Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1978-08-21_COUNCIL MEETINGAGENDA EDINA CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING AUGUST 21, 1978 7:00 P.M. ROLLCALL MINUTES of July 17, 1978, approved as presented or corrected by motion of , seconded by I.. PUBLIC HEARINGS ON PROPOSED ASSESSMENTS Affidavits of Notice by Clerk. Analysis of Assessment by City Manager. Spectators heard. If Council wishes to proceed, action by Resolution Ordering Assessment.' 3/5 favorable rollcall vote to pass. A. Street Improvement No. C =127 - Grading & Graveling to serve 6617 Waterman Ave. B. Street Improvement No. C -122 - Moccasin Valley Road C. Watermain Improvement No. WM -310 - Moccasin Valley Road D. Sanitary Sewer Improvement No. SS -334 - Moccasin Valley Road E. Watermain Improvement No. WM -311 - Forest Glen Road F. Sanitary Sewer No. SS -335 - Forest Glen Road G. Watermain Improvement No. WM -309 - Parnell Ave. from Valley View Road to 6117 Parnell Ave. H. Watermain Improvement No. WM -314 - Millpond Place from Westbrook Lane to Railroad Right -of -Way I. Watermain Improvement No. WM -318 - Edina Highlands Area J. Watermain Improvement No. WM -322 - Parkwood Knolls Area K. Watermain Improvement No. WM -323 - Hillside Rd., Crescent Drive, Crest Lane Westridge Blvd., Hunter St., Highland Road L. Watermain Improvement No. 324 - Doron Drive M. Sanitary!.Sewer Improvement No. SS -338 - Parkwood Road, Akers Lane N. Sanitary Sewer Improvement No. SS -340 - Sunnyside Road from Townes Road to 240 feet West + 0. Watermain Improvement No. WM -299 - Morningside Area- II. PUBLIC HEARINGS ON PLANNING MATTERS Affidavits of Notice by Clerk. Presenta- tion by Planning Department. Spectators heard. First Reading of Zoning Ordinance requires offering of Ordinance only. 4/5 favorable rollcall vote to pass Second Reading or if Second Reading should be waived. Lot Divisions, Plats, Flood Plain Permits, Appeals from Administrative or Board of Appeals and Adjustments Decisions and Plan Amendments require action by Resolution. 3/5 favorable rollcall vote to pass. A. Parkwood Knolls 20th Addition - Generally located South of Interlachen Blvd., North of W..73rd St. - S -78 -1 (PC- 28/78) Continued from 8/7/78 1. Final.Plat Approval B. Braemar Associates - R -1 Single Family Residential District to PRD -3 Planned Residential District - Generally located.on the Northwest corner of W. 78th Street and Cahill Road 1. First Reading - Z -78 -7 - (PC- 8/2/78) C. The Kerr Companies - R -1 Single Family Residential District to 0 -2 Office District - Located at 4917 Eden Ave. 1. First Reading - Z -78 -8 (PC- 8/2/78) D. Gittleman Corporation - R -1 Single Family Residential District to PRD -3 Planned Residential District - Generally located at the Southwest quadrant of Cahill Road and Dewey.Hill Road 1. First Reading - Z -78 -9 (PC- 8/2/78) E. Normandale Carr Addition - Generally located North of W. 66th Street and East of Parnell Ave. - S -78 -4 (CC- 3/10/78) 1. Final Plat Approval (Continued from 8 /7/78) F. Mor.ine's Addition - Generally located North of Morningside Road and West of Grimes Ave. - S -78 -11 (CC- 8/7/78) 1. Final Plat Approval G. :dark Nelson First Addition - Generally located at 45th & France Ave. S. 1.. Final Plat Approval (CC- 7/18/77) S -76 -4 -III. PUBLIC HEARING ON COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT PROJECT - MORNINGSIDE SCHOOL ACQUISITION AND REDEVELOPMENT Affidavits of Notice by Clerk. Presentation by Planning Department. Spectators heard. If Council wishes to proceed, action by Resolution. 3/5 favorable rollcall vote to pass. Agenda August 21, 1978 Page Two IV. AWARD OF BIDS AND QUOTES A. Ballfield Fencing - Lake Edina Park B. Art Center Refrigeration C. Restoration of Historic Park Buildings D. Rental of Prentice Truck and Loader E. Sod - Garden Park V. RECOMMENDATIONS AND REPORTS A. Traffic Safety Committee Minutes of August 15, 1978 B. Suit - Oscar Roberts Company C. Proposed Commercial Use of Easterly Portion of Tract A, R.L.S. 1365 (East of Junior Achievement Building) D. Windwoods Apartments Survey Correction - Continued from 8/7/78 E. Food Establishment License - DeLaria's Restaurant F. Special Concerns of Mayor and Council G. Post Agenda and Manager's Miscellaneous Items -VI. 'COMMUNICATIONS A. Wine License Application - LeBistro B. Petition - Coventry Way Residents C. Xerxes Ave. Residents - Condition of W. 54th St. VII. RESOLUTIONS A. City of Richfield i B. Primary-Election Judges VIII. FINANCE A. Claims Paid. Motion of , seconded by , for payment of the following claims as per Pre -List: General Fund, $242,365.26; Park Fund, $3,313.03; Art Center, $4,003.57; Park Construction, $7,855.12; Swimming Pool, $4,028.18; Golf Course, $10,653.25; Recreation, $3,583.78, Gun Range, $998.31; Water Works, $1,543.42; Sewer Rental, $94,214.79; Liquor Fund, $186,766.53; Construction, $421,585.34; Total, $980.910.58 kt4 rT Re: 6205 Hillside Road Att: Rosetgary r Edina - _Realty. 6500 France Ave. S: Edina, Minn.' 55435 ' Lot 2, Blk.3 VaLley'View•Heights ' to cer if f:t$f I I. *� pu'm ?rp(I O-P ee,.,orvc •lr. r'lp office of the Vt11 f' fig•: perk. • of Edtrra; ,s. r:ot1r{ryt MLPT,(: Ot,) fi:;i f fr.7 llwav- tbe. at�«rae detc Ar-el tract or E.:li C Eq O In4d 11A.3 r'.7e f nl d c:. °,3ct *' gTm cverarAn''.i as 5 .,di :,';,1';,'+'d bll CHECK &—&2FS- ' ::urb [,t1,..rCT' R.Saa--q rLarY '�' ' I:L ° °�' Cc^ �r -� �� 1ii:E'i c 3 cir-1 r .. -A'A Y Grad_fU.1; S:�f• 4 • *' tjLaCl:l:apl�'t *: R �Py BlacIrep ��S °i �jrr]Yy `�, Sis'dl'{�r :iE :•�f'� �'urh b 2;L0 7-r r.' C': ! . I(r.f. T. : ..g ° E -- •-- Sanit-ms7 1mrFIX-Cep"':.or E`a�P T'g, Curb �E ­�Sf.devaia_ 1. further as-rt.if; tbas: actordirg to fIlc, 1mrords r`I:_ &aia c:t:,fi.ce, t•hm foltcw]ng es:7 pssmer�ts aPP ^ar 1j .paf d :it, Est • :�.� : 1Sr.�nof d s';1bsequ�:.t- 1 vea r San.Trunk Sewer C -1 20 1959 $321.60 $96.48 Waterm.Trunk #127 20 1960 74.88 26.18. San.Interceptor #53 20 1954 96.00 4.80 $127.46 ' e J 1 foll.hLax cer•r�f.fy that Lkc:e:In -dfr•? t.o the ::er.. col r. , �, c;` f. `1.c:.:.., itt +s •l:;:ll.owi,ag i�rovgme!r.�:s •'s:° c:'era owdRrcd and W11.1. 'Lin. absesxFCI iit 'a. 31 NONE the abov" itA6rmtiorr i:.be�1lP`.rrn aa�oai.�r, b..+C .LLh, '��AP.ttSc� ft��;l.] 'a{aYO no'llahility•far :E {coif. oY u�tst;la+�- CoLvIat•ioc dave uaad. .k Or pr.- aA. "n irv^prot:s:cpG<'y a, *a .. nar:!r l:as 'anly and tray Chang- s +.ri:stant .nl :4* g,,£c . s.c� i'F ;rr� oc.d. fir-ri A men 1. OacF9 �hls 24th day oZ Augusf' ] 72 :ic •_'.:.�r ?� L \GiY ^��17il.�.r•li• 4.:�':?1; `t: � - i ANALYSIS OF ASSESSMENT . r4 00-� LEVY NO. 7083 COUNTY NO. C127 FOR: STREET IMPROVEMENT NO. C -127 LOCATION: Grading and graveling to service 6617 Waterman Avenue. CONTRACTOR: City of Edina Work Order #637 $750.00 TOTAL CONSTRUCTION COST . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $750.00 ASSESSABLE UNITS: 1 Lot PROPOSED ASSESSMENT - $750.00 ASSESSABLE COST: $750.00 COUNTY CHARGE: 1 parcel @ $0.25 .25 $750.25 TO BE SPREAD OVER 5 YEARS - 1979 thru 1983. FIRST YEAR PAYABLE WITH 1978 TAXES COLLECTED IN 1979. FIRST YEAR'S INTEREST FIGURED AT 57. OF TOTAL PRINCIPAL x 1.36 (497 days). CITY OF EDINA HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA PROPOSED SPECIAL ASSESSMENT ON Street Improvement. No. C -127 Notice is hereby given that the Edina City Council will meet at the City Hall at 4801 West 50th Street, Edina, Minnesota on August 21, 1978, 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 improvement: CONSTRUCTION OF STREET IMPROVEMENT NO. C -127 Grading and graveling to service 6617 Waterman Avenue The area proposed to be assessed for said improvement is as follows: - Lot 2, Block 1, Brown's Addition PROPOSED ASSESSMENT - $750.00 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 five (5) equal installments over a period of five years. First payment of each assessment will be payable together with real estate taxes payable in 1979, with interest on the entire assessment at the rate of 57. per annum from the date of the resolution adopting the assessment to December 31, 1979. To each subsequent installment will-be added interest at the same rate for one year on all unpaid installments. The owner of any property assessed may pay the whole of the assessment, without interest, to the City Treasurer on or before November 15, 1978. NO FURTHER STATEMENT WILL BE ISSUED Any owner may appeal the assessment to the district court pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 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 asseosment by 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 property 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 July 21, 1978 Florence B. Hallberg City Clerk ANALYSIS OF ASSESSMENT LEVY NO. 7082 COUNTY NO. C122 FOR: STREET IMPROVEMENT NO. C -122 LOCATION: Moccasin Valley Road from south line of Moccasin Valley Addition southerly to cul -de -sac. CONTRACTOR: Orfei and Sons, Inc. CONTRACT AMOUNT: $ 9,139.77 ENGINEERING AND CLERICAL 14% 1,279.57 $10,419.34 PUBLISHING AND SUPPLIES: 35.00 $10,454.34 CAPITALIZED INTEREST @ 57.: From: August 15, 1977 To: August 21, 1977 371 days @ $1.43 per day 530.54 TOTAL CONSTRUCTION COST . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $10,984.88 ASSESSABLE UNITS: 8 Lots ESTIMATED ASSESSMENT - $1,368.16 per Assessable Lot PROPOSED ASSESSMENT - $1,373.11 per Assessable Lot ASSESSABLE COST: $10,984.88 COUNTY CHARGE: 8 parcels @ 0.50 each parcel 4.00 $10,988.88 TO BE SPREAD OVER 10 YEARS - 1979 thru 1988. FIRST YEAR PAYABLE WITH 1978 TAXES COLLECTED IN 1979. FIRST YEAR'S INTEREST FIGURED AT 5% OT TOTAL PRINCIPAL x 1.36 (497 days). •CITY OF EDINA HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA PROPOSED SPECIAL ASSESSMENT ON Street Improvement No. C -122 Notice is hereby given that the Edina City Council will meet at the City Hall at 4801 West 50th Street, Edina, Minnesota on August 21, 1978, 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 improvement: CONSTRUCTION OF STREET IMPROVEMENT NO. C -122 Moccasin Valley Road from South Line of Moccasin Valley Addition Southerly to Cul -de -sac The area proposed to be assessed for said improvement is as follows: Lot 1, Block 1, Br.aemar's Hill -A -Way Addition; Lots l thru 5, Block 1, Braemar's Homestead Addition; Lots 1 & 3, Block 1, Charles and Ilene Wright Addition. ESTIMATED ASSESSMENT - $1,368.16 PER ASSESSABLE LOT PROPOSED ASSESSMENT - $1,373.11 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 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 1979, 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, 1979. To each subsequent installment will be added interest at the same rate for one year on all unpaid installments. The owner of any property assessed may pay the whole of the assessment, without interest, to the City Treasurer on or before November 15, 1978. NO FURTHER STATEMENT WILL BE ISSUED Any owner may appeal the assessment to the district court pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 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 assessment by 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 property 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 July 21, 1978 Florence B. Hallberg City Clerk ANALYSIS OF ASSESSMENT LEVY NO. 7079 COUNTY NO. 0310 FOR: WATERMAIN NO. 310 LOCATION: Moccasin Valley Road from south line of Moccasin Valley Addition southerly to cul -de -sac. CONTRACTOR: Orfei and Sons, Inc. CONTRACT AMOUNT: $ 7,332.97 ENGINEERING AND CLERICAL 12 %: 879.96 $ 8,212 93 PUBLISHING AND SUPPLIES: 25.00 $ 8,237.93 CAPITALIZED INTEREST @ 5 %: From: July 18, 1977 To: August 21, 1978 398 days @ $1.13 per day 449.75 TOTAL CONSTRUCTION COST . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $ 8,687.68 ASSESSABLE. UNITS: 8 Lots ESTIMATED ASSESSMENT - $1,114.92 per Assessable Lot PROPOSED ASSESSMENT - $1,085.96. per Assessable Lot ASSESSABLE COST: $ 8,687.68 COUNTY CHARGE: 8 parcels @ $0.50 each parcel 4.00 $ 8,691.68 TO BE SPREAD OVER 10 YEARS - 1979 thru 1988. FIRST YEAR PAYABLE WITH 1978 TAXES COLLECTED in 1979. FIRST YEAR'S INTEREST FIGURED AT 5% OF TOTAL PRINCIPAL x 1.36 (497 days). CITY OF EDINA HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA PROPOSED SPECIAL, ASSESSMENT ON Watermain Improvement No. 310 Notice is-hereby given that the Edina City Council will meet at the City Hall at 4801 West- 50th Street, Edina, Minnesota on August 21, 1978, 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 improvement: CONSTRUCTION OF WATERMIAIN IMPROVEMENT NO. 310 Moccasin Valley Road from South line of Moccasin Valley Addition Southerly to Cul -de -sac The area proposed to be assessed for said improvement is as follows: Lot 1, Block 1, Braemar's Hill -A -Way Addition; Lots 1 thru 5, Block 1, Braemar's Homestead Addition; Lots 1 & 3, Block 1, Charles and Ilene Wright Addition ESTIMATED ASSESSMENT - $1,114.92 PER ASSESSABLE LOT PROPOSED ASSESSMENT - $1,085.96 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 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 1979, 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, 1979. To each subsequent installment will be added interest at the same rate for one year on all unpaid installments. The owner of any property assessed may pay the whole • of the assessment, without interest, to the City Treasurer on or before November 15, 1978. NO'FURTHER STATEMENT WILL BE ISSUED Any owner may appeal the assessment to the district court pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 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 assessment by 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 property 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 July 21, 1978 Florence B. Hallberg City Clerk ANALYSIS OF ASSESSMENT LEVY NO. 7080 COUNTY NO. 0334 FOR SANITARY SEWER NO. 334 LOCATION: Moccasin Valley Road from the south line of Moccasin Valley Addition southerly to cul -de -sac. CONTRACTOR: Orfei and Sons, Inc. CONTRACT AMOUNT: $6,781.82 ENGINEERING AND CLERICAL 12 %: 813.82 $7,595.64 PUBLISHING AND SUPPLIES: 25.00 $7,620.64 CAPITALIZED INTEREST @ 5 %: From: July 18, 1977 To: August 21, 1978 398 days @ 1.04 per day 413.92 TOTAL CONSTRUCTION COST . . . . . . . . $8,034.56 ASSESSABLE UNITS: 8 Lots ESTIMATED ASSESSMENT - $1,169.10 per Assessable Lot PROPOSED ASSESSMENT - $1,004.32 Per Assessable Lot ASSESSABLE COST: $8,034.56 COUNTY CHARGE: 8 parcels @ $0.50 each parcel 200.00 $8,234.56 TO BE SPREAD OVER 10 YEARS - 1979 thru 1988. FIRST YEAR PAYABLE WITH 1978 TAXES COLLECTED IN 1979. FIRST YEAR'S INTEREST FIGURED AT 57. OF TOTAL PRINCIPAL x 1.36 (497 days). CITY OF EDINA HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA PROPOSED SPECIAL ASSESSMENT ON Sanitary Sewer. 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 August 21, 1978, at .7:00 P.M. to hear, consider and pass upon all objections, both oral and written, to a proposed V special assessment for the following improvement: L CONSTRUCTION OF SANITY ;RY SF.IdER IMPROVEMENT NO. 334 Moccasin Valley Road from the South line of Moccasin Valley Addition Southerly to .Cul -de -sac The area proposed to be assessed for said improvement is as follows: Lot 1, Block 1, Braemar's Hill -A -Way; Lots 1 thru 5, Block 1, Braemar's Homestead; Lots 1, Block 1; also Lot 3, Block 1, Charles and Ilene [Aright Addition. ESTIMATED ASSESSMENT - $1,169.10 PER ASSESSABLE LOT PROPOSED ASSESSMENT - $1,004.32 PER ASSESSABLE LOT The proposed assessment roll is now-on file-in th- 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 1979, 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, 1979. To each subsequent installment_ will be added interest at the same rate for one year on all unpaid installments. The owner of any property assessed may pay the whole of the assessment, without interest, to the City Treasurer on or before November 15, 1978., NO FURTHER STATEMENT WILL BE ISSUED Any owner may appeal the assessment to the district court pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 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 assessment by 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 property 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 July •21, 1978 Florence B. Hallberg City Clerk ANALYSIS OF ASSESSMENT FOR: WATERMAIN NO. 311 LOCATION: Forest Glen Road from Valley View Road to cul -de -sac. CONTRACTOR: Orfei and Sons, Inc. CONTRACT AMOUNT: ENGINEERING AND CLERICAL 12% #199385 Braun Engineering - Soil Testing PUBLISHING AND SUPPLIES: CAPITALIZED INTEREST @ 5 %: From: July 18, 1977 To: August 21, 1978 398 days @ $1.72 per day TOTAL CONSTRUCTION COST . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ASSESSABLE UNITS: 4 Lots LEVY NO. 7079 COUNTY NO. 0311 $11,079.38 1.329.53 $12,408.91 90.00 $12,498.91 35-.00 $12,533.91 684.53 $13,218.44 ESTIMATED ASSESSMENT - $3,101.56 per Assessable Lot PROPOSED ASSESSMENT - $3,304.61 per Assessable Lot ASSESSABLE COST: $13,218.44 COUNTY CHARGE: 4 parcels @ $0.50 each parcel 2.00 $13,220.44 TO BE SPREAD OVER 10 YEARS - 1979 thru 1988. FIRST YEAR PAYABLE WITH 1978 TAXES COLLECTED IN 1979. FIRST YEAR'S INTEREST FIGURED AT 5% OF TOTAL PRINCIPAL x 1.36 (497 days). CITY OF EDINA HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA PROPOSED SPECIAL ASSESSMENT ON Watermain Improvement No. 311 Notice 'is hereby given that the Edina City Council will meet at the City Hall at 4801 West 50th Street, Edina, Minnesota on August 21, 1978, at 7 :00 P.M. to hear, consider and pass upon all objections, both oral and written-,,p to a proposed special assessment for the following improvement: CONSTRUCTION OF WATERMAIN IMPROVEMENT N0. 311 Forest Glen Road from Valley View Road to Cul -de -sac The area proposed to be assessed for said improvement is as follows: Lots 1 thru 4, Block 1, Dahlquist Addition Replat ESTIMATED ASSESSMENT— $3,101.56 PER ASSESSABLE LOT PROPOSED ASSESSMENT - $3,304.61 PER ASSESSABLE LOT The proposed assessment roll is now on file in the office of the City Clerk and is o A n 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 1979, 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, 1979. To each subsequent installment will be added interest at the same•rate for one year on all unpaid installments. The owner of any property assessed may pay the whole . of the assessment, without interest, to the City Treasurer on or before November 15, 1978. NO FURTHER STATEMENT WILL BE ISSUED Any owner may appeal the assessment to the district court pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 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 assessment by 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 property 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 July 21, 1978 Florence B. Hallberg City Clerk ANALYSIS OF ASSESSMENT FOR: SANITARY SEWE NO. 335 LOCATION: Forest Road from Valley View Road to cul -de -sac. CONTRACTOR: Orfei and Sons, Inc. CONTRACT AMOUNT: ENGINEERING AND CLERICAL 12 %: PUBLISHING AND SUPPLIES: CAPITALIZED INTEREST @ 57.: From: July 18, 1977 To: August 21, 1978 398 days @ $2.24 per day TOTAL CONSTRUCTION COST . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ASSESSABLE UNITS: 3 Lots ASSESSABLE COST: LEVY NO. 7080 COUNTY NO. 0335 $14,590.71 1.750.88 $16,341.59 35.00 $16,376.59 891.53 $17,268.12 ESTIMATED ASSESSMENT - $5,087,55 per Assessable Lot PROPOSED ASSESSMENT - $5,756.04 per Assessable Lot COUNTY CHARGE: 3 parcels @ $0.50 each parcel 12- $17,268.'S19 1.50 $17,27A.43- 269.62 TO BE SPREAD OVER 10 YEARS - 1979 thru 1988. FIRST YEAR PAYABLE WITH 1978 TAXES COLLECTED IN 1979. FIRST YEAR'S INTEREST FIGURED AT 5% OF TOTAL PRINCIPAL x 1.36 (497 days) CITY OF EDINA HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA PROPOSED SPECIAL ASSESSMENT ON. Sanitary Sewer Improvement 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 August 21, 1978, at 7:00 P.M, to hear, consider and pass upon all objections, both oral and writtenkto a proposed special assessment for the following improvement: CONSTRUCTION OF SANITARY SE94ER IMPROVEMENT NO. 335 Forest Glen Road from Valley View Road to Cul -de -sac The area proposed to be assessed for said improvement is as follows: Lots 1, 2 & 3, Block 1, Dahlquist Addition Replat ESTIMATED ASSESSMENT - $5,087.55 PER ASSESSABLE LOT PROPOSED ASSESSMENT - $5,756.04 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 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 1979, 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, 1979. To each subsequent installment will be added interest at the same rate for one year on all unpaid installments. The owner of any property assessed may pay the whole of the assessment, without interest, to the City Treasurer on or before November 15, 1978. NO FURTHER STATEMENT WILL BE ISSUED Any owner may appeal the assessment to the district court pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 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 assessment by 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 property 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 July •21, 1978 Florence B. Hallberg City Clerk ANALYSIS OF ASSESSMENT FOR: WATERMAIN NO. 309 LEVY NO. 7079 COUNTY NO. 0309 LOCATION: Parnell Avenue from Valley View Road to 6117 Parnell Avenue. CONTRACTOR: Metro Sewer and Water Company. CONTRACT AMOUNT: $ 8,309.02 ENGINEERING AND CLERICAL 12 %: 997.08 $ 9,306.10 PUBLISHING AND SUPPLIES: 25.00 $ 9,331.10 CAPITALIZED INTEREST @ 5 %: From: October 18, 1976 To: August 21, 1978 671 days @ $1.28 per day 858.90 TOTAL CONSTRUCTION COST . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $10,190.00 ASSESSABLE UNITS: 5 Lots PROPOSED ASSESSMENT - $2,038.00 per Assessable Lot ASSESSABLE COST: $10,190.00 COUNTY CHARGE: 5 parcels @ $0.50 each parcel 2.50 $10,192.50 TO BE SPREAD OVER 10 YEARS - 1979 thru 1988. FIRST YEAR PAYABLE WITH 1978 TAXES COLLECTED 114 1979. FIRST YEAR'S INTEREST FIGURED AT 57. OF TOTAL PRINCIPAL x 1.36 (497 days). CITY OF EDINA HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA PROPOSED SPECIAL ASSESSMENT ON Watermain Improvement No. 309 Notice is hereby given that the Edina City Council will meet at the City Hall at 4801 West 50th Street, Edina, Minnesota on August 21, 1978 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 improvement: CONSTRUCTION OF WATERMAIN IMPROVEMENT N0. 309 Parnell Avenue from Valley View Road to 6117 Parnell Avenue The area proposed to be assessed for said improvement is as follows: Lots 7 & 8, Ettner's and Wing's Addition; Also, Lots 15, 16, and 17, Block 5, Virginia Avenue Addition PROPOSED ASSESSMENT - $2,038.00 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 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 1979, 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, 1979. To each subsequent installment will be added interest at the same rate for one year on all unpaid installments. The owner of any property assessed may pay the whole of the assessment, without interest, to the City Treasurer on or before November 15, 1978. NO FURTHER STATEMENT WILL BE ISSUED Any owner may appeal the assessment to the district court pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 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 assessment.by 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 property 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 July 21, 1978 Florence B. Hallberg City Clerk ANALYSIS OF ASSESSMENT LEVY NO. 7079 COUNTY NO. 0314 FOR: WATERMAIN NO. 314 LOCATION: Millpond Place from Westbrook Lane to railroad right of way. CONTRACTOR: Raymond E. Haeg Plumbing, Inc. CONTRACT AMOUNT: $ 5,759.90 ENGINEERING AND CLERICAL 12 %: 691.19 PUBLISHING AND SUPPLIES: $ 6,451.09 25.00 $6,476.09 CAPITALIZED INTEREST @ 5% From: August 15, 1977 To: August 21, 1978 371 days @ $0.89 per day 330.22 TOTAL CONSTRUCTION COST . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $6,806.31 ASSESSABLE UNITS: 5 Lots ESTIMATED ASSESSMENT - $1,078.57 per .Assessable Lot PROPOSED ASSESSMENT - $ 972.33 per Assessable Lot ASSESSABLE COST: $6,806.31 COUNTY CHARGE: 5 parcels @ $0.50 each parcel 2.50 $6,808.81 TO BE SPREAD OVER 10 YEARS - 1979 thru 1988. FIRST YEAR PAYABLE WITH 1978 TAXES COLLECTED IN 1979. FIRST YEAR'S INTEREST FIGURED AT 5% OF TOTAL PRINCIPAL x 1.36 (497 days). CITY OF EDINA HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA PROPOSED SPECIAL ASSESSMENT ON Watermain Improvement No. 314 Notice -is hereby given that the Edina City Council will meet at the City Hall at 4801 West 50th Street, Edina, Minnesota on August 21, 1978, 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 improvement: CONSTRUCTION OF WATERMAIN IMPROVEMENT N0. 314 Millpond Place from Westbrook Lane to Railroad Right -of -Way The area proposed to be assessed for said improvement is as follows: Lots 7 thru 10, Block 2; Also, West half of Lot 3, and lots 4, 5, 6, Block 3, Tingdale Brothers Brookside Addition ESTIMATED ASSESSMENT - $1,078.57 PER ASSESSABLE LOT PROPOSED ASSESSMENT - $ 972.33 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 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 1979, 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,-1979. To each , subsequent installment will be added interest at the same rate for one year on all unpaid installments. The owner of any property assessed may pay the whole of the assessment, without interest, to the City Treasurer on or before November 15, 1978. NO FURTHER STATEMENT WILL BE ISSUED Any owner may appeal the assessment to the district court pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 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 assessment by 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 property 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 July 21, 1978 Florence B. Hallberg City Clerk ANALYSIS OF ASSESSMENT FOR: WATERMAIN NO. 318 LEVY NO. 7079 COUNTY NO. 0318 LOCATION: Goya Lane from Co. Rd 158 to 50' t north of cul -de -sac; easement line from 50' 1 north of Goya Lane to Doncaster Way; Doncaster Way from frontage road Co. Rd 158 to Croyden Lane; frontage road Co. Rd 158 from Merritt Circle to Doncaster Way; Merritt Circle from frontage road Co. Rd 158 to Doncaster Way; Ayrshire Blvd from Doncaster Way to Glengary Parkway, Glengary Parkway from Co. Rd 158 to Northwood Drive; Northwood Drive from Glengary Parkway to Chantrey Road; Northwood Drive from Mirror Lakes Drive to Dundee Road; Dundee Road from Ayrshire Blvd to Northwood Road; Ayrshire Blvd from Mirror Lakes Drive to Dundee Road; South Drive from Mirror Lakes Drive to Dundee Road; Hidden Lane from Mirror Lakes Drive to Dundee Road. CONTRACTOR: Peter Lametti Construction Company. CONTRACT AMOUNT: $213,502.42 ENGINEERING AND CLERICAL 9 %: 19,215.22 $232,717.64 227006 Aqua City - repairs 90.53 276006 Aqua City - repairs 2.64 Work Order #758 - blacktop driveways 276.98 135734 National Green - tree planting 589.96 325719 Aqua City - repairs 84.20 325723 Bachman's - tree work 268.00 339006 Aqua City - repairs 134.65 Lamenti - cleanup 100.00 $234,264.60 PUBLISHING AND SUPPLIES 100.00 $234,364.60 CAPITALIZED INTEREST @ 5 %: From: July 18, 1977 To: August 21, 1978 398 days @ $32.09 per day 12,772.24 TOTAL CONSTRUCTION COST . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $247,136.84 ASSESSABLE UNITS: 116 Lots ESTIMATED ASSESSMENT - $2,126.63 per Assessable Lot PROPOSED ASSESSMENT - $2,130.49 per Assessable Lot ASSESSABLE COST: $247,136.84 COUNTY CHARGE: 116 parcels @ $0.50 each parcel 58.00 $247,194.84 TO BE SPREAD OVER 10 YEARS - 1979 thru 1988. FIRST YEAR PAYABLE WITH 1978 TAXES COLLECTED IN 1979. FIRST YEAR'S INTEREST FIGURED AT 5% OF TOTAL PRINCIPAL x 1.36 (497 days). CITY OF EDINA HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA PROPOSED SPECIAL ASSESSMENT ON Watermain Improvement No. 318 Notice is hereby given that the Edina City Council will meet at the City Hall at 4801 West 50th Street, Edina, Minnesota on August 21, 1978, 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 improvement: CONSTRUCTION OF WATERMAIN IMPROVEMENT NO. 318 Goya Lane from Co. Rd. 158 to 50' - North of Cul -de -sac; Easement Line from 50' North of Goya Lane to Doncaster Way; Doncaster Way from Frontage road Co. Rd. 158 to Croyden Lane; Frontage Rd. Co. Rd. 158 from Merritt Circle to Doncaster . Way; Merritt Circle from Frontage Rd. Co. Rd. 158 to Doncaster Way; Ayrshire Blvd. from Doncaster Way to Glengarry-Parkway, Glengarry Parkway from Co. Rd. 158 to Northwood Drive; Northwood Drive from Glengarry Parkway to Chantrey Road; Northwood Drive from Mirror Lakes Drive to Dundee Road; Dundee Road from Ayrshire Blvd. to Northwood Road; Ayrshire Blvd. from Mirror Lakes Drive to Dundee Road; South Drive from Mirror Lakes Drive to Dundee Road; Hidden Lane from Mirror Lakes Drive to Dundee Road. The area proposed to be assessed for said improvement is as follows: Lots 1 thru 9, Block 1; Lots 4 thru 13, Block 2, John E.'Anderson's Addition to Edina Highlands. Lots 1 thru 4, Block 1, John E. Anderson's 2nd Addition to Edina Highlands. Lots 1 thru 8, Block 1, Danijohn's-Addition. Lots 10 thru 15, Block 2; and Lots 1 thru 13, Block 3; and Lots 1 thru 9, Block 4; and 1 thru 3, Block 7; and Lots 1 thru 7,,Block 8, Mirror Lakes In Edina Addition._ Lots 1 and 2, Block 1; and Lot 1, Blocic 3, Mirror Lakes Meadow -Wood Addition to Edina Highlands. Lots 1 thru 11, and Lots 36 and 37, Rosendahl's Edina Highlands Addition. Lots 2 thru 5, Block 2, Rosendahl's 2nd Addition to Edina Highlands. Lots 1 thru 7, Block 1; and 9 thru 12, Block 1; and 1 thru 11, Block 2; and Lots 1 thru 10, Block 3, Victorsen's Addition to Edina Highlands. ESTIMATED ASSESSMENT - $2,126.63 PER ASSESSABLE LOT PROPOSED ASSESSMENT - $2,130.49 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 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 1979, 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, 1979. To each subsequent installment will be added interest at the same rate for one year on all unpaid installments. The owner of any property assessed may pay the whole of the assessment, without interest, to the City Treasurer on or before November 15, 1978. NO FURTHER STATEMENT WILL BE ISSUED Any owner may appeal the assessment to the district court pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 429.081, by serving notice of the appeal upon the Mayor or Cler6 of the City of Edina within twenty (20) days after the adoption of the assessment by the City Council, and by filing such notice with the district court within ten (10) days after service upon the Mayor or Clerk. Page 2 - Watermain Improvement No. 318 Pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, the City of Edina.has adopted standards and guidelines for deferring special assessments against homestead property 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 JULY 21, 1973 Florence B. Hallberg City Clerk ANALYSIS OF ASSESSMENT FOR: WATERMAIN NO. 322 LEVY NO. 7079 COUNTY NO. 0322 LOCATION: Schaefer Road from the north line of Parkwood Knolls Addition to Idylwood Lane; Schaefer Road from View Lane to Co. Rd. 158; Parkwood Road from Blake Road to Knoll Drive; Idylwood Lane from Blake Road to Schaefer Road; Knoll Drive from Blake Road to Schaefer Road; South Knoll Drive from Blake Road to Knoll Drive; Akers Lane from Parkwood Road to north line of Parkwood Knolls Addition; Schaefer Circle from Schaefer Road to service Lot 7, Block 1, Parkwood Knolls 8th Addition. CONTRACTOR: Orfei and Sons, Inc. CONTRACT AMOUNT: $190,649.71 ENGINEERING AND CLERICAL 97.: 17,158.45 $207,808.16 #199194 General Communication (equipment rental) 18.00 #213738 Aqua City - (clean sprinkler) 36.18 #311006 Aqua City - (repairs) 665.07 #339753 Howard Turf - (repair) 29.65 Lametti - cleanup 585.63 $209,142.69 PUBLISHING AND SUPPLIES 100.00 $209,242.69 CAPITALIZED INTEREST @ 57. From: June 20, 1977 To: August 21, 1978 426 days @ $28.58 per day 12,174.75 TOTAL CONSTRUCTION COST . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $221,417.44 ASSESSABLE UNITS: 83 Lots ESTIMATED ASSESSMENT - $2,806.59 per Assessable Lot PROPOSED ASSESSMENT - $2,667.68 per Assessable Lot ASSESSABLE COST: $221,417.44 COUNTY CHARGE: 83 parcels @ $0.50 each parcel 41.50 $221,458.94 TO BE SPREAD OVER 10 YEARS - 1979 thru 1988. FIRST YEAR PAYABLE WITH 1978 TAXES COLLECTED IN 1979. FIRST YEAR'S INTEREST FIGURED AT 5% OF TOTAL PRINCIPAL x 1.36 (497 days) CITY OF EDINA HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA PROPOSED SPECIAL ASSESSMENT ON Watermain Improvement No. 322 Notice is hereby given that the Edina City Council will meet at the City Hall at 4801 West 50th Street, Edina, Minnesota on August 21, 1978, 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 improvement: CONSTRUCTION OF WATERMAIN IMPROVEMENT NO. 322 Schaefer Road from the North line of Parkwood Knolls Addition to Idylwood Lane; Schaefer Road from View Lane to Co. Rd. 158; Parkwood Road from Blake Road to Knoll Drive; Idylwood Lane from Blake Road to Schaefer Road; Knoll Drive from Blake Road to Schaefer Road; South Knoll Drive from Blake Road to Knoll Drive; Akers Lane from Parkwood Road to North line of Parkwood Knolls Addition; Schaefer Circle from Schaefer Road to Service Lot 7, Block 1, Parkwood Knolls, 8th Addition. The area proposed to be assessed for .said improvement is as follows: Lots 1 thru 12, Block 1; Also, Lots 1 thru 5, Block 2; Lots 1 & 2, Block 3, Parkwood Knolls 5th Addition. Lot 1, Block 1; Lot 1, Block 2; Lots 1 & 2, and the E 9' of Lot 3, Block 4; Lots 8 & 9, Block 4, Parkwood Knolls Addition. Lots 1 thru 8, Block 1; Lots 1 thru 8, Block 2, Parkwood Knolls 3rd Addition. Lots 1 thru 9, Block 1, Parkwood Knolls 6th Addition. Tots 1 thru 9, Block 1; Lots 1 thru 9, Block 2, Parkwood Knolls 7th _addition. Lots 1 thru 7, Block 1; Lots 1 thru 7, Block 2, Parkwood Knolls 8th Addition. Also, Tract A, Registered Lane Survey No. 1286. ESTIMATED ASSESSMENT - $2,806.59 PER ASSESSABLE LOT PROPOSED ASSESSMENT - $2,667.68 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 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 1979,' 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, 1979. To each subsequent installment. will be added interest at the same rate for one year on all unpaid installments. The owner of any property assessed may pay the whole of the assessment, without interest, to the City Treasurer on or before November 15, 1978. NO FURTHER STATEMENT WILL BE ISSUED Any owner may appeal the assessment to the district court pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 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 assessment by 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 property owned by persons 65 years of age or older for whom payment would be a hardship. To . . v f Page 2 - Watermain Improvement No. 322 , Continued, 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 July 21, 1978 Florence B. Hallberg City Clerk ANALYSIS OF ASSESSMENT FOR: WATERMAIN NO. 323 LEVY NO. 7079 COUNTY NO. 0323 LOCATION: Hillside Road from Valley View Road to Tracy Avenue; Crescent Drive from Hillside Road to Westridge Blvd.; Crest Lane from' Westridge Blvd to cul -de -sac; Westridge Blvd from Valley View . Road to Ridgeway Road; Crescent Drive from Westridge Blvd to Countryside Road; Hunter Street from Westridge Blvd to Cresent Drive; Highland Road from Westridge Blvd. to Crescent Drive. CONTRACTOR: Orfei and Sons, Inc. CONTRACT AMOUNT: ENGINEERING AND CLERICAL 9 %: #255712 - Scott Garoutte Refund 4353222 - Hedberg & Son's Co. (gravel) Lametti - Cleanup PUBLISHING AND SUPPLIES: CAPITALIZED INTEREST @ 5 %: From: June 20, 1977 To: August 21, 1978 427 days @ $24.29 per day TOTAL CONSTRUCTION COST . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ASSESSABLE UNITS: 80 Lots ASSESSABLE COST: $162,527.37 14.627.46 $177,154.83 30.00 46.00 585.63 $177,816.46 100.00 $177,916.46 10.371.54 $188,288.00 $188,288.00 ESTIMATED ASSESSMENT - $3,268.21 per Assessable Lot PROPOSED ASSESSMENT - $2,353.60 per Assessable Lot COUNTY CHARGE: 80 parcels @ $0.50 each parcel $188,288.00 40.00 $188,328.00 TO BE SPREAD OVER 10 YEARS - 1979 thru 1988. FIRST YEAR PAYABLE WITH 1978 TAXES COLLECTED IN 1979. FIRST YEAR'S INTEREST FIGURED AT 5% OF TOTAL PRINCIPAL x 1.36 (497 days) CITY OF EDINA HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA PROPOSED SPECIAL ASSESSMENT ON Watermain Improvement No. 323 Notice is hereby given that the Edina City Council will meet at the City Hall at 4801 West 50th Street, Edina, Minnesota on August 21, 1978, 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 improvement: CONSTRUCTION OF WATERMAIN IMPROVEMENT NO. 323 Hillside Road from Valley View Road to Tracy Avenue; Crescent Drive from Hillside Road to Westridge Blvd.; Crest Lane from Westridge Blvd. to Cul -de -sac; Westridge Blvd. from Valley View Road to Ridgeway Road; Crescent Drive from Westridge Blvd. to Countryside Road; Hunter Street from Westridge Blvd. to Crescent Drive; Highland Road from Westridge Blvd. to Crescent Drive. The area proposed to be assessed for said improvement is as follows: Lot 1, Block 4; and Lots 6 thru 13, Block 6; Lots 4 thru 12, Block 7; Lots 5 thru 13,-Block 8; Lots 1 thru 12, Block 9, Countryside Addition. Lots 2 thru 7, Block 1; and Lots 1 thru 5, Block 2; Lots 2 thru 20, Block 3; Lots 1 thru 4, Block 4; Lots 1 thru 9, Block 5, Valley View Heights Addition. ESTIMATED ASSESSMENT - $3,248.21 P,?R ASSESSABLE LOT PROPOSED ASSESSMENT - $2,353.60 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 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 1979, 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, 1979. To each subsequent installment will be added interest at the same rate for one year on all unpaid ins�-allments. The owner of any property assessed may pay the whole of the assess- ment, without interest, to the City Treasurer on or before November 15, 1978. NO FURTHER STATEMENT WILL BE ISSUED Any owner may appeal the assessment to the district court pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 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 assessment by 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 property 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 July 21, 1978 Florence B. Hallberg City Clerk ANALYSIS OF ASSESSMENT LEVY NO. 7079 COUNTY NO. 0324 FOR: WATERMAIN NO. 324 LOCATION: Doron Drive from Valley View Road to cul -de -sac. CONTRACTOR: Orfei and Sons, Inc. CONTRACT AMOUNT: $ 3,811.59 ENGINEERING AND CLERICAL 12 %: 457.39 $ 4,268.98 PUBLISHING AND SUPPLIES: 15.00 $ 4,283.98 CAPITALIZED INTEREST @ 5 %: From: August 15, 1977 To: August 21, 1978 371 days @ $0.60 per day 222.60 TOTAL CONSTRUCTION COST . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $ 4,506.58 ASSESSABLE UNITS: 2 Lots ESTIMATED ASSESSMENT - $1,623.20 per Assessable Lot PROPOSED ASSESSMENT - $2,253.29 per Assessable Lot ASSESSABLE COST: $ 4,506.58 COUNTY CHARGE: 2 parcels @ $0.50 each parcel 1.00 $ 4,507.58 TO BE SPREAD OVER 10 YEARS - 1979 thru 1988. FIRST YEAR PAYABLE WITH 1978 TAXES COLLECTED IN 1979. FIRST YEAR'S INTEREST FIGURED AT 5% OF TOTAL PRINCIPAL x 1.36 (497 days). CITY OF EDINA HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA PROPOSED SPECIAL ASSESSMENT ON Watermain Improvement No. 324 Notice is hereby given that the Edina City Council will meet at the City Hall at 4801 West 50th Street, Edina, Minnesota on August 21, 1978, 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 improvement: CONSTRUCTION OF WATERMAIN IMPROVEMENT N0. 324 Doron Drive from Valley View Road to Cul -de -sac The area proposed to be assessed for said improvement is as follows: 9-'�-PbLots 1 & 2, Block 1, Bach's Addition ESTIMATED ASSESSMENT - $1,623.20 PER ASSESSABLE LOT PROPOSED ASSESSMENT - .$29253.29 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 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 1979, 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, 1979. To.each subsequent installment will be added interest at the same rate for one year on all unpaid installments. The owner of any property . assessed may pay the whole of the assessment, without interest, to the City Treasurer on or before November 15, 1978. NO FURTHER STATEMENT WILL BE ISSUED Any owner may appeal the assessment to the district court pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 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 assessment by 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 property 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 July 21, 1978 Florence B. Hallberg City Clerk ANALYSIS OF ASSESSMENT LEVY NO. 7080 COUNTY NO. 0338 FOR: SANITARY SEWER NO. 338 LOCATION: Parkwood Road from Schaefer Road to Akers Lane; Akers Lane from Parkwood Road northerly 230 feet i CONTRACTOR: Orfei and Sons, Inc. CONTRACT AMOUNT: $17,144.06 ENGINEERING AND CLERICAL 12 %: 2,057.30 $19,201.36 PUBLISHING AND SUPPLIES: 35.00 $19,236.36 CAPITALIZED INTEREST @ 5 %: From: July 18, 1977 To: August 21, 1978 398 days @ $2.64 per day 1,050.72 TOTAL CONSTRUCTION COST . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $20,287.08 ASSESSABLE UNITS: 4 Lots ESTIMATED ASSESSMENT - $5,219.46 per Assessable Lot PROPOSED ASSESSMENT - $5,071.77 per Assessable Lot ASSESSABLE COST: $20,287.08 COUNTY CHARGE: 4 parcels @ $0.50 each parcel 2.00 $20,289.08 TO BE SPREAD OVER 10 YEARS - 1979 thru 1988 FIRST YEAR PAYABLE WITH 1978 TAXES COLLECTED IN 1979 FIRST YEAR'S INTEREST FIGURED AT 5% OF TOTAL PRINCIPAL x 1.36 (497 days) CITY OF EDINA HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA PROPOSED SPECIAL ASSESSMENT ON Sanitary Sewer Improvement No. 338 Notice is hereby given that the Edina City Council will meet at the City Hall at 4801 West 50th Street, Edina, Minnesota on August 21,'1978, 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 improvement: CONSTRUCTION OF SANITARY SEWER IMPROVEMENT NO. 338 Parkwood Road from Schaefer Road to Akers Lane; Akers Lane from Parkwood Road Northerly 230 Feet ± The area proposed to be assessed for said improvement is as follows: Lot 1, Block 1; Lot 1 Block 2, and part of Lot 2,.Block 2 (Parcel 0815) ; also Lot'2, Block 4, and the easterly 9' of Lot 3, Block 4, Parkwood Knolls Addition ESTIMATED ASSESSMENT - $5,219.46 PER ASSESSABLE LOT PROPOSED ASSESSMENT - $59071,77 PER ASSESSABLE LOT The proposed asses -sment 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 1979, 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, 1979. To each subsequent installment will be added interest at the same rate for one year on all unpaid installments. The owner of any property assessed may pay .the whole of the assessment, without interest, to the City Treasurer on or before November 15, 1978. NO FURTHER STATEMENT WILL BE ISSUED Any owner may appeal the assessment to the district court pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 429.081, by serving notice of the appeal upon the Mayor or Clerl. of the City of Edina within twenty (20) days after the adoption of the assessment by 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 property 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 July 21, 1978 Florence B. Hallberg City Clerk ANALYSIS OF ASSESSMENT LEVY NO. 7080 COUNTY NO. 0340 FOR: SANITARY SEWER N0. 340 LOCATION: Sunnyside Road from Townes Road to west 240 feet 1. CONTRACTOR: F. F. 3edlicki, Inc. CONTRACT AMOUNT: $3,815.00 ENGINEERING AND CLERICAL 12 %: 457.80 $4,272.80 PUBLISHING AND SUPPLIES: 15.00 $4,287.80 CAPITALIZED INTEREST @ 5 %: From: May 16, 1977 To: August 21, 1978 461 days @ $0.59 per day 272.00 TOTAL CONSTRUCTION COST . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $4,559.80 ASSESSABLE UNITS: 2 Lots ESTIMATED ASSESSMENT - $2,273.49 per Assessable Lot PROPOSED ASSESSMENT - $2,279.90 per Assessable Lot ASSESSABLE COST: $4,559.80 COUNTY CHARGE: 2 parcels @ $0.50 each parcel 1.00 $4,560.80 TO BE SPREAD OVER 10 YEARS - 1979 thru 1988. FIRST YEAR PAYABLE WITH 1978 TAXES COLLECTED IN 1979. FIRST YEARS'S INTEREST FIGURED AT 5% OF TOTAL PRINCIPAL x 1.36 (497 days) CITY OF EDINA HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA PROPOSED SPECIAL ASSESSMENT ON Sanitary Sewer Improvement No. 340 Notice is hereby given that the Edina City Council will meet at the City Hall at 4801 West 50th Street, Edina, Minnesota on August 21, 1978, 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 improvement: CONSTRUCTION OF SANITARY SEWER IMPROVEMENT N0. 340 Sunnyside Road from Towres Road to West 240 Feet ± The area proposed to be assessed for said improvement is as follows: Lots 14 & 15, Auditor's Subdivision #319 ESTIMATED ASSESSMENT - $2,273.49 PER ASSESSABLE LOT PROPOSED ASSESSMENT - $2,279.90 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 ten (10) equal installments over a period of ten years. First payment of each assessment will be F3yable together with real estate taxes payable in 1979, 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, 1979. To each subsequent installment will be added interest at the same rate for one year on all unpaid installments. The owner of any property assessed may pay the whole of the assessment, without interest, to the City Treasurer on or before November 15, 1978. NO FURTHER STATEMENT WILL BE ISSUED Any owner may appeal the assessment to the district court pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 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 assessment by 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 property owned by persons 65 years of age or older for whom payment mould 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 CITY COUNCIL July 21, 1978 Florence B. Hallberg City Clerk ANALYSIS OF ASSESSMENT LEVY NO. 7079 COUNTY NO. 0299 FOR: WATERMAIN NO. 299 LOCATION: Morningside Area CONTRACTOR: F. F. Jedlicki, Inc. CONTRACT AMOUNT: $363,446.95 ENGINEERing and clerical 8 %: 29,075.76 $392,522.71 WATER WORKS FUND SHARE: $337,276.80 Connection charge - City of Minneapolis (paid by Water Works Fund) 27,363.75 $309,913.05 PUBLISHING AND SUPPLIES: 100.00 $310,013.05 CAPITALIZED INTEREST @ 5% From: May 16, 1977 To: August 21, 1978 461 days @ $42.47 per day 19,576.01 TOTAL CONSTRUCTION COST . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $329,589.06 ASSESSABLE UNITS: 624 Lots ESTIMATED ASSESSMENT: $458:65 per Assessable Lot PROPOSED ASSESSMENT: $534.18 per Assessable Lot ASSESSABLE COST: $329,589.06 COUNTY CHARGE: 624 parcels @ $0.50 each parcel 312.00 $329,901.06 TO BE SPREAD OVER 10 YEARS - 1979 thru 1988. FIRST YEAR PAYABLE WITII 1978 TAXES COLLECTED IN 1979. FIRST YEAR'S INTEREST FIGURED AT 5% OF TOTAL PRINCIPAL x 1.36 (497 days). Contract: $86,523.74 Engineering and Clerical 8 %: 6,921.90 - 93,445.64 $299,077.07 City of St. Louis Park 7,234.60 #157726 - Root- O -Matic - sewer service 85.75 #199194 - General Communication (equipment rental) 18.00 #213736 - Ralph V. Rose - service repair 508.10 #241728 - William Sales - Sens -a- reader 65.85 #276372 - Treasurer, City of Mpls - connection charge 27,363.75 #066037 - Braun Engineering - soil testing 530.00 #353041 - Bury and Carlson - redi -mix 779.00 #300864 - R.S. Jackson - rent 50.00 #311040 - Bury and Carlson - redi -mix 87.13 City Labor 1,271.46 Work Order #634 - sweep and flush ' 206.09 $337,276.80 Connection charge - City of Minneapolis (paid by Water Works Fund) 27,363.75 $309,913.05 PUBLISHING AND SUPPLIES: 100.00 $310,013.05 CAPITALIZED INTEREST @ 5% From: May 16, 1977 To: August 21, 1978 461 days @ $42.47 per day 19,576.01 TOTAL CONSTRUCTION COST . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $329,589.06 ASSESSABLE UNITS: 624 Lots ESTIMATED ASSESSMENT: $458:65 per Assessable Lot PROPOSED ASSESSMENT: $534.18 per Assessable Lot ASSESSABLE COST: $329,589.06 COUNTY CHARGE: 624 parcels @ $0.50 each parcel 312.00 $329,901.06 TO BE SPREAD OVER 10 YEARS - 1979 thru 1988. FIRST YEAR PAYABLE WITII 1978 TAXES COLLECTED IN 1979. FIRST YEAR'S INTEREST FIGURED AT 5% OF TOTAL PRINCIPAL x 1.36 (497 days). CITY OF EDINA HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA PROPOSED SPECIAL ASSESSMENT ON WATERMAIN NO. 299 Notice is hereby given that the Edina City Council will meet at 4801 West 50th Street, Edina, Minnesota, on August 21, 1978, at consider, and pass upon all objections, both oral and written, special assessment for the following improvement: CONSTRUCTION OF WATERMAIN NO. 299 Morningside Area the City Hall at 7:00 p.m. to hear, to a proposed The area proposed to be assessed for said improvement is as follows: Lot 11, Auditor's Subdivision #172; Lot 8, Auditor's Subdivision #319; Lot 2, White Oaks 3rd; Parcels 1100, 2000, and 5000, Sec. 7, Twp. 28, Range 24; Lots 1 thru 12, Block 1, A and B Addition; Lots 1 thru 3, Block 1, and Lots 1 thru 5, Block 2, Arden Park; Lots 3, 4, 5(also Lot 9, Block 2, Arden Park), 6 (also Lot 8, Block 2, Arden Park), Lots 7 thru 31, Lots 33, 35 thru 41, 43 thru 52; Auditor's Subdivision #161; Lots 1 thru 12, Block 1, and Lots 1 thru 7, Block 2, Berkeley Heights; Lots 1 thru 26, Block 1, and Lots 1 thru 26, Block 2, and Lots 8 thru 14, 17 thru 19, Block 3, Crocker & Crowell's First; Lots 2 thru 9, Block 1, and Lots 1 thru 9, Block 2, Fairbairnes Rearrangement in Waveland & Waveland Park; Lots 1 thru 16, Melvin Grimes Subdivision of Lots 8, 9, and 10 Grimes Homestead; Lots 1 thru 3, Leerskovs Firs; Lots 1 thru 3, Block 1, Mac Gregors; Lots 1 thru 8, Block 1, and Lots 1 -(also. Lot 1 and 2, Wooddale Heights 2nd) thru 12, Block 2 Michelson's.Rearrangement of Morningside; Lots 1 thru 10, 12, and-13, Block 1, and Lots 1 thru 19, and 22 thru 26, Block 2, and Lots 1 thru 12, Block 3, Mini - khada Vista Third; Lots 14 thru 95, Morningside; Lots 1 and 2, Block 1, and Lots 1 and 2, Block 2, Morningside Manor; Lots 1 thru 3, and 8 thru 11, Block 1, and Lots 1 thru 9, Block 2, and Lots 1 thru 9, Block 3, Morningside Oaks; Tract A, Registered Land Survey #517; Tracts A thru D, Registered Land Survey #549; Tract A, Registered Land Survey #567; Tracts A thru E, Registered Land Survey #650; Lots . 1 thru 27, Riley's Subdivision of Lots 3 thru 7, 30 & 31, Grimes Homestead; Lots 1 thru 15 and 20, William Scotts; Lots 1 thru 4, Block 1, William Scotts Addition - Peterson Replat; Blocks 13 and 15, Waveland Park; Lots 1 thru 10, Block 1, and Lots 1 thru 7, Block 2, Wooddale Heights; Lots 1 thru 5, Wooddale Heights Second; Lots 1, 2, 11 thru 13, 15 thru 18, 24 thru 29, Grimes Homestead. ESTIMATED ASSESSMENT - $458.65 PER ASSESSABLE CONNECTION PROPOSED ASSESSMENT - $534.18 PER ASSESSABLE 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 1979, 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, 1979. To each subsequent installment will be added interest at the same rate for one year on all unpaid installments. The owner of any property assessed may pay the whole of the assess- ment, without interest, to the City Treasurer on or before November 15, 1978. NO FURTHER STATEMENT WILL BE ISSUED. Proposed Special Assessment on Watermain No. 299 Page 2 Any o:.;ner'may appeal the assessment to the district court pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 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 assessment by 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 assessmen;.s against homestead property 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. July 21, 1978 Florence B. Hallberg City Clerk 4F Phillip A. Erickson Attorney 7716 Hampshire Avenue North Brooklyn Park, MN 55445 August 17, 1978 Thomas S. Erickson, Esq. City Attorney City of Edina 4801 Kest 50th Street Edina, MN 55424 Re: Proposed Special Assessment Watermain Improvement No. 322 Dear Mr. Erickson: Kenneth C. Joas is the property owner at 6209 South Knoll Drive (Lot 1 Block 3 Parkwood Knolls 5th Addition; plat 76464, parcel 6000). Mr. Joas and his family have lived at this address for nearly ten years and in Edina for more than twice that time. Mr. Joas received the communication of July 21, 1978, over the name of Florence B. Hallberg, City Clerk, concerning the captioned proposed assessment. Several days thereafter Mr. Joas contacted the undersigned on the same subject. The Joas' home on South Knoll Drive was built between nine and ten years ago, I under- stand. At that time there was no municipal water service available in the street. front. 'Therefore, in the process of construction, the home was connected to another water line behind the home and a fee incurred and paid in connection therewith of $704.08. Keep in mind that this was nearly ten years ago..._ More recently, the City of Edina elected to undertake the captioned project. No known notice of the project was provided Mr. Joas nor was any assessment anticipated, until receipt of the July 21 communication. Inasmuch as this project does not provide any benefit to the subject property at_the present time (and, arguably, it has proven to be_a negative factor) nor is there any likelihood of the project ever providing a benefit, it is Mr. Joas' opinion, and I concur, that no "improvement" exists for which this property should be assessed. Both Mr. Joas and the undersigned will, unavoidably, be out of town on Monday, August 21, the date of the City Council meeting at which the subject of this proposed assessment is to be addressed. Therefore it is requested that this letter constitute an objection to the proposed assessment, insofar as it would apply to the Joas' property. In that regard it is also requested that you, or another representative of the City of Edina, respond in writing, directly to Mr. Joas, setting forth the decision and reasoning therefor with respect to the proposed assessment as it applies to this particular property. - 2 - I thank you for myself and for Mr. Joas for your consideration. We look forward to hearing from you. PAE:bn cc: K. C. Joas F. $. Hallberg Regards, 0,1 e Phillip A. Erickson Attorney • � ist y 7th mailing for January 17, 1977 Council Meeting r' PARKIVIOOD KNOLLS, 5TH ADDITION (continued) L10, 131 John C. Miller #215 2545 Chicago Avenue S. MPIs., MH 55404 L11, B1 John R. Cleary 6204 S. knoll Drive- 55436 L12, B1 George D. Vanwagenen 6200 S. Knoll Drive.55436 L1, B2- - Ross C. Smith 6309 Knoll Drive S. 55436 L2, B2 Ann M. Cronan 6305 S. Knoll Drive 55436 L3, B2 Lois J. Bach 6301 S. Knoll Drive 554 -36 L4, B2 Walter H. May 6217 S. Knoll Drive 55436 L5, B2 Michael J. Hansberry 6213 S. Knoll Drive 55436 LI, B3 Kenneth C. Joas 6209 S. Knoll Drive 55436 L2, B3 A. Thomas ',!urst 6205 S. Knoll Drive 55436 PARKWOOD KNOLLS, 6TH ADDITION L1, B1 Mildred S. Hanson, 6303 Knoll Drive, 55436 L2, B1 Robert W. Barnett 6304 Knoll Drive 5543E L3, B1 Earl F. Diessner. 6300 Knoll Drive 55436 L4, B1 Edmund G. Taylor 6244 Knoll Drive 55436 e-41 ' Tr 000� �00� , , :i Gerald G. Golster 5532 Vernon Avenue Louis V. Nanne 5801-Hidden La WATERMAIN N0. 318 Lot Block Addition 8 1 Danijohn's 4 8 Mirror Lakes in Edina Con's Dep. Pd $692.48 (WM151 Pd 1967) 690.00 (WM141 Pd 1975) Note: WM 274 Stub deferred on lots below until balance of line extended. ($338.22 @ 6% interest accruing from 7- 17 -72). Lot 1, Danijohn's Addition 2 (paid) 3 4 5 . 6 7 (paid) George D. Van Wagenen 6200 So. Knoll Dr. v Kenneth C. Joas 6209 So. Knoll Dr. Phillip Y. Barrell 6200 Parkwood Rd WATERMAIN N0. 322 Lot Block Addition 12 1 Parkwood Knolls 5th 1 3 Parkwood Knolls 5th 8 1 Parkwood Knolls 3rd L Con's Dep. Pd $1110.05 (WM 212) by request assessed 1970 (9 yr= 704.08 (WM 168)Pd 7 -22 -69 1110.05 (WM212) pd 11 -19 -73 .1i T.N. P, Y"T I C 1'f y z p '.YU rfH'A L L POLICE- ELI W, S V 1:11 LW Ukik DI NA cou, All, FN-0 flo GUR LADY ot C Pl T I 0 Z T -51" ".. (Kerr Companies) dmmwmw�.— HE-,QUF,S'r NUMNIER: Z -78 -8 LOCATION: 4917 Eden Avenue IMQUEST: R-1 Sinqlc ramily District to 0• 2 office District. NORTH 0 2M) 5tit) Y.�io i(PIM . ) I VAII-4-r. (if COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT STAFF REPORT August 2,.1978 Z -78 -8 The Kerr Companies. R -1 Single Family District to 0-2 Office District. Generally located at 4917 Eden Avenue. Refer to: attached graphics and traffic analysis. The subject property is a 3.25 acre tract of land located immediately south of Perkins Restaurant. The.subject property is very long and triangular in shape and has rather serious soil correction problems. The site is devoid of trees or any other natural amenities and is very exposed to Highway 100. On past occasions, multiple residential rezonings have been requested for the subject property. In 1969, the Council granted first reading for a rezoning to R -5 based upon a proposal for a.14 -story apartment. Second read - ing was denied when the proposed building was increased to 20 stories in size. Other proposals included a request for two high -rise apartments containing 260+ units. From a development standpoint, the site has two inherent constraints: First, the site is extremely long and triangular in shape, thus making the south end of the site unusable and creating (almost certainly) the need for setback variances. Secondly, the site is characterized by serious soil problems, which again dictates the location of structures and perhaps the need for var- iances. From a residential development standpoint, the site has problems in addition to the aforementioned. First, the site is extremely close to Highway 100 which creates marketing problems and,more importantly, is influenced by ex- cessive noise. Secondly, the site is quite devoid of any natural amenities. Thirdly, an adequate transition from the commercial use (Perkins) north of the site is not possible. The proponents are requesting a rezoning from R -1 Single Family Dwelling District to 0 -2 Office District. Although not required to do so by the Zoning ordinance, the proponents have submitted a preliminary site plan of a proposed office building as well as a traffic impact analysis. The proposed office building contains five stories and a large surface parking lot. Although the site plan for this development is' in the vciy preliminary stages, staff review indicates that the proposal would probably require front yard setback variances as well as parking.variances. According to the Zoning ordinance, 0 -1 and 0 -2 Office Districts are identical except in terms of building height. 0-1 is limited to four stories in height while 0-2 has no specific height limitations. However., front yard setbacks must.equal the average ]-,eight of the building. Therefore, due to the shape of the property, the proposed buildi.ng.woul.d probably be limited to about five stories. Coiianun.ity Development Staff Report -2- (Z -78 -8) Li regard to the traffic impact analysis, staff agrees that'the development will generate: approximately 1100 trip ends per day. (This volume approximates the generation of the 260 units multiple residence considered in 1970). However, staff disagrees that 90 percent of the generated traffic will use Highway 100 and 10 rcrcent will use otherstreets such as Vernon Avenue and 50th Street. Staff believes that the only Edina residents employed at the office that would use Highway 100 would be those residing south of 70th Street. We agree, however, that nearly all visitors to the office would probably use Iiigh�,,ay 100. Thus, staff believes that perhaps 25 percent of the traffic generated to the office will approach from streets other than Highway 100. Recommendation: Based upon the aforementioned site problems, staff believes that Office is the most appropriate use for this parcel. Although the traffic generated by an office use will exceed that generated by a residential use, staff believes that such traffic will not adversely. affect I surrounding residential properties due to the proximity of Highway 100 and other arterial streets. however, due to the present configuration of Eden Avenue and Willson Road, it should be anticipated that some.fut-ure intersection improvements may be necessary as a result of office development. However, staff believes that such improvements will probably Le necessary as a result of any development of the subject property. Due to soil problems and the configuration of the site, staff also believes that 0-2 zoning is appropriate. Such a zoning would allow a taller building thus enabling a lower lot coverage and greater setbacks. In addition, the site is somewhat depressed, thus lessening the impact of a taller building on the site. Staff recognizes that variances will probably be.necessary to develop the site. Staff would encourage the Board of Appeals to look favorably upon building setback variances due to.the unique shape of the parcel. However, staff would not reconp,end F.A.R. variances, parking requirement variances, or parking setback variances, in that these relate primarily to the intensity of use of the site rather than site conditions. GLH : nr 7 -28 -78 _7 - Y ®01, highway ■ = -- - ---------- - - - -�„ - -- perkins golf course kern company n edina office building site plan south elevation north le east elevation fourth f loor n� i� ' ��,,� �: `�,j lei _,;' fourth f loor n� GERALD T. K OAVE. S. LOT SURVEYS COMPANY RG 17 IDAHO AVE. GOLDEN VALLEY, MINN. BROOKLYN PARK, MINN. MINN, REG. NO. 4741 LAND SURVE,,YORS MINN. REG. NO. 6743 RF.CISTERED UNDER LAWS OF STATE OF MINNESOTA 44L L It LICENSED BY ODINANCF: OF CITY OF MINNF.AI:D C; INVOICE NO. _ 5747 W. Broadway 5339422 F. B. NO. —T � INDUSTRIAL — JUDICIAL Minneapolis. Minnesota 55428 _ JU r COMMERCIAL — TOPOGRAPHICAL � SCALE I" CITY LOTS — PLATTING ::/llrl�r�uru. (9rdiriraf�*D , 0, DENOTES IRON PROPOSED HALLA IZURSEF"' REGISTERED L %J SUIZ',''v City a l;dina `- r S ..I A IZ19 79 0 1 r -�-�- Tukrn �rn tl,�hsynY PA-oQos,(-,d Number o1' `rr3c - z Total irea - :.45 �)i�, 5` >S.6 :::';�. rr•3ct 3 — .Ll.1, Area taken f'or hich;yay w I 6,900.4 :j;:uare Feet 0.16 ,c r•e Cyli i. and I!, t'.GI'�: ?e .i.ered .•nd ; I ��. 3yJ, !'ices of t Lb 'rit.les, Henr.e, Ct,ur.•.y, JIinne3ota. �. V j r 1.,.1 r:cj 102L r i nJ 'i' i t I , i r U✓✓'l✓ /r aw County , Ninr.e6 ] We horoby certify that this is a true and correct representation of a survey of the boundaries of the above duscribed Ion.! and �' t •�. r the location of all buildings and visiblo encroachments. if any, from o, on said land. Signed Surveyed by us this 8 day of, Ju 1 y 1974 LOT SURVEYS COMPANY Traffic I mpact Study Proposed Office Building Wilson Road - Edina I14TRODUCTIOld The Kerr Company proposes to develop an office building on a presently undeveloped parcel located between Wilson Road and Trunk Highway 100, south of Eden Avenue, and south of the existing Perkins Restaurant. The Kerr Company retained Bather- Ringrose- hlolsfeld- Jarvis - Gardner, Inc. (BR14) to study the impact of traffic generated by the office building on the surrounding streets. The office building proposed for the site would contain 77,000 square feet (gross floor area), and would probably house several tenants with a range of.office space requirements. This report documents a study of the impact development generated traffic will have on existing traffic flow during the morning and afternoon peak hours. -1- TRAFFIC IMPACT Traffic impact of a proposed development is determined in a four step process: 1) Determine the number of trips expected to be generated by the proposed development. 2) Determine the directions of approach to the development - site by the generated traffic. 3) Document existing traffic volumes and add development generated traffic surcharge. 4) Determine traffic related impacts at critical locations. TRIP GENERATION Previous traffic studies have shown that office buildings similar to the one proposed generate from 4 to 43 (average 12) vehicle trips ends 1/ per day per 1,000 square feet of gross floor area.?/ Applying a rate of 14 vehicle trip ends /1,000 sq.ft. GFA to the proposed development.size of 77,000 square feet GFA results in a projected trip generation of 1,080 vehicle trip ends per day. 1/A trip end is either on origin or destination. Two. trips ends are gen- erated by each vehicle, one when the vehicle arrives and the second when the vehicle leaves. 2 /Trip Generation, Institute of Transportation Engineers, 1976. -2- Trips which take place during the morning and afternoon peak hours normally cause the greatest impact on the surrounding street system. The studies by the Institute of Transportation Engineers also provide guidance in this area. In this case, it is estimated that 25 percent of all the trips generated by the office development will occur during each of the peak hours, and that 80 percent.of those trips will occur in the peak direction. TABLE 1 TRIP GENERATION (77,000 square feet GFA) x (14 trips /day /1,000 sq.ft. GFA) = 1,080 trips /day (1,080 trips /day) x (0.25) = 270 trips during each peak hour (270 trips) x (0.80) = 220 trips in peak direction (inbound a.m. peak; outbound p.m. peak) (270 trips) x (0.20) = 50 trips in off -peak direction (outbound a.m. peak; inbound p.m. peak). DIRECTION OF APPROACH In order to determine which roadways development related traffic will use to approach the site, an assumption must be made.concerning what areas the trips come from and go to. In this case, because the site is so close to T.H. 100, and with very convenient access to the interchange ramps, it has been assumed that 90 percent of the generated traffic will use T.H. 100: Of the remaining 10 percent, it is felt that some will approach from the southwest along Vernon and Eden Avenues, a smaller amount will approach from the east along 50th Street, and an even smaller amount will approach from the south along Wilson Road (Figure 1). Figure 2 shows the routes these trips would use to get to and from the site. -3- rl AL- .71 :C L� bm A N K A L-V j zz. _71 I-A IV .� t. _ �: ,... _:,... ..� `� , -v •_ , Ili .._ ; •... - ";�._._: \\' f _ K-\ V— ji 5 q , ST. PAUL 12 13 o L4, Ll z 02 Ile 0 A ".0 C 0 T 4- •�+. 1 n._.. i ►..o. 5.N '� -- J '-_."'� i �4 _..\\ �.. �...r'��'i. —w � L ) �Vs, DIRECTION OF APPROACH OF GENERATED TRAFFIC FIG. 1 r e ° 1 bo °e t e° f�� saeseooeeeee oo+r+ /r,.��,__'� °ss • ° �J ,l� CC pp r rr,, �� •Does ° I` ^�l�l`l�Nh C� • °o °•••s 'rte // � ;` � •eo o° !-Y Jr � s• ° °a 1 �. e C ty e e � o � h e Ll a EXISTING AND POST-DEVELOPMENT TRAFFIC VOLUMES Existing peal; -hour traffic volumes were based on machine traffic counts taken at various locations in the T.F. 100 and 50th Street interchange area by the Minnesota Department of Transportation in November, 1977. Development generated traffic during both the a.m. and p.m. peak hours was added to the existing volume for those peak hours. Generally speaking, development oriented traffic both reaches and leaves the site through the use of the interchange with T.H. 100 and the adjacent roads. The vehicles would not use the streets in the adjoining neighborhoods. Two intersections, Eden Avenue /Grange Avenue and Vernon Avenue /S. B. Ramps, are most affected by development oriented traffic. Peak hour traffic flows for both these intersections are shown in Figures 3, 4 and 5. TRAFFIC RELATED IMPACTS -TW6 intersections have been identified which are subject to higher traffic loading by development oriented traffic: 1) Eden Avenue and Grange Avenue /Wilson Road I 2) Vernon Avenue /50th Street and Southbound Ramps Discussed below are impacts on the operation of these two intersections. 1) Eden Avenue and Gran e Avenue /Wilson Road Almost all the development oriented traffic will pass through this 4 -way stop controlled intersection. The total a.m. peak hour approach volume, existing traffic plus generated traffic, will be about 840 vehicles; the total capacity of the four approaches under these conditions is about 1,700 vehicles -6- L[f �o • cr EDEN �VLNUE r Q r •9 cZ' EXISTING VOLUMES EX1:5TING BA5ED ON TRAFFIC. o ° d � A .M • - fl0�t COUNTS BY MNI/ DOT r `� I I� NO V E (V,F R 19 7 7 °J-1— ..,.... __�r �E....,. �._. �.__... �_...�.•__..".. .. - � ri �-_ _ .'...-'m.s- '►_.sr..- r-q?.v r-�nw...- .-- e.•v+t• --t• -r ......_.J... . _......o._.�."... .ate r� .�...�_... .`.�_ _� a.rva��. y. �_ ... �_. �_ � .- ..._.......��........�,..r... - .�......�..v. _.a .�«. �- ��._.........._..�._..s,.. f\VENUF P057 -- DEvELOP�,MENT z A.M. REAf� Hou[ . m � � rid 7 -8 f�•M• PE- 0 TRAFFCG Vac- LkrAcE 5 �r1V �V fdc�E ANI- -> GP- 11PJCE" W IIS i�VCAvuE POST DEVCt-oPMEhJ% P.M. PE /)K gouK 5- (p Pm TR,AFF10- VOLUM C:: 5 ,E0).-,�i) Jlv`it1c.r ffi'_r1J C':rf31116E AL1u1Vc4E 1 U)IL50AJ PO/)O } L�o AVEN u Ex 15T l NG VOLUNles c ,' BA5Eb ON TRAFF=IC, p COUNTS BY MN /UdT o q IN NOVEMBER, IG77 VERNON n AVENUE PD'-)-T - DEY1= LOPmGk)~r �•M• �L -A'� KOu'C� 1li:f�fEC�l�d Film jy��.c F,i��p �,C >117NC?,Oc ;d D U -f r ritAt� A ►. A n r r% t,,, i r...., Pet' hour. The volume to capacity ratio of 0.49 indicates a very high level of service. Tile added traffic does not impose any significant additional delays or congestion on drivers using this intersection in either the morning or evening peal, periods. 2) Vernon Avenue /50th Street and Southbound Raoips This was the only other intersection which appeared to warrant a capacity analysis. During the a.m. peal; hour, the southbound off-ranip volume will be about 370 vehicles if the development is constructed, compared to the current volume of 250 vehicles. It was found that, even when the develop- ment oriented traffic is included, the intersection was still operating at Level of Service "A ". flo other intersections will experience any delays or reduction in operating -efficiency. .CONCLUSIONS Our analysis indicates that the traffic generated by the proposed office bu'lding will have no adverse effects on the existing street system. The location of the proposed development- and the arrangement of T.H. 100 on- and off -ramps combine such that development generated traffic tends to occur away from the busier streets and intersections in the area. -10- Minutes of the 8 -2 -78 CD and PC Meeting Page 3 LD -78 -7 Lot Division. Part of Lot 45, Auditor's Subdivision No. 172. Generally located at 5020 France Ave. So. Mr. G. Hughes told the Commission the subject property was the Red Barn located on 50th and France and was included in the Redevelopment Project. He said the City had acquired a portion of the Red Barn property in this area for the prupose of.constructing a service alley. Mr. G. Hughes explained a lot division was required for tax purposes. He said staff recommended approval of the requested lot division. Mr. Runyan asked what would happen to the parking when this area was changed into a service alley. Mr. G. Hughes replied that seven stalls would be lost. He said at present, the parking is clock -wise, but he proposed the parking be changed to counter - clockwise and explained tentatively how the staff had planned it would go. He added that bays would be set up for parking semis. In respone to Mr. G. Johnson, Mr. G. Hughes said they went over in detail the loss of parking because of the proposal and the HRA's conclu- sion was there would be enough public parking stalls and public ramps to adequately cover the area. He said the seven parking stalls which would be lost are definite- ly used at the present time; however, the parking ramps would compensate for this loss. The other thing Mr. G. Hughes felt should be pointed out was that a new building would be built on the Red Barn site in.the future to which they would lose thirty total spaces. In response to Mr. D. Johnson, Mr. G. Hughes said there did exist a police problem wherein someone may become confused and drive up the wrong way on the one way service alley. Another point Mr. G. Hughes made was that traffic could not enter the parking lot or ramp from the service area which discouraged people from using the alley as a short cut. Ms. McClelland wondered if trucks would block the alley up at any time. Mr. G. Hughes replied they would not. He felt'the traffic would flow through. Mr. Fernelius moved for approval of the lot division. Mr. Seaberg seconded the motion. All voted aye. Motion carried. PC JZ -78 -8 The Kerr Companies. R -1 Single Family District to 0 -2 Office District. Generally located at 4917 Eden Ave. Mr. G. Hughes explained the property in question was located immediately south of Perkins Restaurant. He said the Commission should recall that three to four years ago, Perkins rezoned a portion of the parcel to APD, Automobile Parking District, with the intention of rezoning the remainder to Commercial use. He said it was a long and triangular shaped piece of property the size of which was slightly in excess of three acres. Mr. G. Hughes said this parcel of property had had several multiple residential rezoning requests in past years. In 1969, the City Council Minutes of the 8 -2 -78 CD and PC Meeting Page 4 gave first reading for R- 5,Multiple Residential District, zoning for a substan- tial 14 -story apartment building on the site. Second reading was later denied as the building was increased in height to 20 stories. He said other proposals on the site included a proposal for 260 residential units. Mr. G. Hughes said he believed that from a development stand- point, there are some problems with the. site. It is very long and triangular in shape making the south end of the site unusable. The site also has rather serious soil problems. Mr. G. Hughes then said that from a resid- antial standpoint, it is extremely close to Highway 100 and therefore has a noise problem. tie said the site is also devoid of any natural amenities. Mr. G. Hughes said the present request is to rezone the site from R -1 Single Family District to 0- 2.Office District Zone. He said the pro- ponents were not required to submit any type of plans by the Zoning Ordinance, but staff asked them to submit some concept plans to assist the Commission in their evaluation of the site. He said the proposed building would be approximately five stories in height. From the elevation standpoint, conceptual plans for the north and south elevations of the building as well as the east elevation were prepared. There was also a large surface pazking lot proposed for the site. Mr. G. Hughes explained from an ordinance standpoint, the difference between 0 -1 and 0 -2 Office Districts is very small. The difference centers around the height of the building. 0 -1 allows a maximum of four stories while 0 -2 has no specified height limitation but is regulated by required setbacks from property lines. He felt due to the piece of property in question, the height of the proposed office would be limited to five stories. He then referred to a traffic-analysis of the area prepared by Bather - Ringrose- Wol- sfeld. Mr. G. Hughes said the report indicated the building would generate approximately 1100 trip ends per day. Mr. G. Hughes said staff agreed the number of trip ends generated by the proposed office was approximately 1100 which approximates the trip generation of the 260 multiple residential dwelling which had preliminary approval in 1970 by the City Council. He said staff disagreed with the traffic analysis in that they did not agree 90 percent of the generated traffic would use Highway 100 and the remaining 10 percent would use adjacent side streets, such as Vernon Avenue and West 50th Street. Staff felt the only time Edina residents would use Highway 100 would be if they lived south of W. 70th Street. Mr. G. Hughes said staff therefore felt office use was the most appropriate use for the site. He pointed out, however, that office use would generate more traffic than would a residential use. He.felt it would riot be difficult to accommodate the additional traffic due to the vicinity of Highway 100 and arterial streets. He felt 0 -2 was a more appropriate use than 0 -1 due to the soil problems and the configuration of the site, making a higher building justified. Mr. G. Hughes wished the Commission to recognize variances would be required to develop the property and recommended the Board of Appeals and Adjust- ments look favorably upon building setback variances. However, staff would discourage reacting favorably upon variances from the standpoint of utilization of the site such as parking requirement variances or FAR variances which deal with the intensity of the site rather than the configuration of the site. Minutes of the 8 -2 -78 CD and PC Meeting Page 5 Mr. Bob Martinson, of Kerr Companies, was present as well as Mr. Dick Wolsfeld of Bather - Ringrose - Wolsfeld. He said the construction should begin _late in 1979. He then-proceeded to show a model of the proposed develop- ment. Mr. Runyan asked the height of the Eden 5100 building. Mr. Martinson responded that it was only three stories, but because it was situated higher it was the equivalent of five stories. Mr. B. Martinson said that Perkins had an approximate elevation of 930 and the Eden 5100 building had an approximate elevation of 982. The pro- posed office would have a similar elevation of the Eden 5100 building. Mr. S. Hughes said there would be a problem with excessive traffic on West 50th Street. Mr. Wolsfeld said they weretalking about 10 percent of 1100 vehciles which would be on that street and other residential streets in the same area. Also, in.doing the traffic analysis, they always consider the worst possible situation; therefore, they took in more than 100 trip ends because they took a higher.approach volume. Therefore, they are looking at an additional 50 to 100 trip ends to the existing 12000 on West 50th Street. The same number of people would be leaving for.work in the morning so that number wuld not change substantially. He said 55 percent.of the traffic would come from the north, 35 percent..would. come from the south, and 10 percent would come from the- immedi=ate area and use local arterial streets. He emphasized the majority of those going to the site would use Highway 100. He also felt it would be difficult to perceive any real traffic change. Mr. Lewis said he was opposed to-any extension of commercializa- tion in the area. Mr.. Runyan said he felt the visual impact of this proposal in comparison with the multiple housing project was similar and that the proposed use was a much better one. Mr. S. Hughes said the visual aspect of the project did not bother him but rather the traffic did. Mr..G. Hughes said the problem they on the site from a residential standpoint as it was a the excessive noise from Highway 100. He felt it was use. Also, if the site was used for Planned Industri used for offices.. Therefore, office use was the most be the best use of the site. see is what are the options problem site based on undesirable for Commercial al, it would probably be desirable and tends to In response to Mr. Fernelius' concern about the intersection at Eden Avenue and Willson Road, Mr. Fran Hoffman, the City Engineer, said they may eventually have to substitute traffic signals for the existing 4 -way stop signs. Mr. D. Johnson asked about the use of the office building saying medical use induced a great deal of traffic in and out of the site. Mr. B. Martinson said they would not be considering a medical office building because it did generate a great deal of traffic. He proceeded to point out residential areas also generated traffic and asked if the land use was always compatible with the traffic volume. He said the same number of people would be going to work each day and the only additional traffic would be created by those coming from such locations as Bloomington, of which they would not use residential roads. He felt the capacity of the street system.was not a problem. Minutes of the,8 -2 -78 CD and PC Meeting Page 6 In response to Ms. McClelland, Mr. G. Hughes said based on five spaces per 1000 square feet of floor area, the proposal would require approximately 350 parking spaces. Mr. Martinson said they had not determined the exact number of spaces they could achieve but felt it was close to 350. Mr. G. Hughes clarified that the next step for the proponent, if the rezoning was approved, is for them to go to the Board of Appeals and Adjustments with a request for setback variances. He pointed out he was opposed to variances which relate to the intensity of the use rather than site conditions. Mr. G. Hughes continued he felt it was logical for setback. variances to be considered on the property because it would be difficult, due to the shape of the site, for the building to maintain adequate setbacks from all property lines. He said such issues as off- and on- street parking were items which would have to be worked out. Mr. Runyan noted there was a golf course across the street, and, because of the open land, it limited the encroachment the proposed development would have on other properties. He felt the proposal was a good one. He felt the impact was only minor and they should give the proponent some direction. Mr. G. Hughes said the Commission was not approving the building but rather the use of the property, and the building would have to conform to the ordinance. Mr. Lewis said he felt the residents in the area would be violently opposed to the proposed development and felt the residents should be notified and heard. Mr. Runyan said the neighbors would be notified when the request reached the City Council and would have a chance to be heard at that time if they were not at the meeting tonight. Mr. G. Hughes said that in the case of hearings by the City Council, surrounding property owners within 500 feet were notified ten days prior to the hearing. In this case, however, because -the closest residential area was more than 500 feet away, they would have to send to a larger radius of residents. Mr. Fernelius moved for approval of the rezoning request. Mr. Bentley seconded the motion. Upon roll call, the following voted: Ayes: Ms. McClelland, Mr. D. Johnson, Mr. Seaberg, Mr. Fernelius, Mr. Runyan, and Mr. Bentley. Nays: Mr. Lewis, Mr. S. Hughes, Mr. G. Johnson. Motion carried. Z -78 -9 Gittleman Corporation. R -1 Single Family District to PRD -3 Planned Residential District. Generally located at the southwest quadrant of Chaill Road and Dewey Hill Road. Mr. G. Hughes explained the subject property was a 24 acre tract of land located at Dewey Hill Road and Cahill Road. He said some Commission members should recall that in 1973 a proposed rezoning to PRD -3 was actually approved for first reading by the City Council for 276 units by Condor Corporation. This proposal was then withdrawn after first reading. ". :71. x :L < 00 ............ I'LL BRAEMAR ASSOC. i:� REQUEST NUMBER: — 7, -78-7 LOCATION: IM-1 Corner of 14. 78th St. REQUEST: R-1 to PRD-3 Il- NORTH %,jljr, 't JVL e!lirLfl COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT STAFF REPORT August 2, 1978 Z -78 -7 Braemar Associates. R' -1 S -ingle Family District to PRD-3 Planned Residential District. Generally located on the north corner of West 78th Street and Cahill Road. Refer to: attached graphics. The subject rezoning request to PRD -3 was continued from the June 28, 1973 meeting to allow the propon-arrt to consider alternative roadway plans for the site. At that time, the Commission and staff were primarily concerned with the proximity of the southerly intersection.of the internal roadway system with the intersection of Cahill Road and West 78th Street.' The proponents have now prepared a revised site plan which addresses several of the concerns expressed at the June 28, 1978 meeting. First, the internal-roadway has been re- located northerly such that its intersection with Cahill Road is about 180 feet northerly of the intersection of Cahill Road and West 78th Street. This re- location also provides for a greater buffer from West 78th Street. Secondly, the most southwesterly building has been shifted to better conform to the topography of the site. Thirdly, some of the units on the northerly border of the site have been relocated to lessen the undesirable, straight alignment proposed by the previous plan. We have toured the site with the proponent to review proposed townhouse and roadway locations. Many of these locations are now staked and Commission members are encouraged to tour the property prior to the August 2, 1978 meeting. Based upon the field inspection, we have determined that the topography upon which the plan is based is' in error. The ridge line on the southerly portion of the site is actually located more southerly than shown on the drawings. Therefore, the south branch of the proposed roadr:ay system is actually located on the northerly slope ,of the ridge rather than the crest of the ridge. Staff believes that this actual location would be much more dcsireable than the location described by the plans. Recommendation: Staff believes that th.c proponents have gone a COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT STAFF REPORT page 2 Z -78 -7 August 2, 1978 long way in responding to many of the concerns expressed by staff and the Commission. Staff is still concerned that to,,:nhouses may not be the most appropriate use for the parcel due to the site's topography and location. However, we certainly respect the pro- ponent's desire to pursue this type of development. Staff continues to question the amount of grading and tree removal that would be necessary to facilitate the plan. We are also concerned that the site is being molded to facilitate the construction of a particular type of unit, rather than the unit design being dictated by the characteristics of the site. Nevertheless, staff is willing to recommend preliminary approval for the proposal which would agree, in concept, to the number of units, the style of development, and the general arrangement of buildings and roadways. We stress that a significant amount of design development must be undertaken on this project prior to submission of final plans to the Commission and Council. Staff would suggest that the following items should be considered: 1) Accurate topography for the-site must be provided. 2) Complete grading and utility plans and all other materials required for final approval will-be very essential in this case to review effects of the proposal. 3) Unit 17 appears to have access difficulties and is very close to the anticipated roadway to Delaney Boulevard. This unit should be eliminated. 4) Units 6 -17 would more appropriately be arranged in two 5 to 6 unit buildings rather than in one 12 unit building. 5) Units 38 -41 and possibly units 1 -5 should be decreased in length somewhat to reduce encroachment into the ponding area. GLH:jt 7/2.8/78 15 14 V 13 21, tp —/ ! {� -- / / / 1 . ----------- 29 30 19 - 1�1 I ! I 0 co li 31 c 2-c ;32 3s 846— 6 850 --832 9 es J. 840 A,6 r :6qq 838 I-10 42 10 824 12 DIP, W V Cxls-,,PiG HYD 1p P. D -T 4- 1 , GV S -REFT 824 Tvi 6 DIP FORCE MAIN * 5'rno" r ND \tr.,, Vl 0 I MH tjYD t2 ptP SANS In Minutes of the 5- :31 -78 Community Development and -11- Planning Commission Meeting „ �Z -78 -7 Braemar Assoc. R -1 Single Family District to Planned Residen- tial District 3. Generally located on the northwest corner of West 78th Street and Cahill Road. Mr. G. Hughes showed the location of the property in question and said the proponent is requesting a rezoning from R -1 Single Family Dwelling District to PRD -3 Planned Residential District to allow 50 townhouse units on the site He further said this plan was not in accordance with the den- sity reduction plan adopted by the City Council on August 4, 1975, which allows for a maximum of 38 units rather than the requ•�sted 50 units. Mr. G. Hughes said he felt the site had some extremely unique qualities and is concerned that this plan as proposed does not address itself to the site but rather treats it in some respects as a level piece of property with no woodlands. It does, however, utilize a portion of the site as a pond - ing area. He said access would be by way of two access roads off Cahill Road, and the proponents indicated that after Delaney Boulevard was constructed, access could also be gained from the northwest corner of the site. Mr. G. Hughes felt the site was a good one for development but that the proponent should revise his present.plan. He felt that due to the townhouse nature, there would be a great deal of hard surface, thus the number of units should be reduced to alleviate the congestion of the plan. Mr. Jack Barron, the developer, said it was a difficult piece of property to develop. He said when townhouses are developed, you use a great deal of black top and that eight units per acre was not excessive. Mr. Runyan agreed with staff's opinion on a reduction of units but felt it will not totally reduce the intensity of the site and thus re- quire a lot of replanting. In response to Mr. Lewis, Mr. Barron said the reason he chose townhouses for the site is because he is a single family home builder and this type of construction best resembles his style. Following short discussion, Mr. Barron indicated he was interested in obtaining a direction to go with his plan, and Mr. Runyan suggested he meet with staff and revise the present plan to meet with the Commission's and staff's expectations. Mr. S. Hughes then moved to continue the request to the June 28, 1978, meeting to allow the proponent to meet with staff. Mr. Fernelius seconded the motion. All voted aye. Motion carried. Council Request: Commission Members to attend Council meetings on rota - tion basis. In response to the Council's request to send one member of the Commission to each Council meeting, the Commission generally agreed to allow Mr. G. Hughes to form a rotation plan which they would follow. IV. Adjournment. Respectfully submitted, Nancy J. Rust, Secretary 1. The first concern was the southerly access to the townhouses was unto Cahill Road and was located close to the intersection on West 78th Street, a distance of 50 feet, and it could cause some difficulties in regard to turning movements into the townhouse complex. 2. An additional concern was with the alignment of the roadway in this location. He felt because it was located on the crest of the ridge around the site, it would result in an extensive amount of grading and tree removal. It would also disturb the natural buffer between the town- house units and West 78th Street. One suggestion Mr. G. Hughes made was the F: ; t II. OLD BUS1Nt�Z)• _. V-11"Z -78 -7 Braemar Assoc. R -1 Single Family District to PRD -3 Planned Residential District. Generally located on the northwest West 78th Street Cahill Road. corner of and a� • Mr. G. Hughes said the Commission should recall that this request was continued from the May 31, 1978, meeting to allow the proponent time to prepare a revised site plan which would have a reduced number of units and a greater respect for the topographical features of the site. He said the proposal at the last meeting was for 50 townhouse units at Cahill Road and West 78th Street. Access for the units would be by way of Delaney Boulevard and Cahill Road. Mr. G. Hughes said the revised plans were brought in that day and proceeded to show them to the Commission. He said the revised plans had reduced the total number of units on the site from 50 to 41. Also, the earlier proposal had a double row of townhouses on the southern portion of the site which had now been eliminated and replaced with a single row of town- houses. The 35 -foot setback from all boundary lines was observed in the re- vised plan. Mr. G. Hughes felt the revised site plan went a long way in answering the concerns of the Commission. It provided a reduction in the number of units and was arranged in a manner which further respected the topo- graphy of the site. However, staff still had .a number of concerns: 1. The first concern was the southerly access to the townhouses was unto Cahill Road and was located close to the intersection on West 78th Street, a distance of 50 feet, and it could cause some difficulties in regard to turning movements into the townhouse complex. 2. An additional concern was with the alignment of the roadway in this location. He felt because it was located on the crest of the ridge around the site, it would result in an extensive amount of grading and tree removal. It would also disturb the natural buffer between the town- house units and West 78th Street. One suggestion Mr. G. Hughes made was the F: ; Minutes of the Regular CD and PC Meeting (June 28, 1978) Page 2 roadway could be relocated such that it would be north of the townhouses and would move the intersection further from West 78th Street and retain the natural buffer. He said the.proponents, however, have indicated they do not desire such a road location because it wou16 cause problems with the walk out units. In response to Mr. Fernelius, Mr. Jack Barron, the proponent, said lot coverage would be greatly reduced and this plan would give them a better opportunity to formulate individual residences. Mr. S. Hughes felt the request should be continued one month to give the Commission time to review the plans since they had just received them. Mr. Barron said the building plans may not be exactly as those shown. They were only a prototype of what they would build. He felt he had conformed to the request of the Com- mission by providing a lower density. Mr. Fernelius asked if it would be possible to provide access at the northeast corner and begin construction of the northerly units. Mr. Barron responded they were prepared to begin con- struction on the south ten units and, therefore, needed a south street. However, in the future, they would close this road down and use Delaney Boule- vard as access as it should be constructed by the end of the summer in 1979, Mr. G. Hughes noted that the present schedule shows Delaney Boulevard should be serviceable )y the end of the summer in 179. Mr. Barron said if the road were completed then, he would use Delaney as his access rather than Cahill road. He also said he did not wish to put a road north of the townhouse units because he felt the ground was not as solid, the same number of trees would have to be removed, and the units would lose their walk out effect. He felt the trees presently on the site were not long lasting trees and a large amount of replatting would be necessary regardless of how many trees were lost in the construction process. Mr. Runyan felt planting should be done along West 78th Street and that it would be more desirable to leave the units on the bank as proposed. He felt the revised site plan was much more free and open than the last plan. In response to Mr. Fernelius, Mr, Barron said it would be possible to begin construction on the northerly units first, but he did not want to as those units were not as desirable, and, from past experience, it was better to construct the better units first. In response to Mr, Seaberg, Mr. Barron agreed there was a traffic problem at Cahill and West 78th Street, but wanted to retain the hill if he could. Ms. McClelland said the proponent was asking for 41 units when 38 was the maximum number of units allowed on the site, which may be the cause for the planning difficulties they were not encountering. She felt the request should be considered at least another 30 days. Mr. G. Hughes said that according to the Southwest Edina Plan, this property and those pieces north of it are allowed a density of 0 -12 units per acre; in 1975, the City Council adopted a density reduction plan which reduced the allowable density on this site to 6 units per acre, thus creating the 38 allowable units. Ms. McClelland said she had questions on traffic and the use of the topography. Mr. G. Hughes felt the builder should begin the northwest portion of the site. He said one possibility would.be to close off the road when they can use Delaney Boulevard for access. Mr. G. Hughes said he felt 6.7 units per acre would not be a problem. Mr. Barron said the first revision consisted of Minutes of the Regular CD and PC Meeting (June 28, 1978) Page 3 44 units; however, they were told they did not have enough area for emergency vehicles. Therefore, he reduced the site to include 41 units so he did have the required 22 feet between all corners. He did not feel that taking three units out of the plan would adjust the plan a great deal. Mr. Fernelius said he wished to delay the request one month to allow him time to look at the site in lieu of the new plan. Mr. Seaberg said he did not like the present road location because of safety problems. Mr. S. Hughes felt because th'e proponent did not seem to know exactly what he would build on the site and in view of the fact they had received the revised site plan only tonight, they should continue the request for one month. Mr. Barron said it was difficult to design units before he knew what he could do on the site, and asked the Commission what they wished him to do. Mr. Runyan asked if they were bringing in points which did not per -. tain to the decision they were now asked to make which was whether or not they should approve the rezoning from R -1 Single Family District to PRD -3 Planned Residential District; he said what they were now doing was looking at the final design. He wondered if they should be deciding upon the rezoning rather than the final design. Mr. G. Hughes said he felt it was appropriate at this time for the developer to provide only certain information, such as topographi- cal features of the site, building placement, and location of roadways, so he does not incur extra costs in case it is not approved. Grading plans would be required for final approval, along with any final building plans. Mr. Seaberg said he felt they should approve the rezoning of the pro- perty so the proponent has a direction to take in planning the site. Mr. Lewis felt they could not rely on the probability that the pro- ponent would obtain access by way of Delaney Boulevard because it may not be completed by the time the units are completed. Ms. McClelland said she did not like the proposed road unto Cahill Road and suggested the possibility of a turnaround north of the proposed road location rather than a temporary road unto Cahill Road. This should elimi- nate some of the traffic problems. Following short discussion on the proposed roadway, Mr. Fernelius said he wished the proponent to work with staff on other roadway possibili- ties and moved the request be continued to the August 2, 1978, meeting. Ms. McClelland seconded the motion, Mr. Lewis said he had no argument with the rezoning but that he would rather see more details. Mr. G. Hughes said the problem was the phasing of the project, for if they began with the northerly units, the road unto Cahill Road as proposed would not be necessary. Mr. Barron asked how serious the Commission was about 38 maximum units because that would make a difference in his planning. The Commission indicated they would favor 41 units if the topography and road problems could Minutes of the Regular CD and PC Meeting (June 28, 1978) Page 4 be solved. In response to Mr. Seaberg, Mr. Barron said he could not provide access on the southwest portion of the property because West 78th Street dropped at 10 percent. Upon voting, all voted aye to continue the request to August 2, 1978. Motion carried, III. NEW BUSINESS: S -78 -11 Morine's Addition, Generally located north of Morningside Road and west of Grimes Avenue. Mr. G. Hughes said the subject property was located at e corner of Grimes Aven and Morningside Road. He said the proponent w requesting a subdivision o the existing 100 foot by 140 foot lot. Th roponent present- ly lives in a Ingle family dwelling on the northern po ion of the site. Mr. G. Hughes said at some years ago, a 60 foot by 100 of lot was split off from the origina lot leaving a remaining 100 foot 140 foot lot which is proposed to be sub ivided into two 50 foot by 140 oot lots. He said that due to the number o variances which would be r uired because of this divi- sion, this request w first taken to the Boar of Appeals and Adjustments so the proponent couldge their general reactio as to whether or not these variances could be gran ed if the subdivis' n were granted so the proponent would not have to incur y extra costs f r a plan which would not be feas'- ble. Mr. G. Hughes said t e minutes of hat meeting were attached to the staff report and said at th time, t Board of Appeals did not grant the variances but did indicate th t if t subdivision were approved, they would react favorably to the varianc Mr. G. Hughes said there re several similar replattings of corner lots on the northwest and nort as corners of Lynn Avenue, the northwest corner of Crocker Avenue, the orth st corner of Grimes Avenue, and the northeast corner of Alden, e said t ere were also isolated lots of a similar size as the reques , such as o 4Jest 42nd Street, Therefore, a pre- cedent had been establish in this nei borhood to allow divisions of this type, particularly this case of c rner lots. Mr. G. Hughes said staff thus recommended pproval of the req sted subdivision with the fol- lowing conditions: 1. ReceiptA f subdivision dedication, 2. The anting of the variances, refer d to earlier, by the Boar of Appeals and Adjustments, Mr. S. Hughes agreed there was a precedent e ablished and moved for approval of e requested subdivision with conditions s stated by staff. Mrs. McDona asked if there would be any difficulties etting to the garage. The propon t said no and she subsequently seconded the otion, All voted aye. Moti carried. S -78 -12 St. Alban's Addition. Generally located north of Valley View Road and west of Gleason Road. Mr. G. Hughes explained the subject property was a 3.75 acre tract of land located on Gleason Road presently owned by St. Alban's Episcopal Church. MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE EDINA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT AND PLANNING COMMISSION HELD WEDNESDAY, AUGUST 2, 1978, AT 7:30 P.M. EDINA CITY HALL COUNCIL CHAMBERS Members Present: Wm. Lewis, Chairman, R. Seaberg, D. Johnson, G. Johnson, H. McClelland, D. Runyan, J. Bentley, S. Hughes,. and L. Fernelius. Staff Present: G. Hughes, Planning Director, F. Hoffman, City Engineer, H. Sand, Assistant Planner, N. Rust, Secretary, and J. Teichert, Secretary. I. Approval.of the June 28, 1978, Minutes. Mr. S. .Hughes moved the minutes of the June 28, 1978, Com- munity Development and Planning Commission meeting be approved as submitted. Mr. Bentley seconded the motion. All voted aye. Motion carried. II. ✓ / Old Business: �C Z -78 -7 Braemar Assoc. R -1 Single Family District to PRD -3 g ti�1 Planned Residential District. Generally located on the northwest corner of West 78th Street and Cahill Rd. Mr. G. Hughes explained this request was continued from the June 28, 1978, meeting to allow the proponent time to consider alternative roadway plans for the site. He said the original proposal contained 50 town- house units with access points from Delaney Boulevard and Cahill Road. Per the Commission's request, the proponent has since reduced the number of townhouses on the site to 41 and conformed more to the topography of the site. He said at the June meeting, the Commission was concerned with the south access road being too close to the intersection of Cahill Road and West 78th Street and requested changes be made in the street alignment. Mr. G. Hughes said the proponent has since returned with re- vised plans for 41 townhouse units and the easterly access point was shifted north from the intersection of 78th Street and Cahill Road 180 feet. Also, the north townhouse units were redesigned to change the straight line appearance present in previous plans. He further said the building in the southwest portion of the site was shifted to better conform with the topography of the hillside as compared to the previous location. Mr. G. Hughes said there were stakes out on the site designating proposed roadway and building locations. Mr.. G. Hughes felt this plan had come a long way in answering the concerns of the Commission and staff. He said staff is still concerned to a certain extent that townhouses would not be the best use for this site due to the topography and location; however, staff respects the owner's desire to pursue this type of development. He said staff continues.to question the extent of grading and tree removal necessary to facilitate this type of plan. Mr. G. Hughes said staff is at the point where they will recommend preliminary approval of the proposal which was, in concept, for the number of units, style of development, and arrangement of the roadways and buildings. He said quite a bit of work would have to be done on the plans prior to submission of final plans on this site for which the following should be considered: 1. Accurate topography.for the site must be provided. 2. Complete grading and utility plans and -all other materials required for final approval will be very essential in this case to review effects of the proposal. Minutes of the 8 -2 -78 CD and PC Meeting Page 2 3. Unit 17'appears to have access difficulties and is very close to the antici- pated roadway to Delaney Boulevard. This unit should be eliminated. 4. Units 6 through 17.would be more appropriately arranged in two 5 to 6 unit buildings rather than in one 12 -unit building. 5. Units 38 through 41 and possibly units 1 through 5 should be decreased in length somewhat to reduce encroachment into the ponding area. In response to Mr. Fernelius, Mr. Jack Barron, the proponent, said they would be able to save more trees than they originally anticipated. He said with the buildings constructed on the lower portion of the site, it would take more work to make them buildable. This was also true on the northern portion of the site. In response to Mr. D. Johnson, Mr. Barron said they would be able to save 50 percent of the trees on the site. In. response to Ms. McClelland, Mr. Barron said the first floor elevation was approximately 844. Discussion followed regarding walk -ins to the units with Mr. Barron saying he felt walk -ins were more acceptable to people. Mr. G. Johnson moved for approval of the rezoning request sub- ject to the restrictions stated in the staff report. Mr. Fernelius seconded the motion. Mr. Seaberg asked if Mr. G. Johnson meant, for instance, units 6 through 17 should be divided into two buildings rather than the one. Mr. Runyan said he could not really say that but that 41 units can be on this site. Mr. G. Hughes said the items listed in the staff report were due to problems of:the site which he felt should be addressed. If the problems could be taken care of in the final plans without applying each item, that would be acceptable. Mr. Barron said he had no objection to removing Unit 17 but he did have objections to making the units smaller. Upon voting, all voted aye. Motion carried. III. New Business: LD --78 -6 Lot Division. Lot 3, Block 1, Gleason's Fifth Addi- tion. Generally located south of Vernon Avenue and we�of Gleason Road. �— Mr. G. Hughes expla o the Commission that the proponents requested a party wall lot division sp their double bungalow lot into two halves. He added that individua ewer and w r connections had been installed for each unit. Mr.A�unyan moved for approval of the to division. Ms. McClelland seconded the motion. All voted aye. Motion carried. V) u - a T�fI A M Fl. DW E L LE WIS. 'PARK-: x �- p- Sz, , O z0f -n P,EQUE'ST NUMBEll: Z-78-9 - — m LOCATION: SW quadrant of Cahill Road and Dewey 11iil Road. 1,,1,,.Qul•,,S'r: 1,z-). Single ramilv pistrl(_�t to PRD-3 Planned Residential District. S c r% ot ti j NO;wm �h ` O 25YO 5GO 750 1000 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT STAFF REPORT August 2, 1978 Z -78 -9 Gittleman Corporation. R -1 Single Family District to PRD -3 Planned Residential District. Generally located at the southwest quadrant of Cahill Road and Dewey Hi l l !toad. Refer to: attached graphics. The subject property is a 24 acre tract of land located in the southwest quadrant of Dewey Ili l l Road and Cahi l l Road. Most of the site is characterized by rolling topography with the exception of the westerly portion of the site which exhibits slopes of 250 -30%. Storm water retention ponds which are part of the South- west Edina Stormwater Ponding system are located along the northerly and westerly site boundaries. The Delaney Boulevard right of way also traverses the extreme westerly portion of the site. The subject property has a rather interesting history of rezoning requests. In 1973, preliminary approval t-/as granted for a 276 unit (i.e. 12 units per acre) multiple residential development proposed by Condor Corporation. This proposal included three and four story elements. This proposal was withdrawn by the developers following preliminary approval by the Council. In 1975, a proposal entitled Lowry Hill was considered. This proposal also included 276 units, but in two 5 story buildings. The Planning Commission and Council denied the proposal based upon a 3 story height limitation implied by the Southwest Edina Plan. (This height limitation is now stated in the Plan.) A lawsuit followed this denial in which the Court affirmed the City's actions. The present rezoning request to PRD -3 proposes three condominium buildings containing a total' of 159 units or approximately 7 units per acre. All buildings are three stories in height and contain underground garages. The required number of surface parking spaces have been provided in close proximity to the proposed buildings and are located such that they are well- screened from adjacent properties . Access to the development t-:ould be from -- Dewey Hi11 Road- -and from Dcl -aney Boulevard.- The proposed -. - COIMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT STAFF REPORT page 2 Z -78 -9 August 2, 1978 buildings have been located on the most developable portion of the site and much of the steep topography in the southwestern quadrant has been retained. The small %•retland on the southern portion of the site has also been retained and is proposed to be improved. Recommendation: Staff believes that the proponents have done an exceptional job of responding to many of the objections and con- cerns of the City and neighborhood regarding previous proposals for this property: 1) The total number of units has been reduced from 276 to 159• The proposed density of 7 units per acre is below the densities preliminarily approved for two other multiple residential developments in Southwest Edina. 2) Building height has been reduced from five stories to three stories in conformance with the Southwest Edina Plan. 3) The proposed buildings have been located primarily on the eastern portion of the site to provide a buffer for single family homes to the west. 4) Surface parking has been located away from the ponding areas and is well hidden from properties to the west. 5) The access road to Dewey Hill Road is located as far as possible from.single family residences and maintains an adequate distance from the Cahill Road/ Dewey Hill Road intersection,. The access road to Delaney Road is located as far south as possible to eliminate the possibility of headlights shining into homes on Coventry Way, to avoid encroachment into ponding areas, and to provide adequate sight distance for Delaney Boulevard. The internal roadway system is also designed to discourage through traffic. 6) The steep slopes located on the southwesterly portion of the site are preserved and should provide an excellent buffer. a J � COMIMUNITY DEVELOPMENT STAFF REPORT page 3 Z -78 -9 August 2, 1978 7) The internal roadway system is designed to facilitate the future inclusion of the five acre parcel which fronts on Cahill Road and is not controlled by the proponents. Based upon these factors, staff recommends preliminary approval of the proposal. Staff suggests that the following 'items should be considered in the preparation of the final plans for the-- project: GLH:jt 7 -28 -78 1) Adequate sight distance must be maintained at the intersection of Cahill Road and Dewey Hill Road. Sight distance is presently a problem at this intersection. 2) The surface parking lot northeast of building 3 should be modified slightly to further facilitate the future incorporation, if warranted, of the easterly .parcel not owned by the proponent. 3) Signage for the development must be in conformance _ with the sign ordinance. 4) Final zoning is contingent upon the final plotting of the property. �OAD Ll rf { �/ il.:,'� � 1 � / ��..._\ �_\ � / ��:•:: ^ \i� I 'x.7;1 �1 111 1f �� �/ �/ u-n 186 x 76 glass enclosed porch FIREPLACE CIOSE.T Unit 1 3rd floor only WET BAP aI ter nnto 3rd floor only 1435 sq. ft. not including porch \ L� -�, ,i` III FIREPLACE CIOSE.T Unit 1 3rd floor only WET BAP aI ter nnto 3rd floor only 1435 sq. ft. not including porch 1`i C tooKCf'SE - WiJ BAP CIOSET Unit I Ist & 2nd floors only ,i` III 1`i C tooKCf'SE - WiJ BAP CIOSET Unit I Ist & 2nd floors only I�Cnl ty I laundry & -N 4 storage ;,d, L4 A. j Uhl I - i. 100- ij, , X LL 71 F j 7 "/ {Lrl � 7=- r---1 r ------- I LA' ILL / II I ; I Tr�Il if =1 f1le-PICce F 99 129 160x200 100 130 x 170 — �� \ ' ' O 0 ILL------ --���! x 16 2 TIV --1— 6 96 X 10 120 C, beamed ceiling sun deck Two Bedroom & Den Unit 2 206 X - 7' glass enclosed porch J: 1838 sq. ft. not including porch or deck Minutes of the +8 -2 -78 CD and PC Meeting Page 6 In response to Ms. McClelland, Mr. G. Hughes said based on five spaces per 1000 square feet of floor area, the proposal would require approximately 350 parking spaces. Mr. Martinson said they had not determined the exact number of spaces they could achieve but felt it was close to 350. Mr. G. Hughes clarified that the next step for the proponent, if the rezoning was approved, is for them to go to the Board of Appeals and Adjustments with a request for setback variances. He pointed out he was opposed to variances which relate to the intensity of the use rather than site. conditions. Mr. G. Hughes continued he felt it was logical for setback' variances to be considered on the property because it would be difficult, due to the shape of the site, for the building to maintain adequate setbacks from all property lines. He said such issues as off- and on- street parking were items which would have to be worked out. Mr. Runyan noted there was a golf course across the street, and, because of the open land, it limited the encroachment the proposed development would have on other properties. He felt the proposal was a good one. He felt the impact was only minor and they should give the proponent some direction. Mr. G. Hughes said the Commission was not approving the building but rather the use of the property, and the building would have to conform to the ordinance. Mr. Lewis said he felt the residents in the area would be violently opposed to the proposed development and felt the residents should be notified and heard. Mr. Runyan said the neighbors would be notified when the request reached the City Council and would have a chance to be heard at that time if they were not at the meeting tonight. Mr. G. Hughes said that in the case of hearings by the City Council, surrounding property owners within 500 feet were notified ten days prior to the hearing. In this case, however, because the closest residential area was more than 500 feet away, they would have to send to a larger radius of residents. Mr. Fernelius moved for approval of the rezoning request. Mr. Bentley seconded the motion. Upon roll call, the following voted: Ayes: Ms. McClelland, Mr. D. Johnson,_ Mr. Seaberg, Mr. Fernelius, Mr. Runyan, and Mr. Bentley. Nays: Mr. Lewis, Mr. S. Hughes, Mr. G. Johnson. Motion carried. V Z -78 -9 Gittleman Corporation. R -1 Single Family District to PRD-3 Planned Residential District. Generally located ,�•1 b at the southwest quadrant of Chaill Road and Dewey Hill Road. Mr. G. Hughes explained the subject property was a 24 acre tract of land located at Dewey Hill Road and Cahill Road. He said some Commission members should recall that in.1973 a proposed rezoning to PRD -3 was actually approved for first reading by the City Council for 276 units by Condor Corporation. This proposal was then withdrawn after first reading. Minutes of the 8 -2 -78 CD and PC Meeting Page 7 He continued a second proposal was brought in in'1975 again for 276 units in two -five story buildings. Both the Planning Commission and City Council denied the rezoning request. He said the issue did go to court and the City Council decision for denial was upheld. Mr. G. Hughes stated that the present request was again for a rezoning from R-1 Single Family District to PRD -3 Planned Residential District. He said the total number of units on the site was re- duced dramatically from previous proposals. The present proposal is for 159 units as compared to the previous proposals for 276 units and relates well to the southwest Edina Land Use Plan and reduction plan adopted by the City Council. Mr. G. Hughes explained the access to the development as shown on the plans was from two different points. First, the access was from Dewey Hill Road in the northeast portion of the subdivision and the second access is from Delaney Boulevard on the southwest portion of the site. He said ponds were constructed approximately one year ago and would be retained. Mr. G. Hughes said staff believed the proponents had done an excellent job in responding to many past concerns and stated the following: 1. The total number of units has been reduced from 276 to 159. The proposed density of 7 units per acre is below the densities preliminarily approved for two other multiple residential developments in Southwest Edina. 2. Building height has been reduced from five stories to three stories in con- formance with the Southwest Edina Plan. 3. The proposed buildings have been located primarily on.the eastern portion of the site to provide a buffer for single family homes to the west. 4. Surface parking has been located away from the ponding areas and is well hidden from properties to the west. 5. The access road to Dewey Hill Road is-located as far as possible from single family residences and maintains an adequate distance from Cahill Road/ Dewey Hill Road intersection. The access road to Delaney Road is located as far south as possible to eliminate the possibility of headlights shining into homes on Coventry Way, to avoid encroachment into ponding areas, and to provide adequate sight distance for Delaney Boulevard. The internal roadway system is also designed to discourage through traffic. 6. The steep slopes located on the southwesterly portion of the site, are pre- served and should provide an excellent buffer. 7. The internal roadway system is designed to facilitate the future inclusion of the five acre parcel which fronts on Cahill Road and is not controlled by the proponents. Mr. G. Hughes said staff therefore recommended preliminary approval of the rezoning request but pointed out the following items which staff felt should be considered: Minutes of the 8 -2 -78 CD and PC Meeting Page 8 1. Adequate sight distance must be maintained at the intersection of Cahill Road and Dewey Hill Road. Sight distance is presently a problem at this inter- section. 2. The surface parking lot northeast of building No. 3 should be modified slightly to further facilitate the future incorporation, if warranted, of the easterly parcel not owned by the proponent. 3. Signage for the development must be in conformance with the sign ordinance. 4. Final zoning is contingent upon the final platting of the property. Mr. M. Gittleman, the proponent, showed a site plan depicting what was proposed for the subject property and said a correction should be noted that they would provide 250 rather than 200 parking stalls. He said the density of the site would be 7 units per acre. 71.5 percent of the site would remain as green area. He said one building would be called Dewey Hill West, a second building Dewey Hill North, and a third building Dewey Hill South. There would be a total of 105 one - bedroom and den units and 54 two- bedroom and den units. The buildings would be three stories in height and have underground parking. Fe said he had had at least eight meetings with Foster Green who owned the parcel of property adjacent to the subject property and found out the Green property was subject to life estate in favor of Mr. Green's mother, who was presently confined to a nursing home. Mr. Green had indicated to him it had been his father's wish that the entire parcel, both the Green and Gittleman parcels, be rejoined at one time. If they were to come into title of the Green property they would be back before the Planning Commission and City Council to redo the area of that plan. They would revise the roadway system and construct one smaller building on the Green site. The same number of units would be maintained per acre and adequate parking would be provided. Mr. Gittleman then showed a drawing showing the contours of the property, showing the plan maintained a large part of the high spot of the site. He also presented a grading plan, showing there would not be excessive grading. Mr. Gittleman said they had sent out approximately 35 to 40 letters to all the neighbors in the immediate area for which the list was obtained from Mr. G. Hughes, City Planner, explaining this request would be heard this evening and there was application for a rezoning pending before the Planning Commission and also sent exact copies of the plans submitted to Mr. G. Hughes. This letter invited the neighbors to call and meet with him to allow him to respond to any questions. Mr. Gittleman said he had met with representatives of the neighborhood group west of the property and to the best of his knowledge that group appeared pleased with the proposal. The names of these individuals who represented the group are Mr. Arnold Foote, 7411 Coventry Way, and Mr. Garfield Lovaas, 7409 Coventry Way. Mr. Gittleman proceeded to show the garage plan of Building No. 1 which had a total of 94 underground parking stalls and surface parking for 45 cars. He said there was also a health club area and explained the building layout. He said the buildings were of primarily brick materials and had very little wood. He said a great deal of funds would be allocated for landscaping and said the units would not be renter - occupied and would be for people without pets or children under the age of 17. The price range for the.units was between $85,000 and $105,000 for which finances would be arranged with 1st National Bank of Minneapolis. He said he expected the development to comply with all fire and safety codes and felt the development would complement the area. Ile-referred to a similar project in Bloomington which he had done and was going well.. Minutes of the 8 -2 -78 CD and PC Meeting Page 9 In response to Mr. Runyan, Mr. Gittleman said they would provide retaining walls around the site which would be recessed down and would do high berming to protect the houses on the west side of which area was almost totally built.up. He said there was 250 feet between the homes on the west side and Delaney Boulevard. He said the highest point in the elevation was an elevation of 870. Mr. G. Hughes said the top of the buildings would be 8 to 10 feet higher than the hill. Mr. Jerry Boch, 7415 Coventry Way, said he had spoken against Delaney Boulevard at a previous City Council meeting and had less of an objection to the development than to Delaney. He felt access to Delaney should be eliininated as it would be an expensive road to construct. Mr. Fran Hoffman, City Engineer, said the Delaney Boulevard had been in the Southwest Edina Land Use Plan for seven years and explained the history of the road saying the previously proposed Amundson Avenue would not be put in at this time and said when people bought homes in this area, they were aware of the proposed road. In response to Mr. Boch's question about how to go about re- turning the City Council's decision, Mr. G. Hughes said many meetings had been held on the subject and he felt it would be very difficult to change the City Council's decision. Mr. Garfield Lovaas was present.and said he and Mr. Arnold Foote did meet with Mr. Gittleman on behalf of some of the neighbors west of Delaney Boulevard and said their primary concern was the parking lot. However, Mr. Gittleman had said it would be bermed to conceal it. He commented he felt Mr. Gittleman had done a nice job on his proposal and said Mr. Foote had been to see the City Engineer to see if the road could be moved east as -it was on their properties. He realized, however, it could not be changed. Mr. Gittleman said he would meet with anyone when he came in with the final plans and would go over the landscaping and grading plans. In response to a resident, Mr. G. Hughes said the road would have to work around the existing pond when it was put in as it was on street right -of -way property rather than on the property owner's land. Mr. S. Hughes moved for approval of the rezoning request for the reasons stated in the staff report and with the considerations stated by staff in regard to the final plans. Mr. D. Johnson seconded the motion. All voted aye. Motion carried. IV. Adjournment. Respectfully submitted, u , e . *eta Nancy J. Rust, Secretary GITTLEMAN CORPORATION Development • Construction • Management 7900 Xerxes Avenue South /Minneapolis, Minn. 55431/(612) 831 -2505 SUMMARY Dewey Hill A Condominium in Edina Bldg. I Bldg. II Bldg. III Total Plan I - One bedroom & den (1435 sq. ft. not including glazed /screened porch) 41 41 23 105 Plan II - Two bedroom & den (1838 sq. ft. not including glazed /screened porch or sun deck) 18 18 18 54 TOTAL NUMBER CONDOMINIUM HOMES 159 Indoor parking stalls (minimum) 94 94 62 250 Outside parking spaces 45 45 30 120 TOTAL PARKING 370 The site consists of 24.11 acres. A total of 159 condominium homes is proposed which equates to 6.5 dwelling units per acre. The three building structures would cover 11% of the total land area; driveways and parking areas would cover 17.5% of the total land; and, 71.5% of the land would remain open landscaped areas, including the two outdoor tennis courts. Each of the structures would be a three story building plus a lower level heated garage area. Contained on the lower level of each of.the buildings would be an indoor /outdoor pool, therapeutic whirlpool, saunas and locker room facilities; a fully equipped and well lighted and ventilated workshop to be used by residents; and, a semi - automatic car wash. There would also be an elegant Fireside Lounge for private entertaining and two guest suites for visitors on the main level of each of the buildings. Each of the buildings would have automatic refuse equipment contained within. A small climate control green house would be provided on the roof top of each of the buildings. The condominium homes at Dewey Hill would be equipped with burglar intrusion alarm systems and other equipment to maximize security and safety. The third floor homes would have vaulted ceilings in the living rooms with clerestory windows, and the dens would have beam ceilings. Many of the dens would also have brick wood burning fireplaces and wet bars. All of the homes would feature a glazed /screened porch off the livingroom and den, and a sun deck off the master bedroom in the large units. Supplemental storage space on the same floor will be provided for each condominium home. Page two The exterior of the buildings would be. all brick and cut stone in a monolithic earth color, and the glass. on the porch. enclosures would.be tinted, moreover, the entire development would be. extensively landscaped with.a large budget provided for the installation of many 25 to 30' shade tre-es.. Dewey Hill would be similar to Girard Park, which we recently completed at 85th and France in Bloomington, but upgraded and more luxurious in terms of unit size, added appointments, and finishing details.. This will coincide.with what we perceive to be a. more sophisticated and demanding Edina market. The selling price. of the homes would range from $85,500 to $112,500. We would, of course, continue our policy of selling homes only to adult owners who would occupy and not to speculators. or renters, and, there would be restrictions against animals. We respectfully submit this proposal for your, consideration. Melvin C. Gittleman August 21, 1978 �Refinemente Quality and\ ..m Quiet Good Taste. <g y between highways 452 and a' 152: ..•,} s.J,;s +,,r it accepted for Winter and Spring, 1979, occupancy at current prices. just ten blocks west of Brookdale An identification sign is erected nn the site Shopping Center, and adjacent Mrxlels. brochureand general information availaMo to the award winning Twin Lake at Old Shakopee Park Management Office North Apartments. No children or pets please Management Office Comfort, convenience, s !cur 'flephone (612) 888 1411. ity value, privacy a dedication to quality and excellence in auue lo line uncenainiv nt con,nvcnon, -I,. ae re,erve the ngh, materials and workmanship, 1, nroawpnce,m any nmenn all n„n ,rved—ndonnn— professionalism in management and total commitment to each N ri purchaser... all will be provided In quiet good NEIGittleman Corporation taste. Tour our Display I . Deselopment /Construction /Management Northwestern Financial Center Center soon. Rlnominyton. M,nn 55471 - ', �i1 .. Families considering a change to condominium living seem to be looking for a condominium residence that was not built like an ordinary apartment building... one that is outstanding, distinctive. and well located. And one that Will be occupied by proud owners only, and not renters. Our condominium homes feature unusual one bedroom' GIRARD PARK and den and two bedroom and den floor plans with up Condominium Homes to 1610 square feet of refined and private living area. 851h at Frarxe Awn- South They are planned, engineered and built just the same as NORTH a a fine quality home. The dens have handsome oak library doors and are Condominium Homes a designed to be used also as a guest bedroom. Each home 4710 5Mlh Avenue North h has a breakfast area in the kitchen. its own private 'twin Lake North was conceived and is being A laundry room complete with washer. dryer and laundry built for families who prefer to reside in the North s tub. and more closet and storage space than one Minneapolis suburban areas- Construction is now a would normally need. And each home has its own screened OLD SHAKUPEE porch off the living room. Some of the homes feature a wood burning fireplace PARK and vaulted ceiling in the living room. a wet bar in the den Condominium Homes and a sun deck off the master bedroom. Air conditioning? ,uph at Portland Avenue south Central, of course. including the public corridors and lobby. A number of families presently residing Security) Very advanced systems as would be expected in South Minneapolis. Richfield. Fast Bloomington including burglar intrusion alarms connected to each home and Eagan have selected homes at Old Shakopee Each building has its own elevator, heated underground Park. which is now ready for occupancy. Condominium homes at Old Shakopee Park are garage. indoor swimming and therapeutic whirlpool and presently *priced from $b9,7(X) to $Ki.K50. Fireside Lounge. And the lobbies and common areas are including carpeting and all appliances. with elegantly appointed. favorable comentional financing available. Outdoor swimming and tennis are some of the other Nm decorator models open daily from features offered. The emphasis is placed on the excellence I p.m. to 8 p.m. weekend, from noon to 6 in on of the condominium homes rather than an Over No children or pets please. Management Office Telephone (612) l KS 1411. -4,44, l taaoo', s da, abundance of recreational amenities. x..,n „ „ndvMAI 1 1•wn„ 1,0—, an +,o The sites are extensively landscaped. rustic and natural: with acres of trees. ponds. wild life and lighted walking paths. Our condominium homes are created to provide comfort. convenience. security and privacy. There is a 09 dedication to quality and excellence in materials and work manship, professionalism in management and a total commitment to each purchaser. And all is provided MARSH PARK in quiet good taste. Condominium Homes All of our condominium residences will be identical to 14r1, a ColWw— Road sovtn Girard Park Condominium Homes which is totally sold rW „hh4,weuolvsn'x France s,vtm out and all but completed. The families who urchased P p Now []bar Girard Park is sold out. we proudly „„ homes at Girard Park and their visitors often sac that r announce another alternative for families wishing it is truly enjoyable and even nicer than was �” "�+•L to remain in the Edina. West Bloomington area expected. And we are as pleased as `ti Marsh Park Condominium Homes are presently •priced from >72.700 I,, including w they are! •v, se, . 'L ..;.•- The concept. design. appearance. carpeting and all appliances. with favorable conwn tional financing available. Construction is now Rese floor plans. landscape detail and f`t•. , Cn ' t y (•, ? amenities at all of these condo - underway, rvationswithout obligation arebeing developments be accepted for Winter and Spring, 197879, minium will occupancy at current prices, An identification sign is erected 95t the site. the same as at Girard Park. s �� L And we are dedicated to -' Models. brochure and general information available make sure that all of our at Old Shakopee Park Management Office. No children or pets. please. ��•• developments enjoy the same superb reputation._ , financial stability and overall success. Financing is by the First National Bank of Minneapolis. Visit our new l HYLAND PARK decorator models at Old Shakopee ,. Condominium Homes Park soon. Stith and Rhade Island Avenue IT Bloclu South of Hghaood Drve and �+ von of Hyland Nature Preserve) S Hyland Park will be similar in concept to our other developments and will be designed and bulk in the same tradition of quality and excellence. _ These homes will be more spacious with up to a i 1838 square feet of living area. And they will b e a bit W y o more luxurious with added refinements and I appointments. Prices will be proportionately higher. General information, brochures and floor plans will be available this fall. Construction is scheduled -re, , t to commence early 1979, with occupancy +�a� during late winter and spring, 197980. <g y between highways 452 and a' 152: ..•,} s.J,;s +,,r it accepted for Winter and Spring, 1979, occupancy at current prices. just ten blocks west of Brookdale An identification sign is erected nn the site Shopping Center, and adjacent Mrxlels. brochureand general information availaMo to the award winning Twin Lake at Old Shakopee Park Management Office North Apartments. No children or pets please Management Office Comfort, convenience, s !cur 'flephone (612) 888 1411. ity value, privacy a dedication to quality and excellence in auue lo line uncenainiv nt con,nvcnon, -I,. ae re,erve the ngh, materials and workmanship, 1, nroawpnce,m any nmenn all n„n ,rved—ndonnn— professionalism in management and total commitment to each N ri purchaser... all will be provided In quiet good NEIGittleman Corporation taste. Tour our Display I . Deselopment /Construction /Management Northwestern Financial Center Center soon. Rlnominyton. M,nn 55471 - ', �i1 .. Twin lake North Condominium Homes is similar in concept to Girard Park Condominium Homes now nearly completed at 85th and France Avenue South in Bloomington. The quality character and refinements will be duplicated. And it will enjoy the same superb reputation' These condominium homes are designed, engineered and will be built as fine quality homes that do not resemble an ordinary apartment building, and it will be occupied by proud owners only, and not renters. TWIN LAKE T Twin Lake North features only one type of floor plan. It is NORTH a an unusual one bedroom and den home that is spacious and affords a feeling of openness. And it also has its own washer Condominium Homes a and dryer and screened porch off the living room. Some even 4710 5Mlh Avenue North h have 4 brick, wood - burning fireplace. 'twin Lake North was conceived and is being A Aside from the homes being a bit smaller. the building is the built for families who prefer to reside in the North s same as at Girard Park. In addition. it features a large workshop Minneapolis suburban areas- Construction is now a area complete with workbench, utility sink, power tools and underway and many homes have already been a a private tool locker for each resident. Nice facilities for residents selet led, Crmdnminium homes at Twin Lake w who wish to relax or putter and tinker during their spare time. North are presently priced from $58,700 to T The site is rustic and natural with trees, wild life and lighted $62.700. including carpeting and all appliances w walking paths. And it is well located near ' with excellent conventional financing T Twin Lake on 56th Avenue North. • } "'s , available. R K !.. .gp•,t•.r„r*�+,,�x low-' rat;- 7ri7 ­ { .Ar f�'+ � *` � �-- ,�. -4._ ,,.. � - -+ 9 r ?ol 47: t •:Y�'� \�' _ .�- 'ii/�•:a t _�.r'4.... ~.. '.y . -'� a • .-.AN low-' ♦ 1. ­ { .Ar r u • 47: t � �7►e' .� �'� !�r 1, a�ii . ^k ' i r' ' . . .. ; f ,,�:,.^�.�'R,r'� ,�+@ _ • s w '��► .:� � � , .. •x*d'� � K�'1 4• r •!►. • + � ' 4 jr� e i�•1 •� 1 ♦�`� ..4�� t � '�/A. `+ � )� �, t ' `- 1 ;, � - ,; 71i :�r p' _ •y r ` "1' � .. �r �+ .; �4��• • �-R :; , ,�� .3 '- ""� 3' �~ ::'�yi� • ail'. `� � i��" Y =r`�S �� � ,�'�•7 r ,�µ' i. _ ` -tiP' .. r - lw .. / .,.• � • +F t�� +icy, 4 � k : ­Y 7A i� i e, 1XXT Rk. "� ` • /ewe• - +` /' I �1tR RIM .� .._ . �[ y+ �1 mss.,,.. -•"- rim— - - ����► _W , � � �! _,:... •• A€ r �� i i +Cis"' ^. + • •s' �� � � { • r �i �� ' k a+� syw ,r• 1 } ' 7 ♦rt, l .� Bohn MAP RESOLUTION GRANTING FINAL APPROVAL OF MORINE'S ADDITION BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Edina, that that certain plat known as Morine's Addition, platted by John H. Morine, Jr., and Carol V. Morine, husband and wife, and presented at the Edina City Council Meeting of August 21, 1978, be and is hereby granted final plat approval. ADOPTED this 21st day of August, 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 August 21, 1978, and as recorded in the minutes of said Regular Meeting. WITNESS my hand and seal of said City this 25th day of August, 1978. City Clerk A&6 3 asGL: � 0; August 18, 1978 To: Kenneth E. Rosland, City Manager From: Florence Hallberg, City Clerk Subject: Access to Polling Places by Elderly and Handicapped (M.S. 204A.09) You and the Council should be aware of the following new provisions in the Minnesota Election Laws: Each polling place shall be accessible to and usable by elderly persons and by physically handicapped persons by complying with the following standards of accessibility: 1. Any curb adjacent to the main entrance to a polling place shall have curb cuts or temporary ramps. 2. Any stairs necessarily used to enter the polling place shall have a temporary handrain and ramp. 3. A governing body shall select as polling places only those sites which meet the standards of accessibility prescribed in this subdivision, except that the governing body may select a site not meeting the standards if no available site within the precinct can be made accessible. Edina's polling places have been chosen with convenience to the voters in mind. However, with_:the exception of the City Hall, all of the poll - ing:places have one step up from the sidewalk into the building, and many have one step up from the street onto the sidewalk. The only poll- ing place which has a number of steps is Edina East Upper Division, and I plan to have a large sign on the door directing handicapped voters to the South entrance of the building where there is an elevator that can be used. The school custodian has assured me that he will watch at that door. However, I am told that there is no more powerful lobby in the Legisla- ture than the handicapped and that these people can file suit against the City (without any cost to them) if the above conditions are not met. Will you please bring this matter to the Council's attention so that they can decide whether temporary ramps should be provided. (Mr. Hoffman believes that they could be constructed at a cost of approximately $1,000.) op EDINA PUBLIC SCHOOLS INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DISTRICT 273 5555 WEST 70TH STREET - EOINA, MINNESOTA 55435 - 612 -944 -3613 August 10, 1978 Mr. Kenneth E. Rosland City Manager City of Edina 4801 West 50 Street Edina, Minnesota 55424 Dear Ken: I am enclosing a copy of a memo I prepared for Ralph Lieber and the School Board following the City Council decision to permit a lease of a portion of Cahill School to the Family Renewal Center. I believe the memo covers the commitments I made to the Council during their consideration of this matter. I would appreciate your providing them with a copy. On behalf of the Board, I want to thank you, your staff, and the City Council for their assistance. Thank you. Sincerely, o1 -- George C. Hite Chairman Edina Board of Education GCH:sl Enclosure - 1 AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER It MEMORANDUM August 8, 19 ?8 TO: Ralph Lieber FROM: George. C. Hite - SUBJECT: Cahill - Family Renewal Center On Monday evening the City Council agreed with its staff that the description of permitted uses in the single family zoning district could be interpreted to. permit the family counseling program proposed to be located at Cahill: The Council was, however, concerned that the evening and Saturday activity at the Center might prove to be dleruotive tb the school neighbors..' I assured the Council that the Board would be equally concerned but that the first year proposal by the Center appeared to be a low intensity ,use. I advised the Council that any lease with Fairview Southdale Hospital would permit a, cancellation after one year if.the activity proved to be disruptive to the neighbors. I also promised that the lease would not be expanded beyond the initially pro - posed 10, 000 eq. ft. without securing additional review and sanetlon- by the Council. With these assurances by me on behalf of the Board, the Council approved the use on a four to one vote. I would suggest that you immediately contact the immediate school neighbors and invite them to your office to review the proposed use. This should be done before the Board is asked to approve the lease. GCH /bd cc: Board of Education L August 17, 1978 City Council City of Edina 4801 West 50th. St. Edina, Minnesota 55424 The purpose of this letter is to request some form of satisfactory dust control on 54th. Street west of Xerxes Ave. Fifty- fourth Street west of Xerxes is an unpaved, dead -end roadway paralleling Minnehaha Creek. It is used not only by residents, but also by canoeists transporting canoes to launch sites. It is also travelled by strangers in the area who do not know that 54th. Street provides no access to avenues west of Xerxes. The dead end character of the street necessitates that every entering be followed eventually by an exitting. The wye maneuvers required to achieve exit, compounded by heavy- footed accelerations, maximize the dust disturbance. We are at a disadvantage in petitioning the City of Edina for remedial action because we reside on the Minneapolis side of the Creek. Unfortunately, dust does not respect political jurisdictions as citizens must; and, owing to the prevailingness of southerly winds, the dust drifts and sifts onto and into our home with resultant exterior and interior consequences. Although we are not residents of Edina we nevertheless believe that civic courtesy provides a hope and environmental quality standards give us a ground for requesting remedial action. Sincerely 9yours �� Gj Mr. & Mrs. Vern Lake 5346 Xerxes Ave. So. 927 -6030 Mrs. Theo Bergman 5344 Xerxes Ave. So. 922 -3005 Minneapolis, Minn. 55410 TO: FROM: VIA: REQUEST FOR PURCHASE Mayor and City Council Bob Kojetin Kenneth Rosland, City Manager SUBJECT: REQUEST FOR PURCHASE OF ITEM IN EXCESS OF $1,000 DATE: August 18,1978 Material Description (General Specifications): Sod for Garden Park Drainage Area's Soccer Field Quotations /Bids: Com an j. Riebe Sod Co. 2. Lawn King Inc. 3. Department Recommendation: Amount of Quote or Bid 75G $3,000.00 80� $3,200.00 Riebe Sod Co. • -P�i SignFafii Department Finance Director's Endorsement: The recommended bid is F-1 is not = within the amount budgeted for the purchase. J. N. Dalen, Finance Director _ City Manager's Endorsement: 1. I concur with the recommendation of the Department and recommend Council approve the purchase. 2. I reconrnend as an alternative: �1 y Pt ti Kenneth Rosland, ity hlana e REQUEST FOR PURCHASE TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Bob Kojetin VIA: Kenneth Rosland, City Manager SUBJECT: REQUEST FOR PURCHASE OF ITEM IN EXCESS OF $1,000 DATE: August 1.6, 1978 Material Description (General Specifications): Prentice Loader, Rental truck and loader for trees Quotations /Bids: Company 1.2 B. L. Leasing 2. 0 ce-)e Department Recommendation: B. L. Leasine Finance Director's Endorsement: The recommended bid is Amount of Quote or Bid //' $2,800. 1, -� Signat e Department is not within the amount budgeted for the purchase. J. N. Dalen, Finance Director City Manager's Endorsement: 1. I concur with the recommendation of the Department and recommend Council approve the purchase. 2. I recommend as an alternative: Kenne_tli_ Rosland, G' y Manager / TO: . FROM: VIA: SUBJECT: DATE: REQUEST FOR PURCHASE Mayor and City Council Bob ,Kojetin Kenneth Rosland, City Manager REQUEST FOR PURCHASE OF ITEM IN EXCESS OF $1,000 August 18, 1978 Material Description (General Specifications): Air Conditioning and Ventilation for Art Center Quotations /Bids: Company I.. Hoov -Aire Inc. 2. Rouse Mechanical 3. Department Recommendation: Amount of Quote or Bid $9885.00 $10,835.00 Hoov -Aire Inc. i gnat rze Department Finance Director's Endorsement: The recommended bid is F-1 is not within the amount budgeted for the purchase. J. N. Dalen, Finance Director City Manager's Endorsement: (/ 1. I concur- with the recommendation of the Department and recommend Council approve the purchase. 2. I recommend as an alternative: Kenneth Rosland, ty Mana REQUEST FOR PURCHASE__ TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Bob Kojeyin VIA:. Kenneth Rosland, City Manager SUBJECT: REQUEST FOR PURCHASE OF ITEM IN EXCESS OF $1,000 DATE: July 21, 1978 Material Description (General Specifications): Dugout Fencing Lake Edina Quotations /Bids: Company I. Crown Iron Works 2. Century Fence 3. Department Recommendation: Finance Director's Endorsement: The recommended bid is ED Back Stop Repair Amount of Quote or Bid $1,940.00 $2,907.00 i a e _Department is not = within the amount budgeted for the purchase. J. N. Dalen, Finance Director City Manager's Endorsement: �1. I concur with the recommendation of the Department and recommend Council approve the purchase. 2. I recommend as an alternative: 'enneth Rosland, ty i1at��iDcr V RESOLUTION GRANTING FINAL APPROVAL OF NORMANDALE CARR REPLAT BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Edina, that ,that . certain plat known as Normandale Carr Replat, platted by Irving J. Carr and Catherine A. Carr, husband and wife, and presented at the Edina City Council Meeting of August 21, 1978, be and is hereby granted final plat approval. ADOPTED this 21st day of August, 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 August 21, 1978, and as recorded in the minutes of said Regular Meeting. WITNESS my hand and seal of said City this 25th day of August, 1978. City Clerk Primary biection juages September 12, 1978 PRECINCT NO. 11 - CAHILL SCHOOL 2 Voting Machines 4 Judges 1. Mrs. Geneva Smith, Chairman 6344 Rolf Ave. 941 -2471 2. Mrs. Anna Taggatz 6440 Wilryan Ave. 941 -3996 3. Mrs. Elinor Thornton 5205 Danens Drive 941 -3244 4. Mrs. Gloria Thorburn 5188 Abercrombie Dr. 941 -4710 Alternate: Mrs. Bonnie England 5225 Tifton Drive 944 -3826 PRECINCT NO. 12 - CHRIST PRESBYTERIAN CHURCH 2 Voting Machines 4 Judges 1. Mrs. Adele Olson, Chairman 6825 Oaklawn Ave. 926 -4552 2. Mrs. Mary McDonald 6929 Southdale Road 926 -7860 3. Mrs. Diane Greensweig 6716 Southdale Road 929 -8522 4 Mrs. Doris Van Campen 6920 Dawson Lane 926 -3287 Alternate: Mrs. Phyllis Taylor 6621 Normandale Rd. 922 -3410 PRECINCT NO. 13 - CORNELIA SCHOOL 2 Voting Machines 4 Judges 1. Mrs. Margaret Delaney, Chairman 4515 W. 70th St. 926 -4818 2. Mrs. Mavis deLambert 4440 Ellsworth Dr. 922 -1590 3. Mrs. Marie Crask 4717 Hibiscus Ave. 922 -8765 4. Mrs. Marilyn Person 4800 Larkspur Lane 926 -1409 Alternate: Mrs. Edna Thomsen 4529 Andover Rd. 9.22 -1004 PRECINCT NO. 14 - ST. PETERS CHURCH 2 Voting Machines 4 Judges 1. Mrs. Mary Jane Platt, Chairman 5504 Beard Ave. S. 926 -8447 2. Mrs. Ruth Volk 3616 W. Fuller St. 922 -1651 3. Mrs. Jeanette Lund 5809 Drew Ave. S. 922 -6901 4. Mrs. Esther Olson 5441 York Ave. S. 926 -1006 Alternate: Mrs. Louise Carlson 3700 Chowen Curve 926 -6253 PRECINCT NO. 15 - EDINA WEST UPPER DIVISION 2 Voting Machines 4 Judges 1. Mrs. Charlotte Burns, Chairman 5820 Dewey Hill Rd. 941 -4108 2. Mrs. Patricia Olander 7001 Lee Valley Circle 944 -2185 3. Mrs. Virginia Burke 6820 Chapel Lane 941 -2653 4. Mrs. Helen Rumsey 7212 Fleetwood Drive 944 -2976 Alaternate: Mrs. Carol Hanson 5908 Chapel Drive 944 -2759 PRECINCT NO. 16 - SOUTHDALE HENN. LIBRARY 2 Voting Machines 4 Judges 1. Mrs. Judith Sotebeer, Chairman 5002 Mirror Lakes Dr. 929 -8653 2. Mrs. Dona Monke 6415 York Ave., Apt..200 925 -2989 3. Mrs. Ruth Fitzmaurice 6400 York Ave. S. 920 -9783 4. Mrs. Pat Halvorson 6700 Xerxes Ave. S. 869 -0366 Alternate: Mrs. Noreen Flynn 6400 Barrie Rd. 926 -0673 PRECINCT NO. 17 - CHURCH OF THE MASTER 2 Voting Machines 4 Judges 1. Mrs. Lucille Russ, Chairman 4480 Parklawn Ave., Apt. 301 926 -8970 2. Mrs. Claire Ready 4401 Gilford Dr. 922 -6649 3. Mrs. Ann Matula 4141 Parklawn Ave. 830 -1069 4. Mrs. Dode Thompson 4351 Parklawn Ave. Alternate: Mrs. Margaret Carlson 4201 Parklawn Ave. 831 -8977 PRECINCT NO. 18 - YORKTOWN CONTINAL APTS. 2 Voting Machines 4 Judges 1. Mrs. Betty Doolittle, Chairman 7512 Xerxes Ave. S. 866 -4438 2. Mrs. Signe Bjornson 7300 York Ave. S. 835 -6679 3. Mrs. Jean McDermid 5116 Mirror Lakes Dr. 929 -8859 4. Mrs. Mary Ryan 5508 Goya Lane 926 -5139 Alternate: Mrs. Cynthia Elmquist 5419 Interlachen Blvd. 925 -1421 PRECINCT NO. 19 - CHAPEL HILLS CHURCH 2 Voting Machines 4 Judges 1. Mrs. Sue Holden, Chairman 6016 Tamarac Ave. 935 -5430 2. Mrs. Helen McClelland 5717 Continental Dr. 933 -5282 3. Mrs. Sarah Taft 5605 Schaefer Rd. 933 -4334 4. Mrs. Angie Speliopoulos 6004 Tamarac Ave. 933 -6247 Alternate: Mrs. Phyllis Wohlrabe 6605 Field Way 933 -5833 PROPOSED ROSTER OF PRIMARY ELECTION OFFICIALS SEPTEMBER 12, 1978 PRECINCT NO. 1 - SHEPHERD OF HILLS CHURCH 2 Voting Machines 1. Mrs. Genie Williams, Chairman 6425 Mendelssohn Lane 2. Mrs. Lois Hallquist 305 Grove Place. 3. Mrs. Barbara Anderson 413 Arthur St. 4. Mrs. Rosita Barber 6419 Meldelssohn Lane 4014 Alternate: Mrs. Helen Donovan 6300 Interlachen Blvd. PRECINCT NO. 2 - EDINA CITY HALL 1. Mrs. Joyce Akason,.Chairman 1 _ 2. Mrs. Naomi Johnson 3. Mrs. Emily Scudder 1. 4. Mrs. Betty Jenson Alternate: Mrs. Kay Tate PRECINCT NO. 3 - WOODDALE SCHOOL 1. Mrs. Jane - Hawthorne, Chairman 2. Mrs. Linda Smith 3. Mrs. Sherrill Estensen 4. Mrs. Louisa Gerstenberger Alternate: -Mrs. Patricia Lang 2 Voting Machines 5217.Grandview Lane 5141Bedford Ave. 4521'.Oxford Ave. 5044 Edenbrook Lane 4817. Vandervork Ave. 2 Vd'ting Machines 5301 Minnehaha Blvd. 4519 Bruce Ave. 4528 Arden Ave. 4905 Ridge Place 5117 Wooddale Ave. 4 Judges 938 -5086 938 -3886 938 -1160 935 -3781 938 -8102 4 Judges 929 -7924 929 -0975 920 -4804 929 -0975 .-929 -6839 4 Judges 922 -2609 922 -4620 926 -0655 920 -0398 922 -4458 PRECINCT NO. 4 - MORNINGSIDE BUILDING 2 Voting Machines 4 Judges 1. Mrs. Shirley Dibble, Chairman 4212 France Ave. S. 926 -4048 2. Mrs. Alice Rose 4011 Kipling Ave. 926 -0159 3. -Mrs. Rachel Schoening 4014 Monterey Ave. 922 -5457 4. Mrs. Jeanette Lushine 4166 Monterey Ave. 926 -0576 Oaklawn Ave. Alternate: Mrs. Kathryn Stamp 4224 Grimes Ave. 941 -8012 PRECINCT NO. 5 - HIGHLANDS SCHOOL 2 Voting Machines 4 Judges 1. Mrs. Henrietta Bartlett, Chairman 5512 Mirror Lakes Drive 929 -4738 2. Mrs. Phyllis Cooper 5500 Mirror Lakes Dr. 925 -I594 3. Mrs. Jill Ragatz 5709 Ayrshire Blvd. 925 -1145 4. Mrs. Sue Bonoff 6113 Idylwood Dr. 935 -4517 Alternate: Mrs. Carol McPheeters 5409 Doncaster Way 929 -4742 PRECINCT NO. 6 - COUNTRYSIDE SCHOOL 2 Voting Machines 4 Judges 1. Mrs. Jane Bains, Chairman 6101 Tracy Ave.' 929 -9362 2. Mrs. Catherine Swanson 4804 Merold Drive 929 -8387 3. Mrs. Hope Eilers 5513 Ridge Park Road 929 -2239 4. Mrs. Claire Mac Lennon 6060 Olinger Circle 929 -8496 Alternate: Mrs. Eileen Black 5525 Warden Ave. 926 -6101 PRECINCT NO. 7 - NORMANDALE LUTHERAN CHURCH 2 Voting Machines 1. Mrs. Bess Brudelie, Chairman 5305 Forslin Drive 2. Mrs. Helen Peterson 6121 Code Ave. 3. Mrs. Naomi Ward 5916 Hansen Road 4. Mrs. Barbara Matheson 5609 Bernard Place Alternate: Mrs. Dorothy Stockdale 5117 Benton Ave. PRECINCT NO. 8 - EDINA EAST LOWER DIVISION 2 Voting Machines 1. Mrs. Constance Ryan .5529 Oaklawn Ave. 2. Mrs. Maxine Sanders 4532 Tower Ave. 3. Mrs. Margaret Kinney, Chairman 4513 Oak Drive 4, Mrs. Florence Freudenthal 5616 Concord Ave. Alternate: Mrs. Jane Moran 5429 Wooddale Ave. PRECINCT NO. 9 - CONCORD SCHOOL 1. Mrs. Yvonne Ford, Chairman 2. Mrs. Kay Bach 3. Mrs. Elaine Olson 4. Mr.. Annette Horton Alternate: Mrs. Margaret Wodrich PRECINCT NO. 10 CREEK VALLEY SCHOOL 1. Mrs. Virginia Bodine 2. Mrs, Lynn Billings, Chairman 3. Mrs. Natalie Rudin 4. Mrs. Pat Freerks Alternate: Mrs, Margaret McLellan 2 Voting Machines 4831 Valley View Road 6316 Halifax Ave. 5921 Ashcroft Ave. 6309 St. Johns Ave. 5916 Ashcroft Ave. 2 Voting Machines 6525 Gleason Road 6201 Balder Lane 6901 Paiute Dr. 6828 Sally Lane 5700 Brook Drive 4 Judges 929 -8734 929 -7067 929 -1074 922 -6431 929 -3785 4 Judges 922 -9053 926 -1969 926 -2676 926 -5576 920 -0558 4 Judges 922 -6606 922 -6315 922 -6315 920 -3617 927 -5916 4 Judges 941 -1206 941 -3794 941 -8624 941 -1491 941 -5295 ca M N ® Lf) CL ■® O ®� V/ i ca 4 August 10, 1978 Mr. Kenneth Rosland City Manager 4801 W. 50th St. Edina, Minnesota Dear Ken: I am writing to provide information and -seek the support of your city in our lawsuit contesting the compulsory. binding arbitration provisions of the Minnesota Public Employees Labor Relations Act. This action was initiated by the Richfield City Council as a result of an arbitration panel award issued March 31, 1977 for a 1976 labor contract with Local 1215, International Association of Fire Fighters. In addition to the question of whether binding arbitration is con- stitutional, the lawsuit involves Issue IX of this arbi- tration award concerning contract duration. The Attorney General intervened at the district court level on the side of the bargaining unit to defend the constitutionality of the statute. In addition, the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees AFL -CIO joined the proceedings as amici curiae at this lower court level in support of the bargaining unit position. On January 19, 1978, Judge Allen Oleisky in Hennepin County District Court issued an Order and Memorandum denying the city 's motion to declare the com- pulsory binding arbitration provisions of PERLA uncon- stitutional and refusing to vacate the arbitration award pertaining to Issue IX. The Richfield City Council decided to appeal the lower court decision to the Minnesota Supreme Court. While a Supreme Court hearing date has not yet been set, the court has indicated a preference to hear this matter early in the fall term and we can anticipate a date in late September or early October. In June, 1977, the League of Minnesota Cities Board of Directors voted to support this Richfield action. The Board found it to have very great potential impact on cities throughout the state. Moreover, the Richfield telephone: 869 -7521 (612) an equal opportunity employer LM O CL ■® O O 4 August 10, 1978 Mr. Kenneth Rosland City Manager 4801 W. 50th St. Edina, Minnesota Dear Ken: I am writing to provide information and -seek the support of your city in our lawsuit contesting the compulsory. binding arbitration provisions of the Minnesota Public Employees Labor Relations Act. This action was initiated by the Richfield City Council as a result of an arbitration panel award issued March 31, 1977 for a 1976 labor contract with Local 1215, International Association of Fire Fighters. In addition to the question of whether binding arbitration is con- stitutional, the lawsuit involves Issue IX of this arbi- tration award concerning contract duration. The Attorney General intervened at the district court level on the side of the bargaining unit to defend the constitutionality of the statute. In addition, the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees AFL -CIO joined the proceedings as amici curiae at this lower court level in support of the bargaining unit position. On January 19, 1978, Judge Allen Oleisky in Hennepin County District Court issued an Order and Memorandum denying the city 's motion to declare the com- pulsory binding arbitration provisions of PERLA uncon- stitutional and refusing to vacate the arbitration award pertaining to Issue IX. The Richfield City Council decided to appeal the lower court decision to the Minnesota Supreme Court. While a Supreme Court hearing date has not yet been set, the court has indicated a preference to hear this matter early in the fall term and we can anticipate a date in late September or early October. In June, 1977, the League of Minnesota Cities Board of Directors voted to support this Richfield action. The Board found it to have very great potential impact on cities throughout the state. Moreover, the Richfield telephone: 869 -7521 (612) an equal opportunity employer Page Two August 10, 1,978 position was consistent with adopted League policies on impass resolution with public employee unions. The League has joined the proceedings as amici curiae at the Supreme Court level and will assist in coordinating efforts of individual local governments who wish to support the lawsuit. The City of Richfield and the League of Minnesota Cities have both filed their Supreme Court briefs. On the other side, the Attorney General, and AFCME have filed their briefs. The IAFF has not yet filed its brief but is expected to do so shortly. In addition, the Minnesota Education Association has intervened at the Supreme.Court level and will file a brief on behalf of it's membership in support of the arbitration provisions. This lawsuit is the first attempt to determine the constitutionality of the compulsory binding arbitration provisions of PELRA since first enacted in 1971. However, similar efforts have occurred in other states with varying degrees of success. The most recent litigation occurred in Texas where a lower court decision found the Texas arbitration law unconstitutional. Early in July the Hartford, Connecticut Superior Court found that-state's compulsory arbitration law unconstitutional. A copy of an NLC news article on this Connecticut decision is attached. You will note in the article on the Connecticut decision that 75 Connecticut municipalities helped to support the action initiated in that state. We believe that in addition to LMC support it would be very helpful for the court and our state legislatures to know that a large number of cities in the state are concerned with the binding arbitration provisions in the state statutes. Therefore, I am asking that you bring this matter to the attention of your city council and recommend that your city support our action through adoption of the attached resolution. We are requesting that interested cities help defray the cost of the Supreme Court appeal with a $100 contribution (should contributions exceed costs, we will return the balance on a pro rata basis). How- ever, please note that the contribution is not a prerequisite for the resolution of support. It is most important that cities indicate their positions with respect to this litigation by adopting a resolution similar to the sample which is attached. Please send a copy of your city's resolution to: Mr. Stan Peskar, General Counsel League of Minnesota Cities 300 Hanover Building 480 Cedar Street St. Paul, Minnesota 55101 Checks should be made out to the League of Minnesota Cities and designated for this binding arbitration lawsuit. Page Three August 10, 1978 Inasmuch as the Supreme Court could hear this case as early as next month, we would appreciate a response as soon as possible. Any inquiries on details of the case should be directed to Stan Peskar, 612/222 -2861 or our attorney Dennis O'Brien 612/333 -0543 with the firm of LeFevere, Lefler, Pearson, O'Brien & Drawz. I would be happy to answer any other questions or provide any other additional information you desire. Sincerely yours (fir Wayne S. Burggraaff City Manager WSB /jkl Enclosures I National ,Lea gue - M : of Cities t. p t+s 1 .. ?poi Volume 1, Number 24 Connecticut court nullifies compulsory arbitration law The Hartford, Conn., Superior Court last week declared the state law mandating compulsory binding ar- bitration between a municipality and a union unconstitutional. The suit challenging the constitutionality of.the law was initiated by the Connecticut Conference of Municipalities (CCM) more than two years ago. The law required a union and a municipality, if they were unable to agree on a collective bargaining contract, to submit the issues to an arbitration panel, which would then impose a contract on the two parties. In declaring this mandated collective bargaining unconstitutional, the Superior Court pointed out that the law violates both the United States and ' Connecticut constitutions by delegating the power to determine conditions of employment for municipal employees to an arbitration panel that is not politically ac- countable to the state legislature, the municipal government, or taxpayers and voters of Connecticut. The law also fails through procedural faults to declare a legislative policy or to establish suf- ficient standards to guide the ar- bitration panel in its decision- making, the court said, and the law fails to provide 'a meaningful process of judicial review. The case was brought to court by CCM in the names of eight plaintiff Washington, D.C. July 10, 1978 towns and one taxpayer. Since February, 1976, when the original suit was filed, 75 additional municipalities contributed to the costs of this land- mark case. Statewide, municipal officials ap- plauded this decision as a return of responsibility to local control. 'This decision returns the municipal collective bargaining process to its rightful place —the negotiating table," said Mayor Arthur B. Powers of Berlin, the CCM's president. "The elected and appointed representatives of the municipal taxpayers and the union representatives now again have the final responsibility for deter- mining, through free collective bargaining, the salaries, fringe benefits and working conditions of the municipal employees providing ser- vices to our citizens." — Sharon Walters RESOLUTION SUPPORTING CITY OF RICHFIELD LAWSUIT CONTESTING PELRA COMPULSORY BINDING ARBITRATION PROVISIONS WHEREAS, the City of Richfield has initiated a lawsuit contesting the compulsory binding arbitration provisions of PELRA (City of Richfield vs. Local No. 1215, International Association of Fire Fighters and State of Minnesota, Intervenor), and WHEREAS, this lawsuit is currently under appeal to the Minnesota Supreme Court, and WHEREAS, the PELRA binding arbitration provisions delegate fundamental decisions regarding the kind, extent and cost of govern- mental services to private, politically unaccountable individuals, and WHEREAS, cities in Minnesota have generally had poor experience with these binding arbitration provisions in that decisions have been unfair, inflationary and detrimental to the collective bargaining process, and WHEREAS, other viable, more fair and just alternatives do exist to the PELRA binding arbitration provisions. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Minnesota, as follows: 1. That this.city supports the City of Richfield in this lawsuit and directs that a copy of this resolution of support be filed with the League of Minnesota Cities. 2. (optional) That the sum of $100 is hereby authorized to be paid to the League of Minnesota Cities to assist in financing the cost of appealing this lawsuit to the Minnesota Supreme Court. Passed by the City'Council of the City of Minnesota, this day of August, 1978. RESOLUTION SUPPORTING CITY OF RICHFIELD LAWSUIT CONTESTING PELRA COMPULSORY BINDING ARBITRATION PROVISION WHEREAS, the City of Richfield has initiated a lawsuit contesting the com- pulsory binding arbitration provisions of PELRA (City of Richfield vs. Local No. 1215, International Association of Fire Fighters and State of Minnesota, Intervenor); and WHEREAS, this lawsuit is currently under appeal to the Minnesota Supreme Court; and WHEREAS, the PELRA binding arbitration provisions delegate fundamental decis- ions regarding the kind, extent and cost of governmental services to private, politically unaccountable individuals; and WHEREAS, cities in Minnesota have generally had poor experience with these binding arbitration provisions in that decisions have been unfair, inflat- ionary and detrimental to the collective bargaining process; and WHEREAS, other viable, more fair and just alternatives do exist to the PELRA binding arbitration provisions; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Edina, Minnesota, as follows: 1. That this City supports the City of Richfield in this lawsuit and directs that a copy of this resolution of support be filed with the League of Minnesota Cities. 2. That the sum of $100 is hereby authorized to be paid to the League of Minnesota Cities to assist in financing the cost of appealing this lawsuit to the Minnesota Supreme Court. DATED this 21st day of August, 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 August 21, 1978, and as recorded in the Minutes of said Regular Meeting. WITNESS my hand and seal of said City this 29th day of August, 1978. City Clerk August 29, 1978 Mr. Wayne Burggraaff, City Manager., City of Richfield 67UO Portland Ave. Richfield, . Mil 55423 Dear Hr. Burggraaff: Enclosed herewith is a-certified copy of a resolution adopted by the Ldina City Council supporting tae -City of Richfield in its lawsuit contest- ing PLLIU compulsory 'binding arbitration, along with a caeck in the amount of $IUU.00 as diiia's contribution.toward financing the costoof appealing this lawsuit. Yours very truly, City Clerk enclosure (il). RESOLUTION SUPPORTING CITY OF RICHFIELD LAWSUIT CONTESTING PELRA COMPULSORY BINDING ARBITRATION PROVISIONS WHEREAS, the City of Richfield has initiated a lawsuit contesting the compulsory binding arbitration provisions of PELRA (City of Richfield vs. Local No. 1215, International Association of Fire Fighters and State of Minnesota, Intervenor), and WHEREAS, this lawsuit is currently under appeal to the Minnesota Supreme Court, and WHEREAS, the PELRA binding arbitration provisions delegate fundamental decisions regarding the kind, extent and cost of govern- mental services to private, politically unaccountable individuals, and WHEREAS, cities in Minnesota have generally had poor experience with these binding arbitration provisions in that decisions have been unfair, inflationary and detrimental to the collective bargaining process, and WHEREAS, other viable, more fair and just alternatives do exist to the PELRA binding arbitration provisions. of NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City . , Minnesota, as follows: 1. That this city supports the City of-Richfield in this lawsuit and directs that a copy of this resolution of support be filed with the League of Minnesota Cities. 2. (optional) That the sum of $100 is hereby authorized to be paid to the League of Minnesota Cities to assist in financing the cost of appealing this lawsuit to the Minnesota Supreme Court. Passed by the City Council of the City of Minnesota, this day of August, 1978. CITV CF EDINA 4801 WEST 50TH STREET. EDINA. MINNESOTA 55424 612- 927 -8861 RESOLUTION SUPPORTING CITY OF RICHFIELD LAWSUIT CONTESTING PELRA COMPULSORY BINDING ARBITRATION PROVISION WHEREAS, the City of Richfield has initiated a lawsuit contesting the com- pulsory binding arbitration provisions of PELRA (City of Richfield vs. Local No. 1215, International Association of Fire Fighters and State of Minnesota, Intervenor); and WHEREAS, this lawsuit is currently under appeal to the Minnesota Supreme Court; and WHEREAS, the PELRA binding arbitration provisions delegate fundamental decis- ions regarding the kind, extent and cost of governmental services to private, politically unaccountable individuals; and WHEREAS,, cities in Minnesota have generally had poor experience with these binding arbitration provisions in that decisions'have been unfair, inflat- ionary and detrimental to the collective bargaining process; and WHEREAS, other viable, more fair and just alternatives do exist to the PELRA binding arbitration provisions; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Edina, Minnesota, as follows: 1. That this City supports the City of Richfield in this lawsuit and directs that a copy Rf this resolution of support be filed with the League of Minnesota Cities. 2. That the sum-of $100.is hereby authorized to be paid to the League of Minnesota Cities to assist in financing the cost of appealing this lawsuit to the Minnesota Supreme Court. DATED this 21st day of August, 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 August 21, 1978, and as recorded in the Minutes of said Regular Meeting. WITNESS my hand and seal of said City this 29th day of August, 1978. City Clerk August 16, 1978 MEMORANDUM TO: Kenneth Rosland, Edina City Manager FROM: David A. Velde, Assistant Public Health Sanitarian SUBJECT: Delaria's Restaurant, 124 Southdale Center In August, 1976, Mr. Bill Westerhoff and Mr. Richard Slind purchased Delaria's Restaurant. At that time they agreed to bring the food preparation areas up.to code. Attached is a letter from Mr. Slind stating the items to be corrected and giving a projected completion period. .The restaurant was granted a license to operate with the understanding that the work would commence immediately and that they would meet the completion date of their schedule. Work did commence, and the upstairs area was generally brought to an acceptable condition. However, the lower level work was never completed. Presently the lower level is partially completed, and work has not been done for about one year. The lighting in the lower level is not acceptable, the floor was never finished, the walls were never finished nor painted, and the non - approved equipment was never removed nor replaced. On June 19, 1978, a letter was sent to the manager at Delaria's Restaurant .and a copy of the letter forwarded to Mr. Bill Westerhoff which listed the items..which were not accomplished on the lower level and giving him until July 31, 1978, to accomplish the remainder of the remodeling. He was advised that if he did not accomplish the necessary remodeling by that date, he would-be prohibited from using the lower level for food preparation purposes. On August 4, 1978, Mr. Westerhoff was served with a notice prohibiting the use of the lower level preparation area as no work had been done since June 19, 1978. On August 8, 1978, I again inspected the lower level preparation area and found that the preparation of soup was still being done. A letter was sent to Mr. Westerhoff advising.him that a recommendation would be forwarded to the Edina City Council on August 21, 1978, that his food establishment license be revoked. Since he received the last letter (August 8, 1978) he has discontinued preparing soups in the lower level preparation area, but he is still using this area for preparing roast beef. In addition to the problems with the preparation area, Mr. Westerhoff has also been reluctant to resolve some problems with the Edina Fire Department in relation to the grease duct systems. This will be covered under another memo from the Edina Fire Department. Kenneth Rosland - memorandum page 2 August 16, 1978 With this, I request that the food establishment license for Delaria's Restaurant be revoked, unless a workable and binding.agreement can be reached to resolve the design and construction problems associated with the restaurant. In either case, I recommend that the lower level not be used for the preparation.and storage of food until that area has been brought up to the minimum standards as set forth in Edina City Ordinance No. 731. DAV:jt Encl.: Letter August 1, 1976 Letter June 19, 1978 Letter August 4, 1978 Letter August 8, 1978 lczl�W � k— .2 J; Ken Esse Edina Health Dept. Dear Mr. Esse: 74 August 1, 1976 The following is a list of items and their projected completion dates, ___:required per our conversations to comp.ly_with. the Health Departments regulations. Basement: 1. Tear out old office and construct wall abross entry area and wall above proposed ceiling in balcony. (Start two weeks after closing, time estimate: four weeks.) 2. Drop ceiling and sprinkler heads. (Start as soon as wall construction is over - estimate: two weeks.) 3. Epoxy paint all walls up to ceiling (start when ceiling done - Estimate time: Three weeks.) 4. Enclose Bake Oven on two sides — utilizing sheet metal - cove bottom when floor installed. (Start when paint is completed - one week.) 5. Install continuous.vinyl floor covering and coving. To be done when when all painting completed, in sections - one month. Total Time Involved: Sixteen Weeks Upstairs: 1. Obtain quotes on re- dooring reach in refrigerator. Estimate completion of repairs - three months. 2. Enclose back of warming table - Estimate completion within one month of closing. .' X10" WS ���F. g Tee #7�04_ r 1 L]PEDINA 4801 WEST 50TH STREET. EDINA. MINNESOTA 55424 612- 927 -8861 June 19, 1978 CERTIFIED NO. 790235 Mr. Mike Stuppy Delaria's Restaurant 124 Southdale Center Edina, Minnesota 55435 Dear Mr. Stuppy: A survey of your food establishment was conducted on June 19, 1978. The conditions which are in need of correction or repair are listed below: 1. Replace the missing filters in the exhaust hood above the bakery oven. 2. Apply a durable finish to all wood work surrounding the doors. 3. Chain the compressed gas cylinders to a solid support. .. 4. Keep all doors leading to the preparation area closed. 5. Alb pots and pans must be stored in an inverted position. 6. Elevate all storage above the floor in the walk -in coolers. 7. Provide thermometers accurate within 20F. for all refrigeration units. 8. Clean, sanitize, and organize all utensil drawers. Discontinue the practice of storing hand tools and other non -food items in the food utensil drawers. 9. Provide hand soap and hand towels for the employees' hand sink. 10. At the time of the survey, the floors, walls, and the interior and exterior of all equipment was extremely dirty. This condition will not be tolerated and action must be taken to ensure that these items will be cleaned thoroughly each day and kept clean. 11. Properly label and cover all condiment containers. 12. Replace all missing ceiling tile. Mr. Mike Stuppy Page 2 June 19, 1978 Upper Level 1. Repair the dishwashing machine. At the time of the survey, the rinse temperature was 135 degrees F. and the minimum acceptable rinse temp- erature for this machine is 180 degrees F. 2. Clean the ceiling and ventilation registers. 3. Clean the floors under all equipment. The floors were filthy and had - gross accumulations of food, dirt, and- debris on them. 4. Clean the interior and exterior of all equipment. 5. Clean the walls. 6. Defrost, clean and sanitize the ice cream freezer on a regular basis. 7. Remove the wooden.platform supporting the bulk milk dispenser. 8. Provide thermometer, accurate within 2 degrees F., for all refrigeration units. 9. Provide a backflow preventer for the pre - scraping sprayer hose for the dishwasher. 10. Repair all broken and missing quarry tile. 11. Remove the floor mat in the food preparation area. 12. Re- adjust the thermostat on the rear refrigerated sandwich unit. At the time of the survey, the temperature of the product in this unit was 50 degrees F. The maximum acceptable refrigeration temperature is 40 degrees F. 13. Re- adjust the thermostat on the refrigerated pie display case. The temperature inside this unit was 50 degrees F. 14. Arrange the plastic serving utensils in a manner that presents the handle only to the server. 15. Replace the frayed carpeting. 16. Replace the floor tile in waitress area. 17. Provide hand towels and hand soap for the employee hand sink. The above listed items must be complied with by June 30, 1978. a � Mr. Mike Stuppy Page 2 June 19, 1978 The remodeling in the lower level has not been completed. The following items are still outstanding: 1. Replace the floor with no less than sheet vinyl. 2. Finish all raw sheetrock and cement with no less than light colored epoxy paint. 3. Elevate all equipment on legs which.are at least six inches long. 4. Replace all wooden shelving with NSF approved shelving. 5. Provide no less than 30 foot candles of light on all work surfaces. At the present time, the lighting is very poor and measures between 5 and 10 foot candles in most areas. 6. Provide a coved floor to wall juncture throughout the whole lower level area. 7. Seal all wall penetrations. The above listed work items were to have been completed by January, 1977. These items must be completed by July 31, 1978. If by this date the work is not completed, this department will close the lower level for the pur- pose of food preparation. Sincerely, David A. Velde Assistant Public Health Sanitarian Edina Health Department DAV:nr cc: Mr. Westerhoff 310 N. Snelling Avenue St. Paul, Minnesota 55104 II . STATE OF MINNESOTA ) COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) SS. CITY OF EDINA �) CERTIFICATE OF SEPVICE I, the undersigned, duly appointed and acting Police Patrolman for the City of Edina.. County of Hennepin, State of Minnesota, do hereby certify that I have, this date served copies of the foregoing letter to Mr. Bill Westerhoff, Delaria's Restaurant, 124 Southdale Center, Edina, Minnesota 55435. on August 4, 1978 DATED � � �7�� � —SIGNED—. �1..id�Q� CK�„�� Police Patrolman Signed and sworn to before me, a Notary Public in and for Hennepin County, Minnesota, this the 'q d- _ , day of L-$ _ "_c 19 1 W ®. Halt ®ERG ry nbtalun Ex QesnD cu 31. 1918, R -74 M p 1) 1 NIA •1801 WEST 50TH STREET, EDINk VINNESOTA 55424 612- 927 -8861 August 4, 1978 Mr. Bill Westerhoff Delaria's Restaurant 124 Southdale Center Edina, Minnesota 55435 Dear Mr. Westerhoff: On June 19, 1978, this department issued you restaurant orders to bring the lower level preparation area .up to minimum public health standards. These orders consisted of the following items: 1. Replace the floor with no less than sheet vinyl. 2. Finish all raw sheetrock and cement with no less than light colored epoxy paint. 3. Elevate all.equipment on legs which are at least six inches long. 4. Replace all wooden shelving with NSF approved shelving. 5. Provide no less than 30 foot candles of light on all work surfaces. At the present time, the lighting is very poor and measures between 5 and 10.foot candles in most areas. 6. Provide a coved floor to wall juncture throughout the whole lower level area. 7. Seal all wall penetrations. The above listed items were to have been completed by July 31, 1978. As of this date, the work.has not been completed nor have any visible efforts been made to attempt to accomplish this work. You are hereby ordered to discontinue using the lower level for the purposes of food preparation or storage. Failure to comply with this order will cause this department to seek the revocation of your food establishment license pursuant to Edina City Ordinance No. 141, Section 16. Sincerely, David A. Velde Assistant Public Health Sanitarian DAV:nr cc: Edina City Manager Southdale Management Office August 8, 1978 Mr. Dill Westerhoff Delaria's Rcstaurant 124 Southdale Center Ldina, Wxmesota 55535 Dear Air. Weaterho£f : On August 4, 1978, you .are served with a notice ordering you to discontinue food preparation in thv lower level preparation area. At 9:30 a.m., August 8, 1978, 1, a,lonv evith 'Mr. George Lnopf, Southdale Security, observed that in fact soup was being prepared on the gas range in the lower level preparation area. This food preparation is in direct violatioxi of thy: %arder nerved to you on August 4, 1973, and will result in our reccrmzding to the Edina City Council thaG�yourood Establishment Licenao be re- voked. This recoz; endtation will ba foxvarded to the City Council at their neat regular meeting which will be held at 7:00 p.n. on Augzust 21, 1975, at the L;ii.:3 Council Chimers, 4801 Weat 50th Street. You may appear before the Council at thL-, tine, alter which the Council may suspend or revo�:e your license. Sincerely, David A. Velde Assistant khblic health Sanitarian Edina Uealth Department DAV:ur i M E M 0 R A N D U M Y � DATE: August 16, 1978 TO: Edina City Council FROM: Rick Myre, Fire Inspector SUBJECT': DeLaria's Restaurant -- Non- Compliance, Written Code Violations 124 Southdale Center DeLaria's Restaurant at Southdale has shown very little compliance with the code- violation-orders written by the Edina Fire Department in the last several. years. Some of the code violation °orders are included in this memo, which demonstrate the lack of cooperation. The need for compliance is reflected in the code sections attached. (See Table of Contents) It is recommended upon re�viewal of this memo that DeLaria's operating license be revoked. TABLE OF CONTENTS PART 1 Edina Fire Department -- previous orders on grease ducts P 2 _•� (most recent first) PART 2 Edina City Ordinance No. 611 P PART 3 A I.A- Fire Prevention Code, 1970 -- Section 1.5(d) P -- Section 28.13(c) PART 4 N.F.P.A. Pamphlet #96, "Vapor Removal From Cooking Equipment" P `Z -- Section 4122(f) -PART 5 Hinnesota State Building Code, "General Requirements for Commercialri3-1* Kitchens" -- Section 7714 �- PART 6 Edina Fire Department -- previous orders for annual inspections (most recent first) PART 7 Edina Fire Department -- grease duct memo to all Edina restaurants pt and grease duct cleaning companies (dated 6- 12 -75) RBM /rah Attachments W.- .oh¢. Pint - &Op. De . Gotlam.p. Jm S.0 EDINA FIRE DEPARTMENT FIRE PREVENTION BUREAU 927 -8865 10;00 AM ADDRESS #124 SouthdalP CpnfPr TEL NAME OF BUSINESS DELARIAS TYPE OF OCCUPANCY F -2 PERSON IN AUTHORITY Verne TITLE Cook Fire Dept. Access Fire Resistance & Stopping Ventilation Shut Down Exits, Signs, Obstruct. Interior F inish Permits, Required Fire Doors & Dampers Housekeeping Flammable Liq. & Storage Area Separation Walls Fire Dept. Standpipes Hazardous Materials Occupancy Separations SprinklerSystem Paint Spray Booths Vertical Enclosures (shafts) Fire E xtinguishers Grease Hood & Duct. Exting. Stairwell Vents (smoke) Alarm System L.P. Installation Emer. Elevators (controls) Elect. Cords & Equip. Refer to Bldg. Dept. An inspection of the -above mentioned facility revealed the following fire hazards. You are hereby. requested to correct these conditions before Thank you for your cooperation. INSPECTION - - -- Survey for compliance of previous Edina Fire Dept Written Orders. 1. No access panelshave been installed in the grease ducts.' 2. Improper wiring found throughout the lower level prep area. Cords found going through walls and doors. 3. Exten -Sion cords found throughout. 4. The fire extinguisher located in the rear exit from the hanPmPnt in Pmpty and not npPratipnal 5. There is no cover plate for the electrical switch box in the letter, level ne; t to the —sLak 6. The fire door in the basement lower level to the corrido WRS fpunri ppPn ADDITIONAL VIOLATIONS FOUND AT THIS TIME. 2- WGIr� EDINA FIRE DEPARTMENT °` "" Bldg D.I. FIRE PREVENTION BUREAU _ [1GltlenrOG -JOG 5­ � 927 -8865 1 f` u1�_ ADDRESS� TEL NAME OF BUSINESS TYPE OF OCCUPANCY EMIN — ..� .L ► 1Y _...a tion Cordbcted By U GI Date Whl,e ,o,,;Ce EDINA FIRE DEPARTMENT - "'ll B'�. FIRE PREVENTION BUREAU. Yellow Bldg. for '- G.W..roC.JOGSIr. 927 -8865 �• PERSON IN AUTHORITY TEL --TITLE Fire Dept. Access Fire Resistance & Stopping Ventilation Shut Down Exits, Signs, Obstruct. Interior inish Permits, Required Fire Doors & Dampers Housekeeping Flammable Liq. & Storage Area Separation Walls Fire Dept, Standpipes Hazardous Materials Occupancy Separations SprinklerSystem Paint Spray Booths Vertical Enclosures (shafts) Fire Extinguishers Grease Hood & Duct. Exting. Stairwell Vents (smoke) Alarm System L.P. Installation Emer. Elevators (controls) Elect. Cords & Equip. Refer to Bldg. Dept. ° An inspection of the above mentioned facility revealed the following fire _hazards. You are hereby requested to correct these conditions before Thank you for your co'o�pier_�ation. Sprinkler System 1 Vertical Enclosures (shafts) Fire E xtinguishers Grease Hood & Duct. Exting. Stairwell Vents (smoke) Alarm System L.P. Installation Emer. Elevators (controls) Elect. Cords &.Equip. EMIN — ..� .L ► 1Y _...a tion Cordbcted By U GI Date Whl,e ,o,,;Ce EDINA FIRE DEPARTMENT - "'ll B'�. FIRE PREVENTION BUREAU. Yellow Bldg. for '- G.W..roC.JOGSIr. 927 -8865 An inspection of the above mentioned facility revealed the f ino fire hazards. You are hereby requested to correct, these conditions before Thank you -fory r operation.. Q ,C� I pection Condu e By Date W 'ADDRESS - ' ©`'�1 TEL NAME OF BUSINESS TYPE OF OCCUPANCY PERSON IN AUTHORITY c� TITLE— Fire Dept. Access Fire Resistance & Stopping Ventilation Shut Down Exits, Signs, Obstruct. Interior F inish Permits, Required Fire Doors & Dampers Housekeeping Flammable Liq. & Storage Area Separation Walls -- Fire Dept. Standpipes Hazardous Materials Occupancy Separations Sprinkler System Paint Spray Booths Vertical Enclosures (shafts) Fire E xtinguishers Grease Hood & Duct. Exting. Stairwell Vents (smoke) Alarm System L.P. Installation Emer. Elevators (controls) Elect. Cords &.Equip. Refer to Bldg. Dept. An inspection of the above mentioned facility revealed the f ino fire hazards. You are hereby requested to correct, these conditions before Thank you -fory r operation.. Q ,C� I pection Condu e By Date W EDINA FIRE DEPARTMENT FIRE PREVENTION BUREAU GaWmeoa. Jo" 5.", 927 -8865 ADDRESS NAME OF BUSINESS X�j TYPE OF OCCUPANCY PERSON IN AUTHORITY Fire Dept. Access Exits, Signs, Obstruct. Fire Doors & Dampers Area Separation Walls Occupancy Separations Vertical Enclosures (shafts) Stairwell Vents (smoke) Emer. Elevators (controls) Fire Resistance & Stopping Interior F inish Housekeeping Fire Dept. Standpipes Sprinkler System Fire Extinguishers Alarm System Elect. Cords & Equip. TEL Ventilation Shut Down Permits, Required Flammable Liq. & Storage Hazardous Materials Paint Spray Booths Grease Hood & Duct. Exting. L.P. Installation Refer to Bldg. Dept. An inspection of the above mentioned facility revealed the following fire hazards. You are hereby requested to correct these conditions before Thank You for Your cooperation. fii, `-{ IiI M ; tion Conducted By YDate 1 vvnie ,o a EDINA FIRE DEPARTMENT P,"` 8169. °°°' FIRE PREVENTION BUREAU ,a1 Goban,oC Jan S.0 927 -8865 , ADDRESS TEL NAME OF BUSINESS TYPE OF OCCUPANCY PERSON IN AUTHORITY E f- TITLE Fire Dept. Access Exits, Signs, Obstruct. Fire Doors & Dampers Area Separation Walls Occupancy Separations Vertical Enclosures (shafts) Stairwell Vents (smoke) Emer. Elevators (controls) Fire Resistance & Stopping Interior F inish Housekeeping Fire Dept. Standpipes Sprinkler System Fire Extinguishers Alarm System Elect. Cords & Equip. Ventilation Shut Down Permits, Required Flammable Liq. & Storage Hazardous Materials Paint Spray Booths Grease Hood & Duct. Exting. L.P. Installation Refer toBldg. Dept. An inspection of the above mentioned facility revealed the following!.fire hazards. You are hereby requested to correct these conditions before vale oler, EDINA FIRE DEPARTMENT ran,. Oklp -Dpl FIRE PREVENTION BUREAU Yellow Joof for ' Gomanroe Joe S m/ 927 -8865 ADDRESS — L EL NAME OF BUSINESS TYPE OF OCCUPANCY ` PERSON IN AUTHORITY TITL - Fire Dept. Access Fire Resistance & Stopping Ventilation Shut Down Exits, Signs, Obstruct. Interior F inish Permits, Required Fire Doors & Dampers Housekeeping Flammable Liq. & Storage Area Separation Walls Fire Dept. Standpipes Hazardous Materials Occupancy Separations Sprink I er System Paint Spray Booths Vertical Enclosures (shafts) Fire Extinguishers Grease Hood & Duct. Exting. Stairwell Vents (smoke) Alarm System L.P. Installation Emer. Elevators (controls) Elect. Cords & Equip. Refer to Bldg. Dept. An inspection of the above mentioned facility revealed the following fire hazards. You are hereby requested to correct these conditions before Thank voXf6kvnur cnnnPrntinn ., _ � 1 I Vlpec ' n Conducted By Date i r . C venue' . oP<a VU � pe tlaal. G°uaa.m Jab SM ADDRESS NAME OF BUSINESS,, TYPE OF OCCUPANCY EDINA FIRE DEPARTMENT FIRE PREVENTION BUREAU 927 -8865 C� TEL PERSON IN AUTHORITYL'ZC"D � �1s C�- tiTITLE "Lt�'L -Lpl► Inspection Conducted By ��- ,Z: Date -Whir. W.AS EDINA FIRE DEPARTMENT o e.p,ocvi. FIRE PREVENTION BUREAU °a.aa. J! 5 "" 927 -8865 ADDRESS /57`- i ,mot L= a ez TEL NAME OF BUSINESS -"(✓E-- '- I�JL=�f'� ;._Ct -�-�-� Fire Dept. Access Fire Resistance & Stopping Ventilation Shut Down Exits, Signs, Obstruct. Interior F inish Permits, Required Fire Doors & Dampers Housekeeping Flammable Liq. & Storage Area Separation Walls Fire Dept. Standpipes Hazardous Materials Occupancy Separations Sprinkler System Paint Spray Booths Vertical Enclosures (shafts) Fire Extinguishers Grease Hood & Duct. Exting. Stairwell Vents (smoke) Alarm System L.P. Installation ; Emer. Elevators (controls) Elect, Cords & Equip. Refer to Bldg. Dept. An inspection of 'the above mentioned facility revealed the following fire hazards. You are hereby. requested to correct these conditions before Vertical Enclosures (shafts) Thank you for your cooperation. n Stairwell Vents (smoke) Inspection Conducted By ��- ,Z: Date -Whir. W.AS EDINA FIRE DEPARTMENT o e.p,ocvi. FIRE PREVENTION BUREAU °a.aa. J! 5 "" 927 -8865 ADDRESS /57`- i ,mot L= a ez TEL NAME OF BUSINESS -"(✓E-- '- I�JL=�f'� ;._Ct -�-�-� TYPE OF OCCUPANCY �'�, �-� - ,,_;; PERSON IN AOTHORITY_�� %�+� TITLE e LU-7teni Fire Dept. Access Fir Resistance At Stopping Ventilation Shut Down Exits, Signs, Obstruct, -;, T` InteriorF inish Permits, Required Fire Doors & Dampers Housekeeping Flammable Liq. & Storage Area Separation Walls Fire Dept. Standpipes Hazardous Materials Occupancy Separations Sprinkler System Paint Spray Booths Vertical Enclosures (shafts) Fire Extinguishers Grease Hood & Duct. Exting, Stairwell Vents (smoke) Alarm System L.P. Installation Emer. Elevators (controls) Elect. Cords & Equip. Refer to Bldg. Dept. An inspection of the-above mentioned facility revealed the following• fire hazards. You are hereby. requested to correct these conditions before Tt-1, v .. f— ..n r---- ­+;- 1) i ! nspection Conducted By Date •orK: EDINA FIRE DEPARTMENT I`•,.`. FIRE PREVENTION BUREAU ;.a. —U. JW 5,1. } 927 -8865 4DDRESS L TEL DAME OF BUSINESS__ -_ 'YPE OF OCCUPANCY U " L— 'ERSON IN AUTHORITY LE W_Mrt� TITLEI tsm �q 'TV? m k Ker ire Dept. Access Fire Resistance & Stopping Ventilation Shut Down . zits, Signs, Obstruct. InteriorFinish Permits, Required 'ire Doors & Dampers Housekeeping Flammable Liq. & Storage area Separation Walls Fire Dept. Standpipes Hazardous Materials )ccupancy Separations Sprinkler System Paint Spray Booths 'ertical Enclosures (shafts) Fire E xtinguishers Grease Hood & Duct. Exting. tairwell Vents (smoke) Alarm System L.P. Installation mer. Elevators (controls) -Elect. Cords & Equip. Refer to Bldg. Dept. �• I kn inspection of the above mentioned facility revealed the following fire hazards. 'ou are hereby, requested to correct these conditions before 'hank you for our cooperation. :� Inspectibh Conducted By A i. . .l i { I f j NAME 0 ADDRES TYPE OF OCCUPANCY_ PERSON IN AUTHORITY EDINA FIRE DEPARTMENT FIRE PREVENTION BUREAU 927 -8865 Yes No Type of Occupancy has Changed Hazardous Materials Present Flammable Liquids Present Welding Operation Fire Alarm System TITLE Yes No Automatic Sprinkler System Verbal Recommendation Given Recommend Written Order be Issued Recommend Follow -Up Inspection Refer to Building ❑ Health ❑ Planning ❑ An inspection of the above mentioned facility revealed the f I vXing lf'r hazards. You are, hereby, requested to correct these conditions before .Xl Thank you for your cooperation. Inspection Conducted By ate ORDINANCE NO. 611 — 8- �� An Ordinance Establishing Safety Measures to be Taken in Construction and aintenance of Buildings and Conduct of Certain Activities and Occupations in Order to Prevent Conditions Hazardous to Life and Property from Fire and Explosion, Establishing a Bureau of Fire Prevention, Requiring Permits, Authorizing Establishment of Fire Lanes, and Imposing a' Penalty. Section 1. Adoption of Standards and Codes. There are hereby adopted and put into effect throughout the Village as the regulations governing conditions hazardous to life and property from fire and explosion, the regulations set forth in Ithe following standards and codes: (a) The Fire Prevention Code recommended" by rhP AmPo- ican Insurance Association (Edition of 1970) except Section 2,U of Article 28 of said Code, and (b) Standards For: Dry Cleaning Plants N.F.P.A. No. 32 - 1964 Edition. Spray Finishing using Flammable Liquids and Combustible Materials No. 33 - N.F.P.A. 1966 Edition. Dip Tanks Containing Flammable or Combustible Liquids N.FP.A. No. 34 - 1966 Edition. Standard for Solvent Extraction Plants N.F.P.A. No. 36 - 1967 Edition. Tank Vehicles for Flammable and Combustible Liquids N.F.P.A. No. 385 - 1966 Edition. Warning Labels for Containers of Flammable Liquids N.FP.A. No. 326 - 1951 Edition. Storage and Handling of Liquified Petroleum Gases N.F.P.A. No. 58 - 1967 Edition. Fire Doors and Windows N.F.P.A. No. 80 - 1967 Edition. Incinerators _ N.FP.A. No. 82 - May, 1960. Rubbish Handling and Incinera- tors N.F.P.A. No. 82 A - 1948 Edition. Air Conditioning and Ventilating Systems N.F.P.A. No. 90 A - 1967 Edition. Blowers and Exhaust Systems N.F.P.A. No. 91 - 1967 Edition. Ventilation of Restaurant Cooking Equipment N.F.P.A. 96 - 1964 Edition. Tents, Grandstands and Air Supported Struc- tures . Used or Places of Assembly N.F.P.A. 102 - 1967 Edition. Installation of Sprinkler Systems N.F.P.A. No. 13 - 1966 Edition. Outside Protection N.F.P.A. No. 24 1966 Edition. Installation of Standpipes and Hose Systems N.F.P.A. No. 14 - 1963 Edition. Dry Chemical Extinguishing Systems N.F.P.A. No. 17 - 1968 Edition. Installation of Portable Fire Extinguishers N.F.P.A. No. 10 - 1967 Edition. Indoor General Storage N.F.P.A. No. 231 - 1965 Edition. Local Protective Signaling Systems N.F.P.A. No. 72 A - .1967. (c) Flammable and Combustible Liquid Code N.F.P.A. No. 30 - 1966 Edition. Manufacture, Transport, Storage and Use of Explosives and Blasting Agents N.F.P.A. No. 495 - 1967 Edition. Safety to.-Life from Fire in Buildings and Structures (Twenty -first Edition) N.F.P.A. No. 101 - 1967 Edition. The foregoing codes and standards are hereby adopted and incorporated as fully as if set out at length herein. Sec. 2. Fire Prevention Codes and Standards on File. Three copies of each code or standard referred to in Section 1 hereof, marked "Official Copy ", shall be filed in the office of the Clerk prior to publication of this ordinance, and shall remain on file in said office for,use and examination by the public. The Clerk shall furnish copies of said codes or standards at cost to any person upon request. Sec. 3. Definitions. (a) Wherever the word "municipality" is used in the Fire Prevention Code, it shall be held to mean the Village of Edina. (b) Wherever the term "corporation counsel" is used in said Code, it shall be held to mean the Village Attorney. 99 Sec. 4. Limits of Districts for Storage of Explosives and Blasting,. Agents. The limits referred to in Section 12.6 b of said Fire `Prevention Code, in which storage of explosives and blasting agents is prohibited, are hereby established as follows: The Village Limits of the Village of Edina. Sec. 5. Special Additional Standards for Certain Multiple Occupancy Buildings. (a) Application to Buildings Not Yet Buili. The rules-and regulations in this section shall apply to the following classes of buildings hereafter constructed: (1) Group D and H occupancies, as defined in the Uniform Building Code incorporated by. reference in the Building Code Ordinance (Ordinance No. 401) of the Village, except apartment houses occupied or designed to be occupied by not more than four persons or-families living independently of each other. (2) Any multiple dwelling housing 15 or more people. The classes of buildings above described are hereby designated and shall hereafter be referred to as "multiple occupancy buildings." (b) Application to Existing Buildings. The rules and regulations in this section shall also apply to any existing multiple occupancy building to which improvements are added or alterations made which cost more than 50% of the market value of the existing building as shown in the records of the" Village Assessor, and to all existing multiple occupancy buildings after the expiration of two years from the date upon which the Fire Prevention Bureau hereinafter established has notified the owner of the requirements of this section. (c) Alarm Systems Required. An approved manual elec- tric- supervised fire alarm system and automatic detection system shall be provided in every multiple occupancy building, unless each resident room or living area in one story buildings has direct exit to the outside of the building, oi-, bnless the building is provided with a complete automatic sprinkler system. In a building that is partially sprinklered, a sprinkler system will be accepted in lieu of an automatic detection system for the portion of the building that is sprinklered. The mechanical central air conditioning and ventilation system . shall be connected to the alarm and detection system in such a way that the ventilation will automatically shutdown upon activation of the alarm and detection system. When an alarm system or a sprinkler system is installed whether required or not, plans shall be submitted in duplicate to the Fire Prevention Bureau for approval before installation is made. Sprinkler systems shall be installed in accordance with the 1966 edition of N.F.P.A. No. 13, Standard for the Installation of Sprjrikler Systems. Alarm systems shall be installed in accordance with the 1967 edition of N.F.P.A. No. 72 A, Standard for the Installation, Maintenance and Use of Local Protective Signaling Systems. :' � ` T i • t •',AT. r ', . ,7 t, • ! *t 7 T S� '7M, i`, ! 1, { }: 9 a al ',r r� ��3 r} �4 �'(�t, .�<k'� ,,r,5:i •i�,,a { J � •+ 1 (` f J, ., ��, . � � ..r t ., L)•� ry ti •' ; l r � i' t tit <�ti N 1ii'yfE i 4 s tti ti {r7 1�iS, ar }�y,#*' % .tom *[;�, -'+ Jf(r "'�+ r {sf4.T AfA� 1, rtti'+' pi •. �'+. 5 11 L,I '; ! 1i fr.' ,{{�,N.. ,,� :� i, lTt' �•N � t+.k.. y 1 •x V1 �'�'P i/y �,g V4 ¢�R' r ;4 "[•� x�' I�,i{ %•'ref t t�r(� ?� t 1 1� {1 J.pl�si3': .[ .11G i�tt- ),1�',•, r�. r i :Ik J �''r x3{'49r• C�L '+ 'Y r t 'e�r )�`� �tf h,` 'i t Cxk �r«d ii�Y1l:�r J h yr, x i fitt} d6ri��Sr }' l i i 5• gal�•;*�n,EE2 r 7 1s4 ! r7,.rr l- x f S ii e r) R EV .l 1 �l,f�. 'J Pl +�•tt•�'u�a J�`� r(�f •rf »• t !''i.`! i J� 11 +� +�,'� h tkti"`,�,r,l..�1`i sK�f����r��[� °`'��'i' <� �w v dtW'[+yt+r +.�t�i4jif�1 .r:lyti_,.r ti- r{r 4!.FS 6 n • } .`t srnr ryS: k. �.; `� �',7 fs +S. -M +. {T y�aS�a * !... r �,n • ir' i'F)'t1f:K 1"�S �,t {.iT•1 "�� r t r z,. S, rrr F r is $ a r^y' }Yl� S$0 �. & t'rf i r�ry {v :, tt1 u- il a` ter. r "'i a J' k { Y it ft. 4 \ t - § *1• ! k . L'J i •ti" `t k r {� t���t r 5�` i N >r! � lr'S" T rr t-F> ).� �r 1 i P 11rr + -T^,/ l`i 1 75 4 tl (i 1 lr>•� 1 i z+i I-4f } .7 y .+ IF Y r: Ir ""Z arA }} C�: tr S!'1 « ,t �r s.rt�r ^. y Eta kr7 �1 r •,•tyff.+, t' ; 3,_l'�4 t S'� t'+.'•�°'�'.1t'r�. _ 1} i 1 6 ! f ,ter 'Y' 7 ft'�", rJ:a,• c v tir�r..itF A I c Y' 7�>± l '+tr b'�',d1aY, '• S Wr 4Y 7 !'�°,. 7cju }a•Y t '4 !1 1 1 t }ill � 7 f xJ ;°� •+ ` 5r }} f �z ks i, r 1 4 ! � r - A _ C� tr rt '! t �C vs! - 3 °s rfAAJ�T� k,r�.: �rj !r '� "' t =� f; 7' S! „saij 1•.t v�'�x�(1 Cam• {:!; t{Jlr k i J a'ro .. y 'h'rn ri 3 �rR� "' •,�.- 4�J��`�F •i � � j }qii"" � X,fr+r'!r 1!r 4J;� k'S �,, '`'4f•y5'e?r'j " i at: ,• r � 7 ' .t. F s �,tr l +t, its',- `.anti �` r• 'b, SS'.47. t4 j�f�l'. i., 2�1. : � C # ;ik.. �'..: �.T }'( p. .r',,���,g 11♦♦CC , t p� ��:�'�. S `�:�.. � �� 4� �.. {� , �J ��.t� -� �. t�_. �. t � e f'� ,.I, "r('.'�: . •! ,Jh q-�'74i.`� rt^ 1�$•$��S -'.r �I' �?v 4!`�`t h,'.Y i yil'R i }�tr3'•s �1 �'•,�Jy ill' i ,,i- .�.7�t� ! � �1 •?,• 4r P z .- rf�'St x �Ji a; �fn r� . NAY l p arc: if t r 3 t�(ttf'fCy"° '��,�„" 6 of ,Jrt s 4�jy 7`w =ti�7 �4��1 ✓'�"i� r5 r'j�'r�� Fri4n ' r..rF { e � •1!� �r } a r % : v l7r „, - a,{ t) t r + � � i fm nr. i "� }y' x:{. -1 4jr t r :. Y i. x : r r 'i` f• C. Y 1 t N j, tY, j J ,«.231ivi l�t�'t� •its z7'r%to�.? .1 Tip V1ti.4 y r '1 Ai %3 >d /'fi :41i !'yxt.«, ti-r•i .fi. f 'j1a'' ♦ r v. rf r t +' i�` r r.P i r#�: ����~ °,'797QE ®ITl%1�1: yst Ib, �" r4 a }s'�,vl ref �� ✓ { yr +x yr ui xyx z t t rw.�,, r {{ �rt''es �..�n a "'`� y. '�'t t y ,r �.P -:° �.lr �l i,�iW f� '� •'" t� tT xitw„�i% {� (7 FC'' 'liv S r• { Y� 5 t r ! ;,, �� t i'�' j i * 1 f 1 '�� t fa 1 talky r r+74 1, tr�.t�f � �'' . +6 .. EQTr'�. ^3M � Yi'` �y'• rC' � ' ft rr i r 3e! s + ' �'�� �-� y1,,�i � A et q { {'..f�fi� fir,Ai°'�• 2i ��f ��" Y�* � '.7'y '` +'t t l.I .i 1 7 ;t��k }fxt' �, ry � � i� ' f 4i F :t` ��,�i, "•T�r6 : }, t h }J{ r'4�, 1�d r T^� kIr kt�i rt b -.(. ' 4 L.r+ J 1 t (�i VI ;i C•t` ' ! ,�4 Y �, ' #•a'•{ f 3f 1 • ,.� r , w � r 4 I : t:� P'' 1 7 J L �.,..F ��: J' •� y�it{.,. t t t .�`�i'? ,Ir .. sk, } ! } y� � rt a a �x.i • ('' �` .s`4f � tp�a�Y •JI "Tr r'�'.�prri.lS$'�t }'Sz' �.1t !f� r,:e al'0 � r,{,� 1 t, i � ;° `T 1 ;.k�..� I ' � / •ik1 '�'% y, ,? fi k 4i rk 1e Jqf '�1�• ax e.,, l v,. .�L' � A 7' • � �X,'��` 1 f�t'�'r J file ,f qt� � 1. �� •j � ,%tj` + d v� 7 JH Y1 i'r�Kr"�r' � �.a t�`�C,..Fitt v t ^e'r C•H�!tj 1 e • p ,2 a"3._ y 4 f r n+ t i` �'1;. n ? ; M 1T a c �-•, y t, s,� `� rt+��'� *A!'i �' a �' �'� S't�1,ex �,�`'n�CS�,•f fir, kiR.��, F fit, .i! 7)(1' a -�rt r r "^f �'�;a��� ` •�;7�a•i i r; '`� } Y �' it' •L kh, �;, � t� R,�C �.kTyt -a5 '4 t� A7- r rt}N •f ^y� •J�r ['j91 + -:�' �'G•. k. }t p�.�} /�i�,�44' y/� ti¢, `'?.t�"'d+'r t'.k'E,;rn1y^.�tL•f4E?`'yyt CJ'y,,'yj<•3 Sr4 a1 z-• G � ) `' .( #Y. t", ^v -zs�s j T�4 .ry1 t,y + $ r �3, r,w J {IBF •rl� d ;` rr rr(ft t {4� t 4 4t�J .�`+y�1Ti'$ 1 � %u,� 3�•y 4 r ,� C <t+ t y l�fr,� 1' � X(! •,t q �C - ,tt�w f��4f .E'S79 Y{{4 >tr;', ry '{,fat a, l..r• ,4dr Iti R.OY � �S raM a t., .�.'x t.�('rrr�'( i 4���tR•{,+yy ypy ' �r •A r1.A ryl z �ik,°[,,rd5 ��< i( 7 s. raY 4Z -' 1` �.e�"� � "'.� >�i �1 •r'It+ tl�S�a kffl J.y /�J 'nit �� { �{�,. r s"•j ='2 �r r 1 ;: t t. 4"�+s,r>y�� r ..f ;•,? �.�`qf ..e, y,�iJ'J.i f. t+ i i: `� ^t�r�rs + a(�Ft k 6 �� rle'1 i ,�'k,�1 °,t��.A.! Sfta pJR SQ,yHr:=i • � �YY..i �t 'F 1 t i ! d 4r Y.}^yt `#�,� �! i :� ,� g;�•t�$ja'F°' t�„'' ' „f' `'•. ?,n;�"�'` 'ljti; .�` T{- +t .�. r.�fy� It, bmme�5dedy °thy r } ER,ICAN .I(V$URAN EKASSOCI ITIOIV�' 77 ". 4•'ix k t '' t ) -iJ E��s1 !r).�(3p�..ari - 'I"'- ?S,rSa FFr S r+i' - 'i.�} ���t ��'"��,p,� {k }• . ^9. ( q .J .ftfA '7 ?s � it � t ( - � -rc �'. p r1r1.�r.. � >JYl` 1 ' ` NS'4'� 9 `', �,'� fn. �J � F , -•}F f �, };�•,�cil it kj t,.t. S�.1fa J : °.J.S i �z - dX t a -'1 .(� vim'.. rc e•7 t, �. � Y � •r a 1 ! r , 7•�y"'k ti R. - ,S ca. r.Ji; rr L •� IFS'. MR- SEC. 1.4 GENERAL PROVISIONS to enter and inspect their building or premise at the time and for the purpose stated in this section. :l Section 1.4. Inspection of Buildings and Premises. a. It shall be the duty of the Chief of the Fire Department to'? } inspect, or cause to be inspected by the Bureau of Fire Prevention, or by the Fire Department officers or members, all buildings and premises except the interiors of dwellings, as often as may bed.:`- necessary for the purpose of ascertaining and causing tR be cor -. rected any conditions liable to cause fire, endanger life from fire, 'f or any violations of the provisions or intent of this code and of any other ordinance affecting the fire hazard. b. The Chief of the Fire Department, Chief of the Bureau of Fire Prevention or an inspector upon the complaint of any person or whenever. he or they shall deem it necessary, shall inspect any buildings and premises within their jurisdiction. Section 1.5. Orders to Eliminate Dangerous or Hazardous Conditions. Whenever any of the officers, members or inspectors of the Fire Department or Bureau of Fire Prevention as mentioned in section 1.4 shall find in any building or upon any premises dan- gerous or hazardous conditions or materials as follows, he or they shall order such dangerous conditions or materials to be removed or remedied in such manner as may be specified by the Chief of the Bureau of Fire Prevention. a. Dangerous or unlawful amounts of Combustible or,explo- sive or otherwise hazardous materials; b. Hazardous conditions arising from defective or improperly installed equipment for handling or using combustible or explosive or otherwise hazardous materials; c. Dangerous accumulations of rubbish, waste paper, boxes, shavings or other highly combustible materials; d. Accumulations of dust or waste material in air condition- ing or ventilating systems or of grease in kitchen or other exhaust: ducts or inadequate clearances to unprotected combustible mate- rial from hoods. grease extractors. and ducts: e. Obstructions to or on fire escapes. designated access oncn- ings in exterior walls for fire department use, stairs, passageways, doors or windows, liable to interfere with the operations of the Fire Department or egress of occupants in case of fire; f. Any building or other structure which, for want of repairs, lack of adequate exit facilities, automatic or other fire alarm appa 2 i i I GENERAL PROVISIONS . SEC. 1.7 ratus or fire extinguishing equipment, or by reason of age or dilapi- dated condition, or frpm any other cause, creates a hazardous con- dition. Section 1.6. Service of Orders. a.. The service of orders for the correction of violations of this code shall be made upon the owner, occupant or other person responsible for the conditions, either by delivering a copy of same to such person or by delivering the same to and leaving it with any person in charge of the premises, or in case no such person is found upon the premises, by affixing a copy thereof in a con- spicuous place on the door to the entrance of the said premises. Whenever it may be necessary to serve such an order upon the owner of premises such order may be served either by delivering to and leaving with the said person a copy of the said order, or, if such owner is absent from the jurisdiction of the officer making the order, by sending such copy by certified or registered mail to the owner's last known post office address. b. -If buildings or other premises are owned by one person and occupied by another under lease or otherwise, the orders issued in connection with the enforcing of this code shall apply to the occu- pant thereof, except where the rules or orders require the making of additions to or changes in the premises themselves, such as would immediately become real estate and be the property of the owner of the premises; in such cases the rules or orders shall affect the owner and not the occupant unless it is otherwise agreed be- tween the owner and the occupant. Section 1.7. Investigation of Fires. a. The Bureau of Fire Prevention shall investigate the cause, origin and circumstances of every fire occurring to the municipality which is of suspicious nature or which involves loss of life or in- jury to persons or by which property has been destroyed or sub- stantially damaged. Such investigations shall be begun immedi- ately upon the occurrence of such a fire and, if it appears that such fire is of suspicious origin, the Chief of the Fire Department shall be immediately notified of the facts; he shall take charge imme- diately of the physical evidence, shall notify the proper authori- ties designated by law to pursue the investigation of such matters, and shall further cooperate with the authorities in the collection of evidence and in the prosecution of the case. b. Every fire shall be reported in writing to the Bureau of Fire Prevention within two days after the occurrence of the same, I O 1 'T SEC 28 13 PRECAUTIONS AGAINST FIRE, GENERAL combustion or hot gases to the exterior of the building shall be maintained in a manner as not to create a hazardous condition. (1) Existing masonry chimneys which upon inspection are found to be without flue ? iner and with open mortar joints which will permit smoke ar gases to be discharged into the building, or which are cracked as to be dangerous shall be made. safe by means of a fire clay liner, fire brick, a corrosion resistant metal pipe and otherwise repaired if necessary, or the chimney shall be removed. Metal pipe liners shall be one inch less in diameter than the least dimension of the flue and entire space between the metal liner and the walls of the chimney filled with cement mortar. (2) Existing chimneys and vents of metal which are corroded or improperly supported shall be replaced, unless suitable re- pairs are made. (3) Existing chimney and vent connectors of metal which are corroded or improperly supported shall be replaced. b. All heat producing appliances, including boilers, furnaces, incinerators, ovens, and restaurant type cooking appliances shall be installed and maintained so as to be reasonably safe to persons and property. Evidence that heat producing appliances are installed in accordance with the applicable standard specified for this section 28.13b in article 31 of this Code shall be evidence that such heat producing appliances are installed so as to be reasonably safe to persons and ro ert . c. Exhaust systems provided for restaurant cooking equipment shall be maintained in a manner such as not to create a hazardous (1) Hoods, grease removal devices, fans, ducts and. other devices shall be inspected periodically and cleaned as needed to remove grease and deposits of residues. ire extinguishing systems shall e inspected periodically and checked for proper operation. These inspections shall in- clude a check that the supply of extinguishing agent 'in the system is adequate, and all actuation components are operating satisfactorily. Fusible links, if employed, shall be replaced or properly cleaned. Instructions for manually operating the system shall be posted conspicuously in the kitchen and employees checked for their knowledge of procedures. (3) Any fire dampers shall be tested periodically to insure proper functioning of all parts. d. Commercial, industrial and flue -fed incinerators, shall be 208 PRECAUTIONS AGAINST FIRE, GENERAL SEC. 28.16 provided with approved spark arrestors or other effective means for arresting sparks and fly ash. Section 28.14. Trapdoors to be Closed. All trapdoors, except those which are automatic in their opera- tion, in any factory building or building used for storage shall be closed at the completion of the business of each day. Section 28.15. Shaftways to be Marked. Every outside window in a building used for manufacturing purposes or for storage which opens directly on any hoistway or other vertical means of communication between two or more floors in such building, shall be plainly marked with the word "SHAFT - WAY" in red letters at least six inches high on a white back- ground; such warning sign to be so placed as to be easily discern- ible from the outside of the building. Every door or window opening on such shaftway from the interior of the building, unless the construction of the partition surrounding the shaftway is'. of such distinctive nature as to make its purpose evident at a glance, shall be similarly marked with the warning word, "SHAFTWAY" so placed as to be easily visible to any one approaching the shaft - way from the interior of the building. Section 28.16. Fire Lanes on Private Property, Devoted to Public Use. a. The marking of fire lanes on private property, devoted to public.use, shall be approved by the Chief of the Bureau of Fire Prevention and the Chief of Police. b. Parking of motor vehicles or otherwise obstructing fire lanes shall be prohibited at all times. 209 1 N�� qb 96-4 VAPOR REMOVAL FROM COOKING EQUIPMENT Manufacturers Standard Gage, stainless steel not lighter than No. 20 Manufacturers Standard Gage or of other approved ma- terial of equivalent strength, fire, and corrosion resistance. ' 32. Construction. 321. All seams and joints shall have a liquidtight continuous external weld. 322. Troughs, gutters, or trays should not be used except as provided in Section 6. If troughs, gutters; or trays are necessary they shall .have a maximum width of 1% inches, a maximum depth of % inch and be pitched to drain to an enclosed metal container having a capacity not exceeding one gallon. The container should be emptied daily. 33. Hoods or enclosures of listed grease extractors are con- sidered as complying with the material and construction require- ments of Section 3. The clearances specified in Section 7 shall be maintained. 4. Duct Systems. 41. Duct systems from hoods, canopies, or other collection systems shall comply with 411 or 412. 411. Listed grease ducts installed in accordance 7ith the terms of the listing and the manufacturer's instructions. 412. Ducts complying with the following requirements: 4121. MATERIALS. Ducts shall be constructed of and sup- . ported by steel not'lighter than No. 16 Manufacturers Standard Gage or stainless steel not lighter than . No. 18 Manufacturers Standard Gage. 4122, INSTALLATION REQUIREMENTS FOR INTERIOR LOCA- TIONS. . (a.) All seams and joints shall have a liquidtight continuous external weld. NOTE: Temperatures in excess of 2,000 F. may be experienced within ducts in event of a fire. Means for expansion of long lengths of ducts should be provided. (b.) All ducts should lead horizontally, as directly as possible, to the exterior of the building and shall be installed without forming dips or traps which might collect residues. (c.) Vertical ducts should be located outside the building and adequately supported. If absolutely necessary to locate vertical ducts within a building, the ducts shall be enclosed in a I DUCT SYSTEMS 96-5 continuous enclosure constructed of materials which are not combustible, such as masonry (see Appendix B), and extending from the ceiling above the hood to or through the roof so as to maintain the integrity of the fire separations required by the applicable building code provisions. The enclosure shall con- form to the following: (1.) If the building is less than 4 stories in height, the en- closure wall shall have a fire resistance rating of not less than 1 hour. (2.) If the building is 4 stories or more in height, the en- closure wall shall have a fire resistance rating of not less than 2 hours. (3.) Clearance from the duct to interior surfaces of the enclosure shall be not less than 6 inches. (4.) If openings in the enclosure walls are provided they shall be protected by approved self - closing fire doors of proper rating. See Standard For Fire Doors and Windows, NFPA No. 80. (d.) Each duct system shall constitute an individual sys- tem serving only exhaust hoods on one floor. (e.) Duct systems shall not be interconnected with any other building ventilating or exhaust system. (f.) An ODenine shall be nrovided at each chance in direc- C '—(� s s a 1 not pass through fire walls or fire partitions. (h.) Where ducts pass through partitions or walls of com- bustible material the material shall be cut away to provide a clearance to the duct not less than 18 inches unless protection is provided in accordance with Appendix B. 4123. INSTALLATION REQUIREMENTS FOR EXTERIOR LOCA- TIONS. (a.) The vertical portion of exhaust ducts shall be connected to the horizontal portion of the duct system and shall be in; stalled and adequately supported on the exterior of a building. (b.) All seams and joints shall have a liquidtight continuous external weld. �1 I � j• I .f i ll I. i I j C� BBC 7712 IIIINNFSOTA STATE il BUILDING CODE BBC 7714 air supply which may be exhausted through the adjoining toilet, shower, or swimming rooms. (6) Fresh Air and Rest Rooms. Ventilation shall be provided for all areas of this class to conform to the requirements of S13C 7706. Mechanical ven- tilation is not required where the total sash area is greater than 10% of the floor area and where the openable area is at least 5 %. SBC 7713 General Requirements: Toilets, Pools, Etc. (1) Scope. This classification shall include all toilets, bath and swimming Pool rooms, janitor closets, sterilizing rooms, and similar spaces. (2) Gravity or mechanical exhaust ventilation shall be provided for all such rooms or space except for rooms or spaces having not more than one bathroom group (water closet, bidet, lavatory, bathtub and /or shower) if said room or space has a minimum window area of three square feet, half of which is openable. (3) Air Movement and Supply. (a) The air movement, provided and maintained in janitor closets, ster- ilizing rooms and similar spaces shall not be less than 2 cubic feet per minute per square foot of floor area. (b) Rooms or spaces having one bathroom group as provided above or less and no openable outside window shall be ventilated at the rate of one cubic foot per minute per square foot of floor area. (c) Toilet rooms having more than one bathroom group as provided above shall be ventilated at the rate of two cubic feet per minute per square foot of floor area. (d) The air movement in swimming pool areas and public baths shall not be less than 6 air changes per hour and the tempered air supplied and exhausted shall not be less than 2 cubic feet of air per minute per square foot of'pool surface. (4) Separate Exhaust Systems. Exhaust systems serving this class of occu- pancy shall be separate from, and independent, of all other services in the building. SBC 7714 Ceneral Requirements: Commercial Kitchens I �� (1) Scope. This classification shall include all areas housing cooking of food in all buildings within the scope of this code, except residences and those classified under vocational instruction. (2) Exhaust Ventilation. The exhaust ventilation required and maintained for every occupied area of this class shall not be less than 4 cubic feet per minute per square foot of floor area except that kitchens used occasionally in connection with church auditoriums, lodge halls, and schools the exhaust ventilation may be reduced to a minimum of 2 cubic feet per minute per square foot of floor area. (3) Hoods. The design of range hoods shall provide for the effective re- moval of greasy fumes and excess heat. Acceptable hood designs, air vol- umes, and air velocities are shown in Figures 1, 2, and,3. (a) Hoods over cooking or similar appliances must be constructed of noncombustible materials throughout, with tight sides and tops and have at least 18 inch clearance from all unprotected combustible materials. 152 �1� (b) The length and width of kitchen hoods must extend beyond the extreme projection of the ranges, broilers, etc., over which they are installed. The minimum projection or overlap shall be six inches. (c) Where space conditions permit, range hoods should be two feet high to provide a reservoir to confine momentary bursts of smoke and steam until the exhaust system can evacuate the hood. Range hoods must be located as low as possible to increase their effectiveness, and not more than seven feet (7') from the floor. (d) Exhaust connections to range hoods shall always be made at the top or back of hoods, and shall be spaced preferably not more than six feet (6) apart. Exhaust ducts shall be sized to maintain a velocity of 2000 to 3000 feet per minute. KITCHEN HOODS Figure 1. Ducts 6' on center for large hoods. r -r - r•_ -r -r -r- - r -i --T LJ -1.1 -- { D =4' I Cooking Equipment I Grease Filters desirable Non - combustible construction 45 °•60° Removable 6" Minimum drip pan overhang HOOD AGAINST WALL _ P= Perimeter of hood =2W+L Q =80 cfm /square feet of hood area (80WL). Not less than 50 cfm /sq. ft. of face area (50PD). Duct velocity= 2000 -3000 fpm Entry loss =0.25 inches (filter resistance) -1- 0.50 duct VP, Grease filters —See Figure 3 Figure 2. 4 . -60' L _ 6" Minimu vy -7� overhang on f'e- `- Drip pan all sides. Island Cooking Area ISLAND TYPE HOOD P= Perimeter of hood =2W -I-2L Q =125 cfm /squ €re feet of hood area (125 WL). Not less than 50 cfm /gq. ft. of face area (50PD). Duct velocity_? 300 -3000 fpm Entry loss =0.25 inches (filter resistance) -i- 0.50 duct VP. Grease filters - Sce Figure 3 153 4- SBC 7714 MINNESOTA STATE Figure 3. Ducts on 60" IV centers Plenum =18" X 18" minimum t Pi Filters = Mount at45" 20" Minimum i Face or ends can be -�s o opened for Filter 45 Removal t 1' Maximum oe , Set -Back Removable drip pan Filter Mounting Height See Note.2 Below 3' Maximum t t t Closed ends L desirable W Cooking Equipment Non- Combustible Construction LOW SIDE WALL HOOD Q =200 cfm per lineal foot of cooking surface (200L) Duct Velocity =2000 -3000 fpm Entry Loss =0.25 (filters) -f- 0.25 duct VP FILTER REQUIREMENTS FOR KITCHEN HO 1. Number of filters shall be based on not more than 3 cfm for each square inch of filter area and shall be installed between 45 degrees to 60 degrees to horizontal. 2. Filter mounting height. a. No exposed cooking flame -21h foot minimum to lowest edge of filter. b. Charcoal and similar fires -41h foot minimum to lowest edge of filter. c. Other exposed fires-3V2 foot minimum to lowest edge of filter. 3. An easily removable grease drip pan shall be provided and it should be pitched so that it will drain into the gutters of the hood. 4. Filter media shall be non- inflammable. (4) Ducts. Ducts for carrying off greasy vapors and excess heat shall be of not less than No. 18 U.S. Gauge steel with grease -tight joints made by welding or equal processes. (a) All duct work shall be properly secured to ceiling or joists or sup- ported by substantial brackets when run along the walls. (b) Exhaust ducts must have no connection with other house ventilating systems. They must not be connected to stacks, chimneys, or flues used for ouier purposes. (c) Exhaust nioine to rinse hoods commonly called erease ducts. Shall be provided with ti &ht fitting cleanout doors of adequate size located every feet on horizontal ducts but not �c t on the b bottom o a duct. n an- proved type of ilter s a ��ins�l'ed m all ducts or hoods over ranges. fry kettles, or any other coo tng evtce w ere grease may accumulate 154 n 811JILDING CODE SBC 7716 (d) Ducts or vents connected to range hoods passing through or near combustible construction shall be installed in accordance with the National Fire Protection Association Standard for Ventilation of Restaurant Cooking Equipment. NFPA No. 96, Section 3, Ducts. (e) Manufactured chimneys may be used without additional fire - resistive protection provided that such chimneys have been approved for use with low -heat appliances and tests for a continuous temperature of not less than 1000 degrees F. and 1400 degrees F. for infrequent periods. SBC 7715 Residential Ventilation (1) When power exhaust fans are used for range or range hood ventila- tion in the kitchen of single, double, or multiple dwellings, the installation shall comply with the following requirements: (a) All ducts shall be. galvanized iron of not less than 28 gauge. (b) All seams in the duct system shall be tight. Pressure sensitive tape or other methods approved by the administrative authority can be used. (c) Back draft dampers shall be provided near the outlet of the duct. These shall be in the closed position when the fan is not operating. (d) A one -half inch mesh screen shall be installed at each exhaust outlet. (e) Fans and duct systems shall be designed to permit cleaning and servicing. (f) Insulation Required. Whenever a duct or fan scroll lies within 6 inches of a combustible material, it shall be insulated with 1/2 inch glass fiber insulation, two layers of 12 -pound asbestos paper or the equivalent. (g) When a kitchen range hood faces a combustible material less than 30 inches above the cooking surface, the hood shall be separated from the combustible material by 1/4 inch asbestos board or equivalent. (h) Ducts passing through unheated spaces shall be insulated with a minimum of one inch of glass fiber insulation or equivalent.. (i) Ducts located in a heated space shall be insulated with one inch of glass fiber insulation or equivalent for a distance of three feet from the. duct outlet. (2) Toilet rooms having only one. fixture (water closet or urinal) and no openable outside windows shall be ventilated at the rate of at least one cubic foot per minute per square foot of floor area. (al See (h) and (i) preceding. SBC 7716 Offices (1) Scope. This classification shall include areas where clerical and ad- ministrative work is the chief usage. (2) Ventilation Required. The air movement, supply, and distribution for this classification shall conform to the requirements of SBC 7706 unless each of the following requirements has been satisfied: (a) The total openable area of outside doors. and windows is not less than 3% of the floor area served. (b) The available floor space for each occupant is not less than 75 square feet per person. 155 Wh , EDINA FIRE DEPARTMENT yet— FIRE PREVENTION BUREAU � in.urcio. G.W. ad. Job Snv 927 -8865 ADDR NAME OF BUSIN TYPE OF OCCUPANCY PERSON IN AUTHORITY Fire Dept. Access Exits, Signs, Obstruct. Fire Doors & Dampers Area Separation Walls Occupancy Separations Vertical Enclosures (shafts) Stairwell Vents (smoke) Emer. Elevators (controls) J Fire Resistance & Stopping Interior F inish Housekeeping Fire Dept. Standpipes Sprinkler System Fire E xtinguishers Alarm System Elect. Cords & Equip. TEL _ TITL Ventilation Shut Down Permits, Required Flammable Liq. & Storage Hazardous Materials Paint Spray Booths Grease Hood & Duct. Exting. L.P. Installation Refer to Bldg. Dept. An inspection of the above mentioned facility revealed the following fire hazards. You are hereby. requested to correct these conditions before Thank you f r your cooperation. A ,r Date 1 N � ki WM,e . EDINA FIRE DEPARTMENT V.11— 'dg. Di re . FIRE PREVENTION BUREAU °earn.. Job Site 927 -8865 ADDR NAME OF BUSINES TYPE OF OCCUPANCY Nu I-- TEL An inspection of the above mentioned facility revealed the followingkfire hazards. You are hereby requested to correct these conditions before Date """S"�. PERSON IN AUTHORITY_ TITLE . . I� Fire Dept. Access Fire Resistance & Stopping Ventilation Shut Down Exits, Signs, Obstruct. Interior F inish Permits, Required Fire Doors & Dampers Housekeeping Flammable Liq. &Storage Area Separation Walls Fire Dept. Standpipes Hazardous Materials Occupancy Separations Sprinkler System Paint Spray Booths Vertical Enclosures (shafts) Fire E xtinguishers Grease Hood & Duct. Exting. Stairwell Vents (smoke) Alarm System L.P. Installation Emer. Elevators (controls) Elect. Cords & Equip. Refer to Bldg. Dept. An inspection of the above mentioned facility revealed the followingkfire hazards. You are hereby requested to correct these conditions before Date , . , EDINA FIRE DEPARTMENT '' Dept, FIRE PREVENTION BUREAU G.le Jp$i10 927 -8865 ADDRESS 124 Southdale Center TEL 926 -6594 NAME OF BUSINESS Delaria's TYPE OF OCCUPANCY PERSON IN AUTHORITY Don Delaria TITL Fire Dept. Access Exits, Signs, Obstruct. Fire Doors & Dampers Area Separation Walls Occupancy Separations Vertical Enclosures (shafts) Stairwell Vents (smoke) Emer. Elevators (controls) Fire Resistance & Stopping InteriorF inish Housekeeping Fire Dept. Standpipes Sprinkler System Fire E xtinguishers Alarm System Elect. Cords & Equip. Ventilation Shut Down Permits, Required Flammable Liq. & Storage Hazardous Materials Paint Spray Booths Grease Hood & Duct. Exting. L.P. Installation ; Refer to Bldg. Dept. An inspection of the above mentioned facility revealed the following fire hazards. You are hereby, requested to correct these conditions before January 10 19760 Thank you for your cooperation. *1. Grease duct system in basement does not conform with N.F.P.A. Pamphlet 96, Section 412.(3):Clearance from the duct to interior surfaces of the enclosure shall ;0 be not less than 6 inches. 2. Ceiling is covering the sprinkler heads in office area. *3. Fire Door to kitchen in basement area must- - remain closed at all times. *4. Remove storage and trash in exit corridor by upper level kitchen *(Order previously issued. No compliance as of 12- 11 -75.) Lee- A.Rundberg 12 -17 775 Inspection Conducted By Date rah EDINA FIRE DEPAR 1 MEN I FIRE PREVENTION BUREAU 927 -8865 NAME OF BUSINESS Delaria 1 s Res ADDRESS 124 Southdale Center TYPE OF OCCUPANCY 4. 1944 PERSON IN AUTHORITY f dfhi TITLE Yes No Yes No Type of Occupancy has Changed Automatic Sprinkler System Hazardous Materials Present Verbal Recommendation Given Flammable Liquids Present Recommend Written Order be Issued Welding Operation Recommend Follow -Up Inspection Fire Alarm System Refer to Building ❑ Health ❑ Planning ❑ An inspection of the above mentioned facility revealed the following_ fire hazards. You are, hereby, requested to correct these conditions before Inspection Conducted By Date a7- city of r2i'l d3)9- 4001 WEST FIFTIETH STREET • EDINA. MINNESOTA 67424 9.27 -8861 TO: Duct Cleaning Companies and Edina Restaurant Owners SUBJECT: Periodic Cleaning of Grease Removal Duct and Hood Systems Hood and duct systems for the removal of combustible grease vapors present a serious .fire problem in occupancies utilizing such systems. For this reason, insurance companies and fire departments place special emphasis on the periodic and proper maintenance of this equipment. In order to insure that this maintenance is properly and completely done, the Edina Fire Department must inspect the system immediately after cleaning. A periodic cleaning schedule should be arranged by the owner of the business on an annual, bi- annual or weekly basis as experience would indicate. The Fire Department will periodically inspect these systems to insure that schedules are followed and to determine if changes in frequency of cleaning is necessary.. If our inspections, or our records indicate that the system is overdue for cleaning,,a lettar will be issued to the owner of the restaurant indicating that corrective action must be taken. The Edina Fire Department will provide inspectors on a 24 hour basis for these duct inspections. In order to schedule inspectors, the followin- pro- cedures must be carefully followed: 1. We ask those individuals involved, either the owner of the business or the cleaning company, contact the Edina Fire Department by telephone = 927 -8865 - several days.pri.or to the cleanin- operation. At that time the Fire Department dispatcher will need to know the. approximate time the inspection will be required. On the basis of this information an inspector will be scheduled to standby. 2. When the hood, duct and fan system have been satisfactoriy cleaned, the duct cleanina, company should contact Edina Fire Department at 927 -8865 or 926 -2132 and an inspector will be. dispatched. He will either approve or --- disapprove the system and-a copy of the inspection report will be left with the person in charge. If this procedure is not followed, an inspector will not be available. It will then be necessary that the owner of the restaurant contact the Fire Pre- vention Bureau between 8:00 a.m. and 4:30 p.m., Monday thru Friday, for the inspection. It is important to note that when an inspection is requested the entire system must be available for inspection. All inspection plates to be removed and fans, hoods, filters, etc., be accessible. This policy has been developed and is in conformance with Fire Code, City Ordinance No. 611, Sec. 1 b and National Fire Code, N.F.P.A. #96, 1964 edition, Section 7. If you have any questions or need any further information, do not hesitate to contact me. Sincerely, Theodore Paulfranz, Assistant Fire Chief Fire Prevention Bureau August 16, 1978 MEMORANDUM TO: Kenneth Rosland, .City Manager FROM: Gordon Hughes, City Planner SUBJECT: Tract A, Registered Land Survey No. 1365 In March, 1977, the City Council granted a lot division of the subject tract. This division was granted to facilitate the construction of the Junior Achieve - ment Building at 69th Street and Valley View Road. At that time, the Council expressed concern about the potential use of the 48,000 square foot.parcel lying east of the Junior Achievement site. Although this parcel was (and is) zoned C -3, Commercial, the Council felt that a Commercial use of the site would be undesirable. Dayton- Hudson Corporation, the property owner, was not willing to rezone the parcel at that time, but did pledge that the parcel would be marketed for only non - commercial uses. The attached Council minutes and correspondence document this intent. Dayton- Hudson has recently entered into a purchase agreement on the parcel with Spa Petite, a women's health spa. Spa Petite proposes to construct two story building on the site which would contain a health spa on the first level and its corporate offices on the second level. The health spa and the office would each contain approximately 4500 square feet. The spa would be open from 9:00 a.m. to 9:00 p.m. and would serve approximately 200 patrons daily. Health spas are, of course, a commercial use. Staff suggests, however, that such a use is less intense than most uses allowed in the C -3 district. Also, based on ordinance requirements, a 24,000 square foot building could be con - structed on the site (assuming adequate parking) which would be more inten- sive than the 9,000 square foot building proposed. From the negative standpoint, the health spa could vacate the building and a much more intense use, such as a retail outlet, could be established in con- formance with the zoning ordinance. Similarly, the building could be greatly expanded and thereby create a more intense use. again in conformance with the zoning ordinance. It must be reiterated that the site is zoned C -3, Commercial, and thus from a legal standpoint the proposed use as a health spa is in conformance with the zoning ordinance. Dayton- Hudson recognizes, however, that it pledged that the site would not be used for commercial purposes, and therefore has indicated that it will abide by the Council's wishes concerning the pro- posed use. Dayton- Hudson and Spa Petite have also expressed their willingness to enter into a deed_ restriction regulating 1) the re -use of the proposed building in the event of its vacation and 2) future expansions to the building. GH:jt T9 ISp ro .oc° ,y o s ►� _ • -M; IM: 6th �••J r 15o ij P +� 'S0 fig, R V rl 1M, .^ 150 X1'0 m M, d, a � ��, 1 •e o of ° o a�,r8 %��— � ;^ N8; °yv �r `•° n3p °,•� ry v � A, 154 1. 2 r��i;s .Y85 "ry �, I r5o " 120 A, ��`5436^, �i °`� $ Pc ( r85 °3i'No'N (3240) 179..0 " ro a Southdale Realty Co. C ` OJo y `' 6J �� Qo ;stiC)bL :- (part ofparce/ 3240; p Ff �`� j0 �6 CP 1 , 2a�.- 7 :4 ~ 19 - s, �s ,5,, \ 7 ? l .,•fit -�, 6P �_9� �^; , ii? P jib �k c�0 . ,> \ Ca r7' �,• s` 6 t - FS yT� % ��� . i SO'`j6 ��• 6 g 3 qi/ :5.\ I �j o- 4�h, �' q 1\•jb w R,' / N1 /'S �S �, .,,r� y �5b ✓ o •.�° q 14 $ rI l���\ . am � 15o 9 �RA' L59 14 'I�b g •. v r r G: IB9,0 13 �° is ^' ° a o 12 -A 4.42'.9 go oG 4951 W6 ; . o. y6A° Mm •� /�.. . ,N N6P,�5 ,�°. � ., 2PaYz � k � I,� s`�'v� py•• 1 rn 9W /S 3 90 ° .ST o /�• ra �'F • �' 0 /� � ' 3 y n 41 7 ti v X6 � ` G0 S ° ` 5 sAc "/ 14 011 4 h O 1 /3 Fc /., 10 40 5 15 �vw/ _ y r - d l • T /ON ,� yar074 °•� h � 1 �pyb4 S .vu •�-''�. ° .. - R � 589'So c 9 / 6 n +x\�q, An S99'S6 i oLOT 2 BLK. I 1 61, , 1a794't:- T-E:r� :i. oy, o SOUTH OFFICE r I ` r. F. f 3: 1 S' i 8 24` )9 tiw` c.q ,4 PARK IST. ADD. 1 1, y 4s 142.7 WEST 'R s /fp I n D 9 ? 1. �1 215 L B i� 22 w ^ ^ n's 0�� �o V`3 /2? °w.' o I '(:`�ho a't� 35 3 0235) � ` s ?� w r �� SI �• b9'Zn t' b — R 36 e� o p rexaco lnc. I o ti - c�fr R.tp ' -�L 19D 35, 172 92.7 t•3i.39: ��. $34 I o S L WEST ;moo- _ ... West 1054.1 —9 t 615.13 Res. _ BPS o01 r- `; 'COUNTY SURVEYOR ; .. HENNE.PIN COUNTY, NlIItitN, TRACT A _ R1.GIS1'PPED LAND SURVEY 1365 LOT DIVISION APPROVED. Affidavits of Notice h% were presented by Clerk, approved as to form and ordered placed on file. Mr. Luce �►v �� resented the petition for division of Tract A, Registered Land Survey 1365, as recommended by the Planning Commission, advising that this property is located ._ South of I.7. 69th Street and East of Valley View Road and is being purchased from Dayton Hudson Corporation by Junior Achievement for construction of their head- quarters building which will contain eight classroo»is and four offices. Mr. Luce explained that the building would front on Valley View Road, with Dayton Hudson retaining an easement across the Junior Achievement lot for access to Valley View Road in case the future user of the vacant lot on the East desires to egress to Valley View Road instead of W. 69th Street. Mr. Emmett Albergetti of Dayton Hud- son Properties agreed that the purchase of the West half of the property would be subject to the condition that a retail commercial use will not be allowed on the remaining vacant lot. He presented a site plan and indicated that screening and landscaping would be provided as required. In response to a suggestion of Mr. Erickson that the property be rezoned for office use, Mr. Albergetti said that there is not time for the rezoning procedure. Mayor Van Valkenburg questioned Junior Achievement's ability to restrict land that it does not own. He was assured by Mr. Albergetti that Dayton Hudson Corporation would be restricting the other half of the property to non - commercial uses and that this should be brought up when Mr. Hyde and Dayton Hudson officials meet. Following lengthy dis- cussion, Councilman Richards offered the folloi:ing resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION WHEREAS, the following described property is at present a single tract of land; Tract A, Registered Land Survey 1365; and WHEREAS, the owner has requested the subdivision of said tract into separate parcels (herein called "Parcels ") described as follows: The Easterly 185.00 feet of Tract A, Registered Land Survey 1365; and Tract A, Registered Land Survey 1365, except the Easterly 185.00 feet thereof; and WHEREAS, it has been determined that compliance with the Subdivision and Zoning Regulations of the City of Edina will create an unnecessary hardship and said Parcels as separate tracts of land do not interfere with the purpose of the Sub - division and Zoning Regulations as contained in the City of Edina Ordinance Nos. 801 and 811; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Edina that the conveyance and oi:Tnership of said Parcels as separate 'tracts of land is hereby approved and the requirements and provisions of Ordinance No. 801 and Ordinance No. 811 are hereby waived to allow said division and conveyance thereof as separate tracts of land but are not waived for any other purpose or. as to any other pro- vision thereof, and subject, however, to the provision that no further subdivision be made of said Parcels unless made in compliance with the pertinent ordinances of the City of Edina or with the prior approval of this Council as may be provided for by those ordinances. Motion for adoption of the resolution was seconded by Councilman Courtney. Rollcall: Ayes: Courtney, Richards, Schmidt, Shaw Nays: Van Valkenburg Resolution adopted. May 4, 1977 Mr. Emnnett Alhergotti Davton Hudson Properties 777 'dicollet Mall Minneapolis,.Minnesota 55402 :sear Mx. "Ilbergotti : Re: Tract A, Registered Land Survey 1365 At its ' ?arch 21, 1077, meeting, the 1 °c111rna City Council adopted a resolution ar::�nting a Olivision of the above• - referenced tract of land. The western pc.rtion of Tract A was to be used by Junior Achievement for the construction of a hea( quarters buil0iing. At the !'arch 21 meeting, the City Council expressed concern that the eastern porticrn of Tract A could, under present C­3 zoning, be used for coi-I- mercial purposes. Tn(-- Council agreed that such a use would not be appropriate in this area anr', requested that Layton-- Hudcon Properties petition for the rezoninc of the eastern portion of the site to a more any)ropriate use such as ",t vice." `I'ou stated that due to tine constraints, it was not possible to petition for such a rezoning roncur_rcntly with the requester3 lot <:i.vi- sion. ?;e, thus, uiiderstooO that Layton i.udson Properties %,rould petition for a rezozina at a Date in the near future. '.�'e would appreciate it if you could inform us of your schedule for ,etitioning for a rezoning on this site. For your information, the next three regularly scheduled Planking Corunission meetings will be on June 1, July G, and July 27. Ire will gladly consider your request at any of these meetings. I Nave also included a 'Zone Change Application" 'for your use. Thank you for your consideration of this matter. Sincerely, Gordon L. :.uc;hes Director of Planning GLI', . nr cc: Warren C. Hyde T. S. Erickson L•'nc Richard S. Contee Dayton Hudson Properties 777 Nicollet Mall - Minneapolis, Minnesota 55402 (612) 370 -5579 May 6, 1977 Mr. Gordon L. Hughes Director of Planning City of Edina 4801 West 50th Street Edina, MN RE: Tract "A" Registered Land Survey 1365 Dear Mr. Hughes: Congratulations on your appointment to the post of Director of Planning for the City of Edina. We look ,forward to the same cooperative spirit that has existed between our office and the City of Edina. In your correspondence of May 4, 1977, you mentioned the March 21, 1977, meeting of the Edina City Council where a portion of Tract "A" was sub- divided to allow the development of the Junior Achievement facility. You are correct that the future use of the remaining portion of Tract "A" was discussed and the concensus was that office use was appropriate. However, we did not make any commitment to rezone the property and would rather not go through that process at this time. However, we can go on record as saying that it is the intention of Dayton Hudson Properties to market the remaining portion of Tract "A" with only the office use in mind. It has been our position for some time that no commercial develop- ment should exist west.of France Avenue. I hope that this will serve as a solution to our mutual concern about what type of development takes place West of France Avenue. Please get in touch if you have any further thoughts. , Yours very truly, Emmett R. Albergotti Real Estate Negotiator ERA: 1pm cc: R. Contee J. Rice (copy enclosed) U): C - 14YA_r. (OFFICIAL PUBLICATION) NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARINGS TITLE I OF THE HOUSING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT.ACT OF 1974 BLOCK GRANT PROJECT DETERMINATION Notice is hereby given that.the City Council of the City of Edina will conduct a public hearing on August 21, 1978, at 7:00 P.M. in the City Council Chambers, 4801 W. 50th Street, Edina, Minnesota, and will at said time and place consider an amendment to the Year IV Urban Hennepin County Community Development Block Grant Appli- cation. Said amendment.would designate the "Morningside School Acquisition and Redevelopment-Project" as an eligible Year IV Community Development Block Grant Activity. Information.regarding the -Urban Hennepin County.Block Grant Application and the proposed amendment..to said application can.be obtained by contacting the office.of the Edina City Planner,. .927 =8861. FLORENCE B. HALLBERG CITY CLERK Please:publish.in the .Edina .Sun on August 9, 1978. Please send two Affidavits..of Publication. (OFFICIAL PUBLICATION) NOTICE OF FINDING OF NO SIGNIFICANT EFFECT ON THE ENVIRONMENT, August 9, 1978 CITY OF EDINA 4801 W. 50th Street Edina, Minnesota 55424 927 -8861 TO ALL INTERESTED AGENCIES, GROUPS, AND PERSONS: The above -named City proposes to request the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development to release Federal funds under Title I of the Housing and Community Development Act of 1974 (PL 93 -383) to be used for the follow- ing project: - Morningside School Acquisition and Redevelopment Project It has been determined that such a request for release of funds will not constitute actions significantly affecting the quality of the human environment and, accordingly, the above named City has decided not to pre- pare an Environmental Impact Statement under the National Environmental Pol- icy Act of 1969 (PL 91- 190). The reasons not-to prepare such Statements are contained in the environmental review for this project and include the following: 1. :Jo significant adverse-effects have been identified. 2. The proposed will beneficially expand recreational opportunities in the Morningside Area of Edina. An Environmental Review Record respecting this project has been made by the above -named City which documents the environmental review of the pro- ject -and more fully sets forth the reasons why such _a Statement is not re- quired. This Environmental Review Record is on file at the above address and is available for public examination and copying upon request between the hours of 8:00 a.m. and 4:30 p.m. No further environmental review of this project is proposed to be con- ducted, prior to request for release of Federal funds. All interested agencies, groups, and persons disagreeing with this deci- sion are invited to submit written comments for consideration by the City to the City Planning Department. Such written comments should be received at the Edina Planning Department on or before'September 1, 1978. All such comments so received will be considered and the City will not request the release of Federal funds or take any administrative action on the within pro- ject prior to the date specified in the preceding sentence. KENNETH E. RZOSLAND 4801 West 50th Street Edina, Minnesota 55424 Please publish in the Edina Sun on Wednesday, August 9, 1978. Please send two (2)'Affidavits of Publication. August 15, 1978 MORNINGSIDE RESIDENTS: Progress Report of Morningside Improvement Program Everyone is aware of construction during the last two months, but perhaps it is timely to bring everyone up to date on the overall picture. Underground Construction - All major utility construction will have been completed by the end of this week. Storm Sewer - New mains on Crocker, Morningside Road, and Grimes and catch basins and reconstruction throughout the area. Water Mains - Completion of hydrant replacement, relocation and instal- lations to provide adequate fire protection: Addition and replacement of valves to improve operation of the system. Water service replacement to insure copper service from main to stop box for each house (About forty. services remain to be checked in the north area of Morningside.) Adequate water pressure and flow will now be available at the curb for all homes. Some homes may still have problems with interior piping. Sanitary Sewer - As a result of a television survey of sewer mains, repairs have been made in about twenty locations. Generally the mains were in good condition. Some settled mains in peat areas were replaced and in one area reinstalled on piling. Gas - The Minnesota Gas Company will have completed all necessary replace- ment of mains and services by the end of this week, weather permitting. Street Lighting - New high pressure sodium street lights are being installed. by NSP in conjunction with street work. This work will be financed with Community Development funds. Trees - A total of ninety -eight boulevard elm trees have been.removed to at —ate. Thirty -five of these were infected with dutch elm disease. Addi- tional trees have shown infection in the last few weeks and will be marked and removed soon. Some residents have asked for removal of trees other than those originally marked. If you wish to have a boulevard tree removed, please call as soon as possible. Street Construction The street, curb, and sidewalk construction which began about a month ago has been severely curtailed by the current cement shortage. At this time., the outlook for concrete supply is very uncertain and there seems to be no way to improve the situation. It was our intention to complete the sidewalk construction before the bituminous paving; however, with the current cement shortage, the street paving may be done first. When concrete be- comes available, streets without curb and gutter wi11 have top priority before sidewalk construction. %r ♦• Morningside Residents (letter) Page 2 August 15, 1978 The prime contractor, Bury and Carlson, Inc., had hoped to complete the majority of the work in the area this year and were well ahead of the schedule specified. The streets under construction now are those that were planned for completion this year and will be completed depending upon availability of concrete. No further removals will be made until an adequate concrete supply is assured. The use of an innovative process of constructing streets in peat areas seems to be working out well. Low areas on Monterey, Lynn, and Kipling have been graded and fabric and gravel installed and Grimes and Inglewood are yet to be done. All these streets will be blacktopped this year with concrete curb and a bituminous overlay in 1979. You are probably aware that we are fortunate to have excellent con- tractors working on the Morningside project. The complexity of the project, narrow streets, coordination, etc., necessarily result in inconveniences for everyone. The cooperation of all residents has been greatly appreciated. Once again - please call Edina Engineering Department, 927 -8861, with any problems or concerns. ran man ' Edina City Engineer and Director of Public Works RESOLUTION GRANTING FINAL PLAT APPROVAL TO MARK NELSON FIRST ADDITION BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Edina, that that certain plat known as "Mark Nelson First Addition:, platted by Florence M. Stucki, widow, and Mark B. Nelson, Interior Design, Inc., a Minnesota Corporation, and presented at the Edina City Council Meeting of August 21, 1978, be and is hereby granted final plat approval. ADOPTED this 21st day of August, 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 August 21, 1978, and as recorded in the Minutes of said Regular Meeting. WITNESS my hand and seal of said City this 17th day of October, 1978. City Clerk RESOLUTION GR 4801 WEST 50TH STREET, EDINA. MINNESOTA ;;,)424 612- 927 -8861 RESOLUTION APPROVING AMENDMENT OF YEAR IV URBAN HENNEPIN COUNTY COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT APPLICATION BE IT RESOLVED that the Edina City Council does hereby grant approval for the amendment of the Year IV Urban Hennepin County Community Development Block Grant (PL 93 -383) to be used for the Morningside School Acquisition and Redevelopment Project and that said project will be a multi -year Community Development Project. ADOPTED this 21st day of August, 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 foregoing resolution was duly adopted by the Edina- City Council at its Regular Meeting of August 21, 1978, and as recorded in the Minutes thereof. WITNESS my hand and seal of said City this 24th day of October, 1978. Acting City.Clerk