HomeMy WebLinkAbout1984-03-05_COUNCIL MEETINGAGENDA
EDINA CITY COUNCIL
REGULAR MEETING
MARCH 5, 1984
7:00 P.M.
ROLLCALL
FLAG CEREMONY - Camp Fire Troop No. 273
PROCLAMATION - Camp Fire Week
EMPLOYEE RECOGNITION -- Robert Bahneman
RESOLUTION OF CONDOLENCE - Herman Strachauer
MINUTES of the Regular Council Meeting of February 27, 1984, approved as submitted or
corrected by motion of seconded by
I. PUBLIC HEARINGS AND REPORTS ON PLANNING MATTERS. Affidavits of Notice by Clerk.
Presentation.by Planning Department. Spectators heard. First Reading of Zoning
Ordinance requires offering of Ordinance only. 4/5 favorable rollcall vote to
pass Second Reading or if Second Reading should be waived. Lot Divisions, Flood
Plain Permits, Plats, Appeals from Administrative or Board of Appeals and
Adjustments decisions require action by Resolution. 3/5 favorable rollcall vote
to pass.
A. Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance
1. Second Reading - Adoption of Findings, Reasons and Facts
2. Adoption of Summary Publication of Zoning Ordinance Resolution
B. Grandview Area Traffic Study Report (Continue to 3/19/84)
C. Lot Division
1. Lots 2 and 3, Block 1, Warden Acres Peterson Replat
Generally.located South of Grove Street and West of Garden Avenue
D. Set Hearing Date (3/19/84)
1. Preliminary Plat
a. Replat of Lot.5,.Block 1,.'Indian Hills - Generally located West of
Indian Hills Road and North of Dakota Trail
b. Replat of Lot 3, Block 1, Muir Woods - Generally located West of
Valley View Road and West of Mark Terrace Drive extended
C. Community Development Block Grant Program -.Year X Budget
II. SPECIAL CONCERNS OF RESIDENTS.
III. AWARD OF BIDS.
1. Water Tower Cleaning, Scaling, Inspection, Painting and Sterilization
(Contract #84 -1)
2. Traffic Paint
3. Pick -up Truck /Animal Control
IV. RECOMMENDATIONS AND REPORTS.
1. Traffic Signal Warrants Studies on CSAH 158 at Tracy Av. and at Blake Rd.
2. Hennepin County Legislative Proposals /Community Health Services Act of 1976
3. I.U.O.E Local No. 49 Contract
4. Special Concerns of Mayor and Council
5. Post Agenda and Manager's Miscellaneous Items,
V. RESOLUTIONS.
1. Government Aid Formula
VI. FINANCE.
1. Claims Paid. Motion of , seconded by , for payment of the
following claims as per Pre -List dated 3/05/84: General Fund $27,228.63,
Park Fund $3,577.83, Art Center $395.05, Golf Course Fund $1,543.38,
Recreation Center Fund $638.61, Waterwork Fund $8,955.80, Sewer Rental
Fund $183.18, Liquor Dispensary Fund $1,045.00, Construction Fund,$448.62,
Total $44,016.10.
MINUTES
OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE
EDINA CITY COUNCIL HELD AT CITY HALL
FEBRUARY 27, 1984
Answering rollcall were Members Bredesen, Richards, Schmidt, Turner and Mayor
Courtney.
EDINA VOLUNTEER FIREFIGHTERS COMMENDED. Mr. Rosland advised that the Volunteer
Firefighter Program was begun in the spring of 1981 to provide backup manpower to
the Fire Department. During the year of 1983, the Volunteer Firefighters responded
to an average of 250 hours of calls per man, either by general alarm or by standby
callback. They also attended an average of 75 hours of training per man which
included outside schooling and in -house training. Mr. Rosland then introduced
Terry Kehoe, Assistant Fire Chief, who is director of the Volunteer Firefighter
Program and the following Volunteer Firefighters and presented each with a silver
pen bearing the Edina Logo in appreciation for their service to the City: Greg
Bretson, Larry Friedrichs, Steve Hatzung, Tom Jenson, Steve Nelson,.Bob Prestrud,
Jerry Reisschneider, Dan Scheerer, John Scheerer, Marty Scheerer, John Senior, Mike
Wech and Ray Wolff. Members of the Council joined in commending the volunteers and
in thanking them.
PUBLIC HEARING CONCLUDED; IMPROVEMENT BA -137 A & B ORDERED. Engineer Hoffman recalled
that the public hearing on the proposed Improvement P -BA -137 A & B for construction
of permanent street-surfacing with concrete curb and gutter and sidewalk on Hansen
Road from Vernon Avenue to W. 60th Street.has been continued from the meeting of
January 16, 1984. At that meeting the Council had directed staff to take a poll of
the residents on Hansen Road with regard to the roadway width and sidewalk, and had
referred the matter of a stop sign at Grove Street and Hansen Road to the Traffic
Safety Committee for their recommendation. Mr. Hoffman then reviewed the proposed
project noting that the portion of Hansen Road north of Benton Avenue is considered
a collector street and would qualify for State Aid funds and is proposed to be built
36 feet wide with no parking on the East side. The portion south of Benton Avenue
would be built 30 feet wide using local funds. In addition, a concrete sidewalk
adjacent to the'curb would be constructed on the West side of the roadway. If approved
by Council, plans_ would have to be submitted to the Minnesota Department of Transport-
ation for approval, a grading permit would be required from Nine Mile Creek Watershed
District and an agreement would have to be reached with the Soo Line Railroad regarding
the crossing. The estimated amount to be assessed would be $20.00 per foot /single
family units and $574.00 per unit for multi -units for Hansen Road from Vernon Avenue
to Benton Avenue. The estimated amount to be assessed would be approximately $38.00
per foot for Hansen Road from Benton Avenue to W. 60th Street. Mr. Hoffman advised
that, as directed by the Council, a questionnaire had been sent to the residents
asking them to submit their opinion as to street widths as related to State Aid fund-
ing and as to need for sidewalk. He indicated that to date responses have been
received from approximately 60% of the residents who stated that if the project was
approved State Aid funds should be used for the project. The survey results were:
12 preferred 36 foot width with two driving lanes and one parking lane on the West
side, 11 preferred 32 foot width with two driving lanes and no parking either side,
and 4 totally objected to the project or had no opinion. Regarding the sidewalk
issue, the majority favored a sidewalk on the West side. Mr. Hoffman pointed out that
if State Aid funds were also -used for the portion of the project from Benton Avenue
to W. 60th Street that the estimated cost per assessable foot would be.$20.00. Staff
would therefore recommend that Hansen Road from Vernon Avenue to Benton,Avenue be
constructed to the 36 foot width and from Benton Avenue to 60th Street to the 32 foot
width, using State Aid funds, with sidewalk on the West side. Mr. Hoffman informed
the Council that the matter of a stop sign at Grove Street and Hansen Road had been
considered by the Traffic Safety Committee on February 21, 1984, and the Committee
recommended denial of the request based on 1) lack of warrants required for stop sign
installation, 2) lack of accident history, 3) speeds reported were typical to other
collector roadways, 4) installation of the requested sign would be inconsistent with
other similar intersections, and 5) the fact that there is a stop sign one block South.
John Ward, 5916 Hansen Road, stated he favored a 32 foot width utilizing State Aid
funds and that he did not consider a parking lane to be an issue. Christian Ries,
5800 Hansen Road, stated his preference would be a 32 foot wide roadway without a
sidewalk. Jay Addy, 5801 Hansen Road, voiced his concern regarding the distance
of the proposed roadway to some of the homes and urged the Council to consider a
32 foot roadway. No further comments being heard from the public, Member Turner
offered the following resolution and moved its adoption:
RESOLUTION ORDERING IMPROVEMENT NO. BA -137 A & B
BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of Edina, Minnesota, that this Council
heretofore caused notice of hearing to be duly published and mailed to owners of
each parcel within the area proposed to be assessed on the following proposed
improvements:
L /L //04
1. CONSTRUCTION OF PERMANENT STREET SURFACING WITH CONCRETE CURB AND GUTTER AND
SIDEWALK IMPROVEMENT NO. BA -137A IN THE FOLLOWING:
Hansen Road from Vernon Avenue to Benton Avenue
2. CONSTRUCTION OF PERMANENT STREET SURFACING WITH CONCRETE CURB AND GUTTER AND
SIDEWALK IMPROVEMENT NO. BA -137B IN THE FOLLOWING:
Hansen Road from Benton Avenue to W. 60th Street
and at -the hearing held at the time and place specified in said notice, the Council
has duly considered the views of all persons interested, and being fully advised of
the pertinent facts, does hereby determine to proceed with the construction of said
improvements as described in the published notices of said hearing except that with
respect to Improvement No. BA -137B, the roadway shall be 32 feet wide, including
all proceedings which may be necessary in eminent domain for the acquisition of
necessary easements and rights for contruction and maintenance of such improvement;
that said improvements are hereby designated and shall be referred to in all sub-
" sequent proceedings as follows:
No. 1 Above PERMANENT STREET SURFACING WITH CONCRETE CURB AND GUTTER AND
SIDEWALK IMPROVEMENT NO. BA -137A
No. 2 Above PERMANENT STREET SURFACING WITH CONCRETE CURB AND GUTTER AND
SIDEWALK IMPROVEMENT NO. BA -137B
and the area to be specially assessed for a portion of the cost of the proposed
improvement for Improvement No. 1 Above shall include Lots 1 thru 3, Block 1,
Warden Acres Berg Replat; Lots 1 thru 3, Block 1, E.V. Klopp's Subdivision, Lots 1
thru 3, Block 1, Emil Erickson Addition, Lots 6, 7, 8 and 9, Garden Park Addition;
Lots 7 thru 9, Block 7, Westchester Knolls Add'n; Lots 13 thru 16, Richmond Hills
3rd Add'n; Parcel 2100, Section 33, Township 117, Range 21; Lots 11 thru 16, Block
Melody Knolls 6th Add'n; Lots 5 thru 8, Block 1, Towns First Edina Add'n; Lots 7
thru 12, Block 3, Codes Highview Park Add'n. The area to be specially assessed for
portion of the cost of the proposed improvement No. 2 Above shall include Lots 1
thru 4, Block 1, Theo. Nelson Add'n; Lots 1 and 2, Block 1, Naomi Add'n; Lots 1, 2,
Block 1, Woody Point Add'n; Lot 1, Block 1, Hayden Add'n; Parcel 4700, Section 33,
Township 117, Range 21.
Motion for adoption of the Resolution was seconded by Member Bredesen.
Rollcall:
Ayes: Bredesen, Richards, Schmidt, Turner, Courtney
Resolution adopted.
Member Turner then offered the - following resolution and moved its adoption:
RESOLUTION RELATING TO PARKING RESTRICTIONS ON
S.A.P. 120 - 151 -08 (HANSEN ROAD) FROM VERNON AVENUE TO W. 60TH STREET
J IN THE CITY OF EDINA, MINNESOTA
3,
a
5,
WHEREAS, the City of Edina has planned the improvement of MSAS 151 (Hansen Road) from
Vernon Avenue to W. 60th Street, and
WHEREAS, The City of Edina will be expending Municipal State Aid Funds on the improve-
ment of the Street, and
WHEREAS, this improvement does not provide adequate width for parking on both sides
-of the street approval of the proposed construction as a Municipal State Aid Street
project must therefore be conditioned upon certain parking restrictions, and
WHEREAS, the extent of these restrictions that would be necessary prerequisite to
the approval of this construction as a Municipal State Aid project in the City of
Edina has been determined;
NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY RESOLVED, that the City of Edina shall ban the parking
of motor vehicles on the East side of MSAS 151 (Hansen Road) from Vernon Avenue to
,Benton Avenue at all times, and shall ban the parking of motor vehicles on both
sides of MSAS 151 (Hansen Road) from Benton Avenue to W. 60th Street at all times.
Motion for adoption of the resolution was seconded by Member Bredesen..
Rollcall:
Ayes: Bredesen, Richards, Schmidt, Turner, Courtney
Resolution adopted.
VARIOUS PLANNING MATTERS CONTINUED TO MARCH 19, 1984. Mr. Rosland advised that staff
would recommend continuation of the following Planning matters to the meeting of
March 19, 1984:
1) Johnson Building Company - 5212 Vernon Avenue South - Lots 1, 2, 3 & 12, Block 1,
Grandview Plateau - Overall Plan Amendment - Vernon Hills Condominiums
2) Haymaker - Lots 3, 4 & 5, Block 4, Grandview Heights - Final Rezoning - R -1
Single Family Dwelling District to PRD -3 Planned Residence District and Preliminary
Plat Approval
3) Kyllo Development - Generally located north of Crosstown Highway and west of Vernon
Court - Final Rezoning - R1; Single Family Dwelling District to PRD -2 Planned
Residence District and Final Plat Approval of Vernon Court Addition.
Member Bredesen's motion was seconded by Member Richards to continue the Planning
r matters (Agenda Items II -A, B, C) to the meeting of March 19, 1984.
Ayes: Bredesen, Richards, Schmidt, Turner, Courtney
Motion carried.
SECOND READING OF COMPREHENSIVE ZONING ORDINANCE CONTINUED TO MARCH 5, 1984. Mr. Rosland
recalled that the Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance has been given -First Reading at the
2/27/84
Council Meeting of February 6, 1984, at which time a number of rezoning issues were
discussed. Attorney Erickson advised that a final draft of the Ordinance has been
prepared which contains minor changes prompted by a final staff review as well as
the comments and recommendations received from,the public. Mr. Erickson then
pointed out various zoning changes that are recommended as follows: 1) the Titus
Building from Commercial District to Planned Office District, 2) the Southdale
area properties from Commercial District to Planned Office District, 3) the National
Car property from Planned Industrial District to Planned Office District. All of
these properties are developed with 6ffice buildings. He stated that the managers,-of
the properties involved have been contacted and no objections to the rezoning have
been received. A letter has been received from National Car Rental stating they
have no objection to the - zoning change of its parcel to Planned Office District
with the understanding that their present uses of the parcel allowed under the
existing zoning will remain permissible. Staff has advised them that the uses they
are concerned with are accessory uses in the Planned Office District and therefore
could continue. Mr. Erickson called Council's attention to an alternate Section 13
Planned Residence District which essentially employs the formulas now in the City
ordinance for R -3 and R -4 Districts, and essentially allows consistency of develop-
ment in those districts. It would also result in considerable reduction of some non-
conformance to properties that already exist. Staff would recommend adoption of the
alternate Section 13. Regarding the three unimproved residential properties which
have been under discussion, the Hansen property located west of Lincoln Drive and
south of West 7th Street, the Everson property on Cahill Road, and the Kenneth pro-
perty, Mr. Erickson advised that discussions have been held with each of the owners.
Because the proposed rezoning of these properties to R -1 District has created some
misunderstandings, staff would now recommend that these properties be rezoned to
the appropriate zone under the Ordinance. That would result in the.Hansen property
being rezoned to Planned Office District and would be appropriate because it is
presently proposed under the Comprehensive Plan as mixed development; as Planned
Office District it would be directly across from an existing office building, and
would result in a transition from office to residential. Mr. Hansen has suggested that
the property he owns across the street also be rezoned at this time. However, the
exact use of that property and how it would be developed has not been determined
with any degree of finality and it is recommended that it be rezoned to R -1 District, `
being the holding zone as specifically now stated in the Ordinance so that there
would be the ability to move it into an appropriate zone under the Comprehensive
Plan and Zoning Ordinance. Mr. Everson's property is recommended to be rezoned to
PRD -3 Planned Residence District and should have no substantial effect upon its
development ability. With regard to Mr. Kenneth's properties, presently one site
is zoned R -4 District and some additional lots are zoned R -2 District. Discussions
.have been held with Mr. Kenneth and his counsel and it has been proposed that the
Kenneth property zoned R -4 District be zoned PRD -3 Planned Residence District, that
some of the R -2 District property be zoned PRD -3 directly adjoining the present
R -4 property, and that the long cul de sac be cut off by vacating the road south
of the area to be developed with PRD -3, and the area in there be donated to the
City as an addition to the existing park. Mr. Erickson advised that the discuss-
ions have progressed to the point of a draft of an agreement with some minor
details to be worked out _relative to the location of the buildings, the location
of the cul de sac and the exact descriptions of the property to be rezoned and to
be donated.to the City. It is recommended that the Council authorize the staff to
continue the negotiations with the expectations of bringing back a document for
signature in the -next week and that -the Mayor and City.Manager be authorized to
sign the document if it is acceptable to the City staff and Mr. Kenneth'.s counsel.
In review, Mr. Erickson stated that Council action needed would be: 1) to approve
the changes in the final draft Ordinance, 2) to approve the insertion of the new
Section 13, 3) to approve the rezonings, 4) to authorize the continued negotiations
and execution of the agreement with Mr. Kenneth, and 5) to continue the hearing to
the meeting of March 5, 1984, at which time the Findings, Decisions and Reasons
will be presented together with a Summary Ordinance for approval and publication.
Mayor Courtney then called for comment from the Council and from the public. No
comment being heard, Member Turner's motion was seconded by Member Bredesen to
approve the changes as underlined in the final draft Ordinance No. 825.
Rollcall:
Ayes: Bredesen, Richards, Schmidt, Turner, Courtney
Motion carried.
Member Bredesen moved approval -of the new Section 13 to Ordinance No. 825. Motion
was seconded by Member Turner who stated that it is consistent with the development
of the City that has taken place to this point and that the densities described in
the revised Section 13 are acceptable to her. Member Richards stated he would not
support the revision because it increases the possibility that the densities will
be greater than what the Council attempted"to establish in the 1970's.
Rollcall:
Ayes: Bredesen, Schmidt, Turner, Courtney
Nays: Richards
Motion carried.
2/27/84
OF
Member Bredesen moved approval of the rezonings from Commercial District and from
Planned Industrial District to Planned Office District as identified in these
Minutes, approval of the rezonings for the Hansen property and the Everson property,
and approval of continued negotiations and execution of an agreement by the Mayor
and City Manager with Mr. Kenneth, contingent upon Second Reading and adoption of
the Zoning Ordinance. Motion was seconded by Member Turner.
Rollcall:
Ayes: Bredesen, Schmidt, Turner, Courtney
Nays: Richards
Member Bredesen moved that the hearing on the Zoning Ordinance be continued to the
Council Meeting of March 5, 1984, and that Staff be directed to bring back Findings,
Decisions.and Reasons for adoption of the Zoning Ordinance, together with a Summary
Ordinance for approval and publication. Motion was seconded by Member Turner.
Ayes: Bredesen, Richards, Schmidt, Turner, Courtney
Motion carried.
BID AWARDED FOR 14 HP TORO SAND PRO. Mr. Rosland presented tabulation of bids for
a 14 HP Toro Sand Pro with standard rake kit, showing Tri State Toro at $5,995.00
and Minnesota Toro, low bidder, at $5,400.00. Member Turner's motion was seconded
by Member Bredesen for award of bid to recommended low bidder Minnesota Toro.
Ayes: Bredesen, Richards, Schmidt, Turner, Courtney
Motion carried.
BID AWARDED FOR CUSHMAN SCOOTER /BRAEMAR BASEBALL COMPLEX. Mr. Rosland presented
tabulation of bids for one Cushman Scooter for Braemar baseball complex, showing
Cushman Motor Company, Inc. at $6,679.85 and Horst Distributing, Inc. at $7,427.50.
Member Turner's motion was seconded by Member Bredesen for award of bid to recom-
mended low bidder Cushman Motor Company, Inc.
Ayes: Bredesen, Richards, Schmidt; Turner, Courtney
Motion carried.
BID AWARDED FOR CHLORINATOR UNITS FOR FIVE WELL SITES. Mr. Rosland presented tabula -
tion of bids for chlorinator units for five well sites, showing Tonka Equipment
Company at $6,165.00, Wallace & Tiernan Pennwalt at $7,365.00, and Northwestern
Power Equipment Company at $7,375.00. Member Bredesen's motion was seconded by
Member Turner for award of bid-to recommended low bidder Tonka Equipment Company.
Ayes: Bredesen, Richards, Schmidt, Turner, Courtney
Motion carried.
BID AWARDED FOR SEALING ASBESTOS FIREPROOFING IN YORKDALE LIQUOR STORE. •Mr. Rosland
presented tabulation of bids for sealing asbestos fireproofing in the Yorkdale Liquor
Store, showing Insul Spray Coatings, Inc. at $7,900.00 and Peak Construction at
$13,675.00. Member Schmidt's motion was seconded by Member Turner for award of bid
to recommended low bidder Insul Spray Coatings, Inc.
Ayes: Bredesen, Richards, Schmidt, Turner, Courtney
Motion carried.
TRAFFIC SAFETY COMMITTEE MINUTES OF FEBRUARY 21, 1984 APPROVEb. Member Bredesen's
motion was seconded by Member Turner to approve the following recommended action as
listed in Section A of the Traffic Safety Committee Minutes of February 21, 1984:
1) That a "STOP" sign controlling northbound traffic on Jay Place at West 50th
Street be erected,
and to acknowledge Sections B and C of the Minutes.
Ayes: Bredesen, Richards, Schmidt, Turner, Courtney,
Motion carried.
With reference to Section C of the Minutes, Member Schmidt commented that she was
pleased that safety problems at West 70th Street and Cornelia Drive are being
studied, as requested by the president of the Cornelia School PTA.
PARK BOARD RECOMMENDATION FOR MULTI -USE FACILITY (SPEED SKATING RINK) DISCUSSED.
Park Director Kojetin presented a recommendation from the Edina Park Board that the
Council study and give approval to apply to the Metropolitan Council to consider
locating a speed skating facility at Braemar Park. He advised that two years ago
a study was done in the metropolitan area on the feasibility of an artificial speed
skating rink and that the Metropolitan Commission has determined that there is a need
for such a facility in the area. The proposal was presented to the State Legislature
who agreed and appropriated money for the year 1984 for work on a site selection. A
committee -will be approved this summer to select a site location in the metropolitan
area and to present working drawings for this facility. The facility is proposed to
be a regional park. Mr. Kojetin stated that locating such a multi -use facility at
Braemar Park would be a compliment to the City's park system, its residents, and
that the location would provide easy access for people in the metropolitan area. The
original study done by the Commission did not include provision for a roof over the
facility. Mr. Kojetin submitted that if the facility was to be sited in Edina, the
proposal should be that it would be roofed because of the intense cold, wind chill and
2/27/84
heavy snowfalls commonly experienced during the winter in this area. The proposed
facility size would be an area 350' by 700' and uses could include a soccer field
and a 440 yard artificial turf running track in the summer with an artificial
400 meter speed skating rink and a sheet of artificial ice inside the speed skating
oval in the winter. Spectator stands would seat 5,000 people and under the stands
hostel type housing could be provided for 90 athletes in training. The Olympic
Committee has indicated that, if such a facility were built which could be used as
an Olympic speed skating training center, that the Committee would contribute
operating funds. The facility would be located adjacent to the Braemar Arena and
Pavilion, South of the Pavilion in the lower parking lot. Discussion followed
regarding the impact of the facility on the community, positive and negative aspects
of such a facility in the City, funding of operating costs, how it would be managed
and the traffic generated by such a facility. Mr. Rosland agreed that if such a
facility were considered it should be roofed. He added that if it were built in
Edina, it should not become a burden to the City's taxpayers, either through con-
struction costs or operating costs, but should be solely funded from sources outside
the City of Edina. He also felt that the.size of the facility would be so large that
it would overpower the Arena and Pavilion. Bill Lord, member of the Park Board,
stated that the Board felt that.if a roofed facility was considered by the Committee
to be feasible, that they should be given the opportunity to look at a proposal for
siting the facility in Edina. Member Turner stated that she felt it was appropriate
for Edina to participate in the discussion and to offer the expertise of Mr. Kojetin
and the Park Board in the proposal, that as exciting as it would be to have such a
facility here, there are many pros and cons to the issue.. Member Turner then moved
approval to apply to the Metropolitan Council to consider locating a speed skating
facility at Braemar Park. Motion was seconded by Member Richards, who stated that
he was seconding the motion with the understanding that the concerns expressed would
have to be addressed and that he did not want to see our existing facilities at
Braemar Park, which serve the community well and are in great demand, take second
place.to the proposed facility.
Ayes: Bredesen, Richards, Schmidt, Turner, Courtney.
Motion carried.
JAMES R. HANSEN APPOINTED TO HEALTH ADVISORY BOARD; COUNCIL /BOARDS LIAISON DISCUSSED.
As recommended by Mayor Courtney, Member Schmidt's motion was seconded by Member
Turner for appointment of James R. Hansen to the Advisory Board of Health for a
two year term to February 1, 1986. Mayor Courtney advised that this appointment
brings the number of members on the Health Board up to nine and that there could
be twelve members in total. He reminded the Council Members of their present
liaison assignments with the various boards /commissions and asked that they review
those and advise him if they desired to make changes.
HEARING DATE SET FOR STORM SEWER IMPROVEMENT P -ST.S. -173. As recommended by Engineer
Hoffman, Member Schmidt offered the following resolution and moved its adoption:
RESOLUTION PROVIDING FOR PUBLIC HEARING ON
STORM SEWER IMPROVEMENT NO. P -ST.S. -173
1. The City Engineer, having submitte& to the Council a preliminary report as to
the feasibility of the proposed Storm Sewer described in the form of Notice of
Hearing set forth below, and as to the estimated cost of such improvement, said
report is hereby approved and directed to be placed on file in the office of the City
Clerk.
2. This Council shall meet on Monday, March 19, 1984, at 7:00 p.m. in the Edina'City
Hall, to consider in public hearing the views of all persons interested in said
improvement.
3. The City Clerk is hereby-authorized and directed to cause notice of the time,
place and purpose of said meeting to be published in the official newspaper once a
week for two successive weeks, the second of which publication is to be not less
than three days from the date of said meeting, and to mail notice to all affected
properties in substantially the following form:
(.Official Publication)
CITY OF EDINA
4801 W. 50TH STREET
EDINA, MINNESOTA 55424
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
STORM SEWER
IMPROVEMENT NO. P -ST.S. -173
The Edina City Council will meet at the Edina City Hall, Monday, March 19, 1984
at 7:00 P.M., to consider the following proposed improvements to be constructed
under the authority granted by Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 429, or Chapter 444.
The approximate cost of said improvements are estimated by the City as set
forth below:.
2/27/84
ESTIMATED COST
EDINA - BLOOMINGTON BORDER - HIGHWAY 100 $750,000.00
Easterly 2500 Feet Plus or Minus
The area proposed to be assessed for the cost of Improvement ST. S. -173 include:
Lots 1 thru 34, 39, 45, 46, 47, Blk. 1; Lots 1 thru 26, Blk. 2; Lots 1 and 3,
Blk. 3, Oscar Roberts First Addition; Outlot 1 and 2, Lots 1 thru 11, Blk. 1;
Lots 1 thru 12, Blk. 2; Lots 1 and 2, Blk. 3, Bertelsen 3rd Add'n.; Tract A
and B, R.L.S. 1270, Apt. Ownership No. 88, Heatherton of Edina Condo; Lots 1
thru 3, Blk. 1, Hedberg Parklawn 1st Add'n.; Tracts C thru J, M, and N, R.L.S.
No. 1129; Lots 1 thru 3, Blk. 1, Edina Office Center; Lots 1 and 2, Blk. 1,
Edina Office Center 2nd Addition; Tracts A thru M, P thru V, R.L.S. No. 1218;
Tracts B thru S, R.L.S. No. 1050; Tract A, R.L.S. No. 69; Lots 7 thru 13,
Blk. 2; Lots 1 thru 7, Blk. 3; Lots 3 thru 8, Blk. 4, Lake Edina 4th Add'n.;
Tract A, R.L.S. No. 938; Lots 1 thru 13, Blk. 3, Lake Edina 3rd Add'n.; Lots 4
thru 6, Lake Edina 5th Add'n.; Lot 1, Blk. 1, Yorkdale Townhomes of Edina;
Lot 1, Blk. 1, Outlot A, Ebenezer Society 1st Add'n.; Lot 1, Blk. 1, Al Johnson
Add'n.; Lot 1, Blk. 1, Paul Klodt First Add'n.; Lot 1, Blk. 1, Northwestern
Financial Center; Lot 1, Blk. 1, Eden Place; Parcel 800, 1200, 2802, 2850,
4800, 6000, 6800, 6400, 8000, 9210, and 2400, Section 32 Township 28, Range 24.
The above area is generally_ located in area bordered by Highway 100 on.the
west, City of Bloomington border on the south, City of Richfield border on
the east, and West 72nd Street on the north.
Marcella M. Daehn
City Clerk
Motion for adoption of the resolution was seconded by Member Bredesen.
Rollcall:
Ayes: Bredesen, Richards, Schmidt, Turner, Courtney
Resolution adopted.
GEOFFREY MCCRAY CLAIM NOTED. Chief Swanson advised that a Notice of Claim had been
filed by Geoffrey McCray and that the matter had been referred to the City's insur-
ance company and to the City Attorney. No formal action was taken.
RELEASE OF PARKLAND DEDICATION-AGREEMENT FOR LOT 6, BLOCK 2, PARKWOOD KNOLLS 21ST
ADDITION AUTHORIZED. Mr. Erickson advised that some years ago an agreement was
signed between the City, Carl and Helen Hansen and Parkwood Knolls Construction
Company relating to dedication of parkland, whereby as they platted land the City
received credit for acreage to be combined and added to an existing park in the
Parkwood Knolls area. He explained that the Hansens have now developed all the
land they are going to develop under that agreement, that the City had received all
the parkland therefor, and the Hansens have asked that the existing encumbrance be
removed for the lots involved. Staff would recommend approval of the release.
RESOLUTION
BE IT RESOLVED by the Edina City Council that the Mayor and City Manager be and,..
are hereby authorized and directed, on behalf of the City, to sign a Release which
fully releases Lot 6, Block 2, Parkwood Knolls 21st Addition from an Agreement
dated July 24, 1972, and filed in the office of the Hennepin County Registrar of
Titles as Document No. 1052064 relating to dedication of parkland.
Motion for adoption of the resolution was seconded by Member Bredesen.
Rollcall:
Ayes: Bredesen, Richards, Schmidt, Turner, Courtney.
Resolution adopted.
RESOLUTION ADOPTED REGARDING BIKEWAY CONSTRUCTION PROJECT ON INTERLACHEN BOULEVARD.
Engineer Hoffman recalled that the matter of a path along Interlachen Boulevard has
been discussed for a number of years but that the major problem was always a lack
of means of funding. Recently, the City received a notice that the Minnesota Depart-
ment of Transportation (MNDot) was accepting applications for bikeway projects that
currently are not funded. The State Legislature may appropriate funds for this
type of activity during 1984 and 1985. A candidate for funding would be a bikeway
along Interlachen Boulevard from Vernon Avenue to the Hopkins city boundary. Staff
met with the Hennepin County staff regarding the project and they felt this would
be a good project and also may have some funding available for such a project.
Additionally, the Hopkins City Council passed a resolution to support an application
for funding for their portion of the bikeway. Mr. Hoffman advised that MNDot has
criteria for construction that would have to be met. Maintenance and operations
of the bikeway would be the responsibility of the applicant. The City would nego-
tiate with Hennepin County as to who would maintain the bikeway system along Inter -
lachen Boulevard inasmuch as it is a county roadway.. Staff feels we could comply
with the requirements of MNDot and do not see any other funding possibilities and
would recommend that an application for funding be approved. Member Schmidt offered
the following resolution and moved its adoption:
2/27/84
RESOLUTION REGARDING BIKEWAY CONSTRUCTION PROJECT
INTERLACHEN BOULEVARD /BLAKE ROAD
COUNTY ROAD 20
WHEREAS, the City of Edina desires to construct a pathway along County Road 20
(Interlachen Boulevard /Blake Road) in Edina; and
WHEREAS, the existing "rural section" roadway on County Road 20 provides inadequate
pedestrian /bikeway mobility and unsafe conditions; and
WHEREAS, the construction of a pathway along County Road 20 is difficult and
therefore expensive; and
WHEREAS, the City of Edina is aware that the City of Hopkins desires to continue a
pathway /bikeway along County Road 20 in Hopkins,
NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the City of Edina requests funding from the
Minnesota Department of Transportation Bikeway Construction Program to assist in
Construction of this pathway /bikeway.
Motion for adoption of the resolution was seconded by Member Turner.
Rollcall:
Ayes: Bredesen, Richards, Schmidt, Turner, Courtney
Resolution adopted.
PARAMEDIC REPORT PRESENTED AND DISCUSSED. Mr. Rosland stated that a resignation
letter from John Maloney was received in October, 1983, indicating his intention
to leave his paramedic duties as of year end. At that time Robert Buresh, Public
Safety Director, was asked to prepare and submit a report regarding the paramedic
program in Edina. The report was to include alternative methods of delivering the
service. Mr. Rosland advised that at the present time the City is susceptible to
the resignations of our paramedics in such a way that we could be without a program
if the present trend continues. Staff felt the program was at a point that the
Council should begin discussion on the direction that might be taken.as to
deliver the service to the City (City, County or possibly the hospitals). He
stated that John Maloney, President of the Fire Union, and Robert Buresh would
present their reports which would offer some possible options. Mr. Maloney noted
that his report was written with the intention of preserving the paramedic program
as part of the Edina Fire Department. He then presented graphics showing 1) Fire
and Medical Calls since 1975, 2) Number of Paramedic Calls Comparision with Henn-
epin-County, North and Smith, 3) Number of Calls With vs. Without Supervision at
Scene, 4) 1984 Fire Department Budget Without Revenues, 5) 1985 Budget - After cuts
back to 1975 Levels with Revenues Added, 6) 1985 Budget - Revenues Added, 7) 1984
Budget - 1980 Level + 3 Firefighter /Paramedics with Revenues Added. He stated that
despite its value, the paramedic unit is in danger of disintegrating because of loss
of personnel from within. He felt that the most acute of the problems could be
solved by an addition of three paramedics. This could possibly be accomplished
by redistributing approved allocations which he then explained. ..He submitted that
is a solution is found, it will likely be a combination of possibilities. Robert
Buresh then reviewed his written report for the Council, giving a history of
Emergency Medical Services (EMS) in Edina and specifically the paramedic program,
the present status of the program and the future of the EMS program. He presented
11 options for the Council to consider.in dealing with the future of the EMS program.
and responded to questions of the Council regarding each option. Mr. Rosland
stated that he would review the reports and options outlined and try to bring back
to the Council within the next few weeks several recommendations that may be viable.
John Malony, as President of the Fire Union, then presented data regarding some
problems the union had with -the City during arbitration last year regarding salary
and benefits for the Assistant Chiefs which the union feels violated laws and
agreements with the union. He stated that he hoped better communication could be
developed between the City and the union in the future. Mr. Rosland he would be
discussing the matter with the Assistant Chiefs and would then be talking to
Mr. Maloney to try to clarify the matter. No formal action was taken.
BRAEMAR ARENA TRAFFIC CONGESTION NOTED. Member Turner called attention to the
traffic congestion at Braemar Arena at the recent Edina /Minnetonka hockey game
and suggested that perhaps a solution would be to not schedule activities at the
Pavilion for nights when a major hockey game is to be played. Mr. Rosland stated
that not scheduling the Pavilion for those nights would be an option and also that
it may be possible to arrange for patrols to work the parking lot for such events.
No formal action was taken.
DEATH OF HERMANN STRACHAUER NOTED. Mr. Rosland advised that he has received word of
the death of Hermann Strachauer this afternoon and noted that he was probably the
father of the Park Department, having served on the Park Board for many years during
the early development of Edina. No action.'was taken.
RESOLUTION ADOPTED AUTHORIZING LEND /LEASE AGREEMENT FOR INTOXILYZER. Mr. Rosland
recommended adoption of a resolution approving the City's entering into an Agreement
with` :-the State =of Tlinne�ota , to receive aa, lntoxilyzer 5000 breath ,Cest iasrri:ment
on a loan basis. Member Bredesen offered the following resolution and moved its
adoption:
RESOLUTION
BE IT RESOLVED that the City of Edina enter into an agreement with the State
of Minnesota, Department of Public Safety for the following purpose:
To receive from the State of Minnesota, Department of Public Safety, an
Intoxilyzer 5000 breath test instrument and breath alcohol simulator on a
loan basis. The instruments are to be used by law enforcement officers to
assist them in the detection of motorists who may be in violation of
Minnesota Statutes Section 169.121, or other Minnesota laws or local
ordinances or other law enforcement purposes.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Mayor and City Manager be and they are hereby
authorized to execute such agreement.
Motion for adoption of the resolution was seconded by Member Turner.
Rollcall:
Ayes: Bredesen, Richards, Schmidt, Turner, Courtney
Resolution adopted.
RESOLUTION ADOPTED IN FAVOR OF 21 AS THE MINIMUM LEGAL DRINKING AGE. Mr. Rosland
advised that the Police Chiefs Association has taken an action recommending that the
minimum legal drinking age in the State of Minnesota be raised to age 21 and that
the Council may wish to discuss the issue. Member Turner advised that the Human
Relations Commission was asked to comment on the issue and at their last meeting
they unanimously supported the age of 21. Member Richards then offered the following
resolution and moved its adoption:
RRgnT.11TT0N
WHEREAS, the reduction of the minimum legal drinking age in Minnesota in 1973
was followed by an increase in the number of alcohol - related motor vehicle
deaths for 16 to 21 year old drivers and that alcohol- related traffic crashes
are the leading cause of death of people in this age group; and
WHEREAS, the experience of the States of Michigan and Illinois demonstrate a
decrease of alcohol - related motor vehicle deaths when the minimum legal drinking
age was returned to age 21; and
WHEREAS, raising the legal minimum drinking age to age 21 in Minnesota would
have an important impact in reducing the annual toll of motor vehicle deaths,
particularly the deaths of young people and of others with whom they are
involved in crashes; and
WHEREAS, raising the legal minimum drinking age to age 21 in Minnesota may have
an impact on associated chemical dependency issues among the 16 to 21 year old
youth of the State;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Council of the City of Edina advocates
the return of the legal minimum drinking age in the State of Minnesota to
21 years of age.
Motion for adoption of the resolution was seconded by Member Bredesen.
Rollcall:
Ayes: Bredesen, Richards, Schmidt, Turner, Courtney
Resolution adopted.
RESOLUTION ADOPTED FOR NEGOTIATION OF TERMS OF AGREEMENT ON WOODDALE SCHOOL.
Mr. Rosland advised that a resolution has been drafted by attorneys for the School
District and the City with regard to the terms of an Agreement for the conveyance
of the Wooddale School site to the City of Edina. In response to questions, Attorney
Erickson stated that the Agreement would provide that the City must hold the property
in.public domain, that it would also prescribe that the School Site shall be recon-
veyed to the School District in the future only if used for public education purposes
and that those provisions of the Agreement would be binding on both the City and the
School District. Member Turner then offered the following resolution and moved its
adoption:
RFq()T.TTTT(1N
WHEREAS, Independent School District No. 273 (the
"School District ") is the owner of the property in the City
of Edina (the "City ") known as the Wooddale School site, and
legally described as follows:
Par l: Part of Southeast Quarter of Northwest
Quarter of Section 18, Township 28, Range 24, West
of the Fourth Principal Meridian, described as
follows: Commencing 440 feet West from Southeast
2/27/84
corner of Northwest Quarter; thence West 132 feet;
thence North 264 1/2 feet; thence East 132 feet;
thence South 264 1/2 feet to place of beginning.
Par 2: (a) All that part of Lots 4 and 5,
Block 16, Country Club District, Brown Section,
lying South of a line 300 feet north of and
parallel to the South line of said Block 16,
including that part of the North 1/2 of County Road
No. 2, vacated, lying between extensions across it
of the East and West lines of said Lot 5, and
Northwesterly of the Northwesterly line of New 50th
Street.
(b) All that part of the East 4 feet of
Lots 2 and 3, Block 16, Country Club District,
Brown Section, lying South of a line 300 feet North
from and parallel to the South line of said
Block 16, including that part of the North 1/2 of
County Road No. 2, vacated, lying between exten-
sions across it of the West and East lines of said
4 foot tract.
according to the plat thereof on file or of record
in the office of the Register of Deeds in and for
said County.
(c) All that part of the Northeast Quarter
of the Southwest Quarter of Section 18, Town-
ship 28, Range 24, lying Northerly of New 50th
Street, generally known as State Aid Road No. 20,
and East of Minnehaha Creek, including that part of
the South 1/2 of County Road No. 2, vacated, lying
between extensions across it of the Easterly line
of Browndale Avenue and the Northwesterly line of
New 50th Street, except that part thereof which
lies southwesterly of the southeasterly extension
of the westerly line (tangent segment) of Lot 2,
Block 16, Country Club District, Brown Section.
(said site and all buildings and improvements thereon and all
hereditaments and appurtenances belonging or in anywise
appertaining thereto, is hereinafter called the "School
Site "); and
WHEREAS, the School District has determined that it
does not presently 'need the School Site for any School
District purpose, but may hereafter need it for operation and
use of a public school building for public education
purposes; and
WHEREAS, the School District has also determined
that it is in the best public interest of the School District
that the City acquire the School Site from the School
District for public uses so that it will remain in public
ownership, but has also prescribed that the School Site shall
be reconveyed to the School District in the future if needed
by the School District for operation and use of a public
school building for public education purposes; and
WHEREAS, the City Council has determined that it is
in the best public interest of the City, and the citizens of
the City, for the City to acquire the School Site, subject to
the right of the School District to reacquire it in the
future,,and on the other terms set out in this resolution.
NOW, THEREFORE, be it resolved that, as soon as
reasonably possible, the City enter into an agreement (the
"Agreement ") with the School District for the transfer to the
City of the School Site containing, among other terms, terms
substantially-as follows:
1. The School District shall convey the School
Site to the City in fee simple absolute, free of all liens,
charges, encumbrances and easements whatsoever, except only
those which the City expressly . consents to in writing.
2/27/784
2. The School Site shall be so conveyed to the
City on August 1, 1984, or within sixty (60) days thereafter,
the exact date, within the above time restriction, to be
selected by the School District (said date is hereinafter
called the "Closing Date ").
3. The School District shall pay to the City for
the purpose of defraying the costs incurred and to be
incurred.. by the City in connection with the acquisition of
the School Site and /or any Work (as below defined) done on or
to the School Site:
(a) $25,000.00 at the time said Agreement is
signed;
(b) $100,000.00 on the earlier of (i) the lst day
of the 18th full calendar month after the
Closing Date, or (ii) the date the City awards
a contract for any Work on the School Site in
accordance with the Agreement. For purposes of
the Agreement, "Work" shall mean any remodel-
ing, refurbishing, restoration, repairing,
maintenance,- alteration, modification or
improvement of, or any demolition or removal
of, all or any part of the land, buildings or
improvements forming a part of the School
Site.
4. The School District shall have the right to
remove certain fixtures, items of equipment and personal
property from the building, or improvement, or portion
thereof. The fixtures and items to be so removed, and the
terms of removal, shall be agreed upon by the City and the
School District and specified in the Agreement.
5. The City, by separate instrument to be executed
by the City and the School District on the Closing Date,
shall grant to the School District the right, as prescribed
by the School District as a condition to the conveyance to
the City, to reacquire the School Site for operation and use
by the School District of a public school building for public
education purposes, at any time upon such notice as shall be
specified in the Agreement and without payment of any
consideration to the City in addition to that to be paid
pursuant to the Agreement. Reconveyance by the City shall be
by limited warranty deed, subject to (i) all encumbrances,
charges. and easements as exist against or on the School Site
as of the date of acquisition by the City, (ii) any unpaid
installments of special assessments against the School Site
as of the date of the limited warranty deed, (iii) the
restriction in favor of the City that the School Site shall
be used by the School District only for operation and use of
a public school building for public education purposes, and
(iv) such other encumbrances and easements as may be allowed
pursuant to the Agreement.
6. The School District and the City shall each pay
their own costs, including fees of their respective attor-
neys, incurred in connection with the Agreement and any such
reconveyance to the School District.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Mayor and Manager
are hereby authorized and directed to negotiate the terms of
the Agreement (provided the Agreement shall contain terms
substantially as set forth above), and to bring back to the
Council the Agreement once complete, and after acceptance of
the Agreement by the Council, the Mayor and Manager are
further authorized and directed to execute and deliver said
Agreement, and to negotiate, execute and deliver such other
documents as may be necessary to effectuate the Agreement and
the conveyance of the School Site to the City.
2/27/84
Motion for adoption of the resolution was seconded by Member Richards.
Rollcall:
Ayes: Bredesen, Richards, Turner, Courtney
Nays: Schmidt
Resolution adopted.
ORDINANCE NO. 711 -A3 (ABATEMENT OF REFUSE ACCUMULATION) ADOPTED; SECOND READING
WAIVED. As recommended by Mr. Rosland, Member Schmidt offered Ordinance No. 711 -A3
for adoption as follows, with waiver of Second Reading:
ORDINANCE NO. 711 -A3
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 711
PROVIDING FOR ABATEMENT OF REFUSE
ACCUMULATION BY THE PUBLIC HEALTH SANITARIAN
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDINA, MINNESOTA, ORDAINS:
Section 1. Section 8 of Ordinance No. 711 is hereby amended to read as
follows:
"Sec. 8. Abatement of Refuse Accumulation. Any accumulation of refuse on
any premises not stored in containers which comply with this Ordinance, or
any accumulation of refuse on any premises which has remained thereon for
more than one week is hereby declared to be a nuisance and shall be abated
by order of the City Public Health Sanitarian or the Deputy Public Health
Sanitarian, as provided by Minnesota Statutes, Sections 145.22 and 145.23,
and the cost of abatement may be assessed on the property where the
nuisance was found, as provided in said sections."
Sec. 2. This Ordinance shall be in full force and effect upon its passage
and publication.
Motion for adoption of the Ordinance with waiver of Second Reading was seconded by
Member Turner.
Rollcall:
Ayes: Bredesen, Richards, Schmidt, Turner, Courtney
Ordinance adopted.
CLAIMS PAID. Motion of:Member Schmidt was seconded by Member Turner for payment of
the following claims as per Pre -List dated 2- 27 -84: General Fund $487,482.27, Park
Fund $31,913.23, Art Center $3,911.99, Swimming Pool Fund $1,835.74, Golf Course
Fund $4,184.77, Recreation Center Fund $21,810.79, Gun Range Fund $301.19, Waterwork
Fund $28,914.51, Sewer Rental Fund $17,398.70, Liquor Dispensary Fund $119,665.85,
Construction Fund $360.00, IBR #2 $99,668.00, Total $817,447.04; for Confirmation
of payment of the following claims dated 1- 31 -84: General Fund $35,986.06, Park
Fund $1,971.13, Art Center $306.00, Golf Course Fund $22.84, Recreation Center
Fund $1,083.57, Waterwork Fund $836.57, Liquor Dispensary Fund $101,100.56,
Total $141,306.73; and for confirmation of payment of the following claims dated
1- 31 -84: Liquor Dispensary Fund $175,900.09.
There being no further business, the Mayor declared the meeting adjourned at 10:40 pm.
City Clerk
--T' 1
M E M O R A N D U M
DATE: March 5, 1984
TO: Kenneth Rosland, City Manager
FROM: Gordon Hughes, City Planner
SUBJECT, Zoning Ordinance
Attached are the following items:
1. Pages 1 -1 and 6 -1 . of the Ordinance which were revised to
add a phrase concerning flood plain and heritage preservation.
Page 18 -1 was revised to correct a typo.
2. Section 13 (PRD) and Section 14 (Mixed Development) which
have been revised in accordance with Council direction on
February 27. _ -
3. Findings, Decisions and Reasons concerning the Ordinance.
4. A Summary Publication of Ordinance which must be specifically
authorized by the Council. Also, enclosed is a draft resolution
for Council use in authorizing such a summary.
GHIlde
ORDINANCE NO. 825
AN ORDINANCE DIVIDING THE CITY OF EDINA INTO DISTRICTS
AND ESTABLISHING STANDARDS AND PROCEDURES REGULATING
THE USES, INTENSITY OF DEVELOPMENT, LOCATION,
ARRANGEMENT, SIZE AND HEIGHT OF BUILDINGS AND
STRUCTURES IN EACH DISTRICT, CREATING A BOARD OF
APPEALS AND ADJUSTMENTS, PROVIDING FOR HERITAGE
PRESERVATION, CONTROLLING THE USE OF AND DEVELOPMENT
IN FLOODPLAINS, PRESCRIBING A PENALTY, AND REPEALING
CITY ORDINANCES NO. 811 AND 816, FOR THE PURPOSE OF
PROMOTING THE HEALTH, SAFETY AND GENERAL WELFARE OF
THE RESIDENTS IN THE CITY.
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDINA, ORDAINS:
SECTION 1. FINDINGS, PURPOSE AND OBJECTIVES
The City Council of the City of Edina finds that Edina has emerged
from an era exemplified by unparalleled growth and development and has
entered a period of stability, reuse and redevelopment; that some of the
standards and regulations which guided initial development of the City
are not appropriate for guiding future development _.and, redevelopment; and
that standards and regulations for guiding future development and
redevelopment should be based upon the stated goals, objectives and
policies of the City of Edina Comprehensive Plan, as from time to time
amended, which constitutes the City of Edina's statement of philosophy
concerning the use of land within its jurisdiction. Through the
enactment of this ordinance, the City Council intends to implement this
statement of philosophy so as to provide for the orderly. and planned
development and redevelopment of lands and waters in Edina, to maintain
an attractive living and working environment in Edina, to preserve and
enhance the high quality residential character of Edina and to promote
the public health, safety and general welfare.
Specifically, this ordinance is intended to implement the following
objectives, some of which are contained in the Comprehensive Plan:
1. To maintain, protect and enhance single family detached
dwelling neighborhoods as the dominant land use.
2. To encourage orderly development of multi - family housing
that offers a wide range of housing choice, density and location
while maintaining the overall high quality of residential development.
3. To control the use, development and expansion of certain
non - residential uses in the single dwelling unit district in order to
reduce or eliminate undesirable impacts of such non - residential uses.
1 -1
SECTION 6. DISTRICT BOUNDARIES
The boundaries of all such districts except the Floodplain Overlay
District, shall be as shown in the official Zoning Map (consisting of
half section sheets) entitled "Official Zoning Map," on file in the City
Hall, a composite copy of which, reduced in size, is appended to this
ordinance. The Official Zoning Map, with all explanatory information
thereon, is hereby adopted by reference and declared to be a part of this
ordinance. The boundaries shown on the Official Zoning Map may be
changed by amendment to this ordinance. The Official Zoning Map shall be
on file in the office of the Planning Department and shall be open to
public inspection during normal business hours of the City. The
boundaries of the Floodplain Overlay District shall be as shown on the
Map described and identified in Section 21 hereof, as such Map is to be
interpreted and useas provided in said Section 21.
6 -1
SECTION 18. REGIONAL MEDICAL DISTRICT (RMD)
A. Principal Uses.
1. Hospitals.
2. Medical and dental offices and clinics.
3. Laboratories for performing medical or dental research,
diagnostic testing, analytical or clinical work, having a direct
relationship to the providing of health services, including, but not
limited to, medical research, radiology, hematology, serology,
immunology, allergy, biochemistry, basal metabolism, microbiology,
parasitology, pathology, histology, cytology, toxicology and
pharmacology. Laboratories engaged in the production or manufacture
of goods or products for commercial sale or distribution shall not be
considered laboratories within the meaning and intent of this
paragraph.
B. Accessory Uses.
1. Living quarters and recreational and educational facilities
for nurses, interns, staff members, hospital employees and volunteers,
provided that such uses are located within or are contiguous to the
principal building.
2. Off- street parking facilities for ambulances, service
trucks and automobiles owned by tenants, employees, patients and
visitors.
3. Within principal buildings having a gross floor area of
40,000 square feqt or more, ten percent of the floor area may be
occupied by retail uses allowed in the PC -1 and PC -2 subdistricts,
provided that the primary function of such uses is to serve the needs
of occupants of, and visitors to, the principal use.
4. Helistops for use by helicopters involved in emergency
rescue operations.
C. Requirements for Building Coverage, Setbacks and Height.
1. Floor area ratio.. 1.0.
2. Setbacks.
Interior
Front Side Side Rear
Street Street Yard Yard
351* 351* 201* 20'
or the building height if greater.
18 -1
SECTION 13. PLANNED RESIDENCE DISTRICT (PRD, PSR)
A. Subdistricts. The Planned Resident District shall be divided
into the following subdistricts:
PRD -1
PRD -2
PRD -3
PRD -4
PRD -5
PSR -3
PSR -4
B. Principal Uses.
1. PRD -1. Single dwelling unit buildings, double dwelling
unit buildings and residential townhouses.
2. PRD -2. Residential buildings containing six or fewer
dwelling units.
3. PRD -3 and PRD -4. All residential buildings and day care
facilities licensed by the State of Minnesota.
4. PRD -5. Rest homes, convalescent homes and nursing homes.
5. PSR -3 and PSR -4. Buildings containing four or more
dwelling units, all but one of which are senior citizen dwelling
units.
C. Accessory Uses.
1. PRD -1. All accessory uses allowed in the R -1 District.
2. All Other Subdistricts. All accessory uses allowed in the
R -2 District.
3. PRD -4, PRD -5 and PSR -4. Shops, restaurants and other
services primarily intended for the use and convenience of residents
of the principal use, provided that such accessory uses are
accessible only from the interior of the principal building, are
located only on the ground floor of the principal building, and have
no signs or display relative thereto visible from the outside of the
principal building. Not more than ten percent of the gross floor
area of a principal building shall be devoted to these accessory uses.
13 -1
D. Density.
1. Required Lot Area. The area of the tract shall not,be less
than the sum of the required lot area for each dwelling unit thereon,
adjusted by the allowances permitted or imposed by this paragraph:
Reg. Lot Area /Dwelling Unit
[Square Feet]
PRD -1 10,500
PRD -2 7,200
PRD -3 4,400
PRD -4 2,900
PRD -5
Maximum Allowance
[Square Feet /Dwelling Unit]
0
0
1,500
1,500
PSR -3 3,500 1,500
PSR -4 2,500 1,500
•• The principal building in subdistrict PRD -5 shall
not exceed a floor area ratio of 1.2.
2. Schedule of Allowances.
(a) PRD -3
(i) Subtract 500 square feet for each parking space
within or under the principal building or otherwise
completely underground. (No more than 1.5 spaces per
dwelling unit shall be counted for purposes hereof.)
(ii) Subtract 500 square feet for each dwelling unit
if all principal buildings conform to all specifications of
Type I or II construction as defined in the building code
then in force in the City.
(iii) Subtract 250 square feet for each dwelling unit
if at least a 500 foot spacing is maintained between each
principal and accessory building and the nearest lot line
of a lot in the R -1 District used for residential purposes.
(iv) Add 500 square feet for-each bedroom in excess of
two in any one dwelling unit.
(v) Subtract 250 square feet for each dwelling unit
if the tract is within 2,000 feet of an accessible freeway
interchange (nearest lot line to center of interchange).
13 -2
(b) PRD -4
(i) All allowances permitted by this paragraph for
PRD -3.
(ii) Subtract 250 square feet for each dwelling unit
if the tract is three acres or more in area.
(iii) Subtract 250 square feet for each dwelling unit
if total building coverage is less than ten percent.
(c) PSR -3 and PSR -4
(i) All allowances permitted by this paragraph for
PRD -4.
(ii) Subtract 1,000 square feet for each senior
citizen dwelling unit.
E. Requirements for Building Coverage; Setbacks; Height.
1. Maximum Building Coverage and'F.A.R.
Building
Maximum Coverage F.A.R.
PRD -1 25% --
PRD -2 I 25% --
PRD-3 30% --
PRD -4 30% --
PRD-5 35% 1.2
PSR -3 30% --
PSR-4 35% 1.2
2. Setbacks..
(a) Setbacks shall be measured from the boundary of the
tract. The required setbacks shall be increased to equal the
building height for those buildings whose height exceeds the
minimum setbacks required herein.
13 -3
(b) Minimum setbacks are as follows:
13 -4
Interior
Front Side Side
Rear
Street Street Yard
Yard
PRD -1
30' 30' 20'
25'
PRD -2
30' 30' 20'
35'
PRD -3
35' 35' 20'
35'
PRD -4, 5
35' 35' 35'
35'
PSR -3, 4
35' 35' 20'
35'
Accessory
Same as principal
buildings
building 10'
10'
3. Maximum Building Height.
PRD -1, 2
2 1/2 stories or 30 feet,
whichever is less
PRD -3
3 stories
PRD -4, 5
No maximum. Height is
determined by required
setbacks
PSR -3
3 stories
PSR -4
No maximum. Height is
determined by required
setbacks
F. Usable Lot Area.
Usable lot area in the amount specified
below
shall be provided on the tract.
This space must be easily accessible
by
residents of the principal
building. The front yard and
side yard
established by the required
front street or side street setback
and areas
occupied by driveways, parking
areas and buildings shall not be
included
as usable lot area. Areas
within the tract and dedicated by
the tract
owner to the general public shall be included in usable
lot area
computations.
13 -4
Square Feet Per
Dwelling Unit
PRD -1 2,000
PRD -2 1,500
PRD -3, 4
400
PSR -3
200
PSR -4
100
G. Special Requirements. In addition to the general requirements
described in section 7 of this ordinance, the following special
requirements shall apply:
1. Minimum Tract Area - PRD -1. 10 acres
2. Minimum Floor Area per Dwelling Unit.
PSR PRD (except PRD -5)
(sq. ft.) (sq. ft.)
Efficiency
1 Bedroom
2 Bedroom
Additional
Bedrooms
--
500
500 minimum
750
700 maximum
750 minimum
950
850 maximum
--
150 /each
For purposes hereof, floor area shall be the area within, and
measured from, the inside of exterior walls and from the center of
interior walls bounding the dwelling unit, but shall not include -
furnace rooms, utility rooms, storage areas not within the dwelling
unit, garages or any common areas which are used by residents of two
or more dwelling units, including stairways, entries, foyers,
balconies and porches.
3. Efficiency Dwelling Units. Efficiency dwelling units shall
be permitted only in subdistricts PRD -3 and PRD -4. Not more than ten
percent of the dwelling units per building shall be efficiency
dwelling units.
4. Maximum Number of Townhouses Per Building. Not more than
eight townhouses per building shall be allowed.
13 -5
5. Sewer and Water Connections for Townhouses. Each townhouse
shall be separately and independently connected to public sanitary
sewer mains and water mains.
6. Accessory Buildings. The exterior of accessory buildings
shall be constructed of the same material as the principal building.
7. Community Facilities in PSR -3 and PSR -4. Principal
buildings in subdistricts PSR -3 and PSR -4 shall provide recreational,
service and meeting facilities for the use and enjoyment of residents
and guests. Such facilities shall comprise not less than 1,250
square feet, or 15 square feet of floor area per senior citizen
dwelling unit, measured as provided for in paragraph G.2 of this
section, whichever is greater. Such facilities shall be indoor space •
and shall be conditioned for year round occupancy. Outdoor areas,
laundry facilities, storage areas, mechanical rooms, hallways,
foyers, offices or circulation space shall not be included to satisfy
this requirement.
8. Proximity to R -1 District (PRD -4, 5, and PSR -4). The
following minimum distance shall be provided between the closest
point of the principal building in the PRD -4, PRD -5 and PSR -4
subdistricts and the nearest lot line of an R -1 District used for
residential purposes. This requirement shall only apply to principal
buildings four stories or more in height. The minimum distance to an
R -1 District need not exceed 680 feet for buildings more than 100
feet in height.
13 -6
100
iuu 200 300 400 500
Minimum Distance to R -1 District (Feet)
13 -7
.m
700
SECTION 14. MIXED DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT (MDD)
A. Subdistricts. The Mixed Development District shall be divided
into the following subdistricts:
MD -3
1012M
MD -5
B. Principal Uses.
1. Buildings containing not fewer than ten dwelling units or
senior citizen dwelling units.
2. Publicly owned or operated civic or cultural institutions.
3. Publicly owned park and recreational facilities.
4. Offices, including business and professional offices,
medical and dental offices, post offices, travel agencies and travel
bureaus.
5. Financial institutions.
6. Publicly owned parking facilities.
7. Day care.
C. Accessory Uses.
1. Recreational facilities solely for the use and enjoyment of
residents of a residential principal use and their guests.
2. Customary home occupations.
3. Mass transit passenger waiting and pick -up facilities.
D. Conditional Uses.
1. Privately owned recreational facilities other than those
permitted in paragraph C.1 of this section.
2. Drive - through facilities.
3. All principal uses allowed in the PC -1 and PC -2 sub -
districts, except:
(a) animal hospitals and kennels;
14 -1
E.
(b) automotive accessory stores;
(c) clubs and lodge halls;
(d) exterminating offices;
(e) pawn shops; and
(f) undertaking and funeral home establishments.
Density.
1. Allowed Number of Dwelling Units.
(a) Required Lot Area. The area of the tract shall not be
less than the sum of the required lot area for each dwelling
unit thereon, adjusted by the allowances permitted or imposed by
this paragraph.
Required Lot Area /Dwelling Unit
(Square Feet)
MD -3 4,400
MD -4 3,600
MD -5 3,300
(b) Schedule of Allowances.
Maximum Allowance
Square Feet /Dwelling Unit)
1,000
1,000
1,500
_ (i) Subtract 500 square feet for each required
residential parking space within or under the principal
building or otherwise completely underground.
(ii) Add 500 square feet for each bedroom in excess of
two in any one dwelling unit.
(iii) Subtract 250 square feet for each dwelling unit
if total building coverage is less than 20 percent.
(Buildings devoted to public or private park, or an
accessory recreational facility, shall be excluded from
building coverage for purposes of this allowance.)
(iv) Subtract 400 square feet for each dwelling unit
if the Mixed Development District includes a publicly owned
park that is developed or programmed to be developed with
recreational facilities or other facilities for the use and
enjoyment of the general public.
14 -2
(v) Subtract 600 square feet for each dwelling unit
reserved for sale or rent to persons of low and moderate
income, as defined by, and pursuant to an agreement
approved by, the Housing and Redevelopment Authority of
Edina, Minnesota.
2. Allowed Non - Residential Floor Area.
(a) The gross floor area
exclusive of publicly owned or
recreational facilities, transit
to residential principal uses
allowance, plus the permitted ma,
below:
of all non - residential uses;
operated civic, cultural and
facilities and uses accessory
shall not exceed the basic
:imum allowance, all as set out
(i) Basic Allowance: 500 square feet of non -resi-
dential gross floor area per
allowed dwelling unit.
(ii) Maximum Allowance: 300 square feet of non -resi-
dential gross floor area per
allowed dwelling unit.
(b) Schedule of Allowances:
(i) Add 250 square feet of non - residential gross
floor area for each parking space required for the non-
residential use which is within or 'under the principal
building or otherwise completely underground.
(ii) The basic allowance may be increased by ten
percent if mass transit waiting and pick -up facilities are
provided within a principal building.
F. Requirements for Building Coverage, Setback and Height.
1. Maximum Building Coverage. 30 percent of the tract.
Publicly owned buildings or structures shall be excluded from
building coverage computations.
2. Maximum Floor Area Ratio of Non - Residential Uses. 0.5 of
the tract. Publicly owned buildings or structures shall be excluded
from floor area ratio computations.
3. Setbacks. Setbacks shall be measured from the boundary of
the tract:
14 -3
Interior
Front Side Side Rear
Street Yard Street Yard
MD -3 35' 20' 35' 35'
MD -4 35' 35' 35' 35'
MD -5 50' 50' 50' 50'
In subdistrict MD -5, the minimum building setback shall be increased
by 1/2 foot for each foot the building height exceeds 50 feet.
4. Maximum Building Height.
MD -3 3 stories
MD -4 4 stories
MD -5 No maximum; height determined
by required setbacks
5. Usable Lot Area. Usable lot area in the amount specified
below shall be provided on the tract. Publicly owned or operated
civic, cultural or recreational facilities located on the tract may
be counted as usable lot area. The front yard and side yard
established by the required front street or side street setback and
areas occupied by driveways, parking areas and garages shall not be
counted as usable lot area.
Square Feet Per
Dwelling Unit
MD -3 400
MD -4 400
MD -5 200
G. Special Requirements. In addition to the general requirements
described in section 7 of this ordinance, _the following special
requirements shall apply:
1. Minimum Tract Area. The minimum tract area for subdistrict
MD -5 shall be five acres.
2. Ownership or Control. The tract proposed for transfer to
the Mixed Development District shall be under common ownership and
shall be planned and developed as an integral unit.
14 -4
3. Proposed Development Schedule. The Final Development Plan
required by section 4 of this ordinance shall include a proposed
schedule of construction of the major components of the development
as such major components are determined by the Planner. The proposed
schedule as approved by the Council shall become part of the Final
Development Plana No more than 50 percent of the permitted gross
floor area of non - residential uses on the tract shall be constructed
until a building permit has been issued for, and construction
commenced on, at least 25 percent of the permitted dwelling units.
4. Conditional Uses. In addition to the standards imposed by
section 4 of this ordinance for grant of a conditional use permit, no
permit for any conditional uses in any Mixed Development District
shall be issued unless the proposed use:
(a) is contained within a principal �uilding, except for
drive - through facilities;
(b) will provide goods and services beneficial to the
needs of the occupants and residents of the principal uses and
surrounding properties; and
(c) will have enclosed pedestrian access to the principal
use.
5. Skyway Setbacks. In cases where pedestrian connections are
made across and above a street, the required setback for such
connections may be reduced to zero feet for a width of 120 feet.
14 -5
CITY OF EDINA
Findings, Decision and Reasons
In the, Matter of the Review and Adoption of a
Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance (Edina Ordinance No.
825) by the City of Edina.
The above entitled matter was heard before the City Council (the "Council ")
of the City of Edina (the "City ") on January 16, February 6, February 27
and March 5, 1984. The Council, having heard and reviewed all of the facts
and testimony, both oral and written, presented by City staff and affected
property owners, and having heard and reviewed the evidence and law adduced
by City staff and affected property owners, and being fully advised, after
due consideration, hereby makes the following
FINDINGS OF FACT:
A. General - History
1. The proposed comprehensive zoning ordinance (the "Ordinance ")
was drafted and offered for consideration by the City of Edina Planning
Department and the City Attorney.
.2. The Edina Community Development and Planning Commission (the
"Commission ") reviewed the draft Ordinance at public meetings conducted on
November 2, November 30 and December 28, 1983. After consideration of the
Ordinance, the Commission adopted a resolution reccrrmending that the
Council adopt the Ordinance.
3. On January 16, 1984, the Council conducted a public hearing
pursuant to notice given in accordance with Minnesota Statutes §462.357. A
notice of the date, time and place of said hearing was published in the
official newspaper of the City on January 4, 1984. The same notice was
mailed on January 6, 1984, to each owner of real property in the City of
Edina to the extent that the names and addresses of said owners could be
determined from the most recent tax roles of Hennepin County as maintained
by the Edina. City Assessor. A copy of the notice and a list of the owners
and addresses to which the notice was sent was attested to by the City
Clerk and made a part of the records relating to adoption of the Ordinance.
4. After hearing all testimony at the January 16, 1984 hearing,
the Council continued the hearing to the Council meeting of February 6,
1984, and on that occasion further continued the hearing to February 27,
1984, and on that occasion further continued the hearing to March 5, 1984.
At each of the aforementioned hearings, the Council invited and received
oral testimony from all wishing to speak. It likewise reviewed all written
comments received from persons interested in the Ordinance. Although City
staff received many telephone calls inquiring about the Ordinance, no
objections were received, oral or written, except frcm Harvey Hansen, Marsh
Everson and Wallace B. Kenneth, by his attorneys.
5. The Ordinance is an "official control" of the City, as defined
by Minnesota Statutes § §473.851- 473.872, the Metropolitan Land Use Planning
Act (the "Act "), and the Ordinance implements the City's Comprehensive Plan
as required by the Act.
6. The City's existing Comprehensive Plan (the "Plan ") was
approved by the Commission on December 30, 1980, at a public hearing, a
notice of the time, place and purpose of which was published in the
official newspaper of the City pursuant to Minnesota Statutes §462.355.
Prior to such publication, as required by Minnesota Statutes §462.355, the
proposed Plan was transmitted to the City Council.
7. The City Council approved the Plan for submission to the
Metropolitan Council for review pursuant to Minnesota Statutes §473.175 on
December 29, 1980. The Metropolitan Council reviewed and adopted the Plan
on October 8, 1981.
8. The Council adopted the Plan pursuant to Minnesota Statutes
§473.864 and §462.355, on December 21, 1981, at a public hearing, a notice
of the time, place and purpose of which was published in the official
newspaper of the City at least ten days prior to the day of the hearing.
9. The Plan contains, in part, the following objectives which are
incorporated in and intended to be implemented by the.Ordinance:
A. To maintain, protect and enhance single family
detached dwelling neighborhood as the dominant land
use.
B. To encourage orderly development of multi - family
housing that offers a wide range of housing choice,
density and location while maintaining the overall
high quality of residential development.
C. To control the use, development and expansion of
certain non = residential uses in the single dwelling
unit district in order to reduce or eliminate
undesirable impacts of such non - residential uses.
D. To encourage a more creative and imaginative
approach to the development of multi- family develop-
ments.
E. To provide an enjoyable living environment by
preserving existing topography, vegetation, streams,
water bodies and other natural land and water forms.
F. To encourage mixed use developments which (i)
Provide housing for persons of low and moderate
- 2 -
income; (ii) include recreational facilities and
Parks; (iii) harmoniously integrate residential and
non - residential uses; (iv) encourage the increased
use of crass transit; and (v) reduce employment-rela -
ted automobile trips.
G. To encourage orderly development, use and mainten-
ance of office, carmercial and industrial uses which
are compatible with the residential character of the
City.
H. To recognize and distinguish commercial districts at
the neighborhood level, the community level and the
regional level, so as to provide retail establish -
menu compatible in use and scale with surrounding
properties, especially those used for residential
purposes.
I. To establish requirements for parking and loading to
minimize impacts on public streets and surrounding
properties.
J. To establish standards for landscaping and screening
to contribute to the beauty of the community, add to
the urban forest and buffer inccmpatible uses from
one another.
K. To preserve buildings, lands, areas and districts
which possess historical or architectural signifi-
cance.
L. To protect surface and ground water supplies,
minimize the possibility of periodic flooding
resulting in loss of life and property, health and
safety hazards and related adverse effects.
M. To allow interim uses of closed public school
buildings.
B. Use of Planned Districts
1. The Ordinance proposes the use of a "planned" district
approach for the Planned Residence District, Mixed Development District,
Planned Office District, Planned Commercial District and Regional Medical
District. Such an approach requires the preparation and submission of
general and then specific (using a 2 -step method) plans and drawings for
approval by the Commission and Council in connection with'a petition for
rezoning.
2. Planned districts encourage a more creative and imaginative
approach to the development of the planned uses. Such districts provide a
- 3 -
more enjoyable living and working environment by encouraging the preser-
vation of vegetation, topography, streams, water bodies and other natural
land and water forms.
3. The use of planned districts promotes and improves public
participation in the zoning process by allowing the review of specific
developments plans and, thereby, permitting a more realistic evaluation of
the effect of a particular rezoning.
4. The use of planned districts permits the Commission and
Council to better understand the impact and result of a proposed rezoning
and to seek modifications of development plans as warranted to safeguard
the public interest.
5. The use of planned districts reduces the likelihood of
speculative rezonings hereby a property owner seeks a rezoning only in an
attempt to add value to property and not with the purpose of realizing a
specific development.
6. The City already employs the planned district method, and the
Ordinance will only expand that use so that all developments will be
similarly treated.
C. Use of Conditional Use Permits
1. The Ordinance proposes that certain uses previously permitted
by right in the R -1 District should now only be allowed in the R -1 District
subject to the grant of a Conditional Use Permit (the "Permit "). The
Ordinance requires the insurance of a Permit by the Council for most
non- residential uses in the R -1 District including churches, schools, civic
and cultural institutions and golf course club houses.
2. Owners of residential property in the R -1 District rely upon
protection afforded by the Ordinance fram the adverse effects of
non - residential uses. Non - residential uses customarily permitted in the R -1
District may cause such adverse effects.
3. Due to the fully developed nature of Edina, the growth and
expansion of non - residential uses in the R -1 District may result in the
intensification of such uses in close proximity to residential properties
or the conversion of residential properties to non - residential uses.
4. The Ordinance provides certain findings must be made by the
Council prior to the issuance of a Permit. The criteria contained in these
findings are designed to safeguard residential uses in the R -1 District
from potential adverse effects of non - residential uses.
5. The Ordinance also proposes Permits for some retail uses in
the Mixed Development District. This is to ensure that such uses will not
become dominant and will not adversely affect residents of the District.
- 4 -
6. The Ordinance provides that conditions and restrictions may be
imposed by the Council in connection with the grant of a Permit to protect
the public interest and adjacent properties.
D. Multiple Residential Densities
1. The Ordinance proposes to reduce the maximum densities in
multiple residential developments as compared to those permitted by the
previous ordinance. The Ordinance contains zoning districts permitting
residential densities ranging from four dwelling units per acre to 31
dwelling units per acre for conventional developments, and up to 43.5
dwelling units per acre for buildings designed for senior citizens.
2. The density ranges permitted by the Ordinance are similar,
with few exceptions, to the densities of multiple residential buildings
which now exist in the City, even though such existing developments could
have been developed, under the then zoning ordinance, with a greater
density. These density ranges also permit the constructionof new multiple
residential buildings which are similar in use and scale with existing
buildings in the same zoning district.
3. The proposed density ranges further the Plan's goal of
maintaining and protecting single family detached dwellings as the City's
dominant land use, and further the policies of the Council adopted in 1975
which, frcm that time, have guided rezonings for multiple residential uses.
4. Though some already developed multi- residential properties
have a density in excess of that allowed by the Ordinance, they will be
allowed to continue as non - conforming uses under the Ordinance.
E. Rezoning of Specific Properties
1. Two properties in the City are presently zoned C -3 Commercial
District. Both properties are proposed to be zoned POD, Planned Office
District, by the Ordinance. The first property is located in the northwest
quadrant of West 66th Street and Xerxes Avenue and is known as the Titus
Building. The second property is located west of France Avenue and south
of West 66th Street and is known as Southdale Office Center.In addition to
the published and mailed notice, City staff telephoned the owners or
representatives of the owners of both properties, advised them of the
proposed rezoning, - solicited their comments and invited their attendance
at the public hearings. No objections were received by City.
(a) Facts applicable to both the Titus Building and Southdale Office
Center properties:
(i) Both properties, though allowed to be developed
with carmercial uses, were developed with the
office buildings now existing on the properties;
(ii) the Plan proposes
France Avenue or
except for those
commercial uses;
- 5 -
no commercial uses west of
north of West 66th Street
areas already developed with
- properties north of West 77th Street and west of
Parklawn Avenue;
- properties described as 7550, 7600 and 7700 France
Avenue South.
In addition to the published and mailed notice, City staff telephoned the
owners or representatives of the owners of each of the properties, advised
them of the proposed rezoning, solicited their comments and invited their
attendance at the public hearings. No objections were received by City.
(a) All of the above properties though allowed to be
developed with industrial uses were developed with
the office buildings now existing on the proper-
ties.
(b) The Plan designates all of the above properties for
office uses rather than industrial uses.
(c) Sane of the properties more closely conform to the
requirements of the POD section than the PID
section of the Ordinance.
3. Three vacant properties in the City are presently zoned R -3
or R -4 Multiple Residence District, and are proposed to be rezoned by the
Ordinance. These properties include:
- the Kenneth property at Lincoln Drive and West 7th
Street is presently zoned R -4 and R -2 and is proposed
to be rezoned to PRD -3.
- the Hansen property at West 7th Street and County
Road 18 is presently zoned R -4 and R -3 and is
proposed to be rezoned to POD -1 and R -1.
- the Everson property west of Cahill Road and south of
West 70th Street is presently zoned R -3 and is
proposed to be rezoned to PRD -3.
(a) Facts Applicable to the Kenneth Property:
(i) The Kenneth property is composed of two lots
measuring 6.75 acres which are presently zoned
R -4. Adjoining this property are 20 lots which
are presently zoned R -2. The Ordinance proposes
to rezone the R -4 lots and the R -2 lots to PRD -3.
(ii) The rezoning of the R -4 lots to PRD -3 conforms
with the Plan's designation of the property as
Medium Density Residential.
- 7 -
(iii) the Plan designates both properties fdr Office
uses; and
(iv) both properties separate residential uses from
commercial uses.
(b) Additional facts applicable to the Titus Building:
(i) The Minnesota Supreme Court in Pearce v. Village
of Edina, 263 Minn. 553, 118 N.W.2d 659 (1962),
held that placing the Titus Building property in
an office district was discriminatory and
directed the Village (now City) of Edina to
allow use of this property for community store
purposes. Therefore, the property was placed in
what is now called the C -2 District.
(ii) The Court, in reaching its decision that office
zoning was discriminatory, emphasized these
facts: (a) the property was almost completely
surrounded by cain ercial properties and was "a
peninsula in the commercial area "; (b) the
underlying reason for the office zoning was to
prevent additional competition for the other
commercial properties in the area; and (c)
Edina's policy of not extending commercial use
north of West 66th Street had been abandoned by
establishment of a commercial zone north of West
66th Street (at that time the present Point of
France property was in a commercial zone).
(iii) In addition to the facts contained in subpara-
graph (ii) above, the following facts and
circumstances have changed since the Court's
decisian: (a) there are now no properties north
of West 66th Street zoned C -3 Commercial
District except this property; (b) properties on
both sides of this property are zoned, and will
remain zoned, for office uses, and are developed
with office uses; and (c) the properties north
of this property are used for residential
purposes and office uses provides a buffer
between such residential uses and the cammercial
areas south of West 66th Street.
2. Several properties in the City are presently zoned PID,
Planned Industrial District, and are proposed to be zoned POD, Planned
Office District, by the Ordinance. These properties include:
- properties south of West 77th Street and west of
Computer Avenue;
- 6 -
to PRD -3 conforms with the Plan's designation and
does not materially affect the use or density of
the property.
i) The property adjoins property on. the north, west
and south that is presently zoned PRD =3.
4. Numerous properties in the City are presently zoned Office.
Building District, Carmercial District and Multiple Residential District.
The Ordinance proposes to rezone all such properties to Planned Office
District, Planned Carmercial District and Planned Residential District, as
the case may be. The particular subdistrict to which each property is
zoned (e.g. POD -1, POD -2, etc.) depends upon the intensity of development
of the property. The intent of the Ordinance is to: (a) rezone to
subdistricts which conform to the Plan and (b) rezone to make such
properties as conforming as possible with the standards of the Ordinance.
F. Overlay Districts
1. The Ordinance contains two overlay districts, the Heritage
Preservation Overlay District and the Floodplain Overlay District.
2. The Heritage Preservation Overlay District is in the existing
City zoning ordinance and is only continued in the Ordinance without any
material changes.
3. The Floodplain Overlay District is now a separate ordinance,
Ordinance No. 816, and is brought into the Ordinance without material
changes, except addition of the annexed Blocmington land. It is made a
part of the Zoning Ordinance because it is Trost appropriately in the
Ordinance dealing, as it does, with land uses. Also, in the Ordinance, it
will allow easier and more uniform administration.
G. Amusement Devices
1. The Ordinance will allow two amusement devices in the PC -1
district, and unlimited amusement devices in the PC -2 and PC -3 districts.
2. PC -1 is a neighborhood retail district, PC -2 is commurdty-
wide carmercial, and PC -3 is regional in scope.
3. Presently, there are a large number of amusement devices in
properties which will be in the PC -2 and PC -3 districts under the
Ordinance, and very few properties which will be in the PC -1 district have
rrore than two amusement devices.
Therefore, based on the foregoing Findings, the Council does
hereby make the following
- 9 -
(iii) The rezoning of the R -2 property to PRD -3 permits
a more canprehensive approach to the overall
planning and development of the Kenneth property,
including possible clustering of development. at
the north end of the property and.the elimination
of the long cul -de -sac through the R -2 property.
(iv) The density allowed by PRD -3 is similar to that
developed on the property immediately north of
the property even though that property could have
been developed, under the then zoning ordinance,
with a greater density.
(v) The density allowed by PRD -3 is similar to that
of almost all other multi - residential properties `
developed in western Edina.
(b) Facts Applicable to the Hansen Property:
(i) That portion of the Hansen property lying west of
Lincoln Drive is proposed to be rezoned to POD -1.
That portion lying east of Lincoln Drive and
presently zoned R -3 is proposed to be rezoned to
R -1.
(ii) The property proposed for POD -1 rezoning is
presently zoned in part R -4, multi - residential
use, and in part 0-1, office use, and designated
by the Plan for Mixed Uses. Office uses are
considered to be a proper use for such areas.
This property is located directly across the
street from a similar property which is presently
zoned POD -1 and developed with office uses.
Office uses on this property provides a buffer
between the freeway interchange and multiple
residential uses to the south.
(iii) The property proposed for R -1 rezoning is
presently zoned R -3, multi - residential, and is
designated Low Density Attached Residential by
the Plan. This property adjoins property to the
south which is zoned R -1, and is-located across
the street from a public park which is zoned R -1.
(c) Facts Applicable to the Everson Property:
(i) The Everson property is proposed to be rezoned
fran R -3, multi- residential, to PRD -3.
(ii) The Everson property is designated by the Plan
for Medium Density Residential Uses. The rezoning
- 8 -
DECISION:
Edina Ordinance No. 825, the "Zoning Ordinance," including the
accompanying maps referred to therein, as attached hereto, are hereby
adopted as the zoning ordinance of the City.
The above Decision is made for the following
REASONS:
A. The Ordinance substantially conforms to and implements the
Plan which was duly adopted pursuant to the Act, which conformance and
implementation is required by the Act.
B. The use of planned districts as required by the Ordinance
provides an improved process for transferring land to another zoning
district which will result in a better living and working environment by
providing for review of specific development plans, will allow a more
realistic evaluation of the effect of a particular rezoning and a more
meaningful participation in the planning process by all affected parties,
will promote public participation in the planning process, will reduce
speculative rezonings and will expand to all zoning districts a planning
process now employed in most zoning districts in the City.
C. The use of conditional use permits for certain non- residen-
tial uses in the R -1 District is necessary and desirable to protect a
significant investment in the R -1 District while, at the same time,
allowing suitable uses under such conditions as may be necessary to
protect adjacent properties.
D. The ranges of multiple residential densities permitted by the
Ordinance (i) are consistent with the Plan, (ii) are reasonable and
similar to the densities of rrost multiple residential buildings heretofore
constructed in the City in the respective zoning districts, (iii) further
long standing policies of the Council to reduce densities, and (iv) will
allow multi - family housing offering a wide range of housing choice and
density.
E. The rezonings of specific properties are reasonable and
proper because:
1. The rezonings substantially conform to the Plan.
2. Those properties proposed to be rezoned to POD,
Planned Office District from either C -3 Cannercial
District or PID, Planned Industrial District, have
in fact been developed with office buildings and are
used for office purposes, and, therefore, are most
appropriately zoned POD. Also such uses are consis-
tent with surrounding uses and with the Plan. .
- 10 -
3. The Hansen property proposed to be rezoned to POD
f ran R -4 and 0-1 adjoins a property developed with
office uses, fronts on a highway interchange, and
will buffer residential properties to the south and
east.
4. The Hansen property to be rezoned R -1 from R -3
adjoins R -1 property and is across the street from a
public park iAhich is zoned R -1.
5. The Everson property proposed to be rezoned from R -3
to PFD -3 will not be materially affected by the
rezoning and adjoins similarly zoned property on the
north, west and south.
6. The Kenneth property proposed to be rezoned from R -4
to PFD -3 and from R -2 to PRD -3 will give a
development potential similar to that already
developed by Kenneth on property immediately north
of this property, and similar to that of other
multi- residential properties developed in Western
Edina; will allow better planning of the overall
site; and will allow clustering at the north end of
the site and shortening a long cul -de -sac.
F. The Ordinance provisions on amusement devices are reasonable
and proper because it is desirable to maintain the distinction between
PC -1 and the other corrmercial districts and because:
1. In PC -1 areas (up to two are allowed):
(a) small neighborhood - related retail uses are allowed,
closely linked physically to residential property;
(b) the retail uses are usually shall operations,
therefore likely to have less supervision and
potential for greater conflicts with neighborhood;
(c) many such devices are more likely to attract
unsupervised minors and lead to noise and nuisances
adverse to residences, and may destroy the shall
retail neighborhood atmosphere of PC -1;
(d) businesses are served by small parking areas and
streets, and therefore many such machines may lead
to congestion.
2. In PC -2 and PC -3 areas (unlimited number are allowed):
(a) community and regional shopping centers are allowed
which may have other forms of amusement such as
bowling alleys and pool halls. Therefore, amusement
devices fit with such other uses;
- 11
(b) there are usually larger operators which can
Provide adequate supervision of the amusement area;
(c) there is adequate parking and traffic distribution
via main roads which will avoid congestion;
(d) large numbers already exist and have not resulted
in any health, safety or welfare .problems;
(e) they are not in close physical proximity to
residential property and, therefore, there is less
potential for neighborhood conflicts.
- 12 -
(OFFICIAL PUBLICATION)
CITY OF EDINA
4801 W. 50TH STREET
EDINA, MN 55424
EDINA ORDINANCE NO. 825, THE ZONING ORDINANCE
SUMMARY PUBLICATION
On March 5, 1984, the City Council of the City of Edina, duly adopted Edina
Ordinance No. 825, the Zoning Ordinance, which is a comprehensive revision of
the City of Edina's existing zoning ordinance. The City Council has determined
that publication of the title of the ordinance and the following summary of the
ordinance will clearly inform the public of the intent and effect of the ordin-
ance and has directed that only the title, such summary and maps, together with
the following notice be published. Such publication and notice will fulfill all
legal requirements for ordinance publication. Notice: a printed copy of the
complete text of the ordinance is on file at the office of the Edina City Clerk
and the Edina Planning Department, 4801 W. 50th Street, and is available for
inspection by any person between 8:00 a.m. and 4:30 p.m. Monday through Friday.
EDINA ORDINANCE NO. 825
AN ORDINANCE DIVIDING THE CITY OF EDINA INTO DISTRICTS
AND ESTABLISHING STANDARDS AND PROCEDURES REGULATING THE
USES, INTENSITY OF DEVELOPMENT, LOCATION,. ARRANGEMENT,'
SIZE AND HEIGHT OF BUILDINGS AND STRUCTURES IN EACH
DISTRICT, CREATING A BOARD OF APPEALS AND ADJUSTMENTS,
PROVIDING FOR HERITAGE PRESERVATION, CONTROLLING THE
USE OF AND DEVELOPMENT IN FLOODPLAINS, PRESCRIBING A
PENALTY, AND REPEALING CITY ORDINANCES NO. 811 AND 816,
FOR THE PURPOSE OF PROMOTING HEALTH, SAFETY AND GENERAL
WELFARE OF THE RESIDENTS OF THE CITY.
Section 1. Findings, Purpose and Objectives. This section explains the pur-
pose of the ordinance and describes the goals and objectives of the City of Edina
Comprehensive Plan which the ordinance implements.
Sec. 2. Short Title. The short title of the ordinance is the "Zoning Ordinance."
Sec. 3. Rules of Construction; Interpretation; Severability; Definitions. This
section provides rules to be used in construing the meaning of the ordinance and
its legal interpretation. It also defines words and terms whose meanings must be
clearly understood in order to apply specific standards, restrictions, and require-
ments of the ordinance.
Sec. 4. Administration and Procedures. This section provides procedures con-
cerning variances and appeals, rezonings and conditional use permits, and the
transfer of properties to planned districts by this ordinance including notifi-
cation requirements, application or petition requirements, and procedures for
hearing and decision by the City . and the approval of specific development
plans. This section also provides requirements for fees and charges for appli-
cations or petitions and provides penalties and remedies for violations of the
ordinance.
Sec. 5. Districts. The ordinance divides the City into the following zoning
districts
Single Dwelling Unit District (R -1)
Double Dwelling Unit District (R -2)
Planned Residence Districts(PRD and PSR)
Mixed Development Districts(MDD)
Planned Office Districts(POD)
Planned Commercial Districts(PCD)
Planned Industrial District (PID)
Regional Medical District (RMD)
Automobile Parking District (APD)
Heritage Preservation Overlay District (HPD)
Floodplain Overlay District (FD)
Seca 6. District Boundaries. This section provides that boundaries of zoning
districts will be shown in the Official Zoning Map on file in the City Hall, a
composite copy of which, reduced in size, is appended to the ordinance. The
Official Zoning Map is adopted by reference and declared'to be a part of the
ordinance. The boundaries shown on the Official Zoning Map may be changed by
amendment to the ordinance. The Floodplain Overlay District is shown on the Official
Floodplain Zoning Map on file in the City Hall.
Sec. 7. General Requirements Applicable to All Districts. This section provides
requirements applicable in most cases to all zoning districts. This section incl-
udes requirements for trash storage, dwelling units in accessory buildings,
customary home occupations, fences, exceptions to setback requirements, drainage,
architectural control, building coverage exclusions and inclusions, lighting,
frontage of lots, tent, and trailer sales, platting requirement, drive - through
facilities, district limits, temporary buildings, outdoor storage, setbacks from
lakes and energy collection systems. This section also provides requirements
pertaining to non - conforming uses, buildings and lots and provides standards as
to their use, enlargements, and alterations thereto. _This section also provides
standards for the relocation of buildings and the construction of public utility
buildings and structures.
Sec. 8. Parking and Circulation. This section establishes the number
of parking spaces required for various uses. It also establishes location and
setback, and design standards for off - street parking areas. This section provides
requirements for the proper circulation of vehicles within parking areas, the
relationship of such parking and circulation areas to public streets, and the
review of traffic circulation plans by the City Engineer.
Sec. 9. Loading Facilities. This section provides requirements
for the quantity and design of loading facilities for various non - residential
uses.
Sec. 10. Landscaping and Screening. This section provides requirements for the
submission of landscaping plans in connection with the improvement of most proper-
ties except single dwelling unit and double dwelling unit lots. . The section
contains minimum standards as to the size and number of plant materials required
and prohibits certain species. The section also identifies uses which must be
screened from view from other uses, such as certain non - residential buildings and
parking areas. The section also prescribes standards to insure the effectiveness
of the screening.
Requirements for Specific Zoning Districts
The ordinance provides in Section 11 through Section 19 specific
taining to each zoning district. These sections provide allowed
accessory uses, conditional uses, interim uses, requirements for
dimensions, allowed density, requirements for building coverage,
height, and other special requirements.
Sec. 11. Single Dwelling Unit District (R -1).
Major Principal .Uses
Single dwelling unit buildings
Parks
Major Conditional Uses
Churches
Schools
Civic and Cultural Institutions
Golf Club Houses
Interim Uses
Certain schools and offices only in closed public
school buildings.
Major Lot Requirements
Single dwelling unit lot
Minimum area 9000 square feet
Minimum width 75 feet
Minimum depth 120 feet
requirements per -
Drincipal uses,
lot areas, and
setbacks, and
Major Requirements for Building Coverage, Setbacks and Height
Building Coverage 25%
Minimum Setbacks for Single Dwelling Units
Front 30
Side Street 15 or 30
Interior side 10
Rear 25
Minimum Setbacks for Conditional Uses
50 feet from all property lines
Height
Single dwelling units: 22 stories or 30 feet
All other buildings: 3 stories or 40 feet
4
Special Requirements
A method of computing setback requirements which are
affected by certain circumstances is provided.
An increased building coverage for lots less than
9000 square feet is provided.
Requirements as to decks, patios, and building dimensions
are described.
Sec. 12. Double Dwelling Unit District (R -2).
Principal Uses
Building containing two dwelling units
Minimum Lot Area
15,000 square feet
Minimum Lot Width
90 feet
Major Requirements for
Building Coverage:
Setbacks
Front 30
Side Street 15
Interior Side 10
Rear 35
Building, Covera e, Setbacks, and Height
25%
feet
or 30 feet
feet
feet
Special Requirements
A method of computing setback requirements which are affected by
certain circumstances is provided.
Requirements for subdivision of R -2 lots are provided.
Minimum building dimensions are provided.
Sec. 13. Planned Residential District (PRD, PSR)
Major Principal Uses
PRD -1 - Uses allowed in the R -1 District and townhouses
PRD -2 - Building with six or fewer units
PRD -3 and 4- All residential buildings
PRD -5 - Nursing Homes
PSR 3 -4 - Senior Citizen dwellings
Dens it
The ordinance provides base densities for each subdistrict
and provides a system of density allowances whereby the density of
a particular property may be increased.
5
Building Coverage, Setbacks, and Height
Building
Coverage
PRD -1,2
25%
PRD -3,4,
PSR -3
30%
PRD -5, PSR
-4
35%
Setbacks
Interior
Front
Side
Side
Rear
Street
Yard
Street
Yard
PRD -1
30'
20'
30'
25'
PRD -2
30'
20'
30'
35'
PRD -3
35'
20'
35'
35'
PRD -4, 5
35'
35'
35'
35'
PRO 3, 4
35'
20'
35'
35'
Height
PRD -1, 2 2Z stories or 30 feet, whichever is less
PRD -3 3 stories
PRD -4, 5 No maximum. Height is determined by required
setbacks.
PSR -3 3 stories
PSR -4 No maximum. Height is determined by required setbacks.
Usable Lot Area
A minimum amount of outdoor living space per dwelling unit
is required.
Special Requirements
Minimum sizes for dwelling units are provided.
Requirements for efficiency dwelling units, number of townhouses,
sewer and water connections, exterior treatment of accessory build-
ings, community facilities in PSR -3 and PSR -4, and minimum distances
from four story plus buildings to R -1 Districts are provided.
Sec. 14. Mixed Development District
Major Principal Uses
Buildings with 10 or more dwelling units
Offices
Civic and Cultural Institutions
Conditional Uses
Some accessory commerical uses
Density
The allowed residential density isl determined by increasing
an allowed base density by density allowances which are specified
by this section. The allowed non - residential density is determined
by the number of residential units permitted by this section.
A
Requirements for Building Coverage, Setback & Height
Building coverage: 30%
Floor area ration: 0.5
Setbacks
Heights
MD -3: 3 stories
MD -4: 4 stories
MD -5: No maximum; height determined by setbacks
Special Requirements
This section contains requirements pertaining to minimum tract
area, ownership of the tract, development schedules, conditional
uses, and skyways.
Sec. 15. Planned Office District (POD)
Major Principal Uses
Offices, banks, medical and dental clinics
Clubs, lodge halls
Athletic, health, and weight reduction facilities
Employment agencies and travel bureaus
Requirements for Building Coverage, Setbacks and Height
Building Coverage: 30%
Floor Area Ratio: 0.5
Interior
Front Side Side Rear
Street Street Yard Yard
35'* 35'* 20'* 20'*
*or the building height if greater
Height
POD -1: Four stories
POD -2: No maximum; height determined by setbacks
Interior
Front
Side
Side
Rear
Street
Yard
Street
Yard
MD -3 35'
20'
35'
35'
MD -4 35'
35'
35'
35'
MD -5 50'
50'
50'
50'
Heights
MD -3: 3 stories
MD -4: 4 stories
MD -5: No maximum; height determined by setbacks
Special Requirements
This section contains requirements pertaining to minimum tract
area, ownership of the tract, development schedules, conditional
uses, and skyways.
Sec. 15. Planned Office District (POD)
Major Principal Uses
Offices, banks, medical and dental clinics
Clubs, lodge halls
Athletic, health, and weight reduction facilities
Employment agencies and travel bureaus
Requirements for Building Coverage, Setbacks and Height
Building Coverage: 30%
Floor Area Ratio: 0.5
Interior
Front Side Side Rear
Street Street Yard Yard
35'* 35'* 20'* 20'*
*or the building height if greater
Height
POD -1: Four stories
POD -2: No maximum; height determined by setbacks
N
Sec. 16.
Special Requirements
This section provides requirements for determining increased
setbacks due to proximity to other zoning districts, proximity of
office buildings to the R -1 District, and building design and
construction including allowed building materials.
Planned Commercial District (PCD)
Major Principal Uses
Retailing
Offices
Retail services, including gas stations
Banks
Restaurants
Schools
Requirements for Building Coverage, Setbacks, and .Height
Floor Area Ratio
*or the building height if greater.
Height
PC -1 Two stories _
PC -2 Four stories
PC -3 No maximum; height is determined by setbacks
PC -4 One story
Spbcial Requirements
This section provides requirements for determining increased or
decreased setbacks due to various circumstances, proximity of commer-
cial buildings to the R -1 District, storage and product display re-
quirements, minimum building size, outdoor, trailer or tent sales,
building design and construction, performance standards for uses,
maximum business establishment size in PC -1, prohibition of drive in
uses, and standards for gas stations and car washes.
PC -1
1.0
PC -2
1.5
PC -3
0.5
PC -4
0.3
Setbacks
Interior
Front
Side
Sidod
Rear
Street
Street
Yard
Yard
PC -1
35'*
25'*
251*
25'*
PC -2
35'*
25'*
25'*
25'*
PC -3
50'*
50'*
50'*
50'*
PC -4:
Gas
stations35'
25'
25'
•25'
All
other uses 45'
25'
45'
25'
*or the building height if greater.
Height
PC -1 Two stories _
PC -2 Four stories
PC -3 No maximum; height is determined by setbacks
PC -4 One story
Spbcial Requirements
This section provides requirements for determining increased or
decreased setbacks due to various circumstances, proximity of commer-
cial buildings to the R -1 District, storage and product display re-
quirements, minimum building size, outdoor, trailer or tent sales,
building design and construction, performance standards for uses,
maximum business establishment size in PC -1, prohibition of drive in
uses, and standards for gas stations and car washes.
Sec. 17. Planned Industrial District (PID)
Major Principal Uses
Offices
Warehousing
Manufacturing
Scientific Research
Printing Shops
Business machine sales
Animal hospitals
Requirements for Building Coverage, Setback and Height
Tract Area: 10 acres
Lot Area: Two acres
Minimum Building Area: 10,000 sq. feet
Building Coverage: 30% - 45% Depending on lot area
Floor Area Ratio: 0.5
Setbacks
Interior
Front Side Side Rear
Street Street Yard Yard
50'* 50'* 20'* 20'*
* or the building height if greater.
Height: Four stories or 50 feet
Special Requirements ,
This section provides requirements as to increased setbacks
due to proximity to other zoning districts, temporary retail
sales, building design and construction including allowed building
materials, restrictions concerning noise, vibration, dust, smoke,
odor, glare and wastes, and standards for mini storage warehouses.
Sec. 18. Regional Medical District (RMD)
Major Principal Uses
Hospitals
Clinics
Laboratories
Requirements for Building Coverage, Setbacks and Height
Floor Area Ratio: 1
0
Setbacks Interior
Front Side Side Rear
Street Street Yard Yard
35'* 35'* 20'* 20'*
*or the building height if greater.
Height: No maximum; height determined by setbacks
Minimum tract area: 10 acres
Special Requirements
This secion provides that all uses in the RMD shall comply with
the requirements of the POD and the standards for residual features
of the PID.
Sec. 19. Automobile Parking District
Principal Uses
Parking lots
Parking ramps and garages
Drive through banks
Setbacks
Parking Lots.
Interior
Front Side Side Rear
Street Street Yard Yard
20' 20' 10' 10'
Parking Ramps, Garages and Other Structures.
Interior
Front Side Side Rear
Street Street Yard Yard
35'* 351* 20'* 20'*
*or the building height if greater.
Special Requirements
This section provides for increased setbacks due to
proximity to other zoning districts.
10.
Sec. 20. Heritage Preservation Overlay District (HPD). This section provides
for a zoning district to protect buildings and land with historical or architectural
significance. This district is an overlay district and does not change the basic
zoning of the property.- This section provides a procedure for establishing an HPD.
It also provides a permit requirement prior to undertaking work such as remodeling,
moving or destroying a building in the HPD. A procedure is also provided for
applying for and issuing such permits. The section provides for the authority of
the Building Official to order repairs to building in the HPD and a process for
hearing appeals from such orders. A penalty for disregarding such orders is also
provided.
Sec. 21. Floodplain Overlay District
district to protect floodplains located
in such floodplains. This district is
the basic zoning of the property. This
pertaining to floodplain management. A
identify the location of floodplains in
FD). This section provides for a zoning
in the City and to regulate developments
in overlay district and does not change
section defines a number of technical terms
floodplain zoning map and profiles which
the City are included in the ordinance.
This section provides a process for applying for and issuing permits for the develop-
ment of floodplain lands.. Standards and conditions for the issuance of such per-
mits are provided including the dedication of land along creeks, the effect of
development on flood elevations, right of passage, adverse effects on natural
resources, limits on filling restrictions on sewage systems, and review by the
Watershed Districts. The section also requires minimum elevation for new struc-
tures in the F.D. and regulates the subdivision of F.D. properties.
This section provides for the administration of the section, describes the type of
information necessary for permit application, and provides a variance procedure.
Provisions for nonconforming buildings or structures are also included.
Sec. 22. Repealer. City Ordinance No. 811 and No. 816 are hereby repealed
in their entirety effective as of the date this ordinance becomes effective.
Sec. 23. Effective Date; Publication. This ordinance is effective upon publi-
cation of this summary. A copy of this ordinance with maps is posted at the
Edina Community Library, 4701 W. 50th Street, Edina, MN.
ATTEST:
erk
CITY OF EDINA
By
Mayor
Please send two (2) affidavits of publication.
Please publish in Edina Sun Wed.. March 7, 1984.
PROPOSED RESOLUTION
[To approve of a summary of the Zoning Ordinance, to direct
publication of only.the title and the summary, and to direct
publication in book or pamphlet form.]
[NOTE: 1. Must be adopted by four favorable votes.
2. To be adopted after adoption of Ordinance No. 825,
the new zoning ordinance]
Be it resolved that the Council does hereby approve the summary
of Ordinance No. 825 attached to these minutes and this resolution
as an Exhibit, and hereby made a part hereof, and does hereby determine
that said summary clearly informs the public of the intent and effect
of Ordinance No. 825;
Be it further resolved that the Clerk is hereby directed
to publish only the title of Ordinance No. 825, and the summary of
it attached hereto as an Exhibit, together with the accompanying maps
and together with a notice that a printed copy of the ordinance is
available for inspection by any person during regular office hours
at the office of the Clerk and the office of the Planner in the City
Hall; and also is hereby directed to post the entire text of the ordinance,
with acccmpanying maps, in the Edina Community Library at 4701 West
50th Street, Edina, Minnesota 55424; and
Be it further resolved, that the Clerk is directed after
publication of the title, summary, maps and notice as above directed,
to publish the full text of the ordinance, certified by the Mayor and
Clerk, and bearing the City seal, together with acccmpanying maps,
in book or pamphlet form for public circulation.
ADOPTED this _ day of , 1984.
■wa
RY j
0 _L
RY
HOOL
r-_-
f'
Aio Sue F.
F
- tf.
RIDGE a4p� �.: PARK..
_
?-7- o
. T
a w r—DI
Y w Q
Q W
O �
2
YLE CIR a
_ x
I
SENT
II i
CL'N T YSI OE R
I '
.I I
Ir I
wELOC -�
u
2ov Si
M,E
bU T u 1
LOT D
NUMBER LD -84 -3
L O C A T 10 N Lots 2 and 3, Block 1, Warden Acres Peterson Replat
EDINA PLANNING DEPARTMENT
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT AND PLANNING COMMISSION
STAFF REPORT
FEBRUARY 29, 1984
LD -84 -3
Lots 2 and
3, Block
1, Warden Acres
Peterson Replat
Generally
-Located:
South of
Grove Street and
west of Garden Avenue.
Refer to: Attached graphic
The subject parcels are two vacant lots in the recent Peterson Replat
of Warden Acres. The request is for a 14 foot lot line adjustment between
Lots 2 and 3 of Block 1. The frontage of Lot 2 would be reduced from 91 feet
to 77 feet, and Lot 3 would be increased from 82 feet to 96 feet of frontage.
The proponent has requested the division to allow more freedom in siting a
dwelling on Lot 3, since a front yard setback of 30 feet will be required from
both Garden Avenue and Oak Lane.
Recommendation
Staff recommends, approval. Since Lot 3 is, or will be, a corner lot,
it should be the larger lot. Both lots continue to meet all Ordinance standards
and remain of comparable size with surrounding lots.
PARCEL A
A-zres Peterson Replat except the South
14.00 fyet L:;c-rQaj.
PARCEL 6
LJC 3, 6!Jck i, Warcon Acres Peterson Replat, and the South 1e,.0
o
0 t t uc'. Ac r -'zi Peterson i((.-:) 1 a t
i
I O rG/
li
OAK LANE
lu
-�z
LU
oc
LOT'
PP(ZOT TTTTONT
WHEREAS, the following described tracts of land are now separate parcels:
Lot 2 and Lot 3, Block 1, Warden Acres Peterson Replat; and
WHEREAS, the owners of the above tracts of.land desire to subdivide said tracts
into the following described new and separate parcels (herein called "Parcels "):
Lot 2, Block 1, Warden Acres Peterson Replat except the South 14.00 feet
thereof, and
Lot 3, Block 1, Warden Acres Peterson Replat, and the South 14.00 feet
of Lot 2, Block 1, Warden Acres Peterson Replat; 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.
ADOPTED this 5th day of March, 1984.
STATE OF MINNESOTA )
COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) SS
CITY OF EDINA )
CERTIFICATE OF CITY CLERK
I, the undersigned duly appointed and acting City Clerk for the City of Edina,
do hereby certify that the attached and foregoing Resolution was duly adopted
by the Edina City Council at its Regular Meeting of March 5, 1984, and as
recorded in the Minutes of said Regular Meeting.
WITNESS my hand and seal of said City this-6th-day of March, 1984.
Citv Clerk
REQUEST FOR PURMA SE
T0: Mayor and City Council
FROM: Francis J. Hoffman, Director of Public Works
,IA: Kenneth Rosland, City Manager
SUBJECT: REQUEST FOR PURCHASE OF ITE(rl IN .EXCESS OF $5,000
DATE: February 29, 1984
Material Description (General Specifications):
Cleaning & Painting Interior of Edina Water Tower at 5901 Ruth Drive
Exterior Painting on Welded area of Riser Pipe
Quotations /Bids:
Company
1. See attached Tabulation
Amount of Quote or aid
Note: We are recommending the second low bidder as the low bidder indicates that he
misunderstood the specifications and.did not bid appropriately for the project.
Department Recomendation: Odland,Protective Coating $14,750.00
Finance Director's Endorsement:
The recommended bid is is not
Public Works. - Utilities
ignatur Department
within the amount budget for the purchase.
. ri, uaien, rinance Director
a
City anaaer's Endorsement:
1. I h
concur with the reconynendation of the Department and recommend Council approve
the purchase.
2. I recommend as an alternative:
TABULATION OF BIDS
CITY OF EDINA, MINNESOTA
CONTRACT #84 -1 (ENG)
CLEANING, SCALING, INSPECTING, PAINTING AND STERILIZATION
OF THE
ELLIPSOIDAL WATER TANK (500,000 GALLONS)
AT SCHOOL ROAD AND RUTH DRIVE - 5901 RUTH DRIVE
BID OPENING - FEBRUARY 29, 1984 - 11:00 A.M.
BIDDER
EXTERIOR
INTERIOR
TOTAL
*Ford Tank Painting
$3,000.00
$3,485.00
$6,485.00
* *Odland Protective Coating
$500.00
$14,250.00
$14,750.00
Dairyland Improvement Co., Inc.
$800.00
$14,500.00
$15,300.00
_ aegis Ltd., Inc.
$1,500.00
$16,500.00
$18,000.00
Graham Contracting Company
$3,000.00
$16,400.00
$19,400.00
Larson Tank
$2,450.00
$22,000.00
$24,450.00
* Apparent Low Bidder
** Recommended Bidder
ENGINEER'S ESTIMATE
$3,200.00
$22,500.00
$25,700.00
REQUEST FOR PURC;1ASE
TO: Mayor and City Council
FROM: Francis J. Hoffman, Director of Public Works
VIA: Kenneth Rosland, City Manager
SUBJECT: REQUEST FOR PURCHASE OF ITEM IN EXCESS OF $5,000
DATE: February 29, 1983
Material Description (General Specifications):
Traffic Paint, White (350 gallons) and Yellow (550 gallons)
Quotations /Bids:
Company
1. Diamond Vogel Paint & Wax
2. Sherwin Williams Warehouse
3. Vogel Paint Center
Amourit of Quote or Bid
$5486.50
$6,291.00
$7,108.50
Department Recommendation: Diamond Vogel Paint & Wax $5,486.50
Public Works - Street
Signat . J Department
Finance Director's Endorsement:
The recomnended bid is t/ is not
within the amount budget for the purchase.
J. N. Dalen. Finance DirPrtnr
City Manager's Endorsement:
!ice 1. I concur with the reconrnendation of the Department and recommend Council approve
the purchase.
2. I recommend as an alternative:
Kennet
REQUEST FOR PURCNASE
TO:
Mayor
and City
Council
FROM:
Craig
Swanson,
Chief of-Police
IA: Kenneth Rosland, City Manager
SUBJECT: REQUEST FOR PURCHASE OF ITEM IN EXCESS OF $5,000
DATE: March 2, 1984
Material Description (General Specifications):
(1) S -10 Pick -up Truck
Quotations /Bids:
Company
1. Polar Chevrolet
2. Nelson - Lenzen Chevrolet
x 3. Suburban Chevrolet
Department Recommendation:
Amount of Quote or Bid
$7,910.00
8,343.00
8,393.00
Polar Chevrolet
Signature T Department
Finance Director's Endorsement:
The recommended bid is "// is not within the amount budget for the purchase.
. ri. uaien, ri.nance Direc
City Manager's Endorsement: V
z. I concur with the recommendation of the Department and recommend Council approve
the purchase.
9 . I recommend as an alternative:
FT
HENNEPIN
LFU
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
320 Washington Av. South _ �!
Hopkins, Minnesota 55343` = =`P
�1'NEy0:
935 -3381
Mr. Francis J. Hoffman, P.E.
Director of Public Works and City Engineer
City of Edina
4801 W. 50th Street
Edina, MN. 55424
Re: Traffic Signal Warrants Studies on
CSAH 158 at Tracy Ave. and at Blake Road
Dear Fran
February 14, 1984
As requested in a City Council Resolution dated October 17, 1983 our
department has conducted traffic studies at the intersection of CSAH 158
(Vernon Ave.) with Tracy Ave. and Blake Road.
The traffic studies consisted of 1) obtaining a 16 hour full turning
movement count at each location between the hour of 6:00 AM and 10:00 PM on
typical weekdays, and, 2) analyzing the accident record at both
intersections. Copies of all studies are enclosed.
The results of the studies are as follows:
CSAH 158 at Tracy Ave - Existing traffic volumes exceed the warranting
levels for eight and one -half hours of a typical weekday thereby
establishing justification for traffic signal installation. Accidents do
not appear to be a pressing problem at this location since only eleven
occurred during the three year period of 1980 -82. This yielded a relatively
low rate of 0.83 accidents per million entering vehicles (Ace /MV).
CSAH 158 at Blake Road - Accident analysis identified five collisions in
1982 that were susceptible to correction by a traffic signal. This allows
the application of a 20% reduction in traffic volume warranting
requirements. By applying this reduction exactly eight hours of volumes
exceeding the warrant is obtained. A traffic signal warrant is, thus,
established.
Technically both locations have shown the traffic characteristics necessary
to justify traffic signal installation. However, exceeding the warrants
does not mandate signal installation. Other considerations such as
community and neighborhood opinion, compatibility of a signal with the
I
surrounding area (aesthetically), a signal s overall ability to more
adequately control traffic and the cost of the devices should also be
evaluated in arriving at a firm recommendation.
HENNEPIN COUNTY
an equal opportunity employer
It is our opinion that perhaps traffic signals at these locations would be
premature. This opinion is based on observations of traffic movements at
the two sites and the predominence of right turn movements from the side
streets into the mainline. Both intersections appear to be operating quite
efficiently with no major delays nor extraordinary hazards to traffic.
However, the county's main concern of meeting traffic signal warrants has
been satisfied and we leave the final decision of installation in both cases
to the city.
Please let us know that decision so that we may plan appropriately.
Sincerely
Dennis L. Hansen, P.E.
County Traffic Engineer
DLH /eal
cc: H. 0. Klossner
W. A. Matsumoto
'+
M E M O R A N D U M
DATE: February 17,• =1984
TO: Kenneth Rosland r
FROM: David A. Velde ,�l:A
SUBJECT: Hennepin County Legislative Proposals
The Community Health Service Act of 1976 was introduced to help
decentralize the delivery of Public Health Services in Minnesota.
As an incentive to attain this goal, the Act provided subsidy
funding from the Minnesota Department of Health to local health
agencies for the delivery of Health Services.
This Act focuses on counties in the State, however, in Hennepin
County cities can participate also. The proposal by Hennepin County
will remove the option for cities, thereby paving the way for
consolidation of Health Services by the County.
Evidently, the County is under the impression that the service system
is fragmented and by consolidating, they can improve the coordination
and delivery of services.
What this would mean to Edina is the following:
* All licensing and inspection of Edina facilities would transfer
to the County.
* Personnel presently employed by the City could be hired by
Hennepin County, but this would not be mandatory.
* The County would not respond to nuisance complaints, housing
complaints or other miscellaneous complaints not handled by other
City Departments.
* Public Health Nursing Services would be delivered by Hennepin County.
* Tri City Laboratory may cease operation.
* Hennepin County taxes should, in theory, rise to offset added costs.
If this proposal is adopted by the State Legislature, it would certainly make
our position somewhat tenuous in delivering Public Health Services to Edina.
DAV /Ide
9. Community H_eALth_5_erY1_cje5.. Hennepin County participates In the Community
Health Services Act (CHSA), M.S. 145.911- 145.922, providing a full range of
community health services including emergency medical services, health education,
disease prevention and control, nutritional services, dental public health,
community nursing, and environmental health services. In addition, four
municipalities within the County -- Bloomington, Edina, Minneapolis and Richfield
-- operate their own direct share community health departments under the CHSA and
receive State Community Health Service subsidy funds. Although these programs
have been coordinated fairly successfully within the County, problems do exist:
An important one among these includes the statutory provision permitting a Board
of Health organized under M.S. 145.913 to cease to function; under such
circumstances, it further requires that the County assume a city's
responsibilities while extending absolute protections to employees of its Board of
Health.
In a related problem. the existing CHSA enables any municipality within the County
to develop a community health program and become eligible for State subsidies at
any time. While such an opportunity was appropriate when community health
services began, the potential for fragmentation and disruption of existing and
developing service delivery systems requires the sunset of this option at some
.point in time.
The Legislature has funded the CHSA formula with the apparent expectation that the
Minnesota Department of Health would add available funds to ensure adequate
subsidy to meet the formula allocation requirements. This has not occurred,
resulting in Department of Health reductions to county. subsidies. In addition,
the instability and unrellability created by the current funding and formula
practices results-in counties frequently not knowing what their funding will be
until well after county budget processes are underway or even completed.
The fiscal problems created by the Act are compounded for Hennepin County due to
the inconsistency between the Statewide subsidy formula for counties and the
separate funding provisions /formula to direct share cities eligible for State
subsidy. Legislative funding of community health services, the Statewide CHS
formula applying to counties and the formula allocation of subsidy funds to cities
in a county with a population greater than 300,000 need to be re- examined and
revised.
Another key issue pertains to provision of basic services and their funding.
Every local-Board of Health is not expected to provide every service that Hennepin
County does nor In the same manner as Hennepin does. However, we are concerned
that In some counties the Minnesota Department of Health continues to provide some
of the basic Community Health Services while the local board of health continues
to receive CHS subsidy based on the same formula by which Hennepin and other
full - service providers are allocated their CHS subsidy. A situation results where
counties who provide basic service also subsidize and support, through State
taxes, services in counties where the Minnesota Department of Health continues to
be obligated to provide direct services.
_1z_
ore, the Hennepin County Board of Commissioners recommends that:
j Ean rni 4}�J
1. M.S. 145.913 be amended to make negotiable the issue of the county
providing absolute employee protection for a local board.of health Whose
responsibilities are transferred and assumed by the county.
j 2. The Legislature direct the Minnesota Department of Health, in conjunction
with counties and interested groups to develop and establish minimum or basic
services which are to be provided or made available through a county community
health agency.
"3. Funding to a county for community health services be reduced if basic
services are not provided or are provided by the Minnesota Department of Health.
4. M.S. 145.917, Subd. 2 and M.S. 145.921, Subd. 2 relating to CHSA subsidy
F�1� n titlement and allocation to counties and cities within a county of 300,000 or
more persons be amended to provide appropriateness and consistency in funding
' allocation methods. The Legislature should ensure the appropriation of sufficient
funds to meet formula subsidy requirements.
5. The CHSA be amended to hold a county harmless for expenditures of a city
eligible for subsidy entitlement pursuant to M.S. 145.917, Subd. 2.
6. M.S. 145.913, Subd. 2 be amended to establish a reasonable date after
which a city within a county with a population of 300,000 or more persons would
�v relinquish its authority to establish a board of health pursuant to M.S. 145.913,
Subd. 2, to the county board of health.
G1;.i3t� ��rarac�pbra;
60MGu4�J
RESOLUTION N0. 83 -12 -920
The following; resolution was offered by Commissioners Spartz
and Kremer, Co- Chairs, Intergovernmental Committee
BE IT RESOLVED, that the Hennepin County Board of Commissionhrs
support the principle of amending the Community Health Services Act
to achieve a more equitable distribution of funding and recommends
that the 1984 Minnesota Legislature adopt legislation based on the
County's community health services principle which is on file with
the Clerk of the County Board.
The question was on the adoption of the resolution and there were
seven YEAS and no NAYS as follows:
COUNTY OF HENNEPIN
BOARD OF COUNTY CO;`[ISSIONERS
YEA NAY OTHER
Jeff Spartz
X
Randy Johnson
X
Richard E. Kremer
X
E. F. Robb, Jr.
X
Sam S. Sivanich
X
Mark Andrew
X
John E. Derus, Chairman
X
RESOLUTION ADOPTED.
ATTEST:
CleC7the Cou ty Board
0
�3
MEMO R A N D U M
TO: MAYOR & COUNCIL
FROM: KENNETH ROSLAND, CITY MANAGER
SUBJECT: 49'ers CONTRACT
DATE: MARCH 2, 1984
I have received notice from the MAMA Committee authorized to negotiate with
Local 49 of the International Union of Operating Engineers that an
agreement has been reached for Master Contract Language in 1984 -1985.
In summary, the basic elements are:
1. Wage increase of 5 percent.
2. Insurance of $20.00 in 1984 and $10.00 in 1985.
3. Establishment of a new work classification, called
Maintenance Man I, this is a laborer classification paid
at a rate of $7.76. This can be used at the option of
the City. Previous classifications were light equip -
ment operator, (now Maintenance II) and Heavy Equipment
Operator .(now Maintenance III).
4. Local issues opened in 1985.
The aforementioned items are within approved budget, and I would recommend
approval of the acceptance of this agreement.
City Manager
KER: jkm
0
RESOLUTION NO.
CITY OF
COUNTY OF
STATE OF MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION RECOMMENDING THAT THE STATE OF MINNESOTA LOCAL
GOVERNMENT AID FORMULA BE FROZEN FOR FISCAL YEAR 1985
WHEREAS, the local government aid formula does not
distribute aid in a systematic way that is fair because
of continual piecemeal modifications; and
WHEREAS, the local government aid formula was changed
in 1983 to affect the 1984 fiscal year because of inequities
in the distribution to cities; and
WHEREAS, the 1983 changes in the local government aid
formula has caused an even more unfair distribution to
cities; and
WHEREAS, allowing the formula to continue would cause
another unfair change in the redistribution for fiscal
year 1985;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that:
1. The State of Minnesota should freeze the
formula affecting fiscal year 1985 so that
the formula does not again redistribute
aid even more inequitably.
2. The State of Minnesota review and change
the local government aid formula to be
equitable for the 1986 fiscal year.
Adopted this
ATTEST:
(CFAT,)
day of
Mayor
1984.
CITY OF EDINA
COUNTY OF HENNEPIN
STATE OF MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION RECOMMENDING THAT THE STATE OF MINNESOTA LOCAL
GOVERNMENT AID FORMULA BE FROZEN FOR FISCAL YEAR 1985
WHEREAS, the local government aid formula does not distribute aid in a
systematic way that is fair because of continual..piecemeal modifications;
and
WHEREAS, the local government aid formula was changed in 1983 to affect
the 1984 fiscal year because of inequities in the distribution to cities;
and
WHEREAS, the 1983 changes in the local government aid formula has caused
an even more unfair distribution to cities; and
WHEREAS, allowing the formula to continue would cause another unfair change
in the redistribution for fiscal year 1985;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that:
1) The State of Minnesota should freeze the formula affecting fiscal
year 1985 so that the formula does not again redistribute aid even
more inequitably.
2) The State of Minnesota review and change the local government aid
formula to be equitable for the 1986 fiscal year.
ADOPTED this 5th day of March, 1984.
ATTEST:
City Clerk
Mayor
Dear Mr. Lurie:
• As you know the Hennepin County Community Health Services Advisory Committee's
Subcommittee on Public Health Nursing recently reviewed the MVNA's proposal for Public
Health Nursing Services in the 42 nondirect share municipalities for 1984. Based on
the subcommittee's work I would like to meet with you to discuss the following areas:
1. The rationale for the 30% increase in the cost of a health promotion visit
in 1984.
2. The actual number of home care of the ill patients served and visits pro-
vided through CHS dunds in 1983 & 1984.
3. The possibility of funding hourly home health aide /homemaker services in
the area of home care of the ill.
4. Potential priorities for reducing service if the CHS funding is inadequate
to meet the demand in 1984.
5. Potential sites for a satellite office
6. The geographic distribution of home care of the ill services.
After you have reviewed these areas please call me at 348 -4464 to schedule
a meeting.
Sincerely,
SUMMARY MINUTES
CHS ADVISORY COMMITTEE'S SUBCOMMITTEE ON PUBLIC
HEALTH NURSING
October 4, 1983
MEMBERS PRESENT: David Lurie, Kathleen Manahan, Norris Olson, Donna Roehl
STAFF PRESENT: Todd Monson
I. Minutes of the Subcommittee's August 17, 1983 meeting were approved as distributed.
II. Review of MVNA'S Proposal
A. Home Health Care
1. The cost per visit will increase 13% from 1983 to 1984 because of
inflation, the loss of volume of other reimbursable visit's and
underestimates on the cost per visit in 1983 (it's actually about
$49 this year).
2. The number of patients receiving CHS funded visits will probably be
the same in 1984; the number of visits in the MVNA proposal reflects
the number of equivalent visits fully paid by CHS funds, in actuality,
some visits are only partially funded through CHS; more data is
needed to know definitively the answer-.to this issue.
3. The total amount of CHS funds to be expended for home health will
be $10,000 less than in 1983.
4. The role of CHS funds in providing long term care should be clarified
two new programs= nursing home pre- admission screening and Medicare
care funded hospice care may serve some of the same people that MVNA
may serve; perhaps some CHS funds could be used to supply homemaker/
home health aide services as a way to more appropriately meet the
long term care needs of patients in the most economical manner.
S. The loss of volume in business is seriously affecting MVNA, limit
ing much of its service to patients from the Hennepin County Medical
Center (HCMC); the MVNA is determined to keep its public health focus
which puts it at the disadvantage of getting referrals primarily for
patients without adequate third party reimbursement.
6. With the reduction in volume, the MVNA is reducing its number of full
service office sites to two; the MVNA is interested in establishing
additional satellite offices with a phone, a chair, a desk, etc. to
help maintain its services in the general geographic areas.
7. The outcome criteria that MVNA is implementing is more than adequate.
B. Health Promotion Services
1. The cost per visit of a nurse visit would increase 30% to $40 /visit
in 1984 and the amount of the contract for home visits would increase
from $122,000 to $160,000 for approximately the same number of visits.
Summary Minutes
October 4, 1983
Page 2
2. The cost of the groups for 1984 is quite abit above the experience
to date in 1983 in terms of cost.
3. The sliding fee scale & group activities are pretty much consistent
with the Subcommittees plans, the Discovery groups were retained in
order to help fill the needs of the patients to be referred from the
Community Health Department (CHD) Clinics.
4. The relationship between MVNA and the CHD,clinics will change by
having MVNA nurses assigned parttime to the clinic patients.
5. The outcome measures being developed and implemented by the MVNA are
very good.
6. Still need a better list priorities on those patients who will not
be served if reductions in services are needed in health promotion
services.
7. North Memorial Medical Center's subcontract with MVNA needs some
- evaluation regarding the merits of continuing it in 1984.
III. Future Business
A. Discussions with MVNA
1. Need more data on the increase in costs for health promotion visits,
and on the actual costs for group activities.
2. Need to examine the data more closely on the number of people and
visits that are reimbursed by CHS funds this year and next year.
3. Need to look at 3 quarters of 1983 data on the geographic distribu-
tion of visits for home health care.
4. Need to discuss more extensively the possibility for a satellite
office.
5. Need to discuss the possibility of funding homemaker /home health
aide services in home health care.
6. Staff will meet with MVNA on these issues prior to the next subcom-
mittee meeting on December 5, 1983.
B. Lifespan of this Subcommittee: At the next meeting, the Subcommittee
will finalize its 1983 report and make a recommendation on its existence
for 1984 and beyond.
23)
ISSUES OF CONCERN DISCUSSED BY
WEST HENNEPIN COMMUNITY HEALTH SERVICES COMMITTEE
Citizen Participation & Planning
1) lack of citizen involvement
- need liaison to human services councils
- amount of involvement is lessening
- lack of coordination among County advisory groups
2) need for coordination with other funding bodies
- relationship to United Way priorities
- lack of dialogue between County departments who
provide same types of services (e.g. in -home services
are provided by Community Health Dept. & Community
Social Services Dept.)
- lack of dialogue between levels of government
- lack of innovative projects
3) health care scene is changing - need to do long range
planning
- greater numbers of unemployed and poor
increasing numbers of senior citizens and effect
on health care system
l - need for greater dollars
- financial constraints are causing cutback of free
care
future trends in funding and effect on health care
- County should do assessment of health care needs
and effect of income on whatever needs are met
4) is the Community Health Services Department moving towards
being a direct service provider?
5) why do community -based agencies not get cost of living
increases? this actually results in a cut in their budget
6) why aren't Community Health Services discussed at the
County Commissioner level?
7) need for followup and evaluation of programs; this informa-
tion should be in a form that is accessible to the public
24)
8) need for data and information on:
- how are needs changing
- what will they emphasize in the future
- where do people reside who use services
- which services are in West Hennepin area
- need numbers for each area and numbers re: how
many Suburban residents use services downtown
Access to Services
1) need to publicize services better; need for better outreach
and more aggressive case finding
- lack of coordination in outreach
2) lack of access to services especially seniors
3) who is serving young adult population?
4) who is serving population from 25 -65?
5) need for transportation to services; lack of transportation
prevents Suburban residents from using services
6) need for outreach and local offices in the suburban and
Rural areas
7) need for affordable and accessible health care for families
and the elderly
8) lack of agencies in outlying areas; need to educate doctors,
senior groups, key informed people, churches, etc.
Specific Services
1) support need for maternity and infant care, child health
care; concerned particularly about lack of these services
in outlying areas
2) need for transportation to services; lack of transportation
prevents Suburban residents from using services
3) need for in -home services of all types
Public Health Nursing
1) concern about future of public health nursing
- there is strong community support for local public
health nursing services
- will they become only home care department for Hennepin
County Medical Center
- how will nurses maintain current strong ties in
community
25.1
- a public health nurse office was to be open in outlying
area after merger - is this going to happen?
- service's haven't seemed to have expanded /improved
since merger
- we need to have public health nurses serving special
geographical areas rather than specializing by types
of services
- with funding changes and staff cutbacks the public
health nurses are less able to be responsive to
needs as defined by the community, less coordination
with and referral by the community, and' forced to
turn people down for services
2) pre - admission screening should be done by Metropolitan
Visiting Nurse Assn.
3) public health nurses should expand their role to case
management and coordination
Health Education, Prevention & Maintenance
1) educate public on quality care
2) need for preventive and maintenance services; don't lose
preventative services while meeting basic crisis needs;
e.g. treating high risk mother but not trying to prevent
mothers from this situation
3) need for health education
- need for health education wellness, chemical depen-
dency, family violence and for senior citizens
- health education should not be provided free of
charge or subsidized for private employers (e.g.
heart healthy lifestyles)
C�
26)
RECOMMENDATIONS
3
1) There is a need for more publicity about services; efforts
to promote access to services and more health education.
We recommend that:
* written publicity materials be developed, e.g, directory
of C.H.S. services in West Hennepin area
* key people in the community be identified and educate
them on C.H.S. services available
* develop educational materials which aid consumers
in identifying their problems and help them to know
what to ask for
* look at additional methods of low cost outreach and
health education, e.g. have public health nurse answer
questions on radio talk show
* examine how transportation can be provided to promote
accessibility to service (one low cost method that
we recommend is a voucher system using taxi cabs)
* do better publicity to agencies about specifics of
your programs (e.g. West Hennepin Human Services
Planning Board does not know where in the Western
Suburbs your clinics are located nor did the person ans-
wering the phone at the Community Health Dept: when
we called to find the location)
* need to strengthen local ties with the municipalities
to help facilitate outreach, e.g. Metro Visiting
Nurse Assn. is locating a public health nurse at
Medina City Hall once a week; the City will do publicity
and local advertising
2) There is a need for more citizen involvement and stronger
ties with the Suburban human services councils.
* a return to the type of relationship that the Community
Health Dept. had with the human services councils
(1976 -80) would be a good first step (this included
a much stronger role in community meetings which
used to draw 30 -40 people; help in gathering needs
information; and developing community surveys)
27)
* development of a C.H.S. committee liaison to West
Hennepin Human Services Planning Board and vice versa
* help to facilitate better coordination among County
citizen advisory groups
* gather information from key informed people. in the
various municipalities
3) With the health care system going through a period of
rapid change, there needs to be in- depth; long range planning
by the Community Health Dept.
* we recommend a pilot project which would take a coordi-
nated look at future health needs and services in
the West Hennepin area. If the project is successful,
it could be done in all of the County Planning areas.
This group should be composed of representatives
from:
- West Hennepin Human Services Planning Board
- area service providers including the West
Suburban Teen Clinic, Metro Visiting Nurse
Assn., Community Health Clinics, etc.
- CHS Advisory Committee and Community Health
Dept.
This group should:
- identify community health needs
- identify shortages
- identify economic trends
- identify problems
- identify regulations and controls
- identify duplications, gaps and inadequacies
and make recommendations on future delivery
of services in West Hennepin area ►
This needs to be a coordinated effort with strong leaders
from each group to look realistically at what the future
will hold for Community Health Services.
4) There needs to be discussion about the future of public
health nursing services.
• need for further West, decentralized office
• need for staff who know and understand suburbs and
outlying areas to work in the suburbs and outlying
areas
28)
• need for adequate funding (when public health nursing
didn't get a cost' of living increase in 1984, a cut
in services had to follow)
• needs to be more funding for uncompensated care; health
promotion services; and a subsidized sliding fee
scale for skilled nursing
• because this is a key community health service in
our community, the CHS Advisory Committee should
examine how it is going to maintain its commitment
to public health nursing
6) There is a need for primary health services for all ages
because primary health clinics for teens are the only
type funded in the Suburbs.
• should examine the Suburban Ramsey County model of
providing two community clinics which provide routine
assessment screening and maintenance services staffed
by a LPN and a secretary and share a nurse practitioner.
These clinics cost $50,000 each and are open all
day, Monday to Friday
• or develop a sliding fee scale, family primary health
care community clinic
4.y A,
�1
o e��
1888
WHEREAS, the League of Minnesota Cities annually presents the
C. C. Ludwig Award to an individual who has made outstanding
contributions through their involvement in municipal government;
and
WHEREAS, C. Wayne Courtney served the Village of Morningside as
a Council Member from 1962 to 1966; and
h A$
WHEREAS, he4provided leadership in the City of Edina by serving
as a Council Member from 1966 to 1980,,and as Mayor from 1980 to
the present time; and
WHEREAS, Mayor Courtney has with great dedication shared his time
and talents at the regional level by working as a member of the
Metropolitan Waste ommission, Association of Metropolitan
Municipalities, and other regional committees, and _
WHEREAS, Mayor Courtney has taken an active leadership role in the
League of Minnesota Cities;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the Edina City Council that the
name of
C. WAYNE COURTNEY
be placed in nomination for the League of Minnesota Cities 1980
C. C. Ludwig Award.
ADOPTED this fifth day-of March, 1984.
Mayor Pro -tem
L'i FcJlECx_Na__JDAT_E 984 CITY OF EDINA
�1
AMOiIyL
l..
L
1.1
VI
pf
0
V
i
�I
Y
VI
VI
V
CHECK REGISTER
03 -35 -84 PAGE 1
7
1
2
054141
02/29/84
140.25
HANCO
TIRES
10- 4616- 318 -30
2
3
3 --
- -- - - --
- - . -_ -_
__.__.L4- 0x25 --�
-- - - - - -- -- -
- - --
`
4
I
--
- --
- -�
s
5
6
* ** -CKS
°
7
7
065007
02/27/84
50.00
APEX PEST CONTROL
CONT SERV
20 -4200- 646 -64
°
°
,i
065007
-- - - -- - - --
02/27/84
----------------------
25.00
---- -- _Z_5_..0.0�------
APEX PEST CONTROL
- - - - -- - -------- - -
C04T SERV
- - --
20 -4200- 646 -64
-- -
' -z1
CI
;1-
,t
D55008
02/29/34
20.93
KAMAN SEARING 6 SPLY
PARTS
10- 4620 - 560 -56
3
,4I
le
14
,5�
i i f a a f
f f a -CKS
7
19
20
- --
"
- -
465012
- -- - - - - -- -'
02/29/94
- - - - -- - - -
24.95
AUTOMOBILE SERVICE C
CONT REPAIRS
10- 4248 - 560 -56
21
17
12
24.95 *
zz
23'
24
9
�
06501,
02/28/34
33.96
__
ALTERNATOR REBUILD
__
GEN SUPPLIES
10 -4504- 335 -3Q
5
I
201
465013
02/28/84
130.h0
ALTERKATCq REBUILD
REPAIR PARTS
10- 4540 - 560 -56
27
211.__._065Q13-
-- - X12/25134 _
23...5.2 -.
SLIER- N11. TDi_RE9llILD _-------
G_N _SUP_P.LIES_._
21L- 4505-646 -66 -
--
_
I31
:z
18?.08 *
74
K
32
`61
065026
02/29/84
49971.60
BADGER METER INC
INVEN SUPPLIES
30- 1220 - 000 -00
,..
`61
37
"y
3G
f f f f t a
C KS
:1'J
40
"I
465031
Li2/27/84
94.57
BERTELSON BROS INC
GENERAL SUPPLIES
10 -4504- 440 -44
41
465J31
02/27/84
42.95
BERTELSON BROS INC
GENERAL SUPPLIES
10 -4504- 440 -44
42
4J
27
- ^650.31
..-----..- i32/ 29.! 8. 4-------..------..
12.... T_ Z--------
BERTE-L. S. ON.-_ 9Rn. S__ I1NC--------
_- -OF-F- IC- E__S.UPPLI.ES - -.-.
1n- -4-5 16- 1.6.0-
�.4
3a1
065031
02/29/94
186.96.
BERTSLSON PROS INC
OFFICE SUPPLIES
.L6_ --
10- 4516 - 160 -16
- - - --
45
'5�
065031
02/29/R4
54.40
BERTELSON BROS INC
OFFICE SUPPLIES
10- 4516 - 510 -51
4'.
'1650.31_-
Sll/231.4
zb�0�-
B=$IEI cON HROS TALC_
CREQ_IT
10- 4516 - 51.0
46I
50
__-- - -51 __
365.65
❑
4_
51
53
41
065043
02/29/84
24.50
8 B B SEAT COVER
CONT REPAIRS
10- 4248- 560 -56
42'
- - -- ' -- ---
5
-
065044
02/29/84
313.39
- -
BILL BOYER FORD
-- -- --
REPAIR PARTS
--
10- 4540 - 560 -56
57
45 F_.___.Ob50.4s--------
.i1212S 184_- _-'-- --------
.- .,.5..�5__-
LR_P11RTS
10 -448 S-6D -S.6_-
81I
" 065044 02/28/84 122.51 BILL BOYER FORD REPAIR PARTS 10 -4540- 560 -56
I
453.94 *
62
aU�
63 p
64
5 ;I
tf faaa
*** -CKS
67
66
51 -
Q650- 48.-
_- R21221�94_ -__ -_
_Z1.t13_
_BB?S5�/.N�CEN- NEQY._j11C
BEN- _SUP_PLUES
1Ilm- 004_520rS2
-
67
57
065048
02/29/94
63.81
BRIS3M'AN KENNEDY INC
GEN SUPPIES
10- 4504 - 520 -52
6'
53
-4
133.84 r
70
n
72
--.
* ** -CKS
74
I]2 /2R /R4
1511 -R4
RAIfERY._YARFHOIICF
PARTC
1n- 6A7fl- %An -SA
75
76
7
19,34 r OF FDIAA CHECK �, STER 03 -35 -84 4GE 2
"'�
aaar••
- -- a+a -CKS - --
`4''
DATE
ATE- M- 0FSCRIJ?- T-IOY-
nrr a
P -n_ JLJMc _SS AGE---- -
EL- VIN-- SAF- -TY -. SUPPLY-_-
"`LLL
^55148
U2/27/84
100.00
ELVIN SAFETY SUPPLY
,
10- 4248 - 449 -44
065148
96 515 4
02/28/84
199.20
BATTrRY WAREHOUSE
PARTS
10- 4620 - 560 -56
3
i3.2L271A-4
54_..00
_1
-
RE3 -AIR PA.R.TS`.
-- - - . - -- -
-- -- -- - -- 350.94 -._+
- -- - - -
- - - - - -- -
- - -- - - -- - - -- - - - - -
-- - - -- - -- --
- - - -- -- -- -- - -- - -�!
REPAIR PARTS
10- 4540- 449 -44
415.60
r+ +-CKS >
- - -- ------
- - - - -- - --
065060 J2/29/?4 11?.45 AMBASSADOR SAUSAGE CONCESSIONS 28 -4624- 704 -70
------------------
°
'I-----n6
5.1.5 6 ___
118.45 +
13.4-45-
- EA.IRVZ- E.W-H.OSP__I_T_AL
-L ST_A_ID -_S UPP LIES- Mm45.MD A 40x_4 4
10
065156
02/29/84
86.71
- - -
- - - - --
-- - - -- - - - -- - --
- - - -- - -- - --
- --
_ , ,z
+
{{{•{.
a �
a +• -CKS ,3
',4
4
-_ ^65090 --
.- -_ -.L- 2128184_ - -
+��
065090
U2128/84
340'.62
CERT POW'-:'R TRAIN
REPAIR PAORTS
10- 4540- 560 -56
I,a
'
^65090
02/28/84
51.29
CERT POWER TRAIN
PARTS
10- 4620- 560 -56
1,9I
- -- --- -L.,�
`icl
{ {• { {a
•••- CKS--
24
' 065091) 02/ ?7/64 1504 CUSHMAN MOTOR CC REPAIR PARTS 10- 4540 - 560 -56
5
``,
['65099
J2/29/84
92.80
CUSHMAN MOTOR CO
PARTS
10- 4620- 560 -56
1- 27
,
z,i
-
- -- -
- - -- - - - -
- -- -- --3 08�- �4- a -
- - -- - -- - - - -- --
- -- -
- - --
-- LB
.
70
**-C Ks 3,
izC
065111
02/ ?9184
19410.39
DAVIS WATZR FOUIP CO
P.EPAIR PARTS
30- 4540 - 783 -78
33
1 .410.39 +
�.
y
*►• -CKS "
I.j
-- 0`65.114.
�121291R4__. -_
- 1.3.,z4
-
DELEG.A -P �-O.OL_. CO
_ -T00LS
- 1D -4i8n 5.6II:S6
°v
4G
r
13.74
143
ly
^65125
U2128/84
192.70-
MERIT SUP ?LY
CCRFECTION
10 -4504- 325 -30
4614
"I
0651 25-.--
L'.2/22184._ -_
- _190.?? __ -_
__._�IE4I7 .__SUP.? LY- __- _- .- _
- -_GcN - SUPP_-L.IES.._
^65125
il2/28/94
162.0
MERIT SU ??LY
GEN SUPPLIES
10 -4504- 325 -30
°'
`I"
^65125
12/28/84
88.90
MERIT SUPPLY
CLEAN SUPPLIES
10- 4512 - 540 -54
151
�Ui -_-
0'65125-_.
- 02- .2913- 4 - -
- - -_ 96.50-- - - -
- -- MERIT- SUP_?LY - - - - --
G= N- SUPPLIES- -----
- -29.- 450'4-646- _64 - -- -
-- --
C65125
J2/27/44
212. ?O
MERIT SUPPLY
GEN SUPPLIES
20- 4504- 646 -64
I52
54
560.:0 i
..
"'�
aaar••
- -- a+a -CKS - --
`4''
451
EL- VIN-- SAF- -TY -. SUPPLY-_-
"`LLL
^55148
U2/27/84
100.00
ELVIN SAFETY SUPPLY
CONT REPAIRS
10- 4248 - 449 -44
065148
02/21/44
69.55
ELVIN SAFETY SUPPLY
REPAIR PARTS
10- 4540- 449 -44
` _-
0651_4.8
i3.2L271A-4
54_..00
El 'JIN- S- AFZ-LY- _SUP_P_0Y
RE3 -AIR PA.R.TS`.
10-45 -40- 45.9-4_4.
065148
02/27/94
182.05
ELVIN SAFETY SUPPLY
REPAIR PARTS
10- 4540- 449 -44
415.60
- --
�.
- - -- ------
- - - - -- - --
- - - --------
------------------
CKS
'I-----n6
5.1.5 6 ___
0 7.2271.8 4
13.4-45-
- EA.IRVZ- E.W-H.OSP__I_T_AL
-L ST_A_ID -_S UPP LIES- Mm45.MD A 40x_4 4
065156
02/29/84
86.71
FAIRVIEW ROSPITAL
1ST AID SPLY
10- 4540 - 440 -44
�SGI
221.36
+
dv
a �
41
1984 CITY OF EDINA CHECK REGISTER 03 -05 -84 PAGE 3
- CHECK_- 11- -DALE. AMOUNT - - - - -- vFNnn� - - -- __I_.IEM _DES.CRIP_ TI.ON __A000UtiT No_
V.-AL-P_.0_._11_IHESS AGE -_
4
3
4
w e ^05161 02/29/84 39.75 FLYING CLJUD SANTAR— - RUBBISH REMOVAL
6 39.75 +
° 055162 02/29/94 34.99 FOWLER ELECTRIC REPAIR PARTS
s —34 9_2*
10 -4250- 353 -30
10- 4540 - 560 -56
tA�-CKS-_ 4
7
e
9
io
°.I ^5522.3 ___ ___.U2129_/84_.___— _3,297-62_ ___.HA_WKI.NS._.C.HE.MT CAL.— ._________- WATER..StJRP ES 30- 4-622 -785 -7
065223 J2/29/34 1.880.00- HAWKINS CHEMICAL CREDIT 30 -4622- 785 -78
4JI
19275.13 +
v-
"1 , '' 24.00 +
:3
V
vl57l 065250 02/29/84 138935
ry
HOIGAARIOS INC
._- -GASO. LINE ` - 3D= 4..612 - 560-56 -
PARTS
10 -4620- 318 -30
f3
11,4
Rf# -CKS s
nn
n; r
11111
a #.__CKS__ -1'z
'a I
•
101
13�
R ## -CKS
.e.
1165164
02/29/84
12.80
FREEWAY
DODGE INC
REPAIR PARTS
10- 4540 - 560 -56
;o1
v�Ji
005164
J2/29/84
41.83
FREEWAY
DODGE 1NC
R_PAIR PARTS
4540 560-56
�_.
06 5.1 6 4 -_
—_ J 2 /29-/1.4----
— _._.__
.__ _ _f� c_L A Y_.D
O -D GE- - -I.NC
—_ -10- -
9
v
13i
7�
72.02 #
-- --
_:
zz1
P
?3
E
v,
02/DF51b1 29/84
212.50
GENERAL
SPORTS
UNIFORM ALLOW
10- 4266- 421 -42
#ff — CKS
965194
02/29/84
111177.75
GENERAL
COMMUNICATNS
RADIO EQUIP
10- 2010 - 000 -00
32'
�-3j
11,177.75 •
°
I� I
C
`3�
f ► # #ff
#ff -CKS
7
I3e
�' °,
765199. __.
02128184
____42..5_ 6
G T PAF4TS - _.-
AIR- ADRT.S_
-- R�? P_
1D-4 _4.0-5.6.06
-- -
4r
42.56 #
41j
v
zi
nz.
33'
7,
f4 # #k_R
614
44
�4i
3
v
I
"
176
005209
02/28/84
63.41-
GENUINE
PARTS
CP,EOIT
10- 4540 - 560 -56
,,.
-_ ___965209_
❑.2 /Z8 /R4—
_ —_ - -_
37
065209
02/28/R4
21.99
GENUINE
PARTS
REPAIR PARTS
10- 4540- 560 -56
4vI
�„
a'0
065209
J2/28/44
34.37
GENUINE
PARTS
PARTS
10- 4620 - 560 -56
3E
- -1 .1...2.4_._x------
- - - - --
- - - - - -- -- - - - -
-- - - -- -- --------- - - - - --
- - --
-
- -S1
Ball
vI41I
.# # f # #
. #+ - CKS
3
42
sef
065223
02/29/84
71.18-
HAWKINS
CHEMICAL
CREDIT
30- 4622 - 785 -78
ii7l
1165223
02/29084
71.38-
HAWKINS
CHEMICAL
CREDIT
30- 4622 - 785 -78
°.I ^5522.3 ___ ___.U2129_/84_.___— _3,297-62_ ___.HA_WKI.NS._.C.HE.MT CAL.— ._________- WATER..StJRP ES 30- 4-622 -785 -7
065223 J2/29/34 1.880.00- HAWKINS CHEMICAL CREDIT 30 -4622- 785 -78
4JI
19275.13 +
v-
"1 , '' 24.00 +
:3
V
vl57l 065250 02/29/84 138935
ry
HOIGAARIOS INC
._- -GASO. LINE ` - 3D= 4..612 - 560-56 -
PARTS
10 -4620- 318 -30
f3
11,4
Rf# -CKS s
nn
n; r
11111
a #.__CKS__ -1'z
'a I
•
1984 OF 17DINA CHECK 1 STAR C 3-0 5-8 4 GE 4
-VZND O:Z.
---l-TE M --D.ES C_R.LP-T_I ON----
ACCOUNT NOINV.--X-P.O.—g
MESSAGE---
138.35
it
C KS
—^6525
-3_
J 2 12 q /3 4______
26.50 -- _HU
A-T OR--
CN T__RERA. IRS-'
ln-4,?-4"- 60m_56
17
o
r
065253
J2128/14
26.50
HUMPIR_Y RADIATOR
COMT REPAIRS
10- 4248 - 560 -56
iy
.53.30
�
Ili
13
114
055273
02/29/14
4.20
JERRYS FOODS
CLEAN SUPPLIES
10-4512-440-44
34.20 •
'7
***-CKS'
:21
22
___065304
__02.12813-4-
87R CO- - -._ -- C0__GEN__SUPP_LIFS
2D�-_4_5_0lsa-t64_&-_6_4_
4
065304
02129f14
43.45
KNOX LUMBER Co
LUMBER
20-4604-646-64
25
x.211
DA5304
25.20
KNOX LUMBER CO
LUMBER
20-4604-646-64
.201
127
_065,324—
_12a
223.78 f
29
065315
02/29/84
370.26
ANCHOR PA -ER
GEN SUPPLIES
10-4504-520-52
:7!
37L.26
• ► *-CKS
3;
065317
02/29/84
46.14
LAWSON PRODUCTS
GEN SUPPLIES
10-4504-322-30
1-
3zl
065311
02/29/94
284.7R.
LAWSON PRODUCTS
GEN SUPPLIES
10-4504-325-30
124
- ,
33
__J653
I
J 2 Z29-1 ?4
1,74..5 2
PR.jOOUCTS--
SUPP_L_IES___________
D�4_5_C4_!-560-5j6_______
14 '
"
4.
765311
J2/29/94
424.,3F
LAWSON PRODUCTS
GEN SUPPLIES
10-4504-560-56
755317
02/21/,94
186.00-
LA WSOA PRODUCTS
CREDIT
10-4504-560-56
_' 06.53_1_7______J_2_/2_9
/n4
162.36
1 AJi.',ON_._PR_90U_C_T3_ .-.--PAR-TS---------
I nm_4_62_G-_5_6 0_56__
1
jDl
910.69
411
065343
17.70
MINNESOTA GLOVE
GEN SUPPLIES
10-4504-301-30
osr
Q 2-12 8,13 4
P-IN-NES-9-TA. --- G.L,OVr ---.--GrN-
SUP-P-LIES
M-_45jQ4_-32_5m 3 fi-
i
065343
02/28/84
25.20
MINNESOTA GLOVE
GEN SUPPLIES
10-4504-560-56
*w
065343
02/29/84
57.30
MINNESOTA GLOVE
GEN SUPPLIES
20-4504-640-64
14W
nil
065344
02/27/14
50.92
MrD OXYGE4 & EQUIP
EQUIP MAINT
10 -4274- 440 -44
_965344
012127 84—
28-06
Mrn OX.Y_GEN.___&__EQUIP
—A S I- AID UPP_LI_ES
065344
02/27/14
33*12
MED OXYGE'j & EQUIP
1ST AID SUPPLIES
10-4510-440-44
113.010
*A
2
C K3
Ir
0653_4?_ _1J2Ln-M,
4
___3 87-8 R ----MAC
QUEEN EQUIPMENT
REPA-IR PARTS
_-4_5_4.0-5L0-_5 6
72
dISG
387.88
75?
Rl
!j 1984 CITY OF EOINA CHECK REGISTER 03- 0.5 -84 PAGE 5
Z
._CHECI�IV�.- O�.SE_ -- 1LMOU.NT _ - JLE�003 _-__ rTFM DESCRIPTION ACCOU -NT Nn- TNV-- JL -P -D�� MFCSAri
,
�1
z z
3
' __065355 ------ ART G CO._ REPAIR PARTS �n -4St. .,;60 -5
-" 4
4
4 5
ft
18.85 • ;
e
&I 065359 U2/29184 11.07 MINN TORO INC REPAIR PARTS 10 -4540- 560 -56 0
y' 06.5359 -- n2/_29/34- _---- - 7.5_.1-4 _MIN- k- LORD__I. NC_ - -_ ____ -R EPALR_PARTS - -- X11- 45 -40- .560 -56_
"I ^65359 u2/79/84 92.12 MINN TORO INC REPAIR, PARTS 10- 4540- 560 -56
X65359 02/29184 14.72 MINN TORO INC REPAIR PARTS 10- 4540 - 560 -56 14I „1
065.3.52_._➢2_ 129L84 _ -5 -3 10 11INN_ -T ORO.INC-- ._- .__...___REPAI.R_P -ARTS L0-- 454 - 56Il -_56 _ gel
I"
765359 02/29/84 63.92 MINN TORO INC REPAIR PARTS 10- 4540 - 560 -56 "
e!
I 06535 J2/29/84 15.24 M ?NN TORO INC REPAIR PARTS 10- 4540 - 560 -56
^6535.9------- J2ZZ9.l8!�_ _- .._6...0.4_- 1tL!' 1N. ZOR_ 0TKC---- "--------- PdR.T_S---- . - -...- 1f1- _4.620 - 56.0 -.56- _. -_ ZO
^65359 02/29/84 89.08 MINN TORO INC REPAIR PARTS 27- 4540 - 662 -66 21
dl" ^65359 02/29/84 91.75 MINN TORO INC R_PAIR PARTS 27- 4540 - 662 -66 23,
5653 3_ U- 21..27/84 1._4��_,____- @- IN�L_LOR.O..._ INC ------ 6EPAIL3�.ARt.S__- - 2J'•4540__66�66 1111 __ __ za
^65359 02/29/84 93.92 MINN TORO INC REPAIR PARTS 27- 4540- 662 -66
5 64.2 3 + i
za
065360 02/29/84 10.00 MINNESOTA WANN_R CONT REPAIRS 1C- 4248 - 560 -56
+. 'I 065360 02/29/84 17.50 MINNESOTA WANNER CONT REPAIRS 10-4248-560-56 130
- ^_653 0 -- 02129_/8 - - -- .- 17.50_.- _ -1INN7 - QT1L_WANW:R- GEy__SUP_P- -LIES 10- 45n4- 5- 6.1L -S -0- 13�:
45.00 • 1111 -- :33�
vlac Sal
- 1111- -- 1111- 13`1
20
- - -- - --- -- ..--- -- -- ..- _.. -_..._ -- -- -..-.- ... - -- -- -" - - -- -- --- -- 1111 * +.+ -�.K .-. - 3e
qkw 065367 J2/29/84 59.90 MCGARVEY C^FcEE
331
------------------ 1111 --
3-' 065371 02/29/A4 153.00 MILHOFF STEEL
via' 153.00
t------ 1111 --- 1111 --
f#fffR
JL
GEV SUPPLIES - 10- 4504 - 420 -42 - -�
CONT REPAIRS 40- 4248 - 801 -80
*** -CKS
-1 /
4F
l"1 _ -_ 065319- - - - -- 02129184 - .--PET R2�ON�- -C.OMd - --- OUIP-- RENIAL
ao 4720 a - 1n- 427�s- 540 -54 1111- ---- - - - -- --sal
u
ya2 +a►r..
__- - - -_ --
�i 065385 02/29/84 12 1.00 MCGUIRE ROBERT
�45 _ 0653- 85._- _- _.U2J2.4JS4_ _.- 1"111-- �.60.DIl-- ___- 11CGUIRE �O.BE.RT ___ --
°Gj 480.00 •
065388 L2/28/R4
f f# f f f
54
065450 02/29/84
68.04 NTL ATOMIK MOTOR
142.56 PBS
142.56 •
fe
- - - - -- 1111 -- 1111- - *!- •- � -CX.°i -- '.n
:m
TREE INSPECTION 10- 4242 - 353 -30
1111 -LR :F TRTNNTNF AD -1 iDn -019 1R - -- --- _ - ::jo;
n
Ina r
f.._rrc .1.4
REPAIR PARTS
PAR TS
10- 4540- 560 -56
10- 4620 - 560 -56
* ** -CKS
1984 L or EoImA
+ ^
cmccx srEn 03~05~84 pxsc a
-*
"|
| 28/F4 73.R7 QUICK SERV BATTERY
-� ` »
^°^~cxs |�
_-�"
-| :*mw oa/zr/n� 197.20 Am"nIcom S*An7com racp*omE �n �a�a »vo sv --- '">
vvr.00 ° ~ ~ ~ i",
3}
n65 4 au- -z2 m9m4,-___-'-_-_x�u.su_-
- p6mx6 opr,n'v� 11�"50
' 237.00 °
�
[]
oom-onrocZ-C*cw- GUNS --__--rAxru-----__�-____-_-'_��~*u�o~sau°��_---_-___-
DIN snrncTc*cn ou4s ' p^nry 10~4620-5*0~56
��--�z,65 4 9 0 �9z/zn /n-4 '---__3o.I s--_- --- socnw-Im'ALT L L I.una-- �
30.18 ° �
�~~ c65*92 u2m9f94 23.37
---�--�---------_-___-__�.oz-°
---------
- 065498 02m9m4 5.20
~�|�|
5.20 °
.
10
'1655 37 L; 2/27184
° '
onuT*n^Lc rnxo
urunv cLccrmomzcm
xspxzm pAn7y
n�_pxzx puoru
10~*540~5*0~56
z- 1-8-- ---SU-BU1RAh.-C-HE-VR0 LE c__REpxl R-PxRTS-_ ___�����!- 5.6
7.18 ^
va*.sn aon xnxEmrIozws 23-42 14~610-61 i
-_-As __ 57�
5.33 ur pxoL 000x ocw suppczco
554 .00 7pz ormc onzLLIws xc"Azx pxn7s
55*.00 ^
10~450*~*20~*2
30-*5 40-78 5~7 8
=L
C KS
.42-- _ --- --- u*rr--o cLEcrnIc cn"n nEPu;a_p«nrz- _-_ '_--z0-4540_6*6~64- ---_'--_-_-_ _- 2J
49
065595 0
0'W91F 4
42 0
10
'1655 37 L; 2/27184
° '
onuT*n^Lc rnxo
urunv cLccrmomzcm
xspxzm pAn7y
n�_pxzx puoru
10~*540~5*0~56
z- 1-8-- ---SU-BU1RAh.-C-HE-VR0 LE c__REpxl R-PxRTS-_ ___�����!- 5.6
7.18 ^
va*.sn aon xnxEmrIozws 23-42 14~610-61 i
-_-As __ 57�
5.33 ur pxoL 000x ocw suppczco
554 .00 7pz ormc onzLLIws xc"Azx pxn7s
55*.00 ^
10~450*~*20~*2
30-*5 40-78 5~7 8
=L
C KS
.42-- _ --- --- u*rr--o cLEcrnIc cn"n nEPu;a_p«nrz- _-_ '_--z0-4540_6*6~64- ---_'--_-_-_ _- 2J
49
1984 �TTY OF EDINA CHECK REGIST�R 03-0.5-84 PAGE 7
51.42 3
VICES-
0655 6 3 J2/29fg4 15.00 VA Nr-U ARO SERVICES 50-4 200- 860- 86
57.67 25
(15557Q i32/;19/94 65.45 WILLIA�IS STEEL-FIOWE GEN SUPPLIES 10-45 04- 54 0- 54
1265 5 70 02/29/R4 42.19 WILLIAMS STEEL-HDWE PA:NT 10-4544-301-30 204
[_| xo55,9_—_--uu«re/x* __--�cap-_---_-�����umu��r�c�=xowc_'_�-p�zmr---_--- �o�»o___-_ -------_-�__-- /
n+5 57 9 uz/zvxm* 24.58 W'LLIons s7scL-xowc rooLs 10~45 80~301~30 ---�al
~~' nonn,p 02v79/84 1 .24 WILLIAMS srccL~*ow7 rooLo 10~*580~390~3o "a
low 43
�655 84 ?/29 194 34.24 WARNER INDUSTRIAL GEN SUPPLIES 20-4504-646-64 45
CKS
41 65.35
471 1!2[
065 1 2 02/27/94 333.00 RAIN HUROMAN CPA PRO SERV AUDIT 50-4216-820-82
5'i --065102
065107 02/27/94 155.55 ENTEC INC INVEN SUPPLIES 23-1209-000-00 %:
065120 02/29/94
1165721
sa
*015-6 065722
C)2/?9/A4
02/29194
500.10
-- ___5.0 0.. 1)Z_ • —
595.00
63.00
FRANK FISHER SERVICSES 20-3480-000-00
WESTSTOE EQUIP PrPATR PARTS 10-4540-540-54
JRH ---QUIP TOOLS
10-4580-560-56
1984 C
OF ---D',NA
CHECK
1TER
03-35-84
GE 9
CHECK.__P1O.,__.0_A.T_E
---------
DE.SC_R_tP_T_T_OtJ__
UNT N
02/2-7/R4
-.--VRN-HOLMBERG----
A
90.00
I :
7
_ --'1651.175
----L2J2-7./9-4------780*f:0--M-.--&-R--S-TG.U--CjOMP-AN-Y-----SI-GN
_&_PA1STS____
I
10
10- -38-3
-5
'1
927.20
341
__06510 7—
12/211R4
__3 74-9 9
L UM3_EJqJ_AA_O__
A_P_1_LkL,_WTLA Y
10-- 4-9 nn 4 4 11- 4 4
374.99
__.i12/27114
......
88.62
123[
iUPP-LLES--------20--k-4-5-a4-�646�64—.--
24
j!
065709
�J 2 7 18 4
61.68
PERKES MC
GEN SUPPLIES
20-4504-646-64
125
94.22
Z5
128
L.
065717
12/29/14
5.23
CITY OF RICHFIELD
POWER
10- 4252 - 345 -30
11
23
065110
02/27/F4
15.40
AUTO WHOLESALERS
PEPAIR PARTS
10-4540-560-56
3'
32
2 6
C K S
34
065712
02f77/44
186.54
ALEXANDER MANUF
1ST AID SUPPLIES
10-4510-440-44
36
10
1?6.54
065113
12127IQ4
90.00
ENIROMENTAL AIR
REFUND H44TING PERMIT
10-3130-000-010,
065f1
J2/27/44
po . 1.. 0
ENIROMENTAL Alt?
RE'UND H PERMIT
10-3130-000-00
._L1. 657- 1 1
U 2.12 7 /13 4
80-.J-
113D. D'DmDD
4-1
80.00 •
1
45
S7' a
Al R---P-ARTq
25.00
-------RED
JL
150
-RENT I
151
749.51 •
S4
-J
, 71
— -----
065118
02/29I44
20.16
ENS SRV, CCRP
CONT REPAIRS
28-4248-708-70
065119
G2 /29/14
503.00
DAVE LANGLIOLTZ
SERVICSES
28-3480-000-00
065120 02/29/94
1165721
sa
*015-6 065722
C)2/?9/A4
02/29194
500.10
-- ___5.0 0.. 1)Z_ • —
595.00
63.00
FRANK FISHER SERVICSES 20-3480-000-00
WESTSTOE EQUIP PrPATR PARTS 10-4540-540-54
JRH ---QUIP TOOLS
10-4580-560-56
�
_�xr���-couze_--___�
"'198'4 -CITY
OF EDINA
CHECK REGISTER
165722
02/29/84
2095.00
JRH EQUIP
GARAGE EQUIP
10-4926- 50 2- 50
rA5123
U2/29/94
7,195.21
ImCNEILUS STEEL
GEN SUPPLIES
10-45C4-365-30
__065
12 3
J 2,Z29JBA___71
71
065723
02/29/34
79195.21-
MCNErLUS STE-L
CME:Tm
10-4504-365-30
739.48
MCNEILUS STEEL
G_--N SUPPLIES
30-4504-780-78
13
965124
J2/29f84
200.00
1wRPA
CCNFERENCE
7
20-4202-600-60
200.00
lei
to
065125
J2/23/F4
69.67
RTTEWAV
REDAIR PARTS
10-4540-560-56
21
065725
J2/28/R4
84.00
RITEWAY
REPAIR PARTS
10-4540-560-56
C65726
02/�9194
123.91-
BURTON E.1JIP
CREDIT
20-4504-646-64
i
20
1
500
40 CO
=^/ -- ---'------~^^^~' -----'----'� - «��~� !'
�.
56,64 ° �---------'� ---�--- —' ,,
5r-31 --___-uo�z9��x�-_'-_-__-__--��.on_-___-_zo�'�ou�zc_u�u--__--____w = |�
25.00
i�
n65 t3 zZav/3_4 __-w�u''Y _--_�c /��m_____ �
4:1 t ,. vn.00 ° ------ -----'
�
,,L--uosr�»_--_--uze�vxn�-_'-_--_---___�..zo -__---�.ozaccznx�_uoz_c�xu� &1A-_6_L__ !"
^! z.ro ° .7
065134 L)2J2.9_/_S4
48.26 2
�
_�xr���-couze_--___�
�
e.
az
Iagl
Cd
I-A
rw
71
1984 C
OF EOIN4
CHECK i
;TER
03-05-34
GE 10
----.CHE-CK--NO.
nA-TE---, -----A,--OU-&T
ITEM-DESCRIP-TT-014—
ACiCO.U-NT---UO- INV* # P.0. #-ME.SSAGE--
•
14.00
i2
13
065739
02/29114
15.00
DIESEL COMPONENTS
ComT REPAIRS
10-4248-322-30
5
15.^o ft
065740
02/29/R4
44.00
TWIN CITY SANDBLAST
CONT REPAIRS
10-4248-322-30
u
o
44.00 *
10
.. . . . .
***-CKS
--f!6
5 142
--.----U Z/291-9 4 — ------
--a.U.Tp
;18
r.165743---
134.?O
nFPT--QE-P-U.BLIC-----TRE:r
INSP
t0- 4242-353. -.30
065744
U2129/R4
120.00-
CEPT OF PUBLIC
CORRECTION
10-4242-353-30
25
065744
02/29/94
40.00
DEPT OF PUBLIC
HOOK UP CHARGE
10-4268-420-42
2r,
27
28
29
1"
065145
02/29/F4
124,00
RAGNAR J04NSC4
AMBULANCE REFUND
10-3180-000-00
V-
- --
124 .-O2
32
065146
02f79/44
9.90
M4NAGTNG DEOPLE
ROOKS
10-4502-440-44
1,4
l�
31j
"65747
j2/29/84
7.50
INSTITUTE OF GOVT
BOOKS
10-4502-440-44
Isa
141
4'
,kwl
FUND
Computer checks Vs
C K's
4;
Aw
39577.93
395.05
FUND 20 TOTAL
FUND 23 TOTAL
PORK FUND
ART CENTER
55195 thru 55399
FUND
63F.61
FUND 28 TOTAL
-
R[Z-REATION CENTER
-
FUND
49
89955.40
FUND 30 TOTAL
WATEAWORK FUND
50
51
-
8
-F-UND-4.0.—T O-T AL
EW ER—REN L
TA —EU"----
4
01
1 9045 .00
FUND 50 TOTAL
LIQUOR DISPENSARY
FUND
IIa
4411.62
FUND 60 TOTAL
CONSTRUCTION FUND
:55
•
449016.10
TOTAL
—r
6I
e.
az
Iagl
Cd
I-A
rw
71