Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
2015-08-05 City Council Meeting
REVISED AGENDA CITY COUNCIL MEETING CITY OF EDINA, MINNESOTA • CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS WEDNESDAY, AUGUST 5, 2015 7:00 P.M. CALL TO ORDER 11. ROLL CALL III. APPROVAL OF MEETING AGENDA IV. ADOPTION OF CONSENT AGENDA All agenda items listed on the consent agenda are considered routine and will be enacted by one motion. There will be no separate discussion of such items unless requested to be removed from the Consent Agenda by a Member of the City Council. In such cases the item will be removed from the Consent Agenda and considered immediately following the adoption of the Consent Agenda. (Favorable rollcall vote of majority of Council Members present to approve.) A. Approval Of Minutes — Regular Meeting Of July 21, 2015 and Work Session Of July 21, 2015 B. Receive Payment of Claims As Per: Pre -List Dated, 07/23/2015 TOTAL: • $4,195,705.65 And Per Pre -List Dated 07/30/2015 TOTAL: $1,375,605.91 C. Request For Purchase — Council Chambers A/V System Upgrade D. Request For Purchase — South Ramp Garbage Screening E. Set December 8, 2015 Date For Public Improvement Hearings V. SPECIAL RECOGNITIONS AND PRESENTATIONS A. Metropolitan Airports Long Term Comprehensive Plan, Neil Ralston, MAC VI. PUBLIC HEARINGS During "Public Hearings," the Mayor will ask for public testimony after City staff members make their presentations. If you wish to testify on the topic, you are welcome to do so as long as your testimony is relevant to the discussion. To ensure fairness to all speakers and to allow the efficient conduct of a public hearing, speakers must observe the following guidelines: Individuals must limit their testimony to three minutes. The Mayor may modify times, as deemed necessary. Try not to repeat remarks or points of view made by prior speakers and limit testimony to the matter under consideration. In order to maintain a respectful environment for all those in attendance, the use of signs, clapping cheering or booing or any other form of verbal or nonverbal communication is not allowed. A. PUBLIC HEARING —Vacation of Public Right -of -Way, Cahill Real Estate Holdings, LLC, 7260 Ohms Lane, Resolution No. 2015-71 (Favorable vote of majority of • Council Members present to approve.) B. PUBLIC HEARING — Adding Edina Heritage Landmark Overlay Zoning Designation To the R- I Single Dwelling Unit, 6901 Dakota Trail, Marri Oskam Resolution No. 2015-76 and Ordinance No. 2015-13 (Favorable vote of majority of Agenda August 5, 2015 Page 2 Council Members present to approve.) (Ordinance: First Reading: Requires offering of • Ordinance only. Second Reading. Favorable rollcall vote of three Council Members to pass. Waiver of Second Reading: Affirmative rollcall vote of four Council Members to pass.) C. PUBLIC HEARING — Conditional Use Permit And Front Yard Setback Variance, Edina Community Lutheran Church, 413 West 54th Street, Resolution No. 2015- 77 (Resolution: Favorable vote of majority of Council Members present to approve. ) VII. COMMUNITY COMMENT During "Community Comment," the City Council will invite residents to share new issues or concerns that haven't been considered in the past 30 days by the Council or which aren't slated for future consideration. Individuals must limit their comments to three minutes. The Mayor may limit the number of speakers on the same issue in the interest of time and topic. Generally speaking, items that are elsewhere on tonight's agenda may not be addressed during Community Comment. Individuals should not expect the Mayor or Council to respond to their comments tonight. Instead the Council might refer the matter to staff for consideration at a future meeting. VIII. REPORTS/RECOMMENDATIONS: (Favorable vote of majority of Council Members present to approve except where noted) A. Proposed Franchise Agreement With Xcel Energy, Ordinance No. 2015-12 (First Reading: Requires offering of Ordinance only. Second Reading. Favorable rollcall vote of • three Council Members to pass. Waiver of Second Reading: Affirmative rollcall vote of four Council Members to pass.) B. Ordinance No. 2015-1 1 Amending Code Chapter 2 Article III Regarding Boards & Commissions (First Reading: Requires offering of Ordinance only. Second Reading: Favorable rollcall vote of three Council Members to pass. Waiver of Second Reading: Affirmative rollcall vote of four Council Members to pass.) C. Resolution No. 2015-78 Accepting Donations & Grants D. Greater Southdale Area Planning — Stage 2 Work Plan Proposal E. Energy & Environment Commission Solar Energy Project Proposal IX. CORRESPONDENCE AND PETITIONS A. Correspondence B. Minutes: I. Construction Board Of Appeals, March 6, 2015 2. Transportation Commission, May 21, 2015 3. Arts & Culture Commission, June 25, 2015 4. Human Rights & Relations Commission, June 23, 2015 C. Advisory Communication, Human Rights & Relations Commission • X. AVIATION NOISE UPDATE Agenda August 5, 2015 Page 3 • XI. MAYOR AND COUNCIL COMMENTS XII. MANAGER'S COMMENTS A. Creation of Partners In Energy (PIE) Community Planning Team XIII. ADJOURNMENT The City of Edina wants all residents to be comfortable being part of the public process. If you need assistance in the way of hearing amplification, an interpreter, large -print documents or something else, please call 952- 927-8861 72 hours in advance of the meeting. SCHEDULE OF UPCOMING MEETINGS/DATES/EVENTS Wed Aug 5 Regular Meeting 7:00 P.M. COUNCIL CHAMBERS Tues Aug 18 Work Session — Promenade Phase 5 5:30 P.M. COMMUNITY ROOM Work Plan Update 6:15 P.M. COMMUNITY ROOM Tues Aug 18 Regular Meeting 7:00 P.M. COMMUNITY ROOM Tues Sep I Work Session — Heritage Preservation Board 5:00 P.M. COMMUNITY ROOM Human Rights & Relations Commission 6:00 P.M. COMMUNITY ROOM Tues Sep I Regular Meeting 7:00 P.M. COUNCIL CHAMBERS Mon Sep 7 LABOR DAY HOLIDAY OBSERVED — City Hall Closed Wed Sep 16 Work Session — Edina Community Health Commission 5:00 P.M. COMMUNITY ROOM Arts & Culture Commission 6:00 P.M. COMMUNITY ROOM Wed Sep 16 Regular Meeting 7:00 P.M. COUNCIL CHAMBERS Tues Oct 6 Work Session — Boards & Commission Annual Work Plans 5:00 P.M. COMMUNITY ROOM Tues Oct 6 Regular Meeting 7.00 P.M. COUNCIL CHAMBERS Tues Oct 20 Work Session — Business Meeting/Work Plan Updates 5:30 P.M. COMMUNITY ROOM Tues Oct 20 Regular Meeting 7:00 P.M. COUNCIL CHAMBERS Tues Nov 3 ELECTION DAY — POLLS OPEN 7:00 A.M. UNTIL 8:00 P.M. Wed Nov 4 Work Session — 2016-17 Budget/Finalize 2016 Work Plans 5:30 P.M. COMMUNITY ROOM Wed Nov 4 Regular Meeting 7:00 P.M. COUNCIL CHAMBERS Wed Nov I I VETERANS DAY HOLIDAY OBSERVED — City Hall Closed Tues Nov 17 Work Session — 2016-17 Human Services Funding 6:15 P.M. COMMUNITY ROOM Tues Nov 17 Regular Meeting 7:00 P.M. COUNCIL CHAMBERS Thur Nov 26 THANKSGIVING DAY HOLIDAY OBSERVED — City Hall Closed Fri Nov 26 DAY AFTER THANKSGIVING HOLIDAY OBSERVED — City Hall Closed *es Dec I Work Session —TBD 5:30 P.M. COMMUNITY ROOM es Dec I Regular Meeting 7:00 P.M. COUNCIL CHAMBERS Tues Dec 15 Work Session — TBD 5:30 P.M. COMMUNITY ROOM Tues Dec 15 Regular Meeting 7:00 P.M. COUNCIL CHAMBERS Thur Dec 24 CHRISTMAS EVE HOLIDAY OBSERVED — City Hall Closed Fri Dec 24 CHRISTMAS DAY HOLIDAY OSBERVED — City Hall Closed MINUTES OF THE JOINT WORK SESSION OF THE EDINA CITY COUNCIL AND HELD AT CITY HALL • JULY 21, 2015 5:32 P.M. Mayor Pro Tem Swenson called the meeting to order at 5:32 p.m. ROLLCALL Answering roll call were: Members Brindle, Stewart and Mayor Pro Tem Swenson. Member Staunton arrived at 5:15 p.m. Mayor Hovland arrived at 5:50 p.m. Edina City Staff attending the meeting: Jennifer Bennerotte, Communications & Technology Service Director; Jeff Elasky, Deputy Police Chief; Susan Faus, Assistant Parks & Recreation Director; Ann Kattreh, Parks & Recreation Director; Debra Manger, City Clerk; Chad Millner, Engineering Director; Scott Neal, City Manager; Bill Neuendorf, Economic Development Manager; Brian Olson, Public Works Director; Eric Roggeman, Finance Director; Kyle Sawyer, Assistant Finance Director; Lisa Schaefer, Assistant City Manager; Tom Schmitz, Fire Chief and Cary Teague, Community Development Director. BUSINESS MEETING Manager Neal and Finance Director Roggeman presented the Quarterly Financial Update for the second quarter of 2015 for the General Fund, Utilities Fund, Liquor Fund, Aquatic Center Fund, Golf Course Fund, Arena Fund, Art Center Fund, Edinborough Park Fund, Centennial Lakes Fund and Sports Dome Fund. Staff answered questions regarding each fund and received Council direction. 2016-2017 PROPOSED BUDGET Mr. Neal and Mr. Roggeman presented the 2016-2017 Operating Budget process, timeline, budgeting • challenges, the potential Housing and Redevelopment Authority (HRA) levy and tax comparison noting the potential impacts of different scenarios on property taxes. The Council's discussion included: the possibility that adopting the preliminary tax levy date may need to be moved, how the declining revenues in the Liquor Fund will impact future budgets, potential budget impacts of items not included in the proposed budget scenarios, but in the 2016-17 work plan, consequence of using some inflation index for budgeting, and criteria used when a decision is made by the City to borrow funds. ADJOURNMENT Mayor Hovland adjourned the meeting at 6:58 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Minutes approved by Edina City Council, August 5, 2015 • Debra A. Manger, City Clerk James B. Hovland, Mayor MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE • EDINA CITY COUNCIL HELD AT CITY HALL JULY 21, 2015 7:00 P.M. 1. CALL TO ORDER Mayor Hovland called the meeting to order at 7:05 p.m. II. ROLLCALL Answering rollcall were Members Brindle, Staunton, Stewart, Swenson, and Mayor Hovland. 111. MEETING AGENDA APPROVED Member Brindle made a motion, seconded by Member Swenson, to table Item IV.E. Resolution No. 2015-71 Joint Powers Agreement with Edina Public Schools for Valley View Road Transportation Study indefinitely and to table Items VIII.A. Affordable Housing Policy and VIII.C. Greater Southdale Area Planning — Stage 2 Work Plan Proposal to the August 5, 2015, City Council Meeting. Member Stewart made a motion, seconded agenda as revised. Ayes: Brindle, Staunton, Stewart, Swenson, Hovland Motion carried. by Member Brindle, approving the meeting IV. CONSENT AGENDA ADOPTED Member Staunton made a motion, seconded by Member Stewart, approving the consent • agenda as revised to remove Item IV.F. Resolution No. 2015-72 Approving Final Plat, 5825 Ashcroft Avenue, Jeffrey and Janine Johnson, as follows: IV.A. Approve regular and work session meeting minutes of July 7, 2015 IV.B. Receive payment of the following claims as shown in detail on the Check Register dated July 9, 2015, and consisting of 33 pages; General Fund $481,904.14; Pedestrian and Cyclist Safety Fund $29,257.50; Working Capital Fund $13,400.22; Equipment Replacement Fund $7,153.00; Art Center Fund $2,490.1 1; Golf Dome Fund $884.02; Aquatic Center Fund $15,356.32; Golf Course Fund $31,403.31; Ice Arena Fund $35,556.98; Sports Dome Fund $60,739.96; Edinborough Park Fund $3,975.59; Centennial Lakes Park Fund $3,202.93; Liquor Fund $227,228.95; Utility Fund $445,276.76; Storm Sewer Fund $757.79; PSTF Agency Fund $3,054.96; Centennial TIF District $30.00; Grandview TIF District $726.00; Southdale 2 District $525.00; TOTAL $1,362,923.54 and for receipt of payment of claims dated July 16, 2015, and consisting of 41 pages; General Fund $440,874.21; Police Special Revenue $5,670.09; Arts and Culture Fund $1,500.00; Working Capital Fund $54,510.18; Equipment Replacement Fund $25,346.53; Art Center Fund $6,975.16; Aquatic Center Fund $3,145.51; Golf Course Fund $37,061.60; Ice Arena Fund $71,488.32; Sports Dome Fund $1,340.50; Edinborough Park Fund $4,207.32; Centennial Lakes Park Fund $11,450.89; Liquor Fund $200,937.67; Utility Fund $259,585.52; Storm Sewer Fund $19,159.45; Recycling Fund $36,187.38; PSTF Agency Fund $1,047.64; Centennial TIF District $892.50; Payroll Fund $10,565.51; TOTAL $1,191,945.98; and, Credit Card Transactions dated April 28 — May 25, 2015; TOTAL $47,690.34 IV.C. Request for Purchase, Award of Bid Contract ENG 15-12 Edina Industrial Park Lighting Improvements (Phase2), awarding the bid to the recommended low bidder, • Muska Electric at $230,593.25 IV.D. Adopt Resolution No. 2015-70, Approving France Avenue Median Lighting Construction Cooperative Agreement Page 1 Minutes/Edina City Council/July 21, 2015 W.E.Resolution No. 20-15 7-1, Approving jointPowersAgreement with Eden Public Schools for Valley View Read Transportation Study - This item was tabled indefinitely • W.F. Resolution No. 2015 72, Approving Final Plat, 5825 Ashcroft Avenue, jeffrey and W.G. Authorize Agreement with HealthEMS W.H. Adopt Resolution No. 2015-75, Authorizing Interfund Loan — Pentagon Park Tax Increment Financing District IV.I. Request for Purchase, About Town Paper 2015, awarding the bid to the recommended low bidder, Anchor Paper at $27,324.00 Rollcall: Ayes: Brindle, Staunton, Stewart, Swenson, Hovland Motion carried. ITEMS REMOVED FROM THE CONSENT AGENDA IV.F. RESOLUTION NO. 2015-72 APPROVING FINAL PLAT, 5825 ASHCROFT AVENUE, JEFFREY AND JANINE JOHNSON — ADOPTED Member Swenson noted that she voted against this item previously and could not vote in favor of it as part of the Consent Agenda. Member Stewart introduced and moved adoption of Resolution No. 2015-72 Approving a Final Plat at 5825 Ashcroft Avenue. Member Staunton seconded the motion. Ayes: Brindle, Staunton, Stewart, Hovland Nay: Swenson Motion carried. V. SPECIAL RECOGNITIONS AND PRESENTATIONS V.A. JUNE SPEAK UP EDINA REPORT PRESENTED — TOPIC: COMMUNICATIONS Communications Coordinator Gilgenbach presented a summary of June opinions, both pros and cons, collected through Speak Up, Edina relating to communications. • V.B. EXPLORE EDINA ANNUAL REPORT— RECEIVED Manager Neal shared that over a year ago the Council adopted a lodging tax in order to form the Convention and Visitor's Bureau. When the Convention and Visitor's Bureau was formed it was asked to prepare and present an annual update to the Council. Lori Syverson, Explore Edina President, introduced Shelly Loberg, Explore Edina Marketing Director, and explained that the goal and mission was to attract visitors to Edina. Ms. Loberg noted that shopping was the number one attraction for tourists in Edina. She discussed the target demographic, marketing activities, and plans for 2015 through 2016. Ms. Syverson presented a financial review of June 2014 through June 2015. The Council asked questions relating to anecdotal evidence, Edina's hotels, and events coming to town. VI. PUBLIC HEARINGS HELD — Affidavits of Notice presented and ordered placed on file. VI.A. PROPOSED FRANCHISE AGREEMENT WITH XCEL ENERGY, ORDINANCE NO. 2015-12 — DISCUSSED AND STAFF DIRECTION GIVEN Manager Neal shared that on March 3, 2015, the Council was presented with a proposed process for renewal of the Xcel Energy franchise agreement. Input was sought from the Energy and Environment Commission, Council, staff, and the public. Manager Neal described the five material changes in the proposed agreement including Xcel's response to each change. In addition to the five material changes, the Energy and Environment Commission recommended the City enter into a Memorandum of Understanding • with Xcel to create the Edina Clean Energy Partnership. Manager Neal requested input from the Council on the agreement so that it could be formally presented to the company. Mayor Hovland opened the public hearing at 7:47 p.m. Page 2 Minutes/Edina City Council/July 21, 2015 • Public Testimony John Howard, 5812 61 St Street W, addressed the Council. Member Staunton made a motion, seconded by Member Stewart, to close the public hearing. Ayes: Brindle, Staunton, Stewart, Swenson, Hovland Motion carried. Michelle Swenson, Xcel Energy, answered a question of the Council relating to the 90 -day requirement to remedy visually defective equipment. Ms. Swenson explained that 90 days was sufficient, but Xcel was uncomfortable with the language, finding that visually defective equipment was ambiguous and open to interpretation. The Council suggested that Xcel propose specific language to address visually defective equipment. Manager Neal answered a question of the Council relating to the conservation fee and the Climate Action Plan from 2008. He explained that the City was not on track for the 15% reduction called for in the Climate Action Plan, noting it was a complex issue. It was hard to identify an exact reduction, but the City had been keeping accurate data and should be able to track changes. The Council discussed the material changes and responses from Xcel and provided feedback to Manager Neal for the formal meeting the following week with Xcel Energy. Vii. COMMUNITY COMMENT No one appeared to comment. • Vlll. REPORTS / RECOMMENDATIONS VIIIA. AFFORDABLE HOUSING POLICY— TABLED This item was tabled to the August 5, 2015, City Council meeting. VIII.B. SKETCH PLAN — BANK OF AMERICA, 6868 FRANCE AVENUE — REVIEWED Community Development Director Teague shared that the Council was asked to consider a sketch plan proposal to tear down the existing 3,098 square -foot Think Bank and construct a new 7,190 square -foot Bank of America. Three variances and site plan review would be required to consider a formal application. Aaron Greene, Gensler Development, presented a drawing of the flagship building that Bank of America was proposing to build. Merrill Lynch would also be a tenant in the building and each would have separate entrance/exit to the building. Mr. Greene noted the sidewalks, stormwater ponds, and landscaping that had been added or improved since the Planning Commission meeting on July 8, 2015. Engineer Millner answered a question of the Council relating to removing the free right turn on France Avenue. Anita Thomas, JLL Construction, answered questions of the Council relating to building color and materials, stormwater pond maintenance, and turning the length of the building onto France Avenue. VIII.C. GREATER SOUTHDALE AREA PLANNING — STAGE 2 WORK PLAN PROPOSAL — TABLED This item was tabled to the August 5, 2015, City Council meeting. VIII.D. RESOLUTION NO. 2015-73 ACCEPTING EDINA CRIME FUND DONATION FOR THE • PURCHASE OF MOBILE PRO DEFENDER CAMERA SYSTEM — ADOPTED Deputy Police Chief Jeff Elasky thanked the Edina Crime Fund for its overwhelming generosity. Member Brindle shared that she was a member of the Edina Crime Fund, a non-profit group that had existed for almost forty years. She explained the Crime Fund was donating $47,150.00 to the Edina Police Page 3 Minutes/Edina City Council/July 21, 2015 Department for the purchase of a Mobile Pro Defender camera system. The system would be used to deter crime and could be used at special events for home viewers. • Member Stewart noted that he was a business consultant who had been courting Mobile Pro and asked if there was a conflict of interest. Attorney Knutson answered that the City did not have a financial interest because the Crime Fund was purchasing a product from Mobile Pro. Member Brindle introduced and moved adoption of Resolution No. 2015-73 Authorizing Acceptance of Edina Crime Prevention Fund Donation. Member Swenson seconded the motion. Ayes: Brindle, Staunton, Stewart, Swenson, Hovland Motion carried. VIII.E. RESOLUTION NO. 2015-74 ADOPTED — ACCEPTING VARIOUS GRANTS AND DONATIONS Mayor Hovland explained that in order to comply with State Statutes; all donations to the City must be adopted by Resolution and approved by four favorable votes of the Council accepting the donations. Member Swenson introduced and moved adoption of Resolution No. 2015-74 accepting various grants and donations. Member Stewart seconded the motion. Rollcall: Ayes: Brindle, Staunton, Stewart, Swenson, Hovland Motion carried. IX. CORRESPONDENCE AND PETITIONS IX.A. CORRESPONDENCE Mayor Hovland acknowledged the Council's receipt of various correspondence. IX. B. MINUTES: 1. PLANNING COMMISSION, JUNE 24, 2015 2. HERITAGE PRESERVATION BOARD, JUNE 9, 2015 3. PARK BOARD, JUNE 9, 2015 4. ARTS AND CULTURE COMMISSION, FEBRUARY 26, MARCH 26, APRIL 23, AND MAY 28, 2015 S. ENERGY AND ENVIRONMENT COMMISSION, JUNE 11, 2015 Informational; no action required. IX.C. ADVISORY COMMUNICATION FROM ARTS AND CULTURE COMMISSION FOR PUBLIC ART EDINA BUDGET INCREASE — RECEIVED IX.D. ADVISORY COMMUNICATION FROM ARTS AND CULTURE COMMISSION IN SUPPORT OF ACQUISITION OF A K9 SCULPTURE — RECEIVED The Council requested staff to add this item to a future City Council meeting agenda in order to formally receive a gift. X. AVIATION NOISE UPDATE — Received XI. MAYOR AND COUNCIL COMMENTS — Received XII. MANAGER'S COMMENTS — Received XII.A. DRONES XII.B. LIQUOR ORDINANCE REVIEW XII.C. PARKS MASTER PLAN XII.D. CENTURY LINK'S APPLICATION FOR A CABLE COMMUNICATIONS FRANCHISE • X111. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business on the Council Agenda, Mayor Hovland declared the meeting adjourned at 9:41 p.m. Page 4 0 Respectfully submitted, • • Minutes approved by Edina City Council, August 5, 2015. Video Copy of the July 21, 2015, meeting available. Page 5 Minutes/Edina City Council/July 21, 2015 Debra A. Mangen, City Clerk James B. Hovland, Mayor 1701 7/23/2015 VERNON SELLING 103680 ARAMARK REFRESHMENT SRVCS VERNON SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR YORK SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR R55CKR2 LOGIS101 COFFEE 377461 1185630 CITY OF EDINA COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR 7/21/2015 12:53:37 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR VERNON SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX VERNON SELLING Council Check Register by GL VERNON SELLING Page - 1 YORK SELLING GENERAL SUPPLIES VERNON LIQUOR GENERAL Council Check Register by Invoice & Summary LEGAL SERVICES 377761 147612 1170.6103 5,860.00 7/23/2015 - 7/23/2015 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit 1699 7/23/2016 126.65 118261 2ND WIND EXERCISE INC. 377576 49108900 5862.5515 547.10 177.23 SERVICE EQUIPMENT 377756 021048729 5720.6180 CONTRACTED REPAIRS EDINBOROUGH OPERATIONS 177.23 49109200 5842.5512 2,171.90 1700 7/23/2015 49209600 102971 ACE ICE COMPANY 1,106.60 377819 49209700 28.80 377573 1907625 5822.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX 50TH ST SELLING 5822.5515 77.60 258.36 377574 1908366 5842.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX YORK SELLING 82.40 377809 1908371 5862.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX VERNON SELLING 1.55 102.40 377821 377810 1909779 5862.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX VERNON SELLING 51.20 6567200 377808 1909781 5842.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX YORK SELLING 377579 60.80 5842.5515 377811 1909782 5822.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX 50TH ST SELLING 92295800 403.20 151.69 377577 92335800 1701 7/23/2015 VERNON SELLING 103680 ARAMARK REFRESHMENT SRVCS VERNON SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR YORK SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR 577.69 COFFEE 377461 1185630 1550.6406 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR 577.69 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR VERNON SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX VERNON SELLING 1702 7/23/2015 VERNON SELLING 129624 BARNA GUZY & STEFFEN LTD YORK SELLING GENERAL SUPPLIES VERNON LIQUOR GENERAL COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX 5,860.00 LEGAL SERVICES 377761 147612 1170.6103 5,860.00 1703 7/23/2015 101355 BELLBOY CORPORATION 126.65 377576 49108900 5862.5515 547.10 377626 49109000 5862.5512 213.00 377578 49109200 5842.5512 2,171.90 377818 49209600 5842.5512 1,106.60 377819 49209700 5842.5513 111.20 377822 49209900 5822.5515 258.36 377823 49210000 5822.5512 646.41 377820 49210100 5862.5512 1.55 377821 49210200 5862.5515 407.64 377826 6567200 5862.5515 88.65 377579 92295500 5842.5515 13.56 377580 92295800 5860.6406 151.69 377577 92335800 5862.5515 78.00 377824 92375800 5822.5515 69.19 377825 92375900 5862.5515 5,991.50 1704 7/23/2015 100648 BERTELSON OFFICE PRODUCTS 63.50 OFFICE SUPPLIES 00009421 377657 WO -126047-1 5110.6513 GENERALSUPPLIES CENTRAL SERVICES GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES HUMAN RESOURCES COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX VERNON SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR VERNON SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR YORK SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR YORK SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX 50TH ST SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR 50TH ST SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR VERNON SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX VERNON SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX VERNON SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX YORK SELLING GENERAL SUPPLIES VERNON LIQUOR GENERAL COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX VERNON SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX 50TH ST SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX VERNON SELLING OFFICE SUPPLIES ART CENTER ADMINISTRATION R55CKR2 LOGIS101 CITY OF EDINA 7/21/2015 12:53:37 Council Check Register by GL Page- 2 Council Check Register by Invoice & Summary 7/23/2015 - 7/23/2015 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit 1704 7/23/2015 100648 BERTELSON OFFICE PRODUCTS Continued... 45.97 OFFICE SUPPLIES 00003183 377655 WO-129079-1 1400.6513 OFFICE SUPPLIES POLICE DEPT. GENERAL 29.59 POCKET NOTEBOOKS 377656 WO-130026-1 1550.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES CENTRAL SERVICES GENERAL 46.81 OFFICE SUPPLIES 00003184 377765 WO-130258-1 1400.6513 OFFICE SUPPLIES POLICE DEPT. GENERAL 185.87 1705 7/23/2015 100659 BOYER TRUCK PARTS 34.27 CAPASSEMBLY 00005444 377709 974672 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 340.09 OIL 377711 974672X1 1553.6564 LUBRICANTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 65.90 COOLANT 00005446 377710 975083 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 125.98 TANKASSEMBLY 377712 975196 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 33.81 FREIGHT CHARGE 00005444 377932 CM974672 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 600.05 1706 7/23/2015 100664 BRAUN INTERTEC 1,369.50 SPECIAL INSPECTIONS/TESTING 377933 8032443 47090.6710 EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT PAMELA PK SHELTER & TURF 1,369.50 1707 7/23/2015 120935 CAMPBELL KNUTSON 9,804.39 LEGAL COUNSEL 377471 2851-6/15 1196.6131 PROFESSIONAL SERV - LEGAL CITY ATTORNEY 9,804.39 1708 7/2312015 116114 CANON SOLUTIONS AMERICA INC. 72.54 OCE MAINTENANCE 377472 988482950 1552.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES CENT SVC PW BUILDING 72.54 1709 7/2312015 102372 CDW GOVERNMENT INC. 4,514.36 SAN SWITCH REPLACEMENTS 377474 WG55779 421554.6710 EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT IT CENTRAL SERVICES EQUIPMENT 2,70D.00 SAN SWITCH REPLACEMENTS 377473 WM93312 1554.6710 EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT CENT SERV GEN - MIS 7,470.00 SAN SWITCH REPLACEMENTS 377473 WM93312 421554.6710 EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT IT CENTRAL SERVICES EQUIPMENT 14,684.36 1710 7/23/2015 130477 CLEAR RIVER BEVERAGE CO 412.20 377583 194449 5842.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER YORK SELLING 412.20 1711 7/23/2015 104020 DALCO 285.58 TOWELS, WIPES 377488 2906046 1552.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES CENT SVC PW BUILDING 2,103.36 TISSUE, TOWELS 00001454 377717 2907190 1646.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES BUILDING MAINTENANCE 2,388.94 0 • • R55CKR2 LOGIS101 CITY OF EDINA 7/21/2015 12:53:37 Council Check Register by GL Page- 3 Council Check Register by Invoice & Summary 7/23/2015 - 7/23/2015 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit 1712 7/23/2016 102478 DAY DISTRIBUTING CO. Continued... 1,814.35 377627 811362 5862.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER VERNON SELLING 49.20 377628 811363 5862.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX VERNON SELLING 3,068.78 377829 811364 5842.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER YORK SELLING 4,932.33 1713 7/23/2015 100768 GARTNER REFRIGERATION & MFG INC 2,496.67 EQUIPMENT REPAIRS 377778 48366 5521.6180 CONTRACTED REPAIRS ARENA ICE MAINT 2,496.67 1714 7/23/2015 100814 INDELCO PLASTICS CORP. 15.56 PLUGS 00001318 377622 929629 5913.6406 GENERALSUPPLIES DISTRIBUTION 15.56 1715 7/23/2015 132692 J.F. AHERN CO. 250.00 FIRE SPRINKLER INSPECTION 377983 105691 5210.6230 SERVICE CONTRACTS EQUIPMENT GOLF DOME PROGRAM 250.00 1716 7/23/2015 121075 JIMMY'S JOHNNYS INC. 59.50 TOILET RENTAL 377500 90822 1645.6182 RUBBISH REMOVAL LITTER REMOVAL 59.50 1717 7/23/2015 100858 LOGIS 630.00 377681 40358 1554.6230 SERVICE CONTRACTS EQUIPMENT CENT SERV GEN - MIS 3,666.00 377681 40358 1495.6160 DATA PROCESSING INSPECTIONS 4,040.00 377681 40358 1160.6160 DATA PROCESSING FINANCE 4,514.00 377681 40358 1554.6160 DATA PROCESSING CENT SERV GEN - MIS 5,969.00 377681 40358 1556.6160 DATA PROCESSING EMPLOYEE SHARED SERVICES 6,098.00 377681 40358 1190.6160 DATA PROCESSING ASSESSING 5,935.00 377681 40358 5902.6160 DATA PROCESSING UTILITY BILLING - FINANCE 840.00 IT CONSULTING 377951 40423 1554.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES CENT SERV GEN - MIS 420.00 FIBER CONNECTION 911 377951 40423 2310.6102 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES E911 157.50 WIFI CHANGES - FIRE 377951 40423 4413.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES CITY WIFI PROJECT 560.03 SSL CERT FOR ELEC PLAN REVIEW 377788 40443 4612.6710 EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT FD Plan Review Software 72.02 SWITCH COMPONENTS 377787 40453 1554.6710 EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT CENT SERV GEN - MIS 32,901.55 1718 7/23/2015 112577 M. AMUNDSON LLP 1,317.22 377598 198835 5842.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX YORK SELLING 809.20 377597 199077 5862.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX VERNON SELLING 2,126.42 R55CKR2 LOGIS101 CITY OF EDINA 7/21/2015 12:53:37 Council Check Register by GL Page- 4 Council Check Register by Invoice & Summary 7/23/2015 — 7/23/2015 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit 1718 7/23/2016 112677 M. AMUNDSON LLP Continued... 1719 7/23/2015 101483 MENARDS 69.90 FLASHLIGHT, CONCRETE MIX 00001329 377515 90691 5915.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES WATER TREATMENT 91.09 CONCRETE FORMS 00001336 377514 90759 1301.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES GENERAL MAINTENANCE 160.99 1720 7/23/2015 121497 NORTHWEST ASPHALT INC. 33,272.28 PARTIAL PAYMENT NO. 1 377919 BA -14 01415.1705.30 CONTRACTOR PAYMENTS HYDE PARK NHOOD RECON 93,407.75 PARTIAL PAYMENT NO. 1 377919 BA -14 01414.1705.30 CONTRACTOR PAYMENTS HOLLANDS NHOOD RECON 11,086.50 PARTIAL PAYMENT NO. 1 377919 BA -14 03489.1705.30 CONTRACTOR PAYMENTS Prospect Knolls B Reconstructi 17,526.42 PARTIAL PAYMENT NO. 1 377919 BA -14 05553.1705.30 CONTRACTOR PAYMENTS Prospect Knolls B Reconstructs 37,702.70 PARTIAL PAYMENT NO. 1 377919 BA -14 04410.1705.30 CONTRACTOR PAYMENTS Prospect Knolls B Reconstructi 82,930.16 PARTIAL PAYMENT NO. 2 377921 BA -377 01377.1705.30 CONTRACTOR PAYMENTS BA -377 VALLEY VIEW RD 39,256.25 PARTIAL PAYMENT NO. 2 377921 BA -377 05557.1705.30 CONTRACTOR PAYMENTS Valley View Rd 142,742.79 PARTIAL PAYMENT NO. 2 377921 BA -377 04415.1705.30 CONTRACTOR PAYMENTS Valley View Rd 2,761.60 PARTIAL PAYMENT NO. 2 377918 BA -413 07128.1705.30 CONTRACTOR PAYMENTS S128 COUNTRYSIDE H SIDEWALK 238,500.39 PARTIAL PAYMENT NO. 2 377918 BA -413 01413.1705.30 CONTRACTOR PAYMENTS EDINA HIGHLANDS LAKESIDE RECON 57,146.77 PARTIAL PAYMENT NO. 2 377918 BA413 03488.1705.30 CONTRACTOR PAYMENTS Countryside H Reconstruction 68,046.32 PARTIAL PAYMENT NO. 2 377918 BA -413 05552.1705.30 CONTRACTOR PAYMENTS Countryside H Reconstruction 69,866.74 PARTIAL PAYMENT NO. 2 377918 BA -413 04409.1705.30 CONTRACTOR PAYMENTS Countryside H Reconstruction 19,416.03 PARTIAL PAYMENT NO. 3 377920 BA -416 08060.1705.30 CONTRACTOR PAYMENTS INDUSTRIAL PARK LIGHTING 62,071.70 PARTIAL PAYMENT NO. 3 377920 BA416 01416.1705.30 CONTRACTOR PAYMENTS 54TH ST BRIDGE&STREET REPAIR 141,868.72 PARTIAL PAYMENT NO. 3 377920 BA -416 10096.1705.30 CONTRACTOR PAYMENTS BR6 54TH STREET BRIDGE 281,987.65 PARTIAL PAYMENT NO. 3 377920 BA -416 01412.1705.30 CONTRACTOR PAYMENTS GLEN VIEWADDITION NHOOD RECON 374,143.43 PARTIAL PAYMENT NO. 3 377920 BA -416 05551.1705.30 CONTRACTOR PAYMENTS Arden Park D Reconstruction 397,955.06 PARTIAL PAYMENT NO. 3 377920 BA -416 03487.1705.30 CONTRACTOR PAYMENTS Arden Park D Reconstruction 421,808.59 PARTIAL PAYMENT NO. 3 377920 BA -416 04407.1705.30 CONTRACTOR PAYMENTS 54TH ST RECONSTRUCTION 2,593,517.85 1721 7/23/2015 129485 PAPCO INC. 118.18 CLEANING SUPPLIES 377959 93901 7411.6511 CLEANING SUPPLIES PSTF OCCUPANCY 118.18 1722 7/23/2015 106322 PROSOURCE SUPPLY 373.02 LINERS, WIPES, TISSUE 377799 8056 5511.6511 CLEANING SUPPLIES ARENA BLDG/GROUNDS 821.67 LINERS, SOAP, WIPERS 00002040 377800 8106 5761.6511 CLEANING SUPPLIES CENTENNIAL LAKES OPERATING 1,194.69 1723 7/23/2015 129460 SAWYER, KYLE 0 29.99 IDENTITY MONITORING 377961 9349 0 1160.6105 DUES & SUBSCRIPTIONS i FINANCE 0 0 • R55CKR2 LOGIS101 CITY OF EDINA Council Check Register by GL Council Check Register by Invoice & Summary 7/23/2015 - 7/23/2015 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description 1723 7/23/2015 129460 SAWYER, KYLE Continued... CONTRACTED REPAIRS REPAIR PARTS REPAIR PARTS REPAIR PARTS • 7/21/2016 12:53:37 Page - 5 Business Unit EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR 50TH ST SELLING 29.99 50TH ST SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX VERNON SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR 1724 7/23/2015 VERNON SELLING 101017 SUBURBAN CHEVROLET 2,772.14 VEHCILE REPAIRS 00005522 377745 677204 1553.6180 33.72- CREDIT 377744 CM89182 1553.6530 2,738.42 1725 7/23/2015 103277 TITAN MACHINERY 4,896.18 SKID STEER TRACKS 00005511 377749 6258651 1553.6530 4,696.18 1726 7/23/2015 118190 TURFWERKS LLC 131.78 TIE ROD ENDS 377752 E189945 1553.6530 131.78 1727 7/23/2015 119454 VINOCOPIA 126.50 377605 0128296 -IN 5822.5512 171.75 377604 0128297 -IN 5822.5515 132.00 377606 0128298 -IN 5862.5515 136.25 377892 0128818 -IN 5842.5512 439.00 377893 0128821 -IN 5862.5512 1,005.50 1728 7/23/2015 120627 VISTAR CORPORATION 286.19 CONCESSION PRODUCT 377755 42916979 5520.5510 444.11 CONCESSION PRODUCT 377807 42978401 5520.5510 730.30 1729 7/23/2015 103219 WENDEL SGN ARCHITECTURE INC. 550.00 CONSTRUCTION ADMIN 377695 342283 47090.6710 550.00 1730 7/23/2015 101033 WINE COMPANY, THE 521.90 377607 397908-00 5822.5513 1,659.10 377894 398511-00 5842.5513 641.20 377641 398668-00 5862.5513 2,822.20 395602 7/23/2015 128159 4ACE PRODUCTIONS 540.00 SAFETY CAMP PRESENTER 377925 071715 1600.4390.06 CONTRACTED REPAIRS REPAIR PARTS REPAIR PARTS REPAIR PARTS • 7/21/2016 12:53:37 Page - 5 Business Unit EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR 50TH ST SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX 50TH ST SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX VERNON SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR YORK SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR VERNON SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD COST OF GOODS SOLD EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT ARENA CONCESSIONS ARENA CONCESSIONS PAMELA PK SHELTER & TURF COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD VINE VERNON SELLING SAFETY CAMP PARKADMIN. GENERAL R55CKR2 LOGIS101 CITY OF EDINA Council Check Register by GL Council Check Register by Invoice & Summary 7/23/2015 — 7/23/2015 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description 395602 7/23/2015 128159 4 ACE PRODUCTIONS Continued... 540.00 395603 7/2312015 129458 ACME TOOLS 54.98 GAS CAN, LIGHT 00001108 377974 3416025 5913.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES 29.99 BIT KIT 00005409 377975 3420478 1553.6556 TOOLS 49.00- CREDIT 377976 3439161 1314.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES 35.97 395604 7/23/2015 130792 AIRGAS NATIONAL CARBONATION 280.24 CO2 377757 32280363 5311.6545 CHEMICALS 280.24 395605 7/23/2015 135195 ALLIANCE BENEFIT GROUP 170.00 JUNE 2015 COBRAADMIN 377758 28689 1556.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 170.00 395606 7/23/2015 100630 ANCHOR PAPER COMPANY 253.73 PAPER 377759 10441832-00 5410.6513 OFFICE SUPPLIES 253.73 395607 7/23/2015 101874 ANCOM COMMUNICATIONS INC. 1,509.00 TRIP LITE RACK MOUNT 377460 53844 421400.6710 EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT 1,509.00 395608 7/23/2015 136807 ANDERSON, ANNETTE 13.64 UTILITY OVERPAYMENT REFUND 377977 6700 RIDGEVIEW 5900.2015 CUSTOMER REFUND DR 395609 7/23/2015 136804 ANDERSON, STEVE 310.00 377927 REFUND 1490.4171 1,500.00 377927 REFUND 1400.4131 1,810.00 395610 7/23/2015 119976 AP LAWN 398.00 REMOVE JUNIPERS 00002039 377760 CTLKPK-0615 5761.6103 398.00 395611 7/23/2015 136792 APPLIED ENERGY INNOVATIONS 0 37.40 PERMIT REFUND 377653 ED140924 is 1495.4115 7/21/2015 12:53:37 Page - 6 Business Unit DISTRIBUTION EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN STREET RENOVATION POOL OPERATION EMPLOYEE SHARED SERVICES GOLF ADMINISTRATION POLICE EQUIPMENT UTILITY BALANCE SHEET FOOD ESTABLISHMENT LICENSE PUBLIC HEALTH WINE LICENSE POLICE DEPT. GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES CENTENNIAL LAKES OPERATING MECHANICAL PERMITS INSPECTIONS • 9 7/21/2015 12:53:37 Page - 7 Business Unit 50TH ST SELLING VERNON SELLING YORK SELLING YORK SELLING VERNON SELLING EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN GENERAL STORM SEWER CENT SVC PW BUILDING GENERAL STORM SEWER STREET RENOVATION GENERAL STORM SEWER CENTENNIAL LAKES ADMIN EXPENSE PARKADMIN. GENERAL INSPECTIONS PSTF OCCUPANCY SEWER CLEANING POLICE DEPT. GENERAL • • R55CKR2 LOGIS101 CITY OF EDINA Council Check Register by GL Council Check Register by Invoice & Summary 7/23/2015 - 7/23/2015 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description 396611 7/23/2016 136792 APPLIED ENERGY INNOVATIONS Continued... 37.40 395612 7/23/2015 132031 ARTISAN BEER COMPANY 656.00 377575 3041663 5822.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER 320.00 377813 3042926 5862.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER 480.00 377815 3042927 5842.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER 596.00 377814 3042928 5842.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER 1,151.50 377812 3042929 5862.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER 3,203.50 395613 7/23/2015 101195 AUTO ELECTRIC OF BLOOMINGTON INC. 119.95 377708 157342 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS 119.95 395614 7/23/2015 120995 AVR INC. 721.75 CURB 377463 112478 5932.6520 CONCRETE 311.00 CONCRETE 377464 112479 1552.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES 575.50 CURB 377462 112599 5932.6520 CONCRETE 811.00 CONCRETE FOR STREET PANELS 377929 112722 1314.6520 CONCRETE 1,105.75 CONCRETE CURB 377928 113040 5932.6520 CONCRETE 3,525.00 395615 7/23/2015 103241 BALDINGER, WENDY 200.00 CL PERFORMANCE 8/6/15 377707 070115 5760.6136 PROFESSIONAL SVC - OTHER 200.00 395616 7/23/2015 106217 BANTA, DON 400.00 SAFETY CAMP SPEAKER 377926 071715 1600.4390.06 SAFETY CAMP 400.00 395617 7/23/2015 136808 BARTON, JAMES 101.40 PERMIT REFUND 377973 ED140581 1495.4111 BUILDING PERMITS 101.40 395618 7/23/2015 102196 BATTERIES PLUS 1,008.89 BATTERIES FOR FLOOR SCRUBBER 377465 018-102931-01 7411.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES 19.99 BATTERY FOR PUSH CAM 00001342 377466 018-377018 5920.6530 REPAIR PARTS 50.90 BATTERIES 00003185 377654 018-377438 1400.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES 1,079.78 9 7/21/2015 12:53:37 Page - 7 Business Unit 50TH ST SELLING VERNON SELLING YORK SELLING YORK SELLING VERNON SELLING EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN GENERAL STORM SEWER CENT SVC PW BUILDING GENERAL STORM SEWER STREET RENOVATION GENERAL STORM SEWER CENTENNIAL LAKES ADMIN EXPENSE PARKADMIN. GENERAL INSPECTIONS PSTF OCCUPANCY SEWER CLEANING POLICE DEPT. GENERAL R55CKR2 LOGIS101 CITY OF EDINA 7/21/2015 12:53:37 Council Check Register by GL Page - 8 Council Check Register by Invoice & Summary 7/23/2015 - 7/23/2015 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit 396619 7/23/2016 136267 BAUHAUS BREW LABS LLC Continued... 283.00 377816 2561 5842.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER YORK SELLING 283.00 395620 7/23/2015 126996 BCA - CJTE 75.00 RECERTIFICATION - DAN CONBOY 377930 26549 2340.6104 CONFERENCES & SCHOOLS DWI FORFEITURE 75.00 395621 7/23/2015 136805 BELAIR COMPANY LLC 4,940.00 NETTING AND FABRIC REPAIR 377978 10436 5210.6180 CONTRACTED REPAIRS GOLF DOME PROGRAM 4,560.00 PROVIDE AERIAL LIFT 377979 10437 5210.6180 CONTRACTED REPAIRS GOLF DOME PROGRAM 9,500.00 395622 7/23/2015 117379 BEN IEK PROPERTY SERVICES INC. 703.90 JULY 2015 LAWN CARE 377467 144999 7411.6136 SNOW & LAWN CARE PSTF OCCUPANCY 703.90 395623 7/23/2015 136794 BERG, MELANIE 68.00 SIGNED UP TWICE FOR TENNIS 377649 REFUND 1600.4390.02 TENNIS PROGRAM PARK ADMIN. GENERAL 68.00 395624 7/23/2015 131191 BERNATELLO'S PIZZA INC. 216.00 PIZZA 377762 D2813533 5320.5510 COST OF GOODS SOLD POOL CONCESSIONS 216.00 395625 7/23/2015 108670 BERNER, JIM 150.00 CL PERFORMANCE 8/5/15 377705 070115 5760.6136 PROFESSIONAL SVC-OTHER CENTENNIAL LAKES ADMIN EXPENSE 150.00 395626 7/23/2015 125139 BERNICK'S 179.00 377581 230773 5822.55114 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER 50TH ST SELLING 71.50 377763 232407 5520.5510 COST OF GOODS SOLD ARENA CONCESSIONS 200.00 377817 232410 5842.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER YORK SELLING 450.50 395627 7/23/2015 136548 BERNIE M PHOTOGRAPHY 600.00 GOOGLE PHOTOSHOOT 377764 41070 5410.6122 ADVERTISING OTHER GOLF ADMINISTRATION 600.00 395628 7/23/2015 126847 BERRY COFFEE COMPANY 0 80.35 COFFEE 377613 T80452 • 1552.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES CENT SVC PW BWG 200.00 395635 7/23/2016 102149 CALLAWAY GOLF 406.56 • 377767 926144682 5440.5511 • PRO SHOP RETAIL SALES 1,349.04- • R55CKR2 LOGIS101 926155303 5440.5511 COST OF GOODS - PRO SHOP CITY OF EDINA 150.48- CREDIT 7/21/2015 12:53:37 926155424 5440.5511 COST OF GOODS - PRO SHOP PRO SHOP RETAIL SALES 919.80 Council Check Register by GL 377768 Page- 9 5440.5511 COST OF GOODS - PRO SHOP PRO SHOP RETAIL SALES 526.68 Council Check Register by Invoice & Summary 926161785 5440.5511 COST OF GOODS - PRO SHOP PRO SHOP RETAIL SALES 353.52 7/23/2015 -- 7/23/2015 Check # Date Amount Supplier/ Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit 395628 7/23/2015 635168 126847 BERRY COFFEE COMPANY COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER 50TH ST SELLING 2,972.27 Continued... 377827 635305 5842.5514 80.35 YORK SELLING 395629 7/23/2015 130569 BINTNER, ROSS 75.00 REIMBURSEMENT 377468 070915 1260.6104 CONFERENCES & SCHOOLS ENGINEERING GENERAL 133.40 REIMBURSEMENT 377468 070915 1260.6107 MILEAGE OR ALLOWANCE ENGINEERING GENERAL 208.40 395630 7/23/2015 122248 BLICK ART MATERIALS 58.58 CANVAS PANELS 00009424 377658 4672485 5110.6564 CRAFT SUPPLIES ART CENTER ADMINISTRATION 58.58 395631 7/23/2015 101010 BORDER STATES ELECTRIC SUPPLY 29.34 BREAKER 00001348 377931 909651769 1321.6530 REPAIR PARTS STREET LIGHTING REGULAR 29.34 395632 7/23/2015 136584 BRAVURA CONSTRUCTION INC 2,500.00 REFUND DEMO ESCROW 377659 5604 1495.4109 CONSTRUCTION DEPOSIT INSPECTIONS COUNTRYSIDE RD 2,50D.00 395633 7/23/2015 100667 BROCK WHITE COMPANY 404.95 HILTI FIRE FOAM CP 00001249 377469 12554852-00 1551.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES CITY HALL GENERAL 99.25 CP DISPENSER 00004049 377470 12555207-00 1551.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES CITY HALL GENERAL 504.20 395634 7/23/2015 130486 BRUESKE, TARA 200.00 CL PERFORMANCE 8/4/15 377703 070115 5760.6136 PROFESSIONAL SVC - OTHER CENTENNIAL LAKES ADMIN EXPENSE 200.00 395635 7/23/2016 102149 CALLAWAY GOLF 406.56 GOLF BALLS 377767 926144682 5440.5511 COST OF GOODS - PRO SHOP PRO SHOP RETAIL SALES 1,349.04- CREDIT 377770 926155303 5440.5511 COST OF GOODS - PRO SHOP PRO SHOP RETAIL SALES 150.48- CREDIT 377769 926155424 5440.5511 COST OF GOODS - PRO SHOP PRO SHOP RETAIL SALES 919.80 MERCHANDISE 377768 926155492 5440.5511 COST OF GOODS - PRO SHOP PRO SHOP RETAIL SALES 526.68 GOLF CLUBS 377766 926161785 5440.5511 COST OF GOODS - PRO SHOP PRO SHOP RETAIL SALES 353.52 395636 7/23/2015 119455 CAPITOL BEVERAGE SALES 1,073.50 377582 635168 5822.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER 50TH ST SELLING 2,972.27 377827 635305 5842.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER YORK SELLING R55CKR2 LOGIS101 CITY OF EDINA Council Check Register by GL Council Check Register by Invoice & Summary 7/23/2015 — 7/23/2015 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description 395636 7/23/2015 119455 CAPITOL BEVERAGE SALES Continued... 4,045.77 395637 7/23/2015 103268 CARLSON, DAVID 160.85 UNIFORM PURCHASE 377660 071515 1400.6203 UNIFORM ALLOWANCE 160.85 395638 7/23/2015 101515 CEMSTONE PRODUCTS CO. 703.38 CONCRETE SEALER 00001316 377713 220362 1314.6406 GENERALSUPPLIES 27.12 EDGER TOOL 00001316 377475 220366 1301.6556 TOOLS 153.72 PATCHING MATERIAL 00001326 377934 220640 5932.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES 884.22 395639 7/23/2015 101815 CENTRAIRE INC. 63.36 PERMIT REFUND 377972 ED141026 1495.4115 MECHANICAL PERMITS 63.36 395640 7/23/2015 123898 CENTURYLINK 60.64 952 835-1161 377476 1161-7/15 5720.6186 TELEPHONE 160.48 952285-2951 377935 2951-7/15 1470.6188 TELEPHONE 62.53 952944-6522 377936 6522-7/15 5511.6188 TELEPHONE 213.79 952 835-6661 377661 6661-7/15 1552.6188 TELEPHONE 497.44 395641 7/23/2015 135835 CENTURYLINK 1,335.45 612 -DOB -2053-053 377937 2053-7/15 2310.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES 1,335.45 395642 7/23/2015 100683 CHEMSEARCH 669.12 WATER TREATMENT PROGRAM 377714 1969874 5510.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 669.12 395643 7/23/2015 134994 CITY HOMES DESIGN & BUILD LLC 139,029.00 CASH ESCROW REDUCTION 377939 ACRES DUBOIS 1000.2066 ESCROW DEPOSITS 139,029.00 395644 7/23/2015 100684 CITY OF BLOOMINGTON 50,911.25 LOCAL PUBLIC HEALTH CONTRACT 377662 11180 1490.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 50, 911.25 395645 7/23/20 122317 CITY OF EDINA -COMMUNICATIONS • 7/21/2015 12:53:37 Page - 10 Business Unit POLICE DEPT. GENERAL STREET RENOVATION GENERAL MAINTENANCE GENERAL STORM SEWER INSPECTIONS EDINBOROUGH OPERATIONS FIRE DEPT. GENERAL ARENA BLDG/GROUNDS CENT SVC PW BUILDING I:syil ARENA ADMINISTRATION GENERAL FUND BALANCE SHEET PUBLIC HEALTH 0 R55CKR2 LOGIS101 CITY OF EDINA 7/21/2015 12:53:37 Council Check Register by GL Page- 11 Council Check Register by Invoice & Summary 7/23/2015 - 7/23/2015 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit 396646 7/23/2016 122317 CITY OF EDINA -COMMUNICATIONS _-r Continued... 100.00 IT SERVICES 377938 COM-0630 7411.6188 TELEPHONE PSTF OCCUPANCY 100.00 395646 7/23/2015 122084 CITY OF EDINA - UTILITIES 738.33 00082050-0200650009 377478 200650009-7/15 1551.6189 SEWER & WATER CITY HALL GENERAL 449.59 00082050-0200650018 377477 200650018-7/15 1551.6189 SEWER & WATER CITY HALL GENERAL 78.21 00102561-0200862003 377480 200862003-7/15 5821.6189 SEWER & WATER 50TH ST OCCUPANCY 150.50 00102561-0203163003 377481 203163003-7/15 5861.6169 SEWER & WATER VERNON OCCUPANCY 230.29 00114667-0210000012 377479 210000012-7/15 1375.6189 SEWER & WATER PARKING RAMP 1,646.92 395647 7/23/2016 100692 COCA-COLA REFRESHMENTS 180.08 377828 0138412416 5862.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX VERNON SELLING 180.08 395648 7/23/2015 120433 COMCAST 28.94 8772 10 614 0220686 377771 220686-7/15 5710.6105 DUES & SUBSCRIPTIONS EDINBOROUGH ADMINISTRATION 142.75 8772 10 614 0540372 377772 540372-7/15 5553.6188 TELEPHONE SPORTS DOME BLDG&GROUNDS 171.69 395649 7/23/2015 120826 COMCAST SPOTLIGHT 890.00 ADVERTISING 377980 NW660170 5410.6122 ADVERTISING OTHER GOLF ADMINISTRATION 1,032.46 CABLE TV ADS 377482 NW660730 5862.6122 ADVERTISING OTHER VERNON SELLING 1,032.47 CABLE TV ADS 377482 NW660730 5822.6122 ADVERTISING OTHER 50TH ST SELLING 1,032.47 CABLE TV ADS 377482 NW660730 5842.6122 ADVERTISING OTHER YORK SELLING 3,987.40 395650 7/23/2015 121066 COMMERCIAL ASPHALT CO. 54,497.30 HOT MIX 377483 063015 1314.6518 BLACKTOP STREET RENOVATION 54,497.30 395651 7/23/2015 100696 CONTINENTAL CLAY CO. 103.09 GLAZE 00009418 377664 INV000100093 5110.6564 CRAFT SUPPLIES ART CENTER ADMINISTRATION 253.92 CERAMIC SUPPLIES 00009417 377663 R200401519 5110.6564 CRAFT SUPPLIES ART CENTER ADMINISTRATION 50.65 CERAMIC SUPPLIES 00009420 377665 R200401847 5110.6564 CRAFT SUPPLIES ART CENTER ADMINISTRATION 407.66 395652 7/23/2015 100402 CROW WING COUNTY 300.00 OUT OF COUNTY WARRANT 377484 071415 1000.2055 DUE TO OTHER GOVERNMENTS GENERAL FUND BALANCE SHEET 300.00 R55CKR2 LOGIS101 CITY OF EDINA Council Check Register by GL Council Check Register by Invoice & Summary 7/23/2015 — 7/23/2015 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description 395652 7/23/2016 100402 CROW WING COUNTY Continued... 396653 7/23/2015 136399 CROWE, JONATHAN 19.49 REIMBURSEMENT 377981 072015 1190.6104 CONFERENCES & SCHOOLS 138.00 REIMBURSEMENT 377981 072015 1190.6107 MILEAGE OR ALLOWANCE 157.49 396664 7/2312015 100699 CULLIGAN BOTTLED WATER 20.48 114-09855685-4 377485 6/30/15 7411.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES 20.48 395665 7/23/2015 106670 CULLIGAN WATER CONDITIONING 21.60 PERMIT REFUND 377940 ED140711 1495.4112 PLUMBING PERMITS 21.60 395656 7/23/2015 101418 CUMMINS NPOWER LLC 100.00 REPAIRS 00005486 377715 100-33174 1553.6180 CONTRACTED REPAIRS 100.00 395657 7123/2015 100701 CUSHMAN MOTOR CO. INC. 43.40 IGNITION SWITCH 377486 166054 1642.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 43.40 396668 7/23/2016 119214 CUSTOM HOSE TECH INC. 199.34 HOSE, FITTINGS 00005485 377716 79809 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS 199.34 395659 7/23/2016 134475 D R HORTON INC 2,500.00 REFUND NEW HOME ESCROW 377982 5632 EWING AVE 1495.4109 CONSTRUCTION DEPOSIT 2,500.00 395660 7/23/2016 133169 DAIKIN APPLIED 279.50 SERVICE CALL 377487 3053292 7412.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 279.50 395661 7/23/2015 136800 DEAN, RUTH 15.00 BALLROOM DANCING REFUND 377700 CANCELED 1628.4392.09 SENIOR SPECIAL EVENTS 15.00 395662 7/23/2016 100718 DELEGARD TOOL CO. 0 25.42 CIRCUIT TEST COIL, TOOL SET 00005481 377941 17019 • 1553.6556 TOOLS 7/21/2015 12:53:37 Page - 12 Business Unit ASSESSING ASSESSING PSTF OCCUPANCY INSPECTIONS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN FIELD MAINTENANCE EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN INSPECTIONS PSTF RANGE SENIOR CITIZENS EQUIPMENT OPON GEN 395666 0 100296 DISCOUNT SCHOOL SUPPLY • R55CKR2 LOGIS101 89.44 CRAYONS, SPRAYERS CITY OF EDINA P33122780001 1624.6406 89.44 Council Check Register by GL 395667 7/23/2015 Council Check Register by Invoice & Summary 26.17 CUTTING BLADE 00001311 7/23/2015 — 7/23/2015 01112915 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description 396662 7/23/2016 7/23/2015 100718 DELEGARD TOOL CO. 128149 DRAIN PRO PLUMBING Continued... 190.99 PLIERS, MULTIMETER 00005448 377942 19271 1553.6556 TOOLS 1495.4112 216.41 24.16 395663 7/23/2015 7/23/2015 100899 DEPARTMENT OF LABOR & INDUSTRY 119716 EASTERN PACIFIC APPAREL INC. 11,414.27 JUNE 2015 SURCHARGE 377489 22802053060 1495.4380 SURCHARGE 542006 5440.5511 11,414.27 349.00 MERCHANDISE 377774 395664 7/23/2015 136484 DIEBEL, MIKE 1,341.75 54.00 BRAEMAR GOLF ACADEMY 377773 071515 5401.4602 LESSONS 54.00 67.02 PUBLISH ORD 2015-8 377491 395665 7/23/2015 121103 DIRECTV 50.27 PUBLISH NOTICE 377490 395666 7/23/2015 100296 DISCOUNT SCHOOL SUPPLY 89.44 CRAYONS, SPRAYERS 377944 P33122780001 1624.6406 89.44 395667 7/23/2015 118805 DISCOUNT STEEL INC. 26.17 CUTTING BLADE 00001311 377718 01112915 1314.6406 26.17 395668 7/23/2015 128149 DRAIN PRO PLUMBING 24.16 PERMIT REFUND 377666 ED140993 1495.4112 24.16 395669 7/23/2015 119716 EASTERN PACIFIC APPAREL INC. 992.75 MERCHANDISE 377775 542006 5440.5511 349.00 MERCHANDISE 377774 542716 5440.5511 1,341.75 395670 7/23/2015 132810 ECM PUBLISHERS INC. 67.02 PUBLISH ORD 2015-8 377491 236178 1185.6120 50.27 PUBLISH NOTICE 377490 236179 1185.6120 117.29 395671 7/23/2015 124603 EDEN PRAIRIE WINLECTRIC CO. 14.98 RS5 COVERS 377615 12123700 1646.6530 14.98 GENERALSUPPLIES GENERALSUPPLIES GENERALSUPPLIES PLUMBING PERMITS • 7/21/2015 12:53:37 Page - 13 Business Unit EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN INSPECTIONS GOLF REVENUES PSTF OCCUPANCY PLAYGROUND & THEATER STREET RENOVATION INSPECTIONS COST OF GOODS - PRO SHOP PRO SHOP RETAIL SALES COST OF GOODS - PRO SHOP PRO SHOP RETAIL SALES ADVERTISING LEGAL ADVERTISING LEGAL REPAIR PARTS LICENSING, PERMITS & RECORDS LICENSING, PERMITS & RECORDS BUILDING MAINTENANCE R55CKR2 LOGIS101 CITY OF EDINA Council Check Register by GL Council Check Register by Invoice & Summary 7/23/2015 - 7/23/2015 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description 395671 7/23/2015 124503 EDEN PRAIRIE WINLECTRIC CO. Continued... 395672 7/2312015 118010 EGAN, BILL 475.00 BEAVER REMOVAL 00001232 377667 071215 5932.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 475.00 395673 7/23/2015 100049 EHLERS & ASSOCIATES INC. 3,360.00 UTILITY RATE STUDY 377616 67960 5902.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 3,360.00 395674 7/23/2015 101956 EMERGENCY APPARATUS MAINTENANCE 265.00 E-81 PUMP TEST 377670 80879 1470.6215 EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE 265.00 E-82 PUMP TEST 377672 80880 1470.6215 EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE 265.00 E-83 PUMP TEST 377671 80881 1470.6215 EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE 265.00 T-90 PUMP TEST 377669 80682 1470.6215 EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE 849.80 E-82 REPAIRS 377668 81336 1470.6180 CONTRACTED REPAIRS 1,909.80 395675 7/23/2015 136689 ENKI BREWING COMPANY INC. 369.00 377585 4135 5842.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER 221.40 377584 4136 5862.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER 590.40 395676 7/23/2015 122879 EXECS. BIG BAND 150.00 CL PERFORMANCE 7/27/15 377455 070115 5760.6136 PROFESSIONAL SVC - OTHER 150.00 395677 7/23/2015 100146 FACTORY MOTOR PARTS COMPANY 234.39 BATTERY 377721 1-Z04863 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS 630.09 BELTS, STRUTS 377720 69-185409 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS 65.27 ROTORS, DISC PAD SET 377719 69-165627 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS 929.75 395678 7/23/2015 102485 FAHRENKRUG, ROGER 1,440.00 BRAEMAR GOLF ACADEMY 377776 071515 5401.4602 LESSONS 1,440.00 395679 7/23/2015 122649 FARNER-BOCKEN COMPANY 914.62 CONCESSION PRODUCT 377722 4040680 5520.5510 COST OF GOODS SOLD 914.62 0 7/21/2015 12:53:37 Page - 14 Business Unit GENERAL STORM SEWER UTILITY BILLING - FINANCE FIRE DEPT. GENERAL FIRE DEPT. GENERAL FIRE DEPT. GENERAL FIRE DEPT. GENERAL FIRE DEPT. GENERAL YORK SELLING VERNON SELLING CENTENNIAL LAKES ADMIN EXPENSE EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN GOLF REVENUES ARENA CONCESSIONS 0 • • R55CKR2 LOGIS101 CITY OF EDINA Council Check Register by GL Council Check Register by Invoice & Summary 7/23/2015 - 7/23/2015 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description 395680 7/23/2015 130136 FAUS, SUSAN Continued... 135.70 MILEAGE REIMBURSEMENT 377724 071615 1600.6107 MILEAGE OR ALLOWANCE 5913.6406 GENERALSUPPLIES 5916.6180 CONTRACTED REPAIRS 1400.6406 GENERALSUPPLIES 5110.6107 135.70 5111.6406 GENERALSUPPLIES 5120.6406 GENERALSUPPLIES 395681 7/23/2015 GENERALSUPPLIES 126004 FERGUSON WATERWORKS CRAFT SUPPLIES GENERALSUPPLIES BUILDING MAINTENANCE 208.07 HYDRANT PARTS 00001233 377618 0146689 EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 167.14 METER ECODER 00001236 377945 0148065 375.21 395682 7/23/2015 131188 FIRST -SHRED 261.80 SHREDDING SERVICES 377777 154425 261.80 395683 7/23/2015 100919 FREY, MICHAEL 16.00 377725 071415 19.51 377725 071415 42.68 377725 071415 143.00 377725 071415 156.13 377725 071415 377.32 395684 7/23/2015 130475 FUNTIME FUNKTIONS 250.00 CL PERFORMANCE 7/14/15 377723 797 250.00 395685 7/23/2015 102419 GARDEN & ASSOCIATES INC 110.00 INTERPRETER SERVICES 377492 6891 110.00 395686 7/23/2015 102418 GARDENSIDE LTD 2,592.00 BENCHES 00002381 377946 28062 2,592.00 395687 7/23/2015 101103 GRAINGER 132.16 377496 9780105459 330.24 NITRILE GLOVES 00001293 377493 9783208532 14.24 SAFETY GLASSES 00001150 377495 9784070089 132.16- 377497 9784895352 330.40- RETURN 377494 9784895360 28.86 HIGHLIGHTER PENS 00005518 377727 9785547945 57.42 CHEMICAL RESISTANT GLOVES 00005518 377726 9786370412 5913.6406 GENERALSUPPLIES 5916.6180 CONTRACTED REPAIRS 1400.6406 GENERALSUPPLIES 5110.6107 MILEAGE OR ALLOWANCE 5111.6406 GENERALSUPPLIES 5120.6406 GENERALSUPPLIES 5110.6406 GENERALSUPPLIES 5110.6564 CRAFT SUPPLIES 5760.6136 PROFESSIONAL SVC - OTHER 0 7/21/2015 12:53:37 Page - 15 Business Unit PARKADMIN. GENERAL DISTRIBUTION METER READING POLICE DEPT. GENERAL ART CENTER ADMINISTRATION ART CENTER BLDG/MAINT ART SUPPLY GIFT GALLERY SHOP ART CENTER ADMINISTRATION ART CENTER ADMINISTRATION CENTENNIAL LAKES ADMIN EXPENSE 1400.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES POLICE DEPT. GENERAL 5761.6406 GENERALSUPPLIES CENTENNIAL LAKES OPERATING 1646.6406 GENERALSUPPLIES BUILDING MAINTENANCE 1646.6406 GENERALSUPPLIES BUILDING MAINTENANCE 1646.6610 SAFETY EQUIPMENT BUILDING MAINTENANCE 1646.6406 GENERALSUPPLIES BUILDING MAINTENANCE 1646.6406 GENERALSUPPLIES BUILDING MAINTENANCE 1553.6406 GENERALSUPPLIES EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 1553.6610 SAFETY EQUIPMENT EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN R55CKR2 LOGIS101 7/23/2015 102126 GREG LESSMAN SALES CITY OF EDINA Council Check Register by GL BALL MARKERS 377779 55294 Council Check Register by Invoice & Summary 376.98 7/23/2015 — 7/23/2015 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description 395687 7/23/2015 101103 GRAINGER 976.50 Continued... 377780 6.38 LATCH FOR POLE LIGHT 00001333 377621 9786595703 1322.6530 REPAIR PARTS 976.50 6.38 LATCH FOR POLE LIGHT 00001333 377620 9786595711 1322.6530 REPAIR PARTS 395691 76.56 LATCHES FOR POLE BASES 00001350 377947 9789036507 1322.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES 189.68 1,413.00 BRAEMAR GOLF ACADEMY 395688 7/23/2015 071515 102217 GRAPE BEGINNINGS INC 5401.4602 395689 7/23/2015 102126 GREG LESSMAN SALES 376.98 BALL MARKERS 377779 55294 5440.5511 376.98 395690 7/23/2015 100785 GREUPNER, JOE 976.50 BRAEMAR GOLF ACADEMY 377780 071515 5401.4602 976.50 395691 7/23/2015 100008 GRUBE, MIKE 1,413.00 BRAEMAR GOLF ACADEMY 377781 071515 5401.4602 1,413.00 395692 7/23/2015 100787 GRUBER'S POWER EQUIPMENT 312.85 FUEL PUMP, SEAT COVER, GREASE 377728 145322 1314.6406 312.85 395693 7/23/2015 106431 HALL, MARY 150.00 CL PERFORMANCE 7/30/15 377459 070115 5760.6136 150.00 395694 7/23/2015 123248 HARMONIC RELIEF 150.00 CL PERFORMANCE 8/3/15 377702 070115 5760.6136 150.00 395695 7/23/2015 100797 HAWKINS INC. 1,489.69 CHLORINE, SODIUM HYDROXIDE 377782 3747406 5311.6545 1,489.69 395696 7/23/2015 100012 HD SUPPLY WATERWORKS LTD 4,505.75 HYDRANT, REPAIR PARTS 00001328 377729 E174914 5913.6530 • 4,505.75 • 7121/2015 12:53:37 Page - 16 Business Unit STREET LIGHTING ORNAMENTAL STREET LIGHTING ORNAMENTAL STREET LIGHTING ORNAMENTAL COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING COST OF GOODS - PRO SHOP PRO SHOP RETAIL SALES LESSONS LESSONS GENERALSUPPLIES GOLF REVENUES GOLF REVENUES STREET RENOVATION PROFESSIONAL SVC - OTHER CENTENNIAL LAKES ADMIN EXPENSE PROFESSIONAL SVC - OTHER CENTENNIAL LAKES ADMIN EXPENSE CHEMICALS POOL OPERATION REPAIR PARTS DISTRIBUTION 0 • • s R55CKR2 LOGIS101 CITY OF EDINA 7/21/2015 12:53:37 Council Check Register by GL Page - 17 Council Check Register by Invoice & Summary 7/23/2015 — 7/23/2015 Check # Date Amount Supplier/ Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit 395696 7/23/2015 100012 HD SUPPLY WATERWORKS LTD Continued... 395697 7/23/2015 105436 HENNEPIN COUNTY TREASURER 2,243.31 RADIO FLEET FEES - JUNE 377498 1000062460 1470.6151 EQUIPMENT RENTAL FIRE DEPT. GENERAL 1,988.75 RADIO FEES - JUNE 377499 1000062461 1400.6230 SERVICE CONTRACTS EQUIPMENT POLICE DEPT. GENERAL 4,232.06 395698 7/23/2015 116680 HEWLETT-PACKARD COMPANY 794.00 PC AND MONITOR 00004356 377783 56118403 1600.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES PARKADMIN. GENERAL 1,298.20 PC 00004356 377783 56118403 1554.6710 EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT CENT SERV GEN - MIS 2,092.20 395699 7/23/2015 104375 HOHENSTEINS INC. 555.00 377629 772523 5862.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER VERNON SELLING 1,448.67 377831 772896 5842.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER YORK SELLING 2,003.67 395700 7/23/2015 103302 HONEYWELL CONCERT BAND 150.00 CL PERFORMANCE 8/2/15 377701 070115 5760.6136 PROFESSIONAL SVC - OTHER CENTENNIAL LAKES ADMIN EXPENSE 150.00 395701 7/23/2015 100808 HORWATH, THOMAS 426.08 MILEAGE REIMBURSEMENT 377730 071615 1644.6107 MILEAGE OR ALLOWANCE TREES & MAINTENANCE 426.08 395702 7/23/2015 125032 IEH AUTO PARTS LLC 626.63 PARTS 377673 063015 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 626.63 395703 7/23/2015 131544 INDEED BREWING COMPANY 285.00 377586 30534 5822.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER 50TH ST SELLING 195.00 377587 30647 5862.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER VERNON SELLING 1,565.00 377832 30841 5842.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER YORK SELLING 135.00 377833 30917 5862.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER VERNON SELLING 2,180.00 395704 7/23/2015 100741 JJ TAYLOR DIST. OF MINN 8,195.68 377835 23282327 5842.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER YORK SELLING 777.40 377834 2365074 5842.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER YORK SELLING 59.40 377588 2382306 5842.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER YORK SELLING 3,038.21 377838 2382317 5862.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER VERNON SELLING R55CKR2 LOGIS101 CITY OF EDINA 7/21/2015 12:53:37 Council Check Register by GL Page - 18 Council Check Register by Invoice & Summary 7/23/2015 - 7/23/2015 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit 395704 7/23/2015 100741 JJ TAYLOR DIST. OF MINN Continued... 72.00 377836 2382326 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 35.47 377837 2382328 5842.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX YORK SELLING 659.80 377784 2397031 5421.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER GRILL 12,837.96 395705 7/23/2015 123551 JMS CUSTOM HOMES LLC 2,500.00 REFUND NEW HOME ESCROW 377502 3701 FULLER ST 1495.4109 CONSTRUCTION DEPOSIT INSPECTIONS 2,500.00 REFUND NEW HOME ESCROW 377504 5101 HALIFAX 1495.4109 CONSTRUCTION DEPOSIT INSPECTIONS 2,500.00 REFUND NEW HOME ESCROW 377505 5108 59TH ST 1495.4109 CONSTRUCTION DEPOSIT INSPECTIONS 103.37 UTILITY OVERPAYMENT REFUND 377507 5297 63RD ST W 5900.2015 CUSTOMER REFUND UTILITY BALANCE SHEET 2,500.00 REFUND NEW HOME ESCROW 377503 5705 EWING AVE 1495.4109 CONSTRUCTION DEPOSIT INSPECTIONS S 2,500.00 REFUND NEW HOME ESCROW 377506 6004 HANSEN RD 1495.4109 CONSTRUCTION DEPOSIT INSPECTIONS 2,058.40 REFUND NEW HOME ESCROW 377501 6133 BROOKVIEW 1495.4109 CONSTRUCTION DEPOSIT INSPECTIONS 14,661.77 395706 7/23/2015 124104 JOHN DEERE LANDSCAPES INC. 101.04 IRRIGATION PARTS 00001308 377509 72459284 1642.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES FIELD MAINTENANCE 72.25 IRRIGATION PARTS 00001308 377508 72460547 1642.6406 GENERALSUPPLIES FIELD MAINTENANCE 266.13 ROUND UP 00001314 377619 72479450 1643.6546 WEED SPRAY GENERAL TURF CARE 439.42 395707 7/23/2015 100835 JOHNSON BROTHERS LIQUOR CO. 535.62 377595 5205604 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING 298.25 377589 5205607 5822.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR 50TH ST SELLING 1,743.13 377590 5205608 5822.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR 50TH ST SELLING 493.85 377596 5205609 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING 142.91 377591 5205610 5822.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR 50TH ST SELLING 31.41 377592 5205611 5822.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX 50TH ST SELLING 905.28 377593 5206879 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING 3.48 377594 5206880 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING 753.68 377639 5211172 5822.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR 50TH ST SELLING 1.16 377846 5211173 5862.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR VERNON SELLING 408.66 377869 5211174 5842.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR YORK SELLING 113.07 377842 5211176 5822.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR 50TH ST SELLING 177.55 377843 5211177 5822.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR 50TH ST SELLING 1,133.92 377854 5211179 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 4.64 377855 5211180 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 212.48 377841 5211182 5822.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR 50TH ST SELLING • 31.41 377840 5211183 • 5822.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR 50TH ST SELLIO . • • R55CKR2 LOGIS101 CITY OF EDINA 7/21/2015 12:53:37 Council Check Register by GL Page- 19 Council Check Register by Invoice & Summary 7/23/2015 - 7/23/2015 Check # Date Amount Supplier/ Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit 395707 7/23/2015 100835 JOHNSON BROTHERS LIQUOR CO. Continued... 4.73 377861 5211184 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 16.44 377851 5211186 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 2.32 377850 5211187 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 5,534.05 377868 5211189 5842.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR YORK SELLING 149.66 377867 5211190 5842.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR YORK SELLING 4,646.29 377860 5211191 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 3,831.02 377866 5211192 5842.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR YORK SELLING 1.16 377858 5211193 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 3,110.77 377862 5211194 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 813.30 377865 5211195 5842.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR YORK SELLING 1,599.76 377859 5211196 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 3,562.00 377863 5211197 5842.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR YORK SELLING 94.23 377864 5211198 5842.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX YORK SELLING 3,347.50 377847 5211199 5862.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR VERNON SELLING 885.32 377845 5211200 5862.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR VERNON SELLING 5,997.29 377849 5211201 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 6,549.65 377852 5211202 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 3.48 377853 5211203 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 738.60 377857 5211204 5862.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR VERNON SELLING 2,171.31 377848 5211205 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 1,070.40 377844 5211206 5862.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR VERNON SELLING 62.82 377856 5211207 5862.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX VERNON SELLING 1.00- 377633 532165 5862.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR VERNON SELLING 16.44- 377631 532166 5862.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR VERNON SELLING 1.00- 377632 532167 5862.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR VERNON SELLING 40.00- 377871 532768 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 87.78- 377630 533059 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 12.16- 377870 533547 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 7.67- 377872 533548 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 51, 016.55 395708 7/23/2015 111018 KEEPRS INC. 39.99 00003602 377676 278828-02 1470.6558 DEPT UNIFORMS FIRE DEPT. GENERAL 125.97 00003583 377677 280299 1470.6558 DEPT UNIFORMS FIRE DEPT. GENERAL 26.58 UNIFORMS 00003608 377674 280483 1470.6558 DEPT UNIFORMS FIRE DEPT. GENERAL 577.91 00003598 377675 280564-01 1470.6558 DEPT UNIFORMS FIRE DEPT. GENERAL 84.99 00003598 377680 280564-02 1470.6558 DEPT UNIFORMS FIRE DEPT. GENERAL 69.99 00003638 377678 280753 1470.6558 DEPT UNIFORMS FIRE DEPT. GENERAL 55.00 00003608 377679 280801 1470.6558 DEPT UNIFORMS FIRE DEPT. GENERAL 980.43 R55CKR2 LOGIS101 CITY OF EDINA 7/21/2015 12:53:37 Council Check Register by GL 7/23/2015 Page- 20 115192 KNUDSON, DEBBIE Council Check Register by Invoice & Summary 976.50 7/23/2015 — 7/23/2015 377785 071515 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit 395708 7/23/2015 111018 KEEPRS INC. Continued... 7/23/2015 395709 7/23/2015 136686 KIDCREATE STUDIO 260.00 TRAVELIN TEENS FIELD TRIP 377949 5514 1624.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES PLAYGROUND & THEATER 364.00 PLAYGROUND PROGRAM 377948 5534 1600.4390.52 REACH EDUCATION SOLUTIONS PARKADMIN. GENERAL LESSONS GOLF REVENUES PROFESSIONAL SERVICES SENIOR CITIZENS GEN ADAPTIVE REC PARKADMIN. GENERAL SENIOR SPECIAL EVENTS SENIOR CITIZENS GENERAL SUPPLIES REPAIR PARTS REPAIR PARTS REPAIR PARTS INSURANCE PROFESSIONAL SERVICES PSTF RANGE EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN CENTRAL SERVICES GENERAL SENIOR CITIZENS is 624.00 395710 7/23/2015 115192 KNUDSON, DEBBIE 976.50 BRAEMAR GOLF ACADEMY 377785 071515 5401.4602 976.50 395711 7/23/2015 105887 KOESSLER, JOE 313.20 JUNE/JULY SERVICE 377984 070115 1628.6103 313.20 395712 7/23/2015 131651 LAMPERT, BARBARA 42.00 WATER AEROBICS 377950 REFUND 1600.4390.15 42.00 395713 7/23/2015 136799 LANTSBERGER, BARBARA 15.00 BALLROOM DANCING REFUND 377699 CANCELED 1628.4392.09 15.00 395714 7/23/2015 116260 LAW ENFORCEMENT TARGETS INC. 262.82 TARGETS 377510 0282917 -IN 7412.6406 262.82 395715 7/23/2015 100852 LAWSON PRODUCTS INC. 509.27 SCREWS, BITS, CAPS 00005554 377731 9303393771 1553.6530 175.17 LAMP KIT 00005431 377732 9303400398 1553.6530 89.28 LED LIGHTS 00005431 377733 9303403734 1553.6530 773.72 395716 7/23/2015 101562 LEAGUE OF MINNESOTA CITIES 1,116.00 CLAIM PAYMENT 377786 CA00000008060 1550.6200 1,116.00 395717 7/23/2015 103396 LENT, WILLIAM 538.82 FIREARM SAFETY EXPENSES 377511 SPRING 2015 1628.6103 538.82 LESSONS GOLF REVENUES PROFESSIONAL SERVICES SENIOR CITIZENS GEN ADAPTIVE REC PARKADMIN. GENERAL SENIOR SPECIAL EVENTS SENIOR CITIZENS GENERAL SUPPLIES REPAIR PARTS REPAIR PARTS REPAIR PARTS INSURANCE PROFESSIONAL SERVICES PSTF RANGE EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN CENTRAL SERVICES GENERAL SENIOR CITIZENS is i • i R55CKR2 LOGIS101 CITY OF EDINA 7/21/2015 12:53:37 Council Check Register by GL Page- 21 Council Check Register by Invoice & Summary 7/23/2015 - 7/23/2015 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit 396718 7/23/2016 106726 LINDMAN, DAVID Continued... 200.57 SUPPLIES REIMBURSEMENT 377993 072015 1400.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES POLICE DEPT. GENERAL 200.57 395719 7/23/2015 129667 M.S. INDUSTRIES INC. 1,698.80 MILLING BITS 377513 10859 1314.6518 BLACKTOP STREET RENOVATION 3,380.00 MILLING BITS 377512 10860 1314.6518 BLACKTOP STREET RENOVATION 5, 078.80 395720 7/23/2015 100864 MACQUEEN EQUIPMENT INC. 187.96 WHEEL DRIVE, O -RINGS 00005483 377735 2154047 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 284.15 WHEEL DRIVE 00005483 377734 2154149 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 161.88- CREDIT 00005483 377985 9993 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 310.23 395721 7/23/2015 136790 MAROSTICA, JANE 281.66 UTILITY OVERPAYMENT REFUND 377682 5845 BEARD AVE 5900.2015 CUSTOMER REFUND UTILITY BALANCE SHEET 281.66 395722 7/23/2015 127763 MARTECK 59.74 LICENSE DECALS 377736 127808 1550.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES CENTRAL SERVICES GENERAL 172.00 LICENSE DECALS 377737 127809 1550.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES CENTRAL SERVICES GENERAL 231.74 395723 7/23/2015 122554 MATHESON TRI -GAS INC. 498.98 OXYGEN 00003649 377683 11636277 1470.6510 FIRSTAID SUPPLIES FIRE DEPT. GENERAL 498.98 395724 7/23/2015 102600 MATRIX COMMUNICATIONS INC 382.50 HOOK UP FAX FOR CENT LKS 377953 80122 5760.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES CENTENNIAL LAKES ADMIN EXPENSE 907.50 UCB LICENSE 377952 80139 150D.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES CONTINGENCIES 1,290.00 395725 7/23/2015 101254 MCCORMICK, CAROL 150.00 CL PERFORMANCE 8/4/15 377704 070115 5760.6136 PROFESSIONAL SVC - OTHER CENTENNIAL LAKES ADMIN EXPENSE 150.00 395726 7/23/2015 100886 METRO SALES INC 1,106.44 QTRLY PRINT USAGE 377789 015007-7/15 1554.6230 SERVICE CONTRACTS EQUIPMENT CENT SERV GEN - MIS 1,106.44 R55CKR2 LOGIS101 CITY OF EDINA 7/21/2015 12:53:37 Council Check Register by GL Page- 22 Council Check Register by Invoice & Summary 7/23/2015 -- 7/23/2015 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit 395727 7/23/2015 100886 METROPOLITAN COUNCIL Continued... 9,840.60 JUNE 2015 SAC CHARGES 377516 071015 1495.4307 SAC CHARGES INSPECTIONS 9,840.60 395728 7/23/2015 102729 METROPOLITAN FORD OF EDEN PRAIRIE 178.20 WHEELASSEMBLY 00005445 377738 494369 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 178.20 395729 7/23/2015 104650 MICRO CENTER 17.98 DVDS 377986 5653439 1130.6410 VIDEO PRODUCTION SUPPLIES COMMUNICATIONS 20.97 USB DRIVES 00004360 377954 5656486 1554.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES CENT SERV GEN - MIS 859.98 MONITORS 00004360 377954 5656486 1400.6215 EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE POLICE DEPT. GENERAL 898.93 395730 7/23/2015 130635 MILLINER, CHAD 221.95 MILEAGE REIMBURSEMENT 377517 071015 1260.6107 MILEAGE OR ALLOWANCE ENGINEERING GENERAL 221.95 395731 7/23/2015 100913 MINNEAPOLIS & SUBURBAN SEWER & WATER 7,850.00 SEWER REPAIR 00002668 377955 34996 03482.1705.21 CONSULTING INSPECTION CLOVER LAKE NHOOD RECON 2,137.50 REPLACE WATER SERVICE 00001235 377739 35000 5913.6180 CONTRACTED REPAIRS DISTRIBUTION 9,987.50 395732 7/2312015 102174 MINNEAPOLIS OXYGEN COMPANY 4D.91 CO2, METHAIR 377518 171130860 7413.6545 CHEMICALS PSTF FIRE TOWER 40.91 395733 7/23/2015 136248 MINNESOTA EQUIPMENT 1.84 MOWER PARTS 00001376 377956 P83196 1641.6530 REPAIR PARTS MOWING 1.84 395734 7/23/2015 118144 MINNESOTA PREMIER PUBLICATIONS 400.00 ADVERTISING 377684 158886 5110.6122 ADVERTISING OTHER ART CENTER ADMINISTRATION 400.00 395735 7/23/2015 100908 MINNESOTA WANNER CO. 346.91 WHEELASSEMBLY 00001300 377519 0110783 -IN 1641.6530 REPAIR PARTS MOWING 346.91 395736 7/23/2015 120604 MINT CONDITION DETAILING INC. • 250.00 SQUAD CLEANING 377957 47062 • 1400.6215 EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE POLICE DEPT. GOAL • 0 i R55CKR2 LOGIS101 CITY OF EDINA 7/21/2015 12:53:37 Council Check Register by GL Page- 23 Council Check Register by Invoice & Summary 7/23/2015 - 7/23/2015 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit 395736 7/23/2015 120604 MINT CONDITION DETAILING INC. Continued... 250.00 395737 7/23/2015 128914 MINUTEMAN PRESS 29.00 CRIME INVESTIGATION CARDS 377520 17948 1400.6575 PRINTING POLICE DEPT. GENERAL 82.00 POSTERS, POSTCARDS 377685 18030 2611.6575 PRINTING MUSIC IN EDINA 25.06 CONTEST INFO CARDS 377521 18064 5862.6575 PRINTING VERNON SELLING 136.06 395738 7/23/2015 135283 MOETTUS, ALDA 6.83 ART WORK SOLD 377686 070915 5101.4413 ART WORK SOLD ART CENTER REVENUES 6.83 395739 7/23/2015 101696 MSP COMMUNICATIONS 900.00 WEDDING MAG AD 00006444 377790 2015-47917 5410.6122 ADVERTISING OTHER GOLF ADMINISTRATION 900.00 395740 7/23/2015 130453 NATIONAL CINEMEDIA LLC 364.22 CINEMA SCREEN ADS 377522 INV-060032 5822.6122 ADVERTISING OTHER 50TH ST SELLING 384.22 CINEMASCREENADS 377522 INV-060032 5842.6122 ADVERTISING OTHER YORK SELLING 384.22 CINEMA SCREEN ADS 377522 INV-060032 5862.6122 ADVERTISING OTHER VERNON SELLING 64.82 CINEMA SCREEN ADS 377523 INV-060877 5862.6122 ADVERTISING OTHER VERNON SELLING 64.84 CINEMA SCREEN ADS 377523 INV-060877 5822.6122 ADVERTISING OTHER 50TH ST SELLING 64.84 CINEMA SCREEN ADS 377523 INV-060877 5842.6122 ADVERTISING OTHER YORK SELLING 1,347.16 395741 7/23/2015 100076 NEW FRANCE WINE CO. 169.50 377634 101597 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 169.50 395742 7/23/2015 122449 NEW LIFE ENTERPRISES INC. 166.00 PUBLIC ACCESS SUPPLIES/SIGNS 377524 8026 7414.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES PUBLIC PROGRAMS 166.00 395743 7/23/2015 104350 NIKE USA INC. 64.91 SHOES 377791 973151486 5440.5511 COST OF GOODS - PRO SHOP PRO SHOP RETAIL SALES 64.91 395744 7/23/2015 103106 NLSC PRODUCTS INC. 204.39 POOL LED LIGHTS 377792 90084 5720.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES EDINBOROUGH OPERATIONS 204.39 R55CKR2 LOGIS101 CITY OF EDINA Council Check Register by GL Council Check Register by Invoice & Summary 7/23/2015 - 7/23/2015 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description 395744 7/23/2015 103106 NLSC PRODUCTS INC. Continued... 395745 7/23/2015 136788 NORDLIE, ELIZABETH 5.00 FIREARM SAFETY 377525 REFUND 1600.4390.21 FIREARM SAFETY TRAINING 5.00 395746 7/23/2015 105901 OERTEL ARCHITECTS 19,000.00 ARCHITECTURAL FEES 377526 #4-SMPSB 7410.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 19, 000.00 395747 7/23/2015 102712 OFFICE OF MN.IT SERVICES 24.69 377740 W15060674 1646.6188 TELEPHONE 24.69 377740 W15060674 1554.6188 TELEPHONE 49.38 377740 W15060674 1646.6188 TELEPHONE 74.07 377740 W15060674 1481.6188 TELEPHONE 74.14 377740 W15060674 1554.6188 TELEPHONE 172.83 377740 W15060674 1646.6188 TELEPHONE 271.59 377740 W15060674 1622.6186 TELEPHONE 49.38 377740 W15060674 5111.6188 TELEPHONE 24.69 377740 W15060674 5311.6188 TELEPHONE 98.76 377740 W15060674 5410.6188 TELEPHONE 111.10 377740 W15060674 5710.6188 TELEPHONE 111.11 377740 W15060674 5760.6188 TELEPHONE 49.38 377740 W15060674 5821.6188 TELEPHONE 74.07 377740 W15060674 5841.6188 TELEPHONE 74.07 377740 W15060674 5861.6188 TELEPHONE 49.38 377740 W15060674 5913.6188 TELEPHONE 260.70 377741 W15060679 5420.6188 TELEPHONE 23.75 LANGUAGE LINE 377793 W15060760 1400.6204 TELETYPE SERVICE 1,617.78 395748 7/23/2015 100936 OLSEN COMPANIES 300.00 STRAPS 00005338 377742 560653 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS 300.00 395749 7/23/2015 101659 ORKIN 144.35 PEST CONTROL 377958 103736486 1551.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 144.35 395750 7/23/2015 104950 PACE ANALYTICAL SERVICES INC. 0 175.00 LEAD TESTING 377527 1500520 7412.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 7/21/2015 12:53:37 Page - 24 Business Unit PARKADMIN. GENERAL PSTF ADMINISTRATION BUILDING MAINTENANCE CENT SERV GEN - MIS BUILDING MAINTENANCE YORK FIRE STATION CENT SERV GEN - MIS BUILDING MAINTENANCE SKATING & HOCKEY ART CENTER BLDG/MAINT POOL OPERATION GOLF ADMINISTRATION EDINBOROUGH ADMINISTRATION CENTENNIAL LAKES ADMIN EXPENSE 50TH ST OCCUPANCY YORK OCCUPANCY VERNON OCCUPANCY DISTRIBUTION CLUB HOUSE POLICE DEPT. GENERAL EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN [�71� SCI•\�Selg01�1:7tL� PSTF RANGE 0 • 7/21/2015 12:53:37 Page - 25 Business Unit S115 VALLEY VIEW RD SIDEWALK S105 TH100 SIDEWALK CLOVER LAKE NHOOD RECON CLOVER LAKE NHOOD RECON CLOVER LAKE NHOOD RECON CLOVER LAKE NHOOD RECON 0 180.00 377599 0 5822.5513 R55CKR2 LOGIS101 50TH ST SELLING CITY OF EDINA Council Check Register by GL 7/23/2015 100347 PAUSTIS WINE COMPANY Council Check Register by Invoice & Summary 542.53 377635 7/23/2015 — 7/23/2015 5862.5513 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description 395750 7/23/2015 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 104950 PACE ANALYTICAL SERVICES INC. Continued... 175.00 395754 395751 7/23/2015 136073 PEARSON, NORMA M. 121026 PALDA & SONS INC. 63,526.50 PARTIAL PAYMENT NO. 5 377922 BA -410 07115.1705.30 CONTRACTOR PAYMENTS 1628.4392.09 SENIOR SPECIAL EVENTS 26,239.00- PARTIAL PAYMENT NO. 5 377922 BA -410 07105.1705.30 CONTRACTOR PAYMENTS 272,429.51 PARTIAL PAYMENT NO. 5 377922 BA -410 01410.1705.30 CONTRACTOR PAYMENTS 100945 PEPSI -COLA COMPANY 31,135.43- PARTIAL PAYMENT NO. 5 377922 BA -410 03482.1705.30 CONTRACTOR PAYMENTS 18,696.47 PARTIAL PAYMENT NO. 5 377922 BA -410 05540.1705.30 CONTRACTOR PAYMENTS COST OF GOODS SOLD ARENA CONCESSIONS 228,897.50 PARTIAL PAYMENT NO. 5 377922 BA -410 04398.1705.30 CONTRACTOR PAYMENTS 43278835 5761.5510 526,175.55 CENTENNIAL LAKES OPERATING 297.65 395752 7/23/2015 43278844 131698 PARLEY LAKE WINERY COST OF GOODS SOLD GRILL • 7/21/2015 12:53:37 Page - 25 Business Unit S115 VALLEY VIEW RD SIDEWALK S105 TH100 SIDEWALK CLOVER LAKE NHOOD RECON CLOVER LAKE NHOOD RECON CLOVER LAKE NHOOD RECON CLOVER LAKE NHOOD RECON 180.00 377599 15072 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING 180.00 395753 7/23/2015 100347 PAUSTIS WINE COMPANY 542.53 377635 8506945 -IN 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 1,305.83 377873 8506968 -IN 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 1,848.36 395754 7/23/2015 136073 PEARSON, NORMA M. 15.00 BALLROOM DANCING REFUND 377698 CANCELED 1628.4392.09 SENIOR SPECIAL EVENTS SENIOR CITIZENS 15.00 395755 7/23/2015 100945 PEPSI -COLA COMPANY 445.67 377794 43278557 5520.5510 COST OF GOODS SOLD ARENA CONCESSIONS 915.08 377795 43278835 5761.5510 COST OF GOODS SOLD CENTENNIAL LAKES OPERATING 297.65 377796 43278844 5421.5510 COST OF GOODS SOLD GRILL 1,658.40 395756 7/23/2015 100948 PERKINS LANDSCAPE CONTRACTORS 4,530.00 LANDSCAPING 00001215 377623 268 5913.6180 CONTRACTED REPAIRS DISTRIBUTION 4,530.00 395757 7/23/2015 117087 PETERSON COMPANIES 156.43 IRRIGATION REPAIRS 377528 29832 1375.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES PARKING RAMP 156.43 395758 7/23/2015 117087 PETERSON COMPANIES 13,238.16 PARTIAL PAYMENT NO. 3 377923 A-251 2501.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES PACS IS R55CKR2 LOGIS101 CITY OF EDINA 7/21/2015 12:53:37 Council Check Register by GL Page - 26 Council Check Register by Invoice & Summary 7/23/2015 - 7/23/2015 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit 395768 7/23/2016 117087 PETERSON COMPANIES Continued... 121,015.61 PARTIAL PAYMENT NO. 3 377923 A-251 01251.1705.30 CONTRACTOR PAYMENTS A-251 PROMENADE IV H2O FEATURE 58,533.25 PARTIAL PAYMENT NO. 3 377923 A-251 04401.1705.30 CONTRACTOR PAYMENTS PROMENADE H2O FEATURE&PATH 56,939.77 PARTIAL PAYMENT NO. 3 377923 A-251 9232.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES CENTENNIAL TIF DISTRICT 249,726.79 395759 7/23/2015 100743 PHILLIPS WINE & SPIRITS 8.00- 377883 216535 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 1,068.76 377602 2816625 5822.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR 50TH ST SELLING 105.16 377601 2816626 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING 439.54 377600 2816630 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING 122.52 377875 2820246 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 1,005.80 377881 2820247 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 11.64 377879 2820248 5822.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR 50TH ST SELLING 386.82 377882 2820251 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 326.40 377874 2820252 5842.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR YORK SELLING 892.07 377880 2820253 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 2,682.10 377877 2820254 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 298.73 377878 2820255 5862.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR VERNON SELLING 557.92 377876 2820256 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 7,889.46 395760 7/23/2015 100963 PHYSIO -CONTROL INC. 50.00 EMS FAXING 377689 116020420 1470.6160 DATA PROCESSING FIRE DEPT. GENERAL 2,636.50 LIFEPAK REPAIRS 377687 416013682 1470.6180 CONTRACTED REPAIRS FIRE DEPT. GENERAL 273.94 EMS SUBSCRIPTION 377688 416014444 1470.6160 DATA PROCESSING FIRE DEPT. GENERAL 2,960.44 395761 7/23/2015 136809 PINTO, GABRIELE LO 20.00 PERMIT REFUND 377971 ED139955 1495.4115 MECHANICAL PERMITS INSPECTIONS 20.00 395762 7/23/2015 123092 PLAYPOWER LT FARMINGTON INC 375.00 PLAYGROUND PARTS 377529 1400191737 1646.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES BUILDING MAINTENANCE 375.00 395763 7/23/2015 125979 PRECISE MRM LLC 950.00 377530 IN200-1005707 1318.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES SNOW & ICE REMOVAL 4,920.00 GPS SOFTWARE 377624 IN200-1005713 1318.6525 SALT SNOW & ICE REMOVAL 5,870.00 0 0 0 • • • R55CKR2 LOGIS101 CITY OF EDINA 7/21/2015 12:53:37 Council Check Register by GL Page- 27 Council Check Register by Invoice & Summary 7/23/2015 -- 7/23/2015 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit 395764 7/23/2015 129706 PREMIUM WATERS INC. Continued... 290.45 WATER 377797 609425-06-15 5310.6406 GENERALSUPPLIES POOL ADMINISTRATION 37.72 WATER 377798 622833-06-15 5710.6406 GENERALSUPPLIES EDINBOROUGH ADMINISTRATION 328.17 395765 7/23/2015 129727 PRIOR LAKE WINDJAMMERS 150.00 CL PERFORMANCE 7/29/15 377458 070115 5760.6136 PROFESSIONAL SVC - OTHER CENTENNIAL LAKES ADMIN EXPENSE 150.00 395766 7/23/2015 100980 ROBERT B. HILL CO. 48.50 SOFTENER SALT 00003648 377690 00317472 1470.6406 GENERALSUPPLIES FIRE DEPT. GENERAL 48.50 395767 7/23/2015 102614 ROTARY CLUB OF EDINA 322.00 DUES - SCOTT NEAL 377531 3212 1120.6105 DUES & SUBSCRIPTIONS ADMINISTRATION 322.00 DUES - JENNIFER BENNEROTTE 377987 3260 1130.6105 DUES & SUBSCRIPTIONS COMMUNICATIONS 57.00 7/16/15 MEETING 377988 LINCHES 1130.6106 MEETING EXPENSE COMMUNICATIONS 701.00 395768 7/23/2015 101682 S & S WORLDWIDE INC. 419.79 TIE-DYE KITS 377960 8667306 1624.6406 GENERALSUPPLIES PLAYGROUND & THEATER 419.79 395769 7/23/2015 100988 SAFETY KLEEN 204.14 WASTE FEE 377989 67207172 5422.6182 RUBBISH REMOVAL MAINT OF COURSE & GROUNDS 204.14 395770 7/23/2015 101822 SAM'S CLUB DIRECT 111.99 **** **** **** ***9 350 377691 WFOOD 4075.5510 COST OF GOODS SOLD VANVALKENBURG 111.99 395771 7/23/2015 104788 SANDY'S PROMOTIONAL STUFF 1,066.00 FLASHDRIVES 377532 SH5016 1554.6406 GENERALSUPPLIES CENT SERV GEN - MIS 1,066.00 395772 7/23/2015 132076 SCHERBER CO. LLC 2,500.00 REFUND DEMO ESCROW 377533 5304 CHANTREY 1495.4109 CONSTRUCTION DEPOSIT INSPECTIONS RD 2,500.00 REFUND DEMO ESCROW 377534 5312 CHANTREY 1495.4109 CONSTRUCTION DEPOSIT INSPECTIONS RD 5,000.00 R55CKR2 LOGIS101 150.00 CITY OF EDINA 377457 071515 5760.6136 Council Check Register by GL CENTENNIAL LAKES ADMIN EXPENSE 150.00 Council Check Register by Invoice & Summary 7/23/2015 — 7/23/2015 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description 395772 7/23/2015 132076 SCHERBER CO. LLC Continued... 395773 7/23/2015 104689 SERIGRAPHICS SIGN SYSTEMS INC. 377962 9281 37.50 CUSTOM SIGNAGE 377535 45547 1100.6406 GENERALSUPPLIES 47.50 CUSTOM SIGNAGE 377536 45580 1100.6406 GENERALSUPPLIES 85.00 395774 7/23/2015 7/23/2015 103249 SHANNON, JIM 135917 SILVER HOMES LLC 7/21/2015 12:53:37 Page - 28 Business Unit CITY COUNCIL CITY COUNCIL 150.00 CL PERFORMANCE 7/28/15 377457 071515 5760.6136 PROFESSIONAL SVC - OTHER CENTENNIAL LAKES ADMIN EXPENSE 150.00 395775 7/23/2015 120784 SIGN PRO 78.00 SAFETY CAMP SIGNS 377962 9281 1600.4390.06 SAFETY CAMP PARKADMIN. GENERAL 78.00 395776 7/23/2015 135917 SILVER HOMES LLC 16.38 UTILITY OVERPAYMENT REFUND 377990 5605 GROVE ST 5900.2015 CUSTOMER REFUND UTILITY BALANCE SHEET 16.38 395777 7/23/2015 131885 SISINNI FOOD SERVICES INC. 54.24 HOT DOG BUNS 377743 267005 5520.5510 COST OF GOODS SOLD ARENA CONCESSIONS 54.24 395778 7/23/2015 132195 SMALL LOT MN 96.00 377603 3393 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING 98.00 395779 7/23/2015 100629 SMITH, AMY 292.68 MILEAGE REIMBURSEMENT 377801 071615 5410.6107 MILEAGE OR ALLOWANCE GOLF ADMINISTRATION 292.68 395780 7/23/2015 100430 SNAP-ON INDUSTRIAL 357.82 HEX SETS 00005519 377963 ARV/26229419 1553.6556 TOOLS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 357.82 395781 7/23/2015 122368 SOUTH METRO PUBLIC SAFETY 5,504.00 3rd QTR DUES 377964 122 1470.6221 RANGE RENTAL FIRE DEPT. GENERAL 7,753.00 3rd QTR DUES 377964 122 1400.6221 RANGE RENTAL POLICE DEPT. GENERAL 13, 257.00 396782 7/23/ib 127878 SOUTHERN WINE AND SPIRITS • • COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER MINI HAWKS YORK SELLING VERNON SELLING PARKADMIN. GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SVC - OTHER CENTENNIAL LAKES ADMIN EXPENSE TIRES & TUBES TIRES & TUBES PROFESSIONAL SVC - OTHER PROFESSIONAL SVC - OTHER CLASS REGISTRATION CLASS REGISTRATION EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN CENTENNIAL LAKES ADMIN EXPENSE CENTENNIAL LAKES ADMIN EXPENSE ART CENTER REVENUES ART CENTER REVENUES • 201.50 377888 • 5842.5514 • R55CKR2 LOGIS101 163.75 377887 CITY OF EDINA 5862.5514 7/21/2015 12:53:37 365.25 Council Check Register by GL 395785 Page - 29 136806 STEVENS, ASHLEY Council Check Register by Invoice & Summary 109.00 MINI HAWKS PROGRAM 377991 REFUND 1600.4390.22 7/23/2015 - 7/23/2015 109.00 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit 395782 7/23/2015 127878 SOUTHERN WINE AND SPIRITS 200.00 CL PERFORMANCE 7/28/15 Continued... 070115 5760.6136 859.45 200.00 377886 1305931 5822.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR 50TH ST SELLING 395787 7/23/2015 2,432.32 105874 SUBURBAN TIRE WHOLESALE INC. 377885 1305934 5842.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR YORK SELLING 49.50 5,387.17 377746 377884 1305936 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 112.00 TIRE 00005437 1,737.63 10133441 377639 1305938 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 638.51 377636 1305940 5862.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR VERNON SELLING 2,449.00 377638 1305941 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING DB2066764 5760.6136 80.75 377640 1305942 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 5760.6136 7,869.75 950.00 377637 5011184 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 395789 7/23/2015 21,454.58 136797 SYMANIETZ, BRENDA 396783 7/23/2015 ART CLASS REFUND 129360 STANLEY CONVERGENT SECURITY SOLUTIONS 16863 5101.4607 258.36 MONITORING -PW 377537 12563024 1552.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES CENT SVC PW BUILDING 258.36 395784 7/23/2015 133068 STEEL TOE BREWING LLC COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER MINI HAWKS YORK SELLING VERNON SELLING PARKADMIN. GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SVC - OTHER CENTENNIAL LAKES ADMIN EXPENSE TIRES & TUBES TIRES & TUBES PROFESSIONAL SVC - OTHER PROFESSIONAL SVC - OTHER CLASS REGISTRATION CLASS REGISTRATION EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN CENTENNIAL LAKES ADMIN EXPENSE CENTENNIAL LAKES ADMIN EXPENSE ART CENTER REVENUES ART CENTER REVENUES 201.50 377888 5955 5842.5514 163.75 377887 5956 5862.5514 365.25 395785 7/23/2015 136806 STEVENS, ASHLEY 109.00 MINI HAWKS PROGRAM 377991 REFUND 1600.4390.22 109.00 395786 7/23/2015 134072 STICKS & TONES 200.00 CL PERFORMANCE 7/28/15 377456 070115 5760.6136 200.00 395787 7/23/2015 105874 SUBURBAN TIRE WHOLESALE INC. 49.50 SCRAP TIRE DISPOSAL 00005296 377746 10132820 1553.6583 112.00 TIRE 00005437 377747 10133441 1553.6583 161.50 395788 7/23/2015 122511 SWANK MOTION PICTURES INC. 500.00 MOVIE RENTAL 377748 DB2066764 5760.6136 450.00 MOVIE RENTAL 377802 DB2070066 5760.6136 950.00 395789 7/23/2015 136797 SYMANIETZ, BRENDA 85.00 ART CLASS REFUND 377693 16863 5101.4607 76.00 ART CLASS REFUND 377692 16872 5101.4607 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER MINI HAWKS YORK SELLING VERNON SELLING PARKADMIN. GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SVC - OTHER CENTENNIAL LAKES ADMIN EXPENSE TIRES & TUBES TIRES & TUBES PROFESSIONAL SVC - OTHER PROFESSIONAL SVC - OTHER CLASS REGISTRATION CLASS REGISTRATION EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN CENTENNIAL LAKES ADMIN EXPENSE CENTENNIAL LAKES ADMIN EXPENSE ART CENTER REVENUES ART CENTER REVENUES R55CKR2 LOGIS101 CITY OF EDINA Council Check Register by GL Council Check Register by Invoice & Summary 7/23/2015 -- 7/23/2015 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description 395789 7/23/2015 136797 SYMANIETZ, BRENDA Continued... 161.00 395790 7/23/2015 104932 TAYLOR MADE 163.80 RENTAL CLUBS 377803 30957141 5410.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES 163.80 395791 7/23/2015 136725 TECH DUMP 30.00 RECYCLE CRTS 377625 28616 5110.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 30.00 395792 7/23/2015 121253 THAYER, LARRY 123.63 MILEAGE REIMBURSEMENT 377965 071715 1644.6107 MILEAGE OR ALLOWANCE 123.63 395793 7/23/2015 101930 THOMAS & SONS CONSTRUCTION INC 44,249.65 PARTIAL PAYMENT NO. 8 377924 120-020-037 01404.1705.30 CONTRACTOR PAYMENTS 44,249.65 395794 7/23/2015 101035 THORPE DISTRIBUTING COMPANY 184.20 377890 906336 5862.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX 176.40 377891 906337 5862.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER 4,610.25 377889 906338 5862.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER 4,970.85 395795 7/23/2015 123129 TIMESAVER OFF SITE SECRETARIAL INC. 133.00 7/7/15 COUNCIL MEETING 377804 M21463 1185.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 133.00 395796 7/23/2015 136802 TINBERG, TIM 68.36 PAINT & SUPPLIES 377805 071615 5420.6406 GENERALSUPPLIES 68.36 395797 7/23/2015 101038 TOLL GAS & WELDING SUPPLY 46.04 CABLE GRINDER 377750 10088168 1553.6580 WELDING SUPPLIES 46.04 395798 7/23/2015 124763 TOSHIBA FINANCIAL SERVICES 181.88 COPIER USAGE 377966 63063153 7410.6575 PRINTING 181.88 0 • 7/21/2015 12:53:37 Page - 30 Business Unit GOLF ADMINISTRATION ART CENTER ADMINISTRATION TREES & MAINTENANCE FRANCE AVE PEDESTRIAN CORRIDOR VERNON SELLING VERNON SELLING VERNON SELLING LICENSING, PERMITS & RECORDS CLUB HOUSE EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN PSTF ADMINISTRATION is is 7/21/2015 12:53:37 Page - 31 Business Unit ARENA ICE MAINT ARENA ICE MAINT UTILITY BALANCE SHEET ART CENTER BLDG/MAINT DISTRIBUTION PARKADMIN. GENERAL LITTER REMOVAL LITTER REMOVAL LITTER REMOVAL PARKADMIN. GENERAL UTILITY REVENUES FINANCE PLANNING STREET LIGHTING ORNAMENTAL R55CKR2 LOGIS101 CITY OF EDINA Council Check Register by GL Council Check Register by Invoice & Summary 7/23/2015 — 7/23/2015 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description 396799 712312015 134673 TOTAL MECHANICAL SERVICES INC. Continued... 874.60 HVAC REPAIRS 377751 16797 5521.6180 CONTRACTED REPAIRS 8,143.00 INSTALL SIDE STREAM FILTERS 377806 16804 5521.6180 CONTRACTED REPAIRS 9,017.60 396800 7/23/2015 123304 TURNER, SPENCER 111.59 UTILITY OVERPAYMENT REFUND 377538 6208 HILLSIDE 5900.2015 CUSTOMER REFUND RD 111.59 395801 7/23/2016 122321 ULTIMATE DRAIN SERVICES INC. 378.00 MAIN LINE REPAIRS 377753 52274 5111.6180 CONTRACTED REPAIRS 378.00 396802 7/23/2015 103690 VALLEY -RICH CO. INC. 6,377.20 REPLACE FIRE HYDRANT 00001237 377969 21739 5913.6180 CONTRACTED REPAIRS 6,377.20 396803 7/23/2016 136795 VAN NORMAN, MAGGIE 68.00 SIGNED UP TWICE FOR TENNIS 377650 REFUND 1600.4390.02 TENNIS PROGRAM 68.00 395804 7/23/2015 101058 VAN PAPER CO. 699.58 CAN LINERS 00001310 377539 354538-00 1645.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES 211.35 CAN LINERS 00001310 377541 354813-00 1645.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES 181.98- RETURN 00001310 377540 355045CI 1645.6406 GENERALSUPPLIES 728.95 395805 7/23/2015 136793 VECCHIO SMITH, MARGARET 66.00 SIGNED UP TWICE FOR TENNIS 377651 REFUND 1600.4390.02 TENNIS PROGRAM 68.00 396806 7/23/2015 102734 VEIT COMPANIES 1,640.00 HYDRANT RENTAL REFUND 377992 5108 EDINA 5901.4626 SALE OF WATER INDUST BLVD 1,640.00 396807 7/23/2016 102970 VERIZON WIRELESS 35.01 377968 9748223587 1160.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES 35.01 377968 9748223587 1140.6188 TELEPHONE 35.01 377968 9748223587 1322.6185 LIGHT & POWER is 7/21/2015 12:53:37 Page - 31 Business Unit ARENA ICE MAINT ARENA ICE MAINT UTILITY BALANCE SHEET ART CENTER BLDG/MAINT DISTRIBUTION PARKADMIN. GENERAL LITTER REMOVAL LITTER REMOVAL LITTER REMOVAL PARKADMIN. GENERAL UTILITY REVENUES FINANCE PLANNING STREET LIGHTING ORNAMENTAL R55CKR2 LOGIS101 CITY OF EDINA 7/21/2015 12:53:37 Council Check Register by GL Page- 32 Council Check Register by Invoice & Summary 7/23/2015 - 7/23/2015 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation 396807 7/23/2016 102970 VERIZON WIRELESS 395808 7/23/2015 395809 7/23/2015 395810 7/23/2015 0 70.02 210.06 210.06 350.10 842.91 891.76 35.01 35.01 392.13 50.49 788.40 31.05 120.13 4,132.16 PO # Doc No Inv No 377968 9748223587 377968 9748223587 377968 9748223587 377968 9748223587 377968 9748223587 377968 9748223587 377968 9748223587 377968 9748223587 377968 9748223587 377967 9748276305 377967 9748276305 377967 9748276305 377967 9748276305 101066 VIKING ELECTRIC SUPPLY INC. 66.37 RECEPTACLES 00001296 377754 9467305 Account No Subledger Account Description Continued... 1646.6188 TELEPHONE 1554.6188 TELEPHONE 1260.6188 TELEPHONE 1495.6188 TELEPHONE 1400.6160 DATA PROCESSING 1470.6188 TELEPHONE 44012.6710 EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT 5760.6188 TELEPHONE 5910.6188 TELEPHONE 1470.6188 TELEPHONE 1400.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES 5910.6186 TELEPHONE 5910.6188 TELEPHONE 1553.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES BUILDING MAINTENANCE CENT SERV GEN - MIS ENGINEERING GENERAL INSPECTIONS POLICE DEPT. GENERAL FIRE DEPT. GENERAL P23 50TH&FR PAR KI NG&WAYFI N DING CENTENNIAL LAKES ADMIN EXPENSE GENERAL (BILLING) FIRE DEPT. GENERAL POLICE DEPT. GENERAL GENERAL (BILLING) GENERAL (BILLING) EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 136791 WALTER, JULIE 104.00 MINI HAWKS PROGRAM 377694 REFUND 1600.4390.22 MINI HAWKS PARKADMIN. GENERAL 104.00 103088 WASTE MANAGEMENT OF WI -MN 60.05 377543 0010734 1481.6182 RUBBISH REMOVAL YORK FIRE STATION 96.06 377543 0010734 1470.6182 RUBBISH REMOVAL FIRE DEPT. GENERAL 109.30 377543 0010734 1645.6182 RUBBISH REMOVAL LITTER REMOVAL 162.57 377543 0010734 1628.6182 RUBBISH REMOVAL SENIOR CITIZENS 197.25 377543 0010734 1646.6182 RUBBISH REMOVAL BUILDING MAINTENANCE 266.76 377543 0010734 1551.6182 RUBBISH REMOVAL CITY HALL GENERAL 341.41 377543 0010734 1645.6182 RUBBISH REMOVAL LITTER REMOVAL 430.01 377543 0010734 1645.6182 RUBBISH REMOVAL LITTER REMOVAL 474.24 377543 0010734 1301.6182 RUBBISH REMOVAL GENERAL MAINTENANCE 474.25 377543 0010734 1552.6182 RUBBISH REMOVAL CENT SVC PW BUILDING 62.75 377543 0010734 5111.6182 RUBBISH REMOVAL ART CENTER BLDG/MAINT 257.22 377543 0010734 5311.6182 RUBBISH REMOVAL POOL OPERATION 391.38 377543 0010734 5422.6182 RUBBISH REMOVAL MAINT OF COURSE & GROUNDS 464.72 377543 0010734 5420.6182 RUBBISH REMOVAL CLUB HOUSE 755.23 377543 0010734 5511.6182 RUBBISH REMOVAL ARENA BLDG/GROUNDS 1,096.26 377543 0010734 • 5720.6182 RUBBISH REMOVAL EDINBOROUGJJ�IONS 0 • • R55CKR2 LOGIS101 CITY OF EDINA 7/21/2015 12:53:37 Council Check Register by GL Page- 33 Council Check Register by Invoice & Summary 7/23/2015 - 7/23/2015 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit 396810 7/23/2016 103088 WASTE MANAGEMENT OF WI -MN Continued... 82.14 377543 0010734 5861.6182 RUBBISH REMOVAL VERNON OCCUPANCY 130.95 377543 0010734 5841.6182 RUBBISH REMOVAL YORK OCCUPANCY 39.98 377542 7173972 5511.6182 RUBBISH REMOVAL ARENA BLDG/GROUNDS 5,892.53 395811 7/23/2015 136796 WELLMANN, JULIE 68.00 SIGNED UP TWICE FOR TENNIS 377652 REFUND 1600.4390.02 TENNIS PROGRAM PARKADMIN. GENERAL 68.00 395812 7/23/2016 101312 WINE MERCHANTS 829.28 377608 7037839 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING 864.00 377898 7037913 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 648.00 377642 7037914 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 109.16 377897 7038120 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 650.15 377899 7038799 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 359.48 377896 7038800 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 710.12 377895 7038802 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 862.52 377900 7038803 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 5,032.71 395813 7/23/2015 124291 WIRTZ BEVERAGE MINNESOTA 173.08 377905 1080339489 5842.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR YORK SELLING 213.57 377609 1080345053 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING 1,267.98 377644 1080347706 5862.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR VERNON SELLING 63.01 377647 1080347707 5862.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX VERNON SELLING 3,404.88 377645 1080347708 5862.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR VERNON SELLING 38.31 377646 1080347709 5862.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR VERNON SELLING 1,748.28 377643 1080347710 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 1,232.48 377906 1080347711 5822.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR 50TH ST SELLING 905.70 377907 1080347712 5822.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR 50TH ST SELLING 2,354.82 377903 1080347784 5842.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR YORK SELLING 5,952.62 377904 1080347785 5842.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR YORK SELLING 386.60 377901 1080347786 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 146.30 377902 1080347787 5842.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX YORK SELLING 246.00- 377908 2080094538 5842.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR YORK SELLING 17,641.63 395814 7/23/2016 124629 WIRTZ BEVERAGE MINNESOTA BEER INC 5,019.40 377611 1090434303 5862.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER VERNON SELLING 123.00 377610 1090434305 5822.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER 50TH ST SELLING R55CKR2 LOGIS101 CITY OF EDINA 7/21/2015 12:53:37 Council Check Register by GL Page- 34 Council Check Register by Invoice & Summary 7/23/2015 - 7/23/2015 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit 395814 7/23/2016 124629 WIRTZ BEVERAGE MINNESOTA BEER INC Continued... 1,785.80 377648 1090434490 5862.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER VERNON SELLING 2,250.25 377909 1090435146 5842.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER YORK SELLING 246.00 377910 1090435147 5842.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER YORK SELLING 23.10 377911 1090435148 5842.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX YORK SELLING 4,734.10 377916 1090437822 5862.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER VERNON SELLING 246.00 377915 1090437823 5862.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER VERNON SELLING 138.60 00138.60 377914 1090437824 5862.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX VERNON SELLING 3,294.90 377912 1090437626 5842.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER YORK SELLING 324.00 377913 1090437827 5842.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER YORK SELLING 108.00- 377612 R09101913 5822.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER 50TH ST SELLING 18,077.15 395815 7/23/2016 101726 XCEL ENERGY 7,643.15 51-6121102-5 377547 462884515 1646.6185 LIGHT & POWER BUILDING MAINTENANCE 619.11 51-4197645-8 377545 463047783 1322.6165 LIGHT & POWER STREET LIGHTING ORNAMENTAL 508.27 51-5619094-8 377546 463070183 1552.6185 LIGHT & POWER CENT SVC PW BUILDING 2,431.87 51-5886961-7 377544 463082134 1375.6185 LIGHT &.POWER PARKING RAMP 37,680.73 51-5605640-1 377696 463624959 5911.6185 LIGHT & POWER WELL PUMPS 2,955.23 51-6227619-3 377697 463635887 5761.6185 LIGHT & POWER CENTENNIAL LAKES OPERATING 51,838.36 395816 7/23/2015 120099 Z WINES USA LLC 780.00 377917 15046 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 780.00 395817 7/23/2015 101091 ZIEGLER INC 1,342.62 CATERPILLAR REPAIRS 377970 SW050239264 1553.6180 CONTRACTED REPAIRS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 1,342.62 395818 7/23/2015 136798 ZIMMERMAN, CAROL 150.00 FARMER'S MARKET 6/6/15 377706 D70115 5760.6136 PROFESSIONAL SVC - OTHER CENTENNIAL LAKES ADMIN EXPENSE 150.00 4,195,795.65 Grand Total Payment Instrument Totals Checks 1,502,590.07 A/PACH Payment 2,693,205.58 Total Payments 4,195,795.65 0 0 • 0 0 R55CKS2 LOGIS100 CITY OF EDINA Note: Payment amount may not reflect the actual amount due to data sequencing and/or data selection. Council Check Summary POLICE SPECIAL REVENUE 7/23/2015 - 7/23/2015 Company Amount 01000 GENERAL FUND 428,963.48 02300 POLICE SPECIAL REVENUE 1,830.45 D2500 PEDESTRIAN AND CYCLIST SAFETY 79,546.26 02600 ARTS AND CULTURE FUND 82.00 04000 WORKING CAPITAL FUND 1,367,694.48 04200 EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT FUND 13,493.36 05100 ART CENTER FUND 1,995.02 05200 GOLF DOME FUND 9,750.00 05300 AQUATIC CENTER FUND 2,558.29 05400 GOLF COURSE FUND 12,542.88 05500 I C E AR E NA F U N D 15, 630.48 05550 SPORTS DOME FUND 142.75 05700 EDINBOROUGH PARK FUND 1,716.28 05750 CENTENNIAL LAKES PARK FUND 11,360.60 05800 LIQUOR FUND 178,432.41 05900 UTILITY FUND 1,028,392.94 05930 STORM SEWER FUND 962,583.29 07400 PSTF AGENCY FUND 22,140.91 09232 CENTENNIAL TIF DISTRICT 56,939.77 Report Totals 4,195,795.65 We confirm to the best of our knowledge and belief, that these claims comply in all material respects with the requirements of the City of Edina purchasing policies and procedures date / �5— • 7/21/2015 12:53:49 Page- 1 • • 0 • i ! R55CKR2 LOGIS101 CITY OF EDINA 7/28/2015 15:06:03 Council Check Register by GL Page - 1 Council Check Register by Invoice & Summary 7/30/2015 - 7/30/2015 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit 1731 7/30/2016 102971 ACE ICE COMPANY 72.00 378437 1910520 5822.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX 50TH ST SELLING 158.80 378075 1910530 5842.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX YORK SELLING 164.80 378439 1913243 5862.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX VERNON SELLING 100.00 378180 1913245 5842.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX YORK SELLING 46.40 378438 1913246 5822.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX 50TH ST SELLING 542.00 1732 7/30/2015 100638 BACHMAN'S 27.98 LIQUID IRON COMPLEX 378378 BRAEMAR GOLF 5422.6545 CHEMICALS MAINT OF COURSE & GROUNDS 27.98 1733 7/30/2015 100643 BARR ENGINEERING CO. 1,211.00 STORMWATER MGMT 378234 23270354.00-217 5960.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES ENGINEER SERVICES - STORM 394.00 STORMWATER PLANNING SERVICE 378233 23270354.13-13 04406.1705.20 CONSULTING DESIGN 2013-14 FLOOD PROTECTION IMPR 4,836.85 GRANT IMPLEMENTATION 378232 23271309.02-5 01251.1705.21 CONSULTING INSPECTION A-251 PROMENADE IV H2O FEATURE 833.00 WATER QUALITY TREATMENT 378235 23271398.00-7 5924.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES ENGINEER SERVICES - WATER 7,274.85 1734 7/30/2015 100646 BECKER ARENA PRODUCTS INC. 680.13 RINK GLASS 378273 OD103405 5511.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES ARENA BLDG/GROUNDS 680.13 1735 7/30/2015 101355 BELLBOY CORPORATION 73.10 378078 49209800 5842.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX YORK SELLING 47.66 378077 92335900 5842.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX YORK SELLING 219.60 378184 92375700 5842.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX YORK SELLING 76.46 378443 92408800 5822.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX 50TH ST SELLING 161.08 378443 92408800 5822.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES 50TH ST SELLING 577.90 1736 7/30/2015 100648 BERTELSON OFFICE PRODUCTS 5.49- RETURN 00003183 378137 CP-WO-129079-1 1400.6513 OFFICE SUPPLIES POLICE DEPT. GENERAL 87.32 CALCULATORS, DIARIES 378236 OE-399346-1 1261.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT 16.29 CALCULATOR 00002241 378277 WO-129498-1 5310.6513 OFFICE SUPPLIES POOL ADMINISTRATION 41.71 OFFICE SUPPLIES 377996 WO-131139-1 1130.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES COMMUNICATIONS 25.01 STAPLER 378136 WO-131544-1 1600.6406 GENERALSUPPLIES PARK ADMIN. GENERAL 15.23 OFFICE SUPPLIES 378276 WO-132421-1 1130.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES COMMUNICATIONS 50.66 OFFICE SUPPLIES 378276 WO-132421-1 1550.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES CENTRAL SERVICES GENERAL 230.73 R55CKR2 LOGIS101 CITY OF EDINA Council Check Register by GL Council Check Register by Invoice & Summary 7/30/2015 — 7/30/2015 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description 1737 7/30/2015 122688 BMK SOLUTIONS Continued... 57.56 CLEANING SPRAY, BATTERIES 377998 109966 1552.6406 GENERALSUPPLIES 57.56 2,095.79 SALT 1738 7/3012015 100659 BOYER TRUCK PARTS 1318.6525 109.41 BLOWER 00005452 378000 976761 109.41 1739 7/30/2015 100664 BRAUN INTERTEC 117187 CHEM SYSTEMS LTD 1,416.50 MATERIALS TESTING 378237 8031736 2,139.75 MATERIALS TESTING 378238 B031737 805.25 518398 378244 B031828 11275.75 MATERIALS TESTING 378239 B031836 653.50 MATERIALS TESTING 378240 B031839 825.00 MATERIALS TESTING 378243 B031843 947.47 MATERIALS TESTING 378241 B032094 1,156.03 MATERIALS TESTING 378241 8032094 3,912.63 MATERIALS TESTING 378242 B032096 13,133.88 376.80 1740 7/30/2015 100677 CARGILL INC. 5842.5514 1553.6530 01413.1705.21 01377.1705.21 01416.1705.21 01412.1705.21 01251.1705.21 01404.1705.21 01414.1705.21 01415.1705.21 01410.1705.21 REPAIR PARTS CONSULTING INSPECTION CONSULTING INSPECTION CONSULTING INSPECTION CONSULTING INSPECTION CONSULTING INSPECTION CONSULTING INSPECTION CONSULTING INSPECTION CONSULTING INSPECTION CONSULTING INSPECTION SALT CLEANING SUPPLIES GENERAL SUPPLIES COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER 7/28/2015 15:06:03 Page- 2 Business Unit CENT SVC PW BUILDING EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN EDINA HIGHLANDS LAKESIDE RECON BA -377 VALLEY VIEW RD 54TH ST BRIDGE&STREET REPAIR GLEN VIEWADDITION NHOOD RECON A-251 PROMENADE IV H2O FEATURE FRANCE AVE PEDESTRIAN CORRIDOR HOLLANDS NHOOD RECON HYDE PARK NHOOD RECON CLOVER LAKE NHOOD RECON SNOW & ICE REMOVAL ARENA BLDG/GROUNDS ARENA BLDG/GROUNDS YORK SELLING 50TH ST SELLING 50TH ST SELLING 50TH ST SELLING VERNON SELLING YORK SELLING 0 0 0 2,095.79 SALT 378382 2902336894 1318.6525 2,095.79 1741 7/30/2015 117187 CHEM SYSTEMS LTD 712.00 AUTOMATIC FLUSHER, CLEANER 378280 518398 5511.6511 647.00 FILTERS 378281 518402 5511.6406 1,359.00 1742 7/3012015 130477 CLEAR RIVER BEVERAGE CO 376.80 378448 197221 5842.5514 376.80 1743 7/30/2015 102478 DAY DISTRIBUTING CO. 305.75 378062 811361 5822.5514 395.40 378450 812167 5822.5514 49.20 378449 812168 5822.5515 2,641.60 378451 812293 5862.5514 1,870.10 378083 812294 5842.5514 5,262.05 REPAIR PARTS CONSULTING INSPECTION CONSULTING INSPECTION CONSULTING INSPECTION CONSULTING INSPECTION CONSULTING INSPECTION CONSULTING INSPECTION CONSULTING INSPECTION CONSULTING INSPECTION CONSULTING INSPECTION SALT CLEANING SUPPLIES GENERAL SUPPLIES COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER 7/28/2015 15:06:03 Page- 2 Business Unit CENT SVC PW BUILDING EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN EDINA HIGHLANDS LAKESIDE RECON BA -377 VALLEY VIEW RD 54TH ST BRIDGE&STREET REPAIR GLEN VIEWADDITION NHOOD RECON A-251 PROMENADE IV H2O FEATURE FRANCE AVE PEDESTRIAN CORRIDOR HOLLANDS NHOOD RECON HYDE PARK NHOOD RECON CLOVER LAKE NHOOD RECON SNOW & ICE REMOVAL ARENA BLDG/GROUNDS ARENA BLDG/GROUNDS YORK SELLING 50TH ST SELLING 50TH ST SELLING 50TH ST SELLING VERNON SELLING YORK SELLING 0 0 0 • . • R55CKR2 LOGIS101 CITY OF EDINA 7/28/2015 15:06:03 Council Check Register by GL Page- 3 Council Check Register by Invoice & Summary 7/30/2015 — 7/30/2015 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit 1744 7/30/2015 129718 DREW'S CONCESSIONS LLC Continued... 216.00 CARAMEL CORN 378288 2039 5520.5510 COST OF GOODS SOLD ARENA CONCESSIONS 216.00 1745 7/30/2015 134730 EXPLORE EDINA 41,697.41 LODGING TAX 378390 JUNE2015 1001.4030 LODGING TAX GENERAL FUND REVENUES 41, 697.41 1746 7/30/2015 102079 HIGHVIEW PLUMBING INC 4,445.00 WATERLINE UPGRADE 00002513 378250 14216 05551.1705.21 CONSULTING INSPECTION Arden Park D Reconstruction 4,445.00 1747 7/30/2015 129508 IMPACT PROVEN SOLUTIONS 2,096.41 MAIL JULY UTILITY BILLS 378251 104375 5902.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES UTILITY BILLING - FINANCE 2,096.41 1748 7/30/2015 100814 INDELCO PLASTICS CORP. 110.52 PVC 00001355 378155 930816 1646.6530 REPAIR PARTS BUILDING MAINTENANCE 110.52 1749 7/30/2016 121075 JIMMY'S JOHNNYS INC. 630.50 TOILET RENTAL FOR PARADE 378029 90552 1645.6182 RUBBISH REMOVAL LITTER REMOVAL 630.50 1750 7/30/2015 118660 LAKES AREA HOME IMPROVEMENT SERVICES 607.00 FAUCETS REPAIR 376254 2411 05556.1705.21 CONSULTING INSPECTION Morningside Water Main Lining 607.00 1751 7/30/2015 101792 LUBE -TECH 43.32 OIL 378037 658590 1553.6584 LUBRICANTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 43.32 1752 7/30/2015 101078 LUBE -TECH ESI 187.81 VALVE REPAIR KIT, SERVICE 378036 7793 1553.6180 CONTRACTED REPAIRS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 187.81 1753 7/30/2015 117804 MALLOY MONTAGUE KARNOWSKI 4,887.00 2014 FINAL BILLING 378073 38206 1160.6130 PROFESSIONAL SERV -AUDIT FINANCE 96.00 2014 FINAL BILLING 378073 38206 5110.6130 PROFESSIONAL SERV -AUDIT ART CENTER ADMINISTRATION 64.00 2D14 FINAL BILLING 378073 38206 5210.6130 PROFESSIONAL SERV -AUDIT GOLF DOME PROGRAM 131.00 2014 FINAL BILLING 378073 38206 5310.6130 PROFESSIONAL SERV -AUDIT POOL ADMINISTRATION R55CKR2 LOGIS101 CITY OF EDINA 7/28/2015 15:06:03 Council Check Register by GL Page - 4 Council Check Register by Invoice & Summary 7/30/2015 - 7/30/2015 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit 1763 7/30/2016 117804 MALLOY MONTAGUE KARNOWSKI Continued... 408.00 2014 FINAL BILLING 378073 38206 5410.6130 PROFESSIONAL SERV -AUDIT GOLF ADMINISTRATION 321.00 2014 FINAL BILLING 378073 38206 5510.6130 PROFESSIONAL SERV -AUDIT ARENAADMINISTRATION 78.00 2014 FINAL BILLING 378073 38206 5552.6130 PROFESSIONAL SERV-AUDIT SPORTS DOME ADMINISTRATION 227.00 2014 FINAL BILLING 378073 38206 5710.6130 PROFESSIONAL SERV -AUDIT EDINBOROUGH ADMINISTRATION 142.00 2014 FINAL BILLING 378073 38206 5760.6130 PROFESSIONAL SERV-AUDIT CENTENNIAL LAKES ADMIN EXPENSE 477.00 2014 FINAL BILLING 378073 38206 5820.6130 PROFESSIONAL SERV -AUDIT 50TH STREET GENERAL 477.00 2014 FINAL BILLING 378073 38206 5840.6130 PROFESSIONAL SERV -AUDIT LIQUOR YORK GENERAL 477.00 2014 FINAL BILLING 378073 38206 5860.6130 PROFESSIONAL SERV -AUDIT VERNON LIQUOR GENERAL 1,806.00 2014 FINAL BILLING 378073 38206 5902.6130 PROFESSIONAL SERV -AUDIT UTILITY BILLING - FINANCE 209.00 2014 FINAL BILLING 378073 38206 5932.6130 PROFESSIONAL SERV -AUDIT GENERAL STORM SEWER 9,800.00 1754 7/30/2015 117804 MALLOY MONTAGUE KARNOWSKI 5,300.00 FINAL BILLING -AUDIT 378408 38186 7410.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES PSTF ADMINISTRATION 5,300.00 1755 7/30/2015 101483 MENARDS 64.53 SUPPLIES 00008050 378308 90537 5510.6406 GENERALSUPPLIES ARENAADMINISTRATION 320.90 LUMBER, EARMUFFS 00008051 378309 90681 5510.6406 GENERALSUPPLIES ARENA ADMINISTRATION 47.05 PAINTING SUPPLIES 00008052 378307 90803 5511.6406 GENERALSUPPLIES ARENA BLDG/GROUNDS 3.44 PAINT 00001335 378039 90996 1322.6406 GENERALSUPPLIES STREET LIGHTING ORNAMENTAL 106.40 FORMS 00001362 378040 91096 1314.6406 GENERALSUPPLIES STREET RENOVATION 132.71 TARPS, PRUNER 00001369 378160 91238 1642.6406 GENERALSUPPLIES FIELD MAINTENANCE 68.20 HARDWARE 00001372 378159 91256 1646.6530 REPAIR PARTS BUILDING MAINTENANCE 743.23 1756 7/30/2015 100906 MTI DISTRIBUTING INC. 49,608.09 NEW TORO SPRAYER 00006392 378164 1001290-00 5400.1740 MACHINERY & EQUIPMENT GOLF BALANCE SHEET 128.73 PUMP CONTROL 00006382 378041 1023374-00 5422.6530 REPAIR PARTS MAINT OF COURSE & GROUNDS 95.56 SHAFT 00006382 378042 1023374-01 5422.6530 REPAIR PARTS MAINT OF COURSE & GROUNDS 131.17 IDLER, BUSHINGS 00006386 378043 1024502-00 5422.6530 REPAIR PARTS MAINT OF COURSE & GROUNDS 49,963.55 1757 7/30/2015 115616 NORTH IMAGE APPAREL INC. 43.00 UNIFORM 00005604 378045 NIA8126F 1551.6406 GENERALSUPPLIES CITY HALL GENERAL 43.00 1758 7/30/2015 101620 NORTH SECOND STREET STEEL SUPPLY 135.82 STEEL 00005530 378313 324067 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 0 474.95 STEEL PLATE 00005539 378314 324166 • 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT (TION GEN 0 • • R55CKR2 LOGIS101 CITY OF EDINA 7/28/2015 15:06:03 Council Check Register by GL Page- 5 Council Check Register by Invoice & Summary 7/30/2015 - 7/30/2015 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit 1758 7/30/2015 101620 NORTH SECOND STREET STEEL SUPPLY Continued... 610.77 1759 7/30/2015 115669 ON CALL SERVICES 1,342.70 FOAM, SAFETY TIES, FOOTHOLDS 378316 2574 5720.6530 REPAIR PARTS EDINBOROUGH OPERATIONS 1,342.70 1760 7/30/2015 119620 POMP'S TIRE SERVICE INC. 723.70 SERVICE CALL, REPAIRS 00005552 378318 210163850 1553.6180 CONTRACTED REPAIRS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 723.70 1761 7/30/2015 106322 PROSOURCE SUPPLY 53.16 PAPER PLATES 378319 8150 5320.5510 COST OF GOODS SOLD POOL CONCESSIONS 136.30 PAPER PLATES, TISSU;E 378319 8150 5311.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES POOL OPERATION 723.30 GLOVES, LINERS, CLEANERS 378321 8154 5511.6511 CLEANING SUPPLIES ARENA BLDG/GROUNDS 375.46 TISSUE PAPER, GLOVES, LINERS 00002232 378320 8155 5720.6511 CLEANING SUPPLIES EDINBOROUGH OPERATIONS 106.32 PAPER PLATES 378322 8178 5320.5510 COST OF GOODS SOLD POOL CONCESSIONS 268.65 LINERS, TISSUE 378322 8178 5311.6511 CLEANING SUPPLIES POOL OPERATION 432.48 TOWELS, TISSUE, LINERS 00002243 378323 8180 5720.6511 CLEANING SUPPLIES EDINBOROUGH OPERATIONS 2,095.67 1762 7/30/2015 105690 PRO-TEC DESIGN INC. 1,424.11 CAMERA REPAIR 00001361 378047 71403 1552.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES CENT SVC PW BUILDING 1,424.11 1763 7/30/2015 101000 RJM PRINTING INC. 48.50 BUSINESS CARDS 378168 86979 1550.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES CENTRAL SERVICES GENERAL 88.50 BUSINESS CARDS 378050 87018 1550.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES CENTRAL SERVICES GENERAL 98.50 BUSINESS CARDS 378167 87085 1550.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES CENTRAL SERVICES GENERAL 235.50 1764 7/30/2015 118190 TURFWERKS LLC 1,890.37 SHAFT, REAR COVER, KIT 00005450 378060 EI90028 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 1,890.37 1765 7/30/2015 119454 VINOCOPIA 2,070.00 378481 0129249-IN 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 127.50 378220 0129250-IN 5862.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX VERNON SELLING 92.50 378221 0129269-IN 5842.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR YORK SELLING 90.50 376480 0129271-IN 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING 2,380.50 R55CKR2 LOGIS101 CITY OF EDINA 7/28/2015 15:06:03 Council Check Register by GL Page- 6 Council Check Register by Invoice & Summary 7/30/2015 — 7/30/2015 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit 1765 7/30/2015 119454 VINOCOPIA Continued... 1766 7/30/2015 120627 VISTAR CORPORATION 31.16 CONCESSION PRODUCT 378339 43042270 5520.5510 COST OF GOODS SOLD ARENA CONCESSIONS 31.16 1767 7/30/2015 101033 WINE COMPANY, THE 382.30 378106 398509-00 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING 1,200.00- 378484 399017-00 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 588.25 378482 399180-00 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING 532.40 378222 399311-00 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 1,234.15 378483 399315-00 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 1,537.10 395819 7/30/2015 133522 AARP DRIVER SAFETY PROGRAM 430.00 DRIVING CLASSES 378363 983723 1628.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES SENIOR CITIZENS 430.00 395820 7/30/2015 135922 ACUSHNET COMPANY 102.29 SHIRTS 378364 901000610 5440.5511 COST OF GOODS - PRO SHOP PRO SHOP RETAIL SALES 272.45 JACKETS 378365 901045074 5440.5511 COST OF GOODS - PRO SHOP PRO SHOP RETAIL SALES 247.20 GOLF BALLS 378366 901050787 5440.5511 COST OF GOODS - PRO SHOP PRO SHOP RETAIL SALES 588.80 GOLF BALLS 378367 901050788 5440.5511 COST OF GOODS - PRO SHOP PRO SHOP RETAIL SALES 1,210.74 395821 7/30/2015 136837 AESHLIMAN PLUMBING INC. 25,303.73 PLUMBING 378342 ONE 47090.6710 EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT PAMELA PK SHELTER & TURF 25,303.73 395822 7/30/2015 133504 AID ELECTRIC CORPORATION 2,732.00 SERVICE AERATORS 00001507 378231 47153 5960.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES ENGINEER SERVICES - STORM 2,732.00 395823 7/30/2015 130792 AIRGAS NATIONAL CARBONATION 251.94 CO2 378270 32284508 5311.6545 CHEMICALS POOL OPERATION 251.94 395824 7/30/2015 102164 ALOE UP SUNCARE PRODUCTS 93.60 SUNSCREEN 378368 187801 5440.5511 COST OF GOODS - PRO SHOP PRO SHOP RETAIL SALES 93.60 0 0 0 0 • • R55CKR2 LOGIS101 CITY OF EDINA 7/28/2015 15:06:03 Council Check Register by GL Page- 7 Council Check Register by Invoice & Summary 7/30/2015 - 7/30/2015 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit 396825 7/30/2015 129138 AMERICAN NEEDLE Continued... 869.89 LOGO HATS 378369 174055 5440.5511 COST OF GOODS - PRO SHOP PRO SHOP RETAIL SALES 72.00 LOGO HATS 378370 174159 5440.5511 COST OF GOODS - PRO SHOP PRO SHOP RETAIL SALES 941.89 395826 7/30/2015 101874 ANCOM COMMUNICATIONS INC. 638.29 2X RADIOS 00006376 377994 53978 5440.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES PRO SHOP RETAIL SALES 638.29 395827 7/30/2015 102172 APPERT'S FOODSERVICE 904.05 CONCESSION PRODUCT 378373 507080097 5320.5510 COST OF GOODS SOLD POOL CONCESSIONS 542.60 CONCESSION PRODUCT 378372 507100433 5320.5510 COST OF GOODS SOLD POOL CONCESSIONS 903.56 CONCESSION PRODUCT 378371 507150128 5320.5510 COST OF GOODS SOLD POOL CONCESSIONS 805.55 CONCESSION PRODUCT 378374 507170580 5320.5510 COST OF GOODS SOLD POOL CONCESSIONS 1,214.23 CONCESSION PRODUCT 378376 507200027 5320.5510 COST OF GOODS SOLD POOL CONCESSIONS 363.81 CONCESSION PRODUCT 378375 507210070 5730.5510 COST OF GOODS SOLD EDINBOROUGH CONCESSIONS 11.23 RECEIPT SPINDLE 376377 507210540 5730.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES EDINBOROUGH CONCESSIONS 4,745.03 395828 7/30/2015 100632 AQUA ENGINEERING 2,133.20 UTLEY PARK IRRIGATION 378271 71451 1647.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES PATHS & HARD SURFACE 2,133.20 395829 7/30/2015 121981 ARTEKA COMPANIES LLC 4,374.75 EDINA SPORTS DOME 378496 .00001 5500.1705 CONSTR. IN PROGRESS ICEARENA BALANCE SHEET 23,750.00 EDINA SPORTS DOME 378497 .00002 5500.1705 CONSTR. IN PROGRESS ICE ARENA BALANCE SHEET 38,570.00 EDINA SPORTS DOME 378498 0002 5500.1705 CONSTR. IN PROGRESS ICE ARENA BALANCE SHEET 66,694.75 395830 7/30/2015 132031 ARTISAN BEER COMPANY 745.75 378076 3042925 5822.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER 50TH ST SELLING 541.00 378442 3044202 5822.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER 50TH ST SELLING 256.00 378441 3044203 5842.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER YORK SELLING 192.00 378181 3044204 5862.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER VERNON SELLING 1,054.45 378440 3044205 5842.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER YORK SELLING 989.00 378182 3044206 5862.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER VERNON SELLING 3,778.20 395831 7/30/2015 136825 ASPER, MYRTLE 1,603.42 AMBULANCE OVERPAYMENT REFUND 378135 072115 1470.4329 AMBULANCE FEES FIRE DEPT. GENERAL 1.603.42 R55CKR2 LOGIS101 7/30/2015 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER CITY OF EDINA BAVARIAN MUSIKMEISTERS, THE YORK SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER 50TH ST SELLING Council Check Register by GL 150.00 CL PERFORMANCE 8/12/15 378359 070115 Council Check Register by Invoice & Summary 150.00 7/30/2015 -- 7/30/2015 Check # Date Amount Supplier/ Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description 395831 7/30/2015 136825 ASPER, MYRTLE Continued... 395832 7/30/2015 378360 136687 BALLANTINE PAINTING 5760.6136 200.00 150.00 TOUCH UP OFFICE 378272 1001 1551.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 395837 150.00 129660 BEDARD, MICHAEL 395833 7/30/2015 102195 BATTERIES PLUS 74.02 SUPPLIES REIMBURSEMENT 29.98 BATTERIES 00001370 377995 018-377517 1552.6406 GENERALSUPPLIES 74.02 29.98 395834 7/30/2015 7/30/2015 136267 BAUHAUS BREW LABS LLC 131191 BERNATELLO'S PIZZA INC. 5862.5514 395835 7/30/2015 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER 102608 BAVARIAN MUSIKMEISTERS, THE YORK SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER 50TH ST SELLING 150.00 CL PERFORMANCE 8/12/15 378359 070115 5760.6136 150.00 395836 7/30/2015 127908 BAZZILLIONS, THE 200.00 CL PERFORMANCE 8/13/15 378360 070115 5760.6136 200.00 395837 7/30/2015 129660 BEDARD, MICHAEL 74.02 SUPPLIES REIMBURSEMENT 378379 072415 5110.6564 74.02 395838 7/30/2015 131191 BERNATELLO'S PIZZA INC. 504.00 PIZZA 378274 D2813537 5320.5510 216.00 PIZZA 378380 D2813550 5320.5510 288.00 PIZZA 378275 D2813553 5320.5510 1,008.00 395839 7/30/2015 125139 BERNICK'S 20.00 378185 234034 5662.5515 245.90 378186 234035 5862.5514 148.86 378079 234036 5842.5514 318.00 378444 234849 5822.5514 732.76 395840 7/30/2015 136826 BITTERMAN, PETER 150.00 UTILITY OVERPAYMENT REFUND 378138 4120 SUNNYSI6 5900.2015 • 7/28/2015 15:06:03 Page- 8 Business Unit CITY HALL GENERAL CENT SVC PW BUILDING COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER VERNON SELLING PROFESSIONAL SVC - OTHER CENTENNIAL LAKES ADMIN EXPENSE PROFESSIONAL SVC - OTHER CENTENNIAL LAKES ADMIN EXPENSE CRAFT SUPPLIES COST OF GOODS SOLD COST OF GOODS SOLD COST OF GOODS SOLD ART CENTER ADMINISTRATION POOL CONCESSIONS POOL CONCESSIONS POOL CONCESSIONS COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX VERNON SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER VERNON SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER YORK SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER 50TH ST SELLING CUSTOMER REFUND UTILITY BALAdiHEET • • • R55CKR2 LOGIS101 CITY OF EDINA 7/28/2015 15:06:03 Council Check Register by GL Page - 9 Council Check Register by Invoice & Summary 7/30/2015 — 7/30/2015 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit 395840 7/30/2015 136826 BITTERMAN, PETER Continued... RD 150.00 395841 7/30/2015 100653 BITUMINOUS ROADWAYS INC. 16,021.70 HOT MIX 377997 24117 1314.6518 BLACKTOP STREET RENOVATION 16, 021.70 395842 7/30/2015 100653 BITUMINOUS ROADWAYS INC. 81,861.50 ASPHALT PAVING 378343 2 47090.6710 EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT PAMELA PK SHELTER & TURF 81, 861.50 395843 7/30/2015 122248 BLICK ART MATERIALS 127.59 ART SUPPLIES 378139 170365 5110.6564 CRAFT SUPPLIES ART CENTER ADMINISTRATION 24.19 378140 170711 5110.6564 CRAFT SUPPLIES ART CENTER ADMINISTRATION 151.78 395844 7/30/2015 101010 BORDER STATES ELECTRIC SUPPLY 417.23 LED MODULE FOR LIGHT POLE 00001305 377999 909651768 1552.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES CENT SVC PW BUILDING 417.23 395845 7/30/2015 119351 BOURGET IMPORTS 228.50 378080 127734 5622.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING 603.50 378445 127939 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 832.00 395846 7/30/2015 136660 BRAXTON & SONS INC. 76,636.50 ROUGH CARPENTRY 378344 2 47090.6710 EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT PAMELA PK SHELTER & TURF 76,636.50 395847 7/30/2015 101241 BROWN TRAFFIC PRODUCTS INC. 7,020.00 LED FOR SIGNALS 00001813 378001 205590 1330.6530 REPAIR PARTS TRAFFIC SIGNALS 7,020.00 395848 7/30/2015 100669 BRYAN ROCK PRODUCTS INC. 502.70 AG -LIME 00001358 378141 9231 1643.6517 SAND GRAVEL & ROCK GENERAL TURF CARE 502.70 395849 7/30/2015 122074 BUIE, BARB 50.42 378381 072115 5760.6235 POSTAGE CENTENNIAL LAKES ADMIN EXPENSE 52.47 378381 072115 5760.6406 GENERALSUPPLIES CENTENNIAL LAKES ADMI N EXPENSE R55CKR2 LOGIS101 CITY OF EDINA Council Check Register by GL Council Check Register by Invoice & Summary 7/30/2015 — 7/30/2015 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description 395849 7/30/2015 122074 BUIE, BARB Continued... 70.74 378381 072115 5760.6513 OFFICE SUPPLIES 7/28/2015 15:06:03 Page - 10 Business Unit CENTENNIAL LAKES ADMIN EXPENSE PROFESSIONAL SVC - OTHER CENTENNIAL LAKES ADMIN EXPENSE GENERAL SUPPLIES E911 REACH EDUCATION SOLUTIONS PARKADMIN. GENERAL COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER 50TH ST SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER 50TH ST SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER YORK SELLING PROFESSIONAL SERVICES CONTINGENCIES GENERAL SUPPLIES EDINBOROUGH OPERATIONS GENERAL SUPPLIES EDINBOROUGH OPERATIONS BOOKS & PAMPHLETS FIRE DEPT. GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES ENERGY & ENVIRONMENT COMM HEAT EDINBOROUGfRATIONS 173.63 395850 7/30/2015 103244 BURTIS, ROBERT 200.00 CL PERFORMANCE 8/11/15 378357 070115 5760.6136 200.00 395851 7/30/2015 100391 CALL ONE INC. 133.76 MIC EARPIECE 00003168 378142 577872 2310.6406 133.76 395852 7/30/2015 136820 CALLAN, JOANNA 60.00 PROGRAM CANCELATION 378131 REFUND 1600.4390.52 60.00 395853 7/30/2016 119455 CAPITOL BEVERAGE SALES 389.35 378447 634626 5822.5514 1,052.55 376446 640536 5822.5514 2,848.30 378081 641348 5842.5514 4,290.20 395854 7/30/2015 129923 CAWLEY 51.44 NAME BADGES 378143 V306433 1500.6103 51.44 395855 7/30/2015 101515 CEMSTONE PRODUCTS CO. 639.40 CONCRETE PATCH 378278 220363 5720.6406 258.62 CONCRETE WORK 00001334 378279 221292 5720.6406 898.02 395856 7/30/2015 136841 CENTER FOR EDUCATION AND EMPLOYMENT LAW 254.95 PUBLIC LAW REPORT 378383 072315 1470.64D5 254.95 395857 7/30/2015 103300 CENTER FOR ENERGY & ENVIRONMENT 3,200.00 HOME ENERGY VISIT 378245 13062 1122.6103 3,200.00 395858 7/30/2015 103711 CENTERPOINT ENERGY SERVICES INC. 633.61 378002 3074222 5720.6186 0 0 7/28/2015 15:06:03 Page - 10 Business Unit CENTENNIAL LAKES ADMIN EXPENSE PROFESSIONAL SVC - OTHER CENTENNIAL LAKES ADMIN EXPENSE GENERAL SUPPLIES E911 REACH EDUCATION SOLUTIONS PARKADMIN. GENERAL COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER 50TH ST SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER 50TH ST SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER YORK SELLING PROFESSIONAL SERVICES CONTINGENCIES GENERAL SUPPLIES EDINBOROUGH OPERATIONS GENERAL SUPPLIES EDINBOROUGH OPERATIONS BOOKS & PAMPHLETS FIRE DEPT. GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES ENERGY & ENVIRONMENT COMM HEAT EDINBOROUGfRATIONS 0 • R55CKR2 LOGIS101 CITY OF EDINA Council Check Register by GL Council Check Register by Invoice & Summary 7/30/2015 — 7/30/2015 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description 395858 7/30/2015 103711 CENTERPOINT ENERGY SERVICES INC. Continued... 7,526.86 378003 3074532 5311.6186 HEAT 8,160.47 395859 7/30/2015 101815 CENTRAIRE INC. 0 7/28/2015 15:06:03 Page - 11 Business Unit POOL OPERATION 35,131.00 HVAC 378345 28142 47090.6710 EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT PAMELA PK SHELTER & TURF 378187 0148340929 5842.5515 395865 7/30/2015 129820 COLLIERS INTERNATIONAL 819.99 AUG 2015 MAINTENANCE 378145 072315 5841.6103 819.99 395866 7/30/2015 136822 COLVILLE, SVETLANA 65.00 PROGRAM CANCELATION 378133 REFUND 1600.4390.52 65.00 VERNON SELLING 50TH ST SELLING YORK SELLING PARKING RAMP SENIOR CITIZENS SENIOR CENTER MAINTENANCE SENIOR CENTER MAINTENANCE EMPLOYEE SHARED SERVICES EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX YORK SELLING PROFESSIONAL SERVICES YORK OCCUPANCY REACH EDUCATION SOLUTIONS PARKADMIN. GENERAL 35,131.00 395860 7/30/2015 122317 CITY OF EDINA -COMMUNICATIONS 266.66 ABOUT TOWN AD 378384 COM -0591 5862.6122 ADVERTISING OTHER 266.67 ABOUT TOWN AD 378384 COM -0591 5822.6122 ADVERTISING OTHER 266.67 ABOUT TOWN AD 378384 COM -0591 5842.6122 ADVERTISING OTHER 800.00 395861 7/30/2015 122084 CITY OF EDINA - UTILITIES 2,894.00 00082198-0200615001 378144 200815001-7/15 1375.6189 SEWER & WATER 297.03 00114064-0203163012 378004 203163012-7/15 1626.6189 SEWER & WATER 677.20 00101025-0203600013 378006 203600013-7/15 1653.6189 SEWER & WATER 90.78 00101025-0203610011 378005 203610011-7/15 1653.6189 SEWER & WATER 3,959.01 395862 7/30/2015 106459 CLASSIC CATERING 200.00 11/10/15 LUNCH 378385 4680 1556.6406 GENERALSUPPLIES 200.00 395863 7/30/2015 101838 CLUTCH & U -JOINT / PROVEN FORCE 950.00 DIFFERENTIAL 00005459 378282 801911 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS 950.00 395864 7/30/2016 100692 COCA-COLA REFRESHMENTS 378187 0148340929 5842.5515 395865 7/30/2015 129820 COLLIERS INTERNATIONAL 819.99 AUG 2015 MAINTENANCE 378145 072315 5841.6103 819.99 395866 7/30/2015 136822 COLVILLE, SVETLANA 65.00 PROGRAM CANCELATION 378133 REFUND 1600.4390.52 65.00 VERNON SELLING 50TH ST SELLING YORK SELLING PARKING RAMP SENIOR CITIZENS SENIOR CENTER MAINTENANCE SENIOR CENTER MAINTENANCE EMPLOYEE SHARED SERVICES EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX YORK SELLING PROFESSIONAL SERVICES YORK OCCUPANCY REACH EDUCATION SOLUTIONS PARKADMIN. GENERAL R55CKR2 LOGIS101 30.00 CITY OF EDINA 119214 CUSTOM HOSE TECH INC. 198.29 HOSE 00005541 378284 79947 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS Council Check Register by GL 198.29 395875 7/30/2015 Council Check Register by Invoice & Summary 465.00 CLEAN FLOOR DRAINS 378008 107691 5420.6180 CONTRACTED REPAIRS 465.00 7/30/2015 — 7/30/2015 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description 395867 7/30/2015 136843 COMSTOCK, KALLEE Continued... 4.35 PARKING PERMIT REFUND 378386 REFUND 1000.2039 SALES & USE TAX PAYABLE 60.00 PARKING PERMIT REFUND 378386 REFUND 4090.4751 PARKING PERMITS 64.35 395868 7/30/2015 133173 CRABTREE COMPANIES INC. 8,583.80 SCANNER LICENSES 378246 133428 4418.6710 EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT 8,583.80 395869 7/30/2015 136844 CRAWELL, SHELLY 134.10 MEMBERSHIP REFUND 378387 AQUATIC CENTER 5301.4532 SEASON TICKETS 134.10 395870 7/30/2015 121267 CREATIVE RESOURCES 78.37 INKING STAMP 378283 39212 5311.6406 GENERALSUPPLIES 78.37 395871 7/30/2015 121340 CRETEX CONCRETE PRODUCTS INC 274.55- 378147 CSH0000542 5932.6520 CONCRETE 274.55 378146 SH00004124 5932.6520 CONCRETE 232.05 PRECAST SLABS 00001321 378007 SH00004231 5932.6520 CONCRETE 232.05 395872 7/30/2015 133672 CROIX OIL COMPANY 60.00 JUNE 2015 WASHES 378148 431330 1553.6238 CAR WASH 60.00 395873 7/30/2015 136821 CRONIN, RHONDA 7/28/2015 15:06:03 Page - 12 Business Unit GENERAL FUND BALANCE.SHEET 50TH&FRANCE MAINTENANCE ELECTRONIC RECORDS MANAGEMENI AQUATIC CENTER REVENUES POOL OPERATION GENERAL STORM SEWER GENERAL STORM SEWER GENERAL STORM SEWER EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 30.00 PROGRAM CANCELATION 378132 REFUND 1600.4390.52 REACH EDUCATION SOLUTIONS PARKADMIN. GENERAL EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN CLUBHOUSE PAYROLLCLE# 30.00 395874 7/30/2015 119214 CUSTOM HOSE TECH INC. 198.29 HOSE 00005541 378284 79947 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS 198.29 395875 7/30/2015 100706 D.C. ANNIS SEWER INC. 465.00 CLEAN FLOOR DRAINS 378008 107691 5420.6180 CONTRACTED REPAIRS 465.00 395876 7/30/2015 129884 DEARBORN NATIONAL LIFE INSURANCE CO. 2,118.90 AUG 2015 PREMIUM 378388 F018342-8/15 9900.2033.16 LTD -99 0 0 EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN CLUBHOUSE PAYROLLCLE# R55CKR2 LOGIS101 CITY OF EDINA 7/28/201515:06:03 Council Check Register by GL Page- 13 Council Check Register by- Invoice & Summary 7/30/2015 - 7/30/2015 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit 395876 7/30/2015 129884 DEARBORN NATIONAL LIFE INSURANCE CO. Continued... 2,118.90 395877 7/30/2015 100718 DELEGARD TOOL CO. 51.73 INFRARED THERMOMETER 00005534 378011 20375 1553.6556 TOOLS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 99.87 BRAKE BLEEDER 00005535 378010 20376 1553.6556 TOOLS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 41.14 WRENCH SET 00005535 378009 20420 1553.6556 TOOLS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 192.74 395878 7/30/2015 102831 DEX MEDIA EAST INC. 27.00 650487671 378285 650487671-7/15 5511.6188 TELEPHONE ARENA BLDG/GROUNDS 27.00 395879 7/30/2016 118805 DISCOUNT STEEL INC. 220.50 CONCRETE FORMS 00001311 378286 01112897 1314.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES STREET RENOVATION 166.14 CONCRETE TOOLS 00001374 378287 01116730 1301.6556 TOOLS GENERAL MAINTENANCE 386.64 395880 7/30/2015 131164 DONALD R FRANTZ CONCRETE CONSTRUCT LLC 36,575.00 CONCRETE/MASONRY 378346 2 47090.6710 EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT PAMELA PK SHELTER & TURF 36,575.00 395881 7/30/2016 132810 ECM PUBLISHERS INC. 61.44 PUBLISH ORD 2015-10 378012 238687 1185.6120 ADVERTISING LEGAL LICENSING, PERMITS & RECORDS 76.19 PUBLISH ORD 2015-09 378013 236688 1185.6120 ADVERTISING LEGAL LICENSING, PERMITS & RECORDS 139.63 396882 7/30/2015 123189 EDINA LIQUOR 3.62 RETURNED PARKING PASS 378389 PERMIT 2518 1000.2039 SALES & USE TAX PAYABLE GENERAL FUND BALANCE SHEET 50.00 RETURNED PARKING PASS 378389 PERMIT 2518 4090.4751 PARKING PERMITS 50TH&FRANCE MAINTENANCE 53.62 396883 7/30/2015 105224 EDINA POLICE RESERVES 2,414.00 EDINAART FAIR 378149 6/5-6/7 1428.6010 SALARIES REGULAR EMPLOYEES OFF DUTY EMPLOYMENT 2,030.00 RACE FOR THE CURE 376150 MAY 2015 1428.6010 SALARIES REGULAR EMPLOYEES OFF DUTY EMPLOYMENT 4,444.00 395884 7/30/2016 136830 EDUCATION & TRAINING SERVICES 998.00 LEADERSHIP TRAINING 378247 REGISTRATION 5919.6104 CONFERENCES & SCHOOLS TRAINING 998.00 R55CKR2 LOGIS101 2,310.00 CITY OF EDINA 395892 7/30/2015 136838 EXTREME PANEL TECHNOLOGIES INC. Council Check Register by GL 26,800.61 Council Check Register by Invoice & Summary 47090.6710 EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT 26,800.61 7/30/2015 - 7/30/2015 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description 395885 7/30/2015 125415 EHMILLER, DAVID CREDIT 378018 1-4743873 Continued... 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS 143.99 UNIFORM BOOTS 346996 070214 1470.6558 DEPT UNIFORMS 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS 143.99 12.03 SWITCH 378015 69-185898 395886 7/30/2015 100549 ELECTRIC PUMP INC. MINIATURE LAMPS 378016 69-186380 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS 313.00 FLOAT 00001239 378014 0055740 -IN 5923.6406 GENERALSUPPLIES 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS 313.00 22.14 GAS ENGINE OIL DYE 378290 69-186899 395887 7/30/2015 122792 EMERGENCY AUTOMOTIVE TECHNOLOGIES INC. 4,868.90 SQUAD BUILD UP 378072 RS4258 421400.6710 EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT 0 16,801.50 SQUADS BUILD UP 378071 RS4259 421400.6710 EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT 21,670.40 395888 7/30/2015 134601 EMMONS & OLIVIER RESOURCES INC. 485.00 STREET PROJECT RATINGS 378248 01169-0003-1 5960.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 485.00 395889 7/30/2015 117483 ENGELE, LEE 150.00 CL PERFORMANCE 8/17/15 378362 070115 5760.6136 PROFESSIONAL SVC - OTHER 150.00 395890 7/30/2015 136689 ENKI BREWING COMPANY INC. 147.60 378084 4166 5822.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER 147.60 395891 7/30/2015 102497 EXPLORER POST 925 7/28/2015 15:06:03 Page - 14 Business Unit FIRE DEPT. GENERAL COLLECTION SYSTEMS POLICE EQUIPMENT POLICE EQUIPMENT ENGINEER SERVICES - STORM CENTENNIAL LAKES ADMIN EXPENSE 50TH ST SELLING 2,310.00 RACE FOR THE CURE 378151 MAY 2051 1428.6010 SALARIES REGULAR EMPLOYEES OFF DUTY EMPLOYMENT PAMELA PK SHELTER & TURF EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 2,310.00 395892 7/30/2015 136838 EXTREME PANEL TECHNOLOGIES INC. 26,800.61 STRUCTURAL PANELS 378347 1 47090.6710 EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT 26,800.61 395893 7/30/2015 100146 FACTORY MOTOR PARTS COMPANY 45.00- CREDIT 378018 1-4743873 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS 166.37 BATTERY 378017 1-Z04940 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS 12.03 SWITCH 378015 69-185898 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS 3.20 MINIATURE LAMPS 378016 69-186380 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS 153.71 FAN CLUTCH 378289 69-186440 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS 22.14 GAS ENGINE OIL DYE 378290 69-186899 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS 312.45 • 0 PAMELA PK SHELTER & TURF EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN • • • R55CKR2 LOGIS101 CITY OF EDINA 7/28/2015 15:06:03 Council Check Register by GL Page - 15 Council Check Register by Invoice & Summary 7/30/2015 — 7/30/2015 Check # Date Amount Supplier/ Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit 395893 7/30/2016 100146 FACTORY MOTOR PARTS COMPANY Continued... 395894 7/30/2015 126004 FERGUSON WATERWORKS 2,971.71 REGISTER, METER 00001400 378020 0149822 5917.6530 REPAIR PARTS METER REPAIR 121.76 HOSE, ADAPTER 00001345 378019 0149827 5913.6406 GENERALSUPPLIES DISTRIBUTION 3,093.47 395896 7/3012015 101657 FMAM - 240.00 DUES 378391 072315 1470.6105 DUES & SUBSCRIPTIONS FIRE DEPT. GENERAL 240.00 396896 7/30/2016 136824 FOX, LYLE 38.53 UTILITY OVERPAYMENT REFUND 378152 7012 LYNMAR 5900.2015 CUSTOMER REFUND UTILITY BALANCE SHEET LANE 38.53 395897 7/30/2016 136842 FRISK, PATRICIA 41.00 SOCCER CAMP REFUND 378392 072115 1600.4390.22 MINI HAWKS PARKADMIN. GENERAL 41.00 395898 7/30/2015 135953 FRONTIER FIRE PROTECTION INC, 19,000.00 FIRE PROTECTION 378348 2 47090.6710 EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT PAMELA PK SHELTER & TURF 19,000.00 396899 7/3012015 133742 FUN21RAISE MARKETING AND EVENTS 300.00 AD IN SCHOOL DIST CALENDAR 378291 2843 5310.6122 ADVERTISING OTHER POOL ADMINISTRATION 1,000.00 AD IN SCHOOL CALENDARS 378292 2845 5710.6122 ADVERTISING OTHER EDINBOROUGH ADMINISTRATION 300.00 AD IN SCHOOL DIST CALENDAR 378293 2847 5510.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES ARENAADMINISTRATION 1,600.00 395900 7/30/2015 100764 G & K SERVICES 6.95 TAX ON INV 1013135455 378393 1013135455T 5421.6201 LAUNDRY GRILL 112.15 ACCT 0039263 378394 1013203605 5421.6201 LAUNDRY GRILL 63.66 ACCT 0039263 378395 1013214896 5421.6201 LAUNDRY GRILL 182.76 395901 7/30/2016 123080 GARDENVIEW GREENHOUSE 1,277.15 FLOWERS 378397 669040 5422.6275 COURSE BEAUTIFICATION MAINT OF COURSE & GROUNDS 1,758.55 FLOWERS 378398 669041 5422.6275 COURSE BEAUTIFICATION MAINT OF COURSE & GROUNDS 3,035.70 R55CKR2 LOGIS101 CITY OF EDINA 7/28/2015 15:06:03 Council Check Register by GL Page- 16 Council Check Register by Invoice & Summary 7/30/2015 - 7/30/2015 Check # Date Amount Supplier/ Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit 396902 7/30/2016 101931 GEAR FOR SPORTS Continued... 685.69 MERCHANDISE 378396 40996628 5440.5511 COST OF GOODS - PRO SHOP PRO SHOP RETAIL SALES 685.69 395903 7/30/2015 105508 GEMPLER'S INC. 301.10 TOOLS 00001357 378021 S101739995 1644.6556 TOOLS TREES & MAINTENANCE 301.10 395904 7/30/2015 112776 GEORGE F. COOK CONSTRUCTION CO. 5,230.72 EDINA SPORTS DOME 378499 6581-8 5550.1705 CONSTR. IN PROGRESS SPORTS DOME BALANCE SHEET 5,230.72 395905 7/30/2015 136819 GILLIGAN, EMILY 157.00 ART CLASS REFUND 376127 15623 5101.4607 CLASS REGISTRATION ART CENTER REVENUES 157.00 395906 7130/2015 101178 GOPHER 712.69 BALL CART, BALLS, HOOPS 378294 8985667 5720.6406 GENERALSUPPLIES EDINBOROUGH OPERATIONS 712.69 395907 7/30/2015 133530 GORHAM OIEN MECHANICAL INC. 723.98 FIRE PROTECTION 378500 2 5550.1705 CONSTR. IN PROGRESS SPORTS DOME BALANCE SHEET 723.98 395908 7/30/2015 136814 GRABOWSKI, KERR 987.60 TRAVEL/MEALS/SUPPLIES 378228 JULY 2015 5110.6406 GENERALSUPPLIES ART CENTER ADMINISTRATION 1,950.00 WORKSHOP INSTRUCTION 378228 JULY 2015 5110.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES ART CENTER ADMINISTRATION 2,937.60 395909 7/30/2015 102645 GRAFFITI CONTROL SERVICES 106.00 GRAFFITI REMOVAL 378022 960 1646.6530 REPAIR PARTS BUILDING MAINTENANCE 106.00 395910 7/30/2015 101103 GRAINGER 480.98 STEPLADDER, DRILL SET 00002236 378295 9764707292 5720.6406 GENERALSUPPLIES EDINBOROUGH OPERATIONS 198.24- RETURN 00001293 376023 9787188565 1646.6406 GENERALSUPPLIES BUILDING MAINTENANCE 172.20 MARKING PAINT 00001234 378025 9790715123 5913.6406 GENERALSUPPLIES DISTRIBUTION 17.14 SAFETY HAT 00005536 378296 9792074131 1553.6610 SAFETY EQUIPMENT EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 66.50 CLAMP, WELDING AEROSOL 00005536 378024 9792755879 1553.6560 WELDING SUPPLIES EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 538.58 40 0 0 i 7/30/2015 • 100787 GRUBER'S POWER EQUIPMENT R55CKR2 LOGIS101 CITY OF EDINA 21.05 Council Check Register by GL 378298 145547 Council Check Register by Invoice & Summary 21.05 7/30/2015 — 7/30/2015 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description 395911 7/30/2015 124711 GRANDVIEW TIRE & AUTO - CAHILL Continued... 109.95 ALIGNMENT 00005492 378297 85306 1553.6180 CONTRACTED REPAIRS 109.95 4,266.25 TOTAL CONTROL UPGRADE 395912 7/30/2015 102217 GRAPE BEGINNINGS INC 81290 450005.6710 • 7/28/2015 15:06:03 Page - 17 Business Unit EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 1,824.75 378085 184506 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 1,103.25 378452 184592 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING 2,453.75 378188 184595 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 395913 7/30/2015 100787 GRUBER'S POWER EQUIPMENT 21.05 SWITCH 378298 145547 1301.6556 21.05 395914 7/30/2015 130116 HARRIS CONTRACTING COMPANY 4,266.25 TOTAL CONTROL UPGRADE 378249 81290 450005.6710 4,266.25 395915 7/30/2016 136818 HAUGH, KARI BETH 54.00 MODEL 378153 071615 5110.6103 54.00 395916 7/30/2015 100797 HAWKINS INC. 1,420.85 CHLORINE, SODIUM HYDRO 378299 3749783 5311.6545 4,174.96 CHEMICALS 00005285 378026 3751019 5915.6586 5,549.91 CHEMICALS 00005285 378027 3751587 5915.6586 11,145.72 395917 7/30/2015 103753 HILLYARD INC -MINNEAPOLIS 225.71 TOWELS 00002239 378301 601684794 5720.6406 259.69 CLEANER 00002244 378300 601694125 5720.6406 485.40 395918 7/30/2015 105962 HOFF, BRUCE 180.00 MODEL 378399 072415 5110.6103 180.00 395919 7/30/2016 104375 HOHENSTEINS INC. 617.50 378086 772502 5822.5514 526.00 378453 773785 5822.5514 1,113.00 378087 774266 5842.5514 TOOLS EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT PROFESSIONAL SERVICES GENERAL MAINTENANCE CENTRALIZED HVAC CONTROLS ART CENTER ADMINISTRATION CHEMICALS POOL OPERATION WATER TREATMENT SUPPLIES WATER TREATMENT WATER TREATMENT SUPPLIES WATER TREATMENT GENERAL SUPPLIES GENERAL SUPPLIES PROFESSIONAL SERVICES EDINBOROUGH OPERATIONS EDINBOROUGH OPERATIONS ART CENTER ADMINISTRATION COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER 50TH ST SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER 50TH ST SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER YORK SELLING R55CKR2 LOGIS101 CITY OF EDINA 7/28/2015 15:06:03 Council Check Register by GL Page- 18 Council Check Register by Invoice & Summary 7/30/2015 — 7/30/2015 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit 395919 7/30/2015 104375 HOHENSTEINS INC. Continued... 72.00 378088 774381 5842.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER YORK SELLING 2,328.50 395920 7/30/2015 101697 HORIZON GRAPHICS INC 974.25 EDINBOROUGH BROCHURES 378302 33874 5710.6575 PRINTING EDINBOROUGH ADMINISTRATION 974.25 395921 7/30/2015 101146 IMPACT TELECOM 381.60 378154 608377825 1554.6188 TELEPHONE CENT SERV GEN - MIS 381.60 395922 7/30/2015 131544 INDEED BREWING COMPANY 418.00 378454 31038 5822.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER 50TH ST SELLING 418.00 395923 7/30/2016 126034 INDEPENDENT OFFICIALS ASSOCIATION LLC 2,072.00 OFFICIATING FEES 378124 605 1621.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES ATHLETIC ACTIVITIES 1,764.00 OFFICIATING FEES 378125 610 1621.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES ATHLETIC ACTIVITIES 3,836.00 395924 7/30/2015 134953 INDIGITAL 1,040.60 SCAN BACK FILES 378252 10942 4418.6710 EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT ELECTRONIC RECORDS MANAGEMENT 1,040.60 395925 7/30/2015 132871 INGLAS LLP 15,333.00 ALUMINUM ENTRANCES 378349 2 47090.6710 EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT PAMELA PK SHELTER & TURF 15, 333.00 395926 7/30/2015 119808 INTEGRA 27.74 ISP BUNDLE 378400 13145207 7411.6168 TELEPHONE PSTF OCCUPANCY 27.74 395927 7/30/2015 104696 INT'L SECURITY PRODUCTS 102.19 FENCE PARTS 00001356 378028 3044811 1646.6530 REPAIR PARTS BUILDING MAINTENANCE 102.19 395928 7/30/2015 102640 IPMA-HR 406.77 DUES 378303 INV-09606-Q4P4P 1170.6105 DUES & SUBSCRIPTIONS HUMAN RESOURCES 4 406.77 • • . • 0 i R55CKR2 LOGIS101 CITY OF EDINA 7/28/2015 15:06:03 Council Check Register by GL Page- 19 Council Check Register by Invoice & Summary 7/30/2015 - 7/30/2015 Check # Date Amount Supplier/ Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit 395928 7/30/2015 102640 IPMA-HR Continued... 395929 7/30/2015 100829 JERRY'S HARDWARE 4.39 378401 7/15 -LIQ 5861.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES VERNON OCCUPANCY 29.95 378401 7/15 -LIQ 5841.6406 GENERALSUPPLIES YORK OCCUPANCY 34.34 395930 7/30/2015 100830 JERRY'S PRINTING 700.00 DRIVERS INSPECTION REPORTS 00005559 378304 86779 1553.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 700.00 395931 7/30/2015 100741 JJ TAYLOR DIST. OF MINN 61.02- 378403 2371242 5421.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER GRILL 3,317.35 378089 2382318 5822.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER 50TH ST SELLING 41.80 378190 2382354 5862.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX VERNON SELLING 2,519.80 378456 2382355 5822.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER 50TH ST SELLING 77.85 376455 2362356 5822.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX 50TH ST SELLING 4,680.00 378189 2382357 5862.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER VERNON SELLING 6,280.90 378191 2382363 5842.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER YORK SELLING 531.40 378402 2397102 5421:5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER GRILL 17,388.08 395932 7/30/2015 124104 JOHN DEERE LANDSCAPES INC. 144.15 ANTIFOAM 00006381 378031 72513064 5422.6545 CHEMICALS MAINT OF COURSE & GROUNDS 191.12 ROUND UP 00001337 378030 72535737 1643.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES GENERAL TURF CARE 335.27 395933 7/30/2016 100835 JOHNSON BROTHERS LIQUOR CO. 114.67 376465 5205961 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 177.68 378092 5205962 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 409.80 378094 5211175 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING 3,571.84 378091 5211178 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING 615.68 378093 5211181 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING 9.28 378090 5211185 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING 592.25 378095 5211513 5862.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR VERNON SELLING 101.11 376202 5216556 5842.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR YORK SELLING 1.16 378463 5216557 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 3.48 378461 5216561 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 22.04 378197 5216562 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 1,763.76 378466 5216563 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING 325.98 378200 5216564 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING R55CKR2 LOGIS101 CITY OF EDINA 7/28/2015 15:06:03 Council Check Register by GL Page- 20 Council Check Register by Invoice & Summary 7/30/2015 - 7/30/2015 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit 395933 7/30/2015 100836 JOHNSON BROTHERS LIQUOR CO. Continued... 1.16 378462 5216565 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 159.08 376467 5216566 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING 6,783.89 378464 5216570 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 2,483.75 378460 5216571 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 715.46 378203 5216572 5842.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR YORK SELLING 3,551.00 378201 5216573 5842.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR YORK SELLING 29.16 378459 5216574 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 3.48 378458 5216575 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 51.16 378204 5216576 5842.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR YORK SELLING 2,026.71 378457 5216577 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 3,903.83 378205 5216578 5842.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR YORK SELLING 98.23 378206 5216579 5842.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX YORK SELLING 6,309.49 378198 5216580 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 577.55 378195 5216581 5862.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR VERNON SELLING 4,431.27 378192 5216582 5862.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR VERNON SELLING 1,134.28 378199 5216583 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 1,856.27 378194 5216584 5862.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR VERNON SELLING 1,584.26 378196 5216585 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 2,011.01 378193 5216586 5862.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR VERNON SELLING 30.00- 378096 532767 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING 45,389.77 395934 7/30/2015 136823 JOHNSON, NICOLE 2.50 FIREARM SAFETY TRAINING 378134 REFUND 1600.4390.21 FIREARM SAFETY TRAINING PARKADMIN. GENERAL 2.50 395935 7/30/2015 102113 JOHNSTONE SUPPLY 93.10 HEATING SYSTEM VALVE 00001250 378032 1005754 1551.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES CITY HALL GENERAL 93.10 395936 7/30/2015 122239 KANDIKO, GEORGIA 110.52 REIMBURSE FOR SUPPLIES 378156 071615 5110.6564 CRAFT SUPPLIES ART CENTER ADMINISTRATION 110.52 395937 7/30/2015 108679 KELLEHER CONSTRUCTION 18,230.50 EDINA SPORTS DOME 378501 1656 5550.1705 CONSTR. IN PROGRESS SPORTS DOME BALANCE SHEET 18,230.50 395938 7/30/2015 100845 KREMER SERVICES LLC 0 86.00 BOLTS 00005543 378033 39124 • 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OWION GEN is 7/28/2015 15:06:03 Page - 21 Business Unit GENERAL STORM SEWER ART CENTER REVENUES ART CENTER REVENUES EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN DISTRIBUTION CENTRAL SERVICES GENERAL CENTRAL SERVICES GENERAL CENTRAL SERVICES GENERAL GRILL SPORTS DOME BALANCE SHEET ART CENTER ADMINISTRATION COMMUNICATIONS EDINBOROUGH OPERATIONS s • R55CKR2 LOGIS101 CITY OF EDINA Council Check Register by GL Council Check Register by Invoice & Summary 7/30/2015 — 7/30/2015 Check # Date Amount Supplier/ Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description 395938 7/30/2015 100845 KREMER SERVICES LLC Continued... 88.00 395939 7/30/2015 100849 LAKELAND ENGINEERING 1,050.00 PANELVIEWS 00001340 378253 12287987-01 5932.6406 GENERALSUPPLIES 1,050.00 395940 7/30/2015 136817 LAKSHMANAN, MALA 92.00 ART CLASS REFUND 378129 16928 5101.4607 CLASS REGISTRATION 83.00 ART CLASS REFUND 378128 '16937 5101.4607 CLASS REGISTRATION 175.00 395941 7/30/2015 100852 LAWSON PRODUCTS INC. 344.53 BULBS, TERMINALS, SCREWS 00005557 378035 9303407141 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS 213.88 HYDRANT REPAIR PARTS 00005520 378034 9303408313 5913.6530 REPAIR PARTS 558.41 395942 7/30/2015 101552 LEAGUE OF MINNESOTA CITIES 1,088.00 VOLUNTEER ACCIDENT PLAN 378406 30336 1550.6200 INSURANCE 500.00 CLAIM 378404 C0033405 1550.6200 INSURANCE 1,131.91 CLAIM 378405 C0038671 1550.6200 INSURANCE 2,719.91 395943 7/30/2015 136846 LUCAS, CLAUDETTE 16.99 NUTS 378407 REIMBURSE 5421.5510 COST OF GOODS SOLD 16.99 395944 7/30/2015 135856 MARS CARPET SALES 4,946.18 EDINA SPORTS DOME 378502 003 5550.1705 CONSTR. IN PROGRESS 4,946.18 395945 7/30/2015 136813 MARTIN, SUE 26.76 WORKSHOP EXPENSE 378157 072215 5110.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 26.76 395946 7/30/2015 122878 MARTTI, DOROTHEA 240.00 HOSTING FEE 378409 209 1130.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 240.00 395947 7/30/2015 119209 MASTER TECHNOLOGY GROUP 122.50 KEYSCAN REPAIR 378305 501126 5720.6180 CONTRACTED REPAIRS is 7/28/2015 15:06:03 Page - 21 Business Unit GENERAL STORM SEWER ART CENTER REVENUES ART CENTER REVENUES EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN DISTRIBUTION CENTRAL SERVICES GENERAL CENTRAL SERVICES GENERAL CENTRAL SERVICES GENERAL GRILL SPORTS DOME BALANCE SHEET ART CENTER ADMINISTRATION COMMUNICATIONS EDINBOROUGH OPERATIONS R55CKR2 LOGIS101 CITY OF EDINA Council Check Register by GL Council Check Register by Invoice & Summary 7/30/2015 - 7/30/2015 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description 395947 7/30/2015 119209 MASTER TECHNOLOGY GROUP Continued... 105.00 PHONE LINE REPAIR 378306 501128 5553.6180 CONTRACTED REPAIRS 227.50 395948 7/30/2015 102600 MATRIX COMMUNICATIONS INC 180.00 911 ADMIN LINES - CALLER ID 378038 60169 2310.6102 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 180.00 395949 7/30/2015 136816 MCLEAREN, BRADY 135.00 PT MAINT/KILN REPAIR 378158 072015 5111.618D CONTRACTED REPAIRS 135.00 395950 7/30/2015 101327 MEDICINE SHOW BAND, THE 600.00 CL PERFORMANCE 8/16/15 378361 070115 5760.6136 PROFESSIONAL SVC - OTHER 600.00 395951 7/30/2015 101987 MENARDS 47.26 PAINTING SUPPLIES 00002235 378310 73007 5720.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES 47.26 395952 7/30/2015 101638 MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH 23.00 CERTIFICATION FEE 378410 CLASS D 5913.6260 LICENSES & PERMITS 23.00 395953 7/30/2015 101686 MINNESOTA MUNICIPAL BEVERAGE ASSN 1,833.32 ANNUAL DUES 378161 2015 5860.6105 DUES & SUBSCRIPTIONS 1,833.34 ANNUAL DUES 378161 2015 5820.6105 DUES & SUBSCRIPTIONS 1,833.34 ANNUAL DUES 378161 2015 5840.6105 DUES & SUBSCRIPTIONS 5,500.00 395954 7/30/2015 128914 MINUTEMAN PRESS 51.00 CITY SLICK NEWSLETTERS 378162 18136 1130.6575 PRINTING 49.00 STREET SMARTS POSTERS 378162 18136 2501.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 92.66 POSTERS, POSTCARDS 378312 18138 5110.6575 PRINTING 54.32 POSTCARDS 378311 16157 5110.6575 PRINTING 246.98 395955 7/30/2015 136815 MOBILE PRO SYSTEMS 23,575.00 MOBILE CAMERA SYSTEM 378163 03-1217-112 421400.6710 EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT 23,575.00 • •- 7/28/2015 15:06:03 Page- 22 Business Unit SPORTS DOME BLDG&GROUNDS E911 ART CENTER BLDG/MAINT CENTENNIAL LAKES ADMIN EXPENSE EDINBOROUGH OPERATIONS DISTRIBUTION VERNON LIQUOR GENERAL 50TH STREET GENERAL LIQUOR YORK GENERAL COMMUNICATIONS PACS IS ART CENTER ADMINISTRATION ART CENTER ADMINISTRATION POLICE EQUIPMENT 9 R55CKR2 LOGIS101 CITY OF EDINA 7/28/2015 15:06:03 Council Check Register by GL Page- 23 Council Check Register by Invoice & Summary 7/30/2015 — 7/30/2015 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit 395956 7/30/2015 122793 MODERN MARKETING INC. Continued... 649.81 EVIDENCE RM SUPPLIES 378255 MM1109875 1400.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES POLICE DEPT. GENERAL 649.81 395957 7/30/2015 132591 MUSKA ELECTIRC COMPANY 1,314.00 EDINA SPORTS DOME 378503 00 5550.1705 CONSTR. IN PROGRESS SPORTS DOME BALANCE SHEET 9,500.00 ELECTRICAL 378351 3-7/15 47090.6710 EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT PAMELA PK SHELTER & TURF 10,814.00 395958 7/30/2015 136839 NATIONAL STEEL FABRICATORS INC. 3,424.75 METAL FAB 378350 1 47090.6710 EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT PAMELA PK SHELTER & TURF 3,424.75 395959 7/30/2015 127547 NEAL, SCOTT H. 29.09 REIMBURSE CAB FARE 378495 072715 1120.6104 CONFERENCES & SCHOOLS ADMINISTRATION 29.09 395960 7/30/2015 123954 NEIGHBORHOOD NETWORKS PUBLISHING 299.00 ART CENTER ADS 378165 806905 5110.6122 ADVERTISING OTHER ART CENTER ADMINISTRATION 299.00 395961 7/30/2015 134457 NEW LOOK CONTRACTING INC. 16,178.05 EDINA SPORTS DOME 378504 10 5550.1705 CONSTR. IN PROGRESS SPORTS DOME BALANCE SHEET 16,178.05 395962 7/30/2015 104350 NIKE USA INC. 611.78 CLOTHING 378413 973263418 5440.5511 COST OF GOODS - PRO SHOP PRO SHOP RETAIL SALES 212.61 SHRITS 378411 973429702 5440.5511 COST OF GOODS - PRO SHOP PRO SHOP RETAIL SALES 85.48 VESTS 378412 973556375 5440.5511 COST OF GOODS - PRO SHOP PRO SHOP RETAIL SALES 909.87 395963 7/30/2015 103106 NLSC PRODUCTS INC. 38.00 LIGHTS 00001363 378044 90234 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 38.00 395964 7/30/2015 136812 NORTHLAND FENCE AND REPAIR 1,700.00 FENCING 378046 70712 1344.6577 LUMBER RETAINING WALL MAINTENANCE 1,700.00 395965 7/30/2015 103578 OFFICE DEPOT 169.01 OFFICE SUPPLIES 378315 777671028001 5510.6513 OFFICE SUPPLIES ARENA ADMINISTRATION R55CKR2 LOGIS101 CITY OF EDINA Council Check Register by GL Council Check Register by Invoice & Summary 7/30/2015 - 7/30/2015 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description 396966 7/30/2015 103678 OFFICE DEPOT Continued... 169.01 395966 7/30/2015 101659 ORKIN 65.00 PEST CONTROL 65.00 395967 7/30/2015 100347 PAUSTIS WINE COMPANY 400.07 230.50 1,183.07 426.65 395968 7/30/2015 100945 PEPSI -COLA COMPANY 347.90 352.02 100.54 834.44 546.91 2,181.81 395969 7/30/2015 131877 PETTY CASH 3.45 9.53 9.64 42.90 65.52 395970 7/30/2015 100743 PHILLIPS WINE & SPIRITS 378414 103738514 1552.6103 7/28/2015 15:06:03 Page - 24 Business Unit PROFESSIONAL SERVICES CENT SVC PW BUILDING 378097 10.96- 5822.5513 32.87- 50TH ST SELLING 1,917.56 8507361 -IN 401.28 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 401.96 378100 2.32 5862.5513 151.48 VERNON SELLING 1,877.43 6507956 -IN 1,395.34 • 1,623.31 378414 103738514 1552.6103 7/28/2015 15:06:03 Page - 24 Business Unit PROFESSIONAL SERVICES CENT SVC PW BUILDING 378097 8506946 -IN 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING 378098 8507361 -IN 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 378100 8507950 -IN 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 378099 6507956 -IN 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 378468 8507968 -IN 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING 376469 41136033 5862.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX VERNON SELLING 378416 43278831 5320.5510 COST OF GOODS SOLD POOL CONCESSIONS 378415 43278879 5320.5510 _ COST OF GOODS SOLD POOL CONCESSIONS 378417 43278897 5320.5510 COST OF GOODS SOLD POOL CONCESSIONS 378418 43278908 5421.5510 COST OF GOODS SOLD GRILL 378419 072715 5311.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES POOL OPERATION 378419 072715 5311.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES POOL OPERATION 378419 072715 5310.6610 SAFETY EQUIPMENT POOL ADMINISTRATION 378419 072715 5310.6513 OFFICE SUPPLIES POOL ADMINISTRATION 378475 216830 COST OF GOODS SOLD 5842.5513 378476 216831 WINE 5842.5513 378102 2820245 50TH ST SELLING 5822.5513 378101 2820249 COST OF GOODS SOLD 5822.5513 378470 2823785 WINE 5822.5513 378473 2823786 YORK SELLING 5842.5513 378471 2823788 5822.5513 378472 2823790 5842.5513 378211 2823791 5842.5512 378474 2823792 • 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR YORK SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 0 7/30/2015 i • R55CKR2 LOGIS101 121.60 CITY OF EDINA 376420 7/26/2015 15:06:03 121.60 Council Check Register by GL Page- 25 395972 7/30/2015 Council Check Register by Invoice & Summary 306.00 7/30/2015 — 7/30/2015 378212 24851 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit 395970 7/30/2015 100743 PHILLIPS WINE & SPIRITS 130926 PLANTSCAPE INC. Continued... 534.72 378208 2823793 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 171.48 378209 2823794 5862.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX VERNON SELLING 395974 1,632.71 378210 2823795 5862.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR VERNON SELLING 975.96 378207 2823796 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 395971 7/30/2015 100119 PING 121.60 GOLF BAG 376420 12902885 121.60 395972 7/30/2015 124176 PINNACLE DISTRIBUTING 306.00 378212 24851 306.00 395973 7/30/2015 130926 PLANTSCAPE INC. 2,223.66 PLANT MAINTENANCE 378317 331330 2,223.86 395974 7/30/2015 111340 POLAR CHEVROLET 16,608.65 2016 CHEVROLET IMPALA 00003133 378074 G1100556 18,60B.65 395975 7/30/2015 105055 POWDERHORN NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOC. 275.00 PROGRAM ADVERTISING 378166 EDINAART CENTER 275.00 395976 7/30/2015 120221 RACHEL CONTRACTING INC. 30,255.00 EARTHWORK 378352 14045.7 30,255.00 395977 7/30/2015 135047 RED CEDAR STEEL ERECTORS INC. 3,610.00 EDINA SPORTS DOME 378505 3 3,610.00 395978 7/30/2016 132392 RED POWER DIESEL SERVICE 589.68 FOAM LEVEL GAUGE 00005478 378048 12576 589.68 396979 7130/2015 136832 REMICK, DAVID 5440.5511 5862.5515 5720.6620 421400.6710 5110.6564 47090.6710 5550.1705 1553.6530 COST OF GOODS - PRO SHOP PRO SHOP RETAIL SALES COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX TREES, FLOWERS, SHRUBS VERNON SELLING EDINBOROUGH OPERATIONS EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT POLICE EQUIPMENT CRAFT SUPPLIES ART CENTER ADMINISTRATION EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT PAMELA PK SHELTER & TURF CONSTR. IN PROGRESS REPAIR PARTS SPORTS DOME BALANCE SHEET EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN R55CKR2 LOGIS101 285.00 CITY OF EDINA 7/28/2015 15:06:03 395987 7/30/2016 100995 SEH Council Check Register by GL Page- 26 782.17 WETLAND SERVICES 378257 Council Check Register by Invoice & Summary 540D.1705 CONSTR. IN PROGRESS 3,409.60 54TH ST DOCS & CPS 378258 300181 7/30/2015 — 7/30/2015 01416.1705.21 CONSULTING INSPECTION Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit 395979 7/30/2015 378261 136832 REMICK, DAVID 05551.1705.21 CONSULTING INSPECTION Continued... 25,996.71 ARDEN PARK DOCS & CP 378261 5.33 UTILITY OVERPAYMENT REFUND 378256 4231 GRIMESAVE 5900.2015 CUSTOMER REFUND UTILITY BALANCE SHEET 378261 300182 5.33 04407.1705.21 CONSULTING INSPECTION • 395980 7/30/2015 102408 RIGID HITCH INCORPORATED 117.97 BRAKE CONTROL 378049 1927665677 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 189.94 RECEIVER CONNECTOR 00005538 378324 1927666665 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 307.91 395981 7/30/2015 125178 RJM CONSTRUCTION LLC 24,648.05 CONSTRUCTION MGMT 378353 4520013704 47090.6710 EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT PAMELA PK SHELTER & TURF 24,648.05 395982 7/30/2015 100980 ROBERT B. HILL CO. 309.89 SOFTENER SALT 378421 00318122 5420.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES CLUB HOUSE 309.89 395983 7/30/2015 101963 S & S TREE SPECIALISTS 769.00 OAK WILT INSPECTIONS 378051 909107771 1644.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES TREES & MAINTENANCE 769.00 395984 7/30/2015 101822 SAM'S CLUB DIRECT 29.84- CREDIT 378423 0394656 1628.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES SENIOR CITIZENS 56.22 `'"` **** ***' ""9 350 378422 072115 1628.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES SENIOR CITIZENS 26.38 395985 7/30/2015 128151 SCHERER BROS LUMBER CO. 45,123.49 ROUGH CARPENTRY 378354 2 47090.6710 EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT PAMELA PK SHELTER & TURF 45,123.49 395986 7/30/2015 100349 SCOTT COUNTY 285.00 OUT OF COUNTY WARRANT 378169 072215 1000.2055 DUE TO OTHER GOVERNMENTS GENERAL FUND BALANCE SHEET GOLF BALANCE SHEET 54TH ST BRIDGE&STREET REPAIR GLEN VIEWADDITION NHOOD RECON Arden Park D Reconstruction Arden Park D Reconstruction 54TH ST RECO*UCTION 285.00 395987 7/30/2016 100995 SEH 782.17 WETLAND SERVICES 378257 300049 540D.1705 CONSTR. IN PROGRESS 3,409.60 54TH ST DOCS & CPS 378258 300181 01416.1705.21 CONSULTING INSPECTION 30,026.27 ARDEN PARK DOCS & CP 378261 300182 01412.1705.21 CONSULTING INSPECTION 16,966.51 ARDEN PARK DOCS & CP 378261 300182 05551.1705.21 CONSULTING INSPECTION 25,996.71 ARDEN PARK DOCS & CP 378261 300182 03487.1705.21 CONSULTING INSPECTION 13,539.72 ARDEN PARK DOCS & CP 378261 300182 04407.1705.21 CONSULTING INSPECTION • GOLF BALANCE SHEET 54TH ST BRIDGE&STREET REPAIR GLEN VIEWADDITION NHOOD RECON Arden Park D Reconstruction Arden Park D Reconstruction 54TH ST RECO*UCTION . 0 121,149.17 ACCESSORIES EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN • EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN R55CKR2 LOGIS101 395988 7/30/2015 SERVICES CUSTODIANS 101106 SERVICEMASTER CITY OF EDINA YORK OCCUPANCY 1,650.00 Council Check Register by GL 378170 51978 4090.6103 Council Check Register by Invoice & Summary TRASH ROOM CLEANING 378171 51979 1375.6103 7/30/2015 — 7/30/2015 3,300.00 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description 395987 7/30/2015 103249 SHANNON, JIM 100995 SEH Continued... 9,027.39 ROAD INTERSECTION IMPROV 378259 300183 01430.1705.20 CONSULTING DESIGN 5760.6136 18,127.94 MORNINGSIDE RECON 378262 300184 01422.1705.20 CONSULTING DESIGN 3,272.86 PARKLAWN AVE RECON 378260 300513 01429.1705.20 CONSULTING DESIGN PROFESSIONAL SERVICES PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 0 7/28/2015 15:06:03 Page - 27 Business Unit VALLEY VIEW & TRACY IMPR MORN'SIDE A & WHITE OAKS RECON PARKLAWN: FRANCE TO 78TH RECON 50TH&FRANCE MAINTENANCE PARKING RAMP PROFESSIONAL SVC - OTHER CENTENNIAL LAKES ADMIN EXPENSE DATA PROCESSING DATA PROCESSING DATA PROCESSING CONSTR. IN PROGRESS CENT SERV GEN - MIS CENT SERV GEN - MIS CENT SERV GEN - MIS GOLF BALANCE SHEET ACCESSORIES 121,149.17 ACCESSORIES EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN TOOLS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN TOOLS 395988 7/30/2015 SERVICES CUSTODIANS 101106 SERVICEMASTER SERVICES CUSTODIANS YORK OCCUPANCY 1,650.00 TRASH ROOM CLEANING 378170 51978 4090.6103 1,650.00 TRASH ROOM CLEANING 378171 51979 1375.6103 3,300.00 395989 7/30/2016 103249 SHANNON, JIM 150.00 CL PERFORMANCE 8/11/15 378358 071515 5760.6136 150.00 395990 7/30/2015 104098 SHI INTERNATIONAL CORP 534.00 MS EA RENEWAL 00004357 378173 B03644977 1554.6160 432.00 MS RENEWAL 00004357 378172 B03645167 1554.6160 49,591.00 MSEA RENEWAL 00004357 378174 B03645237 1554.6160 50,557.00 395991 7/30/2015 136840 SIMPLY DESIGNED 3,299.31 BANQUET ROOM FURNITURE 378424 BRAEMAR 5400.1705 3,299.31 395992 7/30/2015 100430 SNAP-ON INDUSTRIAL 527.04 TRUCKTOOLBOX 00005213 378325 ARV/25515514 1553.6585 527.04 TRUCK TOOLBOX 00005214 378326 ARV/25515515 1553.6585 69.62 SOCKETS, SCREWDRIVERS 00005533 378327 ARV/26283048 1553.6556 102.93 WRENCH, GRIP SET 00005537 376328 ARV/26283049 1553.6556 1,226.63 395993 7/30/2015 122800 SOUTH METRO CARPET & UPHOLSTERY 240.47 CARPET CLEANING 378176 1255C 5861.6162 240.47 CARPET CLEANING 378175 1256C 5841.6162 480.94 395994 7/30/2015 122368 SOUTH METRO PUBLIC SAFETY 100.00 TRAINING ROOM RENTAL 378329 118.3 5310.6105 100.00 , PROFESSIONAL SERVICES PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 0 7/28/2015 15:06:03 Page - 27 Business Unit VALLEY VIEW & TRACY IMPR MORN'SIDE A & WHITE OAKS RECON PARKLAWN: FRANCE TO 78TH RECON 50TH&FRANCE MAINTENANCE PARKING RAMP PROFESSIONAL SVC - OTHER CENTENNIAL LAKES ADMIN EXPENSE DATA PROCESSING DATA PROCESSING DATA PROCESSING CONSTR. IN PROGRESS CENT SERV GEN - MIS CENT SERV GEN - MIS CENT SERV GEN - MIS GOLF BALANCE SHEET ACCESSORIES EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN ACCESSORIES EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN TOOLS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN TOOLS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN SERVICES CUSTODIANS VERNON OCCUPANCY SERVICES CUSTODIANS YORK OCCUPANCY DUES & SUBSCRIPTIONS POOL ADMINISTRATION R55CKR2 LOGIS101 7/30/2015 CITY OF EDINA 116176 ST. CROIX HARLEY-DAVIDSON 7/28/2015 15:06:03 GEN TIRES & TUBES Council Check Register by GL GEN Page- 28 681.34 Council Check Register by Invoice & Summary 071615 GEN 1400.6215 7/30/2015 - 7/30/2015 681.34 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit 395995 7/30/2015 127878 SOUTHERN WINE AND SPIRITS 103265 STAN MORGAN & ASSOCIATES INC Continued... 2,069.75 378103 1305932 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING 3.00 378215 1305937 5862.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR VERNON SELLING 1.50 378214 1305939 5862.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR VERNON SELLING 557.40 378213 1308294 5822.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR 50TH ST SELLING 2,055.50 378477 1308295 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING .75 378105 1308296 5842.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR YORK SELLING 791.00 378479 1308297 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 2,374.27 378478 1308299 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 1,679.37 378104 1308300 5842.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR YORK SELLING 707.00 378217 1308301 5862.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR VERNON SELLING 6,445.43 378216 1308302 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 395996 7/30/2015 GEN 116176 ST. CROIX HARLEY-DAVIDSON EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN TIRES & TUBES EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN TIRES & TUBES 681.34 MOTORCYCLE MAINTENANCE 378263 071615 GEN 1400.6215 681.34 395997 7/30/2015 103265 STAN MORGAN & ASSOCIATES INC 330.00 COOLER REPAIR 378177 58475 5821.6180 330.00 395998 7/30/2015 133068 STEEL TOE BREWING LLC 159.50 378218 6001 5862.5514 159.50 395999 7/30/2015 136831 STEP BY STEP MONTESSORI 20.17 EDINBOROUGH OVERPAYMENT 378264 FIELD TRIP 5701.4541 20.17 396000 7/30/2015 104349 STRUCTURED NETWORK SOLUTIONS 95.00 CABLING 378052 18806 1554.6103 95.00 396001 7/30/2016 105874 SUBURBAN TIRE WHOLESALE INC. 280.18 TIRES 00005424 378053 10133169 1553.6583 27.50 TIRE DISPOSAL CHARGE 00005305 378331 10133247 1553.6583 1,509.84 TIRES 00005475 378054 10133380 1553.6583 35.75 TIRE DISPOSAL CHARGE 00005311 378333 10133390 1553.6583 60.50 SCRAP TIRE DISPOSAL 00005555 378330 10133581 1553.6583 195.52 TIRES 00005491 378332 10133821 1553.6583 EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE POLICE DEPT. GENERAL CONTRACTED REPAIRS 50TH ST OCCUPANCY COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER VERNON SELLING GENERAL ADMISSIONS EDINBOROUGH PARK REVENUES PROFESSIONAL SERVICES CENT SERV GEN - MIS TIRES & TUBES EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN TIRES & TUBES EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN TIRES & TUBES EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN TIRES & TUBES EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN TIRES & TUBES EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN TIRES & TUBES EQUIPMENT 0TION GEN R55CKR2 LOGIS101 CITY OF EDINA 7/28/2015 15:06:03 Council Check Register by GL Page- 29 Council Check Register by Invoice & Summary 7/30/2015 - 7/30/2015 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit 396001 7/30/2015 105874 SUBURBAN TIRE WHOLESALE INC. Continued... 2,109.29 396002 7/30/2015 113841 SUMMIT FIRE PROTECTION CO. 240.00 SPRINKLER INSPECTION 378334 1072687 5311.6180 CONTRACTED REPAIRS POOL OPERATION 240.00 396003 7/30/2015 102140 SUN MOUNTAIN SPORTS INC. 105.00 GOLF BAG 378425 267440 5440.5511 COST OF GOODS - PRO SHOP PRO SHOP RETAIL SALES 105.00 396004 -7/30/2015 121492 SUPERIOR TURF SERVICES INC. 160.31 TANK CLEANER 378056 11426 5422.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES MAINT OF COURSE & GROUNDS 320.63 DYE 378055 11447 5422.6545 CHEMICALS MAINT OF COURSE & GROUNDS 480.94 396005 7/30/2015 122511 SWANK MOTION PICTURES INC. 525.00 MOVIE RENTAL 378335 2072521 5760.6136 PROFESSIONAL SVC - OTHER CENTENNIAL LAKES ADMIN EXPENSE 525.00 396006 7/30/2015 106673 TAPCO 131.59 PEDESTRIAN LAMP 00001354 378265 1494749 2501.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES PACS IS 339.25 PEDESTAL BASE 00001354 378266 1495433 2501.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES PACS IS 470.84 396007 7/30/2015 104932 TAYLOR MADE 507.00 DRIVER 378427 30995052 5440.5511 COST OF GOODS - PRO SHOP PRO SHOP RETAIL SALES 975.00 GOLF CLUBS 378426 30995097 5440.5511 COST OF GOODS - PRO SHOP PRO SHOP RETAIL SALES 551.52 MERCHANDISE 378428 31003899 5440.5511 COST OF GOODS - PRO SHOP PRO SHOP RETAIL SALES 2,033.52 396008 7/30/2015 102798 THOMSON REUTERS -WEST 811.99 JUNE 2015 SERVICES 378057 832116283 1400.6105 DUES & SUBSCRIPTIONS POLICE DEPT. GENERAL 811.99 396009 7/30/2015 101035 THORPE DISTRIBUTING COMPANY 242.45 378429 907149 5421.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER GRILL 1,993.80 378219 907949 5862.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER VERNON SELLING 242.45 378430 908661 5421.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER GRILL 2,478.70 R55CKR2 LOGIS101 CITY OF EDINA Council Check Register by GL Council Check Register by Invoice & Summary 7/30/2015 — 7/30/2015 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description 396010 7/30/2015 124958 THURN BECK STEEL FABRICATION INC. Continued... 944.30 EDINA SPORTS DOME 378506 3 5550.1705 CONSTR. IN PROGRESS 7,720.65 EDINA SPORTS DOME 378507 4 5550.1705 CONSTR. IN PROGRESS 8,664.95 396011 7/30/2015 134673 TOTAL MECHANICAL SERVICES INC. 238.00 SOUTH MUNTERS UNIT REPAIR 378336 16810 5511.6180 CONTRACTED REPAIRS 529.50 ROOFTOP UNIT REPAIR 378337 16812 5511.6180 CONTRACTED REPAIRS 767.50 396012 7/30/2015 128835 TOWN & COUNTRY CLEANING CO. INC. 6,745.00 WINDOW CLEANING AT CITY HALL 378126 W715746 1551.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 6,745.00 396013 7/30/2015 136366 TRU NORTH PAINTING INC. 4,193.25 CAHILL/GRANGE PAINTING 378059 16155 1646.6530 REPAIR PARTS 4,193.25 396014 7/30/2015 101403 TRUCK BODIES & EQUIP INTL INC 41.08 HINGE PIN WELDEMENT 00005453 378058 LC00031786 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS 41.08 396015 7/30/2015 123969 TWIN CITIES OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH PC 325.00 PRE-EMPLOYMENT PHYSICALS 378338 072015 1556.6175 PHYSICAL EXAMINATIONS 325.00 396016 7/30/2016 101047 TWIN CITY GARAGE DOOR CO 166.25 EDINA SPORTS DOME 378508 2 5550.1705 CONSTR. IN PROGRESS 166.25 396017 7/30/2015. 102150 TWIN CITY SEED CO. 662.50 SEED 00005380 378061 35494 5422.6543 SOD & BLACK DIRT 662.50 396018 7/30/2015 134220 U.S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE 1,107.97 DEER MANAGEMENT 378062 3001713327 1509.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 1,107.97 396019 7/30/2015 120661 UNITED STATES TREASURY 176.80 2015 FEES 376431 2015 1556.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES • 176.80 0 7/28/2015 15:06:03 Page - 30 Business Unit SPORTS DOME BALANCE SHEET SPORTS DOME BALANCE SHEET ARENA BLDG/GROUNDS ARENA BLDG/GROUNDS CITY HALL GENERAL BUILDING MAINTENANCE EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN EMPLOYEE SHARED SERVICES SPORTS DOME BALANCE SHEET MAINT OF COURSE & GROUNDS DEER CONTROL EMPLOYEE SHARED SERVICES • • 7/28/2015 15:06:03 Page - 31 Business Unit PAMELA PK SHELTER & TURF CENTRAL SERVICES GENERAL YORK SELLING YORK SELLING CLUB HOUSE GOLF CARS GOLF CARS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN BREDESEN PARK COMFORT STATION ARENA CONCESSIONS GOLFREVENUES PARKADMIN. GENERAL CENTENNIAL LAKES ADMIN EXPENSE • • R55CKR2 LOGIS101 CITY OF EDINA Council Check Register by GL Council Check Register by Invoice & Summary 7/30/2015 — 7/30/2015 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description 396019 7/30/2015 120661 UNITED STATES TREASURY Continued... 396020 7/30/2015 127291 URBAN COMPANIES LLC 9,500.00 RETAINING WALLS 378355 51 47090.6710 EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT 9,500.00 396021 7/30/2015 100050 USPS 4,000.00 ACCT # 03620836 378435 072315 1550.6235 POSTAGE 4,000.00 396022 7/30/2015 101058 VAN PAPER CO. 21.67- CREDIT 378179 352545CM 5842.6512 PAPER SUPPLIES 695.98 TOWELS, TISSUE, BAGS 378178 355096-00 5842.6512 PAPER SUPPLIES 177.98 SOAP 378432 355675-00 5420.6511 CLEANING SUPPLIES 852.29 396023 7/30/2015 101063 VERSATILE VEHICLES INC. 156.54 KEYS 378063 709150010 5423.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES 144.28 BATTERY 00006383 378064 713150014 5423.6530 REPAIR PARTS 241.72 CARBURETOR, FUEL PUMP 00005454 376065 717150002 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS 542.54 396024 7/30/2015 101066 VIKING ELECTRIC SUPPLY INC. 228.14 LIGHT FIXTURES 00001347 378066 9497768 47094.6710 EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT 228.14 396025 7/30/2015 133629 VON HANSONS MEATS 31.79 BRATS 378340 89337 5520.5510 COST OF GOODS SOLD 31.79 396026 7/30/2015 136845 WAHL, JESSICA 120.00 CANCEL GOLF LESSONS 376433 REFUND 5401.4602 LESSONS 120.00 396027 7/30/2015 136796 WELLMANN, JULIE 63.00 TENNIS PROGRAM 378130 REFUND 1600.4390.02 TENNIS PROGRAM 63.00 396028 7/30/2015 124556 WILD HONEY 150.00 CL PERFORMANCE 8/10/15 378356 070115 5760.6136 PROFESSIONAL SVC - OTHER 150.00 • 7/28/2015 15:06:03 Page - 31 Business Unit PAMELA PK SHELTER & TURF CENTRAL SERVICES GENERAL YORK SELLING YORK SELLING CLUB HOUSE GOLF CARS GOLF CARS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN BREDESEN PARK COMFORT STATION ARENA CONCESSIONS GOLFREVENUES PARKADMIN. GENERAL CENTENNIAL LAKES ADMIN EXPENSE R55CKR2 LOGIS101 CITY OF EDINA 7/28/2015 15:06:03 Council Check Register by GL Page- 32 Council Check Register by Invoice & Summary 7/30/2015 - 7/30/2015 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit 396028 7/30/2016 124656 WILD HONEY Continued... 396029 7/30/2016 101312 WINE MERCHANTS 1,164.70 378107 7038798 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING 1,113.80 378485 7039681 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING 24.16 378486 7039682 5822.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX 50TH ST SELLING 296.32 378487 7039683 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 186.56 378224 7039684 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 1,476.64 378223 7039686 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 4,262.18 396030 7/30/2015 130471 WINFIELD SOLUTIONS LLC 513.00 DROPLEX 00006379 378067 60289569 5422.6545 CHEMICALS MAINT OF COURSE & GROUNDS 513:00 396031 7/30/2015 124291 WIRTZ BEVERAGE MINNESOTA 1,715.84 378108 1080347713 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING 146.30 378113 1080350569 5862.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX VERNON SELLING 4,696.12 378114 1080350570 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 7,378.94 378227 1080350571 5862.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR VERNON SELLING 1,904.97 378225 1080350572 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING 1,321.57 378226 1080350573 5822.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR 50TH ST SELLING 1,788.61 378111 1080350604 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 9,446.92 378112 1080350605 5842.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR YORK SELLING 114.75 378110 1080350606 5842.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX YORK SELLING 56.30 378109 1080350607 5842.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR YORK SELLING 268.96- 378488 2080086580 5842.5513 _ COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 37.15- 378116 2080094647 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 62.00- 378117 2080096533 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 28.00- 378115 2060096536 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 28,174.21 396032 7/30/2015 124629 WIRTZ BEVERAGE MINNESOTA BEER INC 4,014.05 378119 1090434304 5822.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER 50TH ST SELLING 1,180.10 378118 1090437825 5822.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER 50TH ST SELLING 477.80 378434 1090437828 5421.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER GRILL 1,628.90 378123 1090438131 5862.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER VERNON SELLING 2,039.60 378120 1090438629 5842.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER YORK SELLING 138.45 378122 1090436630 5842.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER YORK SELLING 46.20 378121 1090438691 5842.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX YORK SELLING • 4,652.00 378492 1090441402 • 5862.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER VERNON SELO • 7/28/2015 15:06:03 Page - 33 Business Unit 50TH ST SELLING YORK SELLING YORK SELLING FRANCE AVE LANDSCAPE PLAN TRACYAVE BA -377 VALLEY VIEW RD TRAFFIC SIGNALS STREET LIGHTING ORNAMENTAL STREET LIGHTING REGULAR EDINBOROUGH OPERATIONS ART CENTER ADMINISTRATION YORK SELLING 50TH ST SELLING PLAYGROUND & THEATER R55CKR2 LOGIS101 CITY OF EDINA Council Check Register by GL Council Check Register by Invoice & Summary 7/30/2015 — 7/30/2015 Check # Date Amount Supplier/ Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description 396032 7/30/2016 124629 WIRTZ BEVERAGE MINNESOTA BEER INC Continued... 1,752.35 378489 1090441404 5822.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER 4,775.17 378491 1090441405 5842.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER 110.00 378490 1090441406 5842.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER 2D,814.62 396033 7/30/2015 106740 WSB & ASSOCIATES INC. - 4,057.00 LANDSCAPING CONSTRUCTION 378269 2-01686-610 01259.1705.20 CONSULTING DESIGN 3,886.50 TRACYAVE PHASE 2 378268 2-01686-640 01399.1705.20 CONSULTING DESIGN 38,833.75 FINAL DESIGN 378267 7-01686-590 01377.1705.21 CONSULTING INSPECTION 46,777.25 396034 7/30/2015 101726 XCEL ENERGY 54.52 51-5276505-8 378070 464172594 1330.6185 LIGHT & POWER 89.72 51-0010025256-3 378069 464240151 1322.6185 LIGHT & POWER 14.50 51-0010613106-9 378068 464257443 1321.6185 LIGHT & POWER 12,389.48 51-6644819-9 378436 465402662 5720.6185 LIGHT & POWER 12,548.22 396035 7/30/2015 129312 YOUTH TECH INC. 1,877.50 GAMINGACADEMY 378341 4679 5110.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 1,877.50 396036 7/30/2015 120099 Z WINES USA LLC 223.50 378494 15057 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 149.00 378493 15058 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 372.50 396037 7/30/2015 133014 SOCCER SHOTS 5,994.00 SPRING SOCCER SEASON 376786 051315 1624.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 5,994.00 1,375,605.91 Grand Total Payment Instrument Totals Checks 1,215,722.50 A/P ACH Payment 159,883.41 Total Payments 1,375,605.91 • 7/28/2015 15:06:03 Page - 33 Business Unit 50TH ST SELLING YORK SELLING YORK SELLING FRANCE AVE LANDSCAPE PLAN TRACYAVE BA -377 VALLEY VIEW RD TRAFFIC SIGNALS STREET LIGHTING ORNAMENTAL STREET LIGHTING REGULAR EDINBOROUGH OPERATIONS ART CENTER ADMINISTRATION YORK SELLING 50TH ST SELLING PLAYGROUND & THEATER R55CKS2 LOGIS100 CITY OF EDINA Note: Payment amount may not reflect the actual amount due to data sequencing and/or data selection. Council Check Summary 7/30/2015 - 7/30/2015 Company Amount 01000 GENERAL FUND 195,045.20 02300 POLICE SPECIAL REVENUE 313.76 02500 PEDESTRIAN AND CYCLIST SAFETY 519.84 04000 WORKING CAPITAL FUND 579,317.21 04200 EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT FUND 63,854.05 04500 CANDO FUND 4,266.25 05100 ART.CENTER FUND 6,696.16 05200 GOLF DOME FUND 64.00 05300 AQUATIC CENTER FUND 17,494.35 05400 GOLF COURSE FUND 69,610.93 05500 ICE ARENA FUND 71,753.12 05550 SPORTS DOME FUND 59,247.63 05700 EDINBOROUGH PARK FUND 22,740.90 05750 CENTENNIAL LAKES PARK FUND 2,440.63 05800 LIQUOR FUND 187,459.56 05900 UTILITY FUND 67,482.91 05930 STORM SEWER FUND 19,852.77 07400 PSTF AGENCY FUND 5,327.74 09900 PAYROLL FUND 2,118.90 Report Totals 1,375,605.91 We confirm to the best of our knowledge and belief, that these claims comply in all material respects with the requirements of the City of Edina purchasing policies and procedures date i/ nce Direc or nag r is 0 7/28/2015 15:06:13 Page - 1 0 To: Mayor & City Council From: Scott Denfeld, Video Production Coordinator Date: July 28, 2015 Subject: Request for Purchase — Council Chambers AN System Upgrade Date Bid Opened or Quote Received: July 28, 2015 Company: Alpha Video AVI Systems CompView Recommended Quote or Bid: Alpha Video o e o Agenda Item #: IV. C. The Recommended Bid is ❑ Within Budget 0 Not Within Budget Bid or Expiration Date: August 27, 2015 Amount of Quote or Bid: $142,316.38 $145,441.58 $154,926.16 $142,316.38 General Information: Since 2009, we have planned for the upgrade and replacement of the production equipment in the Council Chambers. The goal of this project is to replace equipment that is nearing its end -of -life term and to upgrade the system to full high-definition broadcast capability. This project includes the following upgrades and replacements: • Camera Systems — The current cameras are not high definition -compatible and must be replaced. • Chamber Monitors — All of the monitors around the dais, as well as the monitor at the main podium, will be replaced. The two large display screens in the Chambers will remain. • Video Routing System — The current video routing system is an analog setup and must be converted to digital. This will include replacing all of the cabling as well as the video processing and distribution equipment in the AN Control Room. This will convert the system to a high-definition system. • Crestron Touchpanel Control System — The Crestron system works as the master control system for the Chambers AN system. With new panels and hardware, we will be able to create different user profiles, therefore simplifying the use of the system for staff, the majority of whom do not need access to the control of the entire system. City of Edina • 4801 W. 50th St. • Edina, MN 55424 REQUEST FOR PURCHASE IN EXCESS OF $20,000/CHANGE ORDER Page 2 Alpha Video was the chosen vendor based not only on providing the lowest bid, but also due to our past positive experiences with them and their familiarity with our system. They also provided the proposal that was closest to our specific needs. This project is classified as "Not Within Budget." We originally budgeted $150,000 for this project. While Alpha Video's quote came in under that amount, it does not include the production switcher, which is the main control unit for live video production. It was critical to us that we got the production switcher that we felt best fit our needs. Because not every bidding vendor carries our chosen switcher, we decided to classify it as a separate purchase so as to not eliminate them from consideration. The cost of the switcher is approximately $14,000 (we are still gathering our estimates at this time). So, with that added to Alpha Video's quote of $142,316.38, we are over the $150,000 budget. However, this expense is being taken from our overall budget of PEG fees, and there are enough funds to cover this project. There are two optional items on the estimate. I have decided to discard the first option, which would have installed a high definition Blu-ray player in the dais. I felt it was not worth the cost to add a piece of equipment that would likely not be used very often. This is an item that could be added later if the demand shows that it is there. The second option is adding a "request -to -speak" system. This would add the capability for Council, commission or board members to signal electronically to the mayor or chair that they would like to speak. It is a low-cost way of adding this functionality using existing equipment. This can be added if the Council determines it is something they would like to utilize. The cost to add it is $535, which would be in addition to the amount given above. • Work is expected to begin on Thursday, September 17th, and conclude around or before September 29th. There are no meetings scheduled in the Chambers during this time. With this upgrade to a new AN production system, the City of Edina will continue to offer high-quality video broadcasts of the City's meetings. Staff recommends awarding the Chambers AN System Upgrade project to Alpha Video. • City of Edina • 4801 W. 50th St. • Edina, MN 55424 9 7690 Golden Triangle Dr Eden Prairie, MN 55344 952.896.9898 i info@alphavideo.com 800.388.0008 www.alphavideo.com Walphavideo July 28th, 2015 City of Edina 4801 West 50th Street Edina, MN 55424 RE: Council Chamber AV System Project Thank you for the opportunity to provide you with a response to your request for a bid for updating the AV technology within the Council Chambers. Please note the following in regard to the bid: • Alpha Video Quotation AAA032183-02 provides detailed pricing for the Base System. The Base System includes pricing for hardware, installation and office labor, Installation materials, 40 hours of system training, 1 year system guarantee, required bonds and tax. • The Base Bid price does not include Option1: Blu-Ray Player or Option 2: Request to Speak Crestron Programming. Pricing for these options are provided on the Alpha Video Quotation AAAQ32183-02. • Year 2 and 3 Service Contract pricing is provided on Alpha Video Quotation AAAQ32183-02. Detailed information on the services as well as service rates are provided within the Service Agreement section of this response. Please feel free to contact me if you have any questions. Sincerely, Mike Pouh Alpha Video (952)841-3365 Mike.pouh@alphavideo.com 3 Comp).tfer Ar� 9�Mt;�`§s 9898 i ia, NIN'55435 800 3 8{1008 • • 0 L C0NTRACTOR: (Name, legal status and address) Alpha Video and Audio, Inc. 7690 Golden Triangle Drive Eden Prairie, MN 55344 OWNER: (1Vame, legal status and address) City of Edina 4801 West 50th Street Edina, MN 55424 BOND AMOUNT: 5% CNASURETY Bond No. Did Bond SURETY:Western Surety Company SD Corporation (Name, legal status and principal place of business) 333 S. Wabash Avenue 41st Floor Chicago, IL 60604 Five Percent of Amount Bid PROJECT: (Name, location or address, and Project number, if any) 2015 City Council Chambers AudioNisual Systems Project This document has Important legal consequences. Consultation with an attorney Is encouraged with respect to its completion or modification. Any singular reference to Contractor, Surety, Owner or other party shall be considered plural where applicable. The Contractor and Surety are bound to the Owner in the amount set forth above, for the payment of which the Contractor and Surety bind themselves, their heirs, executors, administrators, successors and assigns, jointly and severally, as provided herein. The conditions of this Bond are such that if the Owner accepts the bid of the Contractor within the time specified in the bid documents, or within such time period as may be agreed to by the Owner and Contractor, and the Contractor either (1) enters into a contract with the Owner in accordance with the terms of such bid, and gives such bond or bonds as may be specified in the bidding or Contract Documents, with a surety admitted in the jurisdiction of the Project and otherwise acceptable to the Owner, for the faithful performance of such Contract and for the prompt payment of labor and material furnished in the prosecution thereof; or (2) pays to the Owner the difference, not to exceed the amount of this Bond, between the amount specified in said bid and such larger amount for which the Owner may in good faith contract with another party to perform the work covered by said bid, then this - obligation shall be null and void, otherwise to remain in full force and effect. The Surety hereby waives any notice of an agreement between the Owner and Contractor to extend the time in which the Owner may accept the bid. Waiver of notice by the Surety shall not apply to any extension exceeding sixty (60) days in the aggregate beyond the time for acceptance of bids specified in the bid documents, and the Owner and Contractor shall obtain the Surety's consent for an extension beyond sixty (60) days. , If this Bond is issued in connection with a subcontractor's bid to a Contractor, the term Contractor in this Bond shall be deemed to be Subcontractor and the term Owner shall be deemed to be Contractor. When this Bond has been furnished.to ..comply with a statutory or other legal requirement in the location of the Project, any provision in this Bond conflicting with said statutory or legal requirement shall be deemed deleted herefrom and provisions conforming to such statutory or other legal requirement shall be deemed incorporated herein. When so furnished, the intent is that this Bond shall be construed as a statutory bond and not as a common law bond. Signed and sealed this 28th day of July 2015 Alpha Video and A42lio, Inc. (Principal) (Seal) (Title) Western Surety Company (Surety,)'' r, n--� _ I(Seal) (TitJOR-my JN. Burns , Attorney -in -Fact Panted in cooperation with the Arnatican Institute ol'Architects (AIA), Phe language In this document conforms to the language used In AIA DocurnentA310 - BId i3ond- 2010 Edition. CORPORATE ACKNOWLEDGMENT STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF He ; , .� On this 28th day of July, 2015 before me personally appeared ILCeJ t ,r\ Gry✓�s to me known, who being by me duly sworn, did say that he/she is the V, of the Alpha Video and Audio, Inc., the corporation described in and which executed the foregoing instrument; that he/she knows the seal of said corporation; that the seal affixed to said instrument is such corporate seal; that it was so affixed by order of the Board of Directors of said corporation; and that he/she signed his/her name thereto by like order. Notary Public, ACKNOWLEDGMENT OF CORPORATE SURETY STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF HENNEPIN On this 28th day of July, 2015 before me personally appeared Amy M. Bums to me known, who being by me duly sworn, did say that she is the aforesaid Attorney -in -Fact of the WESTERN SURETY COMPANY, a corporation; that the seal affixed to the foregoing instrument is the corporate seal of said corporation, and that said instrument was signed and sealed on behalf of said corporation by the aforesaid officer, by authority of its Board of directors; and the aforesaid officer acknowledged said instrument to be the free act and deed of said corporation. Notary Public, (Notary Seal) KESHA N GREENE NOTAWFUBUC•MiNNESOTA WCOMMISSIONEXPIRES 1131117 I • 0 • • • Western Surety Company POWER OF ATTORNEY APPOINTING INDIVIDUAL ATI'ORNEWIN-FACT Know All Men By These Presents, That WESTERN SURETY COMPANY, a South Dakota corporation, is a duly organized and existing corporation having its principal office in the City of Sioux Falls, and State of South Dakota, and that it does by virtue of the sigratwe and seal herein affixed hereby make, constitute and appoint Amy M. Burns, Individually of St Louis Park, M N its tree and lawful Attomey(s)-in-Fact with full power and authority hereby conferred to sign, seal and execute for and on its behalf bonds, undertakings and other obligatory instruments of similar nature -In Unlimited Amounts - Surety BondNo.: Bid Bond Principal: Alpha Video and Audio, Inc. obligee_ City of Edina and to bind it thereby as fully and to the samo extent as if such instruments were signed by a duly authorized officer of the corporation and all the acts of said Attomcy, pursuant to the authority hereby given, are hereby ratified and confirmed. This Power of Attamey is made and executed pursuant to and by authority of the By -Law printed on the reverse hereof; duly adopted, as indicated, by the shareholders of the corporation. In Witness Whereof, WESTERN SURELY COMPANY has caused these presents to be signed by its Vice President and its corporate seal to be hereto affixed on this 22nd day ofMay, 2015. Q�c� WESTERN SURETY COMPANY 0 a � awr0� 41 T. Vice President State of South Dakota ss Countyof Minnebaba On this 22nd day of May, 2015, before me personally came Paul T. Brufiat, tome known, who, being by me duly sworn, did depose and say: that he resides in the City of Sioux Falls, State of South Dakota; that he is the Vice Pmsident of WESTERN SURETY COMPANY described in and which executed the above instrument; that he knows the seal of said corporation; that the seal affixed to the said instrument is such corporate seal; that it was so affixed pursuant to authority given by the Board of Directors of said corporation and that he signed his name thereto prusuant to like authority, and acknowledges same to be the act rued deed of said corporation. My commission expires } ' S. ETCH February 12, 2021J t1OU'Mf PU6LIC/ + sout►1 loA MA l�r.�ti44}V V�r1.� a.�.4�.KM�tititi �' S. Eich, Notary Public CERTIFICATE L L. Nelson, Assistant Secretary of WESTERN SURETY COMPANY do hereby cert fy that the Power of Attorney hereinabove set forth is stili in force, and further ce>tify that the By -Law of the corporation printed on the reverse hercofis still in force. In testimony whereof I have hereunto subscribed my name and affixed the seal of the said corporation this 28th day of July 2015 at WESTERN SURETY COMPANY bQ lf 4Qe��F k y� eM L Nelson, Ass stunt Sceret ry Form F4290-7-2012 Authorizing By -Law ADOPTED BY TIIE SHAREHOLDERS OF WESTERN SURETY COMPANY This Power of Attorney is made and executed pursuant to and by authority of the following By -Law duly adopted by the shareholders of the Company. Section 7. All bonds, policies, undertakings, Powers of Attorney, or other obligations of the corporation shall be executed in the corporate name of the Company by the President, Secretary, and Assistant Secretary, Treasurer, or any Vice President, or by such other officers as the Board of Directors may authorize, The President, any Vice President, Secretary, any Assistant Secretary, or the Treasurer may appoint Attorneys in Fact or agents who shall have authority to issue bonds, policies, or undertakings in the name of the Company. The corporate seal is not necessary for the validity of any bonds, policies, undertakings, Powers of Attorney or other obligations of the corporation. The signature of any such officer and the corporate scat may be printed by facsimile. :7 • BID PROPOSAL FOR: BID TO: BID FORM CITY OF EDINA COUNCIL CHAMBERS AV SYSTEMS PROJECT 4801 West 501h Street EDINA, MN 55424 CITY OF EDINA 4801 West 501h Street EDINA, MN 55424 BID FROM: Alpha Video and Audio, Inc. We have examined the Contract Documents for the proposed City of Edina Council Chamber— AV Systems Project as prepared by TouchPoint Logic, Chanhassen, Minnesota and the conditions affecting the work. In accordance therewith the undersigned proposed to furnish all labor and materials for Construction as set forth in the Contract Documents. 1. Accompanying this proposal is a Bid Security for all work, required to be furnished by • Contract Documents, the same being subject to forfeiture in the event of default by the undersigned. 2. I agree to complete the Project, provided a contract is executed within thirty (30) calendar days, by Friday, October 2, 2015. 3, 1 understand the Owner reserves the right to reject any or all bids, and it is agreed that this bid may not be withdrawn for a period of thirty (30) days from the opening thereof, 4. 1 agree that my bid will include a copy of the Equipment list, with all the unit prices indicated, for Architecturally Integrated Audio -Video Equipment—Council Chambers and Control Room. Base Bid — Council Chambers and Control Room AV Systems The Bidder agrees to perform all work for the Base Bid Sum of: One hundred forty-two thousand three hundred sixteen and thirty-eight cents Dollars $ 142,316.38 DATE: 7/27/2015 FIRM NAME: Alpha Video and Audio, Inc. ADDRESS: 7690 Golden Triangle Drive Eden Prairie, MN 55344 mike.pouh@alphavideo.com Page 17 TELEPHONE NUMBER: ( 952 ) 841 3365 FAX NUMBER: ( 952 ) 896 - 9899 BY: Mike Pouh TITLE: Account Executive STATEMENT OF COMPLIANCE WITH WORKERS COMPENSATION ACT • Page One of Two The undersigned hereby states that (he) (she) (it) is in full compliance with Minnesota Worker's Compensation Act, M.S.A. 176.01 et. seq., and gives this Statement as evidence thereof as per Minnesota Statutes, Section 176.182. The undersigned hereby states that (he) (she) (it) carries workers compensation insurance in the amount of $1,000,000 in compliance with Minnesota Statutes, Section 176.181(2). The undersigned hereby states that if (he) (she) (it) is exempt from the Minnesota Worker's Compensation Act forthe following reason(s): That the only persons engaged in the businesses are: The partners, their spouses, parents or children, regardless of age; or The executive officer, who owns more than 25% of the stock, his or her spouse, parents or children, regardless of age, of a closely held corporation with less than 22,880 hours of payroll per year; or Persons whose employment is casual, and not in the usual course of the trade, business, profession or occupation of the undersigned; or Persons employed by the corporation where those persons are related by blood or marriage, within the third degree of kindred according to the rules of civil law; to all of the officers of the corporation and the corporation has filed a written election with the Commissioner of Labor and Industry to have those persons excluded from the Minnesota Worker's Compensation Act; or Other: (Cite Legal Authority) The undersigned shall indemnify, defend and hold the City of Edina harmless from any and all damages and claims that may arise by reason of any injury to the undersigned,(his) (her) (its) agents or employees, in the performance of the contract with the City; and in case any action is brought therefore against the City of Edina, the undersigned shall assume full responsibility for the defense thereof, and upon (his) (her) (its) failure to do soon proper notice, the City of Edina reserves the right to defend such action and to charge all costs thereof to the undersigned. In furtherance of this statement of compliance with Minnesota Statutes, Section 176.182, the undersigned of the attached certificate of workers' compensation insurance that provides the name of the insurance company, the policy number and dates of coverage or the attached copy of the permit to self -insure. Page 18 • • I STATEMENT OF COMPLIANCE WITH WORKERS COMPENSATION ACT Page Two of Two Dated this 27th day of July . 20 1S Alpha Video and Audio, Inc. Contracts irm Name Sig ature Cesar ry <<Rr Title 7690 Golden Triangle Drive Address Eden Prairie, MN 55344 City State Zip 952-841-3365 Telephone Number CORPORATE ACKNOWLEDGMENT • Dated this L7thday of July 2015 . Alpha Video and Audio, Inc. 7690 Golden Triangle Drive Eden Prairie, MN 55344 Subscribed and sworn to before me this 27thday of July , 2015 . ANDREW PAUL MISKOWiEC v Notary Public Minnesota t %1 ommissionEx ire3po 31 2620 Page 9 Walphavideo 7690 Golden Triangle Drive, Eden Prairie, MN 55344 Phone: 952-896-9898 - Fax 952-896-9899 -Visit us at www.alphavideo.com Jennifer Bennerotte City of Edina 4801 W. 50th St. Edina, MN 55424 USA Quotation 07/27/15 1 AMQ32183-01 I EDI004 We are an equal opportunity employer Phone: (952)833-9520 Mike Pouh Fax: 952)826-0390 Sales Executive Terms: NET 30 952-841-3365 Ship via: Best Way mike.pouh@alphavideo.com BASE SYSTEM 1 Pro3 Crestron 3 -Series Control System 1 $2,940.00 $2,940.00 2 TPMC-V15-B Crestron V -Panel Integrated 15" HD 1 $4,440.00 $4,440.00 Touch Screen, Black 3 TSW-552-B-S Crestron 5' Touch Screen, Black 2 $720.00 $1,440.00 Smooth 4 TSW-550-TTK-B-S Crestron TableTop Kit for TSW -550, 2 $85.00 $170.00 Black Smooth 5 TSW-1052-B-S Crestron 10.1" Touch Screen, Black 1 $1,330.00 $1,330.00 Smooth 6 TSW-1050-TTK-B-S Crestron TableTop Kit for TSW -1050, 1 $135.00 $135.00 7 FT-TSC600-B Black Smooth Crestron Flip -Top Touch Screen -Black 1 $1,830.00 $1,830.00 • 8 FTA-PWR-102 Crestron Flip -Top AC Power Outlet 1 $90.00 $90.00 Module, Dual, US NEMA 5, Type B 9 GLS-ODT-C-CN Crestron Dual Technology Occupancy 1 $155.00 $155.00 Sensor with Cresnet, 2000 Sq Ft 10 BRCZ330 Sony HD 113 1CMOS P/T/Z Color 5 $3,270.00 $16,350.00 Video Camera 11 BRBKIP10 Sony HDSDI Output Board for BRCZ330 5 $1,320.00 $6,600.00 12 BRCWMZ330 Sony Wall Mount Bracket - 5 $165.00 $825.00 13 RM-IP10 Sony Camera Controller 1 $1,640.00 $1,640.00 14 43042 Winsted 45" Steel Top and Modesty 1 $460.00 $460.00 Panel 15 43044 Winsted 57" Steel Top and Modesty 1 $510.00 $510.00 Panel 16 43061 Winsted E-Soc End Frames 1 $415.00 $415.00 17 43062 Winsted E-Soc Intermediate Frame 1 $355.00 $355.00 18 43542 Winsted 48" Endurance Plus Work 1 $310.00 $310.00 Surface 19 43544 Winsted 60" Endurance Plus Work 1 $380.00 $380.00 Surface 20 E5082 Winsted Double LCD Pole Mount 2 $520.00 $1,040.00 07/27/15 CONFIDENTIAL Page 1 of 3 ��Q ����\/|�-�/—�/~� e N��0��y� 0H�� \/ |�~����\.� Page 2 o 3 Quotation 7690 Golden Triangle Drive Eden Prairie, MN 55344 Phone: 952-896-9898 Fax 952-896-9899 Visit uoatvmxw.o|phavideo.00m VVoare unequal opportunity employer 21 W6493 Winsted 2 Articulating Arm Mounts- 1 $555-00 $555.00 uo.5"Post 22 prmn'1* Middle Atlantic 14 Space nN||ng Rack 1 $455.00 $455.00 23 seK'+*25-/w Middle Atlantic pRKSeries Rack, 44U.28^ 1 $1.275.00 $1.275.00 Deep 24 cpn'10'16 Middle Atlantic 1nSpace Equipment Rack 1 $195.00 $195.00 25 xopmoo Chief Kontou/xoPole Mount with 13 *85-00 $1.105.00 Extreme Tilt Pitch/Pivot 26 x1o12013 Chief Height -Adjustable Dual Arm 1 $145-00 $145,00 Desk Mount 27 om'mo16xl6 Cmmmn1nx10Digital Media 3witcher l $4.775.00 $4'775.00 28 oMc'C CmxtmnUD8mmaTCertified Digital s $610.00 $3.050.00 Media 0G+=Input Card 29 oMo'So/ Cnas\mnSDI Input Card z $005.00 $1.330.00 30 omc~*w'xo cnsvtnnnUoM| Input Card 1 $445.00 $445.00 31 oMo~4x'co'*o Cmstmn2'Channe|HD8aoeTCertified 4 $720.00 $2.880.00 4KDigital Media a8+Output Card 32 oMo'aTno omstmnStreaming Output Card 1 $1.065-00 $1.665.00 33 om-rx-201'o oestmn Digital Media uG+Transmitter 5 $720.00 $3,600.00 201 34 oM'nmu'muxLsm-C Cestmn Digital Media aG+ Roceiv°,& 7 $775.00 S5.425.00 Room Controller *YSoo/or 35 aMo'oowvmanx^n G|uokmogicDesign Mini Converter SDI toHoM| 1 $200.00 $200»0 30 omo'nnmvMa*m24n D|aokmagicDesign Mini Converter noM|toSDI 2 $200.00 $520.00 37 vM-16* Kramer 1:1*HoM/Distribution 1 $815.00 $015.00 Amplifier aa APC UPS Network Management Card 4 $390o0 $1'560.00 z 39 owmuocoo Samsung 4u^HID Monitor for connection m 1 $485o0 $495.00 Pmouctionewitcxer 40 AsW-5*13oc Audio To^hnimyDual Channel Wireless System 1 $2.830.00 S2.830.00 41 oomA Audio TovhnioaCardioid Condenser Boundary o $210.00 *420.00 Microphone *z ow24**500m`nZ^ Samsung 24''TVmn | ob|o 1 *205.00 $205.00 v'awu2: Live Tvmonitor Connected m Comcast box 43 ozxCvmmp Samsung 22''Computer monimr(1soox1o0V 10 $255.00 $4.080.00 resolution) SubTotal $79.500.00 44 mnoxvmev |nxtaUu iom Labor 1 *35,32000 $35.32000 45 Alpha Video Installation Materials $8,80G.00 S8'80000 07127/15 Comnoswnm- Page uofs SubTotal $51,885.00 48 Alpha Video Payment & Performance Bonds 1 $1,280.00 $1,280.00 SubTotal $1,280.00 49 Running SubTotal $132,665.00 Sub Total $132,665.00 A 3% convenience will be added for credit card payments. Sales Tax $9,651.38 Shipping $0.00 Total $142,316.38 Accepted by: Date: PO: All information contained within this quote is valid for the next 30 days. Thereafter, all prices and applicable charges are subject to change. MINIMUM 15% RESTOCKING FEE WITH ORIGINAL PACKAGING. • Ask 07/27/15 CONFIDENTIAL Page 3 of 3 alphavideo 7690 Golden Triangle Drive, Eden Prairie, MN 55344 Phone: 952-896-9898 - Fax 952-896-9899 - Visit us at www.alphavideo.com Quotation 07/27(15 1 AAAQ32183-02 I ED1004 We are an equal opportunity employer Jennifer Bennerotte Phone: (952)833-9520 Mike Pouh City of Edina 4801 W. 50th St. Fax: 952)826-0390 Sales Executive Edina, MN 55424 Terms: NET 30 952-841-3365 USA Ship via: Best Way mike.pouh@alphavideo.com Service Contract Options 10 Year 2 Service Contract Alpha Video Service Contract 1 $6,320.00 $6,320.00 11 Year 3 Service Contract Alpha Video Service Contract 1 $6,400.00 $6,400.00 SubTotal $12,720.00 Sub Total $15,835.00 A 3% convenience will be added for credit card payments. Sales Tax $1,152.00 Shipping $0.00 Total $16,987.00 Accepted by: Date: PO: All information contained within this quote is valid for the next 30 days. Thereafter, all prices and applicable charges are subject to change. MINIMUM 15% RESTOCKING FEE WITH ORIGINAL PACKAGING. 07/28/15 CONFIDENTIAL Page 1 of 1 Option 1: Slu-Ray Player 1 DMC -C Crestron HDBaseT Certified Digital 1 $610.00 $610.00 Media 8G+TM Input Card 2 DM -TX -201-C Crestron Digital Media 8G+ Transmitter 1 $720.00 $720.00 201 3 BLU -RAY PLAYER Blu-Ray Player 1 $220.00 $220.00 4 IRP2 Crestron IR Emitter Probe 1 $30.00 $30.00 SubTotal $1,580.00 5 Alpha Video Installation Labor 1 $845.00 $845.00 6 Alpha Video Installation Materials 1 $155.00 $155.00 SubTotal $1,000.00 7 Running SubTotal $2,580.00 Option 2: Request to Speak Crestron Programming 8 Alpha Video Installation Labor 1 $535.00 $535.00 SubTotal $535.00 9 Running SubTotal $3,115.00 Service Contract Options 10 Year 2 Service Contract Alpha Video Service Contract 1 $6,320.00 $6,320.00 11 Year 3 Service Contract Alpha Video Service Contract 1 $6,400.00 $6,400.00 SubTotal $12,720.00 Sub Total $15,835.00 A 3% convenience will be added for credit card payments. Sales Tax $1,152.00 Shipping $0.00 Total $16,987.00 Accepted by: Date: PO: All information contained within this quote is valid for the next 30 days. Thereafter, all prices and applicable charges are subject to change. MINIMUM 15% RESTOCKING FEE WITH ORIGINAL PACKAGING. 07/28/15 CONFIDENTIAL Page 1 of 1 r --I IMA )2�7alphavidea F� 7690 Golden Triangle Or.. 952.896.9898 j info@alphavideo.com Eden Prairie, MN 55344 1 800.388.0008 1 www.alphavideo.com Ittisfiu'ti x i ry FFi. "xwa§^s YSx2 ag�5 a ga t 3n ,2 f� �`. 0 Service Agreement This service agreement between City of Edina, (Client) and Alpha Video describes certain services Alpha Video shall furnish related to a system owned or supervised by the Client. These services will be rendered in consideration of a fee paid by the Client to Alpha Video. This agreement will be executed for each system/room and includes only those components as described in Addendum #1. System Location (Site): Edina City Hall 4801 W 501h St Edina, Mn 55424 System(s) Description(s): Council Chamber Upgrade. Service Response: 1. Phone Support • Alpha Video will respond within 1-2 hours of client request for phone support. Alpha Video will make every reasonable effort to restore the system(s) to normal functionality by using an on- site employee of the Client that is familiar with the systems and their functionality. If repairs or restoration of functionality are not possible during the initial service phone call Alpha Video's support technician may request a remote login session or consultation with a manufacturer, prior to further support. Hours for support are Monday through Friday from the hours of 8am to 5pm. Holidays that Alpha Video honor are not covered for support. See Addendum #2. On-site Support Our technician will be on-site within 1-2 days after that notification. Alpha Video will make every reasonable effort to restore the system(s) to its normal function. If permanent repairs are not possible during the service call due to lack of parts, availability or failed equipment, permanent repairs will be made as soon as the equipment is repaired or parts can be obtained. Alpha Video may request to re -configure the room(s) / system(s) for some functionality while the failed components(s) are repaired. This technician may be a subcontractor working on behalf of Alpha Video. Shipping costs for parts and equipment are included. All costs for the technician's labor and travel are covered. All costs for internal processing labor at Alpha Video are covered. Alpha Video does not cover the expense of equipment failures, parts or repairs that are out of the manufacturer's warranty or if the equipment has been abused or used outside of its normal. operation procedure. If Alpha Video's Rental Dept. has equipment that is applicable and available during the repair time line, that equipment will be made available to the Client at 50% off the normal rental rate until the repairs can be completed. 2. The Client agrees that prompt and full access to the system will be granted to Alpha Video any • time Alpha Video is on-site to service or maintain the system. It is the responsibility of the Client to provide remote access to the IP addressable components of this system as needed and if applicable. It is the responsibility of the Client to provide any passwords for the components of this system as needed and if applicable. (Crestron, Biamp, Servers, DVR's etc. 3. This agreement does not include emergency 2417 service of the system. 4. The first year of this Service Agreement does not include a preventative maintenance visit to the system location to perform preventative maintenance on the equipment listed in addendum #1. 5. The Service Agreement for the second and third year does include four (4) preventative maintenance visits during each year of the Service Agreement on the equipment listed in addendum #1. This visit is to be scheduled at a mutually agreed on date and time. Software updates will be provided if there is no cost for the software and if it is applicable to be updated. 5. This agreement does not apply to a system or system components manufactured by companies for which Alpha Video is not a dealer or distributor and did not install. 6. The annual fee for the first year of the Service Agreement is $ 3,735.00 The annual fee for the second year of the Service Agreement is $ 6,320.00. The annual fee for the third year of the Service Agreement is $ 6,400.00. 7. This agreement shall begin at 12:01 AM on ??/??2015 and end at 11:59 PM on ??/??/2016Thirty to forty five days prior to the expiration of this agreement Alpha Video may supply a renewal option. 8. Custom programming codes and files will remain in custody of Alpha Video while a system or • systems are in a Warranty or Service agreement time period. This includes programming for Crestron, AMX, Extron, and various DSP equipment installed and supported by Alpha Video. If changes to a program or code are made by anyone other than Alpha Video, the Warranty or Service agreement can be terminated by Alpha Video. Alpha Video is not obligated to refund any payments made by the Client for that Warranty or Service agreement. The Client will incur the cost to reload any programming to keep them in good standing if they chose to continue their Warranty or Service agreement. Once an installed system is out of Warranty or a Service agreement the files can be supplied to the Client if requested. 9. Parts, repairs and support that are not covered in this SMA will be billed on a time and materials basis at Alpha Video's current service rates. These rates may change at any time and without notice. Sr Engineering at 125.00 per hour. Engineering at 100.00 per hour. Programming at 110.00 per hour. Project Management at 95.00 per hour. Service technician at $100.00 per hour. Bench technician at $120.00 per hour. Installation technician at $90.00 per hour. Travel at $50.00 per hour. Hotel, air fare, car rental and per diem costs as incurred. 10. In the event the Client has not paid the billed fee within 60 days of the due date, Alpha Video will, re -invoice via certified mail. If there is no response in 5 business days Alpha Video can terminate this contract. The Client is responsible for any services or time of service performed at current rates on a pro -rated basis. • • 11. Alpha Video warrants that we will provide service to the Client's system substantially in accordance with the terms of this agreement. If the Client believes that Alpha Video is not providing service in accordance with this agreement while it's in force, the Client will contact Alpha Video via certified mail. If there is no response in 5 business days the Client can terminate this contract and reduce payment or request remittance for.any services already performed at current rates on a pro -rated basis. 12. Alpha Video will use its best efforts to correct any deviation from this agreement within a reasonable time after notification. The Client agrees that the foregoing constitutes the Client's sole and exclusive remedy for breach by Alpha Video under any warranty under this agreement. The warranty and remedy provided herein are exclusive and in lieu of all other warranties (express or implied) including but not limited to the implied warranties of merchantability, performance, and fitness for a particular purpose. The Client assumes all risk as to the suitability, quality, and performance of the system. In no event will Alpha Video, or its directors, officers, employees, or affiliates be liable for any consequential, incidental, indirect, special, or exemplary damages arising out of the use or existence of the system in whole or part or use of Alpha Video's service, even if Alpha Video has been advised of the possibility of such damages. Alpha Video's liability to the Client (if any) for actual direct damages for any cause whatsoever, and regardless of the form of the action, will be limited to, and shall not exceed, the fee for the current term of the agreement. 13. if the Client is not also the Owner of the system, the Client represents that they may lawfully enter into contracts as representatives of the Owner and have full and complete authority granted to them by the Owner over service and maintenance of the system, including, but not limited to, expenditures for maintenance, repair, and component replacement of the system. The Client, if not the Owner, also asserts that they have the authority to obligate the Owner to the terms of this contract. • 14. In the event the ownership of the system changes, the Client ceases to be a representative of the system Owner (if different), or the system is taken out of service wholly and completely during the term of this agreement, the Client may terminate this agreement by notifying Alpha Video in writing of the change in status. The value of any services that have been provided from the inception or renewal of the agreement up to the date of notification will be calculated based on current dates for those services and any over -payment will be refunded. If based on this recalculation, it is determined there is a balance due to Alpha Video, this balance will be billed in accordance with current practices. 15. In this agreement, the term "Client" includes the business entity, as well as the directors, officers, employees, affiliates, and assigns of the business entity, jointly and/or separately. 16. No oral or written statement, understanding, or document other than amendments or addendums properly executed by both parties and attached to this agreement shall in any way extend, modify, or add to the foregoing agreement. 4 Client: Provider: Edina City Hall Alpha Video & Audio, Inc. 4801 W 5011 St 7690 Golden Triangle Dr Edina, Mn 55424 Eden Prairie, Mn 55344 Signature (Client) Signature (Alpha Video) Service: 952-841-3364 Main Office 952-896-9898 Date Date The following addendums are a part of this agreement: Addendum #1: Service Agreement Equipment Description Addendum #2: Alpha Video Holidays Service Support Contact Information: Service Coordinator Phil Lang Service Manager John Seidlitz Email Support Main Office 952-841-3364 philip(o)alghavideo.com 952-841-3336 lohns@aiphavideo.com Support(cDalphavideo.com 952-896-9898 • • • • Addendum #1 Addendum #2: SERVICE AGREEMENT EQUIPMENT DESCRIPTION REFERENCE QUOTE# AAAQ32183 Alpha Video 2015 Holiday Schedule Date Holiday Thursday, January 151 New Year's Day Friday, April 3rd Good Friday Monday, May 251h Memorial Day Friday, July 4th Independence Day Monday, September 7th Labor Day Thursday, November 26th Thanksgiving Friday, November 27th Thanksgiving Thursday, December 24th Christmas Eve Friday, December 25th Christmas Day Alpha Video 2016 Holiday Schedule . Date Holiday Friday, January 15t New Year's Day Friday, March 25th Good Friday Monday, May 30th Memorial Day Monday, July 40 Independence Day Monday, September 5th Labor Day Thursday, November 24th Thanksgiving Friday, November 25th Thanksgiving Thursday, December 24th Christmas Eve Monday, December 26th Christmas Co • AGREEMENT THIS AGREEMENT made this 12 day of August, 2015, by and between the CITY OF EDINA, a Minnesota municipal corporation ("City") and ALPHA VIDEO AND AUDIO, INC., a Minnesota corporation ("Contractor"). City and Contractor, in consideration of the mutual covenants set forth herein, agree as follows: 1. CONTRACT DOCUMENTS. The following documents shall be referred to as the "Contract Documents," all of which shall be taken together as a whole as the contract between the parties as if they were set verbatim and in full herein: A. This Agreement. B. Edina City Center Council Chamber AV Systems Project Edina Minnesota Project Manual. C. Contractor's Bid. The Contract Documents are to be read and interpreted as a whole. The intent of the Contract Documents is to include all items necessary for the proper execution and completion of the work and to require Contractor to provide the highest quality and greatest quantity consistent with the • Contract Documents. If there are inconsistencies within or among part of the Contract Documents or between the Contract Documents and applicable standards, codes or ordinances, the Contractor shall provide the better quality or greater quantity of work or comply with the more stringent requirements. • 1.1 Before ordering any materials or doing any work, the Contractor shall verify measurements at the project site and shall be responsible for the correctness of such measurements. No extra charges or compensation will be allowed on account of differences between actual dimensions -and the dimensions indicated on the drawings. Any difference that may be found shall be submitted to the City for resolution before proceeding with the work. 1.2 If a minor change in the work is necessary due to actual field conditions, the Contractor shall submit detailed drawings of such departure to the City for approval before making the change. The City shall not be required to make any adjustment to either the contract sum or contract time because of any failure by the Contractor to comply with the requirements of this paragraph. Actual or alleged conflicts or inconsistencies between the plans and specifications or other Contract Documents shall be brought to the City's attention in writing, priorto performing the affected work. The City's directions shall be followed by the Contractor. 182899v1 • 2. OBLIGATIONS OF THE CONTRACTOR. A. The Contractor shall provide the goods, services, and perform the work in accordance with the Contract Documents. B. Contractor and its employees will park in service areas or lots and use entries and exits as designated by City. Contractor's personnel will contact the appropriate person (i.e. receptionist, maintenance personnel, security, etc,) immediately upon entering the building, and will sign in and out if required by City. C. Care, coordination and communication by Contractor is imperative so that guests and employees in the buildings are not disturbed or inconvenienced during the performance of the contracted services. D. Contractor's personnel must be neat appearing, wear a uniform and badge that clearly identifies them as a service contractor, and abides by City's no smoking policies. E. Contractor must honor the City's request to reassign an employee for cause. Cause may include performance below acceptable standards or failure to present the necessary image or attitude, in the judgment of the owner, to present a first class • operation. • F. Contractor shall exercise the same degree of care, skill and diligence in the performance of its services as is ordinarily exercised by members of the profession under similar circumstances in Hennepin County, Minnesota. Contractor shall be liable to the fullest extent permitted under applicable law, without limitation, for any injuries, loss, or damages proximately caused by Contractor's breach of this standard of care. Contractor shall put forth reasonable efforts to complete its duties in a timely manner. Contractor shall not be responsible for delays caused by factors beyond its control or that could not be reasonably foreseen at the time of execution of this Contract. Contractor shall be responsible for costs, delays or damages arising from unreasonable delays in the performance of its duties. 3. OBLIGATIONS OF THE CITY. The City agrees to pay and the Contractor agrees to receive and accept payment in accordance with the Contractor's bid One Hundred Forty- two Thousand Three Hundred Sixteen and 38/100 Dollars ($142,316.38) inclusive of sales tax. Any changes in the scope of the work which may result in an increase to the compensation due the Contractor shall require prior written approval by an authorized representative of the City or by the City Council. The City will not pay additional compensation for services that do not have prior written authorization. 182899v1 2 • 4. PAYMENT PROCEDURES. A. Contractor shall prepare and submit to City, on a monthly basis, itemized invoices setting forth work performed under this Contract. Invoices submitted shall be paid in the same manner as other claims made to the City. B. Progress Payments; Retainage. City shall make 95% progress payments on account of the contract price on the basis of Contractor's applications for payment during performance of the work. C. Payments to Subcontractor. (1) Prompt -Payment to Subcontractors. Pursuant to Minn. Stat. § 471.25, Subd. 4a, the Contractor must pay any subcontractor within ten .(10) days of the Contractor's receipt of payment from the City for undisputed services provided by the subcontractor, The Contractor must pay interest of 1 %2 percent per month or any part of a month to the subcontractor on any undisputed amount not paid on time to the subcontractor. The minimum monthly interest penalty payment for an unpaid balance of $100.00 or more is $10.00. For an unpaid balance of less than $100.00, the Contractor shall pay the actual penalty due to the subcontractor. • (2) Form IC -134 required from general contractor. Minn. Stat. § 290.92 requires that the City of Edina obtain a Withholding Affidavit for Contractors, Form IC -134, before making final payments to Contractor. This form needs to be submitted by the Contractor to the Minnesota Department of Revenue for approval. is 182899A The form is used to receive certification from the state that the vendor has complied with the requirement to withhold and remit state withholding taxes for employee salaries paid. D. Final Payment. Upon final completion of the work, City shall pay the remainder of the contract price as recommended by City. 5. COMPLETION DATE. The work must be completed and ready for final payment by October 2, 2015. 6. CONTRACTOR'S REPRESENTATIONS. A. Contractor has examined and carefully studied the Contract Documents and other related data identified in the Contract Documents. 3 • B. Contractor has visited the site and become familiar with and is satisfied as to the general, local, and site conditions that may affect cost, progress, and performance of the work. C. Contractor is familiar with and is satisfied as to all federal, state, and local laws and regulations that may affect cost, progress, and performance of the work. D. Contractor does not consider that any further examinations, investigations, explorations, tests, studies, or data are necessary for the performance of the work at the contract price, within the contract time, and in accordance with the other terms and conditions of the Contract Documents. E. Contractor is aware of the general nature of work to -be performed by City and others at the site that relates 'to the work as indicated in the Contract Documents. F. Contractor has correlated the information known to Contractor, information and observations obtained from visits to the site, reports and drawings identified in the Contract Documents, and all additional examinations, investigations, explorations, tests, studies, and data with the Contract Documents. G. Contractor has given City written notice of all conflicts, errors, ambiguities, or discrepancies that Contractor has discovered in the Contract Documents, and the • written resolution thereof by City is acceptable to Contractor. H. The Contract Documents are generally sufficient to indicate and convey understanding of all terms and conditions for performance and furnishing of the work. I. Subcontracts: (1) Unless otherwise specified in the Contract Documents, the Contractor shall, upon receipt of the executed Contract Documents, submit in writing to the City the names of the subcontractors proposed for the work. Subcontractors may not be changed except at the request or with the consent of the City. (2) The Contractor is responsible to the City for the acts and omissions of the Contractor's subcontractors, and of their direct and indirect employees, to the same extent as the Contractor is responsible for the acts and omissions of the Contractor's employees. (3) The Contract Documents shall not be construed as creating any contractual relation between the City, the City, and any subcontractor. (4) The Contractor shall bind every subcontractor by the terms of the Contract Documents. 0 182899v1 7. WARRANTY. The Contractor guarantees that all new equipment warranties as specified within the bid shall be in full force and transferred to the City upon payment by the City. The Contractor shall be held responsible for any and all defects in workmanship, materials, and equipment which may develop in any part of the contracted service, and upon proper notification by the City shall immediately replace, without cost to the City, any such faulty part or parts and damage done by reason of the same in accordance with the bid specifications. 8. INDEMNITY. The Contractor agrees to indemnify and hold the City harmless from any claim made by third parties as a result of the services performed by it. In addition, the Contractor shall reimburse the City for any cost of reasonable attorney's fees it may incur as a result of any such claims. 9. INSURANCE AND BOND REQUIREMENTS. A. Workers' Compensation. The Contractor shall obtain and maintain for the duration of this Contract, statutory Workers' Compensation Insurance and Employer's Liability Insurance as required under the laws of the State of Minnesota. B. Comprehensive General Liability. Contractor shall obtain the following minimum insurance coverage and maintain it at all times throughout the life of the Contract, with the City included as an additional name insured. The Contractor shall furnish the City a certificate of insurance satisfactory to the City evidencing the required • coverage: • 182899v1 Bodily Injury: $2,000,000 each occurrence $2,000,000 aggregate products and completed operations Property Damage: $2,000,000 each occurrence $2,000,000 aggregate Contractual Liability (identifying the contract): Bodily Injury: Property Damage: $2,000,000 each occurrence $2,000,000 each occurrence $2,000,000 aggregate 5 • Comprehensive Automobile Liability (owned, non -owned, hired): Bodily Injury: $2,000,000 each occurrence $2,000,000 each accident Property Damage: $2,000,000 each occurrence C. Policy Requirements. All insurance policies (or riders) required by this Contract shall be (i) taken out by Contractor and maintained with responsible insurance companies organized under the laws of one of the states of the United States and qualified to do business in the State of Minnesota, (ii) shall contain a provision that the insurer shall not cancel or revise coverage thereunder without giving written notice to Contractor as an insured party and to City as an additional insured on a primary and noncontributory basis, (iii) shall name Contractor as an insured parry and City as an additional insured; and (iv) shall be evidenced by a certificate of insurance listing City as an additional insured which shall be filed with the City. D. Performance and Payment Bonds. Within fifteen (15) calendar days after the execution of this Contract and before any work or services are rendered, the Contractor shall furnish a performance bond and payment bond each in the amount of the Contract insuring the faithful performance of the Contract and payment of all • obligations -arising thereunder pursuant to Section 574.26 of the Minnesota Statutes. 10. MISCELLANEOUS. A. City and Contractor each binds itself, its partners, successors, assigns and legal representatives to the other party hereto, its partners, successors, assigns and legal representatives in respect to all covenants, agreements, and obligations contained in the Contract Documents. B. Any provision or part of the Contract Documents held to be void or unenforceable under any law or regulation shall be deemed stricken, and all remaining provisions shall continue to be valid and binding upon City and Contractor, who agree that the Contract Documents shall be reformed to replace such stricken provision or part thereof with a valid and enforceable provision that comes as close as possible to expressing the intention of the stricken provisions. C. Data Practices/Records. (1) All data created, collected, received, maintained or disseminated for any purpose in the course of this Contract is governed by the Minnesota Government Data Practices Act, Minn. Stat. Ch. 13, any other applicable state statute, or any state rules adopted to implement the act, as well as • federal regulations on data privacy. M 182899v1 • (2) All books, records, documents and accounting procedures and practices to the Contractor and its subcontractors, if any, relative to this Contract are subject to examination by the City. D. Software License. If the equipment provided by the Contractor pursuant to this Agreement contains software, including that which the manufacturer may have embedded into the hardware as an integral part of the equipment, the Contractor shall pay all software licensing fees. The Contractor shall also pay for all software updating fees for a period of one year following cutover. The Contractor shall have no obligation to pay for such fees thereafter. Nothing in the software license or licensing agreement shall obligate the City to pay any additional fees as a condition for continuing to use the software. E. Patented Devices, Material and Processes. If the contract requires, or Contractor desires, the use of any design, devise, material or process covered by letters, patent or copyright, trademark or trade name, Contractor shall provide for such use by suitable legal agreement with the patentee or City and a copy of the agreement shall be filed with the City. If no such agreement is made or filed as noted, Contractor shall indemnify and hold harmless the City from any and all claims for infringement by reason of the use of any such patented designed, device, material or process, or any trademark or trade name or copyright in connection with the services agreed to be performed under the contract, and shall indemnify and defend • the City for any costs, liability, expenses and attorney's fees that result from any such infringement. F. Assignment. Neither parry may assign, sublet, or transfer any interest or obligation in this Agreement without the prior written consent of the other party, and then only upon such terms and conditions as both parties may agree to and set forth in writing. G. Waiver. In the particular event that either party shall at any time or times waive any breach of this Agreement by the other, such waiver shall not constitute a waiver of any other or any succeeding breach of this Agreement by either party, whether of the same or any other covenant, condition or obligation. H. Governing LawNenue. The laws of the State of Minnesota govern the interpretation of this Agreement. In the event of litigation, the exclusive venue shall be in the District Court of the State of Minnesota for Hennepin County. I. Severability. If any provision, term or condition of this Agreement is found to be or become unenforceable or invalid, it shall not affect the remaining provisions, terms and conditions of this Agreement, unless such invalid or unenforceable provision, term or condition renders this Agreement impossible to perform. Such remaining terms and conditions of the Agreement shall continue in full force and effect and • shall continue to operate as the parties' entire agreement. 7 182899v1 • J. Entire Agreement. This Agreement represents the entire agreement of the parties and is a final, complete and all inclusive statement of the terms thereof, and supersedes and terminates any prior agreement(s), understandings or written or verbal representations made between the parties with respect thereto. K. Permits and Licenses. The Contractor shall procure all permits and licenses, pay all charges and fees therefore, and give all notices necessary and incidental to the construction and completion of the project. L. If the work is delayed or the sequencing of work is altered because of the action or inaction of the City, the Contractor shall be allowed a time extension to complete the work but shall not be entitled to any other compensation. M. Contractor is an independent contractor engaged by City to perform the services described herein and as such (i) shall employ such persons as it shall deem necessary and appropriate for the performance of its obligations pursuant to this Agreement, who shall be employees, and under the direction, of Contractor and in no respect employees of City, and (ii) shall have no authority to employ persons, or make purchases of equipment on behalf of City, or otherwise bind or obligate City. No statement herein shall be construed so as to find the Contractor an employee of the City. • 11. NOTICE. Required notices to the Contractor shall be in writing, and shall be either hand -delivered to the Contractor, its employees or agents, or mailed to the Contractor by certified mail at the following address: Alpha Video and Audio, Inc. 7690 Golden Triangle Drive Eden Prairie, MN 55344 Notices to the City shall be in writing and shall be either hand -delivered or mailed to the City by certified mail at the following address: Scott Denfeld City of Edina 4801 West 50"' Street Edina, Minnesota 55424 Notices shall be deemed effective on the date of receipt. Any party may change its address for the service of notice by giving written. notice of such change to the other parry, in any manner above specified, ten (10) days prior to the effective date of such change. [The remainder of this page has been intentionally left blank. • Signature page follows.] 182899v1 0 • • CITY OF EDINA :• AND: 182899v] James Hovland, Mayor Scott Neal, City Manager ALPHA VIDEO AND AUDIO, INC. BY: b41fAMVR- its Cfi0Lq)-w— AND: 0 Its RtC00� E�WW • . 10: Mayor and Council From: Brian E. Olson, Public Works Director $60 Date: 08/05/2015 Subject: Request For Purchase- South Ramp Garbage Screening Date Bid Opened or Quote Received: 07/09/2014 Company: Blackstone Contractors LLC Recommended Quote or Bid: Blackstone Contractors LLC General Information: Agenda Item #: IV.D The Recommended Bid is Within Budget Not Within Budget Bid or Expiration Date: 08/09/2015 Amount of Quote or Bid: $44,850.00 The City of Edina prepared a Feasibility Study and Report on January 21, 2014, that reported that it was recommended that we screen all trash enclosures for a sum of $60,000.00. We completed $23,000.00 worth of that work in the P-23 Ramp improvement project. We put the South Ramp garbage screening out for quotes to 7 contractors. Merit Construction Services, Morcon Construction, Global Specialties, LS black Constructors, RAM Construction, A&M Construction, and Blackstone Contractors LLC. Only Blackstone Contractors LLC responded with a bid for $42,500.00, Along with an additional $1,550.00 for a downspout, and $800.00 for masonry tuck -pointing, for a grand total of $44,850.00 This represents less than 10 percent increase in the original Feasibility Report Study. The cost of these improvements will be assessed to the property owners this Fall. City Staff recommends approval. City of Edina - 4801 W. 501h St. • Edina, MN 55424 FJ To: MAYOR & COUNCIL �g1NA,11� • ,���RPORt'��9 • 1888 Agenda Item #: IV. E. From: Chad A. Millner, PE Director of Engineering Action Discussion ❑ Date: August 5, 2015 Information ❑ Subject: Set December 8, 2015 Public Hearing For 2016 Improvement Projects Action Requested: Staff recommends that the City Council set Tuesday, December 8, 2015 at 6:00 p.m. to hold the public hearings for the 2016 proposed neighborhood reconstruction projects. Information / Background: • M.S. 429 requires a public hearing be held before the City Council before an improvement is ordered for which property owners may be specially assessed. The hearing is an opportunity for property owners to ask questions and voice their opinions on proposed projects. For the past few years the Council has held a special meeting on the second Tuesday in December that has been set aside for the purpose of holding the improvement hearings for all of the next year's proposed neighborhood street reconstruction projects. The Engineering staff has already had meetings with property owners advising them of upcoming construction projects. • City of Edina • 4801 W. 501h St. • Edina, MN 55424 FuivaoD uoiJauaaoIuI 1-1 u014aJuasaad Iaap asap 4aNmd ON 1-1 ua1d anisuaga idwoD uaaal 5U07 s4.aodaid uDjyodo-j4aW DVPV 'uo4sIad IiaN 'v 'n I/V31/ VGN3DV • 0 To: MAYOR AND COUNCIL From: Chad A. Millner, PE, Director of Engineering " ;�qq 0 �•fl�OHFOK(`1Y" /� IeAB Agenda Item #: VI. A. Action Discussion O Date: August 5, 2015 Information El Subject: Public Hearing — Vacation of Public Right -of -Way Cahill Real Estate Holdings, LLC, 7261 Ohms Lane, Resolution No. 2015-71 Action Requested: Approve attached Resolution No. 2015-71 Information / Background: The request to vacate the existing 60 -ft roadway easement comes from Cahill Real Estate Holdings, LLC, because a portion of their lot is in the easement. Our records show the area was platted in 1969 as Edina Interchange Center, 3rd Addition, with a 60 -ft roadway easement. In 1981, the area was replatted as One Corporate Center Phase 6, and redeveloped as it exists today. The roadway easement was not vacated and multiple buildings were built over the easement. The City has sanitary sewer and watermain utilities in the area but they are within their own utility easements. Attached is a graphic showing the location of public utilities in the area. The vacation will not impact public utilities. Private utility companies were contacted for feedback regarding the vacation request. Centerpoint Energy and Comcast both have utilities that cross the roadway easement. They have no objection to the vacation as long as they retain rights to access their utility. Staff recommends City Council approve Resolution No. 2015-71. Attachments: Resolution No. 2015-71 (Exhibit A not attached; view it on the website) Public Right -of -Way Vacation Application with sketches Notice of Public Hearing Graphic of City Utilities GAPW\CENTRAL SVCS\ENG DIV\ROW VACATION\7261 Ohms La\Item VI. A. Consider Vacation of ROW 7261 Ohms La.doc City of Edina • 4801 W. 50th St. • Edina, MN 55424 • RESOLUTION NO. 2015-71 VACATING ROADWAY EASEMENT WHEREAS, pursuant to Minnesota Statutes § 412.851 the Edina City Council has conducted a hearing preceded by two (2) weeks published and posted notice and mailed notice to the abutting property owners, to consider the vacation of a roadway easement created and amended by the following recorded documents: (1) Declaration of Easements, Restrictions, and Waiver of Damages dated February 21, 1969, recorded April 21, 1969, as Document No. 3771350; (2) Declaration of Easements, Restrictions, and Waiver of Damages dated February 20, 1969, recorded April 15, 1969, as Document No. 3770391; (3) Declaration of Easements, Restrictions, and Waiver of Damages dated February 21, 1969, recorded April 21, 1969, as Document No. 3771351; (4) Declaration of Easements, Restrictions, and Waiver of Damages dated May 26, 1969, recorded June 30, 1969, as Document No. 3781902; (5) Partial Release of Easement recorded January 29, 1970, as Document No. 3857454; and (6) Resolution recorded May 22, 1981, as Document No. 4645217; 40 (hereinafter referred to as the "Roadway Easement") over property legally described on Exhibit A attached hereto (hereinafter referred to as the "Subject Property"). WHEREAS, that portion of the Roadway Easement as it affects the Subject Property is no longer needed for public purpose. WHEREAS, following the hearing and consideration of the proposed vacation, the Council has determined that it is in the public interest to vacate the Roadway Easement as it affects the Subject Property. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Edina, Minnesota (the "City"), as follows: 1. That portion of the above-described Roadway Easement as it affects the Subject Property is hereby vacated. 2. The vacation shall not affect the authority of any person, corporation, or municipality owning or controlling the electric or telephone poles and lines, gas and sewer lines, water pipes, mains and hydrants thereon or thereunder, if any, to continue maintaining the same or to enter upon such way or portion thereof vacated to maintain, repair, replace, remove, or otherwise attend thereto. 3. The Clerk shall forthwith transmit a certified duplicate of this Resolution to the County Auditor and County Recorder. is Dated: August 5, 2015 182405v2 • • • Attest: Debra A. Mangen, City Clerk James B. Hovland, Mayor 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 5, 2015, and as recorded in the Minutes of said Regular Meeting. WITNESS my hand and seal of said City this day of 20 182405v2 City Clerk • C 182405v2 EXHIBIT A Lot 1, Block 3, One Corporate Center Phase 6, according to the recorded plat thereof, Hennepin County, Minnesota, together with appurtenant easement(s) contained in Document No. 4680134 as supplemented by Document No. 5680511. (Abstract Property) cv9S�til�L ow e \ City Of Edina, Minnesota )o DEPARTMENT OF ADMINISTRATION th 4801 West 50 Street, Edina, Minnesota 55424-1394 Phone ❑ (952) 927-8861 TDD (952) 826-0379 Fax (952) 826-0390 'PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY VACATIONAPPLICATION Applicant Cahill Real Estate HoldincTs LLC Print Name Address 7261 Ohms Lane Edina _MN 55439 Street City/State Zip Telephone No. 952-926-1659 Fax No. I hereby petition the City Council of the City of Edina to vacate all of the following described public right of way pursuant to M.S. 412.851 and Edina Code Section 24-191: H3 Street ❑ Alley ❑ Utility Easement ❑ Drainage Easement ❑ Other Legal description of the area proposed to be vacated (Please note all legal descriptions shall be transmitted electronically in a Word documents to the City of Edina City Clerk: Dmangen@edinamn.gov) : • The North 60 feet of Lot 19, Edina Interchange Center, Third Addition (now replatted as parts of One Corporate Center Phase 6) Does the area proposed to be vacated or any part thereof terminate at or abut upon any public water? ❑ Yes ® No Please note if the area requested to be vacated terminates at or abuts upon any public water, no vacation shall be made unless written notice of the petition is served by certified mail upon the commissioner of natural resources by the City of Edina thirty days before any Council action. • Attach a copy of a scaled drawing showing in full detail the area proposed to be vacated. • Include the vacation fee of $450.00 with your application. THE MINNESOTA DATA PRACTICES ACT requires that we inform you of your rights about the private data we are requesting on this form. Private data is available to you, but not to the public. We are requesting this data to determine your eligibility for a license from the City of Edina. Providing the data may disclose information that could cause your application to be denied. You are not legally required to provide the data, however, refusing to supply the data may cause your license to not be processed. Under MS 270.72, the City of Edina is required to provide the Minnesota Department of Revenue your MN Tax ID Number and Social Security Number. The Department of Revenue maysupply information to the Intema/ Revenue Service. In addition, this data can be shared by Edina City Staff, Department of Public Safety, Hennepin County Auditor, Bureau of Criminal Apprehension, Hennepin County Warrant Office, Ramsey County Warrant Office and other persons or entities deemed necessary for verification of information submitted in the application. Yoursignature on this application indicates you understand these rights. I request that my residence address and telephone number be considered private data. My alternative address and telephone number are as follows: • I Address / Date Initiated =b 6 Sig 04/21/2014 Number 101�eSr den f LLC - Account 10 01.391 • • 0 11 � r ,F.� " ?h� S� J 31bYJcaC� 3N0 ' : a j� \\ •� � I s i� �N�a�a31Na� I i�F .J m � �•' Y_ W' z N3_1 vN43 cj 0 Y3 a. ii _ 2ci A c� 11 � r ,F.� " ?h� S� J 31bYJcaC� 3N0 ' : a j� \\ •� � I s i� �N�a�a31Na� I W' N3_1 vN43 ON 3"ILA • STATE OF MINNESOTA) COUNTY OF HENNEPIN) SS CITY OF EDINA ) CERTIFICATE OF MAILING NOTICE I, the undersigned, being the duly qualified acting City Clerk of the City of Edina, Minnesota, hereby certify that on the following date Jul. 23, 2016, acting on behalf of said City, I deposited in the United States mail copies of the attached Notice of Public Hearing on Vacation of Public Right -of -Way Easement (7261 Ohms Lane) (Exhibit A), enclosed in sealed envelopes, with postage thereon duly prepaid, addressed to the persons at the addresses as shown on the mailing list (Exhibit B), attached to the original hereof, which list is on file in my office, said persons being those appearing on the records of the County Auditor as owners of the property listed opposite their respective names, as of a date 13 days prior to the date of the hearing; and that I also sent said notice to the following corporations at the indicated addresses whose property • is exempt from taxation and is therefore not carried on the records of said County Auditor. NAME WITNESS my hand andthe seal of said ,20 L5 0 ADDRESS City this a, -31\d day of r� X Edina City Wik NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING ON VACATION OF PUBLIC RIGHT-OF-WAY EASEMENT IN THE CITY OF EDINA HENNEPIN COUNTY MINNESOTA NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the City Council of the City of Edina, Minnesota will hold a public hearing on Tuesday, August 5, 2015, at 7:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers at 4801 West 50th Street to consider the requested vacation of the following public right-of-way easement: PROPOSED DESCRIPTION A roadway easement, the north 60 feet of Lot 19, Edina Interchange, Third Addition (now replatted as parts of One Corporate Center- Phase 6), and amended by the following documents: I. Declaration of Easements, Restrictions, and Waiver- of Damages dated February 21, 1969, recorded April 21, 1969, as Document No. 3771350; 2. Declaration of Easements, Restrictions, and Waiver- of Damages dated February 20, 1969, recorded April 15, 1969, as Document No. 3770391; • 3. Declaration of Easements, Restrictions, and Waiver of Damages dated February 21, 1969, recorded April 21, 1969, as Document No. 3771351; 4. Declaration of Easements, Restrictions, and Waiver of Damages dated May 26, 1969, recorded June 30, 1969, as Document No. 3781902; 5. Partial Release of Easement recorded January 29, 1970, as Document No. 3857454; and 6. Resolution recorded May 22, 1981, as Document No. 4645217; All persons who desire to be heard with respect to the question of whether or not the above proposed roadway vacation is in the public interest and should be made shall be heard at said time and place. The Council shall consider- the extent to which such proposed street vacation affects existing easements within the area of the proposed vacation and the extent to which the vacation affects the authority of any person, corporation, or municipality owning or controlling electric, telephone or cable television 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 easement area or portion thereof vacated to maintain, repair, replace, remove, or otherwise attend thereto, for the purpose of specifying, in any such vacation resolution, the extent to which any or all of such easement, and such authority to maintain, and to enter upon the area of the proposed vacation, shall continue. BY ORDER OF THE EDINA CITY COUNCIL Debra Mangen, City Clerk • July 23, 2015 ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT 7450 Metro Boulevard . Edina, Minnesota 55439 wwxv.FdinaMN.gov • 952-826-0371 • Fax 952-826-0392 _ SHEET 2 OF 2 SHEETS Ei-- Afff I e-o-vvi s 7Y-01�� Y,+l • T A83AV-09 juawaWeP 0965 AH3AV Ipege6 al zesinn i ap sues wo�tiane �, salad a selpe} sauanbiq • 911621240010 911621240011 911621240012 Skei Development, LLC 7210 Metro Blvd, LLC Corporate 4 Holdings LLC 7200 Metro Blvd Attn: Mr. Brian Allar 7220 Metro Blvd Edina, MN 55439 7210 Metro Blvd Edina, MN 55439 Edina, MN 55439 911621240013 911621240014 911621240015 Pivotal Real Estate, LLC Lindsay Can -Am Ltd Prtnsp Moose Properties LLC 7230 Metro Blvd 3450 CO RD NO 101 7250 Metro Blvd #200 Edina, MN 55439 Minnetonka, MN 55345 Edina, MN 55439 911621240016 911621240027 911621240028 One Corporate Center Fin G Cubed LLC Citrus, LLC c/o Foresite Prop Services 7201 Ohms Lane #100 7275 Ohms La 3450 County Rd 101 Edina, MN 55439 Edina, MN 55439 Minnetonka, MN 55345 911621240029 911621240030 911621240031 Cahill Real State Holdings Ohms Lane LLP Huntington Properties, LLC 7300 Metro Blvd #625 7251 Ohms La c/o Wintrop Commercial Edina, MN 55439 Edina, MN 55439 7241 Ohms La Edina, MN 55439 911621240032 911621240033 911621240034 Vision Mgmt Services, LLC JACS Properties, LLC One Corporate Center Fin Attn: Rogers DQ,LLC 5024 Seriver Rd c/o Foresite Prop Services • 5775 W. Old Shakopee Rd, Ste 80 Edina, MN 55436 3450 County Rd 101 Bloomington, MN 55437 Minnetonka, MN 55345 911621240035 JACS Properties c/o Staci Will 5024 Scriver Rd Edina, MN 55436 T wi096s ®JltJ3AX ®® jaded pool r ®096s a;eldwaj ofjaw asn .ilk slage3 zlead Ase3 1 L City Utilities: Sanitary Sewer Watermain • To: MAYOR AND COUNCIL From: Joyce Repya, Senior Planner Date: August 5, 2015 w91�,j� owed, CpR�© Agenda Item #: VI. B. Action 0 Discussion 0 Information ❑ Subject: PUBLIC HEARING — Adding an EHLD, Edina Heritage Landmark District overlay zoning designation to the R -I Single Dwelling Unit zoning, 6901 Dakota Trail, Marri Oskam , Resolution No. 2015 - Action Requested: Adopt Resolution No. 2015-76, approving the addition of the EHLD, Edina Heritage Landmark District overlay zoning designation Planning Commission Recommendation: On July 8, 2015 the Planning Commission unanimously recommended approval of adding the EHLD, Edina Heritage Landmark District zoning designation: Vote: 7 Ayes, 0 Nays. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends approval. Information/Background: The subject property is located on the east side of the 6900 block of Dakota Trail in the Indian Hills neighborhood. The existing single family home, an International style constructed in 1963, is situated on the west bank of Indianhead Lake, and has a 2 -car detached garage in front of the residence; connected by a roof -covered deck. Built for owners Hendrik and Marri Oskam, this contemporary home was designed by renowned, female architect, Elizabeth Close; who with her husband started the architectural firm of Close & Close in 1939. One of the first homes built on Indianhead Lake, the natural terrain remained untouched as the home nestled into the sloping hillside. There have been no additions to the homes since it was constructed, however it has been meticulously maintained, and is as shining an example of Mid -Century Contemporary architecture today as it was when constructed in 1963. ATTACHMENTS: • Resolution No. 2015-76 • Ordinance No. 2015-13 • Planning Commission minutes, July 8, 2015 • Planning Commission staff report dated July, 2015, including o Heritage Preservation Board: Nomination Study and Plan of Treatment o Heritage Preservation Board minutes, April 14, 2015 • Edina City Code: Article IX. Edina Heritage Landmarks City of Edina • 4801 W. 50th St. • Edina, MN 55424 RESOLUTION NO. 2015-76 APPROVE ADDING THE EDINA HERITAGE LANDMARK DISTRICT (EHLD) OVERLAY ZONING DESIGNATION TO THE R-1 SINGLE DWELLING UNIT DISTRICT DESIGNATION TO THE OSKAM HOUSE, 6901 DAKOTA TRAIL BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Edina, Minnesota, as follows: Section 1. BACKGROUND. 1.01 Mrs. Marri Oskam has asked that the Edina Heritage Landmark District designation be added to her property at 6901 Dakota Trail. The property is legally described as follows: Lot 1, Block 2, Overholt Hills Sally Addition 1.02 To accommodate the request, a determination of eligibility report was provided to the Heritage Preservation Board and approved on August 11, 2014. The determination of eligibility report defined the following significance of the property: 1. The Oskam House is historically significant in the area of architecture under Criterion C - • "Embodiment of the distinctive characteristics of an architectural style, design, period, type or method of construction; or that possesses high artistic values, or that represents a significant and distinguishable entity whose components may lack individual distinction." 2. The Oskam House also possesses historic significance since its architect, Elizabeth Close of Close and Associates was an influential force in regional architecture; and her work is demonstrably important in women's history and architectural history. 3. The Oskam House's historical significance is a product of its association with the broad themes of suburban development and midcentury modern residential architecture in Edina. 4. The property is widely recognized by architects and architectural historians as one of the outstanding residential examples of the International style in the Twin Cities area. 1.03 On April 14, 2015, the Edina Heritage Preservation Board approved the nomination study identifying the historic significance of the Oskam House and the plan of treatment providing guidance for the preservation of the property, and voted to recommend to the City Council that the EHLD overlay zoning designation be added to 6901 Dakota Trail. 1.04 In a letter dated June 5, 2015, the Minnesota Historical Society identified the Oskam House as an ideal candidate for local designation, noting that the house is "a significant and extremely well-preserved example of International style, Close design." • 1.05 On July 8, 2015 the Planning Commission reviewed the proposed EHLD landmark overlay designation for the Oskam House and recommended approval. Vote: 7 Ayes and 0 Nays. CITY OF EDINA 4801 West 50th Street • Edina, Minnesota 55424 www.EdinaMN.gov • 952-927-8861 • Fax 952-826-0389 RESOLUTION NO. 2015-76 Page 2 • 1.06 On August 5, 2015, the City Council held a public hearing and considered the request. Section 2. FINDINGS • 2.01 The proposal is consistent with the Heritage Preservation section of the Comprehensive Plan that calls for identifying significant heritage resources worthy of consideration in community planning, and adding the EHLD zoning designation to the underlying zoning of the heritage resource. 2.02 The overlay zoning criteria per Section 36-714 thru 719 of the City Code has been met. 2.03 The Oskam House is historically significant in the area of architecture under Criterion C - " Embodiment of the distinctive characteristics of an architectural style, design, period, type or method of construction; or that possesses high artistic values, or that represents a significant and distinguishable entity whose components may lack individual distinction." 2.04 The Oskam House also possesses historic significance since its architect, Elizabeth Close was an influential force in regional architecture; and her work is demonstrably important in women's history and architectural history. 2.05 The Oskam House's historical significance is a product of its association with the broad themes of suburban development and midcentury modern residential architecture in Edina. 2.06 The property is widely recognized by architects and architectural historians as one of the outstanding residential examples of the International style in the Twin Cities area. Section 3. APPROVAL NOW THEREFORE, it is hereby resolved by the City Council of the City of Edina, approves adding Edina Heritage Landmark District designation to the Oskam House, 6901 Dakota Trail, which is subject to the attached Plan of Treatment. Adopted by the city council of the City of Edina, Minnesota, on August 5, 2015. ATTEST: Debra A. Mangen, City Clerk • STATE OF MINNESOTA ) COUNTY OF HENNEPIN )SS CITY OF EDINA ) James B. Hovland, Mayor RESOLUTION NO. 2015-76 Page 3 • 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 5, 2015, and as recorded in the Minutes of said Regular Meeting. WITNESS my hand and seal of said City this day of , 2015. City Clerk • 0 RESOLUTION NO. 2015-76 Page 4 iOSKAM HOUSE 6901 Dakota Trail Edina, Minnesota Edina Heritage Landmark Plan of Treatment By ordinance, no city permit may be issued for certain kinds of development activities (demolition, moving a building, new construction, and excavation) involving a designated Heritage Landmark without a Certificate of Appropriateness (COA) approved by the Heritage Preservation Board. The City of Edina has adopted the Secretary of the Interior's Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties as the authoritative guide for COA review decisions. Within the framework of these standards, and in consultation with the property owner, the Heritage Preservation Board has adopted the following plan of treatment specifically tailored to the preservation requirements of the Oskam House: 1. The Oskam House will be preserved in place and rehabilitated so that those features which are significant to its historical and architectural values can be preserved intact. These features include but are not limited to the following: 1 story with two levels of living space; compact rectangular plan (wider than deep); continuous low pitch "butterfly" roof; wood exterior wall cladding with vertical grooves; casement windows; balcony -type porch; open floor plan with living room, dining room and kitchen connected on the main level; fireplace with end-wall chimney; walk -out basement; and detached garage. • 2. Historically significant character defining architectural features should not be altered or destroyed as a result of any project permitted, funded, or assisted by the City of Edina. 3. Whenever possible, deteriorated architectural features should be repaired rather than replaced. In the event replacement is necessary, the new material should match the material being replaced in composition, design, color, texture, and other visual qualities. 4. Construction of new additions and adjacent accessory structures should be kept to a minimum and they should be designed to be compatible with the historic house in scale, size, and building materials. Additions should be designed to be distinguishable from the original construction and reversible. 5. Minor alterations and small structural additions should not be discouraged when such alterations and additions do not destroy significant historic architectural features and the new work is compatible with the size, scale, color, material, and character of the historic property. 6. Mechanical equipment should be placed in an inconspicuous location where installation will require the least possible alteration to the structural integrity and physical appearance of the historic house and garage. 7. Landscape features such as decks, patios, mature trees, walkways, and setbacks that have • historically linked the house to its environment are important parts of the property's history and should be retained intact, whenever possible. ORDINANCE NO. 2015-13 AN ORDINANCE ADDING THE EHLD, EDINA HERITAGE LANDMARK DISTRICT OVERLAY ZONING DESIGNATIN TO THE R-1, SINGLE DWELLING UNIT DISTRICT ZONING DESIGNATION TO THE OSKAM HOUSE, 6901 DAKOTA TRAIL The City Of Edina Ordains: Section 1. The subject property is hereby zoned R-1, Single Dwelling Unit District and EHLD, Edina Heritage Landmark District based on the following findings: • 1. The proposal is consistent with the Heritage Preservation section of the Comprehensive Plan that calls for identifying significant heritage resources worthy of consideration in community planning, and adding the EHLD zoning designation to the underlying zoning of the heritage resource. 2. Addition of the EHLD, Edina Heritage Landmark District overlay zoning designation criteria per Section 36-714 thru 720 of the City Code has been met. 3. The proposed use would fit in to the neighborhood. Adding the EHLD, Edina Heritage Landmark District overlay zoning designation will not alter the property or have a detrimental effect on the surrounding properties. Section 2. The subject property is legally described as follows: Lot 1, Block 2, Overholt Hills Sally Addition, Hennepin County, Minnesota Section 3. The official zoning map of the City of Edina referred to and described in Section 36.402 • of the Edina City Code shall not be republished to show the aforesaid rezoning, but the zoning map on file in the City Clerk's office shall be appropriately marked for the purpose of indicating the addition of the overlay zoning designation provided for in this CITY OF EDINA 4801 West 50th Street • Edina, Minnesota 55424 www.EdinaMN.gov . 952-927-8861 . Fax 952-826-0389 iordinance. Section 4. This ordinance is effective immediately upon its passage and publication. First Reading: Second Reading: Published: ATTEST: Debra A. Mangen, City Clerk James B. Hovland, Mayor Please publishing in the Edina Sun Current on Send two affidavits of publication 0 Bill to Edina City Clerk 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 Ordinance was duly adopted by the Edina City Council at its Regular Meeting of , 2015, and as recorded in the Minutes of said Regular Meeting WITNESS my hand and seal of said City this day of , 2015 City Clerk • VII. REPORTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS A. Add Edina Heritage Landmark (EHL) Overlay Zoning to the R- I Single Dwelling Unit District Designation. Oskam House. 6901 Dakota Trail, Edina, MN Planner Presentation Planner Repya informed the Commission Mrs. Marri Oskam, 6901 Dakota Trail, is requesting to add her house and property to the Edina Heritage landmark Overlay Zoning Designation. The Heritage Preservation Board recommended that the Commission support this request. Repya reported the subject property is located on the east side of the 6900 block of Dakota Trail in the Indian Hills neighborhood. The existing single family home, an International style constructed in 1963, is situated on the west bank of Indianhead Lake, and has a 2 -car detached garage in front of the residence; connected by a roof -covered deck. This Contemporary home was designed by renowned, female architect, Elizabeth Close; who with her husband started the architectural firm of Close & Close in 1939. Repya explained the subject house is one of the first homes built on Indianhead Lake; the natural terrain remained untouched as the home nestled into the sloping hillside. There have been no additions to the homes since it was constructed, however it has been meticulously maintained, and is as shining an example of Mid -Century Contemporary architecture today as it was when constructed in 1963. Fearing her home could be subject to a future tear -down, Mrs. Oskam approached the Heritage Preservation Board to determine whether her home could be a candidate for designation as an Edina Heritage Landmark (EHL) which would provide protection from demolition Continuing, Repya noted upon the direction of the Heritage Preservation Board (HPB), Preservation Consultant Robert Vogel conducted an evaluation of the Oskam property and provided the HPB with a "Determination of Eligibility" concluding that, "The Oskam House is historically significant in the area of architecture under Criterion "C" of the City Code (Sec. 36- 714. (1) c. with the following eligibility criteria :Embodiment of the distinctive characteristics of an architectural style, design, period, type or method of construction; or that possess high artistic values, or that represents a significant and distinguishable entity whose components may lack individual distinction; or Important archeological data or the potential to yield important archeological data. Repya said in addition to being a noteworthy example of Modern residential architecture, the house is one of a relatively small number of post war residences in Edina designed by a female architect. Elizabeth ("Lisle") Scheu Close (1912-201 1) was one of the first women to graduate from the architecture school at the University of Minnesota. In partnership with her husband, architect Winston A. Close (1906-1997), she designed many modernist homes and other buildings and was an influential force in regional architecture. Her work is demonstrably Is important in women's history and architectural history." Page 4 of 9 • On September 9, 2014, the HPB voted to add 6901 Dakota Trail to the list of Edina properties eligible for Edina Heritage Landmark Designation, and instructed Consultant Vogel to prepare a nomination study identifying the significance of the home. Mr. Vogel and Planner Repya also worked with Mrs. Oskam to create a plan of treatment that would provide protection for the home she was seeking, as well as clear direction to future owners. Continuing, Planner Repya delivered a power point presentation highlighting aspects of the house and property. Repya concluded asking the Commission to provide support for the Heritage Preservation Board's recommendation to add the Edina Heritage Landmark (EHL) Overlay Zoning designation to the R- I Single Dwelling Unit District for 6901 Dakota Trail. Appearing for the Applicant Mrs. Marri Oskam, property owner. Discussion/Questions Commissioner Nemerov commented that in his opinion the house is very interesting; however, he questioned if the Commission supports the requested designation if something "goes wrong" with the house (leaking roof) would the City be required to repair it. Planner Repya responded the City bares no responsibility, • Chair Platteter asked if the property is designated and the house slips into disrepair what happens. Planner Repya responded disrepair is a possibility with any property; and would be addressed accordingly. Repya further explained the Heritage Preservation Board encourages maintenance of our locally designated properties, adding to date the City has had no issues with any of the designated properties. Repya said she expects the same with this property. Platteter said he drove by the home and found it blended well in the environment and was a beautiful property on the lake. Commissioner Olsen asked Planner Repya who requests Heritage Landmark Designation. Planner Repya responded in this instance the property owner requested the designation; however, the Heritage Preservation Board has identified properties as preservation worthy but to date the City has received no requests for designation. Chair Platteter asked Planner Repya if the City received any response from residents regarding the Morningside Bungalow study. Repya responded the Heritage Preservation Board did an extensive study on Morningside Bungalows; inviting property owners to learn about their properties and the possibility of landmark designation; however to date the City hasn't received any input from those owners. Commissioner Hobbs personally thanked Mrs. Oskam and family for their meticulous care of the property. He added it's just beautiful. Chair Platteter and Commissioners agreed with • Hobbs and also thanked Planner Repya for her presentation. Page 5of9 • Motion Commissioner Thorsen moved to support the designation of 6109 Dakota Trail as a Heritage Landmark. Commissioner Hobbs seconded the motion. All voted aye; motion carried. C. Sketch Plan — Bank of America. 6868 France Avenue, Edina, MN. Planner Presentation Planner Teague explained to new Commission Members that the sketch plan review process is a process that provides the applicant an opportunity to come before the Commission to gather feedback on a future project. Teague explained all Commission comments during the sketch plan process are non-binding, however, are informative for the applicant as they proceed with the formal application. Continuing, Teague reported the Commission is being asked to consider a sketch plan proposal to tear down the existing 3,098 square -foot Think Bank, and construct a new LEED Certified, • 7,190 square foot Bank of American with a drive -up ATM at 6868 France Avenue. Merrill Lunch would also be a tenant in the building. Teague said each use would have a separate entrance/exit into the building. Teague said the site is zoned POD -2, Planned Office District; therefore, the proposed uses are permitted. Teague asked the Commission to note the proposed building will be located on the existing 21.8 -acre parcel that houses an eight story building and the attached Tavern on France. Being part of that the site the parking and access would be shared�yvith existing uses. The proposal also includes storm water ponding areas that are uncommon along France Avenue. Teague said staff would recommend in this situation if the ponding areas are developed the ponds are also turned into an amenity such,as`�ater feature with a fountain. Teague noted the following would be required for a formal application: • Site Plan Review • Front Setback Variance from 35 -feet to 22 -feet for the building. • Front Yard Setback from 35 -feet to 20 -feet for the ATM drive through. • Variance to allow an ATM drive through to be located on a side of a building that faces property zoned R-1, Single Dwelling Unit District. Appearing for the Applicant • Anita Thomas and Aaron Greene Page 6 of 9 �1 • J�OORPOR�'�E/ 188fl EDINA PLANNING COMMISSION REPORT & RECOMMENDATION Originator Meeting Date Agenda # VII. A Joyce Repya July 8, 2015 Senior Planner APPLICANT: Mrs. Marri Oskam LOCATION: 6901 Dakota Trail REQUEST: Add Edina Heritage Landmark Overlay Zoning Designation to the Oskam House, 6901 Dakota Trail RECOMMENDED ACTION: Provide Support for the Heritage Preservation Board's recommendation to add the Edina Heritage Landmark (EHL) Overlay Zoning designation to the R-1 Single Dwelling Unit District for 6901 Dakota Trail INTRODUCTION: The subject property is located on the east side of the 6900 block of Dakota Trail in the Indian Hills neighborhood. The existing single family home, an International style constructed in 1963, is situated on the west bank of Indianhead Lake, and has a 2 -car detached garage in front of the residence; connected by a roof -covered deck. BACKGROUND: Built for owners Hendrik and Marri Oskam, this Contemporary home was designed by renowned, female architect, Elizabeth Close; who with her husband started the architectural firm of Close & Close in 1939. One of the first homes built on Indianhead Lake, the natural terrain remained untouched as the home nestled into the sloping hillside. There have been no additions to the homes since it was constructed, however it has been meticulously maintained, and is as shining an example of Mid -Century Contemporary architecture today as it was when constructed in 1963. Fearing her home could be subject to a future tear -down, Mrs. Oskam approached the 40 Heritage Preservation Board to determine whether her home could be a candidate for EHL Designation Request 6901 Dakota Trail July 8, 2015 • designation as an Edina Heritage Landmark (EHL) which would provide protection from demolition (Attachment #1). Upon the direction of the Heritage Preservation Board (HPB), Preservation Consultant Robert Vogel conducted an evaluation of the Oskam property and provided the HPB with a "Determination of Eligibility" concluding that, "The Oskam House is historically significant in the area of architecture under Criterion "C" of the City Code (Sec. 36-714. (1) c. In addition to being a noteworthy example of Modern residential architecture, the house is one of a relatively small number of post war residences in Edina designed by a female architect. Elizabeth ("Lisle") Scheu Close (1912-2011) earned a bachelors and masters degree from MIT, and became one of the first women to practice architecture in Minnesota. In partnership with her husband, architect Winston A. Close (1906-1997), she designed many modernist homes and other buildings and was an influential force in regional architecture. Her work is demonstrably important in women's history and architectural history." On September 9, 2014, the HPB voted to add 6901 Dakota Trail to the list of Edina properties eligible for Edina Heritage Landmark Designation, and instructed Consultant Vogel to prepare a nomination study identifying the significance of the home. Mr. Vogel and Planner Repya also worked with Mrs. Oskam to create a plan of treatment that would provide protection for the home she was seeking, as well as clear direction to future owners. On April 14, 2015, the HPB considered the request to designate the Oskam House an Edina Is Heritage Landmark property subject to the nomination study and plan of treatment approved by Mrs. Oskam. As required by code for pending landmark designations, the Minnesota Historical Society received a copy of the nomination study and plan of treatment for their consideration. In a letter dated June 5, 2015 (Attachment #2) Michael Koop opined that the Oskam house is an ideal candidate for local designation - he went on to recommend that the plan of treatment specifically address interior features of the home which were integral to the Close's modern design philosophy. Typically, only the exterior of Edina's landmark properties have been addressed in their respective plans of treatment, however in consideration of Mr. Koop's suggestion, Mrs. Oskam agreed that the interior design elements should be addressed, thus item #1 of the plan of treatment was amended to include those interior elements. 2 EHL Designation Request 6901 Dakota Trail July 8, 2015 • EDINA HERITAGE LANDMARK NOMINATION STUDY AND PLAN OF TREATMENT OSKAM HOUSE 6901 DAKOTA TRAIL Prepared by Robert C. Vogel Preservation Planning Consultant Edina Heritage Preservation Board revised June 16, 2015 INTRODUCTION This report documents the historic Oskam House for designation as an Edina Heritage Landmark. It identifies and locates the heritage resource, explains how it meets the heritage landmark eligibility criteria, makes the case for historical significance and integrity, and outlines a plan of treatment for the property. In general, the city heritage preservation program has adopted the conventions and terminology of the National Register of Historic Places in its documentation of Edina Heritage Landmarks. Once a property is rezoned as a heritage landmark by the City Council, the plan of treatment contained in the nomination report becomes the official site preservation plan. The subject property is owned and occupied by Marri Oskam. It occupies Lot 1 of Block 2 in the Overholt Hills Sally Addition. The property identification number (PIN) is 06-116-21-34- 0058. The Oskam House was determined eligible for heritage landmark designation by the Heritage Preservation Board in 2014. DESCRIPTION The Oskam House is a two-level, single-family residence in the International style with a rectangular plan, a butterfly roof, post and beam construction, a walk -out basement, and a two - car detached garage. In keeping with its style, it is carefully integrated within its site. The exterior walls are clad with vertically grooved redwood siding. The interior of the house reflects the modernistic aesthetic in its vigorously functional open plan, geometric shapes, flat surfaces, exposed post and beam structure, and indirect lighting. The floors in the kitchen and other functional areas are covered with brick pavers, a feature borrowed from Dutch vernacular architecture. The floors in the living room, study and bedrooms are carpeted. The house is set into a sloping half -acre lot overlooking Indianhead Lake. The detached garage echoes the house in design and materials and is accessed by a paved driveway from the street. When viewed from the public right-of-way, the house looks smaller than it really is and presents a somewhat stark appearance, but the rear (east) elevation features large windows overlooking the lake and surrounding woods. The property is in an excellent state of preservation and retains a high degree of historical integrity. 3 EHL Designation Request 6901 Dakota Trail July 8, 2015 • HISTORICAL SIGNIFICANCE The Oskam House qualifies for designation as an Edina Heritage Landmark by meeting the criteria for evaluation set forth in City Code §36-714. Its historical significance is the product of its association with the broad themes of suburban development and Midcentury Modern residential architecture in Edina. The property is widely recognized by architects and architectural historians as one of the outstanding residential examples of the International style in the Twin Cities area. The house is in excellent condition and retains historic integrity of those features necessary to convey its significance. The house was built in 1963 for the late Dr. Hendrik J. Oskam (d. 2001), professor of electrical engineering at the University of Minnesota, and his wife Marrigje M. Oskam, who is the current owner. It was designed by Elizabeth Scheu "Lisl" Close (1912-2011) of Close Associates, a firm well known for its role in helping to disseminate the Modern Movement philosophy and aesthetic in Minnesota. One of the first women licensed to practice architecture in Minnesota; Lisl Close (although she refused to call herself a woman architect) was a role model for a generation of women who aspired to careers in what was then a male -dominated profession. The International style developed in Europe during the 1920s and became popular in the United States during the middle decades of the twentieth century. Minimalist and utilitarian in concept, the common characteristics of International style houses are their compact plans, •simple geometric forms (usually rectilinear), undecorated exterior walls, and open interior spaces; glass and reinforced concrete were the preferred materials of construction, although regional variants sometimes incorporated wood, stone, and other indigenous materials. In the context of Twin Cities suburban development, the International style encompasses the period from roughly 1938 until 1975, but it reached its height of popularity around 1960. Architect - designed houses in the International style are rare in Edina, where postwar builders generally favored house forms based on the Ranch style over more avant-garde manifestations of Modernism. PLAN OF TREATMENT By ordinance, no city permit may be issued for certain kinds of development activities (demolition, moving a building, new construction, and excavation) involving a designated Heritage Landmark without a Certificate of Appropriateness (COA) approved by the Heritage Preservation Board. The City of Edina has adopted the Secretary of the Interior's Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties as the authoritative guide for COA review decisions. Within the framework of these standards, and in consultation with the property owner, the Heritage Preservation Board has adopted the following plan of treatment specifically tailored to the preservation requirements of the Oskam House: 1. The Oskam House will be preserved in place and rehabilitated so that those features which are significant to its historical and architectural values can be preserved intact. • These features include but are not limited to the following: 1 story with two levels of living space; compact rectangular plan (wider than deep); continuous low pitch "butterfly" roof; wood exterior wall cladding with vertical grooves, casement windows; EHL Designation Request 6901 Dakota Trail July 8, 2015 balcony -type porch; open floor plan with living room, dining room and kitchen connected on the main level; fireplace with end -wall chimney; walk -out basement; and detached garage. 2. Historically significant character defining architectural features should not be altered or destroyed as a result of any project permitted, funded, or assisted by the City of Edina. 3. Whenever possible, deteriorated architectural features should be repaired rather than replaced. In the event replacement is necessary, the new material should match the material being replaced in composition, design, color, texture, and other visual qualities. 4. Construction of new additions and adjacent accessory structures should be kept to a minimum and they should be designed to be compatible with the historic house in scale, size, and building materials. Additions should be designed to be distinguishable from the original construction and reversible. 5. Minor alterations and small structural additions should not be discouraged when such alterations and additions do not destroy significant historic architectural features and the new work is compatible with the size, scale, color, material, and character of the historic property. 6. Mechanical equipment should be placed in an inconspicuous location where installation will require the least possible alteration to the structural integrity and physical appearance of the historic house and garage. 7. Landscape features such as decks, patios, mature trees, walkways, and setbacks that have historically linked the house to its environment are important parts of the property's history and should be retained intact, whenever possible. Attachments: 1. Request for Edina Heritage Landmark Evaluation 2. Comment from Minnesota Historical Society dated June 5, 2015 3. Location Maps 4. Support from Jane King Hession, architectural historian 5. HPB Minutes: April 14, 2015 6. "Elizabeth "List" Scheu Close, FAIR, by Jane King Hession, Docomomo, 8/11/2014 7. "Elizabeth Close, FAIA, Gold Medal Winner", Sparks, September 2002 8. "A look at mid-century modernist homes through the work of Close Associates" 9. Edina City Code: Article IX. - Edina Heritage Landmarks • 5 • 0 o e • INcolipc ZE9/ ,888 DATE: C Y ._ [X — ' Llo(' y REQUEST FOR EDINA HERITAGE LANDMARK EVALUATION FOR INFORMATION: Edina Planning Department — Joyce Repya, Senior Planner 4801 West Fiftieth Street * Edina, MN 55424 * (952) 826-0462 FAX (952) 826-0389 PROPERTY ADDRESS: OWNER EMAIL: �jkt, KIS ( 0SEO-N&4, OF -r' PHONE: STYLE OF HOME: �LIj Q —. ,c � c'r � I � k iL(0 1 K0 DESCRIPTION OF THE KNOWN HISTORY OF THE HOME: 4-0r�ER}vu ki 7 - IMPORTANT IMPORTANT EXTERIOR ELEMENTS OF THE HOME: ADDITIONAL INFORMATION REGARDING THE HISTORIC INTEGRITY OF THE HOME: Include photographs and any information determined pertinent to the proposed • designation. f�Yv Property Owner's Signature Date • ADDENDUM I Construction of the house started in August 1963 and was completed in February, 1964. My husband, Hendrik Jan ( now deceased), and I had chosen Elizabeth Close of Close Associates, Inc., Architects, to design the house in early 1963 and expressed the following wishes to her to create a house with: a spacious feeling, lots of light and few bedrooms that would compliment the site. (An area ordinance stipulated that the site was not to be altered and the architect complied) During the conversations that followed different proposals and ideas were discussed until we arrived at the final design. The fact that we had an excellent rapport with the architect made the design process harmonious and exciting. The result was so satisfactory to us that in all the years that we have lived in the house we never felt any need to alter it. ADDENDUM II • This information was sent to me by Gar Hargens AIA. 1. Clear, all heart redwood T&G vertical siding with raked side out. Close Associates used this distinctive product for interior ceilings and some exterior soffitts, but this house is the only design I am aware of where Ms Close chose to use it as siding. The raking or grooves were claw marks from the sawmill. Ms Close told me she saw this interesting pattern on S3S boards at a job site and told the carpenters to install it "wrong side out". Another product from that era was Cement Board (w/asbestos). The Closes used it mostly for exterior soffits but also for siding as on the Oskam House. 2. Butterfly roof. This gracefully shaped roof is also a simple, practical way to collect rain water on this sloping site and direct it away from the house and into the Lake. 3. Orientation to Sun and Views. The Lake view and passive solar gain were the factors that determined the home's orientation. The open stairway to the Lower Level takes full advantage of both. Gar Hargens AIA, President/Owner Close Associates Inc., Architects Office: 612-339-0979 gark,closearchitects.com www.closearchitects.com N'w {y.� ill �r .t MLI Wt IL _ tt r �. ... � ryy �- r q�e//�• ,yn- 0 it� `r s C. 3.a • Oskam House: 6901 Dakota Trail • 0 �r_,`• �;� ' {* +fig F�4. iz jt� 5 y Photo courtesy of William B. Olexy pq �� ��;� r � rr ,.� a e ' . \\ I �'. 9 __ r ��. `, ,..,� y ��` { k ix S ty. � 'a � �r 1 j. �.. �-.�:k �c =I I E t Minnesota Historical Society June 5, 2015 Joyce Repya City of Edina 4801 W 50th Street Edina MN 55424 Using the Power of History to Transform Lives PRESERVING SHARING : CONNECTING RE: Local designation of the Hendrik and Marri Oskam House, 6901 Dakota Trail, MHS Referral No. 2015- 1788 Dear Joyce, Thank you for the opportunity to comment on the above referenced designation. It has been reviewed pursuant to Minnesota Statutes §471.193, subd. 6., and Edina City Code Sec. 36-717. Located on a sloping hillside overlooking Indianhead Lake, the Oskam House is an International style, two-story residence clad with vertically grooved redwood siding. Typical of the style, the Oskam House features a flat roof, smooth and uniform wall surfaces, a large expanse of windows facing Indianhead Lake, a projecting balcony and upper floor, and an absence of ornamentation. The Oskam House was built in 1963 according to the design of Elizabeth and Winston Close. Formed in 1938 by Lisl Scheu and Win Close, Close Associates has been recognized for its modern, innovative designs and careful consideration of site. The Osl<am House is a significant and extremely well-preserved example of an International style, Close design. As such, it is an ideal candidate for local designation. We note that the landmark nomination form makes specific reference to the interior features and open floor plan of the Oskam House, which is appropriate given that interior spaces are an integral component of the Close's modern design philosophy. We believe it would be appropriate to specifically call out and designate the interior of the house, given its importance and integrity. To that end, it would be best to include a variety of photos of the interior spaces with the nomination form. Please send copies of those photos for our files as well. If you have any questions regarding our assessment of this property, please feel free to contact me at 651.259.3452 or michael.koop(iilmnhs.oi-p. Sincerely, yi Michael Koop Heritage Preservation Department cc: Ryan Weber, HPB Chair Minnesota Historical Society, 345 Kellogg Boulevard West, Saint Paul, Minnesota 55102 651-259-3000 • 888-727-8386 • www.mnlis.org A- ), • r: Parcel 06-116-21-34-0058 ID: Owner Marrigje M Oskam Name: Parcel 6901 Dakota Tr Address: Edina, MN 55439 Property Residential Lake Shore Type: Home- Homestead stead: Parcel 0"51 acres Area: 22,012 sq ft A- 3 Map Scale: 1" = 50 ft. N Print Date: 2/11/2014 This map is a compilation of data from various sources and is furnished "AS IS" with no representation orwarranty expressed or implied, including fitness of any particular purpose, merchantability, or the accuracy and completeness of the information shown" COPYRIGHT © HENNEPIN COUNTY 2014 r- O Parcel 06-116-21-34-0058 ID: Owner Marrigje M Oskam Name: Parcel 6901 Dakota Tr Address: Edina, MN 55439 Property Residential Lake Shore Type: Home- Homestead stead: Parcel 0"51 acres Area: 22,012 sq ft A- 3 Map Scale: 1" = 50 ft. N Print Date: 2/11/2014 This map is a compilation of data from various sources and is furnished "AS IS" with no representation orwarranty expressed or implied, including fitness of any particular purpose, merchantability, or the accuracy and completeness of the information shown" COPYRIGHT © HENNEPIN COUNTY 2014 -7-7 f 0—, J -7 .4 Me L4kd "e - L N-- A aLa c.—j, :—a C= 1= c—, 7-7 77, --XoUnO� B Brdd 7" r6d 7 J4J C.19 Cul •,I Ch—h 5 =5 J........ .. .7P5rk-i—= D-1 iandaiii i 'a' Ind Creek Valley Indian 1:--. —3 E % -4 k Hish 7; it• _ - _ _� - \ _ 1' eighfFs= ...... fleight" LA -7 /—j -jjE- Ch.. ndiaij--Vii ch" M, T rospeAJ6i6jI :-a-Fe- Braernar Hills N-1 -Y, ]ON— C77— \14 L LA", • o I Da.,,Pdycc jrwj---, �� y odno M000000r000c \L4 -LL • o I Da.,,Pdycc jrwj---, �� y odno M000000r000c , �V rC1�tL.. \ �---•-- + t �:—i IL a -I is ;I.,. � t{ 1 ��-t ��r- �L' _ � ... r — I�� .a\ 1� . r r �4,Yt" '" -�~ ��� ' �'� •rte_ i � ._�. �ti ���^s�ti ,+ I �a vi a E o ado (Golf Tertace Heights t' . � �t� ^; ��' � --� `�--' �� : ys'�s� • �- . if'sl�� �! �- r �7-�7 ��� �rT�--t-� �- _ 4 ' �� A� �,!- !Y1 �{-Uk "�:W:"'Y`..J-�l1_ �}-� II J •II�V'. _ � r:. EE FT � CU � � �,� ."• � c`Q�; '�rrs�` -�La�k %`� � I ��.�:s' ,7.-r•r" 4� rd untly{"-tea- i3''P Elf., _... r-� �s�' F�� Bredesel�P� `M rr iy�'�rr � ..-ii X91 IhCSq�I�.Y , F3" w ..c.y_,�% fFY �C�tt,.>,y. i�FT�•LL7. � 'J. w. l4dla[i.�1 1 reek Valle IS '41,at;' , 7 ti '" QTR uFa $fit 'I 7tji�;Lake'""tomeha The � rrJ -j'-- !'�— �� •+ _ Brookview Heights f -'-ti •.�"} ,. i j _ 7' -ma III i j -stn n i 4�i;' : ji i i � 1 ' I I Eli ^i Braemar Hillsr '' ' < �� { j ake Efma�r— �" rk I _ away Hi ty f 7_ Gent es A , ! N Edina Neighborhoods W S E Engineering Dept Council Approved: April 16, 2013 Joyce Repya Dear Ms. Repya, My name is Jane King Hession and I am an Edina -based architectural historian. I am in the process of writing and researching on book on the work of Winston and Elizabeth "Lisl" Close. As such, I have had the opportunity to learn more about the Close -designed Oskam House in Edina through my contact with Marri Oskam. I am well aware of her effort to secure designation for the house through the City of Edina and fully support it. As she will be unable to be at the upcoming Edina Heritage Board meeting at which this designation is to be considered, she asked me if I would represent her. If I were not in New Zealand, I would be happy to do so. The best I can do is to offer a few brief words (Sorry, but I am traveling and am about to lose my internet connection for a few days.) The Oskam House is a well-preserved, significant example of the residential work of Elizabeth and Winston Close (Close Associates), the first architectural firm (founded in 1938) in Minnesota that dedicated itself exclusively to modern design. Vienna -born Lisl Scheu Close lead the design process. Lisl, who passed away in 2011 at the age of 99, was the first woman architect to be awarded the Minnesota AIA Gold Medal—the highest award that organization gives. Architecturally, the work of the Closes is held in high regard by Minnesota architects. laisl and the Oskams (all European born) shared similar philosophies about (and knowledge of) modern architecture, and an admiration for functional, efficient design. As such, their working relationship was particularly fruitful. The house, which stands on a steep, lakeside site, bears all the hallmarks of a Close design: sensitive placement on a site, use of natural (and in some cases unconventional materials), lack of ornamentation, an efficient floor plan, and not a wasted inch of space. It is a unique design created for one set of clients, but it also well represents the work of Close Associates. Remarkably, the house is still owned by the original client and it has been well preserved for decades. What is truly special about it is that it is a model—in this age of energy and environmental concerns—of how to build a house that is spacious (but not huge or bloated), that is suited in size and scale to its site (but does not dominate it), and that retained its relevance overtime. We would all do well to remember that the word "heritage" can also refer to significant works of architecture from the modern era. The Oskam House is a significant work of architecture by one of Minnesota's most significant modern architects. I hope the Edina Heritage Board will honor it, as it deserves, with historic designation. Thank you, Jane King Hession 40 Orom: Jane Hession <janekinghession@icloud.com> Sent: Sunday, April 12, 2015 1:00 AM To: Joyce Repya Cc: Marri Oskam Subject: Oskam House Dear Ms. Repya, My name is Jane King Hession and I am an Edina -based architectural historian. I am in the process of writing and researching on book on the work of Winston and Elizabeth "Lisl" Close. As such, I have had the opportunity to learn more about the Close -designed Oskam House in Edina through my contact with Marri Oskam. I am well aware of her effort to secure designation for the house through the City of Edina and fully support it. As she will be unable to be at the upcoming Edina Heritage Board meeting at which this designation is to be considered, she asked me if I would represent her. If I were not in New Zealand, I would be happy to do so. The best I can do is to offer a few brief words (Sorry, but I am traveling and am about to lose my internet connection for a few days.) The Oskam House is a well-preserved, significant example of the residential work of Elizabeth and Winston Close (Close Associates), the first architectural firm (founded in 1938) in Minnesota that dedicated itself exclusively to modern design. Vienna -born Lisl Scheu Close lead the design process. Lisl, who passed away in 2011 at the age of 99, was the first woman architect to be awarded the Minnesota AIA Gold Medal—the highest award that organization gives. Architecturally, the work of the Closes is held in high regard by Minnesota architects. laisl and the Oskams (all European born) shared similar philosophies about (and knowledge of) modern architecture, and an admiration for functional, efficient design. As such, their working relationship was particularly fruitful. The house, which stands on a steep, lakeside site, bears all the hallmarks of a Close design: sensitive placement on a site, use of natural (and in some cases unconventional materials), lack of ornamentation, an efficient floor plan, and not a wasted inch of space. It is a unique design created for one set of clients, but it also well represents the work of Close Associates. Remarkably, the house is still owned by the original client and it has been well preserved for decades. What is truly special about it is that it is a model—in this age of energy and environmental concerns—of how to build a house that is spacious (but not huge or bloated), that is suited in size and scale to its site (but does not dominate it), and that retained its relevance overtime. We would all do well to remember that the word "heritage" can also refer to significant works of architecture from the modern era. The Oskam House is a significant work of architecture by one of Minnesota's most significant modern architects. I hope the Edina Heritage Board will honor it, as it deserves, with historic designation. Thank you, Jane King Hession 40 • MINUTES Regular Meeting of the Edina Heritage Preservation Board Edina City Hall — Community Room Tuesday, April 14, 2015 7:00 p.m. I. CALL TO ORDER 7:00 P.M. 11. ROLL CALL Answering roll call was Chair Weber and Members, Moore, McLellan, Sussman, Christiaansen, Birdman, Kelly, Pearson and Student Members Otness and Druckman. Absent was Member O'Brien. Staff present was Senior Planner, Joyce Repya. Ill. APPROVAL OF MEETING AGENDA Member Kelly moved to approve the meeting agenda. Member Moore seconded the motion. All voted aye. The motion carried. IV. APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES March 10, 2015 Member Moore moved approval of the minutes from the March 10`h meeting. Member Birdman • seconded the motion. All voted aye. The motion carried. V. COMMUNITY COMMENT - None VI. REPORTS & RECOMMENDATIONS I. Edina Heritage Landmark Nomination - Oskam House - 6901 Dakota Trail Planner Repya reported that the HPB received a request for Edina Heritage Landmark designation from Marri Oskam, the owner of 6901 Dakota Trail. Mrs. Oskam explained her motivation for requesting the heritage landmark designation of her home centered on her desire to prevent a future owner of the property from tearing the house down - particularly in light of the tear -down trend underway in Edina. Upon receipt of the request, Preservation Consultant Robert Vogel conducted a nomination study and worked on a plan of treatment for the property in collaboration with Mrs. Oskam. The nomination study describes the Oskam House as a two-level, single-family residence in the International style with a rectangular plan, a butterfly roof, post and beam construction, a walk- out basement, and a two -car detached garage. In keeping with its style, it is carefully integrated within its site. The exterior walls are clad with vertically grooved redwood siding. The interior of the house reflects the modernistic aesthetic in its vigorously functional open plan, geometric shapes, flat surfaces, exposed post and beam structure, and indirect lighting. The floors in the • kitchen and other functional areas are covered with brick pavers, a feature borrowed from Dutch vernacular architecture. The floors in the living room, study and bedrooms are carpeted. A -5 Edina Heritage Preservation Board Minutes • April 14, 2015 The house is set into a sloping half -acre lot overlooking Indianhead Lake. The detached garage echoes the house in design and materials and is accessed by a paved driveway from the street. When viewed from the public right-of-way, the house looks smaller than it really is and presents a somewhat stark appearance, but the rear (east) elevation features large windows overlooking the lake and surrounding woods. The property is in an excellent state of preservation and retains a high degree of historical integrity. In the nomination study, Mr. Vogel observed that the Oskam House qualifies for designation as an Edina Heritage Landmark by meeting the criteria for evaluation set forth in City Code §36- 714. Its historical significance is the product of its association with the broad themes of suburban development and Midcentury Modern residential architecture in Edina. The property is widely recognized by architects and architectural historians as one of the outstanding residential examples of the International style in the Twin Cities area. The house is in excellent condition and retains historic integrity of those features necessary to convey its significance. The house was built in 1963 for the late Dr. Hendrik J. Oskam (d. 2001), professor of electrical engineering at the University of Minnesota, and his wife Marrigje M. Oskam, who is the current owner. It was designed by Elizabeth Scheu "Lisl" Close (1912-2011) of Close Associates, a firm well known for its role in helping to disseminate the Modern Movement philosophy and • aesthetic in Minnesota. One of the first women licensed to practice architecture in Minnesota; Lisl Close (although she refused to call herself a woman architect) was a role model for a generation of women who aspired to careers in what was then a male -dominated profession. The International style developed in Europe during the 1920s and became popular in the United States during the middle decades of the twentieth century. Minimalist and utilitarian in concept, the common characteristics of International style houses are their compact plans, simple geometric forms (usually rectilinear), undecorated exterior walls, and open interior spaces; glass and reinforced concrete were the preferred materials of construction, although regional variants sometimes incorporated wood, stone, and other indigenous materials. In the context of Twin Cities suburban development, the International style encompasses the period from roughly 1938 until 1975, but it reached its height of popularity around 1960. Architect -designed houses in the International style are rare in Edina, where postwar builders generally favored house forms based on the Ranch style over more avant-garde manifestations of Modernism. Planner Repya further explained that the following recommended plan of treatment for the property was created in collaboration with the homeowner, Mrs. Oskam: PLAN OF TREATMENT By ordinance, no city permit may be issued for certain kinds of development activities (demolition, moving a building, new construction, and excavation) involving a designated Heritage Landmark without a Certificate of Appropriateness (COA) approved by the Heritage is Preservation Board. The City of Edina has adopted the Secretary of the Interior's Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties as the authoritative guide for COA review decisions. 2 Edina Heritage Preservation Board Minutes • April 14, 2015 Within the framework of these standards, and in consultation with the property owner, the Heritage Preservation Board has adopted the following plan of treatment specifically tailored to the preservation requirements of the Oskam House: I. The Oskam House will be preserved in place and rehabilitated so that those features which are significant to its historical and architectural values can be preserved intact. 2. Historically significant character defining architectural features should not be altered or destroyed as a result of any project permitted, funded, or assisted by the City of Edina. 3. Whenever possible, deteriorated architectural features should be repaired rather than replaced. In the event replacement is necessary, the new material should match the material being replaced in composition, design, color, texture, and other visual qualities. 4. Construction of new additions and adjacent accessory structures should be kept to a minimum and they should be designed to be compatible with the historic house in scale, size, and building materials. Additions should be designed to be distinguishable from the original construction and reversible. 5. Minor alterations and small structural additions should not be discouraged when such alterations and additions do not destroy significant historic architectural features and the new work is compatible with the size, scale, color, material, and character of the historic property. 6. Mechanical equipment should be placed in an inconspicuous location where installation will require the least possible alteration to the structural integrity and physical appearance of the historic house and garage. 7. Landscape features such as decks, patios, mature trees, walkways, and setbacks that have historically linked the house to its environment are important parts of the property's history and should be retained intact, whenever possible. Ms. Repya explained that Mrs. Oskam was unable to attend the meeting, however she asked Jane King Hession, an Edina resident and architectural historian to represent her in supporting the request for Edina Heritage Landmark designation. Ms. Hession is currently out of the country; however she submitted an email to the HPB heartily endorsing the proposed landmark designation of the Oskam home. Planner Repya concluded that Staff recommends that the HPB nominate 6901 Dakota Trail for Edina Heritage Landmark Designation and submit Mrs. Oskam's request to the Planning Commission and ultimately the City Council who is responsible for the final determination. Findings for the nomination are found in the nomination study, and the conditions for the designation are found in the proposed plan of treatment. Ms. Repya also pointed out that as required by city code, the proposed nomination if approved by the HPB will be sent to the Minnesota State Historic Preservation Office providing 60 days for them to submit comments relative to the proposed designation. The City Council will is consider the proposed landmark designation after SHPO's 60 day comment period. 3 Edina Heritage Preservation Board Minutes April 14, 2015 Board Comments The board engaged in a brief discussion gathering clarification on design elements of the home. Member Kelly observed that when she drove by the home to become acquainted with the property, Mrs. Oskam invited her on a tour. Ms. Kelly commented that the home has been impeccably maintained, and with its original Danish Modern furnishings it stands out as well deserving of an Edina Heritage Landmark designation. Motion Member Moore expressed his enthusiasm for the proposal by moving approval of a recommendation to the City Council that the Oskam House at 6901 Dakota Trail receive the Edina Heritage Landmark overlay zoning designation. Member Kelly seconded the motion. All voted aye. The motion carried. VI1. 2015 HERITAGE AWARD Planner Repya explained that the two following nominations were received for the 2015 Edina Heritage Award: 1. Savory's Gardens - 5300 Whiting Avenue Site of the 2014 summer tour, Savory's Gardens has been in operation since 1947 when it was one of three nursery businesses operating in the city. Today, only Savory's remains and thrives in its hidden niche amongst a residential neighborhood; and 2. 5201 Wooddale Avenue - A private residence This home has undergone an extensive remodel/addition project that was sensitive to the original 1935 home. In these times when homeowners would rather tear down an older home and start over; it was good to see the owners appreciate and expand upon the "old bones" of this lovely home. Ms. Repya observed that the nomination for 5201 Wooddale Avenue did riot include all of the required information for a nomination (photos, homeowner information, etc.). However, the recent addition to the home was well executed, preserving the original home in lieu of tearing it down and building a new home. Board members agreed, suggesting that more information be gathered on the property, with the nomination being filed for consideration in the future. Member Christiaansen commented that she believed the heritage award should be presented to pubic/civic spaces with a focus on the heritage of the city that the people can visit rather than private residences. In these times with so many homes in the community being renovated, to call out one home as being more significant than the others does not fulfill the intention of the heritage award program. is Board members discussed how the 2014 Heritage Award recipient 5501 Londonderry Road (private residence) was unique. Built in 1956, it was designed by the son of Frank Lloyd Wright, 11 0 Elizabeth "Lisl" Scheu Close, FAIA Published on docomomo united states (http://docomomo-us.org) Home > content > Elizabeth "Lis]" Scheu Close, FAIA Elizabeth "List" Scheu Close, FAIA Published by info on Mon, 2014-08-11 17:08 Page 1 of 4 y Jane King Hession 'Long before she became an architect, a Fellow in •" the American Institute of rchitects (AIA), and the first (and only) woman to ,receive AIA Minnesota's *� Gold Medal I,], Elizabeth Scheu Close was eeply immersed in - architecture. In 1912, the g ear of her birth, her parents commissioned architect Adolf Loos to design a residence in Vienna, Austria. Not only is the radically modern Scheu House significant in the annals of architectural history, it played a major role in determining Lisl's future profession and shaping her architectural aesthetic. Photo (left): The Hendrik and Marri Oskam House, 1963, Edina, Minnesota. Photo credit:© William B. Olexy, Modern House Productions Informally known as the "Giant's Staircase" for its stepped conformation, the unadorned Scheu House stood in stunning contrast to the old world villas that predominated in Vienna's elegant Hietzing neighborhood, which flanks the grounds of Schonbrunn Palace, a former Habsburg summer retreat. Lisl's parents, Gustav Scheu, a lawyer and social democratic city councilman, and Helene Scheu-Riesz, a writer and translator of children's books who was active in international peace and women's movements, httP ://docomomo-us.or /P rint/1219 A,(4,2 g 4/6/2015 • Pi • Elizabeth "Lisl" Scheu Close, FAIA Page 2 of 4 were as unorthodox and forward thinking as the residence they commissioned. Their house became a salon for friends and colleagues from Vienna's political and artistic circles, as well as a magnet for a wide range of international visitors. Lisl remembered the house as being full of lively conversation, music, and ideas. Photo (right): Garden view of the Scheu House by Adolf Loos, 1912, Vienna, Austria. Photo credit: © William B. Olexy, Modern House Productions World War I IShe began her architectural education at the Technische Hochschule in Vienna. As political tensions heightened and the Nazis rose to power, Lisl chose to leave Austria in 1932. With assistance from American department store magnate Edward Filene, a family friend and frequent Ssitor to the Scheu House, she traveled to the United tates and enrolled at MIT where she earned her BArch 'in 1934 and her M.Arch in 1935. She was the only woman in her graduate school class. In graduate school, she met Minnesota native Winston "Win" A. Close, who would become her architectural partner and husband. The mid -1930s was not a propitious time to be seeking employment as an architect --particularly for women. Nonetheless, Lisl further narrowed her options by limiting her search to firms that shared her commitment to modern design. She also hoped to work on public housing, a legacy from her father who, as advisor for 'settlement and housing for Vienna, strove to alleviate the critical shortage of shelter that plagued the city following She applied to three firms: Wiliam Lescaze would not employ her because he believed she would be a distraction in the drafting room; Richard Neutra offered to hire her if she would pay him $20 a month for the privilege; Oskar Stonorov hired her. For Stonorov she worked on Westfield Acres, a PWA public housing project in Camden, New Jersey. Photo (above): Elizabeth "List" Scheu Close, c. 1940. Photo credit: Courtesy of Roy Close Her tenure with Stonorov was brief as Winston Close advised her of an opportunity to join the firm of Magney and Tusler in Minneapolis and work on Sumner Field, a WPA project. In 1938 Lisl and Win opened the firm Scheu and Close (later Close Associates [Z]) in Minneapolis and two months later, they married. http://docomomo-us.org/print/1219 firm's "Opus One" the 1938 Faulkner ise, the first residence in Minnesota that was ired by the rnational Style. imissioned by three 4/6/2015 • Elizabeth "Lisl" Scheu Close, FAIA Page 3 of 4 for University of sota professors, the featured flat roofs rip windows, and A ornamentation. In rther departures :onvention, the employed Homesote, a material not typically used in residential construction, for some interior finishes. To add a touch of color, they paved the driveway with blue -tinted concrete. Photo (left):The Faulkner House, 1938, Minneapolis, was the first house designed by the firm of Scheu and Close. Photo credit: Courtesy of Jane King Hession In its own way, the Faulkner House was as startling a presence in its quiet Minneapolis neighborhood as the Scheu house had been in Hietzing. One local publication reported (perhaps apocryphally) that the shock of seeing the modern house induced a heart attack in an unsuspecting passerby. At the very least, the Faulkner House initiated a discussion about modern architecture in the state. Although the Closes partnered in the firm for fifty years, Winston also served as university architect for the University iof Minnesota during much of that time. As such, Lisl assumed the lion's share of the firm's daily operations and took the lead on design work and client relations. The firm specialized in residential work, but also designed numerous hospitals, clinics, laboratories, and educational buildings. Notable among these is the 1974 Freshwater Biological Institute in Excelsior, Minnesota; a building designed to facilitate scientific research relating to issues of freshwater n lakes, rivers, and marshes. During World War Il, Lisl Close was recruited by the Minnesota-based Page & Hill Company to design prefab housing. The company approached her when it learned that the manufacture and distribution of prefab houses was the subject of her undergraduate hesis at MIT. For Page & Hill she designed at least twenty-five house models each engineered to be packed and shipped in a single truckload. Hundreds of the houses were built across the upper Midwest and Northwest. Photo (right): The Freshwater Biological Institute, 1974, Excelsior, Minnesota. Photo credit:© William B. Olexy, Modern House Productions http://docomomo-us.org/print/1219 4/6/2015 Elizabeth "Lisl" Scheu Close, FAIA Page 4 of 4 During the Cold War, one of her prefab designs for Page & Hill became a propagandistic tool for the • United States government when the State Department selected a "Jubilaire" model to represent "the typical American House," at the 1950 German Industrial Exposition in Berlin. The house, which was stocked with such household marvels as the mix master, vacuum cleaner, and television, was visited by over forty thousand people during the course of the fair. A State Department official later reported the house was "a gratifying demonstration of what can be accomplished in selling the American democratic way of life." Scores of Close houses stand in Minnesota including fourteen in Saint Paul's University Grove, a University of Minnesota -owned enclave of 103 architect -designed houses. Among them is the Closes' own home, designed in 1953. Although the firm never advertised its services, it enjoyed extensive patronage within university circles where the Closes' design sensibilities resonated with potential clients, many of whom-- like Lisl and Win Close --were in the vanguard of modernism in their respective fields. • Photo (right): The Elizabeth and Winston Close House, 1953, University Grove, Saint Paul. Photo credit: © William B. Olexy, Modern House Productions is Before the main text Full width (900 pixels) Tags: NEWSLETTER [3] Source URL: htti)://docomomo-us.org/news/elizabeth lisl scheu close faia Links: [1] http://www.aia-mn.org/wp-content/uploads/Gold-Medal-Recipients-thru-2012.pdf [2] http://closehomes.org/materials/2010-03-Preservationist.pdf [3] http://docomomo-us.org/category_13 http://docomomo-us.org/print/1219 4/6/2015 • • In this issue: Page 2: 25 -Year Award Winner Page 3: AIA Minneapolis Page 4: Con't Education Page 5: IDP/ Convention Programs Page 6: People and Firms Page 7: Calendar Page 8: Architecture Minnesota • w Elizabeth Close, FAIA, will be award- ed the 2002 AIA Minnesota Gold Medal, AIA Minnesota's highest award bestowed on an individual mem- ber. It serves as recognition for a life- time of distinguished achievement and sig- nificant contributions Elizabeth CI_, FAIA to arc_hitectur�e_ Elizabeth, with a� bachelors and masters degree from MIT, became one of the firsrwomen-to--praetic-arc i elTt cTurd'"�— innesota She and her husband, Winston Close, opeiTect- eir firm in 1939. Thirty years later she was elevated to the College of Fellows of AIA National. Truly, her contributions to architecture are significant and influential -- our cities are a better place because of them. Elizabeth was born in Vienna Austria In 1912 and grew up in a house designed by an early mod- ernist, Adolf Loos. This influence of modernism is the essence of Elizabeth's signature style. Her innovative designs of buildings and houses strong- ly relate to their sites through use of modular planning, simplicity and natural materials. Some noteworthy projects include: Duff House in Wayzata (AIA MN 1959 Honorable Mention and Now that Fall is fast approaching it's time to shift into high gear. The AIA Minnesota Conven- tion is occupying the minds and work of all staff members. The Convention Comm- ittee is planning an exciting 4 day event with the theme of Crossing Borders. Beverly Hauschild-Baron, Convention Commit - Non. AIA tee Chair, David Eijadi, AIA defines the theme as "exploring and celebrating the con- nections between design, communities and cul- tures." We will illustrate ways in which architects A-7 September 2002 Sparks is the monthly newsletter of AIA Minnesota, A Society of the American Institute of Architects www,aia-mn.org Volume 15, #8 ATA MN 1988 25 -Year Award Winner), Skywater, an earth -sheltered cabin on the St. Croix (1940); Gray Freshwater Biological Institute in Navarre; Rood House, Minneapolis; 14 houses in University Grove; Ferguson Hall (Music School) at the U of M (recognized nationally as one of the premier music schools); the Lippincott House (across from the FLW Willey House in Prospect Park); the Dayton House on Lake Minnetonka; Metropolitian Medical Center (with Horty Elving); and the Close Office in the Seward neighbor- hood. Her exceptional design work through these and numerous other projects have "a consistency about them - low maintenance, strikingly unique appear- ance, well -integrated with its site, openings to light and views to private yard, spacious floor plans, flat roofs, deep overhangs, pre -cast concrete floors, interior atrium spaces as the core, and always a rich landscape." AIA Minnesota is proud to recognize Elizabeth Close, FAIA, for this award. She will officially receive the award at the December 6, 2002, AIA Minnesota Awards Celebration. become valued collaborators in this ongoing process called architecture. Be sure to put November 1.2, 13, 14, �.5 on your calendar now! Convention Time There are two new technological Innovations that will be unveiled for the convention. The first is a brand new online registration system that will give you improved service and immediate confirmation of your registration. As an incentive to use the new online registration sys- tem you will get an automatic dis- count on your registration fees. In addition, should a program be filled, you will receive immediate feedback with the ability to select another pro- gram. The second technology innova- tion for us is an interactive connection --continued on page 2 Exterior view of Rood House in Lowry Hill, Minneapolis. The house was designed by Winston and Elizabeth Close in 1947. A look at mid-century modernist homes through the work of Close Associates 10 By Gar Hargens, AIA, President, Close Associates Inc., Architects For over twenty years, I worked for and with two pioneering practitioners of mid-century modern architecture in Minnesota—Winston and Elizabeth Close, FAIA. Founded in 1938, Close Associates designed many types of buildings but specialized in houses. I was their student intern in 1968 at the start of my architectural schooling at the University of Minnesota. By the time I was their partner and they retired, I understood and appreciated the tenets that Win and Lisl held dear: compact efficient designs, a strong connection to the site, sustainable practices, and a maximizing use of materials. It is interesting how large and elaborate homes became in the 1980s and 10 A�g THE MINNESOTA PRESERVATIONIST C: • 1990s, and how today most clients who call our office want the simple, affordable, energy efficient, innovative houses that the Closes and their colleagues championed for many years. I own The 1940 Book of Small Houses edited by Architectural Record. Its contributors include such diverse and famous talents as Prairie architect Frank Lloyd Wright, traditionalist Royal Barry Wills, and a young Ralph Rapson. What is strikingly similar about their designs is how deliberate and compact they are, reflecting perhaps the economic sacrifices of World War II and a lingering sense of frugality. The designs are spare and maximize space in ingenious ways. I remember watching the Closes turn a design over and over to cut a few more square feet from the scheme. They favored built-ins because they saved space and the expense of buying furniture. Like the architects in the book, the Closes also carried the goal of economy into structural design. A favorite Close solution was chassis framing, where an abutting 2x8 and 2x4 become a four -foot -on -center structural column and also the frame for a fixed window, with only the addition of an outer wood stop. It was simple, clean design with minimum materials. No wonder that one of the Closes' favorite books was The Elements of Style, by William Strunk and E.B. White, which preached tight, precise prose. Builders of the mid-century modern era did not have the power tools the trades work with today, and ripping a plywood sheet, for example, was done by hand with a rip saw. Architects therefore used dimensioned lumber and full -uncut sheets to save on labor. The grid was an essential planning tool. Its use contributed to the modular, boxy look of many mid-century modern homes. The credo was economy and affordability, and there was little waste. That still sounds like a good approach. Another elegant solution involved the use of concrete plank, concrete slabs with large voids along their centers to lessen their MARCH • ArRIL 2010 3 z 0 I Living room with floor of structural clay tile in King House. weight. Early on, the Closes realized that if holes were added to the plank's downward face, the main furnace duct could be placed right below so that the planks could duct tempered air. Holes at the other end or top of the plank let air flow into the space or evenly up to windows. Our office also has this system. In slippers or stocking feet, having a naturally warm floor is a special treat this time of year. And the concrete floor makes up/down acoustics great too. The Closes used this system even if there was no basement with concrete plank above. The one story, slab on grade King House built in 1950 in the Kenwood Neighborhood in Minneapolis appears to have a floor of large tiles. However, they are not a standard tile dimension. Looking further reveals that the tiles are the outer faces of 4 -inch structural clay tile, masonry units that for years were used for walls in commercial and manufacturing buildings. With the house drawings is a diagram showing how these hollow units were to be placed on the floor with their openings aligned to form duct runs. Another characteristic of the times and one still popular in modern designs today is the use of new and in some cases unlikely materials. Plywood, developed during World War II, was ofparticular interest to the Closes and like-minded architects. The Closes used plywood as the exterior finish siding/facing material on the 1947 Rood House, a large home for a sculptor and his wife on Mount Curve Parkway in Lowry Hill. Plywood was also used inside many Close homes. It was rotary cut (to show maximum pattern and dressed up with only a light white stain. Concrete block, cement asbestos board, Masonite, Homasote (pressed cardboard sheets, and vinyl asbestos floor tile were some of the other new, fairly inexpensive, low -maintenance materials mid-century modernists liked to use and that could often be left in their natural state. Redwood was also available and became a popular wall choice inside and out. The Closes trumpeted redwood's natural tendency to weather to a silver tone, so that it didn't have to be finished and required no maintenance. Not all clients agreed with this aesthetic but it was clearly part of the architects' vision. Honest expression of materials was in fact very important to the mid-century modernists. Concrete block was left exposed, Masonite and Homasote were unpainted and wood was left unfinished whenever possible. The Closes scorned the idea of hiding materials and disliked decoration in 11 • • general. Serendipity could also play a role in their designs. One day Lisl noticed that the backside of a 1x4 had been grooved during the milling process. She like the way it looked and told the carpenters to install it wrong side up. The resulting attractive pattern became standard for Close ceilings. In Close homes I visit, many of these ceilings (all redwood and unfortunately, no longer available) have now been painted. The owners may have been trying to cover up condensation stains, since mid-century homes usually had little insulation and sketchy vapor barriers. The Closes and other mid-century modernists liked flat roofs, partly for reasons of economy and partly for their appearance. Flat roofs offered several advantages: good rainwater management (especially with interior drains), no danger of ice dams, and potential use as decks. Unfortunately, spotty insulation and vapor barriers sometimes caused condensation problems, as mentioned above. Skylights, too, were popular, but early deficiencies in their design and installation gave them an unreliable reputation. Today's skylights are much better. Mid-century modernists also strove to relate houses to their sites in creative ways. New technologies of the era allowed large glazed openings that made smaller spaces seem larger by leading the eye to the outdoors. Flat roofs were often extended over window walls to protect openings and provide sun shading. Siting was very important, both for passive solar gain and establishing a comfortable relationship to the ground. To limit digging no deeper than the required footing depth, designs were often split leveled with entry at grade; the lower level half in the ground, the upper half out of the ground. This allowed the lower level slab to be right above the footing and provided that level with better light and easier access. In a time of lingering recession and worry over climate change, the work of the mid-century modernists remains instructive. Today's architects are trying to simplify, reuse, recycle, and incorporate the latest technologies — all practices that the Closes and architects like them first embraced more than half a century ago. Sometimes recent history can suggest smart solutions for today's problems. 12 RENOVATION • REMODELING • RESTORATION E 3 z 0 Interior hallway in the Rood House. If one looks carefully, you can notice that the shelves/cabinets in the hallway are made of plywood. Gar Hargens, AIA, is President and Owner of Close Associates Inc., Architects in Minneapolis. Gar is known for designing affordable, contemporary homes, a natural progression from the firm's Mid Century Modernist beginnings. He has also pursued the preservation side of sustainability through renovation of historic properties. Two well known award winners are Pratt School in Minneapolis and 260 Summit Avenue in Saint Paul, the Louis and Maud Hill House. Gar served nine years on the Saint Paul Heritage Preservation Commission, three as its Chair. He is currently on the Board of the Preservation Alliance of Minnesota. Contact IMI for free, expert advice on all aspects of masonry restoration and renovation. International Masonry Institute 312 Centrm1 Ave. SE,, #334 . Minneapolis, MN 554'14 (612) 332-2214 + obigelow@iiniw !h.org # wwv4,.imiweb.org THE MINNESOTA PRESERVATIONIST 0 Edina, N4N Code of Ordinances Page 1 of 3 ARTICLE IX. - EDINA HERITAGE LANDMARKS Sec. 36-713. - Purpose. The zoning classification of Edina Heritage Landmark is established to promote the preservation, protection and use of significant heritage resources in the city. Heritage landmarks shall be nominated by the heritage preservation board and designated by council resolution. (Code 1970; Code 1992, § 850.20(1)) Sec. 36-714. - Eligibility criteria. The following criteria will guide the heritage preservation board and the council in evaluating potential heritage landmark designations: (1) The quality of significance in history, architecture, archeology and culture present in buildings, sites, structures, objects and districts that reflects: a. Association with important events or patterns of events that reflect significant broad patterns in local history; b. Association with the lives of historically significant persons or groups significant; c. Embodiment of the distinctive characteristics of an architectural style, design, period, type or method of construction; or that possess high artistic values, or that represents a . significant and distinguishable entity whose components may lack individual distinction; or d. Important archeological data or the potential to yield important archeological data. (2) The retention of specific aspects of historical integrity, including location, design, setting, materials, workmanship, feeling and association, that convey significance as a heritage resource worthy of preservation. (Code 1970; Code 1992, § 850.20(2)) Sec. 36-715. - Determination of eligibility. The heritage preservation board shall review the inventory of heritage resources and evaluate the significance of all properties identified by survey. If it determines that a surveyed heritage resource appears to meet at least one of the heritage landmark eligibility criteria, the heritage preservation board may, by majority vote, issue a determination of eligibility for planning purposes. (Code 1970; Code 1992, § 850.20(3)) Sec. 36-716. - Nomination of a heritage landmark. Nomination of a property to be considered for designation as an Edina Heritage Landmark shall be submitted to the council by the heritage preservation board. Each nomination shall be accompanied by a heritage landmark nomination study prepared by the city planner. This study shall: • (1) Identify and describe in detail the heritage resource being nominated; (2) Explain how the property meets one or more of the heritage landmark eligibility criteria; (3) Make the case for historical significance and integrity; and nhrnit•hlank 6/17/2015 Edina, MN Code of Ordinances Page 2 of 3 (4) Recommend a plan of treatment for the heritage resource, with guidelines for design review • and specific recommendations for preservation, rehabilitation, restoration and reconstruction, as appropriate. The study shall be accompanied by a map that clearly locates the property, a detailed plan of the nominated heritage resource, and archival quality photographs that document significant features of the building, site, structure, object or district. (Code 1970; Code 1992, § 850.20(4)) Sec. 36-717. - State historic preservation office review. The city planner shall submit all heritage landmark nominations to the state historic preservation officer for review and comment within 60 days. (Code 1970; Code 1992, § 850.20(5)) Sec. 36-718. - Planning commission review. The city planner shall submit all heritage landmark nominations to the city planning commission for review and recommendations prior to any council action. (Code 1970; Code 1992, § 850.20(6)) Sec. 36-719. - Public hearing. On receipt of the heritage landmark nomination documents and the comments of the state .historic preservation office and the city planning commission, the council shall hold a public hearing to consider the proposed landmark designation. (Code 1970; Code 1992, § 850.20(7)) Sec. 36-720. - City council designation. The council may designate a property as an Edina Heritage Landmark by resolution. (Code 1970; Code 1992, § 850.20(8)) Sec. 36-721. - Designation of heritage landmarks on zoning map. The planning commission shall place all designated heritage landmarks on the official city zoning map. (Code 1970; Code 1992, § 850.20(9)) Sec. 36-722. - Review of permits. (a) To protect significant heritage resources, the heritage preservation board shall review all applications for city permits for the following types of work in relation to a designated heritage landmark: (1) Demolition of any building or structure, in whole or in part; (2) Moving a building or structure to another location; • (3) Excavation of archeological features, grading or earth moving in areas believed to contain significant buried heritage resources; and (4) New construction. nhnnt-hlank 6/17/2015 Edina, MN Code of Ordinances Page 3 of 3 (b) No city permits for the types of work described in subsection (a) of this section will be issued • without a certificate of appropriateness signed by the city planner and approved by the heritage preservation board evidencing compliance with the comprehensive heritage preservation plan. Applications for a certificate of appropriateness shall be made on forms provided by the planning department and shall be accompanied by the fee set forth in section 2-724. The application shall be accompanied by plans and drawings to scale, which clearly illustrate, to the satisfaction of the planner, the work to be undertaken if the permit is granted. Certificates of appropriateness may be granted subject to conditions (c) Permit review decisions shall be based on the Secretary of the Interior's Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties, the comprehensive heritage preservation plan and the heritage landmark preservation study, for each designated property. (d) The city planner and the heritage preservation board shall complete their review of applications for city permits requiring certificates of appropriateness within 45 days of the date of application. (e) The city planner and the heritage preservation board may issue certificates of appropriateness for work projects submitted voluntarily by owners of heritage resources. (f) To ensure compliance with the goals and policies of the comprehensive heritage preservation plan, the heritage preservation board shall review every application for a preliminary plat, conditional use permit, variance or rezoning, in relation to a designated heritage landmark; and the city planning commission shall give the heritage preservation board a reasonable opportunity to comment on such projects before making its recommendation to the council. (Code 1970; Code 1992, § 850.20(10)) • Sec. 36-723. - Appeals. Any party aggrieved by a decision of the heritage preservation board or an administrative official may appeal such decision by filing a written appeal with the city clerk no later than ten days after the decision of the heritage preservation board or the administrative official. If not so filed, the right of appeal shall be deemed waived and the decision of the heritage preservation board or administrative official shall be final. Upon receipt of the appeal, the city clerk shall transmit a copy of said appeal to the heritage preservation board. The council shall hear and decide all appeals in the manner provided by section 36-100. (Code 1970; Code 1992, § 850.20(11)) Sec. 36-724. - Violation. Violations of the provisions of this chapter or the conditions of approval granted thereunder shall be a misdemeanor. This chapter may also be enforced by injunction, abatement or any other appropriate remedy, in any court of competent jurisdiction. (Code 1970; Code 1992, § 850.20(12)) Sec. 36-725. - Maintenance of heritage landmark properties. Every owner or person in possession of a designated heritage landmark shall keep the property in good repair. (Code 1970; Code 1992, § 850.20(13)) nhout:hlank 6/17/2015 Jovice Reava Worn: Jonathan P. Scoll <jonscoll@gmail.com> Sent: Monday, July 27, 2015 2:44 PM To: Joyce Repya Cc: Barbara Scoll Subject: Application for EHL Overlay Zoning of 6901 Dakota Trail, Edina July 27, 2015 Ms. Joyce Repya Senior Planner City of Edina Edina, MN Re: Application for EHL Zoning Overlay of Close Associates house at 6901 Dakota Trail, Edina Ms Repya: Thank you for taking the time to talk this morning in response to our query about the Notice we received dated July 24, 2015 about this proposed zoning matter. We write to strongly support the Planning Commission's recommendation affirming the Edina Heritage Preservation Board's action regarding EHL designation of the property. Over the more than two decades that we have looked out across the lake at this residence, we have admired it for the midcentury gem that it is. It is not only a distinguished 0 iece of Edina — and Minnesota — architectural history, it is a needed reminder in these days of "larger is better" and indiscriminate tear -owns of the virtues of scale and modesty in design. We would request that this e-mail comment be added, as appropriate, to the recording of the proceedings. Sincerely Jonathan and Barbara Scoll 6920 Valley View Road Edina, MN 55439 952-942-9612 (land) 612-247-3500 (cell) is To: MAYOR AND COUNCIL From: Cary Teague, Community Development Director 491 ,l� o le tit s�2 iJ • !1 CORPOR-11 ]Has Agenda Item #: VI.C. Action Discussion ❑x Date: August 5, 2015 Information ❑ Subject: PUBLIC HEARING — Conditional Use Permit and Front Yard Setback Variance for Edina Community Lutheran Church, 4113 West 54th Street, Resolution No. 2015-77 Action Requested: Staff and Planning Commission Recommendation: Adopt the attached resolution No. 2015-77 approving a Conditional Use Permit and front street setback Variance from 50 feet to 23 feet for Edina Community Lutheran Church. Information/Background: (Deadline for a City Council Decision — No Deadline) Edina Community Lutheran Church is proposing to build a sanctuary and kitchen addition, with a new parking lot on the east side of the existing church located at 4113 West 54th Street. To accommodate this request, the parsonage home would be removed and replaced with the new parking lot. The new sanctuary addition would have the same seating capacity as the existing sanctuary. The purpose of the request is to provide larger fellowship and supportive areas to the church. (See the applicant narrative and plans on pages A3 -A33 in the Planning Commission Staff Report, and in the attached 11 x 17 submittal.) The site is zoned R-1, Single Dwelling Unit District, where a church is a conditionally permitted use. The applicant submitted a request for the conditional use permit in 2013. (See original plans on pages A34 -A40.) The applicant did not move forward with the request after concerns were raised in regard to the architecture of the proposed addition, and impact to the steep slopes and mature trees as a result of a new parking lot south of the building and construction of stormwater ponding. The applicant has now revised the plans in an attempt to address the concerns raised in 2013. They hired a new architect to design the addition to better fit with the neighborhood. The proposed addition uses a pitched roof rather than a flat roof, and has more variety in building material compared to the lap siding originally proposed. The new plan proposes using an underground storage tank for stormwater, rather than the surface pond proposed in 2013. The new plan would preserve the slope and mature tree area. The applicants also went through the sketch plan process with the proposed plans and have incorporated the feedback received into the proposed plans. City of Edina • 4801 W. 501h St. • Edina, MN 55424 REPORT / RECOMMENDATION To accommodate the request, the following is requested: Page 2 ➢ Conditional Use Permit to construct a new 210 seat sanctuary, a 576 square foot kitchen and a new parking field. ➢ A Front Yard Setback variance from 50 feet to 23 for the kitchen to match the existing front yard setback of the church. Planning Commission Recommendation: On July 22, 2015, the Planning Commission recommended approval of the requests on a vote of 7-0, per the findings outlined in the Planning Commission staff report. The Commission added two conditions: The requirement of a construction management plan and relocation of the construction driveway to the west away from the nearest single family home. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends approval per the findings and conditions in the attached resolution, which includes the added conditions from the Planning Commission. ATTACHMENTS: • Resolution No. 2015-77 • Planning Commission minutes, July 8, 2015 • Planning Commission staff report dated July 8, 2015 • • Revised Lanscape Plan • RESOLUTION NO. 2015-77 RESOLUTION APPROVING A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT AND FRONT STREET SETBACK VARIANCE FROM 50 FEET TO 23 FEET FOR THE EDINA COMMUNITY LUTHERAN CHURCH AT 4113 WEST 54th STREET Section 1. BACKGROUND. 1.01 Edina Community Lutheran Church is proposing to build a 210 seat sanctuary and kitchen addition, with a new parking lot on the east side of the existing church located at 4113 West 54th Street. To accommodate this request, the parsonage home would be removed and replaced with the new parking lot. The new sanctuary addition would have the same seating capacity as the existing sanctuary. The purpose of the request is to provide larger fellowship and supportive areas to the church. 1.02 A parking variance was granted in 1992 to allow 37 spaces when the existing sanctuary was built. The proposed parking lot contains 38 spaces. The variance remains in place with the proposal because the sanctuary proposed has a maximum capacity of 210 people. • 1.03 The site is zoned R-1, Single Dwelling Unit District, where a church is a conditionally permitted use. The applicant submitted a request for the conditional use permit in 2013; however did not move forward with the request after concerns were raised in regard to the architecture of the proposed addition, and impact to the steep slopes and mature trees as a result of a new parking lot south of the building and construction of stormwater ponding. 1.04 The applicant revised the plans in an attempt to address the concerns raised in 2013. They hired a new architect to design the addition to better fit with the neighborhood. The proposed addition uses a pitched roof rather than a flat roof, and has more variety in building material compared to the lap siding originally proposed. The new plan proposes using an underground storage tank for stormwater, rather than the surface pond proposed in 2013. The new plan would preserve the slope and mature tree area. • 1.05 To accommodate the request, the following is requested: ➢ Conditional Use Permit to construct a new 210 seat sanctuary, a 576 square foot kitchen and a new parking field. ➢ A Front Yard Setback variance from 50 feet to 23 for the kitchen to match the existing front yard setback of the church. CITY OF EDINA 4801 West 50th Street • Edina, Minnesota 55424 www.EdinaMN.gov . 952-927-8861 . Fax 952-826-0389 RESOLUTION NO. 2015-77 Page 2 . 1.06 On July 22, 2015, the Planning Commission recommended approval of the Conditional Use Permit and Variance. Vote: 7 Ayes, 0 Nays. 1.07 On August 5, 2015, the City Council held a public hearing on the Conditional Use Permit and Variance. Section 2. FINDINGS 2.01 Approval is subject to the following findings: 1. The proposal meets the conditional use permit criteria in Section 36-305 of the City Code as follows: a. Does not have an undue adverse impact on governmental facilities, utilities, services or existing or proposed improvements; b. Will generate traffic within the capacity of the streets serving the property; c. Does not have an undue adverse impact on the public health, safety or welfare; d. Will not impede the normal and orderly development and improvement of other • property in the vicinity; e. Conforms to the applicable restrictions and special conditions of the district in which it is located, as imposed by this chapter; and f. Is consistent with the comprehensive plan. 2. The proposal would meet the required standards for a variance, because: a. The proposed use of the property is reasonable; the use is conditionally permitted, and the kitchen addition has 'the same front street setback of the existing church at 23 feet. b. The practical difficulty and unique circumstance is the location of the existing church, which does not meet the required front street setback. c. The kitchen addition would be constructed out of the same stone that was used on the church. The stone from the parsonage would be used on the kitchen. d. The proposed improvements will not alter the essential character of the neighborhood. The kitchen addition is relatively small compared to the size of the church. It matches the existing setback of the church. A church has been located on this property for over 50 years. 0 RESOLUTION NO. 2015-77 Page 3 Section 3. APPROVAL NOW THEREFORE, it is hereby resolved by the City Council of the City of Edina, approves the Conditional Use Permit and Front Street Setback Variance from 50 feet to 23 feet for the kitchen addition subject to the following conditions: 1. Subject to staff approval, the site must be developed and maintained in substantial conformance with the following plans, unless modified by the conditions below: • Site plan date stamped June 25, 2015. • Grading plan date stamped June 25, 2015. • Landscaping plan date stamped July 31, 2015. • Building elevations date stamped June 25, 2015 • Lighting plan date stamped June 25, 2015 • Utility Plan date stamped June 25, 2015 • Building materials board as presented at the Planning Commission and City Council meeting. 2. The property owner is responsible for replacing any required landscaping that dies. 3. All trash enclosures shall be screened to meet City Code. 4. Submit a copy of the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District permit. The City may require • revisions to the approved plans to meet the district's requirements. 5. Compliance with all of the conditions outlined in the director of engineering's memo dated July 14, 2015. 6. Submittal of a Construction Management Plan. 7. The construction driveway shall be moved to the west away from the single-family home. 0 RESOLUTION NO. 2015-77 Page 4 • ATTEST: Debra A. Mangen, City Clerk James B. Hovland, Mayor 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 5, 2015, and as recorded in the Minutes of said Regular Meeting. WITNESS my hand and seal of said City this day of , 2015. City Clerk 0 u. VI. PUBLIC HEARINGS V A. Edina Community Lutheran Church. 4113 West 54" Street, Edina, MN Planner Presentation Planner Teague informed the Commission the Edina Community Lutheran Church is proposing to build a sanctuary and kitchen addition, with a new parking lot on the east side of the existing church located at 41 13 West 54`h Street. To accommodate this request, the parsonage home would be removed and replaced with the new parking lot. The new sanctuary addition would have the same seating capacity as the existing sanctuary. The purpose of the request is to provide larger fellowship and supportive areas to the church. Teague explained that the site is zoned R- 1, Single Dwelling Unit District, where a church is a conditionally permitted use. The applicant submitted a request for the conditional use permit in 2013. The applicant did not move forward with the request after concerns were raised in regard to the architecture of the proposed addition, and impact to the steep slopes and mature trees as a result of a new parking lot south of the building and construction of stormwater ponding. • Teague reported that the applicant has now revised the plans in an attempt to address the concerns raised in 2013. They hired a new architect to design the addition to better fit with the neighborhood. The proposed addition uses a pitched roof rather than a flat roof, and has more variety in building material compared to the lap siding originally proposed. The new plan proposes using an underground storage tank for stormwater, rather than the surface pond proposed in 2013. The new plan would preserve the slope and mature tree area. Teague stated to accommodate the request, the following is requested: Conditional Use Permit to construct a new 210 seat sanctuary, a 576 square foot kitchen and a new parking field. A Front Yard Setback variance from 50 feet to 23 for the kitchen to match the existing front yard setback of the church. Planner Teague continued his presentation and concluded that staff recommends that the City Council approve the Conditional Use Permit and Front Yard Setback Variance from 50 feet to 23 feet for a new church sanctuary and kitchen at 41 13 54`h Street West for Edina Community Lutheran Church subject to the following findings: • I. The proposal meets the conditional use permit criteria in Section 36-305 of the • City Code as follows: a. Does not have an undue adverse impact on governmental facilities, utilities, services or existing or proposed improvements; b.Will generate traffic within the capacity of the streets serving the property; c. Does not have an undue adverse impact on the public health, safety or welfare; d.Will not impede the normal and orderly development and improvement of other property in the vicinity; e.Conforms to the applicable restrictions and special conditions of the district in which it is located, as imposed by this chapter; and f. Is consistent with the comprehensive plan. 2. The proposal would meet the required standards for a variance, because: a. The proposed use of the property is reasonable; the use is conditionally permitted, and the kitchen addition has the same front street setback of the existing church at 23 feet. b. The practical difficulty and unique circumstance is the location of the existing church, which does not meet the required front street setback. C. The kitchen addition would be constructed out of the same stone that was used on the church. The stone from the parsonage would be used on the kitchen. • d. The proposed improvements will not alter the essential character of the neighborhood. The kitchen addition is relatively small compared to the size of the church. It matches the existing setback of the church. A church has been located on this property for over 50 years. Teague further noted that final approval is also subject to the following Conditions: Subject to staff approval, the site must be developed and maintained in substantial conformance with the following plans, unless modified by the conditions below: • Site plan date stamped June 25, 2015. • Grading plan date stamped June 25, 2015. • Landscaping plan date stamped June 25, 2015. • Building elevations date stamped June 25, 2015 • Lighting plan date stamped June 25, 2015 • Utility Plan date stamped June 25, 2015 • Building materials board as presented at the Planning Commission and City Council meeting. 2. The property owner is responsible for replacing any required landscaping that dies. 3. All trash enclosures shall be screened to meet City Code. 0 • 4. Submit a copy of the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District permit. The City may require revisions to the approved plans to meet the district's requirements. 5. Compliance with all of the conditions outlined in the director of engineering's memo dated July 14, 2015. Appearing for the Applicant Eileen Supple, Randy Moe and Joan McCloud were present representing the church. Applicant Presentation Ms. Supple addressed the Commission and reported that the church has been at this location for 67 years and is in need of updating. Supple said the Church Board listened to feedback on their previous design, adding the start over was painful and expensive; however, they feel the revisions addressed most the the issues raised on the previous plans. Supple further noted that the Church has been working closely with the Minnehaha Watershed District and their engineers because Church property abuts the creek. Continuing, Supple informed Commissioners updates on the revisions were sent to neighboring property owners during the revision process and a neighborhood meeting was held on the 4th of May. Supple noted that the Church site is roughly four acres of private property, it's not a park, and borders Minnehaha Creek on the west. She pointed out the site is heavily wooded, adding many of the trees are located in the • flood plain. Suppple stated they would comply with the new tree ordinance, adding Tom Horwath has visited the site, adding they believe 22 trees will be removed and out of those 22 trees three qualify as protected trees and will be replaced. Supple told the Commission she believes the Minnehaha Watershed District will hear their request at their August 13`h meeting. Concluding, Supple introduced Randy Moe to address the changes in the design. Mr. Moe, Bentz/Thompson/Rietow, Inc. delivered a power point presentation and explained the sanctuary seating remains the same. Moe also noted that the proposed additions would offer consolidated office space for staff members and kitchen and classroom renovations. Continuing, Moe said the proposed additions will also include the addition of a fire sprinkler system, improved energy efficiently, new windows, doors, etc. Moe presented a materials board and told the Commission the pallet of the addition is simple, adding they will be reusing all stone that will removed to accommodate the additions. Joan McCloud told the Commission they understand the Church is located in a residential setting along Minnehaha Creek. McCloud said in all instances the Church Board was cognizant of the neighbors. McCloud noted that the parking lot would be screened, along with the trash containers. Continuing, McCloud said their design allows the Church to take advantage of their proximity to Minnehaha Creek; however, the plans also paid close attention to headlight wash to ensure that neighboring • properties are not negatively impacted by them. 3 Rhonda Pierce, addressed storm water management, adding their intent is to provide • rate control, clean water, and volume control. With graphics Pierce highlighted aspects of the storm water management plan pointing out the plans provide an integrated underground storm water management system below the parking lot. This eliminates the need for large infiltration ponds in the Church's woods, which would have resulted in significant tree removal. Concluding, Supple thanked the Commission for their time and asked for their support Discussion Commissioner Hobbs asked Ms. Pierce how deep the Swale is. Pierce responded that the swale is 18" to include a 100 gallon tank Commissioner Olsen asked Planner Teague if the 37 parking stalls are always used. Planner Teague responded in the affirmative. Olsen further asked if the east parking lot is at a lower elevation. Pierce responded in the affirmative. Acting -chair Carr noted it appears the lighting plan meets the ordinance; however, she noted there is the possibility of locating a timer on the lights abutting the residential properties. Mr. Moe agreed, adding all lights are LED with screening on the outside and down lit. Moe further reported that they are receptive to a timer; however, it may also include a motion detector for safety. • Acting -Chair Carr asked Planner Teague if a variance is required for parking. Teague responded that the property was previously granted a parking variance, adding the variance runs with the property. Commissioner Hobbs with regard to the storm water management system asked who is responsible for its maintenance. Planner Teague responded that the church is responsible. Hobbs asked Teague who monitors the system. Teague responded that he's not sure, adding it's either the City or the Watershed District. Public Hearing Acting -chair Carr invited the public to speak to the Church's request for a Conditional Use Permit. The following residents voiced their concern with the project: Ed Ross, 4015 54`h Street West Kristine Donatelle, 5427 Woodcrest Drive Burton Grimes, 5400 Halifax Lane The following residents voiced their support for the project: Mary Dee Hicks, 13 Paddock Road Mark Bretheim, 5429 Woodcrest Drive 0 • C. Madson, 4404 Philbrook Lane Pastor Eric Strand, 5732 Abbott Avenue Pastor Stephanie Coltvet Erdmann, 3535 14`h St., Minneapolis, MN Acting -Chair Carr asked if anyone else would like to speak to the issue; being none, Commissioner Forrest moved to close the public hearing. Commissioner Olsen seconded the motion. All voted aye; motion carried. Discussion Commissioner Forrest asked Chuck Rickart, with WSB to speak to the traffic and parking study. Rickart reported that in 2013 a traffic and parking study was completed for a proposed expansion of the church. Rickart said since that time the church has revised their plans. Rickart explained that the proposed revised plans do not change the conclusion of the traffic and parking study. Rickart stated on the majority of Sundays the parking lot was full with parking spilling onto West 54`h Street. Rickard added that the traffic and parking study assumed growth; however, according to the plans the sanctuary seating remains the same. Rickart said no additional improvements other than those indicated would be required to accommodate the proposed expansion. • Commissioner Forrest said she has a concern with parking on West 54`h Street; noting that the street has a designated bike lane. Rickart agreed that 54`h was restriped to accommodate bikes. Forrest referred to the Proof of Parking Agreement/Parking Variance and questioned how/when that would be triggered. Rickart said the City of Edina has requirements that trigger implementation. Planner Teague interjected that code requires the City Manager and City Planner to determine if implementing the Agreement is needed. Rickart further commented that implementing the Agreement would probably be reviewed if it appears that vehicles are continually parking on adjacent local streets. (Halifax etc.). Commissioner Thorsen asked how activity during the construction phase is monitored. Planner Teague said the church would fall under the requirements of a commercial site. Continuing, Thorsen noted the depicted location of the construction driveway suggesting that the construction driveway be relocated. Commissioner Forrest asked where the condensers would be located. Mr. Moe responded that the condensers would be located on the roof. Forrest suggested that an analysis be taken to insure the site meets noise requirements. She said she also was concerned with the noise from snow removal, pointing out that noise can impact residents; especially if it is cleared in the middle of the night. • Eileen Supple introduced Christian Klauser, church administrator to speak to the noise issue. Mr. Klauser informed Commissioners he works closely with all vendors (refuse haulers, • lawn service, snow removal) to ensure that nothing is delivered, cut, removed before 7 am and 10 pm. Klauser said the only caveat is that snow removal can occur earlier on Sunday mornings prior to morning services. Klauser asked nearby residents to inform him if vendors are not complying with those restrictions. Commissioner Nemerov asked if the church ever considered locating the parking lot on the west side. Ms. Supple responded if the parking lot were placed in that location because of the slopes and existing tree canopy too much disruption would occur. Supple further noted that the neighbors to the west would not look favorably on additional spaces being shifted to the west. Commissioner Forrest asked Planner Teague as a condition of approval could the Commission recommend that the project comply with the construction maintenance plan for R- I properties. Teague responded that could be added to the conditions of approval. Acting -chair Carr noted that a number of residents expressed concerns with lighting, noise pollution, screening, landscaping and drainage and asked the applicant(s) to address those concerns. Ms. McCloud with graphics explained the grade of the parking areas, landscaping plans and screening. Ms. McCloud did note the site is rather shady; however, the vegetation • proposed should thrive in this environment. The discussion ensued with Commissioners expressing support for the revised plans; noting the importance of landscaping; especially along the east boundary line (this landscaping should minimize impact of the parking lot from the next door neighbor). Commissioners suggested that the church and neighbor to the east work together on the buffering. Commissioners also noted they believe the construction driveway should be moved and that during construction the church should comply with aspects of the R- I residential construction maintenance plan. Motion Commissioner Olsen moved to recommend Conditional Use Permit approval with Variances based on staff findings and subject to staff conditions with the additional following conditions: a) Construction must follow the Residential Construction Maintenance Plan; and b) Relocate temporary construction driveway. Commissioner Thorsen seconded the motion. All voted aye; motion carried. • 0 • 0 o e • N�bRFOM1�9 PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT Originator Meeting Date Agenda # Cary Teague July 22, 2015 VI. B. Community Development Director INFORMATION/BACKGROUND Project Description Edina Community Lutheran Church is proposing to build a sanctuary and kitchen addition, with a new parking lot on the east side of the existing church located at 4113 West 54th Street. (See the property location on pages Al -A2.) To accommodate this request, the parsonage home would be removed and replaced with the new parking lot. The new sanctuary addition would have the same seating capacity as the existing sanctuary. The purpose of the request is to provide larger fellowship and supportive areas to the church. (See the applicant narrative and plans on pages A3 -A33 and in the attached 11 x 17 submittal.) The site is zoned R-1, Single Dwelling Unit District, where a church is a conditionally permitted use. The applicant submitted a request for the conditional use permit in 2013. (See original plans on pages A34 -A40.) The applicant did not move forward with the request after concerns were raised in regard to the architecture of the proposed addition, and impact to the steep slopes and mature trees as a result of a new parking lot south of the building and construction of stormwater ponding. The applicant has now revised the plans in an attempt to address the concerns raised in 2013. They hired a new architect to design the addition to better fit with the neighborhood. The proposed addition uses a pitched roof rather than a flat roof, and has more variety in building material compared to the lap siding originally proposed. The new plan proposes using an underground storage tank for stormwater, rather than the surface pond proposed in 2013. The new plan would preserve the slope and mature tree area. The applicants also went through the sketch plan process with the proposed plans and have incorporated the feedback received into the proposed plans. • To accommodate the request, the following is requested: ➢ Conditional Use Permit to construct a new 210 seat sanctuary, a 576 square foot kitchen and a new parking field. A Front Yard Setback variance from 50 feet to 23 for the kitchen to match the existing front yard setback of the church. SUPPORTING INFORMATION Surrounding Land Uses Northerly: Single-family homes; zoned R-1, Single -Dwelling Unit District and guided Low Density Residential. Easterly: Single-family homes; zoned R-1, Single -Dwelling Unit District and guided Low Density Residential. Southerly: Minnehaha Creek. Westerly: Minnehaha Creek. Existing Site Features • The subject property is 4.15 acres in size, contains the existing church up close to 54th Street and a parsonage. The site is heavily wooded and slopes down toward Minnehaha Creek. Planning Guide Plan designation Zoning: Site Circulation & Traffic LD — Low Density Residential R-1, Single -Dwelling Unit District There are currently two curb cuts to the site; one is to the church parking lot, which is located on the south and west side of the building, and one to the church parsonage. The existing parking lot access point would remain. The parsonage driveway would be removed, but replaced with a new access point to the west to serve as a new parking lot. (See page A2 and A20.) With the proposal of having two parking lots in closer proximity to church entrances, there is a greater likelihood of members parking in the lots and not on adjacent streets. The existing parking lot is difficult to navigate. A traffic and parking study was done by WSB in 2012 and then updated in 2015. (See pages A61 -A72.) The study concludes that there may be a 2 imodest increase in traffic, assuming a 130 to 150 person increase; the existing roads however would support the increase. Parking The number of parking spaces required is based on the seating capacity of the largest place of assembly which is the sanctuary. The Code requirement is one stall per three seats. The capacity of the existing and proposed sanctuary is 210 people; therefore, the required number of stalls is 70. A parking variance was granted in 1992 to allow 37 spaces when the church last expanded. The proposed parking lot contains 38 spaces. The variance remains in place with the proposal because the sanctuary proposed has a maximum capacity of 210 people. (See page A41 -A49 and A53 -A60.) In general, parking has not been a problem for the church. The WSB parking study concludes that the existing parking generally works, and there is not a problem with parking in the neighborhood on adjacent streets. Sec. 36-1274. Sidewalks, trails and bicycle facilities. (a) In order to promote and provide safe and effective sidewalks and trails in the city and encourage the use of bicycles for recreation and transportation, the following improvements are required, as a condition of • approval, on developments requiring the approval of a final development plan or the issuance of a conditional use permit pursuant to article V of this chapter: (1) It is the policy of the city to require the construction of sidewalks and trails wherever feasible so as to encourage pedestrian and bicycle connectivity throughout the city. Therefore, developments shall provide sidewalks and trails which adjoin the applicant's property: a. In locations shown on the city's sidewalk and trail plan; and b. In other locations where the council finds that the provision of such sidewalks and trails enhance public access to mass transit facilities or connections to other existing or planned sidewalks, trails or public facilities. (2) Developments shall provide sidewalks between building entrances and sidewalks or trails which exist or which will be constructed pursuant to this section. (3) Developments shall provide direct sidewalk and trail connections with adjoining properties where appropriate. (4) Developments must provide direct sidewalk and trail connections to transit stations or transit stops adjoining the property. (5) Design standards for sidewalks and trails shall be prescribed by the • engineer. (6) Nonresidential developments having an off-street automobile parking requirement of 20 or more spaces must provide off-street bicycle parking spaces where bicycles may be parked and secured from theft by their owners. The minimum number of bicycle parking spaces required shall be five percent of the automobile parking space requirement. The design and placement of bicycle parking spaces and bicycle racks used to secure bicycles shall be subject to the approval of the city engineer. Whenever possible, bicycle parking spaces shall be located within 50 feet of a public entrance to a principal building. (b) The expense of the improvements set forth in subsection (a) of this section shall be borne by the applicant. There is an existing sidewalk on the property. Any damage to the sidewalk during construction would have to be repaired by the applicant. Bike Racks The applicant has shown five (5) bicycle parking spots on the site plan, located adjacent to the sidewalk connection to the front entrance. (See page A18.) The City Code requirement for bicycle spots in this instance is three (3) 9 Landscaping ,7 Based on the perimeter of the site, the applicant is required to have 60 over story trees and a full complement of under story shrubs over the entire site. The site currently contains over 200 over story trees. There would be 22 trees removed in the area where the proposed new parking lots would be building would be located. These trees are mostly Elms. (See pages A23-24, which shows the trees and species to be removed.) The applicant proposes 44 new over story trees, including Honey Locust, Maple and Canadian Hemlock coniferous. (See page A18 and A33.) A full complement of understory landscaping is also proposed around the building. The Canadian Hemlock will be used for year around screening of the parking lots and trash enclosures from the homes to the south. The existing mature deciduous trees also serve as a buffer to the church. A significant area of landscaping is proposed to provide screening from the closest resident to the east. Plantings in this area include year around screening with a row of 8 -foot Techny Arborvitae along the lot line; a row of ornamental trees (Serviceberry); and a row of shrubs. (See page A18.) The parking lot is also broken up with landscape islands with shrubs and Maples. 4 • Trash Enclosures The trash enclosure is located on the west side of the building in the west parking lot. (See page A26a.) The enclosure is to be a six-foot tall wood cedar fence that would be stained a color to match the church. The trash area would be screened by the enclosure, the coniferous plantings and the existing trees. (See page A18.) Grading/Drainage/Utilities The city engineer has reviewed the proposed plans and found them to be acceptable subject to the comments and conditions outlined on the attached pages A76 -A77. As mentioned earlier, the proposed grading and drainage plan is a big improvement over the previously submitted plans, which proposed to remove trees in the slope area toward the creek to provide stormwater ponding. The applicant has revised the plans to create an underground storage tank under the parking lot, and preserve the trees and slope area. Additionally the east parking ramp would be made of permeable pavers. (See page A20.) Any approvals should be conditioned on the conditions outline in the director of engineering's memo dated July 14, 2015. The grading and drainage plans . are also subject to review and approval of the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District. Building/Building Material The building would be constructed of cementitous siding, and stone to match the existing building. Stone from the parsonage would be reused on the kitchen addition. (See renderings on pages A10 -A17.) The addition has be redesigned to better match the existing church and fit into the neighborhood. (See originally proposed addition on page A39 -A40.) A materials board will be presented at the Planning Commission and City Council meetings. Historical Review The Planning Commission requested that the city's historical preservation consultant, Robert Vogel conduct a review of the existing parsonage that is to be removed. Mr. Vogel has provided that review and is attached to this report on pages A73 -A75. The review concludes that the church rectory is neither historically nor architecturally significant. Therefore, it does not meet the Edina Heritage Landmark eligibility criteria. No further cultural resource management work is recommended. The home was built in 1948, about the same time as the church. The home has not be used a residence in several years and has fallen into a very poor • state of repair. As mentioned, the exterior stone on the home would be used on the church addition. Conditional Use Permit Per Section 36-305, a conditional use permit shall meet the following: 1. Does not have an undue adverse impact on governmental facilities, utilities, services or existing or proposed improvements; 2. Will generate traffic within the capacity of the streets serving the property; 3. Does not have an undue adverse impact on the public health, safety or welfare; 4. Will not impede the normal and orderly development and improvement of other property in the vicinity; 5. Conforms to the applicable restrictions and special conditions of the district in which it is located, as imposed by this chapter; and 6. Is consistent with the comprehensive plan. Staff believes that the above criteria are met. A church has been located on this site since the 1940's; and a 210 seat church has been located there since 1992. The site has not had an adverse impact on governmental facilities, • utilities or services. The existing roads do, and can support the site. The improvements to the site would not impact development or improvement to property in the area. With the exception of the front street setback variance for the kitchen addition to match the existing setback of the church, the proposal meets all zoning ordinance requirements. A variance for the number of parking stalls has already been granted for the site, and has not been an issue in the past. The use is consistent with the comprehensive plan, and the use is conditionally permitted in the R-1 zoning district, in which this property is located. The City may impose, conditions and restrictions upon the establishment, location, construction, maintenance, operation or duration of the use, as deemed necessary for the protection of the public interest and adjacent properties, to ensure compliance with the requirements of this chapter and other applicable provisions of this Code, and to ensure consistency with the comprehensive plan. Is ON • Compliance Table * Existing Condition — Variance Granted in 1992 PRIMARY ISSUES/STAFF RECOMMENDATION Primary Issues • • Is the proposed Front Street Setback Variance Justified? Yes. Per the Zoning Ordinance, a variance should not be granted unless it is found that the enforcement of the ordinance would cause practical difficulties in complying with the zoning ordinance and that the use is reasonable. As demonstrated below, staff believes the proposal does meet the variance standards, when applying the three conditions. Minnesota Statues and Edina Ordinances require that the following conditions must be satisfied affirmatively. The Proposed Variance will: 1) Relieve practical difficulties that prevent a reasonable use from complying with ordinance requirements. Reasonable use does not mean that the applicant must show the land cannot be put to any reasonable use without the variance. Rather, the applicant must show that there are practical difficulties in complying with the code and that the proposed use is reasonable. "Practical difficulties" may include functional and aesthetic concerns. Staff believes the proposed variance is reasonable. The practical difficulty • is the original placement of the church and subsequent additions. (See page A18.) The church is located closer to 54th street to lessen the 7 City Standard (R-1) Proposed Building Setbacks nStreet Front— 54 50 feet 23 feet* Side — East 50 feet 104 feet Side — West 50 feet 100+ feet Rear — Creek 50 feet 100+ feet Building Height 3 Stories or 40 feet whichever is One story 36 less feet tall Building Coverage 25% 15%+/ - Parking Stalls (Site) 70 required stalls for the 38 spaces* sanctuary maximum seating proposed (37 capacity of 210 seats existing) * Existing Condition — Variance Granted in 1992 PRIMARY ISSUES/STAFF RECOMMENDATION Primary Issues • • Is the proposed Front Street Setback Variance Justified? Yes. Per the Zoning Ordinance, a variance should not be granted unless it is found that the enforcement of the ordinance would cause practical difficulties in complying with the zoning ordinance and that the use is reasonable. As demonstrated below, staff believes the proposal does meet the variance standards, when applying the three conditions. Minnesota Statues and Edina Ordinances require that the following conditions must be satisfied affirmatively. The Proposed Variance will: 1) Relieve practical difficulties that prevent a reasonable use from complying with ordinance requirements. Reasonable use does not mean that the applicant must show the land cannot be put to any reasonable use without the variance. Rather, the applicant must show that there are practical difficulties in complying with the code and that the proposed use is reasonable. "Practical difficulties" may include functional and aesthetic concerns. Staff believes the proposed variance is reasonable. The practical difficulty • is the original placement of the church and subsequent additions. (See page A18.) The church is located closer to 54th street to lessen the 7 • impacts to the slope and mature trees located toward Minnehaha Creek. The located of the kitchen therefore, to match the existing front street setback of the church is reasonable. The kitchen addition would be constructed using the stone from the parsonage to match the stone on the existing church. 2) There are circumstances that are unique to the property, not common to every similarly zoned property, and that are not self- created? Yes. The unique circumstance is the location of the existing church which also has a 23 -foot setback from 54th Street. This circumstance is not common to every similarly zoned property. 3) Will the variance alter the essential character of the neighborhood? No. The proposed improvements will not alter the essential character of the neighborhood. The kitchen addition is relatively small compared to the size of the church. It matches the existing setback of the church. A church has been located on this property for over 50 years. • Are the plans proposed reasonable to minimize impacts for the • conditionally permitted Use? Yes, the applicant has minimized impacts on the neighborhood with the revisions that have been made to the plans. Specifically the applicant has: Minimized impacts to the slopes and trees by solving the stormwater ponding issue by using an underground system. Located the sanctuary addition off the back of the existing church, so not to have so much of the mass of the church on 54th Street. Increased the buffer to the home to the east, and provided extensive landscaping to screen the church and the parking lot. v Provided additional year-round screening south of the improvements to minimize impacts to the south across Minnehaha Creek. Proposed downward lighting, and submitted a plan that demonstrates all minimum lighting requirements are met. Proposed to use brick from the existing parsonage to match the existing brick on the church. Proposed a pitched roof to be in character with the single-family homes in the area, rather than the flat roof previously proposed. The City may impose, conditions and restrictions upon the establishment, location, construction, maintenance, operation or duration of the use, as • deemed necessary for the protection of the public interest and adjacent properties, to ensure compliance with the requirements of this chapter and other applicable provisions of this Code, and to ensure consistency with the comprehensive plan. Therefore, these items will be made conditions of approval to minimize impacts in the area. Staff Recommendation Recommend that the City Council approve the Conditional Use Permit and Front Yard Setback Variance from 50 feet to 23 feet for a new church sanctuary and kitchen at 4113 54th Street West for Edina Community Lutheran Church. Approval is subject to the following findings: The proposal meets the conditional use permit criteria in Section 36-305 of the City Code as follows: a. Does not have an undue adverse impact on governmental facilities, utilities, services or existing or proposed improvements; b. Will generate traffic within the capacity of the streets serving the property; c. Does not have an undue adverse impact on the public health, safety or • welfare; d. Will not impede the normal and orderly development and improvement of other property in the vicinity; • e. Conforms to the applicable restrictions and special conditions of the district in which it is located, as imposed by this chapter; and Is consistent with the comprehensive plan. 2. The proposal would meet the required standards for a variance, because: a. The proposed use of the property is reasonable; the use is conditionally permitted, and the kitchen addition has the same front street setback of the existing church at 23 feet. b. The practical difficulty and unique circumstance is the location of the existing church, which does not meet the required front street setback. C. The kitchen addition would be constructed out of the same stone that was used on the church. The stone from the parsonage would be used on the kitchen. 9 • d. The proposed improvements will not alter the essential character of the neighborhood. The kitchen addition is relatively small compared to the size of the church. It matches the existing setback of the church. A church has been located on this property for over 50 years. Final approval is subject to the following Conditions: 1. Subject to staff approval, the site must be developed and maintained in substantial conformance with the following plans, unless modified by the conditions below: • Site plan date stamped June 25, 2015. • Grading plan date stamped June 25, 2015. • Landscaping plan date stamped June 25, 2015. • Building elevations date stamped June 25, 2015 • Lighting plan date stamped June 25, 2015 • Utility Plan date stamped June 25, 2015 • Building materials board as presented at the Planning Commission and City Council meeting. 2. The property owner is responsible for replacing any required landscaping that dies. • 3. All trash enclosures shall be screened to meet City Code. • 4. Submit a copy of the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District permit. The City may require revisions to the approved plans to meet the district's requirements. 5. Compliance with all of the conditions outlined in the director of engineering's memo dated July 14, 2015. Deadline for a city decision: No deadline 10 r� u 51ST STREET 4S'EST _51ST STREET WEST I� t 52NC STREET .157)M,_i STREET —1--- r . -4- F- -- r- W � - -- _— Arden Park < 53RC) STRELI WLl L v { « E4TH STR 44, 3 IJ LLE;;. T, L m t T 55TH STREET '..'FST 1 55TH STP.EFT '0)17 5T n rTObl...ft�UL r 4 — a. , f I L7 11 51 R L, I '& E ST ;, p � l _ FET , .Y D':1E57 � IJ H PHILBR,=-oK LAME 58TH STREET '.VEST Parcel 19-028-24-11-0010 A -T -B: ID: Owner Edina Com Luth Ch Name: Parcel 4113 54Th St W Address: Edina, MN 55424 Property Residential Type: • Parcel 4.15 acres Area: 180,764 sq ft 57 T H STREET '1&EST r-- Map Scale: 1" = 800 ft. N Print Date: 5/6/2015 This map is a compilation of data from various sources and is furnished "AS IS" with no representation or warranty expressed or implied, including fitness of any particular -" purpose, merchantability, or the accuracy and completeness of the information shown. Cod( COPYRIGHT © HENNEPIN COUNTY 2015 IrA Think Green! Al • • r Aa r: BENTZ / THOMPSON / RIETOW June 24, 2015 EDINA COMMUNITY LUTHERAN CHURCH ADDITION & RENOVATION (CUP Explanation of Request) Edina Community Lutheran Church (ECLC) located at 4113 W. 54`h St in Edina, MN, hopes to expand their existing church facility in order to better serve their congregation and the surrounding neighborhood and larger community. The proposed project consists of an addition and remodeling of the existing Edina Community Lutheran Church. The Church has been operating at this site for 67 years as a productive member of the Edina and Twin Cities community and this project will allow them to continue to worship on this site into the future. The existing sanctuary is approved to seat up to 210 people although on a typical Sunday the sanctuary holds only 175 chairs. Both the sanctuary and fellowship hall are undersized and crowded before, during and after services. The new sanctuary, while also capable of seating 210, provides more space to circulate, process and accommodate choirs and musicians. Classroom and meeting space is expanded. The kitchen serving the fellowship hall is undersized to provide for the needs of funerals, weddings, or community celebrations. Staff members' offices, which currently are on both levels, will be consolidated. • In addition to building a new sanctuary and remodeling existing space, the congregation is proposing: 1) Making the building safer, more accessible and more energy efficient by adding its first fire sprinkler system, improving energy efficiency with new windows, doors, light fixtures, improved HVAC and additional insulation. The entire project is being planned to closely follow sustainable guidelines. 2) Improving accessibility and livability of streets by upgrading its elevators and adding accessible door openers, moving the bike parking to the street side of the building and providing an easement to the City to build a sidewalk on the north side of 54th from the west church driveway to the creek. With location on a street marked with bike lanes that is recognized as a key connector between bike routes, combined with a nearby Metro Transit bus stop and parking on both sides of the street, access to the church is broad. 3) Providing stormwater management where there is very little today, resulting in improved water quality in Minnehaha Creek. The Church property includes a parsonage which no longer serves the needs of the congregation and is slated to be demolished. The resulting large open space adjacent to the east side of the church provides space to add more off-street parking but also to locate an integrated underground storm water management system below the parking lot. While this approach is significantly more expensive than the church's initial proposal two years ago, it eliminates the nee large infiltration ponds in the church's woods, which would have resulted in cant tree removal. p"cQ 4) Improving aesthetics by screening the parking lot and trash co Ores, moving,��/C condensers to the roof, repairing or replacing exterior fencing, ing, etc. 5) Zoning code requirements of the property will be followed, with the e��ion of the R • front yard setback which will match the current setback of the existing ilding, a�� parking. 0s, 6F BENTZ/THOMPSON/RIETOW, INC. - 801 Nicollet Mall, Suite 801 - Minneapolis, Minnesota 55402 (Phone) 612.332.1234 (Fax) 612.332.1813 - www.btr-architects.com A3 Off-street parking is limited by useable buildable area on the heavily wooded site. There is • no need to apply for a parking variance, according to Mr. Teague and the city attorney because: 1) the number of approved seats in the sanctuary is not changing; 2) no parking complaints have been received in the 23 years since the City granted the 1992 parking variance and proof -of -parking agreement; and 3) the average Sunday attendance figures have not changed significantly since the Traffic Study performed in 2012 (see 2015 update). A previous addition and remodeling proposal in 2013 was met with resistance from neighbors and City staff for two primary reasons: 1) the perception of the sanctuary design was that it was too modern and too close to the east neighbors; and 2) the parking lot expansion needed to accommodate the design would have required the removal of too many trees in the Church's wooded area. The new addition is designed to fit the neighborhood feel and to take advantage of the view of the woods. It extends to the south rather than toward the eastern neighbors. Because the design creates a second, separate parking lot, cars do not need to be routed across the back of the building, resulting in the removal of far fewer trees. The congregation's consulting arborist has been advising them since 2012 and is working with them on the Tree Preservation Plan submitted here. The congregation's Woods & Creek Task Force is looking at ways to preserve the woods long-term through approaches such as land trust or conservation easement. At this time, ECLC asks that the City of Edina approve this request as the congregation is not changing the intended use of the site or building, but improving the use that has existed • since 1948. The Church is asking to remodel and add space to provide improvements within their facility that assure compliance with current building and accessibility codes, are up to date, and visually integrated with the original building and the surrounding residential neighborhood. • BENTZ/THOMPSON/RIETOW, INC. - 801 Nicollet Mall, Suite 801 - Minneapolis, Minnesota 55402 (Phone) 612.332.1234 (Fax) 612.332.1813 - www.btr-architects.com ;k4 • Off-street parking is limited by useable buildable area on the heavily wooded site. There is no need to apply for a parking variance, according to Mr. Teague and the city attorney because: 1) the number of approved seats in the sanctuary is not changing; 2) no parking complaints have been received in the 23 years since the City granted the 1992 parking variance and proof -of -parking agreement; and 3) the average Sunday attendance figures have not changed significantly since the Traffic Study performed in 2012 (see 2015 update). A previous addition and remodeling proposal in 2013 was met with resistance from neighbors and City staff for two primary reasons: 1) the perception of the sanctuary design was that it was too modern and too close to the east neighbors; and 2) the parking lot expansion needed to accommodate the design would have required the removal of too many trees in the Church's wooded area. The new addition is designed to fit the neighborhood feel and to take advantage of the view of the woods. It extends to the south rather than toward the eastern neighbors. Because the design creates a second, separate parking lot, cars do not need to be routed across the back of the building, resulting in the removal of far fewer trees. The congregation's consulting arborist has been advising them since 2012 and is working with them on the Tree Preservation Plan submitted here. The congregation's Woods & Creek Task Force is looking at ways to preserve the woods long-term through approaches such as land trust or conservation easement. At this time, ECLC asks that the City of Edina approve this request as the congregation is • not changing the intended use of the site or building, but improving the use that has existed since 1948. The Church is asking to remodel and add space to provide improvements within their facility that assure compliance with current building and accessibility codes, are up to date, and visually integrated with the original building and the surrounding residential neighborhood. • BENTZ/THOMPSON/RIETOW, INC. - 801 Nicollet Mall, Suite 801 - Minneapolis, Minnesota 55402 (Phone) 612.332.1234 (Fax) 612.332.1813 - www.btr-architects.com • • • Depiction of Easement Areas Granted to the City of Edina by Edina Community Lutheran Church Effective June 2, 2015 1. Permanent Utility Easement 2. Temporary Construction Easement; expires November 1, 2016. NORTHWEST CORNER OF NORTHWEST QUARIER OF THE NORHTEAST QUARTER OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER NORTH LINE OF NORTHWEST QUARTER OF THE NORHTEAST QUARTER OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER SOUTHERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY UNE OF 84TH STREET WEST 54TH STREET i c SOUTH 2W 14' EAST \ \ 290.00' OR�04' 37' WEST c 2aGo' � 276.62' . LINES PARALLEL WITH THE NORTH \ LINE OF NORTHWEST QUARTER OF THE H ASQUARTER QUARTER OF THE \ \ NORTHEAST QUARTER '*- SOUTH 21r 14' EAST EXISTING SANITARY SEWER EASEMENT \ \ J EASEMENT I- 7 TEMPORARY L J EASEMENT ,r/ s 6, N Q� G` • • • A( 11 0 C: • Q O U o in r � C J uJ► \� N .E J � !Clv O� J w 0 • • • M 11 ISM , •...... ....... 13 m 0 I w W 111 � ❑ V Q O Ln� y W =' I I� � I I 3 ❑ ❑ --A �� v 0 0 0 • • • OFFICE 1 V OFFICE 2 JJDFFICE 311 OFFICE 4 MEN OFFICE 5 OFf ICE6 STORAGE I/f/ll WOMEN COATS p E i L L�I �� � ---`.VryESTBULE COATS LOBBY COFFEE DRMATION 4o GATHERING CONCOURSE /41 LIBRARY 'GRAN D'STAIR vc ® 007u-` o R. STOR. STORAGE 11 ',, Pantry n KITCHEN P DISH 1 - III. r•a • . 1•s • . COFFEE ... NARTHEX SACRISTY KITCHEN ADDITION (275 SF) � COLUMBARIUM �yy T"TTT 4,446 SF p ADDITION 0 WORSHIP � ASSEMBLY ❑ RGA ✓/_ O \ 'vF BAND? f� \ Upper Le%uanAd'd i t i o n� ` \ - -- _ EXISTING RIDGE LINE _ Edina Comrnm ity Church J 25 50 100 Feet 0 0 0 WN r m F-77 No MINE No ■ ■ Z O �Y 5� r Lu J c W tz V mm ME ME L.. IAI, Cyt ......... I AI XM o o i Wm Y 3 a U $ D 4i 3Nn Wt 3ON3i M"422 ip ;�`: /%:. % � '° ' // I e/ ( (fie � C o } {�(o��'� 4V✓ %. .� j ! '`� �`-� ; l� J `c.,/`t✓' I / •Ili ''��' � N � • z3 000 I � li. ,r All' I ; ° O I ♦ it J I � I '�'•/ O� � m m l I „III I I It O s tia H11 O , b o e -��• I 9 t`o> o. w ui m is H W Z 1 rc '• J o = ern d z ry m r� o 16 �I Z y Y F a U � LZ X = X LI EL In �a m a g a O W 'iye IJ U m w Y a i �'8'9t ? •q.Z ' z 3Nn Wt 3ON3i M"422 ip ;�`: /%:. % � '° ' // I e/ ( (fie � C o } {�(o��'� 4V✓ %. .� j ! '`� �`-� ; l� J `c.,/`t✓' I / •Ili ''��' � N � • z3 000 I � li. ,r All' I ; ° O I ♦ it J I � I '�'•/ O� � m m l I „III I I It O s tia H11 O , b o e -��• I 9 t`o> o. w W ui 7c is H W Z m 3W a m Z d o N Z O_ O F a U � LL = X LI EL In W m a g a O W U U W ui a o H Z Z LL Z • UO j O U O H 1M �F W z �_ o W LL LU • z U • Z � X Ia O W W � a - Y H 1M �F W z �_ 0 0 • WEST 54th, STREE,T - STONE- - WALL 4---s W:7 xe 7 i1_____________.____ ............ --------------- - STONE- - WALL 4---s W:7 V, FtANTEP pj: IEF ----------- 0 - STONE- - WALL 3lc;t4,\ - I -----11.858 V, FtANTEP pj: IEF 43 4 }HAND 882 Am P. BOTtOM OF WALL MATCH, F F.E H ELEVATONSTO ON SLORE, TYPICAL I �o 0 0 --'r*J--.'PETE CUPS L(lA'lCII AS SCALED FROM LRAWNGS PRIYADED B) THE ClTi (IF EDINA (NOT FIELD LOCATED) MRS CONS---- - - - - - - -- - - - L B IM RIM 877.5 877.5 F.F.E -877.70 IF. scl. 1 16.8 22P, H 8 471 •Oo RMI 877.5 RIM MIN 7 FFE=877.7 RIM @x6.9 IIL ------------ P 7TZ IN - MH 9 MH RIMMIN 11 RIM '7 I 4\ WZ. c---------- - - - — -- — -- PC) ---------- ::Z -z -1c Y-" N71 r .i O 11 r N 1 ACCESS �ISER MIN 16 RIM 876.21— r, PXASTR BUILD11 _woco FEW S' L T r MIT --',�.jj-)-----CONSTRLJpJ --------- - 562--- ------------ 861 -------- r -------------------- 661- 4�1 —860—(- 0 a 8 STONE- - WALL 3lc;t4,\ - I -----11.858 FtANTEP pj: IEF 43 4 }HAND 882 Am P. F F.E H =886.3-, '-ROOFLit E 0.. ACCESS FY E-=6-,,7.13 10.9 AC• RISER SER MH 22 MH21 RIM 881.0 -RIM-881.0 H 2 EXISTHAG BUILDING 0.9 1.0 RIM 877.4 1 STOP—STONE #4113, 5.00X ----- --- H 3 H QMH 19 RIM 877.5 MIN 4 MH 5 IM RIM 877.5 877.5 F.F.E -877.70 IF. scl. 1 16.8 22P, H 8 471 •Oo RMI 877.5 RIM MIN 7 FFE=877.7 RIM @x6.9 IIL ------------ P 7TZ IN - MH 9 MH RIMMIN 11 RIM '7 I 4\ WZ. c---------- - - - — -- — -- PC) ---------- ::Z -z -1c Y-" N71 r .i O 11 r N 1 ACCESS �ISER MIN 16 RIM 876.21— r, PXASTR BUILD11 _woco FEW S' L T r MIT --',�.jj-)-----CONSTRLJpJ --------- - 562--- ------------ 861 -------- r -------------------- 661- 4�1 —860—(- 0 a 8 � y,0 0 0 V Ny W '1 1 I ILL � 1 1 Im� 1 o Is I z `I Im a I �x 1 In I �W 1 4$ i in www 1 1 nr� I 1 J ' 1 ipW I Is �oLL I I 68 1 1 I I 1 Or Ilplwf ya � > I 1 � I 1 1 ' I 1 v 1 1 1 1 I 1 I u I } OG 1 �[ I 1< V v I�J III w I IN x ImrW lypj�� Iln I- IOWO IDk; I d«x I 1 I i W „zl s I �3 aN� O'oo `�tzNl .(aDwwal 0 ?-1 H, 1 I 1 , 1 I I L I' a m T t= w ama p O FS � rJ ^t F- u (fl J n W (fj 3, C� m _ � U w do Ncc� 2zw J a m T t= w ama p O FS OS ^t a 4al i' .v n I s 4 3, m _ � a a � v z� T U x � O;m a� �p a rc_w i° p ff (( e. al vl In w O w a p� W3NIl F1iJ3dOdd iQ l53M u I 37FI33 iWIl1i1HH�--, f i Ir y s a IWiI , O o� a3 � J " x-1 i rL"�1 {�' n, ZO 4 , m pFZa gain ff 111 I l 1 � i I do � r e 111 a Ip ,fey '..ter/,�-.� •- �c' f; `�`e ` p I f I � e � 0 � I �_;!-!p , v r,La � 0 ,� � fit} I ♦ T, -J 1; ; I 3NI1 Alii3dOdd PoO d31ItlOJ 3, m _ � y O o� a3 � J " x-1 i rL"�1 {�' n, ZO 4 , m pFZa gain ff 111 I l 1 � i I do � r e 111 a Ip ,fey '..ter/,�-.� •- �c' f; `�`e ` p I f I � e � 0 � I �_;!-!p , v r,La � 0 ,� � fit} I ♦ T, -J 1; ; I 3, m _ � l x � O;m tam.(• (' e� �9i -• Irk Z Ina W 11 W m °Ica ( �( tl -•✓ �.. �+ =dO - • 2 4 oil / I • +T 06 y upa Z-- u o a= m m / O o� a3 � J " x-1 i rL"�1 {�' n, ZO 4 , m pFZa gain ff 111 I l 1 � i I do � r e 111 a Ip ,fey '..ter/,�-.� •- �c' f; `�`e ` p I f I � e � 0 � I �_;!-!p , v r,La � 0 ,� � fit} I ♦ T, -J 1; ; I .f• • c: 1 1� d I 1 06` p ole\ Y8l 1!n NO 3r111 FId3d0dd !0 IS3M •IHnHItlHJ- -- N N M 3rm.ua: in w c� pgOm°� M" jZ Ilf' K N nm bm IF t.J nt 4DR Yml� IU 7 1 PI i° 1 tttlllFlll 6�RN U N 3C lip R pNN �U � /Iry°e aril "1nm tf O I Mmmaoi Cc ttt 1, 11 y I a 1 r �a gn c¢in Ir� `i ^ ogm p 'tip 11 s 1 z m m R •. 4 �`-� it ` o �•ti^�. 1 / � c 4R7 w m U MO i' nM1Fn +�^i .�' 1 S J'�• � YNO °°�o^ ��Z `�10 i Si -_1_ fes% ., rc'^ ^m 1 b -414 I I r 1 I i I I" I LYJ o I i - N U aRb 1 N to 1 R 1 1y � � WHWV=1 YW- I 1 `I N U ¢ .rl UUS�w <7pN MRO ' (w(�w�N 1 N3 p I ly I N I•m�� / re /4/ I i0 I 1 I 1 I Nmm Mma>no 1�� \ ¢ �, ���`=i ..�-•✓ f'^/ �O� try Lu 1 1 ¢ I O MN Y 1 1� d I 1 06` p ole\ Y8l 1!n NO 3r111 FId3d0dd !0 IS3M •IHnHItlHJ- -- N N M 3rm.ua: in w c� pgOm°� M" jZ Ilf' K N nm bm IF t.J nt 4DR Yml� IU 7 1 PI i° 1 tttlllFlll 6�RN U N 3C lip R pNN �U � /Iry°e aril "1nm tf O I Mmmaoi Cc ttt 1, 11 y I a 1 r �a gn c¢in Ir� `i ^ ogm p 'tip 11 s 1 z m m R •. 4 �`-� it ` o �•ti^�. 1 w W 1 / � c 4R7 No mnn U MO i' nM1Fn +�^i .�' 1 S J'�• � YNO °°�o^ ��Z `�10 i Si -_1_ fes% ., rc'^ ^m �_L LYJ o 1 R x Ld 1 N3 a n nN. mN 'e N I•m�� / re /4/ I i � t r: Nmm Mma>no 1�� \ ¢ �, ���`=i ..�-•✓ f'^/ �O� try 1 w W L C)C�TILIH IFA � 'MG0 VlFnk,jj.ETrE!' THE CIT, OF EDINA 11 e PELlM/NARY o s� 4 DELINEATION BY � o to v, t oc WRONMENTAL SERVICE IED ON 6/6/2013 ------ 91 --- o T s o Edina Community Lutheran Church Tree Removal Site Plan Site Plan Key = Property Line T� Existing Tagged Trees to Remain 00 Tagged Trees Being Removed for Construction 47stau- ` SIGH M yy Jr� LL NR , -WILLL a"vei . r.r.0-688.37 ; MW LINE rs.a.-877.73 EXISTING BUILDING I STORY -STONE µ1t3 y e PELlM/NARY o s� 4 DELINEATION BY � o to v, t oc WRONMENTAL SERVICE IED ON 6/6/2013 ------ 91 --- o T s o Edina Community Lutheran Church Tree Removal Site Plan Site Plan Key = Property Line T� Existing Tagged Trees to Remain 00 Tagged Trees Being Removed for Construction 47stau- ` SIGH M yy Jr� LL NR , -WILLL a"vei . rM I nu ® I 4 J .223 IiL.e EXISTING BUILDING K Srt»Y-STatx "too 566TR:SS.Q"..la i I Ilk 6 ` `` ire. n e�tne. _ -eel _.UY.s } sae --�=',=-------- --- --e6.----- \�� � _ ---- ------- ------ ----- ' e+- 1 eE I I W o ~ 4 P -40- t I / � N I o 4 j r o is oe � 0 12 6 - - 0 0 0 r.r.0-688.37 ; MW LINE rs.a.-877.73 EXISTING BUILDING I STORY -STONE µ1t3 rM I nu ® I 4 J .223 IiL.e EXISTING BUILDING K Srt»Y-STatx "too 566TR:SS.Q"..la i I Ilk 6 ` `` ire. n e�tne. _ -eel _.UY.s } sae --�=',=-------- --- --e6.----- \�� � _ ---- ------- ------ ----- ' e+- 1 eE I I W o ~ 4 P -40- t I / � N I o 4 j r o is oe � 0 12 6 - - 0 0 0 • • • TREE INVENITORY AS PROVIDED BY HERITAGE SHADE TREE CONSULTANTS Dated July 1, 2013. I _ _ Trials Tag 6 Species DBH Condition Comments Tree Tog 6 species DOH Condition Comments ' 1 Boxelder 9 Fair 47 Boxelder 8 Fair 2 Boxelder 9 Fair _ _ 48 American elm 8 Dead Next to DED trees 3 Boxelder 9 Fair Leaning tree 49 American elm 7 Dead DED 4 Cottonwood 12 Fair Trunk wounds so American elm 7 Dead DED 5 Cottonwood 13 Poor Dead top 51 American elm 7 Dead Next to DED tress 6 Boxelder 7 Poor Leaning tree 52 Boxelder 15 Fair 7 Boxelder 8 Fair« a Boxelder 15 Poor Leaning tree colonized by Aria 64 American elm 9 Dead DED 9 Boxelder 9 Fair 68 American elm 7 Dead DED 10 American elm 21 Good as Boxelder 10 Fair 11 Boxelder 7 Fair 57 Boxelder 8 Fair 12 Boxelder 7 Poor Trunk wounds. lean 60 Mulberry 12 Good 13 Boxelder 8 Poor Leaning into 69 Boxelder 8 Poor Leen, atom cankers 14 Slyer maple 12 Good 60 Mulberry 10 Fair 16 Boxelder 15 Fair 61 Cottonwood 40 Fair Has old IightrNng strike wound 16 Boxelder 6 Fair Trunk wound 62 Cottonwood 14 Poor Dead top 17 Boxelder 6 Fair 63 Cottonwood 27 Fair 1s Heckberty 7 Good 64 Cottonwood 23 Good 19 American elm 19 Dead Structural concems. Within root graft distance of DED tree its Cottonwood, 24 Good 20 American elm 20 Dead Structural concema. Within root graft distance of DED tree 86 Boxelder 13 Poor Leaning into a'85 21 American elm 19 Dead Within root graft distance of DED tree 67 American elm 9 Dead Within root graft distance of DED tree 22 Mulberry 7 Fair Trunk wounds 68 American elm 14 Dead Within root graft distance of DED tree 23 Amedcan elm 12 Fair 69 American elm 10 Dead -- - Within root graft distance of DED tree 24 Boxelder 7 Fair 70 American elm 8 Dead Within mol graft distance of DED into 28 Cottonwood 18 Fair Stem cankers, limited crown te.... 71 Mulberry 7 fair 26 Boxelder 11 Fair - 72 '. Mulberry 8 Fair 27 Boxelder 7 Poor Leaning tree , . American elm 24 Fair Leaning into 28 Cottonwood 32 Good 74 American elm, 24 Do" Within root graft distance of DED tree 29 American elm 10Deatl Within root gran distance DED tree - 76 American elm 12 Dead Within root graft distance of DED tree 30 Boxelder 6 Fair 76 American elm 18 Dead Within root grab distance of DEC) tree 31 Boxelder 9 Fair 77 American elm '`.y.7 Dead Within root graft distance of DED tree 32 American elm 22 Dead Has new DED Infection 78 American elm ;. 7 Dead Within root graft distance of DED t- 33 Boxelder 7 Fair - .>o American Nm 7 —D.ad Within root graft dstance of DED into 34 Boxelder 9,7 Fair Double stemmed tree t: -M American elm 10 Dead Within root graft distance of DEO into 38 Norway maple 13 Good 61 Bur ook t8 Good 36 Boxelder 1b Fair Has diebeck '"' 62 Bur osk 17 Fair Leaning tree Boxsldr k;.:."63 American elm 30 Dead Within root graft distance of DEO tree 38 Boxelder 7 Fair ' : M :,.M Sugar maple 11 Fair Trunk wountls 39 Mulberry B Poor Structure[ concerns Mulberry 9 Fair 40 Mulberry a Pair M Green Nh 16 Fair 41 Silver maple 8 Fair ffBasswood ---_ is Poor Structure conce rns 42 43 American elm Boxelder t4 7 Good Poor CT rgrovm by we So 'M Rher birch10,8, __- Amur maple 7.2 7,6,5 Good Good Clump tree Clump insist 44 46 Mulberry Boxelder 8 9 Fair Fair _ _ 90 91 Amur maple Amur maple 9,6,6.3 8.7,4 Good Good Clump into Clump tree 46 Boxeltler 7 Fair 92 Autumn blaze maple 9 Good 7iet9 -/o 6. Re—o�e<.f BOUNDARY & TOPOGRAPHIC SURVEY \ FOR: EDINA COMMUNITY LUTHE CHURCH tl o \\sem. ¢ s N69332YE ••` , - ' " � 1, 660.46 �" � ::•' 1 � ti 4 j�41:� <=��;,�-y--�:-"` •rte– xh '�-.. -i.1 J. 0 8�;. �--^' fa _ — — - - . ` ICE LEGEND: � va1 laU.n 4� <o t-- _�,,.�. n�+',�,y :?'�, ey (,� �p� i". t�"�_.-_� �ll• R � LEGALOF�cRIrrloN:. - -T-�- ES o. er Ecw, mn s xuwwr, •.c .. C� "�t�•i• • i � Y 9Y 1 f I Y NOT: t �Q�.� �,:'�\\,�-\.y`'ti ----f�yh:- i•�' ...-.-..Wr.,a,,.�,~�.,..... ,sya.�..,.,..,,.a..a....W.. 41 ' �' ; <: I� ` - ur..ri sc, .w a. s. zmz ' �'' \1 ;`'• T��,\\ ���, 4`Y _ ti �.:..=',`_I...«r .......�.r � .. �...,....::'�.b ��...<� �: it ` Ot h • 1 y\ (�\ (:It./l�y�r � s_ r. r,.•.rx war... :raF r. a a�.m+.."r Y: ` ` - /i'is'' l� s �/,l'-T i rr_�r•ri�"off'.. ,i.aws`..we ^^ w, L os BOUNDARY & TOPOGRAPHIC SURVEY EDINA COMMUNITY LUTHERAN CHURCH N JAN Ep\N OF J �\� ,1 P. h ww 4xusr rubcR wrzz R CERTIFICATION: PROPERTY ADDRESS: 4113 WEST 54TH STREET D Tyler Skae1 NE. Solla 100 n a polls. Rlnnasola 651,1] 111nPNONE: (n13I t66-]300 EDINA, MINNESOTA 554241 To.(Fl1a12)46-.3 Egan, Fleur 4 Nowak. Inc rrw.+o«.,c —.- iC� • Ll �Ft4iMG CONCRETE oM�nEA. ro TE TmfG.co. m,rx E.:JSTING a BUILDING vha-EAar xc suunxc ro .Tnxc + o M rro TC Nddm ..,Ww ®C1DEM0LITION PLAN C20 o a 2c w• a' EDINA COMMUNITY LUTHERAN CHURCH ADDITION & REMODELING EDINA, MINNESOTA PIERCE PINI & ASSOCF-ATES 9298 CENTRAL AVENUE NE SUITE 312 BLAINE. NN 55434 - TEL 763,537.1311 FAX 761.537.1354 CONDITIONAL USE 6/24;2015 p� .—A i PflIQ N ut MTIS.'{iD14' .txu Trn•ns 1• -GIS AME -------------- 2..2.11 AGA 4w Ott SG°NrtiAG �InTawe DEMOLITION PLAN C200 w '��; Tfcff ro T[ u21GfEu, riy.r 1 1vPK.LL 4 Y11 �`• �� ' f `� � PAKLENf M� P �G uaFA J J . � ro BE REIIGfED, ".Trr+r ...17 '� PRLGeNIfIARI' /^ IANC BEGINEAI�CW BY 1 a, fQ �r.f � 7�iti ENI•A'ON4�E6G `• 1 ` p:AlEO t"fk 61 G/0/1013013 , C. Ll �Ft4iMG CONCRETE oM�nEA. ro TE TmfG.co. m,rx E.:JSTING a BUILDING vha-EAar xc suunxc ro .Tnxc + o M rro TC Nddm ..,Ww ®C1DEM0LITION PLAN C20 o a 2c w• a' EDINA COMMUNITY LUTHERAN CHURCH ADDITION & REMODELING EDINA, MINNESOTA PIERCE PINI & ASSOCF-ATES 9298 CENTRAL AVENUE NE SUITE 312 BLAINE. NN 55434 - TEL 763,537.1311 FAX 761.537.1354 CONDITIONAL USE 6/24;2015 p� .—A i PflIQ N ut MTIS.'{iD14' .txu Trn•ns 1• -GIS AME -------------- 2..2.11 AGA 4w Ott SG°NrtiAG �InTawe DEMOLITION PLAN C200 C] h10 CEDAR CAP BOARD, D-4 MIT RATCORMRS hA TREATED HORN RAR. 1K4B 1K2 CEDAR HORN FENCE BOARDS PLYWOOD BACKING BNi 1D CO- FOSTB, SET %TIN LM TREATED HORN RAL INCEDM BASE COLLAR SLOPE NIC COFOOTING t CLEAN STONE (NO FINES) SECIONALENIER FRAA�LG9UPPONT FRAMING DETAL • NOTE: CONTRACTORSHALLM MIR TREESNAPLUM9POSTTCNTHRWf,11BI TLE WAARANTY PERXO. WRAP ECIF"TIONO2 LY UPONAPPROVAL BY WIDSCAPEMCXIIECT. BEE BPECFILAICNO2 B3W NDTEAU FASTENERS SHALL BE COATED PROVIDE A INSTALL RODENT PROMCTFON.t HARDWRE CLOTH MESH EXTERIOR GRADE SCREWSAM SIHLLE%lE1DA CYLINDER, B' DN OR GREATER X N NGT- STAKE N %ACE PER SPEC 129300 MN. OF S IND RECENNG BOMD. 11. INSTALL TREE WITH ROOT FLARE VRBLLL. E AT TOP OF THE ROOT BA NSTALLSIPSONSMONGTEANGIES PER REMOVES NLEVELMANNERFRONTOPa ROOTBALLTOEXPOSE1ST MAMEALTIII✓8L5 RECOL NDATIOI"! WRAP WO CEDAR OR URGER MAN ORDER ROOT IF NEEDED. SET ROOT BALL WITH MAN VERTAT END POST& `- ORDER ROOT I•ABOYEADJACENTGMDE. DO NOT COVEN TOP OF ROOT BALL WITH SOIL INTERMEDIATE _ POST AD SIMPSON SMONC>TE 14 CECAR BOARD, A te _-• / PUCE NO NADH IN CONTACT WITH TREE TRUNK GAWANIZEDANGLE.WP g TYP 1N LE.R BOARD. REMOVE BURLAP, THANE, ROPE AAO WIFE FROM TOP HAIR OF ROOT BALL hA CEDAR TYP !- BUILD f HIGH FARM BMICER BEYOND EDGE OF ROOT BALL " WMEATEDPOBTSMP Z WIC CEDAR PLYWOOD K BACKING RADIUS MULCH TING ai PLYWOOD BACKING � �EOGE LOIIDIION VARES PLACE ROOT BALL ON UNDISTURBED OR COMPACTED 508 SCARIFY SIDES UPTREE PR WITH SPADE BVRMI) TO BIND UND6TUR - J=11 WITH PREPARED 'Cl SIMCAME ii' -PLANTINGS OIL. REFERTO SPKFIGTON5, C01MCTT035%OF MA%. DRY LNTT WEKSNTACCORDNGTOASTM D6M dGNANT/O PRP TO B• TARP SOILAROUND ROOT MUSASE FIFLLYINUHI ODT PRESSURE SO DEEPER TNN ROOT BALL THAT ROOT SALL DOES NOT SHIFT RN�EIEANl10M UNDERGRgMD DRANTBE F NEEDED PER PERCOLATION TEST RESULTS. IETOSTORNDRAN WOOD SCREENING FENCE WI GATES 2 TREE PLANTING DETAIL L200 SCALE 11'•1'-0' L200 3 SHRUB PLANTING DETAIL L200 SCALEw•=1'd GENERALNOTES 1. CONTRACTOR SWJ.L INSPECT THE SUE AND BECOME FAMILIAR WITH EKBTIMG CONDITIONS RELATING TO THE NATURE AND SCOPE OF YORK. I CONTRALTORSHALLVERFYPUN UYOW AUD BRING TO THI:AITENTIONOF TIE LANDSCAPEARCHITKT DMCREPAMES WHICH MAY COMPROMISE THE DENGNOR INIENTOTTRE UYOLR. REGNAlIONS CCVERMNG THE WORK AND MATERMLB SUPPLED. 1. COI/TRACTOR SIMLL PROTECT EXIETNG ROADS, CU'RBSGUTTERS. MAKE. TREES, WWSANDSREELEWE DMtWCOWRUCTpND MTM. DAWGETO BAMS SHALL K 0.ERREDAT W ADDRO.L COSTTOTHE ON'MR. 5. CONTPACTORPML fflFYALIGNMEOA LWATCNOFUNOERGRONOAW ABOVEG.DEUTNTESMDPROVBEMENECESBA KOTECi FORSALE BEFORE CONSTRUCTION BEGINS (MINIMUM IOCLEARANCE), 6. CONTRACTOR SHVLCCOR TE THE PHYSES OF CONSiRUOIIONANDPLANTNG kLSTALLAiON W RH O1 XER COIJTRACTORS W ORKNG ON BITE. ). NIOERGROUND DILUTES SHALLBENSTAL3EDWT.TMENCESDONOTCUr THROUGH ROOT SYSTEMS CP EMISTNGIRFES TO REMAIN. I. EMUM CONTWRS. TRAL5, VEGETATION CMSGUTTERAND DINER ELEMENTS ME BASED UPON INFORMATION SUPPLED TO THE LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT BY OTHERS, CONTRACTOR SHAU YFRPY' DISCREPANCIES PROP TO CONSTRUCTION AND NOTIFY UNDSCAPEAACHITEGT OF SAM. S. HORNONTALANDVERTIGLLALIC#MEWOFPROP06EDW M.TRA MRd n ME SUBJECT TO FIELD ADJIJSTNENT REQUIRED TO COMORMTO LOCALffD TOPOGRAPHIC CONDITCNBANOTO Mh1MNE TREE REMCAMLAND GRADING. CHM[ES NAIIfIMENTAND GRADES NST BEAPPROVED BY THE LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT PRIOR TO ILPLE M WATCH. 10 CONiPAL1bR SINAI REVIEW THESUEFMOEFICFNCRSNSITECONDIICR5W 11 MIGHT NEGATNFLYAFFE6T%PAINT EBTABLBHMENT. SURVIAL OR NWRRAII UMESPANE SHE DOHCIlb16 SHALLSE BROW W TO TEATTENTION OF THE UNDSCAPEMCHITECTPROII M COMENDEMW OF WORK. 11. CONTRACTOR B RESP ONSML£FOR ONGCNG MANTENAME OF NEWLY INSTALLED MATERIALS UW IL TIME OF SUBSTANTIAL COMLLTOIL REPAIR OF ACTS OF ANDA LBM OR MWM WHICH WYMCUR PRIOR M SMTAW WLCOMPLETCN SHALLBETHE RESPONSBNTY OF THF LADSCAPE CONTACTOR NOTE PREPARESOLFOR INSTALL I'UYEROFSHREDDED HARDWOOD MULCH ORS THE ENTIRE BED LAYER OF FINELY SHRED DEO HARDWOOD MULCH. DO NOT %ACE N CONTACT MAIM PUNT f •REFER EDGE CONDITDN VARIES EDGER, REFER TO PUN ANDSPELIFICARON LOOSEN ROOTS OF CONTAINER GROWN PLANTS b PLAWNGSOIL -- SCARIFYSDESIRDBOTTOMOFPUNRNGBEDWRHSPADE '-- UNDSTURSEDSUBGRADE q PERENNIAL PLANTING DETAIL LZ00 swE w•=ra ARIEAMBEGRADED. OMSTMREWM EXILINGPL WTERNLBHALLBE BRMKTOTIEATTENTONMF UNDSCAPEMCHTECTMWMREMOVAL 11 FEBFERTILIZED ES TO REMAIN. LYON DIRECTION OF IAIDSLAPEMLHTELT,SHALLBE BRANCHES. PRUED 10 REMOVE DIAD WOOD.OAMAGEDANI RUBBING BRANCHES. M. CONTRA MSH MERREAWSMWTAWRRTENREGKESTFORTHE SUBSTANTNLCOMPLETIONNSPECTONDFLANWS PEAWSITEMPLLOVETAENTS PRIOR TO SUBMITTING FINIAL MY REDDEST 15. CONTRACTOR SHPLL PREPARE AND SUBMIT REPRODUCIBLE ASNUILT NMAIME)Of LANDSCAPE INSTALLATION, IRRIGATION AND ERE IMPROVEMENTS UPON COMPLETION OF CONSTRUCTION NSTAllATION AND PRIOR TO SUBSTANTIAL COMPLETION, 16. SYMBOLS ON PIAN DRAIAIIG TAKE PRECEDENCE OVER SCIEDMESIF PREC EMNLEWER NOTES EXIST SPECFICAIIONSANDOETAl15TARE PRECEDENCE OVER NOTES. PLANTING NOTES 1. STAKE PROPOSED PLANTING LOCATIONS PER PLAN FOR REVEWANDAPPR0IN BY LMDSGPE ARC MELT PRIOR iO IN6ULL 2. P"MATERNL6.LLGlWLYWTFHTMCMRENTEIXIDNOFTMAMRFAN STANDARD FOR MJRSERYSTOCKANSIMI. MlE55 NDim O1N:RWBE, DECOWUS SHRUBS SMLLL HAYFAT LEAST S GNDSATIHE SPECIFIED HIGXT. M -E WA TREES SHALL HAVE W YCMTCWSAND SHALL BEGIN BRANDING. LOWER THAN 3' FEETABOVETIE ROOT BML SMEU" BOULEVARD TREES SHALL BEGIN BRANCHING. HINDER TNNCABOVE RUED SURFACE 3. NSTALPIANTMATERML ONLEFNLLGRADINGAIDCONSRUCTONHASSEEN COMPLETED LATHE RNIEDMTEMEA A. INSTALL PUNT MATERIALS PER PLANTING DETAILS, 5. BUBSlIM10N REQUESTS FOR PLANT MATERIAL IYPE 6 SUE SHALL BE SUBMITTm TO THE LANDSCAPE ANCHTTKT FOR CONBIDE.TDN IMOR TO BIDDING, ALL SUBSTUUTONS AFTER BIDDING MUST BEAPPROVED BY LAND6LAPEARCHTECTAM MESUBJECTTOC MACTAOJUETMENTS. L ADASTMENTSNLOLATIONOFPROPOSEDPLANTMATERNL-K.EKDIH FEUD. WJDSCAPEARCHITECT MUST BE NOTIFIED PRIOR M All)USTMNTOF - S IXLCANC M1LCN NOTE' REFE0. i0 EXTERIOR PUNTING SPECIFiCAIION PREPARE IMA FOR INSTALL I' -ER OF MULCH, DO NOT PLACE IN �•� FINISHEDCRADEAMEDCE 1�EWIAEBED CONTACTWISHRUBSTEM _ �J It IC FSI ii = - FOR CONDITION. APPLY PRE{MERGE. HERBCCE METALEDGERW5TAKE, v EDGECONDU VARIES S LANDSCAPE EDGER EE PLA EDGER, REFER TO PLAN AND SPECFICATCIN LODSHB R0015 OF CONTAINER GROWN PUNTS EXCAVATE PUNT BED MIR.f DEEPER THAN ROOT BALL HOT. SCMFY SIDES AND BOTTOM OF PUNTING BED WITHSPADE LWDIS-SED SUBCAUOE 3 SHRUB PLANTING DETAIL L200 SCALEw•=1'd GENERALNOTES 1. CONTRACTOR SWJ.L INSPECT THE SUE AND BECOME FAMILIAR WITH EKBTIMG CONDITIONS RELATING TO THE NATURE AND SCOPE OF YORK. I CONTRALTORSHALLVERFYPUN UYOW AUD BRING TO THI:AITENTIONOF TIE LANDSCAPEARCHITKT DMCREPAMES WHICH MAY COMPROMISE THE DENGNOR INIENTOTTRE UYOLR. REGNAlIONS CCVERMNG THE WORK AND MATERMLB SUPPLED. 1. COI/TRACTOR SIMLL PROTECT EXIETNG ROADS, CU'RBSGUTTERS. MAKE. TREES, WWSANDSREELEWE DMtWCOWRUCTpND MTM. DAWGETO BAMS SHALL K 0.ERREDAT W ADDRO.L COSTTOTHE ON'MR. 5. CONTPACTORPML fflFYALIGNMEOA LWATCNOFUNOERGRONOAW ABOVEG.DEUTNTESMDPROVBEMENECESBA KOTECi FORSALE BEFORE CONSTRUCTION BEGINS (MINIMUM IOCLEARANCE), 6. CONTRACTOR SHVLCCOR TE THE PHYSES OF CONSiRUOIIONANDPLANTNG kLSTALLAiON W RH O1 XER COIJTRACTORS W ORKNG ON BITE. ). NIOERGROUND DILUTES SHALLBENSTAL3EDWT.TMENCESDONOTCUr THROUGH ROOT SYSTEMS CP EMISTNGIRFES TO REMAIN. I. EMUM CONTWRS. TRAL5, VEGETATION CMSGUTTERAND DINER ELEMENTS ME BASED UPON INFORMATION SUPPLED TO THE LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT BY OTHERS, CONTRACTOR SHAU YFRPY' DISCREPANCIES PROP TO CONSTRUCTION AND NOTIFY UNDSCAPEAACHITEGT OF SAM. S. HORNONTALANDVERTIGLLALIC#MEWOFPROP06EDW M.TRA MRd n ME SUBJECT TO FIELD ADJIJSTNENT REQUIRED TO COMORMTO LOCALffD TOPOGRAPHIC CONDITCNBANOTO Mh1MNE TREE REMCAMLAND GRADING. CHM[ES NAIIfIMENTAND GRADES NST BEAPPROVED BY THE LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT PRIOR TO ILPLE M WATCH. 10 CONiPAL1bR SINAI REVIEW THESUEFMOEFICFNCRSNSITECONDIICR5W 11 MIGHT NEGATNFLYAFFE6T%PAINT EBTABLBHMENT. SURVIAL OR NWRRAII UMESPANE SHE DOHCIlb16 SHALLSE BROW W TO TEATTENTION OF THE UNDSCAPEMCHITECTPROII M COMENDEMW OF WORK. 11. CONTRACTOR B RESP ONSML£FOR ONGCNG MANTENAME OF NEWLY INSTALLED MATERIALS UW IL TIME OF SUBSTANTIAL COMLLTOIL REPAIR OF ACTS OF ANDA LBM OR MWM WHICH WYMCUR PRIOR M SMTAW WLCOMPLETCN SHALLBETHE RESPONSBNTY OF THF LADSCAPE CONTACTOR NOTE PREPARESOLFOR INSTALL I'UYEROFSHREDDED HARDWOOD MULCH ORS THE ENTIRE BED LAYER OF FINELY SHRED DEO HARDWOOD MULCH. DO NOT %ACE N CONTACT MAIM PUNT f •REFER EDGE CONDITDN VARIES EDGER, REFER TO PUN ANDSPELIFICARON LOOSEN ROOTS OF CONTAINER GROWN PLANTS b PLAWNGSOIL -- SCARIFYSDESIRDBOTTOMOFPUNRNGBEDWRHSPADE '-- UNDSTURSEDSUBGRADE q PERENNIAL PLANTING DETAIL LZ00 swE w•=ra ARIEAMBEGRADED. OMSTMREWM EXILINGPL WTERNLBHALLBE BRMKTOTIEATTENTONMF UNDSCAPEMCHTECTMWMREMOVAL 11 FEBFERTILIZED ES TO REMAIN. LYON DIRECTION OF IAIDSLAPEMLHTELT,SHALLBE BRANCHES. PRUED 10 REMOVE DIAD WOOD.OAMAGEDANI RUBBING BRANCHES. M. CONTRA MSH MERREAWSMWTAWRRTENREGKESTFORTHE SUBSTANTNLCOMPLETIONNSPECTONDFLANWS PEAWSITEMPLLOVETAENTS PRIOR TO SUBMITTING FINIAL MY REDDEST 15. CONTRACTOR SHPLL PREPARE AND SUBMIT REPRODUCIBLE ASNUILT NMAIME)Of LANDSCAPE INSTALLATION, IRRIGATION AND ERE IMPROVEMENTS UPON COMPLETION OF CONSTRUCTION NSTAllATION AND PRIOR TO SUBSTANTIAL COMPLETION, 16. SYMBOLS ON PIAN DRAIAIIG TAKE PRECEDENCE OVER SCIEDMESIF PREC EMNLEWER NOTES EXIST SPECFICAIIONSANDOETAl15TARE PRECEDENCE OVER NOTES. PLANTING NOTES 1. STAKE PROPOSED PLANTING LOCATIONS PER PLAN FOR REVEWANDAPPR0IN BY LMDSGPE ARC MELT PRIOR iO IN6ULL 2. P"MATERNL6.LLGlWLYWTFHTMCMRENTEIXIDNOFTMAMRFAN STANDARD FOR MJRSERYSTOCKANSIMI. MlE55 NDim O1N:RWBE, DECOWUS SHRUBS SMLLL HAYFAT LEAST S GNDSATIHE SPECIFIED HIGXT. M -E WA TREES SHALL HAVE W YCMTCWSAND SHALL BEGIN BRANDING. LOWER THAN 3' FEETABOVETIE ROOT BML SMEU" BOULEVARD TREES SHALL BEGIN BRANCHING. HINDER TNNCABOVE RUED SURFACE 3. NSTALPIANTMATERML ONLEFNLLGRADINGAIDCONSRUCTONHASSEEN COMPLETED LATHE RNIEDMTEMEA A. INSTALL PUNT MATERIALS PER PLANTING DETAILS, 5. BUBSlIM10N REQUESTS FOR PLANT MATERIAL IYPE 6 SUE SHALL BE SUBMITTm TO THE LANDSCAPE ANCHTTKT FOR CONBIDE.TDN IMOR TO BIDDING, ALL SUBSTUUTONS AFTER BIDDING MUST BEAPPROVED BY LAND6LAPEARCHTECTAM MESUBJECTTOC MACTAOJUETMENTS. L ADASTMENTSNLOLATIONOFPROPOSEDPLANTMATERNL-K.EKDIH FEUD. WJDSCAPEARCHITECT MUST BE NOTIFIED PRIOR M All)USTMNTOF - S IXLCANC M1LCN -. '- � (SEE SPECPCAIONS) �•� FINISHEDCRADEAMEDCE J11�IC CONDITION VARIES -SEE PUN _ �J It IC FSI ii = - FOR CONDITION. METALEDGERW5TAKE, PER SPEC. S LANDSCAPE EDGER L2� scALEI-1?=Ya PLAWS. >. FERTIIN.EPLAMMATERMLUPONINSTALUTNNWRHDFIE NEMEALOINEA AFPROVEDFERTLNERM(EDNWRHi PLANRDSOILPERTHEMANUPACTURENR RIBMUCTONE OR MAYBE TREATED FOR SUMMERAW FALL NSTALLATIONWRHM APPLCATON OF G.NULAR 10460E 12 M PER 2.5 -CALDER TREEAND 60L FER SHRUB WTMM ADDRDNLLAPPM'.AT30N OF 10410TH: FOLLDWNGSPRING N TIE -SAUCER. 8. INSTALL , DEPTH U PLANINGM%SO&EASRKFNISTONOUNDCOVER. PERENHALS.RANTMNA PIANTNG5dL5XALCONMSTOF Mi, 38TTH; SP N ED INCONTAINAMAXIMUM L. 1D%BAND,APH OF T.1 MIC, ORFS OIHERNLSE SPECIFIED IN TFE PRO,FCTMANWL B. TREE WRAPPING WTERMLSHAUSE TWOAYAIEO PLASTIC SHEETNGAPPLED FROM TRUNK FLARE TO FIRST BRAND H. WRAP SMOOUHBARKEO DECIDUOUS TREES PUNTED W THE FALL PRIOR M DECEMBER 1 AND REMOVE W.PPRIGARER WY 1. 10. LFTWKSH LEOGERMBEWEDTOf NTANSNR .PEREWJWSANO AHIAWS WHERE PUNTFJG BED LEETS BOD NLESS OTHERrVGE NOTED. 11. MPLYPR KRGEMIERMM(PREENDRAPPROVEDEOU4)NANNAL PEREMLAL.AM EH UG BEDD FOLLOWED BY SHREDDED INRDWOOD MULCH. REFER TO SPECFFATONB FORADDRD.L NFORWTION REGAROINIO USE OF KMCOES. 12. INSTAL L TDEEP SHREDDED HARDWOOD MULCH RNOSAT CONFERCUS B DECIDUOUS TREES WITH NO MACH N DIRECT CONTACT WITH THEE TRUNK. 13. NSTALLZDEEPSHREDDED HAROWODD MULCH RNGSAT SHRUB PWJIINGMEAS WRH W MULCH N DRECTCOWACT WITH SMUG STEMS. 11, INSTAL Y DEEP FINELY SHREDDED MULCH OR 1 -DEEP SHREDDED.RDAC00 MULCH N PERENNIAL PUNTING BEDS NEMOVEAUMBRUCH FROM STEMS a PERENHIALB-PUHA STEMS SIIOULD WTBE N DRECTCONfACT WITH MACH 15. WMR), NEW PWT MATERIAL INFOLKH ONE CALENDAR YEAR FROM THE DATE OF SI.BSTANTMLCOLPLEIbH NORRTNLACCEPUNCEMTLLBECONEIDERED. 1fi. SPRING PLAT MATERIAL WSTALLATIONGFROM IHEMRL ISTD JUNE IS. P. FAUCDW RDIJSPWITNGMACCEPTABLEFROMAUGUBT2ITOSEKEMBER30. 18. MUDCIDWWPLANTNGMACCEPUBLEFROMAL T15LNTILWV ERI5, 1B. ADJUSTMENTS TO PUNTING DATES MUST BE APPRWED N MINTING BY THE UNDSCAPEARCHITECT IRRIGATI()N NOTES 1. CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR PRCM%M IRRIGATION LAYOUT PUN AND SPECIFCAUDNAS PARTOF THE SCOPE OF WORK. SUBMT LAYOLRPLANAND SPECIRCAT FORAPPROVALBYTHEUNOSCAPEARCHMCTPNg MINDER ANbCRCONSTRUCTION. ITSFAUBETHECONTRACTOR'SRESPONSBILMTO ENSURETWTSOODEMEEMDANDPUNTEDAREASAREMR MDPROPERLY. NCLUDNGTIOSEAREASDRECTLYARODUDAMABU WBLEDINDFpAM . 2. CONTRACTOR SHALLViRIFY EXRTINDj IRRIGATION SYSTEM UYOUTAIO CONFIRM COMPLETE LIMITS OF IRRIGATION PRIOR TO SUPPLYING SHOP DRAINI 1 CONTRACTORS.LLCONTACTUND.KARCWIECTFORINSPECTpNAND APPRONLL0 AUMUS RECENRJG DRP IRRIGATION PRIOR TO IMSTAUCMN OF ANY MACH A. CONTRACTOR SHALL PROVIDE THE OWNER WTHAN IRRIGATION SCHEDULE APPROPRIATE i0 THE PROJECT BITE CONDITIONS AND TO PLANTED MATERIAL GRO'NIH REQUIREMENTS. S CONTRACTOR SHALL ENSURE THAT SOK CONDITIONS AND COMPACTION ARE ADEQUATE TO ALLOW FOR PROPER DRAINAGE MOUND THE CONSTRUCTION BRE, UNDESIRABLE CONDITIONS SHALL BE BROUGHT TO THE ATTENTION OF THE LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT PRIOR TO BFDINNNG OF WORK. R SHALL BE THE LANDSCAPE CONTRACTORS RESPONSBIUlYTO EIREUtE PROPER SURFACEAND SUBSURFACE DRAINAGE IN PUNTINGAREAS. is EDINA COMMUNITY LUTHERAN CHURCH ADDITION & REMODELING EDINA, MINNESOTA DAMON FARBER LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTS CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT SUBMITTAL 6/2412015 M•DA1R LANDSCAPE DETAILS & NOTES L200 • 1310- L11V 9% IN iI rax saE caanar, r IA'A'cam��i*art �1a min ___� r cores rc ---- ),fp1' ____ \f� a�irsinu T�w� 5 •_�� L u ___ o � \ �I J .•,,.6tc-''• V lR+ -� iz ar. 0 ,fin• ` \ � � nv e]i] I 1 SP4Z o�� r1T e•iva \.J -� y�1 ,'l �* \ .i MVS. ate ,ANDEDEE/ EAT pV BY ENWRONMENTAL MATED ON 6/6120,3 -.. - ].../ , e W E,•� r'r 'y� • ?.LFR:NC 4.4 IES J til n y t SJ'o _ _ - - -' ".-.�C Via,_ _ — _ — — — �.✓ t`�` ` rK! -� h;; bra` Po•Y ��1- . -'- — ^ _ n J l v Ni a :fir ® nSTORMWATER POLLUTION PREVENTION PLAN — EXISTING CONDITIONS 30 m• a• ew EDINA COMMUNITY AUDI I JUN & REMODELING EDINA, MINNESOTA PIERCE PINI & ASSOCIATES 9298 CENTRAL AVENUE NE SUITE 312 BLAINE. MN 55434 TEL 763.537.1311 FAX 763.537.1354 CONDITIONAL USE R—A s n— RilOfl17,4S:F101(i� 11]]] nn�ns �Oy `a n A STORMWATER POLLUTION PREVENTION PLAN - EXISTING C302 0 .7 WEST 54th 1 ST., R E EjT AOSORro� TRS .... .... .... IT,mxcxLrz rowan 1. ".-REV- F ----------- - ---------- - ------ ---------- - ------ - --- 41 m ------------- - ---- - _: I ee -------------- R ---------------------- L -TR Fl:I'_T BUIL l4r, M� :1. BUILDING EXISTING �SSTRUCTR) 'IN N Cl TREE --EE .oawh 11. T.E cl, or To RE-.. SEE ---------- 0 E Mr-% 0 -- ----- 0. sl cJ, r------------ RRELHANA L 0C,A7ED 6161200 r NO 0EUMEZ. 11 ICNIAl �CE ,A -,Z C. --- , - ------- Tn� A, ----------- ---------- -------------- ------- C -------------- --------- -------- ------------ - . A-- '4- 1110 .4y x sl C, dl e; STORMWLTER POLLUTION PREVENTION PLAN PROPOSED CONDITIONS 30 EDINA COMMUNITY LUTHERAN CHURCH ADDITION & REMODELING PIERCE PINI & ASSOCIATES 9298 CENTRAL AVENUE NE SUITE 312 13LANE, RAN 55434 TEL763.537.1311 FAX 763.537.1354 CONDITIONAL USE D-RAIT �l QRArAI R_ I-RIDA & KRCE 041/24P5 STORMWATER POLLUTION PREVENTION PLAN -PROPOSED C303 -46G—_ -ai, �� � •e �, ' __ ;'_ �"'} .:�#>M,t l�„r 3-..,:1\:i`;., � �� - rrE.amS .Hour uc .. � � . wu am .ocEizss �x -- FE, qq+�C. v) ✓ (t.>i?✓. " t� __ \? • ` - ..T. �, r n.,o 'au eei.oPou eei.o G G o t > e�0 EXISTING BUILDING G uI . .- ay4 Roif4 or o _ l e.wxiI 3f _ .� - -----�__. 1• 1 r 71• ti '5N. 4Ta.- ,Ru Rn.s ' Rr ens a 4gm L✓ L`f '1 'w ♦,• 'l wluti)s.® Y' a __ .. 1e EFF=877.7 E �' l JM1Y} � ' 1. -' - ._ (ANO OC(INCA)lCW BY \ ! W 11 J M.0-_ - fr• i . ENHRONM£N� / YF NCC ✓ 4• ♦. _ ,i i``( ,+.� u e>65 W „ _-- _O_'____ - b OCA i( -D QV 6 6 20t? �`` 1^' �.♦1^�,C `� YJ' 9v� 4. 1!1 CM. ^ ------------ --- - �,z°.i sc - -. -- --- '`:.�4-•'�_ff °'t Iro '1• 'a \ � ?` � - �,;�,,- - --;40" f`a ; � .,.m, �� ` - -��l • _ \. ..•\,,, .\; ♦,4 �� �✓def l l.?(�� .Li. � �-� �' r Jo7 dor � \ V VO Ok l 41 GRADING PLAN o 4 0 ]0' EO• EDINA COMMUNITY LUTHERAN CHURCH ADDITION & REMODELING EDINA, MINNESOTA PIERCE PINI & ASSOCIATES 9298 CENTRAL AVENUE NE SUITE 312 BLAINE. AIN 55434 TEL 763.537.1311 FAX 763.537.1354 6/24/2015 N N NrIS.'�14' aRh.A] AWE ].. 30i5 GRADING .'LAN • • ------ -I-- --- 4 ExISTING EU }� ` •...✓ I�`, sroxw a u.xxx E"�n 47— - �•r en.s ' � N •� .Y I CB t '�.J �e � a`1� � f]/ 9]..t � to tT tx• RV TO i1 ,UVJ .-4 r�,J �qy+= •Q1, �!. mYa \.` �'-'r-> ;'���°,. 4� `'J e^,{l�� `` Fes) `-`n ,`` mit tx• my —7, ] J! Qi MVr ✓ Smw o a..laft y7p GRELU.wNARY LAN0 O —E-81 ENNRCWbENNCE ei j'T �+-r '1`;� _r )�( TAL STR�..J , e eye j 0 B' RPI a.9 OCATEO Cw 6/6/10)J - _.r -e W A^ `• ` J w(fx6t � C e --� �'r •—'' t �y, � .r �' ` ens. �� \ 7-Z; Gl waxen ® �IUTILITY PLAN 1•-20' A• EDINA COMMUNITY LUTHERAN CHURCH ADDITION & REMODELING EDINA, MINNESOTA PIERCE PINI & ASSOCIATES 9298 CENTRAL AVENVE NE SUITE 312 ELAINE. AIN 55434 TEL 763.537.1311 FAX 763.537.1354 CONDITIONAL USE 6124/2015 m.owoA s ruxa WbnQtI.S:RaiCP .111x oan.ns I anc x., ruts UTILITY PLAN i•'��ll] • • F U 160 "1 LLO In oil �� OW w W:3:3 �Lf 8 FO z Z QwYxi ��; 1 U p M �. �n Y^nl unci m Lu o- �° a U W W Vg's ri.i O y �v g:jE Y U' G W C/- N m 3k Z0 UJ $d @i8�pp gg a WVIE J CL Q m U a pei 4 2 a 3 sloes y0 ZI �6O ti — lT = �� N3nn . LalfObb f0 153Y u 3lN]1 +WnIYvnJ--, _Z J � a1 p�{$ x i 3Nil .LLblaOYb n° 13uWi 3 0 CD co U 0 �J �,1Pr ° a'-a•MP",fPoC PAN OOMI 1A�E=1A Y� ONE '0.0ell 1.0 \ AOD L22J °'v ssAJ Dqz) '21 "A '1A `'26 ADC v •a0 vV'�1. �- f 'fl 'tA '21 '26 D �•Q AO � -PDOa'u ', ',.e 'za 'u 'z1 �. `O:D, `°D '1.1 '1A 'OA '0J ;Mie • • . x'0.0 'u 'u 'zn 'z. 'w 'z �� i�� �<eI mD ' �tA '29 •tA '11 'z{ 'D x'0.0 '21 Y YJ YJ 'IS '1A �J �,1Pr ° a'-a•MP",fPoC PAN EDINA COMMUNITY LUTHERAN CHURCH ADDITION & EDINA, MINNESOTA PAUL"IN & aARK EMWEERING. M . C°uMy Raaf J. NTNe B((a 1)4 MNb6110 en.n: r.�ww.a,�Jnw.mn CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT SUBMITTAL Site Photomelnc Plan E-10 OOMI ONE EDINA COMMUNITY LUTHERAN CHURCH ADDITION & EDINA, MINNESOTA PAUL"IN & aARK EMWEERING. M . C°uMy Raaf J. NTNe B((a 1)4 MNb6110 en.n: r.�ww.a,�Jnw.mn CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT SUBMITTAL Site Photomelnc Plan E-10 ---\ , ' cwcnc�cum-no---b '• '_, � �_ - a• aK - - - y -P- c(�ya_ _ __ _a - _ \ •\ \{'�1 „\1. Fdi PAYFIIBff -ar �; •. "'M CA 4 IANO MINEATICYJ BY ��(o'�' W NAUC ENNBONMENT6L SENNCE ° , , •\, as cocA rED av s/B/zoo ........ F7 C o f11fi►►� y _ W mo-- PLANT SCHEDULE: KEY PLAN LEGEND: NOTES: _ _ _ _ 1,,N�E� RMlssuswsroxswM a�«Ar�F«r,An�cK mx1AM.TavTs �. COMMON NAME al°mcu,mFE caxrma®v,uu. 0� OE01l1AeNIIB SPECIFICATIONS R3FMIWS 9 �DECIDUOUS SHADE TREES 1.1-EVIISIATH—THM VAR.INERMIS A� 29'CAL F7 C o f11fi►►� y _ W mo-- PLANT SCHEDULE: KEY CITY BOTANICAL NAME COMMON NAME CONT SRE SPECIFICATIONS TAW 9 �DECIDUOUS SHADE TREES 1.1-EVIISIATH—THM VAR.INERMIS II011EYLOCUST,SKYINEB6B 29'CAL 12-7f M., TRUNK FRE BRANCHESS-T µ A ESAM AGER %FREEMANII'JEFFFASREO �' BPB 29'CAL ORCl1JYP 11'-16IO.TRUM(FREEOFSRANcmESS-T Rp if a" tea° i c•' 25 AMEIANCHIENALNIFOUAREGENT CONIFEROUS TREES SERVK:EBERf9Y, REGENT EDINA COMMUNITY P ASSHOWNONTHERAN G25W CANADMHEMLOCK LUTHERAN CHURCH FSPR 2.r CAL PLANT AS SHOWN ON THE RAN SB 1M 135 gFlTVl1A LONICERA CONIFEROUS SHRUBS OWMF WSH HONEYSUCKLE ADDITION & PLWTAS SHOWN ON THE RAN EA]Z THUJAOCCIDENTAUSTECHNY REMODELING CONT. 1#15 1PLANTASSHOWN ONTHERAN EB EXISTING - -- EXISTING BUILDING - RANT ASSHOWNONTHERAN BUILDING ZTB SPOROSOLUS HETEROLEPIS gOl99, PRNiEDROPS® CONE. H PLANT SHOWN ON THE RAN EDINA, MINNESOTA NI � nva° ,Cott ax eaat aT raacRn our CATINT, WALJM LOW CONT. 101 RANT AS SHOYM ON THE PLAN I b PROPISM MEDAMON FARBER Sam X'AUTUMN Jor SEDUM,'M7UMNJ0r ICONT, 91 ,a51 « —1. LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTS F7 C o f11fi►►� y _ W mo-- PLANT SCHEDULE: KEY CITY BOTANICAL NAME COMMON NAME CONT SRE SPECIFICATIONS TAW 9 �DECIDUOUS SHADE TREES 1.1-EVIISIATH—THM VAR.INERMIS II011EYLOCUST,SKYINEB6B 29'CAL 12-7f M., TRUNK FRE BRANCHESS-T TB AGER %FREEMANII'JEFFFASREO MARE, AUTUMN BLAZE BPB 29'CAL ORCl1JYP 11'-16IO.TRUM(FREEOFSRANcmESS-T SA 25 AMEIANCHIENALNIFOUAREGENT CONIFEROUS TREES SERVK:EBERf9Y, REGENT CDM. 115 P ASSHOWNONTHERAN G25W CANADMHEMLOCK ITSWACAmABENss FSPR 2.r CAL PLANT AS SHOWN ON THE RAN SB 1M 135 gFlTVl1A LONICERA CONIFEROUS SHRUBS OWMF WSH HONEYSUCKLE CONE. R PLWTAS SHOWN ON THE RAN EA]Z THUJAOCCIDENTAUSTECHNY MBORVITAE, TECMNY CONT. 1#15 1PLANTASSHOWN ONTHERAN EB 111 467 ARSPERUS CHWFNSIS PERENNIALS AMPFIL MNf JUIEPD CONE, /b RANT ASSHOWNONTHERAN PA ZTB SPOROSOLUS HETEROLEPIS gOl99, PRNiEDROPS® CONE. H PLANT SHOWN ON THE RAN PS NI NEPETA%'FAASENIT WALIERS LOW CATINT, WALJM LOW CONT. 101 RANT AS SHOYM ON THE PLAN PC 55 Sam X'AUTUMN Jor SEDUM,'M7UMNJ0r ICONT, 91 RANTASSHDIAWONTHEPLAN PE 90 HEIAEROCNLIS'SUNDAY SLOYES OAYLILY, MM GLO'YEB' CONT. 1#1 RANT AS SHDWM ON THE RAN PF 19 RUDSECKIA FULGIDA EARLY BFO SOLD• RUOBECIQA EARLY SND GOUY ICONT. 1#1 PIANTA88HOWN ON 7lE RAN 6/24/2015 ® spans - tsv 24. xa15 ,\P, ti ,Loi LANDSCAPE PLAN & G\ SCHEDULE LIU,U A B C DO E i - � 6" WATERSERVICE FOR ' FIRE PROTECTION w PIV w CONNECT TO EXIST. O �➢ WATERMAIN, ER W 54TH STREET J RESTORE STREET P CITY REQUIREMENTS n M ^ .._.. ..--_.._..� 0 W LI D WALL TW/BW 881.3 INSTALL HYDRANT me 0 4j@j c N idj9 \ \ \ h TW 882.5 RETAINING WALL, DESIGNED BW 881.3 BY OTHERS, SEE SITE PLAN FT 177 r v . \ \ BW 880.3 : a IN 6 Bea TW 883.4 S ,5 �e 6 BW 880.4 WATER SERVICE CONNECTION SEE MECH. UPPER FLOOR ELEV=888.7 LOWER FLOOR ELEV - 877.7 876.3 \ \ \ 30' ACCESS R ER AD]U5T RIM RIM 877TO - l.0 .q .0 PROS TW 887.0 \ POSED GRADE .CIPI BE ROOF DRAIN 8W 878.8 ..EXCAVATED AREA FOR '\ \ 'L .) CONNECTION TW 885.7 1� CO NE EXISTIN INV 873.2 -y BW 879.3 1:1 FLOODPWN _ \- 8' PIPE TO 42' HDPE SEE MECH. j 6� 'P IMPACT MITIG883.7 ATION .. \ ... \ ` \ . - INV 870. e r W 879.0 .\ •\. ` - - ,__cl RETAINING WALL, DESIGNED .4 BY OTHERS, SEE SITE PIAN \\ CBI >6 e4 ♦ GRADE SWALE ALONG WALL 30'ACCE55 6° _ TW 881.0 NOTES: . , \ \ �\ , RI ER X63 8T �' ` NLINE DRAIN BW 8�78.5� SEE EROSION CONTROL AND LANDSCAPE PLANS FOR TURF ESTABLISHMENT AND "\ \\ HIM 68 30 NYOPlAST �07� i,. RIM 8759 END WL ALL L RESTORATION INFORMATION. \ / DRAIN BASIN (TYP.) STMH2 ` Olff B71N1� �T 9_ TW/BW 878.0 ALL SPOT ELEVATIONS ARE FLOWLTNE IF IN CURB OR EDGE OF PAVEMENT UNLESS 876.5 TC ~ CONNECT DRSTING 'RIM 877.0 `ll OTHERWISE NOTED. 8' P PE TO DRAIN N INV IN 869.5 EMERGENCY OVERFLOW \ ` a . - ; �' NV OUT 870.5 EXISTING CONDITIONS SURVEY PERFORMED BY OTHERS IN 2007. \� �. 3 )6 0 -e>s THE SUBSURFACE UTILITY INFORMATION IN THIS PLAN IS UTILITY QUALITY LEVEL -D'. 1212 H THIS UTILITY QUALITY LEVEL WAS DETERMINED ACCORDING TO THE GUIDELINES OF - 7 30" ACCESS RISER 20 0% - - ) RIM 876.5 Cl/ASCE 38-02, ENTITLED 'STANDARD GUIDELINE FOR THE COLLECTION AND 42' PERFORATED HDPE - DEPICTION OF EXISTING SUBSURFACE UTILITY DATA.' UNDERGROUND STORAGE, SEE DETAIL \ \ H3 - 1 872 -CONN CT 12' HDPE `BOTTOM OF PIPE 867.0 \ INC/ IN 8 5 N - TO 42" HDPE CONTRACTOR SHALL FIELD VERIFY EXISTING ELEVATIONS AND TOPOGRAPHY PRIOR TO �: \ ( ) _ TMHI COMMENCING GRADING OPERATIONS. IF DISCREPANCIES OCCUR BETWEEN EXISTING ^ - - \ INV IN 869.5 (NE) _ IM 876.8 INV 871.0 CONDITIONS SURVEY AND ACTUAL SITE CONDITIONS, NOTIFY ENGINEER IMMEDIATELY. �� '� \ \ \ NV OUT 860.7 (S) NV IN 869.5 -- g76.5 TC �. .INV OUT 872.0 CONTRACTOR SHALL FIELD VERIFY THE SIZE, LOCATION AND ELEVATION OF EXISTING \ \ - • EMERGENCY OVERFLOW UTILITY CONNECTIONS AND BEGIN CONSTRUCTION AT THESE POINTS. THE ENGINEER \C 12???HOPE STOR PI SHALL BE NOTIFIED IMMEDIATELY OF ANY DISCREPANCIES BETWEEN THE PLAN AND 0 0,8% ,42' PERFORATED HDPE ACTUAL EXISTING UTILITIES. NO CONSTRUCTION SHALL PROCEED UNTIL SUCH ♦ , \ \ 12' HDPE ST UNDERGROUND STORAGE, SEE DET®IL DISCREPANCIES ARE RESOLVED. i11f ♦ \ \ \ \� @ 15.6' � NN �xo6 . - - \ `. - BOTTOM OF PIPE 86 EROSION CONTROL SHALL BE INSTALLED PRIOR TO COMMENCING CONSTRUCTION AND j�0, y �ACyy ♦ \ - \ `• _ MAINTAINED THROUGHOUT CONSTRUCTION. Ry\q `�♦ \ \ \ \ _-. IN 86 LD(TYPJ L ♦ - \ . . WITH TRASH GUARD *_1 RESTORE ALL DISTURBED AREAS TO EXISTING CONDITIONS OR BETTER. IvFp\FFq- ♦-- \ .. \ \\ AND 8 C.Y. CL. III RIPRAP e LEGEND EXISTING LEGEND -PROPOSED \ ,♦'.♦ \ \\ \\\ oiPAtEL INARY NOT WATERSERVICE -L-1- WATER SERVICE ,\ -♦♦ \ \_ \' \\\ WETLAND DELINEATED BY FOR RUCTION STORM SWER-a-a- STORM SEWER _\FOC �> \ \ \\" ACORN ENVIRONMENTAL r �Pf \ SANITARY SEWER - i✓ CONTOUR . F� ' -� ♦ ♦ ♦ \ \ \ \. MAY 2007 W CATACH BASIN ® STORM MANHOLE \ \ EDGE OF PROPOSED -. SANITARY MANHOLE ❑ CATCH BASIN ♦ \ , \ \ - 75 -AVERAGE DRAINAGE FLOW \ 9�� ,♦♦ \ \� WE BUFFER ,876.0 SPOT ELEVATION - TW TOP OF WALL ELEVATION -` \Z_ BW BOTTOM OF WALL ELEVATION `\ ♦♦♦ \ \\ �\: \ BENCHMARK RIPRAP \ ♦.♦ �\ `� TOP NUT OF HYDRANT AT THE NORTHEAST QUADRANT OF HALIFAX AVE AND 54TH ST. \ - - ♦ \ - \ 0 20 40 60 ELEVATION - 889.13 (CITY OF EDINA DATUM) i b�1�iN�L, SU8M(77Ai, A G D PROPOSED WETLAND GGGIII BUFFER c E ------- - -- --� - -- - MAINTAIN 120' OF EXISTING INLET PROTECTION NO CONSTRUCTION ACCESS ALLOW® DOWNSTREAMCONTRACTOR SHALLUTILIZE ��;:�iY�cT.y_wioy s� -•- CONCRETE DRIVE FOR TRACK-0UT \ yVryN ROCK CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCE ONLY W 54TH STREET - PREVENTION UNTIL ROUGH GRADING HAS BEEN COMPLETED 4; •a 'Zi •c„�v .'i4+r� v'ed S ��- r� f)9 {3 - will b ALL OTHER DISTURBED AREAS � r �-� NOT SHOWN BY SEEDING HERE TO BE RESTORED WITH •����.���•-' \ \ SOD AND/OR LANDSCAPING ..l\.\0... au.uu... ...��........:.1.0...0..... i....c.u.00.■.a,11W ...o.r...rawm=.u....uu.-=a.......aGee__e_ee W. ...9.00i..Eo::..::::.ouSn ....... .:.:::.1....0.! PROPOSED RETAINING WALL a .\\. .........\ \....iGi..... �..\I_—:91L ....... ........ i......0..:..0...x ..........i....O....... ......0.1'..\..0..00. ...:............ .....0..0............1 ...................001 51, .............:ii _ . .U..... ....... • .�:_\..00.1 \' \ IV:2H SLOPE :) \\� SEED, BLANKET, - IT LTER LAG TO E ' \ \\ \ IN W IN IN - RS OF PEG INSTALL INTERIOR SILT --- \ FENCE AFTER EXCAVATION' OF FLOODPLAIN IMPACT \ MITIGATION AREAEl MAA PROPOSED WETLAND GGGIII BUFFER 61 INSTALL INTERIOR SILT FENCE AFTER EXCAVATION OF FLOODPLAIN IMPACT MITIGATION AREA RELIMINARY NOT 0R CO TION � 3 OxN 'U 20 b 60 c E � �ii`��•=':�"•r�w' t s'•., :J '�.•�"•`'�o���_�� �.-,..�s1-•►- ��;:�iY�cT.y_wioy s� -•- .��� r'n• Asti' � � ..ems: 4; •a 'Zi •c„�v .'i4+r� v'ed S ��- r� f)9 {3 - will b ALL OTHER DISTURBED AREAS ��iaii:ia::r.:��eis:::::a::::a�iiGiisiGGii.io.�..u._.... �-� NOT SHOWN BY SEEDING HERE TO BE RESTORED WITH •����.���•-' SOD AND/OR LANDSCAPING ..l\.\0... au.uu... ...��........:.1.0...0..... i....c.u.00.■.a,11W ...o.r...rawm=.u....uu.-=a.......aGee__e_ee W. ...9.00i..Eo::..::::.ouSn ....... .:.:::.1....0.! PROPOSED RETAINING WALL a .\\. .........\ \....iGi..... �..\I_—:91L ....... ........ i......0..:..0...x ..........i....O....... ......0.1'..\..0..00. ...:............ .....0..0............1 ...................001 .............:ii _ . .U..... ....... • .�:_\..00.1 MAA 61 INSTALL INTERIOR SILT FENCE AFTER EXCAVATION OF FLOODPLAIN IMPACT MITIGATION AREA RELIMINARY NOT 0R CO TION � 3 OxN 'U 20 b 60 c E � i jy 4; S t f)9 {3 - loo b ALL OTHER DISTURBED AREAS �-� NOT SHOWN BY SEEDING HERE TO BE RESTORED WITH SOD AND/OR LANDSCAPING V _ (TYP ), SEE LANDSCAPE PLAN J e T PROPOSED RETAINING WALL a 61 INSTALL INTERIOR SILT FENCE AFTER EXCAVATION OF FLOODPLAIN IMPACT MITIGATION AREA RELIMINARY NOT 0R CO TION � 3 OxN 'U 20 b 60 w VMf:"- OMV 1. 9ERZt'O°�'e ct/vm DUI'NOSIO%N3NIll3d dUGH.L N3SNVH a ory ade�spueI o g•6uuaaui6u3 I�l 0�6 � Pal Onojp jejn%ao%jg3AV 3 0 0 0 q� o� Z F x o a o £$ O �_ i Q Ww i u 7�-5 w O 'F V)Om LuLu oG F- 00 - u w m o�o a V i �e O0 3 0 0 0 q� o� 3 x o a o z u i Q i i O Ia J w O 1 F- 00 - u w m o�o a V i �e O0 f=!1 o a Z i + J i w 3 0 i w Z uj F LU fZ"A NW ''II -d --;!GI S474S IS°MEtt6 y��ny� ue�ay3nj iunwwo� euip3 _ Qw wQ 2 'LOS'. ¢ D Ww p Omxd Z. i w as Z. F ti ozrco�� Fz ur o> Fo So ru Wuxi: umoo 5 m da z NJm\-M ~oaw z� a� � z��"� oE�o,",u�iz m z o agat u a2o m y �6� Gw 50 00 z7O o1 oao �6swal=°WP. z4x Rz ofz co�oca 6u >F aoo N3 a � o a 5 w'owamGm o t'a< Sod JpaowaRa 5Ru� a G swop Tui mo'x4^�'n�o o �n WWk > oH� m o� wt ut NmAgm15 aM gxmx�azoi�xasa aoa:19 �a Z M ------------02 Z D cr Z ZO U F✓� o '� t WCC° cr O M u_ CI N CL Od1H wdLVto-CWZ'EDA.N BMp'Vf'W - L p3 0 0 0 o D x o a o z u i Q i O u U - �e O0 i F LU LU OF Od1H wdLVto-CWZ'EDA.N BMp'Vf'W - L p3 - - �— �— -T HORwy —'TIEf 1'LL E'219 vllwllvi •LEL 2'<LE'I19 vuoVoalal mwn..m...w.w...rr+�—.,mar.�r��r.,.a.,.r.,a.�„r..�.v.�.e..va �� � �� ay LBuw+O ']apoMmmm a]ISOaM • woa'1aPoVA4s�e IIVW-3 — OS I Ifat55 NW'sllo0eauu!W a�eual puelanoa� S1 ZL188:'en wNa ¢VZKQ NW110.auujw'pa9SW0S1Ew My ■ wz's F9W 'PEl Ano� .area 7 lei n9�aE�yaiy yanyo ueiayynl lgiunwwoo euip3 s m yg K¢ Y A zl a s a U Z�2 OCD04 U O O 't� J A G 9w U Oa �S U— �O Y K Z m yg K¢ Y A zl a s a U J -------------- NJbF113S 3015 0 wves:L" uwxs A31 Z�2 OCD04 U O O 't� J �19e� U) 0 �v yg U Oa �S U— �O Y O Z J -------------- NJbF113S 3015 0 wves:L" uwxs A31 A B IQ 31 IIS I x g��� STEPS �� L�_O_WER LEVEL L xc�P M, trP. AVERAGE EXISTING GROUND ELEVATION AT FRONT= 883.75' �1W -8' 1� as -PTO FwwvmuNE ADDITION 1 REMODELED OWING 3 A, PROPOSED NORTH ELEVATION 'E i A,., Ire' - r4^ • • ENsnuc RooF swucLes TO RExau // �Ewsrlw sTaFrETO REnwu -r--------- ------------- l T.O. SKYL,GHT _ BIEERE —N -El" FVS w V 133 T Sr+EU xEFrt RE :/.L.Io�xF. ttv. FIEERDExExTL--.PWM. R. PRE. x ED /�T.o_WALL _. fl / ensnxo— ,zs -r i . lam MAI lmlllllm,�,o Ewen NG ROOF SxNGlEB TO RENWN T.O. EXIST. ROOF _ PEAK FusnNc srorE TO REWrx _ _ ��� S,EERLE 'P. cN Exlsnna wwa'�''we oasnNC Lova, —� '��- ii 16k, li� &--- I:®:I im! i i N mmSEEN=- Wo . °° f® �EXTIOP J SCREEN WPLLFgi y NEW N11O0.N5 —Y � TFAB166NTE NG.PNM, ttP. Ra+IiLE E%1811� OIABSR0IUNG EA N&® WDODNVIDW&TYP. xtiai''omur, rw. REMODELED EXISTING ADDLTIDN REYEY TOIM.i1Pµ / , EtF/.nON.CREIX T @) , PROPOSED SOUTH ELEVATION SCALE = '-0" O w 6 16 3T W ti r t, i 9 1# �I f LxeaRExerwRAea. f o irr LJLJ 8 � g. ggyp d B 6 � Ew sronE TO UCM WELL Daws: CIADNODD E – w a _ u E•s i E f 5 E _ T_O.SKYLIGHT 133'3' l7 PREnrasnEO rerx � ° < o ® MBINSF®1ET1191d1tl REYFi1L JqM TM. :EF,�"�INo l n _ i gaI�D.PaMT.P. T.O. WALL n W,x,oWs i"IAL F T.O. OPENING 71T -S' V( 2 I 1 c � 7—IR--. m REtEssEO LIELN UWTS R� ( r I E FMGueurwsnpw. C�,p'` E al A- 3.1 NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION AXI°�Dr Kodet Architectural Group, Ltd. © 2013 Is Edina Community Lutheran Church v'f= Exterior Street Level Perspective ®Architectural Group Ltd. 15 Groveland Terrace • Minneapolls,MN 55403-1154 E -Mall archokodet.com • Web5lte www.kodet.com Telephone 612.377.2737 • Facsimile 612.377.1331 02013 KODET ARCHITECTURAL GROUP, LTD. < CO O Q � - ; May 3, 2013 opk6tpL I �gMtT—J/� L • • • Edina Community Lutheran Church SW Perspective Architectural Group Ltd. 11 Grove land Terrace . Minneapolis,MN 55403-1154 ,-Mail arch®kodet.com . Web Site www.kadet.com Telephone 612.377.2737 •Facsimile 612.377.1331 O 2013 KODET ARCHITECTURAL GROUP. LTD. Q�Nc�°' � 31p13 ,it ' May 3. 2013 OR(6w /� C 6 U RT4 L 80 4/6/92 heretofore caused notice of hearing to be duly published and mailed to owners of • each parcel within the area proposed to be assessed on the following proposed improvements: PERMANENT STREET SURFACING, CURB & GUTTER, STORM SEWER. AND SIDEWALK IMPROVEMENT N0. BA -293 (S.A.P. 120-159-03) - Valley View Road from 'West 69th Street/France Avenue to Crosstown Highway PERMANENT STREET SURFACING, CURB & GUTTER AND SIDEWALK IMPROVEMENT NO. BA -299 (S.A.P. 130-144-06) - Vest 66th Street from France Avenue to Southdale Lane STORM SEWER IMPROVEMENT NO. STS -219 TRAFFIC SIGNAL IMPROVEMENT NO. TS -21 - Valley Vier Road & 'West 66th Street STREET LIGHTING IMPROVEMENT NO. L-36 (S.A.P. 120-150-07) and at the hearing held at the time and place specified in said notice, the Council has duly considered the viers of all persons interested, and being fully advised of the pertinent facts, does hereby determine to proceed with the construction of said improvement including all proceedings which may be necessary in eminent domain for the acquisition of necessary easements and rights for construction and maintenance of such improvements; that said improvements are hereby designated and shall be referred to in all subsequent proceedings as: PERMANENT STREET SURFACING, CURB & GUTTER AND SIDEWALK IMPROVEMENT NO. BA -293 PERMANENT STREET SURFACING, CURB & GUTTER AND SIDEWALK IMPROVEMENT NO. BA -299 STORM SEWER IMPROVEMENT NO. STS. -219 TRAFFIC SIGNAL IMPROVEMENT NO. TS -21 STREET LIGHTING IMPROVEMENT NO. L-36 The area proposed to be assessed for a portion of the cost of the proposed improvements includes: Unplatted Parcel (Cornelia Park Pool), Lot 1, Blk. 2, • Southdale Office Park Second Adda.; Meets & Bounds Description Southdale Office Center Unplatted, Commencing at NE corner of SE 1/4 thence South to NE Corner of South Office Park 1st Addn., thence 'Westerly along Northerly line of said Addn. to its intersection with the centerline of Valley View Road, thence Northerly along said centerline to North line of SE 1/4. Thence Easterly to Beginning Except Roads; Lots 1 thru 10, Blk. 3, Southdale First Addn.; Lots 1 thru 13, Blk. 4, Southdale First Addn.; Lot 2, Blk. 1 South Office Park First Addn.; Tract A, RLS No. 1365; and Apartment Ownership X79 - Point of France Condominiums. All units contained with Apartment Ownership *79 (Unit 102 thru 1210 and Penthouse 1 thru Penthouse 12). Motion was seconded by Member Kelly. Rollcall: Ayes: Kelly, Paulus, Smith, Richards Nays: Rice Resolution adopted. GQ- CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT GRANTED FOR BUILDING EXPANSION AND REMODELING - EDINA COMMUNITY LUTHERAN CHURCH Planner Larsen reminded Council that at the March 16, 1992, meeting the request for a conditional use permit for building expansion and remodeling at Edina Community Lutheran Church, 4113 West 54th Street, was continued for additional information on two issues: 1) sidewalk along the front of the church property, and 2) parking bays along the south side of W. 54th Street adjacent to the church. Following that meeting, architects for the church have submitted two site plan for both sidewalk and parking bays. Exhibit "A" illustrates a seven foot wide sidewalk just inside the existing curb line. The sidewalk would extend from the parking lot curb cut on the west to the parsonage driveway on the east, with no parking bay. Exhibit "B" illustrates both a • sidewalk and a parking bay. The parking bay would stop before the parsonage and would provide space for six cars. Staff would recommend the Exhibit "A" sidewalk only alternative. The bay should ft 4/6/92 r. 81 • be included in the Proof of Parking Agreement and considered in the future if conditions warrant. Reasons presented in support were: 1) The existing street meets the local and state width standard for a low volume collector street with parking on both sides. The state standard is 38 feet and the existing street is 40 feet wide. 2) The parking bay would not provide additional parking spaces. There is presently parking on both sides of 54th Street. 3) Due to existing grades, additional steps would be required if the parking bay is constructed. 4) The Proof of Parking Agreement will allow the City to address future parking and safety problems. Ben Crabtree, 5428 Woodcrest Drive, neighbor and church member, submitted that one parking space would be lost if the bay is constructed. With sidewalk up to the curb, snow left by plowing could be more easily moved onto the church property. He concurred with the staff recommendation for Exhibit "A" sidewalk only. No further comment or objection was heard. RESOLUTION GRANTING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR EDINA COMMUNITY LUTHERAN CHURCH WHEREAS, the procedural requirements of Ordinance No. 825 (The Zoning Ordinance) have been met; and WHEREAS, it has been determined that the Findings as required by Ordinance No. 825 have been satisfied; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Edina City Council hereby grants a Conditional Use Permit to Edina Community Lutheran Church at 4113 West 54th Street for building expansion and remodeling. Rollcall: Ayes: Kelly, Paulus, Rice, Smith, Richards. Resolution adopted. SECOND READING GRANTED: ORDINANCE NO. 812-A3 ADOPTED (REGULATING TELEVISION AND RADIO ANTENNAS AND TOWERS) Planner Larsen recalled that the Council granted first reading for Ordinance No. 812-A3 on March 16, 1992. The only changes to the final draft are to the height of the residential radio antennas in Subsection 815.06. Staff would recommend second reading and adoption. Ray Voss, 5716 Benton Avenue, representing the amateur radio group, and Dick Casey, 6120 Ashcroft Avenue, said they concurred with the ordinance amendment as presented. Member Kelly offered Ordinance No. 812-A3 for Second Reading and moved adoption as follows: ORDINANCE NO. 812-A3 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 812 TO REGULATE CONSTRUCTION AND MAINTENANCE OF TELECOMMUNICATION, TELEVISION AND RADIO ANTENNAS, KKTE IOR DISH ANTENNAS AND SUPPORTING TOWERS THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDINA, MINNESOTA, ORDAINS: Section 1. Ordinance No. 812 is amended to read as follows: 815.01 Definitions. Words and phrases used in this Section which are defined in Section 850 of this Code shall be construed in this Section according to their definitions contained in Section 850. The following words and terms shall have the following meanings in this Section: Antenna. Equipment used for transmitting or receiving telecommunication, television or radio signals, which is located on the exterior of, or outside of, any building or structure. For purposes of this Section, "antenna" does not include "dish antenna". Dish Antenna. A parabolic shaped antenna (including all supporting 4+a 3/16/92 5 '9 • bathroom/restroom located within a non residential building or within the common areas of a multiple residential building.) Section 460 - Signs (Scheduled for April 6 hearing.) Section 470 - Dangerous and Substandard'Buildings (Incorporates State Law whereby Council may order repair or removal of dangerous or substandard buildings.) Section 475 - Parking Ramps (Scheduled for April 20 hearing.) Section 480 - Exterior of Single Dwelling Unit and Double Dwelling Unit Buildings No public comment or objection was heard on Chapter 4. CHAPTER 5 - CIVIL DEFENSE AND EMERGENCIES The following provisions in the existing code have been deleted: Section 500 - Air Raid Precautions Sections marked with an asterisk have significant changes noted: Section 505 - Civil Defense No public comment or objection was heard on Chapter 5. Mayor Richards then declared the public hearing closed. V REQUEST FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERkT CONTINUED TO APRIL 6. 1992, FOR BUILDING �+���+++;ko(L EXPANSION/REMODELING - EDINA COMMUNITY LUTHERAN CHURCH. 4113 WEST 54TH STREET Affidavits of Notice were presented, approved and ordered place on file. Presentation by Planner Planner Larsen recalled that in August, 1988, the Edina Community Lutheran Church, 4113 West 54th Street, requested and received a Conditional Use Permit to construct a new sanctuary addition and to generally remodel the church. The new sanctuary would have seated 210 persons compared to 197 in the existing sanctuary. Following approval of the permit, the church decided not to proceed with the addition and renovation. The church has now reapplied for a Conditional Use Permit for a revised and reduced in size plan for expansion and renovation of the church. Phase I would be construction of a 22 x 24 foot addition to the north side of the church for relocation of church offices. The fellowship hall (located in the lower level) would be moved to the main floor and the present fellowship hall would be converted to classrooms: Phase II would be construction of a 16 x 48 foot addition to the sanctuary on the east side to provide improved circulation within the building with no increase in seating capacity. The church presently maintains a setback of approximately 27 feet from West 54th Street. The proposed addition would extend four feet in front of the existing wall and would provide a setback of approximately 23 feet. The Zoning Ordinance requires a 50 foot minimum setback; thus a 27 foot setback variance is requested. All other existing and proposed setbacks comply with ordinance requirements. The existing parking is located west and south of the church with a capacity ranging from 25 .to 35 vehicles. The lot is improved with a blacktop surface but is not striped. The plan anticipates organizing and striping the lot to provide 37 spaces. The Zoning Ordinance requires one space for each three seats in the largest place of assembly. The 197 seat sanctuary would require 66 spaces. The plan requests a 37 space parking variance. The church has submitted an alternate parking plan which would increase the total parking count to 44 spaces. This plan would require substantial fill and retainage along the creek bank. The church site is 4.73 acres in size, with a majority of the site either flood plain or wetland; the useable area is relatively small. In 1988 the church prepared plans to construct parking in the floodplain area. The plan received approval of the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District. This plan was not viewed �3 3/16/52- .60 favorably by the City or neighbors along the.creek. The approved Conditional Use Permit instead included'a proof of parking agreement obligating the church to pursue other parking solutions if a problem arose in the future. The plan addressed modified service schedules and possible parking bays along 54th Street. Staff believes this approach remains valid. On -street parking has not presented a problem for the neighborhood and continued on -street parking seems to be preferable to disturbance of'natural areas adjacent to the creek. Staff would recommend approval of the Conditional Use Permit including the requested parking space variance and building setback variance, subject to a proof of parking agreement for these reasons: 1) The project has been reduced in size from the 1988 plans, 2) Given the characteristics of the site, the plan is the best solution with minimal impact on the.neighborhood and the environmental features on the site, 3) The project will be an improvement to the neighborhood. The Planning Commission heard the request at its meeting of February 26,'1992, and unanimously recommended approval of the Conditional Use Permit, subject to a proof of parking agreement with the following elements if warranted: 1) Parking bays along West 54th Street, 2) Off-site parking implemented on City property, 3) Additional parking constructed behind the parsonage, 4) Rearrangement of existing parking stalls. The Commission specifically recommended that the alternative parking plan for parking within the floodplain not be considered. It was noted that written correspondence in support of the project had been received from Pastor Erik Strand, Edina Community Church; Steven B. Edwins, of Sovik Mathre Sathrum Quanbeck Architects, 205 So. Water Street, Northfield, MN; and Burton W. Grimes, 5400 Halifax Lane. Correspondence in opposition was received from Merideth/John Hale, 5504 Halifax Lane; Martin/Marion Donnelly, 5332 • Halifax Avenue So.; Kathleen Wetherall, 5328 Halifax Avenue So.; Anne/John Crist, 5324 Halifax Avenue So.; Amy/Tom Donnelly, 5333 Halifax Avenue So.; and Teresa Forliti, 5336 Halifax Avenue So. Presentation for Proponent Erik Strand, pastor of :Edina Community Church, submitted that the congregation felt that the plan proposed in 1988 was too ambitious and not in keeping with its desire to maintain a modest size church. He elaborated on the current proposal emphasizing that it would allow for.better internal flow of the building and better utilization of space. Further, a sidewalk along the front of the church property is being considered'if the City and neighborhood concur. Public Comment Burt Grimes, 5400 Halifax Lane, said he favored the sidewalk on church property only. Ray Voss, 5716 Benton Avenue, said he was a councilmember at Edina Community Lutheran Church and referred to a letter from neighboring property owners regarding problems with church activities. He stated that none of the issues mentioned have come to the attention of the church, that they would not intend to impinge upon the neighborhood in any way, and would follow-up on the concerns that have been raised. Jim Grotz, 5513 Park Place, asked if the building was used for day care and�also asked about the parking bays. Pastor Stand said space is rented to a nursery school which uses the facilities from 9:00 A.M. to 3:00 P.M..on weekdays. The church council will be evaluating whether this rental should continue. Planner Larsen said parking bays would essentially be a widening of the street -in front of the church property to allow parallel parking. Tom.McCusker, 5413 Woodcrest Avenue, said he felt the proposal accommodates the wetlands area and asked about the proposed parking on City • property. Planner Larsen explained that, if a parking problem is perceived in the future, one of the solutions may be to improve the City property adjacent to the creek for church parking. 3/16/92 61 Council Comment/Action In response to Mayor Richards, Planner Larsen said there is no code requirement nor a commission recommendation that sidewalks or parking bays be included in the proposal, but could be made a condition of the permit. Answering Member Rice about what triggers a proof of parking agreement, Planner Larsen said there are agreements in force with some churches now. However, with the exception of Christ Presbyterian Church, none have been implemented. A proof of parking agreement would give the City the right to determine and institute any action necessary to bring non -conforming parking requirements into compliance. Engineer Hoffman explained that if a sidewalk were installed the church would be responsible for its maintenance. He added that safety would be the main reason for parking bays and/or a sidewalk in the area. Member Smith made a motion to grant a Conditional Use Permit to Edina Community Lutheran Church, 4113 West 54th Street, for building expansion and remodeling, subject to a Proof of Parking Agreement. Motion was seconded by Member Rice. Council discussion ensued regarding implementation of parking bays and sidewalk into the proposal at this time. Member Paulus amended the motion to continue the public hearing on a Conditional Use Permit for Edina Community Lutheran Church, 4113 Rest 54th Street, for building expansion and remodeling, to April 6, 1992, to allow the church to present plans for parking bays and sidewalk as a condition for issuance of the permit. Motion was seconded by Member Rice. Ayes: Paulus, Rice, Smith, Richards Motion carried. ORDINANCE NO. 812-A3 (REGULATING CONSTRUCTION AND MAINTENANCE OF RADIO AND TELEVISION ANTENNAS AND SUPPORTING TOWERS) GRANTED FIRST READING Subsequent to the public hearing on the draft City Code, and draft Section 815 specifically, the Council considered an amendment to existing Ordinance No. 812 to incorporate language from draft Section 815 as amended. Member Smith offered Ordinance No. 812-A3 for First Reading incorporating the language contained in draft Section 815 as amended in the public hearing on the draft City Code. Motion was seconded by Member Rice. Rollcall: Ayes: Paulus, Rice, Smith Nays: Richards First Reading granted. AMENDMENT TO REPEAL ORDINANCE NO. 114 (MORATORIUM ON CONSTRUCTION OF TOWERS, ANTENNAS AND DISH ANTENNAS) CONTINUED TO 04/06/92 Member Smith made a motion to continue the hearing on an amendment to repeal Ordinance No. 144 (Moratorium on Construction of Towers, Antennas and Dish Antennas) to April 6, 1992. Motion was seconded by Member Rice. Ayes: Paulus, Rice, Smith, Richards Motion carried. _VACATIONS GRANTED FOR DRAINAGE AND UTILITY EASEMENT (LOT 1. BLOCK 2, INTERLACHEN HILLS 3RD ADDITION) AND EASEMENT FOR PUBLIC PARK LANDS, PUBLIC OPEN SPACE, STORMWATER POND AND HOLDING AREA (OUTLOT A. JENTETACHEN HILLS 3RD ADDITION): AGREEMENT APPROVED FOR USE OF UTILITY EASEMENT Affidavits of Notice were presented, approved and ordered placed on file. Presentation by Engineer Engineer Hoffman advised that the developer of the Lincoln Apartments on Lincoln Drive has petitioned the City to either vacate certain public interests or grant 3/16/92 permission for encroachment on public easements on the Lincoln Apartments . project. Staff would recommend the following actions by the Council: A. Vacate the southerly two feet of a 35 foot utility easement above the elevation of 889.7, National Geodetic Vertical Datum of 1929. B. Grant execution of an agreement to permit a ventilation shaft on the utility easement. C. Vacate all public interest on east 20 feet of Outlot A, Interlachen Hills 3rd Addition, except to reserve drainage and utility easement rights over the east 22 feet. The first recommendation involves vacating air rights on the southerly two feet of a 35 foot utility easement running parallel to the north wall of the Lincoln Apartments north building. The north building footprint was constructed just south of the easement but after field confirmation it was determined that the bay windows protruded over the easement area. The developer has requested that air rights be granted over this two foot area to resolve issues with the title company resulting from the encroachment. The second recommendation results from the encroachment of a ventilation shaft on the utility easement for sanitary sewer. In this case, staff would recommend not granting a vacation of the easement to allow the ventilation shaft but would recommend granting the execution of an agreement to use the utility easement. The terms of the agreement would hold the City harmless for any damage done by the City during its use of the utility easement for repair or construction work on the utility system. The third recommendation involves vacating any public interest except for utility and drainage rights over the east.22 feet of Outlot A, Interlachen Hills 3rd • Addition. This area ispart of the parking lot for the south building of the Lincoln Apartments. During.a title examination it was unclear what the City's intent was in 1990 when it earlier vacated all public interests but retained utility interests over the east 20 feet. Council Comment/Action Mayor Richards raised the issue of who would pay for the relocation and legal costs if in the future the City must relocate the public utility within the easement. Attorney Gilligan explained that language could be added to the draft agreement to include the City's right to relocate the utility and that all costs incurred would be paid by the developer. Norm Bjornnes, Lincoln Drive Partners, affirmed that the partnership would indemnify and hold the City harmless from any loss under the terms of the Agreement and would be liable for any and all costs. No public comment or objection to the proposed Council action was heard. Member Paulus introduced the following resolutions and moved adoption: RESOLUTION VACATING EASMENT FOR DRAINAGE AND UTILITY PURPOSES IN THE CITY OF EDINA, HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA WHEREAS, a resolution of the City Council, adopted the 18th day of February, 1992, fixed a date. for a public hearing on a proposed vacation of easement for drainage and utility purposes; and WHEREAS, two weeks published and posted notice of said hearing was given and the hearing was held on the 16th day of March, 1992, 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 easement vacation be made; and li7HRRRAS, 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 o -ac 1 1 9/19/88 259 View Road contain between two and five units. Lot sizes range between 10,000 and 15,000 square feet. The R-2 lot immediately to the south of the subject property • has an area of 11,500 square feet. Planner Larsen explained that despite the minor deficiencies from the ordinance requirements, staff believes there are several reasons to support the proposal. Lot Size - The area of the double dwelling unit lot is below the requirement, however, it is compatible with the other R-2 properties in the vicinity. The R-1 lot exceeds the ordinance minimum as proposed and is larger than several other R-1 lots on Brookview. Character and Symmetry - The streetscape along Brookview Avenue will remain unchanged. The R-1 properties along Brookview are not impacted by the proposal. The new double dwelling on Valley View Road will appropriately fill in a noticeable gap. The new unit will be developed within all required setbacks and orients logically to Valley View Road. Community Planning - The proposed plat and rezoning is consistent with the principles and land use designations set forth in the Comprehensive Plan. Planner Larsen advised that the proposal was considered by the Community Development and Planning Commission on September 7, 1988 and recommended preliminary rezoning and plat approval, subject to final rezoning, final plat, subdivision dedication, curb cut location approval and separate utility connections. He noted that the proponents, Ronald and Robert Erhardt were present to answer questions. Ronald Erhardt gave a brief history of the subject property which was the home of his maternal grandparents. He stated that in the summer of 1987 they made inquiries as to the possibility of constructing a double bungalow on the rear of the lot. With the decease of their mother earlier this N year, they are now pursuing the project with plans to live on this property when LO they retire. Member Turner asked if the Planning Commission discussed the LO substantial variances that are involved. Mr. Erhardt said the variances were discussed and the Commission's questions were answered. Member Turner then asked Z Mr. Ehrhardt to support their request for variance#,, Mr. Erhardt explained that [Q most of the lots along Valley View square footage wise are smaller than the Q variance on the square footage on the proposed lot fronting on Valley View. In discussions with City staff and the surveyor it was determined that the proposal was the best use of that lot. Member Turner said the use makes sense but that she had trouble finding justification for the variances and that she was concerned about the impact on the single family neighborhood. Member Smith suggested that if the lot line were drawn perpendicular to Brookview Avenue instead of diagonally that the variance needed for the single family lot would not be as great and it would maintain a rectangular lot onokview . Member Richards commented that he did not feel there is justificatio0 or the requested variances so that there could be three dwelling units whet4 now just one exists. Mr. Erhardt said that one of the questions raised at i66' Planning Commission meeting was how many units would the square footage of thw'aubject property handle and the answer was a minimum of three. The issue -n was should the existing house be removed in order to construct three unite. The reponse was where there is an existing single family house that fits Brod*view why not build a double on the back portion of the lot which would front on Valley View. There was further discussion on re-orienting the proposed lot line to eliminate the setback variance for the single family lot and how a double could be sited on the new lot fronting Valley View Road. Member Richards made a motion to continue the hearing for approval of the rezoning to R-2 Double Dwelling Unit District and preliminary plat for Erhardt Addition to the meeting of October 17, 1988 to give the proponents time to revise the preliminary plat and provide information on the sizes and dimensions of other lots in the area. Motion was seconded by Member Turner. Ayes: Kelly, Smith, Richards, Turner, Courtney Motion carried. PLAT APPROVAL FOR EDINA HIGHLANDS 2ND ADDITION CONTINUED TO 10/3/88. V*PRELIMINARY v Motion was made by Member Kelly and seconded by Member Turner to continue the q I I� hearing for preliminary plat approval for Edina Highlands 2nd Addition to October 3, 1988, as requested by the proponent. Motion carried on rollcall vote, five ayes. *CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT GRANTED FOR EDINA COMMUNITY LUTHERAN CHURCH. Motion was made by Member Kelly and seconded by Member Turner for adoption of the following resolution, subject to an executed Proof of Parking Agreement prior to issuance of a building permit: RESOLUTION GRANTING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT WHEREAS, the procedural requirements of Ordinance No. 825 (The Zoning Ordinance) have been met; and WHEREAS, it has been determined that the Findings as required by Ordinance No. 825 have been satisfied; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Edina Ctiy Council hereby grants a Conditional Use Permit to Edina Community Lutheran Church, 4113 West 54th Street, for construction of a new sanctuary and conversion of the existing sanctuary to a fellowship hall. Motion carried on rollcall vote, five ayes. PUBLIC HEARING HELD ON ISSUE OF DIVERTING TRAFFIC ON HALIFAX AVENUE. Engineer Fran Hoffman advised that approximately 800 notices were mailed to residents in northeas tdfna regarding the hearing on diverting traffic on Halifax Avenue. The A47 1.8fJ 5./.88 225 RESOLUTION APPROVING PRELIMINARY PLAT FOR OAK PONDS OF INTERLACHEN 2ND ADDITION BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Edina, Minnesota, that that certain plat entitled "OAK PONDS OF INTERIACHEN 2ND ADDITION, platted by Michael Halley Homes, Inc. and presented at the regular meeting of the City Council of August 15, 1988 be and is hereby granted preliminary plat approval. Motion for adoption of the resolution was seconded by Member Turner Rollcall: Ayes: Kelly, Richards, Turner, Courtney, Nays: Smith adopted. =1ution PRY PLAT APPROVED FOR HED ADDITION. Affidavits o notice were presented, approved a ordered placed on file. Planner Larsen pre ented the request for preliminary p t approval for the Hed Addition, locate at 6625 West Trail, Lot 1, Block 10, India Hills. The subject property is a d eloped single family lot with an area of 7 X207 square feet. The proponent submitted a preliminary yhas plat which would cre e one new buildable lot. T existing house would remain as it is today. The new lot would contain 34,277 scare feet, and the lot for the existing house would con' ain 44,930 square feet!/ The new house is proposed to front on Iroquois Trail. '& th lots comply or Axceed all Zoning Ordinance requirements for single fami�] lots. A grapc of the proposed plat was shown indicating the'existing house d driveway d proposed house to be constructed on N the new lot. In support of thei pplicatppon, the proponents have submitted an LO analysis and survey of 40 lots in t we�Eern portion of Indians to determine lot Lo size. The existing lot (Lot 1, Block Indian Hills) is the largest in the area and following the subdivision the res g lots would remain among the largest lots in this area of Indian Hills, anne \\Larsen explained that, normally, staff [[] would want to see the property spli more evh ly than is proposed. However, in /e Q this case a more even division ofpropert would require removing the existing house. The present proposal maximizes the size f Lot 2 while saving the existing house. The entire property isavily wooded and\the existing house is barely visible from the street. A di Sion which would re ire removing the existing dvised that at its house may disturb the site more than the present prop 3\ques, meeting of July 27, 1988, th/ Community Development an Commission reviewed the proposal and recommended preliminary apprct to: 1) final plat approval, 2) subdivision dedication, and 3) utiliion charges. He stated that Virgil Hed, proponent, was present to answns. Member Smith asked questions about the retaining wall adjacent to Iail. Planner Larsen said that it waan existing private retaining wall on the property. Member Smith commented that the lots in the proposed plat are consistent in size with the neighborhood/with the exception of the large lots to the east. No other comment being heard Member Smith introduced the following resolution and moved adoption, subject 1) final plat approval, 2) subdivision dedication, and 3) utility connectio changes: RESOLUTION APPROVING PRELIMINARY PIAT FOR HED ADDITION BE IT RESOLVE/bythe City Council of the City of Edina, Minnesota, that that certain plat ntitled "HED ADDITION", platted by Virgil and Sharon Hed, husband and wife, a� presented at the regular meeting of the City Council of August 15, 1988 be and is hereby granted preliminary plat approval. Motion for adoption of the resolution was seconded by Member Turner. Rollcall: Ayes: Kelly, Richards, Smith, Turner, Courtney Motion carried. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR EDINA COMMUNITY LUTHERAN CHURCH EXPANSION CONTINUED. Affidavits of notice were presented, approved and ordered placed on file. Planner Larsen presented the request of Edina Community Lutheran Church, 4113 West 54th Street, for a conditional use permit. Edina Community Lutheran Church, generally located south of West 54th Street and west of Halifax Avenue, has applied for a conditional use permit to build a new sanctuary and convert the existing sanctuary into a fellowship hall. The new sanctuary will seat 210 people which is an increase of 23 seats over the present sanctuary. The project includes remodeling the interior of the existing building. The exterior of the new sanctuary will be finished with cedar shakes and stone trim to match the stone on the existing church. The existing building will be re-sided with cedar shakes to match the new addition. Discussion at the Community Development and Planning Commission meeting centered upon where additional parking would be located on the church site. The church property measures 4.73 acres in size. However, much of the area is within the flood plain of Minnehaha Creek. No building or other obstructions may be placed in the flood plain. Consequently, the only buildable area is the northeasterly portion of the site. All of the proposed construction is above the flood plain elevation. Under certain circumstances, parking could be developed within the flood plain area. However, from staff's point of view it is not a desirable alternative. In looking at other alternatives, it was determined to develop as much parking as possible on the upper area of the church .ground and if parking overflowed the capacity of that lot it could locate on West 54th Street where there is adequate street width for parking on both sides and very few homes. 8/15/88 226 The church's proposal calls for rebuilding the existing parking area to the south and west of the church to accommodate 41 cars. The existing parking area is unstriped and accommodates 25-35 cars. With seating for 210 persons, the Zoning • Ordinance requires 70 parking spaces. In order to provide the required parking the church would need to locate the.additional parking within the flood plain area. The church has elected to request a parking variance of 29 spaces to avoid disturbing the natural:conditions existing adjacent to the creek. According to church officials the intent of the addition and renovation project is to better accommodate existing needs and not to prepare for any significant increase in congregation size. The seating capacity increase is very modest and'the existing building would benefit'from the proposed renovation. The building design and the soft, natural materials seem appropriate for the site. The Planning Commission members discussed at length whether to recommend the parking variance and the conditional use permit.or to require a proof of parking agreement. The question arose if there is a proof of parking agreement in place and additional parking is required in the future,. where would those 29 spaces be located. The answer would be in the flood plain which both the church and staff have been trying to avoid. At its meeting of July:27, 1988, the Planning Commission recommended approval of the conditional use permit, with a 29 space parking variance as recommended by staff, and that the City and church enter into a proof of parking agreement. Planner Larsen stated that the Planning Commission, staff,.the church, and neighbors all supported the proposed parking variance to avoid disturbing the flood plain areas on the church property. He explained that staff did not recommend the proof of parking agreement for these reasons: 1) The increase in seating capacity is small, only 23 seats. 2). The flood plain area is the only place to develop more parking. This area is approximately 16 feet lower than the existing parking lot make it undesirable parking. 3) Cars can park on both sides of West 54th Street without disrupting traffic flow. 4) Present church activities have not caused problems for the neighborhood. Planner Larsen said that representatives of the church were present,.as well as John Cunningham, project architect. Member Turner asked if all alternatives for parking have been considered. Planner'Larsen said there may be room for additional parking in the future if the existing parsonage were removed. Staff also.looked at the possibility of a parking bay adjacent to West 54th Street. However, the level of traffic and the existing width of the street did not seem to warrant that alternative. Staff a15o looked at public.park land on the south side of West 54th Street and west of Minnehaha Creek as off-site parking; however, that is rather • remote to the church. Member Smith asked how a proof of parking agreement would be handled. Planner Larsen said the standard procedure with regard to a proof of parking agreement is that the City would hope it would not need to be enforced. The problem with an agreement is if additional parking is proved to be needed the City would require that parking be provided somehow on the site. Here the only . place would be down on:the flood plain. Planner Larsen added that the City and church could enter into a general agreement; similar to that with Colonial Church, whereby the church would work with the City to solve parking problems should they occur in the future. Ann Bishop, 5324 Halifax Avenue,.asked about the impact of traffic in the neighborhood if both sanctuaries are used to capacity. Planner Larsen explained that the Zoning Ordinance says you calculate the demand on traffic and parking based on the largest use assembly which in this case would be so modest that there would be no noticeable increase in traffic. If in the future, both structures were used concurrently, it could have some impact. When the City reviews requests for conditional use permits from schools and churches, staff relies on those institutions telling staff how they operate. Mark Brethein, 5429 Woodcrest Drive, said he was supportive of the church's plan and in favor of the parking variance. He said he was concerned about any option to build parking in'the flood plain as that would be across the creek from his property. Member Smith commented that he would. like to see some kind of agreement with the church regarding future parking needs. Member Turner said she would not support putting parking in the flood plain. She added that the Council has been tough with churches in recent years regarding their parking requirements; that we should not make an exception here and that there should be some type of agreement. Member Richards made a.motion that approval.of the Conditional Use Permit for Edina Community Lutheran Church be continued to September 19, 1988 and that staff be directed to bring back an agreement regarding future parking needs for approval before the Conditional Use Permit is granted. Motion was seconded by Member Smith. Ayes: Kelly, Richards, Smith, Turner, Courtney Motion carried. TRAFFIC SAFETY COMMITTEE MINUTES OF AUGUST 9, 1988 APPROVED. Because of the number of persons present regarding Agenda Item VIIIA (Approval of Traffic Safety Committee Minutes), Mayor Courtney declared :this the next item to be heard. Engineer Hoffman reviewed the discussion held at the Traffic Safety Committee meeting of August 9, 1988 regarding the traffic issues on Halifax Avenue, West • 51st through West 54th.Streets and the temporary traffic barricade that had been installed at Halifax and West 51st Street. .He recalled that at the July meeting the Committee had recommended that the Council conduct a public hearing on this matter to get input from the residents of Halifax Avenue and the affected surrounding neighborhoods. At its meeting of August 9, 1988, the members • Mr. Ackerberg told the Commissioners he too would like better pedestrian access to the patio; however, liquor license restrictions prevents it and it is difficult to control seating order. Chair Platteter said he supports the project; adding in his opinion it's a great project. Platteter said the Commission viewed this in a "small scale"; however, as redevelopment occurs in the area the Commission may need to think about how these small redevelopments fit into the rest of the area and bigger picture. Platteter noted it appears throughout Edina and the greater Southdale area infills are occurring. Commissioner Carr stated she supports the project; however, was a little hesitant with the exterior materials. Commissioner Forrest also indicated her support for the project. She said in her opinion the SE corner may need enhancement to keep the public engaged. A discussion ensued on the importance of creating an active streetscape and developing an inviting pedestrian experience. There was some discussion on the loc4tion of the door; however, Commissioners acknowledged the challenge with door placement when the majority of visitors come by car. All in all, Commissioners agreed it was a nice project. Public Hearing • Chair Platteter asked if anyone would like to speak to the issue; being none, Commissioner Thorsen moved to close the public hearing. Commissioner Strauss seconded the motion. All voted aye; motion carried. Motion Commissioner Carr moved to recommend final rezoning and final development plan approval based on staff findings and subject to staff conditions; with the additional comment that the applicant do everything to help encourage engagement with the street. Commissioner Hobbs seconded the motion. All voted aye; motion carried. 9-0. VII. REPORTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS A. Sketch Plan. Edina Community Lutheran Church — 4113 54"' St West. Planner Comments Planner Teague reported the Commission is asked to consider a sketch plan proposal to build a new sanctuary, kitchen addition and new parking lot on the east side of the existing church. • Teague explained the parsonage home would be removed and replaced with the new parking lot. The new sanctuary addition would provide the same seating capacity as the existing 10 AS -0 • sanctuary. Teague gave a brief history on the previous proposal, adding the revised plans address concerns previously raised. Teague asked for Commission comments. Appearing for the Applicant Thomas Whitlock and Randy Mo Discussion Commissioner Nemerov asked how close the proposed addition is to the creek. Planner Teague responded that it appears to be over 100 -feet from the creek. Applicant Presentation Randy Mo told the Commission that the site is striking and with graphics explained the layout of the proposed addition(s) and site drainage. Thomas Whitlock presented the landscaping plan and asked the Commission to note that the proposed addition ends at the edge of the existing parking lot. He noted permeable pavers would be implemented throughout where appropriate. Whitlock explained that the neighbor to the east will be heavily buffered through the planting of evergreens, adding this form of landscaping buffer also screens neighbors from headlight wash from vehicles coming or leaving • the parking lots. Concluding, Whitlock said the development team continues to work with the neighbors on landscaping and tree retention. Discussion Commissioner Hobbs noted that drainage and water shed are important issues facing this redevelopment and asked the applicants if they believe the proposal can adequately handle the run-off. Mr. Whitlock said they are working with the Watershed District and believe the plan will address all drainage issues. He explained that the demolition of the parsonage allows for the location of an integrated underground storm water management system below the parking lot. Whitlock said this storm water management system is superior because it eliminated the need for retaining ponds which would result in additional tree loss. Commissioner Carr noted that the parsonage earmarked to be demolished was built in 1949, adding the Heritage Preservation Board may be interested in the demolition. Carr suggested that the applicant take photos of the parsonage to document it. There was a brief discussion on if the Heritage Preservation Board should weigh in on the demolition of the parsonage. Chair Platteter asked the applicants the square footage of the build -out. Mr. Mo responded that total build -out square footage is 26,000 square feet. Chair Platteter commented that this addition creates an opportunity to work with the Watershed District that could provide a better storm water management situation especially since the structure is in close proximity to • the creek. Continuing, Platteter said special attention needs to be paid to screening the addition from the properties to the west. Platteter said he likes the handling of the trash • enclosures He further recommended that the development team look at the project from all angles and consider the build -out in all seasons, leafs, no leafs, minimal leafs etc. to ensure adequate screening from adjoining neighbors. Concluding Platteter said if done correctly the new addition should blend well. • • Commissioner Forrest commented that the addition of bike parking stations should be added to the plan. She further noted she agrees with Chair Platteter in supporting the location of the trash enclosure. Continuing, Forrest stated she has a couple issues; one is lighting, two, parking. She asked the applicant to make sure they are sensitive to light wash into the residential neighborhood, pointing out parking lot lighting needs to be done correctly. Forrest also noted that she is concerned with parking on West 54th Street. She pointed out West 54th Street is a bike route and the parking of vehicles along a bike route could raise some issues. Commissioner Nemerov commented that it is difficult finding balance and encouraged the applicants to continue to work with the neighbors in addressing all their concerns. Mr. Whitlock agreed, adding they will continue to work on tree placement, landscaping, access and parking. Commissioner Thorsen commented that parking is an issue and will continue to be an issue; however, circulation and viable access can help mitigate the issue. Chair Platteter thanked Mr. Whitlock and Mo for their presentations. 12 /� S') p.. 2272021 AGREEMENT 10� 1%\� �ti5 P O G� 'THIS AGREEMENT, Made and entered into this a day of 1992, by and between EDZNA COMMUNITY LUTHERAN CHURCH, INCORPORATED, a Minnesota non-profit corporation (the "Church") and, CITY OE EDINA, a Minnesota municipal corporation (the "City"); WITNESSETH THAT: WHEREAS, The Church is the Owner of certain real property ("Property") located in .the City of r-- dfa, County of He' nnepin, State of Minnesota, y legally described on Exhibit A attached hereto and hereby made a part hereof; and WHEREAS, The Church proposes to construct an addition to the building currently. existing on the Property ("Building"), which addition is to include parking and landscaping to be used In connection therewith as shown on the plan prepared by Sdvik Mathre Sathrum Quanbeck Edwins dated February 20, 1992 ("Plan") (the addition and said parking and landscaping being hereinafter called the "Improvements"); and WHEREAS, the Plan provides 37 parking spaces on site but would need 70 parking spaces; following completion of the Improvements, to comply with the City's zoning ordinances; and WHEREAS, additional on site parking spaces could only be provided by locating them on the,flood plain of Minnehaha Creek; and WHEREAS, the Church has sought approval from the City for construction of the Improvements and requested a parking variance necessary to allow construction of the Improvements as shown on the Plan; and WHEREAS, the City did, on April 6, 1992, in Case No. C-92-1, approve the construction of the Improvements and grant the requested variance because strict enforcement of the City ordinances would, in this case, cause undue hardship because of circumstances unique to the Property, and the approval of construction and grant of such variance has been determined by the City to be in beeping with the spirit and intent of the applicable ordinances, but the approval of construction and grant of the variance was conditioned upon the execution, delivery, and recording of this Agreement, and upon the conditions hereinafter set out in this Agreement, which the City deems,necessary to impose to ensure compliance with the applicable City ordinances and to protect adjacent properties; and 0% -p R i G a,4 W itJls/lG2� C 'ut l)eputy Exarniner of Titles X%bAvv*'- WHEREAS, The Church is agreeable to the approval of construction and the granting of the variance being subject to the conditions hereinafter set out, and is willing, and represents that it has the power and authority, to enter into this Agreement. NOW, 711ERE1~ORE, in consideration of the approval given by the City and the granting of the above requested variance, by the City, and of the mutual covenants and agreements hereinafter contained, it is hereby agreed by and between the parties hereto as follows: :1. The City hereby confirms that it did, as above stated, approve construction of the Improvements, and did grant variance from its applicable ordinances concerning parking requirements and building setback requirements, subject, however, to the terms and conditions of this Agreement. 2. If the City Manager and the City Planner shall hereafter determine, in their sole and absolute discretion, that additional parking spaces are required on the Property, the Church will, at its sole cost and expense, submit to the City a plan for providing the additional parking spaces as the City Planner and City Manager shall then require, up to the maximum number of parking spaces required by the then applicable City Ordinances. The City Planner and City Manager need not require that all of the additional parking spaces be provided at any one time, but may require additional parking spaces be provided from time to time as they deem therm necessary, again in their sole and absolute discretion, until the maximum number of parking spaces as required by the then applicable City Ordinances have been provided. The plan for additional parking spaces may provide for additional parking spaces on the Property, on the City property used for parking and located West of Minnehaha Creek and South of West 54th Street, on West 54th Street following reconstruction and widening of the street to provide for parking bays, or on other off-street locations or combinations thereof. 'The plan shall also include methods for implementing the use of any such additional parking areas by Church patrons. Any such plan shall avoid use of the floodplain area for additional parking spaces. The plan must be approved by the City, and if approved by the City (which approval may be withheld for any reason or cause), such additional parking spaces may then be utilized by the Church pursuant to said new parking plan, as approved, and subject to the then applicable ordinances of the City, except as such ordinances may be waived by variances, if any, then granted. As above stated, the City Manager and City Planner shall be the sole judges of whether or not additional parking is required, from time to time, and if so, how much is to be constructed at any given time. ..0100 The City Manager and the City Planner shall give written notice to the Church of their determination that additional parking spaces are then required, .2- M setting forth in said notice the number of spaces then required to be provided, up to the maximum required by the then applicable City Ordinances. The Church must submit its proposed plan for additional parking spaces within thirty (30) days after such notice is given. 3. If any term, condition, or provision of this Agreement, or the application thereof to any person or circumstance, shall, to any extent, be field to be invalid or unenforceable, the remainder hereof and the application of such term, provision, and condition to persons or circumstances other than those as to whom it shall be held invalid or unenforceable shall not be affected thereby, and this Agreement, and all the terms, provisions, and conditions hereof, shall, in all other respects, continue to be effective and to be complied with to the full extent permitted by law. 4. In the event that the Church fails or refuses to fully comply with all of its obligations under this Agreement, or violates any of the provisions hereof, and such failure, refusal or violation continues for a period of thirty (30) days after written notice thereof is given to the Church, then, in that event, in addition to any other remedies then available to the City at law or in equity, the City shall have t right to; O,Qa (a) Prohibit any parking on West 54th Street (which City may whether or not agreed to herein by the Church). M Obtain enforcement of this Agreement by court order for mandatory injunction or other appropriate -relief; and (c) Withhold, deny, or revoke any building permits, certificates of occupancy, utility connection permits and any other permits and approvals, now or hereafter issued or granted or to be issued or granted by the City for the construction or occupancy of all or any part of the Properly, or Improvements, until such failure or refusal ends and the Church fully complies with its obligations hereunder. All of the foregoing remedies shall be usable and enforceable by the City separately or concurrently as the City shall determine, and the use of one remedy shall not waive or preclude the use of any one or more of the other . - remedies. Also, the failure to exercise, or delay in exercising, any remedy hereunder In the event of a failure or refusal by the Church, shall not preclude City from thereafter exercising any of its remedies for the same or a subsequent failure or refusal. The Church agrees to pay to City any and all costs and expenses incurred by City in enfox•cing this Agreement by the use of the remedies above set out or by other remedies or means available to the City at law or in equity, including attorneys' fees whether suit be brought or not, and with interest on all such costs and expenses at the highest rate permitted by law, or, if no maximum rate is -3- A - S- applicable, then at the rate of twelve percent (12%) per annum from the dates incurred by the City until paid. The Church also agrees to pay all costs of collection of any monies due to the City from the Church pursuant hereto, and of such costs and expenses incurred in enforcing this Agreement, with interest thereon, again including attorneys' fees and whether suit be brought or not, with interest at the highest rate permitted by law, or if no maximum rate is applicable, then 'at the rate of twelve percent (12%) per annum from the dates'such costs of collection were incurred until paid. 5. All notices, reports, or demands required or permitted to be given under this Agreement shall be in writing and shall be deemed to be given when personally. delivered to. any officer of the party, ,to which notice is being given, or when deposited in the Unites States mail in a sealed envelope, with registered or certified mail postage prepaid thereon, addressed to the parties at the following addresses: To City: 4801 West 50th Street Edina, Minnesota 55424 Attn: City Manager To the Church: 4113 West 54th Street Edina, Minnesota 55424: Such addresses may be changed by any party upon notice to the other party given as herein provided. 5. The terms and provisions hereof shall be binding upon and inure to the benefit of the parties hereto and their respective successors and assigns, and shall run with the title to the Property and be binding upon all present and future owners of the Property. If, for any reason, the provisions hereof should be deternuned by the legal counsel for the City, or by a court of competent jurisdiction, not to be binding upon and fully enforceable against --any owner of the Property, then the ' variance granted by the City in Case No. C-92-1 shall wholly cease and terminate and the Property shall be used and usable only in full compliance with all then applicable ordinances of the City. If there be at any future time more than one owner of the Property, all of such then owners, while they are such owners, shall be jointly and severally liable for all obligations under this Agreement. -4- X54 ENT WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this instrument to be duly executed the day and year first above written. EDINA COMMUNITY L'U'THERAN CHURCH, INCORPORATED By/'. ' JCITY OF EDINA $yT-044S C Its Mayor And Its Ma ager STATE OF MINNESOTA) )SS. COUNTY OF HENNEPENT) The foregoing instrument svgs acl<nowiedged bEfore me Phis Ifft, y of tiu `{ ,1992, by -.A, sk�s�le-l5'�0�, the of EDINA COMMUNITY LUTHERAN CHURCH, INCORPOP\-A.TED, a Minnesota nonprofit corporation, on behalf of said corporation. If I MA&V%&Av VVVVW ���M�n nvwvwr STEVEN J. FRANK NOTARY PUBLIC—MINNESOTA HENNEPIN COUNTY My Conokslon Expires Dec. 21, 1992 :I WYMNv1AA x _5_ ASj Public ak STATE Or MRNNESOTA ) )SS. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this't%ay of �� 1992, byh d. the Mayor and Manager, respectively, of the City of Edina, a Minnesota municipal corporation, on behalf of said municipal corporation. ,1pY tit. APYA ��-Wo"j �` Nota-r--y---Pu lie c This instrument drafted by; Dorsey & Whitney (7ES) 2200 First Bank Place East Minneapolis, Minnesota 55402 -G- AA EXHIBIT A -er (NES) All of the Northwest Qua):L (NWS) of the Northeast Quarter of the Northeast Quarter. (NEI-) in Section Nineteen. (19) , Township 4 Twenty --eight (28) , Range Twenty-four (24), except that part thereof 6;f., platted as Minnehaha Woods QP 0 A -I &kl 'REGISOTMED VGA} --�E,0-6 OMMEOFTPEREGISTRAR OFT lTLES HENiqEP;N,l NESMI CEMI ON JUN 221392 R P OF TrrLE3 By D A • ��� Infrastructure ■ Engineering ■ Planning ■ Construction 701 Xenia Avenue South Suite #300 - Minneapolis, MN 55416 & Aumates, Inc. Tel: 763 541-4800 Fax: 763 541-1700 Memorandum DATE: July 14, 2015 To: Mr. Cary Teague, Planning Director City of Edina FROM: Charles Rickart, P.E., PTOE RE: REVISED Edina Community Lutheran Church Expansion Traffic and Parking Study City of Edina, MN WSB Project No. 1686 - 32 Background In 2013 a Traffic and Parking Study was completed for a proposed expansion of the Edina Community Lutheran Church (ECLC). The proposed expansion at that time included additional . seating capacity for the main sanctuary, additional classroom space and removal of the existing residential building on the east side of the site. A new proposal has been submitted to build a sanctuary and kitchen addition and a new parking lot on the east side of the existing church. To accommodate the request, the parsonage home would be removed and replaced with the new parking lot. The new sanctuary addition would have the same seating capacity as the existing sanctuary. The purpose of this study is to determine potential traffic and parking impacts the proposed expansion would have on the adjacent roadway system. The site is located on the south side of West 54th Street between Minnehaha Blvd and Halifax Avenue. The project location is shown on Figure 1. The new plan includes the reconfiguration of the existing parking east of the building maintaining access to 54th Street, and; construction of a new parking lot with full movement access to 54th Street west of the building. The proposed site plan is shown on Figure 2. The traffic and parking impacts of the proposed expansion were evaluated at the following locations. • 54th Street west of Minnehaha Blvd to east of Halifax Ave • Halifax Avenue north of 54th Street • Intersection of 54th Street and Minnehaha Blvd • Intersection of 54th Street and the site entrances • Intersection of 54th Street and Halifax Avenue • ECLC Site Parking Lot • The following sections of this report document the analysis and anticipated impacts of the proposed ECLC expansion. Al • ECLC Revised Traffic and Parking Study City of Edina July 14, 2015 Page 2 of 7 Existing Traffic Characteristics The existing lane configuration and traffic control include: 54th Street is an east/west city local street with no turn lanes. An all -way stop is provided at Minnehaha Blvd and a side street stop is provided at Halifax Avenue. Access to adjacent developments and residential property including the Edina Community Lutheran Church site is provided directly from this street. The City recently completed the Bike Blvd project that modified the existing street configuration by restriping the street with parking lanes, advisory bike lanes and shared vehicle lanes. Parking is currently allowed on both sides of the street except: west of Minnehaha Blvd where no parking is allowed; on the south side of the street from the Church driveway east for approximately 30 feet where no parking is allowed for site sight lines, and; on the south side of the street for the drop off area in front of the Church where parking is restricted to 15 minutes. The speed limit posted on 54th Street is 30 mph. Halifax Avenue is a north/south city 2 -lane (on lane in each direction) local street with no turn lanes. Access to adjacent residential property is provided directly from this street. Parking is currently, allowed on both sides of the street except directly at the intersection of 54th Street where no parking is allowed approximately 30 feet back from the intersection on both sides of the street. The speed limit posted on Halifax Avenue is 30 mph. Turning movement counts and parking utilization data was collected on Sunday June 10th, 2012 from 7:30am to 1:00pm. In addition hourly directional counts were collected on 54th Street, Halifax Avenue and Minnehaha Blvd beginning on Friday June 8th through Monday June I ltn Figure 3 shows the existing conditions in the area including: lane configurations and traffic control; average daily and average weekend daily traffic counts; weekday and Sunday peak hour traffic counts, and; the Sunday "Church" peak hour traffic turning movement counts. Site Trip Generation In order to determine the impacts the proposed expansion will on the adjacent roadway system the number of trips from the site needs to be determined. For the Church this is based on attendance. Reviewing the Churches attendance records the average attendance (not including Christmas or Easter) for a Sunday is approximately 130 persons at the 11:00 am service. The 8:30 am service has a lower average Sunday attendance, therefore the 11:00 am service was used for the analysis. The attendance at the June 10th 2012 service was 125 persons. It can therefore be concluded that the traffic and parking counts for that day would represent an average event for the Church. A61), ECLC Revised Traffic and Parking Study City of Edina • July 14, 2015 Page 3 of 7 Based on the traffic and parking counts the 125 person attendance was represented by approximately 73 vehicles. Although the expansion is not anticipated to generate additional attendance on an average Sunday, a growth in attendance was assumed for this analysis. Assuming a modest growth in attendance to an average of 150 persons the corresponding traffic growth would be approximately 15 vehicles. Background Traffic Growth Traffic growth in the vicinity of the site will occur between existing conditions and any given future year due to other growth and development within the region. This background growth must be accounted for and included in future year traffic forecasts. Reviewing the historical traffic counts in the area, traffic has stayed constant or dropped in the past few years. In order to account for some background growth in traffic a .05% per year factor was applied to the through traffic on 54th Street. Trip Distribution Site -generated trips were distributed to the adjacent roadway system based on existing travel patterns, the population distribution relative to the site and the travel sheds for the major routes that serve it. The Trip Distribution was assumed as follows: • 65% east on 54th Street 35% west on 54th Street • Future Year Traffic Forecasts Traffic forecasts were prepared for the year 2016, which is the year after the proposed expansion would be completed. The traffic forecasts were developed by adding the projected annual background traffic to the existing traffic counts then adding the anticipated additional site traffic to the system based on the traffic distribution outlined above. Figure 4 shows the projected 2016 Sunday peak hour traffic volume. Traffic Operations Existing and forecasted traffic operations were evaluated for each of the study area intersections. This section of the study describes the methodology used to assess the operations and provides a summary of traffic operations. Analysis Methodology The traffic operations analysis is derived from established methodologies documented in the Highway Capacity Manual 2000 (HCM). The HCM provides a series of analysis techniques that are used to evaluate traffic operations. W ECLC Revised Traffic and Parking Study • City of Edina 14 July 14, 2015 Page 4 of 7 Intersections are given a Level of Service (LOS) grade from "A" to "F" to describe the average amount of control delay per vehicle as defined in the HCM. The LOS is primarily a function of peak traffic hour turning movement volumes, intersection lane configuration, and the traffic controls at the intersection. LOS A is the best traffic operating condition, and drivers experience minimal delay at an intersection operating at that level. LOS E represents the condition where the intersection is at capacity, and some drivers may have to wait through more than one green phase to make it through an intersection controlled by traffic signals. LOS F represents a condition where there is more traffic than can be handled by the intersection, and many vehicle operators may have to wait through more than one green phase to make it through the intersection. At a stop sign -controlled intersection, LOS F would be characterized by exceptionally long vehicle queues on each approach at an all -way stop, or long queues and/or great difficulty in finding an acceptable gap for drivers on the minor legs at a through -street intersection. The LOS ranges for both signalized and un -signalized intersections are shown in Table 1. The threshold LOS values for un -signalized intersections are slightly less than for signalized intersections. This variance was instituted because drivers' expectations at intersections differ with the type of traffic control. A given LOS can be altered by increasing (or decreasing) the number of lanes, changing traffic control arrangements, adjusting the timing at signalized intersections, or other lesser geometric improvements. LOS also changes as traffic volumes increase or decrease. • Table 1- Intersection Level of Service Ranges Source: HCM LOS, as described above, can also be determined for the individual legs (sometimes referred to as "approaches") or lanes (turn lanes in particular) of an intersection. It should be noted that a LOS E or F might be acceptable or justified in those cases where a leg(s) or lane(s) has a very low traffic volume as compared to the volume on the other legs. For example, improving LOS on such low-volume legs by converting a two-way stop condition to an all -way stop, or adjusting timing at a signalized intersection, could result in a significant penalty for the many drivers on the major road while benefiting the few on the minor road. Also, geometric improvements on minor legs, such as additional lanes • or longer turn lanes, could have limited positive effects and might be prohibitive in terms of benefit to cost. A Control Delay (Seconds) Signalized Un -Signalized A :S10 < 10 B 10-20 10-15 C 20-35 15-25 D 35-55 25-35 E 55-80 35-50 F >80 >50 Source: HCM LOS, as described above, can also be determined for the individual legs (sometimes referred to as "approaches") or lanes (turn lanes in particular) of an intersection. It should be noted that a LOS E or F might be acceptable or justified in those cases where a leg(s) or lane(s) has a very low traffic volume as compared to the volume on the other legs. For example, improving LOS on such low-volume legs by converting a two-way stop condition to an all -way stop, or adjusting timing at a signalized intersection, could result in a significant penalty for the many drivers on the major road while benefiting the few on the minor road. Also, geometric improvements on minor legs, such as additional lanes • or longer turn lanes, could have limited positive effects and might be prohibitive in terms of benefit to cost. A ECLC Revised Traffic and Parking Study City of Edina • July 14, 2015 Page 5 of 7 Although LOS A represents the best possible level of traffic flow, the cost to construct roadways and intersection to such a high standard often exceeds the benefit to the user. Funding availability might also lead to acceptance of intersection or roadway designs with a lower LOS. LOS D is generally accepted as the lowest acceptable level in urban areas. LOS C is often considered to be the desirable minimum level for rural areas. LOS D or E may be acceptable for limited durations or distances, or for very low-volume legs of some intersections. The LOS analysis was performed using Synchro/SimTraffic: Synchro, a software package that implements Highway Capacity Manual (HCM) methodologies, was used to build each signalized intersection and provide an input database for turning -movement volumes, lane geometrics, and signal design and timing characteristics. In addition, Synchro was used to optimize signal timing parameters for future conditions. Output from Synchro is transferred to SimTraffic, the traffic simulation model. • SimTraffic is a micro -simulation computer modeling software that simulates each individual vehicle's characteristics and driver behavior in response to traffic volumes, intersection configuration, and signal operations. The model simulates drivers' behaviors and responses to surrounding traffic flow as well as different • vehicle types and speeds. It outputs estimated vehicle delay and queue lengths at each intersection being analyzed. Existing Level of Service Summary Table 2, below, summarizes the existing LOS at each of the study area intersections based on the current lane geometry and traffic volumes. The table shows that all intersections currently operate at an overall LOS A during Sunday peak hour with all movements operating at LOS B or better. Table 2 - Existing Level of Service C = Overall LOS, (D) = Worst movement LOS Ab �- Sunday Peak Hour Intersection LOS Delay (sec/veh) 54th Street at Minnehaha Ave A (B) 4 54th Street at Church Entrance A (A) 2 54th Street at Halifax Ave A (B) 5 C = Overall LOS, (D) = Worst movement LOS Ab �- ECLC Revised Traffic and Parking Study City of Edina • July 14, 2015 Page 6 of 7 Forecast Traffic Operations A capacity and LOS analysis was completed for the study area intersections for 2014 which represents the year after the proposed expansion is planned for completion. The results of the analysis are shown below in Table 3. All of the intersections are expected to continue to operate at similar levels of service with the proposed increase in attendance as before the expansion. Table 4 — Expansion (2014) Level of Service C = Overall LOS, (D) = Worst movement LOS Parking Demand • The parking demand for the site was analyzed based on the existing and anticipated attendance for the Church. Based on the parking inventory and count conducted on June 10th, 2012 there are 37 parking spaces available in the existing Church parking lot (including 3 handicapped spaces) and approximately 35 spaces on 54th Street from Minnehaha Blvd to Halifax Ave south. This represents a total of 72 spaces available on site or adjacent to the Church. There are also an additional 25+ spaces on Halifax Avenue north of 54th Street that could be used during peak attendance days. The peak parking demand on June 10th, 2012 was 73 vehicles between 10:30 and 11:30 am. All of these vehicles were parked in either the existing Church parking lot or on 54th Street. No vehicles were parked on Halifax Avenue. Figure 5 shows the number of parking spaces available and used based on the parking count conducted. As discussed in the Traffic Analysis section, if attendance would grow to an average of 150 persons, this would represent and additional 15 vehicles, raising the parking demand to 88 vehicles. The proposed revised site plan includes 14 spaces west of the building and 24 spaces east of the building for a total of 38 spaces. This represents an increase of only one (1) space in the available parking. It is estimated that on an average attendance day there would not be any change in the parking demand or operations in the parking lot or on 54th Street. However, with any increase in attendance vehicles would be parking on Halifax Avenue. Assuming an increase of 15 vehicles requiring parking, an additional 100 to 200 feet of parking on both sides of Halifax Avenue north of 54th Street would be needed. Ac Sunday Peak Hour Intersection Delay LOS (sec/veh) 54th Street at Minnehaha Ave A (B) 6 54th Street at Church West Entrance A (A) 3 54th Street at Church East Entrance A (A) 4 54th Street at Halifax Ave A (B) 7 C = Overall LOS, (D) = Worst movement LOS Parking Demand • The parking demand for the site was analyzed based on the existing and anticipated attendance for the Church. Based on the parking inventory and count conducted on June 10th, 2012 there are 37 parking spaces available in the existing Church parking lot (including 3 handicapped spaces) and approximately 35 spaces on 54th Street from Minnehaha Blvd to Halifax Ave south. This represents a total of 72 spaces available on site or adjacent to the Church. There are also an additional 25+ spaces on Halifax Avenue north of 54th Street that could be used during peak attendance days. The peak parking demand on June 10th, 2012 was 73 vehicles between 10:30 and 11:30 am. All of these vehicles were parked in either the existing Church parking lot or on 54th Street. No vehicles were parked on Halifax Avenue. Figure 5 shows the number of parking spaces available and used based on the parking count conducted. As discussed in the Traffic Analysis section, if attendance would grow to an average of 150 persons, this would represent and additional 15 vehicles, raising the parking demand to 88 vehicles. The proposed revised site plan includes 14 spaces west of the building and 24 spaces east of the building for a total of 38 spaces. This represents an increase of only one (1) space in the available parking. It is estimated that on an average attendance day there would not be any change in the parking demand or operations in the parking lot or on 54th Street. However, with any increase in attendance vehicles would be parking on Halifax Avenue. Assuming an increase of 15 vehicles requiring parking, an additional 100 to 200 feet of parking on both sides of Halifax Avenue north of 54th Street would be needed. Ac ECLC Revised Traffic and Parking Study City Edina 14 July 14, 2015 Page 7 of 7 Based on the current and proposed seating capacity of 210 people, the current City Code and previous parking agreement requires 70 parking spaces be provided on site for the Church. The Church received a variance for the parking requirement in 1992 for 37 spaces using proof of parking as a justification. Conclusions /Recommendation Based on the analysis documented in this memorandum, WSB has concluded the following: ■ The proposed Church Expansion will include construction of a new sanctuary and kitchen, removal of the existing residential building, revisions to the existing parking lot on the west side of the building and construction of a new parking lot on the east side of the building. ■ Although the expansion is not expected to generate new attendance, assuming a modest growth from 130 persons to 150 persons, the site would generate an additional 15 vehicles / hour on an average Sunday (11:00 am service). ■ Traffic operations at the study area intersections and driveways on 54th Street will remain the same with or without the proposed Church expansion. ■ Based on the analysis documented in this memorandum, WSB has concluded that, although • the available parking does not meet the City's Code, based on the expansion of the Church parking lot and the availability of on street parking, adequate Parking spaces are available for the anticipated parking demand using on -street parking on 54` Street and Halifax Avenue. 0 Based on these conclusions no additional improvements other than those shown on the site plan would be required to accommodate the proposed Church expansion. A-7 :o• >R ST. (ST.AVE, ONNE T elody Lakec S T.L a N w a CLOT R(DG 41 �Q End ST. Ja CLUB a N Q 18. r o a w a o WOODDALE LA, W. a a 51 F-r>< FST. PSE BRUCE of z F� WOOD DgEe PL• a oa 0 700 ft 1400 ft GL EN z W. 52nd ST. 02 W. 52nd 2rd w r > _ �7 Z W. 53 ST = m x IL _ a Pr ject Location Lake Li > 3 W. = 54th UST. U Harvey GOLF >a TER, a �, a ",t^' o Y � W�. FULLER YST.� WOODHILL DR.aY o xQW ST. 55th oa OAK i DR. o J w ha � �m< ST.o ,�EVI�LEXING TON Y DENS" W I C w wF 56 t 0 o ST. SO LTH VI EW TOWER SN. m LA. A WOOD LAD I RD. o -J w CONCORD N N o TER. PHILBROOK LA. LJ Cr a W. 0 v=iCn aLnonW Q aa 59 th ST. W. 59th 5T, cc uo h ST. a a ST. w h 3 ST. Z Y n---. E--. RD 3 a n6O2 ST. a Lf J J NW 0 a o w a a BEY a o= w o x o = ,; �m U a W. 61 st ST. Z A w�R G/ I a VI EW a N } a CQ N R o: �❑ D• W. W. 62 nd ST. ®� w w a <q J a z GARRI SON w w > o 35. N �A, Y a s 35. � � w 3� o aw e�+ti\a a ai m W 64 tF w a 65 na z N Q �1414VVN1111111FCT" Ll- Creek p I W. 57tf�L-ILJ�'�` w 3 OQ• a > > >> w w a ST. a a a a a a GRIM ES nWn59 nthST. z UJ o Ln.Z. o Q a w oLLI " m 60 C LLJW. nth FST. C7 v1 W 61J UJ St ST. m 0 w X M z o x a w } CH 0 V v Qom. CU RV 62 nd �ST. X O L2 cr w w HERITAGE J a 00 DR. a x w a IJ ST. p r o W. 64th ST. Cr o I 111 "nth I ST. � 3 � Lake o a m z W. 66th e ST. a C� a D 00 000 O _. Cornelia SOUTHD ALE L � NP o CIR. > Q GU 68 th r. a LA pR. s BALFANZ o �Q 0 ul RD. i�� a a x e�\14A 4 Revised Traffic and Parking Study - July 14, 2015 Figure 1 °� e �yEdina Community Lutheran Church Expansion .M. 4 City of Edina, Minnesota Project Location Map 3 AY V w w Dote: Printed: 711512015 WS8 Filename K:\01686-320\Cad\Exhib;ts\1686-32 fig-02 Site Plon.d9n -- — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — EDNA COMMUNMY LUTHERAN CH URCH W1 E S T ,4t h S-; P!-:E7 AWnM & - — -- — - REMODELING L ------- EDOK LMMSMA PIERCE PIN[ Bt ASSOCIATES `0 ---------- r C CONDMOM USE PERMIT SUBWTAL �: -- -------------- ;1Z C., MOP C— T) C S A\: PAI PAVING PLAN PAVING PLAN C600 \t4A e >. - 0 Revised Traffic and Parking Study July 14, 2015 Edina Community Lutheran Church Expansion Figure 2 City of Edina, Minnesota Proposed Site Plan Dote: Printed: 7/15/2015 WSB Fdonome+ K:\01686-320\Cad\Exhibits\1686-32 fig-03 - Existing Conditions.dgn 650 1200 (550] [950] N Z PEAK HOUR VOLUME COMPARISON � Z (f1 SUNDAY (11:00 AM TO 12:00 S SUNDAY PEAK (12:00 PM TO 1:00 PM) 189' PM) 221 -n WEEKDAY PEAK ( 4:00 PM TO 5:00 PM) 416 C0 50 ft 100 ft C o .1 m .1 T 1 J y rl T 22DO - - - [zsoo]--------------------------- 4 - ----------------------- -� - ----------- - 2650 [zsso] -- 54th STREET - - � 2650 -------------- - ---------- ---- [z50o] C� 8 8 /-101 9 7 %A y 4— 106 &J 85 9 69 �► 21 69 �� 6 M m 66 �► Edina Community LEGEND Lutheran Church XX SUNDAY 11:00 AM TO 12:00 AM PARKING .,ARKI.............. LANE CONFIGURATION (BIKE BLVD) SHARED _BIKE/ _ VEHICLE L4NES- ..__. BIKE t' TRAFFIC CONTROL - STOP SIGN PARKING XXXX AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC [XXXX) AVERAGE WEEKEND TRAFFIC Revised Traffic and Parking Study - July 14, 2015 Figure 3 °C �y Edina Community Lutheran Church Expansion ..� City of Edina, Minnesota Existing Conditions Date: Printed: 7/15/2015 WSB Filename: K+\01686-320\Cod\Exhibits\1686-32 fig -04 - Proposed Traffic Volumes.dgn N A 0 so ft loo ft � Z D m r T s x 75. m �L O C m �s v► �. 10 4-133 � 4-128 07 9 9 AJ y 4-- 107 or ---------------------------------------------------------------- --- - - - 54th STREET - ------------------------------------------ -- -11-0 11-089 94 --- 00, 1 1 27 t 85 3-�4 4-10 VI IW 85 —► Edina Community Lutheran Church LEGEND XX PROJECTED 2D16 SUNDAY 11:00 AM TO 12:00 AM ape Revised Traffic and Parking Study - July 14, 2015 Figure 4 4 � w1 o�eo Edina Community Lutheran Church Expansion � City of Edina, Minnesota Projected 2016 Traffic Volumes ,te: Printed: 7/15/2015 wmf Filenome+ Knui000-azu\woNexmoirsv000vt ng-uw N A 6?%6EPM000111 0 50 ft 100 ft V ,, s q1. �. No PARKING 54th STREET — - 12 „-) 8 07 � r PARKING -OT ,a 37 t34e r / f UDa� a .M Vt Edina Community Lutheran Church LEGEND XX AVAILABLE PARKING SPACES (XX) PEAK PARKING USE (10:30 TO 11:30) '0%A.. / Revised Traffic and Parking Study - July 14, 2015 Figure 5 °C& fly Edina Community Lutheran Church Expansion �.�..� City of Edina, Minnesota Existing Parking Demand • • 9 Pathfinder CRM, LLC Cultural Resource Management & Heritage Preservation Consultants i T 319 South Division Avenue C PO Box 503 Spring Grove, Minnesota 55974-0503 507-498-3810 800-206-8704 (toll free) id www.pathfindercrm.com 0 TO: Cary Teague, Community Development Director FROM: Robert Vogel, Preservation Planning Consultant DATE: July 14, 2015 RE: Cultural resources survey of the Rectory at Edina Community Lutheran Church This letter report provides a summary of the results of a cultural resources survey of the rectory of the Edina Community Lutheran Church, located at 4113 W. 54th Street. The purpose of the investigation was to identify the subject property and gather the information needed to evaluate its eligibility for designation as an Edina Heritage Landmark. Survey activities included background research and field inspection. Description The subject property is located on the south side of West 54th Street a short distance east of Minnehaha Creek. The rectory is on the east side of the church and the two buildings occupy the same 4.15 acre lot (Parcel ID 19-028-24-11-0010). Historically, the building functioned as the residence of the church pastor and as rental housing. The rectory is a one -and -one-half story, four bedroom, frame house with a gable roof and an attached, front -facing garage. The architectural classification is Minimal Traditional but the design incorporates elements of Ranch and other modern movement styles. This type of house was built in great numbers throughout the Twin Cities in the years immediately preceding and following World War II. It was probably the most popular suburban house form used by Edina builders during the 1940s. Very few of these houses were architect designed. The decorative cut stone wall cladding on the street elevation matches that of the church next door. The house, which contains approximately 3000 square feet of living space, is currently vacant. I A73 • Historical data relating to the rectory is somewhat sparse. It was built in 1947-48 and remodeled in the 1970s, according to building permit records. Edina Community Lutheran Church was founded in 1948. The property appears as vacant land on the 1940 aerial survey of Hennepin County but the rectory and the church are clearly shown on the aerial photographs flown in 1951. Evaluation For a property to qualify for the registry of Edina Heritage Landmarks it must meet one of the heritage landmark criteria for eligibility by being associated with an important historic context and retaining historic integrity of those physical features necessary to convey its significance. Unlike the National Register of Historic Places, the Edina Heritage Landmark program does not disqualify religious properties; as a matter of policy, the city considers churches and related religious buildings as heritage preservation resources when they meet established criteria for historical or architectural significance. A specific property may meet more than one of the eligibility criteria and it may be significant within one or more historic contexts; a property is only required, however, to be documented as significant under a single eligibility criterion and historic context. • For purposes of evaluating its heritage resource value, the church rectory was evaluated individually, and not as a functional component of the church building, within the local historic context "Midcentury Modern Architecture and Landscapes," a thematic planning unit that represents an important aspect of Edina history. Recently developed as part of the city's ongoing preservation planning process, this context is applicable to all residential buildings constructed in Edina between ca. 1935 and 1975. (The Heritage Preservation Board is in the process of developing a city-wide historic context for religious properties that would provide a more detailed framework for evaluating their historical, architectural, artistic and cultural significance. This study unit would also include landmark registration requirements applicable to properties such as rectories and other church -owned residences.) To be eligible under the Heritage Landmark criteria on the basis of its associative value, the rectory would have to be historically significant for its association with a specific event marking an important moment in Edina history or a pattern of events that represent an important trend in community development. Mere association with historic events or trends is not enough, however, to qualify a building as eligible for designation— the specific association would have to be considered important as well. Although it shows the history and development of the church as a community institution and its history reflects the broad pattern of • postwar suburban life, the rectory cannot be said to have acquired historical significance in its own right. 0 0 The rectory would be considered significant for its architectural value if it embodied the distinctive characteristics of a type, period or method of construction, or if it represented the work of a master architect. Based on the results of background research and physical examination, the subject property is not architecturally distinguished when compared with other 1940s era residences in Edina. It was not designed by a notable architect or master builder. Viewed from the perspective of its design and construction values, the rectory is not considered historically significant. Recommendation Evaluated from the perspective of its historic context, the church rectory is neither historically nor architecturally significant. Therefore, it does not meet the Edina Heritage Landmark eligibility criteria. No further cultural resource management work is recommended. cc: Joyce Repya, Senior Planner 3 X75 DATE: July 15, 2014 TO: Cary Teague — Planning Director CC: Chad Millner — City Engineer FROM: Ross Bintner P.E. - Environmental Engineer RE: 4113 W 54`h Street / ECLC — Development Review The Engineering Department has reviewed the subject property for street and utility connections, grading, storm water, erosion and sediment control. I. City Standard Plates available here: http://edinamn.gov/index.php?section=construction standards 2. A separate permit is required from Minnehaha Watershed District: http://www.minnehahacreek.org/ Survey 3. None Soils 4. Submit soils, soil boring and geotechnical report. • Details 5. No comments. Traffic and Street 6. Commercial entrance should follow standard plate 400 and 410. Please coordinate entrance location with Engineering Department and the currently active 54`h Street reconstruction project. 7. A curb cut permit will be required at time of building permit. Sanitary and Water Utilities 8. Show existing utility connections. 9. A revised SAC unit determination will be required at building permit application. Storm Water Utility 10. Provide hydraulic and hydrology calculations that meet Minnehaha Creek Watershed District standards. This majority of this site drains directly to Minnehaha Creek, that portion that drains to W 54`h Street will not affect available capacity, as the street is currently under construction and a new stormwater system will be installed. 11. Provide copies of maintenance agreement for private stormwater systems. 12. Show existing pipe on utility plan (Sheet C500) Grading, Erosion and Sediment Control 13. Provide erosion, sediment control plan that meets provisions of MPCA construction site general • permit. ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT —a 7450 Metro Boulevard • Edina, Minnesota 55439 www.EdinaMN.gov . 952-826-0371 • Fax 952-826-0392 47( • • • 14. Building permit and engineered structure design will be required for retaining wall over 4' in height at time of building permit. Other Agency Coordination 15. Minnehaha Creek Watershed permit is required. MDH, MPCA and MCES permits may be required. G:\PW\ADMIN\COMM\EXTERNAL\GENERAL CORR BY STREETS\50 - 59 Streets\41 13 54th Street - ECLC Church\140715 4413 W 54th Street - Site Review.docx ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT 7450 Metro Boulevard • Edina, Minnesota 55439 wcvw.EdinaMN.gov • 952-826-0371 • Fax 952-826-0392 "'77 Jackie Hooaenakker Worn: Denis Mitchell <djjm99@gmail.com> Sent: Tuesday, July 14, 2015 4:35 PM To: Jackie Hoogenakker Subject: case file 2015.007 Please note that we am TOTALLY in favor of the Edina Community Lutheran Church being granted a conditional use permit & variance Regards Denis & Faye Mitchell is Jackie Hoogenakker *From: Jerry O'Brien <e.g.obrien@egoholdings.com> Sent: Wednesday, July 15, 2015 3:08 PM To: Jackie Hoogenakker Cc: Ilo6100@yahoo.com Subject: Edina Community Lutheran July 15, 2015 City of Edina Planning Department c/o Jackie Hoogenakker 4801 West 50th Street Edina, MN 55424 Re: Edina Community Lutheran CUP application •To Whom It May Concern: We live at 5333 Minnehaha Blvd, directly across 54th Street from Community Lutheran Church. We are writing to assure you that we are completely comfortable with the remodeling designs and requested variances being presented by the church to the City. We have lived here since 2002 and even though we are not members of their congregation, they have always been great neighbors and an asset to our neighborhood. We feel it is important to accommodate their requests so that the church can continue to thrive in its current location. Throughout its renovation process, the church has communicated openly with all its neighbors and has truly listened and reflected upon any divergent views offered. Its final plans are well thought out and appropriately sensitive to all neighbors. We encourage you to approve the projected as presented. Sincerely, O Jerry & Lisa O'Brien 612-801-8936 10, o e • RYOR7vE'9 1888 L Item #: VII. A. Action Discussion ❑ nformation ❑ Subject: Proposed Franchise Agreement With Excel Energy, Ordinance No. 2015-12 Action Requested: Adopt Proposed Ordinance 2015-012 Approving a new Franchise Agreement with Xcel Energy Background: On March 3, 2015, 1 presented the Council with a proposed process and engagement plan for renewal of the Xcel Energy franchise agreement. After seeking input from Council Members and City staff, I prepared a draft franchise agreement, which was considered by the Energy & Environment Commission on May 14. The comments from the EEC were incorporated into the franchise proposal, including the creation of a proposed Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) called the Edina Clean Energy Partnership that is based on a similar MOU between Xcel Energy and the City of Minneapolis. I hosted a two hour public open house on June 25 to enable members of the public with ideas, suggestions or concerns to share them at an early stage in the drafting of the agreement. There were no participants at the open house. Following the open house, I reviewed the proposed franchise agreement with representatives from Xcel Energy on July 2 to seek their initial reactions to the draft franchise agreement. The City Council conducted a public hearing on the draft franchise agreement on July 21 to allow interested members of the public one final opportunity to influence Council Members concerning the proposed franchise agreement. One citizen testified. Following this public hearing, I requested final direction from Council Members on areas of material change in order for the final draft of the ordinance to be prepared for consideration at your August 5, 2105 meeting. The draft franchise agreement reviewed at the July 21 public hearing included five areas of material change compared to the current franchise: 3.8.1 COMPANY SHALL PROVIDE CITY WITH A COMMUNITY -WIDE NETWORK OF FULLY FUNCTIONING STREET LIGHTS. COMPANY SHALL MAKE REASONABLE EFFORTS TO RESPOND AND REPAIR MALFUNCTIONING STREET LIGHTS WITHIN 48 HOURS OF NOTIFICATION BY CITY. 3.8.2 COMPANY SHALL PROVIDE CITY THE LOCATION OF COMPANY OWNED STREET LIGHTS WITHIN THE CITY, TO BE UPDATED AT LEAST ANNUALLY. City of Edina • 4801 W. 501h St. • Edina, MN 55424 REPORT / RECOMMENDATION Page 2 3. 3.8.3 COMPANY SHALL UPGRADE, AT COMPANY COST, CITY'S NETWORK OF STREET LIGHTS TO LED STREET LIGHTS ON OR BEFORE JANUARY 1, 2018. 0 4. 3.9.1 COMPANY AGREES THAT THE APPEARANCE OF ITS GROUND AND POLE MOUNTED EQUIPMENT WITHIN CITY PROPERTY, RIGHT-OF-WAY AND EASEMENT SHALL NOT BE ALLOWED TO BECOME VISUALLY DISPLEASING. COMPANY AGREES TO REMEDY VISUALLY DEFECTIVE EQUIPMENT WITHIN 90 DAYS, WEATHER PERMITTING, OF A REQUESTTO REMEDY FROM CITY. 9.2.1 ENERGY CONSERVATION FEE. COMPANY AGREES TO ASSESS A $0.50/MONTH CHARGE TO EACH CUSTOMER, REGARDLESS OF CUSTOMER CLASS, AND TO REMIT SUCH AMOUNT TO CITY AT THE SAME TIME AND METHOD AS THE FRANCHISE FEE, FOR THE PURPOSE OF FUNDING CITY'S ENERGY CONSERVATION PROGRAM. ECEP - In addition to the five areas of material change, the Energy & Environment Commission recommended the City enter into a Memorandum of Understanding with Xcel Energy to create the "Edina Clean Energy Partnership". The Edina Clean Energy Partnership (ECEP) is based on a similar agreement that Xcel has with the City of Minneapolis called the Minneapolis Clean Energy Partnership. The ECEP is intended to address a number of supplementary energy issues that cannot be included in the franchise agreement itself. I have included a draft copy of the proposed ECEP with the Council packet materials. Xcel does not wish to have a Clean Energy Partnership with the City of Edina. Xcel believes the Partners In Energy (PIE) program will adequately address the energy issues in the ECEP. Information: Before I provide a review of the outstanding franchise issues, it is necessary to note a proposed structural • change that has evolved in the discussion with Xcel Energy about the franchise agreement. The company has requested that City agree to consider the franchise agreement without the requested changes. The company's strong preference is to make their commitments to the City's requests, where applicable, through a side letter or MOU, and not to incorporate them into the franchise agreement itself. They prefer this method of commitment because they prefer to have the same franchise agreement components in all of their cities. I recommend the City Council accept this request from the company, provided the side letter or MOU is executed by someone at the company who is authorized to honor the company's future commitments to the City. As of the writing of this memorandum for the August 5 Council Packet, the status of the material changes under discussion is as follows: 3.8.1 COMPANY SHALL PROVIDE CITY WITH A COMMUNITY -WIDE NETWORK OF FULLY FUNCTIONING STREET LIGHTS. COMPANY SHALL MAKE REASONABLE EFFORTS TO RESPOND AND REPAIR MALFUNCTIONING STREET LIGHTS WITHIN 48 HOURS OF NOTIFICATION BY CITY. Xcel: The company requests this provision be modified to: Company shall provide City with a community -wide network of fully functioning street lights. Company shall make reasonable efforts to respond and repair malfunctioning street lights within two business days of notification by City. SHN: I recommend the Council approve the requested amendment. 0 REPORT / RECOMMENDATION Page 3 2. 3.8.2 COMPANY SHALL PROVIDE CITY THE LOCATION OF COMPANY OWNED STREET LIGHTS WITHIN THE CITY, TO BE UPDATED AT LEAST ANNUALLY. Xcel: The company requests this item be withdrawn from the agreement because they are already meeting this standard. SHN: I recommend the Council accept the company's request to withdraw this item. According to City staff, Xcel's performance in this area has been very good and dependable. 3. 3.8.3 COMPANY SHALL UPGRADE, AT COMPANY COST, CITY'S NETWORK OF STREET LIGHTS TO LED STREET LIGHTS ON OR BEFORE JANUARY 1, 2018. Xcel: The company does not agree to this request. SHN: I recommend the City continue to insist on a stronger commitment from the company on when the LED upgrade project will be completed. I have proposed the following alternative language to the company, which the company does not agree to: The company agrees to substantially complete an LED upgrade of the City's network of cobra head street lights, at the company's cost, on or before December 31, 2018, provided the company receives approval from the Minnesota Public Utilities Commission (PUC) for the upgrade plan on or before March 31, 2016. If the PUC does not approve the company's plan on or before March 31, 2016, the company agrees to complete the LED street light upgrade project in Edina within 24 months of the • PUC's approval of the plan. The company's counter -proposal was: The company agrees to substantially complete an LED upgrade of the City's company-owned network of cobra head street lights, at the company's cost. The Company agrees to make every reasonable effort to complete the LED conversion of cobra head street lights on or before December 31, 2018, provided the company receives approval from the Minnesota Public Utilities Commission (PUC) for the upgrade plan on or before March 31, 2016. The company agrees to inform the City of any delays that arise that may result in the LED upgrades taking place beyond December 31, 2018. 4. 3.9.1 COMPANY AGREES THAT THE APPEARANCE OF ITS GROUND AND POLE MOUNTED EQUIPMENT WITHIN CITY PROPERTY, RIGHT-OF-WAY AND EASEMENT SHALL NOT BE ALLOWED TO BECOME VISUALLY DISPLEASING. COMPANY AGREES TO REMEDY VISUALLY DEFECTIVE EQUIPMENT WITHIN 90 DAYS, WEATHER PERMITTING, OF A REQUEST TO REMEDY FROM CITY. SHN: The company has resisted this request from the start of our discussion. I have offered them the following alternative language: The company agrees to maintain its ground equipment in well maintained condition. The company agrees to make reasonable efforts to respond to the City's requests to repair and maintain the aesthetic appearance of its ground based equipment. The company agrees to record and log • complaints and repair information regarding its ground based equipment, and to provide the information and confer with the City regarding the company's quality and timeliness of the company's response. REPORT / RECOMMENDATION Page 4 Xcel: The company does not agree to this request and has countered with the following: 0 The company agrees to maintain its ground equipment in well maintained condition. The company agrees to make reasonable efforts to respond to the City's requests to repair and maintain the aesthetic appearance of its ground based equipment. 5. 9.2.1 ENERGY CONSERVATION FEE. COMPANY AGREES TO ASSESS A $0.50/MONTH CHARGE TO EACH CUSTOMER, REGARDLESS OF CUSTOMER CLASS, AND TO REMIT SUCH AMOUNT TO CITY AT THE SAME TIME AND METHOD AS THE FRANCHISE FEE, FOR THE PURPOSE OF FUNDING CITY'S ENERGY CONSERVATION PROGRAM. Xcel: The company agrees to this request to increase the franchise by $0.50/customer/month, but cannot agree, due to PUC regulations, to label the franchise fee increase as an "Energy Conservation Fee" on the customer bill. The company also requests that the same $0.50/customer/month franchise fee be applied to the customers of CenterPoint Energy. SHN: I recommend the City accept the company's agreement on this request, including the request to apply the franchise fee increase to CenterPoint Energy customers. If approved by Council, staff will prepare a separate franchise fee ordinance for both utilities for the consideration by the Council at your August 18 meeting. 6. The City proposed the creation of a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) establishing the Edina • Clean Energy Partnership (ECEP). The company proposed an alternative called the Partners In Energy (PIE) program. The City and the company have executed an MOU to create the Edina Partners in Energy program, which negates the need for the proposed ECEP. I recommend the City Council withdraw the request to create the ECEP Attachment NOTE: As of press time for the Council Packet, the company and I are still engaged in active discussions about the outstanding issues. I expect to update this memorandum with new information prior to our August 5 Council meeting. 0 • ORDINANCE NO. 2015-12 CITY OF EDINA, HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA AN ORDINANCE GRANTING TO NORTHERN STATES POWER COMPANY, A MINNESOTA CORPORATION, D/B/A XCEL ENERGY, ITS SUCCESSORS AND ASSIGNS, PERMISSION TO CONSTRUCT, OPERATE, REPAIR AND MAINTAIN IN THE CITY OF EDINA, MINNESOTA, AN ELECTRIC DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM AND TRANSMISSION LINES, INCLUDING NECESSARY POLES, LINES, FIXTURES AND APPURTENANCES, FOR THE FURNISHING OF ELECTRIC ENERGY TO THE CITY, ITS INHABITANTS, AND OTHERS, AND TO USE THE PUBLIC GROUNDS AND PUBLIC WAYS OF THE CITY FOR SUCH PURPOSES. THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDINA, HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA, ORDAINS: SECTION I. DEFINITIONS. For purposes of this Ordinance, the following capitalized terms listed in alphabetical order shall have the following meanings: 1.1 City. The City of Edina, County of Hennepin, State of Minnesota. • 1.2 City Utility System. Facilities used for providing non -energy related public utility service owned or operated by City or agency thereof, including sewer and water service, but excluding facilities for providing heating, lighting or other forms of energy. 1.3 Commission. The Minnesota Public Utilities Commission, or any successor agency or agencies, including an agency of the federal government, which preempts all, or part of the authority to regulate electric retail rates now vested in the Minnesota Public Utilities Commission. 1.4 Company. Northern States Power Company, a Minnesota corporation, d/b/a Xcel Energy, its successors and assigns. 1.5 Electric Facilities. Electric transmission and distribution towers, poles, lines, guys, anchors, conduits, fixtures, and necessary appurtenances owned or operated by Company for the purpose of providing electric energy for public use. 1.6 Notice. A written notice served by one party on the other party referencing one or more provisions of this Ordinance. Notice to Company shall be mailed to the General Counsel, 414 Nicollet Mall, 5`h Floor, Minneapolis, MN 55401. Notice to the City shall be mailed to the City Administrator, City Hall, 481 West 50`h Street, Edina, MN 55424. Either party may change its respective address for the purpose of this Ordinance by written notice to the other party. • 1.7 Public Ground. Land owned by the City for park, open space or similar purpose, which is held for use in common by the public. Ordinance No. 2015-12 Page 2 1.8 Public Way. Any street, alley, walkway or other public right-of-way within the • City. SECTION 2. ADOPTION OF FRANCHISE. 2.1 Grant of Franchise. City hereby grants Company, for a period of 20 years from the date passed and approved by the City, the right to transmit and furnish electric energy for light, heat, power and other purposes for public and private use within and through the limits of the City as its boundaries now exist or as they may be extended in the future. For these purposes, Company may construct, operate, repair and maintain Electric Facilities in, on, over, under and across the Public Grounds and Public Ways of City, subject to the provisions of this Ordinance. Company may do all reasonable things necessary or customary to accomplish these purposes, subject, however, to such reasonable regulations as may be imposed by the City pursuant to ordinance and to the further provisions of this franchise agreement. 2.2 Effective Date; Written Acceptance. This franchise agreement shall be in force and effect from and after passage of this Ordinance, its acceptance by Company, and its publication as required by law. The City, by Council resolution, may revoke this franchise agreement if Company does not file a written acceptance with the City within 90 days after publication. 2.3 Service and Rates. The service to be provided and the rates to be charged by Company for electric service in City are subject to the jurisdiction of the Commission. The area • within the City in which Company may provide electric service is subject to the provisions of Minnesota Statutes, Section 216B.40. 2.4 Publication Expense. The expense of publication of this Ordinance will be paid by City and reimbursed to City by Company. 2.5 Dispute Resolution. If either party asserts that the other party is in default in the performance of any obligation hereunder, the complaining party shall notify the other party of the default and the desired remedy. The notification shall be written. Representatives of the parties must promptly meet and attempt in good faith to negotiate a resolution of the dispute. If the dispute is not resolved within 30 days of the written notice, the parties may jointly select a mediator to facilitate further discussion. The parties will equally share the fees and expenses of this mediator. If a mediator is not used, or if the parties are unable to resolve the dispute within 30 days after first meeting with the selected mediator, either party may commence an action in District Court to interpret and enforce this franchise or for such other relief as may be permitted by law or equity for breach of contract, or either party may take any other action permitted by law. SECTION 3. LOCATION, OTHER REGULATIONS. 3.1 Location of Facilities. Electric Facilities shall be located, constructed and maintained so as not to interfere with the safety and convenience of ordinary travel along and over Public • Ways and so as not to disrupt normal operation of any City Utility System previously installed therein. Electric Facilities shall be located on Public Grounds as determined by the City. Ordinance No. 2015-12 Page 3 • Company's construction, reconstruction, operation, repair, maintenance and location of Electric Facilities shall be subject to permits if required by separate ordinance and to other reasonable regulations of the City to the extent not inconsistent with the terms of this franchise agreement. Company may abandon underground Electric Facilities in place, provided at the City's request, Company will remove abandoned metal or concrete encased conduit interfering with a City improvement project, but only to the extent such conduit is uncovered by excavation as part of the City improvement project. 3.2 Field Locations. Company shall provide field locations for its underground Electric Facilities within City consistent with the requirements of Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 216D. 3.3 Street Openings. Company shall not open or disturb any Public Ground or Public Way for any purpose without first having obtained a permit from the City, if required by a separate ordinance, for which the City may impose a reasonable fee. Permit conditions imposed on Company shall not be more burdensome than those imposed on other utilities for similar facilities or work. Company may, however, open and disturb any Public Ground or Public Way without permission from the City where an emergency exists requiring the immediate repair of Electric Facilities. In such event Company shall notify the City by telephone to the office designated by the City as soon as practicable. Not later than the second working day thereafter, Company shall obtain any required permits and pay any required fees. 3.4 Restoration. After undertaking any work requiring the opening of any Public • Ground or Public Way, Company shall restore the same, including paving and its foundation, to as good a condition as formerly existed, and shall maintain any paved surface in good condition for one year thereafter. The work shall be completed as promptly as weather permits, and if Company shall not promptly perform and complete the work, remove all dirt, rubbish, equipment and material, and put the Public Ground or Public Way in the said condition, the City shall have, after demand to Company to cure and the passage of a reasonable period of time following the demand, but not to exceed five days, the right to make the restoration at the expense of Company. Company shall pay to the City the cost of such work done for or performed by the City. This remedy shall be in addition to any other remedy available to the City for noncompliance with this Section 3.4, but the City hereby waives any requirement for Company to post a construction performance bond, certificate of insurance, letter of credit or any other form of security or assurance that may be required, under a separate existing or future ordinance of the City, of a person or entity obtaining the City's permission to install, replace or maintain facilities in a Public Way. 3.5 Avoid Damage to Electric Facilities. Nothing in this Ordinance relieves any person from liability arising out of the failure to exercise reasonable care to avoid damaging Electric Facilities while performing any activity. 3.6 Notice of Improvements. The City must give Company reasonable notice of plans for improvements to Public Grounds or Public Ways where the City has reason to believe that Electric Facilities may affect or be affected by the improvement. The notice must contain: (i) the • nature and character of the improvements, (ii) the Public Grounds and Public Ways upon which the improvements are to be made, (iii) the extent of the improvements, (iv) the time when the City will start the work, and (v) if more than one Public Ground or Public Way is involved, the Ordinance No. 2015-12 Page 4 order in which the work is to proceed. The notice must be given to Company a sufficient length • of time in advance of the actual commencement of the work to permit Company to make any necessary additions, alterations or repairs to its Electric Facilities. 3.7 Shared Use of Poles. Company shall make space available on its poles or towers for City fire, water utility, police or other City facilities upon terms and conditions acceptable to Company whenever such use will not interfere with the use of such poles or towers by Company, by another electric utility, by a telephone utility, or by any cable television company or other form of communication company. In addition, the City shall pay for any added cost incurred by Company because of such use by City. SECTION 4. RELOCATIONS. 4.1 Relocation of Electric Facilities in Public Ways. If the City determines to vacate a Public Way for a City improvement project, or at City's cost to grade, regrade, or change the line of any Public Way, or construct or reconstruct any City Utility System in any Public Way, it may order Company to relocate its Electric Facilities located therein if relocation is reasonably necessary to accomplish the City's proposed public improvement. Except as provided in Section 4.3, Company shall relocate its Electric Facilities at its own expense. The City shall give Company reasonable notice of plans to vacate for a City improvement project, or to grade, regrade, or change the line of any Public Way or to construct or reconstruct any City Utility System. If a relocation is ordered within five years of a prior relocation of the same Electric Facilities, which was made at Company expense, the City shall reimburse Company for non -betterment costs on a • time and material basis, provided that if a subsequent relocation is required because of the extension of a City Utility System to a previously unserved area, Company may be required to make the subsequent relocation at its expense. Nothing in this Ordinance requires Company to relocate, remove, replace or reconstruct at its own expense its Electric Facilities where such relocation, removal, replacement or reconstruction is solely for the convenience of the City and is not reasonably necessary for the construction or reconstruction of a Public Way or City Utility System or other City improvement. 4.2 Relocation of Electric Facilities in Public Ground. City may require Company, at Company's expense, to relocate or remove its Electric Facilities from Public Ground upon a finding by City that the Electric Facilities have become or will become a substantial impairment to the existing or proposed public use of the Public Ground. 4.3 Projects with Federal Funding. City shall not order Company to remove or relocate its Electric Facilities when a Public Way is vacated, improved or realigned for a right- of-way project or any other project which is financially subsidized in whole or in part by the Federal Government or any agency thereof, unless the reasonable non -betterment costs of such relocation are first paid to Company. The City is obligated to pay Company only for those portions of its relocation costs for which City has received federal funding specifically allocated for relocation costs in the amount requested by the Company, which allocated funding the City shall specifically request. Relocation, removal or rearrangement of any Company Electric Facilities made necessary because of a federally -aided highway project shall be • governed by the provisions of Minnesota Statutes, Section 161.46, as supplemented or amended. It is understood that the rights herein granted to Company are valuable rights. Ordinance No. 2015-12 Page 5 • 4.4 No Waiver. The provisions of this franchise apply only to facilities constructed in reliance on a franchise from the City and shall not be construed to waive or modify any rights obtained by Company for installations within a Company right-of-way acquired by easement or prescriptive right before the applicable Public Ground or Public Way was established, or Company's rights under state or county permit. SECTION S. TREE TRIMMING. Company may trim all trees and shrubs in the Public Grounds and Public Ways of City to the extent Company finds necessary to avoid interference with the proper construction, operation, repair and maintenance of any Electric Facilities installed hereunder, provided that Company shall save the City harmless from any liability arising therefrom, and subject to permit or other reasonable regulation by the City. SECTION 6. INDEMNIFICATION. 6.1 Indemnity of City. Company shall indemnify, keep and hold the City free and harmless from any and all liability on account of injury to persons or damage to property occasioned by the construction, maintenance, repair, inspection, the issuance of permits, or the operation of the Electric Facilities located in the Public Grounds and Public Ways. The City shall not be indemnified for losses or claims occasioned through its own negligence except for losses or • claims arising out of or alleging the City's negligence as to the issuance of permits for, or inspection of, Company's plans or work. The City shall not be indemnified if the injury or damage results from the performance in a proper manner, of acts reasonably deemed hazardous by Company, and such performance is nevertheless ordered or directed by City after notice of Company's determination. 6.2 Defense of City. In the event a suit is brought against the City under circumstances where this agreement to indemnify applies, Company at its sole cost and expense shall defend the City in such suit if written notice thereof is promptly given to Company within a period wherein Company is not prejudiced by lack of such notice. If Company is required to indemnify and defend, it will thereafter have control of such litigation, but Company may not settle such litigation without the consent of the City, which consent shall not be unreasonably withheld. This section is not, as to third parties, a waiver of any defense or immunity otherwise available to the City and Company, in defending any action on behalf of the City, shall be entitled to assert in any action every defense or immunity that the City could assert in its own behalf. SECTION 7. VACATION OF PUBLIC WAYS. The City shall give Company at least two weeks prior written notice of a proposed vacation of a Public Way. Except where required for a City improvement project, the vacation of any Public Way, after the installation of Electric Facilities, shall not operate to deprive Company of its rights to operate and maintain such Electric Facilities, until the reasonable cost of relocating the . same and the loss and expense resulting from such relocation are first paid to Company. In no case, however, shall City be liable to Company for failure to specifically preserve a right-of-way under Minnesota Statutes, Section 160.29. Ordinance No. 2015-12 Page 6 SECTION 8. CHANGE IN FORM OF GOVERNMENT. • Any change in the form of government of the City shall not affect the validity of this Ordinance. Any governmental unit succeeding the City shall, without the consent of Company, succeed to all of the rights and obligations of the City provided in this Ordinance. SECTION 9. FRANCHISE FEE. 9.1 Fee Schedule. During the term of the franchise hereby granted, and in lieu of any permit or other fees being imposed on Company, the City may impose on Company a franchise fee set forth in a separate ordinance from each customer in the designated Company Customer Class. 9.2 Separate Ordinance. The franchise fee shall be imposed by a separate ordinance duly adopted by the City Council, which ordinance shall not be adopted until at least 90 days after written notice enclosing such proposed ordinance has been served upon Company by certified mail. The fee shall not become effective until the beginning of a Company billing month at least 90 days after written notice enclosing such adopted ordinance has been served upon Company by certified mail. Section 2.5 shall constitute the sole remedy for solving disputes between Company and the City in regard to the interpretation of, or enforcement of, the separate ordinance. No action by the City to implement a separate ordinance will commence until this Ordinance is effective. A separate ordinance which imposes a lesser • franchise fee on the residential class of customers than the maximum amount set forth in Section 9.1 above shall not be effective against Company unless the fee imposed on each other customer classification is reduced proportionately in the same or greater amount per class as the reduction represented by the lesser fee on the residential class. 9.3 Terms Defined. For the purpose of this Section 9, the following definitions apply: 9.3.1 "Customer Class" shall refer to the classes listed on the Fee Schedule and as defined or determined in Company's electric tariffs on file with the Commission. 9.3.2 "Fee Schedule" refers to the schedule in Section 9.1 setting forth the various customer classes from which a franchise fee would be collected if a separate ordinance were implemented immediately after the effective date of this franchise agreement. The Fee Schedule in the separate ordinance may include new Customer Class added by Company to its electric tariffs after the effective date of this franchise agreement. 9.4 Collection of the Fee. The franchise fee shall be payable quarterly and shall be based on the amount collected by Company during complete billing months during the period for which payment is to be made by imposing a surcharge equal to the designated franchise fee for the applicable customer classification in all customer billings for electric service in each class. The • payment shall be due the last business day of the month following the period for which the Ordinance No. 2015-12 Page 7 • payment is made. The franchise fee may be changed by ordinance from time to time; however, each change shall meet the same notice requirements and not occur more often than annually and no change shall require a collection from any customer for electric service in excess of the amounts specifically permitted by this Section 9. The time and manner of collecting the franchise fee is subject to the approval of the Commission. No franchise fee shall be payable by Company if Company is legally unable to first collect an amount equal to the franchise fee from its customers in each applicable class of customers by imposing a surcharge in Company's applicable rates for electric service. Company may pay the City the fee based upon the surcharge billed subject to subsequent reductions to account for uncollectibles, refunds and correction of erroneous billings. Company agrees to make its records available for inspection by the City at reasonable times provided that the City and its designated representative agree in writing not to disclose any information which would indicate the amount paid by any identifiable customer or customers or any other information regarding identified customers. 9.5 Equivalent Fee Requirement. The separate ordinance imposing the fee shall not be effective against Company unless it lawfully imposes and the City monthly or more often collects a fee or tax of the same or greater equivalent amount on the receipts from sales of energy within the City by any other energy supplier, provided that, as to such a supplier, the City has the authority to require a franchise fee or to impose a tax. The "same or greater equivalent amount" shall be measured, if practicable, by comparing amounts collected as a franchise fee from each similar customer, or by comparing, as to similar customers the percentage of the annual bill represented by the amount collected for franchise fee purposes. The franchise fee or tax shall be • applicable to energy sales for any energy use related to heating, cooling or lighting, or to run machinery and appliances, but shall not apply to energy sales for the purpose of providing fuel for vehicles. If the Company specifically consents in writing to a franchise or separate ordinance collecting or failing to collect a fee from another energy supplier in contravention of this Section 9.5, the foregoing conditions will be waived to the extent of such written consent. SECTION 10. PROVISIONS OF ORDINANCE. 10.1 Severability. Every section, provision, or part of this Ordinance is declared separate from every other section, provision, or part and if any section, provision, or part shall be held invalid, it shall not affect any other section, provision, or part. Where a provision of any other City ordinance conflicts with the provisions of this Ordinance, the provisions of this Ordinance shall prevail. 10.2 Limitation on Applicability. This Ordinance constitutes a franchise agreement between the City and Company as the only parties, and no provision of this franchise shall in any way inure to the benefit of any third person (including the public at large) so as to constitute any such person as a third party beneficiary of the agreement or of any one or more of the terms hereof, or otherwise give rise to any cause of action in any person not a party hereto. SECTION 11. AMENDMENT PROCEDURE. • Either party to this franchise agreement may at any time propose that the agreement be amended to address a subject of concern and the other party will consider whether it agrees that Ordinance No. 2015-12 Page 8 the amendment is mutually appropriate. If an amendment is agreed upon, this Ordinance may be • amended at any time by the City passing a subsequent ordinance declaring the provisions of the amendment, which amendatory ordinance shall become effective upon the filing of Company's written consent thereto with the City Clerk within 90 days after the date of final passage by the City of the amendatory ordinance. SECTION 12. PREVIOUS FRANCHISES SUPERSEDED. This franchise supersedes any previous electric franchise granted to Company or its predecessor. First Reading: Second Reading: Published: Attest Debra A. Mangen, City Clerk Please publish in the Edina Sun Current on Send two affidavits of publication Bill to Edina City Clerk James B. Hovland, Mayor C] 0 To: City Council o e:1V tr� t>4 Cn ��bRPORATF' IHHli Agenda Item M VIII. B. From: MJ Lamon, Project Coordinator Action Discussion ❑ Date: August 5, 2015 Information ❑ Subject: Ordinance No. 2015-11 an ordinance amending chapter 2 of the Edina city code concerning boards and commissions. Action Requested: Approve the ordinance and waive second reading. Information / Background: The attached track changes document shows recommended changes to City Code. The document indicates some smaller edits and then some more notable changes. Notable changes are: I. Clarifying that all uninterrupted service counts toward the total term limit. (E.g. a term limit is reached if a member serves on HRRC for three years and then immediately serves three years on the EEC.) 2. Once a board or commission member reaches his/her term limits, a one-year break is required prior to a new appointment to a board or commission. 3. Clarifying that board and commission bylaws can be changed by City Council. 4. In the Transportation Commission section, removing the Bike Edina language which is more appropriately placed in bylaws. Attachment: Ordinance No. 2015-1 1. City of Edina • 4801 W. 50th St. • Edina, MN 55424 ORDINANCE NO. 2015-11 • AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 2 OF THE EDINA CITY CODE CONCERNING BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS THE CITY OF EDINA ORDAINS: Section 1. Section 2-80 of the Edina City Code is amended to read as follows: Sec. 2-80. - Membership. (a) Regular members. Regular members of boards and commissions established by the council shall be adult residents of the city unless otherwise expressly stated by ordinance. Members who discontinue legal residency in the city shall automatically be deemed to have resigned from office as of the date of such discontinuance. (b) Student members. Student members shall be residents of the city and entering sophomore, junior or senior year. . Student members shall be nonvoting. Section 2. Section 2-81 of the Edina City Code is amended to read as follows: Sec. 2-81. - Appointment and terms of membership. (a) Regular members. Board and commission members shall be appointed by majority vote of the council. and shall 6epve te.r„6 of m rnbeFship Rot t„ evreed three yeaFs r teFm EaGh mMembers of Arts & Culture, Energy & Environment, Construction Board of Appeals, Heritage Preservation Board, Human Rights & Relations, Park Board and Transportation Commission ares eligible to • serve two three-year terms;. Members of the planning commission; whe-are are eligible to serve three three-year terms, Members of the Board of Appeal & Equalization are eligible to serve six one-year terms. A member in good standing shall serve until a successor has been appointed. (b) Student members. Student members shall be appointed by majority vote of the council and are eligible to serve two one-year terms. ch^" a terms of r„ rnbeF6hip Ret t„ a eed (c) Resignation and removal. Members shall serve without compensation and may resign voluntarily by letter or e-mail to the City Manager or designee Gity clerk or be removed by majority vote of the council or pursuant to section 2-80 or 2-86. (d) Vacancies. Vacancies in membership maysha4 be filled by majority vote of the council for the balance of the unexpired term- (e) Term of appointment to fill vacancy. A person appointed to fill a vacancy shall be eligible to serve term limits as defined in paragraph (a) in addition to the balance of the unexpired term. (f) No concurrent membership. No person may serve concurrently on more than one board or commission. (g) Staggered terms. Terms of membership shall be staggered so that no more than one-half of the terms on a board or commission expire in any particular year. (h) Change in Board or Commission Appointment. All uninterrupted board or commission service will count towards the term limit of the current position, (i) Total Term Limits. Regular members who complete the defined term limits in paragraph (a) are ineligible to serve on any board or commission for one year. 0 Ordinance No. 2015-1 1 Page 2 • Section 3. Section 2-83 of the Edina City Code is amended to read as follows: Sec. 2-83. - Organization and bylaws. (a) Bylaws. Each board or commission shall adopt and -will be governed by such bylaws as approved by the City Council. (b) Chairperson and Vice -chairperson. Each board or commission annually shall elect from its members a chairperson and vice -chairperson to serve a term of one year. No person shall serve more than two consecutive one-year terms as chairperson of a particular board or commission. A chairperson elected to fill a vacancy shall be eligible to serve two full terms in addition to the remainder of the vacated term. There are no term limits for the position of Vice -chairperson. Section 4. Section 2-314 of the Edina City Code is amended to read as follows: Sec. 2-314. - Membership. The commission shall consist of nine regular and two student members, appointed from the different geographic areas of the city. nno ^,eMber of the c..,,,mission shall also be a moi bee of the _R'ke _Fdina Task Force OF aRy eXi6tiRg similar orgaRizatignc)F shall etherwise have aR expert;&e OF 'ntoroof in h'wrl'n as a ede of trnn rtati ' OR Section 5. This ordinance is effective immediately upon its passage and publication. First Reading: Second Reading: Published: Attest Debra A. Mangen, City Clerk James B. Hovland, Mayor PLEASE PUBLISH IN THE EDINA SUN CURRENT, THURSDAY, SEND TWO AFFIDAVITS OF PUBLICATION BILL TO EDINA CITY CLERK 0 To: MAYOR & COUNCIL From: Debra Mangen City Clerk Date: August 5, 2015 w91� ,l� ow e (o �• CORPORX' 1888 Agenda Item #: VIII. C. Subject: Resolution No. 2015-78 Accepting Various Grants & Donations Action Requested: Adopt Resolution. Information / Background: Action ❑x Discussion ❑ Information ❑ In order to comply with State Statutes, all donations to the City must be adopted by a resolution approved by 49 four favorable votes of the Council accepting the donation. I have prepared the attached resolution detailing the various donors, their gifts and the departments receiving donations for your consideration. Attachments: Resolution No. 2015-78 • City of Edina • 4801 W. 50th St. • Edina, MN 55424 RESOLUTION NO. 2015-78 ACCEPTING DONATIONS ON BEHALF OF THE CITY OF EDINA WHEREAS, Minnesota Statute 465.03 allows cities to accept grants and donations of real or personal property for the benefit of its citizens; WHEREAS, said donations must be accepted via a resolution of the Council adopted by a two thirds majority of its members. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Edina City Council accepts with sincere appreciation the following listed grants and donations on behalf of its citizens. Braemar Memorial Fund: Del & Judy Johnson $350.00 Edina Art Center Peg Lindberg Leather Remnants Winnie Martin Supplies, Markers, Crayons, Colored Pencils, Glue Kevin Komadina Pottery Glazing Chemical Jennifer Halligan Pottery Wheel & Kiln Linda Haugen Electric Kiln Park & Recreation: Family of Fran Shea Marbled Granite Slab in memory of Fran Shea Dated: August 5, 2015 Attest: Debra A. Mangen, City Clerk STATE OF MINNESOTA) COUNTY OF HENNEPIN) SS CITY OF EDINA ) CERTIFICATE OF CITY CLERK James B. Hovland, Mayor 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 5, 2015, and as recorded in the Minutes of said Regular Meeting. WITNESS my hand and seal of said City this day of City Clerk 171 To: MAYOR AND COUNCIL �9ZNA,.11?1 •., o• �CORPORA�i IBAB Agenda Item #: VIII.D. From: Cary Teague, Community Development Director Action N Discussion N Date: August 5, 2015 Information ❑ Subject: Greater Southdale Area Planning - Stage 2 Work Plan Proposal Action Requested: Approve the Phase 2 Work Plan. Information / Background This item is next phase in the Planning Commission's Work Plan Goal of doing a Small Area Plan/Density Study in the Southdale area in conjunction with the engineering department's study of transportation and utility capacity in the Southdale area. (See attached Work Plan.) ATTACHMENTS: • Stage 2 Work Plan • Request for Letter of Interest • Planning Commission Work Plan City of Edina • 4801 W. 50th St. • Edina, MN 55424 • • • Greater Southdale Area Planning Framework wa Stage Two Work Plan DRAFT 14 July 2015 Overview At the outset of the planning process, a work plan was demonstrated to the City Council that included four broad stages of planning for the West Side of France Avenue and Greater Southdale area. The first stage was aimed at the creation of a set of working principles that might guide work, offer interim guidance in reviewing proposals for change, and begin setting a tone for expectations of evolution in the study area. Stage Two builds upon that work by laying out a definitive vision for the study area, using graphics, pictorial illustrations, and narrative to create a foundation that, with any necessary modifications to the working principles, articulates the ways the study area might be organized, connected, and experienced. Prior to initiating State Two, Work Group will assess the need for expanding its composition to include other stakeholders or interests from the study area. The Work Group does not see a need for expansion of its membership but if asked by the City Council will identify the types of additions it feels are beneficial to enhancing its work during Stage Two. Recommendations regarding expansion and areas of representation would then be forwarded to the City Council for appointments pending the Work Group's consideration of expansion and composition needs. Importantly, the City Council will make additional appointments. This document establishes the key elements of a Stage Two work plan, including: • Framing a process for Reach -out activities aimed at broadening engagement in the planning process • Identifying the primary goals of Stage Two work; • Highlighting the key deliverables of Stage Two; • Defining needs for anticipated consultant assistance; and • Laying out an initial schedule for the work. This work plan is presented by the Work Group as an outline of its Stage Two activities. It builds upon the successful interactions of the 12 members of the initially appointed and nominated Work Group and their interests in continuing their commitment toward a compelling vision for the study area. It recognizes engagement with the community was less than optimal, but the Work Group also notes that each of its meetings were open to the public and there were non -Work Group members consistently present at its meetings and every non -Work Group member was offered the opportunity to participate during a designated part of each meeting. • • • Greater Southdale Area Planning Framework Stage Two Work Plan Page 2 Reach -out sessions The Work Group, in defining an approach to its Stage Two effort that continues to rely upon the local knowledge and insights of its members, will endeavor to engage other interests and stakeholders throughout the study area. At the end of Stage One, the Work Group formulated a concept of Reach -out activities as a means of creating a more robust engagement process. The Reach -out methods include: • Identifying those interests, stakeholders, neighborhoods, residents, and other groups that need to be engaged in this planning effort, including affirming engagement with those already engaged.; • Developing a consistent presentation and set of interactive exercises that might be used in Reach -out sessions; • Defining Reach -out teams as subcomponents of the Work Group to conduct various Reach -out sessions; • Encouraging further participation in the planning process as a part of each Reach -out session; and • Recording and reporting the results of each Reach -out session so that the interests of these groups are recognized in the planning process. The Work Group has initiated a process of defining a Reach -out process for Stage Two. Interests and stakeholder groups identified for Reach -out meetings to date include: • Residents and neighborhood areas including areas north of 66th Street, new residential development (One Southdale, Westin), Centennial Lakes/Ed in borough, Cedars, Cornelia neighborhood (north of 70th Street and south of 70th Street); • Business and property owners including medical, retail, and office users in relatively defined geographic areas; • Community and service groups including Rotary, Public Art Edina, Chamber of Commerce; and • Other groups identified by the City Council or during Reach -out sessions The Work Group intends to meet with identified interest and stakeholder groups using two to four of its own members as a Reach -out team for each session. Every member of the Work Group has indicated an interest in participating in these sessions. Reach -out sessions will be programmed for 60 to 90 minutes and will generally use the following agenda: Introductions Purpose and need for the planning study Stage One work review focused on the working principles and supporting questions Stage Two goals, schedule, and deliverables Interaction Review working principles and supporting questions Sharing thoughts toward a vision Other interactions as needed or to support known interest of interest/stakeholder group 5 minutes 5 minutes 5 minutes 5 minutes 20 to 50 minutes • • • Greater Southdale Area Planning Framework Stage Two Work Plan Page 3 Summary of input and key messages to carry forward 10 minutes Upcoming meetings and an invitation to be present at Work Group meetings 5 minutes Identification of other stakeholder or interest groups 3 minutes Next steps 2 minutes The Reach -out sessions will present information and accomplishments of Stage One, but will focus on interaction between the groups and the Reach -out team. It is intended that no more than half of the time allotted for each session will be directed to presentation of materials. The working principles and supporting questions will be provided to participants before each Reach -out session to the degree practicable. Reach -out activities will begin with approval of this work plan by the City Council. The schedule posed as a part of this work plan suggests concurrent early activities focused on Reach -out activities and the engagement of a consultant to assist with the deliverables of Stage Two work. Primary goals The Work Group, in considering the efforts of Stage One and the need to make progress toward a definitive vision for the study area as the key deliverable of its charge from the City Council, believes the following goals apply to its Stage Two effort: 1) Continue the active and productive dialog occurring as a part of meetings of the Work Group; 2) Reach out to other stakeholders to broaden engagement and encourage more robust input from the entire study area; 3) Maintain the sequence of a Kick-off Meeting, Work Group Meetings, a Check-in Meeting, and Decision Meetings during the work of Stage Two; 4) Use the working principles defined in Stage One to help craft a graphic vision for the study area; 5) Assess the utility of the working principles and supporting questions and recommend modifications if necessary; 6) Engage outside expertise to enhance the ability of the Work Group to understand conditions extant in the study area, project possible evolutions, and continue building a framework encouraging positive and supported change in the study area; 7) Advance the working principles in combination with other deliverable to offer more refined tools to assess, create, and guide proposals for change in the study area; 8) Accomplish the work in a period of approximately three months to allow possible future stages of the work to advance ahead of or in concert with the upcoming update of the Comprehensive Plan; and 9) Outline methods of translating an accepted graphic vision into the parameters for development, including directions for height and density. Anticipated deliverables Responding to directions of the City Council and in alignment with its intentions from the outset of the planning process, the Work Group intends to prepare and deliver the following items as the core elements of its Stage Two work: g • • • Greater Southdale Area Planning Framework Stage Two Work Plan Page 4 1) Updated working principles and supporting questions that build upon the work of Stage One; 2) Graphic vision for the study area demonstrated in diagrams, two- and three-dimensional illustrations, or other pictorial representations conveying the essential character of and parameters for development, and clearly highlighting the experience expected for people populating a public or publicly accessible realm within the study area; 3) Identification of development zones within the study area, including definition of development parameters based on those zones; and 4) Work plan for Stage Three including key deliverables and areas requiring further resolution. Consultant assistance The Work Group believes its efforts in Stage Two will be enhanced through the engagement of a consultant with expertise and relevant experience in urban design and development. The Work Group proposes to seek Letters of Interest as a way of gauging interest, understanding, and expertise. The Work Group will work with staff to prepare and solicit a Request for Letters of Interest, select qualified candidate individuals, firms, or teams for an interview to be conducted publicly by the Work Group (in whole or in part), and offer a recommendation of a preferred candidate to the City Council. The consultant would be integrally involved in the efforts of Stage Two, but the Work Group would retain responsibility for engaging the public and stakeholders. Because of it broad representation and the depth of experience of key members of the Work Group in public processes, the Work Group believes it can deliver a successful community engagement process and keep the focus of a consultant on delivering urban design expertise in support of the Work Group's efforts. The Work Group estimates the required consulting services can be achieved during a ten -week engagement for fees not exceeding $30,000. The Work Group understands funds for this effort can be made available from funding already established work planning work in the Southdale area and identified in the Planning Commission's 2015 work plan. Schedule The Work Group recognizes the intensity of activity necessary to move this process toward definition and completion. It also understands the importance of a process that perpetuates and broadens its own interactions while building a more complete understanding of the conditions and potential for positive change in the study area. The schedule below is a general outline and an initial framing of the timing and sequence of Stage Two activities. • • • Greater Southdale Area Planning Framework Stage Two Work Plan Page 5 NOTE! This schedule has not been correlated to city meeting schedules, holidays, or other potential meeting conflicts. This schedule cannot be confirmed until a consultant is under contract. Task Key activity Schedule 1 July August September I October November i 6 i13s20 i27 i3 10 i17 124 131 i7 14 21 28 '1 5 i12 X19 126 1 2 1 9 I16 1 23 1 30 1 _nn npfinp and nrnrurp cnnsultin¢ services .............. 1.01 Work Group Meeting 0(a):� Consider actions for Stage Two work ................_._..._.__......................._._..._._...-.._............__...---�-�--.__ ___4—__ - ................ _......_..---- 1.02 Prepare Request for Letter of Interest and document _----- -Stage Two work plan ................._.. t-- - ( I --- - - { ..__..._.......�. ..... .. _...- _ - �--- j _ _._._..._. �__ _................ ...... _...... ......... 1.03 Gain approval for i 1 solicitation through Letter oflnteresti ...................... .... .................................. _.........._.,_............_..._..._..._...__.....---- �...... .... ......_.__......_ �- . __ _ ......_...-_............_ 1.04 Receive responses to Letter oflnterest 1.05 Conduct interviews with ( i select responders __.._._._.__........_..................... ..... _..................... .......... ._.................. _.... _ _ __.._..�.. _ .....{.....-.....-....... _..._._._ ..._._ _ 1.06 Select preferred consultant f and make recommendation I i to City Council 1.07 Establish contract for I i services with City Council- , , approved consultant �-- .. __. 1.08 Work Group Meeting 0(c): Review work plan and __ schedule with consultant i _± _ `_ __ 1.09-_--_. ___—__......._..._....__._...._......___._......�a_^_ ......_......_......._._A.T..^_ ._--_.____i __....._--...-......1..........-.._......A.........y..._^..._ _ ._.... _...^_ �..I_.__...... -_____,__-_-____.-_ 1_—___J.._... 2.00 Conduct Stage Two planning activities 2.01 Work Group Meeting 0(b): y Develop Reach -out strategy and meetings _..... ......... _................................_........ _............................ _._.._......... _-- ... ....... 2.02 Conduct Reach -out meetings ......................_...._..._ _ - ._........_.......... -- .........................._._ 2.03 Work Group Meeting 1: Distill and assimilate Reach - out input � Z u a ! • • Greater Southdale Area Planning Framework Review results of Check-in Stage Two Work Plan Meeting and frame work Page 6 3.03 Participate in City Council Task Key activity Schedule and Planning Commission July August September October November 613 20 27 3 10 .............._........._................_....__ 17 24 31 7 14 21 28 5 12 19 26 2 9 16 23 30 _.............. ................... ... ..............,.:........... __........... ._._._._... ........... _................... _............._............._..... 2.04 Conduct Stage Two Kick-off `....,..............,...............-.............................................................................................................................................._......_...._.._..._.._.._ directions to Planning Meetingg ..........? ...........-............ ......... _............ ............... _..... .......... ...... _ __..-_..-...._. 2.05 Work Group Meeting 2: I directions to City Council Tour study area and extant conditions session with ...consultant_.._..- ................._.._.. 2.06 Work Group Meeting 3: Possibilities sketch session j with consultant 2.07 Work Group Meeting 4: I Sketch alternatives and defining preferences ._........_.___...__..__........ 2.08 Work Group Meeting 5: _........_._ .__ �_.....r..�� ...............................................___...._____. ......... ___.._.................... ......... ....._..........__....... Implications of preferred sketch alternative ........... _ _ _.._ _...... _... ......... -.. _._._ ..__._..._.._............ _............ ...... .... ........ ._._..... ............... _....._........_..._._ ........ ._ ... ._...... _ ......... _.................... ........ .................. .......... ............. _... _.._......... _......................................_,.............. 2.09 Work Group Meeting 6: Defining graphic vision and i i narrative ,supporting 2.10 Work Group Meeting 7: i i { i Catch up i l i r r 2.11 ! t i � i ............................................................. ! ......... _.......... ......................'...... I _ .............-.._........ I i 3.00 Seek concurrence on Stage Two directions 3.01 Conduct Check-in Meeting 3.02 Work Group Meeting 8: Review results of Check-in Meeting and frame work session discussion 3.03 Participate in City Council and Planning Commission session _ 3.04 _work _ Review consultant draft^ deliverable 3.05 Present Stage Two directions to Planning Commission ___,.......__.....__........._...........___ 3.06 Present Stage Two directions to City Council 3.07 �CiE"d 0 0 0 Greater Southdale Area Planning Framework Stage Two Work Plan Page 7 Task Key activity Schedule July i August Sepltembefr October November 6 L_13 )..._20 i 27 ..._..._3.._.._1-10� 17-1_24..._......31_..........�..........1....1.......t....21..._...1.__28.....!._S.._. ..1?........19.........26_..2._.._..R._9_.......�...._16.._......_23........1..._30........ 4.00 Document Stage Two work 4.01 Work Group Meeting 9: Review consultant draft I deliverable and input from Planning Commission and City Council 4.02 Work Group Meeting 10: i Review consultant final deliverable ......... ___ ..._......- _ _ ___ _ _ _. _._..__................................_,...,.............._, _ — ...... _ ..._ _.... 4.03 Work Group Meeting 11: .... i Consider Stage Three work - plan elements _..............._.__.,_.._...__ __..._ _ ______ ... ..__ ............... ..... _._....._..._..._........................_..._., _........._ __ ___. ___ 4.04 ..... ............. _..__.._._._.,..._._.. ... _......... _..._._.1 _...._..........._..........._............_....... .... _ ___..._.._.............._......_.._ __ �. _._.._.........._.i...................... Macintosh HD: Users:michaelschroeder:Desktop:West Side of France Avenue and Southdale Area planning framework:Stage 2:0 Organizing:Stage Two work plan, 20150629.docx '04 Request for Letter of Interest Greater Southdale Area Planning Framework Release date: July xx, 2015 Letter of Interest due: August xx, 2015, 2:00 pm SECTION 1: PROJECT BACKGROUND As charged by the Edina City Council, a Work Group was formed to address issues related to future land use and urban design for parcels along the west side of France Avenue and the greater Southdale Area (extending to TH 62 on the north and the city limits on the east and south—with the entire area referred to as the "district" in the efforts of the Work Group). The process approved by the City Council includes work in four stages, with each stage being completed and the results accepted by the Planning Commission and City Council prior to moving to subsequent stages. On June 17, 2015, the Work Group • concluded its Stage One work by presenting working principles to the City Council as its core deliverable for Stage One. The City Council, at the same meeting, adopted those working principles as policy for guiding the further efforts of the Work Group, evaluating proposals for change in the study area, and providing guidance to those proposing change. The Work Group is composed of residents and commercial interests, some appointed by the City Council and some self-selected during a Kick-off Meeting, and has met nine times since the Kick-off Meeting. The Work Group is assisted by staff but is, at this point, a volunteer effort. Of note, there have been fewer than six absences during the nine meetings of the 12 -member Work Group. Each Work Group meeting has been open to the public with time allowed during each agenda for public comment. The process to date has included a Kick-off Meeting when more than 40 residents and commercial interests participated in a series of workshop exercises and then convened in separate groups to self- select half of the required composition of the Work Group. Information gathered during the Kick-off Meeting was used to inform the efforts of the Work Group as it formulated initial ideas and eventually defined a set of working principles. A key part of Stage One (and every stage of work proposed for this effort) was a Check-in Meeting when members of the public would have the opportunity to review the efforts of the Work Group while in progress. While attendance was limited, the information gained during this meeting remains prominent in the dialog of the Work Group. The deliverable of Stage One is a series of working principles intended as a guide for the public and private realms of the study area. The Work Group acknowledges that work remains in the process of Request for Letter of Interest Greater Southdale Area Planning Framework • Page 2 of 2 offering definitive guidance, but is focused on more aspirational goals for the evolution of the greater Southdale area. As such, the principles may evolve as the Work Group continues through subsequent stages of its work, gaining more insights and a richer understanding of the conditions of the district. As presented to the Planning Comtnission, they stand as more than a draft and staff has acknowledged their utility even in their current form to assist in guiding proposals for change in the district. To enhance understanding of the working principles and offer a more robust tool for staff and proponents for change in the district, the Work Group augmented the working principles with a series of supporting questions—provocations encouraging more comprehensive and thoughtful proposals. The Work Group believes these tools are a key complement to other tools used in guiding development in the district, with these working principles being a higher order filter for acceptability than other more typical planning tools. As it looks forward to a second stage of the work, the Work Group intends to use the working principles to craft a graphic vision for the district and more fully demonstrate the ways in which the working principles can be applied to create more vibrant, forward-looking, and human -focused development patterns across the district. Members of the Work Group have agreed to continue their service, and have concluded that more aggressive outreach is needed to ensure interests across the district are recognized. In essence, the Work Group intends to maintain the current dialog with stakeholders through kick-off and check-in meetings and through its regular Work Group meetings, but will orchestrate a process of interactions where it reaches directly to stakeholder groups throughout the district. In particular, the Work Group recognizes the need to make contact with residential interests • that to date may not have been engaged, as well as business and commercial interests throughout the district. In addition, the Work Group intends to initiate a series of roundtable discussions as a part of its work in Stage Two as a way of more fully understanding the complexity of the district and its physical, functional, and economic evolution. The working principles are attached to this request for Letter of Interest along with a copy of the presentation made to the City Council on June 17, 2015. The Work Group is seeking qualified individuals, firms, or teams to assist it in the process of completing Stage Two of its work. It is possible that the selected individual, firm, or team will be engaged to assist the Work Group in subsequent stages of its work. The City of Edina is supporting the efforts of the Work Group through its Planning Department. Once a consultant is selected, a contract will be established through the City of Edina. SECTION 2: PROJECT DEFINITION This work is intended to support a Work Group charged by the City Council to define a set of principles to guide further planning work, to offer a tool in evaluating proposals for change in the study area, and to provide guidance to those proposing change. To date, the Work Group has achieved the first stage of its work as it delivered to the City Council a set of working principles. Now, the Work Group seeks to articulate graphically a visionary interpretation of the working principles as the core of its charge for Stage Two of its efforts. Further work in framing definitive direction, documenting the process, and gaining approvals will occur in subsequent stages of the Work Group's process. Ultimately, with the • completion of Stage Three and Stage Four, the whole of the efforts will become a core element of the city's comprehensive plan update, which is scheduled to begin in 2016. Request for Letter of Interest Greater Southdale Area Planning Framework Page 3 of 3 • During Stage Two, the Work Group is seeking technical assistance to develop a graphic vision for the study area. The core elements of this work will include: • Assisting the Work Group in the preparation of materials intended to engage the community during discussions about the future of the study area; • Assessing and enhancing the working principles to serve as guides for further work, evaluation tools, and development guidance; • Creating diagrams, illustrations, and other graphics that together demonstrate a graphic vision for the future of the study area; and • Participating in meetings of the Work Group as required, in public meetings including presentations to the Planning Commission and City Council, and other meetings as recommended by the responder. • Developing a vision summary at the conclusion of Stage Two to encapsulate the major vision elements discussed and agreed to during this portion of the work. • Outlining, near the conclusion of Stage Two, the steps needed to translate an accepted graphic vision for the study area to into parameters for development, including directions for height and density. Work related to this project is intended to begin during August and be complete by September xx, 2015. SECTION 3: CONSULTANT SCOPE OF WORK • The Work Group expects responders to define a scope of work aligned with the core elements indicated in Section 2. Definition of a fully supportive scope of work is the responsibility of the responder, but the Work Group expects the following general areas of support: • Provide planning and urban design leadership to assist the Work Group in further framing a vision for preserving, energizing, and adding development in the study area; • Secure and/or prepare materials to elevate the understanding of existing conditions as well as the true viable potential of the study area; • Develop graphics to include, but not be limited to, a three-dimensional massing diagram of culture throughout the study area to support a vision that demonstrates economic viability, functional workability (including relationships and patterns), aesthetic and place -making appeal, and sustainable environmental quality in ways that emanate from and support the working principles and reinforce an aspirational plan for the study area; and • Outline key parameters of directing development, including a comparison of quantitative and qualitative methods of guiding development. The Work Group's anticipated schedule for Stage Two work, as well as its initial overall approach to the work, is attached to this request for Letter of Interest. In addition, the city intends to engage separate consulting services related to defining capacity of infrastructure in the study area. In particular, that consultant will prepare an infrastructure study of the greater Southdale area simultaneously to this planning effort. The study will include an examination the greater Southdale area's roadway, sewer and • water capacity. The study will be based on existing conditions; development that is allowed by Zoning Request for Letter of Interest Greater Southdale Area Planning Framework • Page 4 of 4 Ordinance; and potential for future growth. The consultant team would not be asked to perform any work in these areas but may be asked to work with and use information gathered from the study. SECTION 4: SCHEDULE The Work Group has defined the following general schedule for its work during Stage Two. Responders shall be aware of the key dates indicated, but may propose an alternative schedule for the work that achieves the core elements by the completion date. All meetings of the Work Group are not included in this list and it is not expected that the selected consultant will be required to be present at all meetings of the Work Group. Release of Request for Letter of Interest Letter of Interest Due, 2:00 pm Short-listed teams notified Interviews Consultant selected City Council approval of Consultant Contract First meeting with Work Group Stage Two Kick-off Meeting Stage Two Check-in Meeting City Council/Planning Commission work session Presentation to Planning Commission Presentation to City Council Stage Two Wrap-up Meeting with Work Group July xx, 2015 August xx, 2015 August xx, 2015 August xx, 2015 August xx, 2105 August xx, 2015 August xx, 2015 August xx, 2015 October xx, 2015 October xx, 2015 November xx, 2015 November xx, 2015 November xx, 2015 Dates in italics are approximate and will be refined in concert with the selected consultant. SECTION 5: SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS Questions and clarifications Questions regarding this request shall be directed to: Cary Teague, Community Development Director cteague@EdinaMN.gov Questions shall only be submitted via email. Responses to questions will be provided to all known proposers and posted on the city's website at: <<<insert website link>>> Responses to questions will not be provided within 3 days of the submission due date. Submittal • Responders shall submit a Letter of Interest via email only to: Request for Letter of Interest Greater Southdale Area Planning Framework • Page 5 of 5 City of Edina Attn: Cary Teague, Community Development Director cteague@EdinaMN.gov Letters of Interest shall be submitted no later than 2:00 pm August xx, 2015. Late submittals will not be reviewed. Letter of Interest content and format A Letter of Interest shall not exceed eight single -sided, letter -sized pages. No font shall be smaller than 11 point. If a responder's Letter of Interest exceeds the page limit, the excess pages will not be reviewed, regardless of content. Forms required as a part of the response shall not be counted toward the page limit of the Letter of Interest. A statement describing conflicts of interest, if any, shall be submitted as a part of the response. Such a statement shall not be counted toward the page limit of the Letter of Interest. The Letter of Interest shall include the following: 1. Contact information: Responder shall clearly identify the responder's full legal name, business address, and contact person's name, telephone number, and email address. 2. Key personnel: Responder shall list the key personnel to be assigned to the project and identify their roles and responsibilities. No change in key personnel will be permitted without approval of the City of Edina. 3. Project understanding: Responder shall demonstrate their understanding of the project and • the needs of the city and the Work Group in a statement of objectives and goals, a description of the nature of the effort and the necessary outcomes. The intent is to provide information sufficient to understand the responder's view of the nature and scope of the work required. 4. Approach and work plan: Responder shall provide an approach and general work plan and affirm their ability to provide the services required within the identified time frame for the project. 5. Relevant experience: Responder shall demonstrate their capacity for performing the requested work by providing information for past or current projects of similar size, scope, complexity, and nature. For each past or current project, references shall be provided, including a contact person, project and agency relationship, telephone number, and email address. 6. Specialized expertise: Responder shall identify any specialized expertise available within the firm or team and highlight the ways in which that expertise may be of value to the city and the Work Group. 7. Additional information: Responder shall provide any other information that may be relevant to this project and assist the city and the Work Group in making a selection. 8. A statement accepting the terms of the city's standard consulting services agreement, or if the terms are not acceptable, an indication of the modifications that may be requested. Modifications may require approval by the City Council. 9. A statement indicating your firm can comply with the city's insurance requirements as outlined in the attached standard consulting services agreement template. 10. Conflict of interest: Responder shall indicate that it has no conflict of interest regarding this • project and any current or pending association with other entities or agencies related to this project. Should the responder feel there are current or pending relationships that may pose a Request for Letter of Interest Greater Southdale Area Planning Framework • Page 6 of 6 conflict of interest, the assignment and relationship shall be fully described separate from the Letter of Interest and included with the response. 11. Certification statement: Responder shall provide and agree to the following statement, executed by a person with authority to represent the responder: 1 hereby certify that 1 am a duly authorized representative of the company and that the information contained within this letter of interest is current, true and correct to the best of my knowledge. 1 hereby authorize and request any person, agency or firm to furnish any pertinent information requested by the City of Edina deemed necessary to verify the statements made in this application. (Signature) (Title) (Date) A fee proposal is not required as a part of the Letter of Interest. Fee proposals will be requested from those individuals, firms, or teams selected for an interview as noted in Section 6. SECTION 6: SELECTION PROCESS The City of Edina intends to use this request to shortlist qualified consultants. Letters of Interest will be reviewed by city staff and representatives of the Work Group, including but not limited to: Cary Teague, Community Development Director <<<city staff>>>, title Michael Platteter, Planning Commission chair At least two members of the Work Group representing residential interests in the study area At least two members of the Work Group representing business and commercial property interests in the study area Selection Criteria In its review of submitted Letters of Interest, the City of Edina will consider the following criteria: 1. Expressed understanding of the work and capacity to perform necessary tasks and according to the project schedule (15%) 2. Project approach and general work plan (20%) 3. Qualifications and experience with projects of similar scope, schedule, and complexity of key personnel assigned to the project (20%) 4. Qualifications and experience of the key staff to be assigned to the project (25%) 5. Specialized expertise that may be of value to city for this project (5%) 6. Fee proposed for the performance of the work (15%) Firms selected by the City of Edina for an interview will be notified no later than July xx, 2015. Interview The City of Edina may determine it to be necessary to interview selected responders. If so, interviews • will be 45 minutes and include no more than a 25 minute presentation. The focus of the interview will be directed toward the project approach and work plan, with discussion of timeline and deliverables. Request for Letter of Interest Greater Southdale Area Planning Framework Page 7 of 7 The city will not expect the interviews to include time directed toward past projects unless they bear a specific relationship to the work plan or to the resumes of any personnel assigned to the project unless the personnel brings specialized expertise to the project. A comprehensive fee for services shall be submitted by interviewing individuals, firms or teams not later than 24 hours prior to the date of interviews. Fee proposals shall be submitted via email to: Cary Teague, Community Development Director cteague@EdinaMN.gov Interview attendance shall be limited to the following, with maximum attendance being limited to five personnel: 1. Project manager 2. Design lead 3. Specialist identified by the responder The interview panel will be comprised of the same individuals responsible for reviewing the Letters of Interest. The city may include others depending of the responses received. Macintosh HD:Users:michaelschroeder:Desktop:West Side of France Avenue and Southdole Area planning framework:Stage 2:Request for Letter oflnterest 20150628.docx 0 • i ! w9^lam °� e * �' Planning Commission ;rL _ 0 ~� 2015 Annual Work Plan • !V'ORPOp-'^Yv aee 2015 New Initiative Target Budget Required Staff Support Council Approval Completion Date A. Zoning Ordinance Amendments The On-going No additional Yes, staff support is Council approval is required Planning Commission would like to budget requested required for each Zoning Ordinance complete the following from the list in at this time amendment 2015: 1. Grading & Drainage — work with 50 Hours + Engineering engineering to establish clear regulations 2015 Department 2. Parking regulations/Proof-of-parking 3. Lighting Ordinance 2015 30 Hours 2015 30 hours B. Policy Recommendations 1. Tree Ordinance/Landscaping 2. Density in S thdale aFea (See below) On-going Yes, staff support is 3. Living Streets — Bringing buildings up to No additional required Council approval is required the street & connecting to the street. budget requested 4. Mid Term Comp. Plan Consideration at this time 5. Sustainability enforcement/PUD/Ped. friendly/affordable housing. 6. Monitoring Residential Redevelopment standards & ordinance C. Commission Liaison 1. Connectivity — Living Streets 2. France Avenue Corridor Planning 3. Grandview We anticipate 2015 as another very busy year for development. We will try to accomplish as much as we can outside of our usual "ongoing responsibilities." D. Small Area Plan - Conduct a Small Area 20 $25.000 $75,000 Yes, staff support is Council approval is required Plan for the Cahill and 701h Commercial 2016-17 nding deperk required area as defined in the Comprehensive te dere by_a Plan. consultant. (TIF funds)- Fo Be Determined E. Small Area Plan — Complete the Small 2015 $40,000 (TIF Yes, staff support is Council approval is required Area Plan for the Wooddale and Valley funds) required View Commercial area. F. Small Area Plan/Density Study in the 2015-16 $75,000 depending Yes, staff support is Council approval is required Southdale area — Conduct a Small Area on the scope of required q Plan/Density Study for the Southdale area work to be done by in conjunction with the engineering a consultant. (TIF funds) department's study of transportation and utility capacity in the Southdale area. Progress Report: Ongoing Responsibilities The Planning Commission is responsible to review all Land Use applications submitted to the City of Edina. Land Use applications include: Variances; Site Plan Review; Sketch Plan Review; Conditional Use Permits; Subdivision; Lot Line Adjustments; Rezoning; and Comprehensive Plan Amendments. To accomplish this responsibility the Planning Commission meets twice per month, on the second and fourth Wednesday of the month. The Planning Commission typically reviews 3-4 of the above requests each agenda. Other Work Plan Ideas. - Begin preparation for the 2018 Comprehensive Plan Update Proposed May We anticipate 2015 as another very busy year for development. We will try to accomplish as much as we can outside of our usual "ongoing responsibilities." To: MAYOR AND COUNCIL Agenda Item #: VIII. E. From: Ross Bintner P.E. — Environmental Engineer Action ❑ Discussion 0 Date: August 5, 2015 Information ❑ Subject: Energy and Environment Commission Solar Energy Project Proposal Action Requested: Staff recommends no action be taken Information / Background: Community Solar Gardens (CSG) are developed under a program mandated by Minn. Stat. 216B.1641 from regulated utilities such as Xcel Energy, whose service territory covers the City of Edina. The program began in late 2014, and has been guided by various Public Utilities Commission orders as recent at June 25, 2015 governing details of the implementation of this program. At its June 17, 2015 meeting, Council reviewed advice from the Energy and Environment Commission (EEC) recommending that the City of Edina participate in a joint purchase led by the Metropolitan Council and directed staff to follow up on this recommendation with a report. At its July 7th meeting Council reviewed and approved a staff recommendation to authorize joint powers purchase agreement for CSG, which is now underway and led by the Met Council. Following that approval, the EEC met on July 9, and passed a second community solar advisory communication to Council (attached) proposing that the City of Edina develop an RFP for solar energy project on its Public Works building at 7450 Metro Boulevard under the CSG program. EEC Proposal: The EEC proposes developing a Request for Proposal (RFP) to develop a CSG on Public Works building to benefit citizens of Edina by opening the ability for individual citizens to subscribe to Community Solar. The EEC states that proposed project provides the following benefit: Demonstrates leadership in a unique application of CSGs, promotes renewable energy, reduces greenhouse gas, educates residents on sustainability, helps residents save money, puts the public works roof to productive use, and engages solar supporters. The EEC addresses the cost and level of effort, spells out specific steps needed and explains the various local resources that make the RFP and legal review easier. This EEC proposal is attached in the form of an advisory communication. Staff Review: Staff has reviewed the EEC proposal, spoken with a variety of solar developers, interviewed staff at Met Council and peer local governments, and gathered preliminary information about means and methods to procure solar facilities. City of Edina • 4801 W. 50th St. • Edina, MN 55424 REPORT / RECOMMENDATION EEC CSG Proposal: Page 2 The proposed CSG scope of project would range in size between 250-400 kW peak generating capacity, and would cover a majority of the Public Works building roof. The annual energy production for a system of this size range would be between 300,000-500,000 kWh, have a retail value of between $30,000 and $50,000 and reduce carbon emissions by 165-275 tons. The capital cost of an on -roof solar facility of this size might range from $675,000 to $1,650,000. As described in the EEC advisory, approximately 40-80 households could apply. Due to the complication of funding solar facilities to wrap in tax credits, and state and utility cost share, the method of purchase and ownership can vary widely. The role of the City in the EEC CSG concept sets the city as a lessor and optionally as a purchaser though an agreement. The terms of the lease and agreement would run 25 years. The developer of the facility would be a private party that would develop long term purchase agreements (power and bill credit system for CSGs are facilitated by Xcel) with Edina residents, and optionally the City. The developer would be the initial owner and marketer of bill credits, and may retain ownership in the long term. Long term maintenance, operations, crediting and billing would be the responsibility of the owner. The key benefit of this proposal was well described by the EEC. This is the only way for the City to take a proactive role to open CSG credits for the exclusive benefit of its residents. The costs to this proposal include structural review ($6,300), Legal review ($5,000) and staff resources. Additional costs include minor expense related to facilitating roof access to a private party, and the opportunity cost of diverting work from core services that serve the public as a whole, to work on this project which benefits only a few. is Potential risks to this proposal include reputational, counterparty and technological. Technological risks such as potential damage to the roof and issues with electrical connection can be insured against, and the cost of insurance born by the facility owner. Reputational risks include potential brand and ownership confusion among residents depending on how much of the marketing and promotion effort the City chooses to assist with, and the nature of that support. Counterparty risks include risk of default, sale of facility, and uncertainty relating to the long term decommissioning of the facility. Recommendation: In recommending an optimal path forward, Staff tried to comprehensively weigh costs, benefits and risks by spending considerable time meeting with potential developers, reviewing pro forma, and interviewing staff with Met Council and peer municipal organizations that are and have undertaken large solar installations. This section details the reasons not to recommend the EEC CSG proposal. In general CSGs are a step in the right direction and solar will inevitably be a larger part of the energy market in the future, as it is on a trajectory to be cost competitive with traditional forms of energy generation. The greenhouse gas intensity of Xcel is continues on a long term downward trend, and the CSG program will help. The CSG program was envisioned by early proponents, and in the EEC work plan as a step to consolidate and more efficiently meet demand for solar in the retail customer classes and it was expected that the program would roll out with small, locally hosted projects and many retail customers. In practice the CSG program has prompted many projects proposed at a utility scale that are being marketed almost solely to large business and • institutional customers. After the roll out of the program, Staff began fielding calls from solar firms marketing REPORT / RECOMMENDATION Page 3 • CSG solely to meet City of Edina institutional electric use. While the vast majority of the CSG market is closed to retail customer classes, there are co-op and faith groups that are considering hosting sites for the benefit of their members. The EEC CSG proposal touts the following benefits: 1) demonstrate leadership, 2) promotes renewable energy, 3) reduces greenhouse gas, 4) educates residents on sustainability, 5) help residents save money, 6) puts the public works roof to productive use, and 7) engages solar supporters. Staff disputes only one of these benefits. It is doubtful that the EEC CSG would save money for residents. In comparison to the bulk of the CSG market which are I to 5 megawatt ground mounted installations that market to 5 institutional customer, the economics of the EEC CSG proposal is small (0.25-0.40 megawatt), roof mounted, and retail marketed. To get a sense of the differences in a 25 year cost of operation, imagine marketing once to 5 institutional customers and sending 5 monthly bills, and compare that to marketing to 40-80 residents, sending as many monthly bills, and then having to facilitate the resale of credit blocks as customers move out of Xcel service territory. In addition to the unfavorable economics, there are a variety of reasons to recommend against this proposal. • Unlike the Met Council CSG proposal that staff supported, the public benefit of this proposal benefits only a very small minority of residents. • Power generation is not a core service and there are opportunity costs to the extent that the development of this project takes key staff away from core services they are trained to provide. • Residents that want to support renewables already have the ability to do so through a potentially cheaper alternative, by enrolling in Xcel's Windsource program, which is already promoted by the city and utility. • • Solar advocates have the ability to engage with private party, co-op, and faith based projects in the community. The goals this proposal seeks to fulfill are important, but there are more promising and efficient opportunities to fulfill each goal. • If a solar demonstration project is a goal, the City of Edina already owns a rooftop solar installation, additional effort could be spent promoting its demonstration value, but the results are arguably mixed. • If promotion of renewable energy or greenhouse gas reduction is a goal, Windsource is a remarkably cost effective alternative the City could reconsider. • If promotion of solar energy is a goal, alternative ownership and procurement methods should be compared. Lease/purchase, power purchase or CSG credit purchase arrangements are likely to have less cost, higher benefit and less risk, and the City has already taken a step in this direction with the previous Met Council joint purchase. • If market access for residents or subsidy of energy is a goal, an alternative CSG RFP could be written to require a developer to provide market preference to City residents. • If Greenhouse gas reduction is a goal, the City of Edina already exercises myriad opportunities to demonstrate leadership and save money for business and residents through its efficient operation of public facilities, fleet, street light, road, and utility infrastructure. The EEC work plan envisioned a CGS program entirely different than it turned out. The EEC project could be pursued and effectively completed, but the cost and risk do not justify the benefits. Staff suggests the following alternatives. • Alternate 1: No action. EEC and Staff time is better spent on existing priorities. (Recommended) REPORT / RECOMMENDATION Page 4 Alternate 2: Provide direction and request EEC research on alternate solar ownership, or RFP structures. • Alternate 3, Follow EEC proposal, identify funding and direct staff to conduct an RFP for a solar developer. Attachments: Energy and Environment Commission Advisory CERTs Community Solar Guide (EEC Advisory attachment) MRES Guide to Community Solar Lease (EEC Advisory attachment) Sample Lease Agreement (EEC Advisory attachment) G:\PW\CENTRAL SVCS\ENVIRONMENT DIV\Energy and Environment Commission\Working Groups\Community Solar\150805 Community Solar.docx L 40 >4 O •'`ti�brtNc�t.nKt�� I�HH To: City Council From: Energy and Environment Commission Date: July 21, 2015 Subject: Recommendation that the City Develop and Issue a Request for Proposals for a Community Solar Garden Project on the Roof of the Public Works Building Attachments (1) Model Solar Rooftop Lease Agreement (2) Metropolitan Council Request for Proposals For Solar Facilities dated February 19, 2015 (too large for email; will plan to distribute before council meeting) (3) CERTs Community Solar Guide (4) Guide to sample Community Solar Garden contracts Action Requested: The EEC requests the following: 1. Place this advisory on the Council agenda as soon as possible and provide the EEC and its Community Solar expert an opportunity to discuss this advisory with council and answer their questions. 2. Authorize and direct the City Administrator to have staff and legal counsel develop a Request for Proposals for a Community Solar Garden (CSG -PW) located on the Roof of the Public Works Building. While the City could subscribe to a small portion of the CSG -PW project, the primary intent would be to offer Edina residents the opportunity to become subscribers. Situation: The City has an opportunity. to host a community solar garden project for its residents at a City -owned facility. Considerable work has already been done to develop a model solar rooftop lease agreement and a model RFP calling for proposals for solar projects, including rooftop solar. This project has some urgency, since federal incentives will be significantly decreasing at the end of 2016. When that occurs, the attractiveness to solar developers of smaller -scale residential projects such as the one EEC is proposing will change significantly. To qualify for the federal tax incentives, a project must be completed and producing electricity by the end of 2016. The EEC has been working with the Great Plains Institute and the Clean Energy Resource Teams, who are providing technical assistance to several local governments who are interested in developing community solar projects. They have indicated that a project such as Edina's (approximately 350 kw of rooftop community solar) will be attractive to some developers, and they expect the City would receive bids. They have indicated that GPI and CERTs have some resources set aside to support the local government willing to develop a project to host a CSG project. Page 2 O� u p ti 1;99119 �. Background See situation description above. Assessment: See Questions & Responses Following: What is the Edina Public Works Community Solar Project? EEC recommends that the City issue a Request for Proposals (RFP) for development of an approximately 350 kw Community Solar Garden project on the roof of the City's Public Works building. The RFP should be issued as soon as possible (by September 2015 if possible) before the federal Investment Tax Credit decreases from 30 percent to 10 percent at the end of 2016. (See below) The Project would be open to Edina residents, who would have first rights to subscribe. The project developer would be responsible for construction, operation, and maintenance of the project, and would also bear all risk of damage to the Public Works building. The City could possibly receive income from the lease of the roof space for project development. That revenue may be focused on subsidizing low-income community solar subscribers. Why would the City Host its own Community Solar Project? • There are a number of reasons for Edina to host its own Community Solar Project: I. Leadership — The city can be the first, or one of the first, to demonstrate that a residential community solar project is feasible 2. Promote renewable energy & reducing greenhouse gases — Residents can directly support solar energy and reduce their fossil fuel dependence 3. Educate residents on sustainability — The City can include other opportunities for residents interested in community solar, including energy efficiency and how to conserve other resources. The more energy- efficient a residence is, the more effective its solar subscription is. 4. Help Edina residents save money on electricity costs. Subscribers receive a credit on their utility bills based on the rate paid for the kWh production of their share of the solar garden. The credit may result in residents saving money on electricity, particularly as energy costs rise while they continue to receive solar credits over the life of the project. 5. No City capital or operating costs. The RFP will place the burden of constructing, operating, and maintaining the project on the developer. In fact, the City may receive revenue from the developer who leases the Public Works building roof. 6. Use the Public Works building roof productively. The Public Works roof would not otherwise be a source of sustainable energy or an educational opportunity for residents. 7. Take advantage of assistance from solar supporters. There are several non-profit organizations interested in supporting residential solar projects. The City can benefit from a model RFP, a model solar rooftop lease, and technical assistance from the Clean Energy Resource Teams/Great Plains Institute. 0 Page 3 r0(Le • ,V Vim, • How many Edina residents could subscribe to this project? If every subscriber wished to get 100% of his or her home energy from the project, about 40 residential homes could subscribe to the Public Works project. If residents had the option to subscribe for less than 100% of their energy, more residents could subscribe. For example, the project could serve 80 residential homes that wanted to have 50% of their energy from solar. A typical Minnesota home uses about 800 kWh each month—or 9,600 kWh/ year. To fulfill that need might take about 8 kW of solar (assuming each I kW panel would general 1,200 kWh per year with a 14% capacity factor). Is there a model community solar RFP? Yes. The RFP is not attached to this Advisory because of its length, but we will send it to the City Manager and Council members. Is there a model Lease Agreement for a Solar Rooftop Project? Yes. The Lease Agreement is not attached to this Advisory because of its length, but we will send it to the City Manager and Council members. Didn't the Council just approve a community solar project involving the Metropolitan Council? Yes. But the Met Council project is very different from the Public Works project. The Metropolitan Council project is a unique government collaborative involving local government entities. The Met Council project does not involve residents and does not involve a community solar project located in Edina for residents. The Met Council project is a wonderful opportunity for the City itself to subscribe for up to 100% of its annual electricity usage from solar. The Met Council Request for Proposals, expected to be issued in July 2015, will ask solar developers to submit proposals for community solar gardens that will have local governments, including Edina, as subscribers. Jason Willett of the Met Council, who is leading the project, described the advantages of the approach: "By working together, government entities who sign up won't have to go through the lengthy solicitation and evaluation process themselves, saving time and money," he said. "The size of the solicitation, which will be substantial, should attract more competition and better proposals. And the subscription process will be easier for local governments because we offer a standard subscription agreement." Page 4 © How does the Public Works project differ from the Met Council solar project? This proposal involves the City of Edina hosting a Community Solar Garden project on its own site for its own residents. The Met Council proposal will not be open to Edina residents. The City can subscribe to community solar through the Met Council project and offer its residents the opportunity to subscribe to an Edina -hosted project. Why should the City act now to develop an Edina Community Solar Garden? The Federal Investment Tax Credit (ITC) is worth 30 percent of a solar project's cost. This subsidy will remain in place until the end of 2016, when it will drop to 10 percent. If Congress fails to renew the ITC, it could have a chilling effect both on individuals who want to install residential solar systems as well as companies who are installing the larger scale solar projects. It is quite possible that smaller projects such as the City -hosted Public Works solar project will become less attractive to solar project financers. What must the City do to make this project a reality? Staff Resources to issue RFP. The City must develop an RFP. This requires staff and legal • time. The City may also want to work with a solar project expert to assure the RFP protects the interests of the City and its residents. Ongoing monitoring of roof activities. City staff will need to periodically monitor the project, since it will be on the City Public Works building roof. Although the City will have no financial or legal responsibility for the project, the City will want to monitor the solar operator's activities. Long-term lease. The City will enter a 25 to 30 year lease with the solar developer. The roof will need to be suitable, without major repairs needed during the lease period. Project Unknowns/Risks I . Federal tax credit expires soon. As noted, the ITC expires at the end of 2016. If solar developers need the ITC to make the Public Works project financially viable, the City may not get quality bid responses. 2. The Community Solar program in Minnesota is still evolving. The Minnesota Public Utilities Commission must approve the rules for community solar. This is a new program, and changes will likely continue to occur. For example, the PUC recently considered a significant change to the rules for how many contiguous solar projects could be located on one site during the last week of June 2015. 3. A Local Government Hosted Garden is new. Being the first, or one of the first, publicly hosted residential community solar projects is both an opportunity and an uncertainty. Solar projects are common; rooftop leases are common; local government community projects are also common. Most of the uncertainly around a community solar project for residents involves risks that the project developer will bear. The City should be aware, however, that this is a significant Pae 5 O `` CI Page � PC1F3`K�l V1110 !rgy policy. Summary: A Unique Leadership Opportunity The City has a major leadership opportunity to show other public entities that a local government -hosted community solar project for residents is viable. Edina can again demonstrate the leadership it showed in 201 1, when the City became the first municipality in the Midwest to pass an ordinance creating a "Property Assessed Clean Energy" (PACE) program. Edina's PACE program, called the Edina Emerald Energy Program, allows commercial and residential property owners to install renewable energy and energy efficiency upgrades at minimal upfront cost. Edina's leadership enabled other local and regional entities to establish similar programs, with the St. Paul Port Authority now administering a statewide PACE program. Edina's PACE leadership created widespread acclaim, with the City winning a state environmental leadership award in 2012 for the Edina Emerald Energy Program. Recommendation: The EEC recommends that Council direct the City Manager to authorize staff and attorney time to issue an RFP for a Community Solar Garden on the Public Works Building Roof, with a target date for issuing the RFP by September I, 2015. G:\PW\CENTRAL SVCS\ENVIRONMENT DIV\Energy and Environment Commission\Projects\2015\150721 1 July EEC Community solar at Public Works Council Advisory.docx CPN E S�vRCE WHAT, I5 A0" �AUNI�Y . -..,� LNrw rJMr��. • Community Solar Gardens are centrally -located solar photovoltaic (PV) systems that provide electricity to participating subscribers. Could it work for you? Are you interested in going solar but unable to do so on your own? Perhaps you live in an apartment, have a shaded roof at home, or don't have space at your organization. Now you can join a community solar garden installed near you! Community solar gardens are a simple way to go solar. You purchase an up -front subscription, then soak in the rays (much of Minnesota is as sunny as places like Houston, TX and Tallahassee, FL). 0 Solar PV panels are installed in sunny locations to produce MWAM renewable electricity ,4W Individual entities can subscribe to enough solar to cover up to 120% of their annual electricity usage r Each subscriber's utility bill is credited with the electricity created by their share of the solar garden • e amount of electricity you use each year helps you decide how much solar to get. ur solar garden subscription can cover up to 120% of your usage. A typical Minnesota home uses 800 kilowatt-hours (kWh) a month. Remember: a more efficient home means more cost-effective solar! Electricity Use J F M A M J J AS ON D Solar Subscription Utility Bill [Atypical MN home 4 kW of solar could Solar power production uses 800 kWh each month, provide half the electricity is shown and credited on or 9,600 kWh each year used by the typical MN home the subscriber's utility bill 0 As a subscriber, you don't have to worry about every detail. See below for key players. SUBSCRIBERS: individual entities who get solar power UTILITY: electricity provider where solar garden is installed primary group [DEVELOPER: rganizing the solar garden SITE ASSESSOR: expert that studies solar garden location H�is ocation where sinstalled FINANCE: sources of financing for the project F TALLER: expert that OUTREACH PARTNERS: alls the solar garden groups that find subscribers See more details about utility programs and rules for community solar gardens on our website at SolarGardens.MnCERTs.org#Who. PN E.N S0 URCE SolarGardens.MnCERTs.org The University of Minnesota Law School Environmental Law Clinic In Conjunction With: Minnesota Renewable Energy Society (MRES) Presents: A Guide to Sample Community Solar Garden Leases Written By: Samuel Andre Vicki Kim Ross Edwards Ja Eon Cho 0 is • SOLAR GARDEN LEASE DISCLAIMER C] This lease is not legal advice nor a final, binding lease; it only provides information and guidance and should only be used as an example. This lease should not be duplicated without consideration of an individual's particular situation; it does not cover each and every project lease between the landowner and the developer. This lease cannot anticipate the parties' specific needs and should be negotiated and changed to fit your particular situation. A solar garden lease is a complex document and subjects a person who signs it to legal obligations. Due to this complexity, you should consult an attorney in your area before making any contractual commitment or signing any agreement. Due to variations in state laws, certain provisions included in this lease may not be enforceable or specifically address your situation. An attorney can solve this particular issue. This lease includes multiple interchangeable provisions that may be changed in order to satisfy your specific project. Additional or alternative provisions should be added when appropriate. Nothing contained in these sample lease should be construed to constitute a recommendation or endorsement of any organization, product, service, law firm or attorney. 2 Definitions A word to the wise: The following definitions are only common legal definitions to some of the words that appear in this lease. They are not the exact definitions of the words in the lease. If you are unsure about the meaning of a word in the lease, you must discuss it with the other party and come to a mutual understanding of the word. Access easement: An interest in land owned by another person, consisting in the right to use or control the land, or an area above or below it, for a specific limited purpose (such as to cross it for access to a public road). The land benefiting from an easement is called the dominant estate; the land burdened by an easement is called the servient estate. Unlike a lease or license, an easement may last forever, but it does not give the holder the right to possess, take from, improve, or sell the land. Act of God: An overwhelming, unpreventable event caused exclusively by forces of nature, such as an earthquake, flood, or tornado.The definition has been statutorily broadened to include all natural phenomena that are exceptional, inevitable, and irresistible, the effects of which could not be prevented or avoided by the exercise of due care or foresight. Affiliate: A corporation that is related to another corporation by shareholdings or other means of control; a subsidiary, parent, or sibling corporation. Alternative Energy Expenditure: A sum paid out from the energy source in question. Amendments or Modifications: Official, mutually agreed upon changes to a legal document or agreement. Applicable Law: All law affecting or relating to a particular person, group, or situation; having direct relevance. Assessments: The process of documents, judging, and quantifying certain things. Assignments: the transfer of rights held by one party—the assignor—to another party— the assignee. Audit: A formal examination of an individual's or organization's accounting records, financial situation, or compliance with some other set of standards. Beneficiary: Someone who is designated to receive the advantages from an action or change; esp., one designated to benefit from an appointment, disposition, or assignment (as in a will, insurance policy, etc.), or to receive something as a result of a legal arrangement or instrument. • 40 • Bond: A written promise to pay money or do some act if certain circumstances occur or a certain time elapses. Brokerage Fee: the amount of money that a broker charges. Broker: One who is engaged for another, on a commission, to negotiate contracts relating to property in which he or she has no custodial or proprietary interest. Collateral Assignment: Property that is pledged as security against a debt; the property subject to a security interest or agricultural lien. Commercially Unfeasible: A deal that would not produce an economic benefit to one or more parties involved. Condemnation: An official pronouncement that a building is unfit for habitation. Condemnor: A person or entity that expropriates property for public use. Contingent or Success Fee Basis: Dependent on something that might or might not happen in the future; conditional upon the success of the operation. Conveyance: The voluntary transfer of a right or of property. • Counterpart: One of two or more copies or duplicates of a legal instrument. • Covenant: A formal agreement or promise, usu. in a contract or deed, to do or not do a particular act; a compact or stipulation. CRP Contract: The Conservation Reserve Program (CRP) is a land conservation program administered by the Farm Service Agency. In exchange for a yearly rental payment, farmers enrolled in the program agree to remove environmentally sensitive land from agricultural production and plant species that will improve environmental health and quality. Contracts for land enrolled in CRP are 10-15 years in length. Debtor-in-possession: Chapter 11 or 12 debtor that continues to operate its business as a fiduciary to the bankruptcy estate. With certain exceptions, the debtor-in-possession has all the rights, powers, and duties of a Chapter 11 trustee. Deed of Trust: any written instrument that is signed, sealed, and delivered and that conveys some interest in property. Default: The omission or failure to perform a legal or contractual duty; esp., the failure to pay a debt when due. Delinquent Payment: Payment for a past failure to perform. 4 Designee: Someone who has been designated to perform some duty or carry out some • specific role. Due Diligence: The attention and care required from a person in a given situation; care; heedfulness. Easement: An interest in land owned by another person, consisting in the right to use or control the land, or an area above or below it, for a specific limited purpose. Effective Date: The date on which the contract becomes enforceable or otherwise takes effect. This date sometimes differs from the date on which the instrument was enacted or signed. Embargo: The unilateral or collective restrictions on the import or export of goods, materials, capital, or services into or from a specific country or group of countries for political or security reasons Eminent Domain: The inherent power of a governmental entity to take privately owned property, esp. land, and convert it to public use, subject to reasonable compensation for the taking. Encumbrance: A claim or liability that is attached to property or some other right and that may lessen its value, such as a lien or mortgage; any property right that is not an • ownership interest. a right, other than an ownership interest, in real property. Enforcement: The act or process of compelling compliance with a law, mandate, command, decree, or agreement. Escrow: A legal document or property delivered by a promisor to a third party to be held by the third party for a given amount of time or until the occurrence of a condition, at which time the third party is to hand over the document or property to the promisee. Also termed escrow account; impound account; reserve account. Estoppel: A bar that prevents one from asserting a claim or right that contradicts what one has said or done before or what has been legally established as true. Equity: Fairness; impartiality; evenhanded dealing. Exclusive Easement: An easement that the holder has the sole right to use. Exclusive Right: the right to do something to the exclusion of all others. Fee Simple: An interest in land that, being the broadest property interest allowed by law, endures until the current holder dies without heirs. Fee title: the owner's legal interest in the land. is Fiduciary Relationship: A relationship in which one person is under a duty to act for the benefit of another on matters within the scope of the relationship. Fiduciary relationships usu. arise in one of four situations: (1) when one person places trust in the faithful integrity of another, who as a result gains superiority or influence over the first, (2) when one person assumes control and responsibility over another, (3) when one person has a duty to act for or give advice to another on matters falling within the scope of the relationship, or (4) when there is a specific relationship that has traditionally been recognized as involving fiduciary duties, as with a lawyer and a client or a stockbroker and a customer. Foreclosure: A legal proceeding to terminate a mortgagor's interest in property, instituted by the lender (the mortgagee) either to gain title or to force a sale in order to satisfy the unpaid debt secured by the property. Force Majeure: An event or effect that can be neither anticipated nor controlled. The term includes both acts of nature (e.g., floods and hurricanes) and acts of people. Foresight: care or provision for the future; provident care; prudence. Forfeiture: The divestiture of property without compensation. The loss of a right, privilege, or property because of a crime, breach of obligation, or neglect of duty. Title is • instantaneously transferred to another, such as the government, a corporation, or a private person. FSA Records: Farm Service Agency records; part of the United States Department of Agriculture. Good Faith: A state of mind consisting in (1) honesty in belief or purpose, (2) faithfulness to one's duty or obligation, (3) observance of reasonable commercial standards of fair dealing in a given trade or business, or (4) absence of intent to defraud or to seek unconscionable advantage. Hazardous Wastes: Waste that — because of its quantity, concentration, or physical, chemical, or infectious characteristics — may cause or significantly contribute to an increase in mortality or otherwise harm human health or the environment. In Gross: Undivided; still in one large mass. Indemnify: To reimburse (another) for a loss suffered because of a third party's or one's own act or default. To promise to reimburse (another) for such a loss. Ingress: The act of entering. The right or ability to enter IS Egress: The act of going out or leaving. The right or ability to leave; a way of exit. in • Injunction: A court order commanding or preventing an action. Insolvency: The condition of being unable to pay debts as they fall due or in the usual course of business. The inability to pay debts as they mature. Inure: To take effect; to come into use Investment Grade Company: refers to a companies credit. Most companies are issued a rating based on their financial strength, future prospects and past history. Companies that have manageable levels of debt, good earnings potential and a good debt -paying records will have good credit ratings. Invitee: person who has an express or implied invitation to enter or use another's premises, such as a business visitor or a member of the public to whom the premises are held open. Joint Venture: A business undertaking by two or more persons engaged in a single defined project. The necessary elements are (1) an express or implied agreement; (2) a common purpose that the group intends to carry out; (3) shared profits and losses; and (4) each member's equal voice in controlling the project. Jury Trial: A trial in which the factual issues are determined by a jury, not by the judge. Jurisdiction: A government's general power to exercise authority over all persons and • things within its territory; or, a court's power to decide a case or issue a decree Lease: A contract by which a rightful possessor of real property conveys the right to use and occupy the property in exchange for consideration, usu. rent. The lease term can be for life, for a fixed period, or for a period terminable at will, and possibly including all covenants Leasehold Interest: A lessor's or lessee's interest under a lease contract. Lessee: Someone who has a possessory interest in real or personal property under a lease Letter of Credit: Commercial law. An instrument under which the issuer (usu. a bank), at a customer's request, agrees to honor a draft or other demand for payment made by a third party (the beneficiary), as long as the draft or demand complies with specified conditions, and regardless of whether any underlying agreement between the customer and the beneficiary is satisfied. Liability: A financial or pecuniary obligation in a specified amount License: A permission, usually revocable, to commit some act that would otherwise be unlawful; especially an agreement that it is lawful for the licensee to enter the licensor's land to do some act that would otherwise be illegal. • 7 • Liens: A legal right or interest that a creditor has in another's property, lasting usually until a debt or duty that it secures is satisfied. Typically, the creditor does not take possession of the property on which the lien has been obtained Material: significantly and substantially affecting the merits of a case Memorandum of Lease: An informal written note or record outlining the terms of a transaction or contract of the lease Memorializing: the process of writing an abstract of a legal record Metes and Bound Description: The description of territorial limits of real property as measured by distances and angles from designated landmarks and in relation to adjoining properties. Metes and bounds are usually described in deeds and surveys to establish the boundary lines of land. Mortgage: A lien against property that is granted to secure an obligation (such as a debt) and that is extinguished upon payment or performance according to stipulated terms. Negligent Act: An act that creates an unreasonable risk of harm to another. Intentional Act: An act resulting from the actor's will directed to that end. An act is intentional when it is foreseen and desired by the doer, and this foresight and desire resulted in the act through the operation of the will. Non -Disturbance Agreement: Non disturbance agreement refers to an agreement between a tenant and the landlord's lender to ensure the tenant will remain in possession of the leased property, despite any foreclosure action against the landlord. Subordination Agreement: Formal document acknowledging that one party's claim or interest is inferior to that of the other party or parties. If consent forms a part of a larger agreement, it is called a subordination clause. Nuisance: A condition, activity, or situation (such as a loud noise or foul odor) that interferes with the use or enjoyment of property especially a nontransitory condition or persistent activity that either injures the physical condition of adjacent land or interferes with its use or with the enjoyment of easements on the land or of public highways. Liability might or might not arise from the condition or situation. Omission: A failure to do something especially a neglect of duty - material omission is an omission that significantly affects a person's decision-making. Owner: Someone who has the right to possess, use, and convey something. An owner may have complete property in the thing or may have parted with some interests in it (as IS by granting an easement or making a lease). 8 Penalties: An extra charge against a party who violates a contractual provision. Premises: A house or building, along with its grounds especially the buildings and land that a shop, restaurant, company, and etc. uses. Proprietary: Of, relating to, or holding as property Punitive Damage (Exemplary Damage): Damages awarded in addition to actual damages when the defendant acted with recklessness, malice, or deceit specifically damages assessed by way of penalizing the wrongdoer or making an example to others. Punitive damages, which are intended to punish and thereby deter blameworthy conduct, are generally not recoverable for breach of contract. Quiet Use and Enjoyment (Covenant of Quiet Enjoyment): A covenant ensuring that the tenant will not be evicted or disturbed by the grantor or a person having a lien or superior title Reasonable: Fair, proper, or moderate under the circumstances; sensible Reasonable Notice: Notice that is fairly to be expected or required under the particular circumstances. Recordable/recordation: To set down in writing or the like, as for the purpose of preserving evidence. Reimburse: The primary meaning of this word is "to pay back." It means to make return or restoration of an equivalent for something paid, expended, or lost; to indemnify, or make whole. Remitting (Remit): To send or transmit as to remit money. To give up, annul, relinquish as to remit a fine. Revocation: The recall of some power, authority, or thing granted, or a destroying or making void of some deed that had existence until the act of revocation made it void. It may be either general, of all acts and things done before; or special, to revoke a particular thing. Right of Way: The right of passage or of way. The term would be used in an unusual sense, by applying it to an absolute purchase of the fee -simple of lands to be used for a railway or any other kind of a way. Right to assign or convey: Right to make or set over to another, to transfer as to assign property, or some interest therein. • Z • Run with the Premises (Run with the land): A convention where covenants on land are passed from one owner to the next. Salvage Value: The residual value of a product when it has reached the end of its productive life but still has a value if salvaged for recycling or reselling its parts. Solar Energy Generating Equipment: Any equipment generate energy through the use of sun (such as solar panels), or any equipment that aids in generation, such as transmission wires or meter. This is a broad term. Solid Waste: A semi-solid and solid waste from demolition, mining, agriculture, sewage and garbage. The more concrete definition is defined in section 261.2 of the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act. Sublease: A lease by a tenant to another person of a part of the premises held by him. Subpoena: The process by which the attendance of a witness is required is called a "subpoena." It is a writ or order directed to a person, and requiring his attendance at a particular time and place to testify as a witness. Subordinate: An employee who is ranked below another employee in the office seniority or hierarchy. Subject to or under the authority of a superior. • Subsurface Interests (Subsurface Rights): Rights of the landowner to water and substances below the surface of their land. • Surrender: A yielding up of an estate for life or years to him who has an immediate estate in reversion or remainder, by which the lesser estate is merged in the greater by mutual agreement. Survival of Covenants: The contract shall continue for the duration of the contact even if one of the signing parties is no longer employed or passes away. Termination (Terminate): Customer cancellation of remaining work of a contract. Toxic Substance: According to EPA, A toxic substance means any chemical or mixture that may be harmful to the environment and to human health if inhaled, swallowed, or absorbed through the skin. Transferees (Transfer): A person to whom a transfer is made. Transmission: The act or process of transmitting. A transference of motive force or power. 10 Trustee: The person appointed, or required by law, to execute a trust; one in whom an • estate, interest, or power is vested, under an express or implied agreement to administer or exercise it for the benefit or to the use of another. Venue: A neighborhood, place, or county in which an injury or fact are declared to have happened. Venue also denotes the county in which an action or prosecution is brought for trial, and which is to furnish the panel of jurors. Waive (Waiver): The renunciation, repudiation, abandonment, or surrender of some claim, right, privilege, or of the opportunity to take advantage of some select, irregularity, or wrong. The passing by of an occasion to enforce a legal right, whereby the right to enforce the same is lost. Warranty (Warrant): In conveyance, to assure the title to property sold, by an express covenant to that effect in the deed of conveyance. To stipulate by an express covenant that the title of a grantee shall be good, and his possession undisturbed. In contracts, to engage or promise that a certain fact or state of facts, in relation to the subject matter, is, or shall be, as it is represented to be. Waste: Useless consumption or expenditure; use without adequate return; an act or instance of wasting. Written Notice: A legal notification or warning that is delivered in a written format or through a formal announcement. • Written Approval: An official approbation in a written format. 0 • A word to the wise: The following are plain language explanations to each provision for both leases. These explanations are only meant to shed light on what each provision means, why it is important to the lease, and point out some place where changes could be made. The customizability portions are not all inclusive, nor or they all exclusive. The lease contains the only true meanings, if you have any questions about a provision, you should discuss them with the other party and come to a mutual understanding. • • Land Lease ARTICLE1. Premises............................................................................................... 1 Section1.1........... General................................................................................ 1 (a) Lease of Premises for Solar Energy Purposes Why have this provision: The provision is to designate that the premises is solely used for community solar garden that includes, but not limited to, solar energy generating equipment, solar facilities, and other uses in connection to solar energy generation purposes. Customizability: Most importantly, the provision states that the parties intend to be "legally bound" by the terms of the lease. The parties (both landowner and developer) should determine the scope and extent of the actual premises under the provision as well as the operations that are permitted under the designated premises. In fact, the parties can even narrow down what operations may and may not be allowed and define the terms in further detail, such as "time to time." The provision also states that "general description of the premises described in Exhibit A attached to this lease on the effective date may not be a precise legal description of the premises. The owner and Developer hereby acknowledge and confirm that, notwithstanding any insufficiency in the legal description attached as Exhibit A, the parties desire to enter this lease and to be fully and legally bound by the lease." However, the parties can ensure later that the precise legal description of the premises is met by the effective date, which too has to be determined by the parties, through a separate supplementary document. This is also written under the provision as "metes and bounds description' being substituted for Exhibit A pursuant to amendments. (b) Access Easement Why have this provision: The provision prescribes that the landowner acknowledges that the developer will need access easement in order to ingress and egress from the solar facilities to operate its functions and it further provides the scope of such right and to whom it will be applicable to. Customizability: The parties can explicitly state the term instead of referring to other provisions for the exact term, and amend what rights the scope of access 12 easement retains, and to whom it will be binding to. In the model provision, it binds the parties (landowner and developer), their heirs, personal representatives, transferees, successors, and assigns, and all persons claiming under them. (c) Transmission Easement Why have this provision: The provision is to mainly define what is included under the term "transmission facilities" and what rights and obligations it entails for the parties. Customizability: The parties can explicitly state the term (which is equivalent to the lease as stated in the provision). The provisions transmission easement binds the parties (landowner and developer), transferees, successors, assigns, and all persons claiming under them. This may, however, be amended between the parties upon their agreement before entering into the contract. (d) Owner's Retained Rights Why have this provision: The provision grants the landowner his/her right to use the premise that is not used for solar energy purposes, in a manner consistent with the developer's right under the lease, thereby protecting the landowner's right to use the premise to some extent. Customizability: The landowner should understand what is a "use not consistent with Developer's rights" under the lease by discussing with the developer so that the landowner can protect himself/herself from any compensation incurred upon breach of the provision. The landowner is also protected for the loss incurred, if the initial construction happens during the period of hunting season. (e) Location of Solar Facilities Why have this provision: The provision is to ensure that the developer makes good faith effort in consulting on its development plan prior to protect the landowner. (f) Part of a Larger Project Why have this provision: The provision is to provide prior notice to the landowner that the developer may further include "project properties" within the premises. Section 1.2........... Solar Easement................................................................... 3 (a) Open Access to Sun Why have this provision: "Open and unobstructed access to the sun" is significantly important for the purpose of the project and the provision thereby states the landowner grants and conveys exclusive easement to the developer. Customizability: There is no really a way out to change or opt out of this provision 13 • • C] • is as it is the crux of the project to operate. Refer to Solar Easement in Minnesota Statute § 500.30 (b) Owner Improvements Why have this provision: The provision is to provide whether the landowner may have further improvements on the premises based on developer's judgment, and determine the scope of them. Yet, the provision protects the landowner's improvements located before the date of lease and allows him/her to make improvements upon written approval from the developer. Customizability: The requirements are customizable depending on the parties' intention and consent. There are two requirements set out in the provision — (a) and (b). (a) relates back to Section 1.2 (a) and so it would be hardly possible for the requirement of no interference be changed. (b), however, can be amended by the parties. The distance, especially, is one element of the provision that is subject to customizability. (c) No interference Why have this provision: The provision is to reinstate that landowner himself/herself or any other party should not materially interfere with access to sun. Customizability: The parties may incorporate within the provision the circumstances where the landowner or any other party may interfere with access to sun. ARTICLEII. Lease Term........................................................................................ 4 Section 2.1........... Development Period; Operating Term; Renewal Terms... 4 (a) Development Period Why have this provision: The provision states the exact term of the "development period" in which both parties are bound to. Customizability: The current provision states as follows: "the development period commences on the effective date of this lease and expires on December 31, 201_." The parties shall decide the expiration date and even decide to explicitly state the effective date of the lease for clarity. (b) Operating Term Why have this provision: The provision states that the "operating term" of 25 years will begin from the earlier of either the "operation term" or the "operating term notice date," following the end of "development period." (c) Renewal Term 14 Why have this provision: The provision is to permit the developer to extend its operating term upon the requirement established in the provision. Customizability: The current provision states that the "Developer will have the right, at its option, to extend the operating term for one additional period of ten years." The parties are to determine the length of period. Once the length is determined — assume ten years for example, the parties may even decide if they would like to prefer one additional period of ten years or two, successive five year periods. The current provision also states that the "renewal term will be the same terms and conditions applicable during the operation term." However, the landowner may want to set forth a new monthly payment rate under the renewed lease based on the assessment of then -current fair market value of the system. The renewal process set out in the provision can be stated with more details. It currently states "Developer must deliver a written extension notice to owner prior to the expiration of the operating term." The provision, however, can be amended as follows: "Owner will send renewal forms three months prior to the expiration of the lease term, which forms shall set forth the new monthly payments due under the renewed lease, based on assessment of the then current fair market value of the System. If the Developer wants to renew and is in compliance with this lease, complete the renewal forms and return them to owner at least one month prior to the expiration of the lease term. In the event that Developer does not agree to the new monthly payments, the lease shall expire by its terms on the termination date." (d) Entire Term Why have this provision: The provision states that the entire term is comprised of developing, operating, and renewable (if applicable) term. Section 2.2........... Termination of Lease......................................................... 5 Why have this provision: The provision lays out the different circumstances in which the lease will be terminated. Customizability: This provision should not be considered as an exhaustive list of circumstances in which the lease should/will be terminated. For example, it should consider Force Majeure, default of parties, and one party's intention to terminate due to material breach of the lease. An example of amended provision may be amended as follows: Termination "Either party may terminate this agreement in the event a material event of default pursuant to events of default by owner or events of default by Developer prevents operation of the solar facilities for twelve months, except with respect to Force Majeure events. Developer shall terminate this agreement in the event that Developer 15 • • • • abandons the solar facilities prior to the operating period." Default Events of default in this section are subject to specific performance and monetary damages. 1. Events of Default by Owner Owner breaches any material obligation under this agreement, and fails to cure, despite good faith effort to cure such breach within one hundred eighty business days after notification by Developer of the breach. If any material representation or warranty made by owner proves to have been misleading or false in any material respect when made and to have a material adverse effect on Developer, and does not cure the underlying facts so as to make such representation or warranty correct and not misleading within ten business days of written notice from Developer. Any other material breach of this agreement, which proves to have a material adverse effect on Developer, not specifically enumerated above. 2. Events of Default by Developer Developer breaches any material obligation under this agreement, and fails to cure such breach within one hundred eighty business days after notification by owner of the breach. If any material representation or warranty made by Developer proves to have been misleading or false in any material respect when made and to have a material adverse effect on owner, and does not cure the underlying facts so as to make such representation or warranty correct and not misleading within ten business days of written notice from owner. Any other material breach of this agreement, which proves to have a material adverse effect on owner, not specifically enumerated above. Force Majeure Notwithstanding termination, events of default by owner, and events of default by Developer, if by reason of force majeure either party is unable to carry out, either in whole or in part, its obligations herein contained, such Party shall not be deemed to be in default during the continuation of such inability, provided that: - The non-performing party, as soon as practicable (and in any event within five business days after the force majeure events first prevents performance), gives the other party hereto written notice describing the particulars of the occurrence; The suspension of performance be of no greater scope and of no longer duration than is required by the force majeure event; No obligations of the party which were to be performed prior to the occurrence causing the suspension of performance shall use excused as a result of the occurrence; and The non-performing party shall use commercially reasonable efforts to remedy with all reasonable dispatch the cause or causes preventing it from carrying out its obligations. If an event of force majeure continues for a period of one hundred eighty days or longer, either party may treat such an event as an event of termination, and may immediately terminate this agreement by sending the non-performing owner written termination notice 16 setting forth the termination date, provided, however, that the other party may not terminate this agreement if the non-performing party is using commercially reasonable efforts to remedy the event of termination and the non-performing party provides reasonable written assurances that it will be able to remedy such event of termination within an additional one hundred eighty days. Section 2.3........... Survival of Covenants........................................................ 5 Why have this provision: This provision states that the developer's covenants, conditions, rights and restrictions will be considered as a part of the project and remains valid throughout the "entire term." ARTICLE III. Payments and Taxes Section 3.1........... Payments ....................................... 6 6 Why have this provision: The provision states that the payments will be made according to Exhibit D. Section 3.2........... Taxes, Assessments and Utilities Tax is a very important issue and the land in which the project is to be operated is subject to class 3a. If the real property upon which a solar energy generating system is located is used primarily for solar energy production subject to the production tax under Minn. Stat. § 272.0295, the real property shall be classified as class 3a. According to class rate schedule for taxes payable in 2015, if the land's market value is over $150,000, the class rate would be 2%. If the land's market value is under $150,000, the rate would be 1.5%. Also, the property's taxable market value will be multiplied by the class rates to determine the property's tax base (net tax capacity). Additionally, this class will not be subjected to state general tax but subjected to school district operating referendum levies. All voter -approved levies, except school district levies for bonded debt, are levied on referendum market value. School district levies for bonded debt are levied on the net tax capacity of all types of property. Meanwhile, MN excludes the value added by PV Systems from real property taxation; the land on which PV System is located remains taxable (Minn. Stat. § 272.02; Minn. Stat. § 272.028; Minn. Stat. § 272.029; H.F. 1298, Article 2, Sec. 12). This tax issue is an ongoing issue. For example, according to H.B. 3167 in Minnesota, beginning with tax payable in 2015, personal property consisting of solar energy generating system is exempt from property taxation, but the real property (i.e. the land on which the solar energy generating system is located) is still subject to property tax. As to the personal property tax, in lieu of this property tax on large solar energy generating systems, a production tax is set beginning with taxes payable in 2015. The production tax for electricity generated by solar is $1.20 per MW for systems exceeding IMC (AC); systems 1 MW (AC) or less are exempt from the 17 • 0 C7 • • production tax. The wording in this section introduces some methods for tax payments based on the rent payment methods. There are also differences between systems which are or are not subject to the production tax. Based on the size, location, valuation, and production differences, the land is expected to face a unique tax effect vs. lease rate in each instance. 1MW is an important dividing line for this tax issue. As the Bill 3167, any solar array up to 1MW will be production tax free. Not only that, as to the classification of land, if the solar array produces more than 1MW, agricultural land will be classified as class 3a (commercial -industrial property) and is taxed at a rate of $1.20 per megawatt hour produced. Please refer to the model contract provision Section 3.2(b) in relevance to this. (a) Owner Taxes and Assessments Why have this provision : The provision states the responsibility of the landowner to pay both real property and personal property taxes, and to clarify the consequences upon failure. Customizability: An alternative way to include the tax provision can be as follows: "Owner agrees to pay any applicable sales or use taxes on the monthly payments due under this lease. If this lease contains a purchase option at the end of the lease term, Developer agrees to pay any applicable tax on the purchase price for the project. Developer also agrees to pay as invoiced any applicable personal property taxes on the project that the party's local jurisdiction may levy. The total estimated amount landowner will pay for taxes over the lease term is (b) Developer Taxes and Assessments Why have this provision: The provision states the responsibility of the developer to pay taxes. It also protects the landowner in case the real property taxes increases due to the changes in classifications of the land. The developer will be paying/reimbursing if the landowner provides applicable statements with documentation. (c) Tax Contests Why have this provision: The provision provides both parties to contest the validity or amount of the tax. (d) Developer Utilities Why have this provision: The provision states the developer's responsibility to pay for the utilities in regards to the solar facilities, thereby relieving the landowner from the responsibility to pay for the utilities. Section 3.3........... Audit [*Only if there is Royalty Payment*] ...................... 6 18 r1 Why have this provision: The provision is applicable only if there is a royalty payment and the landowner may be able to view the records on its own expense. Royalty payment is a periodic charge that the developer will have to pay to the landowner some percent of either the overall or net sales of the business and the payment is required each week, month, quarter, or year. ARTICLE IV. Developer's Covenants .............................................. 7 Section 4.1........... Mechanics Liens................................................................. 7 Why have this provision: The provision states the developer's responsibility to keep the premises free and clear from all liens and thereby protecting the landowner from potential harms incurred upon lien or any encumbrance. Section 4.2........... Permits and Laws............................................................... 7 Why have this provision: This provision states the developer's responsibility to comply with all legal requirements. It also states that the developer will have the right to contest the validity/applicability of legal requirement if needed, with the cooperation of the landowner. Landowner will be reimbursed for any out-of-pocket expenses incurred while cooperating. This provision thereby protects landowner from any potential liability resulting from failure in meeting legal requirements. Customizability: In the current lease agreement, there is no provision in relation to first obtaining the legal requirements or zoning — compliance should come afterwards. The parties can determine whether additional provision is needed accordingly. The language for such provision could be as follows: "Developer shall obtain at its sole cost all permits required for Developer's use of premises, the permitted use, and the solar facilities from any and all governmental authorities having jurisdiction in the matter. Owner shall reasonably cooperate with Developer in producing such permits." Section 4.3........... Developer's Improvements ..................................... 8 Why have this provision: This provision states that the improvements established by developer will remain as its sole property and that the responsibility of removing any construction debris that may result from the improvements lies upon developer, protecting the landowner's premises. Customizability: Note that the current lease agreement states that the improvements established by developer will remain as its sole property, and not the landowner. The parties can decide to break down the provision into two different provisions as follows: Maintenance; Repair; Management Responsibilities 1. Developer shall properly maintain the solar facilities, conduct all required 19 • maintenance, and make all repairs thereto in accordance with good engineering practice. Developer shall be responsible for all costs related to the solar facilities, including, but not limited to, those costs necessary to construct, operate, maintain, repair, and remove the solar facilities. Alteration 1. Developer shall have the right from time to time both before and after the completion of the project and at Developer's sole cost and expense to make additions, alterations and changes, structural or otherwise in or to the premises as is reasonably required to conduct the permitted use in compliance with the provisions of this agreement. The provision, if amended as above, would protect the landowner from any damages or claims derived from mismanagement of the developer. It would also ensure that developer alters the project only subject to the provisions of this agreement. This provision exists to protect a landowner from any unexpected situations such that the alteration of the system can harm the leased premises or other parts of the owner's land which is not leased. Section 4.4........... Removal of Developer's Improvements ................. 8 (a) Developer will Remove Solar Facilities Why have this provision: The provision states the developer's responsibility of removing the project at the end of the term and the period of time in which it must be completed by. Customizability: The date of termination could be varied upon the involved parties" agreed terms. There could also be a provision in regards to site restoration and decommissioning at the time of termination. The provision language could be as follows: Site Restoration and Decommissioning On the termination date, Developer shall peaceably and quietly leave, surrender, and yield up unto owner the leased premises. Following the termination date of this agreement, Developer shall have _days to remove the solar facilities from the leased premises, and to restore the leased premises to the condition that existed as of the effective date. Such provision is to ensure the condition of the leased premises of the landowner once the developer is to exit on the effective date. In regards to the decommissioning, the financial resource could be done in the form of a "bond." (b) Owner's Right to Remove Solar Facilities Upon Failure by Developer Why have this provision: The provision is invoked when the developer fails to fulfill its responsibility of removing the project upon termination. The provision is to • protect the landowner from any abandonment left on the leased premises. 20 • Customizability: The provision of the model contract does not state whether the landowner can retain all or any portion of it when abandoned. However, force majeure should be an exception to this provision's application. Another exemplary provision which includes such statement is as follows: "Notwithstanding anything to the contrary contained in this agreement, any waiver in whole or in part of the requirement to remove the solar facilities shall require the written approval of owner. Any of the solar facilities left on the leased premises after the passage of _days after the termination date shall be deemed abandoned. Owner shall provide written notice to Developer within days of expiration of such day period, of its election to retain all or any of the solar facilities as its property, or dispose of all or any of the solar facilities in such reasonable manner as owner may see it fit and at Developer's sole cost. It should be provided, however, that owner's election to retain all or any portion of the solar facilities as its property shall relieve Developer from any liability for its failure to remove such solar facilities and provided further, however, that the foregoing shall not apply to any of the solar facilities that is not timely removed if the failure to remove is caused by an event of force majeure or the negligent acts or omissions of owner (in which in either case the time period for removal shall be extended on a day for day basis)." (c) Security for Removal Why have this provision: The provision states that the developer will be establish a • fund called "restoration security" cover obligations for removing the project. Customizability: The parties can determine the length of period of the provision. Section 4.5........... Hazardous Wastes.............................................................. 9 Why have this provision: The provision states the developer's responsibility to protect the premises from hazardous material substance, thereby protecting landowner's premises. Section 4.6........... Insurance............................................................................. 9 Why have this provision: The provision states the developer's responsibility to obtain and maintain insurance covering the project and its activities on the premises. Customizability: The provision could definitely be more expanded in details by using the following language. Insurance 1. At all time during the term of this lease, the Developer shall maintain in full force a comprehensive public liability insurance policy covering Developer's operations, activities, and liabilities on the leased premises. 2. In insurance policy, the following liabilities can be included but not limited to; 21 C7 • • workers' compensation and employers liability, commercial general liability, excess liability, professional liability, or property insurance. 3. Any insurance policy purchased by Developer must be written by an insurance carrier which has a current rating and must be authorized by law. 4. In the event Developer fails to procure, maintain and/or pay for any insurance required by this lease, owner may (but without obligation to do so), upon _ business days' prior notice to Developer, procure such insurance and pay the premium thereof. In such event, Developer shall repay owner all sums so paid by owner, together with interest thereon and any costs or expenses incurred by owner in connection therewith, within days following owner's written demand to Developer for such payment. 5. Owner shall be furnished with satisfactory evidence (i.e. a certificate of insurance) that the foregoing insurance is in effect, and owner shall be notified days prior to the cancellation or material change of any such coverage. Owner and its affiliates shall be named as additional insured with respect to Developer's activities under this agreement. 6. Maintenance by Developer of the insurance required herein shall in no way be interpreted as relieving Developer of any other obligations it may have under this agreement. 7. Developer's insurance coverage shall be primary coverage without right of contribution from any other insurance carried by owner. Insurance maintained by owner is for the exclusive benefit and shall not inure to the benefit of Developer. All policies procured by Developer shall require the insurer to waive subrogation against owner. So what does the amended provision do? Note that the insurance policy should have limits on the amount of money should be given, for example, not less than $ Also, such policy shall name a landowner as an additional insured under such policy as the landowner's interests may appear. Liability insurance is considered in the amended provisions number two as it protects the insured from the risks of liabilities imposed by lawsuits and similar claims. Public liability insurance should also be included to cover a business if a third party was to suffer an injury as a result of its business activities. Here, if the a third party, gets injured because of the project, the developer can be protected by this public liability insurance. Excess liability insurance means a liability insurance that is in excess of specified other policies and also potentially primary insurance for losses not covered by the other policies. If other policies would not protect the developer, this insurance coverage may do protection. Commercial general liability insurance is a coverage protecting a business in the event that a business owner is was against a suit. It is to protect against claims of either bodily injury or property damage. Section 4.7........... Gates and Fences................................................................ 9 22 Why have this provision: The provision provides that the developer will make gates and fences based on mutual agreement or landowner may require the developer to install a cattle guard. Section 4.8........... Site Rules........... I1 Why have this provision: The provision states developer's responsibility to comply with site rules attached on Exhibit E. The site rules are to protect the premise of the landowner. Customizability: The provisions set out in the site rules are protecting landowner's premise. Yet, there are provisions that could be customized based upon parties intent and agreement — such as provision (f) and (g) of the site rules. The landowner may want to require a notice before the developer burn, remove, and clear wood plants, and brush on the premises for provision (f) and change the numbers of provision (g) as needed. ARTICLE V. Owner Covenants....................................................................... 10 Section 5.1........... Title and Authority........................................................... 10 Why have this provision: The provision grants the landowner the title in the premises in fee simple and states that the lease is valid and binding agreement. Section 5.2........... Cooperation to Eliminate Lien Interference .................... 10 Why have this provision: The provision provides that the parties will cooperate to obtain non -disturbance and subordination agreements necessary to eliminate any actual or potential interference. Section 5.3........... Quiet Enjoyment................ ............... 10 Why have this provision: The provision provides that the developer will be granted the right of quiet use and enjoyment in the premises by the landowner. The landowner is to ensure such right, so that it is not materially interfered for the purpose of the project. Customizability: The current lease agreement states no exceptions in which the landowner may be permitted (to a certain extent) to interfere with the developer's right of quiet use and enjoyment. Thus, the provision could be amended as follows: Quiet Enjoyment 1. Owner covenants that Developer shall quietly have and enjoy the premises throughout the term and any extensions thereof. Owner agrees that, throughout the term and any extensions thereof the premises shall be dedicated to Developer's use for conducting the permitted use and designing, constructing, operating, maintaining, repairing, and expanding the solar 23 • • is • 0 • facilities, except as provided for in the following in this section. A. Owner shall protect Developer's quiet enjoyment of its rights hereunder. In the event of an emergency, owner shall have the right to enter upon the premises for the purposes of preventing damage or harm to property or people. The owner shall, when possible and feasible, make attempt to provide the Developer as much notice as possible, prior to entering the premises. Such access to the premises shall not be considered a breach of the covenant of quiet enjoyment. B. Except as specifically set forth below, owner shall not itself conduct any other use, nor shall Developer allow any third party to conduct any other use, on the premises. The only exceptions to the foregoing are; Owner retains the right to enter or access the property and to use the premises if doing so is required in order for the owner to complete tasks necessary to protect the environment. Owner retains the right to maintain drainage swales and other storm water retention and diversion features required to prevent flooding or erosion or to maintain animal habitats. Section 5.4........... Exclusivity........................................................................ 11 Why have this provision: The provision reinstates the sole and exclusive right of the developer to install and operate project on the premises. Customizability: This provision is rather a straightforward provision in which states that the landowner will not be able to enter into another contract that will allow others to construct, build, or locate solar energy facility other than the developer that the landowner has entered into contract with. Depending on how the parties want it, they can expand on the provision by stating what procedure should happen if it should be allowed in certain circumstances (the developer may fail to complete the project) or what the compensation would be for the landowner's breach of contract under this provision. Section 5.5........... Hazardous Materials......................................................... 1 1 Why have this provision: The provision states the landowner's responsibility to comply with all legal requirements regarding hazardous materials on the premises. Customizability: As stated in the current provision, the landowner is allowed to use, store, dispose of or release on the premises, or cause or permit to exist or be used, stored, disposed of or released on the premises as a result of owner's operations to such quantity that may be required in the operations, and only if such use in full compliance with all legal requirements. Since the owner will have to ensure/warrant the statue of "no hazardous materials in compliance with all requirements" from the date the lease begins, it may be helpful to look at Standards Applicable to Generators of Hazardous Waste under https://www.revisor.mn.gov/rules/?id=7045 to meet full 24 compliance. Minnesota Administrative Rules 7045.0020 states the definitions of "hazardous wastes." Section 5.6 Mineral Rights and Lateral Support ........................................... 11 Why have this provision: The provision is to protect both the landowner's subsurface interests and the developer's project. It defines subsurface interests and prescribes the duties and rights of both parties depending on whether the landowner owns more or less tnan 1uu percent of me suosuriace interests. Customizability: The current provision Section 5.6(d) states (in the case that landowner owns 100 percent of the subsurface interests in and under the premises), that "neither owner nor its successors or assigns will be entitled to use, or authorize the use of, any portion of the surface of the premises located within 300 feet of any existing or proposed solar facility or within one hundred feet of any existing or proposed transmission line." These numbers are customizable, however, it will be worthwhile to consult with an expert as well as the Developer on how much distance is actually required to maximize the use for the landowner while not hindering upon the project. Minnesota Statute on lands and minerals are available at: https://vvww.revisor.mn. gov/statutes/?view=part&header=LANDS+AND+MINERA LS Section 5.7........... Operation of the Solar Facilities......................................................... 12 Why have this provision: The provision prevents Landowner from asserting any possible legal claims, for example, nuisance claims by making clear that Landowner admits the fact that the solar facilities may impact the view of the premises. Customizability: Because the Solar Facilities may impact the view not only on the Premises where the Facilities is located, but also on adjacent Premises, Landowner should consider that the negative visual impacts on neighbors' Premises may sometimes create opposition to solar installations. ARTICLE VI. Indemnification........................................................................................ 12 Section 6.1........... Indemnification................................................................................... 12 Why have this provision: This provision sets and limits the scope of indemnification to prevent any possible legal claims arising from unclarified scope of indemnification. 25 • • • • Customizability: Landowner should consider whether this provision should survive the termination of this Lease. If this provision survives the termination of this Lease, Landowner should then determine how long this indemnity obligation can be maintained after the termination of the Lease. Lastly, Landowner should consider whether there should be a monetary limitation on the extent of the indemnity. Section 6.2........... Damage to Owner's Property............................................................ 12 Why have this provision: This provision explains what kinds of damage should be considered and provides appropriate resolutions for each types of damage. The resolutions can be further negotiated by both parties. Also, it limits the scope of indemnification for each damage. Customizability: As to the drain tile or irrigation system damage, it is good to set an alternative damage measurement in case the Developer fails to repair, restore, replace or rebuild the damaged drain tile or irrigation system. Also, Landowner should make sure that the effect of this provision shall not terminate upon the termination or expiration of the Lease until damages are fully compensated. Section 6.3........... Conservation Reserve Program ................................................. 13 Why have this provision: This provision states that reimbursement made by the Developer to Owner can be operated differently if the Owner is a party to Conservation Reserve Program contract. Before entering this agreement, it is a duty for Landowner to provide Developer with a true and complete copy of such CRP Contract. Customizability: Before entering this agreement, Landowner who is a party to a CRP Contract should make sure whether he/she breaches the CRP contract or not. Obtaining any exemptions allowed under the CRP for the use of Solar Facilities on the Premises covered by a CRP contract will be an important matter. Landowner should discuss this provision with his/her legal counsel. ARTICLE VII. Assignment; Encumbrance of Lease ............................................. 14 Section 7.1........... Right to Encumber.............................................................................. 14 Why have this provision: This provision deals with a situation when the Developer • mortgages all or any part of its interest in the Lease and rights under this Lease and/or FM enter into a collateral assignment of all or any part of its interest in the Lease or rights under this Lease to any entity without the consent of Landowner. Because this mortgage can be done without the consent of Landowner, this provision sets Landowner's right to encumber in case of Developer default. Customizability: Developer will want the flexibility of mortgaging his/her interest as collateral for financing, as well as the flexibility of foreclosure. Landowner should be able to provide the flexibilities, but Landowner should make sure that there is assurance that any foreclosing lender cures outstanding defaults under the lease. Meanwhile, Landowner must evaluate any potential conflicts that the solar lease may have with any existing mortgage terms. Especially, Landowner should consider that it would be difficult to remortgage their lands. Lenders can be reluctant to Landowner who enters into this kind of Lease on the basis that a land -lease agreement is usually a 25 -year lease agreement. For lenders, a 25 years is too burdensome. Regarding (d) and (f), Landowner can customize numbers. (30 days period for notification to Lender in case of Developer default, and 60 days period for Lender to request new lease after the rejection or termination of this Lease.) Landowner should discuss it with his/her legal counsel. Section 7.2........... Assignment of Developer's Interest...... 15 Why have this provision: This provision sets examples of Developer's right to assign without need for Owner's consent. Customizability: Unlike this provision, any agreement between Landowner and Developer that prohibits assignment can be fully binding and enforceable. If Landowner does not want Developer's assignment to any successors or does not want that the assignment is made without his/her consent, Landowner can customize this provision. Landowner should discuss the customization with his/her legal counsel. Section 7.3........... Continuing Nature of Obligations...................................................... 15 Why have this provision: This provision explains the nature of easements and rights granted by Landowner to Developer. When those kinds of right and easement are assigned or succeeded, this provision will guide which party will have the benefit of those. 27 • 0 40 0 Customizability: An easement in gross intended to benefit Developer regardless of whether he/she owns any lands. The purpose is to benefit a holder of the easement right. Also, Landowner should consider a negative easement issue. A negative easement is an obligation not to use land in specified ways. This may prevent Landowner from using his/her land in ways he/she wants to. By entering into a written agreement with neighbors, Landowner can prohibit the neighbors from doing anything that would impede access to solar energy. Restricting the height or shape of new buildings can be one of the examples. Also, regarding solar easements, please consider Minnesota Statute§500.30 According to section 7.3, because Landowner grants easements in gross to Developer and the burdens of the easements will run with and against the Premises and will be binding upon and against Owner and its successor, Landowner should consult with an attorney about whether there is any possibility that the nature of easements can change from easement in gross to other types of easement, which could impact the benefit of Landowner. ARTICLE VIII. Condemnation......................................................................................... 16 Section 8.1........... Effect of Condemnation..................................................................... 16 Why have this provision: This provision gives Developer options to terminate or amend this Lease when the construction, installation or operation of Solar Facilities is adversely • affected because of condemnation. • Section 8.2........... Condemnation Proceeds..................................................................... 16 Why have this provision: This provision states the right of Developer to participate in condemnation proceedings and to what extent Developer will be entitled to get payment for condemnation. Customizability (ARTICLE VIII): As against eminent domain proceedings, a principal concern is the payment of just compensation once the right to take for a public purpose has been established. The effect of condemnation to this leasehold interest begins with the condemnation clause in this Lease. Once the contractual rights between Landowner and Developer are settled, the parties must look to the law of eminent domain to determine whether damages exist to the leasehold and how those damages should be measured. In this Lease, it is Developer's discretion, either amending this Lease or terminating this Lease in the event of eminent domain proceedings. However, the parties can discuss this issue by dividing condemnation issue into "Acquisition of part of the leased property" and "Acquisition of the entire leased Premises." In the case of the latter, the parties can settle that the termination of this Lease is automatic and no written notice is required. In the case of "Acquisition of part of the leased property", there are several issues the parties must decide. First, they must decide who can decide whether the partial taking is sufficient to terminate the lease — both, Landowner, Developer or either. Second, if the termination of this Lease is 28 decided, they should determine whether written notice of the termination of this Lease is required. ARTICLE IX. Default/Termination............................................................................. 16 Section 9.1........... Events of Default............................................................................... 16 Why have this provision: This provisions sets conditions to constitute a "Breach" that will permit the non -defaulting party to terminate the Lease or pursue other remedies. Customizability: 30 -days requirement can be customized. In this section, only two cases can be said as a "Breach", but Landowner may want to add more examples that can be said as a "Breach". For example, if either party has provided any false or misleading financial or other information to obtain this Lease, it can be a breach. Landowner should discuss it with his/her legal counsel. Section 9.2........... Surrender VA Why have this provision: This provision explains what Developer should do upon the termination or expiration of this Lease; Removal of Solar Facilities. Also, this provision solves the issue whether Developer should pay the rent fee after expiration or termination of this Lease but before the removal of Facilities. Customizability: The date could be varied upon the involved parties' agreed terms. The financial resource of decommissioning can be done in the form of "bond." Landowner should discuss this provision with his/her legal counsel. Section 9.3........... Specific Performance.......................................................................... 17 Why have this provision: This provision introduces other ways to recover damages caused by Landowner. Developer will have the right to seek specific enforcement of this Lease under certain conditions. Customizability: In general, a Party who is suing for any breach of a land contract is almost always given the option specific performance. In many jurisdictions, this is a flat rule or regarded as a presumption. 29 0 • • • • Section9.4........... Damages............................................................................................. 17 Why have this provision: This provision will be one of the key material provisions which induce or deduce parties to enter into this Lease. Under this provision, any rights to recover consequential, incidental and punitive damages will be waived. This provision should be considered with other provisions dealing with damages to clarify what the impact of this provision will be. Customizability: This provision does not release each Party from any liability to the other Party, but instead apportions the potential liability between the parties. In general, the law permits parties having relatively equal bargaining power to decide to limit the liability of one party to other. Several courts have ruled that this kind of provision may be valid if the limitation clause has been freely negotiated by parties with relatively equal bargaining power; the limitation clause is conspicuous and clearly set forth in the agreement; and there exists no public policy prohibiting the enforcement of the limitation of liability provision. However, whether this provision will induce Landowner to enter into this Lease should be consulted with Landowner's legal counsel first. Section 9.5........... Waiver of Jury Trial........................................................................... 17 Why have this provision: This provision will be another one of the key material provisions which induce or deduce parties to enter into this Lease. However, it can certainly prevent certain Landowner which does want to install Solar Facilities on their premises but does not want to waive the right to a trial by jury. Customizability: Like Section 9.4, whether this provision will induce Landowner to enter into this Lease should be consulted with an attorney first. Meanwhile, here are other ways to resolute dispute arising under this Lease. First: Dispute Negotiation. In the event of any dispute arising under this Agreement (a "Dispute"), within _ Days following the delivered date of a written request by either Party, (1) each Party shall appoint a representative (individually, a "Party Representative", together, the "Parties' Representatives"), and (2) the Parties' Representatives shall meet, negotiate and attempt in good faith to resolve the Dispute quickly, informally and inexpensively. Second: Non -Binding Mediation. In the event the Parties' Representatives cannot resolve the Dispute within —Days after commencement of negotiations pursuant to dispute negotiation the Parties shall submit to non-binding mediation. 30 Third: Arbitration. In the event that the Parties are unable to resolve their dispute through non- binding mediation pursuant to non-binding mediation within _ Days following the initiation of such mediation, either Party may seek binding arbitration. Such methods also aim to prevent contract disputes from going through litigation, which may cost more than these alternatives to court action and take longer, but it does not need to waive the rights for court action. Section 9.6........... Delinquent Payments......................................................................... 18 Why have this provision: This provision sets payment rate in case of delinquent payments, which will eliminate wide discrepancies in rate and the amount of payment. Customizability: The rate can be customized. For example, a rate of ten percent can be twelve percent if an agreement is made between Landowner and Developer. This customization can be discussed with Landowner's legal counsel. Also, another example that can be raised from this provision is the late charge of monthly payments. In this case, Landowner will want to make sure to obtain this late charge by setting another provision stating that Developer agrees that this is a Net Lease and the obligation to pay all monthly payments and all other amounts due under this Lease shall be absolute and unconditional under all circumstances and shall not be subject to any abatement, defense, counterclaim, setoff, recoupment or reduction for any reason whatsoever, it being the express intent of the parties that all amounts payable by Developer hereunder shall be and continue to be payable in all events including by its heirs and estate. ARTICLE X. Miscellaneous............................................................................................. 18 Section10.1......... Notice................................................................................................. 18 Why have this provision: This provisions explains how notices, consents or other documents required or permitted by this Lease can be given to either party, and sets presumption on delivery if certain conditions are satisfied, which is similar to common law mailbox rule. Customizability: Parties can state more options. For example, each Party shall deem a document faxed or sent via PDF as an original document. Another example is this: Whenever this Agreement requires or Permits delivery of a "notice" or requires a Party to "notify", the Party with such right or obligation shall provide a written communication in the manner specified below. A notice sent by facsimile, transmission, or e-mail will be recognized and shall be deemed received on the day on which such notice was transmitted if received before 5 31 • • • C] p.m. Central Standard Time (and if received after 5 p.m., on the next day) and a notice by overnight mail or courier shall be deemed to have been received two (2) days after it was sent or such earlier time as is confirmed by the receiving Party unless it confirms a prior oral communication, in which case any such notice shall be deemed received on the day sent. A Party may change its addresses by providing notice in accordance with this provision. Section 10.2......... Relationship of the Parties; No Third Party Beneficiaries ................. 18 Why have this provision: This provision states the duties, obligations and liabilities of each parties should be several. Both parties will not bear one party's responsibilities in the form of joint venture or fiduciary relationship. This provision clarifies the scope of responsibilities each party should bear. Customizability: It is good to specify what kind of interpretation of this Lease should not be permitted. For example, the terms of this Lease shall not be construed to provide Landowner with any interest in nor any right to receive renewable energy credits, environmental attributes, state or federal subsidies including tax benefits, not the proceeds of any of the foregoing except as expressly provided herein. Section 10.3......... Entire Agreement................................................................................ 18 Why have this provision: This provision clarifies this Lease will be the entire and final agreement that is agreed upon by both parties, and gets rid of any possible challenges by either party to amend this Lease by providing other prior statements or representations. Customizability: If there is an agreement other than this Lease or any this Lease -related materials between Landowner and Developer, they can discuss about which agreement shall control in the event of a conflict between a provisions set forth in this Lease and the other agreement. Section 10.4......... Governing Law................................................................................... 19 Why have this provision: This provision sets which state law will govern this Lease. This provision will solve disputes arising from the interpretation of this Lease. Also, this provision can solve any possible jurisdictional and venue issues in a lawsuit. 32 Customizability: There is another option to replace the right to go to court; Arbitration. Arbitration replaces the right to go to court, including the right to a jury and the right to participate in a class action or similar proceeding. In arbitration, a dispute is resolved by an arbitrator instead of a judge or jury. Landowner can discuss this option with Developer. But it would be much safer to discuss this issue after Landowner consult with his/her attorney. Section10.5......... Cooperation........................................................................................ 19 Why have this provision: This provision requires both parties' cooperation to carry out the purposes and intent of this Lease and to fulfill the obligations of the respective parties. Because of this provision, either party cannot be knowingly uncooperative towards the other party. Also, this provision will reduce any possibilities to go to law when there are inaccuracies or insufficiencies in the legal description of the Premises. Under this provision, the first thing both parties have to do is to amend this Lease to correct the inaccuracies or insufficiencies. Customizability: Neither party shall not unreasonably delay its compliance with any reasonable request made pursuant to this provision. It would be better to make sure that the parties acknowledge that they are entering into a long-term arrangement in which the cooperation of all of them will be required. Section10.6......... Waiver................................................................................................ 19 Why have this provision: This provision sets conditions which should be done by a party to properly waive any provisions of this Lease. By this provision, both party will not be easily deemed to have waived any provision of this Lease without satisfying those conditions. Customizability: This clause aims to ensure that a party's failure to enforce its contractual rights, whether intentionally or by oversight, does not result in an automatic waiver of those rights or remedies for their breach under certain conditions. Both parties can discuss further about whether they agree that the waivers and disclaimers set forth above shall survive the expiration or termination of this Lease. Section 10.7. . . ..Force Majeure....................................................................................... 19 33 • • • • Why have this provision: this provision takes into account factors outside of the lease that could affect the lease. An outside factor is something that neither party caused or could predict, such as a storm or earthquake. Neither party will be at fault to the other party if such an unforeseen and outside factor prevents either party from meeting their obligation to the other party. Also, neither party can end the contract based on that inability to meet the obligation. Section 10.8......... Confidentiality.................................................................................... 19 Why have this provision: this provision protects personal information pertaining to and included in the lease from disclosure to non -contracting parties. Any information regarding the solar equipment, design, payments, or any other information within the contract cannot be disclosed by either party unless both parties allow the disclosure or the information is already public. This information may be disclosed to a party's representatives, such as an attorney or accountant. These privacy rules continue to apply even after the contract expires. Section10.9......... Tax Credits.......................................................................................... 20 Why have this provision: developers, through their development and maintenance of the solar garden, may be eligible for government tax credits, benefits, or incentives. This provision protects the developers' interest in such tax breaks coming from their • percentage holdings in the garden; if the government changes the tax credit requirements, this provision requires the contract to be changed in order for the developers to meet those requirements. L� Section10.10......... Severability....................................................................................... 20 Why have this provision: this provision keeps the overall contract working if any part or provision of the lease becomes invalid. The invalid provision is taken out and the parties follow the rest of the contract as if that invalid provision never existed. A provision may become invalid due to a change in the law, a judge's ruling, the actions of the parties, or any outside factor. Section 10.11......... Counterparts...................................................................................... 20 Why have this provision: the final lease does not need to be executed all at once or all by the same parties. In dealing with a company as the other party, you may not be dealing with the same company representative the entire time. Also, a lease of this size may take more than one meeting to complete. Instead of requiring the lease to be completed in one sitting by the same parties, this provision allows both sides to complete the final lease piecemeal due to time or availability of the parties. Once all provisions are agreed to, the parts of the lease completed at each meeting will be combined to form the final lease. Section 10.12......... Memorandum of the Lease............................................................... 20 34 Why have this provision: this provision states how the lease will be recorded once completed. This provision also states that, once the parties sign the lease, they are consenting to the included interests and obligations within that lease. ROOF LEASE Section 1.2......... Lease to Use and Access to Rooftop....................................................... 1 1.2.1 Why have this provision: this provision states that, by accepting and signing the lease, the roof owner provides the developer the right to use the roof -top for the installation, operation, and maintenance of the solar garden. The cost of these actions falls solely on the developer. Included in this right to use the rooftop is an easement, providing the developer the ability to use stairs or other ways to access the rooftop at its leisure in order to install, operate, or maintain the solar garden. Each of these rights granted to the developer are subject to the other provisions of the lease that may limit or expand those rights. 1.2.2 Why have this provision: this provision provides that by agreeing to this lease the developer states that it inspected the roof itself, that the roof owner did not guarantee that the roof is suitable for the solar garden, and that the roof owner has not obligation to make sure that the roof is suitable for the garden. Each of these statements are subject to any other provisions within the lease requiring the roof owner to do anything with the roof. Overall, this provision takes away any responsibilities of the roof owner to the developer in regards to the condition of the roof. Section 1.3......... Equipment Space.............................................................................. 2 Why have this provision: this provision clearly states that the developer will install the roof -top equipment and will do so at its own expense. Also, installation is subject to any other provisions within the lease that limit or expand the rights and obligations of the developer and roof owner in regards to installation and expenses. Section 1.4......... Term of Rooftop Lease............ N Why have this provision: this provision provides how long the lease lasts, and also what each party must do once the lease ends. Specifically, this provision provides that, once the lease ends, the developer will remove the equipment at its own expense, make any necessary repairs in order to leave the roof in good condition, and that if the developer at any time defaults on any of its obligations under the lease the roof owner may hold onto the equipment as collateral. Section 1.5......... Fees Paid for Rooftop Lease................................................................... 2 35 • • 0 • Why have this provision: this provision describes what will be paid, by who, and when for the developer's use of the roof -top. Section 1.6......... Responsibilities of Tenant.................................................................... 2 1.6.1 Why have this provision: this provision provides that the developer will design, operate, and maintain the roof -top solar garden equipment. These actions will be at the sole expense of the developer. All plans must be shared with the roof owner. 1.6.2 Why have this provision: this provision limits the use and maintenance of the rooftop equipment by the developer. For instance, the developer cannot use the roof for anything illegal, dangerous, creating a nuisance, or increasing the insurance costs of the building. This includes using or storing environmentally hazardous materials. Also, the roof -top equipment must be stored securely at all times, a responsibility of both the developer and roof owner. Ownership, operation, and maintenance of the equipment still falls on the developer. 1.6.3 Why have this provision: this provision lists the duties of the developer in caring for the roof. For instance, the developer will not injure the roof and must keep it in good 40 condition. Any equipment not necessary will be removed in order to keep the rooftop clean and accessible. Once the lease terminates, the developer will leave the roof in good condition. 1.6.4 Why have this provision: this statement provides that the developer will comply with any and all building and site standards. Such standards may come from city, county, state, or federal laws and regulations. 1.6.5 Why have this provision: this provision describes what happens during the removal of any installed equipment. The amount of time the developer has to remove the equipment is included and may be contracted or expanded upon both parties' wishes. The developer will repair any damages from the use and removal of the equipment that are not caused by the general wear and tear that a roof regularly receives. The developer cannot remove the equipment if in default to the rooftop owner for any reason. If the developer does not remove the equipment, the equipment will be considered abandoned and in possession of the roof owner to do with as he or she pleases. If the developer asks the roof owner for an extension of time to keep the equipment in place after the lease expires, and the roof owner agrees to it, the equipment cannot be considered abandoned if not removed by the end of the lease. 0 Section 1.7......... Responsibilities of Landlord................................................................. 3 36 C, 1.7.1 Why have this provision: this provision provides what duties or things the roof owner has to provide to the developer. Specifically, the roof owner will provide the developer and its employees with access to the roof in order to operate or maintain the equipment. 1.7.2 Why have this provision: under this provision, the roof owner cannot do anything to interfere with the work of the equipment. This prohibition includes engaging in activity that would negatively affect the use or effectiveness of the equipment, or allowing someone else to negatively affect the equipment's use or effectiveness. Section 2.1......... Use of Electrical Services by Tenant ................................................... 4 Why have this provision: this provision provides how the project will get power, and who will pay for that power. The roof owner will provide electrical power access to the developer, but the developer will pay for increased electricity costs to the roof owner from the projects' electricity usage. The roof owner is not liable for any temporary power outages, but the roof owner must do whatever is reasonable to restore power if able to do SO. Section 2.2......... Construction, Alteration, Maintenance..................................................4 Why have this provision: this provision describes what regulations the parties must comply with during construction, alteration, and maintenance of the equipment. These regulations are added on the any other regulations or rules that must be complied with under the lease. The rules are in an attached appendix, and may also include any additional rules that the roof owner creates. Section 2.3......... Law and Regulations............................................................................ 4 Why have this provision: under this provision, the developer needs to follow all laws and regulations that pertain to creating and maintaining a roof lease. Such laws and regulations may be from local, state, or federal government entities. The developer also agrees that all the equipment they use will meet, and continue to meet, industry standards. The developer is solely responsible for maintaining the solar equipment. Also, the developer will use its best efforts not to interfere with the roof owner's business or actions. If the developer's solar equipment does present interference, they must make adjustments to correct the interference. Nothing in this section limits developer's obligations or roof owner's rights under Article 1.7.5, and the developer still agrees to indemnify the roof owner for any issues or damage arising under the contents of this section. Section 2.4......... Building Rules..................................................................................... 5 • 37 • Why have this provision: under this provision the developer must follow all relevant building rules and regulations of the building created by the roof owner. This requirement also applies to all of the developer's agents. Any changes by the roof owner to the rules must be sent in writing. Section 2.5......... Entry by Landlord................................................................................ 5 Why have this provision: under this provision, developer gets entry to the land or roof at all reasonable hours and in case of emergencies. The developer must abide by the roof owner's schedule, and not the other way around. Section 2.6......... Assignment, Subletting and Transfers by Agreement ......................... 5 Why have this provision: this provision describes how the developer can pass its responsibilities under the lease to other parties. The developer has the power to give one of its agents, i.e. a corporation or a partner, the power to run day to day operations, but the developer will not be excused from any liability resulting from this lease. Section 2.7......... Consent to Mortgage......................................................... 2.7.1 Why have this provision: under this provision, the developer can mortgage its interest in the roof panels/garden whenever it wants to. This lease always comes before such mortgages or other agreements, requiring the developer to fulfill the lease before any • such mortgages. If the developer does obtain a mortgage, they must give a copy to the roof owner. Any mortgages will not affect the roof owner's ownership of the property in any way. 2.7.2 Why have this provision: this provision describes the obligation of the roof owner to give information on the state of the agreement to the developer at the developer's request. It is important that the developer be able to check on the status of this lease so that the developer can know where it stands with the roof owner, and if the developer needs to make any sort of adjustments to the lease. It is important for both parties to maintain good communication regarding the status of the lease. Section 2.8......... Insurance................... 2.8.1 Why have this provision: this provision lists the forms of insurance that the developer needs to acquire insurance while building and maintaining the roof panels. The developer needs to acquire insurance that covers: workers compensation, employer's liability, automobile liability, builders risk insurance, and excess insurance. Each insurance has a required amount, most amount should be respected, but the excess liability portion should be discussed. • 2.8.2 38 Why have this provision: each insurance policy under this provision will include the names of additional insured parties of the involved roof owner, its partners, directors, officers, agents and representatives, and affiliates as designated from time -to -time by the roof owner, as well as all other indemnity obligations as set forth in this lease. Each policy also requires thirty days prior notice of cancellation to each party. 2.8.3 Why have this provision: the developer must secure insurance before this lease is signed. The roof owner must inspect the developer's insurance and make sure that it meets the amounts specified in this lease. 2.8.4 Why have this provision: if the developer uses any contractors or subcontractors in building or maintaining the equipment or roof structure, those contractors or subcontractors must abide by the provisions in this lease, including having necessary insurance. Section 2.9......... Indemnity............ ..................... 7 Why have this provision: this provision is needed to protect the roof owner. If the developer or its agents cause any damage to property or person while building or maintaining the project then the developer is responsible for reimbursement for those damages. Thus, if the roof owner is sued by a damaged person or entity arising from the developer's actions, the developer will pay for the roof owner's expenses arising out of that suit. This provision does not apply in the case of gross or extreme negligence by the roof owner leading to damage or injury. Section 2.10......... Casualty Damage .......................... ... 7 Why have this provision: this provision details what will happen in the event that the property is severely damaged in any way, such as by a building fire. If the event damages the building or panels too much, both parties will have the ability to terminate the lease. If both parties agree to continue, the roof owner is responsible fixing up the building so that the solar panels can be operated again. The developer and the developer alone is responsible for restoring the solar equipment. The roof owner will not be responsible for any loss of money suffered by the developer. Section 2.1 1......... Condemnation................................................................................... 8 Why have this provision: this provision details what would happen if the building, or part of it, was to be taken over or seized by the government for public use. If the entire building is taken by the government through eminent domain, then the lease will be terminated immediately. If only part of the building is taken, and it affects the operations of the solar facility, then the developer has the right to terminate the lease, but must give notice to the roof owner within 30 days of its decision to terminate. 39 :J • • Section 2.12......... Damages from Certain Causes.......................................................... 8 Why have this provision: this provision protects both parties from liability for any acts or circumstances that are beyond the roof owner or developers control. Examples of such acts include acts of God, war, riots, etc. Section 2.13......... Events of Default/Remedies.............................................................. 8 2.13.1 Why have this provision: this provision states what constitutes default by the developer, and more importantly what happens if the developer breaks the lease in any way. The roof owner will not be able to recover more than twenty-four months of lease fees in case of a default. This provision proves very important because it details things that can and will end this agreement. 2.13.2 Why: If the developer does break the lease, the roof owner may take any legal actions to recover damages, including taking possession of the solar equipment. 2.13.3 Why: Any party that does not comply with an order to comply with this lease within thirty days will be in breach. If the roof owner is found to be in default, the developer's recovery shall not exceed twenty-four months rent. This provision has much room for • negotiation. It is important that the roof owner has some protection, but the length of time and amount can and should be negotiated. 2.15......... Subordination To Mortgage........................................................9 Why: Existing agreements, such as a mortgage or deed, come first before this lease. This lease is subject to all pre-existing agreements. As such, both parties should be aware of any other agreements on the property. 3.1 ......... Attorneys' Fees............................................................................9 Why: In case of a dispute, the losing party agrees to pay the fee for the other's lawyers. This is an important thing to consider before beginning any court proceedings. Although attorney's fees need to be reasonable, they can still be sizable. 3.2 ......... No Implied Waiver......................................................................10 Why have this provision: If someone does not do what they are supposed to, and the other party does not immediately demand performance, the demanding party does not waive its right to demand performance. The demanding party can later demand performance. This provision is in place so that there is no trickery. Parties now know they will not be let off the hook by hiding a default for a certain amount of time. This Lease • should be based on trust and full disclosure. 40 • 3.3 ......... Personal Liability......................................................................10 Why have this provision: Neither party can be held liable to third parties, such as other tenants in the building. Parties should not be held responsible for things that are beyond their control. 3.4 ......... Notice .....................................................................................10 Why have this provision: All communications required by this agreement must be in writing. And the postage must be prepaid by whoever sends the document. Communications in writing, although not full proof, are the best way to show that something actually happened. 3.5 ......... Severability...............................................................................1 l Why have this provision: If any of the portions of this lease become invalid or unenforceable, the rest of the lease will still stand. It is not in either parties best interest to have this lease invalidated by a small provision no longer being enforceable. 3.6 ......... Recordation ............................................................................ l 1 Why have this provision: If the developer wishes to have a Memorandum of the Lease, • they are responsible for filing it themselves. 3.7 ......... Governing Law..........................................................................11 Why have this provision: Parties need to agree that this lease will be enforced under the laws of the state in which the land is located. This is important so parties may easily comply with the lease, and in case of a dispute, both parties have previously agreed which laws will apply. This will assure that either party is not unduly burdened in case of a lawsuit. 3.8 ......... Time of Performance...................................................................1 l Why have this provision: All acts will be performed swiftly by the developer so as to not cause unnecessarily delay. 3.9 ......... Transfers by Landlord..................................................................3.9 Why have this provision: The roof owner may transfer their interest in this lease, such as by selling their land or building, as long as the new interest holder agrees to abide by this lease. 3.10 ......... Commissions ............................................................................1 1 • 41 • Why have this provision: The roof owner will not pay for any brokerage fees in renewing this lease. If the developer chooses to use a broker, it is the developer's responsibility to pay for the broker. 3.11......... Taxes.....................................................................................11 Why have this provision: The developer needs to pay any taxes incurred from the project. The roof owner also needs to pay any taxes from its increase in revenue coming from the project. 3.12......... Regulatory Authority..................................................................12 Why have this provision: It is the developer's responsibility to obtain any permits to run the project. If the developer becomes aware that it will be unable to secure the necessary permits, it must immediately inform the roof owner. 3.13......... Independent Contractor................................................................12 Why have this provision: The developer cannot make the roof owner do anything beyond the scope of this lease. The developer agrees that any agents or independent contractors it uses represent the developer. This is important if an independent contractor that the developer uses does some harm; the developer cannot later claim that they are not • responsible for the damage. 3.14......... Force Majeure..........................................................................12 Why have this provision: If some event happens, such as an earthquake or fire, that is beyond the control of either party, the affected party will be excused from performance. The affected party will make all reasonable efforts to get the solar facility back on track if possible. Force majeure means something that is beyond any one person control, such as a hurricane or act war. Neither party should be held responsible for something that is beyond their control; sometimes stuff happens. 3.16......... Ownership of Equipment.............................................................12 Why have this provision: The developer holds all ownership right to the solar equipment. The roof owner does not have any say about maintenance of the equipment, as long as it takes place during the roof owner's agreed upon and reasonable schedule. The roof owner is simply renting their space; they do not own anything that the developer puts in that space, and the developer needs to able to access their equipment without the burden of asking the roof owner's permission first. 3.17......... Entire Agreement................................................................. 12 Why have this provision: Both parties agree that this is the only lease between them. • There can be no claims that parties agreed to anything else, only this lease is binding; if it 42 is not in this lease, it is not binding and it does not apply. While verbal agreements and • handshake deals can be binding contracts in other circumstances, they shall not apply in this case. • • 43 • • • 4849-7712-9248.3 DRAFT MODEL ROOFTOP SOLAR LEASE SOLAR ENERGY FACILITY ROOFTOP LEASE AGREEMENT BY AND BETWEEN AS LANDLORD, AND ASTENANT DATED [ , 2015] DRAFT MODEL, ROOFTOP SOLAR LEASE Table of Contents • BACKGROUND RECITALS.....................................................................................................................1 INSURANCE..................................................................................................................... I. GRANT OF ROOFTOP LEASE.............................................................................................................1 2.9 1.1 DEFINITIONS...................................................................................................................1 2.10 1.2 LEASE TO USE AND ACCESS TO ROOFTOP.............................................................1 2.11 1.3 EQUIPMENT SPACE.......................................................................................................2 2.12 1.4 TERM OF ROOFTOP LEASE..........................................................................................2 2.13 1.5 FEES PAID FOR ROOFTOP LEASE...............................................................................2 2.14 1.6 RESPONSIBILITIES OF TENANT..................................................................................2 2.15 1.7 RESPONSIBILITIES OF LANDLORD............................................................................3 III. MISCELLANEOUS II. GENERAL COVENANTS.................................................................................................................... 4 2.1 USE OF ELECTRICAL SERVICES BY TENANT.........................................................4 2.2 CONSTRUCTION, ALTERATION AND MAINTENANCE..........................................4 2.3 LAWS AND REGULATIONS..........................................................................................4 2.4 BUILDING RULES...........................................................................................................5 2.5 ENTRY BY LANDLORD.................................................................................................5 • 2.6 ASSIGNMENT, SUBLETTING AND TRANSFERS BY AGREEMENT ......................5 2.7 CONSENT TO MORTGAGE.......................................................................................... 5 2.8 INSURANCE..................................................................................................................... 6 2.9 INDEMNITY..................................................................................................................... 7 2.10 WAIVER OF SUBROGATION RIGHTS.........................................................................7 2.11 CASUALTY DAMAGE....................................................................................................7 2.12 CONDEMNATION...........................................................................................................8 2.13 DAMAGES FROM CERTAIN CAUSES......................................................................... 8 2.14 EVENTS OF DEFAULT/REMEDIES..............................................................................8 2.15 SUBORDINATION TO MORTGAGE.............................................................................9 III. MISCELLANEOUS ............................................................................................................................10 3.1 ATTORNEYS' FEES.......................................................................................................10 3.2 NO IMPLIED WAIVER..................................................................................................10 3.3 PERSONAL LIABILITY................................................................................................10 3.4 NOTICE...........................................................................................................................10 3.5 SEVERABILITY.............................................................................................................11 3.6 RECORDATION.............................................................................................................11 0 4849-7712-9248.3 DRAFT MODEL ROOFTOP SOLAR LEASE • 3.7 GOVERNING LAW........................................................................................................11 3.8 TIME OF PERFORMANCE...........................................................................................11 3.9 TRANSFERS BY LANDLORD.....................................................................................1 l 3.10 COMMISSIONS..............................................................................................................11 3.11 TAXES............................................................................................................................11 3.12 REGULATORY AUTHORITY......................................................................................12 3.13 INDEPENDENT CONTRACTOR.................................................................................. 12 3.Error! Bookmark not defined. 3.15 FORCE MAJEURE......................................................................................................... 12 3.16 OWNERSHIP OF EQUIPMENT....................................................................................12 3.17 ENTIRE AGREEMENT..................................................................................................12 • • Appendix 1 Solar Equipment 4849-7712-9248.3 DRAFT MODEL ROOFTOP SOLAR LEASE SOLAR ENERGY FACILITY ROOFTOP LEASE AGREEMENT • THIS ROOFTOP LEASE AGREEMENT (sometimes referred to alternatively as "Lease" or "Agreement"), is made and entered into as of the day of (the "Effective Date"), between INC. ("Landlord"), and a corporation ("Tenant"). BACKGROUND RECITALS A. Tenant desires to obtain a lease in order to install and operate solar (photovoltaic) equipment in and on the rooftop of the Building; and B. Landlord is willing to grant the above referenced non-exclusive lease to Tenant subject to certain terms and conditions NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the premises and other good and valuable consideration, the receipt and adequacy of which is hereby acknowledged, the parties hereto agree as follows: I. GRANT OF ROOFTOP LEASE 1.1 DEFINITIONS In addition to terms defined in this Lease, the following terms set forth below will be defined as follows: 1.1.1 `Building" will mean that certain building located at , currently known as • 1.1.2 "Equipment Space" will mean not more than [XX] equipment rack spaces located in the rooftop mechanical room. 1.1.3 "Rooftop' will mean the applicable portions of the roof of the Building designated by Landlord as the space for the Solar Equipment. 1.1.4 "Solar Equipment" will mean Tenant's solar generation facility and related equipment including wiring, cabling and other accessories used therewith for installation, operation and maintenance on the Rooftop [and in the Equipment Space] and described on Appendix 1, attached hereto and made a part hereof. 1.2 LEASE TO USE AND ACCESS TO ROOFTOP 1.2.1 Subject to the terms and conditions contained in this Lease, Landlord hereby grants to Tenant and Tenant agrees to accept the non-exclusive, as to other non -solar uses, right to use the Rooftop for the installation, operation and maintenance, at Tenant's sole cost and expense, of the Solar Equipment. Throughout the Term of the Lease, as described below, Landlord hereby grants Tenant an easement through the Building, including all elevators, stairways or other access points of egress and ingress for purposes of accessing the Rooftop for the purpose described herein and pursuant to the terms and conditions of Section 1.7 below. • 4849-7712-9248.3 DRAFT' MODEL ROOFTOP SOLAR LEASE • 1.2.2 Tenant acknowledges that it has inspected the Rooftop, that Landlord has made no representations or warranties respecting the condition thereof or otherwise or its suitability for Tenant's use, and that, except as may be expressly provided to the contrary in this Lease, Landlord has no obligation or duty to make any alterations, improvements, or repairs in and to the Rooftop to make same ready for Tenant's use and occupancy and Tenant takes and accepts the Rooftop in its present "as is" condition. 1.3 EQUIPMENT SPACE Landlord acknowledges that Tenant will be installing equipment in the Equipment Space and that the installation, maintenance and use of the Equipment Space will be at Tenant's sole expense and is subject to the terms of this Lease. 1.4 TERM OF ROOFTOP LEASE This Lease will commence on the Effective Date and will terminate on the date that is (_) [months/years] from the Effective Date (the "Term"). Upon termination of this Lease, Tenant will at its own cost remove all Solar Equipment and repair any damage to the Building. Tenant will surrender the Rooftop to Landlord in good condition and repair (subject to ordinary wear and tear). If Tenant is in default of this Lease, then Landlord can prohibit the removal of any of the Solar Equipment, in its sole discretion, until the default is cured. 1.5 FEES PAID FOR ROOFTOP LEASE • Tenant agrees to pay Landlord a fee for this Lease, without notice, setoff or demand, of and no/100ths Dollars ($__) per month [year], pro rata for any partial month [year] to the extent that the Term commences or terminates on a day other than the first or last day of the month [year], respectively (the "Lease Fee"). Such payments will be due on the Effective Date and on the first day of each succeeding calendar month [year] of the Term of the Lease and will be made by United States Mail, postage prepaid, to the address of Landlord set forth in Paragraph 2.19. [Automatic Deposit?] 1.6 RESPONSIBILITIES OF TENANT 1.6.1 Plans and Specs of Solar Equipment. Tenant at Tenant's sole expense will design, procure and install the Solar Equipment in accordance with its plans and specifications, which plans and specifications Tenant will share with Landlord. Tenant is responsible for all costs associated with the Lease, including the costs of operating and maintaining the Solar Equipment. 1.6.2 Use and Maintenance. This Lease is limited to allowing Tenant only to install, maintain and operate the Solar Equipment on the Rooftop in the location or locations described in Appendix 1. Tenant agrees not to use or permit the use of the Rooftop for any purpose which is illegal, dangerous to life, limb or property or which, in Landlord's reasonable opinion, creates a nuisance or which would increase the cost of insurance coverage with respect to the Building. In particular, no environmentally hazardous materials will either be used or stored in or around the Rooftop and no such materials will be used in any of the Solar Equipment installed by Tenant on the Rooftop. Tenant will not permit unauthorized person or persons with insufficient expertise or experience to access the Equipment Space or maintain or operate the Solar Equipment. Tenant and Landlord understand that the Equipment . Space must be kept locked and secure at all times. 4849-7712-9248.3 DRAFT MODEL ROOFTOP SOLAR LEASE 0 Tenant acknowledges that interruptions in utility services and power surges are not uncommon in facilities such as the Building. Tenant acknowledges that all Solar Equipment in the Building is the sole responsibility of Tenant and that the use and operation of such Solar Equipment is at Tenant's sole risk. 1.6.3 Care and Maintenance by Tenant. Tenant agrees not to commit any waste or allow any waste to be committed within or on any portion of the Rooftop and will not injure the Rooftop or Building but will maintain the Rooftop in a clean condition and in good repair, except as to damage to be repaired by Landlord, as provided herein. Tenant will remove all excess cable, tools and equipment and will keep all areas neat and clean at all times. At the termination of this Lease, Tenant agrees to deliver up the Rooftop to Landlord in as good condition as at the date of the commencement of the term of this Lease, ordinary wear and tear excepted. 1.6.4 Site Technical Standards. Tenant agrees that the installation, operation and maintenance of its Solar Equipment will at all times, and at Tenant's sole cost and expense, comply with such technical standards for the Rooftop as may from time to time be established by Landlord in Landlord's reasonable discretion, including, without limitation, technical standards relating to structural engineering, and city construction permits (the "Site Technical Standards"). 1.6.5 Removal of Solar Equipment. Tenant will remove its Solar Equipment within ten (10) business days after the termination of this Lease provided Tenant repairs any damage to the Building (including the Rooftop) caused thereby, excluding ordinary wear and tear. [To assure that Tenant will remove its Solar Equipment and will effect such repairs, Landlord may require Tenant to deposit in escrow cash in the amount it reasonably estimates will be incurred to remove Solar Equipment and to affect such repairs.] Tenant will not be permitted to remove any moveable Solar Equipment or other • personal property or equipment from the Rooftop at any time, including at the end of the Term or any renewal thereof or other sooner termination of this Lease, if Tenant is then in default under this Lease. If Tenant does not remove its Solar Equipment (to the extent such is entitled to be removed) on or prior to the expiration or termination of this Lease without the written consent of Landlord to maintain the Solar Equipment at the Rooftop, Tenant's Solar Equipment will be conclusively deemed to be abandoned (after Landlord has given Tenant twenty (20) business days written notice of such expiration or termination) and will become Landlord's property and Landlord may remove and/or dispose of such Solar Equipment as Landlord sees fit, all at Tenant's cost and expense. In connection therewith, provided Tenant is not in default hereunder, Landlord agrees that if Tenant requests permission to maintain its Solar Equipment on the Rooftop after the termination of this Lease, Landlord will not unreasonably withhold its consent thereto, but in no event will Tenant be permitted to maintain its Solar Equipment on the Rooftop for more than forty-five (45) days after the termination of this Lease. Such consent will be deemed to be reasonably withheld if such space is relet to a third party or if the marketing of such space is inhibited by the presence of the Solar Equipment. 1.7 RESPONSIBILITIES OF LANDLORD 1.7.1 Rights of Access and Provision of Space and Facilities. Landlord will provide employees or agents of Tenant rights of ingress and egress in those portions of the Building controlled by Landlord and Landlord will provide Tenant with access to and use of the Rooftop and Equipment Space consistent with the requirements of the installation, operation, maintenance, and service of the Solar Equipment; provided, however, such rights of ingress and egress will be consistent with (i) the terms and conditions • 4849-7712-9248.3 • DRAFT' MODEL ROOFTOP SOLAR LEASE of any leases between Landlord and tenants; and (ii) rules and regulations reasonably promulgated from time to time by Landlord regarding such rights of ingress and egress. 1.7.2 Non -Interference. Tenant will have the sole and exclusive right to install and operate solar energy generating equipment on the Rooftop. In no event during the Term will Landlord construct, build or locate, or allow others to construct, build, or locate any equipment or facilities (solar or otherwise) that would interfere with the Solar Equipment or otherwise engage in, or allow others to engage in activity, that might impede the Solar Equipment's access to the sun or decrease the output or efficiency of the Solar Equipment. H. GENERAL COVENANTS 2.1 USE OF ELECTRICAL SERVICES BY TENANT Landlord will furnish Tenant electrical facilities to provide sufficient power for Tenant's Solar Equipment; provided, however, that Tenant will be responsible for (i) the cost of installing such facilities, (ii) the cost of the installation of any separate meters required by Tenant, and (iii) the sums charged Landlord by the applicable utility for such service as reflected by such meter. Temporary interruption in the power provided by such facilities will not render Landlord liable in any respect for damages to either person or property nor relieve Tenant from fulfillment of any covenant or agreement hereof. If any of Tenant's Solar Equipment fails because of a loss of electrical power, Landlord will use reasonable diligence to restore electrical power promptly, but Tenant will have no claim for damages on account of any interruption in electrical service occasioned thereby or resulting therefrom. 2.2 CONSTRUCTION, ALTERATION AND MAINTENANCE In addition to and not in limitation of any provision herein concerning construction, alterations, installation and maintenance of any equipment installed herewith, Tenant will comply and, to the extent applicable, the contractors or subcontractors of Tenant will comply with the provisions of Appendix R-3, attached hereto, together with such other rules and regulations promulgated from time to time by Landlord. 2.3 LAWS AND REGULATIONS Tenant agrees to comply with all applicable laws, ordinances, rules, and regulations of any governmental entity or agency having jurisdiction with respect to the Lease and/or the Building. Tenant warrants that the equipment installed in conjunction with this Lease will comply with manufacturers' specifications, such specifications to comply with all federal, state and local rules and regulations. Tenant will, at Tenant's sole cost, take all measures necessary to ensure that such equipment is within manufacturers' specifications and that all equipment strictly complies with all laws, rules, regulations, ordinances and codes, whether now or hereafter existing, of all federal, state and local governmental authorities and that the equipment strictly complies with all contractual obligations to which Tenant is bound in connection with such equipment and as applicable to the Solar Equipment or similar facilities. Tenant will use best efforts and take all measures necessary to ensure that the Solar Equipment installed by Tenant does not interfere with or disturb the operation of any other equipment or business of Landlord or of any other tenant, or occupant of the Building. In the event of such interference or disturbance to an existing tenant, occupant, Tenant will make such necessary adjustment to its equipment to correct such interference or disturbance. 4849-7712-9248.3 DRAFT MODEL ROOFTOP SOLAR LEASE Nothing herein will be deemed to limit Tenant's obligations or Landlord's rights under Article 1.7.5 above. In addition to all indemnifications provided by this Lease, Tenant expressly warrants to indemnify and hold Landlord harmless, with counsel acceptable to Landlord, against any claim, cause of action, damage, liability of any type or nature arising from a claim by any party arising under this section. [Discuss] 2.4 BUILDING RULES Tenant will comply with the rules and regulations of the Building as adopted and altered by Landlord from time to time and will cause all of its agents, employees, invitees and visitors to do so, provided such rules: (i) do not unreasonably and materially interfere with Tenant's conduct of its business; and (ii) do not require payment of additional moneys. All changes to such rules will be sent by Landlord to Tenant in writing. 2.5 ENTRY BY LANDLORD Tenant agrees to permit Landlord or its employees, agents or representatives to inspect any portion of the Solar Equipment installed in or on the Building by Tenant at all reasonable hours (and in emergencies at all times) to inspect the same, to clean or make repairs, alterations or additions to the Equipment Space or to the Building, and Tenant will not be entitled to any abatement or reduction of Lease Fees by reason thereof. However, Landlord will not be obligated to change or delay its intended entry into these areas for this purpose and Tenant agrees to make any such representative available, if at all, on the schedule desired by Landlord. 2.6 ASSIGNMENT. SUBLETTING AND TRANSFERS BY AGREEMENT 2.6.1 Tenant may assign this Lease or its rights hereunder to (a) any corporation, company or other • entity which is controlled by, or is under common control with, Tenant, (b) any partnership in which Tenant has a controlling interest or (c) any entity which has purchased all or substantially all the assets of Tenant or the Solar Equipment [*discuss*]. In the case of any assignment, the assignee will be deemed to have assumed, without releasing Tenant, all obligations under this Lease. Any other assignment by Tenant of this Lease or the rights hereunder will be subject to the prior written consent of Landlord, which consent will not be unreasonably withheld. No assignment, whether or not with Landlord's consent, will ever relieve Tenant of any liability hereunder. [*discuss*] 2.7 CONSENT TO MORTGAGE 2.7.1 Consent. Tenant may from time to time, without the prior written consent of Landlord, encumber Tenant's interest in this Lease by mortgage, deed of trust or other real or personal property security instrument (a "Mortgage"), provided that any Mortgage and all rights acquired under it will be subject to each and all of the covenants, conditions and restrictions stated in this Lease and to all rights and interests of Landlord, and that any Mortgagee will assume each and every obligation of Tenant upon foreclosure. Tenant will promptly upon the execution of any Mortgage deliver a true copy thereof to Landlord. Nothing contained in such Mortgages will release or be deemed to relieve Tenant from full and faithful observance and performance of the terms, covenants and conditions herein contained to be observed and performed by Tenant or from any liability for the non -observance or non-performance of any of the terms and conditions hereof, nor be deemed to constitute a waiver of any rights of Landlord hereunder, except as expressly provided for herein. Such mortgage or other security interest will encumber only Tenant's leasehold interest, and will not encumber the fee simple interest of the Landlord in any way. • 4849-7712-9248.3 DRAFT' MODEL ROOFTOP SOLAR LEASE • 2.7.2 Statement by Landlord. At the request of Tenant or a Mortgagee, Landlord (a) will execute, acknowledge and deliver to such Tenant or Mortgagee a written statement declaring: (i) either that the Lease is unmodified and in full force and effect, or the manner in which the Lease had been modified and whether the Lease as so modified is in full force and effect; (ii) the dates to which Tenant's monetary obligations hereunder have been paid in advance; (iii) whether Tenant is or is not then in default hereunder; and (iv) whether any past defaults have been fully cured and (b) enter into an estoppel and consent agreement recognizing the rights of the Mortgagees as may be reasonably requested by Mortgagees. 2.8 INSURANCE 2.8.1 Insurance Policies. Prior to the commencement of any work in, on or about the Building and during the term of this Lease, Tenant will obtain and maintain the following insurance, at its own expense, in amounts not less than those specified below: A. Workers Compensation insurance in accordance with the laws of the State of XXXXXXXXXX, but not less than [$500,000]. B. Employer's liability insurance in an amount not less than [$500,000]. C. Commercial General Liability for bodily injury liability and property damage liability with limits of [$5,000,000] combined single limit each occurrence, and including but not limited to Comprehensive Form, Premises - Operation, Explosion Collapse, Underground Hazard, Products/Completed Operations Hazard (2 years extension beyond completion of the Project), Blanket Contractual Coverage (including coverage for the Indemnity Clauses provided under this contract), Broad form Property Damage, Independent Contractors, Personal Injury (employees exclusion deleted). D. Comprehensive Automobile Liability covering owned, hired and non -owned vehicles with limits of $1,000,000 combined single limit each occurrence. E. Excess liability (Umbrella insurance with limits of [$2,000,000]). [*discuss*] F. Builder's Risk insurance. 2.8.2 Policy Terms. The above insurances will, without liability on the part of Landlord for premiums thereof include the following: A. Endorsement as Additional Named Insureds of Landlord and its partners, directors, officers, agents and representatives, and affiliates as designated from time -to -time by Landlord. 2. All other indemnity obligations as set forth in this Lease. B. Thirty (30) days prior notice of cancellation to each certificate holder. The carrying of the insurance described herein will in no way be interpreted as relieving Tenant of any • responsibility or liability under this Lease. 6 4849-7712-9248.3 DRAFT MODEL ROOFTOP SOLAR LEASE • 2.8.3 Certificates of Insurance. Tenant will before the Effective Date of this Lease and during the term hereof file certificates with Landlord showing existence of such insurance, which insurance will be subject to Landlord's approval as to the adequacy of protection and compliance with this Lease and the satisfactory character of the insurer. Such insurance will be placed with reputable insurance companies Leased to do business in the State of [XXX]. 2.8.4 Contractors and Subcontractors. Should Tenant engage a contractor or subcontractor, the same conditions applicable to Tenant under this Lease apply to each contractor or subcontractor, including but in no way limited to the indemnity and insurance clauses. 2.9 INDEMNITY Except for the gross negligence, willful misconduct or default under this Lease by Landlord, its employees or agents, Tenant hereby agrees to protect, defend, and hold harmless Landlord and its agents and their respective officers, employees, agents, directors, shareholders and assigns, from and against all loss, claims and expense, including without limitation any loss or damage attributable in whole or in part to Tenant or its employees, servants, agents or contractors, because of damage to, loss or destruction of property, including loss of use thereof, and/or because of bodily injury, sickness or disease, or death sustained by any person, including workmen's occupational disease arising directly or indirectly from Tenant's activities under the Lease, arising directly or indirectly from the Solar Equipment, or the use and occupancy by Tenant of the Rooftop, or any breach of this Lease. 2.10 CASUALTY DAMAGE If the Solar Equipment or any part thereof will be damaged by fire or other casualty, Tenant will give prompt written notice thereof to Landlord. In case the Building will be damaged such that alteration or reconstruction of the Building, in Landlord's sole opinion, is required (whether or not any equipment or property of Tenant will have been damaged by such casualty) or in the event any mortgagee of Landlord's should require that the insurance proceeds payable as a result of a casualty be applied to the payment of the mortgage debt or in the event of any material uninsured loss to the Building, Landlord may, at its option, terminate this Lease by notifying Tenant in writing of such termination within ninety (90) days after the date of such casualty. If Landlord does not elect to terminate this Lease, Landlord will commence and proceed with reasonable diligence to restore the Building shell, excluding any of the Solar Equipment (which will be Tenant's sole responsibility to restore at its sole cost and expense) in accordance with the terms of the Lease; except that Landlord's obligation to restore will not require Landlord to spend for such work an amount in excess of the insurance proceeds actually received by Landlord as a result of the casualty. When the repairs described in the preceding sentence have been completed by Landlord, Tenant will then complete the restoration of all improvements in excess of such improvements installed by Landlord which are necessary to permit Tenant's resumption of operations pursuant to the Tenant's final working drawings and specifications ("Improvement Restoration"). Construction of the Improvement Restoration will be completed within two (2) months after Landlord first notifies Tenant that the improvements to be completed by Landlord have been substantially completed. All cost and expense of completing the Improvements Restoration will be borne by Tenant. Landlord will not be liable for any inconvenience or annoyance to Tenant or injury to the business of Tenant resulting in any way from such damage or the repair thereof except that the Lease Fee will abate from the date of the damage through the period of restoration. 0 4849-7712-9248.3 DRAFT MODEL ROOFTOP SOLAR LEASE • 2.11 CONDEMNATION If the whole or substantially the whole of the Building should be taken for any public or quasi -public use, by right of eminent domain or otherwise or should be sold in lieu of condemnation, then this Lease will terminate as of the date when physical possession of the Building is taken by the condemning authority. If less than the whole or substantially the whole of the Building is thus taken or sold, Landlord (whether or not Tenant's equipment or property are affected thereby) may terminate this Lease by giving written notice thereof to Tenant; in which event this Lease will terminate as of the date when physical possession of such portion of the Building is taken by the condemning authority. If less than the whole of the Building is taken and the portion so taken materially interferes or prohibits Tenant from providing its services, then Tenant may terminate this Lease upon notice to Landlord received no later than thirty (30) days after the taking. If this Lease is not so terminated upon any such taking or sale, Landlord will, to the extent Landlord deems feasible, restore the Building to substantially its former condition, but such work will not exceed the scope of the work done by Landlord in originally constructing the Building and installing shell improvements in the Building, nor will Landlord in any event be required to spend for such work an amount in excess of the amount received by Landlord as compensation for such taking. All amounts awarded upon a taking of any part or all of the Property or Building will belong to Landlord, and Tenant will not be entitled to and expressly waives all claims to any such compensation. 2.12 DAMAGES FROM CERTAIN CAUSES Notwithstanding any provision herein, neither party will be liable to the other for any loss or damage to any property or person occasioned by theft, fire, act of God, public enemy, injunction, riot, strike, insurrection, war, court order, requisition, or order of governmental body or authority. • 2.13 EVENTS OF DEFAULT/REMEDIES [add interference by Landlord of access to sun] 2.13.1 The following events will be deemed to be events of default by Tenant under this Lease: (i) Tenant fails to pay any Lease Fees or other sum of money when due hereunder and such failure continues for a period of ten (10) business days after receipt of written notice from Landlord of such failure; (ii) Tenant and/or Landlord fails to comply with its respective obligations under any provision of this Lease, and such failure continues for a period of thirty (30) days after written notice of such default is delivered to the defaulting party, provided, however, if such condition cannot reasonably be cured within such thirty (30) day period, it instead will be an event of default if the defaulting party fails to commence to cure such condition within such thirty (30) day period and/or thereafter fails to prosecute such action diligently and continuously to completion within ninety (90) days of the date of the notice of default; (iii) the Lease hereunder granted will be taken on execution or other process of law in any action against Tenant; (iv) Tenant ceases to do business or abandon any rights granted under the Lease; (v) Tenant becomes insolvent or unable to pay its debts as they become due, or Tenant notifies Landlord that it anticipates either condition; (vi) Tenant takes any action to, or notifies Landlord that Tenant intends to file a petition under any section or chapter of the United States Bankruptcy Code, as amended from time to time, or under any similar law or statute of the United States or any State thereof; or (vii) a receiver or trustee will be appointed for Tenant's Lease interest in this Lease or for all or a substantial part of the assets of Tenant. 2.13.2 Upon the occurrence of any event or events of default by Tenant, whether enumerated in Paragraph 2.13.1 or not, Landlord will have the option to pursue any remedies available to it at law or in equity without any additional notices to Tenant or demand for possession. Landlord's remedies will include but not be limited to the following: (i) terminate this Lease and take possession of the Solar Equipment; (ii) terminate electrical power to the Solar Equipment; and (iii) exercise all other remedies 4849-7712-9248.3 DRAFT MODEL ROOFTOP SOLAR LEASE available to Landlord at law or in equity, including, without limitation, injunctive relief of all varieties, • and termination rights. Upon the occurrence of any event or events of default by Landlord, whether enumerated in Paragraph 2.13.1 or not, Tenant may exercise all remedies available to it at law or in equity, including, without limitation, injunctive relief of all varieties, and termination rights 2.13.3 Each party will be in default hereunder in the event the defaulting party has not begun and pursued with reasonable diligence the cure of any failure to comply with its respective obligations under any provision of this Lease within thirty (30) days of the receipt by the other of written notice of the alleged failure to perform. In no event will either party have the right to terminate or rescind this Lease as a result of the alleged default as to any covenant or agreement contained in this Lease. In addition, Tenant hereby covenants that, prior to the exercise of any such remedies, it will give the mortgagees holding mortgages on the Building notice and a reasonable time to cure any default by Landlord. Tenant hereby agrees that in no event will Tenant's right to recover its actual damages from Landlord hereunder exceed a sum equal to the aggregate sum of [twenty-four (24)] months of Lease Fees paid Landlord hereunder to Tenant (using the twenty-four months immediately preceding any default). If [twenty-four (24) months] have not elapsed then the maximum amount of damages will be equal to the product of twelve multiplied by the average monthly fees paid to date. Tenant acknowledges that the limitation of actions and damages is material consideration for Landlord entering into this Lease. 2.14.4 Notwithstanding the provisions of Paragraph 2.13.2 above, an event of default by Tenant which has resulted from mandated compliance by Tenant with applicable laws, rules or regulations of any federal, state or other local governmental authority will be waived by Landlord; however Tenant agrees to use all reasonable efforts to comply with the terms hereof consistent with such laws, rules or regulations. 2.15 SUBORDINATION TO MORTGAGE • Tenant accepts this Lease subject and subordinate to any mortgage, deed of trust or other lien presently existing or hereafter arising upon the Building and/or the Property and to any renewals, modifications, consolidations, refinancing, and extensions thereof, but Tenant agrees that any such mortgagee will have the right at any time to subordinate such mortgage, deed of trust or other lien to this Lease on such terms and subject to such conditions as such mortgagee may deem appropriate in its discretion. Landlord is hereby irrevocably vested with full power and authority to subordinate this Lease to any mortgage, deed of trust or other lien now existing or hereafter placed upon the Rooftop or the Building and Tenant agrees upon demand to execute such further instruments subordinating this Lease or attorning to the holder of any such liens as Landlord may request, provided Tenant's use and quiet enjoyment of the Rooftop and Equipment Space will not be materially disturbed, so long as Tenant has signed the subordination agreements discussed herein and is not in default hereunder beyond any applicable cure period. In the event that Tenant should fail to execute any subordination or other agreement required by this paragraph within fourteen (14) days after receipt of the document from Landlord as requested, Tenant hereby irrevocably agrees that any mortgagee or holder of deed of trust, their successors or assigns, will have the right to terminate this Lease upon written notice to Tenant, upon the foreclosure of such mortgagee or holder's interest in the Building. Tenant agrees that it will from time to time upon request by Landlord execute and deliver to such persons as Landlord will request a statement in recordable form certifying that this Lease is unmodified and in full force and effect (or if there have been modifications, that the same is in full force and effect as so modified), stating the dates to which Lease Fees and other charges payable under this Lease have paid, stating that Landlord is not in default hereunder (or if Tenant alleges a default stating the nature of such alleged default) and further stating such other matters as Landlord will reasonably require. • 4849-7712-9248.3 • III. MISCELLANEOUS 3.1 ATTORNEYS' FEES DRAFr MODEL ROOFrOP SOLAR LEASE In the event of a dispute hereunder, the non -prevailing party will pay the reasonable attorneys' fees and costs of the prevailing party. 3.2 NO IMPLIED WAIVER The failure of either party to insist at any time upon the strict performance of any covenant or agreement herein or to exercise any option, right, power or remedy contained in this Lease will not be construed as a waiver or a relinquishment thereof for the future. 3.3 PERSONAL LIABILITY In no event will either party be liable to the other for (a) any loss or damage that may be occasioned by or through the acts or omissions of other tenants of the Building or of any third parties or (b) any consequential, special or incidental damages. 3.4 NOTICE All notices, demands, requests, or other communications which are required to be given, served, or sent • by one party to the other pursuant to this Lease will be in writing, and will be mailed, postage pre -paid, by registered or certified mail, or by a reliable overnight courier service with delivery verification, addressed as follows: • If to Landlord to: and If to Tenant to: Each notice, demand, request, or communication which is mailed or delivered in the manner described above will be deemed sufficiently given, served, sent or received for all purposes at such time as it is delivered to the addressee first named above for each party (with the return receipt of verification of delivery being deemed conclusive evidence of such notice), or at such time as delivery is refused by addressee upon presentation. Either party may designate by notice in writing a new address and/or individual to which any notice, demand, request or communication made thereafter will be so given, served or sent. 4849-7712-9248.3 10 DRAFT MODEL ROOFTOP SOLAR LEASE 3.5 SEVERABILITY • If any term or provision of this Lease, or the application thereof to any person or circumstance will, to any extent, be invalid or unenforceable, the remainder of this Lease, or the application of such term or provision to persons or circumstances other than those as to which it is held invalid or unenforceable, will not be affected thereby, and each term and provision of this Lease will be valid and enforced to the fullest extent permitted by law. 3.6 RECORDATION Tenant will have the right to record a Memorandum of Lease for purposes of memorializing its rights to the Rooftop; provided Tenant will be responsible for filing and recording a termination of the memorandum within thirty (30) days prior to the expiration of this Lease. 3.7 GOVERNING LAW This Lease and the rights and obligations of the parties hereto will be interpreted, construed, and enforced in accordance with the laws of the State of XXXXXXXX. The parties acknowledge that any court of competent jurisdiction will apply principles and rules of law as they apply to Leases and not leases, and in the event that any provision contained herein is deemed to create a lease versus a Lease such provision will be deemed severable from the remainder of this Lease. 3.8 TIME OF PERFORMANCE Except as expressly otherwise herein provided, with respect to all required acts of Tenant, time is of the essence of this Lease. 3.9 TRANSFERS BY LANDLORD Landlord will have the right to transfer and assign, in whole or in part, all its rights and obligations hereunder and in the Building, and in such event and upon such transfer Landlord will be released from any further obligations hereunder, and Tenant agrees to look solely to such successor in interest of Landlord for the performance of such obligations, provided, however, such successor in interest expressly accepts such obligations in writing. 3.10 COMMISSIONS Tenant hereby indemnifies and holds Landlord harmless against any loss, claim, expense or liability with respect to any commissions or brokerage fees claimed on account of the execution and/or renewal of this Lease any action of Tenant. 3.11 TAXES Tenant will be responsible for collecting and remitting all applicable federal, state and local taxes attributable to the ownership and operation of any equipment installed pursuant to this Lease, provided, however, that Tenant will not be responsible for any taxes imposed on the income of the Landlord derived from the Building or otherwise. is 11 4849-7712-9248.3 DRAFT MODEL ROOFTOP SOLAR LEASE 0 3.12 REGULATORY AUTHORITY Tenant will use reasonable business efforts to secure any permits, Leases, regulatory approvals and authorizations from federal, state and local governments ("Permits") required currently or in the future for the provision of any services and exercise of any of its rights under the Lease, and Tenant's right and obligations hereunder will be subject to receipt and maintenance of all necessary Permits. Tenant will promptly inform Landlord of (i) any legal or regulatory development of which Tenant becomes aware that would prohibit or render all or any portion of the any Leased service commercially unfeasible or (ii) revocation of or failure to obtain any Permits. 3.13 INDEPENDENT CONTRACTOR Tenant will at all times act in its own capacity and right as an independent contractor. Tenant will have no right to make purchases, or to obligate Landlord to expend any funds or to perform any obligations other than as provided in this Lease or as may be authorized in writing by Landlord. Tenant agrees that it and any of its employees or agents will at all times present and represent itself or themselves as representatives of Tenant. 3.14 FORCE MAJEURE Except with respect to Tenant's payment obligations under this Lease, if the performance by a party to this Lease of any nonmonetary obligation hereunder is interfered with by reason of any circumstances without the fault or negligence, or beyond the reasonable control, of either party, including fire, explosion, power failure, acts • of God, war, revolution, civil commotion, or acts of public enemies, any law, order, regulation, ordinance, requirement, acts of, or failures to act by, any government or any legal body or representative of any such government, labor unrest, including without limitation, strikes, slowdowns, picketing or boycotts, embargo, delay of a common carrier, or any act of any tenant or tenant's agents, or any other cause beyond such party's control, then the party affected will be excused from such performance on a day-to-day basis to the extent of such interference (and the other party will likewise be excused from performance of its obligations on a day-to-day basis to the extent such other party's obligations relate to the performance so interfered with), provided that the affected party will use reasonable efforts to remove such causes of non-performance. 3.16 OWNERSHIP OF EQUIPMENT Landowner will have no ownership or other interest in any Solar Equipment installed on the Building. The manner of operation of the Solar Equipment, including but not limited to decisions on when to conduct maintenance, is within the sole discretion of Tenant, subject to Landlord's reasonable rules and regulations as it relates to access to the Rooftop. Tenant will, in good faith, work to coordinate all construction and maintenance (emergency repairs excepted) of the Solar Equipment with Landlord so as to not unreasonably interfere with Landlord's use of the Property. 3.17 ENTIRE AGREEMENT This Lease embodies the entire agreement between the parties hereto with relation to the transaction contemplated hereby, and there have been and are no covenants, agreements, representations, warranties or restrictions between the parties hereto with regard thereto other than those specifically set forth herein. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this Lease as of this day of 12 4849-7712-9248.3 DRAFT MODEL ROOFTOP SOLAR LEASE LANDLORD: By: Name: Title: TENANT: By: Name: Title: 13 4849-7712-9248.3 • • • • U 4849-7712-9248.3 Appendix I SOLAR EQUIPMENT DRAFT MODEL ROOFTOP SOLAR LEASE O� e �14 A Nov � •'�C�RPO4.P`��9 • I BS To: MAYOR & COUNCIL Agenda Item #: IX. A. From: Debra Mangen Action Z City Clerk Discussion ❑ Date: August 5, 2015 Information ❑ Subject: Correspondence Action Requested: No action is necessary. Attachment: Attached is correspondence received since the last Council meeting. City of Edina • 4801 W. 501h St. • Edina, MN 55424 Heather Branigin •From: JOE ROACH <jroach8l@msn.com> Sent: Tuesday, July 21, 2015 3:19 PM To: James Hovland Subject: Fwd: 4612 Tower Street Jim, We thought we would reach out to you to see if you can intervene in this matter before it escalates any further. Long story short, as a result of a new home built next door to us we how have water running across our driveway and have since late Oct/early Nov 2014. We contacted the City as instructed by the signage in front of the home to get this resolved. We have been promised and assured numerous times that the City would require that this be corrected. Unfortunately, nothing has been done. Nothing for almosf a year. If you could let me know when we could meet to discuss this we would apprecil:+e it. You can email me or call me at 612-819-0209. Thanks and best regards. Jennifer and Joe Roach C] Begin forwarded message: From: JOE ROACH <jroach8lgmsn.com> Date: July 21, 2015 at 3:09:51 PM CDT To: David Fisher <DFishern,EdinaMN.gov> Subject: Re: 4612 Tower Street David, We appreciate everything the City has done and tried to do. The solutioi°r'-is simple - require compliance. It's completely within the City's authority. I don't think it's -;jithin the City's authority to disregard its own rules. If it were then why have them. We assume that is why the City put the ordinances in place. Unfortunately, we have been told numerous times over nearly a year now that compliance was required or the City would do the work and charge the cost against some bond it had from these home owners. Let's get it done. Our property should be protected just as much as any others. As you are aware and we have discussed, with the soil under our driveway and adjacent to it . soaked, as it is, it give the concrete in our drive no support and causes it to break. We would be interested in more details as to why requiring compliance viith the City's Building Code is so difficult. This seems very simple, yet nothing seems to get dose except we get more Heisman Trophy posses. • For whatever reason, reasons we are interested in hearing, the City has let this builder and homeowner damage our property in an unabated manner. Again, we are :nterested in knowing why. t . We have done everything asked and in accordance with the City's Code and direction, where has it got is - our family and guests have to wade through muck to get to our house. Again, why. We are completely perplexed by the events and lack of follow through over nearly a year - a year - a year! We do know we have options - litigation and/or talk to the local media -but that is not what we really want, we want compliance, just like we and everyone else in Edina is required to do. I don't care that a pipe may go in a few years. The problem and compliance are here today. Your prompt action is required A Again, thanks and best regards. Joe r • On Jul 21, 2015, at 2:44 PM, David Fisher <DFishergEdinaMN.gov> wrote: Mr. Roach, We are work towards a solution. When the sod was installed and pop up drain was moved it helped. David Fisher, Chief Building Official <ima eOOl . 1 952-826-0450 1 Fax 952-826-0389 g g DFisher(ZDEdinaMN.gov I www.EdinaMN.gov ...For Living, Learning, Raising Families Sz Doing Businc:;s Tell us how we're doing! Take, our customer satisfaction survey. From: JOE ROACH [mailtoJroach8l@msn.com] Sent: Tuesday, July 21, 2015 9:47 AM To: David Fisher Subject: Fwd: 4612 Tower Street • 2 Begin forwarded message: 40 From: Charlie Gerk <cgerkc EdinaMN.gov> Date: July 21, 2015 at 8:53:04 AM CDT To: 'JOE ROACH' <iroach8IgIg Subject: RE: 4612 Tower Street Joe, David's email is DFisher@EdinaMN.gov =_JCharlie Gerk, EIT, Engineering Technician - Water Resources 952-826-03211 Fax 952-826-0392 cgerkCcDedinamn.gov I www.EdinaMN.gov ...For living, Learning, Raising Families S Doing Busiz;. ss From: JOE ROACH [mailtoJroach8l(gbmsn.com] Sent: Monday, July 20, 2015 9:22 PM To: Charlie Gerk Subject: Fwd: 4612 Tower Street Charlie, Would you be so kind as to forward to Dave Fischer. I used the email address he gave me but it bounced back. • Thanks and best regards. Joe Begin forwarded message: From: JOE ROACH <jroach8I e,msn.com> Date: July 20, 2015 at 9:19:16 PM CDT To: Fischer David <dfischergedinainn.gov> Subject: 4612 Tower Street Dave, Im I hope all is well with you and you are getting tim; to enjoy your summer. I thought I would check in with you as it's been 2 �_-r 3 weeks since we last spoke. We continue to forge; the water being dumped on our driveway from next door. Interestingly there is now a large build up of green slug/slime also building up on not only the driveway but also the yard. So, can you tell me when we can expect compliance with the City's Ordinances. Your prompt attention to this matter is appreciated. Thanks and best regards Joe M • • -etiffo includes, Discussions about moving transportation priorities forward for progress Rernarks by Senator Scott Dibble and Representative Tim Kelly Recognition of Legislators TMO Funding Bill Senators Scott Dibble, Melisa Franzen, Terri Bonoff Representatives Tim Kelly, Frank Hornstein, Ron Erhardt, Jenifer Loon 77 Underpass Senator Melissa Halvorson Wiklund, Representative Linda Slocum Wednesday, August 121h Meeting and Recognition 4:00 - 4:45 p.m. Reception 4:45 - 6:00 p.m. Garden Room of Eden Prairie 8080 Mitchell Rd Eden Prairie, MN 55344 *Located next to Eden Prairie City Hall Please RSVP to Melissa Madison at 612-749-4494 or melissa@494corridor.org 1-494 CORRIDOR COMMISSION Rerhrcirr; Tizrffic• C'on,(,restiuu Bloomington 9 Eden Prairie . Edina a Minnetonka . Richfield Heather Branigin From: Steve Minn<Steve.Minn@lupedevelopment.com> Sent: Tuesday, July 21, 2015 4:39 PM To: Mary Brindle; James Hovland; Kevin Staunton; Robert Stewart; swensonannl @gmail.com Cc: Ibrown@kenoshanews.com Subject: Will Edina Hold a contractor accountable for ruining a street? Honorable Mayor and City Council, I regret that I have a service and public policy question that Public Works seems unable or unwilling to address. Normally we get great service from PW ... not so much on this situation. I ask for Council help in directing a solution. My family has endured a year of heavy renovation at a neighboring property, with allegedly 16 more months to go. A mansion with ho'basement has been lifted in the air, while a new basement poured. Unfortunately, the heavy trucking necessary to excavate, support and pour foundation has destroyed the street in front of my home, which is a convenient staging ground for this contractor. They have turned asphalt into dust. Complete street destruction. I can only assume assessment for a new road will be next. That is when this situation is going to turn really unfortunate. My bride has called Public Works several times for an interim fix and assurances the contractor is bonded to make the full road repairs. The lower portion of our street received cold patch, but this construction zone is beyond cold patch while the trucking and heavy machinery operate — 50 loads a day go up and down the street. There should be documentation, agreements for restoration, and the contractor should be bringing in patch materials at their own • expense every week to keep the public street passable. I ask for some political intervention to motivate the staff. Thank you for your attention to this request. Respectfully, Lucy Brown & Steven Minn 7 Overholt Pass Edina, Minnesota 55439 OFFICE: 612.436.3200 X-210 FACSIMILE: 612.436.3201 MOBILE: 612.868.9112 (brown@kenoshanews.com steve.minn@lupedevelopment.com 0 Heather Branigin `From: info@s3cparis.com Sent: Wednesday, July 22, 2015 8:48 AM To: Edina Mail Subject: S3C Paris VIP Invitation James Hovland Attachments: James_Hovland_286041.pdf; S3C_Paris_2015_en53.pdf Your Honor, Mister James Hovland, We are pleased to send you a VIP invitation to the SMART COUNTRIES & CITIES CONGRESS — S3C Paris - to be held in Paris on 1 st, 2nd and 3rd of September 2015. S3C Paris is sponsored and will be opened by France Foreign Minister Mister Laurent Fabius and France Secretary of State in charge of Digital Madam Axelle Lemaire. 300 territories and world experts will focus on all new technologies for cities and territories covering fields such as energy, transportation, public services, environmental impact reduction, mobile applications, cities possibilities in Internet of Things, and much more. It will host leading industry experts, the world's most advanced corporations, researchers on innovative technologies as well as cities from the five continents which will present their experimentations and achievements in the field of Smart Cities. Paris will also provide an introduction to COP21 (the Paris conference on the climate) and the Open Gov *S3C Initiative which is now sponsored by France. We would be extremely honored to have your presence at the Congress. You will find attached your official invitation letter to S3C Paris. To confirm your registration click here or copy the url below invitation. s3cparis.com/registration.aspx?code=4c2596b7-a601-4bd2-a916- Oael f5a218e5&lgsite=en&email=mail@EdinaMN.gov Hoping to count on your presence, I ask you to accept Mister Hovland, the expression of my respectful greetings. Paul Sitbon President and Founder, SK Paris infons3cparis.com / +339 50 08 85 87 --- to ensure you receive my messages properly, please add info@s3cparis.com to your email contacts --- Pour vous d6sinscrire de ce pushmail cliquez ici 0 MART COUNTRIES sn-CITIES CONGRESS PARIS 2015 is The Honorable Mister James Hovland 4801 W. 50th St. 49376, Paris, 22 July 2015 Subject: VIP Invitation to the Smart Countries & Cities Congress on September 1st, 2nd and 3rd 2015 in Paris, France Your Honor, As new technologies are emerging and creating significant opportunities for cities and territories, it is essential for administration officials and decision makers to get a perfect understanding of the array of possibilities which lie ahead of them. Your City is about to become more intelligent, more reactive, where resources are shared and developed for sustaibability. France, with its history and its relation to the birth of human rights, and Paris, one of the largest historic cities since the middle ages, are the natural centers of this new collective intelligence of cities and territories. It is why we have organized, at the Palais des Congres of Paris on September 1, 2 and 3, the Smart Countries & Cities Congress Paris - S3C Paris - which will be held under the high patronage of France Minister of Foreign Affairs and International Development Mister Laurent Fabius and France Secretary of State in charge of Digital for the ministry of Economy, Industry and Digital Madam Axelle Lemaire. Hereby, we are honored to invite you to the Smart Countries & Cities Congress Paris which will be held on September 1st, 2nd and 3rd, 2015 inside the Palais des Congr6s de Paris Organized as a center of expertise, this place of exchange will let you discover in a pragmatic and educational way the latest breakthroughs in technologies which promote economic and social development and preserve the environment. This will also be the opportunity to ask question's to public and private players and discover immediately applicable solutions to increase the intelligence of your city and its reactivity towards its citizens. Strongly focused on content and experimentation, this interactive event will allow you to g -.t an insight into the new solutions tested in cities with over 250 conferences and physical exhibitions. To validate your VIP (free of charge) invitation, simply Click here. We will be honored to welcome you at SK Paris and remain at your disposal to provide moi details about the event. We ask you to accept, Your Honor, the assurances of our respectful consideration. Paul Sitbon President S3C Paris President, Sikiwis 119 -Vision - To transform lives through homeowner- ship. -Mission- To use our Community Land Trust practice to create and preserve affordable homeown- ership for working families in suburban Hennepin County. " Affordable Homes for Working Families Homes Reach" Homes Bulletin Reach The Power of Partnership For over a decade, a family of west metro communities has been partnering to create longterm affordable home- ownership. Talk to city or county housing officials in west- ern suburban Hennepin Coun- ty, and they'll tell you that affordable hous- ing is a high pri- ority—and prime opportunity, when properly delivered. Since its incep- tion, HWR has sold 118 homes and placed 135 families across 11 suburban communities. Foresight was the foundation of the initial steps to form HWR, according to Elise Dur- bin, Community Development Supervisor for the City of Minnetonka. work group charged with identifying a process to cre- ate sustainable affordable housing." In 2001, after exploring a variety of options, the work group identified the Community Land Trust (CLT) model as the best process to develop enduring and affordable hous- ing stock. "This initiative began in 2000 41 "We're proud of our pro- when as a city we saw land gress, but none of this would values increasing so much have been possible without that even smaller and older the foresight, commitment homes were rapidly becom- and support of our communi- ing unaffordable," she ex- ty partners," said Janet Lind- plained. "So we formed a bo, HWR Executive Director. Wrd Hrnwry:nAffardobFr tte;,r ngland Yr.,ft • It allows quali- fied clients to pur- chase the home and lease the land at a nominal fee. • This significantly reduces the mort- gage, down payment and closing costs. • This in turn means that families can more easily purchase a home, retain it for genera- tions, and work in or near their communities. As a result, both families and communities can rely on affordable homeownership opportunities and a stronger local workforce. Continued on page 2 PAGE 2 PartnershiPays DividendsP, Continued from page 1 "Most programs of this "Our City Council has al- Joyce Repya, Senior Planner type expire within 30 years, ways made housing a top for the City of Edina, which is a relatively short priority. But as a first ring agrees. "HWR plays a time in terms of housing suburb with strong land strong role in our compre- ' planning," said Durbin. values and a lot of high hensive plan's housing I "But the CLT's term I is 99 years, which gave us the extend- ed time frame we needed for plan- ning. We also liked I the family stability that comes from I projected multi- generational own- ership over the 99 yearterm." density, upper in- goals and policies, and we come rental proper- trust them to make home - ties, it's a challenge ownership a reality for our I to find homes that, working families," she said. for example, could I Like Minnetonka and St. be purchased by a Louis Park, Edina is a fully young couple that developed community with , grew up here and is high land costs, which I just starting out. makes it very difficult for I She added that moderate income house- HWR's CLT ap- holds to both live and work proach helps the there. Within six months, Min- younger families and "We want our teachers, I netonka decided to fund others in the housing life nurses and police officers I I the CLT program, which cycle continuum of afforda- to have the option to also I I was named the West supportive ble, senior, , become residents,„ Repya , Hennepin Affordable Hous- mixed use and mixed in- explained. , ing Land Trust under non- I come. Continued on page 3 I profit status. In addition, Schnitker said After two years of success- the program's longterm HWR Housing Production , ful operations and expan- format makes Sion into other communi- planning much I ties, it was renamed Homes more effective ti Within Reach in 2004. by helping yob vol homeowners yon "We would be in a pretty consistently re- T ' tough affordable housing invest in the spot without the Communi- community: voo� ■Fames Served ty Land Trust model and ry"P Pur&a Prope ies HWR program,” said ; tiNSold Homes , Michele Schnitker, Housing 1 S, EF Supervisor for the City of St. Louis Park. yo~ o ��� so ioo Iso Wr}i ilennePin Iidi'ordabJe it t:sy Land TivfY PAGE 3 HWR. Strategic Goals Further strengthen collaborations and partnerships. Continue to be financially stable, efficient and transparent. Influence housing policies that support Hennepin County homeownership options. Offer effective programs that will expand the HWR Community Land Trust program. Creating Diverse, Vibrant Communities �► i stock gives us a It all adds up to a partnership ) higher perfor- that integrates the youthful ) HWR mance score with energy of young fami- j homes are the Metropolitan lies with the charm move -in Council," she said. and stability of estab- ) ready. She also added lished neighborhoods _> WW – that "the HWR/ and cities to create ) CLT model is extremely efficient diversity in housing, Continued from page because HWR does the majority demographics and Partnering on affordable hous- the work so our staff time is lifestyles. ing makes financial sense as ing minimal." "In the final analysis, ' well. The benefits of affordable hous- it all comes down to ) helping working fami- „ Our collaboration with HWR ing extend beyond planning and lies live in or near the has allowed us to our expand p funding to the fundamental communities where ability to promote both neigh- issue of quality of life for fami- they work," said borhood improvement and lies and communities alike. Schnitker. homeownership city-wide," All HWR partner cities ensure ------- —" ) said Natasha Doll -Parry, Eco- that their affordable housing is "If we continue to keep that as ' nomic Development Specialist spread across the community to our focus, then our partnership ' with the City of Brooklyn Park. avoid obvious differences in will continue to expand, as will the benefits to our communi- Durbin concurred. "Our ono ) g - neighborhood demographics. „ ties, she added. � ing work with HWR and our In turn, HWR helps keep neigh - commitment to diverse housing borhood values from slumping ) i by improving their homes. / ♦ I HWR. Strategic Goals Further strengthen collaborations and partnerships. Continue to be financially stable, efficient and transparent. Influence housing policies that support Hennepin County homeownership options. Offer effective programs that will expand the HWR Community Land Trust program. Homes Within Reach 5101 Thimsen Ave., Suite 202 Minnetonka, MN 55345 Submit HWR Application. ���Inuhllllllll�llllu��1�111��111�1,1,�.i�nl�l�����1����11� **-"*—*AUTO`*3-DIGIT 554 JAMES HOVLAND CITY OF EDINA MAYOR 4801 W 5'11 ST imft ------------------ .-a-..Few --- ------ - -a dew Steps Away. Attend HWR I Informational Meeting. Presort Standard US Postage Paid Twin Cities MN Permit No. 296260 Apply for Your Mortgage. Complete Your Closing... and Transforming Lives Through Homeownership Since 2002 -9- • N 40 MEMO � �` Interview ' 48 with HWR Resident Committee. ���Inuhllllllll�llllu��1�111��111�1,1,�.i�nl�l�����1����11� **-"*—*AUTO`*3-DIGIT 554 JAMES HOVLAND CITY OF EDINA MAYOR 4801 W 5'11 ST imft ------------------ .-a-..Few --- ------ - -a dew Steps Away. Attend HWR I Informational Meeting. Presort Standard US Postage Paid Twin Cities MN Permit No. 296260 Apply for Your Mortgage. Complete Your Closing... and Transforming Lives Through Homeownership Since 2002 -9- • 0 NORTHERN WINDS CONCERT BAND Just a note to say "Thank You" for the opportunity to perform at Centennial Lakes on Monday July 13th. We look forward to performing there again in the future. It was a really comfortable night, and we had a nice size crowd in attendance. Plus they enjoyed the musical selections. We have enjoyed performing at Centennial Lakes ove; t%Z. appreicate being able to be included in the performance schedule, in performing at one of the premier venues in the Twin Cities. It's always fun to see the miniature boats in the water, people playing miniature golf and those walking by and deciding to stay for the concert. We also appreciate the financial gift from the city of Edina. All funds we receive are placed in our treasurery to pay for percussion equipment and maintain our times a year for the city of Edina: Mother's Day at Edinborough Indoor Park and here at Centennial Lakes in July. Thank You again and please refer us to other outdoor facilities that may be Interested in our type of entertainment. Sincerely, Joe Speakman - Conductor jr--thern Winds Concert Band ;612-414-4426 f musicmanjjs@aol.com Heather Branigin From: marianne Rother <marother@msn.com> • Sent: Thursday, July 23, 2015 1:45 PM To: James Hovland; Mary Brindle; kstauton@edina.mn.gov; Robert Stewart; swensonannl @gmail.com Cc: bettlebug00@gmail.com Subject: 7200 building and future developement. Dear Edina Council, Did anyone read the Science Section of the Star Tribune on July 12, 2015 on Traffic Noise? If you didn't I have enclosed a copy. How about the August 2015,issue of Scientific American on hearing loss from everyday noises? These articles are why I keep sending you letters on development and increasing the density the west side of France Avenue. I don't want restaurants and more traffic on this side of France where single family homes reside. We also been living with airplanes in this area which is as well When we moved in 23 years ago we accepted and like the fact that we had a suburban and urban feel to the neighborhood. However, that has flipped to urban with a little suburban feel. We have increase restaurants at Southdale, the Westin, apartments buidings galore. Along with that more noise from increase traffic, air condition units/ compressors units with no thought to the people who live in the area. Just because you have the capacity doesn't mean doesn't mean you should build it. It is a moral issue and a quality of life issue. If that is the case then build apartment buildings on some the excess property near Creek Valley Elementary School. I know that won't happen. 9 So what we are suppose to do? Move, however some of us have paid off our homes and want to stay here. suppose I should close my windows in the summer and turn on my air condtioning but I like the outside air. Second anybody read the Star Tribune, today July 23, 2015 about how piggy the United States is when comes to using air conditioning. Let's say I am trying to reduce my carbon footprint for children and grandchildren. The way you have handle Southdale isn't helping matters. Sincerely, Marianne Rother startribune.com/health TRAFFIC NOISE TIED TO HEALTH RISK Continual exposure to traf-fic noise may increase the risk for cardiovascular disease, British researchers report. Scientists used data on road traffic noise and hospital admissions for cardiovascular disease in London from 2003 to 2010. Compared with average noise levels below 55 decibels, levels above 60 decibels were associated with higher rates of hospital admissions for stroke — 5 percent higher among people 25 to 74 and about 9 percent higher arnong those 75 and older. All -cause mortality was 4 percent higher for people in noisy neighborhoods. The study was published in Euro-pean Heart Journal. 0 Sixty decibels is quieter than most urban environ-ments. But the researchers suggest that the cumulative effect could be significant. Heather Branigin Orom: Common Sense Edina <commonsenseforedina@gmail.com> Sent: Thursday, July 23, 2015 11:02 PM To: James Hovland; Robert Stewart; Kevin Staunton; Mary Brindle; swensonannl @gmail.com; Scott H. Neal Subject: Common Sense for Edina - use of drone by the City of Edina I am very familiar with the FAA regulations regarding drones which are called Unmanned Aerial Systems (UAS) by the FAA. The article below published in the Sun Current shows a lack of understanding of federal regulations around the use of UAS. Any use of a UAS operated by a governmental organization requires a certificate of Authorization (COA) which the city of Edina does not have according to the FAA web site that lists all current COAs. Without out a COA the city of Edina is in violation of federal law by operating a UAS. https://www.faa.gov/uas/public operations/foia responses/ In FAA terms there is no such thing as a'demo flight'. Any flight of a drone by a governmental organization like Edina requires a COA. If a third party is used to fly a UAS an FAA Section 333 exemption is required. The FAA requirements are clearly spelled out for UAS and 'higher -altitude' is not a phrase used. Civilian drones are not allowed to fly over 400 ft and it is illegal to fly a UAS over people. These are federal requirements that have no wiggle room and I would highly suggest the city seek qualified advice before there is any future use of a drone. I would also recommend the city of Edina have specialized liability insurance for any drone use. There is no insurance that will cover the illegal use of a drone. • I would also suggest the city of Edina contact the FAA before there are any future use of drones to make sure the city is in full compliance and understands federal regulations on the use of UAS, https://www.faa.gov/uas/contacts/ Contact Us If you believe an imminent risk exists to public safety or to the national airspace, please call your local law enforcement official. If you have a safety-related question, comment, or complaint about UAS, please contact the Agency's Aviation Safety Hotline website or call 1-866-835-5322, Option 4. If you have a general question, comment, or complaint about UAS, please contact us via email at 9-AFS-UAS- Inquiries@faa.gov http://current.mnsun.com/2015/07/edina-city-council-notes-bank-plans-crime-prevention-drone-photo rg aphy- AWnera-conservation/ Drone photography demo City Manager Scott Neal noted that the city is testing a drone as a possible option for cheaper aerial photography of the city. Higher -altitude photography can be hard to come by and expensive, but a drone could prove to be cheaper, he said. • In its demo thus far, the city has been compliant with all federal and FAA regulations, Neal said. If the city should choose to enlist a drone on a more regular basis, administrators would go through the appropriate permitting process that would be required, he said. https://www.faa.gov/about/office org/hcadquarters offices/ato/service units/systemops/aa.im/organizations/uas/ coa/ David Frenkel • 0 Heather Branigin Wrorn: Matt B <mattbehning@hotmail.com> Sent: Friday, July 24, 2015 5:00 AM To: James Hovland Subject: Please consider in GEARS grant decision process Mayor Hovland, I heard about the June 8th CTIB Grant Evaluation and Ranking System meeting where it looks like you are beginning the detailed process of choosing where to issue grants for 2016. I'm a resident of Washington County and I would like to submit to you my evidence that should weigh heavily in your consideration on whether or not to invest in Transit in our area. The corridors are the Gateway Corridor, The Red Rock Corridor, and the Rush Line Corridor. As you may be aware from the Federal Transit Administration, "Low-income residents are the most likely to use transit. source: the FTA linked study called Why Transit Oriented Development and Why Now! at: http://www.fta.dot.gov/exit.php?url=http://www.reconnectingamerica.org/public/reports/115 The point is Washington County is the wealthiest County out of a1187 counties in MN accordingto •the 2010 US census. The WC cities along the proposed corridors like Lake Elmo, Forest Lake, Afton, Dellwood, and Woodbury rank in the top 40 highest per -capita income out of the 867 Cities in MN with the 2010 US census. Currently our County enjoys modest use of the park and ride facilities out of church and business parking lots; however comparatively other suburb cities of similar size like Maple Wood, Lakeville, Maple Grove, etc use huge multi level park and ride facilities with far greater participation. This shows if you invest in a Mass Transit Corridor in our County it will not have the ridership of the more popular corridors such as the Hiawatha and Green Line. Rather you will very likely see unsustainable ridership that has plagued the North Star Line (that also serves an affluent area) where you've had to decrease ticket prices, introduce repeat ridership incentives, and work hard to make the transit pick ups more predictable. A second example for reference is the Red Line in Apple Valley (also a similar suburb to the Woodbury area) that had only 6.3% of it's running cost paid for by the riders according to the 2013 MNDOT Status Guideways Report. The State average is 30%. wrote two fully sourced documents on the Gateway Corridor and the Red Rock Corridor that I believe are VERY important for you to consider as you are weighing the decision on what transit projects to invest in around the metro. I highly suggest you continue to invest in the areas of the metro that actually need their transit corridors. Areas such as the South West metro where traffic congestion is the worst in the State. 0 appreciate your consideration and your work leading up to the difficult decision on where to invest CTIB dollars. Please understand we are perfectly content with our park and rides and traditional bus services. Only a small minority are strongly pushing these Corridors. In the most recent Woodbury Community Survey approval for the corridor has fallen 12% in the last five years to below 50%. The beautiful new Newport Transit Station (being built for the Red Rock Corridor) has seen ridership at less than ten people a day. The Pioneer Press wrote an article about it "Newport Transit Station has few users, so far" and I went further • to explain how this should be no surprise to the planners from their own 2013 study here. Please read my two articles if you require further evidence Washington County is the last area you should prioritize CTIB funds: The Gateway Corridor Big Promises, Little Evidence VIA Red Rock Corridor Faces Delays as 7 Facts Become Undeniable I'd appreciate your reply with input on your thoughts regarding transit in Washington County. -Matt Behning Stillwater, MN • is • • 0 2015 Pollinator Summit Photo courtesy Barr E omerring Cmupm{p Designing for Pollinators - Enhancing our Communities Thursday, August 13, 2015, 8:30 a.m. - 4:30 p.m. Minnesota Landscape Arboretum I Chaska, MN $70 Arboretum Members and Conference Affiliates 1 $80 General Registration Fee includes Arboretum admission, lunch and coffee breaks THE POI.LINA'POR SUMMIT will focus on protecting pollinators by restoring ecological functions to the urban landscape, and recognizing the ecological and economic benefits that using best practices brings to our communi- ties. Those who guide policy, plan, or manage landscapes will leave the with a better understanding of how to sup- port pollinators in an urban environment, and inspired to take action in your work. SU),9411T HIGHLIGHTS Dr. Marla Spivak MaeArthur Fellow. Distinguished McKnight Professor, University of Minnesota Sarah Bergmann Founder and Director, Pollinator Pathways, Seattle, Washington Concurrent sessions on planning, design and management practices that support pollinators 612-301-1210 - www.arboretum.timn.edu/Pollinators2015.aspx I UNIVERSITY OF MINNESt)TA Heather Branigin From: Sent: To: Subject: Dear City Council members: Jennifer Janovy <jjanovy@outlook.com> Friday, July 24, 2015 12:58 PM Edina Mail Fwd: Ethical concern About a year ago, a former City Council member recommended that the Council adopt an Ethics policy. There seemed to be agreement on the idea, but then it was dropped. It's time to pick it back up, and below is one reason why. Thanks for your consideration. Jennifer Janovy Begin forwarded message: From: Jennifer Janovy <jjanovy outlook.com> Date: July 20, 2015 5:46:59 PM CDT To: "Scott H. Neal" <sneal _EdinaMN.gov> Subject: Ethical concern Hi, Scott. 0 After reading your August 17, 2015 Friday Report I wanted to raise up something to you that I consider to be an ethical issue. I don't expect that there will be agreement on this. Your Friday Report included the following: Grandview Update City staff is working with ESG Architects to prepare some preliminary architectural floor plans and renderings for possible mixed-use redevelopment of the City -owned property. This site has been vacant since the new Public Works & Park Maintenance Facility opened in 2010. The mixed-use components include a new 60,000-square-fott civic building, a new apartment building and new outdoor circulation and plaza areas. While this work is very preliminary in nature, it strives to illustrate how the new community building can function on this challenging site. This work should be completed next month and presented to the City Council for further consideration. The Friday Report is billed as "a weekly report to the City Council about current City operations and activities and previews matters that will concern Council Members in the near future." As of August 17, preliminary architectural floor plans and renderings had already been prepared by ESG and council members had already met with city staff members, the developer, and the architect to review the floor • plans and renderings and provide feedback. This fact was completely omitted from your Friday Report. That, in itself, is not the ethical issue, unless there was an intent to hide the fact that these meetings had is happened. To me, the ethical issue is that the meetings happened in the first place. The purpose of the Open Meeting Law is to prohibit secret meetings that make it impossible for the public to become fully informed; assure the public's right to information; and give the public an opportunity to express its views. Council members met in configurations of fewer than a quorum to review and discuss the architectural drawings. If they had all met together, the meeting would have had to have to been open. But by splitting the meetings so that no more than two city council members were present at one time, the same content could be presented to all council members in secret and discussed in secret. Yes, it was secret because the public had no way to know about the meetings and even your Friday Report does not reveal that they happened. There is no compelling reason to conduct these meetings in secret, other than to keep the preliminary plans and discussions out of public view. Scheduling or convenience is not a compelling reason. Fear of how the public might react to the preliminary drawings is not a compelling reason. A desire to have the discussion in private, where perhaps everyone can be more candid, is not a compelling reason. I don't know why these meetings were held in secret, but can think of no reason compelling enough to ignore the spirit (if not the letter) of the Open Meeting Law. lease don't tell me that there is nothing unethical about meeting with all council members in configurations of fewer than a quorum to present and discuss official city council business because I just have a different opinion. Please also don't tell me that it's not unusual. That's not a defense but an admission that the ethics at City Hall may be seriously out of step with community expectations. Last, please do not tell me that no discussions take place or that no decisions are made. Both can occur through intermediaries. This city council makes only some of its decisions by formal vote. The rest are made by open consensus and the council expressly stating its direction, or by individual council members providing feedback that allows the staff member (or other) to determine where there is council consensus and take action accordingly. Council members reviewed and commented on preliminary floor plans and renderings. The next time they see them, they will have been changed, in response to council member feedback, especially where there appeared to be consensus. Presumably, the next iteration of plans will be more agreeable. That's the goal. I personally think that the public should be able to see how we got from A to B. As it is today, the public doesn't even know that there was an A. And your Friday Report did not inform them. •As said at the start, I don't expect you to agree but do hope that you will initiate an open conversation with the city council about where to draw the line. Is the practice in question consistent with their ethical standards? Does it live up to the letter and spirit of the Open Meeting Law? Thanks for listening and for giving this consideration. Please let me know if you'd like to discuss. Jennifer • • • • U N I T E D !_ .teff Smisek Chairman of the Board, President and Chief Executive officer July 13, 2015 The Honorable Edina Hovland Mayor, City of Edina 4801 W. 501h St. Edina, MN 55424 Dear Mayor Hovland: Thank you for your efforts in passing U.S. Conference of Mayors Resolution No. 55 calling on the U.S. Government to initiate consultations with the governments of Qatar and the United Arab Emirates (UAE) to address the enormous subsidies that they provide to their state-owned airlines, in clear violation of Open Skies policy. • The support that the resolution received from mayors like you at the USCM's 83rd Annual Meeting reinforces United's belief that the economic growth of U.S. carriers and our cities is being threatened by the unfair government subsidies and benefits provided to the Gulf carriers. I know how hard you personally worked in the International Affairs committee to get this resolution passed and I would like to extend my gratitude for your hard work and dedication to this issue. As you know, the U.S. airline industry employs more than 300,000 people across the United States. Our employees earn on average double what the average worker in the U.S. does. These are jobs the country needs and they're a crucial part of a strong, growing economy. The business practices of the Gulf carriers are putting these and many other U.S. jobs in jeopardy, and I thank you for standing strong for American carriers and their workers. United's more than 85,000 employees reside in every U.S. state, and with our partners at United Express, they operate an average of more than 5,300 flights to more than 360 airports across six continents. We are committed to building a sustainable future for our employees and their communities. With a level playing field, we will be able to focus on delivering the best possible passenger air service — a critical service that connects friends and families, supports jobs and drives economic activity across the country. Thank you again for your leadership and your support. Sincerely, G(� 233 South Wacker Drive, Chicago, (L 60606 A STAR ALLIANCE MEMBER ' o Heather Branigin From: Laura Russ <laura.e.russ@gmail.com> i Sent: Friday, July 24, 2015 6:18 PM To: sean.broom@mail.house.gov; johnpaul.yates@mail.house.gov; rep. paul.thissen@house. mn; rep.frank.hornstein@house.mn; sen.scott.dibble@senate. mn; sen.melisa.franzen@senate.mn; betsy.hodges@minneapolismn.gov, Edina Mail Subject: Thanks For Your Leadership TO: U.S. Representative Keith Ellison U.S. Representative Erik Paulsen Paul Thissen, Minnesota Speaker of the House of Representatives State Senator Scott Dibble State Senator Melisa Franzen State Representative Frank Hornstein Mayor Betsy Hodges, City of Minneapolis Mayor James Holvand, City of Edina John Quincy, Minneapolis City Council Linea Palmisano, Minneapolis City Council Joni Bennett, Edina City Council Scott Neale, City Manager, City of Edina Loren Olson, Policy Aide John Dybvig, Policy Aide CC Senator Amy Klobuchar Senator Al Franken Governor Mark Dayton Thank you for your leadership with the airport issues. The recent FAA announcement indicating that they will not implement Area Navigation (RNAV) departure routes at MSP would not have been possible without representatives like you and the community coming together in a unified front to find a solution. We look forward to your active leadership as we continue to push for other changes impacting this issue, including: - Mandating an environmental impact study (EIS) for all changes at MSP - land and air - Changing how noise is measured to be fair for all our neighborhoods - Creating a long-term statewide aviation plan that addresses the inevitable airport growth at MSP Our community is always better when we come together. Thanks, again, for all you do. Regards, Laura Russ laura.e.russ@Rmail.com 4800 Fremont Ave So Minneapolis, MN • • ift From: Carol Retherford [mailto:carolreth@gmail.com] Sent: Monday, July 27, 2015 7:27 PM To: Jessica Van Der Werff Cc: James Hovland; Mary Brindle; Kevin Staunton; Robert Stewart; swensonann1(§)gmail.com; Ross Bintner Subject: Re: Southwest Ponds in Edina Jessica Van Der Werff, Thanks for your response. That certainly is good news about Cote's pond. We will look forward to improvement there! We don't understand why the other smaller pond is not eligible as well. Just this spring the city put in a culvert between the 2 ponds in essence making them the same. It certainly is in the worst shape. We'd appreciate any help you can give us to address this issue. Thanks again, Carol & John On Mon, Jul 27, 2015 at 7:13 PM, Jessica Van Der Werff <JVanDerWerff a,edinanin.gov> wrote: 40 Hello John, The larger pond adjacent to your property is called Cote Pond and is on the treatment schedule for algae in 2015. 1 will follow-up with the contractor and provide you with an update. The smaller unnamed pond adjacent to your property is not currently eligible for treatment according to the Lake & Pond Management Policy ( http://edinamn.gov/index.php?section=lake pond management ); however, residents can work together to raise the service level of the pond, making it eligible for whole pond algae treatment. I will send some more information about forming a lake group and we can work together to evaluate opportunities. Jess Jessica Van Der Werff, Water Resources Coordinator ll1t 1= 952-826-04451 Fax 952-826-0392 JVanDerWertKa EdinaMN.gov I www.EdinaMN.gov ...For Living, Learning, Raising Families & Doing Business is From: Carol Retherford [mailto:carol reth@gmail.com] Sent: Sunday, July 26, 2015 1:50 PM To: James Hovland; Mary Brindle; Kevin Staunton; Robert Stewart; swensonannlC�gmail.com; Ross Bintner; Jessica Van Der Werff Subject: Southwest Ponds in Edina City Council, Environmental Engineering Department, and Water Resources, My name is John Retherford and my wife, Carol, and I have resided at 7606 Delaney Boulevard for over twenty five years. When we first moved into our house the ponds behind us were clean, abundant with wildlife, and used by neighbors with canoes and paddleboats. Today those ponds are a moat of green sludge, barren of wildlife, and, at times, with an odor so foul that it is unpleasant to be outside. I have a concern that the ponds may be unhealthy as well. We actually sprayed Lysol on our porch last night to try to combat the smell but were forced inside. Several years ago the residents adjacent to the ponds formed a coalition to meet with Edina's City Council to determine if anything could be done to improve the pond quality. We were informed that the city of Edina couldn't implement a pond improvement program since the ponds drain into Nine Mile Creek. I am aware that the City implemented a Lake and Pond Management Policy in 2014. It is also my understanding that a recent hire by the City has expertise in improving the quality of ponds. Before I start the process of forming a lake association or lake group, I would like to know if the City of Edina has jurisdiction over the ponds in question. 0 My wife and I would welcome the council to have snacks and beverages out on our porch so you can experience this problem first hand. Thank you for your time and consideration, John Retherford 0 p"ov W FSS Permit No.: 15F -3A1034 a; PERMIT TO DESTROY AQUATIC VEGETATION Device No.: til PGO OP HA TU{1h�' The Commissioner of the Natural Resources, pursuant to authority by law, hereby grants this permit to the person whose name appears below, for the purpose specified, dates inclusive as shown, in the conditions hereinafter set forth: Permittee's Name Fire Number Telephone Number 'ROSS BITNER 952-826-0445 CITY OF EDINA Lake Address (if different) 7450 METRO BLVD. ALL SHORELINE EDINA MN 55424 EDINA MN 55424 INCLUSIVE DATES OF PERMIT: FROM: TO: TYPE C:'= PERMIT: June 22, 2015 September 01, 2015 1 Season THIS PERMIT APPLIES ONLY TO THE WATER AREA AS DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: Name of Lake Acres Count'. Cote 27104000 18 Henn pin Extending feet along shore and lakeward a maximum distance of `eet and 3_5 acres. Treatment by permittee or: LR - Lake Restoration Location of Treatment Area: Entire pond (3.5 acres) for plaktonic algae only. • Type of Control' Pesticide control of plankton algae. Means and Methods Allowed: Up to two treatments with DNR approved pesticides to be applied by a licensed cb/nmercial apMicator. Only copper products from Sanco Industries, Freeport-McMoran Sierrita Inc, Chem One, Old Bridge, and Quimag Quimicc •. are labeled for swimmer's itch control. Treatment signs to be posted in accordance with water use restrictions. DNR shall b4, contacted at least 48 hours prior to treatment. Pesticide treatments shall begin near shore and move lakeward to prevent entrapmt: nt of fish. THE PERMITTEE OR AGENT SHALL GIVE NOTICE OF COMMERCIAL MECHANICAL CONTROL OR CHEMICAL TREATF ENT DATE TO THE FOLLOWING PERSON WHICH SHALL BE RECEIVED BEFORE BEGINNING ANY WORK HEREUNDER. FAILURE TO NOTIFY PRIOR TO BEGINNING WORK OR VIOLAT,GN OF OTHER TERMS AND CONDITIONS OF THIS PERMIT SHALL BE GROUNDS FOR REVOCATION OF THIS PERMIT OR REFUSAL TO RENEW. APM Treatment Notification: AP M. notify RWUI)state.mn.us; 1200 Warner Rd St. Paul, MN; or 651-259-5'52 "By obtaining this permit {DNR's Aquatic Plant Management Permit}, dischargers of pesticides are granted ccroerage under the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) / State Disposal System (SDS) Pesticide General Permit for the control of Nuisance Aquatic Animals (MNG87C0000) and Vegetative Pests and Algae (MNG87D0000) administered by the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA). Compliance with this permit will satisfy the requirements of the NPDES/SDS permit. More information and copies of MPCA's permit can be found at www.pca.state.mn. us/pesticidepermit." The Minnesota Department of Natural Resources does not vouch for the effectiveness of any control method or operation nor does it stand as ar�iter whether or not any such method or operation has been satisfactory. This permit is permissive only and no liability shall be incurred by the State or by any of its offices, agents, or employees by rceson of the issuance of it or by reasons of acts or operations of the permittee. The permittee shall be solelyresponsible for any damage or injury to persons, domestic or wild animals, waters, or !%riperty, real or personal of any kind, resulting from the permittee's acts or operations, and at all times the State of Minnesota, its officers, agents, and employees, shall be held hanoless from any liabili :.: for such damage or injury. AFS: CO: 355 Authorized Signature for Commissioner Date •Other: igitally signedn Sisler -=N: cn=Sean Sisler, o=MNDNR, r; U=APM, Minnesota Department of Natural Resources 06/22/2015 ;`:,mail=sean.sisler@state.mn.us, _=US .,ata• ?n1,; n7 n1 nR v�•44-ns'nn' Heather Branigin OlFrom: Harry McLenighan <hmclenighan@gmail.com> Sent: Monday, July 27, 2015 3:41 PM To: Chad Millner Cc: James Hovland Subject: Promenade 4 At what meeting were the initial and final designs approved for the Promenade, Phase 4 project? I need to research an easement issue. April, 2014 sounds like the range, but, like I said, I'd like to look at the conceptual as well as the final plans. I live at 7200 York (condo #222), so I've been able to observe progress on the project daily. It's going to a be really, really nice addition. I watched the planning commission and city council deliberations about this project, and my recollection was that a convenient, attractive, welcoming, PUBLIC easement through the new Lunds & Byerly's apartment development to the new Lunds & Byerly's store was assured for residents in my development as part of the approval process. To this point, I've not seen any accomodation for such a passageway, and the landscaping project is almost to Think Bank. I can assure you than my neighbors and I will be - at the very least - disappointed if we find that we need to walk to Hazeldon rather than cut through to get to L&B. Thanks for your assistance, Warry McLenighan, EdD 7200 York Condo 222 612-749-2154 0 Heather Branigin From: Maura Schnorbach <mschnorbach@stpatrick-edina.org> Sent: Tuesday, July 28, 2015 2:51 PM To: Edina Mail Subject: Thank you for supporting 66 West! Hello Mayor and City Councilmembers, I wanted to thank all of you for the groundbreaking work you have done over the last couple of years in support of 66 West. I believe that it is going to create some wonderful opportunities for our community! It takes vision and leadership to take the first steps on a project like 66 West! This afternoon will be a great celebration of the progress to date and a chance for us to thank all of the members of our community who have played a key role. I know that summer is always busy and some of you may not be at the Ice Cream Social! I wanted to let all of you know how grateful we are for everything you have done on behalf of homeless youth! Best, Maura Schnorbach Social Justice Coordinator Church of St. Patrick 6820 St. Patrick's Lane 0 Edina, MN 55439 952-767-0942 • mschnorbach@stpatrick-edina.org • James Hovland Mayor City of Edina Dear Mayor Hovland, You're invited to a special first-time viewing of "The Real ir-n p _-ict of Aircraft Noise in Arnerica„ By Kevin Terrell Monday, August 3, 2015 7:00-8:30 p.m. Edina City Hall Edina City Council Chambers 4801 W 50th St Edina, MN 55424 In cities across the U.S., residents near airports are living under an increasing barrage of noise and chemical pollution from commercial aircraft. This 17 -minute film uses in-depth research to demonstrate, for the first time, the enormous number of U.S. citizens significantly affected by aviation noise — noise that is damaging our health, impacting schoolchildren's learning ability, and degrading quality of life in affected neighborhoods — as well as a plan of action for citizens. Kevin Terrell, Katana Consulting & MSP FairSkies Coalition co-founder, partnered with the University of Minnesota Center for Urban and Regional Affairs (CURA) to complete a noise analysis of the top 35 U.S. airports, based on data obtained from the FAA. Kevin will be available for questions and there will be time for stakeholder discussion. Please RSVP by Saturday, August 1 to: Connie Carrino 952.920.2111 crcarrino@q.com •This event is sponsored by MSP FairSkies Coalition who is grateful to the City of Edina for allowing us the use of their facilities r: We hope you wily join us t.t a summer • J barbeque to celebrate CAPSH's work and • explore opportunities to partner for community progress. Date: Wednesday, August 26, 2015 := x.2:30-3:00P��'I *Lunch will be served until2.00PM *Special guest speakers at 1:3OPM Location: Brookview Perk 200 Brookview Pkwy N Golden Valli Y, MN 55426 RSVP to Christine Hart by Au'' ust 24, 2015 via email of } - 71— chart@capsh.orr; or phone .xi (952) 697-1364. Please indicate if you have anidietary restrictions. • J (Highway 55 to Winnetka Ave, south to Brookview Parkway, the n turn right) Community Ac�;ion Partnership 0 Heather Branigin From: Joseph M Medina <joemed@us.ibm.com> • Sent: Wednesday, July 29, 2015 9:44 AM To: James Hovland Cc: jennyjmedina@me.com Subject: Fw: 7301 Schey Drive Good morning Mr. Hoveland, I would like to bring to your attention an issue my wife and I have been dealing with for the past few months relating to the road construction project on Schey Drive. I have attempted to work with the city project manager Andrew Scipioni, but unfortunately this has proven to be futile. There are several issues, but the one item that I would appreciate your assistance with is in regards to the challenges we have been dealing with on the repairs to our irrigation system: We recently had our entire irrigation system replaced, at a cost of approximately $4,000. When the road construction commenced, I advised the Edina City Project Manager Andrew of my concerns when the workers damaged several sections of the irrigation system. Given the size of the investment we had made in installing the new system, coupled with the complexity of it, I asked Andrew to contact the company that installed the system to ensure that it was repaired correctly. Unfortunately this never took place, the contractor that is working for the city performed repairs that far from the original and had several issues. I have had several calls with Andrew on this issue, and unfortunately the the outcome is the same. He states that he understands the issue, commits to resolve and get back to us... a few weeks pass without hearing back, and then I have to reach back out to him. I am sure you can appreciate my frustration, and I don't believe this is the type of behavior the • the City of Edina expects from their employees. I would appreciate your guidance and assistance in how best to resolve this issue. Many thanks, Vice President, Global Technology Services Communications Sector Phone: 1-612-397-2507 E-mail: joemed@us.ibm.com IBM Corporation: www.ibm.com ----- Forwarded by Joseph M Medina/Minneapolis/IBM on 07/29/2015 09:09 AM from: Joseph M Medina/Minneapolis/IBM To: Andrew Scipioni <ascipioni@EdinaMN.gov> Cc: jennyjmedina@me.com, hovland@EdinaMN.gov Date: 07/29/2015 09:07 AM Subject: RE: 7301 Schey Drive Andrew, I believe you need to speak with your contractor as there have been no repairs/changes made to the irrigation system, the same issues that I brought to your attention two months ago have not yet been addressed. I have taken photos, and I highly recommend you visit the property today to see for yourself. This issue needs to be Sladdressed ASAP. The sprinkler head on the south end of the property is over a foot short of where the original was installed Two sprinkler head's north of previously mentioned does not rotate The sprinkler head directly south of driveway (adjacent)is attached via a 1/4 hose and not the original 1" pipe, which impacts throughput In addition to the above, there is several pieces of pipe/trash that needs to be removed before topsoil is filled. Again, I have brought this issue to your attention before and this has yet to be resolved. Please advise as to how you will get these items resolved. We have been more than patient during this process, but this has become unacceptable. Regards, Joseph M. Mediwa Vice President, Global Technology Services Communications Sector Phone: 1-612-397-2507 •E-mail: joemed@us.ibm.com IgM Corporation: www.ibm.com Andrew Scipioni ---07/27/2015 11:40:10 AM ---Joe, I understand your frustration and I apologize for not following up with you. in a timely manner. From: Andrew Scipioni <ascipioni@EdinaMN.gov> To: Joseph M Medina/Minneapolis/IBM@IBWS Date: 07/27/2015 11:40 AM Subject: RE: 7301 Schey Drive Joe, I understand your frustration and I apologize for not following up with you in a timely manner. After we last spoke about your irrigation system, I inspected the work and spoke to our contractor about the repairs. My understanding was that the repairs were complete and the system was functioning without any issues. If this is not the case, I can speak to our contractor about getting another crew out to restore the system. • Under the conditions of our contract with Northwest, we cannot guarantee that the repaired portions of irrigation systems or pet fences will exactly match the existing systems, though we try our best to match the existing styles. If the repairs are simply not up to your standards, you are welcome to hire your own contractor to repair them; however, the City will not be able to reimburse you or warranty the work once your contractor touches it. If you have any other concerns or comments, please let me know. • Thanks, Andrew Scipioni, EIT, Engineering Technician 1 �ci 952 826 0440 1 Fax 952-826-0392 �I r,,.ascipioni@EdinaMN.gov I www.EdinaMN.gov ...For Living, Leartli.ng, Raising Families & Doing Business From: Joseph M Medina [mailto_joemed@us.ibm.com] Sent: Monday, July 27, 2015 10:32 AM To: Andrew Scipioni Cc: jennyjmedina@me.com Subject: 7301 Schey Drive Good morning Andrew, It has been over three weeks since our last discussion in where you had committed to get back me on the issue I previously raised regarding the irrigation system at our house. I can appreciate that you may be busy, but I cannot think of any appropriate excuse for failing to follow up as agreed at this point. Given your failure to respond in an acceptable manner, I will have the contractor that • installed the system (BNR irrigation) re -install the mess that your contractor made and will have the invoice sent directly to you. We have lived here in Edina for over 12 years now, and I am quite shocked and disappointed at how the city has managed this road project. Please advise if you have any questions. My mobile is 612-840-6654. Regards, Vice President, Global Technology Services Communications Sector Phone: 1-612-397-2507 E-mail: ioemed us.ibm.com MVI Corporation: www.ibm.com 0 Heather Branigin Orom: Sent: To: Subject: Begin forwarded message: Brenda Becker <brendab2@me.com> Wednesday, July 29, 2015 11:08 AM Mary Brindle; James Hovland; Kevin Staunton; swensonannl@gmail.com; Robert Stewart Fwd: Edina Community Lutheran Church From: Brenda Becker <brendab2gme.com> Subject: ECLC Date: July 28, 2015 at 4:19:02 PM CDT To: Teague Carey <cteaguue ,edinamn.gov_>, James Wisker <JWiskerQminnehahacreek.org>, Holman Ken <ken.holman(cr�,state.mn.us> Dear Carey, Although I was unable to attend last week's Planning Commission meeting regarding the CUP permit for the Edina Community Lutheran Church, I heard that the proposal "sailed right on through" with nary a question or ,concern raised by any board member present. My head is reeling; dust a little more than a week ago, I read a wonderfully encouraging article in the Star Tribune quoting you, Carey, as a major proponent of the new Edina tree preservation ordinance that was recently passed. "We were losing that urban canopy, that urban forest that we had. And we were hearing about it ... " you stated in that article. So I simply do not understand. Apparently a church can scrape a property clean, removing some two dozen mature trees (or more), and pave the entire surface of its residential lot, but a private homeowner has to abide by tough new preservation rules. Do I have it right? I am incensed. I am sad. That canopy you describe as vital to the well-being of Edina and its residents will not be replaced in our lifetime. And probably not in our children's. Once it's gone, it's gone. I do not understand how there can be an apparent double standard for an organization located in a neighborhood zoned residential. I would appreciate an explanation as to why this is so. Perhaps I am just missing something here. Thank you for helping me to understand, what appears to be an anomaly. Sincerely, Brenda B. Becker 0 Heather Branigin Worn: Kristine Donatelle <donatellek@icloud.com> Sent: Wednesday, July 29, 2015 12:27 PM To: Mary Brindle; James Hovland; swensonann1@gmail.ccm; Kevin Staunton; Robert Stewart; Edina Mail Cc: ECLC Subject: Fwd: Questions re ECLC CUP proposal, 4113 West 541111 St, Dear City Council members, I have received no response to the following questions regarding Edina Community Lutheran Church's CUP and variance request at 4113 West 54th St. As a neighbor directly south and within 100 feet of the church, I would like answers to these questions please prior to the City Council meeting on Aug. 5th. We are disturbed that city planning officials and board members have so far denidnstrated little to no concern or consideration for this massive project's adverse impact on the environment including removal of many mature trees, wildlife habitat, noise and massive storm water runoff and erosion of the fragile creek slope and wetlands below. I have heard very few questions, commentary and concern regarding surrounding impact. Sincerely, Kristine Donatelle 5427 Woodcrest Drive *Begin forwarded message: From: Kristine Donatelle <donatellek(cr�.icloud.com> Subject: Questions re ECLC CUP proposal, 4113 West 54th 't. Date: July 23, 2015 11:20:49 AM CDT To: mail ,EdinaMN.gov, ECLC <ecicsite(a_gmail.com> Cc: Cary Teague <ctea, ue _edinamn.gov> Dear Edina Community Lutheran Church and city of Edina planning repr:� sentatives, live directly south of the church across the creek on Woodcrest Drive. . I raised several questions at the city Planning Commission hearing last right regarding the church CUP and variance request at 4113 West 54th St. Nobody was courteous enough to acknowledge or answer several of my questions at the hearing. 0 would like these questions answered by church representatives, their a -chitect and/or city planning officials please before heading into the City Council meeting in a few we As: C�. A/C units - where exactly will these be located on the church building ar d has there been any attempt to mitigate their noise? I am sure they will be quite large and auccle considering the 8,000 - square -foot size of this addition. A comment was made at the hearing thE.` they would be located on the SW side. Where exactly? On the rooftop or down below? How audible will these be? C. Landscaping buffer (west side) - the plans call out for Canadian Hemlock but representatives from the church say it's arborvitae. Which is it? How tall are the shrubs and exactly how many will be planted on the west side portion of the addition? Retaining wall — Is there a retaining wall supporting the length of this pa king lot from west to east? The plans show one. How tall is it? What materials will it be made of — I -oulder? Brick? Why is no detail about the retaining wall called out on the plans? How many more trees will have to be cleared to make way for this retair i,ng wall and why were they a not designated on the required tree impact study? A significant portion c l the fragile slope will be carved out and impacted to put up a retaining wall. Walking path — I see what appears to be a walking path next to the reta,ning wall on the plans. How many more trees will have to be cleared for that path? Is it dirt or will me re surface material be introduced here? Storm Water release onto the slope — How many gallons of water will � e released from the storage/holding tank and how often? With hard rainfalls (we had many tl-�is spring and summer), and with this massive new roof and new impervious surface, what's to preve�;t this water from pouring over the shallow swale and eroding the fragile creek slope below? Wha.-;provisions are being made to preserve the slope and wetlands below the swale? ;Y I was dismayed to find that city planning representatives did not follow u_; on my questions and is demonstrated little to no consideration or concern for this project's impact on surrounding neighbors 1i - and the fragile creek slope below. I ask for your courtesy in addressing these questions. 2 Im Thank you, 01ristine Donatelle 5427 Woodcrest Drive b 'SIR n. • 0 Heather Branigin From: Gayle Dreon, IRET Properties <tbratcher= iret.com@mai 163.atl91.mcsv.net> on behalf of • Gayle Dreon, IRET Properties <tbratcher@iret.com> Sent: Wednesday, July 29, 2015 5:04 PM To: James Hovland Subject: You're Invited: 6565 France Grand Opening Dear Office Administrators and Doctors, Allow us the pleasure of inviting you to attend the Grand Opening of the 6565 France Medical Building at the Southdale Medical Center. Refreshments will be served and we will have a short program at 4:30 PM. Please seethe below invitation and RSVP to Tescia Bratcher, tbratcher(a)iret.com or by calling us at 952-922-5399. We look forward to seeing you there. View this email in your browser • Heather Branigin From: Jennifer Janovy <jjanovy@outlook.com> • Sent: Wednesday, July 29, 2015 7:25 PM To: Edina Mail Subject: Fwd: Ethical concern Please forward to the City Council. Thanks. Begin forwarded message: From: "Scott H. Neal" <sneal�EdinaMN.yov> Date: July 28, 2015 4:43:43 PM CDT To: 'Jennifer Janovy' <Ilanovy(a outlook.com> Subject: RE: Ethical concern Jennifer — I want to acknowledge the receipt of your email. I've read and considered it thoroughly. In your opening paragraph you stated that you expect that we will no agree on the questions you pose. You are right about that. Any further reply would only be argumentative on my part, so I'll leave it that. Regards, '10Scott Neal, City Manager 952 826-0401 1 Fax 952-826-0390 i sneal(dEdinaMN.aov I www.EdinaMN.gov From: Jennifer Janovy [mailto:jjanovy@outlook.com] • Sent: Monday, July 20, 2015 5:47 PM To: Scott H. Neal Subject: Ethical concern Hi, Scott. *After reading your August 17, 2015 Friday Report 1 wanted to raise up something to you that I consider to be an ethical issue. I don't expect that there will be agreement on this. Your Friday Report included the following: Grandview Update City staff is working with ESG Architects to prepare some preliminary architectural floor plans and renderings for possible mixed-use redevelopment of the City -owned property. This site has been vacant since the new Public Works & Park Maintenance Facility opened in 2010. The mixed-use components include a new 60,000-square-fott civic building, a new apartment building and new outdoor circulation and plaza areas. While this work is very preliminary in nature, it strives to illustrate how the new community building can function on this challenging site. This work should be completed next month and presented to the City Council for further consideration. The Friday Report is billed as "a weekly report to the City Council about current City operations and activities and previews matters that will concern Council Members in the near future." As of August 17, preliminary architectural floor plans and renderings had already been prepared by ESG and council members had already met with city staff members, the developer, and the architect to review the floor plans and renderings and provide feedback. i. ,This fact was completely omitted from your Friday Report. That, in itself, is not the ethical issue, unless there was an intent to hide the fact that these meetings had happened. To me, the ethical issue is that the meetings happened in the first place. The purpose of the Open Meeting Law is to prohibit secret meetings that make it impossible for the public to become fully informed; assure the public's right to information; and give the public an opportunity to express its views. Council members met in configurations of fewer than a quorum to review and discuss the architectural drawings. If they had all met together, the meeting would have had to have to been open. But by splitting the meetings so that no more than two city council members were present at one time, the same content could be presented to all council members in secret and discussed in secret. Yes, it was secret because the public had no way to know about the meetings and even your Friday Report does not reveal that they happened. There is no compelling reason to conduct these meetings in secret, other than to keep the preliminary plans and discussions out of public view. Scheduling or convenience is not a compelling reason. Fear of how the public might react to the preliminary drawings is not a compelling reason. A desire to have the discussion in private, where perhaps everyone can be ,,more candid, is not a compelling reason. I don't know why these meetings were held in secret, but can think of no reason compelling enough to ignore the spirit (if not the letter) of the Open Meeting Law. Please don't tell me that there is nothing unethical about meeting with all council members in configurations of fewer than a quorum to present and discuss official city council business because I just have a different opinion.• Please also don't tell me that it's not unusual. That's not a defense but an admission that the ethics at City Hall may be seriously out of step with community expectations. Last, please do not tell me that no discussions take place or that no decisions are made. Both can occur through intermediaries. This city council makes only some of its decisions by formal vote. The rest are made by open consensus and the council expressly stating its direction, or by individual council members providing feedback that allows the staff member (or other) to determine where there is council consensus and take action accordingly. Council members reviewed and commented on preliminary floor plans and renderings. The next time they see them, they will have been changed, in response to council member feedback, especially where there appeared to be consensus. Presumably, the next iteration of plans will be more agreeable. That's the goal. I personally think that the public should be able to see how we got from A to B. As it is today, the public doesn't even know that there was an A. And your Friday Report did not inform them. As said at the start, I don't expect you to agree but do hope that you will initiate an open conversation with the city council about where to draw the line. Is the practice in question consistent with their ethical standards? Does it live up to the letter and spirit of the Open Meeting Law? Thanks for listening and for giving this consideration. Please let me know if you'd like to discuss. • Jennifer Heather Branigin *Frorn: Carissa Slotterback <schiv005@umn.edu> Sent: Thursday, July 30, 2015 5:15 AM To: Carissa Schively Slotterback Subject: U of M Smart Cities and Infrastructure - seeking updates/resources for newsletter update To: Smart Cities and Infrastructure Convergence Colloquium attendees and interested folks About five months ago, on February 28th, we came together for an engaging and productive discussion about research and collaboration opportunities related to smart cities and infrastructure. The report on that event is available here. Since the event, we funded three great proposals with Serendipity Grants and have collaborative teams moving forward on developing a new pilot statewide Infrastructure Stress Transparency Tool, analyzing food flows and supply chains in Hennepin County, and using big data sources including social media and smartphone applications to understand the relationship between urban nature and the well-being of city residents. The teams represent a diverse set of disciplines and bring together expertise from more than 10 organizations outside of the U of M. In order to maintain our emerging "community of research and practice," I'm hoping to share an e -newsletter update every six months or so. •**If you've come across interesting smart cities and infrastructure related articles, events, or resources that you think would be of interest to the group, please feel free to pass them along. Also, if there are interesting initiatives that you and/or your organization are involved in, please share a few sentences and relevant links, and I'll include them in the update.** We hope to be able to maintain an engaged network of folks and look forward to hearing about your ongoing work. Last, we're planning ahead to four additional Convergence Colloquia this fall. Ifyou're interested in attending events related to health equity, renewable energy, water supply, and/or sustainable food systems, please let me know. If you have colleagues who would be interested, please feel free to share their names/emails as well. Thanks! Carissa Carissa Slotterback, PhD, AICP Director of Research Engagement, Office of the Vice President for Research Associate Professor, Urban and Regional Planning Program, Humphrey School of Public Affairs University of Minnesota (612) 625-0640, schiv005Qumn.edu 0 Heather Branigin From: Randy J Anhorn <randy.anhorn@hennepin.us> • Sent: Thursday, July 30, 2015 10:33 AM Subject: Hennepin County draft Natural Resources Strategic Plan Attachments: 34-407-05a-14_NaturalResources_StrategicPlan_Suminary.pdf; Natural_Resources_Strategic_Plan.pdf Good morning; In early June, we sent out a request for feedback on the County's draft Natural Resources Strategic Plan (Plan). This is just a friendly reminder to those that have not yet provided comments, but were planning to, that there is still time to do so. The Plan is intended to guide the county in responding to natural resources issues and in the development of policies, programs and partnerships that improve, protect and preserve our natural resources. During the development of the Plan, the county sought input from a wide variety of internal and external stakeholders on what they believe the county should focus on when it comes to the management of our natural resources, where partnerships would be advantageous and where these partnerships could better leverage resources. As part of our Plan development process, we are now seeking feedback on the draft Plan. Feedback will be collected through July 31, 2015 and will be used to improve the Plan and a summary of the public engagement • findings will be presented to the county board in fall 2015. Your feedback can come in many forms. o Specific comments on the Plan's goals, objectives and strategies o Provide general thoughts on: 1. What you like about the Plan 2. What do you find troublesome about the Plan? 3. What is missing? o Complete the online survey for partners. The online survey will be available through August 7, 2015 The full Plan, online survey and Plan flyer can be found here. Thank you to all that have already provided feedback in one form or another. 4 Randy a Randy Anhorn i Supeivisor, Land & ;dater Unit ( Hennepin County, Environment and Energy DePrtment 701 Fourth Ave S, Suite 700, Mpls MN 55415 i randy.anhornRhennepin.us i o: 612,348.2027 1 c: 651.472.4o61 WFI Please cti)nsider rhe envirormen_ before prinung this e-mail Disclaimer: Information in this message or an attachment may be government data and thereby subject to the Gathering feedback on the Hennepin County � Natural Resources Strategic Plan Hennepin County is seeking feedback on its draft natural resources strategic plan. This plan is intended to guide the county and its partners in responding to natural resource issues and developing internal and external policies, programs and partnerships that improve, protect and preserve natural resources. This provides a summary of the plan and highlights strategies and key elements to meet our natural resources goals. The full plan is available for review at www.hennnepin.us/naturalresources. Goal 1: Hennepin County waters are clean and healthy Protect and restore lakes, rivers and streams Protect groundwater to ensure a safe and sustainable water supply Protect and restore wetlands • Restoring wetlands and banking mitigation credits Under the Wetland Conservation Act, landowners who cannot restore or avoid impacting a wetlana can replace lost wetland acres by purchasing wetland banking credits. Because there are limited wetland_ mitigation banking credits available in Hennepin County, credits are often purchased outside of the county, resulting in a net loss of wetlands within the county.To ensure the availability of mitigation credits within Hennepin County, the county will identify and evaluate wetland restoration and funding opportunities on county -owned properties and tax -forfeited lands. In addition, the county will assist the Minnesota Board of Water and Soil Resources in locating willing county landowners with potential wetland restoration sites. Goal 2: Hennepin County landscapes are diverse and functional and natural areas are preserved • Protect and enhance natural areas, corridors and green spaces 4' • Establish and restore landscapes that serve an ecological function ;Z` • Control and prevent vegetative and biological threats to maintain healthy ecosystems • Practice and promote environmental stewardship of the county's soil resources Establish a conservation easement program Conservation easements restrict development and certain types of use on a piece of property in perpetuity in order to protect its natural resources.The county will explore options for establishing program that provides guidance for potential easements as opportunities arise via tax -forfeiture, capital projects or private landowner inquiries. 0 Maintain and increase a healthy tree canopy Left unmanaged, the overall tree canopy in the county will likely continue to decline due to loss of trees from age, development, disease, pests and storm damage.The county will provide technical assistance to cities and will evaluate the feasihiiity of providing financial and logistical support for planning and mitigation efforts related to the emerald ash borer. Goal 3: Hennepin County fosters effective partnerships Foster partnerships and strengthen collaboration with natural resource management entities Collaborate with internal partners to incorporate sustainable natural resource management strategies Hennepin Natural Resources Partnership The county has convened a group of representatives from watershed districts, water management organizations, cities, county departments, and state and regional natural resource agencies.The Hennepin County Natural Resources Partnership promotes collaborative land and water management efforts on issues transecting political and hydrologic boundaries, encourages sharing of resources and information, increases opportunities to leverage resources, and provides a venue to address countywide policy issues. Goal 4: Hennepin County motivates environmental stewardship • Engage the community in taking action to protect the environment Environmental education The county develops educational resources, shares technical information and provides funding for partners to implement environmental education projects that empower residents to take action to protect water and land. The county supports programs and projects that help audiences understand that they are part of an ecosystem and can take action to protect the environment regardless of where they live. Goal 5: Hennepin County leverages financial resources • Integrate the work of Hennepin County and partners to achieve the goals of the Clean Water, Land and Legacy Amendment • Provide financial assistance Leveraging financial resources The Clean Water, Land and Legacy Amendment provides funding for projects that protect, enhance and restore natural resources, including lakes, rivers, streams, groundwater, wetlands, prairies, forests and wildlife habitat. In an effort to lessen the burden on local taxpayers, the county will seek partners to jointly pursue grant funds on projects and programs that address common natural resources issues, needs and goals. Provide feedback 0 0 Hennepin County is gathering feedback on this plan by hosting meetings, making presentations and surveying partners and residents. Feedback will be collected through July 31, 2015.The feedback will be used to improve the plan and a summary of the public engagement findings will be presented to the county board in fall 2015. Final adoption of the plan by the county board is anticipated in December 2015. The full plan is available for review at www.hennepin.us/naturalresources. Partners and residents are encouraged to complete the online surveys. Written comments can be sent to randy.anhorn@hennepin.us. Hennepin County Public Works Environment and Energy June 2015 34-407-0Sa-14 • Hennepin County Natural Strategic Plan 1 1 1 .7 • • TABLE OF CONTENTS Introduction...................................................... 4 Mission........................................................... 5 Guiding principles ................................................. 5 Natural resources in Hennepin County .............................. 6 Goals, objectives and strategies .................................... 7 Goal 1: Hennepin County waters are clean and healthy .............. 8 1.1 Objective: Protect and restore lakes, rivers and streams ............. 8 1.2 Objective: Protect groundwater to ensure a safe and sustainable water supply.....................................10 1.3 Objective: Protect and restore wetlands ...........................11 Goal 2: Hennepin County landscapes are diverse and functional and natural areas are preserved .................13 2.1 Objective: Protect and enhance natural areas, corridors and green spaces........................................13 i2.2 Objective: Establish and restore landscapes that serve an ecological function..................................14 2.3 Objective: Control and prevent vegetative and biological threats to maintain healthy ecosystems.................16 2.4 Objective: Practice and promote environmental stewardship of the county's soil resources .........................17 Goal 3: Hennepin County fosters effective partnerships ............18 3.1 Objective: Foster partnerships and strengthen collaboration with natural resource management entities .......................18 3.2 Objective: Collaborate with internal partners to incorporate sustainable natural resource management strategies..............19 Goal 4: Hennepin County motivates environmental stewardship.... 20 4.1 Objective: Engage the community in taking action to protect the environment.......................................20 Goal 5: Hennepin County leverages financial resources ............. 22 5.1 Objective: Integrate the work of Hennepin County and partners to achieve the goals of the Clean Water, Land and Legacy Amendment....................................22 • 5.2 Objective: Provide financial assistance .............................23 NATURAL RESOURCES STRATEGIC PLAN 13 u • INTRODUCTION Hennepin county's natural resources strategic plan is intended to guide the county and its partners in responding to natural resource issues and developing internal and external policies, programs and partnerships that improve, protect and preserve natural resources. As the only county in the state with the duties and authorities of a soil and water conservation district, Hennepin County takes the lead role in delivering soil and water conservation services throughout the county. Hennepin County officially assumed this role in 2014 when the Hennepin Conservation District (HCD) was discontinued and all duties and authorities of HCD were transferred to the county. Prior to officially assuming these responsibilities, the county was involved in the management of natural resources for decades through collaboration with internal departments on county projects, performing HCD's conservation duties through a cooperative agreement, and by working in partnership with local watershed districts and joint -powers watershed management organizations. The plan is intended to guide natural resources management in the county through 2020. The plan was developed to be consistent with the county's mission "to enhance the health, safety and quality of life of our residents and communities in a respectful, efficient and fiscally responsible way" It also aligns with the mission of the Environment and Energy Department to "protect and preserve the environment to enhance the quality of life for current and future generations;' and complements the department's strategic plan by providing more details about the broad ecosystems and natural resources protection objectives included in that plan. 4 1 NATURAL RESOURCES STRATEGIC PLAN • • r� Guiding principles The following principles encompass the concepts and values that were used in the development of the natural resources goals, objectives and strategies included in this plan. These principles also provide general guidance to support work plan activities and management decisions regarding natural resources. To protect and preserve natural resources in Hennepin County, we: • Gather and analyze countywide data to identify local and regional trends from which priorities are determined. • Achieve results through deliberate planning, thorough implementation and establishment of clear and measurable goals. • Commit to the use of proven best practices while supporting the research and implementation of innovative practices. • Build and foster partnerships to effectively leverage resources. • Provide financial and technical assistance and education to motivate environmental stewardship. • Promote cost-effective resource management and pursue diverse funding sources. • Anticipate the environmental needs of the county and take advantage of opportunities to preserve and restore the county's natural resources. • Maintain qualified, knowledgeable, multi -disciplinary staff that acts as both advocates for and stewards of the county's natural resources. NATURAL RESOURCES STRATEGIC PLAN I S Natural resources in Hennepin County Hennepin County has an abundance of natural resources, including numerous lakes, streams, wetlands and rivers and diverse landscapes and habitats ranging from gardens and urban parks to prairies and forests. Natural resources provide critical habitat for wildlife, protect water quality, offer recreational opportunities and serve as the foundation for the region's environmental well-being, economic prosperity and collective quality of life. Protecting these important recreational, aesthetic and ecological resources is a priority for the county and its residents and partners. However, the county's natural resources are under increasing pressure from population growth, development and climate change. Hennepin County's size and population present unique challenges and opportunities in regard to protecting natural resources. Hennepin County is the most populous county in the state with about 1.2 million residents, and the population is expected to increase steadily by 8 percent through 2030. Population density and land use vary widely throughout the county, encompassing urban, suburban (collectively referred to as urban in this plan) and rural areas. Many entities in the county have a role in water and land conservation issues, making developing and maintaining partnerships critical to protecting natural resources. Many of the strategies included in this plan outline our intention to partner with cities, watershed organizations, nonprofit organizations, and regional and state agencies in order to meet our natural resource protection goals. The impacts of climate change will put more stress on natural resources. Temperature and moisture patterns may change faster than plant and animal communities can adapt, resulting in changes to ecosystems, habitat loss and spread of invasive species. Additionally, an increased frequency of both flooding and droughts will put additional pressure on our stormwater management infrastructure and groundwater resources. Land use is projected to shift in the county through 2030 with more land being developed and less land being open space or agricultural. Understanding the current and projected land use helps guide our priorities to support programs that implement best practices to protect land and water and enhance wildlife habitat in urban and rural areas throughout the county as well as preserve the county's remaining ecologically significant open space areas. 6 1 NATURAL RESOURCES STRATEGIC PLAN • From lakes to rivers to urban parks, forests and prairies, Hennepin County has an abundance of diverse landscapes and natural resources. Land use in Hennepin County Source: Metropolitan Council 0 Land use type 2010 2030, projected Developed 49% 71% Open space 39% 230/0 Agricultural 12% 6% Source: Metropolitan Council 0 • Goals, objectives and strategies This plan outlines Hennepin County's strategies to meet the following goals: • Hennepin County waters are clean and healthy. • Hennepin County landscapes are diverse and functional and natural areas are preserved. • Hennepin County fosters effective partnerships. • Hennepin County motivates environmental stewardship. • Hennepin County leverages financial resources. The plan accounts for both new and ongoing strategies the county will pursue to meet our goals. The plan proposes an adaptive management approach in which we will continually review management strategies and outcomes in order to fulfill our mission of protecting and preserving the county's natural resources. •The strategies under each objective have been identified as a continuation of past efforts, an expansion or new approach to an existing effort, or a new program. • NATURAL RESOURCES STRATEGIC PLAN 17 A • GOAL I Hennepin County waters are clean and healthy Hennepin County will work to protect and restore lakes, rivers, streams and wetlands to meet applicable standards for fishing and recreation and to ensure that water supplies are sustainable. 1.1 Objective: Protect and restore lakes, rivers and streams Strategy Continue Expand New 1.1.1 Track the quality of the county's water ✓ resources. 1.1.2 Work with partners to implement water quality restoration and protection projects to improve impaired water resources. 1.1.3 Provide technical assistance and education ✓ to residents, municipalities and watersheds. 1 J Reduce the impacts of stormwater runoff through the implementation of best management practices. Strategies 1.1.1 Track the quality of the county's water resources. Understanding the quality of the county's water resources is important to determining priorities and identifying how strategies and programs need to be adapted to better achieve water quality goals and objectives. To assess long-term trends in the quality of the county's water resources, the county will use available data to track annual conditions on 50 reference lakes. To avoid duplication of monitoring efforts, the county will use data collected by watersheds, cities and other groups. The county will also monitor the state's impaired waters list and resulting Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL) studies, which set pollution -reduction goals needed to restore waters.This information will be shared with the county board, partners and the public to increase awareness of the status of our water resources and to guide decisions. 1.1.2 Work with partners to implement water quality restoration and protection projects to improve impaired water resources. Numerous lakes and miles of rivers and streams in Hennepin County are on the State of Minnesota's list of impaired waters for aquatic recreation, aquatic life or aquatic consumption. The impaired waters list assesses water quality based on standards for a wide range of pollutants, including bacteria, nutrients, turbidity and mercury. A body of water is considered impaired if it fails to meet one or more of the water quality standards.The number of impaired waters is expected to increase as more monitoring data on more lakes, rivers and streams becomes available. To remediate impaired waters and support local leads onTMDLs, the county 8 1 NATURAL RESOURCES STRATEGIC PLAN Water resources in Hennepin County Hennepin County has an abundance of water resources, including: • 200lakes • 640 miles of streams • 3 major rivers • 45,000 acres of wetlands The streams and rivers in Hennepin County eventually flow into the Mississippi River. Total Maximum Daily Load ATotal Maximum Daily Load, orTMDL, is a calculation of the maximum amount of a pollutant that a body of water can receive and still meet water quality standards. TMDL studies are an analysis and plan established for an impaired body of water to ensure that the water quality standards will be attained and maintained. • provides technical and financial assistance to partners to implement best management practices.These practices capture and filter stormwater to slow and reduce runoff, reduce erosion and sedimentation, establish native vegetation and vegetative buffers, and enhance wildlife habitat 1.1.3 Provide technical assistance and education to residents, municipalities, watershed management groups and other county departments to protect and restore our water resources. Many entities in the county have a role in protecting water resources, making the establishment of partnerships and providing education critical to meeting our goals.To ensure that the county's water resources are protected and restoration measures are sound, the county provides technical assistance to landowners, local units of government and other county departments. The county provides technical support to these groups by: • • Participating on technical advisory committees to review watershed management plans, rule updates and environmental studies. Reviewing site and project plans. • Participating in project pre -design and pre -construction processes. • Conducting area -wide assessments regarding water quality, wetlands, erosion and floodplain issues. The county also undertakes specific watershed and resource-based assessments to identify and prioritize the implementation of best management practices that protect and restore water resources. 1.1.4 Reduce the impacts of stormwater runoff through the implementation of best management practices. Stormwater runoff occurs when flow from rain or snowmelt runs off of yards, farm fields, roofs, parking lots and roadways, picking up soil, yard waste, chemicals and other pollutants along the way. If left untreated, the runoff drains directly into lakes, streams and wetlands, degrading the quality of those resources. Changes in precipitation patterns, including the amount, timing and intensity, in combination with increased urbanization will affect the amount of stormwater runoff that needs to be managed. Increased runoff puts more demand on our stormwater management infrastructure, increases the potential for flooding, and increases the amount of nutrients, pollutants and sediment that is carried to water resources. Climate and land use changes will worsen some existing stormwater-related issues, while other areas will be less affected. • The county will promote the implementation of low -impact development and green infrastructure methods, agricultural best practices, wetland restorations and innovative stormwater management practices to adapt to changing future conditions, reduce impacts from stormwater runoff and remediate impaired waters. NATURAL RESOURCES STRATEGIC PLAN 19 1.2 Objective: Protect groundwater to ensure a safe and sustainable water supply Strategy Cont nuie ExpAnd New 1.2.1 Participate in planning efforts to protectthe ✓ quality and supply of groundwater. 1.2.2 Advocate for the cleanup of contaminated sites with the potential to significantly ✓ impact groundwater resources. 1.2.3 Seal abandoned wells to reduce the ✓ potential for groundwater contamination. Strategies 1.2.1 Participate in planning efforts to protect the quality and supply of groundwater. Recent Metropolitan Council studies have shown that aquifers are being depleted due in part to the increased reliance on groundwater for water supply. More than 70 percent of the Twin Cities region's water supply now comes from groundwater, compared with about 20 percent in the 19405 and 1950s before suburban growth. The depletion of aquifers is affecting water levels of some Twin Cities metro area lakes, wetlands and streams. To effectively protect and improve groundwater quality and quantity, the county will promote cooperative planning efforts that will evaluate existing data, identify additional data needs, and assess the susceptibility of our surface and groundwater resources to current and projected levels of groundwater withdrawal, contamination and other threats.Through the Hennepin County Natural Resources Partnership, the county will provide a forum for partner engagement in groundwater issues to improve related decision-making processes and build a strong base of support for groundwater protection by encouraging communication and dialogue. The county will work with the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources, the Minnesota Department of Health and the Metropolitan Council to assist local communities in identifying groundwater protection needs and integrating groundwater issues with other local planning efforts, such as growth management plans. The county will also continue to promote groundwater recharge and the protection of groundwater -dependent natural resources. The county will also work with partners to improve our understanding of groundwater and surface water interactions and encourage diversity in sources for public water supplies. 1.2.2 Advocate for the cleanup of contaminated sites with the potential to significantly impact groundwater resources. Stormwater infiltrating through contaminated sites, which are polluted with petroleum, heavy metals, dump materials or other hazardous substances, often contaminates groundwater. In many cases, the contamination is gradually mitigated through natural processes. However, some sites require a more proactive cleanup approach. Through the Hennepin County Environmental Response Fund and federal grants, the county funds the assessment and cleanup of contaminated sites 10 1 NATURAL RESOURCES STRATEGIC PLAN • • Hennepin Countyprovided funding through its Dumpsite Assessment Program and Environmental Response Fund to the City of Excelsior to characterize and reduce environmental risks associated with a former dump site that was given to the City of Excelsior by the prior property owner for use as a park. Financial assistance provided by the county was used to assess environmental risks, complete a partial cleanup, install a four -foot clean soil cover on the dump site, restore the• shoreline and add a landfill gas venting system. These actions greatly expanded the use of the park, which is now clean enough to be used, in part, as a community garden. • where conditions present a threat to human health and the environment and where lack of funding and added environmental costs hinder site improvements or redevelopment. Environmental Response Fund grants are used for a variety of activities that provide community benefit, including assessment and cleanup of groundwater. The county will identify contaminated sites where the implementation of active groundwater cleanup efforts is a high priority. Although the regulatory authority for the protection of groundwater rests with the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency and the Minnesota Department of Health, the county will work with municipalities, landowners and state regulatory officials to advocate for the cleanup of sites that pose a high risk to the environment and/or human health and, when needed, use its funding sources to leverage additional funding. 1.2.3 Seal abandoned wells to reduce the potential of groundwater contamination. Unused and unsealed wells pose a threat to our drinking water by acting as a channel between the surface and the aquifer below, allowing surface water runoff, contaminants or improperly disposed waste to reach an uncontaminated aquifer. Permanently sealing abandoned wells provides long-term protection of our water supplies. • The county will continue to provide cost -share grants to landowners, using a combination of county and state funding as available, to seal high-priority abandoned wells that are located within municipal wellhead protection areas or have other environmental factors that increase the potential for contamination. 1.3 Objective: Protect and restore wetlands Strategy Continue Expand New 1.3.1 Identify the highest -quality wetlands to ensure their protection and determine ✓ impacted wetlands suitable for restoration. 1.3.2 Ensure the protection and preservation of wetlands through enforcement of Minnesota's Wetland Conservation Act. 1.3.3 Pursue creation and restoration of wetlands to establish wetland banking credits, mitigate losses and remediate impaired waters within the county, Strategies 1.3.1 Identify the highest -quality wetlands to ensure their protection and determine impacted wetlands suitable for restoration. Wetlands are diverse ecosystems that act as a transition between water and • land, slowing stormwater runoff and protecting shorelines. Wetlands improve water quality by absorbing excess sediment, nutrients and pollutants, reduce flooding, replenish groundwater, and provide fish and wildlife habitat and recreational opportunities. Wetlands in Baker Park in Maple Plain. NATURAL RESOURCES STRATEGIC PLAN 111 The county will work with partners to conduct a thorough analysis of the function and environmental benefits of the wetlands in the county. This analysis will help set priorities for protecting the highest -quality wetlands and identifying and restoring wetlands that provide the biggest benefit to impaired waters. 1.3.2 Ensure the protection and preservation of wetlands through enforcement of Minnesota's Wetland Conservation Act. Compared to pre -settlement land use, thousands of acres of wetlands in Hennepin County have been drained or filled by Iandowners.To prevent further loss of wetlands, Hennepin County has a statutory role in the enforcement of Minnesota's Wetland Conservation Act (WCA), which was created to protect and preserve the quantity, quality and biological diversity of our wetlands. WCA requires anyone proposing to drain, fill or excavate a wetland must first, try to avoid disturbing the wetland, second, try to minimize any impact on the wetland and finally, replace any lost wetland acres, functions and values. County staff work with landowners who have wetland violations on their properties to restore the wetland to its pre-existing condition or to create a wetland of equal or greater value. The county also participates on Technical Evaluation Panels, which provide a forum to discuss site-specific interpretations of WCA laws, rules and technical data in order to avoid, reduce or mitigate wetland impacts. The county will also track how well county -led projects are fulfilling WCA goals. 1.3.3 Pursue the creation and restoration of wetlands to establish wetland banking credits, mitigate losses and remediate impaired waters within the county. A wetland mitigation bank is a wetland that has been restored, established or enhanced to compensate for impacted wetlands. Under the Wetland Conservation Act, landowners who cannot restore or avoid impacting a wetland can replace lost wetland acres by purchasing wetland banking credits. Because there are limited wetland mitigation banking credits available in Hennepin County, credits are often purchased outside of the county, resulting in a net loss of wetlands within the county. To bolster the availability of mitigation credits within Hennepin County, the county will identify and evaluate wetland restoration and funding opportunities on county -owned properties and tax -forfeited lands. County - owned restorations would ensure the availability of banking credits for county projects within the county boundaries and also avoid the costs of purchasing credits outside the county. In addition, the county will assist the Minnesota Board of Water and Soil Resources (BWSR) in locating willing county landowners with potential wetland restoration sites that may qualify for BWSR funds to restore their wetlands through BWSR's wetland bank road program. These wetland restorations will not only benefit downstream water quality, but will generate additional wetland credits within the county that could be used to offset wetland impacts resulting from county projects or sold to fund additional wetland restorations. In addition, the county will evaluate identified wetland restoration opportunities on county properties, tax -forfeited lands and other available sites to determine those that should be prioritized based on their functions to help address water quality and quantity impairments. 12 1 NATURAL RESOURCES STRATEGIC PLAN is Example ofa filled wetland that would need to be remediated or replaced under the Wetland Conservation Act. is • • GOAL 2 Hennepin County landscapes are diverse and functional and natural areas are preserved Hennepin County will work to identify and protect natural areas and green spaces.The county will also promote, establish and restore ecologically functional landscapes and control threats to natural resources to promote diverse and sustainable ecosystems throughout the county. 2.1 Objectives: Protect and enhance natural areas, corridors and greenspaces Strategy Continue Expand New 2.1.1 Identify, protect and restore the best remaining natural areas and corridors. 2.1.2 Promote the establishment of conservation easements to protect valued natural areas. 2.1.3 Work with partners to preserve, enhance and ✓ expand urban green spaces. Strategies 2.1.1 Identify, protect and restore the best remaining natural areas and corridors. Natural areas are lands that consist of primarily native vegetation and have not been significantly altered by human activity. Natural areas, which include different types of forests, prairies and wetlands, provide critical habitat for wildlife, recreational opportunities and economic benefits. Protecting and restoring natural areas can improve water quality, mitigate flooding and create opportunities for future trail connections between regional parks and other protected green spaces. The remaining natural areas in the county will face increasing pressure in the next 20 years as more land becomes developed, making it critical to protect these areas now. Every acre in the county has been identified and classified with respect to its value as a natural area and habitat, laying the groundwork for long-term protection and restoration of natural areas and important corridors or greenways that facilitate the growth and movement of wildlife and native vegetation between natural areas. Formally designating the best remaining natural areas and corridors would better position the county and partners to leverage funds for their protection and enhancement. The county will continue to maintain an interactive Natural Resources Map that assists local governments in managing growth and protecting their natural resources and green spaces. • Natural areas in Hennepin County Hennepin County encompasses 600 square miles with a variety of natural areas, including prairies, forests and wetlands. The county has: • 2,665 ecologically significant natural areas totaling 26,368 acres, • 47,407 acres identified as priority natural resources corridors. MV L.y«e osv� g. FEW FbedpWn-100 veer g Wetlands Q Pe06c Wows C Walmhed Bc dams Natural Resources Interactive Map The Natural Resources Interactive Map is a tool local governments can use to make land use decisions and landowners can use to learn more about their properties. NATURAL RESOURCES STRATEGIC PLAN 113 2.1.2 Promote the establishment of conservation easements to protect natural areas. Conservation easements are one of the most effective tools available for permanently preserving private lands as open space.The establishment of a conservation easement restricts development and certain types of use on a piece of property in perpetuity in order to protect its natural resources. Conservation easements are legally binding agreements that can be either voluntarily donated or sold by the landowner to protect land and potentially provide public access for future generations. The county manages nearly 40 conservation easements that were either inherited through the transition of the Hennepin Conservation District's duties or in partnership with the Minnesota Land Trust. However, the county does not have a formal program to actively pursue and fund conservation easement opportunities. The county will explore options for establishing a board -adopted conservation easement program that provides guidance for the consideration of potential easement properties as opportunities arise via tax -forfeiture, capital projects or private landowner inquiries. A program approved by the board will also improve the county's ability to secure external funding. As part of this program, the county will continue to provide technical assistance to landowners for tasks related to establishing conservation easements. 2.1.3 Work with partners to preserve, enhance and expand urban green spaces. Urban green spaces include a variety of landscapes, from highly maintained environments like ball fields and gardens to more natural landscapes like greenways along river corridors and urban forests. Urban green spaces serve important ecological functions such as slowing and capturing stormwater, protecting water quality, preserving fish and wildlife habitat, and protecting scenic, cultural and historical features. Urban green spaces also provide recreational opportunities, foster connectivity between communities, create a "sense of place" and have a positive economic impact on the surrounding area. Through the county's work identifying and mapping critical habitats and wildlife corridors and the facilitation of the Hennepin Natural Resource Partnership, the county will continue to collaborate with partners to encourage the incorporation of green spaces, sustainable landscaping practices and establishment and maintenance of tree canopies in developing and redeveloping areas. 2.2 Objective: Establish and restore landscapes that serve an ecological function Strategy Continue Expand New 2.2.1 Develop and implement sustainable landscaping guidelines and practices for county -funded projects and properties. 2.2.2 Work with partners and landowners to implement sustainable landscaping and low- ✓ impact development practices in developed and redeveloping areas. 2.2.3 Maintain and increase a healthy tree canopy. V/ 14 1 NATURAL RESOURCES 5TRATEGIC PLAN Hennepin County and the Minnesota Land Trust established a 44 -acre conservation easement at Camp Kingswood in Minnetrista in 2017. This ecologically diverse natural area had been identified in Hennepin County's natural resources inventory as a priority area in need of protection. The easement area includes a Big Woods remnant maple -basswood forest, a restored tall grass prairie, a tamarack bog and unique glacial features. • • • Strategies 2.2.1 Develop and implement sustainable landscaping guidelines and practices for county -funded projects and properties. Sustainable landscaping focuses on creating outdoor spaces that are functional, easy -to -maintain, environmentally sound, cost-effective and aesthetically pleasing. Sustainable landscaping practices improve the success of landscape installation, can lower maintenance costs, and reduce the need for chemical controls and watering by encouraging the use of native plants, utilizing integrated pest management strategies and implementing stormwater runoff reduction practices. The county will promote the sustainable use of water and land, conserve soils and vegetation, support natural ecosystem functions and lessen maintenance costs and needs by incorporating sustainable landscaping principles in county projects and properties. 2.2.2 Work with partners and landowners to implement sustainable landscaping and low -impact development practices in developed and redeveloping areas. Low -impact development is an approach to land development or redevelopment that works with the landscape to manage stormwater as close to where it falls as possible, using stormwater as a resource and promoting the natural movement of water within an ecosystem. Low -impact development • practices include bioretention ponds, rain gardens, green roofs, rain barrels and permeable pavements. Sustainable landscaping aims to create functional, easy -to -maintain and low -input landscapes by focusing on improving soil and choosing the right plants and landscape features for the conditions. In urban settings, natural landscapes improve air and water quality, increase energy efficiency, reduce the heat island effect, restore wildlife habitat and provide economic and community benefits. The county will support landscapes that serve an ecological function by working with partners through the Hennepin Natural Resources Partnership and by providing technical and financial assistance to incorporate low -impact development and sustainable landscaping practices into development and redevelopment projects. 2.2.3 Maintain and increase a healthy tree canopy. Trees improve water and air quality, sequester carbon, provide wildlife habitat and infiltrate stormwater. Left unmanaged, the overall tree canopy in the county will likely continue to decline due to loss of trees from age, development, disease, pests and storm damage. To enhance the tree canopy, the county will establish a gravel -bed nursery that will give the county access to a wider variety of tree species for use on county properties and projects, will help the county proactively replace ash trees that will ultimately be infected with the emerald ash borer, and will produce trees that have a higher survival rate than conventional nursery trees. The county will also provide technical assistance to cities to enhance tree canopy and will evaluate the feasibility of providing financial and logistical • assistance for planning and mitigation efforts related to the emerald ash borer. Additionally, the county will encourage cities, park districts and landowners to permanently protect existing, high-quality forested areas because established trees provide air and water quality benefits than newly planted small trees. Hennepin County provided grant funding for the establishment of rain gardens in Plymouth. NATURAL RESOURCES STRATEGIC PLAN 115 2.3 Objective: Control and prevent vegetative and biological threats to maintain healthy ecosystems Strategy Continue Expand New 2.3.1 Prevent the introduction and spread of ✓ invasive species. 2.3.2 Control and prevent the spread of noxious ✓ weeds. Strategies 2.3.1 Prevent the introduction and spread of invasive species. Invasive species are non-native species that cause economic or ecological damage. Without natural predators, invasive species can spread rapidly in an ecosystem and out -compete native species. Hennepin County's natural resources are threatened by both aquatic and terrestrial invasive species. The county works to prevent the spread and promote the control of invasive species by participating on regional and statewide invasive species task forces and by educating the public on the actions they need to take. The county will utilize state funding, as available, to enhance efforts to prevent the spread of invasive species, such as using the state's Aquatic Invasive Species Prevention Aid to construct decontamination stations, assist in watercraft inspections and enhance enforcement. 2.3.2 Control and prevent the spread of noxious weeds. Noxious weeds are plants that are injurious to public health, the environment, public roads, crops, livestock and other property. The county assists in administering and enforcing the state's noxious weed laws and rules and provides education, training and outreach for professional and private land managers.The county inspects county right-of-ways for noxious weeds and works with cities to respond to complaints. 16 1 NATURAL RESOURCES STRATEGIC PLAN Invasive species in Hennepin County Invasive species are not native to Minnesota and cause economic or environmental harm. Our natural resources are currently threatened by a number of invasive species such as zebra mussels, Eurasian watermilfoil, invasive carp, common buckthorn and emerald ash borer. Zebra mussel photo by. -D. Jude, Univ, of Michigan Emerald ash borerphoto by: U.S. Department ofAgriculture Buckthorn photo by. Mason Brock (Mosebrock) Eurasian watermilfoil photo by. librarylvron wwwflickr.com • 2.4 Objective: Practice and promote environmental stewardship of the county's soil resources Strategy Continue Expand New 2.4.1 Assist partners in identifying high-priority areas where soil erosion, sedimentation and related water quality degradation is occurring. Strategies: 2.4.1 Assist partners in identifying high-priority areas where soil erosion, sedimentation and related water quality degradation is occurring. Controlling soil erosion improves soil and water quality by reducing sedimentation, preserving topsoil and avoiding the degradation of lakes, rivers, streams and wetlands. The county will offer to help partners, including watershed districts, water management organizations, cities and landowners, identify the types and locations of high-quality soils, prime farmlands and erodible soils.The county will then work with partners to set priorities for conservation planning and implementation, install best management practices, and leverage outside funding sources such as the Natural Resources Conservation Services Fund. 0 Example of soil erosion along a creek. NATURAL RESOURCES STRATEGIC PLAN 117 u • GOAL 3 Hennepin County fosters effective partnerships Hennepin County will take a leadership role in pursuing and fostering external and internal partnerships to protect, restore and enhance the county's natural resources 3.1 Objective: Foster partnerships and strengthen collaboration with natural resource management entities Strategy Continue Expand New 3.1.1 Facilitate collaboration and coordination among natural resource management groups through the Hennepin County Natural Resources Partnership. 3.1.2 Collaborate with partners to research and promote innovative solutions to address ,J regional issues and meet common goals. Strategies 3.1.1 Facilitate collaboration and coordination among natural resource 3.1.2 management groups. There are numerous natural resource management entities working to fulfill varying missions and requirements throughout the county, which often leads to a disjointed approach to managing natural resources. To provide a forum for a more holistic approach to natural resource management, the county has convened a group of representatives from watershed districts, water management organizations, cities, county departments and state and regional natural resource agencies. The Hennepin County Natural Resources Partnership promotes collaborative land and water management efforts on issues transecting political and hydrologic boundaries, encourages sharing of resources and information, increases opportunities to leverage resources and provides a venue to address countywide policy issues. Collaborate with partners to research and promote innovative solutions to address regional issues and meet common goals. We need to gain a better understanding of innovative solutions and best practices to address emerging regional issues, such as water supply sustainability, climate change impacts and mitigation, the urban heat island effect, extreme weather events, stormwater management practices, and regional land use planning that addresses differing natural resource management needs of urban and rural areas. The county will work with partners, including other governmental units, nonprofit organizations and educational institutions, to research, implement and promote innovative solutions to regional issues. 18 1 NATURAL RESOURCES STRATEGIC PLAN Natural resource management entities in Hennepin County Many entities are involved with natural resources, including the county's: • 45 municipalities • 11 watershed management entities, including four watershed districts` and seven joint -powers watershed management organizations • 2 park districts *Watershed district board managers are actively interviewed before being appointed • to three-year terms by the county board. • • 3.2 Objective: Collaborate with internal partners to incorporate sustainable natural resource management strategies Strategy Continue Expand New 3.2.1 Engage other Hennepin County departments to incorporate the use of proven and innovative best management practices on county projects and properties. Strategies 3.2.1 Engage other Hennepin County departments to incorporate the use of proven and innovative best management practices on county projects and properties. Internal collaboration effectively utilizes the range of expertise of county staff.The Environment and Energy Department raises awareness about the threats to our natural resources and educates other county departments on becoming leaders in the management of our natural resources by proactively being part of the solution and, where applicable, going beyond compliance. The Environment and Energy Department provides technical support on county community works, housing, railroad, transit and transportation projects by assisting with environmental permitting requirements, evaluating stormwater and erosion issues, and promoting the incorporation of best management practices. 0 NATURAL RESOURCES STRATEGIC PLAN 119 • GOAL 4 Hennepin County motivates environmental stewardship Hennepin County will support and participate in environmental education and outreach activities that educate the community on the importance of environmental sustainability, natural resource protection and habitat enhancement. 4.1 Objective: Engage the community in taking action to protect the environment Strategy Continue Expand New 4.1.1 Collaborate with partners to deliver environmental education. 4.12 Engage volunteers in environmental stewardship. 4.1.3 Promote natural resources programs. Strategies 4.1.1 Collaborate with partners to deliver environmental education. Natural resources are impacted by the individual actions and choices of the county's residents, businesses local governments and other organizations, making it critical to educate community members about their impact and engage them in taking action to protect the environment. The county works with partners to deliver environmental education, allowing the county to leverage resources, expertise and community connections. The county develops educational resources, shares technical information and provides funding for partners to implement environmental education projects that empower residents to take action to protect water and land. The county supports programs and projects that help audiences understand that they are part of an ecosystem and can take action to protect the environment regardless of where they live. The county will implement additional efforts to engage youth in hands-on, outdoor educational experiences and service -learning projects. The county will also focus on reaching new and diverse audiences through peer-to-peer outreach and culturally appropriate educational materials. 4.1.2 Engage volunteers in environmental stewardship. Volunteer programs engage interested and enthusiastic residents in gathering environmental data and promoting environmental stewardship. The county administers volunteer programs that monitor water quality, collect data and provide hands-on environmental education experiences for volunteers.The county will continue to explore opportunities with our partners where volunteers could be used to promote environmental stewardship. 20 1 NATURAL RESOURCES STRATEGIC PLAN Metro Blooms received a Hennepin County Green Partners Environmental Education Grant to planta rain garden at Bethune Community School in north Minneapolis. About 60 fourth- and fifth -grade students helped plant the garden with assistance from a Master Water Steward volunteer. The garden will reduce runoff by capturing and filtering rain water and will be used to educate students and the community about actions they can take to protect water quality. Citizen scientist volunteers with the Hennepin County Wetland Health Evaluation Program gather data to assess the health ofthe county's wetlands. • 4.1.3 Promote natural resources programs. Actively promoting the county's conservation programs and services educates the community on the issues threatening our natural resources and raises awareness of opportunities to get involved. The county will be visible in the community by advocating for our natural resource management work and expanding the delivery of information about our environmental programs and services through all of our communication channels. • • uu-r�varnav�.axxw.�. '"' nvae.m+r mraa.,a.'w Improving Minnesota's A' Ti Htir:ta, Lakes, Rivers and Streams n 10 Things You Can Do "J) Hennepin County has a variety of resources available to promote the protection of natural resources, including a guide for landowners on protecting natural resources, a brochure developed in partnership with watershed organizations on ways to protect water quality, and a map oftake Minnetonka. NATURAL RESOURCES STRATEGIC PLAN 121 GOAL 5 Hennepin County leverages financial resources Hennepin County will provide financial assistance, pursue additional funding sources and leverage resources to implement projects and programs that meet common goals of the county and partners. 5.1 Objective: Integrate the work of Hennepin County and partners to achieve the goals of the Clean Water, Land and Legacy Amendment Strategy Continue Expand New 5.1.1 Work with partners to leverage resources to implement projects and programs that meet common natural resource management goals. Strategies 5.1.1 Work with partners to leverage resources to implement projects and programs that meet common natural resource management goals. The Clean Water, Land and Legacy Amendment provides funding for projects that protect, enhance and restore natural resources, including lakes, rivers, streams, groundwater, wetlands, prairies, forests and wildlife habitat. County partners, including watershed management organizations, cities and park districts, are better positioned than the county to successfully compete for grant funding because they have defined projects in their state -approved capital implementation plans. In an effort to lessen the burden on local taxpayers, the county will seek partners to jointly pursue grant funds on projects and programs that address common natural resources issues, needs and goals. 22 1 NATURAL RESOURCES STRATEGIC PLAN n • Hennepin County awarded the City of Golden Valley $135,000 in 2009 to stabilize eroded banks along a 5,100 -foot reach of Bassett Creek. Funding came from the county's riparian restoration and streombank stabilization program, which received $500,000 from the Minnesota Clean Water Fund. • 5.2 Objective: Provide financial assistance Strategy Continue Expand New 5.2.1 Develop and manage grant and cost - share programs that provide financial and technical assistance to partners to implement best management practices and programs that preserve, enhance, and restore our natural resources. Strategies 5.2.1 Develop and manage grant and cost -share programs that provide financial and technical assistance to partners to • implement best management practices and programs that preserve, enhance, and restore our natural resources. Providing financial and technical assistance to partners allows the county leverage resources to more effectively accomplish shared goals. The county oversees multiple grant programs that address a variety of environmental issues. Grants are available to help landowners, governmental units and organizations implement best management practices that preserve or restore critical habitats, reduce erosion and protect and improve water quality. Grants are also available to fund the assessment and cleanup of contaminated lands, seal high-priority abandoned wells, and engage and empower residents to take actions to protect the environment. • Hennepin County provided funding for the stabilization of the Fox Creek in Rogers. NATURAL RESOURCES STRATEGIC PLAN 123 Hennepin County Public Works leadership Debra Brisk Assistant County Administrator of Public Works 612-348-4306 debra. brisk@hennepin.us Carl Michaud Director of Environment and Energy 612-348-3054 carl.michaud@hennepin.us • • Hennepin County Public Works Environment and Energy 34407-05-14 Heather Branigin Worn: Ross Plaetzer <rocs@employersolutionsgroup.com> Sent: Thursday, July 30, 2015 6:02 PM To: jhovland@krausehovland.com'; 'mail@Edina MN.gov'; 'kstaunton@Edina MN.gov'; 'rstewart@EdinaMN.gov; 'mbrindle@comcast.net'; 'swensonannl@gmail.com' Cc: Cary Teague; Scott H. Neal; Ross Bintner Subject: Request for Delay in Consideration of Xcel Franchise Agreement Dear Mayor Hovland, City Council Members, and staff, I am respectfully requesting that the Council defer consideration of renewal of the franchise agreement between the City and Xcel Energy to address the issue of facilitating the conversion of overhead utilities to underground utilities. This is not addressed in the proposed franchise agreement and has become a pressing issue in older parts of Edina, especially in light of increased power outages due to aging overhead utility structures. Also, aesthetics are a major consideration, especially in parts of Northeast Edina in which overhead utilities run parallel to sidewalks and are placed in front houses. Currently, conversion of overhead utilities to underground utilities is not Ospecifically covered in the proposed franchise agreement. I am proposing two changes. First, in instances in which the City requires Xcel to covert an overhead utility to an underground utility. In that situation, any such underground relocation would have to be consistent with applicable long-term development plans or projects of the City, or as approved by the City. The expense of such a conversion shall be paid by Xcel, and xcel could recover its costs from its customers in accordance with state law, administrative rule or regulation. Second, there are those situations in which neighborhoods with unsightly and unreliable overhead utilities desire the conversion of overhead utilities to underground utilities within their neighborhood. In some instances, the cost might be fairly low and could be paid as a part of the homeowners' utility bills. In other instances, the cost might be too great to be billed directly to homeowners and in those instances, the city could pay the utility bill to Xcel and then pass the cost on to benefitting landowners through a special assessment. This is likely to be the case with the Curve Avenue and 4400 block of Grimes Avenue neighborhood areas, which will both be under planned roadway Wonstruction next summer. Utility poles run down parallel to the sidewalks on both streets and have numerous weather-related power outages, and, frankly, are unsightly. Dozens of cities and utilities have developed plans to bury or relocate utility lines to improve aesthetics and reliability. A variety of programs is being used to • convert existing overhead lines to underground, including, special assessment areas, undergrounding districts, and state and local government initiatives. Some of the approaches taken are: • Colorado Springs City Council's policy establishing a system improvement fund to provide for burying overhead distribution lines. And the community of Del Mar, California funds undergrounding projects through the creation of assessment districts which finances projects through the issuance of city bonds paid for by the homeowners through their property taxes. • Dare County, North Carolina's local act (N.C. Session Law 1999-127) authorizing the creation of one or more Utility Districts for the purpose of raising and expending funds to underground electric utility lines in the district. The proceeds of the tax are used for undergrounding electric lines within the district. • The three funding policy options for undergrounding facilities adopted by the City of Portland, Oregon recommending that the city: 1) Reserve a portion of utility franchise fees for undergrounding; 2) Promote undergrounding options for Urban Renewal Projects and other major infrastructure improvements; and 3) include undergrounding provisions in future franchise agreements. • I've attached a draft plan below to amend the proposed franchise agreement. I am respectfully asking for a short delay in the Council's consideration of the agreement to address the issue of city participation in the conversion of overhead utilities to underground facilities. Thank you for your consideration of this matter. ROSS PLAETZER 14058 Sunnyside Road I CELL: 612.991.8896 SECTION 4. RELOCATIONS. 4.5 (A) Permanent Relocation - Undergrounding. This subparagraph applies to conversions of Company Electric Facilities from overhead to underground as set forth in this subparagraph. As permitted by and in accordance with City ordinance and any pplicable law, administrative rule, or regulation, the City may require Company to convert any overhead Company Electric Facilities to underground Company Electric Facilities at the same or different 2 locations, subject to the National Electrical Safety Code (NESC) and Company's engineering and safetv standards. This subsection shall not apply to Company Electric Facilities used for or 'in connection with the transmission of electric energy at nominal voltages in excess of 35 kilovolts. Pedestals, cabinets, and other above -ground equipment shall also normally be exempted from this subsection, excepting those instances where lack of suitable Public Wa�or Grounds, lack of easements or special project requirements demand undergrounding of such facilities. Any such underground relocation shall be consistent with applicable long-term development plans or projects of the City, or as approved by the City. The expense of such a conversion shall be paid byCCompany, and Company may recover its costs from its customers in accordance with state law, administrative rule or regulation. The City agrees to provide a suitable location in the Public Way or Public Utility Easement (PUE), as mutually agreed for Company Electric Facilities that meet the Company's construction standards as provided to the Commission and in accordance with NESC requirements to accommodate and permit upgrade of Company Electric Facilities in order to maintain sufficient service. Nothing in this subsection prevents the City and Company from agreeing to a different form of cost recovery on a case-by-case basis consistent with applicable statutes, administrative rules, or regulations. (B) Relocation at Request of or to Accommodate Third Party. In the event that any relocation or conversion of Company Electric Facilities is requested by or is to accommodate a third party, Company shall relocate any Company Electric Facilities, or convert any overhead Company Electric Facilities to underground Company Electric Facilities at the same or different locations, as requested or to carry out any such accommodation, subj ect to the NESC and Company's engineering and safety standards. Any such relocation shall be consistent with any applicable long-term development plan or projection of the City or approved by the City. Company shall seek reimbursement for any such conversion or relocation from the third party consistent with the Company's tariff on file with the Commission and not from the City. The council may by resolution undertake to pay the amount of any such reimbursement or 111bgny portion thereof to Company on behalf of landowners of properties benefiting from the conversion of any overhead Company Electric Facilities to underground Company Electric Facilities. If such a case, the council may by resolution provide that.•'',:he such reimbursable amounts be apportioned among benefitting_ properties and that payment by benefitting • landowners of such reimbursable amounts be spread over a term of un to ten years. The amount unpaid, from time to time, shall bear interest at the rate charged by the city on special assessments at the time the reimbursable amounts were payable. The- amount so spread out shall be certified to the county auditor for collection with interest in the same manner as other special assessments and shall become a lien upon the propertypaid. 0 Heather Branigin OlFrom: Carol Kaemmerer <carol@kaemmerergroup.com> Sent: Thursday, July 30, 2015 11:26 PM To: Edina Mail Subject: Please forward this invitation to Mayor Hovland Attachments: kids and Mayor Hovland August 5 2014 jpg; Bob Solheim and LaRae Hovlandjpg; Neighborhood Flyer (1).doc Dear Mayor Hovland, The Trillium Lane and Lantana Lane neighbors so enjoyed the visit from you and LaRae at the Edina Night to Unite last year. We would love it if you would join our celebration again this year. We'll be at the home of Teresa and Wade Hermes, 4903 Trillium Lane this year. Please don't feel that you need to bring anything to join the party. We would be so delighted if you would attend. Our festivities start at 6:00, but you're welcome at any time. We thank you for being such an active, community -oriented mayor. Carol Carol Kaemmerer www. kaemmererroup.com 952.927.9541 • i7_1'_ Watch my video here: https:11vimeo.com1921866561 49 rte, k b irr- *40V ARE INVITED TO NIGHTto UT 1 Neighbors Joining Together HOSTS: Trillium Lane Neighbors Teresa and Wade Hermes, Sharon Mazion, Carol Kaemmerer Supported by the Edina Police Department as part of Edina Night to Unite WHEN: Tuesday, August 4, 2015 6:00pm — 8:30pm WHERE: Street in Front of Teresa and Wade Hermes' house -- 4903 Trillium Lane Food in Driveway The street will be blocked off at the intersections of Trillium/N'ormandale and Trillium/Lantana -- a 10' wide emergency vehicle lane will be open. COST: $5.00 per Household (for meat, napkins, utensils, plates, game supplies, etc.) BRING: The committee will be responsible for meat and buns. Last Name Beginning with A — J: appetizers, chips, dips, dessert Last Name Beginning with K — Z: sides and salads Beverage in your own cooler Lawn Chairs; Bug Repellent if you need it PLAN ON: Games for Kids and Adults An Enjoyable Evening of Socializing with Neighbors Signing Up for the Neighborhood Blood Drive A Visit from a Public Servant or Two NEEDED: Please contact Carol Kaemmerer, ckaemmerer@gmail.com, 952.927.9541, if you are able to supply a picnic table, serving table or outdoor game for general use. PLEASE RSVP: Carol Kaemmerer, ckaemmerer@gmail.com, 952.927.9541 � . See you August 4! • • To: MAYOR & COUNCIL From: Debra Mangen City Clerk Date: August 5, 2015 Subject: Correspondence Action Requested: No action is necessary. Agenda Item #: IX. A. Action X Discussion ❑ Information ❑ Attachment: Attached is correspondence received since the last packet was delivered to Council Members. City of Edina • 4801 W. 50th St. • Edina, MN 55424 Heather Branigin •From: Tescia Bratcher - IRET <TBratcher@iret.com> Sent: Friday, July 31, 2015 9:01 AM To: James Hovland Subject: Grand Opening of 6565 France Attachments: Grand Opening Invite!.png Good Morning, IRET properties is pleased to announce that we will hold a Grand Opening and Ribbon Cutting Ceremony for the newly constructed 6565 France Avenue. We want to extended an invitation to you and your staff members to join us for an exciting evening. Please see the attached Grand Opening Invitation and RSVP to me at your earliest convenience. We look forward to hearing from you! • pE)p!AOaCI DUI J ed JE)IeA pUe SjUaLu4saa jaH .w4d OE:V W WeJ6oad Ijoq -w-d 00:9 of -Lu'd 00:.V S LOO fZ L 4sn6n V 'AepseupaM sn u10C Oseald .. .. ejd S; 9 9 9 Heather Branigin Wrom: Sent: To: Subject: Name: Deb Gensmer Organization: Website: debgensmer@hotmail.com Friday, July 31, 2015 6:43 PM Edina Mail Contact Us form submission Address 1: 4101 Parklawn Ave #221 Address 2: City: Edina State: MN Zip_Code: 55435 ,Email: deb eng smerphotmail.com Phone: 612-721-2844 • Referrer: google Message: I am writing in support of the Edina Community Lutheran Church (ECLC) Conditional Use Permit (CUP) and Setback Variance. I interviewed for a job at ECLC and, when I didn't get it, was so sold on the church and its mission in the community, I joined. The church upgrade is necessary to keep up with the activities of the church, and those in the community who use the church facilities. Thank you. — Deb Gensmer 1 Heather Branigin From: DEED Communications <MNDEED@public.govdelivery.com> i Sent: Monday, August 03, 2015 8:26 AM To: Edina Mail Subject: Reminder of Upcoming Transportation ED Program Grant Meetings DEPARTMENT k Announcing Available Grant Funds Transportation Economic Development Program The Transportation Economic Development Program (TED) is a competitive grant program available to communities for highway improvement and public infrastructure projects that create • jobs and support economic development. It a joint program of the Minnesota Department of Employment and Economic Development (DEED) and the Minnesota Department of Transportation (MnDOT). A total of approximately $30 million is available through the 2015 TED program. This includes approximately $28 million in MnDOT trunk highway funds and approximately $2 million of DEED general obligation bond funding. The program may provide up to 70 percent of the costs for trunk highway interchanges and other improvements (which is defined as the accepted bid of the construction cost of the project) or the state's share as determined by Mn/DOT's cost participation policy, whichever is less. Application Deadline - September 25, 2015 For full eligibility quidelines and application instructions, please see DEED's website For detailed information on how to apply, please join us for one of the information sessions below: Date Cil ... _ ....... Tuesday, Detroit Lakes August 11 Wednesday, Mankato August 12 j Location _.... ... ...... ... .._. _....._. MnDOT District 4 Office 1000 Highway 10 West I Detroit Lakes, MN 56501 i MnDOT District 7 Office 2151 Bassett Drive 1 _ —! .---___... _....... ._.._.__.............._j_Mankato, MN 56001 _... _.......................... j MnDOT District 3 Office10:00 AM- ;'Noon E Thursday, Brainerd/Baxter 7694 Industrial Park Rd. Ij August 13 i Baxter, MN 56425 r __.___....._._............__. __. t._.._._. ....... _...... -._......_..........__._..._.._............-_......-- --- - ... ---�._ MnDOT District 2 Office j __.__ _ _..._....__.._............._ .---...._....-- 2:00 PM — 4:00 PM ; Thursday, 1 Bemidji ' 3920 Highway 2 West August 13 ! Bemidji, MN 56601 --- .... ...._.---_- _.__......._.._....._.... ..._................. ._..... _.. __-- .................---- __— MnDOT District l Office - - - .... _._._....__...._._._... 10:00 AM -Noon Friday, August 14 Duluth 1123 Mesaba Ave. Duluth, MN 55811 MnDOT µDistrict 6 Office T — 10:00 AM -Noon Monday, August 17 Rochester 2900 48th Street NW ' Rochester, MN 55901 Wednesday, MnDOT Waters Edge Building 1:00 PM- 3:00 PM August 19 Roseville 1500 W. County Road B-2 Roseville, MN 55113 Kandi ohi County Health and ' 3 Thursday, Willmar Human Services Building, 10:00 AM- Noon August 20 220 23rd Street NE I Willmar, MN 56201 -............ ...... -_..... ` .... _.... _..... ....... ..................... This program is a collaboration benreen the Minnesota Department of Employment and Econoinic Developnreni and the Minnesota Department of Ti ansporlarion. or QUBStlOn57 •�J � Contact Us �Departmant of Employment and Economic Development STAY CONNECTED: ,z • jVT SHARE SUBSCRIBER SERVICES: Manage Preferences I Unsubscdbe I Help DEED is an equa! oppom.rnity employer and service provider. This email was sent to edln81nail@)cLedina,mn.us using GovDelivery, on behalf of. Minnesota Department of Employment and �C�VI�ELIVE�Y� Economic Development • 332 Minnesota Street Suite E-200 • Saint Paul, MN 55101 • (800) 657-3858 2 Heather Branigin From: Devan Hunt <devan6516@gmail.com> i Sent: Monday, August 03, 2015 10:16 AM To: James Hovland Subject: Citizenship in the Community Merit Badge - Devan Hunt Dear Mayor Hovland, I am Devan Hunt. you might remember me from last fall when the Edina wrestling team came to discuss our outlook for the up coming season. I am here emailing you to complete my Citizenship in the Community Merit Badge working for my Eagle. I am wondering why the water coming to the homes in Edina is so Hard? My family has to spend a lot of money on salt to soften it every month. Is there anything we can do to fix this issue? About how much will it cost? I greatly appreciate your response. Thank you Mayor Hovland! Sincerely, Devan Hunt 0 0 Heather Branigin Orom: Laurie Jennings <laurie@metrocitiesmn.org> Sent: Monday, August 03, 2015 10:39 AM To: Laurie Jennings Cc: Patricia Nauman; Charlie Vander Aarde Subject: Transportation & General Gov't. Policy Committee Agenda Packet for 8/10/15 meeting Attachments: 081015-TranspGenGovPacket.pdf Dear Transportation & General Government Policy Committee Members: Enclosed is an agenda and related materials for the 2nd meeting of Metro Cities' Transportation & General Government Policy Committee next Monday, August 10th from 11:00 a.m. to 1:30 p.m. The meeting will be held at the LMC Building, 145 University Avenue, St. Croix Room (ground floor). Sandwiches and beverages will be provided, or feel free to bring a lunch. Please contact our office with any questions. We look forward to seeing you next week! Sincerely, Laurie Laurie Jennings Metro Cities—Office Manager 145 University Ave W St. Paul, MN 55103-2044 (651) 215-4004 Laurie2MetroCitiesMN.org Heather Branigin From: Ross Plaetzer<ross@employersolutionsgroup.com> Sent: Monday, August 03, 2015 12:20 PM To: 'jhovland@krausehovland.com'; 'mail@EdinaMN.gov'; 'kstaunton@EdinaMN.gov'; 'rstewart@EdinaMN.goV; 'mbrindle@comcast.net'; 'swensonannl@gmail.com' Cc: Cary Teague; Scott H. Neal; Ross Bintner Subject: RE: Request for Delay in Consideration of Xcel Franchise Agreement Attachments: pge_franchise_agreement_expires_feb_2023.pdf; Item VIII_ A_ Xcel Franchise Ordinance.pdf Dear Mayor Hovland, City Council Members, and staff, On a slightly different but related matter, I have found in looking over electric utility agreements from around the country that the proposed Xcel agreement is not nearly as comprehensive as other agreements (see for example, one from West Linn, Oregon with Portland General Electric Company), and one has to wonder why, especially in light of Xcel's request that changes be made in side agreements or memorandums of understanding. ] Thank you for your continued consideration. ROSS PLAETZER I CELL: 612.991.8896 • From: Ross Plaetzer Sent: Thursday, July 30, 2015 6:00 PM To: 'jhovland@krausehovland.com'; 'mail@EdinaMN.goV; 'kstaunton@EdinaMN.goV; 'rstewart@EdinaMN.goV; ' mbrindle@comcast. net'; 'swensonannl@gmail.com' Cc: 'Cary Teague'; 'Scott H. Neal'; 'RBintner@EdinaMN.gov' Subject: Request for Delay in Consideration of Xcel Franchise Agreement Dear Mayor Hovland, City Council Members, and staff, I am respectfully requesting that the Council defer consideration of renewal of the franchise agreement between the City and Xcel Energy to address the issue of facilitating the conversion of overhead utilities to underground utilities. This is not addressed in the proposed franchise agreement and has become a pressing issue in older parts of Edina, especially in light of increased power outages due to aging overhead utility structures. Also, aesthetics are a major consideration, especially in parts of Northeast Edina in which overhead utilities run parallel to sidewalks and are placed in front houses. Currently, conversion of overhead utilities to underground utilities is not specifically covered in the proposed franchise agreement. I am proposing two 1 changes. First, in instances in which the City requires Xcel to covert an overhead utility to an underground utility. In that situation, any such underground welocation would have to be consistent with applicable long-term development plans or projects of the City, or as approved by the City. The expense of such a conversion shall be paid by Xcel, and xcel could recover its costs from its customers in accordance with state law, administrative rule or regulation. Second, there are those situations in which neighborhoods with unsightly and unreliable overhead utilities desire the conversion of overhead utilities to underground utilities within their neighborhood. In some instances, the cost might be fairly low and could be paid as a part of the homeowners' utility bills. In other instances, the cost might be too great to be billed directly to homeowners and in those instances, the city could pay the utility bill to Xcel and then pass the cost on to benefitting landowners through a special assessment. This is likely to be the case with the Curve Avenue and 4400 block of Grimes Avenue neighborhood areas, which will both be under planned roadway construction next summer. Utility poles run down parallel to the sidewalks on both streets and have numerous weather-related power outages, and, frankly, are unsightly. !Dozens of cities and utilities have developed plans to bury or relocate utility lines to improve aesthetics and reliability. A variety of programs is being used to convert existing overhead lines to underground, including, special assessment areas, undergrounding districts, and state and local government initiatives. Some of the approaches taken are: • Colorado Springs City Council's policy establishing a system improvement fund to provide for burying overhead distribution lines. And the community of Del Mar, California funds undergrounding projects through the creation of assessment districts which finances projects through the issuance of city bonds paid for by the homeowners through their property taxes. • Dare County, North Carolina's local act (N.C. Session Law 1999-127) authorizing the creation of one or more Utility Districts for the purpose of raising and expending funds to underground electric utility lines in the district. The proceeds of the tax are used for undergrounding electric lines within the district. • The three funding policy options for undergrounding facilities adopted by the City of Portland, Oregon recommending that the city: 1) Reserve a portion of utility franchise fees for undergrounding; 2) Promote undergrounding options for Urban *Renewal Projects and other major infrastructure improvements; and 3) include undergrounding provisions in future franchise agreements. z I've attached a draft plan below to amend the proposed franchise agreement. I am respectfully asking for a short delay in the Council's consideration of the agreement to address the issue of city participation in the • conversion of overhead utilities to underground facilities. Thank you for your consideration of this matter. ROSS PLAETZER 14058 Sunnyside Road I CELL: 612.991.8896 SECTION 4. RELOCATIONS. 4.5 (A) Permanent Relocation - Undergrounding. This subparagraph applies to conversions of Company Electric Facilities from overhead to underground as set forth in this subparagraph. As permitted by and in accordance with City ordinance and any pplicable law, administrative rule, or regulation, the City may require Company to convert any overhead Company Electric Facilities to underground Company Electric Facilities at the same or different locations, subject to the National Electrical Safety Code (NESC) and Company ing eering and safety standards. This subsection shall not apply to Company Electric Facilities used for ore in connection with the transmission of electric energy at nominal voltages in excess of 35 kilovolts. Pedestals, cabinets, and other above -ground equipment shall also normally be exempted from this subsection, excepting those instances where lack of suitable Public Way or Grounds, lack of easements, or special project requirements demand undergrounding of such facilities. Any such underground relocation shall be consistent with applicable lon -tg enn development plans or projects of the City, or as approved by the City. The expense of such a conversion shall be paid by Company, and Company may recover its costs from its customers in accordance with state law, administrative rule or regulation. The City agrees to provide a suitable location in the Public Way or Public Utility Easement (PUE), as mutually agreed for Company Electric Facilities that meet the Company's construction standards as provided to the Commission and in accordance with NESC reauirements to accommodate and permit upgrade of Company Electric Facilities in order to maintain sufficient service. Nothingi0 subsection prevents the City and Company from agreeing to a different form of cost recovery on a case-by-case basis consistent with applicable statutes, administrative rules, or regulations. 0 (B) Relocation at Request of or to Accommodate Third Party. In the event that any relocation or conversion of Company Electric Facilities is requested .by or is to accommodate a third party, Company shall relocate any Company Electric Facilities, or convert any overhead Company Electric Facilities to underground Company Electric Facilities at the same or different locations, as requested or to carry out any such accommodation, subject to the NESC and Company's engineering and safety standards. Any such relocation shall be consistent with any applicable long-term development plan or projection of the City or approved by the City. Company shall seek reimbursement for any such conversion or relocation from the third party consistent with the Company's tariff on file with the Commission and not from the City. The council may by resolution undertake to pay the amount of any such reimbursement or any portion thereof to Company on behalf of landowners of properties benefiting from the conversion of any overhead Company Electric Facilities to underground Company Electric Oacilities. If such a case, the council mayby resolution provide that the such reimbursable amounts be apportioned among benefitting_ properties and that payment by benefitting landowners of such reimbursable amounts be spread over a term of tip to ten years. The amount unpaid, from time to time, shall bear interest at the rate charged by the city on special assessments at the time the reimbursable amounts were payable. The amount so spread out shall be certified to the county auditor for collection with interest in the same manner as other special assessments and shall become a lien upon the propelly until paid. 40 ORDINANCE NO. 1610 WEST LINN, OREGON AN ORDINANCE GRANTING A NONEXCLUSIVE ELECTRIC UTILITY FRANCHISE TO PORTLAND GENERAL ELECTRIC COMPANY, APPROVING THE FORM OF A FRANCHISE AGREEMENT WITH PORTLAND GENERAL ELECTRIC, DELETING THE EXISTING FRANCHISE AGREEMENT FROM THE MUNICIPAL CODE, AUTHORIZING SIGNATURE OF THE AGREEMENT, AND SUPERSEDING ORDINANCE 1483 WHEREAS, Portland General Electric Company (PGE) is providing electric service to customers within the City of West Linn pursuant to a franchise granted by Ordinance No. 1342 and extensions granted under Ordinance Nos. 1479 and 1482, and afterwards pursuant to a franchise granted under Ordinance No. 1483; and WHEREAS, the franchise granted by Ordinance No. 1483 expired December 31, 2011, though the franchise fee structure remains in effect under the terms of that franchise; and WHEREAS, state law authorizes PGE to function as an electric utility within the City; and WHEREAS, public health and safety require that electric service be available to all potential electric customers located within the City of West Linn; and WHEREAS, it is in the interest of the City to allow PGE to continue to provide electric service to its customers within West Linn; and • WHEREAS, the City has the authority to control the use of rights of way within the City and to obtain reasonable compensation forth e use of rights of way; and WHEREAS, the West Linn Municipal Code provides that franchises shall be granted by an agreement approved by Council under an ordinance and that individual franchises do not need to be included in the Municipal Code; NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY OF WEST LINN ORDAINS AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. Grant of Franchise. The City of West Linn grants PGE a nonexclusive franchise under which PGE may place and maintain facilities in rights of way and certain other public places within the City of West Linn. Section 2. Terms of Agreement. The agreement between the City of West Linn and PGE attached hereto as Exhibit A and incorporated by this reference is hereby approved and shall provide the terms of the franchise. Section 3. Signature Authority. Council directs the City Manager to sign a franchise agreement substantially in the form of Exhibit A on behalf of the City. r: ORD. 1610 Page 1 of 2 Section 4. Ratification. Council hereby ratifies all acts of City personnel taken under the franchise granted under Ordinance 1483 from the termination date of that franchise to the • effective date of the franchise granted under this Ordinance. Section S. Supersession. This Ordinance, and the agreement embodied within it, supersedes Ordinance 1483; however, to promote continuity of electric service within the City, this Ordinance will cease to have effect, and Ordinance 1483 will be automatically revived, if PGE does not sign the franchise agreement embodied in Exhibit A within 30 days from the passage of this Ordinance. Section 6. Codification. If PGE signs the attached franchise and this Ordinance becomes effective, the codified version of Ordinance 1483 shall be deleted from the West Linn Municipal Code on the effective date of this ordinance and this ordinance shall be codified in its place. Section 7. Effective Date. This Ordinance and the franchise embodied in it become effective 30 days after Council passage and signature by the Mayor; the City Manager shall sign one original copy of the franchise for the City and one original copy for PGE, and shall also ensure that the effective date is written into the City's signature copy, which Council deems the controlling document on the issue of effective dates. PASSED AND APPROVED THIS 28TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2013. qOHN KOVASH, MAYOR ATTEST: KATHY MOLLUSKY, CITY RECORDER APPROVED AS TO FORM: CITY ATTI EY • ORD. 1610 Page 2 of 2 Exhibit A 1 FRANCHISE AGREEMENT 2 This Franchise Agreement grants Portland General Electric Company ("Grantee") a non - 3 exclusive franchise for ten years, with an option to renew for another ten years, to erect, 4 construct, maintain, repair, update and operate an electric light and power system within 5 the City of West Linn ("City"), sets the terms and conditions of the franchise and 6 provides an effective date. 7 WHEREAS, Grantee has been providing electric light and power service within 8 the City; and 9 WHEREAS, Grantee is duly authorized by the Oregon Public Utility 10 Commission ("OPUC") to supply electric light and power within the City; and 11 WHEREAS, the City has the authority to regulate the use of the Public ROW (as 12 defined below) within the City and to receive compensation for the use of the Public 13 ROW; and • 14 WHEREAS, the City and Grantee both desire Grantee to continue to be able to 15 provide electrical service within the City and to establish the terms by which Grantee 16 shall use and occupy the Public ROW; 17 NOW THEREFORE, THE PARTIES AGREE AS FOLLOWS: 18 SECTION 1. NATURE AND TERM OF FRANCHISE. 19 (A) The City hereby grants to Grantee and its successors and assigns, subject to the terms 20 and conditions in this Franchise, a nonexclusive franchise to erect, construct, repair, 21 maintain, upgrade and operate an electric light and power system within the City as it 22 now exists or may be extended in the future, including related communication equipment 23 and Grantee Facilities (as defined below). This Franchise includes the privilege to install, 24 repair, maintain, upgrade and operate Facilities necessary for the operation of Grantee's 25 Electric Light and Power System (as defined below) upon, over, along, and across the 26 surface of and the space above and below the streets, alleys, roads, highways, sidewalks, is 1 Exhibit A 1 bridges, City park property and other public ways over which the City has jurisdiction 2 (collectively, "Public ROW") for the provision of public utility services within the City 3 as Grantee's Electric Light and Power System now exists or is extended or upgraded in 4 the future. Nothing in this Franchise limits the City from granting others the right to 5 carry on activities similar to, or different from the ones described in this Franchise. The 6 rights granted herein do not include the right to build or site electric generating facilities 7 in the Public ROW. 8 (B) All Grantee Facilities in possession of Grantee currently or during the Term (as 9 defined in Section 2(B) that are located within the Public ROW or PUE are covered by 10 this Franchise and are deemed lawfully placed in their current locations. The City may 11 require relocation of Grantee Facilities as further specified in Section 8. 12 (C) Grantee may provide telecommunications services via Grantee's Electric Light and 13 Power System if it obtains all necessary and applicable authorizations from the OPUC 14 regarding the provision of telecommunications service to the public and obtains any 15 necessary, lawful and applicable authorization from the City for use of the Public ROW 16 for such provision, including entering into a separate franchise with the City. 17 SECTION 2. TERM AND EFFECTIVE DATE. 18 (A) Effective Date. The effective date of this Franchise shall be DATE J 2013 19 ("Effective Date"). 20 (B) Duration of Franchise. The term of this Franchise ("Term") shall commence on the 21 Effective Date, and all rights and obligations pertaining thereto shall be in effect ten years 22 from the Effective Date unless the Franchise is renegotiated or terminated as provided 23 hereunder. The Term shall automatically renew for an additional ten years after the 24 expiration of the initial Term, unless either parry provides the other party written notice, 25 at least 180 days before the expiration of the initial Term, that it does not desire to renew 26 the Franchise. 27 (C) Charter and General Ordinances to Apply. To the extent authorized by law, this 28 Franchise is subject to the Charter of the City of West Linn and general ordinance 4 Exhibit A 23 territory within its corporate boundaries, as such may change from time to time. 24 (2) "City Council" means the Council of the City. 25 (3) "City Engineer" means the City Engineer of the City. 26 (4) "City Recorder" means the Recorder of the City. 27 (5) "Director of Finance" means the Director of Finance of the City. r: 3 • 1 provisions passed pursuant thereto, including the applicable provisions of West Linn 2 Community Development Code and the West Linn Public Works Standards, and any 3 other regulation that requires underground utilities in subdivisions or partitions, and state 4 statutes and regulations existing during the Term. Nothing in this Franchise shall be 5 deemed to waive the requirements of the various codes and ordinances of the City 6 regarding permits, permit fees, business licenses, fees to be paid that are generally 7 applicable to other- similar businesses operating within the City, or the manner of 8 construction unless the Franchise language specifically states otherwise. In that regard, 9 and not withstanding any other language in this Franchise to the contrary, if Grantee acts 10 in compliance with this Franchise it shall be deemed to satisfy the requirements of 11 Sections 3.250 through 3.290 of the City's Municipal Code as currently written. 12 SECTION 3. DEFINITIONS. 13 (A) Captions. Throughout this Franchise, captions to sections are intended solely to 14 facilitate reading and to reference the provisions of this Franchise. The captions shall not • 15 affect the meaning and interpretation of this Franchise. 16 (B) Definitions. For purposes of this Franchise, the following terms, phrases, and their 17 derivations shall have the meanings given below unless the context indicates otherwise. 18 When not inconsistent with the context, words used in the present tense include the future 19 tense, words in the plural number include the singular number, and words in the singular 20 number include the plural number. The word "shall" is always mandatory and not merely 21 directory. 22 (1) "City" means the City of West Linn, Oregon, a municipal corporation, and all of the 23 territory within its corporate boundaries, as such may change from time to time. 24 (2) "City Council" means the Council of the City. 25 (3) "City Engineer" means the City Engineer of the City. 26 (4) "City Recorder" means the Recorder of the City. 27 (5) "Director of Finance" means the Director of Finance of the City. r: 3 Exhibit A 1 (6) "Emergency'' means a situation involving (a) an unscheduled outage affecting one or 2 more customers, or (b) danger to public safety. Emergency also includes situations 3 where the failure of Grantee to act would result in (a) or (b). 4 (7) "Franchise" means this Franchise Agreement as fully executed by the City and 5 Grantee and adopted by the City Council pursuant to an enacting ordinance. 6 (8) '`Grantee" means Portland General Electric Company, an Oregon corporation. 7 (9) "Grantee Facility" means any tangible component of Grantee's Electric Light and 8 Power System, including but not limited to any poles, guy wires, anchors, wire, fixtures, 9 equipment, conduit, circuits, vaults, switch cabinets, transformers, secondary junction 10 cabinets, antennas, communication equipment and other property necessary or convenient 11 to supply electric light and power by Grantee within the City. 12 (10) "Grantee's Electric Light and Power System" means all real property and Grantee 13 Facilities used by Grantee in the transmission and distribution of its services that are 14 located inside the boundaries of the City. 15 (11) "Gross Revenues" shall be deemed to include any and all revenues derived by 16 Grantee within the City from Grantee's Electric Light and Power System, and includes, 17 but is not limited to, the sale of and use of electricity and electric service, and the use, 18 rental, or lease of Grantee Facilities, after adjustment for the net write-off of uncollectible 19 accounts within the city limits of the City. Gross Revenues do not include proceeds from 20 the sale of bonds, mortgages or other evidence of indebtedness, securities or stocks, or 21 sales at wholesale by one public utility to another of electrical energy when the utility 22 purchasing such electrical energy is not the ultimate consumer. Gross Revenues also do 23 not include revenue from joint pole use. For purposes of this Franchise, revenue from 24 joint pole use includes any revenue collected by Grantee from other franchisees, 25 permittees, or licensees of the City for the right to attach wires, cable or other facilities or 26 equipment to Grantee's poles or place them in Grantee's conduits. 27 (12) "NESC" means the National Electrical Safety Code. 28 (13) "OPUC" means the Oregon Public Utility Commission. 4 Exhibit A 1 (14) "Term" shall have the meaning described in Section 2(B). 2 (15) "Person" means any individual, sole proprietorship, partnership, association, 3 corporation, cooperative, People's Utility District, or other form of organization 4 authorized to do business in the State of Oregon, and includes any natural person. 5 (16) "Public ROW" shall have the meaning described in Section l (A). 6 (17) "PUE" shall mean an easement, not within the public right-of-way, that is designated 7 for providers of utility services and regulated under the City's municipal code. 8 (18) "Year," "annual," or "annually" means the period consisting of a full calendar year, 9 beginning January 1 and ending December 31, unless otherwise provided in this 10 Franchise. 11 SECTION 4. CONSTRUCTION 12 (A) Construction. Subject to the NESC, and all City codes, and the West Linn Public 13 Works Standards, where applicable, Grantee's Electric Light and Power System shall be 14 constructed and maintained in such manner as not to interfere with sewers, water pipes, • 15 or any other property of the City, or with any other pipes, wires, conduits or other 16 facilities that may have been laid in the Public ROW or PUE by the City. Assuming 17 there is sufficient space in the Public ROW that meets the Grantee's construction 18 standards as provided to the OPUC and in accordance with NESC requirements, any 19 poles carrying PGE service not required to be placed underground shall be placed 20 between the sidewalk and the edge of the Public ROW unless another location is 21 approved by the City Engineer. For any land use development in the City requiring the 22 Grantee's services, the City shall notify the Grantee of such pending land use 23 development as soon as the City deems the land use development application to be 24 complete or 10 days before the pre -application conference, whichever occurs first. The 25 Grantee shall notify the City of the Grantee's construction standards that are provided to 26 the OPUC and of NESC requirements that are applicable to the pending land use 27 development. The City shall promptly relay such information as is received from 28 Grantee to the developer. The City shall process the Iand use development application as . 5 Exhibit A 1 provided by the Community Development Code and the Municipal Code and shall 2 provide the approval authority with concerns or conditions of approval recommended by 3 Grantee. The City shall put developer on notice that nothing in a City land use approval 4 shall authorize violation of any applicable law, regulation or code and that the developer 5 shall be responsible for curing any violation at developer's own expense. In addition, 6 City shall confer with Grantee on an ongoing basis to create language for public work 7 standards that discourages developers from negatively impacting existing utilities already 8 located in the Public ROW or PUE, and from constructing the land use development in 9 such a way that does not allow adequate space for utilities to provide anticipated new 10 service to their customers in accordance with the utility's construction standards provided 11 to the City and OPUC and in accordance with NESC requirements. City and Grantee 12 shall also confer on rules for sharing space in locations where existing PUEs may already 13 have reached, or may be nearing, maximum capacity for utility occupancy. 14 15 1. Before Grantee conducts underground work involving excavation, new 16 construction, or major relocation work in Public ROW or PUEs, Grantee 17 shall apply for a permit and shall comply with any and all special 18 conditions relating to scheduling, coordination, permitting, locating of 19 facilities, restoration, and public safety as determined by the City unless 20 emergency conditions exist. Special conditions would include work being 21 done in the Public ROW or PUEs by the City or its agents. 22 2. Grantee shall file preliminary maps or drawings in electronic, read-only 23 format of its proposed construction work within the City with the City 24 Engineer showing the general location of the construction, extension or 25 relocation of its facilities and services in Public ROW or PUEs. The 26 proposed work must be reviewed and a City permit issued for the work 27 prior to commencement unless Section 4(C) applies. 28 (B) Acquisition. Subsequent to the Effective Date, upon Grantee's acquisition of 29 additional Grantee Facilities in the Public ROW or PUE, or upon any addition or 30 annexation to the City of any area in which Grantee retains Grantee Facilities in the 31 Public ROW or PUE of such addition or annexation, Grantee shall submit to the City a 32 statement describing all Grantee Facilities involved, whether authorized by a franchise 33 agreement or upon any other form of prior right, together with a map, as described in 70, Exhibit A • 1 Section 5, specifying the location of all such Grantee Facilities. Such Grantee Facilities 2 shall immediately be subject to the terms of this Franchise. 3 (C) Emergency Repairs. In the event Emergency repairs to Grantee Facilities are 4 necessary, Grantee may conduct emergency work at any time and must provide the City 5 Engineer with written or oral notice of emergency work as soon as reasonably possible, 6 no later than five (5) business days after the emergency work has commenced. If permits 7 are required by City, Grantee shall apply for appropriate permits the next business day or 8 as soon as reasonably possible following discovery of the Emergency. In the event 9 excavation is necessary in conjunction with the repairs, Section 6 shall also apply. In any 10 event, within thirty (30) days of beginning emergency repairs or construction, Grantee 11 shall provide the City Engineer with a map in electronic, read-only format of the general 12 location of excavations, repaving, and new facilities. 13 (D) Reasonable Care. All work completed by Grantee or subcontracted by Grantee to 14 third parties within the Public ROW or PUEs shall be conducted with reasonable care and 15 in compliance with applicable City standards and codes. All work shall be perforined in 16 accordance with all other applicable laws and regulations, including but not limited to the 17 NESC. Any work completed by Grantee within the Public ROW or PUEs may be 18 inspected by the City to determine whether it has been placed in its approved location and 19 in accordance with City requirements and standards according to Grantee's permit issued 20 by the City. Non -conforming work will be corrected with work conforming to the 21 applicable standards at no cost to the City. If Emergency work has been completed by 22 Grantee in the Public ROW or PUEs and the City determines such work was not 23 completed in a City approved location or in accordance with City requirements and 24 standards, the City shall notify Grantee and provide Grantee with sixty (60) days after the 25 Emergency has passed to reperform the work in a City approved location, in accordance 26 with the NESC. 27 (E) Cooperation between Grantee and City. In accordance with state law, rules and 28 regulations, for purposes of this Franchise, including but not limited to Sections 4, 8 and 0 7 Exhibit A 1 10, Grantee and City shall work together during any design process affecting the Public 2 ROW or PUE to establish suitable locations for Grantee's Facilities and cooperate to 3 discuss project scope and schedule. At a minimum, the discussion must include a 4 description of the plans, goals and objectives of the proposed project and options to 5 minimize or eliminate costs to the City and the utilities. The City is not required to avoid 6 or minimize costs to the utilities in a way that materially affects the project's scope, cost 7 or schedule. 8 SECTION 5. SUPPLYING MAPS. Grantee shall maintain maps and data pertaining to 9 the location of Grantee Facilities on file at its corporate offices or at an office in Oregon. 10 After providing Grantee with twenty-four (24) hours prior notice, the City may inspect 11 the maps (excluding Grantee proprietary information) at any time during Grantee's 12 business hours. Upon request of the City and without charge, Grantee shall furnish 13 current maps to the City by electronic data in read-only format showing the general 14 location of Grantee Facilities, excluding Grantee proprietary information. Unless 15 required by law, the City will not sell or provide Grantee prepared maps or .data to third 16 parties without written permission from Grantee. Upon request of Grantee, the City will 17 make available to Grantee any relevant City prepared maps or data, not exempt from 18 disclosure under public records laws, at no charge to Grantee. 19 SECTION 6. EXCAVATION. Subject to Sections 4 and 7, and after obtaining any 20 permits required by the City, as well as complying with ORS 757.542 et seq. (Oregon 21 Utility Notification Center) as they may be amended from time to time, Grantee may 22 make all necessary excavations within the Public ROW or PUEs for the purpose of 23 installing, repairing, upgrading or maintaining Grantee Facilities, except that in the case 24 of an Emergency, no permit shall be required prior to excavation. In response to locate 25 requests, the City will locate all city owned utilities within the Public ROW and PUEs but 26 individual laterals from the city mains will not be located by the City. It is the 27 responsibility of Grantee to coordinate with individual property owners to locate their 28 laterals traversing Grantee's project prior to excavation. Should there be a direct conflict Exhibit A • I between any teams or conditions stated in a permit granted by the City and the terms of 2 this Franchise, the terms of this Franchise shall control. All excavations made by Grantee 3 in the Public ROW or PUE shall be properly safeguarded for the prevention of accidents. 4 All of Grantee's work under this Section shall, be completed in strict compliance with all 5 applicable rules, regulations and ordinances of the City. Should a customer of Grantee be 6 required, pursuant to Grantee's tariff on file with the OPUC, to make excavations under 7 the customer's own permit from the City that are located in the Public ROW or PUE, the 8 City agrees that Grantee shall not be responsible or liable for any failure by such 9 custorner to comply with any applicable rules, regulations, ordinances of the City and/or 10 with City standards. Notwithstanding the foregoing sentence, Grantee shall notify its 11 customers in writing that customers conducting excavation work in ROW or PUE must 12 comply with any applicable rules, regulations, ordinances of the City, and other 13 applicable City standards. 14 SECTION 7. RESTORATION AFTER EXCAVATION. Except as otherwise • 15 provided for in this Section, Grantee shall restore the area of the Public ROW or PUEs in 16 the area disturbed by any excavation by Grantee to at least the same condition that it was 17 in prior to excavation, in accordance with generally applicable published City standards; 18 provided, however, Grantee shall not be required, at Grantee's expense, to pave a gravel 19 street that was gravel prior to the excavation, install sidewalk panels or curbs that did not 20 exist prior to the excavation, or construct additional improvements in the Public ROW or 21 PUE that did not exist prior to the excavation. if Grantee fails to restore the Public ROW 22 or PUE to at least the sarne condition that it was in prior to the excavation, in accordance 23 with generally applicable published City standards, the City shall give Grantee written 24 notice and provide Grantee a reasonable period of time, not to exceed thirty (30) days, to 25 restore the Public ROW or PUE. If the work of Grantee creates a public safety hazard as 26 determined by the City Engineer, Grantee may be required to repair or restore the Public 27 ROW or PUE within twenty-four (24) hours notice from the City, or such time as agreed 28 between the City Engineer and Grantee, taking into consideration weather and other D Exhibit A 1 relevant factors. Should Grantee fail to make such repairs or restorations within the 2 aforementioned time frames, the City may, after providing notice to Grantee and a 3 reasonable opportunity to cure, refill or repave (as applicable) any opening made by 4 Grantee in the Public ROW or PUE and the expense thereof shall be paid by Grantee. 5 The City reserves the right, after providing notice to Grantee, to remove or repair any 6 work completed by Grantee, which, in the determination of the City Engineer is 7 inadequate, using a qualified contractor in accordance with applicable local, state and 8 federal laws and regulations, and Grantee's construction standards as provided to the 9 OPUC. The cost thereof, including the cost of inspection, management, and supervision, 10 shall be paid by Grantee. In the event that Grantee's work is coordinated with other I I construction work in the Public ROW or PUE, the City Engineer may excuse Grantee 12 from restoring the area of the Public ROW or PUE, provided that as part of the 13 coordinated work, the Public ROW or PUE is restored to good order and condition in 14 accordance with City standards. 15 SECTION 8. RELOCATION. 16 (A) Permanent Relocation Required by City — This subsection (A) covers permanent 17 relocation of overhead Grantee Facilities that will remain overhead, and underground 18 Grantee Facilities that will remain underground. The City shall have the right to require 19 Grantee to change the location of Grantee's Electric Light and Power System located in 20 the Public ROW or PUE when it is necessary for any public project or public 21 improvement in the Public ROW or PUE, and, unless otherwise agreed, the expenses 22 thereof shall be paid by Grantee. The foregoing sentence shall not apply if any of the of 23 the following is hue: a) the project or improvement necessitating the change in location 24 will not be owned by the City; or b) the majority of the funding for the project or 25 improvement does not come from City, county, regional, state, or federal government 26 sources; or c) the public project or public improvement is not located in the Public ROW 27 or PUE. The City agrees to provide a suitable location in the Public ROW or PUE, as 28 mutually agreed, for Grantee Facilities, that meets the Grantee's construction standards as 10 Exhibit A 0 1 provided to the OPUC and in accordance with NESC requirements, to accommodate and 2 permit relocation and upgrade of Grantee Facilities in order to maintain sufficient service. 3 Should Grantee fail to remove or relocate any such Grantee Facilities within ninety (90) 4 days after the date established by the City, which, except in the event of a public 5 Emergency, shall not occur sooner than ninety (90) days after the City provides written 6 notice to remove/relocate to Grantee, the City may cause or effect such removal or 7 relocation, performed by a qualified contractor in accordance with applicable local, state 8 and federal laws and regulations, and the Grantee's construction standards as provided to 9 the OPUC, and the expense thereof shall be paid by Grantee. However, when the City 10 requests a subsequent relocation of all or part of the same Grantee Facilities less than two 11 years after the initial relocation that is necessary or convenient for a public project, and 12 not at the request of or to accommodate a third party, the subsequent relocation shall be at 13 the expense of the City. 14 (B) Notice. The City will endeavor to provide as much notice prior to requiring Grantee • 15 to relocate Grantee Facilities as possible. The notice shall specify the date by which the 16 existing Grantee Facilities must be removed or relocated. Nothing in this Section 8 shall 17 prevent the City and Grantee from agreeing, either before or after notice is provided, to a 18 mutually acceptable schedule for relocation. Grantee and City shall work together during 19 any design process affecting the Public ROW or PUE to establish suitable locations for 20 Grantee's Facilities and cooperate to discuss project scope and schedule. At a minimum, 21 the discussion must include a description of the plans, goals and objectives of the 22 proposed project and options to minimize or eliminate costs to the City and utilities. The 23 City is not required to avoid or minimize costs to the utilities in a way that materially 24 affects the project's scope, cost or schedule. 25 (C) Permanent Relocation - Undergrounding. This subsection (C) applies to 26 conversions of Grantee Facilities fiom overhead to underground. As permitted by, and in 27 accordance with City ordinance and any applicable law, administrative rule, or 28 regulation, the City may require Grantee to convert any overhead Grantee Facilities to , 11 Exhibit A 1 underground Grantee Facilities at the same or different locations, subject to the NESC 2 and Grantee's engineering and safety standards. This subsection shall not apply to 3 Grantee Facilities used for or in connection with the transmission of electric energy at 4 nominal voltages in excess of 35,000 volts. Pedestals, cabinets, and other above -ground 5 equipment shall also normally be exempted from this subsection, excepting those 6 instances where lack of suitable ROW, lack of easements, or special project requirements 7 demand undergrounding of said facilities. Any such underground relocation shall be 8 consistent with applicable long-term development plans or projects of the City, or as 9 approved by the City. The expense of such a conversion shall be paid by Grantee, and 10 Grantee may recover its costs from its customers in accordance with state law, 11 administrative rule, or regulation. The City agrees to provide a suitable location in the 12 Public ROW or PUE, as mutually agreed for Grantee Facilities that meet the Grantee's 13 construction standards as provided to the OPUC and in accordance with NESC 14 requirements to accommodate and permit upgrade of Grantee Facilities in order to 15 maintain sufficient service. Nothing in this subsection prevents the City and Grantee 16 from agreeing to a different form of cost recovery on a case-by-case basis consistent with 17 applicable statutes, administrative rules, or regulations. 18 (D) Temporary Relocation at Request of City. This subsection (D) covers temporary 19 relocation of overhead Grantee Facilities that will remain overhead, as well as 20 underground Grantee Facilities that will remain underground. The City may require 21 Grantee to temporarily remove and relocate Grantee Facilities by giving sixty (60) days 22 notice to Grantee. Prior to such relocation, the City agrees to provide a suitable location 23 in the Public ROW or PUE, as mutually agreed, or a temporary construction easement 24 that meets the Grantee's construction standards as provided to the OPUC and in 25 accordance with NESC requirements, and that allows the Grantee to place its Facilities on 26 the easement in order to maintain sufficient service until such time as the Grantee moves 27 its Facilities to their permanent location. The cost of temporary removal or relocation of 28 Grantee Facilities that is necessary or convenient for public projects, as well as cost of 12 Exhibit A 13 • 1 replacing Grantee Facilities in their permanent location, shall be paid by Grantee. 2 However, when the City requests a subsequent relocation of all or part of the same 3 Grantee Facilities less than two years after the initial relocation, that is necessary or 4 convenient for a public project and not at the request of or to accommodate a third party, 5 the subsequent relocation shall be at the expense of the City. 6 (E) Relocation at Request of or to Accommodate Third Party. In the event that any 7 relocation of Grantee Facilities is requested by or is to accommodate a third party, 8 Grantee shall seek reimbursement from the third party consistent with the Grantee's tariff 9 on file with the OPUC and not from the City. Such relocation shall be consistent with 10 any applicable long-term development plan or projection of the City or approved by the 11 City. If the relocation of Grantee Facilities is caused or required by the conditions placed 12 by the City on approval for projects of third parties, such relocation shall in no event fall 13 under the provisions of subsections (A), (C) or (D) of this Section 8. 14 (F) Temporary Relocation at Request of Third Parties. Whenever it is necessary to 15 temporarily relocate or rearrange any Grantee Facility in order to permit the passage of 16 any building, machinery or other object, Grantee shall perform the work after receiving 17 sixty (60) business days written notice from the persons desiring to move the building, 18 machinery or other object. The notice shall: (1) demonstrate that the third party has 19 acquired at its expense all necessary permits from the City; (2) detail the route of 20 movement of the building, machinery, or other object; (3) provide that the person 21 requesting the temporary relocation shall be responsible for Grantee's costs; (4) provide 22 that the requestor shall indemnify and hold harmless the City and Grantee from any and 23 all damages or claims resulting either from the moving of the building, machinery or 24 other object or from the temporary relocation of Grantee Facilities; and (5) be 25 accompanied by a cash deposit or other security acceptable to Grantee for the costs of 26 relocation. Grantee in its sole discretion may waive the security obligation. The cash 27 deposit or other security shall be in an amount reasonably calculated by Grantee to cover • 13 Exhibit A 1 Grantee's costs of temporary relocation and restoration. All temporary relocations under 2 this subsection shall comply with ORS 757.805. 3 SECTION 9. PUBLIC ROW VACATION. If all or a portion of the Public ROW used 4 by Grantee is vacated by the City during the Tenn, and if reasonably possible, the City 5 shall either condition the approval of the vacation on the reservation of an easement for 6 Grantee Facilities in their then -current location that prohibits any use of the vacated 7 property that interferes with Grantee's full enjoyment and use of its easement, or permit 8 Grantee Facilities to remain in a PUE. If neither of these options is reasonably possible, 9 Grantee shall, after notice from the City and without expense to the City, remove Grantee 10 Facilities from such vacated Public ROW, restore, repair or reconstruct the Public ROW 11 where such removal has occurred in accordance with Section 7. In the event of failure, 12 neglect or refusal of Grantee, after providing Grantee with ninety (90) days prior written 13 notice, to repair, restore, or reconstruct such Public ROW, the City may complete such 14 work or cause it to be completed by a qualified contractor in accordance with applicable 15 state and federal safety laws and regulations, and the cost thereof shall be born by the 16 Grantee. Upon request, the City will cooperate with Grantee to identify alternative 17 locations within the Public ROW for Grantee Facilities if they are not permitted to remain 18 in the vacated area. 19 SECTION 10. CITY PUBLIC WORKS AND IMPROVEMENTS. Nothing in this 20 Franchise shall be construed in any way to prevent the City from excavating, grading, 21 paving, planking, repairing, widening, altering, or completing any work that may be 22 needed or convenient in the Public ROW or PUE that is consistent with applicable codes. 23 The City shall coordinate any such work with Grantee to avoid, to the extent reasonably 24 foreseeable, any obstruction, injury or restrictions on the use by Grantee of any Grantee 25 Facilities, and the City shall bear the responsibilities for damages as set forth in Section 26 20. Nothing in this Section relieves either party from its obligations set forth in Sections 27 4(E) and 8. 14 Exhibit A • 1 SECTION 11. USE OF GRANTEE FACILITIES. City shall maintain attachment 2 agreements and permits to string wires on Grantee's poles or run wires in Grantee's 3 trenches and/or available conduit for municipal purposes and to attach fire and police 4 alarms, communication equipment, and banners to and between Grantee's poles with 5 messages regarding community events and public safety, provided that such wires, 6 banners and equipment: a) do not unreasonably interfere with Grantee operations; b) 7 conform to the NESC: and c) the City's excess capacity on such wires, banners and 8 equipment is not leased to, sold to or otherwise used by non-governmental third parties. 9 Grantee shall not charge the City for such attachments to its poles or in its conduits; 10 however, the City shall be responsible to pay for any snake -ready and inspections Grantee 11 must perform in order to provide access to Grantee Facilities for City wires, banners and 12 equipment in accordance with the NESC. Should any of the City's attachments to 13 Grantee Facilities violate the NESC, the City shall work with Grantee to address and 14 correct such violations in an agreed-upon period of time. The City shall indemnify and • 15 hold Grantee harmless from loss or damage resulting from the presence of City's wires, 16 banners and equipment on or in Grantee Facilities. For purposes of this Franchise, 17 "make-ready' shall mean engineering or construction activities necessary to make a pole, 18 conduit, or other support equipment available for a new attachment, attachment 19 modifications, or additional facilities. 20 SECTION 12. PAYMENT FOR USE OF PUBLIC ROW. 21 (A) Use of Public ROW. In consideration for its use of the Public ROW in accordance 22 with the terms of this Franchise, Grantee agrees to pay the City an amount equal to three 23 and one-half percent (3 1/2%) of the Gross Revenue received by Grantee from its 24 customers within the City. The current year's franchise fee shall be based on the Gross 25 Revenue collected by Grantee during the previous calendar year from Grantee's 26 customers, and shall be paid on an annual basis. To the extent permissible under state 27 law and regulation, the payment imposed by this subsection shall be considered an 28 operating expense of Grantee and shall not be itemized or billed separately to consumers is 15 Exhibit A 1 within the City. However, should the percentage of Gross Revenue permitted to be 2 considered an operating expense of Grantee be increased by regulation of the OPUC 3 during the Term of this Franchise, the City retains the right to require the percentage 4 amount paid by Grantee under this subsection (A) to be increased, not to exceed the 5 maxiinuin amount permitted by regulation to be considered an operating expense by 6 Grantee at that time. 7 (B) Property Tax Limitations Do Not Apply. The payment described in this Section 8 12 is not subject to the property tax limitations of Article XI, Sections 11(b) and 11(19) 9 of the Oregon Constitution and is not a fee imposed on property or property owners by 10 fact of ownership. 11 (C) Privilege Tax. The City shall retain the right, as permitted by Oregon law, to charge 12 a privilege tax based on a percentage of the Gross Revenue earned from Grantee's 13 customers within the City in addition to the payment amounts set forth in subsection (A). 14 The City shall provide Grantee at least ninety (90) days notice prior to any privilege tax 15 or increase in privilege tax becoming effective. Grantee shall follow state regulations 16 regarding the inclusion of such privilege tax as an itemized charge on the electricity bills 17 of its customers within the City. 18 (D) Remittance of Annual Payment. Grantee shall remit -to the Director of Finance on 19 or before the first (1 st) day of April of each year, the annual 3 ''/z% franchise fee payment, 20 or franchise fee payment higher than 3 1/2% if such fee is increased in accordance with 21 the last sentence of subsection A of this Section 12, as well as payment of any additional 22 privilege tax, to be made in such year. Payment must be made in immediately available 23 federal funds. No later than the first (P) day of March of each year, Grantee shall 24 provide the City a statement, under oath, showing the Gross Revenue for the preceding 25 year. 26 (E) Acceptance of Payment. Acceptance by the City of any payment due under this 27 Section shall not be a waiver by the City of any breach of this Franchise occurring prior 28 to the acceptance, nor shall the acceptance by the City preclude the City from later I[7 Exhibit A • 1 establishing that a larger amount was actually due, or fiom collecting the balance due to 2 the City. 3 (F) Late Payments. Interest on late payments shall accrue from the due date based on 4 the one year U.S. treasury bill rate as of the due date, and shall be computed based on the 5 actual number of days elapsed from the due date until payment. Interest shall accrue 6 without regard to whether the City has provided notice of delinquency. 7 (G) No Exemption From Other Fees or Taxes. Payment of the amounts described in 8 this Section 12 shall not exempt Grantee from the payment of any other license fee, tax or 9 charge on the business, occupation, property or income of Grantee that may be lawfully 10 imposed by the City or any other taxing authority, except as may otherwise be provided 11 in the ordinance or laws imposing such other license fee, tax or charge. 12 (H) Direct Access and Volumetric Methodologies. The City may, consistent with state 13 law, direct that the payments made under this Section 12 be based on volume -based 14 methodologies as specifically described in ORS 221.655 instead of the formula set out in 15 subsections 12 (A) and (C). Notice must be given to Grantee in writing for the subsequent 16 payments to be made using volume -based methodology. The volumetric calculation shall 17 apply to payments made in one calendar year (based on January 1 to December 31 18 billings from the previous calendar year). The choice to use volumetric methodology 19 must be renewed annually by the City. No notice is necessary if the City chooses to 20 remain on the revenue -based calculation. 21 (I) Payment Obligation Survives Franchise. If prior to the expiration of this Franchise 22 the parties do not finish negotiation of a new franchise agreement, the obligation to make 23 the payments imposed by this Section 12 shall survive expiration of this Franchise until a 24 new franchise agreement becomes effective and supersedes this Franchise. In the event 25 this Franchise is terminated before expiration, Grantee shall make the remaining 26 payments owed, if any, within ninety (90) days of the termination date. 27 /// 28 /// • 17 Exhibit A 1 SECTION 13. AUDIT. 2 (A) Audit Notice and Record Access. The City may audit Grantee's calculation of 3 Gross Revenues. Within ten (10) business days after receiving a written request from the 4 City, or such other time frame as agreed by both parties, Grantee shall furnish the City 5 and any auditor retained by the City: (1) information sufficient to demonstrate that 6 Grantee is in compliance with this Franchise; and (2) access to all books, records, maps 7 and other documents maintained by Grantee with respect to Grantee Facilities that are 8 necessary for the City to perform such audit. Grantee shall provide access to such 9 information to City within the City, or the Portland, Oregon metropolitan area, during 10 regular Grantee business hours. 11 (B) Audit Payment. If the City's audit shows that the amounts due to the City are 12 higher than those based on the Grantee's calculation of Gross Revenue, then Grantee 13 shall make a payment for the difference within sixty (60) days after the delivery to 14 Grantee of the audit results. In addition to paying any underpayment, Grantee shall pay 15 interest at the prevailing one year U.S. Treasury bill rate, but not penalties, as specified in 16 this Franchise, from the original due date. In the event the City's audit shows that 17 Grantee's calculation of Gross Revenue resulted in an overpayment to the City by five 18 percent (5%) or more in any one year, the Grantee may deduct such overpayment from 19 the next annual franchise fee payment. If the City's audit shows that the amounts due to 20 the City based on the Grantee's calculation of Gross Revenue deviated by five percent 21 (5%) or more in any one year from the City's calculation during the audit, Grantee shall 22 reimburse the City for the incremental cost associated with the audit, not to exceed one 23 percent (1 %) of the total annual franchise fee payment for the applicable audit period. 24 SECTION 14. TERMINATION AND REMEDIES. 25 (A) By City for Cause. If Grantee ceases to maintain Grantee Facilities in accordance 26 with the maintenance commitments outlined in the Service Quality Measures Review 27 filed with the OPUC, and this causes an increase in the risk to the public of personal 28 injury or property damage, the City shall notify Grantee and Grantee shall have thirty Exhibit A • 1 (30) days after the date of the notice to eliminate such risk or, if such risk can not be 2 eliminated within thirty (30) days, such reasonable time period as is required to eliminate 3 such risk and Grantee shall bear all costs related to remedying the risk. If Grantee does 4 not eliminate the risk in accordance with the preceding sentence, the City may then 5 terminate this Franchise by providing Grantee written notice of termination. 6 (B) By City if City Will Provide Service. The City may terminate this Franchise upon 7 one year's written notice to Grantee in the event that the City decides to engage in public 8 ownership of the electric facilities located in the Public ROW and the public distribution 9 of electric energy to customers throughout the City in accordance with ORS 758.470. 10 (C) City Reserves Right to Terminate. In addition to any other rights provided for in 11 this Franchise, the City reserves the right, subject to subsections 14 (E) and (F), to 12 terminate this Franchise in the event that: 13 (1) The Grantee materially violates any material provision of this Franchise; 14 (2) The Grantee is found by a court of competent jurisdiction to have practiced any • 15 material fi•aud or deceit upon the City; 16 (3) There is a final determination that Grantee has failed, refused, neglected or is 17 otherwise unable to obtain or maintain Grantee's service territory designation required by 18 any federal or state regulatory body regarding Grantee's operation of Grantee's Electric 19 Light and Power System; or 20 (4) Grantee becomes unable or unwilling to pay its debts, or is adjudged bankrupt. 21 (D) Material Provisions. For purposes of this Section 14, the following are material 22 provisions of this Franchise, allowing the City to exercise its rights under this Section 14 23 or as set forth elsewhere in this Franchise: 24 (1) The invalidation, failure to pay or any suspension of Grantee's payments of franchise 25 fees or privilege taxes to the City for use of the Public ROW under this Franchise; 26 (2) Any failure by Grantee to submit timely reports as may be requested by the City, 27 regarding the calculation of its franchise fees or privilege taxes paid or to be paid to the 28 City; Exhibit A 1 (3) Any failure by Grantee to maintain the liability insurance or self insurance required 2 under this Franchise; 3 (4) Any failure by Grantee to provide copies of requested information as provided under 4 Sections 4, 5, and 13 above; and 5 (5) Any failure by Grantee to otherwise substantially comply with the requirements of 6 Section 4 through Section 20 of this Franchise, unless otherwise agreed. 7 (E) Notice and Opportunity to Cure. The City shall provide Grantee thirty (30) days 8 prior written notice of its intent to exercise its rights under this Section 14, stating the 9 reasons for such action. If Grantee cures the basis for termination or if Grantee initiates 10 efforts satisfactory to the City to remedy the basis for termination and the efforts continue 11 in good faith within the thirty (30) day notice period, the City shall not exercise its 12 remedy rights. if Grantee fails to cure the basis for termination or if Grantee does not 13 undertake and/or maintain efforts satisfactory to the City to remedy the basis for 14 termination within the thirty (30) day notice period, then the City Council may impose 15 any or all of the remedies available under this Section 14. 16 (F) Remedies. In determining which remedy or remedies are appropriate, the City shall 17 consider the nature of the violation, the person or persons burdened by the violation, the 18 nature of the remedy required in order to prevent further such violations, and any other 19 matters the City deems appropriate. 20 (G) Financial Penalty. In addition to any rights set out elsewhere in this Franchise, as 21 well as its rights under the City Code or other law, the City reserves the right at its sole 22 option to impose a financial penalty of up to $500.00 per day per material violation of a 23 material provision of this Franchise when the opportunity to cure has passed. 24 SECTION 15. ASSIGNMENT OF FRANCHISE. Grantee may not sell, assign, 25 transfer, or convey this Franchise to a third party without the City Council giving its 26 consent in a duly passed ordinance. Upon obtaining such consent, this Franchise shall 27 inure to and bind such third party. Grantee shall not sell or assign this Franchise to an 28 entity that is not authorized by the OPUC to provide electric service to retail consumers 20 Exhibit A L� 1 in the City or is not otherwise authorized to provide electric service to retail consumers 2 under Oregon law. Prior to any proposed transfer, Grantee shall be in full compliance 3 with this Franchise and the proposed transferee shall agree in writing to be bound by this 4 Franchise. In the event Grantee is purchased by or merged into another entity and 5 Grantee survives such purchase or merger as a public utility, Grantee shall provide notice 6 to the City of such purchase or merger, but shall have no obligation under this Franchise 7 to obtain the consent of the City Council for such purchase or merger. 8 SECTION 16. REMOVAL OF FACILITIES. If this Franchise is terminated or 9 expires on its own terms and is not replaced by a new franchise agreement or similar 10 authorization, the City may determine whether Grantee Facilities are to be removed from 11 the Public ROW or remain in place. The City shall provide written notice of any 12 requirement to remove Grantee Facilities and shall provide Grantee sixty (60) days to 13 continent on such requirement to move Grantee Facilities. Following consideration of 14 any such comments, the City Manager may issue an order requiring removal of Grantee 15 Facilities within nine (9) months after such order is declared. 16 SECTION 17. NONDISCRIMINATION. Grantee shall provide service to electric 17 light and power consumers in the City without undue discrimination or undue preference 18 . or disadvantage, in accordance with Oregon law. 19 SECTION 18. INDEMNIFICATION. To the fullest extent permitted by law, Grantee 20 shall indemnify and hold harmless the City against any and all claims, damages, costs and 21 expenses, including attorney's fees and costs, to which the City may be subjected as a 22 direct and proximate result of any willful, intentionally tortious, negligent, or malicious 23 acts and/or omissions of Grantee, or its affiliates, officers, employees, agents, contractors 24 or subcontractors, arising out of the rights and privileges granted by this Franchise. The 25 obligations imposed by this Section are intended to survive termination of this Franchise. 26 SECTION 19. INSURANCE. Grantee shall obtain and maintain in full force and 27 effect, for the entire Term, the following insurance covering risks associated with 28 Grantee's ownership and use of Grantee Facilities and the Public ROW: 21 Exhibit A I (A) Commercial General Liability insurance covering all operations by or on behalf of 2 Grantee for Bodily Injury and Property Damage, including Completed Operations and 3 Contractors Liability coverage, in an arnount not less than Two Million Dollars 4 ($2,000,000.00) per occurrence and in the aggregate. 5 (B) Business Automobile Liability insurance to cover any vehicles used in connection 6 with its activities under this Franchise, with a combined single limit not less than One 7 Million Dollars ($1,000,000.00) per accident. 8 (C) Workers' Compensation coverage as required by law and Employer's Liability 9 Insurance with limits of $1,000,000. With the exception of Workers' Compensation and 10 Employers Liability coverage, Grantee shall name the City as an additional insured on all 11 applicable policies. All insurance policies shall provide that they shall not be canceled or 12 modified unless thirty (30) days prior written notice is provided to the City. Grantee shall 13 provide the City with a certificate of insurance evidencing such coverage as a condition 14 of this Franchise and shall provide updated certificates upon request. 15 (D) Index for minimum coverage. 16 (1) The minimum coverages required in subsections A through C of this Section shall be 17 automatically adjusted to track percentages of statutory increases to the City's exposure 18 under the Oregon Tort Claims act. On July 1,. 2013, and for every year this Franchise is 19 in effect, Grantee shall ensure it has insurance coverage in the amount stated in 20 subsections A through C, increased as follows: 21 (a) On or before July 1, 2013, Grantee shall obtain or maintain insurance policies 22 with minimum coverage amounts stated in the Franchise, increased by 5.25% 23 (b) On or before July 1, 2014, and on July 1 of every year thereafter, Grantee 24 shall obtain or maintain policies with minimum coverage calculated by increasing 25 the coverage amounts applicable to the previous year by the lesser of (i) three 26 percent, or (ii) the percentage increase, if any, in the cost of living for the previous 27 calendar year, based on changes in the Portland -Salem, OR -WA Consumer Price 22 Exhibit A • 1 Index for All Urban Consumers for All Items as published by the Bureau of Labor 2 Statistics of the United States Department of Labor. 3 (2) Grantee is responsible for ensuring that its insurance coverage satisfies the increased 4 minimums embodied in this subsection (E). The City reserves the right to request copies 5 of updated certificates of insurance for inspection. 6 (E) In Lieu of Insurance. In lieu of the insurance policies required by this Section 19, 7 Grantee shall have the right to self -insure any and all of the coverage outlined hereunder. 8 If Grantee elects to self -insure, it shall do so in an amount at least equal to the coverage 9 requirements of this Section 19 in a form acceptable to the City. Grantee shall provide 10 proof of self-insurance to the City before this Franchise takes effect and thereafter upon 11 request by the City. 12 SECTION 20. DAMAGE TO FACILITIES. The City shall not be liable for any 13 consequential damages or losses resulting from any damage to or loss of any facility as a 14 result of or in connection with any work by or for the City unless the damage or loss is • 15 the direct and proximate result of willful, intentionally tortious, negligent or malicious 16 acts and/or omissions by the City, its employees, or agents. In such case, the City shall 17 indemnify and hold harmless Grantee against any and all claims, damages, costs and 18 expenses, including attorney's fees and costs, arising from such acts and/or omissions, 19 subject to any applicable limitations in the Oregon Constitution and the Oregon Tort 20 Claims Act. The obligations imposed by this Section are intended to survive termination 21 of this Franchise. 22 SECTION 21. LIMITATION ON PRIVILEGES. All rights and authority granted to 23 Grantee by the City under this Franchise are conditioned on the understanding and 24 agreement that the privileges in the Public ROW shall not be an enhancement of 25 Grantee's properties or an asset or item of ownership of Grantee. 26 SECTION 22. FRANCHISE NOT EXCLUSIVE. This Franchise is not exclusive and 27 shall not be construed to limit the City from granting rights, privileges and authority to 28 other persons similar to or different from those set forth in this Franchise. • 23 Exhibit A I SECTION 23. REMEDIES AND PENALTIES NOT EXCLUSIVE. All remedies 2 and penalties under this Franchise, including termination, are cumulative and not 3 exclusive, and the recovery or enforcement by one available remedy or imposition of a 4 penalty is not a bar to recovery or enforcement by any other remedy or imposition of any 5 other penalty. The City reserves the right to enforce the penal provisions of any City 6 ordinance or resolution and to avail itself to any and all remedies available at law or in 7 equity. Failure to enforce any term, condition or obligation of this Franchise shall not be 8 construed as a waiver of a breach of any term, condition or obligation of this Franchise. 9 A specific waiver of a particular breach of any term, condition or obligation of this 10 Franchise shall not be a waiver of any other, subsequent or future breach of the same or 11 any other tenn, condition or obligation of this Franchise. 12 SECTION 24. SEVERABILITY CLAUSE. If any section, subsection, sentence, 13 clause, phrase, or other portion of this Franchise is, for any reason, held to be invalid or 14 unconstitutional by a court of competent jurisdiction, all portions of this Franchise that 15 are not held to be invalid or unconstitutional shall remain in effect until this Franchise is 16 terminated or expired. After any declaration of invalidity or unconstitutionality of a 17 portion of this Franchise, either party may demand that the other party meet to discuss 18 amending the terms of this Franchise to conform to the original intent of the parties. If 19 the parties are unable to agree on a revised franchise agreement within ninety (90) days 20 after a portion of this Franchise is found to be invalid or unconstitutional, either party 21 may terminate this Franchise by delivering one hundred and eighty (180) days notice to 22 the other party. 23 SECTION 25. ACCEPTANCE. Within thirty (30) days after the ordinance adopting 24 this Franchise is passed by the City Council, Grantee shall file with the City Recorder its 25 written unconditional acceptance or rejection of this Franchise. If Grantee files a 26 rejection, or fails to file a written unconditional acceptance within thirty (30) days, this 27 Franchise shall be null and void. 24 r1 U 25 Exhibit A • 1 SECTION 26. NOTICE. Any notice provided for under this Franchise shall be 2 sufficient if in writing and (1) delivered personally to the following addressee, (2) 3 deposited in the United States mail, postage prepaid, certified mail, return receipt 4 requested, (3) sent by overnight or commercial air courier (such as Federal Express or 5 UPS), or (4) sent by facsimile transmission with verification of receipt, addressed as 6 follows, or to such other address as the receiving party hereafter shall specify in writing: 7 If to the City: City Manager 8 City of West Linn 9 22500 Salamo Road 10 West Linn, Oregon 97068 11 FAX # (503) 650-9041 12 With a copy to: City Attorney 13 City of West Linn Oregon 14 22500 Salamo Road • 15 West Linn, Oregon 97068 16 FAX # (503) 650-9041 17 If to the Grantee: Regional Manager 18 Portland General Electric Company 19 3700 SE 17th Ave 20 Portland, Oregon 97202 21 FAX: (503) 736-5720 22 With a copy to: Portland General Electric Company 23 Attn: General Counsel 24 One World Trade Center, 17th Floor 25 121 SW Salmon Street 26 Portland, Oregon 97204 27 FAX: (503) 464-2200 r1 U 25 Exhibit A 1 Any such notice, communication or delivery shall be deemed effective and delivered 2 upon the earliest to occur of actual delivery, three (3) business days after depositing in the 3 United States mail, one (1) business day after shipment by commercial air courier or the 4 same day as confirmed facsimile transmission (or the first business day thereafter if faxed 5 on a Saturday, Sunday or legal holiday). 6 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties, through their duly authorized representatives, 7 have executed this Franchise as of the dates indicated below. PORTLAND GENERAL ELECTRIC CITY OF WEST LINN COMPANY By: By:— Name: L �(.��'�� Name: Title: t�/�. y �i (�/� rTitle: G (} Aft-ot yt*- Date:�`�,� Date: 26 To: MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL From: Scott H. Neal, City Manager Agenda Item #: VII. A. Action Discussion ❑ Date: August 5, 2015 Information ❑ Subject: Proposed Franchise Agreement With Excel Energy, Ordinance No. 2015-12 Action Requested: Adopt Proposed Ordinance 2015-012 Approving a new Franchise Agreement with Xcel Energy Background: On March 3, 2015, 1 presented the Council with a proposed process and engagement plan for renewal of the Xcel Energy franchise agreement. After seeking input from Council Members and City staff, I prepared a draft franchise agreement, which was considered by the Energy & Environment Commission on May 14. The comments from the EEC were incorporated into the franchise proposal, including the creation of a proposed Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) called the Edina Clean Energy Partnership that is based on a similar MOU between Xcel Energy and the City of Minneapolis. I hosted a two hour public open house on June 25 to enable members of the public with ideas, suggestions or concerns to share them at an early stage in the drafting of the agreement. There were no participants at the open house. Following the open house, I reviewed the proposed franchise agreement with representatives from Xcel Energy on July 2 to seek their initial reactions to the draft franchise agreement. The City Council conducted a public hearing on the draft franchise agreement on July 21 to allow interested members of the public one final opportunity to influence Council Members concerning the proposed franchise agreement. One citizen testified. Following this public hearing, I requested final direction from Council Members on areas of material change in order for the final draft of the ordinance to be prepared for consideration at your August 5, 2105 meeting. The draft franchise agreement reviewed at the July 21 public hearing included five areas of material change compared to the current franchise: 1. 3.8.1 COMPANY SHALL PROVIDE CITY WITH A COMMUNITY -WIDE NETWORK OF FULLY FUNCTIONING STREET LIGHTS. COMPANY SHALL MAKE REASONABLE EFFORTS TO RESPOND AND REPAIR MALFUNCTIONING STREET LIGHTS WITHIN 48 HOURS OF NOTIFICATION BY CITY. 3.8.2 COMPANY SHALL PROVIDE CITY THE LOCATION OF COMPANY OWNED STREET LIGHTS WITHIN THE CITY, TO BE UPDATED AT LEAST ANNUALLY. City of Edina • 4801 W. 506 St. • Edina, MN 55424 • • REPORT 1 RECOMMENDATION Page 2 3. 3.8.3 COMPANY SHALL UPGRADE, AT COMPANY COST, CITY'S NETWORK OF STREET LIGHTS TO LED STREET LIGHTS ON OR BEFORE JANUARY 1, 2018. 4. 3.9.1 COMPANY AGREES THAT THE APPEARANCE OF ITS GROUND AND POLE MOUNTED EQUIPMENT WITHIN CITY PROPERTY, RIGHT-OF-WAY AND EASEMENT SHALL NOT BE ALLOWED TO BECOME VISUALLY DISPLEASING. COMPANY AGREES TO REMEDY VISUALLY DEFECTIVE EQUIPMENT WITHIN 90 DAYS, WEATHER PERMITTING, OF A REQUESTTO REMEDY FROM CITY. S. 9.2.1 ENERGY CONSERVATION FEE. COMPANY AGREES TO ASSESS A $0.50/MONTH CHARGE TO EACH CUSTOMER, REGARDLESS OF CUSTOMER CLASS, AND TO REMIT SUCH AMOUNT TO CITY AT THE SAME TIME AND METHOD AS THE FRANCHISE FEE, FOR THE PURPOSE OF FUNDING CITY'S ENERGY CONSERVATION PROGRAM. ECEP - In addition to the five areas of material change, the Energy & Environment Commission recommended the City enter into a Memorandum of Understanding with Xcel Energy to create the "Edina Clean Energy Partnership". The Edina Clean Energy Partnership (ECEP) is based on a similar agreement that Xcel has with the City of Minneapolis called the Minneapolis Clean Energy Partnership. The ECEP is intended to address a number of supplementary energy issues that cannot be included in the franchise agreement itself. I have included a draft copy of the proposed ECEP with the Council packet materials. Xcel does not wish to have a Clean Energy Partnership with the City of Edina. Xcel believes the Partners In Energy (PIE) program will adequately address the energy issues in the ECEP. • Information: Before I provide a review of the outstanding franchise issues, it is necessary to note a proposed structural change that has evolved in the discussion with Xcel Energy about the franchise agreement. The company has requested that City agree to consider the franchise agreement without the requested changes. The company's strong preference is to make their commitments to the City's requests, where applicable, through a side letter or MOU, and not to incorporate them into the franchise agreement itself. They prefer this method of commitment because they prefer to have the same franchise agreement components in all of their cities. I recommend the City Council accept this request from the company, provided the side letter or MOU is executed by someone at the company who is authorized to honor the company's future commitments to the City. As of the writing of this memorandum for the August 5 Council Packet, the status of the material changes under discussion is as follows: 1. 3.8.1 COMPANY SHALL PROVIDE CITY WITH A COMMUNITY -WIDE NETWORK OF FULLY FUNCTIONING STREET LIGHTS. COMPANY SHALL MAKE REASONABLE EFFORTS TO RESPOND AND REPAIR MALFUNCTIONING STREET LIGHTS WITHIN 48 HOURS OF NOTIFICATION BY CITY. Xcel: The company requests this provision be modified to: Company shall provide City. with a community -wide network of fully functioning street lights. Company shall make reasonable efforts to respond and repair malfunctioning street lights within two business days of notification by City. 0 SHN: I recommend the Council approve the requested amendment. REPORT / RECOMMENDATION Page 3 2. 3.8.2 COMPANY SHALL PROVIDE CITY THE LOCATION OF COMPANY OWNED STREET LIGHTS WITHIN THE CITY, TO BE UPDATED AT LEASTANNUALLY. Xcel: The company requests this item be withdrawn from the agreement because they are already meeting this standard. SHN: I recommend the Council accept the company's request to withdraw this item. According to City staff, Xcel's performance in this area has been very good and dependable. 3. 3.8.3 COMPANY SHALL UPGRADE, AT COMPANY COST, CITY'S NETWORK OF STREET LIGHTS TO LED STREET LIGHTS ON OR BEFORE JANUARY 1, 2018. Xcel: The company does not agree to this request. SHN: I recommend the City continue to insist on a stronger commitment from the company on when the LED upgrade project will be completed. I have proposed the following alternative language to the company, which the company does not agree to: The company agrees to substantially complete an LED upgrade of the City's network of cobra head street lights, at the company's cost, on or before December 31, 2018, provided the company receives approval from the Minnesota Public Utilities Commission (PUC) for the upgrade plan on or before March 31, 2016. If the PUC does not approve the company's plan on or before March 31, 2016, the company agrees to complete the LED street light upgrade project in Edina within 24 months of the PUC's approval of the plan. . The company's counter -proposal was: The company agrees to substantially complete an LED upgrade of the City's company-owned network of cobra head street lights, at the company's cost. The Company agrees to make every reasonable effort to complete the LED conversion of cobra head street lights on or before December 31, 2018, provided the company receives approval from the Minnesota Public Utilities Commission (PUC) for the upgrade plan on or before March 31, 2016. The company agrees to inform the City of any delays that arise that may result in the LED upgrades taking place beyond December 31, 2018. 4. 3.9.1 COMPANY AGREES THAT THE APPEARANCE OF ITS GROUND AND POLE MOUNTED EQUIPMENT WITHIN CITY PROPERTY, RIGHT-OF-WAY AND EASEMENT SHALL NOT BE ALLOWED TO BECOME VISUALLY DISPLEASING. COMPANY AGREES TO REMEDY VISUALLY DEFECTIVE EQUIPMENT WITHIN 90 DAYS, WEATHER PERMITTING, OF A REQUEST TO REMEDY FROM CITY. SHN: The company has resisted this request from the start of our discussion. I have offered them the following alternative language: The company agrees to maintain its ground equipment in well maintained condition. The company agrees to make reasonable efforts to respond to the City's requests to repair and maintain the aesthetic appearance of its ground based equipment. The company agrees to record and log complaints and repair information regarding its ground based equipment, and to provide the • information and confer with the City regarding the company's quality and timeliness of the company's response. REPORT/ RECOMMENDATION Page 4 Xcel: The company does not agree to this request and has countered with the following: The company agrees to maintain its ground equipment in well maintained condition. The company agrees to make reasonable efforts to respond to the City's requests to repair and maintain the aesthetic appearance of its ground based equipment. 5. 9.2.1 ENERGY CONSERVATION FEE. COMPANY AGREES TO ASSESS A $0.50/MONTH CHARGE TO EACH CUSTOMER, REGARDLESS OF CUSTOMER CLASS, AND TO REMIT SUCH AMOUNT TO CITY AT THE SAME TIME AND METHOD AS THE FRANCHISE FEE, FOR THE PURPOSE OF FUNDING CITY'S ENERGY CONSERVATION PROGRAM. Xcel: The company agrees to this request to increase the franchise by $0.50/customer/month, but cannot agree, due to PUC regulations, to label the franchise fee increase as an "Energy Conservation Fee" on the customer bill. The company also requests that the same $0.50/customer/month franchise fee be applied to the customers of CenterPoint Energy. SHN: I recommend the City accept the company's agreement on this request, including the request to apply the franchise fee increase to CenterPoint Energy customers. If approved by Council, staff will prepare a separate franchise fee ordinance for both utilities for the consideration by the Council at your August 18 meeting. 6. The City proposed the creation of a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) establishing the Edina Clean Energy Partnership (ECEP). The company proposed an alternative called the Partners In Energy (PIE) program. The City and the company have executed an MOU to create the Edina Partners in Energy program, which negates the need for the proposed ECEP. I recommend the City Council withdraw the request to create the ECEP Attachment NOTE: As of press time for the Council Packet, the company and I are still engaged in active discussions about the outstanding issues. I expect to update this memorandum with new information prior to our August 5 Council meeting. 0 ORDINANCE NO. 2015-12 0 CITY OF EDINA, HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA AN ORDINANCE GRANTING TO NORTHERN STATES POWER COMPANY, A MINNESOTA CORPORATION, D/B/A XCEL ENERGY, ITS SUCCESSORS AND ASSIGNS, PERMISSION TO CONSTRUCT, OPERATE, REPAIR AND MAINTAIN IN THE CITY OF EDINA, MINNESOTA, AN ELECTRIC DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM AND TRANSMISSION LINES, INCLUDING NECESSARY POLES, LINES, FIXTURES AND APPURTENANCES, FOR THE FURNISHING OF ELECTRIC ENERGY TO THE CITY, ITS INHABITANTS, AND OTHERS, AND TO USE THE PUBLIC GROUNDS AND PUBLIC WAYS OF THE CITY FOR SUCH PURPOSES. THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDINA, HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA, ORDAINS: SECTION 1. DEFINITIONS. For purposes of this Ordinance, the following capitalized terms listed in alphabetical order shall have the following meanings: 1.1 City. The City of Edina, County of Hennepin, State of Minnesota. 1.2 City Utility System. Facilities used for providing non -energy related public utility service owned or operated by City or agency thereof, including sewer and water service, but excluding facilities for providing heating, lighting or other forms of energy. 1.3 Commission. The Minnesota Public Utilities Commission, or any successor agency or agencies, including an agency of the federal government, which preempts all, or part of the authority to regulate electric retail rates now vested in the Minnesota Public Utilities Commission. 1.4 Company. Northern States Power Company, a Minnesota corporation, d/b/a Xcel Energy, its successors and assigns. 1.5 Electric Facilities. Electric transmission and distribution towers, poles, lines, guys, anchors, conduits, fixtures, and necessary appurtenances owned or operated by Company for the purpose of providing electric energy for public use. 1.6 Notice. A written notice served by one party on the other party referencing one or more provisions of this Ordinance. Notice to Company shall be mailed to the General Counsel, 414 Nicollet Mall, 5t' Floor, Minneapolis, MN 55401. Notice to the City shall be mailed to the City Administrator, City Hall, 481 West 50th Street, Edina, MN 55424. Either party may change its respective address for the purpose of this Ordinance by written notice to the other party. 1.7 Public Ground. Land owned by the City for park, open space or similar purpose, which is held for use in common by the public. Ordinance No. 2015-12 Page 2 • 1.8 Public Way. Any street, alley, walkway or other public right-of-way within the City. SECTION 2. ADOPTION OF FRANCHISE. 2.1 Grant of Franchise. City hereby grants Company, for a period of 20 years from the date passed and approved by the City, the right to transmit and furnish electric energy for light, heat, power and other purposes for public and private use within and through the limits of the City as its boundaries now exist or as they may be extended in the future. For these purposes, Company may construct, operate, repair and maintain Electric Facilities in, on, over, under and across the Public Grounds and Public Ways of City, subject to the provisions of this Ordinance. Company may do all reasonable things necessary or customary to accomplish these purposes, subject, however, to such reasonable regulations as may be imposed by the City pursuant to ordinance and to the further provisions of this franchise agreement 2.2 Effective Date; Written Acceptance. This franchise agreement shall be in force and effect from and after passage of this Ordinance, its acceptance by Company, and its publication as required by law. The City, by Council resolution, may revoke this franchise agreement if Company does not file a written acceptance with the City within 90 days after publication. 2.3 Service and Rates. The service to be provided and the rates to be charged by Company for electric service in City are subject to the jurisdiction of the Commission. The area • within the City in which Company may provide electric service is subject to the provisions of Minnesota Statutes, Section 21613.40. 2.4 Publication Expense. The expense of publication of this Ordinance will be paid by City and reimbursed to City by Company. 2.5 Dispute Resolution. If either party asserts that the other party is in default in the performance of any obligation hereunder, the complaining party shall notify the other party of the default and the desired remedy. The notification shall be written. Representatives of the parties must promptly meet and attempt in good faith to negotiate a resolution of the dispute. If the dispute is not resolved within 30 days of the written notice, the parties may jointly select a mediator to facilitate further discussion. The parties will equally share the fees and expenses of this mediator. If a mediator is not used, or if the parties are unable to resolve the dispute within 30 days after first meeting with the selected mediator, either party may commence an action in District Court to interpret and enforce this franchise or for such other relief as may be permitted by law or equity for breach of contract, or either party may take any other action permitted by law. SECTION 3. LOCATION, OTHER REGULATIONS. 3.1 Location of Facilities. Electric Facilities shall be located, constructed and maintained • so as not to interfere with the safety and convenience of ordinary travel along and over Public Ways and so as not to disrupt normal operation of any City Utility System previously installed therein. Electric Facilities shall be located on Public Grounds as determined by the City. Ordinance No. 2015-12 Page 3 Company's construction, reconstruction, operation, repair, maintenance and location of Electric • Facilities shall be subject to permits if required by separate ordinance and to other reasonable regulations of the City to the extent not inconsistent with the terms of this franchise agreement. Company may abandon underground Electric Facilities in place, provided at the City's request, Company will remove abandoned metal or concrete encased conduit interfering with a City improvement project, but only to the extent such conduit is uncovered by excavation as part of the City improvement project. 3.2 Field Locations. Company shall provide field locations for its underground Electric Facilities within City consistent with the requirements of Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 216D. 3.3 Street Openings. Company shall not open or disturb any Public Ground or Public Way for any purpose without first having obtained a permit from the City, if required by a separate ordinance, for which the City may impose a reasonable fee. Permit conditions imposed on Company shall not be more burdensome than those imposed on other utilities for similar facilities or work. Company may, however, open and disturb any Public Ground or Public Way without permission from the City where an emergency exists requiring the immediate repair of Electric Facilities. In such event Company shall notify the City by telephone to the office designated by the City as soon as practicable. Not later than the second working day thereafter, Company shall obtain any required permits and pay any required fees. 3.4 Restoration. After undertaking any work requiring the opening of any Public Ground or Public Way, Company shall restore the same, including paving and its foundation, to as • good a condition as formerly existed, and shall maintain any paved surface in good condition for one year thereafter. The work shall be completed as promptly as weather permits, and if Company shall not promptly perform and complete the work, remove all dirt, rubbish, equipment and material, and put the Public Ground or Public Way in the said condition, the City shall have, after demand to Company to cure and the passage of a reasonable period of time following the demand, but not to exceed five days, the right to make the restoration at the expense of Company. Company shall pay to the City the cost of such work done for or performed by the City. This remedy shall be in addition to any other remedy available to the City for noncompliance with this Section 3.4, but the City hereby waives any requirement for Company to post a construction performance bond, certificate of insurance, letter of credit or any other form of security or assurance that may be required, under a separate existing or future ordinance of the City, of a person or entity obtaining the City's permission to install, replace or maintain facilities in a Public Way. 3.5 Avoid Damage to Electric Facilities. Nothing in this Ordinance relieves any person from liability arising out of the failure to exercise reasonable care to avoid damaging Electric Facilities while performing any activity. 3.6 Notice of Improvements. The City must give Company reasonable notice of plans for improvements to Public Grounds or Public Ways where the City has reason to believe that Electric Facilities may affect or be affected by the improvement. The notice must contain: (i) the nature and character of the improvements, (ii) the Public Grounds and Public Ways upon which the improvements are to be made, (iii) the extent of the improvements, (iv) the time when the • City will start the work, and (v) if more than one Public Ground or Public Way is involved, the Ordinance No. 2015-12 Page 4 • order in which the work is to proceed. The notice must be given to Company a sufficient length of time in advance of the actual commencement of the work to permit Company to make any necessary additions, alterations or repairs to its Electric Facilities. 3.7 Shared Use of Poles. Company shall make space available on its poles or towers for City fire, water utility, police or other City facilities upon terms and conditions acceptable to Company whenever such use will not interfere with the use of such poles or towers by Company, by another electric utility, by a telephone utility, or by any cable television company or other form of communication company. In addition, the City shall pay for any added cost incurred by Company because of such use by City. SECTION 4. RELOCATIONS. 4.1 Relocation of Electric Facilities in Public Ways. If the City determines to vacate a Public Way for a City improvement project, or at City's cost to grade, regrade, or change the line of any Public Way, or construct or reconstruct any City Utility System in any Public Way, it may order Company to relocate its Electric Facilities located therein if relocation is reasonably necessary to accomplish the City's proposed public improvement. Except as provided in Section 4.3, Company shall relocate its Electric Facilities at its own expense. The City shall give Company reasonable notice of plans to vacate for a City improvement project, or to grade, regrade, or change the line of any Public Way or to construct or reconstruct any City Utility System. If a relocation is ordered within five years of a prior relocation of the same Electric Facilities, which • was made at Company expense, the City shall reimburse Company for non -betterment costs on a time and material basis, provided that if a subsequent relocation is required because of the extension of a City Utility System to a previously unserved area, Company may be required to make the subsequent relocation at its expense. Nothing in this Ordinance requires Company to relocate, remove, replace or reconstruct at its own expense its Electric Facilities where such relocation, removal, replacement or reconstruction is solely for the convenience of the City and is not reasonably necessary for the construction or reconstruction of a Public Way or City Utility System or other City improvement. 4.2 Relocation of Electric Facilities in Public Ground. City may require Company, at Company's expense, to relocate or remove its Electric Facilities from Public Ground upon a finding by City that the Electric Facilities have become or will become a substantial impairment to the existing or proposed public use of the Public Ground. 4.3 Projects with Federal Funding. City shall not order Company to remove or relocate its Electric Facilities when a Public Way is vacated, improved or realigned for a right- of-way project or any other project which is financially subsidized in whole or in part by the Federal Government or any agency thereof, unless the reasonable non -betterment costs of such relocation are first paid to Company. The City is obligated to pay Company only for those portions of its relocation costs for which City has received federal funding specifically allocated for relocation costs in the amount requested by the Company, which allocated funding the City shall specifically request. Relocation, removal or rearrangement of any • Company Electric Facilities made necessary because of a federally -aided highway project shall be governed by the provisions of Minnesota Statutes, Section 161.46, as supplemented or amended. It is understood that the rights herein granted to Company are valuable rights. Ordinance No. 2015-12 Page 5 4.4 No Waiver. The provisions of this franchise apply only to facilities constructed in • reliance on a franchise from the City and shall not be construed to waive or modify any rights obtained by Company for installations within a Company right-of-way acquired by easement or prescriptive right before the applicable Public Ground or Public Way was established, or Company's rights under state or county permit. SECTION S. TREE TRIMMING. Company may trim all trees and shrubs in the Public Grounds and Public Ways of City to the extent Company finds necessary to avoid interference with the proper construction, operation, repair and maintenance of any Electric Facilities installed hereunder, provided that Company shall save the City harmless from any liability arising therefrom, and subject to permit or other reasonable regulation by the City. SECTION 6. INDEMNIFICATION. 6.1 Indemnity of City. Company shall indemnify, keep and hold the City free and harmless from any and all liability on account of injury to persons or damage to property occasioned by the construction, maintenance, repair, inspection, the issuance of permits, or the operation of the Electric Facilities located in the Public Grounds and Public Ways. The City shall not be indemnified for losses or claims occasioned through its own negligence except for losses or claims arising out of or alleging the City's negligence as to the issuance of permits for, or inspection • of, Company's plans or work. The City shall not be indemnified if the injury or damage results from the performance in a proper manner, of acts reasonably deemed hazardous by Company, and such performance is nevertheless ordered or directed by City after notice of Company's determination. 6.2 Defense of City. In the event a suit is brought against the City under circumstances where this agreement to indemnify applies, Company at its sole cost and expense shall defend the City in such suit if written notice thereof is promptly given to Company within a period wherein Company is not prejudiced by lack of such notice. If Company is required to indemnify and defend, it will thereafter have control of such litigation, but Company may not settle such litigation without the consent of the City, which consent shall not be unreasonably withheld. This section is not, as to third parties, a waiver of any defense or immunity otherwise available to the City and Company, in defending any action on behalf of the City, shall be entitled to assert in any action every defense or immunity that the City could assert in its own behalf. SECTION 7. VACATION OF PUBLIC WAYS. The City shall give Company at least two weeks prior written notice of a proposed vacation of a Public Way. Except where required for a City improvement project, the vacation of any Public Way, after the installation of Electric Facilities, shall not operate to deprive Company of its rights to operate and maintain such Electric Facilities, until the reasonable cost of relocating the same and the loss and expense resulting from such relocation are first paid to Company. In no • case, however, shall City be liable to Company for failure to specifically preserve a right-of-way under Minnesota Statutes, Section 160.29. Ordinance No. 2015-12 Page 6 • SECTION 8. CHANGE IN FORM OF GOVERNMENT. Any change in the form of government of the City shall not affect the validity of this Ordinance. Any governmental unit succeeding the City shall, without the consent of Company, succeed to all of the rights and obligations of the City provided in this Ordinance. SECTION 9. FRANCHISE FEE. 9.1 Fee Schedule. During the term of the franchise hereby granted, and in lieu of any permit or other fees being imposed on Company, the City may impose on Company a franchise fee set forth in a separate ordinance from each customer in the designated Company Customer Class. 9.2 Separate Ordinance. The franchise fee shall be imposed by a separate ordinance duly adopted by the City Council, which ordinance shall not be adopted until at least 90 days after written notice enclosing such proposed ordinance has been served upon Company by certified mail. The fee shall not become effective until the beginning of a Company billing month at least 90 days after written notice enclosing such adopted ordinance has been served upon Company by certified mail. Section 2.5 shall constitute the sole remedy for solving disputes between Company and the City in regard to the interpretation of, or enforcement of, the separate ordinance. No action by the City to implement a separate ordinance will commence until this Ordinance is effective. A separate ordinance which imposes a lesser • franchise fee on the residential class of customers than the maximum amount set forth in Section 9.1 above shall not be effective against Company unless the fee imposed on each other customer classification is reduced proportionately in the same or greater amount per class as the reduction represented by the lesser fee on the residential class. 9.3 Terms Defined. For the purpose of this Section 9, the following definitions apply: 9.3.1 "Customer Class" shall refer to the classes listed on the Fee Schedule and as defined or determined in Company's electric tariffs on file with the Commission. 9.3.2 "Fee Schedule" refers to the schedule in Section 9.1 setting forth the various customer classes from which a franchise fee would be collected if a separate ordinance were implemented immediately after the effective date of this franchise agreement. The Fee Schedule in the separate ordinance may include new Customer Class added by Company to its electric tariffs after the effective date of this franchise agreement. 9.4 Collection of the Fee. The franchise fee shall be payable quarterly and shall be based on the amount collected by Company during complete billing months during the period for which payment is to be made by imposing a surcharge equal to the designated franchise fee for the • applicable customer classification in all customer billings for electric service in each class. The payment shall be due the last business day of the month following the period for which the Ordinance No. 2015-12 Page 7 payment is made. The franchise fee may be changed by ordinance from time to time; however, • each change shall meet the same notice requirements and not occur more often than annually and no change shall require a collection from any customer for electric service in excess of the amounts specifically permitted by this Section 9. The time and manner of collecting the franchise fee is subject to the approval of the Commission. No franchise fee shall be payable by Company if Company is legally unable to first collect an amount equal to the franchise fee from its customers in each applicable class of customers by imposing a surcharge in Company's applicable rates for electric service. Company may pay the City the fee based upon the surcharge billed subject to subsequent reductions to account for uncollectibles, refunds and correction of erroneous billings. Company agrees to make its records available for inspection by the City at reasonable times provided that the City and its designated representative agree in writing not to disclose any information which would indicate the amount paid by any identifiable customer or customers or any other information regarding identified customers. 9.5 Equivalent Fee Requirement. The separate ordinance imposing the fee shall not be effective against Company unless it lawfully imposes and the City monthly or more often collects a fee or tax of the same or greater equivalent amount on the receipts from sales of energy within the City by any other energy supplier, provided that, as to such a supplier, the City has the authority to require a franchise fee or to impose a tax. The "same or greater equivalent amount" shall be measured, if practicable, by comparing amounts collected as a franchise fee from each similar customer, or by comparing, as to similar customers the percentage of the annual bill represented by the amount collected for franchise fee purposes. The franchise fee or tax shall be applicable to energy sales for any energy use related to heating, cooling or lighting, or to run • machinery and appliances, but shall not apply to energy sales for the purpose of providing fuel for vehicles. If the Company specifically consents in writing to a franchise or separate ordinance collecting or failing to collect a fee from another energy supplier in contravention of this Section 9.5, the foregoing conditions will be waived to the extent of such written consent. SECTION 10. PROVISIONS OF ORDINANCE. 10.1 Severability. Every section, provision, or part of this Ordinance is declared separate from every other section, provision, or part and if any section, provision, or part shall be held invalid, it shall not affect any other section, provision, or part. Where a provision of any other City ordinance conflicts with the provisions of this Ordinance, the provisions of this Ordinance shall prevail. 10.2 Limitation on Applicability. This Ordinance constitutes a franchise agreement between the City and Company as the only parties, and no provision of this franchise shall in any way inure to the benefit of any third person (including the public at large) so as to constitute any such person as a third party beneficiary of the agreement or of any one or more of the terms hereof, or otherwise give rise to any cause of action in any person not a party hereto. SECTION 11. AMENDMENT PROCEDURE. Either party to this franchise agreement may at any time propose that the agreement be • amended to address a subject of concern and the other parry will consider whether it agrees that Ordinance No. 2015-12 Page 8 the amendment is mutually appropriate. If an amendment is agreed upon, this Ordinance may be amended at any time by the City passing a subsequent ordinance declaring the provisions of the amendment, which amendatory ordinance shall become effective upon the filing of Company's written consent thereto with the City Clerk within 90 days after the date of final passage by the City of the amendatory ordinance. SECTION 12. PREVIOUS FRANCHISES SUPERSEDED. This franchise supersedes any previous electric franchise granted to Company or its predecessor. First Reading: Second Reading- Published: eadingPublished: Attest Debra A. Mangen, City Clerk James B. Hovland, Mayor Please publish in the Edina Sun Current on Send two affidavits of publication Bill to Edina City Clerk 0 Heather Branigin From: Ross Plaetzer <ross@employersolutionsgroup.com> • Sent: Monday, August 03, 2015 12:30 PM To: jhovland@ krausehovland.com'; 'mai l@EdinaMN.gov'; 'kstaunton@Edina MN.gov'; 'rstewart@Edina MN.gov'; 'mbrindle@comcast.net'; 'swensonannl@gmail.com' Cc: Cary Teague; Scott H. Neal; Ross Bintner Subject: Request for Delay in Consideration of Xcel Franchise Agreement Attachments: grimes 1 jpg; curve 2jpg; curve ljpg The previous email had too many photos and was rejected by some recipients' email systems. Thanks. Ross ROSS PLAETZER I CLIENT SERVICES DIRECTOR EMPLOYER SOLUTIONS GROUP I EDINA, MN T: 952.767.8060 1 CELL: 612.991.8896 1 Main: 952.835.1288 From: Ross Plaetzer Sent: Monday, August 03, 2015 11:52 AM To: 'jhovland@krausehovland.com'; 'mail @EdinaMN.gov'; 'kstaunton@EdinaMN.gov'; 'rstewart@EdinaMN.gov'; 'mbrindle@comcast.net'; 'swensonannl@gmail. com' Cc: 'Cary Teague'; 'Scott H. Neal'; 'RBintner@EdinaMN.gov' Subject: Request for Delay in Consideration of Xcel Franchise Agreement Here are some photos of Street -side utilities in the NE Edina area. ROSS PLAETZER I CELL: 612.991.8896 1 • 'K77S G r , iK�+ �� ...,fes � *.. 'tom' • Com• :t , .i Si y 3 Y _�; � Y♦e. ,« � + mak, � WA +!r J y�. '.�'4{� } 7a► '-'iti��r .:'� � 'ttan,. d � / jj• 3 Y -.v • Y .ti a n i From: Jerry O'Brien[maiIto: e.g.obrienCabegoholdings.com] • Sent: Monday, August 03, 2015 12:00 PM To: James Hovland Cc: 11,6100.@. y hno.corn Subject: fyi, church construction Hi Jim, Just dropping you a personal note (so you can quote us if necessary) to let you know that Lisa and I support ECLC's variance requests (coming up on Wednesday). As you know, we aren't members of their church, but we want to give them whatever support they need to be able to thrive in their current location. They have always been great neighbors and try really hard to accommodate everybody's perspective or concerns. Best, Jerry & Lisa • Heather Branigin OlFrorn: Mary Kosters <mkosters@unimaticinc.com> Sent: Monday, August 03, 2015 3:58 PM To: Edina Mail Cc: Kevin Staunton; Robert Stewart; Mary Brindle Subject: Edina City Council -Dave & Buster's sign on wall of Southdale Good Afternoon - Could you verify that the sign that is painted on our beloved Southdale meets the Size restrictions for a billboard in Edina. The Dave & Buster's painted sign - It would be a very sad day in Edina –the Southdale Area if all the buildings were allowed To paint from ground to ceiling their advertisement—which this is –much more then Just a sign on a building ---this is a billboard across the entire wall of a building - Next thing we will have is flashing lights - If we allow Dave &Buster's to do this—what is to keep Macy's and all the others From getting their paint cans out- the entire Southdale area would be covered in paint Just to advertise their locations - Please control these obnoxious signs from bleeding into our community - There must be a zoning law controlling the size of these advertisements. Which they are - Advertisements. Please enforce it - Thank you Wary (Donnelly) Kosters -- Edina resident of 55 years- rr i S • Heather Branigin From: Eugene Persha <epersha@aol.com> • Sent: Monday, August 03, 2015 4:21 PM To: Edina Mail Subject: City Council Members Edina City Council Members: As time moves on, the more I get concerned about what is happening at Grandview. We are once again in our intermittent blackout phase of communications with Bill Neuendorf. I think since the last two major Grandview study/formulation groups(Grandview 1 and Grandview II), there has not been any real solid renderings of what is actually shaping on Grandview. If you just think about it for a bit, after all this time, we have yet to see a real architectual depiction of the "real' Grandview I presume the schematic drawings(master plan) will suddenly just drop out of the sky. This will be the great compilation, supposedly, of what was heard, given, or inputed somehow. What is wrong with this whole thing? It basically is done behind closed doors, and done entirely with Franshuh and friends along with the Economic Development Director. I find this an utterly narrow and skewed design framework since there is no input from any of the Grandview I or II groups for consultation or reaction. And there is even more so, no communication or interaction with these groups. This is hardly inclusive. It is very apparent Mr. Neuendorf is only interested in reaction with Council members. That is only the feedback he wants. The outlying public is not in the picture. This whole process, and the recent checking off with certain people, did not make this a reflective process of what has taken place, nor is it representative of our interested citizens. I have asked for at the outset, that we need at least three different architectual renderings of building configurations. We will not get it. We will get the "one" that will be dropped from above as a take it or leave it. This will be after five plus years! There has been resistance from the very beginning to have a few of our citizens sit at the design table for input from the community. There was really very, very little interaction • of initiating feedback through verbal one on one interaction with our community members. Would anyone dare to ask people individually, "What do you think?" Now, we have to trust people on faith that this is the best. It can hardy be the case since the shades have been pulled down so long on this hidden process. And Member Staunton, you of all people who have been part of this process(Grandview 1) just sit and see no role for our former committee members to play, if only for deference to those who committed so much time and effort to this whole process? I have not seen such a nebulous process like this where a developer really supplants the people and really has not caught the spirit of this whole thing. Does anyone really care about our views? Really, do we any input on the finished design? The process is so insular, secret, and unengaging! If people complain, as they likely will, they have every right to question the process which is most likely worse than the positioned buildings for the site. We need some hope out here! Gene Persha Heather Branigin Worn: LAURA HOPE MELTON <hopemelton@hotmail.com> Sent: Tuesday, August 04, 2015 9:31 AM To: James Hovland Subject: Simple Message Dear Mayor Holland I just wanted to say that it was good to see you last night, and thanks for that great smile of yours! In spite of our occasional differences of opinion, I think you are providing excellent leadership as mayor. I'm also, on the whole, proud and pleased with the work of our City Council. I feel so fortunate to be living in this great city. Finally, I hope you run again --although I know it's not an easy job. You do it with intelligence, integrity, and grace. Sincerely, Hope 0 Heather Branigin From: Carol Retherford <carolreth@gmail.com> • Sent: Tuesday, August 04, 2015 10:46 AM To: James Hovland; Mary Brindle; Kevin Staunton; Robert Stewart; swensonannl @gmail.com; Ross Bintner; Jessica Van Der Werff Subject: Re: Southwest Ponds in Edina Do you know what is causing the terrible smell? We cant sit on our deck because our eyes get very irritated. Is there a possibility of mold spores or anything that would be harmful to children playing in the yards. On Sun, Jul 26, 2015 at 1:50 PM, Carol Retherford <carolreth gmail.com> wrote: City Council, Environmental Engineering Department, and Water Resources, My name is John Retherford and my wife, Carol, and I have resided at 7606 Delaney Boulevard for over twenty five years. When we first moved into our house the ponds behind us were clean, abundant with wildlife, and used by neighbors with canoes and paddleboats. Today those ponds are a moat of green sludge, barren of wildlife, and, at times, with an odor so foul that it is unpleasant to be outside. I have a concern that the ponds may be unhealthy as well. We actually sprayed Lysol on our porch last night to try to combat the smell but were forced inside. Several years ago the residents adjacent to the ponds formed a coalition to meet with Edina's City Council to determine if anything could be done to improve the pond quality. We were informed that the city of Edina couldn't implement a pond improvement program since the ponds drain into Nine Mile Creek. I am aware that the City implemented a Lake and Pond Management Policy in 2014. It is also my understanding* that a recent hire by the City has expertise in improving the quality of ponds. Before I start the process of forming a lake association or lake group, I would like to know if the City of Edina has jurisdiction over the ponds in question. My wife and I would welcome the council to have snacks and beverages out on our porch so you can experience this problem first hand. Thank you for your time and consideration, John Retherford Heather Branigin OlFrom: Jean Colwell <jeancolwell13@gmail.com> Sent: Tuesday, August 04, 2015 3:54 PM To: Mary Brindle; James Hovland; Kevin Staunton; Robert Stewart Subject: SCLC expansion City Council, My name is Jean Colwell and I live at 5401 Oaklawn Ave South. I am writing to you about the expansion of The Edina Community Lutheran Church. I ask that you not rubber stamp the recommendation that will be presented to you at tomorrow evenings City Council meeting. There are many aspects of this expansion that I am opposed to such as the removal of old growth trees along the creek. My greatest opposition though has to do with the tear down of the former parsonage to make a parking lot. This parking lot is going to greatly impact the property values of the homes directly around it and cause traffic congestion on 54th street. Please be considerate of the Edina Citizens you represent! Jean Colwell C 0 Heather Branigin From: Gubrud Robert <regubrudl@aim.com> is Sent: Tuesday, August 04, 2015 10:51 PM To: James Hovland Subject: EEC Community Solar Gardent Advisory Mayor Hovland Reason for this email is to encourage you, the City Council, and City manager Scott Neal to approve the Energy and Environment Commission's Advisory for the installation of solar panels on the City maintenance building. Purpose is to provide Edina residents with the opportunity to participate in utilizing solar energy. This would also demonstrate that Edina is a leader in the Metro area in hosting a Community Solar Garden project. As a resident of Edina for 45 years, we have been impressed by our City Council and Staff as visionaries. This has often meant departing from business as usual to venture into unchartered but progressive territory. The Community Solar Garden Project is another opportunity. My intention as an Edina resident has been to participate and support Minnesota's Renewal Energy Standard. We therefore signed on to Wind Source. Given our interest in renewable energy, we had an assessment of our roof for a solar panel installation. Unfortunately, our solar exposure is unsatisfactory, so we were unable to install solar panels. However, the contractor suggested we investigate Community Solar. My understanding is the EEC is requesting the City Council to play a leadership role in approving the Advisory for a Community Solar Garden Project for Edina residents. This would allow City staff to prepare an RFP which would provide• an indication of the viability of implementing the Solar Garden Project on the City's terms and would not commit the City to take action. It would offer the City the opportunity to thoroughly examine the options and implications before making a decision to proceed. Thanks for your consideration, great spirit and dedication to the vitality of our Edina community. Bob Gubrud 4421 Ellsworth Drive Edina, MN 55435 40 WCenterftint, � Energy August 3, 2015 Deur Community Leader, 505 Nicollet Mall PO Box 59038 Minneapolis, MN 55459-0038 I am writing to inform you that on August 3, 2015, CenterPoint Energy filed with the Minnesota Public Utilities Commission to change its rates for utility distribution service. A rate filing is the regulatory process that public utilities must follow to formally change rates and services for their customers. This filing will affect the rates paid by all of CenterPoint Energy's more than 824,000 customers. The process for changing our rates will take about one year, with interim (temporary) rates implemented on October 2, • 2015, and final rates implemented in 2016. For your information, enclosed is a news release covering sorne of the basic information about our filing. Please contact me if you have any questions or would like additional information about the filing. Information is available at our website at CenterPointEnergy.com/RateCase. Sincerely, Christe Singleton District Director 612-861-8686 Enc. 0 i �►rterP�ir#o Fn For Immediate Release For more information contact Becca Virden Phone 612,321.4879 Pager 612.538.1234 Page 1 of 2 CenterPoint Energy files to change natural gas distribution rates for customers in Minnesota Capital investments for system safety and reliability are primary drivers for proposed rate change MINNEAPOLIS August 3, 2015- CenterPoint Energy today filed an application with the Minnesota Public Utilities Commission (MPUC) to change the company's natural gas distribution rates. If approved, the new rates would generate approximately $54 million or 6 percent in additional revenue on an annual basis. The effect on individual monthly bills will vary depending on natural gas use. If approved, the net impact of the new rates will increase the average residential customer's bill by about $5 per month. "Our significant investments, such as our ongoing pipeline replacement programs, maintain the safety and reliability of our natural gas system and benefit our customers and communities," said Joe Vortherms, division vice president of CenterPoint Energy's regional gas operations. "These capital investments, which are the primary reasons for this proposed increase, help ensure that we have a modernized, technologically advanced natural gas system that will continue to meet the needs of customers now and in the future." This filing seeks approval to change the distribution charge on a customer's natural gas bill, which makes up about 40 to 50 percent of the total bill and covers the cost of distributing natural gas. The filing does not apply to the cost of natural gas, which is the wholesale price the company pays for natural gas, and makes up about 50 to 60 percent of the bill. The wholesale price of natural gas changes monthly depending on market prices and is passed on directly to customers with no mark-up. The proposed change affects two components that make up the distribution charge portion of a customer's bill: First, CenterPoint Energy is proposing to increase the monthly Basic Charge for residential customers from $9.50 to $11.50 a month. Second, the company is proposing to increase the Delivery Charge from the current $0.18977 per therm (which includes the $0.00519 per therm for the Gas Affordability Service Program) to $0.22405 per therm. The principal reasons CenterPoint Energy is proposing to change base rates are to: • Recover the company's significant capital expenditures in its Minnesota service area. In accordance with natural gas pipeline safety and integrity regulations, these capital expenditures are necessary to maintain a safe and reliable system, to respond to significant public improvement requirements on the system and to modernize the system with technology improvements. -more- • • • LJ g,yuCevinterPoint. Enerpy For Immediate Release For more information contact Becca Virden Phone 612.321.4879 Pager 612.538,1234 Page 2 of 2 Establish rates for all customers groups that better reflect the actual costs of providing service to those customers. Achieve an overall revenue recovery level that meets the company's financial objectives. The MPUC is generally allowed 10 months to issue a final decision on general rate filings, however, if the MPUC approves, interim (temporary) rates are expected to take effect on Oct. 2, 2015, and will be in place until a final decision is made. If the final rates are lower than interim rates, CenterPoint Energy will refund customers the difference including interest. If final rates are higher than interim rates, customers will receive no additional charges for natural gas used while interim rates were in effect. Customers with questions about the proposed change to natural gas distribution rates can call CenterPoint Energy at 612-372-4727 or toll-free 800-245-2377, or visit the company's website at CenterPointEnergy.com/RateCase. Additionally, public hearings will be held to provide customers and other interested parties the opportunity to comment on the rate request, followed by formal hearings at the MPUC. CenterPoint Energy, Inc., headquartered in Houston, Texas, is a domestic energy delivery company that includes electric transmission & distribution, natural gas distribution and energy services operations. The company serves more than five million metered customers primarily in Arkansas, Louisiana, Minnesota, Mississippi, Oklahoma, and Texas. The company also owns a 55.4 percent limited partner interest in Enable Midstream Partners, a publicly traded master limited partnership it jointly controls with OGE Energy Corp., which owns, operates and develops natural gas and crude oil infrastructure assets. With more than 7,400 employees, CenterPoint Energy and its predecessor companies have been in business for more than 140 years. For more information, visit the website at CenterPointEnergy com. This news release includes forward-looking statements within the meaning of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. These forward-looking statements are based upon assumptions of management which are believed to be reasonable at the time made and are subject to significant risks and uncertainties. Actual events and results may differ materially from those expressed or implied by these forward-looking statements. Any statements in this news release regarding future events, such as future regulatory actions on the MPUC application, and any other statements that are not historical facts are forward-looking statements. Each forward-looking statement contained in this news release speaks only as of the date of this release. Heather Branigin From: Kris Ross <kehe.ross@gmail.com> • Sent: Wednesday, August 05, 2015 10:17 AM To: Edina Mail Subject: ECLC Expansion Concerns - Ross Residence Attachments: ECLC Expansion Concerns - City Council - Ross Residence.pdf Attached please find a list of our concerns as they relate to the ECLC Expansion Project. Please distribute this document to all council members so that it gets included in their packets for tonight. Thank -you, Edward and Kristin Ross 4015 W. 54th St .J Dear City Council Members, We are writing to reiterate our concerns about the current proposal to replace the single family home next to us with a surface parking lot and a new driveway (which will become the main entrance for the church). •The parking lot capacity is being increased by only 1 space to accommodate ECLC's new sanctuary. If the parking lot addition is approved, we will now have to live with church parking in front of our home and along the side of our property. We will be bearing all of the negative impacts of this expansion yet we are barely a footnote in the application and staff report for the Conditional Use Permit. The requirements for a conditional use permit, as outlined on the application, contain strong language stating that: A permit shall not be issued unless the use: • Will promote and enhance the general public welfare and will not be detrimental to or endanger the public health, safety, morals and general welfare; • Will not cause undue traffic hazards, congestion, or parking shortages, • Will not be injurious to the use and enjoyment, or decrease the value, of other • property in the vicinity, and will not be a nuisance; • Will not impede the normal and orderly development and improvement of other • property in the vicinity • Will not create an excessive burden on parks, streets and other public facilities. • Conforms to the applicable restrictions and special conditions of the district in • which it is located as imposed by the ordinance • Is consistent with the comprehensive plan On particular: • What due diligence was performed by ECLC or the city in determining that there would be no negative impact to our property value and the enjoyment of our property? • Is our case not the very reason for the strong language in the CUP application? • What is the purpose of the CUP for the City of Edina? PROPERTY VALUE: Our house is our biggest financial investment and we are very concerned about the negative impact to our property value. We've spoken with top real estate professionals and appraisers in this area and all have stated that our property values will be negatively impacted when the single family home next to us becomes a parking lot. Our property rights should not take a backseat to the church's desire to expand. We expect a process that is unbiased and a process that will ensure that our property values will be protected based on the requirements outlined in the Application for a Conditional Use Permit. NOISE Nearly all of our primary living spaces are oriented to the back of the house which has a private and wooded backyard. •The ability to enjoy our quiet and peaceful setting is a paramount aspect of the home site. Our second floor windows in the back of the house have direct views of the proposed parking area. The parking lot will run almost the entire length of our property, from the front of our house to beyond our back yard. We will be subjected to all of the nuisance noises of a nearby parking lot: • car doors opening and closing, • car locks beeping, • cars entering and exiting the parking, • engines starting, • • car alarms going off inadvertently, • conversations in the parking lot • Snow plows —we've been woken up out of a dead sleep by the flashing lights, beeping and shovels of the snow plows as they're clearing the church parking lot. With the parking lot next to us, the noise will be intolerable. The church has asked their vendors not to come in the middle of the night but the vendors don't always comply. The proposed landscaping will provide very limited noise mitigation and especially at the distance between our property and the proposed parking lot. The church's landscape architect also mentioned at the planning commission hearing that the landscaping provides only a little bit of noise mitigation. Church Gatherings — At the neighborhood meeting, church representatives confirmed that their intent was to use the new parking lot for church gatherings. We are very worried about the noise and loss of privacy that will result when the land next to us becomes both a parking lot and a gathering location for the congregation and other groups. We feel that outdoor church functions can be accommodated on the west side of the property, away from nearby homeowners. CHURCH GROWTH Although the proposed new sanctuary capacity is 210 seats, as it is today, the church will continue to expand. We worry about the increased activity in a parking lot next to us and our loss of privacy and a quiet setting. The new ECLC pastor spoke at the planning commission hearing: • "We already host many groups that utilize our space. With the improvements, we will be able to welcome even more people in" Below are statements from ECLC President Luke Breen that were submitted to the City of Edina on Nov 19, 2013 in response to the proposed 54th Street reconstruction project proposal. These statements highlight that the church site is active beyond Sundays, "The notion of Christian worship only occurring on Sundays is incorrect. While the majority of on -street parking at ECLC is needed on Sundays, we also worship on Wednesdays during both Lent and Advent, on multiple days and times throughout Holy Week, and on Christmas Eve, Christmas Day, Thanksgiving Eve, and other special occasions. Funerals and weddings may be scheduled on any day of the week. As with most faith communities, we also have scripture studies and meetings during the week. We also have a variety of community users of our building — Edina Lions, Toastmasters, Edina Coalition for Grief Support, AA and others — and are once again a City polling place". SCREENING Our second floor windows (in the back of the house) have a direct view of the proposed parking area. The Arborvitaes will be planted at a height of 8 feet. Their growth rate is moderate and it will take 6-10 years before they reach a height that adequately screens us for privacy. NEW MAIN CHURCH DRIVEWAY: 0 Additional traffic inflow and outflow will shift from the current driveway located away from family residences to the church's new main driveway entrance located within close proximity to our driveway and across the street from another family home. With the proposal to locate the new main church driveway close to our driveway (and closer to the intersection), we are very concerned about our ability to easily (and safely) enter and exit our driveway during church events. ObN STREET PARKING The last parking study was conducted in 2012, however, a new parking study was not submitted for this application. The results of the 2012 study no longer correlate to the current configuration of the streets. The study concluded that church parking could be accommodated on both sides of Halifax Ave. Halifax Ave, however, is currently being narrowed from 36 ft. to 24 ft. and parking will now be restricted to one side of the street. In addition, parking spaces will be lost in front of the new church parking lot to accommodate the new driveway/main entrance. Where is parking going to spill over in the future? A new parking study needs to be performed. SHARED PARKING The Edina Comprehensive Plan sets forth a goal to "Evaluate current parking standards in order to encourage shared parking and minimize the visual impact of surface parking". 0n the spirit of this goal, the possibility of acquiring parking space at the nearby Calvary Christian Church should be explored as an alternative to constructing a surface parking lot so close to private residences. Calvary Christian Church has an expansive, under-utilized parking lot. In addition, they have only one service on Sunday. This parking lot is just a few hundred feet from the ECLC property and would be accessible via the new sidewalk on the north side of 54th St. MISSING DETAILS IN SUBMITTED PLANS The CUP application states that site plans must be submitted with dimensions, however, there are almost no measurements shown. The depiction of our home ("Existing Building") is inaccurate and does not show all of our living space such as the large screen porch and deck off of the back of the house. This is living space that is very close to the parsonage lot and space that will also be affected by noise from the new parking lot. Measurements showing key setbacks are missing - distance from our lot line to the parking stalls, front set back from the street to the parking stalls, width of driveway, distance between the church's new driveway and our driveway, length of the parking lot etc... There are no views showing what our house will look like from the front (situated next to the new parking lot). There are views from every corner of the property EXCEPT the southeast corner closest to us where a majority of the trees are coming down. The church representative and Mr. Teague stated in the planning commission hearing that there would be no changes to We slope of the woodlands behind the property. The plans, however, show the parking lot extending beyond the ridgeline of the slope. We are unclear what is happening back there and we are concerned about our slope and trees near the impact zone. We should not have to absorb the negative impacts detailed above in order for the church to build a new sanctuary. The language in the application for a conditional use permit is clear on this matter. other parking alternatives should be explored. Thank -you for reviewing our list of concerns. Sincerely, Kristin and Edward Ross • • Minutes of the Meeting of the Construction Board of Appeals City of Edina, Minnesota Mayor's Conference Room March 6, 2015 7:30 AM I. Call to Order 11. Roll Call Members Present: Doug Hall, Jennifer Carlson, Scott Busyn, Kip Peterson Members Absent: Tim Cross City Staff Present: Chief Building Official David Fisher, Permit Tech Judy Laufenburger, City Attorney Roger Knutson Guests: Applicants Jim & Lori Grotz, resident Heather Biel, Building Contractors Mike Sullivan & Travis Anderson w/The New Old House Co, Mike Eckardt, Arcos Architects • Ill. Approval of Meeting Agenda Board Member Scott Busyn moved to approve the agenda, Board member Jennifer Carlson seconded the motion. All voted aye; motion carried. IV. Select Board Chair Board Member Kip Peterson nominated Scott Busyn, Board Member Jennifer Carlson seconded the motion; All voted aye; motion carried. V. Approval of the Construction Board of Appeal Minutes Board Member Kip Peterson moved to approve the Board of Appeal's Minutes from the July 23, 2012 meeting. Board Member Jennifer Carlson seconded the motion. All voted aye; motion carried. VI. Community Comments Guest, Heather Biel asked how the Board of Appeals was formed & under what circumstances do they meet. David Fisher explained there is typically a Board in-house at the city level, or it can be deferred to the State if not dealt with in a timely manner. So, if the building official, permit holder, contractor, architect don't agree on something, it is brought before the Board (example: City of 1 Maplewood had a change of use in occupancy, owner disagreed, it was appealed, there was a • Board of Appeals hearing, five members voted on the appeal after some discussion). Usually there is a dedicated Building Official for any given city, someone assigned by their City Council or City Manager. There is an opportunity to submit application for an appeal, but there is an attempt to resolve the issue before it goes to the Board. Ms. Biel commented that this meeting is being tape recorded. Will meeting minutes, audio be made available on our web site? David Fisher replied that written minutes will be made available to the public. City Attorney, Roger Knutson also included that when someone disagrees with the building code and its interpretation, then they can bring the issue before the board, but it is limited to building code issues, not zoning issues/ordinances. There is a separate Board of Adjustments for zoning. Lori Grotz asked about Board of Adjustments. The Planning Commission is the Board of Adjustments, per City Attorney, Roger Knutson. Some discussion ensued regarding time limits for appeals. Knutson states that there is a 30 -day limit for both Construction Board of Appeals & Board of Adjustments. VII. Reports/Recommendations Chief Building Official David Fisher Presented Findings of Fact: See Attachment A On March 6, 2015, the Edina Construction Board of Appeals ("Board") met at a Special Meeting to consider the appeal of James Grotz. The appeal was conducted pursuant to the Minnesota State Building Code Rule 1300.0230 and City Code Section 2-362. The Board's jurisdiction is limited to hearing and deciding appeals of orders, decisions and determinations made by the building official relative to the application and interpretation of the Building Code. Mr. Grotz was present at the Special Meeting. The Board, after considering all pertinent information, makes the following Findings of Fact and Decision: FINDINGS OF FACT Mr. Grotz has appealed three decisions of the City's Building Official, David Fisher, concerning the construction of a single family dwelling on Hennepin County Property ID 19-028-24-1 1- 0012: Appeal One: Mr. Grotz asserts that two window wells were never built as shown on the approved plans and that "city staff must calculate the revised interior side yard setback." Appeal Two: Mr. Grotz asserts that "backfill with clean rock behind wall..." is in direct violation of R403.3.3. Appeal Three: Mr. Grotz asserts he has a right to obtain a copy of the copyrighted building plans. 0 • DECISION I . Appeal One is dismissed. This is not a building code issue and is not within the Board's jurisdiction. The required setback was properly calculated by the Planning Department. Revised plans were submitted by the builder for the construction of the window wells. The location of the window wells are in the same location as the original plans for which the building permit was approved. 2. Appeal Two is denied. The window wells are in compliance with the Building Code. The 2007 Minnesota State Building Code (MSEC) R403.3.3 Drainage: "Final grade shall be sloped in accordance with Section R401.3 In other than Group I Soils, as detailed in Table R405.1, gravel or crushed stone beneath horizontal insulation below ground shall drain to daylight or into an approved sewer system." Based on the code the drainage for the window wells are in compliance. The windows wells will have crushed gravel and drain tile that is tied into the foundation drain tile. The foundation drain tile goes to a pump basket that gets pumped to daylight. This is in an approved method. 3. Appeal Three is dismissed. This is not a Building Code issue and is not within the Board's jurisdiction. The plans Mr. Grotz requested are copyrighted. The Minnesota Department of Administration in Advisory Opinion 08-009 has opined that the City cannot make copies of copyrighted plans without the permission of the copyright holder. The copyright holder has not granted Mr. Grotz permission to copy the plans. Chief Building Official David Fisher presented his staff findings on the three issues before the Board today regarding 1) window well calculations & setbacks, 2) drainage, 3) copyright issues. He explained to the Board and others present that a permit was issued for 5509 Park Place, in October 2014, after being reviewed & approved by all city staff (Planning, Engineering & Building Depts.) Regarding grading & drainage on this plan, the window wells were not exact to the original proposed plan submitted from the builder, he re -submitted a more decorative retaining wall versus a poured wall to the foundation. However, it is in the same location and appears to meet the same contours, based on his findings. Typically, the Planning Department does not review window wells when the plans come in. Window wells are required for egress in existing homes, as well as new construction. So, if a basement bedroom is added, you are required to install an egress window, which goes below grade. Requirements call for a 9 ft. sq. area in order for a fireman with a full pack to get in to the basement, a code requirement for life safety. If we used the average elevation from the bottom of the window well for the average grade for a new home, most of the existing home setbacks would not be in compliance. So, typically they go across the top of the window well (some use plastic covers/they make a cover that can withstand 400 lbs). David Fisher further stated that his findings are in the document, compiled by City Attorney, Roger Knutson, asking for 1) The zoning issue to be dismissed, 2) Code compliance issue should be denied 3) Dismiss. David Fisher clarifies the copyright law — if plans are signed or have a copyright symbol displayed on them, they are considered copyrighted. If signed by an architect, documents are 3 protected. It doesn't mean you can't view them or can't ask for permission from the architect • to make copies, but if they are signed by an architect, they are protected and owned by the architect. Most house files are public documents (i.e. surveys, applications for permits, copies of permits issued). Copyrighted plans are public documents to view, but cannot be copied. So, the copyright law is more a State or Federal law and we cannot make decisions about it, therefore this issue should be dismissed. City Attorney Roger Knutson further reiterated that this does not fall under the Building code. Board member Scott Busyn reiterated that when a building permit is submitted for review and all information is in the Building Dept., (i.e. plans, surveys, and all necessary forms, including a letter which is sent to all residents within 300 ft. of the house being constructed), then any resident or interested party can view the plans. We are not withholding information, other than what can be withheld if it falls under data practice rules. It is not a transparency issue, but purely a copyright issue and protection of that copyright. David Fisher then directed all present to the information provided in their packet (i.e. revised window well plan, storm water drainage plan with contours in it). He also commented that the plan copy size was reduced, so might be difficult to read for the survey and the contours, but when he looks at the survey and the contours to the plan, based on what the window well shows for the slope on the window well, they match and so he doesn't see that there is a change. Scott Busyn commented that he reviewed the packet, which contains great detail. He then requested the applicant to give his presentation but to help us by focusing only on the key points. Applicant, Jim Grotz began his presentation and thanked all present for hearing his appeal. He also states that he assumes this is similar to a public hearing and comments can be made within the three minute time limit. City Attorney Roger Knutson explained that this is not a public hearing and the public is allowed to speak and staff is not limited to three minutes. Scott Busyn also stated that all may speak, if they wish, but limit our comments in the interest of everybody's busy day. Mr. Grotz states that he is an Edina resident and here today regarding 5509 Park Place. He has been told that IRC 2012 does not apply, nor does Minnesota Residential Code, since the permit application for 5509 Park PI was from July 31, 2014. He then directs us to the overhead diagram of egress well with ladder, on the south side, as submitted. It shows an 8" concrete egress well with ladder, on both photos, with directions laid out. The south side is toward their house. He shows us another photo, taken from another property by the same builder and that is an 8" concrete window well. It is made out of support concrete, it is durable, it is 8' deep and it meets the requirements for 15t responders to get in and it is going to have a ladder. Additional drawing is from the side and it shows that there will be an 8 ft. concrete window well w/ladder and the east and west are marked. Directing us back to visualize in our minds, he states this is not how 5509 Park PI was built. He further points out a propane flame thrower and a quick -set by a flame thrower to set concrete. Another shot shows the same type of operation. An additional photo is a piece on cold weather concrete, under extremely cold 4 • conditions, and he was told by someone at the Department of Labor & Industry that this was a good piece to look at, this project in Owatonna was done well and it was cold weather defined. Mr. Grotz further states that provisions define what cold weather is, for how many days, average temperature for 3 days less than 40 degrees. Further, cold weather concrete masonry procedures are defined, where accessible tent or enclosures are required, to be built around the grout and mortar to keep it from freezing for 48 hours, under temperatures of 40 degrees or less. Mr. Grotz states that on any of the work at 5509 Park Place, there was no heated tent, which would've needed to be present to meet the requirements of the code. He displays a photo of the material that was used at this job site and states that they did not follow the manufacturer's instructions for installation. There is nothing on the web site about curing with a blow torch. An additional opinion was handed out by their engineer, Mr. Eric Zimmerman. He discusses this and states that the rock wall was not protected from subzero temps after the heat was applied. Rocks & mortar froze and acceptable industry practices were not followed. In addition, mortar and/or concrete cannot be quick set with heat. They can be dried out and made non-functional. In his opinion, construction of this wall is in violation of acceptable industry practices, ACI 530, and code requirements for masonry work. Board member Scott Busyn reiterates to Mr. Grotz that he should focus his presentations on the (3) issues for the appeal only and eliminate further details that are not pertinent to his appeal. • Mr. Grotz continues that the completed stone walls are in question and points out requirements for setbacks. There was an amendment to the construction plan filed, and that changed the original walls that were to be built from the ones he previously showed to the current walls. Going back to his diagram of window well with ladder, he states that City Planner Cary Teague explained to him that the reason it is done this way is, in terms of measurement, is because of the line across the front, and you can't walk across the back side of that window well without falling in, but this is how it's done and is the city's traditional way of doing it. Mr. Grotz states that applying that same formula to 5509 Park PI and taking the wall across this, this person needed a variance when he changed the setup for these window wells. They are not as originally designed, there was a change form made for that. As a result, it changed the average grade along the house. There is a letter in his packet that says the significance of the grade calculations directly impacts the building setback requirements from the property. It also points to the midpoint of the gable, gable midpoint to the average grade, it changes that. This brings him to his issue on validity of permit. In his review from the IRC, Mr. Grotz states that any jurisdiction, (asks us to substitute "jurisdiction" with the "City of Edina"), the government that has adopted this code under due legislative authority and permit is document, having been issued by the authority, having jurisdiction that authorizes performance of specified activity. He also states that in Minnesota rules, permits assuming to give authority to violate or cancel provisions of the code or other • ordinances (that means Edina's ordinances), of the jurisdiction, are not valid. 5 Mr. Grotz explains that the Construction Mgmt. Plan was intended to hold builders accountable • for their construction project and minimize impact on adjacent properties. The checklist, developed by the Building Official, states that a completed CMP needs to be signed by a contractor. Once a checklist is required, it becomes a code requirement, under the State building code. By signing, they understand that they are responsible for the conditions listed and it is no longer a construction mgmt. plan, it becomes a construction contract. Under page 2, item 7, storm water & erosion control, it states that the permit holder must adhere to the approved plans. He further states that The New Old House Co. did not sign this contract and therefore it is an invalid permit (if any requirement of the local jurisdiction is not met, which means Edina) it is invalid. Mr. Grotz adds that another example of that, the survey site plan requirements, scope all required surveys. Since the building official signed this, it has to be on every one of the items. He states that David Fisher exercised his discretion to leave them off, since he exercised discretion to create the form. Mr. Grotz continues that his letter in October 28, 2014, states that the requirements to obtain a building permit were not met and it was sent to the building official. Additionally, there were changes made along the way, not only the window wells. There was a survey dated Jan 9, 2015 and change form for walls. On the survey, it states proposed catch basin at end of existing pipe. Existing pipe was torn out when the house was demolished, so the change doesn't show any of this. Further, when the design is radically changed and impacts the use of it, it can have zoning implications and must go back to the Planning Commission. In • this case, that's what happened and has to go back•to the Planning Commission for a variance, in Mr. Grotz's opinion. He also shows an aerial map of the neighborhood, which also shows the house under construction and their house. Area is a D, built in 1950, common law retaining walls were built to create five buildable lots and to allow homeowners to have flat lots in the back and use them without steep slope to adjoining property. He further points out a common law retaining wall on their side yard facing to the west, and one facing to the east & that the retaining wall extended all the way up to property boundary. He directs us to a picture of the existing house, lot, and landscaping @ 5509 Park Place (further clarified by Building Official David Fisher) before the house was torn down, as was submitted for permit. Mr. Grotz states that none of this was going to be changed. Scott Busyn asked if Mr. Grotz is referring to the landscape detail and stone detail in the back lot line before the house was torn down and why this is relevant to the discussion. Mr. Grotz explains it is being shown for drainage purposes. Board member, Doug Hall, asks what the black pipe is that is displayed in the photo Mr. Grotz is sharing. Mr. Grotz states that there used to be a tree there and it goes to a catch basin. • 0 • Mr. Grotz continues that when the contractor submitted his permit, it was shown that the retaining walls in the back would be unchanged. He also shows a photo from his roof and points out a significant difference in elevation from the properties in this area. He also points out the catch basin that Doug Hall was asking about, it was 30", it went to the street, and everything was tiled in the back. Mr. Grotz stated that the builder did not submit this with his permit the way it was being built. Mr. Grotz says that he called the Bldg. Official, David Fisher, and asked if there was a new storm water management plan. Mr. Fisher, in turn, called the builder and asked for a revised plan. He is not building per plan or Construction Management Plan, per Jim Grotz. Mr. Grotz also displays the new wall going up in the back, with the same approach used on the concrete. Scott Busyn asks if this is where they rebuilt the wall. Mr. Grotz states that they rebuilt the wall in the back, pushing the existing one way back. Mr. Grotz then shows the corner area, before backfill and a refers to a letter in packet from their engineer, Mr. Zimmerman, talking about the backfill here (egress), starts out as clay, then backfills with sand, with sandy material along the side and another view of crushed limestone going in later on in construction. Mr. Grotz explains, as you go thru his slides, that there is this combination of sand in the back and this shelf that was taken out, which is all sand. Looking at the • material from a technical perspective, under our 401-3 and 403 -3, and 403.3.3, when you build a house, you are supposed to take, the water and slope it away from the foundation. It all comes under the heading of foundation, an item in your packet. The idea is that you don't want the water to go to your foundation. If you get too much water, it will overload your sump pumps, which could be a real problem for the homeowner. In this case, rather than putting on an impervious clay layer on the south side of the property, it is all either sand and/or it is pit run and now will be crushed limestone on the top. If you look at 401.3, it states that you have to grade the house so that the water goes away from it within the first 10 ft. With crushed limestone, the water is going straight down. Looking at the roof water and the way this has been graded and the way it is proposed to be graded, and because there is clay on their side of the property, when it rains this is all going to go in. David Fisher says this is okay, and it is going to be pumped out, all this water is pumped out through his sump pump. Mr. Grotz states that this is basically an undocumented storage well and was not engineered, the water will go down there, will be pumped out thru the sump pump. But, sump pumps are a major problem when overloaded. This does not meet code, it is not on the survey plan, and not on the engineered plan, and has not been engineered. This could be a very serious problem. The water is supposed to be kept as ground surface water and taken to the street, not sent to the ground which may cause potential problems, not only for the homeowner, but for their property. Unfortunately, the way this is built, this is what will happen, in his opinion. • The crushed limestone is not going to meet the requirements of the code. Also, given the steep grades that are being built, this could be a problem, some of the grades look like they are 7 better than 2-1. Unfortunately, sump pumps and overruns are a big problem in our city and • could cause a lot of damage in a basement, if not taken care of. Look at code, what engineer has stated, because they are concerned about the impact it may have on them, but also the future homeowner, if the property is sold and it is not disclosed by an independent agent. Also, on the survey it is not documented as a storage volume and don't know if the proposed catch basin is going to be built because of subsequent revisions that do not show it. Mr. Grotz states that their engineer is a geo-technical engineer, has a lot of experience with this, and asks that the Board review his resume, enclosed in the packet. Lori Grotz states that with the previous grade from the existing retaining wall, the grade behind it was level to the house. So, no water crossed over that. All of the roof drains & back yard water all went to a catch basin, drain tile, and then to the street. They did not get any water. So now with the retaining wall gone, which was 2 %2 ft., the grade of the house on the side is elevated, some areas 2 %2 ft. Now, instead of a level grade between them, now they have a drop of 5 ft., coming straight down at them and nothing will stop it. No gutters or downspouts are shown, the backyard is elevated, the retaining wall in back was moved back, backfilled with approx. 3 ft. of crushed rock to collect water that's coming from the other property and all directed to the south toward them, down to them or in their basement and they will be drowned out. Mr. Grotz states that he did have another slide that was to be shown from another address, where the prior owner of the property had worked hard to get the former city engineer to get • the homeowner upgraded .and take water to the street, said he would put a note in the file the next time they get a permit. Now, there is a permit for this address and they don't see anything happening on that address (5504 Dever Dr). Before Jim & Lori Grotz continue on the V issue before the Board today, Scott Busyn interjects that City Attorney, Roger Knutson has already addressed the copyright issue and feels that their energy could be better focused setting up a separate meeting with the City Attorney. Lori Grotz states that the city did allow previous copies of plans and Scott Busyn states that they may have errored in doing so, but copyright law can be handled separately. Roger Knutson also reassures them that he will review the information on copyright law and if they are, in fact, entitled to make copies, then they will be allowed to do so. VIII. Correspondence & Petitions A. Letter Received February 10, 2015 (copy included in packet) B. Letter Received February 20, 2015 (copy included in packet) IX. Chair, Board Member, Staff Comments Scott Busyn then invited anyone to add questions/comments, regarding Mr. Grotz presentation, but to please keep within the 3 minute time limit. • Doug Hall asked if the catch basin still remains. Mr. Grotz states that it has been removed, along with the drain tile, with no access to the street. David Fisher states that before this project started, there was a conversation about the drain tile from the back of the property, the retaining wall with the City Engineering Dept. There was a meeting on site, a design professional submitted a document to the city, and City Engineer Ross Bintner reviewed it and did not accept it, until there were changes made. The drainage is supposed to be going around the north side of the house, not the south side. There is 8-10 ft. on the south side of the house which drains toward that side of the house and does go back down. Re: backfill & drainage, our Engineering Dept. tries to limit water going from neighbor's property and tries to keep it on their property, but you can probably see from the pictures, that some of the topography of the land drained toward their property, probably from even beyond the tree that you saw, from there and back through their property. Mr. Fisher continues that on the back side of the retaining wall that was seen, there was gravel or landscaping stones and water infiltrates through that, too, which would go through that retaining wall, as well. As far as clean fill & backfill, sand & gravel is the best thing one can use for fill & backfill because water does infiltrate through it. That means it goes into the ground and infiltrates in the ground and doesn't go out to the storm sewer. It dissipates in the ground first, which is a better way to actually displace it. I'm not an engineer, but that is common practice. The drain the that was there, if plugged, could fail, which is what Engineer Ross Bintner explained. So, the plan was to try and get the drainage to the north side, with topography of the land, in order to make it work better. Jim & Lori Grotz do not agree with • that and haven't since day 1. They think the drain tile should be there, as well as the retaining wall put back in place. The builder has stated that possibly the retaining wall will go back in place, but has not decided yet. He may need to do that for better landscaping, but it is still an unknown, since the project is not done yet. The grading & drainage isn't complete yet, so what is seen today is not what's going to be there. Doug Hall asked for clarification that the retaining wall that may come back is on the south side and David Fisher verified. Scott Busyn asked for clarification, and David Fisher verified, that there is an engineered storm water plan in the city, submitted & approved by a licensed, professional engineer, Environmental Engineer Ross Bintner. However, the Grotz' engineer disagrees with that plan. David Fisher further commented that there is language in the code that the drain tile needs to go to daylight. There is drain tile in the house, drain tile in the window well & foundation that goes up to the sump basket and gets pumped out to daylight, which is an approved method. Yes, mechanical equipment can fail but it is an approved method. Contractor, Mike Sullivan reiterated that it is an approved plan, submitted by an engineer, approved by an independent, and Minnehaha Creek Watershed District. He reassured Jim & Lori Grotz that he does intend to be a good neighbor, making sure that water does not go on to their property, and he will have an approved plan which will be followed. 9 Scott Busyn states that it sounds like there were a lot of revisions required by the city before • approval. Heather Biel had comments on a resident's appeal process and addresses (2) questions to City Attorney, Roger Knutson. Does the clock re -set when there are major changes in the plan & what is the process if building occurs before a permit is issued and how can a resident contest this issue. She also states that the current notification that takes place from the city is a great improvement to the residents when major changes are going to take place in their neighborhood. Roger Knutson states that no construction should be taking place before a building permit is issued. Scott Busyn commented that the police may get involved, at that point. David Fisher further addresses the question of working w/out a permit. He states that we issue a stop work order, we request them to get a building permit, and we double fee them for that permit. We definitely hold them accountable for doing what they should do. Roger Knutson states that it is hard to answer when the clock re -sets, based on what the changes are, (Example: building plans show a 2x4, and now changed to a Ix2, if bring in a revised plan, then the clock re -sets when the revised plan is approved). Further discussion ensued on 5509 Park Place and Heather Biel states that she believes there were major changes that took place from the permit to what was actually happening on site and directed her comments to Mike Sullivan. Mr. Sullivan states that he doesn't believe there were any major changes. • David Fisher states that major changes to a plan, such as changing the elevation or the footprint of the house, would be considered a major change. Landscaping or drainage on the outside would be an engineering question. If it didn't change the topography of the land, and drainage is still the same, it is still an engineering question, not a building code issue. In this case, where they moved the retaining wall back, we did receive a revised plan. Not right away, but after the fact. We made sure that engineering reviewed again and verified that it was ok. If it wasn't ok, then we would've stopped the job and informed them that they need to get it fixed to meet our satisfaction. Scott Busyn asked for clarification on when the job is completed and requirements on submittal of the as -built survey, as well as when the builder receives a certificate of occupancy. David Fisher clarified that we get an as -built survey for pre -backfill and we get an as -built survey when the job is done. A certificate of occupancy is not given until that as -built survey is provided that the drainage matches. We are trying to slow down giving the cert of occupancy, even a conditional cert of occupancy, to make sure we have the topography. In the wintertime, the landscaping will not be complete. Scott states that there is still an open permit. David Fisher states that once a temporary co is issued, it becomes difficult to take that back. Heather Biel needed clarification as to what if the as -built survey showed that the drainage, building, etc. accomplished as per the original approved & permitted documents and performed as originally designed. David Fisher states that we are requiring our Engineering Department to go out and look at that and verify that the drainage is the way it's supposed to be. It's not what a building inspector looks at. 10 • Lori Grotz commented that if a major change occurs, different than what was submitted, then didn't Mr. Sullivan build the foundation differently from what was submitted. They submitted an as -built, but the as -built was not what was built. David Fisher explains that, per the building code, it was a very minor change. They put cylinders down. Lori Grotz says that she is referring to the shape of the foundation and David Fisher comments that he is referring to that, too. One part became narrower and much longer. Fisher states that instead of putting a full foundation underneath a landing for an entry in the back, they put cylinders down instead. They used a different style of foundation, so they didn't use a poured wall foundation for that. It would be supported the same way and is considered a minor change. Mike Eckhart w/ Arcos Architects, working with Mike Sullivan, stated that they went before the Planning Commission in regard to setbacks with the egress wells to verify all the setbacks and regarding height, because height is always an issue when over 15 ft. So, we reviewed that with the city and we actually modified our original submittal, based on comments from the city, and then it was approved. He states that they try to work with the city and realize that they need to meet city requirements, in order to get a permit. Scott Busyn suggests that we go around the Board, they can ask questions or make comments, and then we try to act on a motion. • Kip Peterson asked re: window wells if there's a building code or city ordinance on determining how to measure final grade. If understanding correctly, because they did a lookout instead of an egress then final grade at outside of the well is 4 ft lower than if they had done an actual egress window. David Fisher states that it is, in fact, an egress window. It is in the same height and location, but they changed the material. Instead of poured wall window well, now it is a slate wall and that is the only difference. There still could be a ladder out of this, if it is too high or over 44 inches, just like if it was a poured wall. It didn't change, as far as the topography from what can be seen from the contours on the survey. If the windows were lookout originally, that did not change. Scott Busyn further comments that when we measure the height of the sidewall of a house, we measure from average proposed grade, and is at the foundation., because you want to drop that grade away from the house, in order to achieve as much pitch as you can, and looking at Mr. Grotz slides, there was foundation insulation up (yellow material) where the grade was going to go up to meet that. It has always been at the foundation wall where they measure proposed grade. David Fisher comments that for an average, they skip over the window well, they don't count the base of the window well, because that could change and be different anywhere. So, an • average grade, from point A to point B and it' angled, you take the average in the middle and 11 you don't take the base of the window well to get that average, according to Cary Teague. You • just go straight across. Kip Peterson states that, based on the materials, his understanding is that Mr. Grotz is disputing that the plan didn't change, because he thinks that the plan originally showed that they were going to be poured walls and level all the way around and now Mr. Grotz is alleging that they are a step down. He feels that if we are measuring grade at the house, and measured over the top of the highest point of the window well at the house, he doesn't think that the material changes anything . Doug Hall asks, from our engineering perspective, has the topography not changed? David Fisher answers that that is his understanding. Scott Busyn makes final comments on the three issues that were appealed today. Window well — side yard setback is a planning decision and reviewed when the permit was issued. Issue on egress well reducing that average, but have always seen calculated at the foundation wall. Egress wells don't reduce it. On drainage, the plan that Mr. Sullivan has needs to be executed, it is still in process. Busyn stated that he visited the job site and did see some blankets covering up stonework, but the issues on how it is being constructed and best practices, Mr. Sullivan will need to deal with the homeowner, if there are problems. Busyn also clarified with Mr. Sullivan that the catch basin was eliminated, since there is the potential for failure. Mr. Sullivan stated that it was two thirds clogged with sediment and the city doesn't maintain it and it was removed. Busyn also states • that thru his own experience, he believes the retaining wall back further creates a better situation. Mr. Sullivan states that from the southeast corner of the lot, everything is swaled to go around to the north side and he is pitching that yard to the north and a large eave coming down on the south side, so most of the water goes east and west. More grass, more percolation, pitching yard to the north, water goes east & west. Gravel & sand will allow for more percolation. And, in Edina, push more water towards the street, even though the Watershed District might disagree, but if a sand base, it is just going to go below. Sump pump change in direction on the north side is a huge improvement (recommend a battery backup, if runs a lot). Grade on the south side, with water hitting that, will need to establish swale between his property and the Grotz property, and it would go toward the street. Little eyebrow will be guttered (below the top gable). It appears that much effort has been done to mitigate the issue. Lori Grotz questioned Mr. Sullivan about the 300 sq. ft. of stone to be re -used for patio in the backyard on the south side and will that be graded to drain to the north. He states that they will have to see, but reassured that they are not going to dump water on the Grotz's property. Again, Scott reassured that Mr. Sullivan is making every effort for drainage and agrees with Building Official David Fisher, on his reports and recommendations. The takeaway should be that nobody here wants to leave Jim & Lori Grotz with a problem and this has added more urgency on Mr. Sullivan's part. L 12 • Kip Peterson asked on the grading and drainage plan if the retaining wall is reflected on that plan. David Fisher commented that Mr. Sullivan would have to give us a revised plan, since drainage plan was approved w/o the retaining wall on it. Kip Peterson motioned to dismiss the I st appeal. He is sympathetic to the overall height, but doesn't' think it is a building code issue. As Mr. Fisher has indicated, it is a planning issue, in terms of how they calculated the setback. Doug Hall seconded that motion. Scott motioned to deny item II, but expectations are that the drainage plan be met, as part of final inspection process. Also, dismiss Item III, but need good legal information and can be elevated within the council, regarding procedural changes with the city and how plans can be viewed. Kip Peterson states that the copyright issue needs to be explored. Doug Hall states that the drainage issue resonates, the copyright issue should not be discussed here, and stone construction is more an aesthetic thing. Neighborly outreach needs to take place. Work with staff for amicable outcome. Mr. Sullivan was heard loud and clear. Scott Busyn summarizes the Board's decisions on the (3) items before them. 1) Dismiss Item I, due to meeting city requirements, it does not fall within the Board's jurisdiction, it is a planning issue. 2) Deny item II, since a storm water management plan exists. • However we advise the builder to meet the specifications of that plan. 3) Dismiss Item III, because it does not fall within the scope of the Construction Board of Appeals. However, we recommend that the applicant bring up the issue with legal council. Roger Knutson states that we are adopting the findings of fact, with the two additions - 1) the builder meet the specifications of the storm water management plan, 2) applicant ask Roger Knutson to review the IPad finding. 2"d the motion — Doug Hall All Board members voted aye; motion carried. David Fisher further explained at the close of the meeting that there are handouts and guidelines put out there to make it easier for builders to understand. We all need to understand, though, that these are policies and guidelines, but not the law. The Dept. of Labor & Industry website also has some interesting information available for things to be aware of, such as examples of what has happened in the past in other communities, in order to better understand what you are doing within the Construction Board of Appeals. Scott Busyn states that he appreciates all of the Board member's participation. Edina has seen some growth pains and communication goes along way. It is important to be good neighbors. Mr. Grotz thanks the Board for hearing his appeal and getting these new concerns on record. • X. Adjournment 13 MINUTES OF CITY OF EDINA, MINNESOTA • TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION COMMUNITY ROOM MAY 21, 2015 6:00 P.M. ROLL CALL Answering roll call were members Boettge, Campbell, Iyer, Janovy, La Force, Loeffelholz, Nelson, Olson, and Spanhake. ABSENT Bass and Rummel APPROVAL OF MEETING AGENDA The agenda was revised to combine Bike Edina and Walk Edina Working Groups for discussion. Motion was made by member Nelson and seconded by member Boettge to approve the revised meeting agenda. All voted aye. Motion carried. APPROVAL OF MEETING MINUTES REGULAR MEETING OF APRIL 16, 2015 Motion was made by member Olson and seconded by member Spanhake to approve the minutes of Apr. 16, 2015. All voted aye. Motion carried. COMMUNITY COMMENT — None. REPORTS/RECOMMENDATIONS University of Minnesota Capstone Presentation: Neighborhood Traffic Study Traffic safety coordinator Joe Totten presented the capstone project. Mr. Totten said he was part of a team of five students that conducted the traffic study in the Strachauer Park neighborhood in the area bounded by W. 54th Street to the north, TH- •62 to the south, France Avenue to the west and Xerxes Avenue to the east. He said the study was done because of residents' concerns which included cut thru traffic, speeding, lack of crosswalks and sidewalks, uncontrolled intersections and parking issues. Mr. Totten said they evaluated the effects of the traffic calming circles on W. 54th Street and data showed that speeds were lowered by 3.7 mph. He said the bike lanes, bump -outs and narrowed lanes also helped to reduce speeds. Regarding cut thru traffic, he said they looked at W. 58th Street and W. 60th Street and found that at least 85% of the traffic was people leaving or entering the neighborhood. He said eastbound W. 601h Street may have a high amount of cut thru traffic and speeding was observed on W. 58th Street. Regarding parking, Mr. Totten said there were little observable parking issues — one area was because of two remodeling projects and the parking issues were only on week days when the contractors were working; the other area was the business node at Pizzeria Lola where parking increased on Saturdays. He suggested looking at parking again in the summer (to account for patrons using the neighborhood park) because their observation was in the winter. For a bike route, they suggested Beard Avenue which would connect to the Promenade and Minneapolis trails. This would include two bridges, one at France Avenue and TH-62 and the other between Beard Avenue and Colony Way. In summary, their findings are high utilization of parking near 56th Street and Xerxes Avenue; the remaining area of study showed no demand for double -sided parking except during residential remodeling projects; the Living Streets Plan recommends one-sided parking and this was not seen as likely to cause parking capacity issues. And they recommended traffic circles at the intersections of Beard Avenue and W. 58th Street and Beard Avenue and W. 60th Street. Discussion • Any link with requests for stop signs observed? No, but data shows speeds are higher near stop signs. • How was the data collected? Manually for parking and tubes for counting. Member Iyer suggested that Edina play a • leadership role in automating traffic data collection. • Cut thru traffic entering neighborhood could have exited on a different street; cut thru traffic is seen as negative but this is not necessarily so; was speeding at stop signs on the downstream? On W. 601h Street it was on both sides. • Liked the idea of separate bike routes over the freeway because Cornelia Elementary is the school for students int• neighborhood. • Residents often request stop signs to slow traffic and blame cut thru traffic — this data is validation that neighborhood residents make up for the majority of the traffic; traffic calming circles are a good idea instead of not having a solution. • Multi -use bridge was suggested. Traffic Sign Installation and Maintenance Poli Planner Nolan said all cities are required to have a reflective and maintenance sign policy for liability purposes and he is looking for feedback from the ETC before sending the policy to City Council for approval. He said member Janovy provided feedback via email. Feedback • Is there a benchmark for cities to have a certain amount and types of signs (because signs are ignored if too many are in place)? Planner Nolan did not know. • How do cities determine the types of signs needed? By doing a sign study. • Bike lanes have too many signs which lead to confusion. • How do you know when there are too many signs and do you have a policy to address this? Planner Nolan said staff would address this by doing sign study. • Policy addressing multiple things: reflective and budget; need different policy for removing signs; make policy clear that City Council has authority to place regulatory signs and not this is not being delegated; policy states Traffic Safety Committee (TSC) has authority. • TSC's authority is the current practice. • What additional authority is being delegated that the TSC does not currently have? If City Council isn't delegating a6 authority the language should be removed. Planner Nolan will review the language with staff. • Concerned that too much authority is given to City Council who are not trained engineers. • Agreed staff has the expertise and suggested changing the wording to show that City Council has final approval. • Obstruction of signs by overgrown vegetation is not included. Is this addressed in another policy? Yes, said Planner Nolan. Southwest Light Rail Transit (SW LRT) Station Access Planner Nolan said although the SW LRT will not run through Edina, this is on the ETC's work plan and chair Bass included it to begin discussing station access. The closest station for Edina will be Blake Road in Hopkins. Discussion • Blake Road Corridor Study completed by City of Hopkins in participation with Edina and will include a sidewalk from Spruce Road to Maloney Avenue in Edina, and all the way to the LRT station in Hopkins; • It is not known at this time if parking will be available for transit users; • Mayor Hovland and CM Brindle are on a SW LRT committee and may be able to provide information; • What is the ETC's authority at it relates to being able to make certain requests? • Should someone from the ETC sit on a SW LRT committee? Member Nelson once served on a committee. • Request for staff to overlay Edina's sidewalk and bike plan with SW LRT stations on to one map with primary focus on the stations that are accessible to Edina; • Make a map similar to one that Three Rivers District have and have it available during discussion; • Previous discussions about transportation for youths and seniors and this is an opportunity to see if Edina really wants a circulator that would connect the business nodes and SW LRT stations; 0 • Metro Transit looked at feeder systems for the Blue and Green Lines in Minneapolis; what can Edina do to make sure there is a bus line? Planner Nolan said he was not sure what influence the City has with Met Council and Metro • Transit; • Invite Metro Transit to a meeting to learn about their plan and how Edina could be included. Traffic Safety Report of May 6, 2015 A.2. Member Janovy said she like the idea of doing a trial and suggested a communications plan that would include more than the study area. She asked why they could not add a crosswalk and planner Nolan explained that the resident did not want a landing pad near his property in the right-of-way. B.4. Member Spanhake said as a frequent driver in the area, she agreed with the requestor. She said drivers going south on Tracy Avenue do not know what to do and it would be clearer if the northbound stop sign was removed. She said it is also very difficult to stop in the winter when the road is icy. Planner Nolan was asked if warrants were met for a 4 -way stop and he said no. In reference to further study, he did not believe anything new would be learned. Motion was made by member Spanhake and seconded by member Boettge to forward the May 6, 2015, TSC report to the City Council. All voted aye. Motion carried. Updates Student Members Member Campbell said with the recent approval of the school's referendum which includes expansion of the school's parking lot, his environmental teacher is concerned about the impact the parking lot expansion will have on the prairie. Member Campbell said it is interesting that they have the money but that it will have negative repercussion on the environment but they also need to meet the demands of their customers. Member Nelson asked for his suggestion to reduce parking demands and member Campbell said he did not know what the solution was but felt the school's solution to increase parking fees would negatively impact low income families with students who live outside of Edina and drives to school. Bike Edina and Walk Edina Working Groups Member Boettge reported that she was stepping down as chair of the Walk Edina Working Group and handed out feedback from the group (may not reflect all individuals associated) that included why they joined the group, positive feedback and issues. She said some issues that she ran into was inconsistent or lack of policy for working groups, difficulty finding information on the City's website and her inexperience chairing a working group. Member Janovy said she thought Bike Edina would become more focused after becoming a working group of the ETC but this has not been the case. She said in the beginning the ETC was not multi -modal but now that planner Nolan is on staff, the group has become completely multi -modal. She said the ETC does a good job of reviewing and making recommendations and she sees some duplication with Bike Edina. For Bike Edina, it is more difficult because members look to her to provide all the guidance whereas the ETC has staff support. She said some members also become frustrated when they run into limitations based on the rules and communication is difficult because they are going through the formal City structure. She said one role that needs to be promoted is the City's transportation system through forums and educational outreach. Vice chair La Force summarized the issues as Walk Edina does not have a chair and Bike Edina is asking to change what they are currently doing. He asked if the ETC would be okay if both groups were disbanded. Member Olson, a member of Bike Edina, said after the Bike Plan was completed they lost their focus. Feedback • Likes the idea of advocacy of both groups and the historical walks that Walk Edina was going to do, bike rodeo, etc. . • Anyone interested in chairing Walk Edina? No. 0 Would Bike Edina want to absorb Walk Edina? Not if the structure is an issue. • Member Janovy said there is a need for more education and outreach and the Energy and Environment Commission (EEC) has a working group with a budget and they've been successful putting together events. She said she needs • people with the energy. She said they should maintain the Bike/Walk Edina brand and use it to do outreach. • Bike Edina had a clear focus eight years ago and is struggling now to identify its role. • Need to focus their mission so that they are not duplicating what the ETC does. • Member Iyer said when he was on the EEC, the members were motivated; they got $10,000 from the City Council and wrote the solar panel proposal. He said they should disband the groups and they should become advocacy groups that would seek support from the ETC. • Vice chair LaForce asked if this was feasible and member Iyer said yes, they could report quarterly and the ETC could ask for their help as needed. • Member Olson said Bike Edina became a working group of ETC because of liability purposes. Motion made by member Iyer to disband the Bike/Walk Edina Work Groups and give them the option of becoming advocacy groups as long as they are vetted by the City to participate in transportation related issues. Motion failed for lack of second. The two groups should be discussed separately. Can the ETC use the working groups as needed to work on specific issues? Member Janovy reminded them that the reason for the discussion is because of the working group structure that requires information, resources, staff support, etc. so whatever they decide to do going forward should address these concerns. Member Janovy said if Walk Edina does not have a chair it is automatically dissolved and the ETC should be mindful of the message that will be sent based on its action. Motion made by member Iyer to dissolve Walk Edina and restart it at a future date. Motion was seconded by vice chair LaForce and amended to dissolve Walk Edina because it does not have a chair and restart it at a future date. Amendment seconded by member Nelson. Motion withdrawn by member Iyer. • Member Janovy said Bike Edina should continue with a narrowed focus and increase membership by having a purpose and she recommended education/outreach. • Get feedback from current members to see how they feel. Motion made by member Janovy and seconded by member Loeffelholz to continue Bike Edina but with a narrower focus on education and outreach with goals defined by the ETC. All voted aye. Motion passed. Living Streets Working Group Planner Nolan said the Living Streets Plan was approved by City Council two weeks ago. Communications Committee — None. Member LaForce said the article titled 'Stop Behind the Crosswalks in South Area' that he wrote was published in the May 21St issue of Sun Current. CORRESPONDENCE AND PETITIONS — None. CHAIR AND COMMISSION MEMBER COMMENTS Member Boettge asked why the Cornelia Drive sidewalk Safe Routes to School grant application was not approved and planner Nolan said the committee felt there wasn't enough demonstrated risks and lack of support from the school district. He said four grants were awarded from $85,000 to $300,000 and they were for sidewalks across arterial and/or collector • streets. Member Iyer said he was in a Boston suburb recently and he saw crosswalks similar to the ones on France Avenue which probably means it is a best practice. Planner Nolan said it shortens the crossing distance for pedestrians. Member Iyer said it was good to see that Edina was not unique with this design. Member LaForce said he lives three houses away from the Birchcrest 8 roadway reconstruction project and within the past two weeks, at least 300 dump trucks have traveled on his street from the project area. He said essentially he is in a construction zone even though his street is not under construction. He said if he was not on the ETC he would not have known what was going on and suggested communicating with residents outside of the direct area because the project has a broader effect. He received a notice that his water would be shut off and suggested including what residents can do to prepare for the shut off. STAFF COMMENTS • Project area maps for the 2016 neighborhood reconstruction projects were handed out and planner Nolan said staff would seek input at a later date. • Reminder of the joint work session with City Council and the ETC/Bike Edina on June 17. Motion was made by member Iyer and seconded by member Olson to cancel the June 18 regular ETC meeting and reschedule for June 17 immediately following the work session. Motion was withdrawn after discussion. Motion was made by member Iyer and seconded by member Loeffelholz to cancel the ETC's regular schedule June 18 meeting. All voted aye. Motion carried. • 2015 project updates — projects are progressing as planned; Birchcrest is ahead of schedule by a few weeks; Valley View project has started and based on feedback from residents and Council members, staff will be adding striping to define the travel and parking lanes. • Three pedestrian bridges will be removed as part of the Nine Mile Creek Trail and staff is proposing to reuse one of them to connect the new sidewalk going in on Valley View Road to the trail in Courtney Fields. The abutments would be built in 2016 with PACS funds and the bridge installed when it becomes available. • The new lights on France Avenue were turned on last night; staff has received more negative feedback than positive. • Promenade Phase 4, behind Bylery's, is under construction; Phase 5 planning has begun (going north from 70th Street) and design issues will be getting through or around the Galleria and possibly connecting to a trail that is on the Park & Recreation's strategic Grand Loop plan. Member Janovy asked why Park & Recreation did not come to the ETC with their planning of the Grand Loop and planner Nolan said he did not know why. Member Iyer said the ETC should see transportation related items that are being proposed within a certain timeframe, i.e., the Grand Loop. • Hennepin County is hosting a meeting on May 27 for residents on Xerxes Avenue to discuss landscaping the bumpouts. • The Nine Mile Creek Trail west of Tracy Avenue received funding for 2018; it is not known yet when construction would begin. • The school district agreed to participate in the Valley View Road traffic study with the City and the costs will be split 50/50. • MN Greensteps City is hosting a workshop on June 11 and in addition to environmental engineer Bintner presentation, the ETC is scheduled to present on Living Streets but chair Bass will not be available so another presenter is needed. ADJOURNMENT Meeting adjourned. 0 ATTENDANCE TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION ATTENDANCE J F M A M J J A S O N D SM SM WS # of Mtgs Attendance % MeetingsfWork Sessions 1 1 1 1 1 5 NAME Bass, Katherine TERM 2/1/2017 1 1 1 1 (Enter Date) (Enter Date) (Enter Date 4 80% Boett e, Emil 2/1/2017 1 1 1 1 1 5 100% Iyer, Surya 3/1/2018 1 1 1 1 1 5 100% LaForce, Tom 3/1/2018 1 1 1 1 4 80% Loeffelholz, Ralf 1 1 1 3 100% Janovy, Jennifer 2/1/2017 1 1 1 1 1 5 100% Nelson, Paul 2/1/2016 1 1 1 1 1 1 5 100% Olson, Lar 2/1/2016 1 1 1 1 4 80% Whited, Courtney 2/1/2015 1 1 100% S anhake, Dawn 2/1/2016 1 1 1 1 1 5 100% Rummel, Anna 9/1/2015 1 1 2 40% Campbell, Jack 9/1/2015 1 1 1 1 2 40% 0 0 40 Edina Art and Culture Commission Meeting Meeting Minutes City of Edina, Minnesota • Edina City Hall Community Room June 25, 2015 4:30 P.M. I. Call to Order Chair Meifert called the meeting to order at 4:30 p.m. II. Roll Call Commissioners Present: Kandace Ellis, Cheryl Gunness, Barbara La Valleur, Daniel Li, Ray Meifert, Anne Miller, Kitty O'Dea, and Steve Suckow. Commissioners Absent: Dana Lappin. Staff Present: Michael Frey, General Manager, Edina Art Center Student Representatives Present: Jack Ready Student Representatives Absent: Sophia Munic III. Approval of Meeting Agenda Chair Meifert noted the meeting agenda had been circulated and asked if there were requests for additions or changes. He requested to add an item under Reports and Recommendations titled Edina Film Festival. Commissioner Suckow requested to add an item under Reports and Recommendations titled Bylaw Amendment. 4rotion by Commissioner La Valleur and seconded by Commissioner Suckow that the Arts and Culture ommission approve the June 25, 2015 Agenda as amended. Ayes: Kandace Ellis, Cheryl Gunness, Barbara La Valleur, Daniel Li, Ray Meifert, Anne Miller, Kitty O'Dea, and Steve Suckow. Motion carried. IV. Adoption of Consent Agenda A. Approval of Minutes — Regular Meeting of May 28, 2015 B. General Manager's Report C. Music in Edina Chair Meifert asked if there were changes or corrections to the minutes of the Regular Meeting of May 28, 2015. No changes voiced. The consent agenda was approved as presented. V. Community Comment No comments made. V1. Reports/Recommendations A. 4th of July Parade Chair Meifert provided details about the vehicle the Commission will use for the parade. He welcomed any available Commissioners to ride on the vehicle. Wommissioner La Valleur stated that perhaps some of the Music in Edina posters could be placed on the vehicle. Mr. Frey noted that some materials had been ordered publicizing certain events and if received in time could be distributed. B. Edina Film Festival Chair Meifert stated that he did speak with John Swon who stated that he has no problem turning that group over to be a working group of the Arts & Culture Commission, should the Commission desire. • Commissioner Ellis stated that she got the impression from the last meeting that the Commission did not want to move forward with that idea because they felt that it could not be successful. Chair Meifert stated that there would be additional avenues to explore in an attempt to lower costs. Commissioner O'Dea agreed with Commissioner Ellis that the decision had been made not to explore further with that idea. Commissioner La Valleur stated that if the Grandview plans move forward, perhaps that would be good timing for discussing that event. Commissioner O'Dea stated that there had never been a determination if a lower cost for the theater could be obtained if the City were to ask. Mr. Frey stated that if the Commission decides that they would like to pursue the matter he could setup a meeting. Commissioner O'Dea stated that perhaps if the theater was willing to work with the City that could be used for theater space. She confirmed that she would be willing to participate in the meetings with the theater. C. Bylaw Amendments Commissioner Suckow stated that at the April meeting there was discussion regarding the bylaws and how some items may not apply to how the working groups are currently run. He briefly highlighted the items he had noted or proposed for change following the last discussion. He noted that under the bylaws this item is simply for review and can be recommended for adoption at the next meeting. He asked that Commissioners review the bylaw information he highlighted and provide any additional input to him. Commissioner Gunness stated that there would also be a question regarding whether the bylaws should be amended or whether the way the Commission runs should be amended to fit the bylaws, mentioning the budget items. • Commissioner Suckow explained that Public Art Edina existed prior to the formation of the Commission and therefore runs independently from the Commission. He noted that Music in Edina was formed after the formation of the Commission but also runs somewhat separately with updates given to the Commission from both groups. Commissioner Ellis noted that the Commission was involved in approving and discussing the original formation of the summer music series and therefore the group has been running in a similar format. Mr. Frey explained that Public Art Edina has their own treasurer while he acts as treasurer for Music in Edina. He stated that Public Art has funds at the Community Foundation in addition to the City, which Music in Edina does not. Chair Meifert stated that he would like to see the Commission have more review over the budgets for the working groups. Commissioner Miller stated that perhaps the two working groups could create a spreadsheet with their budget information for the Commission to review. Motion by Commissioner Miller and seconded by Commissioner La Valleur that the Art and Culture Commission review sections seven and nine of the bylaws, marking any proposed changes for discussion at the July Commission meeting. Ayes: Kandace Ellis, Cheryl Gunness, Barbara La Valleur, Daniel Li, Ray Meifert, Anne Miller, Kitty O'Dea, and Steve Suckow. Motion carried. D. Public Art Edina i. Advisory Communication — Budget Increase • Commissioner La Valleur stated that the budget increase proposal will be moving on to the City Council for approval. Commissioner Suckow questioned if it should be spelled out that the working group would be requesting assistance from City staff regarding installation. He noted that it should be made clear as to what the group is asking for in full. He also noted that a report should be given to the Commission in one year to determine if more or better quality submissions are received as a result of the higher stipend. �r. Frey agreed that he would speak with Parks & Recreation Staff regarding installation assistance. ii. Advisory Communication — K9 Sculpture Commissioner La Valleur stated that the sculpture would be modeled after Kodiak, if the artist is able to do that. She stated that the Edina Women's Club donated $5,000 for the sculpture. She stated that the organization has an additional $10,000 that they would potentially be willing to donate to the sculpture. Chair Meifert stated that perhaps another member from that group should be consulted as well as an artist, such as John Curie. Commissioner La Valleur stated that there could be an open call for the item but noted that the Women's Club did make a recommendation of an artist that is available and willing to complete the sculpture. Chair Meifert stated that an open call would bring more attention to the item and elevate the level of work from artists. Mr. Frey stated that part of the intent of this advisory communication was to determine if City Council would welcome such a donation as every donation to the City needs to be approved by the Council. He noted that the artist Michelle Recke will have examples of bronze dogs she has completed at the Edina Art Center's Art with a Bark! exhibit. E. Handling Art Exhibit Requests from Developers and Public Places i. Fairview Southdale Hospital Expansion Partnership ii. 71 France Partnership Mr. Frey stated that Commissioner La Valleur invited Chair Meifert and himself to a meeting with Larry Laukka to discuss a partnership opportunity. He explained that Mr. Laukka would like to see the Edina Art Center and Public Art Edina partner with Fairview Southdale Hospital to display local artwork to create a community space. Mr. Laukka stated that there would be a 50 -foot wall that could be used to display different types of two- and three-dimensional art. Mr. Wrey noted that he is being approached more with these kinds of requests, referencing 71 France, which has also pproached the Edina Art Center regarding a space where art could be hung. He stated a concern with adding workload this would place on Edina Art Center staff. Mr. Frey stated that perhaps the Commission could create a new working group for this purpose, as these would be wonderful opportunities to gain exposure and partner with local businesses and organizations. Commissioner Ellis stated that one of the missions of the Commission is to bring more attention to local artists and this would be a great opportunity to do that. She agreed that the Art Center staff would not be able to handle that responsibility. Commissioner La Valleur stated that she attended a University of Minnesota event recently and obtained a contact from a retired nurse that belongs to a group which meets twice a week and would be willing to offer their assistance if possible. F. Sculpture Selections for 2015-2016 There was a switch in agenda items due to commissioner's schedules. Commissioner La Valleur presented a slide show of sculptures within the City. Commissioner Miller commended Commissioner La Valleur and the Public Art working group for their efforts in bringing great sculptures to the City. E. Handling Art Exhibit Requests from Developers and Public Places (Continued) iii. Fairview Southdale Hospital Expansion Partnership iv. 71 France Partnership ommissioner La Valleur stated that some of the members of Public Art are willing to contribute their time rather than lace that burden on the Art Center staff. She noted that items placed on display would be available for sale and suggested that a portion of the sale price be donated to the Art Center and Arts and Culture Commission. She believed that this would be an exciting opportunity. She believed that Mr. Laukka was hoping to have the art in place for the August opening, noting that perhaps a group could meet and setup some initial items for the opening. Commissioner Ellis agreed that it would be excellent to be involved but had concern with selecting artists by the August opening. Chair Meifert stated that information was provided in the packet as to what could be done initially with the opening. H� agreed that a plan would need to be in place to follow. Mr. Frey noted caution in hanging certain types of artwork in hospital settings. He provided an example where he was invited to display portraits at the Penny George Institute and was called a few days later to remove them as people were uncomfortable. Chair Meifert agreed that it can be hard to gauge whether people would be offended by certain items. Commissioner Miller questioned who would have the final say on what art would be selected. Commissioner La Valleur stated that a working group could be created that would make that decision. Commissioner Gunness questioned if the working group would be specifically for the hospital or whether that working group would deal with all similar requests. Chair Meifert stated that the working group should handle all requests from outside organizations. Commissioner La Valleur stated that there are artists that she knows that would be willing to be a part of the working group. Commissioner Ellis questioned who would actually install the art. Mr. Frey stated that the working group assembled would work out those details. He agreed that hanging art for display is a difficult job. He stated that the key to the success for this group would be finding individuals that would be knowledgeable and available to hang and light the exhibition. Commissioner La Valleur stated that it would be the decision of the working group whether the art be rotated on a 6-, 9- or 12 -month period. Motion by Commissioner Ellis and seconded by Commissioner La Valleur to authorize the creation of a working group that will explore partnership opportunities,and alternative exhibition space. Ayes: Kandace Ellis, Cheryl Gunness, Barbara La Valleur, Daniel Li, Ray Meifert, Anne Miller, Kitty O'Dea, and Steve Suckow. Motion carried. Commissioners Ellis and Gunness and Chair Meifert stated that they would like to be on the working group. Commissioner O'Dea stated that she would assist when available. Commissioner La Valleur stated that she will follow up with an email to organize the activities. Commissioner Suckow stated that the creation of the working group should now be published and welcome interested individuals in the community. VII. Correspondence and Petitions Chair Meifert asked if there was any correspondence or petitions. None voiced. VIII. Chair and Board Commissioner Comments Commissioner O'Dea stated that there has been discussion regarding the creation of a calendar that features art and culture events. She noted that she would be willing to begin the work on the calendar by gathering information and surveying the Commissioners. She stated that she can bring a draft back to the Commission for review and input. Commissioner Ellis stated that the Music in Edina group had also discussed that and noted that she has a spreadsheet available through the working group that she can share which lists the music events. TED -X permit, noting that the event • Commissioner Gunness stated that she applied for and received approval to for a will be held on Saturday, October 24th. IX. Staff Comments Mr. Frey referenced the donation and sponsorship brochure and stated that he has a meeting the following week with staff to move this item forward. He stated that any document will need to be a citywide document. He stated that the 4 its and Culture Commission had desired their own brochure and he will mention that at the meeting. He noted that e will update the Commission in July as to what occurs during the meeting. Chair Meifert stated that he could see that brochure to be a sales document and would like to provide input to Mr. Frey. Mr. Frey welcomed input from the Commission. X. Adjournment Motion by Commissioner Li and seconded by Commissioner Suckow that the Art and Culture Commission adjourn the meeting at 6:1 1 p.m. Ayes: Kandace Ellis, Cheryl Gunness, Daniel Li, Ray Meifert, Anne Miller, Kitty O'Dea, and Steve Suckow. Motion carried. n LJ 0 • MINUTES HUMAN RIGHTS AND RELATIONS COMMISSION " J June 23, 2015 at 7:OOPM z City Hall, Community Room • ek*nar waM'^ I. CALL TO ORDER Chair Arseneault called the meeting to order at 7:04 pm. II. ROLL CALL Commissioners answering roll call were Chair Arseneault, Commissioners Rinn, Seidman, Vecchio -Smith and Winnick. Staff present: HRRC Staff Liaison, MJ Lamon, City Management Fellow Devin Massopust and Economic Development Manager Bill Neuendorf. Absent members: Commissioners Burza, Kennedy, and Sanders, and Student Commissioners Gates and Weinert. III. APPROVAL OF MEETING AGENDA Commissioner Seidman moved to approve the June 23, 2015 meeting agenda. Commissioner Winnick seconded. Motion carried. IV. APPROVAL OF MEETING MINUTES Chair Arseneault stated that Commissioner Rinn was not included in the Roll Call portion of the May 26t` minutes, though she was in attendance. Commissioner Winnick moved to amend the minutes to include Commissioner Rinn as present. Commissioner Siedman seconded. Motion carried. Motion was made by Commissioner Seidman to approve the amended meeting minutes from the May 26, 2015 HRRC meeting. Commissioner Rinn seconded. Motion carried. Commissioner Tian arrived at 7:09 pm. City Management Fellow Devin Massopust introduced himself to the Commission. V. COMMUNITY COMMENT None. VI. GUEST SPEAKER: Bill Neuendorf, Economic Developer Economic Development Manager Bill Neuendorf updated the Commission on development activity taking place around the City. He stated that residential redevelopment is continuing to occur at a fast pace with 134 teardowns so far this year. Chair Arseneault asked if the people moving into the new homes are already Edina residents or if they are mostly new residents. Neuendorf replied that there is no concrete data on that, but that in his own neighborhood it is a mix. Neuendorf then updated the Commission on development taking place in the Southdale area that includes Fairview Southdale Emergency Room, the Southdale Medical Expansion and the Aurora on France Project. He also updated the Commission on the various housing developments that are taking place or may take place including the 66 West Apartments, the 7200 France Project, Onyx on York and 71 France Apartments. Due to the new development in housing complexes, Commissioners stated they would like to know whether there is still an issue of families moving into apartments that they believe are in the Edina School District, but are actually in the Richfield School District. The Commission also desires to ensure that there is an affordable housing policy in place with regard to the new housing units being built. VII. REPORTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS A. Work Plan Updates a) Community Outreach: Chair Arseneault relayed information from Commissioner Burza stating that Community Conversations is moving forward and that there will be an update at the next meeting. She also stated that the listening sessions will likely be scheduled in the first or second week of October. • 0 b) Human Rights City Designation: Commissioner Winnick gave an update regarding the speaking outline that was created with input from all members • of the working group for the presentations on the Human Rights Cities iInitiative. Evaluation cards were also developed in conjunction with the presentation. The first presentation to the Minneapolis University Rotary Club on June 3 was well received as indicated by the high ratings on the evaluation forms that were completed following the presentation. c) Affordable Housing: Commissioner Winnick presented a report from the Edina Housing Foundation regarding the current state of affordable housing in the City, as well as the proposed affordable housing policy. The Commission decided that they would like to voice their support for the approval of an Affordable Housing Policy. A motion was made by Commissioner Winnick to approve the HRRC Affordable Housing Committee's drafting of an HRRC resolution to endorse in substantial form the adoption of the Affordable Housing policy as recommended by the Edina Housing Foundation. Motion seconded by Vecchio -Smith. Motion carried. The HRRC Affordable Housing Committee will provide a draft of the communication for City Council regarding the HRRC's resolutions, to be sent by email to commissioners for review by the end of the week. The Committee will work with Chair Arseneault to finalize the communication before next Tuesday's Council meeting. d) ADA Proposal: Commissioner Vecchio -Smith stated that she is in correspondence with a friend who has vast experience with the ADA and hopes to be able to create an informational document that will provide some observations and personal experiences regarding the impact of the law that could be more widely shared through a blog and other City communication forms. e) Tom Oye Award Procedure Review: Commissioner Rinn reported that the Tom Oye Award Committee has just met to begin the review of the Award, with the goal to provide recommendations to Commissioners in July or August for addressing multiple issues regarding the Award Procedure. B. Website Proposal Commissioner Tian gave a presentation on possible improvements that could be 40 made to the Commission's website. Based on the commissioners' feedback, Tian will send a list of recommendations to the staff liaison, who will then forward it to . the Communications and Technology Services Department for consideration. In conjunction with updating and improving the Commission's website, commissioners noted the need to have an updated photograph of the Commission, to be taken in August. VIII. CORRESPONDENCE AND PETITION In response to correspondence received from the liaison to the Eden Prairie Human Rights Commission regarding a movement to effect the history that is reflected in art at the Capitol, Chair Arseneault will attend the proposed presentation by a representative from "Healing MN Stories" and will report back to the Commission about the Capitol Art Project, for possible inclusion in the 2016 work plan. IX. CHAIR AND COMMISSIONER COMMENTS Chair Arseneault informed the Commission that Commissioner Sanders resigned. She also noted that at the July and August meetings, the Commission should be • prepared to address the 2016 work plan. Chair Arseneault also informed the Commission that Commissioner Rinn has volunteered to serve on the Human Services Taskforce as the HRRC representative. Commissioner Rinn stated that the work that she participated in regarding revised guidelines for Human Services vendor applications was completed, and the RFP (Request for Proposals) has been finalized. Commissioner Vecchio -Smith informed the Commission that she is waiting to discuss the possible partnership with the Edina School's Parent Community Network regarding hard conversations. X. STAFF COMMENTS There were no staff comments. XI. ADJOURNMENT Commissioner Winnick moved to adjourn the June 23`d meeting. Commissioner Seidman seconded. Meeting adjourned at 8:58 pm. C7 • Respectfully submitted, MJ Lamon, HRRC Staff Liaison Minutes Approved by HRRC June 23, 2015 Pat Arseneault, HRRC Chair 1 • is To: City Council From: Human Rights and Relations Commission Date: August 5, 2015 w tiA_' Item No. IX. C. Subject: HRRC Advisory Communication Regarding Affordable Housing in Edina Policy Proposal Attachments: None Action Requested: None. Situation: The HRRC Affordable Housing Expanding Opportunity Committee has been tracking the Edina Housing Foundation affordable housing policy as part of the HRRC's 2015 Work Plan. Background: The Edina City Council requested that the Edina Housing Foundation, a private non-profit corporation, recommend an affordable housing policy that will guide future real estate developments in Edina. The Edina Housing Foundation drafted five policy recommendations for the City Council. These policies will be presented to the City Council at a future meeting. In June, the Edina Human Rights and Relations Commission (EHRRC) passed four resolutions regarding affordable housing. In late July, the EHRRC learned that one of the five policy statements included on the July 21 st policy recommendation from the Edina Housing Foundation is in direct contradiction to the principles and intent of the EHRRC's recommendations. The remainder of this memorandum includes two topics: 1) the EHRRC's resolutions regarding affordable housing; 2) an explanation of why the EHRRC is unable to support the Edina Housing Foundations first policy recommendation as worded on the draft dated July 21, 2015. Assessment: Based upon this Background, discussions with the City Development Director and the City Planning Staff, and the HRRC's Committee on Affordable Housing's Reports, the following Resolutions have been adopted by the HRRC for transmission to the City Council to be a part of its consideration of an Affordable Housing Policy for the City. Recommendation/ Resolutions: RESOLVED: That as a matter of City of Edina policy, the City will require that at least 20% of the total of all units in new multi -family housing developments requiring rezoning or variance(s) be sold or Page 2 O f�ti �O • ', CY7RFOF�`��O • �aaa rented at an affordable price, as defined from time to time by the MHFA(Affordable Housing). RESOLVED FURTHER: That, if requested, the City will consider Tax Increment Financing for projects that include at least 20% of all units designated for Affordable Housing. RESOLVED FURTHER: That Affordable Housing in the rental market shall remain so for a minimum of 15 years, as memorialized by a Land Use Restrictive Covenant for all such developments. RESOLVED FURTHER: That the actions, plans, and goals of the Edina Housing Foundation are endorsed by the HRRC, as these goals also accomplish the HRRC goals to improve the socio-economic and cultural diversity of this community, thereby building a stronger, more vibrant environment for all citizens who live, work, or learn in Edina or who wish to do so. HRRC Position on "Payments in Lieu" Policy Statement As worded on the July 21st draft from the Edina Housing Foundation, the first policy recommendation differs significantly from the EHRRC's first resolution and now appears as follows: The City Council will require that at least 20% of the total units in new multi -family housing developments over 20 units requiring a rezoning to a multi -family zoning districts, including Planned Unit Development (PUD) be sold or rented at an affordable price as defined below. If no affordable housing is provided on-site, the City will require a one-time fee in lieu of affordable housing for such rezoning. Fees would be based on the average market rates of comparable housing units and negotiated on a project -by -project basis. The fee must be paid prior to issuance of a building permit and will be used to support affordable housing in other developments within the City of Edina. Strengths The first portion of the policy (not italicized) reflects the original principles and intent of the EHRRC. When 20% of new housing is affordable, we are creating real homes for our teachers, paraprofessionals, police officers, fire fighters, medical workers, and others in the middle income range who are employed within Edina. 2. An increase in reasonably -priced housing will allow the tagline of the Edina Housing Foundation, "come home to Edina," to be a realistic option for many more families. 3. This increase in reasonably -priced housing units will help the City of Edina achieve the goal of 212 new affordable housing units built by 2020. �9��j� Page 3 O Ce:.tIt �"- O - 4)Al!i Potential Problem Areas The portion of the policy italicized above (hereafter referred to as "payments in lieu") is unlikely to lead to tangible short-term increases in the number of reasonably -priced homes in Edina, and it requires the creation of policy and personnel modifications. . Edina lacks significant affordable housing opportunities because of its "built out " nature. Therefore, funds raised through "payments in lieu" are likely to sit unused because appropriate sites for housing of this nature are not frequently available. 2. Construction of affordable units in Edina has led to some political opposition in the past. The EHRRC fears that if affordable housing is removed from larger mixed -income projects (with the funds being used for future projects including more concentrated affordable housing), there may be opposition. 3. This policy lacks numerous details that are material to the conversation: a. a method for calculating the "fee in lieu" b. regulatory standards to ensure that monies contributed to a fund are spent exclusively for the dedicated purpose c. guidelines for specifying a governance structure by which these funds are to be managed, including audit, investment and overhead, and the source of public money to pay for this management. 4. Related to Potential Problem Area #3, the Edina Housing and Redevelopment Authority consists of the City Council, but it has no administrative structure or support. To infuse substantial dollars to this structure without procedures or standards in place will likely result in the money from developers sitting idle or in the city needing to create policies and hire personnel to manage such funds. Conclusion & Recommendation The City of Edina should encourage the development of privately -funded integrated communities consisting of a variety of housing suited for the many groups who wish to live, work, and learn together. Establishing a fund to create affordable housing in the future is not the best method for providing adequate homes for our teachers, firefighters, law enforcement officers, retail managers, medical workers, and others who contribute to the strength and vitality of our city. Therefore, the EHRRC continues to recommend that twenty percent of all new and refurbished multi -family housing to be constructed in Edina should contain affordable housing, as defined from time to time by federal and state authorities. There should not be a provision for the real estate developer to make a payment in lieu of compliance with this policy.