HomeMy WebLinkAbout19760920_regularMINUTES
OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE
EDINA CITY COUMCIL ilELD AT CITY HALL,
SEPTDIBER 20, 1976
Answering rollcall were members Courtney, Richards, Schmidt, Shaw and Hayor Van
Valkenburg.
I-IORZD LIO'NS SERVICE DAY RECOGNIZED.
declaration in recognition of World Lions Service Day:
WE live in a world of marvelous technological progress, where continents and
oceans can be spanned in mere hours.
contact people anywhere in the world in minutes. Men have walked upon the moon.
Yet, in ail corners of the earth, poverty, sickness, loneliness and starvation
are to be found - lnd millions still need compassion, love, medical care and
assistance.
IT is toward this objective - service to the'needy of the world - that more
than 29,000 Lions Clubs, comprised of more than one million members, are at
work in 148 nations and geographical terrltories around the globe. These one
million mzn,.unified by humanitarian service, have but one objective: to
bring to the needy, sick and lonely in each community, the help and assistance
they need to live with grace and dignity.
ON October 8, 1976, the 29,000 Clubs of the International AssociatioE of Lions
Clubs will meet in their home communities to perform a special act of humani-
tarian service. This special act will symbolize the-unity of purpose which is
best defined by the motto of the worldwide Lions organization: "We Serve".
THE Edina Lions Club will observe this day by kicking off the club's annual
Fruit Cake Sale.
TEE Edina South Lions Club will observe this day by supporting Fire Prevention
Week in Edina with promotion of an early warning fire protection device for the
home.
TO make all people more fully aware of the significance of the achievements of
the Lions Club, members at work today throughout the world, I, James Van Valken-
burg as Playor of the City of Edina, do hereby proclaim October 8, 1976, as
WORLD LION SERVICE DAY and urge all citizens of Edina to mark this occasion as
a special observance in recognition of the numerous services provided by the
Edina Lions Cicb to the aeedy, the ill, and the lonely.
Councilman Shaw's motion endorsing-the declaration of the Mayor was seconded by.
Councilman Courtney and unanimously carried.
KRAHL HILL NEIGIFBORHOOD CONTRIBUTION TERMS DETERMINED.
advised the Council that Mr. Crane Bodine and Mr. Richard Seaberg have been
meeting with residents in the Krahl Hill area,and are now within $4,000 to
$4,500 of their goal for their contribu'tion to the purchase of Krahl Hill. Mayor
Van Valkenburg recommended that the Council be flexible in view of the near suc-
cess of the program so that the matter can be closed by September 22, 197G. Nr.
Erickson said that in so doing, the City and Krahl Hill property owners would be
acceTting the Commissioners' award and both would waive all rights of appeal.
He clarified that the City would then be the owner of the property which will be
used f.or open space. Following discussion, Couilcilman Richards moved that:
d
Piayor Van Valkenburg read the following
DECLARATION e
I
Through modern communications, we can
The proceeds of this activity will help build and support the
I Lions Children's Eye Clinic and Hospital at the University of Minnesota.
.-
Mayor Van Valkenburg
1)
2)
30% in cash of the enforceable pledges by paid by September 22, 1976;
that the City fund a parr; of the amount required from citizens, but:
not to exceed $6,000, with the understanding that all required
pledges will still be obtained in a six month period; and
that the. City allow substitution of pledges already given with other
pledges but without reducing the total pledges below the required
.amount.
Courtney, Richards, Schmidt, Shaw, Van Valkenburg
3)
Xotion was seconded by Councilman Courtney.
*Ayes:
Nays: None
Motion carried.
Kr. Bodine t7as assured that no interest would be charged on unpaid pledges,
thyor Van Valkenburg told Mr. Hyde that, for the time being, the money needed to
purchase Krahl Hill should be paid from the Park Bond Fund, but that an analysis
would be made at a later date,
-ASSESSMENT - BEARINGS CORDUCTED FOR "XkOUS IXF'ROVEMEHTS .
presented by Clerk, approved as to form axid ordered placed on file. 'Pursuant to
due notice given, assessntent hearings were conducted and action taken as herein-
after recorded.
Affidavits of Eotice were
9/20/76
1. STREET 1'MPROVZ>f.E%T NO. BA-200 IN THE FOLLOWING:
Gleason Road from the South line of Kyde Park Addition to 14. 78th Street
Mr. Hyde presented Analysis of Assessment showing total assessable cask Bt
$54,835.26, proposed to be assessed Braemar Hills 7th Addition, Outlot A at
$21,619.84, against Outlot 13, Braemar Hills 7th Addition, at $19,654.16, against
Parcel 3810, Sec, 8, T. 116, R. 21 at $916.08 and against Parcel 4015, Sec: 8,
T, 116, R. 21 at $12,645.18. Assessment was the same as estimated inasmuch as
the improvement was a State Aid project.
been received prior thereto.
2.
Mr'. Hyde presented Analysis of Assessment showing total assessable .cost at
$33,233.49, proposed to be 'assessed against Outlot A, Braemar Hills Seventh Addi-
tion, at $15,356.08, against Outlot By Braemar Hills Seventh Addition at $12,159.92, .
against Parcel 3810, Sec. 8, T. 116, R. 21.at $610.72 and against Parcel 4015,
Sec. 8, T. 116, R. 21 at $8,430.12; No objections were heard and none had been
received prior thereto. (See Resolution Ordering Assessment later in Minutes.)
No objections were heard and none had
(See Resolution Ordering Assessment later in Minutes.)
STWET IE~RoVEMENT NO. C-116 IN THE FOLLOWING:
Gleason Road from the South line of Hyde Park Addition to W. 78th Street
3. STREET IMPROVEMENT NO. BA-2033N THE FOLLOWING:
Olinger Blvd. from 0linger.Road to-County Road 158
Mr. Hyde presented Analysis of Assessment showing total assessable cost at
$49,468.44, proposed to be assessed against R-1 properties at $12.00 per assess-
able foot and against PRD-3 properties at $18.00 per assessable foot.
ions were heard and 'none had been received prior thereto,
* 90
b Assessment later in Minutes.) c4 W w
No object-
(See Resolution.Ordering
4. STREET IMPROVEMENT NO. EA-205 IN THE FOLLOWING:
W. 78th Street from Cahill Road to 3300 feet West
Mr:Hyde presented Analysis of Assessment showing total assessable cost at $41,976.00,
proposed to be assessed as originally proposed against 2798.40 assessable feet at
$15.00 per assessable foot.
prior thereto.
No objections were heard and none had been received
(See Resolutio? Ordering Assessment later in Minutes.)
. 5. STREET IMPROVEMZNT NO. BA-507 IN THE FOLLOWING:
Grove Street from Johnson Drive to Tracy Avenue
Mr. Hyde presented Analysis of Assessroent showing total assessable kost at $27,648.40,
proposed to be assessed against 770 assessable feet at $22.92 per assessable foot
against estimated assessment of $18.46 per assessable foot.
heard rid none had been received prior thereta.
later in Minutes.)
6, STREET IMPROVEMENT NO. BA-199 IN THE FOLLOWING:
Lanham Lane fron 245' North of Kemrich Drive to 870' North of Kemrich Drive
Mr. Hyde presented- Analysis of Assessment showing total construction' cost at
$14,502.36, proposed to be assessed against 12 assessable lots at $1,208.53 per
lot against estimated assessment of $1,234.28 per assessable lot.
were heard and none had been received prior thereto.
Assessment later in Minutes.)
7. WATERMAIN IMPRGVEMENT NO. la-295 IN THE FOLLOWING:
.
No objections were
(See Resclution Ordering Assessmect
.. I
No objections
(See Resolution Ordering
Lanham Lane from South line M.P. Johnson'.s Prospect Hills Third Addition to
Fleetwood Drive
Mr. Hyde presented Analysis of Assessment showing total construction cost at
$17,845.20, proposed to be assessed against 18 lots at $991.40 per assessable lot
against estimated assessment of $724.67 per lot.
had been received prior thereto.
Minutes .)
.
No objections were heard and none
(See Resolution Ordering Assessnient later in
8. SANITARY SEmR IMPROVEMZNT NO. SS-324 IN THE FOLLOWING:
Lanham Lane from South Line M.P. Johnson's Prospect Hills Third Addition to
Fleetwcbd Drive
Mr. Hyde presented Analysis of Assessment showing total construction cost at
$12,341.16, proposed to be assessed against 18 assessable lots at $685.62 per lor
against estimated assessment of $780.14 per assessable lot. lir. Dunn explained
that the cost was higher than the estimate because of another project which had
been included in this assessment.
received prior thereto. (See Resolution Ordering Assessment later in Minutes.)
No objections were heard and none had been
9. STORX SEWER L'JLPROVEMXNT NO. ST..S-144 IN THE FOLLOWING:
Lanham Lane from South line M.P. Johnson's Prospect Hills Third Addition to ' '
300' North
Mr. Hyde presented Tabulation of Assessment showing total construction cost at
$8,677.62, proposed to be assessed against 18 assessable lots at $482.09, against
estimated assessment of $252.94 per-assessable lot. No objections were heard and
none had been received prior thereto.
irr Minutes. 1
I
' (See Resolution Ordering Assessment later
31 20/?6
-. %> f' io. ~JATERMAIN IivROVniENT NO. mi- 2 IN im Z;'OLLOWING:
Dovre Drive from Lincoln Drive to West line'of Parkwood Kiolls 19th Adhition
Nr. Hyde presented Analysis of Assessment showing total construction 'cost of
$9,087.18, proposed to be assessed against six lots at $1,514.53 per assessable
lot against estimated assessment of $1,528.52 per lot.
and none had been received prior thereto.
later in Minutes.)
No objections were heard
(See Resolution Ordering Assessment
I
11. SANITARY SEWER II'PROVEMENT NO. SS-322 IN THE FOLLOWING: *
Dovre Drive from Lincoln Drive to West line of Parkwood Knolls
Nr. Hyde presented Analysis of Assessment showing total construction cost of'
$10,424.64, proposed to be assessed against 6 assessable lots at $1,737.44 per
assessable lot against estimated assessment of $1,925.24 per lot.
were heard and none had been received prior thereto. (See Resolution Ordering
Assessment later in Ninutes.)
.
Eo objections
12. I?ATEFNAIN IEPROVE$BNT NO. WM-290 IN THE FOLLOWIXG:
York Avenue from West 74th Street to West78th Street
West 76th Street from York Avenue to France Avenue
Parklawn Avenue from York Avenue to 380 feet West
Mr. Eyde presented Analysis -of Assessment showing total construction cost at
$119,150.81, proposed to be assessed against 74.38 acres at $1,601.92 per assess-
able acre.against estimated assessment of $2,329.05 per assessable acre.
ions were heard and none had been received prior thereto.
Assessment later in Minutes.)
13. SANITARY SETTER DPROVEMEilT NO. 319 IN THE FOLLOWING:
No object-
(See Resolution Ordering
York Avenue from 644' + North of West 76th Street to 138' North
York Avenue from 'nest 76th Street to 1085' + South
Parklatm Avenue from York Avenue to 380' We%
Ex. Hyde presented Analysis of Assessment showing total construction cost at
$51,233.13, proposed to be assessed against 22.66 acres at $2,260.95 per assessable
-acre against estimated assessment of $3,504.43 per assessable acre.
were heard and none had been received prio'r thereto.
Assessment rater in linutes.)
14. SANITARY SEWER DPROVEMENT NO. SS-320 IN'THE FOLLOWING: .
York Avenue from I?. 74th Street to W. 78th Street .
W. 75th Street from Xerxes Avenue to York Avenue
Parklam Avenue from York Avenue to 380' West
West 76th Street from York Avenue to 400' West
No objections
(See Resolution Ordering
I 3ir. Eyde presented Analysis of Assessment showing total construction costrat "
$52,875.14, proposed to be assessed for the trunk at $58.24 per assessable acre
and for the lateral at $2,260.95 per assessatble acre against estimated assessment
for the trunk at.$234.34 per assessable acre and for the lateral. at $3,504.43 per
assessable acre.
(See Resolution Ordering Assessment later in Minutes. ) - No objections were heard aEd none had been received prior thereto.
15. STORM SETJER IMPROVEMENT NO. ST.S-142 IN THE FOLLOWING?
W. 76th Street from France Avenue to York Avenue
. York Avenue from W. 74th Street to W. 78th Street
Xr. Hyde presented Analysis of Assessment showing total cmstruction cost at.
$278 , 671.87, proposed to be assessed for the sub-trunk against 4 223,423 square
feet and against the lateral against 2,607.274 square feet. He gave proposed
assessment for the lateral at $0.1041677 per square foot and proposed assessment
for the sub-trunk at $0.00167596 per square foot.
&at,eral was $0.0958424 per square foot and $0.00149036 per square foot for che sub-
trunk. Mrs. John L. Engesether, 7615 Xerxes Ave.., was told to check with the
Special Assessment Clerk to,determine the amount of .Ker assessment.
Estimated assessment €or the
(Resol tion Yater) IG . WATERMAIN WROVEMFNT NO. WM-293 IN THE FOLLOWING:
Parkwood Lane from Xorth line Parkwood Knolls 19th Addition to Parkwood Road
Mr. Eyde presented analysis o€ assessment showing total construction cost at
$10,303.20, proposed to be assessed against 3 assessable lots at $3,434.40 per
assessable lot against $3,043.75 estimated assessment per lot.
heard ar-d none had been presented prior thereto.
ment later in Minutes.,)
No objections were
(See Resolution Ordering Assess-
17. SANITARY SEWER IMPROVEMENT NO. SS-323 IN THE FOLLOWING:
Parkwood Lane from North line Parkwood Knolls 19th Addition to 170 feet North
MY. Hyde presented Analysis of Assessment showing total construction cost at
$3,041.79, proposed to be assessed against three assessable lots at. $1,013,93 ?er
assessable lot against estimated assessment of $1,102.12 per lot.
were heard and none had been presented prior thereto.
Assessment later in Minutes. )
18.
No objections
(See Resolution, Ordering
WA<EREIAIN INTROVEbIENT NO. WM-285 IN THE FOLLOWING:
West Frontage Road oE Highway 100 from Vesterly extension o€ Hibiscus Av~.
Norgh'to W. 70th Street
Nr, Hyde presented total construction cost at $64,345.12, proposed to be assessed
against 1,101,800 square feet at $0.0584 per assessable square foot against
*estimated assessmcnt,of $0.052 per assessable square foot. Xr. Dean Jenson, 7008
00 t-
W W
m
I
was told that there would be no assessment against the Edina Free Church,
objecti'ons were heard andbnone had been presented prior thereto.
Qrdering Assessment later. in Minutes ,)
1's. STREET LIGHTING IMF'ROVE3iENT NO, L-IO' IN THE POLLOWING:
York Avenue from W. 69th Street to W. 74th Street
Hazelton Road. from France Avenue to York Avenue
W. 70th Street from.France Avenue to Xerxes Avenue
No
(See Resolution
Mr. Hyde presented Analysis of Assessment showing total construction cost at
$96,040.28, proposed to be assessed againsi 14936.28 assessable feet at $6.43 per
assessable foot against estimated assessment of $6.36 per assessable foot.
objections were heard and none had been received prior thereto.
Ordering Assessment later in Minutes.)
S. 56th Street and Oaklawn Avenue
No
(See Resolution
20. STREET LIG'dTING IMPROVEMENT NO. L-11 IN.THE FOLLOWING:
Mr. Hyde presented Analysis of Assessment showing total construction cost at
$1,301.04
assessable lot against estimated assessment of $296.80.
and none had been received prior thereto.
later in Minutes.)
proposed to be assessed against four assessable lots at $325.26 per
(See Resolution Ordering Assessment
No objections were heard '
I
21, STREET LIGHTING IMPROVEMENT NO. L-12A IN THE FOLLOWING:
Prance Avenue between W. 66th Street and W. 69th Street
Mr. Hyde presented total estimated construction cost for this underground wiring
improvement showing total construction cost at $2,742.48 proposed to be assessed
against two parcels at $1,371.24 per assessable parcel.
and none had been received prior' thereto.
later in llinutes.)
No objections were heard
(See Resolution Ordering Assessment
22. STREET LIGHTING IMPROVEMENT NO. L-13 IN THE FOLLOWING:
Tamarac Lane from Vernon Avenue to 684' North
Mr. Hyde presented total construction cost at $748.69, proposed-to be assessed
against 1592.95 assessable .feet at $0.47 per assessable foot , against estimated
assessment of $0.50 per assessable foot. No objections were heard and none had
'been presented prior thereto.
23. SIDEWALK IMFROVmENT NO. S-13 IN THE FOLLOWING:
Mr. Hyde presented total construction cost at $63,939.80, proposed to be assessed
against 3796.90 assessable feet at $1584 per assessable foot against estsmated
assessment of $9.84 per assessable foot.
been received prior thereto.
(See Resolution Ordering Assessment later in Minutes.)
Both sides Hazelton Road from France Avenue to York Avenue
No objections were heard and none had '
See Resolution Ordering Assessment later in MTnutesi)
24. PWING LOT LWROVENENT NO. P-2 IN THE FOLLOWING:
Behind Grandview Liquor Store
Mr. Hyde presented total estimated construction cost at $204,474.61, $78,257.31
of which
fo which is proposed to be ass'essed against Jerry Paulson.
heard.and none had been presented pri'or thereto.
ment later in Minutes.)
25. PARKING LOT IMPROVEMENT NO. P-7 IN THE FOLLOWING:
Mr. Hyde presented total construction cost at $5,789.00, proposed to be assessed
against Parcel No. 2365 at $2,214.50 and against Parcel No. 2376 at $3,463.50.
No objections were heard and none had been presented prior thereto.
tion Ordering Improvement later in Minutes.)
26:
Mr. Hyde presented Analysis of.Assessment showing total construction cost at
$4,570.00 proposed to be assessed at $1,828.00 against Parcel No. 1951 and
at $2,742.00 against Parcei NO. 2010.
received prior thereto.
tion and moved its adoption:
is proposed to be assessed against the City of Edina and $126.217:3Q
No objections were
(See Resolution Ordering Assess-
Behind 3940 and 3944 W. 49% Street
(See Resolu-
PARKING LOT II?U?ROVEMENT NO. P-8 IN THE FOLLOWING
Behind 3918 and 3922 W. 49% Street
No objections were heard and none had been
Counc'ilman Courtney thereupon offered the following resolu:
RESOLUTION ADOPTING AND CONFIRMING
SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS LEVIED ON ACCOUNT OF
SANITARY SEWER IMPROVEMENTS NOS. SS-319, SS-320, SS-322, SS-323, SS-324
WATERMAIN IMPROVEMENTS NOS. WM-285, WM-290, IN-292, WM-293, WM-295
STREEET LIGHTING IMPROVEMENTS NOS. L-1.0, L-119 L-128, L-13
SIDEWALK IMPROVENENT NO. S-13
STORM SEFJER DQROVEMENTS NO. ST.S-142 AND ST.S-144
PARKING LOT IMPROVEMENTS NOS. P-2, P-7 AND P-8
STREET IJPROVMISNTS NOS. C-116, BA-199, BA-200, BA-203, BA-205, BA-207
BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Edina, Minnesota; as follows:
1. The City has given notice of hearings as required by law on the proposed
assessment rolls for the improvements hereinafter referred to and at such hearing
held on September 20, 1976, has considered al.l*oral and written objections pre-
sented against the levy of such assessments.
2. Each of the assessments as set forth in the assessment rolls on file in the
office of the City Clerk for Sanitary Sewer Improvements Nos. SS-319, SS-320,
SS-322, SS-323, SS-324, Watermain Improvements Nos. WM-295 , WM-290, Wl-292, Wf-293,
WM-295, Street Lighting Improvements Nos. L-10, 21-11, L-12A, L-13, Sidewalk Improve-
ment No. s-13, Storm Sewer Improvements Hos. ST.S-142, ST,S-144, Parking Lot
Improvemaits Nos. P-2, P-7, P-8, Street Improvements Nos. C-116, BA-199 ,, BA-200,
EA-203, BA-205 and BA-207 does not exceed the local benefits conferred by said
improvements upon the lot, trace or parcel of land so assessed, and all of said
assessments are hereby adopted and confirmed as the proper assessments on
account of said respective improvements to be spread against the benefited lots,
parcels and tracts of land described .therein.
. 3. --The assessments shall be payable in equal annual installments, the first '
of said installments, together with interest as hereinafter indicated on the
'
entire assessment from the date hereof to December 31, 1977, to be payable with
the general taxes for the'year 1976.
the interest rate shall be as follows:
The number of such annual installments and
Improvement- No.
Street Improvement No. BA-200-
Installments . Interest Rate
- 10 5%
Street Improvement No. C-116 10 5%
Street Improvement No. BA-203 10 5%
Street Improvement No. BA-205 - 10 5%
Street Improvement No. BA-207 10 5%
Street Improvement No. BA-199 . 10 5%
Watermain Improvement No. W-295 . 3 5%
Sanitary Sewer 1mprovement.No. 324 3 5%
Stom Sewer Improvement Mo. ST.S-144 3 5%
I?atermain Improvement No. WM-292 16 5%
Sanitary Sewer No.. SS-322 10 5%
Watermain Inproverrent No. WM-290 10 3% I
Sanitary Sewer Improvement No. SS-319 10 . 5%
Sanitary Sewer No. SS-320 10 5%
Storm Sewer Inprovement Bo. ST.S-142 % 10 5%
Watermain Improvement No. Wf-293 10 5%
Sanitary Sewer Improvement No. SS-323 . 10 5%
Watermain Improvement No. IW-285 . ,. 10 5% .
Street Lighting Improvement No. L-10 10 5% -
Street Lighting Improvement No. L-11 5 . 5%
Street Lighting Improvement No. L-12A 5 5%
Street Lighting Improvement No. L-13
Sidewalk Improvement No. S-13 10
Parking Lot Inprovement No. P-2 20 5%
Parking Lot Improvement No. P-7 5
5%
5%
2
. 6% '. -
Parking Lot Improvement No. P-8 5 6%
4.
copy of this resolution and a-cerkified duplicate of said assessments, with each
then unpaid installment and interest set forth separately, to be extended on
the tax lists of the County in accordance with this resolution.
5. The Clerk shall also mail cotice of any special assessments which may be
payable by a county, by a political subdivision or by the owner of any such
right-of-way, as required by Minnesota Statutes, Section 429.061, Subdivision 4,
and if any such assessment is not.paid in a single installment, the City Treasurer
shall arrarzge for collection thereof in installments, as set forth in said section.
Motion for adoption of the resolution was seconded by Councilman Shaw.
The City Clerk shall forthwith prepare and transmit to.the County Auditor a
Rollcall :
Ayes: Courtney, Richards, Schmidt, Shaw, Van Valkenburg
,Nays: None
Eesolution adopted J
HYDE PARK 2ND ADDITION GRANTED PRELIMINARY PLAT APPROVAL.
Hyde Park 2nd Addition had been continued from the meeting of August 16, 1976.
Note was made that preliminary approval had been granted the plat in August, 1974,
but because more than one year has elapsed since that approval, the developers
have been required to begin the platting process over again. Mr. Harry Lind,
representing Hyde Park Development Company, recalled that his company had agreed
tq dedicate approximately 25% of the land area to the.City, thus reducing the
plat by eight lots.
lot 3 under the assumption that this would be approved based on the 1974 approval.
Councilman Richards said that he did 'not believe that the land which is being
dedicated has as much value inasmuch as jt is low land.
firmed that the property to the East has given cash as well as storm drainage
easements and that he thinks that Hyde Park Development should pay an amount
equivalent to that paid by other developers.
. Glasgow Drive, said that originally there was discussion about a 10 foot wide
hiking trail between Hyde Park 2nd Addition and the property to the South.
suggested that such a trail must be developed at this time.
would'expect that there would be a sidewalk some' tine in the future along Dewey
Hill Road.
Mr. Luce recalled that
He said that the City had been granted an easement aver Out-
He said that he had con-
Mr. Robert Clark, .7701.
. He
Mr. Luce said tha.t he
Discussion ensued as to the need for a lxil~lng tra-il along the mainten-.
c
9 f 20/7G
I i , ance easeinent. Mr. Lind said that he would have no objection to a hiking trail Jf
Mr. Dunn said that there was no reason why.grading could not the City SQ desired.
be commenced before the plat is finally approved.
Councilman Richards offered the following resolution and moved its adoption:
Following lengthy discussion,
RESOLUTION GRANTING PRE1,IMINARY PLAT APPROVAL TO
HYDE PARK 2ND ADDITION
BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Edina, Ninnesota, that that cer-
tain plat entieled "Hyde Park 2nd Addition", platted by Hyde Park Development
Company and presented at the Edina City Council Meeting of September 20, 1976, be . and is hereby granted preliminary plat approval, subject to the following conditions:
1. The submission of deeds for Outlot A and Outlot B
2.
3.
The submission of $S,400 in lieu of parkland dedication
The submission of a .developers agreement, satisfaccory to the Engineering
Department, which would include grading for a future sidewalk on the South
side of Dewey Hill Road
The modification of the plat to show the extension of Hyde Park Lane to the
East property line so that maintenance vehicles will have access to the
ponding areas; and
Subject to obtaining comments of the Park Board as to whether there should
be a trail easement on Ehe maintenence easement.
4.
5.
Motion for adoption of the resolution was seconded by Councilman Shaw.
Rollcall: .
Ayes: Courtney, Richards, Schmidt, Shaw, Van Valkenburg
Nays: None
Resolution adopted.
._
- 1 .I
1 .-.
sirom 'SEWER IMPROVEMENT NO. P-ST , s-153 REFERRED BACK TO ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT
FOR NEW HEARING.
and ordered placed on file.
ducted and action taken as herein recorded for Storm Sewer Improvement No. 'P-ST.S-
153 in the fol1owing:location:
Affidavits of Notice were presented by Clerk, approved as to form
Due notice having been given public hearing was con-
Easement lines in Block 3, Killarney Shores Addition between Lots 4 and 5,
between Lots 12 and 13 and along the rear lines of Lots 2 through 6 and Lots
S through 12 ..
Nr .' Hyde presented total estimated cost at approximately $31,600, proposed to be
assessed at $2,000 against lots 12 through 18, $1,100.00 against Lots 1 and 3
through 11, and $550.00 zgainst Lots 19 through 30. Mr. Dunn advised that some
residents who signed the petition requesting the storm sewer have now requested. . .
that their names be removed and referred also to a petition in opposition to the
;improvement. Council was reminded of a letter from Mr. James C. Duncan, 6004
Schaefer Road, requesting the City to install drainage tile across the width of
his back yard to alleviate a standing water problem which exists
or melting snow drains down from the higher elevated lots of View Lane,and
Schaefer Road. Mr. Dunn said that, even in this dry year, there is evidence of
water standing on Mr. Duncan's property. Mr. Wellington B. Law, 6009 View Lane,
said that the residents on Schaefer
with the contractors who had built the houses. Mr. J. D. Wickett, 5920 Schaefer
Road, said that the storm sewer was needed only because the developer filled in
the swzmp to get additional lots.
were proposed to be assessed.
some
manner.
City was granted necessary easements by property owners.
that the project as proposed be abandoned and referred back to the Engineering
Department to develop a new system to be considered at a new hearing was seconded
by Councilman Courtney.
Ayes: Courtney, Richards, Schaidt, Shaw, Van Valkenburg c
Nays.: None
Motion carried.
when heavy rain
Road had created their own problem, along
Mr. Ed Thernell questioned why his lots
Mr. Max Soderquist, 5928 Schaefer Road, agreed that .
relief is needed but suggested that it could be done in a less expensive '
Mr. Dunn agreed that a drainage swail could be constructed, provided the
Councilman Shat7"s motion
'STORN SEWER IMPROVEMENT NO. ST.S-140 (REHFARING) APPROVED. Affidavits of Notice
were Dresented bv Clerk. approved as to form and ordered.placed on file. Pursuant . . A-
' to due notice given, public hearing was conducted on Storm Sewer Improvement No.
ST.S.-14OB in the following location:
Southwest Edina from W. 70th Street to Interstate 494 &nd from N.N.& S. Rail-
road to Braemar Golf Course
Council was reminded that Storm Sewer No. ST.S-140 had been authorized by the
Council on June 3, 1974, but that bids taken onDecember 12, 1975 had been rejected
and the project redesigned and additional area added to the drainage district. Mr.
Hyde presented estimated cost of the improvement at $693,643.50, proposed to be
assessed against single family residential property at' an estimated rate of $20.00
9/29/76
{- c
per 1 , 000 square feet for property that has had previous storm sewer assessments
of at least $50.00 per 1,000 square feet, arid at an estimated rate of $50.00 per
1,000 square feet for property that has had no previous storm sewer assessment OX
an askessment of less than $50.00 per 1,000 square feet. He added that multiple
residential property is proposed to be assessed at $75.00 per 1;OOO square feet
and commercial and industrial property at $100.00 per 1,000 square Eeet.
was made of a letter from Xr. Donald J. Jacobson of Introl Corporation opposing
the improvement and the assessment and from Nr. I?. E. Johnston, secretary of Hyde
Park Development Company, stating that he believes that they have already paid
their share of the cost of storm sewers in the area. Nr. Dunn explained engineeri
ing plans to Nr. Robert Clark, 7701 Glasgow Drive, advising that the mipimum*depth
would probably be about 6 feet. Mr. Nick Zeola who lives on Glasgow Drive, was
told that no further.storm sever is anticipated for the area. Mr. Robert Naegeli,
5912 Lee Valley Road, objected-that he did not receive any benefit from the improve-
nent. He suggested that a natural pond in the area should have been left for
drainage. Mr. Dunn told Nr. Donald G. Patton, 7220 Fleetwood Drive, that the min-
utes of ten years ago indicated that there would be an'additional storm sewer system
in the area.
following resolution and moved its ad.option:
BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of Edina, agnnesota, that this Council
heretofore caused notice of hearing to be duly published and mailed to owners of
each parcel within the area proposed to be assessed on the following proposed im-
provement:
Note
No further discussion being heard, Councilman Richards offered the
RESOLUTION ORDERING STOBI SEWER IElPROVEMENT NO. ST.S-140B
- STORM SHnR IMPROVEXENT NO. P-ST.S-140B IN THE FOLLOWING:
Southwest Edina from I?. 70th S-reet to Interstate 494 and from M.N.& S. Rail-
road-to Braemar Golf Course
and at.the hearing held at the-time and place specified in said notice, the Council . has duly considered the views of all persons interested, and being fully advised of
the pertinent facts does hereby determine to proceed with the construction of said
improvements including all proceedings which may be necessary in eminent
domain for the acquisition of necessary easements and rights for construction
and maintenance of such improvement; that said improvement is hereby designated ang shall be referred to in all subsequent proceedings as STORM SEWER XMPROVEJT
NO. ST.$-140B; and the area to be specially assessed therefor shall include all lots and tracts of land within the following described boundaries:
Commencing at the intersection of the centerlines of Cahill Road and West 70th
Street; thence,Southwesterly to a point 15.5 rods South of the centerline of I$. .
70th Street and 15.5 rods Vest of the centerline of Cahill Road; thence North- -. .
westerly ro a point 211.8' South'of the centerline of I?. .70th Street and 417.35'
West of the centerline of Cahill Road; thence Southwesterly to a point. 271.8'
South of the centerline of I?. 70th Street aad 733' West of the centerline OE Cahill
Xoad; thezzce Northwesterly to the NE corner of Lot 2, Block 1, Carolane iiddition;
thence North~~esterly along the Worth line of said Lot 2 a distance oE SO';
thence Southwesterly to the Southwest corner of Lot 3, Block I, Carolane Addition;
:hence Vesterly to the Northeast corner of Lot 2, Block 1, 3f.P. Johnson's
Prospect Eiills; thence Southwesterly to a point OR the West line of said.Lot 2, -
which point is 30' North of the Southwest corner of seid Lot 2; thence South-
westerly to the Southwest corner of Lot 1, Block 1, M.P. Johnson's Prospect
Hills; thence Westerly along the North line of Lanham Lane a dlstance of 65';
thence Eorthwesterly to a point on the Eortli line of Lot 4, alack 2, Hondo AddL- .
tion, said point being 50' East of the Northwest comer of said Lot 4; thence
point being 50' East of the Northwest corner of said Lot 2; theoce Xorthwesterfy
to the Northwest comer of Lot I, Block 2, Hondo Addition; thence ia?esterly along
the North line of EIondo Addition to a point'on the Xorth line of Lot 1; Block 1,
Hondo Addition, said point being 40' West of the Xortheast corner of said Lot 1;
thence Southwesterly to a poi-ct on the West line of said Lot 1, said point being
50' South of the Northwest corner thereof; thence Southerly along the West line
of Block 1, Hondo Addition to a point 50' South of the Northwest corner of Lot 3,
Block 1, Hondo Addirion, thence Westerly at right angles, a discawe of 130';
thence Northwesterly to a point on the West line of Lot Z,-Block 1, Al Petersen
Addition, said point being 70' North. of the Southwest comer of said Lot' 2; thence.
Southvesterly to the Southwest comer or" Lot 1, Prospect Hills Addition; thence '
Northwesterly to a point on the West line of LOK 4, Prospect IIills AdGition, sdd
point being 88.3' North of the Southwest corner of said Lot 4; thence North-
westerly to a point on the East line of Tract: A, R.L.S. 971, said point being
. 100' North of the South line of said Tract "A"; thence Westerly, i00' -North of and
-Northerly to a point on the North line of Lot 2, Block 2, Hondo Addition, said
-parallel to the South line of said Tract "A'!, to a point lo(?' Est of the West
-line of said Tract "A"; thence Southwesterly to a point on the West line of Tract
%", R.L.S. 971, said point being 58'<North of the Southwest corner of said Tract
I1 %I, E , thence Southwesterly to rhe Southwest corner of Lot 7, Frospect Hills
I ..
9[20/76 2.5 7r
Addition; thence Southwesterly to the Southeast corner of Lot 8, Prospect Hills
Addition; thence Southeasterly to a point on the Easterly line of Lot 10, Pro-
spect Hills, said point beiog 40' Southwesterly from the most Northeastcrly
corner of said Lot 10, thence Southerly to a point on the West line of Lot 13,
Prospect Hills Additton, said point bciiiig 228.53' Northerly of the Southwest
corner of said Lot 13;.thence Southerly to a point on the South line of said Lot
13, said point being 60' East of the Southwest corner thereof; thence Southeasterly
to a point on the South line of Lot 12, Prospect Mills Addition, said paint being
140' West of the Southeast corner thereof; thence Southeasterly to cr point on the
Sautherly line of Lot 1, Elock 1, .Schey's Park View 2nd Addit-lon; said point being
100' Southwesterly of the Southeast corner thcreo€; thence Southeas tcrly to a
point on the East. line of Lot 2, Block 1, Schey's Park View 2nd Addition, said
point on the East line of Lot 1, Block 2, Prospect Hills 2nd Addition, said point
being 30' Northerly of the Southeast corner of said' Lot I; thence Southeasterly
to a point on the West line of Lot 1, Bldck 3, Prospect Hills 2nd Addition, said
point being 120' Northerly of the Southwest corner of said Lot 1; thence South-
of the most Southerly corner of said Lot 1; thence Southeasterly to the nost
Southerly corner of said Lot 1, Block 3; thence Southeasterly along the Easterly
line of Lot 5, Block 3, Prospect Hills 2nd Addition to an intersection with a line
parallel with and 20 feet Northwesterly of the Southeasterly line of said Lot 5;
thence Southwesterly along said parallel line, a distance of 129.75'; thence
Southeasterly to a point on the Southeasterly line of said Lot 5, said point being
120' Southwesterly of the most Easterly corner of said Lot 5; thence Southwesterly
to the most Southerly corner of said Lot 5; thence Southwesterly to a point on the
North line of Lot 12, Block I, Holand's 1st Additioil, said point being 100' West
of the Northeast corner of said Lot 12; thence Southwesterly to a point on the
West line of said Lot 12, said point being 80' Southeasterly of the Northwest
comer thereof; thence Southwesterly to the Southeast corner of Lot 3, Block 3,
Schey's Park View 3rd Addition; thence Northwesterly to a point in said Lot 3,
said point being 40' North of the South line and 30' West of the East line of said
Lot 3; thence Southwesterly to a point in said Lot 3, said point beiQg 165' West
of the East line and 40' North of the South line of said Lot 3; thence Northwest-
erly to a point in said Lot 3, said point being 230' West of the East line and 70"
13orth cjf the South line Gf said Lot 3, thence Northwesterly C@ the Noi:th.zrest coder
of said Lot: 3; thence Westerly along the Westerly extension of the North line of
said Lot 3 to the center line of Schey Drive; thence Southerly along the center
lin? of Schey Drive to'the teeter line of Dewey Hill Road; thence Southwesterly
to a point on the South line of Lot 20, Block 1, Hyde Park Addition, said point
being 50' Vest of the Southeast corner thereof; thence Southeasterly to a point
on the Northeasterly line of Lot 9, Block 1, Hyde Park Addition, said point being
55' Southeasterly of the most Northerly corner thereof; thence Southwesterly to a
point in Outlot "D", Hyde Park Addition, said point being 535' North of the South
line and 100'' East of the Vest line of said octlot "D"; thence Westerly to a point:
on the West line of said Outlot "D", said point being 515' North of the Southwest
comer of said Outlot "D"; thence Southeasterly to a point in said Outlot "D", said
point being 140' East of the West 'line and 355' Morth of the South line of Outlot ,
II n,
East of the West line and 260' North of the South line of said Outlot I'D"; thence
Southwesteriy to a point in said Outlot "D", said point being 50' East of the West
line and 130' North of the South line thereof; thence Southwesterly to a point on
the North line of the Southeast k of the Southeast %odf Sec. 7, 'I. 116," R. 21,.
'said point being 110' West of the Northeast corner of said Southeast % of the
Southeast k; thence South-desterly to a point in the Southeast % of the Southeast k,
Sec. 7, T. 116, R. 21, said point being 270' West of the East line and 460' North
*of the South line of said Southeast k of the Southeast k thence Southeasterly to a
point in the said Southeastkof the Southeast k, said point being 210' West of the
East line and 425' North of the South line of said.Soukheast k of the Southeast %;
116, R. 21, said point being 598' North of the South line of Outlot "A", Braemar
Hills 7th Addition and 800' West of the East line of Block 13, Braemar Hills 7th
Addition; thence Northeasterly to a point 850' North of the South line of Outlot: , Braemar Hills 7th Addition and 725' West of the East line of Outlot "B",
Braemar Hills 7th Addition; thence Northerly, 725' West of and parallel with the
East line of said Outlot "B", a distance of 140'; thence Northeasterly to a point
in the North line of Braemar Hills 8th Addition, said point being 620' West of the
East line of said Outlot "B"; thence Easterly, along the Elorth line of Braebar
Hills 8th Addition, a distance of 40'; thence Southeasterly to a point in Outlot
, point being 50' North of the Southeast corner thereof; thciicc Soctheasterly to a
, .
. easterly to a point on the South line of said Lot 1, said point being 20' Westerly
'
.
D , thence Southeasterly to a point in said Outlot "D", said point being 155'
. .
.
3 thence Northeasterly to a point in the Southwest k of the Southwest %, Sec. 8, T.
.
11~11
'
"B", Braemar Hills 7th Addition, said point being 385' West of the East
370' South of the North line of said Out102 "B"; thence Northeasterly to a point in
said-Outlot "B", said point being 275' South of the North line and 345' West-of the .
East line of said Outlot "B"; thence Northerly to a point in said Outlot '%", said
point being 70' South of the North line and 300' West of the East line of said
Outlot "13"; thence Southeasterly to a point in said Outlot
120' South of the Norkh line and 70' \Jest of. the East line of said Outlot "B"; thence
Northeasterly to a point in the Northeast !G of the Southwest 'z of Section 8,
Toxasfiip 116, Rzngc 21, said point being 105' East of the West line and 15'
North of the South line of said Northetzst %, of the Southwest %; thence Southeasterly
to a point in the Southeastkof the Southwest %, Section 8, T. 116, R.'21, said
point being 210' South of the North line and 210' East of the \Jest line of said
Soutlieast-31; of the Southwest k; thence Southwesterly to a point in the Southeast
$; of the Southwest 'z, Sec, 8, T. 116, R. 21, said point being 435' South of the
North line and 150' East oE the West line of said Southeast !i of the Southwest k;
thence Southeasterly to a point in the Southeast !c of the Southwest !i;, Sec. 8,
*_ T. 116, R. 21, said point being 570' South of the North line arid 190' East of the
West line of said Southeast ?I; of the southwest ;&; thence Southeasterly to a point .
in the Southeast k of the Southwest'%, Sec. 8, T. 116, R. 21, said point being
675' South of the North line and 270' East of the West line of said Southeast k of
the Southwest k; thence Southeasterly to a point in the Southeast k of the Sourh-
west %, said point .being 950' South of the North line and 490' East of the West
line of said Southeast .k of the Southwest k; tl!ence Southeasterly to a point-on
the South line of Sec. 8, T. 116, R. 21, said poxnt being 625' East o.f the South- .
west corner of the Southeast k of the Southwest k of said Sec. 8; thence Easterly
along the South line of See. 8, T. *116, R. 21 to the Southeast corner of Lot I,
Block 9, Edina Interchange Center Addition; thence Northerly along the East . line of said Lot 1, Block 9, and its Northerly extension to the Southeast corner
of Lot 2, Block J, Atwood Station Subdivision; thence Northwesterly along the
North line of W. 78th Street to the East .line 'of Cahill Road; thence Northerly .
along said East line of Cahill Road to an intersection with the Westerly extension
of the South line of Lot 1, Block 1, Atwood Station Subdivision; thence Easterly
to the Southwest comer of said Lot 1; thence Northeasterly to a point 75' North
of the South line of said Lot 1 and 80' Easterly of and measured at right angles
'from the West line of said Lot I; thence Northerly to a point 75' South of the
North line of said Lot 1 and 56' East of the West line of said Lot I; thace
Northwesterly to a point on the North line of said Lot 1, which poi& is 20' East:
of the Northwest corner of said Lot 1; thence Northerly, parallel with the lest .
line of Lot 1, Block 4, Edina Intechange Center, a distance of 215'; thence
Northeasterly to a point 150' .East of the West line and 385' North of &e South
line of said Lot 1, Block 4; thence Northerly to a point 163' East of the Vest
fine and 506' North of the South line of said Lot 1, Block 4; thence Morthwesterly
to a point 65' East of the Vest line and 732' North of the South line of said Lot I,
Block 4; thence Northeasterly to the Northeast corner of said Lot I, Block 4; thence
Xortherly along the West line of the M.N.& S. Railway right-of-way to the h'orth
line of Dewey Hill Road; thence Nbrthwesterly to a point 285' North of the center-
line of Dewey Hill Road and 490' East of the centerline of Cahill Koad; thence.
Mortherly, parallel with the centerline of Cahill Road, a distance of 532'
thence, deflecting 90° to the left, a distance of 35'; thence deflecting 90 to
the right, a distance of 67'; thence Westerly to a point on the Nest line of
CzbU.1 Road, which point is 880' North of the centerline of Dewey Hill Road;
thence Northwesterly to a point OE the South line of Lot 1, Block 1, Braemar
Oaks, which point is 250' West of the centerline of Cahill Road; thence Northwest-
erly to a point 80' North of the South line of said Lot 1, Block I, and 420' ,
West of the centerline of Cahill Road; thence Northerly to a paint on the Norch
line of said Lot 1, Block 1, Braemar Oaks, which point is 420' West of the center-,
line of Cahill Road; thence Northeasterly to the intersection of the centerlines
of Cahill Road and Amundson Avenue; thence Northerly ;long the centerline of
Cahill Road to the point of beginning.
Hotion 203: adgp.~a -of tlic resolution was seconded by C&nc€inan Richards -
line and
"B" , said point being
- 1. .
I ..
. .
.
. .
i
I Rollcall :
Ayes: Courtney, Richards, Schmidt, Shaw, Van Valkenburg
Nays: None.
Resolution adopted.
STREET IMPROVEMENT NO. P-BA-220 AND SIDEWALK DPROVEEIENT NO. P-S-19 CONTINUED AGAIN.
As recommended by Mr. Dunn, Councilman Shawls motion continuing Street Improvement
No. P-BA-220 and Sidewalk Improvement No. P-S-19 to October 18, 1976, was seconded
by Councilwoman Schmidt .
3/20/76
Ayes: Courtney, Richards, Schmidt, Slzaw, Van Valkenburg
Nays: None
Motion carried. .I
J. E. LOEFFLER OBJECTION TO BUILDING PERMIT AT 4519 BRUCE AVE. NOTED. Mayor Van
ValkenburP; called Council's attention to a letter from Mr. Joes, E. Loeffler, -
4518 Arden Avenue, objecting to the approval of the building permit for a garage
at 4519 Bruce Ave.
letter. No action was taken.
Mayor Van Valkenburg said that he had replied to Mr. Loeffler's
MOCCASIN VALLEY ROAD IMPROVEMENT PETITIONS RECEIVED.
accepting and ordering referral to the Engineering Department the petitions for
the following Moccasin Valley Road improvements was seconded by Councilman Shaw:
Grading and graveling, sanitary sewer, watermain, storm sewer, permanent street
surfacing and curb.
Councilman Courtney's motion
Ayes:
Nays: None
Motion carried.
Courtney, Richards, Schmidt, Shaw,-Van Valkenburg
di 00 e
w W
m
UNDERGROUND WIRING IMPROVMENT NO. UU-z AUTHORIZED ON ioox PETITION. Council was
advised that a petition for an improvement consisting of underground wiring for
telephone and electric services to serve 5101 Gorgas Avenue had been received,
said improvement having been signed by the owner of said property, Said petition
also requested the Council to assess the entire cost against the property of such
owner.
adopt ion :
Councilman Shaw thereupon offered the following resolution and mov'ed its
RESOLUTION ORDERING UNDERGROUND WIRING IMPROVEMENT NO. W-2
UPON PETITION THEREFOR
BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Edina, Minnesota, as follows:
1. It is hereby found and determined that a peeition has been filed requesting
the Council to construct an underground wiring improvement to serve 5101 Gorgas
Avenue and to assess the entire cost against the property of the petitioner and
that said petition has been signed by the-owner of real property
where the improvement is to be located.
2. The making of said improvement in accordance with said petition is hereby
ordered pursuant to Minnesgta Statutes, Section 429.031 (3), (Session.Laws of
1961, Chapter 525, Section 2).
referred to in 211 sdxequent proceedings as UNDERGROUND WIRING IMPROVEMENT NO.
vu-2. The entire cost of said improvement is hereby ordered to be assessed
against the property located at 5101 Gor,gas Avenue where said improvement is to be
located.
at such address
Said improvement is hereby designated and shall be
'Motion for adoption of the resolution was seconded by Councilwoman Schmidt. -
Rollcall :
Ayes: Courtney, Richards, Schmidt, Shaw, Van Valkenlprg
Nays: None
Resolution adopted.
TRAFFIC SAFETY COMMITTEE MINUTES OF SEPTEMBER 14, 1976, CONSIDERED. Council's
attention was called to a petition protesting the recent creation of a one-way
street for Dovre Drive between Parkwood Lsne and Biscayne Boulevard. Plr. Dunn .
made reference to the recoimendation of the Traffic Safety Committee at its meeting
of September 14, 1976, that a one year moratorium be placed on further installation
of traffic control devices in the Parkwood Knolls area and that a letter be sent
to residents in Parkwood Knolls explaining warrants and neighborhood trip genera-
tion for the area. Councilman Courtney's motion approving the recommendations of
the Traffic Safety Committee as they pertain to the Parkwood Knolls area and accept-
ing the remainder of the minutes was seconded by Councilman Shaw.
Ayes :
Nays: None
Motion carried.
Courtney,, Rich.ards , Schmidt, Shaw, Van Valkenburg
- DEER RUN GRANTED FINAL PLAT APPROVAL.
approval, advising that a11 ordinance requirements have.been met.
being heard, Councilman Courtney offered the following resolution and moved its
Mr. Luce presented Deer Run for final plat
No objections
adoption:
RESOLUTION APPROVING FINAL PLAT OF
DEER RUN
EE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Edina, Minnesota, that that
certain plat entitled "Deer Run", platted by Ruth A. Friberg, an unmarried woman,
and presented at the Edina City Council Meeting of September 20, 1976, be and is
hereby granted final plat approval.
Motion for adoption of the resolution was seconded by Councilman Richards.
9/20/76
P
Rollcall :
Ayes : Courtney, Richards, ScIimidt , Shaw , Van Vallcenburg
Nays: None -
Resolution adopted.
Comcilman Richards asked if the City might take some action to assure that a drain-
age problem will not develop at a later time whenever any plat is brought in for
approval,
a certain piece of property had been .f%lled at one time.
Building Departzent does make recommendations on-the grade for a building site.. Mr.
Dunn explained that swales are often constructed to prevent a drainage problem.. No
action was taken.
He suggested that there might be some way to put people on notice that
Mr. Hyde said that tQe
HOUSING FINANCE AGENCY HOME IEPROVEMENT GRANT DISTRIBUTION RXPORT ACCEPTED.
Luce advised that the City has received $28,512.00 from the Minnesota Elousing Fin-
Mr .
ance Agency, $885.00 of which is to be used-for administration.
list of applications which he recommended receive the net grant amount of $27,657.
Mr. Luce added that he expects that the City'will receive an additional distribu-
-tion of between $2,000 and $3,000 at which time he proposes to seek additiofial-:
grant applications. Councilman Courtney's notion that the report be ac'cepted w?s
seconded by Councilwoman Schmidt.
He presented a
Ayes: Courtney, Richards, Schmidt, Shaw, Van Valkenburg
Nays: Xone
.* Motion carried.
CHLORINE ROOMS RENOVATION BID AI?ARDED.
taken for the ftnal renovation of the Water Department chlorine rooms.
mended by the Crty Manager, Councilwoman Schmidt's motion awarding contract to
low bidder, Rouse Mechanical, Inc., in the amount of $3,084 .OO was seconded by
Councilman Richards.
Nr. Hyde presented tabulation of four bids
As recom-
I Ayes: Courtney, Richards, Schmidt, Shaw, Van Valkenburg
Nzys: None
Motion carried. .
HOCKEY RINK LIGHTING PURC'dASE APPROVED.
quotations received for the purchase of hockey rink. lighting at Arden and Weber
Parks.
Electric for $4,044.00 for Arden Park lighting aEd for $4,300.00 for lights for
Weber Parkwas seconded by councilman Shaw.
Efr., Hyde presented tabulation of two
Councilman.Courtney's motion for award to recomuended low bidder, hilite
Ayes: Courtiley, Richards, Schmidt, Shaw, Van Valkenburg
Nays: None
Motion carried.
ORIIINANCE NO. 1234 GRANTED FIRST READING. As recommended by Mr. Hyde, Council-
man Courtney offered the following ordinance for First Reading:
ORDINANCE NO. 1232
AX ORDINANCE REGULATING THE USE OF
MUNICIPAL PAIlKING FACILITIES AND
FROVIDING A PENALTY AND
REPEALING ORDINANCE NO. 1231
TEE CiTY COUNCIL OF TEE CITY OF EDINA. MINNESOTA. ORDAINS:
Section 1. Hours of Parking Limited. No person shall park any vehicle in
any ninicipal parking facility for a period in excess of the tine limits as
cipal parking facility for any length of time during nonbusiness hours, however,
parking may be prohibited at any time for snow removal, repairs an$ like purposes..
. established pursuant hereto during business hours. Persons may park in any muni-
5ec. 2 Definitions. As used in this ordinance:
(a) Municipal parking facility shall mean any lot or ramp, and the lanes
gXvZng ingress thereto and egress therefrom, and all accessories thereof, owned
or operated by the City of Edina or'the IIousing and Redevelopment Authority of
Edina, liianesota, herein called llH.R.A.,ll ar,d made available to the public for
parking of private inotor vehicles, whether for a fee or at no cost.
include parking spaces located along public streets and highways. ,
' It shall not .
(b) Ramps shall mean the two municipal parking facilities located in the - 50th ar,d.France Commercial Area, one North of 50th Stzeet and one South of SOth
Street.
City included within the plan prepared by. the H.R.A. entitled "50th and France
.Commerc5al Area Plan," dated December 3, +1974.,
Sunday, or such other hours duringsuch days as may be set from time to time,by
resolution of the City Council €or any one or more of the municipal parking-
facilities-
as closely as possible, with those hours during which any substantial portion of
the businesses in the business 'area of the part.icular municipal parking facility
shall be open.
(c) The 50th and France Commercial Area shall mean the area with5n the
(d) Busiaess hours shall be fro= 8:OO a.m. to 8:OO p.m. of each day, except
Any business hours hereafter set by the City Council shall coincide,
(e) Time limits shall be such os arc specified by rcsolueion of
In setting rbe tlmc 1 lmit, thc
the City Council from time to the for all or certain poi-t'ioiis 01 my OIIC or
more of the municipal parking facilitks.
City Council shall be guided by the purpose of allowink: maslmun UYC of the
Runicipal parking facilities by patrons of busiiiesscs locntvd In rlic hsincvs
area of each municipal parking Eacility.
conspicuous manner, as determined by the City Manager, on the mun1,cip.il. park-
ing f acilit ies,.
Sec:, '3. Esceptions, Permits. Vehicles identified by a sticker issued by the
City under this section may be parked in the ramps in excess of the time limits,
but.only in such 1ocations.in the ramps as shall be designated from time to time
by the City-Manager. Locations designated by the City Manager shall be those that
are least convenient for patrons of businesses located in the business area of the
ramps, except that parking for physically handicapped employees, as defined in
Ordinance No. 1401, may be located in other places in the ramps. Locations so
designated for employees and 5or physically haDdicapped employees shall be posted
in a conspicuous manner as determined by the City Manager. The stickers shall be
'issued by such City department or City staff personnel as the City Manager from
time to time shall designate, and shall be issued only to persons to be designated
by the City Manager.
permits to persons who are employed by businesses in the 50th and France Commercial
Area.
on forms provided by the City Manager.
shall pay a fee of $12 for the calendar year, or such part thereof then remaining,
and furnish a description of the make, year, body style, color, and license number
00 of the vehicle to which it is to be fastened. Stickers shall be numbered .consecu-
ah tively and shall be CYI shall keep a record of the number of the sticker and the description of the vehicle.
The sticker shall be fastened to the left rear bumper of the vehicle and shall be
visible at all times when the vehicle is parked in the ramp. When the vehicle is
sold or traded and another vehicle is acquired, the City, upon application for a
new sticker for the remainder of the calendar year, accompanied by a description of
the new vehicle and its license number, shall issue such new sticker, -without
charge, and show the old sticker as having been canceled. Whenever a person to
whom a sticker has been issued shall cease to be regularly employed upon the
premises where he was employed at the time the sticker was issued,.the employer
shall notify the City of such fact, and the City shall cancel the old sticker.
No person shall park a motor vehicle in. parking spaces designated and reserved
for physically handicapped employees unless the permit required by this ordhance
be fastened to the vehicle as herein required, and unless that person is physically
handicapped or operating a vehicle under the direction and for the use of a
physically handicapped employee and such vehicle also has displayed prominently
upon it an identifying certificate issued to physically handicapped persons by
the Minnesota Department of Public Safety pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section
169.345.
which shall be punishable by a fine of not more than $100.
entirety .
Time limits stialj be postcd fn
. --1
The City Manager may direct the issuance of up to 400 such
Persons desiring a sticker shall apply to the City Manager for a sticker
Upon issuance of each sticker, the recipient
valid or~ly for the calendar year in which issued. The City
El
..
.
Sec..Lk.. '.Penalty; -Violation of this ordinance shall be a petty aisdemeanor
Sec. 5. Repealer. Ordinance 1231, as amended, is hereby repealed in its
911 UPDATE GIVEN BY CITY WAGER.
ing tlhe 911 system will request remedial legislations so that the Sheriff can be
a part of the joint powers.
Mr, Hyde advised that the municipalities favor-
No action was taken.
COUNCIL TO INSPECT CITY VEHICLES. As recommended by Mr. Eyde, it was generally
agreed that Council would inspect City vehicles which are proposed to be 'turned in
on new vehicles.
Budget Meeting.
LOTS 1 AND 2, YORKTOWN SECOND ADDITION HEIGHT RESTRICTION REVISED.
on Lot 4, Block 6, Yorktown. He recalled that the restriction was to allow 3, 4
and 5 stories in height for that property but the property has been developed with
buildings with 4, 5 and 6 stories in height and that is .the way the restriction had
been written.
was told by Mr. Luce that a height variance had been granted by the Board of Appeals.
Following discussion, Councilman Kichards offered the following resolution and
moved its adoption:
BE IT RESCLVED that the City Council of the City of Edina does hereby release Lots
*thereof, Hennepin County, Minnesota; from the covenants and restrictions set oat
in paragraph 5.c) of the Declaration of Restrictions and Protective Cov,enants
Eiled as Document No. 1033727, Files of the Registrar of Titles, Hennepin County,
Minnesota; and
The inspection will take place during the September 21, 1976
Mr. Luce recalled
' that in April, 1976, the Couilcil had adopted a resolution amending the restrictions
?.
Councilman Courtney questioned the revision of the resolution but
RESOLUTION
.a 1 and 2, Block I, Yorktown Second Addition, according to the duly recorded plat
.I
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the foregoing resolution shall. not be effective unless
and until there is delivered to the City ad amendment to said Deciaration oE
Restrictions and Protective Covenants, duly signed by the owlier and all1 claimants
of an interest in said Lots 1 and 2, and in recordable form, reimposing upo~ said
Lots 1 and 2 the following restrictions:
containing dwelling units shall be a combination of four, five and six stories in
height.
Buildings, parking areas, drivevays, and other hard-surfaced, non-
vegetative areas on the lot shall not cover, in the aggregate, more than sikty
(60%) percent of the area of the lot.
the City of Edina and may be released as to Lots 1 and 2, Block 1, Yorktown
Second Addition, by the City of Edina at any time and from time to time by its
sole act. Any such release shall be done by resolution of the Edina City Council
and shall be effective only upon the recording-of such resolution in the same
office in which said amended Declaration of Xestrictions and Protective Covenants
has been recorded; and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the foregoing resolutions shall supercede those resolu-
tions adopted April 19, 1976, with respect to Lot 4, Block 6, Yorktown, now
replatted as Lots 1 and 2, Block 1, Yorktown Second Addition.
Notion for adoption of the resolution was seconded by Councilwoman Schmidt.
1. (i) Each building on Lots 1 and 2, Block 2, Yorktowt.Second Addition,
(ii)
2. The covenants and restrictions herein contained may be released only by 8-
-
Rollcall :
Ayes: Richards, Schmidt, Van Valkenburg
Nays: Courtney
Abstaining:
Resolution adopted.
Shaw (recalling that he had abstained on the original resolution)
HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY AUDIT AS OF DECENBER 31, 1975, ACCEPTED, by
motion of Councilman Courtney, seconded by Councilwoman Schmidt.
. Ayes: Courtney, Richards, Schmidt, Shaw, Van Valkenburg
Xays: None
Motion carried
DUTCH ELM DfSEASE TREATMENT QUESTIONED.
Ron Erliardt, 4214 Sunnyside Road, has expressed concern about the City's program
for treatment and prevention of Dutch Elm Disease.
ixe can bring the matter up at the September 21, 1976 Budget Heeting.
PROCEDUlGS FOii HEARING AND DECIDING LAND USE.QUESTI0NS CONTINUED. 'Council's atten-
tionwas called to a letter from Nr. Erickson setting forth a "Procedure for Hearing
and Deciding Land ?Jse Questions". Following discussion, it wzs generally decided -
that the Mayor and Councilman Richards should study the procedures further and
report back to Council on October 18, 1976. .
Councilwoman Schmidt advised that Mk. u Mr. Erhardt Tcill be told that
CLAIMS PAID.
for payxent of the following claims as per Pre-list: General Fmd, $52,096.39;
Park Fmd, $1,765.88; Park Construction, $220.80; Swimming Pool, $2,189.04;
Golf Course, $5,243.47; Arezla Fund, $10,151.89; Gun Range, $383.50; Water Works
Fund, $623.15; Sewer Rental, $572.22; Liquor Fund, $27,971.80; Construction,'
$52,220.75; IBR Fund, $13,026.2'1; Total, $171;465.10.
Motion of Councilman Courtney was seconded by Councilwoman Schmidt
Ayes: Courtney, Iiichards , Schmidt , Shaw, Vsn ValIcenburg
$lotion carried.
- PJZyS: Nane
ENVIRONMENTAT, QUGITY COXMISSION NINUTES ,DISCUSSED.
referred to- the Environmental Quality Commission Minutes of August 30, 1976, in.. .
which it was recorded that the !'Engineering Department should prepare a written
plan regarding the handling of future sewage problems for a EQC review and that
if such a plan were not prepared, the EQC should request the Council to order it".
Mayor Van Valkenburg instructed Mr. Luce to advise Mr. Hughes that he should coqe
directly to the Council with any EQC recommendations and said that Mr. Dunn is
not to submit the reqqested report to the Commission.
No further business appearing, Councilwoman Schmidt's motion was seconded by
Councilman Courtney and carried that the meeting be adjourned.
Mayor Van Valkenburg
1
Adjournment- at
10: 10 p .m.
City Clerk
2h