The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About2012-03-06 COUNCIL MEETINGSteve and Linda Enck From: Enck, Steve [senck @wccoradio.cbs.com] Sent: Tuesday, February 28, 2012 12:37 PM To: Slamenck @comcast.net Subject: FW: Roundabout at Countryside School From: Office of Tim Dolan [Tim.Dolan@minneapolismn.gov] Sent: Tuesday, February 28, 2012 12:25 PM To: Enck, Steve Subject: Roundabout at Countryside School Steve, As a parent of four sons who attended Countryside Grade School I have concerns with the idea of a roundabout being put at the Tracy Avenue crosswalk. Roundabouts are proven to be very effective at slowing traffic, eliminating collisions, yet keeping the traffic flow moving. We do have several in the metro area, and their popularity is growing nationally. The largest causes of intersection accidents are inattentive drivers and those who are trying to "make it through" before a light changes. A roundabout goes a long way towards eliminating those issues. However, I can't visualize how a roundabout would be a safer place for child crossings. The intersection at Tracy is an extremely busy intersection for kids and vehicles at the start and closing of the school. It seems inconsistent that it would be safer for kids in an intersection where drivers are expected to yield versus stop. As a driver, your primary concentration in a busy roundabout is finding a space to get in and then making sure oncoming vehicles are yielding. Looking for crossing pedestrians becomes a second priority. I would need to see examples of success for me to feel comfortable with roundabouts at a primary school crossings. Otherwise the concept makes me very nervous. Tim Dolan 5309 West Highwood Drive Edina, Minnesota 55436 Phone: 952 - 933 -8982 Countryside Graduates: Ben, Matt, Brent, and Tommy Dolan. 1 R ez-e, k V (2 1 51 U/ lQ, (2,C 9eLe*?At- RECOMMENDATIONS FOR TRACY AVENUE Roundabout: The majority of the neighbors feel that the roundabout is not something that is needed at Benton and Tracy. • The offset intersection is something we are all familiar with and it has been serving us well without an accident for over 30 years. • The stop signs are something that the kids and drivers understand. • The offset intersection maintains the property values of all the residents. Please vote no for the roundabout. Vote for the offset intersection with the improvements the Transportation Commission recommends. Sidewalks /Boulevards/ Parking Lane /Bump Outs/ Crosswalks/Traffic lanes and Bike Route/Lanes are complicated issues. Keeping Tracy the same width seems to be the desired end result of the neighborhood. The only way that is possible is to model Tracy after 44th Street that was resurfaced last year. Is there a difference between Country Club /Momingside and Countryside? See page 2 The width of 44th street is about 33 feet wide. There is no marking of lanes on the street. Tracy is presently 36 -feet wide (Double yellow line down the middle) The sidewalk is on the north side of 44th Street and is 5 -feet wide. Tracy sidewalk is 5 -feet wide on the East side. 1. Recommend leaving the sidewalk at 5 -feet wide. The Boulevard on 44th Street is 3 -feet wide. Tracy East side Boulevard is 5 -feet wide. 2. Recommend a 3 -foot wide Boulevard on the East side of Tracy. From France going west on 40 Street Parking is allowed on both sides of the street for about 2 -3 blocks. Then No Parking signs on one side. Parking lanes are not marked. Tracy east side Parking Lane is actually 6 -feet wide. 3. Recommend 8 feet wide Parking on the East side with Bump outs Traffic Lanes are not marked on 44th Street (No lines at all) Tracy East Side Traffic Lane is 12 -feet wide with 6 feet of Parking Tracy West Side Traffic Lane is 12 -feet wide with a 6 -foot shoulder. 4. Recommend East Side 11- foot wide Traffic lane with 8 -feet of Parking. Recommend West Side 11 -foot wide Traffic lane with 8 -feet of shoulder There are no Bump outs along the parking lane on 44th Street. There is a short parking "Bump In" on the south side of 44th Street at a park. Tracy has no Bump Outs now, but most residents are not opposed to them. 5. Recommend The Bump Outs on the Parking Lane as presented by Engineering. Crosswalks as presented by Engineering look good 6. Recommend Crosswalks as presented with a slight rise to improve sight lines and reduce speed on Tracy. Signage that Reads Edina Shares The Road with an arrow- pointing west indicates a Bike Route is posted along 44th Street. Same signage is on the opposite side of the street pointing east 7. Recommend the same signage "Edina Shares the Road - Bike Route" on both sides of Tracy. Many of the comments received from residents between Benton and Vernon were concerned with speed. They were interested in seeing the existing 30MPH speed limit being enforced. This speeding on Tracy in both directions is the biggest safety issue that exists. A Roundabout would only add to improved traffic flow and speeding out of the Roundabout. The above Recommendations would result in Two 11 -foot wide traffic lanes plus one 8-foot wide parking lane plus one 8 -foot wide shoulder minus 2 -feet of Boulevard equals the same 36 Foot wide Tracy Avenue and includes all the features on 44TH Street and many more features than other streets in Edina. Bill Rodgers 6100 Arbour Lane, Edina, MN - ECNA Chair Tracy Project (over) 1 > Recz i ✓a 1 (.Q / I A�eeA-i/vu�sj- Is there a difference between Country Club /Momingside and Countryside? • 44th Street was considered Different because of the trees and older homes (Historic). • Tracy Avenue also has trees we don't want to lose. • There are also valued homes we do not want to infringe on and change the quality of life of the residents. • Homes on 44th St have more space between the street and homes that would have allowed widening the street without the issues it would create for Tracy residents. • We also have a quality of life on Tracy Avenue that we need to and should have the right to maintain. • A precedent was set with the 44th Street Reconstruction Project that should be followed on Tracy. • Since 44th Street has been allowed to eliminate Bike Lanes and instead chose to "Share The Road" so too should Tracy Avenue. What is the plan for the section of Tracy Avenue between Benton and Crosstown Highway 62? Residents do not understand why this section of Tracy is not being addressed at this time. J AGENDA CITY COUNCIL MEETING CITY OF EDINA, MINNESOTA CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS MARCH 6, 2012 7:00 P.M. I. CALL TO.ORDER 11. ROLL CALL f 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 February 21, 2012 and Work Session of February 21, 2012, February 17 & 18, 2012 Work Session, and February 28, 2012 Work Session B. Receive Payment Of- Claims As Per: Pre -List Dated 02/23/2012, TOTAL $859,538.43; And Pre - List Dated 03/01/2012 TOTAL $649,029.98 C. Request For Purchase — 2012 GMC 4 x4 Extended Cab Pick -up — Utility Division D. On -Sale Intoxicating, Club On -Sale, and Sunday Sale Liquor License Renewals E. Wine License Renewals F. Beer License Renewals G. Traffic Safety Report of February 1, 2012 H. Resolution No. 2012 -43 Setting April 3, 2012 Public Hearing For Municipal Consent — 1 -494 Auxiliary Lane I. Request For Purchase —Terex PT 60 Track Loader m Braemar Golf Course J. Resolution No. 2012 -44 Approving Amendment Hennepin County Fire Chief's Joint Powers Agreement K. Request For Purchase —Fire Department Type I Ambulance V. SPECIAL RECOGNITIONS AND PRESENTATIONS A. Resolution No. 2012 -45 Authorizing Fire Department To Accept FEMA FireAct Grant Agenda /Edina City Council March 6, 2012 Page 2 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. o 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 — Conditional Use Permit And Lot Width Variance, 5421 France and 3717 Fuller, St. Peter's Lutheran Church Resolution No. 2012 -37 & Resolution No. 2012 -38 (Favorable rollcall vote the three Council Members to approve) B. PUBLIC HEARING - Rezoning From PCD -4, To PUD, 6996 France Avenue, FE70, LLC, Ordinance No. 850 -A -38 and _Resolution 'No. 2012.39 (Favorable' vote of majority of Council Members present to approve) C. PUBLIC HEARING- Tracy Avenue Roadway Improvement No. BA -368, Resolution No. 2012 -41 (Favorable rollcall vote of four 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 speaks 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. Resolution No. 2012 -40 Accepting Various Donations B. Intoxicating On -Sale Renewal of Cocina del Barrio C. Resolution No. 42 Adopting Precinct Boundaries and Polling Locations D. Art.Center Study Submittals and RFP - Art Center Board - Agenda/Edina City Council March 6, 2012 Page 3 IX. CORRESPONDENCE AND PETITIONS A. Correspondence X. MAYOR AND COUNCIL COMMENTS XI. MANAGER'S COMMENTS XII. 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- 886172 hours in advance of the meeting. SCHEDULE OF UPCOMING MEETINGS /DATES /EVENTS Tues Mar 6 Work Session — Redistricting & 2012 Work Plan Tues Mar 6 Regular Meeting Mon Mar 19 Annual Boards & Commissions Dinner Meeting Tues Mar 20 Work Session — Edinborough Park /Sports Dome Report Tues Mar 20 Regular Meeting Tues Apr 3 Work Session — Neighborhood Identification Steering Com Tues Apr 3 Regular Meeting Sat Apr 14 Town Hall Meeting Tues Apr 17 Work Session — TDB Tues Apr 17 Regular Meeting Mon Apr 23 Annual Volunteer Reception Tues May 1 Work Session — TDB Tues May 1 Regular Meeting ies May 14 Work Session — TDB ues May 14 Regular Meeting Mon May 28 MEMORIAL DAY HOLIDAY OBSERVED — CITY Hall Closed 5:30 P.M. COMMUNITY ROOM 7:00 P.M. COUNCIL CHAMBERS 5:00 P.M. HUGHES PV. CENTENNIAL LAKES 5:00 P.M. COUNCIL CHAMBERS 7:00 P.M. COUNCIL CHAMBERS 5:30 P.M. COMMUNITY ROOM 7:00 P.M. COUNCIL CHAMBERS 10:00 A.M. — NOON SENIOR CENTER 5:30 P.M. COMMUNITY ROOM 7:00 P.M. COUNCIL CHAMBERS 5:00 P.M.BRAMAR RM WARREN HYDE CLUB HS 5:30 P.M. COMMUNITY ROOM 7:00 P.M. COUNCIL CHAMBERS 5:30 P.M. COMMUNITY ROOM 7:00 P.M. COUNCIL CHAMBERS r *� MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE EDINA CITY COUNCIL HELD AT CITY HALL FEBRUARY 21', 2012 7:00 P. M. I. CALL TO ORDER Mayor Hovland called the meeting to order at 7:02 p.m. 11. ROLLCALL Answering rollcall were Members Bennett, Brindle, Sprague, Swenson and Mayor Hovland. Ill. MEETING AGENDA APPROVED Member Brindle-made a motion, seconded by,Member Sprague, approving the meeting agenda. Ayes: Bennett', Brindle, Sprague; Swenson;. Hovland Motion carried. IV. CONSENT AGENDA ADOPTED Member Swenson made a motion, seconded by Member Sprague, approving the consent agenda as revised to remove Items IV.D., Resolution No. 2012 -29 authoriiing issuance and sale of $33,690 EEP special assessment revenue bonds, Series 2012A (taxable), IV.E., Resolution No: 2012 -34 supporting the Metropolitan Council's 2012 request for bonding, and IV.H., Resolution No. 2012 -35 receiving the feasibility study for Tracy Avenue Roadway Reconstruction Project Improvement No. BA -368, as follows: IV.A. Approve regular and work session meeting minutes of February 6, 2012 IV.B. Approve correction of regular meeting minutes of January 17, 2012 IV.C. Receive payment of the following claims as shown in detail on the Check Register dated February 9, 2012, and consisting of 29 pages; General Fund $388,135.84; Communications Fund $7,466.72; Police Special Revenue $1,390.00; Working Capital Fund $46;400.51; Equipment Replacement Fund $1,533.95; Art Center Fund $4,061.30; Golf Dome Fund $1,742.61; Aquatic Center Fund $33,256.08; Golf Course Fund' $5,247:77 ;'Ice Arena Fund $16,383.45; Edinborough /Centennial Lakes Fund $2;430:77; Edinborough Park Fund $3,920.26; Centennial Lakes Park Fund $3,197.31; Liquor- Fund .$126,078.75; Utility Fund $409,599.96; Storm Sewer Fund $27,983:64; PSTF Agency Fund; $11,263.36; Payroll Fund $4,652.69; TOTAL $1;094,744.98 and for approval-of payment of claims dated February 16; 2012, and consisting of 23 pages; General Fund $293,440.17; Police Special Revenue $104.80; Working Capital Fund $27,232:47; Equipment Replacement Fund $11,870.37; Art Center Fund $961.81; Golf Dome Fund $277.65; Golf Course Fund $31,562.00; Ice Arena Fund $2,412.13; Edinborough /Centennial Lakes Fund $1,446.83; Edinborough Park Fund $14,084.53; Centennial Lakes Park Fund $1,002.66; Liquor Fund $102,831.24; Utility Fund $62,828.01; Storm Sewer Fund $20338.35; Recycling Fund $39,958.20,• PSTF"\Agency Fund $12,205.07; Payroll Fund $3,211.72; TOTAL $607,768:02; and, Credit Card Transactions dated November 27, 2011— December 26, 2011; TOTAL" $10,250.15; and, Credit Card Transactions dated December 27, 2011— January 27, 2012; TOTAL $10,212:85. r-e-venue -bonds, SeFies 2012A (taxable) IV N Rpsel-itien No IV.F.- Waive Second Reading and Adopt Ordinance No. 2012 -04 amending Section 1230.06 tobacco use in City parks Page 1 Minutes /Edina City Council /February 21, 2012 IV.G. Accept Traffic Safety Report of January 4, 2012 IV H Reselwi ien Nei 2012 ,35 Feseiving the feasibility study —fer Tracy Avenue —Remy IV.I. Request to Purchase, One Ton 4x4 truck. chassis – Braemar Golf Course, awarding the bid to the recommended low bidder, Polar Chevrolet at $24,266.05 plus sales tax. IV.J. • Adopt Resolution No: 2012 -36 approving lot division for 4236 Lynn Avenue IV.K. Approve Hornet's Nest Working Group – Edina Park Board Rollcall: Ayes: Bennett, Brindle, Sprague, Swenson, Hovland Motion carried. ITEMS REMOVED FROM THE CONSENT AGENDA IV.D. RESOLUTION NO. 2012 -29 ADOPTED– AUTHORIZING ISSUANCE AND SALE OF $33,690 EEP SPECIAL ASSESSMENT REVENUE BONDS, SERIES 2012A (TAXABLE) The Council asked staff to assure, prior'to execution, that. documentation. adequately addressed that the purchase of the bond was conditioned on 'the loan to Murphy Automotive. Mayor Hovland introduced and moved adoption of Resolution No. 2012 -29, Authorizing Issuance and Sale of $33,690 EEP Special Assessment Revenue Bonds, Series 2012A (taxable). Member Swenson seconded the motion. Ayes: Bennett, Brindle, Sprague, Swenson, Hovland Motion carried: IV.E. RESOLUTION NO. 2012 -34 ADOPTED –SUPPORTING THE METROPOLITAN COUNCIL'S 2012 REQUEST FOR BONDING Member Sprague introduced and moved adoption of Resolution No. 2012 -34, supporting the Metropolitan Council's 2012 request for bonding, as amended to indicate: "...urge all State legislators to support..." Member Brindle seconded the motion. Ayes: Bennett, Brindle, Sprague, Swenson, Hovland Motion carried. IV.H. RESOLUTION NO. 2012 -35 ADOPTED – RECEIVING THE FEASIBILITY STUDY FOR TRACY AVENUE ROADWAY RECONSTRUCTION PROJECT IMPROVEMENT NO. BA -368 Manager Neal advised that the feasibility study would be updated to include additional material received including correspondence-from the Edina Public Schools. Member Bennett introduced and moved adoption of Resolution No. 2012 -35, receiving the feasibility study for Tracy Avenue Roadway Reconstruction Project, Improvement No. BA -368 with inclusion of requested updates. Member Swenson seconded the motion. Ayes: Bennett, Brindle, Sprague, Swenson, Hovland Motion carried. V. SPECIAL RECOGNITIONS AND PRESENTATIONS V.A. OFFICER OF THE YEAR Police Chief Long described the activities sponsored by the Crime Fund and creation of the Officer of the Year Award in recognition of former Police Chief Mike. Siitari. He announced the first annual, 2010 -11 Mike Siitari Officer of the Year Award recipient was Officer Joel Moore and detailed his extraordinary service on behalf of the City. Page 2 a 4, Minutes /Edina City Coundt /February 21, 2012 Officer Joel Moore thanked the Crime Prevention Fund for sponsoring tthis award, his partners at Southdale,. Officers Jason Behr and Brandon Kuske ( his "2009 and 201P. partners), and his family for their support. The City Council and audience responded with around of applause. VI. PUBLIC HEARINGS HELD — Affidavits of Notice presented and ordered placed on file. VI.A. ST. PATRICK'S CATHOLIC CHURCH, TEMPORARY ON -SALE INTOXICATING LIQUOR LICENSE — APPROVED Police Chief Long presented the request - of the Church of St. Patrick's for a temporary intoxicating liquor license on March 17, 2012, for its "St. Patrick's Day Celebration" event and recommended approval. Mayor Hovland opened the public hearing at 7:19 p.m. Public Testimony No one appeared to comment. Member Brindle made a motion, seconded by Member Swenson, to close the public hearing. Ayes: Bennett, Brindle, Sprague, Swenson, Hovland Motion carried. Member Swenson made a motion, seconded by Member Sprague, to approve issuance of a temporary intoxicating liquor license to the Church of St. Patrick's on March 17, 2012, for an event entitled "St. Patrick's Day Celebration.." Ayes: Bennett, Brindle, Sprague, Swenson, Hovland Motion carried. VI. B. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT— RESOLUTION NO. 2012 -30 ADOPTED Member Swenson disclosed that she served on the board of Community Action Partnership for Suburban Hennepin (CAPSH), a grant recipient, but derived no payment. Attorney Knutson advised this was not a conflict of interest since Member Swenson was unpaid. Associate Planner Repya described the Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) Program and I ecommended allocation of Edina's 2012 allotment of .$110,285' as follows: Public Services- Senior Community Services (H.O.M.E- Housing and Outdoor Maintenance for the Elderly) of. $9;618; Community Action Partnership for Suburban Hennepin (CAPSH) of $4,700; and, Home.Line $2,225 (equaling $16,543 or 15% of total); and, Community Development - Rehabilitation of Private Property Program of $41,491; and, West Hennepin Affordable:: Housing Land Trust (WHAHLT) for its :Homes Within Reach Program of $52,251 (equaling $93,742 or 85% of total). The Council acknowledged that Edina received a greater reduction in CDBG allocation than did other cities in Hennepin County. Ms. Repya explained the formula used by Hennepin County was. based on census data (population) and poverty /over crowding, with poverty being double weighted i Mayor Hovland opened the public hearing at 7:31 p.m. Public Testimony Page 3 Minutes /Edina City Council /February 21, 2012 Kitty Engle, HOME Senior Community Services Program Director, described the services provided to 90 Edina seniors to help them live independently as long as possible and improve the City's housing stock. Paul Birnberg, attorney representing HomeLine, described the tenant advocacy services provided to 100 Edina residents. Scott Zemke, Community Action Partnership for Suburban Hennepin (CAPSH), reported on the services provided to Edina residents in 2011 and thanked the Council for its past and future support. Ms. Repya reported that Janet Lindbo, West Hennepin Affordable Housing Land Trust ( WHAHLT), was unable to attend tonight's meeting. She described the services provided by WHAHLT to purchase, rehab and resell homes while maintaining ownership of the property to make housing more affordable to qualified buyers. The recommended CDBG funding, along with additional funding, would allow WHAHLT to purchase an eighth home for rehabilitation and resale. It was noted that Hennepin County now administered the home rehabilitation loan /grant program (i.e., new furnaces, windows, basement drain tile repair). Member Brindle made a motion, seconded by Member Swenson, to close the public hearing. Ayes: Bennett, Brindle, Sprague, Swenson, Hovland Motion carried. Member Bennett introduced and moved adoption of Resolution No. 2012 -30, approving proposed use of 2012 Urban Hennepin County Community Development Block Grant Program Funds and authorizing execution of subrecipient agreement with Hennepin County and any third party agreements. Member Swenson seconded the motion. Ayes: Bennett, Brindle, Sprague, Swenson, Hovland Motion carried. V1. C. MODIFICATION TO THE REDEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR THE SOUTHEAST EDINA REDEVELOPMENT PLAN AND THE PROPOSED MODIFICATION TO THE TAX INCREMENT FINANCING PLAN FOR THE CENTENNIAL LAKES TAX INCREMENT FINANCING DISTRICT (COUNTY NO. 1203) — RESOLUTION NO. 2012-31 ADOPTED Jessica Cook, Ehlers & Associates representing the City, explained that modification to the Redevelopment Project Area (RPA) and existing Centennial Lakes Tax Increment Financing (TIF) District could provide a funding source for potential redevelopment activities. The Centennial Lakes District currently had cash that was not obligated and since it was operating under older State Statutes, the opportunity existed to use that resource for redevelopment elsewhere in the City. In this case, it was coming forward because modification would accomplish the following: 1) authorize where the tax increment in the district, through 2014, could be spent; 2) restated the budget in the TIF Plan to meet new State reporting criteria; and, 3) the District would expire in 2014 after which time the resource was still available but must be used in accordance with the adopted Plan. Ms. Cook displayed a map depicting the existing project area in the southeast corner of Edina and RPA that would encompass all commercial areas identified in the Comprehensive Plan as "potential areas of change and also all other properties within the area of the City bordered by Morningside Road and Vernon Avenue on the north, Tracy Avenue and Cahill Road on the west, and the City boundaries on the south and east." She indicated concern had been expressed that approval would encourage encroachment of commercial onto residential areas or might not adequately protect healthy residential areas. Ms. Cook explained the recommended configuration would provide the greatest Page 4 Minutes /Edina City Council /February 21, 2012 degree of flexibility for the City to expend tax increments; however, the Council could narrow the RPA. She indicated that approval of this modification would not circumvent the normal land use approval process. It would only authorize the use of tax increments from the Centennial Lakes District to be used for approved activities in the future. The Council acknowledged that $12 million had accrued within the Centennial Lakes District which would equal $23 million when this District expired at end of calendar 2014. Ms. Cook advised that expanding a project area was a common undertaking and many municipalities had created project areas that were contiguous with #s city boundaries. The Council asked questions of staff relating to the proposed language, noting the proposed RPA would encompass about 60% of the City's area and include a substantial number of single - family home neighborhoods not found to be blighted or with substandard housing. Ms. Cook explained that documentation language was driven by State Statute requirements and had been endorsed by the City's TIF legal counsel. She also explained the document made general findings that there were areas within this RPA that might benefit from the use of tax increment proceeds or other HRA activities. Member Bennett noted the document reflected "the property within the RPA," not "some of the Property within the RPA," and included many more properties than identified as "potential areas of change" within the Comprehensive Plan. Ms. Cook explained the City's legal counsel had recommended the RPA comprise a contiguous area so it would not raise a "red flag" for the State Auditor, potentially resulting in a time consuming audit. The Council asked whether inclusion of single family properties within the RPA or outside "potential areas of change" would undermine the underlying zoning laws or enhance the City's ability for condemnation. Ms. Cook answered it would not. Mayor Hovland opened the public hearing at 8:05 p.m. Public Testimony John Bohan, 800 Coventry Place, addressed the Council. Ms. Cook clarified the ways in which Centennial Lakes District tax increment funds could originally be used and the impact of the new legislation to restrict fund use. It was noted these tax increment funds could no longer be used for Centennial Lakes improvements (such as a roof repair /replacement). Alan Ackerberg, Parasole Restaurants, addressed the Council. Richard Curtain, property owner at 50th and France, addressed the Council. Michael Fischer, 4512 Dunham Drive, addressed the Council. Rachel Hubbard, 50th & France Association, addressed the Council. Diana Fleetham, 50th & France Association President, addressed the Council. Janet Bohan, 800 Coventry Place, addressed the Council. Member Brindle a motion, seconded by Member Swenson, to close the public hearing. Page 5 Minutes /Edina City Council /February 21, 2012 Ayes: Bennett, Brindle, Sprague, Swenson, Hovland Motion carried. The Council and staff addressed issues raised during public testimony. Manager Neal clarified the point was to expand the geographic area in which tax increment could be used. Member Brindle introduced and moved adoption of Resolution No. 2012 -31, adopting a modification to the Southeast Edina Redevelopment Project area and Tax Increment Financing Plan for Centennial Lakes Tax Increment Financing District, Alternative 1. Member Swenson seconded the motion. Member Sprague made a motion, seconded by Member Brindle, to amend Alternate 1 to include 441h and France and all areas identified as potential areas of change in the Comprehensive Plan. Ayes: Bennett, Brindle, Sprague, Swenson, Hovland Motion to amend carried. The Council discussed the importance of looking toward the future, retaining Edina's standing as a leading community, and benefit of taking advantage of an extraordinary opportunity to use $23 million of accumulated tax increments for redevelopment in other areas. It was noted the proposed RPA (Alternate 1) would provide the greatest flexibility and the City's residential areas were protected by zoning laws that included a significant public process. The Small Area Plan offered another layer of protection for the City's residential uses and eminent domain law provided protections as well. Support was expressed to consider a contiguous RPA to reduce the likelihood of triggering a State - initiated audit. Member Bennett stated she would not object to expanding the RPA to include "all potential areas of change" as identified in the Comprehensive Plan (less than 10% of the City's total area); however, would not support the proposed RPA since it comprised about 60% of the City's total area and included single - family PF9peFties neighborhoods that were not aa�R, identified as "potential areas of change" during the Comprehensive Plan public heaFings process. Ayes: Brindle, Sprague, Swenson, Hovland Nays: Bennett Motion as amended carried. VII. COMMUNITY COMMENT No one appeared to comment. Vlll. REPORTS/ RECOMMENDATIONS VIII.A. MINNESOTA RESTAURANT ASSOCIATION REQUEST REGARDING SALE PRICES EDINA CODE SECTION 900 Dan McElroy, representing the Minnesota Restaurant Association (MRA), presented its request for a Code amendment to provide pricing flexibility and allow "happy hour" discounts. The language would not allow multiple drink discounts, coupons, or barter contests and all other requirements would stay in place. David Burley, representing Edina Grill, stated his support because their guests had been requesting "happy hour" pricing. He indicated having this flexibility would not impact meeting the 60/40 food to liquor ratio because the offering would be for a short time period on select items. Mr. Burley stated Page 6 Minutes /Edina City Council /February 21; 2012 their restaurants in other municipalities experience vibrant business between 3 -5 p.m. that Edina Grill does not experience. 4 Donna,Fahs, representing Parasole Restaurant, stated her support and indicated giving�some latitude in modest adjustments would be good for business. She noted their restaurants in other municipalities were able to offer drink discounts, their guests expect it, and resent.the -fact it was not offered in Edina: `Ms. Fahs believed having this flexibility would not impact their ability to meet the 60/40 food_ao1Abor ratio. The Council noted an agenda item tonight would consider a change in the penalty.matrix for violating the 60/40 requirement to assure Edina remained a family - friendly restaurant community. It was mentioned that if the MRA's requested amendment was approved, restaurateurs would be able -to offer a drink discount, but would not be required to do so. Mr. McElroy concurred that having the ability to offer modest offerings in price would not have a huge impact in meeting the, required 60/40 split. He advised that while several municipalities limit late night "happy hour", offerings, Edina was the only municipality in Minnesota to prohibit , "happy hour" offerings. The Council discussed the requested amendment and noted that while "happy hour" liquor discounts were. restricted, some Edina restaurants offered food discounts that provided a better profit margin. Member Swenson made a motion, seconded by Member Sprague, referring the request of the Minnesota Restaurant Association regarding an amendment to Edina Code Section 900 to staff for review and recommendation. Ayes: Bennett, Brindle, Sprague, Swenson, Hovland Motion carried. VIII.B. So' & FRANCEWSINESS & PROFESSIONAL ASSOCIATION'S REQUEST TO SELL "VIP" PARKING IN THE 5 -0 MALL PARKING LOT DURING THE EDINA ART FAIR Rachel Hubbard and Diana Fleetham, representing 50th & France Association, presented a request to sell ".VIP" parking in the 5 -0 Mall parking lot on June 1 to June 3 during the 2012 Edina Art Fair. This request was being made because it was found this parking lot was not a successful location for food vendors. The Council acknowledged that parking was challenged and asked questions of staff. Attorney Knutson recommended the City and Association enter into a brief agreement to "lease" the parking, at a nominal sum, to the Association. Ms.' Hubbard indicated the Association provided proof of liability insurance with the Edina Art Fair application. The Council asked that this information be memorialized to assure clarity and serve as a guide for future,considerations. Member Sprague made a motion, seconded by Member Brindle, approving the request of the 50th & France Business Professional Association's request to sell "VIP" parking in the 5 -0 Mall,parking lot from 10.a.m. to 7. p.m. on June V and June 2, and from 10 a.m. to 5 p.m. on June 3 during the 2012 Edina Art Fair, subject to execution of lease pursuant to terms as- discussed. Ayes: Bennett,' Brindle, Sprague, Swenson, Hovland Motion carried. VIII.C. ORDINANCE NO. 2012 -5 ADOPTED — AMENDING SECTION 900 OF- EDINA CITY ' CODE CONCERNING,LIQUOR Mr. Neal presented staff's recommendation to waive first reading and adopt Ordinance No. 2012 -05 establishing penalties and enforcement criteria for compliance with the City's liquor licensing standards and requirements, to include a penalty matrix for failure to meet the City's 60/40 food /liquor standard. He described penalties associated with each violation. Page 7 Minutes /Edina City Council /February 21, 2012 The Council discussed the amendment- language and asked questions of ;staff relating to the process followed should it be .found a restaurant was not making progress to gain .60/40 food /liquor compliance.- City Clerk Mangen clarified that if out of compliance, the establ.ishment.would receive a 12 -month license, with the first six months being probationary. in addition there was. an associated penalty and if -monitoring . revealed the restaurant was not, moving towards compliance within six months, the, Council could, „consider accelerating, to ,a second violation or revocation: Attorney Knutson advised the ordinance proposed presumptive penalties. so it would be.the Council's option to 'impose a penalty, consider revocation, or waive the penalty if close to compliance. The Council acknowledged restaurateurs, had invested millions of, dollars in their businesses and the City's goal was to work with restaurant owners to gain compliance. Discussion ensued whether to offer a one -year :probationary license to assure adequate time was allowed to progress towards compliance. - The consensus of the Council was to revise the first and second violation for "failure to meet requirement of.,60% :of gross receipts from sale of food and non - alcoholic beverages” as follows: "...fine;. a 12 month probationary, license; development of a plan to achieve compliance within one year, with a monitoring .visit.at six months. ;.vhere 4 -he Council may AsideF gFaking,an additional six ........�L. .........J L...�:...... -: 1::....:.... a .-4—rc ___4 :F........:a:. ... .. -.... a..........J.: aL.. C..11 �...Y CA L•.:. -�,. ......I " And to also eliminate the duplicate violation entitled: "Sale of an alcoholic beverage to a person under the State - established drinking age." Member Swenson made a motion to grant First and waive Second Reading adopting Ordinance No. 2012 -5, amending the Edina City Code concerning liquor as revised above. Member Bennett seconded the. motion. Rollcall: Ayes: Bennett, Brindle, Sprague, Swenson, Hovland Motion carried. VIII.D. RESOLUTION NO. 2001 -33 ADOPTED — FINDINGS OF FACT DENYING PRELIMINARY PLAT WITH VARIANCES AT 6109 OAKLAWN AVENUE Member Swenson introduced and moved adoption of Resolution No. 2012 -33, denying a preliminary plat and variances for property at 6109 Oaklawn Avenue in Edina. Member Bennett seconded the motion. Ayes: Bennett, Brindle, Sprague, Swenson, Hovland Motion carried. VIII.E. PRE - CODIFICATION ORDINANCE AMENDMENTS: 1. ORDINANCE NO. 2012 -6 ADOPTED — AMENDING THE EDINA CITY CODE CONCERNING BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS Assistant Manager Kurt presented the amendment to add the definition of a quorum and clarify that partial terms as chair do not count toward the two -term limit. Member Sprague made a motion to grant First and waive Second Reading adopting Ordinance No. 2012 -6, amending the Edina City Code concerning boards and commissions. Member Brindle seconded the motion. Rollcall: Ayes: Bennett, Brindle, Sprague, Swenson, Hovland Motion carried. 2. ORDINANCE NO. 2012 -7 ADOPTED — AMENDING CHAPTER 4 OF THE EDINA CITY CODE CONCRNING BUILDING, CONSTRUCTION AND SIGNS - Page 8 N Minutes /Edina City Council /February 21, 2012 Building Official Kirchmann presented amendments to correct outdated references.and requirements in the City Code and answered questions of the Council. Member Swenson made a motion to grant First and waive Second Reading adopting Ordinance No. 2012 -7, amending Chapter 4 of the Edina City.Code concerning buildings, construction and signs. Member Sprague seconded the motion. Rollcall: Ayes: Bennett, Brindle, Sprague, Swenson, Hovland Motion carried. 3. ORDINANCE NO. 2012 -8 ADOPTED - AMENDING CITY CODE CONCERNING NOISE, VENTILATION AND SWIMMING POOLS City Sanitarian Engelman presented amendments to update language .for consistency with State statutes and rules. Member Bennett made a motion to grant First and waive Second Reading adopting Ordinance No. 2012 -8, amending the Edina City Code concerning noise, ventilation, and swimming pools. Member Brindle seconded the motion. Rollcall: Ayes: Bennett, Brindle, Sprague, Swenson, Hovland Motion carried. VIII.F. RESOLUTION NO. 2012-32 ADOPTED — ACCEPTING VARIOUS DONATIONS Mayor Hovland explained that in order to comply with State Statutes; al,I donations to the City must be adopted by Resolution and approved by four favorable votes of the Council accepting the donations. Member Bennett introduced and moved adoption of Resolution No. 2012 -32 accepting various donations. Member Swenson seconded the motion. Rollcall: Ayes: Bennett, Brindle, Sprague, Swenson, Hovland Motion carried. IX. CORRESPONDENCE AND PETITIONS — Mayor Hovland acknowledged the Council's receipt of various correspondence. X. MAYOR AND COUNCIL COMMENTS — Received XI. MANAGER'S COMMENTS — Received XII. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business on the Council Agenda, Mayor Hovland declared the meeting adjourned'at 10:07 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Minutes approved by Edina City Council, March 6, 2012. Video Copy of the February 21, 2012, meeting available. Page 9 Debra A. Mangen, City Clerk James B. Hovland, Mayor MINUTES OF THE JOINT WORK SESSION OF THE EDINA CITY COUNCIL AND EDINA ENERGY & ENVIRONMENT COMMISSION HELD AT CITY HALL FEBRUARY 21, 2012 5:40 P.M. Mayor Hovland called the meeting to order at 5:40 p.m. in the Community Room of City Hall. Answering rollcall were Members Bennett, Brindle, Sprague, Swenson and Mayor Hovland. Members of the Energy & Environment Commission attending the meeting included: Bob Gubrud, John Heer, Keith Kostuch, Chair Dianne Plunkett Latham, Germana Paterlini, Julie Risser, Rudnffiek8 Bills Sierks, Paul Thompson and Sarah Zarrin Staff attending the meeting: Sherry Engelman. Sanitarian; Karen Kurt, Assistant City Manager; Debra Mangen, City Clerk; Scott Neal, City Manager; Mike Nibbe, Lieutenant Investigations, Jesse Struve, Utility Engineer and Solvei Wilmot, Environmental Health Specialist and Recycling Coordinator. Mayor Hovland explained the purpose of the meeting was to discuss issues of mutual concern. RESIDENTIAL RECYCLING CONTRACT RFP Chair Latham presented the draft RFP for the City's Residential Recycling Contract. The discussion included the pros and cons of single vs. dual sort, frequency of pick -up and RFP evaluation criteria. Following a discussion of the Commissioners and the Council, the Commission was directed to allow the Recycling and Solid Waste Working Group to finish its work, after which City staff will draft the RFP allowing time for the Commission to review and comment before advancing the RFP to the the -City Council, which who will have the final review and approval of the RFP. ORGANIZED HAULING The Commission reported the results of the League of Women Voters of Edina's study relative to Organized Hauling of refuse. Discussion included the League's study, potential municipal outcomes and the statutory process to be followed if the Council were to decide to pursue that option. Council suggested the topic be considered in the ECC's 2013 Work Plan if possible. mil d*rPr#Pd the EEG te study the issue OR gFeateF detail and put this study OR A their:201 2 Work Plan CITY PARK RECYCLING BINS TASK FORCE UPDATE Chair Latham presented an update of the City Park Recycling Bin Task Force. She briefly described a "Recycling Bin Sponsorship Program ". Manager Neal asked that this be held pending review by the City Attorney. The Council indicated this should be placed on a future agenda for review after the Park and Recreation Working Group has had an opportunity to complete their donations /sponsorship policy. TURF MANAGEMENT TASK FORCE REPORT Commissioner Paterlini reported that the Park Board was organizing a pilot project to be completed in 2013 and she asked that further action in this area be held until that pilot has taken place. Page 1 Minutes /Edina City Council Work Session /February 21, 2012 PURCHASING POLICY REVIEWED Commissioner Kostuch reviewed the Environmental Purchasing Policy. Discussion of the policy included the implications on the City's enterprises that currently sell bottled water. Various options were reviewed. After further analysis, the policy will be brought forward for Council's consideration. NO IDLING SIGNAGE REPORT Commissioner Risser reported that two areas have been identified for placement of "No Idling" signs, at Creek Valley School and Concord School. Ms. Risser described the areas at each school where it was recommended the signs be placed. She also outlined possible educational efforts that will be employed to train people to turn off their vehicles. Council directed the proposed signs be advanced to the Traffic Safety Committee. 2012 AND 2013 WORK PLAN Chair Latham outlined briefly the projects to be undertaken by the Recycling and Solid Waste Working Group, the Urban Forest Task Force, the Energy Working Group, the Water Quality Working Group, the Air Quality Working Group and the Education and Out Reach Working Group. She concluded, stating that all would be involved in assuring the website stayed current. The Council noted that staff would survey the proposed work plan and report on staff capacity to assist with the various topics. The Council thanked the Commission for their work. Mayor Hovland declared the meeting adjourned at 6:55 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Debra A. Mangen, City Clerk Minutes approved by Edina City Council, March 6, 2012. James B. Hovland, Mayor Page 2 MINUTES OF THE EDINA CITY COUNCIL PLANNING RETREAT n. HELD AT BRAEMAR GOLF COURSE FEBRUARY 17 & 18, 2012 Present were Mayor Hovland and Members Bennett, Brindle, Sprague, and Swenson. Staff members present were City Manager Scott Neal and Assistant City Manager Karen Kurt. FEBRUARY 17, S:OOPM- 10.30PM The retreat began with a kickoff exercise where members and staff each shared .their perspective on the strengths of Edina's city government, top priorities for 2012 and traits they sought from City leadership and their fellow council members. City Manager Neal reviewed a proposal to establish a utility franchise fee for street- related improvements. The Council agreed that .the concept was worth pursing further and instructed City. Manager Neal, to schedule the to for a future work session. Council members also expressed a desire to review the City's street assessment policy -in conjunction with the. utility franchise fee. City Manager Neal gave a brief presentation on Edina's government structure. The group discussed the appropriate roles of boards and commissions, City staff and the City Council within the structure, why role confusion exists, and what steps could be taken to correct the issue. FEBRUARY 18,12:OOPM- 4:OOPM City Manager Neal reviewed Edina Vision 20/20. Council members discussed relevance of various elements of the current strategic plan and how another strategic plan might be structured for the future. City Manager Neal discussed work items currently scheduled for 2012. Council. members agreed to jointly prioritize and review new items as part of a work planning process moving forward: Respectfully submitted, Karen M. Kurt,.Assistant City Manager Minutes approved by Edina City Council, March 6, 2012. James B. Hovland, Mayor Page 1 MINUTES OF THE JOINT WORK SESSION OF THE EDINA CITY COUNCIL AND EDINA PLANNING. COMMISSION AND THE GRANDVIEW STEERING COMMITTEE HELD AT EDINA SENIOR CENTER FEBRUARY 28, 2012 5:40 P.M. Mayor Pro Tem Swenson called. the meeting to order at 5:40 p.m. in the Fireside Room of Edina Senior. Center. Answering rollcall were Members Bennett, Brindle, and Mayor Pro Tem Swenson. Absent were Member Sprague and Mayor Hovland.. Members of -the Edina, Planning Commission attending the meeting included: Michael Fischer, Ken Potts, Michael Platteter, Michael Schroeder and Kevin Staunton. Members of the Steering Committee in attendance included: Chris Rofidal, Kim Montgomery, Andy Brown, Gen_ a Persha, Greg Domke, Lisa Diehl, Tom Bonneville, Paul Nelson and Dick Crockett Staff attending the meeting: ,Karen KunKare Kun rt, Assistant City Manager; Debra Mangen, City Clerk; Scott Neal, City Manager; and Cary Teague, Planning Director. Consultant Mike Lamb of Cuningh.am Group Architecture was also in attendance. Mayor Pro Tem Swenson stated the purpose of the meeting was to, receive an update on the GrandView District Framework. Steering Committee Chair Staunton said: he had a three -fold purpose to: explain the work of the group since December 20th of 2011, to recap the public comment process to d e #e d and to explain the process going forward. Mr. Staunton explained the name had been changed to Framework from. Small Area Plan due to concern that a Small Area Plan was viewed as a blue print and the product was really more.of a vision. The Steering Committee reached out in various ways, both traditional and new in eliciting public. comment. Some ways included: e-mail, Edina Citizens Engagement page and regular mail. Mike Lamb added that the group listened to the concerns from the Richmond Hills neighbors and the owner of �Wasabu McReavy. Funeral Home. Mr. Staunton continued that the Planning Commission held a public hearing on February 22, 2012, and continued the hearing to March 28, 2012. A recommendation on the Framework will be made by the Planning Commission on the 28th. The Steering Committee will consider comments from the hearings in March and April. The City Council will review and consider the Framework -at the April 17, 2012 meeting. Members of the Council, the. Planning Commission, Steering Committee and audience members discussed the Framework and whether or not it should be included into the City's Comprehensive Plan (along with the need for then updating the zoning ordinance within nine months) whether or not Sherwood Park could be rebuilt 'as a more pf neighborhood park, how the issues of transportation, sustainability, height and density, the economics of future development and the impact of the existing bus garage will all affect the development in the area as envisioned in the Framework. The Council encouraged people to communicate their opinion of the Framework, they acknowledged that it was up to the Council and School Board to figure out a solution to the bus garage,. and added any RFP should .be the work of the City with the Council being -the body to approve .the document. It was suggested that the Framework was ready to be reviewed by the Page 1 Minutes /Edina City Council Work Session /February 28, 2012 Transportation Commission. Manager Neal suggested that communications on the scope of the project be directed to Planning Director Teague.. Planning Director Teague will check to see if any further Metropolitan `Council grants could be obtained to aid in the process. The Council thanked all involved for the tremendous body of work undertaken and the Framework produced. Mayor Pro Tem Swenson declared the meeting adjourned at 7:05 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Debra A. Mangen, City Clerk Minutes approved by Edina City Council, March 6, 2012. James B. Hovland, Mayor Page 2 R55CKREG LOG20000 CITY OF EDINA 2/22/2012 13:06:02 Council Check Register Page - 1 2/23/2012 -2/23/2012 Check # Date Amount Supplier/ Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit 356593 212312012 125198 AARSVOLD, KRISTIN 119.33 MILEAGE REIMBURSEMENT 281644 021312 1600.6107 MILEAGE OR ALLOWANCE PARK ADMIN. GENERAL 119.33 356594 212312012 100715 ACCLAIM BENEFITS 784.00 RENEWAL FEE - COBRA 281773 0022337 -IN 1550.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES CENTRAL SERVICES GENERAL 784.00 356595 2/2312012 103173 ACCOUNTEMPS 788.95 UB TEMP 281645 34887323 5910.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES GENERAL (BILLING) 847.47 UB TEMP 281845 34910383 5910.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES GENERAL (BILLING) 1,636.42 - 356596 212312012 102971 ACE ICE COMPANY _ 46.00 281906 0816364 5862.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX VERNON SELLING 46.00 356597 212312012 100576 ALL SAFE INC. 58.95 EXTINGUISHER MAINTENANCE 00001691 281646 111681 5913.6180 CONTRACTED REPAIRS. DISTRIBUTION 1,503.66 EXTINGUISHER MAINTENANCE 00001640 281647 111682 1552.6180 CONTRACTED REPAIRS , CENT SVC PW BUILDING 1,562.61 356598 212312012 102172 APPERrS FOODSERVICE 456.19 CONCESSION PRODUCT 00002063 281774 1689714 5761.5510 COST OF GOODS SOLD CENTENNIAL LAKES.OPERATING 456.19 356599 212312012 120814 BAGGALLINI INC. 216.74 MERCHANDISE 281775 IVC00461778 5440.5511 COST OF GOODS - PRO SHOP PRO SHOP RETAIL SALES 216.74 356600 2/2312012 102195 BATTERIES PLUS 311.56 BATTERIES 281846 018 - 259933 1400.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES POLICE DEPT. GENERAL - 10.17 CELL PHONE CHARGER 281894 020- 239853 7411.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES PSTF OCCUPANCY 321.73 356601 2/23/2012 102449 BATTERY WHOLESALE INC. 404.52 BATTERIES 00005934 281648 #14736 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 192.00- CREDIT 281649 C21104 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 212.52 356602 2/2312012 100646 BECKER ARENA PRODUCTS INC. 948.57 ICE SKATES 00002064 281776 00087970 5761.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES CENTENNIAL LAKES OPERATING R55CKREG LOG20000 50TH ST SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR 50TH ST SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE CITY OF EDINA VERNON SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX 50TH ST SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR VERNON SELLING Council Check Register VERNON SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR VERNON SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX VERNON SELLING 2123/2012 -2/23/2012 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No 948.57 356603 212312012 101355 BELLBOY CORPORATION 97.55 281716 72097100 5822.5513 111.55 281717 72115800 5822.5512 1,437.40 281718 71631000 5862.5513 213.10 281719 72081900 5862.5513 18.02 281720 86362000 5822.5515 871.80 281907 72216900 5862.5512 48.00 281908 72210800 5862.5513 704.65 281908 72210800 5862.5512 77.55 281909 72210600 5862.5515 85.40 281910 86391200 5862.5515 229.82 281911 6152700 5862.5515 3,894.84 366604 212312012 100648 BERTELSON OFFICE PRODUCTS 92.15 OFFICE SUPPLIES 281777 OE- 276141 -1 1628.6513 96.18 CHAIRMAT 281776 OE- 278546 -1 5111.6406 8.62 PENS 00009120 281779 OE- 278490 -1 5110.6513 192.35 CHAIRMAT 00009120 281780 OE- 278454 -1 5111.6406 389.30 356605 212312012 130005 BITNEY, SUSAN 50.00 TAI CHI INSTRUCTOR 281847 021612 1513.6218 50.00 366606 2/2312012 103832 BLACK & DECKER U.S. INC. 11.04 DISC 00005887 281650 02049068 1553.6530 11.04 356607 2123/2012 128297 BLOOM DESIGNS 153.12 MERCHANDISE 281781 13088 5440.5511 153.12 356608 212312012 122688 BMK SOLUTIONS 41.44 OFFICE SUPPLIES 00001437 281651 74727 1646.6406 28.62 WALL CLOCK 00001437 281652 74757 1552.6406 70.06 356609 212312012 129832 BOILER SERVICES INC. 2,612.00 FINAL PAYMENT 00001087 281958 32003 -TRUCK 4402.6710 2/2212012 13:06:02 Page- 2 Subledger Account Description Business Unit COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR 50TH ST SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX 50TH ST SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR VERNON SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON 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 VERNON SELLING OFFICE SUPPLIES SENIOR CITIZENS GENERAL SUPPLIES ART CENTER BLDG /MAINT OFFICE SUPPLIES ART CENTER ADMINISTRATION GENERAL SUPPLIES ART CENTER BLDG /MAINT EDUCATION PROGRAMS EMPLOYEE PROGRAMS REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN COST OF GOODS - PRO SHOP PRO SHOP RETAIL SALES GENERAL SUPPLIES BUILDING MAINTENANCE GENERAL SUPPLIES CENT SVC PW BUILDING EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT PW BUILDING R55CKREG LOG20000 CITY OF EDINA 2/27/2012 13:06:02 Council Check Register Page - 3 2123/2012 —2/23/2012 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description . Business Unit WASH 2,612.00 - 356610 212312012 101010 BORDER STATES ELECTRIC SUPPLY 377.97 POWER PACK 00001595 281887 903543737 1552.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES - CENT SVC PW BUILDING 377.97 356611 212312012 106367 BOUND TREE MEDICAL LLC 424.18 AMBULANCE SUPPLIES 00003638 281848 87332201 1470.6510 FIRST AID SUPPLIES FIRE DEPT. GENERAL 197.00 AMBULANCE SUPPLIES 00003638 281849 80711500 1470.6510 FIRST AID SUPPLIES FIRE DEPT. GENERAL 191.78 AMBULANCE SUPPLIES 00003734 281850 80710848 1470.6510 FIRST AID SUPPLIES FIRE DEPT. GENERAL 812.96 ' 356612 2/2312012 119351 BOURGET IMPORTS 466.50 281721 106722 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE, 50TH ST SELLING 466.50 356613 212312012 100659 BOYER.TRUCK PARTS, 82.40 FILTERS 00005889 281851 607211 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 82.40 J 356614 212312012 100664 BRAUN INTERTEC . 3,100.00 TRACY AVE RECON 281782 347638 01368.1705.20 CONSULTING DESIGN BA -368 TRACY AVE M&O 26.25 MATERIALS TESTING 281783 347074 01383.1705.21 CONSULTING INSPECTION BA -383 W44TH ST 5,861.50 GEOTECHNICAL EVALUATION 281816 -34717`1 44069.1705.20 CONSULTING DESIGN P22 50TH &FRANCE SOUTH RAMP 8,987.75 356615 212312012 1014301 BROWNELLS INC. 311.19 PARTS FOR PISTOLS 281852 07284406.00 1400.6551 AMMUNITION POLICE DEPT. GENERAL 311.19 356616 212312012 119455 CAPITOL BEVERAGE SALES 174.75 281722 45302 5822.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER 50TH ST SELLING " 174.75 366617 212312012 116683 CAT & FIDDLE BEVERAGE 192.00 281912 92489 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 192.00 356618 212312012 100681 CATCO 20.35 GOVERNOR 00005891 281784 3 -24252 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN - 20.35 R55CKREG LOG20000 CITY OF EDINA 2/22/2012 13:06:02 Council Check Register Page - 4 2/2312012 -2/23/2012 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit 356619 212312012 129923 CAWLEY 49.65 NAME BADGES 281785 V080544 1500.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES CONTINGENCIES 49.65 356620 212312012 100897 CENTERPOINT ENERGY 126.18 281653 020312 5821.6186 _ HEAT ' 50TH ST OCCUPANCY 181.28 281653 020312 5430.6186 HEAT - RICHARDS GOLF COURSE 265.32 281653 020312 5861.6186 HEAT VERNON OCCUPANCY 287.23 281653 020312 5841.6186 HEAT YORK OCCUPANCY 346.93 281653 020312 5422.6186 HEAT MAINT OF COURSE & GROUNDS _ 382.62. 281653 020312 1481.6186 HEAT YORK FIRE STATION 826.58 281653 020312 5913.6186 HEAT' DISTRIBUTION 1,013.09 281653 020312 5111.6186 HEAT ART CENTER BLDG/MAINT 1,294.40 281653 020312 5420.6186 HEAT CLUB HOUSE 1,302.94 281653 020312 5921.6186 HEAT SANITARY LIFT STATION MAINT 1,797.52 281653 020312 1628.6186 HEAT SENIOR CITIZENS 1,829.24 281653 020312 5630.6186 HEAT CENTENNIAL LAKES. 2,206.08 281653 020312 1552.6186 HEAT- CENT SVC PW BUILDING 2,680.18 281653 020312 5911.6186 HEAT- -, WELL PUMPS 2,704.19 281653 020312 1646.6186 HEAT' , . BUILDING MAINTENANCE 8,161.68 281653 020312 5511.6186 HEAT ARENA BLDGIGROUNDS 9,876.87 281653 020312 5210.6186 HEAT GOLF DOME PROGRAM 35,282.33 356621 212312012 103711 CENTERPOINT ENERGY SERVICES IN 45.96 281654 2336132 5311.6186 HEAT POOL OPERATION 5,849.87 281655 2335662 5720.6186 HEAT EDINBOROUGH OPERATIONS 5,895.83 356622 212312012 119661 CENTRAL ENVELOPE CORPORATION 187.00 EMPLOYEE NEWSLETTER 281853 70066 1130.6575 PRINTING COMMUNICATIONS ' 187.00 366623 212312012 123898 CENTURYUNK 105.00 952 835 -1161 281656 1161 -2/12 5720.6188 TELEPHONE EDINBOROUGH OPERATIONS 201.44 952 835 -6661 281657 6661 -2112 1552.6188 TELEPHONE • CENT SVCPW BUILDING 151.99 952 285 -2951 281658 2951 -2/12 1470.6188 TELEPHONE FIRE DEPT. GENERAL . 57.75 952 9441841 281659 1841 -2/12 1646.6188 TELEPHONE -. BUILDING MAINTENANCE 516.18 356624 212312012 130003 CHAPMAN, EDWARD R55CKREG LOG20000 CITY OF EDINA 2/2212012 13:06:02 Council Check Register 2/23/2012 Page - 5 101227 COFFEE MILL INC. 2/23/2012 = 2/23/2012 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit 184.86 UTILITY OVERPAYMENT REFUND 281786 5127 LINCOLN 5900.2015 CUSTOMER REFUND UTILITY BALANCE SHEET CIR 156627 212312012 " 184.86 129275 CONTECH BRIDGE SOLUTIONS 356625 212312012 100692 COCA -COLA REFRESHMENTS 2,008.91 BRIDGE BOARDS 281788 183.60 5431.6251 281723 0158022312 5862.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX VERNON SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD CENTENNIAL LAKES OPERATING SHARED MAINTENANCE RICHARDS GC MAINTENANCE REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN CLEANING SUPPLIES ART CENTER BLDG /MAINT COST OF GOODS SOLD GRILL COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER 50TH ST SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX VERNON SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER, VERNON SELLING ADVERTISING OTHER YORK SELLING DUES & SUBSCRIPTIONS 50TH STREET GENERAL DUES & SUBSCRIPTIONS LIQUOR YORK GENERAL 183.60 356626 2/23/2012 101227 COFFEE MILL INC. 269.00 COCOA MIX _ 00002065 281787 0741403 -IN 5761.5510 269.00 156627 212312012 129275 CONTECH BRIDGE SOLUTIONS 2,008.91 BRIDGE BOARDS 281788 INV000003737 5431.6251 2,008.91 356626 212312012 103330 CRYSTEEL TRUCK EQUIPMENT 192.38 HOOKLIFT 00005617 281660 FP145955 - 1553.6530 192.38 356629 212312012 104020 DALCO 95.65 PUNCH DEGREASER 00005853 281854 2426860 1553.6530 502.55 CAN LINERS, TOWELS, SOAP 00009123 281855 2423747 5111.6511 598.20 356630 212312012 100710 DAVE'S DAIRY 63.19 DAIRY 281789 020612 5421.5510 63.19 356631 212312012 102478 DAY DISTRIBUTING CO. 311.20 281724 638091 5822.5514 87.80 281725 638090 5862.5515 3,406.25 281726 638089 5662.5514 3,805.25 366632 212312012 129157 00- GOOD.BIZ INC 582.84 PROMOTIONAL POSTCARDS 281895 4618 -01 5842.6122 582.84 356633 212312012 100744 EDINA CHAMBER OF COMMERCE 440.00 MEMBERSHIP DUES 281886 2011 -2012 5820.6105 440.00 MEMBERSHIP DUES 281886 2011 -2012 5840.6105 COST OF GOODS SOLD CENTENNIAL LAKES OPERATING SHARED MAINTENANCE RICHARDS GC MAINTENANCE REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN CLEANING SUPPLIES ART CENTER BLDG /MAINT COST OF GOODS SOLD GRILL COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER 50TH ST SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX VERNON SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER, VERNON SELLING ADVERTISING OTHER YORK SELLING DUES & SUBSCRIPTIONS 50TH STREET GENERAL DUES & SUBSCRIPTIONS LIQUOR YORK GENERAL R55CKREG LOG20000 CITY OF EDINA 2/22/2012 13:06:02 Council Check Register Page - 6 2/23/2012 -2/23/2012 Check # Date Amount Supplier/ Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No. Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit 440.00 MEMBERSHIP DUES 281886 2011 -2012 5860.6105 DUES & SUBSCRIPTIONS VERNON LIQUOR GENERAL 1,320.00 356634 212312012 125163 EL- GHAZZAWY, KARIM 235.63 UTILITY OVERPAYMENT REFUND 281896 6924 VALLEY 5900.2015 CUSTOMER REFUND UTILITY BALANCE SHEET VIEW RD 235.63 356635 212312012 126805 ELECTRONIC CENTER 163.03 OUTLETS 00001610 281661 733601 1552.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES CENT SVC PW BUILDING 163.03 356636 2/23/2012 127349 ELSTER AMERICAN METER 1,278.19 PI REPAIR 00001542 281790 91147833 5916.6180 CONTRACTED REPAIRS METER READING 1,278.19 356637 2/23/2012 101956 EMERGENCY APPARATUS MAINTENANC 19,132.54 T -90 REPAIRS 281856 59401 1470.6180 CONTRACTED REPAIR_ S FIRE DEPT. GENERAL 19,132.54 356638 212312012 101937 EMS INSIDER 225.00 1 YR SUBSCRIPTION 281857 021612 1470.6105 DUES & SUBSCRIPTIONS FIRE DEPT. GENERAL' 225.00 356639 2/2312012 104195 EXTREME BEVERAGE LLC. 234.50 281913 125 -516 5862.5515 -COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX VERNON SELLING 234.50 356640 212312012 100146 FACTORY MOTOR PARTS COMPANY 367.59 GEAR 00005839 281662 69- 059149 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS'. EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 323.23 ALTERNATOR 00005839 281663 69-059263 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 97.75 TIRE SENSORS, HALOGEN CAPSULGM)05839 281664 69- 059183 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 167.21 ROTORS, PADS 00005839 281791 69- 059013 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN - 145.57 BATTERY 00005839 281792 69- 059407 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 145.57 BATTERY 00005839 281793 1- 3831496 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 620.20- CREDIT 281794 1- 3829884 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS . EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 626.72 356641 212312012 130010 FARRELL, DANIEL 1,297.00 AMBULANCE OVERPAYMENT 281957 022112 1470.4329 AMBULANCE FEES FIRE DEPT. GENERAL 1,297.00 R55CKREG LOG20000 CITY OF EDINA 2/22/2012 13:06:02 Council Check Register Page - 7 2123/2012 - 2123/2012 # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit _Check 356642 212312012 100297 FAST FOTO & DIGITAL 10.78 PHOTO PROCESSING 08326063 281795 T2- 309538 1130.6408 PHOTOGRAPHIC SUPPLIES COMMUNICATIONS 10.78 356643 212312012 102101 FEDEX OFFICE 11.28 SHIPPING 281796 062200025120 5440.6122 ADVERTISING OTHER PRO SHOP RETAIL SALES 11.28 356644 212312012 116189 FILTRATION SYSTEMS INC. 6,223.85 HVAC FILTERS 281897 45692 7412.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES PSTF RANGE 6,223.85 356645 212312012 129884 FORT DEARBORN LIFE INSURANCE C 1,738.10 STD INSURANCE 281797 F018342 -3/12 9900.2033.16 LTD - 99 PAYROLL CLEARING 1,738.10 356646 212312012 100764 G & K SERVICES 11.46 SHOP TOWELS 281665 1006538972 5422.6201 LAUNDRY MAINT OF COURSE & GROUNDS 11.10 SHOP TOWELS 281666 1006560788 5422.6201 LAUNDRY MAINT OF COURSE & GROUNDS 22.56 356647 212312012 100775 GENERAL SPORTS CORPORATION 1,302.00 CHAMPIONSHIP SHIRTS 281798 83028 4077.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES EDINA ATHLETIC ASSOCIATION 1,302.00 366648 212312012 124541 GEYEN GROUP 90.84 .CARPET CLEANING 281858 21778 5420.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES CLUB HOUSE 90.84 356649 212312012 101103 GRAINGER 64.51 SANDING DISCS 00005886 281667 9748471209 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 56.82 SAFETY COVERALLS 00001376 281799 9748471191 1646.6610 SAFETY: EQUIPMENT BUILDING MAINTENANCE 228.93 SOLENOID VALVE 00001623 281800 9749376746 5912.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES WELL HOUSES 258.61 VALVE, FITTINGS 00001617 281801 9748471217 5912.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES WELL HOUSES 43.75 BRIDGE BOLTS 00006139 281802 9742909055 5431.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES RICHARDS GC MAINTENANCE 66.60 SIGNS 00001627 281888 9750022999 1552.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES CENT SVC PW BUILDING 493.94 EARMUFFS 281898 9754416353 7414.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES PUBLIC PROGRAMS 1,213.16 356650 212312012 102670 GRAND PERE WINES INC 327.00 281727 00028060 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 327.00 R55CKREG LOG20000 CITY OF EDINA 2122/2012 13:06:02 Council Check Register Page - 8 2/23/2012 — 2/23/2012 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit 366651 212312012 102217 GRAPE BEGINNINGS INC 489.00 281728 136200 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING 74.25 281729 136463 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE V_ ERNON SELLING 563.25 - 356652 212312012 130001 GREEN RIVER' 188.69 UTILITY,OVERPAYMENT REFUND 281804 4501 OAK DR 5900.2015 CUSTOMER REFUND UTILITY BALANCE SHEET _ 188.69 356653 212312012 100785 GREUPNER, JOE 2,386.00 GROUP LESSONS 281803 021412 5410.6132 PROFESSIONAL SVCS - GOLF GOLF ADMINISTRATION 2,386.00 356654 212312012 130000 HART, ERIN 128.25 ART WORK SOLD 281892 021312 5101.4413 ART WORK SOLD ART CENTER REVENUES 128.25 356655 2123/2012 100797. HAWKINS INC. 3,023.40 CHEMICALS 00001841 281889 3308613 5915.6586 WATER TREATMENT SUPPLIES WATER TREATMENT 3.023.40 356666 212312012 106371 HENNEPIN COUNTY MEDICAL CENTER 2,475.08 MEDICAL DIRECTOR SERVICES 281805 0820164 1470.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES FIRE DEPT. GENERAL 2,475.08 356657 212312012 105436 HENNEPIN COUNTY TREASURER 32.00 RADIO ADMIN FEE 281859 120138113 1460.6406 -- GENERAL SUPPLIES CIVILIAN DEFENSE 32.00 356658 212312012 130004 HERSTIEN, FRANK 75.00 REFUND FOR GOLF DOME BALLS 281806 021412 5201.4543 GOLF DOME RECEIPTS GOLF DOME REVENUES 75.00 356659 212312012 116680 HEWLETT - PACKARD COMPANY 1,320.67 PCS 00004395 281860 50635850 5821.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES 50TH ST OCCUPANCY 1,320.67 PCS 00004395 281860 50635850 5841.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES YORK OCCUPANCY 1,320:67 PCS 00004395 281860 50635850 5661.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES VERNON OCCUPANCY 3,962.01 356660: 212312012 104375 HOHENSTEINS INC. 484.58 281730 589260 5822.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER 50TH ST SELLING R55CKREG LOG20000 CITY OF EDINA 2/22/2012 13:06:02 Council Check Register Page - 9 2/23/2012 -2/23/2012 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No . Subledger Account Description Business Unit 2,054.00 281914 590097 5862.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER VERNON SELLING 3i109.00 281915 590099 5842.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER. YORK SELLING 5,647.58 356661 212312012 102044 HOISINGTON KOEGLER GROUP INC: 2,390.91 ARCHITECTURAL SERVICES 281807 011 - 059-12 47078.6710 EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT COUNTRYSIDE PK PLAYGROUND &PATH 2,390.91 356662 212312012 100808 HORWATH; THOMAS 356.87 MILEAGE REIMBURSEMENT 281808 021512 1644.6107 MILEAGE OR ALLOWANCE TREES &'MAINTENANCE 356.87 366663 212312012 119998 HOVLAND, JAMES 30.00 LUNCHEON EXPENSE AT U OF M 281891 021712 1100.6106 MEETING EXPENSE CITY COUNCIL 30.00 356664 2/2312012 101085 HOWL, SUSAN 85.18 WORKSHOP EXPENSES `, 281890 021712 1260.6106 MEETING EXPENSE ENGINEERING GENERAL 85.18 356665 212312012 120883 HUBBARD, BRIAN 65.94 TRAINING EXPENSES 281861 020712 1400.6104 CONFERENCES &SCHOOLS _ POLICE DEPT. GENERAL 65.94 356666 212312012 116191 INSTY- PRINTS' 26.29 GALA WINE TABLE TENTS 281862 90942 5842.6575 PRINTING YORK SELLING 26.29 356667 212312012 100828 JERRY S FOODS 14.97 281809 013112 1628.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES SENIOR CITIZENS 16.73 281809 013112 1470.6106 MEETING EXPENSE FIRE DEPT. GENERAL 39.82 281809 013112 1400.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES POLICE DEPT. GENERAL 62.79 281809 013112 1470.4760 DONATIONS - GOVT FUND FIRE DEPT. GENERAL 258.38 281809 013112 5421.5510 COST OF GOODS SOLD GRILL 392.69 356668 212312012 100741 JJ TAYLOR DIST. OF MINN ' 1,966.26 281731 1708741 5822.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER 50TH ST SELLING 59.85 281732 1708743 5862.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER VERNON SELLING 5,012.62 281733 1708739- 5862.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER VERNON SELLING 41.80 281916 1708740 5862.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX VERNON SELLING 7,080.53 RSSCKREG LOG20000 CITY OF EDINA 2/2212012 13:06:02 Council Check Register _ Page - 10 2/23/2012 -2/23/2012 Check # Date Amount Supplier/ Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit 356670 2/23/2012 100835 JOHNSON BROTHERS LIQUOR CO. 222.00 281734 1231155 5862.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR VERNON SELLING 296.00 281735 1231156 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 764.47 281736 1230597 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING 1,185.84 281737 1230603 5872.5513 COST OF.GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING 1,217.73 281738 1230601 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING 7.06- 281739 525311 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING 7.40- 281740 525312 5822.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR' 50TH ST SELLING 666.70 281917 1233205 5862.5513 COST OF GOODSSOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 1,712.79 281918 1235058 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 2,922.30 281919 1235063 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 1,531.36 281920 1235055 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 1,879.69 281921 1235062 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD, WINE VERNON SELLING 1,581.33 281922 1235056 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING' 255.60 281923 1235054 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING - 579.13 281924 1235050 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 56TH ST SELLING 4,377.08 281925 1235060 5862.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR VERNON SELLING 570.84 281926 1235064 5862.5512 COST OF'GOODS SOLD LIQUOR VERNON SELLING 35.37 281927 1235061 5862.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR VERNON SELLING 370.02 281928 1235059 5862.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR VERNON SELLING 105.12 281929 .1230983 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 55.12 281930 1236066 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 4.16- 281931 525956 5862.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR VERNON SELLING 68.74- 281932 525751 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING: 20,241.13 356671 212312012 118660 LAKES AREA HOME IMPROVEMENT SE 175:50 REBUILD LAWN FAUCET 281959 13475 05485.1705.21 CONSULTING INSPECTION WM-485 GOLF TERRACE N'HOOD 175.50 - 356672 2/2312012 130002 LAKESIDE TITLE 13.35 UTILITY OVERPAYMENT REFUND 281810 5617 ST ANDREWS 5900.2015 CUSTOMER REFUND UTILITY BALANCE SHEET __. AVE 13.35 366673 212312012 101652 LEAGUE OF MINNESOTA CITIES 30.00 TRAINING 281668 156880 1550.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES CENTRAL SERVICES GENERAL 30.00 281669 156806 1550:6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES - CENTRAL SERVICES GENERAL 60.00 - 356674 212312012 106301 LOFFLER COMPANIES INC. - R55CKREG LOG20000 70.36 CITY OF EDINA 19070 1301.6406 _ GENERAL SUPPLIES GENERAL MAINTENANCE Council Check Register 356679 2123/2012 —2/23/2012 102507 METRO VOLLEYBALL OFFICIALS - Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description 4088 4077.6103 132.90 COPIER USAGE 00005946 281811 1362444 1553.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES 132.90 356680 212312012 101161- MIDWEST CHEMICAL SUPPLY 356675 212312012 700864 MACQUEEN EQUIPMENT INC. 483.38 KITHEN/BATH SUPPLIES 281899 32605 215.48 SEALS 00005900 281670 2121266 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS KITHEN/BATH SUPPLIES 281899 32605 215.48 PAPER SUPPLIES CITY HALL GENERAL 1,552.13 356676 212312012 122654 MATHESON TRI -GAS INC. 356681 212312012 116165 MILLER FAMILY PROPERTIES LLC 201.33 OXYGEN 00003649 281863 04118877 1470.6510 FIRST AID SUPPLIES STEEL PLATE FOR GOLF DOME 00006441 281813 BRAEMAR 201.33 REPAIR PARTS GOLF DOME PROGRAM 625.00 366677 212312012 129755 MCKINSTRY ESSENTION INC. 356682 2123/2012 103216 MINNEAPOLIS FINANCE DEPARTMENT 34,988.10 RETAINAGE 281953 45424 4403.6710 EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT 204.00 APS ANNUAL ACCESS FEE 281865 2,538.10 FINAL PMT 281954 45461 4403.6710 EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT 204.00 453,437.19 PROGRESS BILLING #3 281961 45278 4403.6710 EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT 102174 MINNEAPOLIS OXYGEN COMPANY 490,963.39 356678 212312012 1033907 101483 MENARDS CHEMICALS PSTF FIRE TOWER 2/2212012 13:06:02 Page - 11 Business Unit EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN FIRE DEPT. GENERAL ENERGY EFFICIENCY UPGRADES ENERGY EFFICIENCY UPGRADES ENERGY. EFFICIENCY UPGRADES 70.36 VISE GRIPS, BLADES, HAMMER 00001626 281812 19070 1301.6406 _ GENERAL SUPPLIES GENERAL MAINTENANCE 70.36 356679 212312012 102507 METRO VOLLEYBALL OFFICIALS 137.50 OFFICIATING FEES 281671 4088 4077.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES EDINA ATHLETIC ASSOCIATION 137.50 356680 212312012 101161- MIDWEST CHEMICAL SUPPLY 483.38 KITHEN/BATH SUPPLIES 281899 32605 1551.6511 CLEANING SUPPLIES CITY HALL GENERAL 1,068.75 KITHEN/BATH SUPPLIES 281899 32605 1551.6512 PAPER SUPPLIES CITY HALL GENERAL 1,552.13 356681 212312012 116165 MILLER FAMILY PROPERTIES LLC 625.00 STEEL PLATE FOR GOLF DOME 00006441 281813 BRAEMAR 5210.6530 REPAIR PARTS GOLF DOME PROGRAM 625.00 356682 2123/2012 103216 MINNEAPOLIS FINANCE DEPARTMENT 204.00 APS ANNUAL ACCESS FEE 281865 400413002650 1400.6160 DATA PROCESSING POLICE DEPT. GENERAL 204.00 356683 212312012 102174 MINNEAPOLIS OXYGEN COMPANY 65.26 METH AIR 281900 1033907 7413.6545 CHEMICALS PSTF FIRE TOWER 65.26 R55CKREG LOG20000 CITY OF EDINA 2/2212012 13:06:02 Council Check Register- Page- 12 2/23/2012 —2/23/2012 Check # Date Amount Supplier/ Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit 356684 212312012 127062 MINNEHAHA BLDG. MAINT. INC. 5.34 WINDOW WASHING 281814 921094092 5821.6162 SERVICES CUSTODIANS 50TH ST OCCUPANCY 5.34 356685 212312012 101912 MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF AGRICU 5.00 LICENSE SURCHARGE FEE 281815, 20090947 1640.6260 LICENSES & PERMITS PARK MAINTENANCE GENERAL 5.00 356686 2123/2012 101638 MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH 150.00 PLAN REVIEW FEE 281817 021512 01385.1705.20 CONSULTING DESIGN COUNTRYSIDE NEIGHBORHOOD _ 150.00 356687 2/2312012 103167 MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSP 241.28 MATERIALS TESTING 281960 . 49081 01367.1705.21 CONSULTING INSPECTION! BA -367 W70TH TRAFFIC IMPLEMENT 759.89 MATERIALS TESTING 281960 49081 07104.1705.21 CONSULTING INSPECTION S104 VALLEY VIEW & NORMANDALE 3,437.95 MATERIALS TESTING 281960 49081 01383.1705.21 CONSULTING INSPECTION' BA -383 W44TH ST 4,439.12 356688 212312012 118129 MINNESOTA SOCIETY OF CPAS 245.00 DUES- ERIC ROGGEMAN 281672 2012 1160.6105 DUES & SUBSCRIPTIONS FINANCE' 245.00 356689 2123/2012 100908 MINNESOTA WANNER CO. 53.61 'HOSE 00005888 281818 0092207 -IN 1553:6530 REPAIR PARTS + EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 53.61 356690 212312012 128914 MINUTEMAN PRESS 59.46 LIVING STREETS POSTERS 281819 10730 1265.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION 837.69 STORE CLOSES POSTCARDS 281866 10755 5842.6122 ADVERTISING OTHER YORK SELLING 897.15 356691 212312012 120551 MNPROA 150.00 CONFERENCE REGISTRATION 281867 .2012 1419.6104 CONFERENCES & SCHOOLS RESERVE PROGRAM 150.00 356692 212312012 101796 MPCA 400.00 COUNTRYSIDE 281820 1 PERMIT FEES 01385.1705.20 CONSULTING DESIGN COUNTRYSIDE NEIGHBORHOOD 400.00 VIKING HILLS 281820 PERMIT FEES 01386.1705.20 CONSULTING DESIGN VIKING HILLS 2ND NEIGHBORHOOD ' 400.00 VALLEY ESTATES 281820 PERMIT FEES, 01387.1705.20 CONSULTING DESIGN VALLEY ESTATES NEIGHBORHOOD 1,200.00 356693 i 212312012 130008 ;_MPS MEDICAL SUPPLY R65CKREG LOG20000 CITY OF EDINA 2/22/2012 13:06:02 Council Check Register Page - 13 2/23/2012 -2123/2012 Check # Date Amount Supplier/ Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit' 288.80 AMBULANCE SUPPLIES 00003736 281664 840 1470.6510 FIRST AID SUPPLIES FIRE DEPT. GENERAL 288.80 356694 212312012 100906 MTI DISTRIBUTING INC. 644.70 BEARINGS, SEALS 00006144 , 281821 826086 -01 5422.6530 REPAIR PARTS MAINT OF COURSE & GROUNDS 1,383.38 BEDKNIFE, BEARINGS 00006144 281822 826086 -00. 5422.8530 REPAIR PARTS MAINT OF COURSE & GROUNDS 225.82 REEL TOOLS 00006146 281823 826156 -00 5422.6556 TOOLS MAINT OF COURSE & GROUNDS 2,253.90 356695 212312012 104451 NENA 200.00 JOB POSTING 281824 200000864 1550.6121 ADVERTISING PERSONNEL CENTRAL SERVICES GENERAL 200.60 356696 2123/2012 100076 NEW FRANCE WINE CO. 714.50 281741 71824 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 714.50 356697 212312012 115616 NORTH IMAGE APPAREL INC. 35.00 UNIFORM JACKET 00005604 281668 NIA5411D 1553.6201 LAUNDRY EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 35.00 356698 212312012 103578 OFFICE DEPOT 39.24 OFFICE SUPPLIES 281825 .1439488216 5410.6513 OFFICE SUPPLIES GOLF ADMINISTRATION 92.67 OFFICE SUPPLIES 281826 1438378767 5410.6513 OFFICE SUPPLIES GOLF ADMINISTRATION 131.91 356699 212312012 102712 OFFICE OF ENTERPRISE TECHNOLOG 375.48 281827 W12010649 5420.6188 TELEPHONE CLUB HOUSE 23.83 281828 W12010643 1646.6188 TELEPHONE BUILDING MAINTENANCE 23.83 281828 W12010643 1550.6188 TELEPHONE CENTRAL SERVICES GENERAL 47.66 281828 W12010643 5111.6188 TELEPHONE ART CENTER BLDG/MAINT 47.66 281828 W12010643 1646.6188 TELEPHONE BUILDING MAINTENANCE 71.49 281828 W12010643 5861.6188 TELEPHONE VERNON OCCUPANCY -. 95.32 281828 W12010643 5821.6188 TELEPHONE 50TH ST OCCUPANCY 95.32 281828 W12010643 1481.6188 TELEPHONE YORK FIRE STATION 119.15 281828 W12010643 1646.6188 TELEPHONE BUILDING MAINTENANCE 142.98 281828 W12010643 5841.6188 TELEPHONE YORK OCCUPANCY 159.39 281828 W12016643 5210.6188 TELEPHONE GOLF DOME PROGRAM 163.09 281828 W12010643 1646.6188 TELEPHONE BUILDING MAINTENANCE 210.51 281828 W72010643 5710.6188 TELEPHONE EDINBOROUGH ADMINISTRATION 210.52 281828 W12010643 5760.6188 TELEPHONE CENTENNIAL LAKES ADMIN EXPENSE 333.62 281828 W12010643 1622.6188 TELEPHONE SKATING & HOCKEY R55CKREG LOG20000 281744 2194076 CITY OF EDINA COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE BOTH ST SELLING 391.94 281934 2197322 Council Check Register COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 2,145.47 281935 2197320 2/23/2012 —2/23/2012 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description VERNON SELLING 1,686.12 2,119.85 2197321 5862.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR 356700 212312012 281938 101439 OLSEN FIRE INSPECTION 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING 1,079.29 185.00 RPZ TEST 00006448 281869 21201314 5210.6610 SAFETY EQUIPMENT BOTH ST SELLING 185.00 356701 212312012 106083 ON SITE SANITATION INC. 53.44 TOILET SERVICE 281829 A- 446612 5422.6182 RUBBISH REMOVAL 53.44 356702 212312012 100347 PAUSTIS & SONS 2/22/2012 13:06:02 Page - 14 Business Unit GOLF DOME PROGRAM MAINT OF COURSE & GROUNDS 2,625.26 281742 8338449 -IN 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 250.00 281743 8338437 -IN 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING 92.25 281933 8338467 -IN 5822.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR 50TH ST SELLING 2,967.51 356703 212312012 100743 PHILLIPS WINE & SPIRITS 1,907.37 281744 2194076 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE BOTH ST SELLING 391.94 281934 2197322 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 2,145.47 281935 2197320 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 1,046.66 281936 2197317 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 1,686.12 281937 2197321 5862.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR VERNON SELLING 180.48 281938 2197319 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING 1,079.29 281939 2197316 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE BOTH ST SELLING 356704 212312012 26,373.50 26,373.50 356705 212312012 259.07 142.00- 117.07 356706 212312012 100953 PHYSIO- CONTROL INC. LUCAS DEVICES 00003716 281870 112090271 100119 PING MERCHANDISE 281830 11063710 CREDIT 281962 10994092 124176 PINNACLE DISTRIBUTING 356707 212312012 100967 PLANT & FLANGED EQUIPMENT 876.65 VALVE 00001588 281673 0058483 -IN 876.65 421480.6710 5440.5511 5440.5511 5862.5515 5912.6406 EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT SPECIAL OPS FIRE EQUIPMENT COST OF GOODS - PRO SHOP PRO SHOP RETAIL SALES COST OF GOODS - PRO SHOP PRO SHOP RETAIL SALES COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX GENERAL SUPPLIES VERNON SELLING WELL HOUSES R55CKREG LOG20000 CITY OF EDINA 2/22/2012 13:06:02 Council Check Register Page -. 15 2/23/2012 -2/23/2012 Check # Date Amount Supplier/ Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit 356708 2/2312012 100961 - POSTMASTER - USPS 1,668.00 EDINA ART CENTER MAILING 281964 022112 5110.6235 POSTAGE ART CENTER ADMINISTRATION 1,668.00 356709 212312012 124831 PRESSWRITE PRINTING INC. 105.14 EVIDENCE LABELS 281871 059899 1400.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES POLICE DEPT. GENERAL 105.14 356710 212312012 130007 PRICE, LUKE 387.60 CONFERENCE EXPENSE 281872 021512 2310.6104 CONFERENCES & SCHOOLS E911 387.60 356711 212312012 100971 QUALITY WINE 4,366.54 281745 574069 -00 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST S WNG 472.53 281746 574068 -00 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING 1,097.61 281747 572289 -00 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 3,130.73 281748 573804 -00 5862.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR VERNON SELLING 6,980.04 281749 574143 -00 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 741.86 281750 574067 -00 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 363.15 281941 573805 -00 5822.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR 50TH ST SELLING 205.03 281942 574793 -00 5852.5513 COST OF. GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 51.75- 281943 572534-00 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 17,305.74 366712 212312012 100466 R & R PRODUCTS INC. 2,674.50 . REELS, BEARINGS 00006145 281831 CD1522677 5422.6530 REPAIR PARTS MAINT OF COURSE & GROUNDS 155.30 TIRES 00006145 281832 CD1522535 5422.6530 REPAIR PARTS OF COURSE& GROUNDS 2,829.80 - 356713 212312012 122170 REGION 3AA 644.55 HIGH SCHOOL PLAYOFF % 281833 021312 5511.6136 PROFESSIONAL SVC , OTHER ARENA BLDGIGROUNDS 644.55 356714 2123/2012 101979 ROFIDAL, KEVIN 46.81 SEMINAR EXPENSE 281901 021312 1400.6104 CONFERENCES & SCHOOLS POLICE DEPT. GENERAL 46.81 356715 212312012 117807 SAM'S CLUB 72.11 SO METRO SUPPLIES 281902 020712 7411.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES PSTF OCCUPANCY 117.31 SO METRO SUPPLIES 281902 020712 7410.6218 EDUCATION PROGRAMS PSTF ADMINISTRATION 189.42 R55CKREG LOG20000 CITY OF EDINA 2/22/2012 13:06:02 Council Check Register Page- 16 2/23/2012 -2/23/2012 Check # Date Amount Supplier/ Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit 366716 212312012 118168 SANSIO 50.00 EMS FAXING 281873 IW- 050442012 1470.6160 DATA PROCESSING FIRE DEPT. GENERAL 733.00 EMS SUBSCRIPTION 261674 INV- 05326 -2012 1470.6160 DATA PROCESSING FIRE DEPT. GENERAL 783.00 356717 212312012 104151. SCHINDLER ELEVATOR CORP. 749.01 QUARTERLY MAINTENANCE 00001725 281834 8103115464 1375.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES; PARKING'RAMP 749.01 356718 212312012 108694 SCHWALM, ELISABETH 31.20 ART WORK SOLD 281893 020812 5101.4413 ART WORK SOLD ART CENTER REVENUES 31.20 356719 212312012 101556 SHRED -IT USA INC. 13.00 SHREDDING 281875 0253896160 1400.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES POLICE DEPT. GENERAL 13.00 356720. 212312012 127878 SOUTHERN WINE AND SPIRITS. 272.50 281751 1716797 5822.5513 COST OF -GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING 506.00 281752 1710460 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE ..A 50TH ST SELLING 815.50 281753 1716730 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING 856.42 281754 1724221 5862.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR VERNON SELLING 1,280.50 281755 1716796 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 1,140.00 281756 1710461 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 112.50 281757 1710448 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING 60.50 281758 1710449 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD' WINE VERNON-SELLING 414.27 281944 1724220 5822.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR 50TH ST SELLING 80.50 281945 1710463 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 5,538.69 356721 2/2312012 105193 SPAIN, MARK 1,784.81 TREE REMOVAL 00001479 281835 . 021112 4088.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES TREE REMOVAL 1,784.81 356722 212312012 130006 STATE OF NORTH DAKOTA 250.00 CONFERENCE FEE 281876 021512 1400.6104 CONFERENCES 8 SCHOOLS POLICE DEPT. GENERAL 250.00 356723 2/2312012 101015 STREICHERS 5.34 REPLACEMENT SEAL 281877 1905853 1400.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES POLICE DEPT. GENERAL 5.3.4 R55CKREG LOG20000 120998 SURLY BREWING CO. SUPPLY CITY OF EDINA 836.00 281759 V001620 5862.5514 Council Check Register VERNON SELLING 562.00 281760 V001605 5822.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER 2/23/2012 -2/23/2012 WELDING GAS Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description 366724 2123/2012 4,602.15 101017 SUBURBAN CHEVROLET 675990 5862.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER VERNON SELLING 100.50 281762 502.31 CLUSTER, CORE 00005904 281674 374508 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS ARCHITECTS 533.57 PIPE 00005907 281675: 374937 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS 5841.6103 1,828.75 583.00 VEHICLE REPAIRS 00005942 281676 605481 1553.6180 CONTRACTED REPAIRS 101047 TWIN CITY GARAGE DOOR CO 973.30 VEHICLE REPAIRS 00005839 281836 605752 1553.6180 CONTRACTED REPAIRS 362282 1552.6180 2,592.18 356725 212312012 100900 SUN NEWSPAPERS 759.60 HELP WANTED AD 281837 1361234 1550.6121 ADVERTISING PERSONNEL 922.00 PUBLISH STORE CLOSING AD 281878 1360210 5842.6122 ADVERTISING OTHER 1,681.60 356726 212312012 101756 SUNDE LAND SURVEYING LLC. 6,285.00 SURVEY CENTER RAMP 281838 43514 44008.1705.20 CONSULTING DESIGN - 11,750.00 SURVEY SOUTH RAMP ` 281839 43524 44009.1705.20 CONSULTING DESIGN 18,035.00 2/22/2012 13:06:02 Page - 17 Business Unit EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN CENTRAL SERVICES GENERAL YORK SELLING P21 50TH&FRANCE CENTER RAMP P22 50TH &FRANCE SOUTH RAMP 356727 21231.2012 120998 SURLY BREWING CO. SUPPLY 836.00 281759 V001620 5862.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER VERNON SELLING 562.00 281760 V001605 5822.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER 50TH ST SELLING 1,398.00 WELDING GAS 00005879 281679 381945 1553.6580 356728 212312012 101035 THORPE DISTRIBUTING COMPANY 00005618 281680 381946 1553.6580 4,602.15 281761 675990 5862.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER VERNON SELLING 100.50 281762 675991 5862.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX VERNON SELLING 356729 212312012 101038 TOLL GAS & WELDING SUPPLY 248.85' WELDING HELMET 00001575 281677 380312 1301.6406 301.86 WELDING MAGNET, BRUSH 00005879 281678 381944 1553.6580 245.64 WELDING GAS 00005879 281679 381945 1553.6580 24.52 WELDING GAS 00005618 281680 381946 1553.6580 29.59 WELDING SUPPLIES 00001563 281681 382356 5913.6580 850.46 356730 212312012 105243 TUSHIE MONTGOMERY ARCHITECTS 1,828.75 YORK REMODEL 281903 211035A -8 5841.6103 1,828.75 356731 212312012 101047 TWIN CITY GARAGE DOOR CO 975.21 DOOR REPAIRS 00005830 281840 362282 1552.6180 GENERAL SUPPLIES WELDING SUPPLIES WELDING SUPPLIES WELDING SUPPLIES WELDING SUPPLIES. GENERAL MAINTENANCE EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN DISTRIBUTION PROFESSIONAL SERVICES YORK OCCUPANCY CONTRACTED REPAIRS CENT SVC PW BUILDING R55CKREG LOG20000 CITY OF EDINA 2/22/2012 13:06:02 Council Check Register Page - 18 2/23/2012 — 2123/2012 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit 975.21 356732 2/2312012 101360 TWIN CITY HARDWARE CO. 32.18 HARDWARE 00001461 281879 502538 1646.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES BUILDING MAINTENANCE 32.18 356733 2123/2012 118221 UNITED HEALTHCARE 964.94 AMBULANCE OVERPAYMENT 281956 RODNEY DICKEY 1470A329 AMBULANCE FEES FIRE DEPT. GENERAL -. 964.94 356734 2/2312012 122362 UNIVERSITY OF LOUISVILLE 10,500.00 BACKGROUND INVESTIGATION 281904 SPI- 122627 -06 7410.6218 EDUCATION PROGRAMS PSTF ADMINISTRATION 10,500.00 356735 212312012 101055 UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA 1,050.00 SHADE TREE COURSE (6) 281880 MAR 20-21 1644.6104 CONFERENCES & SCHOOLS TREES & MAINTENANCE 1,050.00 356736 2123/2012 103298 - UPS STORE #1715, THE 12.36 SHIPPING 281905 TRAN:4143 1400.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES POLICE DEPT. GENERAL 12.36 356737 2!2312012 114236 USA BLUE BOOK 260:57 HYDRANT OIL 00001562 281682 591591 5913.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES DISTRIBUTION 260.57 356738 2/2312012 100410 USA.MOBILITY WIRELESS INC. -_. 191.45 PAGERS 281881 V0319246B 1400.6151 EQUIPMENT RENTAL POLICE DEPT. GENERAL 191.45 356739 212312012 101058 VAN PAPER CO. - 42.87 LIQUOR BAGS 281841 225611 -00 5822.6512 PAPER SUPPLIES 50TH ST SELLING 42.87 356740 212312012 106308 VEITH, MICHELLE 750.00 AR &LE CATALOG DESIGN 281842 2012 -1 1629.6575 PRINTING ADAPTIVE RECREATION 750.00 356741 212312012 101066 VIKING ELECTRIC SUPPLY 161.66 COVER 00001622 281683 6124336 1322.6530 REPAIR PARTS STREET LIGHTING ORNAMENTAL 40.35 SCREWDRIVER, TEE PLATES 00001628 281843 6128379 1301.6556 TOOLS GENERAL MAINTENANCE 793.16 ELECTRICAL REPAIR PARTS 00001628 281843 6128379 1646.6530 REPAIR PARTS BUILDING MAINTENANCE R55CKREG LOG20000 281763 . 292390 -00 5862.5513 CITY OF EDINA VERNON SELLING 811.55 Council Check Register 356748 212312012 101312 WINE MERCHANTS 2/23/2012 - 2/23/2012 397338 Check # Date Amount Supplier/ Explanation PO # - Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description 50TH ST SELLING 653.60 995.17 397588 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 2,715.47 356742 212312012 101069 VOSS LIGHTING 356749 212312012 124291 WIRTZ BEVERAGE MINNESOTA 247.46 LIGHTING 00001604 281882 15197912 -00 1470.6530 REPAIR PARTS COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 247.46 281765 703572 5862.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR VERNON SELLING 356743 212312012 702429 101075 WEIGLE, SUE COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 2,402.71 281772 703576 5822.5513 146.84 HALLWAY BENCH 281844 021412 1628.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX VERNON SELLING 146.84 281950 705045 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 356744 2/23/2012 102798 WEST PAYMENT CENTER 721.99 ` JAN 2012 SERVICE 281883 824392007 1400.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 721.99 356745 2123/2012 127768 WIGLEY AND ASSOCIATES 231.25 WEBSITE DEVELOPMENT 281684 0000022 1130.6124 WEB DEVELOPMENT 600.00 WEBSITE DEVELOPMENT 281684 0000022 1140.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 831.25 356746 212312012 130009 WILMOT, MATTHEW 150.00 AMBULANCE OVERPAYMENT 281955 021512 1470.4329 AMBULANCE FEES 150.00 366747 212312012 101033 WINE COMPANY, THE 2/2212012 13:06:02 Page - 19 Business Unit FIRE DEPT. GENERAL SENIOR CITIZENS POLICE DEPT. GENERAL COMMUNICATIONS PLANNING FIRE DEPT. GENERAL 811.55 281763 . 292390 -00 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 811.55 356748 212312012 101312 WINE MERCHANTS 1,218.82 281946 _ 397338 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 843.05 281947 397337 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING 653.60 281948 397588 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 2,715.47 356749 212312012 124291 WIRTZ BEVERAGE MINNESOTA 5,298.73. 281764 703574 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 8,877.28 281765 703572 5862.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR VERNON SELLING 1,004.24 281767 702429 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 2,402.71 281772 703576 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING 115.63 281949 703573 5862.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX VERNON SELLING 692.05 281950 705045 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 18,390.64 R55CKREG LOG20000 CITY OF EDINA 2/22/2012 13:06:02 - Council Check Register Page - 20 2/23/2012 — 2123/2012 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No - Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit 356750 212312012 124529 WIRTZ BEVERAGE MINNESOTA BEER 1,958.00 281768 860109 5862.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER VERNON SELLING 2,418.85 281769 859702 5862.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER VERNON SELLING 2,249.10 281770 859516 5822.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER 50TH ST SELLING 104.00 281771 859875 5822.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER 50TH ST SELLING 2,451.71 281951 862410 5862.5514' COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER VERNON SELLING 129.00 281952 862411 5862.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX VERNON SELLING 9,310.66 356751 212312012 101726 XCEL ENERGY 13,698.74 51- 5605640 -1 281685 313915015 .5911:6185 LIGHT & POWER WELL PUMPS 4,076.20 51- 5888961 -7 281686 313541832 1375.6185 LIGHT & POWER PARKING RAMP 360.02 51 -4197645 -8 281687 313512690 1322.6185 LIGHT & POWER STREET LIGHTING ORNAMENTAL 500.00 51- 6955679 -8 281688 313940843 1551.6185 LIGHT & POWER CITY HALL GENERAL 1,031.37 51- 5619094 -8 281689 313917258 1552.6185 LIGHT & POWER CENT SVC PW BUILDING 19,666.33 356752 2/2312012 119647 YOCUM OIL COMPANY INC. 10,456.13 UNLEADED FUEL 00005975 281690 476303 1553.6581 GASOLINE EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 517.27 BIO CREDIT CORRECTION 00005948 281884 207849 1553.6581 GASOLINE EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN . 10,503.52 DIESEL FUEL 00001200 281963 466150 1553.6581 GASOLINE EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 21,476.92 356763 212312012 129844 YOGA CENTER OF MIN14EAOOUS 85.00 FITNESS TRAINING- 281885 021612 1470.6104 CONFERENCES & SCHOOLS FIRE DEPT. GENERAL 85.00 - 859,538.43 Grand Total Payment Instrument Totals Check Total 859,538.43 Total Payments 859,538.43 R55CKSUM LOG20000 CITY OF EDINA 212212012 13:06:39 Council Check Summary Page - 1 9/23/2012 - 2/23/2012 _ Company Amount 01000 GENERAL FUND 82,610.72 02300 POLICE SPECIAL REVENUE 387.60 04000 WORKING CAPITAL FUND 532,002.48 04200 EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT FUND 26,373.50 - 05100 ART CENTER FUND 3,687.90 05200 GOLF DOME FUND 10,921.26 05300 AQUATIC CENTER FUND 45.96 05400 GOLF COURSE FUND 12,838.98 05500 ICE ARENA FUND 8,806.23 05600 EDINBOROUGH/CENT LAKES FUND 1,829.24 05700 EDINBOROUGH PARK FUND 6,165.38 05750 CENTENNIAL LAKES PARK FUND 1,884.28 05800 LIQUOR FUND 125,806.38 05900 UTILITY FUND 26,957.78 07400 PSTF AGENCY FUND 17,482.64 09900 PAYROLL FUND .1,738.10 _ Report Totals 859,538.43 We confirm to the best of ourknowledge and belief,", that these claims comply in all material respects with the requirements "of the City of Edina purchasing policies. nd procedures.dat,: 3 . _ -R R55CKREG LOG20000 CITY OF EDINA Council Check Register 3/1/2012 — 3/1/2012 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description 356754 31112012 100613 AAA 32.00. REPLACEMENT PLATES 282048 022212 1553.6260 LICENSES & PERMITS 16.20 AMOUNT DUE 282145 022312 1553.6260 LICENSES & PERMITS 2/28/2012 10:43:05 Page- 1 Business Unit EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX VERNON SELLING GENERAL SUPPLIES STREET NAME SIGNS ALARM SERVICE ART CENTER BLDG/MAINT CONSULTING INSPECTION WM -473 NEW TREATMENT PLANT 96 COST OF GOODS SOLD EDINBOROUGH CONCESSIONS EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE FIRE DEPT. GENERAL CONTRACTED REPAIRS ARENA BLDG/GROUNDS REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN GENERAL SUPPLIES BUILDING MAINTENANCE 48.20 356755 31112012 102971 ACE ICE COMPANY 79.60 282089 0816393 5862.5515 79.60 356756 31112012 129458 ACME TOOLS 398.51 DRILLS 00001526 282049 1132340 1325.6406 398.51 356757 31112012 105162 ADT SECURITY SERVICES 104.22 ALARM SERVICE 282191 65161453 5111.6250 104.22 356768 31112012 129469 AECOM TECHNICAL SERVICES INC. 29,443.04 WATER TREATMENT PLANT CONSTR 281965 37207905 05473.1705.21 29,443.04 356759 31112012 105991 AL'S COFFEE COMPANY 174.95 COFFEE 282192 94658 5730.5510 174.95 356760 31112012 105262 ALEX AIR APPARATUS INC. 700.00 COMPRESSOR MAINTENANCE 282193 21263 1470.6215 700.00 356761 31112012 100575 ALL SAFE INC. 372.26 EXTINGUISHER MAINTENANCE 282294 110904 5511.6180 372.26 356762' 31112012 127365 AMERICAN FLEET SUPPLY 256.39 FREON 00005877 282146 AFS- 220530009 1553.6530 256.39 356763 31112012 100665 AMSAN 414.37 CLEANING SUPPLIES 00001475 .281966 260637095 1646.6406 414.37 356764 31112012 102172 APPERT'S FOODSERVICE 2/28/2012 10:43:05 Page- 1 Business Unit EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX VERNON SELLING GENERAL SUPPLIES STREET NAME SIGNS ALARM SERVICE ART CENTER BLDG/MAINT CONSULTING INSPECTION WM -473 NEW TREATMENT PLANT 96 COST OF GOODS SOLD EDINBOROUGH CONCESSIONS EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE FIRE DEPT. GENERAL CONTRACTED REPAIRS ARENA BLDG/GROUNDS REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN GENERAL SUPPLIES BUILDING MAINTENANCE R55CKREG LOG20000 CITY OF EDINA 2/28/2012 10:43:05 Council Check Register Page - 2 3/1/2012 - 3/1/2012 Check # Date - Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No r Subledger Account Description Business Unit 825.69 CONCESSION PRODUCT 282194 1689510 5730.5510 COST OF GOODS SOLD EDINBOROUGH CONCESSIONS _. 586.81 CONCESSION PRODUCT 282195 1693035 i 5730.5510 COST OF GOODS SOLD EDINBOROUGH CONCESSIONS 1,412.50 356765 31112012 105054 ARROWWOOD RESORT 379.69 CONFERENCE LODGING 282005 MAR 12 -15 2310.6104 CONFERENCES & SCHOOLS E911 379.69 356766 3/1/2012 124846 ASSEMBLED PRODUCTS CORPORATION 69.43 KODIAK REPAIR 281967 657409 1400.6160 DATA PROCESSING POLICE DEPT. GENERAL 69.43 i 356767 31112012 118883 BAN -KOE SYSTEMS INC. 586.26 FIRE ALARM REPAIR 282007 65151 5511.6180 CONTRACTED REPAIRS ARENA BLDGIGROUNDS 586.26 356768 31112012 121141 BCLFSC 85.00 PROGRAM ADVERTISING 282253 022412 5510.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES ARENA ADMINISTRATION 85.00 356769 .31112012 120517 BEITEL, DAWN 69.37 MILEAGE REIMBURSEMENT 282295 123111 1600.6107 MILEAGE OR ALLOWANCE PARK ADMIN. GENERAL 106.56 282310 022412 1600.6107 MILEAGE OR ALLOWANCE PARK ADMIN. GENERAL 175.93 356770 31112012 101355 BELLBOY CORPORATION 59.55 282090 72220200 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING 867.05 282256 72302400 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 289.90 282257 72216800 5822.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR 50TH ST SELLING 572.31 282258 72301800 5862.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR VERNON SELLING 1,788.81 356771 31112012 100648 BERTELSON OFFICE PRODUCTS 59.93 OFFICE SUPPLIES 282147 OE- 279997 -1 7410.6513 OFFICE SUPPLIES PSTF ADMINISTRATION 59.93 356772 31112012 102545 BLUE CROSS & BLUE SHIELD OF MN 156,404.50 PREMIUM 282008 11006 -3/12 1550.6040 HOSPITALIZATION CENTRAL SERVICES GENERAL 10,514.00 PREMIUM 282009 11006 -MAR 1550.6040 HOSPITALIZATION CENTRAL SERVICES GENERAL 166.918.50 356773. 31112012 119631 BONNER & BORHART LLP R55CKREG LOG20000 CITY OF EDINA 2/28 /2012 10:43:05 Council Check Register Page - 3 3/1/2012 — 311/2012 - Check # Date Amount Supplier/ Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit 22,143.75 PROSECUTING 281968 57414 1195.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES LEGAL SERVICES 22,143.75 356774 31112012 119351 BOURGET IMPORTS 659.50 282259 106899 5822.5513. COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING 659.50 356776 31112012 100669 BOYER TRUCK PARTS 75.09 BELT, RADIATOR HOSE 00005916 282196 610088 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 75.09 356776 31112012 122318• BRAEMAR GOLF COURSE 200.00 ROOM RENTAL FEE 282197 3875 1265.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION 200.00 356777 31112012 100664 BRAUN INTERTEC - 6,930.00 MATERIALS TESTING 281969 347639 01388.1705.20 CONSULTING DESIGN WESTCHESTER KNOLLS NEIGHBORHOO 6,930.00 356778 31112012 125156. BRAUN, MICHAEL 60.00 BRAEMAR ARENA PHOTOS 282050 1114 1130.6408 PHOTOGRAPHIC SUPPLIES COMMUNICATIONS - 60.00 ABOUT TOWN PHOTOS 282050 1114 1130.6123 MAGAZINE/NEWSLETTER EXPENSE COMMUNICATIONS 120.00 356779 31112012 113580 BRONZE MEMORIAL CO. 221.17 PLAQUE 00007097 282198 526865 5630.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES CENTENNIAL LAKES 221.17 356780 31112012 119826 BRYANT GRAPHICS INC. 760.18 NEWSLETTER 00008269 282051 27191 1628.6575 PRINTING SENIOR CITIZENS 760.18 356781 31112012 103244 BURTIS, ROBERT ' 150.00 EP ENTERTAINEMENT 3/8/12 282010 022212 5710.6136 PROFESSIONAL SVC - OTHER EDINBOROUGH ADMINISTRATION 150.00 356782 31112012 120935 CAMPBELL KNUTSON 11,466.01 LEGAL 282148 2851G -1/12 1195.6131 PROFESSIONAL SERV - LEGAL LEGAL SERVICES 11,466.01 - 356783 3/112012 119455 CAPITOL BEVERAGE SALES 1,142.09 282260 48917 5822.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER 50TH ST SELLING R55CKREG LOG20000 CITY OF EDINA 2/28/2012 10:43:05 - Council Check Register Page - 4 3/1/2012 - 311/2012 Check # Date Amount Supplier/ Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit 1,142.09 I ' 356784 31112012 100677 CARGILL INC. 6,203.47 DEICER SALT 00005710 281970 2900377415 1318.6525 SALT SNOW & ICE REMOVAL 19,028.92 DEICER SALT 00001582 281971 2900397578 1318.6525 SALT SNOW & ICE REMOVAL 25,232.39 356785 311/2012 116683 CAT & FIDDLE BEVERAGE 525.00 282091 92532 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 525.00 356786 31112012 112561 CENTERPOINT.ENERGY 141.92 5596524 -8 282006 5596524 -2/12 5430.6186 HEAT RICHARDS GOLF COURSE 32.63 5584310 -6 282149 5584310 -2112 7413.6186 HEAT PSTF FIRE TOWER 1,511.53 5584304 -9 282150 5584304 -2112 7411.6186 HEAT PSTF OCCUPANCY 1,686.08 356787 3/1/2012 123898 CENTURYLINK . 58.84 952 9446522 281972 6522 -2/12 5511.6188 TELEPHONE ARENA BLDGIGROUNDS 58.84 356788 31112012 117187 CHEM SYSTEMS LTD 342.54 CLEANERS 00008016 282011 516897 5511.6511 CLEANING SUPPLIES ARENA BLDG/GROUNDS 342.54 356789 '31112012 100685 CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE 125.00 EP ENTERTAINMENT 3/4/12 282015 022112 5710.6136 PROFESSIONAL SVC = OTHER EDINBOROUGH ADMINISTRATION 125.00 356790 31112012 122084 CITY OF EDINA - UTILITIES 400.95 00105263- 0335037016 282012 335037016 -2/12 5430.6189 SEWER & WATER RICHARDS GOLF COURSE 42.44 00077443 - 0332300005. 282013 332300005 -2/12 1646.6189 SEWER & WATER BUILDING MAINTENANCE 50.87 00077443 - 0332300004 282014 332300004 -2/12 1646.6189 SEWER & WATER BUILDING MAINTENANCE 4,379.04 00103426 - 0345052006 282151 345052006 -2112- 1552.6189 SEWER & WATER CENT SVC PW BUILDING 44.03 00086676- 0330288022 282199 86676 -2112 5720.6189 SEWER & WATER EDINBOROUGH OPERATIONS 345.09 0342163045 700113607 282200 113607 -2/12 1470.6189 SEWER & WATER FIRE DEPT. GENERAL 5,262.42 356791 31112012 101119 COCKRIEL, VINCE 39.96 MILEAGE REIMBURSEMENT 282152 021312, 1600.6107 MILEAGE OR ALLOWANCE PARK ADMIN. GENERAL 39.96 R55CKREG LOG20000 CITY OF EDINA 2/28/2012 10:43:05 Council Check Register Page - 5 3/1/2012 - 3/112012 Check # Date Amount Supplier/ Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit 356792 31112012 129820 COLLIERS INTERNATIONAL. 800.80 MARCH 2012 MAINTENANCE 282052 030112 5841.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES YORK OCCUPANCY 800.80 356793 31112012 120433 COMCAST 106.95 8772 10 614 0396908 282080 396908 -2/12 5760.6105 DUES & SUBSCRIPTIONS CENTENNIAL LAKES ADMIN EXPENSE 66.95 8772 10 614 0419858 282203 419858 -2/12 5511.6188 TELEPHONE ARENA BLDGIGROUNDS 173.90 . 356794 31112012 100695 CONTINENTAL CLAY CO. 96.00 CLAY 00009124 282201 INV000066840 5120.5510 COST OF GOODS SOLD ART SUPPLY GIFT GALLERY SHOP 288.00 ELEMENTS 00009124 282201 INV000066840 5111.6530 REPAIR PARTS ART CENTER BLDG/MAINT 878.08 CLAY, KEMPER TOOLS 00009116 282202 INV000066247 5120.5510 COST OF GOODS SOLD ART SUPPLY GIFT GALLERY SHOP 1,262.08 356795 31112012 100697 COOL AIR MECHANICAL INC. 689.00 REPAIR HEATERS 282016 77051 5511.6180 CONTRACTED REPAIRS ARENA BLDGIGROUNDS 3,326.59 RADIANT AIR REPAIR 282017 76949 5511.6180 CONTRACTED REPAIRS ARENA'BLDG/GROUNDS 799.21- FURNACE REPAIR. 282018 76904 5511.6180 CONTRACTED REPAIRS ARENA BLDG/GROUNDS 1,487.63 ALARM SYSTEM REPAIR 282204 77169 5511.6180 CONTRACTED REPAIRS, ARENA BLDGIGROUNDS 6,302.43 356796 31112012 120032 CORPORATE MECHANICAL 3,469.00 PERMIT FEES FOR FIRE TOWER 282153 155131 7413.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES PSTF FIRE TOWER 3,469.00 356797 31112012 101495 CREATIVE IMAGES ON RIBBON INC. 128.25 SKATING RIBBONS 00008015 282019 8818 5510.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES ARENA ADMINISTRATION 128.25 356798 31112012 121267 CREATIVE RESOURCES 1,254.31 T- SHIRTS. 282205 13902 5720.5510 COST OF GOODS SOLD EDINBOROUGH OPERATIONS 124.76 UNIFORM SHIRTS 282206 14150 5720.6201. LAUNDRY EDINBOROUGH OPERATIONS 1,379.07 356799 31112012 126183 CROW RIVER LIGHTING SERVICES 240.05 MH50 00008020 282207 1128 5511.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES ARENA BLDG/GROUNDS 240.35 MH100 00008020 282208 1132 5511.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES ARENA BLDG/GROUNDS 480.40 366800 31112012 129660 CUNINGHAM GROUP ARCHITECTURE 1,000.00 NEW DOME CONSULTING FEE 282209 37524 1500.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES CONTINGENCIES R55CKREG LOG20000 282092 639058 5862.5515 CITY OF EDINA VERNON SELLING 2/28/2012 10:43:05 282093 639057 5862.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER VERNON SELLING Council Check Register' 282261 Page - 6 5822.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER 50TH ST SELLING 2,196.20 3/1/2012 - 3/1/2012 650243624 -2112 5760.6122 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No j Subledger Account Description Business Unit 00001302 282054 660361 1,000.00 TOOLS GENERAL MAINTENANCE 216.65 CHARGERS 00001302'282055 665856 356801 31112012 GENERAL MAINTENANCE 100706 D.C. ANNIS SEWER INC. 356807 544.00 PUMP SUMP, TRENCH DRAINS 282210 87804 1470.6215 EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE FIRE DEPT. GENERAL 544.00 455.56 CAR WASH FLUID 00005976 281974 IN- 1104843 1553.6238 356802 3/1/2012 104020 DALCO 366808 173.06 TISSUE, DISINFECTANT 00001454 282053 2426982 1552.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES CENT SVC PW BUILDING 173.06 268.93 SHARPENER TOOL 00008021 282213 156112 5511.6406 356803 3/112012 102285 DAVANNIS 356809: 79.52 RANGE TRAINING LUNCH 281973 212449 1400.6104 CONFERENCES & SCHOOLS POLICE DEPT. GENERAL 79.52 356804 311/2012 102478 DAY DISTRIBUTING CO. 52.40. 282092 639058 5862.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX VERNON SELLING 1,450.40 282093 639057 5862.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER VERNON SELLING 693.40 282261 639059 5822.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER 50TH ST SELLING 2,196.20 282081 650243624 -2112 5760.6122 ADVERTISING OTHER 356805 31112012 100718 DELEGARD TOOL CO. 150.98 650487671 282211 650487671 -2/12 199.14 BATTERY 00001302 282054 660361 1301.6556 TOOLS GENERAL MAINTENANCE 216.65 CHARGERS 00001302'282055 665856 1301.6556 TOOLS GENERAL MAINTENANCE CENTENNIAL LAKES ADMIN EXPENSE ARENA BLDG/GROUNDS EDINBOROUGH ADMINISTRATION EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN ARENA BLDG/GROUNDS EDINBOROUGH CONCESSIONS 415.79 I 356806 31112012 102831 DEX MEDIA EAST INC. 101.80 282081 650243624 -2112 5760.6122 ADVERTISING OTHER 150.98 650487671 282211 650487671 -2/12 5511.6188 TELEPHONE 125.45 110311867 282212 110311867 -1/12 5710.6122 ADVERTISING OTHER 378.23 356807 311/2012 129080 • DUBOIS CHEMICALS INC. 455.56 CAR WASH FLUID 00005976 281974 IN- 1104843 1553.6238 CAR WASH :• 455.56 366808 311/2012 100736 E -Z SHARP INC - 268.93 SHARPENER TOOL 00008021 282213 156112 5511.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES 268.93 356809: ,` 31112012 103521 ECOLAB EQUIPMENTCARE 75.04 ELEMENT FOR HOTDOG MACHINE 282214 92276631 5730.6530 REPAIR PARTS 75.04 CENTENNIAL LAKES ADMIN EXPENSE ARENA BLDG/GROUNDS EDINBOROUGH ADMINISTRATION EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN ARENA BLDG/GROUNDS EDINBOROUGH CONCESSIONS R55CKREG LOG20000 CITY OF EDINA Council Check Register 3/1/2012 -- 3/1/2012 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description 366810 31112012 100744 EDINA CHAMBER OF COMMERCE 50.00 GMM FEB - J. BENNEROTTE 282056 31343 1130.6106 MEETING EXPENSE 50.00 356811 31112012 103594 EDINALARM INC. 135.00 ALARM REPAIR 00001489 282020 71617 1646.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 135.00 366812 3/112012 100049 EHLERS & ASSOCIATES INC 8,347.50 CENT LAKES TIF MODS 281975 344202 1000.1303 DUE FROM HRA 1,218.75 SOUTHDALE REMODEL 281976 344201 1000.1303 DUE FROM HRA 1,462.50 CENT LAKES CASHFLOW PROJ 281977 344200 1000.1303 DUE FROM HRA 11,028.75 356813 31112012 129676 EMERGENCY SUPPORT SERVICES 5,228.53 SOT HELMETS 00003709 282215 26012OA -2 421480.6710 EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT 5,228.53 356814 31112012 100297 . FAST FOTO & DIGITAL 7.24 T2- 298817 282296 98326063 2210.6408 PHOTOGRAPHIC SUPPLIES 49.10 T2- 297079 282296 #8326063 5620.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES 56.34 356816 31112012 130022 FELDMAN, HARVEY 169.34 SPORTS DOME PRINTING 282254 022112 1500.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 169.34 356816 311/2012 .126004 FERGUSON WATERWORKS 11.31 PINS FOR METER HEADS 00001697 P82154 S01349688.001 5916.6530 REPAIR PARTS 4.05 SHIPPING FEES 282216 S01349834.001 1470.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 15.36 356817 31112012 119211 FIRSTLAB 464:55 DRUG SCREENING 281978 00498640 1550.6121 ADVERTISING PERSONNEL 464.55 356818 31112012 129945 FISHER, MARK 109.89 MILEAGE REIMBURSEMENT 282155 022112 1622.6107 MILEAGE OR ALLOWANCE 109.89 356819 31112012 102727 FORCE AMERICA 2/28/2012 10:43:05 Page- 7 Business Unit COMMUNICATIONS BUILDING MAINTENANCE GENERAL FUND BALANCE SHEET GENERAL FUND BALANCE SHEET GENERAL FUND BALANCE SHEET SPECIAL OPS FIRE EQUIPMENT COMMUNICATIONS EDINBOROUGH PARK CONTINGENCIES METER READING FIRE DEPT. GENERAL i CENTRAL SERVICES GENERAL SKATING & HOCKEY R55CKREG LOG20000 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation 567.00 RESERVOIR .' 88.86 WHEEL KIT 655.86 15.39 356820 311/2012 119936 ,GLOBAL OAK 112.50 ART CENTER E- COMMERCE 150.00 PARKS & REC E- COMMERCE 150.00 BRAEMAR ARENA E- COMMERCE 375.00 POLICE REGISTRATION FORM 468.75 EDIN PARK'E- COMMERCE 843.75 BRAEMAR GOLF E- COMMERCE 1,125.00 AQUATIC CTR E- COMMERCE 2,118.75 WEBSITE MAINTENANCE 5,343.75 SAFETY EQUIPMENT CITY OF EDINA Council Check Register 3/1/2012 3/112012 PO # Doc No Inv No Account No 00005890 281979 01379683 1553.6530 00005944 281980 01379614 1553.6530 282057 010901 282057 010901 282057 010901 282057 010901 282057 010901 282057 010901 282057 010901 282057 010901 366821 ,3/112012 100781 GRAFIXSHOPPE 4,011.02 NEW CITY LOGO GRAPHICS 00005616 281981 79201 4,809.38 REMOVE OLD /APPLY NEW LOGOS 00005616 282058 79261 8,820.40 i 5110.6103 1627.6103 5510.6103 1400.6405, 5720.6103 5410.6103 5310.6103 1130.6124 1553.6585 1553.6180 Subledger Account Description REPAIR PARTS REPAIR PARTS PROFESSIONAL SERVICES PROFESSIONAL SERVICES PROFESSIONAL SERVICES BOOKS BPAIMPHLETS PROFESSIONAL SERVICES PROFESSIONAL SERVICES PROFESSIONAL SERVICES WEB DEVELOPMENT ACCESSORIES CONTRACTED REPAIRS 356822 311/2012 101103 GRAINGER 15.39 SAFETY GLASSES 00005941 281982 9752652082 1301.6610 SAFETY EQUIPMENT 15.30 SAFETY GLASSES 00005941 281983 9752399460 1553.6610 SAFETY EQUIPMENT' 112.13 SAFETY GLASSES 00005941 281983 9752399460 1301.6610 SAFETY EQUIPMENT 94.43 PARTS FOR FURNACE 00001639 282059 9754491117 1646.6530 REPAIR PARTS 36.34 SAFETY GLASSES 00005941 282060 9753858795 1646.6610 SAFETY. EQUIPMENT 4.59 SAFETY GLASSES 00005941 282061 9753496117 i 1553.6610 SAFETY EQUIPMENT 18.57. SAFETY GLASSES 00005941 282061 9753496117 5913.6610 SAFETY EQUIPMENT 23.16 SAFETY GLASSES 00005941 282061 9753496117 1301.6610 SAFETY EQUIPMENT 335.57 AMP METER, GLOVES 00001688 282157 9753229583 5913.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES 13.47 SAFETY GLASSES 00005951 282158 9758354444 1301.6610 SAFETY EQUIPMENT 33.15 SAFETY GLASSES 00005951 282158 9758354444 1646.6610 - SAFETY EQUIPMENT 43.38 CABLE TIES 00002296 282217 9742551253 5720.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES 18.64 SAFETY GLASSES 00005951 282218 9758457080 1646.6610 iSAFETY EQUIPMENT 46.95 FACIAL TISSUE 00005951 282218 9758457080 1552.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES 147.72 SAFETY GLASSES 00005951 282218 9758457080 1301.6610 SAFETY EQUIPMENT 958.79 I 356823 31112012 124711 GRANDVIEW TIRE & AUTO - CAHILL 54.95 ALIGNMENT 00005917 282156 35766 1553.6180 CONTRACTED REPAIRS 54.95 2128/2012 10:43:05 Page- 8 Business Unit EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN ART CENTER ADMINISTRATION SPECIAL ACTIVITIES ARENA ADMINISTRATION POLICE DEPT. GENERAL EDINBOROUGH OPERATIONS :GOLF ADMINISTRATION POOL ADMINISTRATION COMMUNICATIONS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN GENERAL MAINTENANCE EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN GENERAL MAINTENANCE BUILDING MAINTENANCE BUILDING MAINTENANCE EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN .DISTRIBUTION GENERAL MAINTENANCE DISTRIBUTION GENERAL MAINTENANCE BUILDING MAINTENANCE E D I N B O R O U G H'OPERATIONS BUILDING MAINTENANCE CENT SVC PW BUILDING GENERAL MAINTENANCE EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN R65CKREG LOG20000 CITY OF EDINA Council Check Register 3/1/2012 — 3/1/2012 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description 356824 31112012 129205 HARRIS MECHANICAL SERVICES LLC 1,553.18 WATER HEATER REPAIR 282021. 507002130 5511.6180 CONTRACTED REPAIRS 1,553.18 356825 311/2012 125270 HARTFORD -PRIORITY ACCOUNTS 3,420.76 MAR 2012 PREMIUM 282062 5780656-4 9900.2033.16 LTD - 99 3,420.76 356826 31112012 101255 HASLER INC. 318.61 POSTAGE METER RENTAL 00004009 282159 15290597 1500.6235 POSTAGE 318.61 356827 31112012 122093 HEALTH PARTNERS 12,275.61 PREMIUM 281984 39654873 1550.6040 HOSPITALIZATION 994.00 PREMIUM 281985 39649650 1550.6043. COBRA INSURANCE 13,269.61 366828 31112012 128208 HEINZMAN, DAN ` 98.96 UNIFORM PURCHASE 282160 022312 5913.6201 LAUNDRY 98.96 356829 3/1/2012 101871 HENNEPIN COUNTY FIRE CHIEFS AS 100.00 DUES 282219 022412 1470.6105 DUES & SUBSCRIPTIONS 100.00 356830 31112012 105436 HENNEPIN COUNTY TREASURER 656.00 RADIO ADMIN FEE 00001730 282022 120138077 1301.6151 EQUIPMENT RENTAL 656.00 _ 356831 311/2012 104375 HOHENSTEINS INC. 2/2812012 10:43:05 Page - 9 Business Unit ARENA BLDG/GROUNDS PAYROLL CLEARING CONTINGENCIES CENTRAL SERVICES GENERAL CENTRAL SERVICES GENERAL DISTRIBUTION FIRE DEPT. GENERAL GENERAL MAINTENANCE 1,370.50 282094 590947 5862.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER VERNON SELLING 991.50 282095 590283 5822.5514 COST OF. GOODS SOLD BEER 50TH ST SELLING 2,362.00 356832 3/112012 130023 HUGHES ASSOCIATES INC. - 875.00 CONCESSION DECK FIREPROOFING- 282297 INV- 1123639 5600.1720 BUILDINGS 875.00 356833 31112012 101714 IDENTISYS INC. EB /CL BALANCE SHEET 101.53 ID CARD SYSTEM SUPPORT 282063 124714 1130.6136 PROFESSIONAL SVC - OTHER COMMUNICATIONS 101.53 R55CKREG LOG20000 100.00 POLICE SERVICE CITY OF EDINA 030112 1419.6102 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES RESERVE PROGRAM Council Check Register 3/1/2012 - 3/112012 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description 356834 31112012 282162 128368 INDEPENDENT STATIONERS 1550.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES CENTRAL SERVICES GENERAL 1,608.47 87.72 PAPER, NOTE BOOKS 00001734 282220 IN- 000147552 1260.6406 i GENERAL SUPPLIES 356839 31112012 87.72 100741 JJ TAYLOR DIST. OF MINN 356835 311/2012 119808 INTEGRA TELECOM - 282096 1708772 5862.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER 26.74 INTERNET SERVICE 282161 9348343 7411.6188 TELEPHONE 1708773 5862.5515 26.74 VERNON SELLING 34.00- 356836 31112012 5862.5514 100202 JAMAR'•TECHNOLOGIES INC. VERNON SELLING 3,642.02 282262 61.43 ROUND CHINESE FINGERS 00001744 282249 05792 1260.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES 6,000.22 103.41 EPDM -TUBE 00001956 282300 06350 1260.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES 356840 311/2012 164.84 356837 3/1/2012 89.95 101400 JAMES, WILLIAM F 282221 022412 5720.6201 2/28/2012 10:43:05 Page - 10 Business Unit ENGINEERING GENERAL PSTF OCCUPANCY ENGINEERING GENERAL ENGINEERING GENERAL 100.00 POLICE SERVICE 282064 030112 1419.6102 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES RESERVE PROGRAM 100.00 366838 31112012 102146 JESSEN PRESS 1,608.47 LETTERHEAD 282162 31542 1550.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES CENTRAL SERVICES GENERAL 1,608.47 356839 31112012 100741 JJ TAYLOR DIST. OF MINN 2,374.20 282096 1708772 5862.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER VERNON SELLING 18.00 282097 1708773 5862.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX VERNON SELLING 34.00- 282098 1708777 5862.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER VERNON SELLING 3,642.02 282262 1708774 58.22.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER 50TH ST SELLING 6,000.22 356840 311/2012 102059 JOHNS, RICHARD 89.95 UNIFORM PURCHASE 282221 022412 5720.6201 LAUNDRY EDINBOROUGH OPERATIONS 89.95 356841 3/112012 100835 JOHNSON BROTHERS LIQUOR CO. 1.12 282099 1239548 5862.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX VERNON SELLING 7,816.06 282100 1239547 5862.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR VERNON SELLING 3,060.17 282101 1239550 5862.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR VERNON SELLING. 478.44 282102 1239552 5862.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR VERNON SELLING 109.12 282103 1235057 :5822.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR 50TH ST SELLING 31.37 282104 1235053 5822.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX 50TH ST SELLING 912.93 282105 1235052 5822.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR 50TH ST SELLING 323.04 282106 1235051 5822.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR 50TH ST SELLING 1,185.94 282107 1239549 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING R55CKREG LOG20000 CITY OF EDINA 2/28/2012 10:43:05 Council Check Register Page- 11 3/1/2012 - 3/1/2012 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit 230.20 282108 1239542 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 1,877.15 282109 1239551 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 1,625.44 282110 1239546 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 158.24 282111 1239539 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 52.50 POPCHIPS 282222 1229045 5730.5510 COST OF GOODS SOLD EDINBOROUGH CONCESSIONS 494.36 282263 1240452 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 1,093.76 282264 1239537 5822.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR 50TH ST SELLING 492.69 282265 1239541 5822.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR BOTH ST SELLING 262.36 282266 1239545 5822.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR 50TH ST SELLING 57.12- 282267 526600 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING 20,147.77 356842 31112012 120296 KAASA, GUNNAR 995.00 REIMBURSE FOR TRAINING FEES 282163 022212 1281.6104 CONFERENCES & SCHOOLS TRAINING 995.00 356843 31112012 111018 KEEPRS INC. 437.00 GLOCK FIXED SIGHT PISTOL 00003183 282164 183490 1400.6104 CONFERENCES & SCHOOLS POLICE DEPT. GENERAL 284.00 UNIFORMS 00003744 282223 179545 -91 1470.6558 DEPT - UNIFORMS 'FIRE DEPT. GENERAL 207.00- CREDIT 282224 166204 -81 .1470.6558 DEPT UNIFORMS FIRE DEPT. GENERAL 134.97 UNIFORMS 00003698 282225 181842 -02 1470.6558 DEPT UNIFORMS FIRE DEPT. GENERAL ' 648.97 356844 31112012 100841 KEPRIOS, JOHN - 92.91 MILEAGE'REIMBURSEMENT 282082 022212 1600.6107 MILEAGE OR ALLOWANCE PARK ADMIN. GENERAL 177.27 MILEAGE REIMBURSEMENT 282298 122211 1600.6107 MILEAGE OR ALLOWANCE PARK ADMIN. GENERAL 270.18 366845 31112012 117782 KIDDE FIRE TRAINERS INC. 1,640.77 SMOKE FLUID 282165 7697 7413.6545 CHEMICALS PSTF FIRE TOWER 1,640.77- 356846 31112012 118456 KNOLLMAIER, LAURA 128.43 PETTY CASH 282166 022312 5760.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES CENTENNIAL LAKES ADMIN EXPENSE _ 157.33 PETTY CASH 282166 022312 5761.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES CENTENNIAL LAKES OPERATING 285.76 356847 3/112012 130019 KUBACKI, MARK' 83.25 MILEAGE REIMBURSEMENT 282167 022312 1622.6107 MILEAGE OR ALLOWANCE. SKATING & HOCKEY 83.25 356848 31112012 100605 LANDS' END BUSINESS OUTFITTERS R55CKREG LOG20000 282170 34625/34674/347 1554.6160 CITY OF EDINA CENT SERV GEN - MIS 02 Council Check Register 3,747.36 282170 34625/34674/347 1120.6160 311/2012 - 311/2012 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description 34625/34674/347 330,95 UNIFORMS 282226 11168965 5720.6201 LAUNDRY 330.95 7,367.18 282170 34625/34674/347 1554.6160 356849 31112012 CENT SERV GEN - MIS 128325 LANG, USA 02 136.19 MILEAGE REIMBURSEMENT 282168 022212 1622.6107 MILEAGE OR ALLOWANCE 136.19 02 11,136.14 356850 31112012 34625/346741347 100852 • LAWSON PRODUCTS INC. DATA PROCESSING GENERAL (BILLING) 02 683.14 POLYMER WHEELS 00005939 281986 9300608514 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS 1160.6160 384.91 SCREWS, NUTS, PLOW BOLTS 00005938 281987 9300608516 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS 30.64 LOCK NUTS 00005875 281988 9300604266 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS - i. 208.13 PLOW BOLTS 00005875 282065 9300623213 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS 77.23 CABLE TIES 00001631 282169 9300608517 5913.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES 413.65 WASHERS, NUTS, SCREWS 00005949 282227 9300630325 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS 28.66 WASHERS 00001863 282301 9300194462 1301.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES 6.97 PINS 00001081 282302 9300286504 1301.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES 12.54 WASHERS 00001081 282303 9300226384 1301.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES 95.44 PAINT 00001698 282304 9300193532 1301.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES 1,941.31 356851 31112012 130012 LEJCHER, BRENT 70.43 GOLF DOME BALL REFUND 282023 022112 5201.4543 GOLF DOME RECEIPTS 70.43 356852 31112012 100857 LITTLE FALLS MACHINE INC. 617.95 SPINNER ASSEMBY, SPINNERS 00005878 282066 00048754 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS, 617.95 356853 3/112012 100858 LOGIS 2128/2012 10:43:05 Page - 12 Business Unit EDINBOROUGH OPERATIONS SKATING & HOCKEY EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN DISTRIBUTION EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN GENERAL MAINTENANCE GENERAL MAINTENANCE GENERAL MAINTENANCE GENERAL MAINTENANCE GOLF DOME REVENUES EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 1,244.66 282170 34625/34674/347 1554.6160 DATA PROCESSING CENT SERV GEN - MIS 02 3,747.36 282170 34625/34674/347 1120.6160 DATA PROCESSING ADMINISTRATION 02 4,796.58 282170 34625/34674/347 1495.6160 DATA PROCESSING INSPECTIONS 02 7,367.18 282170 34625/34674/347 1554.6160 DATA PROCESSING CENT SERV GEN - MIS 02 8,314.56 282170 34625/34674/347 1190.6160 DATA PROCESSING ASSESSING 02 11,136.14 282170 34625/346741347 5910.6160 DATA PROCESSING GENERAL (BILLING) 02 13,663.52 282170 34625/34674/347 . 1160.6160 DATA PROCESSING FINANCE R55CKREG LOG20000 CITY OF EDINA Council Check Register 3/1/2012 — 3/1/2012 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description - 02 MILEAGE OR ALLOWANCE LUBRICANTS PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 2/28/2612 10:43:05 Page - 13 Business Unit. CENT SERV GEN - MIS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN ADMINISTRATION PROFESSIONAL-SERVICES CENTRAL SERVICES GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERV - AUDIT FINANCE CUSTOMER REFUND UTILITY BALANCE SHEET DUE FROM HRA - GENERAL FUND BALANCE SHEET EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT ENERGY EFFICIENCY UPGRADES CONTRACTED REPAIRS EDINBOROUGH OPERATIONS CONTRACTED REPAIRS EDINBOROUGH OPERATIONS PROFESSIONAL SERVICES PUBLIC PROGRAMS 50,270.00 356854 31112012 125208 LOVEJOY, NICHOLAS 69.87 MILEAGE REIMBURSEMENT 282171 021612 1554.6107 69.87 356865 31112012 101782 LUBE -TECH 4,207.71 TRANSMISSION FLUID, OIL 00005981 282228 2016768 1553.6584 4,207.71 356856 31112012 122076 LYNN 8 ASSOCIATES 980.00 FACILITATION 282172 PG:1:2012 1120.6103 980.00 356857 31112012 129969 MBA EXECUTIVE SEARCH LLC 5,000.00 CANDIDATE SOURCING FEE 282024 148 -A 1550.6103 5,000.00 356858 31112012 117804 MALLOY MONTAGUE KARNOWSKI 4,500.00 AUDIT SERVICES 281989 30322 1160.6130 4,500.00 356859 31112012 130011 MAYO, ROBERT 180.10 UTILITY OVERPAYMENT REFUND 282025 6836 CRESTON RD 5900.2015 180.10 356860 3/112012 130020 MCCD 5,000.00 OPEN TO BUSINESS PROGRAM 282173 4 1000.1303 5,000.00 356861 31112012 129755 MCKINSTRY ESSENTION INC. 13,162.60 ENERGY PROGRAM 282083 45424 -JAN 2012 4403.6710 13,162.60 356862 31112012 125941 MCQUAY INTERNATIONAL 2,468.00 BEARINGS FOR HOUSE BOILER 282229 2566374 5720.6180 - 307.22 TRACK BOILER DRAIN VALVE 00REPAIR 282230 2565897 5720.6180 2,775.22 356863 31112012 103944 MED COMPASS 1,035.00 BLOOD TESTING 282174 19104 7414.6103 MILEAGE OR ALLOWANCE LUBRICANTS PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 2/28/2612 10:43:05 Page - 13 Business Unit. CENT SERV GEN - MIS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN ADMINISTRATION PROFESSIONAL-SERVICES CENTRAL SERVICES GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERV - AUDIT FINANCE CUSTOMER REFUND UTILITY BALANCE SHEET DUE FROM HRA - GENERAL FUND BALANCE SHEET EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT ENERGY EFFICIENCY UPGRADES CONTRACTED REPAIRS EDINBOROUGH OPERATIONS CONTRACTED REPAIRS EDINBOROUGH OPERATIONS PROFESSIONAL SERVICES PUBLIC PROGRAMS R55CKREG LOG20000 CITY OF EDINA 2/28/2012 10:43:05 Council Check Register Page - 14 3/1/2012 - 3/1/2012 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit 1,035.00 356864 31112012 105603 MEDICINE LAKE TOURS 1,325.25 MALL OF AMERICA TRIP 282067 022312 1628.6103.07 TRIPS PROF SERVICES SENIOR CITIZENS 1,325.25 356865 311/2012 101483 MENARDS 9.73 ADHESIVE, GROUT 00001609 282068 16559 1552.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES CENT SVC PW BUILDING 44.84 BIT HOLDERS, LUMBER 00001620 282069 18896 1318.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES SNOW & ICE REMOVAL 48.33 LUMBER 00001629 282070 19816 4090.6406 GENERAL 'SUPPLIES 50TH &FRANCE MAINTENANCE 4.16 FELT 00001637 282071 21214 1301.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES GENERAL MAINTENANCE 107.06 366866 31112012 101987 MENARDS 24.84 HOSE MENDERS, BIT 00002062 282084 71058 5761.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES CENTENNIAL LAKES OPERATING 26.22 CHRISTMAS LIGHTS 00002260 282305 49858 5620.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES EDINBOROUGH PARK 51.06 356867 31112012 104156 MENARDS :538.54 LUMBER, WHEELS FOR SKATE BINS)0002066 282026 88243 5511.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES ARENA BLDG/GROUNDS 43.79 GLUE, PUTTY, SCRAPERS 00002068 282085 91014 5761.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES CENTENNIAL LAKES OPERATING 582.33 356868 31112012 100885 METRO SALES INC i 241.65 COPIER USAGE - 282027 445109 5510.6513 i OFFICE SUPPLIES ARENA ADMINISTRATION 241.65 356869 31112012 102507 METRO VOLLEYBALL OFFICIALS 137.50 OFFICIATING FEES 281990 4096 . 4077.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES EDINA ATHLETIC ASSOCIATION -- 137.50 356870 .31112012 118464 MIDWESTTESTING 160.00 METER REPAIR 00001699 282231 2311 5917.6180 CONTRACTED REPAIRS' METER REPAIR - 160.00 356871 31112012 102873 MILLER, SUSAN 52.54 SUPPLIES REIMBURSEMENT 282028 021012 5511.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES ARENA BLDG/GROUNDS 66.21 SUPPLIES REIMBURSEMENT 282028 021012 5510.6513 OFFICE SUPPLIES ARENA ADMINISTRATION 118.75 366872 31112012 102174 MINNEAPOLIS OXYGEN COMPANY 472.60 METH -AIR - 282175 183026548 7413.6545 CHEMICALS PSTF FIRE TOWER R55CKREG LOG20000 CITY OF EDINA 115616 NORTH IMAGE APPAREL INC. 68.25 UNIFORM SHIRTS 00005604 281992 NIA5441A 5913.6201 LAUNDRY Council Check Register UNIFORMS 00005604 282073 NIA5511 1301.6201 LAUNDRY 362.25 3/1/2012 — 3/1/2012 104232 NORTHERN SAFETY TECHNOLOGY INC Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description 472.60 356873 3/1/2012 100522 MINNESOTA AIR INC. 34.48 BELTS, SWITCHES 00001641 282072 1277391 -00 1552.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES 34.48 356874 31112012 101684 MINNESOTA CHIEFS OF POLICE ASS 61.99 HAND GUN PERMITS 282176 021412 1400.6575 PRINTING 61.99 _ 356875 3/112012 101638 MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH 2/28/2012 10:43:05 Page - 15 Business Unit CENT SVC PW BUILDING POLICE DEPT. GENERAL 22,083.00 CONNECTION FEES 281991 1/1/12 - 3/31/12 5915.6136 PROFESSIONAL SVC - OTHER WATER TREATMENT 22;083.00 356876 31112012 1 1 100231 MINNESOTA POST BOARD 90.00 POST LICENSE FEE 282177 022212 1400.6104 CONFERENCES & SCHOOLS POLICE DEPT. GENERAL 90.00 356877 31112012 117459 MN METRO EWGA 125.00 COURSE SPONSORSHIP PACKAGE 282029 022212 5410.6122 ADVERTISING OTHER GOLF ADMINISTRATION 125.00 356878 31112012 103246 MOIR, BILL 427.00 TRAINING REIMBURSEMENT. 282255 022412 5310.6104 CONFERENCES & SCHOOLS POOL ADMINISTRATION 427.00 356879 - 31112012 101696 MSP COMMUNICATIONS 2,750.00 GOLF AD 282030 - G274112 5410.6122 ADVERTISING OTHEF 2,750.00 356880 311/2012 101608 MSSA GOLF ADMINISTRATION 50.00 MEMBERSHIP 282178 2012 1280.6104 CONFERENCES 8 SCHOOLS SUPERVISION & OVERHEAD 50.00 356881 31112012 115616 NORTH IMAGE APPAREL INC. 68.25 UNIFORM SHIRTS 00005604 281992 NIA5441A 5913.6201 LAUNDRY 294.00 UNIFORMS 00005604 282073 NIA5511 1301.6201 LAUNDRY 362.25 356882 311/2012 104232 NORTHERN SAFETY TECHNOLOGY INC 162.96 STROBE POWER SUPPLY 00005894 282179 29886 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS 162.96 DISTRIBUTION GENERAL MAINTENANCE EQUIPMENT: OPERATION GEN R55CKREG LOG20000 391.00 CITY OF EDINA 282233 2247 5720.6530 REPAIR PARTS EDINBOROUGH OPERATIONS Council Check Register 391.00 311/2012 — 311/2012 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description 356883 31112012 100933 NORTHWEST GRAPHIC SUPPLY CO. 720.75 HVAC SERVICE CONTRACT 195.38 PENCILS, CANVAS PANELS. 00009126 282232 41886100 5120.5510 COST OF GOODS SOLD CENTENNIAL LAKES OPERATING 195.38 720.75 356884 31112012 100936 OLSEN COMPANIES 356887 31112012 104950 PACE ANALYTICAL SERVICES INC. 514.78 WRENCH, SCREWDRIVER SET, BIT.T0001736 282306 666317 1301.6556 '. TOOLS 514:78 465.00 STREET SWEEPING 282307 356885 31112012 BROOMS 115669 ON CALL SERVICES i 2/28/2012 10:43:05 Page- 16 Business Unit ART SUPPLY GIFT GALLERY SHOP GENERAL MAINTENANCE 356891 31112012 100945 PEPSI -COLA COMPANY 334.40 334.40 356892 :31112012 100743 PHILLIPS WINE & SPIRITS 1,416.60 282114 58911408 5862.5515 282115 2200550 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX VERNON SELLING COST OF GOODS.SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 391.00 BLUE SLIDE SADDLE 282233 2247 5720.6530 REPAIR PARTS EDINBOROUGH OPERATIONS 391.00 356886 31112012 100940 OWENS COMPANIES INC. 720.75 HVAC SERVICE CONTRACT 282031 C358 . 5761.6230 SERVICE CONTRACTS EQUIPMENT CENTENNIAL LAKES OPERATING 720.75 356887 31112012 104950 PACE ANALYTICAL SERVICES INC. 465.00 STREET SWEEPING 282307 111181974 1310.6523 BROOMS STREET CLEANING i 465.00 356888 31112012 129485 PAPCOINC. 139.61 HAND WIPES 282180 70050 7411.6511 CLEANING SUPPLIES PSTF OCCUPANCY 139.61 356889 311/2012 129824 PARK AND RECREATION CONSULTANT 7,000.00 SPORTS DOME STUDY. 282234 1 -2012 1500.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES CONTINGENCIES 7,000.00 356890 31112012 100347 PAUS11S & SONS 33.25 282112 8339298 -IN 5862.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX VERNON SELLING 1,657.55 282113 8339295 -IN 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 1,073.46 282268 8339580 -IN 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 1.026.25 282269 8339289 -IN 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING 356891 31112012 100945 PEPSI -COLA COMPANY 334.40 334.40 356892 :31112012 100743 PHILLIPS WINE & SPIRITS 1,416.60 282114 58911408 5862.5515 282115 2200550 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX VERNON SELLING COST OF GOODS.SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING R55CKREG LOG20000 CITY OF EDINA 2/28/2012 10:43:05 Council Check Register Page - - 17 3/1/2012 - 3/1/2012 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account. Description Business Unit 2,191.82 282116 2200553 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 246.72 282117 2200554 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING - 1,358.09 262118 2200555 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 57.12 282119 2200551 5862.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX VERNON SELLING 430.50 282120 2200552 5862.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR VERNON SELLING 159.44 282121 2197316 5822.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR 50TH ST SELLING 174.72 282270 2201143 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 1,349.51 282271 2201146 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 234.81 282272 2200548 5822.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR 50TH ST SELLING . 7,619.33 356893 311/2012 119620 POMP'S TIRE SERVICE INC. 85.00 SCRAP DISPOSAL FEE 00005840 281993 122683 1553.6583 TIRES &,TUBES EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 729.67 TIRES 00005840 281994 141249 1553.6583 TIRES & TUBES EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 814.67 356694 31112012 101811 PREMIER FLEET SERVICES 457.13 EQUIPMENT REPAIRS 00005955 282074 21644 1553.6180 CONTRACTED REPAIRS_ EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 457.13 356895 31112012 129706 PREMIUM WATERS INC. 60.27 622833 WATER 282235 622833 -1/12 5720.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES EDINBOROUGH OPERATIONS 60.27 356896 31112012 100966 PRINTERS SERVICE INC 818.04 BLADE SHARPENING 282032 257732 5521.6180 CONTRACTED REPAIRS ARENA ICE MAINT 818.04 356897 311/2012 102354 PRO GUARD SPORTS INC. 64.43 COACHES WHITEBOARD 282033 311853 5511.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES ARENA BLDG/GROUNDS 40.22 HELMET REPAIR 00008002 282236 311971 5510.5510 COST OF GOODS SOLD ARENA ADMINISTRATION 104.65 356898 31112012 106322 PROSOURCE SUPPLY 300.72 SOAP, PADS 00008017 282034 5511 5511.6511 CLEANING SUPPLIES ARENA BLDG/GROUNDS 448.11 GLOVES, TISSUE, LINERS 00008011 282035 5498 5511.6511 CLEANING SUPPLIES ARENA BLDG/GROUNDS 55.49 HAND WIPES 00008005 282036 5512 5511.6511 CLEANING SUPPLIES ARENA BLDG/GROUNDS 804.32 356699 31112012 100971 QUALITY WINE 593.60 282122 576774 -00 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 1,997.61 282123 576761 -00 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING R55CKREG LOG20000 GENERAL MAINTENANCE 508.21 CITY OF EDINA GENERAL SUPPLIES 2/28/2012 10:43:05 356903 31112012 Council Check Register Page - 18 I 127.20 3/1/2012 - 3/112012 282040 3013177 -00 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit 5,874.06 31112012 282124 576859 -00 5862.5513 i COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 3,771.84 282125 576618 -00 5862.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR VERNON SELLING 2,446.47 282273 577863 -00 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 154.80 31112012 282274 576762 -00 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING 936.61 282275 575222 -00 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING 15,774.99 216.13 356900 31112012 100972 R&R SPECIALTIES OF WISCONSIN 1 i 26.45 ZAMBONI MAINTENANCE 282037 0049572 -IN 5521.6180 CONTRACTED REPAIRS ARENA ICE MAINT 1,169.28 282038 00494934N 5521.6180 CONTRACTED REPAIRS ARENA ICE MAINT 1,195.73 356901 31112012 105324 READY WATT ELECTRIC - 304.00 REPLACE BALLASTS 00002067 282039 96215 5761.6180 304.00 i 356902 31112012 100975 RED WING SHOE STORE 129.99 SAFETY BOOTS 282181 268000000124 1301.6610 148.74 SAFETY BOOTS 282181 268000000124 5761.6406 229.48 SAFETY BOOTS 282181 268000000124 5511.6406 1643.6540 9000.2055 1100.6406 5511.6180 5511.6180 1400.6406 CONTRACTED REPAIRS CENTENNIAL LAKES OPERATING SAFETY EQUIPMENT GENERAL MAINTENANCE 508.21 CENTENNIAL LAKES OPERATING GENERAL SUPPLIES ARENA BLDG/GROUNDS 356903 31112012 125936 REINDERS INC. 127.20 FERTILIZER TABLETS 00001462 282040 3013177 -00 127.20 356904 31112012 100349 SCOTT COUNTY 300.00 OUT OF COUNTY WARRANT 281995 021712 300.00 356905 31112012 104689 SERIGRAPHICS SIGN SYSTEMS INC. 216.13 NAMEPLATES 282182 42712 216.13 356906 31112012 103409 SHAMROCK GROUP, 623.07 ICE MAKER REPAIR 282041 210 - 130077 166.27 ICE MACHINE REPAIR 282237 210- 130093 789.34 356907 .311/2012 101556 SHRED-IT USA INC. 13.00 SHREDDING 282183 0253896161 13.00 1643.6540 9000.2055 1100.6406 5511.6180 5511.6180 1400.6406 CONTRACTED REPAIRS CENTENNIAL LAKES OPERATING SAFETY EQUIPMENT GENERAL MAINTENANCE GENERAL SUPPLIES CENTENNIAL LAKES OPERATING GENERAL SUPPLIES ARENA BLDG/GROUNDS FERTILIZER GENERAL TURF CARE DUE TO OTHER GOVERNMENTS GENERAL FUND,BALANCE SHEET GENERAL SUPPLIES CITY COUNCIL CONTRACTED REPAIRS CONTRACTED REPAIRS GENERAL SUPPLIES ARENA BLDG/GROUNDS ARENA BLDG/GROUNDS POLICE DEPT. GENERAL R55CKREG LOG20000 282126 1710472 5862.5513 CITY OF EDINA VERNON SELLING 1,007.00 282127 1732642 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE Council Check Register 1,668.00 262128 1732618 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 3/1/2012 - 3/1/2012 262129. Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description 366908 31112012 50TH ST SELLING 100999 SIGNAL SYSTEMS INC. 282276 1732641 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE - 50TH ST SELLING 115.00 TIME CLOCK REPAIR 282238 35355 5511.6180 CONTRACTED REPAIRS 50TH ST SELLING 175.55 115.00 1724268 5822.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR 50TH ST SELLING 356909 31112012 23.46 120292 SIGNATURE CONCEPTS 282144 873184124 -111 1470.6168 38.18 141.78 LOGO CAPS 282184 444355 7411.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES 282144 873184124 -111 141.78 51.32 262144 873184124 -111 356910 3/112012 101000 SIR SPEEDY 873184124 -111- 1490.6188 53.16 282144 128.25 BUSINESS CARDS 282239 71637 1550.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES 128.25 356911 31112012 127878 SOUTHERN WINE AND SPIRITS 2/28/2012 10:43:05 Page - 19 Business Unit ARENA BLDG /GROUNDS PSTF OCCUPANCY CENTRAL SERVICES GENERAL 2,644.00 282126 1710472 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 1,007.00 282127 1732642 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 1,668.00 262128 1732618 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 3,247.82 262129. 1724257 5862.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR VERNON SELLING 228.27 282130 1724235 5622.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR 50TH ST SELLING 469.50 282276 1732641 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE - 50TH ST SELLING 493.72 282277 1724258 5822.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR 50TH ST SELLING 175.55 282278 1724268 5822.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR 50TH ST SELLING 356912 31112012 105152 SPAIN, MARK - PW TELEPHONE PUBLIC WORKS ADMIN GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 132.22 TRAINING EXPENSES 282042 022112 1640.6104 132.22 POOL OPERATION TELEPHONE YORK OCCUPANCY TELEPHONE 356913 31112012 130021 SPRING LAKE PARK FIRE DEPT. IN MAINT OF COURSE & GROUNDS 4,000.00 TRAINING COURSE 262240 022412 1470.6104 4,000.00 356914 31112012 104672 SPRINT 7.82 282144 873184124 -111 1554.6230 10.12 262144 873184124 -111. 1240.6188 17.34 262144 873184124 -111 1180.6103 23.46 282144 873184124 -111 1470.6168 38.18 282144 873184124 -111 7411.6188 42.99 282144 873184124 -111 5311.6188 51.32 262144 873184124 -111 5841.6188 51.43 282144 873184124 -111- 1490.6188 53.16 282144 873184124 -111 5422.6188 CONFERENCES & SCHOOLS PARK MAINTENANCE GENERAL CONFERENCES & SCHOOLS FIRE DEPT. GENERAL SERVICE CONTRACTS EQUIPMENT CENT SERV GEN - MIS TELEPHONE PUBLIC WORKS ADMIN GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES ELECTION TELEPHONE FIRE DEPT. GENERAL TELEPHONE PSTF OCCUPANCY TELEPHONE POOL OPERATION TELEPHONE YORK OCCUPANCY TELEPHONE PUBLIC HEALTH TELEPHONE MAINT OF COURSE & GROUNDS 1 R55CKREG LOG20000 CITY OF EDINA 2/2812012 10:43:05 Council Check Register Page - 20 3/1/2012 - 3/1/2012 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit 56.66 282144 873184124 -111 1140.6188 TELEPHONE PLANNING 57.04 282144 873184124A 11 4090.6188 TELEPHONE 50TH &FRANCE MAINTENANCE 79.58 282144 873184124 -111 1120.6188 TELEPHONE ADMINISTRATION 81.65 282144 873184124 -111 1553.6188 TELEPHONE EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 87.40 282144 873184124 -111 5720.6188 TELEPHONE EDINBOROUGH OPERATIONS 120.12 282144 873184124 -111 1190.6188 TELEPHONE ASSESSING 138.46 282144 873184124 -111 1495.6188 TELEPHONE INSPECTIONS 141.89 2112144 873184124 -111 1260.6188 TELEPHONE ENGINEERING GENERAL 163.35 282144 873184124 -111 1322.6188 TELEPHONE STREET LIGHTING ORNAMENTAL 169.21 282144 873184124 -111 1301.6188 TELEPHONE GENERAL MAINTENANCE 186.76 282144 873184124-111- 1640.6188 TELEPHONE PARK MAINTENANCE GENERAL I 339.22 282144 873184124 -111 .5910.6186 TELEPHONE GENERAL (BILLING) 559.86 282144 873184124 -111 1470.6151 EQUIPMENT RENTAL FIRE DEPT. GENERAL 1,711.67 282144 873184124 -111 1400.6188 TELEPHONE POLICE DEPT. GENERAL 4,188:69 356915 31112012 101004 SPS COMPANIES 11.63 LIQUID DRAIN CLEANER 00001723 282075 52505709.001 1646.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES BUILDING MAINTENANCE 11.63 356916 31112012 129745 ST LOUIS PARK DQ GRILL AND CHI 154.79 DILLY BARS, CAKE 282241 578 5730.5510 COST OF GOODS SOLD EDINBOROUGH CONCESSIONS 154.79 356917 31112012 129360 STANLEY CONVERGENT, SECURITY SO 300.55 ALARM SYSTEM REPAIRS 282242 8988605 1470.6180 CONTRACTED REPAIRS FIRE'DEPT. GENERAL 300.55 356918 31112012 101015 STREICHERS i 39.49 GUN CLEANING PATCHES 282185 1906442 7412.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES PSTF RANGE 119.99 UNIFORMS 00003745 282243 1906177 1470.6558 DEPT UNIFORMS FIRE DEPT. GENERAL 59.99- CREDIT 282244 CM252851 1470.6558 DEPT UNIFORMS FIRE DEPT. GENERAL - 34.99. UNIFORMS, 00003745 282245 1905572 1470.6558 DEPT UNIFORMS FIRE DEPT. GENERAL 134.48 356919 31112012 102639 STROHMYER, TOM 150.00 EP ENTERTAINMENT 3/1/12 282043 022112 5710.6136 PROFESSIONAL SVC - OTHER EDINBOROUGH ADMINISTRATION I. 150.00 " 366920 31112012 101017 SUBURBAN CHEVROLET 2,146.64 VEHICLE REPAIRS 00005952 282076 605766 1553.6180 CONTRACTED REPAIRS- - EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 132.85 LAMP 00005982 282246 379640 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN R55CKREG LOG20000 31112012 130013 SYGNAVONG, ALEX CITY OF EDINA 2/28/2012 10:43:05 75.00 GOLF DOME BALL REFUND Council Check Register 5201.4543 Page - 21 75.00 3/1/2012 - 3/112012 356926 31112012 Check # Date Amount Supplier /,Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit CLASS REFUND 2,279.49 022212 5101.4607 117.00 356921 31112012 102140 SUN MOUNTAIN SPORTS INC. 356927 31112012 101035 THORPE DISTRIBUTING COMPANY 123.10 MERCHANDISE 282291 592696 5440.5511 COST OF GOODS - PRO SHOP PRO SHOP RETAIL SALES 5862.5514 6.49- CREDIT 282292 809706 '5440.5511 COST OF GOODS - PRO SHOP PRO SHOP RETAIL SALES 116.61 4,396.13 356928 366922 31112012 100900 SUN NEWSPAPERS 290.00 HRA / COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES 41.97 PUBLISH NOTICE 281996 1361186 1120.6120 ADVERTISING LEGAL ADMINISTRATION 95.92 PUBLISH NOTICE 281997 1361185 1120.6120 ADVERTISING LEGAL ADMINISTRATION 44.96 PUBLISH NOTICE 281998 1361183 1120.6120 ADVERTISING LEGAL ADMINISTRATION 35.97 PUBLISH NOTICE 281999 1361184 1120.6120 ADVERTISING LEGAL ADMINISTRATION 35.97 . PUBLISH NOTICE 282186 1362071 1120.6120 ADVERTISING LEGAL ADMINISTRATION 32.97 PUBLISH NOTICE 282187 . 1362072 1120.6120 ADVERTISING LEGAL ADMINISTRATION 299.00 AQUATIC CENTER AD 282247 1358931 5310.6122 ADVERTISING OTHER POOL ADMINISTRATION 586.76 356923 3/112012 101910 SUNGARD PUBLIC SECTOR INC. 1,250.00 UNIFORM CITATION INTERFACE 282077 46846 1400.6160 DATA PROCESSING POLICE DEPT. GENERAL 91.32 GV CAD MONITORS 262308 41826 1400.6160 DATA PROCESSING POLICE DEPT. GENERAL 1,341.32 356924 3/112012 120998 SURLY BREWING CO. 1,106.00 282131 V001684 5862.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER VERNON SELLING 356925 31112012 130013 SYGNAVONG, ALEX 75.00 GOLF DOME BALL REFUND 282044 022112 5201.4543 75.00 356926 31112012 130018 THORGAARD -REID, CHERYL 117.00 CLASS REFUND 282086 022212 5101.4607 117.00 356927 31112012 101035 THORPE DISTRIBUTING COMPANY 4,293.23 282132 676890 5862.5514 102.90 282133 676891 5862.5515 4,396.13 356928 31112012 123129 TIMESAVER OFF SITE SECRETARIAL 290.00 HRA / COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES 282000 M18886 1120.6103 290.00 GOLF DOME RECEIPTS CLASS REGISTRATION GOLF DOME REVENUES ART CENTER REVENUES COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER VERNON SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX VERNON SELLING PROFESSIONAL SERVICES ADMINISTRATION R55CKREG LOG20000 CITY OF EDINA 2/28/2012 10:43:05 Council Check Register Page - 22 3/1/2012 - 3/1/2012 Check # Date Amount Supplier/ Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No i Subledger Account Description Business Unit 356929 3/1/2012 103277 TITAN MACHINERY 163.28 WATER PUMP, BELT 00005896 282248 9CO4844 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 163.28 356930 3/112012 102742 TKDA ENGINEERS ARCHITECTS PLAN 6,514.53 BRIDGE INSPECTIONS 282001 002012000088 1260.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES ENGINEERING GENERAL 6,514.53 356931 31112012 101293 TODD, DARRELL 43.84 UNIFORM NAMETAGS 282249 022312 1470.6558 DEPT UNIFORMS . FIRE DEPT. GENERAL 43.84 356932 31112012 101038 TOLL GAS & WELDING SUPPLY 80.69 WELDING TANKS 00001696 282188 382857 5913.6580 WELDING SUPPLIES DISTRIBUTION 80.69 366933 31112012 101055 UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA 120.00 RECERTIFICATION - DAVE GOERGEN 282087 MAY 8 5919.6104 CONFERENCES & SCHOOLS TRAINING 120.00 356934 .31112012 101055 UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA 85.00 WORKSHOP - ADAM HELGREN 00001646 282088 TREE INSPECTOR 1644.6104 CONFERENCES & SCHOOLS TREES & MAINTENANCE _. 85.00 i 356935 31112012 101055 UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA 30.00 BILL HANLY 282311 STORMWATER 1640.6104 CONFERENCES & SCHOOLS PARK MAINTENANCE GENERAL PROGRAM 30.00 LEE SWANSON 282311 STORMWATER 1640.6104 CONFERENCES & SCHOOLS PARK MAINTENANCE GENERAL PROGRAM 30.00 BRIAN DRISTE 282311 STORMWATER 1640.6104 CONFERENCES & SCHOOLS PARK MAINTENANCE GENERAL PROGRAM 30.00 JIM SCHMIDT 282311 STORMWATER 1640.6104 CONFERENCES & SCHOOLS PARK MAINTENANCE GENERAL PROGRAM 30.00 JERRY REITER 282311 STORMWATER 1640.6104 CONFERENCES & SCHOOLS PARK MAINTENANCE GENERAL - PROGRAM 30.00 JOHN BUCKENTINE 282311 STORMWATER 1640.6104 CONFERENCES & SCHOOLS PARK MAINTENANCE GENERAL PROGRAM 180.00 356936 31112012 100050 USPS- HASLER 4,000.00 ACCT #75983 282190 022312 1550.6235 POSTAGE CENTRAL SERVICES GENERAL R55CKREG LOG20000 CITY OF EDINA 2128 12012 10:43:05 • Council Check Register Page - 23 - 3/1/2012 - 3/1/2012 Check # Date Amount Supplier/ Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit 4,000.00 356937 31112012 101058 VAN PAPER CO. 693.74 LIQUOR BAGS 282189 225610 -00 5862.6512 PAPER SUPPLIES VERNON SELLING 259.14 LIQUOR BAGS 282250 226912 -00 5822.6512 PAPER SUPPLIES 50TH ST SELLING 952.88 356938 31112012 102970 VERIZON WIRELESS 32.99 282002 2699255989 5952.6188 TELEPHONE RECYCLING 68.05 282002 2699255989 1495.6188 TELEPHONE INSPECTIONS 102.98 282002 2699255989 1600.6188 TELEPHONE PARK ADMIN. GENERAL 121.13 282002 2699255989 1120.6188 TELEPHONE ADMINISTRATION 288.69 282002 2699255989 1470.6188 TELEPHONE FIRE DEPT. GENERAL 613.84 356939 31112012 101066 VIKING ELECTRIC SUPPLY 218.20 ELECTRICAL PARTS 00001632 282078 6137560 1646.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES BUILDING MAINTENANCE 218.20 356940 31112012 101067 VIKING INDUSTRIAL CENTER 426.11 LOCKS, GLOVES, GLASSES 00001458 282045 290766 1646.6610 SAFETY EQUIPMENT BUILDING MAINTENANCE 426.11 356941 31112012 125327 'VINOANDES 95.05 282279 WEB000522 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 95.05 356942 31112012 100023 VOGEL, ROBERT C. 2,250.00 CONSULTING SERVICES 282079 212004 1140.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES PLANNING 2,250.00 356943 31112012 129489 WADSWORTH, EMMA 648.00 MODEL 282251 022412 5110.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES ART CENTER ADMINISTRATION _ 648.00 356944 31112012 106699 WALSER CHRYSLER JEEP 147.61 HANDLE NUTS 00005914 ,282003 602362 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS. EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 114.14- CREDIT 282004 CM181095 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS'- EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 33.47 366945 31112012 101033 WINE COMPANY, THE 40.00 282134 292240 -00 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING R55CKREG LOG20000 CITY OF EDINA Council Check Register 3/112012 - 3/1/2012 Check # Date Amount Supplier/ Explanation PO # - Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description 869.90 282280 293049 -00 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 1,335.80 282281 292768 -00 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 2/28/2012 10:43:05 Page - 24 Business Unit VERNON SELLING 50TH ST SELLING VERNON SELLING VERNON SELLING VERNON SELLING_ 50TH ST SELLING 50TH ST SELLING VERNON SELLING VERNON SELLING VERNON SELLING VERNON SELLING VERNON SELLING VERNON SELLING 50TH ST SELLING VERNON SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER VERNON SELLING 2,245.70 50TH ST SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER VERNON SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX 366946 31112012 101312 WINE MERCHANTS 290.24 282135 398324 5862.5513 5,056.64 282136 398325 5862.5513 210.24 282282 398513 5862.5513 201.12 282283 397425 5822.5513 5,758.24 356947 31112012 124291 WIRTZ BEVERAGE MINNESOTA, 4,353:18 282137 703575 5822:5512- 57.90 282138 706601 5862.5515 10,188.27 282139 706600 5862.5512 7,936.73 282140 706602 5862.5513 45.05 282141 706603 5862.5515 1,481.21 282284 708214 5862.5513 686.05 282285 697446 5862.5513 41.11- 282286 853995 5822.5513 41.11- 282287 854514 5862.5513 24,666.17 356948 3/112012 i 124529 i WIRTZ BEVERAGE MINNESOTA BEER 1,686.75 282142 862714 5862.5514 578.60 282143 862210 5822.5514 2,850.83 282288 865127 5862.5514 28.80 282289 865128 5862.5515 5,144.98 366949 3/112012 105740 WSB & ASSOCIATES INC. 1,943.00 FRANCE AVE RESCOPE 282309 1- 01686 -270 01364.1705.21 1,943.00 356950 31112012 101726 XCEL ENERGY 2,824.87 51- 6227619 -3 282046 314095727 5761.6185 8,361.04 51- 6644819 -9 282293 315597635 5720.6185 11,185.91 366951 31112012 120099 Z WINES USA LLC 173.00 282290 10887 5862.5513 173.00 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 2/28/2012 10:43:05 Page - 24 Business Unit VERNON SELLING 50TH ST SELLING VERNON SELLING VERNON SELLING VERNON SELLING_ 50TH ST SELLING 50TH ST SELLING VERNON SELLING VERNON SELLING VERNON SELLING VERNON SELLING VERNON SELLING VERNON SELLING 50TH ST SELLING VERNON SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER VERNON SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER 50TH ST SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER VERNON SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX VERNON SELLING CONSULTING INSPECTION LIGHT & POWER LIGHT & POWER BA -364 PROMENADE PHASE 2 CENTENNIAL LAKES OPERATING EDINBOROUGH OPERATIONS COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING R55CKREG LOG20000 CITY OF EDINA Council Check Register 311/2012 — 3/1/2012 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No 366962 31112012 101089 ZEE MEDICAL SERVICE ,88.21 FIRST AID SUPPLIES 282047 54068151 5511.6406 88.21 356953 3/112012 129406 ZIEBART OF MINNESOTA INC 435.00 BED LINER FOR PICKUP 00003746 282252 92296 1470.6406 435.00 2/26/2012 10:43:05 Page - 25 Subledger Account Description Business Unit GENERAL SUPPLIES ARENA BLDG/GROUNDS GENERAL SUPPLIES FIRE DEPT. GENERAL 649,029.98 Grand Total Payment Instrument Totals Check Total 649,029.98 Total Payments 649,029:98 R55CKSUM LOG20000 CITY OF EDINA 2/28/2012 10:43:41 Council Check Summary Page - 1 311/2012 - 3/1/2012 Company Amount 01000 GENERAL FUND 380,546.91 02200 COMMUNICATIONS FUND 7.24 02300 POLICE SPECIAL REVENUE 379.69 04000 WORKING CAPITAL FUND 22,278.47 04200 EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT FUND 5,228.53 05100 ART CENTER FUND 2,439.18 05200 GOLF DOME FUND 145.43 05300 AQUATIC CENTER FUND 1,893.99 05400 GOLF COURSE FUND 4,431.39 05500 ICE ARENA FUND 15,589.73 05600 EDINBOROUGH/CENT LAKES FUND 1,171.49 05700 EDINBOROUGH PARK FUND 16,451.29 05750 CENTENNIAL LAKES PARK FUND 4,561.50 05860 LIQUOR FUND 117,692.05 05900 UTILITY FUND 64,152.08 05950 RECYCLING FUND 32.99 07400 PSTF AGENCY FUND 8,607.26 09900 PAYROLL FUND 3,420.76 Report Totals 649,029.98 We confirm tothe best..of our knowledge_ and; °belief, that these" laims comply in all material respects with the requirements oflhe' City of Edina purchasing poli and Procedures e 3 s e is for ana e A, a re -� 0 REQUEST FOR PURCHASE IN EXCESS OF $20,000 /CHANGE ORDER To: MAYOR AND COUNCIL Agenda Item No. IV. C. From: Wayne D. Houle, PE City Engineer Date: March 6, 2012 Subject: 2012 GMC 4x4 Extended Cab Pick -u — Utility Division Date Bid Opened or Quote Received: Bid or Quote Expiration Date: February 9, 2012 NA Company Amount of Quote or Bid 1. Nelson Auto Center $ 24,666.67 State Contract #37907) RECOMMENDED QUOTE OR BID: Nelson Auto Center $ 24,666.67 GENERAL INFORMATION: This purchase is for GMC 4x4 Extended Cab Pick -Up Truck for the Utility Division within Public Works. This truck will replace a 2001 Chevrolet Silverado, Unit 70 -283, which will go to auction this fall. This purchase is through the State of Minnesota Purchasing Program, funded through the 2012 -2016 Capital Improvement Plan — Utility Equipment Re lacement Project # UT -11 -005. Public Works Signature Department The Recommended Bid is 9 within budget not within budget John Wallin, Finance Director Scott H. Neal, City Manager G: \PW\ADMIN \BUDGETS \RFP \RFP - Trucks \Item IV C 2012 GMC 44 Extended Cab Pick -Up Truck - Utiilty Division.docx o e,, 0 REPORVRECOMMENDATION To: MAYOR AND COUNCIL Agenda Item Item No. IV. D. From: Debra Mangen City Clerk ® Action ❑ Discussion ❑ Information Date: March 6, 2012 Subject: On -Sale Intoxicating, Club On -Sale, and Sunday Sale Liquor License Renewals ACTION REQUESTED: Council approval of Club On -Sale and Sunday Liquor License renewals for: On -Sale Intoxicating & Sundav Sale Big Bowl California Pizza Kitchen Crave Restaurant Eden Avenue Grill Edina Grill Restaurant Lake Shore Grill McCormick & Schmick Seafood Restaurant Mozza Mia P.F. Chang's Bistro Pinstripes, Inc. Pittsburgh Blue Raku Inc. Romano's Macaroni Grill Ruby Tuesday Salut Bar Americain Tavern On France The Cheesecake Factory Westin Edina Galleria Club & Sunday Sale Edina Country Club Interlachen Country Club INFORMATION /BACKGROUND: Applications for renewal of On -Sale Intoxicating, Club On -sale and Sunday On -Sale Liquor Licenses for the above listed establishments have been reviewed by the Edina Police Department and renewals are recommended per the attached memo. The applicants have submitted all required paperwork in accordance with the City's liquor ordinance and State Statutes, and have paid their license fees. Once Council approves the licenses, staff will forward them to the Minnesota Liquor Control. Attachment: Sgt. Draper's Memo Memo To: Chief of Police Jeff Long From: Tom Draper Date: February 29, 2012 Re: Liquor License Renewals Background checks have been completed for the 2012 -2013 licensing period for the following liquor licenses: On -sale Intoxicating and Sunday, Club on Sale and Sunday Sale, Wine and 3.2 Beer, 3.2 Beer On- Sale and 3.2 Beer Off -Sale The following restaurants and country clubs comply with City Code. An unqualified recommendation for approval of these renewal applications is warranted. On -Sale Intoxicating and Sunday.Sale Big Bowl California Pizza Kitchen Crave Restaurant Eden Avenue Grill Edina Grill Restaurant Lake Shore Grill Mozza -Mia P.F. Chang's China Bistro Pinstripes Pittsburgh Blue Raku Inc Romano's Macaroni Grill Ruby Tuesday Salut Bar Americain The Cheesecake Factory Westin Edina Galleria Tavern On France McCormick & Schmick Seafood Restaurant 0 Page 1 Edina Police Department Memo To: Chief of Police Jeff Long From: Tom Draper Date: February 29, 2012 Re: Liquor License Renewals Background checks have been completed for the 2012 -2013 licensing period for the following liquor licenses: On -sale Intoxicating and Sunday, Club on Sale and Sunday Sale, Wine and 3.2 Beer, 3.2 Beer On- Sale and 3.2 Beer Off -Sale The following restaurants and country clubs comply with City Code. An unqualified recommendation for approval of these renewal applications is warranted. On -Sale Intoxicating and Sunday.Sale Big Bowl California Pizza Kitchen Crave Restaurant Eden Avenue Grill Edina Grill Restaurant Lake Shore Grill Mozza -Mia P.F. Chang's China Bistro Pinstripes Pittsburgh Blue Raku Inc Romano's Macaroni Grill Ruby Tuesday Salut Bar Americain The Cheesecake Factory Westin Edina Galleria Tavern On France McCormick & Schmick Seafood Restaurant 0 Page 1 Wine and 3.2 Beer OnSale Beaujo's Biryani Chipotle Mexican Grill Cooks,of Crocus Hill D'Amico & Sons'' Good Earth Restaurant Marriott Residence Inn Noodles. &Company Peoples Organic Coffee and Wine Rice Paper Asian Fusion Restaurant T.J.'s of .Edina Restaurant Beer 3.2 On-Sale Davanni's Pizza/Hoagie Chuck E. Cheese's Beer 3.2 Off -Sale Cub Foods DB Convenience LLC _(Edina, Market & Deli) Holiday Station Store #217 Jerrys Foods Super America #4047 Club On-Sale and Sunday.Sale Edina Country Club Interiachen Country Club i IL Ch'i f 0 Police J ng Page 2 J N v -., owe n • f "� eas T REPORT /RECOMMENDATION To: MAYOR AND COUNCIL Agenda Item Item No. IV. E. From: Debra Mangen City Clerk ® Action ❑ Discussion ❑ Information Date: March 6, 2012 Subject: Wine license Renewals ACTION REQUESTED: Council approval of On -Sale Wine and On -Sale 3.2 Beer License renewals for the following restaurants: Beaujo's Biryani Chipotle Mexican Grill Cooks of Crocus Hill D'Amico & Sons Good Earth Restaurant Marriott Residence Inn Noodles & Company People's Organic Coffee /Wine Galleria Cafe Rice Paper Asian Fusion Restaurant TJ's of Edina Restaurant INFORMATION /BACKGROUND: The City received applications for On -Sale Wine and 3.2 On -Sale Beer Liquor Licenses from the above listed establishments. Approval of both the above mentioned licenses allows these establishments to also sell strong beer in their restaurants. Attached please find a memo reporting the results of the Police Department's investigation and review. The above applicants submitted their renewal documentation pursuant to Edina's Code and State Statute, and paid their license fees. Our renewal date is April 1, 2012. Once Council approves the licenses, staff will forward them to the Minnesota Liquor Control for state approval ATTACHMENT: Sgt. Draper's Memo J To: Chief of Police Jeff Long From: Tom Draper Dater February 29, 2012 Re: Liquor License Renewals Background checks have been completed for the 2012 -2013 licensing period for the following liquor licenses: On -sale Intoxicating and Sunday, Club on Sale and Sunday Sale, Wine and 3.2 Beer, 3.2 Beer On- Sale and 3.2 Beer Off -Sale The following restaurants and country clubs comply with City Code. An unqualified recommendation for approval of these renewal applications is warranted. On-Sale Intoxicating and Sunday Sale Big Bowl California Pizza Kitchen Crave Restaurant Eden Avenue Grill Edina Grill Restaurant Lake Shore Grill Mozza Mia P.F. Chang's China Bistro Pinstripes Pittsburgh Blue Raku Inc Romano's Macaroni Grill Ruby Tuesday Salut Bar Americain The Cheesecake Factory Westin Edina Galleria Tavern On France McCormick & Schmick Seafood Restaurant 0 Page 1 Wine and 3.2 Beer On -Sale Beaujo's Biryani Chipotle Mexican Grill Cooks of Crocus Hill D'Amico & Sons Good Earth Restaurant r Maniott.Residence Inn Noodles &.Company Peoples Organic Coffee and Wine Rice Paper Asian Fusion Restaurant T.J.'s of'Edina Restaurant Beer 3.2 On-Sale Davanni's Pizza/Hoagie Chuck 'E. Cheese's Beer 3.2 Off -Sale Cub Foods DB Convenience LLC (Edina Market & Deli) Holiday Station Store #217 Jerry's Foods Super America #4047 Club On -Sale and Sunday Sale Edina Country Club Interlachen Country Club r IL Ch'i f oy Police J ng G a Page 2 i l�In • •lam v • \`b,eea REPORT /RECOMMENDATION To: MAYOR AND COUNCIL Agenda Item Item No. IV. F. From: Debra Mangen City Clerk ® Action ❑ Discussion ❑ Information Date: March 6, 2012 Subject: Beer License Renewals ACTION REQUESTED: Council approve the issuance of 3.2 Beer licenses as listed below. INFORMATION /BACKGROUND: City Code Section 900 requires the City Council approve beer licenses before issuance. The following applicants have submitted the necessary documentation for renewal, paid the applicable fees, and been approved by the Police Department. Our renewal date is April 1, 2012. Once Council approves the licenses, staff will forward them to the Minnesota Liquor Control for state approval. Staff submits these licenses for Council consideration: On -Sale 3.2 Licenses: Chuck E. Cheese's Davanni's Pizza /Hoagies ATTACHMENT: Sgt. Draper's Memo Off -Sale 3.2 Licenses: Cub Foods DB Convenience LLC (Edina Market & Deli) Holiday Stationstore #217 Jerry's Foods SuperAmerica Edina Police Department Memo To: Chief. of Police Jeff Long From: Tom Draper Date: February 29, 2012 Re: Liquor License Renewals Background checks have been completed for the 2012 -2013 licensing period for the following liquor licenses- On-sale Intoxicating and Sunday, Club on Sale and Sunday Sale, Wine and 3.2 Beer, 3.2 Beer On- Sale and 3.2 Beer Off -Sale The following restaurants and country clubs comply with City Code. An unqualified recommendation for approval of these renewal applications is warranted. On -Sale Intoxicating and Sunday Sale Big Bowl California Pizza Kitchen Crave Restaurant Eden Avenue Grill Edina Grill Restaurant Lake Shore Grill Mozza Mia P.F. Chang's China Bistro Pinstripes Pittsburgh Blue Raku Inc Romano's Macaroni Grill Ruby Tuesday Salut Bar Americain The Cheesecake Factory Westin Edina Galleria Tavern On France McCormick & Schmick Seafood Restaurant a Page 1 Wine and 3:2 Beer.-On-Sale Beaujo's Biryani Chipotle Mexican Grill Cooks of Crocus Hill D'Amico & Sons Good Earth Restaurant Ma rtiott Residence Inn Noodles & Company - - Peoples Organic Coffee and Wine Rice Paper Asian Fusion Restaurant t .'s ofwEdina Restaurant Beer 3.2 On -Sale Davanni's Pizza/Hoagie Chuck E. Cheese's -. Beer 3.2 Off -Sale Cub Foods DB Convenience LLC (Edina Market & Deli) Holiday Station Store #217 Jerry's Foods Super America #4047 Club On-Sale and Sundav Sale Edina Country Club Interlachen Country Club CliAj 6V Police J 2! Png il o e tX E4� • IYCaiaes �// REPORT /RECOMMENDATION To: MAYOR AND COUNCIL Agenda Item Item No: IV.G. From: Wayne D. Houle, PE Woe- City Engineer ® Action Discussion Information Date: March 6, 2012 Subject: Traffic Safety Committee Report of February 1, 2012 ACTION REQUESTED: Review and approve the Traffic Safety Committee Report of February 1, 2012 INFORMATION /BACKGROUND: The Edina Transportation Commission accepted the February 1, 2012, Traffic Safety Committee Report at their February 16, 2012, meeting. ATTACHMENTS: Traffic Safety Staff Committee Report for February 1, 2012. Edina Transportation Commission Meeting Minutes of February 16, 2012. G:\ Engineering \lnfrasiruciure \Streets \Traffic \Traffic Safety Committee \City Council Reports \Item W.G. Traffic Safety Committee Report of February 1, 2012.doc TRAFFIC SAFETY `COMMITTEE REPORT Wednesday, February 1, 2012 The Committee review of traffic safety matters occurred on February 1, 2012. The Committee is comprised of staff members included the City Engineer, Assistant City Engineer, Assistant City Planner, Police Traffic Supervisor, and Traffic Safety Coordinator. From that review, the recommendations below are provided. On each of the items, persons, involved have been contacted and the staff recommendation has been discussed with them... They were also informed that if they disagree with the recommendation or have additional facts to present, they can be included on the February 16, 2012, Edina Transportation Commission and then on to the March 6, 201'2 City Council Agenda. CF.CTinN A Requests on which the Committee recommends approval of request: At this time, there are no requests that are recommended for approval. SECTION B: Requests on which the Committee recommends denial of request: At this time, there are no requests that are recommended for denial. SECTION C: Requests that are deferred to a later date or referred to others. 1. Request for an all -way stop sign at the intersection of York Avenue and 56th Street West. The requestor lives at the intersection of York Avenue and 56th Street West. The requestor has stated that vehicles are speeding through the intersection, which is causing a traffic hazard. The requestor has also stated that there have been a number of accidents at the intersection. The requestor has claimed the reason is due to the lack of an all -way stop sign at the intersection. - York Avenue and 566' Street West are classified as local city streets. There are no recent counts near the intersection. There are no recorded accidents at the intersection from 2001 to 2010. The closest accident was Traffic Safety Committee Report Page 1 of 2 January 4, 2012 approximately 230 feet east of the intersection in 2005 (Property Damage). The City of Edina policy regarding an all -way stop sign requires at least 300 vehicles per hour for any eight hours at the intersection. Stop signs are not installed in an attempt to control speed or volume of vehicles. After discussion, it was decided that this item should be deferred until traffic counts can be updated. The Neighborhood Traffic Management Plan (NTMP) was also sent to the resident. SECTION D: Other traffic safety issues handled. 1. Call from a resident inquiring about the use of the "Bike Path Ahead" sign on West Shore Drive. Resident was advised that the sign is used when the path might not be visible immediately to vehicles. 2. Call from a resident who asked about the traffic signals at the intersection of Halifax Avenue and 50th Street West. Resident was advised of the ownership and other information regarding the signals. 3. Call from a resident regarding the parking near Weber Park. Resident was advised that parking is allowed on the streets near the area. 4. Call from a resident requesting traffic counts along Blake Road. The resident was given the counts on Blake Road just south of Interlachen Boulevard (3684 vehicles), near Fox Meadow Lane (2315 vehicles), and north of Eden Prairie Road (3207 vehicles). 5. Request from a resident requesting a "Disabled Child" sign be placed at the intersection of Xerxes Avenue and 60th Street West. The requestor asked for the signs to be on Xerxes Avenue. Referred to Eric Drager, Hennepin County Traffic Operations Engineer. Traffic Safety Committee Report Page 2 of 2 January 4, 2012 MINUTES OF CITY OF EDINA, MINNESOTA TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION COMMUNITY ROOM February 16, 2012 6:00 P.M. New members, Courtney Whited, Tom La Force and Surya lyer were welcomed to the Commission. ROLLCALL Answering roll call was Members Bass, Braden, Franzen, lyer, Janovy, LaForce, Nelson, Schweiger,.Thompson, and Whited. APPROVAL OF MEETING AGENDA Motion was made by member Franzen and seconded by member Thompson approving the meeting agenda. All voted ave. Motion carried. APPROVAL OF MINUTES - REGULAR- MEETING OF JANUARY 19.2012 Motion was made by member Thompson and seconded by member Nelson to approve the minutes. All voted ave. Motion carried. APRPOVAL OF TRAFFIC SAFETY REPORT OF FEBRUARY 1. 2012 Motion was made by member Franzen and seconded by member Nelson accepting the February 1, 2012 Traffic Safety Report. All voted ave. Motion carried. IMMUNITY COMMENT — None. REPORT /RECOMMENDATIONS Tracy Avenue Roadway'Reconstruction Feasibility Study City engineer Houle said the feasibility report completed by Mr. Andy Plowman of WSB & Associates, was handed out recently. He said. Mr. Plowman was in attendance to answer questions. Mr. Houle said all of Tracy Avenue was in the Capital Improvement Plan for concrete replacement but upon closer scrutiny it was determined that more work was needed and therefore, the roadway was broken into two phases from Vernon Avenue to Benton Avenue, and Benton Avenue to the,crosstown. Additionally, staff is working on a grant for up to $500,000 through MnDOT'forthe crosstown interchange at Tracy Avenue. Some of the issues are concrete replacement and an offset intersection at Benton and, Mr. Houle said now is time to evaluate making changes. He said Council also asked that they, consider a sidewalk on the west side. He said discussions included leaving the intersection as is or realign with a roundabout. He said staffs recommendation is to realign the intersection with a roundabout which fits well with bus turning movements and does, not slow .fire trucks response time. He said the roundabout is.safer because crossing distance for pedestrians are decreased and when in the roundabout drivers are only looking to the left instead of looking 4 ways like a 4 -way intersection, and it also serves as a traffic calming measure. Additional recommended features include bike lanes to comply with the BETF's Bike Plan; instead of sidewalk on the west side which would require 9 ft. of right -of -way, they are instead going to improve crossings; 28 parking spaces; and bump -out intersections. Discussion In reference to residents' response in the second survey, chair Janovy asked if opinions had changed and Mr. Plowman 'd it was brought closer to a 50/50 split. Regarding the feasibility report stating support from'the Countryside's Site ouncil, she said she has received information from the school - district outlining the procedures- to,'follow for their support and while the Site Council's opinion is important, she said they do not speak for the superintendent and the board. Everyone agreed that the roadway needs to be reconstructed and to keep existing sidewalk. Members' feedback is as follow: Member Thompson said the bike lanes are critical to be consistent with Comp Plan. He said also to maximize parking on the eastside and that bump -outs would help to slow traffic. Member Bass agreed with the bike lanes because it is a school and riding could help to relieve congestion around arrival /dismissal time. She also said research shows that bike lanes makes road safer. She said it does not appear that people are committed to parking and suggested eliminating parking so prevent widened of the roadway. Mr. Houle clarified that widening of the roadway is due to both parking and the bike lanes. He said widening on the west by 4 ft. is necessary because of a storm sewer pipe on the east that would need to be moved and would increase cost because of watershed rules. Chair Janovy confirmed that per state law, bikers are allowed on the roadway. Members Janovy, Schweiger, Braden, lyer, LaForce, and Nelson agreed with the bike lanes. Member lyer also agreed with maximizing parking. Member LaForce asked if Vernon to the north was also striped with bike lanes. Mr. Houle said no; he said this is the starting point and it gives them something to build on. Member Franzen said the ETC should focus on Comp Plan related issues and not on parking. Member Whited said according to residents no one is biking now. She suggested doing before /after counts to show residents usage. She said she has seen an increase in biking on W. 58`h since the new striping. Mr. Houle was asked about the bike lane on Interlachen Blvd. He said ridership have increased on Interlachen Blvd which is striped with a 3 -4 ft. lane on certain segment and share the road on other segment. He said most homes do not front Interlachen Blvd and therefore parking was not an issue and the speed limit was and still is 30 mph. He said minor modifications were done to a property near Bywood West to accommodate the bike lane. Chair Janovy said there is a cost associated with parking and that TLC has an article about the myth of free parking. She said based on 54 parking spaces, she calculated that the cost would be $1800 /space and residents would be assessed 20% of this cost. If spaces are reduced to 28, she said the cost goes up to $3500 /space. She said she has only seen one car parked there. Member lyer concurred that he too has not seen too many cars parked there and that most times parking are only needed for lots of guests. He said the cost of parking though is relative. Member Bass said parking does spike but there is not an overwhelming demand and it is used infrequently. Chair Janovy was asked if residents would be assessed less if parking was eliminated and she said yes, approximately $250. Member Nelson noted that parking did not appear important but the 2nd survey shows that residents are split 50/50. Member Franzen said they should be strategic about parking and balance it with bump -outs. Mr. Houle said this would give visual cue to slow down vs. having a wide open roadway and it was noted that last speed taken was at 36.7 meaning 85% of drivers were driving at this speed. Regarding the offset intersection, Member LaForce said leaving it 'as is' is not an option. It was noted that one survey showed 65% favorable toward roundabout or realignment and another one showed 77% favorability. Mr. Houle said roundabouts work great because studies show reduction of accidents; pedestrian safety is maximized; and they simplify /reduces risk for drivers /pedestrians. Chair Janovy the intersection does not have a history of crashes so therefore, nothing to reduce. She said there are 10 years of safety data. Member Thompson said it is being added as a component to slow traffic and aid with flow during peak hours. Member Bass said the feel at the intersection is confusing and this is how drivers should feel so that they'll slow down. Member Nelson said he is a proponent of roundabouts but leave as is because there are not too many problems. He said the intersection is odd but it works well. Member Franzen said it is functioning; however, the roundabout is safer and a better long term solution. In terms of size, Mr. Houle said it would be comparable to the ones on W. 70th, although traffic volume is lower. 2 Mr. Plowman cited Mendota Heights with similar lower traffic volume, same issue and skepticism. He said the roundabout was built and now everyone likes it. In• addition to other features already noted, Mr. Plowman said studies 'pow that air quality also improves due to less stopping. Mr. Houle was asked if -the City has a policy for roundabouts nd he said no because they are so new. He said Living Streets may address roundabouts. Member lyer asked about the cost vs. benefit. Mr. Houle- said the volume is lower but the roundabout would help with traffic flow. Member lyer said there is an advantage to keep flow going but the cost is too high. Mr. Plowman said the realignment is more expensive at $240,000 while the roundabout would be $165;000. Member Thompson said there is a place on Benton where parents make U -turn to pick.up students. Mr. Plowman said he has observed this and the roundabout would eliminate the U- turns. Chair Janovy said, this. is an opportunity for education and enforcement at the site. She said from the first survey, 23% said they were fine with the intersection; 58% said it was a problem; and 19% were cautious. In the second survey 60% said .to leave. as is; and 40% said realign. She said she likes roundabouts but not at this location. She said this one.should, have off ramps for bikers and it should be designed for all ages. Mr. Plowman said off -ramps are only needed on dual lane roundabouts. Members,Iyer and Bass concurred with Chair Janovy. Residents Comments Sue Nelson, 5701, Hawkes Ter — Ms. Nelson said she has been resident for 20+ years and a pass educator at Countryside. She said realignment is a better option. She said she loves roundabouts but not in favor of one at this location because it will not help. Susan Clark, 5812 W. 61st — Ms. Clark said high school students drives Benton to Tracy to get to the high school and she wondered if they will go all the way around the roundabout. She said it is good to consider the Countryside students. She said the school has said they would need additional crossing guards. She said one problem is solved and another created. ,dith Rogers, corner of Arbor Lane and Tracy — Ms. Rogers said drivers traveling south on Tracy from Vernon may not ;ze children in the roundabout. She said if obstructions are not placed in the roundabout drivers may drive over it and if obstructions are placed, it may prevent drivers from seeing pedestrians. Steve Erick, 5700 Benton - Mr. Enck said he is against the roundabout. He said he, will not have safe access to his driveway; every road is up hill; has hindrance; stop signs are working; pedestrian lane.-for children are bigger; might improve flow of cars but not pedestrians; easier for crossing guards as is. And, speaking on behalf of his neighbor who is confined to a wheelchair, he said neither of them has seen any accidents in. their time as residents. He said only two ideas were presented and suggested having three or four options including his.suggestion to remove parking on Benton from Tracy to the school's driveway; widen Benton to the intersection, keeping the stop signs and allowing for better turn movement for the buses. Chair Janovy asked if other options were considered including widen of the intersection. Mr. Plowman said widen would help the buses at the intersection but the idea was to create a design for the entire operation of the corridor including speeding which is a problem for the residents. He said roundabouts are safer for pedestrians because they are crossing 16 ft. of traffic at.a time instead of 36 ft., plus four potential conflicts with the offset intersection. Member Franzen said Mr. Enck's driveway does seem to be a problem with the roundabout. Mr. Houle,said he would work with him to realign and landscape. Bill Rogers, 6100 Arbor Lane — Mr. Rogers said he submitted written comments. He said 71% of residents on his survey said the roundabout is not appropriate and neither is straight because it would cause T -bone accidents. He said east on Benton there is a pond like a roundabout and a fatality that happened there could happen at the roundabout and there have not been accidents to date. He said it is not broken, they do not want traffic to flow and if traffic backs up, so )at? He said there is new specifications in the works for visual impair pedestrians which this roundabout will not have. ne said he liked Mr. Enck's idea. Ken Kjelland, 5606Tracy — Mr. Kjelland said he has been a resident since 1982. He said he attended two meetings, completed two surveys and report is still being submitted as is and -not reflecting residents' input. He said he has concluded that residents do not have input. Motion was made by member LaForce and seconded by member Bass for chair Janow to write the recommendation for submittal to the Council with assistance from members Nelson. Franzen and Bass. All voted ave. Motion carried. Members were polled regarding'the following: Bike Lanes: all said yes (10). Parking: Staff said their recommendation is based on residents' needs and to accommodate delivery vehicles which tend to block traffic. Chair Janovy said deliveries were not a reason to retain parking. Member Bass said to reduce the travel lanes down from 11 ft. to 10 ft. and not widen the road. She was informed that a variance would be required. 7 of 10 said yes to parking as proposed. Reducing the speed limit to 25 mph because of the bike lanes: 2 of 10 said:yes. Motion was made by member Thompson and seconded by member LaForce to recommend the proposed design as is north of Benton. 8 ayes. 2 nays. Motion carried: Roundabout: Motion was made by member Nelson and seconded by member Iver to leave intersection as is. 8 ayes, 2 nays. Motion carried. Member Thompson said most residents were in favor of the roundabout. A suggestion was made to consider pedestrian enhancements to improve crossing even though not recommending roundabouts, e.g.. dynamic speed monitor, crosswalks, enforcements, etc. Motion was made by member Iver and seconded by .member Bass to modify previous motion to say leave intersection as is and consider pedestrian enhancements to improve crossing. Motion was made by member Iver and seconded by member Bass to have limited parking, bike lanes, and no change to the intersection. Discussion ensued regarding a motion made earlier by member Thompson and this motion which are in conflict. Member lyer withdrew his motion. TLC Bike Boulevard Update Mr. Houle said Katie Bruwelheide, traffic engineer with: Alliant Engineering would give an update on the TLC Bike Boulevard. He asked that the ETC provide feedback before an informational meeting is scheduled with residents. He said the plan will be to come back to the ETC after the informational meeting with residents and then on to the Council for a public hearing. Ms. Bruwelheide said the route starts at 54th & Zenith west on 54th to Wooddale Avenue, south of Wooddale to Valley View Road, under TW62 and down to 70th into an existing bike path. She said construction is tentatively scheduled to begin August with completion by fall. She said they are requesting design exceptions on a couple segments. She said the project has eight segments that are divided into two phases with phase two being the most difficult. Phase I is 54th to north of TH -62 and Phase II from north of TH -62 to W. 70th. Funding is not yet available for Phase II. The eight segments are: 4 I, Phase I 1. 54" Ave —. Xerxes to France Avenue Option: Bike Boulevard 2. (A) 54th — France to Minnehaha Creek Option 1: Shared Lanes Option 2: Advisory Lanes Option 3: Shared Lane and Bike Lane (B) 54th — Brookview Ave to Wooddale Avenue Option 1: Shared Lanes Option 2: Bike Lanes 3. Wooddale Ave — 54th to Valley View Road Option 1: Bike Lanes Option 2: Advisory Lanes 4. Valley View Road — Woodddale to Brookview Avenue Option: Colored Shared Lanes Phase II 5. Valley View Road — Brookview Ave to 64th Street Option: Bike Lanes 6. Valley View Road— 64th to 65th Street Option: Colored Shared Lanes 7. Valley View Road — 65th to 66th Street Option: Dedicated Bike Lanes 8. Valley View Road — 66th to 69th Street Option: Dedicated Bike Lanes Discussion This route, the first phase of the BEFT Bike Plan, was chosen and narrowed down from an original route and it aligns with Minneapolis' bike lanes. Motion was made by member Thompson and seconded by member Nelson for the consultant to present an option to the public that is most likely to be approved,by State Aid. All voted ave. Motion carried. Livina Streets Workshop Recap Motion was made by member Franzen and seconded by member Nelson to table Living Streets Workshop Recap until next meeting. Ali voted ave. Motion carried. Living Streets Consultant.Selection After brief discussion, the consensus was to go with BARR Engineering, the only firm that submitted a proposal. Edina Transportation Commission Bylaws A Chair Janovy said the bylaws should be adopted as written; however, she received permission to change the quorum from 5 to a simple majority of seated voting members, and also a section that seemed confusing was "If a quorum is not achieved within 15 minutes...." She said if they agree they can vote to make-these changes at the next meeting. Updates Student Member - No updates. Bike Edina Task;Force — Minutes of January 12, 2012 - No updates. Grandview Small Area Study Member Nelson said the public: comment period is still going on and the framework . is online at www.edinacitizen6ngaeement.org. He said two public meetings were held and approximately 25 -30 people attended. Council will receive the recommendation on April 17. Living Streets Working Group Member Thompson said they need discusshow to move. forward. Chair Janovy said they could consider creating a committee of the whole. CORRESPONDENCE AND PETITIONS— None CHAIR AND COMMISSION MEMBER COMMENTS Member Nelson said France Avenue was recently restriped to single lane and he has seen cars using the shoulder as a driving lane. His suggestion of marking the shoulder to show that it is not a driving lane will be forwarded to Hennepin County by Mr. Houle. Member Bass talked briefly about a campaign that the City of Rochester (See Safe Smart) is doing and a possible funding opportunity through the Met Council for France Avenue. She will talk more these at the next meeting. She also asked about Engineering Department staffing which Mr. Houle addressed below. STAFF COMMENTS Update on France Avenue Pedestrian Bridge Re- scoping Mr. Houle said .City Manager Neal and WSB & Associates consultant Chuck Rickart made the presentation to the Met Council. He said some of the Met Council's concerns were:not addressing bike facility and at crossing video detection. He said the committee.felt the bridge was safer. than grade separation. He said the vote was 8 ayes and 10 nays. He said they will be appealing to the TAB and Mr. Rickart to checking to see they can appeal to the TAC. Mr. Houle said it is promising because the TAB recently overturned a sunset date for another project. Staffing in the Engineering Department— Mr. Houle said the entire City has gone through a reorganization. He said he was the public works director /city engineer and as of recent he -is no longer the public works director. He said they are currently advertising to fill the assistant city engineer position but this person will not be the liaison to the ETC. Mr. Houle will continue as the liaison until a transportation engineer is hired. Additionally, the utility engineer position will be vacant soon and this position will be changed to an environmental engineer (if approved by Council) and serve as the liaison to the EEC. Mr. Houle asked the commission if they would be interested in an orientation on functionality of the City. He said assistant city manager Kurt has put together a PowerPoint presentation that they might find useful. They all agreed that this would be helpful. It will be scheduled one hour before the next scheduled meeting in March. Regarding the agenda, Mr. Houle said it is set up similar to the Council agenda showing upcoming meeting dates and events. He said members can add meeting dates also. ADJOURNMENT Meeting adjourned at 10:10 p.m. ATTACHMENT Attendance Spreadsheet r 7 o Le ' MR0 � REPORT /RECOMMENDATION To: MAYOR AND COUNCIL Agenda Item Item No: IV.H. From: Wayne D. Houle, PE G City Engineer ® Action F-1 Discussion 11 Information Date: March 6, 2012 Subject: Resolution 2012 -43 Setting April 3, 2012 Public Hearing for Municipal Consent —1494 Auxiliary Lane ACTION REQUESTED: Set public hearing date of April 3, 2012, to consider adoption of the 1494 auxiliary lane between northbound Interstate 35W entranc e Interstate 494 and the exit ramp from westbound Interstate 494 Highway 100. municipal consent for loop to westbound to northbound Trunk INFORMATION /BACKGROUND: As per State Statutes, the Minnesota Department of Transportation ( MNDOT) is required to submit a Municipal Consent Package for MNDOT projects that are proposed within a municipality and that affect certain operations of the transportation system. Attached you will find a letter from MNDOT outlining the city's responsibility along with supporting submittals. The Edina Transportation Commission (ETC) reviewed the preliminary bridge and roadway layout at their January 19, 2012, meeting and is expected to review the final layout at their March 15 meeting. The bridge located across 1494 at Xerxes Avenue will also be replaced at the same time as this project. ATTACHMENTS: Resolution 2012 -43 February 8, 2012, Letter from MNDOT G: \PW \INFRAS \AGENCIES \STATE \MNDOT\Xerxes Avenue Bridge over 494 \Item IV.H. Resolution No. 2012 -43 Setting April 3, 2012 Public Hearing for Muncipal Concent - 1494 Auxiliary Lane.doc RESOLUTION NO. 2012 -43 SETTING PUBLIC HEARING FOR MUNICIPAL CONSENT FOR IMPROVEMENT OF 1494 AUXILIARY LANE WHEREAS, the Minnesota Department. of Transportation (MnDOT) is improving the 1494 auxiliary lane between northbound Interstate 35W loop to westbound Interstate 494 and the exit ramp from westbound _Interstate 494 to northbound Trunk Highway 100; and WHEREAS, MnDOT is required to receive Municipal Consent for projects within a municipality that affect certain operations of the transportation system; and WHEREAS, the Edina Transportation Commission (ETC) reviewed the preliminary bridge and roadway layout. at their January 1.9, 2012, meeting and is expected to review the final layout at their March 15 meeting; and NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF EDINA, MINNESOTA, that a public hearing shall be held on the 3rd day of April, 2012, in the Council Chambers at City Hall at 7:00 p.m. to consider improvement of 1494 and Xerxes Avenue Bridge; and - BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Clerk shall give mailed and published notice of such hearing and improvements as required by law. Dated: March 6, 2012 Attest: Debra A. Mangen, City Clerk James B. Hovland, Mayor STATE OF MINNESOTA) COUNTY OF HEN_ NEPIN) 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 March 6, 2012, and as recorded.in the Minutes of said Regular Meeting. WITNESS my hand and seal of said City this day of 120 City Clerk ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT 7450 Metro Boulevard . Edina, Minnesota 55439 wwwEdinaMN.gov • 952- 826 -0371 a Pax 952 -826 -0392 bo�`N "E'yo Minnesota Department of Transportation 1500 West County Road 132 OF Roseville, MN 55113 February 8, 2012 Mr. Wayne Houle City of Edina — Director of Public Works 7450 Metro Boulevard Edina, Minnesota 55439 RE: SP 2785 -364 1 -494 Municipal Consent Dear Mr. Houle: "'" ;EIVE FEB 12 ,W1? CITY OF EDI NA PUBLIC SBLIC WOR I am transmitting a copy of the staff approved layout for the above referenced project. This project provides for the construction of an auxiliary lane on Westbound Interstate 494 between the Northbound Interstate 35W entrance loop to Westbound Interstate 494 and the exit ramp from Westbound 494 to Northbound Trunk Highway 100. Two other projects are being developed in conjunction with this project that will replace the Xerxes Avenue Bridge over Interstate 494 and resurface Interstate 494 between Trunk Highway 100 and 24th Avenue. The project(s) are currently programmed for a June 8, 2012 letting. Construction for the projects is anticipated to begin in the Fall of 2012 and be completed in the Fall of 2013. The proposed project is being funded with Congestion Management/Safety Project funds and does not require any local participation A project requires municipal consent if it alters access, increases or reduces traffic capacity, or the project requires the acquisition of right -of -way. This project is adding capacity to Westbound Interstate 494 and thus requires municipal consent. I have enclosed our guidance regarding the municipal consent process, all applicable laws that relate to municipal consent, a draft resolution for the proposed project, and a copy of the staff approved layout for the project. I would be happy to assist the City of Edina in any way that I can throughout the process with presentations or otherwise. Please feel free to contact me at (651) 234 -7726 at any time to discuss this process. An Equal Opportunity Employer I Bloomington Consent Letter February 8, 2012 Page 2 Sinc el , Scott A. Pedersen, P.E. MnDOT Metropolitan District — Right of Way Engineer Enclosures: Staff Approved Layout 1 B Sample Resolution Guidance for Municipal Consent Applicable Statutes regarding Municipal Consent cc: John Griffith, West Area Manager April Crocket, West Area Engineer File. An Equal Opportunity Employer © 0;' v Q HPDP / Scoping / Subject Guidance Minnesota Department of Transportation Municipal Consent Contact Steve Ryan, P. E. steve.rvan(cDstate.mn.us Project and Process Guidance Engineer Office of Technical Support 395 John Ireland Boulevard, MS 676 St. Paul, MN 55155 (651) 366 -4675 Forms For a generic layout - approval resolution for use by a municipality, see Sample Resolution in the Appendix. Threshold Criteria Municipal consent should only be requested from a city if it is required. When Required Municipal approval is required for any trunk highway project that results in any of the following within a municipality: • Alters access, • Increases or reduces traffic capacity, or • Requires acquisition of permanent right -of -way. • (Changing capacity means adding or reducing the number of through lanes. For example, adding auxiliary lanes is not a change in capacity). Exceptions Municipal consent is NOT required (regardless of impacts to access, capacity, or R/W) for projects needed for any of the following: • Regulate traffic, or • Install traffic control devices, or • Other safety measures • The term 'other safety measures" refers to traffic safety measures. For example, the addition of a turn lane is a traffic safety measure; the replacement of a structurally - deficient or fracture - critical bridge is not. 1 of 5 Municipal Consent HPDP / Scoping / Subject Guidance Mn /DOT Also, maintenance activities do not trigger the need for municipal consent. Examples Permanent Easements (such :as Drainage Easements) require municipal consent (because they take permanent right -of -way). Roundabouts are used for traffic regulation and as a safety measure, and thus are exceptions that do not require Municipal Consent even if they involve permanent right -of -way taking. Roles and Procedures Municipal consent should only be requested from a city if it is required. (See Threshold Criteria above). Sometimes a city may choose to waive municipal consent on a specific project. In that case the city council must pass a resolution clearly identifying the project and waiving its right to municipal consent for that project. However, the typical municipal consent process is as outlined below. Procedure (for obtaining municipal consent) 1. Mn /DOT (District) submits to the city the final layout with a letter requesting city approval. The letter includes a good faith cost estimate of the city's share of the project's cost and the following (either in the letter or in an attached report): • project purpose • route location • short description of the proposed design of the highway • any additional supporting data 2. City schedules and holds public hearing (within 60 days of submittal). City must schedule within 15 days of receiving Mn /DOT's request for approval and must give 30 days public notice. 3. City passes resolution approving / disapproving (within 90 days of public hearing). After 90 from the date of the public hearing, if the city has not passed a resolution disapproving the layout, the layout is deemed approved. 2of5 Municipal Consent HPDP / Scoping / Subject Guidance 4. If city disapproves; Mn /DOT decides whether to: a. Meet city's condition(s), assuming city approved with conditions:. Mn /DOT writes,c'ity a letter indicating this and attaches revised layout with change(s). This ends the MC process. b. Go to the appeal,process. Mn /DOT c. Stop the project (do not build the project, or scale project down so that municipal consent is no longer required). 5. If in the final plan Mn /DOT alters access, capacity or R/W, Mn /DOT must..re- submit changed portion of plan for city's approval. (The city is not required to hold another public hearing and has 60.daysao,approve or disapprove). City Approval The city can approve either by a formal approval resolution (see generic resolution in Appendix), or by not passing a resolution disapproving the layout within 90 days of the public hearing. The city's review - with regards to layout approval — is limited to the project elements in the final layout that are within the boundaries of that city. A city cannot impose a condition on its approval that is outside of the city's boundaries. The process allows the city one opportunity to exercise approval or disapproval of the final layout (unless Mn /DOT alters the plan with regards to access, capacity, or right -of -way). Once a city approves the layout, it cannot rescind its approval later. If a city disapproves with conditions, and if Mn /DOT agrees to meet those conditions — and notifies the city in writing (including copy of revised layout) — then municipal consent has been obtained. The municipal consent statute applies to changes on "any route on the trunk highway system lying within any municipality." If a T.H. borders a city and no section of the T.H. is completely within the city limits, municipal consent is still required for any of the designated changes (access, capacity, or right -of -way) that do occur within that city. However, if the changes triggering the municipal consent process are.on the other side of the T.H. — and thus outside the city's limits — then municipal consent is not required from that city and is not requested from that city. 3of5 Municipal Consent HPDP / Scoping / Subject Guidance City Disapproval Mn /DOT If a city disapproves . the final layout, Mn /DOT can stop the project (or scale it back so, that municipal consent is no longer required), or Mn /DOT can take the project to the appeal process. If the city, disapproves , but includes condition(s) for approval, .Mn /DOT has the above option's plus the optior) of meeting the city's condition(s), and thusJobtaining the city's approval. To do this, Mn /DOT sends the city a letter to that effect with the layout attached (revised to show the change(s))., This completes the municipal consent process; Mn /D.OT then has the city's approval. (Sending the letter and revised layout is NOT a' resubmittal for further consideration by the city). Appeal Process The appeal process is the same for interstate and non-interstate projects. However, the Mn /DOT Commissioner is not bound by the recommendations of the appeal board with respect to interstate highways. If Mn /DOT decides to go to the appeal process, the first step is to establish an Appeal Board of three members: one member appointed by the Commissioner, one member appointed by the City Council, and a third member agreed upon by both the Commissioner and the City Council. (If a third member cannot be agreed upon, the Commissioner refers the selection to the chief justice of the Supreme Court, who then has 14 days to appoint the third member). After the appeal board is established, the Commissioner refers the final layout to the Appeal Board. The Appeal Board then has 30 days to hold a hearing at which the Commissioner and the City Council may present their cases for or against approval of the layout. Within 60 days after the hearing, the Appeal Board must make its recommendation regarding the final layout. The recommendation can be: for approval, or for approval with modifications, or for disapproval. The board can also make additional recommendations consistent with state and federal requirements as it deems appropriate. The board must submit a written report with its findings and recommendations to the Commissioner and the City Council. 4of5 Municipal Consent HPDP / Scoping / Subject Guidance Legal Basis Mn /DOT The Minnesota municipal consent statutes (see links below) were revised in the 2001 legislative session. State Municipal Consent Statutes Definitions MN Statute 161.162 Highway Project Review MN Statute 161.163 Final Layout Approval Process MN Statute 161.164 Commissioner Action; Interstate Highways MN Statute 161.165 Commissioner Action; Other Highways MN Statute 161.166 Reimbursement of Expenses (for Appeal Board Members) MN Statute 161.167 Helpful Links Mn /DOT Public Involvement Glossary Municipality: A statutory or home rule charter city. Municipal Consent: A municipality's approval of Mn /DOT's final layout for a project on a Trunk Highway when such approval is required by State Statute — see Threshold Criteria below. (Approval is by a resolution passed by the elected council of the municipality — the City Council). Appendix Municipal Consent Process Sample City Resolution 5 of 5 Municipal Consent Process Mn /DOT — HPDP /Scoping Basic Process 1. Mn /DOT submits the final layout to the City with a letter requesting City approval of the layout. 2. The City holds. public hearing ,within 60:days of Mn /DOT's`submittal 60 days and gives a 30 -d6y (minimum) public notice of.the,hearing. Mn /DOT presents the layout at the public hearing 3. The City Council.passes a resolution approving / disapproving the layout (within 90 days of public hearing). If after,90 days from the public hearing the City has not passed a 90 days resolution disapproving the•layout, the layout is deemed approved 4. If the City approves,.Mn /DOT can proceed with the project. 5. If the City disapproves, Mn /DOTs options are*, • Make the changes requested by the City (if any) • Refer the layout to an Appeal Board • Stop the project • Modify the project so. municipal consent is not required o Prepare a new final layout and start the MC process over from beginning Before Appeal: Total Maximum time = 150 days Appeal Process 1. Mn /DOT notifies the City that it is appealing. An Appeal Board of three persons is established: • Mn /DOT appoints a member Undefined time to • The City appoints a member establish appeal board • Third member selected by mutual agreement between the City & Mn /DOT. If they cannot agree, Mn /DOT requests the MN Chief Justice to select. The Chief Justice appoints third member within 14 days of Mn /DOT's request. 14 days 3. Mn /DOT refers the final layout to the Appeal Board. Undefined time 4. The Appeal Board holds a hearing. (within 30 days of receiving final layout from Mn /DOT). - The City and Mn /DOT each present their case 30 days 5. The Appeal Board makes its recommendation (within 60 days of the hearing): 60 days • Approval, or • Approval with modifications, or • Disapproval of the final layout Maximum for Appeal Process = 104 days + (plus time to establish appeal board, etc.) 6. If the Board approves, Mn /DOT can proceed with the project. 7. If the Board disapproves, or approves with modifications, Mn /DOT's options are: • Make recommended modifications (if any), and proceed with the project • Stop the project • Modify the project so municipal consent is not required • Prepare a new final layout and start the MC process over from beginning • If it is an Interstate Highway rxoiect, Mn /DOT may proceed with the project using the layout that was not approved (and sends a report to the City and the Appeal Board stating the reasons for doing so). TOTAL Possible Time = 254 days + NOTE: If final construction plans contain changes to access, capacity; or right -of -way from the layout approved by the City, Mn /DOT resubmits the changed portion of the plans to the City for approval. (City has 60 days to approve). This holds whether municipal consent was obtained through the basic MC process or through the appeal process. 161.162, 2011 Minnesota Statutes Page 1 of 1 2011 Minnesota Statutes 161.162 DEFINITIONS. Subdivision 1. Applicability. The terms in sections 161.162 to 161.167 have the meanings given them in this section and section 160.02. Subd. 2. Final layout. (a) "Final layout" means geometric layouts and supplemental drawings that show the location, character, dimensions, access, and explanatory information about the highway construction or improvement work being proposed. "Final layout" includes, where applicable, traffic lanes, shoulders, trails, intersections, signals, bridges, approximate right -of -way limits, existing ground line and proposed grade line of the highway, turn lanes, access points and closures, sidewalks, proposed design speed, noise walls, transit considerations, auxiliary lanes, interchange locations, interchange types, sensitive areas, existing right -of -way, traffic volume and turning movements, location of storm water drainage, location of municipal - utilities, project schedule and estimated cost, and the name of the project manager. (b) "Final layout" does not include a cost participation agreement. For purposes of this subdivision "cost participation agreement" means a document signed by the commissioner and the governing body of a municipality that states the costs of a highway construction project that will be paid by the municipality. Subd. 3. Final construction plan. "Final construction plan" means the set of technical drawings for the construction or improvement of a trunk highway provided to contractors for bids. Subd. 4. Governing body. "Governing body" means the elected council of a municipality. Subd. 5. Municipality. "Municipality" means a statutory or home rule charter city. History: 2001 c 191 s 3; 2002 c 364 s 3 https: / /www.revisor.mn.gov /statutes / ?id= 161.162 2/8/2012 161.163, 2011 Minnesota Statutes Page 1 of 1 201I Minnesota Statutes 161.163 HIGHWAY PROJECT REVIEW. Subdivision 1. Projects requiring review. Sections 161.162 to 161.167 apply only to projects that alter access, increase or reduce highway traffic capacity, or require acquisition of permanent rights -of -way. Subd. 2. Traffic safety measures.. Nothing contained in sections 161.162 to 161.167 limits the power of the commissioner to regulate traffic or install traffic- control devices or other safety measures on trunk highways located within municipalities, regardless of their impact on access or traffic capacity or on the need for additional right -of -way. Subd. 3. Construction program. Nothing contained in sections 161.162 to 161.167 limits the commissioner's discretion to determine priority and programming of trunk highway projects. History: 2001 c 191 s 4 https: / /www.revisor.m.n.gov /statutes / ?id, 161.163 2/8/2012 161.164, 2011 Minnesota Statutes Page 1 of 2 2011 Minnesota Statutes 161.164 FINAL LAYOUT APPROVAL PROCESS. Subdivision 1. Submission of final layout. Before proceeding with the construction, reconstruction, or improvement of any route on the trunk highway system lying within any municipality, the commissioner shall submit to its governing body a final layout and project report covering the purpose, route location, and proposed design of the highway. The final layout must be submitted as part of a report containing any supporting data that the commissioner deems helpful to the governing body in reviewing the final layout submitted. The supporting data must include a good faith cost estimate of all the costs in which the governing body is expected to participate. The final layout must be submitted before final decisions are reached so that meaningful early input can be obtained from the municipality. Subd. 2. Governing body action. (a) Within 15 days of receiving a final layout from the commissioner, the governing body shall schedule a public hearing on the final layout. The governing body shall, within 60 days of receiving a final layout from the commissioner, conduct a public hearing at which the Department of Transportation shall present the final layout for the project. The governing body shall give at least 30 days' notice of the public hearing. (b) Within 90 days from the date of the public hearing, the governing body shall approve or disapprove the final layout in writing, as follows: (1) If the governing body approves the final layout or does not disapprove the final layout in writing within 90 days, in which case the final layout is deemed to be approved, the commissioner may continue the project development. (2) If the final construction plans contain changes in access, traffic capacity, or acquisition of permanent right -of -way from the final layout approved by the governing body, the commissioner shall resubmit the portion of the final construction plans where changes were made to the governing body. The governing body must approve or disapprove the changes, in writing, within 60 days from the date the commissioner submits them. (3) If the governing body disapproves the final layout, the commissioner may make modifications requested by the municipality, decide not to proceed with the project, or refer the final layout to an appeal board. The appeal board shall consist of one member appointed by the commissioner, one member appointed by the governing body, and a third member agreed upon by both the commissioner and the governing body. If the commissioner and the governing body cannot agree upon the third member, the chief justice of the Supreme Court shall appoint a third member within 14 days of the request of the commissioner to appoint the third member. Subd. 3. Appeal board. Within 30 days after referral of the final layout, the appeal board shall hold a hearing at which the commissioner and the governing body may present the case for or against approval of the final layout referred. Not later than 60 days after the hearing, the appeal board shall recommend approval, recommend approval with modifications, or recommend disapproval of the final layout, making additional recommendations consistent with state and federal requirements as it deems appropriate. It shall submit a written report containing its findings and recommendations to the commissioner and the governing body. https: / /www.revisor.mn.gov /statutes / ?id= 161.164 2/8/2012 161.164, 2011 Minnesota Statutes History: 2001 c 191 s 5 https : / /www.revi.sor.mn.gpy /statutes / ?id= .16.1:164 Page 2 of 2 2/8/2012 161.165, 2011 Minnesota Statutes Page 1 of 2 2011 Minnesota Statutes 161.165 COMMISSIONER ACTION; INTERSTATE HIGHWAYS. Subdivision 1. Applicability. This section applies to interstate highways. Subd. 2. Action on approved final layout. (a) If the appeal board recommends approval of the final layout or, does not submit its findings and recommendations within 60 days of the hearing, in which case the final layout is deemed approved, the commissioner may prepare substantially similar final construction plans and.proceed with the project. (b) If the final construction plans change access, traffic capacity, or acquisition of permanent right -of -way from the final layout approved by the appeal board; the commissioner shall submit the portion of the final construction plans that shows the changes, to "the governing body for its approval or disapproval under section 161". 164, subdivision 2. Subd. 3. Action on final layout approved with changes. (a) If, within 60 days, the appeal board recommends approval of the final layout with modifications, the commissioner may: (1) prepare final construction plans with the recommended modifications, notify the governing body, and proceed with the project; (2) decide not to proceed with the project; or (3) prepare final construction plans substantially similar to the final layout referred to the appeal board, and proceed with the project. The commissioner shall, before proceeding with the project, file a written report with the governing body and the appeal board stating fully the reasons for doing so. (b) If the final construction plans contain changes in access or traffic capacity or require additional acquisition of permanent right -of- -way from the final layout reviewed by the appeal board or the governing body, the commissioner shall resubmit the portion of the final construction plans that shows the changes, to the governing body for its approval or disapproval under section 161.164, subdivision 2. Subd. 4. Action on disapproved final layout. (a) If, within 60 days, the appeal board recommends disapproval of the final layout, the commissioner may either: (1) decide not to proceed with the project; or (2) prepare final construction plans substantially similar to the final layout referred to the appeal board, notify the governing body and the appeal board, and proceed with the project. Before proceeding with the project, the, commissioner shall file a written report with the governing body and the appeal board stating fully the reasons for doing so. (b) If the final construction plans contain changes in access or traffic capacity or require additional acquisition of permanent right -of -way from the final layout reviewed by the appeal board or the governing body, the commissioner shall resubmit the portion of the final construction plans that shows the changes, to the governing body for its approval or disapproval under section 161.164, subdivision 2. https! / /www.revisor.nm.gov /statutes / ?id= 161.165 y 2/8/2012 161.165, 2011 Minnesota Statutes Page 2 of 2 Subd. 5. Final construction plans issued. The commissioner shall send a complete set of final construction plans to the municipality at least 45 days before the bid opening for informational purposes. History: 2001 c 191 s 6. htttis://www.revisor.mn.gov /statutes / ?id= 161.165 2/8/2,012 161.166, 2011 Minnesota Statutes 2011 Minnesota Statutes 161.166 COMMISSIONER ACTION; OTHER HIGHWAYS. Page 1 of 1 Subdivision 1. Applicability. This section applies to trunk highways that are not interstate highways. Subd. 2. Action on approved final layout. If the appeal board recommends approval of the final layout or does not submit its findings or recommendations within 60 days of the hearing, in which case the the final layout is deemed approved, the commissioner may prepare substantially similar final construction plans and proceed with the project. If the final construction plans change access or traffic capacity or require additional acquisition of right -of -way from the final layout approved by the appeal board, the commissioner shall submit the portion of the final construction plan that shows the, changes, to the governing body for its approval or disapproval under section 161.164, subdivision 2. Subd. 3. Action on final layout approved with changes. (a) If the appeal board approves the final layout with modifications, the commissioner may: (1) prepare final construction plans including the modifications, notify the governing body, and proceed with the project; (2) decide not to proceed with the project; or (3) prepare a new final layout and resubmit it to the governing body for approval or disapproval under section 161.164, subdivision 2. (b) If the final construction plans contain changes in access or traffic capacity or require additional acquisition of permanent right -of -way from the final layout reviewed by the appeal board or the governing body, the commissioner shall resubmit the portion of the final construction plans that shows the changes, to the governing body for its approval or disapproval under section 161.164, subdivision 2. Subd. 4. Action on disapproved final layout. If the appeal board disapproves the final layout, the commissioner may: (1) decide not to proceed with the project; or (2) prepare a new final layout and submit it to the governing body for approval or disapproval under section 161.164, subdivision 2. Subd. 5. Final construction plans issued. The commissioner shall send a complete set of final construction plans to the municipality at least 45 days before the bid opening for informational purposes. History: 2001 c 191 s 7 https: / /www.revisor.mn.gov /statutes / ?id= 161.166 2/8/2012 161.167, 2011. Minnesota Statutes 2011 Minnesota Statutes Page 1 of 1 161.167 REIMBURSEMENT OF EXPENSES. Members of the appeal board shall submit to the commissioner an itemized list of the expenses incurred in disposing of matters presented to them. The appeal board members shall be . reimbursed for all reasonable expenses incurred by them in the "performance of their duties. The commissioner shall pay these costs out of the trunk highway fund. History: 2001 c 191 's 8 httns: / /www.reviser.mn.gnv /statutes / ?id= 161..1.67 2/8/2012 LAYOUT AND PROFILE No.. 1B COPY No. I -494 VICINITY OF BLOOMINGTON & RICHFIELD- _ FROM TH 100 TO I -35W ADD AUXILIARY LANE ALONG I -494 WB Prepared December 2011 Scale: -Hor. 1 Inch, = 100 -Fto By S. PEDERSEN /CB /RR. The alignment and Staff Approval The traffic volumes shown are grades shown on Dateo02 -01 -2012 estimated for year 2008 -2009 this map are tentative OFFICE_ OF TRANSPORTATION _DATA_ and subject to change & ANALYSIS without notice. S.Po2785 -364 T.Ho494 SOP. S. P. Copy To: A.J. T99765 PPMS ActTvity1:140' .. T. H. A.J. T. H. A. J. For: PPMS Activity PPMS . ActIvi ty DESIGN FILE: PW: \Documents \Pro jects \DM -,ROS \494 \2785 \364 \Predesi� DATE. 02 -08 -2012 \ 0. \\ i \ BOROUGH WAY 300 EDINB �. \ a 774 3010 � � 3000 7784 � I W 78TH ST EDINA PARK PLAZA J' " 7 �` / ' " "— 3330 EDINBOROUGH WAY PROP� QSE-8 Pt0I5rWR 'r L /y^.' � . �T : �Cl( { E \ } \ % •' '.o.. F mBH - s�Pe E ID; - . T J.,1.?. i -1 . s .I.e ` . "-_e. � 1,. ,NC. -/ , , - / ° .•.!/ ' � / sxExra n �)y "'»6 mo— b --. i — t' urn NP.B R'I D�GE � MPLACEuB 424 90 0 91 26 3409.44 p ; illg0T:6 AUX 60 M_ LANE 1 DIMPArm BLANE9) . 71?39� 09ADTKLLYiW LMWBIB pFFSE ol[sa.ro —' ° 'PROFU a'0M'RB/94 x ` T =_�� o ` I % I 1 - XERXES AVE BRIDGE AND ADDITIONAL WORK rY + „�i �s �� = �r ` r , , fi TO BE CONSTRUCTED UNDER S.P. 2785 -378 Jk9 Y I >' NEW BRIDGE �y V kstru'� ['�•r NO 27408 xc JV- DESIGN IF71II SPE OUTH 2, lP `1pN '� ED .� 1� �' ps��,.. •.,fi. ' S jrr �r llz 1NP�'� iy �/� i LIMIT T 7' `� /� ., . , //' i �i i' ✓A �� l�J OJ rc z 16 ks'�z.T � '�`� „ `�' �x• it i i SLUMBERLAND TOw 7801 XERXES AVE S N Y It ' Ic / N LLNVV /) ..ice ".l ry SOO +FARGO, BANK\L I M 7900 :XERXE S AVE S r%i O \�roRBPU�'S� REQUEST FOR PURCHASE IN EXCESS OF $20,000 /CHANGE ORDER To: MAYOR AND COUNCIL Agenda Item No. IV. I. From: John Keprios, Director Park and Recreation Department Date: March 6, 2012 Subject: Terex PT60 Track Loader — Braemar Golf Course Date Bid Opened or Quote Received: Bid or Quote Expiration Date: February 6, 2012 July 31, 2012 Company Amount of Quote or Bid 1. Titan Machinery 1. $29,477.19 (includes sales tax & trade -in) RECOMMENDED QUOTE OR BID: Titan Machinery GENERAL INFORMATION: This is for purchase of a new Terex brand PT60 track loader for Braemar Golf,Course. The purchase price of $29,477.19 includes the trade -in value of $13,000.00 for a 2004 Terex brand ASV 60 track loader plus 6.875% sales tax. This piece of maintenance equipment is' used for plowing snow, construction and earth work on the golf course, tree removal and loading. It 'is used for a variety of heavy maintenance tasks on the golf course. This vehicle is being purchased through the State Contract #29810 and is funded through the Braemar Golf Course Maintenance Equipment Replacement Fund which has a balance of $74,730. John K ,Orfos, Director This Recommended bid is within budget Edina Park and Recreation . Department nce Director of1e •l�iv • \fie REPORT /RECOMMENDATION To: MAYOR AND COUNCIL Agenda Item IV. J. From: Marty Scheerer Fire Chief ® Action Discussion Information Date: March 6, 2012 Subject: Resolution No. 2012 -44 Approving Amendment Hennepin County Fire Chief s Joint Powers Agreement originally approved.as Resolution 2008 -42 on April 15, 2008 ACTION REQUESTED: I recommend that you approve the resolution 2012 -44 authorizing the City of Edina to amend a Hennepin County Fire Chiefs Joint and Cooperative Agreement. The originally JPA was approved on April, 15, 2008 with other cities and fire departments from the Hennepin County Fire Chiefs Association. INFORMATION/BACKGROUND: Attached is the copy of the proposed Resolution 2012 -44 by the Edina City Council. The original JPA was specifically written to allow the purchase or lease of firefighting SCBA's. The JPA has been amended to allow for the purchase of any firefighting equipment. ATTACHMENTS: Resolution No. 2012 -044 RESOLUTION NO. 2012-44 HENNEPIN COUNTY FIRE CHIEFS JOINT AND COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT WHERAS, Minnesota Statute 471.59 authorizes local units of government to enter into Joint and Cooperative Agreements of governmental powers common to the contracting parties. The intent of this Agreement is to make available the purchase or lease of firefighting equipment to the City of Edina. - BE IT RESOLVED that the Edina City Council does hereby approve the Joint and Cooperative Agreement for Cities and Fire Departments from the Hennepin Fire Chiefs Association. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Mayor and City Manager are authorized to execute said Joint and Cooperative Agreement on behalf of the City of Edina. Dated: March 6, 2012 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 April 15, 2008 and as recorded in the Minutes of said Regular Meeting. WITNESS my hand and seal of said City this 6th day of March, 2012. REQUEST FOR PURCHASE IN EXCESS OF $20,000 /CHANGE ORDER To: MAYOR AND COUNCIL Agenda Item No.: IV. K From: Marty Scheerer Fire Chief Date: March 6, 2012 Subject: Fire Department Ambulance Description: 2012 Horton Type I Ambulance with Ford F 450 4x2 Diesel Chassis Date Bid Opened or Quote Received: Bid or Quote Expiration Date: February 2, 2012 May 2, 2012 Company . Amount of Quote or Bid 1. Premier Specialty Vehicles (North Central EMS 1. $149,867.00 Cooperative) 2. RECOMMENDED QUOTE OR BID: Premier Specialty Vehicles $ 149,867.00 GENERAL INFORMATION: This request for purchase is for a Horton Model 603 -F Type I Ambulance. The ambulance would be purchased from the North Central EMS Cooperative (NCEMSC) bid. This would replace a 2000 Braun ambulance that had a new chassis remount in 200.6. The 2000 ambulance box cannot be re- chassised due to Ford no longer producing the diesel engine van chassis. The funding for this purchase would come from Fire Department Equipment Replacement account in the CIP. The vehicle would be on a six year replacement schedule. The price includes the trade -in of the 2000 ambulance. Our research and experience indicates this is a very good uality ambulance at a very competitive price and I would recommend approval tpp chase. W/10 � / 49, wow A 94, ignature The Recommend Bid is /1, within budget Fire Department Department not within budaet AQfin Wallin,Winance Director oe lless REPORT /RECOMMENDATION To: MAYOR AND COUNCIL Agenda Item V.A. From: Marty Scheerer Fire Chief ® Action F-1 Discussion 1:1 Information Date: March 6, 2012 Subject: Resolution No. 2012 -45 Authorizing the Fire Department to Accept FEMA FireAct Grant ACTION REQUESTED: _ Adopt Resolution No. 2012 -45 Authorizing the Fire Department to accept FEMA Fire Act Grant and authorizing the Mayor and City Manager to execute the grant agreement. INFORMATION /BACKGROUND: February 13, 2012, the Fire Department received an award notification of a Federal Assistant to Firefighters grant in the amount of $74,520.00 from the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) Assistance to Firefighters (FireAct) grant program ( #EMW- 2011 -F0- 09965). The grant would be used to purchase Personal Protective Equipment (PPE), specifically firefighter turnout gear, helmets, boots, gloves and hoods for the fire department The funding is a reimbursement for the purchase of PPE for firefighting. The grant requires the funds to be expended before February 13th, 2013 and the City of Edina cost share portion of the grant project is a minimum of 10% or $8,280.00, which we will meet. ATTACHMENTS: Resolution No. 2012 -045 RESOLUTION NO. 2012-45 EDINA FIRE DEPARTMENT ASSISTANCE TO FIREFIGHTERS GRANT WHEREAS, The City of Edina and the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) have agreed to enter into a agreement for the acquisition of Personal Protective Equipment for the Edina Fire Department. The City of Edina agrees that the grant is intended to protect the health and safety of the public and firefighting personnel with respect to fire and fire- related hazards NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of Edina, Minnesota hereby accepts the agreement and documents relating to The Federal Emergency Management Agency, U.S. Department of Homeland Security, Federal Fiscal Year 2011 Homeland Security Grant Program, Award Number EMW- 2011 -FO- 09965. -IT IS FURTHER RESOLVED that the Mayor and City Manager are authorized to execute the Agreement and any amendments to the Agreement. Attest: Passed and adopted this 6 n day of March, 2012 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 March 6, 2012 and as recorded in the Minutes of said Regular .Meeting. WITNESS my hand and seal of said City this 6th day of March, 2012. City Clerk ow e, �y REPORPRECOMMEN RATION To: MAYOR AND COUNCIL Agenda Item Item No. VI.A From: Cary Teague, Community z Action Development Director Discussion Information Date: March 6, 2012 Subject: Public Hearing — Conditional Use Permit And Lot Width Variance, 5421 France and 3717 Fuller Street, St. Peter's Lutheran Church, Resolution No. 2012 -37 &Resolution No. 2012 -38 Deadline May 1, 2012 for a City Decision: ACTION REQUESTED: Adopt the attached resolutions approving the Conditional Use Permit & 15 -foot Lot Width Variance. INFORMATION /BACKGROUND: St. Peter's Lutheran Church is requesting a 15 -foot lot width variance to build on their vacant property located at 3717 Fuller Street. This site (3717 Fuller) is currently encumbered by a proof -of- parking plan that was required for a parking stall Variance granted to St. Peter's in 1983. A revised Conditional Use Permit is therefore required to change the proof -of- parking plan. The Church campus consists of property both north and south of Fuller Street between France and Drew Avenue. The site includes the church, a parking lot east of the church, two platted lots east of the parking lot at 3700 and 3704 Fuller Street, and property south of Fuller inculding a south parking lot, and three platted lots east of the south parking lot at 3713, 3717 and 3721 Fuller Street. (See page A4 of the attached staff report.) Planning Commission Review: On January 25, 2012, the Planning Commission unanimously recommended approval of the requested Conditional Use Permit & Variance. (See the attached minutes.) s \; ATTACHMENTS: • Resolution 2012 -37 & 2012 -38, approving the CUP and Variance • Minutes from the January 25, 2012 Edina Planning Commission meeting • Planning Commission Staff Report, January 25 22, 2012 RESOLUTION NO. 2012-37 w9iN�1r� APPROVING A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT o a AT 5421 FRANCE r � �y • A�RPOM� iaee y Tie City Council of e City of ma, mneso a, as o ows: City of Edina Section 1. BACKGROUND. 1.01 St. Peter's Lutheran Church is requesting a 15 -foot lot -width variance to build on their vacant property located at 3717 Fuller Street. This site (3717 Fuller) is currently encumbered by a proof -of- parking plan that was required for a parking stall Variance granted to St. Peter's in 1983. A revised Conditional Use Permit is therefore, required to change the proof -of- parking plan. 1.02 The Church campus consists of property both north and south of Fuller Street between France and Drew Avenue. The site includes the church, a parking lot east of the church, two platted lots east of the parking lot at 3700 and 3704 Fuller Street, and property south of Fuller, including a south parking lot, and three platted lots east of the south parking lot at 3713, 3717 and 3721 Fuller Street. 1.03 In August of 2011, the Church received a 15 -foot lot -width variance for 3713 Fuller Street. (A vacant lot east of the subject 3717 Fuller lot.) 1.04 The purpose of the current request is to create another lot in which the Church intends to sell to JMS Homes. JMS would then build two new single - family homes. 1.05 All of the church property, with the exception of 3700 Fuller, (north of Fuller and west of Drew) and 3713 Fuller, (the property that has already received a width variance), is dedicated to a proof -of- parking agreement filed as a condition of variances granted for an expansion of the Church that occurred in 1983. A parking lot plan was attached to the 1983 agreement providing an ultimate build -out plan of the south parking lot over two lots east of the parking lot including the subject vacant lot. The proof -of- parking plan would be implemented in the event that the City Manager and City Planner determine that additional parking spaces would be required for the Church use. The lot at 3717 Fuller is encumbered by the 1983 parking agreement and may not be sold without a lot width variance and an amendment to the Church's Conditional Use permit to include a re- assessment of the parking needs of the Church and revised proof -of- parking plan. 1.06 SRF Consulting Group, Inc. has submitted a parking study dated November 22, 2011 and revision dated January 16, 2012. The parking study includes a new proof -of- parking plan that would rebuild the south parking lot to provide 86 stalls in a new south lot build -out and include the 46 existing stalls in the north lot for a total of 132 parking stalls. The ordinance requires parking must be provided for one third the maximum seating capacity for the largest place of assembly. The Church use requires a minimum of 131 parking stalls. The sanctuary is the largest place of assembly providing capacity for 393 persons. The build -out plan provides 132 parking stalls and conforms to the required setbacks. 1.07 The seating capacity of the Church was reduced from 470 to 393 persons as part of a 1990 interior renovation. The number of parking stalls required by ordinance reflects the capacity decrease by a reduction 'n parking required from 156. (as required in 1983.), to 131 stalls. City Hall 952 - 927 -8861 4801 WEST 50TH STREET FAX 952 -826 -0390 EDINA, MINNESOTA, 55424 -1394 www.CityofEdina.com TTY 952 - 826 -0379 RESOLUTION NO. 2012-37 Page Two 1.08 SRF Consulting Group has indicated the average weekly parking demand is approximately 73 stalls with 91 stalls currently provided in the north and south lots combined. It isn't anticipated that the south lot will need any improvement in the near future given current lower demand and reduced attendance as indicated in the SRF study. No additional parking has been needed over the last 29 years since the 1983 agreement was put in place. Exercising the current parking agreement has never been considered. 1.09 On January 25, 2012, the Planning Commission unanimously recommended approval of the conditional use permit request. Section 2. FINDINGS 2.01 Approval is based on the following findings: 1. The proposal meets the Conditional Use Permit conditions per Section 850.04 Subd.5.E, of the Edina Zoning Ordinance. 2. The proposal meets all applicable Zoning Ordinance requirements. 3. The revised proof of parking plan allows the release of 3717 Fuller Street from the 1983 proof of parking agreement allowing the Church opportunity for alternative options for use of the property. Section 3. APPROVAL NOW THEREFORE, it is hereby resolved by the City Council of the City of Edina, approves the Conditional Use Permit to revise the proof -of- parking plan at 5421 France Avenue, subject to the following conditions: 1. Recording of a revised proof -of- parking agreement with attached parking plan by SRF Consulting Group, Inc. dated: January 17, 2012, with Hennepin County. 2. Execution of a proof -of- parking agreement. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Edina, Minnesota, on March 6, 2012. ATTEST: Debra A. Mangen, City Clerk STATE OF MINNESOTA ) COUNTY OF HENNEPIN )SS CITY OF EDINA ) James B. Hovland, Mayor RESOLUTION NO. 2012-37 Page Two 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 March 6, 2012, and as recorded in the Minutes of said Regular Meeting. WITNESS my hand and seal of said City this day of , 2012. City Clerk RESOLUTION NO. 2012-38 APPROVING A LOT WIDTH VARIANCE AT 3717 FULLER STREET by the City council of e City of ma, Minnesota, as follows: City of Edina Section 1. BACKGROUND. 1.01.1 St Peter's Lutheran Church /JMS Custom Homes, LLC has requested a 50 foot lot -width variance from the City Code to build a new single dwelling unit home. 1.02 The following described tract of land is requested for variance: The East 60 -feet of the West 393 -feet of the North half of the South half of the Northwest Quarter of the Northwest Quarter of Section 20, Township 38 North, Range 24 West of the Fourth Principal Meridian, Hennepin County, Minnesota. Torrens Certificate No. 503646. 1.03 City Code Section 850.11, requires a lot width of 75 -feet. 1.04 The applicant is proposing a 60 -foot lot width. This requires a variance of 15 feet 1.05 On January 25, 2012, the Planning Commission recommended approval of the Variances on a Vote of 7 -0. Section 2. FINDINGS 2.01 Approval is based on the following findings: 1) With the exception of the variance requested, the proposal would meet the required standards and ordinances for the R -1, Single Dwelling Unit District. 2) The proposal would meet the required standards for a variance, because: a. The proposed use of the property is reasonable; as it is consistent with the Comprehensive Guide Plan. b. The request is reasonable given that a home had occupied the lot in the past. c. The lot width of the subject property is consistent and similar to those near it. 3) The proposal is in harmony with the intent of the ordinance since it will allow replacement of a home that had occupied the lot in the past and was originally platted for that purpose. 4) The unique circumstances are that the property is not needed for future parking demands of the Church, however, may not be sold for redevelopment without the benefit of a lot width variance. City Hall 952 - 927 -8861 4801 WEST 50TH STREET FAX 952 - 826 -0390 EDINA, MINNESOTA, 55424 -1394 www.CityofEdina.com TTY 952- 826 -0379 RESOLUTION NO. 2012-38 Page Two Section 3. APPROVAL NOW THEREFORE, it is hereby resolved by the City Council of the City of Edina, approves the Variance for the property located at 3717 Fuller Street, Edina, MN. Approval is subject to the following Conditions: 1. Recording of a revised proof -of- parking agreement with attached parking plan by SRF Consulting Group, Inc. dated: January 17, 2012, with Hennepin County. Adopted this 6th day of March, 2012. ATTEST: Debra A. Mangen, City Clerk STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF HENNEPIN CITY OF EDINA )SS James B. Hovland, Mayor 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 March 6, 2012, and as recorded in the Minutes of said Regular Meeting. WITNESS my hand and seal of said City this day of , 2012. City Clerk MINUTES CITY OF EDINA, MINNESOTA PLANNING COMMISSION CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS JANUARY 2S, 2012 7:00 P.M. I. CALL TO ORDER Chair Grabiel ailed the meeting of the Edina Plannin Commission to order at 7:00 PM. II. ROLL CALL Answering the roll ca were Commissioners cherer, Forrest, Schroeder, Potts, Platteter, Carpenter, Staunton, Fi her, Grabiel. Absent from the roll call we Commi ioners Cherkassky and Rock. III. APPROVAL OF MEETING AG A Commissioner Carpenter mov d ap roval of the January 25, 2012 meeting agenda. Commissioner Platteter sec ded th motion. All voted aye; motion carried. IV. APPROVAL OF CONS NT ITEMS Commissioner Platt er moved approval of t e January 11, 2012, meeting minutes. Commissioner Sch rer seconded the motion. II voted aye; motion carried. V. COMMUN Y COMMENT No co2mm /nt. VI. P IC HEARINGS — 2011.0001.12a Conditional Use Permit with Variances St. Peter's Lutheran Church /JMS Custom Homes 3717 Fuller Street, Edina, MN Planner Presentation Planner Aaker informed the Commission that St. Peter's Lutheran Church is requesting a 15- foot lot width variance to build on their vacant property located at 3717 Fuller Street. This site Page 1 of 10 (3717 Fuller) is currently encumbered by a proof -of- parking plan that was required for a parking stall Variance granted to St. Peter's in 1983. A revised Conditional Use Permit is also required to change the proof -of- parking plan. Planner Aaker explained that the Church campus consists of property both north and south of Fuller Street between France and Drew Avenue. The site includes the church, a parking lot east of the church, two platted lots east of the parking lot at 3700 and 3704 Fuller Street, and property south of Fuller inculding a south parking lot, and three platted lots east of the south parking lot at 3713, 3717 and 3721 Fuller Street. Planner Aaker pointed out that in August of 2011, the Church recieved a 15 -foot lot width variance for 3713 Fuller Street. The purpose of the current request is to create another lot in which the Church intends to sell to JMS Homes. JMS would then build two new single - family homes. The zoning ordinance requires a minimum 75 foot lot width. The lot is 60 feet in width requiring a 15 -foot lot width variance to allow the sale of the lot. The lot conforms to the depth and area requirements. The lot was platted prior to the current width requirements, is legally nonconforming, however, cannot be sold without the benefit of a width variance. Continuing, Planner Aaker said all of the church property, with the exception of 3700 Fuller and 3713 Fuller, (the property that has already received a width variance), is dedicated to a proof - of- parking agreement filed as'a condition of variances granted for an expansion of the Church that occurred in 1983. A parking lot plan was attached to the 1983 agreement providing an ultimate build -out plan of the south parking lot over two lots east of the parking lot including the subject vacant lot. The proof -of- parking plan would be implemented in the event that the City Manager and City Planner determine that additional parking spaces would be required for the Church use. The lot at 3717 Fuller is encumbered by the 1983 parking agreement and may not be sold without a lot width variance and an amendment to the Church's Conditional Use permit to include a re- assessment of the parking needs of the Church and revised proof -of- parking plan. Planner Aaker noted that SRF Consulting Group, Inc. has submitted a parking study dated November 22, 2011 and revision dated January 16, 2012. The parking study includes a new proof -of- parking plan that would rebuild the south parking lot to provide 86 stalls in a new south lot build -out and include the 46 existing stalls in the north lot for a total of 132 parking stalls. The ordinance requires parking must be provided for one third the maximum seating capacity for the largest place of assembly. The Church use requires a minimum of 131 parking stalls. The sanctuary is the largest place of assembly providing capacity for 393 persons. The build -out plan provides 132 parking stalls and conforms to the required setbacks. It should be noted that the seating capacity of the Church was reduced from 470 to 393 persons as part of a 1990 interior renovation. Page 2 of 10 SRF Consulting Group has indicated the average weekly parking demand is approximately 73 stalls with 91 stalls currently provided in the north and south lots combined. It isn't anticipated that the south lot will need any improvement in the near future given current lower demand and reduced attendance as indicated in the SRF study. No additional parking has been needed over the last 29 years since the 1983 agreement was put in place. Exercising the current parking agreement has never been considered. Planner Aaker concluded that staff recommends that the City Council approve the Conditional Use Permit to modify the 1983 proof -of- parking agreement. Approval is based on the following findings: 1. The proposal meets the Conditional Use Permit conditions per Section 850.04 Subd.S.E, of the Edina Zoning Ordinance. 2. The proposal meets all applicable Zoning Ordinance requirements. 3. The revised proof of parking plan allows the release of 3717 Fuller Street from the 1983 proof of parking agreement allowing the Church opportunity for alternative options for use of the property. Approval is also subject to the following condition: 1. Recording of a revised proof -of- parking agreement with attached parking plan by SRF Consulting Group, Inc. dated: January 17, 2012, with Hennepin County. 2. Execution of a proof -of- parking agreement. Staff further recommends that variance approval is based on the following findings: 1) With the exception of the variance requested, the proposal would meet the required standards and ordinances for the R -1, Single Dwelling Unit District. 2) The proposal would meet the required standards for a variance, because: a. The proposed use of the property is reasonable; as it is consistent with the Comprehensive Guide Plan. b. The request is reasonable given that a home had occupied the lot in the past. c. The lot width of the subject property is consistent and similar to those near it. 3) The proposal is in harmony with the intent of the ordinance since it will allow replacement of a home that had occupied the lot in the past and was originally platted for that purpose. 4) The unique circumstances are that the property is not needed for future parking demands of the Church, however, may not be sold for redevelopment without the benefit of a lot width variance. Page 3 of 10 Approval is also subject to the following condition: Recording of a revised proof -of- parking agreement with attached parking plan by SRF Consulting Group, Inc. dated: January 17, 2012, with Hennepin County. Appearing for the Applicant Jeff Schoenwetter, JMS Custom Homes, Inc. and Jim Ravelle Applicant Comments Jeff Schoenwetter presented a power point presentation on his proposal. Jim Ravelle informed the Commission that 3721 Fuller Street was no longer a day care; it was rented by a teacher, adding there is no issue with parking for that property. Public Comment Wendy Brockman, 3624 Fuller Street told the Commission that she is worried about storm water fun -off and the impact these new houses would have on the environment. Director Teague assured Ms. Brockman that the Engineering Department would review all water run -off related issues. Motion Commissioner Carpenter moved to close the public hearing. Commissioner Platteter seconded the motion. All voted aye; motion carried. Further Comments Commissioner Forrest said she was familiar with the area and had observed that traffic in the immediate area has increased. Forrest asked if it was feasible to require an informal traffic study or site circulation study of the church campus when /if it becomes apparent that the Proof of Parking needs to be implemented. Chair Grabiel asked what the City would require if the Proof of Parking Agreement was triggered. Planner Teague responded that if the Proof of Parking was implemented that would trigger a Conditional Use Permit (parking lot expansion) process and traffic, parking and circulation would need to be included in their application submittal. Page 4 of 10 Motion Commissioner Carpenter moved to recommend Conditional Use and Variance approval based on staff findings and subject to staff conditions noting the request was consistent with recent development. Commissioner Platteter seconded the motion. All voted aye; motion carried. VII. REPORTS /RECOMMENDATIONS • Expansion of the TIF District Planner Teague ex lained that staff was directed to investigat he process necessary to expand the Centenni Lakes Tax Increment Financing (TIF) P oject Area. The purpose of this request was to enable tN City to expand the area in whic the City could expend funds from the Centennial Lakes TIF Di rict. As part of the process, the Planri'ng Commission is r quired to pass a resolution stating that the expansion of the TIF Project Area in complianc ith the Comprehensive Plan. To give an example if the Centennial Lakes TIF istrict Pro' ct Area was expanded the monies from the original Centennial Lakes TIF could be pent o items associated with the GrandView District. Concluding Teague said at this time the P nning Commission needs to make the determination and adopt a resolution finding that the Ian or the expansion of the Centennial Lakes TIF Project Area conforms to the general lans fo the development and redevelopment of the City, is compatible with the Redevelop nt Plan for ast Edina and is not in conflict with the Comprehensive Plan. Planner Teague introduced J94sica Cook from Ehlers &, Associates to further speak on the issue. Jessica Cook addressed t Commission and explained i 1988 a TIF District was created for Centennial Lakes and si ce that time the laws regulating Districts have changed. Cook said the TIF District for Ce tennial Lakes expires in 2014. Cook a plained that at this time the City has the opportunit of making those resources available to a roader area within the city. Discussion Commission r Fischer commented that in a sense this creates a TIF district within the district; however, i only expands the project area; not the TIF district. Page 5 of 10 o� a 0 �J � �o PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT Originator Meeting Date Agenda # Kris Aaker January 25, 2012 2012.0001.12a Assistant Planner INFORMATION & BACKGROUND Background Information St. Peter's Lutheran Church is requesting a 15 -foot lot width variance to build on their vacant property located at 3717 Fuller Street. (See site location on pages Al —A4.) This site (3717 Fuller) is currently encumbered by a proof -of- parking plan that was required for a parking stall Variance granted to St. Peter's in 1983. (See 1983 proof -of- parking plan on page A44.) A revised Conditional Use Permit is also required to change the proof -of- parking plan. (See applicant narrative and plans on pages A5 —A20.) The Church campus consists 'of property both north and south of Fuller Street between France and Drew Avenue. The site includes the church, a parking lot east of the church, two platted lots east of the parking lot at 3700 and 3704 Fuller Street, and property south of Fuller inculding a south parking lot, and three platted lots east of the south parking lot at 3713, 3717 and 3721 Fuller Street. (See page A4.) In August of 2011, the Church recieved a 15 -foot lot width variance for 3713 Fuller Street. (A vacant lot east of the subject 3717 Fuller lot.) The purpose of the current request is to create another lot in which the Church intends to sell to JMS Homes. JMS would then build two new single - family homes. The zoning ordinance requires a minimum 75 foot lot width. The lot is 60 feet in width requiring a 15 -foot lot width variance to allow the sale of the lot. The lot conforms to the depth and area requirements. The lot was platted prior to the current width requirements, is legally nonconforming, however, cannot be sold without the benefit of 'a width variance. All of the church property, with the exception of 3700 Fuller, (north of Fuller and west of Drew) and 3713 Fuller, (the property that has already received a width variance), is dedicated to a proof -of- parking agreement filed as a condition of variances granted for an expansion of the Church that occurred in 1983. A parking lot plan was attached to the 1983 agreement providing an ultimate build - out plan of the south parking lot over two lots east of the parking lot including the subject vacant lot. (See page A55.) The proof -of- parking plan would be implemented in the event that the City Manager and City Planner determine that additional parking spaces would be required for the Church use. The lot at 3717 Fuller is encumbered by the 1983 parking agreement and may not be sold without a lot width variance and an amendment to the Church's Conditional Use permit to include a re- assessment of the parking needs of the Church and revised proof -of- parking plan. SRF Consulting Group, Inc. has submitted a parking study dated November 22, 2011 and revision dated January 16, 2012. (See pages A21 —A44.) The parking study includes a new proof -of- parking plan that would rebuild the south parking lot to provide 86 stalls in a new south lot build -out and include the 46 existing stalls in the north lot for a total of 132 parking stalls. The ordinance requires parking must be provided for one third the maximum seating capacity for the largest place of assembly. The Church use requires a minimum of 131 parking stalls. The sanctuary is the largest place of assembly providing capacity for 393 persons. The build -out plan provides 132 parking stalls and conforms to the required setbacks. It should be noted that the seating capacity of the Church was reduced from 470 to 393 persons as part of a 1990 interior renovation. The number of parking stalls required by ordinance reflects the capacity decrease by a reduction in parking required from 156, (as required in 1983), to 131 stalls. SRF Consulting Group has indicated the average weekly parking demand is approximately 73 stalls with 91 stalls currently provided in the north and south lots combined. It isn't anticipated that the south lot will need any improvement in the near future given current lower demand and reduced attendance as indicated in the SRF study. No additional parking has been needed over the last 29 years since the 1983 agreement was put in place. Exercising the current parking agreement has never been considered. Surrounding Land Uses Northerly: Gas Station; zoned PCD -4 and guided NC neighborhood Commercial, Single- family homes; zoned and guided low - density residential. Easterly: Single- family homes; zoned and guided low- density residential. Southerly: Church parking lot, zoned and guided low- density residential. Westerly: Condominiums; zoned PRD -3 and guided medium density residential FA Existing Site Features The existing site contains St. Peter's Church, two parking lots and five platted single dwelling unit lots. Planning Guide Plan designation: Zoning: Parking Public /Semi - public R -1, Single- dwelling district The parking calculations are based on the capacity of the largest place of assembly. Parking spaces equal to one -third the maximum seating capacity of the largest place of assembly requires the church to providel31 stalls. The proof -of- parking plan illustrates a build -out of 132 stalls that could be accomplished by expanding the south parking lot over one vacant lot east of the south parking lot at 3721 Fuller Street. The proposed proof -of- parking plan does not require improvements on the lot in question at 3717 Fuller Street. The Church can accomplish the parking required by ordinance without having to use the subject lot. Any modification to the parking agreement is an amendment to the St. Peter's Conditional Use Permit. Conditional Use Permit Per Section 850.04 Subd. 5.E, the City Council shall not grant a Conditional Use Permit unless it finds that the establishment, maintenance and operation of the use: 1. Does not have an undue adverse impact on governmental facilities, utilities, services or existing or proposed improvements; The proposal will not change the existing conditions of the Church parking lots. The revised proof -of- parking demonstrates a conforming plan if needed in the future. 2. Will generate traffic within the capacity of the streets serving the property; The proposal will not generate additional traffic. The parking regulation is generated by the maximum capacity of the largest place of assembly which is not changing with this plan. The proof -of- parking plan would provide the required parking for the largest place of assembly in the event that additional parking would be necessary. 3. Does not have an undue adverse impact on the public health, safety or welfare; Again there would be minimal impact, as the 'use of the property will not change with the exception of new homes south of Fuller Street. 4. Will not impede the normal and orderly development and improvement of other property in the vicinity; The proposed modification to the parking plan will not impede development or improvements to surrounding property. The plan will allow for new home construction adjacent to other single family homes. 5. Conforms to the applicable restrictions and special conditions of the district in which it is located as imposed by this Section; and The proof -of- parking plan would provide the required number of parking stalls without the need to use property at 3717 Fuller. The proposed new home at 3717 Fuller would conform to all applicable zoning ordinance requirements. 6. Is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. A Church is a conditionally permitted use in the R -1 District, and therefore, consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. A single dwelling unit building as proposed is a permitted use in the R -1 zoning district Lot width variance request — Building Design The proposed home would be two stories with an attached three car garage. The plans would conform to the zoning ordinance requirements: (See pages A13— A20 and the compliance table on the following page.) 4 Compliance Table New Home * Variance Required Compliance Table Parking Plan City Standard Proposed Front — Average of adjacent homes 41.2 feet Side yard— 5 feet, plus height 5 feet west, 6 feet east Rear— 25 feet 38.6 feet Building Height 30 feet to mid - point, 35 feet to 23.75 mid - point, 30.6 Parking ridge feet to ridge Lot Coverage 25% 21.6% Lot Dimensions *(131spaces required) *132 spaces in proof - Minimum width 75 feet *60 feet Minimum depth 120 feet 165 * Variance Required Compliance Table Parking Plan *Proof of parking plan Primary Issues Is the proposed proof -of- parking agreement reasonable for this site? Yes. Staff believes the proposal is reasonable for the following reasons: 1. The proposal meets the Conditional Use Permit findings. As demonstrated on pages 3-4 of this report, the six findings for a Conditional Use Permit would be met. City Standard Proposed Street setback 20 feet 20 feet, proof of parking south lot Interior lot setback 10 feet 10 feet, proof of parking south lot Parking 1/3 rd the max. capacity of the 91 existing parking largest place of assembly spaces *(131spaces required) *132 spaces in proof - of- parking north and south lot *Proof of parking plan Primary Issues Is the proposed proof -of- parking agreement reasonable for this site? Yes. Staff believes the proposal is reasonable for the following reasons: 1. The proposal meets the Conditional Use Permit findings. As demonstrated on pages 3-4 of this report, the six findings for a Conditional Use Permit would be met. 2. The proposal meets all minimum Zoning Ordinance standards with the proof -of- parking agreement in place. All setback requirements would be met. Is the proposed development reasonable for this site? Yes. Staff believes the proposal is reasonable for four reasons: The proposed new home is permitted in the R -1, Single Dwelling Unit Zoning District. 2. The lot is appropriate in width given adjacent lot widths and lot configurations within the neighborhood. 3. The home demonstrated would conform to the ordinance requirements. Is the proposed 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 lot was developed with single family home previously. It has been demonstrated that a new home may be built within the current standards required by the city. The practical difficulty is that the width requirement for lots has changed since the time when the lot was subdivided. 2) There are circumstances that are unique to the property, not common to every similarly zoned property, and that are not self - created? 0 Yes. The lot was platted prior to the Church's ownership and at a time when 60 -foot lot widths were acceptable. Lots within the surrounding neighborhood provide similar lot widths and do not require a variance for construction. The variances would allow construction on the property with a new conforming single family home similar to homes nearby. 3) Will the variance alter the essential character of the neighborhood? No. The proposed improvements would not alter the essential character of the neighborhood. The modification to the proof -of- parking plan and the lot width variance will allow the opportunity for a home to be built on an existing platted lot consistent with the other single dwelling units within the neighborhood. The sale of the lot will not affect the status of the Church property or ability in the future to provide required parking. Staff Recommendation Conditional Use Permit Recommend that the City Council approve the Conditional Use Permit to modify the 1983 proof -of- parking agreement. Approval is based on the following findings: The proposal meets the Conditional Use Permit conditions per Section 850.04 Subd.5.E, of the Edina Zoning Ordinance. 2. The proposal meets all applicable Zoning Ordinance requirements. 3. The revised proof of parking plan allows the release of 3717 Fuller Street from the 1983 proof of parking agreement allowing the Church opportunity for alternative options for use of the property. Approval is subject to the following condition: 1. Recording of a revised proof -of- parking agreement with attached parking plan by SRF Consulting Group, Inc. dated: January 17, 2012, with Hennepin County. 2. Execution of a proof -of- parking agreement. Staff Recommendation lot width variance Recommend that variance approval is based on the following findings: 7 1) With the exception of the variance requested, the proposal would meet the required standards and ordinances for the R -1, Single Dwelling Unit District. 2) The proposal would meet the required standards for a variance, because: a. The proposed use of the property is reasonable; as it is consistent with the Comprehensive Guide Plan. b. The request is reasonable given that a home had occupied the lot in the past. c. The lot width of the subject property is consistent and similar to those near it. 3) The proposal is in harmony with the intent of the ordinance since it will allow replacement of a home that had occupied the lot in the past and was originally platted for that purpose. 4) The unique circumstances are that the property is not needed for future parking demands of the Church, however, may not be sold for redevelopment without the benefit of a lot width variance. Approval is subject to the following condition: Recording of a revised proof -of- parking agreement with attached parking plan by SRF Consulting Group, Inc. dated: January 17, 2012, with Hennepin County. Deadline for a city decision: February 20, 2012 ya City of Edina s . rC- PID:2002824220039 ^ 5421 France Ave S . Edina, MN 55410 Legend House Number Labels Streat Name L.W. Ciq Limits Creeks ElLai. Names Lakes Parks Parcels '2000. Aerial Photo PID:2002824220039 _ 5421 France Ave S . ' Edina, MN 55410 4* 1ORRA -7-10= City of Edina — Conditional Use Permit Application Explanation of Request St. Peter's Evangelical Lutheran Church December 22, 2011 The City of Edina (the City) and St. Peter's Evangelical Lutheran Church (St. Peter's or the Church) entered in an agreement dated May 22, 1983 (the Agreement) in which the City granted certain variances, including a variance to allow St. Peter's to maintain 102 parking spaces, a variance of 54 spaces from the number required by City ordinances. All property then owned by St. Peter's was subject to the Agreement, and the Agreement provides a parking plan for additional spaces, if and when needed. St. Peter's is contemplating the sale of one parcel of its property subject to the Agreement (3717 Fuller Street) to a third -party developer. However, the Agreement provides that the Church "shall not sell, convey, transfer, mortgage or encumber, in any way or by any means, less than all the Property, in its entirety, at one time and to one person, without receiving in each instance the prior written consent of City..." St. Peter's believes retaining 3717 Fuller Street is not necessary for its present and future parking needs, and through this application is requesting that this parcel be released from the terms and conditions of the Agreement. To support this request, St. Peter's retained SRF Consulting Group, Inc. (SRF) to document the existing and anticipated future parking demand of the Church and identify whether this demand can be accommodated by its existing parking supply. SRF's report accompanies this application. St. Peter's request to release 3717 Fuller Street from the Agreement is based on the following: • The Church's off - street parking lot space has not changed since 1983 and has been adequate to support its worship attendance and other activities since then, including in 1989 when the weekly worship attendance average was two and one -half times the current weekly average. • The two existing off - street parking lots are currently striped to accommodate 91 vehicles. This total could be increased to the 102 spaces per the Agreement by re- striping. • St. Peter's 91 current off - street parking spaces exceed the current zoning requirement of 77 spaces (by variance), the current average weekly peak demand of 73 spaces (during the one weekend worship service), and the 85`h percentile weekly peak demand of 82 spaces. • 120 on- street spaces exist within one block of the Church. These spaces are adequate to accommodate potential parking demand during higher attendance services. • The Church's worship sanctuary is limited in its seating (approximately 255 persons). Increasing church attendance would be accommodated through additional worship services at different times, further easing parking requirements. E D�PARTf�►CNT PLAN it DEC 2 2 2011 413� C; I I ()i- L-L NA The Church has no further plans to sell additional property and specifically will retain 3721 Fuller Street for future off - street parking expansion. St. Peter's agrees with SRF's conclusion that the release of 3717 Fuller Street from the terms and conditions of the Agreement will not have an adverse impact on the City or neighborhood adjacent to the Church. St. Peter's has prepared a preliminary redesign of its east parking lot, as referred to in SRF's report. This redesign would add five spaces to the overall parking capacity of the Church. Construction of this redesign is dependent upon fundraising efforts, and is expected to commence within the next two years. This application request addresses only the release of 3717 Fuller Street from the terms and conditions of the Agreement. Any further considerations regarding this property will be addressed through additional variance requests, if needed. p Oy1VI-S Xf ti AC The proposed variance will: 1. Relive practical difficulties in complying with the zoning ordinance and that the use is reasonable. This application is required due to lot width being less than 75'. Before any building permit is issued on any lots less than 75' a variance must be issued. Alternatively, had there been a prior house on this lot the size would have been grandfathered and a traditional 'over the counter' application would be the correct path, just like so many other sites. 2. Correct extraordinary circumstances applicable to this property but not applicable to other property in the vicinity or zoning district. The scope of work contemplated is consistent with the surrounding neighborhood and virtually identical in scope to dozens of other new construction projects that have occurred over the last few years within Edina. 3. Be in harmony with the general purposes and intent of the zoning ordinance. This project is absolutely consistent with the surrounding residential single - family uses in this neighborhood. This project is consistent in both size of land and size of structure. 4. Not alter the essential Character of the neighborhood. This project is consistent with the neighborhood and does not in any way alter the integrity of the community. WOO Q� �c titi 10�� GSM o &I 161 NI ENGINEERS P LAIN E RS DESIGNERS Consulting Group, Inc. SRF No. 7603 MEMORANDUM TO: Cary Teague City Planner, City of Edina FROM: Nicholas Erpelding, P.E., PTOE DATE: January 16, 2012 SUBJECT: ST. PETER'S CUP APPLICATION/PARKING STUDY RESPONSE TO JANUARY 11, 2012 COMMENTS Cary, In response to your comments on the St. Peter's Conditional Use Permit (CUP) application (received via email by St. Peter's representatives on January 11, 2012), we offer the following clarifications /responses: 1. The proof -of- parking plan does not show the code required parking stalls of 131 as indicated in the parking study. The previous plan that was reviewed as part of the variance in 1983 was 156 stalls. We are not sure why it is less now, but we are guessing that the seating capacity of the sanctuary has changed since 1983? In any event, the proof -of- parking plan must be revised to show at least 131 stalls. You may wish to create a plan to match the 156 stalls required in 1983. That would demonstrate that the church could provide the number of stalls necessary by City Code in 1983 in the original variance. The parking study done by SRF provides the proposed justification to not require the proof -of- parking plan to be constructed at this time. In regards to why parking requirements have decreased since the 1983 variance agreement, St. Peter's representatives indicate that renovations were completed in the late 1990s that reduced the seating capacity of the sanctuary by approximately 75 persons. On the issue of a 156 -stall proof of parking plan: such a plan was included in the parking study completed by SRF as part of the CUP application. The plan was included on the last page of the report, in Appendix as an exhibit in the variance agreement. www.srfconsulting.conn One Carlson Parkway North, Suite 150 1 Minneapolis, MN 55447 -4443 1 763.475.0010 Fax: 763.475.2429 An Equal Opportunity Employer Cary Teague - 2 January 16, 2012 SRF has prepared a proof of parking plan that shows how the 131 -stall parking requirement could be met, if needed. The plan (attached) meets all current setback requirements. The 131- . stall count is able to be met by expanding the south parking lot to the east onto 3721 Fuller :Street, inthe same. way that the 1983 156 7stall proof of parking plan showed'use of both 3721 :and 3717 Fuller Street. No modifications to the'north parking lot are required; Since the 131 -stall proof of parking plan confirms that 3717 Fuller Street is not required to provide land area for the 131 -stall proof of parking plan, the requirement from the 1983 variance agreement that this parcel be held in reserve can be eliminated without adverse impacts to the City or adjacent neighborhood, following the reasoning from the November 22, 2011 parking study. 2. The plan shows an addition to the church. That should be removed so not to add any confusion that it is part of the proof -of- parking plan. Comment noted. No changes to the church: site are proposed as part of this CUP application.. Specifically, the addition to the church shown on the site plan (Figure 6) in the parking study is a potential future addition not being proposed at this time.. The Future Conditions section of the parking study, where the site plan (Figure 6) is located, was included only to provide a forward- looking view for the St. Peter's site for planning purposes. None of the modifications to the site (building or parking) are being proposed as part of this CUP application. The primary.. conclusion from the parking study that the existing parking supply is adequate to serve the existing site remains valid. 3. The access point on to Drew Avenue would not be allowed per our city Engineer. This was suggested by staff as an arrangement that would not be' permitted several months ago. That access point.should be removed. Comment noted. The response to this comment is similar to the response to Comment 2. No changes to the church site are proposed as part of this CUP application. Specifically, the modifications to the north parking lot shown on the site plan (Figure 6) in the parking study are potential future modifications not being proposed at this time. 4. There is.no setback shown for the parking along the north lot line. A 10 -foot setback is required. Should the lot ever be reconfigured, that 10 -foot area would -need to provide screening by landscaping and /or fencing. Comment noted. Again, the response to this comment is similar to the responses to Comments 2 and 3. The modifications to the north parking lot shown on the site plan (Figure 6) in the parking study are potential future modifications not being proposed as part of this CUP application. Cary Teague - 3 - January 16, 2012 In summary a revised parking plan must be submitted to include the following: • A minimum of 131 stalls. You may wish to submit a plan that shows 156 stalls as that was the requirement and what is shown on the existing proof of parking plan. • A 10 -foot setback for the parking lot on the north lot line, and a 20 -foot setback for the parking lot on the south lot line. • No access onto Drew Avenue. • Remove the addition to the church. When /if the church would like to make actual changes to the existing parking lot on the church site, another amendment to the CUP would be required at that time to look at access points, landscaping /screening, circulation and setbacks etc... A proof of parking plan has been prepared and is attached to this memo. The plan shows how 131 stalls can be accommodated on site, if and when necessary. As noted in the parking study, the existing parking configuration is acceptable — accordingly no changes to the configuration of the parking lots are proposed. The proof of parking plan is rather a worst case look at how parking could be reconfigured if necessary. The proof of parking plan follows all applicable setback requirements where modifications to existing parking are proposed. Specifically, 10 -foot setbacks to side lots and a 20 -foot setback to the France Avenue and Fuller Street public rights -of -way are included, pursuant to current City Zoning Code requirements. The proof of parking plan assumes that the north parking lot will be preserved as is, with no modifications. St. Peter's representatives have acknowledged and understand that future modifications, if any, to the north parking lot will include all necessary setbacks and other requirements indicated above, and will comply with the requirements of the proof of parking plan submitted herein. A separate CUP will be prepared and submitted to address any future design considerations of the north parking lot. NE Attachments: 1. St. Peter's 131 -stall Proof of Parking Plan cc: Jim Ravell, St. Peter's Lutheran Church H.• IProjects176031PSIReport (Response to Comments Memo (2012- 01 -16). docx A-10 t� , , - .. I - - - -1 — I — . .. - L 91- p IF �- 4LL, .&1 .1 m. N- 11.11 Ih. 1-h-f O�Wty .1 m. ��M O-w .1 S�I;� 2Q. F—aa 14 P�q* 24 Ar sETWA., Y- No,& 5-M Q) . . ................ ..... ............................. 3ti. 171 S; TAI LLS I"I I Ld cr_ 200 , , I I T STALLS (&W X 1851 PAWNG C) E TIN ... ... 60 77 22 STALLS (13.5- X 2 r--v - k i .... ... ...... . ... ........................... ... _1 .11...0 A . ..... 0 ........ .... .......................... 3 o a, 26 81 W- It e. Ra 5 E4\ j, 52 42i7.u-1 LKLEGEND N8928' "W k M ... -I Found s.i 1. TOTAL REQUIRED PARKING WALLS 131. 2. PARIGNIG STALLS PROVIDED - 132. -I all Ouarler .1 - -Ih-I Strom s • 45 FROM DIISTING PARKING LOT. EAST OF BUILDING AND 85 FROM PROPOSED PARIUK LOT 4 R.9e 2. ftf—E. SOUTH Or FULLER STREET 3. STALL LENGTHS VARY DUE TO SITE CONSTRAINTS AND ARE PURSUANT TO EDINA CITY CODE MOO • Subd. 5AI- Full Sin Spoess P 11 1d;1,11 'I- .. FLon sin W opm oinmmimot to be 113 -Int wife by 18-16d Im" W-h. • Subd. !kr-• &MW OWh*IqB so C b9ninvurn v- 11 spots IonsW -" be d-rm*W by 1.5-160 for 10 sin F, - spots .1'. 8..i� o atfich allow the mdprhoO3 bumper to project -1 3 the lwmkrA of tne Pwkbm space Ca9 cl—I 40M4 obBb-tog othsr WW" SPOCIN; W v0dds CkCLO)t rh. 1-t E,,-!;.n ��;� 1 PROOF OF PARKING PLAN -131 STALLS St Peters Lutheran Church Parking Study Consulting Group, Inc. 5421 France Avenue S., Edina, Minnesota 0117603 Jim" 11. 2012 r -4 '47T GE 496,18 [an Vj. SbT28 AV_ am U) C9 s ICHURCHI I II 4—, n EIIS'TING AND Sc OOL I k:111 I" L T 0 TA L EXISTING PARKING STALLS - 45 1 TE N aj;4- Le -k OF I'm UZ= 011�. - ff'sn"Ai, L?I.,- cvam N89-28-4voly T 4 50 V DISTANCE FROIJ FUL ER jS89'28'49-El S "" .INTERSECTION TO DRIVEMY 1 1N.4 INSTANCE FROM SIDE • LOT ME TO DRIVEVJAY ,. t� , , - .. I - - - -1 — I — . .. - L 91- p IF �- 4LL, .&1 .1 m. N- 11.11 Ih. 1-h-f O�Wty .1 m. ��M O-w .1 S�I;� 2Q. F—aa 14 P�q* 24 Ar sETWA., Y- No,& 5-M Q) . . ................ ..... ............................. 3ti. 171 S; TAI LLS I"I I Ld cr_ 200 , , I I T STALLS (&W X 1851 PAWNG C) E TIN ... ... 60 77 22 STALLS (13.5- X 2 r--v - k i .... ... ...... . ... ........................... ... _1 .11...0 A . ..... 0 ........ .... .......................... 3 o a, 26 81 W- It e. Ra 5 E4\ j, 52 42i7.u-1 LKLEGEND N8928' "W k M ... -I Found s.i 1. TOTAL REQUIRED PARKING WALLS 131. 2. PARIGNIG STALLS PROVIDED - 132. -I all Ouarler .1 - -Ih-I Strom s • 45 FROM DIISTING PARKING LOT. EAST OF BUILDING AND 85 FROM PROPOSED PARIUK LOT 4 R.9e 2. ftf—E. SOUTH Or FULLER STREET 3. STALL LENGTHS VARY DUE TO SITE CONSTRAINTS AND ARE PURSUANT TO EDINA CITY CODE MOO • Subd. 5AI- Full Sin Spoess P 11 1d;1,11 'I- .. FLon sin W opm oinmmimot to be 113 -Int wife by 18-16d Im" W-h. • Subd. !kr-• &MW OWh*IqB so C b9ninvurn v- 11 spots IonsW -" be d-rm*W by 1.5-160 for 10 sin F, - spots .1'. 8..i� o atfich allow the mdprhoO3 bumper to project -1 3 the lwmkrA of tne Pwkbm space Ca9 cl—I 40M4 obBb-tog othsr WW" SPOCIN; W v0dds CkCLO)t rh. 1-t E,,-!;.n ��;� 1 PROOF OF PARKING PLAN -131 STALLS St Peters Lutheran Church Parking Study Consulting Group, Inc. 5421 France Avenue S., Edina, Minnesota 0117603 Jim" 11. 2012 b4f• PLA January 17, 2012 596. lSf A_ J EXISTING CHURCI AND SFHOOL W I l } � � , „��„ � , , I I 3 J: L a 71 v., s JFULLER -W . STAEErfzo.o 2 Ire qI — — — — — — F 7 6' J 7\ El N8r28*52'W i i rd ND E PW6 ro ...... __t .. ,� PARK ov6 :� Boundary and op ographic Survey (or ST PETER'S EVANGELICAL LUTHERAN CHURCH. .--.j to I _rs Rehder and Associates. Inc. Rehder and Associates. Inc. EXHIBIT B. r. .. .......... eil MIT J. 0" c LC of -Fw EX PtAu Located in e NW ige. of N Variance Exhibit for. Sec. 20, Twp. 28, Rge. 24 JMS CUSTOM HOMES, LLC House Address: 3717 Fuller Street, Edina, MN North line of the North half of the South half I r -�� r�7r -r-r r -of the North half of the NW Quarter of the NW f IJL. L. L_I1 I INL -L_ I S89 °28'50"E Quarter of Sec. 20, Twp. 28 N, Rge. 24 W ----- >----- > - - -IJ >----- > - - - - -> --->----->----->— R62 CL- 897.2 / mV EL- 6617 696.e Es. Bituminous Edge 695,4 Right of Woy line of Fuller Street :� _ - ' — -- -=�_ _ _aes` -AS4— ` as monumented and per Hennepin — County Half_Section Maps_. NNE 1e i- 1 N PlC 12 E.. Sand i 460' PROPOSED DRIVEWAY I I I 777� M t1.o�; I' p!e> ,1 7TH Uip 7-17 TT/0, � ° °o I I Ii 11 C n GARAGE / O "� 5.0 Porch -IN E.isl ug House N cont. 1 I e Tat 161. k 'j 19.o 901.4 1 i 1 7.0 �', �� - -J /1 �`0 3 Can,. `` \. a y;Z O I I V ,W ycb PROPOSED HOUSE, ° r 3 I,`t 1 3 4: t N {• 10.38' POURED BASEMENT 6'0 °,y Z a - -�I ::;! 11 .' I I I ° rn I 11 ry RAMBLER �'`foyN rill I I; `.I'.111,i F.F.E. - 903.87 ( 1l m o z 1 L F . E: 893.35 N y`o i �ZO°tED {1 410 O;;z• II . \`, 0 1 wo°t oNj, � -I e 03 z a ; 2' Cont- 3 v8 - CL IS I 6z 1�1 z o V, z y ° A m oz�' 11 I \ \wzo —6 -1 � ��/�71 1 A 1 - J I 1/$ V //1 Tq PPY��. : - • S89 °2852 ° 60. 0 .r • — • — 6'8 South line of the North half of the South half of the North holf of the NW OuDrier of the NW-J 1 Quarter of S . 20. Twp. 28 N, Rge. 24 W PARCEL DESCRIPTION: BUILDING COVERAGE CALCULATIONS Total Lot Area ....................19,902 sq. ft. Total lot area. less Fuller Slreel......... 56.102 s4 fl. Building Coverage ...............t2,140 sq. ft. Mouse .......... .........................31.988 sq. It. Porch ............... ................. .....3152 sq. ft. Total Coverage Percentage ±21.6X t Denotes Iron Monument Bearings shown are assumed GRAPHIC SCALE 0 10 20 40 (IN FEET) X 1 3470.001 (� Carlson McCain ENVIRONMENTAL • ENGINEERING • SURVEYING 248 Apollo Dr, Suite 100, Lino Lakes, NN 55014 Phone: 763 -489 -7900 Fax: 763 -489 -7959 e DROP GARAGE 1.0 FT. DOWN e PROPOSED BUILDING ELEVATIONS Lowest Floor Elevation: 893.35 Top of Foundation Elevation: 903.43 Garage Slab Elevation (at door): 902.03 First Floor Elevation: 903.87 k13 The East 60 feet of the West 393 feet of the North half of the South half of the North half of the Northwest Ouarter of the Northwest Quarter of Section 20, Township 28 North, Range 24 West of the Fourth Principal Meridian, Hennepin County, Minnesota. Torrens Certificate No. 503645 NOTES: 1. Parcel description and easements shown hereon ore those listed in Title Commitment No. HB- 20586A with on effective date of May 12, 2011 at 7:00 AM prepared by Custom Home Builders Title, LLC as issuing agent for Stewart Title Guaranty Company. 2. No record easement was provided'for Fuller Street crossing this parcel. 3. Front yard setback for this parcel was established by matching the front house setback from the adjacent house lying westerly of this property. I hereby certify to JINS Custom Homes, LLC that this survey. plan or report was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that I am a duly licensed land surveyor p �under the laws of the State of Minnesota. Dated this 11th day of January. 2012. PLANNING DE RTWENT Signed: Carlson McCain, Inc. JAN 17 2012 Revised: Move House 1113112 (;i?LrI,r n By Thomas R. Ballull, L.S. Rag. No. 40367 `/ ram -- ?012 DAIA SA ,S!LrVATION I RIGHT SIDE ELEVATION a rua w•.r� JAN 17 2012 G; 71 OF I -ED, a LEFT SIDE ELEVATION 7 rua wtire JAN 17 2012 -FFr ------- : I r --- LQUER LEVEL FLOOR PLAN - mm i II it l LLB`` [LOO II -FFr ------- : I r --- LQUER LEVEL FLOOR PLAN EM0 [Z MAIN LEVEL FLOOR PLAN .ria w•.rr � G j 1 EM0 [Z MAIN LEVEL FLOOR PLAN .ria w•.rr UPPER LEVEL FLOOR PLAN W AXI 01 IC7 r i ILI z BUILDNG SECTION a STAIR b ...•.. w•.re 3 BUILDING SECTION a BONUS AREA 6 r:ra w•.re mesa cown"M a xmet •u memr. mx..rrms.ar® •u mem mxn•as mc.wa mnoom.mxarwm mao®mm.rns .0 mr r.merms s.. rwa oee®.ara w®mromxammsorrm t raams� �� mws��oamar ®re iari'iosm a�o�o �o •uaro rmm rr..mies u oom ro mar rmn s x.ra.m ra nwucuo xnaww rnxaem ro a nxmn uw ra x.rio. owr .aoerm v1.� rru s xrdm rannnen�m ...o xrm.ewremaa r�u wcsxm�ir mm�mamo rrrna�waaaoiowrr. rsr va wain rrws rm a ro.r lair •rmam rx al®M to rocam m M1M rrxcwrr Of xrRr ®OIIR IRiO .rata .art Iao.Mf . xroroi ona. rA m na.�.o m.rnt Ro T fiNSxiLTlai m.emr.mn -rr. rx.ar r..aa raww.rrr� masm s.ar �m. rY1°in.er°a mm mas.ar ao o.rmoar v..a °wura.�x.a�av°V° rnrveae.ra -•w .e mm.mmwr.m.em ma r.0 emm�rerr.K ro.erar.rnw n ream a,ms ra xoro. mararr�sewa..•ra. ra rt srr.rrearos rrrm.m- nrw..amrw® RLar mllnC'ItK nrmxaa rrv.sow mrmr rxaanm raano er xmrm® waoo.e.. xu.w.0 V mxm•RnMD rw.•m�n 2110�11Lr� r•.r•�oam.n.rm nrnaa�.raa r• i�rwnoao m»:wu rrrrr•.a mma w.em naw xeuxa.r.rm yr r.rmr:.nra.nmix. w vra•ewwr ®mowxracmww rww na�xrr.•vam BUILDNG SECTION b EE —T S .r Q� com& comppmnom uore.s.ruu..nasews unmsa� mwreem u rs¢swamsaeas � meewee m m eer ® ®n aas nui° .m�O°inem uiomsnan°Am°°m® uiwsmw� mmerna corn et raver m mswv ic�r'.mwr�c sii o �� ure av�smeamewrnumrer momeGIW wrA i BUILDING SECTION "-" vv.re r•Ti.eer m411.iL�IYRl10 m�arAC rmrsaem muswc.w a rsCeea a nr e w ts. or m error ®a m sw.o metro turn rme . water errs rea m wootmroea mec tm eoretecxu eo.ewraun -ter rxar esruts rs rww awa..emmvro is wev�iemae.esse°° mow ®.svm ea ®m n srnse °testa .aire'�iae�i R�vYOleerelr •.•1L V CT.m0:14w.e.tZflwlr lUMAIAS ACMGTFW W WIWl tlereml6.wlr elm Nell 64L COtLwLlra. •OW relerNev NPw er! r eraW aelC • r0er•YCL MrWlbl OdCRr�. Ymwm•vsm.seemw.® noon tnetwcttaa nn�mnaoe isreaaeaaa rmr wens soar seseeoa wea rurms.ar.rd.wttw ven.m.aem rsn.mse FCLMA rG & mus•vva � na ®ra r waa vfiarmrPnar.�ieumre'i®s�sepQ� e.rorrnm•.n mrc oerwnw r q•oaes�.a RTYgeeeMlr vw°�uxtume�.we4°e ILI,� ENGINEER S PLANNERS D ESIGNERS Consulting Group, Inc. MEMORANDUM TO: Jim Ravell St. Peter's Lutheran Church FROM: Craig Vaughn, P.E., PTOE, Senior Associate Nicholas Erpelding, P.E., PTOE, Associate DATE: November 22, 2011 SUBJECT: ST. PETER'S LUTHERAN CHURCH PARKING STUDY INTRODUCTION SRF No. 0107603 As requested, we have completed a parking study for the St. Peter's Lutheran Church campus at 5421 France Avenue South in Edina. The purpose of this memo is to document the existing and anticipated future parking demand of the Church campus and identify whether this demand can be accommodated by the existing parking supply. BACKGROUND As stipulated in a 1983 agreement with the City of Edina as conditions of a zoning variance granted at the time, St. Peter's Church owns two parcels of land, set aside to provide extra parking if and when needed. St. Peter's is considering alternative options for these parcels (3717 and 3721 Fuller Street), including selling them to another party. Before allowing St. Peter's to end its agreement with the City, The City of Edina requested that St. Peter's document that the existing parking supply is adequate to accommodate current and anticipated future parking demand. It should be noted that St. Peter's also owns an adjacent parcel, 3713 Fuller Street, which is not restricted by the 1983 agreement. EXISTING CONDITIONS Parking Supply Parking for patrons of St. Peter's Lutheran Church is available both off - street and on- street. Two off -street lots are available. The "East Lot" is located immediately east of the church building north of Fuller Street. The capacity of this lot, based on observations made by SRF in October 2011, is 46 vehicles. The "South Lot," with a capacity of 45 vehicles, is located across Fuller Street from the church building. A� I www.srfconsulting.com One Carlson Parkway North, Suite 150 1 Minneapolis, MN 55447 -4443 1 763.475.0010 Fax: 763.475.2429 An Equal Opportunity Employer G. Jim Ravell St. Peter's Lutheran Church November 22, 2011 Page 2 On -street parking is generally permitted in the vicinity of the church. The one notable exception is immediately in front of the church building on Fuller Street, between France Avenue and the East Parking Lot's westerly driveway. On- Street parking stalls available within' a roughly one -block radius from the church (counts approximate) include: • France Avenue: 60 stalls between 54th and 55th Streets • Fuller Street: 30 stalls between the East Lot westerly driveway and Drew Avenue • Fuller Street: 60 stalls between Drew Avenue and Beard Avenue • Drew Avenue: 60 stalls between 54th and 55th Streets These parking facilities are illustrated in Figure 1. A detailed site plan of the existing St. Peter's off street lots is included as Figure 2. Parking Demand Parking demand for St. Peter's Lutheran church is generated via several church functions. These functions include Sunday church service, weekday daycare /preschool, and Wednesday night youth religious education. Information provided by St. Peter's indicates that peak parking demand for the site is experienced between 9:30 and 10:30 a.m. on Sundays, corresponding with the time of the one weekend service. Parking demand for the daycare /preschool and youth education functions is significantly less because the number of employees is very low and children attending are primarily dropped off and picked up. To gauge existing parking: demand for the site, parking counts were completed during Sunday church service on the following dates in October 2011: • Sunday October 9, 2011, 10:00 a.m. • Sunday October 16, 2011, 10:00 a.m. As a check, a count was also completed on a weekday during which daycare /preschool was in session: • Friday October 7, 2011, 10:30 a.m. The parking facilities were divided into on- street and off - street categories for the survey. On- Street spaces were counted block -by- block. The off -street spaces were grouped into the East lot and South lot. Table 'l provides the results of the parking count: ILI ;N I Existing Parking Plan Figure 1 Consulting Group, Inc. St. Peter's Lutheran Church Parking Study 5421 France Avenue S., Edina, Minnesota 0117603 October 2011 cxls�rvc ouaowc ..— - . .. I I � � •. I I � - �' I I I ikur+^4 �Y• I GiNAC! I I:lit+ l t1S Ik/G I—J 9 '28'47•E I: 596.18 ' n E RNG CHURC AND SCHOOL � � � .,. I .. U =�r I _�, � use •' � ,., r"_` ' y N89-28'49,-W, 1 596.21 I I FUL ER STREE 420 T .02 1•°� - - —i �� .,�;.: gee 5897849' r -;- - a — - -- - T j la. s� LIN cc I 1 Q b b 1 o 1 � n -t tiUSt 441-1-1-/4VAU -t-- -Y ._j o I CERFJW MM 449844- . a — R ILI r l>` 'I - - - "..zT r _ --- LLGLND IitlJ' N89 '28'52'W 420.02'.___.:__ _ a � I _ I Existing Site Plan Figure 2 St. Peter's Lutheran Church Parking Study 5421 France Avenue S., Edina, Minnesota 0117609 November 2011 Jim Ravell November 22, 2011 St. Peter's Lutheran Church Page 5 Table 1 Dorkinn mint Results Number of Spaces Occupied Parking Location Table 1 confirms that parking demand on Sunday during the church service greatly exceeds parking demand during the midweek school /daycare time period. Parking demand overall was very light, with peak utilization for all parking (on- street and off - street) measured at approximately 25 %. Another significant finding is that peak parking demand could be accommodated solely in the off -street East and South parking lots. The total number of parking spaces available in these two lots is 91; the maximum number of parked vehicles observed was 73, including vehicles parked on- street. In addition, it should be noted that vehicles parked on- street within a one -block radius may not be St. Peter's patrons, but rather local residents. Despite this caveat, the on- street demand was highest on Fuller Street, in the spaces nearest the church. Based on this information, the primary conclusion is that existing peak parking demand is currently accommodated by the existing parking supply. ITE Parking Demand Comparison To gauge whether the parking demand exhibited by St. Peter's is typical for a church, a comparison with data from the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Parking Generation Manual was completed. This manual provides average peak parking demand ratios for a variety of land uses. The various sites are compared using a number of independent variables. For churches, these variables include attendees, seats, and square footage, with attendees being the variable with the most data collected and highest correlation to peak parking demand. To compare the ITE average peak demand rate to St. Peter's, attendance data was requested from the church. On the two Sundays during which counts were conducted, the attendance figures for the worship service were 150 and 151 persons. Incorporating this data, Table 2 identifies the Spaces Available Fri 10/7/2011 10:30 AM Sun 10/9/2011 10:00 AM Sun 10/16/2011 10:00 AM East Lot 46 Closed for use as playground 31 34 South Lot 45 28 33 32 France Ave - 54th to Fuller 30 1 1 1 France Ave - Fuller to 55th 30 1 0 1 Drew Ave - 54th to Fuller 30 1 1 1 Drew Ave - Fuller to 55th 30 1 0 0 Fuller St - France Ave to East Lot Parking Prohibited _ _ _ Fuller St - East Lot to Drew Ave 30 0 7 4 Fuller St - Drew to Beard 60 1 0 0 0 Totals 301 1 32 73 73 Table 1 confirms that parking demand on Sunday during the church service greatly exceeds parking demand during the midweek school /daycare time period. Parking demand overall was very light, with peak utilization for all parking (on- street and off - street) measured at approximately 25 %. Another significant finding is that peak parking demand could be accommodated solely in the off -street East and South parking lots. The total number of parking spaces available in these two lots is 91; the maximum number of parked vehicles observed was 73, including vehicles parked on- street. In addition, it should be noted that vehicles parked on- street within a one -block radius may not be St. Peter's patrons, but rather local residents. Despite this caveat, the on- street demand was highest on Fuller Street, in the spaces nearest the church. Based on this information, the primary conclusion is that existing peak parking demand is currently accommodated by the existing parking supply. ITE Parking Demand Comparison To gauge whether the parking demand exhibited by St. Peter's is typical for a church, a comparison with data from the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Parking Generation Manual was completed. This manual provides average peak parking demand ratios for a variety of land uses. The various sites are compared using a number of independent variables. For churches, these variables include attendees, seats, and square footage, with attendees being the variable with the most data collected and highest correlation to peak parking demand. To compare the ITE average peak demand rate to St. Peter's, attendance data was requested from the church. On the two Sundays during which counts were conducted, the attendance figures for the worship service were 150 and 151 persons. Incorporating this data, Table 2 identifies the Jim Ravell November 22, 2011 St. Peter's Lutheran Church Page 6 ITE average peak parking demand rate and the anticipated number of spaces resulting from application of this rate to the attendance figures at St. Peter's. Table 2 iTF Avpranp Peak Parking Demand Generation Source: Institute of Transportation Engineers Parking Generation Manual 4th haition kzutu) & m. refer s Lmneraci i,uuic,i. Table 2 shows that St. Peter's actual peak parking demand (73 spaces) is slightly more than what might be expected using the ITE average peak parking demand rate for churches (68 spaces). In terms of parking rate per attendee, The ITE average peak parking demand rate of 0.45 spaces per attendee is slightly less than the rate calculated for St. Peter's of 0.48 spaces per attendee. Historical Parking Demand Review In order to assess whether the existing parking supply is likely to remain adequate into the future, a forecast of future attendance is needed. A typical method used to forecast future attendance is to review historical attendance trends. Historical attendance records were provided by St. Peter's for this task. Figure 3 shows the average weekly worship attendance for St. Peter's, by year, going back to year 1982. While average weekly attendance peaked in 1989 at 370 persons, it has been in decline since that time. As noted on Figure 3, average attendance has been dropping off by an average of 6 persons per week per year. The attendance figures of 150 and 151 in October are near the 2011 average of 146. To better understand the parking demand for St. Peter's, the week -to -week variation in parking was reviewed. Figure 4 shows weekly historical attendance data for year 2010 and year 2011 (through the end of October). Review of this data indicates that weekly attendance is very consistent, with 88% of worship services attended by less than 175 persons and 96% attended by less than 200. The peak attendance over the two year period was for Easter Sunday, 2011, with attendance at 246 persons. The 85th percentile attendance was 170 persons. Attendance of 188 persons, equivalent to a parking demand of 91 stalls at 0.48 stalls per attendee, is at the 89th percentile. To gauge whether peak attendance is trending up or down, a more detailed look was taken at Easter and Christmas Eve worship service attendance since the year 2000. Figure 5 shows the results of this analysis. Since 2000, peak attendance for Christmas Eve has been approximately 275 persons, though trending downward. For Easter, the peak attendance of 246 persons occurred in year 2011. Aal- Resulting ITE Average Peak ITE Average Peak St. Peter's Average. . g Parking Demand for a Church Land Use Parking Demand Rate Attendance of St. Peter's Average (2 Sundays) Attendance Church 1 0.45 spaces per attendee 151 persons 68 spaces Source: Institute of Transportation Engineers Parking Generation Manual 4th haition kzutu) & m. refer s Lmneraci i,uuic,i. Table 2 shows that St. Peter's actual peak parking demand (73 spaces) is slightly more than what might be expected using the ITE average peak parking demand rate for churches (68 spaces). In terms of parking rate per attendee, The ITE average peak parking demand rate of 0.45 spaces per attendee is slightly less than the rate calculated for St. Peter's of 0.48 spaces per attendee. Historical Parking Demand Review In order to assess whether the existing parking supply is likely to remain adequate into the future, a forecast of future attendance is needed. A typical method used to forecast future attendance is to review historical attendance trends. Historical attendance records were provided by St. Peter's for this task. Figure 3 shows the average weekly worship attendance for St. Peter's, by year, going back to year 1982. While average weekly attendance peaked in 1989 at 370 persons, it has been in decline since that time. As noted on Figure 3, average attendance has been dropping off by an average of 6 persons per week per year. The attendance figures of 150 and 151 in October are near the 2011 average of 146. To better understand the parking demand for St. Peter's, the week -to -week variation in parking was reviewed. Figure 4 shows weekly historical attendance data for year 2010 and year 2011 (through the end of October). Review of this data indicates that weekly attendance is very consistent, with 88% of worship services attended by less than 175 persons and 96% attended by less than 200. The peak attendance over the two year period was for Easter Sunday, 2011, with attendance at 246 persons. The 85th percentile attendance was 170 persons. Attendance of 188 persons, equivalent to a parking demand of 91 stalls at 0.48 stalls per attendee, is at the 89th percentile. To gauge whether peak attendance is trending up or down, a more detailed look was taken at Easter and Christmas Eve worship service attendance since the year 2000. Figure 5 shows the results of this analysis. Since 2000, peak attendance for Christmas Eve has been approximately 275 persons, though trending downward. For Easter, the peak attendance of 246 persons occurred in year 2011. Aal- 1982 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 L 1996 d 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 Figure 3. Average Worship Attendance 1982 -2011 Average Worship Attendance 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 ,has )'RF Consulting Group Printed: 11/9/2011 • Figure 4. Worship Attendance by Week (2010 - 2011) Worship Attendance 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 Jan 1 Jan 2 ■ 2010 Jan 3 2011 Jan 4 r Jan 5 Feb 1 Feb 2 Feb 3 Feb 4 Mar 1 Easter Mar 2 Mar 3 Mar 4 Apr 1 Apr 2 _ Apr 3 Apr 4 May 1 May 2 May 3 May 4 May 5 Jun 1 Jung - -- - -- - Jun 3 Ya, Jun 4 3 Jul 1 Jul 2 Ju13 Ju14 Ju15 Pastor Miller's Aug 1 100th Birthday _ Aug 2 Aug 3 Aug 4 Sep 1 Sep 2 Sep 3 _- Sep 4 Oct 1 Oct 2 - -- -T -- Oct 3 Oct 4 Oct 5 Nov 1 Nov 2 Nov 3 Nov 4 nw- Dec 1 Dec 2 Dec 3 Dec 4 A �6 AF Consulting Group Printed: 11/9/2011 v 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2007 2008 i 11*1] iOXII 2011 Figure 5. Easter /Christmas Eve Worship Attendance 2000 -2011 Worship Attendance 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 Aa � RF Consulting Group Printed: 11/9/2011 Jim Ravell November 22, 2011 St. Peter's Lutheran Church Page 10 The expected parking demand for a worship service attended by 246 people, at 0.48 spaces per attendee, is 119 spaces. As noted in Table 1 above, 301 spaces are available within a 1 -block radius including 91 off -street spaces. The conclusions that can be drawn from analysis of the historical attendance and existing parking count data are as follows: • Currently, average attendance for the Sunday worship service is 151 persons. Average parking demand is 73 spaces. 85th percentile demand is 82 spaces. The current off -street parking supply of 91 stalls exceeds both average demand and 85th percentile demand. • Average attendance has been trending downward since peaking in 1989. • Attendance is roughly constant throughout the year, with 11% of services (approximately 6 per year) exceeding 188 attendees, the number of attendees equivalent to a parking demand of 91 stalls. • The on -street parking supply of 297 stalls within a one -block radius is more than enough to accommodate the potential parking demand during higher attendance services. Therefore, the existing St. Peter's off -street parking lots are appropriately sized to accommodate typical parking demand currently and into the foreseeable future. FUTURE CONDITIONS St. Peter's is planning to improve their site. Plans include incorporation of accessible parking spaces in the South and East lots, reconstruction of the East lot to provide additional capacity, and creation of a designated on -street parking area along the north side of Fuller Street adjacent to the East lot. Figure 3 shows the proposed site plan for the improvements. The plan will reduce available parking in the South lot from 45 to 41 spaces, and increase available parking in the East lot from 46 to 55 spaces, resulting in a net increase in available off -street parking spaces from 91 to 96 spaces. Eleven marked on -street spaces along Fuller Street, adjacent to the East lot, would also be added. As the number of off - street parking spaces would increase under the proposed plan, the earlier conclusion that the St. Peter's off -street parking lot supply can accommodate parking demand into the foreseeable future still holds. At the observed rate of 0.48 parking stalls per attendee, the number of attendees that could be accommodated by the off -street lots increases to 198. Based on the attendance data provided, attendance of 198 persons falls in the 96th percentile; this level of attendance is exceed approximately twice per year. 0% FBI r I 9 — - -- — --- - -- ---- — — °— — I i 4 ' - I I WOODBURY PARK NEAR LAKE 51TE PLAN 4 I 3 2 i 1 i i RK cr I m) 0 1 1 3 S,Lm. d -m I 100 0 (n I — _I d7o i u'NN PFMOLITICN NOTE5 a CD c i �NUm j3 R 4ADDITION io TO MINNEAPOLIS o MGM s �e HARRIET Proposed Site Plan Figure 6 St. Peter's Lutheran Church Parking Study 5421 France Avenue S., Edina, Minnesota 0117003 November 2011 -- - EXISTING °'ARKINCT I n�r l,' OI,� IPG4<MG 1 51GLLS I,I — - -- — --- - -- ---- — — °— — I i 4 ' - I I WOODBURY PARK NEAR LAKE 51TE PLAN 4 I 3 2 i 1 i i RK cr I m) 0 1 1 3 S,Lm. d -m I 100 0 (n I — _I d7o i u'NN PFMOLITICN NOTE5 a CD c i �NUm j3 R 4ADDITION io TO MINNEAPOLIS o MGM s �e HARRIET Proposed Site Plan Figure 6 St. Peter's Lutheran Church Parking Study 5421 France Avenue S., Edina, Minnesota 0117003 November 2011 Jim Ravell St. Peter's Lutheran Church CITY PARKING REQUIREMENTS November 22, 2011 Page 12 The City of Edina requires a_ certain number of parking spaces be provided for each land use. In section 850.08(1)(1), the requirement for churches is spelled out as follows: Churches and Other Religious Institutions. Spaces equal in number to one -third the maximum seating capacity of the largest place of assembly, plus spaces for other church facilities which are used concurrently with the largest place of assembly, the number of which shall be determined by the Council in connection with the granting of a conditional use permit. The capacity of St. Peter's, assuming that the main assembly, an adjacent meeting room, and all classrooms are concurrently occupied, is 391 persons. By the language above, the minimum number of parking stalls required is equal to 131. Table 6 summarizes the City parking requirement. Table 6 Cifv Parkina Reauirements* Use Capacity Off - Street Parking Requirement Parking Required Parking Provided Church Main Assembly 255 persons 1/3 * capacity 131 spaces 91 spaces Meeting Room 36 persons Classrooms I 100 persons Total 1 391 persons 113 * capacity 131 spaces I 91 s aces *Does not reflect 1983 St. Peter's variance agreement. In 1983 St. Peter's entered into a variance agreement with the City of Edina. The agreement permitted St. Peter's to build 54 fewer stalls than the zoning code required number of parking stalls at the time (156) in exchange for setting aside land, including 3717 and 3721 Fuller Street, for future construction of additional parking if needed. Based on the existing (year 2011) zoning code parking requirement, as modified by the 1983 variance agreement, the minimum number of stalls that St. Peter's is required to have is 77 stalls; 131 spaces less 54 spaces. The current parking supply of 91 spaces exceeds this minimum requirement by 14 stalls. In the 28 years since initiation of the variance agreement, no additional parking has been constructed. Based on the historical attendance data in Figure 3, St. Peter's has been able to accommodate attendance of two and one -half times the current average under the existing parking configuration. , CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS Based on our review and analysis, the following conclusions are offered for your consideration: • The current combined capacity of the two St. Peter's off -street parking lots is 91 stalls. The proposed improvements to the lots would increase capacity to 96 stalls. X430 Jim Ravell November 22, 2011 St. Peter's Lutheran Church Page 13 • Peak parking demand for St. Peter's church occurs on Sunday mornings during the one weekend worship service (9:30 —10:30 a.m.).. Average attendance for this service is 146 persons. Attendance is fairly consistent week -to -week. • Average parking demand for the weekend worship service is 71 parking stalls. • Parking demand for 89% of the weekend worship services can be accommodated by the existing 91 parking stalls. 96% of the weekends (50 out of 52) can be accommodated by expanding the off -street parking supply, as proposed, to 96 stalls. • Peak parking demand (experienced on Easter Sunday) is estimated at 119 spaces. This demand can be accommodated through a combination of the off -street lots and on -street spaces within one block of the church (301 total spaces). • St. Peter's has been able to accommodate attendance of two and one -half times the current average under the existing parking configuration. • Based on our review and analysis, the existing 91 off -street stalls, combined with the 120 on- street stalls within one block of St. Peter's, are sufficient to accommodate parking demand without causing adverse impacts to the City or adjacent neighborhood. • Further, eliminating the 1983 variance agreement requirement that states that 3717 and 3721 Fuller Street be held in reserve for future parking lot construction will not cause adverse impacts to the City or adjacent neighborhood. H .•IProjects176031PSTeportU)RAFT St Peters Parking Study.docx h3 � APPENDIX 1983 DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF EDINA AND ST. PETER'S LUTHERAN CHURH Ma Z Z 3z- AGREEMENT (Conditions to Zoning Variance) THIS AGREEMENT, dated as of the 22nd day of May, 1983, between ST. PETER'S EVANGELICAL LUTHERAN CHURCH (also known as St. Peter's Lutheran Church) ( "Church "), a Minnesota religious corporation, and the CITY OF EDINA ( "City "), a Minnesota municipal corporation. WHEREAS, the Church operates a church and church school on certain real estate situated in the City of Edina, County of Hennepin, State of Minnesota, legally described on Exhibit A attached hereto and hereby made a part hereof (the "Property "); and WHEREAS, the Church proposes to construct a new school and additional parking lots (the "Improvements ") on the Property in accordance with certain plans and apecificiticns (the "Plans ") prepared by The Architectural Offices, as Architect, dated March 25, 1983, entitled Education /Church Facility, heretofore submitted by the Church to the City, a copy of which Plans is on file with the City and which Plans are incorporated herein by reference; and WHEREAS, in order to undertake the Improvements, certain variances in the City's ordinances are required; and WHEREAS, the City did, on September 30, 1982, in Case No. B -82 -10 grant certain variances (the "Variances ") because strict enforcement of the City ordinances would, in this case, cause undue. hardship because of the circumstances unique :o the °:operty, and the grant of such variances has been determined by the City to be in keeping GE ?a::.:cni l:i �ROPFRIY riVA 04 Ic- �3 E-11%' 3357C(12):TSE:031483 with the spirit and intent of the applicable ordinances, but subject to the execution, delivery and recording of this Agreement, and only upon the conditions and agreements hereinafter set out in this Agreement, which the City deems necessary to impose to insure compliance with the applicable City ordinances and to protect adjacent properties; and WHEREAS, the Church agrees to the granting of the variances subject to the conditions and agreements hereinafter set out, and is willing, and represents that it has the power and authority, to enter into this Agreement. NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the granting by the City of the Variances, and of the mutual covenants and agreements hereinafter contained, it is hereby agreed, by and between the City and the Church, as follows: 1. The foregoing recitals are hereby made a part hereof. 2. The City hereby confirms that it did, as above stated, grant the Variances; that one of the Variances is a temporary fifty -four (54) space parking variance whereby there need now be constructed on the Property only one hundred two (102) exposed parking spaces, subject, however, to the following terms and conditions: (a) If the City Manager and City Planner shall hereafter determine that additional parking spaces are required on.. Ih the Property, the Church will, at its sole cost and �} expense, construct such additional parking spaces as the City Planner and City Manager shall then require, up to a maximum of fifty -four (54) parking spaces, such additional parking spaces to be located as shown on the parking plan (the "Parking Plan ") attached hereto as Exhibit B and hereby made a part hereof. The City Planner and City n Manager need not require that all of the additional parking '✓ spaces be constructed at any one time, but may require additional parking spaces to be constructed from time to -2- A 3 n o / c i id 3357C(12) :TSG:031483 time as they deem them necessary until a maximum number of fifty -four (54) additional parking spaces have been constructed in the locations shown on the Parking Plan. If, at any time, less than all fifty -four (54) parking spaces is required to be built pursuant hereto, Church shall decide where to locate such spaces, but such location shall be in conformance with the Parking Plan. The additional parking spaces from time to time required by the City Manager and the City Planner shall be built in full compliance with the Parking Plan and the then applicable City ordinances; provided, however, that Church, in connection with any additional parking spaces then required to be constructed, may prepare and present to the City a new parking plan for review and approval by the City, and if approved by the City (which approval may be withheld for any reason or cause), the additional parking spaces then required to be constructed may then be constructed 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. (b) The City Manager and the City Planner shall give written notice to Church of their determination that additional parking spaces are then required, setting forth in said notice the number of spaces then required to be constructed, up to the maximum number of fifty -four (54). Church, within thirty (30) days after such notice is given, shall (i) give written notice to the City as to whether or not it will construct such additional parking spaces pursuant to the Plan or will submit a new plan as above allowed, or (ii) appeal such determination to the Board of Appeals and Adjustments of City`(the "Board "), by filing a written appeal pursuant to the then applicable zoning ordinances of City. In the event a new plan is to be submitted, it shall accompany the notice given to the City. If no notice is given to the City, or appeal filed within said 30 -day period, Church shall be deemed to have agreed to construct such additional spaces pursuant hereto and to the Parking Plan. Church, however, agrees, anything herein to the contrary notwithstanding, not to appeal any such determination on the grounds that construction of the additional parking will require removal of any homes or improvements now or hereafter existing, or unusual or extraordinary grading and /or landscaping, it being understood by Church that the Parking Plan provides for removal of two dwellings and a garage now existing on the Property and requires unusual landscaping and grading. (c) If Church appeals to the Board, as above provided, Church, the City Manager or City Planner may appeal the decision of -3- VS- 12):TSE:031483 the Board to the City Council by filing a written appeal pursuant to the then applicable zoning ordinances of City. If no such appeal is filed, the decision of the Board shall be final and conclusive on City and Church. If so appealed to the City Council, the decision of the City Council shall be final and conclusive on City and Church. Church agrees that the determination of the City Manager and City Planner shall be presumed to be correct and that Church shall have the burden of proof to rebut such presumption- d) ( Church shall commence construction of such additional and parking spaces as are then required the city said notice the City Planner within ninety (9 0) da y Manager unless is given by the City Planner and the City in which caChurch elect to submit a new parking plan, case such construction shall commence heiCity of the (90 days after approval or rejection by eaCi such proposed new plan, or (ii)) Church app determination to the Board, in which case constrictionof shall commence within ninety ( 90 ) the Board (if the Board decision is that aditional sp aces must be constructed) or within ninety ( 90 ) days decision of the City Council if the is appealed, as above allowed, to City Council, and if City Council decides that additional id spaces must constructed. The 90-day p material shortages delays due to weather, labor diunavoidable casualty, acts or unavailability of material, my, or other causes beyond the of God, the public ene reasonable control of Church, in which case the 90 -day period shall be extended by a period of time equal to any that no extension shall be given for such delays; provided, is given any such delay unless written notice of such delay to the City within ten (10) days after the commencement of the delay. Once commenced, the construction shall be soon completed with all due diligence as d a of whether thereafter. The City shall be the sole Judge of Church is using due diligence in completing such construction. 3, Church agrees that the Property is and shall be deemed a sin le site for purposes of application of the provisions of the zoning g Church further ordinances of City from- time to time adopted by City- understands and agrees that because of the Improvements and existing improvements on the Property, and because of the requirements of the 43y Q= 3357C(12):TSE:042783 zoning ordinances of City, as varied by the Variances, it is necessary that the entire Property not be used for any purposes other than school and church purposes, and be retained, owned, used and operated by one owner as one contiguous tract and one economic unit; provided, however, and it is understood and agreed by City and Church, that Parcels 2 and 4 on said Exhibit A are presently rented for residential uses, that Parcel 5 on said Exhibit A is presently being used for school purposes, and that any two of said three parcels may, from time to time, be rented by Church for residential uses when not used by Church for school and church purposes. Therefore, Church hereby agrees that it shall not use the Property for any purpose or use of any kind other than school and church uses, except, however, as otherwise provided in the immediately preceding sentence, and shall not sell, convey, transfer, mortgage or encumber, in any way or by any means, less than all of the Property, in its entirety, at one time and to one person, without receiving in each instance the prior written consent of City, which consent may be withheld for any reason or cause, and Church hereby expressly and unconditionally waives any and all provisions of applicable law which would otherwise, but for this waiver, allow Church to sell, convey, transfer, mortgage or encumber portions of the Property to different persons or at different times or without the prior written consent of City. 4. If any term, condition or provision of this Agreement, or the application thereof to any person or circumstance, shall, to any extent, be held 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 A 3 7 -5- 3357C(12):TSE:033083 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. Provided, however, the foregoing to the contrary notwithstanding, if, for any reason, any term, condition or provision hereof should be determined by the legal counsel for City, or by a court of competent jurisdiction, not to be fully binding upon and En Ily enforceable against any owner of the Property, then, City, at its option, may determine, by resolution of the City Council, that all of the Variances shall wholly cease and terminate and, if such determination be made, the Property shall then and thereafter be used and useable only in full compliance with all applicable ordinances of the City. 5. In the event that 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 notice thereof is given to 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 the right to: (a) Enter upon the Property with such personnel, equipment and materials as the City deems necessary for the purpose of performing the obligations of Church hereunder that it has failed or refused to perform, or, at the City's discretion, for the purpose of constructing some or all of the parking spaces shown on and pursuant to the Parking Plan, whether or not then required hereunder to be constructed, without liability or obligation of any kind to Church or any owner or occupant of the Property for trespass or damage to the Property, the Improvements or other property or improvements thereon or for loss of business or business interruption, or any other cause, all of which liability and obligation is hereby waived by Church, and if any person makes any claim against City for loss or damage to -6- Vi 3357C(12):TSE:033083 property or business due to such entry, Church agrees to hold City harmless from and indemni�easonablesattorneys' cost, damage or expense, including whether suit be brought or not, arising out of such fees, a Cit , upon demand of City, any such claim, and to pas to y reasonable loss, cost, damage or expense, including attorneys' fees, suffered or incurred by City, with interest at ten (10 %) percent per annum from the dates suffered or incurred by City until paid. Obtain enforcement of this Agreement by court order for (b) appropriate relief. mandatory injunction or other app P ld or deny any building permits, certificates of (c) Withhold connection permits and any other permits occupancy, utility and approvals, then or thereafter to be issued ancy of r all aoreany by the City for the construction or occup or im rovements part of the Improvements or other property P on the Property, until such failure or refusal ends and Church fully complies with its obligations hereunder. (d) Recover damages incurred by City as a result of such failure, refusal or violation. All of the rights and remedies available to City shall be usable and shall enforceable by the City separately or concurrently as the City determine, and the use of one right or remedy shall not waive or preclude the use of any one or more of the other rights or.remedies• Also, the failure to exercise, or delay in exercising, any right or remedy available to City in the event of a failure, refusal or violation by ising any of its Church, shall not preclude City from thereafter exerc rights or remedies for the same or a subsequent failure, refusal or Church agrees to pay to City any and all costs and expenses violation. incurred by City in enforcing this Agreement by the use of the rights and remedies above set out or by other rights, remedies or means available to the City at law or in equity, including reasonable attorneys' fees, all such costs and whether suit be brought or not, and with interest on 3357C(12):TSE:033083 expenses at the rate of ten (10 %) percent per annum from the dates incurred by the City until paid. Church also agrees to pay all costs of collection of any moneys due to City from Church pursuant hereto, and of such costs and expenses incurred in enforcing this Agreement, or any of City's rights hereunder, with interest thereon, again including reasonable attorneys' fees, and whether suit be brought or not, with interest at the rate of ten (10 %) percent per annum from the dates such costs of collection were incurred until paid. 6. All notices, reports or demands required or permitted to be given under this Agreement, including the determinations referred to in paragraph 2 hereof, 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 United 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 Attention: City Manager To Church: 5421 France Avenue South Edina, Minnesota 55410 Such addresses may be changed by,any party upon notice to the other party given as herein provided. 7. 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 -8- 49 3357C(12):TSE:033083 W be binding upon all present and future owners of the Property. 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. 8. The conditions herein contained may be released or relaxed in whole or in part, as to all or any part of the Property, and as to any building or structure now or hereafter located thereon, by the sole act of the City. Any such release or relaxation shall be effective only upon the recording of a resolution of the City Council describing the condition or conditions released or relaxed in the same office in which this instrument has been recorded. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have causd this Agreement to be executed the day and year first above written. ST. PETER'S EVANGELICAL LUTHERAN CHURCH By 4 a / Its And —J—Vw-a its / h i . :w a 10 YMK rb• CITY OF EDINA By Its Mayor And Its Manager -9- �t� �5. STATE OF MINNESOTA SS COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before e etthis 22nd Donald 0. t4aros , of May, 1983, by Ileen S. rgarose, and by Evangelical respectively) of St, Peter's Evang and the Chairman of Trustees a Minnesota Lutheran Church, (also known as St. Peter's Lutheran Church), half of said corporation religious corporation, on be 0-'44 r Notary Public M M DANIEL A. UTTER NOTARY PUBLIC — MINNESOTA HENNEPIN COUNTY STATE OF MINNESOTA ) My Commission Expires June 24,1988 SS WVVVVVVVVVV0AVVVVVVVVVVVWV0~VW • COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this 3rd of The g June, 1983 by C. Wayne Courtney and Kenneth Rosland the Mayor and al corporation, Mana er, respectively, of the City of Edina, a Minnesota municip g on behalf of said corporation. ri.r'= NOT/; &'I PUBLIC • h!I.NNESOTA o ar Public ''•�j -,�� ' {,�� c:�a:�s`.c. Cx�ires Sc,t. 15, 1584 Y / /j,jb!,•�:i ::tivvri•i V:�:wd�'S4: PLP�YIJ ' 1 l r rt ' ;-11TN� ✓�;,_� 11_ACE �Q j -2,3.� 1 l 3357C(12 ): TSE: 031483 EXHIBIT A (the "Property ") Parcel 1 - 5421 France Avenue: Lots 8, 9, 10, and 11, Block 3, and Lots 9 through 16 inclusive, et, Hennepin Cuunty, Block 4, Ivandale Park near Lake Harri Minnesota. Parcel 2 - 3704 West Fuller Street: Lots 12, 13, and 14, Block 3, Hennepin County, Minnesota. Ivandale Park near Lake Harriet, Parcel 3 - 542 5 France Avenue South: t 480 The West 240 feet of the thesNorth 1 /2toff the a North Northwest quarter 1/2 of the South 1/2 0 of the Northwest quarter lying East of the East line of France Avenue, as now laid out and traveled, in Section 20, ToH shipin8 North, Range 24 West of the Fourt�P�hecGovernmentisurvey County, Minnesota, all according to thereof. Parcel 4 - 3721 West Fuller Stl'eet: The East 60 feet of the of thetNotthfl /2 of the 1/2 of the South 1/2 of Northwest Quarter lying East of the East line of France Avenue as now laid out and tFourthdPrincipaloMertdian ,mHennepin North, Range 24 West of th e to the Government Survey County, Minnesota, all according thereof. Farcel 5 - 3717 West Fuller Street: The East 60 feet of the half of3theeNorthwestNquarterlofothehe South half of the N 28 North, Range 24 Northwest quarter in Section 20) To anShHenne pin County, West of the Fourth Principal Minnesota. At) 1 . tYI+LG •ry ". -. .• ..4•:.11. ::: c 3 �• 9 11' 1 �•1 C e rY 111, _` ��, '�•• � �, -`• `'{. 1. _�__ _ -•J °• 1 � i�,%%'- � - � _, 1 1-� - 1 -: ft.+ rte' oe \N Mee REPORURECOMMEN RATION To: MAYOR AND COUNCIL Agenda Item Item No. VI.B. From: Cary Teague, Community ® Action Development Director ❑ Discussion Information Date: March 6, 2012 Subject: PUBLIC HEARING — Rezoning from PCD -4 to PUD, 6996 France Avenue, FE 70, LLC, Ordinance No. 850 -A -38 and Resolution No. 2012 -39 Deadline May 1, 2012 for a City Decision: ACTION REQUESTED: Adopt Ordinance No. 850 -A -38 and Resolution No. 2012 -39 approving Final Rezoning from PCD-4, Planned Commercial District to PUD, Planned Unit Development District, and Final Development Plan to construct an 8,260 square foot retail /office building at 6996 France Avenue for FE 70, LLC. INFORMATION /BACKGROUND: FE 70, LLC is proposing to tear down the existing gas station at 6996 France Avenue and re- build' an 8,260 square foot office /retail building. The building would include a 3,000 square foot retail store (Vitamin Shop) and a 5,260 square foot financial office. To accommodate this proposed redevelopment, the following is requested: ➢ Final Rezoning from, PCD -4, Planned Commercial District to PUD, Planned Unit Development; A Zoning Ordinance Amendment that establishes the PUD, Zoning District; and ➢ Final Development Plan. The City Council approved Preliminary Rezoning from PCD -4, Planned Commercial District to PUD, Planned Unit Development, and Preliminary Development plan for this project on December 6, 2011. Planninq Commission Recommendation: On February 8, 2012, the Planning Commission unanimously recommended approval of the requested Final Rezoning from PCDA Planned Commercial District to PUD, Planned Unit Development District and Final Development Plan to construct an 8,260 square foot retail /office building at 6996 France Avenue for FE70, LLC; subject to the conditions in the Planning, Commission Staff Report, and added the following conditions: • Submit a photometric lighting plan that details illumination levels sufficient to support an active pedestrian movement along France Avenue and West 70th Street. • Snow will be removed from the site at the point where stored snow consumes one parking space; • Submit a revised site plan to indicate the location of the bicycle storage area that complies with City Code. • Submit an internal truck movement circulation plan. That plan would be subject to review by the City Engineer. • Revise the building plans to address the loss of articulation of the pedestrian entries from France & West 70th Street. • Submit more definitive color renderings of the proposed building including finishes. The color renderings must be revised to add the changes made to the pedestrian entries off the street. These conditions have been added to the attached resolution approving the project. Additionally, the applicant has submitted requested plans to address these conditions. (See attached.) These revised plans have been reviewed by staff and found to meet the requirements of the Planning Commission- Additionally, the building has shifted two feet to the west and one foot to the north in order to avoid the traffic signal on the corner. The revisions have been reviewed by- staff and found to be acceptable. The Ordinance has been amended to reflect these changes. ATTACHMENTS: • Revised Plans per the Planning Commission Recommendation • Ordinance 850 -A -38 • Resolution 2012 -39 • Revised Plans Date Stamped February 29, 2012 • Minutes from the February 8, 2012 Edina Planning Commission meeting • Minutes from the December 6, 2011, City Council Meeting • Planning Commission Staff Report, February 8, 2012 n taw .+Ale, . it r RIa\ \ ►I1 NWO \'I ml \ LWJ mgblwlwl ■ ■ 1 Edina, Minnesota Ad 4 too i - AMERITROE mine vo - �1 • --r �-� .. - ... __,.may ��Y� ...� '� � � I I ..7 � i� tt �.°��L{(,�•-'_ � ;'�+J owb1v1W1■ ■1 Edina, Minnesota E w. r Edina, Minnesota • _y mac. ;: ,x'`� „ ; . 4 oil 11 -n-T� of w-. O 0 cP 0 Ellin mmmrm= all l §Cliffll LL Il 10 0) 0) (01 A200 z ER51a0 o E S1M0 1RC[S I• COxpiCg \ \ / C C mTUwlals J I ENCE i" • - PRO. V �. Rs _ •W 15. � I n � ��;r Ea5TN0 I ' 1 PEOCS1M.x (vRB I �?' wxuEn I APRaI � I I 1 I _ I .-mxESErz `I aen PmcsTa A. alga vocTlAEx 7 � � AxP (IVPa SITE PLAN NOTES: I. umDale w[ m rc Ix eua.x .x>,DR rA¢ a cui0. >_ eEm ro .q.lmwE ow.as Im axcRnE save w.¢rr m .mrasm e.we..: a axn.n5 oacerrt awe • amEn wro� E+aEm E,Ic 9aLL tar[ .IRS rODi 1xx9lOr .. a1.O1ER NR wO M1C1 IOS'CYI m [plat¢,[ xaR B[ a rzD n . n woI Eswxsa swn. s ALL [.5mw Iawe am ro RE .DS.[(D mx aaCRIiE cwB .m anEE mlx.uExr m rxr .tan awRExa. uSEs awa .Ia ams .xR sacwA emml ap... m a rw rnT e. SfRIw.RDS +. SEYi SIRE Y . eO� aSR MR enxw M eA.x. SWa Wrt. R�III M aO a ixEalEw.o oaol suloens. oclwR ..o unErx m e< mxcarE .a clwa vaEss .wlm ElenRCC Rw an s,.InRx 'a nWe R PER _ . _ nu RDSR¢ESS evr/[S Ox ro rsa5 .Da ro ou1mE a eueno r.¢ fDPa ". ram Inas.OE xorm I � {s) caxcRErt srzPS EnTx s , I RETAIL SPACE #2 �ER,DxRR.R � � � lap. STDNE Q SITE LEGEND: COxtRETE .DE— LIKETS �, ClOx m.6TaRr.x1 WO 15 PEOESODAx all® PECEMAR CvRB H LuwaR -aA wn ITLL wllu. L' Pat a 3' mu[iE Ba[ RAUO (M.) rx TRUKREED mlcanC Iatx[n .0 Dnlrs (.P.) I � E �c RS' I T IIRip mIC11Ert APRW uAlpl CcsTRS '• CEAR rt N wlN wALA i owe n WEST 70TH STREET S ID A SCAR Y I[El o CC�L�UdG p DJR 577 wahinglm Am N Suite 8210 Minnppulii, ►iN SSA01 Po. (612) 676I700 Fos (612) 6762796 ALNT Ill PAt1E A - SONIC SU IW RIISSHFAgER 101 .NE! Imoxe Eelanum As lel.l+!uw^ J W N W <N U. u = g Z 2 rc Z CL F az w �EpIQRAR Wb�°'EWM[R r!v xr.: Iti .1x..1 .r .cauve. n WALM ASSORANC[/NNIROL GATE 651rz nn 1 M ixwelELL PrtaSEC+ TEAM DATA C -2 13 "• 11 I 6� el Iar I �Alk I = l I` 1 to CRY .clw Sruu� ruw+ M IswmxS uo a[v.m�rs v alias ., M PmPoII � P � ie TE�a sin ...sa iNR RW M RY�6 I gall I EIfMI ' A IY o...xe RAWK FRAM .• fpllCa,E wIM�R— :T'. 0. i1.1O11C 1 RuRD. O SEE .RCI.EECnmus s• SITE DATA: RETAIL SP #�CEE 1 CaBl0AE � I SVE _ RACKS 8: 1C Tm ffiOal - i0RaE 11t C R: E RO 4 R C I asaRs/' +�.mv.. S. r - : w te -C� _ u .o. _ MAREA _ 4.NE,J , — S.- I LIU PARKING DATA: 3. = a ea R RD. u� _ ACCCSStLC qurz �I I R ` SPaES rD. U.fl .DDnpx,E �Am m rt w ro ,e.mP Ea rt. w .tm wuw vRm Rmurtu . SR I I r .cc IE xAxDa.P Sxi1 ` �S,OxE Uj aw.xn fWRS Nmra[D . Y =_T e.e• !' N' BO 1lOSf1 m I � {s) caxcRErt srzPS EnTx s , I RETAIL SPACE #2 �ER,DxRR.R � � � lap. STDNE Q SITE LEGEND: COxtRETE .DE— LIKETS �, ClOx m.6TaRr.x1 WO 15 PEOESODAx all® PECEMAR CvRB H LuwaR -aA wn ITLL wllu. L' Pat a 3' mu[iE Ba[ RAUO (M.) rx TRUKREED mlcanC Iatx[n .0 Dnlrs (.P.) I � E �c RS' I T IIRip mIC11Ert APRW uAlpl CcsTRS '• CEAR rt N wlN wALA i owe n WEST 70TH STREET S ID A SCAR Y I[El o CC�L�UdG p DJR 577 wahinglm Am N Suite 8210 Minnppulii, ►iN SSA01 Po. (612) 676I700 Fos (612) 6762796 ALNT Ill PAt1E A - SONIC SU IW RIISSHFAgER 101 .NE! Imoxe Eelanum As lel.l+!uw^ J W N W <N U. u = g Z 2 rc Z CL F az w �EpIQRAR Wb�°'EWM[R r!v xr.: Iti .1x..1 .r .cauve. n WALM ASSORANC[/NNIROL GATE 651rz nn 1 M ixwelELL PrtaSEC+ TEAM DATA C -2 t` [ •warI,j \ 1 — 089.50 w Y•ro ; . .o w \ •v 1 Bp68! 8667] • ] I� . IIN �• ' 11 .r:�Il�'Y�III •!� • i' ■ ■ ■� �■ !i FPE 86P.84 RETAlL%PACE #1 =r� ■ ■� it ., �RETAIL SPACE #2. Aw GRADING NOTES: �. rvncxrs swu aort —. r,41 ranosro eu.aa�n a. rstsaH] .raa- srress 6x6 usm 6ac n, m [aaao COxIUnW Srxu aC[r M WKM a0rpa.! rlQ Or �. O<016 6x0 PBlxp, M AI -S,rt le6b.- p SOl . rCC01m61Q a0x M aC.110:1005 b M Lm /COIN,. R VAR OH CNL 61 (000)]!3 -„06 b 11o11H raOM lO 5140 O COx5,a61W. wxvrtw[xR to oraoaw Hm on ..o moon e, mb,0unpu fil6xOwP. SrQ /4,p1 uR51 [NOx. coxsln mcm wra6xca swu e[ raorao +, r. 6 CMRa6nW 10 a[tO . mrr d M rw[ tlax•O[ Hwu, Ib- 9. CCM14C,01 ,0 5® Nl aald Sa6om rMws l iNW[ wo Sa6 w/ awadm w,c01 l[,IVIMrr 5[N ,H. ,a suavlx0a ro von R,ICIIUa6 I1M,Ow rlmw ro sum or eex5lla<,.a. ,,. a6El ro GORCreT HNH uID a1pFt, wxlwl r011 9l eOaatL,41 a[eI.[HNS u0 ,is,oc aml.+oaaxs. ,>. �rovs46 race ro un mxslauc,cu an,s[ nrcewE 6�. ,! a[[rn ro sIR o¢cx rnlrtau s[c,on or mw[n wn]u 600noxu 6muw[xxe,s .. mx1.]a•.lw ,• [eoso. suasal wnxw ua wolosm s �,a6rox uua ,e • omx • wx c•wr6c,cx or ma sxo+xo nmrma edam. ,!. Paaa ro Sl6w1w COx5leunKx. M COM0Nn0a SxNi 0[ a6rOw5B.[ ro x!r[ SIAlO 1aI61 .Ia HOOM[e r0]Mfi um rmlwus ,uc elxx oneto. xo caxs,alnw a name ,— swu Ho. uv,l M mw,vac,oa xxs e¢[xw '•m�6 i �ow m unloxm�''�c oocwuas GRADING LEGEND: .. raa� eex�x. —,09— rNrOSrD [owlaw .la.a �or aafi E735�. ur[ o s,an s[w[e -- ITT, =A rE-- Q�l�erox Ho D DMR 333 Washiegsoe Ave. N $ iR 11211) Muura7•lu MN 55401 M 1612)676 -2700 F a (612) 6762796 ALLIANT EMMEEMM ll G L1 —A-WtM alrlE 1l0 wro]re�ux�a�ssau 61111A18R Z 3 IL J O cC J U t� cc 0 Ir U Q a v~° aWtl LL i i Z mo � N w x w�_r•rw O0l[ln lROaANe[ /mN]aOl mm mOE urt Eaolm IEY, MTl C -3 .L1t • :::,:. �:::;::: �x _ 6 151).1 1 Al ' ro tt Ho D DMR 333 Washiegsoe Ave. N $ iR 11211) Muura7•lu MN 55401 M 1612)676 -2700 F a (612) 6762796 ALLIANT EMMEEMM ll G L1 —A-WtM alrlE 1l0 wro]re�ux�a�ssau 61111A18R Z 3 IL J O cC J U t� cc 0 Ir U Q a v~° aWtl LL i i Z mo � N w x w�_r•rw O0l[ln lROaANe[ /mN]aOl mm mOE urt Eaolm IEY, MTl C -3 NN �x _ 6 Y s ,o ro Ho D DMR 333 Washiegsoe Ave. N $ iR 11211) Muura7•lu MN 55401 M 1612)676 -2700 F a (612) 6762796 ALLIANT EMMEEMM ll G L1 —A-WtM alrlE 1l0 wro]re�ux�a�ssau 61111A18R Z 3 IL J O cC J U t� cc 0 Ir U Q a v~° aWtl LL i i Z mo � N w x w�_r•rw O0l[ln lROaANe[ /mN]aOl mm mOE urt Eaolm IEY, MTl C -3 I 1I nom U/ TJ _ 0 1.as N i a,' (0INEV PTO ealeTM e' r SOA .4 aesl.0 Ric 667.20 INV B60.90( 90(rr) ' `Z O 1 I W 1 -- -1 - - -- 65 --- r- - - - - -- IUI 1 � I 11 L —YR, O UTILITY NOTES: Inuln cm a 1'— s1r1s a cm m cv.. rma. ro i r1YUr�le' a111fM •rID 6 rOrtGrL SOUwaN •1 41 rat i mnraav a Ia3rvleer roe Na rams rsloe w M sow ar mismcros Nita. mNaDaroe w ..� a� .�•,�,� r_ N• = 1a. 11IS<.mNw_1�_Nmae,.Ia,.�r<w�•a. s .1s Innm a6n mIr 71a vu.N. swa cow. m. rm a. tmN uo¢em m4r sulau4s a Ian+. mnav nrt ovs uu. 1(ew>:v -11ea se Nano r •DaIrC[ M •Nr m•Ilr area. a Ior. clam ragrt mwuD a may N •Drag q •v7 N•m Ddn. t, rmrot nravur 7vurc o>Nnu N o7wrNa mN rmD1 �a4•Dea1r lel4ta: mNie¢ 40[ I.1Mf- -craw' .m arwn ewr. wv •rN Nun mrslncls mw curt eAD. a m.rc1 m m srovr ssm rva mN ter[' mDlmoa a .enlaz m aa, are ssicls siwes mlDac74r mn 1ra ear7c7NC mMt rao.rD. 10. vaol ro nolDlnec nw ra 1ag7m raalralnc vsn aIn am ss¢eula.a 11, rwwsD _rtv strut[ s7w � rnram mN a_rw ts' m wrsv arm ..s. a. ssv spaa��a w r nc wv 7e. nsn son use wNa nwm e1DCa srua s rgcsn •1 rnl.cs. 7as. errs. cvoffi. nos c7� �.. aMMa0e w 1rlla Owf DI URm Sn� mN • m0o •.r �! 1 Mcmru.ol ar uw nru1. euc Iw um wD Dw rDv UTILITY LEGEND: —�— nmrascD slur srOl wv77:ra 7alrl.w srm •� re0raf[D _rtwrr � qwx usr � SrMI•Dr /e7aeN Narmi O rlEw® qR .are n09fw m.+w1 fIDiNO Sron filrm ___ -. _ _... Q61a10 S•Iravr a.m [e67ao _lmrr ® sent sw1•n a..uc .[O st.arnr�o-lal aasN PERFORATED HDPE SECnO 7 rmolmm Q'� s, o J 0 J v J J MCOMWEP 1 13-2 lk I DJR 557 Nmtdr, - A— N Sa11a 1210 M'IT' IN MN 55401 M (612) 67b2700 Pu(612)676 -2796 ALLIANT a+OwsfalNa we w r•aa •Ni woos su11i m �rosn rN es.Is rwm.�a srr- wr J FF 5 G to LL zz O1 sr r-uirt w�� 011.171T aRDe•RS/a9MeDl wtc tssu[ ND7JCC1 iGW wi6 C -4 N 0 5q1( 6 10 A w tIIT MCOMWEP 1 13-2 lk I DJR 557 Nmtdr, - A— N Sa11a 1210 M'IT' IN MN 55401 M (612) 67b2700 Pu(612)676 -2796 ALLIANT a+OwsfalNa we w r•aa •Ni woos su11i m �rosn rN es.Is rwm.�a srr- wr J FF 5 G to LL zz O1 sr r-uirt w�� 011.171T aRDe•RS/a9MeDl wtc tssu[ ND7JCC1 iGW wi6 C -4 .-�— N WEST 70TH STREET SO HEAST OF SEC, 30. 7WP- SV 9 ° 5 5' 3 3 (I E 215.00 RNG. 24. HENNEP IN COUNTY MINNESOTA26 0 20 40 80 SCALE IN FEET ALLUNT ENGINEERING, INC. 233 PARK Ave. SOUTH. SUITE 300 MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55415 PHONE (612) 768,3080 FAX (611) 7663099 r ,E)R5T1NG fiNL01NG / JX i J Z W o W U d e ca[ 215.00 �' V W n j V LU O W Z a a o a W W _215 y W a F- 0' H O 10 W ri 1 hereby o.rlNy 1hc1 INS plan, opml0eulbn, er report was prepped by ma pr under my db Rupml4on and Ih01 M I m a duty Lk—..d PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER under the Nn M the Std. el MINNESOTA a CLARK WCKLUND, PE Deh ilrarw Mw OUALrIY ASSURANCE /CONTROL 9Y GTE DATE ISSUE y O 0 O PROJECT TEAM DATA DESIGNED: MK DRAWN: RETAIL SPACE #1 PROJECT NO: 110059 ' d jCY) o 2, I?F W Ld N F N LU V LID RETAIL SPACE #2 Z Q P O o 0 tc Z .-�— N WEST 70TH STREET SO HEAST OF SEC, 30. 7WP- SV 9 ° 5 5' 3 3 (I E 215.00 RNG. 24. HENNEP IN COUNTY MINNESOTA26 0 20 40 80 SCALE IN FEET ALLUNT ENGINEERING, INC. 233 PARK Ave. SOUTH. SUITE 300 MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55415 PHONE (612) 768,3080 FAX (611) 7663099 E -1 SHEET 1 of 1 r i J Z W o W U W n j V LU O W Z a a o a W W Y y W a F- O 10 W ri 1 hereby o.rlNy 1hc1 INS plan, opml0eulbn, er report was prepped by ma pr under my db Rupml4on and Ih01 M I m a duty Lk—..d PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER under the Nn M the Std. el MINNESOTA CLARK WCKLUND, PE Deh ilrarw Mw OUALrIY ASSURANCE /CONTROL 9Y GTE DATE ISSUE PROJECT TEAM DATA DESIGNED: MK DRAWN: DE PROJECT NO: 110059 E -1 SHEET 1 of 1 WEST 70TH STREET -(:l f 'L i i LANDSCAPE REQUIREMENTS w[esmRr m ACQUIRED - I, (DVLRSfDY+ mCC, SrwL w7 ec U3, TIYY M PDioRT[N W M ID} ♦5 YCA,URCO w epT DNOED R b) Yw..YOwn N IeaAao mu; Ss DRWYLNIK 1.3' Re) - 1 eos rnYwnm.Y. (TATIB.) ; rm wmY,R, rmu„mLES Peouom ox 51rt - Ie PLANTING NDTES: or�ow rvM w - sera v -.n i wNRUS PLANNNG DETAIL 2 TRMIA"No DETAIL N 1 D 5 D A [MR 337 WeshI.S- Are. N sYlm a ID MlnwerppooIIL MN SSe01 Ph. (613167637D0 F..(612,676 -37% ALLIANT ENCwE01ND, u+c 5Ur1e- m,Y..rD1,: YY N.G D�iT riaP hJ. W o Z � 5 W Z '0 LL ii Q b � 0 m! ZZQ r J OUWR ASAq.K[/CORIeDI MR rQUL rn L -1 LANDSCAPE SCHEDULE 7-t- r1tr i wNRUS PLANNNG DETAIL 2 TRMIA"No DETAIL N 1 D 5 D A [MR 337 WeshI.S- Are. N sYlm a ID MlnwerppooIIL MN SSe01 Ph. (613167637D0 F..(612,676 -37% ALLIANT ENCwE01ND, u+c 5Ur1e- m,Y..rD1,: YY N.G D�iT riaP hJ. W o Z � 5 W Z '0 LL ii Q b � 0 m! ZZQ r J OUWR ASAq.K[/CORIeDI MR rQUL rn L -1 0.0 .0.0 0.1 0.2 0.4 0.3 0.2 o.l 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 o.o 0:0 " QN 1 2 - 0.0 0:1 0.1 0.5 0:6 0.5 0.5 0.3 0.3 0.2 0.4 0.6 0:6 0.4 0.2 0.1 0.1 0. .1 0.1 Lumens 44000 44000 LLF 0.750 D.750 Description LSI GFM -3 -40D- PSMVR -F -MT- BRZ- HSS/4SQB5- S.1 1G- 22 -S-BRZ LSI GFM- FP400- PSMVR -F -MT- BRZ- HSS14SQB5- S11G- 22 -S-BRZ SINGLE _ 3300 - 0.750 Intense IVT511MH- ST -39SP15 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.7 0.9 0.8 b. 13 0.8 b.7 0.6 1.0 1.6 7 1.1 0.5 0.3 0.4 0. .2 0.1 1800 N- LSI 206H- CFL- 2- 26Q- UNIV/206HPALW 0.00.1' \ \ .21.011.1.2.41. \5,22..0.53.42. 3.9\2'.10. \249.89.92.61.7 SINGLE .30.2 0.750 '4 pa ` 0.0 0.10.3.01.92.02.7 0:7 .9 0.2 .62.32.59.5`5. 0.0 0:3 6 8 3.0 3..6 3.2 2. 2:0- 2.0'3. 3.8 3.7 3. 2.1 1.3 1. 30.2:. 0). p O W 0.0 0.3 3.3 3.9 1. 0.0 0. .' .3 0:2' W 0.0 0.9 3 6 3.7 3.9 1. 0.3 0,. .2 0.1 0.0 0.2 3.9 2.9 3:2 3.0 2.3 5 .1 0.1 .0 C CC 0.0 0.2 .3 1.9 2..5 2.0 2.2.2..5 7. C .0 O.o 0.0 0.2 .3 1.8 2.5.1.8 1.9 1.8 3 B 0.4 $1... ' 0.0 0.0 1 jll 0.0 0.1 .9 3.0 2.5 2.9 2.7 2.0 2. 0.9 0.1 ,0.0 il1I�lllirll D 0.0 0.9. 3.7 3.8 7 0.1 0.0 C I 0.0 0.3 . 3.1 2.9 5. 9: DD 1 0.0 r 0.0 0.9 .1 5:2 3.7 3.8 2.5 1.6 1. CC C 2 0.0 g p .11 erg �Z O.o 0.1 .6 2.8 2.2 2.9 2.7 1.7 3. B 2 1 1.1 0 0.1 0.0 ] 413 ?i 0.0 0.1 .2 1.0 1.6 1.2 1.9 1.3 0.& 5. 0.5 ,88. ' 1 0. '.0.0.0 -0.Q. aaH•I 0.0 0. 1.0 0.8 .7 0.6 0.5 0.3 0.2 0.1.0.1 0. 0.0 ' '.0 0.,o 0.0 0.0 n3� �a1 0.0 0.0 0.5 0.6 0.5 0.40.3 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 '0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 �g�yys 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.3 0.9 0.3 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0:0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 o.o 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.3 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 q v Luminaire Schedule - - Symbol QN 1 2 - Label AA AA1 Arrangement SINGLE SINGLE Lumens 44000 44000 LLF 0.750 D.750 Description LSI GFM -3 -40D- PSMVR -F -MT- BRZ- HSS/4SQB5- S.1 1G- 22 -S-BRZ LSI GFM- FP400- PSMVR -F -MT- BRZ- HSS14SQB5- S11G- 22 -S-BRZ SINGLE _ 3300 - 0.750 Intense IVT511MH- ST -39SP15 8 CC . SINGLE 1800 0.740 LSI 206H- CFL- 2- 26Q- UNIV/206HPALW SINGLE 3200 0.750 LSI VBR- IL- 50- MH -CA -MT -BRZ ti O ay8a� . ro N I� N•II Calculation Summary Label CalcType Units Avg' Max Min Avg/Min Max/Min Description . Area .. Illuminance„ Fc 1.33. 38.6 - 0.0 N.A. N.A. Horiz FL; a130" RESOLUTION NO. 2012-39 RESOLUTION APPROVING A FINAL REZONING AND FINAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR FE 70 LLC AT 6996 FRANCE AVENUE BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Edina, Minnesota, as followtity of Edina Section 1. BACKGROUND. 1.01 The applicant is requesting Final Rezoning from PCD-4, Planned Commercial District to PUD, Planned Unit Development District and Final Development Plan to construct an 8,260 square foot retail/ office building at 6996 France Avenue. The property is legally described as follows: The East 215 feet of the South 190 feet of the Southeast Quarter of Section 30, Township 28, Range, 24, Hennepin County, Minn. 1.02 A sketch plan was reviewed by both the Planning Commission on August 17,2011; and on September 6, 2011 by the City Council. The proposed plan is virtually the same as the plans reviewed for the sketch plan review, with the exception of a mezzanine being added to the building. 1.03 On September 6, 2011, as part of the sketch plan review, the City Council determined that the request did not reach the threshold to require a Small Area Plan. 1.04 On November 9, 2011 the Planning Commission unanimously recommended approval of the Preliminary Rezoning and Preliminary Development Plan. 1.05 On December 6, 2011, the City Council unanimously approved the Preliminary Rezoning and Preliminary Development Plan. 1.06 On February 8, 2012, The Planning Commission unanimously recommended approval of the Final Rezoning and Final Development Plan subject to conditions. Section 2. FINDINGS 2.01 Approval is subject to the following findings: Approval is subject to the following findings: 1. The proposed land uses are consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. 2. The proposal is consistent with the approved Preliminary Rezoning and Preliminary Development Plan. 3. The site layout would be an improvement over a site layout required by standard zoning; the building is brought up to the street, provides front door entries toward the street, includes sidewalks to encourage a more pedestrian friendly environment along the StYPPt_ City Hall 4801 WEST 50TH STREET EDINA, MINNESOTA, 55424 -1394 www.CityofEdina.com 952 - 927 -8861 FAX 952 - 826 -0390 TTY 952 - 826 -0379 RESOLUTION NO. 2012-39 4. The design of the building is of a high quality stone with large windows. The building is consistent with the small scale buildings on this block. 5. The development would incorporate improved landscaping and green space, a decrease in impervious coverage, and an infiltration area. 6. The contaminated soils on the site would be cleaned up. 7. Traffic would be improved in the area with a right -in only access on France Avenue, the elimination of the curb cut nearest the intersection and narrowing the curb cut further to the west. 8. The proposed project would meet the following goals and policies of the Comprehensive Plan: a. Building Placement and Design. Where appropriate, building facades should form a consistent street wall that helps to define the street and enhance the pedestrian environment. On existing auto - oriented development sites, encourage placement of liner buildings close to the street to encourage pedestrian movement. ■ Locate prominent buildings to visually define corners and screen parking lots. ■ Locate building entries and storefronts to face the primary street, in addition to any entries oriented towards parking areas. ■ Encourage storefront design of mixed -use buildings at ground floor level, with windows and doors along at least 50% of the front facade. ■ Encourage or require placement of surface parking to the rear or side of buildings, rather than between buildings and the street. b. Movement Patterns. • Provide sidewalks along primary streets and connections to adjacent neighborhoods along secondary streets or walkways. • Limit driveway access from primary streets while encouraging access from secondary streets. • Provide pedestrian amenities, such as wide sidewalks, street trees, pedestrian - scale lighting, and street furnishings (benches, trash receptacles, etc.) • A Pedestrian - Friendly Environment. Improving the auto - oriented design pattern discussed above under "Issues" will call for guidelines that change the relationship between parking, pedestrian movement and building placement. c. Appropriate Parking Standards. Mixed use developments often produce an internal capture rate. This refers to residents and workers who obtain goods and services from within the development without making additional vehicle trips. Parking ratios for mixed use development should reflect the internal capture rate and the shared parking opportunities this type of development offers. RESOLUTION NO. 2012-39 d. Encourage infill /redevelopment opportunities that optimize use of city infrastructure and that complement area, neighborhood, and /or corridor context and character. Section 3. APPROVAL NOW THEREFORE, it is hereby resolved by the City Council of the City of Edina, approves the Final Rezoning from PCD-4, Planned Commercial District to PUD, Planned Unit Development District and Final Development Plan to construct an 8,260 square foot retail/ office building at 6996 France Avenue. 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 March 2, 2012. • Grading plan date stamped March 2, 2012. • Landscaping plan date stamped March 2, 2012. • Lighting plan date stamped February 24, 2012. • Utility plan date stamped March 2, 2012. • Bicycle storage plan date stamped March 2, 2012. • Building elevations date stamped March 1 & 2, 2012. • Building materials board, including colors, presented at the City Council meeting on March 6, 2012. 2) Prior the issuance of a building permit, the following must be submitted: a. A final landscape plan, subject to staff approval. Additionally, a performance bond, letter -of- credit, or cash deposit must be submitted for one and one -half times the cost amount for completing the required landscaping, screening, or erosion control measures. b. A construction management plan. 3) The property owner is responsible for replacing any required landscaping that dies. 4) Submit a copy of the Nine Mile Creek Watershed District permit. The City may require revisions to the approved plans to meet the district's requirements. 5) Compliance with the conditions required by the chief building official in his memo dated January 10, 2012. 6) Compliance with the conditions required by the city engineer in his memo dated January February 3, 2012. 7) Compliance with the conditions required by the fire marshal in his memo dated January 28, 2012. 8) The contaminated soils must be cleaned up per the requirements of the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency. RESOLUTION NO. 2012-39 9) Adoption and compliance with the PUD Ordinance for the site. 10) Submit a photometric lighting plan that details illumination levels sufficient to support an active pedestrian movement along France Avenue and West 70th Street. 11) Snow will be removed from the site at the point where stored snow consumes one parking space. 12) Submit a revised site plan to indicate the location of the bicycle storage area that complies with City Code. 13) Submit an internal truck movement circulation plan. That plan would be subject to review by the City Engineer. Adopted by the Edina City Council this 6th day of March, 2012. Attest: Debra A. Mangen, City Clerk STATE OF MINNESOTA ) COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) SS CITY OF EDINA ) James B. Hovland, Mayor 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 City Council Minutes is a true and correct copy of the Resolution duly adopted by the Edina City Council at its regular meeting of March 6, 2012, and as recorded in the Minutes of said regular meeting. WITNESS, my hand and seal of said City this day of , 2012. Debra A. Mangen, City Clerk ORDINANCE NO. 850-A-38 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE ZONING ORDINANCE TO ESTABLISH A PUD, PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT AT 6996 FRANCE AVENUE The City Of Edina Ordains: Section 1. Subsection 850.05 is amended to add the following: 850.05 Districts. For the purposes of this Section, the City shall be divided into the following zoning districts: Single Dwelling Unit District (R -1) Double Dwelling Unit District (R -2) Planned Residence District (PRD and PSR) Mixed Development District (MDD) Planned Office District (POD) Planned Commercial District (PCD) Planned Industrial District (PID) Regional Medical District (RMD) Automobile Parking District (APD) Heritage Preservation Overlay District (HPD) Floodplain Overlay District (FD) Building Height Overlay District (HOD) Planned Unit Development District (PUD) Section 2. Subsection 850 is hereby amended to add the following Planned Unit Development (PUD) District: 850.23 Planned Unit Development Districts (PUD) Subd. 1. Planned Unit Development District -1 (PUD -1) — FE 70 LLC at 6996 France Avenue A. Legal Description:. The East 215 feet of the South 190 feet of the Southeast Quarter of Section 30, Township 28, Range 24, Hennepin County Minnesota. Existing text — XXXX Stricken text —X Added text — XXXX B. Approved Plans. Incorporated herein by reference are the !FE 70 LLC plans received by the City on February 24,. 2012,; and March 1, 2012, including the building plans, except as amended by City Council Resolution No. 2012 -39, on file in' the Office of the Planning Department under file number, 2011- 011.11 a. C. Principal Uses: fAll principal uses allowed in the PCD -1 Zoning District,; except drive - through uses, bakeries, coffee shops, -and:; banks,; ;Catering :Clothing store over 2,500 s.f.; ,Department store Dry goods Electrical and appliance store, (Furniture store' Medical office_ s up to a maximum of 7,950 square feet total 'For the site :Office supplies Paint and wallpaper Sporting goods If the entire building is occupied by retail uses, then the mezzanine shall be turned into storage space, and shall Pot be used for retail D. Accessory Uses; Off - street parking facilities Existing text — XXXX 2 Stricken text — XXXX Added text — XXXX Produce stands pursuant to permit issued by the City Manager.; Signs allowed per the PCD -1 District E. Conditional Uses: None F. Development Standards. Development standards per the PCD -1 Zoning District, except the following:; Building Setback§ Front — France Avenue 16 feet Side Street — South 10 feet Side — North 39 feet Rear — West 68 feet Parking Lot Setbacks Front — France Avenue 10 feet. Front — 701h Street 4 feet Side — North & West 4 feet, Building Height one story Maximum Floor Area Ratio 37% G. Drive - through uses, coffee shops, bakeries and banks, medical office over 7,950 square feet, and retail space' over 6,600 square feet shall be prohibited, Section 3. This ordinance is effective immediately upon its passage and publication. First Reading: Second Reading: Published: Existing text — XXXX 3 Stricken text — XXXX Added text — XXXX 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 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 March 6, 2012, and as recorded in the Minutes of said Regular Meeting. WITNESS my hand and seal of said City this day of 2012. City Clerk Existing text — XXXX 4 Stricken text — XXXX Added text — XXXX Planner Teague in ormed the Commission that Raun Nelson and Carol & rank Sidell are requesting to shift a existing lot line that divides their properties at 36 Lynn Avenue. Continuig, Teague exp fined there is no new lot being /elot the request, it is simply a shift in the rear lot lines sell land to the adjacent pr. Land owned by Carol & Frank Sidell, would gain a itional land to be similar in e lots also owned by Carol & Frank Sidell, to the north an south. The 4236 Lynn Auld be smaller in size, but similar i n depth to the lots to he north and south. Planner Teague concluded that s aff recommends at the City Council approve the Lot Division of 4236 Lynn Avenue and Parcel A s submitted n the proposed lot division date stamped January 30, 2011 subject to the foll wing find' gs: 1. The existing and proposed I 2. The two lots involved in the I neighborhood. Approval is also subject to the 1. All building activity standards. Motion all minimum lot size requirements. ision are larger than most lots within the ng conditions: either lot must comply with all minimum zoning ordinance Commissioner F' cher moved to recommend lot divi on approval based on staff findings and subject to st conditions. Commissioner Scherer sec nded the motion. All voted aye; motion carried. VII. PUBLIC HEARINGS 2011.0011.11A Final Rezoning /PUD FE 70, LLC 6996 France Avenue, Edina, MN Planner Presentation Planner Teague informed the Commission that FE 70, LLC is proposing to tear down the existing gas station at 6996 France Avenue and re -build an 8,260 square foot office /retail building. The Page 2 of 8 building would include a 3,000 square foot'retail store (Vitamin Shop) and a 5,260 square foot financial office. To accommodate this proposed redevelopment, the following is requested: ➢ Final Rezoning from PCD -4, Planned Commercial District to PUD, Planned Unit Development; ➢ A Zoning Ordinance Amendment that establishes the PUD, Zoning District; and ➢ Final Development Plan. Planner Teague noted that the City Council approved Preliminary Rezoning from PCD -4, Planned Commercial District to PUD, Planned Unit Development, and Preliminary Development plan for this project on December 6, 2011. The footprint of the building and the parking arrangement has not changed from the preliminary approval. Planner Teague concluded that staff recommends that the City Council approve the Final Rezoning from PCD -4, Planned Commercial District to PUD, Planned Unit Development District; adoption of the Ordinance Amending the Zoning Ordinance to establish the PUD Zoning District; and Final Development Plan to construct an 8,260 square foot retail /office building at 6996 France Avenue for FE70, LLC subject to the following findings: 1. The proposed land uses are consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. 2. The proposal is consistent with the approved Preliminary Rezoning and Preliminary Development Plan. 3. The site layout would be an improvement over a site layout required by standard zoning; the building is brought up to the street, provides front door entries toward the street, includes sidewalks to encourage a more pedestrian friendly environment along the street. 4. The design of the building is of a high quality stone with large windows. The building is consistent with the small scale buildings on this block. 5. The development would incorporate improved landscaping and green space, a decrease in impervious coverage, and an infiltration area. 6. The contaminated soils on the site would be cleaned up. 7. Traffic would be improved in the area with a right -in only access on France Avenue, the elimination of the curb cut nearest the intersection and narrowing the curb cut further to the west. 8. The proposed project would meet the following goals and policies of the Comprehensive Plan: i. Building Placement and Design. Where appropriate, building facades should form a consistent street wall that helps to define the street and enhance the pedestrian environment. On existing auto - oriented development sites, encourage placement of liner buildings close to the street to encourage pedestrian movement. Page 3 of 8 Locate prominent buildings to visually define corners and screen parking lots. Locate building entries and storefronts to face the primary street, in addition to any entries oriented towards parking areas. Encourage storefront design of mixed -use buildings at ground floor level, with windows and doors along at least 50% of the front fagade. Encourage or require placement of surface parking to the rear or side of buildings, rather than between buildings and the street. b. Movement Patterns. • Provide sidewalks along primary streets and connections to adjacent neighborhoods along secondary streets or walkways. • Limit driveway access from primary streets while encouraging access from secondary streets. • Provide pedestrian amenities, such as wide sidewalks, street trees, pedestrian - scale lighting, and street furnishings (benches, trash receptacles, etc.) A Pedestrian - Friendly Environment. Improving the auto - oriented design pattern discussed above under "Issues" will call for guidelines that change the relationship between parking, pedestrian movement and building placement. c. Appropriate Parking Standards. Mixed use developments often produce an internal capture rate. This refers to residents and workers who obtain goods and services from within the development without making additional vehicle trips. Parking ratios for mixed use development should reflect the internal capture rate and the shared parking opportunities this type of development offers. d. Encourage infill /redevelopment opportunities that optimize use of city infrastructure and that complement area, neighborhood, and /or corridor context and character. Final approval is also 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 January 6, 2012. • Grading plan date stamped January 6, 2012. • Landscaping plan date stamped January 6, 2012. • Building elevations date stamped January 6, 2012. 2) Prior the issuance of a building permit, the following must be submitted: A final landscape plan, subject to staff approval. Additionally, a performance bond, letter -of- credit, or cash deposit must be submitted for one and one -half times the cost amount for completing the required landscaping, screening, or erosion control measures Page 4 of 8 b. A construction management plan. 3) The property owner is responsible for replacing any required landscaping that dies. 4) Submit a copy of the Nine Mile Creek Watershed District permit. The City may require revisions to the approved plans to meet the district's requirements. 5) Compliance with the conditions required by the chief building official in his memo dated January 10, 2012. 6) Compliance with the conditions required by the city engineer in his memo dated January February 3, 2012. 7) Compliance with the conditions required by the fire marshal in his memo dated January 28, 2012. 8) The contaminated soils must be cleaned up per the requirements of the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency. 9) Adoption and compliance with the PUD Ordinance for the site. Appearing for the Applicant Sheldon Berg, DJR, Architects. Discussion Commissioner Fischer noted that the building elevations and details presented on the final plan are different from the earlier rendering. (sketch plan). Fischer said that he understands that "things" change between preliminary and final; however, he wants everyone to realize if approved as submitted the building will be different from the plan previously viewed. Applicant Presentation Mr. Berg presented to the Commission an updated and colored rendering of the building. Berg stated that the exterior materials would be the same as previously submitted and approved. Berg acknowledged that changes were made to the building. Berg presented to the Commission the materials board and stood for questions. Discussion /Comments Commissioner Schroeder said he observed that the plans as presented do not adequately illustrate site and building lighting. Schroeder said lighting was important especially as it relates to pedestrian movement. Continuing, Schroeder said in his opinion the final plan doesn't present sufficient illumination levels to support active pedestrian movements. Page 5 of 8 Schroeder also noted that in his opinion the entrance to the building isn't as inviting as it was on the previous rendering. Concluding, Schroeder stated that in his opinion, the plans presented do not enhance the pedestrian experience, the building doesn't "address" the street and the changes made between sketch plan review and final are less than desirable. Commissioner Schroder also commented that he didn't see any reference to snow storage on the final plans. Mr. Berg responded that the 5 -foot buffer around the perimeter of the site would be used to accommodate snow storage. Schroeder said he assumes if one parking space was used for snow storage any snow in excess of that single space would be removed from the site. Berg agreed that would have to be the case. Public Comment Acting Chair Carpenter opened the public hearing for comment; being none Commissioner Scherer moved to close the public hearing. Commissioner Potts seconded the motion. All voted aye; motion carried. Discussion Commissioner Platteter asked Planner Teague if signage was part of the review process. Teague responded that the Planning Department reviews all sign permits; however sign review isn't part of this process. Continuing, Teague explained the "vitamin" store and office would need to go through the sign permitting process before signs are erected. Teague noted that all signs would be required to meet City Code. Commissioner Forrest said she observed that the final site plan doesn't indicate bike racks, adding that in her opinion bike racks should be included on the plan. Continuing, Forrest said she agrees with the comments from Commissioner Fischer that the building elevations presented aren't the same as previously presented, adding she doesn't like the "new" building as well as the "old" building. Forrest said she was still concerned with the internal circulation and parking near the trash enclosure area. Concluding, Forrest noted that this is the City's first PUD and the intent of the PUD process was to ensure by ordinance that what was approved was actually built. Planner Teague responded that he agrees with the comment from Commissioner Forrest on bike racks, adding that bike racks are required by Code; that concern would be addressed. Commissioner Fischer asked Commissioners how they felt about the change in the building between sketch plan and final. Commissioner Platteter acknowledged the changes adding in his opinion the changes seem "OK ". Continuing, Platteter said he was more concerned moving forward; especially with larger projects and at what point in the process would "changes" trigger coming back before the Commission or Council. He concluded that the changes to the project presented this evening Page 6 of 8 may not be deemed significant; however, he reiterated significant changes need to be reviewed by the Commission and Council before a project receives approval. Planner Teague responded that staff reviews all changes and if those changes are considered significant staff would require the applicant to "amend" the approved plan and appear before the Commission and City Council for approval of those changes. Platteter stated if in the future there are minor or major changes to an approved plan the applicant should be required to list those changes. Teague agreed. Commissioner Fischer asked the applicant the reason behind the building changes. Mr. Berg explained that the changes came about because one tenant desired mezzanine space; storefront space was expanded and signage considerations. Acting Chair Carpenter asked if there was further discussion on the changes to the building. Commissioner Forrest reiterated she was disappointed in the final plan. She added in her opinion the plans presented seem tenuous. Commissioner Scherer said she also feels the first rendering presented to the Commission was best, adding in her opinion the first design was more sophisticated. Expanding on the comments from Commissioner Forrest, Scherer said lighting needs to be "firmed up ", and the landscaping plan, while it may be substantial, needs more detail; especially on the trees. Mr. Berg responded that the landscaping plan indicates 15 over -story trees and meets Code. With graphics he pointed out the light poles, entrance lighting and lighting on the north side. Planner Teague said that review of all lighting occurs during the building permit and plan review process. The discussion continued on the changes to the building between sketch plan review and final approval. Commissioners considered tabling the request directing the applicant to return to the Commission with revisions to include a "current" colored rendering and plans reflecting the concerns expressed on bike racks, landscaping, lighting, circulation and the way the building addresses the street. Commissioners stressed the importance of streetscape and the pedestrian experience. Motion Commissioner Schroeder said that in his opinion the final plan generally conforms to the preliminary plan and moved to recommend that the City Council approve the Final Rezoning from PCD -4, Planned Commercial District to PUD, Planned Unit Development District; adoption of the Ordinance Amending the Zoning Ordinance to establish the PUD Zoning District; and Final Development Plan to construct an 8,260 square foot retail /office building at 6996 France Page 7 of 8 Avenue for FE70, LLC based on staff findings and conditions outlined in the staff report and subject to the following additional conditions: • Submit a photometric lighting plan that details illumination levels sufficient to support an active pedestrian movement along France Avenue and West 70th Street. • Snow will be removed from the site at the point where stored snow consumes one parking space; • Submit a revised site plan to indicate the location of the bicycle storage area that complies with City Code. • Submit an internal truck movement circulation plan. That plan would be subject to review by the City Engineer. • Revise the building plans to address the loss of articulation of the pedestrian entries from France & West 70th Street. • Submit more definitive color renderings of the proposed building including finishes. The color renderings must be revised to add the changes made to the pedestrian entries off the street. Commissioner Forrest seconded the motion. All voted aye; motion carried. VII. REPORTS /RECOMMENDATIONS None. VIII. CORRESPONDENCE AND PETITIONS Acting Chair Carpenter acknowledged receipt of Council Connection and Attendance. IX. CHAIR AND COMMISSION MEMBER COMMENTS None. X. STAFF COMMENTS XI. ADJOURNMENT Commissioner Potts moved for adjournment at 8:20 PM. Commissioner Platteter seconded the motion. All voted aye; motion carried. Respectfully submitted Page 8 of 8 Dec. 6, 2011 Edina City Council Regualr Meeting Minutes Page 4 of 15 Mayor Hovla d opened the public hearing at 7:28 p.m. No one appeared tkcomment. Member Swenson mad a motion, seconded by Me/ea , to close the public hearing. Ayes: Bennett, Brindle, rague, Swenson, Hovland Motion carried. Mayor Hovland stated the 2012 dget would be co December 20, 2011, Council meeting. VI.B. 2012 LIQUOR LICENSE FEES Xreired City Clerk Mangen explained State la that a public hearing be held afte r a 30 -day notice to license holders of the City's intention to raisense fees. To date, no comment had been received from licensees. Ms. Mangen indicated stammending a slight increase in On -Sale Intoxicating License and Beer License fees to cover the Ci strative and enforcement costs. Mayor Hovland opened the pu Public Testimony No one appeared to c ment. hearing at 7:30`2.m. Member Brindl ade a motion, seconded by Member Sprag e, to close the public hearing. Ayes: Renn t, Brindle, Sprague, Swenson, Hovland Motion rried. yMem r Swenson made a motion, seconded by Member Brindle, to 'adopt 2012 liquor license fees. Bennett, Brindle, Sprague, Swenson, Hovland n carried. , VI.C. RESOLUTION NO. 2011-127 ADOPTED —PRELIMINARY REZONING TO PUD & PRELIMINARY DEVELOPMENT PLAN, 6996 FRANCE AVENUE FOR FE 70, LLC httn: / /www.ci. edina. mn. us/ CityCouncil/ CityCouncil _MeetingMinutesl2011l2O6Reg.htm 2/28/2012 Dec. 6, 2011 Edina City Council Regualr Meeting Minutes Page 5 of 15 Planner Presentation Planning Director Teague presented the request of FE 70, LLC, for preliminary approval of a rezoning from PCD -4, Planned Commercial District, to PUD, Planned Unit Development District and Preliminary Development Plan. The proponent was proposing to tear down the existing gas station at 6996 France Avenue and rebuild an 8,260 square -foot office /retail building that included a 3,000 square -foot vitamin store and a 5,260 square -foot financial office. He noted the added mezzanine for the financial office had increased the square footage but not changed the footprint of the building. Mr. Teague presented the recommendation of the Planning Commission, from its November 9, 2011, meeting and unanimous recommendation for approval. He explained that should the entire building be utilized as retail, the mezzanine would have to be turned into storage space and not utilized as retail space. It was also concluded that parking was adequate for the intended use but would not support certain other uses. The PUD rezoning would assure this was the building constructed on the site and if approved, the ordinance amendment would be finalized with the second phase of the project. The approved plans and parking standards would be incorporated into the zoning ordinance with principal uses listed. Mr. Teague indicated the staff and the Planning Commission recommendation was subject to the findings and conditions as listed in the staff report. Proponent Presentation Dean Dovolis, DJR Architecture representing the developer, stated this building would create a good transition between the commercial and residential uses and anchor the corner with retail and office. He hoped it was the first step to transition the area. Mr. Dovolis stated he thought the PUD process worked well. The Council asked about the traffic movement on 70th Street, as referenced in the traffic report conclusions and recommendations. Chuck Rickart, WSB & Associates, described the left turning movement from France Avenue to 70th Street that had the most delay during the PM peak hour. He agreed that certain uses needed to be prohibited due to peak parking need. It was noted the available parking was felt to be adequate for nondrive -thru uses. The Council asked whether a drive -thru use should be prohibited in the PUD. Mr. Teague answered in the affirmative. Mayor Hovland opened the public hearing at 7:48 p.m. Public Testimony No one appeared to comment. Member Brindle made a motion, seconded by Member Swenson, to close the public hearing. Ayes: Bennett, Brindle, Sprague, Swenson, Hovland Motion carried. Member Brindle introduced and moved adoption of Resolution No. 2011 -127, approving a Preliminary Rezoning and Preliminary Development Plan for FE 70 LLC at 6996 France Avenue, as revised to list drive- httn: / /www.ei.edina .mn.us /CitvCouncil /CitvCouncil MeetingMinutes /20111206Reg.htm 2/28/2012 Dec. 6, 2011 Edina City Council Regualr Meeting Minutes Page 6 of 15 thru uses as prohibited and restrict the mezzanine level from retail use, and based on the following findings: 1. The proposed land uses are consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. 2. The site layout would be an improvement over a site layout required by standard zoning; the building is brought up to the street, provides front door entries toward the street and includes sidewalks to encourage a more pedestrian friendly environment along the street. 3. The design of the building is of a high quality stone with large windows. The building is consistent with the small scale buildings on this block. 4. The development would incorporate improved landscaping and green space, a decrease in impervious coverage and an infiltration area. S. The contaminated soils on the site would be cleaned up. 6. Traffic would be improved in the area with a right -in only access on France Avenue, the elimination of the curb cut nearest the' intersection and narrowing the curb cut farther to the west. And subject to the following conditions: 1. The final development plans must be consistent with the preliminary development plans dated September 13, 2011, and the materials board as presented to the Planning Commission and City Council. 2. The final landscape plan must meet all minimum landscaping requirements per Section 850.04 of the Zoning Ordinance. Compliance with all of the conditions outlined in the City Engineer's memo dated November 3, 2011. 4. Final rezoning is subject to a Zoning Ordinance amendment creating the PUD, Planned Unit Development, for this site. Member Swenson seconded the motion. It was noted this project would result in the loss of the only full service station in Edina; however, it was a viable business and not a forced sale. The Council discussed the application and whether a change in use should require reconsideration by the Planning Commission and City Council even if the new use was permitted. Attorney Knutson recommended listing the two uses requested (vitamin store of 3,000 square feet and financial office of 5,260 square feet) as permitted uses and all other uses as conditional uses. The Council discussed whether to permit all office uses without a square footage restriction since available parking would be adequate. It was indicated that retail use, up to a certain square footage, could be a permitted use conditioned on the mezzanine being restricted to storage use. Should a new use result in a change from either retail or office, or a combination, then it would be a conditional use and require reconsideration. Member Bennett made a motion, seconded by Member Sprague, amending the motion to revise Resolution No. 2011 -127 to include three conditions: S. Drive - through uses shall be prohibited. 6. Permitted uses are the two uses requested (vitamin store of 3,000 square feet and financial services office of 5,260 square feet); other retail uses up to 3,000 square feet; other retail uses over 3, 000 square feet conditioned on the mezzanine used for storage onl}g and offices uses of up to 8,260 square feet. 7. Al other uses are conditional uses. httD: / /www.ci. edina. mn. us/ CityCouncil/ CityCouncil _MeetingMinutesl201112O6Reg.htm 2/28/2012 Dec. 6, 2011 Edina City Council Regualr Meeting Minutes Ayes: Bennett, Brindle, Sprague, Swenson, Hovland Motion to amend carried. Ayes: Bennett, Brindle, Sprague, Swenson, Hovland Motion as amended carried. Vll. COMMENT Page 7 of 15 Paul Smith, 480 ywood West, stated his concern with the number of aggressive co yot in Edina and reported a coyote ad attacked his small dog. Police Chief Long indicated Edina was le ding the way with coyote managemen nd would be hosting a training session for policy makers and imal control officers throughout the metro rea. Chief Long stated the Police Department would work ith residents and the ultimate goal was to ed cate the community on the benefit of hazing coyotes. Wayne Carlson, 523 Coventry ne, asked when his variance request for ets would be considered. Mr. Neal indicated the Council had direct staff to reassess the situation and termine if new information had been provided to change staff's recom endation on Mr. Carlson's reques . A letter had been mailed today that provided staff's recommendation t of support reconsideration. Sheila Rzepecki, 6617 Normandale Road, \ressed her c cern about the speed of traffic on 66th Street and indicated residents would like reduced sp25 mp on the frontage road. She also commented that activity resulting from renting Hughes Pavove 2,000 people in May was driving people away from the park. Emily Sever, 6713 Normandale Road, supp rted the s \fhing ments of Ms. Rzepecki and indicated that to provide safety there was a need for crosswalks, idewalks and lights on 66th Street. Vlll. REPORTS/ TIONS VIII.A. RESOLUTION NO. 20,i1 -119 ADOPTED —ACCEPTING VAW,1OUS DONATIONS Mayor Hovland ex/inoduced hat in order to comply with State Statut s; all donations to the City must be adopted by Resolu approved by four favorable votes of the uncil accepting the donations. Member Bennett and moved adoption of Resolution No. 011 -119 accepting various donations. Member Brindle s the motion. Rollcall: Ayes: BenXett, Brindle, Sprague, Swenson, Hovland Motion( carried. EDINA ART CENTER REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL DISCUSSED http: / /www.ci. edina. mn. us/ CityCouncil/ CityCouncil _MeetingMinutesl201112O6Reg.htm 2/28/2012 49t�1r�1. 0 �J � �O PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT Originator Meeting Date Agenda # Cary Teague February 8, 2012 2011- 011.11a Director of Planning INFORMATION /BACKGROUND Project Description FE 70, LLC is proposing to tear down the existing gas station at 6996 France Avenue and re -build an 8,260 square foot office /retail building. (See property location and surrounding land uses on pages Al —Aft.) The building would include a 3,000 square foot retail store (Vitamin Shop) and a 5,260 square foot financial office. (See the applicant's narrative, building rendering and plans on pages A11 —A22; and the traffic and parking study on pages A30- A40a.) To accommodate this proposed redevelopment, the following is requested: ➢ Final Rezoning from PCD -4, Planned Commercial District to PUD, Planned Unit Development; ➢ A Zoning Ordinance Amendment that establishes the PUD, Zoning District; and ➢ Final Development Plan. The City Council approved Preliminary Rezoning from PCD-4, Planned Commercial District to PUD, Planned Unit Development, and Preliminary Development plan for this project on December 6, 2011. (See approved preliminary plans on pages A23 —A25, and the minutes from the meeting on pages A52 —A55.) The footprint of the building and the parking arrangement has not changed from the preliminary approval. The Zoning Ordinance Amendment that would accommodate the requested rezoning to PUD, Planned Unit Development can be found on the attached pages A7 —A10.) SUPPORTING INFORMATION Surrounding Land Uses Northerly: Southdale Galleria Offices; zoned PCD -3, Planned Commercial District and guided Office /Residential. Easterly: France Avenue and the Galleria; zoned PCD -3, Planned Commercial District and guided CAC, Community Activity Center. Southerly: 70th Street and a BP Gas Station; zoned PCD -4, Planned Commercial District and guided Office /Residential. Westerly: Southdale Pet Hospital; zoned PCD -3, Planned Commercial District and guided Office /Residential. Existing Site Features The subject property is 27,702 square feet in size, is relatively flat and contains a full service gas station. (See pages A3 —A6.) Planning Guide Plan designation: Office /Residential (See pages A27 —A29.) The property is located within and area designated as a potential area of change. (See page A27.) During the Sketch Plan review of this project, the City Council determined that a Small Area Plan would not be necessary prior to redevelopment of this site. (See page A60.) Zoning: PCD-4, Planned Commercial District (See page A26.) Parking Based on the proposal for 3,000 square feet of retail space and 5,260 square feet of office space, 47 parking stalls would be required by the City Zoning Ordinance. The site plan demonstrates 34 parking stalls available. However, the parking study demonstrates that these uses would generate the need for 29 parking stalls. (See page A38 of the parking study.) Therefore, 34 parking stalls would support 3,000 square feet of retail space and 5,260 square feet of office space. However if the retail uses become a bank, coffee shop, or bakery/bagel shop, the parking would not be adequate. (See page A37.) Therefore, those uses should not be allowed on this site. Additionally, if the office space were turned into retail, the mezzanine would have to be converted into storage. In doing so, that would turn the building back to a 6,600 square foot building. If the building were entirely occupied with general office uses, the site would contain adequate parking; however if the building were entirely occupied by medical offices, the site would not contain adequate 2 parking. (See attached memo from WSB on page A40a.) Based on that WSB memorandum dated February 3, 2012, only a 7,950 square foot medical office could be supported by the site's 34 parking stalls. Therefore a portion of the mezzanine could be utilized by medical office space. A restriction on the size of medical offices should therefore be added into the PUD Ordinance requirements. Site Circulation Access to the site would be from France Avenue and 70th Street. Exit from the site would be onto 70th Street only. (See page A18.) There would be surface parking behind the building. Loading to the building would take place in the parking lot during off peak hours. A walking path would be located around the building and along France and 70th Street. (See page A19.) The city engineer and fire marshal have reviewed the proposed site circulation plans and found them to be acceptable. Landscaping The existing site contains virtually no landscaping or green space. There is one tree existing in the northwest corner of the site. This tree would remain. The applicant is proposing 15 new overstory trees. In addition, a full complement of understory landscaping would be provided around the building and green space added along all four sides. This would all be an improvement over the existing conditions on the site. (See page A19.) The property owner to the north has expressed a willingness to remove the pine trees on their property near the north lot line. (See attached emails on pages A64 —A65.) The applicant believes that these trees would not be impacted during construction of the new building 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 page A63. A developer's agreement would be required for the construction of the proposed sidewalks within the right -of -way. The fire marshal reviewed the proposed plans and is requiring that a fire hydrant be installed on the northeast corner of the property. It should be located on the north side of the proposed driveway entrance on the west side of the sidewalk. (See page A62.) This shall be made a condition of approval. Any approvals of this project would be subject to review and approval of the Nine Mile Creek Watershed District, as they are the City's review authority over the grading of the site. Building /Building Material The proposal is for a stone building with large windows. (See rendering on pages Al5 —A16.) The applicant will have a materials board for the Planning Commission to review at the Planning Commission meeting. The City's chief building official has reviewed the plans and provided provide comments on page A61. These comments and conditions shall be made a condition of approval. A construction management plan must also be submitted subject to staff approval. Planned Unit Development (PUD) Per Section 850.04. Subd. 4 D provides the following regulations for a PUD: 1. Purpose and Intent. The purpose of the PUD District is to provide comprehensive procedures and standards..intended to allow more creativity and flexibility in site plan design than would be possible under a conventional zoning district. The decision to zone property to PUD is a public policy decision for the City Council to make in its legislative capacity. The purpose and intent of a PUD is to include most or all of the following: a. provide for the establishment of PUD (planned unit development) zoning districts in appropriate settings and situations to create or maintain a development pattern that is consistent with the City's Comprehensive Plan; b. promote a more creative and efficient approach to land use within the City, while at the same time protecting and promoting the health, safety, comfort, aesthetics, economic viability, and general welfare of the City; c. provide for variations to the strict application of the land use regulations in order to improve site design and operation, while at the same time incorporate design elements that exceed the City's standards to offset the effect of any variations. Desired design elements may include: sustainable design, greater utilization of new technologies in building design, special construction materials, landscaping, lighting, stormwater management, pedestrian oriented design, and podium height at a street or transition to residential neighborhoods, parks or other sensitive uses; 0 d. ensure high quality of design and design compatible with surrounding land uses, including both existing and planned, e. maintain or improve the efficiency of public streets and utilities; f, preserve and enhance site characteristics including natural features, wetland protection, trees, open space, scenic views, and screening; g. allow for mixing of land uses within a development; h. encourage a variety of housing types including affordable housing; and i. ensure the establishment of appropriate transitions between differing land uses. The proposal would meet the purpose and intent of the PUD, as most of the above criteria would be met. The site is guided in the Comprehensive Plan for "Office Residential — OR," which allows for limited retail. The applicant is proposing to use the site for office with limited retail. Through the PUD rezoning, the City has the ability to specifically limit the uses on the site to be consistent with limited retail uses per the Comprehensive Plan, and to ensure that the uses can be supported by the parking provided. The proposed vitamin store and financial office uses are more consistent with the Comprehensive Plan, than the existing gasoline service station. The proposal would create a more efficient and creative use of the property. The building would be pulled up close to the street, with sidewalks in front, and separated from the street by green space to promote a more walkable environment. Landscaping and patios are also proposed in front, with store fronts opening toward France Avenue. Traffic generated from the site would be less than the existing gas station site. The proposed building would be a high quality stone and glass building. The site circulation would be improved with a right -in only access on France Avenue, the elimination of the curb cut nearest the intersection and narrowing the curb cut further to the west. The applicant will also remediate contaminated soils that exist on the site today from the service station. As demonstrated on page 9 of this report, the proposal meets several goals and policies outlined in the Comprehensive Plan. 5 2. Applicability /Criteria a. Uses. All permitted uses, permitted accessory uses, conditional uses, and uses allowed by administrative permit contained in the various zoning districts defined in Section 850 of this Title shall be treated as potentially allowable uses within a PUD district, provided they would be allowable on the site under the Comprehensive Plan. Property currently zoned R -1, R -2 and PRD -1 shall not be eligible for a PUD. Because of the Comprehensive Plan designation of "limited retail" and the potential for a parking shortage depending on future use; the proposal should be limited to uses that will not create parking problems. (See page A37 of the parking study.) The Zoning Ordinance amendment on pages A7 —A10 lists the uses that would be allowed on this site. The uses allowed are based on the traffic and parking analysis done by WSB and Associates on pages A30 —A40a. b. Eligibility Standards. To be eligible for a PUD district, all development should be in compliance with the following: i. where the site of a proposed PUD is designated for more than one (1) land use in the Comprehensive Plan, the City may require that the PUD include all the land uses so designated or such combination of the designated uses as the City Council shall deem appropriate to achieve the purposes of this ordinance and the Comprehensive Plan; The site is guided in the Comprehensive Plan for "Office Residential — OR," which allows for limited retail. Because of that land use designation, uses allowed within the PCD -1 District would be appropriate, as the PCD -1 is the City's least intensive commercial zoning district. (See pages A41 —A42 for a list of uses allowed within the PCD -1 District.) Per the preliminary approval, the applicant is agreeable to those uses. Uses were added as part of the preliminary approval including: catering, clothing store over 2,500 s.f., department store, dry goods, electrical and appliance store, furniture store, office supplies, paint and wallpaper, and sporting goods. Uses that should not be allowed, based on the parking study, would be a bank, coffee shop or a bakery/bagel shop. (See page 37 of the parking study.) G1 As mentioned above, there is concern over the number of parking spaces provided on the site. According to the parking study, the parking that is proposed would support the initially proposed uses. However, should these uses change in the future; the site could be short parked, depending on the new use. Therefore, as a condition of a change in use, such as the office space turning to retail, the mezzanine would have to be converted to storage area, so the use would meet the parking requirements. If the site were entirely occupied with general office uses, the site would contain adequate parking; however if it were entirely occupied by medical office, the site would not contain adequate parking. (See attached memo from WSB on page A40a.) Based on the WSB memorandum dated February 3, 2012, only a 7,950 square foot medical office could be supported by the site's 34 parking stalls. (See page A40a.)Therefore a portion of the mezzanine could be utilized by medical office space. Again, these provisions would be written into the Ordinance that rezones the site PUD, and would be adopted into the City's Zoning Ordinance. (See draft of the Ordinance on pages A7 —A10.) ii. any PUD which involves a single land use type or housing type may be permitted provided that it is otherwise consistent with the objectives of this ordinance and the Comprehensive Plan; As mentioned above, the proposed uses would be office and limited retail, consistent with Comprehensive Plan. A single land use on the site would meet the limited retail use or office designation of the Comprehensive Plan. iii. permitted densities may be specifically stated in the appropriate planned development designation and shall be in general conformance with the Comprehensive Plan; and Parking requirements would limit the uses that would be allowed on the site. If approved by the City, the building would be limited in size; and the use of the building would be limited by the number of parking spaces on the site. The building would not be allowed to be entirely occupied with 8,260 square feet of retail. Should the office space turn into retail, the mezzanine would have to be turned into storage. VA iv. the setback regulation, building coverage and floor area ratio of the most closely related conventional zoning district shall be considered presumptively appropriate, but may be departed from to accomplish the purpose and intent described in #1 above. The following page shows a compliance table demonstrating how the proposed new building would comply with the PCD -1 Zoning Ordinance Standards. Should the City decide to rezone these sites to PUD, the proposed setbacks, height of the building and number of parking stalls would become the standards for the lots. Please note that several of the City Standards are not met under conventional zoning. However, by relaxing these standards, the purpose and intent, as described in #1 above would be met. The site layout would be improved by bringing the building up to the street, providing front door entries toward the street, and including sidewalks to encourage a more pedestrian friendly environment along the street. The design of the building is of a high quality stone with large windows. The building is consistent with the small scale buildings on this block. The development would incorporate improved landscaping and green space, a decrease in impervious coverage, and an infiltration area. The applicant will also be cleaning up contaminated soils on the site through the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA). Traffic would be improved in the area with a right -in only access on France Avenue, the elimination of the curb cut nearest the intersection and narrowing the curb cut further to the west. Compliance Table PRIMARY ISSUES /STAFF RECOMMENDATION Primary Issues Is the proposed development reasonable for this site? Yes. Staff believes the proposal is reasonable for the following reasons: The proposed uses would fit in to the neighborhood. As mentioned, this site is guided in the Comprehensive Plan for "Office Residential — OR," which allows for limited retail. The applicant is proposing to use the site for office with limited retail. Through the PUD rezoning, the City has the ability to specifically limit the uses on the site to be consistent with limited retail uses per the Comprehensive Plan, and to ensure that the uses can be supported by the parking provided. 2. The building is relatively small and in scale with building within this area on the west side of France. 3. The existing roadways would support the project. WSB conducted a traffic impact study based on the proposed development, and concluded that the Z City Standard (PCD -1) Proposed PUD Buildinq Setbacks Front — France Avenue 35 feet 14 feet Side Street — South 35 feet 9 feet Side — North 25 feet 40 feet Rear — West 25 feet 70 feet Parking Lot Setbacks Front — France Avenue 20 feet 10 feet Front — 70th Street 20 feet 5 feet Side — North & West 10 feet 5 feet Building Height Four Stories One Story + Mezzanine Maximum Floor Area Ratio (FAR) 100% 37% Lot size = 22,210 s.f. Gross s.f. = 8,260 s.f. Parking Stalls 47 34 stalls (Based on 3,000 s.f. retail & 5,200 s.f. office) Parking Stall Size 8.5' x 18' 8.5 x 18' Drive Aisle Width 24 feet 24 feet PRIMARY ISSUES /STAFF RECOMMENDATION Primary Issues Is the proposed development reasonable for this site? Yes. Staff believes the proposal is reasonable for the following reasons: The proposed uses would fit in to the neighborhood. As mentioned, this site is guided in the Comprehensive Plan for "Office Residential — OR," which allows for limited retail. The applicant is proposing to use the site for office with limited retail. Through the PUD rezoning, the City has the ability to specifically limit the uses on the site to be consistent with limited retail uses per the Comprehensive Plan, and to ensure that the uses can be supported by the parking provided. 2. The building is relatively small and in scale with building within this area on the west side of France. 3. The existing roadways would support the project. WSB conducted a traffic impact study based on the proposed development, and concluded that the Z 4. traffic generated from the project would be less than the current use on the site. (See traffic study on pages A30— A40a.) The proposed project would. meet the following goals and policies of the Comprehensive Plan: a. Building Placement and Design. Where appropriate, building facades should form a consistent street wall that helps to,define the street and enhance the pedestrian environment. On existing auto- oriented development sites, encourage placement of liner buildings close to the street to encourage pedestrian movement. Locate prominent buildings to visually define corners and screen parking lots. Locate building entries and storefronts to face the primary street, in addition to any entries oriented towards parking areas. Encourage storefront design of mixed -use buildings at ground floor level, with windows and doors along at least 50% of the front facade: Encourage or require placement of surface parking to the rear or side of buildings, rather than between buildings and the street. b. Movement Patterns. • Provide sidewalks along primary streets and connections to adjacent neighborhoods along secondary - streets or walkways. • Limit driveway access from primary streets while encouraging access from secondary streets. o Provide pedestrian amenities, such as wide sidewalks., street trees, pedestrian -scale lighting, and street furnishings (benches, trash' receptacles, etc) A Pedestrian - Friendly Environment. Improving the auto-oriented_ design pattern discussed above under ".Issues" will call for guidelines that change the relationship between parking, pedestrian movement and building placement. c. Appropriate Parking Standards.. Mixed use developments often produce an internal capture rate This refers to residents and workers who obtain goods and services from - within the development without making additional vehicle trips. *Parking ratios for mixed use development should reflect the internal capture rate and the shared parking opportunities this type of 'development offers. d. Encourage infill /redevelopment opportunities that optimize use of city infrastructure and. that complement area, neighborhood, and /or corridor context and character: 10 5. The proposed plans are the same as the plans that were approved in the Preliminary Rezoning and Preliminary Site Plan. Is the PUD Zoning District appropriate for the site? Yes. Staff believes that the PUD is appropriate for the site. As highlighted above on pages 4 -8, the proposal meets the City's criteria for PUD zoning. In summary the PUD zoning would: 1. Ensure that the building proposed would be the only building built on the site, unless an amendment to the PUD is approved by City Council. 2. Limit the uses allowed on the site to ensure that there would be adequate parking. The uses allowed would be specifically listed in a PUD Ordinance that would be reviewed and approved as part of the Final Development Plan stage of the project. 3. Provide for a more creative site design, consistent with goals and policies in the Comprehensive Plan. Staff Recommendation Final Rezoning to PUD & Final Development Plan Recommend that the City Council approve the Final Rezoning from PCD -4, Planned Commercial District to PUD, Planned Unit Development District; adoption of the Ordinance Amending the Zoning Ordinance to establish the PUD Zoning District; and Final Development Plan to construct an 8,260 square foot retail /office building at 6996 France Avenue for FE70, LLC. Approval is subject to the following findings: 1. The proposed land uses are consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. 2. The proposal is consistent with the approved Preliminary Rezoning and Preliminary Development Plan. 3. The site layout would be an improvement over a site layout required by standard zoning; the building is brought up to the street, provides front door entries toward the street, includes sidewalks to encourage a more pedestrian friendly environment along the street. 11 4. The design of the building is of a high quality stone with large windows. The building is consistent with the small scale buildings on this block. 5. The development would incorporate improved landscaping and green space, a decrease in impervious coverage, and an infiltration area. 6. The contaminated soils on the site would be cleaned up. 7. Traffic would be improved in the area with a right -in only access on France Avenue, the elimination of the curb cut nearest the intersection and narrowing the curb cut further to the west. 8. The proposed project would meet the following goals and policies of the Comprehensive Plan: a. Building Placement and Design. Where appropriate, building facades should form a consistent street wall that helps to define the street and enhance the pedestrian environment. On existing auto - oriented development sites, encourage placement of liner buildings close to the street to encourage pedestrian movement. • Locate prominent buildings to visually define corners and screen parking lots. • Locate building entries and storefronts to face the primary street, in addition to any entries oriented towards parking areas. • Encourage storefront design of mixed -use buildings at ground floor level, with windows and doors along at least 50% of the front facade. • Encourage or require placement of surface parking to the rear or side of buildings, rather than between buildings and the street. b. Movement Patterns. • Provide sidewalks along primary streets and connections to adjacent neighborhoods along secondary streets or walkways. • Limit driveway access from primary streets while encouraging access from secondary streets. • Provide pedestrian amenities, such as wide sidewalks, street trees, pedestrian -scale lighting, and street furnishings (benches, trash receptacles, etc.) • A Pedestrian - Friendly Environment. Improving the auto - oriented design pattern discussed above under "Issues" will call for guidelines that change the relationship between parking, pedestrian movement and building placement. 12 c. Appropriate Parking Standards. Mixed use developments often produce an internal capture rate. This refers to residents and workers who obtain goods and services from within the development without making additional vehicle trips. Parking ratios for mixed use development should reflect the internal capture rate and the shared parking opportunities this type of development offers. d. Encourage infill /redevelopment opportunities that optimize use of city infrastructure and that complement area, neighborhood, and /or corridor context and character. 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 January 6, 2012. • Grading plan date stamped January 6, 2012. • Landscaping plan date stamped January 6, 2012. Building elevations date stamped January 6, 2012. 2) Prior the issuance of a building permit, the following must be submitted: a. A final landscape plan, subject to staff approval. Additionally, a performance bond, letter -of- credit, or cash deposit must be submitted for one and one -half times the cost amount for completing the required landscaping, screening, or erosion control measures. b. A construction management plan. 3) The property owner is responsible for replacing any required landscaping that dies. 4) Submit a copy of the Nine Mile Creek Watershed District permit. The City may require revisions to the approved plans to meet the district's requirements. 5) Compliance with the conditions required by the chief building official in his memo dated January 10, 2012. 6) Compliance with the conditions required by the city engineer in his memo dated January February 3, 2012. 7) Compliance with the conditions required by the fire marshal in his memo dated January 28, 2012. 13 8) The contaminated soils must be cleaned up per the requirements of the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency. 9) Adoption and compliance with the PUD Ordinance for the site: Deadline for a city decision: May 1, 2012 City of Edina Qr7+ LogorW y �j. �, Hi0h1i0111ed FeeEne _ 1 iIOD Q7ti Qid Q101 Hsuse Number laYels 6701 i/016� � $tll'ef Numb LaEeb N 6700 O)iI tll/ .! Cly Limns 1f 57 Vw ON ) 0000 a ,.J Cleats / 700 late Names /N�OiM V 6a00 00� 0i1 M lateb •1I 001 i00� d00 6101 Parks 02C] �.t QMl OJ00 iCf] /. MI ml � Parcels O00 �QOt 0900 OQ7/ 0197 •000912 f901s� QQ25 N } �9 01E 017.��0 i j\B100 6m I N 6913 SO" 0901 J �y �6 NQ1�� f6917h0901 NJf �� 01Qf i31D_m2 hM}6 N1Q Qgp90g80 64tJ A h]T 690 I.09T2 0900 6917 MM ST 0 0Wt69W 11M71 0024 p11 pt1 0977 1 _ t m AC21 Am /8925 J9='� 09a 2707 0 ' 69171 N0360q lo�wl� 79]2 097s,69I0 6928 1 \l as" 24 '6932 40M 4M Imluf)a99 893 dw 1 001 �--f l�O7I 6915 bb 3950 J� 7210 flaw 1�.s7f6Iuoe I1 ]910 Q996 WO Fn lmc�g.y �c�wosaima 7329 O.. i:a 0 �1 1009 p00 7ft0 NW 7fu 7171 71 s 7700 7135 73oQ rtso PID:3002824440001 6996 France Ave S Edina, MN 55435 PAI 7/55 I 3113 3701 24 9 Q 0 6 7270 ,..t 26 ROOM Y 0101 � ss:a M epT owl am VN em 025 dw us em One am 7000 7001 T000 7001 0 7001 7005 70" r 7003 70010 7009 7001 � 7009 R 3 � 70rs 'mod 7012 701J 7017 l9n 7010 7017 70}6 7079 4000 101kB1Fp71 Qy 7101 7100 7101 1001 7103 7104 E bisfe� h 4000 7111 7100 7117 ay 1s per.. s City of Edina wwww 7MSTW PID:3002824440001 6996 France Ave S Edina, MN 55435 /m IMMT N110 •'ti�itPOnni /� � tuctt J Logcnd H4pT`.lg'rir� i- e0hrre House Humber I�Cels Scree; HOmr Lnt.rls City Limos Creeks r _'I W Rc Nc mrs J WRes � 1 PGrAs J Perceie 116925 f lwg-L T d 11 .6 I IW717 Al 14' Als cabod reR,4clVS.Cw1 gt IC; .O..+ •1 �L rW +•* � �� f +y CO1 � � 5 _ . ��„. (�•` I I 'k n101 701 L 3501 . A3 mr;� 1' I IIfM� ? ' 7101 Vii, 1650 A+ 77 -14i JLJ, if W 70 St STOP - "I i r � �` ' � -- •�. -. -�.. `.,,eF �, i� - � "•fir:`; a �J'�; ...�y . F w T a .:.. c It AIM z If il" � ti:_f r 1; A4 6 w:.. . .., T 1I) 'may P DRAFT - DRAFT - DRAFT ORDINANCE NO. 2012 = AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE ZONING ORDINANCE TO ESTABLISH A PUD, PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT AT 6996 FRANCE AVENUE The City Of Edina Ordains: Section 1. Subsection 850.05 is amended to add the following: 850.05 Districts. For the purposes of this Section, the City shall be divided into the following zoning districts: Single Dwelling Unit District (R -1) Double Dwelling Unit District (R -2) Planned Residence District (PRD and PSR) Mixed Development District (MDD) Planned Office District (POD) Planned Commercial District (PCD) Planned Industrial District (PID) Regional Medical District (RMD) Automobile Parking District (APD) Heritage Preservation Overlay District (HPD) Floodplain Overlay District (FD) Building Height Overlay District (HOD) Planned Unit Development District (PUD) Section 2. Subsection 850 is hereby amended to add the following Planned Unit Development (PUD) District: 850.23 Planned Unit Development Districts (PUD) Subd. 1. Planned Unit Development District -1 (PUD -1) — FE 70 'LLC at 6996 France Avenue A. Legal Description: The East 215 feet of the South 190 feet of the Southeast Quarter of Section 30, Township 28, Range 24, Hennepin `County Minnesota.; Existing text — XXXX Stricken text — XXXX Added text —XXXX B. Approved Plans. Incorporated herein by reference are the FE 70 LLC plans received by the City on January 6, 2012,; including the building plans, except as amended by City Council Resolution No. 2012- , on file in the Office of the Planning Department under file number 2011- 011.11 a. C. Principal Uses; All principal uses allowed in the PCD -1 Zoning District, except drive - through uses, bakeries, coffee shops, and banks' - - - Catering Clothing store over 2,500 s.f.; Department store Pry goods `Electrical and appliance store, :Furniture store Medical offices up to a maximum of 7,950 square feet total for the site Office supplies Paint and wallpaper Sporting goods If the entire building is occupied by retail uses, then the mezzanine shall be turned into storage space, and shall not be used for retail D. Accessory Uses:. Existing text — XXXX Stricken text — XXXX Added text — XXXX Off - street parking facilities 41W 2 Produce stands pursuant to permit issued by the City Manager. Signs_allowed per the PCD -1 District E. Conditional Uses: 'None F. Development Standards. Development standards per the PCD -1 Zoning District, except the following:: Puilding Setbacks, Front — France Avenue 14 feet Side Street — South 9 feet Side — North 40 feet Rear — West 70 feet Parking Lot Setbacks Front — France Avenue 10 feet Front — 70th Street 5 feet Side — North & West 5 feet Building Height one story Maximum Floor Area Ratio 37% G. Drive - through uses, coffee shops, bakeries and banks, medical office over 7,950 square feet, and retail space over 6,600 square feet shall be prohibited. Section 3. This ordinance is effective immediately upon its passage and publication. First Reading: Second Reading: Published: Existing text — XXXX 3 Stricken text — XXXX Added text —XXXX 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 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 , 2012, and as recorded in the Minutes of said Regular Meeting. WITNESS my hand and seal of said City this day of 2012. Existing text — XXXX Stricken text — XXXX Added text — XXXX City Clerk A is Cary Teague, Planning Director Planning Department Edina City Hall 4801 W. 50th St. Edina, MN 55424 Project: Retail & Office Development Location: 6996 France Avenue South 333 Washington Avenue North, Suite 210, Union Plaza, Minneapolis, MN 55401 T: 612.676.2700 F: 612.676.2796 www.dir- inc.com 14f f LIC&tVT_ Subject: Response to Suggested PUD Language for the site & City Council Minutes Upon review of the minutes from the city council review of the proposed project and the rezoning of the site to the PUD, the Developer is requesting the following amendments / clarifications to the proposed language. 1. Remediation of Site will be to the state Environmental Protection Agency standards. 2. The proposed office tenant is a financial services office tenant. References to financial services should be removed from the prohibited or conditional uses for the site. We suggest banks should be used instead as a prohibited use. The proposed tenant is TD Ameritrade. 3. Our understanding, based on the city council minutes is the permitted uses on the site are: a. The retail or office uses as outlined in the planner's summary of PCD -1 and select PCD -2 uses, not including the high traffic uses discussed in the parking study. b. Retail uses up to 6,600 square feet would be permitted uses, presuming the mezzanine space is storage only. c. Office uses of up to 8,260 square feet would be a permitted. Please forward these requests in the informational packets to the planning commission and city council for consideration for the Final Review of the PUD application. Cordially, Sheldon Berg, AIA, LEED AP Associate pLANNING DEPARTMENT JAN 0 6 2012 CITY OF EDINA P:\djr- arch\2011 \111 -0027 -General Realty - Edina, MN \Word\Design\Zoning & Planning \Rezoning Application \Letter of Response - PUD language.doc 0 A thicktu r Noorot 333 Washington Avenue North. Suite 210, union Plaza, minnespous, mn a_aui T 612.976 . 2700 F:612.676.2796 www.djr4ne.com Cary Teague, Planning Director Planning Department Edina City Hall 4801 W. 50th St. Edina, MN 55424 Project: Retail & Office Development Location: 6996 France Avenue South Subject: Preliminary Development Plan & PUD Narrative PIANNINC CEPxgn'1E41 SEP 13 2011 CITY CF EI)ON This presentation for Preliminary Development Plan & PUD review illustrates the redevelopment of the Sinclair Gas Station at 6996 France Avenue South - the NW corner of France and 70th Street to a 6,600 square foot retail development with associated site improvements. Current Use & Reasons for Redevelopment: The current use for the site is a gasoline filling station with vehicle repair, constructed in approximately 1960. The building is showing signs of its age. As with most filling stations, there are contaminants in the soil as established in a Phase 1 Environmental Assessment. In addition, the three curb cuts at this location — two on 70th street and one on France Avenue congest traffic flow in the area. Proposed Development: The project proposes a single -story retail and office building with associated parking and landscaping improvements. The building will be 8,260 square feet in size and be sited toward France Avenue and 70th Street with parking in the rear and side of the building. The developer has two tenants to fill the building. City & Neighborhood Betterment: The proposed retail development will benefit the City of Edina and the project's neighbors in the following ways: • Create a pedestrian - friendly development with the building oriented to the street and sidewalk with parking to the side and rear of the building, supporting these initiatives from the Comprehensive Plan. • Improve traffic in the area with a right -in only access on France Avenue, the elimination of the curb cut nearest the intersection and narrowing the curb cut further to the west. A traffic study has been ordered to evaluate any impacts on the neighborhood, but our impression is that this will be negligible. • Remediate contaminated soils on site. • Create a greener and more environmentally friendly development improving storm water rates and quality through storm water retention and rain gardens or vegetated swales. • Replaces unsightly auto repair and filling station in a prominent location of the business district and main thoroughfares of the Southdale Area. • Provides small scale neighborhood serving retail and office uses. • Add new businesses to the Edina tax base. Rezoning and the Comprehensive Plan: The project proposes to change the zoning of the site from PCD-4 to a PUD based on the PCD -2. The change from PCD-4 to PCD -2 is a less dense district than the zoning of the adjoining properties to the north and west which are zoned PCD -3. The current comprehensive plan indicates OR use in this area with limited retail and the Greater Southdale Area Final Land Use and Transportation Study Report identifies the area as a Mixed Use area. Though limited, the west side of France Avenue does have some notable Ala 6996 France Avenue South - PUD Narrative 9/12/2011 retail uses in the near area. including: Room & Board to the south and the Edina Diamond Center to the North. The proposed use is consistent with neighboring uses and reinforces the goals and policies 'of the: Comprehensive Plan by siting the building to address the street, engage pedestrians, cyclists and transit users. Impact on Surrounding Properties: The new building will improve neighboring. property values and improve the streetscape o the neighborhood: No negative impacts are anticipated. The proposed project will yield an FAR of .37 well within the,FAR set forth in the PCD -1, which is Land.Use Impacts: P P P J Y 1.O. At the same time the use is dense enough Traffic. Congestion or Traffic Hazards: The removal of the curb cuts and relocation.of them away from the corner should improve traffic movement at the site for the neighborhood. Conformance with Zoning Code: The PUD is proposing the following variances from the PCD -1 standard to be incorporated: Building Setbacks: . Front Setback — Change from 35 feet to 14 feet Side Street South —Change from 25 feet to 9 feet Parking Lot Setbacks: Front— France Avenue —Change from 20 feet.to 10 feet Front — 70th Street — Change from 20 feet to 5 feet Side - North & West — Change from 10 feet to 5 feet Provides a Proper Relationship between the Proposed Improvements, Existing Structures, Open Space and Natural Features: The building siting reflects the relationships of building and parking to the street, which enhances the pedestrian environment and improves the city's streetscape. The building size and scale are in pro_ portion to adjacent properties for the size and scale of the site. The existing site wasentirely.paved. The proposed development incorporates. landscaping and setbacks which are much friendlier to the natural environment by incorporating the infiltration of.rain water, landscaping of the setbacks and decreasing the amount of impervious coverage of the site. Uses: In addition to the foregoing required considerations, the development is requesting the following uses be allowable in the PUD standards for the site: PC D-1 Uses will be allowed in addition to the additional uses from PCD -2 listed below: 1. Catering 2.. Clothes stores exceeding 2,500 s.f. 3. Department Stores 4. Drygoods stores 5. Electrical. and Househould Appliance Stores O 6. Furniture Stores 7. Office Supplies Stores S. 8. Paint and Wallpaper Stores Ve 9. Personal Apparel Stores ��' r 10. Sporting: and Camping Goods Stores 2 At3 6996 France Avenue South — PUD Narrative Cordially, Sheldon Berg, AIA, LEED AP Associate 9/12/2011 PAdjr-arch\201 1\1 11-0027 - General Realty - Edina, MN \Word \Design\Zoning & Planning \Rezoning Application \Summary Letter.doc p�N SEP 13 JON CM OfVIM 3 A4 July 22, 2011 1 .1.4.21 DJR AMA41irtA :. t • U Z W �8 I ei �. Wang r�tw •H�ox =� r �'u. tx pxi - A4 NEST EXTERIOR ELEVATON Ol EXTERIOR PERSPECTIVE 3- , . ..� 7 02. FXfERIOR PERSPECTVE 1 ' ( I I - - f—i^ -- _ ► F• S�t3 . A2 SOUTH EXTERIOR ELEVATION _ _ _ 'm.6 -� °[0]i '.� . y ,9mT', s unoxi AZ NORTHEXTERIORELEVATON - �1�8'= CU^O), W I - 7 - p ��o . , � px•xp• - SEA ELEVATON none,2x[[n '��'� 1 ®p "t 4- Z 589*51'33'E 2FW LEGEND ."q IN y- 51A Ro WEST STREET .7�TH 589*51'33'E 2FW LEGEND ."q IN y- 51A 4 �0W!• WEST 70TH STREET CC .w.c lF>t owo 0nJ S Tt P LMJ SITE PLAN NOTES: ru n ®wM� � mry wm vs en • ao e. �. v°�i <aae.oms�c wq u .wm sm m -M • ®owaw wmw s wive ww IM,1 �M�ww •iY ne wm•wwwa�Y�. 5ITE DATA: ..a . mnm •a -- uwwm.. v. PARKING DATA: WEIR cam i �i wwo e.m1 SITE LEGEND: wo wma — meneew+um H u.�w.m wn m nrQ w� w Y mona ra aw.a raion (1,NN ,1� day I Pcn a�1V ``N�a� PRE�'p OOµs NOt PO D�JR 337 WlhkWm •a N Sdw�R10y VIII!.1101 M ffil])6k7L6. 0 Fn(GU)676.XM ALLLANT .j R �FF s tl Zq� OIwN17 �MQ/lVIM6 --t-- w � 3 <• I VIES T 70TH S TREE T Ow-iV '`` �SV 1 r J� C wo!e = !,. UIREMENTS —c men nm .oa�a un a �ma'"i® a�rmm'�w n a> ,e� uarr v wap® nm m m y�l u,C) OR ,ma pm wmrom a s1c �. of sunNG NOTES' s ma �ai�wa -eaa,n a.evm II 11 =11 1 -0''■ _ II If71 1 -1 -1 I II R-11 -11 II II. II 11 =.11 I W' 333 Wvltlopm AwN ,d Jn a AMN E3.11,09—r, A (61 6161JOD M @lZ)61651% MALLIANT vaon�opnio up,pnu� J W 5 br 6 Li W K � wB J OIIYII� om ., Doti Cit a .�.rY I� RETAIL SPACE #2 1 III ■ ■Q -- I G RAPT 1JG PLI V nW O 1 (A b � GRADING NOTES: r�emaa � m ® � e er rwa sru oral mr6tm w ®ria+�wnrrw ®V warm u' am d ro � mr 6am rrs a .. s �s Im�.pgeW'161r CIS p tz I4. rrr Oler.LlO. is {�� mlo ®®i�aOR @'lur a�lCe rrrru6 m/AKIa KY� vmL6W to �I.lap m N �rIM�CaMIA i I R� r wrL �Irll�mDYeKla .l GRADING LEGEND: ®ew. r� y.a�...aa..e N FOP ;M\ \y� IpN PRA H `ONyIPyC, 1® 733 WW&rpao Alv. N Sd.mlo 1.4151101 PR (61 6162100 Fat 61 616aM MALLIAN A I�a� p.alY .eaaAraa• ryµrAlaal I J O J 8 6 N w W 0 V 'Al � �'i^ spa � �.v. .rmrw wv ee).xe efv eee.et(.) mind a I/) ,••.•., l •,,, ^ °: / , C %4 \'I ;L i i I I Ui1LITY NOTES: 1. n f ems ®.a.mo>v - j I I j I I anovmu•.. tiT Oaos - '1 i � - v- owLL ■m.o .e .�. rS. UTILRY LEGEND: RETAIL SPACE #1 arw° — —•- I Z I 4 o� uO _ 6 or.i -orc �wx"[ e L 65 I PERFORATED HOPE SECTION: y - RETAIL SPACE #2 LL IIUPE m ama R� 70 TH S TREE T _r ev I UTILITY P LAAJ N "" P`M`NpwRY D�JR sv ar��eN emrnio �� vRe°'iu�iee ALL kN ism u4r�e�omw- u�R� O HM �r n!� C -4 �;�6 I+ u � FlDpp . N iXE VT • 1'd Emol FLOOR PLAN V i ze_y wll P �o6�E n w e I tell II►,1t �3 1 t 0 �o c a� col 1L i A100 1 LPN 0 e I tell II►,1t �3 1 t 0 �o c a� col 1L i A100 I'Vb I �r ; 6 1 Wll MI NAR`i P UM I O E1ffEAlO ElEV O I h -i �4 1. ♦' . �h �� AZ ve•.1•a �4�- �f q'{ _ _ iTlowo Irta I 1 p min M � 1I6' =1'�P mom w.raao I I �R..I¢t ■ 41 oil A] SOUIH RNM LION LB' • 1'1r I Q I Q I Q I I _ off_ aria -o Al EA6f F1(TERI EIEV T10 U Ze_ lE 1 i y C N U �5 O E1ffEAlO ElEV O ,..■■M■■��.�■ AZ ve•.1•a _ off_ aria -o Al EA6f F1(TERI EIEV T10 U Ze_ lE 1 i y C N U �5 ,..■■M■■��.�■ min mom ■ oil I I—ImIJIL ENEMA SUR _ off_ aria -o Al EA6f F1(TERI EIEV T10 U Ze_ lE 1 i y C N U �5 pRtL1 m I P�R� PLAN SITE PLAN NOTES: L a DJR -METE Am S33u' W."Dgm A- N EXS�Hc _10 11 "N 33901 A V- A ALLLANT 4 4 WWI- T —DSED �M R 0' RAW IS- MI—AM 1— M I 112 C —E @ 24' W .5• SEE SITE DATA: RETAIL SPACE #1 SE. VAN A-ESSIS� I . - H-- w — - 9* TO 14' (m) r7i m 'I PARKING DATA: .-p Tllx Tm..= DOME AREA - U.0 M IT 0 qa m w RDD-mm LLJ m6E mm IMOIASED - m 0 9* nmw 03 nxwRE RETAIL SPACE #2 .• RANINDa OT smSmEa SITE LEGEND: 20 PMKSIR SETBAC?�_ DS. Ipwwfole 4" CONMElE- SIDEWALK PEDES711. --cTm PEOEMAM aAtB H LDMMm— un w y —DOX IMSE I,tA- RAW MM MICATED ASSURAHW= 0ii—E IA� DOMES (TTP.) DOMES (m.) R5, DATE IS- mS`DMG m� ;�::0000, UGHT "Nolk NAial —cm Ga1NElE APIION AICH MS 4 MG SME.— =TEAM DATA rLRB .m G SIDE 00 0 1 1. ET!6;z-- SCAU w ,EE, LIM "I LANDSCAPE REQUIREMENTS IT/ENSJDRY — REART! D L I— TURY TREES S— NOT,BE 6 15 •1. -DRE r LESS — DIE PERMCUDI or LOT— MEASURED IN FEET DWIDED SIN —UNT OF REQUIRED ;ES: oR—E— (�,- ..) G. A —TRN3 1DECTO REMAIN -. 7 DJR + INC. T— TREES PROVIDE➢ ON SITE Sol, MIN 333 Wnhinginn Ave. N , . . C S 0 CAUNIFERS N PLANTING NOTES: h.$210 DJACENT J01 P6. PROPERTY -27DD 7 B 1,, 1. scR INC FOR AUT (612) 676-2796 Dr .—R. SH NCLDSURE 1 -AM as 5 soo HL Poc, EDGI G 4-TY 77NF xP IT CONCRETE—\ ALLIANT iRLBD SI.EWAI-K Ummo. INC. pwr IT IDLY E .1 I'Al. A- S.—R. SURE 5.11 -WOOD L LT NE 3A M.LCMULCH I-HL jv. elm exam I—E WIDE ULCH 86a SoD —R Rr I It W W.— IT No P.— 18 NIF —F �W000' I-ST, uA.Fr AS SURANCt/CONTRO1 war DATE ISSUE - - - - — - - - 06 "'T ,P 4-AD S. P111TIT TEAM DATA a D, 11 Mill SHRUB PLANTING DETAIL TREE PLANTING DETAIL SCALE IN FEET LANDSCAPE SCHEDULE ...... --su—, ... ... . —F �W000' I-ST, uA.Fr AS SURANCt/CONTRO1 war DATE ISSUE - - - - — - - - 06 "'T ,P 4-AD S. P111TIT TEAM DATA a D, 11 Mill SHRUB PLANTING DETAIL TREE PLANTING DETAIL SCALE IN FEET W L) Z W L z 7 Rif p 3 NO Z —F �W000' I-ST, uA.Fr AS SURANCt/CONTRO1 war DATE ISSUE - - - - — - - - 06 "'T ,P 4-AD S. P111TIT TEAM DATA a D, 11 Mill SHRUB PLANTING DETAIL TREE PLANTING DETAIL SCALE IN FEET W w O 2r V ZZ❑_i❑ ®❑■MEME■❑❑❑MO■■■i❑■❑❑ i7iTi \, l III i �i MY gg� oE �e zz LVWMR LN d d $ 8 8o aRuruLBLVID 8 g � H64TPNA7oNru ^ g ci R o Sci C � � M1 � an r rs�saHSro'o g n v 1 40 OR ...for living, learning, raising families & doing business " 1r I% "` 2008 Comprehensive Plan v •4 City of Edina �. 2008 Comprehensive Plan Update Data of Aerial Photography: August 2006 Figure 4.4 Conceptual Land Use Framework: Potential Areas of Change e 0��0. 0.5 Miles Edina Comp Plan Update 2008 Chapter 4: Land Use and Community Design 4A. 4 -33 f ...for living. learning, raising families & doing business 1 > / 2008 Comprehensive Plan Nonresidential and Description, Land Uses Development Density Mixed Use Guidelines Guidelines Categories NC Small- to moderate -scale Building footprints Neighborhood commercial, serving primarily generally less than Floor to Area Commercial the adjacent neighborhood (s). 20,000 sq. ft. (or less Ratio -Per Generally a 'node' rather than a for individual current Current examples: corridor.' Primary uses are storefronts). Parking Zoning Code: • Morningside retail and services, offices, is less prominent than maximum of commercial core studios, institutional uses. pedestrian features. 1,0* • Valley View and Residential uses permitted. Encourage structured 2- 3 Wooddale Existing and potential parking and open units /acre • 70`h Et Cahill neighborhood commercial space linkages where districts are identified for feasible; emphasize further study. enhancement of the pedestrian environment. OR Transitional areas along major Upgrade existing Office- Residential thoroughfares or between streetscape and Floor to Area No current examples higher- intensity districts and building appearance, Ratio -Per in City. Potential residential districts. Many improve pedestrian current examples include existing highway- oriented and transit Zoning Code: Pentagon Park area commercial areas are environment. maximum of and other 1 -494 anticipated to transition to this Encourage structured 0.5 to 1.0* corridor locations more mixed -use character. parking and open 2- 3 Primary uses are offices, space linkages where units /acre attached or multifamily housing. feasible; emphasize Secondary uses: 66iied retai the enhancement of and service uses tnut IFILLUU111S the pedestrian "big box" retail), limited environment. industrial (fully enclosed), institutional uses, parks and open space. Vertical mixed use should be encouraged, and may be required on larger sites. O This designation allows for Provide Office professional and business offices, buffer /transition to Floor to Area generally where retail services adjacent residential Ratio - Per Current examples do not occur within the uses. Use high quality Zoning Code: include the office development unless they are permanent building Maximum of buildings on the west accessory uses that serve the materials and on -site 0.5 side of TH 100 needs of office building tenants. landscaping. 701h between and Vehicle access requirements for Encourage structured 77`h Streets. office uses are high; however, parking. traffic generation from office buildings is limited to morning and evening peak hours during weekdays. Office uses should be located generally along arterial and collector streets. Edina Comp Plan Update 2008 Chapter 4: Land Use and Community Design 4 -28 AA rJyMA IDR•L- DMIad/Ramada," OR - Ottce RoodarcEl RM - Raplpnal Medical LDAR - LDw 0-4 A4echrd Remade dk,1 O- oIDn OSP- open Space end P eke MOR- Medium D.afly Remadelltlel —M %C -Meted Use Carder �,• PSP•PuElil-rN -Pubac L-'-- FDR -Hlph DenWj ReW.dIma 1111. CAC- C— IVAClNey Ce,M _ LAH- L.h,bdAccon Horwry - NC- blelphboncocd Cuma,clal I• Induetrlel 2 4 2 12 3-5 ► sl 4 M ealn EI IIDR corn Er r: Sift m °a n Height Limits 0 2 Stories: 24' 0 3 Stories: 36 K 4 Stories: 48' N 5 Stories: 60' 8 Stories: 96' 9 Stories: 108' w 10 Stories: 120' V)I 12 Stories: 144' r:h. Standard Height HD s Podium Height a ry w,alM 5 t n 0 m 12 z -j— 2 0 1 W ,,,n 51 OR _ - e �.� City of Edina 2008 Comprehensive Plan Update Data Source: URS 3-5 OR �.. •�. 4 i z — 10 3 1� 8 8 2 3 2 L` 4 »....t'" 4 2 2 4 q, IDR 4 2 2 9 4 %IDR s, 4 OR 9 2 nr 12 OR-------- Future Land Use Plan with Building Heights Southeast Quadrant Figure 4.6B e0 05 Miles M Memorandum DATE: October 25, 2011 To: Mr. Cary Teague, Planning Director Mr. Wayne Houle, Public Works Director City of Edina FROM. Charles Rickart, P.E., PTOE RE: .6996 France Avenue Traffic and Parking Study City of Edina, MN WSB Project No. 1686 -23 Background 'The purpose of this study is to determine the potential traffic impacts the proposed redevelopment of the 6996 France Avenue site has on the adjacent roadway system, and determine the anticipated parking demand for the proposed redevelopment. The site is located in Edina in the northwest quadrant of France Avenue and 70th Street. The existing site contains a full service Sinclair gas station. Access to the existing site is currently provided at three (3) driveway locations; a right - in/right -out on France Avenue, a right - in/right -out and full movement on 70th Street. The project location is shown on.Figure 1. The proposed site redevelopment includes reconstruction of the site with a new retail /office building. Access to the site will be provided at two driveways; a right -in only on France Avenue and a full movement access on 70th Street. The current plan provides 34 parking spaces for the site. Two redevelopment alternatives were considered for the traffic and parking analysis. Alternative 1 provides for a mix of 3,000 sf of retail and 5,260 sf of office, where Alternative 2 provides for 6,600 sf of only retail use. The proposed preferred alternative (Alternative 1) site plan is shown on Figure 2. The traffic impacts of the existing and anticipated development were evaluated at each site driveway as well as the primary impacted intersection at France Avenue and 701h Street. The parking demand was determined based on the proposed uses and City Code. The following, sections of this report document the analysis and anticipated impacts of the proposed redevelopment. WSBInfrastructure w Engineering a Planning a Construction 701 Xenia Avenue South Suite #300 Minneapolis, MN 55416 & Assoctales, dic. Tel: 763 541 -4800 Fax: 763 541 -1700 Memorandum DATE: October 25, 2011 To: Mr. Cary Teague, Planning Director Mr. Wayne Houle, Public Works Director City of Edina FROM. Charles Rickart, P.E., PTOE RE: .6996 France Avenue Traffic and Parking Study City of Edina, MN WSB Project No. 1686 -23 Background 'The purpose of this study is to determine the potential traffic impacts the proposed redevelopment of the 6996 France Avenue site has on the adjacent roadway system, and determine the anticipated parking demand for the proposed redevelopment. The site is located in Edina in the northwest quadrant of France Avenue and 70th Street. The existing site contains a full service Sinclair gas station. Access to the existing site is currently provided at three (3) driveway locations; a right - in/right -out on France Avenue, a right - in/right -out and full movement on 70th Street. The project location is shown on.Figure 1. The proposed site redevelopment includes reconstruction of the site with a new retail /office building. Access to the site will be provided at two driveways; a right -in only on France Avenue and a full movement access on 70th Street. The current plan provides 34 parking spaces for the site. Two redevelopment alternatives were considered for the traffic and parking analysis. Alternative 1 provides for a mix of 3,000 sf of retail and 5,260 sf of office, where Alternative 2 provides for 6,600 sf of only retail use. The proposed preferred alternative (Alternative 1) site plan is shown on Figure 2. The traffic impacts of the existing and anticipated development were evaluated at each site driveway as well as the primary impacted intersection at France Avenue and 701h Street. The parking demand was determined based on the proposed uses and City Code. The following, sections of this report document the analysis and anticipated impacts of the proposed redevelopment. 6996 France Avenue Traffic and Parldng Study City of Edina September 30, 2011 Page 2 of 9 Existing Traffic Characteristics The existing lane configuration and traffic control include: France Avenue at 70th Street — Traffic Control Signal SB France Ave approaching 70th St — one through / right, two through, one left NB France Ave approaching 70th St — one right, three through, one left EB 70th St approaching France Ave — one through / right, one through, one left WB 70th St approaching France Ave — one through / right, one through, one left Site driveways — Stop Sign Control France Avenue RI / RO access — one lane in, one lane out 70th Street RI / RO access — one lane in, one lane out 70th Street full movement access — one lane in, one lane out AM and PM peak hour turning movement counts were conducted at each site driveway on September 15, 2011. Although 70th Street was under construction west of Valley View Road at the time of the count, the total traffic entering and exiting the existing site should not have been greatly affected. Pervious counts conducted at France Avenue and 70th Street were used in the analysis to determine the background traffic levels on the roadways. Site Trip Generation The estimated trip generation from the proposed redevelopment is shown below in Table 1. The trip generation rates used to estimate the site traffic are based on extensive surveys of the trip - generation rates for other similar land uses as documented in the Institute of Transportation Engineers Trip Generation Manual, 8th Edition. The table shows the total daily, AM peak hour and PM. peak hour trip generation for the existing Gas Station use on the site and two proposed redevelopment alternatives. As indicated previously, traffic counts were conducted at each site driveway during the AM and PM peak hours. This was compared to a typical gas / service station trip generation from the ITE Trip Generation Manual. As shown below in Table 1 the potential trips that could be generated from the site is significantly higher than the actual counts. In order to look at the worst case condition, the ITE site generated traffic was used for the existing no -build analysis. Two redevelopment alternatives were considered. Alternative 1 provides for a mix of retail and office on the site, where alternative 2 provides for only retail uses. Alternative 1 has a higher AM peak hour generation while Alternative 2 has a higher PM peak hour generation. However, in both cases the total traffic volume anticipated for the redevelopment will be less than what is currently generated by the site and significantly less than what a typical gas /service station could generate. A31 6996 France Avenue Traffic and Parking Study City of Edina September 30, 2011 Page 3 of 9 Table 1- Estimated Site Trip Generation Land Use Size Unit ADT AM k PM Peak Total In Out Total LIn Ou t Total In Out Existin g Site Counted 9/15/2011 Gas Station 7 Fueling Stations NA NA NA 24 13 11 46 25 21 Existing Site (ITE Gas Station) Gas Station 7 Fueling Stations 1180 590 590 85 44 42 98 49 49 Redevelopment Alternative 1 Retail 3 1000 sf 129 64 64 4 3 1 11 5 6 Office 5.26 1000 sf 58 29 29 9 7 2 8 1 7 Total Alternative 1 187 93 93 13 10 3 19 6 13 Redevelopment Alternative 2 Retail 6.6 1000 sf 283 142 142 7 5 2 25 12 13 Source: Institute of Transportation Engineers Trip Generation Manual, 8th Edition Trip Distribution Site - generated trips were distributed to the adjacent roadway system based on 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: 30% north on France Avenue 40% south on France Avenue 20% west on 70th Street 10% east on 70th Street Traffic Operations Existing and forecasted traffic operations were evaluated for the intersection of France Avenue at 70th Street and each site driveway. This section describes the methodology used to assess the operations and provides a summary of traffic operations. A39 6996 France Avenue Traffic and Parking Study City of Edina September 30, 2011 Page 4 of 9 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. 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 2. 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 2 - Intersection Level of Service Ranges Source: HCM 433 Control Delay (Seconds) Signalized Un- Signalized A < 10 < 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 433 6996 France Avenue Traffic and Parking Study City of Edina September 30, 2011 Page 5 of 9 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. 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 3, below, summarizes the existing LOS at each driveway and the intersection of France Avenue and 70th Street based on the current lane geometry and traffic volumes. The table shows that all intersection are operation at LOS C or better during both the AM and PM peak hours. At the France Avenue and 70th Street intersection the northbound left turn in the AM peak and the southbound left turn in the PM peak are currently operating at a LOS E. At the full movement driveway access to 70th Street the southbound left turn is operating at a LOS E. All other movements are operating at LOS D or better. 43t 6996 France Avenue Traffic and Parking Study City of Edina September 30, 2011 Page 6 of 9 Table 3 - Existing Level of Service C = Overall LOS (E) = Worst movement LOS Forecast Traffic Operations Source: WSB & Associates, Inc. A capacity and LOS analysis was completed for the France Avenue at 70th Street intersection and each site driveway for both redevelopment alternatives. The results of the analysis are shown below in Table 4 and Table 5. All of the intersections are expected to operate at the same level of service after the redevelopment as before the redevelopment. Table 4 — Alternative 1 Redevelopment Level of Service AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Intersection Delay Delay LOS (sec/veh) LOS ( sec/veh) France Ave at 70th Street C (E) 23 C (E) 28 France Ave R1/R0 Driveway A (A) 1 A (A) 2 70th Street RI/RO Driveway A (A) 1 A (A) 2 7e Street Full Movement A (A) 2 A (E) 3 Driveway C = Overall LOS (E) = Worst movement LOS Forecast Traffic Operations Source: WSB & Associates, Inc. A capacity and LOS analysis was completed for the France Avenue at 70th Street intersection and each site driveway for both redevelopment alternatives. The results of the analysis are shown below in Table 4 and Table 5. All of the intersections are expected to operate at the same level of service after the redevelopment as before the redevelopment. Table 4 — Alternative 1 Redevelopment Level of Service C = Overall LOS (E) = Worst movement LOS Source: WSB & Associates, me. Table 5 — Alternative 2 Redevelopment Level of Service AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Intersection Delay Delay LOS (sec /veh) LOS (sec /veh) France Ave at 70th Street C (E) 23 C (E) 27 France Ave Right In Driveway A (A) 1 A (A) 2 70th Street Full Movement A (A) 1 A (E) 3 Driveway C = Overall LOS (E) = Worst movement LOS Source: WSB & Associates, me. Table 5 — Alternative 2 Redevelopment Level of Service C = Overall LOS (E) = Worst movement LOS /�3�" Source: WSB & Associates, Inc. AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Intersection Delay Delay LOS (sec /veh) LOS (sec /veh) France Ave at 70th Street C (E) 23 C (E) 27 France Ave Right In Driveway A (A) 1 A (A) 2 70" Street Full Movement A (A) 1 A (E) 2 Driveway C = Overall LOS (E) = Worst movement LOS /�3�" Source: WSB & Associates, Inc. 6996 France Avenue Traffic and Parking Study City of Edina September 30, 2011 Page 7 of 9 Parking Demand The parking demand for the site was analyzed based on each redevelopment alternative and potential uses on the site. For the office use either a general office or medical office was evaluated. For the retail use a variety of uses were evaluated from general shops to bagel or coffee shops. The parking generation rates used to estimate the parking demand is based on surveys of the parking generation for other similar land uses as documented in the Institute of Transportation Engineers Parking Generation Manual, 4`h Edition.-Table 6 shows a summary of each of the potential uses and what the anticipated parking demand would be for each for a weekday and weekend. Table 6 - Site Alternative Use Parking Demand Use Office ---------------------------- General Medical ITE ] Size Rate 5,260 sf ----- -------- -- - - - - -- ------ - - - - -- 3.45/ksf 4.27/ksf Generation Manual T--Weekend- ,s Rate Spai ----- - - - - -- ---- - -- ------- - - - - -- 19 1.80/k----- - - sf 10 23 4.27/ksf 1 23 Retail------------------- -L - - -- -3, 000_ sf ----- I ------------- I ------------ I -------------- I -------- - - - - - I __General Shopping Auto Parts ____ Liquor Store - I------------------- Drug Store - - - - - -- -- --------------- -- Video Store ---------------------------- Bank ----- Copy/Print Store ----- Coffee- Shop _______ -Retail --------------------------- General Shopping Auto Parts _______ Liquor_ Store Drug_ Store Video Store ---------------------------- Bank ---------------------------- Co /Print Store ----- Coffee- Shop _______ 3.16/ksf - - - -- -- 2.47/ksf 2.98/ksf 2.92/ksf --------------- - - - - -- - ----- - - - - -- --------------- - - - - -- -- 2.76/ksf----- - - - - -- 5.67/ksf --------------- - - - - -- - ----- - - - - -- 3.00/ksf --------------- - - - - -- - ----- - - - - -- 17.33/ksf 8.00/ksf ----- 6,600 -sf --------- - - - - -- ------- - - - - -- --------------- - - - - -- -- 3.16/ksf----- - - - - -- 2.47/ksf --------------- - - - - -- - 2.98/lcsf --------------- - - - - -- - - --98/ - f 2.92/ksf --------------- - - - - -- - ----- - - - - -- 2.76/ksf --------------- - - - - -- - ----- - - - - -- 5.67/ksf --------------- - - - - -- - ----- - - - - -- 3.00/ksf --------------- - - - - -- - ----- - - - - -- 17.33/ksf 8.00/ksf 10 - - - - - -- 3.40/ksf -------- - - - - -- ------- 11 - - - - -- ---- - - -8- - -- - 2.74/ksf 9- 9 ----- - - - - -- 2.55/ksf -- -- ---- - - - - -- ------- 8 - - - - -- 9 ----- - - - - -- 2.94/ksf -- -- ---- - - - - -- ------- 9 - - - - -- 9 ----- - - - - -- 3.04/ksf -------- - - - - -- ------- 10 - - - - -- 18 ---- - - - - - -- 4.66/ksf -------- - - - - -- ------- 14 - - - - -- 9 ---- - - - - - -- 3.00/ksf -------- - - - - -- ------- 9 - - - - -- 52 17.33/ksf 52 24 9.78/ksf 30 ----- - - - - -- 21 - - - - -- -------- - - - - -- ------- 3.40/ksf -------- - - - - -- ------- - - - - -- 23 - - - - -- ----- - 17 - - -- 2.74/ksf - ----- 19 - - - -- 20 - - - - -- 2.55/ksf -------- - - - - -- ------- 17 - - - - -- ----- 20 - - - - -- 2.94/ksf -------- - - - - -- ------- 20 - - - - -- ----- 19 - - -- - - - .04/ksf 3- -- -- -- ----- - - - - ___21____ ---- 38 - - - ---- - - -- 4.66/ksf - - ----- -- ----- - - - - --- 31 - - - - -- - - - ---- 20 - - -- -- 3- -- ----- .00 /ksf ----- - - - - 20 -- - - - - -- _ 115 17.33/ksf 115 53 9.78/ksf 1 65 A3( 6996 France Avenue Traffic and Parldng Study City of Edina September 30, 2011 Page 8 of 9 The current City Code would require a total of 47 parking spaces for Alternative 1 and 42 parking spaces for Alternative 2. Currently the proposed site is estimating 34 parking spaces available. The developer has indicated that based on the proposed site plan (Alternative 1) and the anticipated uses a parking demand of 33 spaces would be required. Reviewing the ITE Parking Generation summary in Table 6, parking demand for Alternative 1 would range from 27 to 75 spaces needed depending on the use. For Alternative 1 the parking demand would range from 17 to 115 parking spaces needed depending on the use. Table 7 provides a summary of the parking demand for the proposed redevelopment plan. The shaded area under each alternative indicates the uses or combination of uses that would not meet the available parking based on ITE estimates. In general any type of high turnover drive up use such as a bank, bagel shop or coffee shop will require more parking than available. Table 7 — Parking Demand Summary Parking Available City Code Developers Estimate Alternative 1 General Office / General Shopping General Office / Auto Parts General Office / Liquor Store General Office / Drug Store General Office / Video Store General Office / Bank General Office / Copy Print Store General Office / Coffee Shop General Office / Bagel Shop Alternative 2 General Shopping Auto Parts Liquor Store Drug Store Video Store Bank Copy Print Store Coffee Shop Bagel Shop 34 (Alternative 1) 47/42 (Alternative 1 / Alternative 2) 33 (Alternative 1) 29/21 Medical Office / General Shopping 33/34 27/19 Medical Office / Auto Parts 31/32 28/18 Medical Office / Liquor Store 32/31 28/19 Medical Office / Drug Store 32/32 28/20 Medical Office / Video Store 32/33 37/24 Medical Office / Bank 41/37 28/19 Medical Office / Copy Print Store 32/32 71/62 Medical Office / Coffee Shop 75/75 43/40 Medical Office / Bagel Shop 47/53 21/23 xx/xx = Weekday/Weekend 17/19 20/17 20/20 19/21 38/31 20/20 115/115 53/65 �3� 6996 France Avenue Traffic and Parking Study City of Edina September 30, 2011 Page 9 of 9 Conclusions /Recommendation Based on the analysis documented in this memorandum, WSB has concluded the following: • The proposed site redevelopment is anticipated to generate less traffic than the current gas / service station use and significantly less than what a typical. gas / service station could generate. • Traffic operations at the intersections of France Avenue and 70th Street will remain the same with or without the proposed redevelopment. • Traffic operations at each of the proposed site driveway will operate at overall LOS A. The existing movement from the 70th Street full movement access will experience minor delays during the PM peak hour. This will not affect the operation of traffic on 70th Street. • Although the available parking does not meet the City's Code, based on ITE parking generation estimates the 34 parking spaces would be adequate for Alternative 1 or Alternative 2 with non drive -up high turnover uses. Based on these conclusions no additional improvements other than those shown on the site plan would be required to accommodate the proposed site redevelopment. Alt Labe Coiwelia AT Pr ect' Coca 10 y 6996;F4npe A.veriUe n 1. „ M�t -'i• 7Qth, Street 1 ,ra al`•1 ��; f :.. '', t.r.'t-r^ 7•f,.. ",r.,. Jae A t O 6996 France Avenue Traffic Study City of Edina, Minnesota Project Location Map HI AViGFDTH . 333 Wuhington Ave, N' S,it, 0210 _ hlin ... palis. MN 55401' Ph. (612) 676-2700 I N., (612) 67tr2796' . ALLSANT FNGINEE0.1N0, INC. v NNAR%AVe.90UnL SNIE IOo GPOLIS, FAN iS115 PIIONE (el]1 T3Y -vOYO FA%(etl) l51 ] W 1 I N,m Q r I W N, W W U < Z aN Q Z LL �w g LL al "i i a n° [W[ wsA[uxR.,R[ I OUAJiV ASSUFANCE /CONTPOL DATE ISSUE PROJECT TEAM•DATA' C-2 ' I i j - s - SCAIE SITE PLAN NOTES: • EASIb[D (PEES - r t. (°p a0 PCRaw[EOCpuuuxNRI GWWxO A'lo/OR i1 OF NRe. [mRU oRA n [Hoops - — — - - -- — — — PROPERTY UNE- — — FR F un AM /YOx [xPAxs 1111 [ wx IF R[ Cu[m'wnnE %CwCRfl[NRp Au0 Co9TNC — t0' P.A.. ETDACx Em—, NCRETE 1 SNEwACR I I ] Stn Rol x w SN[WU% -.1. R.O.w. TO B[ cn xwrE _ . I 0 FFS I 1 �OgCRETE. R f 6ALVDsYxSIP.mNOS.ut ILURT. M" INE FRE O( REPu�LAxoR _ %9[�pcaxcnflE pptx cusp uralss xmm -., r � ° R. Eltuulrv0u4� ueni ry RIO' I . � 1 .x • I —- RNn=" pp 5, DN S o~,9 ND NPExSbx' we.I -' (IVP) ENCLDSURP • pLONApL E " � - fl %TURF :CONCPETE . 90Ewx n •.. I � 4- I MOlxrs[SmRO W ACTOR LL D[IO SiA E ANO FC ATON COi ES, SAWU�Aa RLO Mnrvx INETPROPO I , _ 10 -0• ZO' 1 Ri0' PCDESTRAN RCUUREIB RAMP DOVES -(TW.) CAIE° TTCP.OR 15,A EN.— OF ART OTSCR[PA"OESTOF VARATONS FROM FIE PINTS "' "' MR """'E" 5- CONGLm P]• PIS' _ S 0 CE N H 1( RAR ROOD —1. ,I - U., I J - I 1= •� ` - S.p• W AC— mc Is.:• I SITE DATA: iWS• RETAIL SPACE #1 I I I N PRpP .T `' U-1 9 AN ActEP¢ ( tt _ -E S' smf/n(' 10 fl m�lpa,ss PRwn¢E. i LcNI[ P MG rR'sE a'. - O.i - ( •,' PEOESIRLW CURB :.� $ j pONCRE1E CO.CRLR f F PARKING DATA: - _ n P' �AE�rAIX 1RUNCATCO RIO. B pink 50 FT - _— el ••-- I CM OF COww EOUn�Fx S �� I FI ..•.•, (O FOR 101u % EP.. am 50 AomlloxN Roo sp— PAR RIO . —EO : 51 cccsvlRE ROUR i L —111-1 IT �wo D - ] (wawFS i NAx AccfsslelE PANDFN SPN:[51 RE 1 sTEPS �. RETAILS CE #2 rAM� I BoTh SS DN DOM SDES J R7•1 �amMwNS W PM %wc.SETBAC% i '' -`I SITE LEGEND: — / t �oNmmcTIDN 5 ARTS RAMP mM TRUNCATED OOUCS T . -M ED[SIRIAN NPB DOVE MM TRUNCATED r� roxCP[T[ Pn METAL XAIIDf. ]] I%R[ OR ]' NNCR[lE.GS[ IxNRo-]m O / STNC TRAFFIC . uOR �YAI . corvcPETE.APPDN uATCN 10 E O —.Al. CURB E1141'.. : coxcRETE 50EwA11[ N - ,(d1 AViGFDTH . 333 Wuhington Ave, N' S,it, 0210 _ hlin ... palis. MN 55401' Ph. (612) 676-2700 I N., (612) 67tr2796' . ALLSANT FNGINEE0.1N0, INC. v NNAR%AVe.90UnL SNIE IOo GPOLIS, FAN iS115 PIIONE (el]1 T3Y -vOYO FA%(etl) l51 ] W 1 I N,m Q r I W N, W W U < Z aN Q Z LL �w g LL al "i i a n° [W[ wsA[uxR.,R[ I OUAJiV ASSUFANCE /CONTPOL DATE ISSUE PROJECT TEAM•DATA' C-2 ' I i j - s - SCAIE TO ]D W FEET AViGFDTH . 333 Wuhington Ave, N' S,it, 0210 _ hlin ... palis. MN 55401' Ph. (612) 676-2700 I N., (612) 67tr2796' . ALLSANT FNGINEE0.1N0, INC. v NNAR%AVe.90UnL SNIE IOo GPOLIS, FAN iS115 PIIONE (el]1 T3Y -vOYO FA%(etl) l51 ] W 1 I N,m Q r I W N, W W U < Z aN Q Z LL �w g LL al "i i a n° [W[ wsA[uxR.,R[ I OUAJiV ASSUFANCE /CONTPOL DATE ISSUE PROJECT TEAM•DATA' C-2 ' I i j WSBInfrastructure ■ Engineering ■ Planning ■ Construction & Associates. Inc. Memorandum DATE: February 2, 2012 To: Mr. Cary Teague, Planning Director Mr. Wayne Houle, Public Works Director City of Edina FROM: Charles Rickart, P.E., PTOE RE: Supplemental Parking Analysis 6996 France Avenue City of Edina, MN WSB Project No. 1686 -23 701 Xenia Avenue South Suite #300 Minneapolis, MN 55416 Tel: 763 541 -4800 Fax: 763 541 -1700 A Traffic and Parking Study was completed in October 2011 that reviewed two primary alternatives for the land use on the site. The alternatives included: 1) a mix of office (5,260sf) and retail (3,000sf), or; 2) all retail (6,600sf). The results of the study concluded that the parking being proposed (34 spaces) was adequate for both alternatives with no drive up high turnover uses (i.e. bakery, bank, bagel shop or coffee shop). However, the analysis did not include an alternative that assumed all office (8,260sf). In order to provide the developer with flexibility in filling the new building the 100% office alternative was also analyzed. The parking generation rates used to estimate the parking demand is based on surveys of the parking generation for other similar land uses as documented in the Institute of Transportation Engineers Parking Generation Manual, 4rh Edition. Table 1 shows a summary of the potential office uses and what the anticipated parking demand would be for each for a weekday and weekend. Table 1— Office Use Parking Demand The results of this supplemental analysis conclude that the available parking would be adequate for a general office use. However, should a medical office use occupy the entire building there would be a shortage of parking. Assuming 34 available parking stalls the maximum size of medical office space that could be accommodated is 7,950sf. A00\ Size Weekday Weekend Rate Spaces Rate Spaces - - - - -- 8,260 sf --------------- - - - - -- ------- - - - - -- ------ - - - - -- -------- - - - - -- ------- - - - - -- -Office ---------------------- General 3.45/ksf 29 1.80/ksf 15 Medical 4.27/ksf 36 4.27/ksf 36 The results of this supplemental analysis conclude that the available parking would be adequate for a general office use. However, should a medical office use occupy the entire building there would be a shortage of parking. Assuming 34 available parking stalls the maximum size of medical office space that could be accommodated is 7,950sf. A00\ City of Edina - City Code Page 1 of 11 CITY CODE Section 850.16 - Planned Commercial District (PCD). Subd. 1 Subdistricts. The Planned Commercial District shall be divided Into the following subdistricts: Planned Commercial (PCD -1) District - 1 Planned Commercial (PCD -2) District -2 Planned Commercial (PCD -3) District -3 Planned Commercial (PCD -4) District - 4 Subd. 2 Principal Uses in PCD -1. Antique shops. Art galleries. Art studios. Bakeries, provided the room or rooms containing the preparation and baking process shall not have a gross floor area in excess of 2,500 square feet. Barber shops. Beauty parlors. Bicycle stores, including rental, repair and sales. Book and stationery stores. Camera and photographic supply stores. Candy and ice cream stores. Clothes pressing and tailoring shops. Clothing stores not exceeding 2,500 square feet of gross floor area. Clubs, lodge halls and meeting rooms, offices and other facilities for non- profit organizations not exceeding 2,500 square feet of gross floor area. Coin and philatelic stores. Day care. Drug stores. Dry cleaning establishments and laundries. Employment agencies. Financial Institutions, but excluding drive - through facilities and pawn shops. Florist shops. Food, grocery, meat, fish, bakery and delicatessen stores. Garden supply, tool and seed stores. Gift shops. Handball courts, racquetball courts and exercise and reducing salons. ,w1 httn: / /www.ei. edina. mn. us/ CityCode /L5- 01_CityCodeSectO850.16.htm 8/8/2011 City of Edina - City Code Hardware stores. Hobby shops for the sale of goods to be assembled and used off the premises. Household furnishings, fixtures and accessory stores not exceeding 2,500 square feet of gross floor area. Interior decorating establishments. Jewelry stores. Launderettes. Leather goods stores. Liquor stores, municipally owned, off -sale. Locksmith shops. Medical and dental clinics. Music and video sales and rental stores. Musical Instruments stores and repair shops. Newsstands. Offices, including both business and professional. Optical stores. Paint and wallpaper stores not exceeding 2,500 square feet of gross floor area. Personal apparel stores not exceeding 2,500 square feet of gross floor area. Picture framing and picture stores. Repair stores and "fix -It" shops which provide services for the repair of home, garden, yard and personal use appliances. Restaurants, but excluding "drive ins" and drive through facilities, other than as allowed in Section 850.07, Subd. 14.F. Schools. Second -hand stores not exceeding 2,500 square feet of gross floor area, but excluding pawn shops. Shoe sales or repair stores. Sporting and camping goods stores not exceeding 2,500 square feet of gross floor area. Tailor shops. Tobacco shops. Toy shops. Travel bureaus and transportation ticket offices. Variety, gift, notion and soft goods stores. Vending machines which are coin or card operated, but excluding amusement devices. Subd. 3 Principal Uses in PCD -2. Any principal use permitted in PCD -1. K) htti): / /www.ci. edina. mn. us/ CityCode /L5- 01_CityCodeSectO850.16.htm Page 2 of 11 8/8/2011 City of Edina - City Code Page 3 of.11 Amusement and recreation establishments such as amusement arcades, commercial bowling alleys and pool halls. Animal hospitals and kennels, but excluding establishments with outside runs. Automotive accessory stores, but excluding repair and service garages. Blueprinting, printing and Photostatting establishments. Business machine sales and service shops. Catering establishments. Clothing stores. Clubs, lodge halls and meeting rooms, offices and other facilities for non - profit organizations. Commercial kennels as defined by Subsection 300.01 of the City Code. Currency exchanges as defined in M.S. 53A. Department stores not exceeding 40,000 square feet of gross Floor area. Dry goods stores. Electrical and household appliance stores, Including radio and television sales and service. Exterminating offices. Fabric stores. Frozen food stores Including the rental of lockers in conjunction therewith. Furniture stores including upholstering when conducted as an incidental part of the principal use. Fraternal, philanthropic and charitable institution offices and assembly halls. . Furrier shops including the storage and conditioning of furs when conducted as an Incidental part of the principal use. Home repair, maintenance and remodeling stores and shops. Hotels, motels and motor inns. Household furnishings, fixtures and accessories stores. Laboratories, medical and dental. Office supplies stores. Orthopedic and medical appliance stores, but excluding the manufacturing or assembly of appliances or goods. Paint and wallpaper stores. Personal apparel stores. Pet shops. Photography studios. Post offices. Public utility service stores. AL�3 http: / /www.ci. edina. mn. us/ CityCode /L5- 01_CityCodeSectO850.16.htm 8/8/2011 City of Edina - City Code Page 4 of 11 Rental agencies for the rental only of clothing, appliances, automobiles, cartage trailers, and household fixtures, furnishings and accessories, excluding pawn shops. Schools for teaching music, dance or business vocations. Sporting and camping goods stores. Taxidermist shops. Telegraph offices. Theaters, but excluding outdoor or "drive -In" facilities. Ticket agencies. Trading stamps redemption stores. Undertaking and funeral home establishments. Subd 4. Principal Uses In PCD -3. Any principal use permitted in PCD -2, except offices requiring the Issuance of a conditional use permit. Department stores or shopping centers exceeding 40,000 square feet of gross floor area. Transit stations. Publicly owned uses. Sexually oriented businesses. Subd 5. Principal Uses in PCD -4. Automobile service centers. Car washes. Gas stations. Subd. 6. Conditional Uses. A. PCD -1 and PCD -2. Multi- residential uses. B. PCD -3. Automobile agencies selling new, unused vehicles. Boat or marine stores or agencies selling or displaying new, unused boats. Multi- residential uses. offices except offices allowed as a permitted accessory use. All non - residential uses that increase the FAR to more than 0.5. Subd. 7. Accessory Uses in PCD -1. off- street parking facilities. Buildings for the storage of merchandise to be retailed by the related principal use. Not more than two amusement devices. Drive through facilities, except those accessory to financial Institutions. A restaurant may have a drive - through facility subject to the requirements in Section 850.07, Subd. 14.F. 40 http: / /www.ci. edina. mn. us/ CityCode /L5- 01_CityCodeSectO850.16.htm 8/8/2011 City of Edina - City Code Page 5 of.1 l , Produce stands pursuant to a permit Issued by the Manager Subd. 8. Accessory Uses in PCD -2. All accessory uses allowed In PCD -1. Drive - through facilities. Amusement devices. Offices accessory to a principal use. Subd. 9. Accessory Uses in PCD -3. All accessory uses permitted In PCD -1 and PCD -2. Automobile or boat and marine stores or agencies selling used automobiles or boats, If (1) such a use is accessory to and on the same lot as a related principal use selling new automobiles or boats, and (ii) the total floor area and lot area devoted to the accessory use does not exceed that of the principal use. Repair garages for servicing motor vehicles, if such a use is on the same lot as an automobile agency. Offices accessory to an allowed principal use. Subd. 10. Accessory Uses in PCD -4. Accessory car washes. Retail sales of convenience goods. Gasoline sales accessory to a car wash. Subd. 11. Requirements for Building Coverage, Setbacks and Height. A. Maximum Floor Area Ratio (subject to the requirements of Subd. 12 of this Subsection) PCD -1 1.0 of the tract PCD -2 1.5 of the tract PCD -3 1) North of West 70th Street: 1.0 of the tract provided that non - residential uses may not exceed 0.75. li) South of West 70th Street: 0.5 of the tract. PCD -4 0.3 of the tract B. Setbacks (Subject to the requirements of paragraphs A. and B. of Subd. it of this Subsection). http:// www .ci.edina.nm.us /CityCode/L5 -01 CityCodeSectO850.16.htm 8/8/2011 Interior Front Side Side Rear Street Street Yard Yard PCD -1 35'* 25'* 25'* 25'* PCD -2 35'* 25'* 25'* 25'* PCD -3 North of 70th 35' ** 35' ** 35' ** 35' ** Street South of 70th 50' ** 50' ** 50' ** 50' ** Street PCD -4 35' 25' 25' 25' All other uses 45' 25' 45' 25' A 46- http:// www .ci.edina.nm.us /CityCode/L5 -01 CityCodeSectO850.16.htm 8/8/2011 City of Edina - City Code Page 6 of 11 *or the building height, if greater. * *Subject to the requirements of Subd. 11 of this section. C. Maximum Building Height. PCD -1 -- See Section 850.22, Building Height Overlay District and Appendix A of the City's Official Zoning Map. PCD -2 -- See.Sectlon 850.22, Building Height Overlay District and Appendix A of the City's Official Zoning Map. PCD -3 -- See Section 850.22, Building Height Overlay District and Appendix A of the City's Official Zoning Map. PCD -4 -- See Section 850.22, Building Height Overlay District and Appendix A of the City's Official Zoning Map. Subd. 12. Special Requirements. In addition to the general requirements described in Subsection 850.07, the following special requirements shall apply: A. Established Average Front Street Setback for PCD -1 and PCD -2. When more than 25 percent of the frontage on one side of the street between intersections is occupied by buildings having front street setbacks of greater or lesser distances than hereafter required, then the average setback of the existing buildings shall be maintained by all new or relocated buildings on the same side of that street and between the Intersections. If a building is to be built or relocated where there is an established average setback, and there are existing buildings on only one side of the building or relocated building, the front street setback of the new or relocated building need be no greater than that of the nearest adjoining principal building. If a building is to be built or relocated where there is an established average setback and there are existing buildings on both sides of the new or relocated building, the front street setback need be no greater than that which would be established by connecting a line between the most forward portion of the adjacent principal building on each side. B. Interior Side Yard and Rear Yard Setbacks. Interior side yard and rear yard setbacks including parking setbacks and loading facility setbacks apply only when the side or rear lot line is a Planned Commercial District boundary. C. Setbacks for PCD -3. The minimum building setback required by Paragraph B of Subd. 11 of this subsection shall be increased as follows: 1. In the area bounded by France Avenue on the west, York Avenue on the east and W. 70th Street on the south, the minimum building setback shall be increased by 1/3 foot for each foot that the building exceeds 50 feet in building height. For purposes hereof, only those portions of buildings which exceeds 50 feet in building height need provide the additional setbacks required by this paragraph. 2. In all other areas, the minimum building setback shall be equal to the building height for buildings taller than 50 feet. Notwithstanding the requirement of this subsection, the City encourages i) ground level retail and service uses that create an active pedestrian and streetscape environment and ii) pedestrian connections by way of skyways and tunnels. The City Council will consider exceptions to setback requirements for these purposes. A http: / /www.ci. edina. mn. us/ CityCode /L5- 01_CityCodeSect0850.16.htm 8/8/2011 City of Edina - City Code Page 7 ofJ l D. Travel Demand Management. Final development plans for any office use In the PCD -3 subdistrict which requires the Issuance of a conditional use permit shall Include a travel demand management (TDM) plan prepared by an Independent TDM professional. The plan must document TDM measures and performance measures to be Implemented. Approval of the TDM plan by the City shall be a condition of the Issuance of the conditional use permit. E. On Site Sanitary Sewage Retention System. This paragraph applies to properties served by Metropolitan Sewer Interceptor No. 1 -RF -491. Final development plans for any new buildings or uses In the PCD -3 subdistrict that require the Issuance of a conditional use permit shall Include plans for storage tanks and other facilities designed to retain on -site sanitary sewer discharges during peak flow conditions that would otherwise enter the City's sanitary sewer system. Such plans must be prepared by a licensed professional engineer acceptable to the City. The plans must provide for facilities designed to prevent discharges to the sanitary sewer system during peak flow conditions, In amounts and volumes that exceed discharges that existed prior to construction of the buildings and uses proposed by the final development plans. Approval of the sanitary sewer retention system shall be a condition of the conditional use permit. In lieu of constructing a storage tank, a cash fee equal to the cost of constructing the storage tank may be paid to the city. The fee shall be placed in a dedicated fund to pay for the cost of reducing Inflow and Infiltration Into the sanitary sewer system. A credit against the fee shall be given for any expenditures made to reduced Inflow and infiltration on -site. Section 850.16, subd. 12, paragraph F of the Edina City Code is repealed effective the day that the capacity of Metropolitan Sewer Interceptor No. 1 -RF -491 is Improved to Increase its capacity by at least +/- 69 %. F. Proximity to R -1 District. The following minimum distance shall exist between buildings In the Planned Commercial District and the nearest lot line of an R -1 District lot used for residential purposes: Building Distance to R -1 District Height 5 - 6 stories the the building height of the building in the Planned Commercial District. 7 - 8 stories Four times the building height of the building in the Planned Commercial District. 9 or more Six times the building height of the building stories in the Planned Commercial District. G. Storage. All materials, supplies, merchandise and other similar materials not on display for direct sale, rental or lease to the ultimate consumer shall be stored within a completely enclosed building or within the confines of a completely opaque wall or fence capable of completely screening all the materials from adjoining properties. The wall or fence under no circumstances shall be less than five feet In height. H. Displays. Merchandise which is offered for sale may be displayed outside of buildings in the PCD -1, PCD -2 and PCD -3 subdistricts, provided the area occupied by the display shall not exceed ten percent of the gross floor area of the building or portion thereof housing the principal use. No displays shall be permitted within that half of the required front street or side street AV7 http:// www .ei.edina.mn.us /CityCode/L5 -01 CityCodeSectO850.16.htm 8/8/2011 -City of Edina - City Code setback nearest the street, nor within any required side yard or rear yard setback. Agencies selling automobiles or boats, as permitted by this Section, may display automobiles or boats outside of a building if the area used for the displays shall comply with all the standards for a parking lot Including construction, setbacks, landscaping and screening as contained in this Section. I. Minimum Building Size. The minimum size for any building housing one or more principal uses In the PCD -1, PCD -2 or PCD -3 subdistricts shall be 1,000 square feet of gross floor area within the first story. J. Outdoor Sales, Tent Sales and Trailer Sales Prohibited. Except for the dispensing of motor fuels and the use of drive- through facilities permitted by this Section, all sales of products and merchandise, and dispensing of services, shall be conducted from within the confines of a permanent building totally enclosed by four walls and a roof. The sale of products and merchandise, and the dispensing of services, from a motor vehicle, trailer, tent or other temporary structure or shelter, or outside of a permanent building as above described, Is prohibited. K. Building Design and Construction. In addition to the other restrictions of this Section and of Section 410 of this Code, the use, construction, alteration or enlargement of any building or structure within the Planned Commercial District shall meet the following standards: 1. All exterior wall finishes on any building shall be one or a combination of the following: a. face brick; b. natural stone; c. specially designed precast concrete units if the surfaces have been Integrally treated with an applied decorative material or texture; d. factory fabricated and finished metal framed panel construction if the panel materials are any of those noted above; or A% Page 8 of 11 http: / /www.ci. edina. mn. us/ CityCode /L5- 01_CityCodeSectO850.16.htm 8/8/2011 City of Edina - City Code e. glass or preflnished metal (other than unpainted galvanized Iron). 2. All subsequent additions, exterior alterations and accessory buildings constructed after the erection of an original building or buildings shall be constructed of the same materials as the original building and shall be designed in a manner conforming to the original architectural design and general appearance. L. Performance Standards. All business operations shall conform to the performance standards established by this Section for the Planned Industrial District provided that the performance standards shall be applied, and must be complied with, at the boundaries of the lot on which the business operations take place. M. Maximum Business Establishment Size In PCD -1 Subdistricts. No use In the PCD -1 subdistrict shall exceed 12,000 square feet of gross floor area or the lesser gross floor area as is Imposed on the use by Subd. 2 of this Subsection 850.16. N. Drive -In Uses. Except for the dispensing of motor fuels, drive -in uses shall not be permitted. Nothing herein contained, however, prohibits accessory drive - through facilities where permitted by this Subsection 850.16. O. Automobile Service Centers and Gas Station Standards. 1. Minimum lot area: a. for an automobile service center, 20,000 square feet, plus 5,000 square feet for each service bay in excess of three. b. for a gas station, 15,000 square feet. ALM Page 9 of •11 http: / /www.ci. edina. mn. us/ CityCode /L5- 01_CityCodeSect0850.16.htm 8/8/2011 City of Edina - City Code 2. Maximum lot area: 60,000 square feet. 3. Hydraulic hoists, pits, lubrication, washing, repairing and diagnostic equipment shall be used and stored within a building. 4. Interior curbs of not less than six Inches In height shall be constructed to separate driving surfaces from sidewalks, landscaped areas and streets. 5. No automobile service station on a lot adjoining a lot in a residential district shall be operated between the hours of 11:00 P.M. and 6:00 A.M. 6. All driving surfaces shall be constructed and maintained in the same manner as prescribed for parking lots by this Section. 7. No merchandise shall be displayed for sale outside a building except in that area within four feet of the building or within pump islands used for dispensing motor fuels. 8. No motor vehicles except those owned by the operators and employees of the principal use, and vehicles awaiting service, shall be parked on the lot occupied by the principal use. Vehicles being serviced may be parked for a maximum of 48 hours. 9. Body work and painting is prohibited. 10. No buildings, driveway surfaces, parking areas or other improvements shall be located within 110 feet of any portion of a lot In a residential district which is used for residential purposes if separated from the lot by a street, or within 50 feet If not so separated by a street. A I. Page 10 of 11 http: / /www.ci. edina. mn. us/ CityCode /L5- 01_CityCodeSectO850.16.htm 8/8/2011 City of Edina - City Code Page 11 of 11 11. Pump islands shall maintain a front and side street setback of at least 20 feet and an Interior side yard and rear yard setback of at least 25 feet. 12. Notwithstanding the requirements of Subsection 850.08, driveways and drive aisles need only provide a setback of not more than five feet from all lot lines, subject to the requirements of subparagraph 10. of paragraph L. of this Subd. 11. P. Car Wash Standards. 1. A car wash shall be subject to the same standards as specified herein for automobile service centers. 2. All waste water disposal facilities, Including sludge, grit removal and disposal equipment, must be approved by the Engineer prior to Installation. 3. Not more than one point of ingress and one point of egress shall be allowed from any one public street to the car wash. Q. Standards for Sexually- Oriented Businesses. 1. No sexually - oriented business shall be located closer than 500 feet from any other sexually- oriented business or licenses day -care facility. Measurements shall be made in a straight line, without regard to Intervening structures or objections, from the nearest point of the actual premises of the sexually - oriented business or licenses day -care facility. 2. No sexually - oriented business shall be located closer than 500 feet from any property in the R -1, R -2, PRD, PSR or MDD District, or any residentially zoned property in the city adjoining the City. Measurements shall be made In a straight line, without regard to Intervening structures objects, from the nearest point of the actual, business premises of the sexually- oriented business to the nearest boundary of the R -1, R -2, PRO, PSR, or MDD District. R. Standards for residential dwelling units. 1. No part of any dwelling unit shall be located in a basement or on the first story of a building in the PCD - 1 or the PCD -2 subdistricts. 2. In the PCD -1 and the PCD -2 subdistricts, the floor area of that portion of a building used for multi- residential purposes shall not be included for the purpose of calculating the maximum floor area ratio allowed by Paragraph A of Subd. 11 of this Subsection. 3. In the PCD -3 subdistrict, the floor area of buildings or portions thereof used for multi - residential purposes shall be included for the purpose of calculating the maximum floor area ratio allowed by Paragraph A of Subd. it of this Subsection. 4. In the PCD -3 subdistrict, the maximum floor area ratio allowed by Paragraph A of Sund. it of this Subsection may be increased by .25 by including the floor areas of dwelling units classified as affordable housing units pursuant to an agreement with the Housing and Redevelopment Authority of Edina. 451 http: / /www.ci. edina. mn. us/ CityCode /L5- 01_CityCodeSectO850.16.htm 8/8/2011 Dec. 6, 2011 Edina City Council Regualr Meeting Minutes Hovland opened the public hearing at 7:28 p.m. No one appe \Brindl nt. Member Swmotion, seconded by Member Sprague, to close Ayes: Bennague, Swenson, Hovland Motion ca r public hearing. Page 4 of 15 Mayor Hovland stated the 201'%budget would be considered aAe December 20, 2011, Council meeting. VI.B. 2012 LIQUOR LICENSE FEES PPROVED City Clerk Mangen explained State law quired tha -public hearing be held after a 30 -day notice to license holders of the City's intention to raise Ii or licen fees. To date, no comment had been received from licensees. Ms. Mangen indicated staff wa eco ending a slight increase in On -Sale Intoxicating License and Beer License fees to cover the City's ad i strative and enforcement costs. Mayor Hovland opened the public hear' g at 7N.m. Public Testimony No one appeared to Member Brind/ma motion, seconded by Member Sprag to close the public hearing. Ayes: Benne Sprague, Swenson, Hovland Motion carri Member enson made a motion, seconded by Member Brindle, to ad t 2012 liquor license fees. Aye ennett, Brindle, Sprague, Swenson, Hovland tion carried. VI.C. RESOLUTION NO. 2011-127 ADOPTED —PRELIMINARY REZONING TO PUD & PRELIMINARY DEVELOPMENT PLAN, 6996 FRANCE AVENUE FOR FE 70, LLC Ars httu: / /www.ci. edina. mn. us/ CityCouncil/ CityCouncil _MeetingMinutes /20111206Reg.htm 1/30/2012 Dec. 6, 2011 Edina City Council Regualr Meeting Minutes Page 5 of 15 Planner Presentation Planning Director Teague presented the request of FE 70, LLC, for preliminary approval of a rezoning from PCD -4, Planned Commercial District, to PUD, Planned Unit Development District and Preliminary Development Plan. The proponent was proposing to tear down the existing gas station at 6996 France Avenue and rebuild an 8,260 square -foot office /retail building that included a 3,000 square -foot vitamin store and a 5,260 square -foot financial office. He noted the added mezzanine for the financial office had increased the square footage but not changed the footprint of the building. Mr. Teague presented the recommendation of the Planning Commission, from its November 9, 2011, meeting and unanimous recommendation for approval. He explained that should the entire building be utilized as retail, the mezzanine would have to be turned into storage space and not utilized as retail space. It was also concluded that parking was adequate for the intended use but would not support certain other uses. The PUD rezoning would assure this was the building constructed on the site and if approved, the ordinance amendment would be finalized with the second phase of the project. The approved plans and parking standards would be incorporated into the zoning ordinance with principal uses listed. Mr. Teague indicated the staff and the Planning Commission recommendation was subject to the findings and conditions as listed in the staff report. Proponent Presentation Dean Dovolis, DJR Architecture representing the developer, stated this building would create a good transition between the commercial and residential uses and anchor the corner with retail and office. He hoped it was the first step to transition the area. Mr. Dovolis stated he thought the PUD process worked well. The Council asked about the traffic movement on 70th Street, as referenced in the traffic report conclusions and recommendations. Chuck Rickart, WSB & Associates, described the left turning movement from France Avenue to 70th Street that had the most delay during the PM peak hour. He agreed that certain uses needed to be prohibited due to peak parking need. It was noted the available parking was felt to be adequate for nondrive -thru uses. The Council asked whether a drive -thru use should be prohibited in the PUD. Mr. Teague answered in the affirmative. Mayor Hovland opened the public hearing at 7:48 p.m. Public Testimony No one appeared to comment. Member Brindle made a motion, seconded by Member Swenson, to close the public hearing. Ayes: Bennett, Brindle, Sprague, Swenson, Hovland Motion carried. Member Brindle introduced and moved adoption of Resolution No. 2011 -127, approving a Preliminary Rezoning and Preliminary Development Plan for FE 70 LLC at 6996 France Avenue, as revised to list drive - 453 http: / /YAm.ci. edina. mn. us/ CityCouncil/ CityCouncil _MeetingMinutes /20111206Reg.htm 1/30/2012 Dec. 6, 2011 Edina City Council Regualr Meeting Minutes Page 6 of 15 thru uses as prohibited and restrict the mezzanine level from retail use, and based on the following findings: 1. The proposed land uses are consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. 2. The site layout would be an improvement over a site layout required by standard zoning; the building is brought up to the street, provides front door entries toward the street and includes sidewalks to encourage a more pedestrian friendly environment along the street. 3. The design of the building is of a high quality stone with large windows. The building is consistent with the small scale buildings on this block. 4. The development would incorporate improved landscaping and green space, a decrease in impervious coverage and an infiltration area. S. The contaminated soils on the site would be cleaned up. 6. Traffic would be improved in the area with a right -in only access on France Avenue, the elimination of the curb cut nearest the intersection and narrowing the curb cut farther to the west. And subject to the following conditions: 1. The final development plans must be consistent with the preliminary development plans dated September 13, 2011, and the materials board as presented to the Planning Commission and City Council. 2. The final landscape plan must meet all minimum landscaping requirements per Section 850.04 of the Zoning Ordinance. 3. Compliance with all of the conditions outlined in the City Engineer's memo dated November 3, 2011. 4. Final rezoning is subject to a Zoning Ordinance amendment creating the PUD, Planned Unit Development, for this site. Member Swenson seconded the motion. It was noted this project would result in the loss of the only full service station in Edina; however, it was a viable business and not a forced sale. The Council discussed the application and whether a change in use should require reconsideration by the Planning Commission and City Council even if the new use was permitted. Attorney Knutson recommended listing the two uses requested (vitamin store of 3,000 square feet and financial office of 5,260 square feet) as permitted uses and all other uses as conditional uses. The Council discussed whether to permit all office uses without a square footage restriction since available parking would be adequate. It was indicated that retail use, up to a certain square footage, could be a permitted use conditioned on the mezzanine being restricted to storage use. Should a new use result in a change from either retail or office, or a combination, then it would be a conditional use and require reconsideration. Member Bennett made a motion, seconded by Member Sprague, amending the motion to revise Resolution No. 2011 -127 to include three conditions: 5 Drive - through uses shall be prohibited. 6. Permitted uses are the two uses requested (vitamin store of 3,000 square feet and financial services office of 5,260 square feet); other retail uses up to 3,000 square feet; other retail uses over 3, 000 square feet conditioned on the mezzanine used for storage onlva and offices uses of up to 8,260 square feet. 7. Al other uses are conditional uses. httD: / /www.ci. edina. mn. us/ CityCouncil/ CityCouncil _MeetingMinutesl201112O6Reg.htm 1/30/2012 Dec. 6, 2011 Edina City Council Regualr Meeting Minutes Ayes: Bennett, Brindle, Sprague, Swenson, Hovland Motion to amend carried. Ayes: Bennett, Brindle, Sprague, Swenson, Hovland Motion as amended carried. VII. COMMENT Page 7 of '15 ' Paul Smith, 480 ywood West, stated his concern with the number of aggressive yotes in Edina and reported a cc ad attacked his small dog. Police Chief Long indicated Edin as leading the way with coyote manageme and would be hosting a training session for policy, mak and animal control officers throughout the met area. Chief Long stated the Police Department wou work with residents and the ultimate goal was to ducate the community on the benefit of hazing c otes. Wayne Carlson, 523 Cov try Lane, asked when his variance r nest for pets would be considered. Mr. Neal indicated the Council had irected staff to reassess the situ on and determine if new information had been provided to change staff's ecommendation on Mr. Ca rls s request. A letter had been mailed today that provided staff's recommen tion to not support recon eration. Sheila Rzepecki, 6617 Norman \Hues oad, expr ed her concern about the speed of traffic on 66th Street and indicated residents would like ed spee of 25 mph on the frontage road. She also commented that activity resulting from renting Pavi ' n to over 2,000 people in May was driving people away from the park. Emily Sever, 6713 Normandale Ro , s ported the statements of Ms. Rzepecki and indicated that to provide safety there was a neealks, s and flashing lights on 66th Street. Vlll. REPORTS / RTIO VIII.A. RESOLUTION ACCEPTING VARIOUS DONATIONS M ayor Hovland ex ined that in order to compl ith State Statutes; all donations to the City must be adopted by Resol ion and approved by four favor ble votes of the Council accepting the donations. Member Benne introduced and moved adoption f Resolution No. 2011 -119 accepting various donations. Member Brin seconded the motion. Rollcall: Ayes: Bonett, Brindle, Sprague, Swenson, Hovland MoticA carried. EDINA ART CENTER REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL DISCUSSED AY' - http: / /www.ci. edina. mn. us/ CityCouncil/ CityCouncil _MeetingMinutesl201112O6Reg.htm 1/30/2012 J P.C. f,�,., � Chair Grabiel op ed the public hearing. No one spoke to the is e. Commissioner Carpenter ed to close t public hearing. Commissioner Platteter seconded the motion. II vot aye to close the public hearing. Commissioner Carpenter said in open the request is reasonable and if parking was addressed as a condition ,.orapproval KLNould support the subdivision. Motion Commission e arpenter moved to recommend preli 'nary plat approval based on staff fi ngs and subject to staff conditions in di the additional condition that s ed parking cross easements be filed and recorde ith Hennepin County at t time of plat approval. Commissioner Potts seconded t motion. All voted a motion carried. VII. REPORTS /RECOMMENDATIONS Sketch Plan Review 6996 France Avenue South, Edina, MN Planner Presentation Planner Teague reported that the Planning Commission is being asked to consider a sketch plan proposal to redevelop the property located at 6996 France Avenue. The site is currently zoned Planned Commercial District -4 (PCD) and is an existing Sinclair Gas Station. The applicant would like to rezone the site from PCD -4 to Planned Unit Development (PUD). Teague noted that the present zoning only allows automobile service centers, car washes and gas stations. Teague explained that the subject property is located within an area of the City that is designated as a "Potential Area of Change" within the 2008 Comprehensive Plan. The site is guided in the Comprehensive Plan for "Office Residential — OR" which allows for limited retail use. Continuing, Teague said because of that land designation uses allowed within the PCD -1 zoning district would seem more appropriate here. Planner Teague explained that the proposal requires a rezoning whether it is to PUD, PCD -1 or to PCD -3. Therefore, the decision to require a Small Area Plan shall be made by the City Council. With graphics Teague presented a compliance table of City standards for the PCD -1 zoning district. Page 4 of 8 AsG Planner Teague concluded that the proposal would be an improvement over the existing building and use on the site. Staff would have a concern however in conventional rezoning (PCD -1 or 3) of the site without a specific use proposed. You may recall the building that was approved as part of the Conditional Use Permit at 69th and York; In that case, initially two small retail buildings were proposed up close to the street, similar to the proposed building. However, after a year of the site siting vacant, a CVS went into the site, in a single building that looked nothing like the originally proposed buildings. However, through the use of the PUD zoning, the City could provide some protections in ensuring that the building �roposed is actually constructed. The PUD Ordinance was not available when the 69t & York Site was approved for development. Appearing for the Applicant Dean Dovolis Discussion Commissioner Platteter asked Planner Teague his reason (if rezoned) for recommending a PCD -1 zoning classification vs. a PCD -3 zoning classification. Teague responded his preference would be PUD; however, if only rezoned a PCD -1 zoning classification would be best. Limited retail would tie in with the newly configured West 70th Street and would also maintain limited retail west of France Avenue. Chair Grabiel clarified that this issue is for site plan review; no action from the Commission is required; just comments and ideas. Planner Teague agreed adding that the applicant can go before the City Council with the sketch plan review on September 6th Applicant Presentation Mr. Dovolis addressed the Commission and illustrated the vision of a possible redevelopment of the existing Sinclair Gas Station. Dovolis said this vision compliments the pedestrian friendly reconstruction of West 70th Street. Continuing, Dovolis said the project would be a single -story 6,600 square foot retail building with parking to the rear. Dovolis said the building would be oriented toward France Avenue and West 70th Street with the parking tucked behind. Dovolis said the goal was to create an evolution; noting this is a strong corner that needs to be redeveloped correctly. Concluding, Dovolis said that leasing for this project would not be an issue; interest has already been expressed if the project moves forward. Commissioner Carpenter asked what the buildings were to the south of the subject site. It was reported that the buildings to the south were an office building and bank respectively. Chair Grabiel asked Mr. Dovolis if he has any thoughts on a PUD designation for the project. Mr. Dovolis responded that in his opinion the PUD classification was logical, Page 5of8 ,45-7 adding working with the City to the guide the project would be beneficial. Dovolis reiterated that this is a strong corner and any redevelopment needs to be done right. Commissioner Potts asked Mr. Dovolis if he thinks the proposed parking on one side only of the building could be a detrimental to retail. Mr. Dovolis responded that the market is starting to become more open to the 2 -door building. Mr. Dovolis said the proposed building would have both rear and front entrances /exit. A discussion ensued on parking and circulation with the following comments. • Controlled intersection - acknowledge there would be periods when stacking would occur *Right in only access on France Avenue and elimination of the curb cut nearest the intersection. *Acknowledge that potential for vehicles to navigate the proposed round -about and circle the block. Commissioner Forrest said that she has a concern with amending the Comprehensive Plan; however, was comfortable with handling this redevelopment through 'the PUD process if the project moves forward. Forrest pointed out that currently what's proposed is a "no -no; it doesn't meet the Comprehensive Guide Plan for west of France Avenue. The discussion continued focusing on the proposed change in retail use from a full scale service station to limited retail and the impact that change in use would have on traffic. It was acknowledged that even without seeing any traffic counts a limited retail use would generate less traffic than a full scale gas station. Chair Grabiel said he was familiar with the service station; adding that although the Sinclair site wasn't a Holiday or SA it still generates business. Commissioner Forrest commented on the building design and asked Mr. Dovolis if he believes the proposed building could be easily adapted to an office building if the need to do so arose. Mr. Dovolis responded in the affirmative. He said the building foot print would service both. Commissioner Staunton said he would like to echo Commissioner Forrest's concern on the Comprehensive Plan and retail west of France Avenue. Staunton also acknowledged the reference in the staff report indicating that this redevelopment could trigger a small area plan, adding he is a little uncomfortable with that. Continuing, Staunton said the Commission should proceed cautiously with any redevelopment west of France. Chair Grabiel noted that retail is the primary use along France Avenue, adding if one looks at the plain language of the Comprehensive Plan this redevelopment works. Planner Teague informed the Commission that this project would not be an amendment to the Comprehensive Plan — limited retail use is a permitted use on this site. Page 6 of 8 A 5t Mr. Dovolis added that he believes limited retail is the appropriate use for this site. Commissioner Forrest commented that in her opinion reviewing this project as a PUD would be useful. Commissioner Carpenter asked Mr. Dovolis if the rendering of the building presented to the Commission would be what was built. Mr. Dovolis responded in the affirmative, adding what was indicated on the drawings would be what's constructed. Continuing, Dovolis reiterated the importance of this corner, adding the design presented is specific to this corner. Concluding, Chair Grabiel and the Commission thanked Mr. Dovolis and the development team for bringing this concept before them. The general consensus was support for the project and that the upgrading of this corner was a good thing. Approaching this redevelopment through the PUD process was also reasonable. VIII. CORSPONDENCE AND PETITIONS Chair Grabiel ack% vledged receipt of the Council Connection. IX. MEN Commissioner Platteter aske tanner Teague fo�ouqml an up to on the chiller at York Gardens. Planner Teague repo d that the City a pproved the new chiller location and also directed York Ga ens to immedi ly install noise reduction materials. Commissioner Staunton asked PlAsa sports dome gets the "nod" would the Planning Commission review responded that both the Commission and Council would hional Use Permit. Staunton commented that keeping abreast is of benefit during the Grandview Small Area Plan process. Commissioner Staunton upd d the Commission on th ongoing Grandview Small Area Plan process, adding at work continues on develo g a work plan and retaining consultants. Staunton s ' a different approach was taken i retaining consultants. Consultants were dire d to provide the Executive Committe ith a 6 -page or less narrative. Staunton id from the responses the Committee ho s to cobble together a good team. Staun n reported that the Committee meets again t orrow evening (8/18) to hamme out the details. Page 7 of 8 ASA Sept. 6, 2011 Edina City Council Regular Meeting Minutesl Page 5 of 7 2. Pa edication fee of $7,100 is due prior to sty's release of the signed Final Plat mylars for recordin ' h Hennepin County. 3. A shared par agreement must be rded between the two lots. Member Bennett sec o ed.the motio Ayes: Bennett, Brindle, ue, nson, Hovland Motion carried. VII. COMMUNI MMENT Wayne Carlso Coventry Lane, aske a Council to reconsider his request to have four dogs at his residenc a Council accepted the submitt nd referred the request to staff for investigation. Vlll. REPORTS/ RECOMMENDATIONS VIII.A. SKETCH PLAN REVIEWED — 6996 FRANCE AVENUE City Planner Presentation Mr. Teague presented the applicant's proposal to tear down the existing automobile service station at 6996 France Avenue and build a new 6,600- square -foot retail building. He also presented the request of the applicant for a rezoning to PUD or PCD -1. Mr. Teague referenced the Planning Commission's comments, noting it was currently undertaking a Small Area Plan with the Grandview District and did not believe this proposal would rise to the level of requiring a Small Area Plan. It was noted that while the Planning Commission was concerned with the Comprehensive Plan and limited retail west of France Avenue, it was comfortable with a PUD rezoning on this site. Mr. Teague indicated this proposal would require a rezoning; therefore, the Council was being asked to determine whether to require a Small Area Plan and to provide general comments on the site plan. Proponent Presentation Dean Dovolis, DJR Architects, presented the sketch plan for a small building containing office and retail tenants at the corner of the site with parking to the rear. Construction materials would include a combination of stone, glass, and copper with signage on raised corners and create a transition to the 70th Street green corridor between the roundabouts. Mr. Dovolis explained how the project would address the street and pedestrian nature of the Southdale area, create a gateway to the 70th Street reconstruction project, and positively impact future development in this area. The Council discussed the sketch plan and asked questions of Mr. Dovolis relating to parking and pedestrian pathways. Mr. Dovolis advised that the sketch plan, as proposed, identified 34 parking spaces, four spaces short of the ordinance requirement and explained why underground parking would not be feasible on this small -sized lot. It was noted that use of the right -of -way corridor could ease access off 70th Street by the day care location. Mr. Dovolis indicated he would determine whether easement rights existed; however, using that,option might impact several parking spaces. The Council discussed its support for the presented sketch plan and building renditions that incorporated a front glass curtain wall. It was noted this type of building appeared appealing and would revitalize that corner with a use that was compatible with the Galleria. Mr. Dovolis indicated the project would incorporate storm sewer practices such as pervious pavers in addition to green building techniques. The consensus of the Council was to favor the use of a PUD, that the request does not reach the threshold to require a Small Area Plan and that the sketch plan was reasonable. VIII.B. RESOLUTION NO. 1 -87 ADOPTED — ADO LUMINARY 1012 TAX LEVY AND OPERATING BUDGET Mr. Wallin presented the draft reso ting the maximum proposed 2012 tax levies and indicated that if approved, the 1.8% increase w e maximum property tax increase the City could levy. He stated the At httn: / /www.ei. edina. mn. us/ CityCouncil/ CityCouncil _MeetingMinutesl201109O6Reg.htm 11/3/2011 City of Edina MEMORANDUM TO: Cary Teague, Planning Director FROM: Steve A. Kirchman, Chief Building Official�•�� • DATE: 1/10/12 SUBJECT: Planning Case 2011.0011.1 IA, 6996 France Ave S I was asked to comment on plans fora proposed building received from DJR Architecture, Inc. and stamped PLANNING DEPARTMENT JAN 06 2012 CITY OF EDINA. I have the following comments: • The proposed mezzanine may be up to '/z of the floor area of the room below provided the building is of type I or II construction, is fully fire sprinkled and is equipped with an emergency voice /alarm communication system. • Manual flush bolts are not permitted on double doors. The following should be included as a condition of approval: • In order to provide for timely, accurate plan review, the architectural design team shall schedule 30 %, 60% and 90% incremental code compliance meetings with the Inspections Department as plans are developed. H:\ Documents\ Memos &Rpts \Planning \6996FranceAveS. doc City Hall 4801 WEST 50TH STREET EDINA, MINNESOTA, 55424 -1394 www.CityofEdina.com 952 - 927 -8861 FAX 952 - 826 -0390 TTY 952- 826 -0379 Cary Teague From: Tom Jenson Sent: Saturday, January 28, 2012 12:42 PM To: Cary Teague Subject: 6996 France Ave S Hi Cary, Here are my comments for the proposed project by DJR for 6996 France Ave S. 1. A fire hydrant shall be installed on the northeast corner of the property. It should be located on the north side of the proposed driveway entrance on the west side of the sidewalk. Let me know if there are questions on this. Thanks, Thomas Jenson, Fire Marshal 952- 826 -0337 1 Fax 952 - 826 -0393 TJenson(cDci.edina.mn.us I www.CityofEdina.com /Fire We're a do.town ... working to make the healthy choice the easy choice! �G � e MEMORANDUM — Plan Review •; ,�• ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT CITY OF EDINA DATE: February 3, 2012 TO: Cary Teague — City Planner FROM: Wayne Houle — Director of Public Works / City Engineer SUBJECT: 70`h & France Retail 6996 France Avenue Engineering has reviewed the preliminary plans for the above stated project and offer the following comments: O A Ninemile Creek Watershed permit will be required. O All storm water from this site shall be treated on -site; no off -site pond expansions are available within the sub - drainage area. O A developer's agreement will need to include any work completed within the right -of -ways for sidewalks and at grade pedestrian improvements along West 701h Street and along France Avenue. O Sidewalk easements will also be required at the intersection of France Avenue and West 7e Street for future at grade pedestrian upgrades. The extent of these pedestrian upgrades will be determined within the next few months. Sheet — C2: 1. Provide a "Do Not Enter" sign on the landscape peninsula located on the northwest corner of the building. This will indicate to vehicles to not exit at France Avenue, since this area is a one -way "In only" access point. 2. Show the updated improvements along West 70`h Street, such as the center median. 3. Show directional pedestrian ramps, versus a mid - radius pedestrian ramp. 4. Revise sidewalk at the northwest corner of West 70`h Street and France Avenue to accommodate ADA requirements; meaning expand sidewalk to accommodate these requirements. Sheet — C4: 1. Indicate on the plans the word "private" next to any onsite storm sewer, water services, and sanitary sewer services. 2. Due to this area being within a moderate to high vulnerability zone for the City's Well Head Protection Plan the storm sewer infiltration system will need to be revised. The revision should include pretreatment of all surface water prior to being infiltrated; the proposed system does not meet this requirement. 3. Revise connection to City water to connect to the 12" CIP that is located on France Avenue. No excavation will be allowed on West 70th Street. 4. Provide Fire Hydrant at the northeast corner of the site along France Avenue. Staff will require a more detail review of the Civil Plans if this project is approved by the City Council. Please contact me if you have any questions regarding this review. Thanks G: \PVNMDMIN\COMM \EXTERNAL \GENERAL CORR BY STREETS\F Streets \6996 France Avenue\20120203 review of 6996 France Ave.doa Jackie Hoogenakker From: Mike DeMoss <lawreview @mac.com> Sent: Monday, January 30, 2012 12:45 PM To: Jackie Hoogenakker; Cary Teague Cc: Mike DeMoss Subject: Fwd: 6996 France case # 2011.0011.11a To: The City of Edina and the owner /contractor /developer of the property at 6996 France Ave S., Edina, MN We are the owners of the property adjacent, and to the north of the proposed development. We have no objection to the development, but we do want to make sure the owner /contractor /developer is aware of the retaining wall (at the south end of our building at 6950 France) that is at the north end of the 6996 France Ave property. It is important to make sure that the construction does not damage this retaining wall because it is necessary to have this undisturbed because it is an emergency exit at the south end of our building. We have sent a previous email (attached) discussing the Air Conditioners and the pine trees, etc. Please feel free to contact me if you have any questions. Thanks, Michael C. DeMoss Attorney for Southdale Galleria Offices, Inc. 6950 France Ave S Suite 100 Edina, MN 55435 952- 920 -0300 Begin forwarded message: From: Cary Teague <cteague(a)ci.edina.mn.us> Date: November 2, 2011 12:06:16 PM CDT To: Mike DeMoss <lawreview mac.com> Cc: Jackie Hoogenakker <JHoogenakkera.ci.edina.mn.us> Subject: RE: 6996 France case # 2011.0011.1 la Mike, I will forward your concerns to the applicant, and let you know how they would handle them should their project be approved. Thanks! Cary Cary Teague, Planning Director 952 - 826 -0460 1 Fax 952 - 826 -0389 1 Cell 952 -826 -0236 "y cteaoue(&ci.edina.mn.us I www. CityofEdina.com /Planning ...For Living, Learning, Raising Families & Doing Business We're a do.town working to make the healthy choice the easy choice! �Y� Jackie Hoogenakker From: Mike DeMoss <lawreview @mac.com> Sent: Wednesday, November 02, 201111:47 AM To: Jackie Hoogenakker Cc: Mike DeMoss Subject: Re: 6996 France case # 2011.0011.11a Please be advised that we are the owners of the property at 6950 France Ave S (two story Office building adjacent and to the north of the above described project). Please notify the developer of the existence of the large (pine ?) trees that are at the south end of our property. These trees, or their roots, may be partially on the developer's (gas station's) property. There is also a lower level exit door at the south end of our building (and air conditioners) that we need to make sure that the developer does not damage or impair. It may be best to have those trees removed by the developer rather than risk damaging them (root wise ?) or having them fall onto our building during construction. Let me know what is the best approach to take. We are agreeable to their removal if that is the best and safest alternative. Please keep me informed of the development (which we approve of). Thank you, Michael C. DeMoss, Attorney for Southdale Galleria Offices, Inc. (owner) 6950 France Ave. S. #100 Edina, MN 55435 952 - 920 -0300 office 952 - 920 -3883 fax 952 - 913 -7048 mobile Ac s i'� Otte REPORT /RECOMMENDATION To: MAYOR AND COUNCIL Agenda Item Item No: VI.C. From: Wayne D. Houle, PE City Engineer ® Action F-1 Discussion 1:1 Information Date: March 6, 2012 Subject: Public Hearing — Tracy Avenue Roadway Improvement No. BA -368, Resolution No. 2012 -41 ACTION REQUESTED: If the City Council determines the project to be necessary, cost effective; and feasible, the Council shall adopt attached Resolution No. 2012 -41 authorizing plans and specifications to be completed and bids taken for Tracy Avenue Roadway Improvement No. BA -368. INFORMATION /BACKGROUND: City staff initiated this project as part of the 2011 -2015 Capital Improvement Plan (Project # PW -00 -015). The Feasibility Study was received by the City Council at the February 21, 2012 City Council Meeting. The overall project cost is $1,287,400. Funding for this project will be from a combination of utility funds, Municipal- State Aid (MSA) funds (monies received from the State Gas Tax as appropriated through Minnesota Department of Transportation, and special assessments). Please refer to the Feasibility Report for a breakdown of the costs and funding of the project. The proposed special assessment amount is estimated at $4,418.75 per residential equivalent unit; this amount does not include the added cost of the roundabout, which is proposed to be funded through the MSA funds. Please refer to the Feasibility Study for the proposed Assessment Roll. Right -of -way for the roundabout will also be required from three property owners. Staff and consultant recommendation includes a roundabout at the intersection of Benton Avenue and Tracy. Avenue. The Edina Transportation Commission (ETC) recommends that the intersection at Benton Avenue and Tracy Avenue alignment remain as is. Both staff and consultant, and the ETC recommend the following for the remaining portion of the corridor: retain the sidewalk along the easterly side of the corridor, northbound parking -bay, which includes bump -outs at the intersections of Grove Street, Warden Avenue, and Hawkes Terrace, northbound bike lane, northbound through lane, southbound through lane, and southbound bike lane. G. \PW \CENTRAL SVCS \ENG DIV\PROJECTS \IMPR NOS \BA368 Tracy Ave Benton - Crosstown \PRELIM DESIGN \Public Hearing \Item VI. C. Public Hearing - Tracy Ave Rdwy Imp No. BA -369, Res. 2012- 41.docx Included with this staff report is an advisory from the Edina Transportation Commission with their recommendation for the project. We have also included all correspondence that has been submitted since the February 21 submittal; this includes the school district procedure on addressing roadway projects adjacent to school district property. ATTACHMENTS: Resolution 2012 -41 ETC Advisory Communication Memo dated February 24, 2012 from WSB regarding Alternative Design Option Additional Correspondence from School District and Residents G: \PW \CENTRAL SVCS \ENG DIV\PROJECTS \IMPR NOS \BA368 Tracy Ave Benton - Crosstown \PRELIM DESIGN \Public Hearing \Item VI. C. Public Hearing - Tracy Ave Rdwy Imp No. BA -369, Res. 2012- 41.docx RESOLUTION NO.2012-41 ORDERING IMPROVEMENT FOR TRACY AVENUE ROADWAY °IMPROVEM_ENT FROM VERNON'AVENUE TO BENTON AENUE IMPROVEMENT NO. 'BA =368 WHEREAS, a resolution of the city council, adopted the -6th day of February, 2012, fixed a date for a council hearing on Improvement No: BA -368, the proposed improvement of Tracy Avenue Roadway Improvement from Vernon Avenue to Benton Avenue; and WHEREAS, ten days' mailed notice and two weeks' published notice of the hearing was given, and the hearing was held thereon on :the 6th day of' March, 2012, at which all persons desiring to be heard, were given an opportunity to be heard thereon; and NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDINA, MINNESOTA: 1. Such improvement is necessary, cost - effective, and feasible to update aging infrastructure. 2. Such improvement is hereby ordered. 3. The city engineer is hereby designated as the engineer for this improvement. The engineer shall prepare plans and specifications for the making of such improvement. 4. The city council declares its official intent to reimburse itself for the costs of the improvement from: the proceeds of tax exempt bonds. Dated: March 6, 2012 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 March 6, 2012, and as recorded in the Minutes of said Regular Meeting. WITNESS my hand and seal of said City this day of City Clerk ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT 7450 Metro Boulevard a Edina, Minnesota 55439 ETC ADVISORY COMMUNICATION Date: February 29, 2012 Subject: Tracy Avenue (Benton Avenue to Vernon Avenue) Roadway Improvements Attachments: DRAFT February 16, 2012 ETC minutes, Tracy Avenue speed, volume, and accident data; Benton Avenue speed and volume data SITUATION: Per City ordinance 1509.03 the ETC reviews "neighborhood street capital investment projects for adherence to adopted City policies and planning documents." The ETC conducted this review at our February 16, 2012 regular meeting and offers the following analysis and recommendations. BACKGROUND: The ETC was presented speed, volume, and accident data for Tracy Avenue and speed and volume data for Benton Avenue at our December 15, 2011 regular meeting.* The ETC discussed the February 6, 2012 feasibility study and appendices at our February 16, 2012 regular meeting. About 10 residents were present at this meeting; six residents provided comments. Discussion took approximately 2.5 hours. Discussion focused on the roadway section between Vernon and Benton (bike lanes, parking, widening, sidewalk, curb extensions, and crosswalks) and the Tracy and Benton intersection (safety, operations, roundabout option, realignment option, pedestrian, bicycle, and transit facilities). *This data is not provided in the study or appendices. ASSESSMENT: Members were polled for their opinions on the following: • Do you support* bike lanes as proposed? — 9 Yes, 0 No • Do you support parking as proposed? — 6 Yes, 3 No • Do you support parking as proposed, but with fewer spaces? — 5 Yes, 4 No • Do you support removing parking and widening bike lanes to 6'? — 2 Yes, 7 No ** Do you support reducing the speed limit to 25 mph with the addition of bike lanes? — 2 Yes, 7 No Do you support seeking a variance to reduce the travel lane width to 10'? — 8 Yes, 1 No The ETC discussed the merit of the roundabout in considerable detail. ETC consensus was that, while the roundabout may be superior in design to the current alignment, the intersection has a history of operating safely and therefore does not warrant the proposed improvement. The following motions were made and carried: • The ETC recommends approval of the roadway section as proposed. — 7 aye, 2 nay • The ETC recommends leaving the Tracy and Benton intersection as it currently is. — 8 aye, 1 nay The following additional points were noted: • The ETC recommends additional consideration of pedestrian and bicycle facilities and safety at the Tracy and Benton intersection (whether roundabout, realignment, or offset). • The ETC recommends that the concerns of the property owner at 5700 Benton be addressed in final design if roundabout or realignment option is chosen. *Based on an assessment of adherence to adopted City policies and planning documents. * *Parking observation data was not provided to the ETC. RECOMMENDATION: • The ETC recommends approval of the roadway section as proposed in the February 6, 2012 feasibility study. • The ETC recommends leaving the Tracy and Benton intersection as it currently is (offset alignment). ROUTING: Prepared by: Jennifer Janovy Reviewed by: Katherine Bass, Nathan Franzen, Paul Nelson TO: Wayne Houle Action Requested: Please distribute to the Council for March 6 regular meeting. MINUTES OF CITY OF EDINA, MINNESOTA TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION COMMUNITY ROOM February 16, 2012 6:00 P.M. New members, Courtney Whited, Tom La Force and Surya lyer were welcomed ROLLCALL Answering roll call was Members Bass, Braden, Franzen, lyer, and Whited. APPROVAL OF MEETING AGENDA ave. Motion carried. Motion carried. Report. All voted ave. Motion carried. COMMUNITY COMMENT— the Commission. Force, Nelson, Schweiger, Thompson, City engineer Houle said the feasibility relSo!f comrpleted by I{V{In Andy Plowman of WSB & Associates, was handed out . �flff.� '.lif�fXJ1'�. recently. He sad'IVIr Plowman wasfm:attendance;to answer questions. Mr. Houle said all of Tracy Avenue was in the Capital Impro�yement'Plar. f concretqq,be rplacement _IJEWupon closer scrutiny it was determined that more work was needed .A }� therefore, the roadway was%ffoken into twd:Ph5ses from Vernon Avenue to Benton Avenue, and Benton Avenue toll crosstown. Additionally, staff:is working on a grant for up to $500,000 through MnDOT for the crosstown interchange'aCt-yT,.racy Avenue. Some,df:the issues,are concrete replacement and an offset intersection at Benton and, Mr. Houle said noWlsaime to evaluate making changes;:' said Council also asked that they consider a sidewalk on the west side. He said discussions inciuded; leaving the - intersection as is or realign with a roundabout. He said staffs recommendation ,lr�,vS� is to realign the intersection (with a. � undabout which fits well with bus turning movements and does not slow fire trucks response time. He said,t�,e- f out) dabout is safer because crossing distance for pedestrians are decreased and when in the roundabout drivers are onlylooking to the left instead of looking 4 ways like a 4 -way intersection, and it also serves as a traffic calming measure. Additional recommended features include bike lanes to comply with the BETF's Bike Plan; instead of sidewalk on the west side which would- require 9 ft. of right -of -way, they are instead going to improve crossings; 28 parking spaces; and bump -out intersections. Discussion In reference to residents' response in the second survey, chair Janovy asked if opinions had changed and Mr. Plowman said it was brought closer to a 50/50 split. Regarding the feasibility report stating support from the Countryside's Site Council, she said she has received information from the school district outlining the procedures to follow for their 1 support and while the Site Council's opinion is important, she said they do not speak for the superintendent and the board. Everyone agreed that the roadway needs to be reconstructed and to keep existing sidewalk. Members' feedback is as follow: Member Thompson said the bike lanes are critical to be consistent with Comp Plan. He said also to maximize parking on the easfside and that bump -outs would help to slow traffic. Member Bass agreed with the bike lanes because it is a school and ridin arrival /dismissal time. She also said research shows that bike lanes maker people are committed to parking and suggested eliminating parkingdofpr clarified that widening of the roadway is,due to both parking and the�b ke la necessary because of a storm sewer pipe on the east that would needlto be watershed rules. Z011 Chair Janovy confirmed that per state law, bikers are allowed on the roadway. iuld help to relieve congestion around safer. She said it does not.appear that it widened of the roadway. Mr: Houle He said widening on the west by 4 ft. is ed and would increase cost because of Members Janovy, Schweiger, Braden, lyer, La Force, and Nelsonmgreed witMthe bike IanesWbmber lyer also agreed {mf r r with maximizing parking. Member La Force asked if Vernon to thernr orth Was%a so striped with bikMnes. Mr. Houle said �` {, no; he. said this is the starting point and it git�Rsg hem something to' build on. Member Franzen said•the ETC should focus on Comp Plan related issues and not on parking !� Member Whited said according to residents no "one is bikingnow. She suggested doing before /after counts to show residents usage. She said she has seen an increasefm biking onxW�, 58`h sincd *,'fW anew striping. Mr. Houle was asked about the bike lane on InterlachenrBIO.- Me .said ridership have increased;on Interlachen Blvd which is striped with a 3 -4 fl rrf {1+ s '�1 1211 � } r f ;ley f ft. lane on certain segmefntrand;share theroad on other, segment He said:most;homes do not front Interlachen Blvd and therefore parking was ridCanAssue and the<speed limit was;and-still is 30 mphffle said minor modifications were done to a property near Bywood Westftoaccommodae the bike Ian Chair Janovy said l ere,isa cost as's'ociated":wifh 'parking and tliat�TLC has an article about the myth of free parking. She said based onr54rparking paces,.she.c 1culated thatft &'kost would be $1800 /space and residents would be assessed Z -rem / �` RE: 20% of thisrcost. If spaces arefrreduced tof28;;she said the..costrgoes up to $3500 /space. She said she has only seen one car parked he re. Member lyer,c6`ncurred,thaattt%h6 too has not seen too many cars parked there and that most times parking are only needed for lots of guests. He sbi tthxe cost of parking though. is relative. Member Bass said parking does . :; fly. Ile r . spike but there�isnott an overwhelming,demand and it" is used infrequently. Chair Janovy was asked if residents would be assessed less if pa kng,was eliminate diand she said yes, approximately $250. Member Nelson noted that parking did not 'r, nd fJ appear important but ,,thei2 survey sho s that residents are split 50/50. Member Franzen said they should be strategic /, about parking and balanee�it;with bum outs. Mr. Houle said this would give visual cue to slow down vs. having a -wide '�' +� open roadway and it was noaed•that last' peed taken was at 36.7 meaning 85% of drivers were driving at this speed. rf I/X Regarding the ,offset intersection,RPmber LaForce said leaving it 'as is' is not an option.. It .was.noted that one survey showed 65% favorable toward roundabout or realignment and another one showed 77%.favorability. Mr. Houle said roundabouts work great because studies show reduction of accidents; pedestrian safety is maximized; and they simplify /reduces risk for drivers /pedestrians. Chair Janovy the intersection does not have a history of crashes so therefore, nothing to reduce. She said there are 10 years of safety data. Member. Thompson said it is being added as a component to slow traffic and aid with flow during peak hours. Member Bass said the feel at the intersection is confusing and this is how drivers should feel so that they'll slow down. Member Nelson •said he is a proponent of oundabouts but leave as is because there are not too many problems. He said the intersection is odd but it works well. 2 Member Franzen said it is functioning; however, the roundabout is safer and a better long term solution. In terms of size, Mr. Houle said it would be comparable to the ones on W. 70th, although traffic volume is lower. Mr. Plowman cited Mendota Heights with similar lower traffic volume, same issue and skepticism. He said the roundabout was built and now everyone likes it. In addition to other features already noted, Mr. Plowman said studies show that air quality also improves due to less stopping. Mr. Houle was asked if the City has a policy for roundabouts and he said no because they are so new. He said Living Streets may address roundabouts. Member lyer asked about the cost vs. benefit. Mr. Houle said the volume is lower but the roundabout would help with traffic flow. Member lyer said there is an advantage to keep flow going but the cost is too high. Mr. Plowman said the /0. realignment is more expensive at $240,000 while the roundabout would be $165;000. Member Thompson said there is a place on Benton where parents make U -turn to pick up students. Mr..-.Plowman said he has observed this and the roundabout would eliminate the U- turns. Chair Janovy said this is an opportifnity for education and enforcement at the lrftlrl�/fi�'�. site. She said from the first survey, 23% said they were fine with the intersection; 58% said it was a problem; and 19% were cautious. In the second survey 60% said to leave as is; and 40% realig �fShe said she likes roundabouts but not "Jf ;b .f at this location. She said this one should have off ramps for bikers•-and it should'bedesigned for all ages. Mr. Plowman �Nf; JAS" �f� -0(J.� said off -ramps are only needed on dual lane roundabouts. Members lyer and Bass concurred with Chair Janovy. Residents Comments Sue Nelson, 5701 Hawkes Ter — Ms. Nelson said she has been She said realignment is a better option. She said she loves rou will not help. - Susan Clark, 5812 W. 61 Ms. Clark said high"'school stud wondered if they will go all the way around the r' Undabc She said the school has said they-,would need additional c created. rif err x�, fry {fri t!'•V /'i:f Judith Rogers, corner of - �Qor,Lane and Tracy — Ms. Rogei see children in the roundabout: She said if obstructions are obstructions are placed, it may prevent drivers from seeing r•-- - -- "Fier ;; Steve Enck;� >5700 �Beriton.,�.Mr. E n c' driveway ;;every road is up' hill;I as improvefloW..of cars but not peiiestr confined toWW_heelchair, he said>h L' i', % 1• ideas were presented and suggested from Tracy to the::school s driveway; turn movement for the uses. for 20ryears and a pass educator at Countryside. but.not in favor of one at this location because it drives 13606q,to Tracy to get to the high school and she he said it is,ggod,to consider the Countryside students. ng<guards. She•..'a".,one problem is solved and another u. •1 d drivers traveling south on Tracy from Vernon may not placed in the roundabout drivers may drive over it and if 3strians. ,ri. k s tl he is agairisf ��e roundabout. He said he will not have safe access to his hindrance; stop signs�af&,.working; pedestrian lane for children are bigger; might �.. fans; easier {.for crossing guards as is. And, speaking on behalf of his neighbor who is r either of tliem.,has seen any accidents in their time as residents. He said only two having three:'66,four options including his suggestion to remove parking on Benton widen Benton to the intersection, keeping the stop signs and allowing for better Chair Janovy asked if other o"p- -#ions w &M66nsidered including widen of the intersection. Mr. Plowman said widen would help the buses at the intersection ;butthe idea was to create a design for the entire operation of the corridor including speeding which is a problem fort! residents. He said roundabouts are safer for pedestrians because they are crossing 16 ft. of traffic at a time instead of 36 ft., plus four potential conflicts with the offset intersection. Member Franzen said Mr. Enck's driveway does seem to be a problem with the roundabout. Mr. Houle said he would work with him to realign and landscape. Bill Rogers, 6100 Arbor Lane — Mr. Rogers said he submitted written comments. He said 71% of residents on his survey said the roundabout is not appropriate and neither is straight because it would cause T -bone accidents. He said east on Benton there is a pond like a roundabout and a fatality that happened there could happen at the roundabout and there have not been accidents to date. He said it is not broken, they do not want traffic to flow and if traffic backs up, so 3 what? He said there is new specifications in the works for visual impair pedestrians which this roundabout will not have He said he liked Mr. Enck's idea. Ken Kjelland, 5600 Tracy - Mr. Kjelland said he has been a resident since 1982. He said he attended two meetings, completed two surveys and report is still` being submitted as is and not reflecting residents' input. He said he has concluded that residents do not have input. Motion was made,bv member LaForce and seconded by member Bass for chair Janovv to write the recommendation for submittal to the Council with assistance from members Nelson, Franzen and Bass. All voted ave. Motion carried. Members were polled regarding the following (polling included student mefnrbWSchw Bike Lanes: all said yes (10). Parking: Staff said their recommendation is based on residents needs and 'to accomm to block, traffic. Chair Janovy said deliveries were not a reason, o retain parking. Men lanes down from 11 ft. to 10 ft. and not widen the road: sl e- as informed that a varia 7 of 10. said yes to parking as proposed. Reducing the speed limit to 25 mph, because of the bike lanes: 2 of.10,saidryes. r): date delivery vehicles which tend er Bass said to reduce the travel Mwo,r...r. uld be required. Motion was made by member Thompson aNseconded by member LfaYFOrce to recommend the proposed design as is north of Benton. 7 ayes, 2 nays. Motion carried. • f • r •r Y, Roundabout: �• ,f Motion was made by member:.Nelson and seconded #bv. memberflyec;to;leave intersection as is. 8 ayes, 1 nay. Motion carried. ra } .////# !2st Memb er Thompsonsaid rds�s'dents,we�re�-in favor of the roundabout. A suggestion was made to consider pedestrian enhancements to improve crossing eve Fi though not recommending roundabouts, e.g. dynamic speed monitor, crosswalks, enf6f66m s, etc. ff � f 1 Motion.was,made.bv merriber�lyer and'seconded by member�Bass to modifyprevious motion to say leave intersection as is and•consider pedestrian enhancements/1"Mmprove crossing.: Motion was madebv member.lyer and?secondedrliiizmember Bass to have limited parking, bike lanes, and no change • °f to the intersection: Discussion ensued regar ng a motion`�m�'ade earlier by member Thompson and this motion. which are in conflict. Member)yer withdrew his mStion: L9- LJP19%C LR{JY ICVOI Y. IAN YOIC'J!l -' - Mr. Houle said Katie Bruwelheide, traffic engineer with Alliant Engineering would give an update -on the TLC Bike Boulevard.-He asked that the'ETC provide feedback before an informational meeting is scheduled with residents. He said the plan will be to come back to the ETC after the informational meeting with residents and then on to the Council for a public hearing. Ms. Bruwelheide said the route starts at 54th &Zenith west on 54th to Wooddale Avenue, south of Wooddale to Valley ✓iew Road, under TH -62 and down to 701h into an existing bike path. She said construction is tentatively scheduled to begin August with completion by fall. She said they are requesting design exceptions on a couple segments: She said the 4 project has eight segments that are divided into two phases with phase two being the most difficult. Phase I is 54th to north of TH -62 and Phase II from north of TH -62 to W. 70th. Funding is not yet available for Phase 11. The eight segments are: Phase I 1. 54th Ave — Xerxes to France Avenue Option: Bike Boulevard 2. 3 (A) 54th — France to Minnehaha Cre( Option 1: Shared Lanes Option 2: Advisory Lanes Option 3: Shared Lane and Bike Lan (B) 54th — Brookview Ave to Wooddi Option 1: Shared Lanes Option 2: Bike Lanes Wooddale Ave — 54th to Valley View Option 1: Bike Lanes Option 2: Advisory Lanes 4. Valley View Road — Woodddale to B Option: Colored Shared Lanes {��fJfti: Phase II 5. Valley View Road ;5B oo�kview AV &t r l.. Option: Bike Lanes?r •. <.! th�v"ro th ?•; 6. Valley View Road — 64 -t6:65 StgA Option:-Colored Sh r La"I .r�. a ed anes��,,� N;J f,. 7. >Yalleji View Road Y' -65�, to 66th St "'J' Option: Dedicated Bikel -anefsi J f J J WJ., IJ J 8. Valley V ewxRoad — 66th to 69tUtree Option: Dedicated Bike Lanes3 Discussion ff= AN This route, the first phase -oft f BEF ', ike Plan, was chosen and narrowed down from an original route and it aligns with Minneapolis bike lanes.' ;ff t, L Motion was made by member Thompson and seconded by member Nelson for the consultant to present an option to the public that is most likely to be approved by State Aid. All voted ave. Motion carried. Living Streets Workshop Recap, Motion was made by member Franzen and seconded by member Nelson to table Living Streets Workshop Recap until next meeting. All voted ave. Motion carried. Living Streets Consultant Selection 5 After brief discussion, the consensus was to go with BARR Engineering, the only firm that submitted a proposal. Edina Transportation Commission Bylaws Chair Janovy said the bylaws should be adopted as written; however, she received permission to change the quorum from 5 to a simple majority of seated voting members, and also a section that seemed confusing was "If a quorum is not achieved within 15 minutes...." She said if they agree they can vote to make these changes at the next meeting. Updates Student Member - No updates. Bike'Edina Task Force — Minutes of January 12, 2012 - No updates. Grandview Small Area Study Member Nelson said the public comment . period ww .w.edinacitizenengagement.org. He said two public mi Council will receive the recommendation on April 17. Living Streets Working Group ff Member Thompson said they need discuss how to move committee of the whole. CORRESPONDENCE AND PETITIONS — None Member Nelson said France Iriving lane. His suggestion County by Mr. Houle. Member Bass talked briefly al opportunity through the Met about EngineArk partmer Mr. Houle sa fdXity M Council. He saidgsome said the committeeffe they will be appealing promising because the he framework is online at mately 25 -30 people attended. consider creating a seen cars using the shoulder as a ne will be forwarded-to Hennepin hester (See Safe Smart) is doing and a possible funding I talk more these at the next meeting. She also asked J,below. 3 &Associates consultant Chuck Rickart made the presentation to the Met oncern re not addressing bike facility.and at crossing video detection. He �r than grade separation. He said the vote was 8 ayes and 10 nays. He said Rickart to checking to see they can appeal to the TAC. Mr. Houle said it is ned a sunset date for another project. '/ x>s � :KAY . Staffing in the Engineering Departm- Mr. Houle said the entire City has.gone through a reorganization. He said. he, was the public works director /city/ngineer and as of recent.he is no longer the public works director. He said they are currently advertising to fill the assistant city engineer position but this person will not be the liaison to the ETC. Mr. Houle will continue as the liaison until a transportation engineer is hired. Additionally, the utility engineer position will be vacant soon and this position will be changed to an environmental engineer (if approved by Council) and serve as the liaison to the EEC. .Mr. Houle asked the commission if they would be interested in an orientation on functionality of the City. He said ssistant city manager Kurt has put together a PowerPoint presentation that they might find useful. They all agreed that this would be helpful. It will be scheduled one hour before the next scheduled meeting in March. 6 Regarding the agenda, Mr. Houle said it is set up similar to the Council agenda showing upcoming meeting dates and events. He said members can add meeting dates also. ADJOURNMENT Meeting adjourned at 10:10 p.m. ATTACHMENT Attendance Spreadsheet 7 South Dr Yrsl� G� Q A C cJ'4A1 . ` 0 5 Sr O /°y nd Of e �y aa C N y Richm e GI o lMndsorAve Windsor Ave '¢ d o Du dee Rd -o W 56t St 3 P e . Ridge Park Rd d a �erpo J wke z a W 57th St ha it Q Berne Warden Av, Z Q a o .� ` p a o Se Grove Cir ce Q Grove SL� ,� Grove t a v c `D Grove St c m m - W 58th St Amy Dr oBenton Ave m Q-a W 59th St 0 _ Countryside Rd R ® a d W �Oth Sfr- _- :: -xr:r linger C Hi hland Rd -- r " 70rslinnDDr � Po ter La W 61st St Hun ter St ��c ......_..._._...___.._ La , p� W 61 qt St 0'Do .._._._. .v _M Jeff Pls... BirchcrestAve ®i chcrest �a Olinger Blvd p W 62nd St Maddox La q. d Roberts PI 0 Colonial Wav y°' D rcy ® �' w- W 663rd St �...... C� „ ` late wY 62 Whiting ve ry^ Q W6 thSta` �. o ericK La W 6 th St o..- kQ po Doron La :w ,fir \� �a Valle La 10. 's ti Hillside -- -,� W 66th St Cree Valle Rd _ Crash Statistics Year: 2001-2010 Intersection: Tracy: Vernon to TH 62 Total Crashes: 33 Breakdown by Year Year 2010 Total: 4 Severity: 2 Propert Year: 2009 Total: 5 Severity: Property Damage: No Apparent Injury 3 y Damage: No Apparent Injury 2/1; 8/7 2125; 0 Injury: Non - Incapacitating Injury 12/15 1445 2 Injury: Possible Injury 2/8; 4/17 0800; 1500 0 Injury: Non - Incapacitating Injury 0 Injury: Incapacitating Injury Year: 2009 Total: 5 Severity: Year: 2007 Total: 1 Severity: 0 Property Damage: No Apparent Injury 3 Property Damage: No Apparent Injury 1/6; 5/15; 1535; 1315; 0 Injury: Non - Incapacitating Injury 12/15 0900 2 Injury: Possible Injury 6/15; 9/17 0932; 1210 0 Injury: Non - Incapacitating Injury 0 Injury: Incapacitating Injury Year: 2007 Total: 1 Severity: 0 Property Damage: No Apparent Injury 1 Injury: Possible Injury 4/23/2011 1725 0 Injury: Non - Incapacitating Injury 0 Injury: Incapacitating Injury Location 4; 1 4; 1 Location 1; 3; 1 1; 1 Location 9 Date Modified: 12/07/2011 By Byron T` G:\ Engineering \Infrastructure \Streets \Traffic \Crashes \2011 \Crash Data Tracy_vernor 62.xlsx Year: 2006 Total: . Severity: Year: 2005 Total: Severity: Year: 2004 i Total: i Severity: 10 Date Time Location= 6 Property Damage: No Apparent Injury 6/26 (2); 10/31 1715 (2); ); 1 Injury: Possible:.lnjury (2); 11/30 (2) 1200(2 4 Injury: Possible Injury 4/12 (2); 9/12 1237 (2); 0 Injury: Incapacitating Injury. 2 1843 (2) 0 Injury: Non= Incapacitating Injury 0 Injury: Incapacitating Injury K 9;(2); 7 9(2),1 (2) Date Time Location 2 Property Damage: No Apparent Injury 1/20; 2/14 1803; 0731 1 Injury: Possible:.lnjury 5/2/2011 1555 0 Injury: Non- Incapacitating Injury 0 Injury: Incapacitating Injury. ' F, 9; 7 1 Date Time Location /17 (2) 1130; 6 (2) 2 Property Damage: No Apparent Injury 8 2340 0 Injury: PossibleAnjury 1/9' 7 0lnjury: Non - Incapacitating -Injury 0 Injury: Incapacitating Injury ' Year: 2003 Total: 2 Severity: Date Modified: 12/07/2011 By Byron Theis I Date Time Location 3/3; 220 ` 1 1/9' 7 9 1 Property Damage: 'No Apparent Injury 1 Injury: Possible-Injury : 40 0 Injury: Non - Incapacitating Injury 0 Injury: Incapacitating Injury G:\ Engineering \Infrastructure \Streets \Traffic\ Crashes \2011 \Crash Data_Tracy_vernon to TH62.x1sx Year: 2002 Total: 3 Severity: Date Timw 3 Property Damage: No Apparent Injury 3/14; 4/15; 1000; 1500; 1 Injury: Possible Injury 5/30 1000 0 Injury: Possible Injury 0 Injury: Non - Incapacitating Injury 0 Injury: Incapacitating Injury Year: 2001 Total: 3 Severity: Date Time 2 Property Damage: No Apparent Injury 3/12; 10/25 1300; 1100 1 Injury: Possible Injury 10/4/2011 1300 0 Injury: Non - Incapacitating Injury 0 Injury: Incapacitating Injury Location 3; 1; 8 Location 5; 4 2 Date Modified: 12/07/2011 By Byron T'. '- G:\ Engineering \Infrastructure \Streets \Traffic \Crashes \2011 \Crash Data Tracy_Verno, 162.xlsx wk,el. h a Location Description Year Average Dail Traff 85th S v �c peed 70 Tr�cKS ° 1 Tracy south of Vernon MSA (5/2009) 4213 32 5.2 Tracy south of Vernon MSA (5/2005) 5064 38.1 5.6 Tracy south of Vernon 08/27/01- 08/31/01 8909 37.3 NA Tracy south of Vernon MSA 1997 3460 NA NA Tracy south of Vernon MSA 1995 3994 NA NA Tracy south of Vernon MSA 1993 3128 NA NA Tracy south of Vernon MSA 1991 3321 NA NA Tracy south of Vernon MSA 1989 3076 NA NA Tracy south of Vernon MSA 1987 3415 NA NA Tracy south of Vernon MSA 1985 3538 NA NA Tracy south of Vernon MSA 1983 3085 NA NA Tracy south of Vernon MSA 1981 3790 NA NA Tracy south of Vernon MSA 1979 4015 NA NA Tracy south of Vernon MSA 1977 2766 NA NA Tracy south of Vernon MSA 1975 3235 NA NA 2 Tracy south of Hawks Terrace @ 5629 1 06/17/08- 06/25/08 3654 36.7 3.3 Date Modified: 12/06/11 By Byr hers G:\ Engineering \Infrastructure \Streets \Traffic \TRAFF STUDIES \20' 3cy.xlsx Location Description Year Average Daily Traffic 85th ,Speed % Trucks 3 Tracy north of Benton MSA 1997 3605 NA NA Tracy north of Benton MS A1995 3766 NA NA Tracy north of Benton MSA 1993 3654 NA NA Tracy north of Benton MSA11991. 3623 NA NA Tracy north of Benton MSA 1989 3695 NA NA Tracy north of Benton MSA 1987 3354 NA NA Tracy north of Benton MSA 1985 3168 NA NA Tracy north of Benton M.SA 1981 3408 NA NA Tracy north. of Benton MSA 1979 3173 NA NA Tracy north of Benton MSA 1977 4636 NA NA Tracy north of Benton MSA 1975 3570 NA NA 4 Tracy south of Benton 08%27/01- 08/31101 3558 NA NA Tracy south of .Benton MSA 1997 4747 NA NA Tracy south of Benton MSA 1997 6483 NA NA Tracy south`of Benton MSA 1995 4958 NA NA Tracy south of Benton MSA 1993 4814 NA NA Tracy south of Benton. MSA 1991 5016 NA NA Tracy south of Benton MSA 1989 4947 NA NA Tracy south of Benton MSA 1987 .4156 NA NA Tracy south of Benton, MSA 1985 5828 NA NA Tracy south of Benton . MSA 1981 5265 NA NA Tracy south of Benton MSA 1979 4266 NA NA Tracy south of Benton MSA 1977 3784 NA` NA Tracy south .of Benton MSA 1975 4435 -NA NA Date Modified: 12/06/11 By Byron Theis G:\ Engineering \Infrastructure \Streets \Traffic \TRAFF STUDIES \2011 \Tracy.xlsx Location Description Year Average Daily Traffic 85th Speed % Trucks 5 Tracy south of Countryside Rd. 06/17/08- 06/25/08 5119 38.9 5.3 6 Tracy south of Ridgeway Rd. @ 6104 06/17/08- 06/25/08 5062 f 31.7 4.2 7 Tracy north of Olinger Blvd MSA (5/2009) 5984 29.2 5.5 Tracy north of Olinger Blvd MSA (4/2005) 6700 30.9 5.6 Tracy north of Olinger Blvd MSA 1997 4114 NA NA Tracy north of Olinger Blvd MSA 1995 5517 NA NA Tracy north of Olinger Blvd MSA 1993 5010 NA NA Tracy north of Olinger Blvd MSA 1991 5556 NA NA Tracy north of Olinger Blvd MSA 1989 4829 NA NA Tracy north of Olinger Blvd MSA 1987 5384 NA NA Tracy north of Olinger Blvd MSA 1985 4712 NA NA Tracy north of Olinger Blvd MSA 1979 4123 NA NA Tracy north of Olinger Blvd MSA 1977 4658 NA NA Tracy north of Olinger Blvd MSA 1975 4578 NA NA Date Modified: 12/06/11 By By, Theis G:\ Engineering \Infrastructure \Streets \Traffic \TRAFF STUDIES \20' -acy.xlsx i j Location Description Year Average Daily Traffic 85th Speed % Trucks 8 Tracy north.of Hillside 08/27/01- 08/31/01 6010 NA NA Tracy north of Hillside MSA 1975 4578 NA NA 9 Tracy north of Colonial Way 06/17/08- 06/25/08 6821 36.8 4.5 10 Tracy south. of Colonial Way 4112/06- 4/14/06 8660 37.9 NA Tracy south. of Colonial. Way MSA (5/2005) 9444 36 5.6 Tracy south of Colonial Way 08/27/01- 08/31/01 7381 NA NA Tracy south of Colonial Way MSA 1997 6483 NA NA Tracy south of Colonial Way MSA 1981 9901 NA NA Tracy south of Colonial Way MSA 1979 5763 Na NA I Date Modified: 12/06/11 By Byron Theis 1 G:\ Engineering\ Infrastructure \Streets \Traffic \TRAFF STU DI ES\2011\Tracy.xlsx Location Description Year Average Daily Traffic 85th Speed % Trucks 11 Tracy north of Valley View MSA (5/2009) 7730 34.7 5.6 Tracy north of Valley View MSA (5/2005) 9837 39.9 NA Tracy north of Valley View 08/13/01- 08/17/01 7881 42.9 NA Tracy north of Valley View Tracy north of Valley View MSA 1997 MSA 1995 6266 7249 NA NA NA NA Tracy north of Valley View MSA 1993 8155 NA NA Tracy north of Valley View MSA 1991 8542 NA NA Tracy north of Valley View MSA 1989 9164 NA NA Tracy north of Valley View MSA 1987 8576 NA NA Tracy north of Valley View MSA 1985 7455 NA NA Tracy north of Valley View MSA 1981 8276 NA NA Tracy north of Valley View MSA 1979 6832 NA NA Tracy north of Valley View MSA 1977 5298 NA NA Tracy north of Valley View MSA 1975 4435 NA NA Date Modified: 12/06/11 By Bye Theis G:\ Engineering \Infrastructure \Streets \Traffic \TRAFF STUDIES \20' ecy.xlsx . LOGISMap Output Page hN 6 su'vAD 61ST ST W ,nuas•� I��f � S a�.d Volute. h ....... .. ....... —LLU .. .WARDENAVE . �Gardan Y Garden Park Additkh 0 Page 1 of 1 4 CA m AVE http: / /gis.logis.oraOGIS ArcIMS /ims ?ServiceName =ed LOGISMap OVSDE &Client... 11/29/2011 Location Description Date Avpraap naily Tra#ir RSth Cnnnrl % Tr.IrFrc 1 Benton 5700[Countryside School] 07/30/98- 08/05/98 391 NA NA Benton 5714[Countryside School] 1 05/26/98- 06/01/98 381 NA NA 2 Benton east of Tracy 06/19/01- 06/22/01 3007 NA NA Benton east of Tracy 07/29/98- 08/03/98 2215 NA NA Benton east of Tracy 05/26/98-06/01/98 3182 NA NA Benton east of Tracy MSA 1997 1897 NA NA Benton east of Tracy MSA 1995 2570 NA NA Benton east of Tracy MSA 1993 2459 NA NA Benton east of Tracy MSA 1991 2183 NA NA Benton east of Tracy MSA 1989 1765 NA NA Benton east of Tracy MSA 1985 2177 NA NA Benton east of Tracy MSA 1983 2071 NA NA Benton east of Tracy MSA 1981 1791 NA NA Benton east of Tracy MSA 1979 1380 NA NA Benton east of Tracy MSA 1977 1005 NA NA Benton east of Tracy MSA 1975 1508 NA NA Date Modified: 12/06/11 By Byre -tieis C ;ineering \Infrastructure \Streets \Traffic \TRAFF STUDIES \2011 \B n.xlsx Location Description Date Average Daily Traffic 85th Speed % Trucks 3 Benton west of Hansen- RECOUNT- MSA (1012009) 3221 30.7 4.4 Benton west of Hansen MSA (6/2009) 2582 30.4 2.4 Benton west of Hansen MSA (4/2005) 3752 34.1 NA Benton west of Hansen 06/19/01- 06/22/01 3586 34.1 NA Bentonvest of Hansen MSA 1997 2977 NA NA Benton west of Hansen MSA 1995 3150 NA NA Benton west of Hansen MSA 1993 2951 NA NA Benton west of :Hansen MSA 1991 2774 NA NA Benton west of Hansen MSA 1980' 27:1,0 NA NA :Benton west of Hansen ' MSA 1987 2459 NA NA Benton west of Hansen MSA 1985 1149 NA NA Benton west 'of Hansen MSA 1983 1239 NA NA Benton west of Hansen. MSA 1981 2795 NA NA Benton west of Hansen MSA 1979 1887 NA NA Benton west of Hansen MSA 1977 1973 NA NA Benton west of Hansen -MSA 1975 2080 NA. NA Date Modified: 12/06/11 By Byron Theis G:\ Engineering\ Infrastructure\ Streets\ Traffic \TRAFF STUDIES \2011 \Benton.xlsx WSB arc Associates. INC'. Infrastructure ■ Engineering ■ Planning ■ Construction Memorandum To: Wayne Houle, City Engineer, City of Edina From: Andrew Plowman, WSB & Associates, Inc. Date: February 24, 2012 Re: Alternate Design Option TracyBenton Intersection Tracy Avenue Reconstruction Project Edina, MN WSB Project Number 01686-25 701 Xenia Avenue South Suite 300 Minneapolis, MN 55416 Tel: 763 541 -4800 Fax: 763 541 -1700 This memorandum is intended to provide analysis and recommendations regarding Council Member Mary Brindle's concept layout for the Tracy Avenue/Benton Avenue intersection. This concept is an alternate design to those provided in the February 6, Feasibility Report, in which three options were presented: leave as is, realignment, and a roundabout. The roundabout has been recommended by the consultant and staff. See next page, Figure 1 is Council Member Brindle's concept layout, sent in an email to Scott Neal on February 20, 2012. See next page, Figure 2 is the corresponding staff /consultant interpretation of the concept layout, including engineering judgment regarding some additions and modifications to the concept. This summary will not provide in -depth analysis of the roundabout option or the realignment option. Please see the feasibility report for additional information. Minneapolis ■ St. Cloud Equal Opportunity Employer K:`01686.2,50WMrin\DmsV crnom_Om Way Wen SideCansidentio daax Concept Layout February 24, 2012 Page 2 Figure 1: Councilman Brindle's Concept Layout I Illillml Figure 2: Staff /Consultant Concept Layout KA01666- 250Wdmin\Doss\Memo One Way West SideConsiderations.d- 0 N 'p 2 ru - _ Two -way as is This section are way going West lkwort it irnale :i f O Ilp � C) 0 J C: �DS! 0 Two :vay as is OIkntrrn,lvcnuc Figure 1: Councilman Brindle's Concept Layout I Illillml Figure 2: Staff /Consultant Concept Layout KA01666- 250Wdmin\Doss\Memo One Way West SideConsiderations.d- Concept Layout February 24, 2012 Page 3 Existing Intersection Deficiencies: Overlapping Intersection The existing intersection is an overlapping, four -way stop configuration. The east and west legs of Benton Avenue are offset 70' from centerline to centerline. There has not been a history of crashes at this location; however, the intersection is cumbersome, confusing, and we believe there is a potential for safety issues. The confusion is enhanced when Countryside Elementary School begins and ends each school day. Section 3.4.5: Offset Driveways and Streets, from the MnDOT Access Management Manual, states that "Overlapping driveways should be avoided, unless the access points can be separated by sufficient distance to allow back -to -back, left -turn lanes (distance "B" in Figure 3.31). ", see Figure 3. The criterion for public streets is the same as driveways. To complicate matters, the intersection is controlled by one set of four stop signs, resulting in vehicles not yielding right -of -way in many circumstances, especially for motorists performing left turns. �nveways should-be-,avoided unless the access points can be separated byj ance to allow bgbk to -back left _lum lanes (distance "B In Figure 3 31):`_ J,' Figure 3.31: Overlapping Driveways j t :J L � r --- -- ----- --- -- - - -- -- ------------ --- - - - - -- --- - - - - -- ---- -- - ---- J J J Aligned Offset LOt7e�lapping`] Public Street Connections (Tyne 4) In some cases, an aligned four - legged intersection with a history of right -angle crashes or an intersection with an undesirable skew angle may be replaced with two "T intersections. In these cases, left -turn movements should be carefully considered. In Figure 3.32, left -turn movements are separated and do not overlap. The distance between the two "T" intersections should.be at least the Spacing between Adjacent Driveways (Figure 3.27). Figure 3: Section 3.4.5 from MnDOT Access Management Manual We do not believe 70' is enough room for back -to -back, left turns to operate simultaneously. This is one reason why the intersection is controlled as one four -way stop. K:t01686.250Wdmin\Doos%Mt Ono Way West SideCotuiderotio —dwx Concept Layout February 24, 2012 Page 4 School Bus Maneuvers Many of the school buses enter from the east leg of Benton Avenue. This turn movement proves to be difficult, especially when there is a vehicle stopped at the west leg of Benton Avenue. Photo 1: School Bus Movements Parent Pickup U -Turns There is an existing parking bay for parents to pick up children along the west side of Tracy Avenue, south of Benton Avenue. As indicated in Photo 7, several parents will make U -turns in the middle of the street to access the parking bay. This maneuver is considered to not be safe and is made worse by the crest vertical curve near the south end of the parking bay. Photo 2: U -Turn to Access Parking Bay K b 1686 -250V drttin\D —\vlem 0- Way West S.&C. —dcr b.. d— Concept Layout February 24, 2012 Page 5 Concept Description Council Member Brindle's concept identifies splitting the west leg of Benton Avenue into two separate one way streets. This would realign the eastbound Benton Avenue approach with the intersection, while maintaining the westbound existing alignment. Below is a summary of the design features: 1. Removal of stop sign at existing northwest quadrant of the intersection, thereby, making the entrance uncontrolled. 2. One -way streets for the west leg of Benton Avenue. A retaining wall along the realigned eastbound roadway would still be necessary. Twenty (20) mph design speed curves are used for this alignment. 3. Addition of a return lane from westbound Benton to eastbound Benton. This would allow a legal maneuver for the resident at the northwest quadrant of the intersection to access Tracy Avenue without having to turn the wrong way on a one -way or being forced to make a tight U -turn at the end of the median. 4. Create an aligned four -way stop at the existing southern portion of the intersection. We modified the four -way stop to only include two crosswalks. Since there are no sidewalk facilities on the west side, we did not feel additional crosswalks would be warranted. 5. Realign 5700 Benton Avenue driveway. The existing City code requires 50' offset from an existing street curb return. T Z. �I .I Figure 4: Proposed Concept Features K.W 1696 -25MAd rd.M c,VMe _0- way Wcs(Si&Co ide liom d- Concept Layout February 24, 2012 Page 6 Concept Advantaues/Disadvantages: We analyzed the concept layout and have the following advantages and disadvantages identified: Advantages: 1. Eastbound Benton Avenue is aligned with the intersection. This will allow people exiting the school easier access to every direction at the intersection. 2. Bus turn movements are more efficient. Although the buses still need to make a difficult maneuver, the bus drivers do not need to be concerned with vehicles being in their turn path. 3. Return lane allows for parents to make a legal U -turn to access the parking bay. 4. Eliminates the need to lengthen the driveway at 5700 Benton Avenue by 70'. The existing north curb of the west leg would remain in the same location. 5. Provided the existing roadbed on the west leg can remain, the cost will be reduced in comparison to the realignment option. However, the retaining wall would still be required. Disadvantages: 1. The overlapping left -turn maneuver is not eliminated from occurring. In fact, the potential for complete gridlock of the intersection exists. As seen in Figure 5, only three southbound vehicles can block the entrance to Benton Avenue. It is not uncommon for a queue of ten vehicles at the existing intersection. This could attempt to be alleviated by adding a "Do Not Block the Intersection" Sign, but we believe the potential is high for queuing to still occur. ,t t. cdo I �t a t� t. t. t; t. itt t t I ' t t t ST r Figure 5: Potential Gridlock K',M686- 250\Ad,,u,0 csWtemo_Om Way West SideConsid ... ti— dwx Concept Layout February 24, 2012 Page 7 2. Bus turn- movements are more efficient; however, the movement is still difficult for the bus drivers, especially with traffic present within the Tracy Avenue corridor with the potential queuing of southbound vehicles. 3, A retaining wall is still needed to be constructed for this option, the same as the realignment option. 4.' Although the number of conflicts at this four -way stop are less than the existing or realignment option (if the north entrance is excluded), there a I still a larger number of conflicts than the roundabout option. 5. The same amount of R/W is required for this option as the realignment option. 6. The cost of this option is $60,000 more expensive'than the roundabout option. 7. Potential confusion and safety issue regarding one -way configuration. Recommendation Although there are some advantages to this option, we do not feel this option solves the intersection deficiencies as well as the realignment or roundabout options. This option does not fix the glaring overlapping intersection deficiency that exists today. In fact, removing the stop sign at the southbound -north approach has the potential to create an overall gridlock situation. We believe the realignment option or roundabout option would be better solutions to fix the efficiency of the operations and eliminate the potential safety issue. K ^016 6- 2501Admin\D.,,\Memo One Wey West Sid.Conside ions.docx Wavne Houle Subject: FW: District's Admin Procedures on Tracy/ Benton Attachments: ROADWAY PROCEDURES 2- 16.docx From: Dressen, Ric [ mailto :ricdressen @edina.kl2.mn.us] Sent: Sunday, February 19,2012 8:06 AM TO: Scott Neal Cc: Bergman, Karen L; Nash, Margo M; Cathy Cella(home); Randy Meyer Subject: District's Admin Procedures on Tracy/ Benton Scott, As per our Friday conversation, here is the Distirct's admin procedures related to the Tracy /Benton Roadway. Also, if you could delete comments in the report that do not reflect these procedures, the District would appreciate. Let me know if you questions. Ric ADMINSTRATIVE PROCEDURE General Approach to Changes in Roadways and Intersections Near Edina Schools 1. The District will work cooperatively with the City as it makes decisions related to traffic flow challenges and roadway improvements. 2. In any consideration of traffic flow and roadway improvements, safety is always the District's top priority. 3. The District's Finance and Facilities Committee will review all proposals for roadway improvements impacting District facilities. 4. The District encourages students to walk or bike to school and will support them with crossing - guards. Any intersection changes must support safe.walking and biking to school. 5. If District owned lane is required for any roadway changes, the City must make a request for the land, so that such request can be handled in accordance with District procedures. 6. Construction of intersections or roadways adjacent to school property during the school year must be completed in a way that minimizes any traffic challenges for students, families, staff and buses. 7. The District's approach is to ensure that its needs are adequately addressed by whatever plan(s) the City chooses to adopt. 8. The City should communicate questions, plans, proposals, or other issues related to traffic flow challenges and roadway improvements to Margo Nash. Ms. Nash will coordinate communication between the District, District personnel and school sites. Countryside Specific Observations 1. The current intersection arrangement does not create limits for bus travel at the school. 2. The District's Board Finance and Facilities Committee welcomes a meeting with the City to discuss and review this project. Further involvement of the Board will be determined by the Committee. c:\ users \whoule \appdata \local\microsoft \windows \temporary internet files\ content .outlook \dvnbno6i \roadway procedures 2- 16.docx Wayne Houle From: Lynette Biunno Sent: Thursday, March 01, 2012 11:11 AM To: Wayne -Houle Cc: Susan Howl Subject: FW: EMAIL CITY COUNCIL IF YOU AGREE: A Better. Recommendation for Tracy Avenue to Keep the Parking Good morning, This message has been forwarded to the Mayor and Council members and Wayne Houle. Lynette Biunno, Receptionist 952-927-88611 Fax 952 - 826 =0389 r } . Ibiunno @EdinaMN.gov 1 www.Ed!naMN.gov �• , ��` ...For Living, Learning, Raising Families & Doing Business Please make note of my new email address. We're a do.town ... working to make the healthy choice the easy choice! From: grustad @comcast.net I EZZMEEK90 Sent: Thursday, March 01, 2012 11:07 AM To: Lynette Biunno Subject: Fwd: EMAIL CITY COUNCIL IF YOU AGREE: A Better Recommendation for Tracy Avenue to Keep the Parking To All strongly agree with the sentiments listed below. Please consider when making your.decisions. It seems to me the crux of the matter is the need to provide bike:lanes. While I do understand the quest for a.greener community, I also understand the need to do what we can as responsible citizens to keep our costs in check, balancing the cost/benefit analysis. The widening of the road', as, proposed, to.install bike lanes (while keeping the parking lane) seems to be a costly. endeavor, causing much heartache to the residents who live on the west side of the avenue,.while beneffiting. the v �[ few. The greatest concern for those of us who live on Tracy `is the speed of the traffic. Upgrading the road surface, and widening the roadway will exacerbate this issue. My children are.required to cross Tracy to catch their school bus. Unfortunately, there is no controlled crosswalk. for them to utilize, and kids being kids, they opt for the shortest path from A to B. The potential for increased speeds on Tracy due to the widening of the roadway is a very big concern. Add to that the concerrn we all`share: that of exiting our driveways with traffic moving well above the posted limits: One more note:. If the city plan is. to include the addition of bike routes throughout, the bike lane on Tracy would start at the bridge (where there is no allowance for a<bike lane unless the bridge gets re- built) nor is their a designated bike lane on Vernon (merely a striped shoulder). We would in effect be creating a 1 mile (roughly) bike -route for a very few.cyclists, at quite an additional expense. I think the lesser expense of installing "share the :•road" or "bike route" signs along the route, along with the "striping" of the roadway (thus creating a seperation between the traffic lane and the parking /shoulder) would provide the necessary awareness to the drivers. Also, please accept the recommendation to remove the "round- about" from consideration near the school. The existing configuration was:designed to do exactly what,we all desire near a school ... have-the automobiles proceed With caution and respect and be made more aware of their suroundings. Let's all try to keep this roadway through this residential district as safe as possible. At the same time, please recognize that it is our goal to be fiscally reposnible. Thank you. Greg Rustad From: "Barbara Hoganson" < To: edinacountrvside(@aooal Sent: Thursday, March 1, 2012 9:51:25 AM Subject: EMAIL CITY COUNCIL IF YOU AGREE: A Better Recommendation for Tracy Avenue to Keep the Parking Bill Rodgers, Tracy Ave Chair requested the following be sent to the Countryside Neighbors and Other Interested Edina Residents. A Better Recommendation for Tracy Avenue to Keep the Parking - If you agree to the following, please email the Mayor, City Council, Transportation Commission today if possible with the following content below, but no later than noon on Mar 6th. The email address to use still is edinamail @ci.edina.mn.us. Feel free to forward on the email, or copy and paste as you deem appropriate. To Mayor Hovland, City Council Members, Transportatibn Commission, City Manager and Assistant City Manager Here is a better recommendation for the Sidewalk, Boulevard, Parking Lane, Bike Route and Traffic Lanes on Tracy Avenue between Benton and Vernon. This recommendation is logical and makes sense. It will result in maintaining many of the requirements everyone is concerned with losing or adding to the Tracy Avenue Reconstruction Configuration. The recommendation as made is adding 3 feet of width to the traffic lanes. If the traffic lanes were increased from 11 foot wide to 12 or 13 feet wide the width of Tracy could be reduced instead of adding another foot to the width. Please review this recommendation with an open mind. The Sharing the road with bikes is a concept that is used on 44th Street and seems to work there and on other Edina streets. I really like the idea of the wider sidewalk and allowing younger bikers to use the sidewalk. Again it keeps our children safe. Commuters and other adults don't mind sharing the road. This is a win -win solution to a set of very complicated issues. Here are comments and creative recommendations from Rick Conkey, resident living on Tracy Ave regarding keeping the Parking. Bill Rodgers ECNA Chair for Tracy Project Hello Barbara and Tracy Avenue homeowners ... I strongly support keeping parking on Tracy Avenue. Sheri and Andrew raise an important issue and something for all residents to consider. While Bill may be accurate regarding permits for large scale reconstruction, it's smaller projects, short notice issues and one off situations that can pose problems. I would like to add some additional points in favor of keeping parking: 1) Parking is an important asset to our properties. In a challenging market, with home values falling, it's important to consider the effect parking would have on prospective buyers. I believe there is a significant percentage of buyers for whom parking would be important. Because Tracy is such a well trafficked street our home values are already challenged in a competitive real estate market. We should do what we can to promote the value and I believe having parking is positive to that end. 2) The ability to park on our street,:in front of our homes makes Tracy Ave. more a residential street and not simply a throughway between Crosstown and Vernon. Parking with bump outs will promote a stronger 'neighborhood' feel, making our street more attractive. 3) A parking lane adds safety. It provides 'bailout' space in the event a driver needs to negotiate something unexpected. ' 4) On a personal level, we have many family members and friends who are now in their 70's and 80's (with a couple 90's mixed in to keep things exciting). When we host Mother's Day and Father's day, etc. side street parking would not be workable. Some statistics have been cited in other comments that need to be clarified. Of the. survey: respondents who live on Trace., between Benton and Vernon, 44% deemed parking Important.' That is the relevant stat to the project being considered. If by a strong majority the residents south of Benton prefer to not have parking that should be an important factor when that phase of the project gets underway. I don't believe it is mandatory that the two segments are the same with regard to parking (as an example 70th St. has sections of each). The two segments of Tracy are different; the south segment has shorter blocks on the east side and the school, park and fire station occupy a significant length of the west side. Also, the question is a very different consideration for non Tracy Ave. residents than for the homeowners actually on Tracy. We all have interest and a stake in the neighborhood but in this case the stakes are different for the two constituencies. Since the planning process began I believed a primary objective should be to make Tracy Ave. feel more like a neighborhood street, the ability to park on your street, in front of your house, does that. With regard to the Tracy Ave. reconstruction configuration currently proposed by the city and ETC, I sent an inquiry to Jack Sullivan and Andy Plowman looking for feedback on an alternate layout concept for Tracy Ave. At the time they did not feel it viable but I'd.like to share it with the" group as it may lead to other ideas. The alternate configuration is as follows: Working From East To West: 7 ft. Shared Use Sidewalk 4 ft. Grass - Boulevard 8 ft. Parking Lane 14 ft. Driving Lane 14 ft. Driving Lane - The overall width including sidewalk and boulevard is 47 ft., compared to the current proposal at 50 ft. This would require only a' 1 ft. widening on the west side of the street. I believe this would save all existing trees. Remember that there is currently a 13 ft. right of way on the.west side of Tracy and 1 ft. on the east side (east of the sidewalk). - The 14 ft: driving lanes allow comfortable width for cars and cyclists to share the - The street could be 'signed' as a Bike Route, as is 44th Street. - Serious cycling enthusiasts and commuter cyclists are very comfortable sharing residential roads with cars. - The 7 ft. wide sidewalk can be comfortably shared by pedestrians, casual cyclists, and most importantly children on bikes. Children ages 5 -9 have the highest crash involvement of all cyclists (Delaware DoT study), and cyclists under the age of 16 account for 13% of all cyclists killed and 25% of all injured (National Center for Statistics and Analysis. Bike lanes may encourage young children to ride in the street, placing them in greater danger. I believe our focus should be to improve our neighborhood, promote its value, and provide a safe and functional environment for children and adult residents, alike. Our first responsibility is to our residents and neighborhood. Homes and families line Tracy from Crosstown to Vernon, it's not a commuter cyclist thoroughfare. I do support cycling as a positive transportation alternative but I don't think we need to overreach. A comfortably wide, signed, roadway can be safely shared. Thanks for your consideration. Hallee and Rick Conkey Tracy Avenue Residents Wayne Houle From: Lynette Biunno Sent: Thursday, March 01, 2012 10:10 AM To: Wayne Houle Cc: Susan Howl Subject: FW: Tracy Avenue construction Good morning, This message has been forwarded to the Mayor and Council members and Wayne Houle. Lynette Biunno,, Reception ist ' 952-927-88611 Fax 952 - 826 -0389 IbiunnoAEdinaMN.gov I www.EdinaMN.gov s ...For Living, Learning; Raising Families & Doing Business Please'make note of my new email address. We're a do.town ... working to make the healthy choice the easy choice! From: Susan Chandler Sent: Wednesday, February 29, 2012 9.38 PM To: Lynette Biunno Cc: Scott Neal Subject: Tracy Avenue construction Hello, I am writing as a 22 -year resident of Edina, and a 13 -year resident of Hawkes Drive. Hawkes Drive and Hawkes Terrace are perpendicular to Tracy and are the only streets off Tracy between Vernon and Hwy. U that depend on Tracy as our sole outlet. I endorse a reconstruction plan for Tracy that will result in two bike lanes and the existing sidewalk on the east side of Tracy. I advocate for the elimination of a parking lane. Because of my location, I traverse Tracy multiple times daily. It's very rare for there to be a parked car on Tracy. In fact, I observe a parked car on Tracy about once eve_ ry 2 months. I believe that creating a parking lane would be a waste of space, create an unnecessarily wide street at the expense of residents' yards, and encourage higher speeds. The growing number of bicyclists will use Tracy Avenue more with the creation of.bike lanes. Thank you for your consideration. Sincerely, Susan Chandler 5709 Hawkes Drive, Edina 1 Wayne Houle From: Judith Rodgers Sent: Thursday, Marc 0 , 2012 9:36 AM To: Lynette Biunno; jonibennett12 @comcast.net; mbrindle @comcast.net; joshsprague @edinarealty.com; swensonann1 @gmail.com; Scott Neal; Karen M. Kurt; Andrew Plowman; Wayne Houle Cc: Barbara Hoganson; Rick Conkey Subject: A Better Recommendation for Tracy Avenue Please pass this on to Mayor Hovland and the Transportation Commission. Thanks, Bill Rodgers To Mayor Hovland, City Council Members, Transportation Commission, City Manager and Assistant City Manager Here is a better recommendation for the Sidewalk, Boulevard, Parking Lane, Bike Route and Traffic Lanes on Tracy Avenue between Benton and Vernon. This recommendation is logical and makes sense. It will result in maintaining many of the requirements everyone is concerned with losing or adding to the Tracy Avenue Reconstruction Configuration. The recommendation as made is adding 3 feet of width to the traffic lanes. If the traffic lanes were increased from 11 foot wide to 12 or 13 feet wide the width of Tracy could be reduced instead of adding another foot to the width. Please review this recommendation with an open mind. The Sharing the road with bikes is a concept that is used on 44th Street and seems to work there and on other Edina streets. I really like the idea of the wider sidewalk and allowing younger bikers to use the sidewalk. Again it keeps our children safe. Commuters and other adults don't mind sharing the road. This is a win -win solution to a set of very complicated issues. Here are comments and creative recommendations from Rick Conkey, resident living on Tracy Ave regarding keeping the Parking. Bill Rodgers ECNA Chair for Tracy Project Hello Barbara and Tracy Avenue homeowners ... I strongly support keeping parking on Tracy Avenue. Sheri and Andrew raise an important issue and something for all residents to consider. While Bill may be accurate regarding permits for large scale reconstruction, it's smaller projects, short notice issues and one off situations that can pose problems. I would like to add some additional points in favor of keeping parking: 1) Parking is an important asset to our properties. In a challenging market, with home values falling, it's important to consider the effect parking would have on prospective buyers. I believe there is a significant percentage of buyers for whom parking would be 'important. Because Tracy is such a well trafficked street our home values are already challenged in a competitive real estate market. We should do what we can to promote the value and I believe having parking is positive to that end. 2) The ability to park on our street, in front of our homes makes Tracy Ave. more a residential street and not simply a throughway between Crosstown and Vernon. Parking with bump outs will promote a stronger 'neighborhood' feel, making our street more attractive. 3) A parking lane adds safety. It provides 'bailout' space in the event a driver needs to negotiate something unexpected. 4) On a personal level, we have many family members and friends who are now in their 70's and 80's (with a couple 90's mixed in to keep things exciting). When we host Mother's Day and Father's day, etc. side street parking would not be workable. Some statistics have been cited in other comments that need to be clarified. Of the survey. respondents who live on Tracy.Ave., between Benton and Vernon, 44% deemed parking Important. That is the relevant stat to the project being considered. If by a strong majority the residents south of Benton prefer to not have parking that should be an important factor when that phase of the project gets underway. I don't believe it is mandatory that the two segments are the same with regard to parking (as an example 70th St. has sections of each). The two segments of Tracy are different; the south segment has shorter blocks on the east side and the school, park and fire station occupy a significant length:of the west side. Also; the question is a very different consideration for non Tracy Ave. residents than for.the homeowners actually on Tracy. We all have interest and a.stake in the neighborhood but in this case the stakes are different for the two constituencies. Since the planning process began I believed a primary objective should be to make Tracy Ave. feel more like a neighborhood street, the ability to park on your street, in front of your house, does that. With regard to the Tracy Ave. reconstruction configuration currently proposed by the city and ETC, I sent an inquiry to Jack Sullivan and Andy. Plowman looking for feedback on an alternate layout concept for Tracy Ave. At the time they did not feel it viable but I'd like to share it with the group as it may lead to other ideas. The alternate configuration is as follows: Working From East To West: 7 ft. Shared Use Sidewalk 4 ft. Grass Boulevard .8 ft. Parking Lane 14 ft. Driving Lane 14 ft. Driving Lane The overall width including sidewalk and boulevard is 47 ft., compared to the current proposal at 50 ft. This would require only a 1 ft. widening on the west side of the street. I believe this would save all existing trees. Remember that there is currently a 13 ft. right of way on the west side of Tracy and 1 ft. on the east side (east of the sidewalk). - The 14 ft. driving lanes allow comfortable width for cars and cyclists to share the road. - The street could be 'signed' as a Bike Route, as is .44th Street. Serious cycling enthusiasts and commuter cyclists are very comfortable sharing residential roads with cars. - The 7 ft. wide sidewalk can be comfortably shared by pedestrians, casual cyclists, and most importantly children on bikes. Children ages 5 -9 have the highest crash involvement of all cyclists (Delaware DoT study), and cyclists under the age of 16 account for 13% of all cyclists killed and 25% of all injured (National Center for Statistics and Analysis: Bike lanes may encourage young children to ride in the street, placing them in greater danger. I believe our focus should be to improve our neighborhood, promote its value, and provide a safe and functional environment for children and adult residents, alike. Our first responsibility is to our residents and neighborhood. Homes and families line Tracy from Crosstown to Vernon, it's not a commuter cyclist thoroughfare. I do .support cycling as a positive transportation alternative but I don't think we need to overreach. A comfortably: wide, signed, roadway can be safely shared. 2 3 C7 • \C0MT T:�0 REPORT /RECOMMENDATION To: MAYOR AND COUNCIL Agenda Item Item No. VIII.A. From: Debra Mangen City Clerk ® Action ❑ Discussion ❑ Information Date: March 6, 2012 Subject: Resolution No. 2012 -40 Accepting Various Donations ACTION REQUESTED: Adopt Resolution. INFORMATION /BACKGROUND: In order to comply with State Statutes, all donations to the City must be adopted by a resolution approved by four favorable votes of the Council accepting the donation. I have prepared the attached resolution detailing the various donors, their gifts and the recipient departments for your consideration. ATTACHMENT: Resolution No. 2012 -40 RESOLUTION NO. 2012-40 ACCEPTING DONATIONS ON BEHALF OF THE CITY OF EDINA WHEREAS, Minnesota Statute 465.03 allows cities to accept grants and donations of real City of Edina 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 donations on behalf of its citizens. Edina Art Center: Angel Havari 4 x 4 Inch Acrylic on Canvas Painting Braemar Memorial Fund For Future Golf Course Equipment Purchases: Gerhard Brahms $100.00 Jack Isaaman $25.00 Lee Hamilton $25.00 Dr. Robert Peterson $100.00 Edina Fire Department: Mark & Kathleen Henkels $100.0 Dated: March 6, 2012 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 March 6, 2012, and as recorded in the Minutes of said Regular Meeting. WITNESS my hand and seal of said City this City Hall 4801 WEST 50TH STREET EDINA, MINNESOTA, 55424 -1394 day of www.CityofEdina.com City Clerk 952 - 927 -8861 FAX 952 -826 -0390 TTY 952 -826 -0379 /0 tv • t \J L /VP REPORT /RECOMMENDATION To: MAYOR AND COUNCIL Agenda Item Item NoXIII. B. From: Debra Mangen City Clerk ® Action ❑ Discussion ❑ Information Date: March 6, 2012 Subject: On -Sale Intoxicating and Sunday Sale Liquor License Renewals For Cocina del Barrio ACTION REQUESTED: Council grant a twelve month probationary on -sale intoxicating and Sunday sale liquor license to Cocina del Barrio and impose a $500.00 fine. License effective date shall be April 1, 2012 through March 31, 2013. Staff will work with the licensee during the probationary period. A monitoring visit will take place in six months. INFORMATION /BACKGROUND: Edina City Code Section 900 requires that all establishments holding liquor licenses within the City of Edina maintain a ratio of food to alcohol sales of sixty percent food to forty per cent alcohol. The City Council at their meeting on February 21, 2012, adopted an amendment to the City code that would allow them to grant a probationary license to an entity not achieving the required 60/40 ratio. The new ordinance requires the licensee to develop a plan by which they hope to achieve the required 60/40 ratio within their twelve month probationary period. It also specified a staff visit at six months. At the time Cocina del Barrio submitted its application for renewal their ratio was at 51/49. However, the owner, Ryan Burnet has stated in the attached letter his intention on working toward achieving the ratio and accepting a $500.00 fine. Mr. Burnet has also developed strategies the establishment intends to use to increase their food sales. He met with Police Chief Jeff Long, Dep. Clerk Jane Timm and myself to explain the strategies they intend to pursue. Staff believes they are sincere in their desire to achieve the desired ratio. Attachment: Sgt. Draper's Memo Ryan Burnet Letter of 2/15/2012 Edina Police .. - Department Memo, To: Chief of Police Jeff Long From: Tom Draper Date: March 1, 2012 Re: Liquor License Renewal Background checks have been completed for the 2012 -2013 licensing period for Cocina del Barrio's,On -sale Intoxicating and Sunday Sale Liquor License. An unqualified recommendation for approval of this renewal application is warranted with a 12 month probationary license and a $500.00 fine. Concina del Barrio should continue to work on their efforts to Meet the 60/40 ratio during the probationary time. On-Sale Intoxicating and Sunday Sale Cocina del Barrio Chiel OlMlice, Je n , l 0 Page 1 Honorable Mayor Hovland and Edina City Council Members; February 15, 2012 As reflected in our City on -sale liquor license renewal application, Cocina del Barrio did not meet the City's percentage food sales requirement for 2011. Please let me start by saying we are dedicated to meeting the City's food percentage requirement, and we take this requirement very seriously. We like doing business in Edina and feel like we are a good addition to the 5& and France area. We hope the solution will be a collaborative effort with you and ask that the strategy, the regulatory overview process, and timeframe set forth for compliance affords us sufficient time and flexibility to make any necessary changes to the strategies we propose. The gravity of this situation is not lost on us, and we will treat this as our top priority. We bought the building in 2010 and over 50% of it is dedicated to kitchen and food prep areas. We offer chef - driven Latin cuisine and every plate is made from scratch. Cocina del Barrio translated means "Kitchen of the Neighborhood ". We are not a bar, we are a restaurant that serves tapas -style food. We are doing so in an economy where restaurants are struggling to survive and our niche comes in affordability of smaller plates that have authentic, made from scratch ingredients. We source almost all of our food from local, organic farmers. Our accolades are extensive and include Best Restaurant of the Year in the Star Tribune and Minneapolis St. Paul Magazine. We currently employ approximately 75 individuals in various capacities at our restaurant. We are active members of our community and donate food to the Edina Girls & Boys basketball tournament, to charities holding local auctions, as well as sponsor several local youth baseball teams. We are active member of the Edina Chamber of Commerce and the 5& & France Business Association. In addition, we intend to increase our community involvement in 2012 in the City. Our challenges in food sales for 2011 include factors such as a slow start to lunch and brunch business which is common for most new restaurants, and the economic reality of competitive, maximum pricing on the Latin foods offered under our concept despite our increased costs in offering a higher quality product that is local, sustainable and organic.' For instance, tacos and enchiladas are a main part of the food program at Barrio. In 2011 these sales accounted for 15.95% of total items purchased; however, sales in terms of dollars amounted to only 10.66% of our total sales. A comparison of our cost of goods sold data for 2011 for food and for beverage alcohol sold at Cocina reveals that the cost of food sold were 30% higher than that of cost of beverage alcohol sold. The cost of goods sold is an accounting indicator of the volume of food sold at the restaurant. Our strategy for food sales in 2012 includes increasing the volume as well as the overall percentage in terms of dollars of food sales. Our strategy includes increased promotion of Sunday brunch (started in mid - November 2011) and lunch and exploring the possibilities of new food options such as family -style meals and food tasting options. With respect to our challenges in beverage alcohol sales, it is significant to note that we have not decreased the regular price on beverage alcohol since opening of Cocina del Barrio; our company philosophy includes pricing alcohol at a socially- responsible level. The beverage alcohol brands offered at Cocina and their corresponding price points are befitting of not only our concept, but of our City. For instance, our most popular margarita, The Trinity, sells for $ 9.50 and features a premium label tequila. Part of our proposed strategy for 2012 involves adding a lesser- expensive margarita to our menu as an option to our most popular at a $ 2.50 reduction in price. Admittedly, this strategy causes us some consternation as the brand in the lesser expensive margarita is not a premium label and we truly feel, not necessarily consistent with either our image at Cocina del Barrio nor that of the City of Edina, nor is as socially responsible. It is the case that the price of distilled spirits is elastic, with a considerable drop in demand with an increase in price. Tap beer at Cocina starts at $ 4.00 (Coors Light $ Grainbelt Nordeast) with a price point beginning at $5.00 for Mexican and other imports, and craft beers offered in the $6 - $8 range. We do not offer inexpensive brands that tend to be popular with young individuals on tap. It is the case that 60 — 70% of all beer sold at Cocina are brands in the $6 - $8 price point range. We are reluctant to reduce our beer prices at this time. We are considering decreasing our price for certain varietals of wine by the glass for 2012. As you can see, our alcohol price strategies have the effect of increasing the percentage of sales in dollars for a similar volume sold in a comparable category elsewhere. Restaurant concepts featuring affordable food items and responsibly -priced beverage alcohol on a regular basis face real challenges in meeting a 60% food sales requirement. We respectfully ask that the Edina City Council review and study this issue during. the 2012 calendar year, perhaps in one or more council study sessions. A study session would allow the council to better understand these challenges and consider options that meet the City's intent and definition of /requirements for a restaurant. We welcome the opportunity to present information and options that allow restaurants more latitude to offer creative, eclectic, affordable organic, local, and sustainable menus and premium brand labels, wine varietals, craft beers and imported brews that are more reflective of the restaurant's concept, the City's image, customers' expectations, and socially - responsible pricing. One suggestion might be to consider the volume of food sold and additional operational requirements as part of a restaurant's food sales and operational requirements. I underscore that we are committed to achieving the City's annual percentage food sales requirement and respectfully request approval of our 2012 liquor license renewal application with the needed flexibility and timeframe to initiate, evaluate, and amend strategies as we review the outcomes of our proposed strategies. If the City Council is inclined to levy a fine for failure to meet the percentage food sales requirement, we are agreeable to a $ 500.00 fine. I ask for your continued support in helping us be a successful restaurant operation in the City, one that is a highly - regarded and valued member of our community. �e R an B , Managing Partner Barrio 50th LLC dba: Cocina del Barrio OPERATIONAL AND PRICING STRATEGIES FOR INCREASING FOOD SALES VOLUME & PERCENTAGE FOR COCINCA DEL BARRIO February 15, 2012 CONFIDENTIAL Please note that the strategies outlined herein are subject to amendment, deletion or substitution at any time if they are not deemed effective in attaining our goal of increasing food sales volume and /or percentage of overall food soles. ✓ Continued and increased promotion of Sunday brunch sales : • Project a 800% increase in brunch sales in 2012 due to significant increase in number of weekends offered, marketing and exposure to new guests; (brunch initiated 11/15/11) • Note: Our typical sales mix during brunch : Food to Liquor ratio: 90% food ; 10% liquor ✓ Continued and increased promotion of lunch sales: • Projection a 50% increase in lunch sales in 2012 due to marketing and exposure to new guests as well as being more involved with the community and gaining more support from the surrounding neighborhoods; • Historically, lunch sales grew by 50% per year during our first three years of operation at our Minneapolis and Saint Paul locations; • Note: Our typical sales mix during lunch: Food to Liquor ratio: 80% food; 20% liquor ✓ Explore the option of a Family Style main course to the menu to compliment the sharing style of our small plates on our current menu: o Projection for this menu addition is an additional sale of approximately $7.00 - $15.00 per person during the dinner hour for customers ordering family style meals . ✓ Explore the possibility of a food - tasting option on Friday & Saturday evenings : o Offering for a fixed price (approx $35.00) three courses to our guests subject to change weekly ✓ Reinforce with staff the importance of promoting food service first and foremost with every guest, including at the bar: o Ensure that serve staff promotes the food menu and all food specials with each guest ✓ Addition of the Barrio Margarita at $7.50 (a market -rate margarita vs. current premium margarita): • Current average sale per Margarita is $9.75; • The Barrio Margarita should allow us to drop overall liquor sales on at least 40% of margaritas by $2.25 ✓ Decrease the price of a glass of entry-level wine by $1.00 per glass. REPORT /RECOMMENDATION To: MAYOR AND COUNCIL Agenda Item Item No. VIII.C. - REVISED From: Debra Mangen City Clerk ® Action ❑ Discussion ❑ Information Date: March 6, 2012 Subject: Resolution No. 2012 -42 Adopting Precinct Boundaries and Polling Locations ACTION REQUESTED: Adopt Resolution. Note that the attached resolution and map were revised 3 -6 -2012 correcting legal descriptions. INFORMATION /BACKGROUND: Following every decennial census, the legislative boundaries are reviewed and adjusted as necessary to keep balance between Minnesota's eight Congressional Districts, 67 State Senate Districts and 134 State House districts. If the State legislature is not able to achieve consensus on a plan then the task goes to the courts. Last year a Five Judge Panel was appointed to accomplish Minnesota's Redistricting in time for the 2012 Elections. On February 21, 2012, the Five Judge Panel released the 2012 redistricting plan. The court followed the school district boundary line when establishing the boundary between Districts 49A and 49B east of France Avenue. The 49A/496 boundary splits the buildings at 7200 and 7220 York Avenue. Staff is in the process of requesting special legislation to correct this problem. Cities are the first level of government to establish their precinct boundaries after the statewide redistricting is accomplished. Therefore, in order to allow the County to complete their redistricting, I recommend the City Council adopt the proposed new precinct boundaries for the entire city. Following the enactment of special legislation, the Council may then adopt another resolution adjusting only the line between precincts 17 and 18. Establishing Edina's precinct boundaries and polling location now allows staff to begin the work of updating the precinct finder, changing the precinct maps, and making sure voters are directed to their correct voting location. NOTE: THE ATTACHED RESOLUTION HAS BEEN REVISED. ATTACHMENT: Resolution No. 2012 -42 2012 Precinct Map RESOLUTION 2012 -42 APPROVING ELECTION BOUNDARIES AND POLLING LOCATIONS: WHEREAS, pursuant to Minnesota Statute 204B:14 the governing body of each mg aikt f Edina shall establish the boundaries of the election precincts in the municipality; WHEREAS, precinct boundaries must be reestablished within 60 days of the time when the legislature has been redistricted or at least 19 weeks before the state primary in a.year, ending in two, whichever comes first; BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Edina, Minnesota, that it hereby establishes boundaries for each precinct as illustrated on the map presented at the regular meeting of March, 6, 2012, and defined as follows: - Precinct No. 1A - Commencing at the intersection of the northern and westerly boundaries of the City of Edina; thence southerly along ,the western boundary of the City of Edina to the southwest corner of Section 30, Township 117,. Range,21; thence easterly along the south line of Section 30, Township 117, Range 21'to the centerline of Parkwood Road; thence northerly, easterly and southerly along the centerline of Parkwood Road to the south line of Section 30, Township 117, Range 21; thence easterly along the south line of Section 30, Township 117, Range 21 to the centerline of Blake Road; thence northerly, northwesterly and northerly along the centerline of Blake Road to the centerline of ,the northern extension of Interlachen Boulevard; thence east along the centerline of.- Interlachen Boulevard to the western boundary of Auditor's Subdivision No. 248 (Interlachen Country Club Golf Course western boundary); thence northerly along the Interlachen Country Club Golf Course western boundary); to the northern boundary of the City of Edina, thence westerly along the - northern boundary of the City of Edina to point of beginning. Precinct No. 1B - Commencing at the northwest corner of Section 31, Township 117, Range 21; thence southerly along the western boundary of the City of Edina to the centerline of State Highway 62; thence easterly 'along the centerline of State Highway 62 to the centerline of Gleason Road; thence northerly along the centerline of Gleason Road to the centerline of Vernon Avenue; thence northeasterly along the centerline of Vernon Avenue to the centerline of Blake Road; thence northerly along the centerline of Blake Road to the northeast corner of Section 31, Township 117, Range 21; thence westerly along the north line of said Section 31, Township 117, Range 21 to the centerline of Parkwood Road; thence northwesterly, westerly and southerly along the centerline of Parkwood Road to the north line of Section 31, Township 117, Range 21; thence westerly along the north line of Section 31, Township 117, Range 21 to point of beginning. Precinct No. 2 - Commencing at the northwest corner of Section 28, Township 117, Range 21; thence southerly along the Section 28'r Township 117, Range 21 to the centerline of Division St; thence easterly along the centerline of Division St to the centerline of Oxford Ave; thence southerly along the centerline of Oxford Ave to the centerline of Hollywood Road; thence westerly and southerly along the centerline of Hollywood Rd to the centerline of Interlachen Blvd; thence westerly along the centerline of Interlachen Blvd to the west quarter City Hall 952- 927 -8861 FAX 952 - 826 -0390 4801 WEST 50TH STREET EDINA, MINNESOTA, 55424 -1394 www.CityofEdina.com TTY 952- 826 -0379 Resolution No. 2012 -42 corner Section 28, Township 117, Range 21; thence southerly along the west line of the southwest quarter of Section 28, Township 117, Range 21; to the southwest corner of said Section 28; thence southerly along the west line of the northwest quarter of Section 33, Township 117 Range 21 to the centerline of Vernon Avenue (County Road 158); thence northeasterly along the centerline of Vernon Avenue to the centerline of Eden Avenue; thence northeasterly along the centerline of Eden Avenue to the centerline of State Highway 100, thence northerly along the centerline of State Highway 100 to the northern boundary of the City of Edina; thence westerly along the northern boundary of the City of Edina to point of beginning. Precinct No. 3 - Commencing at the intersection of West 50th Street and Arden Avenue; thence northerly along the centerline of Arden Avenue to the centerline of Sunnyside Road; thence westerly along the centerline of Sunnyside Road to the centerline of Wooddale Avenue; thence northerly along the centerline of Wooddale Avenue to the northern boundary of the City of Edina; thence southwesterly and westerly along the northern boundary of the City of Edina to the centerline of State Highway 100; thence southerly along the centerline of State Highway 100 to the south line of the Edina Country Club (the south line of Section 18, Township 28, Range 24); thence easterly along the south line of the Edina Country Club to the intersection of Wooddale Ave and West 54th Street; thence easterly along the centerline of West 54th Street to the centerline of France Avenue; thence northerly along the centerline of France Avenue to the centerline of West 50th Street; thence westerly along the centerline of West 50th Street to point of beginning. Precinct No. 4 - Commencing at the intersection of France Avenue (County Road 17) and West 40th Street; thence westerly along the northern boundary of the City of Edina to the western boundary of the City of Edina at the centerline of Natchez Avenue; thence southerly along the centerline of Natchez Ave thence , southwesterly along the boundary of the City of Edina to the centerline of Wooddale Avenue; thence southerly along the centerline of Wooddale Avenue to the centerline of Sunnyside Road; thence easterly along the centerline of Sunnyside Road to the centerline of Arden Avenue; thence southerly along the centerline of Arden Avenue to the centerline of West 50th Street; thence easterly along the centerline of West 50th Street to the centerline of France Avenue, thence northerly along the eastern boundary of the City of Edina to the point of beginning. Precinct No. 5 - Commencing at the northern boundary of the City of Edina and western boundary of Auditor's Subdivision No.248 (Interlachen Country Club Golf Course western boundary); thence southerly along the western boundary of Auditor's Subdivision No.248(lnterlachen Country Club Golf Course western boundary) to the centerline of Interlachen Boulevard; thence westerly along the centerline of Interlachen Boulevard to the centerline of Blake Road; thence southerly along the centerline of Blake Road to the centerline of Vernon Avenue (County Road 158); thence northeasterly along the centerline of Vernon Avenue to the centerline of Olinger Road; thence southerly along the centerline of Olinger Road to the centerline of Grove Street; thence easterly along the centerline of Grove Street to the centerline of Tracy Ave; thence south along the centerline of Tracy Ave to the centerline of Benton Ave; thence easterly along the centerline of Benton Ave to the centerline of the Canadian Pacific Railroad; thence northeasterly along the centerline of the Canadian Pacific Railroad to the east line of the northeast quarter of Section 32, Township 117, Range 21; thence Resolution No. 2012 -42 northerly along the said east line of Section 32 to the northeast corner of said Section 32; thence northerly along the east line of the southeast quarter of Section .29, Township 117, Range 21 to the centerline of lnterlachen Boulevard; thence east along the centerline of Interlachen Boulevard to the centerline of Hollywood Road, thence northerly along the centerline of Hollywood Road to the centerline of Oxford . Ave; thence north , along the centerline of Oxford Ave to-the centerline of Division:,St; thence west along the centerline of Division St to the east line of the northeast quarter of Section 29, Township 117, Range 21; thence northerly along the said east line of said Section 29 to the northern boundary of the City of Edina; thence' westerly along the northern boundary of the: City of Edina to point of beginning... "Precinct No. 6 - Commencing at the intersection of Vernon Avenue (County Road 158) and Gleason Road; thence southerly along the centerline of Gleason Road to the centerline of State Highway 62; thence easterly along the centerline of State Highway 62 to the centerline of State Highway 100; thence north along the centerline of State Highway 100 to the easterly extension of Valley View Road; thence west along the centerline of Valley View Road to the centerline of Clover Ridge; thence west along the centerline of Clover Ridge to the centerline of Tingdale Ave; thence north along the centerline of Tingdale Ave to the centerline of West 601h Street; thence west along the centerline of West 60th Street to the centerline of Hansen Road; thence north along the centerline of Hansen Road to the centerline of Benton Ave; thence west along the centerline of Benton Ave to the centerline of Tracy Ave; .thence north along the centerline of Tracy Ave to the centerline of Grove St; thence west along the centerline of Grove Street to the centerline of Olinger Road; thence north along the centerline of Olinger Road to the centerline of Vernon Ave; thence southwesterly along the centerline of Vernon Avenue to point of beginning. Precinct No. 7 - Commencing at the intersection of Vernon Avenue (County Road 158) and Hansen Road; thence southerly along the centerline of Hansen Road to the Canadian Pacific Railroad; thence southerly along the centerline of the Canadian. Pacific Railroad to the centerline of Benton Ave;'thence east along the centerline.of. Benton Ave to the centerline of Hansen Road; thence south along the centerline.of Hansen Road to the,.centerline of West 60tH Street; thence east along the centerline of West 60th Street to.the centerline of Tingdale Ave; thence south along the centerline of Tingdale Ave to the centerline of Clover Ridge; thence east along the centerline of Clover Ridge to the centerline of Vall,ey.,View Road; thence east along the centerline' of Valley View Road to the centerline of State,Highway 100; thence northerly along the centerline of State Highway 100 . to the centerline of Eden Avenue; thence southwesterly along the centerline of Eden Avenue to the centerline of Vernon Avenue; thence southwesterlyi:along the centerline of Vernon Avenue to point of beginning. Precinct No. 8 - Commencing at the intersection of France Avenue. (County Road 17) and West 54th Street; thence westerly along the centerline of West 54th Street and its extension to State Highway 100 (the south line of the Edina Country Club); thence southerly along the centerline of State Highway 100 to the western extension of Southview Lane; thence easterly along the centerline of Southview Lane to the centerline of Concord Avenue; thence southerly along the centerline of Concord Avenue to the centerline of West 59th Street; thence easterly along the centerline of West 59th Street to the centerline of- Brookview Avenue; thence northerly along the centerline of Brookview Avenue to the centerline of West 58th Street; Resolution No. 2012 -42 thence easterly along the centerline of West 58th Street to the centerline of France Avenue; thence northerly along the centerline of France Avenue to point of beginning. Precinct No. 9 - Commencing at the intersection of France Avenue and West 58th Street; thence southerly along the centerline of France Avenue to the centerline of State Highway 62; thence westerly and northwesterly along the centerline of State Highway 62 to the centerline of State Highway 100; thence northerly along the centerline of State Highway 100 to the western extension of Southview Lane; thence easterly along the centerline of Southview Lane to the centerline of Concord Avenue; thence southerly along the centerline of Concord Avenue to centerline of West 59th Street; thence easterly along the centerline of West 59th Street to the centerline of Brookview Avenue; thence northerly along the centerline of Brookview Avenue to the centerline of West 58th Street; thence easterly along the centerline of West 58th Street to point of beginning. Precinct No. 10 - Commencing at the intersection of the western boundary of the City of Edina and the State Highway 62; thence southerly along the western boundary of the City of Edina to the south line of the north half of the northwest quarter of Section 7, Township 116, Range 21; thence east along the said south line a distance of 1915' more or less to the centerline of Valley View Road; thence north and easterly along the centerline of Valley View Road to Tracy Ave; thence northerly along the centerline of Tracy Avenue to State Highway 62; thence westerly along the centerline of State Highway 62 to point of beginning. Precinct No. 11 - Commencing at the intersection of Tracy Avenue and State Highway 62; thence southerly along the centerline of Tracy Avenue to West 66th Street; thence easterly along the centerline of West 66th Street to Tracy Avenue; thence southerly along the centerline of Tracy Avenue to West 70th Street; thence easterly along the centerline of West 70th Street to State Highway 100; thence northerly along the centerline of State Highway 100 to State Highway 62; thence westerly along the centerline of State Highway 62 to point of beginning. Precinct No. 12 — Commencing at the intersection of State Highway 100 and West 701H Street; thence southerly along the centerline of State Highway 100 to the westerly extension of the centerline of Hibiscus Avenue; thence easterly southeasterly along the centerline of Hibiscus Avenue to the centerline of West Shore Drive; thence southerly along the centerline of West Shore Drive to the centerline of Sedum Lane; thence easterly along the centerline of Sedum Lane to the centerline of Kellogg Avenue; thence northerly along the centerline of Kellogg Avenue to the centerline of Gilford Drive; thence easterly along the centerline of Gilford Drive to the centerline of Oaklawn Avenue; thence northerly along the centerline of Oaklawn Avenue to the centerline of Claremore Drive; thence westerly along the centerline of Claremore Drive to Wooddale Ave; thence north along the centerline of Wooddale Ave to the centerline of Belvidere Lane; thence west along the centerline of Belvidere Lane to the centerline of West Shore Drive; thence north along the centerline of West Shore Drive to the centerline of West 70th Street; thence west along the centerline of West 70th Street to the point of beginning. Precinct No. 13 - Commencing at the intersection of France Avenue (County Road 17) and West 72th Street; thence southerly along the centerline of France Avenue to the southern boundary of the City of Edina; thence westerly along the southern boundary of the City of Edina to State Highway 100; thence northerly along the centerline of State Highway 100 to the western extension of Hibiscus Avenue; thence easterly southeasterly along the centerline of Hibiscus Avenue to West Shore Drive; thence southerly along the centerline of West Shore Resolution No. 2012 -42 Drive to Sedum Lane; thence easterly along the centerline of Sedum Lane to Kellogg Avenue; thence northerly along the centerline of Kellogg Avenue to Gilford Drive; thence easterly along the centerline of Gilford Drive to Oaklawn Avenue; thence northerly along the' centerline of Oaklawn Avenue to West 72nd Street; thence easterly along the centerline of West 72nd Street to point of beginning. Precinct No. 14 - Commencing at the intersection of West 54th Street and France Avenue (County Road '17); thence southerly along the. centerline of France Avenue to the centerline of State Highway 62; thence northeasterly and easterly along State Highway,62 to the centerline of Xerxes Avenue; thence northerly along the centerline of Xerxes Avenue to the centerline of West 54th Street; thence westerly ,along the centerline of West 54th Street to point of beginning: Precinct ,No. 15 - Commencing at the intersection of Valley View Road and West 66th Street;,thence easterly along,the centerline of West 66th'Street to the'centerline of Tracy Avenue; thence southerly along the centerline of Tracy Avenue to the centerline of West 70th Street; thence easterly along the centerline of West 70th Street to the centerline. of Cahill, Road; thence southerly along the centerline of Cahill Road to the centerline of Dewey Hill Road; thence westerly along the centerline of Dewey Hill Road to the southerly extension of the west .line of Lot 10 Block 2 of Schey's Park View Third Addition; thence north along the west lines of Lots 10 -17 Block 2 of Schey's Park View Third Addition to the intersection of the northerly extension of.said Lot 17 and the centerline of Schey Drive; thence westerly along the centerline of Schey Drive to the intersection of the westerly extension of Schey Drive and the east line of Section 7, Township 116, Range 21; thence north along the east line of said Section 7 to the south line of the north half of the northeast quarter of said Section '7; thence west along the south line of the north half of the northeast quarter of said Section 7; thence west along the south line of the north half of the northwest quarter of said Section 7 to the centerline of Valley View Road; thence north and easterly along the centerline. of Valley View. Road to point of beginning. Precinct No. 16 — Commencing at the: intersection of France Avenue and State Highway 62; thence southerly along the centerline of France Avenue to West 72j Street; thence westerly along the centerline of West 72nd Street to Claremore:Drive; thence westerly along the centerline of Claremore Drive to Wooddale Ave; thence north along the centerline of Wooddale Ave to Belvidere Lane; thence west along the centerline of Belvidere Lane to West Shore Drive; thence north along the centerline of West Shore Drive to West. 70th Street; thence west along West 701h Street to State Highway 100; thence northerly along the centerline of State Highway 100 to State Highway 62; thence easterly along the centerline of State Highway 62 to point of beginning. Precinct No. 17 — Commencing at the intersection of France Ave (County Road 17) and Trunk Highway 62; thence southerly along the centerline of France Avenue to the south line of the north half of the northwest quarter Section 32 Township 028 Range 24, thence easterly along the south line, of the north half of the northwest quarter Section 32 Township 028 Range 24,to the east boundary of the City of Edina; thence northerly along the east boundary of the City of Edina until its intersection with Trunk Highway 62, thence westerly along Trunk Highway 62 to the point of beginning. Resolution No. 2012 -42 Precinct No. 18 — Commencing at the intersection of France Avenue (County Road 17) and the south line of the north half of the northwest quarter Section 32 Township 028 Range 24„ thence southerly along the centerline of France Avenue to the south boundary of the City of Edina thence easterly along the south boundary of the City of Edina to the east boundary of the City of Edina thence northerly along the east boundary of the City of Edina to the south line of the north half of the northwest quarter Section 32 Township 028 Range 24; thence westerly along the south line of the north half of the northwest quarter Section 32 Township 028 Range 24 to the point of beginning. Precinct No. 19 - Commencing at the intersection of State Highway 100 and West 70th Street; thence southerly along the centerline of State Highway 100 to the southern boundary of the City of Edina; thence westerly along the southern boundary of the City of Edina to the western boundary of the City of Edina; thence northerly along the western boundary of the City of Edina to the south line of the north half of the northwest quarter of Section 7, Township 116, Range 21; thence easterly along the south line of the north half of the northwest quarter of said Section 7, thence easterly along the south line of the north half of the northeast quarter of said Section 7,to the east line of Section 7; thence south along the east line of said Section 7 to the westerly extension of the centerline of Schey Drive; thence easterly along the centerline of Schey Drive to the northerly extension of the west line of Lot 17 Block 2 Schey's Park View Third Addition; thence southerly along the west lines of Lots 10 -17 block 2 Schey's Park View Third Addition to the intersection of the southerly extension of said lot 10 and the centerline of Dewey Hill Road; thence easterly along the centerline of Dewey Hill Road to the centerline of Cahill Rd; thence north along centerline of Cahill Road to the centerline of West 70th Street; thence easterly along centerline of West 70th Street to point of beginning. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED THAT THE City Council of the City of Edina hereby establishes the following polling locations: Precinct 1A Shepherd of Hills Church 500 Blake Road Precinct 1B Chapel Hills Church 6512 Vernon Avenue Precinct 2 Edina Senior Center 5280 Grandview Square Precinct 3 Covenant Church of Edina 4201 West 50th Street Precinct 4 Weber Park Building 4115 Grimes Avenue Precinct 5 Highlands Elementary School 5505 Doncaster Way Precinct 6 Countryside Elementary School 5701 Benton Avenue Precinct 7 Normandale Lutheran Church 6100 Normandale Road Precinct 8 South View Middle School 4725 South View Lane Precinct 9 Concord Elementary School 5900 Concord Avenue Precinct 10 Creek Valley School 6401 Gleason Road Precinct 11 Creek Valley Baptist Church 6400 Tracy Avenue Precinct 12 Arneson Acres Park 4711 West 70th Street Precinct 13 Centennial Lakes Park Hughes 7499 France Avenue Pavilion Precinct 14 St. Peters Lutheran Church 5421 France Avenue So. Precinct 15 Valley View Middle School 6750 Valley View Road Resolution No. 2012 -42 Precinct 16 Cornelia Elementary School 7000 Cornelia Drive Precinct 17 Southdale Hennepin Library 7001 York Avenue South Precinct 18 Edinborough Park Great Hall 7700 York Avenue South Precinct 19 Calvary Lutheran Church 6817 Antrim Road Passed and adopted this 6th day of March 2012`- 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 March 6, 2012 and as recorded in the Minutes of said Regular Meeting. WITNESS my hand and seal of said City this day of 20 City Clerk JU /-/l CITY OF EDINA PRECINCT MAP 2012 EDINA SCHOOL DISTRICT 273 BLOOMINGTON SCHOOL DISTRICT 271 HOPKINS SCHOOL DISTRICT 270 EDEN PRAIRIE SCHOOL DISTRICT 272 RICHFIELD SCHOOL DISTRICT 280 ST. LOUIS PARK SCHOOL DISTRICT 283 CONGRESSIONAL DISTRICT 3, Pct.. IA,1B,2,5,6,7,10,11,12,13,15 CONGRESSIONAL DISTRICT 5, Pct.. 3,4,8,9,14 SENATE DISTRICT 49. All Precincts — °— REPRESENTATIVE DISTRICT 49A, Pcts. 1A,1B,2, 3,4,5,6,7,9,9,10,11,14,15,16,17 REPRESENTATIVE DISTRICT 49B, Pcts. 12,13,18,19 CITY OF EDINA POLLING LOCATIONS PRECINCT IA Sh*ph&-T of the RU. Church 500 Blake Road PRECINCT ID Chapel HKIs Church 6512 Vernon Avenue PRECINCT 2 Edina Senior Center 5280 Grandview Square (36) PRECINCT 3 Covenant Church of Edina 4201 V. 50th Street PRECINCT 4 Veber Park BuKding 4115 Grimes Avenue PRECINCT 5 H1oh1.Ms School 3505 Doncaster Way PRECINCT 6 CountryskM School 5701 Benton Avenue PRECINCT 7 Normand.le Lutheran Church 6100 Norn.nd.le Road PRECINCT B South View Middle School 4725 South Vlew Lane PRECINCT 9 Concord School 5900 Concord Avenue PRECINCT 10 Creek Valley School 6401 Gleason Road PRECINCT 11 Creek Valley Baptist Church 6400 Tracy Avenue PRECINCT 12 Arneson Acres Park 4711 Vest 70th Street PRECINCT 13 Centennial L.keS Hughes PovKlon 7499 France Avenue So. PRECINCT 14 St. e7fir's Lutheran Church 5421 France Avenue So. PRECINCT 15 Votley View Middle School 6750 Valley View Road PRECINCT 16 Cornell. School 7000 Cornell. Drive PRECINCT 17 So- thd.le H, —pin Llbrary 7001 York Avenue S. PRECINCT 18 Edinborough Park 7700 York Avenue So. PRECINCT 19 Calvary Lutheran Church 6617 Antrim Road REPORT /RECOMMENDATION To: EDINA PARK BOARD Agenda Item Item No. VIII. D. From: John Keprios, Direct ® Action Park and Recreation a artment Discussion Date: March 6, 2012 ❑ Information Subject: Art Center Study Submittals and RFP — Art Center Board ACTION REQUESTED: The Edina Art Center Board recommends that the City Council reject both Art Center study submittals, re -write the Request for Proposal (RFP), narrow the scope of the study and re- submit for bid. INFORMATION /BACKGROUND: Two proposals from consultants were received by the January 31, 2012 deadline in response to the Art Center RFP. The proposals were reviewed by Art Center Board members and at their February 23, 2012 meeting the Art Center Board passed the following motion: 1) The Art Center Board received and reviewed the proposals for the RFP. 2) The Art Center Board recommends that the City Council reject the two proposals because both submittals appear to be too broad in their current form. 3) The Art Center Board also recommends refining the RFP by identifying the key issues to narrow the scope of the study and re -issue for bid. The motion was seconded and passed by a majority of board members. Two members opposed the motion. The Art Center Board is willing to assist with narrowing the scope of the revised RFP by identifying and recommending what they believe to be the most important key issues to be studied. To assist the Art Center Board in their discussion, Board Member Thomas Raeuchle submitted a spreadsheet comparison of the two submittals. A copy of that spreadsheet is attached to this report. On Sunday, February 26, Herman Milligan, Managing Partner of The Fulton Group, submitted to me via email an RFP Qualifications Matrix of the two submittals. A copy of his assessment is also attached to this report. The attached Request for Proposal letter recommended by the Art Center Board and approved by City Council was mailed to 30 different consulting firms (see attached list) on December 28, 2011. We can only speculate why the response was so low. One possibility may have been the scope of the study without a defined budget and the other was the actual list of consultants itself. As we did with the Edinborough Study and Sports Dome Study, part of the strategy was to send the RFP to architect firms in hopes that they would seek partners who have experience with Art Center programming and operations. The majority of Art Center Board members believe that we could secure more submittals if we were to re -write the Request for Proposal letter as suggested above and seek more consultants both in -state and out -of -state who are more qualified in the area of Art Center operations and management. Another option that staff suggests worthy of consideration is to do the following: • Work with the Art Center Board to recommend to the City Council key issues of the highest priority in an effort to narrow the scope of the study. • If the Council approves a narrowed scope, staff and three Art Center Board Members would interview the two consulting firms and request them to re- submit their proposal. • With the three Art Center Board Members' input, staff would then make a recommendation to the City Council. I believe we have two qualified candidates to choose from and staffs recommendations above are an attempt to expedite the process. Staff will of course carry out whatever process the Council desires. ATTACHMENTS: • December 28, 2011 Letter to Consultants (RFP) • List of Consultants • February 27, 2012 Email from Bill McCabe • Spreadsheet Submitted by Thomas Raeuchle • Spreadsheet Submitted by Herman Milligan December 28, 2011 City of !Edina Dear Art Center Consultant: The City of Edina is interested in retaining ahe services of a qualified professional consultant to study the operations of the Edina Art Center. The City's vision for its Art Center enterprise is that it provides the' best visual arts experience in the State of Minnesota while generating sufficient revenues to cover close to 100% of its total annual costs. Key Questions ORGANIZATIONAL. STRUCTURE The Edina Art Center is currently owned and operated by the City of Edina under the direction of the Edina City Council with advice from volunteer members of the Edina Art Center Board and City of Edina professional staff. • Is there an alternative organizational structure that the City of Edina should consider, such as a 501(C)(3) organizational structures or is it financially more feasible for the City of Edina to continue to operate the Edina Art Center in its current format? • What are the advantages and disadvantages of becoming a 501(C)(3) organizational structure? • How does the Edina Art Center's current organizational structure compare to other suburban Art Centers in the Twin Cities area? • Is City funding contribution possible with a 501(C)(3) organizational structure? If so, what is the typical contribution? • Under a 501(C)(3) organizational structure, how are cash and in -kind contributions handled and how are capital improvements handled? • If the City leases a building to a 501(C)(3) organization, what are the legal implications, liability and limitations? MISSION Is the Edina Art Center's mission statement in line with the community's current needs and desires for visual arts? PROGRAMS, SERVICES AND PARTNERSHIPS The Edina Art Center has a wide variety of visual arts programs and services including a Media Arts Studio. City Hall 4801 WEST 50TH STREET. EDINA,,MINNESOTA, 55424 -1394 Park and Recreation Department www.EdinaNrks.com 952 - 826 -0367 FAX 952 - 826 -0385 TTY 952 - 826 -0379 To achieve a stronger cost recovery percentage, are there program and service offerings that should no longer be offered and are there other programs and /or services that should.be either added or expanded? What partnership opportunities should be explored that would be more-cost effective method of providing' visual arts programs and services, such as Edina Community Education? OPERATIONS Current and past financial statements, operating budgets,and..business plans will be provided to the consultant as well as current operational practices and policies to, be made available for analysis. • Identify the current strengths of the Edina Art Center • What operational practices, procedures and staffing allocation changes are recommended to improve operational efficiencies? • What fees and charges should be changed (increased or decreased) that would result in more revenues? • What changes in the Gift Shop operations might result in. increased revenues? BENCH MARKS /COMPARABLES What benchmarks -are used to_evaluate'art centers, and how does the EAC compare in terms of: • Size '(is there a critical mass in terms of square footage; is there a correlation between size and cost recovery) • Gallery space and layout • Classroom pace • Flex space • Facility maintenance cost per square foot • Personnel (headcount and cost) • Facility utilization • Facility revenue (as opposed to programming revenue) • Programming .(courses, performances, shows) • Cost per participant/visitor • Percentage of cost recovered by programming type (e.g. pottery; painting,_ etc.) • Who has successful art centers and how are they programmed, organized, funded and what makes them successful and how do they market their programs Analyze at least 3 comparable art centers in MN and 3 outside MN in cities of similar size and /or arts budgets. Give some examples of successful arts center programs housed in multi -use facilities? What is a measure for community support and what is the result in Edina? . MARKETING, ADVERTISING, REGISTRATION AND MEMBERSHIPS . The consultant should examine and comment on the following aspects of the Edina Art Center: • Membership practice (does it offer enough value to members ?) ;. . Marketing and advertising plan (do we spend enough on advertising and in the right areas ?) and market analysis compared to other Art Centers in the Twin Cities. What are the demographic -based market trend forecasts for the Edina Art Center? • Analyze the current website and marketing techniques of the Edina Art Center as it relates to potential increase in revenue. • Registration process (identify areas for improvement including online registration and data management software) The consultant's response will include recommendations on the aforementioned topical areas in a format that is responsive to the City's key questions. The City of Edina is interested in hiring a consultant who is independent, unbiased and without a conflict of interest. Please describe any relationships that the owners, principals or team members may have to the Edina Art Center. EXPERIENCE In your response to this Request for Proposal, please include your firm's previous experience studying art center. operations . and /or similar facilities. for the past ten,years. CONSULTING TEAM MEMBERS Please include the names of all of your team members who will be involved in the study and a brief background of their qualifications. APPROACH TO THE PROJECT AND PROCESS Please include your proposed approach to this study and what process your firm would use to conduct the study and make recommendations. Please include your proposed timeframe to conduct the study. PROPOSED FEE Please identify your proposed consulting fee, which we ask to be a fixed amount plus reimbursable expenses. Please identify a not to exceed amount for reimbursable expenses. # OF PAGES AND COPIES OF RESPONSE TO PROPOSAL We ask that you please keep your proposals to no more than eight pages including your cover letter. We ask that you please submit six copies of your proposal. The City of Edina will copy and distribute any additional copies as needed for the review process. DEADLINE Proposals should be received no later than Monday, January 30, 2012. SELECTION PROCESS With assistance from staff, the Edina Art Center Board will select and recommend a finalist to the City Council for final approval. It is yet to be determined if there will be interviews required of the finalists. The City of Edina reserves the right to select a consulting firm based on which one appears to offer the best valueto the City of Edina and not necessarily the lowest bid. Please submit your proposal to: John Keprios, Director Edina Park and Recreation Department 4801 West 50th Street Edina, MN 55424 If you have any-questions, feel free to contact me at 952- 826 -0430 or JKeprios @ci.edina.mn.us. Reqpe,ctfully, John Ke ri Director p , Edina Park and Recreation Department LIST OF CONSULTANTS TO RECEIVE THE REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL FOR THE EDINA ART CENTER STUDY Stantec 2335 West Highway 36 St. Paul, MN 55113 -3819 (651) 636 -4600 fax (651) 636 -1311 George Watson, President Brauer & Associates, Ltd. 10417 Excelsior Boulevard Suite #1 Hopkins, MN 55343 TSP ONE, Inc. 21 Water Street Excelsior, MN 55331 (952) 474 -3291 fax (952) 474 -3928 TKDA & Associates Inc. 444 Cedar St. 1500 Piper Jaffray Plaza St Paul MN 55101 (651) 292 -4400 fax (651) 292 -0083 Wold Architects 305 St. Peter Street St. Paul, MN 55102 (651) 227 -7773 fax (651) 223 -5646 Leo A Daly 730 Second Avenue South Suite 1100 Minneapolis, MN 55402 -2455 SRF Consulting Group, Inc. One Carlson Parkway North Suite 150 Plymouth, MN 55447 -4443 phone: 763.475.0010 fax: 763.475.2429 www.srfconsulting.com Tammy S. Magney, Partner ATS &R 8501 Golden Valley Road Suite 300 Minneapolis, MN 55427 Robert Kost, ASLA, AICP, LEED AP Director of Planning and Urban Design Short Elliott Hendrickson, Inc. (SEH) Butler Square Building, Suite 710C 100 North 6`h Street Minneapolis, MN 55403 -1515 Office: 612 -758 -6715 Cell: 612 - 247 -4704 Email: bkost @sehinc.com BWBR Architects, Inc. 380 St. Peter Street, Suite 600 St. Paul,' MN 55102 651-222-37011 bwbr.com AECOM Ellerbe Becket .800 LaSalle Avenue Minneapolis, MN 55402 612- 376 -2000 1 ellerbebecket.com HGA Architects & Eng. 701 Washington Ave. N. Minneapolis, MN 55401 612- 758 -4000 1 hga.com DLR Group 520 Nicollet Mall Suite 200 Minneapolis, MN 55402 Cuningham Group Architecture, P.A. 201 Main Street Southeast, Suite 325 Minneapolis, MN 55414 612- 379 -3400 1 cuningham.com Hoisington Koegler Group, Inc. 123 North Third Street Suite 100 Minneapolis, MN 55401 -1659 Conventions, Sports & Leisure International 520 Nicollet Mall Suite 440 Minneapolis, MN 55402 292 Design Group 9100 49`h Avenue North New Hope, MN 55428 Ballard *King & Associates 2743 E. Ravenhill Circle Highlands Ranch, CO 80126 George Sutton 468 Dayton #8 St. Paul, MN 55.102 George Sutton C/O James Sewell Ballet Suite 215 Cowles Center for Dance and the Performing Arts 528 Hennepin Avenue Minneapolis, MN 55403 Nancy J. Lee Independent Consultant 1460 Scheffer Avenue St. Paul, MN 55116 Herman Milligan 5156 Washburn Avenue South Minneapolis, MN 55410 -2252 Wolf Brown 808 A Oak Street San Francisco, CA 94117 847 - 728 -0954 Performing Arts Consultants Group 339 W. Webster Suite 5E Chicago, IL 60614 Management Consultants for the Arts, Inc. 400 Main Street Suite 400 Stanford, CT 06901 Alice George alicegalicegeorge.org Durel Consulting Partners 2408 Steele Road Baltimore, MD 21209 AMS Planning & Research P.O. Box 423 South Port, CT 06890 AEA Consulting 544 Main Street Beacon, NY 12508 Arts Action Research 423 Atlantic Avenue Suite 1 E Brooklyn, NY 11217 From: Bill McCabe [mailto:Mmccabe4 @ gmail.com] Sent: Monday, February 27, 2012 11:41 AM To Michael Frey; hafedb @comcast.net; marbuchok @gmail.com; barbara. lava lleur @gmail.com; danajolapp @gmail.com; rameifert@comcast.net; t_mohtadi @yahoo.com; justinrawrr @gmail.com; colinnelson683 @gmail.com; kodea.mn @gmail.com; traeuchle @culturaldilemma.com; johnl03l79@gmail.com Cc: Phil Johnson; Sandra Shaughnessy; Anne Spooner; John Keprios; Ann Kattreh Subject: RE: February Board Meeting and RFP Michael, Thanks for your update on the City Council review. My comments on the RFP and responses follow. 1. The receipt of only two responses to the RFP leads me to believe the scope of work seemed daunting to some prospective consultants. In general, I agree with the Art Center Board's resolution that the RFP be rewritten and sent again. On the other hand, I agree with John Keprios' concern that delaying the selection of a consultant leaves the City without information that would support an Art Center leadership decision. 2. The consultant should consider only two or three areas of prospective study including Programs and Services, Location and - Finances. The results of studying these areas should provide enough data to inform a fairly thorough report and would probably lead to the identification of other questions for future consideration. 3, Form of organization is a very focused question and should be dealt with separately. I don't think now is the time to open this discussion. If the City Council decides to negotiate with the two respondents to the RFP, this should be removed from the scope of work. 4. We have about 900 members and many more faculty and students who should be in the first round of information and opinion gathering. 5.1 had an opportunity to comment on the original RFP and did not. If the City Council chooses to revise the RFP, I would make specific comments. I am available to attend the City Council meeting if it would be helpful. Let me know if you have questions. Bill Bill McCabe 612 - 220 -7700 wimccabe4(aDymail. com Submitted by Art Center Board Member Thomas Raeuchle Lee Sutton Comment Organizational Structure Discussion of alternatives - proposes to bring Explore alternative organizational structures Sutton might be going a bit too far by in law partner and funding - has partnership with legal looking at funding for alternative counsel physical structures Mission Understand current mission - no explicit Facilitate discussion with stake holders - mention of recommendations for provide comparables - make changing/expanding mission if necessary recommendation for distinguishing EAC Programs, Services, Partnerships no explicit mention of analysis of data for examinatin of current programs, Lee is lacking an approach to some curent programs - relies on "impressions" participation and cost structure "forensic analysis ". Data rulel l 'from the steering committee meeting #1 Operations. facilitate meeting #2 to explore ideas from SWOT analysis of operations and financials, Lee's aproach seems simplistic - no comparable centers benchmarks, best practices for optimizing operational analysis of EAC planned revenue Benchmarks and Comparables Research comparable centers - unclear Explicit benchmarking process whether they are familiar with benchmarking process - discuss what could benefit EAC with steering committee Marketing, Advertising, Registration and Not addressed, deferred to later study. Benefits analysis - comparables. Marketing membership analysis - effectiveness - demographic forecast. Cost $20K $45K Comment The idea of a steering committee is positive, Stakeholder involvement limited to ensures the study stays on track - on the examination of mission - would benefit from other hand the approach seems a bit too steering committee to check in at least once much internally focussed a month a lot of facilitation /exploration and self might be able to cut back on cost by limiting evaluation with steering committee, unclear the legal /funding scope and the how much actual recommendation will be architectural /building evaluation gained component. Recommendation Ask Sutton to break out legal and architectural cost - see whether cost saving possible by limiting scope or using cheaper legal advice Add steering committee Ask for clarification of operations, programming and financial analysis. City of Edina -Edina Art Center (Edina Park and Recreation Department) Operations and Financial Assessment RFP FP QUALITIFCATIONS MATRIX Overall understanding of the project Capability to perform all aspects of the project according to the timeline outlined in the RFP. Experience in past 10 years w /comparable projects (size & scope) Experience doing studies examining organizational structure issues city /government -run arts organizations Knowledge of organizational structure issues as outlined in RFP Familiarity with City of Edina and /or Edina Art Center Knowledge of issues pertinent to desired mission, programs, services and partnerships as outlined in RFP Knowledge of issues pertinent to operations as outlined in the RFP Nancy J. Sutton + Lee Associates 5 5 5 3 3 3 3 3 5 4 4 1 5 3 4 4 NOTE S Submitted by Herman Milligan, Jr., PhD. Managing Partner of The Fulton Group Nancy J. Lee Details completion of tasks based on an April or May start date. Should provide completion dates for projects listed in RFP response to determine how many have been completed within past 10 years. Details non - governmental organizational experience, but does not specify whether she or external consultant has done projects for governmental agencies in this area. Extensive experience as detailed in RFP response. Provides very good overview of Edina Art Center programming and services. Extensive experience as detailed in RFP response. RFP response indicates some level of sophistication in this area. Additional consultant adds expertise relative to tax - exemption issues. Sutton + Associates Should state completion dates based on a proposed starting date. Timeline may shift if project starts mid - March or later for example. Should provide completion dates for projects listed in RFP response to determine how many have been completed within past 10 years. Would have been nice to include this experience in scope of work summary for projects listed. RFP response indicates some level of sophistication in this area. Additional consultants adds expertise. Unknown. Not mentioned in response. Would have been nice to include this experience in scope of work summary for projects listed. RFP response indicates some level of sophistication in this area. Additional consultants adds expertise. Knowledge or research done about the topic beyond what was described in the RFP narrative 4 3 Knowledge of issues pertinent to benchmarking as outlined in the RFP 2 2 Ability to examine and comment on marketing, advertising, registration and memberships based on prior project experience 3 3 Workload and existing commitments (if described ) 1 1 Professional background of key personnel as evidenced by education and experience 5 5 Quality and clarity of writing (as gleaned from cover letter and response) 5 5 Project cost relative to proposed services to be delivered 5 3 54 43 Could achieve 75 points if rated "5" on all categories_ RanWnga�Gwdelines° tl,. I ranked each candidate in all pertinent areas from 1 to 5, with 5 being the highest. (1) indicates does not meet criteria; (5) indicates greatly excels in this criteria Extensive experience as detailed in RFP response. Given applicant experience, it would have been nice to provide benchmarking examples from other projects without naming specific organizations. Would have been nice to include this experience in scope of work summary for projects listed. Not included in RFP response. Very qualified. Very good. Cost is more competitive relative to tasks and responsibilities. Offers opportunity to create feedback sessions with City of Edina staff throughout process via Steering Committee meetings. Would have been nice to include this experience in scope of work summary for projects listed. Given applicant experience, it would have been nice to provide benchmarking examples from other projects without naming specific organizations. Would have been nice to include this experience in scope of work summary for projects listed. Not included in RFP response. Very qualified. Very good. Cost is higher given the greater number of external consultants to be hired. owe � �4 con REPORT /RECOMMENDATION To: MAYOR AND COUNCIL Agenda Item VIII.F From: Scott Neal City Manager ® Action Discussion Information Date: March 6, 2012 Subject: Resolution 2012 -47 ACTION REQUESTED: Approve Resolution #2012 -47 and forward to HRA for affirmation. INFORMATION /BACKGROUND: The City Council and HRA have previously approved an easement agreement with Jerry's Enterprises, Inc. to connect their property to the City's parking ramp. The City's original approval was for an easement 10 feet in width. The width was determined by representatives of Jerry's. Representatives from Jerry's have now determined that they need an easement 12 feet, 4inches wide. RECOMMENDATION: - Staff support the proposed request and recommend the Council approve the Third Amendment to Easement and Parking Ramp Agreement, as described in Resolution 2012 -47. If approved by the City Council, this same item will .be considered by the HRA at the March 20, 2012 HRA meeting. CITY OF EDINA HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA - RESOL-UTION NO.2012- __. __- ...... _ RESOLUTION APPROVING AMENDMENT TO EASEMENT City of Edina WHEREAS, a parking ramp ( "Parking Ramp ") is located on property owned by the City, which property is legally described in the attached Exhibit "A" (the "City Property "); WHEREAS, Jerry's is the owner of certain real property legally described on Exhibit B ( "Jerry's Property ") upon which is constructed a multi -story office and commercial building ( "Building "); WHEREAS, the City, the HRA and Jerry's entered into that certain Easement and Parking Ramp Agreement dated as of February 1, 1987, recorded in the office of the Hennepin County Recorder on March 19, 1987, as Document Number 5242349 and in the office of the Hennepin County Registrar of Titles on January 29, 1988, as Document Number 1905238 ( "Original Easement "), as amended by (a) that certain First Amendment to Easement and Parking Ramp Agreement dated as of May 28, 1987, recorded in the office of the Hennepin County Recorder on April 26, 1988, as Document Number 5400795 and in the office of the Hennepin County Registrar of Titles on April 22, 1988, as Document Number 1922982 ( "First Amendment ") and (b) that certain Second Amendment to Easement and Parking Ramp Agreement dated as of July 7, 2011, recorded in the office of the Hennepin County Recorder on July 11, 2011, as Document Number A9671595 and in the office of the Hennepin'County Registrar of Titles on. July 11, 2011, as Document Number T4869991 ( "Second Amendment ") (all collectively referred to herein as the "Easement "); WHEREAS, the Easement provided Jerry's with the right to construct pedestrian bridges connecting the Building to the Parking Ramp ( "Pedestrian Bridges "); WHEREAS, an exhibit to the Easement did not include an additional pedestrian bridge constructed with the Parking Ramp ( "Southerly Pedestrian Bridge "); WHEREAS, Jerry's desires to widen the Southerly Pedestrian Bridge and is requesting a correction to the Easement to provide an easement for the Southerly Pedestrian Bridge and an amendment to provide for the additional area required for the widening of the Southerly Pedestrian Bridge as proposed in the Third Amendment to Easement and Parking Ramp Agreement attached hereto as Exhibit C ( "Third Amendment "). City Hall 952- 927 -8861 4801 WEST 50TH STREET FAX 952 - 826 -0390 EDINA, MINNESOTA, 55424 -1394 www.Cityoftdina.com TTY 952 ; 826 -0379 1 NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Edina: 1. The Third Amendment is approved. 2. The Mayor and City Clerk are hereby authorized and directed to, execute the Third Amendment. PASSED AND ADOPTED this day of , 2012 by the City Council of the City of Edina, Minnesota. CITY OF EDINA BY: James B. Hovland, Mayor ATTEST: Debra A. Mangen, City Clerk 2 EXHIBIT A Legal Description of City Property Tracts A and C, Registered Land Survey No. 1393, Files of the Registrar of Titles, Hennepin County, Minnesota. Lots 7, 8, 9 and 10, Block 3, Grand View Heights, according to the recorded plat thereof, Hennepin County, Minnesota. 3' Lots 19, 20, 21 and 22, Block 3, Grand View Heights, according to the plat thereof on file or of record .with the County Recorder, Hennepin County, Minnesota.. Lots 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, :16, 17 and 18, Block 3, and Lots 17, 18, 19 and 20, Block 4, Grand View Heights, according to the plat thereof on file or of record with the County Recorder, Hennepin County, Minnesota, except that ,portion thereof taken for highway purposes. That part of Lots 13 to 15 inclusive, Block 4, Grand View Heights, and that part,of the adjacent portion of West Half of vacated Summit Avenue adjoining Lots 13 to 15 inclusive, lying. between the Easterly extensions across said Avenue of the North line of said Lot 13 and the South line of said Lot 15, all of which lies Easterly of a line parallel with and 90 feet Easterly of the center line of State Highway No. 5, according to the plat thereof on file or of record in the . office of the Register of Deeds in and for said County. That-part of Lot 16 lying East of a line drawn from a point on the South line thereof distant 28 feet East of the Southwest corner of said Lot 16 to a point on the North line of said lot distant 47 feet East of the Northwest corner thereof, Block 4, "Grand View Heights" and that part of the West Half of the adjoining vacated Summit Avenue lying between the extensions across it of the North and South lines of said Lot 16, according to the plat thereof on file or of record-in the office of the Register of Deeds in and for said County. 4 Exhibit C THIRD AMENDMENT TO EASEMENT AND PARKING RAMP AGREEMENT THIS THIRD AMENDMENT TO EASEMENT AND PARKING RAMP AGREEMENT..(this "Third Amendment ") is made as of March , 2012, by and among the CITY OF EDINA, a Minnesota municipal corporation ( "City "), the HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY OF EDINA, MINNESOTA, a body politic and corporate under the laws of the State of Minnesota.( "HRA "), and JERRY'S ENTERPRISES, INC., a Minnesota corporation ( "Jerry's "). RECITALS WHEREAS, the City, the HRA and Jerry's entered into that certain Easement and Parking Ramp Agreement dated as of February. 1, 1.987, recorded in the office of . the Hennepin County Recorder on March 19, 1987, as Document Number 5242349 and in the office of the Hennepin County Registrar of Titles on January 29, 1988, as Document Number 1905238( "Original Easement "), as amended by (a) that certain First Amendment to Easement and Parking Ramp Agreement dated as of May 28, 1987, recorded in the office of the Hennepin County Recorder on April 26, 1988, as Document Number 5400795 and in the office of the Hennepin County Registrar of Titles on April 22, 1988, as. Document Number 1922982 ( "First Amendment ") and (b) that.certain Second Amendment to Easement and Parking Ramp - Agreement dated as of July 7, 2011, recorded in the office of the Hennepin County Recorder on July 11, 2011; as Document Number A9671595 and in the office of the Hennepin County Registrar of Titles on July 11, 201'1, 'as Document Number T4869991 ( "Second Amendment "). WHEREAS, the City is the owner of certain real property legally described on Exhibit A attached to 'this Third Amendment ( "City Property"). WHEREAS, a parking ramp is constructed on the City Property ( "Parking Ramp„) WHEREAS, Jerry's is the owner of certain real property legally described on Exhibit B attached to this Third Amendment (. "Jerry's Property"). WHEREAS, a multi -story office and commercial building is constructed on the Jerry's Property ( "Building "). 5 WHEREAS, the Original Easement, the First Amendment and the Second Amendment are collectively referred to as the "Easement" in this Third Amendment. Terms not otherwise defined in this Third Amendment shall have the meanings ascribed in the Easement. WHEREAS, Section 2(B) of the Original Easement provided Jerry's with the right to construct pedestrian bridges connecting the Building to the Parking Ramp ( "Pedestrian Bridges "). WHEREAS, Exhibit C attached to the Original Easement depicts the location of the Pedestrian Bridge Easement in the location in which a Pedestrian Bridge was .originally constructed. WHEREAS, Exhibit C attached to the Original Easement fails to depict an additional initial Pedestrian Bridge which was constructed in conjunction with the construction of the Parking Ramp and has been used since that time, which additional initial Pedestrian Bridge is located southerly of the Pedestrian Bridge Easement shown on Exhibit C attached to the Original Easement and which southerly Pedestrian Bridge is depicted by crosshatching on Exhibit C attached to this Third Amendment. WHEREAS, Jerry's now desires to widen that southerly Pedestrian Bridge, to encompass the entire area depicted on Exhibit C attached to this Third Amendment as the southerly Pedestrian Bridge Easement. WHEREAS, the parties desire to correct the Easement to accurately indicate the existence of the southerly Pedestrian Bridge Easement and to provide for the widened area of that southerly Pedestrian Bridge Easement. NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the foregoing and other good and valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which are hereby acknowledged, the parties agree as follows: 1. Southerly Pedestrian Bridge. The Easement is hereby corrected to accurately provide for an expanded southerly Pedestrian Bridge Easement with a maximum width of 12 feet 4 inches, in the location depicted on Exhibit C (page 1) attached to this Third Amendment and as depicted on the Exhibit attached hereto as Exhibit C (page 2). 2. Exhibit C. Exhibit C attached to the Original Easement is hereby stricken in its entirety and replaced with Exhibit C attached to this Third Amendment. 3. Confirmation. Except as specifically set forth in this Third Amendment, the Easement is hereby confirmed and ratified. 3 - - - - - IN AGREEMENT, the parties have executed this Third Amendment to Easement and Parking Ramp Agreement as of the date and year first above written. CITY OF EDINA . HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY OF EDINA, MINNESOTA By Its Mayor And by Its City Manager JERRY'S ENTERPRISES, INC. By Its President STATE OF MINNESOTA Its Chairman And by Its Secretary ) ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) The foregoing Third Amendment to Easement and Parking Ramp Agreement was acknowledged before me this day of March; 2012, by James Hovland, the Mayor, and by Scott Neal, the City Manager, of the City of Edina, a Minnesota municipal corporation, on behalf of the municipal corporation. Notary Public STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) The foregoing Third Amendment to Easement and Parking Ramp Agreement was acknowledged before me this day of March, 2012, by James Hovland, the Chairman, and by Ann Swenson, the Secretary, of the Housing and Redevelopment Authority of Edina, Minnesota, a Minnesota body politic and corporation, on behalf of the Authority. iA Notary .Pu blip '. STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) The; foregoing Third Amendment to Easement and Parking. Ramp Agreement was acknowledged before me this day of March, 2012, by Robert N Sh,adduck, the. 'President of Jerry's Enterprises, Inc., a Minnesota corporation, on behalf of the corporation. Notary Public THIS INSTRUMENT WAS DRAFTED BY: LINDQUIST & VENNUM P.L.L.P. (DKP) 4200 IDS Center 80 South Eighth Street Minneapolis, MN 55403 ,(612) 371 -3528 - '- - -- CONSENT -BY- MORTGAGEE -- - Allstate Life Insurance Company, an Illinois insurance corporation, as the, Mortgagee of a portion of the Jerry's Property, as described in the foregoing Third Amendment to Easement and Parking Ramp Agreement, pursuant to that certain Mortgage'dated May 16, 1995 and recorded .May 17, 1995 in the office of the Hennepin County Recorder, as Document No. 6428384 and in the office of the Hennepin County . Registrar of Titles, as ;Document No. 2608876 hereby consents to the terms and: conditions of the foregoing Third Amendment to Easement and Parking Ramp Agreement. ALLSTATE LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY By Its And Its STATE OF ILLINOIS ) ss. COUNTY OF COOK ) The foregoing Consent by Mortgagee was acknowledged before me this day of March, 2012, by and each an Authorized Signatory of Allstate Life Insurance Company, an Illinois insurance corporation, on behalf of the insurance corporation. Notary Public 9 i2 EXHIBIT A Legal Description of City Property Tracts A and C, Registered'Land Survey No. 1393, Files of the Registrar of Titles, Hennepin County, Minnesota. Lots 7, 8, 9, and 10, Block 3, .Grand View Heights, according to the recorded- plat thereof, Hennepin County, Minnesota. 10 Legal Description of Jerry's Property Lots 19, 20, 21 and 22, Block 3, Grand View Heights, according to the .plat thereof on file or of record With the County Recorder, Hennepin County, Minnesota. Lots 11, 12, .1.3, 14, 15, 16, 17 and 1.8, Block 3, and. Lots 17, 18, 19 and 20, Block 4, Grand View Heights, according to the plat thereof on file or of record with the County Recorder, Hennepin. County, Minnesota; except that portion thereof taken for highway purposes. That part of Lots 13 to 15 inclusive, Block 4, Grand View Heights, and that part of the adjacent portion of West Half of vacated Summit Avenue adjoining Lots 13 to 15 inclusive, lying between the'Easterly extensions across said Avenue'of the North line of said Lot 13 and the South line of said Lot 15, all of which lies Easterly of a line parallel with and 90 feet Easterly of the center line of State Highway No. 5, according to the plat thereof on file or of record in the office of the Register of Deeds in and for said County. That part of Lot 16 lying East of a line drawn from a point on the South line thereof distant 28 feet East of the Southwest corner of said Lot 16 to a point on the North line of said lot distant 47 feet East of the Northwest corner thereof, Block 4, "Grand View Heights" and that part of the West Half of the adjoining vacated Summit Avenue lying between the extensions across it of the North and South lines'of said Lot 16, according to the plat thereof on file or of record in the office of the Register of Deeds in and for said County. 11 EXHIBIT C — page 1 DetAction of Pedestrian Bridqes J, ry LLL 1 • 12 11114,11111 fill 01.1.1 IN I I I IVA I I I I �P 12 EXHIBIT C - page 2 Depiction of Southerly 12 Foot 4 Inch (12'47) Wide Pedestrian Bridge 13 THIRD AMENDMENT TO EASEMENT AND PARKING RAMP AGREEMENT THIS THIRD AMENDMENT TO EASEMENT AND PARKING RAMP AGREEMENT (this "Third Amendment ") is made as of March , 2012, by and among the CITY OF EDINA, a Minnesota municipal corporation ( "City "), the HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY OF EDINA, MINNESOTA, a body politic and corporate under the laws of the State of Minnesota ( "HRA "), and JERRY'S ENTERPRISES, INC., a Minnesota corporation ( "Jerry's "). RECITALS WHEREAS, the City, the HRA and Jerry's entered into that certain Easement and Parking Ramp Agreement dated as of February 1, 1987, recorded in the office of the Hennepin County Recorder on March 19, 1987, as Document Number 5242349 and in the office of the Hennepin County Registrar of Titles on January 29, 1988, as Document Number 1905238 ( "Original Easement "), as amended by (a) that certain First Amendment to Easement and Parking Ramp Agreement dated as of May 28, 1987, recorded in the office of the Hennepin County Recorder on April 26, 1988, as Document Number 5400795 and in the office of the Hennepin County Registrar of Titles on April 22, 1988, as Document Number 1922982 ( "First Amendment ") and (b) that certain Second Amendment to Easement and Parking Ramp Agreement dated as of July 7, 2011, recorded in the office of the Hennepin County Recorder on July 11, 2011, as Document Number A9671595 and in the office of the Hennepin County Registrar of Titles on July 11, 2011, as Document Number T4869991 ( "Second Amendment "). WHEREAS, the City is the owner of certain real property legally described on Exhibit A attached to this Third Amendment ( "City Property "). WHEREAS, a parking ramp is constructed on the City Property ( "Parking Ramp "). WHEREAS, Jerry's is the owner of certain real property legally described on Exhibit B attached to this Third Amendment ( "Jerry's Property "). WHEREAS, a multi -story office and commercial building is constructed on the Jerry's Property ( "Building "). DOCS43598913 -0 WHEREAS, the Original ,Easement, the First Amendment and the Second Amendment are collectively referred to as the "Easement" in this Third Amendment. Terms not otherwise defined in this Third Amendment shall have the meanings ascribed in the Easement. WHEREAS, Section 2(B) of,the Original Easement provided Jerry's with the right to construct pedestrian bridges connecting the Building to the Parking Ramp ( "Pedestrian Bridges "). WHEREAS, Exhibit C attached to the Original Easement depicts. the, location of the Pedestrian Bridge Easement in the location in which a Pedestrian Bridge was originally constructed. WHEREAS, Exhibit C attached to the Original Easement fails to depict an additional initial Pedestrian Bridge which was constructed in conjunction with the construction of the Parking Ramp and has been used since that time, which additional initial Pedestrian Bridge is located southerly of the Pedestrian Bridge Easement shown on Exhibit C attached to the Original Easement and which southerly, Pedestrian Bridge is depicted by crosshatching on Exhibit C attached to this Third Amendment. WHEREAS, Jerry's now desires to widen that southerly Pedestrian Bridge, to encompass the entire area depicted on Exhibit C attached to this Third Amendment as the southerly Pedestrian Bridge Easement. WHEREAS, the parties desire to correct the Easement.to accurately indicate the existence of the southerly Pedestrian Bridge Easement and to provide for the widened area of that southerly Pedestrian Bridge Easement. . NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the foregoing and other good and valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which are hereby acknowledged, the parties agree as follows: 1. Southerly Pedestrian Bridge. The Easement is hereby corrected to accurately provide for an expanded southerly Pedestrian Bridge Easement with a maximum width of 12 feetA inches, in the location depicted on Exhibit C (page. 1) attached to this Third Amendment and as depicted on the Exhibit attached hereto as Exhibit C (page 2). 2. Exhibit C. Exhibit C attached to the Original Easement is hereby stricken in its entirety and replaced with Exhibit C attached to this Third Amendment. 3. Confirmation. Except as specifically set forth in this Third Amendment, the Easement is hereby confirmed and ratified. DOCS- 43598913 -0 2 IN AGREEMENT, the parties have executed this Third "Amendment to Easement and Parking Ramp Agreement as of the date and year first above'written. CITY OF EDINA HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY OF .. EDINA, MINNESOTA By - - By Its Mayor . Its.Chairman And by ` And by Its City Manager Its Secretary . JERRY'S ENTERPRISES.INC. By Its President STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) The foregoing Third Amendment to Easement and Parking Ramp Agreement was acknowledged before me this day. of March, 2012, by James Hoveland, the Mayor, and by Scott Neal, the City Manager, of the City of Edina, a Minnesota municipal corporation, on behalf of the municipal corporation. Notary Public DOCS- 43598913 -0 3 STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) The for Third Amendment to Easement and Parking Ramp Agreement was acknowledged before me this day of March, 2012, by James Hoveland, the Chairman, and by Ann Swenson, the Secretary, of the Housing and Redevelopment Authority of Edina, Minnesota, a Minnesota body politic and corporation, on behalf of the Authority. Notary Public STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) The foregoing Third Amendment to Easement and Parking Ramp Agreement was acknowledged before me this day of March, 2012, by Robert N. Shadduck, the President of Jerry's Enterprises, Inc., a Minnesota corporation, on behalf of the corporation. Notary Public THIS INSTRUMENT WAS DRAFTED BY: LINDQUIST & VENNUM P.L.L.P. (DKP) 4200 IDS Center 80 South Eighth Street Minneapolis, MN 55403 (612) 371 -3528 DOCS43598913 -0 4 CONSENT BY MORTGAGEE Allstate Life Insurance Company, an Illinois insurance corporation, as the Mortgagee of a portion of the Jerry's Property, as described in the foregoing Third Amendment to Easement and Parking Ramp Agreement, pursuant to that certain Mortgage dated May 16, 1995 and recorded May 17, 1995 in the office of the Hennepin County Recorder, as Document No. 6428384 and in the office of the Hennepin County Registrar of Titles, as Document No. 2608876 hereby consents to the terms and conditions of the foregoing Third Amendment to Easement and Parking Ramp Agreement. ALLSTATE LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY By Its And Its STATE OF ILLINOIS ) ) ss. COUNTY OF COOK ) The foregoing Consent by Mortgagee was acknowledged before me this day of March, 2012, by and , each an Authorized Signatory of Allstate Life Insurance Company, an Illinois insurance corporation, on behalf of the insurance corporation. Notary Public DOCS- 0598913 -0 EXHIBIT. A Legal Description of City Property Tracts A and C, Registered Land Survey No. 1393, Files of the Registrar of Titles, Hennepin County, Minnesota. Lots 7, 8, 9 and 1'0, Block 3, Grand View Heights, according to the recorded plat thereof, Hennepin County, Minnesota. J DOCS - 43598913 -0 EXHIBIT 13 Legal, Description of Jerry's Property Lots 19, 20, 21 and 22, Block 3, Grand View. Heights, according to the plat thereof on file or of record with the County Recorder, HennepinwCou.nty, Minnesota. ; Lots 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17 and 18, Block 3, and Lots 17, 18, 19 and. 20, Block.4, Grand View Heights, according t6the plat thereof on file or of record with the County Recorder,..Hennepin County, Minnesota, except that portion thereof taken for highway purposes. That part of Lots 13 to 15 inclusive, Block 4, Grand View Heights,.and that part of the adjacent portion of West .Half.oIf vacated Summit'Avenue adjoining Lots 1`3 to 15 inclusive,' lying between the Easterly extensions across said Avenue of the North line of said Lot 13'and the.South: line of said Lot 15, all of which lies 'Easterly of aline parallel. with and 90 feet Easterly of the center line of State Highway No. '5, according to the plat thereof on file or of record in the office of the Register of Deeds in and for said County: That part of Lot 16 lying East of a line drawn from a point on the South line thereof distant 28 feet East of the Southwest corner of said Lot 16.to a point on the North line of said lot distant 47 feet East of the Northwest corner thereof, Block 4, "Grand View Heights" and that part of the West Half of the adjoining.,vacated Summit Avenue lying between the extensions across it of the North and South lines of said Lot 16, according to. the plat thereof on file or of record in the office of the Register of Deeds in and for said County. DOCS4359013 -0 7 EXHIBIT C — page I Depiction of Pedestrian Bridges �~^ �. ... ' " 'tom s. lY r1�'y ,� "'�� Y 7,77 7 M5 r I x_•111 DOCS43598913-0 8 TT Tn I I Mill Lill tl 1:111LI M f! .ul 11 U,1.1-,I:. DOCS43598913-0 8 EXHIBIT C — page 2 Depiction of Southerly 12 Foot 4 Inch (12'4 ") Wide Pedestrian Bridge DOCS - #3598913 -v7 9 RESOLUTION NO. 2012-46 A RESOLUTION IN OPPOSITION TO THE PROPOSED CLOSURE OF THE DIVISION''IV SOUTHDALE COURTHOUSE OF THE FOURTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT City of Edina WHEREAS, the Edina City Council, is the official governing body of the City of Edina, a municipal corporation organized under the home rule provisions of the laws of the .State of Minnesota; and WHEREAS, Hennepin County Administrator'Richard Johnson requested at the February 28, 2012 meeting of the Hennepin County Board of Commissioners that they act cease all court operations at the Division IV, Hennepin County Courthouse at Southdale commencing on September 1','2012, in Hennepin County Resolution 12- 0119; and WHEREAS, the agenda'item for this Resolution indicated that the cases handled at the Southdale Courthouse would be relocated to Brookdale Court, Ridgedale Court or the Division I courthouse in downtown Minneapolis; and , WHEREAS, because nearly one -third of the approximately 11,500 non - felony criminal and traffic cases currently handled at the Southdale Courthouse originate from the City of Edina; and WHEREAS, any relocation of the court functions serving Edina from a south suburban location to any of the Division I, II or III locations will not only reduce the level of services to Edina residents, it will reduce our residents' access to justice; and WHEREAS, the Division IV Courthouse for the Fourth Judicial District, located at 7009 York Avenue, Edina, Minnesota, currently provides suitable quarters for the holding of regular terms of court in a southern suburban location within the county serving the City of Edina; and WHEREAS, the City of Edina, through its City Prosecutor's office, filed approximately 3,100 petty misdemeanor, misdemeanor and gross misdemeanor cases at Division IV Hennepin County Courthouse, and at that location made over 10,000 court appearances on those cases involving citizen victims, witnesses, City police officers and prosecutors during calendar year 2010; and WHEREAS, the City of Edina's Police Department must make daily trips to the courthouse serving the City of Edina to transport prisoners in custody so a judge can set bail or impose conditions of release, obtain judicial review of criminal complaints and warrant applications and testify in pretrial hearings or court trials; and WHEREAS, City prosecutors appear four days per week at the Southdale courthouse handling arraignments, pretrials, court trials, settlernent- conferences, Rasmussen hearings, as well as conferences with traffic offenders about their cases at the Payables calendar; and WHEREAS, the majority of victims and witnesses in criminal cases arising out of the City of Edina are Edina residents, as are the persons to whom traffic citations are issued, and the Southdale courthouse provides for these residents a convenient location with ample free parking and close to mass transit; and City Ha11 952- 927 -8861 4801 WEST 50TH STREET FAbC 952 - 826 -0390 EDINA, MINNESOTA, 55424 -1394 www.CityofEdina.com TTY 952 -826 -0379 WHEREAS, the convenient suburban location of the Southdale courthouse increases the level of victim and witness participation in the prosecution of criminal cases and that in turn improves the ability of Edina prosecutors to secure fair and appropriate consequences for the offenders, thereby effecting an improvement in victim safety, as well as the overall safety of the community; and WHEREAS, the proposed closure of the Division IV Hennepin County courthouse will deprive the residents of the City of Edina convenient, suitable access to court system of the Fourth Judicial District and increase the City's costs of providing police and prosecution services. NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDINA that: 1. The City Council opposes any proposed closure of the south suburban, Division IV, Fourth Judicial District Courthouse based on its concern that such would unduly inconvenience the citizens of Edina served thereby, result in increased costs of prosecution and increased costs to the Edina Police Department. 2. The City Manager and the City Prosecutor are authorized to cooperate with the Hennepin County Board of Commissioners, County Administrator and Court Administrator to form a task force for the purpose of working out the security issues faced by the Southdale courthouse or, alternatively to work with them in identifying a more suitable south suburban location for the handling of the City of Edina's non - felony prosecutions. 3. The City Council hereby directs the City Clerk to provide copies of this Resolution to: the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court for the State of Minnesota, the Honorable Lori Gildea; the members of the Hennepin County Board; the County Administrator, Richard Johnson; the Chief Judge of the Fourth Judicial District, the Honorable James Swenson; and Hennepin County Court Administrator Mark Thompson. Dated: March 6, 2012 Attest: Debra A. Mangen, City Clerk STATE OF MINNESOTA ) COUNTY OF HENNEPIN )SS CITY OF EDINA ) James B. Hovland, Mayor 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 March 6, 2012, and as recorded in the Minutes of said Regular Meeting. WITNESS my hand and seal of said City this day of 20 City Clerk OA MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE VETERANS MEMORIAL COMMITTEE HELD AT CITY HALL _ JANUARY 27, 2012 7:30 AM I. CALL TO ORDER Chairman Goergen called the meeting to order at 7:35 am /L ROLLCALL Answering roll call were Members Benson, Cardarelle, Christiaansen, Kojetin; Lefler, Lonsbury, Reed, Schwartz and Goergen. Ill. APPROVAL OF MEETING AGENDA Member Schwartz made a motion, seconded-by Member Kojetin to add to the agenda that the committee readdresses the issue of the Merchant Marines. Ayes: Benson, Cardarelle, Christiaansen, Kojetin, Lefler, Lonsbury, Reed, Schwartz, Goergen Motion carried. IV. ADOPTION OF CONSENT AGENDA Member Lonsbury'tnade a motion, seconded by Member Lefler to approve the Consent Agenda as follows: A. Approval of the December 1.6, 2011 Veterans Memorial Committee Meeting Minutes. Ayes: Benson, Cardarelle, Christiaansen, Kojetin, Lefler, Lonsbury, Reed, Schwartz, Goergen Motion carried. V. COMMUNITY COMMENT There were no members of the general public present at the meeting. Vl. ITEM ADDED TO AGENDA VI.A. Merchant Marines Member Schwartz reminded the committee that he was among the majority that felt they shouldn't have the Merchant Marines logo recognized as a veteran's status. However, he subsequently stumbled across some information while looking for something totally separate and found that the 8,000 to 10,000 Merchant Marines killed during WWII_ were counted,as military casualties and is included. in the statistics of WWII memorials and such. He informed the committee that in 1936 the Merchant Marine Act said that the Merchant Marines will become an auxiliary of the Navy during time of declared war and in, 1988 President Reagan signed a law which gave Merchant Marines total veteran status for time of war. Therefore, those who served in the Merchant Marines during time of war, which would be WWII, have veteran's status. Member Schwartz explained when he found this information he -felt obliged to bring it to the committee. He noted that Chair Goergen has already received at least one communication from the Merchant Marines, which have a very strong lobby, saying they ought to be included. He indicated that based on the new information he feels they should include the Merchant Marine logo on the memorial. Discussion took place. Member Kojetin made a motion, seconded by Member Schwartz, to include the Merchant Marine Symbol on the Veterans Memorial. Ayes: Kojetin, Schwartz, Benson, Cardarelle, Christiaansen, Lefler Nays: Goergen, Reed, Lonsbury Motion carried. Vll. STANDING COMMITTEE REPORTS A. Fundraising /Treasurer Chair Goergen informed the committee that when they met in December their balance with the Edina Community Foundation was $1,700. He noted since that meeting it has increased to $1,950 of which Mr. Keprios has already committed $1,900 of that to the artist who needs that payment to continue his efforts. He stated that he is very disappointed that the committee has only been able to raise $250.00 since their last meeting. He added that they are not going to be able to go to their potential significant donors without saying this is what the committee has done on their own to start the ball rolling. Member Lefler indicated that he knows Member Benson has had conversations with the Pohlad family; however, they currently have some issues and once those are resolved he will be back in touch with them. Member Lefler reminded the committee that the first contingency they talked about was getting a group of people to sort of test the waters for their target audience to see if there is any interest out there in funding this. However, he has not received any responses from anyone who would be willing to do it. He noted there are some people he would be happy to call but he doesn't want to ask them until he has something he can tell them and show them as to what they are going to be doing. He stated that until they get that first step they really can't move and right now they are waiting for things to fall into place and there is not a lot they can do to make them fall into place. Chair Goergen asked Member Lefler what he meant by "a group that we are going to test the waters ". Member Lefler responded that Mr. Olson had talked about his idea to get a group of two to four people who would call the people on their list and make that initial contact. The caller would explain the project and ask them what they think of it and is it something they would be willing to support. He noted if the feedback is good then they would have their foot in the door in terms of approaching them for a large contribution. He added if the target audience did not seem interested then they would know they are in deep trouble in terms of getting large donations. Chair Goergen stated at this point they can't even get individuals to make those contacts to which Member Lefler replied right now they have several plans they could implement, they just don't have the people to implement them. 2 Member.:Lefler commented at the last meeting it was brought up that because he is a judge he cannot ask,-people for money. He explained- he was asked to. head up the committee in a management, administrative and leadership style to oversee a plan. He stated that if anyone has a problem with it he would be happy to move to something else. He indicated that he just wanted to make sure the committee was aware of the situation. Chair Goergen added she was aware of this when they asked Member Lefler. Member. Benson informed the committee:'he has had three conversations with the Pohlad family and'as Member Lefler po'inted,out the timing was not good for them. He indicated that he thinks during the. next 30 days he will-have a,greater picture as to what will happen in terms of getting. together with the Pohlad family and lay out to them what it is they-are trying to do. Member Benson stated with regards to. General Schulstad he has been trying to get in touch with him but so far has not -been able to. He-explained that his game plan is to meet with General Schulstad and show him what they've done so far. He noted that Member Schwartz and he would go,through the wonderful book Member Schwartz has put together and segue into asking him about being an honorary fundraising chairman. Member Kojetin informed the committee that he is also on the 125th Anniversary committee and they just'applied for a $10,000 grant from the Foundation and were given it. He noted, he thinks,they should apply for a grant for the $10,000; they just need to specify what they need it for. He stated maybe if they tell them they have some bills that need to be paid they will give them a $10,000 grant to start with. Member Lonsbury informed the committee that he is working hard to get all of his things donated. He noted that he has been working with an advertising agency to create the materials to which they are donating their services. They are also going to try to get the vendor who produces it to donate their services once they know what it is they want. He explained he is hoping that it will all be donated and they won't have to come up with the .$5,000 to $6,000. He commented that they currently do not have a vendor because they don't know what it is they are going to do yet but the agency is involved. Chair Goergen indicated he has the application for the grant to the Foundation and he is just waiting for the co'mmittee's approval. He noted the downside is there are three deadlines for grant applications to which the most recent one was January 15tH Member Lonsbury stated that they first need to see if the board has met yet because it may not be too late. Mr. Keprios proposed that Chair Goergen and he fill out the grant application. Mr. Keprios informed the Park Board a big issue they currently have is, they cannot tell the artist to start building the sculpture itself until they either have a commitment that the Foundation will loan them the money or they have, the money in the bank. He noted the amount is now close to $60;000. Mr. Keprios indicated maybe'the foundation can write a separate grant saying they will upfront the cost of the artist/sculpture and the committee will raise the money. He commented that is a risk; however; what if you raise the money for the sculpture and are unable to raise the 3 rest? It's sort of the cart before the horse type thing. He stated he would be willing to write two grants, one for a loan for the sculpture and the second grant for $10,000 to get them out of the starting gate. Member Reed indicated they need $10,000 right away and nothing is getting done. He noted it was suggested at the last meeting that the actual committee comes up with it and that didn't work. He stated that maybe now they should put a notice in the Sun Current saying what it is the committee is doing and if you would like to donate money you can give it to the Edina Foundation and put their information and see how much they get. He commented that he knows Mr. Olson said they will never be able to build it with $20 donations but he thinks right now their backs are against the wall and nothing is getting done. Member Benson commented that he agrees, it does need to start right here with this committee. Member Kojetin made a motion, seconded by Member Lonsbury, that Mr. Keprios and Chair Goergen write a grant to the foundation for $10,000. Ayes: Benson, Cardarelle, Christiaansen, Kojetin, Lefler, Lonsbury, Reed, Schwartz, Goergen Motion carried. Chair Goergen indicated that perhaps the committee should now be contacting the people they consider friends or associates who are not part of the potentially $100,000 donors and meet one on one with them. He commented they may not need all of the publicity efforts and formal presentation that Member Lonsbury is working on and just bring Mr. Kost diagrams of the memorial. Member Lonsbury stated he likes the idea-,of the presentation and asked how difficult it would be for the Communications Department to put something together. Mr. Keprios replied if you provide the information he will ask communications to put it together. Member Lonsbury informed the committee they need to remember that when they start asking for corporate gifts as opposed to individual gifts that they stay consistent with their philosophy of no logos or graphics. Chair Goergen commented that their comeback to corporations is whether you are an individual or corporation for a minimum of $50,000 your name only will be recognized somewhere at the memorial site. Mr. Keprios indicated that he will need someone to give him exactly what the committee wants the presentation to say. Member Lonsbury replied he thinks they want something more generic with history, why they are doing it and some things from Member Schwartz findings and try to make it emotional. Mr. Keprios stated he thinks the Communications Department needs someone to tell them exactly what the committee wants. Member Lonsbury replied that he does not time to write up all of the information because it already exists in existing presentation materials. Mr. Keprios commented he could ask Communications to put something together and the Committee could edit it. Mr. Keprios indicated that he thinks we do have all of necessary information except for any questions or summary that the committee wants to add about the memorial at the conclusion of the presentation. Chair Goergen 4 commented that he thinks they need kind of a summary of Member Schwartz work. He knows there are hundreds and hundreds of hours of work but they need to narrow it down to say 25 elements for the power point to which three to five of those have the emotional aspect of _ it. Member Schwartz indicated he will make a few adjustments to the book and will bring in a final version to give to the Communications Department. Chair Goergen replied that the Communications people are not going to read that. Member Lonsbury asked why not if the objective-is to create a presentation that describes what the Veteran's Memorial is and asks people to donate. He stated they want a power point presentation that they can show to perspective donors that explains what they are doing, gives them the emotional background and asks them to donate. Member Benson stated that Member Schwartz and he. will put together a rough draft of the "emotional" aspect. Chair Goergen commented that their short range goal is $10,000 whether the Foundation provides or the committee members start making one on one contacts prior to the significant donor portions. Chair Goergen asked if Mr.. Olson is done with his assistance to the Committee regarding fundraising, has he done as much as he is planning to do without being retained by contract and payment to do more. Member Lefler replied he has. never . mentioned money and it is his belief that he will continue to help them structure their fundraising efforts. Member Benson indicated he was in contact with Mr. Olson this past week and Mr. Olson told him; if he ever wanted to get together to brainstorm some stuff he would -be more than happy to. Chair Goergen asked if Mr. Olson is more of a sounding board of ideas and would not attend a reception where they may have ten people. Member Benson responded if they were to go in that direction he thinks he would be there to which Member Lefler agreed. Member Benson commented that he thinks.Mr. Olson is waiting for the Committee to take some action. Member Lefler commented that he thinks once they have the $10,000 he thinks Mr. Olson will be much -more comfortable in terms of how he works with the fundraising. He thinks Mr. Olson is still looking forward to helping them and thinks this is a good project and wants to see it through. Member Lefler indicated that once they get going it's a doable thing. He commented in` his discussions with people about the Veterans. Memorial the fact remains that a very. small percentage of the public at large has served in the military. Member Schwartz replied he thought that was the case as well; however, Edina is two points higher than the national average for having veterans. Member. Lefler indicated that in conversations with,,people he has found they think this is a nice idea they are just not sure it's a necessary idea. He noted that people thought it would be nice-to have a Veterans Memorial; however, he didn't run into anyone who said °how.can I help you with that ". He doesn't think „it's high on people's, radar of their wants and needs. Chair Goergen, responded maybe they haven't done enough to put it on their radar. He noted that they have had media people cover their activities and articles have appeared in the Sun and Star Tribune and so they are just waiting for the next step. He noted as soon as he receives materials he can write another article or interview with somebody again. 5 Member Lonsbury commented that it seems to him that people who are professional fundraisers will say you have to have your critical mass; however, they need to think if there is a Plan B. He stated his point is if they go out with, the idea of let's create a big media campaign and put it in the Sun Current so people will write out their checks and they can maybe raise $100,00.0. He noted the question is what if they don't raise enough money to build the memorial, what are they going to,do with the memorial, - what do. they tell those who gave $500, $1,000, etc.; are they just going to have the sculpture at the park? He explained that is the problem with going out ahead of the big donors, is that they don't have assurance. Member Benson stated that he thinks they need to make a list of those top people and create an action plan so they can,get.moving a little bit. Chair Goergen indicated that Dick Crockett has offered the Foundation's list of donors but the Committee would have to be the ones to go through it. He noted once they get a_list,of names of the top 100 or whatever number they decide upon the Committee can look over the list and first see if anyone personally knows any of the people or corporations listed and go from there. This is something they should have already, been working on. Chair Goergen asked who is going to put together a. master list of names to which Member Lefler replied he has already done that and right now the list has 25 names. Chair Goergen asked who can start going to the Foundation and get names from their lists. Member Lefler replied he will call the Foundation and find out what exactly it is they are looking through, a computer, microfiche, etc., and find out when they are open and available for committee members to start working on it. Member Reed noted that he would be willing to help do that. Vll. STANDING COMMITTEE REPORTS B. Design /Architecture Chair Goergen informed the Committee that although this, isn't urgent the architect needs to know what their ideas are on inscriptions on the memorial, plaques, etc. He stated, that Members Reed and Christiaansen have put together. a long list of quotes that may be appropriate throughout the whole memorial. He.noted that they need to come up with some kind of voting system to reduce the list and pick the top ones. the Committee agrees on. Member Christiaansen suggested that he number each quote .and e-mail the list to the Committee. Each Member can list their top 10 or 20 in order.. to narrow down the list. Member Reed indicated that he thinks,,they have plenty of time to figure out the quotes so right now they should discuss where they are going to go. He noted they could,decide that as well as the number of quotes they want to put on the memorial. They need to decide how many quotes and where they should go. Member Christiaansen asked the committee to e-mail him any other quotes they would like placed on the numbered list of quotes before he sends out the e-mail the next couple of months. Member Kojetin asked how many locations they are looking at. Member Reed replied that Member Christiaansen and he came up with the following tentative spots: 1 quote Below the flags 0 2 quotes - One on each of the two sentinels 1 quote — Below the service emblems, prior to the KIA listings or somewhere on the front of the plaque — base for the statue 2 quotes — One on each side of the stadium seating Member Reed commented that they really don't want to overdo quotes. He also added that he doesn't think quotes on the ground are a good idea. Member Kojetin asked if they,were talking about six locations to which Member Christiaansen replied there are six options, they don't necessarily need to fill all of them. Mr. Keprios noted it was disappointing to hear Member Lefler talk about how he had not received excitement from some of the people he has talked to and how they question the importance of it. He stated that a lot of small communities have magnificent memorials and he feels when you look at public facilities in general it's a direct, reflection of how a community feels about itself. He indicated that he believes that this is something Edina needs to have and it pains him to see these tiny communities that can get it done and yet Edina can't. He stated that when he hears comments that this is maybe not all that important, we need to be reminded that the veterans have given us this blanket of freedom which is why it is so important to honor them. Member Schwartz commented that Member Lefler must not be talking to the same people he is talking to because what he hears people saying is how great it is that we are doing this. Member Cardarelle noted that the people he has spoken to about the memorial are all very positive about the memorial. Meeting adjourned at 8:55 am. 7 MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE EDINA HUMAN RIGHTS & RELATIONS COMMISSION JANUARY 24, 2012 7:03 PM CALL TO ORDER Chair Kingston called the meeting to order at 7:03 PM. ll. ROLLCALL Answering rollcall were Commissioners Bigbee, Cashmore, Finsness, Mayer, Newell, Seidman, Stanton, Winnick, and Chair Kingston. Staff present: Lisa Schaefer, Human Resources Director and Staff Liaison; Karen Kurt, Assistant City Manager; and Susan Howl, administrative staff. Guests present: Members of Edina High School STAND Initiative, Ellen Kennedy, Rachael Pream Grenier and Suzanne Kerwin. Ill. MEETING AGENDA APPROVED Motion by Commissioner Winnick and seconded by Commissioner Cashmore changing the STAND Initiative from Item VI. B. to Item VI. A. Ayes: Bigbee, Cashmore, Finsness, Kingston, Mayer, Newell, Seidman, Stanton and Winnick Motion carried. Motion by Commissioner Seidman and seconded by Commissioner Winnick approving the meeting agenda of January 24, 2012, as edited. Ayes: Bigbee, Cashmore, Finsness, Kingston, Mayer, Newell, Seidman, Stanton and Winnick Motion carried. IV. CONSENT AGENDA ADOPTED Motion by Commissioner Mayer and seconded by Commissioner Seidman approving the consent agenda as follows: W.A. Approve the meeting minutes of November 22, 2011. Ayes: Bigbee, Cashmore, Finsness, Kingston, Mayer, Newell, Seidman, Stanton and Winnick Motion carried. V. COMMUNITY COMMENT There were no community comments. Vl. REPORTS /RECOMMENDATIONS VI.A. S.T.A.N.D.- INITIATIVE REQUEST PRESENTED TO THE COMMISSION Four students from the High School STAND Initiative; Rachael Pream Grenier, Coordinator of Youth Serving Youth at Edina High School; and Ellen Kennedy, Executive Director of World Without Genocide, were introduced and welcomed. It was explained to the Commission that the Democratic Republic of the Congo employs armed groups to control the use over the country's mineral deposits as a source of funding. As a result, thousands of deaths occur each month from violence inflicted in order to maintain control of the mines and resources. The request brought before the Commission is for the City of Edina to partner with Edina High School to support the efforts of companies moving towards conflict -free products and to purchase products from electronics companies that are moving towards conflict -free sources of raw materials. It was explained that the City of Edina purchases its electronic materials through a State contract. This is not mandatory, but it is easy and cost effective. The Commissioners pointed out the Council's denial of a recommended procurement policy within the City's Domestic Partnership Ordinance regarding restricting contracts with the City when a contractor does not provide inclusive benefits. Motion was made by Commissioner Mayer and seconded by Commissioner Winnick that HRRC develop a general support statement for Council approval which would cover a variety of different issues and which would include a recommendation concerning a socially - responsible procurement policy. Ayes: Bigbee, Cashmore, Finsness, Kingston, Mayer, Newell, Seidman, Stanton and Winnick Motion carried. The Commissioners acknowledged that a subcommittee should revisit item #4 in the Domestic Partnership Ordinance. Commissioner Cashmore agreed to be in touch with Ellen Kennedy as a follow -up to the presentation and subsequent Commission action. VI. B. DRAFT POLICY RESTRICTING PUBLIC MEETINGS ON CERTAIN RELIGIOUS HOLIDAYS DISCUSSED The Commission introduced and welcomed Assistant City Manager Kurt who shared a draft policy for City of Edina public meetings and religious holidays. She introduced Suzanne Kerwin, a member of the Edina League of Women Voters. The League had approached the City about developing a policy to strike a balance between City -held meetings and religious observances in order to ensure attendance and participation. Commission Members provided input: • Islam days of observance are not recognized in the policy. • Last day of Ramadan is missing. • First day of Lent should be included. • The policy is not adequately diversified. • In the Edina schools, there is an increase in Asian, East Indian and Somalian students. • The policy needs to be broader with the observances. • This policy should recognize religious observance days rather than holidays. • We must reach out to the Muslim and Hindu communities. • The public's ability to attend City meetings is as important a consideration as the ability of members to participate. Assistant Manager Kurt shared that the draft policy looks at the holidays which would have serious work restrictions. Absences by board and commission members due to religious observances would not be counted against them. The draft policy will be an agenda item for discussion at the City Council Workshop with the Commission on Monday, February 6 th VI.C. ADMINISTRATION PROCESSES UPDATED Commissioner Mayer presented an Administration update regarding process, officers, key initiatives and meeting management. The Commissioners recommended that there be an election for each of the two positions —Chair and Vice Chair — rather than one election taking the most votes for Chair. Motion was made by Commissioner Stanton and seconded by Commissioner Winnick to approve the following for elections of officers to be held at the February Commission meeting: • The slate of recommended /interested candidates for the two positions will be presented. • Nominations will be accepted from the floor for each position. • Each individual interested in becoming an officer will make a five- minute presentation. • There will be a separate election for the position of Chair and the position of Vice Chair. Ayes: Bigbee, Cashmore, Finsness, Kingston, Newell, Seidman, Stanton and Winnick Motion carried. Motion was made by Commissioner Mayer and seconded by Commissioner Cashmore to approve the remaining Administration recommendations: • The Administration process, recommendations and the role of the Administration Committee should be reviewed annually and confirmed. • The Chair and Staff Liaison will identify at least two meetings annually where a key topic is discussed for at least 60 minutes. �} • Meeting management, Roberts Rules of Order and respectful behavior will be exercised and modeled. Ayes: Bigbee, Cashmore, Finsness, Kingston, Newell, Seidman, Stanton and Winnick Motion carried. VI.D. NEW ADMINISTRATION CHAIR SELECTED Commissioner Mayer was thanked for his faithful service, and the Commissioners wished him well and shared that he would be missed. Motion, was made by Commissioner Cashmore and seconded by Commissioner Stanton to appoint Commissioner Winnick to the position of HRRC Administration Chair. Ayes: Bigbee, Cashmore, Finsness, Kingston; Newell, Seidman, Stanton and Winnick Motion carried. Commissioner Seidman offered her assistance in the role of Administration Chair. VLE. INITIATIVE ASSIGNMENTS FOR 2012 SHARED The Commissioners�shared updates regarding the particular initiatives. for 2012: • Monitor Domestic Partnership Ordinance regarding Section 4 —Commissioners, Cashmore and Winnick will investigate opportunities to resume deliberation. • Initiate census research funding recommendation — Commissioner Stanton recommended that the Commission schedule time to discuss whether the analysis of the census data is adequate information or if there is a need to go deeper. HRRC needs to consider the implications drawn from the data in terms of human rights and activities. In an hour -long session, the group could develop a major strategic plan on which to focus energies, evaluate community engagement and collaborate with other groups. The Commission needs to de -brief to determine the next steps as a result of the data that was presented and to decide who could be engaged. • Update Bias /hate Crime Response Plan — Commissioner Winnick reported that the Police Chief has assured him that the Plan has been communicated to the Department as a whole. The Deputy Chief and Public Information Officer have been charged to reach out into the community to educate and improve relations. Perhaps the Park and Recreation Department could be brought into the Plan's activities. •. Participate in the April event regarding the Nazi persecution of homosexuals —Chair Kingston shared that the exhibit will be opening on Tuesday, April 10th. There will be a movie screening on April 25th or May 2 "d, and the theatericould partner with Outreach Minnesota. The event will also include a panel discussion. • Sponsor anti - bullying event and community education — Commissioner Finsness reported that the student. members were assigned to.this:'initiative.and that there was no news to share. The Commission should continue to be a watchdog regarding bullying. PSA's with the Mayor and Police Chief would serve as an educational tool. Because more help is needed to create a community -wide event, it was suggested that community working groups be created and that volunteering be encouraged either through advertising or word of mouth. e Sponsor Marriage Amendment forum — Commissioner Stanton shared that the League of Women Voters declined to collaborate with HRRC to provide education regarding the constitutional amendment to ban the legal recognition of same -sex relationships'and unions. • Sponsor diversity awareness event — Commissioner Cashmore will follow up with the Council .- Members. Sponsor Days of Remembrance — Commissioner Seidman shared that this will be another opportunity for HRRC to educate the'community. There will be a display in City Hall and a proclamation. Broadcasting the videos on Channel 16 regarding the Holocaust and the taping of Fred Baron's presentation will be investigated. Coordinate Somali relief efforts — Commissioner Newell will update the Commissioners at a later date. vu. COMMISSIONERS REMINDED.OF CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION The HRRC Work Session with the City Council will be on Monday, February 6th, and it is a mandatory meeting for the Commissioners. It will be an opportunity to discuss the League's resolution opposing the proposed amendment to the Constitution regarding legal recognition of marriage and the League of Women Voters' request to adopt a new calendar respecting religious observances. The Commissioners were encouraged to come prepared to discuss the initiatives for 2012. VI. G. DECEMBER 2011 HUMAN RIGHTS CONFERENCE SHARING MOVED TO FEBRUARY At the February meeting, Commissioner Bigbee will provide information regarding the State's Human Rights Conference which was held in December of 2011. VII. CORRESPONDENCE SHARED • A flyer provided by Council Member Bennett was shared with the Commission regarding a panel discussion on January 31s` entitled "Civil Discourse: Beyond Grid - Lock." • There was an article in the Star Tribune regarding local human rights commissions losing status. Additionall_ y, -Po[iticsiitEdjna�.El.b..) On-Eace ook revealed an article about this issue and then targeted Edina HRRC about being focused too heavily on gay rights. Vlll. COMMISSION MEMBERS' COMMENTS • Commissioner Cashmore shared that there is an aging GLBT population in Hennepin County and that he had attended a focus group on this issue. IX. STAFF COMMENTS There were no comments. Xl. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business on the Commission Agenda, Chair Kingston declared the meeting adjourned at 9:40 PM. Respectfully submitted, Minutes approved by HRRC, February 28, 2012. Susan Howl, Administrative Staff Jessi Kingston, HRRC Chair MINUTES CITY OF EDINA, MINNESOTA PLANNING COMMISSION CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS February 8, 2012 7:00 P.M. I. CALL TO ORDER Acting Chair Carpenter called the meeting of the Edina Planning Commission to order at 7:00 PM. II. ROLL CALL Answering the roll call were Commissioners Scherer, Forrest, Schroeder, Rock, Potts, Platteter, Cherkassky, Fischer, Carpenter. Absent from the roll call were Staunton and Grabiel III. APPROVAL OF MEETING AGENDA Meeting Agenda was approved as submitted. IV. APPROVAL OF CONSENT ITEMS Commissioner Potts moved approval of the January 25, 2012, meeting minutes. Commissioner Scherer seconded the motion. All voted aye; motion carried. V. COMMUNITY COMMENT No comment. Acting Chair Carpenter suggested that the requested Lot Division for 4236 Lynn Avenue be heard at this time. VI. REPORTS /RECOMMENDATIONS 2012.0002.12a Lot Division Carl Nelson /Frank Sidell 4236 Lynn Avenue, Edina, MN Page 1 of 8 r' Planner Presentation Planner Teague informed the Commission that Raun Nelson and Carol & Frank Sidell are requesting to shift the existing lot line that divides their properties at 4236,Lynn Avenue. Co'ntinyig, Teague explained there is no new lot being created with the - request, it is simply a shift in the rear lot lines to sell land to the adjacent property owner..Land owned by Carol & Frank Sidell, would gain additional land to be similar in depth to the lots also owned by Carol & -Frank Sidell, to the north and south. The 4236 Lynn Avenue lot would be smaller in size, -`but- similar in depth to the lots to the north and south. Planner Teague concluded that staff recommends that the City Council approve the Lot Division of 4236 Lynn Avenue and Parcel A as submitted on the proposed lot division date stamped January.30, 2011 subject to the following findings: 1. The existing and proposed lots meet all minimum lot size requirements. 2. The two lots involved in the lot division are larger than most lots within the neighborhood. Approval is also subject to the following conditions: 1. All building activity on either, lot must comply with all minimum zoning ordinance standards. Motion Commissioner Fischer moved to recommend lot division approval based on staff findings and subject to staff conditions. Commissioner Scherer seconded the motion. All voted aye; motion carried. VII. PUBLIC HEARINGS 2011.0011.11A Final Rezoning /PUD FE 70, LLC 6996 France Avenue, Edina, MN Planner Presentation Planner Teague informed the Commission that FE 70, LLC is proposing to tear down the existing gas station at 6996 France Avenue and re -build an 8,260 square foot office /retail building. The Page 2 of 8 building would include a 3,000 square foot retail store (Vitamin Shop) and a 5,260 square foot financial office. To accommodate this proposed redevelopment, the following is requested: ➢ Final Rezoning from PCD -4, Planned Commercial District to PUD, Planned Unit Development; ➢ A Zoning Ordinance Amendment that establishes the PUD, Zoning District; and ➢ Final Development Plan. Planner Teague noted that the City Council approved Preliminary Rezoning from PCD -4, _ Planned Commercial District to PUD, Planned Unit Development, and Preliminary Development plan for this project on December 6, 2011. The footprint of the building and the parking arrangement has not changed from the preliminary approval. Planner Teague concluded that staff recommends that the City Council approve the Final Rezoning from PCD -4, Planned Commercial District to PUD, Planned Unit Development District; adoption of the Ordinance Amending the Zoning Ordinance to establish the PUD Zoning District; and Final Development Plan to construct an 8,260 square foot retail /office building at 6996 France Avenue for FE70, LLC subject to the following findings: 1. The proposed land uses are consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. 2. The proposal is consistent with the approved Preliminary Rezoning and Preliminary Development Plan. 3. The site layout would be an improvement over a site.layout required by standard zoning; the building is brought up to the street, provides front door entries toward the street, includes sidewalks to encourage a more pedestrian friendly environment along the street. 4. The design of the building is of a high quality stone with large windows. The building is consistent with the small scale buildings on this block. 5. The development would incorporate improved landscaping and green space, a decrease in impervious coverage, and an infiltration area. 6. The contaminated soils on the site would be cleaned up. 7. Traffic would be improved in the area with a right -in only access on France Avenue, the elimination of the curb cut nearest the' intersection and narrowing the curb cut further to the west. 8. The proposed project would meet the following goals and policies of the Comprehensive Plan: i. Building Placement and Design. Where appropriate, building facades should form a consistent street wall that helps to define the street and enhance the pedestrian environment. On existing auto - oriented development sites, encourage placement of liner buildings close to the street to encourage pedestrian movement. Page 3of8 Locate prominent buildings to visually define corners and screen parking lots. Locate building, entries and storefronts to face the primary street, in addition to any entries oriented towards parking areas. ■ Encourage storefront design of mixed -use buildings at ground floor level, with Windows and doors 'along at least 50% of the front facade. ■ Encourage or require placement of.surface parking to the rear or side of buildings, rather. than between buildings and the street. b. Movement Patterns. ■ Provide sidewalks along primary streets and connections to adjacent neighborhoods along secondary streets or walkways. ■ Limit driveway, access from primary streets while encouraging access from secon'dary streets. ■ Provide pedestrian: amenities, such as wide sidewalks, street trees, pedestrian- scale lighting, and_,street furnishings (benches, trash receptacles, etc.) ■ A Pedestrian - .Friendly Environment. Improving the auto - oriented design pattern discussed above under "Issues" will call for guidelines that change'the relationship between parking, pedestrian movement and building placement. c. Appropriate Parking Standards. Mixed use developments often produce an internal capture rate. This refers to residents and workers who obtain goods and services from within the development without making additional vehicle trips. Parking ratios for mixed use development should reflect the internal capture rate and the shared parking opportunities this type of development offers. d. Encourage infill /redevelopment opportunities that optimize use of city infrastructure and that complementarea, neighborhood, and /or corridor context and character. - Final approval is also 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 January 6, 2012. • Grading plan date stamped January 6, 2012.1 • Landscaping plan date-stamped January 6, 2012. Building elevations date stamped January 6, 2012. 2) Prior the issuance of a building permit, the following must'be submitted: a. A final landscape plan, subject to staff approval. Additionally, a performance bond, letter -of- credit, or cash deposit must be submitted for one and one -half times the cost amount for completing the required landscaping, screening, or erosion control measures. Page 4of8 1 b. A construction management plan. 3) The property owner is responsible for replacing any required landscaping that dies. 4) Submit a copy of the Nine Mile Creek Watershed District permit. The City may require revisions to the approved plans to meet the district's requirements. 5) Compliance with the conditions required by the chief building official in his memo dated January. 10, 2012. 6) Compliance with the conditions required by the city engineer in his memo dated January February 3, 2012. 7) Compliance with the conditions required by the fire marshal in his memo dated January 28, 2012. 8) The contaminated soils must be cleaned up per the requirements of the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency. 9) Adoption and compliance with the PUD Ordinance for the site. Appearing for the Applicant Sheldon Berg, DJR, Architects. Discussion Commissioner Fischer noted that the building elevations and details presented on the final plan are different from the earlier rendering. (sketch plan). Fischer said that he understands that "things" change between preliminary and final; however, he wants everyone to realize if approved as submitted the building will be different from the plan previously viewed. Applicant Presentation Mr. Berg presented to the Commission an updated and colored rendering of the building. Berg stated.,that the exterior materials would be the same as previously submitted and approved. Berg acknowledged that changes were made to the building. Berg presented to the Commission the materials board and stood for questions. Discussion /Comments Commissioner Schroeder said he observed that the plans as presented do not adequately illustrate site and building lighting. Schroeder said lighting was important especially as it relates to pedestrian movement. Continuing, Schroeder said in his opinion the final plan doesn't present sufficient illumination levels to support active pedestrian movements. Page 5of8 Schroeder also noted that in his opinion the entrance to the building isn't as inviting as it was on the previous rendering. Concluding, Schroeder stated that in his opinion the plans presented do not enhance the pedestrian experience, the building doesn't "address" the street and the changes made between sketch plan review and final are less than desirable. Commissioner Schroder also commented that he didn't see any reference to snow storage on the final plans. Mr. Berg responded that the 5 -foot buffer around the perimeter of the site would be used to accommodate snow storage. Schroeder said he assumes if one parking space was used for snow storage any snow in excess of that single space would be removed from the site. Berg agreed that would have to be the case. Public Comment Acting Chair Carpenter opened the.public hearing for comment; being none Commissioner Scherer moved to close the public hearing. Commissioner Potts seconded the motion. All voted aye; motion carried. Discussion Commissioner Platteter asked Planner Teague if signage was part of the review process. Teague responded that the Planning Department reviews,all sign permits; however sign review isn't part of this process. Continuing, Teague explained the "vitamin" store and office would need to go through the sign permitting process before'signs are erected. Teague noted `that all signs would be required to meet City Code. Commissioner Forrest,said she observed that the final site plan doesn't indicate bike racks, adding that in her opinion bike racks should be included on the plan. 'Continuing, Forrest said she agrees with the comments from Commissioner Fischer that the building elevations presented aren't the same as previously presented, adding she doesn't like the "new" building as well as the "old" building. Forrest said she was still concerned with the internal circulation and parking near the trash enclosure area. Concluding, Forrest noted that this is the City's first PUD and the intent of the PUD process was to ensure by ordinance that what was approved was actually built. Planner Teague responded that he agrees with the comment from CommissionerForrest on bike racks, adding that bike racks are required by Code; that concern would be addressed. Commissioner Fischer asked Commissioners how they felt about the change in the building between sketch plan and final. Commissioner Platteter acknowledged the changes adding in his opinion the changes seem "OK". Continuing, Platteter said he was more concerned moving forward; especially with larger projects and at what point in the process would "changes" trigger coming back before the Commission or Council. He concluded that the changes to the project presented this evening Page 6 of 8 may not be deemed significant; however, he reiterated significant changes need to be reviewed by the Commission and Council before a project receives approval. Planner Teague responded that staff reviews all changes and if those changes are considered significant staff would require the applicant to "amend" the approved plan and appear before the Commission and City Council for approval of those changes. Platteter stated if in the future there are minor or major changes to an approved plan the applicant should be required to list those changes. Teague agreed. Commissioner Fischer asked the applicant the reason behind the but. Iding changes. Mr. Berg explained-that the changes came about because one tenant desired mezzanine space; storefront space was expanded and signage considerations. Acting Chair Carpenter asked if there was further discussion.on the changes.to the building. Commissioner Forrest reiterated she was disappointed in the final plan. She added in her opinion the plans presented seem tenuous. Commissioner Scherer said she also feels the first rendering presented to the Commission was best, adding in her opinion the first design was more sophisticated. Expanding on the comments from Commissioner Forrest, Scherer said lighting needs to be "firmed up ", and the landscaping plan, while it may be substantial, needs more detail; especially on the trees. Mr. Berg responded that the landscaping plan indicates 15 over -story trees and meets Code. With graphics he pointed out the light poles, entrance lighting and lighting on the north side. Planner Teague said that review of all lighting occurs during the building permit and plan review process. The discussion continued on the changes to the building between sketch plan review and final approval. Commissioners considered tabling the request directing the applicant to, return to the Commission with revisions to include.a "current" colored rendering and plans reflecting the concerns expressed on bike racks, landscaping, lighting, circulation and the way the building addresses the street. Commissioners stressed the importance of streetscape and the pedestrian experience. Motion Commissioner Schroeder said that in his opinion the final plan generally conforms to the preliminary plan and moved to recommend that the City Council approve the Final Rezoning from PCD -4, Planned Commercial District to PUD, Planned Unit Development District; adoption of the Ordinance Amending the Zoning Ordinance to establish the PUD Zoning District; and Final Development Plan to construct an 8,260 square foot retail /office building at 6996 France Page 7 of 8 Avenue for FE70, LLC based on, staff findings and conditions outlined in the staff report and subject to the following additional conditions: • Submit a photometric lighting plan that details illumination levels sufficient to support an active pedestrian movement along France Avenue and West 70th Street. • Snow will be removed from the site at the -point where stored snow consumes one parking space; • Submit a revised site plan to indicate the location of the bicycle storage area that complies with City Code. • Submit an internal truck movement circulation plan. That plan would be subject to review by the City Engineer. • Revise the- ,building plans to address the loss of articulation of the pedestrian entries from France & 6st 70th Street. • Submit more definitive color renderings of the proposed building including finishes. The color renderings must be revised to add the changes made to the pedestrian entries off the street. Commissioner Forrest seconded the motion. All voted aye; motion carried. VII. REPORTS /RECOMMENDATIONS None. > VIII. CORRESPONDENCE AND PETITIONS Acting Chair Carpenter acknowledged receipt of Council Connection and Attendance. IX. CHAIR AND COMMISSION MEMBER COMMENTS None. X. STAFF COMMENTS . XI. ADJOURNMENT Commissioner Potts moved for adjournment at 8:20 PM. Commissioner Platteter seconded the motion. All voted. aye; motion carried. ectfully submit5d Page 8 of 8