HomeMy WebLinkAbout1978-01-16_COUNCIL MEETING(Revised)
AGENDA
EDINA CITY COUNCIL
REGULAR MEETING
JANUARY 16, 1978
7:00 P.M.
ROLLCALL
MINUTES of November 21, 1977, approved by motion of seconded by
I. PUBLIC HEARINGS ON PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS Affidavits of Notice by Clerk.
Presentation by City Manager and Engineer. Spectators heard. If Council
wishes to proceed, action by Resolution Ordering Improvement. 4/5 favor-
able rollcall vote to pass.
* A. Sanitary Sewer Improvement No. P -SS -348 - To Serve Lot 6, Block 1,
McGary Addition
B. Watermain Improvement No. P -WM -332 - To Serve Lot 6, Block 1, McGary
Addition
II. REPORTS AND PUBLIC HEARINGS ON PLANNING MATTERS Affidavits of Notice by Clerk.
Presentation by Planning Department. Spectators heard. First Reading of
Zoning Ordinance requires offering of Ordinance only. 4/5 favorable rollcall
vote to pass Second Reading or if Second Reading should be waived. Lot Divi-
sions, Plats, Flood Plain Permits and Appeals from Administrative or Board of
Appeals and Adjustments decisions require action by Resolution. 3/5 favorable
rollcall vote to pass.
* A. Year IV - Community Development Block Grant Program (Second Hearing)
Continued from 1/9/78
B. Appeal from Board of Appeals and Adjustments Decision on Variances
1. Fritz Oertel - Auditor's Subdivision 259 (4424 North Ave.) (Appeal Withdrawn)
C. Southwest Edina Plan Amendment (West of County Road 18 and North and
South of Valley View Road) (Continue to 2/6/78)
* D. Ryan Construction Company - East of York Ave., West of Xerxes Ave., North
of W. 76th Street and South of W. 74th St., extended
1. Preliminary Plat - Yorkdale Townhomes of Edina S -77 -22
2. Ordinance No. 811 -109 - R -1 Residential District to PRD -3 Planned
Residential District - Second Reading Z -77 -17
E. Rainbow Management Division - SW Quadrant 51st & France
1. Zoning.Change - Second Reading (Continued from 11/21/77) .
a. Ordinance No. 811 -A102 - R -1 Residential District to Senior
Citizen Housing District
* F. Edina Interchange Sixth Addition - Final Plat - Generally located East
of Metro Blvd., West of T.H. 100 and North of Edina Industrial Blvd.
S -77 -26 (11/30/77)
III. INFORMAL HEARING ON INDUSTRIAL REVENUE BONDS
IV. SPECIAL CONCERNS OF RESIDENTS
Council Agenda
January 16, 1978
Page Two
V. RECOMMENDATIONS AND REPORTS
A. Tri -City Lab /Hennepin County - Agreement for Water Samples
B. Minnehaha Creek Watershed District Hearing
C. Morningside Area Sanitary Sewer Inspection
D. Yellow Cab Para - Transit Project
E. Special Concerns of Mayor and Council
F. Post Agenda and Manager's Miscellaneous Items
1. Correction of Hinutes of 11/7/77
VI. RESOLUTIONS
A. Council Salaries for 1978
VII. FINANCE
A. Claims paid. Motion of , seconded by ,
for payment of the following Claims per Pre -List: General Fund,
$63,301.39; Park Fund, $4,608.22; Art Center, $1,310.68; Swimming Pool,
$58.09; Golf Course, $1,037.78; Arena, $6,062.80; Gun Range, $103.45;
Water Works, $4,408.39; Sewer Fund, $95,354.22; Liquor Fund, $33,661.56;
Construction, $4,960.80; Total, $214,867.38
MEMORANDUM
12 January, 1978
TO: Ken Rosland, City Manager
FROM: Fran Hoffman, Director of Public Works
SUBJECT: Morningside Sanitary Sewer Inspection
The sanitary sewer system in Morningside needs to be
televised to check for deficiencies prior to reconstructing the street
system. There are suspect areas due to the poor soil conditions.
We propose.to let bids for televising the sewer lines
and use the Year II funds that were allocated for engineering services
in Morningside. The estimated cost is-$8 - 10,000.
FH:ks
M E M O R A N D U M
TO: Ken Rosland, City Manager
FROM: Ken Esse, Sanitarian
SUBJECT: Proposed Agreement with Hennepin County and the
Tri -City Laboratory
Attached are three (3) copies of the Agreement between
Hennepin County and the City of Edina for the provisions of well water
testing services.
The contract has been carefully studied and approved
by Arlin Waelti.
The lab has just successfully finished a four month trial
contract with Hennepin County and this is a renewal of that Agreement which
will expire December 31, 1978.
All copies must be signed by the appropriate officials,
notarized and returned to the Hennepin County Contract Office.
KE:ks
Attach.
1/12/78
Purchase of Sery
ice Office A 1006 Government Center, Minneapolis, MN 55487
HeNNE'PIN COUNTY
September 26, 1917
Mr. Ken Esse
City of Edina
4801 W. 50th Street
Edina, hIN 55424
Dear hIr. Esser.
Enclosed are three copies, of the agreement between Hennepin County
and the City of Edin a for the provision of titre appropriate,
services. Please have the contracts signed by the app ro p
your
officials, notarized, and return all three co to me
edato you
earliest convenience. An execu.ed copy .
once the County has completed its signature process.
Sincerely,
Mac '4Jhatl ey
1414: mi Contract Officer
• Enc.
=Iy1m
:Contract No. 80096
THIS AGREEKENT:Is made and entered into by and between the Hennepin County Board
of Commissioners, A -24 Government Center, Minneapolis, Minnesota 55487, herein -
after referred to as -the "County ", and the City of Edina, Edina, Minnesota,
hereinafter referred to as the "Municipality ".
W I T N E S S ET H
WHEREAS, the Municipality wishes to provide Community. Health Services under the
Community Health Services Act of 1976; and
WHEREAS,.funds are available from the Minnesota Department.of•Health for the
.provision of Community Health Services; and
WHEREAS, the County wishes to support such services.
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual undertakings and agreements
hereinafter set forth, the County and the Municipality agree as follows:
1. TERM OF AGREEMENT
The term of:.this Agreement shall be from January 1, 1978,.through
December 31, 1978, subject to the cancellation provisions herein.
2. CONDITIONS OF COUNTY.SUPPORT
.a. " The County agrees to make payments•to. the Municipality for well -
water testing services. Services provided by the Municipality.
as;part of the testing service shall include:
i
(1) Receiving calls from the public regarding well -water testing.
(2) Mailing.out water testing kits and instructions as shown in
Exhibit A, such Exhibit being incorporated into and made a
part of this Agreement.
(3) Performing coliform and nitrate analyses by standard methods.
(4) Mailing test findings along with possible interpretations of
results as shown in Exhibit A.
Purchase of,Seryice Office
Ca
A 1006 Government Center,. Minneapolis, MN 55487
HeNNeP.IN COUNTY
September 26, 1917
Mr. Ken Esse
City of Edina
4801 W. 50th Street
Edina, MN 55424
Dear Mr. Esse:
Enclosed are three copies of the agreement between Hennepin County
and the City of Edina for the provision of well -water testing
services. Please have the contracts signed. by the appropriate
officials, notarized, and return all -three copies to me at your
earliest convenience. An executed copy will be returned to you
once the County has completed its signature process.
Sincerely,
MW:mj Mac Whatley
Enc. Contract Officer
t
s
®i
,
Purchase of Service Office
A 1006 Government Center, Minneapolis, MN 55487
HeNNePIN COUNTY
September 26, 1917
Mr. Ken Esse
City of Edina
4801 W. 50th Street
Edina, MN 55424
Dear Mr. Esse:
Enclosed are three copies of the agreement between Hennepin County
and the City of Edina for the provision of well -water testing
services. Please have the contracts signed by the appropriate
officials, notarized, and return all three copies to me at your
earliest convenience. An executed copy will be returned to you
once the County has completed its signature process.
MW:mj
Enc.
Sincerely,
4�6. fXIL
Mac Whatley
Contract Officer
i
AGREEMENT
Contract No. 80096
THIS AGREEMENT is made and entered into by and between the Hennepin County Board
of Commissioners, A -24 Government Center, Minneapolis, Minnesota 55487, herein-
after referred to-as the "County ", and the City of Edina, Edina, Minnesota,
hereinafter referred to as the "Municipality ".
W I T N E S S E T H
WHEREAS, the Municipality wishes to provide Community Health Services under the
Community Health Services Act of 1976; and
WHEREAS, funds are available from the Minnesota Department of Health for the
provision of Community Health Services; and
WHEREAS, the County wishes to support such services.
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual undertakings and agreements
hereinafter set forth, the County and the Municipality agree as follows:
1. TERM OF AGREEMENT
2.
The term of this Agreement shall be from January 1, 1978, through
December 31, 1978, subject to the cancellation provisions herein.
CONDITIONS OF COUNTY SUPPORT
a. The County agrees to make.payments to the Municipality for,well-
water testing services. Services provided.by the Municipality
as.part of the testing service shall include:
(1) Receiving calls from the public regarding well -water testing.
(2). Mailing out water testing kits and instructions as shown in
Exhibit A, such.Exhibit being incorporated into and made a
part of this Agreement.
(3) Performing coliform and nitrate analyses by standard methods.
(4) Mailing test findings along with possible interpretations-;of
results as shown in Exhibit A.
3.
- 2 -
b. The County agrees to.pay $7.00 for each
well -water test performed
by the Municipality. Cost components of
the charge are:
:Coliform Test
$2.00
Nitrate Test,
3.50..
Postage - mail out sample
.13
Postage mail out results
.13
Envelope - mail out sample
.05
Envelope - mail out results
.05
Lab Result Sheet
.(three -page self- carbon paper)
.25 .
Information'Sheet(s)
.15
Whirl Pak Bag - 6 oz.
(pre- sterilized)
.04
$6.30
Overhead /administration /clerical
.70
'TOTAL
$7.00
C. The -total -units of well - water testing services to be purchased
under this Agreement shall not exceed four - hundred (400) units
of well -water testing services.
d. Cash payments to Municipality for purchased well -water testing
services shall not exceed $2,800.00.
e. The well -water testing service.shall be available to individuals
for the testing of wells located in areas of Hennepin County
not served by a municipal environmental health program.
f. The Municipality shall within thirty (30) days following the last
day of the quarter ending March 31, June 30, September 30, and
December.31 submit to the County a summary of charges and a..
summary of well - water analysis using Exhibit B attached hereto,.
such Exhibit being incorporated into and made a part of this
Agreement.
g. The County shall within fifteen (15) days of receipt of the
summary reports make payment to.the Municipality for charges.
STANDARDS FOR HEALTH SERVICES
a. During the term of this Agreement.the Municipality shall comply..
with all applicable standards= _required by the Minnesota Department
of Health, and shall comply with any other standards or criteria
specified by the County to assure - quality of service.
b. The Municipality further agrees to remain in compliance with all
other applicable Federal, State, or local laws and regulations
pertaining to the performance of this Agreement.
- 3 -
4. CONDITIONS OF THE PARTIES' OBLIGATIONS
a. It is understood and agreed that the Agreement between the parties
is conditional upon the County receiving sufficient funding from
the State of Minnesota. If such.funding is not available, this
Agreement shall be cancelled immediately upon written notice to
the Municipality, other provisions.for cancellation of this
Agreement notwithstanding. This Agreement may be renegotiated to
reflect any reduced funding.
b. Notwithstanding any other cancellation provisions contained
herein, this.Agreement or any part thereof may be cancelled by
either party.at „any time, with or without cause, upon thirty
(30) days' written notice delivered by :mail or in person.
c. Any alterations, variations., modifications, or waivers of pro-
visions of this Agreement shall be valid only when they have been
reduced;-to writing, duly signed,:and attached to the original.of
this Agreement.
d. In -the event of any policy changes of the.Municipality in types
of clients to be served, types of services, service hours, or
service location,.the Municipality will notify.and consult.with
the County before implementing the new policy.
5. AUDITS, REPORTS, MONITORING PROCEDURES, AND RECORDS
a. The Municipality will:
(1) Maintain a bookkeeping system which sufficiently and prop-
erly reflects all direct and.indirect costs of any nature
expended in the performance of this Agreement. An example
of .a system which provides the minimum amount of information
is described in Exhibit C.
(2) . Maintain all financial books and records for at least five
(5) years for audit purposes; provided that if the County
furnishes written notice during this period requesting
retention of records to allow completion of an audit by the
County or its ultimate sources of funds, the Municipality
shall retain records for the period requested:
b. The County may, at its discretion, require the performance of
financial audits, and shall, after consultation with the
Municipality, arrange for the performance thereof.
c. The County will monitor and evaluate the performance of the
.Municipality under this Agreement on an ongoing basis.
d. The Contract Officer.or other personnel of the County may con-
duct periodic site visits to determine.compliance with this
Agreement and.evaluate the quality of services purchased under
- 4 -
this Agreement. Such visits may be made with or without prior
- :notice at any time within the normal working.hours of operation
of the Municipality. The Municipality shall be furnished a
summary of any reports prepared as a result of the visit.
e. The-Municipality will allow personnel of the County and the
Minnesota Department of Health access to its premises at .reason -
able hours in order to exercise their responsibility to monitor
the services.
6. DATA PRIVACY
The use or disclosure by any party -of information concerning a
recipient of service or applicant in violation of the Minnesota Data.
Privacy Act or for any purpose not directly connected with the admini-
stration of the County's or Municipality's responsibility with respect
to the services hereunder is prohibited- except on written consent of
such recipient of service, his /her.attorney, or his /her responsible
parent or guardian.
7. FAIR HEARING AND GRIEVANCE PROCEDURE
The Municipality will establish a system through which recipients of
service may present grievances about the.operation of the service
program, and the Municipality will advise recipients of service of
this right.
8. TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE
a. A coordinator from the County will act as the Contract Officer
responsible for contractual and administrative issues relating to
the Agreement including, but not limited to, payment procedures,.
monitoring of fiscal operations of the Municipality, and technical
issues.
b. Except as otherwise provided in this Agreement, any dispute
concerning a question of fact arising under this Agreement which
is not disposed of by .negotiation and agreement shall be decided
by the Contract Officer, who shall-reduce his /her decision to
writing and furnish a copy thereof to the Municipality. The
decision-of the Contract Officer shall be final and conclusive
unless, within thirty (30) days from the date of receipt of such
copy, the Municipality furnishes to the Contract Officer a written
appeal addressed to the County. The decision of the County, or
its duly authorized representative for the determination of such
appeals, shall be final and conclusive unless determined by a
court of competent jurisdiction to have been fraudulent, capricious,
arbitrary, so grossly erroneous as :necessarily to imply bad faith,
or not supported by substantial evidence. In connection with any
appeal proceeding under this clause,.the Municipality shall be
- 5 -
-afforded an opportunity to be heard and to offer evidence in
.support.of its appeal. Pending final decision of a dispute here-
under, the Municipality shall proceed diligently with the perfor-
mance of .the Agreement and in accordance with the Contract
-'Officer's decision.
c. This disputes clause does not preclude consideration of questions
.of law.
9. INDEMNITY
The Municipality does hereby agree that it will at all times indemnify
.and hold harmless the County against any and all liability, loss, .
damages, costs, and expenses which the County may hereafter sustain,
incur, or be required to pay:
a. By reason of any.recipient of service suffering personal injury,
death, or property loss or damage either while participating in
or receiving the - services to be furnished under this Agreement,
or while on premises owned, leased, or operated.by Municipality;
or
b. By reason of any recipient of service causing injury to, or
damage to the ,property of another person, when Municipality or
any officer, agent, or employee thereof has undertaken or is
.furnishing the services called for under this Agreement; or
c. By reason of any person employed by the Municipality or alleged
to be employed by the Municipality, for any claim or cause of
action in equity.or for damages arising out of the employment or
alleged employment, or discrimination by the Municipality; or
d. By reason of any-act or omission of the Municipality, his agents,
officers, or employees in the performance`of services under this
Agreement.
10. EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY AND CIVIL RIGHTS
During the performance of this Agreement, the Municipality agrees to
the following:
No person,shall,.on the grounds of race, color, religion, age,.sex,
disability, marital status, sexual orientation, public assistance
status, ex- offender status, or national origin, be excluded from full
employment rights in,:participation in, be denied the benefits of, or
be otherwise subjected to discrimination under any program, service,
or activity under the provisions of any and.all applicable Federal
and State laws against discrimination including the Civil Rights Act
of 1964. The Municipality will furnish all information and reports
required by Hennepin County or by Executive-Order No. 11246 and
Revised Order No. 4, and by the rules and regulations and orders.of
the Secretary of Labor for purposes of investigation to ascertain
compliance with such rules, regulations, and orders.
- 6 -
11. SUBCONTRACTING AND ASSIGNMENTS
The Municipality shall neither enter into subcontracts for performance
of any of the services contemplated in this Agreement, nor assign this
Agreement, without prior written approval of the County and subject
to such conditions and provisions as the County may deem necessary.
The Municipality shall be responsible for the performance of all
subcontractors.
-12. INDEPENDENT CONTRACTOR
It is agreed that nothing herein contained is intended or should be
construed in any manner as- creating or establishing the relationship
of co- partners between the parties hereto or as- constituting the
Municipality or the Municipality's employees or agents as the agent,
'representative, or employee of Hennepin County.
13. DEFAULT
a. Neither party hereto shall be held responsible for delay or
failure to perform hereunder when such delay or failure is due
.to fire, flood, epidemic, strikes, acts of.God or the public
enemy, unusually severe weather,. legal acts of the public
authorities, or delays or defaults caused..by"public,carriers, :
which cannot reasonably be forecast or provided against.
b. Unless the Municipality's default is excused under the provisions
of this Agreement, the County. may, by written notice of.default
to the Municipality, cancel the whole or:any part of this
Agreement in any of the following circumstances:
(1) If the Municipality fails to provide services called for by
this-Agreement within the time specified herein or any
extension thereof; or
(2) If the Municipality fails to perform any of the other pro -
visions of this Agreement, or so fails to prosecute the work
as to endanger performance of this Agreement in accordance
with its terms,
and-in either of these two circumstances the Municipality does
not cure such failure within a period of ten (10) days (or such
longer period as the authorized representative of the County may
approve in writing) after receipt of notice from the County
specifying such failure.
c. Waiver of any default shall not be deemed to be a waiver of any
subsequent default. Waiver of breach of any provision of this
Agreement shall not be construed to be modification of the terms
of this Agreement unless stated to be such in writing, signed by
an authorized representative of the County,.and.attached to the
original Agreement.
_ 7 _
d. The rights and remedies of the County provided in this clause
..shall not be exclusive and are in addition to any other rights
and remedies provided by law or under this Agreement.
14. NOTICE OF CANCELLATION
a. After receipt of a notice of cancellation, except. as otherwise
directed, the Municipality shall:
(1) Discontinue provision of services under this Agreement on
the date, and to the extent specified, in the notice of
cancellation;
(2) Cancel all orders and subcontracts to the extent that they
relate to the performance of .the part of this Agreement
cancelled by the notice of cancellation;
(3) Settle all outstanding liabilities and all claims arising
out of such cancellation of orders and subcontracts, with
the approval or ratification to the extent that may be
required, which approval or ratification shall be final
for all the purposes of this clause; and
(4) Complete performance of such part of the Agreement as shall
not have been cancelled by the notice of cancellation.
b. In the event.of cancellation, the Municipality shall reimburse to
the County any and all unobligated funds as required by the..
-Minnesota Department of Health or shall reimburse the County any
excess above the amount of money which bears.the same ratio to
the total compensation in this Agreement as the.number of days
elapsed in the term of the Agreement bears to the entire term of
the Agreement. The actual reimbursement shall be the larger of
these two amounts and shall be made within sixty (60) days of the
effective date of such cancellation.
c. The Municipality shall maintain all records relating to performance
of the cancelled portion of this Agreement as may be required by
the County.
15. MERGER
It is understood and agreed that the entire agreement of the parties
is contained herein and that this Agreement supersedes all oral
— 8 —
agreements and negotiations between the parties relating to the
subject matter hereof. All items incorporated by reference are
—attached and are deemed to be part of this Agreement.
.IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the County and the Municipality have executed this Agreement
on the day of
Upon proper execution, this Agreement
will be legally valid and binding and
upon date of approval is in compliance
with all laws relating to the subject
herein.
Assistant County Attorney
Date
Approved as to execution
Assistant County Attorney
Date
HENNEPIN COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
By
Chairman of Its County Board
Attest
Deputy County Auditor
By
Deputy County Administrator
CITY OF EDINA
By
And
STATE OF MINNESOTA ) -
ss.
COUNTY OF )
.On this day of 19 , before
me appeared to me personally
known, who being by me duly sworn did say that he /she is the
of
, the corporation described
in and who executed the foregoing instrument; and that said instrument
was executed in behalf of said corporation by authority of its
and said
acknowledged said instrument
to be the free act and deed of said corporation.
Notary Public
My Commission Expires
TI._ CITY PUBLIC flEh..LTH LABORATORY
4801 West 501:h Street
Edina, Minnesota
927 -8861
0 SEND REPORT TO (Print or type):
Name
Address
Town/ Zip
City _ Code
Telephone
*To be filled in by Laboratory*
Coliform
Organism's
per 100 ml
MF
.Nitrate
Nitrogen
milligrams
per 1i -er
Date Received
Code
The enclosed bag is for the collection of a sample of water which is used for drinking or
domestic use. Do not use'for lake or swimming pool water.
The sample should be collected at a point on the piping system which is used regularly.
Water must be permitted to run from the spout for five to ten minutes before the sample
is taken. Samples should be taken from a point on the piping system before the water goes
through the system. Samples must be collected the first part''of the week (Monday, Tuesday,
or Wednesday), and delivered immediately to the lab, preferably first thing in the
morning. SAMPLES WILL NOT BE ACCEPTED ON A THURSDAY OR FRIDAY. Samples must be at the
lab within 30 hours of sampling. See the enclosed map for directions to the lab.
The information below MUST accompany the sample:
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- - - - - --
r- ocation of Well (If different from above
address):
Lot Size
Age of Premises
Age of Well
Sampling Point (tap of well, kitchen tap, other)
WELL INFORMATION:
Type of well (check):
Dug
Drilled
Driven
Bored
Diameter of Casing inches
Depth of Casing feet
Depth of Well feet
Type of storage:
Pressure tank_
Cistern
Other
None
Indicate the distance the well may be from
any of the following:
Privy
Septic tank
Leaching pit
(,***Dil absorption area
darnya rd
Pond, lake, river, or stream
Sewer
Cesspool
Other sources of pollution
1
Water is used by (check):
Private home
Cafe, tdvern, or eating place
Motel or hotel
School
Church
Camp
Nursing home or hospital
Park _
Apartment Building
Dup'l ex
PLEASE INDICATE ANY OTHER PROBLEMS IN THE
SPACE BELOW:
TO GET TO THE TESTING LABORATORY
- 1,
Bring Water Samples To The Health Department
Receptionist
50th AVENUE/
AVENUE EXIT OFF
CITY HALL
ST OF
AY 100
INSTRUCTION SHEET FOR
OPENING, FILLING AND CLOSING
THE WHIRL -PAK BAG
Opening:
T ne 'op shall be completely Porn
cr: at the scored line
E The wires shall be separated by
pulling the tabs outward
u
C The wires shall be further sepa-
rated by pushing the ends of the
wires toward the center of the
bag
i
Filling and Closing
D Liqu;c _hall be placeel in the bar-
as srrown. Fill 2/3 to
3/4 =nl1.
sy'�-
L-J,
E The .wires shall be straightened
as much as possible by pullinS
on the ends of the wire
i
F The bag shall be whirled: ivE
(5 ) complete - revolutions and t�-,r
enos of the wires turned inwarc
against the opposite face to the
fold
e
[a
PRIVATE WELL UlJER
PROVIDED BY HENNEPIN COUNTY Ili 1977
SERVICES FUNDS
TESTING
COMMUNITY HEALTH'
THE INTERPRETATION OF LABORATORY FINDINGS
After considering the laboratory data covering the well water sample submitted
by you to the laboratory, and the system from which it was drawh, statements
which give a possible evaluation of the supply and recommendation for possible
corrections follow below. Please disregard those items not checked.
A. DThe water from this supply appeared to be of satisfactory sanitary quality
t—� at the time the sample was taken, and, unless major physical changes occur
in the system, the water should be safe for human consumption.
B. Organisms of the coliform group were found in the sample and are evidence
of contamination. This contamination may have been introduced into the
system during the construction or repair. The entire system should be
disinfected (see instructions). About a week after disinfection the well
should be re- sampled. A sample kit.for this purpose is enclosed.
C. Organisms of the coliform group were found in the sample. In addition,
nitrate nitrogen levels appear to be elevated. Tire %,jell should be care-
fully examined for sanitary defects, or improper location, and repairs or
corrections made as necessary.
D. I 1Nitrate nitrogen levels appear to be elevated. For a possible interpre-
tation of these findings, please see the attached sheets.
E. L (Since disinfection failed to eliminate organisms of the coliform group,
the well should be carefully examined for sanitary defectsy and repairs
made as necessary.
F. An examination for the cause of taste and odor problems was not perfnrrrJPd.
However, such problems may often be controlled by a thorough disinfection
of the well and distribution system (see instructions). When a well is
constructed or reconstructed it should be disinfected before the water
is used.
GENERAL COMMENT
Laboratory examinations of water drawn from domestic water supply systems can
furnish information which is useful in determining the sanitary quality of the
water. However, laboratory tests have important limitations which must be recog-
nized. If the sample was properly collected and shipped, and if the laboratory
examination was properly performed, the test results should describe the quality
of the water at the time it was collected. Unfortunately, contamination of a
water supply can be intermi_ttent, and a sample (Irawn on one particular day may
not be representative of water collected on a different day. For this reason it
is necessary to consider the location and construction of a % -jell and pumping
system, as well as laboratory test results, in an evaluation of the safety of
a water supply. If the laboratory examination of water drawn from a properly located
K
and constructed supply shows the water I.o be of good sanitary, quality, the
supply should be satisfactory from a health standpoint. However, an improperly
constructed or located well cannot be considered safe, regardless of laboratory
results.
It is also possible for a well to be properly constructed and located acid yet
produce water contamining coliform organisms. These organisms may be intro-
duced into the well at the time of construction or at times whgn repairs are
made. For this reason, wells and distribution systems should be.properly dis-
infected before they are put into service after construction or repairs. When
a well that appears to be properly constructed and located shows evidence of
bacteriological contamination, the first attempt at correction should be disin-
fection, followed by resampling after a lapse of several days. If the contarrri-
nation.persists, it may come from 'a hidden defect such as a faulty casing.
Chemical tests, as well as bacteriological examinations, may be used in deter-
mining the suitability of a water supply for human use. Nitrate nitrogen in
excess of 10 mg /1 may produce methemoglobinemia in infants under 6 months of
age. Water contamining more than 10 mg /1 of nitrate nitrogen should not be used
in the preparation of infant formula. Since nitrate is a natural product of the
decomposition of sewage in septic tank systems, its presence in water may be an
indication of poor sanitary quality. However, nitrate nitrogen occurs naturally
in the shallow ground waters of some areas of the state and its presence is not
always related to sewage or waste disposal. The actual significance of nitrate
in moderate concentrations is difficult to determine unless it is known that the
only likely source of the nitrogen is decomposing waste material.
I. Coliform_Organisms. Coliform organisms are bacteria which are found naturally
101 in the intestines of all warm- blooded animals, including mail, and in the upper
aerated portions of soil. Because of their relationships with the intestine of
warm- blooded animals, they will naturally be found in the feces of these animals
and, in the case of man, in sewage. They also constitute the largest single
group of organisms found in fecal waste or seviage. Although these organisms
are not noramlly considered disease producers, their presence in the water supply
indicates that organisms of an unacceptable origin have gained entrance to the
water supply,.and for this reason the water- supply should be considered unsafe.
Since these organisms also could be introduced at the time that work may have
been done on the well or plumbing system from a dirty tap, or as a part of the
sampling process, it is recommended that the well and distribution system be
disinfected and the supply resam pled.
II. Nitrate Nitrogen. Nitrate is the end product in the decomposition of nitro-
gen containing organic compounds. Thus, in the decomposition of organic matter
in sewage, or organic matter on the surface of the earth, nitrates will be pro-
duced. The naturally occurring nitrate nitrogen concentration of ground water
in this area in believed to be lass than one milligram per liter. When nitrate
nitrogen concentrations in excess of one milligram per liter are found it may
indicate that nitrate containing water from sewage or the rapid infiltration
or surface waters may he gaining access to the aquifer from which the well draws
water. Nitrate nitrogen is not harmful itself except in concentration in ex-
cess of 10 milligrams per liter when given to bottle -fed infants. There is no
method available which is practical for the removal of nitrate from a small
ground %•later supply. Boiling the %later does not eliminate the nitrate problem
but increases the concentration due to evaporation of the water. Available 'in-
formation from the Minnesota Department of Health indicates that the following
interpretation Wright be given to nitrate nitrogen results: I
11
a. Less than one milligram per liter: natural; not significant.
t
b. One to 10 milligrams per liter: questionable quality; probably
not of natural soil mineral deposits: possibly affected by sewage
or surface water infiltration; surveillance and periodic re-
sampling desirable.
c. More than 10 milligrams per liter: should not be fed to infants
under six months of age; is not from natural mineral deposits;
is of unsatisfactory sanitary quality.
III. General. Both of the items used in the evaluation of the sanitary quality
of a water supply (coliform organisms and nitrate nitrogen) are in almost every
case used purely as indicators. That this is the case may be seen by the fact that
normally none of these will cause illness in healthy persons, except as relates to
nitrate in excess of 10 parts per million served to bottle -fed infants. They are
however, constituents of sewage or surface waters which may very readily contain
other compounds or organisms that are harmful to-one's health. If waters con-
taining these "indicators" is reaching the aquifer from which the domestic water
supply is being obtained, then they may indicate that other compounds that might
also be present in the sewage or surface water that may be harmful, may also
be gaining access to this aquifer. In addition to the laboratory results,,
the location, construction and operation of the supply must be considered in any
evaluation of the safety of a water supply. Unless a water supply is properly
located, properly constructed and properly operated, it must be presumed to be
unsafe regardless of the laboratory results.
.5 ,
W
IILNNEf IN COU �' IN 1977 COMMU1111Y IILAL111 SLRV S FUNDS
WELL DISIV ECTION
t
Indications of contamination are often found in the water from new wells' if care
has not been taken to disinfect the well and pumping equipment thoroughly after
the work has been completed. It is also possible that contamination may be intro-
duced into a well or water system when it is opened for repair. Wells and water
systems should, therefore, always be disinfected following new construction or
repair in order to destroy any contamination which may have been introduced at
that time. Wells and water systems which have been flooded should also be flushed
and disinfected before use again. The disinfection may be carried out by pouring
ordinary laundry bleach or other hypochlorite solution mixed with water, in the
ratio of one quart of bleach to three gallons of water, into the top of the well
casing in such a way as to wash down the inside of the casing, and the outside of
the drop pipe. In most instances this is best done by removing the well seal at
the top of the casing, although in those wells equipped with a removable plug
in the seal the solution may be introduced by simply removing the plug. Wells
which are of the one -pipe jet type can be thoroughly disinfected only through
removal of the pipe from the well.
The chemical, after being introduced into the well, should be thoroughly mixed
and dispersed to the bottom by alternately starting and stopping the pump sev-
eral times. The chlorinated water should then be drawn into the pressure tank
and distribution system and all piping and fixtures by opening each faucet, or
other fixture, until the odor of chlorine is apparent. The chemical should be
left in the system for at least four hours, preferably overnight, after which
the water can be discharged to waste until the taste and odor are no longer
objectionable. This chlorinated water should not be drawn through the media of
zeolite water softners.
The following table shows the number of quarts of laundry bleach containing
5.25 percent hypochlorite (each mixed with three gallons of water) for wells
of different sizes. Quantities considerably greater than those indicated will
do no harm.
In the case of large and dug -type wells, a greater quantity of chlorine solution
will be required to accomplish the disinfection. As a rule, approximately one
gallon of laundry bleach will be necessary for 1,000 gal'lons of water. Whenever
possible, the walls of such wells should be thoroughly washed with the solution.
Diameter of well
in Inches
Less than
50 feet
100
150
200
250
300
350
400
500
Quarts
of
Laundry
Bleach
2
1/2
1/2
1/2
112
1
1
1
1
2
4
1/2
1
2
2
3
3
4
4
4
5
1
2
2
3
4
6
6
6
8
6
1
2
3
4
6
6
8
8
10
8
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
18
Gallons
of
Laundry
Bleach
12
1
2
2
2
4
4
4
4
6
18
2
3
4
6
6
8
8.
24
4
5
7
9
- --
- --
- --
- - -.
- --
30
4
7
11
- --
- --
- --
- - -,
- --
- --
r
-
HENNEPI•1 COUNTY
SUMMARY DATA ON ':TELL WATER ANALYSIS
FOR THE PERIOD
WELL CONSTRUCTION
NJ;Y; C,rXi fcr�n
Nr:r; A'i1r,r1,.
--
J'Cr1 ',
A'A'6 t7i1ro1,
17 ."( L1��i''nrvr:
1'rk'
• !'US r:rrli -;� » +n
Dug
----- - - - - --
-
------
-- -
-_.
Drilled—
- - -
- -- - - - --
- - --
- -- - - - - --
= - - -
Bored
- —
- - - - - --
- - - -- -
- - -- -
WELL DEPTH
- - - --
0 - 25'-
- - - --
- -I
- —
-- - -
51 __ 1001
-
--
- - --
-- --- - --
-- - -- - --
100+
- - --
-- --
----- - - - - --
l
- - - - - -- -
-- - - - - -- - --
WELL LESS THAN
75' FROM POINT
OF CONTAMINATION:
Privy
Septic Tank
--
—
-- -- - - -- -
Drainfield
- - - - -I-
-
Leaching Pit
Cesspool
-
- - --
Barnyard
--
- - - - --
I----------I-----------
- - - -- --
I---- - - - - --
Pond, Lake
o ,
River, Stream
--
Sewer
Other
AGE OF WELL
0 - 5 years
6 - 10 years
-
-
------ - - - -
-- - - --
10+ years
WATER USED BY- -- • - - - --
Private Home
Other--
.... - - - -- - - - - - -- -
-- - - - - --
- - --
- - -- - -• - -- - • -
- - - --
--- --- - -- - --
- --
- -- - - -- --
------ � - - - --
DATA NOT PROVIDED
* NUMBER OF
POS Nitrates
+10.oig /1 t.
%30/77
r. .
EXHIBIT B
Community Health Services
Well - Water Testing Program
Charges for Period / / Through /1 /
Tests Performed x $7.00 = $ Total To Be Reimbursed
IWAE
EXHIBIT C
1. The Municipality's bookkeeping system shall be adequate to produce the
required records to ensure adequate accountability under this Agreement.
One example of a system which provides the minimum amount of information
is:
a. Cash Disbursements Journal
b. Cash Receipts Journal
c. General Journal
d. General Ledger
e. Property Records
f. Individual Earnings Records
g. Separate Checking Account
h. Adequate Supportive Documentation
i
i. Cost allocation schedules when all programs of the Municipality are
not funded by this Agreeiiient and overhead allocations acid other
ccusilon costs are involved. Mote: Salaries and wages of employees
chargeable only in part to the program under this Agreement must be
supported by appropriately documented time distribution records.
Documentation must also be on file and up to date in support of all
other allocation basis used to distribute costs in part to the
program under this Agreement.
Alternative bookkeeping systems must be approved by the County or its
designee in order to ensure such accountability.
RESOLUTION GRANTING FINAL APPROVAL
TO EDINA INTERCHANGE CENTER SIXTH ADDITION
B IT RESOLVED by the Edina City-Council that that certain plat entitled
"Edina Interchange Center Sixth Addition",, platted by Interchange Part-
nership, Paul Ogren Johnson and James Rogers Fos, Partners, and presented
At the Edina City Council Hesting.of.January 16, 1978, be and is hereby
,granted final plat approval. .
ADOPTED this 16th day of January, 1978...
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 January
16, 1978, and as recorded in the Minutes of said Regular Meeting.
WITNESS my hand and seal of said City this 20th day of January, 1978.
City Clerk
CITY 01-P E0M
4801 W o 50Th STREEET
E1 INA, HURNI -ES TA 5WA
September 21, 1974
Da..ey Madam.-
The 1974 General-Gi y Blectian will be held on Navember 40 Will. yeu serve as
an Election Judge at you polling place?
In arder to sezve, state law requires that. you must attend a "Voting Imhine
School ". 'Mis class will be held at 700 pm. en Tuesday, Cetebev 298 An the
new ftuncil RaGm an the east side o ' the Catty Hall, and should lost about cne
hour. Those whe a Grked at Uy-, ftimary Blectiem are well me, but not StSILired
to attend this meeting.
o
On Election Day8 you mist appear at the pel is at 6.,00 a.m. and ramie until
the votes are counted in the evening m® hopefully about 10-.00 p.m. For per®
£awing this public. service, you will be paid $2025 per hour for Electien
W,y, amend also for the tinting Machine School.
Please indicate on the &zm below whether or not you will be able to serve
and xeturn the form in the enclosed. eel &addzes »ed env alcpe as soon a s pos-
sible,, Your participatim. will be gimatly appyeciated by City officials.
Yours very Manly;,,
City Clerk
a o EBINA CXTY CURZ
I C(�a ���� � � ,�tr; u ; _ s� ���v Q; ��,� bane: -City Me c ien. cm WAYenber 5.
cL�eelt bee, -
(Wi ll.l wavk)
s ar i � z dui #. g the day but i11 go to asy polling placa air `i'.00 p.MO to
count Absentee Ballvts
Precinct rin
TO: Kenneth Rosland, City Manager
FROM: Gordon Hughes, City Planner
SUBJECT: Year IV Community Development Funds
On January 9, 1978, the City Council requested staff to provide
additional information regarding two of the proposed Year IV projects, i.e.,
Plans for Handicapped Access to City Hall and the Morningside Recycling Study.
Attached is a -memo from Bob Bahneman, Chief Building Official,
regarding the plans for handicapped access to. City Hall. If the Council
desires that plans be prepared and;the improvements undertaken in Year IV,
then the title of the project should be modified to reflect.this added work.
In regard to the allocation for the project, the Council can either allocate
additional funds to undertake the improvements in Year IV or keep the.
.allocation at $5,000 for plan preparation and re- allocate later in the year
if the decision is made to undertake the improvements. I suggest the
latter.
On January 16, 1978, a member.of the Recycling Commission will
be present to explain their concept of the Morningside Recycling Study. I
will also have additional cost information to present at this time.
GLH:ks
1/13/78
Attach.
MEMO:
TO: Gordon Hughes
�j
FROM: Bob Bahneman
January, 13, 1978
The Edina City Hall does not meet the requirements of chapter #55 of the
Minnesota Building Code regarding facilities for the handicapped. These
requirements should have been complied with at the time the building was
remodeled.
Approaches and accessability of the building, with the exception of the
council chambers, involve stairways. One entrance must be provided with a
ramp having a slope not to exceed one foot verticle to twenty feet hori-
zontal or with an elevator servicing both floors. Due to the length required
(60' to 1001) for ramps, it appears that an elevator is the only solution
to the problem. The elevator, if installed, would have to be located and
enclosed on the exterior of the building near the front-entrance.
The sanitation facilities and parking for the handicapped can be provided
without any major change in the structure-
1 have talked with Mr. Ed Kodet of Dickey / Kodet Architects,and Mr. Clark
Engler Architect, about estimated costs for the architectural and
engineering plans on this project. Those estimates are both from $3,000.00
to $5,000.00.
(OFFICIAL PUBLICATION)'.
CITY OF EDINA
4801 West 50th Street
Edina, Minnesota 55424
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARINGS
THE EDINA CITY COUNCIL will meet at the Edina City Hall, 4801 West 50th
Street, on Monday, January 16, 1978, at 7:00 P.M., and will at said time
and place consider the following:
1. Appeal by Fritz Oertel of a Board of Appeals and Adjustment decision
on November 17, 1977, denying the following variance requests: (1)
6 ft. interior side yard variance; (2) 5 ft. front street setback
variance; (3) 5 ft. rear yard; (4) single car garage variance; (5)
89 ft. lot depth variance; and (6) 3400 sq. ft. lot area variance on
property located at 4424 North Avenue and described as follows:
Lot 6, Auditor's Subdivision 259.
2. Preliminary Plat of Yorkdale Townhomes of Edina (Ryan Constr. Co.),
generally located east of York Ave., west of Xerxes, north of W. 76th
Street and south of W. 74th Street described as follows:
"The West one -half of the East one -half of the Northeast one -
quarter of the Southwest one - quarter of Section 32, Township 28N,
Range 24W, and the Northerly 2/3 of the West 3/5 of the South one -
half of the East one -half of the East one -half of the northeast one -
fourth of the Southwest one - fourth of Section 32, Township.28N,
Range 24W of the fourth principal meridian, according to the United
States Survey thereof, and situated in Hennepin County, Minnesota,
and the Southerly one -third of the Westerly three - fifths of the East
one -half of the Southeast one - quarter of the Northeast one - quarter
of the Southwest one- • quarter all in Section 32, Township 28,
Range 24, Hennepin County, Minnesota. ".
All recommendations and objections will be heard at said meeting.
BY.ORDER.OF THE EDINA CITY COUNCIL.
FLORENCE B.HALLBERG
City Clerk
Please publish in Edina Sun, Wednesday, January 4, 1978
Please send 2 Affidavits of Publication '
K
• •
LOCATiON Z
- - Elm MIN ■
■ MEN ■n■
■ ■m■■■
■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■
`MIN ■
IN _ '■ ■
■■ ON MEN ME
IN MEN
subdivision
Yorkdale Townhomes of Edina
REQUEST NUMBER: S -77 -22
LOCATION: N. of 76 & E. of York Ave.
REQUEST: One lot plat for subsidized
housing.
village planning department village of edina
PLANNING COMMISSION
STAFF REPORT
January 4, 1978
Z -77 -17 Ryan Addition. Final Development Plans, R -1 to PRD -3,
and and Preliminary Plat.
5 -77 -22
Refer to: attached overall development plans, preliminary
plat, and November 2, 1977, staff report.
On November 2, 1977, the Planning Commission granted preliminary zoning
approval for the subject development. At that time, 80 townhouse units
for low and moderate income families were proposed. Following pre-
liminary approval by the Planning Commission and prior to review by
the City Council, the proponent was able to include an additional one
acre parcel into his development proposal. The effect of this addi-
tional acre is to provide 10 additional townhouse units, thus bringing
the total number of units to 90. The City Council reviewed and
granted preliminary zoning approval for the revised 90 unit proposal.
It should be noted that the original 80 unit proposal was designed in anti-
cipation of including the one acre parcel. Thus, the locations, elevations,
and design of the original 80 units remain unchanged.
The proponents have also submitted a preliminary plat for the subject
property. This plat proposed to dedicate easements along York Terrace
and York Avenue as previously requested.
Recommendation:
The proponents have satisfied ordinance requirements regarding
plans and specifications for final zoning approval including the sub-
mission of an adequate landscape plan. The proponents have also deleted
the northerly driveway on York Avenue as requested. Therefore, staff
recommends final plan approval with the following conditions:
1. Completion of final platting of the subject property.
2. Completion of suitable agreements among the proponent, the Edina
Housing and Redevelopment Authority, and the City of Edina regarding
the property's development for low and moderate income family
housing pursuant to the Southeast Edina Redevelopment Plan.
Staff recommends preliminary plat approval with the following conditions:
1. Parkland dedication per the attached report.
GLH:nr
12 -30 -77
I
Subdivision No,.. '27—
SUBDIVISION DEDICATION REPORT
TO: Planning Commission
Park Board
Environmental Quality Commission
FROM: Planning Department
SUBDIVISION NAME: CL S-F
LAND SIZE: LAND VALUE: �OC�� Gr%1ZC
(By: Date:
The developer of this subdivision. has been required to
A. grant an easement over part of the land
B. dedicate % of the land
C. donate $ 1 — ccv. OD as a fee in lieu of land
As a result of applying the following policy:
A. Land Required (no density or intensity may be used for the first 5% of
land dedicated)
11 1'. If property is adjacent to an existing park and the addition
beneficially expands the park.
II 2. If property is 6 acres or will be combined with future dedications
so that the end result will be a minimum of a 6 acre park.
0 3. If property abuts a natural lake, pond, or stream.
04. If property is necessary for storm water holing or will be dredged
or otherwise improved for storm water holding areas or ponds.
D 5. If the property is a place of significant natural, scenic or his-
toric value.
ri 6.
B. Cash Required
1. In all other instances than above.
j"� 2.
Zoning Ryan Construction Co. Generally located E. of York Ave.,
Z -77 -17 W. of Xerxes Ave., N. of W. 76th St and S. of W. 74th
'7 e/ St. extended. R -1 Single Family District to Planned
Residential District PRD-3.
Mr. Gordon Hughes reported that Ryan Construction Company is requesting
preliminary rezoning approval from R -1 to PRD -3, Planned Residential District.
The proposed development calls for 80 townhouse units for low- moderate income
families. Structures and parking areas comprise 33.3% of the site with the
remainder devoted to open space areas. Access to the southern portion of the
development is provided from 76th Street and access to the north portion from
York Avenue.. Staff recommended preliminary approval of the rezoning for the
reasons stated in the staff report with the conditions and modifications in
conjunction with final plan approval. He also noted that City ordinances required
that individual sewer and water connections must be provided for townhouse
developments. Staff is of the opinion that no useful purpose would be served
by requiring individual sewer and water services at this time. Staff recommends
that this provision be waived with the condition that such individual services
must be installed in the event that any of the units of the proposed development
are offered for individual ownership.
Mr. Hughes reported that the Veit property is presently excluded in the
Southeast Edina Plan, but is included for acquisition and there have been some
negotiations with the owner and Ryan Construction Co. An additional 9 to 10
units could be added if the property were to be included in the project.
.. r.
Edina Planning Commission
Page 7
November 2, 1977
Mr. Runyan asked why the garages were so far away from the buildings.
Mr. Alan Shackman of Ryan Construction Co., replied that he wanted to keep the
green areas in the middle, which is more pleasing and it is anticipated that
there will be children living in these units, and it seemed safer to have the
garages further away.
Mr. S. Hughes noted that there were to be 8 one bedroom units, 48 two
bedroom units, 20 three bedroom units and 4 four bedroom units, and aksed if
there shouldn't be more three bedroom units and no four bedroom units. Mr. Schackman
replied that H.U.D. makes the requirements for a certain number large family
units and the Metro Council had indicated that some four bedroom units be provided.
After some additional discussion, Mrs. McDonald moved to approve the
preliminary zoning per the staff report. Mrs. McClelland seconded the motion.
All Voted Aye. Motion Carried.
EXCERPT FROM EDINA PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
WEDNESDAY, JANUARY 4, 1978
EDINA CITY HALL COUNCIL CHAMBERS
II. OLD.:BUSINESS:
Z -77 =17 Ryan Construction Co. R -1 Single Family District to
and Planned Residential District PRD -3.
S -77 -22 Yorkdale Townhomes of Edina. Generally located east
of York Avenue, west of Xerxes Avenue., north of W. 76th
Street and south of W. 74th Street extended.
Mr. Hughes reported that the Commission granted preliminary zoning
approval for this development on November 2, 1977. At that time 80 townhouse
units for low and moderate income families were:proposed. Following that
approval but prior to Council review, the proponent was.able to include an
additional one acre parcel into his proposal. This additional acre is to
provide 10 additional townhouse units, bringing the total number of units bringing..,
the
90. The Council granted preliminary zoning proval for the revised 90
unit proposal. He noted that the original 80 unit proposal was designed.in
anticipation.of the inclusion of the one acre parcel. The locations,
elevations and design of the original 80 units remain unchanged. The.proponents
have submitted a prelininary plat for the property. The plat proposes to
dedicate easements along York Terrace and York Avenue as requested.
The proponents have satisfied ordinance requirements regarding plans and
specifications for final zoning approval including the submission of a land-
scape plan. The staff recommends final plan.approval with the following
conditions:
1) Completion of final platting of the subject property.
2) Completion of suitable agreements among the proponent,.
the Edina Housing and Redevelopment Authority,,the City of
Edina regarding the property`.s development for low and moderate
income family housing pursuant.to the Southeast.Edina.
Redevelopment Plan...
Staff also recommends preliminary plat approval with the following conditions:
1) Parkland dedication.
2) Easements for sidewalks and snow removal storage.
Mr. Runyan inquired about the basic material for the buildings.
Mr. Al Schackman, developer, stated that the.construciton would be wood and some
masonry.
There was some discussion regarding the location of the laundry facilities,
the trash containers and outside lighting. The Commission . generally felt that
it would be more desirable to have the laundry facilities>:w thin each building
and the trash containers closer to the buildings.
Planning Commission Excerpt
Page 2
January 4, 1978
Mr. Runyan moved that the Commission recommend approval of the final
zoning plans subject to the staff recommendations. Mrs. McClelland seconded
the motion. All Voted Aye. Motion Carried.
Mr. Runyan then moved that the Commission recommend approval of the
preliminary plat subject to parkland dedication and easements for sidewalks
and snow storage. Mrs. McClelland seconded the motion. All Voted Aye.
Motion Carried.
LA"t'v��
Karen Sorensen, Secretary
MEMORANDUM
January 13, 1978
TO: Kenneth Rosland, City Manager
FROM: Harold Sand, Assistant Planner
SUBJECT: Mr. Fritz Oertel's Appeal of the denial of variances on
Lot 6, Auditor's Subdivision No. 259. (Case No. B -77 -35
and B- 77 -38)
Attached are staff reports and minutes of the Board of Appeals
meetings concerning the above referenced matter. The Board of Appeals denied
variances on two occasions which would have allowed the construction of
a dwelling on the subject property. The proponent has requested an appeal
of these denials before the City Council.
If the Council wishes to affirm the Board of Appeals action
and deny the variances, staff recommends that the matter be continued to
a future meeting to .allow the preparation of written findings of fact.
S:H:ks
Attach.
• •
LOCATION 101
j�
17 (�
10 19 r '�
r I
`.� 44th OUTLOT t ^ ,, n • ST. y "'
to °3AR 24�;PARK + 2 TI�RD so l; � ciz
r
29C Z5- -• o - 5lt5X5 ;4.:•� � b•'- I � I �.
:•ti�:.l :5=65 cdi :i ` (• ,,'ln � '4 (; I
{�
27 3 o 4 12 ;c
28 TO
/v2 F.
-9'k: g MOORE NVE. ^ �r
-- later � 1r
rri t7 �' 4 s
14 112�9 3_ - -� Girt �v'Z c:: C
R, 0, 30
a i 9 f° ® 13 0 ==; D
p I , D• s.
f.� 31
rn
2 I �� oS�c
m
3 1
IB "�_nni f` -- - --- ?,a4.� - - - - -- � - - - -- � �je.1``Ap�� "�•4•di�.�,;�� ;`'� N r
AUD. SUB. • ;I-
34
NO.176 35 AUD. SUB -No 176 6
m : - LOT 4 3 �►O4
ra
ACP
variance
REQUEST NUMBER: B-77-35
LOCATION: 4424 North Avenue.
REQUEST: 2360 sq. ft. lot area; 80 ft.
lot depth; 10 ft. front yard; 11 ft.
rear yard variances.
village t►Iannina te. artment will 're n[ �lits a
EDINA BOARD OF APPEALS AND ADJUSTMENTS
STAFF.REPORT
October 14, 1977
B -77 -35 Mr. Fritz P. Oertel. 4424 North Avenue. Lot 6, Auditor's
Subdivision No. 259
Refer to: Attached building.-plans,. lot survey, air photo
and adjacent survey.
REQUEST: 1. 2360 sq.'ft. lot area variance
2. 80 foot lot depth variance.
3. 10 foot front yard variance
4. 11 foot rear yard variance
The subject property, Lot 6, Auditor's Subdivision No., 259, is an
entire platted lot that has - remained vacant and under separate` ownership for a
number of years. Apparently, the previous owners ceased paying property taxes
around 1953; the property was declared tax forfeit in 1961. The State sold the
property to an individual.in 1969 and Mr. Oertel has a contract to purchase the
property subject to the issuance of a building permit.
The sewer service in the area was installed in 1941 with a vertical
stack for this-lot. The water service was installed in 1.971 with the water and
sewer service extended for this lot to the edge of the pavement. The property
-has been assessed for these services;. the taxes have been delinquent since 1973.
The total lot area is 6640 square feet which requires a 2360 square
foot variance from the 9000 square__ foot minimum lot area. The lot depth, as
measured at the midpoint of the front and rear lot lines. is 40 feet which
requires an 80 foot lot depth variance from the. 120 foot standard. The lot depth
variance is somewhat larger than the apparent variance because of.the unusual
panhandle shape of the lot. The south property line is approximately 108 feet
and the buildable portion of the lot has an average depth of approximately 60-feet..
The Staff has contacted Mr. John Holmquist of the Minnehaha Creek
Watershed District who has indicated their regulations do not affect the project
unless the dwelling is in the flood plain or the grade of the flood.plain is
proposed to be modified. In this instance, the creek has very steep banks and the
flood plain is not affected by any of the. proposed structures.
Mr. Oertel has prepared the enclosed houseplans specifically to fit
the subject property. The dwelling has a two car garage, living room, .dining
room and kitchen on the ground floor and.two bedrooms on the second. floor. The
proposed basement is not allowed because it would be below high water-levels.
Mr. Oertel is requesting a 10 foot front yard setback variance to.
,al-low -a 20•foot> front- yard. The-proposed variance will allow the dwelling to be
10 feet closer to the street than the dwellings on the same :side of North Avenue.
The setback is similar to the dwelling across the street and other setbacks in
the neighborhood. The North Avenue right -of- way is only 30 feet in width and
B -77 -35
F. Oertel
Page 2
October 14, 1977
and therefore the boulevards are approximately 2 feet wide which substantially
reduces the effective width between the dwelling and the street pavement.
Mr. Oertel is also requesting an.11 foot rear yard variance. .Six
feet is occupied by a deck which he has indicated is optional. The enclosed
portion of the dwelling is proposed to have a 20 foot setback from the normal
high water line of Minnehaha Creek.
The interior side.yard setback.conforms to the standard established
for lots greater than 60 feet in width.. Smaller interior side yard setbacks, for
living- space, are common.in the neighborhood.
Recommendation: The Staff feels that. the best use.of the property is an extension
of t,.e adjacent lot or as a private neighborhood park.. These solutions have not
..been accomplished. As a.result,. the property, by virtue of its platting, separate
ownership and utilities has acquired minimal property rights that justify minimal
use.
The requested variances are more than minimal and the proposed dwelling
is excessively large for the site. Therefore, the Staff recommends denial of
the request.
The Staff feels the lot may be developable with a one bedroom, single
car garage, efficiency type dwelling unit. An.interior side yard variance on
the south and a small front setback variance may_be.appropriate considering the
other setbacks in the neighborhood.
HS:ks
10 -14 -77
MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE
EDINA BOARD OF APPEALS AND ADJUSnIENTS
HELD OCTOBER 20, 1977 at 5:30 P.M.
EDINA CITY HALL CONFERENCE ROOM.
Members Present:
Willis F. Sha Chairman; Clark Miller and Gordon Johnson
Staff Present:
Harold
S
d, Assistant Planner, Karen Sorensen, Secretary
I. Approval of
Sep tuber
15,
1977 Board of Appeals Minutes
Mr. Miller x0ved for approval of the September 15, 1977 Board of Appeals
and Adjustments,I�inutes. Mr. Shaw seconded the motion. All Voted Aye. Motion
Carried. �
II. HEARINGS:
B -77 -35 Fritz P. Oertel. 4424 North Avenue. Lot 6, Auditor's
Subdivision #259.
REQUEST: 2360 square foot lot area variance
80 foot lot depth variance
10 foot front yard variance
11 foot rear yard variance
Mr. Sand stated that the proponent's property is on North Avenue south of
West 44th Street. The subject property is immediately North of Craig Vossen's
property which was recently approved for variances. Mr. Oertel has a purchase
agreement on the lot and the lot is a platted lot that has remained vacant and
under separate ownership for a number of years. The sewer service in the area
was installed in 1941 with a vertical stack for this lot. The water service
was installed in 1971 with the water and sewer service extended for this lot to
the edge of the pavement. The lot was forfeited for non - payment of real estate
taxes in 1961. The current owner purchased the property in 1969 from the
State of Minnesota.
The total lot area is 6641 square feet which requires a 2360 square foot
variance from the 9000 square foot minimum lot area. The lot depth, as measured
at the midpoint of the front and rear lot lines is 40 feet which requires an 80
foot lot depth variance from the 120 foot standard. The lot depth variance is
somewhat larger than the apparent variance because of the unusual panhandle shape
of the lot. The south property line is approximately 108 feet and the buildable
portion of the lot has an average depth of approximately 60 feet.
The lot is adjacent to Minnehaha Creek and the staff contacted Mr. John
Holmquist of the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District whose only concern would be
if the flood plain or creek bed were disturbed.
Mr. Oertel has prepared house plans specifically to fit the property. The
dwelling has a two car garage, living room, dining room and kitchen on the ground
floor and two bedrooms on the second floor. The proposed basement is not allowed
because it would be below high water levels.
Board of'Appeals Minutes -.2 - October 20, 1977
Staff noted that there are several non - conforming setbacks in the
neighborhood'. Generally, the neighborhood has side yards of five. feet and
some dwellings that have front yard and.street setbacks less than 30 feet are
adjacent to this lot.
The - proposed dwelling is much more than a minimum use and it is ''excessive.
It is suggested that amore appropriate approach would be a single bedroom
efficiency unit and staff recommends that the front and rear, setbacks be denied.
Chairman Shaw asked if the bank of the creek was the lot line. Mr. John -
son noted that he was not disturbed by the lot depth and lot area variances, but
the front setback was a concern.
Mr. Oertel stated that he has lived in Edina 17 years and all the.children
are gone and he and his wife want a- smaller house.. He stated that he,was'willing
to eliminate the deck as.that would help comply with the rear setback and was not
completely necessary. It is an unusual home and an unusual lot.
Mr. Sand noted that if the deck were removed and the house moved back, the
front setback would be 25 feet. The house cannot have a basement because it
would be below the flood plain.
Mr. David Runyan, 4508 North Avenue stated that he measured the lot. and
presented a drawing which showed the setbacks of the homes in the area. The
rendering.also showed how much area of the subject property would be available
if no variances were granted. The driveway as proposed can accommodate only one
auto and others in the area can accommodate two autos. The lot is 166 feet long.
The proposed house would be sitting 10 feet in front of the other houses.on the
block. The subject property, he added, now looks like it.is part.of the Vossen
lawn. Mr. Runyan noted that he followed all the present setback allowances and
drew all the lines together and if all setbacks were followed, there would be
approximately 20 feet by 20 feet to build on. The .suggestion of a,one bedroom
house:vith a one car garage is not feasible- when.!the ordinance states that all
new dwellings must have a two car garage.
Mr. Craig Vossen, 4500 North Avenue, stated that- one has to see the
property to see what that 10 feet would do to the area. The proposed house will
not conform to the area. The four variances will change the appearance of the
:neighborhood and he concurred with i�Mr-.: 7Runyan -about ;building ;a ,one:- bedroom
efficiency unit; that it would not be'feasible.
Audrey Runyan stated that you must live is a neighborhood in order to
:know .what its problems are North Avenue is a narrow street and there are
traffic problems and there are difficulties with the.:snow.as well. One more
dwelling on the street bringing in one or two more autos could cause additional
problems.
Chairman Shaw asked Mr. Vossen if the adjacent property were available,
would he be interested in acquiring it. Mr. Vossen replied that he would.not be.
- interested in it because of the increase in taxes and the fact that it.could
affect the saleability of his present property. .
Board of Appeals Minutes -3- October 20, 1977
Mrs. Vossen stated that their house had recently been remodeled and there
had been a problem with the additional traffic on North Avenue with the trucks
coming and going at their house. She also stated that there will be erosion at
the creek bed and it appears to her that it will occur right where the proposed
house is to be built.
Mr. Miller stated that he felt ne design of the house is lovely and it
seems that over the years, the lot may become smaller and to place a home in
the creek seems to be a gross misuse of the property. He then moved that the
Board deny the variances. Mr. Johnson seconded the motion. Chairman Shaw stated
that he concurred with the motion. All Voted Aye. Motion Carried. Chairman
Shaw advised Mr. Oertel that he could appeal the decision of the Board to the
City Council and they would make the final determination.
EDINA BOARD OF APPEALS AND,ADJUSTMENTS
STAFF REPORT
November 10, 1977
B -77 -38 Fritz:,P. Oertel. 4424 North Avenue. Lot 6;'- Auditor's
Subdivision No. 259
Refer to: Attached site plan, floor plans,.elevation,
B -77 -35 Staff Report and enclosed October 209 .
1977 Minutes.
REQUEST: 6 foot interior side yard .variance
5 foot front street setback variance
5 foot rear yard
Single car garage variance
89 foot lot depth variance
3400 sq. ft. lot area variance
The subject property is the same considered October 20, 1977 and
reported in Case No. B- 77 -35. The requested variances in that case were denied
with no encouragement to re�turnt with modif1e.d plans.. .
Mr. Oertel has measured the,lot and 'revised the site plan to
reflect.a considerable encroachment of the Minnehaha Creek since the 1974
survey presented at the October meeting. The new lot area illustrated is
5600 square feet requiring a 3400 sq. ft. lot area variance.' The new
average depth is 31 feet which requires an 89 foot variance.
The proposed dwelling will have a 20 foot rear yard, a 5 foot
interior side yard and a 25 foot front yard setback, each of which requires
a 5 foot variance. Each level of the proposed dwelling contains 650 square._
feet. The second level has one bedroom, a kitchen, dining area and living
room. The ground floor has an entrance foyer, a recreation room a.single
car garage. The garage is oriented north to allow a curved driveway with
additional off - street parking.
:Recommendation: Mr. Oertel's revised -plans satisfy many of the concerns
,expressed ,:Previously -by <the :Staf:f, the neighbors and the Board of Appeals and
'Adjustments. However, the improvements,in the dwelling are more than offset
by.the loss of actual lot area.
The staff recommends denial of the requested variances. The sheer
number and magnitude indicate the futility of attempts to develop this
property in a manner consonant with the minimum acceptable standards.
HS :k
B -77 -38 Fritz P. Oertel. 4424 North*Avenue. Lot 6, Auditor's
Subdivision No. 259.
REQUEST: 6 foot interior side yard variance.
5 foot front street setback variance
5 foot rear yard
Single car garage variance
89 foot lot depth variance
3400 square foot lot area variance
Mr. Sand reported that the subject property is the same as that considered
October 20. The Board rejected the variances requested at that meeting and
gave Mr. Oertel no encouragement to return with modified plans. The proponent
has returned with a different plan for the property. Mr. Oertel remeasured
the property and revised-the site plan to reflect a considerable encroachment
of the Minnehaha Creek. The new lot area is 5600 square feet which requires
a 3400 square foot lot area variance. The new average depth is 31 feet which
requires an 89 foot variance.
The proposed dwelling will have a 20 foot rear yard, a 5 foot interior
side yard and a 25 foot front yard setback, each of which requires a five foot
variance. Each level of the proposed dwelling contains 650 square feet. The
garage is oriented north to allow a curved driveway with additional off - street
parking.
Mr. Sand reported that the revised plans satisfy many of the concerns
expressed by the staff, the neighbors and the Board. However, the improvements
in the dwelling are more than offset by the loss of actual lot area. The
staff recommends denial of the requested variances because the property
cannot be reasonably developed with minimum acceptable standards.
Mr. Oertel, the proponent stated that after the October meeting, he felt
somewhat encouraged to present another plan for the property with a one car
garage. He noted that sewer and water are stubbed into the property. He
stated that he felt he had now designed a house that was more proper for
the property.
Dr. Paul Johnson, 4617 Cascade Lane, stated that he was speaking in
opposition to the plan. The multiple variances go against our own principals
and I would recommend denial and hope that it would be finalized so that no
one would have to go through this type of thing any more.
Mr. Dave Runyan, presented another rendering of his own showing the
placement of the new home on the lot with the curved driveway into the garage.
lie felt that he would h ve a very difficult time getting an auto into the
proposed garage.
Board of Appeals Minutes
Page Three
November 17, 1977
He also stated that the previous request of the proponent was for four
variances and the present request is for six variances. The proposed house is
a two story and it still will sit out in front of all the other houses on the
street. He did not think the plans submitted address the problem and nothing
has been solved at all. lie recommended denial of the request.
Miss Nancy Skelly, 4425 North Avenue, spoke against the variances because
of the ecological aspects of the area. The creek is eroding the property and
after a few years, the house would be in the creek. She expressed her concern
about how the house would fit into the neighborhood.
Mr. Myer, 4501 North Avenue, stated that he and his wife were opposed to
the variances for the reasons expressed by the Johnsons and Mr. Runyan.
Mrs. Audry Runyan stated that she was opposed to the variances because
of the aesthetic design of the house. If one needs six variances to fit a
house on a lot, then you are losing the concept of variances. Variances are
not meant to make an unbuildable site buildable, they are mean*_ more for
a necessity to improve the property.
Mr. Johnson asked what Mr. Oertel would have to do in order to stop the
erosion in order not to lose the driveway. Mr. Sand stated that the Watershed
District could issue a permit for him to build a retaining wall to stop the
erosion.
Mr. Miller stated that we are discussing many of the same issues as.
before and we have not achieved anything. We have no property rights to
preserve and he moved to deny the requested variances. Mr. Johnson seconded
the motion. All Voted Aye. Motion Carried.
..
x
T
111- ..
CERTIFICATE OF SURVEY
FOR
LAND /CO INC.
Q)
LLJ
we
DESCRIPTION.
LOT 6.,AUDITOR'S SUB. NO. 2tS,
EDINA MINNESOTA 71 r P,-) 7-- 7
SCALE I heqsby cartity that this survey was prepared
by tne,or under my direct supervision and
i that lam a duly Registered Land Surveyor
under the lows of the Statit of Minneigilo.
.-VENOTE'S IRON MON'T
Date
::YRg. No.
' .
I ! o •yam ='3 m�i -��.
for
Craig
1 Fes• /
�EEr S3. PAP,.
A
o•
i
Fo. Jiy• /.P� . ``
W: Lor 7, Avo/ro,es Sue- No. ,Z59
f:ENW! CO. , M /NN.
Vossen
i'
b•
Iry
I'
I,
s o. 0
`rXisTiiyG
zo,o
1 • • Ali,•
ar No - 7- �`��
CAS � 7 ,.
9
` 9'2 'uS
1
al
'I
PROPO
9
� 7/.Z_�
�I
,?S.7
O EX /S �•�NG
N HO[i,sE• 0
App eo X /MA: "EL Y /O, /SO S f • �f •
EX /s'T /NC, a:
No �sE
h
P
A
0
w
dv � � •
Q 1
411 Fo � • Q ZB,��� � v�
I �-
PPIP
ai
(OFFICIAL PUBLICATION)
CITY OF EDINA
4801 WEST 50th Street
Edina, Minnesota 55424
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARINGS
THE EDINA CITY COUNCIL will meet at the Edina City Hall, 4801 W. 50th Street, on
Monday, November 21, 1977, at 7:00 P.M., and will at said time and place consider
the following:
1. Rezoning Request by Ryan Construction Co. from R -1 Single Family District to
Planned Residential District PRD -3, generally located east of York Ave., west
of Xerxes, north of W. 76th Street and south of W. 74th Street, described
as follows:
The West one -half of the East one -half of the Northeast one -
quarter of the Southwest one - quarter of Section 32, Township 28N, Range
24W, and the Northerly 2/3 of the West 3/5 of the South one -half of the
East one -half of the East one -half of the Northeast one - fourth of the
Southwest one - fourth of Section 32, Township 28N, Range 24W of the fourth
principal meridian, according to the United States Survey thereof, and
situated in Hennepin County, Minnesota, and
the Southerly one -third of the Westerly three - fifths of the East one -half
of the Southeast one - quarter of the Northeast one - quarter of the South-
west one - quarter all in Section 32,- Township 28, Range 24, Hennepin
County, Minnesota.
2. Preliminary Plat of Taft Addition, generally located west of Blake Road and
Scriver Road extended, described as follows: Lots 35 and 36, Auditor's
Subdivision No. 325.
3. Preliminary Plat of Braemar Hills 9th Addition and Rezoning Request from
Planned Residential District 2 to R -1 Single Family District and R -2 Multiple
Residence District, generally located east of._Gleasor. Road extended and north
of W. 78th Street, described as follows:
Planned Residential District 2 to R -2: " Outlot A, Braemar Hills 7th Addition ".
Planned Residential District 2 to R -1:
"Lots 1 to 4 inclusive, Block 1; Lots 1 to 4 inclusive, Block 2;
Lots 1 to 4 inclusive, Block 8; Lots 1 to 4 inclusive, Block 9; Lots 1 to
4 inclusive, Block 10; Lots 1 to 4 inclusive, Block 11; Lots 1 to 4
inclusive, Block 12; Lot 1, Block 13, Outlot B all in Braemar Hills 7th
Addition and that part of Lot 1, Block 14, Braemar Hills, 7th Addition,
except that part embraced within the plat of Braemar Hills 8th Addition."
The preliminary plat, Braemar Hills 9th Addition embraces all of
the above described property.
4. Rezoning Request by City of Edina of Dwight Williams Park from R -1 Single
Family District to R -1 Single Family District and Heritage Preservation
District, generally located on West 50th Street at Browndale Avenue and
described as follows:
Correction of Minutes for November 7, 1977, Meeting:
STREET NAME SIGN BID AWARDED. Mr. Rosland presented tabulation of five bids
received for extruded aluminum street name signs showing Fosco Fabricators low
bidder at $14,300.00. Lyle Signs, Inc., at $17,221.00, Tucker Co., $17,910.00,
Hall Signs, Inc., at $22,365.92, and Gopher Sign Co. at $22,795.00. Council-
woman Schmidt's motion was seconded by Councilman Richards for award to
recommended bidder, Lyle Signs, at $17,221.00, since low bidder did not meet
specifications.
STATE OF MINNESOTA
DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES
MINNEHAHA,CREEK WATERSHED DISTRICT
In the Matter of the Petition of
the Cities of Minneapolis, Edina,
St. Louis Park, Hopkins and
Minnetonka,`and the Minneapolis
Park and Recreation Board fora
Basic Water and Land Management
Improvement Project for Minnehaha
Creek.
In the Matter of the Application
of The Minnehaha Creek Watershed
District for a Permit to Construct
a new Minnehaha Creek Headwaters
Control Structure at.the Gray's
Bay Dam Site, Lake Minnetonka.
NOTICE OF JOINT
HEARING
A public hearing on the above - entitled matter will
be held on Wednesday, February 8, 1978, at the Minnetonka City
Hall, 14600 Minnetonka Boulevard. The.hearing will begin = at
1:30 p.m., and continue at 7:30 p.m. The afternoon session
is intended primarily for governmental testimony., the evening
session for public testimony. The hearing is being held
jointly by.the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District and the
Minnesota Department of Natural Resources and ..the U. S. Army
Corps of.Engineers.
The subject of the joint hearing will be .a series of.-
improvements which the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District has
i been requested to undertake by the Cities of Minneapolis, Edina,
St. Louis Park, Hopkins and Minnetonka, and the Minneapolis Park
1
and Recreation Board. The Minnehaha Creek Watershed District
Board of Managers will consider the series of improvements con -
j templated by the petition of the municipalities listed above, as
i
described in the preliminary engineering report of the district's
a
4
i
plan of the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District. The amend-
ment also updated the preliminary engineering report as to
the downstream projects.
The preliminary engineering report and the amend-
ments were submitted to the director of the Division of Waters
of the Department of Natural Resources and to the Minnesota
Water Resources Board as required by Minn. Stat. 5 112.48,
subd. 3, on December 22, 1977. The reports of the director
of the Division of Water and the Minnesota Water Resources
Board will be available prior to the hearing.
2. Project Description. A general description of the
proposed improvements as described in the preliminary engi-
neering report as amended includes the following:
i'
1. A headwaters control structure for Minnehaha
Creek to be located at the Gray's Bay dam site. The purpose
of the proposed control structure is to (a) stabilize lake
levels on Lake Minnetonka to the maximum practicable extent
between elevation 928.6 MSL and 929.4 MSL to minimize flood-
ing on the lake and maintain more adequate year -end lake
levels; (b) limit the discharge to Minnehaha Creek to the
maximum practicable extent to 250 cfs to reduce downstream
A
-,
flooding; (c) to provide Minnehaha Creek flow augmentation.
' ";� •, < "/
The management objectives proposed to be accomplished are
`
set forth in greater detail in a proposed management policy
•'
adopted by the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District Board of
4-
Managers on November 17, 1977.
2. Gray's Bay dam site renovation.
'
3. A series of recreational development and
channel improvement projects throughout most of the length
4
i
1 �!
y,
of Minnehaha Creek. The purpose of the downstream projects
is to improve the recreational and aesthetic benefits of the
Creek, including:
a. A canoe portage across County Road 73.
b. Recreational access to Minnehaha Creek
at the following locations:
(1) Thirty- second Street at the South
end of Hillsboro Avenue in St. Louis Park.
(2) The west side of the Creek between
Thirty -sixth Street and Highway 7 in St.
Louis Park.
(3) At the intersection of Brookview
Avenue and Edgebrook Drive in St. Louis Park.
(4) South of the 7300 block of oxford
Street in St. Louis Park.
(5) At Louisiana Avenue, west of
Methodist Hospital in St. Louis Park.
(6) Utley Park in Edina between 50th
Street and Minnehaha Creek west of Wooddale
Avenue.
c. The placing of signs along the Creek laying
off creek distances in kilometers and identifying
creek hazards.
d. The removal of obstructions, repair of
small structures and erosion prevention measures
at several points along Minnehaha Creek.
4. The development of a.nature study area along
Meadowbrook Lake in St. Louis Park in the East 1/2 of the
Southeast 1/4 of Section 20, Township 28N, Range 21W as well
as the raising of the bridges over Minnehaha Creek in the
Meadowbrook Golf Course area to permit canoes to pass beneath
them.
The total preliminary cost estimate for the pro-
ject, including engineering and administration is $774,603.
The petition requests that the cost of the project be assessed
against all properties within the Minnehaha Creek Watershed
District by the levy of a tax not to exceed 1/3 mill annually
for a period of not to exceed 15 years pursuant to Minn. Stat.
§ 112.61, Subd. 3.
3. Nature of the Hearing and Issues. For the Depart-
ment of Natural Resources, the hearing is a contested case
hearing conducted according to the contested case provisions
of Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 15, Minn. Req. HE 201 -222,
and Minn. Stat. § 105.44. At the afternoon session of the
hearing the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District will present
evidence regarding its application to the Department of
Natural Resources for a permit for the proposed control
structure. The Watershed District will also present evidence
regarding the overall series of improvements as described in
the preliminary engineering report. For.the Department of
Natural Resources the issues are:
Whether the plans of the applicant are rea-
sonable, practical and will adequately protect
public safety and promote the public welfare.
The hearing examiner will be Howard L. Kaibe1, Jr., whose
address and phone number are:
Office of Hearing Examiner
Room 300
1745 University Avenue
St. Paul, Minnesota 55104
Telephone: (612) 296 -6910
6
RESOLUTION GRANTING PRELIMINARY AND FINAL PLAT APPROVAL
FOR YORKDALE TOWNHOMES OF EDINA
BE IT RESOLVED by the Edina City Council that that certain plat entitled
"Yorkdale Townhomes of Edina ", platted bye Ryan Construction Company of
Minnesota, Inc.., and presented.-at the Edina,City Council Meeting of Jan-
uary 16, 1978, be and is hereby granted preliminary and final plat
approval.
ADOPTED this 16th day of January, 1978.
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 January
16, 1978, and as recorded in the minutes of said Regular Meeting.
WITNESS my hand and seal of said City this 27th day of June, 1978.
City Clerk