Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout19770801_regularMINUTES ' / 225 OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE EDINA CITY COUNCIL HELD AT CITY HALL AUGUST 1, 1977 Answering rollcall were members Courtney, Richards, Schmidt, Shaw, and Mayor Van Vallcenburg . MINUTES of July 18, 1977, were approved as submitted by motion of Councilwoman Schmidt, seconded by Councilman Shaw. Ayes: Courtney, Richards, Schmidt, Shaw, Van Valkenburg - Nays: None Motion carried. C, C. LUDWIG AWARD NOMINATION PRESENTED TO FLORENCE HALLBERG, presented a Certificate of Commendation to City Clerk Florence Hallberg as a Mayor Van Valkenburg permanent' reminder of the recognition given her for having been nominated for the 1977 C. C. Ludwig Award for municipal service which is presented axmually by the. League of Minnesota Cities. The Mayor expressed the congratulations of the Council. t AMUNDSON AVE., DELANEY BLVD. STREET INPROVEMENTS CONTINUED TO SEPTEMBER 12, 1977. Mr. dyde recalled that public hearings on the following street improvements had been continued from May 16, 1973: A. CONSTRUCTION OF GRADING AND GRAVELING IMPROVEMENT NO. P-C-124 IN THE FOLLOWING: Amundson Avenue from Cahill Road to Dewey Hill Road FOLLOWING: Amundson Avenue from Cahill Road to Dewey Hill Road Delaney Blvd. from Dewey Hill Road to W. 78th St. IN THE FOLLOWING: Delaney Blvd. from Dewey Hill Road to W. 78th St; B. CONSTRUCTION OF PERMANENT STREET SURFACING AND CONCRETE CURB & GUTTER IN THE C. GRADING ANI GRAVELING IMPROVEMENT NO. P-C-126 IN THE FOLLOWING: D. PERMANENT STREET SUETACING -AND CONCRETE CURB & GUTTER IME'ROVENENT NO. P-BA-227 The Mayor referred to numerous telephone calls and letters which had been received in regard to these improvements'since che last hearing and said that the concerns expressed hax Seen noted by the Council. Hoffman reviewed the results of traffic studies which were.conducted during the past two months on Cahill Road at its intersections at W. 70th Street, Dewey Hill Road and W. 78th Street and advised that the major conclusions drawn from the ar?alysis of the study are that 1) no closures of roads could be accomplished on Cahill Road until I979 due to T.H. 100 construction; 2) the present roadway system has the capacitytohandlkthe present traffic load; and 3) if no changes are made to the roadway system, the traffic volumes will double West of the industrial park increase under any plan and that most truck traffic in the area at the present t-ime is due to constnction in the developing areas, and suggested that traffic will..be somewhat relieved after T. H. 100 is completed becagse cars will save time by travel- ing at greater speeds. He referred also to the possibility of constructing a cul- de-sac on Cahill Road North of Dewey Hill Road and of constructing a "split inter- sectionl'at the intersection of Cahill Road and Dewey Hill Road; Mr. Hyde referred to the uncertaintiks of development in the area and said that 2,300 cars shou1.d not be considered heavy Mayor Van Valkenburg emphasized that Council has .not reached any.decision a& to .: the improvements. 14r. Me1 Orenstein, attorney representing Mr. and..Mrs. Orin B. Johnston, 5548 W. 78th Street, urged that Council reach a decision inasmuch as the Johnston property is in the path of the Delaney Blvd. improvement as well as in the path of Storm Sewer Improvement No. 140. He pointed out that grades of the John- ston property are such that, if Delaney Blvd. is extended South, the City would have to buy the property and requested that Council authorize the purchase of the entire tract as a total unit if the plan is not abandoned entirely. Mr. Dunn recalled that there is a pond on the Johnston land that is a part of the storm sewer plan and that the revised plan for Delaney Blvd. would leave the house without access to the road. He added that it is not absolutely necessary to acquire the Johnston property fbr construction of the storm sewer, but that if the property is taken for the road, then he would propose to run the storm sewer thru that property. emphasized that his pond is a part of a natural pond which existed as far back as 1851. He objected to donating an easement to the City because the storm sewer is needed "only for additional development which will increase the tax base for the City" and said that those people should pay their proportionate share. that City development in the area has increased the evaporation rate of the pond and khat tb.2 City had rejected his offer to sell a piece of his land to it for $l.OC. He contended that, after waiting eight years, he is entitled to know what the City intends to do. the recommendation that no action be taken at this time. He said that it would be a With the aid of the view-graph, Mr. . under full development. Mr. Hoffman emphasized that W. 70th Street traffic will traffic for a collector road such as Dewey Hill Road. Mr. Orin Johnston He objected . Mr. Darrell Boyd, 7204 Shannon Drive, concurred with 8/1/77 %- waste of taxpayers' money if the City is not prepared to block off Caliill Road in order to prevent too much traffic ending up at the Crositown Eighway at Gleason Road or at the Crosstown'Highway at Tracy Avenue. He recalled that in in its preferred plan, the Task Force had recommended a maximum of 7,000 cars at the intersection of Gleason Road and the Crosstown Highway. Mr. Jeff Gustafson of Florence Lane was told by Mr. Dunn that there are 55 acres from Dewey Hill Road to W. 78th Street and West of Cahill Road for which there are no development plans at the present time. Mr. and Mrs. Roberc Burns, 5820 Dewey Hill Road, objected that the City is proposing to deviate from the Western Edina Plan on which residents of the area had relied since it was adopted in 1971. Mr. Burns contended that residents on Lanham Lane and Fleetwood Drive knew of the plan when they purchased their homes, He referred to the fact that the City thought enough of the Plan to defend it in the Lowry Hill court case. Gleason Road, who had been a member of the Valley View Road/County Road 18 Task Force expressed concern about increased traffic in the industrial area. He sug- gested that the City solve the Johnstons problem but keep its options open for a future roadway. Mr. Dunn said that minutes over the past three or four years reflect concern over traffic volumes in Western Edina generally and reflected also the belief that the construction of roads in this area would ease traffic in residential areas. He recalled that, for the most part, the City does not condemn property to build roads and that since all of the necessary land for road right-of-way (except the Johnston property) had been acquired, it seemed an appropriate time to bring the improvements to hearing. Mr. Stephen Winnick, 7404 Xristol Blvd., urged that a decision be reached because he is considering purchasing a lot on Lanham Lane. Mrs. Doris Christoffersen, 5701 Kemrich Dripe,*said that there is not enough traffic on Dewey ~ Hill Road to warrant the proposed improvements. A resident of SO01 Dewey Hill Road said that he had been told of the Southwest Edina Plan by his realtor and that he purchased his home in reliance of the plan. Blr. Hyde recalled that at the time the Plan was adopted, the land on the West side of Cahill road was zoned industrial, but that it has since been developed with apartments. Ee spoke of the necessity of the staff knowing how to respond to inquiries concerning the Plan. Mr. Dunn pointed out that there are three single family lots that will be hard to reach and should be acquired by the City if the projects are abandoned. Discussion ensued as to the possibility of amending the Western Edina Plan. Councilman Richards then moved that the hearings on Improvements Nos. P-C-124, P-BA-226, P-C-126 and P-Bii- 227 be continued until September 12, 1977, to give the City Attorney an opportm-ity to deternine whether or not it would be legal to approve only that portion of the project relating to acquisition of the Johnston property (which would be assessed against the entire project if it should be authorized at a later date) and so that the EngiEeers and the Planning Commission can make a recommendation as to whether or aot the Southwest Edina Plan should be retained and/or amended as to the road layout. . I Mr. Clement Springer, 6828 . In response to a question of Mr. Greg Gustafson, 6412 Aspen Road-, . B Motion was seconded by Councilman Courtney. Ayes: Courtney, Richards, Schmidt, Shaw, Van Valkenburg Nays: None Motion carried. ORDINANCE NO. 811-A100 GRAI?TED FIRST READING. by Clerk, approved as to form and ordered placed on file. petition for R-2 Multiple Residence District zoning for Lots 3 and 4, Auditor's Subdivision KO. 172 (4626 France Ave. S.) as recommended by the Planning Commis- sion. feet and that the developer would "retrofitfa single family dwelling (which presently exists. 03 Lot 3) into a two-family dwelling and construct a similar building on Lot 4. area. 15,000 square feet and that the gross floor area of each unit substantially exceeds the minimum reqldrements but that the staff and Planning Coinmission had recommended approval because the proposed land use is consistent with other properties abutting France Avenze, because setbacks and lot coverage requirements can be met, and based also on the fact that the common driveway access minimizes traffic hazards on France Ave. been based on lot size variances from the Board of Appeals and that the proponent had indicated that he would not want the R-2 zoning if the variances are not granted. Eiayor Van Valkenburg referred to a letter from Mr. R. W. Russell, 4600 France Ave., So., which stated that he would have no objections to the proposed development, provided there are no windows on the North side of the building. Mr- Jack Oviclc, the proponent, said that there would only be one bedroom window on the North side. He said that he. would live in one unit himself and would maintain the natural foliage on the property. expressed concern about the precedent of developing narrow, but 8eep lots in this manner. It was clarified that, even if the Council does grant First Reading for Affidavits of Notice were presented Mr. Hughes-rpresente&..a He advised th.zt these lots measure 10,032 square feet and 10,450 square . The two structures would share a common driveway and court Mr. Hughes advised that the lots are far below the minimum R-2 lot size of I based on the very innovative plans for development of the property, - He said that the recommendation of the Planning Commission and the staff had ' Mrs. Helen McClelland, 5717 Continental Drives .. 221 the zoning change, Mr. Ovkk would still have to prove the same prerequisites to a variance that anyone else would have to prove. offered Ordinance No. 811-A100 and moved its adoption: Councilwoman Sclzmidt then ORDINANCE NO. 811-A100 AN ORDINANCE -AMENDING THE ZONING ORDINANCE (NO. 811) BY A.DDING TO THE MULTIPLE RESIDENCE DISTRICT THE CITY COUNCIL OF EDINA, MINNESOTA, ORDAINS: Section 1. Paragraph 1 of Section 4 of Ordinance No. 811 of the City is "The extent of the Multiple Residence District is enlarged by the addition of Lots 3 and 4, Auditor's Subdivision No. 172, which is in sub-district R-2". Sec. 2. publication. amended by adding the following thereto: the following property: This ordinance shall be in full force and effect upon its passage and GABBERT AND GABBERT REGISTERED LAND SURVEY GRANTED PRELIMINARY APPROVAL; C-3 ZONING GRANTED FIRST READING, approved as to form and ordered placed on file. Nr. Hughes presented Gabbert & Gabbert Registered Land Survey, located West of York Ave. and North of W. 70th Street, for preliminary plat approval and for C-3 zoning. He recalled that a short time ago, a building permit was issued for the construction of a new multi-tenant commercial building located in the Northwestern quadrant of York Ave. and W. 70th Street, whikh was the former site of the Southdale Car Wash. Following the issuance of the building permit, the staff determined that the site was presently zoned C-4 He said that the requested rezoning is a down-zoning and will result in a more desirable development and -recommended that approval be contingent on the submis- sion of suitable cross easements detailing the parking requirements for the new building and other existing buildings which share a common parking lot. No objections being heard, Councilman Shaw offered the following resolutim and moved ies adoption: Affidavits of Notice were presented by Clerk, . and that C-3 zoning would be proper for the proposed use. RESOLUTION GRANTING PRELIMINARY APPROVAL FOR GABBERT &.GABBERT REGISTERED LAND SURVEY BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Edina, Minnesota, that that certain regfstered Land survey generally located West of York Avenue and North of W. 70th Street, be and is hereby granted preliminary approval. Motion for adoption of the resolution was seconded by Councilwoman Schmidt. Rollcall : Ayes: Courtney, Richards, Schmidt, Shaw, Van Valkenburg Nays: None Resolution adopted. Councilman Shaw then offered the Eollowing ordinance for First Reading: ORDINANCE NO. 811-AlOI AN ORDINANCE AMEhmING THE ZONING ORDINANCE (NOt 811) BY REMOVING FROM THE C-4 COMMERCIAL DISTRICT AND ADDING TO THE (21-3 COMMERCIAL DISTRICT Section 1. "The following property is removed from Commercial District C-4 and added .. Tract A, R.L.S. 1233, which is in sub-district C-3. Sec. 2. publication. Paragraph 3 of Section 9 of Ordinance No. 811 of the City is amended by adding the following thereto: to the Commercial District C-3: . This ordinance shall be in full force and effect upon its passage and EBERHARDT APPEAL OF DECISION OF BOARD OF APPEALS ON SIGN ORDINANCE CONTINUED. Affidavits of Notice were presented by Clerk, approved as to form and ordered placed on file. hearing be continued to August 15, 1977, whereupon Councilman3.hav'ls'motion that the hearing be continued as requested was seconded by Councilman Richards. Mr. Hughes then advised that Eberhardt had requested that this Ayes: Courtney, Richards, Schmidt, Shaw, Van Valkenburg Nays: None I Motion carried. -- EDINA INTERCHANGE CENTER FOURTH ADDITION GRANTED FINAL PLAT APPROVAL FOR PORTION .. OF PLAT. Nr. Eiughes recalled that Edina Interchange Center Fourth Addition had been granted preliminary plat approval on July 11, 1977, conditioned on the understanding that plans for L~ts 4 and 5 are approved and that final approval be withheld pending completion of plans for the extension of Ohm Lane. He said that the proponent has presently submitted a proposed final plat for all of the property for everything except the Northwestlot(O1d Lot 12). recalled that Ms. Waelti had Mr. Hyde indicated that the City could require a roadway 8/1/77 . 'r = dey,-ation on a replat. the proposed dedication and that he is not sure whether or not the plat can be the hearing be continued to August 15, 1977, so that the Planning Commission would have an opportunity to study the possible extension of Ohms Lane. Mr. Steve Gage of the Garron Corporation, 'representing New England Elutual Life Insurance Co., called attention to the fact that his firm has a closing date of August 20, 1977, and that it is important to them that the plat be finally approved by that time-so as not to delay the development of the property at this time. Councilman Richards then offered the following resolution and moved its adoption: Mr. Erickson said that he had not as yet respon..-d to He requested that forced to donate roadway right-of-way at this time. I RESOLUTION GRANTING FIRAL PLAT APPROVAL OF EDINA INTERCHANGE CEhTER FOURTH ADDITION BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Edina, Minnesota, that that certain plat entitled "Edina Interchange Center Fourth Addition, platted by New England Mutual Life Insurance Company, and presented at the Edina City Council Meeting of August 1, 1977, be and is hereby granted final approval for Lots 1 -- thru 6 only, with the balance of the plat to be an outlot which will be replatted at a later date, once road patterns are worked out. Motion for adoption of the resolution was seconded by Councilman Courtney- Rollcall : Ayes: Courtney,Richards, Schmidt, Shaw, Van Valkenburg Nays: None Resolution adopted. .. JAmS OTTO APPEAL FROM ADNINISTRATIVE DECISION DENIED. Affidavits of Notice were presented by Clerk, approved as to form and ordered placed on file. Mr. Hughes presented the appeal of Mr. James Otto from an administrative decision as pertains to Lot 4, Block I, Braemar Parc. He advised that Mr. Otto is appealing an administrative decision that required the rear yard to be measured from either the East or West lines of his.triangular shaped.lot, and the other considered an interior side line. the side property lines and the rear setback measured as a radius from the intersection of the two "sides". Mr. Hughes said that the staff has interpreted the lot to be the same as a corner lot with two non-right-of-way property lines, one of which aust be a rear lot line. No persons were heard, whereupon Council- man Courtney's motion that the Council reaffirm the decision of the Administra- tive.sta€f was seconded by Councilwoman Schmidt. line be He requested that the East and Nest lines he Rollcall : Ayss: Courtney, Richards, Schmidt, Van Valkenburg Nays: None Abstaining:. Shaw, because of his position as Chairman of the Board of Appeals Motfon carried. ZDINA INTERCWGZ CENTER FIFTH ADDITION GRAXTED FINAL PLAT APPeOVAL. Mr. Hughes presented Edina Interchange Center Fifth Addition €or final plzt approval, ad- vising that all. ordinance requirements have been met. Councilman Richards then offered the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION APPROVING EDINA INTERCHANGE CENTER FIFTH ADDITION BE IT RESOLVED BY THE EDINA CITY COUNCIL that that certain plat entitled "Edina Interchznge Center Fifth Addition", platted by New England Mutual Life Insurance Company, and presented at the Edina City Council Meeting of August 1, 1977, be and is hereby. granted final plat approval. Motion for adoption of the resolution was seconded by Councilwonian Schmidt. Rollcall : Ayes: Courtney, Richards, Schmidt, Shaw, Van Valkenburg Eays: None Resolution adopted. LOTS 14 AND 15, HYDE PARK 1ST ADDITION DIVISION APPROVED. Mr. Hughes presented tke petition of Dale Johnson Builders for division of Lots 14 and 15, Hyde Park 1st Addition (6000 Bonnie Brae Drive) to re-align the lot line between the two.lots so as to eliminate the necessity of obtaining a side yard variance for construc- tion of a dwelling on Lot 15. offered the following resolution as recommended by the Planning Comnission and moved its adoption: WHEREAS, the following described property is at present a single tract of land: Lots 14 and 15, Block'l, Hyde Park; and WWREAS, the owner has requested the subdivision of said tract into separate parcel$ (herein called "Parcels") described as follows: No objections being heard, Councilman Richards RESOLUTION 8/1/77 229 All of Lot 15, Block 1, Hyde Park, and that part of Lot 14, Block 1, Hyde Park, which lies Easterly of a line drawn from the Southeast corner of Lot 14 to a point on the North line of said Lot 14, distant 5.00 feet West of the Northeast corner of said Lot 14; and Lot 14, Block 1, Hyde Park, except that part of Lot 14 which lies Easterly of a line drawn from the Southeast corner of Lot 14 to a point on the North line of said Lot 14, distant 5.00 feet West of the North- east corner of said Lot 14,; and . WHEREAS, it has been determined that compliance with the Subdivision and Zoning Regulations of the City of Edina will create an unnecessary hardship and said Parcels as separate tracts of land do not interfere with the purposes of the Subdivision and Zoning Regulations as contained in the City of Edina Ordinance Nos. 801 and 811; NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Edina that the conveyance and ownership of said Parcels as separate tracts of land is hereby approved and the requirements and provisions of Ordinance No. 801 and Ordinance No. 811 are hereby waived to allow said division and conveyance thereof as separate tracts of land but are not waived for any other purpose or as to any other provision thereof, and 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 Councilwoman Schmidt. 0 m Rollcall : r- I Ayes: Courtney, Richards, Schmidt, Shaw, Van Valkenburg Nays: None ,5 Resolution adopted. a- NOISE Mr. Milton Singer, 4812 W. 62nd Street, served as spokesman for three residents ABATEMENT WALL FOR CROSSTOWN HIGJNAY/RYAN AVE. AREA TO BE RECONSIDERED. in the area of 62nd Street and Ryan Ave., asking what could be done to eliminate construction of the noise abatement wall. Mr. Hyde recalled that when con- struction plam for T.H. 130 from Hibiscus Ave. to Valley View Road were approved by the Council on March 21, 1977, noise attenuation devices consisting of com- binations of earth mounds and concrete walls of varying heights throughout most of the project were included. He recalled also that these yalls .and mounds were incorporated into the plan by the Minnesota Department of Transportation after an informal meeting on January 30, 1975, invitations to which were mailed to property owners immediately adjacent to the project. would get in touch with the State Highway Department and arrange a meeting with residents and the Bfghway Department personnel. Mr. Hyde said that he No formal action was taken. HEARING DATES woman Schmidt for August 1% SET FOR PLANNING MATTERS. As recommended by Mr. Hughes, Council- 's motion setting hearing dates for the following Planning matters 1977,. was seconded by Councilman Shaw. 1; Rainbow Managsment Division - Zoning change from R-1 Single Family Residence 3istrict to SR-4 Senio? Citizen Residence District (SW corner 51st and France Ave. Oliver Development Company - Blake Ridge Estates - PRD-3 Planned Residential District to R-1 Single Family Residential District and Preliminary Plat approval - Located South of Vernon Ave. and West of Olinger Blvd. 2. Ayes: Courtney, Richards, Schmidt, Shaw, Van Valkenburg Nays: None Motion carried. JERRY'S ENTERPRISES, INC., LOT DIVISION CORRECTED. Mr. Hughes advised Council that when Jerry's Enterprises, Inc., went to file their lot division which had been sdopted by the Council on Aug.: 1, 1977, they discovered that an incor- rect legal description had been used. description and that it is correct as revised. Councilman Richards offered the following resolution and moved its adoption: He said that he had checked the corrected As recommended by Mr. Hughes, RESOLUTION WHEREAS, the f olPowing described tracts of land constitute ifar.ious separate parcels : Lots 19, 20, 21 and 22, Block 3, Grand View Heights, together with all that part of the East 1/2 of the adjoining vacated Summit Avenue lying between the extensions across it of the South lines of said Lot 19 and the North line of said Lot 22; also that part of Lot 18, Block 3, Grand View Heights lying North of a line run from a point on the West line of said Lot 18 a distance of 1.20 feet South from the Northwest corner of said Lot 18 to a point in the East line of said Lot 18, a distance of 0.70 feet South from the Northeast corner of said Lot 18 End there terminating, except the Eas't 114.0 feet thereof; and except the West 17.5 feet thereof; also that part of Lots 13 8/1/77 to 15 inclusive, Block-4; lying East of State Highway No. 5, Grand View , Heights, and that part of the adjacent portion of the West Half of vacated Summit Avenue lying between the Easterly extensions across,said Avenue of the North line of said Lot 13 and the South line of said Lot 15, according to the plat thereof on file or of record in the office of the Register of Deeds in and for said Hennepin County; also Lots 11, 12, 13 and 14, Block 3, Grand View Heights and Lots 15, 16 and 17, Block 3, Grand View Heights, and that part of Lot 18, Block 3, Grand View Heights, lying South of a line run from a point on the West line of said Lot 18, a distance of 1.20 feet South from the Northwest corner of said Lot 18 to a point in the East line of said Lot 18, a distance of 0.70 feet South from the Northeast corner of Lot 18; also all of Lots 20, 19, 18 and that part of 17 lying East of a line drawn from the Southwest corner of said Lot to a point on the North line of said Lot a distance of 25 feet East of the Northeast corner thereof, all in Block 4; all in Grand View Heights, according to the plat thereof on file or of record in the office of the County Recorder, Hennepin County, 'Minnesota, together with all of vacated Summit Avenue lying Southerly of the Easterly extension of the North line of Lot 17, Block 4 of said Grand View Heights and Northerly of the Easterly extension of the South line of Lot 20, Block 4, of said addition; also that part of Lot 16, lying East of a line dram from a poiat on the South line thereof distant 28 feet East of the Southwest corner of said Lot 16 to a point on the North line of said' lot distant 47 feet East of the Northwest corner thereof, Block 4, "Grand View Heights," and that part of the 'West half of the adjoining vacated Summit Avenue lying between the extensions across it of the North and South lines of said Lot 16, according to the plat thereof on file or of record in the offike of the Register of Deeds in and for said County; also Tract B, Registered Land Survey No. 1393 and that part of the adjacent portion of the East Half of vacated Summit Avenue adjoining said Tract E, lying Northerly of the Westerly extension of the North line of Lot 24, Block 3, Grand View Heights, except that portion thareof taken for highway purposes; also Lots 23 and 24, Block 3, Grand View Heights, and that portion of vacated Summit Avenue, lying Southerly of the Westerly extension of the North line of said Lot 24 and Northerly of the Westerly extension of the South line of said Lot 23, except the portion of said vacated Summit Avenue taken for highway purposes; also that part of Lots 11 and 12, Blcck 4, Grand View Heights, except that portion taken for highway purposes, all located in Hennepin County, Kinnesota; and . . ' WHEREAS, the owners of the above tracts of land desire to combine said tracts into the following described new and separate parcels (herein called "Parcels") : Parcel I Lots 19, 20, 21 and 22, Block 3, Grand View Heights, together with all that part of the East 1/2 of the adjoining vacated Summit Avenue lying between the extensions across it of the South lines of said Lot 19 and the North line of said Lot 22; also that part of Lot 18, Block 3, Grand View Heights lying North of a line run from a point on the West lina of said Lot 18 a distance of 1.20 feet South from the'Northwest corner of said Lot 18 to a point in the East line of said Lot 18, a distance of 0.70 feet South from the Northeast comer of said Lot 18 and there terminating, except the West 17.5 feet thereof; also that part of Lots 13 to 15 inclusive, Block 4, lying East of State Highway No. 5, Grand View Heights, and that part of the adjacent portion of the West Half of vacated Summit Avenue lying between the Easterly extensions across said Avenue of the North line of said Lot 13 and the South line of said Lot 15, according to the plat thereof on file or of record in the office of the Register of Deeds in and for said Hennepin County. All located in Hennepin County, Minnesota. I Parcel I1 Lots 11, 12, 13 and 14, Block 3, Grand View Heights and Lots 15, 16 and 17, Block 3, Grand View Heights, and that part of Lot 18, Block 3, Grand View Heights, lying South of a line run from a point on the West line of said Lot 18, a distance of 1.20 feet South from the Northwest corner of said Lot 18 to a point in the East line of said Lot 18, a distance of 0.70 feet South from the'Northeast corner of said Lot 18; also the West 17.5 feet of that part of Lot 18, Block 3, Grand View Heights, lying North of a line run from a point on the West line of said Lot 18, a distance of 1.20 feet South from the Northwest corner of said Lot 18 to a point in the East line of said Lot 18, a distance of 0.70 feet South from the Northeast corner of said Lot 18; also all of Lots 20, 19, 18 and that part of 17 lying East of a line dram from the Southwest corner of said Lot to a point on the North line of said Lot a distance of 28 feet East of the Northwest corner thereof, all in Block' 4; all in Grand View Heights, according to the plat thereof on file or of record in the off ice of the County Recorder, Hennepin County, Minnesota. Together with all of vacated Summit Avenue lying Southerly of the Easterly extension of the North line of Lot i7, Block 4 of said Grand View Heights m a a 8/1/77 .. 231 and Northerly of the Easterly.extension of the South line of Lot 20, Block 4, of said addition; also that part of Lot 16, lying East of a line drawn from a point on the South line thereof.distant 28 feet East of the Southwest corner of said Lot,l6 to a point on the North line of said lot distant 47 feet Ezst of the Northwest corner thereof, Block 4, "Grand View Heights," and that part of the Xest half of the adjoining vacated Summit Avenue lying between the extensions across it of the North and South lines of said Lot 16, according to the plat thereof on file or of record in the office of the Register of Deeds in and for said County, all located in Hennepin County, Ninnesota. Parcel 111 Tract B, Registered Land Survey No. 1393 and that part Of the adjacent portion of vacated Summit Avenue adjoining said Tract B, Northerly of the Westerly extension of the North line of Lot 24, Block 3, Grand View Heights, except that portion thereof taken for highway purposes; also Lots 23 and 24, Block 3, Grand View Heights, and that portion of vacated Summit Avenue, lying Southerly of the Westerly extension of the North line of said Lot 24 and Northerly of the Westerly extension of the South line Of said Lot 23, except the portion of said vacated Summit Avenue taken for highway purposes; also that part of Lots 11 and 12, Block 4, Grand View Heights, except that portion taken for highway purposes, all located in Hennepin County, Minnesota; and IJHEREAS, it has been determined that compliance with the Subdivision and Zoning Regulations of the City of Edina will create an unnecessary hardship and said Parcels as separate tracts of land do not interfere with the purposes of the Subdivision and Zoning Regulations as contained in the City of Edina Ordinance Nos. 801 and 811; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Edina that the conveyance and ownership of said Parcels as separate tracts of land is hereby approved and the requirements and provisions of Ordinance No. 801 and Ordinance No. 811 are hereby waived to allow said division and conveyance thereof as separate tracts of land but are not waived for any other purpose or as to any other provison thereof, and 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 Councilman Shaw. lying . Ayes: Nays: None Resolution adopted. Courtney, Richards, Schmidt, Shaw, Van Valkenburg INGLEWOOD AVE. TRAFFIC PROBLEM REFERRED TO TRAFFIC SAFETY COEMITTEE. Council's attention was called to a letter from Mr. Leonard W. Fernelius, 4008 Inglewood Ave., asking Edina and St. Louis Park to cooperatively review the traffic hazard problem on.Inglewood Ave. and jointly determine a solution for early implementa- tion. the hill which reaches grade level at 4008 Inglewood. motion referring the letter to the Traffic Safety Committee was seconded by Councilman Shaw. Ayes: Courtney, Richards, Schmidt, Shaw, Van Valkenburg Nays: None Motion carried. He referred to careless and irresponsible movement of motor vehicles on Councilwoman Schmidt's NORNINGSIDE'AREA WATER PRESSURE COMPLAINT NOTED. to a letter from Mr. C. Wesley Andersen, 4303 Morningside Road, complaining Council's attention was called about water pressure at his home. formal action was taken. The letter was ordered placed on file. No CONCORD AVE. CURB AND GUTTER PETITION mCEIVED. seconded bv Councilman Courtney referring a petition for curb and gutter on Con- Motion of Councilman Shaw was cord Ave. between W. 58th and W. 60th Streets to the Engineering Department for processing. Ayes: Nays: None Motion carried. Courtney, Richards, Schmidt, Shaw, Van Valkenburg STREET IMPROVEMENT NO. C-127 AUTHORIZED ON 100% PETITION. The Engineer reported that a petition for an improvement consisting of Grading and Graveling on Water- man Ave. cul-de-sac had been received in his office on July 18, 1977, signed by Paul L. Brown and Patricia K. Brown, husband and wife, and owners of all real property abutting on said portion of Waterman Ave. Said petition also requested 8/1/ 77 the Counc 1 to assess the entire cos against the property of si ch owners. Council- man Shaw thereupon offered the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION ORDERING GRADING AXD GRAVELING IMPROVEMENT NO. (2-127 UPON PETITION THElUFOR BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Edina, Minnesota, as follows: 1. It is hereby found and determined that a petition has been filed requesting the Council to construct a grading and graveling improvement on the Waterman Ave. cul-de-ac, and to assess the entire cost against the property of the petitioners, and that said petition has been signed by all owners of real property abutting on said street where said improvement is to be located. 2. The making of said improvement in accordance with said petition is hereby ordered pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 429.031 (3), (Session Laws of 1961, Chapter 525, Section 2). referred to in all subsequent proceedings as GRADING AND GRAVELING IMPROVEMENT NO. C-127. against the properties abutting on said Waterman Ave. where said improvement is to be located. Motion for adoption of the resolution was seconded by Councilman Courtney. Rollcall : Ayes: Courtney, Richards, Schmidt, Shaw, Van Valkenburg Nays: None Resolution adopted. I Said improvement is hereby designated and shall be The entire cost of said improvement is hereby ordered to be assessed LOT 3, BLOCK 1, GLEASON 3RD ADDITION CONNECTION CHARGES TO BE LEVIED. man Courtney offered the following resolution and moved its adoption. Council- - RESOLUTION BE IT RESOLVED that the Edina City Council does hereby authorize the levy of the following named improvements on Lot 3, Block 1, Gleason 3rd Addition, over a ten year period at 8% interest: TJatermain Improvemsnt No. TJM-186, $698.24. Motion for adoption of the resolution was seconded by Councilman Richards. Sanitary Sewer Improvement No. SS-277, $1,108.78; Rollcall : Ayes: Courtney, Richards, Schmidt, Shaw, Van Valkenburg Nays: None Resolution adopted. I RESTRAINING ORDER ON RENOVAL OF FENCE AT 5017 TJINDSOR AVE. NOTED; attention was called to a temporary restraining order served on the City relative to removal of a fence at 5017 Windsor Ave. No action was taken. Council's XINI?IU% LOT SIZE ORDINANCE AMENDMEhT REFERRED TO PLAhTIEG COMMISSION. Mr. HydP advised that there are several individually owned lots in the City which are below rcinimum size. had recommended that the ordinance be amended to cover these lots so that variance requests would not be necessary for lots platted before the adoption of the zoning ordinance. the matter to the Planning Commission. He referred to a letter from City Attorney Erickson whi,cfi Councilman Richards' motion was seconded by Councilman Shaw referring Ayes: Courtney, Richards, Schmidt, Shaw, Van Valkenburg Nays: Xone Mot ion carried. LOTS 7 AND 8, GRIFFIS SUBDIVISION OF BLOCK 18, MENDELSSOHN, MINUTES OF JUNE 6, 1977, AMENDED. seconded by Councilman Courtney that the Minutes of June 6, 1977, concerning the division of Lots 7 and 8, Griffis Subdivision of Block 18, Mendelssohn, should be amended to reflect that the reason for the denial of the lot division was that the proponent should have applied for a variance to build upon a substandard lot, rather than requesting a lot division. As recommended by Mr. Erickson, Councilwoman Schmidt's motion was Ayes: Courtney, Richards, Schmidt, Shaw, Van Valkenburg Nays: None Motion carried. COMMISSION AND BOARD APPOINTMENTS APPROVED. ing the following appointments recommended by Mayor Van Valkenburg was seconded by Councilman Courtney: Health Board, Mr. LeRay Nerges; Building Construction Codes Commission, Messrs. Quint Collins and Eugene Palmer; Board of Appeals and. Adjustments, Councilman Killis F. Shaw, Messrs. David Runyan, representing the Planning Commission, Clark L. Miller, Member .at Large, and Frederick Hauser and Michael P. Lewis, Alternates; South Henncpin Human Services Council, Councilwoman Schmidt, Mrs. Sue Bonoff and Nr. James Neville replacing Mr. Kirby Erickson; Councilman Richards' motion confirm- Housing and Redevelopment Authority, Mr. James Helson. Ayes: Courtney, Richards, Schmidt, Sliaw, Van Vallcenburg Nays: None Notion carried. 8/1/77 233 The Mayor reminded the Council that they and that the Planning Comlssion are all be unable to attend the Board of Appeals are all alternates to Councilman Shaw alternates to Mr. Runyan should either and Adjustments Meetings. U. S. SENATE BILL NO. 1587 ENDORSED. Mr. Hyde called Council's attention to a letter from the ICMA Retirement Corporation requesting support of U.S. Senate Bill No. 1587 which retirement plans from IRS reporting requirements. authorizing the City Manager to inform Edina's Congressmen and Senators of the City's support for the principle embodied in the bill was seconded by Councilman Shaw. would make unequivocal the exemption of State and local Councilman Courtney's motion Ayes: Courtney, Richards, Schmidt, Shaw, Van Valkenburg Nays: None Motion carried. FORMAL CITY RETIREMENT POLICY TO BE STUDIED. Mr. Hyde recalled a resolution adopted on November 10, 1958, establishing a retirement policy for City employees and also recalled a subsequent policy which left to the Manager's discretion the decision as to whether an employee could continue to work beyond age 65, or, if additional pension benefits will accrue, upon the first anniversary date of P.E.R.A. membership after their 65th birthday. tion, if the City does have a mandatory retirement policy, employees could qualify for a proportionate annuity with between three and ten years of service. As recommended by Mr. Hyde, Councilman Courtney's motion was seconded by Council- woman SchEidt, continuing the matter until a survey could be made as to the number of employees affected by the legislation. He advised that under new legisla- a a e 5 (3 I\ Ayes: Courtney, Richards, Schmidt, Shaw, Van Valkenburg Nays: Nonz Motion carried. SOUTH HENNEPIN HUMAN SERVICES COUNCIL POSITION PAPER AND ANIWAL REPORT CONTINUE2 to September 12, 1977, by motion of Councilwoman Schmidt, seconded by Councilman I Shaw. Ayes: Courtney, Richards, Schmidt, Shaw, Van Valkenburg Nays: None Motion carried. NORTHERN STATES POWER RATE INCREASE NOTED. ern States Power Compa2y advising of the electric rate schedules which became effective or, June 20, 1977. No actior, was taken. CONCKETE REPAIR WORK CONTPACT AWARDED. the amount of $13,418.50 from Victor Carlson & Sons, Inc., had been received for concrete repair work in various locations throughout the City. Schmidt's motion was seconded by Councilman Shaw for award to Victor Carlson & Sons, Inc:, ils recommended by Mr. Hyde. Mr. Hyde noted a letter from North- Mr. Hyde advised that only one bid in Councilwoman Ayes: Courtney, Richards, Schmidt, Shaw, Van Valkenburg Nays: None Motion carried. UNDERBODY SCRAPERS PURCHASE AUTHORIZED. Mr. Dunn advised that informal bids had been received for purchase of two underbody scrapers, one being for two scrapers for a total cost of $3,260 and the other for $4,130 each. Richards' motion was seconded by Councilman Courtney for award to recommended low bidder, McMullen Company, for a total cost of $3,260. Councilman Ayes: Courtney, Richards, Schmidt, Shaw, Van Valkenburg Nays: None Motion carried. SOUTHEAST EDINA TAX INCREMENT DISTRICT PLAN TO BE PREPARED. Council's attention to the H.R.A. Minutes of July 19, 1977, in which the H.R.A. requested the Council to "either authorize or not authorize the H.R.A. to pre- pare and implement the proposed tax increment plan for the establishment of a district in Southeast Edina". its last meeting, the H.R.A. had indicated that if something is to be done in the area, the tax increment district makes sense and that it should be used as a financial vehicle, but that only the Council could decide as to whether or not the City feels it is important to create an H.R.A. District in Southeast Edina to meet other policies and'criteria that are in existence today, i.e., low and moderate income housing. affirmative, then the H.R.A. should seriously consider which of the three size alternatives should be used for the tax increment financing district. Mr. Dunn called Councilman Richards said that he thought that at He clarified that if the Council decides in the He 8f 1/77 \ 234 recommended that the Council now direct Mr. Luce to prepare a plan for the largest area, with the understanding that the project is not going to cost the City one - 1 cent, except 5or the legal fees, which plan would, hopefully, enable the H.R.A. and Council to meet jointly and determine which size area should be developed if the tax increment district is, in fact, approved. Mr. Hughes said that the Plan- ning staff has already developed plans for the area and recommended that the Council ineet with the H.R.A. on August 2, 1977, to review the basic information included in those plans. seen nothing of the largest proposal and that all of the facts must be available so that they will know the economic impact on the City before they can decide on any of the plans. Mr. Luce said that his client, Ryan Construction Company, feels some urgency because of the possible changes in the tax increment law. He recalled that, at the Council Meeting of June 20, 1977, he had indicated that the smallest plan would be paid in four years (1981), that the middle plan would be paid by 1982 and that he is relying OR the Council and the staff to tell him just what should be included in the largest plan. Mr. :Luce spoke of traffic and tax problems in the area, but estimated that all of the plans could be accomp-. lished within & to 6 years. Mr. Luce then said that he would prepare the larg- est plan for consideration. Motion of Councilman Shaw was seconded by Councilman Courtney, directing Mr. Luce and the staff to prepare a plan for the largest tax increment district. Councilman Richards emphasized that the Council has Ayes: Courtney, Richards, Schmidt, Shaw, Van Valkenburg Nays: None Eotion carried. Mr. Erickson advised for the record that his office also represents Ryan Construc- tion Company. The Council made no objection. SENATE FILE 1507 TO BE DISCUSSED WITH CITY'S STATE LEGISLATORS, The City Em- ager called Council's attention to a summary of Senate File 1507 which was turn- ished by Senator Bang, along with comments by Ms. Waelti. Hr. Hyde pointed out that the bill proposes to abolish property tax on residential property and that local units of government will raise the revenue required for their operations by use of a local income tax. uniformity in assessment practices and provide a more equitable dlstribution of government services, but that the administrative costs would be high and it would have the effect of removing accountability one steD further away from the people served. T?SS generally agreed that Mr. Hyde should gather inr'ormation and documentation Ti1 opposition -to the 'all1 to be reviewed with the City's Xegislators. action was taken He explained thatthaintent of the bill is to create I Blr. Hyde emphasized that! he did not see how such a plan could work. It No formal GENERAL ORDER OF COUNCIL BUSINESS ESTABLISSED. a suggestion had been made to establish the order of Council business by ordimice. He recommended, however, that general guidelines be f3llowed and that the Manager and Clerk be directed to prepare the agenda in accordance with those guidelines. Councilman Richards then offered the following resolution and moved its adoption: Mayor Van Valkenburg recalled*iAs+, RESOLUTION BE IT RESOLVED that the following "Order of Transaction of Council Business'' be ~. adopted for Council agendas: A. Introduction 1. Call to order 2. Roll call 3. 4. Public announcements, Proclamations, Recognition of special groups and visitors Approval of minutes (if presented prior to meeting by Clerk, otherwise continued to next meeting) B. Hearings 1. Public hearings: notice has been given pursuant to law. Include commeots and recommendations by Staff. a. Zoning b. Improvement hearings c. Assessment heartngs d. Ordinances e. Plats, Replats and Subdivisions f. Other (The above order to be varied by Manager to best accommodate the public business, most interest first.) Reports of Departments and Commissions - including setting public hearing dates a. Planning b. Park, etc. c . - d. 2. Manager ' s agenda Concerns of Mayor and Council 3. Award of Contracts 235 .. C. Ordinances and Resolutions - not requiring public hearing or not requiring public notice D. Matters not requiring hearing 1. Reports of Commissions 2. Reports of Departments a, Planning b. Park c. Etc. 3. Communications - including petitions Financial - including accounts and claims 1. Liquor report 2. Revenue report 3. Claims E. The above order of business may be varied at any meeting, regular or special, by the presiding officer, except that the call to order and the roll call shall notbe changed from the above order. Motion for adoption of the resolution was seconded by Councilman Courtney. Rollcall : Ayes: Courtney, Richards, Schinldt, Shaw, Van Valkenburg Nays: None Resolution adopted. ORDINANCE NO. 101-A1 GRANTED FIRST READING. Councilman Richards offered the fol- lowing Ordinance for First Reading: ORDINANCE NO. IOl-AI AN ORDINANCE REPEALING RULE VI OF SECTION 1 OF ORDINANCE NO. 101 . THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDINA, MINNESOTA, ORDAINS: its entirety. and publicat ion. Section 1. Rule VI of Section 1 of Ordinance No. 101 is hereby repealed in Sec. 2. This ordinance shall be in full force and effect upon its passage GRANDVIEW CEMETERY SUPREME COURT DECISION ANNOUNCED. Mr. Erickson advised Council that the Supreme Court affirmed the District Court decision that the City owns 20.28 acres of land formerly owned by the Grandview Cemetery Association. formal action was taken. SENATE HEARINGS ON METROPOLITAN COUNCIL AFFAIRS ANNOUNCED. Mr . Hyde informed Council that the Task Force on Metropolitan Affairs of the Senate's Governmental Operations Committee will hold a series of regional hearings in August to get the views of metropolitan area citizens and public officrials on issues related to metropolitan government in the 7-county metropolitan area. The hearing for public officials and'.citizens living in the metropolitan area will be held OIL Wednesday, August 24, 1977, at 7:30 p.m. in the Auditorium of Penn Junior High School. No formal action was taken. No BUILDING PERMIT STATISTICS/SOUTHDALE POLICE RECORDS DISCUSSED. burn questioned the necessity of typing monthly building permit statistics and Mayor Van Valken- -- Southdale Police records. Mr . Iiyde- explained that the Building Permit records must be submitted to the State of Minnesota and to the Metropolitan Waste Com- 3Ession for S.A.C. charges. 2mportant to follow the activities which take place at Southdale Center. action was taken. He further advised that he believes that it is also No HEARING DATE SET FOR SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS. man Richards offered the following resolution and moved its adoption: As recommended by Mr. Dalen, Council- RESOLUTION PROVIDING FOR SPECIAL ASSESSMENT HEARINGS FOR STREET IMPROVEMENT NOS. BA-188, B-78, B-84 AND STORM SEWER IWROVEMENT NO. ST.S-130 BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Edina, Ylnnesota, as follows: 1. having calculated the proper amounts to be assessed for the improvements set forth in the Notice of Hearing forms hereinafter recorded, and the amounts proposed to be assessed against the respective lots, places and parcels of land within the districts affected by said improvements, and said proposed assessments having been filed with the Clerk, the same are hereby approved and the Clerk shall keep the same on file in her office and open to public inspection pending hearings thereon as herein provided. 2. This Council shall meet at the time and place specified in the Notice of Hearing forms hereinafter contained, to pass upon said proposed assessments and the Clerk's action in publishing notices of said hearings in the official news- paper in accordance with law is hereby approved; The Clerk and Engineer Notices bping as follows: 8/1/77 (Official Publication) CITY OF EDINA HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING FOR ASSESSMENTS STREET IBPROVEI'ENT NOS. BA-188, B-78, B-84 STORN SEWER BO. 130 EDINA CITY COUNCIL will meet at the City'Hall, 4801 West 50th Street, Edino, -Minnesota, on Honday, September 19, 1977, at 7:OO p.m. to hear and pass upon all objections, if any, to the following proposed assessments. mese assessments are now on file in the office of the Edina City Clerk and open to public inspection. Assessments on the following will be payable in ten equal installments over a period of ten (10) years with interest on the entire assessment at the rate of s% per annum from th.e date of the resolution levying I the 1. 2. 3. 4. assessment to December 31, 1978: East and West frontage roads T.H. 100 from West 77th Street Edina Industrial Boulevard to South City limits The area proposed'to be assessed includes Lot 10, Block 8, and the North 135.04 feet of Lot 11, Block 8, Edina Interchange Center Addition; Lot 3, Block 1, Repltit of Edina Interchange Center Addition; and Parcels 500 and 1600, Registered Land Survey No. 1050. CONS'.tRUCTIO?T OF STREET IMPROVEMENT NO. B-78 Willson Road from Eden Avenue to 1050' South; Eden Avenue from Willson Road to 300' East; Grange Road from Eden Avenue to West 50th Street; Vest 50th Street from Dale Drive to West Sunnyslope Road; Arcadia Avenue from Eden Avenue to West 50th Street; West Frontage Road from Eden Avenue to 1050' South; Vernon Avenue from Arcadia Avenue to 250' West; Laura Avenue fromMoore Avenue to Cascade Lane; West Frontage Road from West 44th Street to North Edina City Limits. SIDWALK: West of West Frontage Road from Richmond Drive to Our Lady of Grace Church property. %e area proposed to be assessed includes Lots 1 and 2, Block 1; Lots 4 thru 8, Blockl; Lots 2 and 3, Block 2; ai;d Parcel 1255, Grendview Heights Addition; Parcels 5180, 5072, 5452, 5565, and 5925, Tingdale Bros. Brookside Addition; Lots 10 thru 15, and Lots 17 and 18, Auditor's Sub" division No. 176; Lot 1, Cascade Falls Addition; Parcel 2200, Section 18, To;?nship 28, Range 24; Parcel 7500, Section 28, Township 117, Range 21; -' Tract A, Registered Land Survey No. 212; Tract B, Registered Land Survey No. 1021, North side of West 49th Street from Westbrook Lane East to Highway Right of Way line I. The area proposed to be assessed includes Lot 12, Block 1, Tingdale Bros. Brookside Addition CONSTRUCTION OF STORM SEWER NO. 130 North Storm Sewer System (Portion of Alternate 2). From Nine Mile Creek -a: Vest side of intersection of West 77th Street and State Kighway 8100 to. East side of Highway PlOO for future extension to existing storm sei.der at-South- east corner of Lake Edina Park. South Storm Sewer System (Portion of Alternate 3). From Nine Mile Creek at West side of State Highway $100 at South Edina boundary to East side of - . Highway #IO0 for future extension to existing storm sewer on South Edina. boundary 450 feet west of France Avenue The area proposed to be assessed includes All parcels lying within the following described district. Beginning at the Southwest corner of Section 31, Township 28, Range 24; thence North along the Nest line of said Section 31, to an intersection with the Westerly extension of the centerline of West Shore Drive; thence Easterly along the Westerly extension of West Shore Drive and the centerline of Vest Shore Drive to an intersection with the Xortherly extension of the West line of Lot 1, Block 3, Lake Edina 3rd Addition; thence Southeasterly along said West line of Lot 1 to a point 50 feet South of the South line of West Shore Drive; thence Northeasterly parallel to and 50 feet Southerly and Southeasterly of the South line of West Shore Drive to a point 50 feet from the South line of Sedm Lane; thence Northwesterly to the intersection of Wcst Shore Drive and Sedum Lane: thence Northesstcrly to a point in Lot I, Block 4, Lake Edina 3rd Addition, which point is 50 feet North of the South line of said Lotl, and 50 feet East of the West line of soid Lot 1; thence Northerly, parallel to and 50 feet Eaeterly of the East line of Vest Shore Drive to a point which is 400 feet South of the North Lino of Lake Edina 4th Addition; thence East parallck to and 400 feet South of thc North line of Lnkc Edina 4th Addition to the West line of Kcllogg Avenue: thence North along ooid West line a distance of 200 feet; thence East to a point on the West: line of Outlot 2, Bertehma CONSTRUCTION OF STREET IMPROVEXENT NO. BA-188 CONSTil'JCTION OF STREET IEIPROVEMENT NO. B-84 . 8/ 11 77 Addition, whkh point ie 200 feet South of the 'Northwest corner of Outlot 2; thence North ea said Northwest corner of snfd Outlot. 2; thence East to the SoutheaRt corner of Lot 10, Block 1, South Garden Estates 4th Addition; thence North along the East Line of Block I, South Garden Estates 4th Addition, and Block 3, South Garden Estates 3rd Addition; to o point 80 feet South of the centerline of West 72nd Street; thence East 80 feet South of and parallel to the centerline of West 72nd Street to the West line of Lot 31, Block 1, Oscar Roberts First Addition; thence Southeasterly to a point on the South Line of Lot 33, Block 1, Oscar Roberts First Addition, said point being 50 feet East of the Southwest corner thereof; thence South- easterly to a point on the North side of Gallagher Drive, said point being 418 feetwest of the center line of France Avenue; thence Southerly at right angles to the North line of Gallagher Drive to the South side of Gallagher Drive; thence Southeasterly to a point in Lot 3, Block 3, Oscar Roberts 1st Addition, said point being 100 feet North of the South line of said Lot 3, and 100 feet West of the centerline of Prance Avenue; thence Southerly 100 feet West of and parallel to the centerline of France Avenue to the North line of the South half of Section 31, Township 28, Range 24; thence East to a point on the North line of the South half of Section 32, Township 28, Range 24, which point is 1100 feet East of the West line of said Section 32; thence North parallel to the West line of said Section 32 a distance of 70 feet; thence East to a point on the West line of Lot 1, Block 5, Yorktown Addition, which point is 70 feet North of the Southwest corner of said Lot 1; thence South along the West line of Lot I, Block 5, Yorktown Addition and its Southerly extension, a distance of 100 feet; thence Southeasterly to 8 point on the South line of Lot 1, Block 1, Ebenezer Society 1st Addition, which point is 410 feet East of the West line of said Lot 1; thence South- easterly to a point on the West line of the East 358.88 feet of the South- east quarter of the Southwest quarter of Section 32, Township 28, Range 24, which point is 250 feet South of the centerline of West: 76th Street; thence South along said West line of the East 358.88 feet B distance of 245 feet; thence Southwesterly to a point on the South line of Section 32, Township 28, Range 24, which point is 715 feet West of the South Quarter corner of said Section 32; thence West to the Southwest corner of said Section 32; thence West to a point of beginning. ' First payment of these assessments will be payable wfth the taxes for the year 1977, collectible in 1978. To each subsequent installment will be added interest at the same rate for one year on all unpaid installments. Tne owner of the property assessed for the above improvements may pay the whole of the assessment without interest to the City Treasurer an or before November 15, 1977, or make payment with accrued interest to the County Treasurer. Any owner may appeal the assessment to the District Court pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 429.081, by serving notice of the appeal upon the Mayor or Clerk of the City of Edina within twenty (20) days after the adoption of the assessment by the City Council, and by filing such notice with the District Court within ten (10) days after service upon the Mayor or Clerk. Pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, the City of Edina ha6 adopted standards and guidelines for deferring special assessments against homestead property owned by persons 65 years of age or older for whom payment would be a hardship.> To obtain deferment, application must be fiied with the City Assessor's office by the close of business on the last business day before the City Council meeting set out in the first paragraph of this notice. and application forms, please call or visit the City Assessor's office. BY ORDER OF THE EDINA CITY COUNCIL. Florence B. Hallberg, City Clerk Motion for adoption of the resolution was seconded by Councilwoman Schmidt. For further information Rollcall: Ayes: Courtney, Richards, Schmidt, Shaw, Van Valkenburg Nays: None Resolution adopted. LIQUOR REPORT as of June 30, 1977, was presented by Mr. Dalen, reviewed and ord- ered placed on file by motion of Councilman Shaw, seconded by Councilman Richards. Ayes: Courtney, Richards, Schmidt, Shaw, Van Valkenburg Nays: None Motion carried. SURPLUS AND RESERVES as of December 31, 1976, was presented by Mr. Dalen and ord- ered placed 011 file. No formal action was taken. I 238 8/1/77 CLAIMS PAID. ,.Jtion of Councilman Shaw was secoiided by Councilman Courtney for payment of the following claims per Pre-List: Fund, $18,795.35; Park Fund, $2,510.45; Art Center, $127.35; Park Construction, $5,393.00; Park Sinking, $3,930.00; Swimming Pool, $3,037.19; Golf Course, $8,020.00; Recreation Center, $35,264.14; Gun Range, $168.72; Water Fund, $24,939.34; Sewer Fund, $1,655.69; Liquor Fund, $160,017.07; Construction, $116,687.09; IBR Fund, $2,220.45; Total, $466,386.72. General Fund, $83,320.68; Poor Ayes: Courtney, Richards, Schmidt, Shaw, Van Valkenburg Nays: None Notion carried. No further business appearing, the Mayor declared the meeting adjourned at 10:45 p .m. I LA* 7- City Clerk ’