The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About2012-02-06 COUNCIL MEETINGREVISED AGENDA CITY COUNCIL MEETING CITY OF EDINA, MINNESOTA CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS FEBRUARY 6, 2012 7:00 P.M. I. CALL TO ORDER II. ROLL CALL III. APPROVAL OF MEETING AGENDA IV. ADOPTION OF CONSENT AGENDA All agenda items listed on the consent agenda are considered routine and will be enacted by one motion. There will be no separate discussion of such items unless requested to be removed from the Consent Agenda by a Member of the City Council. In such cases the item will be removed from the Consent Agenda and considered immediately following the adoption of the Consent Agenda. (Favorable rollcall vote of majority of Council Members present to approve.) A. Approval of Minutes — Regular Meeting of January 17, 2012, Work Session of January 17, 2012, and Work Session of January 23, 2012 B. Receive Payment Of Claims As Per: Pre -List Dated 01/19/2012, TOTAL $516,658.64; Pre -List Dated 01/26/2012 TOTAL: $700,131.49, And Pre -List Dated 02/02/2012 TOTAL $2,945,395.69 C. Second Reading - Ordinance No. 2012 -03 Amending Section 905 Open House Parties D. Prosecutor Contract 2012 -2015 E. Resolution No. 2012 -23 Lot Division 5239 Highwood Drive F. Request For Purchase —Job Evaluation /Classification Consultant Project G. Request For Purchase —Millwork Supply— Edina Liquor York Remodel H. Request For Purchase — Resilient Flooring And Carpeting — Edina Liquor York Remodel I. Request For Purchase — Electrical Work — Edina Liquor York Remodel J. Temporary On -Sale 3.2 Beer License Our Lady of Grace Church K. Request For Purchase — Street Sweeper L. Request For Purchase — Survey Equipment M. Resolution No. 2012 -24 Correcting Resolution No. 2010 -58 — West 58th Street Bikeway N. First Reading Ordinance No. 2012 -04 Amending Section 1230.06 Tobacco Use In City Parks 0. Resolution No. 2012 -25 Changing Public Hearing Date To March 6, 2012 Tracy Avenue Roadway Reconstruction BA -368 k Agenda/Edina City Council February 6, 2012 Page 2 P. Edina Emerald Energy Program (EEEP) V. SPECIAL RECOGNITIONS AND PRESENTATIONS VI. PUBLIC HEARINGS During "Public Hearings, the Mayor will ask for public` testimony after City staff members make their presentations. ,If you wish to testify on the topic, you are welcome: to do so as long as your testimony. is _ relevant to the discussion. To ensure fairness to all speakers. and `to,, allow the efficient conduct of a public hearing, speakers must observe the following guidelines: • Individuals must limit their testimony to three minutes. The Mayor may modify times, as deemed necessary. • Try not to repeat remarks or points of view made by prior speakers and limit testimony to the matter under consideration. • In order to. maintain a respectful environment for all those 'in attendance, the use of signs', clapping, cheering or booing or any other form of verbal or nonverbal communication is not allowed. A. PUBLIC HEARING — Preliminary Plat And Variances, Refined LLC, 6109 Oaklawn Avenue, Resolution No. 2012 -27 (Favorable majority vote of Council Members present to approve) B. PUBLIC HEARING - Site Plan, Primrose School of Edina, Minnesota /Children's Design Group, 7401 Metro Boulevard, Resolution No. 2012 -28 (Favorable majority vote of Council Members present to approve) VII. COMMUNITY COMMENT During "Community Comment," the City Council will invite residents to share new issues or concerns that haven't been considered in the past 30 days by the Council or which aren't slated for future consideration. Individuals must limit their comments to three minutes. The Mayor may limit • the number of 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 -22 Accepting Various Donations B. Appointments to Various Boards, Commissions and Committees C. Energy Improvement — Grandview Tire And Auto, 5415 West 70th Street, Resolution No. 2012 - 26 a Agenda/Edina City Council February 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 Mon Feb 6 Joint Work Session - HRRC Mon Feb 6 Regular Meeting Tues Feb 7 PRECINCT CAUCUSES Mon Feb 20 PRESIDENTS DAY HOLIDAY OBSERVED — City Hall Closed Tues Feb 21 Work Session — HRA Tues Feb 21 Joint Work Session - EEC Tues Feb 21 Regular Meeting Tues Feb 28 Joint Work Session With Pln Comm & GrandView Str Com. Tues Mar 6 Work Session - Redistricting Tues Mar 6 Regular Meeting Mon Mar 19 Annual Boards & Commissions Dinner Meeting Tues Mar 20 Work Session — Sports Dome Report Tues Mar 20 Regular Meeting Tues Apr 3 Work Session — Tues Apr 3 Regular Meeting Tues Apr 17 Work Session — TDB Tues Apr 17 Regular Meeting Mon Apr 23 Annual Volunteer Reception ?s May 1 Work Session —TDB ues May 1 Regular Meeting Tues May 14 Work Session — TDB Tues 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 4:30 P.M. COMMUNITY ROOM 5:30 P.M. COMMUNITY ROOM 7:00 P.M. COUNCIL CHAMBERS 5:30 P.M. FIRESIDE RM — SENIOR CENTER 5:30 P.M. COMMUNITY ROOM 7:00 P.M. COUNCIL CHAMBERS 5:00 P.M. HUGHES PV. CENTENNIAL LAKES 5:00 P.M. COMMUNITY ROOM 7:00 P.M. COUNCIL CHAMBERS 5:30 P.M. COMMUNITY ROOM 7:00 P.M. COUNCIL CHAMBERS 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 MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE EDINA CITY COUNCIL HELD AT CITY HALL JANUARY 17, 2012 7:07 P.M. CALL TO ORDER Mayor Hovland called the meeting to order at 7:07 p.m. 11. ROLLCALL Answering rollcall were Members Bennett, Brindle, Sprague, Swenson and Mayor Hovland. 111. 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 Bennett made a motion, seconded by Member Swenson, approving the consent agenda as revised to remove Items IV.I., Request to Purchase — Ice Resurfacer — Braemar Ice Arena; and, IV. L., Engineering Services for Bike Boulevard Improvement, as follows: IV.A. Approve regular and work session meeting minutes of January 3, 2012, work session of January 4 -5, 2012, and work session of January 9, 2012. IV.B. Receive payment of the following claims as shown in detail on the Check Register dated January 5, 2012, and consisting of 31 pages; General Fund $138,731.15; Communications Fund $11.54; Working Capital Fund $29,815.63; Art Center Fund $6,694.34; Golf Dome Fund $3,095.61; Aquatic Center Fund $57.26; Golf Course Fund $11,631.46; Ice Arena Fund $145.00; Edinborough /Centennial Lakes Fund $18,607.85; Edinborough Park Fund $1,584.00; Centennial Lakes Park Fund $1,947.54; Liquor Fund $248,347.79; Utility Fund $851,313.09; Storm Sewer Fund $909.34; PSTF Agency Fund $4,544.52; TOTAL $1,317,436.12 and for approval of payment of claims dated January 12, 2012, and consisting of 29 pages; General Fund $882,319.93; Communications Fund $1,022.82; Police Special Revenue $182.79; Working Capital Fund $55,004.71; Equipment Replacement Fund $18,895.50; Construction Fund $6,112.65; Art Center Fund $3,813.59; Golf Dome Fund $3,206.00; Aquatic Center Fund $8,344.78; Golf Course Fund $9,015.22; Ice Arena Fund $31,473.91; Edinborough /Centennial Lakes Fund $8,615.77; Edinborough Park Fund $450.00; Centennial Lakes Park Fund $1,263.43; Liquor Fund $170,801.26; Utility Fund $398,166.87; Storm Sewer Fund $8,450.87; PSTF Agency Fund $408.33; Payroll Fund $5,101.39; TOTAL $1.612.649.82. IV.C. Adopt Resolution No. 2012 -16 approving grant with Minnesota Bureau of Criminal Apprehension, Minnesota Financial Crimes Task Force for 2012. IV.D. Request to Purchase, two 2012 GMC Sierra 1500 AWD Ext Cab SLE, Police Department, awarding the bid to the recommended low bidder, Nelson Auto Center at $49,337.26. IV.E. Request to Purchase, one 2013 Ford Police Interceptor Sedan, Police Department, awarding the bid to the recommended low bidder, Nelson Auto Center at $26,527.61. IV.F. Request to Purchase, one 2012 Ford Explorer 4WD, Police Department, awarding the bid to the recommended low bidder, Midway Ford at $24,459.40. IV.G. Request to Purchase, one 2012 Chevrolet Traverse AWD, Police Department, awarding the bid to the recommended low bidder, Thane Hawkins Polar Chevrolet at $24,525.35. IV.H. Request to Purchase, two LUCAS Chest Compression Devices, Fire Department, awarding the bid to the recommended low bidder, Physio Control at $26,373.50. IV 1 Request te- Parrhase — Re4ies-pbcer.— Rrap a.'c° Arena IV.J. Adopt Resolution 2012 -20 Requesting MnDOT funding for Tracy Avenue and TH62 ramp intersections. Page 1 Minutes /Edina City Council /January 17, 2012 IVX Adopt Resolution 2012 -21 requesting Mn /DOT funding for France Avenue and TH62 ramp intersections. IV.M. Approve First Reading — Ordinance No. 2012 -03 amending Section 905 Open House Parties. IV.N. Adopt Resolution No.. 2012 -22 approving Agreement No. 00354 Minnesota Department of Transportation — Bike Boulevard Project. Rollcall: Ayes: Bennett, Brindle, Sprague, Swenson, Hovland Motion carried. ITEMS REMOVED FROM THE CONSENT AGENDA IV.1. REQUEST TO PURCHASE— ICE RESURFACER — BRAEMAR ICE ARENA — APPROVED Manager Neal indicated there were three electric Zamboni machines at Braemar and life expectancy was 20 years. Member Sprague made a motion, seconded by Member Swenson, awarding contract for ice resurfaces, Braemar Ice Arena, to the recommended low bidder, Frank J. Zamboni & Company, Inc. at $108,111.77. Ayes: Bennett, Brindle, Sprague, Swenson, Hovland Motion carried. IV.L. ENGINEERING SERVICES FOR BIKE BOULEVARD IMPROVEMENT— APPROVED Public Works Director /City Engineer Houle explained the current project would not include geometric changes where the bicycle path passes under Highway 62. Staff would research options for that area, but additional funding would be needed to change the geometric design of that area. Member Sprague made a motion, seconded by Member Bennett, authorizing the City Manager to approve the proposal for engineering services for Bike Boulevard improvement. Ayes: Bennett, Brindle, Sprague, Swenson, Hovland Motion carried. Mr. Houle reported the City had received a $250,000 Transit for Livable Communities grant and described the alignment of the bicycle lane that would be constructed. V. SPECIAL RECOGNITIONS AND PRESENTATIONS None. VI. PUBLIC HEARINGS HELD— Affidavits of Notice presented and ordered placed on file. VI.A. COUNTRYSIDE NEIGHBORHOOD ROADWAY IMPROVEMENT NO. BA -385 — RESOLUTION NO. 2012 -I8 ADOPTED Assistant Engineer Sullivan provided an explanation of how the Engineering Department prioritized neighborhood reconstruction projects. He answered questions of the Council, explaining the Storm Sewer Comprehensive Plan was used to identify deficiencies so repairs could be integrated into the projects. It was noted the Pavement Condition Index (PCI) was a proven program to identify substrata deterioration based on pavement condition. Mr. Sullivan summarized the Countryside Neighborhood roadway improvement that had been initiated by the City. He identified the project area of 120 149 homes, described existing conditions, and the proposed improvements to add new concrete curb and gutter, tighten oversized intersections, and install sidewalks as recommended by the Edina Transportation Commission (ETC). He advised that during neighborhood informational meetings, residents did not respond favorably to the installation of sidewalks but were not aware of the ETC's recommendation. The anticipated cost at preliminary design to add sidewalks was $1,700 per Residential Equivalent Unit (REU). Page 2 of Minutes /Edina City Council /January 17, 2012 Mr. Sullivan presented the proposed utility improvements including installation of sump drain pipe at the curb line to address groundwater issues. The preliminary project cost was estimated at $2,833,725 that included $1,433,725 for street improvements and $1,400,000, for City -owned utility repairs, which would be funded from respective utility funds. The City would pay $1,400,000 and benefitting properties would be assessed $1,433,725. , and six pFepeFties weuld be assessed at third R,ri I at c4 120 Based on the City's Special Assessment Policy, there would be 116 REUs to be assessed at $12,360 per REU. 114 properties would be assessed at one REU each and six properties would be assessed at 1/3 REU each, or $4,120 Mr. Sullivan presented the project schedule. Staff recommended authorization to complete plans and specifications and take bids if the Council found this project to be necessary, cost - effective, and feasible. The Council discussed the project and asked questions of Mr. Sullivan who explained the 1%: -inch copper water seFyeee main was common in the 1960 -70's; however, it was not adequate for fire suppression seFyicce and would be upgraded to a six -inch main. The water service to the 120 4-1-9 REUs would be increased from a %- inch copper service pipe to a one -inch copper service pipe. Mr. Sullivan stated staff would provide residents with a list of plumbing contractors, which would also be made available on the City's website. Mr. Sullivan addressed locations of drainage problems and described intended improvements to resolve those issues. The City would fund storm sewer improvements from the Storm Sewer Fund, and the resident would be responsible to make the sump pump drain connection to the curb -side, if desired. He noted that reducing pavement surface at intersections would minimize runoff, and barrier style curb and gutter would extend the pavement life by addressing runoff and protecting pavement edges. Mr. Sullivan stated this project included more utility work than most projects. He noted the assessment to benefiting properties was higher because the lots were larger, creating a lower density. The Council asked why residents were not surveyed about curb and gutter. Mr. Sullivan stated the question of curb and gutter used to be included on the resident survey, and the answer was that the vast majority did not want it. In 2005, the Council decided to fund curb and gutter from the Storm Sewer Fund and to change calculation of REU from a front footage basis to a per lot basis. Staff would still recommend including curb and gutter even though residents might not support it. It was noted there had been several past projects where residents opposed sue--,ntai3le- concrete curb and gutter and then later indicated that was a mistake due to issues with snow plowing and cars parking on their yard area. Mr. Sullivan stated staff would coordinate with residents to address existing yard elevations to create a smooth transition from the curb. If the grades for a low area could not be addressed, there was opportunity to install sump pump drain tile. The Council asked staff to assure road widths and turning radii were taken into account to assure safety if the walkway was within the street. The Council discussed the 2009 Safe Routes to School Study, noting it was a speed zone study for collector streets and did not include recommendations about future sidewalk and pedestrian facilities. Mr. Sullivan displayed a map of the neighborhood that identified the elementary school walking shed. Mr. Houle indicated the City does not have a Comprehensive Safe Routes to School Plan at this time, but it was on staff's to -do list, along with looking at the Safe Routes To School, updating the Sidewalk Plan and addressing alternate means of funding. The Council acknowledged residents were not made aware of the sidewalk component at the September and October open houses since the ETC did not make its recommendation until November 17, 2011 IaAUa.., 9f 2914. With regard to storm drainage, Mr. Sullivan stated the goal was to capture and redirect water that drained downGrest Crescent Lane to alleviate that problem. The intention was to make improvements only as necessary, not overbuild, and keep costs down to an absolute minimum. Mr. Sullivan addressed improvement funding, noting about 20% of the property taxes come to the City so not many projects could be completed if the projects were not assessed to the benefiting property. Page 3 Minutes /Edina City Council /January 17, 2012 Mr. Sullivan explained that during the open houses, residents' concerns were addressed relating to trees, irrigation systems, and pet containment. He commented on the City's 20/20 vision to have a sound infrastructure for recreation and business, assure safety, and maintain a high level of pride in the community. Mr. Neal indicated that rating agencies look at whether the City had sound public infrastructure for purposes of bonding or borrowing money. Being able to demonstrate a consistent record of addressing infrastructure in an orderly and timely manner was a positive in their determination. Mr. Neal stated Edina had an AAA bond rating adding that fewer than five percent of cities in the United States had such a rating with Moody's and Standards and Poors. Mayor Hovland opened the public hearing at 8:09 p.m. Public Testimony Rodger Peissig, 6116 Westridge Boulevard, addressed the Council. Itai Sher, 6112 Crescent Drive, addressed the Council. Robert Reed, 6223 Westridge Boulevard, addressed the Council. Tim McNamara, 6201 Crescent Drive, addressed the Council. Member Swenson made a motion, seconded by Member Sprague, to close the public hearing. Ayes: Bennett, Brindle, Sprague, Swenson, Hovland Motion carried. The Council and Mr. Sullivan addressed issues raised during public testimony. With regard to cost variability, Mr. Houle explained the open house notices included an estimated number prior to topographic surveys or rough cost estimates. Staff had found the estimates quoted were not realistic, so future notices would contain costs and assessments on projects completed during the past five years. Mr. Houle noted with the current competitive bid environment, recent bids had been 10 -20% lower than staff's estimates. It was noted if the project bid comes in .nueh hi ^h^F than 10% or more above staff's estimates, it would be returned to the Council with a recommendation to not award the project. Mr. Houle stated if the project was approved, the final assessment hearing would be held and the first payment made due on the spring tax bill of 2014. This neighborhood received its first project notice in 2010. Mr. Houle indicated staff would do a better job of marketing the projects and was considering whether to start the process three years prior instead of two years prior. In addition, utility companies were notified at the beginning of the process because there was a five -year moratorium against cutting into newly- reconstructed streets. In this case, the gas company was upgrading its lines. The Council acknowledged the concern expressed about road impact caused by garbage trucks and indicated the Energy and Environment Commission was currently studying that issue. The Council reviewed past project costs compared to staff's estimates, noting last year's assessments averaged 30% below. It was noted the Council had previously discussed the merits of curb and gutter and determined it was best engineering practices to dictate e-uRt °h'^ curb and gutter. The Council discussed its vision to provide safe walkable /bikable opportunities and agreed with the need to have a policy in place that also addressed safe routes to schools, walking routes, and funding mechanisms. It was also agreed the sidewalk decision for this project would be delayed to allow time for resident notification, input, and public hearing and additional study including the option of creating a Sidewalk Utility Fund. Member Swenson introduced and moved adoption of Resolution No. 2012 -18, receiving feasibility study and Page 4 Minutes /Edina City Council /January 17, 2012 ordering improvement for Countryside Neighborhood Roadway Improvement No. BA -385 as recommended by Engineering to not include the sidewalk. Member Bennett seconded the motion. Rollcall: Ayes: Bennett, Brindle, Sprague, Swenson, Hovland Motion carried. VI.B. RICHMOND HILLS PARK NEIGHBORHOOD ROADWAY IMPROVEMENT NO. BA -388 —RESOLUTION NO. 2012 -19 ADOPTED Toby Muse, Short, Elliot Hendrickson (SHE), summarized the West 40—&tFeet Richmond Hills Park reconstruction improvement that had been initiated by the City. He identified the project area, described existing conditions, and the proposed improvement to streets and utilities. Several intersections would be tightened to eliminate potential encroachment onto private property, slow speed of traffic, and make turning movements more deliberate. The project proposed barrier concrete curb and gutter on all streets along with concrete driveway aprons, but sidewalks were not proposed. Mr. Muse indicated sump pump drain tile would be installed at the curb to address ground water flow issues. If the project was approved, residents would receive a list of contractors and instructions about how to approach private contractors to do sanitary sewer service work. Mr. Muse stated the preliminary project cost was estimated at $6,583,000, with the City paying $3,710,000, and benefitting properties assessed $2,873,000, for street reconstruction and sanitary sewer service pipe between the trunk pipe and right -of -way line. There would be "' Resid -e-M-W Equivalent Units (REUs) at a cost of $16,800 /REU including replacement of the sanitary sewer pipe and $13,400 /REU if the resident had already replaced the sanitary sewer pipe. Mr. Muse presented the project schedule. Staff recommended authorization to complete plans and specifications and take bids if the Council found this project to be necessary, cost - effective, and feasible. Paul Pasko, SEH, stated as of 2009 tl+--neighborhood streets had a Pavement Condition Index (PCI) of 25 and in 2012 a PCI of 10. In 2009, Normandale Court had a PCI of 19, and in 2012 a PCI of 9. He displayed a map of the subject neighborhood and identified the location of duplex properties that were considered as a single REU because the duplex shared a single driveway and property identification number as well as sanitary sewer and water service. With regard to the high estimated assessments, Mr. Houle noted the costs were similar to the per lot assessments in the Minnehaha Woods project, and utility replacement was needed with this project due to the high number of breakages. He explained the options to pay the assessment including full or partial payment by November 30, 2013, or collection through property taxes with the first payment due the spring of 2014. He also explained the deferral options for seniors or property owners with limited income. Mayor Hovland opened the public hearing at 9:05 p.m. Public Testimony K.K. Strand, 5521 Code Avenue, addressed the Council. Gerard Shannon, 5033 Kent Avenue, addressed the Council. Jane Stresnak, 5400 Richmond Lane, addressed the Council. Martha Dover, 5113 Richmond Drive, addressed the Council. Shawn Buss, 5024 Kent Avenue, addressed the Council. Page 5 Minutes /Edina City Council /January 17, 2012 Yuriy Malinin, 5033 Richmond Drive, addressed the Council. Margaret Huber, 5025 Kent Avenue, addressed the Council. Doug Erickson, 2200 West 66th Street, #204, Richfield, addressed the Council. Alissa Movern, 5005 West 56th Street, addressed the Council. Margaret Dahl, 5009 West 56th Street, addressed the Council. Susan Arenson, 5103 Windsor Lane, addressed the Council. Lucinda Winter, 5532 Code Avenue, addressed the Council. Dick Stresnak, 5400 Richmond Lane, addressed the Council. Dina Scholl, 5032 Windsor Lane, addressed the Council. Elizabeth Shannon, 5033 Kent Avenue, addressed the Council. Donald Reading, 5017 Kent Avenue, addressed the Council. Laura Giertsen, 5029 Yvonne Terrace, addressed the Council. Keith Thompson, 5017 Richmond Drive, addressed the Council. Karin Marshall, 5524 Richmond Drive, addressed the Council. Jack Heffernan, 5105 Windsor Avenue, addressed the Council. Chris Rofidal, 5037 West 56th Street, addressed the Council. Member Brindle made a motion, seconded by Member Sprague, to close the public hearing. Ayes: Bennett, Brindle, Sprague, Swenson, Hovland Motion carried. The Council and staff addressed the issues raised during public testimony. It was noted that all of the technical information and resident input was provided to the Council the Friday before the meeting. The Council discussed the cost split between the City and assessments to residents and that this project proposed more utility replacement than normal, but Chapter 429 would not allow the property to be assessed for more than the benefit to the property. Mr. Houle reviewed the Council's 2005 decision to reformulate the assessment policy to fund curb and gutter costs, usually 25% of the project total, and special assess 100% of roadway costs. A consulting firm had been hired to conduct an analysis, and it was determined such an assessment would stand. Mr. Houle explained that a thin overlay was had been placed on Richmond Lane to extend the life expectancy. He explained the process for recycling asphalt, which was part of the bid and resulted in a cost savings. Mr. Pasko described the construction process for sewer pipe, which would be cured in place pipe lining, not a processes using fracking, so the sewer service pipe would not be damaged. He noted the sewer service pipes were about the same age as the trunk pipe, which had defects. Thus, it was reasonable to assume the sanitary Page 6 Minutes /Edina City Council /January 17, 2012 sewer service pipes were in the same poor condition. This project would only replace the sanitary sewer service pipe from the property line to the trunk line. Residents could make the determination whether to replace the pipe from the right -of -way line to the house. Mr. Pasko described the day -to -day communication that would occur during the project and access provided to homes. In addition, residents with mobility issues would be identified and assured access. The Council acknowledged toe .residents' concerns expressed that the proposed assessment of $17,000 would equal $140 per month for ten years, considered by many residents to be a financial hardship. The Council found residents had raised compelling issues to consider a longer assessment term, and support was expressed to revisit the financial model. Mr. Neal stated staff would look at that option. He explained the City sells revenue bonds, secured by the special assessment levied, and 2% was added to the net interest rate received to cover the City's processing and financing costs. In 2012, the assessment interest was 4.3 %. With regard to sump pumps, Mr. Houle explained that per Code, the only time the City required connection was when it discharged to a public right -of -way. He also explained how this project area was determined and why it would not reduce assessment to extend the construction limits. This project had been on the calendar for 2017 but was being considered in 2012 because it was reprioritized due to pavement deterioration. Mr. Pasko reviewed the process used to estimate costs. Mr. Houle stated the City typically does three to four projects each year and charged for engineering services whether conducted in -house or by the City. S€#. Mr. Houle addressed the request for additional street lighting, noting ornamental lighting would add cost to the project. Mr. Houle assured the Council staff would look at intersections to assure each was adequately lit by cobra -head fixtures with cutoff lights and make adjustments, as needed. This would not add to assessment costs. He noted the ETC had recommended a crosswalk at Kent Avenue and Warwick Place; however, that location would not meet crosswalk warrants. Stamped crosswalks were proposed along the frontage road and staff looked to narrow roadways and intersections in all projects to reduce hard surface which often resulted in traffic calming. Mr. Houle indicated a grit chamber prior to Melody Lake would be installed as part of the storm sewer system. Mr. Houle explained the City hired an engineering firm to evaluate one -third of the City's pavements each year. That data was placed into a computer program to determine the PCI. Sewer mains were videotaped so the condition could be analyzed to determine if there had been cracking or root intrusion. The Council discussed the need to assure residents received accurate information relating to their specific project and had a realistic expectation. Mr. Houle stated future open house notices would not include an estimated assessment but, instead, include examples of past project costs and assessments. To keep residents informed, the City's website contained the ten -year CIP and map for street projects as well as a video on roadway reconstruction. During a project, property owners without internet access received a mailed copy of the weekly City Extra. The Council acknowledged that notice to residents had contained inconsistencies, lack of detail, and boiler -plate estimates instead of estimates relevant to resident's specific project. In the case of newly - purchased homes, it was explained that a title search would not discover the assessment until it became pending, once approved by the Council. However, property owners received notice two years in advance, and that information was required, under State law, to be disclosed on the purchase agreement. The Council discussed whether to consider a longer term assessment. It was noted that during a past project a longer term was considered, but the Council decided the shorter payment period was preferred given interest rates. Citizen's the (;9 RGw1'S PAR9*dPrafiew. A request was made that the City engage the Citizen's League this year to conduct budget workshops that would study the issue of special assessments and evaluate alternatives. Member Swenson introduced and moved adoption of Resolution No. 2012 -19, receiving feasibility study and ordering improvement for Richmond Hills Park Neighborhood Roadway Improvement No BA -388, and directing staff to investigate whether a 15 -year term was appropriate. Member Sprague seconded the motion. Page 7 Minutes /Edina City Council /January 17, 2012 Rollcall: Ayes: Bennett, Brindle, Sprague, Swenson, Hovland Motion carried. VII. COMMUNITY COMMENT Jacqueline Whitbeck, 6128 Brookview Avenue, stated support for a moratorium on subdividing to create a 50- foot lot or building on a 50 -foot lot. VIII. REPORTS/ RECOMMENDATIONS VIII.A. RESOLUTION NO. 2012-17 ADOPTED — ACCEPTING VARIOUS DONATIONS Mayor Hovland explained that in order to comply with State Statutes; all donations to the City must be adopted by Resolution and approved by four favorable votes of the Council accepting the donations. Member Swenson introduced and moved adoption of Resolution No. 2012 -17 accepting various donations. Member Bennett seconded the motion. Rollcall: Ayes: Bennett, Brindle, Sprague, Swenson, Hovland Motion carried. VIII.B. AWARD OF CONTRACT— WATER METER REPLACEMENT PROJECT CONTRACT NO. PIN 12 -1 Mr. Houle presented staffs recommendation to replace the City's 14,000 water meters since the equipment was no longer supported by the vendor, and the bandwidth license would expire in January of 2013. In addition, starting in 2014, any modification to a meter had to meet the Safe Drinking Water Lead Free Act. The CIP appropriated $1.2 million for this replacement, and the low qualified bid was at $3.6 million. Mr. Houle recommended delaying Water Treatment Plant #5 from 2013 to 2015 to provide funding and undertaking additional study on the need for Water Treatment Plant #5. The Council asked questions of the staff related to the need for battery and equipment replacement and how to assure a new system would not have those issues. Utilities Coordinator Goergen explained the original system was installed in 1996 -1997, and the issue was the reading system and 10 -year battery life. The third party vendor and distributor's relationship fractured, so the equipment was no longer supported or warranted. He indicated the equipment, when purchased, was a top -of -the line system and performed as expected but had now started to fail at a catastrophic level. Staff could no longer collect meter reads in an acceptable timeframe, and many man hours were being spent to process utility bills. Mr. Houle stated the bid specifications were for a 20 -year system upgradable to a better system. Utility Engineer Struve indicated the batteries also had a 20 -year warranty and allowed field replacement. Member Brindle made a motion, seconded by Member Sprague, awarding contract, Water Meter Replacement Project No. PW12 -1, to the recommended low bidder, Ferguson Waterworks, at $3,617,504.29. Ayes: Bennett, Brindle, Sprague, Swenson, Hovland Motion carried. IX. CORRESPONDENCE AND PETITIONS — Mayor Hovland acknowledged the Council's receipt of various correspondence. IX.A. VALLEY VIEW ROAD AND SALLY LANE TREE DELIMBING — MOVED TO MEDIATION Attorney Knutson recommended the City enter mediation with the property owner to resolve the conflict over delimbing trees to create safe sight site distances. Member Swenson made a motion, seconded by Member Bennett, directing Attorney Knutson to enter nonbinding mediation regarding the Council's order to delimb conifer trees at Valley View Road and Sally Lane to a height of eight feet and if not satisfied to seek binding arbitration or declaratory judgment action. Ayes: Bennett, Brindle, Sprague, Swenson, Hovland Motion carried. X. MAYOR AND COUNCIL COMMENTS — Received Page 8 5 Minutes /Edina City Council /January 17, 2012 XI. MANAGER'S COMMENTS — Received XI.A. RECYCLING CONTRACT — REFERRED TO THE ENERGY AND ENVIRONMENT COMMISSION Member Bennett made a motion, seconded by Member Sprague, directing the Energy and Environment Commission to move forward with a multilateral RFP process for the City's recycling contract. Ayes: Bennett, Brindle, Sprague, Swenson, Hovland Motion carried. XII. - ADJOURNMENT There being no further business on the Council Agenda, Mayor Hovland declared the meeting adjourned at 11:54 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Minutes approved by Edina City Council, February 6, 2012. Video Copy of the January 17, 2012, meeting available. Page 9 Debra A. Mangen, City Clerk James B. Hovland, Mayor MINUTES OF THE IGIN WORK SESSION OF THE EDINA CITY COUNCIL HELD AT CITY HALL JANUARY 17, 2012 5:35 P.M. Mayor Hovland called the meeting to order at 5:35 p.m. in the Community Room of City Hall. Answering rollcall were Members Brindle, Sprague, Swenson and Mayor Hovland. Member Bennett entered the meeting at 5:37 p.m. Also attending the meeting were: Floyd Grabiel, Planning Commission Chair; Jessica Kingston, Human Rights and Relations Commission Chair; Mary Jo Kingston, Edina Community Health Committee Chair; Diane Plunkett Latham, Energy and Environment Commission Chair; Robert Mayer, Human Rights and Relations Commission; Bill McCabe, Art Center Board Chair; and Joel Stegner, Heritage Preservation Board Chair. Staff attending the meeting: Jennifer Bennerotte, Communications & Marketing Director; Susan Howl, Administrative Assistant; Karen Kurt, Assistant City Manager; Debra Mangen, City Clerk; and Scott Neal, City Manager. Mayor Hovland explained the purpose of the meeting was to discuss issues relative to the various advisory boards, commission and committees. Assistant City Manager Kurt noted several areas were being worked on relative to the City's various advisory boards, commissions and committees. Ms. Kurt stated a document called Basic By -Laws was originally developed by staff then worked on by a group called the Board and Commission Panel (B &C Panel) that was comprised of members from several boards and commissions. Ms. Kurt led a review of the draft Basic By -laws during which the Council and board and commission members offered their suggestions and points of view on the draft. The suggestions will be incorporated into the draft By -Laws. Other topics of discussion included: • Attendance Policy — frustration has been expressed by many members of boards and commissions with the existing policy because of the negative impact cancelled meetings has on the overall percentage of attendance. Consensus was that beginning with January of 2012 cancelled meetings would be counted as if all members were in attendance. • Board and Commission communication to Council. While it was noted that sometimes the draft version of minutes was forwarded to the City Council, the B &C Panel also felt having a more formal device for communicating with the Council would be helpful. Following review of a template the Edina Transportation Commission has been using, it was directed to request all boards and commissions to use the template when communicating recommendations to the Council. • Slight modifications were considered and approved to the schedule of annual appointments and reappointments. Beginning with 2012, the following schedule will be followed: o December — City Clerk will identify those members reaching term limits and prepare thank you letters for the Mayor's signatures Page 1 Minutes /Edina City Council Work Session /January 17, 2012 o December — City Clerk will send inquiries to those members eligible for reappointment with replies due i,n December. • Late December /early January — Attendance will be reviewed • January —Council will make reappointments • January — List of vacancies developed, interview dates set, applications sought • February — Interviews of applicants take place • February — Following interviews, appointment of new board and commission: members made by Council • March 1— New members seated on various advisory boards and commissions. The Council discussed their desire for advisory boards and commissions to develop annual, work plans. The work , plans will be communicated to the. Council via an executive session with the Council with the Chairs of all Boards and Commissions. It was suggested that the work plans be developed and in place in time to affect the development of the City's Operating Budget. Staff was directed to gather input from the B &C Panel regarding work plans and report findings to the Council. Manager Neal will work on synchronizing the development of work plans to coincide with development of the City's Operating Budget. The Council also indicated they would like to continue the�praetice "draft excerpts" from minutes accompanying items coming before the Council for action along with the board or commission's report. There was also a brief, discussion of the working groups, their work and composition. Mayor Hovland declared the meeting adjourned at 6:46 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Debra A. Mangen, City Clerk Minutes approved by Edina City Council, February 6, 2012. James.B. Hovland, Mayor Page 2 MINUTES OF THE WORK SESSION OF THE EDINA CITY COUNCIL HELD AT CITY HALL JANUARY 23, 2012 5:30 P.M. Mayor Hovland called the meeting to order at 5:30 p.m. in the Mayor's Conference Room of City Hall. Answering rollcall were Members Bennett, Brindle, Sprague, Swenson and Mayor Hovland. Also attending when persons were being interviewed for their respective boards or commissions were: Diane Plunkett Latham, Energy and Environment Commission Chair; Jennifer Janovy, Edina Transportation Commission Chair; Bill McCabe, Art Center Board Chair; and Jessica Kingston, Human Rights and Relations Commission Chair. Debra Mangen, City Clerk was also in attendance. Mayor Hovland stated the purpose of the meeting was to interview applicants for appointment to the various City Council Advisory Boards, Committees and Commissions. The following candidates for appointment were interviewed: Marsha Buchok, Scott Busyn, Andy Porter, Peter Simpson, Jan Wagner, Steven Suckow, Colin Nelson, Adnan Qureshi. Following the interviews, the Council deliberated briefly. There being no further business, Mayor Hovland adjourned the meeting at 8:15 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Minutes approved by Edina City Council, February 6, 2012 Debra A. Mangen, City Clerk James B. Hovland, Mayor R55CKREG LOG20000 CITY OF EDINA 1/18/2012 8:10:07 Council Check Register Page - 1 1/13/2012 - 1/19/2012 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit 355437 1/1312012 100144 BUREAU OF CRIMINAL APPREHENSIO 570.00 BACKGROUND CHECKS 279570 011212 1550.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES CENTRAL SERVICES GENERAL 570.00 355479 111912012 101833 A.T.O.M. 120.00 TRAINING - KENNA DICK 279515 39433905 1400.6104 CONFERENCES & SCHOOLS POLICE DEPT. GENERAL 120.00 355480 1119/2012 101833 A.T.O.M. 200.00 MEMBERSHIP 279516 2012 1400.6104 CONFERENCES & SCHOOLS POLICE DEPT. GENERAL 200.00 355481 1H912012 100613 AAA 1,440.00 LICENSE TAB RENEWALS 279410 010912 1553.6260 LICENSES & PERMITS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 960.60 T.E. PLATES FOR 47 -224 279411 011012 1553.6260 LICENSES 8 PERMITS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 2,400.60 365482 111912012 101971 ABLE HOSE & RUBBER INC. 154.67 HOSE, CLAMP 00001411 279534 1- 836753 5923.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES COLLECTION SYSTEMS_ 154.67 355483 111912012 103173 ACCOUNTEMPS 690.45 UB TEMP 279717 34685011 5910.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES GENERAL (BILLING) 690.45 355484 IM912012 102971 ACE ICE COMPANY 69.20 279658 0816206 5842.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX YORK SELLING 58.00. 279659 0816203 5862.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX VERNON SELLING 79.60 279660 0816204 5622.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX 50TH ST SELLING 206.80 355485 1119/2012 105571 ADVANTAGE PAPER 714.25 CUPS, TISSUE 279535 442272 1628.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES SENIOR CITIZENS 714.25 355486 1119/2012 105991 AL'S COFFEE COMPANY 194.45 COFFEE 279469 93730 1628.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES SENIOR CITIZENS 176.95 COFFEE 279718 93785 5730.5510 COST OF GOODS SOLD EDINBOROUGH CONCESSIONS 371.40 355487 111912012 100058 ALLIED WASTE SERVICES #894 - 38,820.60 RECYCLING 279381 2745415 5952.6183 RECYCLING CHARGES RECYCLING R55CKREG LOG20000 CITY OF EDINA Council Check Register 1/13/2012 - 1/19/2012 1/18/2012 8:10:07 Page - 2 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No SubledgerAccount Description Business Unit 355492 1119/2012 38,820.60 102172 APPERrS FOODSERVICE 355488 1119/2012 461.52 103357 ALPHA VIDEO & AUDIO INC. 279719 1676184 5730.5510 COST OF GOODS SOLD 1,640.53 VIDEO BULLETIN BOARD 00004004 279382 SYSIW11180 2210.6215 EQUIPMENT. MAINTENANCE COMMUNICATIONS 8,432.47 VIDEO BULLETIN BOARD 00004004 279382 SYSIW11180 2210.6710 EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT COMMUNICATIONS 10,073.00 355489 111912012 127366 AMERICAN FLEET SUPPLY 21.03 63.14 LAMPS 00005793 279412 AFS- 220060050 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 21.03 9.88 SEALS 00005732 279413 AFS- 220060004 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 111912012 73.02 355490 1119/2012 ANNUAL INSPECTION 102109 ANCOM TECHNICAL CENTER 159068 1646.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 213.76 475.00 SERVICE FEES 279748 27044 1400.6230 SERVICE CONTRACTS EQUIPMENT POLICE'DEPT. GENERAL 641.26 475.00 355495 355491 1119/2012 103220 ASCAP 129855 ANGELOS, DENA 320.00 100.00 AMBULANCE OVERPAYMENT 279526 011212 1470.4329 AMBULANCE FEES FIRE DEPT. GENERAL 209.12 EDINBOROUGH CONCESSIONS EDINBOROUGH CONCESSIONS GRILL CENT SVC PW BUILDING BUILDING MAINTENANCE BUILDING MAINTENANCE CENTENNIAL LAKES ADMIN EXPENSE PSTF OCCUPANCY 100.00 355492 1119/2012 102172 APPERrS FOODSERVICE 461.52 CONCESSION PRODUCT 279719 1676184 5730.5510 COST OF GOODS SOLD 383.99 CONCESSION PRODUCT 279720 1674448 5730.5510 COST OF GOODS SOLD 706.71 FOOD 279721 1673025 5421.5510 COST OF GOODS SOLD 1,552.22 355493, : 1/1912012 101677 ARMCOM DISTRIBUTING CO. 21.03 COVE BASES 00001502 279571 10047578 1552.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES 21.03 355494 111912012 114475 ARMOR SECURITY INC. 427.50 ANNUAL INSPECTION 00001360 279536 159068 1646.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 213.76 ANNUAL INSPECTION 00001361 279537 159067 1646.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 641.26 355495 111912012 103220 ASCAP 320.00 2012 MUSIC LICENSE 279636 100003416665 5760.6105 DUES & SUBSCRIPTIONS 320.00 355496 1/1912012 102774 ASPEN WASTE SYSTEMS 209.12 279722 010312 7411.6182 RUBBISH REMOVAL 209.12 EDINBOROUGH CONCESSIONS EDINBOROUGH CONCESSIONS GRILL CENT SVC PW BUILDING BUILDING MAINTENANCE BUILDING MAINTENANCE CENTENNIAL LAKES ADMIN EXPENSE PSTF OCCUPANCY R55CKREG LOG20000 279475 71687600 5862.5513 CITY OF EDINA VERNON SELLING 174.65 279661 _ 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE Council Check Register 1,489.58 279662 71783400 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 1/13/2012 - 1119/2012 279663 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description 366497 111912012 129624 BARNA GUZY & STEFFEN LTD 355502 1/19/2012 117076 BEST WESTERN HOTEL, 741.09 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 279538 91919 1120.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 326:64 741.09 279517 71080 _ 1400.6104 CONFERENCES & SCHOOLS 356498 111912012 326.64 .. 129886 BARTICK, JAMAEKA 365503 26.00 ART WORK SOLD 279652 011212 5101.4413 ART WORK SOLD 26.00 52.73 MILEAGE REIMBURSEMENT 279749 355499 1119/2012 MILEAGE OR ALLOWANCE 102195 BATTERIES PLUS .52.73 32.00 BATTERIES 00001534 279459 018- 257102 1552.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES 101176 BLEDSOE, SARA 60.05 LIGHTING 279723 020 - 237236 7411.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES 12.97 92.05 279653 011212 5101.4413 ART WORK SOLD 355500 111912012 12.97 101355 BELLBOY CORPORATION 1/18/2012 8:10:07 Page- 3 Business Unit ADMINISTRATION ART CENTER REVENUES CENT SVC PW BUILDING PSTF OCCUPANCY 296.65 279475 71687600 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 174.65 279661 71783500 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING 1,489.58 279662 71783400 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 117.64 279663 86264800 5842.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX YORK SELLING PSTF OCCUPANCY POLICE DEPT. GENERAL CENT SERV GEN - MIS ART CENTER REVENUES GENERAL MAINTENANCE 2,078.52 355501 111912012 117379 BENIEK PROPERTY SERVICES INC. 824.87 SNOW REMOVAL 279724 138552 7411.6136 SNOW & LAWN CARE 824.87 355502 1/19/2012 117076 BEST WESTERN HOTEL, 326:64 LODGING FOR K9 TRAINING 279517 71080 _ 1400.6104 CONFERENCES & SCHOOLS 326.64 .. 365503 111912012 126209 BISEK, KATIE 52.73 MILEAGE REIMBURSEMENT 279749 102011 1554.6107 MILEAGE OR ALLOWANCE .52.73 355504 1/19/2012 101176 BLEDSOE, SARA 12.97 ART WORK SOLD 279653 011212 5101.4413 ART WORK SOLD 12.97 365505 111912012 115305 BLENKER, DEAN 38.48 2012 UNIFORM PURCHASE 279414 011012 1301.6201 LAUNDRY 38.48 355506, 1/1912012 100666 BMI GENERAL LICENSING PSTF OCCUPANCY POLICE DEPT. GENERAL CENT SERV GEN - MIS ART CENTER REVENUES GENERAL MAINTENANCE R55CKREG LOG20000 CITY OF EDINA 1/18/21112 8:10:07 Council Check Register Page - 4 1/13/2012 - 1/1912012 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit 320.00 2012 BMI MUSIC LICENSE 279637 21835755 5760.6105 DUES & SUBSCRIPTIONS CENTENNIAL LAKES ADMIN EXPENSE 320.00 355507 111912012 119631 BONNER & BORHART LLP 16,762.50 PROSECUTING 279750 56505 1195.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES LEGAL SERVICES 16,762.50 356608 1/1912012 100659 BOYER TRUCK PARTS 85.20 U -BOLTS 00005675 279539 87087SAV 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 11.67._ VENTED CAPS 00005736 279572 595496X1 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 11.67 VENTED CAPS 00005736 279573 595496 1553.6530 REPAIR'PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 66.73 KIT 00005803 279574 596839 1553.6530 - REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT'OPERATION GEN 53.51 FUEL FILTERS 00005801 279575 595835 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS. EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 228.78 355509 1/19/2012 120143 BRAKE & EQUIPMENT WAREHOUSE IN 289.45 BRAKE RELINING 00005778 279415 1- 995148 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 289.45 355610 1119/2012 100664 BRAUN INTERTEC 198.00 MATERIALS TESTING 279383 345850 5300.1715 LAND IMPROVEMENTS AQUATIC CENTER BALANCE SHEET 198.00 355511 111912012 129439 BROWN, BERNICE 41.00 TRIP REFUND 279470 011112 1628.4392.07 - SENIOR TRIPS SENIOR CITIZENS 41.00 355512 1/1912012 100669 BRYAN ROCK PRODUCTS INC. 419.39 BALLFIELD AGLIME 00001342 279540 123111 1642.6542 INFIELD MIXTURE FIELD MAINTENANCE 419.39 355613 1/19/2012 119826 BRYANT GRAPHICS INC. 83.36 EDINA LIQUOR POSTCARD 279725 26800 5822.6575 PRINTING 50TH ST SELLING 83.36 EDINA LIQUOR POSTCARD 279725 26800 5842.6575 PRINTING YORK SELLING . 83.37 EDINA LIQUOR POSTCARD 279725 26800 5862.6575 PRINTING VERNON SELLING 250.09 355514 1/19/2012 121521 CABELA'S MKTG & BRAND MGT INC. 267.85 UNIFORM PURCHASE 00001345 279541 470826305 1640.6201 LAUNDRY PARK MAINTENANCE GENERAL 267.85 i 365516 111912012 108688 CANTON COMMUNICATIONS INC. R55CKREG LOG20000 CITY OF EDINA 1/18/2012 8:10:07 Council Check Register Page - 5 1/13/2012 - 1/19/2012 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit HEAT 8,686.00 DEC ADVERTISING 279751 120105 -1 5210.6122 ADVERTISING OTHER GOLF DOME PROGRAM 010512 8,686.00 HEAT YORK OCCUPANCY 279752 010512 5422.6186 HEAT 355516 1119/2012 279752 119455 CAPITOL BEVERAGE SALES 1481.6186 HEAT YORK FIRE STATION 279752 010512 5913.6186 3,523.25 DISTRIBUTION 279476 27125 5842.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER YORK SELLING 279752 32.30 5420.6186 279586 27124 5822.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX 50TH ST SELLING HEAT 1,146.40 279752 279587 27126 5822.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER BOTH ST SELLING 010512 4,701.95 HEAT SENIOR CITIZENS 279752 010512 1646.6186 HEAT 355517 1/19/2012 279752 116683 CAT & FIDDLE BEVERAGE 5911.6186 HEAT WELL PUMPS 279752 010512 1552.6186 640.00 CENT SVC PW BUILDING 279477 92213 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 355518 1119/2012 100897 - •CENTERPOINT ENERGY 138.72 168.55 232.40 263.48 299.76 393.51 751.32' 1,105.93 1,204.42 1,247.68 1,314.22 1,670.35 2,323.93 2,595.37 2,825.85 R 'AR7 7d 355519 111912012 201.44 105.00 606.52 606.52 540.45 303.56 19.41 57.92 123898 CENTURYLINK 952 835 -6661 952 835 -1161 612 E12 -0797 612 E01 -0426 612 E24 -8657 612 E24 -8656 651281-1355 B001311 952 926 -0092 279752 010512 5821.6186 HEAT 50TH ST OCCUPANCY 279752 010512 5430.6186 HEAT RICHARDS GOLF COURSE 279752 010512 5861.6186 HEAT VERNON OCCUPANCY 279752 010512 5841.6186 HEAT YORK OCCUPANCY 279752 010512 5422.6186 HEAT MAINT OF COURSE & GROUNDS 279752 010512 1481.6186 HEAT YORK FIRE STATION 279752 010512 5913.6186 HEAT DISTRIBUTION 279752 010512 5111.6186 HEAT ART CENTER BLDG/MAINT 279752 010512 5420.6186 HEAT CLUB HOUSE 279752 010512 5921.6186 HEAT SANITARY LIFT STATION MAINT 279752 010512 5630.6186 HEAT CENTENNIAL LAKES 279752 010512 1628.6186 HEAT SENIOR CITIZENS 279752 010512 1646.6186 HEAT BUILDING MAINTENANCE 279752 010512 5911.6186 HEAT WELL PUMPS 279752 010512 1552.6186 HEAT CENT SVC PW BUILDING 279752 010512 5511.6186 HEAT ARENA BLDGIGROUNDS 279752 010512 5210.6186 HEAT GOLF DOME PROGRAM 279416 6661 -1/12 1552.6188 TELEPHONE CENT SVC PW BUILDING 279417 1161 -1112 5720.6188 TELEPHONE EDINBOROUGH OPERATIONS 279418 6797 -1/12 1550.6188 TELEPHONE CENTRAL SERVICES GENERAL 279419 0426 -1/12 1550.6188 TELEPHONE CENTRAL SERVICES GENERAL 279420 8657 -1/12 5420.6188 TELEPHONE CLUB HOUSE 279421 8656 -1112 1628.6188 TELEPHONE SENIOR CITIZENS 279422 1311 -1/12 1400.6188 TELEPHONE POLICE DEPT. GENERAL 279423 0092 -1/12 5913.6188 TELEPHONE DISTRIBUTION R55CKREG LOG20000 CITY OF EDINA 1/18/2012 8:10:07 Council Check Register Page - 6 1/13/2012 - 1/19/2012 Check # Date Amount Supplier/ Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger. Account Description Business Unit 122.09 952 926 -0419 279424 0419 -1/12 1646.6188 TELEPHONE -i BUILDING MAINTENANCE 539.88 612 E01 -8392 279425 8392 -1/12 1550.6188 TELEPHONE CENTRAL SERVICES GENERAL 104.80 612 E23 -0652 279518 0652 -1/12 2310.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES E911 3,207.59 355520 111912012 119725 CHISAGO LAKES DISTRIBUTING CO 255.00 279478 463480 5842.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER -YORK SELLING 255.00 355521 111912012 100684 CITY OF BLOOMINGTON 45,926.50 4TH QTR JOINT POWERS 279542 52738 1490.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES PUBLIC HEALTH 45,926.50 355522 111912012 101803 CITY OF BURNSVILLE 220.00 2012 POWER LIMITED TECH (2) 279726 FEB 21 CLASS 5410.6105 DUES & SUBSCRIPTIONS _ GOLF ADMINISTRATION - 220.00 355523 1/1912012 122317 CITY OF EDINA -COMMUNICATIONS 47.91 TAPING OF AR &LE EVENT 279755 COM1079 1629.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES ADAPTIVE RECREATION 47.91 355524 1/1912012 122084 CITY OF EDINA - UTILITIES 169.38 00102561: 0203163003 279753 203163003 -1/12 5861.6189 SEWER & WATER VERNON OCCUPANCY 74.87 00102561- 0200862003 279754 200862003 -1/12 5821.6189 SEWER & WATER 50TH ST OCCUPANCY 244.25 355525 1/19/2012 105194 CITY OF RICHFIELD 122.22 YOUTH BOWLING SHIRTS 279756 PARK &REC 1629.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES ADAPTIVE RECREATION 122.22 355526 1119/2012 114548 CIZEK, DARIN 137.99 UNIFORM PURCHASE 279519 010912 1400.6203 UNIFORM ALLOWANCE POLICE DEPT. GENERAL 137.99 356527 111912012 101119 COCKRIEL, VINCE 48.84 MILEAGE REIMBURSEMENT 279638 011312 1600.6107 MILEAGE OR ALLOWANCE PARK ADMIN. GENERAL 48.84 355528 :1/1912012 101227 COFFEE MILL INC. 87.00 HOT CHOCOLATE 279727 0741009 -IN 5730.5510 COST OF GOODS SOLD EDINBOROUGH CONCESSIONS 87.00 R55CKREG LOG20000 CITY OF EDINA 1/18/2012 8:10:07 Council Check Register Page - 7 1/13/2012 -1/19/2012 Check # Date Amount Supplier/ Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit 355529 1/19/2012 129683 COMBS, MICHELE 22.75 ART WORK SOLD 279623 010912 5101.4413 ART WORK SOLD ART CENTER REVENUES 22.75 355530 111912012 124487 CORDES, ANN 4.15 ART WORK SOLD 279624 010912 5101.4413 ART WORK SOLD ART CENTER REVENUES 4.15 365531 111912012 121267 CREATIVE RESOURCES 129.72 UNIFORMS • 279757 13690 5620.6201 LAUNDRY EDINBOROUGH PARK 129.72 355532 1119/2012 100699 CULLIGAN BOTTLED WATER 20.48 114-09855685 -4 WATER 279728 010112 7411.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES PSTF OCCUPANCY 20.48 355633 1119/2012 124335. CUMELLA, COLLETTE 12.97 ART WORK SOLD 279625 010912 5101.4413 ART WORK SOLD ART CENTER REVENUES 12.97 355534 1119/2012 121655 CURA, SARA 22.10 ART WORK SOLD 279654 010912 5101.4413 ART WORK SOLD ART CENTER REVENUES 22.10 355535 1/19/2012 105905 CURRENT ORDER PROCESSING CENTS 122.61 CARDS 279471 011112 1628.6513 OFFICE SUPPLIES SENIOR CITIZENS 122.81 355536 111912012 .103176 DANICIC, JOHN 100.01 ART WORK SOLD 279626 010912 5101.4413 ART WORK SOLD ART CENTER REVENUES 100.01 355537 1/1912012 102478 DAY DISTRIBUTING CO. 51.50 279479' 633546 5862.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX VERNON SELLING 1,028.52 279480 633545 5862.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER VERNON SELLING 2,273.25 279481 633548 5842.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER YORK SELLING 1,562.30 279588 633547 5822.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER 50TH ST SELLING 4,915.57 355538 1119/2012 102455 DEALER AUTOMOTIVE SERVICES INC 299.40 VAN MAT 00005780 279576 4- 134143 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 299.40 R55CKREG LOG20000 CITY OF EDINA Council Check Register 1/13/2012 — 1/19/2012 Check # Date Amount Supplier/ Explanation PO # Doc No- Inv No Account No 365539 111912012 118351 DEANOVIC, ELIZABETH 17.55 ART WORK SOLD 279627 010912 5101.4413 17:55 35.5540 111912012 124358 DILL, SARAH 39.00 ART WORK SOLD 279628 010912 5101.4413 39.00 355541 111912012 118805 DISCOUNT STEEL INC. 190.21 TUBE FOR VAC 00001412 279543 01740936 5923.6406 190.21 355542 1119/2012 123162 DISH NETWORK 52.40 8255 7070 8142 2839 279729 010412 7411.6406 52.40 365643 1/19/2012 129167 DO- GOOD.BIZINC 65.19. EDINA LIQUOR POSTCARDS 279426 4585 -01 5862.6575 65.20 EDINA LIQUOR POSTCARDS 279426 4585 -01 5822.6575 65.20 EDINA LIQUOR POSTCARDS 279426 4585 -01 5842.6575 195.59 366644 111912012 - 108648 - DOAN, SIIRI 37.70 ART WORK SOLD 279629 010912 5101.4413 37.70 355545 1/19/2012 123187 DORCAS WIDOWS FUND 14.30 ART WORK SOLD 279655 010912 5101.4413 14.30 355546 1/19/2012 100731 DPC INDUSTRIES 2,945.16 CHEMICALS 00001840 279639 82700019 -12 5915.6586 2,945.16 355547 1/19/2012 129858 ECCLESTON, ROBERT J. 1,900.00 VETERANS MEMORIAL MODEL 279544 2011 -01 47073.6710 1,900.00 - 355548 1/1912012 100049 EHLERS & ASSOCIATES INC .2,000.00 ARBITRAGE MONITORING 279384 62497 3101.6103 1,947.50 SOUTHDALE REMODEL 279523. 344055 1000.1303 1/18/2012 8:10:07 Page- 8 Subledger Account Description Business Unit ART WORK SOLD ART CENTER REVENUES ART WORK SOLD ART CENTER REVENUES GENERAL SUPPLIES COLLECTION SYSTEMS GENERAL SUPPLIES PSTF OCCUPANCY PRINTING VERNON SELLING PRINTING BOTH ST SELLING PRINTING YORK SELLING ART WORK SOLD ART CENTER REVENUES ART WORK SOLD ART CENTER REVENUES WATER TREATMENT SUPPLIES WATER TREATMENT EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT VETERANS MEMORIAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES GENERAL DEBT SERVICE REVENUES DUE FROM HRA GENERAL FUND BALANCE SHEET R55CKREG LOG20000 CITY OF EDINA Council Check Register 1/13/2012 - 1119/2012 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description 4,307.50 CENTENNIAL LAKES TIF MODS 279524 344056 1000.1303 DUE FROM HRA 1,535.00 CENTENNIAL LAKES CASHFLOW 279525 344054 1000.1303 DUE FROM HRA 9,790.00 356549 111912012 123791 ERICKSON, MINDY 24.70 ART WORK SOLD 279630 010912 5101.4413 ART WORK SOLD 24.70 355550 111912012 127590 ETTERMAN ENTERPRISES 129.89 LIGHT KIT, CONNECTORS 00005794 279427 178666 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS 129.89 355551 1/1912012 100146 FACTORY MOTOR PARTS COMPANY 8.20 CAP 00005766 279428 69- 056613 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS 14.36 FUEL CAP 00005766 279429 69- 056736 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS 22.56 356552 1/1912012 124088 FAGERSTROM, JOHN 26.00 ART WORK SOLD 279631 _. 010912 5101.4413 ART WORK SOLD 26.00 355553 111912012 116492 FINANCE AND COMMERCE 175.82 PUBLISH AD FOR BID 279758 20910375 1120.6120 ADVERTISING LEGAL 175.82 355554 111912012 120329 FIRE EQUIPMENT SPECIALTIES INC 213.81 TOOL BRACKETS 00003714 279385 7381 1470.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES 684.00 RESCUE BAGS 00003679 279386 7372 421480.6710 EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT 897.81 355555 111912012 108644 • FIRENET SYSTEMS INC. 1/18/2012 8:10:07 Page- 9 Business Unit GENERAL FUND BALANCE SHEET GENERAL FUND BALANCE SHEET ART CENTER REVENUES EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN ART CENTER REVENUES ADMINISTRATION FIRE DEPT. GENERAL SPECIAL OPS FIRE EQUIPMENT 486.28 FIRE SYSTEM MAINTENANCE 00001851 279387 15651- 11- 10037S 1375.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES PARKING RAMP M 365556 1/1912012 129500 FLAT EARTH BREWING CO. 80.00 279589 4012 5822.5514 80.00 355557 111912012 100759 FLOYD TOTAL SECURITY 134.50 LOCK REPAIR 00001535 279545 267935 5914.6180 134.50 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER 50TH ST SELLING CONTRACTED REPAIRS TANKS TOWERS & RESERVOIR R55CKREG LOG20000 CITY OF EDINA Council Check Register 1/13/2012 - 1/19/2012 Check # Date Amount Supplier/ Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account Nb Subledger Account Description 365558 1119/2012 129300 FORMO, JEAN 12.32 ART WORK SOLD 279632 010912 5101.4413 ART WORK SOLD 12.32 355559 111912012 129884 FORT DEARBORN LIFE INSURANCE C 1,702.35 SHORT TERM DISABILITY 279577 F018342 -1 9900.2033.16 LTD - 99 1,702.35 355560 111912012 126725 FORTNER, NOLA 38.35 ART WORK SOLD 279633 010912 5101.4413 ART WORK SOLD 38.35 355561 111912012 100764 G & K SERVICES 16.73 279388 123111 5511.6201 LAUNDRY 87.20 279388 123111 5913.6201 LAUNDRY 120.56 279388 123111 1552.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES 128.80 279388 123111 1646.6201 LAUNDRY 198.80 279388 .123111 1553.6201 LAUNDRY 314.76 279388 123111 1301.6201 LAUNDRY i 866.85 365562 111912012 101662 GCSAA 170.00 DUES - JEFFREY LUGER 279430 250840 -2012 5410.6105 'DUES &SUBSCRIPTIONS 170.00 355563 111912012 100920 GENUINE PARTS COMPANY - MINNEA 17.58 PARTS 279759 123111 5920.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES 29.77 PARTS 279759 123111 5630.6530 REPAIR PARTS 118.55 PARTS 279759 123111 5422.6530 REPAIR PARTS 757.75 PARTS 279759 123111 1553.6585 ACCESSORIES 923.65 355564 :111912012 100781 GRAFIX SHOPPE -324.84 CITY LOGO GRAPHICS 00005605 279640 78603 1553.6585 ACCESSORIES 324.84 355565 1119/2012 101103 GRAINGER 71.40 PAINTING SUPPLIES 00006416 279389 9711936428 5422.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES 11.65 BRACKETS 00005724 ' 279641 9723781937 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS 142.02 REPLACE FAN 00001498 279760 9718156293 7412.6530 REPAIR PARTS 225.07 1/18/2012 8:10:07 Page - 10 Business Unit ART CENTER REVENUES PAYROLL CLEARING ART CENTER REVENUES ARENA BLDG/GROUNDS DISTRIBUTION CENT SVC PW BUILDING BUILDING MAINTENANCE 'EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN GENERAL MAINTENANCE GOLF ADMINISTRATION SEWER CLEANING CENTENNIAL LAKES MAINT OF COURSE & GROUNDS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN MAINT OF COURSE & GROUNDS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN PSTF RANGE R55CKREG LOG20000 CITY OF EDINA Council Check Register 1/13/2012 —1/1912012 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No 355568, 1/19/2012 102217 GRAPE BEGINNINGS INC 1,215.75 279590 135323- 5862.5513 393.00 279591 135262 5822.5513 1,608.75 355567 1/1912012 121536 GRAY MATTER CREATIVE LLC 1,750.00 BROCHURE DESIGN 279747 12001 1600.6103 1,750.00 355568 1/1912012 100783 GRAYBAR ELECTRIC CO. INC. 182.24 -RESET SWITCH 00001315 279546 957646163 1552.6406 182.24 355569 111912012 100797 HAWKINS INC. 6,031.80 CHEMICALS 00001841 279431 .3296429 5915.6586 6,031.80 ` 355570 1/1912012 122093 HEALTH PARTNERS 12,674.35 JAN 2011 PREMIUM 279531 39334954' 1550.6040 991.76 279532 39334750 1550.6043 13,666.11 356571 111912012 106436 HENNEPIN COUNTY INFORMATION 656.00 RADIO ADMIN FEE 279547 111238077 1301.6151 1,274.96 RADIO ADMIN FEE 279761 111238014 1470.6151 32.00 RADIO ADMIN FEE 279762 111238112 1460.6103 1,962.96 365672 111912012 116680 HEWLETT - PACKARD COMPANY 642.16 COMPUTER 00004391 279390 50589769 421600.6710 642.16 ` 365573 1119/2012 104375 HOHENSTEINS INC. 944.00 279482 586015 5842.5514 552.50 279664 586106 5862.5514 339.00 279665 586154 5822.5514 1,635.50 355574 1/1912012 101732 INDUSTRIAL DOOR CO. INC. 231.08 OVERHEAD DOOR REPAIRS 279432 D227556 -IN 1470.6180 231.08 Subledger Account Description COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 1/18/2012 8:10:07, Page - 11 Business Unit VERNON SELLING 50TH ST SELLING PROFESSIONAL SERVICES PARK ADMIN. GENERAL GENERAL SUPPLIES CENT SVC PW BUILDING WATER TREATMENT SUPPLIES WATER TREATMENT HOSPITALIZATION COBRAINSURANCE EQUIPMENT RENTAL EQUIPMENT RENTAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES CENTRAL SERVICES GENERAL CENTRAL SERVICES GENERAL GENERAL MAINTENANCE FIRE DEPT. GENERAL CIVILIAN DEFENSE EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT PARKS ADMIN EQUIPMENT COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER CONTRACTED REPAIRS , YORK SELLING VERNON SELLING 50TH ST SELLING FIRE DEPT. GENERAL R55CKREG LOG20000 CITY OF EDINA Council Check Register 1/13/2012 - 1/19/2012 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No 355576 1/1912012 103193 INTOXIMETERS INC. 157.64 INTOX METERS 279520 350899 2340.6406 157.64 355676 111912012 129889 JBL COMPANIES 13,674.13 UTILITY OVERPAYMENT REFUND 279730 114559- 11209000 5900.2015 4 1553.6530 2210.6123 5842.5515 5842.5514 5822.5514 5862.5514 5822.5512 5822.5513 5862.5513 5662.5513 5862.5513 5862.5513 5862.5513 5842.5512 5842.5512 5842.5515 5842.5513_ 5842.5513 5842:5513 5842.5513 5842.5512 5862.5515 Subledger Account Description GENERAL SUPPLIES 1/18/2012 8:10:07 Page - 12 Business Unit DWI FORFEITURE CUSTOMER REFUND UTILITY BALANCE SHEET REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN MAGAZINE/NEWSLETTER EXPENSE COMMUNICATIONS COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX 13,674.13 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER YORK SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER 355577 111912012 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER 108618 JEFFERSON FIRE & SAFETY INC. 233.18 FIRE HOSES 00005679 279578 183468 233.18 355578 1/1912012 102146 JESSEN PRESS 8,153.00 ABOUT TOWN PRINTING 279391 30938 8,153.00 355579 111912012 100741 JJ TAYLOR DIST. OF MINN 100.65 279592 1682171 5,451.62 279593 1682170 2,445.20 279594 1682161 2,254.64 279595 1682162 10,252.11 355581 1/1912012 100835 JOHNSON BROTHERS LIQUOR CO. 1,019.35 279483 1209246 242.24 279596 1211258 1,071.38 279597 1213277 1,081.22 279598 1213280 446.72 279599 - 1213641 1,827.44 279600 1213264 264.67 279601 1213279 425.91, 279666 1213274 1,543.69 279667 1213271 31.37 279668 1213269 1,345.86 279669 1213270 1,398:28 279670 1213263 430.73 279671 1213272 1,061.59 279672 1213273 1,917.37 279673 1213268 - 32.49 279674 1213276 1553.6530 2210.6123 5842.5515 5842.5514 5822.5514 5862.5514 5822.5512 5822.5513 5862.5513 5662.5513 5862.5513 5862.5513 5862.5513 5842.5512 5842.5512 5842.5515 5842.5513_ 5842.5513 5842:5513 5842.5513 5842.5512 5862.5515 Subledger Account Description GENERAL SUPPLIES 1/18/2012 8:10:07 Page - 12 Business Unit DWI FORFEITURE CUSTOMER REFUND UTILITY BALANCE SHEET REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN MAGAZINE/NEWSLETTER EXPENSE COMMUNICATIONS COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX YORK SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER YORK SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER 50TH ST SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER VERNON SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR 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 WINE COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR 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 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX 50TH ST SELLING NTH ST SELLING VERNON SELLING VERNON SELLING VERNON SELLING VERNON SELLING VERNON SELLING YORK SELLING YORK SELLING YORK SELLING YORK SELLING YORK SELLING YORK SELLING YORK SELLING YORK SELLING VERNON SELLING R55CKREG LOG20000 CITY OF EDINA Council Check Register 1/13/2012 - 1/19/2012 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No 181.05 279675 1213281 5862.5512 93.12 279676 1213278 5862.5512 4,294.58 - 279677 1213275 5862.5512 416.90 279678 1213261 5822.5513 935.79 279679 1213262 5622.5513 973.45 279680 1213265 5822.5513 222.33 279681 1213266 5822.5512 487.25 279682 1213260 5822.5512 37.20 279683 1213810 5842.5513 11.10- 279684 521539 5842.5513 21,770.88 355582 1/19/2012 111018 KEEPRS INC. 458.96 UNIFORMS 00003670 279392 179001 -01 1470.6558 29.90 00003616 279393 171788 -05 1470.6558 488.86 355583 111912012 105887 KOES9LER, JOE 168.00 JAN 2012 SERVICE 279468 010112 1628.6103 168.00 DEC 2011 SERVICE 279533 1/1/12 1628.6103 336.00 355584 1/1912012 100605 LANDS' END BUSINESS OUTFITTERS 8.50 LOGO APPLICATION FEE 279731 11046876 1513.6203 30.63 LOGO CLOTHING 279732 11058514 1513.6203 30.63- CREDIT 279733 11046987 1513.6203 8.50 355585 111912012, 100862 LAWSON PRODUCTS INC. 484.54 CAP SCREWS, COUPLERS 00005715 279394 9300482742 1553.6530 154.94 HEX NUTS, SCREWS 00001495 279395 9300487004 1325.6406 200.86 SCREWS, WASHERS 00001499 279396 9300487005 1325.6406 303.83 CABLE TIES, TY -RAP 00005762 279433 9300491064 1553.6530 393.03 DRILL BITS, SCREWS, WASHERS 00005737- 279579 9300502940 1553.6530 1,537.20 355587 1119/2012 101552 LEAGUE OF MINNESOTA CITIES 180.00 PREVENTING HARASSMENT TRAINING 279360 155909 1550.6103 180.00 - 279361 155910 1550.6103 180.00 .279362 155911 1550.6103 200.00 278363 155913 1550.6103 260.00 279364 155915 1550.6103 Subledger Account Description COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE DEPT UNIFORMS DEPT UNIFORMS PROFESSIONAL SERVICES PROFESSIONAL SERVICES UNIFORM ALLOWANCE UNIFORM ALLOWANCE UNIFORM ALLOWANCE REPAIR PARTS GENERAL SUPPLIES GENERAL. SUPPLIES REPAIR PARTS REPAIR PARTS PROFESSIONAL SERVICES PROFESSIONAL SERVICES PROFESSIONAL SERVICES PROFESSIONAL• SERVICES PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 1/18/2012 8:10:07 Page - 13 Business Unit VERNON SELLING VERNON SELLING VERNON SELLING 50TH ST SELLING 56TH ST SELLING 50TH ST SELLING 50TH ST SELLING 50TH ST SELLING YORK SELLING YORK SELLING FIRE DEPT. GENERAL FIRE DEPT. GENERAL SENIOR CITIZENS SENIOR CITIZENS EMPLOYEE PROGRAMS EMPLOYEE PROGRAMS EMPLOYEE PROGRAMS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN STREET NAME SIGNS STREET NAME SIGNS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN CENTRAL SERVICES GENERAL CENTRAL SERVICES GENERAL CENTRAL SERVICES GENERAL' CENTRAL SERVICES GENERAL CENTRAL SERVICES.GENERAL R55CKREG LOG20000 CITY OF EDINA 1/18/2012 8:10:07 Council Check Register Page - 14 1/13/2012 -1/19/2012 Check # Date Amount Supplier I Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description_ Business Unit 160.00 279365 155916 1550.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES CENTRAL SERVICES GENERAL 180.00 279366 155917 1550.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES r CENTRAL SERVICES GENERAL 140.00 279367 155918 1550.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES CENTRAL SERVICES GENERAL 160.00 279368 155919 1550.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES CENTRAL SERVICES GENERAL 120.00 = 279369 155920 1550.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES CENTRAL SERVICES GENERAL 200.00 279370 155921 1550.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES CENTRAL SERVICES GENERAL 200.00, 279371 155922 1550.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES CENTRAL SERVICES GENERAL 180.00 279372. 155923 1550.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES CENTRAL SERVICES GENERAL 240.00 279373 -155924 1550.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES CENTRALSERVICES GENERAL 200.00 279374 . '155925 1550.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES CENTRAL SERVICES GENERAL 200.00 279375 155926 - 1550.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES' CENTRALSERVICES "GENERAL 280.00 279376 155927 1550.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES CENTRAL SERVICES GENERAL 20.00 279377 156111 1550.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES CENTRAL SERVICES GENERAL 120.00 - 279378 156248 1550.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES CENTRAL SERVICES GENERAL 120.00 279379 156249 1550.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES CENTRAL SERVICES GENERAL 80.00 279380 156250 1550.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES_ CENTRAL SERVICES GENERAL 3,540.00 355588 111912012 129890 LECKBAND, PETER 184.47 UTILITY OVERPAYMENT REFUND 279734 5033 OXFORD AVE 5900.2015 CUSTOMER REFUND UTILITY BALANCE SHEET 184.47 355589 1/1912012 102204 LOBBY, MACKENZIE 1,536.00 BROCHURE DESIGN 279793 4 1600.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES PARK ADMIN. GENERAL 1,536.00 355590 1119/2012 129885 LOFING, GRETCHEN_ 30.76 UTILITY OVERPAYMENT REFUND 279580 5005 MOORE AVE 5900.2015 CUSTOMER REFUND UTILITY BALANCE SHEET 30.76 365591 111912012 100864 MACQUEEN EQUIPMENT INC. / 98.45 SPRING, BEARING' 00005734 279460 2120683 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 1,575.24 TOW BAR ASSEMBLY, SOCKETS 00005735 279461 2120682 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 477.57 WELDMENT, COLLARS 00005733 279462 2120679 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 462.05 TOW BAR ASSEMBLY, CHAIN COVERD005791 279548 2120710 1553.6530, REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 2,613.31 355592 111912012 122878" MARTTI, DOROTHEA 120.00 HOSTING FEE 279434 165 _1130.6136 PROFESSIONAL SVC - OTHER COMMUNICATIONS 120.00 " 355593 1119/2012 101483 MENARDS J R55CKREG LOG20000 CITY OF EDINA Council Check Register 1/13/2012 -1/19/2012 Check # Date Amount Supplier/ Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No 405.48 LUMBER 00001508 279435 3465 1318.6406 125.67 LUMBER, SCREWS 00001509 279436 3458 1325.6406 6.35 GYPSUM 00001320 279549 84537 1552.6406 31.69 RESPIRATOR, DRILL 00001325 279550 86586 1552.6406 11.76 GYPSUM 00001322 279551 84735 1552.6406 34.61 PVC PIPE, ADAPTER 00001505 279581 3054 1322.6406 48.97 CONCRETE, ROLLER COVERS 00001517 279582 5848 1325.6406 123.88 ROPE, BITS, PLYWOOD 00002040 279642 3572 5761.6406 788.41 355594 111912012 101987 MENARDS 30.56 BITS, PAINT 00002044 279643 61667 5761.6406 25.51 WRENCH, SCREWS 00002041 279644 61210 5761.6406 56.07 365595 111912012 102607 METRO VOLLEYBALL OFFICIALS 137.50 OFFICIATING FEES 279735 4055 4077.6103 137.50 355596 1/19/2012 100886 METROPOLITAN COUNCIL 13,246.20 DEC 2011 SAC CHARGES 279569 011212 1495.4.307 13,246.20 355597 111912012 104650 MICRO CENTER 147.40 DVDS 00003158 279437 3682259 1400.6160 49.15 DVDS 00003161 279438 3685850 1400.6160 196.55 355598 1119/2012 127639 MIDWAY FORD 14,140.00 2011 FORD RANGER 00001281 279746 88360 421650.6710 14,140.00 355599 1119/2012 118464 MIDWESTTESTING 540.00 TEST & REBUILD METERS 00001333 279645 2282 5917.6180 540.00 355600 1119/2012 100913 MINNEAPOLIS & SUBURBAN SEWER & 2,205.00 REPLACE WATER SERVICE 00001539 279646 34007 5913.6180 2,205.00 355601 111912012 102174 MINNEAPOLIS OXYGEN COMPANY 65.26 CO2, METHANE 279763 1032106 7413.6545 Subledger Account Description GENERAL SUPPLIES GENERAL SUPPLIES GENERAL SUPPLIES GENERAL SUPPLIES GENERAL SUPPLIES GENERAL SUPPLIES GENERAL SUPPLIES GENERAL SUPPLIES GENERAL SUPPLIES GENERAL SUPPLIES 1/1812012 8:10:07 Page - 15 Business Unit SNOW & ICE REMOVAL STREET NAME SIGNS CENT SVC PW BUILDING CENT SVC PW BUILDING CENT SVC PW BUILDING STREET LIGHTING ORNAMENTAL STREET NAME SIGNS CENTENNIAL LAKES OPERATING CENTENNIAL LAKES OPERATING CENTENNIAL LAKES OPERATING PROFESSIONAL SERVICES EDINA ATHLETIC ASSOCIATION SAC CHARGES DATA PROCESSING DATA PROCESSING EQUIPMENT; REPLACEMENT CONTRACTED REPAIRS CONTRACTED REPAIRS CHEMICALS INSPECTIONS POLICE DEPT. GENERAL POLICE DEPT. GENERAL PARK MAINT EQUIPMENT METER REPAIR DISTRIBUTION PSTF FIRE TOWER R55CKREG LOG20000 CITY OF EDINA Council Check Register 1/13/2012 -- 1/19/2012 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanatlon PO # Doc No Inv No Account No 65.26 355602 1119/2012 129861 MINNESOTA COMMUNITY ED. ASSOC. 125.00 JOB POSTING 279439 00003142 1550.6121 125.00 355603 111912012 101537 MINNESOTA POLLUTION CONTROL AG 2,620.00 TRAINING & EXAMS - 00001415 279583 9900027634 5919.6104 2,620.00 355604 111912012 101559 MINNESOTA STATE FIR_ E CHIEFS AS 379.00 DUES 279736 011211 1470.6105 379.00 355605 1119/2012 102812 MN DEPARTMENT OF LABOR & INDUS 110.00 CBO CERTIFICATE RENEWAL 279440 80002907 1495.6103 110.00 355606 1N9/2012 102421 MPGMA 70.00 'DUES - FRED RICHARDS GC 279737 2012 -18 '. 5410.6105 70.00 DUES - BRAEMAR GC 279738 ` 2012 -04 5410.6105 140.00 355607 111912012 100906 MTI DISTRIBUTING INC. 430.00 ENGINE PARTS 00006129 279397 823049 -00 5424.6530 784.76 BEDKNIFE 00006134 279398 823616 -00 5422.6530 32.39 BEDBAR BOLTS 00006135 279399 823769 -00 5422.6530 406.67 PICKER ENGINE PARTS 00006131 279441 823446 -00 5424.6530 198.69 BEDBAR, SCREWS 00006136 279442 823780 -00 5422.6530 1,852.51 355608 111912012 102592 MUNICIPAL LEGISLATIVE COMMISSI 10,500.00 ANNUAL DUES 279443 2012 1120.6105 10,500.00 365609 1119/2012 125089 NOKOMIS SHOE SHOP 129.95 2012 SAFETY BOOTS 279463 IN -0113 1552.6406 150.00 2012 SAFETY BOOTS 279463 IN -0113 1260.6406 439.95 2012 SAFETY BOOTS 279463 IN -0113 1553.6610 1,329.65 2012 SAFETY BOOTS' 279463 IN -0113 5913.6610 '- 1,469.65 2012 SAFETY BOOTS 279463 IN -0113 1646.6610 2,049.40 2012 SAFETY BOOTS 279463 IN -0113 1301.6610 Subledger- Account: Description ADVERTISING PERSONNEL CONFERENCES & SCHOOLS DUES & SUBSCRIPTIONS PROFESSIONAL SERVICES DUES & SUBSCRIPTIONS DUES &SUBSCRIPTIONS REPAIR PARTS REPAIR PARTS REPAIR PARTS REPAIR PARTS REPAIR PARTS DUES & SUBSCRIPTIONS GENERAL SUPPLIES GENERAL SUPPLIES SAFETY, EQUIPMENT SAFETY EQUIPMENT SAFETY EQUIPMENT SAFETY EQUIPMENT 1118/2012 8:10:07 Page - 16 Business Unit CENTRAL SERVICES GENERAL TRAINING FIRE DEPT. GENERAL INSPECTIONS GOLF ADMINISTRATION GOLF ADMINISTRATION RANGE MAINT OF COURSE & GROUNDS MAINT OF COURSE &GROUNDS RANGE MAINT OF COURSE & GROUNDS ADMINISTRATION CENT SVC PW BUILDING ENGINEERING GENERAL EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN DISTRIBUTION BUILDING MAINTENANCE GENERAL MAINTENANCE J R55CKREG LOG20000 157.74 JAN 2012 MAINTENANCE CITY OF EDINA 987631832 1495.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES INSPECTIONS Council Check Register 157.74 1/13/2012 - 1/19/2012 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description 5,568.60 104.00 355610 111912012 279656 100933 NORTHWEST GRAPHIC SUPPLY CO. 5101.4413 ART WORK SOLD -ART CENTER REVENUES 50.08 D'ARCHES W/C 00009081 279764 41219801 5120.5510 COST OF GOODS SOLD 93.00 CANSON INGRES #1 WHITE 00009078 279765 41185802 5120.5510 COST OF GOODS SOLD 91.65 ART SUPPLIES 00009087 279766 41324700 5120:5510 COST OF GOODS SOLD 234.73 1,005.00 DECKS FOR ADVENTURE PEAK 279739 355611 1119/2012 5720.6530 116114 OCE EDINBOROUGH OPERATIONS 1/1812012 8:10:07 Page - 17 Business Unit ART SUPPLY GIFT GALLERY SHOP ART SUPPLY GIFT GALLERY SHOP ART SUPPLY GIFT GALLERY SHOP 157.74 JAN 2012 MAINTENANCE 279444 987631832 1495.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES INSPECTIONS 157.74 355612 1/1912012 124089 OHMANN, NANCY 104.00 ART WORK SOLD 279656 011212 5101.4413 ART WORK SOLD -ART CENTER REVENUES 104.00 355613 1119/2012 116669 ON CALL SERVICES 1,005.00 DECKS FOR ADVENTURE PEAK 279739 2230 5720.6530 REPAIR PARTS EDINBOROUGH OPERATIONS 225.00 SAFE INSTALLATION 2797.40 2231 5720.6180 CONTRACTED REPAIRS EDINBOROUGH OPERATIONS __ 1,230.00 355614 1119/2012 101484 OSWALD HOSE & ADAPTERS 433.27 HOSE REPAIRS 00001350 279552 12001 1648.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES SKATING RINK MAINTENANCE 433.27 355616 1119/2012 100940 OWENS COMPANIES INC. 594.52 HEAT CONTROL REPAIR 00006400 279767 71488 5210.6180 CONTRACTED REPAIRS GOLF DOME PROGRAM 594.52 355616 1/1912012 129485 PAPCO INC. 1,072.75 CARPET CLEANER - 279768 69076 7411.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES PSTF OCCUPANCY 703.84 RETURN 279769 66954 -CM 7411.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES . PSTF OCCUPANCY 368.91 365617 111912012 102440 PASS, GRACE 74.75 ART WORK SOLD 279634 010912 5101.4413 ART WORK SOLD ART CENTER REVENUES 74.75 355618 1/1912012 100347 PAUS71S & SONS 291.00 279484 8334204 -IN 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING 1,212.26 279485 8334199 -IN 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 1,252.75 279486 8334205 -IN 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING R55CKREG LOG20000 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation 296.25 3,052.26 355619 1/1912012 100945 PEPSI-COLA COMPANY 474.75 135.83 346.90 CITY OF EDINA Council Check Register 1/13/2012 -1/19/2012 PO # Doc No Inv No Account No 279602 8334211 -IN 5862.5512 279685 74362820 5210.5510 279686 74362851 5730.5510 279687 58911123 5862.5515 279688 59014201 5842.5515 1118/2012 8:10:07 Page - 18 Subledger Account Description Business Unit COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR VERNON SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD COST OF GOODS`SOLD COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX GOLF DOME PROGRAM EDINBOROUGH CONCESSIONS VERNON SELLING YORK SELLING 355620 1/19/2012 124239 PERSONNEL EVALUATION INC. 60.00 PERSONNEL EVALUATIONS 279553 99268 1400.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES POLICE DEPT. GENERAL 60.00 365622 111912012 100743 PHILLIPS WINE & SPIRITS 1.12 279487 2179161 5822.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR 50TH ST SELLING 1,605.92 279488 2179164 5822.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR 50TH ST SELLING 576.22 279603 2181952 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 2,312.05 279604 2181953 5842.5513 COST OF. GOODS 'SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 146.14 279605 2180443 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING 679.40 279606 2181950 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE . VERNON SELLING 316.52 279607 2181955 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 873.49 279608 2181956 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 1,603.07 279689 2181948 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 1,714.55 279690 2181951 5842.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR YORK SELLING 2.24 279691 2181947 5842.5512 COST OF'GOODS SOLD LIQUOR YORK SELLING 2,587.19 279692 2181954 5862.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR VERNON SELLING 3.36 279693 2181949 5862.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR VERNON SELLING 608.68 279694 2181946 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING 37.12 279695 2181945 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING 234.00 279696 2182296 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING. 7.02- 279697 3474418 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 6.67- 279698 3474417 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 6.06- 279699 3474416 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING '28.37- 279700 3474420 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 1.50- 279701 3474419 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 13,251.45 355623 1119/2012 124176 PINNACLE DISTRIBUTING 140.40 - 279702 14345- 5862.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX VERNON SELLING 140.40 R55CKREG LOG20000 VERNON SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE CITY OF EDINA 50TH ST SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR YORK SELLING Council Check Register YORK SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR 50TH ST SELLING 1/13/2012 - 1/19/2012 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No 355624 1/1912012 100961 POSTMASTER - USPS 325.00 NEWSLETTER POSTAGE 279794 011712 1628.6235 325.00 355625 1/1912012 129706 PREMIUM WATERS INC. 66.27 622833 WATER 279770 622833 -12 -11 5620.6406 66.27 355626 1/19/2012 129593 PROFESSIONAL LAW ENFORCEMENT T 250.00 REGISTRATION FEE (2) 279521 WEB000050 1400.6104 250.00 3556.27 1119/2012 104455 PUPPE, RICHARD 389.16 2012 UNIFORM PURCHASE 279445 010912 1301.6201 389.16' 365628 1/1912012 129852 QUALITY SIGN SOLUTIONS 201.00 OVERPAYMENT REFUND FOR SIGNS 279446 011012 1140.4185 201.00 355629 1/19/2012 100971 QUALITY WINE 187.20 279489 559590 -00 5862.5513 5,768.16 279490 560032 -00 5862.5513 528.00 279491 559591 -00 5822.5513 935.61 279492 560033 -00 5822.5513 1;075.07 279493 559752 -00 5842.5512 226.40 279494 559589 -00 5842.5513 121.60 279495 560007 -00 5842.5513 680.16 279609 559874 -00 5822.5512 840.20 279610 559753 -00 5862.5512 223.20 279703 560008 -CO 5862.5514 10,585.60 355630 1/1912012 117692 R & B CLEANING INC. 2,538.28 RAMP STAIRWELL CLEANING 00001519 279447 1072 4090.6406 2,538.28 355631 1119/2012 100466 R & R PRODUCTS INC. 351.67 TIRES 00006132 279400 CD1513426 5422.6530 351.67 365632 1/1912012 100974 RAYMOND HAEG PLUMBING Subledger Account Description POSTAGE GENERAL SUPPLIES 1/18/2012 8:10:07 Page - 19 Business Unit SENIOR CITIZENS EDINBOROUGH PARK CONFERENCES & SCHOOLS POLICE DEPT. GENERAL LAUNDRY GENERAL MAINTENANCE SIGN PERMIT PLANNING COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR YORK SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR 50TH ST SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR VERNON SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER VERNON SELLING GENERALSUPPLIES 50TH &FRANCE MAINTENANCE REPAIR PARTS MAINT OF COURSE & GROUNDS R55CKREG LOG20000 CITY OF EDINA Council Check Register 1/13/2012 - 1/19/2012 Check # Date Amount Supplier./ Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No. Subledger Account Description 108.70 FAUCET REPAIR 00002046 279647 13683 5761.6180 CONTRACTED REPAIRS 1/18/2012 8:10:07 Page - 20 Business Unit CENTENNIAL LAKES OPERATING 1553.6180 CONTRACTED REPAIRS 108.70 1553.6180 CONTRACTED REPAIRS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 1470.6406 355633 1/1912012 4088.6103 118658 RIGHTWAY GLASS,INC. TREE REMOVAL 1644.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES TREES & MAINTENANCE 1325.6406 248.46 WINDSHIELD REPAIRS 00005588 279554 64390 227.03 00005593 279555 64578 475.49 355634 111912012 100980 ROBERT B. HILL CO. 61.43 SOFTENER SALT 00003648 279741 00262314 61.43 355635 111912012 129857 ROCKMAN LANDSCAPING & TREE SER 1,923.75 REMOVE DISEASED TREE 00001357 279528 1261 1,923.75 355636 111912012 101963 S & S TREE SPECIALISTS 275.00 OAK WILT PROGRAM 00001365 279771 56408 275.00 . 355637 A/1912012 105442 SCHERER BROS. LUMBER CO. 76.27 LUMBER 00001514 279584 40993086 76.27 355638 1119/2012 127490 SCULLY, PAT 8.13 ARTWORK SOLD 279657 010512 8.13 355639 1/19/2012 100995 SEH 536.37 VETERANS MEMORIAL PROJECT 279556 252306 536.37 355640 111912012 127878 SOUTHERN WINE AND SPIRITS 1,780.50 279496 1696714 1,714.30 279497 1710404 1,670.84 279611 1710405 360.50 279612 1696711 547.00 279613 1696706 891.08 279614 1710403 648.89 279615 1687622 17.25- 279616 1656982 389.84 279704 1687620 1/18/2012 8:10:07 Page - 20 Business Unit CENTENNIAL LAKES OPERATING 1553.6180 CONTRACTED REPAIRS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 1553.6180 CONTRACTED REPAIRS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 1470.6406 GENERAL` SUPPLIES FIRE DEPT: GENERAL 4088.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES. TREE REMOVAL 1644.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES TREES & MAINTENANCE 1325.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES STREET NAME SIGNS 5101.4413 ART WORK SOLD ART. CENTER REVENUES 47073.6710 5862.5513 5862.5513 5842.5513 5842.5513 5822.5513 5822.5513 5862.5512 5862.5512 5822.5512 EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT VETERANS MEMORIAL 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 WINE COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR VERNON SELLING VERNON SELLING YORK SELLING YORK SELLING 50TH ST SELLING 50TH ST SELLING VERNON SELLING VERNON SELLING 50TH ST SELLING R55CKREG LOG20000 CITY OF EDINA 1/1812012 8:10:07 Council Check Register Page - 21 1/13/2012 - 1/19/2012 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit 518.11 279705 1687623 5842.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR YORK SELLING 8,503.81 355641 1119/2012 129891 SPACK CONSULTING 5,760.00 TRAFFIC STUDY 279772 1203 1140.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES PLANNING 5,760.00 355642 111912012 122455 SPRING LAKE ENGINEERING 922.20 SCADA PROGRAMING 00005430 279446 1185 05508.1705 CONSTR. IN PROGRESS WM -508 SCADA SYSTEM 922.20 ' 355643 1/1912012 101004 SPS COMPANIES 5.01 PLUMBING PARTS 00001349 279557 S2482088.001 1646.6530 REPAIR PARTS BUILDING MAINTENANCE 127.43 DRINKING FOUNTAIN PARTS 00001300 279648 S2476269.OD1 1647.6530 REPAIR PARTS PATHS & HARD SURFACE 127.43 279649 S2476269.002 1647.6530 REPAIR PARTS PATHS & HARD SURFACE 127.43 279650 S2476269.003 1647.6530 REPAIR PARTS PATHS & HARD SURFACE 387.30 355644 111912012 129745 ST LOUIS PARK DO GRILL AND CHI 171.00 DILLY BARS 279742 577 5730.5510 COST OF GOODS SOLD - EDINBOROUGH CONCESSIONS 171.00 355645 1119/2012 128371 STEINMETZ, ROBERT 13.50 DRIVERS LICENSE UPGRADE 279585 011212 1240.6105 DUES & SUBSCRIPTIONS PUBLIC WORKS ADMIN GENERAL 13.50 365646 111912012 129853 STOCKTON, STEPHANIE 301.35 REIMBURSE FOR DISC PLAYER 279472 011112 1628.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES SENIOR CITIZENS- 301.35 355647 1/19/2012 101017 SUBURBAN CHEVROLET 18.34 CAP 00005723 279401 367205 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 265.86 VEHICLE REPAIRS 00005820 279449 603449 1553.6180 CONTRACTED REPAIRS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 102.59 ARM REST, HANDLE 00005802 279464 369732 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 386.79 355646 111912012 100900 SUN NEWSPAPERS 102.96 PUBLISH NOTICE 279743 1355934 1120.6120 ADVERTISING LEGAL ADMINISTRATION 111.54 PUBLISH NOTICE 279744 1355935 1120.6120 ADVERTISING LEGAL ADMINISTRATION 62.92 WATER METER BIDS 279773 1354342 1120.6120 ADVERTISING LEGAL ADMINISTRATION 62.92 AD FOR BID 279774 1354343 1120.6120 ADVERTISING LEGAL ADMINISTRATION 40.04 PUBLISH NOTICE 279775 1354344 1120.6120 ADVERTISING LEGAL ADMINISTRATION R55CKREG LOG20000 i ARTWORK SOLD 1,287.00 CITY OF EDINA TELEPHONE VERNON OCCUPANCY 355649 111912012 Council Check Register 104905 SUNDBERG, ANN TELEPHONE YORK OCCUPANCY 1509.6103 1/13/2012 - 1/19/2012 32.50 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description 514.80 PUBLISH ORD 2011 -18 279776 1355110 1120.6120 ADVERTISING LEGAL 94.38 PUBLISH NOTICE 279777 1355108 1120.6120 ADVERTISING LEGAL 51.48 PUBLISH ORD 2011 -22 279778 1355114 1120.6120. ADVERTISING LEGAL 94.38 PUBLISH NOTICE 279779 1355109 1120.6120 ADVERTISING LEGAL 34.32 PUBLISH ORD 2011 -21 279780 1355113 1120.6120 ADVERTISING LEGAL 68.64 PUBLISH ORD 2011 -20 279781 1355112 1120.6120 ADVERTISING LEGAL 48.62 PUBLISH NOTICE 279782 - 1355111 1120.6120 ADVERTISING LEGAL 1/18/2012 8:10:07 Page - 22' Business Unit ,ADMINISTRATION ADMINISTRATION ADMINISTRATION ADMINISTRATION ADMINISTRATION ADMINISTRATION ADMINISTRATION 5101.4413 i ARTWORK SOLD 1,287.00 5861.6188 TELEPHONE VERNON OCCUPANCY 355649 111912012 50TH ST OCCUPANCY 104905 SUNDBERG, ANN TELEPHONE YORK OCCUPANCY 1509.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 32.50 ART WORK SOLD 279635 010912 5842.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER' 32.50 5822.5514 COST OF GOODS'SOLD.BEER` ' 50TH ST SELLING 355650 111912012 PATHS & HARD SURFACE 121161 SUPER MEDIA LLC CONTRACTED REPAIRS FIELD MAINTENANCE 42.26 PHONE LISTING 279450 010412 42.27 PHONE LISTING 279450 010412 42.27 PHONE LISTING 279450 010412 126.80 355651 1/19/2012 114800 SUPERIOR WHITETAIL MANAGEMENT 900.00 DEER REMOVAL 00001161 279558 NOV -DEC 900.00 355652 +111912012 120998 SURLY BREWING CO. 676.00 279498 V001329 1,067.00 279499 V001328 830.00 279706 V001361 2,573.00 355653 11912012 113549 TENNIS WEST 2,495.00 SUPPLY 8 INSTALL RAILING 00001273 279559 11 -008113 1,551.00 FENCE REPAIRS 00001367 279783 11- 008333 4,046.00 355654 1119/2012 101035 THORPE DISTRIBUTING COMPANY 83.00 279707 671554 2,020.10 279708 671239 463.75 279709 671294 2,566.85 355655 ;111912012 120700 TIGER OAK PUBLICATIONS INC. 291.66 MAGAZINE ADVERTISING 279451 '2011 -70913 1/18/2012 8:10:07 Page - 22' Business Unit ,ADMINISTRATION ADMINISTRATION ADMINISTRATION ADMINISTRATION ADMINISTRATION ADMINISTRATION ADMINISTRATION 5101.4413 i ARTWORK SOLD ART CENTER REVENUES 5861.6188 TELEPHONE VERNON OCCUPANCY 5821.6188 TELEPHONE 50TH ST OCCUPANCY 5841.6188 TELEPHONE YORK OCCUPANCY 1509.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES DEER CONTROL 5862.5514 COST OF GOODS' SOLD BEER VERNON SELLING 5842.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER' YORK SELLING 5822.5514 COST OF GOODS'SOLD.BEER` ' 50TH ST SELLING 1647.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES PATHS & HARD SURFACE 1642.6180 CONTRACTED REPAIRS FIELD MAINTENANCE 5421.5514 5862.5514. 5862.5514 5862.6122 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER GRILL COST OF..GOODS SOLD BEER VERNON SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER VERNON SELLING ADVERTISING OTHER VERNON SELLING R55CKREG LOG20000 CITY OF EDINA Council Check Register 1/13/2012 -1/19/2012 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description 291.67 MAGAZINE ADVERTISING 279451 2011 -70913 5822.6122 ADVERTISING OTHER 291.67 MAGAZINE ADVERTISING . 279451 2011 -70913 5842.6122 ADVERTISING OTHER REPAIR PARTS REPAIR PARTS REPAIR PARTS PROFESSIONAL SERVICES GENERAL SUPPLIES GENERAL SUPPLIES PRINTING DATA PROCESSING DATA PROCESSING DATA PROCESSING PROFESSIONAL SERVICES INSURANCE REPAIR PARTS 1/18/2012 8:10:07 Page - 23 Business Unit 50TH ST SELLING YORK SELLING EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN PATHS & HARD SURFACE MAINT OF COURSE & GROUNDS CENTENNIAL LAKES PSTF ADMINISTRATION 50TH STREET GENERAL LIQUOR YORK GENERAL VERNON LIQUOR GENERAL POLICE DEPT. GENERAL CENTRAL SERVICES GENERAL MAINT OF COURSE & GROUNDS 875.00 355656 1119/2012 103277 TITAN MACHINERY 28.74 SPRING 00005796 279452 9C04147 1553.6530 2,290.52 FRAME, WINDSHIELD, SEALS 00005726 279465 9CO4098 1553.6530 136.50 UJOINTS 00005739 279466 9CO4248 1553.6530 2,455.76 356657 111912012 102742 -TKDA ENGINEERS ARCHITECTS PLAN - 3,000.00 . BRIDGE INSPECTION 00001366 279784 002011003767 1647.6103 3,000.00 355658 1119/2012 101038 TOLL GAS & WELDING SUPPLY 145.24 . WELDING GAS 00006128 279402 376351 5422.6406 42.04 WELDING CYLINDERS 279785 434723 5630.6406 187.28 365669 1119/2012 122109 TOSHIBA BUSINESS SOLUTIONS 217.36 COPIER USAGE 279745 194411054 7410.6575 217.36 355660 • 1119/2012 101693 TOTAL REGISTER SYSTEMS t 14.25 MONTHLY FTP FILE 279453 27337 5820.6160 14.25 MONTHLY FTP FILE 279453 27337 5840.6160 14.25 MONTHLY FTP FILE 279453 27337 5860.6160 42.75 355661 111912012 104064 TRANS UNION LLC 37.20 BACKGROUND CHECKS 279560 12120442 1400.6103 37.20 365662 1119/2012 116535 TRAVELERS 39.00 DEDUCTIBLE 279403 000399020 1550.6200 39.00 355663 111912012 118190 TURFWERKS LLC 98.16' BEARINGS 00006124 279454 S129198 5422.6530 98.16 355664 1/19/2012 105243 TUSHIE MONTGOMERY ARCHITECTS REPAIR PARTS REPAIR PARTS REPAIR PARTS PROFESSIONAL SERVICES GENERAL SUPPLIES GENERAL SUPPLIES PRINTING DATA PROCESSING DATA PROCESSING DATA PROCESSING PROFESSIONAL SERVICES INSURANCE REPAIR PARTS 1/18/2012 8:10:07 Page - 23 Business Unit 50TH ST SELLING YORK SELLING EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN PATHS & HARD SURFACE MAINT OF COURSE & GROUNDS CENTENNIAL LAKES PSTF ADMINISTRATION 50TH STREET GENERAL LIQUOR YORK GENERAL VERNON LIQUOR GENERAL POLICE DEPT. GENERAL CENTRAL SERVICES GENERAL MAINT OF COURSE & GROUNDS R55CKREG LOG20000 CITY OF EDINA Council Check Register 1/13/2012 - 1/19/2012 1118/2012 8:10:07 Page - 24 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit 4,065.20 YORK REMODEL 279786 211035A -7 5841.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES YORK OCCUPANCY 4,065.20 355665 111912012 103048 U.S. BANK 2,100.00 TRUSTEE FEE 279404 3025570 3201.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES CITY HALL DS REVENUES 2,100.00 365666 1119/2012 116379 U.S. BANK 17.90 NET ZERO 279405 010412 1500.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES CONTINGENCIES 38.20 INTERNET 279405 010412 1550.6155 BANK SERVICES CHARGES CENTRAL SERVICES GENERAL 56.10 355667 111912012 103298 UPS STORE #1715, THE 10.93 - SHIP SAMPLES 00001533 279467 TRAN: 1441 5915.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES WATER TREATMENT 10.93 355668 111912012 101908 US FOODSERVICE INC 145.76 CUST 43805514 276787 123111 5421.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES GRILL 446.97 CUST 43805514 279787 123111 5421:5510 COST OF GOODS SOLD GRILL 592.73 355669 111912012 110889 USPCA 150.00• NATIONAL K9 CERTIFICATION 279622 011212 1400.6104 CONFERENCES & SCHOOLS POLICE DEPT. GENERAL 150.00 355670 1119/2012 119476 USPCA REGION 12 170.00 K9 CERTIFICATION 279522 2012 1400.6104 CONFERENCES & SCHOOLS POLICE DEPT. GENERAL 170.00 365671 111912012 101058 VAN PAPER CO. 384.37 LIQUOR BAGS 00007512 279455 222587 -00 5842.6512 PAPER SUPPLIES YORK SELLING 233.20 LIQUOR BAGS 00007511 279456 222588 -00 5822.6512 PAPER SUPPLIES 50TH ST SELLING 50.07 LIQUOR BAGS 00007512 .279457: 222587 -01 5842.6512 PAPER SUPPLIES YORK SELLING 33.38 LIQUOR BAGS 279473 222588 -01 5822.6512 PAPER SUPPLIES 50TH ST SELLING 27.12 CAN LINERS 00001346 279529 221976 -01 1645.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES LITTER REMOVAL 379.75 CAN LINERS 00001346 279561 221976 -00 1645.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES LITTER REMOVAL 1,107.89 ` 355672 - 111912012 121042 WALLACE CARLSON PRINTING 92.98 - BUSINESS CARDS 279562 46216 ' 5110.6575 PRINTING ART CENTER ADMINISTRATION 92.98 R55CKREG LOG20000 VERNON SELLING COST OF'GOODS SOLD WINE CITY OF EDINA 50TH ST SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR YORK SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX YORK SELLING _ Council Check Register YORK SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING 1/13/2012 - 1/19/2012 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No 355673 111912012 129142 WALLY S SERVICE STATION INC. 42.61 SMALL ENGINE FUEL FOR EFD 00003576 279788 011012 1470.6406 42.61 355674 111912012 123616 WATER CONSERVATION SERVICE INC 449.47 LEAK LOCATES 00001532 279458 2905 5913.6103 449.47 355675 111912012 124216 WAUSAU TILE INC. 1,044.99 RECYCLING TOPS FOR TRASH CAMM002012 279651 413659 5761.6406 1,044.99 355676 111912012 105440 WEIGLE, SUE 193.65 PETTY CASH 279474 011112 1628.6406 193.65 355677 111912012 102798 WEST PAYMENT CENTER 721.99 DEC 2011 CHARGES 279563 - 824200104 1400.6103 721.99 355678 111912012 .101033 WINE COMPANY, THE 400.40 279500 289708 -00 5862.5513 998.85 279501 289604 -00 5822.5513 220.20 279502 289605 -00 5842.5513 1,619.45 355679 111912012 101312 WINE MERCHANTS 3,578.90 279617 393124 5862.5513 1,622.96 279618 393122 5862.5513 2;263.24 279710 393120 5822.5513 .56 279711 393121 5842.5513 2,290.35 279712 393123 5842.5513 9,756.01 355680 1119/2012 124291 WIRTZ BEVERAGE MINNESOTA 70.36 279503 687767 5862.5515 5,347.49 279504 687768 5862.5513 1.642.96- 279505 687770 5822.5513 1,930.31 279506 687772 5842.5512 103.59 279507 687773 5842.5515 2,370.20 279508 687774 .5842.5513 162.14- 279509 851085 .5822.5513 Subledger Account Description GENERAL SUPPLIES PROFESSIONAL SERVICES GENERAL SUPPLIES GENERAL SUPPLIES 1/18/2012 8:10:07 Page - 25 Business Unit FIRE DEPT. GENERAL DISTRIBUTION CENTENNIAL LAKES OPERATING SENIOR CITIZENS PROFESSIONAL SERVICES POLICE DEPT. GENERAL 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 WINE COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 50TH ST SELLING YORK SELLING VERNON SELLING VERNON SELLING 50TH ST SELLING YORK SELLING YORK SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX VERNON SELLING COST OF'GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR YORK SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX YORK SELLING _ COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING R55CKREG LOG20000 CITY OF EDINA. 1/18/2012 8:10:07 Council Check Register Page - 26 1/13/2012 - 1/19/2012 Check # Date Amount- Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit 5.32- 279510 851233 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 75.87- 279511 851148 5842.5513 ` COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 544.20 279619 687769 5822.5512 COSTIOF GOODS -SOLD LIQUOR NTH ST SELLING 3,683.92 279620 687766 5862.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR VERNON SELLING 201.15- 279621 851126 5842.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR YORK SELLING 113.06- 279713, 851814 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 33.10- 279714 851813 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 15102.39 355681 1119/2012 124529 WIRTZ BEVERAGE MINNESOTA BEER 2,063.78 279512 845955 5862.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER . VERNON SELLING 2,042.50 279513 846720 5842.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER YORK SELLING 21.50 279514 846721 5842.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX YORK SELLING 1,844.20 279715 849060 5842.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER YORK SELLING 1,206.90 279716 848881 5822.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER 50TH ST SELLING 7,178.88 365682 111912012 129856 WISCONSIN PHYSICIANS SERVICE 327.74 AMBULANCE OVERPAYMENT 279527 CARL SWENDSEEN 1470.4329 AMBULANCE FEES FIRE DEPT. GENERAL 327.74 365683 111912012 •121682 WMCA 150.00 MEETING REGISTRATION (2) 279530 _ IIMC REGION 1180.6104 CONFERENCES & SCHOOLS ELECTION 150.00 355684 1/1912012 101726 XCEL ENERGY 2,454.91 51- 6621207 -1 279406 309289129 5913.6185 LIGHT & POWER DISTRIBUTION 319.48 -51- 9013604 -6 279407 309328784 5913.6185 LIGHT & POWER DISTRIBUTION 3,394.23 51- 6840050 -6 279408 309645579 5921.6185 LIGHT &POWER SANITARY LIFT STATION MAINT - 421.15 51- 4197645 -8 279564 309770988 1322.6185 LIGHT & POWER STREET LIGHTING ORNAMENTAL 6,729.04 51- 5888961 -7 279565 309629339 1375.6185 LIGHT & POWER PARKING RAMP 4,404.96 51- 6824328 -7 279566 309470139 5420.6185 LIGHT & POWER CLUB HOUSE 21,493.75 51- 5605640 -1 279789 309983808 5911.6185 - LIGHT & POWER WELL PUMPS 1,978.07 51- 5619094 -8 279790 309982418 1552.6185 LIGHT & POWER CENT SVC PW BUILDING 4,627.72 51- 6121102 -5 279791 309992725 1646.6185 LIGHT & POWER BUILDING MAINTENANCE 3,957.04 51- 6121102 -5 279792 309796151 1646.6185 LIGHT &POWER BUILDING MAINTENANCE 49,780.35 356685 1119/2012 100568 XEROX CORPORATION 184.08 DEC USAGE - PARK & REC 00004322 279409 059201447 1550.6151 EQUIPMENT RENTAL CENTRAL SERVICES GENERAL 20149 DEC USAGE - BLDG/ENG 00004322 279567 059425567 1550.6151 EQUIPMENT RENTAL CENTRAL SERVICES GENERAL 62.16 COPIER USAGE 279568 059201561 1628.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES SENIOR CITIZENS R55CKREG LOG20000 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation 449.73 516,658.64 Grand Total CITY OF EDINA Council Check Register 1/13/2012 — 1119/2012 PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Payment Instrument Totals Check Total 516,658.64 Total Payments 516,658.64 Business Unit 1/18/2012 8:10:07 Page - 27 R55CKSUM LOG20000 CITY OF EDINA 1/18/2012 8:11:04 Council Check Summary Page - 1 Company Amount 01000 GENERAL FUND 191,069.41 02200 COMMUNICATIONS FUND 18,226.00 02300 POLICE SPECIAL REVENUE 262.44 03100 GENERAL DEBT SERVICE FUND 2,000.00 03200 CITY HALL DEBT SERVICE 2,100.00 04000 WORKING CAPITAL FUND 7,035.90 04200 EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT FUND 15,466.16 05100 ART CENTER FUND 2,063.89 05200 GOLF DOME FUND 16,950.07 05300 AQUATIC CENTER FUND 198.00 05400 GOLF COURSE FUND 11,168.11 05500 ICE ARENA FUND 6,384.47 05600 EDINBOROUGH/CENT LAKES FUND 1,582.02 06700 EDINBOROUGH PARK FUND 2,751.29 05750 CENTENNIAL LAKES PARK FUND 1,973.64 05800 LIQUOR FUND 130,410.98 05900 UTILITY FUND 64,532.84 05950 RECYCLING FUND 38,820.60 07400 PSTF AGENCY FUND 1,960.47 09900 PAYROLL FUND 1,702.35 Report Totals 516,658.64 1/13/2012,- 1/19/2012 We ,confirm to the best of our knowledge and belief, that these claims comply in all material respects with the requirements of the City R55CKREG LOG20000 CITY OF EDINA Council Check Register 1/26/2012 - 1/26/2012 Check# . Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description 355686 112612012 -.. 100613 AAA 33.20 LICENSE FEE 00005823 279795 011312 1553.6260 LICENSES& PERMITS INSURANCE INSURANCE COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX GENERAL SUPPLIES CONSULTING INSPECTION ACCESSORIES ACCESSORIES REPAIR PARTS GENERAL SUPPLIES- GENERAL SUPPLIES GENERAL SUPPLIES GENERAL SUPPLIES CONTRACTED REPAIRS 1/25/2012 8:02:40 Page - 1 EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN CENTRAL SERVICES GENERAL CENTRAL SERVICES GENERAL VERNON SELLING WELL HOUSES WM-473 NEW TREATMENT PLANT #6 EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN EQUIPMENT. OPERATION GEN METER REPAIR BUILDING MAINTENANCE. BUILDING MAINTENANCE BUILDING MAINTENANCE FIRE DEPT. GENERAL 33.20 355687 1/2612012 100715 ACCLAIM BENEFITS 537.60 HRA ADMIN 280172 0022202 -IN 1550.6200 182.00 DEC COBRA ADMIN 280173 0022071 -IN 1550.6200 719.60 355688 112612012 102971 ACE ICE COMPANY 61.20 279966 0816232 5862.5515 61.20 355689 112612012 100614 - ACE SUPPLY CO. INC. 65.93 SCREWS, HANGERS 00001446 280079 126701 5912.6406 65.93 ' 355690 112612012 129469 AECOM TECHNICAL SERVICES INC. 25;173.99- WATER TREATMENT PLANT #6 279846 37186811 05473.1705.21 25,173.99 355691 112612012 127365 AMERICAN FLEET SUPPLY 27.12 LENS COVERS, 00005693 278926 AFS- 213630009 1553.6585 27.12- CREDIT 279273 AFS - 220040003 1553.6585 36.10 MUDFLAPS 00005867 279903 AFS- 220180021 1553.6530 36.10 355692 112612012 103957 AMERICAN VAN EQUIPMENT INC. 536.50 SHE_ LVING 00005804 280080 485685 5917.6406 536.50 355693 112612012 100665 AMSAN 333.02 CLEANING SUPPLIES 00001351 279904 258658137 1646.6406 22.02 URINAL SCREENS 00001351 279905 258827534 1646.6406 106.74 SOAP SCUM REMOVER 00001351 279906 258912336 1646.6406 .455.78 355694 112612012 102109 ANCOM TECHNICAL CENTER 191131 RADIO REPAIRS 280081 27173 1470.6180 191.31 355695 112612012 102470 AON RISK SERVICES INC. OF MN INSURANCE INSURANCE COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX GENERAL SUPPLIES CONSULTING INSPECTION ACCESSORIES ACCESSORIES REPAIR PARTS GENERAL SUPPLIES- GENERAL SUPPLIES GENERAL SUPPLIES GENERAL SUPPLIES CONTRACTED REPAIRS 1/25/2012 8:02:40 Page - 1 EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN CENTRAL SERVICES GENERAL CENTRAL SERVICES GENERAL VERNON SELLING WELL HOUSES WM-473 NEW TREATMENT PLANT #6 EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN EQUIPMENT. OPERATION GEN METER REPAIR BUILDING MAINTENANCE. BUILDING MAINTENANCE BUILDING MAINTENANCE FIRE DEPT. GENERAL R55CKREG LOG20000 CITY OF EDINA 1/25/2012 8:02:40 Council Check Register Page - 2 1/26/2012 - 1/26/2012 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account. No Subledger Account Description Business Unit 4,390.00 PREMIUM 280082 6100000133693 1550.6200 INSURANCE CENTRAL SERVICES GENERAL 4,390.00 355696 112612012 102172 APPERTS FOODSERVICE 355.32 CONCESSION PRODUCT 280052 1677359 5761.5510 COST OF GOODS SOLD CENTENNIAL LAKES OPERATING 377.92 CONCESSION PRODUCT 280053 1677546 5730.5510 COST OF GOODS SOLD EDINBOROUGH CONCESSIONS 375:08 CONCESSION PRODUCT 280054 1672767 •5730.5510 COST-OF GOODS SOLD EDINBOROUGH CONCESSIONS 424.06 CONCESSION PRODUCT 280055 1671018 5730.5510 COST OF GOODS SOLD EDINBOROUGH CONCESSIONS 1,532.38 355697 112612012 103680 ARAMARK REFRESHMENT SRVCS 172.29 COFFEE 280036 - 1002384 7411.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES PSTF OCCUPANCY 301.29 COFFEE 280083 998974 1550.6406 GENERAL- SUPPLIES CENTRAL SERVICES GENERAL 473.58 355698 112612012 129917 ARAPA, SUSAN. 153.00 CLASS REFUND - 279954 011712 5101.4607 CLASS REGISTRATION. ART CENTER REVENUES 153.00 355699 112612012 100634 ASPEN EQUIPMENT CO. 91.99 GASKETS, OIL SEALS 00005721 279907 10095875 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 91.99 355700 112612012 101195- AUTO ELECTRIC.OF BLOOMINGTON I 144.23 REBUILT STARTER 00005863 279908 150456 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 144.23 355701 11/2612012 129908 BARCLAY,.BRUCE 92.59 UTILITY OVERPAYMENT REFUND 279796 4618 MOORLAND 5900.2015 CUSTOMER REFUND 7UTILITY BALANCE SHEET AVE 92.59 355702 :112612012 100643 BARR ENGINEERING CO. 690.00 COMP WATER RESOURSE MGMT 280125 23271072.00 -22 5913.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES DISTRIBUTION " 668.00 STORMWATER'MGMT 280126 23270354.00 -187 5932.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES GENERAL STORM SEWER - 1,358.00 355709 112612012 102449. BATTERY WHOLESALE INC. 157.14; BATTERIES 00005829 280084. 14376%, 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN - 157.14 .. 356704 112612012 101356 BELLBOY CORPORATION R55CKREG LOG20000 CITY OF EDINA 1/25t--./ 8:02:40 Council Check Register Page - 3 1/26/2012 - 1/26/2012 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit 484.60 279859 71776800 5862.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR VERNON SELLING 109.70 279860 6144300 5862.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX VERNON SELLING 129.19 279967 86264900 5862.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX VERNON SELLING 37.00- 279968 86267800 5862.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX VERNON SELLING 7.37- 279969 86268300 5842.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX YORK SELLING 7.00- 279970 71776200 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 534.40 280182 71857700 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 598.53 280183 71857400 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 115.10 280184 71857600 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING 36.55 280185 71857500 5842.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX YORK SELLING 559.60 280186 71863900 5862.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR VERNON SELLING 63.12 280187 86288400 5862.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX VERNON SELLING 56.59 280188 86288600 5822.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX 50TH ST SELLING 51.88 280189 86288500 5842.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX YORK SELLING 2,687.89 355705 1/26/2012 125139 BERNICK'S WINE 616.00 279971 42192 5842.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER YORK SELLING 112.20 280190 42193 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 728.20 355706 112612012 100648 BERTELSON OFFICE PRODUCTS 87.72 OFFICE SUPPLIES 280085 WO- 745767 -1 1190.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES ASSESSING 98.28 FILE POCKETS 280086 WO- 747376 -1 1550.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES CENTRAL SERVICES GENERAL 186.00 355707 1/2612012 122688 BMK SOLUTIONS 68.20 OFFICE SUPPLIES 280087 73969 1552.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES CENT SVC PW BUILDING 20.19- RETURN 280088 5306CM 1552.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES CENT SVC PW BUILDING 5.24• RETURN 280089 5295CM 1552.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES CENT SVC PW BUILDING 42.77 355708 112612012 105367 BOUND TREE MEDICAL LLC 2,222.53 AMBULANCE SUPPLIES 00003710 280127 87321852 1470.6510 FIRST AID SUPPLIES FIRE DEPT. GENERAL 2,222.53 355709 112612012 100659 BOYER TRUCK PARTS 52.69 CABLE ASSEMBLY 00005807 279797 598880 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 258.62 FILTERS 00005866 279798 598836 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 62.37 SEAT 00005811 279909 599038 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 373.68 R55CKREG LOG20000 CITY OF EDINA 1/25/2012 8:02:40 Council Check Register Page - 4 1/26/2012 — 1/26/2012 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit 355710 112612012 100664 BRAUN INTERTEC 620.00 MATERIALS TESTING 280128 346472 01367.1705.21 CONSULTING INSPECTION BA -367 W70TH TRAFFIC IMPLEMENT 541.75 MATERIALS TESTING 280129 346475 01383.1705.21 CONSULTING INSPECTION BA -383 W44TH ST 3,380.00 GEOTECHNICAL EVALUATION 280130 346754 01386.1705.21 CONSULTING INSPECTION VIKING HILLS 2ND NEIGHBORHOOD 2,980.00 GEOTECHNICAL EVALUATION 280131 346756 01382.1705.21 CONSULTING INSPECTION BA -382 GALLAGHER DRIVE 2,750.00 GEOTECHNICAL EVALUATION 280132 346755 01387.1705.21 CONSULTING INSPECTION VALLEY ESTATES NEIGHBORHOOD 3,850.00 GEOTECHNICAL EVALUATION 280133 346753 01385.1705.21 CONSULTING INSPECTION COUNTRYSIDE NEIGHBORHOOD 341.00 MATERIALS TESTING 280134 346751 01334.1705.21 CONSULTING INSPECTION BA -334 MINNEHAHA WOODS RECON 14,462.75 355711 112612012 100669 BRYAN ROCK PRODUCTS INC. 439.81 RIP RAP 00001416 280090 011512 5932.6517 SAND GRAVEL & ROCK GENERAL STORM SEWER 439.81 355712 112612012 120935 CAMPBELL KNUTSON 8,479.51 LEGAL 280135 2851- OOOG58 1195.6131 PROFESSIONAL SERV - LEGAL LEGAL SERVICES 8,479.51 355713 1/2612012 119455 CAPITOL BEVERAGE SALES 1,723.35 279861 00010169 5842.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER YORK SELLING 50.25 279862 30755 5842.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX YORK SELLING 470.00 280191 32292 5842.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER YORK SELLING 2,243.60 355714 112612012 103268 CARLSON, DAVID 465.10 UNIFORM PURCHASE 279947 011812 1400.6203 UNIFORM ALLOWANCE POLICE DEPT. GENERAL 465.10 355715 1126/2012 116683 CAT & FIDDLE BEVERAGE 142.00 279863 92255 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 142.00 355716 1126/2012 129923 CAWLEY 29.30 NAME BADGES 280136 V0T7963 2210.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES COMMUNICATIONS 28.57 NAME BADGES 280178 V076961 2210.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES COMMUNICATIONS 421.11 NAME BADGES 280179 V076669 2210.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES COMMUNICATIONS 861.71 NAME BADGES 260180 V076939 2210.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES COMMUNICATIONS 1,340.69 355717 112612012 103711 CENTERPOINT ENERGY SERVICES IN 5,469.20 279847 2317602 5620.6186 HEAT EDINBOROUGH PARK 45.96 279848 2318072 5311.6186 HEAT POOL OPERATION R55CKREG LOG20000 CITY OF EDINA 1/25/2012 8:02:40 Council Check Register Page - 5 1126/2012 -1/26/2012 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation. PO # - Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit 5,515.16 355718 112612012 129909 CENTRAL BANK 10.25 279799 5905 LEE VALLEY 5900.2015 CUSTOMER REFUND UTILITY BALANCE SHEET RD 10.25 35571.9 112612012 123898 CENTURYLINK 58.84 952 944 -6522 279800 6522 -1/12 5511.6188 TELEPHONE ARENA BLDG/GROUNDS 151.99 952 285 -2951 279801 2951 -1/12 1470.6188 TELEPHONE FIRE DEPT. GENERAL 210.83 355720 112612012 116353 CHIPPEWA GRAPHICS INC. - 443.68 ENVELOPES 280137 - 32633 1190.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES ASSESSING 443.68 355721 112612012 119725 CHISAGO LAKES DISTRIBUTING CO 219.85 279864 463848 5842.5514 COST. OF GOODS SOLD BEER YORK SELLING - 151.95 279865 463836 5822.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER BOTH ST SELLING 371.80 355722 112612012: 122084 CITY OF EDINA - UTILITIES 673.43 00082050- 0200650009 280138 650009 -1/12 1551.6189 SEWER & WATER CITY HALL GENERAL 580.29 00082050-0200650018 280139 650018 -1/12 1551.6189 SEWER & WATER CITY HALL GENERAL 54.49 00114667 - 0210000012 280140 210000012 -1112 4090.6189 SEWER & WATER 50TH &FRANCE MAINTENANCE 379.19 00103426- 0203502003 280141 203502003 -1/12 1552.6189 SEWER &'WATER CENT SVC PW BUILDING 63.17 00103426- 0203158000 280142 203158000 -1112 1552.6189 SEWER & WATER CENT SVC PW BUILDING 235.99 00103426- 0203158108 280143 203158108 -1/12 1552.6189 SEWER & WATER CENT SVC PW BUILDING 19.38 00114064-0203502012 280144 203502012 -1/12 1552.6189 SEWER & WATER CENT SVC PW BUILDING 73.82 00082198- 0200815001 280145 200815001 -1/12 1375.6189 SEWER & WATER PARKING RAMP 2,079.76 355723 112612012 105693 CITYSPRINT 16.76 COURIER SERVICES 280146 24670 1260.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES ENGINEERING GENERAL 16.76 355724 1126/2012 100692 COCA -COLA REFRESHMENTS 174.40 279972 0198030914 5842.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX YORK SELLING 219.40 279973 0108223831 5862.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX VERNON SELLING 190:80 280192 0178083420 5822.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX 50TH ST SELLING 584.60 R55CKREG LOG20000 CITY OF EDINA 1/25/2012 8:02:40 . Council Check Register Page - 6. 1/26/2012 - 1126/2012 - Check # Date Amount Supplier I Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit 355725 1126/2012 101227 COFFEE MILL INC. 413.00 COCOA, CAPPUCCINOS 00002049- 280056 0741013 -IN 5761.5510 COST OF GOODS SOLD CENTENNIAL LAKES OPERATING 413.00 355726 112612012 120433 COMCAST 82.60 8772 10 614 0220686 280057 220686 =1112 5720.6230 SERVICE CONTRACTS EQUIPMENT EDINBOROUGH OPERATIONS 4.51 8772 10 614 0023973 280091 23973 -1/12 1551.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES CITY HALL GENERAL 66.95 8772 10 614 0419858 280171 419858 -1/12 5511.6188 TELEPHONE ARENA BLDG/GROUNDS 154.06 355727 112612012 121267 CREATIVE RESOURCES 3,555.33 T- SHIRTS FOR RESALE. 280058 13691 5620.5510 COST OF GOODS SOLD EDINBOROUGH PARK 3,555.33 355728 _112612012 129550 :CUNINGHAM GROUP ARCHITECTURE 31,667.00 GRANDVIEW STUDY 279849 37353 1500.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES CONTINGENCIES 31,667.00 355729 112612012 100701 CUSHMAN MOTOR CO. INC. - 23.56 FUEL FILTERS 00005861 279910 156104 1553.6536 REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 23.56 366730 112612012 121618 DAKOTA SUPPLY GROUP 317.46 COUPLINGS, GASKETS. 00001544 280092 7203787 5917.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES METER REPAIR 317.46 355731 112612012 102478 'DAY DISTRIBUTING CO. 22.40 279866 634391 5842.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX YORK SELLING 2,050.40 279867 634390 5842.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER YORK SELLING 22.40 279868 634392 5822.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX 50TH ST SELLING 152.00 279869 634389 5822.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER 50TH ST SELLING 2,394.45 279974 634387 5862:5514 COST OF GOODS;SOLD BEER VERNON SELLING 43.00 279975 634388 5862.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX VERNON SELLING 4,664.65 355732 112612012 118063 DC MANAGEMENT & ENVIRONMENTAL 12,845.00 RANGE LEAD ABATEMENT :280037 12 -01 -01 - 7412.6103 - PROFESSIONAL SERVICES PSTF RANGE 8,331.98 280038 12 -01 -02 7412.6103 PROFESSIONAL- SERVICES- P.STF;RANGE 21,176.98 356733 ;112612012 100718' DELEGARD TOOL CO. 209.97: GRINDER KIT, CHISEL SET 00005862 280093 654503 1553.6556 TOOLS - EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN R55CKREG LOG20000 CITY OF EDINA Council Check Register 1/26/2012 -112612012 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description 34.85 SOCKET TRAYS 00005864-280094 654787 1553.6556 TOOLS 244.82 355734 1/26/2012 100899 DEPARTMENT-OF LABOR & INDUSTRY- . 6,919.51 SURCHARGE- DEC 2011 279850 13323053060 1495.4380 SURCHARGE 6,919.51 365735 112612012 104314 DEPOSITORY. TRUST & CLEARING CO ' 1,052.00 AUDIT CONFIRMATION 280039 7791 -35115 1500.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 1.052.00 355736 112612012 102831.' DEX MEDIA EAST INC. 61.18 110311867 280147 110311867 -12/11 5621.6122 ADVERTISING OTHER 67.17 651972955 280148 651972955 -12/11 5621.6122 ADVERTISING OTHER 128.35 365737 112612012 106340 'EDINA CAR WASH, 163.06 DEC WASHES 280149 4917 1553.6238 CAR WASH l 163.06 355738 1126/2012 100549 ELECTRIC PUMP INC. 1,623.67 PUMP PARTS 00001396 .280095 0046475 -IN 5921.6530 REPAIR PARTS - 1,623.67- 365739 1 12812012 104195 EXTREME BEVERAGE LLC. 134.00 279976 125 -381 5822.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX 134.00 279977 W- 487421 5862.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX 268.00 365740 1126/2012 100146 FACTORY MOTOR PARTS COMPANY 28.89 HALOGEN BULB 00005766 279802 69- 057127 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS 61.44. HALOGEN CAPSULES 00005766 279803 69- 057365 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS 4.48 HALOGEN CAPSULE 00005766 279804 70- 085348 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS 181.15 ROTORS, PADS 00005643 279911 69- 057484 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS . 275.96 355741 112612012 100297 FAST FOTO & DIGITAL 11.54.. MOUNT REPRINT 279943 .8326063 -#T2 -308 1130.6408 PHOTOGRAPHIC SUPPLIES 747 11.54 355742 112612012 120831 FIRST SCRIBE INC. 1/25/2012 8:02:40 Page- 7 Business Unit EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN INSPECTIONS CONTINGENCIES EDINBOROUGH ADMINISTRATION EDINBORO UGH ADMINISTRATION EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN SANITARY LIFT STATION MAINT NTH ST SELLING VERNON SELLING EQUIPMENT OPERATION-GEN EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 1COMMUNICATIONSr R55CKREG LOG20000 CITY OF EDINA 1/25/2012 8:02:40 Council Check Register Page - 8 1/26/2012 - 1/26/2012 i Check # Date Amount Supplier /Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger- Account Description 'Business Unit 425.00 ROWAY 280096 23326 1260.6103 - PROFESSIONAL SERVICES ENGINEERING GENERAL 425.00 355743 112612012 119211' FIRSTLAB 39.00 DRUG TEST 280040 00489821 1550.6121 ADVERTISING PERSONNEL CENTRAL SERVICES GENERAL 39.00 vi 355744 1126/2012 128864 FORT DEARBORN LIFE,INSURANCE C ,- 1,702.35 SHORT TERM.DISABILITY ` 279805 F018342 -FEB -" 9900.2033:16 LTD.- 99. PAYROLL CLEARING 1,702.35 355745 112612012 101867 GETSINGER,' DONNA 45.50 ART WORK SOLD 279955 -011712 5101.4413 ART WORK SOLD ART CENTER REVENUES 45.50 355746 , 112612012 129916 GILDENSOPH, L. 214.00 CLASS REFUND 279953 011812 5101.4607 CLASS REGISTRATION ART CENTER REVENUES 214.00 355747 -112612012 117811. GOLBERG, CAROLYN 111.48 ART WORK SOLD 279956 011712 5101.4413 ART WORK SOLD ART CENTER REVENUES 111.48 355748 ` 112612012 100780 GOPHER STATE ONE -CALL INC. 100.00 ANNUAL FEE 00001540 279806 31807 5913.6103 PROFESSIONAL- SERVICES DISTRIBUTION 100.00 355749 112612012 101103 GRAINGER 66.86 EAR PLUGS 00005777 279807 9724516761 1553.6610 SAFETYIEQUIPMENT, EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 154.41 EARPLUGS, WHEELS 00001353 279912 9725145438 1646.6610 SAFETY EQUIPMENT BUILDING MAINTENANCE 53.74 FANS 00002283 280059 9723033057 5720.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES EDINBOROUGH OPERATIONS 25.46 NOZZLE 00002286 280060 9726943559 5720.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES EDINBOROUGH OPERATIONS = 114.09 WET /DRY VACUUM 280097 9724928859 5821.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES 50TH ST OCCUPANCY 144.55 GLOVES, BATTERIES 00001536 280098 9726943575 5913.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES ": DISTRIBUTION 559.11 355750 : 1126/2012 102217 GRAPE BEGINNINGS INC 98.25 279978 135532 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS,SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING 851.25 279979 135533 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 975.25 280193 135571 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING f. 1,924.75 R55CKREG LOG20000 CITY OF EDINA Council Check Register 1126/2012 — 1/26/2012 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description 355751 1/2612012 101518 GRAUSAM, STEVE 13.44 SUPPLIES REIMBURSEMENT 279948 011812 1100.6106 MEETING EXPENSE 57.54 SUPPLIES REIMBURSEMENT 279948 011812 5841.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES 70.98 355752 112612012 129922 GREATER MSP 10,000.00 2012 ANNUAL INVESTMENT ._. 280099 000123 1120.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 10,000.00 355753 112612012 115612 : GREATMATS 2,643.72 GRAPPLING MATS 00007440 280041 1343908 7411.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES 2,643.72 355754 112612012 124620 GRIFFIN, SANDRA - 19.50 ART WORK SOLD 279957 011712 5101.4413 ART WORK SOLD 19:50 355755 112612012 100918 GRIMSBY, NANCY 22.75 ART WORK SOLD 279958 011712 5101.4413 ART WORK SOLD 22.75 - 355756 1/2612012 102869 GUEST, LISA 14.30 ART WORK SOLD 279959 011712 5101.4413 ARTWORK SOLD „ 14.30 355757 112612012 104482 GUNNAR ELECTRIC CO. INC. 855.20 TOWER UPGRADES 280042 11 -12-49 7413.6710 EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT 855.20 355758 112612012 100788 H&L MESABI 885.44 POLY BLADES 00005598 279913 84558 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS 885.44 355759 1126/2012 102320 HAMCO DATA PRODUCTS 176.84 THERMAL PAPER 00007516 279914 104209 5862.6512 PAPER SUPPLIES ' 176.84 355760 1/2612012 124775 HAMLINE UNIVERSITY 1,300.00 SPRING 2012 TUITION 280100 9877202 -2012 .1470.6104 CONFERENCES & SCHOOLS 1,300.00 365761 112612012 125270 HARTFORD -PRIORITY ACCOUNTS 1/25/2012 8:02:40 Page- 9 Business Unit CITY COUNCIL YORK OCCUPANCY ADMINISTRATION PSTF OCCUPANCY ART CENTER REVENUES ART CENTER REVENUES ART CENTER REVENUES PSTF FIRE TOWER EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN VERNON SELLING FIRE DEPT. GENERAL R55CKREG LOG20000 CITY OF EDINA 1/25/2012 8:02:40 Council Check Register Page - 10 1/26/2012 - 1/26/2012 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit 3,331.90 PREMIUM 280061 5708451 -9 9900.2033.16 LTD - 99 PAYROLL CLEARING 3,331.90 355762 112612012 126917 HAYES, SUSAN 22.75 ART WORK SOLD 279960 011712 5101.4413 ART WORK SOLD ART CENTER REVENUES 22.75 355763 1126/2012 102460 HENNEPIN COUNTY TREASURER 6,290.03 TIF ADMINISTRATION 280043 - 24 -2011 1000.1303 DUE FROM HRA GENERAL FUND BALANCE SHEET 6,290.03 = 355764 112612012 103753 HILLYARD INC - MINNEAPOLIS 436.71 SOAP, SPONGES 00002279 280062 600066675 5720.6511 CLEANING SUPPLIES EDINBOROUGH OPERATIONS 226.72 SOAP, CLEANERS 00002281 280063 600068270 5720.6511 CLEANING SUPPLIES EDINBOROUGH OPERATIONS 338.69 SANITIZER, MOPS 00002275 280150 600061447 5620.6511 CLEANING SUPPLIES . EDINBOROUGH PARK. 1,002.12 355765 112612012 104375 HOHENSTEINS INC. 483.50 279670 586677 5842.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER YORK SELLING 481.50 279980 586910 5822.5514- COST OF GOODS SOLD, BEER 50TH.ST SELLING 572.50 279981 586909 5862.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER VERNON SELLING 1,537.50 355766 112612012 125176 HORIZON AGENCY INC. 121,027.00 WORKERS COMP INS 279939 115315 1550.6200 INSURANCE CENTRAL SERVICES GENERAL 2,293.00 INLAND MARINE INS 279940 115316 1550.6200 INSURANCE CENTRAL SERVICES GENERAL 22,237.00 BUSINESS AUTO INS 279941 115317 1550.6200 INSURANCE CENTRAL SERVICES GENERAL 51,919.00 COMMERCIAL PACKAGE INS 279942- 115330 1550.6200 INSURANCE CENTRAL SERVICES GENERAL 197,476.00 355767 1/26/2012 100417 -- HORIZON COMMERCIAL POOL SUPPLY - 840.56 CHLORINE, ACID 00002272 280151 11122705 5620.6545 CHEMICALS EDINBOROUGH PARK 840.56 355768 112612012 - 124698- HOYE, PAMELA 9.75 ARTWORK SOLD 279961 '011712 5101.4413 ARTWORK SOLD ART CENTER REVENUES 9.75 355769 112612012 112628 ICEE COMPANY, THE 162.00 CONCESSION PRODUCT 280064 . 206445. 5730.5510 COST OF GOODS SOLD EDINBOROUGH CONCESSIONS 162.00 R55CKREG LOG20000 CITY OF EDINA Council Check Register 1/26/2012 - 1/26/2012 . Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation - PO # Doc No Inv No Account No 3.55770 112612012 101468 IIMC 100.00 MEMBERSHIP - JANE TIMM 279808 20252 -2012 1180.6104 100.00 355771 1126/2012 129924 ILEETA 100.00 MEMBERSHIP DUES 280229 012312 1400.6105 100.00 355772 112612012 125093 ILVONEN, ILONA 63.70 ART WORK SOLD 279962 011712 5101.4413 63.70 355773 1/2612012 129508 IMPACT PROVEN SOLUTIONS 175.58 MAIL WATER BILLS 279809 58768 5910.6103 175.58 355774 1126/2012 100814 INDELCO PLASTICS CORP. 11.37 PLUMBING PARTS 00001354 279810 687621 1646.6530 11.37 355775 112612012 119808 INTEGRA TELECOM 26.74 INTERNET 280044 011512 7411.6188 26.74 355776 1/2612012 100818 INTERSTATE POWER SYSTEMS INC 6.96 GASKET 00005810 279811 C001072160:01 1553.6530 34.79 GASKETS 00005810 279812 C001072165:01 1553.6530 8.27 SEALING RINGS 00005810 279915 C001072268:01 1553.6530 50.02 355777 112612012 128290 I PMBA 455.00 TRAINING CONFERENCE 279946 011812 1400.6104 455.00 CONFERENCE FEE 280228 012312 1400.6104 910.00 ' 356778 112612012 129175 JAMECO ELECTRONICS 73.73 RAILS 00001537 280101 15635242 -001 5921.6406 73.73 355779 112612012 100828 JERRY S FOODS 24.93 279851 123111 1628.6406 - 304.30 279851 123111 5421.5510 Subledger Account Description CONFERENCES & SCHOOLS DUES & SUBSCRIPTIONS ART WORK SOLD PROFESSIONAL SERVICES REPAIR PARTS TELEPHONE REPAIR PARTS REPAIR PARTS REPAIR PARTS CONFERENCES & SCHOOLS CONFERENCES & SCHOOLS GENERAL SUPPLIES GENERAL SUPPLIES COST OF GOODS SOLD 1/25/2012 8:02:40 Page - 11 Business Unit ELECTION POLICE DEPT. GENERAL ART CENTER REVENUES GENERAL (BILLING) BUILDING MAINTENANCE PSTF OCCUPANCY EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN POLICE DEPT. GENERAL POLICE DEPT. GENERAL. SANITARY LIFT STATION MAINT SENIOR CITIZENS GRILL R55CKREG LOG20000 CITY OF EDINA 1/25/2012 8:02:40 Council Check Register Page - 12 1/26/2012 -1/26/2012 Check # Date Amount Supplier! Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit 329.23 355780 112612012 100829 JERRY S; HARDWARE 2.00 279852 123111 1553.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 3.24 279852 123111 1322.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES STREET LIGHTING ORNAMENTAL 5.38 279852 123111 1260.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES ENGINEERING GENERAL 13.67 279852 123111 1495.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES INSPECTIONS 22.28 279852 123111 1644.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES TREES & MAINTENANCE 24.35 279852 123111 5820.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES 50TH STREET GENERAL 29.34 279852 123111 1551.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES CITY HALL GENERA_ L 37.93 279652 123111 1641.6530 REPAIR, PARTS MOWING 39.11 279852 123111 1641.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES MOWING 42.34 279852 123111 1552.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES CENT SVC PW BUILDING 47.80 279852 123111 5630.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES CENTENNIAL LAKES 53.21 279852 123111 4090.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES 50TH &FRANCE MAINTENANCE 64.77 279852 123111 5422.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES MAINT OF COURSE & GROUNDS 71.46 279852 123111 5431.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES RICHARDS GC MAINTENANCE 99.80 279852 123111 5620.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES EDINBOROUGH PARK 101.59 279852 123111 1301.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES GENERAL MAINTENANCE 116.50 279852 123111 1400.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES POLICE DEPT. GENERAL 119.32 279852 123111 1470.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES FIRE DEPT. GENERAL 146.33 279852 123111 5913.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES DISTRIBUTION 571.04 279852 123111 1646.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES BUILDING MAINTENANCE 1,611.46 355781 112612012 129635 JESSE JAMES CREATIVE INC. 6,625.00 WEBSITE REDESIGN 280181 JJ48241 2210.6124 WEB DEVELOPMENT COMMUNICATIONS 6,625.00 365782 112612012 100741 JJ TAYLOR DIST. OF MINN 2,028.26 279982 1682196 5862.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER VERNON SELLING 2,893.60 279983 1708607 5842.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER YORK SELLING, 3.33- 279984 1161184 5842.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX YORK SELLING 1,002.14 279985 1682198 5822.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER 50TH ST SELLING 53.80 279986 1682197 5862.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX VERNON SELLING 5,974.47 355784 112612012 100835 JOHNSON BROTHERS LIQUOR CO. 115.80 279871 1213811 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 146.13 279872 1213812 5862.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR VERNON SELLING 70.74 279987 1217703 5862.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX VERNON SELLING 5,128.91 279988 1217702 5862.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR VERNON SELLING R65CKREG LOG20000 CITY OF EDINA- 1/25/2012 8:02:40 Council Check Register Page - 13 1/26/2012 - 1/2612012 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO #_ Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit 514.09 279989 1217701 5862.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR VERNON SELLING 387.60 279990 1217705 5862.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR VERNON SELLING 105.68 279991 1217687 5862.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR VERNON SELLING 290.42 279992 1217684 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING 733.70 279993 1217688 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING 2,156.82 279994 1217686 5822.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR BOTH ST SELLING 74.47 279995 1217685 5822.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR 50TH ST SELLING 193.80 279996 1217689. 5822.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR 50TH•ST SELLING 938.23 279997 1217691 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 1,990.24 279998 1217693 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 707.93 279999 1217694 5842.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR YORK SELLING 4,458.40 280600 1217695 5842.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR YORK SELLING 50.14 280001 1217696 5842.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX YORK SELLING 1,529.57 280002 1217697 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD.WINE YORK SELLING. 319.86 280003 1217698 5842.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR YORK SELLING 696.94 280004 1217699 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 127.63 280194 1218070 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 940.23 280195 1217700- 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 791.72 280196 1217704 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 1,415.44 280197 1217706 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 1,125.26 280198 1217692 5862.5513 COST OF G60DS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 556.12 280199 1217690 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING -. 133.34 280200 1218073 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE -YORK SELLING 182.01- 280201 522959 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 21.75- 280202 522961 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 6.90. 280203 523176 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 73.84 280204 522652 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 8.33- 280205 522958 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING _ 18.77- 280266 522962 5862.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR VERNON SELLING 30.33- 280207 522963 5862.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR VERNON SELLING 25,357.28 355785 112612012 129918 JOHNSON, BRIAN 154.46 SUPPLIES. REIMBURSEMENT 280045 012012 7411.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES PSTF OCCUPANCY 154.46 355786 112612012 100919 JOHNSON, NAOMI 19.21 PETTY CASH 279916 011712 5111.6511 CLEANING SUPPLIES ART CENTER BLDG /MAINT - 21.24 PETTY CASH 279916 011712 5120.5510 COST OF GOODS SOLD ART SUPPLY GIFT GALLERY SHOP 42.42 PETTY CASH 279916 011712 5110.6513. OFFICE SUPPLIES ART CENTER ADMINISTRATION 65.95 PETTY CASH 279916 011712 5110.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES ART CENTER ADMINISTRATION R55CKREG LOG20000 CITY OF EDINA 1/25/2012 8:02:40 - Council Check Register Page - 14 1/2612012 - 1/2612012 Check # Date Amount Supplier/ Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit 321.97 PETTY CASH 279916 011712 5111.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES _ ART CENTER BLDG /MAINT 470.79 355787 1126/2012 123696 JOHNSTON, TORI 39.00 ART WORK SOLD 279964 011712 5101.4413 ART WORK SOLD _ ART CENTER REVENUES 39.00 355788 112612012 102603 JONAS, LENORE 26.00 ARTWORK SOLD 279963 011712 5101.4413 ART WORK SOLD ART CENTER REVENUES 26.00 355789 1/2612012 129913 KUNZ, MELINDA 128.00 CLASS REFUND 279950 011912 5101.4607 CLASS REGISTRATION ART CENTER REVENUES 128.00 355790 112612012 116776 KUSTOM KARRIERS 614.96 DWI TOWS (4) 280046 011912 2340.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES DWI FOR 614.96 355791 1126/2012 129914 LAUGHLIN, LYNN 24.00 CLASS REFUND 279951 011812 5101.4607 CLASS REGISTRATION ART CENTER REVENUES 24.00 355792 112612012 100852 LAWSON PRODUCTS INC. 34.98 SCREWS' 00005805 279917 9300522410 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 263.16 NYLON STRAPS 00001516-279918 9300510306 4090.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES 50TH &FRANCE MAINTENANCE 298.14 355793 112612012 106301 LOFFLER COMPANIES INC. 132.90 COPIER USAGE- 00005827 279919 1348214 1553.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES. EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 132.90 355794 112612012 112577 M. AMUNDSON LLP 676.34 280005 124295 5822.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX 50TH ST SELLING 676.34 355795 ,112612012 - 100864 MACQUEEN EQUIPMENT INC. - 85.86 STRAP, SUPPORT 00005798 279813 2120763 1553:6530 REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 85.86 355796 112612012 100866 MAMA 45.00 2012 DUES - SCOTT NEAL 280102 824 1120.6105 DUES & SUBSCRIPTIONS ADMINISTRATION R55CKREG LOG20000 CITY OF EDINA 1/25/2012 8:02:40 Council Check Register Page - 15 1126/2012 - 1/26/2012 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit 45.00 355797 112612012 124000 MARTIN, KAYLIN 20.00 REIMBURSEMENT 280227 012311 1130.6160 DATA PROCESSING COMMUNICATIONS 75.50 REIMBURSEMENT 280227 012311 1130.6408 PHOTOGRAPHIC SUPPLIES COMMUNICATIONS 95.50 355798 1126/2012 125941 MCQUAY INTERNATIONAL 1,504.00 QUARTERLY CONTRACT 280065 47508 5720.6230 SERVICE CONTRACTS EQUIPMENT EDINBOROUGH OPERATIONS 404.37 POOL HEATER REPAIR 280066 2564442 5720.6180 CONTRACTED REPAIRS EDINBOROUGH OPERATIONS 1,908.37 355799 112612012 103944 MED COMPASS 49.00 ANNUAL MED SCREENING 280103 18918 1470.6175 PHYSICAL EXAMINATIONS FIRE DEPT. GENERAL 49.00 355800 1126/2012 105603 MEDICINE LAKE TOURS 954.00 1968 EXHIBIT TRIP 279920 011712 1628.6103.07 TRIPS PROF SERVICES SENIOR CITIZENS 954.00 355801 1/2612012 101483 MENARDS 91.55 HARDWARE 00001362 279921 7150 1646.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES BUILDING MAINTENANCE 36.54 LUMBER, SCREWS 00001521 279922 6235 1325.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES STREET NAME SIGNS 64.11 FILE CABINETS 00001545 280104 7055 5913.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES DISTRIBUTION 192.20 355802 112612012 101987 MENARDS 198.63 SHELVING 00002290 280067 64649 5720.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES EDINBOROUGH OPERATIONS 48.13 LAUNDRY SOAP, TRAPS 00002282 280068 61081 5720.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES EDINBOROUGH OPERATIONS 71.26 DOOR STOPS, HOSE PARTS 00002291 280069 64804 5720.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES EDINBOROUGH OPERATIONS 318.02 355803 1/2612012 102928 METRO CITIES 12,367.00 2012 MEMBERSHIP DUES 280105 429 1120.6105 DUES & SUBSCRIPTIONS ADMINISTRATION 12,367.00 355804 1/26/2012 100885 METRO SALES INC 244.71 COPIER USAGE 279814 440278 5110.6151 EQUIPMENT RENTAL ART CENTER ADMINISTRATION 1,611.77 COPIER USAGE 280106 440932 1552.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES CENT SVC PW BUILDING 1,856.48 355806 112612012 104650 MICRO CENTER R55CKREG LOG20000 CITY OF EDINA 1/25/2012 8:02:40 Council Check Register Page - 16 1/26/2012 - 1126/2012 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit 21.36 CARD READER 00004397 280152 3672775 1301.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES GENERAL MAINTENANCE 21.36 355806 112612012 102582 MINN DEPT OF LABOR & INDUSTRY 787.50 OSHA PENALTIES 280170 83161713051 7410.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES PSTF ADMINISTRATION 787.50 355807 112612012 127062 MINNEHAHA BLDG. MAINT. INC. 32.06 WINDOW WASHING 280153 921093095 5861.6180 CONTRACTED REPAIRS VERNON OCCUPANCY 10.69 280154 921093096 5821.6180 CONTRACTED REPAIRS 50TH ST OCCUPANCY 42.75 260155 921093094 5841.6180 CONTRACTED REPAIRS YORK OCCUPANCY 85.50 355808 1126/2012 101589 MINNESOTA GFOA 60.00 DUES - ERIC ROGGEMAN 280107 010112 1160.6105 DUES & SUBSCRIPTIONS FINANCE 60.00 355809 112612012 102775 MN DNR ECO- WATERS 140.00 INDIANHEAD LAKE ASSESSMENT 00001368 279944 123111 4086.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AQUATIC WEEDS 140.00 355810 1/2612012 100159 MOOERS PRINTING INC. 175.93 ENVELOPES 00003713 280108 5828 1470.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES FIRE DEPT. GENERAL 175.93 355811 112612012 108668 MORRIS, GRAYLYN 150.00 . EP ENTERTAINMENT 12/29/11 280156 011712 5621.6136 PROFESSIONAL SVC - OTHER EDINBOROUGH ADMINISTRATION 150.00 366812 1/2612012 100921 NATIONAL CAMERA EXCHANGE 214.54 CANON CAMERA 00003167 279923 0117207NWME 1400.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES POLICE DEPT. GENERAL 214.54 355813 112612012 100076 NEW FRANCE WINE CO. 215.00 279873 71247 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 215.00 355814 112612012 103632 NEXT DAY GOURMETISUPERIOR PROD 354.01 TABLES / CHAIRS 00008082 280176 8467226 5510.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES ARENA ADMINISTRATION 1,614.49 280177 8467331 5510.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES ARENA ADMINISTRATION 1,968.50 'R55CKREG LOG20000 CITY OF EDINA 1/25/2012 8:02:40 Council Check Register Page - 17 1/26/2012 - 1/26/2012 Check # - Date Amount Supplier/ Explanation PO.# Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit 355815 1126/2012 - 101620 NORTH SECOND STREET STEEL SUPP 106.16 GRATE 00005858 279815 222230 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 106.16 355816 112612012 104232 NORTHERN SAFETY TECHNOLOGY INC 87.65 STROBE LIGHT 00005812 280109 29610 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 600.89 POWER SUPPLY 00005865 280110 29601 5916.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES METER READING 688.54 355817 112612012 - 100933 NORTHWEST GRAPHIC SUPPLY CO. 249.92 ARTISTS OIL, TOOL KITS, PADS '00009115 .279816 .41713500 5120.5510 COST OF GOODS SOLD ART SUPPLY GIFT GALLERY SHOP 249.92 355818 112612012 102557 NTOA 745.00 ` TRAINING CONFERENCE 280230 012312 1400.6104 CONFERENCES & SCHOOLS POLICE DEPT. GENERAL 745.00 365819 112612012 100936 OLSEN COMPANIES 25.79 GLOVES 00001529 280111 669410 5913.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES DISTRIBUTION 25.79 355820 112612012 115669 ON CALL SERVICES 1,096.70 REPAIRS AT ADVENTURE PEAK 280070 2225 5720.6530 REPAIR PARTS EDINBOROUGH OPERATIONS 5.500.00 PLAY STRUCTURE WARRANTY 280071 2224 5720.6230 SERVICE CONTRACTS EQUIPMENT . EDINBOROUGH OPERATIONS 6,596.70 355821 112612012 101659 ORKIN PEST CONTROL 126.56 PEST CONTROL 280112 71286156 1551.6180 CONTRACTED REPAIRS CITY HALL GENERAL 126.56 355822 1126/2012 100347 PAUSTIS & SONS 1,775.26 279874 8335041 -IN 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE,, VERNON SELLING 552.00 279875 8335033 -IN 5642.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 943.75 280006 8335036 -IN 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING 92.25 280007 .8335066 -IN 5822.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR 50TH ST SELLING 3,363.26 355823 1126/2012 100945 - PEPSI -COLA COMPANY 503.92 280072 74362889 5761.5510 COST OF GOODS SOLD CENTENNIAL LAKES OPERATING 191.94 280073 74362789 5730.5510 COST OF GOODS SOLD EDINBOROUGH CONCESSIONS 128:98 280074 74362906 5730.5510 COST OF GOODS SOLD EDINBOROUGH CONCESSIONS 824.84 R55CKREG LOG20000 CITY OF EDINA 1/25/2012 8:02:40 Council Check Register Page - 18 1/26/2012 - 1126/2012 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit 365824 112612012 124709 PETRELLA, ADAM 80.00 FAO BOOK 280113 011812 1470.6104 CONFERENCES & SCHOOLS FIRE DEPT. GENERAL 80.00 355825 112612012 100743 PHILLIPS WINE & SPIRITS 168.00 279876 2182297 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 16.67- 279877 3474415 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING 773.92 280008 2185124 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 982.42 280009 2185126 5842.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR YORK SELLING 391.55 280010 2185127 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 1,142.68 280011 2185128 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 113.49 280012 2185121 5822.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR 50TH ST SELLING 170.24 280013 2185122 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING 850.25 280014 2185129 5862.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR VERNON SELLING 168.00 280208 2185321 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 831.11 280209 2185131 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 772.96 280210 2185130 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 866.87 280211 2185125 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 1,725.76 280212 2185123 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING 49.28- 280213 3475090 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING 8,891.30 355826 112612012 119620 POMP'S TIRE SERVICE INC. 470.98 TIRES 00005767 279924 087603 1553.6583 TIRES & TUBES EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 120.00- CREDIT 279925 068382 1553.6583 TIRES & TUBES EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 1,276.09 TIRES 00005767 280114 090999 1553.6583 TIRES & TUBES EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 1,627.07 355827 1/2612012 121436 POWER/MATION 1,434.02 DRIVES FOR RANGES 280047 2334531 -00 7412.6215 EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE PSTF RANGE 3,111.68 280048 2334531 -01 7412.6215 EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE PSTF RANGE 4,545.70 356828 112612012 124831 PRESSWRITE PRINTING INC. 125.53 DOOR HANGERS 00001543 280115 059688 5913.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES DISTRIBUTION 125.53 355829 1126/2012 105802 PRINT CRAFT INC. 267.19 EFD PULSE 280116 59025 1470.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES FIRE DEPT. GENERAL 267.19 R55CKREG LOG20000 POLICE DEPT. GENERAL CONFERENCES & SCHOOLS TREES & MAINTENANCE DUES & SUBSCRIPTIONS CITY OF EDINA Council Check Register 1/26/2012 - 1/26/2012 Check # Date Amount Supplier I Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No 355830 1/2612012 100966 PRINTERS SERVICE INC 180.00 BLADE SHARPENING 280174 257276 5521.6215 180.00 355831 112612012 100971 QUALITY WINE 947.37 279878 562575 -00 5862.5512 2,506.41 279879 562817 -00 5862.5513 1,795.21 279880 562798 -00 5862.5513 276.00 279881 562797 -00 5842.5513 1,456.81 279882 562816 -00 5842.5513 1,069.67 279883 561469 -00 5842.5512 61.60- 279884 558233 -00 - 5862.5513 243.20 280015 562799 -00 5822.5513 862.91 280016 562574 -00 5822.5512 248.80 280214 564081 -00 5862.5512 9,344.78 355832 112612012 112562 RADIO SHACK CORPORATION _ 39.46 . CONVERTER,.CONNECTOR 00001989.:280157 030963 5913.6406 - 257.42 WALKIE TALKIES 00008097 280175 026667 5510.6406 296.88 35.5833 112612012 104262 RAMADA,INN 313.60 CONFERENCE LODGING 279945 011712 1400.6104 ' 313.60 355834 112612012 129912 ROCHESTER ARBORIST WORKSHOP 190.00 ARBORIST WORKSHOP 00001369 279926 (2) 1644.6104 190.00 355835 1/2612012 102614 ROTARY CLUB OF EDINA 303.00 3RD QTR DUES- J. BENNEROTTE 279817. 1054 1130.6105 303.00 - 355836 112612012 118168 SANSIO 733.00 EMS SUBSCRIPTION 280117 IW- 04784 -2011 1470.6160 50.00 'EMS FAXING 280158 IW- 04640 -2011 1470.6160 783.00 355837 112612012 121382. SIGNATURE AQUATICS 316.00 POOL CHLORINATOR REPAIR 00002280 260075 1246 5720.6180 316.00 Subledger Account Description EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR 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 WINE COST OF GOODS'SOLD WINE COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR 1/25/2012 8:02:40 Page - 19 Business Unit ARENA ICE MAINT VERNON SELLING VERNON SELLING VERNON. SELLING .YORK SELLING YORK SELLING YORK SELLING VERNON SELLING 50TH ST SELLING 50TH ST SELLING VERNON SELLING i GENERAL SUPPLIES DISTRIBUTION GENERAL SUPPLIES ARENA ADMINISTRATION CONFERENCES & SCHOOLS POLICE DEPT. GENERAL CONFERENCES & SCHOOLS TREES & MAINTENANCE DUES & SUBSCRIPTIONS COMMUNICATIONS DATA PROCESSING FIRE DEPT. GENERAL DATA PROCESSING FIRE DEPT. GENERAL CONTRACTED REPAIRS EDINBOROUGH OPERATIONS _ R55CKREG LOG20006 CITY OF EDINA 1/25/2012 8:02:40 Council Check Register Page - . 20 1/26/2012 - 112612012 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit 355838 112612012 122368 SOUTH METRO PUBLIC SAFETY 4,609.00 1ST QTR DUES 280049 8686 1470.6221. RANGE'RENTAL FIRE DEPT. GENERAL 6,229.00 1ST QTR DUES 280049 8686 1400.6221 RANGE RENTAL POLICEDEPT. GENERAL 10,838.00 355839 112612012 127878 SOUTHERN WINE AND SPIRITS 3,312.97 279885 1687640 5862.5512, COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR VERNON SELLING 2,103.28 279886 1710413.: 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 1,630.34 280017 1710412 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 329.92 280018 1687634 .5842.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR YORK SELLING 167.00 280019 1696766 5822.5513 rCOS -OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING 777.46 280020 1710411 5822.5513 'COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING 182.13 280021 1687641 5822.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR 50TH ST SELLING 8,503.10 355840 .112612012 - 125169 SPECTER INSTRUMENTS 395.00 WIN -911 ANNUAL FEE 00001541 279853 1112020159 5913.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES . DISTRIBUTION 395.00 355841.. 112612012 129920 STEGNER, JOEL 35.00 HENNEPIN COUNTY HISTORY CTR 280050 MEMBERSHIP 1140.6105 DUES & SUBSCRIPTIONS PLANNING 35.00 355842 112612012 102639 STROHMYER, TOM 150.00 EP ENTERTAINMENT 212/12 280076 020212 5710.6136 PROFESSIONAL SVC - OTHER; EDINBOROUGH ADMINISTRATION 150.00 355843 1126/2012 104349 STRUCTURED NETWORK SOLUTIONS 3,944.72 EDIN PK CONCESSION WIRING 279854 15058 5620.6180 CONTRACTED REPAIRS EDINBOROUGH PARK 1,517.94 DOME/MAINT BLDG WIRING 280159 15040 5210.6180 CONTRACTED REPAIRS GOLF DOME, PROGRAM 5,462.66 . .355844 :112612012 101017 SUBURBAN CHEVROLET 753.21 PIN KITS 00005713 279855 365274 1553.6585 ACCESSORIES. EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 753.21 355845 112612012_ 102919. SUNGARD PUBLIC SECTOR 195.00, 2012 DUES 280078 2012EDIN. 1400.6105 DUES '& SUBSCRIPTIONS POLICE DEPT. GENERAL 195.00 365846 112612012 101910 SUNGARD PUBLIC SECTOR INC. R55CKREG LOG20000 CITY OF EDINA 1/25/2012 8:02:40 Council Check Register Page - 21 1/26/2012 - 1126/2012 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit 94,647.62 2012 OSSI SERVICE CONTRACT 280077 44294 1400.6230 SERVICE CONTRACTS EQUIPMENT POLICE DEPT. GENERAL 94,647.62 365847, 112612012 120998 SURLY BREWING CO. 731.00 280022 V001383 5862.5514 COST OF GOODS _SOLD BEER VERNON SELLING 731.00 365848 112612012 120595 T- MOBILE 42.62 SURVEY PHONE 280160 122711 1260.6188 TELEPHONE ENGINEERING GENERAL 42.62 . 355849 112612012 105982 T.P.C. LANDSCAPE 255.45 SNOW REMOVAL 280118 416431 1551.6103. PROFESSIONAL SERVICES CITY HALL GENERAL 101.00 260119 416444 1551.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES CITY HALL GENERAL 96.50 280120 416497 1551.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES CITY HALL GENERAL 124.00 280121 416488 1551.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES CITY HALL GENERAL 576.95 355850 112612012 116920 TARGET COMMERCIAL INTERIORS 406.13 STOOLS 280161 671274 5620.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES EDINBOROUGH PARK 406.13 355851 112612012 125136 TEAMINTEL LLC 588.00 1 YR GPS DATA SERVICE 279927 1441 1400.6230 SERVICE CONTRACTS EQUIPMENT POLICE DEPT. GENERAL 588.00 355852 112612012 122794 1ENNANT SALES AND SERVICE COMP 623.19 BRUSH/BROOM 00005606 279928 910769098 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 623.19- 355853 1/2612012 101035 THORPE DISTRIBUTING COMPANY 64.60 280023 672211 5862.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX VERNON SELLING 3,477.55 280024 672210 5862.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER VERNON SELLING 3,542.15 355854 112612012 123129 TIMESAVER OFF SITE SECRETARIAL 418.75 DRAFT MINUTES -1 /3/12 MEETING 279929 M18832 1120.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES ADMINISTRATION 418.75 355855 1/26/2012 .103277 TITAN MACHINERY 123.31 WELDMENTS, BUSHINGS 00005860 279818 9004278 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 306.56 HANDLE, CYLINDER, SWITCH 00005740 279819 9004267 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN R55CKREG LOG20000 CITY OF EDINA 1/25/2012 8:02:40 Council Check Register Page - 22 112612012 - 1/26/2012 Check # Date Amount Supplier/ Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit 25.22 BOLTS 00005870 279930 9CO4375 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 60.02 BUSHING, PIN 00005860 280122 9C04284 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 80.86 SWITCH 00005572 280162 9C03327 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 595.97 355856 1/2612012 118190 TURFWERKS LLC 236.28 SEAL KIT 00001900 279856 S128712A 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 236.28 355857 .112812012 120839 UNITED FIRE FIGHTER ASSOCIATIO 30.00 2012 MEMBERSHIP. DUES " 260123 011312 1470.6105 DUES 8' SUBSCRIPTIONS FIRE DEPT. GENERAL 30.00 356868 1/2612012 100410 USA MOBILITY WIRELESS INC. 191.45 PAGERS 279931 V0319246A 1400.6151 EQUIPMENT RENTAL POLICE DEPT. GENERAL 191.45 355859 112612012 129911 VALEN, CHRISTOPHER 71.15 ART WORK SOLD 279965 011812 5101.4413 ART WORK SOLD ART CENTER REVENUES 71.15 355860 112612012 101058 VAN PAPER CO. 186.11 TISSUE, TOWELS 00001355 279820 223113 -00 1646.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES BUILDING MAINTENANCE 83.45 LIQUOR BAGS 00007513 279932 222589 -01 5862.6512 PAPER SUPPLIES VERNON SELLING , 298.24 LIQUOR BAGS 00007513 279933 222589 -00 5862.6512 PAPER SUPPLIES VERNON SELLING 132.17 LIQUOR BAGS 00007513 279934 222361 -00 5862.6512 PAPER SUPPLIES VERNON SELLING 699.97 355861 1126/2012 129915 VERETTE, JACQUELINE 204.00 CLASS REFUND 279952 011812 5101.4607 CLASS REGISTRATION ART CENTER REVENUES 204.00 355862 1126/2012 101066 VIKING ELECTRIC SUPPLY 459.05 ELECTRICAL ITEMS 00001448 279935 6060647 1552.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES CENT SVC PW BUILDING - 459.05 ELECTRICAL ITEMS 00001448 279935 6060647. 1646.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES BUILDING MAINTENANCE 918.10 355863 112612012 101067 VIKING INDUSTRIAL CENTER 15.51 SAFETY GLASSES 00005821 '279936 288471 r, 1646.6610 SAFETY EQUIPMENT BUILDING MAINTENANCE 15.51. ,SAFETY GLASSES 00005821 279936 288471 1301.6610 SAFETY EQUIPMENT GENERAL MAINTENANCE 15.51 SAFETY GLASSES 00005821 279936 288471 5913.6610 SAFETY EQUIPMENT, DISTRIBUTION 46.53 R55CKREG LOG20000 CITY OF EDINA 1/25/2012 8:02:40 Council Check Register Page- 23 1/2612012 -- 1/26/2012 Check # Date Amount Supplier/ Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit 355864 112612012 119454 VINOCOPIA 53.17 280025 0051055 -IN 5822.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR 50TH ST SELLING 235.58 280026 0051053 -IN 5842.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR YORK SELLING 76.38 280215 0051052 -IN 5862.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR VERNON SELLING 1,136.50 280216 0051054 -IN 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING 1,501.63 355865 112612012 101069 VOSS LIGHTING 35.89 LIGHTING 00001512 279937 15195968 -00 5111.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES ART CENTER BLDG /MAINT - 72.50 LIGHTING 00001512 279937 15195968 -00 1551.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES CITY HALL GENERAL 474.21 LIGHTING 00001193 280163 15193381 -00 1322.6530 REPAIR. PARTS STREET LIGHTING ORNAMENTAL 73.38 MOTION SENSOR 00001339 280164 15194159 -01 1552.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES CENT SVC PW BUILDING 655.98 355666 112612012 120352 WASTEQUIP 3,255.00 DUMPSTER BOX 00001380 280124 2129054 5932.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES GENERAL STORM SEWER 3,255.00 355867 112612012 101033 WINE COMPANY, THE 577.90 279887 290237 -00 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 164.20 279888 290064 -00 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 665.90 280027 290236 -00 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING 302.30 280217 290299 -00 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 1,710.30 355868 112612012 101312 WINE.MERCHANTS 555.13 280028 393927 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING .56 280029 393928 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING - 4,990.59 280030. 393930 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 5,853.99 280218 393931 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 1.68 280219 393929 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 11,401.95 355869 112612012 124291 WIRTZ BEVERAGE MINNESOTA 1,775.15 279889 690878 5662.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR VERNON SELLING 3,075.08 279890 690880 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 307.72 279891 690882 - 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 41.41 279892 690890 5842.5512 COST.OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR YORK SELLING 70.36 279893 690889 5842.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX YORK SELLING 2,133.72 279894 690887 5842.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR YORK SELLING 1,570.95 279895 690888 5842.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR YORK SELLING R55CKREG LOG20000 CITY OF EDINA 1125/2012 8:02:40 Council Check Register Page - 24 1/26/2012 - 1126/2012 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit 2,191.13 279896 690891 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD.WINE YORK SELLING 153.05- 279897 851216 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 55.95 280031 690886 5822.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX 50TH ST SELLING 4,857.17 _ 280032 _690885 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS`SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING 1,668.65 280033 690883 5822.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR 50TH ST SELLING 35.31 280034 690879 5862.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX VERNON SELLING 7,378.73 280035 690877 5862.5512 COST..OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR VERNON SELLING 1,601.75 280220 ' 692575 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 215.36 280221 .692574 5862.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR VERNON SELLING 26,825.39 355870 112612012 124529 WIRTZ BEVERAGE MINNESOTA BEER 2,481.70 279898 849829 5842.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER YORK SELLING 71.85 279899 849830 5842.5514 COST OF -GOODS SOLD BEER YORK SELLING 1,437.00 279900 849376 5862.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER VERNON SELLING 64.50 279901 849086 5862.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX VERNON SELLING 2,943.45 279902 849085 5862.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER VERNON SELLING 26.45 280222 851399 5822.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER 50TH ST SELLING , 23.50 280223 851400 5822.5515 COST OF GOODS'SOLD MIX 50TH ST SELLING 1,200.35 280224 851398 5822.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER 50TH ST SELLING .03 280225 851397 5822.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER 50TH ST SELLING 714.25 280226 851564 5842.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER YORK SELLING 8,963.08 355871 •112612012 118395 WITMER PUBLIC SAFETY GROUP INC 43.19 HELMET SHIELD 00003686 280165 E900588 1470.6552 PROTECTIVE CLOTHING FIRE DEPT. GENERAL 38.00 HELMET SHIELD 00003687 280166 E904230.001 1470.6552 PROTECTIVE CLOTHING FIRE DEPT. GENERAL 81.19 355872 112612012 118340 WPS I TRICARE 82.21 AMBULANCE OVERPAYMENT 279949 DOROTHY DEDIC 1470.4329 AMBULANCE FEES FIRE DEPT. GENERAL 83.04 AMBULANCE OVERPAYMENT 279949 DOROTHY DEDIC 1470.4329 AMBULANCE FEES FIRE DEPT. GENERAL 165.25 355873 :112612012 105740 WSB & ASSOCIATESJNC. 402.00 TRAFFIC STUDY 279857 2- 01686 -240 1140.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES PLANNING 402.00 TRAFFIC STUDY 279858 3- 01686 -230 1140.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES PLANNING 3,000.00 MS4 SERVICES 280167 2/01686 -200 5932.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES GENERAL STORM SEWER 3,804.00 355874 112612012 101726 XCEL ENERGY 1,267.30 51- 6227619 -3 280168 310182155 5650.6185 LIGHT & POWER PROMENADE R55CKREG LOG20000 CITY OF EDINA 1/25/2012 8:02:40 Council Check Register Page - 25 1/26/2012 — 1126/2012 1 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit 2,339.00 51- 6227619 -3 280168 310182155 5630.6185 LIGHT & POWER CENTENNIAL LAKES 3,606.30 355875 1126/2012 103226 YEADON FABRIC DOMES INC. 1,149.25 DOME ROOF REPAIR 00006425 280169 US15388 -IN 5210.6180. CONTRACTED REPAIRS GOLFDOME PROGRAM. 1,149.25 355876 . 112612012 119647 YOCUM OIL COMPANY INC. 16.303.29 UNLEADED FUEL 00001200 279938 472755 1553.6581 GASOLINE - EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 16,303.29 355877 1/2612012 129919 YORK PLACE WEST 422.93 PAID STORM DRAINAGE REFUND- 280051 3201 69TH ST W 5900.2015. CUSTOMER REFUND UTILITY BALANCE SHEET 422.93 355878 1/2612012 129406 ZIEBART OF MINNESOTA INC 415.00 TRUCK LINER 00005824 279821 92122 15516530 415.00 355879 .112612012 101658 MPELRA REPAIR'PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 140.00 CONFERENCE - LISA SCHAEFER 280278 012512 1120.6104 CONFERENCES & SCHOOLS ADMINISTRATION 140.00 700,131.49 Grand Total . Payment Instrument Totals Check Total 700,131.49 Total Payments 700,131.49 R55CKSUM LOG20000 CITY OF EDINA Council Check Summary 1126/2012 - 1/26/2012 Company Amount 01000 GENERAL FUND 430,281.38 02200 COMMUNICATIONS FUND 7,965.69 02300 POLICE SPECIAL REVENUE 614.96 04000 WORKING CAPITAL FUND 14,632.61 04800 CONSTRUCTION FUND 341.00 05100 ART CENTER FUND 2,170.19 05200 GOLF DOME FUND 2,667.19 05300 AQUATIC CENTER FUND 45.96 05400 GOLF COURSE FUND 440.53 05500 ICE ARENA FUND 2,531.71 05600 EDINBOROUGH/CENT LAKES FUND 18,586.88 05700 EDIN BOROUGH PARK FUND 11,774.30 05750 CENTENNIAL LAKES PARK FUND 1,272.24 05800 LIQUOR FUND 133,207.40 05900 UTILITY FUND 30,839.80 05930 STORM SEWER FUND 7,362.81 07400 PSTF AGENCY FUND 30,362.59 09900 PAYROLL FUND 5,034.25 Report Totals 700,131.49 We confirm to the best of our knowledge and belief, that these claims comply in all material respects with the requirements of the City of Edina purchasing policiep an procedures 1/25/2012 8:03:13 Page- 1 CITY OF EDINA 2/1/k- 7:45:59 R55CKREG LOG20000 _ Council Check Register Page - 1 2/2/2012 — 212/2012 Check # Date . Amount Supplier/ Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit 365880 21212012 100613 AAA 865.00 VEHICLE LICENSE TABS 280231 012312 1553.6260 LICENSES & PERMITS EQUIPMENT OPERATION,GEN 865.00 355881 21212012 103173 ACCOUNTEMPS 887.76 UB TEMP 280232 34738057 5910.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES GENERAL (BILLING) 767.52 UB TEMP 280523 34790326 5910.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES GENERAL (BILLING) 1,655.28 355882 21212012 102971 ACE ICE COMPANY 27.60 280576 0816261 5842.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX YORK SELLING 51.60 280577 0816258 5862.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX VERNON SELLING 79.20 355883 21212012 129469 AECOM TECHNICAL SERVICES INC. 42,625.63 WATER TREATMENT PLANT #6 280418 37199470 05473.1705.21 CONSULTING INSPECTION WM -473 NEW TREATMENT PLANT #6 42,625.63 355884 21212012 100575 ALL SAFE INC. 225.21 EXTINGUISHER MAINTENANCE 280524 111207 7411.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES PSTF OCCUPANCY 225.21 355886 21212012 127366 AMERICAN FLEET SUPPLY 234.67 MUDFLAPS 00005867 280339 AFS- 220240003 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 234.67 355886 21212012 100630 ANCHOR PAPER CO. INC. 113.20 COPIER PAPER 280497 10311158 -00 1550.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES _ CENTRAL SERVICES GENERAL 113.20 355687 21212012 101874 ANCOM COMMUNICATIONS INC. 251.16 BATTERIES 00005826 280498 27326 1552.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES CENT SVC PW BUILDING 251.16 355888 21212012 102646 AQUA LOGIC INC. 242,250.00 FLOWRIDER CONSTRUCTION 280419 APPL 1 5300.1715 LAND IMPROVEMENTS AQUATIC CENTER BALANCE SHEET 242,250.00 355889 . 212/2012 104069. B.B. WATSON GRAPHIC DESIGN 479.97 BUSINESS CARDS 280233 482 1400.6104 CONFERENCES S& SCHOOLS POLICE DEPT. GENERAL - 479.97 R55CKREG LOG20000 Check # Date Amount Supplier /Explanation 355890 21212012 1 129549 BEHLEN, NATE 23.31 MILEAGE REIMBURSEMENT 23.31 OFFICE SUPPLIES 355891 212/2012 101355 BELLBOY CORPORATION 471.40 50TH ST SELLING 128.81 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 171.10 280235 35.00 50TH ST SELLING 96.65 OFFICE SUPPLIES 22.10 . 280340 158.56 VERNON SELLING -CITY OF EDINA Council Check Register 2/2/2012 -2/2/2012 PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit 280309 012312 5919.6106 MEETING EXPENSE TRAINING, 280291 71845500 280578 71929100 280579 71953700 280580 71943000 280580 71943000 280581 86313300 280582 86313200 280583 86313100 355892 21212012 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR 100648 BERTELSON OFFICE PRODUCTS 5822.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR 50TH ST SELLING 4.58 OFFICE SUPPLIES YORK SELLING 280234 WO- 745877 -1 50TH ST SELLING 15.49 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING 280235 OE- 276435 -1 50TH ST SELLING 111.89 OFFICE SUPPLIES YORK SELLING 280340 OE- 276343 -1 VERNON SELLING 131.96 GENERAL SUPPLIES PARK ADMIN. GENERAL 1600.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES 355893 21212012 1628.6513 122688 BMK SOLUTIONS SENIOR CITIZENS 1495.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES INSPECTIONS 106.93 OFFICE SUPPLIES YORK SELLING 280525 74265 VERNON SELLING 106.93 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING 356894 21212012 119351 BOURGET IMPORTS 187.00 280393 106580 81.50 280451 106578 81.50 280584 106563 350.00 355895 2/212012 100659 BOYER TRUCK PARTS 65.64 SENDER, GASKET 00005813 280236 599363 168.68 ARM 00005807 280237 598880X1 236.74 PIPE, FILTERS 00005897 280341 601114 81.01 HARDWARE KIT, OIL SEAL 00005987 280342 601126- 552.07 355896 21212012 100663 BRAEMAR GOLF COURSE - 6.02 PETTY CASH 280526 012712 , 12.85 PETTY CASH 280526 012712. _ 19.30 PETTY CASH 280526 012712 2/1/2012 7:45:59 Page- 2 5842.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR YORK'SELLING 5822.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR 50TH ST SELLING 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 5822.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX 50TH ST SELLING 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING 5822.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX 50TH ST SELLING 5842:5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX YORK SELLING 5862.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX VERNON SELLING 1600.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES PARK ADMIN. GENERAL 1600.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES PARK ADMIN. GENERAL 1628.6513 OFFICE SUPPLIES SENIOR CITIZENS 1495.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES INSPECTIONS 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS 5420.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES 5422.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES 5410.6513 OFFICE SUPPLIES EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN CLUB HOUSE MAINT OF COURSE & GROUNDS GOLF ADMINISTRATION R55CKREG LOG20000 269.63 CITY OF EDINA Council Check Register 212/2012 126155 BRAUN, MICHAEL 212/2012 - 2/2/2012 Check # Date Amount Supplier I Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description 32.36 PETTY CASH '280526 012712 5210.6511 CLEANING SUPPLIES 33.00 PETTY CASH 280526 012712 5410.6107 MILEAGE OR ALLOWANCE 49.15 PETTY CASH 280526 012712 5410.6235 POSTAGE 116.95 PETTY CASH 280526 012712 5410.6105 DUES & SUBSCRIPTIONS 2/1/2012 7:45:59 Page- 3 Business Unit GOLF DOME PROGRAM GOLF ADMINISTRATION GOLF ADMINISTRATION GOLF ADMINISTRATION 269.63 355897 212/2012 126155 BRAUN, MICHAEL 60.00 PHOTO SHOOT 280420 1110 2210.6408 PHOTOGRAPHIC SUPPLIES COMMUNICATIONS 60.00 365898 21212012 119826 BRYANT GRAPHICS INC. 738.51 NEWSLETTER 00008268 280343 26933 1628.6575 PRINTING SENIOR CITIZENS 738.51 355899 21212012 100144 BUREAU OF CRIMINAL APPREHENSIO 90.00 BACKGROUND CHECKS 280574 013012 1550.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES CENTRAL SERVICES GENERAL 90.00 355900 2/2/2012 129944 BURNS, KELSEY 169.66 MILEAGE REIMBURSEMENT 280527 012612 1622.6107 MILEAGE OR ALLOWANCE SKATING & HOCKEY 169.66 365901 2/2/2012 119455 CAPITOL BEVERAGE SALES _ 905.31 280292 34243 5842.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER YORK SELLING 31.10 280394 34241 5822.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX 50TH ST SELLING 967.70 280395 34244 5822.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER 50TH ST SELLING 1,904.11 355902 212/2012 100677 CARGILL INC. 4,537.69 DEICER 00001582 280499 2900368451 1318.6525 SALT SNOW & ICE REMOVAL 7,512.81 DEICER 00001582 280500 2900371122 1318.6525 SALT SNOW & ICE REMOVAL 12,050.50 355903 2/212012 116683 CAT & FIDDLE BEVERAGE 487.00 280452 92329 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 487.00 355904 21212012 129923 CAWLEY 33.67 NAME BADGES 280625 V078681 2210.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES COMMUNICATIONS 33.67 356905 212/2012 112561 CENTERPOINT ENERGY R55CKREG LOG20000 952 922 -2444 280344 24441/12 CITY OF EDINA TELEPHONE CENTRAL SERVICES GENERAL 114.49 952 920 -8166 280345 Council Check Register 1550.6188 TELEPHONE CENTRAL SERVICES GENERAL 57.75 952 9441841 212/2012 -2/2/2012 1841 -1112 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger ,Account Description 2,272.07 8034001 -1 280238 8034001 -1/12 1552.6186 HEAT; 280643 112.71 5596524 -8 280277 5596524 -1/12 5430.6186 HEAT 5,479.01 5591458-4 280528 5591458 -1/12 1551.6186 HEAT 355908 2/2/2012 7,863.79 355906 2/212012 450.56 119861 CENTRAL ENVELOPE CORPORATION 516865 - GENERAL SUPPLIES 139.00 EMPLOYEE NEWSLETTER 280239, 70001 1130.6575 PRINTING 139.00 355909 2/2/2012 119725 CHISAGO LAKES DISTRIBUTING CO 355907 .21212012 123898 CENTURYLINK 282.00 2/1/2012 7:45:59 Page- -4 Business Unit CENT SVC PW BUILDING _ RICHARDS GOLF COURSE CITY HALL GENERAL COMMUNICATIONS 64.79, 952 922 -2444 280344 24441/12 1550.6188 TELEPHONE CENTRAL SERVICES GENERAL 114.49 952 920 -8166 280345 8166 -1/12 1550.6188 TELEPHONE CENTRAL SERVICES GENERAL 57.75 952 9441841 280501 1841 -1112 1646.6188 TELEPHONE BUILDING MAINTENANCE UNIFORM PURCHASE 133.00 40.32 952 922 -9246 280643 9246 -1/12 1400.6188 TELEPHONE POLICE DEPT. GENERAL - 277.35 355908 2/2/2012 117187 CHEM SYSTEMS LTD 450.56 ICE MELT 00008006 280240 516865 5511.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES ARENA 13LDGIGROUNDS 450.56 355909 2/2/2012 119725 CHISAGO LAKES DISTRIBUTING CO 282.00 280585 464717 5822.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD. BEER 50TH ST SELLING 282.00 355910 2/212012 101256 CHUCK E.'CHEESE 1,677.07 DEPOSIT REFUND 280421 012412 1120.4314 INVESTIGATION FEE ADMINISTRATION 1,677.07 355911 212/2012 100684 CITY OF BLOOMINGTON 17,770.00 PHEP & CRI 17,770.00 355912 2/212012 122084 CITY OF EDINA - UTILITIES 491.10 00101025 - 0203600013 633.16 00101025- 0203610011 12.32 00077443 - 0200650027 1,136.58 i 355913 2/2/2012 114548 CIZEK, DARIN 133.00 UNIFORM PURCHASE 133.00 280502 PH1043 4204.6103 280423 203600013 -1/12 1628.6189 280424 203610011 -1/12 1628.6189 280425 200650027 -1/12 1646.6189 280644 '012612 - 1400.6203 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES SEWER & WATER SEWER 8 WATER SEWER & WATER UNIFORM ALLOWANCE HEALTH ALERT NETWORK SENIOR CITIZENS ` SENIOR CITIZENS. BUILDING MAINTENANCE POLICE DEPT. GENERAL R55CKREG LOG20000 CITY OF EDINA 2/1/2012 7:45:59 Council Check Register Page - 5 212/2012 - 21212012 Check # Date Amount Supplier I Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit 355914 21212012 101119 COCKRIEL, VINCE 43.29 MILEAGE REIMBURSEMENT 280529 011712 1600.6107 MILEAGE OR ALLOWANCE PARK ADMIN. GENERAL 43.29 355915 2/212012 129820 COLLIERS INTERNATIONAL 800.80 FEB 2012 MAINTENANCE 280314 211/12 5841.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES YORK OCCUPANCY 800.80 355916 212/2012 101345 COLOURS 100.00 DOWNLOAD FILES 280426 10312 2210.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES COMMUNICATIONS 100.00 355917 2/212012 120433 COMCAST, 99.95, 8772 10 614 0378302 280530 378302 -1/12 5420.6188 TELEPHONE CLUB HOUSE 106.95 8772 10 614 0396908 280531 396908 -1/12 5760.6105 DUES & SUBSCRIPTIONS CENTENNIAL LAKES ADMIN EXPENSE 206.90 356918 21212012 129275 CONTECH BRIDGE SOLUTIONS 3,432.80 BRIDGE BOARDS #24 280315 1W000003692 5422.6251 SHARED MAINTENANCE MAINT OF COURSE & GROUNDS 3,432.80 355919 21212012 120538 CREATIVE GRAPHICS 138.17 DOME CARDS 0000642.9 280316 00061118 5410.6575 PRINTING GOLF ADMINISTRATION 138.17 355920 2/2/2012 102478 DAY DISTRIBUTING CO. 571.15 280293 635394 5842.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER YORK SELLING 22.40 280294 635395 5842.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX . YORK SELLING 1,105.80 280396 . 635392 5822.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER 50TH ST SELLING 41.60 280397 635393 5822.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX 50TH ST SELLING 88.70 280398 635390 5862.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX VERNON.SELLING 1,526.77 280399 635391 5862.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER VERNON SELLING 3,356.42 366921 212/2012 100720 DENNYS 6TH AVE. BAKERY 79.82 BAKERY 280317 396884 5421.5510 COST OF GOODS SOLD- GRILL 79.82 355922 21212012 102831 DEX MEDIA EAST INC. 101.80 650243624 280645 650243624 -1/12 5760.6122 ADVERTISING OTHER CENTENNIAL LAKES ADMIN EXPENSE 101.80 R55CKREG LOG20000 CITY OF EDINA Council Check Register 2/212012 —2/2/2012 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No 355923 2/212012 123995 DICK'SILAKEVILLE SANITATION IN 3,357.75 REFUSE 280241 1337480 4095.6103 3,189.16" 280242 1330159 4095.6103 6,546.91 355924 21212012 128299 DIEDRICH, PAMELA 60.00 NIGHT OUT WINTER PARTY PHOTOS 280532 199 1130.6408 60.00 355925 21212012 101766 DISPLAY SALES . 152.33 US FLAGS 280243 INVO083680 5511.6406 152.33 355926 21212012 102783 DLT SOLUTIONS INC. 7,362.54 AUTOCAD CIVIL- LICENSE 00001330.280346 S1175708 421260.6710 7,362.54 355927 2/212012 102252 DRAPER, TOM 90.00 UNIFORM PURCHASE 280646 012612 1400.6203 90.00 355928 - 21212012 123189 EDINA LIQUOR 48.80 BEER 00006338 280318 142 5421.5514 48.80 355929 21212012 101630 . EDINA PUBLIC SCHOOLS 4,727.87 OPERATIONS /MAINTENANCE 280427 12479 1621:6103 4,727.87 355930 2/2/2012 100049 EHLERS & ASSOCIATES INC 3,000.00 ARBITRAGE MONITORING 280533 62585 3301.6103 3,000.00 355931 21212012 129947 EHLERS INVESTMENT PARTNERS 279.25 DEC MANAGEMENT FEE 280626 010412 1500.6103 279.25 355932 ` 2/212012 121440 EMERGENCY COMMUNICATIONS NETWO 15,000.00 CODE RED SERVICES 2012 280347 10857 .2310.6406 15;000.00 355933 212/2012 126004 FERGUSON WATERWORKS Subledger Account Description PROFESSIONAL SERVICES PROFESSIONAL SERVICES PHOTOGRAPHIC SUPPLIES GENERAL SUPPLIES 2/112012 7:45:59 Page - 6 Business Unit 50TH STREET RUBBISH 50TH STREET RUBBISH COMMUNICATIONS ARENA BLDG/GROUNDS EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT ENGINEERING EQUIPMENT UNIFORM ALLOWANCE POLICE DEPT. GENERAL COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER GRILL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES. ATHLETIC ACTIVITIES PROFESSIONAL SERVICES PIR DS REVENUES PROFESSIONAL SERVICES CONTINGENCIES GENERAL SUPPLIES E911 R55CKREG LOG20000 CITY U. "DINA 2111/:_ 7:45:59 Council Check Register Page - 7 2/2/2012 - 2/7/2012 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit 259.70 WATER.METER 00001552 280503 S01347572.001 5914.5516 COST OF GOODS SOLD METERS TANKS TOWERS & RESERVOIR i 259.70 355934 21212012 106420 FIKES SERVICES 41.25 AIR DEODORIZERS 280320 42528 5841.6162 SERVICES CUSTODIANS YORK OCCUPANCY - " 41.25 365935 21212012 129945 FISHER, MARK 168.16 MILEAGE REIMBURSEMENT 280534 012912 1622.6107 MILEAGE OR ALLOWANCE SKATING S HOCKEY 168.16 355936 21212012 129934 FLANDERS, JANE 138.00 CLASS REFUND 280519 012412 5101.4607 CLASS REGISTRATION ART CENTER REVENUES 138.00 365937 21212012 100769 -FLOYD TOTAL SECURITY 141.33 DOOR HANDLE REPAIR 00006421 280319 269965 5420.6530 REPAIR PARTS CLUB HOUSE 141.33 .. 355938 212/2012 101475 FOOTJOY 959.88 GLOVES 280535 4098568 5440.5511 COST OF GOODS - PRO SHOP PRO SHOP RETAIL SALES 659.42 SHOES 280536 4100225 5440.5511 COST OF GOODS - PRO SHOP PRO SHOP RETAIL SALES 1,500.50- CREDIT 280627 6902124 5440.5511 COST OF GOODS - PRO SHOP PRO SHOP RETAIL SALES.. 118.80 355939 212/2012 119936 GLOBAL OAK 37.50 BRAEMAR GOLF E- COMMERCE 280428 010852 5410.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES GOLF ADMINISTRATION 487.50 ART CENTER &COMMERCE 280428 010852 5110.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES ART CENTER ADMINISTRATION 2,418.75 WEBSITE MAINTENANCE 280428 010852 2210.6124 WEB DEVELOPMENT COMMUNICATIONS 2,943.75 355940 212/2012 114510 GOODHUE COUNTY 283.00 OUT OF COUNTY WARRANT 280647 013012 1000.2055 DUE TO OTHER GOVERNMENTS GENERAL FUND BALANCE SHEET 283.00 356941 21212012 111092 GOTZSCHE, OTTO 178.75 ART WORK SOLD 280280 011912 5101.4413 ART WORK SOLD ART CENTER REVENUES 178.75 355942 21212012 - 100781 GRAFIX SHOPPE 64.13 VEHICLE GRAPHICS 00005608 280244 78703 1553.6556 TOOLS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 325.97 VEHICLE GRAPHICS 00005607 280245 78713 1600.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES; PARK ADMIN. GENERAL R55CKREG LOG20000 CITY OF EDINA 211/2012 7:45:59 Council Check Register Page - 8 2/2/2012 -2/2/2012 Check # Date Amount Supplier/ Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description -Business Unit 390.10 355943 212/2012 101107 GRAINGER 12.47 BATTERY 00006135 280321 9724713350 5422.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES MAINT OF COURSE & GROUNDS 13.77 FUSE 00006134 280322 9720471458 5422.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES., MAINT OF COURSE & GROUNDS 154.30 FLOODLIGHT 00006132 280429 9718868525 5422.6406 , GENERAL SUPPLIES MAINT OF COURSE & GROUNDS 180.54 355944 21212012 120201 GRANICUS INC. 829.64 FEB WEBSTREAMING 280246 32924 1130.6124 WEB DEVELOPMENT COMMUNICATIONS 180.00 FEB E- COMMENT 280247 32948 1130.6124 WEB DEVELOPMENT COMMUNICATIONS 1,009.64 i 355945 21212012 102217 GRAPE BEGINNINGS INC 573.50 280400 .135770. 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 573.50 355946 21212012 100783 GRAYBAR ELECTRIC CO. INC. 113.65 AUTOMATIC CLOCK/TIMER 280348 958214302 5821.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES 50TH ST OCCUPANCY 113.65 355947 21212012 129935 GREENBERG, LYNN i 138.00 CLASS REFUND 280520 012412 5101.4607 CLASS REGISTRATION ART CENTER REVENUES 138.00 355948 :21212012 100785 GREUPNER, JOE 12,699.00 1ST QTRLY PMT 280504 010112 5410.6132 PROFESSIONAL SVCS - GOLF GOLF ADMINISTRATION 12,699.00 355949' 21212012 100787 GRUBER'S POWER EQUIPMENT 19.78 EDGER PARTS 00001374 280430 98407 1641.6530 REPAIR PARTS MOWING i 217.49 DRAWBAR 280431 104362 1646.6556 TOOLS BUILDING MAINTENANCE 215.46- RETURN 280432 103508 1646.6556 TOOLS BUILDING MAINTENANCE 21.81 356950 21212012 102967 'HALSTEAD, TODD 125.27 UNIFORM PURCHASE 280537 013012 1553.6201 LAUNDRY EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 125.27 355951 :2Y1J2012 124775. HAMLINE'UNIVERSITY,. I 1,317.38 'SPRING 2012 LEADERSHIP CLASS 280349 - 9069078 1260.61D4 CONFERENCES & SCHOOLS ENGINEERING GENERAL 1,317.38 R55CKREG LOG20000 CITY OF EDINA Council Check Register 21212012 — 21212012 Check # Date Amount Supplier! Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description 356962 21212012 129929 HANLY, DUSTIN 23.31 MILEAGE REIMBURSEMENT 280306 012312 5919.6106 MEETING EXPENSE 23.31 355953 21212012 101255 HASLER INC. 193.27 POSTAGE METER RENTAL 280650 14986181 1400.6235 POSTAGE MEETING EXPENSE ART WORK SOLD 211/".'_ 7:45:59 Page- 9 Business Unit TRAINING POLICE DEPT. GENERAL TRAINING ART CENTER REVENUES CONFERENCES & SCHOOLS FIRE DEPT. GENERAL DUE FROM HRA GENERAL FUND BALANCE SHEET TAX LEVIES CURRENT GENERAL FUND REVENUES TOOLS DISTRIBUTION 193.27 YORK SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER VERNON SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER 355954 21212012 128208 HEINZMAN, DAN 23.31 MILEAGE REIMBURSEMENT 280305 012312 5919.6106 23.31 355955 21212012 117366 HEMSTAD, BETTY 29.84 ART WORK SOLD 280338 011912 5101.4413 29.84 355956 21212012 100802 HENNEPIN COUNTY MEDICAL CENTER 1,165.00 EMT COURSE 280538 25266 1470.6104 1,165.00 355957 21212012 100801 HENNEPIN COUNTY TREASURER 224,365.83 OVER SETTLEMENT PAYMENT 280539 24- 122011 1000.1303 56,437.37 OVER SETTLEMENT PAYMENT 280628 24- 122011.1 1001.4006 280,803.20 355958 21212012 102483 HILTI INC. 110.85 CHISEL 00001538 280248 4600539978 5913.6556 110.85 355959 21212012 104375 HOHENSTEINS INC. 831.50 280401 587462 5842.5514 577.50 280453 587663 5862.5514 270.00 280586 587664 5822.5514 1,679.00 355960 21212012 101618 HOPKINS PET HOSPITAL 8,050.43 WOUNDS 280651 328109 1450.6217 8,050.43 355961 21212012 129303 HOUGH, NICOLE 7.80 ART WORK SOLD 280337 012512 5101.4413 MEETING EXPENSE ART WORK SOLD 211/".'_ 7:45:59 Page- 9 Business Unit TRAINING POLICE DEPT. GENERAL TRAINING ART CENTER REVENUES CONFERENCES & SCHOOLS FIRE DEPT. GENERAL DUE FROM HRA GENERAL FUND BALANCE SHEET TAX LEVIES CURRENT GENERAL FUND REVENUES TOOLS DISTRIBUTION COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER YORK SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER VERNON SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER 50TH ST SELLING KENNEL SERVICE ANIMAL CONTROL ART WORK SOLD ART CENTER REVENUES R55CKREG LOG20000 CITY OF EDINA Council Check Register 2/212012 —2/212012 Check # Date Amount Supplier/ Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit CONSULTING DESIGN CONSULTING DESIGN CONSULTING DESIGN LAND. IMPROVEMENTS SAFETY EQUIPMENT SAFETY EQUIPMENT DUES & SUBSCRIPTIONS 211/2012 7:45:59 Page - 10 COUNTRYSIDE VALLEY ESTATES VIKING HILLS AQUATIC CENTER BALANCE SHEET GENERAL MAINTENANCE EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN FIRE DEPT. GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES GENERAL (BILLING) COST OF GOODS. - PRO SHOP PRO SHOP RETAIL SALES PROFESSIONAL SERVICES INSPECTIONS PRINTING FINANCE BOOKS & PAMPHLETS INSPECTIONS 7.80 355962 21212012 129056 HYDRO -VAC INC. 3,403.96 SANITARY SEWER LINES 00001510 280433 6507 03468.1705.20 2,751.57 280434 6518 03470.1705.20_ 2,350.17 280435 6519 03469.1705.20 8,505.70 355963 2/212012 129430 HYDROTECH SYSTEMS LTD 212,950.50 35% FLOWRIDER CONTRACT 280323 N35A4 5300.1715 212,950.50 355964 212/2012 129925 HYTEST SAFETY SHOE SERVICE 145.00 SAFETY BOOTS 00005833.280249 36436 1301.6610 150.00 SAFETY BOOTS 00005833 280249 36436 1553.6610 295.00 355965 ` 2/212012 102588 IAFC 229.00 DUES 280540 012712 1470.6105 229.00 355966 2/212012 129508 IMPACT PROVEN SOLUTIONS 700.03 INSERT FOR WATER BILLS 280541 59183 5910.6103 700.03 355967 . 21212012 129150 INNOVATIVE CONCEPTS LLC 200.61 MERCHANDISE 00006364 280324 4472A 5440.5511 200.61 365968 212/2012 101183 INSPECTRON INC. 4,700.00 DEC PLAN REVIEWS 280629 011012 1495.6103 4,700.00 355969 2/212012 116191 INSTY- PRINTS 719.92 BUDGET /CIP 280542 90806 1160.6575 719.92 355970 21212012 104157 INTERNATIONAL CODE COUNCIL INC 223.14 ELECTRONIC CODE BOOKS 280543 INVO084176 1495.6405 223.14 355971 21212012 112658 ISAAMAN, TREVOR CONSULTING DESIGN CONSULTING DESIGN CONSULTING DESIGN LAND. IMPROVEMENTS SAFETY EQUIPMENT SAFETY EQUIPMENT DUES & SUBSCRIPTIONS 211/2012 7:45:59 Page - 10 COUNTRYSIDE VALLEY ESTATES VIKING HILLS AQUATIC CENTER BALANCE SHEET GENERAL MAINTENANCE EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN FIRE DEPT. GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES GENERAL (BILLING) COST OF GOODS. - PRO SHOP PRO SHOP RETAIL SALES PROFESSIONAL SERVICES INSPECTIONS PRINTING FINANCE BOOKS & PAMPHLETS INSPECTIONS R55CKREG LOG20000 CITY OF EDINA Council Check Register 21212012 - 2/2/2012 Check # Date Amount Supplier/ Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No 89.76 LAMINATED GLASS 280544 011712 5410.6406 5919.6106 1495.6406 1419.6102 421480.6710 5862.5515 5862.5514 5842.5514 5842.5514 5822.5515 5822.5514 5842.5512 5842.5512 5862.5512 5862.5512 5862.5512 5862.5512 5862.5513 5862.5513 5862.5513 5862.5513 5842.5513 5842.5513 5842.5513 Subledger Account Description GENERAL SUPPLIES MEETING EXPENSE GENERAL SUPPLIES CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 2/1/2012 7:45:59 Page - 11 Business Unit GOLF ADMINISTRATION TRAINING INSPECTIONS RESERVE PROGRAM EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT SPECIAL OPS FIRE EQUIPMENT COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX VERNON SELLING 89.76 VERNON SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER YORK SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER 355972 2/212012 50TH ST SELLING 129077 IVERSON, TRAVIS COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR - YORK SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR YORK SELLING 23.31 MILEAGE REIMBURSEMENT 280307 012312 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR VERNON SELLING 23.31 VERNON SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD:WINE VERNON SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE. 355973 212/2012 VERNON SELLING 118276 J.P. COOKE CO., THE COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 77.10 STAMP 280630 159618 77.10 355974 21212012 101400 JAMES, WILLIAM F 100.00 POLICE SERVICE 280325 020112 100.00 355975 21212012 108618 JEFFERSON FIRE & SAFETY INC. 2,618.61 BOOTS 00003656 280545 183734 2,618.61 355976 21212012 100741 JJ TAYLOR DIST. OF MINN 158.80 280454 1708636 3,362.12 280455 1708635 1,757.60 280456 1708644 85.00 280457 1678351 24.50 280458 1708638 1,538.20 280587 1708637 6,926.22 355978 21212012 100835 JOHNSON BROTHERS LIQUOR CO. 785.11 280459 1221782 1,734.85 280460 1221780 „28 280461 1221769 3,848.52 280462 1221783 110.21 280463 1221788 2,915.31 280464 1221786 1,779.89 280465 1221785 2,088.18 280466 1221787 1,755.87 280467 1221771 230.45 .280468 1221784 6.06- 280511 523559 4.36- 280512 523560 27,92- 280513 523561 5919.6106 1495.6406 1419.6102 421480.6710 5862.5515 5862.5514 5842.5514 5842.5514 5822.5515 5822.5514 5842.5512 5842.5512 5862.5512 5862.5512 5862.5512 5862.5512 5862.5513 5862.5513 5862.5513 5862.5513 5842.5513 5842.5513 5842.5513 Subledger Account Description GENERAL SUPPLIES MEETING EXPENSE GENERAL SUPPLIES CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 2/1/2012 7:45:59 Page - 11 Business Unit GOLF ADMINISTRATION TRAINING INSPECTIONS RESERVE PROGRAM EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT SPECIAL OPS FIRE EQUIPMENT COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX VERNON SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER VERNON SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER YORK SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER YORK SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX 50TH ST SELLING COST OF.GOODS SOLD BEER 50TH ST SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR - YORK SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR YORK SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR VERNON SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR VERNON SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR VERNON SELLING COST'OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR VERNON SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD:WINE VERNON SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE. VERNON SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING R55CKREG LOG20000 Check # Date Amount Supplier/ Explanation Council Check 24.00 - Page - 12 122.95- -212/2012 921.20 Inv No Account No Subledge_ r Account Description 628.71 280514 523635 5842.5513 397.86 YORK SELLING 280515 522960 1 ,777.42 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR YORK SELLING 280588 102.62 5822.5513 COST. OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING 3,574.06 1221773 5822.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR .28 280590 1221774 5822.5513 1,537.60 50TH ST SELLING 280591 1221775 800.17 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE - 50TH ST SELLING 280592 1,563.12 5822.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR 50TH ST SELLING J 1,548.86 1221777 i COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR 669.79 280594 - 5842.5512 165.52 YORK SELLING 280595 1221770 1, 175.00 - COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 280596 925.00- 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 325.00- 1221779 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 26,325.59 280598 355979 212/2012 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 124869 JOHNSON, BRYAN 280599 1221768 11.70 ART WORK SOLD j 280600 11.70 5822.5513 365980 21212012 280601 101918 JUNGWIRTH, MARK 5862.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR 23.31 MILEAGE REIMBURSEMENT 523265 5842.5512 23.31 -.YORK SELLING 355981 212/2012 5822.5512 129936 JUVLAND, JANICE 50TH ST SELLING 280281 138.00 CLASS REFUND ART WORK SOLD ART CENTER REVENUES 138.00 012312 355982 21212012 TRAINING 122239 KANDIKO, GEORGIA 16.90 ART WORK SOLD 16.90 355983 21212012 116349 KAY, KATIE 346.00 CLASS REFUND 346.00 365984 2/212012 111018 KEEPRS INC. 29.99 UNIFORMS 280521 012412 5101.4607 CLASS REGISTRATION ART CENTER REVENUES 280282 011912 5101.4413 ART WORK SOLD ART CENTER REVENUES 280518 012512 5101.4607 CLASS REGISTRATION ART CENTER REVENUES 00003670 280546 179001 -02 1470.6558 DEPT UNIFORMS FIRE DEPT. GENERAL CITY OF EDINA 2/1/2012 7:45:59 Council Check Register Page - 12 2/2/2012 -212/2012 PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledge_ r Account Description Business Unit 280514 523635 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 280515 522960 5842.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR YORK SELLING 280588 1221772 5822.5513 COST. OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING 280589 1221773 5822.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR 50TH ST SELLING 280590 1221774 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING 280591 1221775 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE - 50TH ST SELLING 280592 1221776 5822.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR 50TH ST SELLING J 280593 1221777 5842.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR YORK SELLING 280594 1221767 5842.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD, LIQUOR YORK SELLING 280595 1221770 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 280596 1221778 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 280597 1221779 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 280598 1221781 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 280599 1221768 5822.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR 50TH ST SELLING 280600 1220004 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING 280601 523265 5862.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR VERNON SELLING 280601 523265 5842.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD:LI000R -.YORK SELLING 280601 523265 5822.5512 COST, OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR 50TH ST SELLING 280281 011712 5101.4413 ART WORK SOLD ART CENTER REVENUES 280312 012312 5919.6106 MEETING EXPENSE TRAINING 280521 012412 5101.4607 CLASS REGISTRATION ART CENTER REVENUES 280282 011912 5101.4413 ART WORK SOLD ART CENTER REVENUES 280518 012512 5101.4607 CLASS REGISTRATION ART CENTER REVENUES 00003670 280546 179001 -02 1470.6558 DEPT UNIFORMS FIRE DEPT. GENERAL 355986 212/2012 CITY OF EDINA R55CKREG LOG20000 189.13 PETTY CASH Council Check Register 013012 5761.6406 212/2012 -21212012 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description 305.96 00003721 280547 179545 1470.6558 DEPT UNIFORMS 1,104.92 00003699 280548 179351 1470.6558 DEPT UNIFORMS 191.26 00003670 280549 179490 1470.6558 DEPT UNIFORMS 1,632.13 177.71 355985 212/2012 124730 KEITH, BARBARA 355988 21212012 13.64. ART WORK SOLD 280283 011912 5101.4413 ART WORK SOLD 13.64 690.80 PLUMBING PARTS 355986 212/2012 118456 KNOLLMAIER, LAURA 189.13 PETTY CASH 280550 013012 5761.6406 189.13 356987 21212012 129942 KNOLLMAIER,.LAURA 177.71 MILEAGE REIMBURSEMENT 280631 0127.12 5631.6107 177.71 355988 21212012 118334 KULLY SUPPLY INC. 690.80 PLUMBING PARTS 00001358 280250 , SI- 205686 1646.6530 ' 156.81 PLUMBING PARTS 00001267 280436 SI- 201639 1646.6530 847.61 355989 21212012. 129932 LABOVITZ, ANNE 30.88 ART WORK SOLD 280368 012412 5101.4413 30.88 - 355990 21212012 128865 LAGERQUIST, MARY 16.25 ART WORK SOLD 280369 012412 5101.4413 16.25 355991 2/212012 121656 LAVEN, JANE 124.15 ART WORK SOLD 280516 012712 5101.4413 124.15 355992 2/2/2012 100862 LAWSON PRODUCTS INC. 462.48 SCREWS, CLAMPS, BITS 00005822 280251 9300530359 1553.6530 68.44 CUP BRUSH 00005822 280252. 9300534783 1553.6530 542.74 BITS, CLEVIS HOOKS 00005828 280505 9300543797 1553.6530 1,073.66 365993 2/212012 129928 LEVIN, SIMON 200.00 ART WORKSHOP 280279 012312 5110.6103 GENERAL SUPPLIES MILEAGE OR ALLOWANCE REPAIR PARTS REPAIR PARTS ART WORK SOLD ART WORK SOLD ART WORK SOLD REPAIR PARTS REPAIR PARTS REPAIR PARTS PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 2/1 %cC._ 7:45:59 Page - 13 Business Unit FIRE DEPT. GENERAL FIRE DEPT. GENERAL FIRE DEPT. GENERAL ART CENTER REVENUES CENTENNIAL LAKES OPERATING CENTENNIAL ADMINISTRATION BUILDING MAINTENANCE BUILDING MAINTENANCE ART CENTER REVENUES ART CENTER REVENUES ART CENTER REVENUES EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN ART CENTER ADMINISTRATION R55CKREG LOG20000 CITY OFEDINA 2/1/2012 7:45:59 Council Check Register - Page - 14 21212012 -212/2012 Check # Date Amount Supplier/ Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit r 200.00 355994 21212012 101466 LIEBER, JUDY 15.60 ART WORK SOLD 260370 012412 5101.4413 ART WORK SOLD ART CENTER REVENUES 15.60 355995 21212012 106726 LINDMAN, DAVID 770.23 EXPENSE REIMBURSEMENT 280648 013012 1400.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES - POLICE DEPT. GENERAL 770.23 355996 21212012 100858 LOGIS 192.00 280632 34438/34409 1554.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES CENT SERV GEN - MIS 262.59 280632 34438/34409. 1554.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES CENT SERV GEN -MIS 1,140.38 280632 34438/34409 1554.6160 DATA PROCESSING CENT SERV GEN - MIS 672.00 280633 34459 1554.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES CENT SERV GEN - MIS 207.74 280634 34531/34592/345 1554.6710 EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT CENT SERV GEN - MIS 76 1,152.00 280634 34531/345921345 1554.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES CENT SERV GEN - MIS 76 i 3,626.71 355997 21212012 100443 LUCHT, PETE. . 23.31 MILEAGE REIMBURSEMENT 280310 012312 5919.6106 MEETING EXPE14SE TRAINING 23.31 355998 21212012 102722 LYNN PEAVEY COMPANY 140.50 EVIDENCE SUPPLIES 280253 251264 1400.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES POLICE DEPT. GENERAL 26.50 280254 251715 1400.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES POLICE DEPT. GENERAL i. 167.00 355999 21212012 122188 MACMAGIC 240.00 FOXPRO HOSTING 280551 4746 7410.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES PSTF ADMINISTRATION 240.00 356000 2/212012 100864 MACQUEEN EQUIPMENT INC. - 648.11. WELDMENT, PARTS 00005808 286255 2120685 1553.6530 -.REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN i 245.57 FLANGE, SEALS, HOSE 00005809 280256 2120731 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 893.68 356001 '21212012 124142 MCNAUGHTON, MARY 12.99 ART WORK SOLD 280284 011912 5101.4413 ART WORK SOLD ART CENTER REVENUES 12.99 21112012 7:45:59 Page - 15 Business Unit SENIOR CITIZENS ART CENTER REVENUES PATHS & HARD SURFACE MAINT OF COURSE & GROUNDS MAINT OF COURSE & GROUNDS GRILL 356005 2/212012 101891 .METRO ATHLETIC SUPPLY 782.82 CITY OF EDINA R55CKREG LOG20000 _ 280552 138077 4077.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES EDINA ATHLETIC ASSOCIATION 689.50 137.50 OFFICIATING FEES 280260 4064 Council Check Register 356006 212/2012 100885 METRO SALES INC 137.50 2/2/2012 -2/2/2012 TONER Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description 366002 21212012 EQUIPMENT RENTAL 105603 MEDICINE LAKE TOURS 588.31 COPIER USAGE 280329 441341 5410.6230 SERVICE-CONTRACTS EQUIPMENT 39.75 1968 EXHIBIT TRIP 280350 012512 1628.6103.07 TRIPS PROF SERVICES 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS 39.75 256.26 356003 212/2012 21212012 106464. MEIXNER, DIANNE 102508 MERGER, MAURE ANN 14.30 ART WORK SOLD 280285 011912 5101.4413 ART WORK SOLD 31.20 14.30 356010 21212012 356004 2/2/2012 101483 MENARDS 2,205.00 . REPLACE WATER SERVICE 00001550 280351 34012 185.83 SNOW SHOVELS 00001371 280257 10712 1647.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES 130.34 TRASH CANS, WET/DRY VAC 00006133 280326 3983 5422.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES 6.15 GLUE 00006137 280327 5675 5422.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES 205.82 BREAD BOX PARTS 00006140 280328 6992 5421.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES. 528.14 21112012 7:45:59 Page - 15 Business Unit SENIOR CITIZENS ART CENTER REVENUES PATHS & HARD SURFACE MAINT OF COURSE & GROUNDS MAINT OF COURSE & GROUNDS GRILL 356005 2/212012 101891 .METRO ATHLETIC SUPPLY 782.82 689.50 SOFTBALLS 280552 138077 4077.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES EDINA ATHLETIC ASSOCIATION 689.50 137.50 OFFICIATING FEES 280260 4064 4077.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 356006 212/2012 100885 METRO SALES INC 137.50 51.30 TONER 280258 95587A 5840.6513 OFFICE SUPPLIES LIQUOR YORK GENERAL 143.21 COPIER USAGE 280259 441022 5110.6151 EQUIPMENT RENTAL ART CENTER ADMINISTRATION 588.31 COPIER USAGE 280329 441341 5410.6230 SERVICE-CONTRACTS EQUIPMENT GOLF ADMINISTRATION EDINA ATHLETIC ASSOCIATION EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN ART CENTER REVENUES DISTRIBUTION 782.82 356007 21212012 102507 METRO VOLLEYBALL OFFICIALS 137.50 OFFICIATING FEES 280260 4064 4077.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 137.50 356008 2/212012 102729 METROPOLITAN FORD OF EDEN PRAI 256.26 BUMPER ASSEMBLY 00005814 -280261 478995 1553.6530 REPAIR ;PARTS 531.81 00005599 280262 478633 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS 531.81- 280263 CM478633 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS 256.26 356009 21212012 102508 MERGER, MAURE ANN 31.20 ARTWORK SOLD 280286 011912 5101.4413 ART WORK SOLD 31.20 356010 21212012 100913 MINNEAPOLIS & SUBURBAN SEWER & 2,205.00 . REPLACE WATER SERVICE 00001550 280351 34012 5913.6180 CONTRACTED REPAIRS EDINA ATHLETIC ASSOCIATION EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN ART CENTER REVENUES DISTRIBUTION R55CKREG LOG20000 CITY OF EDINA 211/2012 7:45:59 Council Check Register Page - 16 212/2012 -212/2012 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger�AccounkDescdption Business Unit 1,470.00 REPLACE WATER SERVICE 00001551 280352 34011 5913.6180 CONTRACTED REPAIRS DISTRIBUTION 3,675.00 356011 21212012 102568 MINNESOTA CHAPTER IAAI 75.00 DUES 280554 612612 1470.6105 DUES & SUBSCRIPTIONS FIRE DEPT. GENERAL 75.00 356012 2/2/2012 101589 MINNESOTA GFOA - 60.00 MEMBERSHIP - JOHNWALLIN 280553 013012 1160.6105 DUES &SUBSCRIPTIONS FINANCE 60.00 -- 366013 212/2012 116471 MINNESOTA VISITING NURSE AGENC 14.27 FLU SHOT 280635 24303 1550.6121 ADVERTISING PERSONNEL CENTRAL SERVICES GENERAL 14.27 356014 '21212012 100908 MINNESOTA WANNER CO. 158.18 FABRICATE & WELD SHELF .00005868 280264 0092022 -IN 1553.6585 ACCESSORIES EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 470.25 FLOODING NOZZLES 00001373 280506- 0092040 -IN 1648.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES SKATING RINK MAINTENANCE 628.43 356015 21212012 128914 MINUTEMAN PRESS 295.01 WORKOUT CARDS 280265 10601 5760.6575 PRINTING CENTENNIAL LAKES ADMIN EXPENSE 203.98 YORK REMODEL FLYERS 280266 10663 5842.6575 PRINTING YORK SELLING 48.74 STUDIO WORKSHOP POSTERS 280437 10550 5110.6575 PRINTING ART CENTER ADMINISTRATION 547.73 356016 2/212012 117420 MOE, MARK 16.25 ART WORK SOLD 280287 011912 5101.4413 ART WORK SOLD ART CENTER REVENUES 16.25 356017 ,21212012 125322 MOSS, STEPHANIE 115.70 ART WORK SOLD 280288 011912 5101.4413 ART WORK SOLD ART CENTER REVENUES 115.70 366018 21212012 100906 MTI DISTRIBUTING INC. 77.62 BEARINGS 00006138 280330 824491 -00 5422.6530 REPAIR PARTS MAINT OF COURSE & GROUNDS 1,226.99 REELS, GREASE SEALS 00006141 280331 825109 -00 5422.6530 REPAIR PARTS MAINT OF COURSE & GROUNDS - 497.14 ROLLERS 00006125 280438 822888 -02 5422.6530 REPAIR PARTS MAINT OF COURSE & GROUNDS 1,801.75 366019 21212012 110522. MUNICIPAL BUILDERS INC. 1,669,080.70 PARTIAL PAYMENT NO.7 280636 012712 05473.1705.30 CONTRACTOR PAYMENTS WM -473 NEW TREATMENT PLANT 96 R55CKREG LOG20000 CITY OF EDINA Council Check Register 2/2/2012 —2/212012 . Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description 1,669,080.70 356020 2/212012 129930 MYERS, TODD 45 00 OLA FEES REFUND 280313 011212 1400.4120 DOG LICENSES GENERAL SUPPLIES ADVERTISING OTHER ART WORK SOLD ADVERTISING OTHER GENERAL SUPPLIES 211/2012 7:45:59 Page - 17 Business Unit POLICE DEPT. GENERAL BUILDING MAINTENANCE PRO SHOP RETAIL SALES ART CENTER REVENUES ART CENTER ADMINISTRATION PUBLIC PROGRAMS REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN CONFERENCES & SCHOOLS POLICE DEPT. GENERAL GENERAL SUPPLIES OFFICE SUPPLIES ART WORK SOLD ARENA ADMINISTRATION GOLF ADMINISTRATION ART CENTER REVENUES 45.00 356021 21212012 100921 NATIONAL CAMERA EXCHANGE -, 45.00 CAMERA SUPPLIES 00001377 280507 01252070FCU 1646.6406 45.00 356022 21212012 127348 NAVIS PACK AND SHIP MN -1094 259.13 SHIPPING 00006430 280555 NC346690 5440.6122 259.13 366023 2/2/2012 129304 NELSON, DAVID 32.50 ART WORK SOLD 280289 011912 5101.4413 32.50 .356024 21212012 124074 NEMAA 484.00 ART CENTER ADVERTISING 00009119 280556 4669 5110.6122 484.00 356025 21212012 122449 NEW LIFE ENTERPRISES INC. 326.56 RANGE PASSES 280557 3836 7414.6406 326.56 356026 21212012 104232 NORTHERN SAFETY TECHNOLOGY INC 94.54 LENS, MAGNET 00005859 280353 29609 1553.6530 94.54 356027 21212012 102557 "NTOA 1,580.00 .TRAINING CONFERENCE 280354 20120140 1400.6104 1,580.00 356028 21212012 103578 OFFICE DEPOT 75.43 OFFICE SUPPLIES 280267 592395095001 5510.6406 27.29 MARKERS, BINDERS 280332 1428873622 5410.6513 102.72 356029 212/2012 123786 OLSON,.VICKI 26.00 ART WORK SOLD 280371 012312 5101.4413 26.00 GENERAL SUPPLIES ADVERTISING OTHER ART WORK SOLD ADVERTISING OTHER GENERAL SUPPLIES 211/2012 7:45:59 Page - 17 Business Unit POLICE DEPT. GENERAL BUILDING MAINTENANCE PRO SHOP RETAIL SALES ART CENTER REVENUES ART CENTER ADMINISTRATION PUBLIC PROGRAMS REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN CONFERENCES & SCHOOLS POLICE DEPT. GENERAL GENERAL SUPPLIES OFFICE SUPPLIES ART WORK SOLD ARENA ADMINISTRATION GOLF ADMINISTRATION ART CENTER REVENUES R55CKREG LOG20000 CITY OF EDINA Check # Date 356030 212/2012 356031 21212012 356032 21212012 356033 2IV2012 356634 2122012 Subledger Account Description COST OF GOODS SOLD RUBBISH REMOVAL CLEANING SUPPLIES CLEANING SUPPLIES ART WORK SOLD 211/2012 7:45:59 Page - 18 Business Unit CENTENNIAL LAKES OPERATING MAINT OF COURSE & GROUNDS PSTF OCCUPANCY. PSTF OCCUPANCY ART CENTER REVENUES 100347 PAUSTIS &SONS 8335764 -CM 5842.5513 Council.Check Register YORK SELLING - 1,057.01 2/2/2012 -2/2/2012 Amount Supplier/ Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No 8335866 -IN 129946 OLYMPIA GRANOLA COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING 2,127.76 78.48 CONCESSION PRODUCT 00002054 '280558 JL430 5761.5510 78.48 280470 8335893 -IN 5862.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR : VERNON SELLING 106083 ON SITE SANITATION INC. '2187914 5822.5512 COST OF:GOODS SOLD LIQUOR 106.88 TOILET SERVICE 280333 A- 445861 5422.6182 106.88 280605 2187910' : 5822.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR 50TH ST SELLING 129485 PAPCO INC. . 2187911 5822.5513' COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 49.97 CARPET CLEANING SUPPLIES 280559 69266 7411.6511 76.98 TOWELS, DEGREASER 280560 69478 7411.6511 126.95 129614 - PAPER, ELIZABETH 34.39 ART WORK SOLD 280372 012312 5101.4413 34.39 Subledger Account Description COST OF GOODS SOLD RUBBISH REMOVAL CLEANING SUPPLIES CLEANING SUPPLIES ART WORK SOLD 211/2012 7:45:59 Page - 18 Business Unit CENTENNIAL LAKES OPERATING MAINT OF COURSE & GROUNDS PSTF OCCUPANCY. PSTF OCCUPANCY ART CENTER REVENUES 100347 PAUSTIS &SONS 8335764 -CM 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING - 1,057.01 280402 8335862 -IN 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 976.75 280403 8335866 -IN 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING 2,127.76 280469 8335869 -IN 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 92.25 280470 8335893 -IN 5862.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR : VERNON SELLING 4,246.77 356035 21212012 116626 PETERSON, HARRIETTE 9.10 ART WORK SOLD 9.10 356036 21212012 100743 PHILLIPS WINE & SPIRITS 985.90 708.36 314.31 429.58 935.40 429.22 1,370.66 2,356.56 82.12 180.58 1,879.52 280602 8335764 -CM 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 280373 012312 5101.4413 ART WORK SOLD ART CENTER REVENUES 280471 2187912 5842.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR YORK SELLING 280472 2187918 5842.5512 COST OF.GOODS SOLD LIQUOR. YORK SELLING 280473 2187922 5862.5513 COST OF'GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 280474 2187917 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD. WINE VERNON SELLING 280475 2187923 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 280476 "' 2187921 5862.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR VERNON SELLING 280603, '2187914 5822.5512 COST OF:GOODS SOLD LIQUOR 50TH ST SELLING 280604 2187916 .5862.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR VERNON SELLING 280605 2187910' : 5822.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR 50TH ST SELLING 280606 2187911 5822.5513' COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING 280607 2187915 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING R55CKREG LOG20000 Check # Date 356037 21212012 356038 21212012 356039 21212012 356040 21212012 356041 21212012 Amount Supplier/ Explanation 568.72 570.12 CITY OF EDINA Council Check Register 2/2/2012 -2/212012 PO # Doc No Inv No Account No 280608 2187913 5842.5513 280609 2187919 5842.5513 280610 2187920 5842.5513 1400.6105 1646.6610 1646.6201 1646.6406 5842.5512 5842.5513 5842.5513 5842.5512 5842.5512 5822.5513 5862.5513 5862.5513 5862.5512 5822.5512 5862.5513 5862.5513 5862.5513 5822.5513 5862.5512 5842.5512 5822.5513 5822.5512 5521.6180 5521.6180 Subledger Account Description COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE DUES & SUBSCRIPTIONS SAFETY EQUIPMENT LAUNDRY GENERAL SUPPLIES 2/112012 '7:45:59 Page - 19 Business Unit YORK SELLING YORK SELLING YORK SELLING POLICE DEPT. GENERAL BUILDING MAINTENANCE BUILDING MAINTENANCE BUILDING MAINTENANCE COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR 101138 PLEAA COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 150.00 2012 MEMBERSHIP (5) 280355 012512 150.00 YORK SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 100380 =PRESTRUD; ROBERT COST OF-GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 139.99 UNIFORM PURCHASE 280356 012512 367.20 UNIFORM PURCHASE 280356 012512 507.19 VERNON SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING COST OF GOODSSOLD LIQUOR 101275 PX PRODUCTS COMPANY COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR YORK SELLING 265.81 GLASS CLEANER 00001356 280268 5782 265.81 100971 QUALITY WINE 1,280.32 280295 565495 -00 95.20 280296 565731 -00 131.20 280297 565808 -00 22.08- 280298 559795 -00 9.80- 280299 559473-00 218.13 280404 565733 -00 1,628.62 280405 565809 -00 801.20 280406 565732 -00 3,152.08 280477 565342 -00 175.18 280478 565341 -00 .01 280479 564381 -00 16.00- 280480 561622 -00 55.00- 280481 558725 -00 151.20 280611 565810 -00 1,849.50- 280612 561642 -00 1,000.00- 280612 561642 -00 635.00- 280612 561642 -00 214.50- 280612 561642 -00 3,831.26 100972 R &R SPECIALTIES OF WISCONSIN I 315.76 ZAMBONI REPAIR 280269 0049183 -IN 262.50 280270 0049244 -IN 1400.6105 1646.6610 1646.6201 1646.6406 5842.5512 5842.5513 5842.5513 5842.5512 5842.5512 5822.5513 5862.5513 5862.5513 5862.5512 5822.5512 5862.5513 5862.5513 5862.5513 5822.5513 5862.5512 5842.5512 5822.5513 5822.5512 5521.6180 5521.6180 Subledger Account Description COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE DUES & SUBSCRIPTIONS SAFETY EQUIPMENT LAUNDRY GENERAL SUPPLIES 2/112012 '7:45:59 Page - 19 Business Unit YORK SELLING YORK SELLING YORK SELLING POLICE DEPT. GENERAL BUILDING MAINTENANCE BUILDING MAINTENANCE BUILDING MAINTENANCE COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR YORK SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR YORK SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR YORK SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING COST OF-GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR VERNON 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 WINE VERNON SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING COST OF GOODSSOLD LIQUOR VERNON SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR YORK SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR 50TH ST SELLING CONTRACTED REPAIRS ARENA ICE MAINT CONTRACTED REPAIRS ARENA ICE MAINT . R55CKREG LOG20000 CITY OF EDINA 2/1/2012 7:45:59 i Council Check Register ,Page - 20 2/2/2012 —2/212012 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit 578.26 356042 .21212012 104450 RAPID GRAPHICS & MAILING INC. 1,542.21 MAIL WATER BILLS 280357 6770 5910.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES GENERAL (BILLING) 1,542.21 - 356043 2/2/2012 104642 RCM SPECIALTIES INC. 904.16 EMULSION 00005834 280440 3221 1301.6519 ROAD OIL GENERAL MAINTENANCE 602.78 280441 3227 1301.6519 -ROAD OIL GENERAL MAINTENANCE 1,506.94 366044 212/2012 100977 RICHFIELD PLUMBING COMPANY 136.00 WATER HEATER REPAIR 280271 58760 5511.6180 CONTRACTED REPAIRS ARENA BLDG/GROUNDS 136.00 356045 212/2012 106171 ROSE, SARAH • 26.00 ART WORK SOLD 280374 012312 5101.4413 ART WORK SOLD ART CENTER REVENUES 26.00 356046 21212012 124809 RPU INC. 9,950.00 HDPE SUMP DRAIN 280442 1272 5923.6180 CONTRACTED REPAIRS COLLECTION SYSTEMS 9,950.00 356047 2/212012 124732 RUNKE, STACEY 10.73 ART WORK SOLD 280508 012312 5101.4413 ART WORK SOLD ART CENTER REVENUES 10.73 356048 - 212/2012 129828 SAUNDERS, NATE 11.70 ART WORK SOLD 280375 012312 5101.4413 ART WORK SOLD ART CENTER REVENUES 55.00 CLASS REFUND 280522 012412 5101.4607 CLASS REGISTRATION ART CENTER REVENUES 66.70 356049 ;21212012 124780 SCHAUER, LAUREN 16.90 ART WORK SOLD 280376 012312 5101.4413 ART WORK SOLD ART CENTER REVENUES 16.90 356050 .21212012 124792 SCHUELLER, JASON 104.20. UNIFORM PURCHASE 280561 013012 1301:6201 LAUNDRY GENERAL MAINTENANCE 104.20 356051 '21212012 108694 SCHWALM, ELISABETH 19.50 ARTWORK SOLD 280377 012512 5101.4413 ARTWORK SOLD ART CENTER REVENUES R55CKREG LOG20000 Check # Date Amount Supplier/ Explanation RICHMOND HILLS PK 19.50 RICHMOND HILLS PK 358052 21212012 WESTCHESTER KNOLLS NEIGHBORH00 128052 SECAP - 242.87 POSTAGE MACHINE SUPPLIES CONSULTING INSPECTION 242.87 CONSULTING INSPECTION 356053 212/2012 CONSULTING DESIGN 100995 SEH CONSULTING DESIGN 7,663.63 RICHMOND HILLS PK RD RICHMOND HILLS PK 9,016.04 RICHMOND HILLS PK RD 11,270.04 RICHMOND HILLS PK RD 17,130.46 RICHMOND HILLS PK RD 1,777.99 MINNEHAHA WDS RECON 1,887.83 MINNEHAHA WDS RECON 3,801.39 MINNEHAHA WDS RECON 3,878.62 MINNEHAHA WDS RECON 11,576.18 RICHMOND HILLS PK RD 13,619.03 RICHMOND HILLS PK RD 17,023.79 RICHMOND HILLS PK RD 25,876.15 RICHMOND HILLS PK RD 124,521.15 356054 212/2012 - 102870 SEIFERT, ELIZABETH 109.20 ART WORK SOLD 109.20 356055 2/212012 101360 SHAUGHNESSY, SANDRA 335.40 ART WORK SOLD 335.40 356056 .21212012 101556 SHRED4T USA INC. 13.00 DOCUMENT SHREDDING 13.00 366057 21212012 111824. SIDEKICK 5,275.65 PLAN SCAN & INDEX 5,275.65 366058 212/2012 127619 SIEGEL, LISA 44.75 ART WORK SOLD 44.75 356059 21212012 119596 SMD COPY SYSTEMS CITY Or EDINA Council Check Register 21212012 —2/2/2012 PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description 280509 81137153 280443 251734 280443 251734 280443 251734 280443 .251734 280444 252293 280444 252293 280444 252293 280444 252293 280445 252294 280445 252294 280445 252294 280445 252294 280379 012312 280378 012312 1550.6235 03471.170510 05525.1705.20 04387.1705.20 01388.1705.20 03460.1705.21 04375.1705.21 05511.1705.21 01334.1705.21 03471.1705.20 05525.1705.20 04387.1705.20 01388.1705.20 5101.4413 5101.4413 280272 0253896156 1400.6103 280637 4046 1495.6136 280380 012212 5101.4413 POSTAGE 2/1rz. — 7:45:59 Page- 21 Business Unit CENTRAL SERVICES GENERAL CONSULTING DESIGN RICHMOND HILLS PK CONSULTING DESIGN RICHMOND HILLS PK CONSULTING DESIGN RICHMOND HILLS PK CONSULTING DESIGN WESTCHESTER KNOLLS NEIGHBORH00 CONSULTING INSPECTION MINNEHAHA WOODS RECON CONSULTING INSPECTION MINNEHAHA WOODS RECON CONSULTING INSPECTION MINNEHAHA WOODS RECON CONSULTING INSPECTION BA -334 MINNEHAHA WOODS RECON CONSULTING DESIGN RICHMOND HILLS PK CONSULTING DESIGN RICHMOND HILLS PK CONSULTING DESIGN RICHMOND HILLS PK CONSULTING DESIGN WESTCHESTER KNOLLS NEIGHBORHOO ART WORK SOLD ART WORK SOLD PROFESSIONAL SERVICES ART CENTER REVENUES ART CENTER REVENUES POLICE DEPT. GENERAL PROFESSIONAL'SVC - OTHER INSPECTIONS ART WORK SOLD ART CENTER REVENUES R55CKREG LOG20000 CITY OF EDINA Council Check Register 212/2012 -2/2/2012 Check # Date Amount Supplier. /Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No 149.43 SHREDDER PARTS .280358 353940 1400.6215 Subledger Account Description EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE 2/1/2012 7:45:59 Page - 22 Business Unit POLICE DEPT. GENERAL 5421.6230 SERVICE CONTRACTS EQUIPMENT GRILL 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 149.43 5862.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR VERNON SELLING 356060 21212012 VERNON SELLING 102935 SOUTH TOWN REFRIGERATION INC COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR 50TH ST SELLING 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 672.25 EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE 00006340 280562 25212 5842.5512 COST.OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR 672.25 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 356081 21212012 VERNON SELLING 127878 SOUTHERN WINE AND SPIRITS COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 571.50 1130.6136 280407 1710414 2,301.68 280482 1687675 2,672.18 280483 1710423 430.79 280484 1687674 770.50 280485 1716632 2,491.12 280486 1710422 630.77 280487 1687676 364.50 280488 1710425 2,941.00 280613 1716631 1,023.72 280614 1710421 251.00 280615 1696790 14,448.76 356062 11212012 101023 SOUTHWEST SUBURBAN CABLE COMMI 5,430.62 1ST QTR FEES 280563 201202 5,430.62 356063 21212012 110977 SOW, ADAMA 185.25 ART WORK SOLD 280381 012312 185.25 356064 21212012 102698 SPOONER, ANNE 26.00 ARTWORK SOLD 280382 012312 26.00 356065 21212012 104672 SPRINT Subledger Account Description EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE 2/1/2012 7:45:59 Page - 22 Business Unit POLICE DEPT. GENERAL 5421.6230 SERVICE CONTRACTS EQUIPMENT GRILL 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 5862.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR VERNON SELLING 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 5822.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR 50TH ST SELLING 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 5842.5512 COST.OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR YORK SELLING - 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 1130.6136 PROFESSIONAL SVC - OTHER- COMMUNICATIONS 5101.4413 5101.4413 8.10 280334 873184124 -110 1240.6188 17.34 280334 873184124 -110 1180.6103 42.99 280334 873184124 -110 5311.6188 51.32 280334 873184124 -110 5841.6188 51.32 280334 873184124 -110 1190.6188 51.90 280334 873184124 -110 7411.6188 51.92 280334 873184124 -110 1490.6188 52.20 280334 873184124 -110 4090.6188 ART WORK SOLD ART WORK SOLD TELEPHONE PROFESSIONAL SERVICES TELEPHONE TELEPHONE TELEPHONE TELEPHONE TELEPHONE TELEPHONE ART CENTER REVENUES ART CENTER REVENUES PUBLIC WORKS ADMIN GENERAL ELECTION POOL OPERATION YORK OCCUPANCY ASSESSING PSTF OCCUPANCY PUBLIC HEALTH 50TH &FRANCE MAINTENANCE R55CKREG LOG20000 CITY OF EDINA 211/2012 7:45:59 Council Check Register Page - 23 2/2/2012 -2/2/2012 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit 53.06 280334 873184124 -110 5422.6188 TELEPHONE MAINT OF COURSE &,GROUNDS 56.66 280334 873184124 -110 1140.6188 TELEPHONE PLANNING 56.66 280334 873184124 -110 2210.6188 TELEPHONE COMMUNICATIONS 77.10 280334 873184124 -110 1553.6188 TELEPHONE EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 80.01 280334 873184124 -110 1120.6188 TELEPHONE ADMINISTRATION 91.52 280334 873184124 -110 1554.6230 SERVICE CONTRACTS EQUIPMENT CENT SERV GEN - MIS 139.55 280334 873184124 -110 1470.6188 TELEPHONE FIRE DEPT. GENERAL 175.85 280334 873184124 -110 1322.6188 TELEPHONE STREET LIGHTING ORNAMENTAL 185.02 280334 873184124 -110 1301.6188 TELEPHONE GENERAL MAINTENANCE 195.99 280334 873184124 -110 1260.6188 TELEPHONE ENGINEERING GENERAL 204.60 280334 873184124 -110 5720.6188 TELEPHONE EDINBOROUGH OPERATIONS 236.70 280334 873184124 -110 1495.6188 TELEPHONE INSPECTIONS 378.42 280334 873184124 -110 1640.6188 TELEPHONE PARK MAINTENANCE GENERAL 429.19 280334 873184124 -110 5910.6188 TELEPHONE GENERAL (BILLING) 519.87 280334 873184124 -110 1470.6151 EQUIPMENT RENTAL FIRE DEPT. GENERAL 1,973.23 280334 873184124 -110 1400.6188 TELEPHONE POLICE DEPT. GENERAL 5,180.52 366066 21212012 103668 ST LOUIS PARK COMMUNITY BAND 75.00 EP ENTERTAINMENT 2/12/12 280359 010912 5710.6136 PROFESSIONAL SVC = OTHER EDINBOROUGH ADMINISTRATION 75.00 356067 2/212012 121383 ST LOUIS PARK POLICE DEPARTMEN 520.00 COURSE CANCELLATION OOREFUND280564 012612 7414.4390 REGISTRATION FEES PUBLIC PROGRAMS 520.00 366068 21212012 116175 ST. CROIX HARLEY - DAVIDSON 820.97 MAINTENANCE 280446 610444 1400.6215 EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE POLICE DEPT. GENERAL 820.97 356069 21212012 100650 STANLEY SECURITY SOLUTIONS INC 31.10 DOOR PARTS 00001363 280273 CH- 571460 1646.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES BUILDING MAINTENANCE 31.10 356070 21212012 129409 STEEN, BARB 33.48 ART WORK SOLD 280290 011912 5101.4413 ART WORK SOLD ART CENTER REVENUES 33.48 356071 21212012 101015 STREICHERS 199.99 BOOTS 00003701 280638 1887020 1470.6558 DEPT UNIFORMS FIRE DEPT. GENERAL 199.99 R55CKREG LOG20000 6,704.69 CAD SERVER SERVICES CITY OF EDINA 45519 2310.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES E911 Council Check Register 280652 45033 2310.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES E911 2/2/2012 --212/2012 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO #, Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description 366072 2/212012 104349 STRUCTURED NETWORK SOLUTIONS 940.00 418.30 ICE ARENA NETWORK WIRING 280447 15039 5510.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 378.76 EDIN PK NETWORK WIRING 280448 15128 5620.6180 CONTRACTED REPAIRS VERNON SELLING 978.06 ICE ARENA NETWORK WIRING 280448 15128 5510.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER 50TH ST SELLING 1,775.12 2,342.00 356073 21212012 101017 SUBURBAN CHEVROLET 2/212012 106441 SUSA 16.01 RETAINERS 00005816 280360 372253 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS 00001547 280274 010112 16.01 DUESA SUBSCRIPTIONS DISTRIBUTION 200.00 356074 21212012 100900 SUN NEWSPAPERS 356078 21212012 122365 SUTPHEN, CHRISTINE 56.95 PUBLISH ORD 2012 -01 280361 1356783 1120.6120 ADVERTISING LEGAL 18.53 32.97 PUBLISH NOTICE 280362 1356785 1120.6120 ADVERTISING LEGAL 98.92 PUBLISH ORD 2012 -02 280363 1356784 1120.6120 ADVERTISING LEGAL 356079 47.96 PUBLISH NOTICE 280364 1357777 1120.6120 ADVERTISING LEGAL 236.80 .186.76 UNIFORM PURCHASE 280565 012612 356075 2/2/2012 BUILDING MAINTENANCE 101910 SUNGARD PUBLIC SECTOR INC. 186.76 2/1/2012 7:45:59 Page - 24 Business Unit .:ARENA ADMINISTRATION EDINBOROUGH PARK ARENA ADMINISTRATION EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN ADMINISTRATION ADMINISTRATION ADMINISTRATION ADMINISTRATION 6,704.69 CAD SERVER SERVICES 280365 45519 2310.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES E911 1,302.80 CAD SERVER LABOR 280652 45033 2310.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES E911 8,007.49 356076 21212012 120998 SURLY BREWING CO. 940.00 280300 V001428 5842:5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER YORK SELLING 722.00 280408 V001430 5862.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD.BEER VERNON SELLING 680.00 280616 V001459 5822.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER 50TH ST SELLING 2,342.00 356077 2/212012 106441 SUSA 200.00 MEMBERSHIP (2) 00001547 280274 010112 5913.6105 DUESA SUBSCRIPTIONS DISTRIBUTION 200.00 356078 21212012 122365 SUTPHEN, CHRISTINE 18.53 ART WORK SOLD 280517 011912 5101.4413 ART WORK SOLD ART. CENTER REVENUES 18.53 356079 21212012 103307 SWANSON, LEE .186.76 UNIFORM PURCHASE 280565 012612 1646.6201 LAUNDRY BUILDING MAINTENANCE 186.76 356080 2/212012 116868 SWENSON, SUSAN 12.97 ART WORK SOLD 280383 012312 5101.4413 ART WORK SOLD ART CENTER REVENUES R55CKREG LOG20000 CITY OF EDINA 211 /2012 7:45:59 Council Check Register Page - 25 2/212012 -2/2/2012 Check # Date Amount Supplier/ Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit 12.97 356081 21212012 108509 TAFFEE, MARY 78.65 ART WORK SOLD 280384 012312 5101.4413 ART WORK SOLD ART CENTER REVENUES _ 78.65 356082 21212012 124781 TALY, HENRY 25.35 ART WORK SOLD 280385 012312 5101.4413 ART WORK SOLD ART CENTER REVENUES 25.35 356083 2/212012 101027 TARGET BANK 34.22 X- XXX -XX9 -840 SUPPLIES 280566 011812 5410.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES GOLF ADMINISTRATION 34.22 356084 21212012 104932 TAYLOR MADE 59.85 GOLF CLUB 280335 17163079 5440.5511 COST OF GOODS - PRO SHOP PRO SHOP•RETAIL SALES 59.85 356086 212/2012 120602 TEAGUE, CARY 109.89 MILEAGE REIMBURSEMENT 280649 012712 1140.6107 MILEAGE OR ALLOWANCE PLANNING 109.89 356086 2/212012 128085 TELFER, JOHN 13.00 ART WORK SOLD 280386 012312 5101.4413 ART WORK SOLD ART CENTER REVENUES 13.00 356087 2/2/2012 101526 THOMPSON, BETTY 55.90 ART WORK SOLD 280387 012312 5101.4413 ART WORK SOLD ART CENTER REVENUES 55.90 356088 21212012 102227 THOMPSON, PAUL 39.00 ART WORK SOLD 280388 012312 5101.4413 ART WORK SOLD ART CENTER REVENUES 39.00 356089 2/212012 101035 THORPE DISTRIBUTING COMPANY 36.75 280409 673070 5862.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX VERNON SELLING 3,054.58 280410 673069 5862.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER VERNON SELLING 3,091.33 356090 2/212012 101474 TITLEIST 35.64 GOLF BALLS 280449 0147195 5440.5511 COST OF GOODS - PRO SHOP PRO SHOP RETAIL SALES 179.61 GOLF CLUBS 280567 0190290 5440.5511 COST OF GOODS - PRO SHOP PRO SHOP RETAIL SALES R55CKREG LOG20000 CITY OF EDINA 211/2012 7:45:59 Council Check Register Page - 26 2/212012 -2/212012 Check # Date Amount Supplier I Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit 37.00- CREDIT 280568 6045835 5440.5511 COST OF GOODS --PRO SHOP PRO SHOP RETAIL SALES 178.25 356091 21212012 103153 TREUTING, KRISTEN 28.28 ART WORK SOLD 280389 012312 5101.4413 ART WORK SOLD ART'CENTER REVENUES 28.28 356092 21212012 102078 UNITED STATES GOLF ASSOCIATION 30.00 GOLF RULES BOOKS 00006432 280569 10005833 5410.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES GOLF ADMINISTRATION 30.00 _ 356093. 2/212012 129933 VAN DYKE, ROIAH 24.70 ART WORK SOLD 280390 012312 5101.4413 ART WORK SOLD ART CENTER REVENUES 24.70 356094 121212012 101058 VAN PAPER CO. 508.89 LIQUOR BAGS, TOWELS 280336 224173 -00 5842.6512 PAPER SUPPLIES YORK SELLING 508.89 356095 212/2012 102970 VERIZON WIRELESS 32.99 280275 2684997604 5952.6188 TELEPHONE RECYCLING 68.05 260275 2684997604 1495.6188 TELEPHONE INSPECTIONS 103.04 280275 2684997604 1600.6188 TELEPHONE PARK ADMIN. GENERAL 121.13 280275 2684997604 1120.6188 TELEPHONE ADMINISTRATION 288.67 280275 2684997604 1470.6188 TELEPHONE FIRE DEPT. GENERAL 92.42 280450 2684139175 1400.6188 TELEPHONE POLICE DEPT. GENERAL 706.30 356096 21212012 101067 VIKING INDUSTRIAL CENTER 8.43 SAFETY GLASSES 00005821 280276 288763 1646.6610 SAFETY EQUIPMENT BUILDING MAINTENANCE 8.43 SAFETY 'GLASSES 00005821 280276 288763 1301.6610 SAFETY EQUIPMENT GENERAL" MAINTENANCE 8.43 SAFETY GLASSES 00005821 280276 288763 1553.6610 SAFETY EQUIPMENT EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 8.46 SAFETY GLASSES 00005821 280276 288763 5913.6610 SAFETY EQUIPMENT DISTRIBUTION 33.75 356097 21212012 121611 VON BARGEN, AMY 74.75 ART WORK SOLD 280391 012312 5101.4413 ART WORK SOLD ART CENTER REVENUES 74.75 356098 21212012 101932 VOTH, BART 23.31 MILEAGE REIMBURSEMENT 280311 012312 5919.6106 MEETING EXPENSE TRAINING 23.31 R55CKREG LOG20000 YORK SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING CITY OF EDINA .50TH ST SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING Council Check Register 2/2/2012 -2/212012 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No 356099 212/2012 102642 WALKER PARKING CONSULTANTS INC 6,200.00 2012 RAMP CERTIFICATION 280510 21379800001 1375.6103 6,200.00 356100 2/212012 121042 WALLACE CARLSON PRINTING 115.06 ART SHOW POSTCARDS 280570 47226 5110.6575 115.06 356101 212/2012 101071 ,WALLIN, JOHN 79.92 MILEAGE REIMBURSEMENT 280639 012712 1160.6107 79.92 356102 21212012 124743 WALSTED, KRISTEN 46.80 ART WORK SOLD 280392 012312 5101.4413 46.80 356103 . 21212012 102020 WELLS, GARY 23.31 MILEAGE REIMBURSEMENT 280308 012312 5919.6106 23.31 356104 21212012 101973 WILMOT, SOLVER 33.30 MILEAGE REIMBURSEMENT 280640 012512 5952.6107 87.69, MILEAGE REIMBURSEMENT 280640 012512 1490.6107 120.99 356105 21212012 101033 WINE COMPANY, THE 222.30 280411 290601 -00 5842.5513 1,343.10 280490 29068400 5862.5513 - 420.25 280617 290602 -00 5822.5513 1,985.65 356106 21212012 101312 WINE MERCHANTS .56 280491 394756 5862.5513 2,016.56 280492 394758 5862.5513 624.74 280618 394755 5822.5513 1.12 280619 394754 5842.5513 805.14 280620 394757 5842.5513 3,448.12' 366107 21212012 124291 WIRTZ BEVERAGE MINNESOTA 1,498.97 280412 694113 5842.5513 2/1/2012 7:45:59 Page - 27 Subledger Account Description Business Unit , PROFESSIONAL SERVICES PARKING RAMP PRINTING ART CENTER ADMINISTRATION MILEAGE OR ALLOWANCE FINANCE , ART WORK SOLD ART CENTER REVENUES MEETING EXPENSE TRAINING MILEAGE OR ALLOWANCE RECYCLING MILEAGE OR ALLOWANCE PUBLIC HEALTH COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE .50TH ST SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING COST OF GOODS'SOLD WINE' VERNON SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING R55CKREG LOG20000 Business Unit . CITY OF EDINA COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX YORK SELLING Council Check Register 21212012 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX 2/212012 -2/2/2012 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No 3,352.06 280413 694111 5842.5512 " 74.67 280414 '694112 5842.5515 9,847.74 280415 694106 5862.5513 39.90 280416 694107 j 5862.5515 179.00 280417 656127 5862.5512 1,926.27 280493 694104 5862.5512 7,692.16 280494 ' 694105 5862.5512 41.05 280495 694110 5822.5515 1,913.49 280496 694108 5822.5512 287.80 280621 690884 5822.5512 3,299.92 280622 694109 5822.5513 5862.5514 5862.5514 5862.5514 5842.5514 5842.5514 5822.5514 1470.6552' 1470.6552 5862.5513 1330.6185 1321.6185 5720.6185 5110.6122' 211/2012 7:45:59 Page - . 28 Subledger Account Description Business Unit . 30,153.03 YORK SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX YORK SELLING 356108 21212012 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX 124529 WIRTZ BEVERAGE MINNESOTA BEER COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR VERNON SELLING COST OF, GOODS SOLD LIQUOR VERNON SELLING .03 VERNON SELLING 280301 851586 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR 50TH ST SELLING 1,910.15 50TH ST SELLING 280302 851870 3,537.45 280303 851587 1,823.65 280304 852335 505.50 280623 854144 3,927.47 280624 853993 11,704.25 356109 212/2012 118395 WITMER PUBLIC SAFETY. GROUP INC 1,749.60 FIREFIGHTING GLOVES 00003691 280571 E917608 76.00 HELMET SHEILDS 00003668 280641 E896544.001 1,825.60 356110 21212012 127774 WORLDWIDE CELLARS INC. 177.50 280489 1162 177.50 356111 .21212012 101726 XCEL ENERGY 46.61 51- 5276505 -8 280366 310849252 57.65 51-4420190 -3 280572 311695854 6,360.83 51- 6644819 -9 280575 312052456 6,465.09 356112 '21212012 129943 YELLOW PAGES UNITED 124.00 EDINA ART CENTER AD 280573 2700020 124.00 = 356113 ,21212012 119647 YOCUM OIL COMPANY INC. 5862.5514 5862.5514 5862.5514 5842.5514 5842.5514 5822.5514 1470.6552' 1470.6552 5862.5513 1330.6185 1321.6185 5720.6185 5110.6122' 211/2012 7:45:59 Page - . 28 Subledger Account Description Business Unit . COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR YORK SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX YORK SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE. VERNON SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX VERNON SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR VERNON SELLING COST OF, GOODS SOLD LIQUOR VERNON SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR VERNON SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX- 50TH ST SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR 50TH ST SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR 50TH ST SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING COST,OF GOODS SOLD BEER COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER COST OF.GOODS SOLD BEER COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER F `COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER VERNON SELLING VERNON SELLING VERNON SELLING YORK SELLING YORK SELLING 50TH ST SELLING PROTECTIVE CLOTHING FIRE DEPT. GENERAL PROTECTIVE CLOTHING FIRE DEPT. GENERAL COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING LIGHT & POWER TRAFFIC SIGNALS LIGHT & POWER STREET LIGHTING REGULAR LIGHT. & POWER EDINBOROUGH OPERATIONS ADVERTISING OTHER ART CENTER ADMINISTRATION R55CKREG LOG20000 .013112 CITY — EDINA 129946 -MONTANO, MICHAEL 6,500.00 SETTLEMENT Council Check Register PENSIONS 356116 212/2012 100946 PERA 2/2/2012 —2/212012 FURLOUGH PERA MATCH Check # Date Amount Supplier/ Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Descdp8on 10,517.49 UNLEADED FUEL 00001200 280367 472498 1553.6581 GASOLINE 10,517.49 - 356114 21212012 101091 ZIEGLER INC 2,992.50 ROLLER COMPACTOR RENTAL 280642 K0326201 1301.6151 EQUIPMENT RENTAL 2,992.50 .013112 356115 21212012 129946 -MONTANO, MICHAEL 6,500.00 SETTLEMENT 6,500.00 PENSIONS 356116 212/2012 100946 PERA 54.21 FURLOUGH PERA MATCH 54.21 2,945,395.69 Grand Total 280691 .013112 1500.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES' 280439 4410 -00 -1/12 1550.6030 PENSIONS Payment Instrument Totals Check Total 2,945,395.69 Total Payments 2,945,395.69 2/r -_,2 7:45:59 Page - 29 Business Unit EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN GENERAL MAINTENANCE CONTINGENCIES CENTRAL SERVICES GENERAL R55CKSUM LOG20000 Company Amount 01000 GENERALFUND 392,550.74 02200 COMMUNICATIONS FUND 2,669.08 - 02300 POLICE SPECIAL REVENUE 23,007.49 03300 PIR DEBT SERVICE FUND 3;000.00 04000 WORKING CAPITAL FUND 68,202.72 04200 EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT FUND 9;981:15 04800 CONSTRUCTION FUND 3,878.62 05100 ART CENTER FUND 4,392.29 05200 GOLF DOME FUND 32.36 05300 AQUATIC CENTER FUND 455,243.49 05400 GOLF COURSE FUND 21,770.36 05500 ICE ARENA FUND 2,788.94 05600 EDINBOROUGH/CENT LAKES FUND 556.47 05700 EDINBOROUGH PARK FUND 6,640.43 05750 CENTENNIAL LAKES PARK FUND 771.37 05800 LIQUOR FUND 131,788.12 05900 UTILITY FUND 1,786,383.49 05930 STORM SEWER FUND 30,181.66 05950 RECYCLING FUND 66.29 07400 PSTF AGENCY FUND 1,490.62 Report Totals 2,945,395.69 CITY OF EDINA Council Check Summary 2/2/2012 - 21212012 We confirm: to the best of our knowledge and belief, that these: claims comply in all material respects with the requirements of the City of Edina,purchasing poll ie and procedures`d 2/112012 7:46 :54 Page REPORPRECOM MEN DATION To: MAYOR AND COUNCIL Agenda Item IV.0 From: Jeff Long Chief of Police ® Action F1 Discussion Information Date: February 6, 2012 Subject: Second Reading - Ordinance No.2012 -03 Amending Section 905 Open House Parties ACTION REQUESTED: Adopt Ordinance No. 2012 -03. INFORMATION /BACKGROUND: First reading of this proposed amendment was presented to the City Council on January 17, 2012 and no changes were requested. Background: When this ordinance was originally written, the definition of "Alcoholic Beverage" was written as "Any beverage containing more than one -half of one percent of alcohol by weight ". The true definition changes the last word from "weight" to "volume ". With this change, the definition of alcohol will be compatible with Minnesota State Statute. ATTACHMENTS: Ordinance No. 2012 -03 Amending Section 905.01 ORDINANCE NO. 2012- 03 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE EDINA CITY CODE CONCERNING OPEN HOUSE PARTIES THE CITY COUNCIL OF EDINA ORDAINS: Section 1. The definition of "Alcoholic Beverage" in Subsection 905.01 of the Edina City Code is amended to provide as follows: Alcoholic Beverage. Any beverage containing more than one -half of one percent of alcohol by volume. Section 2. This ordinance is effective immediately upon its passage and publication. First Reading: Second Reading: Published: Attest Debra A. Mangen, City Clerk James B. Hovland, Mayor Please publish in the Edina Sun Current on: Send two affidavits of publication. Bill to Edina City Clerk FEBRUARY 6, 2012 REPORT /RECOMMENDATION CORRECTION • Agenda Item No. IV.D. -Prosecutor Contract 2012-2015 • The contract included with the original report included a YEARLY fee for each MONTH. • The updated contract has been corrected and includes the proper MONTHLY fee. • The updated contract is attached. AGREEMENT FOR LEGAL SERVICES J BETWEEN THE CITY OF EDINA AND BONNER & BORHART, LLP THIS AGREEMENT, effective March 1, 2012, is by and between the CITY OF EDINA, a Minnesota municipal corporation ( "City ") and BONNER & BORHART, LLP ( "Attorney "). NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual undertakings herein, the parties hereto agree as follows: City. 1. ACCEPTANCE OF PROPOSAL. A. The Attorney shall furnish and perform criminal prosecution legal services for the B. The Attorney shall be engaged as an independent contractor and not as a City employee. The Attorney is free to contract with other entities. 2. CONTRACT TIME. A. The Attorney shall serve at the pleasure of the City Council and City Manager, and may be terminated without cause by resolution of the City Council and the City Manager. B. The Attorney may terminate the contract at any time, provided that the Attorney shall give the City thirty (3 0) days written notice before the termination becomes effective. [c�W.,%`tu I DQM-9 A. The Attorney will bill the City monthly. The City will normally pay for services within thirty five (35) days of receipt of a statement for services rendered. Costs and fees will be charged as set forth in subsections B and C below. Be Criminal Prosecution: A monthly retainer for attorney fees, law clerks, legal assistants and secretaries: $18,333 per calendar month from March 1, 2012 to February 28, 2013; $18,750 16153702 1 RNKr01262012 ti per calendar month from March 1, 2013 to February 28, 2014; $19,166 per calendar month from March 1, 2014 to February 28, 2015. All prosecution legal services are included in the retainer including criminal appeals, civil and criminal forfeitures of motor vehicles, and prosecution of ordinance violations. C. " Costs. Out -of- pocket costs without mark -up. Costs include: • Westlaw • recording fees • postage of 50¢ or more • photocopies at 20¢ per copy • long distance telephone calls • litigation (court filing fees, expert witnesses, acquisitions, subpoenas, service of process, etc.) 4. INSURANCE. The Attorney will purchase and maintain sufficient insurance to protect Attorney against claims for legal malpractice. 5. REVIEW. The Attorney's performance shall be reviewed as deemed appropriate by the City Manager or City Council. 6. MISCELLANEOUS. Minnesota. A. Governing Law. This Agreement shall be governed by. the laws of the State "of B. Assignment. The Attorney may not assign or refer any of the legal services to be performed hereunder without the consent of the Edina City Manager. C. Effective Date. This Agreement shall be effective the day and year first above written. This Agreement shall not be modified or amended without the approval in writing of the parties. 16153702 RNKA 262012 2 V Dated: , 20_ CITY OF EDINA BY: James B. Hovland, Mayor AND Scott Neal, City Manager 16153702 RNK:r01/26n012 Dated: 20 BONNER & BORHART, LLP _ BY: Patrick G. Leach 3 Ii I AGREEMENT FOR LEGAL SERVICES BETWEEN THE CITY OF EDINA AND BONNER & BORHART, LLP THIS AGREEMENT, effective March 1, 2012, is by and between the CITY OF EDINA, a Minnesota municipal corporation ( "City ") and BONNER & BORHART, LLP ( "Attorney "). NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual undertakings herein, the parties hereto agree as follows: City. 1. ACCEPTANCE OF PROPOSAL. A. The Attorney shall furnish The Attorney employee. The Attorney is free to 2. may be I: 1174 legal services for the contractor and not as a City of the City Council and City Manager, and .ion of the City Council and the City Manager. terminate the contract at any time, provided that the Attorney shall give the City thirty (30) days written notice before the termination becomes effective. 3. PAYMENT. A. The Attorney will bill the City monthly. The City will normally pay for services within thirty five (35) days of receipt of a statement for services rendered. Costs and fees will be charged as set forth in subsections B and C below. B. Criminal Prosecution: A monthly retainer for attorney fees, law clerks, legal assistant and secretaries: X0;000.00 per calendar month from March 1 2012 to February 28 2013, 16153701 1 RNKA2 /14!2011 r , . :, Q2200.00 per calendar month from March 12013 to February 28, 2014, $230,000.0A per calendar month from March 1 2014 to February 28 2015. All prosecution legal services are included in the retainer including criminal appeals, civil and criminal forfeitures of motor vehicles, and prosecution of ordinance violations. C. Costs. Out -of- pocket costs without mark -up. Costs include: • Westlaw • ' recording fees • postage of 50¢ or more • photocopies at 20¢ per copy • long distance telephone calls • court filing fees, subpoengA 4. INSURANCE. The Attorney Attorney against claims for legal malpractice. 5. REVIEW. The Atto SP' City Manager or City Council. 6. MISCELL US. A. overning aw. Minnesota. B. Assignment. Attor of process insurance to protect ie *ed as deemed appropriate by the ;hall be governed by the laws of the State of assign or refer any of the legal services to be performed hereunder without the consent of the Edina City Manager. C. Effective Date. This Agreement shall be effective the day and year first above written. This Agreement shall not be modified or amended without the approval in writing of the parties. 16153701 2 RNKA 2 /14/2011 Otte REPORT /RECOMMENDATION To: MAYOR AND COUNCIL Agenda Item IV.D. From: Jeff Long Chief of Police ® Action ❑ Discussion 0 Information Date: February 6, 2012 Subject: Prosecutor Contract 2012 - 2015. ACTION REQUESTED: Approve a new three year contract with Bonner & Borhart, LLP to provide prosecution services for the City of Edina. INFORMATION /BACKGROUND: The City's prosecuting attorney is responsible for prosecuting petty misdemeanor, misdemeanor and gross misdemeanor level crimes. Typical crimes include traffic offenses, domestic abuse and commercial crimes such as shoplifting and credit card fraud. Traffic- related offenses constitute the majority of the activity. The firm of Bonner and Borhart, LLP has provided prosecution services for the city of Edina since 2006. Patrick Leach has been the "lead" attorney assigned by Bonner and Borhart to provide this service. Mr. Leach has been responsive to our needs and the company of Bonner and Borhart, LLP has worked closely with our IT department to transition to mandated transmittal requirements established by our courts. Bonner & Borhart, LLP and Mr. Leach also provide prosecution services for the City of Eden Prairie. Patrick Leach has previously worked as a prosecutor for the Metropolitan Airports Commission (as an employee of Thompson & Nybeck, P.A.) and for the St. Paul City Attorney's Office. This three year contract commences on March 1, 2012. The first year of the contract matches the 2011 cost. The second and third year of the contract have increases of $5000.00 a year respectively. ATTACHMENTS: Contract AGREEMENT FOR LEGAL SERVICES BETWEEN THE CITY OF EDINA AND BONNER & BORHART, LLP THIS AGREEMENT, effective March 1, 2012, is by and between the CITY OF EDINA, a Minnesota municipal corporation ( "City ") and BONNER & BORHART, LLP ( "Attorney "). NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual undertakings herein, the parties hereto agree as follows: 1. ACCEPTANCE OF PROPOSAL. A. The Attorney shall furnish and perform criminal prosecution legal services for the City. B. The Attorney shall be engaged as an independent contractor and not as a City employee. The Attorney is free to contract with other entities. 2. CONTRACT TIME. A. The Attorney shall serve at the pleasure of the City Council and City Manager, and may be terminated without cause by resolution of the City Council and the City Manager B. The Attorney may terminate the contract at any time, provided that the Attorney shall give the City thirty (30) days written notice before the termination becomes effective. 3. PAYMENT. A. The Attorney will bill the City monthly. The City will normally pay for services within thirty five (35) days of receipt of a statement for services rendered. Costs and fees will be charged as set forth in subsections B and C below. B. Criminal Prosecution: A monthly retainer for attorney fees, law clerks, legal assistant and secretaries: $220,000.00 per calendar month from March 12012 to February 28 2013, $225,000.00 per calendar month from March 1 2013 to February 28, 2014, $230,000.00 per calendar month from March 12014 to February 28 2015. All prosecution legal services are included in the retainer including criminal appeals, civil and criminal forfeitures of motor vehicles, and prosecution of ordinance violations. C. Costs. Out -of- pocket costs without mark -up. Costs include: • Westlaw • recording fees • postage of 50¢ or more • photocopies at 20¢ per copy • long distance telephone calls • court filing fees, subpoenas, service of process 4. INSURANCE. The Attorney will purchase and maintain sufficient insurance to protect Attorney against claims for legal malpractice. 5. REVIEW. The Attorney's performance shall be reviewed as deemed appropriate by the City Manager or City Council. 6. MISCELLANEOUS. of Minnesota. A. Governing Law. This Agreement shall be governed by the laws of the State B. Assignment. The Attorney may not assign or refer any of the legal services to be performed hereunder without the consent of the Edina City Manager. C. Effective Date. This Agreement shall be effective the day and year first above written. This Agreement shall not be modified or amended without the approval in writing of the parties. Dated: , 20_ Dated: , 20_ CITY OF EDINA I: ►Ip James B. Hovland, Mayor Scott Neal, City Manager BONNER & BORHART, LLP 176-IN Patrick G. Leach, Ir L•J REPORURECOMMEN RATION To: , MAYOR AND COUNCIL Agenda Item Item No. IV.E. From: Cary Teague Planning Director ® Action Discussion Information Date: February 6, 2012 Subject: Resolution No. 2012 -23 Lot Division at 5239 Highwood Drive Deadline for a City Decision: January 15, 2011 ACTION REQUESTED: Adopt the attached Resolution approving the Lot Division. INFORMATION /BACKGROUND: Mr. James Zavoral is proposing to shift the existing lot lines that divide his property at 5239 Highwood Drive, from 6008 and 6000 Pine Grove Road. Planninq Commission Recommendation: On January 11, 2012, the Planning Commission unanimously recommended approval of the Lot Division, subject to the findings and conditions set forth in the attached Planning Commission Staff Report. ATTACHMENTS: • Resolution 2012 -23 • Planning Commission Staff Report, January 11, 2012 • Minutes from the January 11, 2012 Edina Planning Commission meeting RESOLUTION NO. 20.112-23 APPROVING A LOT DIVISION OF 5239 HIGHWOOD DRIVE, 6008 & 6000 PINE GROVE ROAD aaa WHEREAS, the following described tract of land is requested to be divided: City of Edina DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY SURVEYED Parcel 1 - 5239 Highwood Driver Lot 7, Block 1, Emerald Woods Addition Parcel 2 - 6008 Pine Grove Road: Lot 3, Block 1, ` Graytower Estates Parcel 3 - 6000-Pine Grove Road:._ Lot 2, Block 1, Graytower Estates . WHEREAS, the owner of the described land desires to- subdivide said tract in to the following described new and separate parcels (herein called "parcels') described as follows: Parcel 1 - 5239 Highwood Drive: See attached Exhibit A Parcel 2 - 6008 Pine Grove Road: See attached Exhibit A Parcel 3 -6000 Pine Grove Road: See attached`' Exhibit A WHEREAS, the requested subdivision is authorized under Code. Section 810 and it has been determined to comply with; the Subdivision and Zoning Regulations of the City of Edina and do not interfere with the Subdivision and Zoning Regulations as contained.in the Edina City Code Sections 810 and 850; NOW THEREFORE, it is hereby resolved by the City Council of the City of Edina, that the conveyance and ownership of the above described .tracts of land. as separate tracts of land are `hereby approved and the requirements and provisions of Code Sections 850 and 810. are hereby waived to allow said division and conveyance thereof as separate tracts of land but only to the extent permitted under Code Sections 810,.and 850 subject to the limitations set out in Code Section 850 and said Ordinances are now waived for any other purpose or as to any other provisions thereof, and further subject, however, to the provision that no further subdivision be made of said Parcels unless made in compliance with the pertinent Ordinances of,the City of Edina. City Hall 952- 927 -8861 4801 WEST 50TH STREET FAX 952- 826 -0390 EDINA, MINNESOTA, 55424 -1394 www.CityofEdina. corn TTY 952 -826 -0379 RESOLUTION NO. 2012-23 Page Two Adopted this 6TH day of February, 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 February 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 Frank R. CardareUe Land Surveyor, Inc. 6440 Flying Cloud Drive # 103 Eden Prairie, Minnesota 55344 Phone: 952- 941 -3031 E -Mail cardarelleis @aol.com PROPOSED Descriptions For Jim Zavoral 11- 16 -•11. Rev. 11 -21 -11 Rev. 11 -29 -11 Rev. 12 -2 -11 Description for 5239 Highwood Dr. Edina, Mn 55436 Lot 7 Block 1 Emerald Woods;, Addition; Except the South 35.0 Feet of said Lot 7, as measured at right angles to the South line of said Lot 7; and lying West of a line begining at a point on the South line 195.30 feet West of the Southeast corner of said Lot'7, :to a po.�nt on the North line 150.1Q feet West of the Northeast corner of said Lot7 and there terminatincr. Also Except that oart of Lot .7 described as lying East of a line begining at a point on the South line 195.30 feet West of the Southeast corner of said Lot 7; to a point on the North line 150.10 feet West of the Northeast corner of said Lot 7 and there terminating. Subject* to easements of record. All in Hennepin County Minnesota. Subject to a easement,the East 152.60 feet of said Lot 7, for Pedestrian walk -way to Lake over the North 10.0 feet adjacent to the north line, easement to alow for a; dock bench or several chairs, and keep a canoe or other similar water craft. Description for 6008 Pine Grove Ind, Edina Mn 55436 Lot 3 Block I Graytower Estates together with, that part of Lot 7 Block I Emerald Woods Addition Described as; The South 35.0 Beet of said Lot 7, as measured at right angles to the South line of said Lot 7, and lying West of a line begining at a point on the South line 195.30 feet West of the Southeast corner of said Lot 7; to a point on the North line 150.10 feet West of the Northeast corner of said Lot 7 and there terminating.Subject * to easements of record. All in Hennepin County Minnesota. 4 Description for 6 0 0 0 Pine Grove ltd. Edina Mn 55436 Lot 2 Block I Graytower Estates together with, that part of Lot 7 Block I Emerald Wood s Addition Described as; lying East. of a line begining at a point on South line 195.30 feet West of the Southeast corner of said Lot 7; to a point on the North line 150.10 feet West of the Northeast corner of said Lot 7 and there terminating. Subject to easements of record. All in Hennepin County Minnesota. Subject to a easement,the East 152.60 feet of said Lot 7, for Pedestrian walk -way to Lake over the North 10.0 feet adjacent to the north line, easement to alow for a dock bench or several chairs, and keep a canoe or other similar water craft. w91N�'1r�. o e CD PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT Originator Meeting Date Agenda # Cary Teague January 11, 2012 2011.017.11a Director of Planning INFORMATION & BACKGROUND Project Description Mr. James Zavoral is requesting to shift the existing lot lines that divide his property at 5239 Highwood Drive, from 6008 and 6000 Pine Grove Road. (See the property location on pages Al —A5.) 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 owners. The 6000 Pine Grove Road lot would gain additional land on Mirror Lake. The 5239 Highwood Drive lot would no longer own property abutting Mirror Lake, but would retain a private easement for access to the lake. The drainage and utility easement adjacent to Mirror Lake would remain. (See the proposed lot divison on pages A6 —A8.) Surrounding Land Uses The surrounding land uses are all single - family homes zoned and guided low - density residential. (See pages A3 —A5.) Existing Site Features Each lot contains a single - family residential home. There are no alterations planned for any of the homes. The three lots are generally oversized compared to other lots in the neighborhood. Total land area of the three lots is 184,853 square feet or 4.2 acres. Planning Guide Plan designation: Low - density residential Zoning: R -1, Single- family residential Primary Issue • Is the proposed lot division reasonable? Yes. The resulting lot line shift does not create an additional lot. The three lots are all oversized when compared to the neighborhood. (See page A2.) As demonstrated below, with the exception of the 6008 Pine Grove lot width, the proposed lots would still meet the minimum lot size requirements in the R -1 Zoning District. The lot width of 6008 Pine Grove is an existing nonconforming condition, and would not change as a result of the lot division. Minimum Lot Requirements Existing 5239 Hi hwood Existing 6008 Pine Grove Existing 6000 Pine Grove Proposed 5239 Hi hwood Proposed 6008 Pine Grove Proposed 6000 Pine Grove Lot Area — 19,369 s.f. 73,266 s.f. 34,481 s.f. 77,106 s.f. 35,481 s.f. 40,921 s.f. 108,451 s.f. Lot Width —120 feet 181 feet 95 feet` 200 feet 181 feet 95 feet' 200 feet Lot Depth —135 feet 480 feet 320 feet 325 feet 320 feet 355 feet 515 feet "existing nonconforming condition Any new construction on these new lots would be subject to conformance with all of the City's rules and regulations regarding lot coverage, building height, setbacks and curb cuts. Staff Recommendation Recommend that the City Council approve the Lot Division of 5239 Highwood Drive, 6008 Pine Grove Road and 6000 Pine Grove Road. Approval is subject to the following findings: 1. The existing and proposed lots meet all minimum lot size requirements. 2. The three lots involved in the lot division are larger than most lots within the neighborhood. Approval is subject to the following conditions: 1. All building activity on either lot must comply with all minimum zoning ordinance standards. Deadline for a city decision: March 28, 2012 2 City of Edina • 21�i J �. w1a � N soz{ si sro 24 5772 5017 302/3 721 S1T7 6100 + 71N SI03 Sq1 6009 6005 8001 N 5101 6109 6705 6201 51 11 117 3123 3121 - 6213 1215 6121 6717 6101 6700 6212 5417 SIW , 5117 5412 541 34113/1! 14 71 5420 1 5432 24 ,j.L; .O $1]7 ni $It7� 1716 172 6106 61 6100 60 6016 6012.5000 5425 S: 3517 13315 3lf6 � -. t5 2w .L. S13i ` 5100 S6N M7 62 ,72 6220 6212 6206 6M 5IM S10f H 6140 6144 6215 1 1 1 I I I 16000 550, 1?SOQ 1 6111 6100 611261o6610/6/60 "'r 24 (' N%� 6229. 24 6115 8221 6717 02.15 5210 11 N 3266 V 321 { 6100 5210 209 71 ?2!" _ _ _ �• 34 25> 5224 5721 5124 .i 21 17�yy1 /' �Si09 6101 —r\ 69�96!35 -B6pp66,1 6111610/ ,(601960136017 f 3616 l 1 1 m1 t l I I 6004 5609 0 ]1 21 �eaea i3O4 5300 SJOI � 5715 5304 S72S 5226 3232 0176 -. _ _� -� $216 .. 3240 , 33W yjOl 6312 5304 5- 3707 5300 5701 :•'3700 6705 6171 5701 53a 33]9 5706 6709 3777 571157/1 5310 5305 5]13 b)Ol 6316 5700 6117 5112 N 6016 60 6000 5980 5116 .,.,. 6720 - 5120 5714 5121 531 5717_. 1 I 5,700 8110 VIII SI03 Sq1 6009 6005 8001 N 5101 6109 6705 6201 08 9403 5409 5115 5117 SIN 517 lS00 $701 5l00 - 6213 1215 6121 6717 6101 6700 6212 5417 SIW , 5117 5412 541 34113/1! 14 71 5420 1 5432 24 5901 5303 3504 yAe 5309 3312 6220 6218 6121 620962056707 172 6106 61 6100 60 6016 6012.5000 5425 S: 3517 13315 3lf6 � -. i228 6117 8177 6721 5429 5505 1116109 6103 6107 602160}56009 6005 5509 'l53117 5316 '+310 537 i219 611S 6272 6176 6224 5236 1 1 1 �) I 1 1 6001 '6117 61+06 6104 6100 6020 6012 6006 6004 5315 S., Sap 5525 5524 3517 6140 6144 6215 1 1 1 I I I 16000 550, 1?SOQ 1 3579 55N 5 !!16 6100 6179 6009 6003 3510 5307 5501 5517 5573 62336229 i364 6237 6241 •� 611] 6109 6103 60116015 6101 I I I 1 1 ` j Tom~ 6004/ 5514 �y— 6 3511 8006 6000 11jj5306jj 3331 5577 5377 5577 35773576 551 'EJ4 6120 24 .y66160I160706060T2 � 55155�was 5516 \ 1 $305 t 6301 9P 6718 6117 2620 5909 331335/1 6112602S 6017 6009 6005 6001 3527 l l l 5601 5607 5510 5606 3601 2� 6013 16�Y ' A .0 6101 607/ 6071 6076 SB61 Bolt,�90i X561)39/75 / 6106 $713 am MO1' fill "a 6103 6100 6O�20 �q 5�3 5612 6103 17�yy1 /' �Si09 6101 —r\ 69�96!35 -B6pp66,1 6111610/ ,(601960136017 f 3616 l 1 1 m1 t l I I 6004 5609 0 58011 1 tt o PID:2911721330047 5239 Highwood Dr W ' Edina, MN 55436 d 4( 5Ql' tS7 �4 10 5200 5101 5204 St03 'S 552208 5N� 5711 5701 $300 SJO9 5304 $313 5301 5311 5312 5401 5400 510$ 5101 5705 5408 5501 SW � 5301 SOS 5501 3503 09 x5501 5309 3 5512 �SS13� 5516 5317 53p 5510 552133N L SST4 , 5525 S ISN SSI/ 337/ 5373 5511 L433 55M cr O Legend Hnusa M"1111 L41011 Name LM..'4 City Limits � Cf.oaA6 ❑ [Ak. Na- L6ka6 L Parts Pa ct is City of Edina SIJr 5123 Lcgcnd \ I/.— Nllmbc! L.Wl Street Nome Lnbels _.. 5200 562/ Sao x16 x/J GmeAs sm L J f _l L.a kc lin mes as 6121 6rT8 tt81 N {� �'�oDp9 \N La Acs ParAa e610 mr6BEaaaw4t �, � x11 s:1a x12 � Pa.cc is 2l ! 24 11Y/\4W,- sm w sm g 24 H 4112 x12 x01 y 7 -�•�__ 14 --- �5.•"'. sire Mp�LA -- ur1 ual 5231 u:s 5240 �_��- x12 s6°s sWs aJW 3207 sm SJO1 5231 5209 3301 12 -16 -�_ 3273 sax S30s sm 5804 5215 5308 s301 SJ16 - 3317 5311 wSe 6016 6012 e000 5980 soda � +DA 5321 3316 5217 6024 3400 3809 SBDS IME FAD 5401 8 5401 5400 8029 eta W21 $017 W n 6W9 5406 5816 5405 6W5 Wo1 24 5166 arx+r4nra�m $404 8105 5409 .Hts 5417 sui $499 5524 5500 ssm $on 5101 „p.rtlnD d1 w 24 5505 3412 5416 5470 5424 5416 3172 24 5412 Sx4 5504 24 5509 5512 ssa 6172 6101 ON e1W W20 W/6 WIT 6000 ills 5513 ssr: ssle ernwa°6a18 Sips 5429 5517 w =..e.•.,waw c.,...a;;00.acza o alb PID: 2911721330047 �O� e r� ° a 5239 Highwood Dr W Q ' "• 4• Edina, MN 55436 inns City of Edina u"Jand 111ea! Namr Lairh 24 F- R%........ 5712 c1y LMnIY fM"A .V Lain vft � - - - 5218 Loh" f� rn8s uo :2128 5232 $2,� s 'Panels 32x0 m" ammN 5301 i s3ao y -- —lf $231 829s 5279 - -- `- i 5702 s3os s399 - - 8016 6072 6020 8000 5080 0008 5j f6 —_ J1J 6021 Sr'OO MWGJd WRD N0= 020 6025 8021 0012 8017 6009 8003 6001 24 5408 5 5409 5415 5411 5421 _ -- $13 --AT 550 lORINU0o t)R W rx Np 5628 MI.1.2 2/ 28 0a o x5m PID: 2911721330047 J A J? O .� •� ; 5239 Highwood Dr W a �• Edina, MN 55436 u to cu h o 0 o� mac O (D H. On C rrt N n cn �a rt rt H M �" CJ1 O C N 0 J� O H N• � 0 J. fD N U) fn T I - - Eb o -. y11 4 " I b d 0 m 0 ` w p Pi rt :j ma En til 0 N N M O m w z J sr I 26 S8 a a y � 9 y F O I I b rt 1 ~ 1 318.41 `C }35 h7 C) - - - -- - z O C) 0� O rnr NCC� o° �c I w (A m `� a 325010 rob I r i C OD / I I 788.875 ?. �. C) "o I m fD rn0 a �N A. I� w� -A � • f C3 0 (D N I a M (� 3 m 0 I � C7 220 �/ r0* (D H rt f I rt o rt rt ' 181.27 429 `<�/ 122.10 92 �/ f CD r 0 O p T "° PROPOSED LOT SPL I T '*NOV 15, 2011 . EASEMENT SKETCH ° 12-19-11 Land - Frank R. Carderelle Surveyor ENEBY CEATWY T „.T Tw SURVEY wes vrcvAeEO for JIM ZAvORAL 6440 FLYING CLOUD DRIVE uE ON a MY .M T SUPS --- AND AT i ApA.Y XE TE L SuPVEVdi EDEN PRAIRIE,MN 55344 UNDER NE S Dr ATE WrrESOTA. 5239 HIGHWOOD DRIVE 952- 941 -3031 reAN u e e e YIUHWUU 40.56 152.6 DRIVE L0T 8-9 € B' T. Dr, EXISTING �\ 42 HOUSE v c #5239 " CP PROPOSED LOT LINE 193.16 Drainage Easement 1� L' n Line 195.30 - CP Drainage & Utility Easement Drainage & Utility Easement # 6o E *. - \ AO q�l #6000 a 0 50 100 150 SCAL E IN FEET l �� SF Square Feet 1 14 I \ MIRROR LAKE � Iron Monuments 1 p RoPosCfl House Locations by Others Drainage & Utility 1 iY Easements to remain as located I f / I ROVE ROAD I r�r^ vJ O W 0 0 0 1 I R." ff U— f/lGHW00 40.56 315.65 �O�t.''150.1 7-- 152.6 DRIVE LOT 71. 89.42 B T• Dr EXISTING HOUSE - } #5239 73,24A 9J. J CD LO 1 �cA _ Drainage Easement 1� rn Ln 6440 SF Line o__ ^.• 195.30 - 174.73 - - -. 11D.0 - -- _ \ Drainage & Utility - ti -� Easement Drainage & Easement Utility °oSE � N l ' Xou #600 z . i o 1 7 7,101 0 50 100 150 l % S.f ' I � o SCALE IN FEET l SF Square Feet • Iron Monuments MIRROR LAKE E y rST W6 House Locations by Others ya. Drainage & Utility yy LOTS Easements to remain as located 1 f qn 83.40 _ ,r i GROVE ROAD P A`�1J. �'cS house witho review or comment. Carpenter said he sympathizes with th uation but believes maint ing the original plat makes sense. Commissioner Sche stated the job of the Commission is w before us this evening. We can't spe ate on what someone might do. their house /lot in the future. Commissioner Forrest reiterate e;Commiss' can place conditions�.on approval. Building height can be addressed d so c e trees. Forrest said it is important to ensure that'any new house matches eighborhood character. Commissioner Staunton said -th' pe of 'nversation -is difficult; adding he supports the .request as submitted. Motion Commission taunton moved to recommends division approval with variances sed on staff findings and subject to sta conditions. Commissioner Carpe r seconded the motion. Ayes; Potts, Plattete Carpenter, Staunton, Fis r, Grabiel. Nays;: Scherer, Forrest, Schroeder. Mo . 'n carried 6 -3. 2011-0017.11a Lot Division James Zavoral 5239. Highwood Drive 6008 and 6000.Pine Grove Road, Edina Planner Presentation Planner Teague informed the Commission Mr. James Zavoral is requesting „to shift the existing lot lines that divide his property at 5.239 Highwood Drive, from 6008 and 6000 Pine Grove Road. Teague explained that 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 owners. The 6000 Pine Grove Road lot would gain additional land on Mirror Lake. The 5239 Highwood Drive lot would no longer own property abutting Mirror Lake, but would retain.a private easement for access.to the lake. The drainage and utility easement adjacent to Mirror Lake would remain. Planner Teague concluded that staff recommends that the City Council approve the Lot Division of 5239 Highwood Drive', 6008 Pine Grove Road and 6000 Pine Grove Road based on the following findings: Page 11 of 12 1. The existing and proposed lots meet all minimum lot size requirements. 2. The three lots involved in the lot division are larger than most lots within the neighborhood. Approval is also subject to the following condition: 1. All building activity on either lot must comply with all minimum zoning ordinance standards. Discussion Commissioner Staunton moved lot division approval based on staff findings and subject to staff conditions. Commissioner Scherer seconded the motion. All voted aye; motion carried 9 -0. VII. REPOR Commissioner Staunto ave a brief rep on the progress of the Grandview Small Area Plan Committee. said the nex -n eeting will be on January 19th and will be held at the Grange Hall from 7: 0 -9:0o PM /All are invited to attend. VIII. NDEN Chair Grabiel acknowledged IX. CHAIR None X. STAFF COMMENTS Planner Teague report the City Council. Teag XI. ADJOURNMENT Commissioner Sc seconded the moi of the Council Connection. EMBER COMMEN he forwardeXthe ordinances the Commission worked on to said he woul also look into the subdivision ordinance. or moved adjournment at 9:15 PM. Commissioner Forrest . All voted aye; motion carried 9 -0 Page 12 of 12 ecAie Woogena"et Respectfully Submitted olte REQUEST FOR PURCHASE IN EXCESS OF $20,000 /CHANGE ORDER To: MAYOR AND COUNCIL Agenda Item No. IV. F. From: Lisa Schaefer, HR Director Date 1 -20 -2012 Subject: Job Evaluation /Classification Project Date Bid Opened or Quote Received: Bid or Quote Expiration Date: NA NA Company Amount of Quote or Bid 1_. '-TruSight, Inc. 1. $40,972.50 2. Fox Lawson & Associates _ 2. $38,000 RECOMMENDED QUOTE OR BID: TruSi ht, Inc. GENERAL INFORMATION: A re- design of the city's job classification /evaluation system was included in the 2012 budget. Staff has determined the job evaluation system used by TruSight will be easier to maintain and adjust in -house on a go- forward basis. ig ure The Recommended Bid is X within budget not wit Dbpartment hn Wallin, Fina ce Director Neal, ri-tyManager olte .f 0 ZIN K� REQUEST FOR PURCHASE IN EXCESS OF $20,000 /CHANGE ORDER To: MAYOR AND COUNCIL Agenda Item No. IV. G. From: Steven Grausam- Director of Liquor Operations Date February 6th, 2012 Subject: Edina Liquor -York Remodeling Project Date Bid Opened or Quote Received: 1 -24 -2012 Bid or Quote Expiration Date: NA Company Amount of Quote or Bid 1. Aaron Carlson 1. $32,756.40 2. Ron's cabinets 2. $55,064.00 3. 3. RECOMMENDED QUOTE OR BID: Aaron Carlson GENERAL INFORMATION: Construction of checkout counters and wine tasting area. Signature The Recommended Bid is A within budget not v . T YO Ilk o REQUEST FOR PURCHASE IN EXCESS OF \°•h,��Kb� $20,000 /CHANGE ORDER 888 To: MAYOR AND COUNCIL Agenda Item No. IV. H. From: Steven Grausam- Director of Liquor Operations - Date February 6t", 2012 Subject: Edina Liquor -York Remodeling Project Date Bid Opened or Quote Received: 1 -24 -2012 Bid or Quote Expiration Date: NA Company Amount of Quote or Bid 1. MCI (Multiple Concepts Interiors) 1. $34,200.00 2. Grazzini Brothers 2. $34,575.00 3. Hamernicks Decorating 3. $40,999.00 RECOMMENDED QUOTE OR BID: MCI GENERAL INFORMATION: Resilient Flooring & Carpet AL A LcQ (Z— Signature epartment The Recommended Bid is within budget no744 n allin, Finance Di ctor al, it ager REQUEST FOR PURCHASE IN EXCESS OF $20,000 /CHANGE ORDER To: MAYOR AND COUNCIL Agenda Item No. IV. I. From: Steven Grausam- Director of Liquor Operations Date February 6th, 2012 Subject: Edina Liquor -York Remodeling Project Date Bid Opened or Quote Received: 1-24-2012 Bid or Quote Expiration Date- NA Company Amount of Quote or Bid 1. Burnsville Electric 1. $29,100.00 2 Res Corn Electric 2. $34,345.00 3. 3 RECOMMENDED QUOTE OR BID: Burnsville Electric GENERAL INFORMATION: Electrical Work- Design Build L • A Goo (Z Signature Department The Recommended Bid is C within budget not within bydget fiI4 Wallin, FjAance Direct REPORT /RECOMMENDATION To: MAYOR AND COUNCIL Agenda Item Item No. IV. J. From: Debra Mangen City Clerk ® Action ❑ Discussion ❑ Information Date: February 6, 2012 Subject: Temporary On -Sale 3.2 Beer License Our Lady of Grace Church ACTION REQUESTED: Adopt a motion granting a temporary beer license to Our Lady of Grace Church for their Lenten Fish Fry on March 23, 2012. INFORMATION /BACKGROUND: Our Lady of Grace Church has applied for a temporary beer license for a Lenten Fish Fry to be held Friday, March 23, 2012. Edina Code Section 900 allows non - profit organizations to obtain a temporary beer license to sell 3.2 beer on -sale for this type of event. Our Lady of Grace has filed the necessary application and insurance as well as paid their fee. They have held similar events in the past and obtained a temporary license each time. Their previous events were held without any incident. of VU ,eee REQUEST FOR PURCHASE IN EXCESS OF $20,000 /CHANGE ORDER To: MAYOR AND COUNCIL Agenda Item No. IV. K From: Wayne D. Houle, PE Director of Public Works / City Engineer Date: February 6, 2012 Subject: Street Sweeper Date Bid Opened or Quote Received: Bid or Quote Expiration Date: January 9, 2012 March 9, 2012 Company Amount of Quote or Bid 1. MacQueen Equipment, Inc. $ 181, 333.00 State Contract #S -843 5 RECOMMENDED QUOTE OR BID: MacQueen Equipment, Inc. $ 181,333.00 GENERAL INFORMATION: This purchase is for a street sweeper — Elgin Pelican NP. This unit will replace a 2004 Elgin Pelican Sweeper, which will be sold at auction this fall. Street sweepers utilized in Edina will typically last eight to nine years. This is due to the extensive use and all of the moving parts. The last street sweeper was replaced was in 2006, which replaced a 1995 street sweeper. This purchase is through the State of Minnesota Purchasing Program, funded through the 2012 -2016 Capital Improvement Plan. otO Signature The Recommended Bid is )� within budget not within budget G: \PW \ADMIN \BUDGETS \RFP \RFP - Misc \Item IV. K. Request for Purchase - Street Sweeper.docx Public Works Department John Wallin, Finance Director S tt al, y 6 e o g REQUEST FOR PURCHASE IN EXCESS OF , ,o $20,000 /CHANGE ORDER To: MAYOR AND COUNCIL Agenda Item No. IV. L From: Wayne D. Houle, PE Director of Public Works / City Engineer Date: February 6, 2012 Subject: Survey Equipment Date Bid Opened or Quote Received: Bid or Quote Expiration Date: December 9, 2012 February 9, 2012 Company Amount of Quote or Bid 1. Leica Geos stems, Inc. $ 25,398.50 RECOMMENDED QUOTE OR BID: Leica Geos stems $25,3 98.50 GENERAL INFORMATION: This purchase is for survey equipment for the Engineering Department. The survey equipment includes Leica survey equipment that will replace 2005 survey equipment, which will be traded with this purchase. This equipment is utilized to collect topography for roadway and other public construction projects in the City and is compatible with our existing survey equipment. Only one other vendor supplies compatible equipment, data collectors and software; they did not submit a quote for this purchase. This purchase is funded through the 2012 -2016 Capital Improvement Plan. Signature Public Works Department The Recommended Bid is o within budget not within budget John Wallin, Finance Director Scot H. eal, Ry Maiiager G: \PW \ADMIN \BUDGETS \RFP \RFP - Englneering \Item IV. L. Request for Purchase - Survey Equipment.docx o e • L °�oaP°P -�°� ,ems REPORT /RECOMMENDATION To: MAYOR AND COUNCIL Agenda Item Item No. IV.M. From: Wayne D. Houle, PE City Engineer ® ❑ Action Discussion Information Date: February 6, 2012 Subject: Resolution No. 2012 -24 Correcting Resolution 2010 -128 — Street Bikeway West 58th ACTION REQUESTED: Adopt Resolution No. 2012 -24 correcting Resolution No. 2010 -128 designating West 58th Street from France Avenue to Xerxes Avenue a bicycle route and designates a 25 mph speed limit. INFORMATION /BACKGROUND: The City Council adopted attached Resolution No. 2010 -128 at the December 21, 2010, City Council meeting. Staff and our City Attorney have since learned that the resolution lacked language to officially lower the speed limit to 25 mph. The roadway is currently signed for 25 mph. This resolution will enable our public safety staff to enforce the 25 mph speed limit. ATTACHMENTS: Resolution No. 2012 -24 Resolution No. 2010 -128 g:\ engineering \infrastructure\streets \traffic \traff studies \traffic studies \58th_chowen \item iv.m. resolution no. 2012 -24 correcting resolution no. 2010 -128 - west 58th street bikeway.docx RESOLUTION NO. 2012 -24 DESIGNATING BICYCLE LANES ON WEST 58TH STREET BETWEEN FRANCE AVENUE AND XERXES AVENUE AND DESIGNATES A 25 mph SPEED LIMIT City of Edina WHEREAS, the City Council requested staff to review the West 58th Street corridor at the May 18, 2010 City Council meeting; and WHEREAS, the City Council directed staff to implement bicycle lane along the corridor at the September 21, 201,0, City Council meeting; and WHEREAS, State Statute 160.263 Subd. 4 provides that the City Council may designate a safe speed for ,any street or highway under its authority upon which is has established a bicycle lane provided that such safe speed . shall not be lower than 25 miles per hour; and WHEREAS, on December 21, 2010, the City Council approved Resolution 2010 -.128 reducing the speed limit to 25 mph and said resolution is rescinded; NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City. Council of the City of Edina: 1. Resolution 2010 -128 is rescinded. 2. The City has established and hereby designates bicycle lanes on West 58th Street between France Avenue (County Road 17) and Xerxes Avenue (County .:Road 31), designates the speed limit on this section of roadway as 25 miles per hour, and authorizes the change of the speed limit signs on this section of roadway from 30 mph to 25 mph. Dated: February 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 February 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 City Hall 952 -927 -8861 4801 WEST 50TH STREET FAX 952 - 826 -0390 .EDINA, MINNESOTA, 55424 -1394 www.cityofedina.com TTY 952- 826 -0379 •�lV• �3si REPORT /RECOMMENDATION To: EDINA CITY COUNCIL Agenda Item Item No. IV. N. From: John Keprios, Director ® Action Park and Recreation Department F-1 Discussion Information Date: February 6, 2012 Subject: FIRST READING ORDINANCE NO. 2012 -04 AMMENDING SECTION 1230.06 TOBACCO USE IN CITY PARKS ACTION REQUESTED: Staff recommends the City Council approve the attached Ordinance No. 2012 -04 that prohibits the use of all forms of tobacco in all Edina parks both indoor and outdoor. INFORMATION /BACKGROUND: At their Tuesday, August 17, 2004, meeting, the City Council voted unanimously to direct the Park Director to establish an additional Regulation, under the authority granted the Park Director in Code 1230.06, to make all Edina parks tobacco -free: As Park Director, I wrote a memo the file on September 1, 2004 (see Attachment) that followed the Council's directive and made the new tobacco -free regulation effective as of Friday, October 15, 2004. People often visit our website to see if there is a tobacco -free regulation.in place for parks but it does not show up in the City Code. Until and unless they see signs in the park, visitors assume that tobacco is allowed in the parks. The attached proposed ordinance is identical to the Regulation that is currently in place as directed by the City Council at their August 17, 2004 Council meeting. The enforcement of the new ordinance is the same as the Regulation that is currently in place. ATTACHMENTS: • Ordinance No. 2012 -04 • September 1, 2004 Memo to. the File ORDINANCE NO. 2012-04 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE EDINA CITY CODE CONCERNING THE USE OF TOBACCO IN CITY PARKS THE CITY OF EDINA ORDAINS: Section 1. Chapter 12 of the Edina City Code is amended by adding Section 1230.10 to provide as follows: 1230.10 Additional Restrictions for Parks. In addition to the requirements of Subsections 1230.02 and 1230.03, no person in a park shall use tobacco in any form. Section 2. This ordinance is effective immediately upon its passage and publication. First Reading: February 6, 2012 Second Reading: Published: Attest Debra A. Mangen, City Clerk Please publish in the Edina Sun Current on: Send two affidavits of publication. Bill to Edina City Clerk James B. Hovland, Mayor — John Keprios, Director Edina Park & Recreation Department 4801 West 50'' Street Edina, MN 55424 Office (952) 826 -0430 FAX (952) 826 -0385 Jkeprios @ci.edina.mn.us Memo To: FILE From: John Keprios CC: Mayor and Council Members, Edina Park Board, and Gordon Hughes. Date: September 1, 2004 Re: TOBACCO -FREE REGULATION. At their Tuesday, August 17, 2004, meeting, the City Council voted unanimously to direct the Park Director to establish an additional Regulation, under the authority granted the Park Director in Code 1230.06, to make all Edina parks tobacco -free. After having discussed the implementation of this new regulation with staff, I have decided to make this new regulation effective as of Friday, October 15, 2004. This new regulation prohibits the use of all forms of tobacco in all Edina parks both indoor and outdoor. ORDINANCE NO.2012 -04 AN'ORDINANCE AMENDING THE EDINA CITY CODE CONCERNING THE USEDF TOBACCO IN CITY PARKS (REVISED ALTERNATIVE LANGUAGE) THE CITY OF EDINA ORDAINS: Section 1. Chapter 12 of the Edina City Code is amended by adding Section.1230.10 to provide. as follows: 1230.10 Tobacco Use Prohibited in Public. Parks. In addition to the requirements of Subsections 1230:02 and 1230.03, the use of tobacco in any form is prohibited in public parks, indoor or outdoor. Section 2. This ordinance is. effective immediately upon its passage and publication. First Reading: February 6, 2012 Second Reading: Published: 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 F ldie •vv• � e i REPORT /RECOMMEN DATION To: MAYOR AND COUNCIL Agenda Item Item No: IV.O. From: Wayne D. Houle, PE City Engineer ® Action Discussion Information Date: February 6, 2011 Subject: Resolution No. 2012 -25, Changing Public Hearing Date to March 6, 2012 Tracy Avenue Roadway Reconstruction BA -368 ACTION REQUESTED:. Approve attached Resolution No. 2012 -25, changing the Public Hearing Date to March 6, 2012 Tracy Avenue Roadway Reconstruction, Improvement No. BA -368 INFORMATION /BACKGROUND: The Edina City Council set the Public Hearing date for the Tracy Avenue Roadway Reconstruction project for February 21 per Resolution No. 2012 -12. City staff is requesting to change the date of the Public Hearing to March 6, to allow the Edina Transportation Commission to review and comment on the Feasibility Study at their February 16 meeting and to present the project to the Countryside Elementary Parent Teacher Organization on February 21. Staff is anticipating delivering the feasibility study for the project to both the Edina Transportation Commission and the City Council on February 6. ATTACHMENTS: Resolution 2012 -25 G:\PW\CENTRALSVCS\ENG DIV\PROJECTS \IMPR NOS \BA368 Tracv Ave fr Vemon -Xtown \PRELIM DESIGN \Public Hearina \Item IV. O. Res. 2012 -25 Chanaina PH RESOLUTION NO. 2012 -25 CHANGING PUBLIC HEARING DATE TO MARCH 6, 2012 TRACY AVENUE ROAD RECONSTRUCTION IMPROVEMENT NO. BA -368 City of Edina WHEREAS, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 2012 -12 setting a public hearing for February 21, 2012, for street reconstruction on Tracy Avenue, Improvement No. BA -368; and WHEREAS, staff is requesting to change the date of the public hearing to allow the Edina Transportation Commission to review and comment on the Feasibility Study at their February 16, 2012, meeting and to present the project to the Countryside Elementary Parent Teacher Organization on February 21, 2012; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF EDINA, MINNESOTA, that a public hearing shall be held on the 6th day of March, 2012, in the Council Chambers at City Hall at 7:00 p.m. to consider street reconstruction on Tracy Avenue, Improvement No. BA -368; BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Clerk shall give mailed and published notice of such hearing and improvements as required by law. Dated: February 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 February 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 Hall 4801 WEST 50TH STREET EDINA, MINNESOTA, 55424 -1394 www.cityofedina.com City Clerk 952 - 927 -8861 FAX 952 - 826 -0390 TTY 952 - 826 -0379 REPORT /RECOMMENDATION To: MAYOR AND COUNCIL Agenda Item Item No. IV.P. From: Jesse Struve Utility Engineer ❑ Action F-1 Discussion ® Information Date: February 6, 2012 Subject: Edina Emerald Energy Program (EEEP) ACTION REQUESTED: Update on EEEP with completed package including application and other handouts. INFORMATIONIBACKGROUND: On August 16, 2011, the City Council authorized staff to develop a Property Assessed Clean Energy Program (PACE) following MN Statue 216C.436. Staff created the EEEP as a method of financing energy efficiency investments through special property tax assessments and the City Council approved EEEP at the November 15, 2011 meeting. Using property tax assessments increases the likelihood of loan repayment, which in turn lowers the cost of securing capital. Lower capital costs raise the return on investment for energy projects with longer payback periods. There are eleven program requirements under the statute, including: • Establishing a financing terms that do not exceed the useful life of the project or 20 years, whichever comes first. The assessment amount cannot exceed the lesser of 10% of the assessed property value or the actual cost of installing the energy improvements. The established interest rate must cover the cost of program administration. The borrower's ability to pay and the status of the borrower's current mortgage payments must be verified. • Completing an energy audit or feasibility study, as well an inspection and performance verification of at least 10% of the energy improvements. • Disclosing to borrowers the risks involved in borrowing, including risk of foreclosure if taxes are not paid. I:\Emerald Energy Program \Council Information The City will issue revenue bonds which will be purchased by a lending institution provided by the applicant. Per the City's special assessment policy, 2% will be added to the interest rate given by the lender. The entire amount plus capitalized interest will be added to the overall special assessment against the property. The City acts as an intermediary by collecting loan repayments through special property tax assessments. The City then forwards those payments to the lending institution. The assumption is that lending institutions will be interested in these loans because they have first lien on the property, and therefore are at a low risk of default. However, this issue of first lien remains in question for housing at the federal level. The Federal Housing Financing Agency (FHFA) has "urged state and local governments to reconsider these programs and continues to call for a pause in such programs so (first lien) concerns can be addressed" (FHFA Press Release 7/6/2010). There is proposed legislation in the House of Representatives that would remedy the issue (HR 2599). Commercial programs would not be subject to the FHFA guidance so EEEP only concerns commercial / industrial properties and residential homes are currently excluded from the program at this time. ATTACHMENTS: EEEP Application, Guidelines, and Handouts I: \Emerald Energy Program \Council Information City of Edina, Min,nesota Edi.na.Emerald Energy Program APPLICATION AND PETITION. FOR SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS 4501 West 50th Street, Edina, Minnesota 55347 Phone: (952) 927 -8861 Fax: (952) 826 -0390 E -mail: www.cityofedina.org: REV 01/20/2012 File No. The Edina Emerald Energy Program ( "EEEP ") provides financing for the installation of energy efficiency and conservation improvements that are permanently fixed to commercial / industrial real property ( "Improvements "). The undersigned applicant(s) hereby submits the following application for financing and petition for special assessments in accordance with Minnesota Statutes Sections 216C.435 and 216C.436, Chapter 429 and the Edina Emerald Energy Program. Section 1: Eligibility Requirements • Applicant(s) is /are legal owner of the property described in the Application (the "Property "). • Property is developed and located within the City of Edina. • Property Owner is current on all mortgage(s). Lender has signed the Lender Acknowledgment form for EEEP Financing. • Property Owner is not in bankruptcy and the property is not an asset in a bankruptcy proceeding. • There are no federal or state income tax liens, judgment liens, or similar involuntary liens on the Property. • Improvement costs are reasonable for the scope of the proposed project and in relation to Property value. • Requested Financing Amount does not exceed 10 percent of the Property Market Value or the actual cost of installing the energy improvements, including the cost of necessary equipment, materials, and labor,.the costs of energy audit or renewable energy feasibility study, and the cost of verification of installation, less the value of expected rebates. • Term of financing requested does not exceed the weighted average of the useful life of the Improvements. • Applicant(s) has /have obtained an energy audit or renewable energy feasibility study on the Property. For Further information on eligibility requirements, see the Program Report and Administrative Guidelines, or contact the Program Administrator at fb.us.7840854.02 FouOffice Use Only File No. [Date Stamp] Received On: By: SECTION 2: Applicant Information PROPERTY OWNER(S) LEGAL NAME(S) AS THEY APPEAR ON PROPERTY TAX RECORDS OWNER 1 LAST 4 DIGITS OF SSN OR TIN LIST ALL PARCEL Ws OWNED BY APPLICANT xXX -XX- OWNER 2 LAST 4 DIGITS OF SSN OR TIN LIST ALL PARCEL Vs OWNED BY APPLICANT )= -XX- OWNER 3 LAST 4 DIGITS OF SSN OR TIN LIST ALL PARCEL Vs OWNED BY APPLICANT )= -XX- OWNER 4 LAST 4 DIGITS OF SSN OR TIN LIST ALL PARCEL Vs OWNED BY APPLICANT )= -XX- PROPERTY OWNER(S) TYPE (Check all that apply) • Individual(s) / Joint Tenants / ❑ Corporation ❑ Limited Liability Company Common Property (Not in Trust) • Trust / Trustees / Living Trust ❑ Partnership ❑ Other (Please specify) PROPERTY OWNER CONTACT INFORMATION NAME EMAIL ADDRESS DAYTIME TELEPHONE NO PHYSICAL PROPERTY ADDRESS (Site of improvements) STREET ADDRESS CITY STATE ZIP MAILING'AD.DRESS (If different) MAILING ADDRESS CITY STATE ZIP SECTION 3- Prnnprtv Infnrmatinn PROPERTY TYPE) ❑ Industrial ❑ Commercial File No. SECTION 4: Proposed Improvement Project Information PROPOSED IMPROVEMENT: PROJECT (Attach additional page(s) if necessary.) 7. DESCRIPTION OF IMPROVEMENT TRACK FOR PARTICIPATION (CHECK ONE). ❑ Solar ❑ Energy ❑ Custom Measure Efficiency PROPOSED IMPROVEMENT COST ( -) LESS REBATE ( +) PLUS ESTIMATED PERMIT FEE (_H NET PROPOSED IMPROVEMENT COST $ $ @ $ $ 2., NAME OF CONTRACTOR ADDRESS OF CONTRACTOR _ EVIDENCE OF ENERGY AUDIT OR RENEWABLE ENERGY SYSTEM FEA$IBLITY STUDY (attach) SECTION 5: Request for Financing REQUESTED FINANCING AMOUNT A. Construction contract(s) (bid price for cost of materials and labor less any applicable rebates), excluding permit fees (attach copy): B. Costs of energy audit or feasibility study C. Professional services (Appraisal, drafting, engineering, project management and /or plan preparation costs): D. ❑ Permit Fee: ❑ Permit included in bid Minimum amount is ,tt; I IUN b: veatlon for Assessment $ Total: $ Requested Financing Amount: We hereby acknowledge that we will be obligated to pay the assessments when due. The assessment and the interest and any penalties thereon will constitute a lien against the Property until they are paid, even if I(we) sell the Property to another person. I(we) understand that assessment installments together with the interest on the assessment will be collected on my /our property tax bill in the same manner and at the same time as property taxes and will be subject to the same penalties, remedies, and lien priorities as for property taxes in the event of delinquency, including foreclosure. I(we) waive any and all procedural and substantive objections to the installation of the Improvements and the special assessments, including but not limited to hearing requirements and any claim that the assessment exceeds the benefit to the Property. I(we) waive any appeal rights otherwise available pursuant to M.S.A. § 429.081. REQUESTED, ASSESSMENT REPAYMENT PERIOD The minimum amount for an EEEP Assessment is $2,500. For 115 Years ❑ 10 Years assessments between $2,500 and $4,999, the term will be 5 years. Assessments $5,000 and above may be for a term of 5 or 10 years. I File No. SECTION 7. Current Mortgage Financing (Attach copy of Mortgage Statement) T. Name and Address of Mortgage Lender: 2. Outstanding'Principal Balance: SECTION 8. Declarations By signing this Application, the undersigned hereby declares under:penalty of perjury under the laws`of the State of Minnesota all of the following: 1. 1(we) arn(are) current owner(s) of record of the property described herein (the "Property "). 2. The Property is not currently involved in a bankruptcy proceeding. 3. I(we) are current on any mortgage or other loan secured by the Property. 4. I(we) and the Property meet'the eligibility requirements listed in Section 1. 5. That (i) the information provided in this Application is true and correct as of the date set forth opposite my /our signature(s) on this Application and (ii) that I /we understand that any intentional or negligent misrepresentation(s) of the information contained in this Application may result in civil liability and /or criminal penalties including, but not limited to, fine or imprisonment or both and liability for monetary damages to the City of Edina, its agents, successors and assigns, insurers and any other person who may suffer any loss due to reliance upon any misrepresentation which I /we have made in this Application. 6. I(we) agree that the selection of any product(s), equipment, and measures referenced in this Application (the "Improvements "), the selection of any manufacturer(s), dealer(s) supplier(s), contractor(s) and installer(s), and the decision regarding the purchase, installation and ownership /maintenance of the Improvements is(are) my(our) sole responsibility and that I(we) have not relied upon any representations or recommendations of the City of Edina, its agents, representatives, assignees, or employees, in making such selection or decision, and that my manufacturer, dealer, supplier, contractor or installer of the Improvements is not an agent, employee, assignee or representative of the City of Edina. 7. I(we) understand that the City of Edina makes no warranty, whether express or implied, with respect to the choice, use or application of the Improvements, including without limitation, the implied warranties of merchantability and fitness for any. particular purpose, use or application of the Improvements. I(we) agree that the City of Edina has no liability whatsoever concerning (i) the quality or safety of any Improvements, including their fitness for any purpose, (ii) the estimated energy savings produced by or performance of the Improvements, (iii) the workmanship of any third parties, (iv) the installation or use of the Improvements including, but.not limited to, any effect on indoor pollutants, or (iv) any other matter with respect to the Edina Emerald Energy Program. Dated: Property Owner Signature Printed Name Property Owner Signature Printed Name Property Owner Signature Printed Name LENDER ACKNOWLEDGMENT FORM The undersigned, on behalf of the Lender which is the holder of a mortgage lien on the Property described in this Application and Petition for Special Assessments in accordance with the Edina Emerald Energy Program, acknowledges that it has been informed of Applicant's application and petition, and confirms that Applicant's receipt of EEEP financing and petition for assessment in connection therewith, will not constitute a default under Lender's mortgage. Lender: Name of Institution By: Signature Name: Title: Date: fb.us.7840854.02 City of Edina :, Minnesota Edina Emerald EnergyProgram PROGRAM REPORT AND ADMINISTRATIVE GUIDELINES 4801 West 50th Street; Edina, Minnesota 55424 Phone: 952 - 927 78861 ' Fax: 952 - 826 -0390 E -mail: www.cityofedina.com Approved: 11/16/2011 rev 01/24/12 EDINA EMERALD ENERGY PROGRAM Program Report and Administrative Guidelines Table of Contents Introduction.......................................................................... ............................... 1 A. Goals ............................................................................... ............................... 1 B. Program Benefits ............................................................. ............................... 1 C. Program Administration .................................................... ............................... 2 Il. Program Requirements ........................................................ ............................... 2 A. Program Report ............................................................... ............................... 2 B. Geographic Parameters .................................................... ..............................2 C. Eligible Property Owners and Eligible Properties .............. ..............................2 D. Eligible Equipment ........................................................... ............................... 3 E. Eligible Costs and Program Fees ...................................... ..............................4 F. Administrative Costs ........................................................ ............................... 5 III. Tracks for Participation .......................................................... ..............................5 A. The Energy Efficiency Track ............................................ ............................... 5 B. The Solar Track ............................................................... ............................... 5 C. The Custom Measure Track .............................................. ..............................5 IV. Energy Surveys, Evaluations, and Solar Site Checks .......... ............................... 5 V. Program Parameters ........................................................... ............................... 6 A. Minimum Energy Financing Amount and Duration of Assessment ................ 6 B. Maximum Energy Financing Amount .............................. ............................... 6 C. Maximum Portfolio .......................................................... ............................... 6 D. Assessment Interest Rate ............................................... ............................... 6 E. Property Assessment Lien .............................................. ............................... 6 F. Delinquent Assessment Collections ................................ ............................... 7 VI. The Financial Strategy ...................................................... ............................... 7 VII.Changes to Report .............................................................. ............................... 8 Appendix A — Eligible Improvements .......................................... ..............................1 I. Energy Efficiency Measures ................................................ ............................... 1 A. Commercial Energy Efficiency Measures ........................ ............................... 1 B. Commercial Energy Efficiency Custom Measures ......... ............................... 1 II. Solar Equipment .................................................................. ............................... 2 III. Custom Measures ............................................................... ............................... 2 A. Energy Efficiency Custom Measures .............................. ............................... 2 B. Energy Generation Custom Measures ............................ ............................... 3 EDINA EMERALD ENERGY PROGRAM Program Report and Administrative Guidelines I. INTRODUCTION In 2010, the Minnesota State Legislature approved 216C.345, authorizing cities and counties to establish voluntary contractual assessment programs to fund an array of conservation and renewable energy projects proposed by property owners. The State Legislature declared that a public purpose will be served by such programs, giving local governments the authority to finance the installation of distributed generation renewable energy sources — such as solar — and energy efficiency improvements that are permanently affixed to residential, commercial, industrial, or other real property. To make energy efficiency and conservation improvements more affordable and to promote their installation, the bill [bill #] provides procedures for authorizing voluntary assessments to finance the cost of these improvements. The Edina Emerald Energy Program ( "EEEP" or "Program ") works at the request and with the consent of owners of the property on which the energy and water conservation improvements are to be made. The program will provide financing ( "EEEP financing ") to property owners within the City to finance the installation of energy efficiency and conservation improvements under contractual assessment agreements. Property owners will repay EEEP financing through an assessment levied against their properly which is payable in semi - annual installments on property tax bills. A. Goals EEEP will help property owners of improved real property make principled investments in the long -term health of the local, state, and national economy and global environment by providing a long -term financing mechanism for energy efficiency and conservation improvements. EEEP provides multiple benefits. By enabling property owners to take responsible energy efficiency and conservation actions, the Program will reduce their utility bills. At the same time it boosts the local economy, supports the City's Green Steps Cities Program, and makes it possible for the City of Edina to fulfill energy efficiency and conservation and climate protection goals. B. Program Benefits From the City's perspective, the program will be a key element in achieving greenhouse gas reduction goals. EEEP provides a significant tool for funneling more resources into the shift to greater efficiency and renewable energy. Lower energy use translates directly into reduced greenhouse gas emissions and helps secure our energy future. For property owners, EEEP offers a no- money -down means of financing energy efficiency and conservation improvements, fixed -rate financing over a number of years, financing without requiring a property appraisal, a streamlined financing and repayment process, and access to financing that may not readily be available through traditional means, such as home equity loans. EDINA EMERALD ENERGY PROGRAM Program Report and Administrative Guidelines C. Program Administration The City Manager shall designate an EEEP Program Administrator. The EEEP Program Administrator is authorized to enter into contractual assessments on behalf of the City. The Program Administrator will oversee professionals from the City's Finance Department. EEEP staff responsibilities will include: Community outreach; responding to property owners inquiries; Processing applications; Managing and tracking funds available for EEEP; Tracking individual and collective energy conservation; and Working and coordinating with participating jurisdictions. EEC responsibilities include: public promotion and community education of the Program and review of Program administration activities and performance. II. PROGRAM REQUIREMENTS A. Program Report In order to establish this program, the City must prepare this report setting out how the program will function (the "Program Report"). The Program Report is the guiding document for EEEP and fulfills the statutory requirements that this report contain: • A map showing the boundaries of the territory within which contractual assessments are proposed • A draft assessment contract between a property owner and the City • Program policies concerning contractual assessments, including: a list of eligible improvements; identification of the City official authorized to enter into contractual assessments on behalf of the City; maximum aggregate dollar amount of contractual assessments; and a method for setting priority for applications in the event that requests appear likely to exceed the authorization amount • A plan for funding the program • Information on the City's cost of placing assessments on the tax roll. B. Geographic Parameters All property within the corporate limits of the City of Edina is geographically eligible to participate in the Program. A map showing the City boundaries is attached as Appendix B. C. Eligible Property Owners and Eligible Properties Property owners may be individuals, associations, business entities, cooperatives, and virtually any owner which pays secured real property taxes. Only property classified as commercial /industrial by the City Assessor is eligible to participate in the Program. Certain eligibility criteria must be satisfied. Financing may be approved if the following criteria are met: • Property Title is vested in the applicant(s), without federal or state income tax liens, judgment liens or similar involuntary liens on the property. • Property owner is current on property taxes. • Property owner is not in bankruptcy, and the property is not an asset in a bankruptcy proceeding. • Property owner is current on mortgage(s). • The lender has signed an acknowledgement regarding EEEP financing Improvement costs are reasonable to property value. EDINA EMERALD ENERGY PROGRAM Program Report and Administrative Guidelines As a guideline, proposed improvements should not exceed 10 percent of assessed value. If the proposed project exceeds this guideline or otherwise does not appear prudent when compared to the property's value, the Program Administrator may require additional information supporting both the reasonable relationship of the improvements to the property, and information related to the ability of the property owner to repay the assessment. These applications are reviewed on a case -by -case basis; and if property owner has been in bankruptcy in the past three years, the bankruptcy must have been concluded at least one year before application was filed. In addition, all mortgage payments due on the property must have been timely paid during the six months preceding the application. If property is subject to loan modification because of default or delinquency, the loan modification must have been completed at least one year before application was filed. In addition, all mortgage payments due on the property must have been timely paid during the six months preceding the application. EEEP financing is not currently available for properties that are not subject to secured property taxes, such as governmental entities and certain non - profit corporations, or for mobile homes that are not affixed to real property and subject to secured property tax. Property owners may make more than one application for funding under the program if additional energy and water conservation improvements are desired by the owner. D. Eligible Equipment EEEP affords property owners in the City of Edina the opportunity to take advantage of a wide range of energy- savings and conservation measures, consistent with the following provisions: (1) EEEP financing is intended principally for retrofit activities to replace outdated inefficient equipment and to install new equipment that reduces energy consumption, produces renewable energy, or reduces energy use.. However, EEEP financing is also available for purchasers of new businesses that wish to add energy efficiency, renewable energy, and energy conservation improvements after taking title to the property. (2) EEEP provides financing only for improvements that are permanently affixed to real property. (3) EEEP provides financing only for improvements specified in Appendix A. Broadly, these include: (a) Energy Efficiency Improvements; (b) Solar Systems; and (c) Custom Measures, such as large -scale commercial or industrial projects requiring engineering design and meeting the financing threshold ($500,000) requiring approval by the City Council or projects involving emerging technologies for improvements that provide new ways to save or generate energy will be evaluated on a case -by -case basis. A detailed list of Improvements is set out in EEEP's Eligible Improvements list. EEEP financing is also available for projects that combine eligible improvements, such as bundling of, energy efficiency and renewable energy measures. For instance, a property EDINA EMERALD ENERGY PROGRAM Program Report and Administrative Guidelines owner may choose to replace an aging and inefficient furnace, install weather stripping, and install a photovoltaic system. E. Eligible Costs and Program Fees (1) Project Costs. Eligible costs of the energy efficiency and conservation improvements include the cost of equipment and installation. Installation costs may include, but are not limited to, energy evaluation consultations, labor, design, drafting, engineering, permit fees, and inspection charges. All improvements, including those normally exempt from permit requirements, will require a permit from the City. Final inspection by a building inspector will ensure that the Improvements were completed and compliant with all applicable building codes.. The installation of energy savings and conservation improvements can be completed by a qualified contractor of the property owner's choice. Eligible costs do not include labor costs for property owners that elect to do the work themselves. Property owners who elect to engage in broader projects may only receive EEEP financing for that portion of the cost of retrofitting existing structures with energy and conservation improvements. Repairs and /or new construction do not qualify for EEEP financing except to the extent that the construction is required for the specific approved improvement. The value of expected rebates but not the value of expected tax credits will be deducted from EEEP financing. "Expected rebates" do not include rebates (1) that are contingent on performance or (2) that are not available to the property owner at or shortly after completion of the project, so as to be available for use to pay for the project. EEEP staff will determine whether the estimated equipment and installation costs are reasonable. EEEP staff will evaluate market conditions and may require the property owner to obtain additional bids to determine whether costs are reasonable. While the property owner may choose the contractor, the amount available for EEEP financing will be limited to an amount determined reasonable by EEEP staff, and may be reviewed by the Program Administrator. (2) Program Fees. The following program fees will be the responsibility of the property owner. The annual assessment fee will be included on the annual tax statement. The other fees must be paid at the time they are incurred. (a) Title costs, including title insurance, where required (b) Recording fee for documents required to be recorded by State law, which includes the Notice of Assessment, Assessment Contract, and Disclosure Notification (c) Legal fees and underwriting fees incurred by the City for the project financing (3) Escrow fees. Some large projects, or projects with multiple contractors, may benefit from funding through an escrow process. If this process is selected by the property owner, the owner would select an escrow agent, and after the Assessment Contract is signed, the amount requested would be funded into the escrow account. Escrow instructions governing release of the funds would need to be approved by the Program Administrator. All fees related to this process would be the responsibility of the property owner but could be requested as part of Program funding. As in the Multiple Disbursement Assessment Contract, interest on the full amount of the requested disbursement will begin to accrue as EDINA EMERALD ENERGY PROGRAM Program Report and Administrative Guidelines soon as the escrow is funded.. Any amount not needed at the completion of the project must be returned to the Program, and will ,be deducted from the amount of the 'assessment lien. All projects over $500,000 must utilize an escrow process. F. Administrative Costs The Program may elect to cover all or a portion of its costs through -the "spread" between its interim funding source interest<rate and the EEEP financing interest rate offered to the property owner. Similarly, it may elect to' recover EEEP costs through a spread between bond rates and assessment rates, or the-spread between.interest rates of ariy�fnancial vehicle. The Program shall charge a fee :as outlined in the EEEP Financial Summary section at the time. 6f:-submission'-of the EEEP application. III. TRACKS FOR PARTICIPATION There are three categories or "tracks" of technologies under which property owners may participate in the program. Eligible improvements must meet specified minimum efficiency standards. A complete list.of approved improvements is set out in the Eligible Improvements list. A. The Energy Efficiency Track. The Energy Efficiency Track covers a wide range of energy efficiency fixtures from windows and doors, attic insulation and HVAC equipment that is. Energy Star rated. Packaged and central air conditioning systems must meet - specified minimum efficiencies. B. The Solar Track. The Solar System Track covers solar energy generation and, solar hot water systems. C. The Custom Measure Track. The development of technologies is encouraged by EEEP as a means of diversifying the City's energy sources. The Custom Measure Track will evaluate and provide funding, if appropriate, for these innovative projects. Applicants for the Custom Measure..Track should,consult with :EEEP staff to determine eligibility and will be required in most cases to submit engineering plans and specifications. The Program Administrator, or designated staff, will approve the Custom Measure Track application on a case -by -case basis, and may request consultation from- outside technology experts in making this decision. The applicant would be expected to bear the cost of such consultation. Cost reimbursement would be discussed with the applicant before the project was reviewed. IV. ENERGY AUDITS, EVALUATIONS AND SOLAR SITE CHECKS An onsite energy audit or evaluation is required for to participate in the Program. Your energy providers (Xcel Energy or CenterPoint Energy) may offer a- energy auditor evaluation services for commercial properties tol help property owners determine the most cost- effective and efficient route to maximize investment and energy savings. 'Commercial F. EDINA EMERALD ENERGY PROGRAM Program Report and Administrative Guidelines property owners may include the cost of the energy audit or evaluation in the application for EEEP financing. V. PROGRAM PARAMETERS A. Minimum Energy Financing Amount and Duration of Assessment EEEP Assessment Contracts are available for up to 10 -year terms to accommodate a wide range of efficiency measures and renewable energy investments. The minimum amount for an EEEP Assessment Contract is $2,500. All Assessment Contracts below $5,000 are subject to a five- or ten -year assessment repayment period. Assessments over $5,000 are subject to a 10- assessment repayment period, requested by the property owner, and agreed to by the Program Administrator or designated Program staff. The Program Administrator may approve a five -year term for a Contract exceeding $5,000 after discussion with the property owner and in the Program Administrator's discretion after considering such factors as cost to value ratio, and the marketability of bonds relying on the Assessment Contract for security. B. Maximum Energy Financing Amount Improvement costs must bear a reasonable relationship to assessed value of the property. All contracts for amounts up to $20,000 may be approved by the Program Administrator. Amounts over $20,000 must be reviewed and approved by the Edina City Council. EEEP financing will be disbursed directly to the property owner after improvements are completed and final documentation is submitted to EEEP Staff. C. Maximum Portfolio The City intends to initially fund EEEP with a commitment of up to $1 million of its total statutory debt capacity. The City will explore other financing opportunities, with the goal of expanding the Program to $10 million of its total statutory debt capacity. D. Assessment Interest Rate The Program Administrator will set the interest rate for an EEEP Assessment Contract at the time the Program and property owner enter into the contract. The interest rate will be fixed at that point and will not go up, although the City may reduce the rate for all Program participants if it is able to negotiate long term financing on sufficiently favorable terms to allow it to do so while still funding the program costs. The interest rate for the EEEP program will be determined by the negotiated market rate of the special assessment revenue bonds. The Program will recover its administrative and overhead costs through the spread between the market rate of the revenue bonds and the interest rate charged to the applicant in the special assessment contract. Initially, the Program Administrator is recommending the interest rate for the program be set at a fixed interest rate spread of 2.00 percent. E. Property Assessment Lien All property owners must sign and notarize the EEEP Assessment Contract and Implementation Agreement ( "contract documents "). Upon execution of the contract EDINA EMERALD ENERGY PROGRAM Program Report and Administrative Guidelines documents, the .program wilt place a lien for the full amount of the assessment on the property that secures the assessment, including capitalized interest being the amount of interest accrued from the date of disbursement.through September 1 of the first tax year. If funds are disbursed to propertyzowners by the first,busindss day in September, the assessment will appear on -the next tax' bill. For disbursements made after the first business day of September,`the assessment,will not appear. -on the 'ax`bill`until the following tax year, but interest will accrue on the outstanding amount. . F. Delinquent Assessment Collections Delinquent assessments will be:collected using the laws and powers authorized under state statutes for collecting property taxes and assessments: Delinquent assessments will'be collected and allocated, in accordance with state:statutes. Where bonds have`beeh�sold to finance assessments, state law also allows delinquent assessments to be collected through foreclosure proceedings to protect bondholders. VI. THE FINANCIAL STRATEGY The City Finance Director will establish the Edina Emerald Energy Program Fund (the "EEEP Fund ") and may accept funds from any available source and may disburse 'the funds to eligible property owners for the purpose of funding energy efficiency and conservation improvements. Repayments will be made pursuant to Assessment Contracts between the property owners and City of Edina and will be collected through the property assessment .mechanism in the Edina City property tax system. The City will manage the EEEP ,in one enterprise fund with multiple sub- funds: It is necessary to ensure that financings equal,the City's receivables. Likewise, it is necessary to separate City's funds for repaying bonds, etc. to ensure funds are available when payment is due. The Program Administrator has the authority to develop the necessary accounting structure needed to run the EEEP. Each year, the City may use assessment revenues in. excess of the amounts needed to repay the loan to fund a reserve account.and,a program expense. account. Moneys in the reserve account will provide additional security for the repayment of the: oan. Moneys in the program expense fund may be used to pay or reimburse the City for expenses to administer the EEEP. The-City, may use surplus funds, which remain' after the payment of the Bond at maturity or upon early redemption, for any lawful purpose- for the program. The City will use revenues from the annual administrative assessment provided for in each assessment contract to pay for the administrative expenses of the City in connection with the bond and the collection of the assessments. It is anticipated the administrative assessment will be a nominal amount, to cover the cost of the assessment administrator and the Program Administrator cost in ,placing the charge on the tax roll. For long -term and additional financing, the Program Administrator will explore funding opportunities from a number of other potential funding sources, and combinations of sources, which may include but are not limited to additional funding from any funds under the control of the City of Edina, the issuance of notes, bonds, or agreements with utilities or EDINA EMERALD ENERGY PROGRAM Program Report and Administrative Guidelines public or private lenders, other governmental entities and quasi - governmental entities, or any financing structure allowed by law. Program Administrator will report on program progress to the EEC on a quarterly basis and the City Council on an annual basis with the information necessary to further adjust the Program to encourage participation and effectiveness, with recommendation from the Program Administrator. The Program Administrator shall have the authority to establish an EEEP budget to be ratified by the City Council. M A Eel : F-1 111 [r] 4� te1 7 A 1e7:-I The Program Administrator may make changes to this Report that the Program Administrator reasonably determines are necessary to clarify its provisions. Any changes to this report that materially modify the EEEP shall only be made after review and recommendation of the EEC and approval by the City Council The Program Administrator may modify from time to time the eligible improvements List, Assessment Contract and Application attached hereto as Appendix A, Appendix D and Appendix C, respectively, as deemed necessary by the Program Administrator to effectuate the purposes of the program. EDINA EMERALD ENERGY PROGRAM Program Report and Administrative Guidelines APPENDIX A — ELIGIBLE IMPROVEMENTS The Edina EmeraldEnergy Program offers EEEP funds for number of equipment types, including energy efficiency measures, solar systems, and other innovative, energy- saving and energy generation custom measures. In each .case, if a rebate is available to the property owner to be applied to the purchase price, that amount must be deducted from the amount of financing requested: A comprehensive list of eligible improvements is available on the EEEP website. I. ENERGY EFFICIENCY MEASURES The EEEP provides services and funding for a wide -range of Energy Star -rated efficiency measures, including many Energy Efficiency measures for which property owners can get rebates as well as EEEP funding. Excepting the HVAC equipment as noted below, efficiency measures must meet the performance criteria stated in the list of eligible improvements or the Energy Star minimum efficiency levels. For all packaged and central air conditioning systems funded in this.Program, the minimum efficiency levels shall be as required by the current minimum requirements set forth in list of eligible improvements. All . other proposed efficiency measures will be considered in the Custom Measure Track. The City of Edina anticipates that Energy Star requirements will "ratchet up" to greater efficiency levels over time. Energy Star will also become more inclusive of technologies over time. Thus, the EEEP will evolve with Energy Star and the market for energy - efficient technologies. The following Energy Star measures — among others — are eligible in the Efficiency Track. A. Commercial. Energy Efficiency Measures (1) Heating, ventilating and air conditioning systems ( "HVAC) .(a) Minimum efficiencies '(i) Split-systems with 14 SEER or 12 EER (ii) Package systems with 13 SEER or 11 EER (2) Geothermal exchange heat pumps (a) Minimum efficiencies (i) Ground source. exchange open loop system 17.8 EER or higher (ii) Ground source exchange closed loop system 15.5 EER or higher (3) High efficiency electric hand dryer (4) All applicable energy; efficiency measures listed in "Residential' section B. Commercial Energy Efficiency Custom Measures (1) Building energy management systems, (2) Lighting control systems, which shall include occupancy sensors and other energy saving measures (3) HVAC duct zoning control systems (4) Motors and controls (processing or manufacturing equipment) (5) Customer electric vehicle plug -in station EDINA EMERALD ENERGY PROGRAM Program Report and Administrative Guidelines II. SOLAR EQUIPMENT Solar track funding is available for a wide range of solar equipment. EEEP funding will be available for photovoltaic equipment and installers listed by the Minnesota Energy Commission. Solar thermal equipment must be rated by the Solar Rating Certification Council (SRCC). As with efficiency measures, if a rebate is available to the property owner to be applied to the purchase price, that amount must be deducted from the amount of financing requested. Eligible solar equipment for both residential and commercial properties includes: (1) Solar thermal systems (hot water) (2) Solar thermal systems for pool heating (3) Photovoltaic systems (electricity) (a) Battery back -up systems will be allowed (b) Funding for off -grid systems will be allowed (c) PV systems can be sized to accommodate plug -in electric vehicles (d) Plug in stations (4) Emerging technologies — following the Custom Measures Track (a) Nano /thin film photovoltaic (b) High intensity (parabolic solar panels) III. CUSTOM MEASURES The Custom Measures Track is a process by which EEEP Staff can evaluate and fund projects that are not "off the shelf' improvements listed in the eligible Water Conservation, Energy Efficiency or Solar Measures. These custom projects may involve large scale industrial or commercial energy efficiency improvement projects, such as process or industrial mechanical systems, renewable energy sources and energy generation, other than the solar system (photovoltaic), such as geothermal, and potentially fuel cells, as well as more complex and cutting edge energy management solutions and emerging technologies. The Custom Measure Track will evaluate and provide funding, if appropriate, for these innovative projects. Applicants for the Custom Measure Track should consult with EEEP staff to determine eligibility and will be required in most cases to submit engineering plans and specifications. An EEEP Custom Measure's Track review /technical panel will meet to review the engineering documents and data for custom and emerging technology projects. EEEP may require an additional administrative fee for project evaluation by the technical review. In all cases, the City reserves the right to decline funding of a custom measure. The following types of measures — among others — will be considered for EEEP funding through the Custom Measure Track: A. Energy Efficiency Custom Measures (1) Alternative energy generation (other than photovoltaic) (2) Building energy management controls (3) HVAC duct zoning control systems (4) Lighting controls EDINA EMERALD ENERGY PROGRAM Program Report and Administrative Guidelines (5) Industrial and process equipment motors and controls As these "Custom Measures" become Energy Star rated they will be included in the 'list of eligible improvements- B. Energy Generation Custom Measures (1) Fuel Cells (2) Natural gas (3) Hydrogen fuel (4) .Other fuel sources (emerging technologies) (5) Co- generation (heat and energy) Other documents including the Application, Petition for Special Assessments, Summary of Financing Process, Flowchart, and list of eligible improvements.can be found online at. www.edinaCityener-gy.ora or can be obtained at Edina City Hall (4801 W.. 50th Street) or at the Edina Public Works Facility (7450 Metro Blvd). 1 A. City of Edina, Minnesota e o Edina Emerald Energy Program SUMMARY OF FINANCING • ��• PROCESS 4501 West 50th Street, Edina, Minnesota 55424 Phone: (952) 927 -8861 Fax: (952) 826 -0390 E -mail: www.cityofedina.org REV 01/24/12 A. Introduction The Edina Emerald Energy Program ( "EEEP ") helps to provides financing for the installation of energy efficiency improvements and renewable energy sources that are permanently.fixed,to commercial / industrial properties ("Improvements ") in Edina. Property owners will repay EEEP through an assessment levied against.their,property which is payable over 10 years in semi- annual installments on property tax bills. The program is only for commercial / industrial properties and does not include residential properties. B. Project Scoping Commercial / Industrial property owners can obtain an'onsite survey by hiring a Home Energy Rating System ( "HERS ").rater, or equivalent. By participating in.EEEP, property owners.are making a financial investment; this decision should be.:mad'ebased on,both the efficiency and the cost effectiveness of the improvements. Conducting a`n energy.audit;will help property owners assess water conservation, energy efficiency, and renewable energy, opportunities for their property. An onsite energy audit is required to participate in EEEP. For more information, go to www.cityofedina.com. Conducting an energy audit will help property owners assess energy efficiency and renewable energy opportunities for their property. Costs incurred to conduct onsite audits or surveys may be included in your application for EEEP Financing. Property owners will, work directly with contractors to determine the scope of their project. As the project is defined, the property owner obtains a contractor's bid or determines the cost of the equipment if self - installing. Interested property owners can visit Edina Public Works, located at 7450 Metro Blvd, Edina, MN 55439 or contact the EEEP Administrator at (952) 927 -8861. C. Program Application The property owner visits the EEEP website (www.cityofedina.com) or the,Edina Public Works to complete an EEEP application.form (the "Application "). The EEEP staff can'also provide an Application by mail, a -mail or fax upon request. D Title Check EEEP staff will verify property ownership by performing a title check. Applicants are responsible for the costs of the title check as follows: 1) Financing requests less than $5000: $100 2) Financing requests $5000'to $49,999: '$150 3) Financing requests $50,000 to $199,999: $200 4) Financing requests greater than $200,000: $250 Title costs may be included in the EEEP Financing request. E. Application Review During the Application Review process, EEEP staff verifies that: • The Application is complete and accurate; • The property owner(s) owns the Property without federal or state income tax liens, judgment liens or similar involuntary liens on the Property; • The Property is developed and within the County; • The Property is not exempt from secured property taxes; • The property owner is current on property taxes; • Property owner is current on mortgage(s) and lender has given consent to EEEP Financing; • The property owner has declared that the property owner(s) and the Property is /are not currently involved in a bankruptcy proceeding. If property owner has been in bankruptcy in the past three years, the bankruptcy must have been concluded at least one year before application was filed. In addition, all mortgage payments due on the property must have been timely paid during the six months preceding the application; • The property owner has executed all declarations required in the Application; • The proposed Improvements and costs are eligible to be financed under the Program. If the proposed Improvements are part of a project that includes new construction (e.g., a room addition), the costs of the work have been properly allocated between adding EEEP Improvements and new construction; • The cost estimate(s) /bid(s) is /are reasonable for the Improvements; • Improvement costs are reasonable to property value. As a guideline, proposed Improvements should not exceed 10 percent of assessed value. If more costly Improvements are proposed, the Program Administrator may require additional information supporting both the reasonable relationship of the Improvements to the property, and information related to the ability of the property owner to repay the assessment; • All required documents have been submitted; • The requested assessment amount (including contingency) is equal to or greater than $2,500; and • EEEP funding is available. Within 15 business days of receipt of an application, EEEP Staff notifies the property owner if the application is incomplete, approved, denied or requires additional approval. • Incomplete. An application shall be deemed incomplete if it is missing any information or attachments the property owner is required to provide. All requested documentation must be submitted within 30 -days. • Approved. An application shall be approved if EEEP Staff have verified all of the items in step (1) through (14). • Denied. An application shall be deemed denied if EEEP Staff cannot verify any of the items in steps (1) through (14). EEEP will send a written denial notice. Property owners are free to submit a new application, which will be processed on a first -come, first - served basis based upon the new receipt date. o If an application is denied on the sole basis that EEEP funding is not available, the application does not need to be resubmitted; applicants will be placed on a waiting list based on the date of application receipt. o If an application is denied because the cost estimate(s) is /are not deemed reasonable by EEEP Staff, a resubmitted application must be accompanied by additional documentation of cost estimates as determined in EEEP Staff's discretion, including, but not limited to, cost estimates provided by one or more additional contractors. The property owner will not be required to select the low bid; however, EEEP Staff may limit the maximum assessment amount to an amount deemed reasonable by the Program Administrator. Applications for EEEP Financing up to $20,000 require approval of the Program Administrator. The property owner will be notified that the application is complete and has been forwarded to the Program Administrator for approval. Applications for EEEP Financing over $20,000 require approval of Edina City Council. The property owner will be notified that the application is complete and has been forwarded to the Program Administrator to prepare an agenda item for the City Council. The property owner will be advised once a City Council date is set. With respect to an application to finance a renewable energy system(s) other than solar (such as wind or geothermal) or a custom energy efficiency measure(s) (such as a combined heat and power system cogeneration system), or to finance an emerging technology ( "Custom Measures "), EEEP Staff reserve the right to require the appropriate engineering documentation and energy studies showing the energy savings and /or energy generation capabilities of the proposed project. EEEP Staff may also charge an additional administrative fee for this technical review to be discussed with the property owner before proceeding. F. Permit After receiving notice of Application approval, property owner (or contractor) must obtain a permit from the local building official. All Improvements, including those normally exempt from permit requirements, will require a permit from the Building Department. Final inspection will be required to ensure that the Improvements were completed. A valid permit is required before EEEP can execute an Assessment Contract and reserve EEEP Financing for a project. G. Assessment Contract and Reservation All property owners of record must sign the Assessment Contract and Implementation Agreement ( "Contract Documents ") and have their signature(s) notarized. The Program Administrator or designee, on behalf of the City, will execute the Contract Documents. This will assure the property owner that the EEEP Financing has been approved and that funds are reserved for the property owner's approved project. H. Assessment Lien Upon execution of the Assessment Contract, EEEP records an assessment lien against the Property in the office of the Program Administrator, Clerk of the City. The lien will be for the full amount of the assessment on the property that secures the assessment, including capitalized interest. If funds are disbursed to property owners by the first business day in September, the assessment will appear on the next tax bill. For disbursements after that date, the assessment will not appear on the tax bill until the following tax year, but interest will accrue on the outstanding amount. I. Installation of Improvements Property owner enters into a contractual arrangement directly with a contractor for Improvements unless the property owner is self - installing the Improvements. All work is subject to the appropriate permitting and inspections and all other applicable federal, state, and local laws and regulations. All work must be completed, including the final inspection, within 90 days of execution of the Assessment Contract. The property owner and Program Administrator may agree to an extension of this completion date for good cause. J. Progress Payments /Multiple Disbursements If the maximum assessment amount is $20,000 or greater, the property owner may request in writing that EEEP make a progress payment prior to the completion of the work. Progress payments will be subject to a $150 onsite inspection fee per disbursement and interest will accrue on the entire assessment amount at the time of the first disbursement. Progress payment requests must be filed with EEEP at least five business days before the end of the month for payment to be made on the first business day of the next month. The following conditions must also have been met before disbursement is made: 1) At least 75 percent of the required materials have been delivered to the property and have been reasonably secured as confirmed by an onsite inspection. EEEP Staff has the discretion to make its own determination with respect to whether this condition has been satisfied; and 2) The requested progress payment does not exceed 50 percent of the maximum assessment amount. K. Final Inspections & Disbursement of EEEP Financing After Improvements are completed, the Property owner must contact the local permitting agency for a final inspection and finaled permit. The Property owner notifies EEEP that all work has been completed and submits final documentation: finaled permit; invoices showing all costs, less rebate amounts and Request for Disbursement. Checks will be mailed at the beginning of each month, provided that final documentation has been filed with EEEP five business days before the end of the month for processing. The amount disbursed will be the lesser of (i) the maximum assessment amount provided in the Assessment Contract or (ii) the actual costs, net of County costs listed on Request for Disbursement. Interest accrues as of the date of disbursement. Application is submitted to EEEP Program Administrator EEEP Program Team reviews project application Financing arrangements and terms are finalized Applicant agrees to financing terms Financing contracts are signed by all parties City Council approves contracts and conducts special assessment hearing Project is approved Payment for materials may be issued Construction period Final inspection is completed and permit is closed Final payment is issued Project performance is verified Edina Emerald Energy Program (EEEP) Eligible Improvements Building Type Improvement Category Measure Name Requirement Spec Unit Measured In UnitMeasSavedOrGen All Energy Efficiency Attic Fan - Solar no A/C power required Each Therms All Energy Efficiency Core Plumbing System Energy Star Each Gallons All Energy Efficiency Doors, Glass U 0.40 or less, SHGC 0.40 or less Each Therms All Energy Efficiency Doors, Solid, Insulating Energy Star Each Therms All Energy Efficiency Duct Sealing CF6R Form Required Lin Ft Therms All Energy Efficiency Electronic Air Cleaner /Filter (i.) Electronic Air Cleaner /Filter, high Each Therms efficiency for use with HVAC systems — Whole Building (ii.) Input Power: 24Volts AC (iii.) Output Power: 24KV DC Nominal (iv.) Rated Static Pressure: 0.25" initial @ 500FPM (v.) Minimum Depth Thickness: 2.0" Nominal (vi.) Recommended media changes per year. 1 -2 per year (vii.) Ozone production: 0 PPB detectable All Energy Efficiency Geothermal Well Drilling Custom Each Therms All Energy Efficiency HVAC Air Conditioning - Split 14 SEER or 12 EER Each Therms System Unit All Energy Efficiency HVAC Heat Pumps - z 15.5 EER Each Therms Geothermal Exchange Closed Loop All Energy Efficiency HVAC Heat Pumps - 2 17.8 EER Each Therms Geothermal Exchange Open Loop All Energy Efficiency HVAC, Evaporative Coolers Separate duct system, max 5 g /ton -hour Each Therms cooling All Energy Efficiency Insulation, Hot Water Pipes R4 Lin Ft Gallons All Energy Efficiency Insulation, Reflective or Radiant Energy Star Sq Ft Therms Barriers All Energy Efficiency Insulation, Sub -floor R19 minimum Sq Ft Therms All Energy Efficiency Lighting Control Systems with Custom Each kWh Occupancy Sensors All Energy Efficiency Lighting, High Efficiency, Hard- Energy Star, UL Listed, Title 24 Compliant Each kWh Wired Fixtures All Energy Efficiency Pool Equipment, Pool variable flow and /or multi -speed with Each kWh Circulating Pumps controllers All Energy Efficiency Sealing, Whole Building Energy Star Sq Ft Therms All Energy Efficiency Skylights U value 0.60 or less, SHGC 0.40 or less Each kWh All Energy Efficiency Solar Thermal Systems for Hot Rated by SRCC Sq Ft Therms Water All Energy Efficiency Solar Thermal Systems for Pool Rated by SRCC Sq Ft Therms Heating - Evacuated Tubes All Energy Efficiency Solar Thermal Systems for Pool Rated by SRCC Sq Ft Therms Heating - Panels All Energy Efficiency Solar Tubes Each kWh All Energy Efficiency Water Heater, Natural Gas z 0.67 EF and Energy Star Each Therms All All All All All Edina Emerald Energy Program (EEEP) Eligible Improvements Storage Energy Efficiency Water Heater, Tankless a 0.82 EF and Energy Star Each Energy Efficiency Weather- stripping Energy Stara Lin Ft Energy Efficiency Window Filming NFRC glazing ratings Sq Ft Energy Efficiency Windows U 0.40 or less, SHGC 0.40 or less Each Generation Co- generation System Each Therms Therms Therms Therms kWh P p ow e 0) 0 �A \�Cb 1 REPORPRECOMMEN DATION To: MAYOR AND COUNCIL Agenda Item Item No. VI. A. From:. Cary Teague Planning Director ® Action ❑ Discussion Information Date: February 6, 2012 Subject: Preliminary Plat with Variances, Resolution No. 2012 -27. Refined LLC, 6109 Oaklawn Avenue, — ACTION REQUESTED: Adopt the attached Resolution approving the Preliminary Plat with lot area variances from 9,000 square feet to 6,699 and 6,693 square feet; and lot width variances from 75 feet to 50 feet for each lot. Planning Commission Recommendation: On January 11, 2012, the Planning Commission recommended approval of the Preliminary Plat and Variances, subject to the findings and conditions in the Planning Commission Staff report dated January 11, 2012. (Vote: 6 -3) INFORMATION /BACKGROUND: The applicant is proposing to subdivide the property at 6109 Oaklawn Avenue into two lots. The existing home would be torn down, and two new homes built on the new lots. To accommodate the request the following is required: 1. A subdivision; 2. Lot width variances from 75 feet to 50 feet for each lot; and 3. Lot area variances from 9,000 square feet to 6,699 and 6,693 square feet. ATTACHMENTS: • Resolutions 2012 -27 • Planning Commission Staff Report, January 11, 2012 • Minutes from the January 11, 2011 Edina Planning Commission meeting • Letters from a potential owner in the property and a response letter from the city attorney • Letters from nearby residents RESOLUTION NO. 2012-27 APPROVING A PRELIMINARY PLAT WITH VARIANCES AT 6109 OAKLAWN AVENUE City of Edina BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Edina, Minnesota, as follows: Section 1. BACKGROUND. 1.01 Refinned, LLC is requesting a Preliminary Plat of 6109 Oaklawn Avenue to divide the existing parcel into two lots. 1.02 The following described tract of land is requested to be divided: Lots 22 and 23, Block 23, Fairfax, Hennepin County, Minnesota. 1.03 The owner of the described land desires to subdivide said tract in to the following described new and separate parcels (herein called "parcels ") described as follows: Lots 1 and 2, Block 1, Annabelle Addition. 1.04 The proposed subdivision requires the following variances: 1. Lot width variances from 75 feet to 50 feet for each lot; and 2. Lot area variances from 9,000 square feet to 6,699 and 6,693 square feet. 1.05 On January 11, 2012, the Planning Commission recommended approval of the Preliminary Plat and Variances on a Vote of 6 -3. Section 2. FINDINGS 2.01 Approval is based on the following findings: 1. Except for the variances, the proposal meets the required standards and ordinance for a subdivision. 2. The subdivision would meet the neighborhood medians for lot width and depth and nearly meet the median area. 3. The proposal would restore the property back to the form of the original plat, which included two lots. 4. The proposal meets the required standards for a variance, because: a. There is a unique hardship to the property caused by the existing size of the property which is two times the size of every lot on the block. 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. 2012-27 Page Two b. The requested variances are reasonable in the context of the immediate neighborhood. The existing lot is both larger and wider than most properties in the area, including nearly every lot on the block. The proposed subdivision would result in two lots more characteristic of the neighborhood. c. The proposed lots would be the same size as the lots were originally platted. d. The variances would meet the intent of the ordinance because the proposed lots are of similar size to others in the neighborhood. e. If the variances were denied, the applicant would be denied a use of his property, a 50 -foot wide lot, which is common to the area. In addition, the applicant would be denied a subdivision with variances that has been previously approved by the City in two instances in the last two years. Section 3. APPROVAL NOW THEREFORE, it is hereby resolved by the City Council of the City of Edina, approves the Preliminary Plat and requested Variances for the proposed subdivision of 6109 Oaklawn Avenue. Approval is subject to the following Conditions: 1. The city must approve the final plat within one year of preliminary approval or receive a written application for a time extension or the preliminary approval will be void. 2. Prior to issuance of a building permit, the following items must be submitted: a. Submit evidence of Minnehaha Creek Watershed District approval. The City may require revisions to the preliminary plat to meet the district's requirements. b. A curb -cut permit must be obtained from the Edina Engineering department. C. Utility hook -ups are subject to review of the city engineer. Adopted this 6th day of February, 2012. ATTEST: Debra A. Mangen, City Clerk STATE OF MINNESOTA ) COUNTY OF HENNEPIN )SS CITY OF EDINA ) James B. Hovland, Mayor RESOLUTION NO. 2012-27 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 January 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 4,9SN��r.1, �J � �y PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT Originator Meeting Date Agenda # Cary Teague January 11, 2012 2011.015.11a Director of Planning INFORMATION & BACKGROUND Project Description Refined, LLC is proposing to subdivide the property at 6109 Oaklawn Avenue into two lots. (See property location on pages Al —A5.) The existing home would be torn down, and two new homes built on the new lots. (See applicant narrative and plans on pages A6 —A11.) To accommodate the request the following is required: 1. A subdivision; 2. Lot width variances from 75 feet to 50 feet for each lot; and 3. Lot area variances from 9,000 square feet to 6,699 and 6,693 square feet. Both lots would gain access off Oaklawn Avenue. Within this neighborhood, the median lot area is 6,701 square feet, median lot depth is 133 feet, and the median lot width is 50 feet. (See attached median calculations on page Al2.) The new lots would meet the median width and depth, but would be just short of the median area. Surrounding Land Uses The lots on all sides of the subject properties are zoned and guided low - density residential. Existing Site Features The existing site contains a single - family home and detached garage. (See pages A4 and A5.) Both the home and garage would be removed. Planning Guide Plan designation Zoning: Lot Dimensions Single- dwelling residential R -1, Single- dwelling district * Variance Required Grading /Drainage and Utilities The city engineer has reviewed the proposed plans and found them generally acceptable. (See memo from the city engineer on page A15.) All storm water from the proposed homes, driveways, and westerly half of the lots shall drain to Oaklawn. All sump pump drains shall drain into the existing sump pump drain tile along Oaklawn Avenue. Any disturbance to the roadway caused by the construction of the new homes must be repaired. The detailed grading plans would be reviewed by the city engineer at the time of a building permit application. A construction management plan will be required for the construction of the new homes. Specific hook -up locations would be reviewed at the time of a building permit for each lot. A Minnehaha Creek Watershed District permit would also be required. Primary Issue Are the findings for a variance met? Yes. Staff believes that the findings for a Variance are met with this proposal. Per state law and 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 meets the variance standards, when applying the three conditions: a) Will the proposal relieve practical difficulties that prevent a reasonable use from complying with the ordinance requirements? 2 Area Lot Width Depth REQUIRED 9,000 s.f. 75 ft 133 ft. Lot 1 6,699 s. f. * 50 ft* 133 ft. Lot 2 6,693 s. f. * 50 ft* 133 ft. * Variance Required Grading /Drainage and Utilities The city engineer has reviewed the proposed plans and found them generally acceptable. (See memo from the city engineer on page A15.) All storm water from the proposed homes, driveways, and westerly half of the lots shall drain to Oaklawn. All sump pump drains shall drain into the existing sump pump drain tile along Oaklawn Avenue. Any disturbance to the roadway caused by the construction of the new homes must be repaired. The detailed grading plans would be reviewed by the city engineer at the time of a building permit application. A construction management plan will be required for the construction of the new homes. Specific hook -up locations would be reviewed at the time of a building permit for each lot. A Minnehaha Creek Watershed District permit would also be required. Primary Issue Are the findings for a variance met? Yes. Staff believes that the findings for a Variance are met with this proposal. Per state law and 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 meets the variance standards, when applying the three conditions: a) Will the proposal relieve practical difficulties that prevent a reasonable use from complying with the ordinance requirements? 2 Yes. 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. The practical difficulty is due to the fact that the subject property is double the size of all lots on this block. This area was originally plated with 50 -foot lots, including the subject property. (See page A13.) The requested variances to split this lot are reasonable in the context of the immediate neighborhood. The existing lot is both larger and wider than other properties in the immediate area. The proposed subdivision would result in two lots more characteristic of the neighborhood and original plat. If the variances were denied, the applicant would be denied a subdivision of his property of which the lots would be the same as existing lots in the area. As demonstrated on page Al2, the median lot size in this neighborhood is 50 feet wide, 133 feet deep and 6,701 square feet in size. The proposed lots would be 50 feet wide, 133 feet deep and 6,699 and 6,693 square feet in size, which nearly meet the medians. The City of Edina has also granted similar variances within this area. In 2009, a similar subdivision and variances were granted at 5920 and 5924 Oaklawn, and in 2011 at 5829 Brookview Avenue. To deny the subject variances would deny the applicant a subdivision that has been recently approved by the City. (See approved subdivisions on page A14.) b) There are circumstances that are unique to the property, not common to every similarly zoned property, and that are not self - created? The condition of this oversized lot is generally unique to Oaklawn Avenue. The vast majority of the lots on Oaklawn are 50 feet wide and 6,700 square feet in size. The circumstance of the oversized lot was not created by the applicant. C) Will the variance alter the essential character of the neighborhood? No. The proposed improvements requested by the variance would not alter the essential character of the neighborhood. The neighborhood includes a vast majority of single - family homes on 50 -foot lots as proposed. W Staff Recommendation Recommend that the City Council approve the proposed two lot subdivision of 6109 Oaklawn Avenue and the lot width variances from 75 feet to 50 feet for each lot, and lot area variances from 9,000 square feet to 6,699 and 6,693 square feet. Approval is based on the following findings: Except for the variances, the proposal meets the required standards and ordinance for a subdivision. 2. The subdivision would meet the neighborhood medians for lot width and depth and nearly meet the median area. 3. The proposal would restore the property back to the form of the original plat, which included two lots. 4. The proposal meets the req,(l uirr�edOstann/dards for a variance, because: a. There is a .M� to he property caused by the existing size of the property which is two times the size of every lot on the block. b. The requested variances are reasonable in the context of the immediate neighborhood. The existing lot is both larger and wider than most properties in the area, including nearly every lot on the block. The proposed subdivision would result in two lots more characteristic of the neighborhood. C. The proposed lots would be the same size as the lots were originally platted. d. The variances would meet the intent of the ordinance because the proposed lots are of similar size to others in the neighborhood. e. If the variances were denied, the applicant would be denied a use of his property, a 50 -foot wide lot, which is common to the area. In addition, the applicant would be denied a subdivision with variances that has been previously approved by the City in two instances in the last two years. Approval is subject to the following conditions: The City must approve the final plat within one year of preliminary approval or receive a written application for a time extension or the preliminary approval will be void. 4 2. Prior to issuance of a building permit, the following items must_ be submitted: a. Submit evidence of Minnehaha Creek Watershed District approval. The City may require revisions to the preliminary plat to meet the district's requirements. b. A curb -.cut permit must be obtained from the Edina engineering department., C. A grading plan subject to. review and approval of the city engineer. d. All storm water from -the proposed homes, driveways, and westerly half of the. lots shall drain to Oaklawn. All sump pump drains shall drain into the existing sump pump drain the along Oaklawn. Avenue. e. Any disturbance to the roadway caused by the construction of the new homes must be repaired by replacing the asphalt pavement from curb -to -curb and from saw -cut to saw -cut. f. A construction management plan will be required for the construction of the new homes.. g. Utility hook -ups are subject to review of the city engineer. Deadline for City Decision: March 20, 2012 5 City of Edina 4521 Nt7 24405/60157175721 $717 -5716 1304 14 Io21 4017 N- r Legend I r I 1 -Nm 4619 46M 4604 5771 -5711 SIi1 -5721 N2 / N7/ N/ 44; NOI S<00 43214370431 }04708100{ 2936 3917 7921 3821 f!� /� Hlghlighlad feature 1612 5775 -5718 5725 -5731 1 !4420 1 1440 1 4328 1 016 1701 I ) J91a /6 710— House Number Labels 58015600 5807 5801 5800 501 Sea 5801 5801 5800 5801 580sea ssa 5804 ssos 50494 secs s'8o4 saos 5600 5605 sea 5805 5804 3 Sm SM9 5806 5809 Sm 3809 5806 5609 sea SB09 seas 5809 SBO'8 5601 5804 5800 sect 1911 3917 Se04 _y.79n 5805 SVaef Name Labels city umlts 6812 5813 5812 5813 5812 5811 58/3 36+2 5817 5817 5'812 5618 3617 5816 5817 5'816 3877 817 5617 5806 SB17 5816 8617 5816 3017 5620 x.11 seal 5810 581 i 5871 i 5804 + 1 580 21/2 Creaks 382'0 Sail 5820 5821 5620 3870 3621 5820 58 11 5874 5821 5875 584 58 }3' 5825 5825 5671 255876 5815 5828 5879 5828 5029 5828 rn San 3828 5026 5829 So 5115 581! 5816 79037904 Lake Names 5829 36295832 5637 3832 5833 5832 < 5833 3832 583] 5831 5832 5833 5832 56335836 5837 5837 3'836 4 58n 5876 5877 38 ]6 8037 5626 5837 5836 58x9 $8775821 }gp9 1 _ 58a9� Lakes Perks 8775640 5611 3'810 561 5840 5611 584 5'841 SNO 5840 5'840 5815 5844 5811 5844 564 5841 /'5811 5824 5801 L Parcels _f 568 So" 5843 5845 361 5845 se44 SH6 5811 15900 5901 5908 5901 5900 990/ 3900 5901 5900 3901 5900 590 3900 59°3_7__ 3809 5900 905 5904 5903 5904 903 5904 5905 5904 5905 3904 5905 5904 5906 5909 3908 390 5909 5908 5909 S900 5909 5908 24 5913 5917 5917 1 5917 5913 5912 3917 5911 5913 3917 14 '" : 7I { 5901 'S 5905Q 3908 5901 13{ 9}7 5916 591 591 ig+7 5916 SB/7 5916 591739/6 5917 3918 392f 5920 5911 5910 5921 5921 3920 591/43921 O 5971 1.1 i 3°e° 3906 391} li 5D 1 9253924 5821 5915 5974 3925 59x1 392359x4 $ 5923 394 i 3016 !/17 } 3979 SB28 3926 5979 5978 5929 3928 5918 f : S912 5033,928, 5973 5932 5933J5937 S9J3 3933 x4 5937 5936 5937 5836 3937J5938 59175938 [ 5933 5932 m 5937 5935 i` 215916 S8t0 5016- 3941 63 560 561 5940 594 5941 5940 561 Sao 565 5915 594 3915 561 ` N 5925.3910 1 I 5920- 3043 5945 594 594 + • 8974 6000 6041 6000 IJpJ 90411180380 3926 195974 ,�J2 5824_ 160001 6001 6000 j6001 1001 6000 6001 6000 16005 6001 6005' 6001 77 59 5911. S 6004 6005 6004 6005 6004 6003 6004 6006 6009 6008 60/1 3936 391E 7 !9J 1591E / MO/ 009660 6009 6008 6009 am 6009 608 6077 6012 W13, 6016 60+7 6016 -- 5910 0071157 W - -- 73 -- 6017 80136017 60216020 f 601 1 6013 6017 6025 60216020 6021 6025 6014 6000 3 21 2121 2117 3809 _ 6011 1 6017 e017!Mf6 6015 80/7 8016 6029 SO 8 6029 6020 6018 6033 6032 6033 6032 002} 601 0 6020 I 6004 5817 1 8016 6006 6008 21 6024 6021 0021 6037 6036 6037 036 6037 4171 6015 621 801s16o24 6015 6041 6040 Nm 602/ Was 6044 6039 6011 604 6041 f , ; 1 71 8012 6017 NIS $017810461 '6160 4416 4611 6079 . 6028 J 6101 6100 610/ 6/80 6101 6100 4604 i 0� :24 6020 AIAVES 6031 S4 6 L45fe 15118 6704 6105 6fa 61ad 610 ffa 6/a f.. /a 4 \ 3 6074 8101 6o08611f 6101 604 61 IS00 103 6103 6101 61/1 6117 6112 6111 H21 6116 311 6116 61/7 6/21 6117 -" ; 108 X61 6/04 109 6109 6103 6121 6121 6110 612 6115 6114 6125 6121 24 6112 i 608 441 420 614 629 6118 Slid i 74 6114- 141617} 6117 6109 11 4313 1 6133 61]1 6133 of" 6716- 0110 117 6112 1405 _ 8117 616 412 8176 137 6176 6141 177 1/72 1119 1 H 6141 121 N 180 1 la 6120- 8/ 6121 6116 6117 71 4404 4473 6143 6180 6147 6f24- 8160 67 w VI 6101 6716 N 4411 Y��' 4305" /6/74611 vQy1 6740 SiW 6700 6101 -am 580 3409 '71 4 6205 i 203 6272 S2a 1508 704 820944/04421! p12.f71T9 11 ft9 1111 H6 6103 f6212 104 16 12 m 428 6t70 am 17 4303 60 Nm rY,e 21� �$0 i 6}13 0210 x6-778 4210 3700 4211 BT1B j62137 1762/7 ^Yp 8301 _. 38221 2q f7 i 1300 725 10 - 6218 J 1/21 458 N]1 1 6110 6137 4077 2J 622 6277 4275 2J 6277 6227 6224 >, 8701 0320 Sm9 t i 726 12327221624 '8211 55. 6144 Wm6 27! 6301 6304 6717 4509 6305 6312 4303/301 1 E 473 14411 € 1 6210 6241 5878 a 621 4113 6300 1 6215 636 6703 6700 )056301 6709 6316 6717 "— s- c�-vric�.oc6xa5n ` i i 6704 I M 6309 1211 d21<4270 83pd 6708 61/7 am PID: 1902824430105 �Ix3A,l Ow Q f�1 ° 6109 Oaklawn Ave Q Edina, MN 55424 rV a 1.6 • , �,, • 1 ji}•l rf VN s201 I 62}6 II � N"'`� Na mq-'a PID:1902824430105 6109 Oaklawn Ave Edina, MN 55424 !I "fm 57 w o� e A ° I'd �. ^�n1p61 T ,11084 City of Edina 1200 Legend 88794 37 w Highl lghbd Feature 5801 3800 580 MO1 SB00 5101 5801 3800 t 5809 5001 House Number Labels 5905 5809 Ma sBOd seas -5m- ss91 Mos saM 3808 5385 5109 seW 380! 3103 5108 5101 5801 ' 3804 street Name Lsi»Is 5817 11 5117 5817 5811 3812 317! 3611 ./ City Limib 5817 31}8 �+ 3817 3912 5817 5816 3817 3816 ,x-77 381 MOB /- ^f Croaks 5821 3820 k 1 38p 5121 5020 MM 5111 $p 5812 5825 5824- �yc�y 38 5823 5813 M21 Lake Names 5829 3811 sJ 5829 8418 3819 5876 M7g 5812 3819 5121 $ 5878 !' ._ Lakes 5873 5832 dd 5817 5832 5837 5871 5837 Se33 _5832- 5877 3838 5837 M36 5837 5836 5677 MM 5877 MM Parks 3811 5810 5941 5640 5817 5840 341! 5110 �:2 i Parcels 3843 311/ 5813 581/ 5843 5844 5811 / MID MTN w T11 sr w 3 3900 1_S7 8491 900 s9or slur 5809 590+ 3909 5905 5901 590 5901 5805 301 -woos 3901 7 5904 3909- 5909 590e 5we shoe -5909- 5908 1 11 74 5913 W 5811 5917 3911 5917 3811 5913 311 _ _J 5900 5917 916 391 5916 1117 5816 �{ 5817 376 5910 21 3910 3921 l9I0 F 5921 3910 5912 �{ 5915 3874 315 5921 3925 924- M28 5921 5929 29 5928 5679 5910 8429 3020 5916 597] 8428 333 56>2 377 5972 �^ 5977 39]2 5920 5977 5936 3877 5684 8437 8476 5877 376 5811 5940 3941 5940 5941 8410 3994 3945 5994 3808 5945 5W_ M:s 007N ST 4303 P_ue:P.A p 800'1 6000 6001 6000 6001 8000 8001 8000 5931 -005 BOW 6003 6004 8476 6005 6004 6005 6001 6099 6008 6000 6000 6012 6077 /012 MM 6609 6960 6009 6000 9017 Gold- 6011 6018 i 6017 6017 6017 6012 6021 6010 6021 6020 i 6000 74 6023 6011 6025 6021 1 i am 6017 6016 6017 6016 8029 6078 6010 6010 !� 6008 602 1 8070 8011 6016 6037 6037 6072 6036 80]7 6077 6031 6084 6017 i 1 3825 6011 6073 BWf 8011 3 8918 I rL.am M bop 18 24 8015 6011 6101 6100 610 dw r6101T6f00 ? .11 � N 89L8 60314516 24 6194 610.5 6104 6184 6fa -6108 { I \3894 I 1508 9108 6109 61W ' y 4500 4420 6112 6117 6112 6117 6112 61011'Rp 6116 6117 6116 6117 8/p 6120 6121 8110 8121 1.-' 05 6125 6/21 6123 1 6128 6129 6128 i 6709 74 9418 6177 8172 6177 6137 8117 j 41I 6178 8177 6178 1177 tl]2 H11 1116411241084104 4100 I4� 165 1404 6111 0t7 1184 i 8113 6111 6147 s201 I 62}6 II � N"'`� Na mq-'a PID:1902824430105 6109 Oaklawn Ave Edina, MN 55424 !I "fm 57 w o� e A ° I'd �. ^�n1p61 T ,11084 1 4410 wf] wla w17 wfi w2/ 6626 wts w24 wH w?0 wJJ w32 wn 6ot6 wig 6011 6011 01012 -- 6100 6100 6101 ` 6101 1 Mf6 6106 6104 wm 6106 wz. 6103 6112 em 6116 6032 f }f7 6120 M 6121 F boas 6120 6123 w37 — 6045 /Ow 1014 6125 nJrJ7w -- 6100 6100 6101 ` 6101 1 61041 ON 6106 6104 0101 6109 6106 6112 6113 6103 6112 6116 /1f/ yp�7� 6117 f }f7 6120 M 6121 F 6121 6120 6123 s } 6125 6124 6125 4410 6126 6125 4416 6133 1137 6132 4412 6137 61.76 6111 4445 y'1t� 4404 6145 24 4415 e" � @o of Edina Haw•fa •M 6100 i side i 6101 j j I 6112 6111 j 6126 j 6ti1 M 6120 S 61 6133 6137 6136 6141 6144 6143 62ND 57 w 4305 4361 1113 i 0041% -`�l�l PID: 1902824430105 6109 Oaklawn Ave �, ILL Edina, MN 55424 sr� l Legend Highlighted feature Hausa Number Labels Street Name Labels ,/ City Lim1te !� Cracks Lake Names Lakes LParks Parcels I ' `, AtfveAmT N/IRWFTI VE November 23, 2011 6109 Oaklawn Avenue - Subdivision Description of Intended Use REFINED, LLC is a residential homebuilding firm specializing in new home construction in existing neighborhoods. The majority of our business is done within the City of Edina, where we enjoy a strong working relationship with the City and our neighbors. REFINED's intentions are to return the subject property to the originally platted /intended use (two home - sites) via the subdivision process. When completed, these two sites will again match all the other properties on the block. We then intend to build two new homes per City ordinances. REFINED plans to be the General Contractor for both of the new homes; it is not our goal to receive subdivision approval and then sell the lots to another builder for construction. Currently our plan is to find two clients that would like to build custom homes for their families; we have no current plans to build the homes on "Spec ". We believe the City should approve this request for the following reasons: 1. All of the homes on the 6100 block of Oaklawn Avenue are on similar size lots to our proposal. 2. The subdivision shall in no way diminish the natural streetscape of the Oaklawn Avenue or negatively change the overall feel of the neighborhood as a whole. Conversely, without subdivision, a single new home could be built within current City ordinances, and if constructed it could be much larger than neighboring homes and therefore would result in a diminished streetscape and would likely affect the overall neighborhood aesthetic. 3. The vast majority of the homes in the neighborhood are built on lots sized very similar to our request. 4. The City has recently approved a similar subdivision request at 5920/5924 Oaklawn Avenue. 5. The City has recently approved a similar subdivision request at 5829 Brookview Avenue. , De?p,��MENT p�h N<JV 2 $ 2p11 Of Ea \NA G125E PREL IM INARY PLAT FOR: Refined, LLC WeWfldgaBKL Edh.. MN 66436-2565 NOTES: --P.P—Z 0\ 01� Fr--[Wg-.dD.saipban PRELIMINARY PLAT ANNABELLE ADDITION F-. Refined, LLC 6125 Wbidg. Blvd. Edk.. MIN 554352555 CEiifiFlGTON LOT SURVEYS COMPANY. INC. Tnaamm MIS Sheet 2 of 4 --- --------------------------------- --------------- — — ---- 7-1 In ------------ -------- ; --- --- -- ;zm-- l � - — ------------ ---------------- - ------------ IVF --- - -------------- Ned'WOR. IUA1 F=7, R - - - - - - - - - - - LfGENO SCALE IN FEET o zu AO G125E PREL IM INARY PLAT FOR: Refined, LLC WeWfldgaBKL Edh.. MN 66436-2565 NOTES: --P.P—Z 0\ 01� Fr--[Wg-.dD.saipban PRELIMINARY PLAT ANNABELLE ADDITION F-. Refined, LLC 6125 Wbidg. Blvd. Edk.. MIN 554352555 CEiifiFlGTON LOT SURVEYS COMPANY. INC. Tnaamm MIS Sheet 2 of 4 � I I I , I I I I 1 I N,.uoi I ja - - - -- - - - - - -- R --_,� 8 �;•ss,� ^.- JCL N — _-- -_ - -__ 1e29i- W --- •y;.�- -,may,; - � �.,' _`_`1�: , I LC6END -- wm+rmeq raa� 0 O .- Q Wm Qe ar r,Ya...7r,y,.m�sa SCALE IN FEET o 20 40 fi EXISTING CONDTIONS !FOR Refined, LLC 6125 M&W9e BNd. EdhM h61 55438 -2565 NOTES: Ear.m.,oamror '- (6.gYo. "—o.vlm nr..a ra.a�6llm -R, IrC`Gw`91Lr omaaY P.a..l eaam ea,.am Frlraa �aataulrradNDre 6lllraa Wam an l,ae9,aYN praaamrl ewr.e ar raanran�.a•,m ra rom ati N.mwolelan- ' 0.4 w.W . esms .,>mM e.wrsax.ow. -,u �aDf7®elEakam Y.��?(� wFFW nn 11 Leggpmchption Lm a .a u. eea it Falba i,®� �..,. Nimm EXISTING CONDITIONS ANNABELLE ADDITION For. Refined,LLC 6125 Weaeldge BNd. OWL NN 65436.2565 COMICATION lr eti �m a� w a ar a smr s m.r n.aml a aw IvFYI-�l�tbualml e.., -W,r� wewa asa, r, rma owalmr.w,r.wer�almewwmpps wao.✓n.aFwVPMM. L1waN 1,OrI -. a„ �w 1M Il.Lr YIY ^m•� -i 10T SURVEYS SURYS COMPANY, LNC. IS 9NUET'ORp i0, 1J101NEIEE w eIaQUQYII VAN[ W Ella aNiWOm ar. illltl..aa d _ -- iar IeSiTI ner Tlll Sheet I of 4 I jf I I 4 @I I I � � 981 � I I d- � I I I , I I I I 1 I N,.uoi I ja - - - -- - - - - - -- R --_,� 8 �;•ss,� ^.- JCL N — _-- -_ - -__ 1e29i- W --- •y;.�- -,may,; - � �.,' _`_`1�: , I LC6END -- wm+rmeq raa� 0 O .- Q Wm Qe ar r,Ya...7r,y,.m�sa SCALE IN FEET o 20 40 fi EXISTING CONDTIONS !FOR Refined, LLC 6125 M&W9e BNd. EdhM h61 55438 -2565 NOTES: Ear.m.,oamror '- (6.gYo. "—o.vlm nr..a ra.a�6llm -R, IrC`Gw`91Lr omaaY P.a..l eaam ea,.am Frlraa �aataulrradNDre 6lllraa Wam an l,ae9,aYN praaamrl ewr.e ar raanran�.a•,m ra rom ati N.mwolelan- ' 0.4 w.W . esms .,>mM e.wrsax.ow. -,u �aDf7®elEakam Y.��?(� wFFW nn 11 Leggpmchption Lm a .a u. eea it Falba i,®� �..,. Nimm EXISTING CONDITIONS ANNABELLE ADDITION For. Refined,LLC 6125 Weaeldge BNd. OWL NN 65436.2565 COMICATION lr eti �m a� w a ar a smr s m.r n.aml a aw IvFYI-�l�tbualml e.., -W,r� wewa asa, r, rma owalmr.w,r.wer�almewwmpps wao.✓n.aFwVPMM. L1waN 1,OrI -. a„ �w 1M Il.Lr YIY ^m•� -i 10T SURVEYS SURYS COMPANY, LNC. IS 9NUET'ORp i0, 1J101NEIEE w eIaQUQYII VAN[ W Ella aNiWOm ar. illltl..aa d _ -- iar IeSiTI ner Tlll Sheet I of 4 21 I I a= I JI { 1 a�w 1 I — 1 1 1 w rma Q GOVERMNO SPECWMT10NS ,. rn.lwm.al.,w�or.eaa rata Waf9nfl eesacre< >. T rtb,tl1a,wrm R.daurr r— 1s.a mwvse9rara,.. CONSTRUCTION NOTES ,. caner as.en mreae uuFlm,rorx. Duv.rwmuann 1. 1arAU 1Lf FD,u rrm, ro m,anaalw s morLCrnvnDmnnsnE.srura 1111a wm,llarrwrav�xvm ...FrLn emrlu ouvLw.r ALYOVAL IfBTALL AOOI CO,6twx'ICN ALg]3 Faa sne.crEa ® Gopher Star One Call i �Me GRADING PLAN LQr KEY ses rte+' � lunr so a'•w pym�r�rrm. nrerr. er..la.m LccrND o- as o pa..— wwrwrr..Om,..,r �� ; tred e+rlr rw.e. SCALE IN FEET 0 20 40 fi0 GRADING, DRAINAGE, UTILITY AND TREE PLAN Refined, LLC 6125 WesMP BN& Edina, MN 55036.2565 NOTES: wrarbbls nuorrnn+.FmSla H1fr Frs�ar°numrta.. -a, P.u. a...a w �m n.9a.sar.vo.r. - -w, wdr o.+o w mu, rama.a saaa s.mdz FM Yrd •rrrlltlblsllasa prllrr,l 6s Y,ra vrw tll,siNiplrplflra mwnonl vr.,e err ratl,v.an.r.n•,ao.9A R�, wl Legal Descripti Iooadit RAdA o c�1 NO �O��errYi3;vS- GRADING, DRAINAGE, UTILITY AND TREE PLAN ANNABELLE ADDITION T- Refined, LLC 5125 W.-W9. Blvd. EdMe, MN 5513&2565 cERrlrTUnoN -.mvE .3 OMPAM: 6VC. LAW amlarua >w+ran4vDUEN lalomarr mrw.>$r Sheet 4 at 4 Q I O � Z; I - I I I 1 a I u' �Q I I I I I 1 la 6101, Oaklawn lie. I . No. 6101 . i � ' s93 6 dsn hnk Iene Garage i31. g 30.9 - 89$0 0.5Y,lathdhw B9r.I ``I ` T 693. > I IO i — — i -- e92. n1 .L- j— r r N90 °00'00 "E 133.84 - 692 490.6— — — — — ; block wo on Me fir - j b92.3� .�89� i L i -.B93 6% & 893.4. A 892.6 CD 6 TO 2 +' -:•095•-- -- -_ _ _ a r p BC / /\- \ �� Ace O T u \ /,`\ ! \ metd ® 895.7 rr 1 696.2 .\ . r. O`NlatNaar 696 -. 9- •;j ,.. , 698.6 �. O - _� hr •- \ on `.k 9,6.4 . \ \ QT p �•.� 8,96.8. 89G0 9. O 3 Z 49.5 I -1 -5tory frame S Y ' w � o Garage 894.62 1 V�, , za.o. 696.7 ` ' 0 4ac9° B°°'• N 096.9 v • 695.49 1 696.14 T c 0 n c r e t�dr a10 a 5 k! I T . • I . ' • 32.0. n I f - - - &96.9 N 90 °00'00 ",W 133.81 - -`°4` -- 895.2/ x_34.9 `�ad/cmanhir Sil ' 1 -5tory Frame Garage I 3 No.61 13 P 3 r I I r Ow,rcr: r Damd Kop e N 61 13 OWW-wry Ave. i 1 1 ' I `I � I I I `1- I I �Q I •� I II I o" I �N I t0 Q Q 0 I T T I r3 TI r; �T :I Th 31 I I TI r� I I I r I� 0 0 0 0 N O O 0 r. I l -Story Frame No.6 /Ol Owrk!r-: I Dxnr y Uhrsmmar u 6/O/ OjUwm Ave. No.6 / 13 I Garage I � � g man-/VH/l/ -= 4'7'3 OA 6/ /3 OakWmi Ave. in /o ; I I ;5 I , I 10 I 10 IC I I , P e R I Ubbly E asement L1 I ------------- tz -------------------- -- --------- - - - - -J kn sway h,e oa•toe 23 In N90 °00'00 "E 133.93 Un r------------------------------------- - - - - -- I ;5 I o i I uul I I I Io° I ;� /O ; , LO I I I I I I I I , L---- ��----------------------------------------------- t I in N au-uu -uu" w 13:i.ts I l -Story Frame � No.6 / 13 g e OlHw Dom& Xwpke 6/ /3 OakWmi Ave. O �. `u$ Li_ Q upp3 ..r30 �liic t Q c � N � O s16`G Do .o CD O �. `u$ Li_ Q upp3 ..r30 �liic �O / � X]BW35SV a311U .N 0 nNOiS JNUSIx3 38nionals waols ,cx,z -als NO11031.06d 131N1 i I 'a^V UM4igo E! l9 �0 -4dey �—qa I 3 a6e�e 0/ 19'ON - � � �,, r•�sP�� ,11� awe�� troa,,c- l r . `,„,- - -LS'C£L M".00,00.06 N 9999, o _ - rzs -- — — — — — — — — /=s - ' T al to I MNA/ 17 1S (I Sa I 11 j m ; I M}atll .Ix.I TI! Crtt -xm .90 xdeva lams (WO 'Mw .Vt-/,) M53M 3uu I I i 10 Z O auq 0 a 1O)1ta2136 I i" p "o Fox OU 6=19NUGDG p o �--- - - - --J K3 Oc :� I , ms,µ` apd •96P �n �✓ 1 -7 to , , It CD CD CD oop � 1 iI `� - --- - -•s6P -- J s6P`� q'2� ,.T i j °o CD Ln kn a� m to (z x' — —rf Ln 44 Z6A L� �__ —� — - - -- — ow �} - z6A - ti8'££ L 3.00,0O.O6N /TT' o V l' 16P �W Ys+a sS 0 / o,�.6A I •E6P . I10 aryuoputPON aa'a/iWtmP�11 9'E/6 6OE :rs I I �vgmereo /oi9 1019.ON I g I _•y/) 4arcQ awej 4 kOac -/ 6vE j 0 94,69 - I X I °°d '°r i d C I� F� _ I^ O F3 I, C 30N33 DIS p! Lzx.z aooM WO 'WM) ZOd 01 v D I I I g�� I a� I I I I ar I� I• SCALE: 1"= 100' 6001.600 i60016000 6005:G004 16005- �G00t. _ - _'.... - _6f]li8 �610Q9.;6008 - 600Q:60l2 ;611,3.'6012 6017 6016 • 161117 ,6.0 6021 x6020'9 16.0 020. 60x5 - 6024.0 25.6024. ! 4303 6029,i602IV " 5029 -T 60211- ; CTr OF �iNA, 6033_6032 X6037 603x_ 5037 603 160371$0]6" •6037 6041'60. 0I �6039t— 7+ 6045_¢ ,.4.1 ,6041 6044 � ,6045 _ 6 ST ST W j 6101_'6 00 '6.101 16100 16101X6100 j 6 04 .6ifl5 6104 rb 6104 16 06: 6109_�611W 6 0096108_.gv 12. ;5113.6112. G113.'6ii2.;8 14420 6117 �6116. !6!!T-5120: I :61 0- 6121.6120_ L6121 6121 ll +6125_6124 },61�� =•_ 441 6129j.6120 ;6129 6128 16129 :� r 4141 i6 137 6132 613]. 'G133 16!]6 6137_ nn 1 . 41 to, 41� 6136 613 7 4131 .61411 _ ] :Y14 i I ft425 ��' "'1d0A 61$5 6144 3 2W �� D 62ND 5T W —2�1 x•1!5 �``- X1305 4124 6_205 -. 4301 4213 4125 I 4544 et43t -s etat32 44129 � +130!' +1250' 4243 Y Ld— 419.1 hm Hamim iC-4 Tu momma wwnm w Dapm 6 eelamu,ad Sr 9w D4r d E&m1 E9I Un enpwn In 6•Nm 8W of IN Ury CW' lal Nf V. Imm HmmapN CemlT Hall sa Mep. r..a�n...er R -1 LOTS Wf MN SDD FEET OF PROPOSED ANNNIEL E ADOMON Refined, LLC 6125 W-UWW turd. Ulm MN 55436-2565 NOTES: pnpnr Afbua NW OYan M. E4'M YN 6>IN FsvgSvYV 9fmhtlM- Rlleeq. p...�a uMOset+1 Pnswe4 tuwp hem- W, IeHtle p••oq un�dl �r•a �u.se sm.m: v :.,..9.d.q...ala . s M.9l•W s...9 r.u..m�s+syl.eaPl.w.K..nl Tma w..aa9p.w • 7>� qn wa, AI N A Te0i4 •1'96 q�11 ' ,9_MPUeI.,m,gl F...e,9.aH.m.•,wn IF—Legal De pbon V :V- G� ANNABELLE ADDITION Fw' Refined, LLC 6175 Wesbidge 5ML Edina. MN 554764.555 CEIiTffIGT70N ca.• r/ ,ra LOT SURVEYS COMPANY. INC. mom slnvESTxo rem Tam •v9HlR n. 911pOeLTN PMR 6161eN iNe6prW]psn 191e8]9999v Sheet 3 of 4 f.`3.1�0 molum l73a 16tmv. �. raa64444t�:e�eao,� S.ki CZDME >.. rs •v. aS.Y7�E:E�2d:a H aZII_ Q. KWULR @ {nll E +rl ��7��rtw. ��r=�!i[.'V. *tLiQe'sl v. sSSUaE:astti7� i��a•QT'J.��s��.' —irrl• ��mm .gym EL'J�ElJ•Si2L� �iuusEzu=nart �ers��rt ErE�7ara �c >. r-12 =.rt r a•v �. �J•�2d'� �9[ Tr�•��rtQ S. t �212 Q 0190■ �mLujuLmx=m Qu�s;a.r::.a 2� . .' 1 amsuaEa�Lrsa amium M=;Z=rt SILi�E:Eao er'>• . �ssr��Qara ®. A2AQ �,. , lamugma9fre . 3 Esau N -�° a_ [� �KL92M _rtT x-a>Ta MKIQ.E:ail:8l� �M`�.9..a xE ©rte•,•. a.aacmean.= L N s" •.>.ao•u.. ®o Eru��•• Ld— 419.1 hm Hamim iC-4 Tu momma wwnm w Dapm 6 eelamu,ad Sr 9w D4r d E&m1 E9I Un enpwn In 6•Nm 8W of IN Ury CW' lal Nf V. Imm HmmapN CemlT Hall sa Mep. r..a�n...er R -1 LOTS Wf MN SDD FEET OF PROPOSED ANNNIEL E ADOMON Refined, LLC 6125 W-UWW turd. Ulm MN 55436-2565 NOTES: pnpnr Afbua NW OYan M. E4'M YN 6>IN FsvgSvYV 9fmhtlM- Rlleeq. p...�a uMOset+1 Pnswe4 tuwp hem- W, IeHtle p••oq un�dl �r•a �u.se sm.m: v :.,..9.d.q...ala . s M.9l•W s...9 r.u..m�s+syl.eaPl.w.K..nl Tma w..aa9p.w • 7>� qn wa, AI N A Te0i4 •1'96 q�11 ' ,9_MPUeI.,m,gl F...e,9.aH.m.•,wn IF—Legal De pbon V :V- G� ANNABELLE ADDITION Fw' Refined, LLC 6175 Wesbidge 5ML Edina. MN 554764.555 CEIiTffIGT70N ca.• r/ ,ra LOT SURVEYS COMPANY. INC. mom slnvESTxo rem Tam •v9HlR n. 911pOeLTN PMR 6161eN iNe6prW]psn 191e8]9999v Sheet 3 of 4 This is not a legally recorded map. It represents a compilation of information and data from city, county and other sources. Print Date: Fri Jul 12 08:42:04 200 200 400 Feet S.1 /2 SE. 114 SEC. 19 T.028 R.24 NiSW /19 NISE /19 N /SW/ 0 NINW 29 Eighth /Quarter /Section ,5RI6(NAL aAr S /SW /19 S /SW/ N /NW /F NINE/3 NINW 29 Eighth /Quarter /Section ,5RI6(NAL aAr A14 c9� 11,�,, w � y MEMORANDUM - Plan Review ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT CITY OF EDINA DATE: January 5, 2012 TO: Cary Teague - City Planner FROM: Wayne Houle - Director of Public Works / City Engineer SUBJECT: Annabelle Addition - Preliminary Plat 6109 Oaklawn Avenue Engineering has reviewed the plans for the above stated project and offer the following comments: 1. A Minnehaha Creek Watershed permit will be required. 2. All storm water from the proposed homes, driveways, and westerly half of the lots shall drain to Oaklawn Avenue. All sump pump drains shall drain into the existing sump pump drain tile along Oaklawn Avenue. 3. Any disturbance to the roadway shall be repaired by replacing the asphalt pavement from curb -to -curb and the from saw -cut to saw -cut. 4. Staff recommends that this site incorporate a construction management plan for the construction of the homes. This is the first review of these plans. Staff will require a more detail review of the plans that are submitted for building permits. Please contact me if you have any questions regarding this first review. Thanks Al 5- G:\PWWDMIN \COMM\EXTERNAL \GENERAL CORR BY STREETS \O Streets\6109 Oaklawn Ave\20120105 review of 6109 Oaklawn Avenue.docx Cary Teague Subject: FW: [FWD: Subdivision of Annabelle Addition /6109 Oaklawn] Attachments: image001.png Andy- Thank you for your time on the phone My husband and I are the homeowners at.6117 Oaklawn. We wanted to.voice our approval for the subdivision of the two lots. at 6109 Oaklawn. We and many of.pur neighbors have been doing a lot of renovating and updating on our homes. We would bike to see the neighborhood continue to be revitalized. There is currently a rental house in between us and the Jots you are buying. We would not like to see additional rental homes or any vacated, homes on the block., It is our hope that you plan to build two reasonable sized (50 ft lots) owner occupied homes. We. know of several young couples looking in the area for homes in the Edina school district. Sincerely, Jenny Williams Nelson. Sales 7125 Amundson Ave, Edina; MN 55439 Motion Commission Potts rove approval based on staff findings and subject to staff conditions. Co sioner Platteter seconded the motion. Mr. Brandt pr dented %carr ior building materials board to the Commission. All vot aye; motion 9 -0. 20 11.0015.11a Preliminary Plat Refined LLC 6109 Oaklawn Avenue, Edina, MN Planner Presentation Planner Teague informed the Commission that Refined, LLC is proposing to subdivide the property at 6109 Oaklawn Avenue into two lots. The existing home would be torn down, and two new homes built on the new lots. To accommodate the request the following is required: 1. A subdivision; 2. Lot width variances from 75 feet to 50 feet for each lot; and 3. Lot area variances from 9,000 square feet to 6,699 and 6,693 square feet. Continuing, Teague explained that both lots would gain access off Oaklawn Avenue. Within this neighborhood, the median lot area is 6,701 square feet, median lot depth is 133 feet, and the median lot width is 50 feet. The new lots would meet the median width and depth, but would be just short of the median area. Planner Teague concluded that staff recommends that the City Council approve the proposed two lot subdivision of 6109 Oaklawn Avenue and the lot width variances from 75 feet to 50 feet for each lot, and lot area variances from 9,000 square feet to 6,699 and 6,693 square feet. Approval is based on the following findings: 1. Except for the variances, the proposal meets the required standards and ordinance for a subdivision. 2. The subdivision would meet the neighborhood medians for lot width and depth and nearly meet the median area. 3. The proposal would restore the property back to the form of the. original plat, which included two lots. 4. The proposal meets the required standards for a variance, because: Page 6 of 12 a. There is a unique hardship to the property caused by the existing size of the property which is two times the size of every lot on the block. b. The requested variances are reasonable in the context of the immediate neighborhood. The existing lot is both larger and wider than most properties.in the area, including nearly every lot on the block. The proposed subdivision would result in two lots more characteristic of the neighborhood. C. The proposed lots would be the same size as the lots were originally platted. d. The variances would meet the intent of the ordinance because the proposed lots are of similar size to others in the neighborhood. e. If the variances were denied, the applicant would be denied a use of his property, a 50 -foot wide lot, which is common to the area. In addition, the applicant would be denied a subdivision with variances that has been previously approved by the City in two instances in the last two years. Approval is also subject to the following conditions: 1. The City must approve the final plat within one year of preliminary approval or receive a written application for a time extension or the preliminary approval will be void. 2. Prior to issuance of a building permit, the following items must be submitted: a. Submit evidence of Minnehaha Creek Watershed District approval. The City may require revisions to the preliminary plat to meet the district's requirements. b. A curb -cut permit must be obtained from the Edina engineering department. C. A grading plan subject to review and approval of the city engineer. d. All storm water from the proposed homes, driveways, and westerly half of the lots shall drain to Oaklawn. All sump pump drains shall drain into the existing sump pump drain tile along Oaklawn Avenue. e. Any disturbance to the roadway caused by the construction of the new homes must be repaired by replacing the asphalt pavement from curb -to- curb and from saw -cut to saw -cut. f. A construction management plan will be required for the construction of the new homes. g. Utility hook -ups are subject to review of the city engineer Appearing for the Applicant Andy Porter, Refined, LLC. Discussion Commissioner Scherer asked Planner Teague if two houses were on the Page 7 of 12 lots. Planner Teague responded to the best of his knowledge it's always been one house. Commissioner Staunton asked Planner Teague if he knows when the two lots were consolidated. Teague responded he doesn't know. Applicant Presentation Andy Porter addressed the Commission and explained that the street scape supports the two 50 -foot wide lots, adding he mailed notification letters to property owners within 500 -feet and held a neighborhood meeting. Discussion Commissioner Carpenter noted that the Planning Commission received letters in support of the subdivision and letters against it. Continuing, Carpenter asked if the new houses would be "spec" or custom. Mr. Porter responded that it was his intent to have buyers and construct custom homes for each lot. Porter said he intends to keep the new homes nested into the site. Chair Grabiel opened the public hearing. Public Comment Trudy Landgren, 6104 Brookview Avenue spoke in opposition of the proposed subdivision. Dan Uhrhammer, 6101 Oaklawn Avenue, adjacent neighbor spoke in opposition of the Subdivision. He expressed concern over water run -off and loss of sunlight. Kathy McGuire, 6104 Oaklawn Avenue commented that she doesn't want to see overly large houses built on the lots. Jackie Whitbeck, 6128 Brookview Avenue spoke in opposition to the subdivision and requested that the City consider a moratorium on subdivision /development in the City's small lot neighborhoods. Whitbeck said the large houses that are being built on these smaller lots negatively impact neighborhoods. Janey Westin, 6136 Brookview Avenue, presented an aerial of the. neighborhood and pointed out the large Oak trees found in this area; and on this lot. Westin said she doesn't want to see trees lost or damaged as a result of the proposed subdivision. Westin noted that at this time the Energy and Environment Commission was working on developing a tree ordinance. Westin said she agrees with the suggestion made by Ms. Whitbeck that the City Council considers a moratorium on subdivision /development on all residential lots under 75 -feet in width. Dick Whitbeck, 6128 Brookview Avenue, asked when the City would put its residents first. Page 8of12 Chair Grabiel asked if there was anyone else that would like to speak to the issue; being none Commissioner Scherer moved to close the public hearing. Commissioner Carpenter seconded the motion. All voted aye; public hearing closed. Discussion A discussion ensued with Commissioners acknowledging that the 75 -foot lot width requirement was city wide; however questioned how it's handled with regard to subdivisions. Planner Teague explained that the subdivision ordinance requires that lot width, depth and lot area be calculated for all single dwellings that fall within 500 feet of the perimeter of the property. The lots are required to meet the mean; however, these lots must still meet the minimum ordinance requirements for lot width, depth and lot to perimeter ratio. Continuing, Teague pointed out these lots do not comply with that standard therefore variances are required. Teague explained that the subdivision ordinance was drafted to ensure an orderly redevelopment of Edina's large lot neighborhoods. The discussion continued on if it was better for the neighborhood that the lot was redeveloped as one 100 -foot lot with the property owner building one very large house on the lot instead of two houses on two 50 -foot wide lots. Further discussion continued on character definition and if what's there now is the neighborhood character. Commissioner Fischer said with regard to small lot neighborhoods that the City has had the same conversation over and over again; which to him indicates that the the ordinance needs to be addressed. Fischer said the key issue began when the City changed the minimum lot width requirement to 75 -feet. This change was a blanket change and created consequences for those with smaller lots. Continuing, Fischer gave an example: the Zoning Board of Appeals wrestled for years with a "newer" 12- foot driveway width requirement. This change placed a majority of driveways in the City's smaller lot neighborhoods into non - compliance; therefore in certain instances variances were required. Over the years the Zoning Board heard and granted multiple driveway width variances based on hardship. In many instances it just didn't make sense to require a 12 -foot wide driveway on a 40 or 50 -foot lot. Fischer reported that the 12 -foot driveway width was recently amended and now residents can proceed without the need for a variance. Fischer added that in his opinion it may be time for the Commission to reevaluate the subdivision and zoning ordinances as they relate to lot width, depth and area. Fischer pointed out a "goal" of the Comprehensive Plan was to establish "character districts" and to protect the "character "of those districts. The Commission has continued to struggle with the one size fits all. Fischer reiterated that the Commission should take another look at the City's Ordinance as it relates to subdivision and redevelopment standards (setbacks) especially of the small lots. Chair Grabiel said he recalls past subdivisions where the Commission placed specific Page 9 of 12 conditions on redevelopment. Grabiel asked Planner Teague if the Commission could place conditions of approval of the proposed subdivision. Planner Teague responded in the affirmative. Commissioner Fischer acknowledged that in the past both the Commission and the Council supported similar subdivisions within this neighborhood and questioned if there was a difference between this request and the previous requests? Planner Teague responded that the previous subdivision requests had little to no opposition. Commissioner Forrest acknowledged past approvals; however, pointed out that each request needs to be viewed individually and on its own merits. Commissioner Forrest said one concern she has was if approved the two new homes would be too expensive. Forrest pointed out the Comprehensive Plan indicates that the City support the creation of affordable housing, adding she doesn't believe the new houses would be considered "affordable ". Commissioner Scherer said she agrees with the comments from Commissioner Fischer that in the past the Commission has had similar discussions on the subdivision process; however, she believes its reasonable for Edina's residents to rely on the City's ordinances. Scherer stated she agrees that future discussions need to occur but at this time she cannot support the subdivision request as presented. Commissioner Staunton said the discussion has been good; however, at this time the application needs to be reviewed under the present ordinances. Staunton noted that at this time there is no ordinance that would prohibit tress from being cut down on this lot or any lot. Staunton said he was persuaded to support the request by viewing the map that captured the 500 -foot neighborhood. He said he observed that the large majority of lots within that 500 -foot neighborhood were 50 -feet, adding that in his opinion the variances are justified. Continuing, Staunton said he was pleased (if approved) that according to Mr. Porter that the new houses would not be spec but custom. Commissioner Forrest said the process still requires that specific criteria be met, adding trees can be considered during the decision making process and the Comprehensive Plan can be another tool. Commissioner Staunton agreed that the Comprehensive Plan is a good "tool" to use during the review process. Staunton said he feels comfortable that maintaining the two 50 -foot wide lots was the correct thing to do, adding it supports the continued viability and maintenance of Edina's. unique "character districts ". Chair Grabiel said another goal was to maintain consistency and this subdivision supports the preservation of the 50 -foot wide lot neighborhoods. Commissioner Carpenter pointed out that property owners of 50 -foot wide lots can get a demolitions permit tomorrow and tear down their existing house and build a new Page 10 of 12 house without review or comment. Carpenter said he sympathizes with the situation but believes maintaining the original plat makes sense. Commissioner Scherer stated the job of the Commission is what's before us this evening. We can't speculate on what someone might do with their house /lot in the future. Commissioner Forrest reiterated the Commission can place conditions on approval. Building height can be addressed and so can the trees. Forrest said it is important to ensure that any new house matches the neighborhood character. Commissioner Staunton said this type of conversation is difficult; adding he supports the request as submitted. Motion Commissioner Staunton moved to recommend subdivision approval with variances based on staff findings and subject to staff conditions. Commissioner Carpenter seconded the motion. Ayes; Potts, Platteter, Carpenter, Staunton, Fischer, Grabiel. Nays; Scherer, Forrest, Schroeder. Motion carried 6 -3. 20111-0017.11a Planner Presentation Division ies Zavoral Nighwood Drive nd 6000 Pine Grove Planner Teague informed the Commission existing lot lines that divide his property at Pine Grove Road. dina James Zavoral is requesting to shift the LHighwood Drive, from 6008 and 6000 Teague explained that t/rainage lot being cre ed with the request, it is simply a shift in the rear lot lines he adjacent pr erty owners. The 6000 Pine Grove Road lot would gand on Mirror La . The 5239 Highwood Drive lot would no longer own pr Mirror Lake, but uld retain a private easement for access to the lake. Tnd utility easement acent to Mirror Lake would remain . Planner Teague co uded that staff recommends that the City ouncil approve the Lot Division of 5239 hwood Drive, 6008 Pine Grove Road and 60 Pine Grove Road based on the f wing findings: Page 11 of 12 PETERSEN, PLC A LAW PRACTICE January 24, 2012 VIA EMAIL AND U.S. MAIL Ms. Cary Teague Planner - City of Edina 4801 West 50`I' Street Edina, MN 55424 Re: 6109 Oakla.wn Avenue, Edina., l INT 55424 Dear Ms. Teague: This office represents Sawbill Strategic, Inc. ( "SSI "). I also am a, principal of SSI. It has recently come to our attention that Refined, LLC and potentially the prior owner have submitted an application to subdivide the property at 6109 Oaklawn Avenue, Edina. Each party in title must consent to and join in any proposed subdivision of property. SSI acquired title to the subject property at the foreclosure sale thereof held on November 17, 2011. While the prior owner maintains possessory and redemption rights with regard to the property, SSI acquired title and a vested ownership interest in the property at the foreclosure sale. This interest can be` divested only through the owner's redemption, which has not occurred. See Harbal v. Fed. Land Bank of St. Paul, 449 NW2d 442 (Minn.App. 1989); Tinkcam v. Lewis, 2t'Minn. 122 (1874); Bradley v. Bradley, 554 N.W.2d 761, 764 (Minn. App. 1996). SSI may divide this property in the future. However, SSI objects to the current proposed variance request and subdivision artd demands that the City of Edina refrain from acting on the applications at this time. You indicated that the applications are before the Council on February 6, 2012. I ask that you let me know whether this matter will stay on the agenda in advance of that meeting. I have attached a 'copy of the Sheriff Certificate of Sale and Foreclosure Record 'from the foreclosure sale referenced above. Z. SHERIFF'S CERTIFICATE OF SALE AND FORECLOSURE RECORD SHERIFF'S CERTIFICA'T'E OF SALE STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF HENNEPIN 1, Richard W. Stanek, Sheriff of the County of Hennepin, State of Minnesota, do hereby certify that pursuant to the printed Notice of Foreclosure sale hereto attached and the power of sale contained in the following described mortgage: DATE OF MORTGAGE: September 05, 2003 ORIGINAL PRINCIPAL AMOUNT OF MORTGAGE: $164,000.00 MORTGAGOR(S): John G. Bohlander and Margaret M. Bohlander, Husband and Wife MORTGAGEE: Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems, Inc,, as nominee for Provident Funding Associates, L.P., its successors and assigns DATE AND PLACE OF RECORDING: Recorded: October 10, 2003 Hennepin County Recorder Document Number: 8191511 ASSIGNMENTS OF MORTGAGE: And assigned to: Provident Funding Associates, L.P. Dated: December 29, 2008 Recorded: January 23, 2009 Hennepin County Recorder Document Number: A9310383 And assigned to: Deutsche Bank Trust Company Americas as Trustee, BALI, 2003 -QS22, 12/30/2003, 4776 Dated: September 29, 2011 Recorded: October 04, 2011 Hennepin County Recorder Document Number: A9699113 Transaction Agent: Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems, Inc. Transaction Agent Mortgage Identification Number: 100017935130800366 Lender or Broker: Provident Funding Associates, L.P. Residential Mortgage Servicer: Provident Funding Associates, L.P. Mortgage Originator: Not Applicable COUNTY IN WHICH PROPERTY IS LOCATED: Hennepin Property Address: 6109 Oaklawn Ave So., Edina, MN 55424 -1925 Tax Parcel ID Number: 19- 028 -24 -43 -0105 I did, at the time and place in said notice specified: DATE AND TIME OF SALE: 11/17/2011 10:00 AM t�ct PLACE OF SALE: Hennepin County Sheriffs Office, Civil Division, Room 30, Courthouse, 350 South 5th Street, Minneapolis, Minnesota offer for sale and sell at public auction to the highest bidder and best bidder, the tract of land described as follows, to wit: Lot 22 and 23, Block 23, "Fairfax, Hennepin County, Minnesota." and did strike off and sell the same to: Sawbill Strategic, Inc. for the sum of: $ 170,637.77 said purchaser being the highest bidder and said sum being the highest and best bid offered therefore and that said sale was in all respects openly, honestly, fairly, and lawfully conducted, and the time allowed for redemption by the mortgagor(s), their personal representatives or assigns is six (6) months fiom the date of said sale. Interest rate on the date of sale: 5.625% IN TESTIMONY WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand on 11/17/2011. STATE OF MINNESOTA Richard W. Stanek Goo I?eputy COUNTY OFHennepin ' Sgt. Dave Berens On 11/17/2011, before me personally appeared #368 , known to be the C4 I't Sheriff of said County, and the person described in and-who executed the foregoing instru ent, and acknowledged that he she executed the same as(gher free act and deed as such L' P (AT Y Sheriff. TODD BRIAN CONNORS Notary Public- Minnesota My Commission Explros Jan 31. 2014 AFFIDAVIT OF MILITARY STATUS STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF WASHINGTON Lawrence A. Wilford/James A. Geske/Eric D. Cook/Christina M. Weber /Caitlin R. Dowling/Michael R. Sauer/Robert Q. Williams/David R. Mortensen/Orin J. Kipp, being first duly sworn on oath says that he/she knows the facts relating to the military status of John G. Bohlander and Margaret M. Bohlander owners) of the mortgaged premises described in the foregoing Sheriffs Certificate of mortgage foreclosure sale thereof, that . said person(s) was not in the military or naval service of the United States at the time of said sale, or during the nine (9) months preceding such sale, as appears from facts known at the time of the sale. Thonus J. CampbA ROL I ger N. Knutson Thomas N1. Scott Elliott B. Knetsch Joel .1.1.1aninih Andrca McDowell flochicr S01'ell NI. Mallick john F. KAN. A. SA"A'L-r, Ah"I sch"val'17 1I.1 III it L! N1nrL'LI•r;iu' N1. McCarron ;XC, Corporalc Cemcr Curvc ')Ij'l I C 317 • j:.j,,.jjj. N1 IN 35 121 Fas 1) 5 1 - 45 55; CAMPBELL 4J TS Professional Association Direct Dial: (651)234 -6215 E -mail Address: rknutson@ck-law-com January 31, 2012 Mr. Mark A. Petersen Petersen, PLC 228 East Chestnut Street, Suite 3 Stillwater, Minnesota 55082 RE: 6109 Oaklawn Avenue, Edina, Minnesota Dear Mr. Petersen: Your January 24, 2012 letter to Cary Teague has been referred to me. I am the Edina City Attorney. If the City refrained from - acting upon the applications they would be deemed approved by operation of law, Minn. Stat. §§ 15.99 and 462.358, Subd. 3B. A plat requires the signature of all owners of record and without the signatures it cannot be filed, Minn. Stat. § 505.021. Subd 3. Regards, Jackie Hoogenakker From: DUHRHAMMER1 @comcast.net Sent: Saturday, January 28, 2012 5:26 PM To: Jackie Hoogenakker Subject: Fwd: Moratorium on developement of 50 foot lots Attachments: A little over Twenty years ago I was considering buying the property at 6101 Oaklawn.docx From: DUHRHAMMER1 CcD__comcast.net To: EdinamailR- ci.edina.mmus Sent: Tuesday, January 17, 2012 5:35:52 PM Subject: Moratorium on developement of 50 foot lots Dear Council Members and Planning Department members: I am writing in support of placing a moratorium on the development of sub -code sized lots. Namely 50 foot lots which are being developed all over our neighborhood. My Name is Dan Uhrhammer, I own and more importantly, reside at 6101 Oaklawn Ave, Edina. My property is located adjacent to 6109 Oaklawn Ave. which was approved by the Planning committee for subdivision. I'm not going to get long winded on the effects this subdivision will have on me. Since although I, and my neighbors pleaded our case to the Planning committee, it was passed because, as stated by a member of the committee, the area is predominately 50 foot lots, so 50 feet is OK. Even though the City saw differently in the early 1950s, and as recently as the summer of 2010. The city. of Edina apparently regarded these "double lots" with a single residence not appropriate for seperation in our neighborhood. Because when the city did the street and utilities improvement here, no utility stubs where installed to serve these "lots ". Some current members of the committee saw no reason for a variance as no hardship existed. Yet it passed because 50 feet is ok. My reason for concern, outside of the cities abrupt change as to minimum required lot size. Is what the city allows to be built on this sites. The structures are far to over -sized and take up most of the city allowed building pads. This includes only a 5 foot side yard set back. This set back does not include the overhang which in many cases sticks back over the 5 foot set back by as much as 1 1/2 feet. This with the fact that the Facia height can be as tall as I believe 23 feet, can greatly limit the amount of sun light an existing home receives. More importantly is the potential water drainage issues. These new homes limit the amount of available land scape area for absorption of water run off. The square area of roof on these homes collect enormous amounts of water. This, along with the before mentioned height, and limited side yard set back; drop a tremendous amount of uncontrolled water between the new and existing home with less then 8 feet (including the 1 1/2 foot return of the soffit) of side yard between the properties. Most of us with older homes in this area deal with water run off the same way, by grading our yards away from our homes, which works very well. This increase in water volume, and the fact the new home will set a new yard grade in their favor, pose huge potential for water problems in the existing older homes basements. I seriously doubt any developer, new property owner, or the city will consider this their problem or pay for repairs and damages. If gutters are required to collect this water, it still must be dumped somewhere. Given the limited size of the new homes yard, even i1 it is dumped on their property it won't be absorbed fast enough by the available lawn, and the water run off will be the neighbors to deal with again because the new properties grade will be set in its favor again. Also, no one has thought of how these properties will be maintained by the new owner. There so close to the property side yard set back, and so tall there is no way for the owner to maintain his homes exterior, or clean his gutters if installed. His only access " if using a ladder" is to place it in the neighbors yard. This may sound all right, until he falls. A twisted ankle, no big deal. A broken neck or back, given our societies current trend, is a law suit, a gian# problem. So do we risk it so the neighbor can get the job done. Or, tell him to leave our lawns and post them. It doesn't make for good neighbors or neighborhoods. Also where do their children play? Apparently on the neighbors yard to. These are only a few of the issues those of us who live here think about, and can get no answers to. I think it is time to stop this process of 50 foot yard development until the city has some answers, and some standards that work on these lots. It's not as clear cut as the city and planning committee think. One of the planning committee members asked the other members why, when these subdivision come up there is so much Resistances to them by the neighbors. IT'S BECAUSE OF WHAT THE CITY IS MAKING US LIVE WITH. I'm a believer that a property owner should be able to do with his property as he likes, but only to the point where it doesn't effect those around him to any great degree. And the Developers, just doing what they do to the limit the city allows. This issue is yours to deal with. Please do it now, it's time Sincerely, Dan Uhrhammer 6101 Oaklawn Ave. Edina, MN RIECEWED FEB 0 1202 Dear Council Members: In 19911 was considering buying the property at 6101Oaklawn. The house and property were a disaster. By today's standards it would have been a scrape. It was.in far worst condition at that time. Then the existing Bolander home at 6109 Oaklawn Ave. andproperty are now. Besides my concern about the'condition of the house, and the time and money it would take to bring it back into shape. I was concerned about the circumstances surrounding the empty lot between.the Bolander house and 6101. I knew it was owned' by the Bolander Family, and I was concerned that it would be available for development if the Bolander or next owners choose to do so. Given the condition of the property at.6101.' 1f the possibility of an additional home is squeezed in on the empty lot existed. I would have walked away, and not purchased 6101. But I didn't. Why? Because I was informed by the Real estate Agent representing 6101 that it was not possible to develop the vacant lot. The city required 75 feet as a lot size, and they would not allow a new home to be built on the 50 foot lot. Also the Bolander home had intentionally been placed over the lot line to prevent the sale of the lot, and it was set back in the lot to preserve the trees in the front yard. Being a pessimist about what I hear from someone trying to sell me something. I went to the city to confirm this information. I was assured by the city of Edina, the information was correct. Edina required 75 feet for a lot, and the house did and does sit .over the property line. So it could not hold another home. With that information in hand. And the. fact that the, basic design of the 6101 home offered large, and numerous windows throughout. With those facing south offering abundant sun light, along with open views of the property, and neighborhood from the daily, living spaces of the home. I bought the property, and committed to the neighborhood. - Twenty years later, I find myself defending my significant investment in my home, and neighborhood. Why? Because someone who. has no ties to, or interest in this neighborhood wishes to separate the property at 6109 into two lots, and construct a home on each section. Homes, that as described by the potential developer, will be significantly larger in footprint and size then those that exist in the neighborhood. Homes that would take up the majority of the building pads on these lots. Homes moved forward to the front yard setback, (resulting in the removal of the existing mature - oaks), built to the 5. foot setback at the side.property lines (not including the overha.ngs), and that will run to the limit line of the backyards. Not only would these homes take up most of the actual lot area, they would be significantly, taller. than the existing homes.in the neighborhood. The personal price. I would pay for this subdivision, when a new home is.built on the north lot. The lot closest to my property. If it's built as described by Andy Porter of Refined LLC. The new home would have a price point of $800,000.00, and be 12 feet from my'home:on the south side. It would run along the side of the property line, 5 feet from my fence, past the back of my home, and continue the length of my backyard to the limit line. The front of the home would set 3 feet closer to the street then the front corner of my home, and it would stand much taller than the 21 feet of my home. And before I forget to mention it. Out of the 50 available feet of front yard from property line to property line, almost half would be concrete driveway and walk. All this at the expense of existing yards, trees, and open space. This north lot also slopes to my property, and the building of these homes would greatly reduce the amount of lawn and landscape area which currently absorbs rain, and snow melt. This would lead to significant increases in amount of water run off to my property, and the property located directly east of mine who already deals the with the surrounding lots run off flowing across their driveway, and deal with water issues in their basement already. These lots are south of my property. If this subdivision is approved and these homes are allowed to be built as described. My entire southern exposure is gone. No sun light or views from any of my south facing windows other than siding, or shingles. The front corner of the new home would be visible in my living room picture window which faces west, the views for the east window in the kitchen, and my dining room patio door would include the side of the new house running along my property. And my back yard would become a fish bowl if the houses are anything like the Fairfax and 59th home. Which Andy Porter of Refined LLC said was similar to what would be built on these lots. It has a family room with windowed walls on all sides, extending into the back yard along the property line. The view form from these windows is over 6 feet, so no city approved fence can block it. This would also be true for the Kapkes home at Oaklawn on the south side of the Bolander property; and all homes south of that. I'm asking you to do this neighborhood and the people who reside it a favor, and reject this subdivision. This request serves no one, other than the developer who brought it to you. The Bolander property is sound, and fully capable of being remodeled, and added on to if the new owner wishes. Even a new single home on the site is a better option. And following this path would preserve, and improve the neighborhood as it currently exists. No one's property valve in a neighborhood increases by the removal of a good home. Along with the dismantling of the property it sits on, just to add small lots with homes like those being suggested. Values increase when the residences take care, and improve their existing homes, properties, and protect the positive aesthetics of their neighborhood. Please vote no on this subdivision. Thank You. Sincerely: Dan Uhrhammer, Owner and Occupant of 6101 Oaklawn Ave. Edina, MN 1 TAX, FEB � -- �r rrrr Jackie Hoogenakker From: Joe Clay <marian joe @msn.com> Sent: Saturday, January 28, 2012 1:35 PM To: Jackie Hoogenakker Subject: Lot Subdivision Dear City of Edina Planning Department, I oppose the dividing of the lot at 6109 Oaklawn Ave, just as I oppose the dividing the property across the street from my house. I live at 6117 Brookview Ave, Edina. The ugly house (resembles a warehouse) now at 6120 Brookview Ave is the result of doing damage to the community by the efforts to divide the lot. Large oaks trees were felled to as the builder sought to divide the lot. What would happened to the oaks on the property at 6109 Oaklawn now? Will they be slaughtered & burned as brush wood? Another reason to oppose the subdivision is the increase of traffic, should two dwellings be built on this tiny lot. Your Truly, Joseph P Clay 6117 Brookview Ave. South, Edina, MN 1/28/2012 HECEO V ED FEB o 12012 To: Edina City Council Planning Dept - - -- - -- RE: 6109 Oaklawn lot subdivision and variance If you are going to make the decision to make an exception to the minimum 75 ft lot width based on the fact that the lots in our immediate neighborhood are only 50 ft wide then you should limit the size of both of the houses that would be built there to not more than a 1000 -1200 sq ft footprint and not more than a story and a half. In this way, the houses would conform to the rest of the properties in our neighborhood. In this way you would be protecting the original neighborhood plan and would meet your obligation of preserving and protecting the citizens who live here. You should also consider the following: 1) JMS has built 3 houses (2 on Oaklawn and 1 on Brookview) that do not conform to the sizes indicated above and only 1 of the 3 appears to have actually sold, as JMS is currently actively marketing two of them. Not surprisingly the ugly house on Brookview and the vastly oversized house on Oaklawn. 2) This is not a neighborhood where people have bought homes and put substantial additions onto those homes. In fact, I don't recall seeing anyone around here adding much more than a 4- season porch or bumping out a dormer on an upper level. Country Club (where my parents live) is a different story. For many years people have either added on a whole other house to double their square footage or torn the house down and built a house twice the size. The house JMS built on Bruce fits into the Country Club neighborhood nicely in design and size and, therefore, they were able to sell it fairly quickly. Just the opposite of the other over -sized houses that were built here. 3) If I were to ask for a variance to build an addition on my house, you would be concerned about how it would affect my neighbors. Curiously, this doesn't seem to be a big concern with the subdivision of this property. Several homeowners living adjacent to this property have raised concerns about how it would impact their enjoyment of their property. These concerns included the following: a) Because the lot on Brookview slopes downward from the Oaklawn property any house with substantial height (i.e. over 1 story) is going to tower over the Brookview property and block the sun from the west. b) The drainage of under ground waters is also a concern because of the soils retaining a lot of moisture. The neighbor to the north may have water problems if two houses are built on the property and, if the houses are over sized (greater than the 1000 —1200 sq ft foot print and more than 1 %: stories) then this could cause a significant increase in the water in the ground. It should be required that an engineer be picked by the city and paid for by the builder to determine how to avoid this problem. The builder should also be required to set aside funds for any future need to make repairs on this property if there is a problem. (In other words, let's not wait until it becomes a lawsuit.) c) There are several mature trees that will have to be cut down in order to divide this lot. Apparently the city of Edina does not have a requirement to replace these trees or even to preserve as many as possible. So we build a new city hall that we are supposedly very proud of because of its energy efficiency and "green" attributes and we don't care about the most environmentally friendly thing to do, save the trees. That really doesn't make one bit of common sense! Have you been here during this winter? Does this lack of substantial snow, warm weather in winter and 100 degree temperatures in the summer not make you think about global warming? How difficult can it be? I review condominium project legal documents for a living and many times they require specific drainage requirements and if trees are removed, an obligation to replace them with like quality and of a substantial size. This is Edina and we should be at least this progressive. 4) Before you make your decision you should also consider why the people live in this neighborhood because it is your duty to protect the homes of all the people in Edina, not just those who live in Country Club. It is definitely NOT your job to provide an income for a builder or anyone else speculating in this city! Here are some of the reasons we live here: M a) We want our children to go to school in Edina. b) We want to live in a safe neighborhood. c) We want to live within a reasonable distance to our work. d) We don't want to live in an apartment or condominium and this is what we can afford. e) Some of us garden, some of us want a backyard for our children to safely play or our dogs to run around in or just to have a barbeque or a private moment to enjoy nature. If you allow "McMansions" to be built on Oaklawn then you take away reason "e" above for most of us and you start to erode "d." Our quality of life goes down because we can no longer enjoy what we originally thought we had purchased. I garden and I know from experience that a McMansion on the south side of my house will create a vastly different environment in my backyard than exists today. It will make it hot and will create stagnant air that will cause a lot of problems for many plants and trees. How do I know this? I had to put up a 6 ft privacy fence to protect my dogs from the dogs of a renter behind me. If I had to do it over again I would put up the same fence on the back but a more open fence on the south side. The result has been some very dry areas on the south side that were formerly not dry. A two -story huge house would make it a waste of time and money to even try to garden in the backyard. 5) The reason you must restrict the building size and design is that the average person who doesn't know any better might be conned by a good sales job to build something that does not fit into the neighborhood because they are only looking at what they can get. This is what caused the mortgage business to be able to get people to obtain mortgages that in the long run they were never going to be able to sustain if any little thing went wrong in their lives. They looked at what they could get and not whether or not they could really afford it. In conclusion: You have no basis to allow these over sized houses to be built other than the greed of gaining additional tax dollars. There are some people who may be ok with this because they see their property values may go up but these people are forgetting that after they "cash -in" on this money, that there is another group of people in our income bracket that will now not be able to afford to live in Edina. This argument should not be about financial gain for the city or for a few individuals. If it is, then it is short sited and selfish and you might as well make it a law that you have to earn over $250,000 per year to live here because Edina is going to get rid of all of the housing that those who earn less can afford. Your decision should be based on what is best for this neighborhood's quality of life. Is this neighborhood viable? Obviously it is as the neighborhood displays "pride of ownership." There is no logical reason to allow a builder to build houses that do not fit in with the original housing sizes in this area. It serves no purpose. If you do elect to go ahead with this subdivision without putting the previously mentioned restrictions I would greatly appreciate it if you would send me and everyone else a detailed explanation of why you think it will benefit us, the people who live here and plan on living here for a long time. If you can't answer that question then you have not fulfilled your duty. Sincerely, Kathy McGuire 6104 Oaklawn Avenue Edina graduate 1972 Homeowner & taxpayer for about 25 years To: Edina City Council Feb. 1, 2012 Edina Planning Dept. Edina City Manager Regarding variance request for proposed subdivision of 6109 Oaklawn Ave, Block 23, Fairfax. This would divide a 100' wide lot of 13.300 sq, ft., into two lots of 50' width and 6650 sq. ft.. Variance request applied for by Refined, LLC. Property owner: John Bolander. We are strongly opposed to this proposed property subdivision. According to Edina City Code 81.4.11 Guidelines and Criteria for Evaluating Plats and Subdivisions, Subd. 2 Lot Dimensions: A. Tlae minimum lot area,...sh.all be the greater of 9,000 sq. ft., or the median lot area of lots in the neighborhood. Division does not meet this criteria. B. The minimum lot width,...Shall be the greater of`75 feet, or the median width of lots in the neighborhood. Division does not meet this criteria. Subd. 1 Considerations: A. Suitability of size...of lots in the proposed subdivision relative to the size ... of lots in the neighborhood. Within a 350 A circle of said lot, 25% are of a lot width greater than 50 ft. B. Impact of the proposed subdivision and proposed development on the environment, including ... vegetation.... Four mature oak trees would be removed. Andy Porter specifically stated that he, 'Will not save the trees,'vr even attempt to. The oaks are old growth trees that are a vital part of our neighborhood environment, giving us f es•h air, lower cooling bills in the summer, ca break front wind and fi-eeway noise, and wildlife habitat. They help keep our area healthier. Think back to when whole city blocky lost all of their elms to disease. C. The consistency of the proposed subdivision and development... with the goals of the Comprehensive Plan. The Comprehensive Plan calls for more 'affordable housing'. Andy Porter told the neighbors the fteture houses tit+nuld be in the X700,000 to $800,000 price range. Reined UC'.s history of homes built since 2009 does not reflect any prices lower than this. Some have sold for $1,O91,531 (in 2011) and $1, 030,000 (in 2011). This is not 'affordable housing' in ar ljwne `.s book. M. Whether the proposed subdivision...are likely to cause substantial environmental damage. The proposal removes the trees. They are substantial. The neighbors to the north and east will be dealing with additional runo9firom hard surf aces and snow melt on driveways. 810.45 Variances. Subd. i Grant by Council A grant of a variance by the Council shall be deemed to include a. favorable finding on each of the variance grounds... A. The hardship (practical difficulty) is not a mere inconvenience, Refined t LC.' can easily add on to, or remodel the existing hawse, or build asingle house on the existing lot. FEB 0 1 2012 B. The hardship (practical difficulty) is due to the particular physical surroundings, shape or topography of the land; ?here are no hardships in this category; C The conditions upon which the request for a variance is based are unique to the property being subdivided and not generally applicable to other property; 25% of Properties within 350 feet are greater. than 50 feet wide. U. The hardship (practical difficulty) is caused by this Section and not by the applicant; This is u self imposed hardship. F. The variance, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the land within the subdivision or in the neighborhood. The essential character of this neighborhood is single story to 1 � story modest homes of roughly .1, 200 sri. feet in footprint on the lot. Refined LLC does not build houses of't ris size. At the Planning Commission meeting, Andy Porter changed 'his tune' saying that now, he doesn't know what will. be built. How can this subdivision be approved when what will be built is not even known? This sounds like another'shell game. Jane), Westin and Charlie Hughes 6136 Brookview Ave. Edina MN 55424 C %%J ED 1~EB 0 1 2412 Jackie Hooqenakker From: Lynn Wallin <Iwallin @skypoint.com> Sent: Thursday, February 02, 2012 9:12 AM To: Jackie Hoogenakker Subject: Lot Subdivision on 6100 block of Oaklawn am completely against the subdivision of the lot on the 6100 block of Oakl,awn. Squeezing in more houses damages the values of the other properties in the immediate area. My understanding is that currently in Edina a lot is to be at least 75 feet wide for new construction so I can't see why dividing a.100 foot lotto squeeze in two monstrous homes in an area of smallish homes makes any sense'.; The house at 6120 Brookview is such a monstros.ity...'Built at the edge of the lot, despite not receiving permission to split the lot, built too close to the street and ' probably to the lot line,, it doesn't fit into the area and consequently hasn't sold. The same house, had it been built centered on the lot preserving the beautiful old growth oak tree that was removed, `would have quite likely sold very quickly as it would have fit into the neighborhood and the space. Instead, there it sits, vacant, and with a scraggly "side lot" that isn't cared for in the way the other homes'on.the block are cared for. I do not think the lot on Oaklawn should be split and hope that you decide the same. Lynn Wallin 4213 West 62nd Street Edina, MN 55424 952 - 925 -9225 Iwallin skypoint.com 1 02/03/2012 09:00 9529431975 BURLEY FOODS PAGE 01/01 T February 3"', 2012 City of Edina Planning Department Case File- 2011.0015.11a Subdivision and Variance of 6109 Oaklawn Ave .I am writing to express my approval liar the subdivision and variance of the lot(s) located at 6109 Oaklawn Ave. I am a homeowner residing at 6117 Oaklawn Ave. As I understand, the builder's plan for the two 50 ft. lots will be two custom built homes. These homes could be in the $700,000 range. The cost for the lots in our neighborhood is approximately $150,000. Some of my neighbors feel the homes should be in keeping with the $200 - 300,000 value of the neighborhood homes. Looking at this simple math, it.is not possible to build a home on one of the.lots for a value of $200 - 300,000. The homes along Oaklawn are approaching 60 years in age. We and many others on Oaklawn Avenue, as evidenced by the number of workmen and dumpsters, have recently invested in the improvement, update and revitalization of our properties. Investment in some of the older properties is not feasible or practical. I hope and am pleased that part of the interest and revitalization in our neighborhood could include new homes. I do not see any severe or practical negative impact on our home as a neighbor on Oaklawn Avenue, only positive progress. Progress may need -to include new tree plantings to replace the mature trees nearing the end of their healthiest He cycle. The negative impact of failure to approve the subdivision- Directly behind.our home, is the empty lot located adjacent to the 1MS home built at 615` and Brookview. This empty lot is a result of a subdivision that was denied for the building of two homes. We are. left with the negative impact of an unkempt empty lot, weed filled with lot stakes and black plastic bordering our backyard. We hope this situation is rectified soon with the placement of a new home also. Sincerely, x nnifer Williams Nelson P 6117 Oaklawn Ave PO Edina, Mn 55424 `� Miroslava ( Mickie) Turk 6141 Brookview Avenue Edina, MN 55424 mturk Qisd.net 952- 925 -2352 February 2, 2012 Dear City Council Members, I am strongly objecting to a proposed subdivision of the property of 6109 Oaklawn Avenue by Refined LLC (Limited Liability Corporation). It is currently a 100 -foot wide lot with four beautiful mature oak trees in front of the existing house. A couple of years ago, JMS LLC bought nearby 6120 Brookview Avenue, and tried to subdivide the 100 -foot lot. He was unsuccessful. But before that, in anticipating a ruling in his favor, JMS built a gigantic and ugly house on the south side, effectively destroying the view of the park for the Whitbecks, who own the historic and oldest home in Edina, next door. Since then, the people who own modest, older houses on the two sides of the street of Brookview Avenue, have had to live with an eye sore that has neither sold, nor contributed to the worth of the neighborhood in any way. Edina's minimum lot width as stated in the city code, is 75 feet. Please do not grant Refined LLC a variation on this sound and principled code, as it will forever change the appearance and unity of the neighborhood, while destroying mature oaks, and causing hardship for nearby homeowners who will have to start living smashed in, between out - of -place houses. A builder stands to gain only monetarily and only in the short term. He or she will not actually live in the neighborhood. But the entire neighborhood will suffer damage for a long time to come. People will lose their unobstructed view of the street and trees, and the ability to live harmoniously and in privacy next door to others in houses of similar structure and size. On the economic side, the smaller houses will continue to lose value forcing middle class folks to move away from Edina where they have nearby employment and their children are enrolled in school. Respectfully, Mickie Turk RECfEWED FEB 0 2 2012 Miroslava ( Mickie) Turk 6141 Brookview Avenue Edina, MN 55424 mturkgisd.net 952- 925 -2352 January 10, 2012 Dear Planning Commission Members, I am strongly objecting to a proposed subdivision of the property of 6109 Oaklawn Avenue by Refined LLC (Limited Liability Corporation). It is currently a 100 -foot wide lot with four beautiful mature oak trees in front of the existing house. A couple of years ago, JMS LLC bought nearby 6120 Brookview Avenue, and tried to subdivide the 100 -foot lot. He was unsuccessful. But before that, in anticipating a ruling in his favor, JMS built a gigantic and ugly house on the south side, effectively destroying the view of the park for the VWhitbecks, who own the historic and oldest home in Edina, next door. Since then, the people who own modest, older houses on the two sides of the street of Brookview Avenue, have had to live with an eye sore that has neither sold, nor contributed to the worth of the neighborhood in any way. Edina's minimum lot width as stated in the city code, is 75 feet. Please do not grant Refined LLC a variation on this sound and principled code, as it will forever change the appearance and unity of the neighborhood, while destroying mature oaks, and causing hardship for nearby homeowners who will have to start living smashed in, between out - of -place houses. Respectfully, Mickie Turk � 0�1' OV 1 January 10, 2012 To: Planning Commission Members This letter and opinion is in opposition to a proposed subdivision of the property of 6109 Oaklawn Avenue by Refined L.L.C. (Limited Liability Corporation). This proposal consists of dividing the existing parcel into 2 Lots. A couple of years ago, JMS L.L.C. purchased 612o Brookview Avenue. A 200 year old healthy oak tree in the front yard was removed and a very large home was built on the property. The home was not built in the middle of the property, but on the extreme south side of the property. I think we have all heard the phrase, "A picture is worth a thousand words." I am attaching photos of the original home at 612o Brookview, which shows the beautiful, healthy oak tree in the front yard. There are two photos, one taken in the summer months and one in the winter months. I am also attaching photos of the currently vacant JMS home at 6120 Brookview sans the oak tree canopy in the front yard. If you were to vote on which of the homes /property is more appealing to the eye ...... how would you cast your vote? Thank you. Carol Carmichiel 6112 Brook view Ave. Edina, MN. 55424 ,4 A nks ,4 A February 3'd, 2012 Clty of.Edina Planning Department Case FIIe- 2011.0015.11a Subdivision and Variance of 6109 Oaklawn Ave I am writing to express my.approval for the subdivision and variance of the lot(s) located at 6109 Oaklawn Ave. I am a homeowner residing atM17 Oaklawn Ave. As I understand, the builder's plan for.the two 50 ft. lots will be two custom built homes. These homes could be in the $700,000 range. The cost for the lots in our neighborhood is approximately $1,50,000. Some of my neighbors feel the homes should be in keeping with the $200 - 300,000 value of the neighborhood homes. Looking at this simple math, it is not possible to build a home on one of the lots for a value of $300- 300,000. The homes along Oaklawn are approaching 60 years in age. We and many others on Oaklawn Avenue, as evidenced by the number of workmen and dumpsters, have recently invested in the improvement, update and revitalization of our properties. Investment in some of the older properties is not feasible or. practical. I hope and am pleased that part of the interest and revitalization in our neighborhood could include new homes. I do not see any severe or practical negative impact on our home as a neighbor on Oaklawn Avenue, only. positive progress_ Progress may need to include new tree plantings to replace the mature trees nearing the end of their healthiest life cycle. The negative impact of failure to approve the subdivision- Directly behind our home, is the empty lot located adjacent to the JMS home built at 61' and Brookview. This empty lot is a result of a subdivision that was denied for.the building of two homes. We are left with the negative impact of an unkempt empty lot, weed filled with lot stakes and black plastic bordering our backyard. We hope this situation is rectified soon with the placement of a new home also, Sincerely, nnifer Williams Nelson pJ' 6117 Oaklawn Ave p` Edina, Mn 55424 `� Miroslava (Mickie) Turk 6141 Brookview Avenue Edina, MN 55424 mturkgisd.net 952- 925 -2352' February 2, 2012 Dear City Council Members, lam strongly objecting to a proposed subdivision of the property of 6109 Oaklawn Avenue by Refined LLC (Limited Liability .Corporation). It is currently a 100 -foot wide lot with four beautiful mature oak trees in front of the existing house. A couple of years ago, JMS LLC bought nearby 6120 Brookview Avenue, and tried to subdivide the 100 -foot lot. He was unsuccessful. But before that, in anticipating a ruling in his favor, JMS built a gigantic and ugly house on the south side, effectively destroying the view of the park for the Whitbecks, who own the historic and oldest home in Edina, next door. ' Since then, the people who own modest, older houses on the two sides of the street of Brookview Avenue, have had to live with an eye sore that has neither sold, nor contributed to the worth of the neighborhood in any way. Edina's minimum lot width as stated in the city code, is 75 feet. Please do not grant Refined LLC a variation on this sound and.principled code, as it will forever change the appearance and unity of the neighborhood, while destroying mature oaks, and causing hardship for nearby homeowners who will have to start living smashed in, between out- of -place houses. A builder stands to gain only monetarily and only in the short term. He or she will not actually live in the neighborhood. But the entire neighborhood will suffer damage for a long time to come. People will lose their unobstructed view of the street and trees, and the ability to live harmoniously and in privacy next door to others in houses of similar. structure and size. On the economic side, the smaller houses will continue to lose value forcing middle class folks to move away from Edina where they have nearby employment and their children are enrolled in school. Respectfully, Mickie Turk REPEWED FEB 0 2 2012 Miroslava (Mickie) Turk 6141 Brookview Avenue Edina, MN 55424 mturk ,isd.net 952- 925 -2352 January 10, 2012 Dear Planning Commission Members, I am strongly objecting to a proposed subdivision of the property of 6109 Oaklawn Avenue by Refined LLC (Limited. Liability Corporation).. It is currently a 100 -foot wide lot with four beautiful mature oak trees in front of the existing house. A couple of years ago, JMS LLC bought nearby 6120 Brookview Avenue, and tried to subdivide the 100 -foot lot. He was unsuccessful. But before that, in anticipating a ruling in his favor, JMS built a gigantic and ugly house on the south side, effectively destroying the view of the park for the Whitbecks,. who own the historic and oldest home in Edina, next door. Since then, the people who own modest, older houses on the two sides of the street of Brookview Avenue, have had to live.with an eyesore that has neither sold, nor contributed to the worth of the neighborhood in any way. Edina's minimum lot width as stated in the city code, is 75 feet. Please do not grant Refined LLC a variation on this sound and principled code, as it will forever change the appearance and unity of the neighborhood, while destroying mature oaks, and causing hardship for nearby homeowners who will have to start living smashed in, between out- of-place houses. Respectfully, Mickie Turk 1 It is January 10, 2012 To: Planning Commission Members This letter and opinion is in opposition to a proposed subdivision of the property of 61og Oaklawn Avenue by Refined L.L.C. (Limited Liability Corporation). This proposal consists of dividing the existing parcel into 2 Lots. A couple of years ago, JMS L.L.C. purchased 612o Brookview Avenue. A 200 year old healthy oak tree in the front yard was removed and a very large home was built on the property. The home was not built in the middle of the property, but on the extreme south side of the property. I think we have all heard the phrase, "A picture is worth a thousand words." I am attaching photos of the original home at 612o Brookview, which shows the beautiful, healthy oak tree in the front yard. There are two photos, one taken in the summer months and one in the winter months. I am also attaching photos of the currently vacant JMS home at 6120 Brookview sans the oak tree canopy in the front yard. If you were to vote on which of the homes /property is more appealing to the eye ...... how would you cast your vote? Thank you. Carol Carmichiel 6112 Brook view Ave. Edina, MN. 55424 1 \CN;� 1N A o Le \,� Cn �a RE PO RURECO M M E N DATI O N To: MAYOR AND COUNCIL Agenda Item Item No. VI.B From: Cary Teague ® Action Planning Director F-1 Discussion 1:1 Information Date: February 6, 2011 Subject: Site Plan, Primrose School of Edina, Minnesota /Children's Design Group, 7401 Metro Boulevard, Resolution No. 2012 -28 Deadline March 28, 2012 for a City Decision: ACTION REQUESTED: Adopt the attached Resolution No. 2012 -28, approving the Site Plan at 7401 Metro Boulevard. INFORMATION /BACKGROUND: Children's Design Group is requesting a Site Plan review to develop the recently created lot at 7401 Metro Boulevard with a Primrose Day Care Center. During the final platting of this property in September of 2011, this same building was contemplated for construction on the site. Planning Commission Recommendation: On January 11, 2012, the Planning Commission unanimously recommended approval of the Site Plan subject to the findings and conditions set forth in the staff report dated January 11, 2012. ATTACHMENTS: • Resolution 2012 -28 • Draft minutes from the January 11, 2012 Edina Planning Commission meeting • Planning Commission Staff Report dated January 11, 2012 RESOLUTION NO. 2012-28 APPROVING A SITE PLAN FOR 7401 METRO BOULEVARD City of Edna BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council. of the City of Edina, Minnesota, as follows: Section 1. BACKGROUND. 1.01 Children's Design. Group is requesting a Site Plan review for 7401 Metro Boulevard. 1.02 The applicant is proposing to build a Primrose Day Care Center on the newly created lot at 7401 Metro Boulevard. 1.03 The subject property is legally described as follows:. Lot 1, Block 1, One Corporate Center, 2nd Addition. 1.04 On January 11, 2012, the Planning Commission unanimously recommended - approval of the project. Section 2. FINDINGS . 2.01 The proposal would meet the required standards and ordinances for a Site Plan. 2.02 Spack Consulting conducted a traffic impact and parking study, and concluded that the existing roadway system could support the proposed project, and there,would be more than enough parking. Section 3. APPROVAL NOW THEREFORE, it is hereby resolved by the City Council of the City of Edina, approves the Site Plan at 7401 Metro. Boulevard for Childrens Design Group. Approval of the Site Plan 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 November.28, 2011. • Grading plan date stamped November 28, 2011. • Landscaping plans date stamped November 28, 2011 and January 5;2012. • Building elevations date stamped November 28, 2011 and January 6, 2012. • Building materials board including colors as presented at the Planning Commission q and City Council meeting. City Hall 952- 927 -8861 4801 WEST 50TH STREET FAX 952 - 826 -0390 TTY 952 - 826 -0379 EDINA, MINNESOTA, 55424 -1394 www.CityofEdina.com RESOLUTION NO. 2012-28 Page Two 2. Prior the issuance of a building permit, a final landscape plan must be submitted, 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. 3. Before issuance of a building permit, a shared parking arrangement with the southern lot must be executed. 4. The property owner is responsible for replacing any required landscaping that dies. 5. 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. 6. A construction management plan will be required for the construction of the new building. 7. Compliance with the conditions required by the city engineer in his memo dated January 5, 2012. Adopted by the city council of the City of Edina, Minnesota, on January 11, 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 January 11, 2012, and as recorded in the Minutes of said Regular Meeting. WITNESS my hand and seal of said City this day of 12012. City Clerk Survey date stamped: December 8, 2011 \uilding plans/ elevations date stamped: December 8, 2011. Appearina Tor the Applicant William and Xesise Denison Discussion Commissioner rForre asked Planner Aaker if Code st • lates a minimum two stall garage door width. Planer Aaker responded.that 'tyhe best of her knowledge Code does not establish a mi um garage door.:width; wever, Planner Aaker stated she rarely sees double garag stall widths less than -feet: Chair Grabiel questioned if a existing shed as non - conforming. Planner Aaker responded in the affirmative. Applicant Comments Mr. Denison said the reason the ge was designed as submitted was because a small alcove was built over a well d building foundation. The plans as submitted don't disturb the well and building fou a ' n. Chair Grabiel asked if anyo was pre nt to speak to the issue; being none; Commissioner Platteter m ed to close a public hearing. Commissioner Carpenter seconded the motion. A oted aye; mot n carried. Discussion A discussion en! on if the proposed chan s were self - created. The majority of the Corn: missioners ' dicated they could support th ariance and didn't feel'the circumstances ere self - created. . Motion Commi loner Carpenter moved variance approval t3�sed on staff findings and sub to staff conditions. Commissioner Potts seco ed the motion. Ayes; SYJ- r, Schroeder, Potts, Platteter, Carpenter,. Staunton, Fischer, Grabiel. Nays F t. Motion carried 8 -1. 2011.0004.11 b Final Site Plan Children's_ Design Group/Primrose-School of Edina 7401 Metro Boulevard Page 3 of 12 Planner Presentation Planner Teague told the Commission Children's Design Group is requesting a Site Plan review to develop the recently created lot at 7401 Metro Boulevard with a Primrose Day Care Center. During the final platting of this property in September of 2011, this same building was contemplated for construction on the site. Planner Teague explained that access to the site would be off Metro Boulevard. No new curb cut would be created. Parking for the site would be provided from the lot to the south through a shared parking arrangement. The outdoor play area would be enclosed for security, with an ornamental six -foot black picket fence. The building would be built of stone and hardie plank lap siding with wood finish. The roof would be made of architectural asphalt shingles. The applicant will have a materials board to present to the Planning Commission the night of the public hearing. Parking and traffic studies were done to review impacts that the proposed development would have on the site and surrounding roadways. Planner Teague concluded that staff recommends that the City Council approve the Site Plan at 7401 Metro Boulevard for the Primrose Day Care based on the following findings: 1. The proposal would meet the required standards and ordinances for a Site Plan. 2. Spack Consulting conducted a traffic impact and parking study, and concluded that the existing roadway system could support the proposed project, and there would be more than enough parking. Approval of the Site Plan 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 November 28, 2011. • Grading plan date stamped November 28, 2011. • Landscaping plans date stamped November 28, 2011 and January 5, 2012. • Building elevations date stamped November 28, 2011 and January 6, 2012. • Building materials board including colors as presented at the Planning Commission and City Council meeting. Page 4 of 12 2. Prior the issuance of a building permit, a final landscape plan must be submitted, 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. 3. Before issuance of a building permit, a shared parking arrangement with the southern lot must be executed. 4. The property owner is responsible for replacing any required landscaping that dies. 5. 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. 6. A construction management plan will be required for,the construction of the new building: 7. Compliance with the conditions required by the city engineer in his memo dated January 5, 2012. Appearing for the Applicant Mike Brandt, MFRA Discussion Commissioner Platteter referred to the shared parking agreement and asked where additional parking would be found if needed. Teague explained to gain more parking stalls the landscaping islands could be removed. Chair Grabiel commented on the lack of setback from the property line. Teague explained that the zoning for both parcels is the same so setbacks are measured from the perimeter of the site. Applicant Presentation Mike Brandt, MFRA said he.was present to answer questions. Chair Grabiel asked if there was anyone present that would like to speak to the issue; being none Commissioner Carpenter moved to close the public hearing. Commissioner Potts seconded the motion. All voted aye; motion carried to close public hearing. Discussion Commissioner Carpenter said that in his opinion the layout was good and the information was complete. Carpenter said he supports the. request, adding it's reasonable. Motion Commissioner Potts moved approval based on staff findings and subject to staff conditions. Commissioner Platteter seconded the motion. Mr. Brandt presented the exterior building materials board to the Commission. All voted aye; motion carried 9 -0. 2011.0015.11a Preliminary Plat Refined LLC 6109 Oaklawn Avenue, Edina, MN Planner Presl♦ntation Planner Teague formed the Commission that Refined, LLC is prop ,5,Wg to subdivide the property at 6flV Oaklawn Avenue into two lots. The existing a would be torn down, and two new omes built on the new lots. To accommo a the request the following is required: 1. A subdivision; 2. Lot width varian s from 75 feet to 50 fee r each lot; and 3. Lot area variance from 9,000 square f to 6,699 and 6,693 square feet. Continuing, Teague explained at both lots uld gain access off Oaklawn Avenue. Within this neighborhood, the dian lot a is 6,701 square feet, median lot depth is 133 feet, and the median lot widtlkis 50 et. The new lots would meet the median width and depth, but would be just sho f median area. Planner Teague concluded that ecommends that the City Council approve the proposed two lot subdivision o 109 aklawn Avenue and the lot width variances from 75 feet to 50 feet for each to and lot a a variances from 9,000 square feet to 6,699 and 6,693 square feet. Ap oval is base on the following findings: 2 0 4 Except for the riances, the propo I meets the required standards and ordinance fo subdivision. The subdiv' ion would meet the neigh rhood medians for lot width and depth and near meet the median area. The pr osal would restore the property ck to the form of the original plat, whic ncluded two lots. Th roposal meets the required standard Page 6 of 12 r a variance, because: w91�1tL O e �y PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT Originator Meeting Date . Agenda # Cary Teague January 11, 2011 2011- 044.11b Director of Planning INFORMATION /BACKGROUND Project Description Children's Design Group is requesting a Site Plan review to develop the recently created lot at 7401 Metro Boulevard with a Primrose Day Care Center. (See project. location on' pages Al —A4, and the applicant narrative and plans on pages A5 —A18.) During the final platting of this property in September of 2011, this same building was contemplated for construction on the site. Access to the.site would.be off Metro Boulevard. No new curb cut would be created. Parking. for the site would be provided from the lot to the south through a shared parking arrangement. The outdoor play area would be enclosed for security, with an ornamental six -foot black picket fence. (See page A10a.) The building would be built of stone and hardie plank lap siding with wood finish. The roof would be made of architectural asphalt shingles. (See pages A7a —A7c.) The applicant will have a materials board to present to the Planning Commission the night of the public hearing. Parking and traffic.studies were done to review impacts that the proposed development would have on the site and surrounding roadways. (Seethe parking study on pages A20 —A28 and the traffic. study on pages A29 —A60.) SUPPORTING INFORMATION Surrounding Land Uses Northerly: A three -story office building; zoned POD -1, Office District and guided Office. Easterly: Highway 100. Southerly: A six: story office building; zoned POD -2, Office District and guided Office. Westerly: Edina Public Works; zoned PID, Industrial and guided Industrial. r. r Existing Site Features The subject property contains a parking lot attached to a six -story office building with 557 parking stalls. (See pages A3 —A4.) Planning Guide Plan designation: Office Zoning: POD -2, Office Parking A shared parking arrangement is proposed with the lot to the south. Based on the size of the existing building on lot to the south, 454 parking stalls are required. Both lots currently contain 557 stalls; however, 72 would be removed with the new building, for a total of 485. With the proposed day care use on the site, based on a maximum of 22 employees and 180 children on the site at one time, 485 stalls would be required for both lots. The applicant has provided a proof -of- parking plan that demonstrates that an additional 21 stalls could easily be added for a total of 506 stalls should parking ever become a problem and more stalls needed. (See page A18.) Additionally, the applicant provided a parking study that concludes that there would be more than enough parking spaces on the site. (See pages A20— A28.) Specifically the study indicates that 309 is the peak parking demand for the site, therefore, there would still be an excess of nearly 200 stalls. Before issuance of a building permit, a shared parking arrangement with the southern lot must be executed. Site Access The primary access to the site would remain off Metro Boulevard. Landscaping Based on the perimeter of the site, 22 overstory trees are required. The landscape and site plans demonstrate that there would be 22 existing and proposed overstory trees on the site. Additionally, full complements of understory plantings are also proposed along the site entrance and front entrance to the building. (See pages A15 —A16.) 2 Grading /Drainage /Utilities The city engineer has reviewed the proposed grading, drainage and utility plans and has provided comment on page A19. A Nine Mile Creek Watershed permit would be required prior to issuance of a building permit. Building Design The building would be built of stone and hardie plank lap siding with wood finish. The roof would be made of architectural asphalt shingles. (See page A7a.) The applicant will have a materials board to present to the Planning Commission the night of the public hearing. Compliance Table Primary Issue • Is the proposed development reasonable for this site? Yes. Staff believes the proposal is reasonable for three reasons: 1. The proposed use is permitted in the POD -2 District. City Standard Proposed Front — Metro Boulevard 35 feet 36 feet Rear — Highway 100 20 feet 35 feet Side — South 20 feet 200+ feet Building Height 8 stories or 1 story and 18 feet 96 feet, whichever is less Building Coverage 30% 13% Parking lot and drive aisle 20 feet (street) 20 feet (existing) parking is setback located on the adjacent lot Parking Stalls 485 (overall site) 506 with the proof -of- parking plan (485 existing stalls) Overstory Trees 22 required 22 existing and proposed (number is based on the perimeter of the entire development site) Primary Issue • Is the proposed development reasonable for this site? Yes. Staff believes the proposal is reasonable for three reasons: 1. The proposed use is permitted in the POD -2 District. 2. The proposed plan creates development over a parking lot that is not used by the existing office at 7401 Metro Boulevard. 3. The proposed Site Plan meets all applicable zoning ordinance requirements. 4. The parking and traffic studies done by Spack Consulting conclude that there would be adequate parking, and the use would not have a negative impact on adjacent roadways. Staff Recommendation Recommend that the City Council approve the Site Plan at 7401 Metro Boulevard for the Primrose Day Care. Approval is based on the following findings: The proposal would meet the required standards and ordinances for a Site Plan. 2. Spack Consulting conducted a traffic impact and parking study, and concluded that the existing roadway system could support the proposed project, and there would be more than enough parking. Approval of the Site Plan is subject to the following conditions: Subject to staff approval, the site must be developed and maintained in substantial conformance with the following plans, unless modified by the conditions below: • Site plan date stamped November 28, 2011. • Grading plan date stamped November 28, 2011. • Landscaping plans date stamped November 28, 2011 and January 5, 2012. Building elevations date stamped November 28, 2011 and January 6, 2012. Building materials board including colors as presented at the Planning Commission and City Council meeting. 2. Prior the issuance of a building permit, a final landscape plan must be submitted, 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. 4 3.. Before issuance of a building permit, a shared :parking arrangement With the southern lot must be executed. 4. The property: owner is responsible for replacing any required landscaping that dies. 5. 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. 6. A construction. management plan will be required for the construction of the new building. 7. Compliance with the conditions required by the city engineer in his memo dated January 5, 2012. Deadline for a city decision:. March 28, 2012 City of Edina L 17 7771 m V x 5790 �a � n rBraw x � i 1310 ?:r 7701 77N 7750 3700 7770 s/0 719e rm6 L Legend 0 i o � � 1976 1871 49p 4977 1916 1911 i300 5187 5107 518'7 5187 730 4940 4917 .4917 1908 f90 1992 4m 4995 1180 4909 4909 < 1918 7590 4901 - 7675 7615 ° 4952 DR 0 7511 711¢1 ffi10NE 1461 750 7505 746J 14 7169 65 7049 ; s/ro 3 4s19 1600 510 � o fL MU AN WTA" BLVD 777H SJW 4820 1',YI g 5101 nzw- cmra.lci:ocsucam - PID: 0911621310017 0.�1 p 1r 7401 Metro Blvd �� 4 Edina, MN 55439 IIIHB ff %l 41 Mf ra engineering surveying planning energy Date: November 28, 2011 To: City of Edina Planning Department 4801 West 50th Street Edina, MN 55424. By: Children's Design Group Mark D. Pavey, AIA — Architect 1114 Eagles Creek Way Acworth, GA 30101 Project: Primrose School at Edina 7401 Metro Boulevard Edina, MN, 55439 Subject: Application Narrative 1. General Description The proposed Primrose School of Edina will be a high quality provider of child care and early childhood education for 181 children ages 6 week to 12 years, employing 40+ teachers & staff. The building will cover 12,000 square feet +/- on a 1 acre lot. The facility will generally be open 6:00 am to 6:30 PM Monday through Friday. The children in our care will be kept on premises at all times except for planned field trips in the area. Primrose currently has franchise's operating in Savage, Eden Prairie, Maple Grove, Woodbury, Plymouth, Blaine, Lakeville, and Egan. 2. Existing Land Use The land is vacant and is zoned Planned Office District 2 (POD -2), child care is permitted by right. 3. Phasing- Construction Schedule All work will be done in a single phase. After zoning approval and obtaining building permits, we estimate 6 months will be required for construction. PLANNING DEPARTMENT NOV 2 8 2011 As CITY OF EDINA t° # kS�Ti. a.'�' �' �� • � N" .. '+o u i •u"w vZ��C.;1 •,,A,.r' x ��.6 4. Development Method Primrose Schools are owned by a local member of the community. The franchise owner is responsible for financing the purchase of the land and construction of the school; additionally, the franchise owner is required to be onsite during the schools hours of operation. The project's architectural development and construction administration will be performed by Children's Design Group (CDG), who has over 23 years of childcare facility development experience. All development and construction work will be competitively bid by General Contractors who specialize in the construction of educational childcare facilities. 5. Signage We have proposed a monument sign as shown on the site plan and site details. An attractive building sign is shown on the front elevation. Shade shelters are provided with logos. 6. Traffic/Parking Analysis Traffic will not be adversely impacted in the surrounding area as the school lies in the natural traffic pattern of I ost commuters. Parents will be commuting in a direction that would take them directly by or near the school. Unlike a retail operation, the parents will be very familiar with the traffic patterns and volumes at the school and will adjust to the daily traffic accordingly. The school will have 43 dedicated parking spaces, 2 of which are handicapped accessible. Parents are required to physically bring their child or children into the center and sign in and out. Many times the parent will have a short discussion with the child's caregiver. With 23 (max at any one time) spaces allocated for staff and van parking, a total of 20 spaces will be provided for unloading and loading. Our studies and experience tell us the average time for loading and unloading (parking time) is seven minutes. With 18 spaces allocated for parents, a total of 154 cars per hour could be accommodated, far more than necessary to accommodate the 181 children that would come from approximately 135 families using the center. Arrivals occur from 6:00am until 9am and departures are generally from 3pm to 6:30pm. From our experience with the design of over 600 centers in the past 20 years, we assure you adequate parking is provided. 7. Building Material and Design Elements - The building has been designed to fit with the attractive architecture of the area. Each elevation has features to enhance the area's aesthetic. The building is tied to the ground with strong horizontal lines and a defined brick base with horizontal siding above., The building has been designed to look "homelike ". Each elevation has features to enhance the residential aesthetic. The roof will be architectural shingles. The building has a "T" plan to break down the visual mass of the building. Visible wall faces are articulated to add interest and reduce the scale. Gables are used to break the roof plane. Security is a top concern for Primrose. Security is provided at the front door of the school with an electronic check -in system for children. Playgrounds are fenced and gated. Primrose provides a building that exceeds requirements for fire safety. Not only for fire egress but also for ease of operations, each classroom has direct exit and access to outside playground areas. Every Primrose building is also equipped with a fire alarm and smoke detection system. The Primrose interior decor creates a soft, warm, homelike environment through the u At G-vF_M"t ;lT and wood trim. The plan consists of closed classrooms that are all sized larger than state requirements. NOV 2 8 20ii G[TY OF EDINA Classrooms are bright and cheerful with lots of windows. Areas for computers are provided for all children over the age of three. Older children are provided state of the art audiovisual equipment as well. 8. Other - There are no major high powered electrical lines near the site that would generate potentially harmful electromagnetic fields. This site will not generate fumes, odors, glare, vibration, gases, radiation, dust, liquid waste, or smoke and there are no sites nearby that would generate the same that would impact the school. Conclusion Rest assured that as owner /operators, we intend to keep the premises in a safe, clean, neat, and wholesome condition. By the nature of our service, we shall comply in all respects with all governmental, health and police requirements. In conclusion, we firmly believe the Primrose School of Edina will be an asset to the community and will provide a safe, clean, and friendly environment for both the children in our care and the surrounding community. h1 � � � Abbv,. k E �) /e U, « /��k \k Q � \ ) % / ? § � ) $ o y / �z $ ƒ /§§ 5HINGLE5: HG82 5AN05TONE BEIGE - TRIM 5TUGGO BUILDING STONE DUMP5TER 6ATES (POST t HINGES) MBM HG 112 TATE OLIVE (INDU5TRIAL ENAMEL, EXTERIOR APPLICATIONI EXTERIOR HD. TRIM, EXTERIOR TO MATGH HARDIE TRIM DOOR5, FRAMES, LOWERS, SANDSTONE BEIGE J00 -20 CUPOLA WALL5, WrTEF5 AND (BM W-62 or 5W 5W 6151) AND DOWN5POVT5, 5OFFIT5. EXTERIOR HARDIE TRIM, SANDSTONE BEIGE 300-20 FASCIA, FRIEZE (BM W-52 or SW 5H 6151) WINDO06 BEIGE ALUMINUM SIDING MATCH HARDIE SAIL CLOTH, JI 20-10 ASPHPJ_T 5HIN5LES, MANIF.: GAF STYLE: TIMBERLINE SERIES, T -30 WITH 'SHADOW ACCENT' GOLOR: hEATHERED HOOD NOTE: ALL ROOF MOUNTED EQUIPMENT SHALL BE PAINTED TO MATGH ROOF COLOR VINYL SHUTTERS ARGHITEGTLRALDEPOT.GOM - 14' JOINED 51-111I7TER5 WN STALL 50REW5 WIDE STANDARD SIZE FOUR BOARD PREFIN15FED 0252 COLONIAL GREEN 5TANDIN5 SEAM ROOFING: KYNAR 500 - "DARK BRONZE' BUILDING STONE: LONESTAR STONE - LIBERTY CLA551G COLOR = ACPJMN WITH BUFF 6ROJT PAINT - TATE OLIVE 12.11. F • 21L7:Pwra7 5TANDING SEAM ROOFING Site: Children's Design Group Mark D. Povey, A.I.A. - Architect PRIMROSE 5GH00L of 1114 Eagles Greek Way EDINA Acworth, GA 30101 110- 485 -8496 EDINA, MINNE50TA 206 - 350 -0593 Fax ch I Id.designa mindspr Ing.com Date: 1/5/2012 EXTERIOR COLOR SCHEDULE . C.ONST ovoN NOTE5:O 0 a. o• - 0 EAST ELEVATION 0 NEST ELEVATION w:� E� m ��jsaq � o L I p� Q ,ga ll 1I44� E o E P�NING�EPP eamg np... EXTERIOR EiEVATIOP 9 ( \�1 v —fl A -4 I I I 1 , , I ----- -------------- ------ ----------- - -------- - 1 -- ------- ------------- --------------------------------------- I I I• I 4I�NN I � ___ I j I' M.aT wsl a.aT FYI � ; I � I !m. aY•mT I . 1 1 I , I yl I J:I III 1 I 1 I w, I ��' 9 ` I awsamlw ' 1 b.aµe..ymw mare ®. nYY.mYI 1- I I I 1 I I - OO __________J nmL-- - f l LICENSING FIRE EGRESS PLAN I •- ; SCALE, 3n6• = ry I TOTAL BUILDING AREA • II$56 3f AGGESSIBILITr SIC ACE DETAILS .neowvc quo �� a.�e�s1°" w I •+•••• °� � •• ie0 a�oaaaro. ,ll srw pv+'�xwe� M M .Qamm�aro� ®_ ro �� I 1 I I ® sc.,os�ceoromomc ' w 1 1 .aw.s 1 - _ 1 1 •.n.aa a „s , ^ ° y tw Primrose . School Frcmchlsing G ompcmy j °ro�oce m"'.I�anc I -• __ I mwa � xeo cemv...w a .,��•�.'•9^.. I mwmwamiaNNa! ' , I ChkkVI'3 D.gn crow Ilmar••n.wu -wow .v.mx cricocs A -1.4 ...s�r.w aoloi° � mai own.u.. I T WbMC! nnr�cn 1OI1 MNi / / / / 000 / / / / / fi\ I / j > C +1 +1 J 1'11j1 it !I I!'9�� 11111 / I plZ9 l 14y � 50 I I I I�I III $— J I I�I¢li �I I II I I s I I Taal \�n lj� 11 � �il � � �• , 0 C K 1 ��o ✓ ✓ .m I .✓ I 1 li IlI III I I I I III illl� I i j l l IIII I r i :� 1 111111! I I VIII / .� i .I 1l ill l,ll+lllll I 111 +11111 �✓ Ij 11 IIII .I +II• I 1 I I I .✓ �� I !r ! l I! i l LEGEND UJ 100 m v—x� Remo LU n °" Igg W LL x X I x SURVEY NOTES ly C . tl ........ .. . R.� t OtiT 1 1._ R' i..mWl.._.w.Ae..Yw.YatlO.amwtl.Me •l a .I I a SU91ECr PROPERTY .r . I � ,�YL w.w..m.w.xr..•.waw . . w.o.m e spar �L'�'i•a 4wuosmm I I u ueaW� w�4Y 4wam'�'�o0u.mmt•oo.whmna I i 1 ✓ 1 i 1 1 I Q ,00 Q• , � I NC •r � I N � 1 1 G G I � � I I eenfr-a .F�.�R4/R41RN IRmMfts.®iW N-AYl ww oO— ON- PYN.® raRr Client CHILDREN'S DESIGN GROUP 111°FACdEfOIEOI- °GNIOROI•"Wwl Project PRIMROSE SCHOOL OF EDINA Location EDINA, MINNESOTA Certification 0 J� 0d Summary 1 N -d () V 1 met Title EXISTING CONDITIONS PLAN Sheet No. Revision C2.01 Project No. CHI19070 . / r •dl I � � d � .n d � � j i / / / / WOO / \d /1 // 11 / 111 11111 II 1 11!11 1 1 / ' 1 1111 II 11 pr It Ijll�lTllIl I I I I iul � I Ilii'i II�11111 11111111 I 1 Ill�Ijjli it �01/i l r 1 II / 111 iill�l � .r 1111111 11 1 111 II . • 1 1111111111 � jl 11 111111 1 1111 I I I I III \ \\ \ \ I / I�I11.�•1: I I 111 \ I i •P1 i i i � '�I •wry / �' �' / nfraate.— ecrossa �.-- a.ummm+v �t ®n[ w[x.exrx[wnename[ aw m�.rt — — oo m.mio rolm yC Client = DENIOLMDN LEGEND CHILDREN'S �r'.ry• uummu[Ywm .nwro[nmren ® YIIIIme mron DESIGN GROUP mY OUnD Ina EAGLESGILQWAI ACWORTKG•WWI =KEY NOTES [•wmra xowe mmxewwmmnxn.•vx[mroonm surnaort m mxmun xIw r•W.a 4m wxm W laxn �,� xxYxx[mnnmrtnxwm.xexxaw�[m[rY. • mmrtmmxxmm•xemrtx Project a om.x� 4.^ .e*[a[xem[4mY4roLLm x4.xY xxrtmwxme uen PRIMROSE SCHOOL OF r = DENIOImONNOTES 1 xoxwnm xorY.ulmo•uomea•4nueswx . rwra a"n�'m[rewarowrt[u EDINA am'n'mumw[�wm m�xwl:mm smYOOwn ra romm mxs,.crxx 1 raC6GxnWxeYfmxlC .M[xCDR[RWO[nn[®nUTM[�nle xx ocexlucrox ®xmsmn msrmroroc[Mn4lwwxal •nwmwoa.mxYax[wv[.Ynaxertxemne[, Location ron xumc swnr n • umnun uxx vnnw xxx suwrt rt ro ra oxxY rox uvnw. mnu[m.e4we.um[n[n[xm xn4nu.xxowxnn• EDINA, MINNESOTA •u muuxxa xmo4nY.xx ix usolwxY wrtx .r �x[ �ao: 4[ [man�...n.x4ww.n.[mxwr414..x.n, � rq ownee srwRrux[t nam4 ne xla rwr rn xv.w[x[xn sxavx �Yxxwirron•"�i[ wruuuxomcxwiro' aum[mroxumu � o sxxl W,ma1Yra! r�6 a ramxlxsnx[emleeua u[xum[xumaumlxrrasm •xo �ra avm n • Yxxxl x.Oet ra mx1YLro.O uxexseu IO xl mm� 4xuxm m mmnm xm ®msi a ramuucmxsx4smaonn wmlu>Rnx[urnmmv.xmlmm [r�umxruao.sxxsrn[wx Certification Q •r �Imvro�iummxaxn unxmxnxwra xcxrorxrYxmYmxsrxnnx mx mnc.xw[mwm.nWnxru in.lnmx„w[mw.,n,e�., nrsw�Y[x:uro u rl'''m'mm[v'�mmmw:x.w[rxu uxvxn'wrw ' may_ -- - ,„R, b mxixicraewlauou wxr •rm4sao4mouix:n p ramxY4rox exvaeo [maraeemXx[nDX01xr4R[IIx6rTera a mmnmwxm xmxrourmurolarrax[[mm raoorrtunoxesr [orrunw[rxx®nurraux..souar.ummu •. u �vomoxnuwxxn [xxmmwlmrxounu[mxwuurm �.xxmxxn w[ramxmm¢mramxrunoararxmeu xounmadlr,umnlmun.nmxroranurvxn 4rnrtaramxYSC,ossxuseannra ul•mmlaxeo4u4r 5 o..[ �...,.,.ra , �� «aw<a.n�..oxlae.g[m.�eam.4w.raz a rm ulaxow4suuruexnramxmicrmnauwa Summa ry o.e mrxon4[mnun[masu[e a 41cur[usnnarexa xxeunl ,nsxxwx4[xnroumoxurm4ra o.a[o m �'O � /�w� x"a'�` � o.e[mrmx,w4ramrmunssrwrYnomnmrxe m.v[mr mmcmxx[mn mrxumw�nt muxsxvxo•u.x,v4[o .uwunmxrxm mYmxeemlxaxw4u Revision History Nx.e[Y Br SubmlRal /e.wen 40141xM[IWn uYGV rLLY,6 xrGlrmn[xxpwTxra WOxanrlM6 x[nxAY[pro 4•WlmxfD[e111Y n[W[ellexe[xra xmexnnauxuu n uroxx wuxwrma •, umxxxx ronumu4s nxm wxwo ouuYia a rximreni4w�m �roeY�[mx�n.�[�mmxrt�e�xnronxxr4LLa LL x�xemlm4. xx/ �xee� ,�,[,�mxxr,e[r�lml��e.e.xx� mw xe[r srxxnnxi raw ra msn[cmx sxus nowt xM wnwunrnr.•wo us®wlxa x,mramxlun mow[xn�rrrox x. meurmmnYrw[•umxamomnn[ 4 s4i[eusswuxuw. �O'i \\ u �mxnurwsxsuYms4•urtarnlcn masv4rom•nnu s[r4 �mxm4nxxnaras[mrerxnol x4a ene.xr ra su[smro[or•nsan,ncra wrnnxu w[muxxx4.xxwrw � S u �x�wro.mnnmrnan.uwwxcx4urowwx m \O� mxonuurolYwnwuuulYCm4mxrssc [rtxe nrlxsi �'�' LITION 'LA N V� .r ® Sheet No. Revision xomx IYLL® c2.02 Project No. CH119070 —• s = LEGEND R o eon fra �.� .�•�.•- [ ` ��' � \ �•�• iS y/o> ,YMPd m .e�FNM1..m� N. x .�b xILow- Client KEYNOTES CHILDREN'S F Ywa:roR 3 rt.Re [..ew[n�Y .�w w R.mI DESIGN GROUP :1' ,,, •',/ -1 \ / /` r �^ I I O I L KumRUn dY 11fU[A[i M[o AT -', ,, ,' V��O • / ' ' ' Z c w[6Y11xw1 NID4YnYSR Y[[uIODR .rlt — G Mn J .� : �' , �.F' /,/ •� ' i I I Q j mortbrtu[oau I O I I [0.. wwowswxw/mxam rue SRRluowlmaoaR (�� j Sxwert,xxrtmnwN.xHwwnY, i9 Fun[w[6uuoewa.uw[monYSl Project [u R x.e0[d[.xaortdu..uxxwert.Yl �� / / / j Q ► 1 .Fw w..dYY.�RRw,.oe[, PRIMROSE SCHOOL OF / / "�' '^ I . 1rRRNR.w.wWRNtlSw. aw[.eOID EDINA — DOE V ELOOPPM ENT roNOTES / / ®� I i roraxws nxw om. Location •; I I' ; . eYNe, w[ Ye. Rxro, x[xw.w.[YF..R�..ao.dYeR�,e„xR,R EDINA, MINNESOTA 1 I r. .ur.xwFanuuroRlwwmxuR [.'w NNe,xuxRR dx[[wnliewR.Ra � -` oxmo�wabm� - MRO \\` Ii �' 1 me I [. m.00ncvRFruYroFFabFmn[o w..R[ PRI [ • / •' � .• - -_� E. [�pOe�/k�DINA' i v ( nRa� rm ucurFw HRxmm[en.R. ®Wwu.vFmnmY �� -- I I x Rrt.row.[x.,ro.ro ewYFRm[..YCNY�oo�RQ Certification `VI O W RY.ax[Y[xw[Yw.N,Yn _ � N zxl»L �rtrt Ol[[...e1 dOl.Y.x.mmssurm _ [>•+lu4H x.YAFb RO1 w.Ra1C[gexM.p.rMYRn.LL �M b � Yslra �Te tDx[I.ue.uuRwv.W.xevmwra ®O O - I / I I oemr.[n Rmm[rRCUOanu1W [LL10vmYf nn RfY[�ROmrtRe• ,+�� S c e � I /'(''/ 1 emnmws radxwR,w[wu '.F /° I 1 I I . +R..ROR'xr+e[FUUR n. ®.uuR,u[mv[w.nRUwumntm. �d NuWY[ `umWlR eIWON' �OVGNI '�'�11Nw[Y'�'mxeR]luR�ux[Il eMw.� .xeNNW ni[I w.l lr u AY ,• Y.LL[OXN ' va +a�wYr. .. I (4xlp,ra ronuxmFWRe.LLV6 . I � .,°g I �/ ! L ��VirnR[rFUe nw.ss.uvcxa,xo[mlex[R , rtYm YOSx.oe ' w o t Summary / —DEVELOPMENT SUMMARY rxln�y- �.. Wx.r..W uw �vFU,x. Revision History 4 , I j m�Y YN1 [3 R[rt1 Ha. yn l Splst /RM[bn I I / I ro mxxe ,ow o.[Wx. � � � I rm[Rmnm mO1iw[aw I I SGCe'smm an.usNwom [,< Q n I I I .u.ssovix'nN['wi roirm�'vosemmnonox 'SSnuw tT ,1``[� I \` `0/ ' I w.[ruRRrwxnm[Y,[mR[nucFOn , R � I ; V I I I I i / umRR[nusrtw— WMIMUxmm3[.RS C41TE , PLA ,q f �`y. TSheet No. Revision NORTH C3.01 Project No. CH119070 0 A a CATCH BASIN CASTING AND CURB DETAIL SANITARY SEWER SERVICE CONNECTION . m a... CATCH BASIN MANHOLE w .,u ar a. v.w .. TYPICAL CIEMOIT DETAIL xo e•,a A aAx rrct v AAr oammi v ..w oo. Qcn., �K -.air1 a i.nr -.yr coo; °o; k car mar m. a`.� �i m.w amp o.wA.s s,ar�.ma 0' ivin.leRm aria° rtl��x�Q r, Vim- ws.0 4L'Iml .-A PEDESTRIAN CURB RAMP .o —E " .m6iLO1.a yr can 6 w. am vau �-em mvom9 »x rmrao v.e.r as o r1'r �-Vr Diu L r GATE VALVE AND BOX INSTALLATION a scvA Tw.�,maum XGr -0RAY OAA EWALHE ORNAMENTAL GATE infra mmm.s�., W a4® O.b.l Client CHILDREN'S DESIGN GROUP ll GG,FSWQAWAY AtWO.IIAGlO,pl Project PRIMROSE SCHOOL OF EDINA Location EDINA, MINNESOTA Certification 0% y r Summary rese wr.n Sheet T CON CTION DETAILS Sheet No. Revision C9.01 Project No. CHI19070 r N `�0 � — o 9 o / .r qJ ,r ae ..,rh. .r Y\• ay m IN i LLLLLL I • \VII \ $'W \, I r d � II 11111 j41 11lil11 r ijllil ! rlllllll > !!/ llyl I f I I � I tLl I I i <1 1111111/ I I liliilili� 1 I lil�iill r'p 1111111 / I !� '= iilliil � I,I Illllll I 1 II IIII � i i,11 /llll�r 1 11111111111 111 �! I ! 1 111111/1 ,,�; 11111 II 1 1.•111111111 11�1111'IIII 1 11111 \��d\ � I \ I I IIII ! f I % •rf�l�/ I '' I III/ /•r li !!l�iir l i II l �llll l / 1111,111. !, , III I I I I n 111111 j r � III Ij1�1 IIII dl �I�li I 1 VII I II iII le LEGEND =� %4n r-a an.ana °J1•1 �.4�.IN111M�! Nm:O tNewgweu Imo ®O A•N.i 10 w1,1.m1..N - -- v�.11.mawr lT NIY.Y.• d d oom.olo�rlms Client �GDIuG CHILDREN'S yw'n�� .w•� e.. °�ap� DESIGN GROUP ew m "n •. ew+ww•wwrn.w•n•ne 111<EAGMMUKWAY e. . w • woe • :PYOF111,Wl0101 w.yww•en y ww a W �wyy�y w Project PRIMROSE SCHOOL OF • �a.w, m�u •",,..�. �°•^ EDINA Location EDINA, ®'°°° ° °° •• MINNESOTA • s��.• "�.�� —w� ° Certification .r •..wweevnwwo '.:^�..:.:�'�LO ° .aaww ®•n ®.amnu.s�msssvmnrnmrya• e..w .w.r... e..••.yw,.•.yw�.w°,•w. .w e_ 1 .^•e..,y, Summary .r yy.�.y.•ye. �� ...�M "+ em°w•oea.n�s°mM ••�umwnen••m .w•.rl HtlY 4wet�NCw: Revision History °e•m rm ®•.w�aw.n.a. .•yam No.Ueu BY SWMtteI /Rrvl:bn • ..we.y w• ° °...° we..w°y,�.. 'll .�yw..y....w...e. e•..•.wywwe.w...eAn•.... Sheet Title ,,,� „ ° „®, •^""•••�- �• °m--°° GRADING PLAN .r Sheet No. Revision NORTH C4.01 Project No. CH119070 1 1 1 Cq +Y 1 1 al �1 II 11111 j41 11lil11 r ijllil ! rlllllll > !!/ llyl I f I I � I tLl I I i <1 1111111/ I I liliilili� 1 I lil�iill r'p 1111111 / I !� '= iilliil � I,I Illllll I 1 II IIII � i i,11 /llll�r 1 11111111111 111 �! I ! 1 111111/1 ,,�; 11111 II 1 1.•111111111 11�1111'IIII 1 11111 \��d\ � I \ I I IIII ! f I % •rf�l�/ I '' I III/ /•r li !!l�iir l i II l �llll l / 1111,111. !, , III I I I I n 111111 j r � III Ij1�1 IIII dl �I�li I 1 VII I II iII le LEGEND =� %4n r-a an.ana °J1•1 �.4�.IN111M�! Nm:O tNewgweu Imo ®O A•N.i 10 w1,1.m1..N - -- v�.11.mawr lT NIY.Y.• d d oom.olo�rlms Client �GDIuG CHILDREN'S yw'n�� .w•� e.. °�ap� DESIGN GROUP ew m "n •. ew+ww•wwrn.w•n•ne 111<EAGMMUKWAY e. . w • woe • :PYOF111,Wl0101 w.yww•en y ww a W �wyy�y w Project PRIMROSE SCHOOL OF • �a.w, m�u •",,..�. �°•^ EDINA Location EDINA, ®'°°° ° °° •• MINNESOTA • s��.• "�.�� —w� ° Certification .r •..wweevnwwo '.:^�..:.:�'�LO ° .aaww ®•n ®.amnu.s�msssvmnrnmrya• e..w .w.r... e..••.yw,.•.yw�.w°,•w. .w e_ 1 .^•e..,y, Summary .r yy.�.y.•ye. �� ...�M "+ em°w•oea.n�s°mM ••�umwnen••m .w•.rl HtlY 4wet�NCw: Revision History °e•m rm ®•.w�aw.n.a. .•yam No.Ueu BY SWMtteI /Rrvl:bn • ..we.y w• ° °...° we..w°y,�.. 'll .�yw..y....w...e. e•..•.wywwe.w...eAn•.... Sheet Title ,,,� „ ° „®, •^""•••�- �• °m--°° GRADING PLAN .r Sheet No. Revision NORTH C4.01 Project No. CH119070 LEGEND ..mmlD 3 ®m �' �' I 1 apmvm`�iowDlw � �,/ I r I 111 ulnamrosRR¢ 0sr9 0 PaID CHI CH • � � l l f 1 1 I�I .r °,� � DE Y , - _. �'• / / JQ�O •` ,/ / i/ .�' , / I / I BBiENRmemxoevnl ®vl Ire AL / O�OJ •/` �` _ \ i/ J I 1 I I j nNrwun.emmD.RS. '•' • ,ice �� / /�/ jr \\ V I I I d I tDl i I = _ ,'•F •• 'ice j• '�� ----\ .r /i .I I ffff I 1 I i I nNOOiuulnareeuanmo.uu TS PFC ryl I I I n1YDY.I¢RYRAiW NRARI.¢ -/ / /' �i- \� t I I I f,•l I lulwnu®wiwsvr!numna PR = SEQUENCEOFCONMLICTI Sc ED A. niown° ,®,,°w { –' - -- I I: 1 111' I A mmmmarlEmaRram. ,/ / fD ••• •mr \ _ � I I I I I I I I I � . anmacr. mm.a.rA m�'orlamemn'"°6mmn..Nrrow¢uu / / ° / \a'° •+•' ` ••� —' I I I 1 III 1 I I ' js l ru"'�`mm nnr'm`ea `�'Wmlimi "umu1¢ "mim`�mmmnEn`�'nuc'"'me Lm ED } / \ r i I j i l I I I ¢Art`mm uuram m.nw1B1RDRID3 uR Dm MI 1. — '•� ` `\ I I I I I I I I I.OI A LNAIEBIMOMWIS ✓�►°I I m \ rr i III 1 JI I I I I l wm ¢unumi,uiu"�wwniromnwogaimuwaDma • i ' -' �� J•1r— _ —'•`r —_ •s. _ _ _ \ I� I I I ll l / I I A. R"R"iR1'"w1Er�NU11crUR wYI'LLAU3rowlEwu¢NRNR¢ ��• 8 0 L• ,r .r II I I I I'r /I : AD ran s¢wmnaavm lwBYUxne Cel �. – K i 'd• \ \ 1 , '1 II III { •r I =NOTE TO CONTRACTOR I�00 o>�n �.an.a.wmmuaoxmmra.mmranrnrwm�¢rt �' ,r — \ '1'r �,. 111jj1+'i NDmarn .lwwmRRRUDwraraN.gra�mxnrmnwNlAr ,rte ' � _ I I 1I 1111 I urwnmmrw.auuowarao�lmnmlwmm.s wnuoR l `O� �\ \ I III 1111 II Qirc° inu`' n.nwanlcma�ie��i.iolraswn..nuooe 'no / \\ ,'�°✓1� \ — \ � i�, 11 IIII IIj I rootsm"" 01"A" DR3n .UURU.1vBRAAroDNmrRl.lmmroraawDl Q rg I \ ° '= -� \\ �- \� j I 1 11/1111 II wmmnR.ow> 1°•mmlu®Rnmmmmmcmo®um M I \ �may / i '•911 I� � R SUMMARY IN ACRES R3. �• `+°.. �./ I \ 1111 .An .. i � o � 'N...�° / .�I\ 1 I 1111 1 \• ov.moR.lA D13.0 Sul \\\� \\ •,r I nloln..wl �� m« ''€ '��•�.. •, I I\ '' I \\ \\ •REFERT03MMGA3MA GENERAL NmE IAAI T a NR.D NOTE96 LMMON nAP3. AND 3FAND —I DETARs 1 ,r •� 1 / r / I I I I I I \ \\ I \\ EROSION CONTROL MATERIALS QUANTITIES BEM I QDANYFn I ® v �gC \\ P-R-O m¢RR¢oR1.w.R. w.Rn1 Q \.� .I I / � I �� . s \\ I •�'I I / I I � I / I .. Il naRYx �NUrronwmown Rr.D �C "r ' m wm RRRnlRwxm pA —SOIL EROSION / SEDIMENTATION CONTROL OPERATION TIME SCHEDULE C11 GDN3TRICIIDN 3EUDENCE A1N I FEB J&4AR APR JW1 AN1 AR A¢D 3ED I DCF NDV I DEC LW FEB NIM MR IMY ARI SE N�N1.W¢3 .D•1 Dm.E3wRDR CC n.00RRnaxmRUnox3D.w PFI wwA.wN Fr.AwDm�.Rwa fnEtiHwlNfigR NRNNRA WRRUt FnNwDU3 Shy �om1DFNRUn..nwDOR RRRs . . . . =1 NOn:: fANTRAROR OR GENERALIDNiRAROR TD mMFIEIETABIE WITNTN¢R SFEUFR: /ROIEGT 6OIEDIAE PTE 33a infra 4rE�egAq I- MMAWAIOIn I'll-ma -6310 M—m .4Nm mmA3¢ ft m Int ILDREN'S SIGN GROUP IAGLE3 CREEA WAY IRTN•W10701 jest IMROSE HOOL OF INA ation INA, NNESOTA - tiFlwtion 0 r N ' mil r..l uu nmary iislon History a. swwm.l 13R TO � •�Title SSIt•ON AND DIMENT INTROL PLAN ASEI !et No. Revision 5.01 J.ct No. CHI19070 / / / 1.1 `Ilel I I113sV°I II 111 1 I I I , 1111 it � �'1lI�IIII Il I l i� II l�l I I I *3 I I I III cut I l I II I III I11� II II I I Lljjl� � I I'III'I ll ii iil•'� � �IlliIIII/ I I 1 111/ II II�II1�1� I IIII1111i1 111111+'1 III\ 11V 1111111 11 I 11� II +111 11 1111 1 1111111 +111`11 I �l Ill 11.� l I � III I I •ri�l�/ 1 = IliGEND 7fra rm�m D xmD ` nunuex —� vwumv-- wwsa —s mum.xm Dear mcw-R {rj ST -9 ibPM IO x�xm• o Eu° °.--° >. Client rtq..eDNwme """ HIm ® CHILDREN'S DESIGN GROUP ®DE KwvRTll, w sotei mm,o.EE ®vE nxwunvmR .eoixxr nnnRYxs emmn wN SB n uxx w XDee R.mru -u.N. TS Project 75EDY W®""YRR.�XT�IY �� PRIMROSE SEQUENCE OF CONSTRUCTION SCHOOL OF EDINA i i �n�Re�oaosN'iexxsm. a me sE- nRR.mn wD nonaxne.r wen imwr.0 enrvmu ueD mxaer ra ervx mxuu- mimlrtun m rnmeu M" �R- DxHX— mR,.�De Location EDINA, I E.xRae�m 'D"D- rm- DfxcxXl MINNESOTA D i PXASE1pMO1rs[m DExuDmw.+. •LLYNrtDS,YtID[mwi6. niMrtR NI1C.ID14Ylmn I eel[Trem[� xMIxDXISSWM]lwlxfnuFl111155. I � nsrt uurno� mn�unouuExr.uemiDenoruxewn o+ wEeumerewnummumemevneaumeDmmwxnnvmn Certification 0 —NOTE TD CONTRACTOR �umxwm ��ra�Xnmwnxra�mewrasmnrmn¢u I m ra.orwrauxerueroeXwr Dorm ue.vr. NeYUn �w P®ux mwe °muuun wm. u naa... m uawP r.DSnuuu :inR�imi m"'u'uD�'ra nunnuw�i.nuEr�i¢DV.�..,.aeDw� eIra RPNr�pEMeeMiNS. EGIe]WIMra�D %lldlxlY llDaMEDNeraD6 ®R lE I AREA SUMMARY IN ACRE , w�'^'•'•"`' Summary e�- .✓ Irrs.mumceme.wrvors anx'E rD�Dx. m+e— seve+me Revision History •RFSER TSI SHEEP 6L3 R JRGEI2MLNOiES,MNMFNAxQ Ne.Deex B, LebmllpeN Rwlabn I xo F; nEAnox xuPS Rxu srnxwAOOEruES ?- 'I EROSION CONTROL MATERIALS n�Ar 1 QUANTITIES Vi 1 KE nEM UN ouaxmr TO ew 1 e6t�YCiOneRxNxE � V `�� A 1 NORTX mLLTPRORCeEx OLVxI Ur-4 O r�CC1 X- I ® �xurwvuuox DEVnn�x O- -`! EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROLPLAN PHASE II Sheet No. Revision C5.02 vroiea No. rmagu D i `_I' / Y1IwIN1 ei1N YY/ / � s' sNr•Hil� '�' � . �T' x • f ro Lwow -u F tY Imv[ mw w[ F F ! � ,-e• exwnF e' OG �\ INFILTRATION BASIN TOP PIPE LAYOUT 1 i�N.TS. j �1 INFILTRATION BASIN BOTTOM PIPE LAYOUT �� N.TS I I I I tR)enee o osss H ��v` Sheet No. Revision NORTH C6.01 0 Project No. CH119070 infra eLEGEND .IOrm[e m m mu.anm ` stwu �M —.O • �stwa � —e�0 O P.N 1 �� wP.Aw0.iMINwAwwm ' IIIR>miRa M.m 110 ut[N[M gpwatb,m 65H1 Nu,ee — +— —.— rzvllvu —A— —•— M-00 W- wm.esa ewwr wwmeemN I = UnL1TY CONSTRUCTION NOTES Client .elpRwmn rY nw reORn Y W l n OY6rwR,N w �0.m wrtx j ` os wouomLn¢sLrmrwuu u UUewonra mLU�N wwxam +m•.a ®r u.wam uaa.nNRr.roe s1Y. a"'u"•Lmi'm„wwNwY,iAn CHILDREN'S u.i" I . wuanouuuumimuimowucm ..aromruama.mLa DESIGN GROUP s m.le.nw.wuNmor[iLroYmr..,lLime wmtm•rzuwunrnm j W roYruw,nuwx mo.cworoMLmuuwsamwnamn)o uiww¢w•MinwN. •Nr"OrNaL fnlHm,cO m •R sO¢pulm m mwnmumuwa rorarue,c•uraumnrmra vsluLCLLSrntuwnr •awnrN,wsolos mxl.enu I wuuv [mwLLVUU,oxmu®meRwwu•rwW,LUUw u ouwaeuw (wnori4naew•Im,•IRr•epauswm . w. aw ,Lxwnuwm®wnw,RL.Y�. ®n.,�.�x[w.. Project . wA .rzwwtNw.nlwwwxxMRAiwNwwNmraol.. j> wuAruuwuronwcwaAnm.mmmYwec PRIMROSE • wwma.nroR^mnL®^•°•u>zwun� a ice. °m.n SCHOOL OF ` wu.. a ,�.roLrouuwwwomxau[rrLwnx..nNwum • wwtxwnrwwrtv�u. EDINA I I m of vrmiuu rtw la"uxa L""'u'w�",auom .r1Of'icmi:ivn '� � � � LIww,N,NOw.R.a�umunLRL.uL�..,Yn Location .sRmRwwmnN[nM,Mnuox . xma.LUr . nxer m"i""� "IJpOwxpl EDINA, i i � MtL Min6MnYGl1.[roxnm MVMY11 mRiY [0.0•x1 YY�igwRN IWOtLM[AfURwNnf )e![x Aix[ INIUMNIVaM1nN N.mro uoww . "o.L,Y�.arz.,x[mxw.nA1..,R..ILM l[•n YYAAi wNW wrLaAwmnrol¢wa. I �n ��aunnesrtswuuMwroroYmmMmn..L,o.ro u,emvwlwNrou,nwmlra rlvrmmm.wL,awn sl.wxaNM n•n M Launwwm u1.uu[.nmswuuaar•mmnM ' ou rwaavc®. MINNESOTA c MLrAlYRO.sNw,•Rw..IWnCR erzta.nro•wwAmmmuraro •vusv[ruxuero w.wmmlw,w¢.o.rYW m,Iw rmm.M mNi.rnal wu w xm,anr imroeNOU rm rxr mswm ro M •elruwr r.orvlo tauuw. tuuw ra ms,wovx rwm m,Iw wMn. I r v m omrooa ucroaA.ttnuuxnwrtxcLUwn•mmu w. �uo+ roots ,MLmlrunwwuusauwwmAnLm.uwumL Certification �r �O j D• MIOe11[ I .O�YOLIOYILnmwraWO•ImrNr[RrW010 1�roeYW OiMN9611a uAwlvwlnwnYTSm.[Wro1RYe10.m4 1� y�4W 1. W w.wusromwlwarawmmMOUQno.ramvmn.ro olaTmu,.ln.n nwtwmramrtuvanR.r®uNCL..mwmmm 'I monuA.wawm Mruwu,mramLl.wxnsum uuwetsuAlee [nwM rO16mR1R.el,,. mNua anM M nonRn weiNtwm MT ue nmulmo R Ya,i, umnoxauuuanmowwYiwumuwsxWwe v,owomme a. .lom m ronaa rurso enNFl11 M ,tII w .v,wnou ra r.oumm •rm wunuimu Hunt j Nnmtrx'�"c"Rlvns' "� uR•ov,wuxw.tr✓a wunoe•Ltnarwuww.lm R unmromsna, IRU. wulmrw,wiewnN.LOSSUr.,eureoNnes �m�r �. iemr ..e•w..� omcwswuuasAUrrourrorwn.ml.LSm� ewwmaumRrunR•mN j neNUm Summary pwb.em p1.seLs L wfoumnrro Swaueounn [onuwowxRllruas [NCLttulwvu,oll \' 10.01[N.ronmelNWNOYXn.W OeORM•W f04fSNN1RrofILROtl e[ m1P[ OwTN[ iA0L N0wL 0.MMN .eNlixlrolO,wRTOwixwlmANlwrtl[ rN.wwm 4.1 /rwwt� rlwrnw AWIA�.A i I �nm�wl"xnm M[ ro.l IM0wl0. MC0nMR0eRWlw wtr010wa tp uuoAaosw,LS,selmiotenrmmwlAralw LNCUa Revision History NaOmM sWOJYI /Ry •lxanOAN•l[imrtNxx.VOR H.swmtOWLr[0m rrov""mss: d� ra m.,uc,a sx.0 Art•x • tnn m.Im Iw wFR. L we•rznewwuuuwmanoxramur �. ��ructsmrtmrGLlNYrz .a• suet. ..a.ramReu,mtwunwex•uu.mr•Iw[N•W �' w" x". 4�eZ��' co1o['��'iwLaunm.'�wLrtM�.uwi'�u mxm"'tRLOnM��m Nu• uuror: W. cawnvxarasl '�'in'icumasa[wioasnnmw rR0•wupvmxM w0liYiwNI.mMNW [MmIwR (� V .. \�V n \� H ��v` Sheet No. Revision NORTH C6.01 0 Project No. CH119070 I n3� 1 M YED a1.(1)R.I gy DE / y /° ` /01.55 YI IXIUL L2E) C9,D111 m_I� / / \ 1 1 F I, /I6 I / / ! I hl I I I I I I IIII �I I 4••11{{1 ' 1' I II 'WD�mD /r x / / / - _ekiiiiiiiiiiiimvv_ am DE U -E) B:1 IIK,I PIM_R_OSES \VVI = I 0 art` ®�I�® ®00.. BI- KIN COb1G (1m.) 9 1 SITE LANDSCAPE PLAN 10 R: LL0 f scut 1' • ED, NORTH F I, /I6 I / / ! I hl I I I I I I IIII �I I 4••11{{1 ' 1' I II 'WD�mD /r x / / / - OIWKES 90.1.., Dl 1wD.c SO(OK[ YR 1. 1K COMwC1d1'S COMO(.f2. coxla.clu. 1: vG+r. w.wnu 9o.x w :c nw. SEED NI% LEGENDO PIANTING NOTES —1 DE . uo-:Egtwl lMwnlYart.wsw[o DEE. DIE. W° 1:� n� :� a "a k1fra .�yu.mw 11.ana PEmm, mEar 1� 1RP wa x.>b 2a x,nwrt 1G.® SBN1 Irsa.n.sm: aaBRaa Bn m.esv amen Client CHILDREN'S DESIGN GROUP 2124EAGIISUFEK 1AI —ORM GA 30101 Project PRIMROSE SCHOOL OF EDINA Location EDINA, MINNESOTA Certification ' aaA� O -,3 Summary, Ovb�•o Ps1� Revision History N:.WU B1 SuamlOAl /RvN1b: Sheet Title LANDSCAPE PLAN Sheet No. Revision L1.01 Project No. CH119070 _ekiiiiiiiiiiiimvv_ am 0 art` ®�I�® ®00.. OIWKES 90.1.., Dl 1wD.c SO(OK[ YR 1. 1K COMwC1d1'S COMO(.f2. coxla.clu. 1: vG+r. w.wnu 9o.x w :c nw. SEED NI% LEGENDO PIANTING NOTES —1 DE . uo-:Egtwl lMwnlYart.wsw[o DEE. DIE. W° 1:� n� :� a "a k1fra .�yu.mw 11.ana PEmm, mEar 1� 1RP wa x.>b 2a x,nwrt 1G.® SBN1 Irsa.n.sm: aaBRaa Bn m.esv amen Client CHILDREN'S DESIGN GROUP 2124EAGIISUFEK 1AI —ORM GA 30101 Project PRIMROSE SCHOOL OF EDINA Location EDINA, MINNESOTA Certification ' aaA� O -,3 Summary, Ovb�•o Ps1� Revision History N:.WU B1 SuamlOAl /RvN1b: Sheet Title LANDSCAPE PLAN Sheet No. Revision L1.01 Project No. CH119070 P MROSE SCHOOL OF EDINA — — — — — — — — — — ------- —12,000s -F - — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — -- FFE=827.9 lia err p wia v �II � n W .1,�� Vi nn 4— r2-'� MAIN ENTRANCE PIAN o lo ao �w immilill MAIN ENTRANCE PLAN o 1. NORW ELM RD A 13 0MV nMk C11"AR10 PI MAIL Cile CHI DE.' 1114 L ACW0l Po ............ PRI scl EDI ay Loa EDI ME Cer t--- 19— Sur mb Rei xLo-- DE Shi L Pro Infra LDREN'S IGN GROUP f MEK WAY TK"Nwl act MROSE IOOL OF MA Mon NA, MESOTA ifl-tion _0" imary Islon Hist* % TO \b, 9DSCAPE (AILS it No. Revislon .02 ectNo-CH119070 Lei IN Mmm L-3 M no K30 ®m�� 'l1lly� Cer t--- 19— Sur mb Rei xLo-- DE Shi L Pro Infra LDREN'S IGN GROUP f MEK WAY TK"Nwl act MROSE IOOL OF MA Mon NA, MESOTA ifl-tion _0" imary Islon Hist* % TO \b, 9DSCAPE (AILS it No. Revislon .02 ectNo-CH119070 1111111 IRRIGATION GUIDELINES nIla9l10 vALK � � m® wbm ro .lc .vim. m I i TmA,6 6iAR C0.e¢OW UTZ QNY1,T 1406 I TaO,DQ TQ I iFalAC UTa4L TIB,q rd,mo�.cWR �m`i i M/VACWY A9N VKK m. n d vmf n W[ AT Gal Mal FMI) I mi m ue�AR AvamT c niax,Tum�TwTnap,mvmsg11 �rw. aam ®umo .m�p1n - s¢ ion rlmr sanr 14bw w m.1� . wv vsrJ4°m.• i01¢ avaP0. vALK qT . VxOG u�1'F "K • •u1 16 � mw r,mm GvIV. I c �Y Ow ngAD can D PLANTING BED OFIP SYSTEM —TYP. il I 1 AS —BUILT IRRIGATION REQUIREMENTS �^ 1z.o s••,• .• a m• NORTH LAYOUT 070 �liH�m f3 LOW FLOW ZONE CONTROL VALVE KIT �, POP —UP MP ROTATOR �avu. �i• 0-1--m r.0 lamo �n 0� xw vem .mm ®'O .O1.a mo a.a n r � aw1 v � �� E REMOTE CONTROL VALVE •u _ a0ly 1Aeam n01 WK � � _ r �f �4 r �.. man ,a. - m. w cam • lsiun uiv o nnom F ZONE VALVE •iy IRRIGATION LEGEND � ❑ �i..�®e Iona AvcAmca m. ems, �010 m. M wa.�\ �`" 1 1111111 IRRIGATION GUIDELINES nIla9l10 vALK � � m® wbm ro .lc .vim. m I i TmA,6 6iAR C0.e¢OW UTZ QNY1,T 1406 I TaO,DQ TQ I iFalAC UTa4L TIB,q rd,mo�.cWR �m`i i M/VACWY A9N VKK m. n d vmf n W[ AT Gal Mal FMI) I mi m ue�AR AvamT c niax,Tum�TwTnap,mvmsg11 �rw. aam ®umo .m�p1n - s¢ ion rlmr sanr 14bw w m.1� . wv vsrJ4°m.• i01¢ avaP0. vALK qT . VxOG u�1'F "K • •u1 16 � mw r,mm GvIV. I c �Y Ow ngAD can D PLANTING BED OFIP SYSTEM —TYP. il I 1 AS —BUILT IRRIGATION REQUIREMENTS �^ 1z.o s••,• .• a m• NORTH LAYOUT 070 �liH�m f3 LOW FLOW ZONE CONTROL VALVE KIT �, POP —UP MP ROTATOR �avu. �i• nm 1eunL AT ® i.so1.®.m.nir,e"ruarim'wa�mn� omfr-a 1--h%kale n01�cc1�OhSVA�p rw.ftm _B MMAW No* Client CHILDREN'S DESIGN GROUP ssu EAGMO MWAY Project PRIMROSE SCHOOL OF EDINA Location EDINA, MINNESOTA Certification 0� Summary o.c.cra r v. wu. mn. Revision History rm.on. sub ,.cam. sy TJ DETAILS Sheet No. ReVISIon L1.02 Project No. CH119070 0-1--m r.0 lamo �n 0� xw vem .mm ®'O .O1.a mo a.a n r � aw1 v � �� E REMOTE CONTROL VALVE •u _ a0ly 1Aeam n01 WK � � _ r �f �4 r �.. man ,a. - m. w cam • lsiun uiv o nnom F ZONE VALVE •iy IRRIGATION LEGEND � ❑ �i..�®e Iona AvcAmca m. ems, �010 m. M wa.�\ nm 1eunL AT ® i.so1.®.m.nir,e"ruarim'wa�mn� omfr-a 1--h%kale n01�cc1�OhSVA�p rw.ftm _B MMAW No* Client CHILDREN'S DESIGN GROUP ssu EAGMO MWAY Project PRIMROSE SCHOOL OF EDINA Location EDINA, MINNESOTA Certification 0� Summary o.c.cra r v. wu. mn. Revision History rm.on. sub ,.cam. sy TJ DETAILS Sheet No. ReVISIon L1.02 Project No. CH119070 F=00WIE D) i — LEGEND rNwEIR °� a infra � / \ a wltwc w.0 llvm°,E.A °w ° _ 11N0 ®n,r k m to 41tllmN mu) MlN oo Rtnm. Client i o I CHILDREN'S / I - _ KEY NOTES UP DESIGN GROUP •-' O Z I WuwiwwaEWAUrscllaE 'ou 1114 M [NEE[ WAY AOND" ."-01 �; / t i 1 WVMfIA 9G. w,0�OR,E NF,d1A1o16R 0[TYmDU • 0�0 j, ✓ I� i V, ; e. wxurvxrsexlwE+inu,¢wuww,w °now . Irx„Ra l� lcx,llc vu° cal w,Aw rAl wm.w Project ,:' l`� / ''/ i = ; 'I °. lAwunwnlrs�Amanwl � � � � .• � w i � � ; " )ulwusvAwlrtnwuw wlEww PRIMROSE / �� -'x :• I Q j i. rmES,N°elvnwoo>E OElANl90tl 1 w,ssnA,ARmw°EloEAlom SCHOOL OF EDINA /•/ ' /• ®� � � I � rmuartpatnAlmu DEVELOPMENT NOTES ♦ •uwamsu¢miwwroncR.uES„mxrmt. Location / �o - • a o' ( I j I ; . catcalls otuowl.lErottrsl.uvl>,oroanol>mlwm ° 0R. EDINA, , i j Y wUf cam lDmroTElw111wAAE o. Au roNl +mwm,x Ax°u•WI[wixlnnk7SmlclwrsEmu,En. MINNESOTA / `� � • t. � I ; I c m.,l.c,w°wullmro:wwrznwuruxs,w n•c'1III4,NRS4:0 • ` 1 – ' I ' UW"` LeS[u„uwiC'�lur.,f'O�vIS RU,ri P¢w11NIPW 0ilRwLwE.MDO.[,mm:W _ ' ?RIMROSE $?IpOI` I 1 11. ( iFrt QO OM) 1 ! '. a[llwrvmhC rw lAa,rra[)o,xwlw o[tAaumwNn2,lltn,arsar Certification O r+rwra....ea.. —; .� –______`__ I i M. IEM IOiWY n.,Iw mi NlBwlLLt m,Y81NpM1. m,.RAt.lmmtw,R®1S I wcumrsowmEWUauam na aniou,E UE VUU w•rt.wvuur twcnuwultt0 [18sRil$I>�1,RG,OIAMrt lt]ry AwAtunwlltoE /0 / swEaalAll�1 , �u..awvnr[nmwunolww.°+rrvmxoR+ua wlR4mELwIR[>d11,oL 00Ew1YElw1)MIINMtw ANDY06YTS �° e_ � f 'I 11 wwRr„[Ian NPC,x[wrmuRSrml,°n.[)IO mI�f,Fw Y0A0tfUS nEmYIM [Ica 9MLL m1RM[MMQMWW1RYenO[6• M6N,10Q7)IW11F W1°YF61Il,IEO� °Y0p1. ° ° _ � � I ; 06O6r1)I[ \lMm 1. 79 r111®r•fO68Mll RrY68 A1wOALL�lMwARAfImMfDRmI. 1 � 1 j a. wlelrR nt00RTrAwdn9°u ¢riplW[D AS 1011�LL Wlelfl lm UlWR uYl °s flry)/Rll '%w .ROO ~•` ° ®� ° Qom/ I 1 ` . la,b.a °. r.rs °l.0 uuwwmmwww. ..ma.lE Summary (D '' N l E DEVELOPMENT SUMMARY mml -`t Revlsion History c 'Y` l i �\ ��\ I �E•um�mu•w1 ss� yuimlm, uxE ° xo.mte or sremm.i /Ne.hen 'll Dom— O 1 I I tl ¢lwmRUlsrw rmm>F m.snuRal 10 RA0s nAU mu¢°ruut r°ull>A EwSwIC,W �� I � \ j � tm1°O�Ow °I C�f4�lS�o°'RIR�MIw41 / IPS)Nl5 Sheet Title d 1 ROOF OF PARKING j EXHIBIT �Tr, �✓ l Sheet No. Revision m PPXBTl Project N= HI I T 'R10f aF PA RK1 P L JFA) .r{9iNA11..y, MEMORANDUM - Plan Review ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT • N�Pt-� B CITY OF EDINA DATE: January 5, 2012 TO: Cary Teague - City Planner FROM: Wayne Houle - Director of Public Works / City Engineer SUBJECT: Primrose School of Edina 7401 Metro Boulevard Engineering has reviewed the plans for the above stated project and offer the following comments: 1. A Nine Mile Creek Watershed permit will be required. This is the first review of these plans. Staff will require a more detail review of the plans that are submitted for building permits. Please contact me if you have any questions regarding this first review. Thanks G:\PW%ADMIN \COMM\EXTERNAL \GENERAL CORR BY STREETS \M Streets \7401 Metro Blvd\20120105 review of 7401 Metro Boulevard.docx h■ Sa c pTRAFFIC STUDY COMPANY Aid I Traffic and Parking Study One Corporate Circle Edina, MN ; O� G� I hereby certify that this report was prepared by me or under my direct supervision, and that I am a duly Licensed Professional Engineer under the laws of the State of Minnesota. By: Micxiael P. Spack, P.E., .T.O.E. MN License No. 40936 Date: May 9, 2011 Kd 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. ExecutiveSummary ............................................... ..............................1 ExistingParking Data ............:.............................. ............................... 2 Parking Forecasts and Analyses .......................... ..............................3 Conclusions and Recommendations ................... ..............................4 Appendix................................................................ ............................... 4 LIST OF FIGURES Figure1 — Location,Maps ............................................................... ..............................1 Figure 2 — Existing Parking Trendline .......................................... ............................... 2 Figure 3 — Factored Parking Trendline for Office Full Occupancy ............................ 3 One Corporate Circle Parking Impact Study B p' Edina, MM May 2011 1. Executive Summary a. Background and Purpose Hempel Properties manages One Corporate Circle, a 110,975 gross square foot office complex located at 7401 Metro Boulevard in Edina, MN (see Figure 1). The purpose of this study is to assess the parking feasibility of adding a 11,500 square foot day care center to the northern portion of the site. One Corporate Circle in Edina, MN � t Figure 1 — Location Maps b. Results If the existing One Corporate Circle building was fully occupied, it is anticipated 266 of the 557 parking spaces would be filled with vehicles during the peak parking period. The proposed day care center footprint will eliminate 65 parking stalls leaving the office building's associated peak parking with 226 vacant parking stalls. At the day care center's peak parking period, which is conservatively being combined to coincide with the office building's peak, the day care center will need 43 parking stalls. Based on the analyses in this study, it is expected peak parking demand would occupy 309 of the 492 available parking stalls after the proposed 11,500 square foot day care center is built on the site. There will continue to be ample parking on the One Corporate Circle site after the day care center is fully operational. �o One Corporate Circle 1 Edina, MM Parking Impact Study May 2011 4'�a 2. Existing Parking Data a. Data Collection Procedure The parking lot was divided into three zones and a visual count was made every half hour to determine how many cars were parked in each of the three zones. A map showing the three zones is included in Appendix A. The first count was started at 8:00 a.m. and the last count was started at 4:30 p.m. Counts were collected on Thursday, May 5, 2011. Data was recorded in 30 minute increments using hand held data collection equipment (Jamar Count Boards). b. Existing Parking Utilization The three zones contain a total of 557 parking stalls. This includes 545 regular stalls and 12 handicap stalls. The most stalls occupied on Thursday, May 5th (197) occurred at 10:30a.m. which represents 35.4% of the available parking. A trendline of the site's parking occupancy for May 5th is shown in Figure 2. Detailed existing parking data by zones and in total is contained in Appendix A. 600 500 400 °t 00 s CL CL 200 100 0 G G L G C G G C G L L G C Q •t Q Q Q Q Q o. a � a �. a i d pa a 0 OM OM 0 M 0 M �? 0 0 O0 Om 0 rCi^. 0 Om 00 00 M M O O H 14 N N .--1 H N N 'h rf: d d .-4 r1 .-1 .-4 .-I .--1 6 Total Capacity —f— Occupied 5 /5/11 Figure 2 — Existing Parking Trendline P� ,*0 o� One Corporate Circle 2 Utdina, MN Parking Impact Study May, 2011 3. Parking Forecasts and Analyses a. Parking with Full Occupancy One Corporate Circle currently has a 22.1% vacancy rate. To be conservative in the assessment of maximum parking needs, we factored the actual counts by 22.1 % plus an additional 5% to allow a "safety factor'. Figure 3 shows the factored parking trendline. Factoring the peak demand of 197 parked vehicles results in a maximum of 266 vehicles parked on site, which represents 47.7% of the available parking. Detailed factored parking data by zones and in total is contained in Appendix C. Figure 3 — Factored Parking Trendline for Office Full Occupancy b. Forecast Parking A parking generation analysis was performed for the proposed development based on the methods and rates published in the ITE Parking Generation Manual, 4th Edition. The Manual is a compilation of data collected at existing facilities throughout the United States. The peak parking periods for a day care center (ITE land use code 565) are om 8:00 a.m. to 9:00 a.m. and 4:00 p.m. to 6:00 p.m. The peak ing demand on site occurred at 10:30 a.m., which does not coinci ith the peak period of the proposed day care center. To be con ative,&the peak parking to be generated by the day care center wia'N alig 4wlth the site's peak. �C� One Corporate Circle Parking Impact Study k4 Edina, MN May, 2011 600 500 400 Y 300 �C L a 200 100 -- 0 Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q a n a a a a a a Q. a 0 0 0 0 o O o 0 0 o O o 0 0 0 0 0 0 o m 9 m 0 m 0 M 0 m o m o m o n o m 0o Do M Ql O O r-I e-i N N H -4 N N Cn M CT V e 4 r1 4 Total Capacity —11— Factored 5/5/11 Figure 3 — Factored Parking Trendline for Office Full Occupancy b. Forecast Parking A parking generation analysis was performed for the proposed development based on the methods and rates published in the ITE Parking Generation Manual, 4th Edition. The Manual is a compilation of data collected at existing facilities throughout the United States. The peak parking periods for a day care center (ITE land use code 565) are om 8:00 a.m. to 9:00 a.m. and 4:00 p.m. to 6:00 p.m. The peak ing demand on site occurred at 10:30 a.m., which does not coinci ith the peak period of the proposed day care center. To be con ative,&the peak parking to be generated by the day care center wia'N alig 4wlth the site's peak. �C� One Corporate Circle Parking Impact Study k4 Edina, MN May, 2011 The 85th percentile peak period parking demand for a day care center is 3.70 parking spaces per 1,000 square feet of gross floor area. Using this parking rate results in needing 43 parking stalls for an 11,500 square foot day care center. Of the 557 parking spaces supplied on site, 266 spaces would be expected to be occupied if the site's buildings are fully leased and 65 spaces would be expected to be eliminated to make room for the day care center. This leaves 226 parking spaces vacant to be used by the day care center. 4. Conclusions and Recommendations If the existing One Corporate Circle buildings were fully occupied, it is anticipated 266 of the 557 parking spaces would be filled with vehicles during the peak parking period. The proposed day care center footprint will eliminate 65 parking stalls leaving the office building's associated peak parking with 226 vacant parking stalls. At the day care center's peak parking period, which is conservatively being combined to coincide with the office building's peak, the day care center will need 43 parking stalls. Based on the analyses in this study, it is expected peak parking demand would occupy 309 of the 492 available parking stalls after the proposed 11,500 square foot day care center is built on the site. There will continue to be ample parking on the One Corporate Circle site after the day care center is fully operational. 5. Appendix A. Existing Parking Capacity and Occupancy E. Factored Parking Capacity and Occupancy One Corporate Circle Parking Impact Study W IS, �\ I -I(, � ,W 2011 Appendix A Existing Parking Capacity and Occupancy / V• � tmort 1 i Zone 2 i e v Zone 1 One Corporate Circle Parking Zones One Corporate Circle 5 Parking Impact Study 41b 2011 Appendix A Existing Parking Capacity and Occupancy One Corporate Circle Raw Parkinq Data: Thursday - May 5, 2011 TIME Zone 1 Zone 2 Zone 3 Total Occupied 5/5/11 Total % Occupied 8:00 AM 41 49 1 91 16.3 8:30 AM 1 60 65 1 126 22.6 9:00 AM 78 75 1 154 27.6 9:30 AM 90 86 1 177 31.8 10:00 AM 102 88 1 191 34.3 10:30 AM 103 93 1 197 35.4 11:00 AM 105 90 1 196 35.2 11:30 AM 104 87 1 192 34.5 12:00 PM 98 87 2 187 33.6 12:30 PM 93 81 2 176 31.6 1:00 PM 94 84 1 179 32.1 1:30 PM 90 76 1 167 30.0 2:00 PM 97 74 1 172 30.9 2:30 PM 102 86 0 188 33.8 3:00 PM 94 80 0 174 31.2 3:30 PM 86 72 0 158 28.4 4:00 PM 73 59 0 132 23.7 4:30 PM 1 62 52 0 114 20.5 CAPACITY 287 205 1 65 557 One Corporate Circle Parking Impact Study W O ina, AdN r� May, 2011 Appendix B Factored Parking Capacity and Occupancy One Corporate Circle Factored Parkin Data: Thursda - May 5, 2011 TIME Zone 1 Zone 2 Zone 3 Total Occupied Total % Occupied Factored Occupied Factored % Occupied 8:00 AM 41 49 1 91 16.3 123 22.0 8:30 AM 60 65 1 126 22.6 170 30.5 9:00 AM 78 75 1 154 27.6 208 37.3 9:30 AM 90 86 1 177 31.8 239 42.8 10:00 AM 102 88 1 191 34.3 257 46.2 10:30 AM 103 93 1 197 35.4 266 47.7 11:00 AM 105 90 1 196 35.2 264 47.4 11:30 AM 104 87 1 192 34.5 259 46.5 12:00 PM 98 87 2 187 33.6 252 45.3 12:30 PM 93 81 2 176 31.6 237 42.6 1:00 PM 94 84 1 179 32.1 241 43.3 1:30 PM 90 76 1 167 30.0 225 40.4 2:00 PM 97 74 1 172 30.9 232 41.6 2:30 PM 102 86 0 188 33.8 253 45.5 3:00 PM 94 80 0 174 31.2 235 42.1 3:30 PM 86 72 0 158 28.4 213 38.2 4:00 PM 73 59 0 132 23.7 178 31.9 4:30 PM 62 52 0 114 20.5 154 27.6 CAPACITY 287 205 65 557 FACTOR 1.348 One Corporate Circle Parking Impact Study kaq I,` P ,MN 2011 on V �o n f Mb r r��'! ill r ! �� 1 '.�'" � � �_.�/ � } �� - ,.•�/ '� A �r�: • k � ter~ -_� ' - a � � {l i - LN Avenue Sou dMt. Louis Park, MN 55426 . 952 -37 8-5017 . www.SpackConsulting.com TABLE OF CONTENTS 1. Introduction and Summary ......................... ..............................1 2. Proposed Development ............................. ............................... 2 3. Analysis of Existing Conditions ................ ............................... 4 4. Projected Traffic ......................................... .............................10 5. Traffic and Improvement Analysis ............ .............................19 6. Conclusions and Recommendations ...... ............................... 21 7. Appendix ..................................................... .............................21 LIST OF FIGURES Figure2.1 — Location Map .................................................... ..............................2 Figure2.2 — Site Plan ............................................................ ...................:..........3 Figure 3.1 — Existing Transportation System ..................... ..............................7 Figure 3.2 — Existing Weekday AM Peak Hour Volumes ... ..............................8 Figure 3.3 — Existing Weekday PM Peak HourVolumes .... ..............................9 Figure 4.1 — Trip Distribution ............... ... ..... ... ........ ............ .............................12 Figure 4.2 — Weekday AM Peak Hour Volume Dye to Development .............13 Figure 4.3 — Weekday PM Peak Hour Volume Due to Development .............14 Figure 4.4 — 2013 No -Build Weekday AM Peak Hour Volumes ......................15 Figure 4.5 — 2013 No -Build Weekday PM Peak Hour Volumes ......................16 Figure 4.6 — 2013 Build Weekday AM Peak Hour Volumes ...........................17 Figure 4.7 — 2013 Build Weekday PM Peak Hour Volumes ............................18 LIST OF TABLES Table 3.1 — Existing Peak Hour Level of Service ( LOS) ..... ..............................6 Table4.1 — Trip Generation ................................................. .............................11 Table 5.1 — 2013 Level of Service ( LOS) ............................. .............................19 Table 5.2 - Daily Traffic Volumes ........................................ .............................20 60 2. Proposed Development a. Site Location The project site is located along Metro Boulevard northwest of the Highway 100 & Edina Industrial Boulevard/West 77th Street intersection in Edina, MN (see Figure 2.1). Proposed Site Figure 2.1 — Location Map b. Land Use and Intensity The proposed development will consist of a 12,000 square foot daycare center with a playground area. The proposed daycare center's footprint will eliminate 65 parking stalls and will be sharing a parking lot and driveways with the One Corporate Circle office building. A parking study at this lot was conducted by Spack Consulting in May of 2011. The study showed that there is expected to be adequate parking available after the daycare center is fully operational. The parking study can be found in the Appendix. c. Site Plan See Figure 2.2 for the proposed site plan. d. Development Phasing and Timing The Primrose School daycare center is planned to be built and fully operational by 2013. Traffic Impact Study 2 Primrose School of Edina 4�a 1. Introduction and Summary a. Purpose of Report and Study Objectives Children's Design Group is proposing to build an approximately 12,000 square foot daycare center on the northern corner of the parking lot at 7401 Metro Boulevard in Edina, MN. The daycare center will be known as the Primrose School and it will share the surface parking lot with the One Corporate Circle office building. The Traffic and Parking Study for One Corporate Circle dated May 9, 2011 found ample parking on site to accommodate the daycare center. The purpose of this report is to determine if the proposed daycare will significantly impact the adjacent transportation system in the near term and to recommend mitigation measures if necessary. The study objectives are: i. Document how the adjacent existing transportation system operates. ii. Analyze how the adjacent transportation system will operate in 2013 if there is no development. iii. Analyze how the adjacent transportation system will operate in 2013 with full development of the site. iv. Recommend improvements if needed. The scope of this traffic study follows the City of Edina's Transportation Impact Analysis Initiation and Review Policy. The following intersections are analyzed in this study: is West 70th Street/Metro Boulevard ii. Northern Site Driveway /Metro Boulevard iii. Southern Site Driveway /Metro Boulevard iv. Edina Industrial Boulevard /Metro Boulevard b. Executive Summary Traffic Impact Study The development is proposed to contain a 12,000 square foot daycare center with 45 parking stalls. The daycare center is anticipated to be fully operational by the year 2013. This report analyzes the 2013 No -Build and Build scenarios to determine if any transportation improvements will be necessary to allow traffic to operate acceptably after the development is fully occupied. The study intersections are forecast to operate acceptably at Level of Service D or better in 2013 with the addition of traffic from the proposed development. No additional modifications to the existing public transportation system will be needed to accommodate the proposed development. 431 Primrose School of Edina rL 0 0 STATE H IG HWAYNO. 100 . . . . . . . . 15f gill !I It (it E-1 i;; It H, 'Nli 1,11h, Z MO -99 ; Sn 0 P aald 0 0 :;0 Z A 0 U; HIS, ISE) Site Plan prepared for Children's Design Group by MFRA Traffic Impact Study 3 Primrose School of Edina r, 3. Analysis of Existing Conditions a. Transportation Network Characteristics Traffic Impact Study Edina Industrial Boulevard is Municipal State Aid Street 136. It is designated as an "A" Minor Arterial and a Primary Bicycle Route in the City of Edina's Comprehensive Plan. Edina Industrial Boulevard is a four lane road with a 30 mph speed limit near the site. West 70th Street is Municipal State Aid Street 145. It is designated as a Collector Street and a Primary Bicycle Route in the City of Edina's Comprehensive Plan. West 70th Street is a four lane road east of Metro Boulevard and a two lane road west of Metro Boulevard with a 30 mph speed limit near the site. Metro Boulevard is Municipal State Aid Street 172. It is designated as a Collector Street and a portion of it is designated as a Primary Bicycle Route in the City of Edina's Comprehensive Plan. Metro Boulevard is a four lane road near the intersection with West 70th Street and a two lane road nearer to the site with a 30 mph speed limit. There are several bus stops served by Metro Transit buses near the proposed site. Stops are located west of the site along 74th Street West and south of the site along Metro Boulevard. These stops are served by Metro Transit routes 5, 540 and 578. Existing traffic control, speed limits and travel lanes are shown on Figure 3.1 for each study intersection. b. Traffic Volumes Turning movement volumes were counted at the study intersections between 6:00 a.m. and 7:00 p.m. on a typical weekday. The a.m. and p.m. peak hour times were determined from these counts to be: • a.m. peak hour (between 7:30 and 8:30 a.m.) • p.m. peak hour (between 4:30 and 5:30 p.m.) The turning movement volumes were counted at the existing study intersections in December 2011 and are shown at the end of this section in Figures 3.2 and 3.3. The turning movement count data is contained in fifteen minute intervals in the Appendix. The data included in the Appendix also includes pedestrian counts (bicycles were counted as pedestrians), which were low during the study period (less than 25 pedestrians per crossing over the entire 13 A31� Primrose School of Edina hour count). The existing daily traffic volumes for the study intersections are shown in Table 5.2. c. Level of Service Traffic Impact Study LosA -- An intersection capacity analysis was conducted _ for the existing intersections per the Highway T 'Capacity Manual. Intersections are assigned a "Level of Service" letter grade for the peak hour of traffic based on the number of lanes at the intersection, traffic volumes, and traffic control. Los c Level of Service A (LOS A) represents light traffic flow (free flow conditions) while Level of Service F (LOS F) represents heavy traffic flow (over capacity conditions). LOS D at intersections is typically considered acceptable LOSD= Acceptable - in the Twin Cities region. Individual movements are also assigned LOS grades. One or more individual movements typically operate at LOS F when the overall intersection is operating acceptably at LOS D. The pictures on the left LOS IF Unacceptab represent some of the LOS grades (from a signal = T� ..� - controlled intersection in San Jose, CA). These i LOS grades represent the overall intersection '- operation, not individual movements. Source: city of The LOS results for the existing study hours San Jose, CA are shown in Table 3.1. These are based on the existing traffic control and lane configurations as shown in Figure 3.1. The existing turning movement volumes from Figures 3.2 and 3.3 were used in the LOS calculations. The LOS calculations were done per the 2010 Highway Capacity Manual using TRAFFIXTM software. The signal timing plans used were determined through observation. The complete LOS calculations, which include grades for individual movements, are included in the Appendix. All study intersections currently operate acceptably at LOS D or better for both the a.m. and p.m. peak hours. k3l�- Primrose School of Edina Traffic Impact Study Table 3.1 — Existing Peak Hour Level of Service (LOS)' 'The first letter is the Level of Service for the intersection. The second letter (in parentheses) is the Level of Service for the worst operating movement. A31 Primrose School of Edina Peak -P.rn. Peak Intersection W 70m St/Metro Blvd a.m. C d D e Northern Site Driveway/Metro Blvd A b A a Southern Site Driveway/Metro Blvd A b A b Edina Industrial Blvd /Metro Blvd B c C c 'The first letter is the Level of Service for the intersection. The second letter (in parentheses) is the Level of Service for the worst operating movement. A31 Primrose School of Edina pac k TuTRAFFIC STUDY COMPANY W 70th St 30 mph Figure 3.1 Existing Lanes & Traffic Control North 1 Driveway No Scale a � r m a o E 0 d M X orh SO�r 40, way V > t 00 a o E c y M Edina Industrial Blvd 30 mph CD Yid v f d Traffic Impact Study 7 Primrose School of Edina M SpackFigure 3.2 Existing AM Peak Hour Traffic Volume: oars W 70th St NorM No Scale /N L 6 ♦�6 �4 3560$ t \4 N N N r N \ z � ry \ N �o L\ t r♦ N N t0 N \ N N L 366 ♦— 469 �18 35 0 O N N N Traffic Impact Study 00 0 M 0 v F d Driveway tio�h e�. h s�'9 eh, sr@ dy M'ay Edina Industrial Blvd 0 Primrose School of Edina Spack Figure 3.3 _.� -,rFIC STUDY COMMNY Existing PM Peak Hour Traffic Volumes ors North W Both St No Scale Driveway L,s N O A 4�9 3 497 2 3 m N N � 23 L 2, m 1 L r5 t r� i L 22 of N 25 tr "' 4 1 a L 88\N 4 307 � r_ ,3 32� t \6 2 Ej � Traffic Impact Study v M 0 CD W W - 0111661-h h S�'P Sit@ y e�y ay Edina Industrial Blvd A-° Primrose School of Edina 4. Projected Traffic a. Site Traffic Forecasting A trip generation analysis was performed for the site based on the methods and rates published in the ITE Trip Generation Manual, 8th Edition. The resultant trip generation is shown in Table 4.1. It was assumed that 10% of the trips to the daycare will come from "internal" trips: These internal trips are vehicles that will use the daycare but are already going to the site parking lot to use the businesses the daycare shares the lot with. Since these vehicles are already going to the site parking lot, these trips were reduced from the trip generation. The directional orientation of the generated traffic is shown in Figure 4.1. This orientation was determined by using existing daily traffic volumes as well as the collected turning movement counts. The distribution pattern takes into account site access and access to the regional transportation system. The traffic generated by the development was assigned to the area roadways per the trip distributions shown in Figure 4.1. The traffic volumes added to the study roadways through this process are shown in Figures 4.2 and 4.3. b. Non -site Traffic Forecasting Traffic forecasts were developed for the year 2013 scenario by applying a 0.96% compounded annual growth rate to the existing traffic volume data. This growth rate is based on the 20 -year growth factor of 1.1 the Mn /DOT State Aid office has assigned to Hennepin County. The 2013 No -Build ,forecasts for each study period are shown in Figures 4.4 and 4.5 at the end of this section. c. Total Traffic Traffic forecasts were developed for each study period in the year 2013 Build scenario by adding the traffic generated by the proposed development (as shown in Figures 4.2 and 4.3) to the 2013 No -Build volumes (as shown in Figures 4.4 and 4.5). The resultant 2013 Build forecasts are shown in Figures 4.6 and 4.7. Traffic Impact Study 10 Primrose School of Edina M SpackTable 4.1 � Forecast Trip Generation TRAFFIC STUDY COMPANY r% -:1.. T,/ -1. von � v LAND USE ITE CODE # DEVELOPMENT UNITS (GFA) QUANTITY DAILY RATE ENTER PERCENT EXIT PERCENT INTERNAL PERCENT INTERNAL TRIPS PASSBY PERCENT PASSBY TRIPS NEW TRIPS ENTER EXIT Daycare Center 565 1,000 GFA 12.0 79.26 50% 50% 10% 1 95 0% 0 428 428 TOTALS I 1 95 0 428 428 w11e o,..,1. U..... • LAND USE ITE CODE # DEVELOPMENT UNITS (GFA) QUA AM RATE ENTER PERCENT EXIT PERCENT INTERNAL PERCENT INTERNAL TRIPS PASSBY PERCENT PASSBY TRIPS NEW TRIPS ENTER EXIT Daycare Center 565 1,000 GFA 12.0 12.26 53% 47% 10% 15 0 *0 0 71 62 TOTALS I 15 0 71 62 DM Dnnlr Wo%elr LAND USE ITE CODE # DEVELOPMENT UNITS (GFA) QUANTITY PM RATE ENTER PERCENT EXIT PERCENT INTERNAL PERCENT INTERNAL TRIPS PASSBY PERCENT PASSBY TRIPS NEW TRIPS ENTER EXIT Daycare Center 565 1,000 GFA 12.0 12.46 47% 53% 10% 15 0% 0 63 72 TOTALS I 15 0 63 72 NOTES: 1. GFA =Gross Floor Area 2. All trip generation rates based on "Trip Generation ", Institute of Transportation Engineers, 8th Edition unless otherwise noted. 3. Reduction for internal trips (Internal Percent) is based on 'Trip Generation Handbook ", Institute of Transportation Engineers, 2nd Edition. 4. A.M. Trip Generation is for the peak hour of adjacent street traffic (one hour between 7 and 9 a.m.). S. P.M. Trip Generation is for the peak hour of adjacent street traffic (one hour between 4 and 6 p.m.). Traffic Impact Study 11 Primrose School of Edina a ck PTRAFFIC STUDY COM ►ANY Figure 4.1 Trip Distribution t North No Scale is, war '�4�►� 4 �Q> � t� Rq Traffic Impact Study 12 Primrose School of Edina 6-11 Traffic Impact Study Driveway 4,0 he �S rfe d 13 Primrose School of Edina (-3 S ac PTHE TRAFFIC STUDY COMPANY ro O1 qtr 10 o L 35 1 �► rD tr 00 L\ 0 00 1 � r 35 tr o� SON �O ,51 qtr \0_rl o 0� Traffic Impact Study 2 m v 2 m 0 m 0 m f d Figure 4.3 - PM Peak Hour Traffic Volumes Due to Developmen Driveway 14 _ tio0 e,j� s -fe s ay Industrial Blvd A" North No Scale Primrose School of Edina O\ Lo o L 35 1 �► rD tr 00 L\ 0 00 1 � r 35 tr o� SON �O ,51 qtr \0_rl o 0� Traffic Impact Study 2 m v 2 m 0 m 0 m f d Figure 4.3 - PM Peak Hour Traffic Volumes Due to Developmen Driveway 14 _ tio0 e,j� s -fe s ay Industrial Blvd A" North No Scale Primrose School of Edina ac k IR�IIX THE TRAFFIC STUDY COM PANY m� L\ C, C', 1 �► r° 1� L\ N n ° \ 1 �► r° 1 r► N N J360:-t—" \ ° Figure 4.4 2013 AM Peak Hour No -Build Traffic Volumes 0] m v m m v m i d Driveway Edina ti,,�� @A 0jf�'@ Sf1F@ 40�f�e day Traffic Impact Study 15 A Rs!� Blvd North No Scale Primrose School of Edina L Z� < .°� � 10 �0 360 1 \70y 0 M / m� L\ C, C', 1 �► r° 1� L\ N n ° \ 1 �► r° 1 r► N N J360:-t—" \ ° Figure 4.4 2013 AM Peak Hour No -Build Traffic Volumes 0] m v m m v m i d Driveway Edina ti,,�� @A 0jf�'@ Sf1F@ 40�f�e day Traffic Impact Study 15 A Rs!� Blvd North No Scale Primrose School of Edina Figure 4.5 20 3 ack 1 PM Peak Hour No -Build Traffic Volum( P TRAFFIC STUDY COMPANY S� North W 70th St No Scale L Driveway zo 500 t i 20m% M n m i L z0 ° 4r 10 t� L Yo 9q a N 30 t r' No see s °4'h °ryisj' 407/1, e�ay s� r/� way / o d Traffic Impact Study 16 Primrose School of Edina m L 90 ° ° v x.310 io 3000 t f♦ 880 Edina Industrial Blvd / o d Traffic Impact Study 16 Primrose School of Edina L 30 o� mm l �► r° t� 0 0 Lo N O 1 �► r 30 do @� N s`'@ �y` So`fh @kay @''s 4Q, e�y ay m L 390 c . 470 1 r 20 s� 39605 Edina Industrial Blvd 0� G f d Traffic Impact Study 17 Puac k VERENOREfflE ETRAFFIC STUDY COMPANY 5ooJ 011111111111011, \0 -W 'L20 ♦iiiiiiiii 10 r0 w L 55 r,0 t r' / L z0 M O r 55 1 r �a Traffic Impact Study Figure 4.7 2013 PM Peak Hour Build Traffic Volumes m m m O Z m i m Driveway 18 -4,0 s /5�1 19/5,1 way e�y ay Blvd rim North No scale Primrose School of Edina m ° ;; 40M 310 r,e 45 J ■ t ■ 0 Traffic Impact Study Figure 4.7 2013 PM Peak Hour Build Traffic Volumes m m m O Z m i m Driveway 18 -4,0 s /5�1 19/5,1 way e�y ay Blvd rim North No scale Primrose School of Edina 0 S. Traffic and Improvement Analysis a. 2013 Level of Service Analysis The LOS results for the 2013 scenario stud y hours are shownJn. . Table 5':1: ° These .are :based on the existing traffic control and lane configurations as shown in 4 Figure 3.1. No improvements are programmed at any of the existing study intersections. The forecast turning movement volumes for each. No -Build and Build scenario .peak hour were used .in the LOS calculations. The LOS calculations were done in accordance with the 2010: highway Capacity Manual using TRAFFIXTm software, .including the existing signal timing plans which were determined upon observation.. The complete LOS calculations, which include grades for individual movements, are included in the. Appendix. Table 5.1 — 2013 Level of Service. (LOS) 'The first letter is the Level of Service Tor the intersection. i ne second MUM (in parentheses). is the Level of Servicelor the worst operating movement. The results in Table 5.1 show there is no decrease in LOS between the No -Build and Build scenarios, meaning the 'proposed development will have little impact on the study intersections. All study intersections. are forecasted to, operate acceptably at LOS D or better for both the a.m. and p.m. peak hours in the 2013 . No- Build and Build scenarios. b. Daily Traffic Volumes Existing average daily traffic volumes were taken from multiple road segments near the site. These volumes were then forecast for the 2013 No -Build and Build scenarios, which are shown in Table 5.2. As shown in Table 5.2, no road segments near the site are expected to reach capacity through the 2013 Build scenario. AM Pe ak PM Peak H ur, .Interse( _No Build W 70 St/Metro Blvd C (d) C (d) D (e) D (e) Northern Site Driveway/ A (b) A (a) A (a) A (a) Metro Blvd Southern Site Driveway/ A (b) A (b) A (b) A (b) Metro Blvd Edina Industrial Blvd/ B (c) B (c) C (c) C (c) Metro :Blvd 'The first letter is the Level of Service Tor the intersection. i ne second MUM (in parentheses). is the Level of Servicelor the worst operating movement. The results in Table 5.1 show there is no decrease in LOS between the No -Build and Build scenarios, meaning the 'proposed development will have little impact on the study intersections. All study intersections. are forecasted to, operate acceptably at LOS D or better for both the a.m. and p.m. peak hours in the 2013 . No- Build and Build scenarios. b. Daily Traffic Volumes Existing average daily traffic volumes were taken from multiple road segments near the site. These volumes were then forecast for the 2013 No -Build and Build scenarios, which are shown in Table 5.2. As shown in Table 5.2, no road segments near the site are expected to reach capacity through the 2013 Build scenario. Table 5.2 - Daily Traffic Volumes W 70th St West of Metro 13,000 9000 9200 100 9300 Blvd W 70th St East of Metro 27,000 18400 18800 300 19100 Blvd Metro Blvd South of W 20,000 6200 6300 400 6700 70th St North of Metro Blvd Edina 8,000 5500 5600 400 6000 Industrial Blvd Edina West of Metro 20,000 8500 8700 200 8900 Industrial Blvd Blvd Edina East of Metro 20,000 10800 11000 300 11300 Industrial Blvd Blvd * inna Awmrorio nnni mi Daily Traffir \ /nhirnPC - SnurrP- MWDOT Traffic Flow MaDS to Traffic Impact Study 20 Primrose School of Edina 40 c. Pedestrians & Bicycles Pedestrian volumes were very low for this area and should not be impacted by the nominal increase in traffic volume. Sidewalks are provided along West 70th Street and portions of Metro Boulevard. No segregated bicycle facilities, trails, or sidewalks exist adjacent to the project site. Given the small footprint of the proposed development, adding a section of sidewalk within the project site adjacent to Metro Boulevard is not recommended. d. Travel Demand Management The intent of a Travel Demand Management Plan is to reduce the amount of single occupant vehicles during rush hour. Since day care customers are dropping off their children on their way to work, travel demand management at the center would have little impact on them. They've already chosen their transportation mode for their primary trip, not the secondary day care trip. Day care center employees typically work through the rush hours and do not impact the rush hour. It is recommended bus schedules for area transit be made available to the center's employees. 6. Conclusions and Recommendations The study intersections are forecast to operate acceptably at Level of Service D or better in 2013 with the addition of traffic from the proposed development. No additional modifications to the existing public transportation system will be needed to accommodate the proposed development. 7. Appendix A. 7401 Metro Boulevard Parking Study B. Traffic Counts C. Capacity Analysis Backup Traffic Impact Study 21 Primrose School of Edina 471 Appendix A - 7401 Metro Boulevard Parking Study ac THE TRAFFIC STUDY COMPANY Traffic and Parking Study Traffic Impact Study One Corporate Circle Edina, MN I hereby certify that this report was prepared by me or under my direct supervision, and that I am a duly Licensed Professional Engineer under the laws of the State of Minnesota. By: Micgiael P. Spack, P.E., .T.O.E. MN License No. 40936 Date: May 9, 2011 AS') Primrose School of Edina Appendix A - 7401 Metro Boulevard Parking Study TABLE OF CONTENTS 1. Executive Summary ............................................... ..............................1 2. Existing Parking Data ........................................... ............................... 2 3. Parking Forecasts and Analyses ......................... ............................... 3 4. Conclusions and Recommendations ................... ..............................4 5. Appendix ................................................................. ..............................4 LIST OF FIGURES Figure1 — Location Maps ............................................................... ..............................1 Figure 2 — Existing Parking Trendline .......................................... ............................... 2 Figure 3 — Factored Parking Trendline for Office Full Occupancy ............................ 3 One Corporate Circle i Edina, M1V Parking Impact Study May 2011 Traffic Impact Study A2 Primrose School of Edina a�s3 Appendix A - 7401 Metro Boulevard Parking Study 1. Executive Summary a. Background and Purpose Hempel Properties manages One Corporate Circle, a 110,975 gross square foot office complex located at 7401 Metro Boulevard in Edina, MN (see Figure 1). The purpose of this study is to assess the parking feasibility of adding a 11,500 square foot day care center to the northern portion of the site. /z:::�- One Corporate Circle in Edina, MN Figure 1 — Location Maps b. Results If the existing One Corporate Circle building was fully occupied, it is anticipated 266 of the 557 parking spaces would be filled with vehicles during the peak parking period. The proposed day care center footprint will eliminate 65 parking stalls leaving the office building's associated peak parking with 226 vacant parking stalls. At the day care center's peak parking period, which is conservatively being combined to coincide with the office building's peak, the day care center will need 43 parking stalls. Based on the analyses in this study, it is expected peak parking demand would occupy 309 of the 492 available parking stalls after the proposed 11,500 square foot day care center is built on the site. There will continue to be ample parking on the One Corporate Circle site after the day care center is fully operational. One Corporate Circle 1 Parking Impact Study Traffic Impact Study A3 hS `i Edina, MN May 2011 Primrose School of Edina Appendix A - 7401 Metro Boulevard Parking Study 2. Existing Parking Data a. Data Collection Procedure The parking lot was divided into three zones and a visual count was made every half hour to determine how many cars were parked in each of the three zones. A map showing the three zones is included in Appendix A. The first count was started at 8:00 a.m. and the last count was started at 4:30 p.m. Counts were collected on Thursday, May 5, 2011. Data was recorded in 30 minute increments using hand held data collection equipment (Jamar Count Boards). b. Existing Parking Utilization The three zones contain a total of 557 parking stalls. This includes 545 regular stalls and 12 handicap stalls. The most stalls occupied on Thursday, May 5th (197) occurred at 10:30a.m. which represents 35.4% of the available parking. A trendline of the site's parking occupancy for May 5th is shown in Figure 2. Detailed existing parking data by zones and in total is contained in Appendix A. 600 Soo 400 X00 s L d 200 100 — - 0 2 :5 G G G G G G G G C G G G Z -It 2 Q Q Q Q d O O O O n n n n O O O O O O O C O G O m O m O m O m O m O m O m O T O m 00 CO G% M O O ri ri N N .--4 1-1 I1 N -n rv' It It —0 Total Capacity �— Occupied 5 /5/11 Figure 2 — Existing Parking Trendline One Corporate Circle 2 Parking hnpact Study Traffic Impact Study A4 Edina, MN May, 2011 Primrose School of Edina Appendix A - 7401 Metro Boulevard Parking Study 3. Parking Forecasts and Analyses a. Parking with Full Occupancy One Corporate Circle currently has a 22.1% vacancy rate. To be conservative in the assessment of maximum parking needs, we factored the actual counts by 22.1 % plus an additional 5% to allow a "safety factor ". Figure 3 shows the factored parking trendline. Factoring the peak demand of 197 parked vehicles results in a maximum of 266 vehicles parked on site, which represents 47.7% of the available parking. Detailed factored parking data by zones and in total is contained in Appendix C. 600 i 500 400 N 16 N N E- 300 X M R CL 200 100 0 ¢ ¢ ¢ ¢ ¢ ¢ ¢ ¢ a a n a a a- a- a d n_ O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O M O M O T O rn O M O T O M O T O T 00 00 M Cn O O .--/ —1 N N c-1 c-1 N N r'n M It -�r --*—Total Capacity —H— 5 /5/11 Figure 3 — Factored Parking Trendline for Office Full Occupancy b. Forecast Parking A parking generation analysis was performed for the proposed development based on the methods and rates published in the 1TE Parking Generation Manual, 4th Edition. The Manual is a compilation of data collected at existing facilities throughout the United States. The peak parking periods for a day care center (ITE land use code 565) are from 8 :00 a.m. to 9:00 a.m. and 4:00 p.m. to 6:00 p.m. The peak parking demand on site occurred at 10:30 a.m., which does not coincide with the peak period of the proposed day care center. To be conservative, the peak parking to be generated by the day care center will be aligned with the site's peak. One Corporate Circle 3 Edina, AN Parking Impact Study Afay 2011 Traffic Impact Study A5 A Primrose School of Edina ' 1S Appendix A - 7401 Metro Boulevard Parking Study The 85th percentile peak period parking demand for a day care center is 3.70 parking spaces per 1,000 square feet of gross floor area. Using this parking rate results in needing 43 parking stalls for an 11,500 square foot day care center. Of the 557 parking spaces supplied on site, 266 spaces would be expected to be occupied if the site's buildings are fully leased and 65 spaces would be expected to be eliminated to make room for the day care center. This leaves 226 parking spaces vacant to be used by the day care center. 4. Conclusions and Recommendations If the existing One Corporate Circle buildings were fully occupied, it is anticipated 266 of the 557 parking spaces would be filled with vehicles during the peak parking period. The proposed day care center footprint will eliminate 65 parking stalls leaving the office building's associated peak parking with 226 vacant parking stalls. At the day care center's peak parking period, which is conservatively being combined to coincide with the office building's peak, the day care center will need 43 parking stalls. Based on the analyses in this study, it is expected peak parking demand would occupy 309 of the 492 available parking stalls after the proposed 11,500 square foot day care center is built on the site. There will continue to be ample parking on the One Corporate Circle site after the day care center is fully operational. 5. Appendix A. Existing Parking Capacity and Occupancy B. Factored Parking Capacity and Occupancy One Corporate Circle Parking Impact Study Traffic Ir'fi c Study A6 A551 Edina, MN Primrose School o Edina Appendix A - 7401 Metro Boulevard Parking Study -1 Appendix A Existing Parking Capacity and Occupancy / • Y10�1 /r R}�Q I y pIW1 _ UI[l16 ` /VOIt WWrI ' _ �sy U1C / r L !I►1 i Zone 2 J j y4 • �` mss., i � - - Zone 1 One Corporate Circle Parking Zones One Corporate Circle 5 Parking Impact Study Traffic I padt Study A7 A i4 t Edina, MN May 2011 Primrose School o Edina Appendix A - 7401 Metro Boulevard Parking Study Appendix A Existing Parking Capacity and Occupancy One Cor orate Circle Raw Parkin g Data: Thursday - May 5 2011 TIME Zone 1 Zone 2 Zone 3 Total Occupied 5/5/11 Total % Occupied 8:00 AM 41 49 1 1 91 16.3 8:30 AM 60 65 1 126 22.6 9:00 AM 78 75 1 154 27.6 9:30 AM 90 86 1 177 31.8 10:00 AM 102 88 1 191 34.3 10:30 AM 103 93 1 197 35.4 11:00 AM 105 90 1 196 35.2 11:30 AM 104 87 1 192 34.5 12:00 PM 98 87 2 187 33.6 12:30 PM 93 81 2 176 31.6 1:00 PM 94 84 1 179 32.1 1:30 PM 90 76 1 167 30.0 2:00 PM 97 74 1 172 30.9 2:30 PM 102 86 0 188 33.8 3:00 PM 94 80 0 174 31.2 3:30 PM 86 72 0 158 28.4 4:00 PM 73 59 0 132 23.7 4:30 PM 62 1 52 0 114 20.5 CAPACITY 1 287 1 205 1 65 1 557 One Corporate Circle 6 Edina, AN Partnf; Impact Study May 2011 Traffic lApact Study A8 #� Primrose School o Edina Appendix A - 7401 Metro Boulevard Parking Study Appendix B Factored ParWng Capacity and Occupancy One Corporate Circle Factored Parkin Data: Thursday - May 5 2011 TIME Zone 1 Zone 2 Zone 3 Total Occupied p Total % Occupied p Factored Occupied Factored % Occupied 8:00 AM 41 49 1 91 16.3 123 22.0 8:30 AM 60 65 1 126 22.6 170 30.5 9:00 AM 78 75 1 1 154 27.6 208 37.3 9:30 AM 90 86 1 177 31.8 239 42.8 10:00 AM 102 88 1 191 34.3 257 46.2 10:30 AM 103 93 1 197 35.4 266 47.7 11:00 AM 105 90 1 196 35.2 264 47.4 11:30 AM 104 87 1 192 34.5 259 46.5 12:00 PM 98 87 2 187 33.6 252 45.3 12:30 PM 93 81 2 176 31.6 237 42.6 1:00 PM 94 84 1 179 32.1 241 43.3 1:30 PM 90 76 1 167 30.0 225 40.4 2:00 PM 97 74 1 172 30.9 232 41.6 2:30 PM 102 86 0 188 33.8 253 45.5 3:00 PM 94 80 0 174 31.2 235 42.1 3:30 PM 86 72 0 158 28.4 213 38.2 4:00 PM 73 59 0 132 23.7 178 31.9 4:30 PM 62 52 0 114 20.5 154 27.6 CAPACITY 1 287 1 205 1 65 1 557 FACTOR 1 1.348 One Corporate Circle Parkinf� Impact Study Traffic Irgpadt Study 7 A9 A40 Edina, AN Primrose Schooy Edina 0AW gm �aaa i REPORT /RECOMMENDATION To: MAYOR AND COUNCIL Agenda Item Item No. VIII.A. From: Debra Mangen City Clerk ® Action -❑ Discussion ❑ Information Date: February 6, 2012 Subject: Resolution No. 2012- 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 -22 w9SNA,®l� O� e 0 m • IN�RPOM�E9 eeB RESOLUTION NO. 2012-22 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. Braemar Memorial Fund For Future Golf Course Equipment Purchases: Chip Fuhrmann $175.00 Scott Nelson $25.00 Edina Police Department: Alerus Financial $100.00 Edina Crime Prevention Fund $40,719.69 K -9, Bike Patrol, Crime Prevention and Fall Into the Arts Expenses Dated: February 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 February 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 REPORT /RECOMMENDATION To: MAYOR AND COUNCIL Agenda Item Item No. VIII.B. From: James Hovland Mayor ❑ Action ® Discussion ❑ Information Date: February 6, 2012 Subject: Appointments To Various Boards, Commissions and Committees ACTION REQUESTED: Appoint the persons listed below. INFORMATION /BACKGROUND: The City received applications for members to fill vacancies on its advisory boards, commissions and committees. The City Council conducted interviews of applicants on January 5, 9 and 23, 2012. Members who were unable to meeting the attendance requirement during 2011 were also interviewed on these dates with the intention of reappointment. In addition, the Edina School Board has appointed Cathy Cella as their Board Representative on the Edina Park Board for a period of one year. Edina City Code 1507.03 states the Council shall ratify the School Board's appointment. The following slate of people has been recommended for appointment or reappointment as noted below: ' New Appointments — All Three -year Terms Ending 2/1/2015 Unless Noted Differently Art Center Board — Marsha Buchok and Ray Meifert; Board of Appeal & Equalization —Steven Suckow Community Health Committee — Nancy Ott - Pinckaers, M.D. Construction Board of Appeals — Scott Busyn Energy & Environment Commission —John Heer and Tim Rudnicki Heritage Preservation Board — Jennifer Christiaansen, Joyce Mellom and Peter Sussman Human Rights & Relations Commission — Ron Erhardt Park Board — Daniel Gieseke and Kathryn Peterson and School Board Representative Cathy Cella — Term Ending 2/1/2013 Transportation Commission — Surya lyer, Tom La Force and Courtney Whited Reappointments —Terms As Listed Art Center Board — Colin Nelson — Term ending 2/1/2014 Community Health Committee — Adnan Qureshi, M.D. — Term Ending 2/1/2014 Human Rights & Relations Commission —John Cashmore —Term Ending 2/1/2013 Park Board — David Deeds —Term Ending 2/1/2014 Planning Commission — Michael Schroeder Term Ending 2/1/2015 ATTCHMENT: Edina School Board Resolution G FOR ACTION INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DISTRICT 273 Regular Meeting, January 23, 2012 SUBJECT: 2011 -2012 BOARD COMMITTEE APPOINTMENTS, LIAISONS AND REPRESENTATIVES Be It Resolved, That The School Board Confirm the committee appointments, liaisons and representatives by the Board Chairperson in accordance with Policies 213 and 216. BOARD COMMITTEE APPOINTMENTS COMMITTEE BOARD MEMBER(S) STAFF PERSON(S) Board Finance and Facilities Committee Cathy Cella (Chair) Ric Dressen Sarah Patzloff Margo Nash Lent/ Wallen- Friedman Board Human Resources Committee Idith Almog Gwen Jackson Randy Meyer Ric Dressen Regina Neville Board Policy Committee Lonni Skrentner (Chair) Ric Dressen Cathy Cella Regina Neville Board Teaching and Learning Committee Idith Almog Jenni Norlin- Weaver Cathy Cella Ric Dressen Lonni Skrentner BOARD LIAISONS COMMITTEFJORGANIZATION BOARD MEMBER(S) STAFF PERSON(S) Minnesota School Boards Association (MSBA) Randy Meyer Ric Dressen Association of Metropolitan School Districts (AMSD) Cathy Cella Ric Dressen Alt. Regina Neville West Metro Education Program (WMEP) Joint Cathy Cella Gwen Jackson Powers Board 'Nest Metro Education Program Steering Committee Gwen Jackson Technology & Information Educational Services (TIES) � Lenv Wallen- Friedman Ric Dressen Alt. Steve Buettner Minnesota State High School League (MSHSL) Sarah Patzloff John Soma Intermediate School District 287 Peyton Robb District 287 Tech Prep Committee Mary Manderfeld Parent Leadership Council Regina Neville Ric Dressen Edina Education Fund With Almog Ric Dressen Alt. Regina Neville City Council Randy Meyer Edina Park Board Cathy Cella Valerie Burke Special Services Parent/Staff Advisory Committee Regina Neville Penny Kodrich Student Activities Advisory Committee (SAAC) Lenv Wallen- Friedman Mary Manderfeld SCHOOLS Concord Elementary School Cornelia Elementary School Countryside Elementary School Creek Valley Elementary School Highlands Elementary School Normandale Elementary School South View Middle School Valley View Middle School Edina High School Early Childhood Special Education BOARD REPRESENTATIVES Lonni Skrentner Sarah Patzloff With Almog Regina Neville Cathy Cella Idith Almog Randy Meyer Cathy Cella Lenv Wallen- Friedman Lonni Skrentner COMMITTEE/ORGANIZATION BOARD COMMITTEE ALIGNMENT BOARD MEMBER(S) STAFF PERSON(S) Meet & Confer+ Board HR Committee Regina Neville Gwen Jackson Lenv Wallen- Friedman Ric Dressen Community Education Services Board Board T &L Committee Sarah Patzloff Valerie Burke Edina Chemical Health Partners Board T &L Committee Lonni Skrentner Penny Kodrich Insurance Committee Technology Advisory Team (TAT) Board HR Committee Board T &L Committee Edina Alternative Compensation Board HR Committee Steering Committee Salary Schedule and Compensation Board HR Committee Committee COMMUNITY APPOINTMENTS BY BOARD Sarah Patzloff Margo Nash Gwen Jackson With Almog Steve Buettner Community Education Services Board Jenni Norlin- Weaver Idith,Alm24 Jenni Norlin- Weaver Regina Neville 6/30/12 Idith Almog Gwen Jackson Randy Meyer Regina Neville 6/30/13 Alt. Lonni Skrentner Gwen Jackson 6/30/13 COMMITTEE/BOARD /COMMISSION APPOINTMENT TERM EXPIRES Community Education Services Board Julie Labosky 6/30/12 Edina Community Council Committee Cheryl Gunness 6/30/12 Open 6/30/12 Peg Gaard 6/30/13 Gwen Jackson 6/30/13 Janet Schank 6/30/13 Meg Barrett 6/30/14 Valerie Burke 6/30/14 David Ingham 6/30/14 Board Finance and Facilities Committee Daryl Gemar 6/30/13 Debra Page 6/30/13 Open 6/30/14 The Board will make committee appointments in July and January. Those committees designated with are school -year appointments with terms ending June 30. 84116 REPORT /RECOMMENDATION To: MAYOR AND COUNCIL Agenda Item Item No. VIII. C. From: Jesse Struve Utility Engineer ® Action ❑ Discussion ❑ Information Date: February 6, 2012 Subject: Energy Improvement — Grandview Tire and Auto, 5415 W. 70th Street, Resolution No. 2012 -26 ACTION REQUESTED: Approve resolution 2012 -26 for Grandview Tire and Auto's Application to enter Edina Emerald Energy Program (EEEP) and place special assessment against the property. INFORMATION /BACKGROUND: On August 16, 2011, the City Council authorized staff to develop a Property Assessed Clean Energy Program (PACE) following MN Statue 216C.436. Staff created the EEEP as a method of financing energy efficiency investments through special property tax assessments. Grandview Tire and Auto (5415 70th Street), has submitted an application requesting $31,686 from the EEEP program. This is a portion of the $131,375 construction costs to install solar panels on top of their facility. This will reduce energy consumption for their Grandview Tire and Auto. Capitalized interest will be added to the amount requested to bring the total assessment levied against the property to $34,030. Staff recommends accepting the application from Grandview Tire and Auto into the EEEP program. ATTACHMENTS: Resolution No. 2012 -26 Application for Grandview Tire and Auto Assessment Roll for 5415 West 70th Street I:\Emerald Energy Program\Applications\2012 \Grandview Tire and Auto J RESOLUTION NO. 2012 -26 APPROVING AGREEMENT AND ADOPTING ASSESSMENT City of Edina. WHEREAS, Edina has been designated one. of five Minnesota Green Step Communities . and with the leadership of the Edina Energy and Environment Commission has developed a plan to implement the standards; and WHEREAS, Minnesota Statues §§ 216C.435 and 216C.436. authorizes the City to finance energy improvements using special assessments on residential, commercial and industrial properties where owners have petitioned, for special assessments, to repay the financing; and WHEREAS, Edina has created an Edina, Emerald 'Energy Program (EEEP), which authorizes voluntary special assessments for energy improvements; and WHEREAS, Edina has received a Special Assessment Agreement from Murphy Automotive, Inc. d /b /a and owner'of Grandview Tire & Auto waiving its right to a special assessment hearing and petitioning for special assessment to repay the financing. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDINA, MINNESOTA: 1. The Special Assessment Agreement with Murphy Automotive, Inc. d /b /a Grandview Tire & Auto is approved. The Mayor and City Manager are authorized to sign the Agreement. 2. The proposed assessment in the principal amount of $34,030.00, a copy of which is attached hereto and made a .part hereof, is hereby adopted and shall constitute the special assessment against the lands named therein and each tract of land therein included is hereby found to be benefited by the proposed improvements in the amount of the assessment levied against it. 3. Such assessment shall be payable in equal annual installments extending over a period of ten (10) years, the first of the installments to be payable on or before the first Monday in January of 2013, and shall bear interest at the rate of nine percent` (9 %) per annum from the date. 'of adoption of this Resolution. To the first installment shall be added interest on the entire assessment from the date of this Resolution until. December 31, 2012. To each subsequent installment when due shall be added interest for one year on all unpaid installments. 4. The property owner may, at any time prior to certification of the assessment to the County, pay the whole of the assessment on such property with interest accrued to the date of payment to the City, except that no interest shall be charged if the entire assessment is. paid within thirty .(30): days from the adoption of this resolution and the owner may at any time thereafter pay the City the entire amount of the assessment remaining unpaid with interest accrued to December 31 of the year in which the payment is made. Such payment must be made before November 30 or interest will be charged through December 31 of the next succeeding year. City Hall 952- 927 -8861 4801 WEST 50TH,STREET FAX 952 - 826 -0390 EDINA, MINNESOTA, 55424 -1394 www.cityofedina.com TTY 952 -826 -0379 5. The City Clerk shall forthwith transmit a certified duplicate of this assessment to the County to be extended on the property tax lists of the County and such assessments shall be collected and paid over in the same manner as other municipal taxes Dated: February 6, 2012 Attest: Debra A. Mangen, City Clerk STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ( ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) 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 February 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 City of Edina, Minnesota Edina Emerald Energy Program APPLICATION AND PETITION FOR SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS 4501 West 50th Street, Edina, Minnesota 55347 Phone: (952) 927 -8861 Fax: (952) 826 -0390 E- mail: www:cityofedina.org REV 01/20/2012 File No. The Edina Emerald Energy Program ( "EEEP ") provides financing for the installation of energy efficiency and conservation improvements that are permanently fixed to commercial / industrial real property ( "Improvements "). The undersigned applicant(s) hereby submits the following application for financing and petition for special assessments in accordance with Minnesota Statutes Sections 216C.435 and 216C.436, Chapter 429 and the Edina Emerald Energy Program. Section 1: Eligibility Requirements • Applicant(s) is /are legal owner of the property described in the Application (the "Property "). • Property is developed and located within the City of Edina. • Property Owner is current on all mortgage(s). Lender has signed the Lender Acknowledgment form for EEEP Financing. • Property Owner is not in bankruptcy and the property is not an asset in a bankruptcy proceeding. • There are no federal or state income tax liens, judgment liens, or similar involuntary liens on the Property. • Improvement costs are reasonable for the scope of the proposed project and in relation to Property value. • Requested Financing Amount does not exceed 10 percent of the Property Market Value or the actual cost of installing the energy improvements , including the cost of necessary equipment, materials, and labor, the costs of energy audit or renewable energy feasibility study, and the cost of verification of installation, less the value of expected rebates. • Term of financing requested does not exceed the weighted average of the useful life of the Improvements. • Applicant(s) has /have obtained an energy audit or renewable energy feasibility study on the Property. For Further information on eligibility requirements, see the Program Report and Administrative Guidelines, or contact the Program Administrator at fb.us.7840854.02 For Office Use.Only File No. Received On: By: SECTION 2: Applicant Information, PROPERTY OWNER(S), LEGAL NAME(S) AS THEY APPEAR ON PROPERTY TAX RECORDS OWNER 1 LAST 4 DIGITS OF SSN OR TIN LIST ALL PARCEL Vs OWNED BY APPLICANT TIMCIN PROPERTIES LLP XXX -XX 77110 08- 116 -21 -11 -0005 OWNER 2 LAST 4 DIGITS OF SSN OR TIN LIST ALL PARCEL Vs OWNED BY APPLICANT XXX-XX- OWNER 3 LAST 4 DIGITS OF SSN OR TIN LIST ALL PARCEL #'s OWNED BY APPLICANT XXX XX- OWNER 4 LAST 4 DIGITS OF SSN OR TIN LIST ALL PARCEL Vs OWNED BY APPLICANT \ XXX-XX- PROPERTY OWNER(S) TYPE (Check all that apply) ❑ Individual(s) / Joint Tenants / ❑ Corporation ❑ Limited Liability Company Common Property (Not in Trust) ❑ Trust / Trustees / Living Trust X Partnership ❑ Other (Please specify) PROPERTY OWNER CONTACT INFORMATION NAME TIMOTHY R. MURPHY EMAIL ADDRESS tim.murphy(a)-murphyauto.net DAYTIME TELEPHONE NO 612- 719 -9745 PHYSICAL PROPERTY ADDRESS (Site of improvements) STREET ADDRESS 5415 70' STREET WEST CITY EDINA STATE MN ZIP 55439 MAILING ADDRESS (If different) MAILING ADDRESS 9110 225T" STREET WEST CITY LAKEVILLE STATE MN ZIP 55044 SECTION 3: Property`Information PROPERTY TYPE) ❑ Industrial " -X . Commercial File No. SECTION 4: Proposed Improvement Project Information PROPOSED IMPROVEMENT PROJECT (Attach additional page(s) if necessary.) 1. DESCRIPTION OF IMPROVEMENT TRACK FOR PARTICIPATION (CHECK ONE) SOLAR ELECTRIC SYSTEM X Solar ❑ Energy ❑ Custom Measure Efficiency PROPOSED IMPROVEMENT COST ( -) LESS REBATE ( +) PLUS ESTIMATED PERMIT FEE ( =) NET PROPOSED IMPROVEMENT COST $ 131,375.00 $ 60277.00 $ INCLUDED $ 71,098.00 2. NAME OF CONTRACTOR ADDRESS OF CONTRACTOR BLUE HORIZON ENERGY 7246 WASHINGTON AVE. SO. EDEN PRAIRIE, MN 55344 EVIDENCE OF ENERGY AUDIT OR RENEWABLE ENERGY SYSTEM FEASIBLITY STUDY (attach) SECTION 5: Request for Financing REQUESTED FINANCING AMOUNT A. Construction contract(s) (bid price for cost of materials and labor less any applicable rebates), excluding permit fees (attach copy): $ 131375.00 B. Costs of energy audit or feasibility study 400.00 C. Professional services (Appraisal, drafting, engineering, project management and /or plan preparation costs): $ INCLUDED D. ❑ Permit Fee: Minimum amount is SECTION 6: Petition for Assessment X Permit included in bid $ Total: $ 131.775.00 Requested Financing Amount: $ 31 We hereby acknowledge that we will be obligated to pay the assessments when due. The assessment and the interest and any penalties thereon will constitute a lien against the Property until they are paid, even if I(we) sell the Property to another person. I(we) understand that assessment installments together with the interest on the assessment will be collected on my /our property tax bill in the same manner and at the same time as property taxes and will be subject to the same penalties, remedies, and lien priorities as for property taxes in the event of delinquency, including foreclosure. I(we) waive any and all procedural and substantive objections to the installation of the Improvements and the special assessments, including but not limited to hearing requirements and any claim that the assessment exceeds the benefit to the Property. I(we) waive any appeal rights otherwise available pursuant to M.S.A. § 429.081. REQUESTED ASSESSMENT REPAYMENT PERIOD The minimum amount for an EEEP Assessment is $2,500. For ❑ 5 Years X 10 Years assessments between $2,500 and $4,999, the term will be 5 years. Assessments $5,000 and above may be for a term of 5 or 10 years. File No. SECTION 7. Current Mortgage Financing (Attach copy of Mortgage Statement) 1. Name and Address of Mortgage Lender: LAKEVIEW BANK 9725 W 163RD ST. LAKEVILLE, MN 55044 2. , Outstanding Principal Balance: $1,409,827.99 SECTION 8. Declarations By signing-this Application, the undersigned hereby declares under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of Minnesota all- the followin 1. 1(we) am(are) current owner(s) of record of the property described herein (the "Property "). 2. The Property is not currently involved in_a bankruptcy. proceeding. 3. I(we)'are current on any mortgage or other loan secured by the Property. 4. I(we) and the Property meet the eligibility requirements listed in Section 1. 5. That (i) the information provided in this Application is true. and correct as of the date set forth opposite my /our signature(s) on this Application and (ii) that I /we understand that any intentional or negligent misrepresentation(s) of the information contained in this Application may result in civil liability, and /or criminal penalties including, but not limited to, fine or imprisonment or both and liability for monetary damages to the City of Edina, its agents, successors and assigns, insurers and any other person who may suffer any loss due to reliance upon any misrepresentation which I /we have made in this Application. 6: I(we) agree that the:selection of any product(s), equipment, and measures referenced in this Application (the "Improvements "), the selection of any manufacturer(s), dealer(s) supplier(s), contractor(s) and installer(s), and the decision regarding the purchase, installation and ownership /maintenance of the Improvements is(are) my(our) sole responsibility and that I(we) have not relied upon any representations, or recommendations of the City of Edina, its agents, representatives, assignees, or employees, in making such selection or decision, and that my. manufacturer, dealer, supplier, contractor or installer of the Improvementsis not an agent, employee, assignee or representative of the City of Edina. 7. I(we) understand that the City of Edina makes no warranty, whether express or implied; with respect to the choice, use or application of the Improvements, including without limitation, the implied warranties of merchantability and fitness for any particular purpose; use -or application of the Improvements. I(we) agree that the City of Edina has no liability whatsoever concerning (i) the quality or safety of any Improvements, including their fitness for any purpose,, (ii) -the estimated energy savings produced by or performance of the Improvements, (iii) the workmanship of any third parties, (iv) the installation or use of the Improvements including, but not limited to, any effect on. indoor pollutants, or (iv) any other matter with resaect to the Edina Emerald Enerav Proaram. TIMOTHY R MURPHY Printed Name MANAGING PARTNER, TIMCIN PROPERTIES LLP Property Owner Signature Printed Name 3 �f a aDi� CAROL DENISE MAY %i NOTARY PUBLIC - MINNESOTA i(OMycommissbnE*resJ.an.3i,,20141 LENDER ACKNOWLEDGMENT FORM The undersigned, on behalf of the Lender which is the holder of a mortgage lien on the Property described in this Application and Petition for Special Assessments in accordance with the Edina Emerald Energy Program, acknowledges that it has been informed of Applicant's application and petition, and confirms that Applicant's receipt of EEEP financing and petition for assessment in connection therewith, will not constitute a default under Lender's mortgage. 3� m 1(9■ CAROL DENISE MAY NOTARY PUBLIC - MINNESOTA My0WnMbS10nExPftWjW.31.2014 ■ ■ fb.us.7840854.02 Lender: LAKEVIEW Name of Ins By: f,' ( ZZ vv� Signature Name: 141;c4,4.1 Title: S-y n Date: % 3 /— ) u) �4— ASSESSN ROLL ' EDINA EMERALD Ewr-RGY PROGRAM PROPERTY ADDRESS PID OWNER MAILING ADDRESS CITY /STATE /ZIP ASSESSMENT 5415 70th Street 08- 116 -21 -11 -0005 TIMCIN Properties LLP 9110 225th Street W Lakeville, MN 55044 $ 34,030.00= Community Works 2012 — Q 1 (Jan —March) Annual Report Corporate Outreach Strategy /BAC formation Development Assasa,na,VSb TypdWias Integrated Ctanmunioabons Plan DevebgnaM Tod In—.Z& Gap Arnlysis Redevalopmara Barriers Report Re se RFP for T —s-nal StatlM Area Acton Plans ITSAAP) Workshop LRT Basics 2012 — Q2 (April — June) • TSAAP Cpftnt Sabcted 6 Process Begins IOenbficabon of CatalyC Saes Mousnp Inve and Strategy Deve —m A— Analy Value Cap— d other Inrov , Flnancap Toils Analy- Package vl SW InhastructUre P,., c tna, support Transd i TOD U n Community Works 2012 — Q 3 & 4 (July — Dec) .'Jprk . and Business &_ Plan TOO MarkeVng Plan Sbategic AcRuns n Plan ✓E S TSAAP unde,a.,y aril integrated I;eraWe Discus5iorn Imegrabng Engines ,ng d Land Use (parWrde. OMF. TPSS. atabon bumps. Public art rnotlel connectims OCS. structures, afapona. alpnrrerrt. etc ) Update lnhas#mW a Inventory based m TSAAP d PE LRT designs to 30% and ready for the munKipal consent p—ass 2013 — Q 1 (Jan — March) Municipal Concern Process for — LRT des.gns TSAAP process completed Invastrnam Framework f LRT Design & Land Use Integration Mn COUmiI L OuK °m� Deve • Uw /prwwo�.tt suovon rr rrgaaebna wrsFa l4 Nan nine opm<�I � \ ��ereitt .M rain ame�,a Communey4nput LRT Integratlon Drs a^ oeapn loo.. rrwr.wruaauwnl Lana Uad wuwn��Ie to ew.ewamne L«a raian 5upwn qan vropoua ar Inpa 0.vebprwnt a+Mr�MYa .. • 3 ❑T Southwest Light Rail (Green Line Extension) Community Works Steering Committee January 19, 2012 A � Metropolitan Councll Q1VtelroTranst 2002 —2005 Feasibility Studies 2005 —2010 Alternatives Analysis 2010 —2011 Pre - Preliminary Engineering 2011 —2013 Preliminary Engineering 2013 Record of Decision (ROD) 2013 —2014 Final Design 2014 Full Funding Grant Agreement 2014 —2017 Construction 2018 Revenue Operation P ❑T • Evaluate Engineering Services Consultant Early 2012 Proposals • Award contract for Engineering Services March 2012 Consultant • Begin Preliminary Survey & Geotechnical April 2012 and Other Investigations Move into Permanent Southwest Q2 2012 Project Office 2 3 1 M • 7 FTE's previously authorized in 2010 • 6 positions filled; 1 position posted • Managers and professional /technical staff needed to: - Support functional areas during PE - Satisfy FTA technical capacity requirement Southwest Project Office Organizatio Kam SWLRT Project Office Staff Needs for 38 New FTEs 2 C • Permanent Project Office needed by 02 2012 • 28,000 total square feet needed for anticipated peak staff count of 140 staff • Mobilization planned in two phases: — Phase One during PE (2012 -13) — 110 to 120 staff — 20,000 sq. ft. (approximate) — Phase Two initiated by Final Design in 2014 — Additional 20 to 30 staff — Additional 8,000 sq. ft. (approximate) ❑T • 25,000 to 28,000 usable square feet • Accessible to public (visible, available parking, near bus routes) • Fiber optic connection • Stable building ownership; responsive onsite management • Competitive lease terms T❑ Sites toured {/ • Finalist ` 1 • Recommended _ T i i !T • Organizational benefits of co- locating with consultants — Increases collaboration and coordination for resolution of complex design issues • Cost avoidance benefits of co- locating with consultants — Significantly reduces consultant office overhead rates by providing space for consultant staff in the project office — Estimated at $3 8 million in first two years, $15.7 million over seven years O Not to Exceed: $3,600,000 for Phase One Terms — 3/1112 to 7/31/19 — Gross free rent for the first five months (3/1/2012 to 7/31/2012) — 50% gross free rent for the next 12 months (8/112012 to 7/31/2013) — Tenant improvement allowance of $12 psf ($263,436) — Termination option after third year with notice 0 Location. Park Place West, 6465 Wayzata Blvd , St Louis Park MINUTES . CITY OF EDINA,- MINNESOTA PLANNING COMMISSION CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS January 11, 2012 7:00 P.M. I. CALL TO ORDER Chair Grabiel 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, Carpenter, Staunton, Fischer, Grabiel. . III. APPROVAL OF MEETING AGENDA Meeting Agenda was approved as submitted. IV. APPROVAL OF CONSENT ITEMS, Commissioner Potts moved approval of the December 14, 2011, meeting minutes. Commissioner Scherer seconded the motion. All voted aye; motion carried. V. COMMUNITY COMMENT No comment. VI. PUBLIC HEARINGS B -11 -14 Variance William and Denise Denison 5805 Johnson Drive, Edina, MN d A 2 foot side•yard setback variance, to allow a 3 foot side yard setback and a 5.7 foot rear yard setback variance to allow a 19.3 foot rear yard setback to expand the existing garage -width and depth for property located at 5805 Johnson Drive for William and Denise Denison. Planner Presentation Planner Aaker informed the commission the subject property, is located on the east side Page 1 of 13 of Johnson Drive and south of Grove Street consisting of a one and one half story home with an attached garage. The home was built in 1941 and has had few improvements made to it over the years Planner Aaker explained that the applicant is proposing to add onto the existing home to include a family room, master bedroom, laundry with an office above on the south side of the home and a garage expansion to the north side of the home. All of the improvements conform to the ordinance requirements with the exception of the garage addition towards the north and east lot lines. Planner Aaker said the garage is proposed to be located 3 feet from the north side lot line and 19.3 feet from the easterly rear lot line. The zoning ordinance requires a minimum 5 foot side yard setback and a 25 foot rear yard setback for an attached garage. The homeowner would like to expand the existing narrow garage width from 19.6 feet to 21.6 feet and add 10 feet onto the depth of the garage for additional storage and shop area. Planner Aaker noted that the home was built much farther back on the lot than neighboring homes leaving a shallow rear yard for expansion. The homes on either side of the subject home are closer to the front lot line. and were not setback as deep from the front lot line. It should be noted that the garage on the subject home is even farther back and deeper into the rear yard than the main portion of the house. The house was also built much closer to the north lot line leaving no opportunity to expand garage width without the benefit of a variance. The original placement of the house and garage, (farther back on the lot and closer to the north lot line), make planning a garage expansion difficult for the property. Planner Aaker concluded that staff recommends that the Planning Commission approve the variances based on the following findings: 1) With the exception of the variances 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 a minimal encroachment into the side and rear yard as is needed for the addition. b. The practical difficulties in adding onto the home are as a result of the original house placement closer to the north lot line and nearer to the back /easterly lot line and given the existing floor plan. Page 2 of 13 Approval of the variance 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: Survey date stamped: December 8, 2011. Building plans/ elevations date stamped: December 8, 2011. Appearina for the Applicant William and Denise Denison Discussion Commissioner Forrest asked Planner Aaker if Code stipulates a minimum two stall garage door width. Planner Aaker responded that to the best of her knowledge Code does not establish a minimum garage door width; however, Planner Aaker stated she rarely sees double garage stall widths less than 20 -feet. Chair Grabiel questioned if the existing shed was non - conforming. Planner Aaker responded in the affirmative. Applicant Comments Mr. Denison said the reason the garage was designed as submitted was because a small alcove was built over a well and building foundation. The plans as submitted don't disturb the well and building foundation. Chair Grabiel asked if anyone was present to speak to the issue; being none; Commissioner Platteter moved to close the public hearing. Commissioner Carpenter seconded the motion. All voted aye; motion carried. Discussion A discussion ensued on if the proposed changes were self- created. The majority of the Commissioners indicated they could support the variance and didn't feel the circumstances were self- created. Motion Commissioner Carpenter moved variance approval based on staff findings and subject to staff conditions. Commissioner Potts seconded the motion. Ayes; Scherer, Schroeder, Potts, Platteter, Carpenter, Staunton, Fischer, Grabiel. Nays Forrest. Motion carried 8 -1. Page 3 of 13 2011.0004.11b Final Site Plan Children's Design Group /Primrose School of Edina 7401 Metro Boulevard Planner Presentation Planner Teague told the Commission Children's Design Group is requesting a Site Plan review to develop the recently created lot at 7401 Metro Boulevard with a Primrose Day Care Center. During the final platting of this property in September of 2011, this same building was contemplated for construction on the site. Planner Teague explained that access to the site would be off Metro Boulevard. No new curb cut would be created. Parking for the site would be provided from the lot to the south through a shared parking arrangement. The outdoor play area would be enclosed for security, with an ornamental six -foot black picket fence. The building would be built of stone and hardie plank lap siding with wood finish. The roof would be made of architectural asphalt shingles. The applicant will have a materials board to present to the Planning Commission the night of the public hearing. Parking and traffic studies were done to review impacts that the proposed development would have on the site and surrounding roadways. Planner Teague concluded that staff recommends that the City Council approve the Site Plan at 7401 Metro Boulevard for the Primrose Day Care based on the following findings: 1. The proposal would meet the required standards and ordinances for a Site Plan. 2. Spack Consulting conducted a traffic impact and parking study, and concluded that the existing roadway system could support the proposed project, and there would be more than enough parking. Approval of the Site Plan 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 November 28, 2011. • Grading plan date stamped November 28, 2011. • Landscaping plans date stamped November 28, 2011 and January 5, 2012. • Building elevations date stamped November 28, 2011 and January 6, Page 4 of 13 J1 2012. • Building materials board including colors as presented at the Planning Commission and City Council meeting. 2. Prior the issuance of a building permit, a final landscape plan must be submitted, . 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. 3. Before issuance of a building permit, a shared parking arrangement with the southern lot must be executed. 4. The property owner,is responsible for replacing any required landscaping that dies. 5. 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. 6. A construction management plan will be required 'for the construction of the new building. 7. Compliance with the conditions required by the city engineer in his memo dated January 5, 2012. Appearing for the Applicant Mike Brandt, MFRA Discussion Commissioner Platteter referred to the shared parking agreement and asked where additional parking would be found if needed. Teague explained to gain more parking stalls the landscaping islands could be. removed. . Chair Grabiel commented on the lack of setback from the property line. Teague explained that the zoning for both parcels is the same so setbacks are measured from the perimeter of the site. Applicant Presentation Mike Brandt, MFRA said he was present to answer questions. Chair Grabiel asked if there was anyone present that would like to speak to the issue; being none Commissioner Carpenter moved to close the public hearing. Commissioner Potts seconded the motion. All voted aye; motion carried to close public hearing. Discussion Commissioner Carpenter said that in his.opinion the layout was good and the information was. complete. Carpenter said he supports the request, adding it's reasonable. Page 5 of 13 l Motion Commissioner Potts moved approval based on staff findings and subject to staff conditions. Commissioner Platteter seconded the motion. Mr. Brandt presented the exterior building materials board.-to the Commission. All'voted'aye' motion carried 9 -0..; 2011.0015.11a Preliminary Plat Refined LLC 6109 Oaklawn Avenue, Edina, MN Planner Presentation Planner Teague informed the Commission that• Refined, LLC is proposing to subdivide'the property at 6109 Oaklawn Avenue into two lots. The existing home would be torn down, and two new homes built on the new lots. To accommodate the request the following'is required: 1. A subdivision; 2. Lot width variances from 75 feet to 50 feet for each lot; and 3. Lot area variances from 9,000 square feet to 6,699 and 6,693 square feet. Continuing, Teague. explained that both lots would gain access off Oaklawn Avenue. Within this neighborhood, the median lot area is 6,701 square feet, median lot depth is 133 feet, and the median lot width is 50 feet. The new lots would meet the median width and depth, but would be just'short of the median area. Planner Teague concluded that•staff recommends that the City Council approve the proposed two lot subdivision of 6109 Oaklawn Avenue and the lot width variances from 75 feet to 50 feet for each lot, and lot area variances from 9,000 square feetto 6,699 and 6,693 square feet. Approval is based on the following findings: 1. Except for the variances, the proposal meets the required standards and ordinance for a subdivision. 2. The subdivision would meet the neighborhood medians for lot width and depth and nearly meet the median area. Page 6 of 13 3. The proposal would restore the property back to the form of the original plat, which included two lots. 4. The proposal meets the required standards for a variance, because: a. There is a unique hardship to the property caused by the existing size of the property which is two times the size of every lot on the block. b. The requested variances are reasonable in the context of the immediate neighborhood. The existing lot is both larger and wider than most properties in the area, including nearly every lot on the block. The proposed subdivision would result in two lots more characteristic of the neighborhood. C. The proposed lots would be the same size as the lots were originally platted. d. The variances would meet the intent of the ordinance because the proposed lots are of similar size to others in the neighborhood. e. If the variances were denied, the applicant would be denied a use of his property, a 50 -foot wide lot, which is common to the area. In addition, the applicant would be denied a subdivision with variances that has been previously approved by the City in two instances in the last two years. Approval is also subject to the following conditions: 1. The City must approve the final plat within one year of preliminary approval or receive a written application for a time extension or the preliminary approval will be void. 2. Prior to issuance of a building permit, the following items must be submitted: a. Submit evidence of Minnehaha Creek Watershed District approval. The City may require revisions to the preliminary plat to meet the district's requirements. b. A curb -cut permit must be obtained from the Edina engineering department. C. A grading plan subject to review and approval of the city engineer. d. All storm water from the proposed homes, driveways, and westerly half of the lots shall drain to Oaklawn. All sump pump drains shall drain into the existing sump pump drain tile along Oaklawn Avenue. e. Any disturbance to the roadway caused by the construction of the new homes must be repaired by replacing the asphalt pavement from curb -to -curb and from saw -cut to saw -cut. f. A construction management plan will be required for the construction of the new homes. g. Utility hook -ups are subject to review of the city engineer Appearine for the Applicant Andy Porter, Refined, LLC. Page 7 of 13 Discussion Commissioner Scherer asked Planner Teague if two houses were on the lots. Planner Teague responded to the best of his knowledge it's always been one house. Commissioner Staunton asked Planner Teague if he knows when the two lots were consolidated. Teague responded he doesn't know. Applicant Presentation Andy Porter addressed the Commission and explained that the street scape supports the two 50 -foot wide lots, adding he mailed notification letters to property owners within 500 -feet and held a neighborhood meeting. Discussion Commissioner Carpenter noted that the Planning Commission received letters in support of the subdivision and letters against it. Continuing, Carpenter asked if the new houses would be "spec" or custom. Mr. Porter responded that it was his intent to have buyers and construct custom homes for each lot. Porter said he intends to keep the new homes nested into the site. Chair Grabiel opened the public hearing. Public Comment Trudy Landgren, 6104 Brookview Avenue spoke in opposition of the proposed subdivision. Dan Uhrhammer, 6101 Oaklawn Avenue, adjacent neighbor spoke in opposition of the Subdivision. He expressed concern over water run -off and loss of sunlight. Kathy McGuire, 6104 Oaklawn Avenue commented that she doesn't want to see overly large houses built on the lots. This was a concern for her. Jackie Whitbeck, 6128 Brookview Avenue spoke in opposition to the subdivision and requested that the City consider a moratorium on subdivision /development in the City's small lot neighborhoods. Whitbeck said the large houses that are being built on these smaller lots negatively impact immediate neighborhood and entire neighborhoods. Janey Westin, 6136 Brookview Avenue, presented an aerial of the neighborhood and pointed out the large Oak trees found in this area; and on this lot. Westin said she doesn't want to see trees lost or damaged as a result of the proposed subdivision. Westin noted that at this time the Energy and Environment Commission was working on developing a tree ordinance. Westin said she agrees with the suggestion made by Ms. Page 8 of 13 Whitbeck that the City Council considers a moratorium on subdivision /development on all residential lots under 75 -feet in width. Dick Whitbeck, 6128 Brookview Avenue, asked when the City would put its residents first. Chair Grabiel asked if there was anyone else that would like to speak to the issue; being none Commissioner Scherer moved to close the public hearing. Commissioner Carpenter seconded the motion. All voted aye; public hearing closed. Discussion A discussion ensued with Commissioners acknowledging that the 75 -foot lot width requirement was city wide; however questioned how it's handled with regard to subdivisions. Planner Teague explained that the subdivision ordinance requires that lot width, depth and lot area be calculated for all single dwellings that fall within 500 feet of the perimeter of the property. The lots are required to meet the mean; however, these lots must still meet the minimum ordinance requirements for lot width, depth and lot to perimeter ratio (W 75 -feet Area 9,000 sq. ft.). Continuing, Teague pointed out these lots do not comply with those standards therefore variances are required. Teague explained that the subdivision ordinance was drafted to ensure an orderly redevelopment of Edina's large lot neighborhoods. The discussion continued on if it was better for the "neighborhood" if the lot(s) was redeveloped as one 100 -foot lot with the property owner building one very large house on the lot instead of two houses on two 50 -foot wide lots as the original plat indicates. Further discussion continued on character definition and if maintaining the original is maintaining the neighborhood character. Commissioner Fischer said with regard to small lot neighborhoods that the City has had the same conversation over and over again; which to him indicates that the the ordinance needs to be addressed. Fischer said the key issue began when the City changed the minimum lot width requirement to 75 -feet. This change was a blanket change and created consequences for those with smaller lots. Continuing, Fischer gave an example: the Zoning Board of Appeals wrestled for years with a "newer" 12- foot driveway width requirement. This change placed a majority of driveways in the City's smaller lot neighborhoods into non - compliance; therefore in certain instances variances were required. Over the years the Zoning Board heard and granted multiple driveway width variances based on hardship; pointing out that in many instances it doesn't make sense to require a 12 -foot wide driveway on a 40 or 50 -foot wide lot. Fischer reported that the 12 -foot driveway width was recently amended and now residents can proceed without the need for a variance. Fischer added that in his opinion it may be time for the Commission to reevaluate the Page 9 of 13 subdivision and zoning ordinances as they relate to lot width, depth and area. Fischer pointed out a "goal" of the Comprehensive Plan was to establish "character districts" and to protect the "character "of those districts. The Commission has continued to struggle with the one size fits all. Fischer reiterated that the Commission should take another look at the City's Ordinance as it relates to subdivision and redevelopment standards (setbacks) especially of the small lots. Chair Grabiel said he recalls past subdivisions where the Commission placed specific conditions on redevelopment. Grabiel asked Planner Teague if the Commission could place conditions of approval of the proposed subdivision. Planner Teague responded in the affirmative. Commissioner Fischer acknowledged that in the past both the Commission and the Council supported similar subdivisions within this neighborhood and questioned if there was a difference between this request and the previous requests? Planner Teague responded that the previous subdivision requests had little to no opposition. Commissioner Forrest acknowledged past approvals; however, pointed out that each request needs to be viewed individually and on its own merits. Commissioner Forrest said one concern she has was if approved the two new homes would be too expensive. Forrest pointed out the Comprehensive Plan indicates that the City support the creation of affordable housing, adding she doesn't believe the new houses would be considered "affordable ". Commissioner Scherer said she agrees with the comments from Commissioner Fischer that in the past the Commission has had similar discussions on the subdivision process; however, she believes it's reasonable for Edina's residents to rely on the City's ordinances. Scherer stated she agrees that future discussions need to occur but at this time she cannot support the subdivision request as presented. Commissioner Staunton said the discussion has been good; however, at this time the application needs to be reviewed under the present ordinances. Staunton noted that at this time there is no ordinance that would prohibit tress from being cut down on this lot or any lot. Staunton said he was persuaded to support the request by viewing the map that captured the 500 -foot neighborhood. He said he observed that the large majority of lots within that 500 -foot neighborhood were 50 -feet, adding that in his opinion the variances are justified. Continuing, Staunton said he was pleased (if approved) that according to Mr. Porter that the new houses would not be spec but custom. Commissioner Forrest said the process still requires that specific criteria be met, adding trees can be considered during the decision making process and the Comprehensive Plan can be used as another tool. Page 10 of 13 Commissioner Staunton agreed that the Comprehensive Plan is a good "tool" to use during the review process. Staunton said he feels comfortable that maintaining the two 50 -foot wide lots was the correct thing to do, adding it supports the continued viability and maintenance of Edina's unique "character districts ". Chair Grabiel said another goal was to maintain consistency and this subdivision supports the preservation of the 50 -foot wide lot neighborhoods. Commissioner Carpenter pointed out that property owners of other 50 -foot wide lots can get pull a demolition permit tomorrow; tear down their existing house and build a new house without review or comment. Carpenter said he sympathizes with the situation but believes maintaining the original plat makes sense. Commissioner Scherer stated the job of the Commission is what's before us this evening. We can't speculate on what someone might do with their house /lot in the future. Commissioner Forrest reiterated the Commission can place conditions on approval. Building height can be addressed and so can the trees. Forrest said it is important to ensure that any new house matches the neighborhood character. Commissioner Staunton noted that this type of conversation was difficult; adding he supports the request as submitted. Motion Commissioner Staunton moved to recommend subdivision approval with variances based on staff findings and subject to staff conditions. Commissioner Carpenter seconded the motion. Ayes; Potts, Platteter, Carpenter, Staunton, Fischer, Grabiel. Nays; Scherer, Forrest, Schroeder. Motion carried 6 -3. 2011- 0017.11a Lot Division James Zavoral 5239 Highwood Drive 6008 and 6000 Pine Grove Road, Edina Planner Presentation Planner Teague informed the Commission Mr. lames Zavoral is requesting to shift the existing lot lines that divide his property at 5239 Highwood Drive, from 6008 and 6000 Pine Grove Road. Page 11 of 13 Teague explained that 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 owners. The 6000 Pine Grove Road lot would gain additional land on Mirror Lake. The 5239 Highwood Drive lot would no longer own property abutting Mirror Lake, but would retain a private easement for access to the lake. The drainage and utility easement adjacent to Mirror Lake would remain. Planner Teague concluded that staff recommends that the City Council approve the Lot Division of 5239 Highwood Drive, 6008 Pine Grove Road and 6000 Pine Grove Road based on the following findings: 1. The existing and proposed lots meet all minimum lot size requirements. 2. The three lots involved in the lot division are larger than most lots within the neighborhood. Approval is also subject to the following condition: 1. All building activity on either lot must comply with all minimum zoning ordinance standards. Discussion Commissioner Staunton moved lot division approval based on staff findings and subject to staff conditions. Commissioner Scherer seconded the motion. All voted aye; motion carried 9 -0. VII. REPORTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS Commissioner Staunton gave a brief report on the progress of the Grandview Small Area Plan Committee. He said the next meeting will be on January 19th and will be held at the Grange Hall from 7:00 -9:00 PM. All are invited to attend. VIII. CORRESSPONDENCE AND PETITIONS Chair Grabiel acknowledged receipt of the Council Connection. IX. CHAIR AND COMMISSION MEMBER COMMENTS None X. STAFF COMMENTS Planner Teague reported he forwarded the ordinances the Commission worked on to the City Council. Teague said he would also look into the subdivision ordinance. Page 12 of 13 XI. ADJOURNMENT Commissioner Scherer moved adjournment at 9:15 PM. Commissioner Forrest seconded the motion. All voted aye; motion carried 9 -0 Jackie Hooeenakker Respectfully Submitted MINUTES OF THE ANNUAL MEETING OF THE EDINA HUMAN RIGHTS &RELATIONS COMMISSION NOVEMBER 22, 2011 7:00 PM 1. CALL TO ORDER i Chair Finsness called the meeting to order. at 7:00 PM. ll. ROLLCALL Answering rollcall were Commissioners Bigbee, Finsness, Mayer, Newell, Seidman, Stanton, Winnick, Student Members Aderhold and Nolan, and Chair Kingston. Staff present:. Lisa Schaefer, Human Resources Director, and Susan Howl, staff liaison. 111. MEETING AGENDA APPROVED Motion by Commissioner Stanton and seconded by Commissioner Newell approving the meeting agenda of November 22, 2011, with the addition of Item VI.H. Human Rights Conference. Ayes: Bigbee, Finsness, Kingston, Mayer, Newell, Seidman, Stanton and Winnick Motion carried. IV. CONSENT AGENDAADOPTED Motion by Commissioner Mayer and seconded by Commissioner Seidman approving the consent agenda as follows: V.A. Approve regular meeting minutes of October 25, 2011. Ayes: Bigbee, Finsness, Kingston, Mayer, Newell, Seidman, Stanton and Winnick Motion carried. V. COMMUNITY COMMENT There were no community comments. VI. REPORTS /RECOMMENDATIONS VI.A. CENSUS DATA UPDATES REPORTED Commissioner Stanton shared that HRRC could investigate, ways to fund a census data report for future planning. Edina is rapidly changing, as seen in the divided economics within the community. In a portion of the northeast quadrant, the median family 'income is $178,000, while the amount is $3,9,000 in a portion of the southeast quadrant. Edina's population is becoming more diverse, with 27% foreign born in the southeast quadrant. Amber Cameron, Edina Resource Center Manager,' presented a power point of the 2010 census data. She referenced the.New York Times. innovation entitled "Mapping America Every City Block" which allows a person to explore a variety of demographics such as race and ethnicity, income, education and housing /families. • With growing disparities in Edina, the question becomes how to shift Edina's resources. • There has been a decrease in the White population —the largest decrease seen in the southeast quadrant. • In every area of Edina, the median home value has increased. • People are not accessing the resources that are available to',them. The Resource Center seeks ways to reach the diverse populations and work with Richfield schools in the southeast quadrant —i.e. scholarships for enrichment,classes. • There has been an increase in family wealth in people over 65 and a loss in income in people.. under 35. • There are many calls to the Resource Center from the senior population, while there are fewer calls from young families and the populations between 18 and 25. • The Edina Community Council, the Resource Center's advisory body, continues to seek ways to market the services of the Center to all the populations in Edina. • A challenge exists in finding ways to bring inclusive togetherness into neighborhoods which have greater affordable housing opportunities. • A do.Town grant will provide classes and services to the less fluent populations. This effort could become a satellite office of the Resource Center. Daryl Coppoletti, Regional Planning Coordinator of the Hennepin South Services Collaborative (HSSC), provided a power point of census information in Edina and the south Hennepin community. • Trends are the same in all the communities, while issues may be different. • The senior population throughout the communities is now eight to ten percent. • The following facts were presented regarding the low income residents of Edina: households are earning less money; more people are living in poverty; fewer families are living in poverty; more children are qualifying for free or reduced lunch; more homeowners are cost burdened by housing costs; and foreclosures continue to rise. • Research could be undertaken to learn how these changes in Edina will impact the needs for services. • If Edina wanted to undertake a study regarding demographics and emerging issues, the following topics could be investigated: occupational re- training for the unemployed; barriers to building affordable housing; the growing wealth gap; transportation; and poverty. • A study undertaken for Edina by HSSC would be labor intensive —nine months from start to finish. This could be a cost of approximately $40,000. Another option would be for Edina to re -join the collaborative and contribute $25,000 annually. VI.B. DOMESTIC PARTNERSHIP ORDINANCE HIGHLIGHTS SHARED Chair Kingston reported that since Edina created its Domestic Partnership Registry and Ordinance, 15 cities in Minnesota now have a registry and ordinance. Currently, there are ten couples registered in Edina. • Citizens of Edina are now assured that Edina public venues will have the same registration, membership or other fees for Domestic Partnerships as for traditional families. • The City of Edina's Personnel Policy was updated to include the benefits of sick leave, funeral and illness for Domestic Partnerships. • The initial homestead rights of Domestic Partnerships are now recognized. VI.C. ANTI- BULLYING INITIATIVE REVIEWED With 150 attendees at last April's event entitled "Reflections on Bullying," Commissioners Newell and Finsness reported that it resulted in a raising of awareness in the community, and the City Council proclaimed October Anti - Bullying Month. The April event included the following: • A light supper with a presentation of submissions and display of EdinaSecrets posts • Presentation of the short film, "Bullied," produced by the Southern Poverty Law Center • Panel with students and members of the community Opportunity for audience engagement Student Members Aderhold and Nolan shared the following activities happening at the High School with the Gay Straight Alliance: • "No Hate Week" event • Petition signing for "Safe Schools for All " legislation • The 360 Visual Arts Project • Upcoming "Day of Silence" • Opportunities to meet with local and State officials on behalf of equal rights for the GLBT community VID. DAYS OF REMEMBRANCE EVENT REVIEWED Commissioner Seidman shared that the City's-first "Days'of Remembrance" event on Sunday, May 1st, was an opportunity to engage the community in acknowledging -the Holocaust. • The City Council proclaimed May V through May :8th , 2011, as Days of Remembrance. • At the Sunday event, Mayor Hovland:presented.i e.proclamation. • Fred Baron, a survivor, spoke about his'experiences during an&,after the Holocaust. • "World Without Genocide" was present at the event. • Also included that day were displays of the Holocaust in Greece. VI.E.. BIAS /HATE CRIME RESPONSE PLAN REVIEWED Commissioner Winnick reported that HRRC's Response Plan required that.an annual review with the Police Chief was to be completed in March. e The Plan provides for a timely.local response showing victim support. • The Plan upholds zero community tolerance for any crimes of bias or hate. • The Plan seeks to raise community awareness. • The Plan establishes and updates a network to be activated if needed. VI.F. TOM OYE HUMAN RIGHTS AWARD PROCESS OUTLINED Commissioner Mayer provided information about HRRC's.annual Tom Oye Human Rights Award to.be presented in April at the City's Volunteer Recognition Reception. • The Award was initiated in 2006, and ten recipients have been honored. • The Award recognizes individuals who live and work in Edina and whose good works promote human relations and advance human rights. • Dan Johnson, the retired pastor of Good Samaritan United Methodist Church, was the 2011 recipient. • There will be a story.about the Award in the winter About Town and also an article placed in the Sun - Current to encourage nominations. • Nomination for 2012 will be accepted until the deadline of February 17th VI.G. EVENT PLANNING PROCESS APPROVED In order to establish a structured budget and event planning process for Commissioners to use when planning an HRRC event and to conduct a post evaluation after the conclusion of an HRRC event, Commissioner Seidman presented three documents (planning and reporting tools) for consideration and approval. • Budget. Planning Worksheet • Event Planning Guide • Post Event Evaluation Motion by Commissioner Newell and seconded by Commissioner Winnick approving the three documents as presented. Ayes: Bigbee, Finsness, Kingston, Mayer, Newell, Seidman, Stanton and Winnick Motion carried. VI.H. HUMAN RIGHTS CONFERENCE INFORMATION PRESENTED Commissioner Bigbee shared that HRRC could host a table at the League's Human Rights Conference in St. Paul on December 2 "d. The event will note the League's 40`h anniversary with a dinner the night before. Hosting a table would be a networking opportunity for the Commission. The following Commissioners indicated an interest in attending along with Commissioner Bigbee: Stanton, Newell and Winnick. The staff liaison will coordinate the, registration fees. VII. CORRESPONDENCE AND PETITIONS No correspondence or petitions were received. Vlll. CHAIR AND COMMISSION MEMBERS' COMMENTS Chair Kingston reported that a former HRRC Member and State League Board member, Idelle Longman, prepared a Chanukah display for viewing at the Edina Community Library over the holidays. The Commissioners shared their condolences regarding Commissioner Cashmore's hospitalization and wishes for his speed recovery. IX. STAFF COMMENTS There were no comments. X. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business on the Commission Agenda, Chair Kingston declared the meeting adjourned at 8:50 PM. Respectfully submitted, Minutes approved by HRRC, January 24, 2012. Susan Howl, HRRC Staff Liaison Jessi Kingston, HRRC Chair i , MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE VETERANS MEMORIAL COMMITTEE HELD AT CITY HALL DECEMBER 16, 2011 7:30 AM I. CALL TO ORDER Chairman Goergen called the meeting to order at 7:30 am IL ROLLCALL Answering roll call were Members Lefler, Lonsbury, Christiaansen, Reed, Kojetin, Benson, Cardarelle, Kieffer and Goergen. III. APPROVAL OF MEETING AGENDA Member Kojetin made a motion, seconded by Member Cardarelle, approving the meeting agenda. Ayes: Christiaansen, Kojetin, Lonsbury, Reed, Lefler, Cardarelle, Kieffer, Benson, Goergen. Motion carried. IV. ADOPTION OF CONSENT AGENDA Member Kojetin made a motion, seconded by Member Lonsbury to approve the Consent Agenda as follows: A. Approval of the October 21, 2011 Veterans Memorial Committee Meeting Minutes. Ayes: Christiaansen, Kojetin, Lonsbury, Reed, Lefler, Cardarelle, Kieffer, Benson, Goergen. Motion carried. V. COMMUNITY COMMENT There were no members of the general public present at the meeting. Vl. STANDING COMMITTEE REPORTS A. Fundraising Plan — Richard Olson & Herb Lefler Member Lefler informed the committee since their October meeting he has received one phone call from one committee member concerning fundraising which they are following up on. He noted that he thinks there is a bit of an issue in the fact that he has only received one phone call. Member Lefler pointed out that they have identified a number of high profile potential donors; however, they can't really pursue them until they are prepared. He stated that right now they need $10,000; $3,800 for the artist and the remaining for fundraising expenses such as brochures, postage, stationary, etc. He noted that while they have a long range plan they don't have the seed money to execute it. He noted that the people they are going to be talking to are going to be expecting a certain quality of presentation that will speak to how serious they are and the dignity of what it is they are trying to do. Member Lefler stated that he also thinks they need some commitment from the committee to be able to tell their potential donors that the committee has already raised "X" amount of money. Richard Olson, an Edina resident who has worked on many fundraisers, gave the committee a little background on himself as well as his experiences with fundraising. He pointed out the committee needs to have materials or something to hand out to the potential donors to give them the vision. He explained when they go out and visit with potential donors they need three things. They need to approach them on an intellectual side; what does it look like, what it's going to be. Secondly, and most important, is the emotional side. You need to tell a story and come up with some talking points on why they may want to donate. Third, they need to make it easy for the donor to sign up; the physical part of it is key. He stated that they need to go out and tell the story and they need to decide who is going to be the one to do that. Mr. Olson stated that they know who the wealthy people are in the community and $400,000 might not be that much if you talk to the right people; however, these people are very smart. Therefore, you need to talk intellectually to them about it and then emotionally tie into it. Mr. Olson explained to the committee that they need to start with their top donor and work their way down. He indicated as a group they should say who they want for $200,000 and $100,000 and $50,000, etc., and work their way down and peg those people and go to them and solicit them. He stated you need to ask them if they would like to consider a gift of "X" amount and then you need to let them know what they would get, if anything. He noted some people don't want anything for giving money and some people may want their names on it; therefore, you need to decide as a group what you are going to do. Member Lonsbury informed the committee that he will take care of the materials needed. He stated that he will also head up the effort to try to get the printing donated. He indicated he is more concerned about what it is they are offering to vie the donors. Mr. Olson asked the committee who their natural circle of friends are and go out and tap those people and then those people know people. He noted that peer to peer solicitation is better than him going to someone he doesn't know and asking for a gift. He suggested putting names on a spreadsheet and see who may know them and then assign a solicitor to them and report back every month. Member Reed commented that his circle of friends are not millionaires; however, he has had dozens of people come to him that would like to give $5.00 or $20.00. He noted they've heard you are not supposed to do that before the big shooters put their money on the table but then how are they supposed to get the $10,000 that is needed now. Mr. Olson suggested the committee is a good starting point and maybe everyone puts in $1,000 or $500. He noted that you need to start the campaign by saying it was a stretch but collectively the committee was able to come up with "X" amount. He stated you are not going to raise $400,000 with $5.00 and $20.00 donations. You need to get a $200,000 or $100,000 gift. He indicated that you need to start strategically thinking about how do you find these people and Edina has a lot people 2 with a lot of money. You need to appeal to them and you have to be organized on how you want to do it. The committee discussed what they may give to those who make large donations. Member Lonsbury asked for two points of clarification. First, does the $400,000 include any of the extras such as the miniature eagles or sentinels because if not and they are going to offer those things they may want to raise that amount to $500,000. Secondly, they need to decide exactly what donors would receive if they were to donate $250,000, $100,000 or $50,000 so he can start to put the materials together and sales presentation so they know what it is they are going to say to these people. Member Kojetin stated the City Council only approved $400,000. Mr. Keprios responded that if they find they are going to exceed the $400,000 he would go back and make a recommendation to the Park Board and then on to the City Council saying they would like to raise some additional dollars. Mr. Olson stated that the committee needs to come back with a campaign plan and needs to determine what the name recognition levels are going to be. He noted the committee first needs to agree is it $400,000 or $500,000. He indicated that once that has been decided you need to put together a spreadsheet with everyone you know and put dollars to it. He pointed out then the committee needs to find someone who has a nice home and is willing to host an open house. At that time bring in a speaker such as General Schulstad, a widow whose husband died in combat or some guys from Pearl Harbor and get that emotion in the room for the people like himself who have never served in the Armed Forces. Member Cardarelle indicated that he knows a lot of contractors who will donate work which could be worth $5,000 to $10,000 or more in construction costs. He asked would that be considered over and above the $400,000 or $500,000 as well as the surveying he did or the donated printing Member Lonsbury was talking about. Mr. Keprios explained the committee has done a great job bringing it through the public process. He noted City Council has approved the plan and design and if that doesn't change he doesn't think they are going to give the committee any trouble about having to spend more money to build the approved memorial. Member Lonsbury stated he was anticipating those types of donations would count towards the $500,000. Member Lonsbury made a motion, seconded by Member Lefler, to develop a campaign plan for $500,000 to make sure there is enough money. The rationale is in case construction costs increase, etc., as well as cover office fundraising and other operating expenses that are part of the construction. Ayes: Christiaansen, Kojetin, Lonsbury, Reed, Lefler, Cardarelle, Kieffer, Benson, Goergen. Motion carried. Member Lonsbury asked Mr. Olson if he could give the committee an idea of how to break down the $500,000. He stated the committee needs to agree as to what the donors are going to get; what are logical levels. Member Kieffer suggested they break 3 it up into four stars like the general ship; four star donations, three star donations, two and one star donations. He noted it would be tied to the military. Member Lefler asked if the recommendation were four would they have four sentinels, two on each side. Member Reed replied that one person doesn't have to be on one sentinel. Chair Goergen noted that one of the things they previously agreed on, unless they want to change it, is to have a single monument of recognition and that doesn't fit into four sentinels. Member Kieffer responded they could still break it up into four stars on the same sentinel with the stars and names underneath. Member Lonsbury made a motion, seconded by Member Lefler, that donations of $100,000 or more are recognized on one or more sentinels, donations between $50,000 and $100,000 are recognized on the bench or benches and nothing else in the memorial. Member Reed stated they haven't even decided on benches and he would like to leave benches out of it right now. He noted that he thinks everything should be recognized on one sentinel where they could put 100 names if they wanted. He indicated he thinks they don't need to put in a lot of sentinels because it would just clutter the design. He commented he thinks there should be two sentinels leading into the memorial, four at a maximum. Member Lonsbury replied he was thinking two sentinels so they would have some options. Member Kojetin indicated that he thinks most of the big donors could care less what they get for their donation. He suggested making a brochure showing the different levels and ask the potential donor which level they would like to donate and don't worry about what they get. He indicated if someone asks do they get some kind of recognition then a committee member would have the authority to say you will get recognition someplace. Member Lonsbury asked what the authority is of the people who are out making the pitch. Member Kojetin responded he would give you the authority to make that decision. Mr. Olson indicated it would be good to have a basic foundation such as the four star level. Let potential donors know you are working on what it's going to look like but let it be known that for $250,000 you will have recognition on a sentinel or something like that. Chair Goergen commented that in the brochure they ought to establish the minimum level for recognition, not what the recognition is. Member Lonsbury made an amendment to his motion, seconded by Member Lefler, donations of $50,000 and above get recognized that there are four levels that they will recognize somewhere on the memorial and the fundraising committee is granted the authority to determine what that is including adding sentinels to the memorial as needed. Ayes: Christiaansen, Kojetin, Lonsbury, Reed, Lefler, Cardarelle, Kieffer, Benson, Goergen. Motion carried. 4 Member Benson asked Mr. Olson what he meant by "need to make it easy ". Mr. Olson explained what he meant by that is they need to have the materials right in front of the donor when they make the commitment. He stated you need to have your "go to guy" that's going to be there to answer questions and. make it as easy as possible for them to make a check,,transfer stocks, IRA distributions:, etc. He noted they may:want to ask Dick Crockett from the Edina Foundation what he is and is not able to do. Mr. Keprios asked what a realistic time frame.is to raise this,kind of money to which .Mr. Olson replied it's difficult times to raise $500,000. Mr:- Olson pointed out that when you - sit down with a potential donor you want to know a ,lot about. that:person ahead of:time. He explained you want to be able to ask them a questionyou already know, the answer to because you don't want to ask a dumb question and the answer is "no" and,that's the end of your conversation. Mr. Olson stated at some point the committee needs to sit down and say who is going to be''Ohair of the campaign. ,Maybe..you have an honorary chair like General Schulstad who can talk and has-done this type of thing before. You need to play onthe emotion side of things and make sure there are materials ready for people to take. home. He pointed out the most, important thing you need to do is follow -up with.these people after. That's one of the biggest mistakes fundraisers make is not following'..up. Mr. Olson commented that Member Lefler is head of the fundraising; however, because he is a judge he is restricted by law and cannot ask anyone for anything. He suggested Member' Lefler administer the plan in the background because the chief fundraising person needs to be able to attend meetings and lunches, etc., to ask people for money. Mr. Olson indicated the initial question still is where you are going to get the $10,000. He noted Member Lonsbury stated he was going to take care of the materials but you still need $3,800 for the artist. Maybe as a board you can somehow come up with that now. He commented you give your time and you give your treasure, that's why you are on this board. Member Kojetin asked if the Edina Foundation .would be able to help them with a grant or something.. Mr. Keprios responded that the Edina Foundation is receiving free rent at the Senior Center for a year because they are handling this project: Chair Goergen pointed out the problem with grants that he- has found is it's an annual:thing. They consider all of them for a year and then on a certain date they issue the grant(s). - He added that maybe.:the Edina Foundation has a quicker system than the ones he is aware of but it's his understanding that it's a process and it takes time. Mr. Olson pointed out they need to get a newsletter or something out to the residents of.Edina so they are aware of it. In addition, the committee needs to proactively seek to speak before the.Chamber of Commerce, service clubs and other gatherings that offer important awareness building opportunities. He noted to also make it known that you will speak one on one in small groups of.current and potential donors. Mr. Olson stated they could have Member Lonsbury set up a website where people can go and actually get a virtual tour of what the memorial will look like_. .> . 5 Mr. Olson suggested to the committee to try and buy and /or get a list of veterans who live in Edina or even Hennepin County where information could be mailed to them on a regular basis because that is where you are going to get your $25, $50 or even more donations. It was noted that Dick Crockett is willing to open up the Edina Foundation's database; however, he doesn't have the manpower to do it. Someone from the committee will need to go through it and get the hundred biggest contributors to the Foundation or whatever number the committee agrees upon to look at. Mr. Olson suggested to the committee if anyone receives newsletters, or annual reports to page through them and see if there is anyone you recognize at those top levels. Mr. Olson suggested to the committee that at one of their meetings to bring a list of names of potential donors on a grid and say who knows these people and how can we get to them. He stated that with two or three people they could reach most people in Edina in this group, you know somebody who knows somebody who knows somebody and would you be willing to follow -up with this person. He explained you would meet the person for coffee and just explain what it is the committee is doing; your first meeting is not to solicit them for a gift. All you want to go into your first meeting with is will they meet with you a second time because you are not going to be able to do it in one meeting. Talk to them, and get them to think about it and say do you want to hear more about this at a later date, then you give them materials and ask them to go to the website. It's socialize, present, follow -up. At this time there was no longer a quorum, 8:17 am. MINUTES OF CITY OF EDINA, MINNESOTA TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION COMMUNITY ROOM DECEMBER 15, 2011 6:00 P.M. ROLLCALL Answering rollcall were members Bass, Bonneville, Braden, Janovy, Nelson, Schweiger, Schold Davis and Thompson. APPROVAL OF MEETING,AGENDA Motion was made by member Bonneville and seconded by member.Thompson approving the meeting agenda. APPROVAL OF MINUTES — REGULAR MEETING OF NOVEMBER 17. 2011 Motion was made by member Bonneville and seconded by member Schold Davis approving the minutes with the following addition. page 3. W Street add '20 mph limit when children are present.' COMMUNITY COMMENTS Susan Keane, 5105 W. 56th Street, said at the Richmond Hills Park meeting discussion included sidewalk; however, staff was not recommending sidewalk and the neighborhood does not want sidewalk. She said she was told at the meeting that it was up to residents if sidewalk is included and to her knowledge only one resident wants sidewalk. She said further that she was told to attend this meeting because the project was being reviewed. Sheila Rerat, 4913 Payton Ct., said at 70th & 69th two arrows on overhead sign pointing up Normandale Rd; rhy not have one arrow? Requested crosswalk at 66th & Normandale Road; misleading sign on eastside says to TH100, pointing down one -way; requested no left turn sign so drivers know not to turn; 70th Street bike path ends at church, requested continuing up Normandale, to 66th to park (lots of kids); and requested lowering speed limit to 25 mph on Normandale as well as 66th; and is unhappy with proposal for a sidewalk on Normandale. Rachel Jerstad, 4904 Payton Ct., (written comment submitted by neighbor). I have two children, ages 14 & 8. They ride their bikes to the pool and park in the summer. There are many cars that drive very fast on Normandale Road and it is scary for the kids on bikes to turn on to 66th and to cross to the sidewalk. In addition, it would be safer if 66th speed limit was 25 mph. There are a lot of parks and walking paths. Let's be safe in our community! Sheila Rzepecki, 6617 Normandale Road, said she understand that she is on a busy road because of its proximity to TH100 but have seen increase in traffic and is concerned for her son who has disability. She said 100 citations going 55mph on the frontage road have been issued; cars are traveling in the wrong direction on the one -way street; her mailbox have been knocked down and there have been several accidents; crossing 66th to get to the lake is very difficult; Cornelia Park of 66th had 2000 visitors in May and it is a death trap waiting to happen; and drivers are avoiding 70th and cutting thru. Robert Kane, 6629 Normandale Road, requested another 'do not enter' sign at 66th & Normandale on the eastside; asked what it will take to get a permanent speed monitor like the one on 70th Sothy Namasivayam, 6641 Normandale Road, echoed what had been said previously including extending the 'like path at up Normandale to 66th; requested a stop sign Payton and a crosswalk. Emily Sever, 6713 Normandale Road, said there is no way to get to Cornelia and Normandale Park by foot or bike. They must drive to cross 66tH REPORT /RECOMMENDATIONS Neighborhood Street Reconstruction Review Richmond Hills Park Assistant city engineer Sullivan said an open house was held on November 29 by SEH (consultant that is designing and managing this project). He said the project include realignment to two intersections to minimize hard surface and create traffic calming. To date, there have been minimum correspondence from residents and some discussion by residents regarding a sidewalk on W. 56" Street. Discussion included the following: • 750 cars is the threshold for sidewalk approval. • Staff is not recommending sidewalk because of threshold requirement. • Based on questionnaire results, residents opposes sidewalk 111 to 6; and it is not part of the pedestrian Comp Plan. • Sidewalk on 56th is a logical connection to Hansen to get to Garden Park. • Crosswalk and 70th type entrance islands requested but not enough interest at this point. • Road right of way width is 66 ft; enough city -owned property to include entrance island and crosswalk are doable. • Attempt to implement Living Streets when possible; however, residents want village -look and ETC should support this. • ETC charge with looking at City as a whole and should consider sidewalk for safety and pedestrian connectivity. • Resident at 5009 W. 56th Street said residents surveyed said no to sidewalk; not a lot of vehicles; parents are driving kids to park; no school; and is okay with kids being in the street. • Residents' main concern was the assessment and sidewalk would add more. • Sidewalk assessment would be divided amongst all the properties. • ETC is advisory to Council and can make recommendation. • Resident said staff is not recommending sidewalk. • Believes in majority rule and if safety is not an issue, then no sidewalk. • Residents not in favor of sidewalk even if cost was not an issue; no safety concerns. • Residents okay with curb and gutter proposal. • Auto turn vehicle template used for intersection realignment and tested by school bus tested for effectiveness (it does encroach into opposing lane). • Concern that drivers will take wide turns and defeat calming effect; also, concern for pedestrians in road at this area. • Prefers bigger radius on low volume roads. • Goal is to have more people walking based on Living Streets concept. • Statistically, sidewalk saves lives. • No crosswalk treatment currently and none planned. • This is the only opportunity to put in a sidewalk for 20 -30 years. e Countryside had clear path to a school for sidewalk but not same for this neighborhood. • Noted firm support for Living Streets. After discussion, the recommendation was to support the Richmond Hills Park Neighborhood Street Reconstruction as submitted with the intersection modification at Kent & Windsor and Warwick & Kent and not including sidewalk in this project. 2 Tracy Avenue: Vernon Avenue to Benton Avenue (Phase 1) Assistant city engineer Sullivan said the size and cost are too much to do the roadway in its entirety at this lime, therefore, Tracy Avenue to the fire station is scheduled for 2015 and a consultant is designing the Tracy kvenue and crosstown interchange with hopes of getting funding in 2012. Mr. Sullivan said Tracy Avenue is a concrete road, 36 ft. wide, parking on both sides, traffic volume of 3,500, and no accident along this stretch. An informational meeting was held on November 28 to share information and gather feedback from residents in the 35 homes. An open house is scheduled for December 19 to show residents the design which will include a 5 ft boulevard concrete sidewalk on the eastside only; curb line in the same location; and bike lane on both sides and parking only on one side. Discussion included the following: • No sidewalk on the west side because of impact to corridor and not many pedestrians. • Improved crosswalk at Hawkes. • Primary bike route for on city's Comprehensive Bicycle Transportation Plan. • Road would expand to 40 ft with everything that is planned. • Staff believes intersection of Tracy Avenue and Benton Avenue is cumbersome and the right -of -way should be made clearer. Staff is meeting with school district tomorrow morning to discuss and get their feedback on an oval -about that will fit with bus movement. Intersection not currently used by buses because of difficulty. • Public hearing is being scheduled for February 17. • Comments by residents at informational meeting suggest they find the current configuration of the Benton/Tracy intersection safer because of unique design. • Support for sidewalk on the east and two bike lanes. • Support for everything but the reconfiguration. • What criteria was used for realignment of the Tracy /Benton intersection because generally want drivers to be uncertain so they are paying attention. • Buses cannot use the intersection as it is currently. • WSB & Associates is designing this project to be similar to the W. 70th Street project — concrete to asphalt; 11 ft travel lane; 8 ft parking lane; and 5 ft bike lanes. • 12 ft driving lanes would be better and have bikes and parking share lanes, or eliminate parking. • Residents' support included bike lanes, parking and sidewalk on east side. • Vernon Avenue is a county road and is not included with this project. Further discussion, including a review of written public comment and project details, to continue at a future ETC meeting. Bike Edina Task Force — Bike Routes Chair Janovy said the ETC should not put too much distinction on the primary and secondary bike routes. She said the top four routes to be considered for striping, per BETF recommendation, are: 1) 70th; 2) Cahill; 3) Valley View; and 4) 50th and if they concur with the recommendation it will be forwarded to Council. The Council would then, at their discretion, direct staff to perform a feasibility study. Discussion included the following: • Many things that Council would have to review and decide upon such as reducing speed limit to 25 mph. • Routes are already in Bike Plan. • Routes were identified by staff and BETF chair and co -chair and other BETF members ranked them. • Staff time to complete feasibility studies. Some routes are easier to stripe than others, 50th being the most difficult. 3 • No criteria were used to identify the routes except that they are in the Comp Plan and the perception is that they would be utilized; also, the roads are wider with little to no parking. ber feasibility studies for possible striping. 71 High School Traffic Chair Janovy said she has spoken with various individuals (school board member, assistant High School principal, police chief, and city engineer) regarding traffic issues at the high school. In addition to as many as 500 student vehicles, there are 150 -200 parents' drop -offs and 34 buses. She has suggested to the city engineer reviewing the crosswalk at Chapel Lane because of its proximity to the high school exit. Member Bass said busing and carpool is an issue and suggested that they look at traffic flow and also look at models around the country. She said for changes to be effective it must be the brain child of the students and she suggested that they could start with their passion for the environment and consider not driving to school for just one day. Chair Janovy said there are remote drop -offs and wondered if they had proper facility to accommodate students who become pedestrians. She asked about the number of motor vehicle accidents on school property and how are they handled. Questions /Updates from Student Members Member Schweiger asked how much is an average assessment per property. Mr. Sullivan said each property could be assessed $5,000 -$6000 on the low end and $12,000413,000 on the high end. Regarding high school traffic, member Schweiger, a junior at the high school, said he drives alone to school every day, and while traffic is heavy it is manageable. He said it is dangerous to walk when school gets out. Working Group Updates Transportation Options Chair Janovy said member Schold Davis is not continuing on the ETC so may need to find a new chair for Transportation Options Working Group. Living Streets Chair Janovy said Living Streets held their first meeting. Member McKlveen is not continuing on the ETC but would like to continue to be part of this group. Member Thompson said at their first meeting the common theme was creating system of roads into structure to enhance active living and to create options for many modes as possible. Other topics discussed that could be used to guide a consultant as they develop the policy included having natural connections, green focus with storm water treatments, neighborhood identity or art for community feel, etc. A National Complete Streets Coalition Workshop is being scheduled for February and it will include a presenter that worked on the LA Living Streets design manual. The date is tentatively set for February 15, all day, and location still to be determined. Grandview Small Area Studv Update Member Nelson thanked Mr. Sullivan for distributing to the ETC the transportation section of the draft report. He said suggestions are to eliminate some ramps off TH100 and replace with a split diamond; other alternatives being considered are making Vernon Avenue one lane of traffic and adding bike lanes; other transportation issues include inconvenience walking to Jerry's from the Grandview Square Condominium. There is an interest is developing the Park N Ride soon. Comments are being taken until February. Chair Janovy asked if it would make sense to do a formal presentation to the ETC in January. Members Bonneville and Nelson agreed and suggested asking Jack Broz to do the presentation. 4 Bike Edina Task Force Update No report. .:ORRESPONDENCES /PETITIONS Normandale and 66"' Street Discussion Councilmember Bennett said Council directed staff to prepare a feasibility study for a sidewalk on Normandale Road and for staff to look at all possible options. Staff said the area was re- signed yesterday at 66th Street including relocating the 'do not enter' sign; one -way signs updated; both legs are marked and signed correctly. Mr. Sullivan will check with MnDOT for clarification on the arrows on the traffic signal going northbound to TH100 vs going to Normandale Road to see if it can be made clearer. Mr. Sullivan said the dynamic speed sign on W. 70th is about $3500 -$5000 and he is not sure if the cost would be assessed to residents since this was the first installation in the City. Residents were told to contact the police department to schedule use of the portable speed monitor. Mr. Sullivan will contact the police department to see if it could be used now since there isn't any snow. Mr. Sullivan said the Normandale Road sidewalk feasibility study could include dynamic speed monitor and cross walk at 66th. Feasibility studies are being done also for the following sidewalk projects: Xerxes, School Road, and 42nd St. CHAIR AND COMMISSION MEMBER COMMENTS During discussion, a Normandale Road resident said a sidewalk is not necessary, instead he suggested that the bike lane that ends at 70th continue up Normandale and onto 66th, and install a stop sign at Payton to stop traffic in an effort to slow them down as they are going down the hill. Councilmember Bennett reiterated that ie feasibility study for the sidewalk is to include all options. Chair Janovy handed out a proposed ETC priority list for the ETC for 2012. Chair Janovy said the proposed ETC priority list for 2012 include 66th Street. She said they need to do a better job -of teaching drivers how to navigate the roundabouts. Councilmember Bennett said there is an educational video that could be posted to the web. Chair Janovy said the draft bylaws should be ready in January for review. Also being discussed is developing a work plan to identify priorities. Chair Janovy handed out a list of accomplishments for 2011 and thanked everyone for their involvement. In preparation for the work plan, she handed out a priority list for 2012 and explained that items could be added or deleted. Regarding the High School/Valley View area, member Bass suggested changing it to Safe Routes to School to make it a part of the comprehensive plan and making sure an ETC member is part of the discussion group. After discussion, consensus was reached that their top three priorities were: Living Streets, High School traffic (under the umbrella of Safe Routes To School), and France Avenue Corridor /Southdale Area transportation improvements. Further discussion of the proposed priorities planned for the January. 2012 ETC meeting schedule was handed out based on a requirement from the forthcoming bylaws that will require them to sign off on the meeting schedule. It may be necessary to reschedule October's meeting and Mr. Sullivan will look into this further. The plan was to have the ETC sign off on the 2012 meeting schedule at the January meeting. STAFF COMMENTS France Avenue Bridge Scope Chanae France Avenue Bridge re- scoping will be presented to the ETC in March. WSB is currently rewriting the scope and the cost is $20,000. TLC Grant/Bike Boulevards Approval was received today from MnDOT. Another open house will be scheduled. Living Streets Living Streets RFQ is not done due to workload. The plan is to get it out and by early January. The RFQ and submittals will be distributed to the ETC to be discussed at the January meeting. Council Actions /discussions related to transportation since'last ETC meetina Mr. Sullivan said he thinks the assistant city manager should be getting these types of information to commissions, along with department heads. Chair Janovy asked to receive correspondences related to traffic and transportation that are sent to the City. She said residents might think their mail is being forwarded to the ETC. Member Thompson thanked everyone, including staff for a great first year. Member Bass suggested having the Living Streets RFQ on the January agenda for discussion. Member Bonneville said there will be a need for Grandview Small Area Committee and the ETC to discuss roadways being proposed. He thanked everyone for a great year and said the next meeting would be his last. ADJOURNMENT Meeting adjourned at 9:55 p.m. 11 ]668 REPORURECOMMENDATION 'To: MAYOR AND COUNCIL Agenda Item Item No: From: Wayne D. Houle, PE City Engineer Action F Discussion ® Information Date: February 6, 2012 Subject: Feasibility Study for Tracy Avenue Road Reconstruction, Improvement No. BA -368 INFORMATION /BACKGROUND: Attached is the Feasibility Study for Tracy Avenue Road Reconstruction project, additional responses to residents will be included with the formal submittal. Staff will submit the formal feasibility submittal at the February 21 City Council. ATTACHMENTS: Feasibility Study — BA368 a �.� oun reuro w i f \ /I^f\ CA1(` M \A DDl1 iC(`Th nIDO AI/lf\ o w 7ro T....... Ci p / -1-1 I hereby certify that this feasibility study was prepared by me or under my direct supervision, and that I am a duty Registered Professional Engineer under th aws of the State of Minnesota. 216/1 Z ArillieIry J. Plowman, PE Reg. No. Date Approved Wayne D. Houle, PE Date City Enpineer 4,91��1 FEASIBILITY STUDY - BA 368 N� o ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT ay CITY OF EDINA • r,TMrcntAt tV STREET IMPROVEMENTS Tracy Avenue — Benton Avenue to Vernon Avenue February 6, 2012 LOCATION: The project is located along Tracy Avenue from Benton Avenue to Vernon Avenue as shown in Figure 1 below. Figure 1. Proiect Location Map Tracy Avenue consists of the following roadway characteristics: • Classified as a Collector • Posted Speed Limit — 30 mph • Concrete pavement constructed in 1961 • Width = 36' (curb face to curb face) • 8' parking lane on the east side • 5' boulevard and 5' sidewalk on the east side • ADT = 4,200 to 6,000 vehicles per day • Length = 2,200'(0.42 miles) 'Feasibility Study - TRACY AVENUE — BENTON AVENUE to.VERNON AVENUE INITIATION & ISSUES: Thee Tracy .Avenue project was initiated by the Engineering Department as., part of the City's street reconstruction program and identified in the Capital Improvement Program. This project addresses updating aging infrastructure , issues associated with the pavement condition, storm water, sanitary sewer, and watermain systems. All Engineering projects are reviewed for compatibility with the City of Edina 2008 Comprehensive Plan Update, Comprehensive Bicycle Transportation Plan, and the Comprehensive Water Resource Management Plan. City of Edina 2008 Comprehensive Plan Update Sidewalk Facilities Chapter.7 of the plan addresses locations of proposed sidewalk, facilities and funding options within the City. As shown in Figure 7.10 of Appendix N, there' is an existing sidewalk on Tracy Avenue. There are no proposed additional sidewalk facilities shown along the corridor. Bicycle Facilities . Chapter 7 of the plan addresses locations of proposed bicycle facilities within the City as part of the Comprehensive Bicycle Transportation Plan. As shown in Figure 7.11 of Appendix N, Tracy Avenue is a designated a primary _ " bike route. Staff Identified Issues The following issues were identified by staff during the preliminary scoping of " the project: • Poor condition-of.existing concrete pavement; -: Offset intersection at Benton Avenue and:Tracy-Avenue • Localized drainage issues • Parking constraints • Lack of bicycle accommodations • ;Pedestrian access issues • Storm sewer trunk line capacity issues to Hawkes Lake • Sanitary sewer and watermain deficiencies Resident Input A street reconstruction informational letter was distributed on November 24, 2011, to 34 property owners that are adjacent to the proposed street reconstruction area from Benton Avenue to Vernon Avenue. An informational meeting was held at the Public Works and Park Maintenance Facility on November 28, 2011. A presentation was given explaining the street reconstruction process and described the existing conditions of the roadway corridor as well as the design criteria for the roadway given that it is a designated Municipal State Aid roadway. The meeting was attended by Page 2 of 23 Feasibility Study TRACY AVENUE = BENTON AVENUE to VERNON AVENUE approximately 20 residents representing 16 properties. Input from' this meeting and comments received are included in Appendix G. This meeting was followed up with a questionnaire sent to the property owners on November 30;..2011. The questionnaire was. distributed to ascertain the residents' preference regarding pedestrian accommodations, on- street bicycle facilities, on- street parking, street light upgrades, traffic management issues, and the Benton Avenue and Tracy Avenue intersection. The .questionnaire also inquired if the resident had drainage problems and /or private underground facilities, such as pet containment or irrigation systems. A return rate. of 94 %, or 32 of the 34 residents, responded to the questionnaire. A tabulation of the responses has been completed and can be found in Appendix C. Below is a summary of a few key questionnaire responses: uayoa atcr ugzC un teswunses ur returneo questionnaires ana may not equal 100% if questions were not answered. ** Interest in Bike Lanes if it allows the speed to be lowered to 25 MPH, which is allowed with on- street bike lanes. ' ** Some residents responded the intersection is confusing, but the confusion leads to drivers to be more cautious than a standard intersection. Table 1. Results from Questionnaire #1 Key issues, from the questionnaire, that residents wanted to be addressed were traffic management at the Benton Avenue and Tracy Avenue intersection, speed control, and maintaining parking. Residents were not in favor of on- street bicycle lanes or upgrading street lights. A second neighborhood meeting was held on December 19, 2011, 'to discuss the results of the questionnaire, the preliminary project design, and the estimated assessments to properties. . The meeting was attended by approximately 30 residents representing 17 properties. Comments and - correspondence received subsequent to this meeting have been included in Appendix G. Page 3 of 23 Benton Pedestrian Bike Lane Issues & On- Street Issues Tracy Parking Intersection West Side Importance of Bike 25 MPH Speed Traffic Control Issue Exists • Importance of on , Surveys y Surveys y Sent : Returned Sidewalk Lanes Limit" street Parking Important =5 Important =5 Important =5 Yes Yes; to to to but no Important -5 Not Not Not safety to Im ortant =1 Im ortant =1 Im ortant =1 . issue * ** Not Important =1 34 32 1.34 1.66 2.28 15 5 2.50 %of R Returned* %° Survey s 100% . 100% 100% 58% 20% - . 100 uayoa atcr ugzC un teswunses ur returneo questionnaires ana may not equal 100% if questions were not answered. ** Interest in Bike Lanes if it allows the speed to be lowered to 25 MPH, which is allowed with on- street bike lanes. ' ** Some residents responded the intersection is confusing, but the confusion leads to drivers to be more cautious than a standard intersection. Table 1. Results from Questionnaire #1 Key issues, from the questionnaire, that residents wanted to be addressed were traffic management at the Benton Avenue and Tracy Avenue intersection, speed control, and maintaining parking. Residents were not in favor of on- street bicycle lanes or upgrading street lights. A second neighborhood meeting was held on December 19, 2011, 'to discuss the results of the questionnaire, the preliminary project design, and the estimated assessments to properties. . The meeting was attended by approximately 30 residents representing 17 properties. Comments and - correspondence received subsequent to this meeting have been included in Appendix G. Page 3 of 23 Feasibility Study TRACY AVENUE — BENTON AVENUE to VERNON AVENUE A second questionnaire was sent out on January. 20, 2012. Input was received at the December 19 informational meeting that residents may have answered differently knowing the impacts associated with the design. The questionnaire was completed and summarized by three separate groups: . 1. Residents along Tracy (from Benton to Vernon) . 2. Residents along Tracy Avenue (from TH 62 to Benton Avenue) 3. Other residents in Edina, not on Tracy Avenue The results are tabulated in Appendix E. An overall survey response map is included in Appendix O, which represents. the .:properties -from which questionnaires were received. * Half responses are indicated if household was split (i.e., husband and wife disagreed on their answer) ** Percentages are based on those who answered a particular question, some residents left answers blank. * ** Questionnaires were sent out via email through the Countryside Neighborhood Group, it is unknown . the number of questionnaires that weredistributed - - Table 2.. Results from Questionnaire. #2. EXISTING CONDITIONS:. Roadway Tracy Avenue between Benton Avenue and Vernon Avenue is .a concrete roadway that was constructed in 1961 and consists of a two -lane roadway with parking allowed on the east side of the street. The width of Tracy Avenue is 36 feet, from curb face to curb face. There is an existing 5' boulevard and 5' sidewalk on the east side of the street. The existing right -of -way is 60' wide. The sidewalk on the east side is generally 1' from the east right -of -way line. The west curb is generally 12 -13' from the west right -of -way line. Is Proposed Section Maintain Parking If resident could eliminate one Most Appropriate? (East Side) cross section component? West Side Sidewalk Is Roundabout Appropriate? If No, which is most Parking Leave As appropriate? Group Yes No Important Not Im rtant Bike Lane Lane Proposed Important Not Im rtant Yes No a ign s we s Tracy Avenue (Benton to Vernon) Answered 6.5* 17.5* 11 14 13 8 3 3 21 7 17 7 10 (25 of 34) 74% Responses Percent "" 27% ` 73% 44% 56% 54% 33% 13% 12% 88% 29% 71% 41% 59% Tracy Avenue (TH 62 to Benton) Answered 7 11 6 13 5 9 5 2 16 10 - -9 4 4 (19 of 38) 50% Responses Percent- 39% 61% 32% 68% 26% 47% 26% 11% 89% 53% 47% 50% 50% Non -Tracy Avenue— Answered 6 12 5 12 7.5 8 2.5 7 11 2 16 5.5 10.5 18 Responses Percent** 67% 29% 71% 42% �44% 14% 39% 61% 11% 89% 34% 66% * Half responses are indicated if household was split (i.e., husband and wife disagreed on their answer) ** Percentages are based on those who answered a particular question, some residents left answers blank. * ** Questionnaires were sent out via email through the Countryside Neighborhood Group, it is unknown . the number of questionnaires that weredistributed - - Table 2.. Results from Questionnaire. #2. EXISTING CONDITIONS:. Roadway Tracy Avenue between Benton Avenue and Vernon Avenue is .a concrete roadway that was constructed in 1961 and consists of a two -lane roadway with parking allowed on the east side of the street. The width of Tracy Avenue is 36 feet, from curb face to curb face. There is an existing 5' boulevard and 5' sidewalk on the east side of the street. The existing right -of -way is 60' wide. The sidewalk on the east side is generally 1' from the east right -of -way line. The west curb is generally 12 -13' from the west right -of -way line. Is Proposed Section Maintain Parking If resident could eliminate one Most Appropriate? (East Side) cross section component? West Side Sidewalk Is Roundabout Appropriate? If No, which is most Parking Leave As appropriate? Group Yes No Important Not Im rtant Bike Lane Lane Proposed Important Not Im rtant Yes No a ign s we s Tracy Avenue (Benton to Vernon) Answered 6.5* 17.5* 11 14 13 8 3 3 21 7 17 7 10 (25 of 34) 74% Responses Percent "" 27% ` 73% 44% 56% 54% 33% 13% 12% 88% 29% 71% 41% 59% Tracy Avenue (TH 62 to Benton) Answered 7 11 6 13 5 9 5 2 16 10 - -9 4 4 (19 of 38) 50% Responses Percent- 39% 61% 32% 68% 26% 47% 26% 11% 89% 53% 47% 50% 50% Non -Tracy Avenue— Answered 6 12 5 12 7.5 8 2.5 7 11 2 16 5.5 10.5 18 Responses Percent** Feasibility Study TRACY AVENUE — BENTON AVENUE to VERNON AVENUE Existing 2 Lane Section with Parking (Looking North) Figure 2. Existing Typical Section The concrete pavement and integral curb are in very poor condition. The existing pavement has significant cracking and the crown of the roadway is inverted in many locations due to settlement. Generally, the sidewalk is in fair condition. However, some segments of the sidewalk are structurally deficient. Photo 1 — Pavement Condition (cracked and settled) Page 5 of 23 Feasibility Study TRACY AVENUE — BENTON AVENUE to VERNON AVENUE Photo 2 — Sidewalk and Parking on East Side Only Tracy Avenue /Benton Avenue Intersection The east and west legs of Benton Avenue at Tracy Avenue are offset approximately 70' (center to center), see Photo 3 below. The west leg serves as the primary access to Countryside Elementary School. We believe the offset intersection creates driver and pedestrian confusion and decreases intersection efficiency, especially during school opening and closing hours. Although there is not a history of crashes at this intersection, we believe the existing intersection has a potential safety issue. According to the MnDOT Access Management Manual offset (or overlapping) intersections should be avoided, unless the access points can be separated by sufficient distance to allow back -to -back left turns. Not only is there not sufficient distance for back -to -back, left -turn lanes, the intersection is also treated as a four -way stop condition as if the legs were aligned. job# %wil FTK;,I 'Rr . Photo 3 — Benton Avenue/Tracy Avenue Offset Intersection Page 6 of 23 Feasibility Study TRACY AVENUE — BENTON AVENUE to VERNON AVENUE Bus - turning movements are difficult, to nearly impossible, see Photo 4 below. This is especially true when vehicles are stopped at the west leg stop sign. This causes some of the bus drivers to continue north to Grove Street to Stuart Avenue to access the school rather than make the difficult maneuver. Photo 4 — Difficult Bus Turning Movements at Benton /Tracy Countryside Elementary School begins and ends, see Photo 5 b made up of one to two staff volu according to conversations with intersection when school adjourns. provides crossing guards when school elow. The crossing guard team is usually nteers and one to two student volunteers, Countryside staff and from observing the Photo 5 — Crossing Guards Assists Students Cross Intersection Page 7 of 23 Feasibility Study TRACY AVENUE — BENTON AVENUE to VERNON AVENUE Photo 6 (below) shows a near accident between a commuter bicyclist and a vehicle making a left turn from southbound Tracy Avenue to westbound Benton Avenue. The silver vehicle had to wait in the intersection to complete the left turn, due to a previous vehicle not yielding right -of -way. This photo is a clipped screen shot from a video taken at the intersection. Photo 6 — Driver Confusion at Benton/Tracy 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 7 — U -Turn Maneuvers by Parents Accessing Parking Bay Page 8 of 23 Feasibility Study TRACY AVENUE — BENTON AVENUE to VERNON'AVENUE Crash History The crash data indicates no accidents along the corridor.in the past three years, with the exception of three accidents at the Tracy ' AvenueNernon Avenue intersection. Geotechnical Information A geotechnical evaluation report for the corridor was completed and indicates that the soil conditions of the roadway consist of sandy loams, loamy sands, and sandy clay loams with minimal aggregate base under the existing 7 -8" of concrete pavement. Municipal State Aid Street Tracy Avenue, from Benton Avenue to Vernon Avenue, is 'a designated Municipal State Aid. Street (MSA) and is eligible to receive funding through the State gas tax. The purpose of this fund is to help local governments construct and maintain collector and arterial roadways. The State Aid office of MnDOT has established clearly defined design requirements for MSA streets. :. Bicycle Accommodations According to the City of Edina's Comprehensive Bicycle Transportation Plan, Tracy Avenue is currently a favored street for connection and movement to destinations within and outside of Edina and has been designated as a primary route for cyclists.. The primary goal of the Bicycle Transportation Plan is to provide a safe and convenient bicycle transportation network. The report recommends that in the short and medium term, the City sign the bicycle route, repair curb - pavement joints, remove certain areas of on- street parking, and provide. striping of bicycle lanes. _ Public Utilities Sanitary Sewer. The trunk sanitary sewer system along Tracy Avenue has been televised and has been evaluated. The sanitary .system consists of 9- inch - diameter clay pipe. The televising has. indicated some minor root intrusion, settlement, and breaks. Manhole inspections have been completed for the corridor. Watermain: The existing watermain is a 12 -inch, unlined, cast iron pipe, constructed in 1959. The City has experienced relatively, few watermain breaks or service calls for the area. . The hydrants in the area are not standard City hydrants. Storm Sewer: In general, storm water runoff is channeled along curb and gutter where it is captured in storm sewer catch basins and routed into Hawkes Lake. "Capacity issues in the existing outlet to Hawkes Lake via Warden Avenue have been identified for the 100 -year storm event. Feasibility Study TRACY AVENUE — BENTON AVENUE to VERNON AVENUE Localized drainage issues have been identified by the residents via the questionnaire. Additional catch basins will need to be added to bring Tracy Avenue up to State Aid Standards. Private Utilities Private utilities extend within the roadway rights of way and consist of overhead electric and cable, and underground gas, telephone, cable, and fiber optics. Street lighting consists of "cobra head" lights mounted to the electrical poles at the west side of each intersection. Landscapinq Some properties have vegetation, hardscapes (such as boulders and retaining walls), or other landscaped items within the City right -of -way. Many of these landscape items are located directly behind the curb or around existing fire hydrants. Some of these landscape items will need to be removed in order to complete the necessary reconstruction work. PROPOSED Roadway IMPROVEMENTS: The pavement section is proposed to be completely reconstructed to the subgrade. The roadway width is proposed to be increased from 36' to 40'. The additional 4' width being added to the west side of the street, where right - of -way is available. Proposed 2 Lane Section with Bike Lanes & Parking (Looking North) R/W BO' R/W 5' 1' 40' Section Figure 3. Proposed Typical Sections Roadway Components Proposed 1. Driving Lanes: The existing driving lanes are 12'; the minimum state aid standard is 11'. It is proposed to reduce the lane width to the minimum width allowed. 2. On- Street Bike Lanes: 2 -5' on- street bike lanes are proposed for the corridor. The following are the factors considered for this proposal: Page 10 of 23 11' 5' a. 5' 5' Bike Thru Lane ' ► Thru Lane Bike . .r I Parlang - —N Blvd I Walk � r low If 4 If Ingr 40' Section Figure 3. Proposed Typical Sections Roadway Components Proposed 1. Driving Lanes: The existing driving lanes are 12'; the minimum state aid standard is 11'. It is proposed to reduce the lane width to the minimum width allowed. 2. On- Street Bike Lanes: 2 -5' on- street bike lanes are proposed for the corridor. The following are the factors considered for this proposal: Page 10 of 23 Feasibility Study TRACY AVENUE — BENTON AVENUE to VERNON AVENUE Tracy Avenue is a Primary Bike Route in the City's Comprehensive Plan. The MnDOT Bikeway Guidelines recommend 5' bike lanes for this roadway classification and traffic volume. *The west side bike lane is proposed to be constructed with a B660 Design concrete curb and gutter (5' gutter pan), which matches the eastbound bike lane used on W. 701h Street. See Appendix K for the memo - "B660 Bike Lane Comparison Cost" for further information regarding reasoning and cost comparison for this option. Photo 8- 70th Street Bike Lane 3. On- Street Parking (East Side): Several factors were considered when determining proposal for an 8' on- street parking lane on the east side of the street, made up of 28 parking stalls. These factors include: • Resident input • Sidewalk locations for access to parking • Existing side tree locations • Existing parking on east side • MSA requirement for 8' parking lane width • Ability to put in "bump outs" for traffic calming Page 11 of 23 Feasibility Study TRACY AVENUE — BENTON AVENUE to VERNON AVENUE 4. Sidewalk (East Side): Three factors were considered when determining proposal to maintain the existing 5' sidewalk and 5'. boulevard on the east side of the street. These factors include: • Resident Input • Existing sidewalk condition is adequate, meaning less removal and reconstruction. 5' boulevard and 5' sidewalk matches the existing City standard. Roadway Components Considered (Not Proposed) The following components were considered but ultimately not recommended by staff. 1. On- Street Parking (West Side): An 8' parking lane on the west side was considered but ultimately not recommended due to the following reasons: = • Resident Input - residents felt the parking lane on the . east side was adequate. Some residents did not want a parking lane at all, see Appendix C. • Existing Stalls are Adequate — From parking counts and anecdotal evidence, it does not appear the demand is present for additional parking space. • The increased width would cause the need for both temporary and permanent easement along a majority of the west side of Tracy Avenue. 2. Sidewalk (West Side): A 5' sidewalk and 5' boulevard onthe west side was considered but ultimately not recommended as due to the following: • Impact to residences Temporary Easement Needed • Probable addition of-numerous retaining walls - -- • Xcel Energy -Power Poles to be relocated to boulevard • Difficulty matching driveway grades Feasibility Study TRACY AVENUE — BENTON AVENUE to VERNON AVENUE Additional Roadway Enhancements The following components are additional proposed enhancements to the corridor. 1. Parking Bump Outs: Bump Outs are areas where the curb offset decreases from centerline (as shown below). The overall roadway width decreases from 40' to 33.5' (from curb face to curb face). Parking a j pW -� Lane ,- - - Figure 4. Example Bump Out Configuration Bike Lane Drive Lanes Bike Lane Bump -Out Advantages • Creates Visual Friction — Feeling roadway width is decreasing which is a traffic calming device to reduce speeds. • Improves Pedestrian Visibility • Decreases Crosswalk Distance Page 13 of 23 Feasibility Study TRACY AVENUE — BENTON AVENUE to VERNON AVENUE 2. Enhanced Crosswalks: It is proposed to add "in -laid" pavement markings and signage to enhance the visibility of the crosswalks (see below). Figure 5. "In- Laid" Crosswalk and Example (70th Street) Widening to the West The 4' widening is proposed all on the west side of the roadway with the existing east curb line staying in the same location. The factors that determined widening to the west include: • City standard boulevard next to a sidewalk is 5', which is the current boulevard width on the east side. • The existing east sidewalk is structurally adequate and 1' from the existing right -of -way line. Widening would not be possible without reconstructing sidewalk and purchasing additional right -of -way. • There is adequate right -of -way on the west side. • The existing storm sewer trunk line is on the east side of the street, thus reducing reconstruction costs to the storm sewer network and potential conflicts with private utilities. Tracy Avenue and Benton Avenue Intersection The existing intersection of Tracy Avenue and Benton Avenue is confusing due to the offset alignment of the intersection. This creates operational problems and potential safety issues as well. These problems are especially prevalent during the hours the Countryside School day commences and adjourns. Three alternatives were analyzed for the Tracy Avenue /Benton Avenue intersection. Page 14 of 23 Feasibility Study TRACY AVENUE — BENTON AVENUE to VERNON AVENUE 1. Leave Intersection as is ._.vim'' yh' _.'•. "j. l 4 F Figure 6. "Leave As Is" Option 2. Realign West Leg of Benton Avenue m m �. 1 p Figure 7. Realign West Leg Option Page 15 of 23 Feasibility Study TRACY AVENUE — BENTON AVENUE to VERNON AVENUE 3. Roundabout Figure 8. Roundabout Option Recommended Intersection Alternative The roundabout intersection is the proposed option recommended by staff. We gathered input from parties that will be affected by the proposed roundabout to understand concerns with the current intersection and with the proposed roundabout. Below is a summary of the coordination activities and a list of the interested parties: 1. Countryside Elementary School: Staff met with principal Karen Bergman, bus operations manager Dave White, and additional members of the school district to initially discuss the roundabout concept. The roundabout was unanimously accepted as a beneficial option. The project team was invited to give a presentation to the Countryside Elementary School Site Council and PTO on January 10 (see Appendix L for a copy of the presentation). Those in attendance were in support of the roundabout and thought it would enhance the operations of the intersection and provide a safe environment for pedestrians, specifically the students. The information regarding the project and roundabout will be brought to the school board and any additional correspondence will be included in future submittals (i.e., Edina Transportation Commission and City Council Packets). 2. Edina Police Department: Edina Police Chief, Jeff Long, provided a support letter for the proposed roundabout, see Appendix H. He indicated officers were skeptical about roundabouts before they were installed in Edina, but that feeling changed after they were installed. Police Chief Long indicated the roundabouts have been helpful with the flow of traffic and reducing accidents. He also indicated that, although the intersection of Tracy Avenue and Benton Avenue does not have a high number of car accidents, there is congestion with the "out of place" four - Page 16 of 23 Feasibility Study TRACY AVENUE BENTON AVENUE to VERNON AVENUE way stop. He stated the Edina officers are 'very supportive of implementing additional roundabouts and. strongly encourage the use of them on Tracy Avenue. 3. Fire Department: In-. conversations with the City. of Edina' Fire Chief, Marty. Scheerer, Marty explained concern with roundabouts in general, due to a feeling of being. unable to negotiate them efficiently and having . an increase in response time. We analyzed the movements of fire trucks through this proposed roundabout at Tracy Avenue and Benton Avenue, See Appendix J, "Fire Truck Memo ". Our conclusion was that a fire truck can adequately maneuver through the intersection (without the use' of the truck apron), and a negligible increase in response time. Information was also gathered from the City of Carmel, °Indiana's Fire ° Chief, Keith Smith. The City of Carmel" .Indiana has' in excess of 60 . roundabouts, and many more planned, for a* City with a population of 80,000 people. See Appendix H for, Fire Chief Smith's'. responses regarding fire trucks and roundabouts. He states that their response times have not increased since the roundabouts have been installed, in fact, they are in the middle of the process to become an Accredited 'Agency through the Center for. Public ,Safety Excellence (CPSE), and incident response times are a critical measurement. 4. Project Comments: See Appendix F and Appendix 'G. regarding comments from residents.' The ' following are factors that influenced the ' decision to recommend the roundabout intersection: Traffic Calming: Residents, indicated speed is an area of concern along the corridor. Roundabouts are designed to slow traffic. . Safety: Although there is not a history of accidents. at this . intersection, the unusual configuration leads to confusion that has a _ potential for safety issues. Since the intersection is located right at the Countryside Elementary School 'entrance, pedestrian safety is . also a primary concern. The following are reasons roundabouts are considered safer than a four -way stop controlled intersection: • Crossing One Direction at a time —:Need to only look one direction. • Slower Vehicle Speeds • Refuge Island provided • Shorter Crossing Width — 16' versus 36' • Multi -Stage Vehicle Recognition — Meaning a vehicle entering the roundabout first identifies pedestrians before coming to the yield line, removing an extra task in the decision making process. Page 17 of 23 Feasibility Study TRACY AVENUE — BENTON AVENUE to VERNON AVENUE Reduced Footprint and Cost: The realignment option requires a greater footprint and higher cost due to a necessary retaining wall. The figure below shows the footprint comparison between the two options. -0, t sa1'� 11 IT � Y nr Figure 9. Footprint Comparison Resolve Bus Turning Issues: Most of the school buses usually enter from the east leg of Benton Avenue. This maneuver is very difficult, and at times impossible if a vehicle is positioned at the west leg stop sign. This appears to cause some buses to use Grove Street (the next street to the north) to enter the school. Bus turning movements have been performed for the proposed roundabout option, and are shown in Figure 10: rigure iu. tsus i urn movements r Page 18 of 23 Feasibility Study TRACY AVENUE - BENTON AVENUE to VERNON AVENUE U -Turn Ability: There is currently a parking bay for parents to pick up students at the school. Many.parents make a U- turn.in the middle of the street to access the parking bay, which can be dangerous. The roundabout allows the parents to make a legal and safe- U- turn-to enter the parking bay. Increased Efficiency: There is a lot of confusion with the current intersection resulting in the, need for a great deal of eye contact to decide which vehicle has the right -of -way. The current operation is ;not efficient and - results in significant backups when school is starting and finishing. The roundabout will allow traffic to keep moving, thus . improving operations. Decrease in Emissions: In one study, replacing traffic signals and stop sign intersections with roundabouts reduced carbon monoxide emissions by 32 percent, nitrous oxide emissions by 34 percent, carbon dioxide emissions by 37 percent, and hydrocarbon. emissions by 42 percent'. Metro Transit: Metro Transit currently has a bus line 578 that traverses from westbound Benton Avenue to southbound Tracy Avenue in the AM and northbound Tracy Avenue to eastbound Benton Avenue in the PM .,A bus stop currently exists at the southeast quadrant of Benton and Tracy. Staff -has discussed the project with Metro Transit. They are currently evaluating this line and are considering re- routing this line. Metro Transit has acknowledged that they will work with staff during design to ensure their needs are considered during construction and long term. See Appendix H for Metro Transit correspondence. . . Edina Public Utilities Sanitary Sewer: The: sanitary sewer pipe system has been evaluated. Pipe -,..repair work%has been identified and is.- proposed to be completed with the project.- Watermain: City staff is currently evaluating the watermain system to determine if any areas have a history of breaks. The areas that are deemed : deficient will be replaced_ Hydrants,within the project area will be replaced with City standard hydrants. . Storm Sewer: The existing storm sewer is proposed to be replaced to meet the capacity needs based on the City of Edina's Stormwater Management Plan and MSA standards. Additional storm sewer piping and catch. basins will address the drainage issues within the roadway. Mandavilli, S.; Russell, E.R.; and Rys, M. 2004. Modem roundabouts in United States: an efficient intersection alternative for reducing vehicular emissions. Poster presentation at the 83rd Annual Meeting of the Transportation Research Board, Washington DC. Page 19 of 23 Feasibility Study TRACY AVENUE — BENTON AVENUE to VERNON AVENUE It has been identified the existing trunk line along Warden Avenue is inadequate for the 100 -year storm event. Instead of replacing the entire trunk line to Hawkes Lake, the system will be upsized within the project limits and once Warden Avenue is reconstructed the remainder of the trunk line can be upsized as well. In addition, a storm water treatment structure will be constructed at Warden Avenue with the project to provide treatment before outleting to Hawkes Lake. Other Improvements In addition to the proposed improvement discussed above, several other improvements are being proposed with the project. These include: Sidewalks: Segments of the existing east side sidewalk will be replaced where they are structurally deteriorating or are trip hazards (more than a 1/2- inch settlement). Pedestrian crossings at Grove Street, Warden Avenue, Hawkes Terrace (both locations), and the roundabout will be marked with in -laid pavement brick patterned pavement markings similar to other new crossings in the City of Edina. Pedestrian Curb Ramps: All of the pedestrian curb ramps will be reconstructed to meet the current design standards as dictated by MSA and ADA. Private Utilities: It is anticipated that CenterPoint Energy will need to make spot repairs to their lines as they are currently within the roadway. It is not anticipated the other buried private utilities will have any significant relocations. Xcel Energy has poles that run along the western right -of -way line that are not impacted, with the exception in the area of the roundabout. Two power poles will require relocation near the roundabout. The relocation will be Xcel Energy's expense and no expense to the City. 1 ..r ! i l; -� j 7 Figure 11 - Proposed Project Layout Z11e]:k9103 ;ZT !_\'1 & EASEMENTS: Permanent right -of -way and temporary easement will be needed from the Countryside Elementary School and from the properties at 5825 and 5901 Tracy Avenue. The anticipated right -of -way cost between the two properties Page 20 of 23 Feasibility Study TRACY AVENUE — BENTON AVENUE to VERNON AVENUE is approximately $7000, based on current property values. It is anticipated the right -of -way needed from Countryside Elementary School will be donated by the Edina School District. PROJECT COSTS: The total estimated project cost is $1,287,400 (Table 2). The total cost includes directs costs for engineering, clerical, and construction finance costs " from start of the project to final assessment hearing. Funding for the entire project will be from a combination of'utility funds, state aid funds, and special assessment. The roadway cost north of Benton Avenue is 80 percent funded by state aid funds and 20 percent funded by special assessments. The special assessment cost in the roundabout area is equivalent to 20 percent of the typical 40' roadway section through the Benton Avenue intersection area. - "The additional cost of constructing the roundabout is. 1.00 percent funded by .state aid funds. .Table 2: Pro'ect Costs PROJECT COSTS Item City Utility Municipal State Aid Special Assessment Roadwa - -Roadway $485,600.00 $1211400.00 - Roundabout Area $165,400.00 $ 20,000.00* Roadway Total: $651,000.00. $141,400.00 ' Utilities - Storm $240,000.00 - Water $90,000.00 - Sanitary $165,000.00 Utilities Total: $495,000.00 FTOTAL PROJECT COST $ _.. 1,287,400 *Special Assessment cost is equivalent to 20% of the. typical. 40' roadway section through the intersection area. ASSESSMENTS: City of Edina Assessments A special assessment of $141,400 is proposed for this project. The assessments will be levied against the benefitting adjacent properties, see 'attached preliminary assessment role and map in Appendix M. The methodology used for these assessments are based on the City Council _ adopted State Aid Assessment Policy. Per the policy, assessments will be based on a Residential Equivalent Unit (REV.) and will be 20% of the project cost with the remaining 80% being funded through Municipal State Aid (monies appropriated through the gas tax fund). There are 32 residential equivalent units_(REU); one property is shown as 4 REU's, 9 properties are shown as a 1/3 REU and 25 properties are shown as a 1 REU.` The cost -per REU is $4,418.75. Page 21 of 23. Feasibility Study TRACY AVENUE — BENTON AVENUE to VERNON AVENUE School Property: Countryside Elementary School: 4 REUs = Layout of school property with similar size lots in neighborhood: (4 lots"total) / (1 potential access) Assessment:.. $17,675.00 FEASIBILITY: The proposed, improvements as outlined in this study are found to be necessary, cost effective, and feasible from an engineering standpoint. PROJECT SCHEDULE:.. ''The following schedule is feasible from an engineering standpoint: Information Meeting # 1 ......................................... .......:....................... November 28, 2011 Information Meeting # 2 ........................................ ............................... December 19, 2011 . City Council Orders the Public Hearing .......................... ....................:....January 6, 2012 Countryside Elementary Site Council Presentation ....... .........................January 10, 2012 Edina Transportation Commission Receives Feasibility Report .............. February 6, 2012 Edina Transportation Commission Meeting:........... ............................... February 16, 2012 Feasibility Report Received by City Council ... .............................. :.......... February 21, 2012 Countryside Elementary PTO Meeting Presentation . .. ........................... February 21, 2012 . City'Council Conducts Public hearing and Orders Project . .......................:..March 6, 2012 City Council and MnDOT approve Plans and Specifications ..................:.........:. May, 2012 ReceiveBids .........:..........................................::.................. ............................... May, 2012 Award Contract ......................................... ............................... ...............:.........:June, 2012 Begin Construction ..: .............:.:......................................................................... June, 2012 Complete Construction ................. .............. ............................... .....:......:.......:..... Fall, 2012 . Assessment Hearing ......: .......:...:......................................... ............................... Fall, 2013 Page 22 of 23 Feasibility Study TRACY AVENUE - BENTON AVENUE to VERNON AVENUE Appendix: A. Information Meeting, Letter, Presentation and Sign In Sheet B. Property Owner Questionnaire #1 C. .Questionnaire #1 Results D. Informational Meeting Letter, Presentation and Sign In Sheet'.... ; E. Property Owner Questionnaire #2 'Questionnaire F. #2 Results G. Project Comments & Letters'Received H. Roundabout Correspondence I. Roundabout Links J. Fire Truck Memo : K. 8660 Bike Lane Comparison Cost Memo L. Countryside Elementary School Site Council Presentation M. Preliminary Assessment Roll and Map N. City Comprehensive Plan Update —Sidewalk and. Bicycle Facilities (Fig. 7.10 and .. 7.11) - O.Survey Response Map P. Existing Parking Analysis Memo Page 23 of 23 I hereby certify that this feasibility study was prepared by me or under my direct supervision, and that I am a duly Registered Professional Engineer under the aws of the State of Minnesota. 44200 216/12 J. Plowman, PE Reg. No. Date Approved Wayne D. Houle, PE Date City Engineer a t i. r F y91r�t FEASIBILITY STUDY - BA 368 Fes?, o ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT `' ay CITY OF EDINA • `bRro1NwV STREET IMPROVEMENTS Tracy Avenue — Benton Avenue to Vernon Avenue February 6, 2012 LOCATION: The project is located along Tracy Avenue from Benton Avenue to Vernon Avenue as shown in Figure 1 below. Figure 1. Proiect Location Map Tracy Avenue consists of the following roadway characteristics: • Classified as a Collector • Posted Speed Limit — 30 mph • Concrete pavement constructed in 1961 • Width = 36' (curb face to curb face) • 8' parking lane on the east side • 5' boulevard and 5' sidewalk on the east side • ADT = 4,200 to 6,000 vehicles per day • Length = 2,200'(0.42 miles) Feasibility Study TRACY AVENUE — BENTON AVENUE to VERNON AVENUE INITIATION .& ISSUES: The Tracy Avenue project was initiated by the Engineering Department as part of the City's street reconstruction program and identified in the Capital,, Improvement Program This project addresses updating aging infrastructure issues associated with the pavement condition, storm water, sanitary sewer, and watermain systems. All Engineering projects are reviewed for compatibility with the City of Edina '2008 Comprehensive Plan Update, Comprehensive Bicycle Transportation Plan, and the Comprehensive Water Resource Management Plan. City of Edina 2008 Comprehensive Plan Update Sidewalk Facilities Chapter 7 of the plan addresses locations "of proposed sidewalk•facilities and funding options within the City. As shown in Figure 7:10 of Appendix N, there is an existing sidewalk on Tracy Avenue. There are no proposed additional. sidewalk facilities shown along the corridor. Bicycle Facilities Chapter 7 of the plan addresses locations of proposed bicycle facilities within the City as part of the Comprehensive Bicycle Transportation Plan. As, shown in Figure 7.11 of Appendix N, Tracy Avenue is a designated a primary . bike route. Staff Identified Issues The following issues were identified by staff during the preliminary scoping of the project: Poor condition of existing concrete *pavement Offset intersection at;Beriton Avenue and Tracy Avenue .- • Localized drainage issues • Parking constraints • Lack of bicycle accommodations • Pedestrian access issues • ' Storm sewer trunk line capacity issues to Hawkes Lake Sanitary sewer and watermain deficiencies Resident Input A street reconstruction informational letter was distributed on November 24, 2011, to 34 property owners that are adjacent to the proposed :street reconstruction area from Benton Avenue to Vernon Avenue. An informational meeting was held at the Public Works and Park Maintenance Facility on November 28, 2011. A presentation was given explaining the street reconstruction process and described the existing conditions of the roadway corridor as well as the design criteria for, the roadway given that it is a designated Municipal State Aid roadway. The meeting was attended by Page 2 of 23 Feasibility Study " TRACY AVENUE — BENTON AVENUE to VERNON AVENUE ..approximately 20 . residents representing 16 properties. Input from this — meeting and comments received are included in Appendix G. This meeting was followed up with a questionnaire sent to the property owners on November 30, 2011.. The questionnaire was distributed to ascertain the residents' preference regarding pedestrian accommodations, on- street bicycle - facilities, on- street parking, street light upgrades, traffic management issues, and the Benton Avenue and Tracy Avenue intersection. The questionnaire also inquired if the resident had drainage .problems and /or private underground facilities, such as pet containment or irrigation systems. A return rate of 94 %, or 32 of the 34 residents, 'responded to the questionnaire. A tabulation of the responses has been completed and can be found in Appendix C. Below is a summary of a few key questionnaire responses U. „tayc0 of uaocu tin ICSNunzies ur rerurnea questionnaires and may not equal 100% if questions were not answered. ** Interest in Bike Lanes if it allows the speed to be lowered to 25 MPH, which is allowed with on- street bike lanes. " ** Some residents responded the intersection is confusing, but the confusion leads to drivers to be more cautious than a standard intersection. Table 1. Results from Questionnaire #1 Key issues, from the questionnaire, that residents wanted to be addressed. . were traffic management at the Benton Avenue and Tracy Avenue intersection, speed control, and maintaining parking. Residents were not in favor of on- street bicycle lanes or upgrading street lights. A second neighborhood meeting was held on December 19, 2011, to discuss the results of the questionnaire, the preliminary project design, and the estimated assessments to properties. The meeting was ' attended by approximately 30 residents representing 17 properties. Comments and correspondence received. subsequent to this meeting have been included in Appendix G. Page 3 of 23 Benton Pedestrian Bike Lane Issues & On- Street Issues Tracy. Parking Intersection West Side Importance 25 MPH Traffic Control Importance of on Surve s y Surveys y Sent Returned Sidewalk of Bike Speed ** . Issue.Exists ` street Parking Lanes Limit .. Important =5 Important =5 Important =5 Yes Yes, to to to but no . Important =5 Not Not Not safety to Im ortant =1 Im ortant =1 Im ortant =1 issue *** Not Important =1 ,34.1 32 1.34. 1.66 2.28 .15 "5 2.50.. of Returned* Surveys ` 100% :100% 100% 58% 20% 100% U. „tayc0 of uaocu tin ICSNunzies ur rerurnea questionnaires and may not equal 100% if questions were not answered. ** Interest in Bike Lanes if it allows the speed to be lowered to 25 MPH, which is allowed with on- street bike lanes. " ** Some residents responded the intersection is confusing, but the confusion leads to drivers to be more cautious than a standard intersection. Table 1. Results from Questionnaire #1 Key issues, from the questionnaire, that residents wanted to be addressed. . were traffic management at the Benton Avenue and Tracy Avenue intersection, speed control, and maintaining parking. Residents were not in favor of on- street bicycle lanes or upgrading street lights. A second neighborhood meeting was held on December 19, 2011, to discuss the results of the questionnaire, the preliminary project design, and the estimated assessments to properties. The meeting was ' attended by approximately 30 residents representing 17 properties. Comments and correspondence received. subsequent to this meeting have been included in Appendix G. Page 3 of 23 Feasibility Study TRACY AVENUE — BENTON AVENUE to VERNON AVENUE A second questionnaire was 'sent out on January 20, 2012. Input was received at the December 19 informational meeting that residents may have answered differently knowing the impacts associated with the design. The questionnaire was completed and summarized by three. separate groups: 1. Residents along Tracy (from Benton to Vernon) 2. Residents along Tracy Avenue (from TH 62 to Benton Avenue) 3. Other residents in Edina, not on Tracy Avenue The results are tabulated in Appendix E. An overall survey response map is included in Appendix O, which represents the properties from which questionnaires were received. * Half responses are indicated if household was split (i.e., husband and wife disagreed on their answer) * Percentages are based on those who answered a particular question, some residents left answers , blank. * ** Questionnaires were sent out via email through the Countryside Neighborhood Group, it is unknown the number of questionnaires that were distributed Table 2. Results from_Questionnaire #2 _. . EXISTING CONDITIONS: Roadway Tracy Avenue between Benton Avenue and Vernon Avenue is a concrete roadway that was constructed in 1961 and consists of a two -lane roadway with parking allowed on the east side of the street. The width of Tracy Avenue is 36 feet, from curb face to curb face. There is an existing 5' boulevard and 5' sidewalk on the east side of the street. The existing right -of -way is 60' wide. The sidewalk on the east side is generally 1' from the east right-of-way line. The west curb is generally 12 -13' from the west right -of -way line. Is Proposed Section Maintain Parking If resident could eliminate one Most Appropriate? (East Side) cross section component? West Side Sidewalk Is Roundabout Appropriate? If No, which is most Parking Leave As appropriate? Group Yes No Im ortant Not Imp ortant Bike Lane Lane Pro sed Im octant Not Im ortan Yes No Realign ave s s Tracy Avenue (Benton to Vernon) Answered 6.5* 17.5* 11 14 13 .8 3 3 21 17 17 7 10 (25 of 34) 74 %Responses Percent" 27% 73% 44% 56% 54% 33% 13% 12% 88% 29% 71% 41% 59% - Tracy Avenue (TH 62 to Benton) Answered 7 11 6 13 5 9 5 2 16 10 9 4 4 (19 of 38) 50% Responses Percent' 39% 61% 32% 68% 26% 47% 26% 11% 89% 53% 47% 50% 50% Non -Tracy Avenue — Answered •'6 12 5 12, 7.5 8 2.5 7 11 2 16 5.5 10.5 18 Responses Percent** 33% 67% 29% 71% 42% 44% 14% 39% 61% 11% 89% 34% 66% * Half responses are indicated if household was split (i.e., husband and wife disagreed on their answer) * Percentages are based on those who answered a particular question, some residents left answers , blank. * ** Questionnaires were sent out via email through the Countryside Neighborhood Group, it is unknown the number of questionnaires that were distributed Table 2. Results from_Questionnaire #2 _. . EXISTING CONDITIONS: Roadway Tracy Avenue between Benton Avenue and Vernon Avenue is a concrete roadway that was constructed in 1961 and consists of a two -lane roadway with parking allowed on the east side of the street. The width of Tracy Avenue is 36 feet, from curb face to curb face. There is an existing 5' boulevard and 5' sidewalk on the east side of the street. The existing right -of -way is 60' wide. The sidewalk on the east side is generally 1' from the east right-of-way line. The west curb is generally 12 -13' from the west right -of -way line. Feasibility Study TRACY AVENUE — BENTON AVENUE to VERNON AVENUE Existing 2 Lane Section with Parking (Looking North) RAN 6a W. 12' 12' a' Shki Thru Lane Thru Lane i Parking BNd � wait 36' Section Fiqure 2. Existing Typical Section The concrete pavement and integral curb are in very poor condition. The existing pavement has significant cracking and the crown of the roadway is inverted in many locations due to settlement. Generally, the sidewalk is in fair condition. However, some segments of the sidewalk are structurally deficient. Photo 1 — Pavement Condition (cracked and settled) Page 5 of 23 Feasibility Study TRACY AVENUE — BENTON AVENUE to VERNON AVENUE Photo 2 — Sidewalk and Parking on East Side Only Tracy Avenue /Benton Avenue Intersection The east and west legs of Benton Avenue at Tracy Avenue are offset approximately 70' (center to center), see Photo 3 below. The west leg serves as the primary access to Countryside Elementary School. We believe the offset intersection creates driver and pedestrian confusion and decreases intersection efficiency, especially during school opening and closing hours. Although there is not a history of crashes at this intersection, we believe the existing intersection has a potential safety issue. According to the MnDOT Access Management Manual offset (or overlapping) intersections should be avoided, unless the access points can be separated by sufficient distance to allow back -to -back left turns. Not only is there not sufficient distance for back -to -back, left -turn lanes, the intersection is also treated as a four -way stop condition as if the legs were aligned. . 0 1 1 av? _ §. C 't'Ac -w f "Z mow, Photo 3 — Benton Avenue/Tracy Avenue Offset Intersection Page 6 of 23 Feasibility Study TRACY AVENUE — BENTON AVENUE to VERNON AVENUE Bus - turning movements are difficult, to nearly impossible, see Photo 4 below. This is especially true when vehicles are stopped at the west leg stop sign. This causes some of the bus drivers to continue north to Grove Street to Stuart Avenue to access the school rather than make the difficult maneuver. Photo 4 — Difficult Bus Turning Movements at Benton/Tracy Countryside Elementary School provides crossing guards when school begins and ends, see Photo 5 below. The crossing guard team is usually made up of one to two staff volunteers and one to two student volunteers, according to conversations with Countryside staff and from observing the intersection when school adjourns. Photo 5 — Crossing Guards Assists Students Cross Intersection Page 7 of 23 Feasibility Study TRACY AVENUE — BENTON AVENUE to VERNON AVENUE Photo 6 (below) shows a near accident between a commuter bicyclist and a vehicle making a left turn from southbound Tracy Avenue to westbound Benton Avenue. The silver vehicle had to wait in the intersection to complete the left turn, due to a previous vehicle not yielding right -of -way. This photo is a clipped screen shot from a video taken at the intersection. Photo 6 — Driver Confusion at BentonlTracy 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 7 — U -Turn Maneuvers by Parents Accessinq Parkinq Bay Page 8 of 23 Feasibility Study TRACY AVENUE — BENTON AVENUE to VERNON AVENUE Crash History The crash data indicates no accidents. along the corridor in the past three years, with the exception of three accidents at .the Tracy Avenue/Vernon Avenue intersection. Geotechnical Information A geotechnical evaluation report for the corridor was completed and indicates that the soil conditions of the roadway consist of sandy loams, loamy sands, and sandy clay loams with minimal aggregate base under the existing 7 -8" of concrete pavement. Municipal State Aid Street Tracy Avenue, from Benton Avenue to Vernon Avenue, is a designated Municipal State .Aid Street (MSA) and is eligible to receive funding through the State 'gas tax. The purpose of this fund is to help local governments construct and maintain collector and arterial roadways. The State Aid office of MnDOT has established clearly .defined design requirements for MSA streets. Bicycle Accommodations According to the City of Edina's Comprehensive aBicycle Transportation Plan, Tracy Avenue is currently a favored street for connection and movement to destinations within and outside of Edina and has been designated as a primary route for cyclists. . The primary goal of the Bicycle Transportation Plan is to provide a safe and convenient bicycle transportation network. The report recommends that in the short and medium term, the City sign the bicycle route, repair curb - pavement joints, remove certain areas'of on- street parking, and provide striping of bicycle lanes. ..Public Utilities - Sanitary Sewer: The trunk sanitary sewer system along Tracy Avenue has been televised and has been evaluated.,- The sanitary system consists of 9- inch diameter clay 'pipe. The televising has-.indicated some "minor root intrusion; settlement, and breaks. Manhole inspections have been. completed for the corridor. Watermain: The existing watermain is a 12 -inch, unlined, cast iron pipe, constructed in 1959. The _City has experienced relatively few Watermain breaks or service calls for the area. The hydrants in the area are not standard City hydrants. Storm Sewer: In general, storm water runoff is channeled along curb and gutter where it is captured in storm sewer catch basins and routed into Hawkes Lake. 'Capacity issues in the existing outlet to Hawkes Lake via Warden Avenue have been identified for the 100 -year storm event. Page 9 of 23 Feasibility Study TRACY AVENUE — BENTON AVENUE to VERNON AVENUE Localized drainage issues have been identified by the residents via the questionnaire. Additional catch basins will need to be added to bring Tracy Avenue up to State Aid Standards. Private Utilities Private utilities extend within the roadway rights of way and consist of overhead electric and cable, and underground gas, telephone, cable, and fiber optics. Street lighting consists of "cobra head" lights mounted to the electrical poles at the west side of each intersection. Landscaping Some properties have vegetation, hardscapes (such as boulders and retaining walls), or other landscaped items within the City right -of -way. Many of these landscape items are located directly behind the curb or around existing fire hydrants. Some of these landscape items will need to be removed in order to complete the necessary reconstruction work. PROPOSED Roadway IMPROVEMENTS: The pavement section is proposed to be completely reconstructed to the subgrade. The roadway width is proposed to be increased from 36' to 40'. The additional 4' width being added to the west side of the street, where right - of -way is available. Proposed 2 Lane Section with Bike Lanes & Parking (Looking North) R/VV �, R" V 8' 5' S' Bike I Thru Lane i Thru Lane Bike ` Parking Blvd I Walt Z.L low i 1 x. 1 40' Section Figure 3. Proposed Typical Sections Roadway Components Proposed 1. Driving Lanes: The existing driving lanes are 12'; the minimum state aid standard is 11'. It is proposed to reduce the lane width to the minimum width allowed. On- Street Bike Lanes: 2 -5' on- street bike lanes are proposed for the corridor. The following are the factors considered for this proposal: Page 10 of 23 Feasibility Study TRACY AVENUE — BENTON AVENUE to VERNON AVENUE Tracy Avenue is a Primary Bike Route in the City's Comprehensive Plan. The MnDOT Bikeway Guidelines recommend 5' bike lanes for this roadway classification and traffic volume. "The west side bike lane is proposed to be constructed with a B660 Design concrete curb and gutter (5' gutter pan), which matches the eastbound bike lane used on W. 70th Street. See Appendix K for the memo - "B660 Bike Lane Comparison Cost" for further information regarding reasoning and cost comparison for this option. Photo 8- 70tt' Street Bike Lane 3. On- Street Parking (East Side): Several factors were considered when determining proposal for an 8' on- street parking lane on the east side of the street, made up of 28 parking stalls. These factors include: • Resident input • Sidewalk locations for access to parking • Existing side tree locations • Existing parking on east side • MSA requirement for 8' parking lane width • Ability to put in "bump outs" for traffic calming Page 11 of 23 Feasibility Study TRACY AVENUE — BENTON AVENUE to VERNON AVENUE 4.' Sidewalk (East Side): Three factors, were considered when determining proposal to maintain the existing 5' sidewalk and 5' boulevard on the east side of the street. These factors include: Resident Input • Existing sidewalk condition is adequate, meaning less removal and reconstruction. • 5' boulevard and 5' sidewalk matches the existing City standard. Roadway Components Considered (Not Proposed) The following -components were considered but ultimately not recommended by staff. 1. On- Street Parking (West Side): An 8' parking lane on the west side was considered but ultimately not recommended due to the following reasons: • Resident Input - residents felt the parking lane on the east side was adequate. Some residents did not want a parking lane at all, see Appendix C. • Existing Stalls -are Adequate From parking counts and anecdotal evidence, it does not appear the demand is present for additional parking space. • The increased width would cause the need for both temporary and permanent easement along a majority of the west side of Tracy Avenue. 2. Sidewalk (West Side): A 5' sidewalk and 5' boulevard on the west side was considered but ultimately not recommended as due to the following: • Impact to residences Temporary Easement Needed • -.Probable addition of numerous retaining -walls • Xcel Energy Power Poles to be relocated to boulevard • Difficulty matching driveway grades Feasibility Study TRACY AVENUE — BENTON AVENUE to VERNON AVENUE Parking Lane Additional Roadway Enhancements The following components are additional proposed enhancements to the corridor. 1 J . 1. Parking Bump Outs: Bump Outs are areas where the curb offset decreases from centerline (as shown below). The overall roadway width decreases from 40' to 33.5' (from curb face to curb face). r A44'. �. _. B m P, ou'll- T s c_ Figure 4. Example Bump Out Configuration Bike Lane Drive Lanes Bike Lane Bump -Out Advantages • Creates Visual Friction — Feeling roadway width is decreasing which is a traffic calming device to reduce speeds. • Improves Pedestrian Visibility • Decreases Crosswalk Distance Page 13 of 23 Feasibility Study TRACY AVENUE — BENTON AVENUE to VERNON AVENUE 2. Enhanced Crosswalks: It is proposed to add "in -laid" pavement markings and signage to enhance the visibility of the crosswalks (see below). Figure 5. "In- Laid" Crosswalk and Example (70 h Street) Widening to the West The 4' widening is proposed all on the west side of the roadway with the existing east curb line staying in the same location. The factors that determined widening to the west include: • City standard boulevard next to a sidewalk is 5', which is the current boulevard width on the east side. • The existing east sidewalk is structurally adequate and 1' from the existing right -of -way line. Widening would not be possible without reconstructing sidewalk and purchasing additional right -of -way. • There is adequate right -of -way on the west side. • The existing storm sewer trunk line is on the east side of the street, thus reducing reconstruction costs to the storm sewer network and potential conflicts with private utilities. Tracy Avenue and Benton Avenue Intersection The existing intersection of Tracy Avenue and Benton Avenue is confusing due to the offset alignment of the intersection. This creates operational problems and potential safety issues as well. These problems are especially prevalent during the hours the Countryside School day commences and adjourns. Three alternatives were analyzed for the Tracy Avenue /Benton Avenue intersection. Page 14 of 23 Feasibility Study TRACY AVENUE — BENTON AVENUE to VERNON AVENUE 1. Leave Intersection as is � r i 4 Figure 6. "Leave As Is" Option 2. Realign West Leg of Benton Avenue rn i J if -.�.. ! ➢ .. Figure 7. Realign West Leg Option Page 15 of 23 Feasibility Study TRACY AVENUE — BENTON AVENUE to VERNON AVENUE 3. Roundabout Figure 8. Roundabout Option Recommended Intersection Alternative The roundabout intersection is the proposed option recommended by staff. We gathered input from parties that will be affected by the proposed roundabout to understand concerns with the current intersection and with the proposed roundabout. Below is a summary of the coordination activities and a list of the interested parties: Countryside Elementary School: Staff met with principal Karen Bergman, bus operations manager Dave White, and additional members of the school district to initially discuss the roundabout concept. The roundabout was unanimously accepted as a beneficial option. The project team was invited to give a presentation to the Countryside Elementary School Site Council and PTO on January 10 (see Appendix L for a copy of the presentation). Those in attendance were in support of the roundabout and thought it would enhance the operations of the intersection and provide a safe environment for pedestrians, specifically the students. The information regarding the project and roundabout will be brought to the school board and any additional correspondence will be included in future submittals (i.e., Edina Transportation Commission and City Council Packets). 2. Edina Police Department: Edina Police Chief, Jeff Long, provided a support letter for the proposed roundabout, see Appendix H. He indicated officers were skeptical about roundabouts before they were installed in Edina, but that feeling changed after they were installed. Police Chief Long indicated the roundabouts have been helpful with the flow of traffic and reducing accidents. He also indicated that, although the intersection of Tracy Avenue and Benton Avenue does not have a high number of car accidents, there is congestion with the `but of place" four - Page 16 of 23 Feasibility Study TRACY AVENUE - BENTON AVENUE to VERNON AVENUE way stop. He stated the Edina officers are very supportive of implementing additional roundabouts and strongly encourage the use of them on Tracy Avenue. 3. Fire Department: In conversations with the City of Edina `Fire Chief, Marty. Scheerer, Marty explained concern with roundabouts in general, 'due to a feeling of being unable to negotiate them efficiently and having an increase in response time. We analyzed the movements of fire trucks through this proposed roundabout at Tracy Avenue and Benton Avenue, :See Appendix J; "Fire Truck Memo ". Our conclusion was that a fire truck can adequately maneuver: through the intersection (without the use of the truck apron), and a negligible increase in response time. Information was also gathered from :the City of Carmel, Indiana's' Fire Chief, Keith - Smith. The .City of Carmel, Indiana has in 'excess of 60 roundabouts, and many' more planned, for a City with a' population of 80,000 people. See Appendix H for Fire Chief Smith's .responses regarding fire trucks and roundabouts. He states that their response :`times have not increased since the roundabouts have been installed, in fact., they' are in the middle -of the process to •become an Accredited .Agency through the Center for Public 'Safety . Excellence (CPSE), and incident response times are a critical measurement. 4. Project' Comments: See Appendix F and Appendix G regarding "comments from residents. The following are .factors that influenced the decision to, recommend the roundabout intersection: -Traffic Calming: : Residents indicated speed is an area of concern along the corridor. Roundabouts are designed to slow,traffic. Safety:. Although there is not a history of accidents at this intersection, the unusual configuration leads to confusion that has a ' potential for safety issues. , Since the. intersection is located right at —� the Countryside- Elementary- "School entrance, pedestrian safety is also a .primary concern. The following are reasons roundabouts are - considered safer than a four -way stop controlled intersection: • Crossing One. Direction at a time — Need to only _ look one direction. • Slower Vehicle Speeds Refuge Island provided • Shorter Crossing Width — 16' versus 36' • Multi -Stage Vehicle Recognition — Meaning a vehicle entering the roundabout first identifies pedestrians before coming to the yield line, removing an extra task . in the decision making process. Feasibility Study TRACY AVENUE — BENTON AVENUE to VERNON AVENUE Reduced Footprint and Cost: The realignment option requires a greater footprint and higher cost due to a necessary retaining wall. The figure below shows the footprint comparison between the two options. { j 4 Figure 9. Footprint Comparison Resolve Bus Turning Issues: Most of the school buses usually enter from the east leg of Benton Avenue. This maneuver is very difficult, and at times impossible if a vehicle is positioned at the west leg stop sign. This appears to cause some buses to use Grove Street (the next street to the north) to enter the school. Bus turning movements have been performed for the proposed roundabout option, and are shown in Figure 10: Figure 10. Bus Turn Movements Through Movement • I j�— Page 18 of 23 Feasibility Study TRACY AVENUE — BENTON AVENUE to VERNON AVENUE U -Turn Ability: There is currently a parking bay for parents to pick up students at the school. Many parents make a U -turn in the middle of the street to access the parking bay, which can be dangerous. The roundabout allows the parents to make a legal and safe U -turn to enter the parking bay. Increased Efficiency: There is a lot of confusion with the current intersection resulting in the need for a great deal of eye contact to decide which vehicle has the right -of -way. The current operation is not efficient and results in significant backups when school is starting and finishing. The roundabout will allow traffic to keep moving, thus improving operations. Decrease in Emissions: In one study, replacing traffic signals and stop sign intersections with roundabouts reduced carbon monoxide emissions by 32 percent, nitrous oxide emissions by 34 percent, carbon dioxide emissions by 37 percent, and hydrocarbon emissions by 42 percent'. Metro Transit: Metro Transit currently has a bus line 578 that traverses from westbound Benton Avenue to southbound Tracy Avenue in the AM and northbound Tracy Avenue to eastbound Benton Avenue in the PM . A bus stop currently exists at the southeast quadrant of Benton and Tracy. Staff has discussed the project with Metro Transit. They are currently evaluating this line and are considering re- routing this line. Metro Transit has acknowledged that they will work with staff during design to ensure their needs are considered during construction and long term. See Appendix H for Metro Transit correspondence. Edina Public Utilities Sanitary Sewer: The sanitary sewer pipe system has been evaluated. Pipe repair work has been identified and is proposed to be completed with the project. Watermain: City staff is currently evaluating the watermain system to determine if any areas have a history of breaks. The areas that are deemed deficient will be replaced. Hydrants within the project area will be replaced with City standard hydrants Storm Sewer: The existing storm sewer is proposed to be replaced to meet the capacity needs based on the City of Edina's Stormwater Management Plan and MSA standards. Additional storm sewer piping and catch basins will address the drainage issues within the roadway. ' Mandavilli, S.; Russell, E.R.; and Rys, M. 2004. Modern roundabouts in United States: an efficient intersection alternative for reducing vehicular emissions. Poster presentation at the 83rd Annual Meeting of the Transportation Research Board, Washington DC. Page 19 of 23 Feasibility Study TRACY AVENUE — BENTON AVENUE to VERNON AVENUE It has been identified the existing trunk line along Warden Avenue is inadequate for the 100 -year storm event. Instead of replacing the entire trunk line to Hawkes Lake, the system will be upsized within the project limits and once Warden Avenue is reconstructed the remainder of the trunk line can be upsized as well. In addition, a storm water treatment structure will be constructed at Warden Avenue with the project to provide treatment before outleting to Hawkes Lake. Other Improvements In addition to the proposed improvement discussed above, several other improvements are being proposed with the project. These include: Sidewalks: Segments of the existing east side sidewalk will be replaced where they are structurally deteriorating or are trip hazards (more than a 112 - inch settlement). Pedestrian crossings at Grove Street, Warden Avenue, Hawkes Terrace (both locations), and the roundabout will be marked with in -laid pavement brick patterned pavement markings similar to other new crossings in the City of Edina. Pedestrian Curb Ramps: All of the pedestrian curb ramps will be reconstructed to meet the current design standards as dictated by MSA and ADA. Private Utilities: It is anticipated that CenterPoint Energy will need to make spot repairs to their lines as they are currently within the roadway. It is not anticipated the other buried private utilities will have any significant relocations. Xcel Energy has poles that run along the western right -of -way line that are not impacted, with the exception in the area of the roundabout. Two power poles will require relocation near the roundabout. The relocation will be Xcel Energy's expense and no expense to the City. - all 4 ni 1<r�SrF'`��^,°� u ka Figure 11 - Proposed Project Layout RIGHT -OF -WAY & EASEMENTS: Permanent right -of -way and temporary easement will be needed from the Countryside Elementary School and from the properties at 5825 and 5901 Tracy Avenue. The anticipated right -of -way cost between the two properties Page 20 of 23 Feasibility Study TRACY AVENUE — BENTON AVENUE to VERNON AVENUE is approximately $7000, based on'current property values. It is anticipated . the right-of-way needed from Countryside Elementary School will be donated by the Edina School District. PROJECT COSTS: The total estimated project cost is $1,287,400 (Table 2). The total cost includes directs costs for engineering,' clerical, and construction finance costs from start of the project to final assessment hearing.. Funding for the entire project will be from a combination of utility funds, state aid funds, and special assessment. The roadway cost north 'of Benton Avenue is 80 percent funded by state .aid funds and 20 percent funded by special assessments. The special assessment cost in the roundabout area is equivalent to 20 percent of the typical 40' roadway section through the Benton Avenue intersection area. The additional cost of constructing the roundabout is 100 percent funded by state aid funds. Table. 2: Proiect Costs PROJECT COSTS Item City Utility Municipal State Aid Special -Assessment R adway Roadway $485,600.00 $121,400.00 Roundabout Area $165,400.00 $ 20,000.00* RoadwayTotal: $651,000.00 $141,400.00 Utilities Storm $240,000.00 Water $90,000.00 Sanitary $165,000.00 Utilities Total: $495,000.00 TOTAL PROJECT COST $ .1 ;287,400 --Assessment- cost is ffqyivalent to 20%-of .the intersection- area. • - ASSESSMENTS: City of Edina Assessments A special assessment of $141,400 is proposed for thi s project. The assessments will be levied against the benefitting adjacent properties, see attached preliminary assessment role and map in Appendix M. The methodology used for these assessments are based on the City Council adopted Stat& Aid Assessment Policy. Per the policy, assessments will be based on a Residential Equivalent Unit (REU) and will be 20% of the project cost with the remaining 80% being funded through Municipal State Aid (monies appropriated through the gas tax fund). There are 32 residential equivalent units (REU); one property is shown as 4 REU's, 9 properties are shown as a 1/3 REU and 25 properties are shown as a 1 REU. The cost per REU is $4,418.75.: 'Page 21 of 23 " Feasibility Study TRACY AVENUE — BENTON AVENUE to VERNON AVENUE School Property: Countryside Elementary School: 4 REUs = Layout of school property with similar size lots in neighborhood: (4 lots total) / (1 potential access) Assessment: $17,675.00 FEASIBILITY: The proposed improvements as outlined in this study are found to be necessary, cost effective, and feasible from an engineering standpoint. PROJECT SCHEDULE: The following schedule is feasible from an engineering standpoint: Information Meeting # 1 ......................................... ............................... November 28, 2011 Information Meeting # 2 ......................................... ............................... December 19, 2011 City Council Orders the Public Hearing ........................... .........................January 6, 2012 Countryside Elementary Site Council Presentation ........ .........................January 10, 2012 Edina Transportation Commission Receives Feasibility Report .............. February 6, 2012 Edina Transportation Commission Meeting ............ ............................... February 16, 2012 Feasibility Report Received by City Council ........... ............................... February 21, 2012 Countryside Elementary PTO Meeting Presentation ............................. February 21, 2012 City Council Conducts Public hearing and Orders Project . ..........................March 6, 2012 City Council and MnDOT approve Plans and Specifications .............................. May, 2012 ReceiveBids ........................................................................ ............................... May, 2012 Award Contract ......................................... ............................... ..........................June, 2012 Begin Construction ............:...................... ............................... ..........................June, 2012 Complete Construction ......................................................... ............................... Fall, 2012 Assessment Hearing ............................................................ ............................... Fall, 2013 Page 22 of 23 Feasibility Study TRACY AVENUE — BENTON AVENUE to VERNON AVENUE Appendix: A. Information Meeting Letter, Presentation and Sign In Sheet B. Property Owner Questionnaire #1 C. Questionnaire #1 Results D. Informational Meeting Letter, Presentation and Sign In Sheet E. Property Owner Questionnaire #2 F. Questionnaire #2 Results G. Project Comments & Letters Received H. Roundabout Correspondence I. Roundabout Links J. Fire Truck Memo K. B660 Bike Lane Comparison Cost Memo L. Countryside Elementary School Site Council Presentation M. Preliminary Assessment Roll and Map N. City Comprehensive Plan Update — Sidewalk and Bicycle Facilities (Fig. 7.10 and 7.11) O. Survey Response Map P. Existing Parking Analysis Memo Page 23 of 23 a e Vi FEASIBILITY STUDY — BA 368 r - 0 ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT — `' y� CITY OF EDINA STREETIMPROVEMENTS. Tracy Avenue — Benton Avenue to Vernon Avenue February 6, 2012 Appendix A Open House Meeting Letter, Presentation, and Sign In Sheet OL;yA t� sa City of Edina November 16, 2011 Tracy Avenue Area Residents City of Edina Re: Public Open House - Monday, November 28 at 7:00 p.m. Tracy Avenue Infrastructure Rehabilitation Project Dear Resident: The City of Edina has initiated the process of roadway and utility improvements for Tracy Avenue in the summer of 2012 from Vernon Avenue to Benton Avenue. You are invited to attend a public open house on Monday, November 28, at 7:00 p.m., at the Public Works Facility, located at 7450 Metro Boulevard, Edina (see back of letter for map). The public open house will consist of a brief presentation that will be given shortly after 7:00 p.m. followed by an informal question- and - answer session. The presentation will explain the City of Edina's street reconstruction process, the existing conditions of the infrastructure, and what the design criteria may be for the corridor. The actual design of project and costs will be prepared for a second informational meeting to be held in mid December. City staff from Edina, along with the City's consultant, WSB & Associates, Inc., will be available to answer any questions or concerns you may have regarding the project. To prepare for the meeting, please review the enclosed brochure, "A Guide to Edina's Street Reconstruction Process ". Also, for additional information on our Street Reconstruction process visit our website at http: / /www.ci.edina.mn.us /Departments /L5 -17a Construction Proiects future htm If you are unable to attend and would like more information on the project, please feel free to call Andrew Plowman with WSB & Associates, Inc. at 763 - 287 -7149 or myself at 952 - 826 -0445. Jack D. Sullivan, P.E. Assistant City Engineer Enclosure City Hall 952- 927 -8861 4801 WEST 50TH STREET FAX 952- 826 -0390 EDINA, MINNESOTA 55424 -1394 www.cityofedina.com TTY 952- 826 -0379 W 70TH ST �_rH Sr a City of Edina New Public Works Building 7450 Metro Blvd N (V +E Edina, MN 55439 W S >j m 0 CO Ui VV W 74TH ST 0 New Public Works Building W 76TH ST EDINAINDUSTRIAL W 77TH ST BLVD ------------------------- a City of Edina New Public Works Building 7450 Metro Blvd N (V +E Edina, MN 55439 W S Edina's Vision 20/20 calls for Edina to be the preeminent place for living, learning, raising families and doing business as dis- tinguished by five objectives, including a sound public infrastructure. A sound public infrastructure encourages a stable private infrastructure, leading to an enhancement of the sense of quality that Edina has and will enjoy. M, T7 " - - .. - _ City of Edina Public Works & Engineering Departments 7450 Metro Blvd. Edina, MN 55439 952 - 826 -0371 Fax 952 - 826 -0392 www.CityofEdina.com/Engineering edinamail ®ci.edina.mn.us The City of Edina prioritizes neighborhood streets and utilities for reconstruction in conjunction with the five -year Capital Improvement Plan approved by Council. This "Guide to Edina's Street Reconstruction Process" explains: • How are streets selected for reconstruction? • Who selects the neighborhood streets for reconstruction? • How can I petition the City Council for neighborhood streets reconstruction? • What happens after the streets are selected? • How are the residents notified of the neighborhood streets reconstruction? • Who funds the project? • What do my taxes pay for? • What other costs are associated with neighborhood street reconstruction? • When do I pay the special assessment for the project? • How do I pay the special assessment? • How will staff communicate with property owners? • How can I give input and stay informed? • What can I expect during construction? • What can I do to prepare for the project? r August Kick -off Informational Letter to residents Mid- September Open House (for preceding two years) Mid - October /November Neighborhood Informational Meeting December Feasibility Report/Public Hearing January / February/ March Plan/Preparation/Bidding April / May Construction starts October/ November Construction finishes Spring Warranty work Summer / Fall Final Assessment Hearing How are Streets Selected for Reconstruction? All City streets that are not built to current standards (including concrete curb and gutter) will be subject to major rehabilitation at some time during the life of the streets. Prior- ity is given to streets or groupings of streets that have the highest need. Streets are prioritized based on the Pavement Condition Index (PCI), water main /service breaks, storm sewer /drainage and sanitary sewer deficiencies. Repairing streets with low PCI ratings using standard maintenance procedures such as patching, crack - sealing and seal - coating is very expensive and ineffective on a long -term basis. Reconstruction is usually the most cost - effective solution. Streets are grouped together in neighborhoods for major reconstruction and future mainte- nance measures to help prolong the life of the pavement and to maximize the economics of construction. A map showing anticipated street ,! reconstruction for approximately 10 years can be viewed at www.CityofEdina.com/ • Construction Projects. Please be aware that the dates shown on the map represent the anticipated years of construction and are subject to change based on budgetary .; constraints, adjacent projects, residents' input ` and other factors. Who selects the neighborhood streets for reconstruction? The City's Engineering Department determines which neighborhood streets have the highest priority based on good engineering judgment. Residents can petition the City Council to have their streets reconstructed sooner if they so desire. How can 1 petition the City Council for Neighborhood Street Reconstruction? Residents can petition the City Council to conduct a feasibility report for neighborhood street reconstruction. Residents are responsible for collecting signatures from as many adjoining property owners using the official petition form, which is available from the City Clerk's office, the Engineering Department or at www.CityofEdina.com. When the completed petition is returned, it is considered by City Council and may be referred to the Engineering Department for a feasibility study. What Happens After the Streets are Selected? Infrastructure improvements, including streets and utilities, are approved by Council in the 5 -year Capital Improvement Plan (CIP), and each year a specific dollar amount is approved for these improvements. Whether petitioned by residents or staff initiated, under the authority granted by Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 429, staff begins the process of determining the feasibility of the project. The following is a typical outline of the process from start to end: 1. Staff performs preliminary design work including evaluation of the neighborhood's utility infrastructure (concrete curb and gutter, water main, storm and sanitary sewer), street- lighting system and pedestrian accessibility (sidewalks). 2. A neighborhood information meeting is held to discuss the issues listed above, including traffic management issues. 3. Staff completes the feasibility study. 4. Public hearing is held and residents are notified per State law. 5. Council hears proposed project and decides on the issue. Residents can speak publicly (on record) regarding the project. If Council orders the project: 6. Construction documents are drafted, project is publicly advertised and bids are accepted. 7. Council awards the project to the lowest bidder. 8. Construction begins. 9. Final assessment hearing is held after project completion and final costs are known. The typical process from start to finish is one to two years. P, 4 How Are Residents Notified of the Neighborhood Streets Reconstruction? Residents will first be notified one to two years in advance of their project through an invitation to an open house. After the open house, a questionnaire will be mailed, asking for information relating to the proposed project. Once this information is gathered, an invitation to a neighborhood informational meeting will be sent. Included in this notice will be the estimated special assessment to each property owner, along with important dates such as the public hearing. The first open house, along with the neighborhood meeting, will allow residents to start discussing the project and to ask questions. However, please do not feel that you must wait for the open house to have your question or concern answered. You are welcome to call or visit the Engineering office at any- time. Using the information gathered, staff completes the feasibility report to present to the City Council at a public hearing. At least 10 days before the public hearing, property owners along the streets being considered for reconstruction are notified. At the public hearing, staff provides the City Council and property owners with the find- ings of the feasibility report, which includes information about preliminary design, esti- mated project costs, and preliminary special assessment (all of which is discussed with residents during the informational meeting(s).) Property owners have the opportunity to ad- dress the City Council either in writing or in person at the public hearing. After the public hearing is closed, the City Council votes to determine whether or not the project goes forward. Who Funds the Project? The project is paid for by special assessment to property owners and the respective utility funds. Special assessments are based on the concept that when land is benefited from a particular improvement, a portion of the costs of the improvement should be levied against those properties to finance such improvements. Special assessments typically include the roadway surface, decorative streetlights, sidewalks, traffic - calming measures and landscaping. Curb and gutters are funded through the Utilities Fund. See the Special Assessment Policy at www. CityofEdina .com /SpecialAssessment. Property owners are not assessed for ongoing maintenance (sealing coating, etc.) needed to prolong the life of a street. What Do My Taxes Pay For? It is typical for residents to ask "what do my taxes pay for ?" Approximately 20 percent of your property tax goes to the City of Edina for expenses related to police, fire, parks and public works for snowplowing, pothole repairs, sealcoating, and other street maintenance. Your taxes do not pay for street reconstruction. What other Costs are Associated with a Neighborhood Streets Reconstruction? All of the utility work (concrete curb and gutter, sanitary and storm sewer, and water main) is done at no direct cost to the property owner. These costs are paid from the respective utility funds. During project design, the City encourages each private utility company (gas, electric, telephone and cable TV) to upgrade or repair its utilities within the streets along the project area. This approach helps reduce street excavations and disturbances to the neighborhood in the future. If you've ever considered burying your private overhead utility lines, this is an opportune time to do so. If you are interested, please contact the Engineering Department and we will give you contact information for the respective private utility company. When Do 1 Pay The Special Assessment For the Project? A final assessment hearing is typically held one year after the completion of the project. The one -year timeframe is necessary to allow time for warranty work and final payment to close out the project. You will be notified of the final assessment hearing at least 14 -days prior to the final assessment hearing. How Do I Pay the Special Assessment Payment? Special Assessment payments are due Nov. 29* of the calendar year in which it is levied. There are four ways to pay the special assessment: 1. Pay the entire balance by Nov. 29 and avoid finance charges. 2. A minimum partial payment of 25 percent is allowed. The balance will automatically be certified to Hennepin County and be payable over the next 10 years on the same schedule as your property taxes, plus finance charges. 3. Have the entire special assessment certified to Hennepin County and make annual payments over the next 10 years on the same schedule as your property taxes, plus interest. This option will be done automatically if you do nothing by Nov. 29. 4. Deferral on Special Assessment of Homesteads Owned By Persons 65 Years Of Age Or Older. Under provisions of Minnesota Statutes Section 435.193 to 435.195 the City may, at its discretion, defer the payment of assessments for any homestead property owned by a person 65 years of age or older for whom it would be a hardship to make the payments. The procedures to apply for such deferment are available from the Assessor's office. Deferment applications must be filed with the Assessor's office by Nov. 15. See http: / /www. CityofEdina, com /Departments/ AssessingDeferrals.htm for complete detail. Property owners who elect option 2 or 3 may pay off the assessment during any year by paying the remaining principal amount and finance charges (interest) to the City by the close of business on Nov. 15 *. *If this is a weekend day, payments are due by the close of business the last business day prior to this date. � 07 How Will Staff Communicate with Property Owners? ] Letters via Regular Mail Staff will send an informational letter to property owners in the neighborhoods whose streets may be reconstructed the next two consecutive years (e.g., 2011 and 2012). Other letters will be sent out as necessary informing you of project plans and schedules, open house(s) and public hearing(s). Once construction is underway, you will receive construction update letters via mail. Edina Sun - Current Public hearings will be published in the Edina Sun- Current. The Edina Sun - Current is published every Thursday. Resident Questionnaires During the feasibility phase, staff may need to gather residents' input to help formulate a decision. This may be in the area of style of lighting for the neighborhood, etc. "City Extra" Email This service is free and allows individuals to sign up to receive email messages from the City on a variety of topics. We use this email to send out weekly construction updates. To sign up for the service, go to the City Extra website at http: / /cityextra. cityofedina.com and place a check mark in the box next to your neighborhood's project name. Please contact the City at 952 - 927 -8861 if you have trouble signing up for City Extra. Hand - delivered letters Letters may be hand- delivered to inform you of a time- sensitive event such as water shut -off the next morning. How Can I Give Input and Stay Informed? Visit our website on a regular basis, www.CityofEdina.com. All the information that is mailed and discussed at the open houses, informational meetings and public hearings is archived under the neighborhood's project name on the Engineering Department's webpage. Send an email edinamail@ci.edina.mn.us Call us If you cannot find what you're looking for on the website, call us at 952 - 826 -0371, between 7 a.m. and 3:30 p.m. Drop in You can drop in at any time Monday through Friday between 7 a.m. and 3:30 p.m. We are located at 7450 Metro Blvd. Schedule an appointment If you believe your question or concern will take more than just a few minutes, it is advisable to call and schedule a meeting with the appropriate staff, 952 - 826 -0371. 12 What Can I Expect During Construction? Communication Once construction begins, you will receive a monthly construction update letter via regular mail and weekly construction updates via email through City Extra. We strongly encourage everyone to sign up for City Extra, as this method of communicating will be utilized most often. The utility companies (gas, electric, cable, telephone) will be in the neighborhood first, upgrading their utilities as they deem necessary. They are required to notify you of their start date. Construction Activities As the work progresses, it may be dusty, muddy, noisy and inconvenient; however, we do have requirements to deal with the nuisances. For example, watering trucks will be available to keep the dust down and the contractor must adhere to the City's noise ordinance. You may be asked to limit your water use and flushing of the toilet while the sanitary sewer is being repaired. You may be connected to temporary water in a hose that iff t NI- f \ 1. will run on the boulevard or have temporary water shut -offs while the water main is being repaired. Your irrigation and pet containment system may be damaged if they are located in the City's right -of -way. They will be restored only if you indicate that you have these systems on your returned questionnaires. You may not be able to access your driveway for up to seven days and the roadway for a few hours up to a few days while certain com- pounds are curing; however, the contractor will accommodate those with special needs. You will receive advance notices of these occurrences so that you can plan accordingly; however, while we try to give advance notices, there are instances that limit how much notice we can provide. One such instance may be an accidental water main break that interrupts your water service. Weather is also a factor that could change plans with limited notification. Landscaping in Boulevards Prior to construction, property owners will be given an opportunity to remove plantings and other landscaping items from the boulevard. All boulevard areas will be restored with grass regard- less of previous plantings or landscaping items. Construction typically starts in May, depending on our fickle weather, and runs through October or November. Once the work is completed, some items are warranted until the following spring. Sod, for example, is planted in the fall and property owners are given detailed instructions how to water it. If the sod does not make it through the warranty period, the company will replace it. If the sod dies after the warranty period, it is your responsibility to replace the dead sod. You will be notified via regular mail of the sod warranty expiration. This is typically about six weeks. What Can I Do to Prepare for the Project? • Ask questions; inform staff of your concerns. • Complete questionnaries to provide feedback. • Sign -up for City Extra. • Coordinate landscaping, driveway replacement and house remodeling projects with the reconstruction schedule. • Begin financial planning for the assessment. Neighborhood Informational Meeting Tracv Avenue `F? (Benton Ave to Vernon Ave) November 28, 2011 TYPICAL ROADWAY Cis CITY OF EDINA RECONSTRUCTION Video — can also be found on City web site: ht_t_p: / /www.cityofedina.com /Departments /L5- 17a ConstructionProiects future.htm :: CITY OF EDINA AGENDA Introductions Typical Roadway Reconstruction Tracy Avenue Information Existing Conditions Design Criteria Communications / Preparing Next steps Questions PROCESS FROM START TO END Lid : CITY OF EDINA Final � EvaNation assassmen of Infra- CoroWCtio Nelghbor- n ba9ms. hood wfor- tional AOL sting Councl Staff awards b Completes Feasibilay Study Muni�Aid StatApp Hearing. ProAdvetlas Residents' fsf bids, n hhed Couj Council + pmp pmlecl /1 City of Edina CITY OF EDINA Municipal State Aid Streets Edina Municipal State Aid Roadways — sc.t• •w sa..t. (I: CITY OF EDINA FUNDING Utility Fund - 100% of the following: • Curb & Gutter • Sanitary Sewer— main line only • Storm Sewer— main line only • Water main — main line only • Drain tile — if needed for residents to connect sump pumps and down spouts EDINA ME CITY of EDINA STATE AID FUNDING 80120 SEl • 80% of roadway costs funded through Municipal State Aid — "Gas Tax Monies" ■ 20% of roadway costs funded through Special Assessments: o Based on Residential Equivalent Unit (REU) • Each home is an REU • Businesses are assigned REU's based on trip generation. WHAT DO YOUR TAXES PAY FOR? ::CITY OF EDINA The Portion of Your Property Tax that the City Receives City of Edina so City of Edina eo% ■ other Allocation • Police • Fire • Parks • Public Works • Snowplowing • Pothole Repairs • Seal coating • Other Street Maintenance .-2 CIS CITY OF EDINA SPECIAL ASSESSMENT PAYMENT OPTIONS Prpble , o y— A final special Rana ^nm assessment hearing is held the fall after the your property axe: project is completed (sometimes one year later). BOULEVARD AREAS :: CITY OF EDINA Property owner items located within the City's right of way may be damaged during construction: • Irrigation and pet containment systems will only be restored if indicated on the resident questionnaire. • Prior to construction, residents will be given an opportunity to remove plantings and other landscape features in the boulevard. • Boulevards will be restored with grass - regardless of previous planting or landscaping. RESIDENT QUESTIONNAIRE „i: CITY OF EDINA The property owners questionnaire generally gathers information on the following topics: • Sump Pump Discharge Service Line? • Residential Roadway Lighting? • Pedestrian Issues - what are the issues? • Private Underground Utilities - do you have underground lawn irrigation and pet containment? • Local Drainage Problems - have you noticed drainage issues in the neighborhood? :: CITY OF EDINAP roject Location — Tracy Avenue -3 CITY OF EDINA Existing Corridor Conditions Sidowalkc -Structurally inadequate -Varying widths ;10 CITY OF EDINA Existing Corridor Conditions �■ Roadway conditions: • Concrete Pavement placed in 1961 • Prevalent cracking & deterioration of pavements • Pavement Inverted caused by settlement Existing orridor Conditions la: CITY OF EDINA g Storm sewer system ■ Maintain existing drainage patterns ■ Existing system does not meet design standards JAM ,-4 Typical Street Section ti CITY OF EDINA b b II II 11 11 II II II II 11 11 11 •mar ■r" u n 1[M u+d ufi II � i M• Yn• Yt� •III1111! � VYff ••4lYF 011 CITY OF EDINA Existing Corridor Conditions Sidowalkc -Structurally inadequate -Varying widths ;10 CITY OF EDINA Existing Corridor Conditions �■ Roadway conditions: • Concrete Pavement placed in 1961 • Prevalent cracking & deterioration of pavements • Pavement Inverted caused by settlement Existing orridor Conditions la: CITY OF EDINA g Storm sewer system ■ Maintain existing drainage patterns ■ Existing system does not meet design standards JAM ,-4 Us CITY OF EDINA Existing Corridor Conditions ®® Sanitary Sewer • Built in 1950s • Typical issues : root intrusion, cracked segments • Infiltration Watermain • Built in 1950s • Watermain breaks - to be evaluated • Service issues - to be evaluated • Water quality - to be evaluated :0 CITY OF EDINA Design Criteria Edina Comprehensive Plan -Bike Plan Pion N HOOK No. Npc•Ira �yrul l Nm� titi L� 3" ` t 1.. Yai CITY OF EDINA c�■ State Aid Requirements ■ Min. roadway width - 40 feet • 2 - 11ft through lanes • 1 - 8 ft parking lane • 2 - 5 ft bike lanes ■Parking allowed on one side of roadway ■ Variance needed for "width" Design Criteria IN CITY OF EDINA Design Criteria f�. Private Utility Companies • Potential gas main rehabilitation • Potential burying of overhead power lines ,-5 EML Weekly construction updates will be sent via the "City Extra" email. Stay In the loop by signing up for this free service. Letters may be delivered to Inform you of time - sensitive events such as water shutoff the next morning. WHAT CAN YOU DO TO PREPARE o0 CITY OF EDINA FOR THE PROJECT? • Begin financial planning for the assessment. • Coordinate landscaping, driveway replacement and house remodeling projects with the reconstruction schedule. • Complete questionnaire to provide feedback • Ask questions; inform staff of your concerns • Sign -up for "City Extra" to receive updates via email notification L - Q l: HOW CAN YOU GIVE INPUT M® CITY OF EDINA • www.CityatEdina.com AND STAY INFORMED? Visit our website regularly. Information from open houses and other communications are archived on our website. I • edinars°- ii(a`ci.cdina.cori Drop us an email •952 -826 -0371 Call us; office hours are 7:00.3:30 p.m. • Stop by the office Pul�llg Works and Engineering Departments 7450 Metro Boulevard • Schedule an appointment 952 -826 -0371 ®� CITY OF EDINA Next Steps 1. Resident Questionnaire • Decorative Street Lighting • Parking • Sidewalk 2. Next Meeting in December • Preliminary design drawings • Estimated costs/ assessments ➢6 COMMUNICATING WITH YOU 00 CITY OF EDINA Our first contact with you is when we Inform you of the Informational meeting, followed by public hedtings notification; open house; surveys; project plans and schedules; and construction update letters via regular diail. Our last communication to you Is the notice of final special assessment hearing. Public hearings will be published in the Ediha Sun - Current. Questionnaires will be sent during the early planning stage to help staff formulate a decision in areas such as street lighting and style of street lighting. EML Weekly construction updates will be sent via the "City Extra" email. Stay In the loop by signing up for this free service. Letters may be delivered to Inform you of time - sensitive events such as water shutoff the next morning. WHAT CAN YOU DO TO PREPARE o0 CITY OF EDINA FOR THE PROJECT? • Begin financial planning for the assessment. • Coordinate landscaping, driveway replacement and house remodeling projects with the reconstruction schedule. • Complete questionnaire to provide feedback • Ask questions; inform staff of your concerns • Sign -up for "City Extra" to receive updates via email notification L - Q l: HOW CAN YOU GIVE INPUT M® CITY OF EDINA • www.CityatEdina.com AND STAY INFORMED? Visit our website regularly. Information from open houses and other communications are archived on our website. I • edinars°- ii(a`ci.cdina.cori Drop us an email •952 -826 -0371 Call us; office hours are 7:00.3:30 p.m. • Stop by the office Pul�llg Works and Engineering Departments 7450 Metro Boulevard • Schedule an appointment 952 -826 -0371 ®� CITY OF EDINA Next Steps 1. Resident Questionnaire • Decorative Street Lighting • Parking • Sidewalk 2. Next Meeting in December • Preliminary design drawings • Estimated costs/ assessments ➢6 ➢7 TRACY AVENUE PUBLIC OPEN HOUSE NOVEMBER 28, 2011 NAME ADDRESS Do you have the folloWn ? Y or N SUMP DRAIN PET FENCE 1 2 C i cl h "�— < c�` ci tie : lce -�-i :. ✓t t e �': 5-71z- Q/ TccL 4c 0 1zo s PlZfC—: N INC) NcJ (O t ° n 5 Wovn e V. -Fri-JIUAci 5712, C ro ve -ec7 - -NO No s ,e My 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 TRACY AVENUE PUBLIC OPEN HOUSE NOVEMBER 28, 2011 NAME ADDRESS Do you have the followin ? Y or N SUMP DRAIN PET FENCE 1 Or Ke Z e r 5isa$ Je�T 2 p R t for s o S c 5? 1 !p & n l-/.v,n. 3 Co f 06 bow- LAI �! 4 5 i ff /lA Ave. .,C ilp 7 -e (J % , V Al 8 5701 Ea S 9 d LFl 51G�? AWK6 Rf & /V 11 Y Fi Vt- 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 8� � FEASIBILITY STUDY — BA 368 ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT • CITY OF EDINA STREET IMPROVEMENTS Tracy Avenue — Benton Avenue to Vernon Avenue February 6, 2012 Appendix B Property Owner Questionnaire #1 A. oe.,171 f l0 City of Edina November 30, 2011 RE: Tracy Avenue (Benton Avenue to Vernon Avenue) - Resident Questionnaire Dear Resident: The City of Edina has initiated the process of roadway and utility improvements for the summer of 2012 for your neighborhood. The first step was to hold an open house on November 28, 2011, for you to become familiar with the street reconstruction process. A second meeting will be held on December 19, 2011, where preliminary design drawings of the roadway will be presented. You will receive a separate notice by mail for this meeting. The next step is to get feedback from you regarding a number of key components of the project. The information you share with us is essential in determining certain aspects of the project that may be constructed. Please read the information below before you complete the questionnaire. Things to know and consider: • Residents in Edina pay a portion of the overall project cost in the form of a special assessment. Tracy Avenue is a Municipal State Aid route, in which the City is eligible to receive funding from MnDOT for the street improvements as long as it meets their design standards. The City of Edina's assessment policy identifies that 20% of,the street improvement costs for the project are specially assessed to the adjacent benefitting properties. Special assessments are based on a Residential Equivalent Unit (REU) or, per property, and are payable over 10 years. The estimated special assessment for your neighborhood will not be determined until after information has been gathered from the questionnaires and a feasibility report is completed, which is planned to be complete in January 2012. An estimated range of the assessment amount will be provided to you at the December 19, informational meeting. If the project is completed during the summer of 2012, the special assessment for your property will not be levied until fall 2013. Special assessments for roadway projects in the City of Edina typically fund roadways, sidewalks, and street lights. Other utility upgrades such as water main, sanitary sewer, storm sewer, and concrete curb and gutter are funded through the utility fund and are not special assessed. City Hall 952- 927 -8861 4801 WEST 50TH STREET FAX 952- 826 -0390 EDINA, MINNESOTA 55424 -1394 www.cityofedina.com TTY 952 -826 -0379 Tracy Avenue (Benton Avenue to Vernon Avenue) Reconstruction - Resident Questionnaire Page 2 of 4 • Construction typically starts in spring /early summer and end in late fall of the same year. Questionnaire: The following information explains the questionnaire that is enclosed. A map showing the boundaries of the area to be reconstructed is attached to this letter. After reading this letter completely, please complete the questionnaire and return by December 12, 2011, in the self - addressed stamped envelope. It should be noted, the questionnaire asks you about your feelings about the design characteristics of Tracy Avenue, such as adding or removing parking lanes, bike lanes, and sidewalks. The following figure shows the existing typical section of the roadway. The addition and /or removal of lanes or sidewalks will mean the footprint of the corridor may be changed and may add significant impacts that may not be feasible. , 6W Flight -w-way 4' 12' 12' & S 5 Shkf I Thru Lena I TWu Lane Perking M,,d I Walk 36' Seddon Design Characteristics I. Pedestrian Issues Presently, there is a 5' sidewalk on :the east side- of•the street:.� Let us, know your, feelingst::.:, xA< about the importance of : pedestrian facilities and.: whefhe' 'yoU`#e�bl o sidewalk -isr ` needed on both sides of the street. In addition, we would like to hear your input regarding pedestrian crossings and safety for pedestrians along the corridor. II. Bike Lane Issues Tracy Avenue is designated a primary bike route by the City of Edina. Currently, there is no signed or striped designation along Tracy Avenue related to that. We would like to know how you feel about on- street bike lanes. The MnDOT Bikeway Facility Design Manual requires a minimum 5' bike lane and recommends a 6' bike lane adjacent to a parking lane. II. Benton/Tracy Intersection The east and west legs of Benton Avenue at the intersection of Tracy Avenue'are currently offset by a distance of 70' from centerline of the west leg to centerline of the east leg. As part of the design, we will be analyzing this intersection. We would like to know your input in terms of safety, traffic, sight distance, pedestrian facilities, and any other additional items that would be helpful to know while proceeding with the design. Tracy Avenue (Benton Avenue to Vernon Avenue) Reconstruction — Resident Questionnaire Page 3 of 4 III. Traffic Management During street reconstruction projects the issue of vehicle speed or volume within the project limits are typically raised by residents. We would like to know if you feel that your roadway has any traffic issues. Please tell us about it in the traffic management section of the questionnaire. V. On- Street Parking Currently, on- street parking is only permitted on the east side of Tracy Avenue. We are looking for your feedback in the questionnaire to gauge the importance of parking along the corridor. Parking is not required, however if park is desired MnDOT requires parking lanes to be a minimum of 8' wide for streets with the design speed and traffic volume characteristics of Tracy Avenue. VI. Residential Streetlights As part of all reconstruction projects, staff typically asks if residents favor upgrading their streetlight system. Funding for streetlights are currently through special assessment for residents. In the residential streetlight option section of the questionnaire, are examples of the different styles of street lighting that could be installed along Tracy Avenue. Please rank your style preferences. Please note that ranking your style preferences does not necessarily mean you are in favor of streetlights. Prooerty Inauiry VII. Drainage Service Connection Do you use a sump pump or have you considered installing one? Do you currently have a footing drain? The project could include a sump drain system along the roadway to collect groundwater, storm water runoff, and discharges from private sump pumps, roof drains or any other runoff from private property. A typical sump pump discharges onto a homeowner's lawn. This can cause problems with your lawn, your neighbor's lawn, your basement if your lawn drains back to your home or with the street if the sump pump constantly runs down the gutter line promoting algae growth. Discharging the sump pump into the sanitary sewer system such as floor drains or laundry tubs is against the law, both City Ordinance and State Statute. If the topography and final street designs favor a City sump drain system, we will need to know if you currently have a sump pump or a footing drain. The line from the home to the City sump drain system would be your responsibility including any plumbing modifications needed to connect your sump pump. The City of Edina's sump drain system is funded through the storm sewer utility fund. We also would like to know about any local drainage problems. This might be an opportunity for the sump drain system to correct these issues. Tracy Avenue (Benton Avenue to Vernon Avenue) Reconstruction - Resident Questionnaire Page 4 of 4 VIII. Local Drainage Problems Does storm water runoff stand in the street or sidewalk in front of your house? As part of the storm sewer and sump drain design process, we would like to know if this or similar situations are occurring in your area. If so, please describe it in the local drainage problems section of the questionnaire. We will review them for possible corrective action. IX. Private Underground Utilities Some residents install private underground utilities in the City -owned boulevards, also called the right -of -way (ROW). These utilities are usually lawn irrigation or pet containment systems. Utility and roadway reconstruction can damage these utilities. If they are damaged, they will be restored only if you indicate that you have these systems on your returned questionnaire in the private underground utilities section. Additionally, if the contractor knows the location of these private utilities, they can attempt to avoid damaging them during construction. Receive Project Updates via the City Extra If you sign up for our "City Extra" e-mail notification service, you will receive project updates as they occur. During this stage of the project, such updates are usually notifications of upcoming meetings. Later, if the Council chooses to proceed with construction of this project, the updates will occur weekly. During construction, the updates will include information such as when access to your driveway might be limited or when to have your contractor repair your private lawn irrigation system if it was damaged by construction activities. The City Extra service is free and allows you to sign up to receive messages from the City regarding this project and any other project of interest. To sign up for the service, go to the City Extra website at httr): / /citvextra.citvofedina.com. Follow the instructions to sign up and then select "Tracy Avenue - Benton Avenue to. Vernon - .Avenue"- from the, list -of projeets --- under Public" Works: A' :information '�ou-- - rovide,Luill: be -,confide tral, aril _only t ecific- .:.�. Y y P_... _ ., Y sP information you request will be sent to you:- Your `subscriptions are protected by your own personal password. Please note, the City of Edina website is currently being reconstructed. If the Tracy Avenue project is unavailable, please try again after a few days. If you do not have access to e-mail or the internet, please call me at 952 - 826 -0371, and I will have hard copy of correspondences sent to you. Questions If you have questions after reading this letter, please feel free to call Andrew Plowman with WSB & Associates, Inc. at 763 -287 -7149 or myself at 952- 826 -0445. Sincerely, Jack Sullivan, P.E. Assistant City Engineer Enclosures: Map Questionnaire Self- Addressed Envelope o�-4A ,�� g PROPERTY OWNERS QUESTIONNAIRE November 30,2011 �° Tracy Avenue (Benton Avenue to Vernon Avenue) • City of Edina Please do not answer these questions until after you have read the entire newsletter. Please complete and return this survey by December 12, 2011, using the self- addressed stamped - envelope. DESIGN CHARACTERISTICS Pedestrian Issues: A. There is currently a sidewalk on the east side of Not Satisfied 717171 ❑ ❑ Satisfied Tracy Avenue, how satisfied are you with the 1 2 3 4 5 condition of the existing sidewalk? Additional Comments: B. How important is it to you to have a sidewalk on the east side and construct a new sidewalk on the west side of the street? Additional Comments: 11. Bike Lane Issues: A. Tracy Avenue is a primary bike route within the City of Edina. Currently, there is no signed bike lane, how important is it to you to have two - one way bike lanes, knowing this may require no on- street parking or require the street to be widened from the existing footprint? Additional Comments: Not Important 7171 ❑ ❑ ❑ Important 1 2 3 4 5 Not Important 7171 ❑ ❑ ❑ Important 1 2 3 4 5 B. How interested are you in having bike lanes if Not Interested ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ Interested it allows the City to post the speed limit at 25 mph? 1 2 3 4 5 Additional Comments: III. Benton/Tracy Intersection: A. Please share your thoughts regarding the Tracy Avenue and Benton Avenue intersection (i.e. safety, traffic, sight distance, etc.) Comments: VI. Traffic Management A. Do you feel your neighborhood or roadway has any traffic issues? ❑ Yes ❑ No B. Do you feel your neighborhood has any safety issues? ❑ Yes ❑ No If yes, what is it and where does it occur? PROPERTY OWNERS QUESTIONNAIRE November 30,2011 Tracy Avenue (Benton Avenue to Vernon Avenue) • City of Edina V. On- street Parking A. Parking is currently permitted on the east side of the roadway. How important is it to have parking Not Important ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑Important in front of your home or property? 1 2 3 4 5 Additional Comments: B. How important is it to you to have parking on both sides, knowing that the addition of a parking Not Important C] C1 71 C3 ❑Important lane may require the street to be widened from 1 2 3 4 5 the existing footprint? Additional Comments: C. If parking could only be allowed on one side of the street, which side of the street would you prefer parking be allowed? Additional Comments: ❑ West Side ❑ East Side VI. Residential Streetlights: A. Do you favor upgrading your streetlights (there would be a special assessment cost to your property)? ❑ Yes ❑ No B. If the streetlights are upgraded, which style do you prefer? Please rank all the styles from 1 to 5, with 5 being most liked. Please answer even if you answered "No" in section VI. A. Acorn: Style can be viewed along Concord Ave from Valley View Rd to South View Ln, Edina. Arlington Lantern: Style can be viewed in the Country Club neighborhood, just north of West 50th St along Wooddale Ave, Edina. Coach: Style can be viewed in the Sunnyslope neighborhood, just north of Edina City Hall, Edina Shoebox: Style can be viewed on W 70th St between TH 100 and France Ave. Dislike ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ Like 1 2 3 4 5 Dislike ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ Like 1 2 3 4 5 Dislike ❑ ❑ 7171 ❑ Like 1 2 3 4 5 Dislike ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ [)Like 1 2 3 4 5 o e PROPERTY OWNERS QUESTIONNAIRE November 30,2011 �( /y Tracy Avenue (Benton Avenue to Vernon Avenue) • City of Edina VII. Other Design Comments: PROPERTY INQUIRY VIII. Drainage Service Connection: A. Does your home have a drain tile /footing drain? ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑Unknown B. Does your home have a sump pump? Yes C] No ❑Unknown C. Would you be willing to connect your sump pump up to a City drain if provided (at your own cost)? ❑ Yes ❑ No D. Would you be willing to connect your roof drains up to a City drain if provided (at your own cost)? ❑ Yes ❑ No Please sketch in the space to the right: your house, garage, driveway, sump pump discharge location and approximately where along the right -of -way (ROW) line you would like the service connection pipe located. If you do not provide this information, the City cannot guarantee that a City drain will be provided with the construction project. SBUCE ®CONNECn PIPES IX. Local Drainage Problems — please list specific surface water drainage problems in your neighborhood: X. Private Underground Utilities - A. Do you have an underground lawn irrigation system in the City's right -of -way? (The right -of -way varies between 10'to 15'behind the roadway.) B. Do you have an underground electric pet containment system in the City's right -of -way? If you have these systems an do not indicate yes, the City cannot guarantee that these systems will be repaired or replaced with the construction project and would therefore be at your cost. ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ Yes ❑ No Thank you for taking time to complete this very important survey. Your feedback is essential to make this project a success. Please return this questionnaire in the enclosed self- addressed, stamped - envelope. Please complete all questions and return to the City of Edina by December 12, 2011. FEASIBILITY STUDY — BA 368 r } ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT °•�=� CITY OF EDINA STREET IMPROVEMENTS Tracy Avenue — Benton Avenue to Vernon Avenue February 6, 2012 Appendix C Questionnaire #1 Results Data Entered By: Dean Chamberlain Last Date Data Entered: 30- Dec -11 Due Date: 4Jan -11 Questionnaires Sent Out: 34 Questionnaires Returned: 32 Percent Returned: 94% Data Checked ByfDate: Andrew Plowman Questionnaire #1 Tabulation Keiser•25owdmncoon)ou.w- wi,%T, Av— OwO.nmim TO Aift -x 2 012 104 VII. Other Design 1. Pedestrian Issues 11. Bike Lane Issues Ill. Benton Trae y Intersection IV. Traffic Management V. On met Parking VI. Residential Street Lights Comments Condition Importance of Parking East Side Favor of Existing West Side On- Street Bike Do you feel your neighborhood or Do you feel your neighborhood or roadway Importance Both or West Upgrading Preferred Styles - Like =S, Sidewalk Sidewalk Lanes roadway has traffic issues has safe issues of Parkin - Sides Side Street Li hts Dislike =l 5, Important - 5, Important - 5, Fkene 5, Not 5, Not Adingto Unsatisfied Not Important Not Important I Important - Important East or n Shoebo 1 Comments 1 Comments 1 Comments Comments Comments Quantify Yes If Yes, Explain No Yes If Yes, Explain No 1 Comments 1 Comments West Comments Yes No Acorn Lantern Coach x I Comments From Vernon and /or Benton it is all downhill to our address at 5712 Poor Question. I Tracy. Therefore Do not put a would like bike lane people speed up going sidewalk on the but DO NOT want down hill and max out No Parking on West 5 1 west side 1 the street widened. 5 Very Interested X X at our address. 1 1 Side East I X 1 1 1 1 1 1 Traffic backs up with drivers confused as to right of way rules of the road, thankfully it Excessive speed when Is it a primary bike is a 4 way stop. If cars pass Warden on route because Tracy Not enough room Tracy and Warden, Also, heavy Tracy. Even school is a primary arterial for parking on would also work since traffic from Good buses exceed 40 mph roadway for the both sides of that intersection is Samaritan daily. There is limited entire street - to the street and bike offset also. It would Church which vtewof cars southbound Crosstown and lanes on each also slow the traffic on uses Warden on Tracy for traffic 5 1 1 Vernon corridors? 1 side Tracy. C X heavily. X westbound on Warden. 1 1 East X 3 4 5 1 Drivers need to be As a homeowner, it is encouraged to treat this very important to as a residential street, have available Lighting that suggests parking on- street. The intersection "neighborhood" and This is a Parking should currently causes crosswalk would help neighborhood. be on the drivers to use more promote better driving Parking impacts sidewalk side of 5 1 1 3 caution. C X behavior. 5 value. 1 East the street. X Most Consistent Issues are We are opposed Problem at congestion when Not interested in Sidewalk on that to a sidewalk on We are not in favor No Interest in bike intersection is rolling school is sterling paying more for City 5 side is fine. t the west side t of any widening. t lanes at all. stops. P X and letting out. X 5 1 No Wideni Fast Where it is now X 5 1 4 2 Lights. Poor Design, often driving south on Tracy See above. Also, to turn east on many cars and During heavy rain, Benton. I have been school buses use water accumulates I appreciate the indicating my turn but Benton and Tracy between driveways of plowing of the cars heading North of intersection 5633 and 5629, even sidewalk in the Tracy proceed ahead morning and time though there is a 5 winter. 1 1 1 of ma P X school is out. X 3 1 East X 4 drain. -- -- — 7000 care a day Like sidewalk on Need to retain on- pass our home. east side, please street parking and Many too fast retain it No need cerhrwl widen road traffic often for sidewalk on due to small front blocks up during 5 1 west side. 1 yards. 1 X rush hour. X 5 1 East X 3 5 4 1 Would like to see the sidewalk and Terrible, lived on curb all in one like comer for 37 years - on Benton the fact that it is not a Avenue. We are normal 4 way stop No parking on on the comers of has always been Benton, this would 2 Benton and Tracy 3 Or one side only. 3 4 confusing for drivers. P X X 5 really limit us. 3 East X 5 4 5 1 My sidewalk is not I think this is a bad During rush I don't want to have bad, but several intersection and not hours the trefflb I don't want to have the road redone and other homes have New sidewalk on safe for people or gets heavy and the street widen so get a high special really bad the east would be ears, sight is very people speed on everyone loses more assessment Just to 3 sidewalks. 3 Inice. p22r. IP I X Tracy. X 1 3 1 1 land for the road. East X 5 1 3 4 1 1 Imake it pretty. Fact that intersection Don't want to lose Least costly is unusual means portion of my front option - have Leave sidewalk Don't want sidewalk drivers are overly Have gone 27 years yard as any widening been in effect for configuration as if it means street will cautious as is - no without, no need to would probably be on many years - no 5 1 is. 1 7 lbe wider. 1 1 1 C X I I X 1 than a now. 1 west side. East need to than e. X 1 2 1 3 4 Keiser•25owdmncoon)ou.w- wi,%T, Av— OwO.nmim TO Aift -x 2 012 104 Data Entered By: Last Date Data Entered: Due Date: Questionnaires Sent Out: Questionnaires Returned: Percent Returned: Dean Chamberlain 30 -Dec -11 4Jan -11 22 Questionnaire #1 Tabulation 94% Data Checked By /Date: Andrew Plowman K 01 25(Mdtl \DocelOueetionrmWT,w Avenue OueaCOnrmire Tab be . ,m x/32012 2 of 4 VII. Other Design I. Pedestrian Issues 11. Bike Lane Issues Ill. Benton Trac y Intersection IV. Traffic Management V. On-Street Parking A. Residential Street Lights Comments Condition Importance of Bike Lanes if Parking East Side Favor 01 Existing West Side On -Street Bike 25 MPH is Do you feel your neighborhood or Do you feel your neighborhood or roadway Importance Both or West Upgrading Preferred Styles - Like =S, Sidewalk Sidewalk Lanes posted roadwa has traffic issues has safe issues of Parkin - Sides Side Street Lights Dislike =l 5, Important - 5, Important - 5, Interested - 5, 5, Not 5, Not Arlingto Unsatisfied Not Important Not Important Not Interested Important - Important East or n Shoebo 1 Comments 1 Comments 1 Comments 1 Comments Comments Quantify Yes If Yes, Explain No Yes If Yes, Explain No 1 Comments 1 Comments West Comments Yes No Acem Lantern Coach x Comments c ... ... _ .. , ... .: ., . , I any tlonY see , ., .. .... x;: _ rob b mwl th the come T Benton mtersectron. .:._._, F, _..._, ._+ _ ....� _... -._ ... ... ........ .. ..X _, ,.. _.. 4.., >..,..,. .: :. _.:,. , :::X� _:...5. 1. ,r.L 1x1; "Eesb X_ .'3 -. .. 3. Lower speed limit would be wonderful if it is Not enough room for enforced. The 30 a roundabout? Would mph speed limit is be nice. If drivers not currently were alert and enforced. But courteous the Should street be even slower traffic intersection would be I would hate to live widened beyond In favor of one bike woudl be ok as is. But that is Speeding is a big issue. here if traffic were existing footprint lane and no on- unacceptable if an unrealistic Even the school buses I enjoy on- street any Goser to my please widen on west street parking rather closer to my expectation in all exceed 30 mph. Speed parking occasionally, front door Q 5625 side as much as 3 1 1 than widenin . 1 house. cases. P X X limit is not enforced. 1 but it is not vital. 1 Tracy. East X 1 3 1 2 1 5 1 ossible. r. -,.. . . -.. , ... -r. - :v.. _... ,,. ., 3 ..P , ,: ,.: .... a ,.. , . -J Move BentonA a ;. :. ..... .... ,.., - - ,. .. .,. ,... :. + _,.s .,.. _ ..., .. _ ., . -, .. _:, -.. .. ._ -_ ,• .i W08t Onro.9 001,. ,_ -. t , :.ra i _ ... .1 .. .,. _ : c � c . ' ,. .. .< ,<. .. r v. ♦ >_ _ , :,: ,._ is ,'4 ♦. .• ,, ., ... G. _:. . -. , :[ property (sign now ..a .: a ,.. .. ., ..,... .,. -F „ r, _ .. .. . „ ..._...- , ... -.:,. r >a.. -r r, ,- ._ .., _. � a. 4:?f _... gu ou fie n _,._. This ; sseemsrobe '.. .. :. , there �., ,, 1 4.: ,'- �: c " h .. .,. _.., a— ., .. . _ _ � ... .. _.. .. ..., .•,.: r. ., . _,n ._. ....... ,.. . _about > r P Y meal , condition riov/J.. _ .... . , . .. , _, Pere _ Iiestrons. FFsst r, .. r s. , ._ -: , _ .... „. -�.c, _ r ... .. ,._. x. . _. r _ .. - _ , ,<..., .._. _ , i n > . mterseeaoa.Possl routebu sea out of : : �_ .. ..." .. x, ., „_ 1 at midpoint ,,. r >> � ;i - i :. ... __.. Theconddton of , - r. < 9Ma WOfk9 we9 ... _ .. ,. _ , >_ . , .a ._ ...., > _ .. n'. r'., south end of e]eshn , ., .. ._. �. � .. , ,.:., .. [ _.. ,. .. 3 ..... J_ .. ... , Grove Street to Warden -:�'� •.: ,. C., `ti, :r '' Two'13 fl lanes two i. .. ., . the exl Str ry n9 .... . : -:.. M > ,. ._ now side tle r `:., ., -, _ ,.. ,. : - ,. .. ...- r a. `rot to errter r 'r. G.. .. ,. ...: . .. \. ,. .- w . .... a _...,- ::: ,.,.. .. .....�: .... r . . !•ry ..l, _ .:.- F...: ...k,: _ :,.. tlownhi9frombodt. . . ..r ,. . : ;" ,.. ,. v fir. :. '- s bike lariea 5' Total'. .. „r .,.:. . :.._r. . ". ._. . ,., , .. . -" :. r , of neoeesa _ _.:.:_ .,. .. ,. 3 .. ,�. .. T. ". ., yr ,. ._ .. .._. , .. .... ,. F. 4. ..., ,... - ., c, -: ._ . -. _ Tra away that .. .. _.,- � ._ P..._,. ...._.. z.,.... :: .. _. - -.., X .:.. _r .. .. .. .:..... . a , ,. .: ... , ..,.., .,._X. _ dtrections. -r. Only if street is not Intersection is fine as There is too 4 1 1 5 widened. 4 a 4-way stop. F X much traffic. X Fire trucks o too fast. 1 1 West X 5 5 5 1 is ria t ro a ,. r. - . It broken and:,. c ,. a have two _:. -.:, „. , .; , , , , _ . - _:... .,n .,.,, . , fl -. - ,. _ ..�... • .. ,,.., �. raised m many sidewalks the. .., � .._. Again; ai ,.how about. - _ , _ >_ ..., .... _ . : _� Would love ro see the s .,.:3. _ .. locetwns�,_..... ..,r,.1 .r. axlsh walk is .. .,, , ...,,._. t ... uat one rone9.... ... ...__. - -�1 25 hlsloo at streets al ned:� .. :. - ...�., R- x..:.. .. ,.. _ +..... _ e., .. : r_ .., ... ,. -.:< __ ._r..: ., •.s �, . >_ X_ .. .,', .,. ..r ,..,.� .. __._: �_ >:.!, ,.: X ,. -- , `r :4'z -. ..:,::z,, � 3., -. �: ., 1. -: -'- s�. East -. ..x:n X a Y �` S r There is negligible The expanded plan,M< pedestrian traffic eliminates trees and on Tracy. One does not allow for new sidewalk is ample. People appear more trees. We will lose a There is no There is negligible cautious or move dozen to 17 trees destination for _ bike traffic on Tracy, hesitant to enter traffic Parking on Tracy is depending upon the walkers besides and there is no bike because of the non- used by service plan. This loss the school, so destination conforming vehicles, the post creates a wasteland pedestrian traffic accessed by Tracy intersection. It office, school events of asphalt and is unlikely to so bike traffic is probably enhances and minimally by concrete that 5 1 increase. 1 unlikely to increase. 1 safely. C X X 1 1 residents. East X 1 4 1 3 5 1 1 discoura es walkers - t , r - ,.', :. _ r .., _ ... - F 1, •.. r^ ,, a x... fir 1: v � . a , s,. 5 .. :.. ..- r �:. -,. ,. .., ,3 - a :. '_ �. : a - � ne side i9 erro h _ need one n � Weo need one W e need arldn -. no P 9, ... ., 't. ,.a. , .. � S m and rw. .:- r= '.:•. -�. tr ° DonY ohan e T - s °: ... _ .. 5 sltlewalk." . , .� .,. r•_. .... _. 1 .- .nN.. ._ sidewalk ,. ._ :. ,.. ,...,1,._ ,. .. _ bike lahea.., .- ,._ ,. ,_.. ... _ ._. _. -t. :.._, ._ _ :... ,... w._. .... _ -,. _ °. No Blke lanes,, ,, .r. .... r_ .,.. r, ,. ., .,t -_ .- _ .- _ >. .If fin v : .. s e ba art ,...' _ _. :. a ., _...,.:. ._ . • F :.: •- ,� -,.i 7�,.. -. .. ,:, _ _, -. .:._ X .. _,. < , ,.: E ,. .:,- ,,,� -.... r. a rz; :... a, ,,,: _-,. ... `a - _, X:'.. r . .. s. - Peed 9 -..,. ..,. ., ., aossvra9ra :, ,,. <. . .- .... ,,. _.,.5. -. - s .. -a ,•>-, .;,: -, - _ - rt; ,,' 9:y Avenue. - .. :. >Eestc ; �_. ...z, _ •ac. > . `.`.X 5.' ,. 4 ,1... '. Yes, Tracy Ave is very loud. I hope you do not put cement back 4 1 1 1 X down. X 1 1 East X 5 3 4 1 K 01 25(Mdtl \DocelOueetionrmWT,w Avenue OueaCOnrmire Tab be . ,m x/32012 2 of 4 Data Entered By: Dean Chamberlain Last Date Data Entered: 30 -Dec -11 Due Date: 4-Jan-11 Questionnaires Sent Out: 34 Questionnaires Returned: 32 Percent Returned: 94% Data Checked By/Date: Andrew Plowman Questionnaire #1 Tabulation K `D1686- 5 Mmnl O , Qu wwmi,NT q Avenue 0—fi m- TabJ.b.n..1- 2132012 3 W4 VII. Other Design I. Pedestrian Issues U. Bike Lane Issues Ill. Benton Trac V Intersection IV. Tana Management V. On rest Parking VI. Residential Street Lights Comments Condition Importance of Bike Lanes if Parking East Side Favor of Existing West Side On -Street Bike 25 MPH is Do you feel your neighborhood or Do you feel your neighborhood or roadway Importance Both or West Upgrading Preferred Styles - Like =S, Sidewalk Sidewalk Lanes osted roadwa has traffic issues has safe issues of Parkin - Sides Side Street Lights Dislike =l 5. Important - 5, Important - 5. Interested - 5, 5, Not 5, Not Adingto Unsatisfied Not Important Not Important Not Interested Important - Important East or n Shoebo 1 Comments 1 Comments 1 Comments 1 Comments Comments Quantify Yes If Yes, Explain No Yes If Yes, Explain No 1 Comments 1 Comments West Comments Yes No Acorn Lantern Coach x Comments Why aren't the remaining residents on Hawke's Drive and 11 this occurs I WE I empathize w/ Hawkes Terrace The hill from Benton need my 2 year old residents who sharing In Ore Avenue to Warden fence replaced, a live on the east assessment cost? Why?? Isn't one Avenue causes major tree removed side and have They all have to use sidewalk enough? vehicles to accelerate and sound proofing parked cars in Tracy Avenue to enter My elementary It's busy, especially and its difficult seeing added to teh east front of their and exit their sheets school age during school them approadung O you side of my house homes, but at unlike other streets daughter crosses I fad to see any opening/closing are crossing the street because cars will least they are that have more than Tracy Avenue significant bike Posting a 25 mph hours. A traffic light from Hawkes Drive to now be 00 feet from used to it one connection. This each day and usage that would speed limit won't here would make a lot the east side walk M my headboard. It's because its been lee should be shared walks to warrant creating a stop people from of sense and be safer the base of the hill Parking in front of my already difficult this way for a by them too. Bringing Countryside special bike lane. driving faster W for children walking could be re- graded due house occurs on sleeping w/ all the long time. They my cast to beard School just fine on Cares should take or wfo bike lanes. home. There is to visibility from both Hawkes Drive, not noise right outside also have down some. teh existing priority in having a Tracy is a major adequate school drivers and Tracy Avenue, so my bedroom. This driveways that Everyone on Hawkes sidewalk. We place to park versus street and people parking on Tracy pedesterians ward having Tracy Avenue will only increase it connect to Tracy, Drive and Terrace Ire choppy and walk our dog 8 bikes having a use it to drive fast venue at the spot improve, a potentially perking doesn't Whiter snowplows so they need uses Tracy Avenue — needs repair, but ride bikes on it special lane to ride to conned to 62 opposing the parking serious accident might change things for are the worst, then parking on their - everyone should 4 ifs not awful. 1 too. 1 in. 1 or Vernon. I let P X be prevented. 1 me. 1 firetrucks. East side of the street X 3 5 4 1 have to s speed will adversety affect Extreme Safer for the all of the congestion at the school bus emergency beginning and students at the vehicles and slow ending of school We don't want to bus stop across them in arriving to Needs better lighting, hours at lose any of our As it currently is, 5 5 from us. 1 1 help whomever. possibly a signal light. P X Countryside. 5 1 property. East is fine. X 5 5 1 1 1 Works ok as is. F X X 1 1 East I X Need stop lights at Tracy 8 Hwy 62 exit 4 1 1 1 X ram s! 5 1 East X 1 1 5 1 The speed on Tracy should be reduced; drivers seem to think it 5 1 5 5 Seems fine as is F X X is a 40 mph Eke Vernon. 1 1 East X 1 5 5 1 unclear whether it's a LOT going up & close to the curb - my 4-way or not. Going down Tracy. wife was almost hit west on Benton & Angry drivers getting mail from the 2 2 4 5 corssing to P X pass in the X mailbox. 2 1 East X 4 3 5 1 turning on Tracy from Vernon try to see how lase they can speed 3 1 1 5 Unsafe end confusing P X X down the hill. 3 1 East Too much traffic 4 1 1 4 J4-way stop is just fine. F X going too fast X 1 1 East X 5 5 5 1 ' VERY Very confusing & _ INTERESTED es NOT SAFE Drivers go way They also speed up drivers go too fast particularly when too fast right way too much after they Prefer one lane 8 on parts of Tracy school is opening 8 before light on turn onto Tracy from 5 1 3 NOT widenin street 5 right now, closing. P X -Vernon & Tracy. X Vernon. 1 1 East X 2 4 5 1 Velocity of cars coming Like location of through. We are at sidewalk; ok in bottom of hill in both We use occasionally. front of our house Don't need on Need parking, no If speed limit was directions &people are Nice to have 1 side Don't need on both, but bad south of both sides of widening. Bikers use slower that would It's a problem, what flying. Volume of traffic w/ parking but also would rather not 2 us. 1 street. 1 street anyway. 3 be nice. do you say. It's goofy. P X X also an issue. 3 use Warden. 1 widen street East X 1 5 1 1 K `D1686- 5 Mmnl O , Qu wwmi,NT q Avenue 0—fi m- TabJ.b.n..1- 2132012 3 W4 Data Entered By: Dean Chamberlain Last Date Data Entered: 30- Dec -11 Due Date: 4-Jan -11 Questionnaires Sent Out: 34 Questionnaire #1 Tabulation Questionnaires Returned: 32 Percent Returned: 94% Data Checked By /Date: Andrew Plowman x^016 250Mmin0oc.buee4o.WT.c Auntie nuemamvim T.bW nahm 2l 12 4W4 VII. Other Design I. Pedestrian Issues II. Bike Lane Issues Ill. Benton Trac y Intersection IV. Traffic Management V. On Street Parking VI. Residential Street Lights Comments Condition Importance of Bike Lanes if Parking East Side Favor of Existing West Side On- Street Bike 25 MPH is Do you feel your neighborhood or Do you feel your neighborhood or roadway Importance Both or West Upgrading Preferred Styles - Like =5, Sidewalk Sidewalk Lanes osted roadwa has traffic issues has safe issues of Parkin - Sides Side Street Lights Dislike =l 5, Important - 5, Important - 5, Interested - 5, 5, Not 5, Not Arlinglo Unsatisfied Not Important Not Important Not Interested Important- Important East or n Shoebo 1 Comments 1 Comments 1 Comments 1 Comments Comments Quantify Yes If Yes, Explain No Yes If Yes, Explain No 1 Comments 1 Comments West Comments Yes No A, Lantern Coach x Comments The cement street is very loud and hard to drive 4 1 1 2 1 2 X on. X 1 I / East I X 4 4 5 1 5 1 1 1 X X 1 1 East X 4 3 5 1 is speed. We have We are lucky of live two students who on a comer so we have to cross Tracy at Although there Speed on Tracy have options. There an unregulated point are a few cracks. Although the limit Is too fast. are those totally to reach their bus this is 2011 & we There is not enough may get lowered, If all parties proceed Installing a fronting Tracy (both stop. So far, we've need to choose bike traffic to warrant this does not with caution and couple of 4 -way east & west) who had no Issues. But it wisely between Totally opposed special lanes or mean that traffic respect, the existing stops (signs) need the addl East side only Is only has to happen 5 needs and wants. 1 as unneocessary. 1 widenin . 1 will slow. intersection is fine. C X would help. X 3 Darkino. 1 sufficient East As it is today. X once. Also we have We live on the Cars go too fast Speed of traffic and west side & have regardless of the pedestrian crossing - a long front yard - posted limit. church traffic will not if our neighbors People routinely Realignment of the stop to let people cross Raised panels with much less go 40+ especially intersection would be the street or drive out of Need to "define' our make it hard for space want it, we during rush hour, great - anything to their own driveways. street is part of a the plow. Good would not be going to school, promote safety for the Mowing and snow• East side parking neighborhood, not a 3 design, however. 1 OP005ed 1 1 and on Benton kids walkers etc. P X X blowina is den Brous 3 works arestl 1 East 5 5 hi hwa . 4 1 4 5 Realign P X X Speed 1 1 West X Returned 32 32 32 32 26 22 7 18 13 32 32 30 FAST 11 19 24 24 23 26 Score 133 43 53 73 8o 34 2 WEST 81 82 96 48 Avers a Score 4.16 1.34 1.66 2.28 2,50 1.08 3.38 3.42 4.17 1.85 Percent Answered 1 100% 1 1 100% 1 100% 1 100% 1 81% 76% 24% 58% 42% 100% 100% 37% 63% 75% 75% 72% 81% Returned 32 (F) FINE AS IS 6 SCORE FINE PERCENT 23% AVERAGE SCORE (P) PROBLEM 15 Returned PROBLEM 32 Response 100% PERCENT 58% 34 Surveys Sent Out 94% (C) CAUTIOUS 5 CAUTIOUS PERCENT 19% x^016 250Mmin0oc.buee4o.WT.c Auntie nuemamvim T.bW nahm 2l 12 4W4 A. o e �� FEASIBILITY STUDY - BA 368 r )o ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT °• CITY OF EDINA STREET IMPROVEMENTS Tracy Avenue — Benton Avenue to Vernon Avenue February 6, 2012 Appendix D Informational Meeting Letter, Presentation, and Sign In Sheet . WSB & associates. rnc. Engineering ■ Planning ■ Environmental Construction 701 Xenia Avenue South Suite 300 Minneapolis, MN 55416 Tel: 763 5414800 Fax: 763 541 -1700 December 7, 2011 Re: Informational Meeting #2 - Monday, December 19 at 7:00 p.m. Tracy Avenue Reconstruction Project Dear Resident: The City of Edina held an open house on November 28, 2011, explaining the typical street reconstruction process, as well as describing the existing conditions and design criteria for the proposed reconstruction of Tracy Avenue between Benton Avenue and Vernon Avenue. Following that meeting, a questionnaire was mailed to residents to obtain feedback on various components of the proposed project toIuse in the design process. If you have not yet returned your questionnaire,' please do so as soon as possible. Be sure to include your name and address on the questionnaires. If you_ have already submitted your questionnaire, but did not include your name or address, please call me at 763 - 287 -7149. Staff has incorporated the discussion from the November 28, meeting and the returned questionnaires to formulate a preliminary design of the roadway. The next step is to hold an informational meeting to review the preliminary project design and then discuss the next steps to move forward with the project. You are invited to attend an informational meeting on Monday, December 19, at 7:00 p.m. The meeting will be held at the Public Works and Park Maintenance Facility located at 7450 Metro Boulevard, Edina. A brief presentation will begin shortly after 7:00 p.m., followed by an informal discussion of the project to address any questions _or concerns you may have. City staff, from Edina, along with the city's consultant- - - -WSB .8K Associates,: Inc., will be available at the meeting. `- If you are unable to attend but would like more information on the project, please feel free to contact me at 763 -287 -7149. Sincerely, WSB & Associates, Andrew Plowman, PE Project Manager cc: City of Edina, Jack Sullivan, PE Minneapolis ■ St. Cloud Equal Opportunity Employer K:\ 01686- 260\Admin \Docs \Ouestlonna've \120711 Infomotional Meeting 2 Notice Tracy Avenue.docx - Neighborhood Informational Meeting No. 2 Tracy Avenue (Benton Avenue to Vernon Avenue) December 19, 2011 30 Project Location — Tracy Avenue) on GTY OF ..... Agenda 1. Introductions 2. Survey Results 3. Proposed Improvements 4. Costs /Assessments 5. Next steps 6. Questions :; CITY OF EDINA Questionnaire Results 62% Returned (21 of 34) • Pedestrian Issues • Existing Sidewalk Condition Unsatisfied Satisfied .! .AVG. _ .; 3 5 • West Side Sidewalk Not Important Important 1 AVG 1.48 S .1 QO CITY OF EDINA Questionnaire Results) Results Cont.' • Bike Lane Issues • Importance of On- Street Bike Lanes Not Important Important 1 AVG. = 1.52 5 • Bike Lane to Lower Posted Speed to 25 mph Not Important Important 1 AVG. = 1.90 5. Questionnaire Results DO CITY OF EDINA Results Cont.' • Traffic Management • 68% -- Traffic Congestion Issues -Most Comments were related to congestion at school • 55% -- Safety Issues -Most Comments were related to speed QOCITrOFEDINA Questionnaire Results Results Cont.' • Tracy /Benton Intersection • 18 of 21 commented • 56% -- Intersection is a Problem -Suggested Realignment or Other alternative • 22% -- Intersection is Fine • 22% -- Unusual Alignment Causes Driver Cautiousness 4 Safe Intersection, (Do 0o CITY OF EDINA Results Cont.' • On- Street Parking Questionnaire Results) NOT IMPORTANT IMPORTANT 1 AVG. = 2.67 5 • Parking Both Sides NOT IMPORTANT IMPORTANT 1 AVG. = 1.10 g •19 of 21 want Parking to Remain on East Side ➢2 Questionnaire Res OO CITY OF EDIPIA Results Cont.' • Upgrade Street Lights • 33% were in favor of upgrading Street Lights i p0 Proposed Street Improvements) OO CITY OF EDIPIA Proposed Street Components -Sidewalk and Boulevard • Maintain Existing Sidewalk and Boulevard 5' 5' IBw Vft1k 0o Proposed Street Improvements DO CITY OF fiDIP14 Existinq Street Section -Typical Section • Existing (36' Section) e 12 12 9 !i S Skid) TNU LAM TWu lane PaAmg BW walk I 36 Section 0o Proposed Street Improvem 00 CITY OF EDtTlA Proposed Street Components -Parking Lane • Based on Questionnaire Results 13' r s Padtlrq I BM Walk ➢3 Proposed Street Improvements :: CITY OF EDINA p p PropoS Plm ReA eMat Raul, %1l d • Bike L • Trac r r .3 Proposed Street Improvements Proposed Street Section -Typical Section Proposed Street Improvements 11: CITY OF EDINA p p Proposed Street Components • Thru Lanes • Reduce Lanes from 12' to 11' s 11' 11' r r r w j w W. ma. " rill.» Jw I iProposed Street Im rovementsl s CITY OF EDINA p p Tracy Avenue Layout ➢4 1 r Tracy Avenue Layout ➢4 Proposed Street Improvements Traffic Calming /Safety Enhancements • Parking Bumpouts Slows Speeds due to narrowing (constricting) roadway width • Improve driver visibility of pedestrians Shorter crossing for pedestrians Proposed Intersection) Improvements Tracy /Benton Intersection Roundabout Benefits • Elliptical Shape -Minimizes Impact to Residences • Allows Benton Legs to remain offset • Traffic Calming Safety -Pedestrians -Vehicles Capacity • More efficient than 4 - way stop due to continuous motion � jZ. Proposed Street Improvements Enhanced Crosswalks ■ Proposed Improvements) Storm Sewer Improvements • Upgrade pipes and catch basins to meet standards • Address local drainage issues identified in survey Sanitary Sewer • Manhole and pipe repairs • Currently evaluating system Watermain • Currently evaluating system .5 Grr OF EUu Costs /Assessments) . Street Improvement Costs Grlin❑ Rocirlantc • Total Estimated Street Reconstruction Costs = $880,000 • Assess 20% - $176,000 • Spread over 32 Residential Equivalent Units (REU's) = $5,500 per REU • Countryside Elementary has 4 REUs • Does not include the respective utility funds Next Steps Project Schedule Feasibility Report Complete ......... January 4, 2012 Public Hearing (tentative) .......... February 21, 2012 Approve Plans and Specifications....... April. 2012 Receive Bids ......... ...........................May, 2012 Award Contract ..... ..........................June, 2012 Begin Construction . ..........................June, 2012 Complete Construction .......................Fall, 2012 Assessment Hearing ..........................Fall, 2013 Costs /Assessments) Property Assessment Map ��• Project Contact Information http: / /www.ci.edina.mn.us /Departments /L5 _Construction Projects_TracyAvenue.htm -Andrew Plowman- WSB & Associates 763 - 287 -7149 or aplowman @wsbeng.com �'6 M, TRACY AVENUE PUBLIC OPEN HOUSE December 19, 2011 V NAME ADDRESS Do you have the following Y or N SUMP DRAIN PET FENCE Gd 4 N A 3 / ?1-7 L(l c lJ l/ ` 5 7 Z -7-k j-G JpW C� JAI 4 e;- z,l / s 1 J rzz Ci`' 7 I b y � h �%Z 1 ✓. 8 r 24 9( �. N/ 4W n `e, c A � N 12 5- v E 5--700 13 p c4ta lrf- _ SGa� l .CAC 14 4 ��d� �- r'1�1; IV 15 61hR15T1 NE 04alck4 SZO! Tva 16 't . n C+1 Ind 17 + J S fo-A C SCp V� S� I`I hl 1s .19 20 - - _21 - - 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 V r o e FEASIBILITY STUDY — BA 368 Hr ) CD o ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT °•.� CITY OF EDINA STREET IMPROVEMENTS Tracy Avenue — Benton Avenue to Vernon Avenue February 6, 2012 Appendix E Property Owner Questionnaire #2 o� e� M 0 City of Edina January 20, 2012 RE: Tracy Avenue (Benton Avenue to Vernon Avenue) - Resident Questionnaire Dear Resident; At the second informational meeting on December 19, 2011, the City brought forward a proposed design that showed the proposed cross section of the street and a roundabout at the intersection of Benton Avenue and Tracy Avenue (shown below). 5' 11' 11' Bike Thru Lane Thru Lane i West Side I .7t', 5' 8' 5' 5' Bike Parking Blvd Watk Proposed Tracy Avenue Cross Section East Side Proposed Roundabout at Tracy Avenue and Benton Avenue City Hall 952- 927 -8861 4801 WEST 50TH STREET FAX 952 -826 -0390 EDINA, MINNESOTA 5 5424 -1 394 www.cityofedina.com TTY 952- 826 -0379 Tracy Avenue (Benton Avenue to Vernon Avenue) Reconstruction — Resident Questionnaire #2 Page 2 of 2 Staff is suggesting this configuration based on verbal comments at the first informational meeting, the City's Comprehensive Plan, results from the previous questionnaire and State Aid standards and guidelines. The roadway configuration, in the cross section (on the previous page), increases the roadway width from 36' to 40' (measured to face to face of curb). The increased 4' width is all being constructed to the west side of the road due to available right of way. To help show how staff developed this concept, we have split the road characteristics into two categories; "Required" and "Optional ". The required items are characteristics that need to be implemented in the plan based on standards, or the City's Comprehensive Plan. The optional items are characteristics that are not required to be part of the plan but have support from the previous questionnaire. Required • Drive Lanes: I V driving lanes is the acceptable minimum. • Bike Lanes: MnDOT Bikeway Facility Design Manual recommends 5' on- street bike lanes, guidelines recommend 6' adjacent to parking lanes. Parking is not a required component of the roadway. • Staff will recommend bike lane on this project based on the Comprehensive Plan. • Sidewalk and Boulevard on the East Side: 5' sidewalk and 5' boulevard is the City standard. Most residents were happy with the condition of the existing sidewalk, therefore we anticipate spot repairs only and thus reducing the cost of the project. Optional • Parking Lanes: State Aid minimum for a roadway with the volume of traffic and speed on Tracy Avenue is 8'. • West Side Sidewalk: 5' concrete sidewalk and 5' boulevard. If the sidewalk on the west side is not built the staff is recommending enhanced crosswalks at selected locations. At the second informational meeting; we heard that many of you. might have answered-' th'e ' _. . questionnaire differently if you had a better understanding-how the roadway - components affected the overall design. Therefore, we are asking some additional questions to get updated results based on this proposed design. Please answer the questions on the enclosed questionnaire and return to WSB & Associates, Inc. with the enclosed stamped envelope by January 30, 2012. If you have additional questions or comments, feel free to contact me, Andrew Plowman, at 763 - 287 -7149 or email me at ar)lowman @wsbeng.com. Sincerely, Andrew Plowman WSB & Associates, Inc. Project Manager Enclosures: Questionnaire Self- Addressed Envelope o e cyst J 3� PROPERTY OWNERS QUESTIONNAIRE #2 January 20, 2012 Tracy Avenue (Benton Avenue to Vernon Avenue) • City of Edina Please do not answer these questions until you have read the entire newsletter. Please complete and return this survey by January 30, 2012, using the self- addressed, stamped envelope. West Side East Side 1. Roadway Do you agree the 40' roadway section: Bike Lane /Drive Lanes /Sidewalk /Parking /Sidewalk (as shown above), is the most appropriate design for this corridor (knowing the road will be widened by 4' on the west side)? ❑ Yes ❑ No II. Roadway Components Parkina How important are parking lanes on the east side of the street to you, knowing that the 4' of roadway width will be added to the west side of the current roadway to accommodate the parking? Not Important ❑ Important ❑ Cross Section If you could eliminate one component of the design (to limit the proposed width) what would it be? ❑ Bike Lanes ❑ Parking Lane (East Side) ❑ No Elimination - Leave section as shown above 11' 11' S' 8' E 5' ' :5' Bike Thru Lane E Thru Lane ia6 ! Bike #` Parking-[ i —� p:A' Blvd I Walk West Side East Side 1. Roadway Do you agree the 40' roadway section: Bike Lane /Drive Lanes /Sidewalk /Parking /Sidewalk (as shown above), is the most appropriate design for this corridor (knowing the road will be widened by 4' on the west side)? ❑ Yes ❑ No II. Roadway Components Parkina How important are parking lanes on the east side of the street to you, knowing that the 4' of roadway width will be added to the west side of the current roadway to accommodate the parking? Not Important ❑ Important ❑ Cross Section If you could eliminate one component of the design (to limit the proposed width) what would it be? ❑ Bike Lanes ❑ Parking Lane (East Side) ❑ No Elimination - Leave section as shown above PROPERTY OWNERS QUESTIONNAIRE #2 January 20, 2012 1 a ¢r Tracy Avenue (Benton Avenue to Vernon Avenue) • City of Edina Sidewalk How important is the addition of a sidewalk on the west side of the street knowing it will add 10' of width to the project? Not Important ❑ Important ❑ If a sidewalk is not proposed on the west side of the street do you feel placing "bumpouts" and enhanced crosswalks (as shown) is an appropriate alternative in creating a safer pedestrian environment? Yes ❑ Additional Comments: No ❑ - — M. Benton /Tracy Intersection A. Do you agree the proposed Roundabout is the correct solution to the Benton /Tracy offset intersection? lAi:l� ❑ Yes ❑ No 1. (9�\; PROPERTY OWNERS QUESTIONNAIRE #2 January 20, 2012 ALj L �J'�" Tracy Avenue (Benton Avenue to Vernon Avenue) • City of Edina B. If you answered no, please select which option you believe is most appropriate. ❑ Leave the intersection as it is ❑ Realign West Leg NO V 'y .- -- i--_�, Realigned West Leg of Benton Avenue ❑ Other: Explain:_ a � 'y .- -- i--_�, Realigned West Leg of Benton Avenue ❑ Other: Explain:_ A. e �'�, FEASIBILITY STUDY - BA 368 r �y ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT �•.:� CITY OF EDINA STREET IMPROVEMENTS Tracy Avenue — Benton Avenue to Vernon Avenue February 6, 2012 Appendix F Questionnaire #2 Results Data Entered By: Last Date Data Entered: Due Date: Questionnaires Sent Out: Questionnaires Returned: Percent Returned: Data Checked By /Date: Dean Chamberlain 2- Feb -12 30,1an -12 34 Questionnaire #2 25 Tracy Avenue Residents: Benton to Vernon 74% Andrew Plowman K:\ 01686- 250Wdmin\Docs \Questionnaire \Tracy Avenue Questionnaire Tabulation#1xlsm 2132012 1 of 2 I. Roadway Roadway Com onents BentonlTracy Intersection Do you Agree Proposed is the Most Importance of Maintaining Parking Appropriate? East Side If you could Eliminate One Cross Section Item? Importance of Adding west side Sidewalk Are "Bum outs" an enhancement? Is Roundabout Correct Solution? If No, Which Option Is Most Appropriate? Leave Realign Returned Not Bike Parking Section Not West Survey Yes No Comments Important Important Comments Lane Lane As Is Comments Im ortant Im ortant Comments Yes No Comments Yes No As Is Leg Other Comments Also eliminate blvd on east side; eliminate mailboxes and make it a walking route; have sidewalk at curb like on Benton Ave. Bike lanes would be better on quieter streets - even though Tracy is a direct route, the high volume of traffic makes bike X X X X riders a liability. X X X Y Y There is absolutely no cycling occurring on Tracy Ave that warrants this kind of design and expense. If actually witnessed cyclists I would nol With new, visible pedestrian crosswalks. This will vote otherwise, but this is an awful Bumpouts are not the stop traffic completely so children may safety cross waste of taxpayers moneyl I'd rather solution to an unsafe the street without the fear of constantly moving traffic X X X X put my $ into my children's education in Edina. I X X pedestrian envimment - enforced speed limit Isl I X X coming toward them and multiple cross points to contend with. No sidewalk on west side. The I have lived here for 51 years! It is fine as is - leaveit X X No bike lanes!! X Very X X one on the east What is a bum out? X X alone. Stop trying to jack up the rice! X X X X X X X X X X X X X Y Y Y X X X X X X X We agree with this proposal X X X X X X X X I do not understand the X X X X X diagram. X X x x x x x x x Why must property on we st -NuMn-g-a-r-ou—ndabout near an elementary school is Eliminate 4' of boulevard to side lose 4' when there is a 5' inviting disaster, especially since existing intersection X X X accomplish 40' roadway section X X boulevard which could be X X has been accident free. What are you thinking?? The current offset intersection forces drivers to be One half dozen bike commuters per aware, courteous, and respectful which inherently day, six months a year do not justify adds safety to this intersection which is necessary the added expense and heartache. near a school /playground. Installing a roundabout to There is no official bike lane on either increase N -S throughput endangers children who use Vernon (north end) or at the bridge the schoolgrounds after school, on weekends, and (south end). This would be a bike during summers when there would be no crossing lane for no reason. Striping the road guard. The focus of this intersection should be to create a shoulder should be plenty safety, not saving a couple minutes from someone's X X X X for a 30 mph zone. X X X commute. I do no wan o ose 4' off the front of my I do not want to lose 4' of my X X yard. X X X X front yard. X X A roundabout Is a waste of precious spaosl Either leaving it as is or realigning west leg are better X X X X X X X Y Y options than roundabout. K:\ 01686- 250Wdmin\Docs \Questionnaire \Tracy Avenue Questionnaire Tabulation#1xlsm 2132012 1 of 2 Data Entered By: Last Date Data Entered: Due Date: Questionnaires Sent Out: Questionnaires Returned: Percent Returned: Data Checked By /Date: Dean Chamberlain 2- Feb -12 30-Jan-12 25 74% Andrew Plowman Questionnaire #2 Tracy Avenue Residents: Benton to Vernon K:\ 01686- 250\Admin\Docs \Ouesdonnaim \Tracy Avenue Ouestionnaire Tabulabon#2.xlsm 2/32012 2 o12 I. Roadway Roadway Com onents Benton[Tracy Intersection Do you Agree Proposed is the Most Importance of Maintaining Parking Appropriate? East Side If you could Eliminate One Cross Section Item? Importance of Adding west side Sidewalk Are "Bum outs" an enhancement? Is Roundabout Correct Solution? If No, Which Option Is Most Appropriate? Leave Realign Returned Not Bike Parking Section Not West Surve Yes No Comments Im ortant Im ortant Comments Lane Lane As Is Comments Important Im ortant Comments Yes No Comments Yes Ne As Is Leg Other Comments No accidents or problems with e Intersection for past 38 years. Keep stop signs for safety. X X X X X X X X The Intersection of Tracy and Benton cannot be An enhanced crosswalk would still be a good idea. X X X X X X See the arrows drawn on X X X Y Y Answered "Ma be" X X 0 box selected or s roundabout correct sou on option, but resident selected "Realign West Leg" X X X X X X X option, s it is assumed the resident would select F X X X X X X Love this ideal X X X X X X X X X e ve one some s u o e roun a ou an think it is a good solution. We also strongly think the X X X X X X X bike lanes are Im ortant. We think eo le will use e X X X X X X X X Why do bike lanes have to be 5'? Could they be 4'? Do we need a boulevard? Grass What about putting in a stoplight? Why are we not does not grow well discussing street lights for a more neighborhood X X there. X X X X Y Y Y feel? X X X X X X X 1151 leave road Not necessary - have there width as it is been any pedestrian X X X currently X X X accidents? X X X X X X X X X 25 Returned 6.5 17.5 11 14 13 8 3 3 21 12 9 7 17 7 10 Percent 27% 73% 44% 56% 54% 33% 1 13% 13% 88% 57% 43% 29% 71% 41% 59% Total Answered 24 25 24 24 21 24 Percent of Returned 96% 100% 96% 1 1 96% 84% 1 96 K:\ 01686- 250\Admin\Docs \Ouesdonnaim \Tracy Avenue Ouestionnaire Tabulabon#2.xlsm 2/32012 2 o12 Data Entered By: Last Date Data Entered: Due Date: Questionnaires Sent Out: Questionnaires Returned: Percent Returned: Data Checked By /Date: Dean Chamberlain 2- Feb -12 30Jan -12 38 19 50% Andrew Plowman Questionnaire #2 Tracy Avenue Residents (TH 62 to Benton) K: \01686- 250\Admin \Dots \Questionnaire \Tracy Avenue Questionnaire Tabulation#2.xlsm 2/32012 1 of 2 I. Roadway Road Components Benton/Tracy Intersection Do you Agree Proposed is the Most Importance of Maintaining Parking Appropriate? East Side If you could Eliminate One Cross Section Item? Im ortance of Adding west side Sidewalk Are "Bum outs" an enhancement? Is Roundabout Correct Solution? If No, Which Option Is Most Appropriate? Leave Realign Returned Not Bike Parking Section Not West Survey Yes No Comments Important Im ortant Comments Lane Lane As Is Comments Important Im ortant Comments Yes No Comments Yes No As Is Leg Other Comments X X X X X X X No sidewalk & no bumpouts The proposed roundabout may speed traffic flow ut pedestrian safety will be on the west; the existing comprim!sed - especially when school is starting and ending. The sidewalk on the east handles roundabout as proposed cuts Into the property on the NW comer of Benton the fool traffic well. The & Tracy & will create new traffic problems for drivers coming out of W. ' bumpouts" are a wasted Benton - particularly the comer house. Most bike lanes in Edina are not expense. 'Enhanced" marked nor are they 5 It wide. Make the Tracy bike lanes 4 ft. Take 2' from crosswalks (N not raised) may the lawns on the west and 2' from the lawns on the east (making the east Parking on Tracy help to make it dear where blvd T which Is fine for growing grass when there is a bike lane beside ft). X X X not needed. X X Unneeded X crossing is safest. X X Eliminate the parking & the bum outs. Pedestrian safety would be improved by straightening Benton. This [realign west leg option] is the safest for all of the pedestrian traffic - most importantly the children!!! This option will also best maintain the existing X X X X X X X X environment/setting for the neighborhood. Thanks! X X X X X X X X X X X X X X We are hoping we will not be assessed for this. X X X X X X X X X X X X X X Widening the road will encourage higher speeds and more traffic on Tracy Ave. My mailbox is hit by a car every winter. Cars have skidded onto my lawn every winter. It is very difficult to get out of my driveway between 7:15 to Traffic speeds and volume of traffic is unbearable the way it is now. Making 9:15 am everyday as It Is any of these proposed changes will cause long -lean hardship to the X X X X X X now. X X property owners along Tracy Ave. There is a I think that there is not a need sidewalk there for parking on the east side of already on the Tracy currently. There is I think that straightening out Benton on the west side to match the east side west side in front already parking on the west of Benton would make it less confusing to drivers at the 4 -way stop and for X X X X X side of the school X side. X X the walkers at school time. X X X X X X X X ommunlca on In the summertike clubs Dikes at s time) use Tracy Ave. That Adult bike lanes on cables are number going through a roundabout would be a [unreadable - 2 words]. X X X X Olinger Rd beneath where X X X Ground water could do great damage. Water rushing down Tracy along Not sure what 'bumpouts" are - enhancinglimproving 1 have lived at my address since 1975, and I have never thought that the X X X X X X crosswalks Is a flood Idea. X X Intersection was a problem for pedestrians or — hides. K: \01686- 250\Admin \Dots \Questionnaire \Tracy Avenue Questionnaire Tabulation#2.xlsm 2/32012 1 of 2 Data Entered By: Last Date Data Entered: Due Date: Questionnaires Sent Out: Questionnaires Returned: Percent Returned: Data Checked By /Date: Dean Chamberlain 2 -Feb -12 30-Jan-12 38 19 50% Andrew Plowman Questionnaire #2 Tracy Avenue Residents (TH 62 to Benton) K'.\ 01686- 250\Admin \DocsQuestionnaire \Tracy Avenue Questionnaire Tabu1ation #2.s1sm 21312012 2 of 2 I. Roadway Road Components Benton/Tracy Intersection Do you Agree Proposed is the Most Appropriate? Importance of Maintaining Parking East Side If you could Eliminate One Cross Section Item? Importance of Adding west side Sidewalk Are "Bum outs" an enhancement? Is Roundabout Correct Solution? Returned Survey Yes No Comments I Important Not Im ortant Comments Bike Lane Parking Lane Leave Section As Is Comments Important Not Important Comments Yes No Comments Yes No If No, Which Option Is Most Appropriate? Comments As Is Realign West Leg Other X X X X X I don't understand the illustration X X X X X X X X X X X X ere Is a rea y nice sidewalk on the east side! X X X It will be a nightmare to control traffic when children are resent! X X X X X X X X X X X X X pee —is-a-gi—gproolem. most people go 40 mph on Tracy. Hard to get out and in to X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X 19 Returned 7 11 6 13 5 9 5 2 16 12 6 10 9 4 4 Percent 39% 61% 32% 68% 26% 47% 26% 11% 89% 67% 33% 53% 47% 50% 50% Total Answered 18 19 19 16 18 19 Percent fReturned 95% 100% 100% 95% 95% 100% K'.\ 01686- 250\Admin \DocsQuestionnaire \Tracy Avenue Questionnaire Tabu1ation #2.s1sm 21312012 2 of 2 Data Entered By: Last Date Data Entered: Due Date: Questionnaires Sent Out: Questionnaires Returned: Percent Retumed: Data Checked By/Date: Dean Chamberlain 2-Feb-12 18 Andrew Plowman Questionnaire #2 Non -Tracy Avenue Residents K'.`01696250Wtlmin\Do,s%Q Mi,, jm%Trary Avenue 0u91on Ira TabulalionnA,m 216/2012 2012 1. Roadway Roadway Components Benton/Tracy Intersection Do you Agree Proposed is the Most App ro riate? Importance of Maintaining Parking East Side If you could Eliminate One Cross Section Item? Im ortance of Adding west side Sidewalk Are "Bum outs" an enhancement? Is Roundabout Correct Solution? Retume d Survey Yes No Comments 1 Important Not Important Comments Bike Lane Parking Lane Leave Section As Is Comments Important Not Important Comments Yes No Comments Yes No If No, Which Option Is Most Appropriate? Comments As Is Realign West Leg Other x x x x x I x x x x x x x X x x I I Making the bicycle lanes W would only improvement can think of. The bicycle lanes ere important for this north south route. Thank you for your considerations. 18 Returned 6 12 6 12 7.6 8 2.6 7 11 10 6 2 16 6.6 10.6 Percent 33% 67% 29% 71% 42% 44% 14% 39% 61% 63% 38% 11% 89% Total Answered 18 17 18 18 16 13 Percent of Returned 100% 94% 100% 100% i 9% 10)% K'.`01696250Wtlmin\Do,s%Q Mi,, jm%Trary Avenue 0u91on Ira TabulalionnA,m 216/2012 2012 A. o e �0 FEASIBILITY STUDY — BA 368 )� ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT °•=� CITY OF EDINA STREET IMPROVEMENTS Tracy Avenue — Benton Avenue to Vernon Avenue February 6, 2012 Appendix G Project Comments and Letters Received L COMMENT 'D • 1 �� tl'11 • tai! fr � , IS i I I i r 91KE LAAIE5,,,, r4a eme A". I � A . - 7cc, a 72 GQ, p� �S Ca Qomes 4c � c � PI'S n s w , se an4 cam' � `OS Z. p ,�lk -� %12:�t?As& �We . G'7ile a !'lam sku ",S- ./I Andrew Plowman From: Judith Rodgers <jbr62 @ earthlink. net> Sent: Wednesday, January 25, 201212:19 PM To: edinamail @ci.edina.mn.us; jsullivan @ci.edina.mn.us; Andrew Plowman Subject: ROUNDABOUT AND BIKE LANE INFORMATION From: Bill Rodgers [malito:jbr62 @earthlink.net] Attached is some additional information, from another resident, relating to the Tracy Avenue rehabilitation Project. Please pass this e-mail on to the City Council. Does the City Manager get these a -Mails also? Thanks, Bill Rodgers Begin forwarded message: From: Greg Rustad <GRustad @schadegg- mech.com> Date: January 25, 2012 11:17:33 AM CST To: "4br62 @ earthlink.net" <ibr62 @ earthlink.net> Subject: ROUNDABOUT AND BIKE LANES I agree wholeheartedly that although the current intersection is a bit unusual, it does force drivers to proceed with additional caution and respect, which is inherently a good thing for an Intersection near a school/playground. Also, keep in mind that if a roundabout is installed, there would not be a crossing guard in the evenings, on weekends, and over the summer months, when neighborhood kids use the playground, sledding hill, etc. One other thing... Regarding the proposed bike lanes, it seems a bit odd to me that they would install bike lanes from the bridge over 62 to Vernon. Neither the roadway south of the bridge, the bridge itself, or Vernon have bike lanes. Vernon does have a striped shoulder which varies in width as you travel east towards Jerry's. But there is no official markings indicating this roadway to be a bike lane. Therefore, my point is they want to build a bike lane which does not connect to any other bike lanes for a very few bike commuters for 6. . . months of the year. As I said in the second meeting, it seems like a lot of heartache to satisfy these very limiting conditions. Why not simply "stripe" the side of the road to create an official shoulder which could be used by the serious bikers. Greg Rustad Project Manager <image002 ;jpg> P: 651 - 292 -9933 C: 651 -248 -7061 www.schadegg1mech.com Andrew Plowman From: frabonimn@earthlink.net Sent: Wednesday, January 25, 2012 1:15 PM To: Andrew Plowman Subject: Tracy/Benton Intersection Andrew, While I do not live on Tracy, I do drive thru the Benton intersection one or more times per day. While I would usually like the idea of a roundabout to ease traffic flow, its use on this intersection creates too many issues with adjacent properties and school safety crossings. I vote to leave it as is since there are no known accidents at this point. Thanks for allowing our input on this project. Ron Fraboni 5505 Grove St. Edina frabonimn@earthfink.net EarthLink Revolves Around You. Andrew Plowman From: Molly Urbanski <urbys@comcast.net> Sent: Friday, January 27, 2012 11:59 AM To: Andrew Plowman Subject: RE: Tracy Avenue construction project Thank you for getting back to me in regard to my questions. I will take them in to consideration. Molly Urbanski From: Andrew Plowman [mailto:APlowman @wsbeng.com] Sent: Thursday, January 26, 2012 10:51 PM To: Molly Urbanski Subject: RE: Tracy Avenue construction project Ms. Urbanski, Thank you for your time and your well written questions regarding the Tracy Avenue project. I will answer these questions and when applicable refer to an attachment or links that I have added. i 1) Yes, buses can navigate the roundabout and was actually one of the'reasons a roundabout was considered at this location. (See attachment). I have been present many times in the past couple of months when the buses come and in and depart for the day. Based on those visits I have seen the chaos that ensued. Basically, creating a situation where the ability for a bus to make the tight turns (especially when vehicles are present is virtually impossible) causing them to make the turn to Grove and subsequently to Stuart. In our meetings with the Countryside Elementary school we invited the head of the bus operations, he (and the rest of the folks from the school) were pleased at the ability the buses would have to enter the school with the roundabout and how It would improve the operations. We also presented a power point presentation to the Site Council at the school that shows video of the cumbersome operations, I would attach that file but I know it is way too large. If you would like I could get you a flash drive with the video on it? 2) I think #1 answers most of the questions related to this. But, you also asked about the children. I have been getting a lot of feedback related to the fact that people have the misconception a roundabout is not safe for pedestrians. There is a lot of information on the Internet about the safety of roundabouts at schools. httg: / /www. modestogov.com /pwd/ transportation /streets /roundabouts /videos.aso This link shows operations of a roundabout near a school. =. http://www.walkinainfo.orci/peds6fe/`Osestu.dy.cfm,,.?C.-S NUM =49 - " � • _ � ` ° "y "s` = _ -• This link is a case study discussing "the'skepticism ofz4ouiidabout -near a middle schdbl'and elementary school that turned out as a success. http: / /www.ci. edina. mn. us / Departments /L5_ConstructionProiects TracvAvenue.htm This link is to the Tracy Avenue Construction project and has a paper downloaded to it related to roundabout myths. Specifically look at Myth #5 starting on page 9. We intend the pedestrian operations to work just as they do today. When I get you the power point presentation, it presents the reasons why roundabouts are safer for pedestrians. 3) I believe the roundabout solves the issue of why some drivers feel they have to turn down Grove. To reiterate, the turning movements become very difficult from the east leg of Benton to the west leg of Benton. 4) The lack of available parking is more of a school operations Issue. Although we are proposing to maintain the parking on Tracy, I don't know if this is going to have much of an Impact on folks still parking on the side streets during functions. The roundabout will neither hurt or help that issue, other than improve the operations for people to get to or leave the function more efficiently. 5) The issue of the buses I believe will be solved, for the most part. They no longer are forced into using Grove to Stuart. At least as it relates to negotiating the intersection at Tracy and Benton. Again, thank you for your questions and I hope I did an adequate job at answering them. Your questions were clear, concise and valid and go to the core of one of the reasons we are considering a roundabout at this intersection. Again, let me know if you would like a copy of the Countryside presentation. I anticipate we will try to upload this to the website soon as well. Thank you, Andy Andrew Plowman, PE Transportation Project Manager d: 763 - 287 -7149 j c: 612 - 360 -1311 WSB & Associates, Inc. 1701 Xenia Avenue South, Suite 300 1 Minneapolis, MN 55416 At Elgli.tic.Or� - Plarnmg "WAS CtAlti ilcour, This email, and any flies transmitted with It, Is contldentlal and is Intended solely for the use of the addressee. If you are not the addressee, please delete this email from your system. Any use of this email by unintended recipients Is strictly prohibited. WSB & Associates, Inc does not accept /lablAly for any errors or omissions which arise as a result of electronic transmission. if vedficatlon'is required, please request a hand copy. I From: Molly Urbanski [urbys @comcast.net] Sent: Thursday, January 26, 2012 9:38 PM To: Andrew Plowman; isullivan@ci.edina.mn.us Subject: Tracy Avenue construction project am writing in regard to the Tracy Avenue construction project. I apologize for coming late to the party but was not informed of this project due to not residing on Tracy itself. I live at 5800 Stuart Avenue which is approximately one block in from Tracy via Grove Street. I have taken the time to review the different presentations and surveys in regard to this project. In all of the information I have looked at I did not find any mention in regard to the bus traffic to and from Countryside Elementary School as well as busses to and from the middle school and high school. I have several concerns in regard to this — 1.) Is it possible for buses to navigate the round about that is being proposed? If not what route would the buses be instructed to take to get in and out of Countryside or in and out of the neighborhood? 2.) If the buses are to be re- routed through the surrounding neighborhoods how will the City determine what these routes would be? Also, children in the neighborhood walk to and from school — how would they be guaranteed a safe route? 3.) As it stands now, although Benton is a far wider street, buses choose to use cut down the far narrower streets of Grove to Stuart to access Countryside School. 4.) When there are school functions or several class functions in a day, there is not enough parking available in the school lot so parking overflows onto both sides of Stuart Avenue. It is near impossible for a car or a bus to maneuver down the middle of the street. I could not imagine what would happen if there was an emergency and medical vehicles had to attempt to get through as well. 5.) There is also the extreme degeneration of Stuart Avenue's road material due to the excessive weight of the buses on the road that Is not rated to handle such weights. It is especially destructive to the outer edges by the curbs. I am concerned that this Issue has not been addressed in regard to the construction project. I realize that surveys have been sent out for neighborhood input and meetings have been held but before a decision In regard to this project is set in stone I would like to know that all aspects of this project be looked at. I look forward to your response. Thank you for your time, Molly Urbanski 5800 Stuart Avenue Edina, MN 55436 612 - 310 -4075 3 61 Andrew Plowman From: Tom Kluis <tomkluis ®gmail.com> Sent: Friday, January 27, 201212:09 PM To: Judith Rodgers; Lynette Biunno Cc: barbarahoganson; whoulefti.edina.mmus; Andrew Plowman Subject: In support of bike lanes on Tracy Bill, Lynette - I am a resident of Countryside neighborhood and strongly support the proposed bike lanes on Tracy. My family likes to bicycle in the neighborhood but if we want to go North /South, Tracy is the only viable route. We are forced to ride on the sidewalk on Tracy rather than the street due to the speed of cars, and lack of visibility in key stretches. The sidewalk is safer than the street, but still quite dangerous to other pedestrians, dog walkers, and cars coming out of driveways. Dave Henry in a prior email also has similar conclusions about bike safety on Tracy. Further, there aren't many good alternate routes for North /South travel if one wants to go from Garden Park to Countryside Park on bike, or to use the playground at Countryside Elementary. I would much rather have dedicated bike lanes on Tracy Ave than ride on the dangerous sidewalk or even more dangerous uncontrolled street. I believe more families would bike in our part of the city if the available routes were safer. Thanks Tom Kluis 5824 Lyle Cir Edina, MN Andrew Plowman From: Tom Kluis <tomkluis ®gmail.com> - Sent: Saturday, January 28, 2012 4:11 PM To: Andrew Plowman Subject: Fwd: Edina ResidentBiker's Opinion Whether Tracy Ave Needs Bike Trails Andrew - Here is the letter from Mr. Henry I referred to: On Wed, Jan 25, 2012 at 9:19 PM, Barbara Hoganson <barbarahoganson @comcast.net> wrote: Please find an Edina resident and avid biker's email to City Hall regarding his opinion on whether Tracy Avenue needs bike lanes, and some alternatives. January 24, 2012 Jack Sullivan Andrew Plowman Wayne Houle City Hall 480I WEST 50TH STREET EDINA, MINNESOTA 55424 -1394 I am a resident of Edina and commute daily (year- round) to downtown Minneapolis on my bicycle. I believe existing road right -of -ways in Edina offer a great opportunity to encourage safe, convenient commutes for bicyclists with minimal additional investment by the City and no additional taking of land for right of way. Existing streets already connect our communities homes, schools, stores, places of employment, parks and other amenities. Existing streets are already illuminated after dark and have traffic control pavement markings, signs and signals. Existing streets are already patrolled, maintained and plowed. Existing streets are where Edina's homeowners expect to find vehicles, bikes and on the side of the right of way, pedestrians. New off road trails do not offer any of this and are extremely expensive to build and in our community don't make the connections the majority are seeking. (However if the rail line abandons or sells the north/south Dan Patch corridor, a new bike trail would be much easier on the environment and community, in addition to allowing some really useful and convenient connections.) I have attached an aerial outlining a particular road segment that is currently very unsafe for travel (cars or bikes) with an idea on how this area could be made much more safe for all. This segment is a small portion of my daily commute. On the aerial the `Bike Kill Zone" is indicated on Tracy Avenue between Olinger Blvd to just north of Highland Road. This Kill Zone is hazardous for a number of reasons you are already aware of: 1. Extreme curvature of the Tracy Avenue right -of -way limiting lines of sight and requiring aggressive steering maneuvers. 2. Three "T" intersections in the arc of the curve in the right of way. 3. High Speed for a residential area between two parks and next to a school (30 MPH) 4. High Traffic volume (numerous studies show increases of traffic through Edina's neighborhoods when traffic slows on Hwys 169, 62 and 100) 5. Future additional unmitigated traffic volume (The City's collaboration with the Shelter's Assisted Living Development adding 425 vehicles per day to the immediate neighborhood without any traffic mitigation or improvements being installed at the Developer's expense). 6. Routine speeding on City Streets. (You don't need to be a cop to know that most vehicles on Tracy Avenue exceed the posted 30 MPH limit, especially south of Hwy 62) With a parking lane allocated to the roadway on the east side of the street (northbound travel for vehicles and bikes) there is plenty of room for vehicles to pass bikes. The bikes are moving slowly do to the slight uphill grade in this area. During the past four years I have only observed one car parked, one day in this entire area on the east (northbound) side of Tracy Avenue during the am and pm commute. However the issue is very different on the west side (southbound) lane of traffic on Tracy Avenue. On this side of the street there is No Parking and with the curb, no shoulder. The painted double yellow centerline of the street is very close to the curb, resulting in a very narrow traffic lane. In the `Bike Kill Zone ", given the distance from the raised 6" curb to the double yellow centerline, there is not enough room for a bike to be legally overtaken by a car (with the bike a safe distance from the curb — out of the snow and/or gravel next to the curb AND the car passing the bike with the State required 36" minimum clearance (NM Statue 169.18 Subd. 3. (3)). As a result, southbound cars routinely pass bikes by drifting across the double yellow centerline, into the northbound lane of traffic. Given the curves in the road, limited sight lines, intersecting streets this illegal driving is extremely dangerous for oncoming traffic, bike riders and scofflaws themselves. I spend only about a total of 4.5 minutes a week in the Kill Zone heading southbound, but at least twice a week I am passed by a vehicle being operated in this very dangerous and illegal manner. - A couple of years ago I mentioned this issue to Wayne and as a result the City tried to paint the double yellow centerline in a manner that increased the width of the southbound lane. It helps, but with the southbound direction of travel dropping downhill, bikes are able to get very close to the speed limit (30 MPH) in this area resulting in the impatient, reckless drivers now adding an aggressive speeding violation to their illegal pass, exacerbating the danger to all. Low Cost Solutions: 1. Make no lane changes. Simply add four evenly spaced "DO NOT PASS BICYCLES ZONE" signs along the west (southbound) lane in the `Bike Kill Zone ". Speed Limit 25 MPH in the `Bike Kill Zone ". 2. Eliminate the never used parking lane on the east (northbound) side of the street and paint the double yellow centerline exactly halfway between the 6" raised curbs. Speed Limit 25 MPH in the "Bike Kill Zone ". The remaining segments of Tracy Avenue offer much better sight lines and wider traffic lanes. With the exception of the deteriorated road surface, biking is relatively easy. Speeding & inattentive drivers are the greatest threat to bikes, as they are anywhere else. Please feel free to contact me with any questions. Sincerely, Dave Henry Edina, MN Andrew Plowman From: Janet Conn <janetconn @ comcast. net> Sent: Monday, January 30, 2012 3:49 PM To: Andrew Plowman Cc: slamenck @comcast.net; 'Becky Frederick'; 'Caroline Carlin'; 'Cyndi Forsberg; 'David Lynch'; 'Jane Kise; 'Jo Mundy; 'Julie Madison; 'Kelly & Steve Housh'; 'Leann Montgomery; Lisa Bale; 'Lonnie Larson; 'Paula Glieden; 'Rani Zappa; 'Riley Powell'; 'Skip Powell'; Stacey Hughes; 'Stacy Wood; Sujata Gholkar; 'Vicki Lettow' Subject: Tracy /Benton Redesign I live on Oak Lane and thus regularly drive through the intersection of Tracy and Benton from one direction or another. I have seen the proposal for a roundabout at that intersection, and spoken with one of the residents most immediately affected by the plan. I do not think that Tracy needs a roundabout or indeed any reconfiguration along its length. The current width of the street accommodates automobile traffic, bicycles and parking very well. Painting in bike lanes would actually reduce the flexibility that allows cars and bikes to co -exist so comfortably. As to the roundabout, it seems to be a solution in search of a problem. Yes, sometimes cars coming in from different angles have to maneuver around each other, but there appears to be no history of accidents. And school buses may get backed up when it is time to drop off or pick up, but this is for a brief period a couple of times a day, when school is in session. This certainly doesn't warrant the creation of a costly roundabout that would make life harder for people living on the intersection. Cost is another reason not to proceed with this plan. Asking people on Tracy to pay over $5000 for "improvements" they neither want nor need would be very unfair. Thank you for respecting the wishes of the neighborhood. Janet Conn 5804 Oak Lane Edna 952 - 929 -1955 Andrew Plowman From: bert@finsand.com Sent: Monday, January 30, 2012 8:39 PM To: Andrew Plowman Subject: Re[2]: Re[2]: Re[2]: Tracy questionaire Thanks Andy, Good and vigorous debate. Have a great evening! Bert - - -- Original Message -- -- From: Andrew Plowman <APlowman@wsbeng.com> To: "bert@finsand.com" <bert@finsand.com> Sent: Mon, Jan 30, 2012, 8:25 pm Subject: RE: Re[2]: Re[2]: Tracy questionaire Thank you again for your comments. I just wanted to comment on a couple of additional items related to your email. I believe as engineers we do need to keep up with the education at roundabouts. For some reason, the older driving public has a lot of problems with new features. I believe in 20 years they will be so common place that they will be treated just as signals. I have heard many horror stories like you shared about the elderly lady. I have also seen similar Incidents in my time designing and analyzing roundabouts. I have also seen the benefits as well, and have heard the feedback after they were placed about how well they work. It is true, there doesn't appear to be a history of accidents at this Intersection. That is according to the City records, we are also checking with the State to be certain. Many people do feel the confusing nature of the intersection causes people to be more conscious of their actions. I think that is great and is valid, but I also know that often offset Intersections do create safety issues and that is the= reason,they aren't proposed and =fsced by-engineers when.given.the --� opportunity. Few people disagree that the intersection is cumbersome and not.efflcidnt dudngschooi start'and.endl6g( times. The other issue Is the difficulty the buses have negotiating' the turns from east Benton to west Benton when there are vehicles everywhere. Some buses are forced to use Grove Street. One other items that should be mentioned is the funding for the roundabout. We do not plan on assessing for the roundabout, but instead plan on using State Aid funds. Residents would only be assessed on the equivalent intersection cost. Meaning, if we put back exactly what was there, what would they pay? The difference would be covered 100% by State Aid. If you are not familiar, State Aid funds are from the gas tax. In which case you, me, my mom and everybody who drives are paying for that. Again thank you for having this discussion and listening to my viewpoints as well. Have a good day. Andy Andrew Plowman, PE Transportation Project Manager d: 763 -287 -7149 1 c: 612 - 360 -1311 WSB & Associates, Inc. 1 701 Xenia Avenue South, Suite 300 1 Minneapolis, MN 55416 0 This email. and any files transmitted with B, Is confidential and is intended solely for the use of the addressee. ff you are not the addressee. please delete this email from your system. Any use of this small by unintended recipients is strictly prohibited. WSB & Associates. Inc. does not accept liability for any errors or omissions which arise as a result of electronic transmission. If verification Is required, please request a hard copy. From: Wert@finsand.com [bert@finsand.com]� Sent: Monday, January 30, 2012 8:00 PM To: Andrew Plowman Subject: Re[2]: Re[2]: Tracy questionaire Completly agree with your comments; 100 %. The issue is the speed limit isn't 25mph and your drivers aren't a 23 yr. old female and a 73 yr. old male in these two cities. I think the ones at Cornelia and between Target and Pittsburgh Blue work well. The ones that are only three way are only traffic slow mechanisms. Not that this is bad but I think many "speed bump" devices don't work so good or tear the bottom out of your car at even 5mph like at the high school. I agree with the traffic flow concept in even a 50% perfect world. Wait until you are behind a car that stops instead of yields; I'm certain you've been there or seen this. It's a driving nightmare. The other day we were backed up for as far as we could see on 66th by the airpoort in Richfield. When we finally got to the roundabout the older lady was still sitting there waiting for her turn. It was very sad for her but when introducing a new traffic pattern this type of situation can, and will occur. Just a thought. I did read that the Benton intersection has not had an accident in decades. Not sure if that is correct. I do dislike it. it does howefer, keep the driver at full alert. Right now though it's really not worth the money. If this was on our block you'd be kicking us out of our home as we just wouldn't be able to come up with the money. Voted for the last referendum; wishing I hadn't. I know the engineers really like this design but it's likely they don't live there. I was an architect by education; not anymore as I didn't listen to my customer. Just some thoughts. Again, I really appreciate that you are requesting feedback. Even though we disagree on this topic I really do like that you are reading and listening to this information. Thanks too for your response! Sorry if this is a little disjointed; trying to cook dinner at the same time! :) Bert - - -- Original Message - - -- From: Andrew Plowman <APlowman@wsbeng.com> To: "bert@finsand.com" <bert@finsand.com> Sent: Mon, Jan 30, 2012, 7:27 pm Subject: RE: Re[2]: Tracy questionaire Thank you for providing that information and feedback. Roundabouts are definitely a polarizing topic amongst many. I disagree with you completely, as the track record is there supporting how they provide safety benefits, relieve traffic congestion and calm traffic speeds (to name a few of the benefits). Many residents indicated the intersection was confusing and a problem. Viewing the intersection in operation when school adjourns, those indications were confirmed. That is why we considered the alternatives we did. Many of the intersections in Paris and the New England area -are rotaries or traffic circles and are actually quite different from modern roundabouts, which is the traffic control being proposed at Tracy and Benton. For instance, the Arc de Triomphe is a traffic circle and operates much differently than the United States modern roundabout. Many of the old rotaries or traffic circles in New England are being retrofitted to modern roundabouts. You are not alone in your skepticism. We do appreciate the feedback and it will be added to the feasibility report. Thank you, Andy Andrew Plowman, PE Transportation Project Manager d: 763 - 287 -7149 1 c: 612 - 360 -1311 WSB & Associates, Inc. 1701 Xenia Avenue South, Suite 300 1 Minneapolis, MN 55416 This email, and any Cries transmitted with it, is confidential and is intended solely for the use of the addressee. If you are not the addressee, please delete this email from your system. Any use of this email by unintended recipients is strictly prohibited. WSB & Associates. Inc. does not accept liability for any errors or omissions which arise as a result of electronic transmission. If verillcation Is required, please request a hard copy. .. .From: bert@fjnsand.com,[bert @finsand.com] _ �.��__�r -��-� _ _� - ..� -�� .. . -• Sept. Monday, January_30, 2012 6 :58 -PM ' To: Andrew Plowman: _... Subject: Re[2]: Tracy questionaire Yes! Bert Finsand, 6404 Limerick Drive, Edina, MN 55439. I drive this route on average three to four times a day. Frankly, I think the roundabout is a terrible choice; that is unless you want drivers to avoid this street. Driving on 70th is kind of a joke so we now we stay away. Why would we emmulate traffic solutions from arguably the two worst places to drive in the world; Paris and Boston? Repave is fine; the rest, leave it alone. Thanks again for doing the research. Bert - - -- Original Message - - -- From: Andrew Plowman <APlowman @wsbeng.conv Andrew Plowman From: Judith Rodgers <jbr62@earthlink.net> Sent: Tuesday, January 31, 2012 9:36 AM To: Andrew Plowman Cc: Barbara Hoganson Subject: Fwd: A roundabout way of decreasing pedestrian safety,, Ren Thomas Andy - Here is an article on roundabouts that I hope you consider. Please share it with Wayne. Bill Rodgers Subject: A roundabout way of decreasing pedestrian safety)) Ren Thomas Roundabouts are not considered safe for children, adults with disabilities and especially those visually impaired. They prioritize cars over pedestrians and bicyclists. Please read the attached article by Dr Ran Thomas. Thank you, Bill Rodgers • Blo • Teaching • Publications • Presentations • Service • Blog • ratpnnriam Ren Thomas M.A., Ph.D. (Planning) A roundabout way of decreasing pedestrian safety Like many cities In North America, Vancouver is in a love affair with roundabouts. And why not: traffic engineers tell us they improve vehicle safety, increase roadway capacity and efficiency, reduce vehicular delay and emissions, provide traffic-calming effects, and mark community gateways. But hang on ... isn't this just another road design that prioritizes cars there is a gap in traffic to cross, placing them at a considerable disadvantage from traditional stop signs and stop lights. There is no designated time for pedestrians to cross, like a walk signal, which means at a busy intersection you can wait several minutes. And there are - = reasons to fear for pedestrian safety as well. Studies shows that while the risk of serious vehicle collisions is decreased, this is mainly because they reduce collisions where cars run red lights /stop signs or drivers misjudge the gap In oncoming traffic while turning. The US Access Board, a Federal agency committed to accessible design, writes that "the research findings on pedestrian safety at roundabouts are less clear. There have been relatively few studies, mostly conducted in Europe, concerning pedestrians and roundabouts." Little is known about the effects of roundabouts on the particular demographic groups, such as the 2 elderly, children, and those with accessibility Issues. Many drivers do not yield to pedestrians at Crosswalks, and it might be difficult to tell if they plan to yield; as the traffic volume increases, the number of "crossable gaps" decreases. The design of a roundabout also pushes the crosswalks away from the intersection, creating travel paths that are inconvenient for pedestrians, according to the New Urban News. New Urbanists have been promoting roundabouts for many years as a traffic calming measure, despite any evidence that they Increase pedestrian safety. In England, where roundabouts are commonplace, drivers are reasonably vigilant and yield to pedestrians. Nevertheless, the real advantage of roundabouts is that cars are not required to stop. Drivers generally like the for this reason; it reduces their travel time. But what does this do for pedestrians? It again places them at the bottom of the pecking order, and places them at considerable risk. It also lengthens their travel time considerably, as they must cross several directions of traffic, waiting for gaps each time. Compare this to a regular four -way signalled intersection, where the pedestrian gets a clear walk signal and does not have to determine whether it is safe to cross. In other words, the problem that cars supposedly have at four -way intersections (trying to judge the gap in traffic) is transferred to the pedestrian, who is not encased in steel forProtection. 3 Path 1 here shows the pedestrian encountering traff ic In two Instances; Path 2 shows the pedestrian must cross four lanes of traffic. In all cases, since this is a roundabout, traffic does not stop and pedestrian paths are greatly increased from a traditional four - wTY�lled intersection., _ Interestingly, public opinion on roundabouts is divided. Many drivers I know detest them, and find them difficult and confusing to use. A cab driver recently told me that he hated.the -new roundabouts in Vancouver, but one fnend�of' ". mine defended them. She hails from England and says that the problem is simply public education: North American drivers just don't know how to use roundabouts. When the issue of pedestrian safety is raised, she said, "I see nothing wrong with pedestrians having to wait a few minutes to cross the street. There's way too much encouragement of pedestrians getting the right of way all the time, even when it's unsafe u wonder what experts like Barry Wellar, a retired University of Ottawa professor who studies public safety and testifies at trials where pedestrians and cyclists are injured, thinks about roundabouts. Wellar developed the Pedestrian 4 Safety Index, which some municipalities have been using to evaluate their busiest Intersections. Similarly, John Pucher of Rutgers University discusses the many innovations in Europe designed for pedestrian safety, including advanced crossings for pedestrians, scatter crossings, grade- separations and separate pedestrian and cyclist signals. One of Pucher's main arguments is that pedestrians and cyclists increase in number with increased safety precautions; he also argues that penalties for striking a pedestrian or cyclist are much harsher In Europe. Surely we should be examining all the different safety aspects of roundabouts if they are to be applied everywhere from quiet residential streets to major intersections such as the one pictured in this article. My guess is the UBC roundabout, which was converted from a signalized intersection last year, will prove treacherous to the pedestrians (many of them seniors) crossing the intersection at 16th and Wesbook Mall to access the new grocery store, community centre, school, and housing in the area. But UBC already has plans for another roundabout, and like many municipalities seems content to let traffic engineers' reports lead the way. The US Access Board makes several suggestions for improving roundabouts for blind pedestrians, including: o Landscaping, planters, pedestrian channelization, bollard- and -chain separation, railings, and other architectural features can delineate paths that lead to the crosswalk and prevent or discourage crossing at locations other than the crosswalk; a distinctive edge such as a raised curb o Traffic calming measures to ensure vehicles are travelling at low speeds, which influences whether or not thqy will eld to a pedestrian 5 o Raised crossings to discourage vehicle acceleration o 'Smart' signals that can sense and signal a pedestrian's presence • 'Splitter' islands with a detectable surface, which can be used as a pedestrian refuge • Public awareness campaigns encouraging drivers to yield to pedestrians These measures can help counterract some of the pedestrian safety issues associated with roundabouts, but the fundamental question of whether they are advantageous for all transportation modes is not addressed. Pedestrians and cyclists are considerably disadvantaged by roundabouts as compared to traditional street crossings, proving once again that traffic engineers have a tendency to prioritize cars' needs over non - motorized transportation modes. Hopefully we learn more about roundabouts through research and not pedestrian and cyclist fatalities. August 2, 2009 1 Tags: pedestrians, planning, Transportation, Vancouver, walking infrastructure) 2 Comments n 2 Responses to "A roundabout way of decreasing pedestrian safety" 91chim says: Selrt amber G. 2010 at 5: 12 pin In my opinion, the roundabout at UBC is a large Improvement for slowing down vehicles and severity of collisions, and emissions caused by start and stop traffic. Roundabouts have been in use in Europe and also Hong Kong for a long time. For issues of pedestrian safety, this could be addressed by Installing crossing signals, i.e. the flashing amber lights which notifies the motorist to yield. Also in Hong Kong, most roads are fenced off (except for designated crossings, and high medians to discourage jay walking), and includes an fenced Island in the middle of the road. Some larger intersections also have pedestrian underpasses and overpasses, and may even include an elevator 6 at both sides of the overpass for people with disabilities. Cyclysts there all know how to navigate a roundabout, and there are even roundabouts that are made only for bicycle traffics. Parking is also discouraged by placing knee to hip -high planter boxes / fences right next to the curb so even if someone parks they will not be able to get out, in which case would allow for better line of sight for both motorists and pedestrians. Roundabouts are great and we need more of them. In places that lack space, a mini - roundabout can also be used, which is just a white painted circle in the middle of the intersection allowing larger trucks and busses to go over them, but to address pedestrian / cyclist safety, education is a key issue along with other components mentioned ( over /underpass /elevators /sputter Islands/amber signals/bike -only roundabouts to familiarize cyclists without motor vehicle traffic etc..) At last, I would encourage anyone to explore the road design in Hong Kong through Google Earth, as I do believe they have a very safe and efficient system there. Areg 2. Alexander says: May 25. 2011 at 9:18 am Roundabouts do not reduce emissions. When you are wearing trousers, if you gain weight, then eventually the trousers will pinch your belly. And you may say, "the problem is that my belly is pinched," and therefore the solution is. trivial, "I will buy looser trousers. Then you are free to gain more weight. Since gaining weight wasn't actually your original goal, though, and in fact the problem was the weight and not the trousers. This is literally the same problem with the car. The car makes you fat, angry, and impatient. These are the problems with the car. It also pollutes, in rough proportion to how many times you stop and start, but that's just an auxiliary effect. If you reduce the number of times you stop and start the car then it will seem more convenient, as one of the downsides will be removed. So you'll drive it more, and longer distances, which will in turn make you fatter, angrier, and more Impatient. The primary ills of the car for the society are increased, and ultimately so are the emissions because people substitute longer drives for shorter ones. That is to say, the emissions reduction of a roundabout is true only if the traffic patterns do not change in response to the increase in perceived vehicular convenience. However, if you did not expect traffic patterns to change then why would you make an additional investment in infrastructure in the first place? Go ahead, loosen your belt, it'll cure your obesity. - Greg Leave a Reply Name (required) Mail (will not be published) (required) Website [Submit Comment] Port city: Vancouver by water Farewell Meidad Kissinger .ure attitudes BC behaviour Canada cities city council federal ding governance health homeownership housing Immigration inequities infrastructure munici whoods PhD planning planning practice planning processes policies provincial 1 planning renting research Social geography suburbs Toronto transit Transportation urban ielopment urban growth urban planning us Vancouver walking (c) 2009.Ren Thomas 8 Andrew Plowman From: Judith Rodgers <jbr62 @ earthlink. net> Sent: Tuesday, January 31, 201210:28 AM To: edinamail ®ci.edina.mn.us; Andrew Plowman; sneal ®ci.edina.mn.us; KKurt@ci.edina.mn.us Cc: Barbara Hoganson; julie appel; susan peterson; jhoward612 @comcast.net Subject: Why Bike Lanes are a Bad Idea Please forward to the City Council Thanks, Bill Rodgers Mayor James Hovland Joni Bennett Mary Brindle Josh Sprague Ann Swenson Here are some reasons, in this link, of why bikers do not like bike lanes. httn : / /www.!pel.com/protest/city /nobike /van bikelanesbad htm Here are some reasons why some residents don't support bike lanes on Tracy Avenue: Tracy Avenue is not a safe street for bikes. Hansen Rd and Olinger Rd are safer routes for bikers Why do we need this bike route when there will be a new safer bike trail within 1/2 mile also Bredesen Park has great safer bike trails for families. It is not fair to the residents to be assessed for bike lanes that they do not feel are necessary. The bike lanes constitute 25% of the roadway and will probably be utilized by less than 5% of Edina residents. If the bike lanes are so important find another way to pay for them. Reduce the cost of the Tracy Project. Project Costs can probably be reduced by 15% of the total cost of the project by eliminating the bike lanes. Bill Rodgers 6100 Arbour Lane Edina, MN 55436 952- 927 -9421 jbr62 @earthlink.net Andrew Plowman From: Judith Rodgers <jbr62 ®earthlink.net> Sent: Tuesday, January 31, 2012 10:34 AM To: edinamail@ci.edina.mmus; Andrew Plowman; sneal@ci.edina.mn.us; KKurt®ci.edina.mn.us Cc: Barbara Hoganson; julie appel; susan peterson; jhoward612@comcast.net Subject: In Support of Bike Lanes/Routes? Please forward to the City Council Thanks, Bill Rodgers Mayor James Hovland Joni Bennett Mary Brindle Josh Sprague Ann Swenson There are apparently many residents in Edina that support Bike lanes on city streets. This statistic can be found on pages 27 -28 of the City of Edina Comprehensive Bicycle Transportation Plan: • 66% of respondents said walking and biking trails were among the top three actions they would be willing to support with tax dollars; 44% ranked walking and biking trails as their first choice to support with tax dollars, the highest percentage for any action What else did the report indicate? "89% of respondents were supportive of the City developing walking and biking trails; 65% were very supportive ". See http : / /www.ci.edina.mn.us/PDFs/ Edina% 252OBike %2520P1an%252OFinal#625 ° = == ^'- �.�- 202007.pdf - - - - - The results of this survey need to be implemented. Or the survey should be repeated because times have changed. In 2007 the economy was at its highest. Today the economy is at its lowest. If the 2007 results are repeated (66% of all respondents willing to pay taxes to implement the bike routes) I believe if the city engineers looked at the comprehensive plan and determined what all the bike route and bike lanes cost and divided it over all the taxpayers in the city there wouldn't be as much of an issue over bike lanes. Also why do we need a bike route within a 1/2 mile of the proposed new bike trail? This is not an issue of NEVIBY Not In My Back Yard. It is one of PDDTTM Please Don't Do This To Me. Don't expect a few residents to pay for the bike lanes of a few die hard cyclists. Assessing residents on a street for bike lanes that are 10 -feet wide by 1 mile long is not fair. That's 25% of a 40- foot wide street. We need to share the pain with those that are willing to support walking and bike trails by paying taxes to build them. Then I wouldn't mind sharing the road. Could the engineers determine the actual costs of all the bike lanes /routes that are in the comprehensive plan? This would be an interesting cost to know and easy to determine. Thanks again, Bill Rodgers 6100 Arbour Lane Edina, MN 55436 952- 927 -9421 jbr62@earthlink.net Andrew Plowman From: Judith Rodgers <jbr62 @ earthlink. net> Sent: Tuesday, January 31, 2012 11:24 AM To: edinamail ®ci.edina.mn.us; Andrew Plowman; sneal ®ci.edina.mn.us Cc: Barbara Hoganson; jhoward612@comcast.net; julie appel; susan peterson Subject: Richard Bernstein Challenges Traffic Roundabouts Please forward to City Council This is an issue that needs to be considered. Bill Rodgers httn: / /caUsam.com/bemstein- media - center /richard- bemstein- videos /roundabouts- lawsuit/richard bemstein challen ges- traffic - roundabouts Andrew Plowman From: Judith Rodgers <Jbr62 @ earthlink. net> Sent: Tuesday, January 31, 2012 1:20 PM To: edinamail@ci.edina.mn.us; KKurt®ci.edina.mn.us; sneal @ci.edina.mn.us; Andrew Plowman Cc: karbergman@edina.kl2.mn.us; Barbara Hoganson; Julie appel; susan peterson; Steve and Linda Enck; tomkluis ®gmail.com; Kent Gravelle; William Cosgrove; jhoward612 ®comcast.net; jstpierre6005@gmaii.com Subject: Federal Disability Lawsuit Challenges Traffic Roundabouts Please forward to the Mayor and City Council. Thanks, Bill Rodgers Here are several links and comments related to roundabouts. I am not against roundabouts. I think they are great in the right place. Is the comer of Benton and Tracy in Edina the right place? Is it the right thing to do? The existing Intersection Is unusual/different. Apparently we are used to it There hasn't been an accident there in over 30 years. Talk to residents in the comer houses some have lived there for over three decades If it isn't broke don't fix it. We could have more problems with a roundabout than what we haven't had with what we have. Also, how many roundabouts have you seen in the front yards of private homes? It Is pretty awesome and personal. Have you thought how that would affect you? Our city engineers sure haven't. I'm sure they have read all the positive information about roundabouts and see roundabouts as a solution for all intersection issues. Please take the time to look at these links and consider carefully what you do. Thanks again for listening Bill Rodgers 6100 Arbour Lane Edina, MN 55436 http: / /eazettextra.com/news/ 2011 /nov /15 /roundabout - plan - detoured/ We have not had an accident at this intersection in over 30 years. If it isn't broke don't fix it. Listen to the residents. http: / /www.dailvtribune.com/articles/ 2008 /03 /10/localnews /20080310- archivel txt ?viewmode Do we want to put this roundabout in and find out that we need to add signals? We will be back to a four way stop with a circle in the middle. httn: / /callsam.com/bernstein- media - center /richard- bernstein- news- fightin -for justice /federal - disability lawsuit- challenL,es- traffic- roundabouts Click on the news video lower in the article. A 05-13-2010, 09:24 AM MI -Roger Join Date: Oct 2007 563 posts, read 836,377 times Senior Member Reputation: 366 So, M -DOT Is beginning to have second thoughts regarding Roundabouts? I saw an article in the annarbor.com electronic newspaper last night that included a link to a special survey being conducted by Wayne State University for M -DOT regarding roundabouts. After forcing these things upon the citizens of Michigan for the past few years, I am guessing they are receiving enough public pressure to reassess their position. Personally, I don't like them. I agree they can be a big benefit for low speed low traffic volume routes. But. in this use they are like the "Yield" signs that were removed from rural intersections years ago because they were proven to be ineffective at preventing crashes. My biggest complant with Roundabouts is MDOT's crusade to place these traffic circles in moderate speed (45mph to 50mph) heavily travelled roads. I project a huge Increase in side -swipe collisions at these Installations. Think about it. The average MI driver had 15 years of traffic rule observation, followed by classroom training., then followed by supervised driving in a dual brake vehicle to learn how to properly execute the traditional stop style intersections and accompanying rules. Now we find ourselves on tight circular roundabouts with no instruction on their proper use. Even if I consider myself competent at using traffic circles, how can I have any comfort at knowing the abilities and knowledge of the other drivers? Shoot; look at how many drivers use 4 -way stops improperly, and how many jump the Green Light when executing a left hand turn in front of oncoming traffic! We are to assume these same fools know how to use roundabouts correctly? MDOT's decision to remove servicable intersections and replace them with roundabouts, then Install so many "Right Turn Only" signs and yellow /black chevron billboards that sight lines of oncoming traffic are completely blocked (Lee Rd at US23) is a foolish waste of our State's scant financial resources. [ +] Rate this post positively Read more: http://www.city - data.com/ forum /mlch1gan/ 974667 -so -m- dot - beginning -have- second.html #lxzz113gpEACI Andrew Plowman From: leanne montgomery <montylea@yahoo.com> Sent: Wednesday, February 01, 2012 6:38 PM To: Janet Conn; Andrew Plowman Cc: slamenck@comcast.net; 'Becky Frederick; 'Caroline Carlin'; 'Cyndi Forsberg'; 'David Lynch; 'Jane Kise'; 'Jo Mundy'; 'Julie Madison'; 'Kelly & Steve Housh'; Lisa Bale; 'Lonnie Larson; 'Paula Glieden'; 'Rani Zappa; 'Riley Powell'; 'Skip Powell; Stacey Hughes; 'Stacy Wood'; Sujata Gholkar; 'Vicki Lettow'; Brad Montgomery at Noran Subject: Re: Tracy/Benton Redesign -Grove St Resident:) Hello Andrew Plowman, We have a very involved neighborhood, here on Grove Street. This is a response from one of them and I'd like to agree and reiterate her thoughts as follows. I too considered all the proposals, diagrams, etc on -line at City Hall, and really feel roundabouts are a nuisance. They look so good on paper, I know! But I drive the ones over near Target and Galleria daily and truly wonder what in the world our City Planners were thinking. Accidents just WAITING to happen! Seriously, please just repair and neaten up Tracy and we'll all be fine. I'm also a big biker, (even in winter). I'd love a little lane, if possible. (Edina is sorely missing bike links ... btw) And it'd be good for the kids too. But please please please, no roundabout. Thank you. Sincerely, Leanne Montgomery 5400 Grove St. 612.387.6908 cell From: Janet Conn <janetconn ®comcast.net> To: aplowman @wsbeng.com Cc: slamenck @comcast.net;'Becky Frederick' <beckyfrederick @gmail.com >;' Caroline Carlin' <ccarlin ®umn.edu >; 'Cyndi Forsberg' <cdsf @earthlink.net>; 'David Lynch' <dlynch9 ®comcast.net >;'Jane Kise' <janekise @earthlink.net>;'Jo Mundy' <jmmundy ®earthlink.neb;'Julie Madison' <juliemadison ®mac.com >;'Kelly & Steve Housh' <shoush @comcast.net>;'Leann Montgomery' <montylea@yahoo.com >; Lisa Bale <Iisa.bale@comcast.net>;'Lonnie Larson' <Ijlarson ®q.com >;' Paula Glieden' <gliedenfamily @yahoo.com >;'Ran! Zappa' <rmzappa@comcast.net >;' Riley Powell' <rileypowell @ post.harvard.edu>; 'Skip Powell' <skippowell ®gmail.com >; Stacey Hughes <cline.hughes ®gmail.com >;' Stacy Wood' <user130529@aol.com >; Sujata Gholkar <sgholkar ®gmail.com >;' Vicki Lettow' <vlettow @aol.com> Sent: Monday, January 30, 2012 3:49 PM Subject: Tracy/Benton Redesign I live on Oak Lane and thus regularly drive through the intersection of Tracy and Benton from one direction or another. I have seen the proposal for a roundabout at that intersection, and spoken with one of the residents most immediately affected by the plan. I do not think that Tracy needs a roundabout or indeed any reconfiguration along its length. The current width of the street accommodates automobile traffic, bicycles and parking very well. Painting in bike lanes would actually reduce the flexibility that allows cars and bikes to co -exist so comfortably. As to the roundabout, it seems to be a solution in search of a problem. Yes, sometimes cars coming in from different angles have to maneuver around each other, but there appears to be no history of accidents. And school buses may get backed up when it is time to drop off or pick up, but this is for a brief period a couple of times a day, when school is in session. This certainly doesn't warrant the creation of a costly roundabout that would make life harder for people living on the intersection. Cost is another reason not to proceed with this plan. Asking people on Tracy to pay over $5000 for "improvements" they neither want nor need would be very unfair. Thank you for respecting the wishes of the neighborhood. Janet Conn 5804 Oak Lane Edina 952- 929 -1955 Andrew Plowman From: Tom Kluis <tomkluls@gmail.com> Sent: Tuesday, January 31, 2012 4:44 PM To: Andrew Plowman Cc: BarbaraHoganson@comcast.net Subject: RE: Two completed Surveys - Tracy Ave project Andy - Thanks for the well thought -out reply. Tom On Jan 31, 2012 4:37 PM, "Andrew Plowman" <APlowman @wsben .conv wrote: Tom, I have not read through the entire report either. I will start from the other direction to say why, in my opinion, a roundabout is the most ideal solution and how we came upon this solution. When starting this project we asked residents (that lived on the corridor) several items. Two items that were of concern to residents were; speed and confusion at the Benton/Tracy intersection. We reviewed the conditions of the intersection and noticed, that despite a lack of crashes historically, the intersection does not operate well and there appears to be a potential for accidents given the confusing nature of the intersection. At that point we analyzed options. We first thought about realigning the west leg. This option is viable, however cost was a consideration as well. This impact would necessitate a large retaining wall on the south side of the realigned roadway as well as increased limits of construction to match in with the existing roadway. In addition, there were issues with increasing the NW comer property's driveway well over 70'. In addition, the operations of the intersection during school closing and opening hours would not be completely fixed since roundabouts are more efficient than stop controlled intersections. The next option we analyzed was a roundabout. Our first look of it, we thought there was probably not a way of doing this without taking someone's house. That is something we did not want to do. After laying it out and making the roundabout more elliptical in shape, we were able to accomplish most of our goals; 1. Increase intersection efficiency, 2. Minimize additional cost, 3. Provide a traffic calming measure and 4. And create a safe pedestrian and vehicle intersection. We realized after further coordination with the school and being on- site that the roundabout also provides parents a way to safely pick up their children by allowing a U -tum maneuver at the intersection for parents coming from the south and wanting to access the parking bay. The roundabout in Richfield at 66th and Portland had similar concerns due to the proximity to the community pool and the amount of children that walk to get there. It has been in operation for 3 years and there are 0 reported pedestrian crashes. And, that is a dual lane roundabout situation. In my professional opinion, the lack of yielding simply means longer potential wait times to find gaps or vehicle recognition, it isn't indicating near misses and/or actual accidents. I believe it recognizes the fact that pedestrians and motorists are both paying attention to one another before the move is made. I do believe pedestrians are given a false sense of security when crossing at a signal or 4 way stop controlled intersection. That is a brief summary of how we go to where we are. I do thank you for your interest. Andrew Plowman, PE Transportation Project Manager d:763- 287 -7149 I c:612- 360 -1311 WSB & Associates, Inc. 1 701 Xenia Avenue South, Suite 300 Minneapolis, MN 55416 - - - -- Original Message---- - From: Tom Kluis [mailto:tomIduis@gLnail.co ml Sent: Tuesday, January 31, 2012 4:01 PM To: Andrew Plowman Cc: BarbaraHoganson @comcast.net Subject: Re: Two completed Surveys - Tracy Ave project Andy - While I certainly did not read the entire report in depth, a review of several chapters turned up some concerning data. In reading the report (httn: / /onlinepubs.trb.or /og_ nlinepubs /nchrp /nchrp rpt 572.2dfl, I have some large questions about the viability of such a roundabout in a residential location next to a busy elementary school and playground. Table 62: Pedestrian behavior at common intersection -type crosswalks.- Table shows that at a stop sign intersection, 100% of the time pedestrians proceeds as normal. I infer from that data that 100% of the time vehicles yield. This seems like the ideal situation. Table 63: Motorist behaviors by traffic control type. - Table shows that in a roundabout, only 68% of vehicles yielded to a pedestrian. 32% did not. (The article states that 1 -lane roundabouts increases the amount of yielding. Still 17% of vehicles did not yield to a pedestrian when they should have). - - - - - Analysis of Findings : "What is the yielding behavior of motorists when they encounter a pedestrian who is crossing or waiting to cross? On average across all sites, approximately 30% of the motorists did not yield to pedestrians who were crossing or waiting to cross." That said, there did not seem to be imminent danger - "In all but one case, the pedestrians were waiting to cross, so there was no imminent risk." Conclusion - Safety performance "Motorists not yielding to pedestrians ranged from 48% at uncontrolled locations to 32% at roundabouts to 15% at signalized locations to 4% at stopcontrolled sites. Crossings in which the behavior of the pedestrian was considered to be normal were 70 %, 85 %, 90 %, and 100% for uncontrolled, yield- controlled, signalized, and stop - controlled locations, respectively " This data leads me to believe that a roundabout causes vehicles to yield less to pedestrians compared to the existing 4 -way stop.An 8 fold increase in vehicles not yielding to pedestrians doesn't seem to be a worthwhile change in a neighborhood setting next to an elementary school. What is the goal of the roundabout? If the intersection needs to be changed, I support rerouting the west leg of Benton. However, I am still not in support of a roundabout due to pedestrian safety compared to other options (or compared with leaving the intersection as-is). Thanks, Tom Kluis On 1/31/12, Andrew Plowman <APlowman @wsben .com> wrote: > Tom, > http://onlinepubs.trb.org/onlinepubs/nchM/nchM rpt 572 .pdf • This is kind of a boring piece of text, but analyzes roundabouts in • regards to pedestrian safety. • Andrew Plowman, PE • Transportation Project Manager • d:763- 287 -7149 I c:612- 360 -1311 • WSB & Associates, Inc. 1701 Xenia Avenue South, Suite 3001 • Minneapolis, MN • 55416 > - - - -- Original Message---- - > From: Tom Kluis [mailto:tomkluis@gmail.co Sent: Tuesday, January 31, 2012 9:57 AM • To: Andrew Plowman • Cc: BarbaraHoaanson @comcast.net • Subject: Re: Two completed Surveys - Tracy Ave project • Andy - The first linked document compared roundabouts with signaled • intersections where traffic speed can be drastically higher. However, • I did not see any comparisons with 4 -way stops where traffic seems • substantially slower as all directions need to stop. I would think a • roundabout versus 4 -way stop would increase the average speed of traffic. • Do you have any studies comparing roundabouts with 4 -way stops, • especially near schools or with elderly drivers? > On 1/31/12, Andrew Plowman <APlowman@wsbeng.com> wrote: >> Tom, >> Thank you for the surveys. I will print off your email and get your >> answers incorporated. >> I want to take a moment to address one of Kristin's comments >> regarding pedestrian safety at the roundabout. It has been a common >> concern amongst residents that roundabouts are not safe for pedestrians. >> However, data has shown that they are very safe for pedestrians and >> have been implemented successfully at elementary schools. I will >> direct you to a couple of sites if either of you would like to read >> up on some of that. >> http : / /www.ci.edina.mn.us/PDFs/En ing _eeringProjectsfFracyAvenue/RAB My >> t >> hs.pdf >> The link above will take you to a document titled, "Common Modern >> Roundabout Myths ". This document was completed by a company known as >> DLZ out of Michigan. They provided the peer review on a roundabout >> we worked on in Savage. If you go to Myth #9, it addresses >> pedestrian safety at roundabouts and discusses some of the locations >> near schools where roundabouts have been put in. >> http: / /www.modestogov.com/owd/ transportation /streets /roundabouts /vide >> o >> s.asp >> The next link is out of Modesto, CA. The first link they show is a >> video of a roundabout in operation when a local school is adjourning >> for the day. >> You will be able to see the crossing guard and how the drivers and >> pedestrians interact. >> Again, thank you for the time to fill out the survey. Sorry your >> scanner didn't work, but this will work just the same. >> Thank you, >> Andy >> From: Tom Kluis [maUto:tomkluis @gmail:cn >> Sent: Tuesday, January 31, 2012 7:33 AM >> To: BarbaraHoganson @comcast.net; Andrew Plowman >> Subject: Re: Two completed Surveys - Tracy Ave project >> Barbara, Andrew - Well, it looks like my scanning didn't go as >> anticipated. >> I'll just list the results here for brevity's sake: >> Tom: >> I: Yes >> H- Parking: Not Important >> II -Cross Section: Parking Lane >> H- Sidewalk: Not Important >> II- Bumpouts: Yes >> III- A:Roundabout: No >> III -B: Leave as -is >> III -C: Comments: Need to address safety of crosswalks at Tracy and Benton. >> Kristin: >> I: Yes >> II- Parking: Not Important >> II -Cross Section: Leave As -is >> II- Sidewalk: Not Important >> II- Bumpouts: Yes >> III- A:Roundabout: No >> III -B: Realign West Leg >> III -C: Comments: Concern about pedestrian safety with roundabout, >> drivers will be focused on other cars rather than children and >> pedestrians walking. >> Thanks and sorry for the issue with the blank surveys. >> Tom >> On Mon, Jan 30, 2012 at 8:02 PM, Tom Kluis >> <tomkluis @ gmail.com <mailto: tomkluis @ grnail.com>> wrote: >> Andrew, Barbara - Please see two competed surveys from my wife and me >> regarding the Tracy Avenue project. >> Thanks. >> Tom Kluis >> 5824 Lyle Cir >> Andrew Plowman, PE >> Transportation Project Manager d: 763 - 287 -7149 1 c: 612 - 360 -1311 >> WSB & Associates, Inc. 1 701 Xenia Avenue South, Suite 3001 >> Minneapolis, MN 55416 >> [cid:image6fc5aa.JPG@96951776.46b3ded7]<hqn://www.wsben g com> >> This email, and any files transmitted with it, is confidential and is >> intended solely for the use of the addressee. If you are not the >> addressee, please delete this email from your system. Any use of this >> email by unintended recipients is strictly prohibited. WSB & >> Associates, Inc. does not accept liability for any errors or >> omissions which arise as a result of electronic transmission. If >> verification is required, please request a hard copy. e , FEASIBILITY STUDY - BA 368 �o ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT °• CITY OF EDINA STREET IMPROVEMENTS Tracy Avenue — Benton Avenue to Vernon Avenue February 6, 2012 Appendix H Roundabout Correspondence A,l''lr MY • ��7i8E`'� February 1, 2012 City of Edina Jack Sullivan, Assistant City Engineer 7450 Metro Blvd. Edina, MN 55439 Re: Roundabouts Mr. Sullivan, I am writing to express support, from the police department, with regards to adding additional roundabouts in the City of Edina. In particular, we strongly back the use of roundabouts on Tracy Ave. Just like other members of our community, our officers were skeptical about roundabouts when they first appeared in Edina, However, we have found roundabouts very helpful with the flow of traffic and the reduction in accidents. The Minnesota Department of Transportation indicates that roundabouts show a 39 percent decrease in accidents and an 89 percent decrease in fatal crashes. Although I don't have the exact count in Edina, those roundabout numbers are consistent with what we observe in Edina. In addition, our officers note an improved traffic flow with roundabouts versus stop signs and stop lights. Although we do not have an outrageously high number of car accidents at Tracy Ave and Benton Ave, we do have congestion with the "out of place" four way stop. Drivers are often confused and agitated as they try to figure out who has the right of way. Our officers are very supportive of implementing additional roundabouts and strongly encourage the use of them on Tracy Avenue. Please let me know if you have any questions or if I can be of service in any way. Sil erely, L. Je T Lo g Police Chief Edina Police Department Administration (952) 826 -1610 4801 West 50th Street Fax (952) 826 -1607 Edina, Minnesota Police 24 hr. and TDD Line (952) 826 -1600 55424 -1394 Andrew Plowman From: Smith, Keith <ksmith @carmel.in.gov> Sent: Thursday, January 19, 2012 3:24 PM To: Andrew Plowman Cc: Brainard, James C; McBride, Mike T Subject: RE: Question Regarding Fire Trucks through Roundabouts Hi Andrew Your questions are common, coming from communities that are just now considering roundabouts, I get three or four inquiries annually from fire chiefs in the Midwest. The community of Carmel has over 60 roundabouts that have in most cases taken the place of intersections. Roundabouts have been common in our community over the last four or five years. The Carmel Fire Department makes over 5,000 emergency responses annually and roundabouts are a non -issue in response times. I will answer your questions in the order you asked them: First, to add to my comment above regarding response times, our Department is in the middle of a process to become an Accredited Agency through the Center for Public Safety Excellence (CPSE) and incident response times are a critical measurement. Our response times have not increased because of street and access issues including the use of roundabouts. Safety is a major benefit! Our fire trucks and firefighters are not rushing through a 4 way intersection which is always hazardous even using Opti -Com signal controls. In a 4way stop intersection is was always confusing for other drivers who didn't understand how to get out of the way of an emergency vehicle. In a roundabout situation you are focused straight ahead and not side to side as in an intersection. Roundabouts keep traffic moving so it is easy to get out of the way of emergency vehicles. Our police department has a bit better statistics on this issue than us ... but our vehicle accident responses by both agency's is 30% less in a roundabout than a typical intersection. Firefighters will tell you they feel safer negotiating a roundabout than any tradition intersection. Some of our roundabouts are two lanes and some are one lane and some have access ramps for right turns only. Our apparatus do not have problems negotiating any layout. The secret of course is speed and if they try to use a roundabout at normal street speed ... then they will find it harder to maneuver. Of course there were skeptics because of the unfamiliarity. After driving them for a while and watching traffic flow easily, I believe people begin to wonder why no one considered them before. I have not heard of any cry to return to a signaled intersection. Roundabouts are a bit of a challenge to motorist initially. But it doesn't take long before a comfort level set in with the drivers. We at first thought people getting out of the way on a roundabout would be a problem... but that didn't materialize simply because traffic is able to flow quickly and evenly. If the fire chief in the community of Edina MN needs to talk to me personally, I would be happy to have that conversation. I have also included in this response, our Mayor, James Brainard, who is the visionary behind the initiative, and our city engineer Mike McBride who has a vast knowledge concerning roundabouts including design. I hope you find the reply useful. Best of luck in your endeavor! Respectfully, Keith D. Smith Fire Chief Carmel Fire Department Carmel Indiana 46032 Phone: 317 — 571 — 2602 From: Andrew Plowman [mailto:APlowman @wsbeng.com] Sent: Thursday, January 19, 2012 3:00 PM To: Smith, Keith Subject: Question Regarding Fire Trucks through Roundabouts Mr. Smith, My name is Andrew Plowman and I am a Civil Engineer in Minnesota. The reason I am contacting you is to gather your thoughts concerning roundabouts and specifically how you feel the operations for fire trucks work through roundabouts as opposed to other intersection types. 1 am working on a project in Edina, MN, where we are proposing a roundabout. The intersection currently is a 4 way stop, and has safety and operational issues. There is some concern because this corridor is down the road from the fire station and this is a primary route for the fire engines to take. I figured the best thing to do was gather information from people that have to negotiate through roundabouts all the time and their feelings towards having to do so, compared to signals or stop signs. Some of the specific questions I am wondering about are the following: • Do you notice a big impact on response time? • Do you feel safer by having this form of control over a signal or stop sign? • Do the fire trucks use the truck apron? • Were you skeptical towards roundabouts before they were put in? Did your viewpoint change after they were put in? • Do other motorists correctly operate the roundabout and get out of the fire truck's way? more so than signals or stop signs? Any feedback you provide would be greatly appreciated. If you prefer contacting me by phone to discuss this, my information can be found below. Thank you so much for your time, Andy Andrew Plowman, PE Transportation Project Manager d: 763 - 287 -7149 1 c: 612 - 360 -1311 WSB & Associates, Inc. 1 701 Xenia Avenue South, Suite 300 Minneapolis, MN 55416 - Engineering • Planning t�rVV Environmental • Consftuctlon a a�rm� eye. This email, and any files transmitted with it, is confidential and is intended solely for the use of the addressee. if you are not the addressee, please delete this email from your system. Any use of this email by unintended recipients is strictly prohibited. WSB & Associates, Inc. does not accept liability for any errors or omissions which arise as a result of electronic transmission. If verification is required, please request a hard copy. Andrew Plowman From: Smith, Brad <brad. smith@metc.state. m n. us> Sent: Wednesday, January 25, 2012 9:31 AM To: Andrew Plowman Cc: Johnson, Lisa M; Russell, Jay; Benson, Bob; Miller, Sheila Subject: RE: Benton Avenue Andy, Metro Transit operates express route 578 through the intersection of Benton and Tracy each weekday. In the mornings there are two buses before 700am that travel west on Benton and turns south on Tracy. In the afternoon two buses after 500pm travels north on Tracy and turns east onto Benton Avenue. A total of four buses throughout the day. With the construction of a round -about at that intersection, buses would either have to be allowed through the area with the turning movements unhindered during construction or we would need to get the City of Edina's approval to go around the block to the south of the intersection of Tracy and Benton. Going around the block would be physically possible although these are residential streets that have had no buses on them in the past. With the completion of the round - about, it would have to be build so it could handle the turning movement of a full size or articulated 60 foot bus. Also, with the completion of the round - about, we would like to have our two bus stops reinstalled just before the round -about at the crosswalk that is ADA accessible. The two current bus stops are on WB Benton at Tracy and on NB Tracy at Benton. Brad Smith Transit Supervisor Metro Transit 612.418.1133 From: Andrew Plowman [mailto:APlowman @wsbeng.com] Sent: Tuesday, January 24, 2012 11:51 AM To: Smith, Brad Subject: RE: Benton Avenu Brad, In addition to the construction activities and how the buses run during that time, we are wanting a letter of acknowledgement from Metro Transit regarding the bus stop long term operation. Basically, whether the current location is anticipated to stay and how it will operate with the roundabout. Sort of a memo that Metro Transit has looked at the proposed project and talk about the construction activities and the long term location of the bus stop. Is that something that we could get from you? I think you may need some more information from me, give me a call and we can discuss it. Andrew Plowman, PE Transportation Project Manager d: 763 - 287 -71491 c: 612 - 360 -1311 WSB & Associates, Inc. 1701 Xenia Avenue South, Suite 300 1 Minneapolis, MN 55416 AEngineering • Planning Environmental • Construction e eaonaan as This email, and any files transmitted with it, is confidential and is intended solely for the use of the addressee. if you are not the addressee, please delete this email from your system. Any use of this email by unintended recipients is strictly prohibited. WSB & Associates, Inc. does not accept liability for any errors or omissions which arise as a result of electronic transmission. If verification is required, please request a hard copy. From: Smith, Brad [mailto:brad.smith @metc.state.mn.us] Sent: Tuesday, January 24, 2012 10:48 AM To: Andrew Plowman Subject: Benton Avenu Andy, believe we are playing phone tag. But then again you probable could use my e-mail. Yes, the express Rt. 578 runs along Benton and along Tracy. Two AM buses and two PM buses. I would love to be involved with this project as I was with 70`h Street. If Benton is closed, I will need to find a different way through the neighborhood. Perhaps Vernon to southbound Tracy in the AM and the reverse in the PM. Northbound Tracy to Vernon. Let's stay in touch. Brad Smith Transit Supervisor Metro Transit 612.418.1133 Andrew Plowman From: Smith, Brad <brad. smith@metc.state. mn. us> Sent: Wednesday, January 25, 2012 10:03 AM To: Andrew Plowman Subject: FW: Benton roundabout Attachments: MAP_587_2012- 12-03- Idea.pdf Andy, I just ran this by our Service Development people to make sure they didn't have some other plans on the table. They are interested in seeing the roundabout plans. Have you got them that you could send? I really think we can work around the bus stop issues if we adjust any routes. Thanks. Brad Smith Transit Supervisor Metro Transit 612.418.1133 From: Dillery, John Sent: Wednesday, January 25, 2012 9:49 AM To: Miller, Sheila Cc: Smith, Brad Subject: RE: Benton roundabout Brad, Sheila, I would like to have an opportunity to review the roundabout plans soon please. Does anyone have a set of plans here? I have a route re- design idea that would have some affect on bus stops at the intersection. It is based on the assumption that we will have a park & ride near Eden & Vernon Ave. This possibility is looking more likely now that the city's "Grandview" small area plan recommends a park & ride on city property. Please see map of proposed Route 587 with new B branch. Maybe the best idea would be to see if we could have a bus stop on eastbound Benton Ave farside of Tracy to allow us flexibility in setting our route alignment. Route 578C would no longer need to operate on Benton Ave with this idea and would be cut back to loop on Colonial Way, a few blocks to the south of Benton Ave. John Dillery Senior Transit Planner Service Development Metro Transit Direct: 612 349 7773 john.dillery@metc.state.mn.us From: Miller, Sheila Sent: Wednesday, January 25, 2012 9:36 AM To: Dillery, John Cc: Smith, Brad Subject: FW: Benton roundabout Brad & I thought you would be interested; do you anticipate any route changes in this area? From: Smith, Brad Sent: Wednesday, January 25, 2012 9:31 AM To: 'Andrew Plowman' Cc: Johnson, Lisa M; Russell, Jay; Benson, Bob; Miller, Sheila Subject: RE: Benton Avenue Andy, Metro Transit operates express route 578 through the intersection of Benton and Tracy each weekday. In the mornings there are two buses before 700am that travel west on Benton and turns south on Tracy. In the afternoon two buses after 500pm travels north on Tracy and turns east onto Benton Avenue. A total of four buses throughout the day. With the construction of a round -about at that intersection, buses would either have to be allowed through the area with the turning movements unhindered during construction or we would need to get the City of Edina's approval to go around the block to the south of the intersection of Tracy and Benton. Going around the block would be physically possible although these are residential streets that have had no buses on them in the past. With the completion of the round - about, it would have to be build so it could handle the turning movement of a full size or articulated 60 foot bus. Also, with the completion of the round - about, we would like to have our two bus stops reinstalled just before the round -about at the crosswalk that is ADA accessible. The two current bus stops are on WB Benton at Tracy and on NB Tracy at Benton. Brad Smith Transit Supervisor Metro Transit 612.418.1133 From: Andrew Plowman [mailto:APlowman @wsbeng.com] Sent: Tuesday, January 24, 2012 11:51 AM To: Smith, Brad Subject: RE: Benton Avenu Brad, In addition to the construction activities and how the buses run during that time, we are wanting a letter of acknowledgement from Metro Transit regarding the bus stop long term operation. Basically, whether the current location is anticipated to stay and how it will operate with the roundabout. Sort of a memo that Metro Transit has looked at the proposed project and talk about the construction activities and the long term location of the bus stop. Is that something that we could get from you? I think you may need some more information from me, give me a call and we can discuss it. Andrew Plowman, PE Transportation Project Manager Downtown Terminal Jim dash% Gateway aSf Termmpinal m a� CO 0 614 � 0 y• Marquette /2nd Ave Stop Groups Marquette Ave, Group B: NS of 3rd, 5th, 7th, 9th, on 11th FS Marquette 2nd Ave, Group H: NS of 10th, 8th, Gth, 4th oCD c �o 8� c c J J Route B Lincoln Terminal o� co A o J J •• Londonderry • i Vernon Ave • OM • yoc Hwy 62 A Park and Ride Egg Express or Non -stop Route 0 MnPASS Express Lane ❑ Time Point 0 Point of Interest ........ Downtown Zone Limit �k Layover Point Pull -Out Pull -In Route Ramp Meter Bypass r in in r Bus Only Shoulder Fares: Off- Peak/Peak $2.251$3.00 Time saving tip: Follow the Westside Dr. Exit, then re -enter South Hwy. 100 L OME I Expn t ri i• i■ i• i• H�N1 ME WE �aa'41-e 50th St hem °� Pve e FAB 40,14 Eden Ave Edina U_ M 3i J11 rwe SEE IN . 0 o • Hwy 62 = VeileY ••••••• •••••••• North Route C - AM Terminal Layover on Johnson 300 feet back from Minnesota Dr. Express Route 5 7 EFFECTIVE: 12/03/12? (New branch W replaces 1466, Eden Ave MR) ig, CO phi R 'v, SEE INSET Gateway I ■ y1�SI �Sr Ramp • Terminal Downtown Minneanollis +AveExpresses Shuttle nsfer Point — South Yew La . Edina Community � Center ie Hwy 62 • .p � Southdale 66th St O 69th St M 678 CL �I Minnesota Dr ietsk Parklawn ID 8, 578 Hwy 62 a'• • s3• • • N 77th StO.066 South 0 • Garage 0 JD 12/14/11 d AM Shuttle � to Express � Transfer Point Z South View La. Edina n Ave Community Center ie Hwy 62 • .p � Southdale 66th St O 69th St M 678 CL �I Minnesota Dr ietsk Parklawn ID 8, 578 Hwy 62 a'• • s3• • • N 77th StO.066 South 0 • Garage 0 JD 12/14/11 A. ok a VS FEASIBILITY STUDY - BA 368 fro �q ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT • CITY OF EDINA STREET IMPROVEMENTS Tracy Avenue — Benton Avenue to Vernon Avenue February 6, 2012 Appendix I Roundabout Links Roundabout Links: I. Description: Link to videos on City of Modesto, California website. First video is a roundabout near an elementary school when school adjourns. http: / /www.modestogov.com /pwd /transportation /streets /roundabouts /videos asp MO D ESTO Roundabout Videos Aa sanwc.a N. ha+a "—*&W aae. wOros..wcn «A q.. You aw,. nkn.amn ah :stow of -sndwav, aM th- ur. ft— ti.nv.. tarot. se,l.re. 42i'L a r.d.o H V,. ra..'a+b. —dl*a ~ dw ^�+M t6wer+ewy rd,o.t adpvna 51nw1 .dwd no.la+p oo.rsar+s 04a+f a .,yrx • �-- - - - rw.rn.. V1de. �tLLt1MMr • n.:� - om.�:n.�- t ootc. ./RCu w 10aw Ow C" Of .1.b.M d+csw.. uf" qw b bent' tt , h —dwe al. Ael isrr�n. Irl..a fwmcas a ya4.a Ok. fr— M Or, of Lacy, Woo11f6loh fcuR.l th. propw .aY h &" tlrw0 rtAnd."ft • e1111112MMISK RiN Ootr10tioea Ywwl oaentt+atttbtcyci.t wwatww Vrwgn . 04610. L— a.rc— .:t. �` •N° IeK1d�l6etaDslYefliGln Oawl trucks an4 "1040 rows tw.annq trw +a�.nn+r� crww t:�l... tsyyyl iWSl • M.rylatMd St.t. I /iphwaY Adnrm.tr.titt10. vwws W Aln.Ats M mod.tn '3.OVe ► ty.yy.r r <Wr1dGa.., fn.l!A.Iw'. • QCpHL101 '.OL9�..If.1011hMl�tj>td,' . w mO 1 74 rKnd —tl MJ! 2. Description: NCHRP Report 572, Roundabouts in the United States. Discusses safety performance of Roundabouts, including pedestrian safety. http° / /onlinepubs trb org /onlinepubs /nchrp /nchrp rpt 572 pdf NCHRP REPORT 572 Roundabouts in the United States 3. Description: School zone roundabout case study in Howard, Wisconsin. The roundabout alternative was met with public skepticism. The roundabout implementation turned out to be a success. http:// www. walkinginfo .org /pedsafe /casestudy.cfm ?CS NUM =49 4. Description: Washtenaw County Roundabout site, provides safety benefits of roundabouts. http: / /www.wcroads.org /news /roundabouts /safety.htm 5. Description: 45 foot ladder truck through roundabout in Washington County, Wisconsin http: / /www.youtube.com /watch` ?v= d5dxB -nFEZA 6. Description: Washington County, MN: Roundabout U Website. Discusses safety benefits and advantages of roundabouts. http: / /www.co.washington.mn.us /info for residents /transportation division /round about u/ '^^ Roundabout [] v ann.., w.a,n,aw �•_•••. �� Nev14s0on � M4O��+,dwtiwbM�I.wwa � 2 WM�M MS�Iw�In w�YMn�� 1r ok a , FEASIBILITY STUDY — BA 368 )o ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT �• a CITY OF EDINA STREET IMPROVEMENTS Tracy Avenue - Benton Avenue to Vernon Avenue February 6, 2012 Appendix J Fire Truck Memo WSB Assoc Infrastructure ■ Engineering ■ Planning n Construction 701 Xenia Avenue South Suite 300 Minneapolis, MN 55416 Tel: 763 5414800 Fax: 763 541 -1700 Memorandum To: Wayne Houle, City Engineer, City of Edina Jack Sullivan, Assistant City Engineer, City of Edina From: Andrew Plowman, WSB & Associates, Inc. Date. January 24, 2012 Re: Fire Truck Turning Movements at Proposed Roundabout Tracy Avenue and Benton Avenue Tracy Avenue Reconstruction Project Edina, MN WSB Project Number 01686 - -25 This memo serves as a summary of the Edina Fire Engine turning movement analysis through the proposed roundabout at the intersection of Tracy Avenue and Benton Avenue. We analyzed the turning movements through the roundabout. We were told the primary movement to emergency calls is the northbound movement, originating at Fire Station 1, located at 6250 Tracy Avenue which is approximately'' /2 mile south of the intersection of Tracy Avenue and Benton Avenue. We analyzed this movement for the ability for the truck to use only the driving lanes (and not the truck apron) and analyzed the response time loss due to the roundabout compared to the current stop configuration condition. In summary, the fire truck does not need to use the truck apron to navigate the proposed roundabout intersection and conservatively the response time is increased by 4.5 seconds compared to the existing 4 way stop condition. The assumptions used for the response time calculation is conservative in nature, it is anticipated actual response time change will be minimal. Minneapolis ■ St. Cloud Equal Opportunity Employer r,\01686- 2%kAdmm \Da \M. _FveTnrkTimting Movemenb.dwx Fire Truck Turning Movement Page 2 Proposed Roundabout: Below (Figure 1) is a rendering of the proposed roundabout. A few of the reasons for proposing a roundabout at this location are the following: • Improve safety for pedestrians and motorists • Improve efficiency of the intersection • Allow for U -Turns at the intersection • Eliminate the confusing nature of the existing intersection Apron s Tracy Avenue A Is�lland f li Bento Avenu$ Fi�urc 1 KA1686-2MAdmm Do 'Man _FireTruic —ing Movemans.d- Fire Truck Turning Movement Page 3 Turning Movement Analysis: The design vehicle used is a 47' long fire truck, which we are told is the longest fire truck in the City of Edina's fleet. The primary movement for emergency calls is the northbound movement. We analyzed the truck turning movement with the intention of not having to use the truck apron. The truck apron is usually needed for large semi - trucks to make the turns at the intersection. Figure 2, below, shows the outside envelope of the truck turning movement for the northbound and southbound thru movements. Analysis was conducted for the other directions as well, but not shown. The fire truck is able to make all the necessary movements. Tracy Avenue - .,-. �.� {"� - f P CV�ve 1 r �� v Figure 2 .r Curvy 2 KA1696- 250,JWminDm\Ma FireTnxtTurning Mus cme ts.d x Fire Truck Turning Movement Page 4 Response Time Loss Analysis: We analyzed the potential loss of response time based on the intersection changing from a 4 7way stop controlled intersection to a roundabout intersection. The roundabout intersection includes a series of 3 consecutive curves (labeled Curves 1, 2 and 3 in Figure 2) to maneuver the through the intersection. Speed is correlated to the curve radius, which is the reason vehicles cannot go as fast on curved roadways. Roundabouts are designed to slow traffic, which happens with the introduction of a median island (splitter island) in the roadway and a central island in the middle of the roundabout. The splitter island curves at the entrance of the roundabout, used to deflect (or curve) drivers at the entry. The tightest radius is the second radius in the turn (the turn around the central island curb, labeled Curve 2). The radius is 125', approximately. To put this radius into perspective, the radius north of Olinger Boulevard is 233'. Based on the speed- radius relationship, a typical automobile is able to negotiate a 125' radius at 20 mph. It is assumed a fire truck will not be able to negotiate these curves at the same speed as a car, therefore a conservative speed of 15 mph was used. Fire trucks are able to legally drive through stop controlled intersections without stopping. However, they are required to use caution when driving through said intersections. We assume the maximum speed through this intersection is 30 mph, as a conservative assumption. The approximate length to negotiate through the 3 curves of the roundabout is 200'. The corresponding time based on 15 mph, to traverse this distance, is 9.1 seconds. The corresponding time to negotiate 200' in length, based on 30 mph, is 4.6 seconds. The additional travel time to negotiate the roundabout is 4.5 seconds. Travel Time 4 way stop: 30 mph = 44'ft1s; 200 (ft) / 44 (ft/s) = 4.5 seconds Travel Time Roundabout:. 15 mph = 22 ft/s; 200 (ft) / 22 (ft/s) = 9.1 seconds Additional Travel Time = 9.1s — 4.5s = 4.6s K:`01686?SOV�iulDocsU1� FveT�uckTivmng Mm' ®mis.docc Andrew Plowman From: Smith, Keith <ksmith @carmel.in.gov> Sent: Thursday, January 19, 2012 3:24 PM To: Andrew Plowman Cc: Brainard, James C; McBride, Mike T Subject: RE: Question Regarding Fire Trucks through Roundabouts Hi Andrew Your questions are common, coming from communities that are just now considering roundabouts, I get three or four inquiries annually from fire chiefs in the Midwest. The community of Carmel has over 60 roundabouts that have in most cases taken the place of intersections. Roundabouts have been common in our community over the last four or five years. The Carmel Fire Department makes over 5,000 emergency responses annually and roundabouts are a non -issue in response times. I will answer your questions in the order you asked them: First, to add to my comment above regarding response times, our Department is in the middle of a process to become an Accredited Agency through the Center for Public Safety Excellence (CPSE) and incident response times are a critical measurement. Our response times have not increased because of street and access issues including the use of roundabouts. Safety is a major benefit! Our fire trucks and firefighters are not rushing through a 4 way intersection which is always hazardous even using Opti -Com signal controls. In a 4way stop intersection is was always confusing for other drivers who didn't understand how to get out of the way of an emergency vehicle. In a roundabout situation you are focused straight ahead and not side to side as in an intersection. Roundabouts keep traffic moving so it is easy to get out of the way of emergency vehicles. Our police department has a bit better statistics on this issue than us ... but our vehicle accident responses by both agency's is 30% less in a roundabout than a typical intersection. Firefighters will tell you they feel safer negotiating a roundabout than any tradition intersection. Some of our roundabouts are two lanes and some are one lane and some have access ramps for right turns only. Our apparatus do not have problems negotiating any layout. The secret of course is speed and if they try to use a roundabout at normal street speed ... then they will find it harder to maneuver. Of course there were skeptics because of the unfamiliarity. After driving them for a while and watching traffic flow easily, I believe people begin to wonder why no one considered them before. I have not heard of any cry to return to a signaled intersection. Roundabouts are a bit of a challenge to motorist initially. But it doesn't take long before a comfort level set in with the drivers. We at first thought people getting out of the way on a roundabout would be a problem... but that didn't materialize simply because traffic is able to flow quickly and evenly. If the fire chief in the community of Edina MN needs to talk to me personally, I would be happy to have that conversation. I have also included in this response, our Mayor, James Brainard, who is the visionary behind the initiative and our city engineer Mike McBride who has a vast knowledge concerning roundabouts including design. I hope you find the reply useful. Best of luck in your endeavor! Respectfully, Keith D. Smith Fire Chief Carmel Fire Department Carmel Indiana 46032 Phone: 317 — 571— 2602 From: Andrew Plowman [mailto:APlowman @wsbeng.com] Sent: Thursday, January 19, 2012 3:00 PM To: Smith, Keith Subject: Question Regarding Fire Trucks through Roundabouts Mr. Smith, My name is Andrew Plowman and I am a Civil Engineer in Minnesota. The reason_ I am contacting you is to gather your thoughts concerning roundabouts and specifically how you feel the operations for fire trucks work through roundabouts as opposed to other intersection types. I am working on a project in Edina, MN, where we are proposing a roundabout. The intersection currently is a 4 way stop, and has safety and operational issues. There is some concern because this corridor is down the road from the fire station and this is a primary route for the fire engines to take. I figured the best thing to do was gather information from people that have to negotiate through roundabouts all the time and their feelings towards having to do so, compared to signals or stop signs. Some of the specific questions I am wondering about are the following: • Do you notice a big impact on response time? • Do you feel safer by having this form of control over a signal or stop sign? • Do the fire trucks use the truck apron? • Were you skeptical towards roundabouts before they were put in? Did your viewpoint change after they were put in? • Do other motorists correctly operate the roundabout and get out of the fire truck's way? more so than signals or stop signs? Any feedback you provide would be greatly appreciated. If you prefer contacting me by phone to discuss this, my information can be found below. Thank you so much for your time, Andy Andrew Plowman, PE Transportation Project Manager d: 763 - 287 -7149 1 c: 612 - 360 -1311 WSB g Associates, Inc. 1 701 Xenia Avenue South - Engineering • Planning Environmental • Construction ri S a e� er. Suite 300 1 Minneapolis, MN 55416 This email, and any files transmitted with it, is confidential and is intended solely for the use of the addressee. If you are not the addressee, please delete this email from your system. Any use of this email by unintended recipients is strictly prohibited. WSS 8 Associates, Inc. does not accept liability for any errors or omissions which arise as a result of electronic transmission. If verification is required, please request a hard copy. �S�11 o e �'� FEASIBILITY STUDY — BA 368 )cc ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT °• CITY OF EDINA STREET IMPROVEMENTS Tracy Avenue — Benton Avenue to Vernon Avenue February 6, 2012 Appendix K B660 Bike Lane Comparison Cost Memo WS8 && Assucialey. Inc. Infrastructure ■ Engineering ■ Planning ■ Construction Memorandum To: Wayne Houle, City of Edina Front: Andrew Plowman, WSB & Associates, Inc. Date: January 24, 2012 701 Xenia Avenue South Suite 300 Minneapolis, MN 55416 Tel: 763 541 -4800 Fax: 763 541 -1700 Re: B660 Curb and Gutter versus 5' Bituminous Bike Lane with B618 Curb and Gutter Tracy Avenue Reconstruction: Project Edina, MN WSB Project Number 01686 -25 This memo is intended to compare the costs of two alternatives to on- street bike lane designs; B660 Curb and Gutter and five foot of bituminous pavement adjacent to B618 Curb and Gutter. In summary, the cost between the two options in terms of construction costs is virtually the same price per linear foot, which is in the range of $24 and $25 based on prices from the 2011 construction season. Options: According to the Mn/DOT Bikeway Facility Design Manual, dated March 2007, Chapter 4 -3.3.1 states, "The longitudinal joint between the gutter pan (the curb and gutter) and roadway surface can be hazardous to a cyclist." "In locations with greater than 10 percent truck traffic, and at higher traffic speeds and traffic volumes as indicated in Table 4 -1, a minimum bicycle width of 1.8 m (6 ft) is preferred, with a minimum width of 1.5 m (5 ft) of smooth, rideable surface provided." This means either having a full concrete gutter pan of 5' (B660 C & G) or providing 5' of bituminous surface next to standard city gutter pan of 1.5' (13618 C & G). See Figure 1. Minneapolis ■ St. Cloud Equal Opportunity Employer B660 Curb and Gutter Memo Page 2 1.5' width covered by Storm Sewer Fund -- ---� —y , � 8880 C &G 5' BIKE LANE 8618 C &G BITUMINOUS PAVEMENT _ I 5• 1.5 GUTTER PAN Figure 1 Costs The costs are based on 2010 and 2011 average bid prices and the average of the bids taken from Edina's 701h Street Reconstruction project where over 7000' of B660 curb and gutter was placed. B660 Option: $25.00/LF (linear foot) B618 Option: $25.38/LF • 5' Bituminous Pavement: Assume 7" of bituminous pavement o 0.22 tons /foot *$60 /ton = $13.20/LF • Additional Aggregate below 1.5' Gutter (assume 6" aggregate base) o 0.028 cu. yd. /foot *$18 /cu. yd. _ $0.50ALF • B618 C & G: $11/LF • Additional Excavation: Assume V excavation depth o 0.17 cu. yd. /foot *$4 /cu. yd. _ $0.68/LF B660 Curb and Gutter Memo Page 3 • Additional Treatment: The additional quantity of impervious pavement over a 2200' length of roadway is 3300 square feet (0.08 AQ. Additional impervious area may require additional drainage and treatment structures, resulting in higher costs. Summary When reviewing only the construction costs, the options are very similar. The prices may vary depending on the contractor, time of year and price of materials. If maintaining existing width is a priority, the B660 option saves 1.5' of total roadway width and results in a lower construction cost as well. �1�11 o e t, FEASIBILITY STUDY — BA 368 � ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT • CITY OF EDINA STREET IMPROVEMENTS Tracy Avenue — Benton Avenue to Vernon Avenue February 6, 2012 Appendix L Countryside Elementary School Site Council Presentation Countryside Elementary School Site Council Meeting Tracy Avenue (Tracy Avenue /Benton Avenue Intersection) January 10, 2012 oaa sid CITY OF EDINA Agenda 1. Introductions 2. Tracy Avenue Project Overview 3. Existing Intersection 4. Alternatives Considered /Chosen 5. Roundabout Advantages 6. Questions OU CITY OF EDIPtA Proposed Street Improvements Proposed Street Section • Widen from 36' to 40' • Widening all on West Side �1 No CITY OF EDINA Existing Intersection Benton Avenue Offset Alignment �ta'Ir • 70' Offset •4 — Way Stop Condition -Confusion at Intersection Y Capacity Issues r Potential Safety Issues r Bus Turn Issues CITY OF EDINA Alternatives Considered is Leave As Is • Leave as 4 Way Stop, Enhance Crosswalks Realign West Leg • Use 20 mph curves "3 a • )r IS Existing Intersection Example of Difficulty at Intersection :: CITY OF EDINA Alternatives Considered Roundabout 1 - - �2 o� CITY of EDINA Roundabout Advantages Roundabout Advantages Summary ,Safety -.-Pedestrians - 4Vehicles r. Elliptical Shape Minimizes Impacts - 4 Less Impact to Residents/School 4 Allows Benton Legs Offset Adak • > Traffic Calming' : Resolves Bus Turning Issues .., U -Turn Capabilities A - . Increased Capacity /Efficiency a1 CITY OF EDINA Roundabout Advantages Bus Turning Movements CITY Of EDINA Roundabout Advantages Safety Advantages Only Look One Directi- : Slower Vehicle Speec 4 15 mph through : Refuge Island Shorter Crossing Wid 4 16' versus 36' > Multi-Stage Vehicle R %1 CITY OF EDINA Roundabout Advantages Bus Turning Movements 4�a 1A . iUr A ,.1 ". 1 3 CITY OF EDINA Roundabout Advantages Student Pickup �aCITY OF EDINA Roundabout at School Example Modesto, CA Wo RI CITY OF EDINA Roundabout Advantages U -Turn Capahility »� Questions? .4 �tA1r 04 a �, FEASIBILITY STUDY — BA 368 Cn )o ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT °•�„� CITY OF EDINA STREET IMPROVEMENTS Tracy Avenue — Benton Avenue to Vernon Avenue February 6, 2012 Appendix M Preliminary Assessment Roll and Map 17 1F 1� 2C 21 Z 22 24 2E 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 33 34 PENDING ASSESSMENT ROLL TRACY AVENUE IMPROVEMENT BA -368 STREET PID LEGAL HOUSE NO I OWNER ASSESSABLE REU ASSESSMENT AMOUNT LOT BLOCK BENTON AVENUE 1 3211721420004 5700 STEVEN J ENCK 1/3 $ 1,472.92 2 3211721420054 5701 ISD 273 (Countryside School 4.0 $ 17,675.00 $ GROVE STREET 3 3211721130014 5616 GREG & ROSEMARY K RUSTED 1/3 $ 1,472.92 4 3211721420029 5700 VICTOR FRIDLUND JR 1/3 $ 1,472.92 5 3211721420006 5701 KENNETH J FRANK & LINDA M KLAVER 113 $ 1,472.92 HAWKES DRIVE $ 5 3211721130023 5700 VINCENT & KRISTA ERICKSON 113 $ 1,472.92 7 3211721130031 5701 CHRISTINE EHRLICH 1/3 $ 1,472.92 HAWKES TERRACE $ 3 3211721130018 5701 IDAVID & SUSAN NELSON /3 $ 1,472.92 TRACY AVENUE $ 3 3211721130040 5600 KENNETH & JEANNINE KJELLAND 1.0 $ 4,418.75 3211721130069 5601 MARK ARONSON 1.0 $ 4,418.75 I 3211721130041 5604 MICHAEL & LYNDA SONNEK 1.0 $ 4,418.75 3211721130070 5605 RICHARD CONKEY 1.0 $ 4,418.75 3211721130042 5608 ALLYSON PEARSON 1.0 $ 4,418.75 t 3211721130071 5609 KENT & HOLLY GRAVELLE 1.0 $ 4,418.75 i 3211721130060 5612 THOMAS & GRETCHEN SHANIGHT 1.0 $ 4,418.75 i 3211721130082 5615 IJAMES SUCCIO JR 1.0 $ 4,418.75 3211721130076 5621 1KATHLEEN & JAMIES TOTH 1.0 $ 4,418.75 t 3211721130057 5625 JDARA & CARLEEN MICHUDA 1.0 $ 4,418.75 I 3211721130056 5629 MICHAEL & KRISTI CURTIS 1.0 $ 4,418.75 3211721130066 5633 IMIRIAM KISER 1.0 $ 4,418.75 3211721130001 5708 IMICHELE & DARREL HART 1.0 $ 4,418.75 3211721130002 5712 ITHOMAS & JANE WIDMARK 1.0 $ 4,418.75 3211721130009 5715 IMICHAEL & ANDREA SHEEHAN 1.0 $ 4,418.75 3211721130063 5716 IMARLIN SUNDERMAN 1.0 $ 4,418.75 3211721130073 5617 IWAYNE JAMES NELSON 1.0 $ 4,418.75 3211721420038 5801 IMICHELLE & JASON KALENBORN 1.0 $ 4,418.75 3211721420037 5805 ISHERI & ANDREW LANGFIELD 1.0 $ 4,418.75 3211721420039 5809 ITAMMY & JESSE SMASAL 1.0 $ 4,418.75 3211721420040 5813 IWALID & IBTISAM ABDELAL 1.0 $ 4,418.75 3211721420041 5817 ISCOTT & SANDRA ROSEQUIST 1.0 $ 4,418.75 3211721420042 5821 IROCHELLE LACKNER 1.0 $ 4,418.75 3211721420043 5825 INANCY & DENNIS DAHLIEN 1.0 $ 4,418.75 3211721420056 5901 CLARICE NOLTE 1.0 $ 4,418.75 WARDEN AVENUE $ 3211721130008 5616 JANET KRAMER 1/3 $ 1,472.92 3211721130032 5700 RICHARD & LANE WEINBERG 113 $ 1,472.92 Total 32 PRELIMINARY ASSESSABLE ROADWAY COST $ 792,400.00 TOTAL ASSESSMENT REU 32 ASSESSMENT COST (NON -STATE AID) $141,400.00 AVERAGE COST PER REU ` 4,418.75 Tracy Avenue Improvements Legend Q t• 0 250 500 Feet A o e Preliminary Assessments l� 1/3 REU School Property (4 REU) WSB BA -368 City of Edina 1 REU -Project Location January 30, 2012 Path K \01686 -250tG ISIMa slAsaessmentMa mxd Date Saved 1!30/2012 3 57.22 PM fl� 5600 5601 5604 5605 5608 •.' 5609 5612 6615 5617 C35ZP ll•n6 r` ! .r6.. 5701 6621 �g 5700 5625 - �p 5629 8 5633 l� 5701 5700 5616 5708 5715 5712 5716 5616 B C�xoC�7 5804 C3�fli C�� D�'Q 5700 5801 5605 � pp [[8 5809 5701 5813 5817 5700 5821 g gLx�ciAGS� 5825 5901 5701 R Pirrhrr� •l lircJcsoa _�a>" �IFp3yy Tracy Avenue Improvements Legend Q t• 0 250 500 Feet A o e Preliminary Assessments l� 1/3 REU School Property (4 REU) WSB BA -368 City of Edina 1 REU -Project Location January 30, 2012 Path K \01686 -250tG ISIMa slAsaessmentMa mxd Date Saved 1!30/2012 3 57.22 PM A. 8 � FEASIBILITY STUDY - BA 368 ok H� )o ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT �•.� CITY OF EDINA STREET IMPROVEMENTS Tracy Avenue — _Benton Avenue to Vernon Avenue February 6, 2012 Appendix N City Comprehensive Plan Update — Sidewalk and Bicycle Facilities (Fig. 7.10 and 7.11) 158 /iF-S!I'm i 0 62 494, i 17 21 31 15f 62 494 17 21 31 ok @ FEASIBILITY STUDY — BA 368 Yr �� ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT `�•�:� CITY OF EDINA STREET IMPROVEMENTS Tracy Avenue — Benton Avenue to Vernon Avenue February 6, 2012 Appendix O Survey Response Map • O voos� � C� �t y� Cetulit� � � � � � • � � G2mOJbs t "a't ll�,,, . t t � L Mal Ccm ko ,..._._ f S, r, tiP N V FE �m Pond Ult _ t . lr,r'„ ` WACO �AN ❑ li L�Z2 1 udenu a i cc -j sa �.k 8 c'am r,rrrrl _ WV PId s FekAr,r.•,r,nr% ��" y ( * - Irrrrn•h nJ ( r'rrr•lr.r _ /irAr_ /` r R�lA17tl� f 11.'i�lrn l - t �� ✓�' U�_�', /u/.r "rp.T _ _ as ^��{y�`Sob ) VT� Q, \'.j, ,fatly nVulluv 1111ptuvw1fleflizi 6MUMd \ Survey Responses w. 0 750 1,500Feet A ore 1 BA -368 ,Tracy Avenue Phase 1 Non -Tracy Avenue WS`B $" / City of Edina Tracy Avenue Phase 2 Project Location Pa tft K.101658- 2501GISWm s%Surve es WS0Me and Date Saved 2/1/2012 2 41 23 PM w9tA1j ok e, FEASIBILITY STUDY — BA 368 Nr 4 o ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT �y CITY OF EDINA STREET IMPROVEMENTS Tracy Avenue — Benton Avenue to Vernon Avenue February 6, 2012 Appendix P Existing Parking Analysis Memo WSB - Infrastructure ■ Engineering ■ Planning ■ Construction Memorandum To: Wayne Houle, City of Edina From: Andrew Plowman, WSB & Associates, Inc. Date: February 1, 2012 701 Xenia Avenue South Suite 300 Minneapolis, MN 55416 Tel: 763 541 -4800 Fax: 763 541 -1700 Re: Analysis of Existing Parking Conditions on Tracy Avenue (Benton Avenue to Vernon Avenue) Tracy Avenue Reconstruction Project Edina, MN WSB Project Number 01686 -25 This memo is intended to answer questions raised in an email from Jennifer Janovy to Wayne Houle, dated Wednesday, February 1, 2012 (see attached). The distance from each home on Tracy (Vernon to Benton) to the closest side street parkin$ (even if across the street): The distance to the nearest side street was measured for each residence along the corridor, even if the residence's driveway was off a side street. See Figure 1 for a summary at each property. The measurement, for residences east of Tracy Avenue, assumed the following walking trip; 1. Begin from the side street (20' from Tracy Avenue), 2. Crossing Tracy Avenue perpendicular to traffic; 3. Turning perpendicular along the sidewalk; 4. Turning perpendicular up the driveway or house sidewalk. Minneapolis ■ St. Cloud Equal Opportunity Employer c:mibe 250'naminM=\Fou;w;fy RqWUVpamdWMcw_E,i�.dxx Existing Parking Memo Page 2 The measurement for residences west of Tracy Avenue (with driveways along Tracy Avenue, assumed the following walking trip: 1. Begin from the side street (20' from Tracy Avenue), 2. Turn perpendicular on the existing west shoulder, 3. Turn perpendicular up the driveway. - The number of on -site parking spaces (including garage) for each home: The number of on -site parking spaces was measured by assuming all available driveway pavement could be used for parking and there would be no encroachment on the lawn. The minimum parking dimension for a vehicle in this configuration was assumed to be 22' length and 8' width per vehicle. See Figure 1 for the summarized results per property. The number of on- street parking spaces on Tracy currently (and size of each space as a rule): The criteria used for the amount of on- street parking spaces that currently exist along Tracy Avenue are; 1. Edina City Code 1400. 10, Subd. 1: Additional Parking Rules. No person shall stop, stand or park a vehicle, except when necessary to avoid conflict with other traffic or in compliance with the directions of a police officer or traffic control device, in any of the following places:.... B. Within five feet of the intersection of any public or private driveway or alley with any street or highway;.... 2. The City of Edina does not have a code regarding parking lane length along City Streets. The AASHTO, 2004 "A Policy on Geometric Design of Highways and Streets ", page 375, Exhibit 4 -31, shows parking lane lengths of 22' — 26'. For the purposes of this analysis we assumed 22' needed for a parking space. Due to the numerous driveways and irregular spacing of the driveways, often additional length beyond the 22' would be available once the 5' setback was taken into account. Based on the criteria above, we measured 54 total parking spaces, See Figure 2. K:\01686- 250�Mm A3DrA\FadbihtYRepmA x\?Ae _EtietinQPa'kin¢.do Existing Parking Memo Page 3 Areas currently posted "NO PARKING ": Currently, the only streets with posted no parking signs within the corridor is the west side of Tracy Avenue and the east leg of Benton Avenue. Cost to Construct a Typical Parking Space: The following is a summary of the cost of a typical parking space. But in reality, reflects the reduced cost of a project if less pavement was needed for a parking lane. Costs such as removals, curb and gutter, storm sewer, etc. would still be part of the project even if the parking lane wasn't constructed, or in this case, reconstructed. The typical parking stall is 8' wide and 22' in length. However, 1.5' of the 8' is curb and gutter. Thus the parking stall width is 6.5' wide and 22' in length. This results in the following area: 221 x6.5' =143sf = 15.9sy Assume a 7" bituminous section over 6" aggregate base section Pavement Cost: 15.9 sv x 7" x 113 lbs /sy /in = 6.3 tons x $60 /ton = $378 /parking stall 2000 lbs /ton Aggregate Base Cost: 15.9 sy x 0.17 yard = 2.65 cubic yard x $20 /cy = $53 /parking stall Total Cost per parking stall = $431 As an Engineer, do you have an opinion about whether there would be safety benefits associated with removing parking on the curve areas of Tracy (for example if there are bike lanes)? Provided a curve is designed and constructed according to a designated design speed, we do not believe there is any added safety benefit to removing a parking lane. K:\A I686- 250\Ad \Doc Twsib0iry ReponWppm \Mano_E is i gpa king.doc i a t -i �'!� — ',Sa. }3� i♦ I - 5 `� -� 'fir .} a4 i! 1 s I aiu �YAir • h �� 4: �. • �) .. 58 01 5716 Tra Trac 'spa, Avd Ave ��. st• ,�11i o .5700 ; f Tracy .Tracy a 5700 < Grove St _Benton Ave 5701 cn Ave Ave t Grovc St 5700 . + 1 .4 O (D Warden Avg c CD co s Y a ro _ M , © © © O © © 1 r 5901L D 1 .1 .1 1 • 1 ' 1 5616 5715 561 E CD Tracy Ave m ' "�' _ _ Grove St Tracy Ave Warden c Trac # sTrac Tracy . Tracy Tracy 'Tracy Tracy � �' w r 17 5825 .w 5821 5817 5813 5809 15805 -* Ave • Ave Ave Ave - Ave y Ave Ave + !: - m EX AMPLE DISTANCE CALCULATION: M _x, 5633. 5 T racy Ave T r I r , *L M - Johnson Drive Distance from Garage Door to Sidewalk via Driveway " N p Distance from Driveway to Close Side of Nearest Crgss Street r� t Distance across Tracy Ave (If Applicable) t O Clearance Space from Intersection (20' from Radial Curb) r ' jo,„ �► 1,% a Tracy Avenue Improvements Property Parking Summary City of Edina, Minnesota Figure 1 APO, j �� / 'ant! � • `� u', 6L gg i - .. s ♦t JK.0 * ' y r, LEGEND Existing Parking �r � , • ,;� � - - - - , - •. � (8' x 22' Typical Parking Space) um Number o N b f Spaces .- - - - s ` a Vi-, ` A" CD �. #� D V? t i v' CD ti ►' — CD O 1� n y N 1 i _ N ID -• — L ' 40 a � bt CD Alm =3 JOEL : Q q x m 3 r- 5 L ,_.,. y , ar [ `f i .71 Johnson Drive , r _ 7L e Tracy Avenue Improvements Existing Parking Spaces '.. City of Edina, Minnesota Figure 2 Andrew Plowman From: Wayne Houle <WHoule @ci.edina.mn.us> Sent: Wednesday, February 01, 2012 9:57 AM To: Jennifer Cc: Andrew Plowman Subject: Re: Tracy and general parking questions I'll talk to Andy at WSB and have them provide this information. Sent from my Motorola phone. --- - - - - -- Original Message----- - - - - -- From: Jennifer <rjmeyovy @comcast.net> Sent: Wed Feb 0109:34:05 CST 2012 TO: Wayne Houle <WHoule @ci.edina.mn.us> Subject: Tracy and general parking questions Hi, Wayne. Following up on my earlier email about on street residential convenience parking, is it possible to get the following information? These same questions were asked during W. 70th and bike boulevard discussions and were not answered (although number of parking spaces and NO PARKING areas on W. 70th were eventually provided). The distance from each home on Tracy (Vernon to Benton) to the closest side street parking (even if across the street); The number of on -site parking spaces (including garage) for reach home; The number of on street parking spaces on Tracy currently (and size of each space as a rule); Areas currently posted "NO PARKING "'; and Cost to construct a typical parking space. I understand the parking discussion is not really one that staff has wanted to have, but I think ETC members would like to have an informed discussion. I don't assume it will necessarily lead to a recommendation to remove parking on Tracy, but do think this discussion is going to come up more frequently as decisions need to be made about how available road space /right of way is used. Lastly, as an engineer do you have an opinion about whether there would be safety benefits associated with removing parking on the curve areas of Tracy (for example, if there are bike lanes)? Please let me know. This would be a high priority going into the February 16 ETC meeting. Thanks. Jennifer