HomeMy WebLinkAbout1983-04-18_COUNCIL MEETINGAGENDA
EDINA CITY COUNCIL
REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING
APRIL 1u-,•1983
ROLLCALL
VOLUNTEERS WEEK PROCLAMATION
EMPLOYEE RECOGNITION - Evelyn Kjos
MINUTES of Special Meeting of March 7, 1983, March 31, 1983 and April 4, 1983 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. Hedberg & Sons - East of France Ave. and North of Parklawn Ave. extended
1. R -1 Residential District to POD Planned Office District
2. Hedberg Parklawn Acres - Preliminary Plat Approval
(Continued from 3/21/83) (Continue indefinitely)
B. Pearson /Elmer Townhouses - Generally located South of Vernon Avenue and East
of Vernon Court
1. R -2 Residential District to PRD -2 Planned Residential District
2. Pearson /Elmer Addition - Preliminary Plat Approval
(Continued from 4/4/83)
C. Gittleman Corporation - Generally located West of Cahill Road and North of
Dewey Hill Road
1. R -1 Residential District to PRD -3 Planned Residential District - Second
Reading
D. Braemar Associates /Klodt Development Co. - Amendment to PRD -3 Planned
Residential District Overall Development Plan - W. of Cahill and N. of W. 78th
E. Normandale Bluff - Generally located West of Rolf Avenue and South of
West 64th Street
1. Preliminary Plat Approval
F. Kenneth "Chip" Glaser - Generally located South of Valley View Road, East
of Washington Avenue and West of Co. Rd. 18
1. PID Planned Industrial District to C -1 Commercial District - First Reading
(Continue to 5/2/83)
G. Target Stores /Yorktown - Deed Restriction
II. PUBLIC HEARING ON EASEMENT VACATION. Presentation by Engineer. Spectators
heard. If Council wishes to proceed, action by Resolution. 3/4 favorable
rollcall vote to pass.
A. Crosstown Hills
III. SPECIAL CONCERNS OF RESIDENTS.
IV. AWARD OF BIDS AND QUOTES. Tabulations and recommendations by City Manager.
Action of Council by Motion. 3/5 favorable vote to pass.
A. Public Improvements,
1. Contract No. 83 -1 (BA -256, BA -257, BA -258)
2. Contract No. 83 -2 (E -31)
B. Lewis Park Lighting
C. Pick -up Trucks
V. RECOMMENDATIONS AND REPORTS.
A. Traffic Safety Committee Minutes of 4/12/83
B. Eden Prairie /Edina- Water, Sanitary Sewer, Storm Sewer and Traffic Signal
Agreements
C. Correspondence - MNDOT on Vernon Avenue Speed Limits
D. Feasibility Report - Set Hearing Date (5- 16 -83) (Golf Terrace)
E. Edina Foundation /City Centennial Celebration 1988
F. Formation of Senior Citizen Ad Hoc Committee
G. Special Concerns of Mayor and Council
H. Post Agenda and Manager's Miscellaneous Items
Edina City Council Agenda
April 18, 1983
Page Two
VI. FINANCE
A. Liquor Dispensary Fund Report - Year Ending 12/31/82
B. Recreation Center Fund Report - Year Ending 12/31/82
C. Claims Paid: Motion of , seconded by for payment of the
following Claims as per Pre -List: General Fund $184,078.43; Park Fund
$18,061.59; Art Center $1,901.14; Swimming Pool $607.46; Golf Course
$3,641.72; Arena Fund $22,659.14; Water Fund $23,,364.94; Sewer Fund
$150,794.26; Liquor Fund $93,285.42; Construction $312.79; IBR $26,148.00;
Total $524,854.89; and for confirmation of payment of the following claims:
General Fund $66,928.65; Park Fund $4,939.42; Art Center $43.3.14; Swimming
Pool $23.28; Golf Course $2,624.92; Arena $1,502.11; Gun Range $71.98;
Water Fund $9,936.28; Sewer Fund $2,059.03; Liquor Fund $26,259.80;
Total $114,778.61; and for confirmation of.Liquor Fund $220,856.33
PROCLAMATION
WHEREAS, Edina.volunteers are a vital resource in solving some of the human
problems that are a consequence of our complex society; and
WHEREAS, volunteers, through their demonstrated concern and commitment to the
well -being of others, prove assurance for the continuing high quality of life
in the City of Edina; and
WHEREAS, volunteers represent all ages, economic, education and ethnic back-
grounds; and
WHEREAS, volunteering provides opportunities for personal growth, career explora-
tion and civic contribution for every citizen; and
WHEREAS, recognition should be given to individual volunteers for their
contributions to the health, education, welfare, recreation and cultural
services to the City of Edina;
NOW, THEREFORE, I, C. Wayne Courtney, Mayor of the City of Edina, Minnesota,
hereby proclaim the week. of April 17 through April 23, 1983, as
EDINA VOLUNTEER RECOGNITION WEEK
in the City of Edina;
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have set my hand and caused the Seal of the City of Edina
be affixed this 18th day of April, 1983.
Mayor
(Seal)
EVIE KJOS
04/18/93
Evie Kjos was the first fulltime female employed by the
City of Edina. She started in January of 1943 and worked until
Febuary of 1946 at which time she left to raise her family.
In December of 1959 she returned and has been with the City
of Edina ever since.
During the first "2� years of employment (43 -46) the
Village staff was minimal and her duties were diversed to say
the least. Among them were Deputy City Clerk and Deputy Treasurer.
Upon returning in 1959 she worked in the Water Department
doing utility billing etc.; the position she has at the present
time.
Evie has witnessed many changes in both the water department;
from a entirely manual system to the current "on- line" computer
system; and the City of Edina as a whole. She has observed the
on -going changes in the structure of the City and its development
and how this relates to the function of the City government services.
... . LOCATION
F -11 - -- - -T
/ LONDONDERRY
A F =�
t00, 00,1,1
C:i11iljl
Rk 3 Rk M IQ
REZOOM-114
NUMBER Z -82 -3 Pearson /Elmer Townhouses
S -83 -4 Preliminary Plat of Pearson /Elmer Addition
L O C A T 10 N Generally located south of Vernon Avenue and east of
Vernon Court
REQUEST R -2 to PRD -2
EDINA PLANNING DEPARTMENT
+ lll• NEW BUSINESS:
PG Z -82 -3 Pearson /Elmer Townhouses, R -2 Two Family Dwelling
to PRD -2, Planned Residence District. Los 1 and2 Crosstown
Hills. Generally located south of Vernon Avenue and east of
Vernon Court.
5 -83 -4 Preliminary Plan of Pearson /Elmer Addition
Mr. Hughes reported that the subject property measured about 46,000
square feet in area and is composed of two lots which are presently zoned R -2
Two Family Dwelling District. Approximately one year ago a request to rezone
the property to PRD -2 was considered by the Commission and Council. The
proposed five -unit townhouse plan received preliminary approval from the City
Council, however, the developers did not seek final approval and subsequently
dropped their interest in the property.
Community Development and Planning Commission
March 2, 1983
Page five
The owners of the property now desire to resume the rezoning process
which was discontinued by the earlier developers, Mr. Hughes explained.
Their overall development plans are very similar to the earlier preliminary plans
from a site plan and access standpoint. However, two of the units have been
relocated northerly on the site in order to accomodate a tennis court. The
elevation drawings of the units have been refined from the previous plans and
a detailed landscape schedule has been submitted. Our earlier recommendations
as to setbacks from Vernon and other property lines have been provided in
final drawings.
Mr. Hughes recommended approval of final rezoning conditioned upon
final platting. Final plat approval is conditioned upon subdivision dedication and
a developer's Agreement.
Mr. Paul Elmer was present and noted that Frank Cardarelle has no
connections with this new development proposal. He commented on the improvement
in the plans from the prior proposal.
2,,f4- Del Johnson questioned the need for variance and Mr. Hughes reported
a side yard variance and small front yard variance which have been granted before
on small parcels. js f+-
Del Johnson moved for approval of the proposal upon Staff's conditions
and John Palmer seconded the motion. All were in favor, the motion carried.
.i
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT AND PLANNING COMMISSION
STAFF REPORT
MARCH 3, 1983
Z -82 -3 Pearson /Elmer Townhouses, R -2 Two Family Dwelling District
to PRD -2 Planned Residence District. Generally located south
of Vernon Avenue and east of Vernon Court.
S -83 -4 Preliminary Plat of Pearson /Elmer Addition
Refer to: April 28, 1982, Staff Report; Attached Overall Development Plan
and Preliminary Plat
The subject property measures about 46,000 square feet in area and is composed
of two lots which are presently zoned R -2, Two Family Dwelling District.
Approximately one year ago, a request to rezone the property to PRD -2 was
considered by the Commission and Council. This request proposed a five unit
townhouse plan for the site. Although this plan received preliminary approval
from the City Council, the developers did not seek final approval and subse-
quently dropped their interest in the property.
The owners of the property now desire to resume the rezoning process which
was discontinued by the earlier developers. They have thus prepared an
overall development plan for the site and request final rezoning approval and
plat approval. The overall development plans are very similar to the earlier
preliminary plans from a site plan and access standpoint. However, two of
the units have been relocated northerly on the site in order to accomodate a
tennis court. The elevation drawings of the units have been refined from the
previous plans and a detailed landscape schedule has been submitted. Our
earlier recommenations as to setbacks from Vernon and other property lines
have been provided in the final drawings.
A site survey has also been submitted which will serve as a preliminary plat for
the site. This survey should be modified to illustrate townhouse type lots for
each dwelling. Easements for utilities should also be submitted on this plat.
Recommendation
Staff recommends final rezoning approval conditioned upon final platting.
Final plat approval is conditioned upon subdivision dedication and a Developer-'s
Agreement.
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT AND PLANNING COMMISSION
STAFF REPORT
APRIL 28, 1982
Z -82 -3 Jack Helms. R -2 Two Family Dwelling District to
PRD -2 Planned Residential District. Generally
located south of Vernon Avenue and east of Vernon
Court.
Refer To: Attached site plan and elevation schematic, and attached
Crosstown Hills subdivision.
The subject property measures approximately 46,000 square feet in area and
is zoned R -2 Two Family Dwelling District. The subject property is composed
of two lots that were platted (and zoned R -2) in 1979. This plat, which was
called Crosstown Hills, included three R -2 lots. An existing building on Lot
3 is currently. being retrofitted into a double bungalow. This building is
located immediately southwesterly of the subject property. Across Vernon
Avenue to the north are the Hansen /Martinson townhouses, Fountainwoods
Apartments and the Habitat.
The proponent is requesting a rezoning to PRD -2 Planned Residential District.
A preliminary site plan has been submitted which illustrates a five unit town-
house development of the property. These units would be served by a common
drive from Vernon Avenue. The units would back into the hillside which
slopes from east to west across the site. Two enclosed garage stalls per
unit and surface parking in the driveway areas are proposed. In addition
to the site plan, the proponent has submitted conceptual elevation drawings
for your review.
The proposal would require setback variances. Thirty -five foot building
setbacks are required from all property lines. A 20 foot setback from Vernon
Avenue and 10 foot setbacks from the east and southwest property lines are
requested.
Although a preliminary plat has not been submitted, the proponent states an
intent to propose a townhouse style plat. This plat will be submitted in
conjunction with final rezoning approval.
Recommendation
The subject property is designated for low density attached residential by
the Comprehensive Plan. The type and density of the use (i.e. five units /acre)
conform to the Plan. In our view, the proposed project represents an excellent
use for this parcel and should complement the townhouse and apartment develop-
ments to the north.
Our only reservation regarding this project has been its relationship to the
remodeled dwelling which is located on the abutting lot. In our view, the —
proposed Flan should not adversely impact this dwelling. The proponent
reports that the owner of this dwelling has approved the proposed plans.
lrurnniuniiy ueveiopment and ;Tanning Commission
Z -82 -3 Jack Helms
`April 28, 1982
Page 2
As noted previously, several setback variances will be required. We believe
that the side yard variances are appropriate in that they approximate required
setbacks for double bungalows. We request, however, that the Vernon Avenue
setback should be increased to a uniform setback of at least 30 feet. Likewise,
we request that the drive aisle setback on the west side should be increased
to 10 feet.
With these modifications, Staff recommends preliminary rezoning approval with
the following conditions:
1) Final rezoning is contingent on an acceptable overall development plan.
2) Final platting
3) Subdivision dedication based on one new dwelling unit.
AZW" 7-A
A,!7.L;k'7-1L7Al
l ,p
p d/
to Or
z
41
i
A
Y7
O � j � -i �. •r �a•ifat`�o: 3 \ \�\ \ �� qua \
V
-rU Q
Ae�EUMINAPY -5/7-EF PLAN
RON KRuEr.ER:: 6 ASSOCIATES,- INC-.-
I
N
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT AND PLANNING COMMISSION
STAFF REPORT
Z -83 -1 Gittleman Corporation, R -1 Single Family District to PRD -3 Planned
Residential District. Generally located west of Cahill Road and north
of Dewey Hill Road.
Refer to: Attached Plans
Preliminary approval by the Commission was given on February 9, 1983,
to rezone the subject property to allow the construction of 108 condominium units
on the 11.65 acre site. The City Council granted the project preliminary
approval at its February 28, 1983, meeting.
The proponent has returned with final development plans and is requesting
final zoning approval for the project. The plans presented meet all ordinance
requirements for completeness.
Included for the Commission's review is a site plan, grading plan,
parking level plan, main floor plan, unit plans, entertainment center plan, main
floor plan, elevations, building setction, site profile, landscape plan, survey
and utility plan,
Recommendation
Staff believes that the proponent is proposing an a porogriate use
and the development plan is an excellent example of multi family housing.
Staff does, however, have some problems with the technical aspects of the
plans. Staff believes that the landscaping should be increased around the
tennis court in the southeasterly corner of the site.
Additionally, Staff cannot accept the utility plan as presented.
/ Problems including the elevation of the pond and roadway, and the storm
sewer system must be addressed. If solutions to these problems are agreed
to, Staff recommends final, rezoning approval with the following conditions:
1. Final Zoning is conditioned on final platting,
2. An acceptable landscape plan and schedule,
3. A utility plan acceptable to Staff.
�1
MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE EDINA
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT AND PLANNING COMMISSION
HELD ON WEDNESDAY, MARCH 30, 1983
MEMBERS PRESENT: Chairman Bill Lewis, Gordon Johnson, Del Johnson
Helen McClelland, Mary McDonald, John Palmer, Leonard
Ring and Phil Sked
STAFF. PRESENT: Craig Larsen, Comprehensive Planner
Harold Sand, Assistant Planner
Fran Hoffman, City Engineer
Linda Elsen, Secretary
Approval of the Minutes: March 2, 1983
John Palmer moved for approval of the March 2, 1983, minutes. Leonard
Ring seconded the motion. All were in favor, the motion carried.
II. Old Business:
Z -83 -1 Gittleman Corporation R -1 Single Family Residence to PRD -3
Planned Residential District.
Mr. Craig Larsen noted that the Commission has given preliminary approval
of the rezoning of the subject property on February 9, 1983, to allow for the
construction of 108 condominium units on the 11.65 acre site. On February 28, 1983,
the City Council granted the project preliminary approval.
The proponent has returned with final development plans and is requesting
final zoning approval for the project. The plans presented are the site plan,
grading. plan, parking level plan, main floor plan, unit plans, entertainment center
plan, main floor plan, elevations, building section, site profile, landscape plan survey,
and utility plan which all meet ordinance requirements for completeness.
Mr. Larsen believed that the landscaping should be increased around the
tennis court in the southeasterly corner of the. site and explained that the - Gittleman-
Corporation agreed to comply with the request. He explained that the minor problems
Staff was concerned with in connection with the utility plans presented, had been
corrected also. He recommended final rezoning approval conditioned upon:
1. final platting;
2. an acceptable landscape plan and schedule;
3. staff approved utility plans.
Fran Hoffman stated that there were no problems with drainage and
agreed with the approval of the utility plans.
Gordon Johnson moved for final rezoning approval subject to Staff's conditions
and John Palmer seconded the motion. All were in favor; the motion carried.
RESOLUTION GRANTING FINAL PLAT
APPROVAL FOR COLONIAL COURT
BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Edina, Minnesota, that that
certain plat entitled "Colonial.Court ", platted by Donald R. and Shirley Ann
Berg, husband and wife, and presented at the regular meeting of the City Council
of April 4, 1983, be and is hereby granted final plat approval, subject to
payment of a subdivision dedication fee of $8,000.00 and execution of a
Developer's Agreement.
ADOPTED this 4th day of April, 1983.
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 April 4, 1983, and as
recorded in the Minutes of said Regular Meeting.
WITNESS my hand and seal of said City this 18th day of June, 1984.
City Clerk
1 '
1 _
II tt�
L..1�
i
Lis
m
ID3 m
1 1 [Did i
'yO,pDI
D
I
iI
1
/cH ID 1
' 1
r
r
r
r t 1
1 1
1
' A
ffi�l r
f f
�rE3 1 1 � 1
___.l______►_ -i_� I i .
Of2,AF.MPR
4WC6
I►Ita04 s tuu,aN4 a
WPAI<vWf,LA, L.EW15 PRFK
PSW 6Y 1416A, fRO,^V
Pewey HIw
D
L-
WRA JWTCqRCHM4S
v
---- ------
beNE4-tj-i, q4fOf�ri,--TION
al.-e KTOP,AffpI I.40 A e", A &4(o W,Pr. N%.
&f." O'le, fcno, W. fT. 10-7•
PAj1r-4t4dF
Iran 5f 1
60 elrra-
VOIT PAT,&
TO,r?J- VNrfS, lob q,oq Liwir. tlOe
C✓L-eeb6& IoV
GNP mvpwm 4 Oe#J 'I'k LJNiT'p 1,1191 'A.Pr. Ce,04
TWO 6ED(boM 4 rCN x UNITep 1,40 4-44
i
1
3
i
f; >isnvEi (rorosto
F�lFL�pV rrf<��ro vso�c�r�o�+
14
I 1 \ \
I I bo
I 1 I 1 1 1 ✓!1
. 1 �
-
I
\N.N\ \\ \11 1
- \
&d
1
Il1l
J I
�JNWIQN
iM
gu�wrms : • a crw eke (W FN [hNi+b �
I
1
I
d�
i
i
y
a
wl"
l
r
h
i
_i
r
a
a
0
0
'Ao
jog
ao
0
no
oZ
3 -
O
O HM
n � a
—1u1 g
o
cJ
r
i
_i
r
a
a
0
0
'Ao
jog
ao
0
no
oZ
3 -
O
O HM
n � a
—1u1 g
o
cJ
r
_i
r
a
a
0
0
'Ao
jog
ao
0
no
oZ
3 -
O
O HM
n � a
—1u1 g
o
cJ
r
17: i
i
DHE BEDROOM 6. DEH
UH97 0 ��6 U so. FT (NOT IN(.6UDINb MN44)
i
- I
s
7WO o & IDIEH
u V it 2 look so. Fir. (HOT INGLUDINb M;P4N)
n
®i
® I
0
1� ..
I
r
L
1� ..
I
r
m
b
TYPUCAL UHqlr ELEWAMOHO
Ff
� IIIIIilllll 1 1 1111111! �II111119111111d1111111U1 !111111 I ,,,,,,,; � � '� ;.,,,,, I 11lI !!II!!!I!!!Jlll!!!!!9!!!!!I!9 I
lllll Il I II l 111111111_Ililll_ 1IIII(II�II 11 11! III 111110. ( ,,,,w, ,!. ,,,; IIIIIIIIlIIIIIIUIlll11 !lU11!!lIIU
■ ■ ....... ... ..................�. ................. .... - - - -- --
II II II � I i
........
I II lu I IIV
END VIEW SECTION A
- IT1111FIflij
zz-
um
hCh
r
POOL &HEI
r
J�
LOBB'Y
1
HAH
P{ L p o L 7
>y vfiJb,v
ciru v0 J61.
0
1
POOL &HEI
r
J�
LOBB'Y
1
HAH
P{ L p o L 7
>y vfiJb,v
ciru v0 J61.
0
HAH
P{ L p o L 7
>y vfiJb,v
ciru v0 J61.
0
p
Rf161De- rrTI,-,
0xitiilr+Gi PPR�
II
twI'aI' (PPPftog)
P�P�►�A f'i'Y�k
,;.Colo II
PRoPvyEv �p1'E �
I
Fi51Df%I�GFi C�'I1oq I.PNNPM IPr!Fi
y0'D� h67 aPGK P9h11M�D
61.6,o fil'bT
W�`�T ��II.DING (bUII.DING L
b4�,o piR`jT pl,. ���dPjioN ..
b'Ih•o 1400 Gl.WPT1ar.
P�PSj PiJI�DiNG E�EdPTlarS Sirti�Plg (m���v�rG a)
r
i
p
Rf161De- rrTI,-,
0xitiilr+Gi PPR�
II
twI'aI' (PPPftog)
P�P�►�A f'i'Y�k
,;.Colo II
PRoPvyEv �p1'E �
I
Fi51Df%I�GFi C�'I1oq I.PNNPM IPr!Fi
y0'D� h67 aPGK P9h11M�D
61.6,o fil'bT
W�`�T ��II.DING (bUII.DING L
b4�,o piR`jT pl,. ���dPjioN ..
b'Ih•o 1400 Gl.WPT1ar.
P�PSj PiJI�DiNG E�EdPTlarS Sirti�Plg (m���v�rG a)
r
r
e
r
P Pi
f►Pl� �./wv DtOir�?ION
_ _ I
MA
bT
I I
�� '• GGL
GoS
� ` ;,�1 �• �::^.r� �' ``'\ �;; � Gas I
IIA H n
Is M
• .s
J
rbND�N®
Z2u� l:n; DCK_'
•rte ' .,�` �::�'-`.V `y .. ww
Is
1
I '
:w• I I
J
I
';..% Fp VAT& prl.4
R.�r S�nEa�LE OD
SYH
ctrl
Nit+E
eae
rmr
M1[r+MU6
C&;
81
cd+ twca�z
1O /i
Mew- Itr,E
1NFr�.�bc��ts•sirt6
:;•
�o
ot��ouou5.
2= "I ->• wlFtS- rw�srEO
oe�
�n•+gsrEGioS
On
44
n!44
StxuFE 'R•rre
Ayw+ vttnarL '-"�
v^rywa s use
WH
V
N6tH "Co wluoy�
Y1/v
1°�+n
vMYr�+661sE6
W6wiNb
�/
I�
2'�2' �iN 5rnt:6 �—��
7ftE wnrrvl.+b
I I
sr�e n.,ao
rrrwv Diu, p
��
a+orr��rt
��ot or
" 2'MiN•l,�Yth MULCH
II �
1'HiN,Lnyra.
H�•v
Gp rlvL-crt
�i
a r
e
REt'IaVe tlih/I'
NCIM,T"t G/u.
—!
I
91 -
I•ren -Op V ?l Of
SFt� u P:ITIJNtD
Ft•vre wh.,P
IX
u
' �'
fiCDf eV'lL
- TreE FLPNTINC7 GInINf� DETNL
•
�V�ICbRtJ
PI�iNT1N6 cruet,
No 4WLA
11
Fro 'v^z
:w• I I
J
I
';..% Fp VAT& prl.4
R.�r S�nEa�LE OD
SYH
ctrl
Nit+E
eae
rmr
M1[r+MU6
C&;
81
cd+ twca�z
1O /i
�.w
1NFr�.�bc��ts•sirt6
:;•
�o
ot��ouou5.
4'
oe�
�n•+gsrEGioS
0
ear
"Pry
tjmg
S.Ze
rQJr
fMa-v^MG
C&;
bl
srhra;
°�a'
'Of-Y,00 fjZf4
ti
Zo
MA-La
4•1w
/Hn
vMYwb#t�r� +yze5
On
44
n!44
ccm,
tO,(,".
v^rywa s use
WH
V
N6tH "Co wluoy�
Y1/v
1°�+n
vMYr�+661sE6
0
ear
T
t
B L i R i `�l E M rE •L F. /-0--/
Q Q /
:I SOUTHEAST CORNER Of OUTIOT /
/ -• -- 58382 k j--f— 6269 - .-
i
BOUNDARY SURVEY FOR
GITTLEMAN CORPORATION
n f'-f
---1326.51 S89 °55' 19 "W -- —NORTH LINE OF THE SW 1/4 OF THE NE 1/4 OF SEC. B. T. 116, N. 21
-- - -- - 04700 - --
I,- I Y I Ao / / R_
C� 4
-- Q o /� GRAS1 0
65� \ZP 54
O
za
CLN
O'
J I I C i i�
0
v
;(I ; '-82.00'" �— i
N 89'57'14 "E , QD•
o� �9
Sri
To
•� ski a FS o O06 J
`�3 �♦ � y CO
s /
r:
19 / rp�- ' O
K --1 - -- a) / t z v, LL- ;�-,�1 �
O J
L L/ ,1 I IS 35
=� -•
Ly� ♦ � f
fr SCALE IN FRET
I
0 50 100 150 200
' ORIENTATION OR THIS BEARING SYSTEM IS ASSUMED
0 DENOTES IRON MONUMENT
f
---760.22 EAST -• - -
A LINE 818 FEET NORTH OF AND PARALLEL WITH THE SOUTH LINE
OF TN[ SW 1/4 OF THE ItE 1/4
I
19
i' i l r'1 iti 1 �l i t 1
1�1A �(_�1Wr`'E -L_L.
U
1 �_ "I ' -r
t ;
A R K
1 HEREBY CERTIFY TO GITTLEMAM CORPORATION THAT THIS IS A TRUE AMD CORRECT REPRESENTATION
Of A SURVEY OF THE BOUNDARIES OF:
That part of the Southwlsl Quarter of the Northeast Quarter, Section B,
Township 116, Range 21 described as follows: Commencing at the Intersection
of the West line of said Southwest Quarter of the Northeast Quarter and the
Es f early 0 nfton Of the North TIM Of Lot 1, Block 2, leer lch "0111;
thence North slap the West tine of toed Southwest Quarter of the Northeast
Quarter a dbtance of 198.99 feet to the actual p01nt of beginning of Lhe
land to to described; thence latterly at rlgn[ angles to said West line of
the Southwest Quarter of the Northeast Quarter, a distance Of 82 feet; thence
Southeasterly, at a deflection angle of 45' 00' degrees to the right, to an
Intersection with a TIM running Southwesterly from the Southeast corner of
Outlot A, 8rae°ar Oats a an angle of 7)• 10' 020 as turned counter Clockwise
from the Southwest corner of said Outlot A; thence Northeasterly, along said
I1ne rut1,11ng Southwesterly from the Southeast corner of Outlot A, to an
Intersection with a line 816 feet North of and parallel with the South line
of Said Southwest Quarter of the Northeast Quarteri thence East along sold
line 818 feet Korth and parallel with the South line of the Southwest Quarter
55 I 55 I l
I
I p
M Z •`
-- 29895 -- - ._ 3000 /NORTHEAST COAAEN OF THE
SW 1/4 OF fit[ AE 1/4
- -- 331.95 S89 °55'19 "W - -- , -''�
� SOUTH LINE OF THE MONTH 30.0 FEET Of THE
SN 1/4 OF INE A[ 1/4
551 95
; w^
1
1 290 Y5 S d9.5� ig "w 00
s -1 PROPOSED$ :i ACCESS
w AREA • . 24 718 SO FTL /
--- -- - - - - ------ .M.74ACBES-----------
35B95 14119'55'19"R
. ri f'I� l i
t'1' -%A 1
, 'S V 1 , -
/1 1 '-iIV
of the Northeast Quarter to a point ))1.95 feel West of thi East line of
toId Southwest Quarter of the Northeast Quarter; thence Northerly parallel
to the [aft IIne of said Southwest Quarter of the Horthuast Quarter to the '
South line of the North 30.0 feet of sold Southwest Quarter of the Northeast
Quarter; thence East parallel with the MOrlh line Of the Southwest Quarter of
the Northeast Quarter to the Eat line of told Southwest Quarter of the
Northeast Quarter; thence North along the Eatt Il,le Of tb Southwest Quarter
of the NOrlheasl Quarter a distance Of )11.0 faeI. t0 the MOrtheaft corner of
asId 5oulhwett Quarter 01 the NurtAeaft Quarter; thence West along the North
l lne Of told Southwest Quarter of the Northeast Quarter to the Northwest
corner of told Southwe at Quarter of the Northeast Quarters thence South along
the Weft line of said Southwest Quarter of the Northeast Quarter to the point
of beginning.
AND OF THE LOCATION Of ALL BUILDINGS THEREON, IF ANY, AND ALL VISIBLE ENCROACHMENTS, IF
ANY, FROM OR ON SAID LAUD. AS SURVEYED BY TIE, OR UNDER MY DIRECT SUPERVISION, THIS
201. DAY OF JANUARY, 1983.
SIGNSDD: JAMES R. HILL. INC
HAROLD C. PETERSON, LAND SURVEYOR
MINNESOTA LICENSE NO. 12294
I —AREA• 99OSO.FT.
I 0.0227 ACRES
I
of
0
x
55 55 I
� I
a
A I
� Ir
�I
JI
33 33
al
I"
�I
PKOPOSSD WATER MAIN
I Vill, E;--,
O
zoninci
lc�-
REQUEST NI MBER : Z -79 -10
Braemar Associates
LOCATIoN. . Generally located west of Cahill Road
and north of VJ. 78th Street.
RFC ?UES 1': R -1 Single Family Dwelling to �� 41
PRD -3 Planned Residential District.
Overall plan apDroval.
% iI III ,•r. pr'tIrnin[' rfrr>nrir!ren
�I 1. 0. i( r4ri111:
-r—I
s
i
c
s
Community Development and Planning Commission
March 2, 1983
Page six
Z -79 -10 Plan Amendment to PRD -3, Planned Residential District Overall
Development Plan, Braemar Associates / Klodt Development Co.
Generally located west of Cahill Road and north of West 78th Street
Mr. Hughes reminded the Commission that the Commission and the Council
had granted final rezoning approval to PRD -3 for the subject property approximately
two years ago. At that time an eight building condominium project containing 89
units was approved. Construction of the condominium project has never commenced.
The property owners have now joined forces with Klodt Construction Company
who proposes to develop the east half of the site. Klodt desires to modify the overall
development plan to reflect a considerable reduction in the unit sizes as compared to
earlier plan. The revised plans illustrate two condominium buildings containing a
total of 54 dwelling units. These two, buildings will take the place of five
condominium buildings (also containino 54 units) which were proposed by the
.earlier plans. The present site plan illustrates considerably less building coverage
than the earlier plan due to the substantial decrease in unit size. Underbuilding
and surface parking are proposed in numbers which conform to our ordinance. As
with the earlier plan, a 15 foot parking setback from Cahill Road is proposed which
is below the required setback from 35 feet. All other setbacks are consistent with
our requirements.
A revised subdivision has not been submitted for the property. It is
our understanding that such a plat would divide the property. in half and, therefore,
two totally separate condominimum associations would be created.
Mr. Hughes noted that Staff was very supportive in the prior proposal
for the site and therefore, find it difficult to be enthusiastic about a plan which in
essence, separates the site into two distinct projects which are very different in terms
of their style and market.
He adds aknowledoement that the site is somewhat unique in terms of its
surrounding land uses which lead to a more modestly priced unit for the easterly
portion of the site and a luxury class unit for the westerly portion. The site
has excellent access which does not hinder the establishment of separate projects.
Mr. Hughes believes the site plan proposed a desirable placement of the
two condominium buildings and their accessory parking. The building coverage
of the new proposal is considerably reduced which will contribute to a feeling of
openness on the site. Staff requests modification to the site plan, however, in
that the parking setback from Cahill should be increased to 20 feet which is more
consistent with parking setbacks in other areas.
Also Staff would ask that additional work should be undertaken on the
elevation plans of the building. He expressed particular concern with the proposed
roof line of the building, especially the shed roofs which are shown in various
Mr. Hughes advised that the proponents are not
suggesting significant
changes
to the original plan for the west
half of the site.
Three condominium
buildings
containing 36 extrememly large
units continue to
be shown. (He noted
that the
approved plans show 35 units in
these buildings
rather than 36.) The
site plan
illustrates a slight re- alignment
of these buildings to the north and east
in order
to provide a more generous spacing between the
buildings.
A revised subdivision has not been submitted for the property. It is
our understanding that such a plat would divide the property. in half and, therefore,
two totally separate condominimum associations would be created.
Mr. Hughes noted that Staff was very supportive in the prior proposal
for the site and therefore, find it difficult to be enthusiastic about a plan which in
essence, separates the site into two distinct projects which are very different in terms
of their style and market.
He adds aknowledoement that the site is somewhat unique in terms of its
surrounding land uses which lead to a more modestly priced unit for the easterly
portion of the site and a luxury class unit for the westerly portion. The site
has excellent access which does not hinder the establishment of separate projects.
Mr. Hughes believes the site plan proposed a desirable placement of the
two condominium buildings and their accessory parking. The building coverage
of the new proposal is considerably reduced which will contribute to a feeling of
openness on the site. Staff requests modification to the site plan, however, in
that the parking setback from Cahill should be increased to 20 feet which is more
consistent with parking setbacks in other areas.
Also Staff would ask that additional work should be undertaken on the
elevation plans of the building. He expressed particular concern with the proposed
roof line of the building, especially the shed roofs which are shown in various
Community Development and Planning Commission
March 2, 1983
Page seven
locations. He also noted the landscape plans, grading plans, utility plans and
other final drawings should be submitted for review prior to approval of the
plan amendment by the Council.
Mr. Huahes stated that subject to the afore mentioned modifications and
comments, Staff recommends approval of the pla "n amendment conditioned upon
the elimination of one dwelling unit from the project in order to make the density
consistent with the earlier approval and submission of a revised subdivision for
the site.
Mr. Gene Nieland, the owner and Mr. Joe Swakman of Klodt Construction
were present to answer questions.
Mrs. McClelland questioned the elevation of the building. Mr. Swakman
replied approximately 40 feet. She also asked how many enclosed parking
spots per unit there were and Mr. Swakman answered 1 per unit with the option
to purchase a second at 1.4 per unit.
Mr. Swakman confirmed Mr. Hughes statement that the two separate
condominium developments were proposed to suit two different markets.
Mr. Del Johnson asked for a comment on Staff's suggestion to eliminate
one dwelling unit from the project. Mr. Swakman noted there would be no
problem.
Helen McClelland moved for approval subject to Staff's conditions and
Len Fernelius seconded the motion. All were in favor the motion carried.
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT AND PLANNING COMMISSION
STAFF REPORT
MARCH 2, 1983
Z -79 -10 Braemar Associates / Klodt Construction Co.
Generally located west of Cahill Road and north of West .78th Street
Refer to: Revised overall development plan; October 1, 1980, Staff report
The Commission and Council granted final rezoning approval to PRD -3 for the
subject property approximately two years ago. At that time, an eight building
condominium project containing 89 units was approved. This project included
excess right -of -way from land acquired for Delaney Boulevard. Construction of
the condominium project has never commenced.
The property owners have nowjoined forces with Klodt Construction Company
who proposes to develop the east half of the site. Klodt desires to modify
the overall - development plan to reflect a considerable reduction in the unit
sizes as compared to the earlier plan. The revised plans illustrate two
condominium buildings containing a total of 54 dwelling units. These two
buildings will take the place of five condominium buildings (also containing
54 units) which were proposed by the earlier plans. The present site plan
illustrates considerably less building coverage than the earlier plan due to the
substantial decrease in unit sizes. (The present units are less than one half
the floor area of the prior condominiums.) Underbuilding and surface parking
are proposed in numbers which conform to our ordinance. As with the earlier
plan, a 15 foot parking setback from Cahill Road is proposed which is below
the required setback of 35 feet. All other setbacks are consistent with our
requirements.
The proponents have also submitted schematic floor plans and elevation drawings
in support of their plan amendment. Landscape plans , grading plans,
utility plans, and so forth have not been submitted at this time.
The proponents are not suggesting significant changes to the original plan
for the west half of the site. Three condominium buildings containing 36
extremely large units continue to be shown. (It should be noted that the
approved plans show 35 units in these buildings rather than 36.) The site
plan illustrates a slight re- alignment of these buildings to the north and east
in order to provide a more generous spacing between the buildings.
A revised subdivision has not been submitted for the property. It is our
understanding that such a plat would divide the property in half and therefore two
totally separate condominium associations would be created.
Community Development and Planning Commission
March 2, 1983
Page two
Recommendation:
We were very supportive of the prior proposal for the site. Thus, it is
difficult for us to be enthusiastic about a plan which in essence, separates
the site into two distinct projects which are very different in terms of their
style and market.
However, we acknowledge that the site is somewhat unique in terms of its
surrounding land uses which lead to a more modestly priced unit for the
easterly portion of the site and a luxury class unit for the westerly portion.
Also, the site has excellent access which does not hinder the establishment
of separate projects.
We believe the site plan proposes a desireable placement of the two condominium
buildings and their accessory parking. The ponding area in the center of
the site is retained as originally shown and should provide an excellent
amenity for the project. As noted earlier, the building coverage of the new
proposal is considerably reduced which will contribute to a feeling of openess
on the site. Our only .requested modification to the site plan is that the
parking setback from Cahill. should be increased to 20 feet which is more
consistent with parking setbacks in other areas.
We would ask that additional work should be undertaken on the elevation plans
of the building. We are particulary concerned with the proposed roof line of
the building, especially the shed roofs which are shown in various locations.
JAs noted earlier, landscape plans, grading plans, etc., which usually
are submitted in cases such as this have not been provided. Such drawings
should be provided for review prior to approval of the plan amendment
by the Council.
Subject to the above modifications and comments, Staff recommends approval
of the plan amendment conditioned upon:
1. The elimination of one dwelling unit from the project in order to
make the density consistent with the earlier approval and
2. submission of a revised subdivision for the site.
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT AND PLANNING ,COMMISSION
STAFF REPORT
OCTOBER 1, 1980
Z -79 -10 Braemar Associates. R -1 Single Family Dwelling to
PRD -3 Planned Residential District. Final rezoning
and preliminary plat approval.
Refer to: Attached overall development plans and November 28, 1979,
Staff Report
The Commission and City Council granted preliminary approval of this re-
zoning to PRD -3 in late 1979. You will recall that this development plan
incorporates a portion of the property acquired by the City for Delaney
Boulevard.
The proponents have now returned with overal development plans and are
requesting final rezoning approval. As before, the site plan illustrates 89
condominium units located in eight buildings which represent an overall
density of about 8.5 units per acre. Approximately two enclosed parking
spaces and .5 exposed parking spaces per unit are proposed.
The overall development plans also include a grading plan, a concept land-
scape plan, utility plan, unit plans, and elevation drawings. In addition,
the proponents have submitted a preliminary subdivision.
Recommendation
Staff believes that the proponents have prepared an excellent development
concept for the site. The plan preserves the slopes and vegetation in the
west central portion of the site and proposed a proper use of the wetland
area in the east central portion of the site.
Staff's criticism of the plans relate primarily to the apparent need for set-
back variances and the location of exposed parking areas. The PRD section
of the Zoning Ordinance requires a 35 foot setback for buildings and parking
from all property boundaries. The proposed plan violates this setback on
-all four sides. We believe that building setback variances along Delaney
Boulevard are reasonable due to the curvature of the street. However, we
believe that the two buildings along Cahill should be adjusted by providing
smaller unit sizes to meet the 35 foot setback. Similarly, the pool building
should be adjusted to meet this setback from the north boundary.
Staff is also concerned with the location of exposed parking. The two
parking areas. along Delaney are located entirely within the setback area.
Also, the driveway entrances to these parking areas exhibit poor- site distances
for Delaney traffic. Likewise, the parking area on the east side is within
the setback area and abuts Cahill Road. It should be noted that this parking
area was not shown on the preliminary plan.
........., - -I r......, ... ...... . .......... J ..............
Z -79 -10 Braemar Associates
Page 2
In addition to these concerns, Staff also notes that a "concept" landscape
plan has been submitted. The ordinance requires a detailed landscape plan
and plant schedule. We agree that it is difficult to prepare such a detailed
plan with this site due to the abundance of existing vegetation which may be
preserved. However, a more detailed plan should be prepared prior to
final approval by the Council. Also, the exterior materials on all buildings
should be noted on the plan.
Therefore, we recommend overall plan approval with the understanding that
the above noted features should be modified. Approval is recommended
conditioned on final platting and subdivision dedication.
-r -
i
', I '° � � . j o �_ _; i � ; 1, `�..,...,,_, � � •, ' � i ; I�,'
t� y-
;\ o, � ►� � �,�:I I it
ji
1p
J/P
I/
d a
J
nl
�0
I
LA-4
LIv1NG.f— _ \,\ %ti';ZI I r �L \' /�' •`> / x
Y ter': -\� i
I .
:.rvlI
71G^:-ell
LI
Ifl:
Is
I
LA-4
LIv1NG.f— _ \,\ %ti';ZI I r �L \' /�' •`> / x
Y ter': -\� i
I .
:.rvlI
71G^:-ell
LI
F-
April 15, 1983
City of Edina
4801 West 50th Street
Edina, Minnesota 55424
Members of the City Council:
Regarding,the Council meeting to be held April 18th, 1983. Item two
for consideration, Preliminary Plat Approval of Normandale Bluff,
generally located West of Rolf Avenue and South of West 50th Street.
Generally described as lots 6, 7, 8, 9 and the north z of lot 10,
Block 10, Normandale Second Addition.
I am Rodger Rostad, homeowner of 6433 Rolf, a 100 ft. lot directly East
of the above lots 9 and 10, which make up the proposed Wallace subdivision
parcel C (South lot).
In the event that I can not be in attendance of the April 18th meeting,
I wish to state clearly my views of the proposed Wallace subdivision request.
I have attended both meetings of the Planning Commission on March 2, 1983
and Match 30th, 1983. I have reviewed both Wallace proposals and reviewed
other requests for variances. Since the March 2nd meeting, I have attended
several meetings with concerned neighbors. My conclusions remain unchanged
and I am in agreement with the Planning Commission's findings and their
rejection of the request for variances. I believe the subdivision would
be uncharacteristic of the neighborhood, incompatible with surrounding
properties and in direct conflict with Edina's lot width and area
requirements., whose purpose is to preserve the openness and spaciousness of
residental neighborhoods and prevent an increase in density.
I support the group of neighbors who oppose the subdivision and will continue
to support them with whatever it takes.
Sincerely,
Rodger Rostad
6433 Rolf Avenue
Edina, Minnesota 55435
4fS9 M
y
a
4S Nf 9 9 lH
gyp!
— Al
oaf
Sb
0.9
ooh N� ��
�
�� oo� - Of
S yG ppl.
'a 5
b 10 09 $ oe
oo l 05 G °� 001
05 5 oy
f�
0
i
b
V
V
ti
�0
W
NORMANDALE BLUFFS
REVISION II OF SUBDIVISION PROPOSAL
APRIL 18, 1983
This revision would subdivide the property into three parcels.
Parcel A would be 75feet in width, Parcel B would be 83feet
in width and Parcel C would be 67 feet in.width.
Parcel A becomes a buildable lot if.and when the existing
attached garage on Parcel B is made to conform to set back
requirements, i.e, the north wall of the attached.garage is
at least 5 feet from the north line of Parcel B.
Parcel C becomes a buildable lot.if and when the existing
structure on Parcel B is made to conform to set back requirements,
i.e, the south wall of the house is at least 10 feet from
the south.line of Parcel B.
REVISION II
PARCEL A
Lot 6.and north 2 of lot 7, Block 10, Normandale
2nd Addition.
PARCEL B
Lot 7, except the north z thereof, Lot 8, and north
8.0 feet of Lot 9, B1ock.10, Normandale 2nd Addition.
PARCEL C
Lot 9, except the north 8.0 feet there of and the
north z of lot 10; Block 10, Normandale 2nd Addition.
iq
10/25 SQ•Fr
.23 AC.
Parcel Al
p.oposea� /of / %ne
F-r \
- Parcel B
-
se
d /o* /:ne = ,
propo .�_
` j/' -• Via. .
\\ \ 0 y S SQ. FT. H
Ac. I
7ardetl C.-.
-
*
1 e .00—
PROPOSED LOT SPLITS For:
Dl1NCAN WALLACE-
5 1 ON ZC
d
,s -
b.
-
se
d /o* /:ne = ,
propo .�_
` j/' -• Via. .
\\ \ 0 y S SQ. FT. H
Ac. I
7ardetl C.-.
-
*
1 e .00—
PROPOSED LOT SPLITS For:
Dl1NCAN WALLACE-
5 1 ON ZC
d
,s -
Z!
. ....`
LU
i 1
/1205 SQ.I:T
-
se
d /o* /:ne = ,
propo .�_
` j/' -• Via. .
\\ \ 0 y S SQ. FT. H
Ac. I
7ardetl C.-.
-
*
1 e .00—
PROPOSED LOT SPLITS For:
Dl1NCAN WALLACE-
5 1 ON ZC
d
,s -
Target Stores 777 Nicollet Mall T / '
' Minneapolis, Minnesota 55402 � (J°
T,,,x,
March 25, 1983
Mr. Gordon Hughes
City Planner, City of Edina
City Hall
Edina, Minnesota 55424
RE: Target Proposal for April 4 Public Hearing
Dear Gordon:
Enclosed are four copies of the proposal by Target Stores for
the modification to our site, as we've outlined previously in
sketch drawings submitted to your office. These attached
legal statements written in a form of Resolution are set out
as a suggested wording. You will want to have your City
Attorney review prior to April 4th.
Our Corporate Attorney, William Hise, drafted this and may be
reached at 370 -6884 if there are questions on the legal aspects.
Also, I may be reached at 370 -5804 for business - related questions.
Sincerely,
Thomas A. Bonneville
Project Administrator
Enclosures
cc: Jack Rice, The Rice Company
Darrell Creamer, Target
TAB /cb
A Division of the Dayton- Hudson Corporation
r
RESOLUTION NO.:
A RESOLUTION AMENDING CERTAIN RESTRICTIONS
FOUND IN A DECLARATION OF RESTRICTIONS
AND PROTECTIVE COVENANTS
AND AMENDING A GRANT OF EASEMENT
WHERE =LS, Yorktown Investment Co., Inc; Glacier
Sand and Gravel Company; and George J. Ablah and
Virainia L. Ablah, husband and wife; have heretofore
executed and delivered that certain instrument dated
May 3, 1972.entitled "Declaration of Restrictions and
Protective Covenants "; and
WHEREfiS, the aforementioned Declaration of
Restrictions and Protective Covenants applies, in hart., to
Lot 1, Block 2, Yorktown, according to the recorded plat
thereof, Hennepin County, Minnesota; and
WHEREAS: the aforementioned Declaration: of
Restrictions and Protective Covenants provides, in part,
at Section C, paae O:
and
"The covenants and restrictions herein contained
may be released only by the Villaae of Edina and
rr:ay be released as to any one or more of the
Yorktown Lots bv the Villaqe of Edina, at a ^y
time and from time to time, ;✓y its sole act.
Any such release shall be made or done by
resolution of the Edina Villaqe Council and
shall be ezofective only upon the recording of
such resolution in the same office in which
this instrument has been recorded ";
WHEREAS, Yorktown Investment Co., Inc., Glacier
Sand and Gravel Company. and George J. Ab1ah and Virainia
L. Ablah, husband and wife, as Owners, did; by instru;r,ent
entitled "Grant. of Easement" dated May 3, 10112, grant,'
bargain, sell, and convey unto the Villaae of Edina certain
easement rights in and over Lot 1, Bloc{ 2, Yorktown; and
WHEREAS, the owner of Lot 1, Block 2, 1'orktown,
TGrgP.t Stores, Dayton- Hudso:: Corporation; has petitioned
the City of Edina. to release a portion of the restrictions
applicable to Tot. I, Block 2, Yorktown, as contained in the
Declaration of RPstr.ictions and Protective Covenants:
and to *codify the easements in and over Tot., 1, Block 2,
Yorktown,.contained in the Grant of Easements.
0325653
WHEREAS, the City of Edina. by its City Council,
is hi l l inn to :modify the aforementioned restrictions, and �
modify the aforementioned easements.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL
OF THE CITY OF EDINA, MI- NNESOTA., that the provisions of
Section 5(a)(i) of the Declaration of Restrictions and
Protective Covenants dated May 3, 1972, are, in part,
released so as to permit a parking area to be constructed
and maintained adjacent and continuous to.the south side
of the existinG building as shown on a drawing entitled
"Access Revision - Tarcaet" dated February 2, 1983, a corm
of whic' is in the permanent records of the City of Edina;
AND BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED; that the terms,
covenants and conditions of the :rant of Easements dated
Mav 3, 1972 in favor. of the Citv of Edina are hereby modi-
fied so as to permit a narking lot to be constructed and
maintained adjacent and contiguous to the south side of the
existinca building as show, on a drawing entitled "Access -
Revision - Tarcet" dated February 2, 1983., a copy of which
is in the permanent records of the City of Edina;
AND BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, THAT THE'City Clerk
of the Citv of Edina is directed to furn.-Lsh to Tarcaet Stores,
Dayton- Hudson Corporation, a true-and correct copy of this
Resolution, in recordable form;
AND.BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that this Resolution
shall be effective.only upon the recordinca of this Resolution
in the same office in which the Declaration of Restrictions
and Protective Covenants and the Grant of Easement are
recorded.
ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDINA ON THE
DAY OF APRIL. 1983.
ATTEST
City Clerk-
-2-
Mayor
r
w �
ice_ 68 CCNC. WW- &bTOF5 C@ 4!
Mom a-W,. wpa
,o N • TARGET
p EVINA, MINN. _.
\ �f 57 APPITIC4� 'Wlv. laiPAACI:S
\\ II 25
E'd ar - 9VEWAI.K
870.3
\ rvv WF-WAI J, @ END
\
c NFEW END AAAND =<'
cy
`r
U . _
ANLwr 4AT44 W61N5 Ms N ICY
MOVE F9FE HYP V (EITHER 91DE OF
r % NRW irGM-rs PRJVE.
-_'�-
�It
!"TY or
2JRED �1A
4801 WEST 50TH STREET. ED!NA. r: MESOTA 53424
612- 927 -8861
January 31, 1983
Mr. Thomas A. Bonneville
Project Administrator
Target
777 Nicollet Mall
P.O. Box 1392
Minneapolis, MN 55440
Re: Edina Target Store
Dear Tom:
After our meeting on January 20, 1983, we reviewed your preliminary plans
regarding the relocation of the southerly driveway entrance and the provision
of additional parking at the Edina Target Store. We also reviewed the
Declaration of Restrictions as well as the Grant of Easement which affect these
proposed modifications' (copies enclosed) . According to these documents,
1.) no parking areas or driveways shall be constructed closer than 35 feet
to the sides or front of the building, and 2.) driveway entrances are limited
to those locations now used. Therefore, the modifications which you seek
will require a release, in part, of the Declarations and a consent as to the
Grant of Easement. This release and consent must be granted by our City
Council.
In our review of the plans as well as an inspection of the site, we concluded
that the present driveway location and alignment appears superior to that
which is proposed. Our criticisms are as follows. First, sight distance
is reduced for exiting vehicles relative to east bound Hazelton traffic. Second
traffic entering the south driveway destined to the new parking spaces which
are forced to wait for exiting vehicles, may create a back up onto Hazelton.
Third, it seems that the new driveway location would contribute to a speeding
problem in front of the store. From a traffic circulation and channelization
standpoint, we could not identify any particular advantages of the new plan.
Likewise, we could not identify a particular need for the additional parking
spaces which are proposed. Perhaps the parking issue could best be evaluated
in light of a specific reuse of the Applebaums site.
Tom, we certainly do not intend to dictate parking lot design for Target.
However, the Declarations and Easements referred to earlier were imposed
for a reason. We cannot identify satisfactory reasons for their release at
this time relative to the driveway entrance and parking. Therefore, we can't
recommend approval of the proposed plan.
Edina Target Store
January 31, 1983.
Page two
I will be glad to schedule this matter as an agenda item for the
Council at your request.
Sincer ly
Gordon L. Hughes
City Planner
GLH /lde
c: Fran Hoffman
City, Engineer
REQUEST FOR PURCHASE 11-1,r y�
-0
TO: Mayor and City Council
FROM: Francis J. Hoffman, City Engineer
VIA: Kenneth Rosland, City flanaver
SUBJECT: REQUEST FOR PURCHASE OF ITEN-IN EXCESS OF $5,000
DATE: April 14, 1983
Material Description (General Specifications):
Contract #83 -1 (Eng) Permanent Street Surfacing with Concrete Curb & Gutter
Improvement No. BA -256 - Gleason Court from Gleason Road to Cul -de -sac
BA -257 - Nob Hill Road in-Oak Ridge of Edina
" BA -258 - Browndale, Coolidge, Brook, and Mackey from W. 44th St. to No.
Quotations /Bids: City Limits
Company Amount of Quote or Bid
1. See attached Tabulation
2.
3.
Department Recommendation: Asphalt Paving Materials, Inc. $92,934.50
i
Zcc %a Public Works - Engineering
S i.' jKa ture Department
Finance Director's Endorsement:
The recommended bid is ✓ is .not
within the amount budget for the purchase.
,// J. PI. Va I en, Finance Director
City Manager's Endorsement:
1. I concur with the recommendation of the Department and recommend Council approve
the purchase.
2. I recommend as an alternative:
TABULATION OF BIDS
CITY OF EDINA, MINNESOTA
CONTRACT #83 -1 (ENG)
PERMANENT STREET SURFACING AND CONCRETE CURB AND GUTTER
IMPROVEMENT NO.'S BA -256, BA -257, AND BA -258
CONTRACT #83 -2 (ENG)
ALLEY PAVING
IMPROVEMENT NO. E -31
BID OPENING - APRIL 14, 1983 - 11:00 A.M.
BIDDER
CONTRACT #83 -1 CONTRACT #83 -2
SECTION "A" SECTION "B" SECTION "C" TOTAL SECTION "D"
Asphalt Paving Materials
$31,828.25
$13,510.75
$47,595.50
$92,934.50
Midwest Paving & Re- Cycling
$31,992.00
$14,227.25
$48,564.00
$94,783.25
Victor Carlson & Sons, Inc.
$32,936.50
$13,794.50
$53,144.20
$99,875.20
Bury & Carlson, Inc.
$34,536.50
$14,901.45
$51,878.64
101,316.59
Valley Paving, Inc.
$33,347.45
$15,306.50
$57,679.13
$106,333.08
Bituminous Roadways, Inc.
$40,110.00
$15,061.00
$55,852.10
$111,023.10
Barber Construction Company
$37,144.40
$16,971.50
$61,346.68
$115,462.58
Minn -Kota Excavating
$51,130.00
$18,346.00
$71,468.00
$140,944.00
ENGINEER'S ESTIMATE
$39,178.75
14,948.75 +$58,979.20
$113,106.70
$24,494.75
REQUEST FOR PURMA SE
TO: .Mayor and City Council
FROM: Fran Hoffman, City Engineer
VIA: Kenneth Rosland, City Nanaver
SUBJECT: REQUEST FOR PURCHASE OF ITEM IN EXCESS OF $5,000.
DATE: April 14, 1983
Material Description (General Specifications):
Contract #83 -2 (Eng) Concrete Alley Paving from Alley between Abbott and
Beard, West 59th to West 60th Street
Quotations /Bids:
Company Amount of Quote or Bid
1• See attached Tabulation
2.
K3
Department P.ecor.nendation: Standard Sidewalk, Inc.
Finance Director's Endorsement:
The recommended bid is v is not
$22,462.50
Public Wo
signat0e Departmen
within the amount budget for the purchase.
W //d
9M
en, Finance Director
City Manager's Endorsement:
1. I concur with the reco►r.nendation of the Department and recommend Council approve
the purchase. /
2. I recommend as an alternative: �1
eth Rosland, qity Manager
TABULATION OF BIDS
CITY OF EDINA, MINNESOTA
CONTRACT #83 -1 (ENG)
PERMANENT STREET SURFACING AND CONCRETE CURB AND GUTTER
IMPROVEMENT NO.'S BA -256, BA -257, AND BA -258
CONTRACT #83 -2 (ENG)
ALLEY PAVING
IMPROVEMENT NO. E -31
BID OPENING - APRIL 14, 1983 - 11:00 A.M.
BIDDER
CONTRACT #83 -1 CONTRACT #83 -2
SECTION "A" SECTION "B" SECTION "C" TOTAL SECTION "D"
Standard Sidewalk, Inc.
$22,462.50
Concrete Curb Company
$24,001.00
Victor Carlson & Sons, Inc.,
$24,247.25
Midwest Paving & Re- cycling
$24,746.25
Minn -Kota Excavating
$31,670.00
U. S. Masonry & Concrete
$34,058.75
ENGINEER'S ESTIMATE
$39,178.75
14,948.75i$58,979.20
$113,106.70
$24,494.75
April 15, 1983
TO: MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL
FROM: FRANCIS HOFFMAN, CITY ENGINEER
VIA: KENNETH ROSLAND, CITY MANAGER
SUBJECT: AGREEMENTS WITH EDEN PRAIRIE /WASHINGTON AVENUE
The City of Eden Prairie desires to update our existing agreements on the
following items along Washington Avenue (the border street):
sanitary sewer control and maintenance
watermain control and maintenance
storm sewer maintenance
street maintenance
Additionally, they would seek to enter. into a new agreement on a traffic
signal installation at Valley View Road and Washington Avenue.
The history behind the existing sanitary sewer, watermain, and storm sewer
service agreement is as follows: Various agreements have provided that Edina
will provide service until such time that Eden Prairie is in position to
assume same. Eden Prairie now states that they have improved their system to
a point where they wish to assume the lines on Washington Avenue. Edina has
maintained the systems to this point.
The history behind the street and storm sewer maintenance has been that
Eden Prairie will maintain both systems and conduct routine maintenance on
Washington Avenue.
The traffic signal agreement request at Washington Avenue and Valley View
Road is a new request. Hennepin County used to control Valley View Road
west of County Road 18 as County Road 39. The County is currently re-
constructing Valley View Road west of County Road 18 and is turning it over
to Eden Prairie except for the portion between Washington Avenue and the
west ramps of County Road 18. Eden Prairie is currently paying for the project
and requests that the City of Edina participate in the traffic signal construct-
ion at Washington Avenue and Valley View Road.
Our staff position to the Council is as follows:
A. Update the existing sanitary sewer, watermain and storm sewer
agreements to include the following:
1. Eden Prairie will service all properties on the west side
of County Road 18 with sewer and water except for two prop-
erties which must continue to be sewered to Edina. The
sewer changeover would require a sign -off by Bloomington
and an approval by the Metropolitan Waste Control Commission.
2. The sewer rates would remain approximately the same for the
property owners Edina serves west of County Road 18 after
the changeover.
3. The water rates would approximately double for our current
water users on Washington Avenue due to the fact that Eden
Prairie provides softened water.
B. Eden Prairie would pay for construction that was done for
completion of a watermain loop on the east side of County Road 18.
Previously approved by both City Councils in 1981.
C. Eden Prairie would pay back charges for water and sewer and Edina
would pay back charges for street and storm sewer maintenance on
Washington Avenue.
Page 2 - Agreements with Eden Prairie /Washington Avenue
D. Eden Prairie and Edina split the cost of the traffic signal
installation with Eden Prairie maintaining the signal and Edina
paying the electricity cost in lieu of being billed for future
maintenance on Washington Avenue.
The above items are the Staff recommendations which we would suggest in
drawing up the various new agreements. The staff will make a presentation
Monday evening in more detail regarding the various existing agreements.
FJH:1m
Minnesota Department of Transportation
District Five
5801 Duluth Street
Golden Valley, Minnesota 55422
(612)545 -3761
April 6, 1983
Mr. Dennis L. Hansen, P.E.
County Traffic Engineer
Hennepin County Dept. of Transportation
320 Washington Avenue.South
Hopkins, MN 55343
Res 315 - Speed Zoning
Hennepin County - CSAH -158
Dear Mr. Hansen:
A speed limit authorization was issued by the State Traffic Engineer on
April 1, 1983 for CSAH -158 between CSAR -62 and T.H.100.
You will notice one difference between the speed limits contained in the
authorization and the speed limit recommendations listed in my letter to
you last December €3. The recommended 35 MPH zone between Villa Way and
a point 450 feet west of Summit Avenue was not authorized. Instead, the
existing 30 11PH limit for this area was retained. The reasons given for
the change are: high volume of turning vehicles, limited sight distance,
and greater speed limit continuity.
While evaluating speed limits on CSAH -158, it was observed that the wide
road width existing between Glacier Place and Villa Way contributes to
two different lane configurations being assumed by road users. Some
drivers choose to drive the road as a four lane street while others
assume only two lanes exist. To alleviate the resulting conflict, we
suggest you consider additional striping. Two possible alternatives are:
1) Restrict parking and mark the road as a four lane undivided street.
2) Strips an eight foot shoulder /parking area for each direction of
travel, thereby restricting each driving lane to :a fourteen foot
width.
An Equal Opportunity Employer
Mr. Dennis L. Hansen
April 6, 1983
Page Two
Based on the data obtained during the recent study, existing speed limits
on CSAH -158 appear reasonable. The most effective means of responding to
local concern would probably be more stringent enforcement directed
against those driving over the limit.
We apologize for the length of time required to issue a new speed limit
authorization for CSAH -158. If you have questions concerning either the
authorization or our recommendations, please call me.
Sincerely,
J. S. Katz, P.E.
District Traffic Engineer
cc: Francis J. Hoffman, City of Edina
JSK:pn:EB
a
HENNEPIN
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
320 Washington Av. South,.
Hopkins, Minnesota 55343
935 -3381
Mr. Fran Hoffman
Director of Public Works
City of Edina
4801 blest 50th Street
Edina, MN 55424
Re: CSAH 158 Speed Zoning
Dear Fran:
April 7, 1983
Attached is a speed limit authorization from MN /DOT designating speed
limits on CSAH 158 (Gleason Rd.- Vernon.Ave.) from CSAH 62 to TH 100.
The only change authorized is between CSAH 62 and View Lane where the
speed limit is lowered from 35 MPH to 30 MPH. The existing 40 MPH speed
limit between iew Lane and Villa Way and the existing 30 MPH between
Villa Way and TH 100 remain as posted.
Signing changes will be made by our field crews within the next ten
days.
Yo s truly,
Dennis L. Hansen, P. E.
County Traffic engineer
DLH:de
Attachment
HENNEPIN COUNTY
an equal opportunity employer
j Mn /nqf ?9213 (12 -78)
STATE OF MINNESOTA
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
LOCAL STREET OR HIGHWAY SPEED LIMIT AUTHORIZATION
(or (
Page_ of _I Pages
Road Authority Hennepin County
�.aun
Date April 1, 1983
Road Name or No.
County State Aid Highway 158
Termini of Zone: From
South ramps of County State Aid Highway 62 interchange
To West end of bride 27102 over T.N.
g 1010
Date of a pte
�ptember 21, 1982
Kindly make the following changes in speed limits on the above - referenced section. Changes authorized herein are in
accordance with Minnesota Highway Traffic Regulation Act, M.S. Chapter 169.14 and applicable subdivisions thereof.
30 miles per hour between the intersection with the south ramps of
County State Aid Highway 62 interchange and the intersection with
View Lane.
+0 �aiies p4r hour between the intersection with View Lane and the
intersection with Villa Way.
30 miles per hour between the intersection vA th Villa Way and the
west end of bridge 27102 over Trunk Highway 100.
Please Sj'qnature of Tra�itc ngi eer
Sign
Here
(3) White — Road Authority
(1) Pink — Central Office Traffic
(1) Blue — District Traffic Engineer
for Road Authority use only
Date traffic control devices changed implementing this authorization
Month - Day -Year I Signature I Title
TO: MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL
FROM: FRANCIS HOFFMAN, CITY ENGINEER
VIA: KENNETH ROSLAND, CITY MANAGER
SUBJECT: FEASIBILITY REPORT, 83 -3 - SET HEARING DATE
The following improvement has been investigated and it has been determined
that it is feasible, and its construction would be in the best interest of
the overall development of the City of Edina.
IMPROVEMENT AND LOCATION ESTIMATED COST
P -BA -260
Bituminous Street Overlay and Concrete
Curb and Gutter Replacement.
Golf Terrace from Wooddale Avenue to $128,356.21
2100 + feet west (to approximately
Lake Harvey)
This project would be 50% assessed and 50% funded by general funds as in the
policy on curb and gutter replacement project. The proposed hearing date
would be May 16, 1983.
FJH:lm
4/15/83
MEMORANDUM
TO: KENNETH ROSLAND, CITY MANAGER
FROM: MIKI GAMER, CHAIR, HRC
SUBJECT: FORMATION OF A SENIOR CIT ZEN AD HOC COMMITTEE.
DATE: APRIL 6, 1983
The Human Relations Commission requests the City Council to sanction
the formation of a Senior Citizen Ad Hoc Committee, as a sub - committee
of the Commission, with the-purpose of assessing the needs of senior
citizens in Edina.
Senior needs could possibly be assessed by contacting: churches, the
Senior Center, adult day care centers, meals on wheels, Crimewatch,
Fire and Police Departments, Bloomington Public Health, South Hennepin
Human Services Council, Senior Citizen groups, grocery stores, and
beauty shops. This list is neither final nor complete but gives an
idea of where a start might be made.
Kathrine Sehlin has offered to assemble the committee drawing on inter-
ested citizens from the community.
CS : j km
THIRD BIENNIAL TRI -CITY COMMUNITY HEALTH MEETING
Date: April 26, 1983
Time: 7:00 - 9:00 p.m.
Place: Bloomington City Hall
2215 W. Old Shakopee Road
Bloomington, Minnesota
The Advisory Boards of Health of the Cities of Bloomington, Richfield and
Edina cordially invite you to attend the Third Biennial Tri -City Community
Health Meeting for the south suburban area. This meeting is sponsored by
the Advisory Boards of Health in conjunction with the South Hennepin Human
Services Council. This meeting provides an excellent opportunity for you to
participate and gain understanding of the local process.
The tentative agenda includes two keynote speakers, response by community
representatives and audience dialogue .with the speakers. The keynote speakers
are:
* Sister Mary Madonna Ashton, State Commissioner of Health
* Ben Aune, Executive Director, Minnesota Council of Health,
Promotion and Wellness
Community responses will be given by:
* Jim Lindau, Mayor, City of Bloomington
* Helen Yates, Director of Select Care - An Alternate Health Plan;
South Hennepin Human Services Council Board of Directors; liaison
to Richfield Advisory Board of Health
* Bruce Nydahl, M.D., Chairperson, Edina Advisory Board of Health
Norris Olson, Chairman, . South Hennepin Human Services Council Board of
Directors will Chair the meeting and moderate the panel.
We look forward to seeing you at the Tri -City Community Health Meeting.
i2
Initials Bale
Prepared By
Approved By
14,
■
ro
ON
0
0
Mll
.-
ROOM
IMIUMMEMMEMMINO
Ell
m
IN
mm
®
®N
®�
n�
Win■
min
m
01
A.
IME
INIMM
■
In
i
■i
min
IN
Winn
THE,
EDINA
POLICE REPOR
Sundays at 6:30 PJI.
Tuesdays at 10:30 P.M.
Thursdays at 6:30 P.M.
With a new show presented every two "weeks, the Edina Police Report will
cover everything from special features to current news events, from reward
offers to information about exactly what types of crimes have been
occurring in your neighborhood.
1:)1(2aQS0 tune in!
"r '/-/F -Y-3
MN 4 -7 -83
RECREATION CENTER FUND
STATEI:1ENT OF INC01-;1E AND EXPENSE
CITY OF EDINA
FOR YEARS ENDING DECEMBER 31, 1982 AND DECEMBER 31, 1981
REVENUE
Season tickets
Retail sales
Concessions
Daily skating fees
Spectator fees
Ice Rental
Services - Skate Sharpening
Vending machine commisssion
Skate & Locker Rental
Other
Sale of Property
OPERATING EXPENSES:
Salaries and wages
i- tanager
City clerical, cashiers & ticket
Police takers
Maintenance
Organist
Concession labor
Total Salaries and Wages
1.1ileage and conferences
Printing - tickets, notices
Laundry
Telephone
Light and power
Fuel and heat
Rubbish Hauling
Cleaning Supplies
Lumber & Paint
General supplies
Equipment maintenance & repairs
Central services
Food & soft drinks purchased
Insurance & Alarm Service
Audit
Other
Total Contractual Services
and Commodities
Total Operating Expenses
INCOME BEFORE INTEREST AND
DEPRECIATION (LOSS)
Interest on bonds
Interest on loan - Liquor Fund
TOTAL 11ITEREST
INCOME ( LOSS) BEFORE DEPRECIATION
Provision for depreciation
NET INCOkE-: (LOSS)
Bonds Paid
MN /b,i
1982 1981 INCREASE
DECREASE*
$ 27 949.72 $ 25 516.72 $
94.62 1.53
12,621.13 18,061.29 5,440.16
7.977 F7 R 7nn ;; 797 QP
20,834.70' 18.049.06 2.785.64
4,555.
*
74.25 697.03 622.78
- 0 - 8,000.00 8,000.00
297,945.99 $287,310.54 10,635.45
$ 5,193.04
-0- 945.00 945.00
70,694.79 81,332.37 10,637.58
1,440.00 945.00 495.00
2 111 tii A nn7 nti QQF AC
$110,694.16
$116,408.14
$ 5,713.98 *
1,818.00
2,172.97
354.97 *
1,218.68
1,543.45
324.77 *
914.42
887.48
26.94
3,958.87
3,577.03
381.84
54,334.55
59,737.64
5,403.09 *
16,592.74 62.666.7o 4. 1 ••
29,160.00 1 11 3,960.00
6,120.20 9,923.60 SI 41
3,175.26 3,356.22 180-96
700.00 700.00 1
828.20 165.20 663.00
$187,012.79 $236,910. 04 $ 49 897.25
9g7.7nh gq, Iqq lip la FF rii 91
3,204.53 2 355.13 849.40
(8,468.59T-7F74, 121.67 65,653.08
105,000.00 $105,600.00 1 -0-
MN 4 -1 'd -83
GUN RANGE FUND
STATEMENT OF INCOME AND EXPENSE
CITY OF EDINA
FOR YEAR ENDED DECEMBER 31,1982
REVENUE:
Range Fees:
Rental of Property
Rifle
Pistol
Trap
Firearm Safety Instruction
Sale of Ammunition
Sale of Scrap Lead
Sale of Brassards and Targets
Vending Machine
Inter Fund Transfer
Other
Total Revenue
OPERATING EXPENSES:
Salaries and Wages:
Supervision and Clerical
Maintenance
Light and Power
Telephone
Insurance
Supplies
Concession Commodities
Ammunition
Targets
Other
TOTAL OPERATING EXPENSES
12/31/82
12/31/81
INCREASE
DECREASE*
$_ 3,928.21
$ 1,718.03
$ 2,210.18
1,380.00
2,079.00
699.00 *
3,006.00
11,200.00
8,194.00 *
7,689.50
3,519.00
4,170.50
200.00
175.50
24.50
16,203.71
18,691.53
2,487.82 *
178.70 192.85 14.15 *
818.51 991.70 173.19 *
-0- 1,000.00 11000.00 *
241.57 194.18 47.39
20 272.24 $ 24,825.85 $ 4,553.61 *
14,587.00 12,244.25 2,342.75
58.32 1,502.55 1,444.23
14,645.32 13,746.80 898.52
3,145.25
BEFORE DEPRECIATION
2,713.98
(8,834.77)
431.27
(2,278.69)
353.09
61556.08
302.56
50.53
85.00
85.00
-0-
Depreciation
967.79
1,992.67
$
1,024.88
1,011.45
29.30
359.20
652.25
4,307.53
.3,369.84
937.69
4,496.58
4,149.49
347.09
95.00
385.00
290.00
29,107.01
27,104.54
2,002.47
INCOME (LOSS)
BEFORE DEPRECIATION
$
(8,834.77)
$
(2,278.69)
$
61556.08
Provision for
Depreciation
$
97.62
$
126.92
$
29.30
NET INCOME (LOSS) $ (8,932.39) $ (2,405.61) $ 6,526.78
MN /bj
MN 4- 11; -83
ART CENTER FUND
Statement of Income and Expense
City of Edina
For Years Ending December 31, 1982 and December 31, 1981
INCOME:
Memberships
Registration Fees
Donations
Merchandise Sales
Less: Cost of Merchandise Sold
Other 2,592.39
1,983.19
Increase
609.20
Total Income $ 79,235.15
Decrease*
1982
1981
410.74
$ 5,065.95.
$ 5,451.50
$ 385.55
41,274.14
45,590.22
4,316.08
22,529.65
8,503.33
14,026.32
12 955.02
10 639.94
2,315.08.
(5,182.00)
(6,383.96)_
1,201.96
$ 7,773.02
1 4,255.48
$ 3,517.04
Other 2,592.39
1,983.19
$
609.20
Total Income $ 79,235.15
$ 65,784.22
$
13,450.93
OPERATING EXPENSES:
Personal Services:
Administrative
Instructors
Maintenance
Dues and Subscriptions
Advertising
Light and Power
Telephone
Heat
Rubbish Removal
Printing
Insurance and Alarm Service
General Supplies
Central Services
Audit
Office Expense
Repairs
Other
Total Operating Expenses
Profit (Loss) Before Depreciation
Provision for Depreciation
Net Profit (Loss)
MN /bj
26,035.41
45.00
22,610.60
2,240.83
3,424.81
32,700.34
5,068.00
27,320.92
410.74
5,379.42
2,836.34
33.91
2,171.80
779.85
664.54
61,572.09
415.00
$ 52,103.32
6,059.64
$ 9,468.77
145.75
45.00
100.75
2,240.83
1,596.94
643.89
5,068.00
4,657.26
410.74
1,767.36
1,733.45
33.91
961.53
779.85
181.68
645.00
415.00
230.00
6,059.64
3,824.70
2,234.94
478.26
834.23
355.97
T, V V J. J/ L,/ 1/. L V 1, V J L.//
3,780.00 3,360.00 420.00
100.00 100.00 -0-
$ 88,777.18 $ 73,057.11 $ 15;720.07
$ (9,542.03) $ (7,272.89) $ 2,269.14
$ 1,610.02 1,290.34 319.68
$ (11,152.05) $ (8,563.23) $ 2,588.02 *
MN 3/31/83
SWMENG POOL FUND
STATEMENT OF INCOME AND EXPENSE
CITY OF EDINA
Year Ended December 31, 1982
REVENUES
Pool Fees:
Season Tickets
General Admissions
Rental - Instruction Program
Other
OPERATING EXPENSES
Salaries and Wages:
Supervision
Life Guards
Cashiers & Clerical
Basket Room Attendants
Watchmen
Maintenance
Light and power
Water and sewer
Gas
Telephone
Rubbish Hauling
Insurance
Repairs
Cleaning supplies
Water Treatment
General Supplies
Audit -
Printing and Office Expense
Central Services
Other
Total Operating Expenses
CONCESSIONS
Sales
Cost of Sales
Gross Profit
Operating Expenses
Net Income
Provision for Depreciation
Net Income (Loss)
MN:mk
Increase
1982 1981 Decrease*
40,129.32 39,336.88 792.44
5,000.00 5,000.00 -0-
61,526.02
56,497.58
5,028.44
*
6,295.34
7,086.56
791.22*
1,605.00
1,817.70
212.70*
7,650.53
7,400.45
250.08
40,459.82
41,151.64
691.82*
3,629.38
5,308.11
1,678.73*
-n-
ZA nn
U nn*
118.90 145.44 26.54*
81,230.87 $ 80,220.28 1,010.59
�T9,704.85 23,722.70 4,017.85
• 4:1 19 1 •
101910MOM-0 . ..
1 : • R • ' 1
(15,763.08) $(24,142.52) $ 8,379.44
MN 4/4/83
GOLF COURSE FUND
STATEMENT OF INCOME AND EXPENSE
CITY OF EDINA
FOR YEARS ENDING DECEMBER 31,1982
and DECEMBER 31, 1981
1982 1981 INCREASE
REVENUE DF.CRFASE*
Membership Fees 43 465 O1 38.54n -Rq- $ 4_g24 12
Green Fees:
18 holes 189,873.82 181.900-93 7_g72_Rq
9 holes 102,940.47 97,989.33 4.951 -14
Par 3 71,192.38 61,960.77 9.231 -61
Golf car, cart & Club rental 64,492.15 59.475.84 5-016-11
Locker Rental 1,601.00 1.284.00 317 no
Golf Lessons 1,997.00 3,893.00 1.896.00*
Other 690.75 ...... 140-7-9
$ 476.252.58 $ 445,394.76 30,857.82
OPERATING EXPENSES
Administration
Salaries and Wages:
Manager
Pro
Rangers and Starters
Cashiers & Clerical
Printing and Advertising
Golf Car Rental
Supplies
Insurance and Alarm System
Retirement, Insurance, Office
Supplies, etc,
Mileage and schools
Audit
Other
Total Administration
Building - Clubhouse and Pro Shop
Salaries and Wages
Telephone
Water
Fuel
Light and Power
Laundry
30% Less: Amount charged to Grille
Repairs - building
Rubbish Hauling
- Fnsurance
Supplies
Other Clubhouse
Total Building= ancu Pro 6nop
Maintenance of Course and Grounds
Salaries and Wages:
Superintendent
Maintenance
Golf Car Maintenance
Irrigation System
Telephone
Light and Power
Fuel
Fertilizer and Chemicals
Sand, gravel and rock
Concrete and asphalt
Sod, tree replacement, etc.
Lumber
Repairs
Supplies
Equipment Operation
Golf Car Maintenance
Irrigation System
Other
3,570.00
23,176.90
4,402.44
-0-
-0-
-0-
_> _
23,769 96
18,710.78
19,080.59
6,278.15*
4,689.37
$ 63,781.93
$ 60,968.27
$ 2,813.66
3,468.20
6.824 -R8
'1 356 6R*
1,946.00
1.914.00
.12 on
3,814.13
3.701.37
112.76
913.16
1,452.84
53q -6R*
11,230.11
1
157 nn
40,260.00
37,200.00
3,060.00
883.26
887.30
4.04*
800.00
800.00
-o-
82.05
2,021.59
1,639.54*
$ 116,, 48773
.25 _
$ 478.48
3,570.00
2 345 88 1.224.12
905.97
888.00 17.97
5,272.30
5,125.05 147.25
_ 358.50
449.00 90.50*
$ 32,431.35
$38,685.56 '$ 6,254.21*
Total Maintenance of
Course and Grounds
Total Operating Expenses
Total Onerntine Income
$ 29.382.71
$ 6
702 -R6 $ 417q RF
79,463.61
69,130-71
10.332 RR
8,706.79
11.614.37
__ 2 qn7 SR*
7,924.7Q
8,781-77
257 n1*
$ 125,477-87
$ 114
729.73 S 10.748.14
2,646.96
592.79 2,054.17
8 224.07
11,230.11
1
157 nn
9,661.09
7,762.95
L,RQR 14
-0-
728.80 72R Rn*
13,925.65
2,677j5
11.247 Qn
4,099. 76
8,298.42
4.14R 66*
2,966.29
308.33 2.657 -96
7 276 73
10,848.86
3.572 1'2*
10 444 92
6,344.19
4.100 73
36,600.00
32,880.00 3,720-00
8,934.68
2
640.92
3,803.87
2,244.95
318.07
204 03 114 -04
$238,318.95
336 999 n3
6202,127
53r6
6n $ 36,191.35
623 41
$ 89 253.55
$ 88,811.35
442 2Q --
GOLF COURSE FUND (con't)
Income on Investments
Net Income - operating Department
Income Before Interest and
Depreciation
Interest on Bonds
Interest on Loan - Liquor Fund
Total Interest
Income Before Depreciation
Provision for Depreciation
Net Income
Range
Income
Less: Operating Expenses
Net Income - Range
Grille
Income
Less: Operating Expenses
Personal Services
30% Contractual Services
Commodities
Net Income - Grille
Net Income - Operating
-Departments
Bonds Paid
MN:mk
1982
1981
INCREASE
DECREASE*
�- 0-
-0-
-n-
67,019.07
49,816.4c)
17,2w sR
67,019.07
49,816.49
17,202.58
$156,272.62
$
138,627.84
$
17.644.78
8,774.00
24,147.30
5.373.30*
-0-
-0-
-0-
00
24,147.30
5,373.30*
$137 498.62
$
$ ZJ,b1b.51
$
2 ,056.43
$
_1,459.0.8__
$113,483.11
$
92,424.11
$
21,559.00
$ 88,046 17 75 911.49 $ 12.134.68
33 795.77 33,240.61
$ 54,250.40 $ 42,670.88 11.579.52
97.417 87 q2 oin 96 4,486.91
30.765-45 32 347 A7 i gA2 99*
6,115 85 6 217 7n 101 R5*
47.767.9r)
84 *
12 768 67 $ 7.ta5 61 $ 5 6m n6
$ 67,019.07 49,816.49 $ 17.209
$40,000.00 $ 40,000.00 $ -0-
LIQUOR DISPENSARY FUND
BALANCE SHEET
CITY OF EDINA
December 31, 1982
ASSETS
CURRENT ASSETS:
Cash:
Demand deposit
Deposits in Transit
Working; Fund
Due from other funds
Merchandise Inventory -at the lower
of cost (first in,first out method)
or market:
Liquor
Wine
Beer
Mix and Miscellaneous
Prepaid Expenses:
Unexpired Insurance
Supply Inventory
$367,440.69
72,003.49
TOTAL CURRENT ASSETS
OTHER ASSETS:
Note Receivable
Loan To Golf Course Fund
Loan To Recreation Center Fund (Arena)
FIXED ASSETS ON BASIS OF COST:
Land
Land Improvements
Buildings
Furniture Fixtures and Equipment
Leasehold Improvements
Less: Allowance for Depreciation
and Amortization
CURRENT LIABILITIES:
Accounts Payable
Accrued payroll
Due To Other Funds
SURPLUS:
Invested in Fixed Assets
Unappropriated
TOTAL ASSETS
iA
$ 439,444.18
3,800.00 8 443,244.18
415,384.02
311,543.64
34,423.44
8,022.05 769,373.15
$ 9,396.50
400.00 9,796.50
$1,222,413.83
$ 53,212.82
$245,000.00
170,000.00 415,000.00 468,212.82
$ 233,784.60
$ 22,136.07
729,769.27
294,419.64
3,035.55
$1,049,360.53
379,888.98 669,471.55 903,256.15
LIABILITIES AND SURPLUS
TOTAL CURRENT LIABILITIES
TOTAL LIABILITIES AND SURPLUS
$2,593,882.80
$ 153,328.90
8,275.62
469,167.00
$ 630,771.52
$ 903,256.15
1,059,885.13 1,963,111.28
$2,593,882.80
LIQUOR DISPENSARY FUND
COMPARATIVE STATEMENT OF INCOME AND EXPENSE
CITY OF EDINA
YEAR ENDED DECEMBER 31
PERCENT TO NET SALES
1 9 8 2
Cost of Sales:
Inventory January 1
$ 254,569.38
1982
$ 275,210.64
1981
Increase 50th Grand- 1981
Sales:
50th Street
Yorkdale
Grandview
Total
Total
Decrease* Street Yorkdale view Total Total
Liquor
$ 614,145.23
$1,257,987,49
$1,070,096.54
$2,942,229.26
$3,150,010.17
$ 207,780.91*
Wine
380,868.16
711,916.12
581,745.89
1,674,530.17
1,665,859.03
8,671.14
Beer
264,091.08
495,102.20
405,239.38
1,164,432.66
1,162,623.26
1,809.40
Mixed Miscellaneous
18,933.64
36,058.74
34,591.21.
89,583.59
95,039.36
5,455.77*
$ 9,699.41* 18.19% 14.82% 16.79% 16.25% 15.89
$1,278,038.11
$2,501,064.55
2,091,673.02
$5,870,775.68
$6,073,531.82
$' 202,756.14*
Less:Refunds and
51,930.79
$ 89,536.38 $
124,378.41 $
265,845.58 $
293,382.30 $
27,536.72*
Discounts
34,700.42
84 812.31
73,157.73
192,670.46
203,142.72
10,472.26*
NET SALES
$1,243,337.69
2,416,252.24
$2,018,515.29
5,678,105.22
5,870,389.10
192,283.88* 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00°! 100.00%
Cost of Sales:
Inventory January 1
$ 254,569.38
$ 394,458.82
$ 275,210.64
$ 924,238.84
$ 858;705.38
$ 65,533.46
Purchases
972,547.05
1 967 130.04
1,660,608.80
4 600 285.89
5,003,269.51
402,983.62*
559239.17
$1,227,116.43
2,361,588.86
$1,935,819.44
$5,524,524.73
5,861,974.89
337,450.16*
Inventory December 31
209,893.84
303 342.64
256 136.67
769,373.15
924,238.84
154 865.69*
159,469.66
$1,017,222.59
$2,0582246.22
1,679,682.77
_7
,755,151.58
4937,736.05
182,584.47* 81.81 85.18 83.21 83.75 84.11
GROSS MARGIN
$ 226,115.10
$ 358,006.02
$ 338,832.52
$ 922,953.64
$ 932,653.05
$ 9,699.41* 18.19% 14.82% 16.79% 16.25% 15.89
Operating Expenses:
Selling $
88,077.42
$ 156,014.00 $
119,254.33 $
363,345.75 $
357,727.43 $
5,618.32
7.08%
6.46%
5.91%
6.40%
6.26%
Occupancy
37,779.06
559239.17
41,274.42
134,292.65
1261503.92
7,788.73
3.04
2.28
2.05
2.36
2.16
Administration
48 327.83
57,216.47
53,925.36
159,469.66
155 039.40
4,430.26
3.89
2.37
2.67
2.81
2.72
Total Operating Expenses $
174,184.31
$ 268,469.64
214,454.11 $
657,108.06 $
639,270.75
17,837.31
14.01%
11.11%
10.63%
-11.57%
11.14%
OPERATING INCOME $
51,930.79
$ 89,536.38 $
124,378.41 $
265,845.58 $
293,382.30 $
27,536.72*
4.18%
3.71%
6.16%
4.68%
4.75%
Other Income:
Discounts
17,493.53
36,335.05
29,645.00
83,473.58
81,836.91
1,636.67
1.41
1.50
1.47
1.47
1.39
Cash over or (under)
37.16
(418.43)
160.66
(220.61)
(148.43)
( 72.18)
(.02)
.01
Other
588.10
203.66
272.28
1,064.04
1,532.10.
468.06*
.05
.01
.01
.02
.03
$ 70,049.58
$ 125,656.66 $ 154,456.35 $ 350,162.59
$
376,602.88
$
261,440.29* 5.64% 5.20% 7.65% 6.17% 6.17%
Income on Investments
3,479.47
8,988.71
59509.24*
NET INCOME
$ 353,642.06
$
385,591.59
$
31,949.53*
Depreciation and Amortization
included in expenses
$ 51,860.40
$
49,310.32
$
2,550.08
OPERATING EXPENSES
i
J
Selling:
Salaries and wages
Supplies
Licenses and dues
Service contracts
Direct Promotion
LIQUOR DISPENSARY FUND CITY OF EDIN.
December 31, 1982 December 31, 1981 Increase- Decrease*
50th 50th
Street Yorldale Grandview Total Street Yorkdale Grandview Total Street Yorkdale Grandview Total
$ 80,709.35
$143,947.24
$111,088.56
$335,745.15
$ 78,567.09
$141,763.47
$111,755.33
$332,085.89
$ 2,142.26 $
2,183.77 $
666.77 *$
3,659.26
4,247.59
9,222.85
5,292.87
18,763.31
3,528.55
8,072.46
5,776.55
17,377.56
719.04
1,150.39
483.68*
1,385.75
380.00
131.00
121.00
632.00
430.00
452.92
221.00
1,103.92
50.00*
321.92*
100.00*
471.92*
1,493.95
1,493.97
1,493.95
4,481.87
842.40
1,684.80
1,263.60
3,790.80
651.55
190.83
230.35
691.07
1,246.53
1,218.94
1,257.95
3,723.42
19168.99
19100.13
1,100.14
3,369.26
77.54
118.81
157.81
354.16
$ 88,077.42
$156,014.00
$119,254.33
$363;345.75
$ 84,537.03
$153,073.78
$120,116.62
$357,727.43
3,540.39
2,940.22
862.29 $
5,618.32
Occupancy:
Salaries and wages $
Telephone
Supplies
Light and power
Mtce.- heating and
air - conditioning
Heat
Laundry & rug service
Burglar alarm
Insurance
Share of Mtce. Parking
lot & snow plowing
Repairs & maintenance
Provision for
Depreciation
Rubbish hauling
Janitorial services
Miscellaneous
Water & sewer service
$ 37,779.06 $ 55,239.17 $ 41,274.42 $134,292.65 $ 36,007.49 47,526.15 $ 42,970.28 $126,503.92 $ 1,771.57 $ 7,713.02 $ 1,695.86 $ 7,788.73
752.22 $
952.68 $
474.84 $
2,179.74 $
1,759.34
$ 1,196.07 $
1,067.62 $
4,023.03 $
1,007.12 *$
243.39 *$
592.78 *$
1,843.29,E
1,373.19
1,636.96
1,063.41
4,073.56
1,045.89
1,280.34
771.26
3,097.49
327.30
356.62
292.15
976.07
1,778.32
709.65
263.82
2,751.79
1,822.17
1,213.45
765.17
3,800.79
43.85
503.80
501.35
1,049.00
6,881.01
10,370.67
3,923.15
21,174.83
5,788.88
10,380.70
4,680.26
20,849.84
1,092.13
10.03
757.11
324.99
167.30
217.39
207.56
592.25
498.32
206.93
156.55
861.80
331.02*
10.46
51.01
269.551
1,268.82
3,908.45
2,277.07
7,454.34
525.50
2,200.11
1,802.32
4,527.93
743.32
1,708.34
474.75
2,926.41
651.52
435.81
770.21
1,857.54
530.55
271.83
634.93
1,437.31
120.97
163.98
135.28
420.23
615.40
539.90
665.92
1,821.22
485.07
784.48
1,103.32
2,372.87
130.33
244.58*
437.40*
551.65,!
4,856.76
9,033.34
7,406.90
21,297.00
4,153.50
8,002.00
61,533.00
18,688.50
703.26
1,031.34
873.90
2,208.50
2,355.16
_550.00
2,905.16
278.08
81.00
359.08
2,077.08
469.00
2,546.08
303.40
6,208.88
1,355.53
7,867.81
1,464.01
2,684.22
6,398.53
10,546.76
1,160,61*
3,524.66
5,043.00*
2,678.951
15,276.22 16,572.75
20,011.43 51,860.40
151889.98
16,482.02
16,938.32 49,310.32
613.76*
90.73 3,073.11
2,550.08
1,080.00 29575.00
2,575.00 6,230.00
1,080.00
1,865.00
1,865.00 4,810.00
-0-
710.00 710.00
11420.00
943.95
943.95
125.00
441.00
566.00
125.00*
502.95
377.95
232.20
232.20
232.20*
232.20,
419.74 583.74
279.58 1 283.06
329.00
437.00
254.00 1,020.00
90.74
146.74 25.58
263.06
Adaministrative:
Salaries and wages $ 19,086.92 $ 19,887.59 $ 20,031.97 $ 59,006.48 $ 15,828.59 $ 16,134.56 $ 17,528.52 $ 49,491.67 $ 3,258.33 $ 3,753.03 $ 2,503.45 $ 9,514.81
Supplies 136.97 242.56 182.60 562.13 66.41 1,514.96 293.67 1,875.04 70.56 1,272.40* 111.07* 1,312.91
Professional services 2,111.87 21110.00 2,060.00 6,281.87 11587.00 1,592.00 1,572.00 4,751.00 524.87 518.00 488.00 1,530.87
Allocated expenses -
retirement,insurance,
office supplies,etc. 24,600.00 309360.00 29,340.00 84,300.00 20,580.00 26,460.00 27,060.00 74,100.00 41,020.00 3,900.00 21280.00 10,200.00
Miscellaneous 192.50 4.00 196.50 291.07 999.06 425.50 1,715.63 98.57* 999.06* 421.50* 11519.13
Mileage 416.33 407.20 403.29 1,226.82 450.00 500.00 450.00 1,400.00 33.67* 92.80* 46.71* 173.181
Chcecks written off 251.85 706.17 545.96 1,503.98 950.48 1,191.66 361.92 2,504.06 698.63* 485.49* 184.04 1,000.08
Data Processing system 19531.39 31502.95 1 357.54 6 391.88 6,400.00 61401.00 6,401.00 19,202.00 4,868.61 2,898.05 5,043.46 12,810.12
$ 48,327 83 57,216.47 53,925.36 $159:469.66 46,153.55 54,793.24 $ 54,092.61 155,039.40 _2,174.28 $ 22423.23 167.25 $ 4,430.26
$174,184.31 $268,469.64 $214,454.11 $657,108.06 $166,698.07 $255,393.17 $217,179.51 $639,270.75 $ 7,486.24$13,076.47 $ 2,725.40 $17,837.31