HomeMy WebLinkAbout19840820_regularMINUTES
OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE
EDINA CITY COUNCIL HELD AT CITY HALL
AUGUST 20, 1984
Answering rollcall were Members Bredesen, Schmidt, Turner and Mayor Courtney.
MINUTES of the Regular Council Meeting of July 16, 1984, and the Special Meeting of
July 23, 1984, were approved as submitted by motion of Member Turner, seconded by
Member Schmidt.
Ayes: Bredesen, Schmidt, Turner, Courtney
Motion carried.
PROPOSED IMPROVEMENT OF CASCADE LANE BERMING CONTINUED, Affidavits of Notice were
presented by Clerk's representative, approved as to form and ordered placed on file.
Mr. Hoffman presented the visual description of the property affected by the
proposed berm, specifically Lots 3, 4 and 5, Cascade Falls. He cited that the
estimated cost of this improvement is $1,975.84; this improvement would be assessed
on a per lot basis at an estimated cost of $300.00 per assessable lot with the
balance of the cost placed as special benefit against Lot 3 Cascade Falls. The
project would be a small berm of six inches across the properties, and.construction
would be accomplished in 1984. Assessments would be levied in 1984 with the initial
installment due in 1985. The improvement is proposed to be assessed over a one-year
period.
determine the annual rate of interest that will be charged on the unpaid balance, but
it will not exceed the maximum allowed by law,
result of a petition by property owners to reduce flooding. Concerned residents
were there to represent others residing on Cascade Lane: Mr. & Mrs. Frank Bures,
relatives of Mrs. Anfinson at 4613 Cascade Lane; and Mrs. Betty Anfinson of 4613
Cascade Lane. Anumber of issues were addressed by these people, based on the
fact that the flooding is getting worse and that the berm, by itself, will not cure
the problem. The weight of the water is making the yards settle, leaving visible
holes and exposing tree roots.
most of the backyards. If the dredging and the removal of rip-rap from the Highway
100 bridge reduces the risk of flooding, then the berm is not necessary. .Questions
concerning the berm: how constructed, will heavy equipment be used, the dimensions
of the berm and whether it will be seeded or sodded, whose responsibility is the
maintenance of the berm. It was indicated that the residents of Cascade Lane would
have the responsibility of the berm's maintenance. If the berm does in fact become
necessary, it was promised to-the residents of the Cascade Lane area that the special
assessments used to pay for its construction along Minnehaha Creek will not be placed
upon the property until after the dredging and removal of rip-rap from the Highway
100 bridge is complete. Member Turner's motion was seconded by Member Bredesen to
continue the proposed improvement for six months or until the spring of 1985 after
the Watershed Project is completed, so that it can then be evaluated as to the
necessity of the berm and what the neighbors choose to. do.
Ayes: Bredesen, Schmidt, Turner, Courtney
Motion carried. .
.
The present condition of the Municipal Bond Market makes it difficult to
This project is being proposed as a
During the entire summer of 1984, water covered
. _.
PRELIMINARY PLAT APPROVAL'OF KIDD'ADDITION'CONTINUED TO SEPTEMBER 17, 1984.
of Notice were presented by Clerkrs representative, approved as to form and ordered
Affidavirts
placed on file.
Valley View Road.
square feet in area and is zoned R-1, Single Dwelling Unit District. The property
fronts on West 62nd Street to the north and also enjoys access to Valley View Road
to the south.-This latter access is possibly due to an unusual jog in the right of
way for Valley View Road.
two lots which would each measure about 14,000 square feet in area. Lot 1 would be
retained for the existing dwelling and Lot 2 would be a new building site.
southerly portion of the subject property was shown'for low density attaahed resi-
dential uses by the Comprehensive Plan. All properties fronting on Valley View Road
in this area are used for low density attached uses.
southeast is a four-unit building and adjoining the property to the west is a three-
unit building, both of which front on Valley View Road.
property are two R-1 lots which are developed with modest dwellings fronting on
West 62nd Street.
poor state of repair.)
by 338 feet in depth and the easterly lot measures 126 feet by 338 feet.
these lots, however, enjoys aceess to Valley View Road.
proponent has pursued the possibility of the joint development with the two lots to
the east.
proposed subdivision complies with the requirements of the Zoning Ordinance as to lot
size, frontage, and access, Staff is concerned with the unusual relationship of the
new lot to surrounding properties. This unusual relationship is principally caused
by the lot's frontage on the jog in the Valley View Road right-of-way. If this jog
The site is generally located south of 62nd Street and east of
Mr. Hughes reported that the subject property measures 28,252
The proponent requests a subdivision of the property into
The
Adjoining the property to the
Easterly OX the subject
I
(The dwelling immediately east of the subject property is in a
The westerly of the two lots measures about 95 feet in width
Neither of
At Staff's urging, the
Apparently, these efforts have not been successful. Although the
I
81 20/ 84 125
were not present, the proposed lot would not have frontage on a street and a
division would not be possible.
property would revert to a lot west of Valley View Road.
would not solve the frontage problem unless the proponent acquired the vacated
property from the owner to the west.
limit the development potential of the large R-1 lots to the east.
the subject property provides the only potential access to Valley View Road.
this access is lost, a rezoning for low density attached uses for these properties
is questionable. Also, the subject property and the two lots to the east could be
replatted into R-1 lots which would be served by a new cul-de-sac from West 62nd
Street.
If the subject property were excluded from such a replat, the new cul-de-sac could
not be "double loaded" with lots and, thus, may not be feasible.
submitted a graphic which schematically illustrates the proposed location of a new
dwelling on the property.
buildings on Valley view Road, it will require setback variances from the Valley
View right-of-way.
approved which technically complies with the requirements of the Zoning Ordinance,
but does so due to an unusual'arrangement of public right-of-way; or should the
proponent be required to delay his subdivision plans and pursue a joint development
with adjoining owners even though such a joint development may be premature?
noted earlier, such a joint development has been pursued without apparent success.
It is Staff's view that the latter approach is most desirable from a planning stand-
point.
should be rezoned to R-2, Double Dwelling Unit District.
cation would conform with the Comprehensive Plan and would be a more logical use as
compared to a single family dwelling. It is assumed that the northerly line of the
new lot could be relocated slightly to provide the required 15,000 square foot minimum
area f0r.R-2 lots. However, a variance from the 90-foot lot width minimum would be
needed.
Street; Arnold Twedt, 4246 Valley View Road; and Douglas Yarwood, 4111 West 62nd Street.
The proponents, Mr. & Mrs. Robert Kidd, 4125 62nd Street West, felt a delay would be
of no help.
approval of the addition to the September 17th Council Meeting.
If the jog were vacated, it appears that the
Therefore, a vacation
Approval of the proposed subdivision will
As noted earlier,
If
,
(This plan would require the demolition of at least one existing dwelling.)
The proponent
Although such a house placement aligns well with other
The issue in this case is clear: Should a subdivision be
As
However, if the requested subdivision is approved, it is felt that the new lot An R-2 use in this lo-
Delay of action taken was recommended by Dr. Byron Armstrong, 4119 West 62nd
Member Bredesen's motion was seconded by Member Turner to continue
Ayes: Bredesen, Schmidt, Turner, Courtney
Motion carried.
PRELIMINARY PLAT APPROVED'FOR'DENNIS MILLER'ADDITION. Affidavits of Notice were pre-
sented by Clerk's representative, approved as .to foh and order placed on file.
Mr. Hughes presented the petition for preliminary plat approval for the Dennis Miller
Addition, generally located north of Grove Street and east of Johnson Drive.
subject property measures 40,339 square feet in area and is zoned R-1, Single
Dwelling Unit District.
the property.
proponent requests a subdivision of the property into two lots.
90 feet by 160 feet and would be retained for the existing dwelling.
measure 80 feet by 160 feet and would constitute a new buildable lot.
77 feet of the lot is described as an outlot and is proposed to be dedicated to the
City as a subdivision dedication which would add to the area of Garden Park. The City
recently approved a subdivision for the adjoining property to the east (Smaby Addition).
Four of the five lots in the Smaby Addition were identical in size to the new lot pro-
posed for-the subject subdivision.
77 feet of its property for park purposes. As a result of the Planning Commission
Meeting onAugust 1, 1984, Staff recommends approval of this plat, noting that the
characterigtics of the subject property are identical to the Smaby Addition.
proposed lots comply with the requirements of the Zoning Ordinance and are consistent
with other lot sizes in the neighborhood.
introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption:
The
An existing dwelling is located on the easterly portion of
The property adjoins Garden Park on its north and west boundaries.
Lot 1 would
The
Lot 2 would measure
The northerly
Smaby Addition likewise dedicated the northerly
The
No objections being heard, Member Turner
RESOLUTION GRANTING PRELIMINARY PLAT APPROVAL
DENNIS MILLER ADDITION
BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Edina, Minnesota, that that certain
plat entitled "Dennis Miller Addition," platted by Dennis Miller and presented at the
regular meeting of the City Council of August 20, 1984, be and is hereby granted
preliminary plat approval, subject to the dedication of Outlot A to the City.
Motion for adoption of the resolution was seconded by Member Schmidt.
Rollcall :
Ayes: Bredesen, Schmidt, Turner, Courtney
Resolution adopted.
.- ' . - .-,- . . .. ,.
'FINAL 'PLAT 'APPROVAL 'OF 'MILLER'ADDITION 'CONTINUED 'TO 'SEPTEMBER '10; '1984.
by Staff, Member Bredesen's motion was seconded by Member Schmidt to continue the
final plat approval of Miller Addition, generally located west of Dearborn Street
and north of Belmore Avenue, to the City Council Meeting of September 10, 1984.
As recommended
Ayes: Bredesen, Schmidt, Turner, Courtney
Matlaa carried,
.- 126 8/ 20/84
PUBLIC HEARING DATE SET FOR DESIGNATION OF NEIGHBORHOOD FOR EAST EDINA HOUSING
FOUNDATION. As recommended by Staff, Member Bredesen's motion was seconded by
Member Schmidt to set the hearing date for designation of neighborhood for East Edina
Housing Foundation for September 10, 1984.
Ayes: Bredesen, Schmidt, Turner, Courtney
Motion carried.
PUBLIC BEARING ON STREET VACATION CONTINUED TO SEPTEMBER 10, 1984.
by Staff, Member Bredesen's motion was seconded by Member Schmidt to continue the
public hearing on street vacation pertaining to a portion of Dearborn Street, a
portion of Spruce Road and the alley between Dearborn Street/Arthur Street and between
Spruce Road/Belmore Lane to the City Council Meeting of September 10, 1984.
As recommended
Ayes: Bredesen, Schmidt, Turner, Courtney
Motion carried.
AWARD OF BID FOR TRUCK SNOW WING APPROVED.
bidders: La Hass Manufacturing Company and Little Falls Machine, Inc. Staff
recommends the low bidder, La Hass, with a bid of $6,801.00.
for the City's larger trucks purchased two years ago.
the streets; instead of having to plow four times down a street, it could be done in'
two times with the wing. It is an experimental piece this year; if this one works
and speeds up our movement of snow, then we will come back in further budget years .
to ask for more.
of bid to recommended low bidder, La Hass, at $6,801.00.
Mr. Rosland explained that there were two
This snow wing is
It will give wider plowing of
Member Bredesen's motion was seconded by Member Schmidt for award
Ayes : Bredesen, Schmidt, Turner, Courtney
Motion carried.
I
I
TRAFFIC SAFETY COMMITTEE MINUTES OF 8/14/84 APPROVED; 4-WAY "STOP" SIGNS ISSUE ON
WEST 70TH STREET AND WEST SHORE DRIVE CONTINUED TO TRAFFIC SAFETY MEETING OF
SEPTEMBER 11, 1984.
Traffic Safety Committee's agenda of August 14, 1984: 1) Request for installation
of a "Stop1' sign to control eastbound West 69th Street traffic at Xerxes Avenue
South; 2)
Lane at Monroe Avenue; 3) Request for "Stop" signs to control traffic on Edina
Industrial Boulevard at Metro Boulevard; 4)
zone along West 78th Street; 5)
Road intersection.
signs creating a four-way stop intersection on West 70th Street at West Shore Drive
is a highly disputed issue.
7008 West Shore Drive; Helaine Cohen, 4405 Dunham Drive; Ron Martin, 4519 West 70th
Street; and Jess Cohen, 4405 Dunham Drive. Neighbors opposed to the "Stop" signs:
Harold Babb, 4701 West 70th Street; Albina Horsch, 4705 West 70th Street; and
Donn Latourell, 6905 Creston Road. (At this time during the Council Meeting, Council
Member Richards arrived.)
many reported accidents at the intersection; however, those that have been reported
all involved injuries.
deter traffic from the area; but the neighbors against the "Stop" sign feel it will
make it difficult for them to get out of their driveways.
intersection does not meet the requirements for a four-way "Stop" based on traffic
volume; however, gap studies indicate inadequate time is available to cross the
street for pedestrians. The question of traffic lights was raised; Staff does not
feel they are the answer, and that perhaps outside expertise may be necessary for a
resolution of this issue.
Member Turner's motion was seconded by Member Schmidt to approve the Traffic Safety
Committee MinGtes of August 14, 1984, and to hold the West 70th Street/West Shore
Drive "Stop" sign issue until the next Traffic Safety Committee Meeting on September
11, 1984, at which time everyone will be heard, and the issue will come back to the
City Council again on September 17, 1984.
. Ayes: Richards, Schmidt, Turner, Courtney -
Council Members reviewed without questions five items on the
Request for improved safety in conjunction with the part located on Belmore
Request for a reduction in the speed
Request for review of West 70th Street and Antrim
Mr. Hoffman reported that the request for installation of "Stop"
Neighbors recommending the "Stop" signs: Ron Rich,
Mr. Hoffman further reported that there have not been
It was felt that a four-way ?Stop" at the intersection might
Mr. Hoffman cited that the
-
I Nays : Bredesen
Motion carried.
EDINA LEAGUE OF WOMEN VOTERS RECYCLING REQUEST APPROVED.
for the League of Women Voters of Edina, was introduced, and she presented a study to
the City Council on recycling, the League's position as it relates to this study, and
she urged that the Council request the Edina Recycling Commission to study this issue
and made recommendations to the City council on the feasibility of household pick-up
of recyclables in Edina.
of Women Voters studied the feasibility of implementing household pick-up of re-
cyclables. In December, consensus was reached which supported household pick-up of
recyclabes. Based on the consensus, a position statement was developed: The League
of Women Voters of Edina supports the household pick-up of recyclables in Edina,
involving 1) support for adequate City staff for local recycling programs; 2) support
for an ordinance to allow curbside placement of recyclables for pick-up; 3) support
for City-wide anti-scavenging ordinance to protect those recyclables from being
Judy Smith, Action Chairperson
Mrs. Smith explained that in the fall of 1983 the League
8/20/84 127
picked up by anyone other than the designated receiver, and 4) support for adequate
funding for a household pick-up system.
conducted pilot/test programs which are now city-wide. There was a concern as to
whether this project would necessitate a certain "special" kind of truck; but
apparently, any truck would work.
Member Turner's motion was seconded by Member Richards to request the Edina
Recycling Commission to study the issue of household pick-up of recyclables in Edina
and then come back with recommendations to the City Council with how it might best
be implemented in the City government structure.
St. Louis Park and Minneapolis have
Ayes: Bredesen, Richards, Schmidt, Turner, Courtney
Motion carried.
BUDGET HEARING DATES SET. Mr. Rosland explained that the budget's target date for
certification and approval for the County is the Council Meeting on October 1, 1984.
Staff recommends that the first date be set at 4:30 P. M., September 10, prior to
the Council Meeting that night. A second date was suggested for 4:30 P. M., September
11. Council Members agreed to those times and will schedule future dates as
necessary and agreeable to all.
TRAFFIC SIGNALIZATION AF'PROVED AT WEST 70TH AND MF,TRO BLVD; AND ALSO AT EDINA INDUSTRIAL
BLVD. AND METRO BLVD. Mr. Hoffman commented that Staff has been reviewing the needs
for traffic signalization in the Edina Industrial Park; there have been several calls
from business people in the Park during the past year. The final buildings have been
built there and are now being occupied, with resulting traffic causing severe rush hour
problems to and from the Industrial Park.
Blvd. and Edina Industrial Blvd/Metro Blvd. have met.traffic signal warrants, and
their preliminary cost estimates,total $150,035.75 which includes construction and
engineering. The project for signalization at West 78th Street and East Bush Lake
is not scheduled to begin until 1985 or 1986.
Member Schmidt's motion was seconded by Member Turner to approve the two signalization
projects (1. West 70th and Metro Blvd.; 2. Edina Industrial Blvd. & Metro Blvd.) with
Municipal State Aid Funds, and that plans and specifications be authorized for State
Aid approval.
The intersections at West 70th/Metro
Ayes: Bredesen, Richards, Schmidt, Turner, Courtney
Motion carried.
REPORT ON SOLID WASTE TRANSFER SITE MEETING.
the meeting of August 14, 1984, for public input on solid waste transfer stations. A
resolution from the City Council adopted at its meeting of August 6, 1984, was presented
opposing Site 24 because the site does not appear to meet the criteria.
presentation was given on the Edinborough project which pointed out that the station
was on part of the Edinborough site and the incompatability of the station with the
project.
to have the facilities being discussed located on his land; refuse was being disposed
of on the site now, and it would be a natural progression to locate the proposed
facilities on the same property with no disruption to other proposed Bloomington/Edina
alternatives. The City of Bloomington made a presentation opposing the original
recommended Site 18 at 94th and James, with no preference 'to any other location; and
they recommended to the County that strong efforts be made to look at the N. S.,P-
facilities in terms of large scale energy recovery.
Hennepin County should strongly consider the comments of the Freeway Landfill owner
and the City of Bloomington as to the transfer station location and refuse derived
fuel processing with N. S. P. No action was taken.
COUNCIL MmER SCT3MIDT ANNOUNCED INTENT NOT TO RUN FOR RE-ELECTION.
wanted to tell the Council first that she will not be running for re-election.
Council members expressed their regret.
METROPOLITAN COUNCIL'S 1984 ESTIMATE OF POPULATION GIVEN. Mr . Rosland compared the
figures provided by the Metropolitan Council from the April, 1980, census with 1984
for Edina.
45,280 in 1984. The number of persons per household has shifted from 2.55 to 2.42.
There was no further discussion.
COST OF THE ELECTION AND WINE REFERENDUM QUESTIONED.
cost of the election would run about $63,710; there will be 47 known questions on the
ballot.
The wine referendum is an advisory opinion only; the City cannot incur any costs in
connection with it, and it can't be binding. The Council has to make a decision by
October 9 as to whether the wine referendum will be on the ballot.
taken at this time.
Mr. Hoffman reported that he had attended
A short
A matter of interest was that the owner at Site 25 (Freeway Landfill) wishes
Mr. Hoffman indicated that
Member June Schmidt
The
The population apparently is shrinking, with 46,073 reported in 1980 and
Mr. Rosland reported that the
The wine referendum would cost approximately $1400 to appear on the ballot.
No action was
BANNING PARKING ON WOODDALE FOR COUNTRY CLUB DISCUSSED.
concern of residents on Wooddale with the overflow parking of Edina Country Club Mr. Rosland expressed the
\
.- 828 8/20/84
members onto Wooddale Avenue.
on this street during large Country Club events.
manager of the Club and has suggested that when there are extra crowds the staff
could park down in the Wooddale Park parking lot or the Wooddale School lot. It
Wooddale from others; "NO Parking" on Wooddale would interfere with church functions;
thus, it seems more appropriate for the few times the Club has large crowds to
arrange for the Club's staff to park elsewhere.
individuals.
The Council is requested to look at banning parking
Mr. Rosland has spoken with the
would be difficult for the Police to distinguish Country Club cars parked on i
Mr. Rosland will contact the concerned
I GARDEN PARK/NSP LAND DONATION APPROVED.
to donate a parcel of land abutting the east boundary of Garden Park to the City,
subject to retaining an easement for maintenance of their utility lines.
Richards introduced the following resolution to accept NSP's conveyance for the
easement and moved adoption:
RESOLUTION
BE IT RESOLVED, by the Edina City Council that it hereby approves acceptance of a
Quit Claim Deed whereby Northern States Power Company will convey to the City of Edina
a parcel of land abutting the east boundary of Garden Park, described as follows:
All that part of Lots 6, 7, 8 and 9, of Garden Park, Hennepin County, Minnesota,
according to the map or plat thereof on file and of record in the office of the Register
of Deeds in and for Hennepin County, Minnesota, being a part of the E% of the NE%
in Section 32, Township 117 North, Range 21 West, described as foiiows, to-wit:
Commencing at a point on the South line of the County Road, known as the Eden Prairie-
Minneapolis Road, 30 feet West of the East Section line of said Section 32; thence
South, parallel to said East Section line and 30 feet distant therefrom to the
right-of-way of the Minneapolis, Northf ield & Southern Railroad Company; thence
Southwesterly along the Westerly line of said railroad right-of-way to a point 264
feet North of the South line of said Lot 6 of said Garden Park, Hennepin County,
Minnesota; thence West parallel to said South line of said Lot 6 of said Garden Park,
Hennepin County, Minnesota, a distance of 55.6 feet; thence North 30 East, a distance
of 146 feet; thence North ZOO East, 630 feet; thenceNorth, parallel to the East I
Section line of said Section 32, a distance of 953 feet, more or less, to the South i I line of said County Road, known as the Eden Prairie-Minneapolis Road; thence 1
Northeasterly along the South line of said County Road to the point of beginning,
containing 1.67 acres, more or less.
EXCEPTING AND RESERVING unto Northern States Power Company, its successors and assigns,
the perpetual right, privilege and easement to construct, operate, maintain, use,
rebuild or remove electric lines for the transmission of electric energy with all
towers, structures, poles, crossarms, cables, wires, guys, supports, counterpoises,
fixtures and devices used or .useful in the operation, maintenance and use of said
lines and facilities related and appurtenant thereto for transmission and distribution
of electric energy, over, under, across and upon all that part of the property described
above which lies within a strip of land 75 feet in width being 37.5 feet on each side
of the following described centerline and extensions thereof:
Beginning at the Southeast corner of the NFSI; of Section 32, Township 117 North, Range
21 West; thence westerly along the South line of the said NE%, having a bearing of
N 89049"12" W,. a distance of 250.18 feet to the point of beginning of the centerline
to be described; thence N 09 10' 36" E, 54.8 feet; thence N 4015'12" E, 447.65 feet; -
thence N 17O57'54" E, 537.08 feet; thence North 0005"21" E to the South line of the
Eden Prairie-Minneapolis Road, now known as County Road 158 or Vernon Avenue, and
there terminating; and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Edina City Council hereby authorizes the Mayor and
Clerk to execute and deliver, on behalf of the City, as easement granting Northern
States, Power -Company the authority to enter upon said parcel to construct, operate,
maintain, use, rebuild, or remove electric transmission lines, through, over, under
and across the following described land:
Torrens Parcel.
8 and 9 lying West of a line described as follows: Commencing at a point 55.6 feet
West from the West line of railroad right-of-way and 264 feet North from South line
of Lot 6; thence North 3 degrees East 146 feet; thence North 20 degrees East 630
feet; thence North parallel with East line of Garden Park Addition to South line of
Eden Prairie Road, all in Garden Park, Hennepin County, Minnesbta, according to the
plat thereof on file or of record in the office of the Register of Deeds in and for
said Hennepin County, and
Abstract Parcel. That part of the North 202.7 feet of Lot 6 and that part of Lots 7,
8 and 9 lying West of the right-of-way of the Minneapolis, Northfield & Southern
Railroad Company and East of a line described as follows: Commencing at a point 55.6
feet West from the West line of railroad right-of-way and 264 feet North from South
line of Lot 6; thence North 3 degrees East 146 feet; thence North 20 degrees East 630
feet; thence North parallel with East line of Garden Park Addition to South line of
Eden Prairie Road, all in Garden Park, Hennepin County, Minnesota, according to the
plat thereof on file or of record in the office of the Register of Deeds in and for
said Hennepin County.
Which easement as it crosses the above described parcels lies within a strip of land
75 feet in width, being 37.5 feet on each aide of the following described centerline
Mr. Erickson explained that NSP has offered
Member
I !.
1
.
1
That part of the North 202.7 feet of Lot 6 and that part of Lots 7,
I
8120184 129
and extensions thereof:
Township 117 North, Range 21 West; thence westerly along the South line of*the said
NE%, having a bearing of N 89049'12" W, a distance of 250.18 feet to the point of
beginning of the centerline to be described; thence N 03°10'36" E, 54.8 feet; thence
N 4015'12" E, 447.65 feet; thence N 17O57'54" E, 537.08 feet; thence N 0°05'21" E to
the South line of the Eden Prairie-Minneapolis Road, now known as County Road 158
or Vernon Avenue, and there terminating.
Motion for adoption of the resolution was seconded by Member Bredesen.
Rollcall :
Beginning at the Southeast corner of the NE% of Section 32,
I
Ayes: Bredesen, Richards, Schmidt, Turner, Courtney
Resolution adopted.
BIDS TO BE TAKEN FOR VARIOUS PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS.
Turner introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption:
As recommended by Staff, Member
RESOLUTION APPROVING PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS
FOR PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS AND
DIRECTING ADVERTISEMENT FOR BIDS
FOR SANITARY SEWER IMPROVEMENT NO. SS-368
WATERMAIN IMPROVEMENT NO. WM-352
GRAVELING IMPROVEMENT NO. PC- 14 1
STORM SEWR IMPROVEMENT NO. ST.S.-174
BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL, CITY OF EDINA, MINNESOTA:
1. The plans and specifications for the proposed improvements set forth in the
following Advertisement for Bids form, heretofore prepared by the City Engineer
and now on file in the office of the City Clerk are hereby approved.
2.
the following notice of bids for improvements:
The Clerk shall cause to be published in the Edina Sun and Construction Bulletin
(Official Publication)
CITY OF EDINA
4801 W. 50TH STREET
EDINA, MINNESOTA 55424
HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA
ADVERTISEMENT FOR BIDS
SANITARY SEWER, WATERMAIN, STORM SEWER AND GRAVELING
IMPROVEMENT NUMBERS
SS-368, WM-352, ST.S.-174 & PC-141
CONTRACT #84-5 (ENG)
BIDS CLOSE-SEPTEMBER 27; 1984
SEALED BIDS will be received and opened in the Council Chambers in the Edina City
Hall, 4801 West 50th Street at 11:OO A. M., September 27, 1984, and the Edina City
Council will meet at 7:OO P. M., Monday, October 1, 1984, to consider said bids for
sanitary sewer, watermain, storm sewer and graveling. The following are approximate
quantities of the major items:
88, L/F, 8" V.C.P.: Sewer
85 L/F, l?' Copper Watermain
278 L/F, 12" R.C.P. Storm Sewer
4 Standard Manholes
847 Tons, Class 2 Gravel -
Bids shall be in a sealed envelope with a statement thereon showing the work covered
by'the bid. Bids should be addressed to the City Engineer, City of Edina, 4801 West
50th Street, Edina, Minnesota 55424, and may be mailed or submitted personally to the
City Engineer.
personal submission, after the time set for receiving them may be returned unopened.
Work must be done as described in plans and specifications on file in the office of
the City Clerk. Plans and specifications are available for a deposit of $10.00 (by
check).
a bona fide bid.
bond or certified check payable to the City Clerk in the amount of at least ten (10)
percent of all bids. All plans mailed, enclose separate check for $5.00 payable to
the City of Edina for postage and handling.
BY THE ORDER OF THE EDINA CITY COUNCIL.
Bids received by the City Engineer, either through the mail or by
Said deposit to be returned upon return of the plans and specifications with
No bids will be considered unless sealed and accompanied by bid
Marcella M. Daehn
City Clerk
Motion for adoption of the resolution
Rollcall :
Ayes: Bredesen, Richards, Schmidt,
Resolution adopted.
was seconded by Member Schmidt.
Turner, Courtney
.. 130 8/20/84
ORDINANCE NO. 312-A1 &ENDING ANIMAL CONTROL ORDINANCE NO. 312 ADOPTED ON SECOND
READING. . Mr. Erickson presented Ordinance No. 312-A1, pointing out that the
definition of "owner's premises" had been deleted; that any animal which on any
occasion has bitten a person, no matter where it occurs, except its owner or a
member of the owner's family, shall be deemed a public nuisance; and that after
an animal has been impounded, the City may bring an action in municipal court, and
the court will determine the fate of the animal and the penalties to be imposed upon
the owner. Member Schmidt moved adoption of Ordinance No 312-A1 as follows:
ORDINANCE NO. 312-A1
AN ORDINANCE AElENDING ORDINANCE NO. 312
RELATING TO ANIMAL CONTROL I THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDINA, MINNESOTA ORDAINS:
Section 1. Section 3 of Ordinance No. 312 is hereby amended to read as follows:
"Section 1. Impounding. City Police Officers, Animal Control Officers,
Community Service Officers or such person or persons designated by the City
Council shall impound any animal found, or, by complaint of the City, believed
to be, in violation of this ordinance."
Sec. 2. Section 5 of Ordinance No. 312 is hereby amended to read as follows:
Sec. 5. Redemption. Any animal impounded for a reason other than rabies observation
or for biting a person in violation of Section 29(f) hereof may be redeemed from
ehe animal pound by its owner within the time period stated in Section 7 of this
ordinance by paying to the City the redemption fees in the amounts set forth in
Ordinance No. 171 and a license fee if the animal is required to be licensed and
is unlicensed. The Police Department shall, upon request, deliver any redeemed
animal to its owner."
Sec. 3. Section 8 of Ordinance No. 312 is hereby amended to read as follows:
Sec. 8. Impounding Animal; Objection by Owner; Court Order. Any owner may object
to the impounding or subsequent disposition of his animal as being contrary to
the provisions of this ordinance by filing an objection signed by the owner with
the City within five days after the action objected to was taken. Within twenty
days after impounding of an animal, if the animal is not redeemed pursuant to
Section 5 hereof or if the City is unable to reach agreement with the owner
regarding the keeping of the animal in an enclosure and in a manner consistent
with the provisions of this ordinance, the City may bring an action in the
municipal court by serving on the owner a complaint setting forth the violation
of this ordinance which caused the City to take action under this ordinance. The
court may then order the return of the animal to its owner with or without payment
of redemption fees by the owner; or the disposal, destruction or sale of the
animal; or, if the animal has been improperly disposed of or sold, the payment to
the owner of the reasonable value of the animal; or imposition on the owner of
the same penalty as that for commission of a misdemeanor; or any*two or more of the
foregoing. When an objection has been filed with the City, the City shall not
dispose of or sell the animal referred to in the objection if it is still in the
pound, but shall within ten days after filing of such objection, either return
the animal to the owner, without liability on his part for any fees, or keep it
pending agreement with the owner or order of the court as above provided. If
the animal has been disposed of or sold without a court order, the City shall
within ten days after such filing either pay to the owner the reasonable value
of the animal or begin the action described in this section."
Sec, 4. Section 10 of Ordinance No. 312 is hereby amended to read as follows:
Sec. 10.- Rabies Vaccinations and Dog License Required.
(a)
for such dog from the City.
Ordinance No. 1-71.
neutered, the amount of the fee for the license for such dog shall be reduced
as set forth in Ordinance No. 171.
(b) rabies vaccinations and dogs must wear their current vaccination tags at all times."
See. 5. The second sentence in Section 23(c) of Ordinance No. 312 is hereby
"Such notice shall be delivered to the City Animal Control Officer by the owner
I1
'I
I
.
-
I1
Any owner of a dog over six months of age in the City shall secure a license
The fee for such license shall be as set forth in
If the owner of a dog shows proof that his dog has been
I All dogs and cats over six months of age in the City must have current
amended to read as follows:
not less than ten days, or more than fourteen days, from the date of the estab-
lishment of the quarantine."
Sec. 6. Section 29(f) of Ordinance No. 312 is hereby amended to read as follows:
or a member of its owner's immediate family shall be deemed a public nuisance.
Such animal shall be quarantined pursuant to Section 23 of this ordinance, and
also shall be subject to the procedures and penalties set out in Section 33 of
this ordinance.
"(f) Any animal which on any occasion, has bitten a person, other than its owner
8/ 20/84 131
Sec. 7. Section 33 or Ordinance No. 312 relating to penalties is hereby amended
by adding thereto the following paragraph:
deemed to be a nuisance, as defined in this ordinance, or which is found, or by
complaint of the City, believed to be, in violation of any provision of this
ordinance, may be impounded pursuant to Sections 3 and 4 of this ordinance. The
handling and disposal of the animal shall be considered and determined pursuant
to Section 8 of this ordinance." I
Sec. 8. Section 30(a) of Ordinance No. 312 is hereby amended to read as follows:
No dog shall be permitted to be off the premises of its owner at any time unless
it is leashed."
Sec. 9. The third sentence in Sec. 30(b) of Ordinance No. 312 is hereby amended
"It shall furthermore be the duty of each person having the custody or control of
"In addition to other penalties, fees or remedies in this ordinance, any animal
11
to read as follows:
a dog when such dog is upon any of the places or areas described in the immediately
preceding sentence to have in his possession a device or equipment for the
picking up and removal of dog feces; at a minimum this equipment must include
at least 2 bags ."
Sec. 10. To Section 30 of Ordinance No. 312, the following Sub-paragraph is added
as follows:
"(f) As provided in Minnesota Statute Chapter 347, if a dog, without provocation,
attacks or injures any person who is peaceably conducting himself in any place
where he may lawfully be, the owner of the dog is liable in damages to the
person so attacked or injured to the full amount of the injury sustained. The
term "owner" includes any person harboring or keeping a dog but the owner shall
be primarily liable.
species.
The term "dog" includes both male and female of the canine
I
4 0 ffl -3 ld a:
I
Sec. 11. Section 12 of Ordinance No. 312 is hereby amended to read as follows:
"Sec. 12. Receipts and Tags. Upon payment of the license fee required by Section
10 hereof, the City shall deliver an original receipt to the person who pays the
fee and retain a duplicate of such receipt.
the City shall also deliver to the owner of the dog a metallic tag.
renew a license, an owner must pay a delinquent year's renewals.
in addition to any penalties imposed for violation of this ordinance.
Sec. 12.
Upon the initial-licensing of-a dog,
To properly
This shall be
This ordinance shall be in full force and effect upon its passage and
publicat b ion. a
Motion for adoption of the ordinance was seconded by Mayor Courtney.
Rollcall :
Ayes: Schmidt, Turner, Courtney
Nays: Bredesen, Richards
Ordinance adopted. ..
ATTEST :
f-/
Acting City Clerk
v
OFFICIAL STATEMENT PRESENTED - $5,400,000 GENERAL OBLIGATION IMPROVEMENT BONDS. Mr.
Dalen presented Council Members with the Official Statement on $5,400,000 General
Obligation-Improvement Bonds, Series 1984, together with the opinion of the City's
bond Counsel. He advised that this information is provided to prospective bidders for
their use in connection with the bond sale authorized by the Council at Its meeting
of August 6, 1984. No formal action was taken.
LIQUOR FUND REPORT as of June 30, 1984 was approved and ordered placed on file by
motion of Member Schmidt, seconded by Member Turner.
Ayes: Bredesen, Richards, Schmidt, Turner, Courtney
CLAIMS PAID.
following claims as per Pre-List dated 8/20/84: General Fund $165,039.93, Park Fund
$25,741.27, Art Center $1,710.60, Swimming Pool Fund $7,548.96, Golf Course Fund,
$20,545.68, Recreation Center Fund $8,797.94, Gun Range Fund $815.63, Waterwork Fund
$38,235.48, Sewer Rental Fund $4,489.26, Liquor Dispensary Fund $108,687.96, Construction
Fund $125,646.48, Total $507,259.19; and for confirmation of payment of claims dated
7/31/84: Liquor Dispensary Fund $213,436.36.
Motion of Member Schmidt was seconded by Member Turner for payment of the I
Ayes: Bredesen, Richards, Schmidt, Turner, Courtney
Motion carried.
There being no further business, Mayor Courtney declared the meeting adjourned at 9:45 PM.
SLBWLL&~LL-Q-
Acting City Clerk