a variance, shall be presented to the Board
of Appeals and Adjustments for hearing and decision in the same manner
as the original request for variance. If the petition relates to a trans-
fer of land, it shall be heard and decided by the Council, upon the report
and recommendation of the Planning Commission, in the same,manner as the
original petition for transfer of land.
In determining under this paragraph whether the petition has made a
good -faith attempt to use the-transfer or variance, the Board or Council
may consider such ,factors as the design, size, expense and type of this
proposed construction or alteration.
It shall be within the power of the Board or Council, at the time
of granting the original request for transfer or variance,,to grant also
a two -year period for the commencement of construction or alteration of
the building or structure utilizing the same, bu,r such-two -year period may
not thereafter be-extended."
Sec. 2. This ordinance shall be in full force and effect upon its
passage and publication.
Motion for adoption,of the ordinance shall be seconded by Councilman Shaw
and on rollcall there were five ayes and no nays and /tt e,.•- ardinatzde was
adopted.
ATTEST:
16, 1
City Clerk
ORDINANCE NO. 815 -A1 ADOPTED ON SECOND READING. on the request of Council-
man Johnson, Mr. Luce reviewed Ordinance No, 815 -A1. Councilman Courtney
then offered the . ordinance -for Second Reading as follows and moved its
adoption:
ORDINANCE,NO. 815 -A1
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 815 BY PROVIDING FOR LAPSE
OF VARIANCE OR SPECIAL PERMIT BY NONUSER
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDINA,•MINNESOTA, ORDAINS:
Section 1., Paragraph (f) of Section 8--of Ordinance No, 815 is hereby
amended to.read as follows:
"(•f) Lapse of Variance or Special Permit by Nonuser. If within
one uear after the issuance or grant of a special permit or variance,
the owner or occupant shall not have commenced the work authorized
by such special permit or variance, then the special permit or
variance shall become null and void unless a petition for extension
of time in which to commence such work has been granted.
Such petition to extend time shall be in writing and filed with
the City Planner more than twenty (20) days before the expiration of
one year from the date the original special permit or variance was
issued or granted, shall state facts showing a good -faith attempt to
use the special permit or'variance, and shall state the additional
time requested to commence such work. Such petition, if it relates
to a variance,.shall `be presented to.the Board for hearing and.
4/15/74
- decision, and appeal to the Council, in the same manner as the original
request for variance. If the petition relates to a special.permit, it shall
be heard and decided by the Council, upon the report and.recommendation of
the Planning Commission, in the same manner as the original petition for a
special permit.
In determining under this paragraph whether the petitioner has made a
good -faith attempt to commence such work, the Board or Council may consider
such factors as the design, size, expense and type of the proposed work.
It shall be within the power,of the Board or Council, at the time of
granting the original request for a special permit or variance, to grant a
two -year period for the commencement of the work authorized thereby, but
such two -year period may not thereafter-be extended.
Section 2. This ordinance shall be in full force and effect on its
passage and publication.
Motion for adoption of the ordinance was seconded by Council Shaw and on
rollcall there were five ayes and no nays anftlhe ord' ncs,/aSVpted._
ATTEST:
D '�/ Mayor
ORDINANCE N0: 801 -A7 GRANTED SECOND REA G. Mr. Luce reviewed the purpose of
Ordinance No. 801 -A7 for Councilman Jo nson, whereupon Councilman Courtney
offered Ordinance-No. 801 -A7 for Second Reading and moved its adoption:
ORDINANCE NO. 801 -A7
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 801 OF THE CITY
PROVIDING FOR REJECTION OF PRELIMINARY PLATS
IF NOT FINALLY APPROVED WITHIN ONE YEAR.
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDINA, MINNESOTA, ORDAINS:
Section 1. Sections 10, 11 and 12.of Ordinance No. 801 are hereby
renumbered Sections 11, 12 and 13,.respectivu &ly.
Sec. 2. There is hereby added to Ordinance No. 801 a new Section 10 as
follows:
"Section 10. One Year Limitation on Plats Receiving Preliminary
Approval. Any plat which has not received final approval by the Council
within one year after the date it received preliminary approval, shall be
deemed rejected by the Council, and the plat must again be filed and
approved pursuant to this ordinance as in the case of a newly presented
plat. For purposes hereof, one year shall mean a period of three hundred
sixty -five consecutive days, beginning with, and including, the date
preliminary approval is given by the Council."
Sec. 3. This ordinance shall be in full force and effect immediately
upon its passage and publication and when effective shall be filed with the
office of the Register of Deeds, Hennepin County, Minnesota.
Motion for adoption of the ordinance was seco.rde� by Cou c "�w and on
rollcall there were five ayes and no nays and /f�� ordi ce s opted.
ATTEST:
City Clerk
ORDINANCE NO. 801 -A8 GRANTED SECOND READING. Mr. Luce reviewed Ordinance No.
801 -A8 for Councilman Johnson, whereupon Councilman Courtney offered the fol-
lowing ordinance for Second Reading and moved its adoption:
ORDINANCE -NO. 801 -A8
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 801
OF THE CITY TO REQUIRE DEDICATION OF LAND
OR CONTRIBUTION OF CASH FOR PUBLIC PURPOSES
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDINA, MINNESOTA, ORDAINS:-
Section 1. Subparagraph (a) of Section 4 of Ordinance No. 801, as amended,.
is hereby amended'to read as follows:
"(a) In every plat, replat or subdivision of land to be developed for
residential, commercial, industrial or other uses; or as a planned development,
which includes residential, commercial and industrial uses, or any combination
thereof, a reasonable portion of such land, but not less than 5% thereof in
eaea, shall be set aside and dedicated by the tract owner or owners to the
general public as open space for parks, playgrounds, public open space, or
storm water holding areas or ponds, or, at the option of the City. the tract
owner or owners shall contribute to the City an amount of cash equal to the fair
market value of the undeveloped land otherwise required to be so set aside and
dedicated, or set aside and dedicate a part of such land and contribute the
balance of such undeveloped land value in cash. Land then set aside and dedi-
4/15/74 119
cated for public park and playground purposes pursuant to Section 5 (Planned
Residential District) of Ordinance No. 811 may be considered as set aside
and dedicated under this Ordinance No. 801 to the extent required hereunder
in connection with such plat, replat or subdivision, but then only to the
extent that such land is in excess of the open space then required by
Ordinance No. 811. 'Any money so paid to the City shall be placed in a
ppecial- fundcand used only for the acquisition of land for parks, playgrounds,
public open space and storm water holding areas or ponds, development of
existing parks and playground sites, public open space and storm water
holding areas or ponds, and debt retirement in connection with land previously
acquired for such public purposes. For purposes of this ordinance "fair
market value of the undeveloped land" is defined as the fair market value of
the land within such plat, replat or subdivision as of the date the plat,
replat, or subdivision is presented to the City Council for preliminary
approval, or if no preliminary approval be given or required, as of the date
so presented for final approval, as determined by the City Assessor in the
same "manner as he determines the fair market value of land for tax purposes,
excluding in determining such value, all value added to such land by improve-
ments, including utilities, streets and other public improvements serving
such land, but including in such determination the highest and best use to
which the land can be put under the zoning district then existing or under
that zoning district to which the land is then about to be transferred."
Sec. 2. This ordinance shall be in full force and effect upon its passage
and publication, and when effective shall be filed with the office of the
Register of Deeds, Hennepin County, Minnesota.
Motion for adoption of the ordinance was seconded by Counc an aw and n
rollcall there were five -ayes -and'no nays and tie ordi e wA adopjled
ATTEST: 119'
Mayor
City Clerk
ORDINANCE NO. 801 -A9 ADOPTED ON SECOND READING. As reviewed by Mr. Luce,
Councilman Courtney offered the following ordinance for Second Reading and
moved its adoption:
ORDINANCE NO. 801 -A9
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 801
OF THE CITY TO REQUIRE LAND OR EASEMENTS
FOR PROTECTION OF NATURAL WATER BODIES'
THE CITY COUNCIL OF EDINA, MINNESOTA, ORDAINS:
Section 1. Subparagraph (b) of Section 4.of Ordinance 801, as amended,
is hereby amended to read as follows:
"(b) Where any plat, replat or subdivision of land adjoins a natural
lake, pond or stream,'including streams which flow only intermittently, a
strip of land running along all sides thereof which are contiguous to such
lake, pond or stream, which strip shall extend from a line 100 feet upland
from the lake or pond, as measured from the high water mark, and 100 feet
from the centerline of the stream, and to and including the bed and water body
of such lake, pond or stream, shall be either (i) dedicated to the City for
public use, or (ii) subjected to a perpetual easement in favor of the City
over and in said land and the bed and water body of such lake, pond or stream
for the purpose of protecting the hydraulic efficiency and the natural
character and beauty of such lake, pond or stream. The Planning Commis -
sion'shall determine which of these options is more appropriate and shall
recommend to the City Council one of'said options. In either case, there
shall also then be granted to the City the right of ingress to and egress from
the said strip of land with men, equipment and material. Also, where the
easement is determined to be in the best interest of the City, said easement
shall also provide that the owners of the areas as to which such easement is
granted shall not make, do or place, any fill, grading, improvement or
development of any kind on or to such easement area, or raise the level of
the-easement area in any way, but all such right to fill, grade, improve and
develop, and to raise the level of the easement area, shall be granted by said
easement to the City."
Sec. 2. This ordinance shall be in full force and effect upon its adopt-
ion and publication, and when effective shall be filed with the Office of the
Register of Deeds, Hennepin County, Minnesota.
Motion for adoption of the ordinance was seconded by Co cilm Shaw and on
rollcall there were five ayes and no nays and a ord' anc as 4dpted.
ATTEST:
Mayor
City Clerk
s
120
METRAM 1ST ADDITION CONTINUED TO MAY 20, 1974. Councilman Johnson's motion
_continuing the public hearing on preliminary plat of Metram 1st Addition was
seconded by Councilwoman Schmidt and carried.
EBENEZER SOCIETY 1ST ADDITION GRANTED PRELIMINARY APPROVAL. Affidavits of
notice-were presented by Clerk, approved as to form and ordered placed on file.
Mr. Luce recalled that this plat was reviewed at the meeting of April 1, 1974,
but because proper notice had not been given, action was not taken and this new
hearing was set. No objections-being heard, Councilman Courtney offered the
following resolution and moved its adoption:
RESOLUTION APPROVING PRELIMINARY PLAT OF
EBENEZER SOCIETY 1ST ADDITION
BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Edina, that that certain plat
entitled "Ebenezer Society 1st Addition ", platted by Robert E. Clark and Donna
Mae Clark, husband and wife, Joseph J. Maurer and Mary J. Maurer, husband and
wife, Madelyn L. Schultz, widow, Robert E. Engstrom and Phyllis R. Engstrom,
husband and wife, Harry Goodyear and Mary Patricia Goodyear, husband and wife,
and presented at the Edina City Council Meeting of April 15, 1974, be and is
hereby granted preliminary plat approval.
Motion for adoption of the resolution was seconded by Councilman Shaw and on roll -
call there were-four ayes with Councilman Johnson voting "nay ". Councilman John-
son said that he is in concurrence with Councilman Courtney's views and that he
believes that the proposed density of the Ebenezer Society project was too great
and that he would not, therefore, vote in favor of the plat.
CONTRACT AWARDED FOR SEVERAL PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS. Mr. Hyde presented tabulation
of bids for Improvements Nos. BA -191, BA -194, BA -195, BA -198 and E -29 showing seven
bids for the Alternate Proposal. Tabulation showed Minnesota Valley Surfacing Co.,
Division of Mathy Construction low bidder at $255,207.50, Bury & Carlson, Inc., at
$260,7.23.82, Riegger Roadways, Inc., $275,272.36, Hardrives, Inc., at $882,205.58, .
Alexander Construction Co. at $284,968.85, Northwest Biruminous Co. at $285,608.00
and Schaefer Contracting, Inc., at $297,711.15 against Engineer's estimate of
$335,227.15. Mr. Hyde recalled that one of the projects included in the bids was
the W. 70th Street project which will be reviewed on May 20, 1974, in connection with
the Metram 1st Addition plat and zoning request and recommended awarding the bid
at this time and at the next meeting copies of all the various plans for W. 70th
Street will be available for Council's study. Mr. and-Mrs. James Merrell, 5024
W. 70th Street, reiterated their comments which had been made during the Metram
Properties zoning hearing. Mr. Dunn said that there is no way that the cul -de -sac
can be moved far enough to take care of the Merrell property. Councilman Courtney's
motion was then seconded by Councilman Johnson and carried, awarding contract to
recommended low bidder, Minnesota Valley Surfacing Co. Div. of Mathy Construction.
_TRACTOR AND 7 -GANG HYDRAULIC LIFT MOWER BID AWARDED, Mr. Hyde presented a tabula-
tion of bids showing Minnesota Toro, Inc. at $7,500 and R. L. Gould & Company at
$7,249.50 for tractor and 7 -gang hydraulic lift mower. Councilman Johnson's
motion awarding bid to recommended low bidder, R. L. Gould & Company was seconded
by Councilman Shaw and carried.
GOLF COURSE CARTS BID AWARD CONTINUED TO MAY 6, 1974. As recommended by Mr. Hyde,
Councilman Johnson's motion continuing award of bid for golf course carts to the
next meetin: was seconded by Councilman Courtnev and carried.
LAWRENCE W. RIXE AND WILLIAM F. GREER RESOLUTIONS OF APPRECIATION ADOPTED. Being
advised that Mr. Lawrence W.- Rixe had submitted his resignation from the Board of
Appeals and Adjustments and from the Edina Governmental Commission and that Mr.
William F. Greer has resigned from the Edina Governmental Commission so that both
could accept membership on the Housing and Redevelopment Authority, Councilman John -
sbn offered the following resolutions and moved their adoption;
RESOLUTION OF APPRECIATION
WHEREAS, Lawrence W. Rixe has served as a member of the Board of Appeals and
Adjustments d'ince 1966; and
WHEREAS, during those many years, Lawrence W. Rixe has given most generously of
his time and energy in service on the Board of Appeals and Adjustments; and
WHEREAS, Lawrence W. Rixe has now submitted his resignation from the Board of
Appeals and Adjustments and has accepted a new appointment as a member of the
Edina Housing and Redevelopment Authority;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Edina City Council express its most
sincere appreciation and thanks for the dedication to duty of
LAWRENCE W. RIXE
for more than eight years of service as a member of the Edina Board of Appeals
4/15/74 1-2
and Adjustments; and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that a copy of this Resolution be spread upon the
Minutes of the Edina City Council and that an appropriate copy of this Resolu-
tion be presented to Lawrence W. Ri_xe as he enters into this new phase in the
service to his community.
RESOLUTION OF APPRECIATION
WHEREAS, William F. Greer has served as a member of the Edina Governmental
Commission since its organization in May of 1973; and
WHEREAS, William F. Greer has given extensively of his time in his capacity-as
a member of the Edina Governmental Commission; and
WHEREAS, William F. Greer has now resigned from the Edina Governmental Com-
mission in order to become a member of the Edina Housing and Redevelopment
Authority;
NOW,.THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the-Edina City Council that
WILLIAM F. GREER
be commended and that the appreciation of the Edina City Council be extended
to him for his service to the community; and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that a copy of this Resolution be spread upon the
Minutes of the Edina City Council and that an appropriate copy of this Resolu-
tion be presented to'William F. Greer upon his retirement from the Edina
Governmental Commission.
Motion for adoption of the resolutions was seconded by Councilman ,Shaw
and carried.
G�
OTTO BYHRE, JR., REAPPOINTED TO HUMAN RELATIONS COMMISSION. Councilman Shaw's
motion was seconded by Councilman Courtney and carried accepting the recom-
mendation of the School Board for the reappointment of Mr. Otto Byhre, Jr.
to the Human Relations Commission.
EBENEZER SOCIETY PETITIONS FOR PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS REFERRED TO ENGINEERING
DEPARTMENT. Petitions submitted by Ebenezer Society for Watermain,•Sanitary
Sewer and Storm Sewer extension were accepted and referred to the Engineering
Department by motion of Councilman Shaw, seconded by Councilwoman Schmidt and
carried.
LOT 6, BLOCK 1, PARKWOOD KNOLLS 15th ADDITION DIVISION APPROVED. Mayor Van'
Valkenburg.recalled that Lot 6, Block 1, Parkwood Knolls 15th Addition division
had been continued from April 1,.1974. Mr. Erickson.said that he had reviewed
the matter with Mr. Harvey Hansen and Mr. Dalen and Mr. Dunn and it had been
agreed to change the connection charge from a payment to be made at the time
approval of the lot division is given to payment at the time the connection is
physically accomplished. No objections being heard, Councilman Courtney offered
the following resolution and•moved its adoption:
RESOLUTION
WHEREAS, the following described property is at present a single tract of land:
Lot 6, Block 1, Parkwood Knolls 15th Addition; and
WHEREAS, the owners have requested the subdivision of said tract into separate
parcels'(herein called "Parcels ") described as follows:
,The North 60.45 feet of Lot 6, Block 1, Parkwood Knolls 15th Addition;
and
Lot 6, Block 1, Parkwood Knolls 15th Addition, except the North 60.45
feet thereof; and
WHEREAS, the requested subdivision is authorized "under Ordinance No. 801 and
it has been determined that compliance with the Subdivision and Zoning Regula-
tions of the City of.Edina will create,an unnecessary hardship and said Parcels
as separate tracts of land do not interfere with the purpose of the Subdivision
and Zoning Regulations as.contained.in the City of Edina Ordinance Nos. 811 and
801;
NOW,.THEREFORE, it is hereby resolved by the City Council of the City of Edina
that the conveyance and ownership of the second above described Parcels.as
separate tracts of land is hereby approved and the,requirements and provisions
of Ordinance Nos. 811 and 801 are hereby waived to allow said division and
conveyance thereof as separate tracts of land, but only to the extent.per-
mitted under Ordinance No. 801 and Ordinance No. 811 and subject to_the limita-
tions set out in Ordinance No. 811 and said Ordinances are not waived.for
any other purpose or as to any other provisions thereof, and further subject,
however,,to the provision that no further subdivision be made of said Parcels
unless made in compliance with the pertinent ordinances of the City of Edina
or with the.prior approval of this Council as may be provided for by those
ordinances.
Motion for adoption of the resolution was seconded by Council Johnson and on
rollcall there were five ayes and no nays and the resolution was adopted.
1,22-
4/15/74
MIRROR LAKES PLAT NO. 2 GRANTED FINAL APPROVAL. Fir. Luce presented Mirror Lakes
Plat No. 2 for final approval, advising that the necessary documents have now
been signed. Councilman Johnson thereupon offered the following resolution and
moved its adoption, subject to review of the documents by the City Attorney:
RESOLUTION GRANTING.FINAL APPROVAL
TO
MIRROR LAKES PLAT NO. 2
BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Edina, Minnesota, that that
certain plat entitled "Mirror Lake Plat No. 2 ", platted by Kathleen T. Moore,
widow, and by Carl R. Pohlad and Eloise 0. Pohlad, husband and wife, and by
Fergus Falls Savings and Loans Association, a Minnesota Association, and pre-
sented at the Regular Meeting of the Edina City Council of April 15, 1974, be and
is hereby granted final plat approval.
Motion fox adoption of the resolution was seconded by Councilman Shaw and
carried.
WESTERN EDINA TRAFFIC TASK FORCE REPORT CONTINUED TO MAY 20, 1974. Mr. Arthur
Nelson, Chairman of the Western Edina Traffic Task Force, presented the Western
9dina- .Ciic' ulation Plan -prepared by'.the Task:.Force,�and explained that bhe function
of the Task Force was to determine the best traffic circulation patterns for
Western Edina. A copy of the Western Edina Circulation Plan is attached hereto
and made a part of these Minutes. Mr. Nelson pointed out that the study area
included the Crosstown Highway, Blake Road, Gleason Road, Vernon Avenue and Inter -
lachen Blvd. He said that the Task Force had worked closely with Bather, Ringrose_
& Wolsfeld as well as with the City Engineer and introduced Mr. Richard Wolsfeld
who reviewed both present and projected traffic counts for the study area. It
was explained that the Western Edina area had been divided into the following
four.issue areas: Vernon Avenue West of Gleason Road, Vernon Avenue East of
Lincoln Drive, Lincoln Drive South of Access -to County Road 18 and the proposed
County 62 Frontage Road West of Gleason Road, and that the computations had been
made using the highest land use in all cases. Mr. Wolsfeld explained that there
were three alternatives for Issue Area 1 (Vernon Avenue West of Gleason Road),
six alternatives for Issue Area 2 (Vernon Ave'. East of Lincoln Drive), three
alternatives for Issue Area 3 (Lincoln Drive-South of Access to County Road 18)
and three alternatives for Issue Area 4 (Proposed County Road 62'Frontage Road
West of Gleason Road. Mr. Wolsfeld reviewed the strengths and weaknesses of each
alternative, pointing out that the approach prefenred by the consultant was not
necessarily the approach favored,by the Task Force. An unidentified gentleman in
the audience objected that construction of a road thru the park would be dangerous
to children at play and objected also,of the threat to wild -life in the park. Mr.
Lloyd Pearson, 5700 View Lane and member of the Task Force, said that it had been
his understanding.that a straw vote of the Task Force resulted in a 6 to 1 vote
in favor of constructing the road,thru the park as opposed to blocking local roads.
He said that it did not make good sense to block streets and not provide a South-
erly exit. Mr. Fletcher Waller, 5601 Schaefer Road, said that it is important to
retain the total environment of the area and that the cost of the solution should
be fully considered. He spoke in opposition fo building the road thru the park.
Mrs. Robert Amis, 5720 View Lane, said that if a road were constructed from View
Lane to Cadillac Drive, it would bring traffic right up to her side yard. Mr.
Jack Ziegler, 6012 Tamarac Ave., spoke in opposition to Mr. Robert Hansen's com-
mercial center at Vernon Avenue and Lincoln Drive, stating that this would change
the traffic volumn drastically. He suggested a cul -de -sac at Vernon Avenue West
of Walnut Drive and building a road around Krahl Hill, Mr. Thomas Wurst, 6205
South Knoll Drive, endorsed the recommended plan of the consultant for Issue
Area 2 and -said that the park should be kept safe for children. Mr. David Taft,
5605 Schaefer_Road, suggested that Council drive around the area before deciding
on building a road along the creek. ,Mr. Darrell Boyd, 7204 Shannon Drive, said
that the merits of constructing the road thru the park should be thoroughly
evaluated before any decision is made. Mr. Robert K. Kasbohm, 6147 Arctic Way,
expressed concern that the Rauenhorst development in Eden Prairie will generate
considerably more traffic than hadibeen estimated. Messrs..David Blair, 5717 View
Lane, and the resident at 5800 View Lane both expressed concern about the speed-of
cars on View Lane, mentioning specifically the danger to children in the area.
It was suggested that radar be moved around more in an attempt to apprehend
speeders. Dr. John Kyllo, 5201 Schaefer Road, also objected to speeding in his
neighborhood, Mrs. Thomas Schneider, 6118 Arctic flay, questioned who would be
assessed fox the County Road 62 Service Road. She was told that the improvement
would be assessed against abutting properties at no cost to homeowners. Mr. Dunn
mentioned the possibility of receipt of State Aid Funds for the project. Mrs.
Schneider also mentioned her concern for the safety of children. Following con-
siderable discussion, Councilman Johnson's motion to continue the matter to May
20, 1974, was then seconded by Councilman Courtney and carried. -
1
L�
r. %N
i
� � \
�� ��\
� � � \
[�� \
/
����y\
� � }
� � \
1
WESTERN, EDINA
1
CIRCULA110N PLAN
1
1
i
1 Prepared For
CITY OF EDINA
EDINA, MINNESOTA
1
1 .
1
Prepared By
BATHER- RINGROSE- WOLSFELD, INC.
7101 YORK AVENUE SO.
1
EDINA, MINNESOTA.55435
1
March, 1974
_CONTENTS
INTRODUCTION
Background
Study Process
STUDY-AREA CHARACTERISTICS
Existing Land Use
Hydrological Features
Existing Traffic Data
Forecasted Land Use and Road Plan
TRAFFIC CIRCULATION SYSTEM ANALYSIS
Traffic. Planning Principles.
Additional Traffic Generated By Existing
Vacant Land
Development of Traffic Circulation
-Alternatives
EVALUATION AND SELECTION OF TRAFFIC CIRCULATION
Evaluation Criteria
Evaluation Process
Results of Evaluation
Recommended Circulation Plan
Page
1
7
3
5
7
10
13
15
17
26
27
29
34
1
J
FIGURES
EM
a
1,
Study Process
2
2.
Existing Land Use
4
3,
Hydrological Features
6
4,
Existing Traffic Volumes
8
5,
Selected Traffic Control Devices
9
6.
Forecasted Land Uses And Road Plan
11
7.
Schematic Of Traffic Planning Principle
14
8.
Additional 1985 Daily Trips Generated
16
9.
Issue Area 1 Alternatives
18
10.
Issue Area'2 Alternatives
20
11.
Issue Area 3 Alternatives
22
12.
Issue Area 4 Alternatives
24
13.
Score Sheet For Evaluation Of Circulation
Plan Alternatives
28
14.
Recommended Circulation Plan Of Task Force
Majority
Y
35
15.
Recommended Circulation Plan Of Consultant
And Slight Minority Of Task Force'
36
16.
Recommended Treatment Of Street Closures`
38
17.
Estimated Cost And Possible Method Of Payment
For Improvements Of The Recommended Circulation
Plan 1
39
INTRODUCTION
BACKGROUND
As the Western Edina area has continued to develop over the
past years, numerous traffic circulation problems have arisen.
Several residents have expressed concern about the increasing
traffic volumes on selected residential streets. In response
to this concern, the City Council retained BRtd to work with
the Western Edina Task Force to develop a circulation plan
for the Western Edina area. The Task Force is to present the
plan to the City Council for their consideration.
STUDY PROCESS
The purpose of this study is to develop a traffic circu-
lation plan for the Western area of Edina. The major
steps necessary to complete this task are shown in
Figure 1 and discussed below.
The first step involves a complete inventory and analysis
of existing and projected 1985 study area characteristics.
These characteristics include existing land use, hydrological
features, existing traffic volume and traffic control
devices, as well as projected 1985 land use and road
plans.
The second step in developing a traffic circulation plan
is to determine what traffic planning principles are
involved and to obtain input from the community on their
concerns. The latter will be achieved through meetings
with the Task Force and appropriate public officials.
The third step is to develop the street system alternatives.
The analysis that preceeds the development of alternatives
includes trip generation and trip distribution analysis.
Through the application of the traffic planning principle,
alternatives are generated.
The final step is to evaluate and select the preferred
1985 circulation system. The evaluation is based on
accessibility, the impact of the forecasted traffic
volumes, pedestrian safety, natural features impact,
and.emergency vehicle access.
0
I_-_
1
TRAFFIC
PLANNING •..•o.
PRINCIPLES
•
s
0
0
0
WESTERN EDINA
TASK FORCE ........
INPUT
EVALUATION
CRITFRIA
e
' o
e•• os• e•e e• eesoaesoeseoeoeeooeeeeoeesee •sesoe•••.
e °
e
e
' EXISTING
o•aseo•esoeo•ao
LAND USE
:
•
e
DEVELOPMENT OF EVALUATION &
STREET SYSTEM '° SELECTION OF
ALTERNATIVES PREFERRED
STREET SYSTEM
FIGURE 1
y STUDY PROCESS
1!
1985 TRAFFIC
CIRCULATION PLAN
FOR WESTERN
EDINA
a
EXISTING
TRAFFIC FLOW &
•� ° °°'
e
TRAFFIC CONTROL DEVICES
0
1985 STREET
FIGURE 1
y STUDY PROCESS
1!
1985 TRAFFIC
CIRCULATION PLAN
FOR WESTERN
EDINA
• .........:
1985 LAND USE °•......•••.
•
e
tPLANS
0
1985 STREET
FIGURE 1
y STUDY PROCESS
1!
1985 TRAFFIC
CIRCULATION PLAN
FOR WESTERN
EDINA
STUDY AREA CHARACTERIST ICS
EXISTING LAND USE
The study area is located in northwest Edina as shown
in Figure 2.; The immediate study area is bounded on
the north by Maloney Avenue, on the west by Washington
Avenue, on the south by Highway 62 and Vernon Avenue
and on the east by Blake Road. A significant portion
of the study area is devoted to single family residential
use. Within this area are approximately 533 dwelling
units. Scattered development of light industrial/
office and multiple residential uses are located along
Lincoln Drive. At the present time, substantial vacant
areas exist in the north and west portions of the study
Area,
The land uses of the area adjacent to the western'Edina
study area are also shown-an Figure 2. The area to the
east of the study area consists largely of single family
residential uses. Located in the vicinity of the junc-
tion of Highway 100 and Vernon Avenue is a concentration
of commercial, industrial and office use activities. In
contrast, the area to the west is largely undeveloped
with scattered residential and light industrial develop-
ment.
3
HYDROLOGICAL FEATURES
Nine Mile Creek and other lake areas found in. the vicinity..
of the study area are natural features that will have an
impact on the development of the circulation plan. These
areas provide potential for the preservation of natural re-
sources and for aesthetic and recreational enjoyment.
Nine Mile Creek lays in the southwest portion of the study
area. It first crosses into the study area just south of
the Hopkins corporate limits and continues to wind south
and eastward through the study area, eventually passing
into the Mud Lake basin. Much of the area immediately
surrounding Nine Mile Creek is either undeveloped or desig-
nated as open space or parkland.
Associated with the Nine Mile Creek is its flood plain as
shown in Figure 3 . Much of this flood plain has been
designated as open space or parkland. The flood plain
area that encompasses and runs parallel to County Road 18
just north of the terminated south Lincoln Drive is pre-
sently undeveloped, however, it is zoned for multiple
residential use.
Scattered throughout the northwest Edina area are numerous
lakes. The study area itself contains approximately
fourteen lakes.
t
b1
EXISTING TRAFFIC DATA
Traffic Volumes
Existing traffic volumes within the study area, as
shown in Figure 4 , reflect counts taken along collector
streets and cordon counts for the specific Parkwood
Knolls neighborhood.
Counts on Tracy Avenue, Blake Road in the north and eastern
portions of Vernon Avenue and Interlachen Boulevard were
obtained from the fall 1972 Edina counts. Counts on
Schaefer Road, Blake Road, Vernon Avenue, Gleason Road
and Interlachen Boulevard are counts taken by BRI -I
in the fall of 1973 and adjusted to average daily
traffic.
Cordon counts for the specific Parkwood Knolls neighborhood
were taken on Schaefer at Vernon; on View Lane at Vernon;
on Stauder at Londonderry; on Parkwood at Londonderry; on
Parkwood at Blake; on Idylwood at Blake; on Knoll Drive at
01-1-
Blake; on South Knoll Drive a� Blake ard on* Schaefer just
north of Parkwood. These counts were taken by the City of
Edina in February 1972.
Traffic Control Devices
Traffic control devices serve to affect traffic flow and
assist in achieving safe and efficient traffic operation.
An inventory of traffic control devices in the study area
was conducted in 1974 by BRW. The traffic control devices
selected for survey included stop signs and speed limits
exceeding 30 mpH. As shown in Figure 5 , most stop signs
are located at intersections of minor streets with such
collector streets as Vernon Avenue, Blake Road, Schaefer
Road and Maloney Avenue. Speed limits exceeding 30 mph
exist in one location; Vernon Avenue from Gleason Road to
to the east.
rA
MALONEY AVE.
9 0 *---� f p i
32 0 *--
I
0
//' m Arrnwhpn�
FIGURE 4
EXISTING
TRAFFIC
VOLUMES
4
I
W
MUD
_. LAKE
THIS MAP IS PREPARED FOR PLANNING
PURPOSES AND SHOULD NOT BE SCALED
WHERE ACCURATE MEASUREMENTS ARE
REQUIRED
0' 500'_ 1000' 1500'
Mirror
\yoke
1
T-1 w
CD
0
■
0
OD
0
It
-i
I
■
I
0
//' m Arrnwhpn�
FIGURE 4
EXISTING
TRAFFIC
VOLUMES
4
I
W
MUD
_. LAKE
THIS MAP IS PREPARED FOR PLANNING
PURPOSES AND SHOULD NOT BE SCALED
WHERE ACCURATE MEASUREMENTS ARE
REQUIRED
0' 500'_ 1000' 1500'
Mirror
\yoke
1
T-1 w
2
FORECASTED LAND USES AND ROAD PLAN
Forecasted Land Uses
The Western Edina study area expects to reach full develop-
' ment by 1985. As indicated on the Western Edina Plan, the
development of office, industrial, single family and multiple
residential uses is expected as sh,own.in Figure 6 Expected
by 1985 is a total of 2880 dwelling units within the study
' area. The major areas for development within the study area
are:
' Expected single- family residential uses
in the northwest
Multiple- residental uses in the south along
Lincoln Drive and in the northwest along
Nine Mile Creek and Lincoln Drive
Development of office and light industrial
uses west along Lincoln Drive between
Nine Mile Creek and County Road 78
The area immediately adjacent to the Western Edina study area
is expected to be completely developed by 1985. Under the
' Minnetonka Comprehensive Guide Plan the area to the immediate
west expects intensive multiple residential, commercial.,
office and light industrial development. The Rauenhorst
Corporation is currently in the municipal review process to
achieve zoning for Section 36 in Minnetonka.
1 10
i
-S
at
Ooi
'CH
'Oa 83d3VI43S
'Oa
%•®
W
CD
U
W W
D CD r
0 Q =QU
W W r
cc cc
=r
LL �
O _
CD M
j() N�t
N W O
Z W ga rr-
Zcn�2
z
LLIZ _
J m W O
O
COW M
04
G-.I W O
Mai
a=� N
L
x
a
dZM°o
wQV O
aWaW r ,
IoW¢
NaWmo
Z � cc
Q
z co
,a o
CO W ¢ O
L
e
0 U D J
Q z D W
UJ W cc
�
Q
N
O
cn
� D
r
N m
J
V p d
CC
N
Z °
LLJ
r
a.
gt— U
2 Tit Wz
-j
D O Ru-z°¢
U �—/ O
,
=).j
W
CD
U
W W
D CD r
0 Q =QU
W W r
cc cc
=r
LL �
O _
CD M
j() N�t
N W O
Z W ga rr-
Zcn�2
z
LLIZ _
J m W O
O
COW M
04
G-.I W O
Mai
a=� N
L
x
a
dZM°o
wQV O
aWaW r ,
IoW¢
NaWmo
Z � cc
i
1985 Road Plan
Plans for upgrading existing and providing new transpor
tation facilities in and near the study area are shown
in Figure 5 .
Within the study area plans include:
' Upgrading County Road 18 to freeway design
standards including:
- Construction -of Dominick Interchange at the
junction of Dominick Road and Co. Road 18.
' - Construction of a second Interchange with Co.
Road 18 at 7th Street
- Lincoln give will be constructed from south
of Interlachen Hills apartments to Maloney Avenue
- Extension of 7th Street east to intersect
with Lincoln Drive
Extension of Parkwood Lane to Londonderry
Road.
' Extension of Field Way and Dovre Drive to
Parkwood Lane
' Extension of Olinger Boulevard to Vernon
Avenue
" Creation of Glacier Place just west of
g
Gleason Road
Plans for the surrounding area include:
Extension of Highway 62 west to I -494
' Cul- de- sac.7th.Street in Hopkins east of
East Park Valley in conj uncti on - wi th 'the
construction of County Road 18
Creation. of a new north -south road between
5th and 7th Street extending south of 7th
Street west of County Road 18
" Creation of a connection between the Dominick
' Interchange and llth Avenue and a connection
between the Dominick Interchange and Shady
Oak Road
.12
TRAFFIC CIRCULATION SYSTEM ANALYSIS
TRAFFIC PLANNING PRINCIPLES I/
The-principle of division of traffic movement functions to
separate highway facilities is basic for an efficient street
system. Different types of traffic movements can be most
advantageously accommodated on facilities specially designed
for each movement function. A functional system of streets
provides for a, graduation of traffic flow from the access
function to the movement function (Figure 7). Without this
functional hierarchy, streets designed to provide access begin
to serve a movement function and traffic circulation problems
develop.
As Figure 7 illustrates, the movement function is characterized
by the proportion of through traffic; at one extreme is the
freeway which allows no local traffic and at the other end is
the cul -de -sac', which carries no through traffic. The access
function ranges in the degree of use of the street for access
purposes, the cul -de -sac has unrestricted access, while the
freeway has complete control of access..
The basic principle of traffic circulation planning is to de-
velop a functional hierarchy of streets compatible with adjacent
land use that range in facilities from rapid movement and un-
interrupted flow, to- slower movement subject to interruption
wherever necessary.
This traffic planning principle along with the estimated addi-
tional traffic to be generated by the development of the exist-
ing vacant land, are important inputs to the development of
circulation plan alternatives.
1! "Protection of Highway Utility ", Highway Research Board, 1971.
13
UNRESTRICTI
ACCESS
1
0
1
z
0�
1
co
co
1
w�
z
z
cn
Q
w
w
z
o
COMPLETE
'ACCESS
CONTROL
NO THRU INCREASING THRU TRAFFIC
TRAFFIC
INCREASING SPEED
EWA
,CAL
C
ADDITIONAL TRAFFIC GENERATED BY EXISTING VACANT LAND
Figure 8 illustrates the additional trips estimated to be
generated by land that is currently vacant within the study
area. These trips will result in increases to the existing
traffic volumes shown in Figure 4. The trips were determined
by applying the average trip generation rates shown in-the
table,to the vacant•acres of land;
AVERAGE TRIP GENERATION RATES-
Daily Trips
Land Use Per Gross Acre '
Single Family
{ 22 dwelling units per acre) 30
Multiple Family
(5 -20 dwelling units per acre) 96
Industry
(10 -85 employees per gross acre) 150
Office 200
j
The additional trips expected to be generated from the study
area after complete development is 21,030 trips per day-. '
The particular travel paths used by the motorists to enter
and exit the area depends upon the street system ultimately
developed. The emphasis 1s made that the design year street
system must accommodate present traffic plus, this additional -
traffic.
The trip generation rates in the 'above-table have been chosen
to reflect the expected conditions within Edina. An example
is the generation rate for the single family units, 12 trips
per dwelling unit. For the entire metropolitan area the
average generation rate fbr single family units is 8 trips
per dwelling u'ni t. •
15 ,
MALONPY AVE.
1660
THIS MAP IS PREPARED FOR PLANNING
PURPOSES AND SHOULD NOT BE SCALED
WHERE ACCURATE MEASUREMENTS ARE
REQU 0 ED 500 1000 1500
silkily
20 INTERL ACHEN BLVD.
i
Mirror
= L ale
° 3700 W 200
�° W m Q 1
o m
6310 PARKWOOD
RD-
315
J
1
1245
N
� CL JE
} 1680 w
1080 w a
(18 2 >
600 `� MUD
',LAKE
100 1� z
0
795 a
1 169
21�
Q/ 1 A�rn►vh,on, -� .�'�� _ M"Ve
FIGURE 8
ADDITIONAL
1985 DAILY
TRIPS GENERATED NOTE: TOTAL ADDITIONAL TRIPS - 21030 TRIPS /DAY
0
DEVELOPMENT OF TRAFFIC CIRCULATION ALTERNATIVES
Analysis of the circulation issues within Western Edina study '
area resulted in the definition of four, somewhat independent,
issue areas. On the basis of input from the Task Force, traf-
fic planning principles, study area characteristics, and the '
estimated additional trip generation from the vacant land, alter-
natives were developed for.each issue area. The alternatives
are described below; included in the descriptions are traffic
volume data.
Issue Area 1
The traffic issue within Area 1 is can Vernon Avenue and ,
Gleason Avenue adquately accommodate the existing and fore-
casted traffic volumes from the area without severe negative
impact on the residential area along Vernon west of Gleason..
The two alternative street plans to resolve the issue include
(Figure 9):
Alternative 1: retain the present road configuration
and provide access to the vacant properties from either
Vernon, Lincoln or Gleason.
Alternative 2: cul -de -sac Vernon just south of Walnut '
and to construct an extension of Lincoln Drive as a
frontage road just north of County Road 62 to Gleason.
Alternative 3: retain the present road s.ystem and to
construct an extension of Lincoln Drive over to Gleason.
Presented in the table are the existing traffic volumes and
the volumes expected when all the land along Vernon and
Lincoln Drive is developed for the three alternatives.
Existing 1985 Est. 1985 Est. 1985 Est.
Location Daily Daily Daily Daily
Volume Volume Volume Volume —
Alt. 1 Alt. 2 Alt. 3
Vernon W. of Gleason 1780 4775
1840
2400
Vernon E. of Lincoln 720 2240
4335
3715
Lincoln S. of Access
to Co. Rd. 18 1030 3390
2590
2725
Pro -posed Co. Rd. '62
Frontage Rd. W. of
Gleason '" -
4530
3735
1 7
F
e-P
,.C--- �-
D
FIGURE 9
ISSUE AREA 1
ly
ly
cn
MUU
1609
Issue Area 2
The traffic issue within Area 2 is where should additional
access points be provided to the surrounding collector and
arterial street system to develop a functional system and
relieve the present and future emphasis on View Lane and
Schaefer Road.
The alternative street plans to resolve the issue i.nclude
(Figure 10):
Alternative 1: construct a bridge connecting Walnut
Drive to Londonderry Road.
Alternative 2: construct a connection between View
Lane and CamelbackR Drive along Cadillac.
Alternative 3: construct a connection between Parkwood
Lane and Lincoln Drive to the west.
Alternative 4: construct a bridge over Nine Mile Creek
to connect Londonderry Drive on the west'and east.
Alternative 5: construct an extension of Londonderry
Drive through Walnut Ridge Park, north of Nine Mile
Creek to Vernon Avenue that lines up with Gleason Road.
Alternative 6: - cul de sac View Lane just south of
South Knoll Drive, close Londonderry Road at Stauder
Circle, and reconstruct the intersection of Schaefer
and South Knoll Drive to only allow right turns for
northbound Schaefer traffic.
If no new connecting streets were constructed and the
vacant land in the issue area developed, the combined traffic
volume on View and Shafer just north of Vernon, would be ex-
pected to increase from 1615 vehicles per day today to 2735
vehicles per day. (This forecast assumes. that access 1s pro-
vided to County Road 18 and Znterlachen for the undeveloped
land to the north).
19
C
Issue Area 3
The traffic issue within Area 3 is should Lincoln Drive be
connected o.n the north and south over Nine Mile Creek and
if so, should Malibu Drive be used to make the connection.
The alternative street plans to resolve the issue include
(Figure 11):
Alternative 1: construct Lincoln Drive just north of
Nine Mile Creek.
Alternative 2: construct a bridge over Nine Mile
Creek and connect Lincoln from the south to Malibu
Drive.
Alternative 3: construct a bridge over Nine Mile
Creek and connect Lincoln Drive.
Existing and forecast traffic volumes are presented for
various alternatives below:
1985 Daily 1985 Daily
Location on Existing Daily Traffic Volume Traffic w /out
Lincoln Drive Traffic Volume W /Connection Connection
North of proposed
Dominick 200 3440 1870
Bridge over Nine
Mile Creek 0 2010 0
Just South of
7th Street 0 4740 6310
21
I T
t
1 I �
1
1
1
Mill ON! Y AVE
m
UL -DE -SAC
i
J
Q
a
a�
n
C�
/'18
Mill ON! Y AVE
,-.00,�152
ArrnwhP.,, -
ALTERNATIVE 2
MALOWY AVE. —1
c'
n ,
J
C.l
Q�
a
NDE
1�ONDO RRY 0
C18 `
j
�� _ _ • (I 58
A LTERNATI VE 3
cL
Ar
o /nWhP /7/�
ALTERNATIVE 1
FIGURE 11
ISSUE
AREA 3
a�
n
C�
/'18
Mill ON! Y AVE
,-.00,�152
ArrnwhP.,, -
ALTERNATIVE 2
MALOWY AVE. —1
c'
n ,
J
C.l
Q�
a
NDE
1�ONDO RRY 0
C18 `
j
�� _ _ • (I 58
A LTERNATI VE 3
Issue Area 4
The traffic issue within Area 4 is how should Interlachen Blvd.
and Ridge Road relate the street system that will service the
Issue Area and relate to the proposed interchange at County
Road 18.
The alternative street plans to resolve the issue include
(Figure 12):
Alternative 1: extend Interlachen Blvd. to County Road
18 and to develop'the street system with connections to
Interlachen, Malibu, Ridge Road, Larada Lane and Willow
Wood.
Alternative 2: cul -de -sac Interlachen Blvd. and develop
the street system with connections to the same streets as
in Alternative 1.
Alternative 3: cul-de-sac Interlachen Blvd., and Ridge
Road and develop the street system with connection
to the same streets as in Alternative I except Ridge Road.
The full development of the single family residential land in
the Issue Area is expected to generate an additional 3900 trips
per day. The street system developed for the Issue Area will
have to support 'these trips. If Interlachen were open to County
Road 18, it is estimated that 40% of the additional trips or
1550 vehicles per day would travel to the east.
23
it
EVALUATION AND SELECTION
F TRAFMC CIRCULATION PLAN
IEVALUATION CRITERIA
' The key ingredient to the evaluation of traffic circulation
plan alternatives is the criteria against which the plans are to
be evaluated. For the Western Edina plan alternatives, the
' criteria are divided into three areas and are described below:
Service Criteria
' residential accessibility - the ability of the
residents of Western Edina to access the surround-
ing arterial and freeway facilities.
' pedestrian safety - the ability for pedestrians
to circulate safely within the study area.
emergency vehicle access - the ability for all
emerg.ency vehicles to access all development
within the study area.
local /collector street relationship - the attain-
ment of an effective relationship between the
' local streets and collector streets.
Environmental Criteria
' natural features impact - the ability of the cir-
culation plan to minimize the disruption to the
areas hydrology and topography.
' land use impact - the ability of the system to
complement existing land use patterns.
' traffic volume impact - the ability of the plan
to minimize the number of vehicles passing the
residential land uses.
Cost /Benefit Criteria
` cost /benefit - the ability to minimize the cost
and maximize the benefits.
Each of these eight criteria will be utilized in evaluation of
the plan alternatives within each Issue Area. The task force
chose not to consider cost criteria in the initial evaluation.
26
EVALUATION PROCESS
The process used to evaluate those alternatives against the,
criteria involved the use of an evaluation sheet (Figure 13
The steps involved in using the sheet are:
1. Rank order the importance of the evaluation
criteria from 1 to 5; two criteria may have
the same value and 5 is highest.
2. Score each alternative within each Issue Area
from 1 to 5 as to its attainment of the cri-
terion; 5 is highest.
3. Multiply the criterion weight times the alter-
native score for each alternative.
4. Sum the numbers developed in step 3.
5. Evaluate the results.
27
Alk
9
M
r-°
W
a
c7
H
LL-
V)
W
M
i-°
Z
W
N
Z'
.J
>-- L1
D
i— O
(� H
U Q
l-+ J
LL-
LL- U
� Cz:
h U
.::c LL
2= O
P--i
Cl
W C)
H
LLt
t- J
C!? <
Lij �:_
= W
O
LL
W
LLJ
V)
W
O
U
Z
a
r\
W
J
Q
Z
C
W
Q
Z
a
W
N LC)
J
4
Z
tX
W
I--
Q
Z
W
F- M
J
Q
,
Z
W
CIJ
J
f-•
J
4
C�
H �
� Z
W C'3
I•-- H
C)
i
CU
•)-r
r-
V)
<
H
U
n'
<
rt3
+?
ctS
E
W
Cn
Q)
U r-
•N2
O
ro
t t
ro
r L1_
QJ
*--4
O
Q''
•r
ra
r
LL
C •r
$..
.= V)
U. CU
r- U
V)
U U
Z
CU e--
4-)
U Q)
\ N
to (a
=
•r (0
O
Ci r-
VI
O) U
r` S
S- 0-
LI- G1
r-
1--I
r O
Q)
S- U
rcS N
O E
_0
L;-- F
ft5
F--
ul r
-a
CU <
U C/7
•d-) r-i
Si
ri. H
1
i
Q
CU
CU
E
O
co
rS
S_
O
=
a
Cl-
W
J
. -
_J
F-
J
S-.
U..
=5 cu
(n E
V) riI
AOL
RESULTS OF EVALUATION
For each issue area the major strengths and weaknesses of
each alternative are-summarized below. These comments on
strengths and weaknesses are those of the task force. Follow-
ing the summary is the identification of the alternative
selected by the task force that best meets the evaluation
criteria.
ISSUE AREA 1
Alternative 1 Strengths Alternative 1 Weaknesses
• good residential accessibility. ' highest traffic volume past
single family homes.
• no impact on the hill.
potential vehicle /pedestrian
conflicts along Vernon.
Al ter „ati ve 2 Strengths Al tei "native 2 Weaknesses
best pedestrian safety. reduced residential access-
ibility.
good local /collector street
relationship. ' lowers emergency vehicle access.
' lowest traffic volume past ' negative impact of the road on
single family homes. the hill.
r
Alternative 3 Strengths Alternative 3 Weaknesses
• highest residential accessibility negative impact of the road on
the hill.
• reduces the potential in traffic
past the single family homes.
• good emergency vehicle access.
The evaluation of the alternatives within Issue Area 1 by the Western
Edina Task Force resulted in the selection of Alternative 2. After
the frontage road north of County Road 62 is open, then Vernon
should be closed to through traffic. Considerable discussion was
had about building the frontage road and then monitoring the volume
of traffic on Vernon and only closing Vernon if the volume exceeds '
2400 vehicles per day. This approach of.,Alternative 3, preferred by
the consultant, was not selected by the task force.
29
ISSUE AREA 2
t 1 s Alternative 1 Weaknesses
Alternative Strength
' provides alternative exit increased traffic volume on
to vehicles using View and Walnut would cause negative
Schaefer. impact.
' increases residential accesiblilty additional traffic volume on
Walnut would increase pedes-
' increases emergency vehicle access. trian /vehicle conflicts.
new bridge would cause negative
land use impact.
' turns existing local street into
a collector street.
1.
Alternative 2 Strengths Alternative 2 Weaknesses
slight increase in residential same traffic volume on View and
' accessibility. Schaefer north of Vernon.
reduces traffic volume on View and does little to implement good
I Schaefer north of Cadillac_ local /collector street relation-
ship.
A1te.r.native 3 Strengths' Alternative 3 Weaknesses
' increases accessibility for far negative impact of natural
western residents. features in flood plain.
minimizes negative land use and
traffic volume impact.
increases emergency vehicle
access.
30
Alternative 4 Strenqths Alternative 4 Weaknesses
' increases residential accessibility.' severe negative impact
on the natural features
increases emergency vehicle access. of the creek.
turns a local street, London-
derry Drive, into a collector.
the traffic impact and land
use impact along Londonderry
is negative.
the pedestrian /vehicle con-
flicts on Londonderry increase.
Alternative 5 Strenqths Alternative 5 Weaknesses
provides alternative exit to severe negative impact on
Vernon for residents of area. the park.
increases residential accessibility.' road in Nine Mile Creek flood
plain.
increases emergency vehicle access. .
nt%ga't:ve I a n d use mpact for
acceptable local /collector street homes backing onto creek.
relationship.
pedestrian safety hazards for
park users.
Alternative 6 Strenqths Alternative 6 Weaknesses .
good local /collector street residential accessibility
relationship is established. is reduced.
traffic volumes are distributed. emergency vehicle access
restricted.
In evaluating the various alternatives, no task force member was
completely satisfied with any single alternative or any combina-
iion of alternatives. The staff of the Park and Recreation Depart-
ment was opposed to a road through the park; however,-felt that i -f
the residents of the neighborhood agreed that the road was needed,
then a park road would be considered. The trade offs included a
road through the park, versus accepting the traffic volumes on the
local streets of View and Schaefer, versus closing streets. The
task force was advised by the consultant that street closures should
only be used as a "last resort" to solve traffic.problems and only
after all feasible alternatives has been discussed. The final
decision of the task force was to combine Alternative 2, AIternative
3, and Alternative 6.
31
ISSUE AREA 3
Alternative 1 Strengths Alternative 1 Weaknesses
maximum flexibility in develop- negative impact of creek
I ing land east of Co. Rd. 18. crossing.
.
good accessibility.
' good local /collector street
relationship.
1
Alternative 2 Strengths Alternative 2 Weaknesses
' heavy pedestrian /vehicle
conflicts along Malibu.
' severe negative traffic
impact on Malibu.
conflicts in local /collector
street relationships.
negative impact of creek
crossing.
Alternative 3 Strengths Alternative 3 Weaknesses
'
best 'accessibility could restrict development
of parcel east of Co. Rd.18.
good emergency vehicle access.
' road is in portion of flood
good local /collector street plain.
relationship.
The evaluation of the alternatives within Issue Area 3 by the
task force resulted in the selection of Alternative 1. The
major reason for the choice of Alternative 1 over Alternative 3
is the potential financial hardship to a property owner. AccoHing
to current city policy 100% of the cost of constructing streets on
the Municipal State -Aid System,(Lincoln Drive is on the MSA System)
in multiple and industrial zones, is assessed against the property
owners. This "cul de sac" of Lincoln on the north and south
provides multi- access to the parcel under single ownership just
east of County Road 18_ Thus`if Lincoln were connected, this
property owner would be assessed the cost of a road that is not
' needed for the provision of access to his property-or any other
pro-perti es .
32
ISSUE AREA 4
Alternative 1 Strengths Alternative 1 Weaknesses
maximum residential accessibility. ' transforming a local
street, Interlachen, in-
best emergency vehicle access. to a collector.
negative traffic volume
and land use impact on
homes along Interlachen.
Alternative 2 Strengths Alternative 2 Weaknesses
increases residential accessibility.
increases emergency vehicle access.
good local /collector street
relationship.
Alternative 3 Strengths Alternative 3 Weaknesses
minimum increase in resi-
dential accessibility to
the east.
negative traffic volume
impact to the south and
east.
The evaluation of 'the above alternatives led to the selection of
Alternative 2 as best meeting the evaluation criteria.
33
RECOMMENDED CIRCULATION PLAN
In putting together a composite plan from the four issue areas,
as previously mentioned, there are two items that the task
' force was split on. Figure14 shows the composite recommenda-
tion as favored by a slight majority (9 of the 15 members
were voting )of voting task force. Figure 15 shows the con -
sultant preferred recommended plan, which is-also the view
of the other members of the task force. As review of the
two figures shows, many points had complete agreement.
The following points are applicable to both Figure 14 and
Figure 15 and are presented for clarification:
1 the new frontage road north of County Road 62
should be placed on the Municipal State -Aid
street system.
' the cost of the construction of the frontage road
should be assessed against the adjoining property
owners; the cost will include any right -of -Way ob-
tained from the county. If county land is not ob-
tained and the right -of -way requirements of the
road render selected land parcels non - usable, the
cast should be paid for with State -Aid funds.
the connection between Parkwood Lane.and Lincoln Drive
' north of the Nine Mile Creek should be completed when
Parkwood Lane is connected south and east to Londonderry.
the extensions of Lincoln Drive -on the north and south
. as shown on Figure 14 wi11 be completed by Hennepin
County as part of the construction of County Road 18.
17
Malibu should be intersected with the connection be-
tween Lincoln and Parkwood to discourage use of Malibu;
and trucks should be prohi,bited'from using Malibu.
The streets shown in the northwest area are conceptual
and are intended to show relationships rather than
s.pecific locations; these roads will be developed
when the land develops. One restriction of development
should be that the connection through the property to
7th Street should be made prior to any development.
34
1
Figure 14 and Figure 15 differ in the following ways:
Vernon is closed at Walnut on Figure 14 and left
open on Figure 15. The consultant felt that to
close Vernon now is an over- reaction to a "poten-
tial" not an existing problem and that the best
course of acti,o'n is to monitor the traffic volume
and only close the road if the volume exceeds 2400
vehicles per day. A slight majority of the task
force felt that to wait is to increase the risk
that the road,would never be closed.
a two lane road through the park is shown on
Figure 15, while Figure 14 solves the problem in
Issue Area 2 with street closures and a new con-
nection via Cadillac Lane. The intent of the re- ,
commendation of Figure 15 is to have the city pro-
ceed with a feasibility study of the new road
in the park;.if- :the road is not feasible, then to
choose from the other alternatives for Issue Area
2. The implementation of three changes to the
street system shown on Figure 14, are detailed on
Figure 16.
Figure 17 documents the estimated cost of the improvement plans.
37
n
O�
-RIGHT TURN ONLY
of
FIGURE 16
RECOMMENDED
TREATMENT OF
STREET CLOSUR S
000 RO.
Q PR
CLOSE ROAD
s
Arc
41,�
C
LL Q
J
C-
Z
w z
C
?- H
CL C
J
LL-
C) U
tx
C) U
z
W W
W W
Lr1 �
W f tQ
tY N U
N W
C C tY
H a-
LQ
d T_
z t-
LL
N
C N
CU f-
Q LL1
W a:
I- L+ t
cL }
O
H ti
N �
W H
39
a
a
a-:1
s_
a
0_
4-3
0
0
4-3
1-
U)
0
to
to
cn
S_
S_
S_
S-
2::
_0
S.-
't7
-0
'r)
a)
O..
CL
O
W
s=
>=t
>=
5=
s=
CL
2::
=3
to
O
O
-0
'c3
p
-O
>-
4-
M-0
4-
4--
4--
S`
O
(3)
a)
s=
CL
4-)
4-3
sz
LL
Q)
•r
a)
Q)
Q)
4--
•r
p
U
4-
U
U
U
CA
•r
4-
tT
r-
LL
S✓
4-)
S=
sr
4-
Q)
S~
Q)
C
O -0
rCf
co
(a
•r
o
•r
a
m
ro (T5
a)
a)
(1)
4-3
a)
n
4-)
-0
C
4--
t
4-)
4--)
4-t
O
-0
i-
•r
M 4-3
•r
•r
•r
to
d-)
N
rLS
•�-
W
rCS
o as
(Ci
its
r[f
cA
.r 4-31
11-7
�
rL
{ �
i
.r
4
Z7
2C5 to
-
rn
•r
N
W
4.3
C
4-)
.Ft
s=
ns '
_)
Q)
rd S-
(3)
(1)
(D
•r
iT
ru
•r
r
co
N
tT
to
N
>>
4-)-0
4--)
4-)
4J
co
• J
4-N
N
N
Sr a
N
N
N
�
5=
C
aJ ro
'C
Q)
N
•Lf
CL
r
E
r
r
r
a)
Q)
a)
as
to to
rd
its
«S
vt to
vt rn
to th
to E
S-
to S_
S_
S_
S_
cn S-
to S_
to S+
(n S-
Cl)
Q) Q)
a)
(D
a)
Q) Q)
(1) tv
Q) Q)
O a)
O
S=
to s=
5=
5=
s`
N =
to tr
to O
N
a)
cn 3
o
a)
a)
to y
cn -:�:
cn 3
cn >
a
C
<0
C3
co,
C'S
-C 0
do
O
CTO
M
o
Q
�-
o
Q
N
C
Q
U
o
Q
LO
t-
Q_
N
W
tf
b4
C
C
t)
C
c)
C
C
CD
r
C
C
C
C
Q
O
Cl
C
C)
i-
C
C
C
C
O
Q
N
C
C
C
^
C
Q
W
^
O
^
^
^
C
L7
Opp
ul
N
N
e--i
r-t
rt
LO
M
rt-
-x:-
b}
�fi•
" `tom
•rfl-
i�
tfi
{f}
-�}.
S=
a)
o
a.,
U
r'3 CL
r Y
-0
a
u
Qt J
ra
r-
O Q)
cc
S-
r-
N
a)
r-
tv
U tll
i-
O
S_
>)
- oc'S
r
O
t= S_
W
T)
O S=
J
p (1)
-0
4J,
J
S�
rd
En
W
O
0)
O
t:S
U
ra 0)
4- r-
a
>
c
rLi "
'CS
S= o2S
ty
J
O
O •r
N
a
}
O
J
• --) Q)
4-3 O
O
=o=
O U
ra
N
I 4-
Q)
U O
S
S- -t.)
M
•r O
H
-
a)
Lt,
o
4-)4-
•t-) .
tv }
4-)
4-)
.
U)
Q
rn
d
to
-S-- o
tz
c JC
to
M -0
Q
t✓ z
W
O
B:
W
O
m co
U
tr S-
s=
s r «s
W
O
W
tY
r
Q)
w
r-
•r .0
(a
O co
O
O O
Of
•c-) Q)
CL
Q)
C
U
z
c[
U
Cam' N
>
U CL
U
U S-
Cf
>11 =
C
z
W -P
W
W
W
tyt
N
N
N
N
N
39
Q 4/15/74
2'3,
EDINA TAX APPEAL CONTINUED to May 6,_1974, by motion of Councilman Courtney,
seconded'by'Councilwoman Schmidt and'carried.
T.H. 100 UTILITY RELOCATION AGREEMENT WITH MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF HIGHWAYS
CONTINUED to May 6, 1974, by motion of Councilman Courtney, seconded by Council-
woman Schmidt and carried.
TRAFFIC SAFETY COMMITTEE MINUTES OF APRIL 9, 1974, APPROVED. Mr. Marshall
Pieczentkoasld, 6537 Polar Circle; recalled that at a meeting with the Mayor and
Mr. Dunn, he had requested installation of temporary stop signs on Vernon Avenue
at Tamarac Drive and Walnut Drive and "crosswalks at these same locations. Mr.
Dunn recalled that this' matter had been before the Traffic Safety Committee in
March and at that time the action had been that nothing be done until the
results of the Western Edina Traffic Task Force are known. Mr. Pieczentkowski
was told that he would have an answer At the meeting of May 20, 1974. Council -
man Gohnton.then ?inquifed about the stop signs which were.to be installed at
56th and Xerxes Ave. Mr: Dunn explained that Hennepin County and the City of
Minneapolis now have agreed that traffic signals are heeded' at W. 56th Street
and W. 60th Street on Xerxes Avenue and that these signals be interconnected
with'the signals at the'Crosstown Highway and Xerxes Ave. Councilman Courtney's
motion approving the Traffic _Safety Committee Minutes of April. 9, 1974, was then
seconded by Councilman Johnson and carried.
BOARD OF REVIEW MEETING DATE SET FOR JUNE 11, 1974, at 4:.30 p.m in the Edina
Council Chambers by motion of Councilwoman Schmidt, seconded-by Councilman
Shaw and carried.,
W 'IHUMAN RELATIONS COMMISSION AUTHORIZED TO ATTEND CONFERENCE ON VOLUNTARISM.
Councilman Johnson's motion was seconded.by Councilwoman Schmidt and carried
authorizing the Human Relations Commission to spend $60.00 for its budget for
one ticket to People Power, the Conference on Voluntarism which is being sponsored
by the Junior League of Minneapolis.
YOUTH ACTION DANCE PERMIT APPROVED. Mr..Hyde ddVised Council that Youth Action
has requested a Dance Permit in connection with meetings at the Edina Community
Lutheran Church,.but said that he had not been able to get entirely satisfactory
answers as to who would be responsible for the group. Mrs. Meredith Bart urged
that the permit be given and said that responsible adults will be' at each meet-
ing. Following considerable discussion, Councilman Johnson's motion was seconded
by Councilwoman Schmidt and carried approving the Dance Permit for Youth Action.
HUMAN RELATIONS COMMISSION STATE LEAGUE DUES APPROVED.Councilman Courtney's
motion authorizing expenditure of $132.00 for State League dues for the Human
Relations Commission was seconded by Councilman "Johnson and carried.
LEAGUE OF WOMEN VOTERS USE OF CITY HALL APPROVED. As requested by the League
of Women Voters, Councilman Courtney's motion was seconded by Councilman Shaw
and carried authorizing the.League of Women Voters to set up a table in the
lobby of the City Hall for the purpose of collecting signatures on petitions
favoring reform of the.National Campaign Financing Law.
CICERO'S ON SALE BEER LICENSE - NORMANDALE GOLF ON SALE BEER LICENSE APPROVED.
Councilman Johnson's' motion -was seconded by Councilman Shaw and carried for
approval of On -Sale Beer Licenses for Cicero's and Normandale Golf.
POLICE DEPARTMENT ANNUAL REPORT was accepted for filing by motion of Council-
man Johnson, seconded by Councilwoman Schmidt and carried. Councilman Johnson
said that he would like to know the number of police calls at Southdale Center.
MAYOR'S "THINK LIST" DISCUSSED. Mayor Van Valkenburg.presented a "Think List"
which he had drawn up listing a number of items on which action should be taken
or direction given. Individual items will appear on future agendas.
ORDINANCE NO. 1401 -A1 GRANTED FIRST READING. City Attorney Erickson presented
Ordinance No. 1401 -A1 for First reading as requested by the Police Department,
whereupon Councilman Courtney - offered Ordinance,No. 1401 -A1 for First Reading as
follows: `
ORDINANCE NO.. 1401 -A1•
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE EDINA TRAFFIC CODE TO ADOPT
BY REFERENCE AMENDMENTS TO THOSE PROVISIONS OF
MINNESOTA STATUTES PREVIOUSLY ADOPTED AND
TO MAKE CERTAIN OTHER CHANGES
THE CITY COUNCIL OF.THE CITY OF EDINA, MINNESOTA, ORDAINS:
V2 4. 4/15/74
Section 1. Section 1 of Ordinance No. 1401 is hereby amended bX deleting
therefrom reference to "Minnesota Motor Vehicle and Traffic Laws and Motor
Carrier Laws, 1969 -70, ".and inserting in lieu thereof "Minnesota Motor Vehicle
and Traffid Laws and Motor Carrier Laws, 1973."
Sec. 2. The following subsections of Section 2 of Ordinance No. 1402 are
hereby amended so as to provide as follows:
"ZOO M.S., Sec. 171.01, as amended by Chapter 421, Sec. 3, Minn. Laws
of 1973 (Definitions).
2.02 M.S., Sec. 171.02, as amended by Chapter 16, Sec. 1, Minn. Laws
of 1973 (Driving Without a License).
2.05 M.S., Sec. 171.05, as amended by Chapter 95, Sec. 1, Minn.
Laws of 1973 Instruction Permits):
3.01 M.S., Sec. 169.121, as amended by Chapter 421, Sec. 1 and Chapter
494, Sec. 8, Minn. Laws of 1973 (Driving Under Influence).
83.03 M.S., 'Sec. 169.123, as amended by Chapter 35, Sec. 36 and Chapter
.551, Sec. 1, Minn. Laws of 1973 (Implied Consent Law).
8.01 M.S., Sec. 169.44, as amended by Chapter 384,•Secs. 1, 2, 3, 4
and 5, Minn. Laws of 1973 (School Buses; Stop Signs; Conduct.of other
Vehicles).
8:02 M.S., Sec. 169.21, Subd. 2, as amended by Chapter. 193, Sec. 1,
Minn. Laws of 1973 (Children Under School Patrol Have Right -of -Way).
9.04 M.S., Sec. 169.03, as amended by Chapter 28, Sec. 1, Minn. Laws
of 1973 (Drivers of Emergency Vehicles).
10.01 M.S., Sec. 169.21, as amended by Chapter 421, Sec. 1 and Chapter
494, Sec. 8, Minn. Laws of 1973 (Rules for Pedestrians and Vehicle Drivers).
14.01 M.S., Sec. 169.80, as amended by Chapter 148,'Sec. 1, Minn. Laws
of 1973 (Size, Weight and Load).- -
14.02 M.S., Sec. 169.813 as amended•by Chapter 707, Secs. 1 and 2,
Chapter 17, Sec. 1, Chapter 546, Sec. 4 and Chapter 666, Sec. 1, Minn. Taws
of 1973 (Limitations on Height, Length and Loading). .
14.04 M.S., Sec. 169.82, as amended by Chapter 10, Sec. 1, Minn. Laws
of 1973 (Trailer Equipment).
14.05 M.S., Sec. 169.83, as amended by Chapter 353, Secs. 1, 2 and 3,
Minn. Laws of 1973 (Weight Limitations)'.
14.08 M.S., Sec. 169.86, as amended by Chapter 549, Sec. 3, Minn.
Laws of 1973 (Special Permits)..
14.09 M.S'., Sec. 169.87,, as amended by Chapter.853 Sec. 1, Minn. Laws
of 1973 (Seasonal Load Restrictions),
15.01 M.S., Sec. 169.47, as amended by Chapter 730, Sec. 1, Minn.
Laws of 1973 (Unsafe Equipment).
15.07 M.S., Sec. 169.52, as amended by�Chapter 56, Seca 1, Minn.
Laws of 1973 (Projecting. Loads - Lights and Flags)..
15.28 M.S., Sec. 169.72, as amended by Chapter 378, Secs. 1, 2 and 3,
Minn._'Laws of 1973 (Tire, Cleat and Track Restrictions).
18.05 M.S., Sec. 169.42, as amended by Chapter 299, Sec. 1, Minn.
Laws of 1973 (Glass, etc., on Street or Highway Prohibited). ".
Sec. 3::•,- SuBsection 21.04 of Section 2 of Ordinance No. 1401 is hereby
amended to provide as follows:
1121.04 M.S., Sec. 169.89, as amended by Chapter 421, Sec. 2, Minn.
Laws of 1973 (Penalties)."
Sec. 4. This ordinance shall be in full force and effect immediately upon
its passage and publication.
ORDINANCE NO. 1101 -A3 AND ORDINANCE NO. 1111 -A2 GRANTED FIRST READING. Mr. Erick-
son presented Ordinance No. 1101 -A3 and Ordinance No. 1111 -A2 for First Reading,
advising that these ordinances change the date for payment of the connection charge
in.connection with subdivision of an R -2 lot from the time the subdivision is made
to the time the connection is made... Councilman Courtney thereupon offered the
two following ordinances for First Reading:
ORDINANCE NO. 1101 -A3
_AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 1101 TO REQUIRE
CONNECTION CHARGES WHEN R -2 DISTRICT LOTS ARE SUBDIVIDED
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDINA, MINNESOTA, ORDAINS:
Section 1. Sec. 7 of Ordinance No. 1101 is hereby amended to read -as follows:
"Sec. 7. Connection Charges for Subdivided Lots in R -2 District. Whenever
any connection is to be made to a lot in an R -2 District of the City which
has been subdivided pursuant to subparagraph (c) of Sec. 3 of Ordinance No.
801, and -�subpai:agraph"8 iof':Sec. �4 = of'-0rdiriance .-No.--.-811, a;-connection charge
shall then be made pursuant to Sec. 5 or Sec. 6 of this Ordinance, whichever
is applicable,-for each connection to be made to -such lot."
Sec. 2. This ordinance shall be in full force and effect upon its passage
and publication.
4/15/74 1 2b,
ORDINANCE NO. 1111 -A2
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 1111 TO REQUIRE CONNECTION
CHARGES WHEN R -2 DISTRICT LOTS ARE SUBDIVIDED
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDINA, MINNESOTA, ORDAINS:
Section 1. Sec. 7 of Ordinance No. 1111 is hereby amended to read as
follows:
"Sec. 7. Connection Charges for Subdivided Lots in R -2 District. Whenever
any connection is to be made to a lot in an R -2 District of the City which
has been subdivided pursuant to subparagraph (c) of Sec. 3 of Ordinance
No. 801 and subparagraph 8 of Sec. 4 of Ordinance No. 811, a connection
charge shall then be made pursuant to Sec. 5 or Sec. 6 of this Ordinance,
whichever is applicable, in each connection to be made to such lot."
Sec. 2.. This Ordinance shall be in full force and effect upon its passage
and publication.
COUNCIL ROOM CHAIRS TO BE PURCHASED. Mr. Dalen presented quotation for Council
Room chairs showing General Office Products low bidder at $33.60 each and
Sperry Office Furniture at $37.60'each. Councilman Johnson's motion approving
purchase of fifty chairs from General Office Products was seconded by Council-
woman Schmidt and carried.
SANITARY SEWER SS -309 EASEMENT ACQUISITION APPROVED. As recommended by Mr. Dunn
�. and Mr. Erickson, Councilman Johnson offered the following resolution and moved
�j its adoption:
00 RESOLUTION
BE IT RESOLVED that the Edina City Council authorize acquisition of a utility
W easement -for Sanitary Sewer Improvement No. SS -309 (Brookside'Terrace) from
w the owner of 5131 Motor Street for a sum not to exceed $1,000.
Motion for adoption of the resolution was seconded by Councilman Shaw and on
rollcall there were five ayes and no nays and the resolution was adopted.
BICYCLE SAFETY WEEK PROCLAIMED. Mayor Van Valkenburg issued the following
proclamation:
PROCLAMATION
AS MAYOR OF THE CITY OF EDINA, I call.upon all members of this community to give
their wholehearted support to the 9th Annual Edina Bicycle Safety Program which
will be conducted Monday, April 22 through Friday, May 10 under the united
efforts of the Edina Lions, Jaycees, Rotary, Scout Troops, Police Department,
Greater Edina Chamber of Commerce, Optimists and Southdale Optimists, and the
PTAs and parent - groups of the eight Edina Elementary Schools and three Paro-
chial schools.
The purpose of the Program is to reduce the hazards of bicycle riding for young
bicyclists, as well as for pedestrians and motorists. The growing congestion
of our streets and highways daily increases the dangers for-the careless or
unskilled rider. Reports.of hundreds of deaths and thousands of injuries
each year throughout our nation (due to collisions between bicycles and motor
vehicles alone) have alerted us to the need for such a Program. By training
our boys and girls, at an early age, in proper riding skills; by teaching them
the laws governing bicyclists; by explaining the reasons for obeying safety
rules; and by helping them to be aware of the hazards of biking -- we feel
Edina is making a concerted attempt to assure that the number of accidents does
NOT keep uO with the ever - increasing number of.bicyclists. The energy crisis may
even now by creating the need for our adults to use their bicycles as a means
of transportation for short haul errands. It behooves us all to remember that
a bicycle is no longer just a toy but a vehicle to be taken seriously; therefore
we should all become thoroughly familiar with the "rules of the road" to
minimize the incidents of, accidents.
The safety of our children cannot be relegated to a once -a -year- campaign. I
call for the support of every parent in carrying out this campaign all year
long; and I urge every youngster to participate in this Bicycle Safety Program
and then practice what he has learned -- for his own safety as well as another's.
CLAIMS PAID. Motion of Councilman Shaw was seconded by Councilwoman Schmidt
and carried for payment of the following claims as per pre -list: General Fund,
$72,857.29; Construction Fund, $189.99; Park Funds, $6,318.06, Water Fund,
$5,745._81; Liquor Fund, $142,763.03; Sewer Fund, $650.76; Total, $228,524.94.
No further business appearing, Councilman Johnson's motion for adjournment was
seconded by Councilman Courtney and carried. Adjournment at 11 :10 p.m.
City ,Clerk
i