HomeMy WebLinkAbout1979-04-16_COUNCIL MEETINGAGENDA
EDINA CITY COUNCIL
REGULAR MEETING
APRIL 16, 1979
ROLLCALL
MINUTES of April 2, 1979, approved as presented or corrected by motion of ,
seconded by
BICYCLE SAFETY WEEK PROCLAMATION
I. PUBLIC HEARING ON PROPOSED IMPROVEMENT 'Presentation by City Manager and
Engineer. Spectators heard. If Council wishes..to proceed, action by Reso-
lution Ordering Improvement. 4/5 favorable rollcall vote to -pass.
A. Storm Sewer Improvement No. P -ST.S -161 - Generally located from Wooddale
Ave. West to T.H. 100 and between Edina Country Club Golf Course and
W. 60th St. (Continued from 4/2/79)
II. PUBLIC HEARINGS ON PLANNING MATTERS Affidavits of Notice by Clerk. Presenta-
tion 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,
Plats, Flood Plain Permits, Appeals from Administrative or Board-,Of-.Appeals....:-'_..
and Adjustments Decisions and Plan Amendments require action by- Resolution.
3/5 favorable rollcall vote to pass.
A. Appeals from Board of Appeals and Adjustments Decision.
1. John J. Velie - 4300 -4302 Valley View Road- 10 foot front yard set -
back variance, 3,147 square foot lot area variance, 25 foot rear
lot variance (Continued from 3/19/79)
B. Preliminary Approval
1. Grandview Park R.L.S. - Generally located East of Malibu Drive and
South of Grandview Park - 5 -79 -3 (3/28/79)
2. Kerry Subdivision - .Generally located South of Kerry Road and East
of Down Road - S -79 -4 (3/28/79)
C Final Approval
1• Dewey Hill Addition R.L.S.
III. SPECIAL CONCERNS OF RESIDENTS
A. Mr. Arthur J. Felker - Request for Additional Animal Control Officers
IV. _AWARD.OF:BIDS.'AND QUOTES
A. Sand, Rock and Bituminous Materials
B., Playground Equipment for Handicapped
C. Postage Meter
D. Public Offi.cials' Liability. Insurance
Agenda
Edina'City Council
April 16, 1979
Page Two
V. RECOMMENDATIONS AND REPORTS
A. Human Relations Commission
B. Saints Valley View Roller Skating Center - -Dance Hall Permit (Continued
from 4/2/79)
C. Above Ground Swimming Pools (Continued from 4/2/79)
D. Building Department Position (Continued from 4/2/79)
E. Notice of Claim — Thomas Scott Peterson
F. Correction of Minutes of February 5, 1979
G. League of Minnesota Cities - Tax Increment Expenses
H. Welcome Home Group Home
I. Community Development Funds
J. Joint Health Advisory Board Meeting
K. Special Concerns of Mayor and Council
L. Post Agenda and Manager's Miscellaneous Items
VI. ORDINANCES First Reading requires offering of Ordinance only. 3/5 favorable
rollcall vote to pass Second.Reading. 4/5 favorable rollcall vote to pass if
Second Reading should be waived.
A. First Reading
1. Ordinance No. 311 -A10.- Amendment to Animal Ordinance
VII. FINANCE
A. Claims Paid. Motion, of , seconded by , for payment
of the following claims.as per Pre -List: General Fund, $252,238.88; Park
Fund, $9,145.54; Edina Art Center, $5,111.16; Park Construction,
$27,073.71; Swimming Pool, $278.98; Golf Course, $4,436.63;.Arena Center,
$8,319. "41; Gun Range, $105.00; Water Works, $11,519.93; Sewer Fund,
100,096.24; Liquor Fund,.$144,615.68; Construction Fund, $3,424.03;
IBR, $51,972.00; Total, $618,337.19
DEWEY HILL ADDITION R.L.S. GRANTED FINAL APPROVAL Mr. Hughes presented Dewey
Hill Addition R.L.S. , generally,_:locatedd —� -7 s{
U
for final approval as.recd.mmended by "the Community Development and Planning Com-
mission. Councilman.-Richards then offered the following resolution and moved its
adoption as recommended by Mr. Erickson:
RESOLUTION APPROVING>
DEWEY HILL ADDITION REGISTERED LAND SURVEY
BE IT RESOLVED that that certain Registered Land Survey, generally located
and presented for final approval at the Edina.City Council Meeting of April 16,
q- N-.- ,:J,- 9-C,
1979, , be and is hereby granted final approva]� that all
existing special assessments ii against Dewey Hill 2nd Addition on an
a.o
acreage basis and'lQxoJ' the specials d to the lots-qjjK& be further divided
equally among the lots; a-
BE IT-RESOLVED FURTHER that pending special assessments for Storm Sewer 140B
shall be transferred wholly to Outlot B, Dewey Hill 2nd Addition, upon receipt by
the City of a request for such transfer from all owners and lien holders of.Outlot
B and containing a waiver of all claims that such pending assessment, as the result
of such'.transfer be inequitable, unfair, unreasonable or in an amount greater
than the benefit received.
Motion for adopion of the resolution was seconded by Councilman Courtney.
All ayes.
i
To allocate all of the existing special assessments against Dewey Hill 2nd
Addition on a acreage basis and the specials allocated.to the lots shall be further
divided equally among the lots; that-.special assessments for Storm Sewer 140B
shall be transferred wholly to Outlot B, Dewey Hill 2nd Addition upon receipt
by the City of a request for such transfer from all owners and lien holders of
Outlot B and containing a waiver of all claims that such pending assessment, as
the result of such transfer, will be inequitable, unfair, unreasonable or in an
amount greater than the benefit received.
Lt] EDINA
4801 WEST 50TH STREET. EDINA. MINNESOTA 55424
612- 927 -8861
P R O C L A M A T I O N
WHEREAS, public interest in bicycling has increased tremendously in recent
times; and
WHEREAS, the rate of accidents involving bicycles has also increased, creat-
ing a distinct need for continuing bicycle education; and
WHEREAS, during Bicycle Safety Week in the City of Edina, instruction in
bicycle safety will be provided by the Edina Police Department at the various
schools under the sponsorship of the PTA Council and the Citizens' Safety
Council;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Edina City Council that all Edina
youngsters be urged to participate in Bicycle Safety Week which will be held
from April 30 through May 3, 1979, in the City of Edina; and
BE IT RESOLVED FURTHER that all bicyclists in Edina be aware of their respon-
sibility while operating their bicycles.
ADOPTED this 16th day of April, ]
;
MEMORANDUM
TO: Kenneth Rosland, City Manager
FROM: Harold Sand, Assistant Planner
SUBJECT: John J. Velie Appeal.
DATE: April 16, 1979
Mr. Velie has retained Phillip D. Johnson, architect, who has prepared the
attached plans for a double bungalow.. The revised plans face the building
toward West 62nd Street and require the following variances:
15 foot front yard setback variance
20 foot rear yard variance
.3,147 square foot lot area variance
The planning staff.believes the revised plans are a substantial.improvement
in the proposal.
HS : j t
4/12/79
3
TV
C,
00 4?
k-P
COT
- - - - - - - - - - - - -
��I• I ! 3�� j�6 I
I,I ,I
!� —J //• �_. J;;I___..l ice_ i I ,
- r 1
Tr
- -- — Al , a
-- I �_ It -
l �. � •
_ - - -- J
r- I f:;-.> ?_4
L
I
MEMORANDUM
TO: Kenneth Rosland, City Manager
FROM: Gordon Hughes, City Planner
SUBJECT: John J. Velie Variance. Appeal
DATE: February 2, 1979
Staff has completed additional research concerning the Velie variance appeal. We
find that the subject property was originally part of a larger parcel which is
now platted as "Victorsen's Valley View ", (located south of Valley View Road).
In December, 1955, the then owners of the original parcel granted a public street
right -of -way easement for Valley View Road. This resulted in the creation of.an
11,853 square foot residue on the north side of Valley View Road which is the
subject property.
The subject property was zoned "open development district" until 1965. At that
time, the subject property and many other parcels in the area were rezoned to R -2
in conjunction with the adoption of a zoning ordinance which eliminated the "open
development district" as a zoning classification. Staff is unable to locate any
analyses concerning the rezonings of these properties.
At the time of the aforementioned rezoning in 1965, the minimum lot size for a
two - family dwelling was 12,000 square feet. Shortly after this rezoning, the
minimum R -2 lot size was increased to 18,000 square feet. Later it was reduced
to the present ordinance requirement of 15,000 square feet.
When the easement for Valley View Road was granted in 1955, the zoning ordinance
required a 10,000 square foot lot for a two - family dwelling. The ordinance also
required a rear yard setback of 25 feet and a front yard setback of 30 feet. Thus,
when the subject property was created in 1955, by way of the easement grant,
sufficient lot area was available, according to the ordinance, to construct a two -
family dwelling. However, the plan as now proposed by Mr. Velie would have been
in violation of setback requirements in force in 1955.
In summary, this property has been subject to development constraints since its
creation in 1955. Presumably, the owners of the property in 1955 realized the
implications of the easement grant for Valley View Road.. Similarily, the proponent
should have been.aware of the development constraints as now imposed by the ordinance..
If the Council believes that the subject property should be developed, staff advises
that a two - family dwelling would be the best use for the site. Staff would recommend,
however, that a new design should be pursued for the dwelling which would respect
the unusual features of the site.
GH:md
L
i, -As C4A,,-T- RON MAP
6 2-in d
7
IL
0
-PON6 T • _j
uj
T
? j VICTORS EN'S VALLEY ;:z
ViEW
>
c \7w;t_ 26.66 i
. — 't. 7,
(8015) 1
;10
((Polo
2
it
10 PART S
OF
Ld
.40
7,
4
RT# Z
LOT 2 j<
4
1A 66200), �;;o 4
227 N_ 11e
330
�i-!PFAfF
oo
r.. W
V, ?
of LC t5 15, ,
C-i
^;O-kz Peace a:: 1 CO "
led' i� �'re_ 5
ca
OUIN' 0 j'a _j
s° 1 1 0 Port of Lot 14, '1. _CZ 4—
0: Block 2, Pea- C3 2
Acres ;b
z 03 cedol, , ; 1
MANOR
(70,
0 0
Garvey �
0
variance
JOHN VELIE
REQUEST NUMBER: B-78-45
LOCATION:. 4300-02 Valley View Road
REQUEST: 10' front yard setback;
-25' rear yard setback-, 3,147 square foot
lot area variance
0 250 5W 750 1000
y1linge Oniming deginriment velb-se of dine
EDINA BOARD OF APPEALS
STAFF REPORT
December 21, 1978
B -78 -45 John J. Velie. 4300 -02 Valley View Road. All that part of
the northwest quarter of Section.30, Township 28,.Range 24,
lying south of West 62nd Street, west of Brookview Avenue
and northeasterly of Valley View Road.
REQUEST: 10 foot front yard setback variance
25 foot rear yard setback variance
3,147 square foot lot area variance
REFER TO: attached petition, survey, floor plan, and
elevation.
The subject parcel of property is an unplatted residue from street right -of -way
on all three sides. It is in private ownership and is zoned R -2, two family
dwelling district.
The property has 11,853 square feet of area. The zoning ordinance requires a
minimum 15,000 square foot lot area for a two family dwelling; therefore, a
3,147 square foot lot area is requested. The triangular shape and street
setbacks reduce the developable area substantially. In addition, the westerly
portion of the site. has a storm sewer under it diagonally. The City does not
have an easement for the sewer. However, the line is very deep and the Engineering
Department has indicated they will approve construction over the line.
The proponents have prepared a plan that has a moderate size (28 X 80 foot)
-double bungalow with tuck under garages. The enclosed plans will be modified
to have the garage facing there or with a driveway to West 62nd Street. The
decks in the rear will be eliminated. Both West 62nd.Street and Brookview
Avenue are treated as side streets with 15 foot setbacks. One.of these sides
is required to be a 40 foot rear yard. Therefore, a 25 foot rear variance is
required.
The front of the dwelling faces Valley View Road. A 30 foot setback is required;
because a 20 foot setback is proposed, a 10 foot variance is requested. Valley
View Road, however, has a 25 foot boulevard which is 10 feet larger than normal.
Therefore, the normal space between the dwelling and the curb will be preserved.
There is not a uniform row of dwellings to compare with the proposed front set -
back. However, it appears to be reasonably close to the minimum setbacks for
the apartment and gas station on nearby lots. The proposed dwelling will conform
to the lot coverage limitations. The proponents have marked the approximate
corners of the dwelling and the site so that the Board. can view the proposed
variances.
Staff Report page 2
B -78 -45
December 21, 1978
Recommendation:
This is a highly visible lot that many people are suprised is privately owned
The staff feels that as private property, the best use is for a two - family
dwelling. The proponents have presented a reasonable plan for that use. There-
fore the staff recommends approval of the variances for the following reasons:
1. The variance will relieve an undue hardship created by the
unusual shape and large setbacks required.
2. The variance will correct extraordinary circumstances that
apply to this property.
3. The.proposed variance will not be materially detrimental to
the public welfare or injurious to other property in the
vicinity.
The staff would recommend the following contingencies to the variance:
1. The variance is limited to the plans presented.
2. The owner provides a storm sewer easement for areas
not covered by the proposed structure.
3. The owner agrees by recordable document to accept
normal sidewalk, utility, and other street improvements
within the street right -of -way.
HS: jt
12 -15 -78
Ca,c Number
Vato
• fee. Paid '�C'.l "'C) C J 2V
Applicant I , c Phone�%4L�
-_-Address
/D SG'8 ylrtr� �o %��(5• zip.-
Status of Applicant (owner, buyer, agent, etc.) : 911yl/7— pb-n7, k-/77A-)La.
Legal Description:_ t'lge,' S$ l ��L�- _• 3 3 d •
Street Address: //
Request: EF-r , /�C 1�
141nnesota statutes and Edina ordinances require that the following conditions rust be
satisfied affirmatively.
The proposed variance will: (If yes, please explain. Use additional sheets if
necessary.)
a)
Yes No
Relieve an undue hardship which was not self - imposed or a
mere inconvenience..
5
b) Correct• extraordinary circumstances applicable to this
property, but not applicable to other property in the
vicinity or zoning di trict. l /
c) 'Preserve a substantial property right' possessed. by of er
property in the vicinity and zoning district.
.1 Sim %3
d)
Not be materially detrincnta1 to tha public welfare or
Injurious to other property in th.a vicinity or Zoning
district. /
_T5 calk /4# - IlC,' ��/I�� h. [Ili �c y it �U -5-
N.
519naturo of Applicant
t
i
1
i
L
GERALD T.COYNE LOT SURVEYS COMPANY
MO BRUNSWICK AVE.S. LAND SURVEYORS
GOLDEN VALLEY. MINN.
REGISTERED UNDER LAWS OF STATE OF MINNESOTA
7601- 73rd Avenue North 5603098
Minneapolis, Minnesota 66428
E.,. Graham_ burvrgaro (Urtiftratt
RAYMOND A. PRASCH
6917 IDAHO AVE. N.
BROOKLYN PARK, MINN.
INVOICE NO. 1' 1?
B. NO. -
SCALE I"
0— DENOTES IRON
t� That part of the North 334
.� 1�c WEB M t IJo•Ih Ihnc- oy iha IJOT4.1 -a -J 1 jtc 3b, TvvP. :6 lZi 24, feet of the Northwast Ito.
50' the Northeast 1i4 i s ��
of the hest 658.5 feetr th. re o:
SAi.79 N — 2s5.i0 and lying ✓rest of LhP see' li: e
�. _ �, __: _ -. - - - -• ^` - / ` of Brookview Avenue cxhe t :..'.ed
I _ - 74,34• u Vy ES Y M �d $ ; to the North line of h
�pZ �TREET M M W said t:orth•west 1;4 e!' t`e
UJ Northeast 1/4 in Sect,iol.
Township 2E, Ranpe :r , :•• ^.e 'lest
w 0 y tour+dary of said tra_t is -harked
by jual 1and-tark -- =P'
u ac ^�
w the Southwest cer ;i.,r
an d at a ooir.t at. Ll'.e :: s: line
thereof 11:1.:5 feet 1 z1.. :s of
± I x Y 4h the N�.)rthwert corner
f'
d , except that PorLiot. Jr..' �hP
Total Area — 11.853 Square Feet ° • z o
�E•�' 1.3. r � stove descri :e:. tr.+:t �=
sot lr.cluding Road
-4- I Y\ 3'Sg` !� o O $ Southwesterly of the f:l: +inp
descrited 1>,r.e cor+st: tut : :•r
h
36.110 Square Feet Including Road / e_ r rJ the center line of :a:le,
^� �,� ur oil } view flar +C; °Pflnh :t„ a a
00 �' — °c point ot. the North :: cf the
.\ 1 t.�
Northeast 1!4 of 3•'iou
30 dtstaitt 549.79 : e.•t va -L of
r , �>� a •" �
the Northwest corurr t1nr. Jf:
;,�, -__ - 3 thence running Southra >;tPrlc
Subject to Valley View Roads j .
de,;t 62nd Street and Brookview J ' �; N tp\ _) 1 :at art +trhl le of 26 do.-r,-e: P_ 36
minutes with said \, ri 1� 1 ir•e.
Aaeuue. �� . 0
� whet. me :poured from �•L :t
Sub ea
Subject to easem+ts of record. "* J C) South, for a dI.SLat,cr ut -"J
'� v feet ai,d there term ;fiat it...
1 �l
W Subject to an easemrr.' for
installing .rater c. :t : :.s a:•J
+ •J - sanitary sewers over Lr... West
n
n1 16 feet of stove la. :„ ca:ept
L, the North 33 feet tY.Preo`.
as net forth in Book 2, of
Deeds, page 415
- rr, I.ne of Fhe Nh..rh 334 feeF of Ntc NW4 of ;ht NE4 Sec. 30. 1
Vk hereby certify than this It a true and correct f6tv's snutlon of a arwy / /J
of the tloundaries of the above described land and the location of all build-
i
++lf and visible encroachments. II any, from a on said tend. y , •tt_
ml.er 78 Signed
Surveyed W N this 3 r `�day of hove� -- -to V LOT SURVEYS COSICANY
SURVEYS COMP ANY
RAYMOND A P RASCH
GERALD T. COYNE LOT
6911 IDAHO AVE. N.
300 BRUNSWICK AVE. S.
LAND SURVEYORS
BROOKLYN PARK, MINN.
GOLDEN VALLEY, MINN.
REGISTERED UNDER LAWS OF STATE OF MINNESOTA
7601 -73rd Avenue North 66D-3093
INVOICE NO.
F. B. NO.
SCALE I"
Minneapolis, Minnesota 55428
0'- DE140TES IRON
E.J. Graham Oururgars.
That art of the hor*::'i
4,. C. NFL est 41hr_ siurrl-ew�i ��4� "JID Twit. -�13. t,%4. Z4. feet of the Nort-tijr..',
the orthed,;L 1,'4 1 '
of the 'West 658.5 feet -h,�
h r
2915.70 ;u r ,lest of
,d lyin
of Arookview Avnl.uP Ox:-1
to the North lit-e 0:' ho
-r I" said j%L)T'LhWPSt, U4 01'
Northea it 1A if' ti, '
0 'n k"t
'K ed
t out.War y 0 f 5, t
Ly jujiCial
the Southwest ccl'14,tr "Ief"Of
Njd at "t point on tf.• I. .-. I iie
'.Z 'J� thereof 110.2'1 feet ' I, !% of
j I . the Nori.hwpFt cornr ttfif.
poltlTl. '.nc
"eet. aloes Jeacril fJ tr.i
Total' Area 1L.853 Square I
3. T 8 southwesterly of f:"
Il- 2 u
:,ol. b,cluding hoad S8, I C5 descrit-en liwl cot:-:::
I the cei,tor line of
56,110 Square Feet li,cluding Ptoad'�
U.
CA fit. of. 'tie hurt!. f
POI icr-o
Northeast 1/4 Of :1
10 O.L:,,af,L 549
-:A > ti-,.e %ol,,.,iwp!,t cori.—
Z F. 01P muittie 3
uLject to Valley Viea oathence ,
ii-.;t 67jjd Street and Brookview Ij at. a;, aj.i-le of 26
nmiliutes with said
C! - whe:i measured - l-rom
:;jtject to eaaements of record. -17 f) south, for a dist"u.,.v rf
.0 v Le feet ai.d there term-e-t::,e'.
I IV
saject to an cas, for
illst..111i,ig mater a:-i
M sanitary - ewers OVOT'
A 16 fee, of atove I �- ", "rt
the North 33 feet t;:P: cc' I
eon :"It: of
as net forth in
K
Deeds, par.e 415
Of
Hr. North 314 Ccef Of hit M%N ot �hr_ NZI Sec.. 30•
We Isereby cxrt;fy that this is a true and correct representation of a virwev
of the bw.da,ws of the above described land and the for Ation of all build-
k-ge and v"wbie ancroactirnents, if any, from or an said land. ef .4 7—
S..,,dby.sth;,3r1 day of .overnll er. 78 Si LOT SURVEYS LONIPANY
11
If
.................................
..........
An -cam
I-
11- '5
I. . . . ...
2At,4 9x-,
tA
441
11
12
cc-
-V J_
u�J)
Ili
Sf4� C. ZL<i• �L
1
4.,4
4.c C EeaK
IT I-Az- f*zu.
Edina Board of Appeals an Adju tments
December 21, 1978
Page 3
the jurisdiction of he City Co ncil, and he also felt the uncil shou
the existing ordinan a to see if they felt it was still pert nent or if
were in order. Mr. David Runyan said that because KMSP was trying to ke
changing technolog and their co etitors, their request c. ld not reall
self - imposed. How ver, he was co cerned about the precede t that could
the variance was ranted. Mr. Sa d noted that within the past year ther
a request from Co perative Power ssociation for an anten a height varia
was withdrawn.
Shoreview, but
feet high. Mr
see how_ they c u
was spot zonigg.
Mr.. Elmer Johnso'
he Village would n
Bill Shaw said tha
ld prevent anyone.
stated KMSP had bu
t allow anyone else
if one person was
lse from building t
t a 1,466 foot t
o build a tower
lowed to build,
ough the courts
d examine
ome changes
p up with
be called
e set if
.had been
ce which
r in
r 150
did not
ess it
Bill Shaw moved t e Board deny the riance as requested on the
basis that h did not feel items B nd C of the four riteria were met: that it
would not co rect extraordinary circ mstances app lica 17ng to the property that was
not applicab a to other property in he vicinity or z district, and it would
not presery a substantial property ight possessed b other property in the vicinity
and zoning istrict. He also advised and encouraged KMSP to appeal the decision to
the City Co cil because he felt it w s more appropr ate for them to exa ine if the
variance s uld be allowed or the ordi ance changed ather than go about it from
the Board f Appeals decision standpoi t..
Dan.Reader asked if a_ ha ever been granted to this
ordinance 'n Edina. Bill Shaw replied t at there w re none to his knowle ge, only
Cooperati a Power's request which was dro ed.
motion
J 80�
ied.
David Runyan seconded Mr.haw's/motion. All voted aye;`the
B -78 -45 John J. Velie. 4300 -02 Valley View Road. All that
part of the northwest quarter of Section 30, Town -
ship 28, Range 24, lying south of West 62nd Street,
west of Brookview Avenue, and northeasterly of Valley
View Road.
REQUEST: 10 foot front yard setback variance
25 foot rear yard setback variance
3,147 square foot lot area variance
Mr. Sand reminded the Board that the item had been continued a
number of times while the owner obtained surveys and prepared building plans. The
area being considered, he continued, is surrounded on all three sides by street
frontages, is in private ownership, and is zoned R -2, two family dwelling district.
Harold Sand stated the property, 11,853 square feet in area, is
required by the zoning ordinance to be a minimum 15,000 square foot lot area for
Edina Board of Appeals and Adjustments
December 21, 1978
Page 4
a two family dwelling; therefore, a 3,147 square foot lot area was requested. He
noted the triangular shape and street setbacks would reduce the developable area
substantially. In addition, the westerly portion of the site has a storm sewer
under it diagonally. Harold Sand informed the Board that although the City does
not have an easement for the sewer, the Engineering Department has indicated the
line is very deep, and they will approve construction over it.
Mr. Sand indicated the proponent had prepared a 28 by 80 foot
plan for a double bungalow with tuck -under garages. He added that both West 62nd
Street and Brookview Avenue are proposed to be treated as side streets with 15
foot setbacks. Because one of those sides is required to be a 40 foot rear yard,
a 25 foot variance was required.- Harold Sand also explained that the front of the.
dwelling faces Valley View Road which requires a 30 foot setback; because a 20
foot setback is proposed, a ten foot variance is requested. He observed that .Valley
View Road had a 25 foot boulevard which is ten feet larger than normal, and, there-
fore, the normal space between the dwelling and the curb will be preserved.
Staff felt that if the property remains in private ownership, a
two - family dwelling would be most appropriate for the site. The staff
recommended approval of the variance for the reasons stated in the staff report
and conditioned upon the following: 1) The variance be limited to plans presented.
2) The owner provides a storm sewer easement for areas not covered by the proposed
structure. 3) The owner agrees by recordable document to accept normal sidewalk,
utility, and other street improvements within the street right -of -way.
Bill Shaw asked Harold Sand how long the property had been zoned
R -2. Mr. Sand answered it had been R -2 for about 13 years, since about 1965. Mr.
Shaw inquired if the ordinance in effect at that time specified that if the new
classification was not utilized within one year, the zoning would lapse to R -1
zoning. He noted that research should be done to determine this point.
Clark Miller inquired about the history of the private.ownership
of the property. Mr. Sand replied the applicants have a contract to purchase the
property from Mr. Paul Mans who owned the property since about 1962.
David Runyan felt .the piece of property was very unusual, and the
plans were not sensitive to the unusual geometry of the property. Clark Miller said
he felt there were other nice double bungalows with less square footage than the
proposed plans. David Runyan asked Mr. Velie if the plans presented were not merely.
stock plans rather than plans designed especially for the lot. Mr. Velie replied
they were prototype plans for. the typical double bungalow.
There were no neighbors present at the meeting. Bill Shaw again
questioned the zoning of the property and stated he felt it was up to the City
Attorney to render a judgement as to the zoning of the property. Clark Miller felt
the variance was rather excessive in terms of lot area and setbacks on two sides.
Bill Shaw pointed out the lot is almost the size required for a single family
dwelling. Mr. Velie noted he would not be encroaching on any neighbors.
-Edina Board of Appeals and Adjustments
December 21, 1978
Page S
Mr. Runyan said he felt the proposed plan was rather heavy for
the site making the yard for use of the occupants virtually nil. Clark Miller
cited a situation similar to Mr. Velie's in Golden Valley developed with a single
family home that worked very satisfactory.
David Runyan moved the Board deny Mr. Velie's request based on
excessive use of the land, a design which is not sympathetic to the property, and
because the Board did not feel it was a buildable lot. Clark Miller also stated
it may be injurious to other property in the vicinity in terms of appearance, and
a substantial property right was not being preserved. Clark Miller seconded the
motion. David Runyan and Clark Miller voted aye with Bill Shaw voting nay. The
motion to deny Mr. Velie's request carried.
I MAP
• ',
is s 3 _ a. - - - -- - - - - -- -- k- -. 62-nd - — -- - f- -- - - — - - --
I 11207: ,� j6 ` n : •.aii .i.ov :y ` :oc
a 1.00
- _ i'
'6 N6 .. 1 JL.M '���\ 3 ,'. � �•.,' S �� �� Q 7 I
ilo
`46 2 ti !-y 3
Ld 7C
t -a
afe . 2 a r
VICT RSEtf�S YAi.LEY - Uri
VIEW 2 0 `�$� QCs °�y�' ��u-_
; s, 0 3; 9 . r..
J.L.M. i D.L.. f °�
sb9`414L`# ,.1j l
a;. ;3. \ .G.66
(8015) (8025.1 -.S� " i•r
• l
hOto) !�
qq
P! F.Gorvey
(6010)
:�`
u .40 \`�o
4 ANN
6. 2
PART` 3 (n i r i o. C
I J F � •' 4
OF reL c
r,� o LA IS
r3� y
i- `� .`�.+C(l SOR 01' -�i Q�y� 1�� =ter• `l;'r7
6,200)
variar-Ice
JOHN VELIE
REQUEST NUMBER: B -78 -45
LOCATION: 4300 -02 Valley View Road
REQUEST: 10' front yard setback;
N.'(tc�o�
( 1
e ' �s
O LI N``L
v�
ob •£esJ pQp �• , �T { n; ,-.,
G a
� •�• -a
.
MANOR 2
q
_3S.- I
p
(7030)
PFAFF
variar-Ice
JOHN VELIE
REQUEST NUMBER: B -78 -45
LOCATION: 4300 -02 Valley View Road
REQUEST: 10' front yard setback;
25' rear yard setback; 3,147 square foot
lot area variance
-\%I. - _l- i — 2 -
yilingc ulmilning delmumcnt yillrec of ediita
LOT 2 _^ J
3 �
j` �°-
( 1
e ' �s
v�
ob •£esJ pQp �• , �T { n; ,-.,
G a
� •�• -a
.
;C)
.
� i �O r `519•. .,; a N
r�"'"'vle5.
PFAFF
35 FIRST ;�z ADDS
to
`1 rcrt of Lci
3
w
C! �
-��,
00 V?
rbs _ t
Q
0 Part of Lot 14, . 4
it Block 2, Pea- 'C2 2 "'
' ` 4i
CO cedole Acres
ry ,� >> j +� O
G -VN
N 3
m
25' rear yard setback; 3,147 square foot
lot area variance
-\%I. - _l- i — 2 -
yilingc ulmilning delmumcnt yillrec of ediita
EDINA BOARD OF APPEALS
STAFF REPORT
December 21, 1978
B -78 -45 John J. Velie. 4300 -02 Valley View Road. All that part of
the northwest quarter of Section 30, Township 28, Range 24,
lying south of West 62nd Street, west of Brookview Avenue
and northeasterly of Valley View Road.
REQUEST: 10 foot front yard setback variance
25 foot rear yard setback variance
3,147 square foot lot area variance
REFER TO: attached petition, survey, floor plan, and
elevation.
The subject parcel of property is an unplatted residue from street right -of -way
on all three sides. It is in private ownership and is zoned R -2, two family
dwelling district.
The property has 11,853 square feet of area. The zoning ordinance requires a
minimum 15,000 square foot lot area for a two family dwelling; therefore, a
3,147 square foot lot area is requested. The triangular shape and street
setbacks reduce the developable area substantially. In addition, the westerly
portion of the site has a storm sewer under it diagonally. The City does not
have an easement for the sewer. However, the line is very deep and the Engineering
Department has indicated they will approve construction over the line.
The proponents have prepared a plan that has a moderate size (28 X 80 foot)
- double bungalow with tuck under garages. The enclosed plans will be modified
to have the garage facing there or with a driveway to West 62nd Street. The
decks in the rear will be eliminated. Both West 62nd Street and Brookview
Avenue are treated as side streets with 15 foot setbacks. One of these sides
is required to be a 40 foot rear yard. Therefore, a 25 foot rear variance is
required.
The front of the dwelling faces Valley View Road. A 30 foot setback is required;
because a 20 foot setback is proposed, a 10 foot variance is requested. Valley
View Road, however, has a 25 foot boulevard which is 10 feet larger than normal.
Therefore, the normal space between the dwelling and the curb will be preserved.
There is not a uniform row of dwellings to compare with the proposed front set-
back. However, it appears to be reasonably close to the minimum setbacks for
the apartment and gas station on nearby lots. The proposed dwelling will conform
to the lot coverage limitations. The proponents have marked the approximate
corners of the dwelling and the site so that the Board can view the proposed
variances.
Staff Report
B -78 -45
December 21, 1978
k
page 2-
Recommendation:
This is a
highly
visible lot that many people are suprised is privately owned.
The staff
feels
that as private property, the best use is for a two - family
dwelling.
The
proponents have presented a reasonable plan for that use. There-
fore the staff
recommends approval of the variances for the following reasons:
1.
The variance will relieve an undue hardship created by the
unusual shape and large setbacks required.
2.
The variance will- correct extraordinary circumstances that
apply to this property.
3.
The. proposed variance will not be materially detrimental to
the public welfare or injurious to other property in the
vicinity.
The staff
would recommend the following contingencies to the variance:
1.
The variance is limited to the plans presented.
2.
The owner provides a storm sewer easement for areas
not covered by the proposed structure.
3.
The owner agrees by recordable document to accept
normal sidewalk, utility, and other street improvements
within the street right -of -way.
HS: jt
12 -15 -78
'Edina Board of Appeals and Adjustments
December 21, 1978
Page 3
the jurisdiction of the City Council, and he also felt the Council should examine
the existing ordinance to see if they felt it was still'pertinent or if some changes
were in order. Mr. David Runyan said that because KMSP was trying to keep up with
changing technology and their competitors, their request could not really be called
self- imposed. However, he was concerned about the precedent that could be set if
the variance was granted. Mr. Sand noted that within the past year there had been
a request from Cooperative Power Association for an antenna height variance which
was withdrawn.
Mr.. Elmer Johnson stated KMSP had built a 1,466 foot tower in
Shoreview, but the Village would not allow anyone else to build a tower over 150
feet high. Mr. Bill Shaw said that if one person was allowed to build, he did not
see how they could prevent anyone else from building through the courts unless it
was spot zoning.
Bill Shaw moved the Board deny the variance as requested on the
basis that he did not feel items B and C of the four criteria.were met: that it
would not correct extraordinary circumstances applicable to the property that was
not applicable to other property in the vicinity or zoning district, and it would
not preserve a substantial property right possessed by other property in the vicinity
and zoning district. He also advised and encouraged KMSP to appeal the decision to
the City Council because he felt it was more appropriate for them to examine if the
-variance should be allowed or the ordinance changed rather than go about it from
the Board of Appeals decision standpoint.
Dan. Reader asked if a variance had ever been granted to this
ordinance in Edina. . Bill Shaw replied that there were none to his knowledge, only
Cooperative Power's request which was dropped.
motion carried.
David Runyan seconded Mr. Shaw's motion. All voted aye; the
B -78 -45 John J. Velie. 4300 -02 Valley View Road. All that
part of the northwest quarter of Section 30, Town-
ship 28, Range 24, lying south of West 62nd Street,
west of Brookview Avenue, and northeasterly of Valley
View Road.
REQUEST: 10 foot front yard setback variance
25 foot rear yard setback variance
3,147 square foot lot area variance
Mr. Sand reminded the Board that the item had been continued a
number of times while the owner obtained surveys and prepared building plans. The
area being considered, he continued, is surrounded on all three sides by street
frontages, is in private ownership, and is zoned R -2, two family dwelling district.
Harold Sand stated the property, 11,853 square feet in area, is
required by the zoning ordinance to be a minimum 15,000 square foot lot area for
Edina Board of Appeals and Adjustments
December 21, 1978
Page 4
a two family dwelling; therefore, a 3,147 square foot lot area was requested. He
noted the triangular shape and street setbacks would reduce the developable area
substantially. In addition, the westerly portion of the site has a storm sewer
under it diagonally. Harold Sand informed the Board that although the City does
not have an easement for the sewer, the Engineering Department has indicated the
line is very deep, and they will approve construction over it.
Mr. Sand indicated the proponent had prepared a 28 by 80 foot
plan for a double bungalow with tuck -under garages. He added that both West 62nd
Street and Brookview Avenue are proposed to be treated as side streets with 15
foot setbacks. Because one of those sides is required to be a 40 foot rear yard,
a 25 foot variance was required. Harold Sand also explained that the front of the
.dwelling faces Valley View Road which requires a 30 foot setback; because a 20
foot setback is proposed, a ten foot variance is requested. He observed that Valley
View Road had a 25 foot boulevard which is ten feet larger than normal, and, there-
fore, the normal space between the dwelling and the curb will be preserved.
Staff felt that if the property remains in private ownership, a
two - family dwelling would be most appropriate for the site. Therefore, staff
recommended approval of the variance for the reasons stated in the staff report
and conditioned upon the following: 1) The variance be limited to plans presented.
2) The owner provides a storm sewer easement for areas not covered by the proposed
structure. 3) The owner agrees by recordable document to accept normal sidewalk,
utility, and other street improvements within the street right -of -way.
Bill Shaw asked Harold Sand how long the property had been zoned
R -2. Mr..Sand answered it had been R -2 for about 13 years, since about 1965. Mr.
Shaw inquired if.the ordinance in effect at that time specified that if the new
classification was not utilized within one year, the zoning would lapse to R -1
zoning. He noted that research should be done to determine this point.
Clark Miller inquired about the history of the private ownership
of the property. Mr. Sand replied the applicants have a contract to purchase the
property from Mr. Paul Mans who owned the property since about 1962.
David Runyan felt the piece of property was very unusual, ai:d the
plans were not sensitive to the unusual geometry of the property. Clark Miller said
he felt there were other nice double bungalows with less square footage than the
proposed plans. David Runyan asked Mr. Velie if the plans presented were not merely
stock plans rather than plans designed especially for the lot. Mr. Velie replied
they were prototype plans for the typical double bungalow.
There were no neighbors present at the meeting. Bill Shaw again
questioned the zoning of the property and stated he felt it was up to the City
Attorney to render a judgement as to the zoning of the property. Clark Miller felt
the variance was rather excessive in terms of lot area and setbacks on two sides.
Bill Shaw pointed out the lot is almost the size required for a single family
dwelling. Mr. Velie noted he would not be encroaching on any neighbors.
. ,
Edina Board of Appeals and Adjustments
December 21, 1978
Page 5
Mr. Runyan said he..felt the proposed plan was rather heavy for
the site making the yard for use of the occupants virtually nil. Clark Miller
cited a situation similar to Mr. Velie's in Golden Valley developed with a single
family home that worked very satisfactory.
David Runyan moved the Board deny Mr. Velie's request. based on
excessive use of the land, a design which is not sympathetic to the property, and
because the Board did not feel it was a buildable lot. Clark Miller also stated
it may be injurious to other property in the vicinity in terms of appearance, and
a substantial property right was not being preserved. Clark Miller seconded the
motion. David Runyan and Clark Miller voted :aye with Bill Shaw voting nay. The
motion to deny Mr. Velie's request carried.
B -78 -62 United Properties /Twin City Federal Savings and Loan.
3400 West 66th Street. Part of Lot 4, Cassin's Out -
lots, and Part of Lot 4, Block 4, Southdale Acres.
REQUEST: sign variance to permit an additional
building identification sign
Harold Sand asked the Commission to recall that the subject
property, recently zoned 0 -1, Office Building District, was the subject of a
temporary parking variance which was granted for the project. Mr. Sand pointed
out that although preliminary discussions between the developer and staff included
sign regulations, the construction documents contained proposals for additional
signage which does not comply with the ordinance. He explained sign regulations
for office zone permit one building identification sign per street frontage, with
the first sign being allowed a maximum area of 50 square feet and additional sign-
age limited to 36 square feet. Also he noted traffic directional signs are per -
mitted where appropriate provided they are less than 6 square feet in area and
do not bear any advertising.
Mr. Sand stated the proponents. requested permission for three
building identification signs so defined because they exceed 6 square feet and
all bear advertising. Staff suggested a traffic directional sign on the canopy
or a freestanding sign should be adequate and is utilized by other financial
institutions. He continued that the proposed signage has the same number of
building identification signs as would be permitted if the properties had been
developed independently; the total sign area proposed is less than the total
area permitted for the site, and the sign is permitted to be illuminated and
read "drive -in teller, auto bank - entrance, open, closed, et cetera."
Staff was concerned about granting the sign variances based on
aesthetics and good relationships. Mr. Sand noted a somewhat similar variance
was recently denied for Eberhardt Company, and the denial was upheld on appeal to
the City Council. Staff believes that adequate information and traffic direction
is possible under present regulations, and therefore, they recommended the Board
deny the variance request.
w •
LOCATION MAP Win,
O r t O
r ' > _ Z
GRAND
v•EW
PARK
CEIMETERV
OOF
:i
subdivision
R.L.S. GRANDVIEW PARK
REQUEST NUMBER: S -79 -3
LOCATION: Part of Outlot A, Parkwood
Knolls 20th Addition
REQUEST:
gill ^;;r �.irnir ,u �'� r �rlrttCi]! lilLnle of rrl•ra
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
STAFF REPORT
March.28, 1979
S -79 -3 R.L.S. Grandview Park. Described as a part of Outlot A,
Parkwood Knolls 20th Addition. Generally located east
of Malibu Drive and south of Grandview Park.
REFER TO: attached graphic
The City is in the process of purchasing a l� acre tract of land from
Carl Hansen. This parcel will be included within Grandview Park. The
County has requested a registered land survey for the purpose of recording
the transaction.
Recommendation:
Staff recommends approval of the registered land, survey.
GLH:jkt
3 -22 -79
/. n '
RREGISTERED LAND SURVEY NO.
HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA
BEARINGS SHOWN ARE ASSUMED EGAN, FIELD & NOWAK , INC.
ODENOTES IRON MONUMENT `� - f SURVEYORS—
SCALE IN FEET,
r 0 100 200 300 400 500 !
r
to - 1
alto
t� Colo 00f tit
o15pp IIfR
Sod 55* 00 o
Gil ; {., i .�.•i. t 7- .
T IRA CT 6
htr
A OrM
'•�. t' iq i ° a1'
.. . -._ B ..
S' 01
- i0 I e
s.
i
I
I hereby certify that in accordance with the provisions of Chanter 508, Minnesota Statutes 'of 1949, as amended. I lave
1
surveyed the following described tract,of land to the County of Hennepin and State of Minnesota, fu wit:
- All that of Outlot A. PARKNOOD KNOLLS °OTII ADDITION which lies Northwef :tcrly of the following described line:
part
• Commencing at the most Southerly corner of Outlot E. i'ARKi•:OOD KNOLLS _OTIi ADDITION: th`pcc on an assumed hearing of
33
;
North 59 degrees 04 minutes 53 seconds East along the southerly line of said Outlot F. 390.00 fret; thence South
degrees 04 minutes 40 seconds East, along the Southerly line of said outlot F., 14.1.44 feet to the actual point of
test, :!17.45 feet; thence South-
beginning of the lioiito he described; thence South 56 degrees 39 minutes 57 set. nds
feet; thence South 78 degrees
westerly, 146.64 feet along a tangential curve to the rikl�t, having a radius of 385.x!
there terminating.
29 minutes 14 seconds Nest, 64.33 feet to the Westerly line of said Outlot A and
That the survev shown hereon is a correct delineation of said survey.
Dated this day of 197 —'
>
j� Vernon A. %ickols, Land Survcvor
\ Minnesota Registration Nu. 9053 ,
`
EDINA, MINNESOTA
Survey was approved and accepted by the City Council of Edina, Minnesota, at a regular meeting
This Registered Land
thereof held this day of 197 —•
CITY COUNCIL OF E:DINA, 51INNE:SOIA
t.,.
by mayor by manager
FINANCE. OIl'ISI04, Iiennepin County, Minnesota
to for land described on this
I hcrcbv certify that there are no delinquent taxes for all years prior
plat. ,
Dated this day of . 197 —.
by tax clerk
Yernun T. Ih.apc, Dircct.ur
SIFtI%,Ey DIVISION, llennepin County, Minnesota
1969, this Itcgistcred Land Survey has been appro rd this day of
Pursuant to Chanter 1410, Minnesota i.aws of
' t 97 —. •
Alver It, I recnan, llcnnepin County `:nrvevor by _
RF.C15THAR (IF TITLFS, liruncpin County, Minnesota
filed in thin office this day of
I hercbv - -i-tifv that. the within ri:arred I.and SurvvY No, w:18
197_, at u•clnck —,M,
deputy
Wavne A. .lohurtnn, itcgistr:rr of TitIt- by
FIELD & NOWAK , INC.
EGA SURVEYORS
BEARINGS SHOWN ARE ASSUMED
DENOTES IRON MONUMENT
;;.I
f ,' 1lh 1,hf pF /bt Nw," W the
0�
�i'fG•rnirnl I • Nd'�5/ /G�E
I
( S' "I.k6..i0
Mop
W
q � /S59 67
w�
6p
' ' •���nE;r(nrCer7� e
lb
�o
e
�•,'.D�'�A
`�
•7 �'
a . gym.
•/5.70 it0� _
•t •"S.�'� ' °•N'f)1(hrCerlf:�laNr
-. -
Y
'
212.1
3
q�
D�tigti
\�O
W
zC4
0
CfAAINJEW
0
UM I I
hl
o�
as
hl
r
s
a
4
0
TIW
O
V.
0 �
0�
�r
�v � w
+wa -a sue: sv
Mop
W
�p.0p• .�
w�
6p
' ' •���nE;r(nrCer7� e
lb
�o
e
hl
o�
as
hl
r
s
a
4
0
TIW
O
V.
0 �
�v � w
+wa -a sue: sv
� v .
�p.0p• .�
6p
' ' •���nE;r(nrCer7� e
lb
fv
�•,'.D�'�A
`�
•7 �'
a . gym.
� la's
HARVEYtANE AR ti
Y
•\\ I
3
q�
D�tigti
\�O
W
zC4
0
i
o
�h
co
hl
o�
as
hl
r
s
a
4
0
TIW
O
V.
0 �
�v � w
+wa -a sue: sv
� v .
�p.0p• .�
' ' •���nE;r(nrCer7� e
lb
�•,'.D�'�A
`�
•7 �'
a . gym.
� la's
.f�:�j�•
Y
•\\ I
D�tigti
ss� Rj � l!���•,�
hl
o�
as
hl
r
s
a
4
0
TIW
O
V.
0 �
• . Y I•'�
�v � w
f .'�
� v .
�p.0p• .�
`�
•7 �'
1512 M
r" � ,.wT i5il. n�
.f�:�j�•
• . Y I•'�
Edina Community Development and Planning Commission
March 28, 1979
S- 79 -3- R.L.S. Grandview Park. Described as a part of
Outl6t A "� Parkwood Knolls 20th Addition. Generally
located east of Malibu Drive and south of Grandview.
Park.
Gordon Hughes asked the Commission to recall that several
years ago the City acquired about a 20 acre tract of land south of the Grand-
view Park cemetary. He continued that several months ago the Planning
Commission approved the Parkwood Knolls 20th Addition -for_the Carl Hansen
property to the south of this tract of land, and as part of that subdivision
Mr. Hansen dedicated an additional five acres to the park.. Gordon. Hughes
indicated the City then entered into a purchase agreement-with Mr. Hansen to
purchase another III acre tract of land to add to the park; that purchase agree-
ment has now been signed. However, Mr. Hughes noted the County had informed
.him that because Mr. Hansen is undergoing a torrens proceeding on the property,
they will be unable to record the deed for the property unless a Registered
Land Survey is completed on the property.
Staff, therefore, recommended approval of the Registered
Land Survey of this 111 acre tract of land for the purpose of recording the
transaction with Mr. Hansen. After a general discussion as to the traffic
patterns in the area, Richard Seaberg moved the 'Commission approve the
'Registered Land Survey for the property. James Bentley seconded the motion.
All voted aye; the motion of approval carried.
LOC.,ATION MAP
subdivision
KERRY SUBDIVISION
REQUEST NUMBER: S -79 -4
LOCATION: Lot 14, Prospect Hills
REQUEST:
;N /l!•'llll•a_ /It' •Ilr 1'lert vill a!-f, 11 rJ !!�[
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
STAFF REPORT
March 28, 1979
S -79 -4 Kerry Subdivision. Described as Lot 14, Prospect Hills.
Generally located south of Kerry Road and east of Down
Road.
REFER TO: attached graphics
The subject property is a 42,584 square foot single family lot (Lot 14,
Prospect Hills). A single family dwelling is located on the northerly
portion of the lot and fronts on Kerry Road.
The proponents are requesting a subdivision of the subject property in
order to create one new buildable lot. As proposed, a 22,410 square
foot lot would be retained for the existing dwelling. The new lot would
measure 20,174 square feet and would have an average depth of about 150
feet and a width at the building site of about 140 feet.
Prospect Hills was originally platted in the late 1940's into 15 lots.
These lots ranged in size from about 30,000 square feet to 4z acres.
Most lots were 1 to Ili acres in size. Since the original platting, lots
2, 4, 6, 7, 8, 11, and 15 of Prospect Hills have been further subdivided.
These lot divisions are shown by dashed lines on the attached graphic.
The approximate sizes of these "newly created" lots (also shown on the
graphic). range from 18,000 square feet to 30,000 square feet.
Recommendation:
The proposed subdivision complies with the standards imposed by the Zoning
Ordinance and appears to be a logical subdivision of the subject property.
The proposed new lot is consistent in size and shape with other lots created
in the past by the further subdivision of Prospect Hills lots. Therefore,
staff recommends approval of the proposed subdivision with the following
conditions:
1. Payment of a subdivision dedication prior to final plat approval.
2. Payment of sewer and water connection charges prior to issuance of a
building permit.
3. A tree cutting permit will be required prior to issuance of a
building permit.
GLH:jkt
3/23/79
Subdivision No.
SUBDIVISION DEDICATION REPORT
TO: Planning Commission '
Park Board
- Environmental Quality.Commission
FROM:. planning Department pp '
_:SUBDIVISION NAME: � � S'L( �[Jly� SlO�
LAND SIZE: 0 % LAND VALUE:��, G
(By: ; Date:
"The developer-of-this subdivision has been required to
A. grant an:easement, over -part ,of•the land
E] B. - dedicate $ .of. the .land
�j C. donate $ as a fee in lieu of land
;-rAs.a. result of-applying :he,.following..policy:•
A. Land Required (no density :or: intensity: may, be -used for the first 5% of
.land dedicated).
j —j1. If property is adjacent to an existing park and the addition
beneficially expands the park.
II2. If property is 6. acres or will be combined with future dedications
so that -the end result will be a minimum of a , 6 acre park.
3. -If property .abuts a natural lake,, pond, or .stream.
�J 4. If property is necessary for storm water holding or will be dredged
or otherwise improved for storm water holding areas or ponds.
S. If the property is a place of.aignificant natural, scenic or his-
•toric value.
�6.
S. Cash Required •
61. In all other- Instances than above.
2. .
: L /l' IAI,49K
LOT 0/VISION/ "
Ar-�
% %k�rr, o� Lot 14 P/t2�pCGf
�/il /.3
A- RDARELLE c t, A- SSC)CI.ATES, INC.
L A N D
S U R Y E Y 0 R S
110 Flying Cloud Drive, Eden
Prairie klinnesota, 55343 Phone
612.941 -3030
scale / "` =�0"
Revisions
Drawn By
Date
fob No.:�-
— a
I Gook
PSae
N3 ---�i
I
l �oAD
�ba
CPO
PROSPEC7 HILzs
1sT Z&P ADDI;rloNs
a
o
4.T2 7 c _ 7t�`
_ ,�. �•,
3aK►ao tv� � 6° ; "- . 9 zoo �
V ZddOd W N .•� �•� I
CP
0
Q ti �� H /8'92 •.. i s 325 � I
3.03 � ... v��.Q ' z v,�� �� •, 3 � �$ � Z I
/O •. co
.� .r
27 7 391 ... 6'37. I4
}
. .
Edina Community Development and Planning Commission
March 28, 1979
page 3
Staff, therefore, recommended approval of the Registered
Land Survey of this 1 acre tract of land for the purpose of recording the
transaction with Mr. Hansen. After a general discussion as to the traffic
patterns in the area, Richard Seaberg moved_ the Commission approve the
Registered Land Survey for the property. James Bentley seconded -the motion.
All voted aye; the motion of approval carried.
S -79 -4 Kerry Subdivision.
Hills. Generally
east of Down Road.
Described as Lot 14, Prospect
located south of Kerry Road and
Explaining that the subject property is a 42,584 square
foot single family lot with a single family dwelling located on the northerly
portion of the lot, Gordon Hughes elaborated that the proponents are requesting
a subdivision to create a new 20,174 square foot lot that would have an
average depth of about 150 feet and a width at the building site of about
140 feet while retaining 22,410 square feet for the existing dwelling.
Mr. Hughes noted that the new lot would front on Down
Road while the existing dwelling fronts on Kerry Road. He also indicated
that Prospect Hills was originally platted in the late 1940's into 15 lots
which ranged in size from 30,000 square feet to 4z acres. Continuing that
since the original platting, many of the lots have been further -subdivided
into lots ranging in size from 18,000 to 30,000 square feet, Mr. Hughes
stated the proposed subdivision complies with the - standards imposed by the
Zoning Ordinance and appears to be a logical subdivision of the subject
property. Staff felt the new lot is consistent in size and shape with other
lots created in the past by the further subdivision of Prospect Hills lots;
therefore, staff recommended approval of the proposed subdivision with the
following conditions: that payment of subdivision dedication be made prior
to final plat approval, that payment of sewer and water connection charges
be paid prior to issuance of a building permit, and that a tree cutting permit
be required and obtained prior to issuance of a building permit.
Mr. Hughes introduced Pat Robbins who was present on behalf
of the owner of the property. There was general discussion on previous
subdivisions in Prospect Hills. James Bentley moved, the .Commission = approve
the subdivision request with the conditions that payment of subdivision
dedication be made prior to final plat approval, that payment of sewer and
water connection charges be paid prior to issuance of a building permit, and
that a tree cutting permit be required and obtained prior to issuance of a
building permit. Mary McDonald seconded the motion. All voted aye; the motion
carried.
III. Other Business:
Election of officers for the Community Development and Planning
Commission for 1979 was held over for one month until; more. commissioners could
be present to participate in the voting process.
DORSEY, WINDHORST. HANNAF'ORD. WHITNEY &_.,HALLADAY U J
JOHN ++INOMORST MICMACLA OLSON
HEMP' HALLADAI LA 01'sw_JCY:.SON
JIJLC A10.0 1H0MAS
ARIMUq B WHITNEY O LAPP' GPIf lIIH
RUSSC%L R LIHDOWST CRAI', A SEC. ') a @.I". :DHOMAS O YOEACT
:E Mac" M WLl JAMES n OHA GAN
�i PT V 1APBOK 'JOMII r MA'.pn
ROBCR7 J JOHNSON MICHAEL w • IGHI
IM'NARO B HASSELOUIST ,`Apa, RVKNOTT
NNE I
PETER DORSET
GEORGE P ELAPY PnILLIP N MARTIN
CUR'IS L POY PEESE C JOHNSON
AgIHIIR I WC15 BC RG CHARLES J NAUEN51EIN
oIIANE C JOSEPH CHARLES A GC ER
JArCS B VCSSEY JOHN C jW AKMAN
WILLAN A WMITLOCK JOHN R WICAS
EDWARD J SC ..AR EUGENE L JOMMSON
THOMAS M BROWN JOHN W WINOHORST•JR
CORNELIUS O MAHONCY. JR MICHAEL P- .CHAPO
WILLIAM C_BABCOCK JOHN P VITMo
THOMAS S EPICK50'1 R1HIARORG5SWANS9N
MICHAEL C. BRCSS
RAYMOND A RCISTCP PAIIM L. OMMAN
JOHN J TAYLOR P ROBERT JASILVERMAN
JOHN S MIBBS BS THOMAS R IuMTMC1
ROBERT 0. FLOIICM WILLIAM R. HIM
JOHN O. LCVINC PHILIP P SOELTER
Rostov J SERUM WILLIAM B PATNE
23Q0 FIRST NATIONAL BANK BUILDING
MiNNEAPOLIS.MINNESOTA SS402
46121 340 -2600
CABLE: DOROW
TELEX: 29 -0605
TELECOPI ER: 1612,340-2668
1468 "W -FIRST NATIONAL BANK BUILDING ,
6T..;PAUL.MINNESOTA 56101."
16121 "227 -6017 -
115 THIROLSTREET SOUTHWEST
ROCHESTER. MINNESOTA 56901
46071 268 -3156
Ken Rosland
City Manager
City of Edina
4801 West 50th Street
Edina, MN 55424
December 19,, 1978
ROBERT A MCISEPG
JOHN 0 KIR97
POOERT A SCMWARIZSAI
DHOIM M + RTOINMCKM
AY A
JON f IU'.
CMCPY W BARILE
WILLIAM A JOHNSTONE
STEVEN ■ CHAMPLIN
MICHAEL J PAOMCR
MICMACL TRUCANO
JAMES A PLAOEq
DAVID l BOCMNCM
MICMCL A LAPOND
DON D CARLSON
PAUL J SCHECRER
DAN T NICOL
PRANK Y VOIGT
WILLIAM M MIPPCC,JR
ROBERT BURNS
ROGER J MAGNUSON
J ROBERT NIBBS
JAI F COOK
STANLEY Y REIN
CHARLES L POTUZNIK
VEPLAMC L ENDOW
DENNIS R BURATTI
G[ORDEANN BECKER
ROBERT L MOBBINS
BARRY O. GLAZER
PETER S. MCNORIKSON
NICK R MAY
IRVING WEISER
JCR STEPHEN C GOTTSCHALK
THOMAS + CIKINS
ACNHEIM L CUTLER
GAP' M JOHNSON
THOMAS W TIN.
JAI% BENNETT
008EP1 G BAYER
SUUNNE B VAN 010
SIUARI P HEMPHILL
J DAVID JACKSON
W CHARLCS LAN7Z
DOUGLAS E PAY
STEVEN F WOLGAMOT
J MAROUIS EASTWOOD
EDWARD J PLUIMCR
A[NN[I" W ERICIISON
OWEN C MARK
JAMES C. BO-LUS
GEORGE.L CHAPMAN
THOMAS D VANDER MOLEN
MARK A JARBOE
BRUCE 0 BOLANOCA
OP COUNSEL
DONALD WEST
WALDO f MAROUART
GEORGE E ANDERSON
JOHN F. FINN
J
Re: Dog Ordinance Dr4 y h ®` •
Dear Ken:
Enclosed is a proposed ordinance amending Section 17(c)
of Ordinance 311 to require that persons in.control or custody
of a dog while on public property or a public area remove feces
of that dog and have in his immediate possession a device.or
I ou and your
equipment for that purpose.nce an d request any changesaor
review this proposed
questions that you might have.
In reviewing the ordinance please note that we have
11
included public area" as well as public property as a place
from which feces must be removed. However, we have not required
that feces be removed from private property even though they
may have been placed thereon without the consent of the owner
or the possessor of the private property. We considered re-
quiring such removal. However, there - -is -a- problem -of- a - -dog - - owner-having to trespass in order to make such removal. Other
ordinances do require removal from private property also. In
any event, the ordinance does make it a.- misdemeanor for a dog
to defecate on private property even though the dog owner is
not required to remove the feces. If you wish us to add a
requirement that feces be removed from private property, p lease
advise and we can do so.
Again, if you have any questions or comments on the
proposed ordinance, please advise.
Very truly yours,
\i V 1' 'x-12 -1
Thomas S. rickson
TSE:gems
cc: Bob Kojetin - Gordon Hughes
1.
b
s
I
ORDINANCE NO. 311 -A
AN-ORDINANCE AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 311 TO PROHIBIT PROPERTY
DAMAGE BY DOGS, TO PROHIBIT THE MICTURATION OR DEFECATION BY DOGS ON PRIVATE
PROPERTYWITHOUT THE CONSENT OF THE O.WNCER OR POSSESSOR OF THE PROPERTY
AND TO REQUIRE THE REMOVAL OF DOGS' WASTES.FROM PUBLIC PROPERTY
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDINA, MINNESOTA, ORDAINS:
Section 1. Sec. 17(c) of:Ordinance No. 311 is hereby amended to read
as follows:
"(c) No person having the custody or control of a dog shall.permit
the dog to damage any lawn, garden or other property, public or private, or
TIRE to micturate or defecate on private property without the consent of the
RA owner or possessor of the property. It shall be the duty of each person
APH having the custody or control of a dog to remove any feces left by such dog
W] on any sidewalk, gutter, street, park land or other public property, or on
any public area, and to dispose of such feces in a sanitary manner. It shall
furthermore be the duty of each person having the custody or control of a
dog when such dog is upon any of the places or areas described in the
immediately preceding sentence to have in his immediate possession a device
-for the removal of dog feces. For the purposes of this section, public
area" shall mean any property open for public use or travel even though it
is privately owned. The provisions of this section shall not apply to a
guide dog accompanying a blind person or to a dog when -used in police or
rescue activities by or with the permission of the City. This section
shall not be construed by.implication or otherwise to allow dogs to be
where they are otherwise prohibited by the ordinances of the City."
Section 2. This ordinance shall be in full force and effect upon its
passage and publication.
(N.B. Deletions are lined out [_____]; additions are underlined [__]
or noted as entirely new.
{
The following information was gathered on the phone by random selection
Of surrounding communities. How are dogs handled in the Parks?
Bloomington- Police - -Dept. There can be dogs on leash, must clean up
mess.
Richfield Police -Dept. There can be dogs on leash -not really enforced.
Golden Valley:- Must be leashed or controlled by owners command.
New Hope- $25.00 fine if dog is not on leash.
Minnetonka -Must be on leash.
Eden Praire -Ifust be leashed or under owners control. Real Problem.
Crystal- Dogs will in the near future be prohibited from parks.
Robinsdale- Leashed or under owners control. Must clean up after dogs
if they do not'they are ticketed.
Maple Grove- No dogs in the park.
Minneapolis- Must be leashed and must carry a means of cleaning up dog
mess.
17. Restrictions on Oogs.
(a) No person shall keep or harbor a dog which habitually
barks or cries between the hours of 10:00 Y.S. and 7:00 A.�l.
(b) No do- shall be pernritted to be off the premises of the
owner at any time. unl.ss it is Dashed, or accompanied
as by
person having as effective control over it by
leash.
(c) No owner shall rem f t hi C� L�� lG<c'L� l i- A S
garden or other property. f'
(d) No more than two animals over six months of age shall
be kcrt.or harbored at any place.cxccrt in a licensed pet shop
or licensed aniulal Iwapital, 46
`.'
3 i IL
Sec, 7. Animals in Parks. No person shall
(a) take or allow any do; or other animal in or buildan g.
public park, park ��'atcrs, bird or animal refuge
or skatirtg'rink where forbidden b poste sIgIls: or
(b) take or allow any cattle, mules, swine, sheep, goats or
fowl in or upon any public park or public waters.
The prohibition in this section shall nrt apply to animals
kept by the Village or under its direction or with its
permission. Norscs may
not be taken or allowed in any public and
Park (in park exc Pt1andLthen r but trot within the golf coursesarea.
unimproved
-2-
We also receive 28% to 40% back from the state on the cost of removal of boulevard
trees. Mr.. Kojetin also handed out a memo explaining exactly in what areas the
subsidies can be used.
Since this was the first year.for reforestation, Mr. Kojetin also explained this
program. There were a total of 80 trees planted this year. Forty of these trees
were planted on boulevards where trees had been removed for Dutch'Elm.disease.
The other 40 trees were divided among-the 5 designated�tree. districts in the City
of Edina. The trees were planted according to a random selection on streets within
the City. It was, of course up to the residents as to whether or not they wanted
the trees replaced. We also kept records of all types of trees we planted and where
they were planted.
Due to the severity of.the Dutch Elm problem this year and the _ "do it yourself"
attitude of many of the home owners who cut down their own trees and placed the
cuttings on the boulevard for the city to pick up and bring to the dump area;
the tree trimming program is lagging far behind. By doing this, the city receives
the 28% subsidy and the home owner forfeits his right to the subsidy for removal.
Next year we hope to alleviate this problem by renting a machine called a Prentice
Loader used to pick up the trees. This will, hopefully, allow us to get back on
schedule in our trimming program.
Mr. Kojetin explained that this year we will start cutting down city owned trees
with Dutch Elm disease in the wildlife areas. There are 226 marked elm trees
in the wildlife areas such as Bredesen Park and along Nine Mile Creek. It is
permissable to spray these trees with an oil spray, cut them down and leave them
to decay in the-wildlife area. This would save us a lot of money by not having.to
haul them away. This is a project we can start sometime this winter.
V. WEEDS
Mr. Kojetin also went over the weed inspection program. The inspector, Gene
Davis, inspects privately owned lots for obnoxious weeds, sends a letter to the
owner informing them that the weeds must be removed within a given period of time
and if they are not, the city will cut the weeds and bill the owner for the
cutting at the rate of $25.00 per hour.
VI. AQUATIC WEEDS
Mr. Kojetin explained the problem of treating aquatic weeds. It is the policy of
the state (which owns the water) to not treat any body of water. Under special
permission and permit authorization by the state we treated 12.ponds in the City
of Edina last year. A list of the treated ponds and the dates they were'treated
was provided. The state, however, only allows us to treat 10% of the lake; therefore,
this treatment is not very effective. The pond located next to the swimming pool
has been treated with an experimental aeration system. This system, however, has
not proved to be a successful way of treating aquatic weeds in ponds.
VII. DOG ORDINANCE
The Board was handed and went over the new proposed Dog Ordinance. In this Ordinance
it is a misdemeanor with a fine of $25 to.$500 if a dog owner, doesn't have the means
with him to clean up after his dog. It was the general consensus of the Board that
`LV
this was an excessive measure for the effective enforcement of this Ordinance. The.
fine was too high and making it a misdemeanor would tie up the courts unnecessarily
and people would be reluctant to enforce the Ordinance. The Board felt that
-3-
a ticket with a fine of $15 to $25 would be more pratical to enforce. Mr. Wanninger
MADE A MOTION that the Board approve the Ordinance with the alteration that a ticket
with a small fine be issued for infraction of the Ordinance. Mr. Gyetvan SECONDED.
CARRIED. It was also felt by the Board that more publicity was needed in order that
the dog owner would be more aware of this Ordinance; including the placing of signs
in the parks. With the help of these signs and other publicity measures it was felt.
that the general public as well as the dog owners would aid in the enforcement of this
Ordinance.
VIII. DREDGING OF #2 FAIRWAY (BRAEMAR GOLF COURSE)
Mr. Fischer, chairman of the golf committee, summarized the dredging of two ponds
alongside the #2 fairway. These ponds would be located between fairway #2
and the Braemar.Boulevard road. This area has constantly been in a swampy, flooded
condition, where at high water the water would run over the road. This causes
constant slow play on the golf course and also cannot be maintained. The proposal .
is to dredge and connect the.ponds with'a. pipe so they will drain into'the Nine Mile
Watershed area. The cost of this project would be approximately $9000. Mr.
Fisher also pointed out that this has been recommended by the golf course staff
and the men's club; and was proposed in the 5 Year Plan that Mr. Kojetin had
presented to us earlier at another meeting. Included in this project, would be
the construction of a new #2 tee for the men and ladies, since the present ones have
been sinking for the past few years. Mr. Kojetin also stated that this is part
of the maintaining and up- grading program for the golf course in order to keep the
facility at a high level of play. Mr. Fischer MADE A MOTION that we approve the
dredging of #2 fairway. Mrs. Lonsbury SECONDED. CARRIED.
IX. DEDICATION - EDINA OFFICE CENTER
Mr. Kojetin briefly went over this project and suggested that the Park Board
request a greater percentage of land in the dedication and build a park around
the office facility. It was felt by the Board, however, that the developer might
already have plans for the development of some type of park, and with the value of
the land perhaps it might be wiser to ask for the money in leiu of land. Mr.
Gyetvan pointed out that this money could be used to help maintain and repair our
present facilities. Mr. Wanninger MADE A MOTION that the Planning Department or
developer present.to the Board more detailed.plans for the development of the
area before determing what action to take. Mr. Fischer SECONDED. CARRIED.
It was also suggested that we try to determine the monetary value of the land
before making a decision.
DISC GOLF EQUIPMENT
Mr. Kojetin informed the Board that the Disc Golf equipment had been purchased at
a cost of $1000, which had been approved at an earlier Park Board meeting.
SR. CITIZEN VEHICLE
Mr. Kojetin informed the Board that Farmers and Mechanics Bank is going to purchase
and donate a vehicle to the Srs. The vehicle will be larger than the van we had .
originally thought about purchasing and will have facilities to adjust for a wheelchair.
There will also be advertising on the van similar to what is on the Show Mobile.
The bank would like the vechile purchased by February 2 when their new branch
is scheduled to open up. Mr. Warner inquired as to the schedule that had been
drawn up for the vehicle. Cecelia Smith explained the calendar briefly (calendar
enclosed). The city will be divided into 4 sections; the people will call up
the center when the vehicle is scheduled to be in their section and the vehicle will
pick them.up at a certain time. There will also be days when part of the day will
be open for the bus to take tours of shopping trips, etc.
Meeting adjourned at 10:00 p.m.
-1
M E M O R A N D U M
TO: Kenneth E. Rosland, City Manager DATE: April 10, 1979
FROM: Craig G. Swanson, Chief of Police
SUBJECT: Report on Training Institute
On March 28 -30, 1979, I attended the Minnesota Chiefs of Police Association
Spring Training Institute. This is an annual event sponsored by the associ-
ation and presented by the Government Training Service in cooperation with
the League of Minnesota Cities. Participant cost was $60.00.
The agenda of the institute is attached for your information and I will only
highlight a few of the most important items.
The Chiefs Association has employed a lobbyist in the person of Mr. Terrence
Serie. Mr. Serie updated the group on current legislative activity. Foremost,
is legislation in the form of Senate File 873, dealing with confidentiality
of investigative records. Current legislation expires July 31, 1979 and
unless new legislation is passed, all police department records will be made
public. It is my feeling that this would severely hamper the police investi-
gative function and could be harmful to various witnesses and informants.
Needless to say, the Chiefs Association is working actively for passage of
the needed legislation.
A labor relations presentation was made which highlighted communication as
an important function to preclude labor problems.
Also, a most timely topic was presented by Henderson Young and Company of
Denver, Colorado. The topic was entitled Coping With a Budget Crunch, Cost
Cutting and Budget Balancing for Law Enforcement. Many of the specific
examples of cost cutting have already been implemented within Edina. However,
the complete.elimination of programs formerly provided has not yet been
examined. Underlying this entire presentation was the direct relationship
of "level of service" and "manpower resources."
If there are any questions on these topics or others listed in the attachment,
feel free to contact me.
CRAIG SWANSON
CHIEF F POLICE
SPRING TRAINING INSTITUTE FOR POLICE CHIEFS
March 28 - 30, 1979
-I Sheraton Inn - Northwest
Sponsored
by the
Police Chiefs Association of Minnesota
Presented
by the
Government Training Service in cooperation with
the
League of Minnesota Cities
Final Program Schedule
Wednesday. ;. March
28 Presiding: Robert Metcalf
8:15
a.m.
Final Registration (Courtyard)
9:00
Welcome and Introduction (Acapulco & Mazatlan)
Robert Metcalf
9:15
Legislative Concerns and Update
.:.
Terrence Sarie ".
-
10:30
;`
Refreshment_ Break (Courtyard)
10:45
Privacy Act
Senator William McCutcheon
-
William Bloyer
,+
12:00
p.m...
Luncheon (Courtyard)
1:00
Business Meeting (Acapulco & Mazatlan)
,.
Robert Metcalf...
5 00
A
Adjourn
,
{
s. Thursday;
March
29 Presiding:., .1and_(Bud) Thurman.
9:00
a.m...
A Police Chiefs Guide to Labor Relations:
(Acapulco & Mazatlan,.
Unions,.Strikes and Negotiations
_
Walt Sirene
10:30
Refreshment Break (Courtyard)
12:00
p.m.
Luncheon (Courtyard)
1:00
A Police Chief's Guide to Labor Relations
(continued)
Walt Sirene
_
.
5:00
Adjourn
t
&
yeF.n
3
z
Thursday, March -29
6:00 p.m.
7:00
Friday, March 30
9:00 a.m.
10:30
12:00 p.m.
Social Hour — Cash Bar
Awards Banquet (Courtyard)
Remarks and Presentation of Police Officer
of the Year
Governor Al Quie
Presiding: Harmarthur Hull, Second Vice President
Coping with a Budget Crunch: (Acapulco & Mazatlan)
-Cost Cutting and Budget Balancing for-Law
Enforcement
Randy Young
Refreshment Break (Courtyard)
Luncheon (Courtyard)
.1
1:00 Police Officials Standards & Training (Post)
A Briefing on Continuing Education /Training
Requirements, Reserve Officers and Part -
Time Officers '
Mark.Shields
-2:15 Refreshment-.Break (Courtyard)
3:30 Adjourn
} PROGRAM NOTES
_ A Central Message Board, .located b- the Registration Table, will have up -to -date .
conference:information. plus personal messages. Participants are encouraged. to
check it regularly.
1 j, 'Tickets
are required for all meals;,especially the Thursday banquet. Please
t �e
,t keep them handy
comments and suggestions are welcome.at: any time. Please.feel -free to
�r =talk with the conference staff. or jot them down. at the registration desk.
-'Several exhibits will be displayed in the Courtyard for the duration of the
Conference. Information on upcoming program presented.by the Government
Training Service.is also available.
About the Government Training Service._
The Government Training Service is a public,.joint powers organization. providirg
training, education, and consulting services to public officials, employees and
employers'in "the state of Minnesota.•, Its members include the League of Minnesota
Cities, the Association of Minnesota Counties,.•the University of Minnesota, the-
- _School Boards Association, the,State Planning Agency, and the "State-Department of-
Personnel...
j 14
- rrr.f y 7 i yl iFI
la
4 f i fry (?K-�f (al� 'ri �6 j a� - 1 L N ! r .(, , f. ea , - ! .•% k- _
J., ,i• C: -::,.
TO: Mayor and Council
City Manager
FROM: Mark Bernhardson, Administrative Assistant
SUBJECT: PUBLIC OFFICIAL LIABILITY
DATE: April 11, 1979
The current policy for Public Official Liability expires on May 3,-1979.
The present policy is with Forum Insurance for a premium of $5,700 for
$1,000,000 coverage and a $2,500 deductible. During the policy year,.
the City submitted one claim (Prestige Realty) to the company, for which
they agreed to accept.
This year three quotations were again sought with the attached purchase
forms listing those amounts.
Should you have further questions, please feel free to contact me.
;(3)
r
Mark E. Bernhardson
Administrative Assistant
MEB /skh
REQUEST FOR PURCHASE
TO: Mayor and City Council
FROM: Mark Bernhardson, Administrative Assistant
VIA: Kenneth Rosland, City Manager
SUBJECT:' REQUEST FOR PURCHASE OF ITEM IN EXCESS OF $1,000
DATE: April 16, 1979
Material Description (General Specifications):
Public Official Liability Insurance $1,000,000 ($2,500 deductible)
Quotations/Bids-
Company. Amount of Quote or Bid
1. Midland $.3,918/$ 10,687 (3 year prepaid)`
2. Forum
3. International Surplus
$ 6,000
$ 6,726
* For an additional 10 %, the exclusion on architects, attorneys,
engineer or accountant would be removed
Department Recommendation:
Recommend selecting three year quotation from Midland with 10% additional
for the elimination of the prof ssio a� excl sion.
4
Signature' Department
Finance Director's Endorsement:
The recommended bid is T�is not D within the. amount b dget d for the purchase.
/j J. N. Dalen
Finance Director
City M ger's Endorsement:
1. I concur with the recommendation of the Department and recommend Council
approve the purchase.
2. I.recommend as an alternative:
Kenn6tH Rosland
City Manager
r
•
A PRELIMINARY PROPOSAL
TO STUDY
PROACTIVE PROGRAMS IN EDINA YOUTH SERVICES
This proposal outlines a strategy to identify proactive
programs in Edina youth services.. We define proactive pro -
grams as anticipatory (prevention- oriented) rather than re-
actionary (treatment - oriented). The problem inherent with a
treatment orientation to human services can best be illustra-
ted by the "Upstream /Downstream Parable."
"It's been many years since the first body was spot-
ted in the river. Some old - timers remember how spar-
tan were the facilities and procedures.for managing
that sort of thing. Sometimes, they say, it would
take hours to pull 10 people from the river, and even
then only a few would survive.
Though the number of victims in the river has increa-
sed greatly in recent years, the good folks of Down-
stream have responded admirably to the challenge.
Their rescue system is clearly second to none: most
people discovered in the swirling waters are reach-
ed within 20 minutes, many in less .than 10. Only
a small number drown each day before help arrives;
a big improvement from the way it used to be.
Talk to the people of Downstream and.they'll speak
with pride about the new hospital by the edge of
the waters, the flotilla.of rescue boats ready for
service at a moment's notice, the comprehensive
health plans for coordinating all the manpower
(' involved, and the large number of highly.train-
ed and dedicated swimmers always ready to risk
• their lives to save victims from the raging currents.
1 t b t an the Downstreamers
Sure.it costs a o u y
what else can decent people do except to provide
whatever it takes when human lives are at stake.
Oh, a few people in Downstream have raised the
question now -and again, but most folks show little
interest aboLit r•hat's happening Upstream. It seems.
there's so much to do to help those in the river,
that nobody's got time to check how all those
bodies are getting there in the first place.
That's the way things are, sometimes."
This study is not designed.to evaluate how many. or how
fast "victims" are being rescued by Edina youth services. We
feel this "casualty" or "body count" approach to human services
treats the syA oms rather than the "dis- eases" plaguing today's
youth. Parents, teachers and churches have traditionally been
the primary influence in the forming of a child's values,.
beliefs, and standards of behavior. These traditional institu-
tions of youth socialization have suffered a distressing de
cline in authority and credibility among today's youth.
Anew group of professionals and youth services have
emerged to help the child cope with this increasingly complex
and confusing world. Unfortunately, most of.the resources
and training has gone to treat youth failures, not increase
youth success. We feel a more comprehensive (and perhaps
more cost-effective) approach 'would be to identify ways to
increase children's "life- coping" skills before they are iden-
tified as failures.
This study would provide a means for beginning to
assemble comprehensive and accurate information about youth
services designed from an.anticipatory model. These ser-
vices start with a prevention ethic as a central theme.
Ideally, human service programs should recognize the enormous
influence that such things.as mass media, changing lifestyles,
increase in family breakdowns, etc., have on today's youth.
Concomitantly youth services should seek ways.to support
and encourage healthy family relations. Youth services
should try to develop children with strong and positive
self images.. Youth services should give children the tools
to understand, relate and respond to others. Youth services
( "r should attempt to equip children with the capacity to be
flexible, to cope with uncertainity, to risk commitment
and involvement.
Youth services for children in need or in trouble must
be maintained and strengthened. But unlike the good people
of Downstream, we must ask how our children can be helped
not to be victims. This study is designed to identify and
document youth services that increase the social -and psycho-
logical health of all Edina children in the.hope that.the
study findings might decrease the number of Edina children
becoming victims.
RESEARCH DESIGN
Structured interviews will be held with key figures i.n
organizations and agencies in the Edina area which act as
services for youth. The organizations from which a sample
will be drawn include Edina police, Edina schools, Edina
.Community Education, Edina churches, Association of Drop -in
Centers, juvenile corrections, St. Mary's, The Colony,
'Storefront /Youth Action, YMCA and YWCA and the student
council.
The interview instrument will assess information con-
cerning the following:
a) The range and type of human services available;
b) the size of the clientele each serves and any emer-
�__J ging trends in the clientele's characteristics
such as size, age, etc;
c) identification of significant life stress factors
impacting Edina's peoples and community;
d) the degree to which these organizations operate
proactively or reactively (treatment vs. preven-
tion);
e) how much control Edina youth .services feel -they have
over the direction the future takes.
The data will first be analyzed and presented descrip-
tively illustrating the range of opinions given as well as
showing the degree to which these problems are encountered
by youth. This data will then be extrapolated into the near
future graphically portraying the probable size and severity
of those problems in the years to come. Finally, the ability
of the Edina social services approach (proactive or reactive)
will be interfaced with its probable future. developments to
give a clearer view of their ability to meet the needs of.
the Edina community and its children.
INTERVIEWS ANALYSIS EXTRAPOLATION
: OF DATA OF DATA
(r�`1
FINAL.REPORT
PRESENTATION
OF
SIGNIFICANCE
EDINA HUMAN RELATIONS ADVISORY COUNCIL PROPOSAL
(DIRECT INTERVIEWING)
PRELIMINARY BUDGET
Instrument Development ...................... $ 225.00.
Field Interviewing ............. .............. 450.00
Data Analysis ....................:..•:...... 225.00
Final- Report & Presentation ..........,....... 200.00
Indirect Costs .............................. 350.00
(Clerical, travel, expenses, fringe benefits)
Printing /Duplicating 50.00
...� TOTAL $19500.00
i ._ FUTURE SYSTEMS
1 RESEARCH AN0 PLANNING, FOR THE. FUTURE
MICHAEL DEWANE f
vIGE PRESIDENT - -
P.O. Box 14067
MINNEAPOLIS. MINNESOTA 55414 (6 12) 222 -2247
j
S
H
H '
C
SOUTH HENNEPIN HUMAN SERVICES COUNCIL
PROPOSAL FOR A
COMPREHENSIVE STUDY OF
HUMAN SERVICE NEEDS IN SOUTH HENNEPIN
January 1979
Serving:
Bloomington
Eden Prairie
Edina
Richfield
9801 Penn Avenue South • Room 100 a Bloomington, Minnesota 55431 • (612) 888 -5530
COMPREHENSIVE STUDY OF
HUMAN SERVICE NEEDS IN SOUTH HENNEPIN
I. Statement of Purpose-
The purpose of this project is to determine human service needs and priorities
at the community level in the four municipalities in South Hennepin: Bloomington,
Eden Prairie, Edina, and Richfield. The community planning model to be used is
a cooperative effort by the South Hennepin Human Services Council, each of
the four cities, and Hennepin County, and involves significant input by commun-
ity representatives.
This study will, more specifically, define current health and social service
needs of the residents of the area; make projections regarding future needs;
develop long and short range plans for service development, coordination and
implementation including defined responsibilities and alternative funding
strategies among County and municipal governments and other public and private
funding sources. The study will be completed via two major types of activities,
an extensive resource inventory and needs assessment and cooperative decision -
making by community and area wide working committees.
II. Background and Rationale
This proposal is in response to a request by City Officials to the South Hennepin
Human Services Council to conduct an indepth study of the resources, needs, and
service priorities in South Hennepin to assist them in decision making regarding
municipal funding for human services. Because of a number of trends and issues
occurring within the South Suburban area, Hennepin County, and throughout the
country, it has become crucial that communities take more initiative in planning,
developing, and /or delivering human services. Following is a brief discussion
of several of these major issues and their implications for human service
delivery in South Hennepin:
1. A recent report of the Metropolitan Council confirms the need to ". .
define the kinds of human services needed. . . and the gaps in available
services," and that this process should involve "coordination and cooperation
of all public, private, and nonprofit entities at the metropolitan level."
A critic of the "metropolitan level" concept advocates for "planning,
-2-
coordinating, and evaluating human services at the local level. . .
Neighbors need to establish priorities but they must assume participation
in providing services. and be organized toward positive objectives and
wider social goals." It is obvious that this comprehensive assessment of
human service needs is in line with the recommendations of the Metropolitan
Council. By necessity this particular study must be conducted at the
community level, though undoubtedly much broader studies are needed
throughout the metropolitan area. The results of'this study in South
Hennepin will undoubtedly provide a great deal of information for future
planning at the county and metropolitan level.
2. During 1977 -78 the United Way of Minneapolis and the three Suburban Human
Services Councils (South, West, and Northwest) conducted a joint study
involving the collection and analysis of a wide range of demographic and
social indicator data and a secondary analysis of an attitude survey con -
ducted by the Metropolitan Council in 1974. This study shows that there are
areas in South Hennepin with distinctly different characteristics and
growth patterns; for example, the inner ring of older suburbs (Bloomington,
Richfield, and Edina) are gradually loosing population, while the outlying
developing suburb of Eden Prairie is growing very rapidly. The age com-
position of older and newly developing areas varies accordingly with younger
families occupying the growth areas and older residents comprising a greater
percentage of the older suburbs.
obviously these changes impact the volume of health and social services
needed in an area and certainly create problems for city officials who must
face either extensive school closings or the need to expand school facilities
for a growing population. In terms of social services resources, newer
areas like Eden Prairie severely lack services which are immediately accessible.
to residents in the area; in older areas needs shift and the types of services
should respond accordingly.
It is essential that human services planners and elected and appointed offi-
cials look - carefully at the development patterns of the South Hennepin area
in order to better focus on needs and alternative methods by which to deploy
financial and manpower resources for human services.
• -3-
3. In April, 1976, Hennepin County published its proposed recommendations for
decentralizing such services as eligibility technicians, food stamp sales,
information and referral, outreach and social casework services, specialized
services, and court services. Some of these services have been decentralized
and are now available in South Hennepin, e.g., at Creeks ide Community
Center. Other services, such as casework and counseling have not yet been
decentralized. The County's original concept of the Multi Service Centers
in which to house all social services as well as civil /administrative
services seems to have gone by the wayside because of financial constraints,
but the verbal commitment to decentralize social services seems to remain.
Decentralization of County services will continue to be an important issue
to residents and officials in South Hennepin. It demands concentrated atten-
tion and consideration of alternatives other than the Multi Service Centers.
4. A number of changes at the federal, state,.and county levels seem to be
occuring in terms of the financial basis for human services. The formula
for state allocation of federal Title XX funds has been changed several
times, the most recent change meaning a projected $3 million cut for
Hennepin County in 1980. Governmental reaction to California's Proposition
13 has already had significant impact on elected officials in terms of
all government spending, and may well mean funding decreases for social
services. Hennepin County has already indicated that there is an increasing
probability that the County will no longer be able to fully fund human services
and will be requesting financial participation by local public or private
sources in the future. Such is the case currently with the Human Services
Councils which now must match the County's grant with funds from participating
municipalities. The same may be true of other direct service agencies
receiving funds through the County.
5, The overall result of these trends in funding will undoubtedly be an increas-
ing number of direct requests from human service providers for municipal
support in funding, site location, documentation of need, etc. The very
impetus for this study was the request made by city officials during a
joint meeting of the cities and the Human Services Council for a comprehensive
inventory of resources available and a determination of needed program areas,
an inventory which would help them in making decisions regarding such requests.
-4-
This request, initiated by Edina, confirms the need indicated by Eden
Prairie for a comprehensive planning study (during the summer of.1978)
and again by Bloomington staff and City Council during a recent discus-
sion regarding specific human service needs /concerns in that city (Dec-
ember, 1978).
Because these factors seem to be occuring somewhat simultaneously, they have
serious implications for the continued development of an effective human service.
system in Hennepin County and subsequently in South Hennepin. The Cities in
this area have the foresight to consider these issues and provide leadership
to other communities in developing a model for community based human services
planning which has the potential to:
1. Document unmet service needs.
2. Inventory all public and private social service resources.
3. Provide information to Cities regarding specific funding need areas.
4. Eliminate duplication in services, and possibly in administrative costs.
5. Prioritize service development areas and identify needed decentralized
services.
6. Identify appropriate and alternative financial /funding arrangements.
M. Scope of the Study
This comprehensive community study will focus on human service needs in the
four cities of Bloomington, Eden Prairie, Edina, and Richfield. Because of
the nature of human services, however, it will also consider related activities
at the County, state, and federal levels: for example, trends in service devel-
opment, funding priorities and alternatives, role relationships among public and
private agencies, etc.
The study will address a number of basic requests related to the issues discussed
previously:
- What service resources are now available? What is the utilization rate,
cost per service, funding base?
- What are the implications of demographic trends in terms of current and
future human service needs? What are the most urgent unmet needs? Where
should priorities lie in terms of service expansion and development?
- What services seem to be duplicatory in nature? Is there in fact sub -
stantial need for similar services? How could emphasis be changed
and cooperation be encouraged to eliminate potential duplication.
-5-
What is the role of municipal social /community services departments?
How can effective planning and coordination between municipalities,
the Human Services Councils, and the County prevent fragmentation
of area -wide human services? What are the roles of each in planning
and service coordination?
- What is the current status and future of Hennepin County's decentral-
ization plan?
- Whose responsibility is it to develop and fund social services? What
alternatives for funding human services exist now and in the future?
What are some alternatives for community organizing and cooperative
service development by public, private, business, and civic /service
organizations?
- What has been the experience of other areas, especially municipalities,
in cooperative planning for and providing human services.
IV. Methodology
This study utilizes a variety of needs assessment, resource identification,
and other planning techniques with special efforts to involve city and County
officials, human services administrators and providers, and citizens of each
city in the area.
1. Literature Review: It is important that this planning process not be done
in isolation from other efforts but should consider the experiences and
problems in other communities, in Hennepin County, and throughout the
country. A number of publications are available regarding social services
planning, needs assessment, public participation, etc., but few of these
methods actually seem to be being used at the community level. The relevant
literature will be carefully reviewed and adapted for this study as appro-
priate. Following is a partial list of relevant publications:
Human Services Bibliography Series:
The Role of Cities in Human Services
Needs Assessment Research in Human Services
Approaches to Human Services Planning
Roles for General Purpose Government in Services Integration
Managing the Human Services "System ": What Have We Learned from
Services Integration
Trends in Mental Health Service Coordination
Multi- service Centers, Co- location, and Service Integration
Title XX publications:
Techniques for Needs Assessment in Social Services Planning
_Techniques for Resource Identification, Review and Inventory
in Social Services Planning
Techniques for Public Information, Participation, Review and
Comment in Social Services Planning
Comprehensive Social Services Plan for Hennepin County
Hennepin County Office of Planning and Development Decentralization.
Plan
Planning for Change: Needs Assessment Approaches, University of
Florida
Publications of: Metropolitan Council, Metropolitan Health Board,
Hennepin County Criminal Justice Council, Mental Health Deparartment,
Office of Planning and Development; Minnesota State Planning
Agency; Minnesota Department of Health.
Publications on other relevant topics including housing, children and
youth, developmental disabilities, day care, etc.
2. Committee Structure: Two types of working committees form the core of the
study methodology: a Community Consultation Committee in each city and
an area -wide Study Advisory Committee. The responsibilities of.each are
as follows.
Community Consultation Committee - -to exist in each city and composed of
representatives of the community, schools, public safety /police, city
staff, city. council, advisory commissions, public health, social ser-
vice programs, county workers, private agencies. The responsibilities
of this committee are to:
1. Provide specific information about the service resources, needs,
and problems of residents of each municipality.
2. Assist in establishing working relationships with key agencies in
the city.
3. React to study results and information on an ongoing basis
4'. Assist in developing recommendations specific to each city and
to the South Hennepin area.
5. Provide representation and ongoing input to the Study Advisory
Committee.
6. Provide ongoing input to the County Board of Commissioners in
behalf of each municipality.
-7-
- Study Advisory Committee -- Comprised of representatives of each community -_ --
committee plus city managers, city council representatives, a Hennepin
County Commissioner, Hennepin County Office of Planning and Development,
Community Services Department and its respective divisions, private
agencies located in South Hennepin, United Way, and other public or
private organizations relevant to the scope of the study. The
responsibilities are:
1. Provide a county -wide perspective to the study.
2. Function in a steering /advisory capacity regarding the study
design and methodology and the subsequent development of human
services in the area.
3. Address the integration of area specific needs with those of
Hennepin County as a whole.
4. Provide information regarding County human service plans, private
agency capabilities, etc.
5. React to the results and trends of the study.
6. Identify responsibility for service development, implementation,
and funding.
7. Provide technical assistance and consultation regarding study
methodology.
8. Develop long and short range human service plans and recommendations.
9. Identify and facilitate possible alternative methods of human services
delivery, e.g., cooperative day care centers, civic and service
sponsorship of services, business responsibility; - facilitate demon-
stration of such alternatives.
3. Survey Design: Needs assessment and resource inventory techniques and
instruments will be selected for their proven success in previous research
efforts and will be adapted to this study as appropriate (e.g., interview
questionnaires, agency inventory reports, etc.) The Study Advisory Committee
may assist in developing such research instruments and computer programs for
data analysis, i.e., through donated services of Hennepin County.
The actual survey process will be combined with the working committees'
activities in a number of phases, each one building on information gained
from the previous step. Following is an example:
-8-
Tentative.Timetable - One Year Study
Phase I (6 months) Each City
1. Demographic,data collection and analysis.
2. Analysis of existing-- service delivery resources - and - patterns.
3. General population survey regarding the public's perception of
human service needs.
4. Survey of service recipients as appropriate.
5. Survey of human service agencies, public and private, in or
serving. South Hennepin.
6. Community consultation review of all data.
Phase II (2 months) Each City
1. Interviews with key professionals, city and county officials
regarding the results of Phase I surveys.
2. Group interviews with school, police, agency staff, regarding
needs assessment results.
3. Community consultation review.
Phase III (1 month) Area -wide
1. Review and discussion by Study Advisory Committee and Community
Consultation Committees.
2. Prioritize areas of service development (Delphi or nominal group).
3. Preliminary recommendations
Phase IV (1 month) Each City
1. Community forum of citizens, professionals, city and county
representatives. -
Phase V (2 months) Area -wide
I. Final recommendations for service development.
2. Recommendations regarding funding alternatives, implementation
responsibilities.
4. Data Collection and Analysis: Some demographic and social indicator data
for South Hennepin and Hennepin County is already available and will be
used throughout the study. Additional data will be collected or updated
as needed. Survey instruments and computer programs will be designed
with assistance from Hennepin County. All data -- both needs assessment
surveys and verbal /written comments regarding needs or recommendations --
will be documented throughout the study. The data will be analyzed to determine
the implications of current population trends, project and prioritize service
needs on a short and long range basis, identify areas needing service develop -
went, increased coordination, elimination of duplication, etc.; determine
community resources for providing services, and identify political and
financial strategies .for developing and.funding- needed - health and social=
services.
V. Administrative.Design
This study is a cooperative effort among the South Hennepin Human Services
Council, the municipalities in South Hennepin, and Hennepin County. The Human
Services Council will assume primary responsibility for coordination of the study
including the functioning of the committees, and will provide assistance and
direction to City staff and others who assume specific responsibilities during
the study.
Hennepin County will be requested to provide technical assistance in research
methodology; specific information regarding County human services in South
Hennepin; and input to the Study Advisory Committee regarding program development
from a County perspective.
Following are the respective responsibilities of each group.
South Hennepin Human Services:
1. Finalize study design and provide technical assistance throughout the
process. -
2. Develop interview schedules and survey instruments.
3. Assist with sample selection.
4. Conduct training on survey techniques and interview skills.
5. Assist in literature search.
6. Participate in forecasting demographic and social service trends.
-7. Coordinate the analysis of all data; assist with analysis.:--
8. Assist in developing all committee work.
9. Write final report.
10. Provide technical assistance on developing action plans, implementation
of services.
City:
1. Assemble demographic data on each city.
2. Inventory public health and social services provided at State, County,
South Hennepin, and community level.
3. Determine utilization rates by city residents.
4. Conduct surveys of local professionals and the residents.
5. Develop and convene Community Consultation Committee.
6. Assist with literature search.
7. Provide materials, postage, xerox, and print reports.
8. Assist in developing Study Advisory Committee.
9. Assist in writing final report.
10. Assist with action /implementation plans.
-10-
Hennepin County
1. Provide service inventory data regarding County funded services.
2. Provide technical assistance in research methodology (survey design,
.sample selection, data. analysis,._ computer.._programming,._etc.).
3. Provide representation to the Study Advisory Committee.
COMPREHENSIVE STUDY OF
HUMAN SERVICE NEEDS IN SOUTH HENNEPIN
BUDGET
TOTAL $47,684 $24,502 $23,182
TOTAL
COMMITTED
NEEDED
A.
SALARIES
Director (50 %)
$10,250
$10,250
$
-
Planner (100 %)
16,000
-
16;000
Secretary (50 %)
5,000
52000
-
Interns (2)_
2,000
-
2,000
TOTAL
$33,250
$15,250
$18,000
B.
FRINGE BENEFITS
Health Insurance
$
1,680
$
840
$
840
Life Insurance
54
36
18
PERA
1
1,718
839
880
TOTAL
$
3,453
$
1,715
$
1,738
C.
PAYROLL TAXES
FICA
$
1,917
$
935
$
982
Workman's Compensation
100
50
50
Minnesota Unemployment Ins.
744
372
372
TOTAL
$
2,761
$
1,357
$
1,404
D.
OFFICE SUPPLIES
$
100
$
50
$
50
E.
PROFESSIONAL CONSULTANT
$
2,000
$
2,000
-
F.
POSTAGE
$
200
$
100
$
100
G.
PRINTING & XEROX
$
2,000
$
1,000
$
1,000
H.
TRAVEL
$
500
$
125
$
375
I.
COMMUNICATIONS
$
480
$
240
$
240
J.
STAFF DEVELOPMENT
$
200
$
- _
$
200
K.
INSURANCE
$
40
$
40
$
-
L.
OCCUPANCY
$
2,000
$
2,000
$
-
M.
EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE
$
200
$
200
$
N.
PAYROLL SERVICES
$
200
$
200
$
-
0.
MISCELLANEOUS
$
300
$
225
$
75
TOTAL $47,684 $24,502 $23,182
I-%,
MEMORANDUM
TO: Mayor and Council
FROM: Kenneth E. Rosland, City Manager
SUBJECT: HUMAN SERVICES INVENTORY
DATE: April 12, 1979
Attached is the recommendations of the Human Relations Commission concerning
funding of two proposals to do a human services inventory.
The first, Future Systems, proposes to inventory resources and needs in the
youth area and develop a program to proactively prevent or minimize youth
problems. The study appears to be limited in scope by the issues it addresses
and resources it surveys. The proposal was developed at the request of the
Human Relations Commission.
The second, from South Hennepin Human Services Council, was developed at the
request of the City Managers from Edina, Richfield, Bloomington and Eden Prairie.
The proposal seeks to inventory the full range of human services available to
residents in all four communities and recommends possible directions for service.
The study will involve both a monetary and staff cost to the City and will require
a longer study time.
While costs for the South Hennepin proposal are not firmed up, these are brought
up at this time to get Council's reaction to the Commission's recommendation.
It is the recommendation of staff that only one study be funded, as for the
most part there would be duplication between the two. It is also recommended
that while the South Hennepin will probably cost-the City a greater amount of
money, the added scope will give the City a better basis on which to judge
current services funded by the City, plus any future proposals.
Should you have questions representatives of the Commission and South Hennepin
will be in attendance at the Council meeting.
1
i
City Manager
KR:MB:md
j
MEMO
TO: Ken Rosland
FROM: Cecelia Smith
DATE: April 12, 1979
RE: Staff Report of Human Relations Commission
As one of its goals for 1979 the Human Relations Commission
has stated °the need to. "concentrate its efforts on building
self- concepts, communications and human relations skills for the
youth of Edina." One of the objectives to achieve this goal:
is "to develop an inventory of human and physical resources..."
With this in mind, the Commission at its February meeting
entertained a study proposal from Future Systems, Inc.,
see attached summary. At the Commission's March meeting Mary
Weeks from South Hennepin.Human Service Council presented
a proposal for a comprehensive study for the*South Hennepin
County area that would include Edina, see attached summary.
The Commission has given consideration to both proposals and
feels that both have individual merit and could help achieve
their stated objective. Therefore, the Commission would
like to recommend that the City Council approve the expenditure
of monies.necessary to fund the implementation of both studies
in Edina.
SUMMARY OF A PRELIMINARY PROPOSAL
TO STUDY PROACTIVE PROGRAMS
IN EDINA YOUTH SERVICES
Background: In the Spring of 1978 the Edina Human Relations Commission set
a goal "to concentrate HRC efforts on building self- concept, communications,
and human relations skills of the youth of Edina ". The focus. is to indentify
and promote preventative measures, building life- coping skills of our young
people. In order to meet this goal the Commission felt its .first step should
be to gather data about existing services, about the clientele served, and about
the significant life stress factors impacting Edina residents. Future Systems.,,
Inc., a non- profit research, planning, and consulting organization that
specializes in future studies, has designed a study which the Commission feels
would supply the data needed.
Purpose: To identify and document youth services that increase the social
and psychological health of all Edina children in the hope that the study
findings might decrease the number of Edina children becoming victims.
Method: Structured interview will be held with key figures in organizations
and agencies in the Edina area which act as services for youth (including
police, schools, churches, juvenile corrections, Storefront /Youth Action, YMCA,
Colony, etc.). The interview instrument will assess information concerning the
following: range and type of services available; the size of the clientele
each serves and any emerging trends in the clientele's characteristics;
identification of significant life stress factors impacting Edina's peoples
and community; the degree to which these organizations operate proactively
or reactively; how much control Edina youth services feel they have over the
direction the future takes. The data will first be analyzed and presented
descriptively illustrating the range of opinions given as well as showing the
degree to which these problems are encountered by youth. This data will then
be extrapolated into the near future graphically portraying the probable size
and severity of these problems in the years to come. Finally the ability of
the Edina social services approach (proactive or reactive) will be interfaced
with its probable future developments to give a clearer view of their ability
to.meet the needs of the Edina community and its children.
Cost: $1500
Results: A new group of professionals and youth services have emerged to
help the child cope with this increasingly complex and confusing world.
Unfortunately, most of,the resources and training has gone to treat youth
failures, not increase youth success. We feel a more comprehensive (and
perhaps more cost - effective) approach would be to identify ways to increase
children's "life- coping" skills before they are identified as failures.
SUMMARY OF A PROPOSAL
FOR A COMPREHENSIVE STUDY OF HUMAN SERVICES IN SOUTH HENNEPIN
Background: The Proposal for a Comprehensive Study of Human Service Needs
in South Hennepin is a response to a request by city officials and City
Managers to the South Hennepin County Human Service Council at the joint .
meeting last summer. The proposal reflects the concerns expressed by the cities
regarding human service resources, finding, etc.
Purpose: The purpose of the project is to:
1. Inventory all available resources in and available to residents in
South Hennepin.
2. Determine appropriate mechanisms by which to develop cooperative
agreements to plan for and provide human services.
3. Indentify alternative financial /funding and administrative mechanisms
for delivering human services.
Study Methodology: The South Hennepin Human Services Council will act as the
coordinating and technical advisory agency. A Community Consultation Committee
in each city will focus on specific concerns of that city as well as issues
common to the South Hennepin area.
A Study Advisory Committee, including representatives of each of the city
committees, will address area -wide concerns and develop recommendations for
coordinating, funding, and developing the human services system in South Hennepin.
A Community Consultation Committee would be responsible for making city -
specific recommendations and for carrying out any recommendations relevant to
the city.
The study design emphasizes extensive input and involvement of each of the four
communities and in this way ensures accurate and effective decision - making
at community and area levels.
Cost: The South Hennepin Human Service Council has indentified the study as
a high priority and is committing 50% of its activities (approximately $24,000)
during the.next year to complete the project.
Because of the time limited nature and extensive scope of the project, the
Human Service Council must supplement its normal operating.budget to fulfill
the project objectives. We are therefore requesting each city to make.a
monetary commitment to the project.
As a cooperative effort, the study methodology also requires a local commitment
in terms of staff and support services for the various efforts.
Results:
1. An inventory of all human services
2. Established priorities for.human service funding
3. Recommendations for cooperative.administration and delivery of human
services
C _
4. Reduce the duplication of services and administrative costs
5. Identification of appropriate and alternative financial /funding
resources
6. Documentation of unmet service needs
u
TO:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
DATE:
Mayor and Council
Ken Rosland, City Manager
BUILDING DEPARTMENT POSITION
April 11, 1979
As directed by the Council, an arrangement has been negotiated with Wayne Michael
whereby he would be willing to work on a year =to -year contractual basis starting
June 15, 1979, for about 50 to 60% of the time. (It is Wayne's intention in any
event to terminate this relationship in a couple of years, even if the City
desired him to stay on.)
Since Wayne would be resigning from fulltime employment and a new fulltime
employee would be hired,to replace him,the request at this time for the new
position is to fund Wayne's contractual services.
While it would appear self- evident (given the fact that 94% of the community is
developed) that a decrease in activity for building would be occuring, the last
few years have had an increase in the number of permits. For the following reasons
the additional assistance will be needed over at least the next few years.
* Energy issues, code calculations and enforcement are now a
responsibility of the Building Department
* Remodeling requires more inspection time availability:
a. Remodeling done by owners often requires inspectors
telling them how to do it correctly
b. Remodeling by contractors has to be supervised more
closely than new construction and requires greater
inspector availability
The number of permits over the past years for remodeling together with the total
number of permits and fees generated are as follows:
* Building permits, planning fees, plumbing and mechanical
REMODELING
TOTAL
PERCENT
TOTAL FEES
PERMITS
PERMITS
REMODELING
GENERATED
1971
363
654
55%
$
1974
386
587
65%
89,638
1975
504
668
75%
93,575
1976
605
806
75%
126,550
1977
648
861
75%
165,035
1978
703
869
80%
141,378
* Building permits, planning fees, plumbing and mechanical
The request for funding this is based additionally on the fact that up to now,
as additional employee has been utilized through CETA funding over the past
four years and that while the Department is able to respond rapidly to current
projects, it is felt that more time should be devoted to each inspection to
insure a proper inspection and.avoid problems in the future.
.- Should you have further questions, please present them to Mr. Bahneman or
..myself at the meeting.
Kenneth E. Rosland
City Manager
AER /skh
Fees for a $700,000 -00 New Office Warehouse Suil�inc�
Present Fees: Proposed Fees;
Permit 886.50 Permi -t 1 ,087:00
50% Plan Checks It 43.25 65% Plan Check 706.55
$1,3'9.7S- . .1,793.55
Fees for a SS0,000.00 Commercial Remodeling Job_
Present Fees: Proposed Fees:
Permit 151.50 Permit 147.00.
50% Plan Check 75.75 65% Plan Check 121.55
$2 ?_7.2) 308.55
Fees for a $17.0,000.10 'Jew_ Sinqle Family Home
Present Fees: Proposed Fees:
Permit 246.50 .Permit 317.00
50% Plan Check 123.25 50% Plan Check 158.50
$:K.. 75 5 75:50
Fees for a S5 ^000._00 Addition to a Single Fami1-y- Home
Present Fees: Proposed Fees:
Permit 29.00 Permit 32,40
50% Plan Check 14.50 50% Plan Check 16.00
543.50 SrB:oo
i
1976 EDITION
302.303
The issuance of a permit based upon plans and specifications shall not
prevent the Building Official from thereafter requiring the correction of
errors in said plans and specifications or from preventing building opera -
tions being carried on thereunder when in violation of this Code or of any
other ordinance of the city.
(d) Expiration. Every permit issued by the Building Official under the
provisions of this Code shall expire by limitation and become null and
void, if the building or work authorized by such permit is not commenced
within 120 days from the date of such permit, or if the building or work
authorized by stick permit is suspended or abandoned at any time after the
work is commenced for a period of 120 days. Before such work can be
recommenced a new permit shall be first obtained so to do, and the fee
therefor shall be one -half the amount required for a new permit for such
work, provided no changes have been made or will be made in the original
plans and specifications for such work; and provided, further, that such
suspension or abandonment has not exceeded one year.
(c) Suspension or Revocation. The Building Official may, in writing,
suspend or revoke a permit issued under provisions of this Code whenever
the permit is issued in error or on the basis of incorrect information sup-
plied, or in violation of any ordinance'or regulation or any of the provi-
sions of this Code.
Fees
See. 303: (a) Building Permit Fees. A fee for each building permit shall
be paid to the Building Official as set forth in Table No. 3 -A.
The determination of value or valuation under any of tite provisions of
this Code shall be made by the Building Official. The valuation to be used
in computing the permit and plan -check fees shall be the total value of all
construction work for which the permit is issued, as well as all finish work,
painting, roofing, electrical, plumbing, heating, air conditioning,
elevators, fire- extinguishing systems and any other permanent work or
permanent equipment.
Where work for which a permit is required by this Code is started or
proceeded with prior to obtaining said permit, the fees specified in Table
No. 3 -A shall be doubled, but the payment of such double fee shall not
relieve any persons from fully complying with the requirements of this
Code in the execution of the work nor from any other penalties prescribed
herein.
(b) flan- checking Fees. When the valuation of the proposed construc-
tion exceeds $1,000.00 and a plan is required to be submitted by subsec-
tion (c) of Section 301, a plan- checking fee shall be paid to the Building
Official at the time of submitting plans and specifications for checking.
Said plan- checking fees for buildings of Groups R, Division 3 and M
Occupancies shall be one -half of the building permit fees. Plan- checking
fees for all other buildings shall be 65 percent of the building permit fees as
set forth in Table No. 3 -A.
31
303.304 UNIFORM BUILDING CODE
Where plans are incomplete, or changed so as to require additional plan
checking, an additional plan -check fee shall be charged at a rate estab-
lished by the Building Official.
(c) E%piration of Plan Check. Applications for which no permit is
issued within 180 days following the date of application shall expire by
limitation and plans submitted for checking may thereafter be returned to
the applicant or destroyed by the Building Official. The Building Official
may'exiend the time for action by the applicant for a period not exceeding
180 days upon written request by the applicant showing that circumstances
beyond the control of the applicant have prevented action from being
taken. In order to renew action on an application after expiration, the ap-
plicant shall resubmit plans and pay a new plan -check fee.
(d) Reinspection Fee. The fee for each reinspection shall be S10.00.
TABLE NO.3 -A— BUILDING PERMIT FEES
TOTAL VALUATION
FEE
$1.00 to $500.00
$5.00
$501.00 to $2,000.00
$5.00 for the first $500.00'plus $1.00
for each additional $100.00 or frac-
tion thereof, to and including $2,000.
$2,001.00 to $25,000.00
$20.00 for the first $2,000.00 plies
$4.00 for each additional $1,000.00
or fraction thereof, to and inchtding
$25,000.00
$ 25,001.00 to $50,000.00
$ 112.00 for the first $25,000.00 plus
$3.00. for each additional $1,000.00
or fraction thereof, to and including
$50,000.00
$50,001.00 to $100,000.00
$187.00 for the first $50;000.00 plus
$2.00 for each ndditional $1,0(10.00
or fraction thereof, to and including
$100,000.00
5100.001.00 to $500,000.00 $2,37.00 for the first S100,000.00 plus
$1.50 for each additional $1,000.00
or fraction ,thereof, to hod including
$500,000.00
$ 500,001.00 and up
$887.00. for the first $500,000.00 plus
S1.00 for each additional $1,000.00
or fraction thereof
inspections
S ec. 304. (a) General. All construction or work for which a permit is
retittttc,t .hall he subject to inspection by the Building Official, and certain
t %.11- tit construction shall have continuous inspection by special inspec-
ft " %.:'% %licolit:d in Section 305.
A .tits% of the lot may be required by the Building Official to verify
ctutti'It.ttt:e of tite structure with approved plans.
32
SECTIONS 303.304 UNIFORM BUILDING CODE Iilp EDITION
Fees
(Continued)
TABLE NO. 3- A— BUILDING PERMIT FEES
TOTAL VALUATION
FEE
$1.00 to $500.00
$5.00
.$501.00 to $2,000.00
$5.00 for the first $500.00 plus $1.00
for each additional $100.00 or frac-
tion thereof, to and including
$2,000.00
$2,001.00 to $25,000.00
$20.00 for the first $2,000.00 plus
S3.00 for each additional thousand or
fraction thereof, to and including
$225,000.00
$25,001.00 to $50,000.00
S89.00 for the first $ 25,000.00 plus
52.50 for each additional thousand or
fraction thereof, to and including
S50,000.00
$50,001.00 to $100,000.00
$151.50 for the first $50,000.00 plus
$1.50 for each additional thousand or
fraction thereof, to and including
$100,000.00
$100,001.00 and up
S226.50 for the first $100,000.00 plus
$1.00 for each additional thousand or
fraction thereof
Where work for which a permit is required by this Code is
started or proceeded with prior to obtaining said permit, the
fees above specified shall be doubled, but the payment of
such double fee shall not relieve any persons from fully com-
plying ,%vith the requirements of this Code in the execution of
the work nor from any other penalties prescribed herein.
(b) Plan- checking Fees. When the valuation of the pro -
posed construction exceeds $1,000.00 and a plan is required
to be submitted by Subsection (c) of Section 301, a plan-
checking fee shall be paid to the Building Official at the time
of submitting plans and specifications for checking. Said plan -
checking fee shall be equal to one -half of the building permit
fee as set forth in Table No. 3 -A.
Inspections Sec. 304. (a) General. All construction or work for which
a permit is required shall be subject to inspection by the
Building Official, and certain hypes of construction shall have
continuous inspection by special inspectors, as specified in
Section 305.
A survey of the 1:>t may be required by the Building Offi-
cial to verify compliance of the structure with approved plans.
(b) Inspection Record Card. Work requiring a building
permit shall not be commenced until the permit holder or his
agent shall have posted all inspection record card in a con -
30
place on:the front premises and ir, s
the Building Official convenienth• t
•! 'rntrivs thereon regarding inspection of
:.! .hall be maintained in such position by fl,
,::.111 the (:crtificatc of Occupancy has been
,el :Approvals Required. No work shallI
t• it „ f tilt- building or structure bevond the
a, h successive inspection Nvithout first obt:
I, „ .opproval of the Building Official. Such s�
",.III he civen onlh• after all inspection shall h
t eaeh Successive step in the construction a
elf the inspections required in Subsectior
There shall be a final inspection and appro:
mcs when completed and ready for occupanc)
(dl Required Inspections. Reinforcing stet
hainvwork of any part of any building or stru
IN• covered or concealed without first obtainin
III flat, Building Official.
The Building Official, upon notification fv
holder or his agent, shall make the following i
%Ball either approve that portion of the constr
pleted or shall notify the permit holder or his
the same fails to comply with this Code.
1. FOUNDATION INSPECTION: To b
trenches are excavated and forms erect(;
materials for the foundation are deliver-
Where concrete from a central mixing pl::
termed "transit mixed ") is to be used, mat
bd on the job.
?. FRAME INSPECTION: To be made aft:
framing, fire - blocking, and bracing are in
Pipes, chimneys, and vents are complete.
.1. LATII AND /OR WALLBOARD INSPE(
Made after all lathing and /or wallboard
exterior, is in place: but before any plaste,
or before wallboard joints and fasteners
finished.
4. FINAL INSPECTION: To be made aft
completed and ready for occupancy.
(e) Other Inspections. In addition to the
linos specified above, the Building Official ma%
cl'ttrt' ;ut >' tither inspections of ;llry construction
f•�it, cYtrnpli:utce with the provisions of this Cr,
1.1%%.s Which are enforced by the Building Depar
31
Z
Fees for
a $700,000_00 Ile,.I Office
Warehouse Ruil�i;ng_
Present Fees:
Proposed Fees:
Permit
886.50
Permit
1,087,00
50% Plan Checks
Oil. 2q
65% Plan Check
706.55
$1,
3'9.7S .
1,793. 55
Fees for
a $170,000.00 Commercial Remodel in�Job
Present Fees:
Proposed Fees:
- Permit
151.50
Permit
187.00
50% Plan Check
75.75
65Z Plan Check
121.55
$22 7.25
309.55
Fees for
a $120_000_00 Mew _Single
Family Home
Present Fees:
Proposed Fees:
Permit
246.50
•Permit
317.00
50% Plan Check
123.25
50% Plan Check
158.50
$ 3e% . 75
Sr+75.50
Fees for
a S5_000,00 Addltlon.to a
Single Family Nome
Present Fees:
-
Proposed Fees -:
Permit
29.00
Permit
32.0n'
50% Plan' Check
14:50
50% Plan Check
16.00
S43 • ��
S71-8: oW
i
1976 EDITION
302.303 303.304
The issuance of a permit based upon plans and specifications shall not
prevent the Building Official from thereafter requiring the correction of
errors in said plans and specifications or from preventing building opera-
tions being carried on thereunder when in violation of this Code or of any
other ordinance of the city.
(d) Expiration. Every permit issued by the Building Official under the
provisions of this Code shall expire by limitation and become null and
void, if the building or work authorized by such permit is not commenced
within 120 days from the date of such permit, or if the building or work
authorized by such'permit is suspended or abandoned at any time after the
work is commenced for a period of 120 days. Before such work can be
recommenced a new permit shall be first obtained so to do, and the fee
therefor shall be one -half the amount required for a new permit for such
work, provided no changes have been made or will be made in the original
plans and specifications for such work; and provided, further, that such
suspension or abandonmcrnt has not exceeded one year.
(c) Suspension or Revocation. The Building Official may, in writing,
suspend or revoke a permit issued under provisions of this Code whenever
the permit is issued in error or on the basis of incorrect information sup-
plied, or in violation of any ordinance'or regulation or any of the provi-
sions of this Code.
Fees
Sec. 303. (a) Building Permit Fees. A fee for each building permit shall
be paid to the Building Official as set forth in Table No. 3 -A:
The dctcrinination of value or valuation under any of the provisions of
this Code shall be made by the Building Official. The valuation to be used
in computing cite permit and plan -check fees shall be the total value of all
construction %v6A' for which the permit is issued, as well as all finish work,
painting, roofing, electrical, plumbing, heating, air conditioning,
elevators, fire- extinguishing systems and any other permanent work or
permanent equipment.
«'here work for which a permit. is required by this Code is started or
proceeded with prior to obtaining said permit, the fees specified in Table
No. 3 -A shall be doubled, but the payment of such double fee shall not
relieve any persons front fully complying with the requirements of this
Code in the execution of the work nor from any other penalties prescribed
herein.
(b) Plan- checking Fees. When the valuation of the proposed construc-
tion exceeds $1,000.00 and a plan is required to be submitted by subsec-
tion (c) of Section 301, a plan - checking fee shall be paid to the Building
Official at the time of submitting plans and specifications for checking.
Said plan - checking fees for buildings of Groups R, Division 3 and M
Occupancies shall be one -half of the building permit fees. Plan- checking
fees for all other buildings shall be 65 percent of the building permit fees as
set forth in Table No. 3 -A.
31
UNIFORM BUILDING CODE
Where plans are incomplete. or changed so as to require additional plan
checking, an additional plan -check fee shall be charged at a rate estab-
lished by the Building Official.
(c) Expiration of Plan Check. Applications for which no permit is
issued within 180 days following the date of application shall expire by
limitation and plans submitted for checking may thereafter be returned to
the applicant or destroyed by the Building Official. The Building Official
may extend Ilse time for action by the applicant for a period not exceeding
180 days upon written request by the applicant showing that circumstances
beyond the control of the applicant have prevented action from being
taken. In order to renew action on an application after expiration, the ap-
plicant shall resubmit plans and pay a new plan -check fee.
(d) lteinspection Fee. The fee for each reinspection shall be 510.00.
TABLE NO.3 -A— BUILDING PERMIT FEES
TOTAL VALUATION
FEE
$1.00 to $500.00
$5.00
$501.00 to $2,000.00
$5.00 for the first $500.00 plus $1.00
for each additional $100.00 or frac-
tion thereof, to and including $2,000.
$2,001.00 to $25,000.00
$20.00 for the. first $2,000.00 plus
$4.00 for each additional $1,000.00
or fraction thereof, to and including
$25,000.00
$25,001.00 to $50,000.00
. $112.00 for the first $25,000.00 plus
$3.00 for each additional $1,000.00
or fraction thereof, to and including
$50,000.00
$50,001.00,10 $100,000.00
$187.00 for the first $50,000.00 plus
$2.00 for each additional $1,000.00
or fraction thereof, to'and including
$100,000.00
S10t1,001.00 to $500,000.00. S?87.00 for the first $100.000.00 plus
$1.50 for i•ac•h additional $1,000.00
or fracticm thereof, to and including
$500,000.00
$!' 110,001.00 and tip
$857.00 for the first 5500.000.00 plus
$1.00 for each additional $1,000.00
or fraction thereof
Inspections
Set'. 104. (a) General. All construction or work for which a permit is
reatuucd .hall he subject to inspection by the Building Official, and certain
type% 4+1 :on%iruction shall have continuous inspection by special inspee-
Ica., a� .t +e :flied in Section 305.
A %aat%c% of the lot may be required by the Building Official to verify
.annl +la,na:c ut the structure with approved plans.
32
SECTIONS 303 -304
Fees
(Continued)
UNIFORM BUILDING CODE
TABLE NO. 3- A— BUILDING PERMIT FEES
TOTAL VALUATION
FEE
$1.00 to $500.00
$5.00
$501.00 to $2,000.00
$5.00 for the first $500.00 plus $1.00
for each additional $100.00 or frac-
tion thereof, to and including
$2,000.00
$2,001.00 to $25,000.00
$20.00 for the first $2,000.00 plus
S3.00 for each additional thousand or
fraction thereof, to and including
$4x",000.00
$25,001.00 to $50,000.00
$59.00 for the first $25,000.00 plus
S2.50 for each additional thousand or
fraction thereof, to and including
$50,000.00
$50,001.00 to $100,000.00
$151.50 for the first $50,000.00 plus
$1.50 for each additional thousand or
fraction thereof, to and including
$100,000.00
$100,001.00 and up
$226.50 for the first $100,000.00 plus
$1.00 for each additional thousand or
fraction thereof
Where work for which a permit is required by this Code is
started or proceeded with prior to obtaining said permit, the
fees above specified shall be doubled, but the payment of
such double fee shall not relieve any persons from fully com-
plying with the requirements of this Code in the execution of
the work nor from any other penalties prescribed herein.
(b) Plan- checking Fees. When the valuation of the pro-
posed construction exceeds $1,000.00 and a plan is required
to be submitted by Subsection (c) of Section 301, a plan -
checking fee shall be paid to the Building Official at the time
of submitting plans and specifications for checking. Said plan -
checking fee shall be equal -to one -half of the building permit
fee as set forth in Table No. 3 -A.
Inspections I Sec. 304. (a) Cencral. All construction or work for which
a permit is required shall be subject to inspection by the
Building Official, and certain types of construction shall have
continuous inspection by special inspectors, as specified in
Section 305.
A survey of the lot may be required by the Building Offi-
cial to verify compliance of the structure with approved plans.
(b) Inspection Record Card. Work requiring a building
permit shall not be commenced until the permit holder or his
agent shall have posted an inspection record card in a con -
30
11'0 EDITION
,P„n.-place oil, the front premises and ir, <
till' Building Official convenicnth• t
,•.1 vain -% thereon rcg:u•ding inspection of
%hall ht- m:eint:rinccl in such position by th
wAll tilt- (:ertificate of Occupancy has been
,et- :Approvals Required. No work :shall b
;,ut cif the huilding or structure hevond the
17, e.u•h snc•c•essive inspection 'without first obt;
I. to .1ppruval of the Building Official. Such ,%
J,.III be given only after an inspection shall h
d 41.1ch successive step in the construction
,.�,.h of the inspections required in Subsection.
'I'hc•n• shall be a final inspection and approv
Iuc: Iwn completed and ready for occupanc,
(d) Required Inspections. Reinforcing stee
h.uni-work of any part of any building or stru_
I..• on-ered or concealed without first obtainin,
nl till' Building Official.
The Building Official, upon notification frc
h,dcler or his agent, shall make the following ii
%Ball either approve that portion of the constn
pleted or shall notify the permit holder or his
the same fails to comply with this Code.
1. FOUNDATION INSPECTION:. To b.
trenches are excavated and forms erecter
materials for the foundation are deli-,,err
Where concrete from a central mixing pl:
termed "transit mixed ") is to be used, mat:
be oil the job.
?. FRAME INSPECTION: To be made aft;
framing. fire - blocking, and bracing are in
Pipes, chimneys, and vents are complete.
3. LATII AND /OR WALLBOARD INSPEC
made after all lathing and /or wallboard
exterior, is in place; but before any plastez
or before wallboard joints and fasteners
finished.
4. FINAL INSPECTION: To be made aft,
completed and ready for occupancy.
(c•) Other Inspections. In addition to the c,
ti"as spci"ficd above, the Building Official may^
rintro :un• other inspections of any construction
I•liu e1,rnpli: nce with th(-• provisions of this Co
laws Which are enforced b)• the Building Depa
31
TO: Ken Rosland, City Manager 0
FROM: Mark Bernhardson, Administrative Assistant
SUBJECT: BUILDING INSPECTIONS DEPARTMENT
DATE: March 22, 1979_
APPENDICES: A. Comparison Fees
B. Fee Comparison /1978
RArKf mimn
The attempt to utilize the CETA approach to training potential Building
Department personnel has not been successful due to program changes,
uncertainty, and the quality of personnel. Coupling this with a workload
that is greater than what can be adequately handled by the current
personnel, it is the des ire.of the Department to add an additional
inspector. While the amount of new construction will, in the future, be
limited; renovations of current structures have increased dramatically.
These together with added requirements for energy conservation appear
to sustain such a workload. The organization, however, lacks Council
authority for an additional permanent position, or the budgeted funds.
The intent of the balance of this memo is to discuss the methods of
funding Building Inspections in general and the additional position
specifically.
ASSUMPTIONS
It has been a generally accepted assumption in the past that the services
provided by the Department are specific to new or altered structures,
and therefore, should be part of the building improvement costs on a
fee basis rather than funded by the general tax base. In line with this
reasoning, a portion of the work of.the Fire Prevention Division, acting
as Building Inspection officials, is also building specific and should
be funded in the same manner. Both assumptions are used in the remaining
discussions.
APPLICABLE REGULATIONS
The fee structure for Building Inspections is addressed in the following
ordinances:
Building Permits 404
Plan Checks
404
Mechanical
429
Plumbing
431
Sewer
431
Water
431
Ordinance 404, which was. revised in 1974, references the 1973 Uniform
Building Code (UBC) and the Minnesota State Building Code with the fee
structure for building permits and plan checks being patterned after
the 1970 UBC. Since then, the revision of the 1976 UBC has been issued
and adopted by the State with fees comparable to the 1973 code. A
1979 edition is contemplated to be issued soon. (For a comparison of .
building permits and plan check schedules, see Appendix A.)
The plumbing and mechanical codes reference Minneapolis Ordinance 203
rates as the basis for fees. Since our Ordinance revision, Minneapolis
has recodified their ordinances so that Section 91 is now the applicable
portion with rates being substantially higher than those Edina is
presently charging. (See Appendix B.)
COMPARABLE RATES
In surveying the neighboring suburban communities, their fees are mod-
erately to significantly above Edina's. (See Appendix B.)
APPLICABLE COSTS AND OPTIONS
The costs (actual /projected) for the Department, together with revenues
raised for the years 1978 -1980, are as follows (assuming stable economic
growth).
COSTS 1978 1979 1980
Building $ 96,584 $ 94,616 $105,634
Fire Prevention 50,212 78,455 83,924
$146,796* 173,071 IT9,5-5T
Add. Bldg. Insp.. $ 16,601 $ 19,043
Revenues $151,378* $155,500 $171,067
(Current Rates)
* Includes CETA position
While several options for rate structure increases
revenue estimates are based on building permit and
in accordance with the 1976 UBC that plumbing cost
$2.00 to $4.00 per fixture and the mechanical fees
In line with neighboring communities. Given again
estimated revenues are:
1979
M
exist, the following
plan check fees being
s be increased from
be increased to be
stable economic growth,
$ 189,249 $ 204,798
A
RECOMMENDATIONS
It is the recommendation of the Building Department that rates be
Increased as outlined and that the new position of inspector be estab-
lished. Should a serious prolonged downturn in the economy occur,
that position would be reviewed, however, given the current plans of
certain departmental persons, it would be advantageous to train in a
new inspector to fill the void should one of the inspectors decide to
retire in the next few years.
Administrative Assistant
POSTSCRIPT
Since the original draft was made of thi
a desire to resign fulltime work. As an
interest in working part -time (60%). It
that the addition of one fulltime person
the Department should be able to handle
Mr. Michael could either work fulltime c
fulltime person hired.
MEB /skh
s memo, Wayne Michael has :indicated
alternative, he has indicated
is the opinion of Mr. Bahneman
and Mr. Michael working part-time
the workload adequately. If not,
r retire altogether and another
Building Permit
$1.00 - 500.00
COMPARISON FEES
Current Edina (404)
.Base Additional
$1.00 - 1,000.00
$ 10.00
$500.00 - 2,000.00
$1,000.00 -
2,000.00
$ 10.00
$2,00.1.00 -
25,000.00
$ 20:00
$25,000.00
- 50,000.00
$ 89.00
$50,000.00
- 100,000.00
$151.50
$100,000.00
- 500,000.00
$226.50
$500,000.00
+
$226.50
Plan Check (When required)
$1.00 /HRD
$3.00 /M
$2.50/M
$1.50 /M
$1.00 /M
$1.00 /M
APPENDIX A
UBC/1973 s 1976
Base Additional
$ 5.00
$ 5.00
$.20.00
$112.00
$187.00
$287.00
$887.00
$1.00 /HRD
$4.00 /M
$3.00 /M
$2.00 /M
$1.50 /M
$1.00 /M
1% of Building Fee) 50% .50% single residence/
(Over $5,000 cost) miscellaneous categories
(Over $1,000 cost)
65% on remainder
EXAMPLE: $150,000 building /plan check required would cost:
Single.Residence
Building Permit: $276,50 .$362.00
Phan Check: 138.25 181.00
1 .75 $543-00
Other
$276.50 $362.00
138.25 235.30
1 .75 597.30
..Building Permits
Plan Checks
Commercial
Plumbing
Fixtures
Heating
Air Conditioning
Vent Heater
APPENDIX B
FEE COMPARISON /1978
EDEN
EDINA
BLOOMINGTON
ST. LOUIS PARK
PRAIRIE
MINNEAPOLIS
Current Proposed
+25%
+25%
+49%
+22%
+75 -95%
50% 65%
65%
65%
65%
65%
$2.00 $4.00
$5.00
$4.00
$2.50
$9.00
75%
40 -70%
90 -285%
6o -l00%
40 -120%
More
More
More
More
More
75%
50 -70%
100 -140%
6o -l00%
40 -120%
Mo re
More
More
More
More
75%
50 =80%
50%
6o -100%
40 -120%
More
More
More
More
More
L�PEDINA
4801 WEST 50TH STREET, EDINA. MINNESOTA 55424
612- 927 -8861
April 5, 1979
Mr. William C. Hirsch, Sr.
1111 Crandon Blvd. #703A
Key Biscayne, FL 33149
Dear Mr. Hirsch:
I have looked at the minutes of February 5th and your letter of
January 31st and, obviously, the minutes are contrary to what your
letter said.
I have talked to Mrs. Hallberg, our City Clerk, and she has agreed
that the minutes have one word that changes the whole meaning. I will
ask the Council to correct the minutes at the next meeting and the
words "no objections" will be changed to "he would have objections ".
I do feel, however, that the Council understood what you were objecting
to and I think their decision would not be changed.
Sincerely]
Kenneth E. Rosland
City Manager
KR:md
LJ RiS OLUTION
WHEREAS, plans for Hennepin County`Projcct No. 6829 showing proposed alignment,
profiles, grades and cross sections, together with specifications and special pro -
visions for the construction of County State Aid Highway No. 17 within the City
as a State Aid'Project have been prepared and presented to the City;
NOW, THEREFORE,•. BE.'IT. -RESOLVED, that. -said, pl'ans.,,. specifications and special pro-
visions be. in all things, approved; and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Mayor and City Manager are hereby authorized and
directed.to enter into said agreement.
Motion for adoption of the resolution was seconded by Councilman Richards.
Rollcall:
Ayes: Courtney, Richards, Schmid,t, . Van Valkenburg �ol
ays: None ./
Resolution adopted.
WILLIAM AND BERNICE JACKSON VARIANCE REQUEST APPROVED BY COUNCIL. Mr. Hughes
recalled that on December 18, 1978, Council had.considered the appeal by William
and Bernice Jackson of a Board of Appeals and Adjustments decision denying their
request for a 6.1% lot coverage variance (320 square feet) for Lot 16, Block 3,
Colonial Grove Sixth Addition located at_5660 Woodcrest Drive. At that meeting,
the matter had been continued until January 8, 1979, to allow time for the staff
to survey other homes around the pond, determine setback measurements and for the
Council to view the affected homes before making a decision. On January 8, 1979,
a the hearing had again been continued to'this date upon the request of Mr. William
r Hirsch. Mr. Hughes referred to a summary of lot coverages in the area which were
computed from surveys submitted to the Building Department at the time of con-
struction of the dwellings which showed the average lot coverage in the area to
be 23.55 %, with the Jackson home presently having a lot coverage of 27.98% which
is similar to four other surrounding dwellings. He clarified that the proposed
addition to the Jackson home would result in a lot coverage of 30.36% and that
the approximate lowest lot coverage in the.area is 23.5 %, with the highest approxi-
mately 28.27 %. Mr. Hughes emphasized that these are not absolute figures inasmuch
as some additions have been made to properties without taking out building permits.
Mr. Jackson referred to pictures which had been submitted to support his request
and also to a letter submitted by Mr. and Mrs._ Hirsch__ in which they stated that
they would not obiect to the construction of a deck as long as it is not enclosed.
��. �®
Mr. Jackson emphasized that there is already a tree p an e �n the middle of tine
only window for which the view could possibly be affected by the construction of
the deck. He added that the home of Mr. and Mrs. Crane,who had also objected to
the variance, also exceeds ordinance requirements, and that he is not asking for
any other consideration than others in the area. Mr. William Hirsch, 5664 Wood -
crest Drive, reiterated comments made in his letter of January 31, 1979 which
stated that he would ave co�obiectionnss if the Jacks ons "wis.h- to- screer
deck and_also ut a permanent roof over this structure'" Sand recalled that
the Board of Appeals and.Adjustments had enie t e variance because of objections
of neighbors. No further discussion being heard, Councilman Richards' motion
approving the variance was seconded by Councilman Courtney.
Ayes: Courtney, Richards, Schmidt, Van Valkenburg
Nays: None
Motion carried with the comment that Council did not believe that the addition
would spoil the view of neighbors.
JOHN T. VELIE BOARD OF APPEALS AND ADJUST.HENTS DECIS [ON APPEAL CONTTNUED. Mr.
Hughes recalled that the appeal of John J. Velie from the decision of the Board
of Appeals and Adjustments for a 10 foot front yard setback variance and a 3,147
square foot lot area variance for property located at 4300 -4302 Valley View Road
had been continued from Jnnuary 15, 1979. Mr. Ve.lie presented photographs show-
ing the type of building which tic! proposes to construct on the R -2 lot and said
that the :staff had recomnUnded approval. of the vnriances provided that particular
plan was used. Mr. Velie said that he had not pursued nc.w plains for his building
-17-- 4 - /
5664 Woodcrest Drive
Edina, Minnesota 55424
January 31, 1979
City of Edina
4801 West 50 Street
Edina, Minnesota 55424
Attention: City Clerk and Edina City Council
Gentlemen:
After attending two meetings regarding the request by Mr. and Mrs. William
Jackson, we wish to state our position as follows:
If the Jacksons wish to extend their deck only_, we would have no_ further_
objections.T However, if they wish to screen in t k.
he dec.and_ also —put_a
permanent roof over this - structure, we certainly would object to this.
Firstly, there is a great deal of esthetic difference between the
appearance of an open deck on the second story level of a house and one
that has the roofline extended and is enclosed as a permanent part of the
house. If any members of the council have seen the houses around the pond,
they will note that none have decks that are in any way enclosed. We
feel that this is also consistent with 99% of all the new houses being
built with decks. Therefore, we would have to question the statements in.
the Jacksons' letter of November 30 where they state that this addition
would not be noticeably out of character with surrounding dwellings and
also in keeping with the character of surrounding dwellings. Following
is a copy of the paragraphs which we are questioning:
"As for possibly diminishing the value of ,their home, we believe that
will not be the case. If anything, it should add both to the value
of our home, their home, and the neighborhood. We plan to have the
addition built by our original builder, Ken Durr, who enjoys an
excellent reputation for quality and craftsmanship. It has been
designed to blend in with the basic design of our home and is in
keeping with the character of surrounding dwellings. The architect's
drawing, which is available, provides a graphic.illustration of
what the addition would look like."
"As mentioned in the initial response from the Board of Appeals
and Adjustments, we believe that'the addition will not be noticeably
out -of character with surrounding dwellings' and that 'there are
no adverse impacts on adjacent dwellings.' We further feel, as
mentioned above, that a favorable decision would be consistent with
exceptions granted to several other dwellings with regard to lot
coverage requirements."
ALL- AMERICA CITY
`i ri
1
202 East Jackson Street Box 3368 ,;'.'p Mankato, MN 56001 Phone (507) 625 -3161
February 14, 1979
James VanValkenb.urg
Mayor
4801 W. 50th Street
Edina, MN 55424
Dear Mayor VanValkenburg:
The League -NAHRO Committee on Tax increment Financing has worked to preserve
and improve the tax increment tool for city governments to use in dealing
with local redevelopment, housing and economic development programs. This
has been, predominantly, a legislative battle which we have fought over the
last three years. During that period of time only a.few cities carried the
expense of supporting the tax increment effort. The costs were indeed sub-
stantial, amounting to several hundreds of thousands of dollars. It is only
equitable now that these costs be shared by other cities who will benefit
from the legislative effort.
Before this session of the Legislature, the committee worked to draft a tax
increment bill which would meet the needs of cities and provide us with a
positive initiative. With our bill in hand, we are able to be out front with
the Legislature and not simply reacting to a bill which comes from an un-
friendly Legislator or an unfriendly committee.
Over a year ago when the League -NAHRO Committee was working on tax increment
legislation during the last session of the Legislature, the committee con-
sidered the matter of financing this extraordinary effort. We decided, at
that time, that we should assess ourselves.to support the research and coun-
sel work on which a successful legislative program depends. Apportioning
these figures to the one hundred cities in Minnesota.whom we know to be in-
volved with the program, yields the following figure for your city: $1,750.00
We hope that you will support the efforts of the League -NAHRO Committee and
that you will remit, as soon as possible, the amount of money indicated above
to the League of Minnesota Cities, 300 Hanover Building, 480 Cedar Street,
St. Paul, 55101, which has agreed to serve as treasurer for the committee.
Sincerely,
William Bassett
Co- Chairman
League of MN Cities -NAHRO Committee
IWB, DO: kgk
Luc'
Dean Otterson
Co- Chairman
League of MN Cities -NAHRO Committee
Mankato is an affirmative action, equal opportunity employer.
e
eE
3__
ALL - AMERICA CITY
® e
202 East Jackson Street Box 3368 a Mankato, MN 56001 Phone (507) 625 -3161
April 3, 1979
Kenneth Rosland
City Manager
City Hall
4801 W. 50th Street
Edina, MN. 55424
Dear Mr. Rosland:
When we first wrote to cities requesting contributions to defray tax
increment lobbying expenses, we thought that city officials were
acquainted with the proposition. After our letter was received, a
number of cities raised questions concerning the matter so that
additional information is clearly indicated.
The question of a special assessment to support tax increment lobbying
was first discussed and agreed to at a meeting.of the League /NAHRO
Committee meeting in Alexandria in August of 1977. The issues were
again discussed and supported at a similar meeting in July of 1978.
Based upon these understandings, a budget was drawn and an assessment
schedule established. Both are enclosed for your information. Please
note that the budget does not support. the League of Cities lobbying
staff, but pays for technical back up and the services of a special..
counsel, namely, Jim Holmes. The technical staff.and attorney Jim
Holmes have already worked to produce the League supported tax
increment bill S.F. 257 and H.F. 451. We expect to support the
enactment of these bills vigorously.
We hope that you will join us in financing this effort.. Your assessment
amount is included in the assessment table. Please forward your pay-
ment to the League of.Minnesota Cities, 300 Hanover Building, 480 Cedar
Street, St. Paul, MN. 55101.
William Bassett,
City Manager
4Zean Otterson
HRA /St. Cloud
cc Mayor Mankato is an affirmative action, equal opportunity employer.
NAME OF MUNICIPALITY
POPULATION
ASSESSMENT
Albert Lea
19,418
$ 717.00
Amboy
571
50.00
Annandale
1,234
75.00
Appleton
1,789
100.00
Austin
26,210
955.00
Beaver Creek
235
50.00
Benson
.3,549
162.00
Bird Island
1,309
75.00
Bloomington
81,970.
2,906.00
Blue Earth.
3,965
176°00
Breckenridge
4,200
185.00
Brewster
563
50.00
Cambridge
2,720
133.00
Cannon Falls
2,072
125.00
Clarkfield
1,084
75.00
Crookston
8,312
328.00
Dawson
1,699
100.00
Detroit Lakes
6,352
260.00
Duluth
100,578
3,558.00
Edina
48,940
1,750.00
Eveleth
4,721
203.00
Farmington
3,104
146.00
Fergus Falls
12,443
473.00
Glencoe
4,217
185.00
Grand Marais
1,301
75.00
Granite Falls
3,225
150.00
Hastings
12,195
464.00
Hopkins
13,428
507.00
Hutchinson
8,142
322.00
Jordan
1,836
100.00
Lake Crystal
1,807
100.00
LeCenter
1,890
100.00
LeSueur
3,745
169.00
Luverne
4,703
202.00
Madelia
2,316
125.00.
Mankato -
30,895
1,119.00
Marshall
10,194
394.00
Milroy
247
50.00
Minneapolis
390,000
10,000.00
Minnetonka
35,776
1,290.00
Moorhead
29,687
1,077.00
Morris
5,366
225.00
Mountain Lake
1,986
100.00
New London
736
50.00
Northfield
10,235
396.00
North Mankato
7,347
295.00
North St. Paul
11,950
456.00
Pelican Rapids
1,835
100.00
Pipestone
5,328
224.00
Red Lake Falls
1,740
100.00
Red Wing
12,834
487.00
Richfield
47,231
1,691.00
Robbinsdale
16,845
627.00
(OVER)
NAME OF MUNICIPALITY
Sauk Rapids
St. Cloud
St. Louis Park
St. Paul
South St. Paul
Starbuck
Stewartville
Virginia
Waconia
Walnut Grove
Waseca
Watkins
Willmar
Windom
Winona
Worthington
Zumbro Falls
Wayzata
Chanhassen
POPULATION
42,223
48,833
309,000
25,016
1,138
2,802
12,450
2,445
736
6,789
785
13,362
3,952
26,438
9,916
203
3,700
5,054
ASSESSMENT
$ 214.00
1,515.00
1,747.00
10,000.00
913.00
75.00
136.00
473.00
125.00
50.00
275.00
50.00
505.00
176.00
963.00
385.00
50.00
167.00
214.00
NAME OF MUNICIPALITY
Ada
Anoka
Aurora
Buffalo
Cokato
Columbia Heights
Cottonwood
Dodge Center
Excelsior
Faribault
Floodwood
Gaylord
Golden Valley
Hollandale
Lakeville
Litchfield
Little Falls
Madison
Monticello
Montevideo ,
New Prague
Olivia
Onamia
Owatonna
Princeton
Redwood Falls
Rochester
Rush City
Savage
Shakopee
St. Peter
Sobieski
St. James
Thomson
Tower
Trommald
Warren
Watertown
Winton
Zumbrota
PLANNING TO USE TAX INCREMENT FINANCE
POPULATION ASSESSMENT
2,076
$ 125000
13,298
503:00
2,531
126.00
3,275
152.00
1,735
100.00
23,997
877.00
794
50.00
1,603
100.00
2,563
127.00
16,595
618.00
650
50.00
1,120
75.00
24,246
886.00
287
50.00
7,556
302.00
5,262
222.00
7,467
299.00
2,242
125.00
1,636
100.00
5,729
238.00
2,680
131.00
2,553
127.00
670
50.00
15,341
574.00
2,531
126.00
4,774
205.00
53,983
1,927.00
1,130
75.00
3,611
164.00
7,780
310.00
8,331
329.00
189
50.00
4,027
178.00
- 159
50.00
699
50.00
82
50.00
1,990
100.00
1,390
75.00
193
50.00
1,929
100.00
ALL- AMERICA CITY ® ® O
-
�� "' :7,41 202 East Jackson Street Box 3368 "''�' '� Mankato, MN 56001 Phone (507) 625 -316.1
i`
The attached 11979 Session Tax Increment Budget'
was inadvertently omitted from the mailing you
received from William Bassett and Dean.Otterson
dated April 2nd or 3rd regarding a special
assessment to support tax increment lobbying.
Please attach to first correspondence.
Also omitted was the heading on the second sheet
of paper (listing cities beginning with Albert Lea)
which should read:
CITIES PRESENTLY USING TAX INCREMENT FINANCING.
We apologize for the inconvenience.
cc: Mayors
4.4.79
Mankato is an affirmative action, equal opportunity employer.
1979 Session Tax Increment Budget_
Period covered by April, 1978 - May, 1979
Expense
Personnel =
Salaries $30,898.33
Benefits 4,325.77
Office expense -
Rent 1,718.4E
Telephone 1,603.00
Secretary 420.00
Mailing 250.00
Photocopying 450.00
Travel and Expense 1,600.00
Consultant's Legal 36,000.00
$77265.58
* If the Legislature passes a Tax Increment Financing Bill prior to May, the
assessment proceeds will be returned on a proportioned basis.
3550 S. HIGHWAY 100 0 MINNEAPOLIS, MINNESOTA 55416 0 TELEPHONE 612/929.1351
Ski shop O camping equipment C casual furniture 0 mfg. of canvas awnings and canvas products
..April 2, 1979
Mr. Fran Hoffman, Chief Engineer
City of Edina
-4801 West 50th .Street
.Edina,.Minnesota 55424
Dear Mr. Hoffman:
At the outset, I want you to consider this letter as a
high compliment to the work of your department with the
flooding conditions of the Minnehaha creek.
I have been a resident and tax payer of Edina for the
past 36.years and for the past 12 years, I have lived
-at 76 Woodland Circle. Ply property backs down to
Minnehaha Creek at the bridge on 56th Street. Mrs.
•Hoigaard and I were out of the city on vacation for
four weeks- during the month of March and little did
-we realize the potential flooding conditions of the
creek behind our home. Your department employees put
up a barricade of sand. bags across the rear of my
- property to prevent the overflowing creek to get into
our amusement room and entire ground level.
It is most commendable that you would protect property
particularly when the owners were out of the city and
we do appreciate the protection your efficient depart-
ment afforded us during this crisis.
Sincerely,
-C..J. Hoigaard
CJH :mg
CC: Mayor James Van Valkenburg
City of Edina
4801 W. 50th St.
Edina, Mn.
BRANCH STORES: 421 14TH AVENUE S.E. 0 MINNEAPOLIS. MINNESOTA 55414 0 TELEPHONE 612/331 -93160
2004 F011DPAnKWAY 0ST. PAUL. MINNUSOTA -15116 OTrLEPIInNr G17/G!1n'.-5 ?1
Freoiwi the desk of
.,•'�- ROBERT .M, APPEL
x+/7/79
Dear Ms. Hallberg:
Please find attached the copies
of materials used in the seminar
on Marijuana.
If more detailed information is
desired, the tapes of the acttial
seminar are available from Chirst
Pree. Church or Normandale Lutheram
Church,.
Best regards.
M
SCIENTIFIC UPDATE: MARIJUANA, 1975: FLOW SHEET
Types of altered functions briefly summarized:
The Psyche: Corroding effect on will power, emotions, and ability to think. This is
the "amotivational syndrome" and patients exhibit very uniform symptoms.
The Brain: Short term, reversible effects include affecting perception of time,
space, sound, and speed, upsetting motor coordination, disburbing sexual
functions, and deteriorating short term memory.
Long term, irreversible effects include organic brain damage and cerebral
atrophy.
The Respiratory System: Severely damaging effects on human lung tissue causing many
respiratory difficulties.
The Immune System: Suppresses this system through impairment of T- lymphocytes and
reduction in number of phagocytes. Impairment of pulmonary macrophages.
The Reproductive Process: Reduction of testosterone levels and sperm production in
males. Possibility of birth defects, hormone imbalance, inhibition of
puberty, disruption of normal sexual differentiation during fetal
development, birth loss.
The Genes and Chromosomes: Causes very high rates of chromosome breakage. Possible
genetic consequences. Synthesis of DNA and RNA diminished.
Hemp Plant
(Cannabis sativa
Flowers'& Leaves CrudeZResin
(Marijuana) (Hashish)
Cannab
voids (56) Cannabinols A1kaT6ids_
High
Non - Psycho- Active
Psycho- Active(4)
temp.
Cannabidiol
Delta -9- tetra -�y
ro- cannabinol
T.H.C.
Liver
Body
Impaired Liver
Metabolism
Function
11- OH -THC
Drugs
Damaged
Accentuated
Body Cells
Drug Action
Altered Functions of:
The Psyche
The Brain
The Respiratory System
The Immune System
The Reproductive Process
The Genes and Chromosomes
Types of altered functions briefly summarized:
The Psyche: Corroding effect on will power, emotions, and ability to think. This is
the "amotivational syndrome" and patients exhibit very uniform symptoms.
The Brain: Short term, reversible effects include affecting perception of time,
space, sound, and speed, upsetting motor coordination, disburbing sexual
functions, and deteriorating short term memory.
Long term, irreversible effects include organic brain damage and cerebral
atrophy.
The Respiratory System: Severely damaging effects on human lung tissue causing many
respiratory difficulties.
The Immune System: Suppresses this system through impairment of T- lymphocytes and
reduction in number of phagocytes. Impairment of pulmonary macrophages.
The Reproductive Process: Reduction of testosterone levels and sperm production in
males. Possibility of birth defects, hormone imbalance, inhibition of
puberty, disruption of normal sexual differentiation during fetal
development, birth loss.
The Genes and Chromosomes: Causes very high rates of chromosome breakage. Possible
genetic consequences. Synthesis of DNA and RNA diminished.
A.
Om in in1pnrlrr»I roc to . l,nn,l Ilre,l .cltnrrlrl he iu eve-q, hrisir�r s. cr hnr,l rrrrrl I,rrhlie lih,rr,a .
SI -NSUAL 1)'ZUGS: 1)l:l RIVATI(-)N AND IMIABILI•I'r1'I'I() \` OF '1'666: ;11tN1)
13), Hardin and i- #clef/ Jules
Wanibridge l 1nkcrrity i,ress. 1977: 383 'pp; I':t1wrhack 53.95; hardcover, $ I S.95 I
Editor's Note. I''e hat-e a%krd Otiviel 11, r ^r�r,t:js,,rr, •1/.l).. fornif- 1.1%. Chir-1 ofVvyeIried1w. ('wvefl Hos-
piral, Unit•ei-sity of Califol,111 . fT7_T,-1e,-. who !notes trhrrro/ Ire NIUWl;%•. to rrtiru Ilrn i nportant
riew hook that helo)t•,s in errr;y hn%irrr.U. school erne/ public library. Reae 'rte yon hill s� i• rr -7—
In 1965 the use of marijuana spread 111'rou,:houl the
Berkeley campus and to other colleges and universities
across the country. From the campuses, its use spread
at an accelerating rate through surrounding conununi
tics.. In the United States, n a ijuana use is �zuhject 10 no
age, social, or geographic harriers.
From 19614 to i972, 1 scrved - as -director of file
psychiatric department of the Stu Beni Health Service
at the University of Californi ;i at Berkeley, v. here 1 was
in a -imique position to observe rho narijuana problem.
-1 was'in daily contact with the constant flow of students
through the student health service, the psychiatric clinic.
and the hospital. During this time. the number of
patients who were using marijuana vvas increasing.
"Legalize pot" was the headiinc .in the Daily Cali -
fornian, our campus newspaper. on April 12. 1967.
'Marijuana is harmless.'. 1 was quoted ❑s saving.
"There is no evidence that is does anything except make
people feel good. it has ncy:r mad: anyone into a
criminal or a nar-orics addict. it sh;,tr!d he legalized."
This view was met with approval from most students
and most of my profession .-d colleagues. At the lime.
I had not had any direct experience ;rs a plivsician wilh
marijuana users. information about nmrijn:!na smnking
described a mild experienc-c —this was the early 1960s
— without anv noticeable ill effects. (We nt,ly know
that THC must accumulate in tine brain !,.fore in effect
is produced: then, until 161crance i-, i')uilt up to the
effect; of the drug. small amounts produce an effect.)
Tho medical literature was spark, hilt it seemed to
indicate that marijuana was nonaddictive and produced
no harmful effects.
t Within five years, i knew I was wrong: I knew that
marijuana was harmful. During these five years, two to
three 'thousand students came each year to the clinic,
i and 1 personally interviewed about !,-vo Ititncdn.-d - stu-
dents a year. Many were'seen for only one hour: others
were seen. as tnu_ch as two to three times a week for
five years.
The first shift in my thinking. concerning the harnn-
Icssness of marijuana occurred as a re%oh cif i�hser_va—
lions my wife (who is a psychiatric social worker) anti
i made during psycho.hcrany sessions with Mike, a
young roan we had known previow%ly. :Mike was bright
arid. agile and was sinitiltancously getting. a law clegree
anti a Ph.D., learning to fly an 'airplatic, and dealing in
real estate. hie had just heLnw to use "grass" when he
came to its for privale treatment.
in therapy sessions, as file p::tient thinks out loud
about his problems, the therapist has the opl-mi-tunit• to
At...-
sturdy his thinking, to come to I,now fio\v he its nr
nlisrses logic. remembers thin, s. cxcrci <c,4 hiN judgmcnt.
;ind knows his own feelings. Periodically Mikes, think -
ing would beconle cloudy and unreal. If !tried to fol•
low him• nhy head would houin to spin. When i pro-
tested that Its had become impossible to listen in, he
would sav that he was thinkimu, more clearly and in-
sightfully than cycr.
Mikes trouble in thinking cic:ir•l usually occurred.
we noticed, after he had smoked marijumna. but it
Sccmed to us unlikcl' that marijuana WAQ the Cusc. Is
his smoking preceded the therapy ses <iow, by _a day or
more: -In one session, when his thinking, was particular -
ly confused, he said that he had attended a prat part
three days before. A11110110, it w,',; lot gencrally rcco;�-
nizcd at that time that marijuana accun1111 :rtes in file.
body. we told -Mike that we thoussht there was .f con-
nection between his confused thinking and his marijuana
use. We asked him to stop using marijuanna as an c-
perinient. Such :ln experinhcnt world ohvinw ly not Iltvi
hint, yet his reaction was hostile, and he said he .woil!(!
not stop.
h•iike had it paranoid view of the word. He rnn-
stantly suspected that he ryas being controlk-if by the
establishment or the system. He talked often about Ihi�
search for somelhim: or sonlc•onc he cried.! :rust. \•;! he
frequently attacihc(I himself to pro, !.,, %%-0'
re un-
trustwnrthy • and rejected or hurt the people vyho liked
and admired him.
As Mike bc-canhc more iriyok-ed with rnlrijuana. hie
gullibility with regard in others and his suspiciousness
Inward us increas, 1. lie had trouhle concentrating on
his sludi" and could not finish his work. Six months
later. a plane he was piloting cra died. and Mike and
two companions were killed.
As -lime passed. i -gradually learned to pick up Subtle•..
hilt important sigtis.nf- the mental changes in nrtrijuan:!
users. Again avid again, i saw the same picture in the
StudentS 1 'cntiihseled. Small amounts of ,marijuana
seemed to interfere with the user's meinory and sense
— of_timc, �� =ith- prate- regular- usc�ltis thinking became
distorted and his fieltt of interest cot nan-6wer and nar-
rower as he focused his attention on inunediate Scnsa-
lions. At the same time, his defiendence nn and toler-
ance to marijuana grew. As -hc used more of file drug.
his ahilily to thinl, sequentially dinhini0hwl, and his
judenhcnl. menun•Y. and logic became impaired. 'rile
user then began 10 depend milts and mor.• oil liatho-
logical patterns of thought. Ultimately the heavy- -that
is, daily —user developed a paranoid way of thinking
ihal.'11 call "ntarijilaua Ihinl, m", in 10ich Ili,, aharact
and concrete reasonin!! her :tole di = :eta ialyd.
T made the,;k: hd'ort` Ills' coillrollcd
studies were made !hat fl:lvr Iw,-!In to ! vc us clues a: to
the nature of tl'FU 11.11-0i ;d than!:c, 11101 VNIlklin Ihe,,t•
phenomena. In srh5,\•ipwnt years, hoth al illy clinic aild
in my priyale practicc. I h ;ive oh r\cd Ih:r I,,n!! -term
effects of rannallit. In :r.nl: u:rrs, the subtle in
the capacity to think are Ion!: Listing. if not perm;inent.
One of the first users 1 ill 1967 was a
member of the junior faculiv. Ile ` droop :d nut" and
used hashish daily for eirlitccn luuaths. \',•hen he real -
ized that the drue \ \•as intcrfcrin!: with his physical co-
ordination, lie stopped tt;:n!' it. T%-- o.yc•ars later. when
he returned to the uni\'ersiiv. hr found Thai he co'llY
not perform mathenintical functions .1 . l;: had been ehle
lit do before. T!rve Ord a+. hal; lilt :r. hr v:as con -
vinecd that -the chin iv was. Fronh my ob-
servations.of hint and rt;' rather �t : : :h ;tiftal people, 1 have
come to the sank ccmclu-Jon: the &immve may he per-
manent.
John, a young indent. \v ::s i\pical of nlan\•
patients who used niarijuaim every cl:iv. He could not
sleep at regular hours and had ironhle concentrating.
in speaking he used all the current cliches and was tin -
able to focus his attention. I nlet hint after hk' followed
me out of a Icrlurc in which I 11;!tl t.dkt d abolf: n1arl
juana. He came In see u:; re,•uL'irk to are: is ailout pot.
and after a year. he rave it up. But the effects (if
- smoking so mt :c!i marijuana Oyer so Ions a period Tc-
nlaincd. Even today, ,in!in Ims to fol -its his attention
consciously before fie can thick and act as Other people
do spontaneously.
By the sprithn. of 1970, after I hail i n hundreds of
marijuana- usir." studen!c in cnnsidta iron and In therapy
sessions, [ became convinced that nhy original opinion
about the harmlessness of !Marijuana y:; ?s \wro1-. T toad;
2 public .my changed point oj' view. For flit fnllowirrp
reasons, I runt, believe that inarihaina is flit most dan-
gerous drug tee angst ronttrid ►pith:
1. Tts early use is beguiling. The user is riven an
illusion of tm
feciing rood: ilk' c:hrn sense the deli:ii-
oration of his mental and physio!n,,ical processes.
2. Its .continued use Icadz to delusional thinking.
After one to three ycarti of col;tinitous use. the
pathological forms of thinking beein to take over
the. thought process.
3. There is a siront-, need to seduce .others into usinu,
drugs. 1 have rarely seen a re,,ular nrtriitiana user
who didn't actively attempt to influence friends
pilots, air-11 :11110 C,mtroll( rs. I'ii rinrll, policemen, Irmll
moti,l'inell, "llr! ... " l'. ;Intl Illll'SC> M'c Il<tl'N of Bits t!rm,
The effect`; (if marijuana ;trc unp!t :divt;Ihk- and v-.:!v
wary frrnu individual In indi\ idt! :1I. V"ll n null-qurula is
used in collihilmil tl wirn t,lhk'r glans•,, and n:rt!icanons.
its effects play lic con Ipourded. : IC"llol :Intl nr:lrijuan :l
are frednt:ntly u,,ed in conlhirl :ttioll.
M;u'ijuana u,.crs wmall% proiv. s it, niorc frequent
use or to Ilion! potent varieties of the drug. They often
pro ^I :k'ss In other. nu \re potent, driwN.
1 used to he!ic\•c that nlal i'111:1 11,11 utk'r; were "cc,itl"
and lit
\'ing :vhcll !icy v:erc hip h. I R :nt,\\ now th;It ;hi•
ie ;In interniedi -iii, stairs. lfeary m:triju :tn0 r:c`rs may
loot: arhliahle, ht-11 \\h,n they art• Cric.F.Iloncd ilhow
use of drnpq or iheir ideology. tllc y can !hc :-nnle ho:tl!c:
If ihCV ark' i!t:2iCd I11:IrIjlta!h ;t, diev Illay becoult• a0-
,,re. "Siwe.
Hardin anti f leler Jolles la--.v \r: iHk'r, at itr;rfili hr,u►,
nn drue ahttsc: Scns•rtcll PI-11Y.%.- !:: l,rirn ?ir rt "P0 f?r-
haliHiration of ill(, Afincl. \\'nrher>. profc inak. -Ii 1,!
executives _.. -- wS \well as student" - - -- are rniontal dru_.,
user;. 'I'lu: risk, of dens u,,e :u; i!lcrrasin::_ ila a!I
divilN of socict.. Those -who tak,: drijus become in-
creasin_ly involved in drug;- oriented life siylcs. AS dc:-
pcndency devclop-�. the user's ai-lility to discern real,:
arld to evaluate his personal 6111,16nn c'a cline.
Int•rc.l•,in,:l\. Iho'c who !216c11• WIWI -l'enh!.'I li\c"
leacher,, coulist:lons. parents, and e.xec uli\c.
- -;ire encounterirle pmhlcros Il;at ; -c the result of the
effect of drue *.: on thinking and h h ;ivior. Srnmci Drmr s
is the first nook that al!ows th,: nonii�cr „ nod; r•.t2n:!
the user. and the first to give the user ir.si ;21,: into tilt•
other\ +rise unperceived transformation in p.rsonahiv
brourlit about b\ drug usc. A!I those who face these
Problems will find the hook useful.
The Joneses have done a remarkable educatit -Inal ser-
vice. Their infoiniatiwe, lucid• and htmutift'1!)• organii :d
text places the extensive literature on drue abuse —
carefully explained and critically analy:ted —at flee ser-
vice of all who need to understand the prob!etns of the
drug user. if is a pleasure to find clear scientific think-
ing presented in down -lo- earth turn,. 'rlhe honk co\crs
abused drugs in ,general and marijuana in particular.
The future holds mint' difficulties sternmine froth
wide- spread drue ablISC. Practical d.c•isions will he
required, and ttli,� hook can hcip illuminate our way.
David 1 -1. Po welson, M.D.
Formerly Chief of Psychialry
Cowell Ilt,.t,ital. Univer.ily (if C ;ilifnini :!, lierkolev
Priv.re•11raoitioner and Consuluinl. lictkcley. i ":11iiorrim
into using the d11112. EXECUT1W HEA -LTH is published monthly by F.Yncutice Puli-
lic•ations. Pickfeir Bldg., Rancho San!a tie. California 92067.
1 am concerned not only for the narijuana user, bill Sl ?B�CRIFTiO \S SIB T. YEAR 1V U.C.Z. and i!s possessions.
also for those whose lives lit! affects. llecai;:k' marl- ;319 per year in Canada and kovrico. lndivioual rt•part:a
jllana accumulates !P. !lira brain. r,enh!C \k l.lte mare- (brick issuesl S1.5a per eonv. All other caunari S24, by
st„!cce mail. S28 by vi- mail. fC ^!v In rrn,r.ii ;act r4wlev
Juana are clinically "stonc-d" :!Il Ole little. 1 hnis we luvt' Ord::: or ch;cic rr.shethle on I.I.S. hank will b.• acceploh;c..)
' Scc•.d Class :.stair pair at lct:cho
' sr nta Fr. Cnlia pia reason Io he crmc�rnci lluhtl. Iirp!
and at crdditi ?url'rnaiiinrl offices.
!3'ail :r \'I11'l :. ' ulrxtri; terra.+ f:► l ;.rev rrlrc i tr :!;it Re,porl are ar•centrri tr'ith the- Pit rrlr•rsr,rrre.'ir!t, flint !leis vtipv-
rig'hteil niWeriad wilt not t,t• rc•prrrr.frrrr•rt by nos procsess i!r- tahrrtr or in peer; irithnrrf irriltei. perrinssiorl.
s
r� r•
April 12, 1979
TO: Mayors, City Managers and City Clerks
We cordially invite you to join your municipal colleagues from throughout the state at the League's next Annual
Conference, an exciting three day session at the Radisson South. The Conference Steering Committee has cho-
sen the theme "Entering The '80's; Challenge To The Cities" as the theme of the conference. Three special
workshops will be offered on Wednesday. Thursday's general conference will open with a lively legislative de-
bate at the general breakfast, with the annual meeting being held at 2:00, followed by a mock council meeting.
This is Minnesota's version of the popular National League of Cities council training and development session.
It is followed by a reception buffet in the Rad isson Grand Ba.11room.
Friday is jam - packed with 12 workshops. A workshop track on Cities and the Challenge of the Media will be
offered to provide practical advice and strategies for the local official in dealing with the Media. Friday also
features numerous workshops on the nuts and bolts of city government.
Advance conference registrations can be made through this office. ($60 for general delegate registration or $20
for the Small Cities Day, or they can be purchased at the conference ($65 for general delegate registration or
$23 for Small Cities Day).
We encourage you to make advance registrations to assist us in providing you with the best facilities and pro-
grams possible. Registration will be required for all those attending any session of the conference. It is neces-
sary that all city delegates pay the registration fees in order that we might meet the financial burdens necessary
to finance the conference.
The League's enabling act (M.S. 465.58, Subd. 1) permits the use of municipal funds to pay for attendance at
League meetings as well as League dues.
Enclosed you will find a conference registration form, a Housing Reservation Form, and a special Spouse Invi-
tation Form.
Make your plans now to attend the 65th Annual Conference of the League of Minnesota Cities for a learning
experience that will assist you in your job as a municipal official.
Si cerely,
vI�
Donald Slater
Executive Director
DS:glb
Enclosure
tv
65TH ANNUAL •LEAG.UE CONFERENCE
Bloomington June 13 -15, 1979
PROGRAM SUMMARY
Wednesday, June 13 — General Conference
Keynote address ...... Concurrent workshops throughout the day ...... Noon luncheon ...... City of
Bloomington Night.
Thursday, June 14 — General Conference
General breakfast /speaker ....... Concurrent workshops ....... Association luncheons and Mayors
luncheon /speaker ....... League annual meeting ....... Evening reception.
Friday, June 15 — General Conference
Morning workshops ....... Luncheon banquet /speaker /C.C. Ludwig Awards ....... All Small Cities
Day events open to general conference delegates.
Friday, June 15 — Small Cities Day
Concurrent sessions designed for officials from smaller cities held throughout the day ....... Let's
Talk ....... Joint luncheon banquet with general conference delegates.
Events scheduled at Radisson South Hotel or L'hotel de France. Plan to visit the exhibits.
HOUSING RESERVATION
On the reverse side are listed the hotels available to delegates. Registrants will be assigned accommodations
in the order reservations are received, based on choices indicated on this form.
IMPORTANT: Housing forms should be received by May 15, 1979.
Please complete and mail this form to:
League of Minnesota Cities Housing Bureau
Radisson South Hotel ,
7800 Normandale Boulevard
Bloomington, Minnesota 55435
Attention: Marlys Dorfer
A deposit equal to one night's lodging per room must accompany this housing form. Make check payable
to the Radisson South Hotel.
Housing Reservation
SINGLE DOUBLE
Radisson South Hotel, 7800 Normandale Boulevard ................ $39 -44 $45.52
L'hotel de France. 5601 West 78th Street .......................... $47 $62
Howard Johnson's Motor Lodge, 7801 Normandale (load .......... $33 $39
7% state and local taxes apply.
Parking is available at no extra cost to guests.
Please reserve the following accommodations for:
Name
Address
City, __ State Zip
Arrival Date Time Departure Date
Hotel Preference:
First Second Third
No. of Rooms No. of Nights Single Double Twin
Are Separate Billings for Each Occupant Required? Yes No
Special Requirements: .
Names of . All Occupants
IMPORTANT: Housing forms should be received by Ml ay 25, 1979.
TWIN
$45.52
$62
$39
A deposit equal to one night's lodging per room must accompany this housing form. Return housing
form and deposit to League of Minnesota Cities Housing Bureau, Radisson South Hotel, 7800 Normandale
Boulevard, Bloomington, MN 55435 (Attention: Marlys. Dorfer).
0
April 12, 1979
SPECIAL CONFERENCE EVENTS FOR SPOUSES ON JUNE 13
Style Show and Luncheon
View the newest fashions from Dayton's and
dine elegantly at the Minnesota Valley Country
Club, all compliments of the City of Bloomington.
Transportation will be provided. Participation is
limited to the first 175 who register; advance re-
servations are required. Letters of confirmation
will be sent.
Time: Leave Radisson South at 11:15 a.m., re-
turn by 2:00 p.m.
Price: Free
Shopping Trip to Southdale
For your convenience in exploring the wide
range of shopping opportunities available in this
famous Twin Cities indoor mall, the City of
Bloomington has made arrangements for free
bus transportation. No reservation necessary.
Time: Leave Radisson South at 2:00 p.m.,
return 5:00 p.m.
Price: Free
STYLE SHOW RESERVATION FORM
To: Kent T. Michaelson
City of Bloomington
2215 West Old Shakopee Road
Bloomington, MN 55431
Return this form promptly, no later than J une 1, 1979.
Please register me for the Style Show
Name
Address
City State Zip
'CONFERENCE REGISTRATION FORD
1979 General Delegate Registration
June 13 -15, 1979
ADVANCE REGISTRATION ....... .........................$60.00
(Received on or before June 1, 1979)
REGISTRATION AT CONFERENCE ..................$65.00
The registration fee includes a badge and admission to all
general sessions and workshops and tickets for the regular
meal functions listed on the official program — Wednesday
lunch, Thursday breakfast, Thursday reception, and Friday
luncheon banquet. Extra tickets for meal functions may be
purchased separately (at right). If you register in advance,
you will receive a postcard acknowledgement which you
must present at the prepaid registration desk.
Name of City
We wish to purchase advance registration
packages at $60.00 each for the following persons:
Print or type name and position:
Registered delegates to the General Conference are
welcome to attend Small Cities. Day sessions and do not
need to purchase special registrations.
Extra Conference Meal Tickets
Small Cities Day registration DOES NOT INCLUDE: any
meals except Friday luncheon banquet.
Extra tickets may be ordered below. Be sure to indicate
the name of the person(s) for whom the tickets are
ordered, or the name of the delegate who should receive
the extra tickets.
NUMBER FOR WHOM TOTAL.
Wednesday
Luncheon — $6.00 $
Thursday
Breakfast — $6.00
w Reception
Buffet. -- $8.00 _
Friday Luncheon
Banquet — $11.00
Thursday
Mayors Luncheon — $8.00 --
Small Cities Day
ADVANCE REGISTRATION ................ .........................$20.00
REGISTRATION AT CONFERENCE .... .........................$23.00
Delegates from smaller cities are urged to attend the
Annual Meeting on "f Ehursday, June 14 (no fee). If you plan
to attend the Thursday reception, please order tickets in
the second column above.
On Friday, June 15, there will be a full day of Small Cities
Day programming. The registration fee includes a badge,
registration, and the Friday luncheon banquet. If you
register in advance, you will receive a postcard
acknowledgement which you must present at the pre -paid
registration desk.
Name of City
We wish to purchase advance registrations at
$20.00 each for the following persons:
Print or type name and position:
Total Advance Registration Order
(Must be received on or before June 1, 1979)
NUMBER AMOUNT
Advance general delegate registrations at $ 60. 00 .............................. ............................... $
Advance Small Cities Day registrations at $ 20. 00 ............................... ...............................
Extra tickets for conference meals and . reception ............................. ...............................
TOTAL...................:................................................................ ............................... $�
Mail the completed form with your check, made out to the League of Minnesota Cities, 300 Hanover Building,
480 Cedar Street, St. Paul, Minnesota 55101. Please make conference fee checks separate from any other
checks.
RESOLUTION APPROVING DEWEY HILL ADDITION REGISTERED LAND SURVEY
AND APPORTIONING .SPECIAL.ASSESSMENTS
BE IT RESOLVED that that certain Registered Land Survey, generally located
North of W. 78th Street, East of Braemar Park and South of Dewey Hill Road
and presented: -for final approval at.the Edina City Council Meeting of !.
April 16, 1979, be and is hereby granted.final..approval; and
BE IT FURTHER.RESOLVED that all existi•ng.special assessments against Dewey
Hill Second Addition be apportioned against.Dewey Hill 2nd Addition on an
acreage basis and that the- specials.so apportioned to the lots be further
divided equally among the lots; and
BE IT RESOLVED FURTHER, that pending special assessments against Dewey
Hill 2nd.Addition for Storm Sewer 140B.shall.be transferred wholly to
Outlot B, Dewey Hill 2nd Addition, upon receipt by the City of a request
for such transfer from.all owners and lien holders of Outlot B and contain -
ing a waiver of all claims that such pending assessment, as the result of
such transfer, may be inequitable, unfair, unreasonable or in an amount
greater than-the benefit received.
ADOPTED this 16th day of April, 1979.
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 16,
1979,, and.as: recorded in the minutes of said Regular Meeting.
WITNESS my hand and seal of said City this 2nd day of May, 1979.
City Clerk
RESOLUTION GRANTING PRELIMINARY.AND.FINAL
APPROVAL FOR GRANDVIEW PARK REGISTERED LAND. SURVEY
BE IT RESOLVED.by the City Council of the City of Edina, Minnesota, that
that certain Registered Land Survey, presented for approval'by the City of
Edina.covering property.described as follows:
All that part.of Outlot A, Parkwood.Knolls 20th Addition, which lies
Northwesterly .of,.the..following. described line: Commencing at the most
Southerly corner.of.Outlot E, Parkwood Knolls 20th Addition; thence
on an- assumed bearing of North 59 degrees 04 minutes 53 seconds East
along the Southerly line of said Outlot E, 390.00 feet; thence South
33 degrees 04 minutes 40 seconds East, along the Southerly line of
said Outlot E, 144.44 feet to the actual point of beginning of the line
to be described; thence South 56 degrees 39 minutes 57 seconds West,
217.45 feet; thence Southwesterly 146.64 feet along a tangential curve
to the right, having a radius of 385.02 feet; thence South 78 degrees
29 minutes 14 seconds West, 64.35 feet to.the Westerly line of said
Outlot A and there terminating;
and.presented.at the Edian City Council Meeting of April 16, 1979, be and
is hereby granted preliminary and final approval.
ADOPTED this 16th day-of April, 1979.
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 16,
1979,.and..as recorded in the minutes of said.Regular Meeting.
WITNESS my hand. and seal of. said City -':this 2nd day of May, 1979.
City Clerk
TO: Mayor and Council, Park Board, Athletic Association
Presidents, City Manager
FROM: Robert Kojetin, Director, Park and Recreation
Mark Bernhardson, Administrative Assistant
SUBJ: Athletic Association Insurance & Relationship Between
City and Associations
DATE: April 16, 1979
On Saturday, April 21, there is going to.be a.Community
Seminar held in the Council Chambers at City Hall between
the City Council and Commission Boards. Between 12:15
and 1:00 p.m., the Park Board will meet with the City Council
and dissuss certain questions in the relationship between the
Park Board and Athletic Associations.
I would like, at this time, to encourage each Athletic Board
to send the President or one of its Board Members to
participate in this discussion.
Another question that has been raised in the past has been the
question of insurance coverage for Athletic Association
participants and volunteers through either the association
or the city. At present the situation varies from association
to association and situation to situation. As an attempt
to standardize coverage and to insure adequate coverage, the
attached material outlines what the city desires as minumum
coverage for the associations. This matter is proposed to
be among the items discussed at the Community Seminar of
Saturday, April 21, 1979.
Should you -have further questions, please feel free to contact
me.
97"Id 0. !Ozddman, c P c u
INSURANCE CONSULTANT
100 BUILDERS EXCHANGE
MINNEAPOLIS, MINNESOTA 55402
TELEPHONE (612) 336 -5866
City of Edina
Athletic Associations
Recommended Insurance -
Workers' Compensation Insurance Including:
Employer's Liability insurance with limit of $100,000.
All States Endorsement
Comprehensive General Liability Insurance Including:
Personal Injury and Property Damage
Officers, Managers and Employees to be covered
as additional insureds
Products Liability
Non -Owned and Hired Car Automobile Liability
insurance to be included
City of Edina to be named as additional insured
only insofar as Athletic Association
activities are concerned
Recommended Minimum Limits
Personal Injury $300,000/$500,000
Property Damage $1001000-
November 14, 1978
. �
AGENDA _
COMMUNITY SEMINAR
APRIL 21, 1979
8:45 a.m.
Introduction
9:00 -11:00 a.m.
Low and Moderate Housing in Edina - Where to go
Hughes and Staff introduces
Tax - Values - Neighbors - Metro Press -
Debate: Richards vs Bredesen
11:00 -11:30 a.m.
Human Relations - What to do to get more
community support.
Results of People- Making
11:30 -12:15 p.m.
Lunch
12:15 -1:00 p.m.
Park - Bond Issue - 5 Year Plan
1:00 -1:30 p.m.
Energy - What ideas for consideration
1:30 -2:00 p.m.
The Edina Foundation - Ideas - School and City
2:00 -2:30 p.m.
School Cooperation - What can we do re: buying
old schools
Other possible areas:
Art
Recycle
Transit
Cable TV
JIV - *A
Invite:
All Commissions
Neighborhood groups
e
League of Women Voters
EDINA ASSOCIATION PRESIDENTS
Braemar City of Lakes Figure
Skating Club
Mrs. Madrienne Larson
4820 Bywood West
Edina, MN 55436
929 -0529
(830) Edina Baseball Association
1b. Darrell Warner
5305 Ayrshire Blvd
Edina, NN 55424
920 -9768
(400) Edina Basketball Association
Mr. Fred Bjork
5813 Amy Drive
Edina, IM 55436
920 -5988
(700) Edina Football Association
herb Hughes
7204 Lanham Lane
Edina, Minn. 55435
Edina Girls' Athletic Association
Itti Furlong
4703 Meadow Rd.
Edina MN 55424
920 -5084
The following sports are
included in E.G.A.A.:
(260) Basketball
(60) Flag Football
(120) Team Tennis
(310) Volleyball
(5 2) Hockey
(700) Edina Girls' Softball Association
Debbie Ducar
4616 Wooddale Ave
Edina, ?,IN 55424
920 -4551
4/79
(500) KEG - EDINA Gymnastics Association
Mr. Pdel Peacock
6904 Paiute Cr
Edina, MN 55435
941 -2297 - Home
(100) Edina Swim Club
341 -5281 - Work
Mr. John Nelson
6624 Southdale Road
Edina, AMi 55435
920 -8019
(1,150) Edina Hockey Association
Duncan Wallace
5861 Creek Valley -Rd.
Edina, MN 55435
941 -8960
(1,990) Edina Soccer Association
Mr. Paul Quinn
4610 Browndale
Edina, MN 55424
920 -8958
Edina Special Children's Group
(E.S.C.G.)
Mrs. B. T. (Birdie) Bagley
4405 Claremore Drive
Edina, IAN 55435
Leisure Time Committee E.S.C.G.
Mr. Hal Liljenquist
5833 Fairfax Avenue
Edina, MN 55424
TO: Park Board Members, Mayor, Council and City Manager
FROM: Bob Kojetin, Director, Park and Recreation
DATE: April 18, 1979
RE: Capital Improvement Budget
Enclosed is an up -date of the Capital Improvement
Budget which we have discussed at our Park Board meetings
in the past. I think it would be a good idea, as a
reminder before the meeting this Saturday, to go over
this plan which will be discussed at the meeting.
Also enclosed is an outline of the relationship between
Athletic Associations, the Edina Park Board and the
Edina Park and Recreation staff from a discussion
during the November 8, 1977 Park Board meeting.
CITY OF EDINA
PARK AND - RECREATION DEPARTMENT
Five Year Plan 1979 -1983
_Park Capital Improvements Program
Land Purchases Not Included
Park Proposed Improvement Total
Alden Plantings $ 1,000
Park Sign 250
1,250.
Arden Park Sign 250
Park Lighting 3,600
Asphalt Path 2,500
Traffic Control Posts 2,000
8,350
Beard Tennis Courts 20,000
Playground Equipment -Area Curbing 4,000
Irrigate Athletic Field 6,000
30,000
Birchcrest Backstop
Playground Equipment -Area Curbing
Bredesen Park Interior Paths
Perimeter Paths (50% complete)
Fencing (75% complete)
Parking Area
Lake Development.
Picnic Tables and Benches
Blinds, Watch Areas & Feeding Stations
Plant Materials for Screening
Lighting
Maps, Labels and Plaques (25% complete)
Braemar
'Fencing of Storage Area
Class Five Base - Storage Area
.Surfacing East Road
Lighting Soccer Field
Traffic Control Posts
Class 5 Gravel Road To Picnic Point
Water to Picnic Point
Picnic Area Lighting
Picnic Shelter
Irrigate Soccer Field
Batting.Cages
Permanent Team Benches
Parking Lot Soccer Field
Netting for Baseball
1,000
3,000
4,000
132,660
15,000
10,000
53,000
159,500
2,000
4,000
15,000
20,000
3,000
414,160
7,000
4,000
4,000
20,000
8,000
3,000
5,000
2,000
.10,000
6,000
5,000
750
3,000
3,000
80,750
Park Proposed Improvement Total
Bristol~ Plantings $ 500
500
Browndale Concrete Slab & Gas 2,000
2,000
Creek Valley.
Park School
Chowen
Cornelia
Art Center
Plantings
Fencing of Athletic Perimeter
Irrigation of Fields
Light Tennis Courts
Drinking Fountain
Permanent Team Benches & Dugout Fencing
Parking Area
Fencing - Backstop
Circumference Bike Path (90% complete)
Light Tennis Courts
Regrade Bank and Sod
-Picnic Shelter with Water & Electricity
Playground Equipment-Area-Curbing
Hard Surface Play Area
Recondition Swim Pool Bath House.
Permanent Benches & Dugout Fencing
Air Conditioning
Parking Lot Lighting
Cornelia School Regrading and Sodding
Hockey Lighting
Upgrade Shelter - Add Toilets
Irrigate Athletic Fields
Countryside Color Coat Hard Surface
Outfield Fence - Jr. League
Playground Equipment -Area Curbing
Irrigate Athletic Fields
Backstops
Permanent Team Benches
Parking Lot
Todd` Permanent Benches
Plantings
Parking Area
Purchase House & Removal
Drainage Pipe
Playground Equipment
Color Coat Hard Surface
1,500
5,000
7,000
6,000
5,000
1,500
26,000
1,000
2,500
3,500
1,000
6,000
2,000
20,000
10,000
5,000
25,000
1,500
70,500
10,000
1,000
11,000
5,000
6,000
12,000
9,000
32,000
2,000
4,000
4,000
9,000
5,000
1,000
2,000
27,000
500
1,000
3,000
40,000
3,000
4,00.0
3,000
54,500
44th Street
Property Develop Park 30,000
Park Proposed Improvement
Labe Edfna Light Tennis Courts
Traffic Control Posts
Regrade and Irrigate Ballfields
Outfield and Pond Fencing
Playground Equipment -Area Curbing
Drinking Fountain
Permanent Team Benches
Garden Park Shelter
Plantings
Permanent Team Benches
Dugout Fencing
Playground Equipment -Area Curbing
Irrigate Athletic Field
Color Coat and Hard Surface Area
Heights Plantings
Playground Equipment -Area Curbing
Sun Shelter
Highlands Drinking Fountain
Playground Equipment -Area Curbing
Irrigate Athletic Fields
Permanent Team Benches
Backstops - 3 Fields with Dugouts
Historical Park Basement of School
Irrigate
McGuire Plantings
Hard Surface Area
Normandale Playground Equipment -Area Curbing
Color Coat Hard Surface Area
Backstop & Dugout Fencing
Irrigate Athletic Field
Permanent Team Benches
Pamela Hard Surface Play Area
Traffic Control Posts
Backstop & Dugout Fencing
Playground Equipment -Area Curbing
Light Soccer Field
Irrigate Baseball Fields
Permanent Team Benches
„ Sherwood
Playground Equipment
Total
$ 6,000
1,000
3,000
6,000
3,000
1,000
1,500
21,500
7,000
1,000
1,000
1,000
4,000
1,500
2,000
1.7,500
500
4,000
5,000
9,500
3,500
4,000
12,000
1,500
7,900
28,000
6,000
4,000
10,000
1,500
5,000
6,500
4,000
2,000
4,000
6,000
1,000
17,000
4,000
1,000
4,000
4,000
20,000
6,000
3,500
42,500
2,000
Utley Park Light Tennis Courts 6,000
Park Proposed Improvement
Walnut Ridge Plantings
Parking Area
Soccer and Football Field
Irrigate Soccer & Football Field
Playground Equipment -Area Curbing.
Weber Irrigate Baseball Fields
Yorktown Light Tennis Courts
Irrigate Soccer Field
Plantings
Drinking Fountain
Extend Asphalt Path to Sr. Citizen
Center
Permanent.Team Benches
Playground Equipment -Area Curbing
Areneson Acres
School Properties
Grandview
Lewis
Park Lighting
Walkways
Remodel Garage & Green House
Nursery Trees
Water & Irrigation Source
Light Football Field
Light East High Tennis Courts
Neighborhood Park Construction and
amenities
Neighborhood Park Construction and
amentities
E,
Total
1,500
2,000
8,000
6,000
6,000
23,500
9,000
6,000
6,000
1,000
500
3,000
500
4,000
21,000
6,000
3,000
8,000
6,000
.5,000
28,000
20,000
10,000
30,000
100,000
125,000
Mirror Lakes Neighborhood Park Construction and
amenities 20,000
Hedberg Neighborhood Park Construction and
amenities 150,000
TOTAL $1,462,510.
FACILITY THINK LIST
1. Gymnastics Building (School Area)
.2. Multi Purpose.Center (Bicentennial Survey)
(Community Music & Cultural Arts Center) $ 300,000.
3. Indoor Tennis at Braemar Pavilion 40,000.
4. Par 3 Enlargement 150,000.
5. Up -grade and replacement of playground equipment 50,000.
GOLF COURSE
1. Put in a good year -round outside lighting system for the
Clubhouse walkway
2. Place a top over a portion of the Driving Range
3. Purchase ball dispensing machine
4. Replace ice maker
5. Purchase audio-visual equipment for the lesson program
a. Projector and screen
b. T. V. replay
c. Films
6. Increase golf car fleet from 30 to 40
Upgrade Clubhouse & Enlargement
1. Expand Pro Shop to include two offices
Expand building to hold 20 more golf cars
Air condition clubhouse
2. Add general multi purpose room for seating 300
3. Up -grade maintenance building at golf course for year
round maintenance and more storage
Course & Grounds
1,000.
2,500.
3,000.
1,200.
4,000.
25,000.
50,000.
200,000.
50,000.
$ 336,700.
Continuous Capital Improvement of Golf Course Operating Budget - Approximately
$20,000. is set aside for maintenance and repair expenses for maintenance
equipment each year
1. Nine year plan to build new tees - -two tees per year
$3,000 /year - $27,000.
2. Five year plan to dredge water hazards - $1,000 /year - $5,000.
3. Replace A -Frame tractor - $2,000.
ARENA & PAVILION
1. Ice re- surfacer
2. Re- build old re- surfacer
3. Up -grade Arena & Pavilion
4. Plexiglass replacement and new plastic boards
$ 23,000.
2,500.
25,000.
20,000.
70,500.
ART CENTER
1. Additional Parking Space $ 3,000.
2. Photography Department with darkroom 5,000.
3. More jewelry equipment 19000.
4. Xerox machine or mimeograph machine 1,000.
5. Large file cabinet 300.
6. 2 more electric wheels for pottery department 1,200.
7. Gas kiln for reduction firing 2,000.
8. Art Center Expansion
As the number of painting and drawing classes increase we will
need a larger room for the easle arts. Now, the room can
comfortably hold 8 or 9 students. Ideally, a room for 15 -20
is needed. Along with this painting room it would be desireable
to have an area large enough to hold a program for a crowd
of about 100 25,000.
38,500._
SENIOR CITIZEN CENTER
1. Expansion of parking facility $ 5,000.
T -5,000
GUN RANGE
1. Raint and up -grade exterior-and new. roof $ 4,000.
4,000.
TOTAL $ 454,700.
PARK
_ v Parkland Dedication By Area
Dc- ccTr.bcr 31 , 1977
r -c Plat Ndme Amount Southirc!-t Northwest Southeast CcntralNorthc
t0. -7I Griffith' $ 2,925. 2,925.
8 -23 -72 Kenney Addition 2,500. 2,500. '
5 -15 -72
Edina n1estland
11,250.
.3- 06 -72.
Eclody knolls 7th.
800.
ED-15-73
Grcen Hills
109.000..
I2 -13 -72
Afar- Barry
12i625. .
5 -07 -73
Warden Lot 21- Hansen replat
1,2500
7 -16 -73
-Greg Addition.
750.
9 -14 -72
Scott Berg's Addition
2,100.
1 -15 -73
Ex•ans -ood Ind..Addition
600.
5 -07 -73
McCauley Heights 4th Addit.
. 2,500.
12 -03 -73
Braemar Hills 7th
11,670
8 -04 -75
Warden Acres Austin replat
2,500
3- 04 -74:
Braemar Park
1,400.
5 -06-76
Fbere_er Society & Addit.
32,000.-
:0 -01 -73
Schneider's Ind Addition
1,380.
9 -03 -75
11cCauley Heights 5th Addit.
1,406.
i -07 -75
Graytower Estates
5,000..
5 -19 -75
Rembrandt Nano:
18,600.
7 -21 -75
Av--Zrl Sharne Lot Division
375.
11 -03 -75
Don Byerly R.L.S.
3,750.
_1- 17 -75'
Whiteman Addition
4,000.-
5- -17 -78
N'agengast Addition
1,250.
9 -03 -75
Heather Hill
1,250. -
1- -76
Brown's Lddition
1,400._
'.1 -01 -76
Data 100 Second-
1,250.
'.1 -15 -76
Wright's Addition-
1,350.
8 =16-76
McCauley Heights 6th Addit.
1 "2350.
01-20 -76
Dear Run
2,250.
1 -15 -76
Robert 11iddlet:ist 2nd Addit:
1,500:
1 -15 -76
Braemar Homestead Addit.
3,000.
2 -12 -77
Hyde Park Ind Addit.
8,400.
1 -18 -76
Songstad Lot Division- -
Warden Acres
600.
6-20 -77
Mirror Wood 2nd Addition
3,000.
6 -20777
McCauley Heights 8th A3dition2,500.
0-01-77
Edina Interchange 5th Addit
9,000.
10-77
Roushar Square
750.
5 -16-77
Dahlquist Addition Replat
1,500.
2 -19 -77
Taft Addition
41500.
1 -16 -77
Derkas Addition
39000.
3 -08-77 Greg's Investmant Lot
11,250. .
800..
10,000.
2,625.
1,250.
750.
2,100.
600.
2,500.
11,6700
1,400.
2,500.
3,000..
2,500.
9,000..
1950041--
Division (,Iorningside)
329000, -
19380.,--
1,406.
850.
Edina Interchage 6th Add.
5,000.
11000
189600.--,.
375.
13,716.
N. W. Addition-
3,750.-
4,000.
4,000.-
1,250.-
1,050.,
Dewey Hill 2nd Add.
1,250.
19,382.
1,400..
5,000.
1,250. °
Dewe y Hill Condominiums
30,000.
1,350.-
Folke- Victorsen
40,000.
- 2,250..,
National Car Rental
1,500.
3,000.-
Kerr Company (Pending)
8,400.
Total
600.
3,000..
2,500.
9,000..
1950041--
Division (,Iorningside)
465.
j R. Wilson Prosp. Iiills
850.
850.
Edina Interchage 6th Add.
11000.
11000
.,Dewey Hill
13,716.
13,716.
N. W. Addition-
4,000.
4,000.
Tupa Woods
1,050.
1,050.,
Dewey Hill 2nd Add.
19,382.
19,382.
St. Alban's Add.
5,000.
5,000.
Dewe y Hill Condominiums
30,000.
Z 0 .QQO.
Folke- Victorsen
40,000.
40,000.
National Car Rental
28,112.
Kerr Company (Pending)
16,000.
Total
$326,806.
171,224.
750. '
4,500. °
3,000.
465.
28,112.
16,000.
33,750. 80,092. 25,275. 16,465
TOTAL
$326,_80.6.00
Under the present operating conditions of the $80,000.00 per year
and the dedicated park funds; in the next 5 years the revenue
would be $400,000.00, the dedicated funds are $326,806.00 and
a trade off for gravel at the Grandview Park site would be
approximately $75,000.00, for a total of $801,806.00.
With the proposed 5 year plan we will be spending approximately
$1,462,510.00 on park improvements and on revenue facilities we
are projecting $454,700.00 in improvements.
ATHLETIC ASSOCIATIONS RELATIONSHIP WITH THE PARK BOARD AND
THE PARK AND RECREATION STAFF
From the Minutes of the November 8, 1977 Park Board Meeting
The basic philosophy that the Edina Park and Recreation Department staff recommends
to be used in working with the athletic associations in order to maintain good
programs is as follows:
The Edina Park Board and the Edina Park and Recreation Department recognize the
individual athletic associations in the City of Edina as the only governing body
for each respective sport. The Edina Park Board, in cooperation with the Edina
Park and Recreation Department, will administer and help each individual association
plan, provide facilities,, and give professional direction regarding operation
of their association, so as to maintain the basic philosophies. Also, the Edina
Park and Recreation Department acts as a liaison between.the associations and the
Edina Park Board to help see that the associations are providing a well rounded
and equal.program for all participants.
The Edina Park and Recreation Department staff recommend the following guidelines
be followed:
1) That all boys and girls receive an equal opportunity to participate
in any activity at whatever ability level they may play.
2) Have fun.
3) Build good sportsmanship and character.
4) Learn basic fundamentals of the sport they participate in.
5) Be a good.team member.
6) Learn to accept discipline.
7) Have a reasonable amount of practice and games.
8) The Edina Park and Recreation Department staff should encourage the use
of volunteers on the Board of Directors, as well as in the coaching,
because we believe in the philosophy of citizen involvement.
9) Selection of members to serve on the Board of Directors and as coaches
should be based on the prospective member having the understanding of the
basic program for all ability levels and all ages.