Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1979-09-17_COUNCIL MEETING(Revised) AGENDA EDINA CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING SEPTEMBER 17, 1979 7:00 P.M. ROLLCALL RECOGNITION OF MRS. SHIRLEY PETERSON EDINA MASONIC LODGE PRESENTATION MINUTES of September 10, 1979, approved as submitted or corrected by motion of , seconded by I. PUBLIC HEARINGS ON SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS Affidavits of Notice by Clerk.. Analysis of Assessment by City Manager. Spectators heard. If Council wishes to proceed, action by Resolution. 3/5 favorable rollcall vote to pass. A. Watermain Improvement No. WM -334 - Shaughnessy Road B. Grading & Graveling Improvement No. C -128 - Shaughnessy Road C. Sanitary Sewer Improvement No. SS -350 - Shaughnessy Road D. Storm Sewer Improvement No. ST.S -160 - St. Albans Circle E. Sanitary Sewer Improvement No. SS -349 - St. Albans Circle F. Watermain Improvement No. WM -333 - St. Albans Circle G. Watermain Improvement No. 329' Sherman Circle H. Sanitary Sewer Improvement No. SS -344 -,Sherman Circle I. Storm Sewer Improvement No. ST.S -155 - Sherman Circle J. Watermain Improvement No. WM -335 - Ewing Circle, W. 55th St. K. Grading & Graveling Improvement No. C -129,- Ewing Circle L. Sanitary Sewer Improvement No. SS -351 = Ewing Circle M. Watermain Improvement No. WM -319B - Oxford Ave., Hollywood Road, Vandervork Ave. N. Storm Sewer Improvement NO. ST.S -138 —County Road 18 from Nine Mile Creek to 3rd St. South in Hopkins II. PUBLIC HEARINGS AND REPORTS ON PLANNING MATTERS Affidavits of Notice by Clerk. Presentation by Planning Department.. Spectators heard. First Reading requires offering of Zoning 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. Subdivision and Zoning Change 1. First Reading a. Don Berg Construction Company - R -1 Residential District to PRD -2 Planned Residential District (Generally located North of the Crosstown Highway and West of the MN &S Rialroad Tracks) Z -79 -3 - S -79 -6 (Continued from 9/10/79) B. Preliminary Plat Approvals 1. Lowe First Addition - Generally located West of County Road 18, North of Valley View Road and East of Washington Ave...- S -79 -12 (9/5/79) 2. One Corporate Center - Phase III - Generally located West of Metro Blvd., East of Ohms Lane and W. 73rd Street - S- 79-13 (9/5/79) III. PUBLIC HEARING ON STREET NAME CHANGE Affidavits of Notice by Clerk. Presenta- tion by Engineer. Spectators heard. Action of Council by Ordinance. First Reading requires offering of Ordinance only. 4/5 favorable rollcall vote to pass if Second Reading should be waived. 3/5 favorable rollcall.vote to pass Second Reading. A. Edina Industrial Blvd. between Bush Lake Road and W. 78th Street to "Bush Lake Road" IV. SPECIAL CONCERNS OF RESIDENTS A. C. Wesley Anderson - Morningside Lighting. Council Agenda September 17, 1979 Page Two V. AWARD OF BIDS Tabulations and Recommendations by City Manager. Action of Council by Motion. A. Park Shelter Buildings - Continued from 9/10/79 B. William Wardwell Lewis Park Irrigation C. William Wardwell Lewis Park Sewer and - Watermain D. Sidewalk Improvement No. 5 -26 E. Trees for Parks and Boulevards F. Rejuvination of Webber Park Shelter, Arena, Swimming Pool Bath House G. Gas Furnace - Moore House H. Gas Conversion Unit - Art Center I. Sod for Weber Park VI. RECOMMENDATIONS AND REPORTS A. Traffic Safety Committee Minutes of September 12, 1979 B. Johnston Condemnation Award C. Acquisition of Open Space D. Amendment of Easement - Lot 33, Auditor's Subdivision 172 E. Special Concerns of Mayor and Council F. Post Agenda and Manager's Miscellaneous Items VII. ORDINANCES First Reading requires offering of Ordinance only. 4/5 favorable rollcall vote to pass if Second Reading should be waived. 3/5 favorable roll - call vote to pass Second Reading. A. First Reading- i. Ordinance No. 1405 - Recreational Vehicle Ordinance 2. Ordinance No. 1031 -A1 - Amendment to Nuisance Ordinance 3. Ordinance No. 110 - Low and Moderate Income Housing Moratorium VIII. RESOLUTIONS A. 1979 Community Health Services Contract Amendment IX. FINANCE A. Claims Paid. Motion of seconded by for payment of the following claims as per Pre -List: General Fund, $73,186.15; Park Fund, $5,733.81; Art Center, $267.37; Park Construction, $53,013.51; Swim- ming Pool, $2,011.87: Golf Course, $11,074.56; Arena, $3,460.45; Gun Range, 112.90; Water Fund, $2,702.59; Sewer-Fund, $2,285.07; Liquor Fund, $47,792.83; Construction, $267,595.37; Total, $469,236.48 RECOGNITION OF SHIRLEY PETERSEN WHEREAS, Sh *rley -Peter the Edina Park and Recreation Department has begun to operate a greenhouse at Arneson Acres, Edina's arboretum, and, WHEREAS, Shirley Petersen, a resident of the city of Edina, has organized, during tb *s 1979, the first year of the,greenhouse operation, ergan� zed the Edina Garden Geeee }ls Clubs,for the purpose of transplanting plants and other flora to establish the greenhouse program, and, WHEREAS, Shirley Petersen has generally organized, in conjunction with the Edina Park and Recreation Department, the operation of the Edna greenhouse at Arneson Acres, and, WHEREAS, Shirley Petersen has performed these this valuable service for the City of Edina as a volunteer'. NOW THEREFORE`THE'EDINA CITY COUNCIL HEREBY RECOGNIZES Shirley Petersen for her creative and productive leadership toward providing the residents of the City of Edina a living, responsive, and on -going greenhouse program. I ' 13 CITY OF EDINA ✓%a.- HMT]NEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA oC PROPOSED SPECIAL ASSESSMENT ON Watermain Improvement No. 334 Notice is hereby given that the Edina City Council will meet at the City Hall at 4801 West 50th Street, Edina, Minnesota on September 17, 1979, at 7:00 P.M. to hear, consider and pass upon all objections, both oral and written, to a proposed special assessment for the following improve- ment: CONSTRUCTION OF WATERMAIN IMPROVEMENT NO. 334 Shaughnessy Road from West 78th Street north to the south line of Lots 11 and 12, Block 3, Dewey Hill 2nd Addition. The area proposed to be assessed for said impro vement is as follows: South 100 ft of the north 833 ft of the east 416 ft of the west 488 ft of SE4 of SW4, Section 8, Township 116, Range 21; Outlot B, Dewey Hill 2nd Addition; Lots 1 thru 4, Shaughnessy 1st Addition. ESTDV= ASSESSMENT - $ 927.80 PER CONNECTION PROPOSED ASSESSMENT - $1,267.37 PER CONNECTION The proposed assessment roll is.now,on file in the office of the City Clerk and is open to public inspection. The proposed assessment will be payable in ten (10) equal installments over a period of ten years. First payment of each assessment will be payable together with real estate taxes payable in 1980, with interest on the entire assessment at the rate of 5% per annum from the date of the resolution adopting the assessment to December 31, 1980. To each subsequent installment will be added interest at the same rate for one year on all unpaid install- ments. The owner of any property assessed may pay the whole of the assessment, without interest, to the City Treasurer on'or before November 15, 1979. NO FURTHER STAME NT WILL BE ISSUED Any owner may appeal the assessment to the district court pursuant to Minnesota Statutes 429.081, by serving notice of the appeal upon the Mayor or Clerk of the City of Edina within twenty (20) days after the adoption of the City Council, and by filing such notice with the district court within ten (10) days after service upon the Mayor or Clerk. Pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, the City of.Edina has adopted standards and guidelines for deferring special - assessments against homestead prop- erty owned by persons 65 years of age or older for whom payment would be a hardship. To obtain deferment, application must be filed with the City Assessor's office by the close of business on the last business day before the City Council meeting set out in the first paragraph of this notice. For further information, and application forms, please call or visit the City Assessor's office. BY ORDER OF THE CITY COUNCIL August 17, 1979 Florence B. Hallberg City Clerk CITY OF EDINA HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA PROPOSED SPECIAL ASSESSMENT ON Grading and Graveling Improvement No. C -128 Notice is hereby given that the Edina City Council will meet at the City Hall at 4801 West 50th Street, Edina, Minnesota on September 17, 1979, at 7:00 P.M. to hear, consider and pass upon all objections, both oral and written, to a proposed special assessment for the following improve- ment: CONSTRUCTION OF GRADING AND GRAVELING IMPROVEMENT NO. C -128 Shaughnessy Road from West 78th Street to cul- de-sac The area proposed to be assessed for said improvement is as follows: South 100 ft of the north.833 ft of the east 416 ft of the west 488 ft of SE4 of SW4, Section 8, Township 116, Range 21; Outlot B, Dewey Hill 2nd Addition; Lots 1 thru 4, Shaughnessy lst Addition. ESTIMATED ASSESSMENT - $10.94 PER ASSESSABLE FOOT PROPOSED ASSESSMENT - $16.33 PER ASSESSABLE FOOT The proposed assessment roll is now on file in the office of the City Clerk and is open to public inspection. The proposed assessment will be payable in ten (10) equal installments over a period of ten years. First payment of each assessment will be payable together with real estate taxes payable in 1980, with interest on the resolution adopting the assessment to December 31, 1980. To each subsequent installment will be added interest at the same rate for one year on all unpaid install- ments. The owner of any property assessed may pay the whole of the assessment, without interest, to the City Treeasurer on or before November 15, 1979. NO FURTHER STATEMENT WILL BE ISSUED Any owner may appeal the assessment to the district court pursuant to Minnesota Statutes 429.081, by serving notice of the appeal upon the Mayor or Clerk of the City of Edina within twenty (20) days after the adoption of the City Council, and by filing such notice with the district court within ten (10) days after service upon the Mayor or Clerk. Pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, the City of Edina has adopted standards and guidelines for deferring special assessments against homestead prop- erty owned by persons 65 years of age or older for whom payment would be a hardship. To obtain deferment, application must be filed with the City Assessor's office by the close of business on the last business day before the City Council meeting set out in the first paragraph of this notice. For further information, and application forms, please call or visit the City Assessor's office. BY ORDER OF THE CITY COUNCIL August 17, 1979 Florence B. Hallberg City Clerk CITY OF EDINA I a.AJC-- iM\TEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA PROPOSED SPECIAL ASSESSMENT ON Sanitary Sewer Improvement No. 350 Notice is hereby given that the Edina City Council will meet at the City Hall at 4801 West 50th Street, Edina, Minnesota on September 17, 1979, at 7:00 P.M. to hear, consider and pass upon all objections, both oral and written, to a proposed special assessment for the following improve - ment: CONSTRUCTION OF SANITARY SD[ER IMPROVEMENT NO. 350 Shaughnessy Road from West 78th Street north to the south line of Lots. 11 and 12, Block 3, Dewey Hill 2nd Addition The area proposed to be assessed for said improvement is as follows: South 100 ft of the north 833 ft of the east 416 ft of the west 488 ft of SE;,-, of 981-4, Section 8, Township 116, Range 21; Outlot B, Dewey Hill 2nd Addition; Lots 1 thru 4, Shaughnessy lst Addition. ESTIMATED ASSESSMENT - $1,046.04 PER CONNECTION PROPOSED ASSESSMENT w $1,125.67 PER CONNECTION The proposed assessment roll is not on file in the office of the City Clerk and is open to public inspection. The proposed assessment will be payable in ten (10) equal installments over a period of ten years, First payment of each assessment will be payable together with real estate taxes payable in 1980, with interest on the entire assessment at the rate of 5% per annum from the date of the resolution adopting the assessment to December 31, 1980. To each subsequent installment will be added interest at the same rate for one year on all unpaid install- ments. The owner of any property assessed may pay the whole of the assessment, without interest, to the City Treasurer on or before November 15, 1979. NO FURTHER STATEMENT WILL BE ISSUED Any owner may appeal the assessment to the district court pursuant to Minnesota Statutes 429.081, by serving notice of the appeal upon the Mayor or Clerk of the City of Edina within twenty (20) days after the adoption of the City Council, and by filing such notice with the district court within ten (10) days after service upon the Mayor or Clerk. Pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, the City of Edina has adopted standards and guidelines for deferring special assessments against homestead prop- erty owned by persons 65 years of age or older for whom payment would be a hardship. To obtain deferment, application must be filed with the City Assessor's office by the close of business on the last business day before the City Council meeting set out in the first paragraph of this notice. For further information, and application forms, please call or visit the City Assessor's office. BY ORDER OF THE CITY COUNCIL August 17, 1979 Florence B. Hallberg City Clerk CITY OF EDINA HR SPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA PROPOSED SPECIAL ASSESSMENT ON Storm Sewer Improvement No. 160 Notice is hereby given that the Edina City Council will meet at the City Hall at 4801 West 50th Street, Edina, Minnesota on September 17, 1979, at 7:00 P.M. to hear, consider and pass upon all objections, both oral and written, to a proposed special assessment for the following improve- ment: CONSTRUCTION OF STORM SEWER IMPROVEMENT NO. 160 St. Aims Circle from Gleason.Road to cul-de -sac The area proposed to be assessed for said improvement is as follows: Lots 1 thru 9, Block 1, St. Alban's Addition. ESTIMATED ASSESSMENT -. $1,478.34 PER ASSESSABLE LOT PROPOSED ASSESSMENT $1,.412..54 PER ASSESSABLE LOT The proposed assessment roll is now on file in the office of the City Clerk and-is open to public inspection. The proposed assessment will be payable in three (3) equal installments over a period of three years. First payment of each assessment will be payable together with real estate taxes payable in 1980, with interest on the entire assessment at the rate of 5% per annum from the date of the resolution adopting the . assessment to December 31, 1980. To each subsequent installment will be added interest at the same rate for one year on all unpaid install- ments. The owner of any property assessed may pay the whole of the assessment, without interest, to the City Treasurer on or before November 15, 1979. NO FURTHER STAZIMEff WILL BE ISSUED Any owner nay .appeal the assessment to the district court pursuant to Minnesota Statutes 429.081, by serving notice of the appeal upon the Mayor or Clerk of the City of Edina within twenty (20) days after the adoption of the City Council, and by filing such notice with the district court within ten (10) days after service upon the Mayor or Clerk. Pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, the City of Edina has adopted standards and guidelines for deferring special assessments against homestead prop- erty owned by persons 65 years of age or older for whom payment would be a hardship. To obtain deferment, application must be filed with the City Assessor's office by the close of business on.the last business day before the City Council meeting set out in.the first paragraph of this notice, For further information, and application forms, please call or visit the City Assessor's office. BY ORDER OF THE CITY COUNCIL August 17, 1979 Florence B. Hallberg City Clerk CITY OF EDINA HE NNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA PROPOSED SPECIAL ASSESSMENT ON Sanitary Sewer Improvement No. 349 Notice is hereby given that the Edina City Council will meet at the City Hall at 4801 West 50th Street, Edina, Minnesota on.September 17, 1979, at 7:00 P.M. to hear, consider and pass upon all objections, both oral and written, to a proposed special assessment for the following improve - nent: CONSTRUCTION OF SANITARY SEWER EVIPROVEV= NO. 349 St. Albans Circle from Gleason Road to cul- de-sac The area proposed to be assessed for said improvement is as follows: Lots 1 thru 9, Block 1, St. Alban's Addition ESTIMATED ASSESSMENT - $2,593.92 PER CONNECTION PROPOSED ASSESSMENT - $2,390.80 PER CONNECTION The proposed assessment roll is now on file in the office of the City Clerk and is open to public inspection. The proposed assessment will be payable in three (3) equal installments over a period of three years. First payment of each assessment will be payable together with real estate taxes payable in 1980, with interest on the entire assessment at the rate of 5% per annum from the date of the resolution adopting the assessment to December 31, 1980. To each subsequent installment will be added interest at the same rate for one year on all unpaid install - ments. The owner of any property assessed may pay the whole of the assessment, without interest, to the City Treasurer on or before November 15, 1979. NO FURTHER STATE= WILL BE ISSUED Any owner may appeal the assessment to the district court pursuant to Minnesota Statutes 429.081, by serving notice of the appeal upon the Mayor or Clerk of the City of Edina within twenty (20) days after the adoption of the City Council, and by filing such notice with the district court within ten (10) days after service upon the Mayor or Clerk. Pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, the City of Edina has adopted standards and guidelines for deferring special assessments against homestead prop- erty owned by persons 65 years of age or older for whom payment would be a hardship. To obtain deferment, application must be filed with the City Assessor's office by the close of business on the last business day before the City Council meeting set out in the first paragraph of this notice. For further information, and application forms, please call or visit the City Assessor's office. BY ORDER OF THE CITY COUNCIL August 17, 1979 Florence B. Hallberg City Clerk CITY OF EDINA MZMPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA PROPOSED SPECIAL ASSESSMENT ON Watermain Improvement No. 333 Notice is hereby given that the Edina City Council will meet at the City Hall at 4801 West 50th Street, Edina, Minnesota on September 17, 1979, at 7:00 P.M. to hear, consider and pass upon all objections, both oral and written, to a proposed special assessment for the following improve- ment: CONSTRUCTION OF WATE MAIN ]MPROVE UU NO. 333 St. Albans Circle fram Gleason Road to cul- de-sac The area proposed to be assessed for said improvement is as follows: Lots 1 thru 9, Block 1, St. Alban's Addition. ESTIMATED ASSESSMENT - $1,166.04 PER CONNECTION PROPOSED ASSESSMENT - $1,231.92 PER CONNECTION The proposed assessment roll is now on file in the office of the City Clerk and is open to public inspection. The proposed assessment will be payable in three (3) equal installments over a period of three years. First payment of each assessment will be payable together with real estate taxes payable in 1980, with interest on the entire assessment at the rate of 5% per annum from the date of the resolution adopting the assessment to December 31, 1980. To each subsequent installment will be added interest at the same rate for one year on all unpaid install- ments... The owner of any property assessed may pay the whole of the assessment, without interest, to the City Treasurer on or before November 15, 1979. NO FURTHER STATEMENT WILL BE ISSUED Any owner may appeal the assessment to the district court pursuant to Minnesota Statutes 429.081, by serving notice of the appeal upon the Mayor or Clerk of the City of Edina within twenty (20) days after the adoption of the City Council, and by filing such notice with the district court within ten (10) days after - service upon -the Mayor or Clerk. Pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, the City of Edina has adopted standards and guidelines for deferring special assessments against homestead prop- erty owned by persons 65 years of age or older for whom payment %vuld be a hardship. To obtain deferment, application must be filed with the City Assessor's office by the close of business on the last business day before the City Council meeting set out in the first paragraph of this notice. For further information, and application forms, please call or visit the City Assessor's office. BY ORDER OF THE CITY COUNCIL August 17, 1979 Florence B. Hallberg City Clerk CITY OF EDINA H2NEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA PROPOSED SPECIAL ASSESSMENT ON Watermain Improvement No. 329 NOTICE IS HEREBY given that the Edina City Council will meet at the City Hall at 4801 West 50th Street, Edina, Minnesota on September 17, 1979, at 7:00 P.M. to hear, consider and pass upon all objections, both oral and written, to a proposed special assessment for the following improve- ment: CONSTRUCTION OF WATERMAIN IMPROVEMENT NO. 329 Blake Ridge Estates (Sherman Circle) The area proposed to be assessed for said improvement is as follows: Lots 1 thru 13, Block 1, Lots 1 thru 5, B lock 2, Blake Ridge Estates. ESTIMATED ASSESSMENT - $1,476.75 PER CONNECTION PROPOSED ASSESSMENT - $1,081.27 PER CONNE]CTION The proposed assessment roll is now on file in the office of the City Clerk and is open to public inspection. The proposed assessment will be payable in three (3) equal installments over a period of three years. First payment of each assessment will be payable together with real estate taxes payable in 1980, with interest on the entire assessment at the rate of 5% per annum from the date of the resolution adopting the assessment to December 31, 1980. To each subsequent installment will be added interest at the same rate for one year on all unpaid install- ments. The owner of any property assessed may pay the whole of the assessment, without interest, to the City Treasurer on or before November 15, 1979. NO FURTHER STATEMENT WILL BE ISSUED Any owner may appeal the assessment to the district court pursuant to Minnesota Statutes 429.081, by serving notice of the appeal upon the Mayor or Clerk of the City of Edina within twenty (20) days after the adoption of the City Council, and by filing such notice with the district court within ten (10) days after service upon the Mayor or Clerk. Pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, the City of Edina has adopted standards and guidelines for deferring special assessments against homestead prop- erty owned by persons 65 years of age or older for whom payment would.be a hardship. To obtain deferment, application must be filed with the City Assessor's office by the close of business on the last business day before the City Council meeting set out in the first paragraph of this notice. For further information, and application forms, please call or visit the City Assessor's office. BY ORDER OF THE CITY COUNCIL August 17, 1979 Florence B. Hallberg City Clerk CITY OF EDINA HENN[EPIN COUN'T'Y, MINNESOTA PROPOSED SPECIAL ASSESa= ON Sanitary Sewer Improvement No. 344 Notice is hereby given that the Edina City Council will meet at the City Hall at 4801 West 50th Street, Edina, Minnesota on September 17, 1979, at 7:00 P.M. to hear, consider and pass upon all objections, both oral and written, to a proposed special assessment for the following improve - ment: CONSTRUCTION O�- SANITARY SEWER TMPROVEMEDFT NO. 344 Blake Ridge Estates (Sherman Circle) The area proposed to be assessed for said improvement is as follows: Lots 1 thru 13, Block 1; Lots 1 thru 5, Block 2, Blake Ridge Estates. ESTIMATED ASSESSMENT - $1,631.46 PER CONNECTION PROPOSED ASSESSMENT - $1,203.16 PER CONNECTION The proposed assessment roll is now on file in the office of the City Clerk and is open to public inspection. The proposed assessment will be payable in three (3) equal installments over a period of three years. First payment of each assessment will be payable together with real estate taxes payable in 1980, with interest on the entire assessment at the rate of 5% per annum from the date of the resolution adopting the assessment to December 31, 1980. To each subsequent installment will be added interest at the same rate for one year on all unpaid install- ments. The owner of any property assessed may pay the whole of the assessment, without interest, to the City Treasurer on or before November 15, 1979. NO FURTHER STATEMENT WILL BE ISSUED Any owner may appeal the assessment to the district court pursuant to Minnesota Statutes 429.081, by serving notice of the appeal upon the Mayor or Clerk of the City of Edina with twenty (20) days after the adoption of the City Council,.and by filing such notice with the district court within ten (10) days after service upon the Mayro or Clerk. Pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, the City of Edina has adopted standards and guidelines for deferring special assessments against homestead prop- erty owned by persons 65 years of age or older for whom payment would be a hardship. To obtain deferment, application must be filed with the City Assessor's office by the close of business on the last business day before the City Council meeting set out in the first paragraph of this notice. For further information, and application forms, please call or visit the City Assessor's office. BY ORDER OF THE CITY COUNCIL August 17, 1979 Florence B. Hallberg City Clerk CITY OF EDINA fENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA PROPOSED SPECIAL ASSESSMENT ON Storm Sewer Improvement No. 155 Notice is hereby given that the Edina City Council will meet at the City Hall at 4801 West 50th Street, Edina, Minnesota on September 17, 1979, at 7:00 P.M. to hear, consider and pass upon all objections, both oral and written, to a proposed special assessment for the following improve- ment: CONSTRUCTION OS STORM SEWER IMPROVEMENT NO. 155 Blake Ridge Estates (Sherman Circle) The area proposed to be assessed for said improvement is as follows: Lots 1 thru 13, Block 1; Lots 1 thru 5, Block 2, Blake Ridge Estates. ESTIMATED ASSESSMENT - $603.16 PER ASSESSABLE LOT PROPOSED ASSESSMENT - $519.43 PER ASSESSABLE LOT The proposed assessment roll is now on file in the office of the City Clerk and is open to public inspection. The proposed assessment will be payable in three (3) equal installments over a period of three years. First payment of each assessment will be payable together with real estate taxes payable in 1980, with interest on the entire assessment at the rate of 5% per annum from the date of the resolution adopting the assessment to December 31, 1980. To each subsequent installment will be added interest at the same rate for one year on all unpaid install- ments. The owner of any property assessed may pay the whole of the assessment, without interest, to the City Treasurer on or before November 15, 1979. NO F2JRTHER STATEMENT WILL BE ISSUED Any owner may appeal the assessment to-the district court pursuant to Minnesota Statutes 429.081, by serving notice of the appeal upon the Mayor or Clerk of the City of Edina within twenty (20) days after the adoption of the City Council, and by filing such notice with the district court within ten (10) days after service upon the Mayor or Clerk. Pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, the City of Edina has adopted standards and guidelines for deferring special assessments against homestead prop - erty wed by persons 65 years of age or older for whom payment would be a hardship. To obtain deferment , application must be filed with the City Assessor's office by the close of business on the last business day before the City Council meeting set out in the first paragraph of this notice. For further information, and application forms, please call or visit the City Assessor's office. BY ORDER OF THE CITY COUNCIL August 17, 1979 Florence B. Hallberg City Clerk CITY OF EDINA HE 012IN COUN'T'Y, MINNESOTA PROPOSED SPECIAL ASSESSMENT ON Watermain Improvemait No. 335 Notice is hereby given that the Edina City Council will meet at the City Hall at 4801 West 50th Street, Edina, Minnesota on September 17,'1979, at 7:00 P.M. to hear, consider and pass upon all objections, both oral and written, to a proposed special assessment for.the following improve - ment: CONSTRUCTION OF WATERMAIN IMPROVE= NO. 335 West 55th Street from France Avenue to Ewing Circle; Ealing Circle from West 55th Street to,cul -de -sac. The area proposed to be assessed for said improvement is as follows: Lots 1 thru 5, Block 1, Woodbury Park Second Addition. ESTIMATED ASSESSMENT - $4,508.87 PER CONNECTION PROPOSED ASSESSMENT - $2,645.62 PER CONNECTION The proposed assessment roll is now on file in the office of the City Clerk and is open to public inspection. The proposed assessment will be payable in three (3) equal installments over a period of three years. First payment of each assessment will be payable together with real estate taxes payable in 1980, with interest on the entire assessment at the rate of 5% per annum from.the date of the resolution adopting the assessment to December 3l, 1980. To each subsequent installment will be added interest at the same rate for one year on all unpaid install- ments. The owner of any property assessed may pay the whole of the assessment, without interest, to the City Treasurer on or before November 15, 1979. NO FURTHER STATEMENT WILL BE ISSUED Any owner may appeal the assessment to the district court pursuant to Minnesota Statutes 429.081, by serving notice of the appeal upon the Mayor or Clerk of the City of Edina with twenty (20) days after the adoption of the City Council, and by filing such notice_ with_ the district court within ten (10) days after service upon the Mayor or Clerk. Pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, the City of Edina has adopted standards and guidelines for deferring special assessments against homestead prop- erty owned by persons 65 years of age or older for whom payment would be a hardship. To obtain deferment, application must be filed with the City Assessor's office by the close of business on the last business day before the City Council meeting set out in the first paragraph of this notice. For further information, and application forms, please call or visit the. City Assessor's office. BY ORDER OF THE CITY COUNCIL August 17, 1979 Florence B. Hallberg City Clerk CITY OF EDINA HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA PROPOSED SPECIAL ASSESSMENT ON Grading and Graveling Improvement No. C -129 Notice is hereby given that the Edina City Council will meet at the City Hall at 4801 West 50th Street, Edina, Minnesota on September 17, 1979, at 7:00 P.M. to hear, consider and pass upon all objections, both oral and written, to a proposed special assessment for the following improve- ment: OONSTRUCrION OF GRADING AND GRAVELING IMPROVEN1ENT NO. C -129 Ewing Circle from West 55th Street to cul- de-sac The area proposed to be assessed for said improvement is as follows: Lots l thru 5, Block 1, Woodbury Park Second Addition. ESTIMATED ASSESSMENT - $15.76 PER ASSESSABLE FOOT PROPOSED ASSESSMENT - $10.55 PER ASSESSABLE FOOT The proposed assessment roll is now on file in the office of the City Clerk and is open to public inspection. The proposed assessment will be payable in three (3) equal installments over a period of three years. First payment of each assessment will be payable together with real estate taxes payable in 1980, with interest on the entire assessment at the rate of 5% per annum.from the date of the resolution adopting the assessment to December 31, 1980. To each subsequent installment will be added interest at the same rate for one year on all unpaid install- ments. The owner of any property assessed may pay the whole of the assessment, without interest, to the City Treasurer on or before November 15, 1979. NO FURTHER STATEMENT WILL BE ISSUED Any owner may appeal the assessment to the district court pursuant to Minnesota Statutes 429.081, by serving notice of the appeal upon the Mayor, or Clerk of the City of Edina within twenty (20) days after the adoption of the City Council, and by filing such notice with the district court within ten (10) days after service upon the Mayor or Clerk. Pursuant to- Minnesota Statutes, the City of Edina has adopted standards and guidelines for deferring special assessments against homestead prop- erty owned by persons 65 years of age or older for whom payment would be a hardship. To obtain deferment, application must be filed with the City Assessor's office by the close of business on the last business day before the City Council meeting set out in the first paragraph of this notice. For further information, and application forms, please call or visit the City Assessor's office. BY ORDER OF THE CITY COUNCIL August 17, 1979 Florence B. Hallberg City Clerk CITY OF EDINA. HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA PROPOSED SPECIAL ASSESSMENT ON Sanitary Sewer Improvement No. 351 Notice is hereby given that the Edina City Council will meet at the City, Hall at 4801 West 50th Street, Edina, Minnesota on September 17, 1979, at 7:00 P.M. to hear, consider and pass upon all objections, both oral and written, to a proposed special assessment for the following improve- ment: CONSTRUCTION OF SANITARY SEWER IMPROVE[!]T NO. 351 Ewing Circle from West 55th Street to cul- de-sac The area proposed to be assessed for said improvement is as follows: Lots l thru 5, Block 1, Woodbury Park Second Addition. ESTIMATED ASSESSMENT - .$1,928.61 PER CONNECTION PROPOSED ASSESSMENT - $1,879.86 PER CONNECTION The proposed assessment roll is now on file in the office'of the City Clerk and is open to public inspection. The proposed assessment will be payable in three (3) equal installments over a period of three years. First payment of each assessment will be payable together with real estate taxes payable in 1980, with interest on the entire assessment at the rate of 5% per annum from the date of the resolution adopting the assessment to December 31, 1980. To each subsequent installment will be added interest at the same rate for one year on all unpaid install- ments. The owner of any property assessed may pay the whole of the assessment, without interest, to the City Treasurer on or before November 15, 1979. NO FURTHER STATEMENT WTT,T, BE ISSUED Any owner may appeal the assessment to the district court pursuant to Minnesota Statutes 429.081, by serving notice of the appeal upon the Mayor or Clerk of the City of Edina within twenty (20) days after the adoption of the City Council, and by filing such notice with the district court within ten (10) days after service upon the Mayor or Clerk. Pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, the City of Edina has adopted standards and guidelines for deferring special assessments against homestead prop- erty owned by persons 65 years of age or older for whom payment would be a hardship. To obtain deferment, application must be filed with the City Assessor's office by the close of business on the last business day before the City Council meeting set out in the first paragraph of this notice. For further information, and application forms, please call or visit the City Assessor's office. BY ORDER OF THE CITY COUNCIL August 17, 1979` Florence B. Hallberg City Clerk CITY OF EDINA HENNEPIN COUN'T'Y, MINNESOTA PROPOSED SPECIAL ASSESSMENT ON Watermain Improvement No. 319B Notice is hereby given that the Edina City Council will meet at the City Hall at 4801 West 50th Street, Edina, Minnesota on September 17, 1979, at 7:00 P.M. to hear, consider and pass upon all objections, both oral and written, to a proposed special assessment for the following improve- ment: H oily wood (Ld -ro The area proposed to be assessed for said improvement is as follows: Tats 1 thru 6, Block 1; Lots 1 thru 3, Block 2; Lots 1 and 2, Block 3; Lots 1 thru 9, Block 4; Lots 1 thru 4 plus north 10 feet of Tats 5 and 6, Block 5, Beverly Hills Addition; Lot 1, Block 1, Beverly Hills Second Addition; Lot 1, that part lying south of north 9 feet thereof; Lots 2 thru 9, Limback Addition. ESTIMATED ASSESSMENT - $1,915.89 PER CONNECTION PROPOSED ASSESSMENT - $1,981.38 PER CONNECTION The proposed assessment roll is now on file in the office of the City Clerk and is open to public inspection. The proposed assessment will be payable in ten (10) equal installments over a period of ten years. First payment of each assessment will be payable together with real estate taxes payable in 1.980, with interest on the entire assessment at the rate of 5% per annum from the date of the resolution adopting the assessment to December 31, 1980. To each subsequent installment will be added interest at the same rate for one year on all unpaid install- ments. The owner of any property assessed may pay the whole of the assessment, without interest, to the City Treasurer on or before November 15, 1979. NO FUR'T'HER STATFJV1ENT WILL BE ISSUED Any owner may appeal the assessment to the district court pursuant to Minnesota Statutes 429.081, by serving notice of the appeal upon the Mayor or Clerk of the City of Edina within twenty (20) days after the adoption of the City Council, and by filing such notice with the district court within ten (10) days after service upon the Mayor or Clerk. Pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, the City of Edina has adopted standards and guidelines for deferring special assessments against homestead prop- erty owned by persons 65 years of age or older for whom payment would be a hardship. To obtain deferment, application must be filed with the City Assessor's office by the close of business on the last business day before the City Council meeting set out in the first paragraph of this notice. For further information, -and application forms, please call or visit the City Assessor's office. BY ORDER OF THE CITY COUNCIL August 17, 1979 Florence B. Hallberg City Clerk CITY OF EDINA HMEPIN COLTTI'Y, MINNESOTA PROPOSED SPECIAL ASSESSMEI7r ON Storm Sewer Improvement No. 138 Notice is hereby given that the Edina City Council will meet at the City Hall at 4801 West 50th Street, Edina, Minnesota on September 17, 1979, at 7:00 P.M. to hear, consider and pass upon all objections, both oral and written, to a proposed special assessment for the following improve- ment: CONSTRUCTION OF STORM SEWER IMPROVE= NO. 138 County Road 18 from Nine Mile Creek to 3rd Street South in Hopkins The area proposed to be assessed for said improvement is as follows: Lots 1 thru 5, Block 1 and Lots 1 thru 5, Block 2, Mendelssohn Addition; Lots 2 thru 13 incl. st. vac., Block 1; Lots 14 thru 25, Block 1; com. at a point 20 feet north from NE corner of Lot 25, Block 1, thence east to east line of NW-4 of Section 30, Township 117, Range 21, thence north to NE corner thereof, thence W to a point north of beginning, thence south to beginning; Lots 2 thru 25, Block 2; Lots 2 thru 25, incl. 2 vac. alley, Block 3; Lots 2 thru 25 incl. z vac. alley, Block 4; Lots 2 thru 25, Block 5; Lots 2 thru 25, Block 6; Lots 2 thru 25, Block 7; Lots 2 thru 25, Block 8; Lots 2 thru 26, Block 9; Lots 1 thru 26 incl. i vac. alley, Block 10; Trots 1 thru 26, Block 11; Lots 1 thru 26 incl. , vac. alley, Block 12; Lots l.thru 26 incl. z vac alley, Block 13; Lots l thru 26 Incl. , vac. alley, Block 14; Lots 1, 25 and 26 incl. z vac. alley, Block 15; Lot 1 including north 37 feet of Lot 2, Block 16,.West Minneapolis Heights Addition; Lot 1, Steiner & Koppelman's lst Addition; Lots 1 thru 4, Block 1; Lots 1 and 2, Block 2; Lots 1 and 2, Block 3; Outlots 1, 2, 3, Trolley Line Addition; Property I.D. No.s 3a- 117- 21 -23- 0001,30 - 117 -21 -23 -0002, 30 -117- 21 -23 -0003, 30- 117 -21 -24 -0002, 30- 117 -21 -31 -0003, 30- 117 -21 -32 -0001, 30 -117- 21 -32 -0002, 30- 117 -21 -32 -0003 all in Section 30, Township 117, Range 21; Tracts A and B ex road, Registered Land Survey #246; Lot 1, Block 11 Interlachen Hills Addition. ESTIMATED ASSESSMENT - (Lateral) $.03992 PER ASSESSABLE SQ. FT. (Trunk) .010404 PER ASSESSABLE SQ. FT. PROPOSED ASSESSMENT - (Lateral) $.03992 PER ASSESSABLE SQ. FT. 0" (Trunk) .012192 PER ASSESSABLE SQ. FT. The proposed assessment roll is now on file in the office of the City Clerk and is open to public inspection. The proposed assessment will be payable in ten (10) equal installments over a period of ten years. First payment of each assessment will be payable together with real estate taxes payable in 1980, with interest on the entire assessment at the rate of 5% per annum from the date of the resolution adopting the assessment to December 31, 1980. To each subsequent installment will be added interest at the same rate for one year on all unpaid install- ments. The owner of any property assessed may pay the whole of the assessment, without interest, to the City Treasurer on or before November 15, 1979. NO FURTHER STATEMENT WILL BE ISSUED Proposed Special Assessment on Storm Sewer No. 138 Page -2- Any owner may appeal the assessment to the district court pursuant to Minnesota Statutes 429.081, by serving notice of the appeal upon the Mayor or Clerk of the City of Edina within twenty (20) days after the adoption of the City Council, and by filing such notice with the district court within ten (10) days after service upon the Mayor or Clerk. Pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, the City of Edina has adopted standards and guidelines for deferring special assessments against homestead prop- erty owned by persons 65 years of age or older for whom payment would be a hardship. To obtain deferment, application must be filed with the City Assessor's office by the close of business on the last business day before the City Council meeting set out in the first paragraph of this notice. For further information, and application forms, please call or visit the City Assessor's office. BY ORDER OF THE CITY COUNCIL August 17, 1979 Florence B. Hallberg City Clerk LOCATION MAP""' subdivision A NORTH LOWE FIRST ADDITION REQUEST NUMBER: 5 -79 -12 LOCATION- W of Cty Rd 18, N of Valley View Dr. & E of Washington Ave. S. REQUEST: 600, L- 0 2" �[!"( -'f!. f' of rfl}118 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT STAFF REPORT September 5, 1979 S -79 -12 Lowe First Addition. Generally located west of County Road 18, north of Valley View Road, and east of Washington Avenue South. REFER TO: attached graphic The subject property was originally bisected by Valley View Road extending westerly from County Road 18. In conjunction with the construction of a new interchange at County Road 18, Valley View Road was re- located to the southerly boundary of the subject property. The original right -of -way for this street was vacated, but utility easements were retained in this area. The proposed subdivision is requested by the owner to clarify and simplify the complex legal description, boundaries, and easements associated with the subject property. Recommendation: Staff recommends approval of the subdivision with the condition that all easements retained by the City over the vacated Valley View Road right -of- way must be identified on the plat. In that the proposed subdivision is requested by the.owner to simplify a complicated property and no additional development potential is created by the plat, staff recommends that subdivision dedication should not be required. GLH:jkt 8/29/79 L 0 �11 E, lu• BEARINGS SHOWN ARE ASSUMED DENOTES IRON MONUMENT. SCALE: 0 50 100 150 200 250 N. c —elf at Nw Ki 7 0. -E. N.SV 0 o.l D D 0 N EGAN, FIELD a NOWAK, INC. SURVEYORS -4 III �r lit 0 z vl I „3 -4,0 - �j In av z to f 3 tl” if"'iiiel e r d 33 h� Ic", I L-�j fit ".Ile 33 '7 L d,arrn SOP$ H•y or, measured anyle !e } - , • , `. '.�.. ., '�:.n Jp,; and •C:!' /. �,i6'�i ? °* and parallel wdh Line -A" -9c SBA 'A 'Line Irl -4 III �r BE L MAR INDUSTRIAL ACRES /.98 Acres � Q PA ROSE D x, 0 WE F1 R S T D D i ON PAZ 0 7 4VI x .R4A,0 0.54 Acres: COUNTY R 0A D N0, 39 911* 0 - o v 5 Q Q 3 ~ Q 02 --j,—AL W r. ROA 0 U0�S 4 , Edina Community Development and Planning Commission September 5, 1979 page 4 5 -79 -12 Lowe First Addition. Generally located west of County Road 18, north. of Valley View Road, and east of Washington Avenue South. Gordon Hughes explained to the Commission that the subject property was originally bisected by Valley View Road extending westerly from County Road 18, but in conjunction with the construction of a new interchange at County Road 18, was relocated to the southerly_ boundary of the subject property. Mr. Hughes noted that the original right- of- way.for this street was-vacated, but utility easements were retained in this area. Gordon Hughes clarified that the proposed subdivision was requested by the owner to clarify and simplify the complex legal description, boundaries, and easements associated with the subject property. Staff recommended approval of the subdivision with the condition that all ease- ments retained by the City over the vacated Valley View Road right -of -way must be identified on the plat. In that the proposed subdivision was requested by the owner to simplify a complicated property and no additional development potential is created by the plat, staff recommended that subdivision dedication not be required. Gordon Hughes introduced Clarence Lowe.. who. was present to answer the Commission's questions about his subdivision request. Mr. Lowe reaffirmed that his request was to clear up the complex legal description of the property. Helen McClelland moved that the Commission approve the requested subdivision with the condition that all easements retained by the City.over the vacated Valley View Road right -of -way must be- identified on the plat. Del Johnson seconded the motion. All voted aye; the motion of approval carried. 5 -79 -13 One.Corporate Center - Phase III. Generally located west of Metro Boulevard and east of Ohms Lane and West 73rd Street. Gordon Hughes informed the Commission that the subject property which measures 5.5 acres in area and fronts on Metro Boulevard which is the west frontage road of Highway 100, is composed of a portion of Outlot A, Edina Interchange Center Third Addition and a portion of unplatted property. He also stated that the property is presently zoned 0 -2, Office District. Mr. Hughes pointed out that according to the.subdivision ordinance, outlots are unbuildable until they are platted into lots and blocks. Therefore, the proponents are requesting a one lot subdivision of the subject property in order to utilize the 0 -2 zoning and construct an office building on the site. He indicated this office building would be very similar in size and architecture to One Corporate Center which is located south of the subject property. ti G LOCATION zoning S U, b, al I vil, s o n DON BERG CONSTRUCTION COMPANY REQUEST NUMBER Z -79 -3 LOCATION: REQUEST: R -1 Single Family to R -5 Multiple Family District villa me I3(Afin' °e�trnent vil rye �f et4ina COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT .STAFF REPORT August 1, 1979 Z -79 -3 Don Berg Construction Company. R -1 Single Family District and to PRD-2 Planned Residential District. S -79 -6 Don Berg Construction Company. Generally located north of the Crosstown Highway and west of the Minneapolis, North- field and Southern Railway. REFER TO: past staff reports The Commission reviewed this rezoning and subdivision request at two prior meetings.. On these occasions, the Commission recommended approval of proposed development plans which delineated two, four unit residential buildings. The City Council heard the subject request at its July 16, 1979, meeting. At that meeting, the Council expressed concern about the number of units proposed for the site. At the Council's suggestion, the proponent withdrew his request and agreed to pursue an alternative plan. Staff met with the proponent following the July 16, 1979, meeting. The proponent will submit new plans for the Commission's review on August 1, 1979. GLH:jkt 7/25/79 MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE EDINA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT AND PLANNING COMMISSION HELD WEDNESDAY, AUGUST 1., 1979, AT 7:30 P.M. EDINA CITY HALL COUNCIL CHAMBERS Members Present: Chairman Bill Lewis, James Bentley, Len Fernelius, Del Johnson, Gordon Johnson, Helen McClelland, Mary McDonald, David Runyan Members Absent: Richard Seaberg Staff.Present: Gordon Hughes,. Director of Planning; Judy Teichert, Secretary I. Approval of the Minutes David Runyan moved that the minutes of the June 27, 1979, Community Development and Planning Commission meeting be approved. Gordon Johnson seconded the motion. All voted aye; the minutes were approved. II. Old Business: Z -79 -3 Don Berg Construction Company. R -1 Single Family and District to PRD -2 Planned.Residential District. S -79 -6 Don Berg Construction Company. Generally located north of the Crosstown Highway and west of the Minneapolis, Northfield, and Southern Railway. Gordon Hughes recalled that the Commission reviewed this rezoning and subdivision request at two prior meetings. On these occasions, he reminded that the Commission recommended approval of the proposed develop- ment plans which delineated two, four unit residential buildings. Mr. Hughes advised that the City Council heard the subject request at its July 16, 1979, meeting at which time the'Council expressed concern about the number of units proposed for the site. He continued that at the Council's suggestion, the proponent withdrew his request and agreed to pursue an alternative plan. Gordon Hughes noted that staff had met with the proponent following the July 16, 1979, meeting, and the proponent was present with a revised request. Mr. Don Berg presented to the Commission a four -plex plan along with a plan for four double bungalows which met all -the ordinance requirements. In comparing the plans, Mr. Berg pointed out that the four double bungalows would take up more lot coverage, leave less green area, and be two stories in height. The four- plexes, on the other hand, would be one and a. half stories with a tuck -under garage, be 126 feet in length, and rent for about 600 dollars a month. Mr. Berg also clarified that the duplexes, if built, would be for sale whereas he would retain ownership of the four - plexes. Helen McClelland explained to the Commission what had happened at the Council meeting, and asked Mr. Berg if he would consider two, tri- plexes Community Development..and.Planning Commission August 1, 1979 page 2 on the-site..- Mr.. Berg .replied he was not asking for tri- plexes, and ' if the four - plexes would.not be acceptable, he.would go -with the duplexes. Gordon Johnson moved that the Commission approve the two, four - plexes and send the Council a letter stating the reasons the Commission approved _ a- density -of four units per - acre.. James Bentley. seconded the motion. Len Fernelius.asked. if there would be no need for any approval at all..if..the.. double, bungalows :were built.. Gordon Hughes replied. that a rezoning to R-2-.would be required-but the controls on landscaping, building design, and site requirements are:not as- stringent. Shirley Stoddar.t. o.f. 6227 ,Westridge Boulevard-stated the neighbors -.were afraid that- their - °residential neighborhood. would be turned into 'a multiple unit area. - - Shirley-Berg,. 5900.. Hansen Road,..noted- .that. if they only got duplexes they could still._put.f ive.bedrooms in each.unit making.the- density greater =`than the proposed four- plexes. Ray- O'Shaughnessy of-6308 Valley View Road felt the site of 1.85--acres-was-not large.::enough..to accommodate eight units. Jim Voss of. -6300 Valley-View Road.commented that-he would like to see single family homes -on -that site. There was no:-further.discussion. -. Upon roll -the following voted: Ayes: ::_.Lewis, Bentley, D. Johnson, G. Johnson, McDonald, Runyan Nays:. Fernelius, McClelland Z -79 -5 Metro:Consultants. R- L.Single Family District to and PRD -4 Planned Residential District. S-79-T.- Regency.lst Addition. Geaerally.lcoa.ted west of - France.Avenue and south .of -51st Street. Gordon.Hughes asked the Commission. to- recall that they had reviewed and approved preliminary plans for the subject rezoning.and subdivision at the May 30, 1979, meeting... He noted.-that these -plans proposed an 18 unit market rate.condominium building.. Mr. Hughes informed them that the City Council granted preliminary rezoning` and:plat - approval at its June 18, 1979, meeting. 0 �t a CITY OF EDINA In the Matter of the Petition of DON BERG.CONSTRUCTION COMPANY for a Rezoning of Land Described as That Part of Tract B, Registered Land Survey No. 519, Lying North- easterly of the Northeasterly Line_ of Tract A and its Southerly extension; and Northwesterly of the following described line: Beginning at a point on said Southerly extension of the Northeasterly line of Tract A, distance 15.0 feet Southeasterly of the most Southeasterly corner of said Tract A as measured along said Northeasterly line and its Southerly extension; thence Northeasterly to a point on the East line of said Tract B, distance 366 feet North of the Southeast Corner of Said Tract B and there terminating; except the East 70.0 feet thereof. (Z- 79 -3), and the Application of DON BERG CONSTRUCTION COMPANY for a Subdivision of Land Entitled Westridge Estates. (S -79 -6) FINDINGS, DECISIONS, AND REASONS II./�.1. The above entitled matters were heard before the City Council; City of Edina, on May 21, 1979, July 16, 1979, August 20, 1979, and September 10, 1979. Don Berg ( "Proponent ") was present. The City Council, having heard and reviewed all of the facts and arguments presented by the Proponent, City Staff, and property owners residing in the vicinity of the land effected by the petition for rezoning and application for subdivision, and having heard and reviewed the evidence and law adduced by the Proponent, City Staff, and surrounding property owners, and being fully advised, after due consideration, hereby makes the following FINDINGS OF FACT: 1. The Proponent, on April 19, 1979, submitted a petition (Case Number Z -79 -3) to rezone a 1.86 acre tract of land located in central Edina. ( "Subject Property "). This petition (the "Proposed Rezoning ") requested a rezoning of the Subject Property from R -1 (Single Family Dwelling District) to PRD -2 f (Planned Residential District - 2). In accordance with ordinance requirements, the Proponent submitted preliminary development plans for the Subject Property. These plans delineated two, six unit apartment buildings. The Proponent also applied for a two lot subdivision of the Subject Property ( "Proposed Subdivision "). 2. The Edina Community Development and Planning Commission ( "Com- mission ") reviewed the preliminary development plans in support of the Proposed Rezoning and.Subdivision on May 2, 1979. The Commission recommended preliminary approval of the Proposed Rezoning and'Subdivision with the condition that two, four unit apartment buildings be delineated on the preliminary development plans rather than two, six unit apartment buildings. The Proponent consented to this condition. 3. On May 21, 1979, the City Council conducted a public hearing regarding the Proposed Rezoning and Subdivision. After reviewing the report and recommendation of the Commission, City Staff, and surrounding property owners, the Council referred the Proposed Rezoning and Subdivision back to the Commission to consider reducing the density to two units per acre and to address the effect of tree removal on surrounding properties. 4. On June 27, 1979, the Commission considered the Proposed Rezoning and Subdivision. After reviewing the report of City Staff, testimony from the Proponent,and testimony of surrounding property owners, the Commission recommended approval of the preliminary plans delineating two, four unit apartment buildings on the Subject Property. The Commission also recommended that the proposed buildings be relocated easterly to provide a.greater setback from the westerly boundary of the Subject Property. 5. On July 16, 1979, the City Council conducted a public hearing regarding the Proposed Rezoning and Subdivision. After reviewing the report of the Commission, testimony of the Proponent, and testimony of surrounding property owners, the Council indicated an intent to deny the Proponent's petition for -2- rezoning and application for subdivision. The City Council noted that denial of the Proposed Rezoning would preclude the submission of a PRD -2 rezoning petition for a period of one year.. However, in reliance on the Proponent's agreement to prepare revised preliminary development plans reducing the number of units proposed for the Subject Property, the City Council allowed the Pro- ponent to withdraw his petition for rezoning and application for subdivision. 6. On August 1, 1979, the Commission reviewed the Proposed Rezoning and Subdivision. The Proponent presented preliminary development plans for two, four unit apartment buildings for the Subject Property. These plans were essentially identical, to the plans previously reviewed by the Commission and City Council. For comparison purposes, the Proponent submitted a subdivision plan delineating four, two family dwelling lots for the Subject Property. The Proponent testified that the latter plan complied with ordinance requirements of the City. The Proponent further noted that if the Proposed Rezoning was not approved, he would request approval of four, two family dwelling lots. After reviewing the proposed plans and testimony of surrounding property owners, the Commission recommended approval of the Proposed Rezoning and Subdivision which requested two, four unit apartment buildings. 7. On August 20, 1979, the City Council reviewed the report of the Commission, testimony,of the Proponent, and testimony of surrounding property owners. The City Council thereupon ordered City Staff to prepare findings of fact concerning the Proposed Rezoning and Subdivision. 8. On January 7, 1970, the Edina Planning Commission adopted the Western Edina Land Use Plan-(the "Plan "). The Subject Property is located within the area encompassed by the Plan. The Plan designated the Subject Property for "low density attached residential development" According to the Plan, low density attached residential development has a density of O to 4 dwell.ing units -3- per acre and includes single family cluster housing, two family dwellings, townhouses, and apartments, 9. On January 19, 1970; the Edina City Council adopted the Plan as adopted by the Edina Planning Commission. 10. On September 3, 1975, the Edina Planning Commission adopted an amendment to all comprehensive plans in the City including the Western Edina Land. Use Plan.- This amendment was enti -tled "Clarification of Allowed Multi- Family Densities in Comprehensively Planned Areas of Edina" (the "Amendment "). The Amend- ment established a set of criteria for determining the maximum allowed densities of multi- family developments. 11. On May 3, 1976, the City Council. adopted the Amendment. 12. City. Staff has computed the allowed density of the Subject Property based upon the criteria set forth in the.Amendment. Based upon this analysis, City Staff determines the allowed density for the Subject Property to be 3.1 units per acre. 13. The Subject Property measures 1.86 acres in area. Therefore: the allowed number of units for the Subject Property is 5.77 units. 14. Twenty -six developed single family lots are located within a 500 foot radius of the Subject Property. These single family lots range in size from 15,700 square feet to 47,800 square feet. The average single family lot size in this area is 25,400 square feet. 15. No land uses other than detached single family dwellings are located within .a 500 foot radius of the Subject Property. The nearest non- single family dwelling land'use is located 1,250 feet from the Subject Property. 16. The Proponent has testified that due to the elevation of the Subject Property in relation to the elevation of the public street abutting the Subject Property, the development of the Subject Property as conventional -4- single family detached housing would require extensive filling and tree removal. The Proponent further testified that the Proposed Rezoning would require the removal of fewer trees than the development of the Subject Property with single family dwellings. The Proponent testified that the visual impact of the Proposed Rezoning would be insignificant. 17. The Proponent has testified that the proximity of the Cross- town Highway adversely effects the development potential of the Subject Property. for single family detached housing. 18. Property owners residing in the vicinity of the Subject Property have.testified and submitted petitions in opposition to the Proposed Rezoning and Subdivision. Surrounding property owners have testified that a) the construction of higher density housing would alter the single family character of the area, b) single family dwellings have been construction in surrounding areas which are equally close to the Crosstown Highway; c) the Proposed Rezoning would adversely affect the value of surrounding single family dwellings, d) the Proposed Rezoning would particularly affect the single family dwelling located directly west of the Subject Property, e) the Proposed Rezoning would result in the removal of many trees which presently buffer existing dwellings from the adverse effects of the Crosstown Highway, and f) approval of the Proposed Rezoning would establish a precedent leading to a similar rezoning for property lying westerly of the Subject Property. -5- Therefore, based upon the foregoing Findings, the City Council does hereby make the following DECISION: The Petition by the Proponent to Rezone the Subject Property from R -1 Single Family Dwelling District to PRD -2 Planned Residential District - 2 and the Application-of-the Proponent for a Subdivision entitled Westridge.Estates is hereby denied. The above Decision is made for the following REASONS: A. The Proposed Rezoning does not conform to the Western Edina Land Use Plan as amended. B. The Proposed Rezoning would result in a style and density of development which is not in character with existing land uses in the vicinity of the Subject Property. C. The Western Edina Land Use Plan designated certain areas including the Subject Property for low density attached residential development. The Plan states that such housing should have the same density as single family detached residential development. The Proposed Rezoning requests a density which is substantially greater than the density of existing single family detached housing in the vicinity of the Subject Property. .Therefore, the Proposed Rezoning does not comply with the intent of the Plan regarding the density of such attached housing. D. Approval of the Proposed Rezoning would establish a precedent leading to a similar rezoning for land lying westerly of the Subject Property. 10 • E. Property owners residing in the vicinity of the Subject Property have relied upon the Plan's intent to maintain the low density residential character of the area. F. The unique characteristics of and the physical constraints imposed upon the Subject Property do not preclude its development at a lower density than requested by the Proposed Rezoning. IWA Lo7- 2 133 332 1 j � 42 t 11 Vol. ' RE- A Z \s LOT I REST: �J�1�6 i Z o ivy ,e_ i Ilk / n of o� 424° v rJ0 i y! W , I �M r v rJ0 i REQUEST FOR PURCHASE _ 2 T0: Mayor and City Council FROM: Bob Kojetin VIA: Kenneth Rosland, City Manager .p SUBJECT: REQUEST FOR PURCHASE OF ITEM IN EXCESS OF $1,000 DATE: September 14, 1979 Material Description (General Specifications): Sod for Weber Park Quotations /Bids: Company Amount of Quote or Bid 1. Riebe Sod Co. 85�'x 2,500 yds. _ $2,125.00 Darwin MN 55424 2. C & W. turf. $1.05 x 2,500 yds. _ $2,625.00 1159 NW Andover Blvd. Anoka, MN 3. . Department Recommendation: Riebe Sod Co. Park & Recreation Signatu 'e Department Finance Director's Endorsement: The recommended bid is is not within-the amount budgeted for the purchase. . Dalen, Fin nce Director City Manager's Endorsement: X_ 1. I concur with the recommendation -of the Department and recommend Council approve the purchase. 2. I recommend as an alternative: 3 REST FOR PURCHASE TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Bob Kojetin VIA: Kenneth Rosland, City Manager p - SUBJECT: REQUEST FOR PURCHASE OF ITEM IN EXCESS OF $1,000 DATE: Sept. 12, 1979 Material Description (General Specifications): Furnish and install a gas conversion burner, gas line from meter chimney liner, vent pipes, wiring, start-up and check out-at the Art Center Quotations /Bids: Co- mpany Amount of Quote or Bid 1. Burn- O -Matic $1,580.00 2. Hoglund Contractors .$2,343.00 3. Minnegasco $1,895.00 Department Recommendation: Recommend award of contract of Burn- 0 -Matic for. sum of $1,580.00 Department Finance Director's Endorsement: v . The recommended bid is is not within the amount budgeted for the purchase. J. Dalen, Finance Uirector City M ager's Endorsement: 1. I concur with the recommendation of the Department and recommend Council approve the purchase. 2. I recommend as an alternative: Kenneth Ros a d, City Mana er REQUEST FOR PURCHASE TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Bob Kojetin, Director Park & Recreation Dept. - VIA: Kenneth Rosland, City Manager SUBJECT: REQUEST FOR PURCHASE OF ITEM IN EXCESS OF $1,000 DATE: September 12, 1979 Material Description (General Specifications): Gas furnace (convert from deteriorated oil furnace) (Moore House) Quotations /Bids: ' Company Amount of Quote or Bid 1. Cronstrom's •$1,248.00 2. Kleve Heating & Air Conditioning $1,269.00 3. Minnegasco $1,40.0.00 Department Recommendation: Cronstrom's Finance Director's Endorsement: Park & Recreation Department The recommended bid is is not within the amount budgeted for the purchase. J N. Dalen, Finance Director City P ager's Endorsement: y 1 I concur with the recommendation of the Department and recommend Council approve the purchase. 2. I recommend as an alternative. Ke neth Roslanid, City Manage REQUEST FOR PURCHASE TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Bob Kojetin VIA: Kenneth Rosland, City Manager p SUBJECT: REQUEST FOR PURCHASE OF ITEM IN.EXCESS OF $1,000 DATE: September 12, 1979 ----Material Description (General Specifications): Trees for Blvd. and Parks Reforestation Program Quotations /Bids: Company 1. Minnesota Valley Rt. 3,Box 130, Shakopee 2. Arteka 6233 Baker Road Eden Prairie 3. Department Recommendation: Minnesota Val -ley at $4,950.00 jT - r 1 C -.- Amount of Quote or Bid .55x $90.00 each = $4,950.00 55x $118.00 each = $6,490.00 s�-4 tInance Director's Endorsement: -The recommended bid is is not within the amount budgeted for the purchase. '01 N..Dalen, Finance Director -T. City Manager's Endorsement: 1. I concur with the recommendation of the Department and recommend Council approve the purchase. 2. I recommend as an alternative: REQUEST FOR PURCHASE TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Bob Kojetin ' VIA: Kenneth Rosland, City Manager p SUBJECT: REQUEST FOR PURCHASE OF ITEM IN EXCESS OF $1,000 DATE: September 14, 1979 Material Description (General Specifications): Irrigation Lewis Park Quotations /Bids: Company �• Green Acres 5233 Richwood Dr. Edina 55436 2. Albrecht Landscape 1408 W. Co. Rd. C 'Roseville, 55113 3. Department Recommendation: Green-Acres /1 Finance Director's Endorsemeni. The recommended bid is is not within n� v Amount of Quote or Bid $9,662.00 $9,928.00 Park & Recreation Department emount budgeted for the purchase. U L y" G 41*07^ . N. Dalen, Finance Director City td ager's Endorsement: V 1. I concur with the recommendation of the Department and recommend Council approve the purchase. 2. I recommend as an alternative: / Kenneth Rosland, City Manager 31 A - J / V i / ti' Y 3 .�ri -.mac, '�"* -'�i -� c�.�,� �, ! �!• y !% f f� .�, a qw. . t� �., -& B/ -�Y 1 r � rd Z4 -X-e. -c� � 'fie .--•� ���• 'f �.� -�-�� �Le i 'ter 17 1;1 l � Ot ol Ae 7L� L �.� A NANCY OLRON w v a PHONE CHAIR? { 348 -3080 S til�Ey� BOARD OF HENNEPIN COUNTY COMMISSIONERS 2400 GOVERNMENT CENTER MINNEAPOLIS, MINNESOTA 55487 September 13, 1979 Ms. Florence B. Halberg City Clerk City of Edina. -4801 West 50th Street Edina, Minnesota 55424 Dear Ms. Halberg: Thank you for forwarding the resolution from the City of Edina supporting the development of a suburban Community Action Agency (CAA) in Hennepin County. Your resolution will be officially communicated to the Board of Commissioners at its September 18, 1979 meeting, and a copy will be provided each commissioner. The County Board will consider adoption of the model proposed by the Human Services Councils Planning Task Force after receiving input from the September 12 Town Meetings. Again, thank you for your interest in this matter. Si ncerely, Nancy Olkon, air Hennepin C unty Board of Commissioners N KO: pI a MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE EDINA BOARD OF APPEALS AND ADJUSTMENTS HELD THURSDAY, JUNE 21, 1979, AT 5:30 P.M. EDINA CITY HALL CONFERENCE ROOM Members Present: Chairman David Runyan, Del Johnson, Michael Lewis, Mary McDonald, Bill Shaw Staff Present: Harold Sand, Assistant Planner; Judy.Teichert, Secretary I. Approval of the Minutes Bill Shaw moved.that the minutes of the May 17, 1979, meeting of the Edina Board of Appeals and Adjustments be approved. Michael Lewis seconded the motion. All voted aye; the minutes were approved. II. for the items to June 8, 1979. III. Notice of Public Hearing Judy Teichert informed the Board that Notice of Public Hearing be heard had been mailed to affected property owners on Friday, HEARINGS: B -79 -15 City of Edina. 2000, Section School). 4110 West 42nd Street. Part of Parcel 7, Township 28, Range 24. ( Morningside REQUEST: 6.5. acre . lot area variance 100 foot lot width variance 100% parking variance 40 foot rear yard variance 40 foot east side yard variance 40 foot west side yard variance 1 foot front yard variance Harold Sand explained to the Board that the Morningside School, located at the northeast corner of Grimes'Avenue and West 42nd Street, is- bordered by single family residences to the south -and west,of the site, the Morningside Community Building on the north side of the site, and Weber Park on the east side of the site. He stated that due to- declining enrollment, the school was closed in 1977. The City then acquired the north 225 feet of the property, and later acquired the remainder of the property including the buildings. He indicated the latest acquisition was funded with Community Development Block.Grant funds with the intent of demolishing the school building, enlarging the park, and improving the recreation equipment. Mr. Sand pointed out that the City has received an offer to purchase the building and part of the property for a'private elementary school grades K -3 and Montessori School for pre - school children. He noted the purchaser proposes to remodel the newer, one story east wing of the building and demolish the older two story element of the building; the City proposes to sell the minimum Edina Board of Appeals and Adjustments Thursday, June 21, 1979 page 2 lot area possible and allow joint use of the Weber Park playground and parking facilities. He added that the City will retain the first right to re- purchase the property if it should be offered for sale in the future. The City proposed to divide the property in a manner that provides ten foot yards on•the east, north, and west sides of the remaining building. Harold Sand observed that the existing 49 foot setback is proposed from West 42nd Street, but a 50 foot setback is required; therefore, 40 foot setback variances are requested on the east, north, and west sides, and a one foot variance on the south side. Harold Sand commented that the proposed lot is approximately -120 feet deep and 200 feet wide with an area of 24,000 square feet which is .55 acres. The site is required a minimum area of five acres plus one acre for each 150 children enrolled. He noted the exact enrollment is not known but may possibly exceed 150 students, and therefore.seven acres could be required, necessitating a 6.5 acre variance request.. He continued that the lot is required to be 300 feet in width and is proposed to be 200 .feet in width; therefore, a 100 foot variance is requested. Harold Sand explained that the school is required to provide parking at a ratio of one parking space for each three seats in the largest place of assembly. Indicating that the exact number of spaces required would be ` difficult to determine because we do not have any proposed floor plans, and the building will not have an auditorium, Mr. Sand pointed out that the school -would provide no on -site parking, and therefore.a 100-percent variance was requested. He informed the Board that a shared parking lot with the park is proposed with a minimum of eight spaces, and the proponents indicated the peak parking demand for the school and park.use would not overlap. Staff advised that while the magnitude and number of variances is large by any standard, the physical.and visual:consequences of. the variances are minimal. Mr. Sand noted that the scale of the building and the spacing between buildings will be adequate according to normal City standards. Continuing that the perceived lot area, open space, and play area will function and appear adequate with the use of adjacent parkland, Harold Sand informed the Board that the parking. is under control of the City and.presumably is adequate and can be corrected if found inadequate. On this basis,. staff considered the impact of the neighborhood. within the spirit and intent of the zoning ordinance. Mr..Sand advised that there was some potential for a precedent in this case because the proposed lot area is equivalent to a moderately large single family lot, and considering the strong demand for child care services in the southwest Metropolitan area, there may be future requests for lot size variances based upon proximity to public parks and open space. Staff recommended that...if the Board - determines that the variance .is justified the following conditions be attached to the variance: 1) The use of the property is limited to the educational and child day care use outlined in the purchase agreement. i Edina Board of Appeals and Adjustments Thursday, June 21, 1979 page 3 2) The school parcel.of the.property is not further subdivided. 3) The building is not enlarged beyond the size proposed. 4) The variance is terminated if the terms of the purchase agreement are not satisfied. Ken Rosland, City Manager, explained that the City could not afford to use the building and did not want to destroy all of it. He felt that the use proposed was most appropriate in utilizing the site. David Runyan questioned Mr. Rosland about.the traffic parking and was informed that the park would use more parking facilities than would the school, but if.parking became a problem, the City could correct the situation. Bill Shaw asked about snow removal to which Mr. Rosland replied the prospective buyer, Mr. Wallace Recke, would be required to clean the snow off the parking lot. Mr. and Mrs. Recke were present and commented.that nothing would be done to the outside of the building other than tearing the old section down. Mr.. Recke also noted that they would be running according to the Edina School System schedule and classes would .go from 9 a.m. to 3 p.m. Cici Freeberg of 4114 Morningside Road stated she and her_ husband were very pleased with the proposal. David Runyan asked if there would be a fence around the building. Mr. Recke replied there would be no fence around the school. Michael Lewis moved that the Board approve the variances requested with the conditions that: 1) The use of the property is limited to the educational and.child day care use outlined in the purchase agreement. 2) The school parcel of property is not further subdivided. 3) The building is not enlarged beyond the size proposed. 4) The variance -is terminated if the terms of the purchase agreement are not satisfied. Mary McDonald seconded the motion. All voted aye; the motion carried. B -79 -16 Jesco, Inc. 7175 Cahill Road. Part of Tract B and all of Tract C. R.L.S. No. 1193. REQUEST: 10 foot parking setback variance 50 foot parking setback variance building materials variance landscaping variance 1 Edina Board of Appeals and Adjustments Thursday, June 21, 1979 page 4 Harold Sand informed the Board that the subject property which is the southerly portion of the former J.A. Danen's and Son business property, has been acquired by Jesco, Inc., a concrete and masonry contractor who is re- selling the northerly parcel and retaining the southerly parcel for their business operations. He continued that Jesco is in the process of re- modeling the structures to suit their needs which includes some additional office space within the westerly building and large partitions, doors, and office .space within the easterly.building. Mr. Sand indicated that the Edina Zoning Ordinance requires that any non - conforming structure (other than a single family residence) must be brought into conformance with all the requirements of the ordinance before it is added to or altered in any manner. Noting that the present facilities are non - conforming in several respects, Harold Sand pointed out that Jesco proposes to partially correct the non - conforming parking setback from Cahill Road, surface.unsurfaced drive areas, and requests variances for the other non- conforming features. The Edina Zoning Ordinance requires the buildings and parking to maintain a 75 foot setback from Cahill Road, and all parking areas must main- tain a ten foot setback from an interior side or rear property line or any building. In addition, all parking -and drive aisles must be surfaced with a hard, all - weather, durable, dust -free surfacing material, and all areas that are not used for drive aisles or parking must be landscaped with ..t:rees, grass, shrubs, and other landscaping materials. Mr.. Sand also stated the buildings were required to be constructed of brick, stone, textured concrete block, or factory - finished, framed metal panel construction. Harold Sand commented that the existing parking lot on the west side was constructed entirely within the street setback and partially on the - right -of -way, which was possibly. permitted in anticipation of industrial zoning west of Cahill Road and the vacation of a portion of the Cahill Road right -of -way when Amundson was extended. However, Mr. Sand indicated that land use plans have been changed and there are residential uses west of Cahill Road, Amundson Avenue will not be extended, and Cahill Road will not be vacated. Mr. Sand also noted that Jesco proposes to remove,the parking on the west side of the lot and landscape this 25 foot wide area while retaining'some visitor parking near the front entrance. Therefore, he continued, they requested a 50 foot setback variance to permit the remainder of the parking. In reviewing the history of the property Mr. Sand commented that the right -of -way for the east half of the existing cul -de -sac was dedicated in 1967, and the west building was built in 1968. He'explained that the building maintains a 24 foot setback from the cul -de -sac while part of the front parking maintains a 14 foot setback, and the screened, blacktopped yard maintains a 35 foot setback. Because a 75 foot setback is required, 51 foot, 61 foot, and 40 foot variances are requested, Mr. Sand added. Proposing to asphalt a gravel drive area north of the buildings, Jesco requested to maintain the required ten foot setback from the north property line. However, they did not wish to maintain a ten foot setback from the west Edina Board of Appeals and Adjustments Thursday, June 21, 1979 page 5 wall of the east building or the east wall of the west building. In addition, Harold. Sand informed the.Board that there are non - conforming setbacks adjacent to the east building and adjacent to the south property line that are proposed to remain. Staff noted the.landscaping adjacent to Cahill is proposed to be improved to provide screening of the parking, and the existing landscaping west of the main building is adequate. While the proponent and the adjacent property owner on the north side proposed to landscape the area adjacent to Cahill Road and Amundson Avenue according to a, submitted plan in lieu of any landscaping along the north property line of the site, they also indicated that they may construct a building in -this area and do not wish to landscape areas that may be disturbed later. .Staff submitted that no landscaping was being proposed in the area north and east of the east building nor along the south property line. Mr.- ,:Sand.recalled that the east storage building was permitted. on February 25, 1963, as a temporary structure that was to be removed within two years, and the building permit was issued for an unheated steel shell with a dirt floor. He continued that while the building subsequently has been improved with a concrete floor, insulation, and heating equipment, the exterior materials.of the structure and the majority of the west building is corrigated steel which does not conform to the material standards of the ordinance. Jesco proposed to submit a letter agreeing to surface portions of the buildings within two years if there are no further additions to the structure. However, they did not agree to surface the south and east walls of the west building or the north, south, and east walls of the east building -.and requested variances to approve this agreement. Staff was in agreement with the parking and.landscaping solution proposed-...adjacent to Cahill Road stating that additional landscaping would screen and enhance the area in a difficult situation created by a change in.the land use plans. In addition, they noted the building setback variance and parking setback variances from the cul -de -sac are extremely difficult to correct, and may be unnecessary to correct due to the indefinite status of the cul -de -sac; therefore, staff recommended.variances for these conditions. They further recommended a condition to require a redesign of the parking areas, removal of asphalt, and planting additional landscape materials if the cul -de -sac is vacated. Staff advised that any solution to the exterior materials variance include the surfacing of all four walls of both buildings, and a. specific construction design should be proposed with some form of performance guarantee such as a bond or deed restriction. Staff believed that:'while the landscaping proposal on the vacant property to the north is a good one, the potential locations for a new structure could be identified, and the remaining areas along the north property line, the east property line, the south property line, and areas adjacent to the buildings can be landscaped. Mr. Sand noted the site has vast areas of uninterrupted hard surface, and the landscaping required relative to the site area is small and should not be.reduced. J Edina Board of Appeals and.Adjustments Thursday, June 21, 1979 page 6 Mr. Bill Quinlan and Mr. Chet Pzynski were present on behalf of Jesco, Inc.. They showed a brief slide presentation of the site, and modified their request.slightly saying -they would also face the north end of the easterly building. Michael Lewis asked what was proposed for the exterior -sides they proposed to face. Bill Quinlan replied they would use block or stucco. A general discussion followed on the landscaping and black - topping on the site. Mary McDonald and David Runyan noted that they felt it would look tacky to do two sides of a building with one material -and leave the other two sides. They felt then it would be better to leave the building in its present state. Discussion arose on the "temporary" building and if the proponents should be required to bring it up to fire code. Del Johnson wondered if the Board gave the proponents a time period such as two years in which to face the building, if that would be acceptable. The proponents replied they would rather not have to face the buildings as they felt -they looked very nice.at present. David Runyan stated he felt that just painting the .present exterior of the buildings would improve .them just as much as putting block around them. Bill Shaw moved that the Board grant the ten.foot.parking set - back variance, the 50 foot parking setback variance, a permanent variance on the building materials, and the landscaping variance'as requested with the conditions that the parking area be re- designed, asphalt removed, and additional landscape materials planted if the cul -de -sac is vacated, and the entire East building be brought up to fire code and protected-by sprinkling systems. Michael Lewis seconded that motion. All voted aye;.the motion carried. IV. Next Meeting Date: July 5, 1979,..at.5:30 p.m. V. Adjournment: 6:50. p.m. Respectfully submitted, Judy Teichert, Secretary MEMORANDUM TO: Ken Rosland, City Manager FROM: Jay W. Brask SUBJECT: Hostage Negotiations - Advanced DATE:' September 10, 1979 On the 6th and 7th of September, 1979, I along with Mike Snyder of the Edina Police Department attended a two day Advanced Hostage Negotiation Seminar held in Eden Prarie, Minnesota. It was an excellent session with a great.deal of valuable information and two practical role - playing sessions. The instructors were well qualified and the materials provided will be an asset to our organization and operations. I feel confident that with the tools we were gi.ven that we could successfully handle a situation of the nature presented in the seminar. Thank you for the opportunity to attend, it was money well spent. ll\J .JA B A K, LIEUTENANT PA L D SION CC /Chief Swanson MEMORANDUM TO: Ken Rosland, City Manager DATE:-September 10, 1979 FROM: Sergeant Mike Snyder, Edina Police SUBJECT: Hostage Negotiation Training On September 6 and September 7, 1979, Lt. Jay Brask and myself participated in a Hostage Negotiation Training Seminar at the Eden P_rarie Department of Public Safety. This was a sixteen hour advanced course. Students were required to have previously attended a basic course. Both Lt. Brask and myself had attended a twenty hour seminar last year. The advanced course included a review of the basic strategies involved in dealing with barricaded suspects and hostage takers, training in setting up an all out department effort in hostage situations with descriptions of the functions of negotiators, commanders, investigators, snipers, etc., and two role - playing exercises. The instructors, Harvey Schlosberg, a practical psychologist who is a former New York City Police Officer, and Gerald Doane, a Lieutenant with the San Rafael, California Police Department, were excellent. Both have had extensive personal experience in dealing with hostage situations. I highly recommend this.course for future use by the Edina Police Department. MICHAEL SNYDER, SERGEANT PATROL DIVISION AFC OT TTT TOOT BE IT RESOLVED that the Edina City Council does hereby approve the First Amendment to Agreement No. 90049 ( Community Health Services ) with the County of Hennepin; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Mayor and City Manager are hereby author- ized to execute said Amendment. DATED this.17th day of September, 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 September 17, 1979, and as recorded in the Minutes of said Regular Meeting. WITNESS my hand and seal of said City this 18th day of September, 1979. City Clerk * C11V r�F qqEDINA _ 4801 WEST 50TH STREET, EDINA. MINNESOTA 55424 612- 927 -8861 RESOLUTION OF RECOGNITION WHEREAS, the Edina Pak and Recheati.on Depa&tment ' hays begun to operate a gneenhou,de at Arneson Ached, Edina's aAbonetum; and WHEREAS, ShiAtey Pete�usen, a Auident of the City o4 Edina.. had organized duAi.ng 1979, the 6iust yea& ob the greenhouse opehation, the Edina Ganden Ctubb Jon the punpo-s e o6 tnavvs ptanti ng. ptants and other 6tona to utabt ins h the greenhouse pnognam; and WHEREAS, ShiAtey Peteuen has genehatty ongani.zed, in conjunction with the Edina Pak and RecAeati.on Department, the operation of the gneenhouze at Annedon Ached; and WHEREAS, ShiAtey Peteu en hail peAJonmed thus vaZuabte a env ice Jon the City o6 Edina ad a votunteen; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Edina City Councit heheby necognizes SHIRLEY PETERSEN Jon hen cheati.ve and p�wduc#,i.ve teadendh,ip toward pnovidtng the %es.ident6 o6 the City of Edina a Zi.v.i.ng, nesponzi.ve, and on- going gneenhoude program. ADOPTED this 17th day o J Septem ben, 19 79 . Mayon RESOLUTION BE IT RESOLVED by the-Edina City Council that the Mayor and City Manager are hereby authorized to enter into Purchase.Agreement with Gust A. Johnson & Sons, Inc., for purchase f or:ahe purpose of open space of the following des- cribed property: That part of the East One -Half of the Northwest Quarter (E ' of NWT) of Section 5, Township 116, Range 21, lying North of Creek Valley Addition and South of County Road No. 62, all according to the recorded plat and United States Survey thereof, Hennepin County. ADOPTED this 17th day of September, 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 September 17, 1979, and as recorded in the Minutes of said Regular Meeting. WITNESS my hand and seal of said City this 18th day of September, 1979. City Clerk September 13, 1979 The City Council of Edina Edina City Hall Edina, Minnesota Members of the Council: Yesterday morning my wife and I along with several fellow petitioners attended a hearing before the Edina Traffic and Safety Council. Our petition requests that a stop sign be placed on the corner of 55th Street and Brookview Avenue South. Much to my dismay, the Traffic and Safety Council unanimously decided against our petition and will forward a negative recommendation to the City Council. I respectfully suggest that the Traffic and Safety Council reached their decision without full consideration of the facts at hand. I therefore request that the City Council carefully review our case and grant our petition. Our request for a stop sign is based on an urgent -ne.ed to provide better protection against traffic accidents for the dozen small children in our block. The absence of a stop sign (or other effective device) exposes our children to serious danger as cars are now frequently crossing the intersection at excessive speed. The threat this poses in itself is aggravated by the fact that children may suddenly emerge from behind cars parked along Brookview Avenue. The Traffic and Safety Council's negative recommendation is based on general information we feel is not quite relevant in our case. First, one of the statistics quoted was that on our intersection no accident had taken place in more than four years. We feel this experience is not relevant since it deals with vehicular accidents from the past while we are seeking protection for our children in the future. Secondly, we were told that a recent survey indicates that very few speed violations occurred on our block. We feel this fact is not relevant either. Even strict adherence to the 30 mph speed limit represents a serious safety hazard to our children when cars cross the intersection without halting. Thirdly, it appears to be the Traffic and Safety Council's opinion that adding a stop sign on our corner will diminish the effectiveness of such signs in other places. This may be true when stop signs are being used in excessive quantities. It certainly doesn't apply to our area, however, where such signs appear to be in sparse use. i a Sept. 13, 1979 Page Two. Esteemed members of the City Council, we urge you to grant our request. We strongly feel a stop_ sign on our corner will provide better protection for our children. In view of this we feel -it is your responsibility to act accordingly, and to personally intervene in order to prevent accidents from happening in the future. I plan on attending the City Council's meeting this coming Monday and will be available for any further questions you may have. Sincerely, Daniel F. Prins cc: The Honorable James Van Valkenburg, Mayor of Edina The Honorable Craig Swanson, Chief of Police Minneapolis Star - Tribune )� M E M O R A N D U M TO: Kenneth Rosland, City Manager FROM: David A. Velde, Sanitarian SUBJECT: 1979 .Community Health Services Contract Amendment DATE: September 10, 1979 Hennepin County has proposed .the following amendment to the 1979 contract: *Vaccine charges have been lowered from $1,200.00 to $923.00. *The total cash payment from Hennepin County to the City of Edina has been increased by $2,865.00. This brings our subsidy allocation to $83,788.00. A certified copy of the City Council's action authorizing this amendment must accompany the signed agreement. Can this be placed on the City Council agenda for-September 17, 1979? 1 W41 David A. Velde DAV:jkt RESOLUTION BE IT RESOLVED that the Edina City Council does hereby approve the First Amendment to Agreement No. 90049 (Community Health .Services ) with the County of Hennepin; and BE IT,FURTHER RESOLVED that the Mayor and City Manager are hereby author- ized to execute said Amendment. DATED this 17th day of September, 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 September 17, 1979, and as recorded in the Minutes of said Regular Meeting. WITNESS my hand and seal of said City this 18th day of September, 1979. City Clerk REQUEST FOR PURCHASE TO: Mayor and City Council a FROM: Bob Kojetin VIA: Kenneth Rosland, City Manager p SUBJECT: REQUEST FOR PURCHASE OF ITEM IN EXCESS OF $1,000 DATE. September 14, 1979 Material Description (General Specifications): Lewis Park Building Quotations /Bids: Company 1. Cedar Forest Products Co. 107 W. Colden St. Polo, ILL 61064 2. Hamele Recreation Co. (did not meet specification)` — —� Department Recommendation: Cedar Forest Products Co. Finance Director's Endorsement: 7E:7-4 Amount of Quote or Bid $31,689.00 $23,158.00 Park & Recreation Department fhe recommended bid is pa", is not within the amount budgeted for the purchase. N. Dalen, Finance Director :ity Manager's Endorsement: 1. I concur with the recommendation of the Department and recommend Council approve the purchase. 2. I recommend as an alternative: W PECIAL MEETING OF THE EDINA PARK BOARD BUDGET COMMITTEE Tuesday, September 4, 1979 °., 4:30 p.m. Edina City Hall MEMBERS PRESENT: Virginia Shaw, Chairperson; Joan Lonsbury, Vice- Chairperson; Al Fischer, Arthur Erdall -, Mack Thayer - Members of the Edina Park Board Budget Committee STAFF PRESENT: Bob Kojetin, Rick Jacobson, Rosie Hafner DISCUSSION OF AWARDING OF BIDS FOR PARK SHELTER BUILDINGS Mr. Kojetin handed out a break -down of the specs and pictures from the two companies (Cedar Forest Products Company and Hamele Recreation Company) bidding on the park shelter buildings. Mr. Kojetin pointed out that although Cedar Forest Products bid was higher the building was built. from better materials (Cedar vs. Yellow Pine) and the dimensions of the building were better. Mr. Kojetin also explained that the tongue and groove roof construction used by Cedar Forest Products was better than the 3/4" plywood construction that Hamele used. Mrs. Lonsbury expressed concern over the upkeep involved in the Yellow Pine building. Mrs. Shaw: pointed out that the over -hang on the building from Cedar Forest Products (absent in the Hamele building) would provide additional shelter, e.g., on a rainy day. Mr. Fischer felt that in building these shelters we would want them to be of comparable quality as those that have been erected in the other parks throughout Edina. It was the general consensus of the Park Board members that the building designed by Cedar Forest Products Company was of better quality and more aesthetically pleasing than the building from Hamele Recreation Company. Mrs. Lonsbury MADE A MOTION that we accept the bid from Cedar Forest Products Company on the grounds that the building: a) is of better quality, b) because of its dimensions provides more efficient use of interior.and storage space, c) will be more aesthetically pleasing, d) will .provide larger restroom facilities. Mr. Thayer SECONDED. CARRIED. Mr. Kojetin pointed out that after having received the bids for the shelter buildings he has discovered that there are not enough funds in the Capital Improvement budget to build a shelter in both.Garden and Cornelia this year. He explained that he wanted to erect a 60' octagon shelter building in Cornelia rather than the 40' building originally planned. At this time, he would like to go ahead with the plans for the shelter at Cornelia and postpone the construction of the shelter at Garden until 1980. Mr. Fischer expressed the opinion that there is a more immediate. need for the shelter in Garden Park since the hockey season will start soon. It was his feeling that the building at Cornelia could come out of next year's budget and construction postponed until next-spring since this facility wouldn't be used until next summer. There was question, however, as to whether there would be an increase in price if this construction were postponed. There was also discussion on the two aforementioned companies bids on these shelters. Mr. Fischer MADE A MOTION to accept the bids from Cedar Forest Products Company on these two buildings, building the shelter at Garden Park this year and postponing the building of the shelter at Cornelia Park until next year provided we could get it at the quoted price. Mrs. Lonsbury SECONDED. CARRIED. The Park Board prefers Cedar Forest Products over Hamele Recreation Company in all instances for the reasons stated above. Mr. Erdall MADE A MOTION to adjourn. Meeting adjourned at 5:45 p.m,. LEWIS PARK SHELTER BUILDING . 2 Contractors Bidding Hamele Recreation 1536 Square Feet (2469) $23,158.00 Does not meet size Material — Yellow Pine Roof Structure - 3/4" Plywood with steel beams Hollow Side Panels - Plywood rough sawed verticle panelling Width of Maintrnance Garage - .12x24" Bathrooms - 8' x 8' Cedar Forest Products 1560 Square Feet (5200) $31, 689.00 Material - 100% Cedar Timber Roof Structure - 2x4 tongue and groove decking of laminated beams One Building - 30'x 52' Solid Side Panels - 4'x 8' Cedar Log Decking Width of Maintenance Garage - 12'x 30' quality Bathrooms - 8'x 12' According to the specifications of comparable building, it does not meet size spec- ifications or cedar wood material. SPECIAL MEETING OF THE EDINA PARK BOARD BUDGET COMMITTEE Tuesday, September 4, 1979 4:30 p.m. Edina City Hall MEMBERS PRESENT: Virginia Shaw, Chairperson; Joan Lonsbury, Vice - Chairperson; Al Fischer, Arthur Erdall, Mack Thayer - Members of the Edina Park Board Budget Committee STAFF PRESENT: -Bob Kojetin, Rick Jacobson, Rosie Hafner DISCUSSION OF AWARDING OF BIDS FOR PARK SHELTER BUILDINGS Mr. Kojetin handed out a break -down of the specs and pictures from the two companies (Cedar Forest Products Company and Hamele Recreation Company) bidding on the park shelter buildings. Mr. Kojetin pointed out that although Cedar Forest Products bid was higher the building was built from better materials (Cedar vs. Yellow Pine) and the dimensions of the building were better. Mr. Kojetin also explained that the tongue and groove roof construction used by Cedar Forest Products was better than the 3/4" plywood construction that Hamele used d. Mrs. Lonsbury expressed concern over the upkeep involved in the Yellow Pine building. Mrs. Shaw: pointed out that the over -hang on the building from Cedar Forest Products (absent in the Hamele building) would provide additional shelter, e.g., on a rainy day. Mr. Fischer felt.that in building these shelters we would want them to be of comparable quality as those that have been erected in the other parks throughout Edina. It was the general consensus.of the Park Board members that the building designed by Cedar Forest Products Company was of.better quality and more aesthetically pleasing than.the building from Hamele Recreation Company. Mrs. Lonsbury MADE A MOTION that we accept the bid from Cedar Forest Products Company on the grounds that the building: a) is of better quality, b) because of its dimensions provides more efficient use of interior and storage space, c) will be more aesthetically pleasing, d) will provide larger restroom facilities. Mr. Thayer SECONDED. CARRIED. Mr. Kojetin pointed out that after having received the bids for the shelter buildings he has discovered that there are not enough funds_in the Capital Improvement budget to build a shelter in both Garden and Cornelia this year. He explained that he wanted to erect a 60' octagon shelter building in Cornelia rather than the 40' building originally planned. At this time, he would like to go ahead with the plans for the shelter at Cornelia and postpone the construction of the shelter at Garden until 1980. Mr. Fischer expressed the opinion that there is a more immediate need for the shelter in Garden Park since the hockey season will start soon. It was his feeling that the building at Cornelia could come out of next year's budget and construction postponed until next-spring since this facility wouldn't be used until next summer. There was question, however, as to whether there would be an increase in price if this construction were postponed. There was also discussion on the two aforementioned companies bids on these shelters.. Mr. Fischer MADE A MOTION to accept the bids from Cedar Forest Products.Company on these two buildings, building the shelter at Garden Park this year and postponing the building of the shelter at Cornelia Park until next year provided we could get it at the quoted price. Mrs. Lonsbury SECONDED. CARRIED. The Park Board prefers Cedar Forest Products over Hamele Recreation Company in all instances for the reasons stated above. Mr. Erdall MADE A MOTION to adjourn. Meeting adjourned at 5:45 p.m. LEWIS PARK SHELTER BUILDING 2 Contractors Bidding Hamele Recreation Company 1536 Square Feet (24' X 64') $23,158.00 Material - Yellow Pine Roof Structure - 3/4" Plywood Two Buildings (24' X 32') put together Side Panels - Plywood rough sawed vertical panelling Width of Maintenance Garage - 12' X 24' Bathrooms - 8' X 8' Cedar Forest Products Company 1560 Square Feet (30' X 52') $31,689.00 Material - 100% Cedar Timber Roof Structure - 2 x 4 tongue and groove decking One Building - 30' X 52' Side Panels - 4' X 8' Cedar Log Decking Width of Maintenance Garage - 12' X 30' Bathrooms - 8' X 12' FOR: WATERMAIN IMPROVEMENT NO. 334 LOCATION: Shaughnessy Road from West 78th Street north to the south line of Lots 11 and 12, Block 3, Dewey Hill Second Addition. CONTRACTOR: Ideal Interprises, Inc. CON FACT AMOUNT: $14,737.50 ENGINEERING AND CLERICAL 12% 1,768.50 $16,506.00 PUBLISHING AND SUPPLIES: 35.00 $16,541.00 CAPITALIZED INTEREST @ 5 %: From: November 20, 1978 To: September 17, 1979 300 days @ $2.27 per day 681.03 $17,222.03 Lot B - Dewey Hill Second (26.41 %) 4,548.33 TOTAL CONSTRUCTION COST ................ .................... $12,673.70 ASSESSABLE UNITS: 10 ESTIMATED ASSESSMENT $927.80 PROPOSED ASSESSMENT - $1,267.37 ASSESSABLE COST: $12,673.70 COUNTY CHARGE: 6 parcels @ $0.50 each parcel 3.40 $12,676.70 TO BE SPREAD OVER 10 YEARS -:1980 thru 1989. FIRST YEAR PAYABLE WITH 1979 TAXES COLLECTED IN 1980. FIRST YEAR'S INTEREST FIGURED AT 5% OF TOTAL PRINCIPAL x 1.29 (470 days). ANALYSIS OF ASSESSMENT LEVY NO. 7451 COUNTY NO. C -128 FOR: GRADING & GRAVELING IMPROVEMENT NO. C -128 LOCATION: Shaughnessy Road from West 78th Street to Cul -de -sac. CONTRACTOR: Ideal Enterprises, Inc. CONTRACT AMOUNT: $12,021.43 ENGINEERING AND CLERICAL 120 1,442.57 $13,464.00 #338780 - Total Tree - Trees Rernved 1,125.00 $14,589.00 PUBLISHING AND SUPPLIES: 35.00 $14,624.00 CAPITALIZED INTEREST @ 50 From: November 20, 1978 To: September 17, 1979 300 days @ $2.00 per day 596.38 TOTAL CONSTRUCTION COST ..... ............................... $15,220.38 ASSESSABLE UNITS: 932.05 Feet ESTIMATED ASSESSMENT - $10.94 per foot . PROPOSED ASSESSMENT - $16.33 per foot ASSESSABLE COST: $15,220.38 COUNTY CHARGE: 6 parcels @ $0.50 each parcel 3.00 $15,223.38 TO BE SPREAD OVER 10 YEARS - 1980 thru 1989. FIRST YEAR PAYABLE WITH 1979 TAXES COLLECTED IN 1980. FIRST YEAR'S INTEREST FIGURED AT 5% OF TOTAL PRINCIPAL x.1.29 (470 days). ANALYSIS OF ASSESSMENT LEVY NO. 7449 COUNTY NO. 350 FOR: SANITARY SEWER IMPROVEMENT NO. 350 IACATION: Shaughneesy Road from West 78th Street north to the south line of Lots 11 and 12, Block 3, Dewey Hill Second Addition. CONT'RACT'OR: Ideal Interprises, Inc. CONTRACT AMOUNT: $28,152.83 ENGINEERING AND CLERICAL ll%: 3,096.81 $31,249.64 PUBLISHING AND SUPPLIES:. 50.00 $31,299.64 CAPITALIZED INTEREST @ 5 %: From: November 20, 1978 To: September 17, 1979 300 days @ $4.29 per day 1,287.02 $32,586.66 Lot B - Dewey Hill Second (65.45 %): 21,329.96 . TOTAL CONSTRUCTION COST .............. ................... $11,256.70 ASSESSABLE UNITS: 10 Lots ESTIlIATED ASSESSMENT - $1,046.04 PROPOSED ASSESSMENT - $1,125.67 - ASSESSABLE COST: $11,256.70 COUNTY [BARGE: 6 parcels @ $0.50 each parcel 3.00 $11,250.70 TO BE SPREAD OVER 10 YEARS - 1980 thru 1989. FIRST YEAR PAYABLE WITH 1979 TAXES COLLECTED IN 1980. FIRST YEAR'S INTEREST FIGURED AT 5% OF TOTAL PRINCIPAL x 1.29 (470 days). ANALYSIS OF ASSESSMENT LEVY NO. 7457 • COUNTY NO. 160 FOR: STORM SEWER IMPROVEMENT NO. 160 LOCATION: St. A1ban's Circle from Gleason Road to Cul -de -sac. CONTRACTOR: G. L. Contracting, Inc. CONTRACT AMOUNT: $10,911.55 ENGINEERING AND CLERICAL 12%: 1,309.39 $12,220.94 PUBLISHING AND SUPPLIES: 35.00 $12,255.94 CAPITALIZED INTEREST @ 5 %: From: December 18, 1978 To: September 17, 1979 272 days @ $1.68 per day 456.92 TOTAL CONSTRUCTION COST....... ........................... $12,712.86 ASSESSABLE UNITS: 9 Lots ESTIMATED ASSESSMENT - $1,478.34 per lot PROPOSED ASSESSMENT - $1,412.54 per lot ASSESSABLE COST: $12,712.86 COUNTY CHARGE: 9 parcels @ $0.15 each parcel 1.35 $12,714.21 TO BE SPREAD OVER 3 YEARS - 1980 thru 1982. FIRST YEAR PAYABLE WITH 1979 TAXES COLIE= IN 1980. FIRST YEAR'S INTEREST FIGURED AT 5% OF TOTAL PRINCIPAL x 1.29 (470 days). ANALYSIS OF ASSESSMENT LEVY NO. 7456 COUN'T'Y NO. 349 FOR: SANITARY SEWER IMPROVEMENT NO. 349 LOCATION: St., Albans Circle from Gleason Road to.Cial -se -sac. CONTRACTOR: G. L. Contracting, Inc. CONTRACT AMOUNT: $18,422.50 ENGINEERING AND CLERICAL 12 %: 2,210.70 $20,633.20 PUBLISHING AND SUPPLIES: 35.00 $20,668.20 CAPITALIZED IN`=ST @ 5 %: From: November 20, 1978 To: September 17, 1979 300 days @ $2.83 per day 849.00 TOTAL CONSTRUCTION COST ..... ............................... 21,517.20 ASSESSABLE UNITS: 9 Lots ESTIMATED ASSESSMENT - $2,593.92 per lot PROPOSED ASSESSMENT - $2,390.80 per lot ASSESSABLE COST: $21,517.20 COUNTY CHARGE: 9 parcels @ $0.15 each parcel 1.35 $21,518.55 TO BE SPREAD OVER 3 YEARS - 1980 thru 1982. FIRST YEAR PAYABLE WITH 1979 TAXES COVED IN 1980. FIRST YEAR'S TNT'F:RFST FIGURED AT 5% OF TOTAL PRINCIPAL x 1.29 (470 days). ANALYSIS OF ASSESSMENT LEVY NO. 7455 ' COUNTY NO. 333 FOR: WATERMAIN IMPROVEMENT NO. 333 LOCATION: St. Albans Circle froQn Gleason Road to Cul -de -sac. CONTRACTOR: G.L. Contracting, Inc. CONTRACT AMOUNT: $ 9,513.50 ENGINEERING AND CLERICAL 12 %: 1,141.62 10,655:12 PUBLISHING AND SUPPLIES: 35.00 10,690.12 CAPITALIZED INTEREST @ 5 %: From: December 18, 1978 To: September 17, 1979 272 days @ $1.46 per day 397.16 TOTAL CONSTRUCTION COST ...................... .. ........ $11,087.28 ASSESSABLE UNITS: 9 Lots ESTIMATED ASSESSMENT - $1,166.04 per connection PROPOSED ASSESSMENT - $1,231.92 per connection ASSESSABLE COST: $11,087.28 COUNTY CHARGE: 9 parcels @ $0.15 each parcel 1.35 $11,088.63 TO BE SPREAD OVER 3 YEARS - 1980 thru 1982. FIRST YEAR PAYABLE WITH 1979 TAXES C0I=CTED IN 1980. FIRST YEAR'S INTEREST FIGURED AT 5% OF TOTAL PRINCIPAL x 1.29 (470 days). ANALYSIS OF.ASSESSMENT LEVY NO. 7455 t COUNTY NO. 329 FOR: WATER!vlAIN IMPROVEMENT NO. 329 . LOCATION: Blake Ridge Estates (Sherman Circle) CONTRACTOR: G.L. Contracting, Inc. ACT AMOUNT: $20,235.30 i ENGINEERING AND CLERICAL 120 2,428.24 ` $22,663.54 PUBLISHING AND SUPPLIES: 35.00 22,698.54 t CAPITALIZED INTEREST @ 50: ` From: October 18, 1977 Tb: September 17, 1979 698 days @ $3.11 per day 2,170.62 TOTAL CONSTRUCTION COST .... ............................... $24,869.16 ASSESSABLE UNITS: 18 Lots ESTIMATED ASSESSMENT - $1,476.75 per lot PROPOSED ASSESSMENT - $1,381.62 per lot ASSESSABLE COST: $24,869.16 COY CHARGE: 18 parcels @ $0.15 each parcel 2.70 $24,871.86 TO BE SPREAD OVER 3 YEARS - 1980 thru 1982. FIRST YEAR PAYABLE WITH 1979 TAXES COLLECTED IN 1980. FIRST YEAR'S INTEREST FIGURED AT 5% OF TOTAL-PRINCIPAL x 1.29 (470 days). ANALYSIS OF ASSESSMENT TO BE SPREAD OVER 3 YEARS - 1980 thru 1982. FIRST YEAR PAYABLE WITH 1979 TAXES COLLECTED IN 1980. FIRST YEAR'S INTEREST FIGURED AT 5% OF TOTAL PRINCIPAL x 1.29 (470 days). LEVY NO. 7456 • OOUNTY NO. 344 FOR: SANITARY SEWER IMPROVEMENT NO. 344 LOCATION: Blake Ridge Estates (Sherman Circle) CONTRACTOR: G.L. Contracting, Inc. CONTRACT AMOUNT: $39,350.01 Less construction cost chargeable to Sanitary Sewer No. 342A and Watermain No. 326A 16,843.20 $22,506.81 ENGINEERING AND CLERICAL 12 %: 2,700.82 $25,207.63 PUBLISHING AND SUPPLIES: 50.00 $25,257.63 CAPITALIZED INTEREST @ 5% From: October 18, 1977 To: September 17, 1979 698 days @.$3.46 per day 2,415.03 TOTAL CONSTRUCTION COST ....... ............................... $27,672.66 ASSESSABLE UNITS: 18 Lots ESTIMA= ASSESSMENT - $1,631.46 per lot PROPOSED ASSESSMENT - $1,537.37 per lot ASSESSABLE COST: $27,672.66 COUNTY CHARGE: 18 parcels @ $0.15 each parcel 2.70 $27,675.36 TO BE SPREAD OVER 3 YEARS - 1980 thru 1982. FIRST YEAR PAYABLE WITH 1979 TAXES COLLECTED IN 1980. FIRST YEAR'S INTEREST FIGURED AT 5% OF TOTAL PRINCIPAL x 1.29 (470 days). TO BE SPREAD OVER 3 YEARS - 1980 thru 1982. FIRST YEAR PAYABLE WITH 1979 TAXES COLLECTED IN 1980. FIRST YEAR'S INTEREST FIGURED AT 5% OF TOTAL PRINCIPAL x 1.29 (470 days). ANALYSIS OF ASSESSMENT LEVY NO. 7457 CCXJAN Y NO. 155 FOR: STORM SEWER IMPROVEMENT NO. 155 LOCATION: Blake Ridge Estates (Sherman Circle) CONTRACTOR: G.L. Contracting, Inc. ' CONTRACT AMOUNT: $141234.07 City share of construction cost 4,527.06 9,707.01 ENGINEERING AND CLERICAL 120: 1,164.84 $10,871.85 PUBLISHING AND SUPPLIES: 35.00 $10,906.85 CAPITALIZED INTEREST @ 50: From: October 18, 1977 To• September 17, 1979 698 days @ $1.49 per day 1,039.93 TOTAL CONTRUCI'ION COST ...... ............................... $11,946.78, ASSESSABLE UNITS: 18 Lots ESTIMATED ASSESSMENT - $603.16 per lot PROPOSED ASSESSMENT - $663.71 per lot ASSESSABLE COST: $11,946.78 COUNTY CHARGE: 18 parcels @ $0.15 each parcel 2.70 $11,949.48 TO BE SPREAD OVER 3 YEARS - 1980 thru 1982. FIRST YEAR PAYABLE WITH 1979 TAXES COLLECTED IN 1980. FIRST YEAR'S INTEREST FIGURED AT 5% OF TOTAL PRINCIPAL x 1.29 (470 days). LOCATION: West 55th Street from France Avenue to Ewing Circle; Ewing: Circle from West 55th Street to.Cul -de -sac. CONTRACTOR: G.L. Contracting, Inc. CONTRACT AMOUNT: $11,322.38 ENGINEERING AND CLERICAL 12 %: 1,358.69 $12,681.07 PUBLISHING AND SUPPLIES: 25.00 $12,706.07 CAPITALIZED INTEREST @ 5$: From: November 20, 1978 To: September 17, 1979 300 days @ $1.74 per day 522.03 TOTAL CONSTRUCTION COST ................. ......... ...... $13,228.10 ASSESSABLE UNITS: 5 Lots ESrIMA D ASSESSMENT - $4,508.87 per lot PROPOSED ASSESSMENT - $2,645.62 per lot ASSESSABLE COST: $13,228.10 COUNTY CHARD: 5 parcels @ $0.15 each parcel .75 .$13,228.85 TO BE SPREAD OVER 3 YEARS - 1980 thru 1982. FIRST YEAR PAYABLE WITH 1979 TAXES COLLECTED IN 1980. FIRST YEAR'S INTEREST FIGURED AT 5% OF TOTAL PRINCIPAL x 1.29 (470 days). ANALYSIS OF ASSESSMENT LEVY NO. 7458 COUNTY NO. C -129 FOR: GRADING AND GRAVELING IMPROVEMENT NO. C -129 LOCATION: Ewing Circle fresn West 55th Street to Cul -de -sac. CONTRACTOR: G.L. Contracting, Inc. CONTRACT AMOUNT: $3,164.60 ENGINEERING AND CLERICAL 14 %: 443.04 $3,607.64 PUBLISHING AND SUPPLIES: 15.00 3,622.64 CAPITALIZED INTEREST @ 5 %: From: November 20, 1978 To: September 17, 1979 300 days @ $0.50 per day 148.99 TOTAL CONTRUCTION COST ................ ......................$3,771.63 ASSESSABLE UNITS: 357.50 Feet ESTIMATED ASSESSMENT - $15.75 per Assessable Foot PROPOSED ASSESSMENT - $10.55 per Assessable Foot ASSESSABLE COST: $3,771.63 COUNTY CHARGE: 5 parcels @ $0.15 each parcel .75 $3,772.38 TO BE SPREAD OVER 3 YEARS - 1980 thru 1982. FIRST YEAR PAYABLE WITH 1979 TAXES COLLECTED IN 1980. FIRST YEAR'S INTEREST FIGURED AT 5% OF TOTAL PRINCIPAL x 1.29 (470 days). ANALYSIS OF ASSESSMENT LEVY NO. 7456 COUN'T'Y NO. 351 FOR: SANITARY SEWER IMPROVEMENT NO. 351 LOCATION: Ewing Circle from West 55th Street to Cul-de -sac. CONTRACTOR: G.L. Contracting, Inc. CONTRACT AMOUNT: $8,046.70 ENGINEERING AND CLERICAL 12 %: 965.60 $9,012.30 PUBLISHING AND SUPPLIES: 15.00 $9,027.30 CAPITALIZED INTEREST @ 5 %: From: November 20, 1978 To: September 17, 1979 300 days @ $1.24 per day 372.00 TOTAL CONSTRUCTION COST .................................... $9,399.30 ASSESSABLE UNITS: 5 Tats ESTIMATED ASSESSMENT - $1,928.61 per lot PIUPOSED ASSESSMENT - $1,879.86 per lot ASSESSABLE COST: $9,399.30 COUNTY CHARGE: 5 parcels @ $0.15 each parcel .75 $9,400.05 TO BE SPREAD OVER 3 YEARS - 1980 thru 1982. FIRST YEAR PAYABLE WITH 1979 TAXES COLLECTED IN 1980. FIRST YEAR'S INTEREST FIGURED AT 5% OF TOTAL PRINCIPAL x 1.29 (470 days). ANALYSIS OF ASSESSMENT m LEVY NO. 7448 COUNTY NO. 319B FOR: 4Q MF44AIN IMPROVEMENT NO. 319B LOCATION: Oxford Avenue from Interlachen Blvd. to Hollywood Road; Hollywood Road from Oxford Avenue to Rutledge Avenue. Vandervork Avenue from Hollywood Rd. to Interlachen Blvd. CONTRACTOR: Peter Iametti Construction Company Raymond E. Haeg CON'T'RACT AMOUNT: $40,599.61 3,577.00 $44,176.61 ENGINEERING AND CLERICAL ll %: 4,859.43 $49,036.04 #241006 - Aqua City Engineering - Sprinkler repair 38.59 #290757 - Patrick Harrington — Trees and shoubs 1,045.00 #325719 - Aqua City Engineering Repairs 41.40 $50,161.03 PUBLISHING AND SUPPLIES: 75.00 $50,236.03 CAPITALIZED SST @ 5 %: From: August 15, 1977 To: September 17, 1979 762 days @ $6.88 per day 5,242.61 TOTAL CONSTRUCTION COST ....... ............................... $55,478.64 ASSESSABLE UNITS: 28 Connections ESTIMATED ASSESSMENT - $1,915.89 per connection PROPOSED ASSESSMENT - $1,981.38. per connection ASSESSABLE COST: $55,478.64 COUNTY CHARGE: 28 parcels @ $0.50 each parcel 14.00 55,492.62 TO BE SPREAD OVER 10 YEARS - 1980 thru 1989 FIRST YEAR PAYABLE WITH 1979 TAXES COLLECTED IN 1980. FIRST YEAR'S INTEREST FIGURED AT 5% OF TOTAL PRINCIPAL x 1.29 (470 days). ANALYSIS OF ASSESSMENT LEVY NO. 7450 COUNTY NO. 138 FOR: STORM SEWER IMPROVEMENT NO. 138 JACATION: County Road 18 from Nine Mile Creek to 3rd Street South in Hopkins. CONTRACTOR: Hennepin County CONTRACT AMOUNT: $110,536.98 ENGINEERING AND CLERICAL 40: 4,421.48 PUBLISHING AND SUPPLIES: $114,958.46 100.00 $115,058.46 CAPITALIZED INTEREST @ 5 %: One year @ $15.76 per day 5,751.67 $120,810.13 Lateral Cost: 68,182.56 Trunk Cost: $ 52,627.52 LATERAL ASSESSABLE UNITS: 1,707,980 Square Feet ESTIIMATED ASSESSMENT - $.03992 per Assessable Square Foot PROPOSED ASSESSMENT - $.03992 per Assessable Square Foot TRUNK ASSESSABLE UNITS: 4,316,648 Square Feet ESTIMATED ASSESSMENT - .$.010404 per Assessable Square Foot PROPOSED ASSESSMENT - $.012192 per Assessable Square Foot ASSESSABLE COST: $120,810.13 COUNTY CHARGE: 272 parcels @ $0.50 each parcel 136.00 $120,946. TO BE SPREAD OVER 10 YEARS - 1980 thru 1989 FIRST YEAR PAYABLE WITH 1979 TAXES COLLECTED IN 1980. FIRST YEAR'S INTEREST FIGURED AT 5% OF TOTAL PRINCIPAL x 1.29 (470 days).