Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
1975-08-18_COUNCIL MEETING
�A 1 . (Revised) AGENDA - EDINA CITY COUNCIL MEETING AUGUST 18,. 1975, 7.00 P.M. ROLLCALL SCHOOL BOARD MEETING MINUTES of July 21, 1975, approved as 'submitted or corrected by motion of , seconded by I. PUBLIC HEARING ON PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS Affidavits of Notice by Clerk. Pre - sentation by City Manager and Engineer. Spectators heard.. If Council wishes to proceed, action by Resolution Ordering Improvement. 4/5 favorable rollcall vote to pass. A. Street Improvement No.. BA -210 - Townes Road from W. 48th. St. North B. Street Improvement No. -BA -212 Dale Ave. from W. 56th St. to W. 57th St. C. Ornamental Street.Lighting Improvement No. L -13 - Tamarac Lane from Vernon Ave. North D. Oak Lane Improvements 1. Graveling Improvement No. P -C -118 2. Watermain'Improvement No. P =WM -297 3. Sanitary Sewer Improvement No. P -SS -326 4. Storm Sewer Improvement No. P -ST.S -146 5. Street Improvement No. P -BA -211 II. PUBLIC HEARING ON ZONING MATTERS Affidavits of Notice by Clerk. Presentation by Planning Department. Spectators heard. First Reading requires offering of Ordinance only. 4/5 favorable rollcall vote to pass Second Reading or'if Second Reading should be waived. A. First Reading ' 1. W. 8 feet of Lot 1, Block 1, Vic Adams Addition - 3945 W. 49th St. - R -1 Residential District to R -2 Multiple Residential District - Z -75 -6 - .(7/30/75) - Lot Division of Lot 1, Block 1, Vic Adams Addition 2. Ordinance Amendment - Adding a Minimum Building Size to the Commercial District (7/30/75) III. PUBLIC HEARING ON PRELIMINARY PLAT APPROVALS 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. A. Brown's Addition of Edina - 6621 Waterman Ave. - S -75 -15 (7/30/75) B. Braemar Hills.8th Addition - North of W. 78th,St. and East of Gleason Road - S -75 -16 (7/30/75) IV. COMMUNICATIONS A. Metropolitan Transit Commission Hearing - 5�_ Additional Surcharge U V. RECOMMENDATIONS AND REPORTS A. Planning Commission 1. Rescind Plat of Roushar Square - Acknowledge Lapse of Zoning ," August 18, 1975 Agenda Page Two B. Traffic Safety Committee Minutes of August 12, 197.5 C. Morningside Area-Water Study . D. Set Hearing Dates 1. Street Improvement No. A =175 - Malibu Drive (9115/75) 2. Street Vacation.- Old County Road 62 West of County Road 18 3. Utility Easement Vacations - Block 2, Lake Edina 3rd Addition and Block 1, Lake Edina 5th Addition E. Feasibility Report - Set Hearing Date F. Lowry Hill Enterprises, Inc. Suit G. Notice: of Claim - Kerry Jahn H. Valley View Road Street.Vacation Easements I. Order Watermain Improvement No. WM -298 - 100% Petition J. Arbitrator's Award - Police K. Bond Issue Information - Program L,. Liquor Pricing Policy Revision M. Community Development Money Allocation N. John Philip Sousa Band - President Ford 0. Governor Anderson -- State Aids VI. FINANCE A. Bids on Paramedic Equipment B. Well No. 6 - Emergency Repairs for C. Claims Paid: Motion of , seconded by payment of the following claims as per Pre -List dated August 18, 1975: General & Revenue Sharing, $65,464.41; Construction Fund, $132.940.80; Park Funds, $54,480.95; Water Fund, $49,234.95; Liquor Fund, $185,275.98; Sewer Fund, $55401.30; Improvements, $5,574.44; Total, $548,372.83 19 MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE EDINA CITY COUNCIL HELD.AT CITY HALL ON MONDAY, JULY 21, 1975 Answering, roll call were Council members Courtney, Richards, Schmidt and Mayor Van Valkenburg, Councilman Shaw entered later. 17 ::. MINUTES of June 16, 1975, were approved as submitted by motion of Councilman Courtney, seconded by Councilman Richards and carried. THREE-NEW FIRE FIGHTERS INTRODUCED. .GRADUATE PARAMEDICS DEMONSTRATE EQUIPMENT. Fire Chief Buresh introduced three new fire fighters, Ron Rogers, Ron Samuelson and .� John Grove, giving their backgrounds., Also introduced were Dick Vernon, Bill Lutts and Terry Kehoe, who are the first three volunteers to enter the Edina Paramedic Program, an emergency medical service. With Dick Vernon narrating, they demonstrated their specialized training, received through Hennepin County General Hospital, using -a recently purchased $4,200 Electrical Cardiagram Monitor and Defibulator and a Military Anti -Shock Trouser which forces blood from the lower extremities_to supply vital organs in the upper portion of the body. The radio communication system to be installed enabling the Paramedic to be in communication with emergency room doctors at the hospitals was explained by Chief Buresh. Mayor Van Valkenburg welcomed the new fire fighters and congratulated the Paramedics. WATER MAIN IMPROVEMENT NO. P -WM -294 CONTINUED TO AUGUST 4. Being advised by Mr. Dunn that bids came in 15 percent over the estimate and that redesign to cut costs is being studied, Councilwoman Schmidt's motion was seconded by Councilman Courtney and carried that the hearing be continued. NINE MILE NORTH 2ND ADDITION GRANTED PRELIMINARY PLAT APPROVAL. Affidavits of Notice were presented by Clerk, approved as to form and placed on file. Mr. Luce presented Nine Mile North 2nd Addition for preliminary plat approval as recommended by the Planning Commission. After.discussion, Councilman Richards moved the plat be returned to the Planning Commission requesting dedication to the City of land at rear of the three lots North of Dovre Drive and requesting two lots instead of three on the South side of Dovre Drive. Motion died for lack of a second. Mr. Dunn reminded the Council of the necessity of proceeding with Dovre Drive construction. Mr. Ray Drake, Rauenhorst Corporation, said they preferred large lots and suggested an easement; whereupon Mr. Schwartzbauer, acting City Attorney, stated the City could obtain a drainage easement from the property owners. Councilman Courtney then offered the following resolution granting preliminary plat approval subject to a 125 ft. drainage easement at the rear of.Lots 1, 2, 3, Block 1, and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION GRANTING PRELIMINARY PLAT APPROVAL TO NINE MILE 2ND ADDITION BE IT RESOLVED by the Edina City Council that the plat entitled "Nine Mile North 2nd Addition ", presented by Rauenhorst Corporation, and presented for Preliminary Plat approval at the Edina City Council Meeting of July 21, 1975, be and is hereby granted Preliminary Plat Approval, subject to 125 ft. drainage easement at rear of Lots 1, 2, 3, Block 1. M' Motion for adoption of the resolution was seconded by Councils �; and on roll call, there were three ayes and Councilman Richards voting, nay because of the size of Lots 1, 2, 3, Block 2, and the resolution was adopted. QZC _ cam.. NAGF.NGAST ADDITION GRANTED PRELIMINARY PLAT APPROVAL. Affidavits of Notice re presented by Clerk, approved as to form and placed on file. Mr. Luce presented Nagengast Addition for preliminary plat approval contingent on a 5 percent cash parkland dedication as recommended by the Planning Commission. Councilman Courtney offered the following resolution granting preliminary -plat approval for Nagengast Addition and moved its adoption:, RESOLUTION GRANTING PRELIMINARY PLAT APPROVAL TO NAGENGAST ADDITION BE IT RESOLVED by the Edina City Council that the plat entitled "Nagengast Addition ", presented by J.J. Nagengast, and presented for Preliminary Plat approval at the Edina City Council Meeting of July 21, 1975., be and is hereby granted Preliminary Plat approval, contingent on 5 percent cash parkland dedication. / -Z Motion for adoption of the resolution was seconded h Councilman and on roll cal , there were four ayes and no nays, and the resolution was adopted. ALLEY VACATION ABBOTT /BEARD /14.60) CONTINUED to August 4. Affidavits of Notice were presented by Clerk, approved as to form and placed on file. Mr. Dunn noted that a petition had'been received to vacate the alley in Block 5, Harriet Manor 2nd Addition. Mr. Essen, 5928 Abbott, complained of the damage to his hedge and redwood fence and :.1 74 7/2.1/75 requested protection of his property, stating that the 14 ft. easement is too narrow for turning movements. Messrs. Fisher, 5924 Abbott, and Wescott, 5933 Beard, also spoke in favor of the vacation. *In opposition were Messrs. David Nelson, 5917 Beard; Leonard Anderson, 5909 Beard; E. Carmichael, 3408 W. 60th Street; and Dan Hanscom, 3412 W. 60th St. Thereupon, Councilman Courtney moved, Councilman Richards.seconded and motion-carried that the matter be tabled to August 4th, with the provision that Mr. Dunn inspect the property and the suggestion that the residents meet to determine a solution. BROOKSIDE AVENUE VACATION (BEHIND GRANDVIEW LIQUOR STORE) APPROVED., Affidavits, .of Notice were presented by Clerk, approved as to form and placed on file. Mr. Dunn reported the Minnesota Gas Company objected to the vacation as it affects the maintenance of their gas main. No further objections being heard, Councilman Courtney offered the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION VACATING A PORTION OF BROOKSIDE AVENUE WHEREAS, a resolution of the City Council, adopted the 16th day of June, 1975, fixed a date for a public hearing on a proposed vacation of Brookside Avenue (behind Grandview Liquor store) and WHEREAS, two weeks' published and posted notice of said hearing was given and the hearing was held on the 21st day of July, 1975, at which time all persons desiring to be heard were given an opportunity to be heard thereon; and WHEREAS, the Council deems it to be in the best interest of the City and of the public that said street vacation be made; and WHEREAS, the Council has considered the extent to which the vacation affects existing easements within the area of the vacation and the extent to which the vacation affects the authority of any person, corporation, or municipality owning or controlling electric or telephone poles and lines, gas and sewer lines, or water,pipes, mains, and hydrants on or under the area of the proposed vacation, to continue maintaining the same, or to enter upon such street or portion thereof vacated to maintain, repair, replace, remove, or otherwise attend thereto. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of Edina, Hennepin County, Minnesota, that the following described portion of Brookside Avenue be and is hereby vacated effective as of 21st of July, 1975: That part of Brookside Avenue as shown on the plat of Grand View Heights, on file and of record in the office of the-Register of Deeds, Hennepin County, Minnesota, which lies between the Easterly extension across Brookside Avenue.of the South line of Tract C, Registered Land Survey No. 1393, Files of the Registrar of Titles, Hennepin County, Minnesota, and the extension across Brookside Avenue of the South line of Hopkins Road, as shown on said plat of Grand View Heights. Provided, however, that after due consideration, the Council has determined and hereby specifies that the foregoing vacation shall not affect, and there is hereby continued, reserved, and retained, the following existing.easements and authority in, on, and under the above vacated area: (a) The authority of the City of Edina to enter upon the above vacated area to maintain, repair,.replace, remove, or otherwise attend to, all of the pipes, mains, lines, and hydrants for water, sanitary sewer, or storm and drainage water, now in, on, or under the above vacated area; (b) The authority of the Minnesota Gas Company to enter upon.the West 30 feet of the above vacated area to maintain, repair, replace, remove, or otherwise attend to, all of the poles, pipes, mains, and lines for gas lines and mains now in, on, or under the above vacated area; (c) The authority of each and every other person or corporation owning or control- ling any electric or telephone poles and lines, gas or sewer lines, or water pipes, mains, and.hydrants, now in, on, or under the above vacated area, to enter upon the .vacated area to maintain, repair, replace, remove, or otherwise attend thereto; and that the Clerk is authorized and directed to cause a notice of completion of proceedings to be prepared, entered in the transfer record of the County Auditor, and filed with the Register of Deeds, in accordance with Minnesota Statutes, Section 412.851. Motion for adoption of the resolution was seconded by Councilwoman Schmidt; and on roll call, there were four ayes and no nays.and the resolution was adopted. LOT 2, SHARPE -BAKKE ADDITION, DIVISION APPROVED. Affidavits of Notice were presented by Clerk, approved as to form and placed on file. Mr. Luce presented Lot 2, Sharpe -Bakke Addition for division into two lots and recommended approval contingent on a 5 percent cash in lieu of parkland dedication. Councilman Courtney offered the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION WHEREAS, the following described property is at present a single tract of land: Lot 2, Sharpe -Bakke Addition; and i. 1 A >.t 7/21/75 WHEREAS, the owner has requested the subdivision of said tract into two separate parcels (herein called "Parcels ") described as follows: Parcel A: Lot 2, Sharpe -Bakke Addition, except the North 110 feet thereof. Parcel B: The North 110 feet of Lot 2, Sharpe -Bakke Addition. 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 parcel as separate tracts of land do not interfere with the purpose of the Subdivision and Zoning Regulations as contained in the City of Edina Ordinance Nos: 811 and 801; NOW, THEREFORE, it is hereby resolved by the City Council of the City of Edina that the conveyance and ownership of said Parcels as separate tracts of land is hereby approved and the.requirements and provisions of Ordinance Nos. 801 and 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 provisions thereof, and further 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 Councilwoman Schmidt; and on roll call, there were four ayes and no nays and the resolution was adopted. i 17.5: PERMANENT STREET SURFACING & CONCRETE CURB & GUTTER IMPROVEMENTS NOS. BA -205 & ® BA -207 BID AWARDED. Mr. Dunn presented tabulation of five bids received in response to Advertisement for Bids in the Edina Sun and Construction Bulletin on June 26, July 3 & 10, 1975. Tabulation showed Bury & Carlson, Inc, low bidder at $474,744.04; W � M.G. Astleford Co., Inc., $510,538.72; Minnesota Valley Surfacing, $529,362.94; Fischer Sand & Aggregate, Inc., $534,218.71; Shafer Contracting Co., Inc., $577,280.46. As recommended by Mr. Dunn, Councilman Courtney's motion was seconded by Councilman Richards and carried awarding the contract to low bidder, Bury & Carlson, Inc., subject to approval of the City of Bloomington. CONCRETE SIDEWALK IMPROVEMENT NOS. S -11, S -12 and S -13 BID AWARDED. Mr. Dunn presented tabulation of four bids received in response to Advertisement for Bids in the Edina Sun and Construction Bulletin on June 26, July 3 & 10, 1975. Tabulation showed Concrete Curb Company low bidder at $119,602.05; Arnold Beckman, Inc., $143,756.22; Victor Carlson & Son, Inc., $145,177.00. As recommended by lMr. Dunn, Councilman Courtney's motion was seconded by Councilman Richards and carried awarding the contract to low bidder, Concrete Curb Company. SANITARY SEWER IMPROVEMENT NOS_._ SS -323, 324; WATERMAIN IMPROVEMENTS NOS. WM -293 295; STORM SEWER IMPROVEMENT NO. ST.S -144, GRADING. GRAVELING AND BITUMINOUS STREET SURFACING IMPROVEMENT NO. BA -208 BID AWARDED. Mr. Dunn presented tabulation of five bids received in response to Advertisement for Bids in the Edina Sun and Construction Bulletin on June 26, July 3 & 10, 1975. Tabulation showed Q.R.S. Construction, Inc. low bidder at $62,120.64; Fischer Sand & Aggregate, Inc., $71,555.70; G.L. Contracting, Inc., $65,862.02; Metro Sewer & Water Co., $74,039.07; Dean Luxenburg Construction, $78,403.32. Mr. Dunn recommended bid awarded to Q.R.S. Construction, Inc. with the exception of Proposal I, Watermain Extension Improvement No. P -WM -294, (bid reduced to $46,753.39). Councilman Courtney moved, Councilwoman Schmidt seconded and motion carried that contract be awarded to Q.R.S. Construction. SANITARY SEWER IMPROVEMENT NO. SS -322, 14ATER1AIN IMPROVEMENT NO. WM -292, GRADING, GRAVELING, CREEK CROSSING AND STORM SEWER IMPROVEMENT NO. C -117 BID AWARDED. Mr. Dunn presented tabulation of five bids received in response to Advertisement for Bids in the Edina Sun and Construction Bulletin on June 26 1975. Tabulation showed Rauenhorst Construction Company low bidder at 597.25- isch —1 Sand & Aggregate,_Inc., $106,044.20; Q.R.S. Construction, Inc., $120,749.5 ;' G.L. Contracting, Inc., $102,804.97; Metro Sewer & Water Company, $111,177.11. As recommended by Mr. Dunn; Councilman Courtney's motion was seconded by Council- woman Schmidt and carried awarding the contract to low bidder, Rauenhorst Construc- tion Company. PETITIONS REFERRED TO ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT. By motion of Councilwoman Schmidt, seconded by Councilman Richards and carried, the following petitions were referred to the Engineering Department: 1. Ornamental Street Lights, Arbour Avenue between West 61st St. & Sun Road (submitted by Mrs. Claude' Callaghan) . ' 2. Storm Sewer, Hilldale area (submitted by Wayne E. Sweet). _ 1 v:' 6 7/21/75 W.E. JOHNSTON HYDE PARK DEVELOPMENT COMPANY LETTER 7/7/75 NOTED. Mayor Van Valkenburg stated he replied to Mr. Johnson's letter regarding zoning, informing him that the State law applied to cities of the first class. No action taken. M.P. JOHNSON'S PROSPECT HILLS 3RD ADDITION GRANTED FINAL PLAT APPROVAL. Mr. Luce presented M.P. Johnson's Prospect Hills 3rd Addition for final plat approval as recommended by the Planning Commission. Advised that the developer's agreement is satisfactory to the Engineering Department and no objections being heard, Councilman Richards offered the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION APPROVING M.PR. JOHNSON' -S PROSPECT HILLS 3RD ADDITION BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Edina, Minnesota, that that certain plat entitled M.P. Johnson's Prospect Hills 3rd Addition, platted by Barron and Associates, Inc., a Minnesota Corporation, fee owner, and Melvin P. Johnson and Helen E. Johnson, husband and wife, mortgagees, and presented at the regular meeting of the Edina City Council of July 21, 1975, be and is hereby granted final plat approval. Motion for adoption of the resolution was seconded by.Councilwoman Schmidt; and on roll call, there were four ayes and no nays and the resolution was adopted. McCAULEY HEIGHTS 5TH ADDITION FINAL PLAT APPROVAL TABLED INDEFINITELY. Mr. Luce informed the Council the developer was unable to complete his developer's agree- ment, and recommended the plat be tabled until the documents are completed. Councilman Courtney's motion McCauley Heights 5th Addition final plat approval be tabled indefinitely was seconded by Councilman Richards; and on roll call, there were four ayes and no nays and motion carried. DUTCH ELM REMOVAL POLICY ACCEPTED. Mr. Hyde recommended the following policy regarding diseased Elm trees: Effective August 1, 1975, the City of Edina will pay 50 percent of the total cost of removing from private property any Elm tree which is diagnosed by the City Department of Parks and Recreation as being infected with Dutch Elm disease, or a dead Elm that.potentially can harbour the European Bark Beetle, with a maximum payment by the City of $50 per tree. Property owners desiring to be reimbursed must have approval from the Director of Parks and Recreation prior to having the tree removed by a private contractor. After a tree is removed by a private contractor, the property owner shall submit a true copy of the contractor's bill to the City. The City may, if circumstances permit or require, remove any such trees with its own forces, in which case the City will bill the property owner for one -half of labor, equipment and disposal costs incurred by the City. If the total cost per tree exceeds $100, the property owner will be responsible for paying all costs over that amount. Mr. Courtney moved the above policy be accepted, Councilwoman Schmidt seconded; and on roll call, there were four ayes and no nays and motion carried. BLOOMINGTON ANNEXATION CONTINUED. Because of the.objection of Bloomington property owners, Mr. Hyde reported that a meeting had been held with City Manager of Bloomington to discuss the possibilities of other pieces of property with fewer problems of equivalent value. Mayor Van Valkenburg commented that the municipali- ties were attempting to keep the trade as equitable as possible from a tax stand- point, projected use, etc., and suggested the matter be held until Bloomington reports. LANGUAGE AND ORDER OF BOND ISSUE OUESTIONS APPROVED. Mr. Hyde advised the Council of language relating to $2,950,000 General Obligation Park Bonds as recommended by the City Attorney for the special election proposed to be held September 4, 1975. After discussion of the language and order of the questions, Councilman Courtney offered the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION DETERMINING THE NECESSITY AND EXPEDIENCY OF ISSUING GENERAL OBLIGATION PARK BONDS AND CALLING A SPECIAL ELECTION TO VOTE ON THEIR ISSUANCE BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Edina, Minnesota, as follows: 1. On the basis of recommendations received from the Park Board and the Open Space Committee of the City and upon investigation and consideration of the matter by the Council, it is hereby found and determined that it is necessary and for the best interests of the City of Edina and i-ts inhabitants to issue its general obligation bonds in the amount of $450,000 for the purpose of acquiring "open space" land within the corporate limits of the City to be preserved substantially in its natural state for recreational use, to issue its general obligation bonds in the amount of $500,000 for the purpose of acquiring various lands within the corporate limits of the City to be developed 0.' 7/21/75 for local or neighborhood park or playground purposes and to issue its general obligation bonds in the amount of $2,000,000 for the purpose of improving, developing and equipping local or neighborhood parks or playgrounds of the ' City. 2. A special election is hereby called and shall be held on Thursday, September 4, 1975, between the hours of 7:00 A.M. and 8:00 P.M., at the regular polling places for City elections as set forth in the form of notice of bond election hereinafter prescribed, at which election the questions of issuing bonds shall -be submitted to the voters. 3. Notice of the submission of said questions at the special election shall be given by publication of the notice of bond election in the Edina Sun at least twice, not more than 14 and not less than 7 days before the date of election, and by posting of the same at each of the polling places and in three of the most public and conspicuous places in each precinct not less than 10 days before the election. Said notice shall be in substantially the following form: (Official Publication) City of Edina 4801 West 50th Street Edina, Minnesota NOTICE OF SUBMISSION OF BOND QUESTIONS- AT SPECIAL ELECTION ON SEPTEMBER 4, 1975 CITY OF EDINA, MINNESOTA __ NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that a special election will be held in and for the City of Edina, Minnesota, on Thursday, the 4th day of September, 197.5, between the hours of 7:00 A.M. and 8:00 P.M., at which the following questions will be submitted: Question No. 1 Shall the City of Edina borrow money by issuing its general obligation bonds in the amount of $2,000,000 for the purpose of improving, developing and equipping parks, playgrounds, and recreational facilities of the City? Question No. 2 Shall the City of Edina borrow money by issuing its general obligation bonds in the amount of $450,000 for the purpose of acquiring "open space" land within the City to be preserved substantially in its natural state for recreational use? . Question No. 3 Shall the City of Edina borrow money by issuing its general obligation bonds in the amount of $500,000 for the-purpose of acquiring lands within the City to be developed for local or neighborhood park or playground purposes? BY ORDER OF THE EDINA CITY COUNCIL. Florence B. Hallberg City Clerk Motion for adoption of the resolution-was seconded by Councilman Richards; and on roll call, there were four ayes and no nays and the resolution was adopted.. MINNEAPOLIS NORTHFIELD & SOUTHERN RAILWAY RETAINING WALL EASEMENT AUTHORIZED. Mr. "Dunn stated the City is building a retaining wall on the vacated Brookside Avenue, and that MN &S Railway requires an acknowledgement by the City Council on the document. Councilwoman Schmidt moved the easement be accepted, Councilman Richards seconded; and on roll call, there were four ayes and no nays and motion carried. HENNEPIN COUNTY HEALTH COALITION FORUM MEETING NOTED. Councilwoman Schmidt agreed to attend the meeting scheduled for July 23, 1975. SOUTH HENNEPIN HUMAN SERVICES FUNDING OPPOSED. Councilwoman Schmidt reported that ` Hennepin County officials have notified the Community Boards of their responsibility of ten percent participation in the cost of non - direct services, Edina's share being approximately $1,300. (Councilman Shaw entered 9:00 P.M.). The reason the County Commissioners gave for the participation was the fact that they felt that if the community contributed in a monetary way, they would be a more participating community. After considerable discussion, Councilman Courtney moved commendation of the South Hennepin Human Services and the work they are performing, but urged the County to continue to fully fund the services. Councilman Richards seconded the motion; and on roll call, there were five ayes and no nays and motion carried. TRAFFIC SAFETY COMMITTEE MINUTES OF JULY 15, 1975 APPROVED. .Councilman Richards suggested the NO PARKING ANYTIME restriction on the south side of. West 50th Street for a distance of 100 feet west of Wooddale Avenue be amended to allow parking on Sunday to accommodate churchgoers. Councilman Courtney moved approval of the 7/21/75 change in parking restrictions and that the minutes of July. 18 be accepted. Councilman Shaw seconded the motion and motion carried. 1974 AUDIT REPORT .ACKNOWLEDGED. No action taken on 1974 Audit. Report by Ernst and Ernst. AUGUST 18'JOINT MEETING -- SCHOOL BOARD NOTED. Mayor Van Va,lkenburg stated the joint Council- School.Board meeting is a continuation of cooperation and inter - change.between the City and schools. He recommended public hearings on the agenda be held on the second meeting of the month to permit scheduling of meetings of this type. SOUTHDALE DANCE PERMIT REFERRED TO ATTORNEY. Mr. Hyde noted a letter from the Southdale Center Merchants Association requesting a permit to hold a 23 -hour dance -a -thon on August 9 -10 and recommended referral to the City attorney for legality. COMPREHENSIVE EMPLOYMENT AND TRAINING.ACT (CETA) POSITIONS AUTHORIZED. Mr. Hyde stated the County had given notification of.Edina'.s allocation of CETA funds as $67,950, and recommended possible positions to be filled, subject to eligibility and continuation of funds. With the suggestion of an outreach worker for the elderly by Councilwoman Schmidt and a suggestion of one -time activity.positions by Councilman Shaw, Councilman Courtney moved authorization of CETA funding positions. Councilwoman Schmidt seconded the motion and motion carried. ORDINANCE NO. 1353 - 'LICENSING AND REGULATING HEALTH CLUBS, MASSAGE PARLORS, ESCORT SERVICES, ETC. CONTINUED. Upon recommendation of Mr. Hyde, Councilwoman Schmidt moved, Councilman Shaw seconded and motion carried that -the ordinance be continued until a suit is resolved in District Court on Bloomington's similar ordinance. ORDINANCE NO. 811 -A62 - REQUIRING SIGNS FOR PROPOSED REZONINGS AND SUBDIVISIONS HEARING DATE SET. Upon recommendation of,Mr. Hyde, Councilman Shaw's motion was seconded by Councilwoman Schmidt and carried, setting August 4 as the hearing date for Ordinance No. 811 -A62, requiring signs for proposed rezonings and subdivisions. USE OF M.S.A. FUNDS FOR CITY SHARE OF T.H. 100 /50th STREET SIGNALS APPROVED. As recommended by Mr. Dunn, Councilman Courtney moved State -Aid money be made available for the City's share of T.H. 100 /50th Street signals, and offered the following resolution: RESOLUTION. APPROPRIATION OF MUNICIPAL STATE -AID FUNDS TO SUPPLEMENT STATE PROJECT WHEREAS, it has been deemed advisable and necessary for the City of Edina to supplement a construction project located on T.H. 100 within the limits of said municipality by participation in the construction of traffic signals on portions thereof; and WHEREAS, said construction project has been approved by the Department of Highways and identified in its.records as S.P. No. 2733 - 58(100 -130); NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED: That the City of Edina hereby appropriate from our Municipal State -Aid Street Funds the sum of $9,752.00 to supplement the con - struction of said project and request the Commissioner of Highways to approve this authorization.. Motion for adoption of the resolution was seconded by Councilman Shaw; and on roll call, there were five ayes and no.nays, and the resolution was adopted. USE OF M.S.A. FUNDS FOR PORTION OF CITY SHARE OF STORM SEWER NO. 138 APPROVED. As recommended by Mr. Dunn, Councilman Courtney moved State -Aid money be made available for the portion of City's share of St.S. -138 and offered the following resolution: RESOLUTION APPROPRIATION OF MUNICIPAL STATE -AID FUNDS TO SUPPLEMENT C.S.A.H. PROJECT WHEREAS, it has been deemed advisable.and necessary for the City of Edina to supplement'a construction project located on,::C.S.A.H. No. 18 within the limits of said municipality by participation in.the.;construction of .storm sewer on portions thereof; and WHEREAS, said construction project has been approved by the Department of highways and identified in its records as S.A.P. No. 27- 618 -27 (CSAH18); NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED: That the City of Edina hereby appropriate from the Municipal State -Aid Funds the maximum allowable sum in accordance with IN '� 179 7/21/75 calculations of the Minnesota Highway Department Hydraulics Division to supplement the construction of said project and request the Commissioner of Highways to approve this. authorization. Motion for adoption of the resolution was seconded by Councilman Shaw; and on roll call, there were five ayes and no nays, and the resolution was adopted. 56TH & OAKLAWN STREET LIGHT (L -11) BID'AWARDED. Mr. Dunn presented two quotations for the installation of street light at 56th and Oaklawn, Edina Electric, $1,100; and Kauffman Electric, $1,278. As recommended by Mr. Dunn, Councilman Courtney's motion was seconded by Councilman Shaw and carried awarding the contract to low bidder, Edina Electric. MAXIMUM DENSITIES IN COMPREHENSIVE PLANS DISCUSSED. Councilman Richards commented on the July 2, 1975 Planning Commission minutes in regard to the request by the Council to submit recommendations for lowering densities on rezoning requests. Mr'. Luce explained variables such as traffic pattern, flood plains, interchanges, preserving natural resources, etc. Discussion followed with the request from the Council that the Planning Commission prepare density alternatives that are of sound planning. HUMAN RELATIONS MINNESOTA HUMANITIES GRANT APPLICATION OUESTIONED. Mayor Van Valkenburg questioned the $1,000 request in matching funds, and was informed C� by Mr. Hyde that this was money for the annual meeting shown in the budget.. CLAIMS PAID. Motion of Councilwoman Schmidt was seconded by Councilman Richards and carried for payment of the following claims as per pre -list: General and Revenue Sharing, $269,112.49; Construction Fund, $150,900.74; Park Funds, $83,343.80; Water Fund, $19,380.93; Liquor Fund, $200,974.40; Sewer Fund $55,792.01; Improve - ments, $1,000.00; TOTAL, $780,504.37. _ No further business appearing, Councilman Shaw's motion for adjournment was seconded by Councilman Richards and carried. Adjournment at 10:05 P.M. n � Deputy City Clerk FOR ACTION INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DISTRICT 273 Special Meeting, August'18, 1975 Volume 47, Report 55 SUBJECT: CITY OF EDINA REFERENDUM Be it Resolved, That The Board of Education Endorse the Park Improvements, Park Land Acquisition and Open Space Acquisition Referendum to be held on Thursday, September 4, 1975. BACKGROUND INFORMATION This $2,950,000 referendum will require an additional tax of $14.20 per year on an Edina home valued at $40,000. The referendum will be voted on in three parts. Part 1) Shall the City of Edina borrow money by issuing its general obligation bonds in the amount of $2,000,000 for the purpose of improving, developing and equipping parks, playgrounds, and recreational facilities of the City of Edina. Part 2) Shall the City of Edina borrow money by issuing its general obligation bonds in the amount of $450,000.for the purpose of acquiring open space within the City to preserve substantially in its natural state for recreational use. Part 3) Shall the City of Edina borrow money by issuing its general obligation bonds in the amount of $500,000 to acquire lands within the,City of Edina to be developed for local or neighborhood park or playground purposes. k MEMO TO: Warren Hyde FROM: James Van Valkenburg DATE: July 31, 1975 We are going to meet with the schools on August 18. I wish you and Lieber would work out some type of an agenda so that we have some very specific items to discuss. The memo I have here from my June 24th meeting may be a help, but in addition to that, let's have some other things so that we can have a discussion rather than merely an exchange of praise. Summary of meeting held on June 24, 1975, between Dr. -Ralph Lieber, Dr. John Hoyt, Warren Hyde and James Van Valkenburg We discussed the police liaison matter and wondered the status of Wayne Bennett's inquiries. We discussed the exchange of vehicle maintenance. The possibility was raised as to whether the City could do some of. the blacktopping for the schools at a cheaper price to the public than they have been paying. We discussed the legislative problems and thought that we should first work together and then try to work through the nine - school legislative group and to also involve:the councils in those areas to the end that we might have a more efficient impact on the leg- islators. It was agreed that we should identify people within the school and City with particular expertise and have them exchange ideas as to cost savings. We agreed that there would be a joint meeting of the School Board and the Council in August and I would suggest that we would have it on August 18th if, we can in fact, claar away our meetings so that we have some time to devote to the same, otherwise we should try for August 25th. It was agreed that we would send Warren's memo to Ralph regarding the Radisson property to get their reaction on that and also send.a copy of the Governmental Commission to Ralph. When I say Ralph, I am also assuming that we would send one to John Hoyt. It was pointed out that the Braemar Inspection Tour will be on July 22nd. We discussed- the_matter_of *he_ stadium breifly and wondered whether_ it might not be workable to have it at Edina -West. We discussed Bredesen Park and Dr. Lieber indicated he felt an interest in the science and nature area might produce some funds. As to the budget cuts by the shoo], they indicated they would be sending a copy of that to us so that we can .determine in advance what impact it may have on us. f J ' 11 7 tter, d t s� • w i 1 i t y of not onl %, our annual WC u �Gu��cu ricw5�0��ci � aiiu �i�B NC � � ..� � � newsletter, one from the Park year, one in connection with the tax assessments, for the legislature, fall school opening and, of course, this August in connection with the park bond issue. It was suggested that if we coordinate this in some way that the schools might print it at a lesser cost. We left the meeting to exchange the Radisson and Governmental CommissionL reports as well as the school budget cuts and with the understanding that we would promptly get back to them with a suggested date for the joint meeting. .WHEREAS, the following described tracts of land are now separate parcels: Lots 1 and 2, V. H. Adams Addition; and WHEREAS, the owners of the above tracts of land desire to combine said tracts into the following described new and separate parcels - (herein called ,,Parcels") Lot Lot 2 and,the West 8 feet of Lot 1, V.-H. Adams Addition;-and Lot 1, V. H. Adams Addition, except the West 8 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 purposes of the Subdivision and Zoning Regulations as contained in the City of Edina Ordinances Nos. 801 and 81-1; NOW, THEREFORE,'BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Edina that the conveyance and ownership 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 con- veyance thereof as separate tracts of land but are not waived for.any other prupose or as to any other provision 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 tYe prior approval of this Council as may be provided for by those ordinances. ADOPTED this 18th day of August, 1975. 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 18, 1975, and as recorded in the Minutes of said Regular Meeting. WITNESS.my hand and seal of said City this 29th day of August, 1975. City Clerk aPPICENTERS WAREHOUSE-SHOWROOMS 4936 FRANCE AVENUE SOUTH, EDINA, MINNESOTA 55410 • 5008 34th AVENUE SOUTH, MINNEAPOLIS, MINNESOTA 55417 TELEPHONE: 927 -4396 TELEPHONE: 721$219 July 29,1975 Edina City Council 4801 W. 50th Street Edina, Minnesota 55424 Dear Council, In conjunction with the reconstruction of 49h Street please add a 6" water line to my building at 4936 France Avenue, South. I request you acess the cost over a 5 year period. "SEE US FOR THE BEST BUYS" lz h - . ZMAITHWAS ALD E AV ---jj M D < 0 o St L%- ORE LA4f J-. F THE H' --Ltr r ERMAN 14V E O S 0 cr wl0 HAROLD WOODS t:z2E sub d l*v is iu,,� n REQUEST NUMBER: , S-75-15 LOCATION: 6621 Waterman Avenue REQUEST: 3 lot single family plat i4lInfle, viurjge of edinp —r AvE 41 SCrp 3) EDINA:P.LANN.ING:COMMISSION STAFF REPORT' -July :30, 1975 S -75 -15 Brown's Addition of Edina. 6621 Waterman Avenue. Refer to: Attached area map and parkland dedication report. The proponents are requesting to subdivide the attached shown parcel of property into three single family lots. There presently exists a house on the southwest corner of lot 1. Lot 2 and Lot 3 will be 12,623 square feet. The neighboring lots.vary in size, but approximate 11,000 square feet. Water and sewer. services are presently in the street and are adequate for the use from this site. In connection with the subdivision, the staff has required that Waterman 'be cul- de- saced, as it would never be extended through the cemetery property., Recommendation: The staff would recommend approval for the following reasons: 1. The use is in conformance with the Western Edina Plan. 2. The lot sizes are adequate for the neighborhood. . Approval is recommended with the following stipulations: 1. That a developer's agreement be entered into for the cul -de -sac. 2. That a cash in lieu of parkland dedication be submitted per the attached parkland dedication report. GL: In 7/25/74 'e. EDINA:P.LANN.ING:COMMISSION STAFF REPORT' -July :30, 1975 S -75 -15 Brown's Addition of Edina. 6621 Waterman Avenue. Refer to: Attached area map and parkland dedication report. The proponents are requesting to subdivide the attached shown parcel of property into three single family lots. There presently exists a house on the southwest corner of lot 1. Lot 2 and Lot 3 will be 12,623 square feet. The neighboring lots.vary in size, but approximate 11,000 square feet. Water and sewer. services are presently in the street and are adequate for the use from this site. In connection with the subdivision, the staff has required that Waterman 'be cul- de- saced, as it would never be extended through the cemetery property., Recommendation: The staff would recommend approval for the following reasons: 1. The use is in conformance with the Western Edina Plan. 2. The lot sizes are adequate for the neighborhood. . Approval is recommended with the following stipulations: 1. That a developer's agreement be entered into for the cul -de -sac. 2. That a cash in lieu of parkland dedication be submitted per the attached parkland dedication report. GL: In 7/25/74 A LJ LLJ Z 2 5 2 ii 24 23 4 22 5 '2 21 6 20 7 9 a 17 10 16 11 IS 12 Y-1 60 1. (4001 Z Lli X Z LANE • 2 6' 22 25 2 24 21 23 4 22 5 6 21 20 7 cr Mom C, IB 17 10 I G ;5 1 0 g213 U)135 f',?5 26 '2955 331 3 3 2 24 23 4 C^ 'CL AV -E. 5 44 Zia I PARK GRA ND KE spill, Cemetery Association .2 492.37 ;!Ci w . (3200) -JL o J6 4�' 2 13 0 (3800) 107.4. 83-33 1,5,5 0 C / �4 r/ 0 7 6 5 A DER Y 14- jo j ied- (2200)' Zx '(0600) �13 (2000) :(3000 /0 1p q J, J, t IDS Co 5urieyor Records 330 3 22 5 21 6 — 0 V) 20 7 : 6 I I: ; w 19 cr 8 C, IB ct: < 9 NLLJ 17 1 0 U)135 ( 9 c• 16 > —cr, a: log 12 15 60 '4 125 .42 8 '2 33 3 C^ 'CL AV -E. 5 44 Zia I PARK GRA ND KE spill, Cemetery Association .2 492.37 ;!Ci w . (3200) -JL o J6 4�' 2 13 0 (3800) 107.4. 83-33 1,5,5 0 C / �4 r/ 0 7 6 5 A DER Y 14- jo j ied- (2200)' Zx '(0600) �13 (2000) :(3000 /0 1p q J, J, t IDS Co 5urieyor Records 330 3 LA WATERMAN 3307 Me.Ae:ssohn il° to 588.92 Torr. No. 11114 00" ICU: 135So CO ou c 131-01 r CZY 15 CC) 4 C' CC 5 —5. Torn No 11994 14 9.3 1 0. NanO-E '�46 ------- INTERLAGHE44— - 330 mendeissol-nn ,p 6' I U)135 ( 9 c• > —cr, a: log ]v W z 5 0 See 23ok L-14,4211 2 Co. Surveyor r7c- sLvc-us ��t 34.74.;. Co. sL;rvevor 1 4 - — Is ;' 5 'West a, I : 45 LA WATERMAN 3307 Me.Ae:ssohn il° to 588.92 Torr. No. 11114 00" ICU: 135So CO ou c 131-01 r CZY 15 CC) 4 C' CC 5 —5. Torn No 11994 14 9.3 1 0. NanO-E '�46 ------- INTERLAGHE44— - 330 mendeissol-nn Subdivision No.. SUBDIVISION DEDICATION REPORT TO: Planning Commission Park Board Environmental Quality Commission FROM: Planning Department ex,p ( F SUBDIVISION NAME: '��'L i�f'Owi� � � -75 7 3 C' 0 C) LAND SIZE: �� . %� G �1C ! LA 5,D VALUE: (By: Date• 7-'7!�i ) 5% _ $ L400, ®O -The developer of this subdivision has b. een required to C1 A. grant an easement over part Pof the land [� B., dedicate % of the land .C. donate $(_'� as ,a fee in lieu of land as a result of applying the following-policy: A. Land Required (no density or intensity may be used for the first 5/ of land dedicated) E] 1. If property is adjacent to an existing park and. the addition beneficially expands the park. ❑ 2. If property is 6 acres or will be combined with future dedications so that the end result will be a minimum of a 6 acre park. 3. If property abuts a. natural. lake, pond, or stream. [] 4. If property is necessary for storm grater holding and will be dredged or otherwise improved 'and brill be a scenic place. [] 5. If the property is a place of significant natural, scenic or historic value. ❑ 6, B. Cash Required �1. In all other instances than above. ❑ 2• 7 -3075 Planning Commission Minutes S -75 -15 Brown's Addition of Edina. 6621 Waterman Avenue. Mr. Luce explained the proponent's request to subdivide the property in question into three single family lots. A single family home presently exists on one lot, which would be 43,500 square feet. Lots 2 and 3 would be 77' X 162' (12,623 square feet). The lots in the neighborhood vary in size but are approximately 11,000 square feet. Mr. Luce recommended approval of the requested three lot subdivision, subject to receipt of a 5% cash parkland dedication in the amount of $1400.00. Discussion was held regarding that part of lot 1 (100' X 154') south of lots 2 and 3. Mr. Luce indicated that that land would serve as additional yard area for the Brown residence, which is setback considerably from Waterman Avenue. He noted also that that portion of lot 1 could eventually become a buildable lot if the properties to the south or east were developed and public access was made available. A motion approving the preliminary plat of Brown's Addition of Edina, contingent on receipt of a 5% cash parkland dedication in the amount of $1400, .was made by Mr. G. Johnson and seconded by Mr. Runyan. All voted aye. Motion carried. • L.00ATION MAP Win:.. a s.� � � �t � �_""'+ � L•� ' 4 S REQUEST NUMBER: S-75 -16 N of W. 78th Street and LOCATION: E of Gleason Road REQUEST: Replat altering one building location. N'il(nt�e nlannitta de"rtmcnt yivagr of ed' EDINA PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT July 30,1975 S -75 -16 Braemar Hills 8th Addition. Generally located north of W. 78th Street and east of Gleason Road. The proponents are .requesting to resubdivide for the purpose of moving block 6 of Braema -r Hills 7th Addition across the private drive. There would 'be no increased density nor would any rezoning be required. The City Engineer and myself have reviewed the proponent's request on the .site, and after considerable discussion we recommend that the rearrangement be approved. The existing block 6elocation is crowded between two buildings and is on an extremely high bluff which would be very visible from Gleason Road. The relocated structure (now called block 1 of Braemar Hills 8th Addition) would set against the back of ,a hill and would allow a greater perception of open space. The relocation would not cause any further grading of this site. GL:ln 7/25/75 r EDINA PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT July 30,1975 S -75 -16 Braemar Hills 8th Addition. Generally located north of W. 78th Street and east of Gleason Road. The proponents are .requesting to resubdivide for the purpose of moving block 6 of Braema -r Hills 7th Addition across the private drive. There would 'be no increased density nor would any rezoning be required. The City Engineer and myself have reviewed the proponent's request on the .site, and after considerable discussion we recommend that the rearrangement be approved. The existing block 6elocation is crowded between two buildings and is on an extremely high bluff which would be very visible from Gleason Road. The relocated structure (now called block 1 of Braemar Hills 8th Addition) would set against the back of ,a hill and would allow a greater perception of open space. The relocation would not cause any further grading of this site. GL:ln 7/25/75 . rr», ws•- �e!• n•.- r.-.. R..•-.' s• �+.. s^, 1^^ sw...- e•+•.•.'^^•-.. �,+ wr.!'• r 't+'+.^!"'T�..•�- ...�- r- r•. -•-. . r�+:•: v•'tTie'f^`�'smen'r•�- rf`!� -�.: v!'^'T"'"1 "�.""�*'....'�.�,`w'r .•.."'."'''"r° -.-.� ....... .... , i :IOC' 4 L y 4 . _ r —� 6 M A •R .. I fl J0; 1: �,• �--, MILL i' T _wp0„ AREA TC BE PLATTE AS BRAE MAR'HPLLS 8TH AD ITION Icr v of 76 th r i .'� l ... p. � � •� • `4 ' • � •� Via; ,:• 1. _ T App• • j V'� 'N' • .a•,• ,/� �•�; EST �� iil J .. • ' 1 i• u •!''.: •1T S` •i :: r •! `fir 11.... • - ,� - 1, ; :•;: � 1NE ,.,. - ;t ILA. -- �L _ ' STPEES v�`' +••• �? ,•� N a $00 a 0 r 0 4•a 2 9. $ s S• too 9 04° �a 1 °o'$ ' - tools w �4•)T,3 t�' - ,[ -777- boon .- OOti o $ �•,eiE - r "oT -).' •-.r--- -.; . �i' 2 1 _ r.- oQOO N�'•o ��o,s 195.00- 50 10 32E H ��- -- 44.15•. I:.::.:..: i. ; �• N$ ��?�b o' ,$,� n •s0000,E.: _ -1. ti LOT 1....:. BLOCK 2 W I N 46.00. .. IO . e .' _ -..:�: R 'n arm -- • - /:'\• .�\ �, . F o1 eet s0 S i- - - - - -- . — = I I NT40� I N�3� /OS \S_ / �� - - -I --- — - -- 4 7 7= I . _ I ry32 y /ye �` P H .I 2vSBs Solo /, 2,3 ,t zd 4 , /3/ocE 6 and all l%rlp r4Z o/E .o[ ; 9,1.,e /4, BPAEMA4 WILLS 7TN AOOI T /ON/ a[cO ?diRq Eo % r {hr arco4drd glad tfeaeo�, oa /,Yr and of 4reo•rd /a MA o// /lice of fife Z yiate¢ of dhede • /lrnarpu+ County, AfL=raola,deac/ri6rd aa/ollarue.: _. Commeariaq aL !le nnalh`o ofr. t/y co -rae2 of 9¢id BlocE /4, t/eraer 3 o•/o'JY•E Caaattared bra¢iayJ along the raa.Lre y lsir� e Aa /.! /: /.�/ /I aka /,rinr .� /'/�. on �rr/ /n / /.r /nn/ nj/ /,.•gins inq nr /!re //nircr! /foreria di.c ¢i ifr.f; lhrnir S3n'on'! / "E alnay //rr norfF!anfrTfy G of a• /n( h// /4 a + /anar• /�!l4f. R.T w.f; //ivaCr Sl4' /7'J /'W n /av,9 Me v 4rxJ..4 e•rererly live e/ Z— onid Aroc! N C -. 4ielaaee o/ 435.00 �rrf !o /Ar aoaZ4 radZ Coonrr o/ adid RIo( /. /4/ fifrvee N 63'rY'/J "W olony fkr oew/Hruvrferly AAA of arv'd Blec! M a dufe+rcv o� 4S 601"f f lbrsr< nozlifirrale•r /y o /ary said muliF /urefrrly lcae a ©wlnncr of /sn. r /�.f rr /oay a laa9rafia 1. Cuvr, ean<aw !o dada Lea (e ial da�� n/ / /'J/f •.T / "; lhra•r NS1'47'tu "/✓ ,) /nny enr.! anrr //in... /erly /rsr a din taaci o/ 146-80111 / /encr N!2 JJ'24 "E Q die /anie of 9J. 8.s�•!/ /Grucr SSS'St'is "F cr /'alir�,ri of 4/. Jl� /`f /hia r N Jf 'lrt'J7 "£ a delr/aer a! /n 7. 99�•ef ; /hancr NS'4J'4a "W adia<mur gd NSq*49b6'l,1,__! 1.•1 /•••lh //r nnv /h M— o/ raid' Al —A /f, o dielsnre -T 4nn. n.T�raL,/nn +r or /iaa, eo !Ae rna /•rely /:.,! n�ani,/ h /...r N;G1+,... Su'n,7/Y' a /•n/• a•uil nre: •. /J 4J /s oc! nrnrr or baa I-' ! /.,.�oautL o� %rgciiuiry• i• �o i � 3 pro ry O, ' co q- Gnr a . /ia /.r ,cr Of j,.•7^,,F'°q,'hf''',•""r"";�we! .. I .7 u:L_.. :ham a :'./..L. .. . ... .. 7 -30 -75 Planning'Commission Minutes S -75 -16 Braemar Hills 8th Addition. Generally located north of W. 78th Street and east of Gleason Road. Mr. Luce stated the property in the proposed subdivision, presently block 6 of Braemar Hills 7th Addition, is the only undeveloped lot remaining in the "Hills of Braemar" townhouse development. The proponents are requesting to move that building site to the east.side of the.private road for mortgage purposes and to allow more open.space between the structures. If constructed as originally platted, the units on block 6 would be crowded between those on blocks 5 and 7 and would be built on an extremely high bluff, visible from Gleason Road. Noting the parkland dedication requirement has already been met and no additional grading will be necessary, Mr. Luce recommended the requested subdivision be approved because no additional buildable lots would be created and the overall site layout would be improved. After brief discussion, Mr. Hughes moved the preliminary plat of Braemar Hills 8th Addition be approved as presented. Mr. Kremer seconded the motion. All voted aye. Motion carried. NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARINGS The Metropolitan Transit Commission will conduct two public hearings on the proposed 5 cents increase in the surcharge applied to freeway ex- press bus service, from the present 5 cents surcharge to a new surcharge of 10 cents. The hearings will be on Tuesday, August 26, 1975, at 7:30 PM- in the Bloomington City Hall, 2215 West Old Shakopee Road, Bloomington, MN, 55433; and on Wednesday, August 27, 1975, at 7:30 PM in the Maplewood Fire Station, Hazelwood Avenue and County Road C, Maplewood, MN. The public is invited to attend the hearings and comment on the pro- posed surcharge increase. C. D. Andre Chief Administrator August 8, 1975 Nlllage of cEdin a 4501 WEST FIFTIETH STREET • EDINA. MINNESOTA 53424 92%.8861 RESOLUTION APPROVING FINAL PLAT OF ROUSHAR SQUARE BE IT RESOLVED by the Village Council of the Village of Edina, Minnesota, that that certain plat entitled."Roushar Square ", platted by Darrell A. Farr Development Corporation and First Wisconsin National Bank of Milwaukee and presented at the Regular Meeting of the Edina Village-Council of December 17, 1973, be and is hereby granted final plat approval. ADOPTED this 17th day of December, 1973. 1 \�5 STATE OF MINNESOTA ) COUNTY OF HENNEPIN) SS VILLAGE OF EDINA_ ) CERTIFICATE OF VILLAGE CLERK I, the undersigned duly appointed and acting Village Clerk for the Village of Edina, do- hereby certify that the attached and foregoing resolution was duly adopted by the Edina Village Council at its Regular Meeting of December 17, 1973, and as recorded in the Minutes of said Regular Meeting. WITNESS my hand and seal this 18th day of December, 1973. Village Clerk June 4, 1975 City of Edina 4801 West 50th Street Edina, Minnesota Re: Roushar Square.Proposed Plat Gentlemen: The undersigned, fee owner of the above referenced property, hereby relinquish any and all claims for zoning, p'1at, ,plan development, or other approvals that may have''b'eein` granted or any approvals for the development of'the above referenced site that may be pending. The above referenced site contains 16± acres and is located on Highway 18 between Fabri -Tek and the Edina West Condo- miniums. Very sincerely, DARREL A.. 'FARR 'DEVELORMENT CORP. Darrel A. Farr President DAF:hm e- 1'ARRELA. PARR C ®K Offices In: Denver, Colorado • Albuquerque, New Mexico Executive Offices TELEPHONE 612 / 560 8110 2810 COUNTY ROAD 10 MINNEAPOLIS, MINNESOTA 55430 -a // c ... June 23, 1975 City of Edina c/o Thomas S. Erickson Dorsey, Narquart, Windhorst, West & Halladay 2300 First National Bank Building Minneapolis, Minnesota 55402 Re: Roushar Square Gentlemen: U -A- ( We are the mortgagee of the property described within the proposed plat of Roushar Square in the City of Edina. Please be advised that we hereby relinquish all right, title and interest in the proposed platting of Roushar Square as well as any underlying zoning permits, uses, deposits, fees and other charges which may have been delivered or presented to the City in connection therewith. We understand that the owner of the property, Darrel A. Farr Development Corp., has similarly relinquished all such rights in and to such plat and related documents. Very truly yours, FIRST W CONSIN NATIONAL BANK By Aemrrrts�JAGE imKiNA Ofnc C 0 R P E SEAL; � PLO RESOLUTION RaQUESTING hMiWESOTA HIGhWAY DEPARTMENT TO DECREASE SPEED LI141T ON W. 78TH STREET BETWEEN CAHILL ROAD AND HEivNEPIN COUNTY i10. 13 Wmzw, , W. 78th Street has a speed limit of 50 miles per hour at the present time; and WHEREAS, it is no longer a state hia;'away, having been turned back to the City of Bloomington and the City of Edina; NOW, THEREFOP.c., BE IT RESOLVED that the City of Edina requests that the ilir.nesota I:ighway Department conduct a survey to determine the desirability of decreasing the speed limit on West 78th Street between Cahill Road and Henne- pin County Highway #18 from 50 to 35 miles per hour. DKrED this 15th day of August, 1975. STATE OF M_ININESOTA ) COUNTY OF EIE'NAEPI:1) SS CITY OF EDINA ) CERTIFICATL OF CITY CLERK I, the undersigned duly appointed and acting City Clerk for the City of Ediaa, do hereby certify that the attached and foregoing resolution was duly adopted by the Edina City Council at its Regular Meeting of August 1G, 1975, and as recorded in the Minutes of said Regular Meeting. WITNESS try hand aad seal of said City this 22nd day of August, 1975. - City Clerk Sep unbcr-22-, a O3�l U lti Traffic Engineer District 5 Hiunanota State Hialway Departmant 2055 N. Lilac Drive Goldon Valley, Minnesota Daar flirt Enclosed is a copy of a resolution adopted by the Edina V , Council raquaating the Hinnesota Highway Department to de¢ra^se the speed limit on W. 78th Street tween I-IM xaosetm�` � • and Henn- apin County 418 from 50 to W miles per hour. Yours very truly, v Village Cleat cct Bloomington Director of Engineering Edina polio+ De=partment L----Ziina Engineering Department r • RESOLUTION P,E4USSTUIG r URMSOTA ttIG1'�1AY DBPArMMNT TO DECRSASR SPLED LMET ON We 78T11 STI'�%L"1' BI:ZS+]I:EN Z ! Ah'D 11E1,RI9PFN COMT_TY_ #18 W11EP,AS, West 713th Street has a speed limit of 50 Idles per hour at the present time; and W"ERZAS, it is no longer a stator highway. h ° � turned back to " the City of Bloomington and the V of Edina-, Ina of Edina requests that NOW T1MM -ORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the ins the the�Minnasota 11ij hway Depaftmant conduct a ouzvey to determine desirability -of c1ecreaeing the speed limit on Walt 713th Street between • / / end 11annepin County itighWay iPlt3 £rota 50 to 30 Idles per hour. =Wv1Ug#M Dated this , 3v& Any of August, • STATE OF MowsSOTA) ' COUNTY OF 1II3IrPIN ) SS VILLAGE OF EDINA ) CE n-ORTE c CIMS I the undersigned duly appointed and acting Viilane Clert: for the Vill- ago of. Edina. do harrby certify that the t�bove and foregoing ular t revolution ctin,, was duly adopted by the Ec'._na Villa. 38 Council at ito Reg o f• , and as recorded in ttie'lUnutes of said p,,egular Meeting. TNESS my hand and seal of said Village thisIILy of August, -'• Village. Clark ,twTE O �'NE$0 WENDELL R. ANDERSON GOVERNOR STATE OF MINNESOTA OFFICE OF THE GOVERNOR ST. PAUL 55155 August 11, 1975 Ms. Florence B. Hallberg, Clerk 4801 West Fiftieth Edina, Minnesota 55424 Dear Ms. Hallberg: During the last legislative session your city sent in a resolution urging support of my proposal to return gross earning revenue to local governments. Since so many cities sent in messages of support, I did not have the time to thank you because of the pressure of the legislative session. However, I would like to take this opportunity to thank you for your efforts. While we did not realize the passage of the gross earning bill itself, we were able to include in the final tax package a very large increase in Local Government Aid. While the increase in Local Gov- ernment Aid overall was not as large as the funds the gross earning bill would have given to muncipalities, I have no doubt that there would have been no increase without the strong effort put forth for the gross earning bill. WRA : j w With warmest personal regards. 1- Sincerely, W6*76&Z1 � • I.A*P44w. Wendell R. Anderson 29..August, 1975 The Honorable Wendell.R. Anderson GOVERNOR OF THE STATE OF MINNESOTA 130 State Capitol .St. Paul, MN 55101 Dear Governor Anderson, City of C4 d ffdoo M- 4801 WEST FIFTIETH 'STREET • EDINA, MINNE50TA 55424 927 -8861 Your letter of August 11 to Mrs. Florence Hallberg, City Clerk, thanking the City of Edina for supporting your proposal to return gross earning revenue to local governments, was received very well at the City Council meeting, August 18. Mayor James Van Valkenburg and the Council noted with interest and expectation your statement that, "we were able to include in the final tax package a very large increase in Local Government Aid ". At the same meeting, the Mayor and Council were advised of a letter of July 14 from Commissioner of Revenue Roemer to the City Clerk which stated that Edina's 1976 Local Government Aid will be $843,137.47. Having anticipated additional funds on the basis of your letter, the Mayor and Council were aghast.when I advised them that Edina, along with most of the other municipalities in Hennepin and Ramsey Counties, will receive absolutely no increase over the 1975 payments. Of the 45 cities in Hennepin County, only 22.will receive more in 1976, and 5 of those* receive less than, $5,000 additional. While the Hennepin County total is about $12.5 million more, one city, not surprisingly in view of its political profile, gets over $10 million additional next year. Need I name the city? Minneapolis! I was directed by the Mayor and Council to call this anomaly to your personal attention. The Ramsey County figures on 1976 Local Government Aid reveal a generally similar situation as that in Hennepin County, namely, the central city, St. Paul, receiv- ing $4,745,000 of the $4,850,000 additional. Only 3 of the 17 suburbs are granted more in 1976. .It is significant to note, I believe, that the other "winners" in :the legislative .take and pu,t game, like Bloomington, Brooklyn Center, Brooklyn Park, Minnetonka, Richfield -;and Robb.insdale, all have much higher three- ,year average :mill ra -tes and :lower :1974 sales ratios than Edina. Apparently, the formula works to the advantage of the municipali 'ties which have not made as great an effort as Edina has to comply with State and County guide- lines on property value assessment practices, and to those who have kept their tax rates as high as possible. Also related-to the whole problem is a statement in the MINNEAPOLIS TRIBUNE of August 18, 1975. This is contained in the second of three articles on teachers' The Honorable Wendell R. Anderson Page Two 29 August, 1975 salaries and public employee pensions in Minnesota by Bernie Shellum and Steve Dornfeld. The statement is "Last year, a single telephone call from the office of Minneapolis Mayor Albert Hofstede was sufficient to exclude the city from a bill designed to phase out local (pension) funds ". In other words, Minneapolis is not willing to face the political problems of refinancing its very expensive, fiscally unsound police, fire and general employee pension funds. You are aware, I am certain, of the legislative efforts made over many years by cities of the second and third class -to freeze or phase out similar funds. Minneapolis pension costs are exorbitant. One of the reasons I resisted any move toward a city charter for Edina was because charter adoption, until a few years ago, brought with it automatic inheritance of the special pension fund legislation. In negotiating with labor unions on salaries and particularly fringe benefits for police, fire fighters, and public works personnel, we of the suburbs are constantly faced with the much higher figures granted by Minneapolis, St. Paul, and the two major counties. Our employees are paid reasonably well on an absolute basis, but not in comparison to those of our big brothers. A comparison of the municipalities which are not receiving any additional State - Aid next year with the 24 cities which were the losers in the so- called "Fiscal Disparities" finagling indicates that only seven of them get some relief. Two of the seven, Mendota Heights and Woodbury, are in the plus column by very small amounts. (See list attached). Minneapolis and St. Paul were, again, the big winners. A review of Federal Revenue Sharing would, I believe, show that the cities which lost in "Fiscal Disparities" and receive no additional State -Aid in 1976 are also the cities receiving the lowest per capita grants. In conclusion, the 1975 legislative formula continues to penalize economical, efficient local government and rewards cities with high tax rates and low sales ratios. It completely overlooks the source of state income tax paid by residents. Very truly arren C. H, CITY MANAGE! bgd 11�r -tom Attachment Copies: Mayor /Council Edina Sun Minneapolis Star /Tribune - ;'.W - ��•l ; - u /i����= Sri ``ztT� Legislators L Suburban City rfanagers �- �� League of Municipalities — ' ='t `t: L� �vr� f.IC /� `� t% St. Paul Dispatch __. • . . -... /' .`t..11i ').7 t-.✓ L ✓lri .tC� //1�.i ti! . J � p�rti, .:,J %''�t �L- - .L:..CfL., i�{t.r --.� '1 . /�- �.Lt- .- ��I�CC� / L �" r''�'` ''° . ^.' •�' �- r t FISCAL DISPARITIES Amount of Total Losers Gain 74 over 71 Contribution Distribution Net Change Edina. V/11' 23,130,160 •9,252,067 1,709,843 - 7,542,224 Bloomington r 29,707, 530 11,883, 015 4,454115 -7,431,900 Inver Grove ts;�13,641,370 5,456551 1,139,832 - 4,316,719 Shakopee 11,897,480 4,758,992 616,488 - 4,142,504 i Plymouth 11,495,090 4,598,.039 i,236,424 - 3,361,615 i 1 Golden "Valley to 10,943,150 4,377,261 1,099,132 - 3,278, 129 i 1 Fridley -13,137,6.6.o 5,255, 066 2,114,313 -3,14o,753 Maplewood 10,599,870 -4,239,951* 1,433,408 - 2,806,543 Eagan 8,641,010 3,456,405.. 749,790 - 2,706,615 Burnsville f 8,890,350 3 , 556143 1,449,816 -2,106,327 Eden Prairie 5,892,860. 2,357,145 260,890 - 2,096,255 Minnetonka -}' 9,174,820 3,669,931 2,280,270 - 1,389,661 Little Canada 3,128,130 1,2510255 384,328 - 866,92? Chaska 3,467,372 1,386,949 525,131 - 861,818 Hopkins t/ 4,421,580 1,768,632 968,672, .- 799,960 Savage 1// 2,327, 950 931,181 172,245 -758,936 Bleine 8,627,730 3;450,921. 2,748,358 - 7C2,563 7 .Lakeville � 3,602,220 1,440,891 828,092 . - 612,799 New Hope .V 6,111,350 2,4 4,542 1,865,809 - 578,733 Arden hi 11 1,933',550 773,1x2.1 255,:;2 - 517, 479 Mendota ht s. 1,820,830 724,335 3fi6,214 - 282,121 ��u�� 1 ; Wooci'oury �i 1,093,230 797295 445,616 - 351,679 west St. Paul +- 3,843,320 1,537,328 1,339,944 - 1971384 Roseville ✓ 8,232,710 3,293,083 2,001,536 - 1,291,547 � � Ce n{y ?7•t�'i CLt�4CW % "�kl' r' �r /r y MEMORANDUM TO: Warren C. Hyde, City Manager FROM: Greg Luce, City Planner SUBJECT: Low Income Person Home Improvement Program- Please recall that the City of'Edina. will receive $20,000 on September 1, 1975, through the Community Development Act for the improvement of single family structures owned and occupied by low .income persons. While this seems like a great deal of money, it is not enough to spend significant administrative time disbursing it. Therefore, I would suggest that the distribution of these funds be handled in conjunction with an existing program, state, federal, local or whatever, so that the City of Edina does not become a bank. One method would be to tie ourselves in witli,the Minnesota Housing Finance Agency's loan program.(M.H.F.A.). This' pr� rovid-es for a 7 3/4% loan Z" home improvements to persons w o� ��a, ess than $16,000 yearlyJ! I would suggest that-anyone who q" ua�i ies for that loan program would qualify for a grant from the City of Edina of 20% of the loan amount, up to $1,000.00. If we spend the money in this. manner, we would not be responsible for checking the person's references and income; this would instead be handled by the State of Minnesota or by the bank. Other ways to use,this money wisely would include partially subsidizing persons for insulating their homes, blacktopping their driveways, or other modern code enforcement requirements. If we were to do the latter, we should put an 'income limitation on it but this would require us to check applications.- We have received a great deal of encouragement from the Morningside Neighborhood Association to get underway with this program as soon as possible so that the private sector improvements can be made in conjunction with public sector improvements. �LL ! ✓ � ��� -�-i �' --�^- C''��'��(.C� �� 'I.� ---ten GL : In (QJ August 13, 1975 :13 , Min ,, league of Minnesota municipalities SPECIAL MW TO: City Clerks in Cities Operating Municipal Liquor Stores FROM: Dean A. Lund, Executive Director PLEASE READ AND PASS ON; TO" YOUR RE: Use of Blank Checks in Liquor Purchasing LIQUOR.STORE MANAGER The 1973 law which broke up liquor brand monopolies in Minnesota is now beginning to have effect. Nearly all liquor wholesalers in Minnesota have recently announced new pricing policies. In general these new poll- in prices lower and much more consistent than before. However, lower prices are going to force the wholesalers to cut their overhead costs by cutting services to customers. The new.ordering policies that are currently being instituted by most wholesalers are a by- product of the new law. In order to cut bookkeeping costs, the liquor wholesalers are no longer going to .carry accounts receivable (extend credit) or keep back order files. All orders will be on,a cash 3 basis, requiring either payment in full or a covering deposit. The whole- salers are suggesting that for quickest service, customers send in with any order a signed check,,';made out to the proper payee, but with the amount left blank. It is the conclusion of "the League and the Office of "the.State Auditor that it would not be legal "for any statutory"city in Minnesota to send "out blank checks for any purpose. Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 412 requires, `that each order check be audited and-approved by the city council before: " it: is--., signed and issued. To be meaningful, this must obviously be approval:.of" a specific amount. Municipal clerks should insist that wholesalers' salesmen or_other:repre- sentatives explain the other acceptable ordering methods, of which there are many. Any questions or problems may of course be directed to the League research staff. 8/13/75 DAL:LMF:pjr 300 hanover building, 4130 cedar street, saint paul, minnesota 55101 C61 21 222 -21361 1! r► LABOR RELATIONS ASSOCIATES, INC. 303 Hanover Building 480 Cedar Street St. Paul, Minnesota 55101 C.F.Smythe P.E.Obermeyer K.A.Olsen LL.Compton August 6, 1975 Telephone: 227 -7541 Area Code 612 TO: CITY MANAGERS M.A.M.A. -320 COMMUNITIES FROM: C. F. Smythe Labor Relations Associates, Inc. SUBJECT: AN EVALUATION OF THE M.A.M.A.- TEAMSTERS, LOCAL NO. 320 ARBITRATION AWARD OF AUGUST- 1, 1975 A review of this award leads logically to.two conclusions, 1. Multi- employer bargaining with an "essential" employee group with.the right to mandatory arbitration gives the employees the best of all possible worlds. 2. These arbitrators (J. C. Fogelberg, H. G. Heneman, Jr., and George Jacobs) paid no discernible attention to the total cost of their award - either to the "average" municipality covered by the award or to certain communities. These conclusions appear to be logical ones based on the following facts of the award: Best of all possible worlds conclusion a. With regard to the issues of holidays vacation insurance education incentive - longevity injury in line of duty pay. The arbitrators issued rulings which did not establish the multi - employer standard in the above areas but only,minimums. Thus, employees with better benefits than the minimums retain them, but employees with lower benefits get increases to the new minimum. :10 1 ARBITRATION AWARD EVALUATION August 6, 1975 Page Two ..Almost no progress, therefore, has been, made toward standard - ization. The only result is to increase (in some cases drastically) costs in these areas. Multi - employer arbitration to this arbitration panel is a "no way the employees can lose but many ways the employee can win" game. b. Wages - The split wage award gives the employees a 12.9% increase in their base rate. The $1,230 /month rate places these employees well above the average non - Teamster Group V settlement of $1,216 /month or 11.4% over the average 1974 rate. There appears to be no visible rational basis for this increase of 1.5% increase above the Group V average. Nor. does the panel in its award give any written reason or justification for their wage award. c. Despite the language of M.S. 179.66, Subd. 1, which states that a. public employer is not required to meet and negotiate about "selection" of employees and Minnesota Chapter 419, the panel ruled that "senior qualified employees have first preference on the job ". In addition to the fact that this award is of questionable legality and should not be implemented by the municipalities involved, the award is vague. What..is "the job "? Obviously only a "job" within the bargaining unit is a job. The question remains, however, is a shift assignment a job, is a transfer to different duties without a change in job classification,a change in "job "? This section of the award appears appropriate for court review.. ARBITRATION AWARD EVALUATION August 6, 1975 Page Three Thus, the award appears to mean -that multi - employer bargaining without the employer allowed the decision of.strike or arbitrate is a win -win proposition for the union and a lose -lose one for the employers. If this multi- employer arbitration had resulted in standards being set for all - then multi- employer bargaining with .essential employees would be worth trying to preserve. However with this result, apparently employers have nothing to gain by continuing to bargain jointly with any group.of "essential" employees. Total Cost Analysis Each municipality can estimate the total dollar and percentage cost for their own police department. For a number of municipalities this cost will exceed sixteen percent. This cost with the names of the panel cited, can be reported to the local newspapers along with that section on seniority which would not allow the City to select the most qualified person for a job. The public may be interested and may be 'entitled to know the costs to them of this panel's ruling and what mandatory arbitration in Minnesota can mean. Conclusion This panel's award should - receive the publicity it merits for the level of costs it imposes and the impact on multi - employer bargaining it dictates. CFS:hfc :10 IN THE MATTER OF ARBITRATION OPINION AND AWARD between Metropolitan Area Managers Association Impasse Arbitration I and Minnesota Teamsters Public & PER Case No. 75 -PN -381 -A Law Enforcement Employees_ Union Local 320 APPEARANCES For Metropolitan Area Managers Association (hereafter referred to as M.A.M.A.) C. F. Smythe; Consultant - Thomas Lewcock, Chairman,M.A.M.A. James Hill, Public Safety Director, Fridley For.the Union Jack Mogelson, Business Agent Robert Weisenburger,. Business Agent Larry Bastian, Business Agent STATEMENT OF JURISDICTION - In accordance with the Public Employment Labor Relations Act of 1971, M.S.A. 179.72, as amended, the Director of the Bureau of Mediation Services certified the issues, stated herein after, as being at.impasse and invoked the Parties request for binding arbitration. The Panel of Arbitrators was selected by the Parties from a list submitted by the Director. A Hearing in the matter -was convened at 10:00 A.M., June 9, 1975 in Bloomington, Minnesota and was concluded on that same date. The following issues were certified by the Director to the Panel for resolution. ISSUES AT IMPASSE - 1 . Wages '6.: Retroactivity 11. Sick leave 2. Holidays 7. Education incentive 12. Severance 3. Vacation 8. Longevity pay 13. Standby pay 3. Insurance 9. Seniority 14. Uniform allowance 5. Contract term 10. Line of duty pay 15. Contract language modification ISSUE NO. 1: WAGES The Union Contends -, A. That wages be adjusted by 21 % plus a cost of living provision. B. That personnel assigned on either a temporary or full time basis as an Investigator, receive a $150.00 monthly wage differential. M.A.M.A. Contends.: ' . A. That the 1974 wage rate of the "benchmark" job classification (top patrol officer). be adjusted by 10% for the 1975 contract year. B. That investigators be paid at the patrol officer wage schedule. AWARD - Both parties in this dispute offered considerable data in support of their respective positions regarding the issue of Wages. This information, which was thoroughly examined and discussed by the panel, rLL Page two . suited in the following award: The"1974 benchmark rate is to be adjusted in 1975 with two staggered increases 1) From $1,089 to $1,200, retroactive to January 1, 1975; and 2) an adjustment to,$1,230 effective July 1, 1975. As to the - differential pay for Investigators, effective July 1,, 197,5any.personnel,in the bargaining unit assigned Investigator duty, either full or part time, shall receive a $75 monthly wage differential. ISSUE NO._ 2 : H The Union Contends: A. That employees required to work a holiday shall receive double time credit toward the work year plus an additional day off in lieu of the holiday. B. That employees who are on a regular day off when a holiday is scheduled shall receive an addition- al days credit toward the work year. C. That the minimum number of holidays for the contract year shall be twelve. M.A.M.A. contends: That the number of holiday credit hours and /or holidays per calendar year be standardized at eighty (80) hours and /or ten (10) days. AWARD - `The`Panel in, examining the data, has noted the considerable,-!past variations amongst the 18 communi- ties represented, regarding Holidays, as well as the apparent desire of the parties to now achieve some degree of parity for both this issue and others. Accordingly, -the Panel has - concluded that significant and justifiable progress can be achieved by establishing the minimum number of :holidays in any com- munity at 10, plus one floating holiday per year. It should be noted that in making this award, the. . Panel intends that all communities who now have more than 10 holidays plus a "floater" shall not re-. duce their respective provisions to the minimum established here, but rather shall retain the greater number for the duration of the 1975 contract year. ISSUE NO 3: VACATION The Union Contends: That,paid.vacations accrue at the following rate: 0-4 years service . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 days per year 5 -1:0 years'service . . . . . . 15 days per year After 10 years service . . . ... . . . . . . . . . . . . . one additional day per year M,A.M.A. Contends: - - = That the vacation schedule be standardized at: 0 -5 years service . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5/6 dayy per month 5 -1 "5 years service . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Over '15 years service . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 -1/4 day per month . . . 1 -2/3 day per month, not to exceed 20 days AWARD- The following minimum vacation schedule is established: 0.5 years - service . . . . . . .. .. 10 days per year 6 -10 years service. . . . . . . . 15 days per year 'Over 10 years service . . . . . . . .. . . . . .. one additional day per year, not to exceed 20 days ISSUE NO 4: INSURANCE The Union Contends: A. That the Employer pay 100% of the cost of insurance premiums for the employee and his or her if ~ Page three dependents. B.�That the Employer provide Delta Dental insurance for the employee and his or her dependents and pay 100% of said premium. C. That the Employer provide. medical insurance upon retirement for the employee and his or her dependents. rM.AN.A. Contends: ' A. That the Employes -shall contri,bute'$40.00 :per month per employee toward all insurance coverage programs. B. That any award which would specify --a particular ,insurance company coverage would be in violation of the Minnesota State requirement which specifies the bidding of insurance. C. That retirement contributions and benefits are not mandatory subjects of negotiation and therefore, not properly before the Panel. AWARD - , A.* The Employer will contribute a minimum of $50.00 per month, per employee toward all insurance coverage. B. The Employers position regarding dental insurance ,is sustained. C. The Employers position regarding retirement contributions is sustained. ISSUE NO. -5.: -.CO NT•R ACT -TE'R M The parties have agreed that :the term ,of the,con.tract.shall �be for one,caiendar year. ISSUE NO 6 - RETROACTIVITY The parties have agreed that retroactivity is to be figured from the'.begrhning`of the contract term (January 1, 1975). ISSUES NO. 7 &8: EDUCATION INCENTIVE AND LONGEVITY PAY The Union Contends: A. That these two issues.be treated, separately. B. That educational incentive pay be.based on the following formula: ,a 3 %- pay,rnent f,or:one;.year.of:col .ege,.qu,aeter.credits. a ;6 ° %ipayment fort -wo years,of college quarter credits. 'a 9 %,payment forihree�yearstof- college quarter. credits. a.1`2Wpayment-for four years of` college quarter credits. - .plus, employees with less than a full year .(or years) shall receive $.60 per month for each college quarter credit. C. That a longevity formula be established as follows: - a 3% longevity increment at the 5th year of service - .a 6% longevity increment at the 9th year of service a.9`'0 longevity increment at the 12th year of service a 12% longevity increment at the 15th year of service M.A.M.A. Contends: A. That the:co lege, incentiv .e- and.longev.ity;pay.,.issues: must be considered.together. B. 'That the individual municipal:educational incentive plans remain in effect for the contract term 19.75. C. That there be no change in the present individual municipality programs and practices regarding .longevity pay.. AWARD - •It�is the Panel's view that college incentive and longevity pay cannot be considered separately in light of the collective bargaining trends already established in this area, amongst the Group V communities. Accordingly, the Panel finds that an education incentive - self- cancelling longevity program is most ..desirable and :so -instructs .the.communities r:epr.esented - here to establish such,a program. The.Panel Pagefour notes that there is some diversity among the self - cancelling plans already in effect in some 13 of the 18 communities and therefore will not attempt to establish a particular cut -off date for each munici- pality, but rather will leave it up to the various communities to establish their own cut -off dates. Further, the' Panel notes the language used ,in the Brooklyn Park contract regarding education incen- tive pay, and suggests that this provision be used as a model for.other communities to follow. Finally, in an effort to equalize the pay rate for education, a fifty cent ($.50) per quarter credit is awarded for all employees represented here. ISSUE NO 9• SENIORITY ' The Union Contends: That seniority shall prevail. That senior qualified employees have first preference on the job and that an employee assigned the responsibility of :a high, er position shall receive the full differential for each hour assigned to that position. M.A.M.A. Q:)ntends: That the Erployer is not required to bargain about selection of -employees under M.S. 179.66, Subd. 1, Selection of Personnel", and therefore the issue is not properly before the Arbitration Panel. AWARD - The Employer's argument is not persuasive and the Union's position is awarded. ISSUE-NO. 10: 'LINE'OF DUTY PAY The Union Contends: That an employee injured in the line of duty, through no fault of his or her own, shall receive full Pay from the first day of said injury until they are able to return to work or until eligible,for disability. restorement. M.A.M.A. Contends: That there.be no change in the present individual municipality programs and practices. AWARD= A minimum of sixty (60) days leave with pay, resulting from an employee's injury on duty (through n`o`fault.of his or her own) shall be established. Said time shall not be charged against the employees 'sick leave, vacation or other accumulated benefits. 1 N 11 & 12' SICK LEAVE AND SEVERANCE The Union Contends: That sick leave be accumulated at the rate of one.day per month of employment; that said leave be accumulated without limitation and that the Employer shall pay 50% of the unused accumulation lot upon termination. M.A:M.A. Contends: That there be no change inthepresent individual municipality practices regarding these issues. AWARD- The Employer's position is persuasive and so awarded. ISSUE NO. 1.3: STANDBY PAY The Union Contends: That.the .Employer, when requiring an employee to standby, shall compensate said employee at the rate of one hour s pay for each "hour on standby. M.A.M.A. Contends: Page f ive That employees required to standby shall be paid one hour of overtime if not called to court or duty. 'AWARD The Union's position is awarded. ISSUE NO 14: UNIFORM ALLOWANCE The Union Contends: That the Employer provide all uniforms in additon.to a $20.00 per month cleaning allowance. M.A.M.A. Contends: That employees will be furnished all uniform items which each municipality requires as part of the stipulated uniform. AWARD The Employers position is awarded. ISSUE NO 1`5' CONTRACT LAN Qiior-,EV0QIFIC:ATION The Union Contends: That the Waiver and Zipper clauses (Articles 7.6 and 5.2 respectively)'be removed from the collective bargaining agreement. M.A.M:A. Contends: That Articles 4.2, 9.3, 10.3 (the phrase '.'And the Union "), 10.5, 10.6 and the entire Article XI be removed from the contract, while adding the following clause: "Any federal or State -.o.f.Minnesota legislative action during the term of this Agreement which results in increased compensation or benefits costs to (municipality) beyond those stipulate'd.by this Agree - ment:shall be .charged against.the.salaries of the em?loyees covered by this'Agreement beginning at -the time such costs are incurred by (municipality).' AWARD - At the hearing, the Union agreed to the.removal of Article 4.2 from the collective bargaining agree- . ment. Beyond Article 4.2, no other contractual provision shall be `removed from the 1975 contract. Moreover, the additional language proposed by the Employer is denied. Note: In connection with Issues 2, 3� 4, 7, 8 and 1.0 where new minimums have been established, it is the Panel's intention that all provisions which have already been bargained for, by individual com munities, which are now over and above the base provisions awarded here, shall remain in full force and effect'forrthe life of the contract. Dated this first day of August, 1975. . ogelberg, Chairman ' `H. G. Heneman, Jr. GeorgqJ)o