Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2011-04-19 COUNCIL MEETING;4 AGENDA EDINA HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY EDINA CITY COUNCIL APRIL.19, 2011 7:00 P.M. ROLLCALL ADOPTION OF CONSENT AGENDA Adoption of the Consent Agenda is made by the Commissioners as to HRA items and by the Council Members as to Council items. All agenda items marked with an asterisk ( *) in bold print are Consent Agenda items and are considered routine and will be.enacted by one motion. There will be no separate discussion of such items unless a Commissioner or Council Member so requests it. In such cases the item will be removed from the.Consent Agenda and considered in its normal sequence on the Agenda. EDINA HOUSING & REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY * I. APPROVAL OF MINUTES OF HRA - Regular Meeting of April 5, 2010 * II. Proposed Tax Increment Financing Policy III. ADJOURNMENT i EDINA CITY COUNCIL Recognition of Sgt. Brian Tholen — Lifetime Achievement Award - Special Operations Training Association * I. APPROVAL OF MINUTES - Regular Meeting of April 5, 2010 and Work Session of April 5, 2010 II. 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: Temporary On -sale Intoxicating Liquor License — Edina Chamber of Commerce Taste of Edina, May 12, 2011 (Favorable vote of majority of Council Members to approve) Agenda/Edina City Council April 19, 2011 Page 2 B. PUBLIC HEARING: — New On -sale & Sunday Sale Intoxicating Liquor License — Ruby Tuesday, 1975 Southdale Center (Favorable vote of majority of Council Members to approve) C. PUBLIC HEARING: — Conditional Use Permit, Jeff Miller and Connie Carrino, 4509 Garrison Lane, Resolution No. 2011 -47 (Favorable vote of majority of Council Members to approve) D. PUBLIC HEARING: — Ordinance No. 2011 -05 Amending Section 850 Side Yard Setback Exception For Properties Designated Within The Heritage Landmark District (First Reading: Requires offering of Ordinance only. Second Reading: Favorable rollcall vote of three Council Members to pass. Waiver of Second Reading: Affirmative rollcall vote of four Council Members to pass.) E. PUBLIC HEARING: — Ordinance No. 2011 -06 Amending Section 850 Establishing the Planning Commission as the Zoning Board of Appeals (First Reading: Requires offering of Ordinance only. Second Reading: Favorable rollcall vote of three Council Members to pass. Waiver of Second Reading: Affirmative rollcall vote of four Council Members to pass.) III. AWARD OF BID /CHANGE ORDERS * A. 2011 Commodities Purchase - Sand, Rock, Bituminous Materials, Concrete, and Water Treatment Chemicals — Continued From April 5, 2011 * B. Snow Blower — Street Department * C. Pool Boiler Replacement — Edina Aquatic Center IV. REPORTS /RECOMMENDATIONS (Favorable vote of majority of Council Members present to approve except where noted) A. Sketch Plan Review, Ed Noonan, 4528 & 4530 France Avenue * B. Super America New 3.2 Off -Sale Liquor License * C. Proposed Tax Increment Financing Policy— Continued From April 5, 2011 * D. Resolution No. 2011 -48 Revising the City Council Agenda E. Proposed Policy for Recording and Broadcasting City Commission Meetings F. Resolution No. 2011 -46 Accepting Various Donations * G. Traffic Safety Report of April 6, 2011 * H. Resolution No. 2011 -49 Designating No Parking on West 44`h Street * I. Approve Professional Services Agreement With Urban Land Institute (ULI) For Energy Management Consulting Services V. 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 p Agenda /Edina City Council April 19, 2011 Page 3 future consideration. Individuals must limit their comments to three minutes. The Mayor may limit the number of speaks on the some 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. VI. FINANCE * A. CONFIRMATION OF PAYMENT OF CLAIMS As per, Pre -List dated April 7 2011, TOTAL $413,812.02; and per Pre -List dated April 14 2011, TOTAL $976,410.47; and Credit Card Transactions from 2/26/11— 3/25/11 TOTAL $4,595.41 VII. CORRESPONDENCE AND PETITIONS A. Correspondence VIII. MAYOR AND COUNCIL COMMENTS A. , Process For Student Board & Commissions Applications & Interviews B. Park Board Vacancies IX. MANAGER'S COMMENTS X. ADJOURNMENT The City of Edina wants all residents to be comfortable being part of the public process. If you need assistance in the way of hearing amplification, an interpreter, large -print documents or something else, please call 952 - 927 - 886172 hours in advance of the meeting. SCHEDULE OF UPCOMING MEETINGS /DATES /EVENTS Tues Apr 19 Work Session — Economic Development 5:00 P.M. COMMUNITY ROOM Tues Apr 19 Regular Meeting 7:00 P.M. COUNCIL CHAMBERS Wed Apr 27 State of The Community 11:30 A.M. INTERLACHEN COUNTRY CLUB Thur Apr 28 Volunteer Recognition Reception 5:00 P.M. EDINBOROUGH PARK GREAT HALL Tues May 3 Work Session - -Joint Meeting With B & C Chairs 5:00 P.M. COMMUNITY ROOM Tues May 3 Regular Meeting 7:00 P.M. COUNCIL CHAMBERS Tues May 17 Work Session —Joint Meeting With Heritage Preservation Brd 5:00 P.M. COMMUNITY ROOM Tues May 17 Regular Meeting 7:00 P.M. COUNCIL CHAMBERS Wed May 18 Public Works Open House 3:30 -7:00 P.M. PUBLIC WORKS Mon May 30 MEMORIAL DAY HOLIDAY OBSERVED — City Hall Closed Tues Jun 7 Work Session — Budget Planning 5:00 P.M. COMMUNITY ROOM Tues Jun 7 Regular Meeting 7:00 P.M. COUNCIL CHAMBERS Wed Jun 8 Employee Recognition 11:00 A.M. & 12:30 P.M. BRAEMAR CLUBHOUSE Tues Jun 21 Work Session — Neighborhood Associations 5:00 P.M. COMMUNITY ROOM Tues Jun 21 Regular Meeting 7:00 P.M. COUNCIL CHAMBERS MINUTES OF THE EDINA HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY HELD AT CITY HALL APRIL 5, 2011 7:09 P.M. ROLLCALL Answering rollcall were Commissioners Bennett, Brindle, Sprague, and Chair Hovland. Commissioner Swenson was absent. CONSENT .AGENDA APPROVED Motion made by Commissioner Bennett and seconded . by Commissioner Brindle, for approval . of the Edina Housing and Redevelopment Authority Consent Agenda as presented. Rolccall: Ayes:. Bennett, Brindle, Sprague, Swenson, Hovland Motion carried. *MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF MARCH 15, 2011, APPROVED Motion made by Commissioner Bennett and seconded by Commissioner Brindle approving the Minutes of the Regular Meeting of the Edina Housing and Redevelopment Authority for March 15, 2011. Motion carried on rollcall vote - four ayes. There being no further business on the Edina Housing and Redevelopment Authority Agenda, Chair Hovland declared the meeting adjourned at 7:10 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Scott Neal, Executive Director o e ,:` ,aas REPORT /RECOMMENDATION To: MAYOR AND COUNCIL Agenda Item HRA Item: II. Council Item: IV.C. From: Scott Neal City Manager Action Discussion Information Date: April 19, 2011 Subject: PROPOSED Tax Increment Finance Policy ACTION REQUESTED: Approve proposed Tax Increment Finance (TIF) Policy INFORMATION /BACKGROUND: The City of Edina does not currently have a Tax Increment Financing Policy. I have adapted this policy from one that was originally produced by the League of Minnesota Cities and then subsequently modified by a number of Minnesota cities. This proposed policy would be fairly characterized as a conservative policy. For example: It does not provide up -front or speculative TIF assistance. it allows only PAYGO TIF assistance. 2. It requires the use of "look back" provisions in TIF agreements that allow for the City to recapture the TIF assistance if it can be demonstrated that it was not actually needed. 3. It requires applicants for TIF assistance to pay for all costs associated with the development of the TIF agreement up front through application fees and pre - action deposits. A TIF policy is desirable for staff and applicants alike. It provides a basic deal framework for those early discussions between staff and applicant which can be very important in an economic development opportunity. ATTACHMENTS: Proposed Tax Increment Finance Policy i� o e "0 V � � MW CITY OF EDINA TAX INCREMENT FINANCING POLICY For the,purpose of this policy, the "City" shall also mean the Edina Housing and Redevelopment Authority (HRA), which assists in a variety of housing, redevelopment, and economic development activities for the City of Edina. General TIF Definition: o.. The City of Edina has the authority to use Tax Increment Financing (TIF), pursuant to Minnesota State Statutes. TIF uses the increased property taxes generated by new real estate development within tax increment financing districts to pay for certain cost associated with the development. The complete TIF Act can be found in Minnesota Statutes, Section 469.174 - 469.1799. Policy Purpose: • Establish criteria and guidelines for how Tax Increment Financing (TIF) is utilized in Edina. • Help insure that TIF assistance is used in a consistent and equitable manner. General TIF Policies: • The use of TIF will be considered for projects that qualify and meet the general use of law as defined in Minnesota Statutes, Section 469.174 — 469..1799. • The use of TIF will only be considered on case by case basis for projects that help accomplish the City's goals for housing,, redevelopment, and economic development described in its Comprehensive Plan, Economic Development Strategies, and other related policy, documents approved by the City. Council. • TIF may be considered to encourage, stimulate, and attract desirable development and /or redevelopment that would not occur without the use of TIF. • TIF will be provided on a pay -as- you -go basis. In certain cases, up -front assistance may be considered by the City, but will be at the sole discretion of the City Council. • The City reserves the right to approve or reject the use of TIF, the amount of TIF, and the total term, on a case by case basis, taking into consideration established policies, project criteria, and demand on services in relation to the potential benefits from the project. F . • Applicant will pay for all legal and consultant costs associated with the preparation, processing, review and actual use of TIF. Applicant will submit to the City a deposit equal to the total estimated costs for legal and consultant fees. The City will draw upon these funds to pay all related expenses. • Applicant will also pay to the City a separate non - refundable application fee of $2,000 to reimburse staff costs and cover all other City related costs associated with the processing the TIF request. • Projects utilizing TIF are responsible for paying their share of Fiscal Disparities contribution from the project. • The City's Financial Advisor shall prepare the TIF plan and the applicant will provide to the City and its financial advisor all information necessary to conduct a financial analysis of the proposed project. • Tax increment financing assistance will not be provided to projects that have the financial feasibility to proceed without the benefit of tax increment financing. The business or developer shall provide the City with a project financial pro -forma and a development budget at the time of application. In effect, tax increment financing assistance will not be provided solely to provide an excessive contingency to the project or broaden a developer's profit margins on a project. • Prior to approval of a tax increment financing plan, the business developer shall provide any required market and financial feasibility studies, appraisals, environmental studies, soil boring information for the project, and other information or data that the City or its financial consultants may require in order to proceed with an independent underwriting. Such information may be public information at the time of submission. • The business developer should provide adequate financial guarantees to ensure completion of the project and the repayment of the tax increment financing subsidy. These may include, but are not limited to, assessment agreements, insurance, letters of credit, etc. • Any business or developer requesting tax increment financing assistance should be able to demonstrate past successful general development capability as well as specific capability in the type and size of development proposed. The developer shall submit a list of qualifications and references. • The TIF agreement will include "look back" provisions to ensure that the TIF was actually needed or will be reimbursed unless otherwise determined by the City Council. , • The provision of TIF is contingent upon receiving all other necessary project approvals for the City. • The City will require compliance with the State of Minnesota Business Subsidy Laws in Minnesota Statutes, Section 1161.993 through 116.997, unless the project meets one of the business subsidy exceptions. 4 Cn t7 � •y • fNroRPOPI`T4'9 • 18BB Recognition of Sgt. Brian Tholen - Lifetime Achievement Award - Special Operations Training Association ❑ No packet data ❑ Oral presentation ❑ Information coming MINUTES. OF THE WORK SESSION OF THE EDINA CITY COUNCIL HELD AT CITY HALL APRIL 5, 2011 5:04 P.M. Member Bennett called the meeting to order at 5:04 p.m. in the Community Room of City Hall. Answering rollcall were Members Bennett, Brindle, and Sprague. Mayor Hovland entered the meeting at 5:10 p.m. Member Swenson was absent. Staff attending the meeting included: Todd Anderson, Golf Course Manager; Doug Bauman, Braemar Arena Manager; Jennifer Bennerotte, Communications & Marketing Director; Steve Grausam, Liquor Operations Director; Diana Hedges, Art Center Director; Ann Kattreh, Edinborough Park Manager; John Keprios, Park & Recreation Director; Ed MacHolda, Assistant Park & Recreation Director; Debra Mangen, City Clerk; Susie Miller, Assistant Edinborough Park Manager; Scott Neal, City Manager; Eric Roggeman, Assistant Finance Director; Tom Shirley, Centennial Lakes Park Manager; Ceil Smith, Assistant to the City Manager; and John Wallin, Finance Director. Member Bennett said the purpose of the meeting was to review the City's Enterprise Business Plans. Manager Neal stated the purpose of the enterprise business plans' review was: • To receive feedback and input from the Council on the draft business plan updates • To assist the Council with discussion about policy options for the operation and management of the City's enterprises. • To provide clear operational and management philosophical guidance to staff • To demonstrate to residents the City takes stewardship of enterprises seriously Mr. Neal asked the Council members to share their feedback and identify questions or information they would like see in the next draft. He briefly reviewed the cost recovery goals of each enterprise and noted that each enterprise plan included new overall themes: 1) Cost recovery expectation, 2) Break -even scenario, 3) Customer Identification and 4) Market Activity. With the assistance of the facility managers, Mr. Neal reviewed each enterprise as follows: Braemar Arena — Doug Bauman, Manager The cost recovery for 2010 was 85% with the same goal set for 2011. Mr. Neal, Mr. Bauman and the Council reviewed the market, including the amount of ice time Feviewed reserved by the major customers (Edina High School, Edina Hockey Association, and Braemar City of Lakes Figure Skating Club). Discussion points included: capacity for ice rental and percent of capacity rental; revenue derived from advertisements on the boards in the South Arena from the Hockey Association and the East Arena from the Figure Skating Club; potential revenue for City from advertising; need to review the financials from the Association and Club; operation of the concession stand; price of ice in the Twin Cities market; possibility of recruiting private partnership to share operational costs; origin of current agreement governing ads and concessions. Staff will review agreements and report financials for advertising and concession revenue. Braemar Golf Course — Todd Anderson, Manager The cost recovery for 2010 was 97% with the 2011 goal set for 100 %. It was noted that during 2010 the total rounds declined, operating revenue decreased and operating expenses were stable. The debt service that has challenged the golf course will be ending with the last payment in 2013. The Council and Minutes /Edina City Council Work Session /April S. 2011 staff discussed: separating the financial reporting for the Golf Dome, driving range, Fred Richards and Braemar, areas requiring potential improvement such as the driving range, the original 18 -hole golf course, clubhouse and Clunie nine, the Braemar Memorial Gift Fund, and potentially increasing rates for play for 2012. Centennial Lakes Park — Tom Shirley, Manager & Edinborough Park — Ann Kattreh, Manager The cost recovery for 2010 was 78% with the 2011 goal set for 80 %. The 2010 operating revenue was up slightly, and the operating expenses were down slightly. Mr. Neal requested Council to give direction: whether the two entities should be separated, management of the trust fund, and overall operating philosophy of the two parks. Council and staff discussed: potential operational challenges of separating the entities (both mangers felt operating separately was totally feasible), the sunset of the trust fund that has supported the parks, whether there were physical improvements or additions that could be completed at Edinborough that would improve its profit /loss, philosophically should both parks be operated with subsidies or must they break even, can the costs for Edinborough be specially assessed when the trust fund is depleted. Staff will work on separating the financials and report findings to Council. Edina Art Center, Diana Hedges, Director The cost recovery for 2010 was 71% with the 2011 goal set for 70 %. Both the operating revenues and expenses were down in 2010 from 2009. Staff and Council discussed the challenges of operating an art center during a slow economy, the physical challenges of parking at the art center, whether or not a reduction in hours would be prudent, a brief review of the Taste of Creativity, and the array of classes offered. Edina Aquatic Center, Ed MacHolda, Assistant Park & Recreation Director The 2010 cost recovery was 126% and the goal for 2011 has been set for 100 %. Operational revenue was up in 2010, and expenses were down. Staff discussed with the Council the user structure; need to keep the center up to date and fresh, timing of the FlowRider installation, history of swimming lessons, and structure of operations. Edina Liquor, Steve Grausam, Liquor Operations Director The 2010 cost recovery was 111% with a goal for 2011 of 110 %. Both operating revenue and expenses were up for 2011. The 2010 operating income was up $60,000. Recent proposed legislation may challenge how Edina Liquor operates. Staff and Council discussed the changes in local markets and subsequent impact on sales, how Edina can maintain its share of the market competing with "warehouse" type operations, whether the 50th and France Store could remain viable, potential improvements necessary to maintain the three stores, and should the possibility of a fourth store be investigated. There being no further business, Mayor Hovland adjourned the meeting at 6:58 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Debra A. Mangen, City Clerk Minutes approved by Edina City Council, April 19, 2011 James B. Hovland, Mayor Page 2 0. MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE EDINA CITY COUNCIL HELD AT CITY HALL APRIL 5, 2011 7:10 P.M. ROLLCALL Answering rollcall were Members Bennett, Brindle, Sprague, and Mayor Hovland. Absent at rollcall was Member Swenson. CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS APPROVED Motion made by Member Bennett and seconded by Member Brindle approving the Council consent agenda with the exceptions of Item II.D., Contract ENG 11-5, Imp. Nos. BA -334, SS -460, STS -375, WM -511 & BR -7; Minnehaha Woods Neighborhood Roadway Improvements & West 56`h Street Bridge; and, Item II.F., Contract 11 -01PK, Chowen Park Playground Improvements. Rollcall: Ayes: Bennett, Brindle, Sprague, Hovland Motion carried. ARBOR DAY PROCLAIMED Mayor Hovland read a proclamation declaring April 29 as Arbor Day 2011 in the City of Edina. Member Sprague made a motion, seconded by Member Bennett, approving the proclamation declaring Arbor Day 2011. Ayes: Bennett, Brindle, Sprague, Hovland Motion carried. Park & Recreation Director Keprios advised of the upcoming Arbor Day project. DAYS OF REMEMBRANCE PROCLAIMED — Jessica Kingston and John Cashmore, Human Rights & Relations Commissioners, recommended the ereati^^ ^ that Edina observe Days of Remembrance, established by the US Congress, to remember Holocaust victims and promote human dignity, beginning with an event at Edina City Hall May 1, 2011. Mayor Hovland read a proclamation declaring the week of May 1 -8, 2011, as Days of Remembrance in the City of Edina. Member Bennett made a motion, seconded by Member Brindle, approving the proclamation declaring Days of Remembrance, May 1 -8, 2011, and authorizing the event on May 1, 2011. Ayes: Bennett, Brindle, Sprague, Hovland Motion carried. Mr. Cashmore advised of upcoming Days of Remembrance events and Ms. Kingston announced the educational presentation and panel discussion on April 26, 2011, about bullying. EARTH DAY PROCLAIMED Mayor Hovland read a proclamation declaring April 22, 2011, as Earth Day in the City of Edina. Member Sprague made a motion, seconded by Member Bennett, approving the proclamation declaring Earth Day, April 22, 2011. Ayes: Bennett, Brindle, Sprague, Hovland Motion carried. Bob Gubrud, Energy & Environment Commissioner, introduced the Education and Outreach Working Group and advised of their activities to promote energy and earth friendly practices. *MINUTES APPROVED — REGULAR MEETING OF MARCH 15, 2011, AND WORK SESSION OF MARCH 15. 2011 Motion made by Member Bennett and seconded by Member Brindle approving the minutes of the regular meeting of March 15, 2011, and work session of March 15, 2011. Motion carried on rollcall vote — four ayes. Page 1 Minutes /Edina City Council /April 5 2011 R AWARD OF BID – EDINA FIRE DEPARTMENT – TRAINING CENTER 6TH FLOOR BURNER Manager Neal recommended the Council table consideration of the training center 6th floor burner to allow time to obtain a competitive bid. Member Brindle made a motion, seconded by Member Bennett, tabling indefinitely consideration of Training Center sixth floor burner. Ayes: Bennett, Brindle, Sprague, Hovland Motion carried. *AWARD OF BID – EDINA FIRE DEPARTMENT – REPAIR OF FIRE DEPARTMENT PUMPER E -81 Motion made by Member Bennett and seconded by Member Brindle awarding the bid for repair of Fire Department Pumper E -81 to the recommended low bidder, Premier Fleet Services at $33,200.68. Motion carried on rollcall vote – four ayes. *AWARD OF BID – 2011 COMMODITIES PURCHASE – SAND. ROCK, BITUMINOUS MATERIALS, CONCRETE. AND WATER TREATMENT CHEMICALS – CONTINUED TO APRIL 19, 2011 Motion made by Member Bennett and seconded by Member Brindle continuing award of bid for the 2011 commodities purchase to April 19, 2011. Motion carried on rollcall vote – four ayes. AWARD OF BID – CONTRACT ENG 11 -5. IMP. NOS. BA -334, SS -460, STS -375. WM -511 & BR -7; MINNEHAHA WOODS NEIGHBORHOOD ROADWAY IMPROVEMENTS & WEST 56TH STREET BRIDGE In response to the Council's inquiry, Public Works Director /City Engineer Houle stated the watermain costs increased since the preparation of the CIP because when a project specification is prepared greater detail is used which results in some areas increasing and some decreasing. He stated the 2011 CIP understated the watermain work needed for the project and added that three competitive bids were received for Alternate A. Mr. Houle explained the bids were under the estimate costs because of the economy and the favorable bidding environment. Member Sprague made a motion, seconded by Member Brindle, awarding the bid for Contract No. ENG 11 -5, Imp. Nos. BA -334, SS -460, STS -375, WM -511, and BR -7; Minnehaha Woods Neighborhood Roadway Improvements and West 56th Street bridge to the recommended low bidder, Palda & Sons at $4,259,438.35 for Base Bid and Alternate A. Ayes: Bennett, Brindle, Sprague, Hovland Motion carried. *AWARD OF BID – CONTRACT ENG 10 -13, IMP. NO. WM -509 GLEASON ROAD WATER TOWER CLEANING. REPAIRING AND PAINTING Motion made by Member Bennett and seconded by Member Brindle awarding the bid for Contact No. ENG 10 -13, Imp. No. WM -5091 Gleason Road water tower cleaning, repairing and painting to the recommended low bidder, M.K. Painting, Inc. at $449,000.00. Motion carried on rollcall vote – four ayes. AWARD OF BID — CONTRACT 11 -01PK CHOWEN PARK PLAYGROUND IMPROVEMENTS The Council indicated it was impressed with the new process used in the design for the Chowen Park Improvements. Mr. Keprios described the process, which was more formal; that was used to gather additional community input. Member Sprague made a motion, seconded by Member Bennett, awarding the bid for Contract 11 -01PK, Chowen Park Playground Improvements, to the recommended low bidder, Fitol -Hintz Construction at $109,884.50. Ayes: Bennett, Brindle, Sprague, Hovland Motion carried. *AWARD OF BID – 2011 EVAPCO EVAPORATOR – CONDENSER – BRAEMAR ARENA Motion made by Member Bennett and seconded by Member Brindle awarding the bid for 2011 EVAPCO evaporative condenser, Braemar Arena, to the recommended low bidder, Cool Air Mechanical at $54,768.00. Motion carried on rollcall vote – four ayes. Page 2 Minutes /Edina City Council /April S. 2011 GYPSY MOTH PRESENTATION MADE Lucia Hunt, Minnesota Department of Agriculture, updated the Council regarding the Gypsy Moth infestation near Highways 169 and 62 comprising 136 acres (12 acres in southwest Edina) and plans for multi -year BTK organic aerial treatment starting in May of 2011. Ms. Hunt said notification has been mailed to residents in the affected area. She explained that since the Gypsy Moth treatment program received federal funding, an Environmental Assessment was required which was nearing completion. The Council asked questions of Ms. Hunt about trapping_ and monitoring moths .to verify the treatment's effectiveness as well as the safety of the product used on exposed residents. Ms. Hunt reiterated the dates and time of day that treatment would occur, stated notification would include local media, and information regarding the treatment would be posted in the affected area. Member Brindle made a motion, seconded by Member Sprague, authorizing staff to send a letter to the Federal Aviation Administration to approve spraying of Gypsy Moths in the southwest area of Edina. Ayes: Bennett, Brindle, Sprague, Hovland Motion carried. CITY COUNCIL MEETING AGENDA MODIFIED Mr. Neal offered suggestions to modify the agenda to group perfunctory administrative actions earlier on the agenda. The Council discussed when Community Comment should be placed on the agenda, reiterating its desire for transparency. The Council supported scheduling Community Comment on- camera, just prior to Public Hearings, with a limit of three minutes per speaker but without an overall time limit. The Council indicated support for compiling Consent Agenda items and discussed whether items removed from the Consent Agenda should be addressed immediately following or when that item would have been considered if not on the Consent Agenda. Mr. Neal recommended those items be considered immediately following since it was not uncommon to have staff and residents in attendance concerning consent items. The Council supported reordering the Housing and Redevelopment Authority (HRA) to follow the Council agenda unless an HRA public hearing was scheduled. The Council considered whether to start the meeting with •°citation of the Dledge of Allegianee eF a unity statement. It was noted the Council had adopted the U.S. Council of Mayors' Civility Accord and directed staff to post it, in some fashion, in its Chambers; however, it was too lengthy to read at the start of each meeting. Council consensus was to begin meeting °. ^^ ° city statement suggest language for a unity statement from staff to be further reviewed by the Council. Council consensus was reached directing staff to draft a resolution reordering the agenda as follows: Meeting Instructions, Call to Order, Roll Call, Unity Statement, Approval of the Meeting Agenda, Adoption of Consent Agenda, Pulled Consent Agenda Items, Recognitions and Presentations, Community Comment with three minutes /citizen, Public Hearings, Reports and Recommendations, Finance, Correspondence and Petitions, Mayor and Council Comments, Manager's Comments, and Housing & Redevelopment Authority. It was noted that more discussion on a unity statement would be held prior to any implementation. BUSINESS SUBSIDY POLICY ADOPTED Mr. Neal presented the draft Business Subsidy Policy and advised that State Statutes required cities to adopt such criteria prior to awarding business subsidies. He noted the addition of a public hearing process in response to a request for public subsidy prior to approval of said subsidy. The Council discussed its support to obtain public comment through a hearing process and expressed concern with the language of item C indicating "In cases where the objective was the retention of existing jobs, the recipient of the subsidy shall be required to provide reasonably demonstrable evidence that the loss of those jobs is imminent," which may be too high a standard. City Attorney Knutson offered revised language. Member Bennett made a motion, seconded by Member Sprague, adopting Business Subsidy Policy revising Item C as follows: "In cases where the objective is the retention of existing jobs, the recipient of the subsidy shall be required to provide evidence that the loss of those jobs is probable." Ayes: Bennett, Brindle, Sprague, Hovland Motion carried. Page 3 Minutes /Edina City Council /April 5 2011 TAX INCREMENT FINANCING POLICY TABLED Member Brindle made a motion, seconded by Member Bennett, to table consideration of the Tax Increment Financing Policy to a date to be determined by the City Manager Ayes: Bennett, Brindle, Sprague, Hovland Motion carried. PROPOSED SPORTS DOME Mr. Neal advised of the activities by a group of Edina residents that wished to develop an indoor sports facility, possibly through a partnership with the City and School District. The School Board had received the proponent's presentation and requested additional information, which could also be requested by the City Council. The Council discussed its support to request additional information including eeit proposed financing. ORDINANCE NO. 2011 -03 ADOPTED — AMENDING SECTION 100.11 REGARDING BACKGROUND. CHECKS Mr. Neal presented the recommendation of the Police Department to adopt an ordinance amending the City Code concerning background checks and reviewed the clarifying revisions Member, Bennett proposed. Member Bennett made a motion, seconded by Member Brindle, to grant First and waive Second Reading adopting Ordinance No. 2011 -03, amending Chapter 1 of the Edina City Code concerning background checks, as revised. Rollcall: Ayes: Bennett, Brindle, Sprague, Hovland Motion carried. PARK BOARD SUBCOMMITTEES AUTHORIZED Mr. Keprios presented the Park Board Chairman's request to form subcommittees that would include non -Park Board member residents. He indicated the Park Board had not yet established bylaws that would allow them to form subcommittee. The bylaws were drafted and would be considered at its upcoming meeting. So the PaFk 99aFd WaS Fequesting ap ffev.,l of the Subeemmf + +^^ f0ffna +' ^ ^. In absence of bylaws, the Park Board requested specific approval of the Council to form subcommittee. The Council and City Clerk Mangen discussed how open meeting requirements would be met by posting the meeting or assuring the subcommittee was comprised of less than a quorum number of the Park Board. Mr. Keprios acknowledged staffs support of the Board's request. Member Bennett made a motion, seconded by Member Sprague, authorizing the Park Board to establish subcommittees to study: 1) association fees and fee - related matters; 2) donations policy and establish a naming of parks and facilities policy; 3) review responses to the golf course request for proposals; and, allowing residents (non -Park Board members) to serve on the subcommittees. Ayes: Bennett, Brindle, Sprague, Hovland Motion carried. ART CENTER BOARD AND HERITAGE PRESERVATION BOARD APPOINTMENTS ENDORSED Mayor Hovland made a motion, seconded by Member Sprague, endorsing the Mayor's appointment of Alfreda Terry to the Art Center Board for a term ending February 1, 2013, and Terry Ahlstrom to the Heritage Preservation Board for a term ending February 1, 2012. Ayes: Bennett, Brindle, Sprague, Hovland Motion carried. RESOLUTION NO. 2011 -41 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 Bennett introduced and moved adoption of Resolution No. 2011 -41 accepting various donations. Member Brindle seconded the motion. Rollcall: Ayes: Bennett, Brindle, Sprague, Hovland Page 4 I Minutes /Edina City Council /April 5, 2011 Motion carried. *AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITIES OF BLOOMINGTON & EDINA FOR PUBLIC HEALTH EMERGENCY RESPONSES (PHER I. II, III) AMENDED Motion made by Member Bennett and seconded by Member Brindle approving the amended agreement between the cities of Bloomington and Edina for Public Health Emergency Responses (PHER I, II, III). Motion carried on rollcall vote — four ayes. *RESOLUTION NO. 2011 -40 ADOPTED — FINDINGS OF FACT — REQUEST TO KEEP MORE THAN THREE ANIMALS DENIED Motion made by Member Bennett and seconded by Member Brindle to adopt Resolution No. 2011 -40, denying permit for more than three cats or dogs in a home. Motion carried on rollcall vote — four ayes. *RESOLUTION 2011 -44 ADOPTED — HEARING DATE SET (MAY 3. 20111 — DELINQUENT UTILITIES Motion made by Member Bennett and seconded by Member Brindle to adopt Resolution No. 2011 -44, calling a public hearing for consideration of certain delinquent utilities DU -11, May 3, 2011. Motion carried on rollcall vote — four ayes. *WATER SHUTOFF AUTHORIZED Motion made by Member Bennett and seconded by Member Brindle authorizing water shutoff at 2906 66`h Street West for nonpayment. Motion carried on rollcall vote — four ayes. *RESOLUTION NO. 2011 -42 ADOPTED — COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF MINNEAPOLIS AND THE CITY OF EDINA REGARDING BICYCLE PARKING PROJECT APPROVED Motion made by Member Bennett and seconded by Member Brindle to adopt Resolution No. 2011 -42, approving cooperative agreement between the City of Minneapolis and the City of Edina regarding bicycle parking project. Motion carried on rollcall vote — four ayes. *RESOLUTION NO. 2011 -45 ADOPTED — UTILITY EASEMENT ALONG OLINGER BOULEVARD APPROVED Motion made by Member Bennett and seconded by Member Brindle to adopt Resolution No. 2011 -45, approving utility easement for Excel Energy along Olinger Boulevard. Motion carried on rollcall vote — four ayes. *CONSTRUCTION ENGINEERING SERVICES FOR MINNEHAHA WOODS NEIGHBORHOOD ROADWAY RECONSTRUCTION PROJECT APPROVED Motion made by Member Bennett and seconded by Member Brindle approving construction engineering services for Minnehaha Woods' neighborhood roadway reconstruction project. Motion carried on rollcall vote — four ayes. *RESOLUTION NO. 2011 -43 ADOPTED — CONSTRUCTION GRANT AGREEMENT BETWEEN METROPOLITAN COUNCIL AND CITY OF EDINA FOR INFLOW AND INFILTRATION ABATEMENT PROJECTS APPROVED Motion made by Member Bennett and seconded by Member Brindle to adopt Resolution No. 2011 -43, approving Construction Grant Agreement No. SG2011 -002 between Metropolitan Council and City of Edina for inflow and infiltration abatement projects. Motion carried on rollcall vote — four ayes. COMMUNITY COMMENT No one appeared to comment. *CONFIRMATION OF CLAIMS PAID Motion made by Member Bennett and seconded by Member Brindle approving payment of the following claims as shown in detail on the Check Register dated March 17, Page 5 Minutes /Edina City Council /April 5 2011 2011, and consisting of 29 pages: General Fund $103,913.73; Communications Fund $5,256.50; Police Special Revenue $1,152.27; General Debt Service Fund $833.75; PIR Debt Service Fund $1,202.50; Working Capital Fund $15,008.47; Equipment Replacement Fund $222,378.93; Art Center Fund $3,445.52; Golf Dome Fund $568.76; Golf Course Fund $30,646.47; Ice Arena Fund $1,547.83; Edinborough /Centennial Lakes Fund $25,965.63; Liquor Fund $170,636.38; Utility Fund $430,929.04; Storm Sewer Fund $1,680.50; Recycling Fund $38,820.60; PSTF Agency Fund $10,295.83; TOTAL $1.064,282.71: and for approval of payment of claims dated March 24, 2011, and consisting of 25 pages: General Fund $566,344.76; Communications Fund $3,322.85; Police Special Revenue $960.00; Working Capital Fund $2,549.74; Equipment Replacement Fund $1,557.65; Art Center Fund $2,319.64; Golf Dome Fund $31,576.15; Aquatic Center Fund $45.96; Golf Course Fund $33,531.17; Ice Arena Fund $54,093.76; Edinborough /Centennial Lakes Fund $19,279.17; Liquor Fund $122,978.87; Utility Fund $25,509.97; Recycling Fund $7,518.66; PSTF Agency Fund $9,576.50; Payroll Fund $5,325.18; TOTAL $886.490.03: and for approval of payment of claims dated March 31, 2011, and consisting of 29 pages: General Fund $68,031.43; Communications Fund $10,123.29; Police Special Revenue $1,001.28; Working Capital Fund $19,048.24; Equipment Replacement Fund $56,988.94; Construction Fund $27,258.75; Art Center Fund $18,946.12; Golf. Dome Fund $1,238.43; Golf Course Fund $34,888.87; Ice Arena Fund $139.40; Edinborough /Centennial Lakes Fund $20,395.01; Liquor Fund $142,388.35; Utility Fund $104,717.11; Storm Sewer Fund $37,502.51; Recycling Fund $107.73; PSTF Agency Fund $5,807.24; Payroll Fund $14,643.48; TOTAL $573.226.18; and, Credit Card Transactions dated January 26, 2011, to February 25, 2011: TOTAL $8.469.47. Motion carried on rollcall vote — four ayes. LETTER RECEIVED FROM GOLF TERRACE /LAKE HARVEY NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION The Council acknowledged receipt of a letter with several signatures from the Golf Terrace /Lake Harvey Neighborhood Association regarding a parking restriction on Lakeview Drive. Mr. Houle stated the no parking issue could be addressed via the Traffic Safety Report. The Council indicated its desire to address this matter because it was creating neighborhood anxiety. Following discussion, Member Bennett made a motion, seconded by Member Brindle, modifying the Council's previous decision by retaining parking on the residential (north) side of the northern portion of Lakeview Drive while continuing to eliminate parking on the south (lake) side of the northern portion of Lakeview Drive to accommodate construction of stormwater - filtering swales to help improve Lake Harvey water quality. Ayes: Bennett, Brindle, Sprague, Hovland Motion carried. There being no further business on the Council Agenda, Mayor Hovland declared the meeting adjourned at 9:17 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Debra A. Mangen, City Clerk Minutes approved by Edina City Council, April 19, 2011. James B. Hovland, Mayor Video Copy of the April 5, 2011, meeting available. Page 6 k REPORT /RECOMMENDATION To: MAYOR AND COUNCIL Agenda Item ILA From: Jeff Long Police Chief ® Action ❑ Discussion ❑ Information Date: April 19, 2011 Subject: Temporary On -Sale Intoxicating Liquor License ACTION REQUESTED: Approve the Temporary On -Sale Intoxicating Liquor License and Special Permit to use city property in conjunction with the.Temporary On -Sale Intoxicating Liquor License. The license, and permit, is for the Edina Chamber of Commerce "Taste of Edina" event. INFORMATION /BACKGROUND: The Chamber of Commerce has applied for a Temporary On -Sale Intoxicating Liquor License and Special Use Permit to hold the annual "Taste of Edina" event. The event will be held at the Centennial Lakes Park Centrum Building on May 12, 2011 from 4:30- 7:30 PM. This has been an annual event that has had no public safety issues. The applicants are eligible for the Liquor License and have submitted plans to meet the special requirements for a Temporary License under City Code, e.g. physical barriers to separate the licensed premises, police protection and age of servers. Since the Chamber does not intend to serve hard liquor, I recommend that the Temporary Liquor License include the condition that the sale and consumption of liquor be limited to beer and wine. ATTACHMENTS: None REPORT /RECOMMENDATION To: MAYOR AND COUNCIL Agenda Item Item No. II.B. From: Debra Mangen City Clerk ® Action ❑ Discussion ❑ Information Date: April 19, 2011 Subject: New On -sale & Sunday Sale Intoxicating Liquor License — Ruby Tuesday, 1978 Southdale Center Recommendation: Motion approving New On -Sale Intoxicating Liquor License and Sunday On -Sale Liquor License to Ruby Tuesday, Inc. dba Ruby Tuesday, for the period beginning April 20, 2011 and ending March 31, 2012. Info /Background: Ruby Tuesday, Inc. dba Ruby Tuesday at 1978 Southdale Center has applied for new on -sale intoxicating and Sunday Sale liquor licenses. The reason for the new license is a new corporate structure that constitutes a new licensee. They have filed the necessary paperwork and paid the applicable fees for the licenses. Edina Code requires a public hearing before the issuance of a new liquor license. The proper notification has been published in the Edina Sun Current. The Administration Department has reviewed the submittals and finds that they comply with code requirements. The Health Department is satisfied with the applicant's plan for storage and service. The Planning Department has reviewed the application and finds that it complies with code requirements. The Police Department has completed their investigation. Attached is Sgt. Draper's memo stating the findings of the Police Department's background investigation. The licenses are placed on the agenda for consideration by the Council. • BACKGROUND INVESTIGATION SUMMARY ON -SALE INTOXICATING LIQUOR OR ON -SALE WINE LICENSE Establishment: Ruby Tuesday License: On -Sale Intoxicating & On Sale "Special Sunday Sales" On 02/16/11, Ruby Tuesday Inc. made application to the City of Edina for an On -Sale Intoxicating & On Sale "Special Sunday Sales" liquor license. The required alcohol awareness training has been completed. Ruby Tuesday Inc. operates a Restaurant at 1975 Southdale Center., in Edina, MN. Ruby Tuesday Inc. is incorporated in the State of Alabama with an LLC with RT Minneapolis Franchise. The Alabama Secretary of State reports they are in good standing. Owners/Managers /Members Ruby Tuesday Inc.: Samuel E. Beall . Knoxville, TN Scarlett Ann May Maryville, TN Marguerite Naman Duffy Knoxville, TN The owners /managers /members have been investigated and were found to have no criminal records. Checks were made with the following agencies. NCIC MINCIS Hennepin County Alabama Secretary of State Minnesota Secretary of State Minnesota Liquor Control Board Personal, business and bank references were contacted and responded positively. From the information gathered during the course of the investigation, I found nothing to prevent Ruby Tuesday Inc. from obtaining an On -Sale Intoxicating & On Sale "Special Sunday Sales" license. I would support a positive recommendation from the Police Department in regard to the issuance of this license. Sgt. Tom Draper #150 ffl), Cr. 0 - "I TZI: 1J REPORTMECOMMEN DATION To: MAYOR AND COUNCIL Agenda Item Item No. II.C. From: Cary Teague ® Action Planning Director F] Discussion ❑ Information Date: April 19, 2011 Subject: Conditional Use Permit, Jeff Miller and Connie Carrino, 4509 Garrison Lane, Resolution No. 2011 -47. Deadline June 21, 2011 for a City Decision: ACTION REQUESTED: Adopt the attached resolution approving the Conditional Use Permit, per the recommendation of the Planning Commission. INFORMATION /BACKGROUND: College City Design Builders Inc., on behalf of property owners Jeff Miller and Connie Carrino, are requesting a Conditional Use Permit to tear down and construct a new home at 4509 Garrison Lane. A Conditional Use Permit is requested to allow the first floor elevation of the new home to exceed the first floor elevation of the existing home by more than one foot. Specifically the applicant would like to raise the first floor elevation 2.4 feet above the existing first floor elevation. Planning Commission Recommendation: On March 23, 2011, the Planning Commission unanimously recommended approval of the Conditional Use Permit subject to the findings and conditions set forth in the staff report dated March 23, 2011. Additionally, the Planning Commission found that the proposal met condition #2 in addition to condition #4 as listed on page 3 of the staff report. The applicant demonstrated through a licensed hydrologist that the structure needed to be elevated more than two feet to safely lift the home to avoid flooding. (See page A7a —A7b. of the staff report.) ATTACHMENTS: • Resolution 2011 -47 Planning Commission Staff Report, March 23, 2011 Draft minutes from the March 23, 2011 Edina Planning Commission meeting • Proposed Plans • Memo from the city engineer. RESOLUTION NO. 201147 APPROVING A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT AT'4509 GARRISON LANE FOR COLLEGE CITY DESIGN BUILDINGS INC. BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City. of Edina, Minnesota, as ,follows: City Of Edina Section 1. BACKGROUND. 1.01 The applicant is requesting a ConditionalUse Permit to tear down and construct a new home at 4509 Garrison Lane. A Conditional Use Permit is requested to allow the first. floor-elevation of the new home to exceed the first floor elevation of the existing home by more than one foot. Specifically the applicant would like to raise the first floor elevation 2.4 feet above the existing first floor elevation. 1.02 The property is legally described as.follows: Lot 7, Block 2, MILLER'S ADDITION, Hennepin County, Minnesota. 1.03 On March 23, 2011, the Planning Commission recommended approval of the conditional use permit. Vote: 6 Ayes and 0 Nays. Section 2. FINDINGS 2.01 Approval is based on the following findings: 1.: The proposal meets the, Conditional Use Permit conditions per Section 850.04 Subd. 5.E, of the Edina Zoning Ordinance. 2. Per Section 850.11. Subd. 2, of the Edina Zoning Ordinance, one or more of the first three conditions listed, and always condition four must be met. Conditions #2 and #4 are found to be met. 3. The proposal meets all applicable Zoning Ordinance requirements. 4. The proposed new home is in character with this neighborhood, in height, mass and scale. Section 3. APPROVAL NOW THEREFORE, it is hereby resolved by.the City Council of the City of Edina, approves the Conditional Use Permit to allow construction of a new home at 4509 Garrison Lane, subject to the following conditions: 1. The site must be developed and.maintained in conformance with the following plans: ® Survey date stamped March 9, 2011. • Building plans and elevations date stamped March 9, 2011. . City Hall 952- 927 -8861 4801 WEST 50TH STREET FAX EDINA, MINNESOTA, 55424-1394 www.CityofEdina.com. TTY 952 - 82952 - 826 -0390 6 -0379 RESOLUTION NO. 2011-47 Page Two 2. 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. 3. Final grading and drainage plans are subject to review and approval of the city engineer prior to issuance of a building permit. Drainage patterns may not be directed to adjacent properties. Adopted by the city council of the City of Edina, Minnesota, on April 19, 2011. ATTEST: Debra A. Mangen, City Clerk James B. Hovland, Mayor STATE OF MINNESOTA ) COUNTY OF HENNEPIN )SS CITY OF EDINA ) CERTIFICATE OF CITY CLERK I, the undersigned duly appointed and acting City Clerk for the City of Edina do hereby certify that the attached and foregoing Resolution was duly adopted by the Edina City Council at its Regular Meeting of April 19, 2011, and as recorded in the Minutes of said Regular Meeting. WITNESS my hand and seal of said City this day of , 2011. City Clerk 2011.0001.11a Conditional Use Permit 4509 Garrison Lane, Edina Planner Presentation Planner Teague informed the Commission that College City Design Builders Inc., on behalf of property owners Jeff Miller and Connie Carrino, are requesting a Conditional Use Permit to tear down and construct a new home at 4509 Garrison Lane. A Conditional Use Permit is requested to allow the first floor elevation of the new home to exceed the first floor elevation of the existing home by more than one foot. Specifically the applicant would like to raise the first floot elevation 2.4 feet above the existing first floor elevation. Teague explained that the existing 10,393 square foot lot contains a rambler style single - family home, a scattering of mature trees and is located within a 100 -year flood plain area for Nancy Lake as determined by the City of Edina's Stormwater Management Plan. Continuing Teague said per Section 850.11. Subd. 2 that the Ordinance reads: Additions to or replacement of single dwelling unit buildings with a first floor elevation of more than one (1) foot above the existing first floor elevation of the existing dwelling unit building. Such additions to or replacements of single dwelling unit buildings must meet one or more of the first three (3) conditions listed below, and always meet condition four (4). 1. The first floor elevation may be increased to the extent necessary to elevate the lowest level of the dwelling to an elevation of two (2) feet above the 100 - year flood elevation, as established by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), or the City's Comprehensive Water Resource Management Plan; or 2. The first floor elevation may be increased to the extent necessary to reasonably protect the dwelling from ground water intrusion. Existing and potential ground water elevations shall be determined in accordance with accepted hydrologic and hydraulic engineering practices. Determinations shall be undertaken by a professional civil engineer licensed under Minnesota Statutes Chapter 326 or a hydrologist certified by the American Institute of Hydrology. Studies, analyses and computations shall be submitted in sufficient detail to allow thorough review and approval; or 3. The first floor elevation may be increased to the extent necessary to allow the new building to meet State Building Code, City of Edina Code, or other statutory requirements; and 4. An increase in first floor elevation will only be permitted if the new structure or addition fits the character of the neighborhood in height, mass and scale. Conditions #1 and #4 above apply to the proposed new home. The subject property is 3 located within the 100 -year flood elevation for Nancy Lake in the City's Comprehensive Water Resource Management Plan. Planner Teague concluded that staff recommends that the City Council approve the Conditional Use Permit for College City Design Builders Inc., on behalf of property owners Jeff Miller and Connie Carrino, to tear down and construct a new home at 4509 Garrison Lane. The Conditional Use Permit allows the new home to have a first floor elevation of 2.4 feet above the first floor elevation of the existing home. Approval is based on the following findings: 1. The proposal meets the Conditional Use Permit conditions of the Zoning Ordinance. 2. The proposal meets all applicable Zoning Ordinance requirements. 3. The proposed new home is in character with this neighborhood. Approval is also subject to the following conditions: 1. The site must be developed and maintained in conformance with the following plans: • Survey date stamped March 9, 2011. • Building plans and elevations date stamped March 9, 2011. 2. 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. 3. Final grading and drainage plans are subject to review and approval of the city engineer prior to issuance of a building permit. Drainage patterns may not be directed to adjacent properties. Appearing for the Applicant Jeff Miller, Connie Carrino Discussion After a brief discussion the Commission expressed the opinion that the proposal meets Conditional Use Permit conditions 2 and 4. Applicant Presentation Connie Carrino, 4509 Garrison Lane addressed the Commission and acknowledged that this process was all very new and clarified that at least from their perspective when they applied for the CUP they met Conditions # 1 and #4, and the condition that the proposed new house maintains the character of the existing neighborhood. Carrino stated that in her opinion their plan responsibly fixes their long standing problems with 4 groundwater. Carrino noted their submitted materials also contain several letters of support from neighbors. She pointed out in some of those letters neighbors acknowledged they had experienced similar groundwater problems and now have a concern with the potential for spring flooding. Continuing, Carrino said their "problems" occur not so much from flooding but from groundwater, adding this usually occurs when the lake is at risk. Concluding, Carrino said their plan was reviewed with great detail, adding she would like the support of the Commission on this project. Commissioner Staunton asked the applicants if the 2.4 -feet "get them where they need to be" including a basement ceiling height of 8 -feet. Ms. Carrino responded that it does. Jeff Miller, 4509 Garrison Lane, agreed with Ms. Carrino that the proposed plan "gets us where we need to be ". Continuing, Miller said the hydrologist determined that their property was within the flood plain, adding after that was established he helped us find the correct "number ". Miller said that the requested 2.4 feet also enables them to achieve an 8 -foot ceiling height. Miller reported that their builder built roughly 1000 houses over the past decade and the majority of those homes had ceiling height in excess of 7 -feet. Concluding, Miller explained that instead of going with 2X10 floor joists floor trusses will be used, which also adds to height. Public Testimony Scott Nelson, 4505 Garrison Lane, addressed the Commission. Yedda Marks, 4508 Garrison Lane, addressed the Commission James Lany, 5925 Drew Avenue, representing Mrs. Lany, 4513 Garrison Lane, addressed the Commission. Lisa Lynch, 6113 Ashcroft Avenue, addressed the Commission. Discussion The Commission acknowledged their support for the Conditional Use Permit and applauded the applicants for their project and their patience during this new process. The Commission explained that the 1 -foot restriction came about from concern expressed by Edina residents that new houses were being constructed too tall and out of character for the neighborhood. Continuing, the Commission stated the goal of the 1 -foot ordinance cap requirement was to reduce the height of new houses to ensure compatibility with surrounding properties. Motion Commissioner Staunton moved to recommend approval of the Conditional Use Permit noting the Permit satisfies conditions 2 and 4 of the Ordinance. Commissioner Scherer seconded the motion. All voted aye; motion carried. 9 w9tN�11� o� e 0 PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT Originator Meeting Date Agenda # Cary Teague March 23, 2011 2011- 001.11a Planning Director INFORMATION & BACKGROUND Project Description College City Design Builders Inc., on behalf of property owners Jeff Miller and Connie Carrino, are requesting a Conditional Use Permit to tear down and construct a new home at 4509 Garrison Lane. (See location on pages Al —A5.) A Conditional Use Permit is requested to allow the first floor elevation of the new home to exceed the first floor elevation of the existing home by more than one foot. Specifically the applicant would like to raise the first floor elevation 2.4 feet above the existing first floor elevation. (See applicant narrative and plans on pages A6 —A21.) Surrounding Land Uses Northerly: Single- family residential homes; zoned and guided low- density residential Easterly: Single- family residential homes; zoned and guided low- density residential Southerly: Single- family residential homes; zoned and guided low- density residential Westerly: Single- family residential homes; zoned and guided low- density residential Existing Site Features The existing 10,393 square foot lot contains a rambler style single - family home, a scattering of mature trees and is located within a 100 -year flood plain area for Nancy Lake as determined by the City of Edina's Stormwater Management Plan. (See pages A3 and A33 —A35.) Planning Guide Plan designation: Zoning: Grading & Drainage Low - Density Residential R -1, Single- Dwelling District Drainage patterns would generally remain the same. The city engineer has reviewed the proposed plans and found them to be acceptable. The grading must not impact adjacent neighbors. Final grading and drainage plan is subject to review and approval of the city engineer at the time of building permit application. The proposed plans will also require a review and approval by the Nine Mile Creek Watershed District. Conditional Use Permit Per Section 850.04 Subd. 5.E, the City Council shall not grant a Conditional Use Permit unless it finds that the establishment, maintenance and operation of the use: 1. Does not have an undue adverse impact on governmental facilities, utilities, services or existing or proposed improvements; The proposal for a tear down and rebuild of a new single - family home would not have an impact on governmental facilities or services. A single - family home is a permitted us on the site. 2. Will generate traffic within the capacity of the streets serving the property; The proposal to tear down and rebuild a single - family home would not have an impact on traffic or the capacity of the streets serving the property. The use, a single - family home, remains the same on the property. 3. Does not have an undue adverse impact on the public health, safety or welfare; Again there would no impact, as the use of the property remains the same as exists today. 4. Will not impede the normal and orderly development and improvement of other property in the vicinity; The proposed new home would fit the character of the existing neighborhood. The proposed new home is a rambler, the same as the existing home. (See home comparisons on pages A15 —A21.) 2 5. Conforms to the applicable restrictions and special conditions of the district in which it is located as imposed by this Section; and. The new home would meet all applicable zoning ordinance requirements. 6. Is consistentwith the Comprehensive Plan: A single- family home is consistent with the low- density residential land use designation within the Comprehensive Plan. Additional Conditions Per Section 850.11. Subd. 2: Additions to or replacement of single dwelling unit buildings with a first floor elevation of more than one (1) foot above the existing first floor elevation of the existing dwelling unit building. Such additions to or replacements of single dwelling unit buildings must meet one or more of the first three (3) conditions listed below, and always meet condition four (4). 1. The first floor elevation may be increased to the extent necessary to elevate the lowest level of the dwelling to an elevation of two (2) feet above the 100 -year flood elevation, as established by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), or the City's Comprehensive Water Resource1Management Plan; or 2. The first floor elevation may be increased to the extent necessary to reasonably protect the dwelling.from ground water intrusion. Existing and potential ground water elevations shall be determined in accordance with accepted hydrologic and hydraulic engineering practices. Determination's shall be undertaken by.a professional:ciivil engineer licensed under Minnesota Statutes Chapter 326 or a hydrologist certified by the American Institute of Hydrology. Studies, analyses and computations shall be submitted in sufficient detail to allow thorough review and approval; or ... 3. The first floor elevation may be increased to the extent necessary to allow the new building to meet State Building Code, City of Edina Code, or other statutory requirements; and 4. An increase in first floor elevation will only be permitted if the new structure or addition fits the character of the neighborhood in height, mass and scale. Conditions #1 and #4 above apply to the proposed new home. The subject property is located within the 100 -year flood elevation for Nancy Lake in the K City's Comprehensive Water Resource Management Plan. (See pages A22— A35.) Per the Comprehensive Water Resource Management Plan, the normal water level of Nancy Lake is 863.0. The 100 -year flood elevation is 865.4. Structures must be at least two (2) feet above the established 100 -year flood elevation; therefore, the low floor elevation for the new home must be a minimum of 867.4. The existing home has a low floor elevation of 867.2. The proposed new home would have a low floor elevation of 867.8. The applicant would like to build in an additional 0.4 of elevation for an extra margin of safety, since the applicant did experience flooding during storms in 1987 and 1997. The existing home has seven (7) foot ceilings within the basement. The applicant would like the new home to have an eight (8) foot ceiling height in the basement. An eight to nine foot basement ceiling height within single - family homes in an Edina is typical, even though the minimum building code requirement is seven feet. Therefore, with the combination of the inability to go down lower to accomplish an eight foot ceiling height in the basement, the desire to raise the low floor elevation and an upgrade of building materials from previous building practice will result in the new home being 2.4 feet above the first floor elevation of the existing home. The proposed new home would fit the character of the neighborhood. (See pages A15 —A21, which shows existing homes in the area, including the homes on either side.) The proposed new home is a rambler, therefore would only be slightly taller than the homes on either side. Additionally, the home would sit on the same grade as the existing home. The garage access is at the same elevation as the adjacent home. The only portion of the home that appears slightly elevated would be the front door, which has a couple steps up. The highest point of the new home would only be two (2) to six (6) feet taller than the adjacent homes. (See page A16.) The building height as defined by City Code is 15 feet. The building height allowed by City Code is 30 feet. 4 Compliance Table PRIMARY ISSUE & STAFF RECOMENDATION Primary Issue • Is the proposed new home with a first floor elevation 2.4 feet higher than the existing home reasonable for this site? Yes. Staff believes the proposal is reasonable for four reasons: 1. The proposal meets the Conditional Use Permit findings. As demonstrated on pages 3 -4 of this report, the findings and conditions required for this conditional use permit would be met. 2. As demonstrated on the Compliance Table on page 4 of this report, the proposal meets all minimum Zoning Ordinance standards. 3. Because of the 100 -year flood plain elevation for Lake Nancy, the applicant cannot dig down lower to build a basement with an eight foot ceiling, and meet the code requirement that the first floor elevation for a new home cannot exceed the first floor elevation of the existing home. A basement with an eight foot ceiling is considered reasonable within the City. 4. The proposed new rambler style home is in character within this neighborhood. There are ramblers on both sides of the subject property. 5 City Standard Proposed Front — Garrison Lane 29.9 feet 29.9 - 30 feet Side - West 10 feet 10 feet Side — East 10 feet (living space) 10 feet 5 feet (garage) 5.5 feet Rear — Nancy Lake 50 feet 50 feet Building Coverage 25% 24.6% Building Height 30 feet 15 feet PRIMARY ISSUE & STAFF RECOMENDATION Primary Issue • Is the proposed new home with a first floor elevation 2.4 feet higher than the existing home reasonable for this site? Yes. Staff believes the proposal is reasonable for four reasons: 1. The proposal meets the Conditional Use Permit findings. As demonstrated on pages 3 -4 of this report, the findings and conditions required for this conditional use permit would be met. 2. As demonstrated on the Compliance Table on page 4 of this report, the proposal meets all minimum Zoning Ordinance standards. 3. Because of the 100 -year flood plain elevation for Lake Nancy, the applicant cannot dig down lower to build a basement with an eight foot ceiling, and meet the code requirement that the first floor elevation for a new home cannot exceed the first floor elevation of the existing home. A basement with an eight foot ceiling is considered reasonable within the City. 4. The proposed new rambler style home is in character within this neighborhood. There are ramblers on both sides of the subject property. 5 Staff Recommendation Recommend that the City Council approve the Conditional Use Permit for College City Design Builders Inc., on behalf of property owners Jeff Miller and Connie Carrino, to tear down and construct a new home at 4509 Garrison Lane. The Conditional Use Permit allows the new home to have a first floor elevation of 2.4 feet above the first floor elevation of the existing home. Approval is based on the following findings: 1. The proposal meets the Conditional Use Permit conditions of the Zoning Ordinance. 2. The proposal meets all applicable Zoning Ordinance requirements. 3. The proposed new home is in character with this neighborhood. Approval is subject to the following conditions: 1. The site must be developed and maintained in conformance with the following plans: Survey date stamped March 9, 2011. Building plans and elevations date stamped March 9, 2011. 2. 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. 3. Final grading and drainage plans are subject to review and approval of the city engineer prior to issuance of a building permit. Drainage patterns may not be directed to adjacent properties. Deadline for a city decision: June 21, 2011 0 4( k01- An ra !f k -tot, 1. ■■ i, '%Vi i !� Oki 1 ' IL k01- �� �f .'-`.�.' t City of Edina Legend �. Hausa Number Labels ±may LS - Strtet Name Labels City Nk" ./ Limit. FEFAA J ® 1m CRlk6 LakeNam- LLakea Parks Parcels aspi 2009 Aerial Photo j 1 1109 N w�r..�Aws muraaasa PID:3002824210018 pp r �i ❑�O x C'1 4509 Garrison La Edina, MN 55424 Haul .'-`.�.' t 3/3/2011 Miller- Carrino 9-509 Garrison Lane ® E_Jina, MN 55 +2+ ® 952,926: +85g February 28, 2011 TO: Cary Teague, Planning Director City of Edina FROM: Jeff Miller &Connie Carrino, Residents and CUP applicants . City of Edina RE: Application for Conditional Use Permit Ordinance 2010 -17, Section.3; Section 850.11 Together:with our builder, College.City Design Build, we are submitting an application for a Conditional Use Permit (CUP) according to Ordinance 2010 -17, Section 3; Section 850.11. The purpose of our application is to allow us to raise our first floor beyond the one -foot ordinance restriction so that we can- replace our 1,959 modest rambler by rebuilding an updated modest rambler. If approved, the CUP will allow us to build a new, updated structure that is sustainable and void of water problems, and where we can efficiently and effectively use taxable lower level space that is currently restricted due to low ceilings. City of Edina ordinance 850.11 prohibits us from correcting all of these building problems unless a CUP is approved. Specifically we request increasing the first floor elevation from the existing house of 874.9' ASL to 877.3' ASL or a total of 2.4' which is 1.4' more than allowed by the current ordinance. The supporting data includes: • The current lower level elevation is 867.2' ASL. To correct groundwater issues, comply with the City's Comprehensive Water Resource Management Plan and as advised by a certified hydrologist (see attached letter) we need to increase the lower level elevation by 2.0' above the 100 year flood level to 867.4' ASL ( +0.2' to foundation). • To reasonably protect the property from future groundwater intrusion and overland flooding, the hydrologist notes the above elevation is the minimum he would recommend increasing the foundation.. Therefore for an extra margin of safety, we would like to add an additional 0.4' for a starting lower level. elevation of 867.8' ASL. ( +0.4' to foundation) To replace sub - standard 7' ceilings with modest 8' ceilings so we can use the walkout level for primary, living space brings the elevation to 875.8' ASL.( +1.0' to first floor height) • To use up -to -d ate,. recommended and required new building materials replacing the old joist system with 1.4' trusses that are 0.6' deeper /taller than the 2 "X10" building materials used in 1959 would bring the elevation to 877.2' ASL ( +0.6' to firstfloor height) • The balance of the stack -up. includes 0.1' for subflooring material bringing. the first floor elevation to 877.3' ASL. According to the information you requested for the CUP` application we are providing the following required documents: ✓ Floor plan showing location, arrangement and floor area of proposed use (new home). ✓ Elevation drawings of the new proposed home in relation to adjacent homes on either side.(we have provided. a drawing of the elevation and photos of the existing vs. proposed home) , ✓ Registered survey showing existing and proposed structures, lot lines, pertinent dime, lot acreages, and wetland delineation with existing first floor elevation. PQ` ✓ Grading and drainage plan with existing and proposed two -foot contours. 0�� ✓ A written statement describing the intended use of the property and why the City should approve your request (this cover letter serves that purpose). ✓ Letter from certified hydrologist regarding existing and potential ground water determinations. ✓ Three large scalable copies and thirty 11 x 17 copies of the survey, floor plan elevations and grading and drainage plan. We believe you will find the attached CUP application and documentation demonstrates our proposed project is consistent with Edina's Comprehensive Plan and, in fact, brings the property up to the standards of the Comprehensive Water Resource Management Plan; that the proposed new structure complements the character of the neighborhood; and that it meets the approval guidelines. Thank you for your consideration. 0 QP� L Ole UNIVERSITY OF MINNES07A Departmni of Bioproducis and Biosysterns Engineering College of Food, Agricultural and Natural Resource Sciences College ojScience and Engineering February 3, 2011 Mr. Jeff Miller and Ms. Connie Carrino 4509 Garrison Lane Edina, MN 55424 Dear Mr. Miller and Ms. Carrino: BBE North Kaufert Lab 2004 Folwell Avenue St. Paul, MN 55108 =6130 612 - 624 -1293 Far: 612- 625.6286 BBE South BioAgEng Building 1390 Eckles Avenue St. Paul, MN 55108 -6005 612.625 -7733 Far: 612 -624 -3005 E -mail: bbe @umn.edu Web: www.bbe.umn.edu It is my understanding thafthe City of Edina has adopted a new ordinance that requires you to solicit the professional analysis and recommendation of a civil engineer or certified hydrologist regarding your property and existing/potential groundwater intrusion/flood water relating to the elevation of a potential new structure on the same property. In addition I understand the following situational facts: • Your home, lot and neighborhood experienced flooding in July 1987 from what has been referred to as the "Super Storm." The flooding was directly from Nancy Lake. • Your lower level flooded in July 1997 during a period of above average precipitation. • The current lower level has high levels of moisture as indicated from ongoing floor condensation. • A professional survey completed on the property shows a relatively flat lot with less than a 2' grade reduction in the 65' between the existing house and retaining wall at the rear of the lot abutting Nancy Lake. I have reviewed available data regarding your property located at 4509 Garrison Lane. Based upon a review of survey of the property and a site visit, I conclude the property is subject to water intrusion problems because: Although Nancy Lake has a sand based substrate which provides some natural drainage, it is connected to Lake Cornelia on the other side of the Crosstown Highway (Highway 62) and other ponds in the area by a system of culverts and drainage pipes. As such, during period of intense high rainfall such as July 23 and 24, 1987 when this area experienced rainfall of over 10" in 24 hours, once the storage capacity of Lake Cornelia is reached, the overflow is directed toward Nancy Lake with its limited natural drainage capacity as indicated in Section 7.0 of the City of Edina Comprehensive Water Resource Management Plan (DRAFT Nov 3, 2009 — Barr Engineering) (PAMp1s\23 MN\27\23271072 Edina Water Resources Mgmt Plan Update \WorkFiles\Report\Nov 3 2009, DrafilEdina SWMP 2009_Nov3Drafl.doc) . This has caused Nancy Lake to overflow its boundaries and flood the lower level of the property. Also, during extended periods of above average rainfall such as July 1997, the already high water level in Nancy �� Lake can be exacerbated by the overflow of water from Lake Comelia. �Q Most importantly, according to the City of Edina Ordinance 2010.17 Section 3, Part 1, condition 1 which states: "The first floor elevation may be increased to the extent necessary to elevate the lowest level of the dwelling to an elevation of two (2) feet above the 100 -year flood elevation, as established by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), or the City's Comprehensive Water Resource Management Plan'. As indicated in Section 7.0 of the City of Edina Comprehensive Water Resource Management Plan (DRAFT Nov 3, 2009 — Barr Engineering) (PAMp1s\23 MN\27\23271072 Edina Water Resources Mgmt Plan Update \WorkFiles\Report\Nov 3 2009, Draft\Edina SWNW 2009 Nov3Dra&doc) in Table 7.3 it indicated that the pond located directly behind your house (identified as N_2 in Figure 7.1 of the same report) has a normal water level (NWL) of 863.0 feet above sea level (ASL). The table also indicated that the flood bounce or change in elevation expected in the 100 year precipitation event is expected to be 2.4 feet bringing the level of the pond to 865.4 feet ASL. As indicated by the survey of your property the lowest ground elevation abutting your proposed foundation is at 866.7 feet ASL. Based upon this data and the Comprehensive Water Resource Management Plan, it is clear that you should raise the level of your foundation a minimum of 0.7 feet (8.4 inches) to 867.4' ASL which is 2' above the 100 year flood bounce elevation. Further, given the information provided in the situational analysis and a review of official data mentioned above, I would recommend that during the new construction proposed for your house, you increase the elevation of your foundation as much of the amount allotted in the Ordinance that will fit into your new construction plans. This would help to reasonably protect your property from future reoccurrence of lake flooding or groundwater intrusion during large precipitation events like the 1987 and 1997 event. Please contact me if you have any further questions. Respectively submitted, Joseph A. Magner, Ph.D., P.H., P.S.S., P.Hg. Research Professor (American Institute of Hydrology Certification #750) k7b J��oo offil 0� r n -� PP 877.3' ASL- 1ST FLOOR ELEVATION OF PROPOSED HOUSE 874.9' ASL- 1ST FLOOR ELEVATION OF EXISTING HOUSE PROPOSED 2.4' - ELEVATION INCREASE OVER EXISTING HOUSE EXISTING STRUCTURE 1.0' - ELEVATION INCREASE ALLOWED PER ORDINANACE STRUCTURE 877.3 1.4' - REQUESTED ELEVATION INCREASE ABOVE ORDINANACE 874.9 WALK -OUT ELEVATION 2' -0" MIN. PER CUP ELEV. 867.4 100 YEAR FLOOD BOUNCE ELEV. 865.4 lot� NWL WATER ELEV. 863.0 CERTIFICATE OF SURVEY for: COLLEGE CITY DESIGN BUILD, INC. DESCRIBED AS: Lot 7, Block 2, MILLER'S ADDITION, Hennepin County, Minnesota. ADDRESS: 4509 Garrison Lane, Edina, MN iA�1E / w A GP'R�ISONClIaL 35p01u /' s e5a. Y y PR6POSED RETAINING C7 o aWALL, 3.5' MAX. HEIGHT / CFO ^� 873.1 .3 ro 'rn 70 GARAGE 83. EXISTING 0 \ 74. L' HOUSE �TOOP, PROPOSE GO ;, GARAGE o �6a 667.1 AGE EXISTI{rG - -- --- m� r' N E 872.4 HOUSE (WO) -5' SETBACK PROPOSED FFE UPPER 674.9 FE o ° 10' TBACK HOUSE (WO) IF LOWER SHED2 s 72.5 872. 872 m GONG, PATIO –� 0 } �m DECK EXISTING g7} 0' DECK 7 ,1 GARAGE HOUSE – — 66.7 L LJ / N I 1 1 , 0/ 1 I l •auoPle Z 66 7 0 / "' 1 S 1. 51106 O EZ� AT�o�u Assumed Bearings 0 30 P 2� � Q 4 Maple m _ Scale in Feet PROPOSED ELEVATIONS Z z Garage Floor at drive = 875.1 x I M7 Top of Foundation = 875.5 1 ` j X866 N S� Lowest Floor =867.8 ^ — I 1 06 First Floor - 877.3± tp g 5 1 1865.7 N —863 SETBACK REQUIREMENTS 863 J < Front = 30 feet or average setback of �° BOULDER WALL LEGEND adjacent houses. House to west is / TIMBER WALL NWL ELEV. 863.0 �aci XX.X Proposed Elevation setback 29.0 ft. and the house to the AT WATER UNE XXX.X Existing Elevation east is setback 30.8. Therefore, the 9 average setback of the adjacent houses - -869 -- Existing Contour and front setback for this house is WATER ELEV. 864.2 Proposed Contour 29.9 feet. AS OF 4/12/10 - -► Surface Drainage Rear (from NWL Elev. 863) = 50 feet E7 Offset Hub or Spike Side House = 10 feet - - -- Drain. and Utility Ease. Side Garage = 5 feet p O N • Monument Found O Monument Set BENCHMARK Deciduous Tree TNH AT NW CDR. WOODDALE & GARRISION UTILITIES EASEMENT-- - ELEV. 875.89 (NGVD29) Coniferous Tree Proposed House AREA & BUILDING COVERAGE & Garage Lot Area = 18,025 sq. ft. Water Area - 7632 sq. ft. Area for Coverage Calc. = 5 10,393 sq. ft. EDGE OF WATER Existing Coverage UTIUTIES EASEMENT-� BITUMINOUS House & garage = 1801 / sq. ft. = 17.3% IN LOT WATER ER — — — — 1� — — — FLUME Win Pro osed Coverage o \ House do garage = 2548 58.59 S89 44'00" \ sq. ft. - 24.5% – 2� Maximum allowable building EDGE OF WATER RCS S coverage is 25% or 2598 �/ EDGE OF Q �? Poo sq. h• BITUMINOUS 3�5, R EVISED 3 9 11 - CHANGED HOUSE X71 CERTIFICATION KALLIO Engineering Inc. I hereby certify that this plan, specification, or report was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that I am a duly 10775 Poppitz Lane ph: 612 -418 -6828 Licensed Land Surveyor under the laws of the State of Minnesota. Chaska, MN 55318 fax: 952- 400 -8492 3/9/11 1010 Curtiss J. Kallio, Lic. No. 26909 Dote JOB NO.: n�lo -.I- - I II I - II II II II T �l - - OIL ROOF PLAN SCIIL 1 � - College City Design Build, Inc. APPROVED BY DATE I L - Buyer I II II II II II II U3 �l - - OIL ROOF PLAN SCIIL 1 � - College City Design Build, Inc. APPROVED BY DATE Buyer C1 C Buyer —s CCDB U3 m� m m 0 E FO Um� �m z IN R` lV Qi�1 J LEFT ELEVATION hRIGHT ELEVATION ��ahfi . i -oT �-nmv-- REAR ELEVATION p m�3 �m D' O Z Q U W Z W Z Og Z 060 MU) 0! J Q. Z J Q LL LL O Z 0 —Wi q W JPR 3/3111 10-511 2 �, 7 A o Of UD�a9 O z Q U w zW z og z ca N 0_ W J Q LL oz 0 )vw 9 tip \\ vip of Lo\\tl A71 1 10 -511 P-4 mmm s �. 1L VVY • i 1 I.. ill � -rn+irsamasrwoea�avParaq PPS y� e�icaomass �aau�raaraoome�.�a �► .sraamdrraaasaae�sRm� qB aar.�r�r ®r.,rvova.�J. t.�•soor.�m.,� �� � i ®9sarm� 0 e A 'i �i.�� mi%ro.�ssoemvavdo sow A o Of UD�a9 O z Q U w zW z og z ca N 0_ W J Q LL oz 0 )vw 9 tip \\ vip of Lo\\tl A71 1 10 -511 P-4 � - - -- r_r - - -- -n ys I• -r r -r r-r Ir< I 'I•x Is•-r u a as Qom• O z U w z W z og U z O �U) J_ Q Q L o z_ � W 5`" )��o \r1P is 111 4 � 7 M DECK maw b j 1 II I II I II C ` II I I I I II I I � 2tl g rmwrII II I'I II 1 I Ii v e raemAlmx coos m a Ie• nc a 11 I I i Ie•.e" rtc b I •. I sr -r Ir -r Y r m•�• I I 1 i; r - -- Ir -r I I r - -- I I - -_ II _- L_ L J L___ I sa Frsr ax I I so. ever a 1 'A e o e r-r vasao r ma ruL a ere' I 1 I I I I I ------- I I Y -Y zo• -r I I I 1 f_ _- -___ —_ _l II b �I r sic.s.u..cssueid _ _ wsesn: o uxeuTa ulac t_. �I � 4 I ,, I IMFY!'�VAlE11 I I I s• oam - r I I- I � .mom I " I Yrvu�r�euu e� � un¢ a Ie•� I 1 I I --------- - - - - -- s1® eusT a Fvsm Q I FOUNDATION PLAN 1 I r--- ---- - - - - -- —J 1 I/1 - I -a t.l - Sea 54 FT. cu+t� dnQl w G L_____________� L _________ml � - - -- r_r - - -- -n ys I• -r r -r r-r Ir< I 'I•x Is•-r u a as Qom• O z U w z W z og U z O �U) J_ Q Q L o z_ � W 5`" )��o \r1P is 111 4 � 7 M eY -Y . I b Lo B■ B i i:�:►� ■ ��� Rose m: • ��_ ®1 - i ■I J ,111 b h� mzm U y P„ 0 z b J a U ZW Z. og b b r ca J r r LL Z - PAR nARAGE - ]/o -e' - pd Y-a' W Q W Ljr) - - - P]]dl an- 0001 Iu -e• Ir-e• Isd 1`�,V1 MA I I I 91�ii- � I MAR ON FLOOR PLAN S.9C I/arl -0' M P� 1Y -p Eyl-�tl 6tpf- et prr—'spt,�'t, �C �O G� propo-�ed 6tro-et provec-6,L/e PLANNING DEPARTMENT FEB 2 8 2011 CITY OF EDINA 1 :IYYF.'i III Mriii:��ni:�nn�i�: lw r i aL w i "a'' t _ f 5 S` i },.► lFY wo st IF 6?O104oq,1. - ..al:.� CMtO E,we�TMhnW�Nl. •� s 1 Garrison Lane -Line of Smite Looking East from St. Johns Looking West from Woo ddal, -0 O�QP� Q l� OR�l. 111110 4509 Garrison Lane and Adioininu Prouerties LANNtN�''DEPARTMENT P FEB 2 $ 2011 Of ��tNR J Garrison Lane -South Side &,kt In',.T s • e - - pI AKIN •• From Street Level FEB 2 8 201" CITY OF EDINA Garrison Lane -North Side From Street Level ' FB 2 8 2011 ti IEW IS 7.0 Lake Cornelia /Lake Edina /Adam's Hill 7.1 General Description of Drainage Area Figure 7.1 depicts the Lake Cornelia/Lake Edina/Adam's Hill drainage basin. This drainage basin are located in the southeast portion of Edina. 7.1.1 Drainage Patterns This chapter discusses four major watersheds within the drainage basin: North Lake Cornelia, South Lake Cornelia, Lake Edina, and the Adam's Hill Pond drainage area. These major "watersheds are depicted in Figure 7.2. North and South Lake Cornelia ultimately drain to Lake Edina, which outlets into the North Fork of Nine Mile Creek. The Adam's Hill drainage area includes those watersheds within the City of Edina that drain to the Adam's Hill stormwater detention basin in Richfield. This drainage area was analyzed in conjunction with the North Cornelia watershed because the storm sewer systems draining to North Lake Cornelia and Adam's Hill Pond are adjoined at the intersection of 69th Street and York Avenue. Each of the four major watersheds have been further delineated into numerous subwatersheds. The naming convention for each subwatershed is based on the major watershed it is located within. Table 7.1 lists each major watershed and the associated subwatershed naming convention. The stormwater system within these drainage'basins is comprised of storm sewers, ponding basins, drainage ditches, and overland flow paths., Table 7.1 Major Watersheds within the Lake Cornelia /Lake Edina /Adam's Hill Drainage Basin Major Watershed, Subwatershed Naming Convention # of Subwatersheds Drainage Area (acres) Lake Cornelia- North NC—## 154 859 Lake Cornelia -South SC ## 9 112 Lake Edina" LE ## 47 394 Adam's Hill (Richfield) AHR ## 20 109 7.1.1.1 North Cornelia North Lake Cornelia has a large watershed, encompassing 859 acres. The North Cornelia watershed has been delineated into 154 subwatersheds and is characterized by several ponding basins within the watershed. Land use within this watershed is comprised of a large commercial area (including the Southdale Shopping Center), portions of T.H. 62 and T.H. 100, residential areas (high and low density), parks, wetlands, and open water. The majority of the runoff from the highly impervious commercial area drains through the France Avenue and West 66th Street storm sewer system and discharges into the Point of France pond, located just northeast of the West 66th Street and Valley View Road intersection. The Point of France pond drains to the Swimming Pool Pond west of Valley View Road, which typically drains to North Lake Cornelia. During large storms, such as the Barr Engineering Company PAMpls \23 MN \27 \23271072 Edina Water Resources Mgmt Plan Update \WorkFiles\Report \Nov 3 2009 Draft \Edina_SWMP_2009_Nov3 Draft. doe FEB G Un 2011 Fr, 100 -year frequency event, as North Lake Cornelia nears its capacity, the Swimming Pool Pond will flow northward through the two 60 -inch culverts located under T.H. 62 that connect the Swimming Pool Pond with the Brookview Pond, just north of T.H. 62. An outlet control structure located on the north side of this pond allows flows to the north into Lake Pamela when the water elevation reaches elevation 863.3 MSL. North Lake Cornelia covers approximately 29 acres and serves as a recreation area for the City of Edina. The lake outlets to South Lake Cornelia through a 12 -inch culvert beneath West 66th Street. 7.1.1.2 South Lake Cornelia The South Lake Cornelia watershed is located south of the North Lake Cornelia watershed. The 112 -acre watershed is comprised of 9 subwatersheds, with two stoiinwater detention areas in addition to Lake Cornelia. The land use within the watershed is low density residential and open water. South Lake Cornelia spans approximately 32 acres. The normal elevation of the lake is controlled by a weir structure at elevation 859 MSL. Discharge from South Cornelia flows southward through a 54 -inch system for approximately 1,000 feet, where it connects with a 21 -inch system at the intersection of Dunberry Lane and Cornelia Drive. This systein ultimately drains to Lake Edina. During extreme storm events, such as the 100 -year frequency'event, the 21 -inch storm sewer system at Dunberry Lane and Cornelia Drive restricts flow „resulting in flow northward through the 54 -inch system and into South Lake Cornelia. 7.1.1.3 Lake Edina The Lake Edina watershed, i's ,located south of the Lake Cornelia drainage basins. The watershed encompasses approximately 394 acres and has been delineated into 47 subwatersheds. Land use within the watershed is mainly low'densityresidential, with smaller portions of high density residential, comniereial, institutional (Cornelia Elementary School), park, wetland, and open water. A wetland is located along the west side `of Lake Edina, directly east of T.H. 100, that receives runoff from an area of approximately 36 acres. ,Flow from this wetland discharges into Lake Edina via a weir structure and pipe -system. Lake Edina spans an area of approximately 23 acres. The normal elevation of the lake is controlled by a weir structure at elevation 822 MSL. Discharge from Lake Edina flows through a 36 -inch system underneath T.H. 100 and into the North Fork of Nine Mile Creek. 7.1.1.4 Adam's Hill Pond The Adam's Hill drainage area discussed in this analysis includes the area within the City of Edina that drains to the Adam's Hill Pond in Richfield. The outlet from Adam's Hill Pond is a pumped outlet that discharges 10 cfs to Centennial Lakes. Barr Engineering Company P:\Mpls\23 MN\27\23271072 Edina Water Resources Mgmt Plan Update \WorkFiles\Report\Nov 3 2009 Draft\Edina SWMP 2009 Nov3Draft.doc 1�r 7 -2 1 7.2 Stormwater System Analysis and Results 7.2.1 Hydrologic /Hydraulic Modeling Results The 10 -year and 100 -year frequency flood analyses were performed for the Lake Cornelia/Lake Edina/Adam's Hill drainage basins. The 10 -year analysis was based on a' /z -hour storm of 1.65 inches of rain. The 100 -year analysis was based on a 24 -hour storm event of 6 inches of rain. Table 7.2 presents the watershed information and the results for the 10 -year and 100 -year hydrologic analyses. The results of the 10 -year and 100 -year frequency hydraulic analysis for'the Lake Cornelia/Lake Edina/Adam's Hill drainage areas are summarized in Table 7.3 and,Table 7.4. The column headings in Table 7.3 are defined as follows: Node /Subwatershed ID— XP -SWMM node identification label. Each 'XP -SWMM node represents a manhole, catchbasin, pond, or other junction within the stormwater system. Downstream Conduit — References the pipe downstream of the node in the storm sewer system. Flood Elevation —The maximum water elevation reached in. the given pond/manhole for each referenced storm event (mean sea level). In soine cases, an additional flood elevation has been given in parenthesis. This flood elevation reflects the 100 -year flood elevation of Nine Mile Creek, per the Nine Mile Creek Watershed Management Plan, May 1996. Peak Outflow Rate —The peak discharge rate (cfs) from a given ponding basin for each referenced storm event. The_ peak 'outflow rates reflect the combined discharge from the pond .. through the outlet structure and y°over an fl,ow.- NWL— The_normal water level in ihe.ponding basin (mean sea level). The normal water levels for the ponding basins were assumed to' be at the outlet pipe invert or at the downstream control elevation. Flood Bounce —The, fluctuation of the water level within a given pond for each referenced storm event. Volume Stored —The maximum volume (acre -ft) of water that was stored in the ponding basin during'the storm event. The volume represents the live storage volume only. Table 7.4 summarizes the conveyance system data used in the model and the model results for the storm sewer system within the Lake Cornelia/Lake Edina/Adam's Hill drainage basins. The peak flows through each conveyance system for the 10 -year and 100 -year frequency storm events are listed in the table. The values presented represent the peak flow rate through each pipe system only and do not reflect the combined total flow from an upstream node to the downstream node when overflow from a manhole /pond occurs. Barr Engineering Company 7-3 P:\Mpls\23 MNU7 \23271072 Edina Water Resources Mgmt Plan Update \WorkFiles \Report \Nov 3 2009 Draft \Edina SWMP 2009 Nov3Draft.doe MTO ■ Figure 7.3 graphically represents the results of the 10 -year and 100 -year frequency hydraulic analyses. The figure depicts the boundaries of the drainage areas, subwatershed boundaries, the modeled storm sewer network, surcharge conditions for the XP -SWMM nodes (typically manholes), and the flood prone areas identified in the modeling analyses. One of the objectives of the hydraulic analyses was to evaluate the level of service provided by the current storm sewer system. The level of service of the system was examined by determining the surcharge conditions of the manholes and catch basins within the storm sewer system during the 10 -year and 100 -year frequency storm events. An XP -SWMM node was considered surcharged if the hydraulic grade line at that node breached the ground surface (rim elevation). Surcharging is typically the result of limited downstream capacity and tailwater impacts: The XP -SWMM nodes depicted on Figure 7.3 were color coded based on the resulting surcharge conditions. The green nodes signify no surcharging occurred during the 100 -year or 10 =yeai storm event, the yellow nodes indicate surcharging during the 100 -year event, and the red nodes identify: that surcharging is likely to occur during both a 100 -year and 10 -year frequency storm event. Figure 713 illustrates that several XP -SWMM nodes within the Lake Cornelia/Lake Edina/Adam's Hill drainage'areas- are predicted to experience surcharged conditions during both the 10 -year and 100 -year frequency storm events. This indicates a probability greater than 10 percent in any year that the system will be overburdened and unable to meet the desired level of service at these locations. These manhole and catch basin are more likely to experience inundation during the smaller, more frequent storm events of various durations. Another objective of the hydraulic analyses was to evaluate the level of protection offered by the current stormwater system; Level of protection is defined as the capacity provided by a municipal drainage system (in terms of pipe capacity, and overland overflow capacity) to prevent property damage and assure a reasonable degree of public safety following a rainstorm. A 100 -year frequency event is recommended as' a Standard for. design of stormwater management basins. To evaluate the level of protection of the stormwater system within the Lake Cornelia/Lake Edina/Adam's Hill drainage areas, the 100 -year frequency flood elevations for the ponding basins and depressed areas were compared to the low elevations of structures surrounding each basin. The low elevations were initially determined using 2 -foot topographic information and aerial imagery in ArcView. Where 100 -year flood levels oft he, ponding areas appeared to potentially threaten structures, low house elevations were obtained through field surveys. The areas that were determined to flood and threaten structures during the 100 -year frequency storm event are listed in Table 7.5 and highlighted in Figure 7.3. Discussion and recommended implementation considerations for these areas are included in Section 7.3. 7.2.2 Water Quality Modeling Results The effectiveness of the stormwater system in removing stormwater pollutants such as phosphorus was analyzed using the P8 water quality model. The P8 model simulates the hydrology and phosphorus loads introduced from the watershed of each pond and the transport of phosphorus throughout the stormwater system. Since site - specific data on pollutant wash -off rates and sediment A�'( E° 1,_ i . -1 J ._ r EIY f Barr Engineering Company P:\Mpls\23 I%M7 \23271072 Edina Water Resources Mgmt Plan Update \WorkFiles\Report\Nov 3 2009 FEB 3 2011 Draft\Ed ina_S WMP_2009_Nov 3Draft. doc has 0111 OF ffl{NA characteristics were not available, it was necessary to make assumptions based on national average values. Due to such assumptions and lack of in -lake water quality data for model calibration, the modeling results were analyzed based on the percent of phosphorus removal that occurred and not based on actual phosphorus concentrations. Figure 7.4 depicts the results of the water quality modeling for the Lake Cornelia/Lake Edina/Adam's Hill drainage areas. The figure shows the fraction of total phosphorus removal for each water body as well as the cumulative total phosphorus removal in the watershed. The individual water bodies are colored various shades of blue, indicating the percent of the total annual mass of phosphorus entering the water body that is removed (through settling). It is important to note that the percent of phosphorus removal is based on total phosphorus, including phosphorus in the soluble form. Therefore, the removal rates in downstream ponds will decrease due to the large soluble fraction of incoming phosphorus that was unsettleable in upstream ponds. The watersheds are depicted in various shades of gray, indicating the cumulative total phosphorus removal achieved. The cumulative percent removal represents the percent of the total annual mass of phosphorus entering the watershed that is removed in the pond and all upstream ponds. Ponds that had an average annual total phosphorus removal rate of 60 percent or greater, under average climatic conditions, were considered to be performing 'well. For those ponds with total phosphorus removal below 60 percent, the permanent pool storage volume was analyzed to determine if additional capacity is necessary. Based on recommendations from the MPCA publication o Protecting Water Quality in Urban Areas, March'2000, the'per>_ni'anent pool for detention ponds should be equal to or greater than the runoff from "a 2.0 -inch rainfall, in addition to the sediment storage for at least 25 years .of sediment accumulation. For ponds with less than 60 percent total phosphorus removal, the recommended storage volume was calculated for each pond within the .I drainage basin and compared to the ,eXistirig.permanent pool storage volume. 7.3 Implementation .Considerations The problem areas, identified through the''hydrologic and hydraulic XP -SWMM analyses and P8 water quality analysis were investigated to determine possible mitigation alternatives. These alternatives are discussed below.. 7.3.1 Storm Sewer Capacity Projects The 100 -year frequency hydraulic analysis identified several locations within the Lake Cornelia and Lake Edina watersheds where the 100 -year level of protection is not provided by the current stormwater system. The problems and potential corrective measures for these areas are discussed below. 7.3.1.1 Swimming Pool Pond (NC_3) /North Lake Cornelia (NC_62) During the design process for the West 66h Street drainage improvements, a detailed analysis of the storm water system was performed that included the entire Lake Cornelia drainage area. The system �,► ri',�,�I��r, nEpARTti�►�N`� Barr Engineering Company 7 -5 - , ZOtit P:\Mpls\23 MN\27\23271072 Edina Water Resources Mgmt Plan Update \WorkFiles\Report\Nov 3 2009 FEB Draft\Edina SWMP 2009 Nov3Draft.doe MINA was modeled based on several recommended improvements, many of which have been since implemented. One recommendation was to replace the 18 -inch RCP pipe and orifice structure between the Swimming Pool Pond and North Lake Cornelia with a 42 -inch equivalent RCP arch pipe. A 20 -foot weir control structure was recommended to be installed at the inlet to this pipe. The overland flow elevation between these two areas was recommended to be lowered to 863.5 MSL. Although this recommendation has not yet been implemented, it was assumed to be implemented for the XP -SWMM modeling analysis. 7.3.1.2 Hibiscus Avenue (LE 53, LE 7, LE 10) Stormwater runoff from a 48.5 -acre subwatershed (LE _53) collects at the intersection of Hibiscus Avenue and West Shore Drive. Along the south side of this intersection, two catchbasins connect to the 54 -inch storm. sewer system that discharges into Lake Edina: Due to the lack of inlet capacity at this intersection, the stormwater that does not enter the storm tewer system flows west along Hibiscus Avenue toward the low area near 4708, 4709, and'-471 3 Hibiscus Avenue. A separate storm sewer system exists at this low area along Hibiscus, with' two catchbasins on the street to allow water into the system. This system extends upstream, collecting runoff from the backyard depression area behind 4708 and 4712 Hibiscus Avenue. During the 100 -year frequency event, the low area in the street becomes inundated with stormwater runoff from the watersheds directly tributary to this system and from the excess runoff coming from West Shore Drive (subwatershed LE_53). The street flooding causes the system to back up and reverse flow into the backyard depression area. The 100 -year flood elevation in the street and in the backyard depression area reaches approximately 83 1.1 MSL. This flood elevation has the potential to affect structures at 4704, 4708, 4712, 4716 Hibiscus Avenue on the north side and 4705 Hibiscus on the south side of the street. To alleviate this problem and 'erisure a 100 -year level' of protection is provided, it is recommended that a positive overflow _drainage way be constructed between the low area of the street and Lake Edina. This will allow the street to drain and prevent the system from backing up into the backyard depression area. An option of adding additional inlet capacity to the trunk 54 -inch system at the intersection of West Shore Drive and Hibiscus Avenue was considered; however, the 54 -inch storm sewer system drains'hearly 200 acres in addition to the 48.5 acres from subwatershed LE-53 and is already at full capacity. Adding additional inlet capacity at the intersection of West Shore Drive and Hibiscus Avenue would cause additional street flooding problems at upstream locations. 7.3.1.3 6312, 6316, 6321, 6329 Tingdale Avenue (NC--11) A depression area exists along Tingdale Avenue, between West 63rd and West 64a' Streets. Two catchbasins are located at the low portion of the street, collecting stormwater runoff. During the 100 -year frequency storm event, the flood elevation at this location reaches 936.5 MSL. A field survey determined that this flood elevation would potentially impact egress windows at 6312 and 6316 Tingdale Avenue (935.24 MSL and 935.20 MSL, respectively). Barr Engineering Company 7 -6 P: \Mpls \23 MN\27\23271072 Edina Water Resources Mgmt Plan Update \WorkFiles\Report\Nov 3 2009 Draft \Edina_S WMP_2009_Nov3Draft.doc (j . 7.3.1.4 St. Johns /Ashcroft and West 64Th Street (NC_40, NC-26) A low area exists directly north of North Lake Cornelia, encompassing portions of T.H. 62 and West 64'h Street between Ashcroft Lane and St. Johns Avenue. The storm sewer system in this depression area includes two catchbasins on West 64th Street and several inlets along T.H. 62, including an inlet in the grassed median of T.H. 62. During extreme storm events such as the 100 -year frequency event, this area is inundated with stormwater runoff, receiving flows from the subwatersheds directly tributary to the system, as well as flow not captured by the storm sewer system at the intersection of Ashcroft and West 64`h Street (40 cfs) and excess T.H. 62 flows not collected upstream (160 cfs). Because of the topography and the slope of the highway at this location, during intense rainstorm events water from the highway will flow north toward the low area on West 64th Street. The 100 -year frequency flood elevation for the highway and West 64th Street area is 868.1 MSL. At this flood elevation, the entire stretch of West 64th Street between Ashcroft Lane and St. Johns Avenue will be inundated, in addition to the highway and backyard area just north of West 64th Street, endangering structures at 6336 St. Johns Avenue and 6329 `Ashcroft Lane: To alleviate this situation, it is recommended that an,additional pipe be installed at the low point in the T.H. 62 median that would drain to North Lake Cornelia. A 24 -inch pipe would decrease the 100 -year frequency flood elevation of this depression area to 867.7 MSL and alleviate the flooding concerns for 6336 St. Johns Avenue and 6329 Ashcroft Lane. 7.3.1.5 Barrie Road and Heritage Drive (NC_86, NC 97, NC_99) A depression area exists at the intersection of Barrie Road and Heritage Drive and extends south of the intersection along Barrie }toad io'W' est 65th Street. Stormwater from this area is collected by storm sewer and flows northvyard, eventually connecting with the T.H. 62 system. During large storm events, this large depression area is inundated, causing street and parking lot flooding. The calculated flood elevation for the 100 -.year frequency storm event is 879.8 MSL. The low elevations of several properties in this area were surveyed to determine if this flood level would encroach upon and potentially: cause damage to, any structures. The field survey identified only one property at 6328 Barrie Road with a 878.6 MSL walkout patio elevation, with a low elevation below the 100 -year frequency flood level. The analysis of this system determined that the flooding problem in this area results from lack of capacity of the T.H. 62 system. As large stormwater flows enter the T.H. 62 storm sewer system from the highway, flow into that system from Barrie Road and Heritage Drive is restricted. To alleviate this problem, it will be necessary to re- examine the capacity of the T.H. 62 storm sewer system. 7.3.1.6 York Avenue and West 64`h Street (NC_88) A stormwater detention basin is located southeast of the intersection of York Avenue and West 64"' Street. This basin has two pumped outlets, one which discharges to the west and one that discharges to the east. The outlet to the west is controlled by two pumps, each with an approximate pumping rate of 500 gpm (1.1 cfs). For the XP -SWMM model, it was assumed that the first pump on i4 ANNINCz DEPART [-.N Barr Engineering Company 7-7 PAMpls\23 MNU7\23271072 Edina Water Resources Mgmt Plan Update \WorkFiles\Report\Nov 3 2009 FEB 1, 201'i Draft \Edina SWMP 2009 Nov3Draft.doe the west side turns on as the water elevation reaches 863 MSL, with the second pump turning on at water elevation 864 MSL. It was assumed the pumps turn off at water elevation 862 MSL. The pumped discharge flows west through a forcemain and connects to the gravity system along Barrie Road. The outlet to the east is also controlled by two 500 gpm pumps. Similar to the west outlet, it was assumed that the first pump on the east side turns on as the water elevation reaches 863 MSL, with the second on at elevation 864 MSL and both pumps off when the water level recedes to 862 MSL. Discharge from this outlet flows south along Xerxes Avenue, eventually connecting into the West 66th Street system. The predicted 100 -year flood elevation for this detention basin is 870.9. MSL. Based on the 2 -foot topographic information, if flood waters reach this elevation the strueture at 6415 York Avenue would be affected and potentially the structure at 6455 York Avenue. To prevent these structures from incurring flood damage, the pump capacity from the system should be increased. It is recommended that the capacity of both the east and west lift stations be upgraded to 1500 gpm (approximately 3 cfs) each. It is also recommended that the pumps turn on at water elevation 862.5 and off at 861.5 MSL. With implementation of these recommendations, the predicted 100 -year frequency flood elevation is 870 MSL, providing a level of protection for these structures. 7.3.1.7 T.H. 62 at France Avenue (NC_132) The modeling results indicated that isolated flooding would occur along T.H. 62 during a 100 -year frequency storm event. Specifically, flooding would 'o'cciii on T.H. 62 near the France Avenue crossing. The 100 -year frequency. flood elevation of this area ,is 873.2 MSL. To correct this problem, it will be necessary to re- examine the capacity of the T.H. 62 storm sewer system. 7.3.1.8 Parnell Avenue and. Valley_ View Road (NC_135) A backyard depression. area exists - between the blocks of Ryan Avenue and Parnell Avenue, just south of Valley View Road:.The backyard depression area collects stormwater from its direct subwatershed:of approximately:3 acres. The area is currently not connected to the storm sewer system. The predicted 100 -year frequency flood elevation for this area is 910.2 MSL. Based on the 2 -foot topographic �data, this flood elevation would potentially impact the structures at 4801 and 4809 Valley View Road and 6112 Parnell Avenue. 7.3.2 Construction /Ul5grade of Water Quality Basins Results of the water quality modeling in the Lake Cornelia/Lake Edina drainage area indicated that the annual removal of total phosphorus from several ponds was predicted to be below the desired 60 percent removal rate, under average year conditions. For those ponds with total phosphorus removal below 60 percent, the permanent pool storage volume was analyzed to determine if additional capacity is necessary. The ponds that exhibited deficiencies in total phosphorus removal and permanent pool volume are listed below, along with recommended pond upgrades. . Barr Engineering Company 7-8 PAMpls\23 MNU7 \23271072 Edina Water Resources Mgmt Plan Update \WorkFiles \Report\Nov 3 2009 Draft \Edina SWMP 2009 Nov3Draft.doe In Ol NV' % 7.3.2.1 LE 38 Pond LE-38 is located along the west side of Lake Edina, directly east of T.H. 100 (primarily within MnDOT right -of -way). The pond receives runoff from an area of approximately 36 acres. Flow from this pond is discharged into Lake Edina via a weir structure and pipe system. Based on the recommended storage volume discussed above, Pond LE-38- is deficient in permanent pool storage volume. It is recommended that an additional 1.4 acre -feet of dead storage volume be provided to meet the MPCA design criteria for detention basins. 7.3.2.2 NC 88 Pond NC 88 is located southeast of the intersection of York Avenue acid West 64`h Street. This basin has two pumped outlets, with pumped discharge eventually entering both the Point of France Pond and the Swimming Pool Pond. Based on the MPCA recommended'storage volume for detention basins, there is not an adequate amount of permanent pool storage in this basin. However, since the predicted total phosphorus removal rate from this pond is -approximately 50 percent and the pumped stormwater leaving this basin will receive additional water quality treatment through several subsequent ponding basins, recommendations for pio`viding additional dead - storage volume are not being made at this time. 1YI ANNNNG DEPARTMENT FE Barr Engineering Company P:\Mpls\23 MN\27\23271072 Edina Water Resources Mgmt Plan Update \WorkFiles \Report\Nov 3 2009 NA Draft\Edina_SWMP_2009_Nov3Draft.doc '� -� F_ ��� M DRAFT Table 7.2 Watershed Modeling Results for Subwatersheds in the Lake Cornelia/Lake Edina/Adam's Hill Pond Drainage Areas (Revised 12/2006) Watershed Information 100 -Year Stone Results 24 -Hour Event 10 -Year Storm Results 1/2 -Hour Event Watershed ID Total Area (ac) % Impervious Area Peak Runoff Rate (cfs) Total Volume Runoff (ac -ft) Peak Runoff Rate (cfs) Total Volume Runoff (ac -ft) C_16 5.6 20.9 24.3 1.6 13.2 0.3 C_17 1.8 19.9 8.3 0.5 6.0 0.1 C_18 8.9 20.0 35.6 2.5 17.3 0.5 C 19 7.8 23.5 33.7 2.2 18.8 _ 0.5 ;:C_2 11.5 59.0 54.2 4.5 42.5 1.2 C_20 2.0 22.3 8.2 0.6 4.3 0.1 C_21 7.2 48.0 33.1 2.5 25.1 0.6 C_22 5.8 17.2 26.1 1.8 15.0 0.4 C_23 3.8 50.0 18.4 1.4 19.3 0.4 C_24 6.3 22.1 28.2 1.8 16.4 0.4 C_25 7.7 21.1 35.3 2.2 21.4 0.5 NC-26 1.9 50.0 9.3 0.7 10.4 0.2 NC 12.4 49.0 59.3 4.4 58.2 1.1 -27 C_28 1.1 49.6 5.4 0.4 5.9 0.1 C 29 0.7 43.9 3.2 0.2 3.2 0.1 C_3 16.2 43.8 76.0 7.2 60.9 1.8 NC 21.7 58.7 95.6 8.4 59.6 2.2 -30 C 31 6.6 21.6 29.2 1.9 16.4 0.4 C 32 6.4 49.9 27.6 2.3 16.8 0.5 C_33 2.5 46.1 12.1 0.9 12.6 0.2 C_34 1.0 50.0 4.7 0.4 5.2 0.1 C 35 10.6 20.0 45.8 2.9 24.0 0.6 C 36 14.1 20.0 56.9 3.9 27.7 0.8 C_37 2.2 18.5 10.1 0.7 6.0 0.2 C_38 3.9 14.8 17.6 1.2 10.0 0.3 NC 4.7 22.3 20.7 1.3 11.7 0.3 -39 C_4 12.1 69.0 54.7 4.9 35.1 1.3 C_40 7.0 23.1 28.0 2.0 14.3 0.4 C_41. 7.8 51.1 34.7 2.8 22.5 0.7 C_42 8.3 50.4 22.9 2.8 9.3 0.6 C 43 13.9 22.6 58.6 4.0 31.0 0.9 C_44 2.8 50.0 13.0 1.0 10.1 0.2 C_45 1.8 21.5 8.5 0.5 6.3 0.1 C_46 8.9 23.7 30.7 2.5 14.6 0.5 NC 3.2 41.2 14.5 1.1 10.3 0.3 -47 C 48 8.2 20.0 34.3 2.3 17.2 0.5 NC 1.9 20.1 8.9 0.5 6.9 0.1 -49 C_5 8.6 64.1 40.8 3.4 32.4 0.9 C_50 3.3 20.1 15.5 1.1 11.0 0.3 NC 3.7 58.0 17.7 1.4 16.8 0.4 -51 C_52 7.6 20.0 34.5 2.2 20.0 0.5 C_53 2.2 19.9 9.6 0.6 5.2 0.1 NC 54 - 5.6 49.4 24.7 2.0 15.7 0.5 -F P:\Mpls\23 MN\27\23271072 Edina Water Resources Mgmt Plan Update \WorkFiles \QAQC Model for Pon d\NineMII.e_SWMM_j3ydraulic_ output_ 2006UPDATE _final_NWL_verification.als Cornelia Runoff Update ,, 20'Ok OtNA t C. F,a Z01` D R A F T Table 7.3 � (� s� Hydraulic Modeling Results for XP -SWMM Subwatersheds/Nodes In the Lak -', e,'- rineQjaO rikAdam's Hill Pond Drainage Areas (Revised 12/2006). Subwatershed or Node Downstream Conduit 100 -Year Storm Results 24 -Hour Event 10 -Year Storm Results 1/2 -Hour Event Flood Elevation (ft) Type of Storages NWL (ft) Flood Bounce (ft) Flood Elevation (ft) NWL (ft) Flood Bounce (ft) NQ--150 1632p 878.0 876.5 NC-151 1866P 883.4 parking lot 882.0 880.3 1.8 NC_152 1828P 884.0 884.0 NC-153 25584 883.5 883.5 NC-154 1238p 877.8 877.2 NQ-155 1872g 884.1 884.0 NC 156 1870 -T 882.1 parking lot 881.6 876.3 5.4 NC-16 518p 928.9 street 920.1 NQ-17 527=p 916.3 908.2 NC-18 542P 874.7 874.5 NC-19 525_ 919.0 910.6 NC -2 5-79_p 865.4 pond 863.0 2.4 863.7 863.0 0.7 NC-20 522p 926.3 street 926.2 NC-21 3130p 910.6 909.4 NC-22 534p 865.9 .865.1 NC--23 523 921.3 912.5 NC-24 538p 876.1 874.3 NC 562p 881.7 881.7 -25 NC-26 575p 868.1 hwy ditch 861.3 6.8 867.1 861.3 5.8 NQ-27 565P 889.4 889.2 NC-28 554p 868.1 867.4 NC-29 559p 874.5 874.5 NC_3 591P 865.2 pond 862.9 2.3 864.0 862.9 1.1 NC-30 3111p 865.2 pond 862.9 2.3 864.0 862.9 1.0 NC-31 5694 902.4 902.3 NC-32 568p 893.0 892.6 NC-33 3136p 888.7 888.8 NC-34 5604 880.0 880.0 NC-35 548p 896.1 894.3 NC-36 545p 913.3 913.1 NC-37 552p 864.9 862.9 NC-38 544p 865.5 864.0 NC-39 556p 869.4 869.3 NC-4 598p 865.7 pond 862.9 2.8 864.3 862.9 1.4 NC-AO NC 41 577p 3133p 868.1 916.3 byd hwy ditch 861.7 901.6 6.4 - 14.7 866.5 913.2 861.7 901.6 4.8 11.6 NC_42 3132p 908.3 hwy ditch 890.0 18.3 905.9 890.0 15.9 NC-43 3134p 895.1 894.8 NC-44 1897p 924.0 921.2 NQ-45 1887 918.9 byd 914.4 4.4 915.9 914.4 1.4 NC-A6 NC-47 1891p 1886p 918.1 918.8 street byd 910.2 8.7 913.6 915.8 910.2 5.6 NC-48 592p 869.1 865.6 NC-49 2232p 866.6 street 864.5 860.0 4.5 NC-5 596p 867.7 pond 864.5 3.2 865.5 864.5 1.0 NC_50 1084_p 877.7 byd 872.9 4.8 877.1 872.9 4.2 NC-51 2233p 871.9 868.4 NC-52 1087p 875.2 871.8 NC 53 1088P 895.0 893.3 NQ-54 1080P 869.0 867.9 NQ-55 1081p 878.0 byd 874.9 3.1 877.0 874.9 2.1 NC-5 6 1083p 878.7 8783 NC_57 1S59-p 881.5 878.4 NC 58 1077p 877.1 877.0 P -.\Mpls\23 MNU7\23271072 Edina Water Resources Mgmt Plan Update \WorkFiles \QAQC Model for Pond\NlneNM- e_SWrMM- hydraulic output_ 2006UPDATE - final- NWL_veri6ca6on.xls Cornelia_ lode update �3� S 'ejecT LITE ,•_; P. r st — - Adam's Hill .. ` Lake Edi y Sdb Y. Minneapolis Richfield �] City of Edina Boundary Roads /Highways 1`—� Creek/Stream Lake/Wetland C3 Lake Cornelia /Lake Edina/ Adam's Hill Pond Drainage Basin Major Watershed (:3 Subwatershed Imagery Source: Aeriah Express, 2008 O Feet 1,200 0 1,200 Meters 400 0 400 DRAFT Figure 7.2 LAKE CORNELIA/LAKE EDINA/ ADAM'S HILL POND MAJOR WATERSHEDS Comprehensive Water Resource Management Plan City of Edina, Minnesota Tw SuBIECT (� City of Edina Boundary Roads /Highways �. Creek /Stream Lake/ Welland C3 Lake Cornelia /Lake Edina/ Adam's Hill Pond Drainage Basin Subwalershed Imagery Source: Aerials Express, 2000 0 Feet 1,200 0 1,200 Meters 400 0 400 DRAFT Figure 7.1 LAKE CORNELIA/LAKE EDINA/ ADAM'S HILL POND DRAINAGE BASIN Comprehensive Water Resource Management Plan City of Edina, Minnesota ryk ' j •••ffff '(I 1 .% i t �•% _ 5%)VO)ECT S ITL Minneapolis } i . R v i .?'`: -- ! L r'�t,�. _.; t 111'• -'''�" ..�% : �. `-.� � , �. Ulm .�...1r Richfield Source: Aerl.le 1�I1 fv9�.G4 C( a }U) Percent TP Removal in Water Body" This number represents the percent of the total annual mass of phosphorus entering the water body that Is removed. 0 - 25% (Poor /No Removal) 25 - 40% (Moderate Removal) _ 40 - 60% (Good Removal) - 60 - 100% (Excellent Removal) Cumulative TP Removal in Watershed' This number represents the percent of the total annual mass of phosphorus entering the watershed and upstream watersheds that is removed in the pond and all upstream ponds. - 0 - 25% (Poor /No Removal) ® 25 - 40% (Moderate Removal) 40 - 60% (Good Removal) 60 - 100% (Excellent Removal) *Data based on results of P8 modeling. Flow Direction Q Feel 1,200 0 1,200 Meters 400 0 400 DRAFT Figure 7.4 LAKE CORNELIAILAKE EDINA WATER QUALITY MODELING RESULTS Comprehensive Water Resource Management Plan City of Edina, Minnesota ...J y S S /AM2• �� Y Y f t� i 5%)VO)ECT S ITL Minneapolis } i . R v i .?'`: -- ! L r'�t,�. _.; t 111'• -'''�" ..�% : �. `-.� � , �. Ulm .�...1r Richfield Source: Aerl.le 1�I1 fv9�.G4 C( a }U) Percent TP Removal in Water Body" This number represents the percent of the total annual mass of phosphorus entering the water body that Is removed. 0 - 25% (Poor /No Removal) 25 - 40% (Moderate Removal) _ 40 - 60% (Good Removal) - 60 - 100% (Excellent Removal) Cumulative TP Removal in Watershed' This number represents the percent of the total annual mass of phosphorus entering the watershed and upstream watersheds that is removed in the pond and all upstream ponds. - 0 - 25% (Poor /No Removal) ® 25 - 40% (Moderate Removal) 40 - 60% (Good Removal) 60 - 100% (Excellent Removal) *Data based on results of P8 modeling. Flow Direction Q Feel 1,200 0 1,200 Meters 400 0 400 DRAFT Figure 7.4 LAKE CORNELIAILAKE EDINA WATER QUALITY MODELING RESULTS Comprehensive Water Resource Management Plan City of Edina, Minnesota v i .?'`: -- ! L r'�t,�. _.; t 111'• -'''�" ..�% : �. `-.� � , �. Ulm .�...1r Richfield Source: Aerl.le 1�I1 fv9�.G4 C( a }U) Percent TP Removal in Water Body" This number represents the percent of the total annual mass of phosphorus entering the water body that Is removed. 0 - 25% (Poor /No Removal) 25 - 40% (Moderate Removal) _ 40 - 60% (Good Removal) - 60 - 100% (Excellent Removal) Cumulative TP Removal in Watershed' This number represents the percent of the total annual mass of phosphorus entering the watershed and upstream watersheds that is removed in the pond and all upstream ponds. - 0 - 25% (Poor /No Removal) ® 25 - 40% (Moderate Removal) 40 - 60% (Good Removal) 60 - 100% (Excellent Removal) *Data based on results of P8 modeling. Flow Direction Q Feel 1,200 0 1,200 Meters 400 0 400 DRAFT Figure 7.4 LAKE CORNELIAILAKE EDINA WATER QUALITY MODELING RESULTS Comprehensive Water Resource Management Plan City of Edina, Minnesota MEMO TO: City of Edina Planning FROM: James Lany RE: Conditional Use Permit at 4509 Garrison Lane, Edina DATE: March 17, 2011 Concerns over any negative impact(s) to adjacent 4,513 Garrison Lane (John & Betty Lany) Change in the new roofline from north — south to east —west Desire that the water from the roof stays on the applicant's property Suggestions 1. Amore pronounced swale than is currently shown on the survey 2. A five (5) foot drainage easement running front to back - on applicant's west line. (so that a swafe would stay in place) Frank Kriz RUM RIVER LAND SURVEYORS 413 South Rum River Drive Princeton, MN 55371 1- 763 - 389 -4476 Jackie Hoogenakker From: Tom Pelinka <TomP @synergy- graphics.com> Sent: Tuesday, April 12, 201112:23 PM To: Jackie Hoogenakker Subject: case file 2011.0001 Let them have the foot and fix that street instead, it's as bad as Chicago Av. In south Mpls!! Tom. Pelinka Synergy Graphics Direct: 7637586 -3740 Mobile: 612- 968 -0267 Fax: 763 7586 -3790 The information contained in this email and any attachments is confidential and.may be subject to copyright or other intellectual property protection of Synergy Graphics. If you are not the intended recipient, you are not authorized to use or disclose this information, and we request that you notify us by reply mail or telephone and delete the original message from your mail system. L 1 Jackie Hoogenakker From: Doug FUERST < cdfuerst @comcast.net> Sent: Friday, April 08, 20111:30 PM To: Jackie Hoogenakker Cc: jeffery.l.miller @medtronic.com; cdfuerst @comcast.net Subject: 4509 Garrison Lane CUP -Case File 2011.0001 omeowners Jackie - I intended to voice my support at the April 19 public hearing for 4509 Garrison Lane Conditional Use Permit - Case File 2011.0001 . Due to family matters I need to attend to on behalf of aging parents that day, I will be unable to attend in person . It seems very reasonable to me what the homeowners are requesting especially in light of the direct and complete support received from neighbors adjacent to their property who will be the parties affected by the homeowners project . The homeowners appear to have taken extreme measures to ensure their project does not have any adverse effects on neighboring homes not to mention their desire to ensure the projected design architecturally compliments their neighborhood. We're all aware of less considerate homeowners in our city who show little regard for their neighbors views and over build on their property. Doug Fuerst Jackie Hoogenakker From: Paul Hanson <PauIH @woodstoneinc.com> Sent: Monday, March 21, 20119:54 AM To: Jackie Hoogenakker Subject: Edina Planning Commission - Case 2011.0001 - 4509 Garrison Lane - Conditional Use Permit Request Hello! We strongly support Connie Carrino and Jeff Miller in their efforts to build a new home at 4509 Garrison Lane. Please approve their request for a Conditional Use Permit. We have lived at 4520 Garrison Lane since the early 90's and can see Connie and Jeff's house very clearly through the east window in our living room. Because of the curve in the street, we see more of their house then we do of our immediate neighbor. We greatly appreciate the efforts Connie and Jeff have gone through to make their proposed new home fit in with the rest of the neighborhood and hope to soon look out that same window on their new home. Our neighborhood is made up of a nice mix of houses (walk -out ramblers, split entries and a few two -story homes) that were all built in the late 50's or early 60's. None of these houses "dominate" the street. We would not be happy if Connie and Jeff were to build a large two -story house with a steep roof on their lot — this style of house would take over the street and look completely out of place. A large size house would spoil our view out the east window. What we want to see in our neighborhood are homeowners that care for their houses and yards — and consider the whole neighborhood in their actions. After studying the proposed plans of their new house, we are impressed with the work that Connie and Jeff have done to minimize the effect on the neighborhood while still getting the new house that meets their needs. I am in the construction business and understand the need for planning and zoning laws to maintain control of development — but it is sometimes necessary for an exemption to the City code to really maximize the benefit of the new construction. I believe that is the case here. Connie and Jeff could build a large two -story house on their lot without any special permit from the City — but that would not be the best solution for all of us neighbors. Their proposed walk -out rambler would be very much in keeping with the character of the neighborhood while giving them the space that they desire. As our house also backs up to one of the ponds on Garrison Lane, we understand the concern with the_ water table. On this block, I would not recommend lowering a house deeper into the ground to get the desired 8' ceiling height in the lower level — there is too great of a risk for flooding and ground water infiltration. And we agree with Connie and Jeff's decision that they need to have an 8' ceiling in the lower level. Just because a lower level with a 7' ceiling was acceptable when the original house was built doesn't mean that same height should be carried forward into a new house. There are a lot of building methods that were common practices in the 50's and 60's that are not used today. We should not be held back from utilizing the current practices just because of a City code requirement. This is especially true when the proposed solution has considered the impact on the rest of the neighborhood and not just the interests of the owner. Please grant the Conditional Use Permit to Connie and Jeff to allow them to build their dream home on our street. They are a part of our neighborhood and something would be lost if they were forced to move away to build their dream home. PLANNING DEPARTMENT Thank you for allowing us to share our thoughts on this issue. MAR 21 2011 Paul and Sue Hanson CITY OF EDINA 4520 Garrison Lane Edina, MN 55424 952 - 920 -7930 Jackie Hooaenakker From: Mary Gunderson <mary@marygunderson.com> Sent: Wednesday, March 23,20111:01 PM To: Jackie Hoogenakker Subject: 4509 Garrison lane, Edina, MN CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT To the Edina Planning Commission: I live at 6120 Ashcroft Ave, about 2 blocks from Connie Carrino and Jeff Miller. I support the permit for them to raise their 1st floor one foot. I understand that if they built a 2 story house, they wouldn't have to apply for a permit. The single -story house they plan will fit seamlessly into the neighborhood; a better fit than a two -story home would be. I've talked with the Carrino- Miller Neighbors to the south and they are fine with the permit as well. I welcome this kind of development in my neighborhood. Mary Gunderson 6120 Ashcroft Ave Edina, MN MaryGunderson.com Creative Living, Good Food and Wellness HistoryCooks.com Paleocuisineology(R) 1 051 nJ,�ON\ Jackie Hoogenakker From: FRANK W BARNARD <frankbarn5464 @msn.com> Sent: Monday, March 21, 201110:57 PM To: Jackie Hoogenakker Subject: Regarding: Edina Planning Commission, Case File: 2011.0001 EDINA PLANNING COMMISSION, CASE FILE: 2011.0001 MARCH 21, 2011 REGARDING - THE CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT, SOUGHT BY JEFF MILLER AND CONNIE CARRINO @ 4509 GARRISON LANE, EDINA... I AM THE NEIGHBOR ACROSS THE STREET, FRANK BARNARD, @ 4504 GARRISON LANE. I HAVE REVIEWED THEIR DRAWINGS AND DISCUSSED THEIR HOUSING PROBLEM WITH THEM AT LENGTH AND FIND THEIR PROPOSED SOLUTION TO BE WELL STUDIED, VERY REASONABLE AND ACCEPTABLE. I SEE NO REASON TO DENY THEM THE PERMIT. THEIR NEW HOUSE WILL BE VERY ATTRACTIVE. FRANK BARNARD RETIRED ARCHITECT PLANNING DEPARTMENT MAR 21 2011 CITY OF EDINA Jackie Hooaenakker From: Jon R DeMars Victorsen <apts.mn @earth link. net> Sent: Monday, March 14,201110:40 AM To: Jackie Hoogenakker Subject: Case File: 2011.0001 To Whom it May Concern: I have reviewed the proposed information regarding the Conditional Use Permit for 4509 Garrison Lane. I do not have any criticism of,this request. Having visited New Orleans, post- Katrina, this request raises questions about contingency plans. Is the City.of Edina monitoring the condition of the. infrastructure which maintains the waterlevel of the interconnected ponds and marsh? Are there contingency plans should the single, overflow connection to Pamela Park collapse? Jon DeMars Victorsen, Partner Victorsens' Rentals LLP (4401 Valley View Road)' Jackie Hoogenakker From: mahflyer @comcast.net Sent: Sunday, March 13, 201111:21 AM To: Jackie Hoogenakker Subject: 4509 Garrison Lane,Edina To the city of Edina planning department, I read over the plan's for the residence at 4509 Garrison Lane in Edina and found them to be very nice I hope to see Connie and Jeff fulfill their dreams. Sincerely, 6305 St. Johns Ave Tom and Marcie Hamel Jackie Hoogenakker From: Yedda Marks <yedda @comcast.net> Sent: Sunday, March 13, 2011 9:56 AM To: Jackie Hoogenakker Subject: Testimony RE: Case 2011.0001 - Conditional Use Permit -4509 Garrison Lane To: The City of Edina Planning Department RE: Case File 2011:0001 (4509 Garrison Lane, Edina, .MN) — CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT REQUEST My name is Yedda Marks. As of July 2011 1 will have lived at 4508 Garrison Lane for nine years - directly across the street from the property in question. I received the public hearing notice dated March 11, 2011 for the March 23 Planning Commission meeting regarding my neighbor's request for a conditional use permit. Due to a scheduled surgery, I am unlikely to be able to attend in person, although if circumstances allow I will be there. I am the only resident in the neighborhood that has a full view of the property in question from many rooms in my home where. l spend the majority of my time — living room, family room, two of my bedrooms and entry foyer. The view from my home is more direct than neighbors on both the east and west sides of said property as well as on the east and west sides of my own property facing said property. I believe my vantage point is an important consideration. Please NOTE: I have NO ISSUE with the design or elevation of the new house Jeff and Connie wish to build. I am 100% supportive of the proposed project for many reasons including: • This neighborhood consists of primarily ramblers, walkout ramblers and split entries (like my home). The design of the proposed new home is appropriate for and will blend well with the character of the neighborhood. • Our neighborhood has many homes owned by mature, long -time residents. These homes are likely to be subject to sale in the next few years and having a new home in the neighborhood will only benefit the value of-all of the homes. • Unfortunately, there are also a number of homes that have been very poorly maintained and the poor condition is noticeable from the street. A newly built home would hopefully. encourage improvements to these many tired properties. Most importantly,..) am supportive of my neighbor's desire to do the right thing for their property, and the . neighborhood by keeping with a walkout rambler style. Their project. has been on. hold since July of last year. Most other homeowners would have taken the easy way out by applying for the standard building permit which would mean I would be looking at an oversized two-story home. I attended a prior planning. commission session on this request last fall and cannot fathom that this request is still under review. It is inconceivable to me that a CUP is required to build a new, improved walkout rambler, but a two -story home - one I would not have supported - could have been readily built with only a building permit. Jeff and Connie want to do the right thing and the Planning Commission and the neighborhood would do right. by supporting their efforts and setting a precedent for others to improve and sustain the integrity of our neighborhood while enhancing the real estate values for all by APPROVING. the CUP. Thank you very much for your serious consideration of my feedback. Yedda S. Marks i Jackie Hoogenakker From: james westin <jimmywestone @hotmail.com> Sent: Saturday, March 12, 201112:25 PM To: Jackie Hoogenakker Subject: 4509 Garrison Lane, Edina Proposal I am a neighbor that lives 2 doors down from 4509 Garrison Lane at 4501 Garrison Lane. I would like to give my support to their proposed building project. All of us on our street have issues with our basements and raising the level above the ordinance makes sense. They have a nice design for their proposed house and it would fit the neighborhood nicely. —James Westin 4501 Garrison Lane Edina, Mn 55424 612 - 709 -1338 DATE: March 22, 2011 TO: Cary Teague Director of Planning MEMORANDUM PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT CITY OF EDINA FROM: Wayne D. Houle, PE Director of Public Works / City Engineer SUBJECT: Lake Cornelia and Garrison Ponds 2011.0011.11 a Conditional Use Permit College City Design Builders 4509 Garrison Lane I understand that the homeowners located at 4509, 4505, and 4501 Nancy Lane might raise some concern regarding the above requested conditional use permit. These homeowners along Nancy Lane were sent the attached letter last week notifying them that their homes were identified as "at- risk" properties for spring flooding. The intent of the notification of "at- risk" properties was to make the property owner aware that the City of Edina may have sandbags available for these properties. The determination of the "at- risk" properties was based on computer modeling of the anticipated snow melt and a large spring, rain event; please read the note located in the lower left hand corner of the attached map. We also utilize the word "properties ", since we do not have accurate data (elevations, etc.) on each home or structure. Most of the properties adjacent to the Garrison Ponds are also indicated on the FEMA Flood Maps as being within Zone X. Zone X is described by FEMA as "Areas of 0.2% annual chance flood, areas of 1% annual flood with average depths of less than 1 foot or with drainage areas less than 1 square mile; and areas protected by levees from I% annual chance flood." The City of Edina's Storm Water Management Plan also indicates this area is within the 100 -year flood plain. Due to the proximity to Garrison Ponds these properties will always have a potential for flooding. Also, per Nine Mile Creek Watershed rules, no filling is allowed within the 100 -year flood plain. If a property owner does wish to fill within a flood area, they will need to "balance the site" by excavating the same amount within the flood area so the total volume of flood storage remains the same. Nine Mile Creek Watershed District is the Local Government Unit for surface water regulations in this area and any changes to the 100 -year flood plain will require their approval. Let me know if you need additional information regarding this issue. G: \Englneering \Generol\G Streets \4509 Ganlson Lane \20110323 WH -Edlno to CT -Edlno 4509 Garrison Ln Flood Issue.docx A. ok Is 7— 0 . N m y mnu Cily of Edina March 17, 2011 John & Nancy Parker 4509 Nancy Lane Edina, MN 55424 RE: Potential Spring Flooding Dear Property Owner: The City of Edina has worked with Nine Mile Creek and Minnehaha Creek watershed districts to help prepare for the potential spring flooding. The City has identified an action plan to deal with the spring flooding and has identified your property as a potential property that could be flooded this spring. Owners of at -risk properties may request sandbags from the City, which we will deliver them to your front yard or driveway as supplies allow. The City will not place sandbags for property owners, but can advise as to proper placement. Please contact the City's Utility Engineer — Jesse Struve at - struve@ci.edina.mn.us or 952 - 903 -5713, if you would like to request sandbags or learn more about this event. You can also visit our web site at http• / /www.ci!yofedina.com for more information. Sincerely, Wayne D. Houle, PE Director of Public Works / City Engineer C: City Council G:\ Engineering \lnfrastructure\Storm Sewer\2010 Spring Flooding\20110315 letter to homeowners.doc City Hall 4801 WEST 50TH STREET EDINA, MINNESOTA, 55424 -1394 www.cityofedina.com 952 - 927 -1:111567 FAX 952 - 826 -0390 TTY 952 - 826 -0379 . • • •ry l ,t a>���?,�, � {iY A -1 't r r• r—' 1 r < P ± _ • . �4 ♦ ♦ D S� W •`.62N VNI #' ♦ ♦ K. P Q, y 7444` VN °• ♦ ♦y.am-}• i•i ♦• ♦o Y ♦♦ ♦p� �' .� �• ia:1. 1y1 a9 r + • • • ..� fP♦ �+ • . •) t .YY 1 ,1 fa �.. �i :•P• °itPaaes a•: : ♦# ♦Ppp 1.! I � i is °a•< i•Y 1 i•. ' � i 4� i e #� 1paY< i•J ! r <i i ;! •Yr�♦:PI, � 1 tl1/' {�♦� °J• <i ♦* •'•O :ri <'r i 4.ai . ii •Pi • s ♦i e i a'a•: 1' ', O••iiaa .:,, ,. # � 1 � Ila •1♦ !•e• ♦•••.•1••40 •Itl1♦ ♦••' 'L ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦• !f�.�•� +i ::i<0O•♦ :PPS 1;.•i < +:1 ° <�i ariaOr� •i a; �• O.rOO: '` e �1. p�(� � •. ♦•,+♦<Ir ��0�• �rp� i i ♦ia•! � °.piles �•P • {aY. IP•�Pp ♦� P �•♦ 1 y �• .'' `4 ♦ ♦• .•° t !♦•111 ♦ 1y1p0� Yayl K 1. °A a PJ >ppppppp< �. alt " ', � � . • Pa ♦��c <P�1' M•— _: '�. m ♦••.♦,. '.1. 64TH ST W H+ • 1•t #a • Oft ♦P 1J. p1 3 „ x J♦P. i .4 1 x , } - \ 1 < ♦1i ♦ <� ra 1# r a�i : i a� :• f'i M t - ♦YI•P ♦1.1 �i •re •a i•aP < ♦:•e♦ <� ♦Pt1w <ae ♦uai. • '• L #+•♦♦• ♦a•r1•r ♦•♦ o♦•• f• I f � •� ♦•PP••♦ #a °i i♦ i ° ♦a♦ #:••a <re i•aa• ♦• <PPi a i0i ♦•i i 4 Dea • i i °• n e• < °O� <�p <O i ii a,.• 4O :iO <:i it s .xxf °j• 1•♦1•• ♦1• ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦f ♦••••♦ #•Pete ♦•ell p• • F a• #P :. �< # Y l• I ♦�Pai a 'i0i1: :� : ♦ta ° :�sr•��1�a�:•�1pYP , • •••, ► <ep• ♦ •y h t •��as. ♦i : •o. <♦aiQ :ail i O: aa• °Y O♦•: < ♦caa P�!P.' ..._ � . • < ♦ i t+♦♦♦p .p♦ipip "sail : ♦ iy <yi ; '. -t < < ° .'♦r 'rleP: i : a'<O ::ail • �iaa <ia:OO< a "ePa <o <:PO4O +Y�♦P :•. w i° '••a�• +va. �i'•J'.e:•''' ...i i.:• < ♦ • ail ••:: •t •• ii +e <i i1 •O♦ i° . �i�.rr�♦ ♦i iai :': .�e':• -.. a;.°, _ �•E... {<as'<.•it.•. :�a♦•:: O :Yi'i'<r••.'•OiaaPi :O�i` }','•� a♦� +iOt+♦P.Pi.<': 1. •• • a•a:O••.s•.••<o•<aPa° h• . '♦ is•4 ••••••� cslre ♦♦ ♦1••• y 4i1� <ip,•° • �Oa °: i i i i•.:::O ii c :O ♦w i e °i i• cai J :: i P: f��f • #elect « •<• ♦ ♦ ♦e•• < ♦f ♦•e•• <<• i ♦♦ •h t Ia ♦PP it w °: o. ♦Paa • ♦••••O ♦ef P•••• • ♦ ♦ 1 9 • a J �1 �e ♦e • <a♦� ♦ S. � <• « ♦�e° +� • < <! ♦ ♦ e•� •'iii <.•.:a. e�;•Yela %a� i �i 1i: I f •iie V. !y. < +e. aoa• # <•♦ ♦ • < t ls•"'tly CIR. :.Lr 600' r'a. ♦ � < +♦ .; 1 °♦ ".'• . °< • r . <° e. < <', 1 , 666'. V•i <•< •�4 a <• �' <1 a••• < <Y <•a•• P a ♦ t a • �a • < t a t a 3 ♦ 'r • Y ♦ • 4 � E° ♦ { � ea • Y P e; Y ♦ 9 S° � • ea< ! °• � t «a : <• °i < 1 ♦ ♦ � f ♦•a ♦a <: •••t•f a° "�y "i1Y�• t ; �• •r � < < <� , c a e �a ... P.o ♦. ''. • a • � :i.• :.�a <e a 5Ya �. •a . ". ° °° s4� Ja : °i *P i a a • < i° • <i tea•:a a !'. �'•'' < e•♦• •1a p•4 i!• ♦••••••a•1•ii "2 O O <+Ja i : -X 0.4 ♦.. or<♦ •a ° ♦ <rah f•: t °• ♦9 <i4 • Y t< • i °i °• wa :: •• < °a•:a �iaeP�r! P a #a r ",S � � �a� ♦y °i f i 4 eiPJ i , sS.a9 �* �Pa i• ♦ +a i � w °:• i ♦ °s aa� � ✓h" <aP P 700 - •♦ - ` } � < � ♦. #♦ �Y♦ < °e 4 rf � :O °Y °�i P i °a�f : i a ° °aa♦ ♦aa ° � i< a < ♦ # <♦ Y 0 <' 1 ., t' • . • � �. _ r• It ' _ _� — "• ! n••� � �• • ♦ V hi:1 aa1:: •ail •P� �•a+1 :•e• � 0 • # PLEASE NOTE: This map is for general informational purpOS as only •.,♦t;.; ;a .•y.S'aP; i ♦.: ♦.'• <:.'::::O +t ° °`' and should not be relied on for any official purpose. Prediction of ih� �,° +:.h...O:.. +'P ": 123' .•.•.'. °f•.•: ,•: •:.� ;d •J. • .. the extent or duration of flooding is imprecise and based on many , • • .� , a •ii•i.•� •,•� <• ♦ <� • �' assumptions about snow and ice conditions and how water will �& ♦ '` ' ! ;:O �;� „a e a move across land and within surface water channels and basins. ' ^ ;`fit• -' , �;:•; •a;;aae ♦ 68THgr y `�� •� t d, �•. i•�•� ♦a:O• e' 676' All future flooding scenarios are also affected significantly by f • K t� ♦ , <.•• +;:f <,• <;•, , l weather conditions including but not limited to temperatures and PDm7roe J a :•�.a + °+:.::'.” .,' patterns of snowfall and rainfall. Any indication of how far flood - lot. �' `.'• •♦ • +' %: • <e• +� •'• ' waters may reach or how long they may remain there, generally or , 1- ?7 _: t .; < e• " •' with respect to a specific property, is for illustration only. It does not 1 t r + •• i? represent the most likely scenario and the City of Edina does not 44Q. i represent any particular level of probability associated with it R4 oA.K1q Property owners and other interested persons should rely on a t �' } 4.1, Y �< licensed surveyor or other professional retained for specific advice �,, ^a ; -„• ; � °F ', \ ' soj �• . concerning their property and should contact the City for information i ° and assistance concerning federal flood insurance, flood risks and _- 6 response. The City of Edina strictly disclaims any and all warranties on use of the Information in this map for any purpose. i Qs� �N LEg•nd � P•fenLa�6aNWalmt. R�l °.I •EeLN ». •.•. Lake Cornelia & Garrison Ponds ©Rrym•e Ilm0�f••Wt Mil L°•tl I +. i'�w..ivelDq.fb°•pab E•»I•y %ECwlpolrPb°ylan N N!` W+r �1115Ir// Homes: 19 Linear Ft of Sandbagging: 1951 O mlabl fegptW MW Wtl P+tl• EnEin♦.nnp o.p 1.'a�cn ). 2011 442' Ogg' + °ioi °i °! °i °i °i ♦ °i °i r� AM ++ +1111 � . �' �!!! ♦! ♦!o°! +•!!!!!!! °•!!!♦ ♦1111 °+ •!e!•. _ ? +-1144-1 +4e ♦•+ ♦.! •l.t4 !P!a•` ♦e! ae••`o.. : r° a °e °! +• °!a + ° ♦ °!�►" °a °oawae °e °!., . ►''n +laie�► ♦!!4!!a ♦ ♦ +e say .i!! ♦•+♦!•♦ ♦44°4. s4•+ 110 ►e °i ♦i °i °i °! °i °i °i s °ia ♦aaa +� ��+♦o�aaa ♦a!a •�ae/aoaalala�la �•��. °► +. +a °i ♦+"'- a� ! °laeii ° °! ° ♦ °! ° + °e °eP! °a�►°. ' ;i °i °i °iO °i °! °ioe °i ♦i °i °!mod- `_•'��s +i +i °i °0 , ..` *`��el�a +�•l�e� ♦�!� ; .�� °�! •+ P °! a •! olP.; y t. e a •! ♦ a°+a� Z � 1144 +•!!• rG •vy'r,. •e•�41! ♦4 ♦! ¢ o +lla +a!!•,�1 ♦� +� .. 4 1 5� �' s 'ri�P�'�'Ksi�! ♦�1� +�� t`i aE U ��a! &.�.tjk`P !`1Fji i4•t,aa•lee4 +++ uWj 1 +a ♦• + +�,! ♦ ♦la +eaa ♦!laf..� : TH ST W 4 HIGHWAY 62 -r7777 ` - - °,vo -��-P, +mss.: -- Vie,- -- �r.:..�_._. ..r_.._..- _ ,. . -.. - :•..'L.'.;!7...'� 4 64TH ST W !+ ♦ . tai �` ?'` ♦ A k� +o �.rr� +lY °�hl�lY�cF , ` . fi ► a�•`• /ems ♦• +,. d� Y " wis ��s� +�4�• +a +i`r'« 4 + + +• + ++ ♦414-1+ ++aee!!!!! °+ • • • ♦ e+ ` 0il+•••e•++44••aot4°+I°ia♦ Y • �1° 41ao• +.44 -1a 4 -10 + +e -1a1e1a1•�! a-14 // -1ae.�•all /laae+ -> • ' x �, ,'-. .. ' ♦ao••+•0+ +l44e14!•e4 44eelal+ �! �. o+ �++ �1 �• �• �+ ia�4e° eili+°• i4s° a° iss+ °a�l�+ee °i °i +i °�°, °f °�°,eo+ieti ..•' ° 4� • *e�• °i�l�• °4+•�+�P°a�►�o +0/�o� °ate -1i °i °i °i °i°s'i °i °s°i °iai +� "i ° ° e+ a++ ei�+•° i+ ai° i+ a° i++• a41'1°1aa+a!!+ -1114aa1��4,��1e�, s 66TH ST W 4 CORNELIA CIR 1110 1110 1111 ��►,►°e'++► *i +ii %4,°►i �� %e *i ii°�i +i °� +iw +��i +ii +ioa °iii +i +� +so4a 4 +. +0 + °awo + +oo. • oww+ w+ aaw-1 oawwo +i +o +w + + + +a� + +.wo3 +�i + + +o + +� Ica �- :•i�►�'o+i+''4 ° + +i i°+i'i'i �.4,e' !" i + +'isy�o�o�J�+4�►�4e% *+ i v% i°i-* a `iii 16 tC !♦ ••a♦ + ++ +w + +aa �'� •°•+ �' • *w.i+• °$i + + °ooi *• °! +•+ +"' +�°_' �L!► + +4a + +►w +w� *�•W+ + E- This map is for general informational purposes only �'?t ' ` . " «�e.°Aoio�i;.�w;•*° +`o�• t be relied on for any official purpose. Prediction of luration of flooding is imprecise and based on many '+ a` 123' about snow and ice conditions and how water will and and within surface water channels and basins. �.. . - ling scenarios are also affected significantly by �,► tions including but not limited to temperatures and POINT DR owfall and rainfall. Any indication of how far flood ach or how long they may remain there, generally or a specific property, is for illustration only. It does not most likely scenario and the City of Edina does not �ZA-` 600' k "a Z0 Q*1 L J Jackie Hoogenakker tom: FRANK W BARNARD <frankbarn5464 @msn.com> Sent: Sunday, April 17, 201111:36 PM To: Jackie Hoogenakker Subject: Regarding: EDINA CITY COUNCIL, case File: 2011.0001 EDINA CITY COUNCIL CASE FILE: 2011.0001 APRIL 17, 2011 REGARDING - CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT, SOUGHT BY JEFF MILLER AND CONNIE CARRINO @ 4509 GARRISON LANE, EDINA... I AM THE NEIGHBOR ACROSS THE STREET, FRANK BARNARD, @ 4504 GARRISON LAND. I WANT TO REPEAT MY RECOMMENDATION THAT THE CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT WHICH THEY ARE SEEKING BE GRANTED TO THEM. I'VE TALKED WITH THEM ABOUT. THEIR PRESENT HOUSING PROBLEMS AND UNDERSTAND THAT THEY HAVE GONE THROUGH GREAT EFFORT TO COME UP WITH A VERY NICE, WELL STUDIED NEW HOUSE PLAN TO PREPLACE THEIR EXISTING HOUSE. IT IS VERY REASONABLE AND ATTRACTIVE. THEIR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT SHOULD BE GRANTED. -RANK BARNARD, .ETIRED ARCHITECT. 1� O e REPORURECOMMEN®ATION To: MAYOR AND COUNCIL Agenda Item Item No. II.D. From: Cary Teague ® Action Planning Director ❑ Discussion ❑ Information Date: April 19, 2011 Subject: Ordinance No. 2011 -05 Amending Section 850 Side Yard Setback Exception for Properties Designated within the Heritage Landmark District. Deadline No Deadline for a City Decision: ACTION REQUESTED: Approve Ordinance 2011 -05 regarding side yard setbacks in Edina Heritage Landmark Districts. If the Council is comfortable with the proposed language, waive the second reading. INFORMATION /BACKGROUND: Specifically, the Ordinance exempts properties zoned Edina Heritage Landmark District from the side yard setback requirement that requires a setback increase'based on building height. (See the attached Zoning Map which shows the location of Heritage Landmark Districts.) The purpose of the amendment is to encourage to reconstruction of Colonial Style housing within the Country Club District. Planning Commission Recommendation. On March 23, 2011, the Planning Commission unanimously recommended approval of the proposed amendment. Heritage Preservation Board Recommendation. On March 11, 2011, the Heritage Preservation Board recommended approval of the proposed amendment. ATTACHMENTS: Ordinance No. 2011 -05, amending the side yard setback requirements. • Planning Commission Staff Report, including minutes from the Heritage Preservation Board discussion. 0 Draft minutes from the March 23, 2011 Edina Planning Commission meeting ORDINANCE NO. 2011 -05 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE ZONING ORDINANCE CONCERNING SIDE YARD SETBACKS IN EDINA HERITAGE LANDMARK DISTRICTS The City Of Edina Ordains: Section 1. Subsection 850.11. Subd. 7.A.3 is amended to read as follows: Subd. 7. Special Requirements. A. Special Setback Requirement for Single Dwelling Unit Lots. 3. Interior Side Yard Setback. With the exception of single dwelling unit lots designated as Edina Heritaae Landmarks on the Citv's official Zoning Map, the required interior side yard setback shall be increased by 6 inches for each foot the building height exceeds 15 feet. For purposes of this subparagraph, building height shall be the height of that side of the building adjoining the side lot line and shall be measured from the average proposed elevation of the ground along and on the side of the building adjoining the side lot line to the top of the cornice of a flat roof, to the deck line of a Mansard roof, to a point on the roof directly above the highest wall of a shed roof, to the uppermost point on a round or other arch -type roof, to the average distance of the highest gable on a pitched roof, or to the top of a cornice of a hip roof. Single dwelling unit lots designated as Edina Heritage Landmarks that use the above exception are required to 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 CERTIFICATE OF CITY CLERK I, the undersigned duly appointed and acting City Clerk for the City of Edina do hereby certify that the attached and foregoing Ordinance was duly adopted by the Edina City Council at its Regular Meeting of , 2011, and as recorded in the Minutes of said Regular Meeting. WITNESS my hand and seal of said City this day of , 2011. City Clerk kA a t V � MEMORANDUM TO: Planning Commission FROM: Cary Teague, Planning Director RE: Side Yard Setback (Heritage Landmark District — March 23, 2011) At the February 9, 2011 Work Session, the Zoning Ordinance Update Committee asked for the Heritage Preservation Board to review the draft Ordinance regarding side yard setback exemption for properties with a Heritage Landmark District overlay zoning. (See the attached February 9, Work Session minutes.) The concern raised by the Committee was that there would be no review of the Heritage Preservation Board if an addition were built at the back of a home and used the side yard setback exception. The Heritage Preservation Board discussed the issue at their March 8, 2011 meeting, and agreed with the Planning Commission that there should be some review of a house that uses the exemption. The Board agreed to require a certificate of appropriateness for any addition that uses the setback exemption to ensure compatibility with adjacent homes. (See the attached minutes from the March 8, 2011 Heritage Preservation Board meeting.) The attached Ordinance has been revised to specifically state the requirement for review by the Heritage Preservation Board. • Requiring a 50 -foot setback from R -1 or R -1 Zoning Distric rather than from any r 'dential use. The Commission /ed at because n exception was made to ow residential uses within coning di acts, the City should not now ,p ce additional restrictions a co ercial use where it was previous allowed. • Screening quirements were ad • Outdoor spea rs are allowed as y are not audible from adjacent property. Teague also noted that attac d was aa resident that found regulations on rooftop dining from other comm ities. Planner Teague told the Commissio they were comfortable with the changes he made to the ordinance he would far he ordinance on to the City Council. The Commission said they wp6ld like to disc s this issue further in light of the materials received from Co ncilmember Benne The Commission also suggested that it might be beneficial to a tl a definition of "rooftop ining" to the ordinance. This would clarify what "uses" (we ing receptions) would be pe it on the rooftop. It was also suggested that Plan r Teague look at safety for the r ftop diners to ensure that someone wouldn't a able to tumble off the roof. Lastly the Commission asked Planner Teague to clarify a difference between sidewalk and rooftop dining and establish a percentage for rjoth. Side Yard Setback (Heritage Landmark District) Planner Presentation Planner Teague reminded the Commission that at their February 9th Zoning Ordinance Update Committee (ZOUC) meeting Committee Members requested that the Heritage Preservation Board review and comment on a draft ordinance regarding side yard setback exemptions for properties with a Heritage Landmark District overlay zoning. Also at that meeting the Committee raised a concern that there would be no review of the Heritage Preservation Board (HPB) if an addition were built at the back of a home and used the side yard setback exception in the newly drafted Ordinance. Teague told the Commission the HPB discussed the Committees issue at their March 8th meeting, and agreed there should be some review of a house that uses the exception. Continuing, Teague said the HPB agreed to require a Certificate of Appropriateness (COA) for any addition that uses the setback exemption to ensure that the new addition was compatibility with adjacent homes. Teague concluded that the draft Ordinance was revised to specifically state the requirement for review by the HPB. 10 Motion Commissioner Carpenter moved to recommend adoption of An Ordinance Amending the Zoning Ordinance Concerning Side Yard Setbacks in Edina Heritage Landmark Districts. Commissioner Potts seconded the motion. All voted aye. Motion carried. Is n Planner Tea a reported that the Planning Cc Ordinance Up to Committee had been discu Appeals (ZBA) fo some time. Teague noted tl decision afforded t Commission/ Committef be served. The conse sus was that the City/ n ZBA. Staff was directe o draft an Ordinar}be the ZBA. / mrprssion (PC) and respective Zoning ssy g the makeup of the Zoning Board of i t the Krummenacher Supreme Court !time to decide how the City would best as best served if the PC became the amendment that establishes the PC as Continuing, Planner Teague sNq that gssuming the legislature address the Krummenacher case, and cities 6o back to business as usual with variances, the Commission /Committee discussed *o options: 1. Have the ZBA meet at 5:3 the a ening of a regular Planning Commission meeting. These meeting would nZ have to be televised. The regular PC meeting would begin at t e usual tim 7:00 p.m. 2. Have the ZBA and Plan ing Commissio meet at the same time, or potentially earlier such as 6:30, a d have variances the regular Planning Commission /ZBA ag da. Teague concluded that st recommends that the Plan ing Commission recommend approval of the proposed Ordinance amendment that es blishes the Planning Commission as the Zon' g Board of Appeal and discuss to ight the timing for when the Zoning Board should et. Discussion The Commission a ked Planner Teague if the automatic appeal to th@ City Council was still intact for com ercial developments with variances. Teague resp ded in the affirmative. The Commissi in asked Planner Teague for clarification on the reason(s) ! not televising vari nces. Planner Teague responded that historically the Zoning oard of Appeals deal mostly with residential variances. The current makeup of only five members; no't eleven; and the fact that the meetings aren't televised created a more 11 Minutes Heritage Preservation Board March 8, 2011 3. Do you believe Nat filming and rebroadcasting your Comm' on meetings is an important t I in communicating your Commission' activities and discussions with a public? • Yes, filming and rebro casting is the future .... how m people expect to access information. • Does the cost benefit warr t the financial ex iture? This might not be a financially prudent tool if ther re few vie • Rarely does a member of the p lic aft the HPB meetings if not interested in an agenda item, as evidenced in e k of participation during the "Community Comment" portion of the meeting 4. Do you have any other i9-9 that yo would like Scott Neal or the City Council to consider w orming a p \en n this subject? • The HPB consists of members and thguration of the Community Room makes it difficult t t up the room to pror spectator space as w ell as a place to provid isual information. (The ' behind the area used for spectator c s.) If the chairs are moved to the perimeter of the room where spectat can view the screen, Board members have their backs to the spe ors. Filming in this room would be impossible. B. New (proposed) Ordinance — Setback Requirement for Single Dwellin Unit Lots for Edina Heritage Landmark Properties — Update Planner Repya explained that the Planning Commission has continued the discussio on the proposed change to the Zoning Ordinance that would exempt heritage landm" properties from the side yard setback requirement of increasing the setback by 6 incl for each foot the building height of the structure exceeds 15 feet. The Planning Commission recognized that since a Certificates of Appropriateness is not required i an addition to a heritage landmark property, if an owner were to take advantage of th proposed exemption, there would be no check to ensure that the addition met the criteria set out in the plan of treatment for the property. The Planning Commission recommends that as part of the subject change to the Zor Ordinance, in the event the owner of a heritage landmark property were to take advantage of the exemption to the side yard setback when adding an addition, the Heritage Preservation Board require that the project receive a Certificate of Appropriateness. The Board briefly discussed the Planning Commission's suggestion and agreed that requiring a Certificate of Appropriateness for an addition that takes advantage of the side yard setback exemption was an excellent idea. C. Neigh'beQood Street Signs Planner Repya referr-964Q..an email exchan en City Manager, Scott Neal and the Morningside Neighborho ommittee. In the email, the neighborhood steering committee reque at the ostpone any branding efforts for Morningside unt' policy for neighborhoo�diing has been developed. Mr. MINUTES OF THE ZONING ORDINANCE UPDATE COMMITTEE MEETING FEBRUARY 9, 2011 EDINA CITY HALL COUNCIL CHAMBERS 4801 50TH STREET WEST MEMBERS PRESENT: Mike Fischer, Floyd Grabiel, Michael Schroeder, Arlene Forrest Kevin Staunton, Jeff Carpenter, Michael Platteter STAFF PRESENT: Cary Teague, Jackie Hoogenakker Chair Fischer welcomed everyone and introduced new Commission Member, Michael Platteter. Topic: Sideyard Setbacks Country Club District Date Introduced: January 19, 2011 Planner Teague addressed the Committee and explained that as the result of recent changes to the ordinance to address massing it became apparent that those changes compromised the ability for a Colonial Style home to be constructed in the Country Club District. Teague said the Heritage Preservation Board (HPB) has requested that the Planning Commission provide guidance on this topic. The committee said that in their opinion if the Country Club District was eliminated from maintaining the same side yard setback requirements as other R -1 properties that could be problematic. The committee said they fully understand the historic nature of the district; however, the goal of the recent ordinance amendment(s) was to reduce massing period, for all Edina; not just parts of Edina. The committee suggested that if the HPB desires to change side yard setback requirements for the Country Club District that new home construction and all additions to a home, including off the rear, that request this "exception" be reviewed by the HPB. The committee stated they want assurances that the massing of any new house and /or addition "fits in" with the surrounding properties. The committee asked Planner Teague to consult with Roger Knutson, City Attorney to see if a change in setbacks for a specific area was legal and if so, to work with Mr. Knutson on drafting the correct" language. The committee said their preference at this time would be to have the HPB revisit their request and provide the committee with more information on what they had in mind. Planner Teague suggested that an ordinance be drafted that would recognize that side yard setback reduction(s) in the Country Club District be an "exception" to the ordinance and if /when that "exception" is requested the need for a Certificate of Appropriateness in triggered; even for an addition off the rear. The committee cautioned Planner Teague when drafting ordinance language that there is "leverage" in the ordinance that would prevent a house or addition from being constructed at too large of a scale. The discussion continued with committee members reiterating their concern on massing and asked Planner Teague to work with the city attorney on drafting ordinance language and have that language reviewed and discussed by the HPB for their review and comments. To Rooftop Dining Date Introduced: February 9, 2011 Chair Fisc r introduced the topic of rooftop dining, and asked Planner Teague to u ate the Zoning Ordinance ftdate Committee (ZOUC) on what's occurring in the City with rooftop fining. Planner TeaguN ormed the ZOUC that the City Council recently adopted a rdinance placing a temporary morao m prohibiting rooftop dinin.g within the City of Edina. P nner Teague explained that a new restaura (Barrio) located in the 50 & France Avenue area d expressed the desire to add rooftop dining to it establishment. This new restaurant is locat within close proximity to the condominiums at 50th & ance, and the "rooftop dining" would also' elude a bar area. Teague reported that the adjacent operty owner (condominiums) expres d concern in locating rooftop dining so close to residentia uildings. Continuing, Teague rep ed that rooftop dining is currently considered a permitted use si ilar to outdoor dining; (sidewa patio) however, at this time the City doesn't have any rooftop dining tablishments. Planner Teague noted from a study a conduct/th etro area that a number of cit ies allow rooftop dining either as a permitted u or throuditional Use process. Teague said at this time he would like the committees inpu n rooftespecially in close proximity to residential properties, and how it should or should n be a Chair Fischer asked Planner Teague if parkV could become an issue. Planner Teague responded in the affirmative adding that parking in thVLX& France business district at times is limited. Member Staunton questioned if an ad tonal le I responded that could be a possibilityhowever, th business district and the ramps w d have to be e additional level. Teague said an er part of this is and occurs (Salute) in close p imity to the reside sidewalk could be added to the ramps. Planner Teague e are height restrictions within the 50th & France ineered to accommodate the weight of an s to remember is that outdoor dining is permitted nti properties in question; however, it's on the Chair Fischer com/that in a way the City should f I fortunate that the 50th & France business district is so succontinuing, Fischer said he unde tands concerns expressed from residential prope; however, he doesn't know if h ould rather look at a flat roof or people dining. A discussion Vsued with committee members raising the folloNng: • Wo d continued expansion of dining facilities (including the Minneapolis side) within the 50th s F nce business district strain parking? • rooftop dining is permitted limiting the hours, number of seats, and lighting should be addressed. • equiring a 50 -foot setback from R -1 or R -1 Zoning District, rather than f1po any r idential use. The Commission believed that because an exceptioqoTs made to Now residential uses within commercial zoning districts, the Ci ould not now ce additional restrictions or not allow a commercial use ere it was previo allowed. • Screenin requirements were added. • Outdoor sp kers are allowed as long as they are audible from adjacent property. Teague also noted that ached was an email f a resident that found regulations on rooftop dining from other c munities. Planner Teague told the Corn sion ' ey were comfortable with the changes he made to the ordinance he would and the ordinance on to the City Council. The Commission said they uld like discuss this issue further in light of the materials received from uncilmembe ennett. The Commission also suggested that it might be beneficia add a definition o ooftop dining" to the ordinance. This would clarify what "use " edding receptions) wo be permitted on the rooftop. It was also suggested th tanner Teague look at safety the rooftop diners to ensure that someone Idn't be able to tumble off the roof. stly the Commission asked Planner Teagu clarify the difference between sidewalk a rooftop dining and establish a per tage for both. Side Yard Setback (Heritage Landmark District) Planner Presentation Planner Teague reminded the Commission that at their February 9t" Zoning Ordinance Update Committee (ZOUC) meeting Committee Members requested that the Heritage Preservation Board review and comment on a draft ordinance regarding side yard setback exemptions for properties with a Heritage Landmark District overlay zoning. Also at that meeting the Committee raised a concern that there would be no review of the Heritage Preservation Board (HPB) if an addition were built at the back of a home and used the side yard setback exception in the newly drafted Ordinance. Teague told the Commission the HPB discussed the Committees issue at their March 8th meeting, and agreed there should be some review of a house that uses the exception. Continuing, Teague said the HPB agreed to require a Certificate of Appropriateness (COA) for any addition that uses the setback exemption to ensure that the new addition was compatibility with adjacent homes. Teague concluded that the draft Ordinance was revised to specifically state the requirement for review by the HPB. 10 Motion Commissioner Carpenter moved to recommend adoption of An Ordinance Amending the Zoning Ordinance Concerning Side Yard Setbacks in Edina Heritage Landmark Districts. Commissioner Potts seconded the motion. All voted aye. Motion carried. Zonina Board of Planner Teaguir Ordinance Upda Appeals (ZBA) foi decision afforded be served. The cc ZBA. Staff was di the ZBA. ported that the Planning Commission (PC) respective Zoning Committee had been discussing the make Fp of the Zoning Board of ome time. Teague noted that the /Krum nacher Supreme Cour t Commission/ Committee time to how the City would best is sus was that the City was best if the PC became the �cte to draft an Ordinance amend t establishes the PC as Continuing, Planner Teagi Krummenacher case, and Commission /Committee d said that assuming le legislature address the Igo back to bu V ess as usual with variances, the sed two or)tione. 1. Have the ZBA meet at 5e eve ng of a regular Planning Commission meeting. These meetings uld t have to be televised. The regular PC meeting would begin at the u ime 7:00 p.m. 2. Have the ZBA and Planning C mission meet at the same time, or potentially earlier such as 6:30, and hav riances on the regular Planning Commission /ZBA agenda. Teague concluded that staff r approval of the proposed Ord Commission as the Zoning Zoning Board should meet Discussion I'mmends tIN t the Planning Commission recommend nce amend nt that establishes the Planning J of Appeal a discuss tonight the timing for when the The Commission ask ,fd Planner Teague if the automakc appeal to the City Council was still intac/tmostly cial developments with variances. \one ue responded in the affirmati The Comed Planner Teague for clarification reason(s) for not televisinPlanner Teague responded that historically the Zoning Board of Appeals with residential variances. The current makeup of only five member and the fact that the meetings aren't televised created a more 11 14` REPORT /RECOMMENDATION To: MAYOR AND COUNCIL Agenda Item Item No. II.E. From: Cary. Teague ® Action Planning Director ❑ Discussion Information Date: April 19, 2011 Subject: Ordinance No. 2011 -06 Amending Section 850 Establishing the Planning Commission as the Zoning Board of Appeals. Deadline No Deadline for a City Decision: ACTION REQUESTED: Approve Ordinance 2011. -06. If the Council is comfortable with the proposed language, waive the second reading. INFORMATION /BACKGROUND: On March 23, 2011, the Planning Commission unanimously recommended approval of the proposed amendment establishing the Planning Commission as the City's Zoning Board of Appeals. The proposal is based upon the recommendations from the joint work session with the City Council on March 15, 2011. As a result of the amendment, the Planning will have to meet twice per month, similar to the current Zoning Board of Appeals. ATTACHMENTS: • Ordinance No. 2011 -06 • Planning Commission Staff Report • Draft minutes from the March 23, 2011 Edina Planning Commission meeting • Minutes from the March 15, 2011 Council work session 1V ORDINANCE NO. 2011 -06 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE EDINA CITY CODE CONCERNING THE CITY'S ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS The City Of Edina Ordains: Section 1. Subsection 850.04. Subd. 2 is amended "to read: Subd. 2 Variances and Appeals. A. Zoning Board of Appeals. TheFe is ^entinped a sepaFate 7eninn EleaFd of Appeals of • I V IV VVII.11 M VV MI M.V L ems. The Zoning Bea 4s, Planning Commission shall serve as the, Board of Appeals and Adjustments created pursuant to M.S. 462.354, Subd. 2. All memheFs of the GAmmrtec� ion fFGFA time to +imo IIL,VI... , shwa he member and the other member shall he six -.:.J. nts a ah B. Powers and Duties of Board. The Board shall have the power and duty of hearing and deciding, subject to appeal to the Council, the following matters: 1. Requests for variances from the literal provisions of this Section; 2. Appeals in which it is alleged that there is an error in any order, requirement, decision or determination made by an administrative officer in the interpretation or enforcement of this Section; 3. Requests for variances from the literal provisions of Section 1046 of this Code; 4. Requests for modifications from the requirements of Section 815 of this Code; and 5. If a variance request is part of another land use application, including but not limited to a conditional use permit, rezoning, and preliminary or final site plan, the decision by the Zoning Board of Appeals is automatically appealed to the City Council. The City Council would then take official action on the applications including the variance. If a variance request is made along with a certificate of appropriateness for the Heritage Preservation Board, the Zoning Board of Appeals decision is not automatically appealed. Final decision of the Board of Appeals would stand unless appealed �. C. Petitions for Variances. The owner or owners of land to which the variance relates may file a petition for a variance with the Planning Department. The petition shall be made on forms provided by the Planning Department and shall be accompanied by the fee set forth in Section 185 of this Code. The petition shall be accompanied by plans and drawings to scale which clearly illustrate, to the satisfaction of the Planner, the improvements to be made if the variance is-granted. The Planner may require the petitioner to submit a certificate by a registered professional land surveyor verifying the location of all buildings, setbacks and building coverage, and certifying other facts that in the opinion of the Planner are necessary for evaluation of the petition. D. Appeals of Administrative Decisions. A person who deems himself or herself aggrieved by an alleged error in any order, requirement, decision or determination made by an administrative officer in the interpretation and enforcement of this Section, may appeal to the Board by filing a written appeal with the Planning Department within thirty (30) days after the date of such order, requirement, decision or determination. The appeal shall fully state the order to be appealed and the relevant facts of the matter. E. Hearing and Decision by the Board; Notice. F) I` Notice of variance hearings shall be mailed not less than ten (10) days before the date of the hearing to the person who filed the petition for variance and to each owner of property situated wholly or partially within two hundred (200) feet of the property to which the variance relates insofar as the names and addresses of such owners can be reasonably determined by,the Clerk from records maintained by the Assessor. 2. A notice of hearing for appeals of administrative decisions shall be published in the official newspaper of the City. not less than ten. (10) days before the hearing. A notice.shall also be mailed to the appellant. 3. None w.notice need be given for any hearing which is continued by the Board'to a specified future date. F. Findings for Variances. The Board shall not grant a petition for a variance unless it finds that the strict enforcement of this Section would cause undue hardship because of circumstances unique to the petitioner's property and that the grant of said variance is in keeping with the spirit and intent of this Section. "Undue hardship" means that (i) the property in question cannot be put to a reasonable use as allowed by this Section; (ii) the plight of the petitioner is due to circumstances unique to the petitioner's. property which were not created by the petitioner; and (iii) the variance, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the property or its surroundings. Economic considerations -alone shall not constitute an undue hardship if reasonable use for the.petitioner's property exists under the terms of this Section. A favorable vote by the Board shall be deemed to include a favorable. finding on each of the foregoing matters even if not specifically set out in the approval resolution or the minutes of the Board meeting. G. Appeals from Decisions of the Board. 1. The following individuals may appeal a decision of the Board: a.:; any petitioner for a variance; b. any owner to whom notice of the variance hearing is required to be mailed pursuant to this Section; c. the appellant in the case of an appeal of an administrative decision; d. any person who deems to be aggrieved by the Board's decision on the appeal of an administrative decision; and e. any administrative officer of the City; 3 2. An appeal from a decision of the Board shall be filed with the Clerk no later than ten (10) days after the decision by the Board. If not so filed, the right of appeal shall be deemed waived, and the decision of the Board shall be final. H. Hearing and Decision by Council. The Council shall hear and decide all appeals from the decisions of the Board, and variances associated with other land use applications. An appeal shall he heard net later than rm)dy (60) days afteF the date the appeal is filed. The Council shall follow the same procedures as to notices, hearings, findings for variances and decisions that the Board is required to follow relative to the subject matter of the appeal pursuant to this Section. A favorable vote by the Council shall be deemed to include a favorable finding on each of the required findings even if not specifically set out in the approval resolution or the minutes of the Council meeting. I. Conditions on Variance Approvals. In granting a variance, the Board, or the Council on appeal, may impose conditions to ensure compliance with the purpose and intent of this Code and to protect adjacent properties. J. Form of Action Taken and Record. The Board, or the Council on appeal, shall maintain a record of its proceedings which shall include the minutes of its meetings and final order concerning the variance petition or appeal of administrative decision. If a variance is granted, the petitioner, at the petitioner's expense, shall duly record the final order in the proper office to give constructive notice. A verified copy of such order, with the recording data, shall be delivered to the Planner. The Board, or the Council on appeal, may require such order to be recorded and such verified copy to be delivered to the Planner before the variance shall be effective. K. Lapse of Variance by Non -User; Extension of Time. If, within one (1) year after the date of the meeting of the Board, or the Council on appeal, at which the variance was granted, the owner or occupant of the affected land shall not have obtained a building permit, if one is required, and commenced the work or improvement described in such petition, the variance shall become null and void unless a petition for extension of time in which to commence the proposed work or improvement has been granted. 2. A petition for extension shall be in writing and filed with the Clerk within such one (1) year period. The petition for extension shall state facts showing a good faith attempt to use the variance and shall state the additional time requested to begin the proposed work or improvement. The petition shall be presented to the Board for hearing, findings and 4 -a. decision in the same manner as then required by this Section 850 for an original petition for variance..The Board may grant an extension of the variance for up to one (1) year upon finding that a good faith attempt to use the variance has been made, that there is a reasonable expectation that the variance will be used during the extension, that. speculation will thereby not be fostered, and that the facts and circumstances under which the original variance was granted are not materially changed. L. Denial. No application for a variance which has been denied in whole or in part shall be' resubmitted within twelve (.12) months of the date of the order of denial, except.thatVa new application may be permitted to the same denying board, if new evidence or a change of circumstances warrant it. Section 2: Section 1506 —Zoning. Board of Appeals is deleted in its entirety. Section 3. 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: 5 Send two affidavits of publication. Bill to Edina City Clerk CERTIFICATE OF CITY CLERK I, the undersigned duly appointed and acting City Clerk for the City of Edina do hereby certify that the attached and foregoing Ordinance was duly adopted by the Edina City Council at its Regular Meeting of , 2011, and as recorded in the Minutes of said Regular Meeting. WITNESS my hand seal of said City this day of 2011. City Clerk n MEMORANDUM J TO: Planning Commission FROM: Cary Teague, Planning Director RE: Zoning Board of Appeals — March 23, 2011 Attached is an Ordinance amendment that establishes the Planning Commission as the Zoning Board of Appeals (ZBA). The Ordinance does not detail the date and time that the Zoning Board of Appeals would meet. The date and time do not have to be set by Ordinance. Since the Zoning Board has not met since last summer due to the Krummenacher Supreme Court decision, we have time to discuss the specifics of when the new Board would meet. In the short term, if a Variance is requested, it can be part of the regular Planning Commission agenda. Assuming the legislature addresses the Krummenacher case, and cities go back to business as usual in regard to Variances, the two options that have been discussed include: 1. Have the ZBA meet at 5:30 the night of a regular Planning Commission meeting. These meetings would not have to be televised. The regular meeting could then begin at 7:00 pm. 2... Have the ZBA and Planning Commission meet at the same time, or potentially earlier such as 6:30, and have variances on the regular Planning Commission /ZBA agenda. Staff recommends that the Planning Commission recommend approval of the Ordinance amendment, and discuss the timing for when the ZBA should meet. -�10� � �- Motion Commissioner Carpen ov recommend adoption of An Ordinance Amending the Zoning O ce Concerning Side Yard Setbacks in Edina Heritage Landma stricts. issioner Potts seconded the motion. All voted aye. Motio ied. Zoning Board of Appeals Staff Presentation Planner Teague reported that the,Planning Commission (PC) and respective Zoning Ordinance Update Committee had been discussing the makeup of the Zoning Board of Appeals (ZBA) for some time. Teague noted that the Krummenacher Supreme Court decision afforded the Commission/ Committee time to decide how the City would best be served. The consensus was that the City was best served if the PC became the ZBA. Staff was directed to draft an Ordinance amendment that establishes the PC as the ZBA. Continuing, Planner Teague said that assuming the legislature address the Krummenacher case, and cities go back to business as usual with variances, the Commission /Committee discussed two options: 1. Have the ZBA meet at 5:30 the evening of a regular Planning Commission meeting. These meetings would not have to be televised. The regular PC meeting would begin at the usual time 7:00 p.m. 2. Have the ZBA and Planning Commission meet at the same time, or potentially earlier such as 6:30, and have variances on the regular Planning Commission /ZBA agenda. Teague concluded that staff recommends that the Planning Commission recommend approval of the proposed Ordinance amendment that establishes the Planning Commission as the Zoning Board of Appeal and discuss tonight the timing for when the Zoning Board should meet. Discussion The Commission asked Planner Teague if the automatic appeal to the City Council was still intact for commercial developments with variances. Teague responded in the affirmative. The Commission asked Planner Teague for clarification on the reason(s) for not televising variances. Planner Teague responded that historically the Zoning Board of Appeals dealt mostly with residential variances. The current makeup of only five members; not eleven; and the fact that the meetings aren't televised created a more 11 comfortable less formal and less intimidating atmosphere. Continuing, Teague stressed that residential variances deal with people's homes; something very personal, and if televised everyone watching would gain access to certain characteristics of a private home. Concluding, Teague noted that residential variances can also be very emotional, not only for the applicant, but at times for the applicant's neighbors. The Commission indicated that they believe the draft ordinance makes sense and should be passed on to the City Council. Commissioner Staunton asked Chair Grabiel if he would like the discussion continued on the internal workings of the ZBA. Chair Grabiel responded that given the time he would prefer that the proposed amendment be forwarded to the City Council as is, and to hold off comments on the internal organization of the ZBA until a later date. Chair Grabiel asked for a motion. Motion Commissioner Staunton moved to recommend adoption of an Ordinance Amending the Edina City Code Concerning the City's Zoning Board of Appeals. Commissioner Scherer seconded the motion. All voted aye; motion carried. Enerav Svstems — Ene Planner Teagudkformed the Commission that Vrya lyer would be presenting a power point presentation n small wind and solar en y systems. Mr. lyer delivered a p entation /the ssion. Mr. lyer requested that members of the Planning Commi ion servind and solar energy systems task force along with members of th EEC tthese energy systems meet Code. Planner Teague informed r. lyer a, mission that the Zoning Ordinance presently addresses renew le a s. Commissioners Potts and Pla er said they would be willing to serve on the EEC task force on wind and solar renefflaft energy systems. Also speaking for the E Richard Griffith and GAq Nelson NITY COMMENT: •[7TH 12 March 15, 2011 Edina City Council Work Session Meeting Minutes Page 1 of 2 MINUTES OF THE WORK SESSION OF THE EDINA CITY COUNCIL HELD AT CITY HALL MARCH 15, 2011 5:04 P.M. Mayor Hovland called the meeting to order at 5:04 p.m. in the Community Room of City Hall. Answering rollcall were Members Bennett, Brindle, Sprague, Swenson and Mayor Hovland. Planning Commission Members attending the meeting were Jeffrey Carpenter, Michael Fischer, Arlene Forrest, Floyd Grabiel, Michael Platteter, Ken Potts, Matt Rock, Nancy Scherer, Kevin Staunton and Melissa Stefanik. Staff attending the meeting included: Kris Aaker, Assistant Planning Director; Jennifer Bennerotte, Communications & Marketing Director; Roger Knutson, City Attorney; Scott Neal, City Manager; Ceil Smith, Assistant to the City Manager; and Cary Teague, Planning Director. Mayor Hovland said the purpose of the meeting was to meet with the Planning Commission about its proposed changes to the variance review process, traffic review, public hearings..and required Commission attendance. In order to streamline the review process, the Planning Commission recommended dissolving the City's current Zoning Board of Appeals. Commissioners Michael Fischer and Kevin Staunton explained that the Planning Commission would take over the responsibilities of the Zoning Board of Appeals. The Planning Commission would likely have to meet twice a month to process all requests and applications in a timely fashion. Council members indicated their general support for such a move, directing Director Teague to draft an ordinance to effect that change. Director Teague reported that residents have expressed concerns about the confusion caused by multiple public hearings during the development review process. After a discussion, it was agreed that hearings would continue to be held by both the Planning Commission and City Council, but that one notice listing both meeting dates and times would be mailed instead of two and one legal notice listing both meeting dates and times would be published. Director Teague reported that concern was raised by members of the Transportation Commission about the need for their review of traffic studies for individual development projects. The Planning Commission http: / /www.ci. edina. mn. us/ CityCouncil/ CityCouncil_ MeetingMinutesl201103l5Spee.htm 4/12/2011 a � l March 15, 2011 Edina City Council Work Session Meeting Minutes Page 2 of 2 recommended that the Transportation Commission could focus its efforts on larger transportation issues and studies, rather than review individual projects, which could be done-by the Planning Commission. Council members indicated their support for such a change. Commissioner Fischer suggested the Planning and Transportation Commissions meet jointly to transition the work. Commissioner Fischer suggested that joint meetings of the City Council and its advisory boards and commissions be exempt.from the City's attendance policy. Council members stressed the importance of the joint meetings and did not show support for such an exemption. f Mayor Hovland announced the status of some bills in the Legislature at the time of the meeting Commissioner Staunton announced the April 14 kick -off of the Grandview Small Area Plan. Director Teague provided a brief update on the proposed Walgreens project. Director Teague reported that the Planning Commission would have its first sketch plan review on March 23 for a project at 44th Street and France Avenue proposed by Noonan Construction. There being no further business, Mayor Hovland adjourned the meeting at 6:34 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Jennifer Bennerotte, Communications & Marketing Director Minutes approved by Edina City Council, April 5, 2011 James B. Hovland, Mayor http: / /www.ei. edina. mn. us/ CityCouncil /CityCouncil_MeetingM nutesl201103l5Spec.htm 4/12/2011 o /le /01 REQUEST FOR PURCHASE IN EXCESS OF $20,000 /CHANGE ORDER To: MAYOR AND COUNCIL Agenda Item No. III. A. From: Wayne D. Houle, PE Director of Public Works / City Engineer Date: April 19, 2011 Subject: 2011 Commodities Purchase — Sand, Rock, Bituminous Materials, Concrete, and Water Treatment Chemicals — Continued From April 5, 2011 Date Bid Opened or Quote Received: Bid or Quote Expiration Date: March 31, 2011 May 31, 2011 Company Amount of Quote or Bid 1. See attached tabulation 1. See attached tabulation RECOMMENDED QUOTE OR BID: Award to companies. as listed on attached page. GENERAL INFORMATION: This is the bid establishing prices for certain materials used in public works projects. The prices are firm for a period of one year (April 1, 2011 to March 31, 2012). The funds for the purchases come from the money allocated to the operating section of the budget (1300, 1500, and 5900 accounts). Prices of previous year are compared where applicable. The largest increase that we have this year is emulsified tact oil used with patching bituminous pavements at 78.67% and iron castings for storm sewers at 68.01 %. These bids should not affect the amount of material that we typically purchase. Public Works Signature De artment The Recommended Bid is within budget not within bu John W Ilin, Finance Director e ,.Ci an qVK G: \Public Works - Utillties\ Administration \Commodities \Commodity 2011 \Item III.A. Commodities Purchase - Sand, Rock, Bituminous Materials, Concrete, and Water Treatment Chemicals continued from April 5 2011.docx 201_1_ COMMODITIES BID RESULTS: SAND, ROCK, BITUMINOUS MATERIALS, CONCRETE, WATER TREATMENT CHEMICALS & HYDRANTS BID ITEM NO UNIT ITEM COMPANY 2011 2010 Comparison Of % +Or- 1 Ton Coarse Washed Sand Del SA -AG $ 8.84 $ 7.00 26.29% 1 Ton Coarse Washed Sand PU SA -AG $ - $ 2.73 2 Ton Cl. 2 Limestone Del NO BID $ 14.16 2 Ton Cl. 2 Limestone PU $ 7.60 3 Ton FA -2 Seal Coat Chips Del Dresser Trap Rock Inc $ 40.95 $ 39.40 3.93% 3 Ton FA -2 Seal Coat Chips PU Dresser Trap Rock Inc $ 27.20 $ 26.90 1.12% 4A *Ton Asphalt 2350 Base Type 31 or 32 Bituminous Roadways PU $ 42.80 $ 46.00 - 6.96% Alt 1 CS McCrossan PU $ 40.00 $ 40.00 0.00% Alt 2 Commercial Asphalt PU $ 47.95 $ 43.75 9.60% Bituminous Roadways - Del $ 49.80 $ 54.50 -8.62% Alt 1 Midwest Asphalt Del $ 56.95 $ 55.95 1.79% 4B *Ton Asphalt 2350 Base Type 41 or 42 Bituminous Roadways PU $ 47.00 $ 47.75 -1.57% Alt 1 Commercial Asphalt PU $ 50.75 $ 47.10 7.75% Alt 2 CS McCrossan PU $ 46.60 $ 46.60 0.00% Bituminous Roadways - Del $ 54.00 $ 56.25 -4.00% Alt 1 Midwest Asphalt - Del $ 58.95 $ 57.95 1.73% 4C *Ton Asphalt 2350 Wear Type 41 or 42 Bituminous Roadways PU $ 43.40 $ 45.60 -4.82% Alt 1 Commercial Asphalt PU $ 47.65 $ 43.25 10.17% Alt 2 CS McCrossan PU $ 43.00 $ 43.00 0.00% Bituminous Roadways - Del $ 50.40 $ 54.10 -6.84% Alt 1 Midwest Asphalt - Del $ 56.95 $ 55.95 1.79% 4D *Ton Asphalt 2360 Wear Type 31 or 32 Commercial Asphalt PU $ 53.45 $ 53.00 0.85% Alt 1 Bituminous Roadways PU $ 56.00 $ 58.00 -3.45% Alt 2 Midwest Asphalt PU $ 58.00 $ 63.70 -8.95% Midwest Asphalt - Del $ 62.95 $ 62.00 1.53% Alt 1 Bituminous Roadways - Del $ 63.00 $ 72.20 - 12.74% 5A CY Delivered Concrete 3+ Yds. AVR, Inc. $ 96.00 $ 96.00 0.00% 5B CY Delivered Concrete 1 -3 Yds. AVR, Inc. $ 109.00 $ 96.00 13.54% 6 Ton Emulsified Asphalt CRS -2 NO BID $ - $ 440.00 7 Gal Emulsified Tack Oil Midwest Asphalt $ 3.35 $ 1.88 78.67% 8 LB Crack Joint Sealer #3725 BrockWhite $ 0.62 $ 0.60 3.33% 9 CWT H drofluosilicic Acid DPC Industries $ 35.87 $ 42.52 - 15.64% 10 CWT Liquid Chlorine DPC Industries $ 36.60 $ 35.60 2.81% 11 Gal. Water Treatment Chemical (Poly) DPC Industries $ 6.25 $ 6.40 -2.42% BID ITEM NO ,UNIT ITEM COMPANY 2011 2010 i .Comparison Of% + Or - 12 Gal Tonkazorb 3 %' Hawkins Inc. $ 8.72 $ 7.65 13.99% 13 CWT Caustic Soda Hawkins,. Inc. $ 47.25 $ 42.75 10.53% 14A Ton Red Ball Aggregate Del NO BID $ - $ - 14B Ton Red Ball Aggregate PU $ - $ - 15 SF Lannon Stone Wall Repair Blackstone Contractors $ 26.00 $- 25.00 4.00% 16A EA San. Sew. R1733 Cover Complete Ess Brothers & Sons, Inc. $ 240.00 $ 228.50 5.03% 16B EA Storm Sew. Rnd. :R2548 Ess Brothers & Sons, Inc. $ 395.00 $ 235.10 68.01% 16C EA Storm Sew. Rect. 3067V Ess Brothers & Sons, Inc. $ 377.00 $ 354.40 6.38% 16D EA Curb Box Neenah Foundry $ 95.00 $ - Notes: These items are awarded on basis of total cost per ton -incl. trucking & labor, and past year's performance. This is a summation of bids taken for commodities used by Public Works and Parks. Typically, there are one to four bidders on each item. The asphalt bids are always awarded with an alternate plant site (single asterisk) because of . the need to continue using asphalt during the summer and plant overloading or shut down does occur every summer. ✓ Item 9, 10 and 11 are awarded together as a tied bid O Le k14 �� REQUEST FOR PURCHASE IN EXCESS OF $20,000 /CHANGE ORDER To: MAYOR AND COUNCIL Agenda Item No. III. B. From: Wayne D. Houle, PE Director of Public Works / City Engineer Date: April 19, 2011 Subject: Snow Blower — Street Department Date Bid Opened or Quote Received: Bid or Quote Expiration Date: NA NA Company Amount of Quote or Bid 1. St. Joseph Equipment (State Contract # 443412) 1. $ 87,745.00 RECOMMENDED QUOTE OR BID: St. Joseph Equipment $ 87,745.00 GENERAL INFORMATION: This purchase is for a SnowBlast M -8000 MD snow blower that is attached to a front -end loader for the Street Department within Public Works. This snow blower will replace a 1979 Root snow blower that will go to auction this summer. The existing snow blower is obsolete and is very unreliable. This purchase is through the State of Minnesota Purchasing Program and is funded through the Capital Improvement-Plan — Equipment Replacement. Public Works Signature / Departmen The Recommended Bid is / within budget not within bu et allin, Finance Pir -ector Scott Ndal, City Ma G:\ Engineering \Administration \CORRPW \RFP - Misc \Item III.B. Snow Blower- Street Department.docx owe �"I 7 �o REQUEST FOR PURCHASE IN EXCESS OF $20,000 /CHANGE ORDER To: MAYOR AND COUNCIL Agenda Item No. III.C. From: John Keprios, Director Park and Recreation Department Date: April 19, 2011 Subject: Pool Boiler Replacement — Edina Aquatic Center Date Bid Opened or Quote Received: Bid or Quote Expiration Date: April 6, 2011 May 6, 2011 Company Amount of Quote or Bid 1. Gilbert Mechanical Contractors, Inc. 1. $27,115.00 2. GR Mechanical Plumbing and Heating, Inc. 2. $27,940.00 3. United States Mechanical, Inc. 3. $33,400.00 RECOMMENDED QUOTE OR BID: ACCOUNT #: Gilbert Mechanical Contractors, Inc. 5300.1740 $27,115.00 GENERAL INFORMATION: This is for purchase and installation of a replacement pool boiler for the Edina Aquatic Center. The purchase includes demolition and removal of one (1) existing Lochinvar model CPN 1440 pool boiler and the purchase and installation of a new Lochinvar model CPN 1441 pool boiler for the Edina Aquatic Center. Installation also includes all needed gas piping, flue adjustments, electrical, as well as, all permits, tests and inspections as required by Code. This is a planned 2011 Capital Improvement Plan expenditure under the category of Upgrades and Replacements budgeted at $50,000. This is the first expenditure of 2011 coded to that CIP account. John Kenos, Director This Recommended bid is within budget not w Edina Park and Recreation Department ZN -= rMn TM LV,3 LWIM MAIM REPORT /RECOMMENDATION To: MAYOR AND COUNCIL Agenda Item Item No. N.A. From: Cary Teague Planning Director ® Action ® Discussion Information Date: April 19, 2011 Subject: Sketch Plan Review, Ed Noonan, 4528 and 4530 France Avenue. Deadline for a City Decision: No Deadline ACTION REQUESTED: Determine if a Small Area Plan is required prior to any Rezoning of these properties; and provide comment regarding the proposed Sketch Plan. INFORMATION /BACKGROUND: The applicant is proposing to tear down the existing building at 4530 France, and build an addition above the existing garage at 4528 France that would match the existing building on that lot. (See the attached Planning Commission staff memorandum, the applicant's narrative, building rendering and site plan.) The applicant would like to request a rezoning of these two sites from Planned Commercial District, (PCD -1 and PCD-4) to Planned Unit Development (PUD). The lot at 4530 France, where the building that would be removed, is currently zoned PCD -4. The PCD -4 District only allows automobile service centers, car washes, and gas stations. The previous use of the property was a Rapid Oil Change station. These properties are located within an area of the City that is designated as a "Potential Area of Change" within the 2008 Comprehensive Plan. (See pages A6 —A7 of the staff memo.) The Comprehensive Plan states that within the potential areas of change, "A development proposal that involves a Comprehensive Plan Amendment or a rezoning will require a Small Area Plan study prior to planning application. However, the authority to initiate a Small Area Plan rests with the City Council." The proposal requires a rezoning whether it is to PUD, or to PCD -1. Therefore, the decision to require a Small Area Plan shall be made by the City Council. f Planning Commission Review: On March 23, 2011, the Planning Commission reviewed the proposed Sketch Plan. (See the attached minutes for specific comments.) The following is a summary of some of their comments: • The Commission acknowledged that the Comprehensive Plan identifies this area as an area where a Small Area Plan may be required. • The Planning Commission is currently undertaking a Small Area Plan with the Grandview District. It was acknowledged that it would be difficult for the Planning Commission to undertake two Small Area Plans at one time. • At a minimum, the sketch plan needs to be presented to the neighborhood. In some way, the entire area should be considered with this request. A neighborhood Sketch Plan meeting could be a possible alternative for a Small Area Plan in this instance. It is difficult to put all development on hold until all Small Area Planning is done in the designated areas of change. • The City Council needs to determine if a Small Area Plan was needed before this project can proceed. • The proposed office use is preferable to a Rapid Oil Change. • The direction of the Comprehensive Plan was walkability and creating and maintaining streetscapes. • The proposed front parking lot doesn't match the character of the 44th area. The 44th Street area is comprised of buildings close to the street, creating a more pedestrian friendly streetscape. • The Commission noted that they respect the work that Mr. Noonan does, it's quality work, and suggested he review the layout to see if a revision to the plan could be i designed that was more pedestrian friendly. The Commission also suggested that if a redesign was accomplished that brought the building closer to the street (flip the position of the parking and building) there would be the potential to add a second level of parking over the existing garage. It was also noted if parking was constructed over the garage the site could go down to two curb cuts. • Minneapolis is directly east of the subject site and the City has no control over what happens on that side of the street. Parking is a concern. ATTACHMENTS: • Applicant response to the Planning Commission meeting dated April 14, 2011 • Planning Commission Staff Report, March 23, 2011 • Draft minutes from the March 23, 2011 Edina Planning Commission meeting NEWLAND ARCHITECTURE _521 7 Jomes Avenue South Minneopolis, MN 554 19 1136 tel: .612 926-2424— fox: left in the 20th century scotf@newlandarchiteclure.com www.newlandarchitecture.com 14 April 2011 Mayor James Hovland, City Council c/o Cary Teague Edina City Hall 4801 W. 50' Street Edina, MN 55424 Re: 4530 France Avenue South Dear Mayor Hovland and the City Council: I am assisting my client, Ed Noonan, in proposing improvements to the property at 4530 France Avenue South. As part of the process, we have developed preliminary plans for the site - which would be combined with the adjacent 4528 site - to create a unified whole. The logical path seems to be to change the zoning of the existing PCD -4 and PCD -1 sites to a PUD. We have participated in the new Sketch Plan review with the Planning Commission in their March 23, 1011 and received a favorable response. We are now anticipating a presentation to the City Council next week. In advance of the April 19 meeting, we would like to make a few key points clear and I have summarized them in this letter. Above. Existing view of the abandoned oil change building. The proposed development removes the existing oil change building and adds a new level above the existing parking garage building. This garage has been there for many decades and is not visible from France Avenue, located down behind the oil change building. A new landscaped parking area is proposed in front of the addition. Right. • Overview of the proposed site development, with the existing 4528 France building on the right. The hip- roofed building on the left is on the adjacent property anc4 while zoned R- 1, is used as a commercial building. A few comments were made at the Planning Commission meeting that we've addressed: 1. It was suggested that the new addition be studied in a configuration that puts is closer to France Avenue. Pulling the proposed addition forward to meet the street, while attractive to consider aesthetically, does not make sense in several ways. First, the economies of building on top of the existing parking garage base would be lost. Second, a decrease in the number of total parking stalls would result, with less efficient vehicular circulation. Third, it would put cars up against the R -1 district (on the roof of the garage), with lot lighting and the light from headlamps potentially visible by the neighboring residents. There is not currently a strong streetscape of commercial buildings on either the Edina or Minneapolis sides of this stretch of France Avenue, so we don't feel that bringing the addition forward would be advantageous. 2. The parking capacity on the site was questioned. It is Mr. Noonan's intent to focus on office uses for the building, not retail. Compass Games is the sole 4528 building tenant at present, and they would be given first choice in expanding, with the remaining space offered to other office tenants. The proposed site improvements include 31 outside parking stalls and between 21 -25 interior stalls (depending on the final layout) for a total of 52 -56 stalls. With 11,947 sq. ft. in gross floor area (taken to interior walls, not including bathrooms, etc.), per my calculations an all-office use would require 60 stalls. An all- retail use would require 74 stalls. We feel that the 60 -stall requirement is most in line with the project intent, very close to the available on -site stalls. 3. The need for a Small Area Plan is something that is to be determined by the City Council. In lieu of the Small Area Plan, we propose a meeting with the Morningside neighborhood group to present the proposed project and discuss and concerns. This meeting is to be scheduled after the upcoming City Council meeting. It should be recognized that if one takes into account the commercial developments across France Ave. on the Minneapolis side, the proposed project strengthens the overall image and use patterns; it is a very different context than the Grandview development. Thank you for your consideration. Sincerely, I I /Scott J. Newland, AU c: Ed Noonan t Hr 5 .5 P-0 O U�tO NMI TO: Planning Commission FROM: Cary Teague, Planning Director RE: 4528 & 4530 France Avenue South — Sketch Plan Review The Planning Commission is asked to consider a sketch plan proposal to redevelop the properties at 4528 and 4530 France Avenue. The applicant is proposing to tear down the existing building at 4530 France, and build an addition above the existing garage at 4528 France that would match the existing building on that lot. (See the applicant's narrative, building rendering and site plan on pages Al —A5.) The existing detached garage does not meet required setbacks. The applicant would like to request a rezoning of these two sites from Planned Commercial District, (PCD -1 and PCD -4) to Planned Unit Development (PUD). The property at 4530 France, where the building that would be removed, is currently zoned PCD-4. (See page A9.) The PCD -4 District only allows automobile service centers, car washes, and gas stations. The previous use of the property was a Rapid Oil Change station. This property is located within an area of the City that is designated as a "Potential Area of Change" within the 2008 Comprehensive Plan. (See pages A6 —A7.) The Comprehensive Plan states that within the Potential Areas of Change, "A development proposal that involves a Comprehensive Plan Amendment or a rezoning will require a Small Area Plan study prior to planning application. However, the authority to initiate a Small Area Plan rests with the City Council." The proposal requires a rezoning whether it is to PUD, or to PCD -1. Therefore, the decision to require a Small Area Plan shall be made by the City Council. The following page shows a compliance table demonstrating how the proposed new building would comply with the PCD -1 Zoning Ordinance Standards. Please note that the proposal would require several variances. Should.the City decide to rezone these sites to PUD, the proposed setbacks, height of building.and number of parking stalls would become the standards for the lots. Please note that the new standards requested would vary significantly for the Zoning requirements of the PCD -1 District, including the screening requirement from adjacent residential property. Compliance Table * "Would not conform to Ordinance Standard of the PGV -7 [J►strict Per Section 850.04. Subd. 4 D provides the following regulations for a PUD: 1. Purpose and Intent. The purpose of the PUD District is to provide comprehensive procedures and standards intended to allow more creativity and flexibility in site plan design than would be possible under a conventional zoning district. The decision to zone property to PUD is a public policy decision for the City Council to make in its 2 City Standard, (POD-1) . Proposed. Building Setbacks Front — France Avenue 35 feet 75 feet Side — South 30 feet 2 feet"" Side — North 0 feet 20 feet Rear — Setback to R -1 Property 30 feet 2 feet" Parking Lot Setbacks Front - France Avenue 20 feet 0 feet " j Side — South 10 feet 5 feet " Side — North 10 feet 0 feet (existing condition) Building Height Two Stories One Story Maximum Floor Area Ratio (FAR) 100% 33% Lot size = 36,335 s.f, Gross s.f. = 11,994 Parking Stalls 60 stalls (for office space) 53 stalls"* 74 stalls (for retail space) Parking Stall Size 8.5'x 18' 7.5'x 16' to 8.5 x 18' (using compact stalls) Drive Aisle Width 24 feet 24 feet Landscaping Screening required for non - residential No screening proposed from the buildings or structures within 200 feet residential property" of residential property * "Would not conform to Ordinance Standard of the PGV -7 [J►strict Per Section 850.04. Subd. 4 D provides the following regulations for a PUD: 1. Purpose and Intent. The purpose of the PUD District is to provide comprehensive procedures and standards intended to allow more creativity and flexibility in site plan design than would be possible under a conventional zoning district. The decision to zone property to PUD is a public policy decision for the City Council to make in its 2 legislative capacity. The purpose and intent of a PUD is to include most or. all of the following: - a. provide for the establishment of PUD (planned unit development) zoning districts in appropriate settings and situations to create or maintain a development pattern that- is consistent with the City's Comprehensive Plan; b. promote a more creative and efficient approach to land use within the City, while at the same time protecting and promoting the health, safety, comfort, aesthetics, economic viability, and general welfare of the City; c provide for variations to the strict application of the land use regulations in order to improve site design and operation, while at the'same time incorporate design elements that exceed the City's standards to offset the effect of any. variations. Desired design elements may include: sustainable design, greater utilization of r new technologies in building design, special construction materials, landscaping; lighting, stormwater management, pedestrian oriented design; and podium height at a street or transition to residential'neighborhoods, parks or. other sensitive uses; d. ensure high quality of design and design compatible with surrounding land uses, including both existing and planned; e. maintain or improve the efficiency of public streets and utilities; f. preserve, and enhance site characteristics including natural features, wetland protection, trees open space, scenic views, and screening; g. allow for mixing of land uses within -a development; h. encourage a variety of housing types including affordable housing; and i. ensure the establishment-of appropriate transitions between differing land uses. 2..Aoplicability /Criteria a. Uses. All permitted uses, permitted accessory uses, conditional uses, and uses allowed by administrative permit contained in the various zoning districts defined in Section 850, of this Title shall be 3 treated as potentially allowable uses within a PUD district, provided they would be allowable on the site under the Comprehensive Plan. Property currently zoned R -1, R -2 and PRD -1 shall not be eligible.for a PUD., b. Eligibility Standards. To be eligible for a PUD district, all development should be in compliance with the following: i. where the site of a proposed PUD is designated for more than one (1) land use in the Comprehensive Plan, the City may require that the PUD include all the land uses so designated or such combination of the designated uses as the City Council shall deem appropriate to achieve the purposes of this ordinance and the Comprehensive Plan; ii. any PUD which_ involves a single land use type or, housing type may be permitted provided that it is otherwise. consistent with the objectives of this ordinance and the Comprehensive Plan; iii. permitted densities may be specifically stated in the appropriate planned development designation and shall be in general conformance with the Comprehensive Plan; and iv. the setback regulation, building coverage and floor area ratio of the most closely related conventional zoning district shall be considered presumptively appropriate, but may be departed from to accomplish the purpose and intent described in #1* above. While the proposal would be an improvement over the existing building on the site, and the uses would be compatible in the area, staff has some concern over the number of standards that don't meet the minimum code requirements of the PCD -1 district, the shortage of parking, and the lack of screening from adjacent single - family residential homes. M 7 March 2011 0 Re: 4530 France Avenue South N E W LA N D To: City of Edina c/o Cary Teague ARCHITECTURE Narrative Statement Project Description: The project is intended to be a merger of 2 currently existing sites; the larger 4528 France Avenue South — with the newer brick -and- stucco office /retail building and the older 1 -story parking /storage building — and the abandoned Valvoline Rapid Oil Change site at 4530 France Avenue South. Above. The old oil change building as seen from the southeast. Thep roposed design for a combined property is to add an upper level to the existing parking /storage building, allowing the existing oficelretail building to expand. The existing Valvoline building would be torn down, and a new landscaped parking lot would be provided in front of the new building expansion. The new addition would be designed to closely match the exterior image of the existing 4528 building. LIM 4530 France Avenue South Narrative, Page 2 of 2 The 4528 property is currently zoned PCD -1. The 4530 property is currently zoned PCD-4, which limits its allowable uses. To rezone this property as PCD -1 and combine it with the 4528 property is one possibility, but this presents the problem of the existing parking /storage garage. The garage structure is less than 2' away from property lines on the south, west and north sides. As a non - conforming structure, any modifications or additions would require a variance. The property abuts an R -1 district, but mitigating this is that the adjoining residential lots have extraordinarily deep yards and there is significant landscape screening between the dwellings and the existing garage structure. Establishing the combined site as a new PUD district is a possibility that my client, Ed Noonan, would like to explore. The benefits in creating a PUD district lie in the ability to define the function and characteristics of the specific site. Because of the unique nature of the site and its existing buildings, we believe that granting a PUD would be advantageous not only to my client but also to the city. The overall site drainage patterns would not change from how they are today, and the overall impervious area would be similar. Advantages to the City of Edina: 1. The removal of the old oil change building, along with the proposed building addition, would provide a more visually consistent image. Because the 4528 building was designed to match the brick and buff coloration of the existing historic buildings on the west side of 44`h & France, the overall image of the streetscape would be strengthened. 2. The west side of the parking garage building current has old signage painted on it as well as 6 original industrial -type windows. The entire building exterior would be painted to match the new addition above and the windows would be removed and infilled. These upgrades will provide a cleaner and more consistent image, even though the building is well- screened by existing landscaping. 3. The change from an automotive -based PCD -4 district to a more flexible PUD district should be seen as a general upgrade to the city's vision of this retail district; more consistent with the prevailing zoning type and business uses. 4. The total retail /off=ice space and the flexibility it would offer to a variety of businesses would be increased. 5. The updated site work and parking lot configuration would allow the number of existing curb cuts on France Avenue to be reduced from 4 to 3. 030711 Narrative.docx 04 1 ;R� Pre Iimimary Images 4528 & 4530 France Avenue South Edina, MN 5542x1 Plan F-1 LA RETAIL BUILDING EXISTING RODFTOP M. ^"^=`" ^,"""" """`" . '` . ME 1� ON 4528 & 4530 France Avenue South Edina, MN 55,424 O � Caw.d t Tr. IV-d'. le_V-4. Plan 0. Lower' Level Plan P r o p o s e d P l a n s 4528 & 4530 France Avenue South Edina, MN 55424 . -���: mw JAF Own Hl -9. INN Caw.d t Tr. IV-d'. le_V-4. Plan 0. Lower' Level Plan P r o p o s e d P l a n s 4528 & 4530 France Avenue South Edina, MN 55424 I �I ...for living, learning, raising families & doing business 2008 Comprehensive Plan City of Edina 2008 Comprehensive Plan Update Date ofAenal Photogiaphy. August 2006 Edina Comp Plan Update 2008 Chapter 4. Land Use and Community Design 4 Figure 4.4 Conceptual Land Use Framework: Potential Areas of Change E) C, Mdes 4 -33 tE ` A for living, learning, raising families &doing business 2008 Comprehensive Plan �. ..,ra Staging of Development: Small Area Plans Given the essentially developed character of the City, the Land Use Plan does not include a specific schedule for staging or phasing of redevelopment. However, the act of identifying the Potential Areas of Change is intended to highlight the need for Small Area Plans that focus on these areas. These studies, conducted in consultation with residents, property owners, business owners and commercial property owners, will produce a guide for redevelopment. A request t .nitiate a specific Small Area Plan can be made by community groups usiness groups, the Planning Commission, or City staff. A development proposal that involves a Comprehensive Plan Amendment or a rezoning will require a Small Area Plan study prior to planning application. However, the authority to initiate a Small Area Plan rests with the City Council. Plans may include identification of sub -areas with distinctive characteristics, recommendations for phasing of development/redevelopment, and standards for managing transitions between existing and planned uses. These Small Area Plans may include planning principles such as: 1) Area or neighborhood land use pattern and design that encourages walking and transit use 2) High degree of connectivity to existing and new public (and active private) spaces to encourage physical activity, social interaction, and optimal land use 3) Smaller parking footprints 4) Reduction in impervious surfaces and associated storm water runoff 5) Water quality -water conservation measures- reuse of graywater, wastewater management 6) Potential for creating lifecycle housing 7) High - quality of community design, with a system for measuring excellence, not just compliance with design guidelines. Additional areas may also be identified for further study. See Chapter 12, Implementation, for further details. Staging of Development: Community Design Guidelines In order for Edina to remain economically competitive, attractive to residents, businesses, and visitors, and sustainable, the community must be more than functionally responsive. Edina must also be beautiful, vibrant, safe, inclusive, and promote active living. The principles and guidelines in this chapter are intended to help the City achieve this vision by focusing on the design of the built environment and the natural environment. The community design principles apply to both City actions and private sector development. The City is responsible for designing, maintaining and improving its streets, parks, public buildings and other public spaces. The private sector is encouraged to design Edina Comp Plan Update 2008 Chapter 4: Land Use and Community Design 4 -35 Cokk�NT zbm)&j6 a , Al" L rr 111 � � _- _- ___- •��: r r • i r r- , i zjqr 4 Y Cokk�NT zbm)&j6 FZ FL ME \ 0920 J0J0 3010 \ CC00 4002 \ 1007 1000 1001 1003 ' 4532 am IS.T6 4511 4510 8� o ti � � v r} City of Edina r r= Legend House Number Labels 5"et Name Labels N City Limits Creeks Lake Names FLakes Pat11s Zoning . APD /AVlem Paine0 tl ❑ Y60�1NmtlDevevamnlDMret1 ■ MOD51Mm0 OaewP>sa+0s+ne1 ■ N0061YmJ Davbpmw:Dsm�] ■ PCD•1 jl' — Comms+cd DMndl ■ PCO 2:R.' a Commcrc+el0�gr 11 ■ PCO 1P-- c.. —a!OMe 11 ® PcD +IP�,wcam.�aDM..xI O.m IP'NnaPS ewuw.r OMnq) OPOD-l" Off" DPOD -21Pm— Orl.m Dd+M1 . PRD- 11IN—: -4a 11 Dslr 41 ■ PRD.2(p-::.-W .DMnPlI ■ PRO SIPMnd aad —Da—t ■ PRD,jp— ,Ra+Eonld01rC1 ■ PRD- SIPMnnaa Racbvntd DalrcAl ■ PSR<IP. —Sena D-1 ❑ R -11 &nab Drw gU.!I ■ R 210av0b Dwrcnp Un'I DRMOIRepenr M.—C. —I ❑ Parcels 2008 Aerial Photo L 4269 1700 4017 40 4011 4400 44to 4704 4709 1710 City of Edina 1244 1757 aR3%RAVG- ERD 4701 7915 7977 7911 909 7907 903 0 4007 4001 4707 4307 (r 7920 7910 7916 11Dd 4711 7970 7921 r \,� 4410 \ 4009 4651 Lord 4611 (017 1571 vp cars 41441 Ise IOtJ 4576 40191017 4M 14 45" 41-'40 lOSJ 1051 1544 LOSS � 4515 Is41a 2< 11 4600 4601 4600 4601 4601 1601 41661 4407 1606 Legend H ... e Number Labels Street Nam. Labels N City Limits Cmeks ❑ Lake Names FLakes Packs Zoning A-; lamomeaftP~p 0slr tl DMUDSIMma De,.m...nl DslrC1 ■ MDD 51M— O—W —Dr j . MDD41M -1 Dek+v —1 0-1 . PC0-1fpr:.CommknalDrr�1 ■ PCD- 2 /Pianel Can +raaa:O Sntil ■ PCDi lPrin�Cemn+o!ceOOrrxal ■ PCD4jPMnW Cammerae:Urrictl O►Ip fPbniwe meuvna:Orndl OPOD.t fPannaa Olfaa Orr.al OPOD- 21Pla,— Off— D m,.aI ■ PRD11Pminei Reabanlr Da`rn11 ■ Pa1D2iVannaaGwfonLf O+.fngl ■ PRD- 3jp.—W Remmnr D—I ■ PRD41P�.r Rssaklr Orr.e1 ■ PRDSi►bnnm Rekadmlr DrrsU . PEA<1►lannw 6anurDr.,u1 O0..1 {tmpb D.r6np Un41 . 0.- 11Daa!'a Daswp Un.l ORMUIRCq. awl Mr:d Dalnal ❑ Parcels -Af lk mr� S RL MSU!' _ .'w ' 1. , i" •!�� ',,!~ia .,•.. �(�� r '; a • ':. Kii w i Ali .w I .eG-• e -:.... z � �� \�K\ w 6W Aff vi'l 1 9AF M I i-V7 — - r �ill p IVA • C I i , A 114411 A? V. 4m o"A 4k _51 At :7,i IL IP dr N' V 4 1,; 41, 404Y Jai 0.1, ,r.i,r I'll I A *2 440 0 Ph. 4h% a IPA /* 3 Nk r < A IMP OR v At N. •t� W7� "i t X WR i OMAN W� tA JM/7 7. 1w 9 71 SO L WIN %on-- Aw 4 aof ol AA 07 oi %oNv, till, Xq IN 14, M IT J 69 " AN of ITIR L A IWMC WN was. JI-1 Sketch Plan Review Potential Rezoning Ed Noonan 4528 & 4530 France Avenue Planner Presentation Planner Teague informed the Commission that the Planning Commission has been asked to consider a sketch plan proposal to redevelop the properties at 4528 and 4530 France Avenue. The applicant is proposing to tear down the existing building at 4530 France, and build an addition above the existing garage at 4528 France that would match the existing building on that lot. Planner Teague explained that the applicant would like to request a rezoning of these two sites from Planned Commercial District, (PCD -1 and PCD -4) to Planned Unit Development (PUD). The property at 4530 France, where the building that would be removed, is currently zoned PCD -4. The PCD -4 District only allows automobile service centers, car washes, and gas stations. The previous use of the property was a Rapid Oil Change station. Planner Teague noted that this property is located within an area of the City that is designated as a "Potential Area of Change" within the 2008 Comprehensive Plan. The Comprehensive Plan states that within the Potential Areas of Change, "A development proposal that involves a Comprehensive Plan Amendment or a rezoning will require a Small Area Plan study prior to planning application. However, the authority to initiate a Small Area Plan rests with the City Council." The proposal requires a rezoning whether it is to PUD, or to PCD -1. Therefore, the decision to require a Small Area Plan shall be made by the City Council. Planner Teague commented that while the proposal would be an improvement over the existing building on the site, and the uses would be compatible in the area, staff has some concern over the number of standards that don't meet the minimum code requirements of the PCD -1 district, the shortage of parking, and the lack of screening from adjacent single - family residential homes. Planner Teague concluded that at this time the Commission can provide advisory comments on the sketch plan. Appearing for the Applicant Ed Noonan, Noonan Construction and Scott Newland, Newland Architecture. 9 Anolicant Presentation Ed Noonan, 84 Woodland Circle, gave the Commission a brief history of his projects and of the subject sites. Mr. Noonan acknowledged that Planner Teague apprised him of the fact that this area of Edina was identified in the Comprehensive Plan as a candidate for a Small Area Plan. Noonan added that in all honesty he's afraid of what that could mean. Noonan introduced Scott Newland, architect for the project. Scott Newland addressed the Commission and informed them he was the architect of the newer building at 4528 France and the goal of the proposed project is to redevelop the properties to provide a more visually consistent image within the 44th /France Avenue area. Newland stated that the old oil change building would be removed and an addition would be built above the existing garage area at 4528 France. The sites would be rezoned to a PUD district making the site(s) more in keeping with the prevailing zoning and uses. Mr. Noonan and Newland stood for questions. Comments The Commission asked Mr. Noonan if the existing garage would continue to function as a garage. Mr. Noonan responded in the affirmative. The Commission questioned if the parking spaces in the existing garage were included in the parking calculations provided. Mr. Newland responded that the parking calculations included the garage stalls. Continuing, The Commission asked Mr. Noonan the intent of parking garage; would the public be allowed to park there, etc. Mr. Noonan responded that the parking garage would be used for vehicle storage and staff parking, no public parking. The Commission commented that they have some concerns with parking, pointing out that the site was under parked. Continuing the discussion on parking the Commission commented that the configuration of the surface parking appears confusing. They acknowledged that the elimination of one of the curb cut improves the flow; however, the flow isn't clear especially in the middle area. The Commission suggested that eliminating two, not one curb cut could reduce confusion and provide more parking. Mr. Newland said he would be willing to revisit the parking stalls and circulation; however, because of existing conditions three curb cuts would still be needed. The Commission focused on the "primary use" of the building(s) and asked Mr. Noonan if he sees the use as office or retail. Mr. Noonan said he visualizes the space more as office. Continuing, Mr. Noonan said that presently he has two tenants in the building that would like to remain; however, the logistics haven't been worked out yet. Noonan said another option would be an office /condo design. Noonan said he doesn't envision a Starbucks or other high use retailers. VA The Commission stated they appreciate the quality of the design and the desire to maintain the character of the area; however are struggling with the front parking lot. The Commission indicated that they felt the front parking lot doesn't match the character of the 44th area. They pointed out the 44th Street area is comprised of buildings close to the street, creating a more pedestrian friendly streetscape. Continuing, the Commission added they respect the work that Mr. Noonan does, it's quality work, and suggested he review the layout to see if a revision to the plan could be designed that was more pedestrian friendly. The Commission also suggested that if a redesign was accomplished that brought the building closer to the street (flip the position of the parking and building) there would be the potential to add a second level of parking over the existing garage. It was also noted if parking was constructed over the garage the site could go down to two curb cuts. Mr. Newland acknowledged that they didn't consider that option, adding they would need to study construction costs associated with such a revision. Mr. Newland and Noonan acknowledged that scenario was creative. Mr. Noonan pointed out with regard to parking that it's always been an issue in this area. He noted Minneapolis is directly across the street and Edina businesses have no control over what happens on the east side of France. Noonan said he believes there is street parking on the Minneapolis side of the street. Continuing, Noonan acknowledged that the site presents some difficulties. He pointed out the grade change, watershed drainage area to the rear, and heavy vegetation with mature trees also to the rear. Noonan acknowledged that the vegetation is a plus as a buffer to the residential properties along West 44th Street and to the west. The Commission acknowledged the potential for a small area plan in this area; however, if the City Council doesn't direct one for this project the "word" still needs to get out to the neighborhood. Mr. Noonan agreed. He said he knows that the Morningside neighborhood has a very active and strong association. Continuing, Noonan said a sign could be posted indicating the sketch plan and process. The Commission noted that regardless of what occurs with this project eventually the City Council will need to take the "small area plan head on ". The Commission also acknowledged that initiating a small area plan from start to finish is a long process. Mr. Noonan said the cost of a small area plan would really impact the developer. A discussion ensued with Commissioners acknowledging that this area was identified for a Small Area Plan; however, it would be unrealistic to put development "on hold ". The Commission acknowledged and reiterated the City Council would make the decision if a small area plan was needed for this development plan. Chair Grabiel said he appreciates the applicants work on the sketch plan review and the fact that this process was new for the applicant and Commission. Grabiel said one fact that can't be changed is that Minneapolis is directly across the street from this property and the City has no control over what happens on the east side of France Avenue. Continuing, Grabiel said "perfect is the enemy of the good ", noting there probably isn't a perfect project that meets all issues. Grabiel said in his opinion this was a worthy plan 0 that would enhance the streetscape along France Avenue and the neighborhood. Concluding Grabiel said in his opinion Mr. Noonan should bring his plan to the City Council. The Commission highlighted the following points: • The Commission acknowledged that the Comprehensive Plan identifies this area as an area where a Small Area Plan may occur. • The City Council needs to determine if a Small Area Plan was needed before this project can proceed. • Keep in mind that the direction of the Comprehensive Plan was walkability and creating and maintaining streetscapes. • Minneapolis is directly east of the subject site and the City has no control over what happens on that side of the street. • The Commission suggested revisions to the plan; Pull the building closer to the street; construct parking on top of existing garage; work on the interior configuration of the parking lot. A redesign of the parking lot could achieve more parking. • The sketch plan presented tonight needs to be presented to the neighborhood. Mr. Noonan thanked the Commission for their input, adding he would consider their comments and would proceed to the City Council. Motion Commissioner Staunton moved to recommend that the Commission formally pass their comments on the Sketch Plan presented by Mr. Noonan to the City Council. Commissioner Potts seconded the motion. All voted aye; motion carried. 2009.0004.10.N., Zoning Ordinance Amepdffients Rooftop Dining Planner Presentation Planner Teague remiaogE the Commission this to v as Planner Teague s at their last Planning Commission directed him vise the ordinance with the following cha � addressed at past meetings. eting the Commission °I W e ts REPORT/RECOMMENDATION To: MAYOR AND COUNCIL Agenda Item Item No. W.B. From: Debra Mangen City Clerk ® Action ❑ Discussion ❑ Information Date: April 19, 2011 Subject: Super America New 3.2 Off -Sale Liquor License ACTION REQUESTED: Motion approving New Off -Sale Beer License to Northern Tier Retail LLC. dba as SuperAmerica #4047, 5205 Vernon Avenue for the period beginning April 20, 2011 and ending March 31, 2012. INFORMATION /BACKGROUND: Northern Tier Retail LLC. dba as SuperAmerica #4047, 5205 Vernon Avenue has applied for a 3.2 beer liquor license. There has been a change in their corporate structure. They have filed the necessary paperwork and paid the applicable fees for the licenses. The Administration Department has reviewed the submittals and finds that they comply with code requirements. The Health Department is satisfied with the applicant's plan for storage and service. The Planning Department has reviewed the application and finds that it complies with code requirements. The Police Department has completed their investigation. Attached is Sgt. Draper's memo stating the findings of the Police Department's background investigation. The licenses are placed on the agenda for consideration by the Council. ATTACHMENT: Sgt. Draper's Memorandum. • BACKGROUND INVESTIGATION SUMMARY 3.2 Off Sale Malt Liquor Establishment: Super America #4047 License: 3.2 Malt Liquor On 11/02/10, Super America 44047 Inc. made application to the City of Edina for a 3.2 Malt Liquor license. Super America Inc. operates a station at 5205 Vernon Ave., in Edina, MN. Super America Inc. is incorporated in the State of Delaware with an LLC with Northern Tier Retail. The Delaware Secretary of State reports they are in good standing. Owners/Managers/Members Super America Inc.: Rex Eric Butcher Bethel, Connecticut Oscar Ignacio Rodriguez Katy, Texas The owners /managers /members have been investigated and were found to have no criminal records. Checks were made with the following agencies. NCIC MINCIS Hennepin County Delaware Secretary of State Minnesota Secretary of State Minnesota Liquor Control Board Personal, business and bank references were contacted and responded positively. From the information gathered during the course of the investigation, I found nothing to prevent Super America Inc. from obtaining a 3.2 Malt Liquor license. I would support a positive recommendation from the Police Department in regard to the issuance of this license. G Sgt. Tom Draper #150 o t Le� v �1 "tease REPORT /RECOMMENDATION To: MAYOR AND COUNCIL Agenda Item Item IV. D. From: Scott Neal F-1 Action City Manager � Discussion Information Date: April 19, 2011 Subject: Resolution No. 2011 -48 Revising City Council Agenda ACTION REQUESTED: Adopt Resolution No. 2011 -48 revising the City Council Agenda. INFORMATION /BACKGROUND: At their April 5, 2011, meeting the Council discussed a proposal for a new format of the City Council meeting agenda. Staff has prepared the necessary resolution revising the Council's meeting agenda based upon direction received at the April 5th meeting. ATTACHMENTS: Resolution No. 2011 -48 RESOLUTION NO. 2011 -48 REVISING THE EDINA CITY COUNCIL AGENDA City of Edina BE IT RESOLVED that the Order of Business for the Edina City Council Meetings sh II be changed as follows: I. Call To Order II. Roll Call III. Unity Statement IV. Approval of Meeting Agenda V. Adoption of Consent Agenda VI. Special Recognitions and Presentations VII. Community Comment VIII. Public Hearings IX. Reports /Recommendations X. Correspondence and Petitions XI. Mayor and Council Comments XII. Manager's Miscellarteous Items XIII. Adjourn Meeting Passed and adopted by the City Council of the City of Edina, Minnesota. Dated this 19th day of April, 2011 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 April 19, 2011 and as recorded in the Minutes of said Regular Meeting. WITNESS my hand and seal of said City this day of 20_ City Hall % M7-8861 4801 WEST 50TH STREET FAX 952- 826 -0390 EDINA, MINNESOTA, 55424 -1394 www.CityofEdina.com TTY 952- 826 -0379 0, REPORT/RECOMMENDATION To: MAYOR AND COUNCIL Agenda Item Item No. IV. E. From: Scott Neal Action City Manager Discussion Information Date: April 19, 2011 Subject: Proposed Policy For Recording and Broadcasting City Commission Meetings ACTION REQUESTED: Approve new policy for recording and rebroadcasting City Board & Commission meetings. INFORMATION /BACKGROUND: Currently, the City records and rebroadcasts meetings of the City Council, Planning Commission, Park Board and Transportation Commission. Recently, staff have received an increasing number of requests from boards and commission seeking waivers from the policy to allow their meetings to be unrecorded. These requests were a signal to me that perhaps a change of policy was needed. At your March 1 meeting, I told the City Council of a plan to prepare a new policy for the Council to consider regarding the recording and rebroadcasting of City Board and Commission meetings. I told you that I would propose a new policy to you at the April 19 Council meeting. This proposal is consistent with that commitment. I asked board and commission liaisons to raise this issue with their board or commission during their regular March 2011 meeting. The consensus of the input and feedback from the boards and commissions was that the recording of their meetings may inhibit their discussions and stifle their abilities to make the best decisions. With that input and feedback in mind, I propose the City Council consider this alternative policy: 1. All regular meetings of the City Council and Planning Commission will be recorded and rebroadcast. This is the same as the current policy. 2. All other City Boards and Commission meetings will not be recorded and rebroadcast unless: a. The meeting agenda includes a Public Hearing; or,. b. The City Council gives a special direction for the meeting to be recorded and rebroadcast. 3. All Board and Commission meetings that are recorded for rebroadcast shall occur in the City Council Chambers. 4. Any Board and Commission meeting that occurs in the City Council Chambers shall be conducted using the standard City Council dais. Policy points 3 and 4 are not drawn from the feedback offered by Boards and Commissions, but is related to feedback from staff. The audio /visual equipment in the City Council Chambers was designed around meetings that occur at the Council Dais. The equipment's functionality is substantially decreased when it is used to attempt to record meetings that occur in the Chambers in configurations that do not include the Council Dais. Also, while it is possible to record meetings that occur in rooms other than the Council Chambers, the functionality of our mobile recording equipment produces a quality of audio and video that is much below the standard that our residents are accustomed to. Therefore, we recommend that any meeting that is required to be recorded should be held in the City Council Chambers. RECOMMENDATION: I recommend this policy for adoption by the City Council. If adopted, I recommend an effective date of June 1, 2011. IZ.iA, Ow Le ` N � uBeB REPORT /RECOMMENDATION To: MAYOR AND COUNCIL Agenda Item Item No. IV. F. From: Debra Mangen City Clerk ® Action ❑ Discussion ❑ Information Date: April 19, 2011 Subject: Resolution No. 2011 -46 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. 2011 -46 RESOLUTION NO. 2011 -46 ACCEPTING DONATIONS ON BEHALF OF THE CITY OF EDINA City of Edina WHEREAS, Minnesota Statute 465.03 allows cities to accept grants and donations of real or personal property for the benefit of its citizens; WHEREAS, said donations must be accepted via a resolution of the Council adopted by a two thirds majority of its members. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Edina City Council accepts with sincere appreciation the following listed donations on behalf of its citizens. Edina Art Center: Paul & Eva Lane $10.00 Public Art Committee Donation Barbara Nelson Two Newsprint Pads & Nine Illustration Boards Dated: April 19, 2011 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 April 19, 2011, and as recorded in the Minutes of said Regular Meeting. WITNESS my hand and seal of said City this day of 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 �9R REPORT /RECOMMENDATION To: MAYOR AND COUNCIL Agenda Item Item No: IV.G. From: Boyd Tate Traffic Safety Coordinator ® Action ❑ Discussion Information Date: April 19, 2011 Subject: Traffic Safety Committee Report of April 6, 2011. ACTION REQUESTED: Review and approve Traffic Safety Staff Review of Wednesday, April 6, 2011. BACKGROUND: It is not anticipated that residents will be in attendance at the Council meeting regarding any of the attached issues. ATTACHMENTS: Traffic Safety Review for April 6, 2011. TRAFFIC SAFETY STAFF REVIEW Wednesday, April 6, 2011 The staff review of traffic safety matters occurred on April 6, 2011. Staff present included the City Engineer, Assistant City Engineer, City Planner, Police Traffic Supervisor and Traffic Safety Coordinator. From that review, the recommendations below are provided. On each of the items, persons involved have been contacted and the staff recommendation has been discussed with them. They were also informed that if they disagree with the recommendation or have additional facts to present, they can be included on the April 19, 2011, Council Agenda. SECTION A: Requests on which staff recommends approval of request: 1. Request to post the south side of West 56h Street between Xerxes Avenue and York Avenue for "No Parking Anytime." This request comes from a resident on the 5500 block of York Avenue who states that the recent opening of a pizza restaurant on the Minneapolis side of Xerxes Avenue has generated a large amount of customers who park on West 56h Street between Xerxes and York Avenues. Cars are being parked on both sides of the street making it hard to enter /exit the alley to requestor's home as well as narrowing West 56' Street. Temporary no parking signs were placed on the south side of West 56, Street between Xerxes Avenue and York Avenue during the winter months when the roadway was_ ,narrowed by snow plowing. Staff feels that permanent no parking signs are needed. Staff recommends the approval of the request to post the south side of West 56th Street between Xerxes Avenue and York Avenue for, "No Parking Anytime." 2. Request to post the south side of West 590' Street between Kellogg Avenue and Oaklawn Avenue to No Parking Anytime. This request comes from staff. Traffic Safety Staff Review April 6, 2011 Page 1 of 4 MIL-1 This section of West 59th Street was reconstructed last year. During the reconstruction the street was narrowed to 18 -feet. Allowing cars to park on both sides of the street would not allow for emergency vehicles to pass. The south side of the street was chosen because the north side can accommodate more vehicles. Avenue to "No Parking Anytime" for Public safetv reasons SECTION B: Requests on which staff recommends denial of request: Request from St. Stephen's Church to allow parking on the east side of the bridge over Minnehaha Creek on Wooddale Avenue just south of West 50'h Street on Sundays from 7:00 am to 1:00 pm. Wooddale Avenue, at this location, is a 32 -foot wide B -Minor Arterial roadway with an average Mon. -Fri. daily traffic count of 5,700 and .an 85''- percentile speed of 30.7 mph. Wooddale Avenue has curb, gutter, and a sidewalk on the east side. The north bound traffic lane is 17 -feet wide and the south bound lane is 15 -feet wide. Allowing cars to park on the east side of the bridge would narrow the north bound traffic lane to an unsafe distance. Minnesota State Statute 169.34s13 prohibits parking on any bridge on any roadway. Edina City Code also prohibits parking on bridges. This bridge is 54 -feet long and at best could only accommodate three vehicles. Staff recommends the denial of this request Per State Statute SECTION C: Requests that are deferred to a later date or referred to others. None for Wednesday, April 6, 2011. Traffic Safety Staff Review Page 2 of 4 April 6, 2011 SECTION D: Other traffic safety issues handled. 1. Parking concerns from a resident on the 5300 block of Halifax Avenue about two reconstructed homes going up directly across from each other. Edina Police have placed temporary no parking signs to accommodate this resident. 2. Request from a resident on the 6200 block of Hillside Road regarding parking from people using Countryside Park. Traffic Safety Coordinator will monitor this summer. 3. Parking concerns from a resident on the 4500 block of W. 56th Street on Sundays from people attending the Wooddale Church. Requestor states that cars are being parked too close to driveways and intersections. Edina Police will take enforcement action. 4. A resident of the 4500 block of Oak Drive called with same concerns as above. 5. Complaint received from a resident on the 7400 Block of Edinborough Way regarding Metro Transit busses. Resident referred to Metro Transit bus supervisor. 6. Call from a resident who states that the traffic signal on West 70th Street and Cornelia Drive gives too little "green" time for the Cornelia Drive traffic. The timing of this signal was adjusted to give more time to Cornelia Drive traffic. 7. A call from a resident who wants the timing looked at on the traffic signal at West 66th Street and Drew Avenue. This is a Hennepin County signal and the caller was referred to-the county. 8. Complaint from a resident on the 4600 block of Bruce Ave regarding the excess traffic generated by the Parade of Homes house on the block. Caller advised to call police if any vehicles are parked illegally. 9. Concerns from a caller regarding traffic and pedestrian safety on West 42nd Street and Grimes Avenue regarding the Golden Years Montessori School. Staff will monitor and police will enforce. 10. Call from a resident that a retaining wall on the north east corner of West 76th Street and Edinborough Way had fallen onto the sidewalk. Street Department notified. Traffic Safety Staff Review April 6, 2011 Page 3 of 4 . %. 11. Complaint from a resident on Ridgeway Road regarding construction workers parking in front of her house. Advised resident to call police if any vehicles are parked illegally. 12. Three phone calls from realtors wanting to know traffic counts on streets. Traffic Safety Staff Review Page 4 of 4 April 6, 2011 i\ 0) J �f �ReeeA'tw� REPORT /RECOMMENDATION To: MAYOR AND COUNCIL Agenda Item Item No: IV. H. From: Wayne D. Houle, PE k- Public Works Director/ City Engineer ® Action F� Discussion 0 Information Date: April 19, 2011 Subject: Resolution No. 201149 Designating No Parking on West 44th Street. ACTION REQUESTED: Adopt a resolution approving parking restrictions on West 44th Street from Brookside Terrace to France Avenue. INFORMATION /BACKGROUND: The Council authorized staff to prepare plans and specifications and take bids for the reconstruction of West 44th Street at the February 1, 2011 Public Hearing. West 70th Street is designated as a Municipal State Aid (MSA) roadway that requires a no parking resolution due to utilizing MSA funds to reconstruct the roadway. Currently, a resolution authorizing the required parking restrictions does not exist for this roadway. As you will recall the Council also authorized staff to request a variance from Standards for State Aid Operations for this project. Attached is the approval of the required variances. Staff has also received notification that the advance of MSA funds for this roadway have been secured. Therefore, the next steps for this project is to acquire approval of plans from Minnesota Department of Transportation - Municipal State Aid Office, enter into an agreement with City of St. Louis Park - this will be submitted at the May 3, City Council meeting, receive bids and award contract. We are anticipating a mid -June construction start, with completion still anticipated for this October. ATTACHMENTS: Resolution 2011 -49 Variance Approval Letter dated April 12, 2011 G: \Engineering \Contract Numbers \2011 \ENG 11 -7 W. 44th St - France to TH- 100 \FINAL DESIGN \MISC \Item IV. H. Resolution No. 2011 -49 Designating No Parking on West 44th Street.docx RESOLUTION NO. 2011-49 w9t�1r� FOR PARKING RESTRICTIONS ON WEST 44TH STREET o e'' t1i FROM BROOKSIDE TERRACE TO FRANCE AVENUE (CSAH 17) • ,^� 1 89 bO B City of Edina WHEREAS, the City of Edina has planned the improvement of West 44th Street from Brookside Terrace to France Avenue (CSAH 17), State Aid Project No. 120- 140 -004; and WHEREAS, the Cities of Edina will be expending Municipal State Aid -Funds on the improvements on West 44th Street; and WHEREAS, the City is preparedto proceed with the construction of said projects through the use of an advance from the Municipal State Aid Street Fund; and WHEREAS, this improvement does not provide adequate width for parking on both sides of the.street; and approval of the proposed construction as a Municipal State Aid Street project must therefore be conditioned upon certain restrictions. NOW THEREFORE, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDINA, MINNESOTA, that parking of motor vehicles on the following portions of West 44th Street is hereby ban: 1. Both sides of the street from Brookside Terrace to Browndale Avenue. 2. On the south side of the roadway from Browndale Avenue to the Edina City limit, which is approximately 180 feet east of Glen Place. 3. On'the south side of the roadway between the Edina City limit, which is approximately 40 feet east of °Wooddale, and Curve Avenue, except along Kojetin Park. 4. On the.north side of the roadway between Curve Avenue and Eton Place. 5. Both sides, of the street from 150 feet west of France Avenue to France Avenue. ADOPTED this 19th day of April, 2011 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 is a true and correct copy of the Resolution duly adopted by the Edina City Council at its regular meeting of April 19, 2011, and as recorded in the Minutes of said regular meeting. WITNESS, my hand and seal of said City this day of , 2011. City Hall 4801 WEST 50TH STREET EDINA,. MINNESOTA, 55424 -1394 www.CityofEdiha.com City Clerk 952 - 927 -8861 FAX 952 - 826 -0390 TTY 952 - 826 -0379 O'ONESOT42 O� n a Qo� OP TPOxy Minnesota Department of Transportation State Aid Division 395 John Ireland Boulevard MS 500 Saint Paul, MN 55155 April 12, 2011 Wayne Houle, P.E. Edina City Engineer 4801 West 50 Street Edina, MN 55424 'IrRECEIVED 132011 �1�,� DE EDfNA Scott Brink, P.E. St. Louis Park City Engineer 5005 Minnetonka Blvd. St. Louis Park, MN 55416 In reply refer to: Request for Variances (2011 -04 and 2011 -05) Cities of Edina and St. Louis Park SAP 120-141-004,163-318-001 West 44th Street between Brookside Terrace and France Avenue Dear Mr. Houle and Mr. Brink: The letter is written to respond to your Cities' joint two variance requests. Variance 1 (2011 -06): The March 24, 2011 State Aid Variance Advisory Committee was appointed expressly for the purpose of recommending the validity of the joint City of Edina and the City of St. Louis Park variance from Minnesota Rules 8820.9936, Design Standards, Urban: New or Reconstruction Projects as they apply to the West 44th Street from Browndale Avenue to Dart Avenue and Wooddale Avenue to Curve Avenue so as to allow a 30 foot roadway width in lieu of the 32 foot roadway width as required by law. I hereby GRANT the variance to allow for a 30 foot roadway width based on the following condition: The termini Browndale Avenue to Dart Avenue and Wooddale Avenue to Curve Avenue are approximate. The variance approval applies to the more specific roadway termini as described in the City of Edina Resolution No. 2011 -34 dated February 15, 2011 and the City of St. Louis Park Resolution No. 11 -028 dated February 24, 2011. Variance 2 (2011 -07): The March 24, 2011 State Aid Variance Advisory Committee was appointed expressly for the purpose of recommending the validity of the joint City of Edina and the City of St. Louis Park variance from Minnesota Rules 8820.9936, Design Standards, Urban: New or Reconstruction Projects as they apply to the West 44th Street from Eton Place to France Avenue so as to allow a 35 foot roadway width in lieu of the 38 foot roadway width as required by law. An Equal Opportunity Employer O© 0 0 F1 �Q�flt Wayne Houle, P.E. Scott Brink, P.E. April 12, 2011 Page Two I hereby GRANT the variance to allow for a 35 foot roadway width based on the following condition: The termini Eton Place to France Avenue is approximate. The variance applies to the more specific roadway termini as described in the City of Edina Resolution No. 2011 -34 dated February 15, 2011 and,the City of St. Louis Park Resolution No. 11 -028 dated February 24, 2011. Sincerely, cvJulieSk'a�lman State Aid Engineer State Aid Division cc: Mike Kowski, Metro State Aid Variance File An Equal Opportunity Employer O 0 On" © V � �a s RESOLUTION NO. 2011 -49 -Z4er% W. �4- FOR PARKING RESTRICTIONS ON WEST 44. TH STREET FROM BROOKSIDE TERRACE TO FRANCE AVENUE (CSAH 17) City of Edina WHEREAS, the City of Edina has. planned the improvement of West 44th Street from Brookside Terrace to France Avenue (CSAH 17), State Aid Project No. 120 - 140 -004; and WHEREAS, the Cities of Edina will. be expending Municipal State Aid Funds on the improvements on West 44th Street; and WHEREAS, the City is prepared to proceed with the construction of said projects through the use of an advance from the Municipal State Aid Street Fund; and WHEREAS, this improvement does not provide adequate width for parking on both sides of the street; and approval of the proposed construction as a Municipal State Aid Street project must therefore be conditioned upon certain restrictions. NOW THEREFORE, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDINA, MINNESOTA, that parking of motor vehicles on the following portions of West 44th Street is hereby banned: 1. Both sides of the street from Brookside Terrace to Browndale Avenue. 2. On the south side of the roadway from Browndale Avenue to the Edina City limit, which is approximately 180 feet east of Glen Place. 3. On the south side of the roadway between the Edina City limit, which is approximately 40 feet east of Wooddale, and Curve Avenue, except along Kojetin Park. 4. On the north side of the roadway between Curve Avenue and Eton Place. 5. Both sides of the street from 150 feet west of France Avenue to France Avenue. ADOPTED this 191h day of April, 2011 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 is a true and correct copy of the Resolution duly adopted by the Edina City Council at its regular meeting of April 19, 2011, and as recorded in the Minutes of said regular meeting. WITNESS, my hand and seal of said City this day of , 2011. City Clerk City Hall 952 -927 -8861 4801 WEST 50TH STREET FAX 952 - 826 -0390 EDINA, MINNESOTA, 55424 -1394 www.CityyofEdina.com TTY 952 -826 -0379 elwn REPORT /RECOMMENDATION To: MAYOR AND COUNCIL Agenda Item Item IV. I. From: Scott Neal City Manager Action z Discussion Information Date: April 19, 2011 Subject: Approve Professional Services Agreement With Urban Energy Management Consulting Services Land Institute (ULI) For ACTION REQUESTED: Approve professional services agreement with Urban Land Institute (ULI) For energy management consulting services INFORMATION /BACKGROUND: The Energy and Environment Commission at their meeting April 14, 2011 made a recommendation that the Council approve a professional services agreement with Urban Land Institute (ULI) for Energy Management Consulting Services. Rick Carter from the LHB consulting firm, (sub - consultant for ULI) will join us at the meeting and give the Council a brief presentation on the project. ATTACHMENTS: Diane Plunkett Latham E -mail Deb Mangen From: Dianne Plunkett Latham < Dianne .Plunkett.Latham @Comcast.net> Sent: Friday, April 15, 20119:36 AM To: Ann Swenson; James B. Hovland; Joni Bennett; Josh Sprague; Mary Brindle Cc: Deb Mangen; Jesse Struve; Rick Carter; Bill Sierks; Jane Timm; Scott Neal Subject: EEC Benchmark Tool Recommendation for April 19 City Council Agenda 4 -15 -11 Honorable Mayor Hovland and Edina City Council Members, wanted to make you aware that at the 4 -14 -11 EEC meeting a unanimous recommendation was made that the City of Edina hire the Urban Land Institute (ULI) at $5000 to apply ULI's Regional Indicator's Project tool (also known as Pilot within a Pilot) to supply a benchmark for 2009 and 2010, as well as to train Edina City Staff such that staff can institutionalize the tool and continue benchmarking from 2011 forward. The sectors included are municipal, residential and commercial for electricity, gas, drinking water, waste water, municipal solid waste, recycling, vehicle miles traveled and carbon dioxide. To reach this decision the EEC studied the following tools: State of Minnesota's 133 database ICLEI's CACP software Hara's software McKinstry Consulting ULI's Regional Indicator's Project It was unanimously approved that Edina would also use the State of Minnesota's 63 database, which is required in order to qualify for certain State grants. Jesse Struve is presently being trained to operate this database. The B3 database covers only gas and electric for the municipal sector, which is why ULI's tool will be needed to gather the other sector's data. The selection of ULI does not preclude use of the ICLEI software, which is free with ICLEI membership. Nor does the selection of ULI preclude the use of McKinstry Consulting, Hara software or any other consulting or software in the future. Rather, it was determined that the price, startup time, staff time and efficacy of the ULI tool was so low as to be the best way to proceed just to get immediately started with the benchmarking that will be required under the GreenStep Cities program. I am not certain as to what is the best way to proceed. It may be too late to get this item into the packet for the April 19 City Council agenda. If so, perhaps it can be taken up under Mayor's comments. I understand that it will be useful for City Council to make this decision prior to the April 28 Regional Council of Mayor's meeting. If you have any further questions, do not hesitate to contact me. Dianne Plunkett Latham Chair, Edina Energy & Environment Commission 7013 Comanche Ct Edina MN 55439 -1004 'J Debra Mangen 4801 West 5e Street Phone 612 826 -0408 Edina, MN 55424 Fax 612 826 -0390 Memorandum To:_ Mayor Hovland, Members Bennett, Brindle, Swenson and Member -Elect Sprague From: Debra Mangen, City Clerk Date: April 19, 2011 Re: Petition Received April 19, 2011 Wendy Simpson brought in the attached petition this afternoon. Our typical process when a petition is received is to have the City Council to accept it and refer it to the Engineering Department for processing as to feasibility. If the Council so desires they can add the receipt and referral of the petition to the April 19, 2011 Agenda or they may have it appear on the May 3, 2011 Agenda. CC: City Council POO- NA .� )�1 tj� Cn O .41Wco RPORx I888 The City Council City of Edina Petition AV �, City of Edina;-Minnesota CITY COUNCIL 4801 West 50'h Street • Edina, Minnesota 55424 • �.u;1 ,, • (952) 927 -8861 --(952). 927 -7645 FAX • (61.2) 927 -5461 TDD PETITION TO THE CITY COUNCIL SIDEWALK ❑ ALLEY PAVING ❑ WATER MAIN ❑STORM SEWER ❑ SANITARY SEWER : ❑ STREET LIGHTING ❑ CURB AND GUTTER ONLY �❑ PERMANENT STREET. E] OTtIER: . l;- SURFACING WITH : ' V' CURB'AND GUTTER To the Mayor and City Council: --(— The persons who have signed this petition ask the City Council to consider the improvements listed above_ to the locations I isted -below. U -I ' (� �C ` behveen ` /,�C�(�C �n�`C ;i,l'F And 1 �Ct LO ATION OEJMPROVEP7RN'1' aY STRUT NAME _y, r' ADDRESS L .y. _ ADDRESS .� V LOCATION OF IMPROVEMENT O.Y. STREET NAME WKLSS ' nvvcw� Im �Imp n /' LOC�TIr ON OF`7�GDY ST1 l �T� ADIE ` �'A DRESS , J�ADDRES` LL�Ojc`xr11OON_ 1MPR P VErWENTDY TREET_`NN#ME.. AD R' S.., 'N AD1�D.RJSS IMPORTANT NOTE: THE PERSONS : WHO HAVE SIG TI$ PE,IIU�i= RSTAND THAT THE CITY .COUNCI- -_Y— ASS:L�.. COSTS OF TH ES E IMPROVEMENTS AGAINST :mot : THE PRO 3- NEFITING .FROM THE IMPROVEMENTS IN AMOUNTS DF�,TFRED COUNCIL AS AUTHORIZED BY CHAPTER-429, MINNESOTA STATUTES. PROPERTY OWNER'S OWNER'S NAME PROPERTY ADDRESS ,1 SIGNATURE (PRINTED) (PRINTED) Al .�• LN LP ST 711il petition was c' culated by: NAME ADDRESS PHONE There is space for more signatures on the back., N/ PROPERTY OWNER'S OWNER'S NAME PROPERTY ADDRESS SIGNATURE (PRINTED) (PRINTED) This petition was circulated by: NAME I ADDRESS PHONE The Minnesota Data Practices Acl requires that we inform you of parr rights about the private data we are requesting on this.%rm. Under the law, your telephone number is private data. This petition when submitted will become public info-mauion. There is no consequence for refusing to supply this information. You may attach extra pages with signatures. APRIL 2008 Petition Instructions This petition form is to be used to ask the Edina City Council to consider the following types of improvements: SIDEWALK ALLEY PAVING WATER MAIN STORM SEWER PERMANENT STREET SURFACING WITH CURB AND GUTTER CURB AND GUTTER ONLY (WITHOUT PERMANENT STREET SURFACING) SANITARY SEWER STREET LIGHTING or another improvement you describe (called OTHER on this form). You may use another petition form if you wish but the city council may reject such petitions unless they contain the following inforniation: 1. Type of improvement(s) requested, e.g., SIDEWALK, STORM SEWER, WATER MAIN, ETC. 2. Precise locations(s) of the requested improvements. 3. A statement that all who sign the petition understand that the city council may assess the costs of these improvements against the properties benefiting from the improvements in amounts determined by the Council. 4. Printed name of property owner, owner's signature and phone number, and property address. 5. Signature of person circulating the petition. If you have questions, please call the City Clerk at 952- 927 -8861 between 8:00 a.m. and 4:30 p.m. DEBRA MANGEN CITY CLERK APRIL 2008 R55CKREG LOG20000 CITY OF EDINA 345748 41712011 101479 AMERICAN SERVICES CORP. Council Check Register EQUIPMENT REPAIR 259085 2362 5861.6180 CONTRACTED REPAIRS 192.32 4n12011 - 4n12011 Check # Date Amount Supplier/ Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No _ Account No Subledger Account Description 345742 417/2011 259086 100613 AAA 5421.6201 LAUNDRY 51.76 259086 033111 23.50 LICENSE FEE 259275 040111 1553.6260 LICENSES & PERMITS 5841.6201 LAUNDRY 23.50 259086 033111 1470.6201 LAUNDRY 345743 41712011 259086 101971 ABLE HOSE & RUBBER INC. 5861.6201 LAUNDRY 342.58 259086 033111 87.25 PIPE 00001588 258960 1- 829264 5912.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES 033111 1470.6201 87.25 1,300.40 345744 4/7/2011 103680 ARAMARK REFRESHMENT SRVCS 119577 ACCESS COMMUNICATIONS INC. 283.31 COFFEE 258856 139.27 FIBER CONSULTING WORK 259110 18601 1554.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 139.27 345745 41712011 102971 ACE ICE COMPANY 61.60 258915 0814166 5862.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX 55.60 259197 0814195 5842.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX 26.00 259227 0814194 5822.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX 143.20 345746 41712011 106476 ACE TRAILER SALES 4/5/2011 13:56:50 Page- 1 Rnei.... I Wt EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN WELL HOUSES CENT SERV GEN - MIS VERNON SELLING YORK SELLING 50TH ST SELLING 4.01 GREASE SEAL, WASHER 00005835 258961 S024456 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 4.01 345747 41712011 128905 ADVISORS REALTY 80.93 UTILITY OVERPAYMENT REFUND 259166 425 MONROE AVE 5900.2015 CUSTOMER REFUND \ UTILITY BALANCE SHEET 80.93 345748 41712011 101479 AMERICAN SERVICES CORP. 192.32 EQUIPMENT REPAIR 259085 2362 5861.6180 CONTRACTED REPAIRS 192.32 345749 41712011 101115 AMERIPRIDE SERVICES 32.28 259086 033111 5421.6201 LAUNDRY 51.76 259086 033111 5621.6201 LAUNDRY 57.06 259086 033111 5841.6201 LAUNDRY 134.76 259086 033111 1470.6201 LAUNDRY 245.07 259086 033111 5861.6201 LAUNDRY 342.58 259086 033111 1551.6201 LAUNDRY 436.89 259086 033111 1470.6201 LAUNDRY 1,300.40 345750 41712011 103680 ARAMARK REFRESHMENT SRVCS 283.31 COFFEE 258856 419349 1550.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES VERNON OCCUPANCY GRILL 50TH ST OCCUPANCY YORK OCCUPANCY FIRE DEPT. GENERAL VERNON OCCUPANCY CITY HALL GENERAL FIRE DEPT. GENERAL CENTRAL SERVICES GENERAL R55CKREG LOG20000 CITY OF'EDINA. 4/5/2011 13:56:50 Council Check Register Page - 2 4/712011 --4/7/2011 i Check # Date Amount Supplier /;Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit 330.25 COFFEE 258857 419501 1550.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES CENTRAL SERVICES GENERAL 613.56 J 345751 41712011 100634 ASPEN EQUIPMENT CO. 477.92 SEAT 00005636 259130 10083664 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 477.92 345752 41712011 102573 ASSOCIATION OF RECYCLING MANAG 20.00 MEMBERSHIP = SOLVEI WILMOT 259087 2011 5952.6105 DUES & SUBSCRIPTIONS RECYCLING 20.00 345753 417 @011 126019. B 8 B.PRODUCTS 1 RIGS AND SQUA 2,395.96 SQUAD BUILD -UP 258962 3482' 421400.6710 EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT POLICE EQUIPMENT 2,395.96 SQUAD BUILD -UP 258963 3484 421400.6710 EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT POLICE EQUIPMENT 181.82 VEHICLE REPAIRS 258964 3483 1400.6215 EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE POLICE DEPT. GENERAL 4,973.74 345754 41712011 125300 BAUMAN,.DOUG 109.14 MILEAGE REIMBURSEMENT 259067 033111 5510.6107 MILEAGE OR ALLOWANCE ARENA ADMINISTRATION 109.14 345755 41712011 126996 BCA - CJTE 200:00 BCA TRAINING 258858 215 1400.6104 CONFERENCES & SCHOOLS POLICE DEPT. GENERAL j 200.00 345756 41712011 101355 BELLBOY CORPORATION 2,173.75 258916 57589700 5842.5513 .. COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 36.55. 258917 -• ,57488400 5842:5515 COST., OF GOODS SOLD'MIX YORK SELLING 114.02 258918 84980100 '5842.5.515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX YORK SELLING 135.21 258919 ' 84980200 5862.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX VERNON SELLING 1,005.05 259027 . `57589800. _ 5862.5513; -, R. COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 437.18 259228 57690700 5842:5513. COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 173.10 259229 57702300 5862.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR VERNON SELLING 4,074.86 345757 41712011 100648 BERTELSON OFFICE PRODUCTS - 91.40 - OFFICE SUPPLIES 258859 WO- 683558 -1 1550.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES CENTRAL SERVICES GENERAL 65.54 OFFICE SUPPLIES 258860 WO- 682804 -1 1550.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES CENTRAL SERVICES GENERAL ? 276.25 OFFICE SUPPLIES 259088 0E- 252060 -1 5862.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES VERNON SELLING 433.19 346768 4!712011 119679 BIXBY PORTABLE TOILET SERVICE CITY OF EDINA 4/5/2011 13:56:50 R55CKREG LOG20000. Council Check Register Page - 3 4/7/2011 -41712011 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit 68.69 TOILET SERVICE 00001221 259131 24655 1399.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES PW SPECIAL PROJECTS 68.69 345759 4/712011 128901 BLOOMINGTON KIDS SAFARI 110.00 OVERPAYMENT ATEDINBOROUGH PK 259111 REIMBURSEMENT 5601.4541 GENERAL ADMISSIONS EB /CL REVENUES 110.00 345760 4712011 122688 BMK SOLUTIONS 34.95 OFFICE I SUPPLIES 00001437 258965 67366 1260.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES ENGINEERING GENERAL 66.90 OFFICE SUPPLIES ;- 00001437 258965 67366 1552.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES CENT SVC PW BUILDING 101.85 345761 4/712011 119351 - BOURGET IMPORTS 419.00 259230 102970 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 419.00 345762 41712011 100659 BOYER TRUCK PARTS 993.72 SPRING I ASSEMBLY, U -BOLTS 00005842 258966 503426 4553.6530 REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 993.72 345763 41712011 120935 CAMPBELL KNUTSON- 12,000.86 LEGAL I 259167 2851G -1/11 1195.6131 PROFESSIONAL SERV - LEGAL - LEGAL SERVICES 4,803.92 I. LEGAL 259168 2851G -2/11 1195.6131 PROFESSIONAL SERV - LEGAL LEGAL SERVICES 16,804.78 345764 41712011 119455 CAPITOL BEVERAGE SALES 62.80 259028 15640 5842.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX YORK SELLING 3,677.50 259029 15641 5842.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER YORK SELLING 5,054.90 259231 15639 5842.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER YORK SELLING 46.60 259232 15635 5822.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX 50TH ST SELLING 8,841.80 345765 41712011 116683 CAT & FIDDLE BEVERAGE 122.00 259233 89604 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING 574.00 259234 89567 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 696.00 345766 417/2011 112561 CENTERPOINT ENERGY, 2,742.75 5546504 I -1 258827 5546504 -3/11 1470.6186 HEAT FIRE DEPT. GENERAL 5,298.14 :5591458 I -4 258828 5591458 -3/11 1551.6186 HEAT CITY HALL GENERAL 3,304.64 8034001 -1 258904 8034001 -3/11 1552.6186 HEAT- CENT SVC PW BUILDING 45.96 5528973 -0 259014 5528973 -3/11 1552.6186 HEAT CENT SVC PW BUILDING l 4/5/2011 13:56:50 Page- 4 Subledger Account Description Business Unit HEAT PSTF OCCUPANCY HEAT PSTF FIRE TOWER FUEL OIL PSTF FIRE TOWER GENERAL SUPPLIES ARENA BLDG/GROUNDS COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER YORK SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER VERNON SELLING SEWER & WATER ART CENTER BLDG /MAINT CONTRACTED REPAIRS VERNON OCCUPANCY CONTRACTED REPAIRS 50TH ST OCCUPANCY CONTRACTED REPAIRS YORK OCCUPANCY GENERAL SUPPLIES RANGE TELEPHONE MAINT OF COURSE & GROUNDS TELEPHONE CLUB HOUSE TELEPHONE RICHARDS GOLF COURSE COST OF GOODS SOLD ART SUPPLY GIFT GALLERY SHOP CRAFT SUPPLIES ART CENTER ADMINISTRATION COST OF GOODS SOLD ART SUPPLY GIFT GALLERY SHOP PROFESSIONAL SERVICES ADAPTIVE RECREATION CITY OF EDINA R55CKREG LOG20000 Council Check Register 4f7/2011 - 4n12011 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No 1,871.93 5584304 -9 259089 5584304 -3111 7411.6186 34.75 5584310-6 259090 5584310 -3111 7413.6186 18.86 5590919 -6 259091 5590919 -3/11 7413.6582 13,317.23 345767 41712011 117187 CHEM SYSTEMS LTD 3,836.15 AUTO FLUSHERS 00008064 258861 516402 5511.6406 3,836.15 345768 41712011 119725 CHISAGO LAKES DISTRIBUTING CO 658.50 259030 441849 5842.5514 158.92 259031 441742 5862.5514 817.42 345769 4f712011 122084 CITY OF EDINA - UTILITIES 311.69 00113667 - 0120835016 258905 0120835016 -3/11 5111.6189 311.69 345770 4712011 100688 CITYWIDE WINDOW SERVICES INC 14.92 WINDOW CLEANING 259077 482972 5861.6180 16.49 WINDOW CLEANING 259077 482972 5821.6180 25.99 WINDOW CLEANING 259077 482972 5841.6180 57.40 345771 417/2011 120433 COMCAST 74.95 8772 10 614 0165667 259169 165667 -3/11 5424.6406 59.00 8772 10 614 0199138 259170 199138 -3/11 5422.6188 88.28 8772 10 614 0177449 259171 177449 -3111 5420.6188 82.60 8772 10 614 0164959 259277 164959 -3/11 5430.6188 304.83 345772 4f712011 100695 CONTINENTAL CLAY CO. 45.53 CLAY 00009021 258862 INV000058940 5120.5510 569.22 CLAY 00009021 258862 INV000058940 5110.6564 68.98 KEMPER TOOLS, KILN SHELF 00009180 258863 R200369787 5120.5510 683.73 346773 4!712011 101704 COOK, BARBARA 405.11 ADAPTIVE CONTRACTED SERVICES 259225 11 -1566 1629.6103 405.11 345774 4f712011 100697 COOL AIR MECHANICAL INC. 4/5/2011 13:56:50 Page- 4 Subledger Account Description Business Unit HEAT PSTF OCCUPANCY HEAT PSTF FIRE TOWER FUEL OIL PSTF FIRE TOWER GENERAL SUPPLIES ARENA BLDG/GROUNDS COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER YORK SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER VERNON SELLING SEWER & WATER ART CENTER BLDG /MAINT CONTRACTED REPAIRS VERNON OCCUPANCY CONTRACTED REPAIRS 50TH ST OCCUPANCY CONTRACTED REPAIRS YORK OCCUPANCY GENERAL SUPPLIES RANGE TELEPHONE MAINT OF COURSE & GROUNDS TELEPHONE CLUB HOUSE TELEPHONE RICHARDS GOLF COURSE COST OF GOODS SOLD ART SUPPLY GIFT GALLERY SHOP CRAFT SUPPLIES ART CENTER ADMINISTRATION COST OF GOODS SOLD ART SUPPLY GIFT GALLERY SHOP PROFESSIONAL SERVICES ADAPTIVE RECREATION R55CKREG LOG20000 CITY OF EDINA Council Check Register 4/7/2011 -4r712011 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description 1 667 70 COMPRESSOR REPAIR 00008084 258864 73942 5521.6180 CONTRACTED REPAIRS 5101.4413 ART WORK SOLD 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS 1495.4111 BUILDING PERMITS 05508.1705 CONSTR. IN PROGRESS 5511.6511 CLEANING SUPPLIES 5101.4413 5862.5514 5862.5514 5842.5515 5822.5514 5862.5515 5862.5514 5842.5514 ART WORK SOLD COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX COST OF GOODS 'SOLD BEER COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER 1553.6556 TOOLS 1,667.70 TOOLS 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS 1400.6551 346775 41712011 124487 CORDES, ANN 50.23 ART WORK SOLD 259017 032911 50.23 - 345776 41712011 104310 COUNTRY ENTERPRISES INC. 224.44 PLOW MARKERS 00005774 259132 23858 224.44 345777 41712011 105569 CUSTOM REMODELERS 89.00 PERMIT REFUND 259078 ED105645 89.00 345778 41712011 102791 D2 SERVICES INC. 3,111.00 SCADA SYSTEM WORK 00005430 258967 10034 3,111.00 345779 41712011 104020 DALCO 649.91 DISINFECTANT, GLOVES 00008078 258865 2313253 649.91 345780 41712011 103176 DANICIC, JOHN 57.20 ART WORK SOLD 259018 032911 57.20 345781 4/712011 102478 DAY DISTRIBUTING CO. 1,040.00 258920 593572 2,311.95 258921 593291 22.40 258922 594121 220.30 259032 594118 22.40 259033 594116 916.00 259034 594117 1,914.90 259235 594120 - 6,447.95 345782 41712011 100718 DELEGARD TOOL CO. 344.34 BLOW GUNS, WRENCH 00005844 259133 568407 23.30 RIVETER 00005844 259134 568434 67.66 BLOW GUNS, PICKUP SET - 00005844 259135 569084 47.54 GUN REPAIR TOOL 259136 568833 5101.4413 ART WORK SOLD 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS 1495.4111 BUILDING PERMITS 05508.1705 CONSTR. IN PROGRESS 5511.6511 CLEANING SUPPLIES 5101.4413 5862.5514 5862.5514 5842.5515 5822.5514 5862.5515 5862.5514 5842.5514 ART WORK SOLD COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX COST OF GOODS 'SOLD BEER COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER 1553.6556 TOOLS 1553.6556 TOOLS 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS 1400.6551 AMMUNITION 4/5/2011 13:56:50 Page - 5 Business Unit ARENA ICE MAINT ART CENTER REVENUES EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN INSPECTIONS WM -508 SCADA SYSTEM ARENA BLDG/GROUNDS ART CENTER REVENUES VERNON SELLING VERNON SELLING YORK SELLING 50TH ST SELLING VERNON SELLING VERNON SELLING YORK SELLING EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN POLICE DEPT. GENERAL CITY OF EDINA 4/5/2011 13:56:50 R55CKREG LOG20000 - Council Check Register Page- 6 i 417/2011 —4/7/2011 - Check # Date Amount Supplier/ Explanation PO # — Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit 482.84 345783 41712011 101947 DEPARTMENT.OF PUBLIC SAFETY 1,920.00 CJDN CONNECTION 259083 _.; P07MD027060011 1400.6160 DATA PROCESSING POLICE DEPT. GENERAL 1,920.00 345784 4/712011 128869 DEVRIES, GRETCHEN 62.00 REFUND FOR BASKETBALL 259068 032911 1600.4390.15 _ GEN ADAPTIVE REC PARK ADMIN. GENERAL 62.00 349785 41712011 102831 DEX MEDIA EAST INC. 507.40. 110311893 259278 110311893 -3111 5410.6122 ADVERTISING OTHER GOLF ADMINISTRATION 507.40 345786 41712011 115356 DIEKMAN, LARRY 181.75 UNIFORM PURCHASE 259137 040111 1301.6201 LAUNDRY GENERAL MAINTENANCE 181.75 . 345787 41712011 124358 DILL-, SARAH 36.40 ART WORK SOLD 259019 032911 5101.4413 ART WORK SOLD ART CENTER REVENUES 36.40 345788 41712011 128860 DOJE'S FORENSIC SUPPLIES INC. 36.70 FORENSIC SUPPLIES 258906- . 16920 1400.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES POLICE DEPT. GENERAL I. 36.70 345789 41712011 100730 DORSEY & WHITNEY LLP 100.00 SOUTHDALE TAX INCREMENT - 259015. 1713602 1000.1303 DUE FROM HRA GENERAL FUND BALANCE SHEET 100.00 345790 41712011 100731 DPC INDUSTRIES 4,344.81 CHEMICALS 00001215 258968 82700333 -11 5915.6586 WATER TREATMENT SUPPLIES WATER TREATMENT 4,344.81 345791 41712011 124503 EDEN PRAIRIE WINLECTRIC CO. 18.44 CONE NUTS 00005564 258969 07868500 1314.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES STREET RENOVATION 18.44 345792 41712011 106340 EDINA CAR WASH 145.89 FEB CAR WASHES 258866 4562 1553.6238 CAR WASH 'EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 145.89 R55CKREG LOG20000 CITY OF EDINA 4/5/2011 13:56:50 Council Check Register Page - 7 417/2011 - 4/7/2011 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit 345793 41712011 100744 EDINA CHAMBER OF COMMERCE - 50.00 GMM MARCH 2011 258970 29812 1120.6105 DUES & SUBSCRIPTIONS ADMINISTRATION 50.00 345794 4/7/2011 103694 EDINALARM INC. 335.05 ED001224 ALARM SERVICE 259172 65297 5420.6250 ALARM SERVICE CLUB HOUSE - 335.05 ED001290 ALARM SERVICE 259173 65298 5420.6250 ALARM SERVICE CLUB HOUSE 670.10 346795 417/2011 102340 EDMUNDS, LIZ 104.40 259198 967 5842.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX YORK SELLING 104.40 345796 417/2011 100549 ELECTRIC PUMP INC. 155.34 O -RINGS 00001610 259138 0043794 -IN 5921.6406 1 GENERAL SUPPLIES SANITARY LIFT STATION MAINT ' 155.34 745797 41712011 102357 ENVIROMATIC CORPORATION OF AME 408.17 HOODNENT SYSTEM CLEANING 00006250 259174 212071 5421.6102 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES GRILL 408.17 345798 41712011 100,146 FACTORY MOTOR PARTS COMPANY 10.38 FILTER 00005757 258971 70- 047751 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 343.54 FILTERS, JOINT KITS 00005757 258972 69- 033977 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 147.67 CV SHAFTS 00005757 258973 1- 3598307 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN -. 190.67 CV SHAFTS 00005757 258974 69- 034043 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 145.25 POWER STEERING PUMP 00005757 258975 69- 034185 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 37.88 OIL PAN SEAL 00005757 258976 69- 034170 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS` EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 216.81 ROTORS 00005757 258977 69- 034161 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 184.83 STEERING KNUCKLES, RODS 00005757 258978 69- 034302 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 427.48: ADJUSTING ARMS 00005757 259139 1- 3601233 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN - 1,704.51 345799 4/712011 102101 FEDEX OFFICE 15.75 MAILING 00006364 258908 062200021534 5440.6122 ADVERTISING OTHER PRO SHOP RETAIL SALES 15.75 345800 417/2011 126004 FERGUSON WATERWORKS 815.19 CALIBRATION 00003513 259175 S01295612.001 1470.6180 CONTRACTED REPAIRS FIRE DEPT. GENERAL 815.19 345801 41712011 116492 FINANCE AND COMMERCE R55CKREG LOG20000 CITY OF EDINA 4/5/2011 13:56:50 Council Check Register Page - 8 4n/2011 - 4/7/2011 Check # Date .. Amount Supplier / Explanation - PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit 140.85 AD FOR BID 258867 22272663 1120.6120 ADVERTISING LEGAL ADMINISTRATION 86.06 AD FOR BID - 258868 22272337 1120.6120 ADVERTISING LEGAL ADMINISTRATION 226.91 ' _ 345802 41712011 101512 FLEXIBLE PIPE TOOL COMPANY 8,090.01 CHAIN FLAIL NOZZLES 00001506 7259140 14086 5923:6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES COLLECTION SYSTEMS 8.090.01 _ - 345803 41712011 106351 FOSTER, REBECCA 113.22 MILEAGE REIMBURSEMENT 259141 040111"- 1260.6107 MILEAGE OR ALLOWANCE ENGINEERING GENERAL 113.22 345804 41712011 117874 FOURTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT 442.62 CITATIONS 2011 259084. °-- 201,141 =" , 1400.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES POLICE DEPT. GENERAL 442.62 345805. 41712011 122614 FRUCHI 279.00 CONCESSION PRODUCT 259112 .. 1 -1692 5620.5510 COST OF GOODS SOLD : EDINBOROUGH PARK 279.00 345806_ 41712011 105508 GEMPLER'S INC. 56.32 PENS 00001594: 258979 1017054362 5913.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES DISTRIBUTION 56.32 345807 41712011 103316 GOETSCH; SAM L. 2,143.52 INTERPRETER 259069 033111 4078.6103 - PROFESSIONAL SERVICES INCLUSION PROGRAM 2,143.52 345808 41712011 100781" GRAFIXSHOPPE 2,141.00 KITS FOR NEW SQUADS 258869 74182 421400.6710 EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT POLICE EQUIPMENT :. 26.07 SQUAD GRAPHICS 00005576 259142. 74213 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN - 2,167:07 345809 4/712011 101103 GRAINGER 8.40 TOGGLE SWITCH 00001633 258980 9494461966 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 295.34 STRETCH -WRAP, RATCHET STRAPS0001591 258981 9490070498 1399.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES PW SPECIAL PROJECTS 40.27 PROPANE CYLINDERS 00001642 258982 9467806320 1314.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES STREET RENOVATION 167.17 GLOVES, BATTERIES 258983 9465787431 ' 1314.6406 ''GENERAL SUPPLIES STREET RENOVATION 199.17 HAMMER DRILL 258984 ' 9465787423 1314.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES STREET RENOVATION 288.22 EAR PLUGS, TORCHES 258985 9466167286 1314.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES STREET RENOVATION 63.09 HALOGEN LAMPS, FUSES 259092 9494765653 7412.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES PSTF RANGE 43.20 EARPLUG DISPENSER 259093 9498671818 7412.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES PSTF RANGE CITY OF EDINA 4/5/2011 13:56:50 R55CKREG LOG20000, Council Check.Register Page - 9 4n12011 — 4/7/2011 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit 166.39 CABLE TIES, BULBS 00002277 259113 9474615904 5620.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES EDINSOROUGH PARK - 392.71 GLOVES, EARPLUGS, WRAPS :. 00001600 259143 9495887615 1399.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES PW SPECIAL PROJECTS 1,663.96 345810 41712011 102202 GRAND VIEW LODGE 260.76 CONFERENCE LODGING 259279 CAN-AM - 1400.6104 CONFERENCES & SCHOOLS POLICE DEPT. GENERAL - 260.76 345811 41712011 124711 GRANDVIEW TIRE & AUTO - CAHILL 54.95 ALIGNMENT 06005847 259144 23509 1553.6180 CONTRACTED REPAIRS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 54.95 345812 417/2011 102217 GRAPE BEGINNINGS INC 98.25 259199 128244 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 40.00- 259200 128246 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 98.25 259236 128243 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING 1,187.75 259237 128245 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 1,344.25 346813 41712011 101618 GRAUSAM, STEVE 236.13 MILEAGE REIMBURSEMENT 259094 033111 5840.6107 MILEAGE OR ALLOWANCE LIQUOR YORK GENERAL 236.13 345814 41712011 100783 GRAYBAR ELECTRIC CO. INC. 7,814.70 LIGHT POLES 00001014 259145 952654437 1322.6185 LIGHT & POWER - STREET LIGHTING ORNAMENTAL 7,814.70 345815 41712011 101576 HEGGIES.PIZZA 506.25 PIZZA 259176 1708156 5421.5510 COST OF GOODS SOLD GRILL 506.25 345816 417/2011 103585 HENNEPIN COUNTY HOUSING DEPART 888.00 REHAB LOAN PAYBACK 259177 5536 MALIBU DR 2101.4205 FEDERAL AID CDBG REVENUES 888.00 345817 41712011 106436 HENNEPIN COUNTY INFORMATION 160.31 TECHNICAL SUPPORT 259082 110362025 1400.6160 DATA PROCESSING POLICE DEPT. GENERAL 160.31 345818 4/712011 100801 HENNEPIN COUNTY TREASURER 1,740.50 FEB 2011 ROOM & BOARD 259071 20112 - EDINA 1195.6225 BOARD & ROOM PRISONER LEGAL SERVICES 1,740.50 CITY OF EDINA 415/2011 13:56:50 R55CKREG LOG20000 Council Check Register Page - 10 417/2011 - 417/2011 Check # Date Amount Supplier/ Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit 346819 41712011 127282 HEUN ENTERPRISES INC. 369.00 259035 2484 5862.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR VERNON SELLING 369.00 345820 4/712011 116680 HEWLETT - PACKARD COMPANY 1,638.92 PCS 00004312 259070 49167120 1554.6710 EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT CENT SERV GEN - MIS 1,638.92 345821 41712011 103753 HILLYARD INC - MINNEAPOLIS 495.59 SOAP 00002295 259114 6686659 5620.6511 CLEANING SUPPLIES EDINBOROUGH PARK 550.69 DUSTERS, CLEANERS 00002090 259115 6682902 5620.6511 CLEANING SUPPLIES EDINBOROUGH PARK 220.32- RETURN 00002272 259116 8193826 5620.6511 CLEANING SUPPLIES EDINBOROUGH PARK 825.96 345822 4!712011 100805 HIRSHFIELD'S 32.03 PAINT 258870 003433049 5410.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES GOLF ADMINISTRATION 25.52 PAINT 258871 003433290 5424.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES RANGE 35.93 PAINT 259095 003432896 5861.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES VERNON OCCUPANCY 93.48 345823 41712011 104375 HOHENSTEINS INC. 338.00 259036 554017 5822.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER BOTH ST SELLING 1,738.50 259201 554412 5842.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER YORK SELLING 1,731.00 259238 554516 5862.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER VERNON SELLING 3,807.50 345824 41712011 126816 HOME DEPOT CREDIT SERVICES 53.61 PUB WORKS /ENG EXPENSES 258986 022811 1325.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES STREET NAME SIGNS 72.70 PUB WORKS /ENG EXPENSES 258986 022811 1260.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES ENGINEERING GENERAL 315.01 PUB WORKS /ENG EXPENSES 258986 022811 1646.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES BUILDING MAINTENANCE 439.11 PUB WORKS/ENG EXPENSES 258986 022811 5913.6556 TOOLS DISTRIBUTION 880.43 345825 417/2011 128876 HOVELSRUD, MARJORY 946.19 AMBULANCE OVERPAYMENT 259065 033111 1470.4329 AMBULANCE FEES FIRE DEPT. GENERAL 946.19 345826 4/712011 121629 ICLEI 600.00 ICLEI MEMBERSHIP 259016 033011 1122.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES ENERGY & ENVIRONMENT COMM 600.00 R55CKREG LOG20000 CITY OF EDINA Council Check Register 4/7/2011 - 41712011 Check # Date Amount Supplier I Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description 345827 41712011 126093 ILVONEN, ILONA 159.90 ART WORK SOLD 259020 032911 5101.4413 ART WORK SOLD 4/5/2011 13:56:50 Page - 11 ART CENTER REVENUES 1120.6120 ADVERTISING LEGAL ADMINISTRATION 2340.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES DWI FORFEITURE 1646.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES BUILDING MAINTENANCE 1322.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES STREET LIGHTING ORNAMENTAL 1330.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES TRAFFIC SIGNALS 1470.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES FIRE DEPT. GENERAL 1419.6102 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES RESERVE PROGRAM 5862.5515 159.90 VERNON SELLING 5822.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX 345828 4/712011 5822.5514 116191 INSTY- PRINTS 50TH ST SELLING 5862.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER 419.48 TABS FOR CITY CODE 259096 88436 5862.5515 419.48 VERNON SELLING 5862.5514 COST-OF GOODS SOLD BEER 345829 417/2011 5842.5514 103193 INTOXIMETERS INC. YORK SELLING 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 130.00 INTOX REPAIR 258872 328149 5862.5515 130.00 VERNON SELLING 5862.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR 346830 417/2011 5862.5512 101861 J.H..LARSON COMPANY VERNON SELLING 5822.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR 75.58 ELECTRICAL SUPPLIES 00001637 258987 4324839-01 126.68 ELECTRICAL SUPPLIES 00001637 258987 4324839 -01 75.16 TESTER, NUT DRIVER SET 00001640 258988 4324965 -01 123.94 GLOVES, BULBS 00001640 258988 4324965 -01 401.36 346831 41712011 101400 JAMES, WILLIAM F 100.00 POLICE SERVICE 258907 040111 100.00 345832 4/712011 100741 JJ TAYLOR DIST. OF MINN 18.00 258923 1509898 21.50 258924 1509899 4,197.67 258924 1509899 127.65- 259037 1519665 38.80 259202 1535238 . 53.80 259203 1535227 .7,323.57 259204 1535226 8,487.70 259239 1535237 20,013.39 345833 41712011 100835 JOHNSON BROTHERS LIQUOR CO. 124.54- 259205 491238 95.12 259240 1027207 66.74 259241 1027219 1,204.23 259242 1027222 1,484.29 259243 1027218 349.30 259244 1027212 591.94 259245 1027205 4/5/2011 13:56:50 Page - 11 ART CENTER REVENUES 1120.6120 ADVERTISING LEGAL ADMINISTRATION 2340.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES DWI FORFEITURE 1646.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES BUILDING MAINTENANCE 1322.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES STREET LIGHTING ORNAMENTAL 1330.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES TRAFFIC SIGNALS 1470.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES FIRE DEPT. GENERAL 1419.6102 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES RESERVE PROGRAM 5862.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX VERNON SELLING 5822.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX 50TH ST SELLING 5822.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER 50TH ST SELLING 5862.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER VERNON SELLING 5842.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX YORK SELLING 5862.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX VERNON SELLING 5862.5514 COST-OF GOODS SOLD BEER VERNON SELLING 5842.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER YORK SELLING 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING 5862.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR VERNON SELLING 5862.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX VERNON SELLING 5862.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR VERNON SELLING 5862.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR VERNON SELLING 5822.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR 50TH ST SELLING 5822.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR 50TH ST SELLING R55CKREG LOG20000 CITY OF EDINA 415/2011 13:56:50 Council Check Register Page - 12 ART WORK SOLD CONFERENCES & SCHOOLS ART WORK SOLD ART CENTER REVENUES TRAINING ART CENTER REVENUES COST OF GOODS - PRO SHOP PRO.SHOP RETAIL SALES MILEAGE OR ALLOWANCE COMMUNICATIONS GENERAL SUPPLIES - PW SPECIAL PROJECTS PROFESSIONAL SVCS - GOLF GOLF DOME PROGRAM AMBULANCE FEES CONTRACTED REPAIRS CONTRACTED REPAIRS FIRE DEPT. GENERAL EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 47/2011 - 47/2011 345834 41712011 102603 JONAS, LENORE Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit 2,146.57 259246 1027206 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING 410.36 259247 1027211 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING 2,378.73 259248 1027210 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 825.55 259249 1027215. 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 1,770.56 259250 1027216 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING ART WORK SOLD CONFERENCES & SCHOOLS ART WORK SOLD ART CENTER REVENUES TRAINING ART CENTER REVENUES COST OF GOODS - PRO SHOP PRO.SHOP RETAIL SALES MILEAGE OR ALLOWANCE COMMUNICATIONS GENERAL SUPPLIES - PW SPECIAL PROJECTS PROFESSIONAL SVCS - GOLF GOLF DOME PROGRAM AMBULANCE FEES CONTRACTED REPAIRS CONTRACTED REPAIRS FIRE DEPT. GENERAL EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 11,198.85 345834 41712011 102603 JONAS, LENORE 58.50 ART WORK SOLD 259021. 032911 5101.4413 58.50 345835 41712011 120296 KAASA; GUNNAR 661.80 TUITION REIMBURSEMENT 258989 032511 1281.6104 661.80 345836 4712011 122239 KANDIKO, GEORGIA 71.98 ART WORK SOLD 259022 032911 5101.4413. 71.98 345837 4/712011 116296 KING PAR CORPORATION 361.76 GOLF SPIKES 258873. 2550132 5440.5511 361.76 345838 4712011 119705 KLEIN, AARON 98.94 MILEAGE REIMBURSEMENT 259097 033011 2210.6107 98.94 345839 41712011 101573 KLIER'S NURSERY INC. 300.00 PALLETS 00001587 258874 5382 1399.6406 300.00 345840 41712011 115192 KNUDSON, DEBBIE 320.00 GOLF DOME KIDS CAMPS 259063 032911 5210.6132 320.00 345841 4712011 128883 KRONFELD, SUZY 1,076.80 AMBULANCE OVERPAYMENT 259066 033111 1470.4329 1,076.80 345842 41712011 116776 KUSTOM KARRIERS 112.50 TOW VEHICLE 00005650 259146 65726 1553.6180 116.94 TOW VEHICLE 00005848 259147 64980 1553.6180 ART WORK SOLD CONFERENCES & SCHOOLS ART WORK SOLD ART CENTER REVENUES TRAINING ART CENTER REVENUES COST OF GOODS - PRO SHOP PRO.SHOP RETAIL SALES MILEAGE OR ALLOWANCE COMMUNICATIONS GENERAL SUPPLIES - PW SPECIAL PROJECTS PROFESSIONAL SVCS - GOLF GOLF DOME PROGRAM AMBULANCE FEES CONTRACTED REPAIRS CONTRACTED REPAIRS FIRE DEPT. GENERAL EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN CITY OF EDINA 4/5/2011 13:56:50 R55CKREG LOG20000 Council Check Register Page - 13 4/7/2011 - 4/7/2011 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit 229.44 345843 41712011 101935 KUSTOM SIGNALS INC. 386.64 DWI FORFITURE 258875 437778 2340.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES DWI FORFEITURE 977.57 DWI - PROLASER III 259098 438498 2340.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES DWI FORFEITURE 1,364.21 345844 4/712011 128865 LAGERQUIST, MARY- 53.63 ART WORK SOLD 259023 032911 5101.4413 ART WORK SOLD ART CENTER REVENUES 53.63 345845 41712011 100852 LAWSON PRODUCTS INC. 155.55 SCREWS, NUTS, CLIPS 00001372, 258990 0118406 1314.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES STREET. RENOVATION 132.17 BLACK HOSE PROTECTOR 00001577 258991 0271480 5921.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES SANITARY LIFT STATION MAINT 109.92 LUBRITEMP, FITTINGS 00005845 259148 0302006 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN . 397.64 345846 41712011. 124418 LEXUS,OF WAYZATA 204.65 VEHICLE MAINTENANCE 258876 413693 1400.6215 EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE POLICE DEPT. GENERAL 204.65 345847 41712011 105726 LINDMAN, DAVID 42.82 BEST BUY SPEAKERS '. 258909 032811 1400.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES POLICE DEPT. GENERAL 42.82 345648 41712011 125208 LOVEJOY, NICHOLAS 108.68 MILEAGE REIMBURSEMENT 259117 040111 1554.6107 MILEAGE OR ALLOWANCE CENT SERV GEN - MIS 51.10 . CELL PHONE REIMBURSEMENT 259178 040411 1554.6230 SERVICE CONTRACTS EQUIPMENT CENT SERV GEN - MIS 159.78 345849 41712011 101792 LUBE -TECH 398.24 DELO GREASE 00005885-259149 1889063 1553.6584 LUBRICANTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 398.24 345850 41712011 112677 M. AMUNDSON LLP - 1,085.13 258925 105883 5862.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX VERNON SELLING 1,085.13 345851 417/2011 100864 MACQUEEN EQUIP INC. 87.94 LIFT LATCH LINKS -00005892 259150 2112354 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 57.89 SHAFT CLAMP, SEAL 00005892 259151 2112076 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 145.83 4/5/2011 13:56:50 Page - 14 Business Unit INSPECTIONS EDINBOROUGH PARK POLICE DEPT. GENERAL POLICE DEPT. GENERAL CLUB HOUSE CENTRAL SERVICES GENERAL CENTRAL SERVICES GENERAL UTILITY BALANCE SHEET v EDINBOROUGH PARK MAINT OF COURSE& GROUNDS ARENA' BLDG /GROUNDS ARENA BLDG/GROUNDS VERNON OCCUPANCY VERNON OCCUPANCY CITY OF EDINA R55CKREG LOG20000 - Council,Check Register, 47/2011 = 47/2011 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description 346862 47/2011 128864 MAHCO 490.00 SPANISHANSPECTOR SAFETY 259076 SEMINAR. 1495.6104 CONFERENCES & SCHOOLS 490.00 345853 4712011 120502 MANAGEMENT INFORMATION SOLUTIO " 2,932.65 ADVENTURE PEAK CAMERAS 259119 1660 5620.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES 2,932.65 345854 4712011 124000 MARTIN, KAYLIN 30.48 TRAINING EXPENSES 258910 . ,032811 1400.6104 CONFERENCES &SCHOOLS 40.80 TRAINING EXPENSES' 258910 032811 1400.6107 MILEAGE OR ALLOWANCE 71.28 345855 4712011 119209 MASTER TECHNOLOGY GROUP 635.00 FIRE ALARM REPAIR 259179 448854 5420.6180 CONTRACTED REPAIRS 635.00 346866 4712011 102600 MATRIX COMMUNICATIONS;INC 12,366.00 TELEPHONE EQUIP MAINT CONTRACT 259099 '0067594 -IN --,1550.6188 TELEPHONE 8,560.69 SOFTWARE MAINT CONTRACT 259100 59431 1550.6188 TELEPHONE 20,926.69 346857 4712011 128910 MAXWELL, DAVID 42.20 UTILITY OVERPAYMENT REFUND 259224 " -.3905 SUNNYSIDE 5900.2015' • CUSTOMER REFUND RD 42.20 346868 4712011 100875 MCCAREN DESIGNS INC. ' 1,683.28 PLANTS 00002271 259118 50953 5620.6620 TREES, FLOWERS, SHRUBS - 1,683.28 a _ - 345859 41712011 103944, MED COMPASS 210.00 PULMONARY TESTING 259180 17352 5422.6180 CONTRACTED REPAIRS 210.00 -346860 4712011 101483 MENARDS 22.21 MAINTENANCE SUPPLIES 00008070 258877 37752 5511.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES - 107.49 MAINTENANCE SUPPLIES 00008079 258878 427,,18 5511.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES 5.54 JOINT COMPOUND 259101 34563 5861.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES ` 9.77 SCREWS, TROWEL, WALLBOARD 259102 34891 5861.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES 145.01 4/5/2011 13:56:50 Page - 14 Business Unit INSPECTIONS EDINBOROUGH PARK POLICE DEPT. GENERAL POLICE DEPT. GENERAL CLUB HOUSE CENTRAL SERVICES GENERAL CENTRAL SERVICES GENERAL UTILITY BALANCE SHEET v EDINBOROUGH PARK MAINT OF COURSE& GROUNDS ARENA' BLDG /GROUNDS ARENA BLDG/GROUNDS VERNON OCCUPANCY VERNON OCCUPANCY CITY OF EDINA 4/5/2011 13:56:50 R55CKREG LOG20000 Council Check Register Page - 15 417/2011 -4 /72011 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit 345861 41712011 101987 MENARDS 83.64 BATTERIES, HOOKS 259120 74897 5620.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES EDINBOROUGH PARK 83.64 345862 41712011 104650 MICRO.CENTER 82.22 DVDS, BATTERIES 00003027 258911 3229960 1400.6160 DATA PROCESSING POLICE DEPT. GENERAL 82.22 345863 41712011 102873 MILLER, SUSAN 328.19 MILEAGE REIMBURSEMENT 259121 032511 5621.6107 MILEAGE OR ALLOWANCE EDINBOROUGH ADMINISTRATION 328.19 345864 417/2011 102582 MINN DEPT OF LABOR & INDUSTRY 100.00 ELEVATOR LICENSE 259181 B42ALR00087841 1470.6260 LICENSES & PERMITS FIRE DEPT. GENERAL - 100.00 346865 4/712011 100913 MINNEAPOLIS & SUBURBAN SEWER & 2,450.00 REPLACE WATER SERVICE 00001663 258992 33794 5913.6180 CONTRACTED REPAIRS DISTRIBUTION 2,572.50 REPLACE WATER SERVICE 00001602 258993 33798 5913.6180 CONTRACTED REPAIRS DISTRIBUTION 1,102.50 EXCAVATE FOR WATERMAIN BREA90001613 259152 33802 5913.6180 CONTRACTED REPAIRS DISTRIBUTION 6,125.00 345866 417/2011 101684 MINNESOTA CHIEFS OF POLICE ASS 58.78 PERMITS TO AQUIRE 259073 2937 1400.6575 PRINTING POLICE DEPT. GENERAL 58.78 345867 417/2011 117837 MINNESOTA RURAL WATER ASSOCIAT 250.00 TRAINING SESSION (2) 259276 040411 5919.6104 CONFERENCES & SCHOOLS TRAINING 250.00 345868 41712.011 100908 MINNESOTA WANNER CO. 25.65 FABRICATE STEEL PLATE 00001584 258994 0087743 -IN 1322.6530 REPAIR PARTS STREET LIGHTING ORNAMENTAL 25.65 345869 41712011 121491 MORRIE'S PARTS & SERVICE GROUP 427.81 CONTROL 00005804 258995 490584F6W 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 118.55 SHOCK ABSORBERS 00005813 258996 490984F6W 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 17.45 WIRE ASSEMBLY 00005841 259153 490895F6W 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 263.76 CONDENSER ASSEMBLY 00005898 259154 491151F6W 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN _ 827.57 4/5/2011 13:56:50 Page- 16 Business Unit POLICE DEPT. GENERAL EDINBOROUGH PARK 50TH ST SELLING YORK SELLING PSTF ADMINISTRATION FIRE DEPT. GENERAL POLICE DEPT. GENERAL ART SUPPLY GIFT GALLERY SHOP ART SUPPLY GIFT GALLERY SHOP GOLF ADMINISTRATION ART CENTER REVENUES PW SPECIAL PROJECTS CITY OF EDINA R55CKREG LOG20000 Council Check. Register 4/7/2011 -4M2011 Check # Date Amount Supplier./ Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description 345870 417/2011 116368 NATIONAL ANIMAL CONTROL ASSOC. 525.00 CONFERENCE FEE -TIM HUNTER 259280 NACA 100 1400.6104 CONFERENCES & SCHOOLS 525.00 345871 4/712011 106662 NET LITIN DISTRIBUTORS 785.66 PLASTICWARE FOR RESALE 259122 109480 5620.5510 COST OF GOODS SOLD 785.66 - 345872 417/2011 100076 NEW FRANCE WINE CO. 518.50 259038 65446 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 956.50 259251 65447 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 1,475.00 345873 41712011 124528 NORTHEAST.WISCONSIN TECHNICAL 1,650.00 TASER RE- CERT'COURSE 259103 22074969 7410.6218 EDUCATION PROGRAMS 1,650.00 - 345874 41712011 102888 NORTHERN DOOR COMPANY 378.79 RECEIVERS 00003546 "259182 44061 1470.6530 REPAIR PARTS 378.79 345875 41712011 117830 NORTHLAND BUSINESS SYSTEMS INC 149.56 REPAIR RECORDER 258879•' IN26382._ ,..- 1400.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES, 149.56 345876 4/712011 100933 NORTHWEST GRAPHIC SUPPLY CO. 35.86 CANVAS 00009175 258880 40230501 5120.5510 COST OF GOODS SOLD 32.87 CANVAS 00009162 258881 ;- ; 40046401. - 5120.5510 . COST OF GOODS SOLD 68.73 345877, 4712011 103578 OFFICE:D_ EPOT 367.67 OFFICE CHAIRS , 00006034--'258882 1326172028 5410.6513 OFFICE SUPPLIES 367.67 345878 41712011 124089 OHMANN, NANCY 153.40 ART WORK SOLD 259024 032911. 5101.4413 ART WORK SOLD 153.40 345879 4712011 100936 OLSEN COMPANIES 181.47 TIE -DOWN STRAPS 00001592 258883 631204 1399.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES 181.47 4/5/2011 13:56:50 Page- 16 Business Unit POLICE DEPT. GENERAL EDINBOROUGH PARK 50TH ST SELLING YORK SELLING PSTF ADMINISTRATION FIRE DEPT. GENERAL POLICE DEPT. GENERAL ART SUPPLY GIFT GALLERY SHOP ART SUPPLY GIFT GALLERY SHOP GOLF ADMINISTRATION ART CENTER REVENUES PW SPECIAL PROJECTS Subledger Account Description EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT EQUIPMENT. REPLACEMENT GENERAL SUPPLIES GENERAL SUPPLIES ART WORK SOLD COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE SOLICITOR PERMITS MILEAGE OR ALLOWANCE GENERAL SUPPLIES, CONFERENCES & SCHOOLS MILEAGE OR ALLOWANCE MEETING EXPENSE MILEAGE OR'ALLOWANCE MILEAGE OR ALLOWANCE MEETING EXPENSE MEETING' EXPENSE MILEAGE OR ALLOWANCE OFFICE SUPPLIES - CONFERENCES & SCHOOLS MILEAGE OR ALLOWANCE MILEAGE OR ALLOWANCE MILEAGE OR ALLOWANCE GENERAL SUPPLIES 4/5/2011 13:56:50 Page - 17 Business Unit POLICE EQUIPMENT POLICE EQUIPMENT POLICE EQUIPMENT PW SPECIAL PROJECTS PW SPECIAL PROJECTS ART CENTER REVENUES 50TH ST SELLING VERNON SELLING YORK SELLING POLICE DEPT. GENERAL FINANCE PUBLIC HEALTH CITY COUNCIL GENERAL (BILLING) PLANNING ASSESSING ADMINISTRATION ADMINISTRATION COMMUNICATIONS CITY- COUNCIL ARENA ADMINISTRATION PLANNING PLANNING ENGINEERING GENERAL PARK ADMIN..GENERAL ARENA BLDG/GROUNDS CITY OF EDINA R55CKREG LOG20000 Council Check Register r 4/7/2011 - 4/7/2011 - Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No 346880 417/2011 103624 P & L AUTOMOTIVE INC. 208.41 WINDOW TINTING 259079 212648 421400.6710 208.41 WINDOW TINTING 259080 212649 421400.6710 208.41 WINDOW TINTING 259081 212650 421400.6710 625.23 345881 4/712011 126863 PALLET SERVICE CORPORATION 360.70 PALLETS, 00001590- 258997 64081 1399.6406 1,593.51 PALLETS 00001590 258998 64101 1399.6406 1,954.21 345882 417/2011 102440 PASS, GRACE 59.15 ART WORK SOLD 259025 032911 5101.4413 59.15 345883 41712011 100347 PAUSTIS & SONS _ 198.25 259039 8299379 -IN 5822.5513 3,534.74 259206 8299381 -IN " 5862.5513 4,230.50 259252 8299372 -IN 5842.5513 7,963.49 - 345884 41712011 119219 PC /NAMETAG- '' 48.57 SOLICITOR BADGES 258884 15374365 1400.4128 48.57 345885 41712011 100950.. PETTY CASH 4.08 259123 040111 1160.6107 5.35 259123 040111 1490.6406 " 10.00 259123 040111 1100.6104 10.71 259123 040111 5910.6107 11.34 259123 040111 1140.6106 12.00 259123 040111 1190.6107 12.00 259123 040111 1120.6107 13.95 259123 040111 1120.6106 15.00 259123 040111 2210.6106 " 18.36 259123 040111 1100.6107 19.62 259123 040111 5510.6513 - 20.50 259123 040111 1140.6104 22.44 259123 040.111 1140.6107 26.52 259123 040111 1260.6107 28.00 259123 040111 1600.6107 30.55 259123 040111 5511.6406 Subledger Account Description EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT EQUIPMENT. REPLACEMENT GENERAL SUPPLIES GENERAL SUPPLIES ART WORK SOLD COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE SOLICITOR PERMITS MILEAGE OR ALLOWANCE GENERAL SUPPLIES, CONFERENCES & SCHOOLS MILEAGE OR ALLOWANCE MEETING EXPENSE MILEAGE OR'ALLOWANCE MILEAGE OR ALLOWANCE MEETING EXPENSE MEETING' EXPENSE MILEAGE OR ALLOWANCE OFFICE SUPPLIES - CONFERENCES & SCHOOLS MILEAGE OR ALLOWANCE MILEAGE OR ALLOWANCE MILEAGE OR ALLOWANCE GENERAL SUPPLIES 4/5/2011 13:56:50 Page - 17 Business Unit POLICE EQUIPMENT POLICE EQUIPMENT POLICE EQUIPMENT PW SPECIAL PROJECTS PW SPECIAL PROJECTS ART CENTER REVENUES 50TH ST SELLING VERNON SELLING YORK SELLING POLICE DEPT. GENERAL FINANCE PUBLIC HEALTH CITY COUNCIL GENERAL (BILLING) PLANNING ASSESSING ADMINISTRATION ADMINISTRATION COMMUNICATIONS CITY- COUNCIL ARENA ADMINISTRATION PLANNING PLANNING ENGINEERING GENERAL PARK ADMIN..GENERAL ARENA BLDG/GROUNDS CITY OF EDINA 415/2011 13:56:50 R55CKREG LOG20000 Council Check Register Page - 18 4M2011 - 4!712011 Check # Date Amount Supplier I Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit 30.66 259123 040111 1600.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES PARK ADMIN. GENERAL 32.00 259123 040111 5840.6107 MILEAGE OR ALLOWANCE LIQUOR YORK GENERAL 34.24 259123 040111 1100.6106 MEETING EXPENSE CITY COUNCIL 39.00 259123 040111 1190.6106 MEETING EXPENSE ASSESSING 49.00 259123 040111 5860.6107 MILEAGE OR ALLOWANCE VERNON LIQUOR GENERAL 58.91 259123 040111 5841.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES YORK OCCUPANCY 118.54 259123 040111 2210.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES COMMUNICATIONS 167.22 259123 040111 1120.6104 CONFERENCES & SCHOOLS ADMINISTRATION 789.99 345886 41712011 100743 PHILLIPS WINE & SPIRITS 312.00 258927 2045465 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 2.91- 259207 3456135 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING 32.00- 259208 3456136 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 2,681.15 259253 2048290 5862.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR VERNON SELLING 1,596.69 259254 2048284 5822.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR 50TH ST SELLING 1,523.70 259255 2048286 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING 447.07 259256 2048285 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING 733.79 259257 2048288 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 2,071.18 259258 2048289 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 9,330.67 345887 41712011 128727 PINE PRODUCTS INC. 480.00 PALLETS 00001586 258885 50178 1399.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES PW SPECIAL PROJECTS 90.00 PALLETS 00001586 258886 50197 1399.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES PW SPECIAL PROJECTS 570.00 345888 417/2011 124176 PINNACLE DISTRIBUTING 14.00 258926 12089 5842.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX YORK SELLING 14.00 345889 41712011 128902 PLAY WITH A PURPOSE 596.88 GREAT HALL TOYS 259124 8279261 5620.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES EDINBOROUGH PARK 596.88 345890 4f712011 119620 POMP'S TIRE SERVICE INC. 413.48 TIRES 00005758 259155 318246 1553.6583 TIRES & TUBES EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 413.48 346891 41712011 100961 POSTMASTER - USPS 2,600.00 PERMIT #939 UTILITY BILLING 259223 040411 5910.6235 POSTAGE GENERAL (BILLING) 2,600.00 Subledger Account Description GENERAL SUPPLIES ALARM SERVICE 4/5/2011 13:56:50 Page - 19 Business Unit POLICE DEPT. GENERAL ARENA BLDG/GROUNDS COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR YORK SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR 50TH ST SELLING CITY OF EDINA R55CKREG L0620000 50TH ST SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR VERNON SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE _ 50TH ST SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING Council Check Register YORK SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 417/2011 - 417!2011 Check # Date Amount Supplier! Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No 345892 41712011 128861 PRIMARY PRODUCTS COMPANY " 178.50 NITRLE GLOVES 258912 44841 1400.6406 178.50 " 345893 41712011 103094. PROTECTION,ONE 169.15 ALARM MONITORING 00008086 258887 12743654 -3/11. 5511.6250 169.15 345894 41712011 -160971 QUALITY WINE 2,602.53 259040 437516 -00 5842.5512 616.26 259041 437519 -00 5822.5512 498.27 259042 437602 -00 5822.5513 74.93 259043 437603 -00 5822.5513 1,272.63 259044 437518 -00 5862.5512 106.16- 259045 429219 -00 5822.5513 752.64 259209 437600 -00 5862.5513 1,313.86 259210. 437601 -00 5862.5513 30.00- 259211 436471 -00 5842.5513 392.01 259259 436759 -00 _ 5842.5513 18.60 259260 437597 -CO 5842.5513 511.20 259261 437599 -00 5842.5513 1,270.60 259262 437598 -00 5842.5513 9,187.37 345895 417/2011 123898 QWEST 63.19 952 922 -2444 258829 2444 -3111 1550.6188 114.21 952 920 -8166 258830 8166 -3/11 1550.6188 40.24 952 922 -9246 259074 9246 -3/11 1400.6188 55.76 952 929 -0297 259156 0297 -3/11 4090.6188 338.70 952 927 -8861 259157 8861 -3/11 1550.6188 612.10 346896 41712011 104480 RAPID GRAPHICS &MAILING INC. 80.16 WATER BILLS MAILED 258888 5513_ 5910.6103 80.16 345897 41712011 104842 RCM SPECIALTIES INC. 859.28 EMULSION 00001213 259183 1209 1314.6519 945.20 EMULSION 00001213 259184 1231 1314.6519 1,804.48 Subledger Account Description GENERAL SUPPLIES ALARM SERVICE 4/5/2011 13:56:50 Page - 19 Business Unit POLICE DEPT. GENERAL ARENA BLDG/GROUNDS COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR YORK SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR 50TH ST SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR 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 YORK SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING TELEPHONE TELEPHONE TELEPHONE TELEPHONE 1TELEPHONE CENTRAL SERVICES GENERAL CENTRAL SERVICES GENERAL POLICE DEPT. GENERAL 50TH&FRANCE MAINTENANCE CENTRAL SERVICES GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES GENERAL (BILLING) ROAD OIL ROAD OIL STREET RENOVATION STREET RENOVATION 4/5/2011 13:56:50 Page- 20. Business Unit BUILDING MAINTENANCE GENERAL MAINTENANCE STREET RENOVATION STREET RENOVATION 38.98 ICE CREAM CAKES 259125 CITY OF EDINA 5620.5510 R55CKREG LOG20000 EDINBOROUGH PARK 38.98 345901 Council Check Register 100980 ROBERT B. HILL CO. 417/2011 - 4/7/2011 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation _ PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description 345898 4A12011 100975, RED WING SHOE STORE 345902 4/712011 110.46 SAFETY BOOTS 00005189 258999 7250000001370. 1646.6610 SAFETY EQUIPMENT -� 150.00 SAFETY BOOTS 00005189 258999 7250000001370 1301.6610 SAFETY EQUIPMENT SERVICE CONTRACTS EQUIPMENT CLUB HOUSE. 260.46 - 345899 41712011 106358 RESIDENCE INN 2,064.62 442.38 LODGING FOR SNOW PLOWERS 00001644 259000 00003751 1314.6180 CONTRACTED REPAIRS CORP. 516.11 LODGING FOR SNOW PLOWERS 00001644' 259001 00003713 1314:6180 CONTRACTED REPAIRS ELEVATOR MAINTENANCE 259158 958.49 1550.6230 SERVICE CONTRACTS EQUIPMENT CENTRAL SERVICES GENERAL 345900 4/712011 126343. RICHFIELD DO GRILL AND CHILL 4/5/2011 13:56:50 Page- 20. Business Unit BUILDING MAINTENANCE GENERAL MAINTENANCE STREET RENOVATION STREET RENOVATION 38.98 ICE CREAM CAKES 259125 550 5620.5510 COST OF GOODS SOLD EDINBOROUGH PARK 38.98 345901 41712011 100980 ROBERT B. HILL CO. - 77.00 SOFTENER SALT 00003649 259185 00249507 1470.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES. FIRE DEPT. GENERAL 77.00 345902 4/712011 100981 ROCHESTER MIDLAND _ -� 2,064.62 ANNUAL RESTROOM MAINT BILL 00006257 259186. 833576 5420.6230, SERVICE CONTRACTS EQUIPMENT CLUB HOUSE. - 2,064.62 345903 41712011 104151 SCHINDLER ELEVATOR CORP. 521:16 ELEVATOR MAINTENANCE 259158 8102876349 1550.6230 SERVICE CONTRACTS EQUIPMENT CENTRAL SERVICES GENERAL 521.16 345904 4/712011 102841 SHUTTERS 'N SHADES ' 250.49 REPAIR BLINDS 00006253 258889 SNS21140 5424.6530 REPAIR PARTS RANGE - 250.49 345905 4/712011 105654- SIMPLEX GRINNELL LP 380.00 SMOKE ALARM MAINTENANCE 259104 66413557 5861.6250 ALARM SERVICE VERNON OCCUPANCY 380.00 345906 41712011 103689 SNAP -ON TOOLS 103.56 1/2" SOCKETS 00001607 259159 214111208 -19143 5913.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES DISTRIBUTION 6 122.79 ADAPTERS, BOLTS 00005886 259160 214111208 -19331 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN i = 7 - 226.35 345907. 41712011 122368 SOUTH METRO PUBLIC SAFETY R55CKREG LOG20000 CITY OF EDINA Council Check Register 4/7/2011 - 4(7/2011 Check # Date Amount Supplier I Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No 2090.00 FEES 258890 ' 8532 1400.6104 4/5/2011 13:56:50 Page - 21 Subledger Account Description Business Unit CONFERENCES S& SCHOOLS POLICE DEPT. GENERAL 5822.5513 2,090.00 50TH ST SELLING 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 345908 41712011 5862.5513 127878 SOUTHERN WINE AND SPIRITS VERNON SELLING 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 185.00 5842.5513 259046 1489650 5842.5515 708.00 YORK SELLING 259212 1489649 POLICE EQUIPMENT 185.00 EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT 259213 1537420 2,058.50 259263 1489652 643.00 259264 1537419. 36.99 259265 1520684 3,816.49 345909 4f71201.1 105193 SPAIN, MARK 65.00 STUMP GRINDING 00001222 259161 033111 65.00 - 345910 41712011 100181" SPEEDY KEYS 340.00 RECODE LOCKS - INV 110380 259072 033011 340.00 RECODE LOCKS - INV 110449 259072 033011 340.00 RECODE LOCKS - INV 110450 259072 033011 340.00 RECODE LOCKS - INV 110448 259072 033011 340.00 RECODE LOCKS - INV 110447 259072 033011 340.00 RECODE LOCKS - INV 110382 259072 033011 340.00 RECODE LOCKS - INV 110381 259072 033011 2,380.00 345911 41712011 102698 SPOONER,'ANNE 65.00 ART WORK SOLD 259026 032911 65.00 345912 41712011 116175 ST. CROIX HARLEY - DAVIDSON 892.53 INSTALL NEW EQUIPMENT 258891 586108 1 892.53 345913 41712011 103277 ST. JOSEPH EQUIPMENT CO INC. 1,923.75 SNOW BLOWER RENTAL 00001286 259002 SR16977 1,923.75 345914 41712011 128906 STAR TRAINING AND CONSULTING I 800.00 VEHICLE TRAINING 259187 040111 800.00 4/5/2011 13:56:50 Page - 21 Subledger Account Description Business Unit CONFERENCES S& SCHOOLS POLICE DEPT. GENERAL 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 5842.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX YORK SELLING 1552.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES CENT SVC PW BUILDING 421400.6710 EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT POLICE EQUIPMENT 421400.6710 EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT POLICE EQUIPMENT 421400.6710 EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT POLICE EQUIPMENT 421400.6710 EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT POLICE EQUIPMENT 421400.6710 EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT POLICE EQUIPMENT 421400.6710 EQUIPMENT.REPLACEMENT POLICE EQUIPMENT 421400.6710 EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT POLICE EQUIPMENT 5101.4413 ART WORK SOLD ART CENTER REVENUES 421400.6710 EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT POLICE EQUIPMENT 1318.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES SNOW & ICE REMOVAL 1470.6104 CONFERENCES & SCHOOLS FIRE DEPT. GENERAL R55CKREG LOG20000 FERTILIZER 00006404 259188 6745 CITY OF EDINA FERTILIZER 4/5/2011 13:56:50 122088 SUMMIT FISCAL AGENCY Council Check Register JASMINE SORENSEN OOOOOFOR 259064 Page - 22 1600.4390.15 GEN ADAPTIVE REC ' 4/7/2011 -- 4/7/2011 258899 38.00 aCheck # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit 345915 41712011 34.32 112668 STONEBROOKE EQUIPMENT INC. 258894 1305126 1120.6120 ADVERTISING LEGAL 45.76 PUBLISH ORD 2011 -01 130.33 PLOW SIDE HARNESS 00005812 259003 18696: 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN '. 1120.6120 130.33 60.06 AD FOR BID 258897 1306047 1120.6120 ADVERTISING LEGAL 345916 41712011 258898 101015 STREICHERS 1120.6120 ADVERTISING LEGAL 228.80 10.55 GUN CLEANING PARTS 258892 ., 1823947 1400.6551 AMMUNITION POLICE DEPT. GENERAL 135.85 GUN CLEANING ITEMS 258893 1823528 1400:6551 AMMUNITION :, POLICE DEPT. GENERAL 83.36 K -9 ID TAG 259075 1825053 4607.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES EDINA CRIME FUND K9 DONATION 54.51 GUN CLEANING BRUSHES 259105 1823909 7412.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES PSTF RANGE 28427 345917 41712011 101017 SUBURBAN CHEVROLET. 122.44 BOLTS 00005881 259004 306503 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 122.44 FERTILIZER 00006404 259188 6745 5422.6540 FERTILIZER 345918 41712011 122088 SUMMIT FISCAL AGENCY 38.00 JASMINE SORENSEN OOOOOFOR 259064 SUPER SUNDAY 1600.4390.15 GEN ADAPTIVE REC ' REFUND CELL PHONE REPAIR 258899 38.00 1400.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES POLICE DEPT. GENERAL 35.00 345919 41712011 100900 SUN NEWSPAPERS 345922 4/712011 34.32 AD FOR BID 258894 1305126 1120.6120 ADVERTISING LEGAL 45.76 PUBLISH ORD 2011 -01 258895 1306045 .. 1120.6120 ADVERTISING LEGAL 20.02 PUBLISH AUCTION NOTICE 258896 1306046 1120.6120 ADVERTISING LEGAL 60.06 AD FOR BID 258897 1306047 1120.6120 ADVERTISING LEGAL 68.64 COMMODITIES AD FOR BID 258898 1307166 1120.6120 ADVERTISING LEGAL 228.80 345920 41712011 121492 SUPERIOR TURF SERVICES INC. . PARK ADMIN. GENERAL ADMINISTRATION ADMINISTRATION ADMINISTRATION ADMINISTRATION ADMINISTRATION 4,556.98 FERTILIZER 00006404 259188 6745 5422.6540 FERTILIZER MAINT OF COURSE & GROUNDS 4,556.98 345921 41712011 110674 SUPERIOR WIRELESS COMMUNICATIO 35.00 CELL PHONE REPAIR 258899 29605. 1400.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES POLICE DEPT. GENERAL 35.00 345922 4/712011 120998 SURLY BREWING CO. 603.00 259047 02250 5862.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER VERNON SELLING 1,548.00 259266 02251 5842.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD, BEER YORK SELLING 2,151.00 345923 4/712011 105982 T.P.C. LANDSCAPE R55CKREG LOG20000 Check # Date 345924 4!1/2011 345925 41712011 345926 41712011 345927 4/712011 4/5/2011 13:56:50 Page - 23 Business Unit CITY HALL GENERAL DARE UTILITY BALANCE SHEET 345.45 259190 633170 CITY OF EDINA COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER GRILL 4,415.40 259214 Council Check Register 5862.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER VERNON SELLING 109.40 417/2011 - 417/2011 633181 Amount Supplier/ Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description 315.00 SIDEWALK SHOVELING 259106 413950 1551.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 315.00 343223 1553.6580 WELDING SUPPLIES EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 112358 TEE'S PLUS 57.30 WELDING GAS 00005834 773.91 DARE SUPPLIES 258005 347004 1425.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES 773.91 ADMINISTRATION 17.55- CREDIT 00005834 259008 128900 THOELE, DONNA 1553.6580 WELDING SUPPLIES EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 76.37 UTILITY OVERPAYMENT REFUND 259107 #160562342 5900.2015 CUSTOMER REFUND 76.37 343073 1325.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES STREET NAME SIGNS 101035 THORPE DISTRIBUTING COMPANY 260.86 4/5/2011 13:56:50 Page - 23 Business Unit CITY HALL GENERAL DARE UTILITY BALANCE SHEET 345.45 259190 633170 5421.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER GRILL 4,415.40 259214 633182 5862.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER VERNON SELLING 109.40 259215 633181 5862.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX VERNON SELLING 8.50- 259216 631406COR 5862.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER VERNON SELLING 4,861.75 259006 343223 1553.6580 WELDING SUPPLIES EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 123129 TIMESAVER OFF SITE SECRETARIAL 57.30 WELDING GAS 00005834 259007 262.50 DRAFT MINUTES 3/1/11 258900 M18284 1120.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES ADMINISTRATION 262.50 345928 417/2011 101038 TOLL GAS & WELDING SUPPLY 130.21 REGULATOR 00005831 259006 343223 1553.6580 WELDING SUPPLIES EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 57.30 WELDING GAS 00005834 259007 343586 1553.6580 WELDING SUPPLIES EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 17.55- CREDIT 00005834 259008 343587 1553.6580 WELDING SUPPLIES EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 90.90 ACETYLENE, OXYGEN 00001579 259009 343073 1325.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES STREET NAME SIGNS 260.86 345929 417/2011 128903 TORO MN 1,800.00 IRRIGATION COMPUTER 259189 112230 -05 5422.6611 IRRIGATION EQUIPMENT MAINT OF COURSE & GROUNDS 4,356.00 3 YR SERVICE AGREEMENT 259189 112230 -05 5422.6180 CONTRACTED REPAIRS MAINT OF COURSE & GROUNDS 6,156.00 345930 417/2011 101693 TOTAL REGISTER SYSTEMS - 671.39 THERMAL PRINTERS 259108 26341 5862.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES VERNON SELLING 671.39 345931 4/712011 123649 TOWMASTER 109.42 SPRING RAMP 00005838 259010 328348 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 109.42 R55CKREG LOG20000 CITY OF EDINA 4/512011 13:56:50 Council Check Register Page - 24 - 4/71201.1 - 4/7/2011 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit 345932 41712011 123969 TWIN CITIES OCCUPATIONAL HEALT 55.00 PRE EMPLOYMENT PHYSICAL 259109 101769698 1550.6121 ADVERTISING PERSONNEL CENTRAL SERVICES GENERAL 55.00 345933 41712011 101360 TWIN CITY HARDWARE CO. 92.65 DOOR CLOSER 00002286 259126 446797 5620.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES EDINBOROUGH PARK 92.65 345934 41712011 103048 U.S. BANK 900.00 ADMIN FEES 259162 2829031 3201.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES CITY HALL DS REVENUES . 900.00 345935 4/712011 114236 USA BLUE BOOK 451.69 LOCATE FLAGS 00001497 259011 357085 6913.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES DISTRIBUTION 155.81 MARKING WANDS 00001593 259012 357420 5913.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES DISTRIBUTION 607.50 " 346936 41712011 122564 VALLEY.NATIONAL GASES LLC , 76.61 OXYGEN %,;00003649 259191. -. 854963 1470.6510 FIRST AID SUPPLIES FIRE DEPT. GENERAL 76.61 345937 4712011 103590 VALLEY -RICH CO. INC. 2,967.15 WATERMAIN REPAIR 00001609` 259163 16412 5913.6180 CONTRACTED' REPAIRS DISTRIBUTION 2,967.15 345938 4712011 101058 VAN PAPER CO. 280.65 LIQUOR BAGS 258913 192850 -00 5822.6512 PAPER SUPPLIES 50TH ST SELLING 116.61 CUPS 259192 192180 -01 5421.5510 COST OF GOODS SOLD GRILL 195.69 LIQUOR BAGS 00007512 259196 192813 -00 5842.6512 PAPER SUPPLIES YORK SELLING 592.95 345939 4712011 102970 VERIZON WIRELESS 99.36 258901 2542214901 1400.6188 TELEPHONE POLICE DEPT. GENERAL 99.36 345940 4712011 101066 VIKING ELECTRIC SUPPLY 26.90 VOLTAGE DETECTOR 00001626 259013 5284992 1301:6556 TOOLS GENERAL MAINTENANCE 30.36 SOCKETS, BRACKETS 00001626 259013 5284992 5921.6406.' GENERAL SUPPLIES SANITARY LIFT STATION MAINT 50.80 JUNCTION BOX 00001634 259164 5291419 1552.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES CENT SVC PW BUILDING 108.06 345941 4712011 100023 VOGEL, ROBERT C. R55CKREG LOG20000 APR 2011 MAINTENANCE 258914 CITY OF EDINA 5841.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES YORK OCCUPANCY 572.16 Council Check Register 345946 4812011 4712011 - 417/2011 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation . PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description 259048 265938 -00 2,250.00 HPB CONSULTANT - 2ND QTR 259193 211008 1140.6103 - PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 259049 2,250.00 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 345942 4/712011 259267 128904 WALCZAK EXTERIORS 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 1,589.07 2,625.00 STATION 2 GUTTER REPAIRS 259194 032511 1470.6180 CONTRACTED REPAIRS 2,625.00 101312 WINE MERCHANTS 345943 41712011 121042 WALLACE CARLSON PRINTING 259217 52822 5822.5513 3,599.96 CLASS SCHEDULE 00009173 258902 40717 5110.6575 PRINTING 259218 52875 3,599.96 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 5,205.00 345944 41712011 356645 123616 WATER CONSERVATION SERVICE INC COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING 7,576.95 225.50 LEAK LOCATE 00001611 259165 . 2442 5913.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES YORK SELLING 944.56 225.50 259270 356815 5842.5513 345945 417/2011 13,381.02 103266 WELSH COMPANIES LLC 4/5/2011 13:56:50 ,Page- 25 Business Unit PLANNING FIRE DEPT. GENERAL ART CENTER ADMINISTRATION DISTRIBUTION 572.16 APR 2011 MAINTENANCE 258914 040111 5841.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES YORK OCCUPANCY 572.16 345946 4812011 101033 WINE COMPANY; THE 522.92 259048 265938 -00 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST: SELLING 508.25 259049 265983 -00 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 557.90 259267 .265935 -00 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 1,589.07 345947 4812011 101312 WINE MERCHANTS 96.37- 259217 52822 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING 249.12- 259218 52875 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 5,205.00 259268 356645 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING 7,576.95 259269 356647 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 944.56 259270 356815 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 13,381.02 345948 4812011 124291 WIRTZ BEVERAGE MINNESOTA 1,904.13 259050 549799 5862.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR VERNON SELLING 46.57 259051 5498071 5842.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX YORK SELLING 87.83 259052 543321 5862.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR VERNON SELLING 1,205.22 259053 548223 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 1,360.54 259054 - 549801 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING 779.19 259055 549802 5822.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR 50TH ST SELLING 46.57 259056 549803 5822.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX BOTH ST SELLING 67.75 259057 546689 5862.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX VERNON SELLING R55CKREG LOG20000 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation 145.05 - 49.05- 299.40- 86.04 46.57 4,493.14 2,948.25 3,398.16 4 38 PO # Doc No 259058 259059 259060 259061 259219 259220 259221 259271 CITY OF EDINA Council Check Register 4/7/2011 - 4(712011 Inv No Account No 827061 5842.5513 827060 5842.5513 826942 5822.5513 826816 5822.5512 549800 5862.5515 549798 5862.5513 549806 5842.5512 549604 - 5842.5513 Subledger Account Description COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE COST OF GOODS S- OLD WINE COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 15,80 . 345949 417/2011 124529 WIRTZ BEVERAGE MINNESOTA BEER 184.00 258928 728590 5842.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER 64.50 258929 728593-- ' 5842.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER 6,255.70 258930 727795 5862.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER 1,460.35 259062 728050 5862.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER 184.00 259222 727939 5862.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER 2,244.65 259272' 728592: 5842.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER 4,443.02 259273 730455 5842.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER 998.00 259274 730456 5842.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER 15,834.22 345950 417/2011 123911 WRAP CITY GRAPHICS 26.72 SIGN / PRICE UPDATES 00006255 259195 11 -167 5410.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES 26.72 345952 41712011 101726 XCEL ENERGY 867.43 51- 9011854 -4 258831 .276054874 5913.6185 LIGHT & POWER 87.70 . 51- 9608462 -5 258832 276244410 5921.6185 LIGHT & POWER 9.95 51- 60501842 258833 276012089 4086.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 58.37 51- 89760049 258834 • 276218358 1321.6185 LIGHT & POWER 32,634.31 51- 4621797 -2 258835 -276146743 1321.6185 LIGHT & POWER 501.54 51- 48272325 258836 276153094 5311.6185 LIGHT & POWER 5,904.37 515955679 -8 258837. _ .276187435 1551.6185 LIGHT & POWER 37.08 51- 8102668 -0 258838 276203120 1 1321.6185 LIGHT & POWER 203.32 51- 8987646 -8 258839 - 276217581 '.: 1321.6185 LIGHT & POWER 186.28 51- 9337452 -8 258840 276228416 1321.6185 LIGHT & POWER 43.98 51- 9422326 -6 .. 258841,. 276226123- 1322.6185 LIGHT & POWER 386.71 51- 8324712 -5 258842 276049603 1321.6185 LIGHT & POWER 33.74 515892224 -5 258843 276029400 1321.6185 LIGHT & POWER 297.29 51- 9251919 -0 258844 276061228 5650.6185 LIGHT & POWER 93.59 51- 97701647 258845 276072652 1321.6185 LIGHT & POWER 19.97 51- 97701635 258846 276079980 1321.6185 LIGHT & POWER 415/2011 13:56:50 Page - 26 Business Unit YORK SELLING YORK SELLING 50TH ST SELLING 50TH ST SELLING VERNON SELLING VERNON SELLING YORK SELLING YORK SELLING YORK SELLING YORK SELLING VERNON SELLING VERNON SELLING VERNON SELLING YORK SELLING YORK SELLING YORK SELLING GOLF ADMINISTRATION DISTRIBUTION SANITARY LIFT STATION MAINT AQUATIC WEEDS STREET LIGHTING REGULAR STREET LIGHTING REGULAR POOL OPERATION CITY HALL GENERAL STREET LIGHTING REGULAR STREET LIGHTING REGULAR STREET LIGHTING REGULAR STREET LIGHTING ORNAMENTAL STREET LIGHTING REGULAR STREET LIGHTING REGULAR PROMENADE STREET LIGHTING REGULAR STREET LIGHTING REGULAR CITY OF EDINA 415/2011 13:56:50 R55CKREG LOG20000 Council Check Register Page - 27 417/2011 — 417/2011 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation, PO # -. Doc No ; Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description - Business Unit 9,019.46 51- 9603061 -0 258847 276066571 1552.6185 LIGHT & POWER CENT SVC PW BUILDING 95.10 51- 8526048 -8 258848 276048637 1322.6185 LIGHT &POWER STREET LIGHTING ORNAMENTAL 1,313.78 51- 5547446 -1 258849 276001591 1628.6185 LIGHT & POWER SENIOR CITIZENS 9.95 51- 6541084 -2 258850 276021885 1646.6185 LIGHT•& POWER BUILDING MAINTENANCE 52.46 51- 8997917 -7 258851 276066491 1321.6185 LIGHT &POWER STREET LIGHTING REGULAR 59.90 51- 4420190 -3 258852 275495419 1321.6185 LIGHT &POWER STREET LIGHTING REGULAR 57.97 51- 6692497 -0 258853 275870880 1460.6185 LIGHT & POWER CIVILIAN DEFENSE 2,348.42 51 -6223269 -1 258854 275863332 5210.6185 LIGHT & POWER` GOLF DOME PROGRAM 1,161.96 51- 5107681 -4 258855 275847979 5111.6185 LIGHT & POWER ART CENTER BLDG /MAINT 140.07 51- 6229265 -9 259127 276359613 1481.6185 LIGHT &POWER YORK FIRE STATION 1,555.15 51- 6229265 -9 259127 276359613 1470.6185 LIGHT,& POWER FIRE DEPT. GENERAL 344.30 51- 6046826 -0 259128 276357177 5422.6185 LIGHT & POWER MAINT'OF COURSE & GROUNDS 114.63 51- 5938955 -6 259129 276354193 4086.6185 LIGHT & POWER' AQUATIC WEEDS 17,471.75 51- 4688627 -1 ' 259226 276679332 5511.6185 LIGHT & POWER ARENA BLDG /GROUNDS 75,110.53 345953 41712011 101089 ZEE MEDICAL SERVICE 116.14 FIRST AID SUPPLIES 00008082 258903 54067051. 5510.6610 SAFETY EQUIPMENT ARENA ADMINISTRATION 116.14 345954 4/7/2011 128911 MUHAR, MICHAEL - 79.93 SHIRT & JACKET 259281 040111 1470.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES FIRE DEPT. GENERAL 79.93 413,812.02 Grand Total Payment Instrument Totals Check Total 413,812.02 Total Payments 413,812.02 R55CKSUM LOG20000 CITY OF EDINA Council Check Summary 4f712011 - 4/7/2011 Company Amount 01000 GENERAL FUND 154,779.99 02100 CDBG FUND 888.00 02200 COMMUNICATIONS FUND 232.48 02300 POLICE SPECIAL REVENUE 1,494.21 03200 CITY HALL DEBT SERVICE 900.00 04000 WORKING CAPITAL FUND 2,407.22 04200 EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT FUND 10,830.68 -05100 ART CENTER FUND 6,591.46 05200 GOLF DOME FUND 2,668.42 05300 AQUATIC CENTER FUND 501.54 05400 GOLF COURSE FUND 17,937.93 05500 ICE ARENA FUND 24,199.81 05600 EDINBOROUGH/CENT LAKES FUND 8,220.57 05800 LIQUOR FUND 147,832.79 05900 UTILITY FUND 30,570.58 05950 RECYCLING FUND 20.00 07400 PSTF AGENCY FUND 3,736.34 Report Totals 413,812.02 415/2011 13:57:42 Page - 1 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 pol' 'es and procedures l f y 0 R55CKREG LOG20000 CITY OF EDINA Council Check Register 4/11/2011 — 4114/2011 Check #. Date Amount Supplier / Explanatlon PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description " 345955 411112011 128988" "MICRON TECHNOLOGIES 3,645.36 PARTS FOR HVAC SYS 00001844 259703 019268 1552.6536 REPAIR PARTS 3,645,36 345956 411412011 108757 3D SPECIALTIES, i 1,760.52 POST.DRIVE, VALVE KIT 00001629 .259382 435537 1325.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES 1,760.52 345957 4/1412011 119152 A -1 VACUUM SOLUTIONS 50.01 VACUUM BAGS 00006259 259282 12806 5210.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES 50.01 345958 411412011 124613 ABM JANITORIAL- NORTH CENTRAL 2,695.87 JANITORIAL SERVICE APR 2011 259319 2355763 1551.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 2,695.87 345959 411412011 102971 ACE ICE COMPANY 60.00 259490 578715 5842.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX 28.40 259727 0814219 5862.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX 32.00 259728 0814193 5862.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX 38.00 259729 578712 5862.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX 158.40 345960 4/14/2011 100058 ALLIED WASTE SERVICES #894 38,820.60 RECYCLING 259643 2484925 5952.6183 RECYCLING CHARGES 38,820.60 345961 4/1412011 124837 ALT, MARY ELLEN ` 41.00 TRIP_ REFUND 259718 040411 1628.4392.07 SENIOR TRIPS 41.00 345962 4/1412011 127365 AMERICAN FLEET SUPPLY 181.09 MUFFLER 00005818 259383 AFS- 210900008 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS 181.09 345963 411412011 100630.- ANCHOR PAPER CO. INC. 73.32 PAPER 259644 10279683 -00 5822.6512 PAPER SUPPLIES 109.98 PAPER 259644 10279683 -00 5862.6512 PAPER SUPPLIES 220.01 PAPER 259644 10279683 -00 5842.6512 PAPER SUPPLIES 403.31 345964 4174/2011 125964 AND MORE CORPORATION 4113/2011 7:45:22 Page - 1 Business Unit CENT SVC PW BUILDING STREET NAME SIGNS GOLF DOME PROGRAM CITY HALL GENERAL .YORK SELLING VERNON SELLING VERNON SELLING VERNON SELLING RECYCLING SENIOR CITIZENS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 50TH ST SELLING VERNON SELLING YORK SELLING R55CKREG LOG20000 CITY OF EDINA Council Check Register 4/11/2011 - 4/14/2011 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No 238.75 MERCHANDISE 00006224 259645 105436 5440.5511 1281.6579 5430.5510 1553.6530 1645.6182 5821.6182 1481.6182 5111.6182 5210.6182 5422.6182 1470.6182 1628.6182 5841.6182 5861.6182 5420.6182 5511.6182 1551.6182 1301.6182 1552.6182 5620.6182 7411.6182 421400.6710 1470.6180 Subledger Account Description COST OF GOODS - PRO SHOP TRAINING AIDS COST OF GOODS SOLD REPAIR PARTS RUBBISH REMOVAL RUBBISH REMOVAL RUBBISH REMOVAL RUBBISH REMOVAL RUBBISH REMOVAL RUBBISH REMOVAL RUBBISH REMOVAL RUBBISH REMOVAL RUBBISH REMOVAL RUBBISH REMOVAL RUBBISH REMOVAL RUBBISH REMOVAL RUBBISH REMOVAL RUBBISH REMOVAL RUBBISH REMOVAL RUBBISH REMOVAL RUBBISH REMOVAL EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT CONTRACTED REPAIRS 4113/2011 7:45:22 Page- 2 Business Unit PRO SHOP RETAIL SALES TRAINING RICHARDS GOLF COURSE EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN LITTER REMOVAL 50TH ST OCCUPANCY YORK FIRE STATION ART CENTER BLDG / MAINT GOLF DOME PROGRAM MAINT OF COURSE & GROUNDS FIRE DEPT. GENERAL SENIOR CITIZENS YORK OCCUPANCY VERNON OCCUPANCY CLUB HOUSE ARENA BLDG/GROUNDS CITY HALL GENERAL GENERAL MAINTENANCE CENT SVC PW BUILDING EDINBOROUGH PARK PSTF OCCUPANCY POLICE EQUIPMENT FIRE DEPT. GENERAL 3,996.00 STORMWATER MANAGEMENT 259283 23270354.00 -184 5932.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES GENERAL STORM SEWER 238.75 345965 4114/2011 101282 APWA 84.00 POSTERS 00001741 259540 714859 84.00 345966 4/1412011 103680 ARAMARK REFRESHMENT SRVCS 85.20 COFFEE 259646 419628 85.20 345967 411412011 100634 ASPEN EQUIPMENT CO. 388.32 VALVE PLATE WELDMENT 00005836 259384 10083856 388.32 345968 4/14/2011 102774 ASPEN WASTE SYSTEMS 26.30 259320 040111 33.00 259320 040111 33.28 259320 040111 46.03 259320 040111 66.03 259320 040111 68.91 259320 040111 82.60 259320 040111 84.97 259320 040111 90.08 259320 040111 101.98 259320 040111 173.95 259320 040111 219.85 259320 040111 238.05 259320 040111 298.39 259320 040111 298.40 259320 040111 647.65 259320 040111 249.49 259541 APR1 2,758.96 345969 4/14/2011 126019 B & B PRODUCTS / RIGS AND SQUA 160.00 NEW SQUAD BUILD -UP 259436 3488 9,284.20 BUILD UP (3) FIRE VEHICLES 259542 3486 9,444.20 345970 411412011 100843 BARR ENGINEERING CO. 1281.6579 5430.5510 1553.6530 1645.6182 5821.6182 1481.6182 5111.6182 5210.6182 5422.6182 1470.6182 1628.6182 5841.6182 5861.6182 5420.6182 5511.6182 1551.6182 1301.6182 1552.6182 5620.6182 7411.6182 421400.6710 1470.6180 Subledger Account Description COST OF GOODS - PRO SHOP TRAINING AIDS COST OF GOODS SOLD REPAIR PARTS RUBBISH REMOVAL RUBBISH REMOVAL RUBBISH REMOVAL RUBBISH REMOVAL RUBBISH REMOVAL RUBBISH REMOVAL RUBBISH REMOVAL RUBBISH REMOVAL RUBBISH REMOVAL RUBBISH REMOVAL RUBBISH REMOVAL RUBBISH REMOVAL RUBBISH REMOVAL RUBBISH REMOVAL RUBBISH REMOVAL RUBBISH REMOVAL RUBBISH REMOVAL EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT CONTRACTED REPAIRS 4113/2011 7:45:22 Page- 2 Business Unit PRO SHOP RETAIL SALES TRAINING RICHARDS GOLF COURSE EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN LITTER REMOVAL 50TH ST OCCUPANCY YORK FIRE STATION ART CENTER BLDG / MAINT GOLF DOME PROGRAM MAINT OF COURSE & GROUNDS FIRE DEPT. GENERAL SENIOR CITIZENS YORK OCCUPANCY VERNON OCCUPANCY CLUB HOUSE ARENA BLDG/GROUNDS CITY HALL GENERAL GENERAL MAINTENANCE CENT SVC PW BUILDING EDINBOROUGH PARK PSTF OCCUPANCY POLICE EQUIPMENT FIRE DEPT. GENERAL 3,996.00 STORMWATER MANAGEMENT 259283 23270354.00 -184 5932.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES GENERAL STORM SEWER R55CKREG LOG20000 CITY OF EDINA 4/13/2011 7:45:22 Council Check Register Page - 3 4/11/2011 - 4/14/2011 Check # Date Amount Supplier ] Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit 1,819.03 COMP WATER RESOURCES MGMT 259284 23271072.00 -16 5913.61013 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES DISTRIBUTION 5,815.03 345971 4/1412011 102195 BATTERIES PLUS 12.81 BATTERY 00001.660 259543 018- 230465 5311.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES POOL OPERATION 12.81 345972 4/1412011 100546 BECKER ARENA PRODUCTS INC. 106.88 HOCKEY NET REPAIR PARTS 00001507 259647 00083592. 1648.6530 REPAIR PARTS SKATING RINK MAINTENANCE , 106.88 345974 4/14/2011 101355 BELLBOY CORPORATION _ 890.15 259345 57702200 5842.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD - LIQUOR YORK SELLING 124.05 259346 57690400 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 322.15 259347 57690300 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD.WINE VERNON SELLING 191.05 259348 57702100 5822.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR 50TH ST SELLING 376.25 259349 57690500 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING 94.43 259350 85008100 5822.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX 50TH ST SELLING 20.50 259594 57690600 5842.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX YORK SELLING 109.59 259595 85008206. 5842.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX YORK SELLING 275.60 259730 57821000 5822.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR 50TH ST SELLING 234.15 259731 57816100 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING 37.05 259732 57816000 5822.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX 50TH ST SELLING 730.85 259733 57815700 5862.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR VERNON SELLING 810.63 259734 57821200 5862.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR VERNON SELLING 1,340.95 259735 57605400 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE .. YORK SELLING 591.65 259736 57821100 5842.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR YORK SELLING 675.35 259737 57815600 5842.5512 COST OF.GOODS SOLD LIQUOR YORK SELLING 1,143.25 259738 57816200 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 1,112.70 259739 57680500 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 36.55 259740 57815800 5862.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX VERNON SELLING 252.41, 259741 6044200 5862.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX VERNON SELLING 64.56 259742 85035400 5862.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX VERNON SELLING 74.44 259743 85008000 5862.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX VERNON SELLING 92.76 259744 85035300 5822.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX 50TH ST SELLING 9,601.07 345975 411412011 117379 BENIEK PROPERTY SERVICES INC. 572.85 APR 2011 LAWN CARE 259544 137141 7411.6136 SNOW & LAWN CARE PSTF OCCUPANCY 572.85 345976 4/14/2011 120165 BERGLUND, JULIE R55CKREG LOG20000 CITY OF EDINA 4113/2011 7:45:22 Council Check Register Page - 4 4/11/2011 - 4/14/2011 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit 18.00 OLLI CLASS REFUND 259719 032811 1628.4392.09 SENIOR SPECIAL EVENTS SENIOR CITIZENS 18.00 345977 411412011 100648 BERTELSON OFFICE PRODUCTS 47.32 OFFICE SUPPLIES 259285 W0-684630 -1 1600.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES PARK ADMIN. GENERAL 2.02 ADHESIVE PUTTY 259286 WO- 685248 -1 1550.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES CENTRAL SERVICES GENERAL 116.57 OFFICE SUPPLIES 259545 OE- 252819 -1 1628.6513 OFFICE SUPPLIES SENIOR CITIZENS 165.91 345978 4/14/2011 115305 BLENKER, DEAN 13.96 UNIFORM PURCHASE 259385 040411 1301.6201 LAUNDRY GENERAL MAINTENANCE 13.96 345979 411412011 101375 BLOOMINGTON SECURITY SOLUTIONS 1,683.22 SECURITY CAMERAS 259546 573005 5311.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES POOL OPERATION 1,683.22 345980 411412011 122688 BMK SOLUTIONS 30.52 OFFICE SUPPLIES 00001437 259386 67547 1552.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES CENT SVC PW BUILDING 15.32 PENS, PENCILS 00001437 259387 67464 1260.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES ENGINEERING GENERAL 198.69 OFFICE SUPPLIES 00003557 259724 67707 1470.6513 OFFICE SUPPLIES FIRE DEPT. GENERAL 244.53 345981 4114/2011 105367 BOUND TREE MEDICAL LLC 2,452.71 AMBULANCE SUPPLIES 00003530 259547 87233952 1470.6510 FIRST AID SUPPLIES FIRE DEPT. GENERAL 6.25 AMBULANCE SUPPLIES 00003532 259548 87235524 1470.6510 FIRST AID SUPPLIES FIRE DEPT. GENERAL 94.32 AMBULANCE SUPPLIES 00003532 259549 80561657 1470.6510 FIRST AID SUPPLIES FIRE DEPT. GENERAL 201.39 AMBULANCE SUPPLIES 00003536 259550 87238011 1470.6510 FIRST AID SUPPLIES FIRE DEPT. GENERAL 103.68 AMBULANCE SUPPLIES 00003536 259551 87238406 1470.6510 FIRST AID SUPPLIES FIRE DEPT. GENERAL 2,858.35 345982 4/1412011 100669 BOYER TRUCK PARTS 87.95 FRONT AXLE ALIGNMENT 00005936 259388 240664 1553.6180 CONTRACTED REPAIRS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 113.85 SENDER 00005851 259552 506146 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 1,056.84 SPRING ASSEMBLY 00005901 259553 506057 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 279.57 SPRING 00005901 259554 506069X1 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 1,538.21 345983 4114/2011 122496 BREAKTTME BEVERAGE INC. 878.80 CANDY 259759 2340:027365 5421.5510 COST OF GOODS SOLD GRILL 878.80 Subledger Account Description PRINTING PRINTING PRINTING PRINTING ADVERTISING OTHER PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 4/1312011 7:45:22 Page- 5 Business Unit 50TH ST SELLING YORK SELLING VERNON SELLING SENIOR CITIZENS GOLF ADMINISTRATION PSTF OCCUPANCY COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER YORK SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER 50TH ST SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER 50TH ST SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE REPAIR PARTS PRINTING CONFERENCES & SCHOOLS CONTRACTED REPAIRS YORK SELLING VERNON SELLING EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN COMMUNICATIONS FIRE DEPT. GENERAL ARENA ICE MAINT CITY OF EDINA R55CKREG LOG20000 Council Check Register i 4/11/2011 — 4/14/2011 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No 346984 411412011 119826 BRYANT GRAPHICS INC. 167.36 EDINA LIQUOR NEWSLETTER - 259334 24479 5822.6575 167.36 EDINA LIQUOR'NEWSLETTER 259334 -24479 5842.6575 167.36 EDINA LIQUOR NEWSLETTER 259334 24479 5862.6575 768.37 NEWSLETTER 00008257 259437 24427 1628.6575 1,270.45 345985 4114/2011 108688 CANTON COMMUNICATIONS INC. 4,316.50 GOLF DOME ADS 259648 110404 -1 5410.6122 4,316.50 345986 411412011 127500 CAPITAL MAINTENANCE SERVICES L 941.34 APR 2011 CLEANING 259555 86494 7411.6103 941.34 345987 4114120.11 119455 CAPITOL BEVERAGE SALES 5,925.50 259351 15767 5842.5514 2,445.45 259352 15634 5822.5514 507.50 259491 15763 5822.5514 8,878.45 345988 411412011 116683 CAT & FIDDLE BEVERAGE 640.00 259492 89647 5842.5513 107.00 259493 89665 5862.5513 747.00 346989 4/1412011 100681 CATCO 202.43 FLEX TUBING, ELBOW 00005897 ..259389 3 -06713 1553.6530 202.43 345990 411412011 119661 CENTRAL ENVELOPE CORPORATION 214.82 EMPLOYEE NEWSLETTER 259649 69269 2210.6575 214.82 346991 4/1412011 102804 CENTURY COLLEGE . 2,357.00 ACLS RECERTIFICATION 259556 00412151 1470.6104 2,357.00 :345992 4114/2011 117187 CHEM SYSTEMS LTD 4,321.04 TOWER TREATMENT 00008080 259650 516430 5521.6180 4,321.04 Subledger Account Description PRINTING PRINTING PRINTING PRINTING ADVERTISING OTHER PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 4/1312011 7:45:22 Page- 5 Business Unit 50TH ST SELLING YORK SELLING VERNON SELLING SENIOR CITIZENS GOLF ADMINISTRATION PSTF OCCUPANCY COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER YORK SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER 50TH ST SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER 50TH ST SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE REPAIR PARTS PRINTING CONFERENCES & SCHOOLS CONTRACTED REPAIRS YORK SELLING VERNON SELLING EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN COMMUNICATIONS FIRE DEPT. GENERAL ARENA ICE MAINT R55CKREG LOG20000 CITY OF EDINA Council Check Register 4/11/2011 - 4/14/2011 Check # Date Amount Supplier/ Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No 345993 4/1412011 128987 CHOI, BRENDA 70.93 UTILITY OVERPAYMENT REFUND 259720 5314 MALIBU DR 5900:2015 70.93 345994 411412011 100684 CITY OF BLOOMINGTON 9,596.00 SERVICES CONTRACT 259390 PH1008 4204.6103 9,596.00 345995 411412011 100687 CITY OF RICHFIELD 225.15 XCEL ENERGY FOR LS 00001621 259651 4809 5934.6185 ' 225.15 345998 411412011 102165 CLEVELAND GOLF -1,394.01 MERCHANDISE 259652 3417263SO 5440.5511 183.00 MERCHANDISE 259653 341618750 5440.5511 1,577.01 345997 411412011 120747 CMS 180.00 DRUG TESTING 259713 032011532294 1550.6121 180.00 345998 411412011 100692 COCA -COLA BOTTLING CO. 203.00 259494 0138237910 5842.5515 203.00 345999 4/14/2011 101119 COCKRIEL, VINCE 40.80 MILEAGE REIMBURSEMENT 259716 040811 1600.6107 40.80 346000 411412011 120433 COMCAST 1.53 8772 10 614 0023973 259723 23973 -4/11 1120.6406 2.98 8772 10 614 0023973 259723 23973-4111 1400.6406 4.51 346001 411412011 120826 COMCAST SPOTLIGHT 424.98 CABLE TV/WEB ADVERTISING 259335 EDINA LIQUOR 5822.6122 424.98 CABLE TVMIEB ADVERTISING 259335 EDINA LIQUOR 5842.6122 424.99 CABLE TV/WEB ADVERTISING 259335 EDINA LIQUOR 5862.6122 1,274.95 346002 4/1412011 100693 COMMERCIAL FURNITURE 237.08 WORKSURFACE 00006262 259654 49077 -0 5410.6406 Subledger Account Description CUSTOMER REFUND 4/13/2011 7:45:22 Page- 6 Business Unit UTILITY BALANCE SHEET PROFESSIONAL SERVICES HEALTH ALERT NETWORK LIGHT & POWER COST OF GOODS - PRO SHOP COST OF GOODS - PRO SHOP STORM LIFT STATION MAINT PRO SHOP RETAIL SALES PRO SHOP RETAIL SALES ADVERTISING PERSONNEL CENTRAL SERVICES GENERAL COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX YORK SELLING MILEAGE OR ALLOWANCE PARK ADMIN. GENERAL GENERAL SUPPLIES ADMINISTRATION GENERAL SUPPLIES POLICE DEPT. GENERAL ADVERTISING OTHER 50TH ST SELLING ADVERTISING OTHER YORK SELLING ADVERTISING OTHER VERNON SELLING GENERAL SUPPLIES GOLF ADMINISTRATION Subledger Account Description EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT CRAFT SUPPLIES EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT COST OF GOODS SOLD CONSTR.- IN PROGRESS CONTRACTED REPAIRS ADVERTISING OTHER GENERAL SUPPLIES GENERAL SUPPLIES REPAIR PARTS COST OF GOODS SOLD COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER 4/13/2011 7:45:22 Page- 7 Business Unit ART CENTER BLDG /MAINT ART CENTER ADMINISTRATION ART CENTER BLDG /MAINT ART SUPPLY GIFT GALLERY SHOP ICE ARENA BALANCE SHEET ARENA ICE,MAINT GOLF ADMINISTRATION PSTF OCCUPANCY BUILDING MAINTENANCE EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN GRILL YORK SELLING YORK SELLING 50TH ST SELLING 50TH ST SELLING YORK SELLING VERNON SELLING VERNON SELLING CITY OF EDINA R65CKREG LOG20000 Council Check Register 4/11/2011 - 4/14/2011 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # . Doc No Inv No Account No 237.08 346003 4/14/2011 100696 CONTINENTAL CLAY CO. 805.83 KILN BRICKS, ELEMENTS 00009025 259391 INV000059506 5111.6710 46.52 CONES 00009022 259392 INV000059362 5110.6564 251.63 NEW PARTS 00009022 259392 INV000059362 5111.6716 922.81 CLAY 00009022 259392 INV000059362 5120.5510 2,026.79 346004 411412011 100697 COOL AIR: MECHANICAL INC. 57,398.85 BRAEMAR ARENA IMPROVEMENTS 259557 FINAL 5500.1705 9,979.38 RINK EQUIPMENT REPAIRS 00008090 259656 73963 5521.6180 67,378.23 346005 4/14/2011 124910 COURSE TRENDS INC. 100.00 EMAIL MARKETING 00006393 259655 172972 5410.6122 100.00 346006 411412011 100699 CULLIGAN BOTTLED WATER 65.22 114-09855685 -4 WATER 259558 1385096 7411.6406 65.22 346007 411412011 104020 DALCO 95.65 PUNCH DEGREASER 00005883 259393 2316550 1646.6406 95.66 PUNCH DEGREASER 00605883 259393 2316550 1553.6530 191.31 346008 4/14/2011 100710 DAVE'S DAIRY 40.20 DAIRY 259287 032811 5421.5510 40.20 346009 411412011 102478 DAY DISTRIBUTING CO. 4,454.00 259353 595192 5842.5514 134.90 259354 595193 5842.5515 1,017.90 259495 595190 5822.5514 104.00 259496 595191 5822.5515 105.75 259497 595651 5842.5514 43.90 259596 595189 5862.5515 2,534.25 259597 595188 5862.5514 8,394.70 346010 4114/2011 105930 DELL MARKETING L.P. Subledger Account Description EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT CRAFT SUPPLIES EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT COST OF GOODS SOLD CONSTR.- IN PROGRESS CONTRACTED REPAIRS ADVERTISING OTHER GENERAL SUPPLIES GENERAL SUPPLIES REPAIR PARTS COST OF GOODS SOLD COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER 4/13/2011 7:45:22 Page- 7 Business Unit ART CENTER BLDG /MAINT ART CENTER ADMINISTRATION ART CENTER BLDG /MAINT ART SUPPLY GIFT GALLERY SHOP ICE ARENA BALANCE SHEET ARENA ICE,MAINT GOLF ADMINISTRATION PSTF OCCUPANCY BUILDING MAINTENANCE EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN GRILL YORK SELLING YORK SELLING 50TH ST SELLING 50TH ST SELLING YORK SELLING VERNON SELLING VERNON SELLING R55CKREG LOG20000 `• CITY OF EDINA- Council Check Register 4/11/2011 - 4/14/2011 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description 405:16 DRIVE UPDATE 00004410 259394 . XF7X82N23 1400.6160 i DATA PROCESSING 405.16 346011 4/1412011 100720 DENNYS 5TH AVE. BAKERY 29.06 BAKERY 259657 364857 5421.5510 COST OF GOODS SOLD 29.06 i 346012 4/1412011 101349 DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCE i 47.00 POND TREATMENT PERMIT '00001539 259336 10F3A057 4086.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 47.00 346013 4/14/2011 102831 DEX MEDIA EAST INC. j 120.40 110311867 259658 110311867 -3111 5621.6122 ADVERTISING OTHER 120.40 I 346014 4/1412011 128913 DIGITAL CONTENT FACTORY LTD 283.70 QUICK REFERENCE SHEETS 259288 .4973 1400.6160 DATA PROCESSING 283.70 346015 411412011 122199 DOLL, MARTY 141.27 MILEAGE REIMBURSEMENT 259395 040611 2210.6107 ! MILEAGE OR ALLOWANCE 132.00 LIQUOR NEWSLETTER POSTAGE '259659 APR6`- 5842:6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES 48.50 DEC MILEAGE-REIMBURSEMENT 259660- 040511 2210.6107 MILEAGE OR ALLOWANCE 321.77 346016 4/1412011 112663 DOLLARS-& SENSE 683.33 DIRECT MAIL ADVERTISING 259337 27157 5622.6122 ADVERTISING OTHER 683.33 DIRECT MAIL ADVERTISING 259337 27157 5842.6122 i ADVERTISING OTHER 683.34 DIRECT MAIL ADVERTISING 259337 27157 5862.6122 ADVERTISING OTHER 2,050.00 346017 4/14/2011 124438 DONNAY HOMES 23.67 UTILITY OVERPAYMENT REFUND 259722 5509 HUNTER ST 5900.2015 CUSTOMER REFUND 23.67 346018 411412011 100731 DPC INDUSTRIES 4113/2011 7:45:22 Page - 8 Business Unit POLICE DEPT. GENERAL GRILL AQUATIC WEEDS EDINBOROUGH ADMINISTRATION POLICE DEPT. GENERAL COMMUNICATIONS YORK SELLING COMMUNICATIONS 50TH ST SELLING YORK SELLING VERNON SELLING UTILITY BALANCE SHEET 4,168.49 CHEMICALS 00001215 259396 82700378 -11 5915.6586 WATER TREATMENT SUPPLIES WATER TREATMENT 4,168.49 346019 4114/2011 124503 EDEN PRAIRIE WINLECTRIC CO. 11.60 STRAPS 00001638 259397 07941400 1322.6530 REPAIR PARTS STREET LIGHTING ORNAMENTAL 11.60 Subledger Account Description GENERAL SUPPLIES REPAIR PARTS PROFESSIONAL SERVICES CONFERENCES &SCHOOLS 4/1312011 7:45:22 Page - 9 Business Unit ADAPTIVE RECREATION EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN FIRE DEPT. GENERAL RESERVE PROGRAM COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX VERNON SELLING REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN REPAIR PARTS CITY OF EDINA R55CKREG LOG20000 EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN GENERAL SUPPLIES BUILDING MAINTENANCE GENERAL SUPPLIES Council Check Register 4/11/2011 - 4/14/2011 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No 346020 411412011 102966 EDINA PUBLIC SCHOOLS_ 133.25 SUPER SUNDAY BUS FEE 259761 041111 1629.6406 133.25 346021 4/14/2011 127590 ETTERMAN ENTERPRISES i i 158.62 FUSES, BULBS, LIGHTS 00005879 259661 169410 1553.6530 158.62 346022 411412011 100018 EXPERT T BILLING 5,742.25 MARCH BILLINGS 259438 040511 1470.6103 5,742.25 346023 4/14/2011 102497 EXPLORER POST 925 2,616.33 CONFERENCE FEES 259439 040511 1419.6104 2,616.33 346024 411412011 104195 EXTREME BEVERAGE LLC. 167.50 259598 W- 348736 5862.5515 167.50 346025 411412011 100146 FACTORY MOTOR PARTS COMPANY 227.15 RADIATOR 00005757 259290 1- 3602144 1553.6530 34.18 HARDWARE KIT, OIL SEAL 00005889 259398 1- 3604209 1553.6530 366.65 ROTORS, PADS, SEALS 00005889 259399 69- 034585 1553.6530 40:30- CREDIT 259400 1- 3601818 1553.6530 45.83 SEALS 00005889 259559 69- 034805 1553.6530 84.88- CREDIT 259560 1- 3603895 1553.6530 147.67- CREDIT 259662 1- 3606921 1553.6530 400.96 346026 4114/2011 106035 FASTENAL COMPANY 47.41 HARDWARE 00001514 259663 MNTC2105577 1646.6406 62.19 HARDWARE 00001518 259664 -MNTC2105586 1646.6406 109.60 346027 4114/2011 126004 FERGUSON WATERWORKS 213.54 CURB STOPS 00001605 259401 501296934.001 5913.6406 1,452.85 CURB STOP PARTS 00001612 259561 501297069.001 5913.6406 1,666.39 346028 411412011 116492 FINANCE AND COMMERCE Subledger Account Description GENERAL SUPPLIES REPAIR PARTS PROFESSIONAL SERVICES CONFERENCES &SCHOOLS 4/1312011 7:45:22 Page - 9 Business Unit ADAPTIVE RECREATION EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN FIRE DEPT. GENERAL RESERVE PROGRAM COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX VERNON SELLING REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN GENERAL SUPPLIES BUILDING MAINTENANCE GENERAL SUPPLIES BUILDING MAINTENANCE GENERAL SUPPLIES DISTRIBUTION GENERAL SUPPLIES DISTRIBUTION R55CKREG LOG20000 774.44 CITY OF EDINA Council Check Register 411412011 122683 FIRE SAFETY USA INC. 4/1112011 - 4/14/2011 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description 229.51 AD FOR BID 259440 22273716 1120.6120 ADVERTISING LEGAL 264.41 AD FOR BID 259441 22273715 1120.6120 ADVERTISING LEGAL 280.52 AD FOR BID 259442 22273717 1120.6120 ADVERTISING LEGAL REPAIR PARTS PROFESSIONAL SERVICES MACHINERY & EQUIPMENT 4/13/2011 7:45:22 Page- 10 Business Unit ADMINISTRATION ADMINISTRATION ADMINISTRATION EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN ENGINEERING GENERAL ART CENTER BALANCE SHEET CONFERENCES & SCHOOLS FIRE DEPT. GENERAL CONTRACTED REPAIRS ART CENTER BLDG /MAINT TELEPHONE FIRE DEPT. GENERAL CUSTOMER REFUND UTILITY BALANCE SHEET TRAINING AIDS TRAINING GENERAL SUPPLIES CENT SVC PW BUILDING GENERAL SUPPLIES PSTF OCCUPANCY GENERAL SUPPLIES DISTRIBUTION 774.44 346029 411412011 122683 FIRE SAFETY USA INC. 433.00 PRESSURE REGULATOR 00005806 259402 43767 1553.6530 433.00 346030 411412011 120831 FIRST SCRIBE INC. 425.00 ROWAY 259289 21372 1260.6103 425.00 346031 4/1412011 119667 GARELICK STEEL CO INC 56.11 METAL FOR KILN 00009178 259562 198768 5100.1740 56.11 346032 411412011 105959 GARFIN, JEFFREY 416.20, CONFERENCE EXPENSES 259563 032911 1470.6104 416.20 346033 411412011 100773 GENERAL PARTS INC. 266.87 REFRIGERATOR REPAIR 00001656 259564 5297602 5111.6180 266.87 346034 411412011 118941 GLOBALSTAR USA 29.20 R -91 PHONE 259565 2906948 1470.6188 29.20 346035 4/1412011 128986 GOODELL, MERRILY 212.36 UTILITY OVERPAYMENT REFUND 259717 5212 DUNDEE RD 5900.2015 212.36 346036 411412011 128920 GOVERNMENT FLEET MAGAZINE 195.00 AUDIT MANUAL 00001223 259403 GF0404 -001 1281.6579 195.00 346037 411412011 101103 GRAINGER 103.14 CAN LINERS, BATTERIES 00001646 259404 9498432484 1552.6406 8.82 FUSES 259566 9502719728 7411.6406 439.10 GLOVES 00001614 259567 9501582994 5913.6406 551.06 REPAIR PARTS PROFESSIONAL SERVICES MACHINERY & EQUIPMENT 4/13/2011 7:45:22 Page- 10 Business Unit ADMINISTRATION ADMINISTRATION ADMINISTRATION EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN ENGINEERING GENERAL ART CENTER BALANCE SHEET CONFERENCES & SCHOOLS FIRE DEPT. GENERAL CONTRACTED REPAIRS ART CENTER BLDG /MAINT TELEPHONE FIRE DEPT. GENERAL CUSTOMER REFUND UTILITY BALANCE SHEET TRAINING AIDS TRAINING GENERAL SUPPLIES CENT SVC PW BUILDING GENERAL SUPPLIES PSTF OCCUPANCY GENERAL SUPPLIES DISTRIBUTION R55CKREG LOG20000 219.50 CITY OF EDINA 554785 5822.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER 50TH ST SELLING Council Check Register 259498 555169 5842.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER YORK SELLING 4/11/2011 - 4/14/2011 162.00 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description 346038 411412011 259600 124711 GRANDVIEW TIRE'& AUTO'-' CAHILL 5862.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER VERNON SELLING 2,177.50 54.95 ALIGNMENT 00005937 259568 23718 1553.6180 CONTRACTED REPAIRS 346044 4/1412011 10.00- CREDIT ON ACCT 259569 20415 - 1553.6180 CONTRACTED REPAIRS 44.95 391.17 MILEAGE REIMBURSEMENT 259338 040411 1644.6107 346039 4/1412011 105436 HENNEPIN COUNTY INFORMATION 391.17 160.31 TECHNICAL SUPPORT 259665 110362024 1190.6105 DUES & SUBSCRIPTIONS 160.31 210.95 WANDS, GUN, NOZZLES 00005577 346040 411412011 1552.6530 106371 HENNEPIN FACULTY ASSOCIATES CENT SVC PW BUILDING' 210.95 2,475.08 MEDICAL DIRECTOR SERVICES 259291 OB17031 1470.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 101714 IDE14TISYS INC. 2,475.08 346041 4/14/2011 DATACARD REPAIR 00006260 115377 HENRICKSEN PSG 100517 5410.6230 SERVICE CONTRACTS EQUIPMENT GOLF ADMINISTRATION 623.58 ADMIN WORK AREA 259321 469083 44005.6710 EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT 346047 623.58 102223 IMPERIAL HEADWEAR INC 346042 4/14/2011 100806 HIRSHFIELD'S 128.94 PAINT 00002016 259443 003432983 5630.6532 PAINT 128.94 346043 411412011 104375 HOHENSTEINS INC. 4/13/2011 7:45:22 Page - 11 Business Unit EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN ASSESSING FIRE DEPT. GENERAL CITY HALL BLDG IMPROVEMENTS- CENTENNIAL LAKES 219.50 259355 554785 5822.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER 50TH ST SELLING 799.00 259498 555169 5842.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER YORK SELLING 162.00 259599 555303 5822.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER 50TH ST SELLING 997.00 259600 555308 5862.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER VERNON SELLING 2,177.50 346044 4/1412011 100808 HORWATH, THOMAS 391.17 MILEAGE REIMBURSEMENT 259338 040411 1644.6107 MILEAGE OR ALLOWANCE TREES 8 MAINTENANCE 391.17 346045 4/1412011 103869 HOTSY EQUIPMENT OF MINNESOTA 210.95 WANDS, GUN, NOZZLES 00005577 259570 37546 1552.6530 REPAIR PARTS CENT SVC PW BUILDING' 210.95 346046 411412011 101714 IDE14TISYS INC. 757.72 DATACARD REPAIR 00006260 259292 100517 5410.6230 SERVICE CONTRACTS EQUIPMENT GOLF ADMINISTRATION 757.72 346047 411412011 102223 IMPERIAL HEADWEAR INC CITY OF EDINA 4/13/2011 7:45:22 R55CKREG LOG20000 Council Check Register Page - 12 4/11/2011 - 4114/2011 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit 445.43 MERCHANDISE 259444 807550 5440.5511 COST OF GOODS - PRO SHOP PRO SHOP RETAIL SALES 445.43- RETURN 259445 CR45810 5440.5511 COST OF GOODS - PRO SHOP PRO SHOP RETAIL SALES 411.18 MERCHANDISE 259446 0840040 5440.5511 COST OF GOODS - PRO SHOP PRO SHOP RETAIL SALES 411.18 346048 411412011 105894 INDUSTRIAL FLOOR MAINTENANCE 1 820.80 BROOMS 00001651 259405 25575 4090.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES 50TH &FRANCE MAINTENANCE 820.80 346049 4114/2011 116191 INSTY- PRINTS 104.61 BROCHURE 259666 88525 2210.6575 PRINTING COMMUNICATIONS 104.61 346050 411412011 100830 JERRY S PRINTING 228.71 INVITATIONS, ENVELOPES 00008258 259571 53179 1628.6575 PRINTING SENIOR CITIZENS 228.71 346051 411412011 102136 JERRY S TRANSMISSION SERVICE 147.87 SWITCH MAGI 3 NVIRE 00005795 259406 0016865 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 147.87 346052 4/1412011 100741 JJ TAYLOR DIST. OF MINN 793.00 259356 1521636 5842.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER YORK SELLING 108.00 259357 1535230 5822.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER 50TH ST SELLING 39.05 259358 1535229 5822.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX BOTH ST SELLING 5,063.27 259359 1535254 5842.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER YORK SELLING 1,173.20 259499 1161035 5822.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER 50TH ST SELLING 1,591.65 259500 1535228 5822.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER 50TH ST SELLING 4,815.14 259501 1535279 5842.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER YORK SELLING 39.05 259601 1535270 5822.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX 50TH ST SELLING 3,369.31 259602 1535271 5862.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER VERNON SELLING 2,592.22 259745 1535269 5822.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER 50TH ST SELLING 38.80 259746 1535272 5662.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX VERNON SELLING 19,622.69 346054 411412011 100835 JOHNSON BROTHERS LIQUOR CO. 6,414.83 259360 1027213 5842.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR YORK SELLING 694.74 259361 1027209 5842.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR YORK SELLING 1.12 259362 1027214 5842.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX YORK SELLING 1,758.64 259363 1027217 5842.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR YORK SELLING 1,077.65 259364 1027221 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 1,581.28 259365 1027208 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING R55CKREG LOG20000 Check # Date 346055 4114/2011 346056 411412011 100841 KEPRIOS, JOHN 109.15 MILEAGE REIMBURSEMENT 109.15 346057 411412011 112618 KOLLMER CONSULTANTS INC. 1,000.00 WATER TOWER REHAB SPECS_ 1,000.00 259667 040811 259293 1542 1600.6107 05509.1705.20 346058 411412011 100852 LAWSON PRODUCTS INC. 390.85 FITTINGS, BITS, WHEELS. 00005880 259294 0302007 1553.6530 354.01 FLANGED NUTS 00005763-259407 0315532 1553.6530 511.61 FITTINGS, SCREWS, TY -RAP 00005891 259573 0320760 1553.6530 1,256.47 4/13/2011 7:45:22 Page - 13 Subledger Account. Description Business Unit COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE CITY OF EDINA COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR Council Check Register COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR VERNON SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR 4/11/2011 - 4114/2011 Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No 3,104.04 YORK SELLING 259366 1027220 5862.5513 1,868.51 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR 259502 1031716 5862.5513 4,275.08 YORK SELLING 259603 1031715 5862.5512 980.53 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 259604 1031718 5862.5512 237.64 50TH ST SELLING 259605 1031700 5862.5512 711.80 259606 1031717 5862.5513 659.21 259607 1031701 5862.5513 22.11 259608 1031702 5862.5513 1,630.04 259609 1031704 5842.5513 2,806.37 259610 1031714 5842.5513 2,387.06 259611 1031712 5842.5513 1,995.70 259612 1031713 5842.5512 309.86 259613 1031703 5842.5512 6,194.51 259614 1031710 5842.5512 543.49 259615 1031709 5822.5513 82.38 259616 1031708 5822.5512 439.68 259617 1031707 5822.5513 1,200.57 259618 1031706 5822.5513 1,053.33 259619 1031705 5822.5512 59.02- 259747 492617 5822.5513 33.12- 259748 492789 5822.5513 41,938.03 102719 JOHNSON, PHILLIP 60.81 SOFTWARE. 259572 1027.19 5125.6710 74.97 SPLICE TABS 259572 102719 5125.6406 79.98 HARD DRIVES 259572 102719 5125.6710 215.76 346056 411412011 100841 KEPRIOS, JOHN 109.15 MILEAGE REIMBURSEMENT 109.15 346057 411412011 112618 KOLLMER CONSULTANTS INC. 1,000.00 WATER TOWER REHAB SPECS_ 1,000.00 259667 040811 259293 1542 1600.6107 05509.1705.20 346058 411412011 100852 LAWSON PRODUCTS INC. 390.85 FITTINGS, BITS, WHEELS. 00005880 259294 0302007 1553.6530 354.01 FLANGED NUTS 00005763-259407 0315532 1553.6530 511.61 FITTINGS, SCREWS, TY -RAP 00005891 259573 0320760 1553.6530 1,256.47 4/13/2011 7:45:22 Page - 13 Subledger Account. Description Business Unit 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 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 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 LIQUOR '" YORK SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR 50TH ST SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING COST OF'GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR 50TH ST SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT MEDIA STUDIO GENERAL SUPPLIES MEDIA STUDIO EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT MEDIA STUDIO MILEAGE OR ALLOWANCE CONSULTING DESIGN REPAIR PARTS REPAIR PARTS REPAIR PARTS PARK ADMIN. GENERAL GLEASON WATER TOWER REHAB EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN R55CKREG LOG20000 CITY OF EDINA Council Check Register 4/11/2011 — 4/14/2011 Check # Date Amount Supplier/ Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No 346059 411412011. 124810 LIFT BRIDGE BEER COMPANY 130.00 259367 4670 5822.5514 130.00 346060 4/14/2011 101792 LURE -TECH 190.58 OIL 00005896 259574 1891652 1553.6581 95.29 OIL 00005896 259668 1892880 1553.6584 285.87 346061 411412011 112577 M. AMUNDSON LLP 584.46 259368 106288 5822.5515 584.46 346062 411412011 100669 MARTIN- MCALLISTER 400.00 PERSONNEL EVALUATION 259295 7323 1400.6103 400.00 346063 4/1412011 112360 MAY, DOUG 88.96 UNIFORM PURCHASE 259447 040511 5630.6201 88.96 346064 4/14/2011 126941 MCQUAY INTERNATIONAL 1,504.00 PREVENTATIVE MAINT CONTRACT 259669 34917 5620.6230 1,504.00 346065 411412011 105603 MEDICINE LAKE TOURS 1,559.00 GOLDEN STRINGS_ TRIP 259446 040511 1628.6103.07 1,559.00 346066 411412011 101292 MED23S, ANDREW 416.20 CONFERENCE EXPENSES 259575 032811 1470.6104 416.20 346067 411412011. 113023 MEGGITT TRAINING SYSTEMS INC. 17,046.56 WIRING UPGRADE 259726 INV- 0049552 7412.6710 17,046.56 346068 4/14/2011 101483 MENARDS 99.49 CORDREEL, ALUMINUM 00001652 259296 46221 5913.6406 59.25 BITS, LUMBER 00001458 259297 32350 1301.6406 10.99 BUILDING MATERIALS 00001417 259322 40670 1646.6406 Subledger Account Description COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER GASOLINE LUBRICANTS 4/13/2011 7:45:22 Page - 14 Business Unit 50TH ST SELLING EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX 50TH ST SELLING PROFESSIONAL SERVICES POLICE DEPT. GENERAL LAUNDRY CENTENNIAL LAKES SERVICE CONTRACTS EQUIPMENT EDINBOROUGH PARK TRIPS PROF SERVICES SENIOR CITIZENS CONFERENCES & SCHOOLS FIRE DEPT. GENERAL EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT PSTF RANGE GENERAL SUPPLIES DISTRIBUTION GENERAL SUPPLIES GENERAL MAINTENANCE GENERAL SUPPLIES BUILDING MAINTENANCE 4/13/2011 7:45:22 Page - 15 Business Unit BUILDING MAINTENANCE BUILDING MAINTENANCE BUILDING MAINTENANCE BUILDING MAINTENANCE BUILDING MAINTENANCE SNOW & ICE REMOVAL CENTENNIAL LAKES BUILDING MAINTENANCE' BUILDING MAINTENANCE' CENTENNIAL LAKES CENTENNIAL LAKES 230.64 FIELD MARKING PAINT 00001538 259672 130842 1642.6544 LINE MARKING POWDER FIELD MAINTENANCE 230.64 346072 411412011 100885 METRO SALES INC 3,656.00 COPIER USAGE 259452 403522 1550.6230 SERVICE CONTRACTS EQUIPMENT CENTRAL SERVICES GENERAL 3,656.00 346073 4114/2011 100887 METROPOLITAN COUNCIL ENVIRONME 365,307.57 SEWER SERVICE 259453 0000956151 5922.6302 SEWER SERVICE METRO SEWER TREATMENT 365,307.57 346074 411412011 104650 MICRO CENTER 62.97 COMPUTER SUPPLIES 00009024 259576 3243037 5125.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES 62.97 c 346075 4f14/2011 127639 'MIDWAY FORD 28,984.49 2011 FORD F550 00005054 259673 84391 5900.1735 AUTOMOBILES & TRUCKS 28,984.49 346076 411412011 100019 MIDWESTARTFAIRS 83.58 CONSIGNMENT SALES 259409 7107 5120.5510 COST OF GOODS SOLD 83.58 MEDIA STUDIO UTILITY BALANCE SHEET ART SUPPLY GIFT GALLERY SHOP L CITY OF EDINA R55CKREG LOG20000 Council Check Register 4/11/2011 - 4/14/2011 Check # Date Amount Supplier I Explanation P00- Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description 27.92 STOWAWAYS 00001418 259323 40935 1646.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES ,. 79.57 BUILDING SUPPLIES 00001419 259324 40982 1646.6406 - GENERAL SUPPLIES 165.68 SAWHORSES, LUMBER 00001422 259325 41345 1646.6556 TOOLS 62.68 DRILL BITS, CORD 00001262 259326 - 43210 1646.6556 TOOLS 67.88 SAWHORSES, LEVEL 00001424 259327 43158 1646.6556 TOOLS 67.66 LUMBER, AIR HOSE 00001743 259408 47388 1318.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES 40.42 LIGHTS AND BULBS 00002017., 259449 143823 5630.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES 29.57 HARDWARE 00006533;. 259670 49111 1646.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES _ 82.04 LUMBER 00001521 259671 48672 1646.6577 LUMBER 793.15 346069 4114/2011 101987 MENARDS 113.35 FIXTURES, OUTLETS, PLANTERS 00002017 259450 73772 5630.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES 113.35 346070 4114/2011 104166 MENARDS 72.00 CEMENT, HOSE, BLEACH 00002018 259451 48196 5630.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES 72.00 346071 4/1412011 101891 `METRO ATHLETIC SUPPLY 4/13/2011 7:45:22 Page - 15 Business Unit BUILDING MAINTENANCE BUILDING MAINTENANCE BUILDING MAINTENANCE BUILDING MAINTENANCE BUILDING MAINTENANCE SNOW & ICE REMOVAL CENTENNIAL LAKES BUILDING MAINTENANCE' BUILDING MAINTENANCE' CENTENNIAL LAKES CENTENNIAL LAKES 230.64 FIELD MARKING PAINT 00001538 259672 130842 1642.6544 LINE MARKING POWDER FIELD MAINTENANCE 230.64 346072 411412011 100885 METRO SALES INC 3,656.00 COPIER USAGE 259452 403522 1550.6230 SERVICE CONTRACTS EQUIPMENT CENTRAL SERVICES GENERAL 3,656.00 346073 4114/2011 100887 METROPOLITAN COUNCIL ENVIRONME 365,307.57 SEWER SERVICE 259453 0000956151 5922.6302 SEWER SERVICE METRO SEWER TREATMENT 365,307.57 346074 411412011 104650 MICRO CENTER 62.97 COMPUTER SUPPLIES 00009024 259576 3243037 5125.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES 62.97 c 346075 4f14/2011 127639 'MIDWAY FORD 28,984.49 2011 FORD F550 00005054 259673 84391 5900.1735 AUTOMOBILES & TRUCKS 28,984.49 346076 411412011 100019 MIDWESTARTFAIRS 83.58 CONSIGNMENT SALES 259409 7107 5120.5510 COST OF GOODS SOLD 83.58 MEDIA STUDIO UTILITY BALANCE SHEET ART SUPPLY GIFT GALLERY SHOP L 4/1312011 7:45:22 Page - 16 Subledger Account Description Business Unit GENERAL SUPPLIES FIRE DEPT. GENERAL CONTRACTED REPAIRS FIRE DEPT. GENERAL CONFERENCES & SCHOOLS FIRE DEPT. GENERAL CONTRACTED REPAIRS DISTRIBUTION WATER PURCHASED DISTRIBUTION PROFESSIONAL SERVICES POLICE DEPT. GENERAL GENERAL SUPPLIES GRILL CHEMICALS PSTF FIRE TOWER GENERAL SUPPLIES DISTRIBUTION CONFERENCES & SCHOOLS PATHS & HARD SURFACE CONFERENCES & SCHOOLS PARK MAINTENANCE GENERAL REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN ACCESSORIES EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN CITY OF EDINA R55CKREG LOG20000 Council Check Register 4111/2011 — 4/14/2011 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No 346077 411412011 101161 MIDWEST CHEMICAL SUPPLY 495.18 TISSUE, TOWELS, NAPKINS 00003544 259577 30859 1470.6406 495.18 346078 4/1412011 100351 MIKE'S SHOE REPAIR INC. 30.00 BUNKER GEAR REPAIR 259578 3312011 1470.6180 30.00 346079 411412011 103942 MINN FIRE SERVICE CERTIFICATIO 75.00 FFII CERTIFICATION EXAM 259581 849 1470.6104 75.00 346080 411412011 100913 MINNEAPOLIS & SUBURBAN SEWER & 1,592.50 REPLACE CURBSTOP & STANDPIPBl0001620 259579 33805 5913.6180 1,592.50 346081 411412011 103216 MINNEAPOLIS FINANCE DEPARTMENT 9,775.17 431 - 0005.300 WATER PURCHASE 259328 040511 5913.6601 9,775.17 346082 411412011 103216 MINNEAPOLIS FINANCE DEPARTMENT 204.00 USER ACCESS FEE 259454 400413001735 1400.6103 204.00 346083 411412011 102174 MINNEAPOLIS OXYGEN COMPANY 21.95 CO25 259455 8103110105 5421.6406 49.03 CO2, METHANE 259580 8103110223 7413.6545 70.98 346084 411412011 101376 MINNESOTA PIPE & EQUIPMENT 446.40 HYDRAULIC PARTS 00001615 259298 0264608 5913.6406 446.40 346085 411412011 101459 MINNESOTA RECREATION & PARK AS 415.00 PLAYGROUND SAFETY COURSE 00001536 259329 JOHN HARRIS 1647.6104 525.00 PLAYGROUND SAFETY COURSE 00001707 259674 040811 1640.6104 940.00 346086 411412011 100908 MINNESOTA WANNER CO. 78.92 FITTINGS, FOG NOZZLE 00005884 259410 0087911 -IN 1553.6530 1,184.20 REEL, HOSE 00005817 259582 0087953 -IN 1553.6585 4/1312011 7:45:22 Page - 16 Subledger Account Description Business Unit GENERAL SUPPLIES FIRE DEPT. GENERAL CONTRACTED REPAIRS FIRE DEPT. GENERAL CONFERENCES & SCHOOLS FIRE DEPT. GENERAL CONTRACTED REPAIRS DISTRIBUTION WATER PURCHASED DISTRIBUTION PROFESSIONAL SERVICES POLICE DEPT. GENERAL GENERAL SUPPLIES GRILL CHEMICALS PSTF FIRE TOWER GENERAL SUPPLIES DISTRIBUTION CONFERENCES & SCHOOLS PATHS & HARD SURFACE CONFERENCES & SCHOOLS PARK MAINTENANCE GENERAL REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN ACCESSORIES EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN CITY OF EDINA 4/13/2011 7:45:22 R55CKREG. LOG20000 Council Check Register Page - 17 4111/2011 - 4/14/2011 - Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit 1,263.12 346087 411412011 128914 MINUTEMAN PRESS 235.42 POSTCARDS 259299 9108 1504.6218 EDUCATION PROGRAMS HUMAN RELATION COMMISSION 235.42 346088 411412011 104477 MN STATE BOARD OF ASSESSORS 115.50 FEE FOR`LICENSE 259583 040711 1190.6105 DUES & SUBSCRIPTIONS ASSESSING , 115.50 346089 411412011 122019 MOORE CREATIVE TALENT 115.00 TALENT FEE FOR COMMERCIALS 259339 130891 5622.6122 ADVERTISING OTHER 50TH ST SELLING 115.00 TALENT FEE FOR COMMERCIALS 259339 130891 5842.6122 ADVERTISING OTHER YORK SELLING ' 115.00 TALENT FEE FOR COMMERCIALS 259339 130891 5862.6122 ADVERTISING OTHER VERNON SELLING 345.00 346090 4/1412011 108668 MORRIS, GRAYLYN 150.00 EP ENTERTAINMENT 4/21111 259714 040911 5621.6136 PROFESSIONAL SVC - .OTHER EDINBOROUGH ADMINISTRATION 150.00 346091 4/1412011 100906 MTLDISTRIBUTING INC. 177.33 MOWER.PARTS 00002010 259456 777417 -00 5630.6530 REPAIR PARTS CENTENNIAL LAKES 10.40 MOWER PARTS 00002010 259457 777417 -01 5630.6530 REPAIR PARTS CENTENNIAL LAKES 701.21 FUNGICIDE 00002022 259458 777495 -00 5630.6540 FERTILIZER CENTENNIAL LAKES 888.94 346092 411412011 104671 MUSCO SPORTS LIGHTING LLC 8,734.89 CONTRACT REPAIRS 00001390 259675 221252 1647.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES PATHS & HARD SURFACE 8,734.89 346093 4/1412011 103267 NATIONAL GOLF FOUNDATION . 275.00 ANNUAL DUES 259676 ID 1032214 5410.6105 DUES & SUBSCRIPTIONS GOLF ADMINISTRATION 275.00 346094 4/1412011 104360 NIKE USA INC. 295.44 MERCHANDISE 259677 932398622 5440.5511 COST OF GOODS - PRO SHOP PRO SHOP RETAIL SALES 492.00 MERCHANDISE 259678 932501439 5440.5511 COST OF GOODS - PRO SHOP PRO SHOP RETAIL SALES 787.44 346095 411412011 125442 NORMAN_ DALE PTO 187.50 ART CENTER AD 259411 MAR142001 5110.6122 ADVERTISING OTHER ART CENTER ADMINISTRATION 187.50 R55CKREG LOG20000 CITY OF EDINA 4/13/2011 7:45:22 Council Check Register Page - 18 4/11/2011 - 4/14/2011 Check # Date Amount Supplier/ Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit 346096 4/14/2011 116816 NORTH IMAGE APPAREL INC. 26.00 UNIFORM PURCHASE 00005604 259412 NIA4866B 1301.6201 LAUNDRY GENERAL MAINTENANCE 26.00 346097 411412011 117830 NORTHLAND BUSINESS SYSTEMS INC 75.00 REPAIR RECORDER 259459 IN26707 1400.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES POLICE DEPT. GENERAL 75.00 346098 4/14/2011 100933 NORTHWEST GRAPHIC SUPPLY CO. 381.83 PAINT TUBES, CANVAS 00009023 259413 40282800 5120.5510 COST OF GOODS SOLD ART SUPPLY GIFT GALLERY SHOP 152.55 ART PAINT 00009023 259414 40282801 5120.5510 - COST OF GOODS SOLD ART SUPPLY GIFT GALLERY SHOP 534.38 346099 411412011 103678 OFFICE DEPOT 44.97 OFFICE SUPPLIES 00006034 259300 1326561327 5410.6513 OFFICE SUPPLIES GOLF ADMINISTRATION 105.25 BINDERS, BATTERIES, PAPER 00002009 259460 556693667001 5631.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES CENTENNIAL ADMINISTRATION 150.22 346100 4/1412011 100936 OLSEN COMPANIES 21.99 SHACKLES 00001519 259340 632475 1644.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES TREES & MAINTENANCE 519.17 TOOLBOX 00001534 259679 633113 1641.6556 TOOLS MOWING 541.16 346101 4/14/2011 104163 ORECK CORPORATION 418.36 VACUUM CLEANER, BAGS 00001395 259341 18977116 1646.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES BUILDING MAINTENANCE 418.36 346102 4/1412011 103624 P & L AUTOMOTIVE INC. 212.68 SCOTCHGUARD VEHICLE 259725 212979 1470.6180 CONTRACTED REPAIRS FIRE DEPT. GENERAL 212.68 346103 4/14/2011 100347 PAUSTIS & SONS 1,070.50 259503 8300263 -IN 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 436.75 259504 8300267 -IN 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING 555.90 259505 8300270 -IN 5662.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 2,063.15 346104 411412011 125492 PAYPAL INC. 39.95 MARCH 2011 FEE 259415 10892199 5910.6155 BANK SERVICES CHARGES GENERAL (BILLING) 39.95 R55CKREG LOG20000 CITY OF EDINA 4/13/2011 7:45:22 Council Check Register Page - 19 4/11/2011 - 4/14/2011 Check # Date Amount Supplier /Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description. Business Unit 346105 411412011 100945 PEPSI -COLA COMPANY 240.38 259461 60826625 5421.5510 COST OF GOODS SOLD GRILL 282.31 259680 60826628 5210.5510 COST OF GOODS SOLD GOLF DOME PROGRAM 522.69 346106 - 411412011 125978 PETSMART#459 102.39 K9 DOG FOOD 00003037 259462 T -7311 4607.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES EDINA CRIME FUND K9 DONATION 102.39 346107 411412011 100743 PHILLIPS WINE & SPIRITS 6,499.21 259369 2048287 5642.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR YORK SELLING 1,259.81 259370 2048291 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 991.84 259371 2048292 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 57.12 259372 2048293 5862.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX VERNON SELLING 935.62 259506 2051428 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 545.26 259507 2051426 5862.5513 COST'OF.GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 166.71 259620 2051424 5842.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR YORK SELLING 2,759.89 259621 2051425 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 2,103.28 259622 2051423 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 289.13 259623 2051427 5862.5512 COST OF,GOODS SOLD LIQUOR VERNON SELLING 45.07 259749 2051422 5822.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX 50TH ST SELLING 191.76 259750 2051421 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING 992.39 259751 2051420 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING 16,837.09 346108 411412011 100119 PING 348:68 GOLF CLUBS 259463 10622677 5440.5511 COST OF GOODS - PRO SHOP PRO SHOP RETAIL SALES 348.68 346109 411412011 124176 PINNACLE DISTRIBUTING 281.20 259752 12194 5862.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX VERNON SELLING 281.20 346110 411412011 100958 PLUNKETrs- PEST CONTROL 44.52 PEST CONTROL 259584 2274154 7411.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES PSTF OCCUPANCY 44.52 346111 411412011 119620 POMP'S TIRE SERVICE INC. 406.13 TIRES 00005758 259416 304929 1553.6583 TIRES & TUBES EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 2,057.14 TIRES 00005758 259417 304829 1553.6583 TIRES & TUBES EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 220.00 SCRAP DISPOSAL FEE 00005758 259681 318205 1553.6583 TIRES & TUBES EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 146.38 TIRES 00005890 259682 335332 1553.6583 TIRES & TUBES EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN R55CKREG LOG20000.! CITY OF EDINA Council Check Register 4/11/2011 - 4/14/2011 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No i Subledger Account Description 292.84 TIRES 00005890 259683 337953 1553.6583 TIRES 8 TUBES 3,122.49 i i 346112 411412011 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 100961 POSTMASTER - USPS COST OF GOODS SOLD. LIQUOR YORK SELLING f 50TH ST SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR YORK SELLING 300.00 NEWSLETTER POSTAGE COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR 259721 041111 1628:6235 300.00 346113 4114/2011 102728 PRECISION LANDSCAPE AND TREE C- i 1,683.28 TREE REMOVAL 00001509, 259330 21067 4088.6103 523.69 TREE REMOVAL 00001508 259331 .21068 4088.6103 2,206.97 346114 411412011 128861 PRIMARY PRODUCTS COMPANY 110.55 ALC HAND WIPES 259464 44855 1400.6406 110.55 w 346115 411412011 100966 PRINTERS SERVICE INC 126.00 BLADE SHARPENING 00008082 259684 --252898 5521.6215` 126.00 346116 411412011 106341 PRIORITY DISPATCH 1,980.00 PRO QA MAINTENANCE 259465 65222! 1400.6230 1,980.00 346117 4/1412011 106322 PROSOURCE SUPPLY 1,148.95 FLOOR FINISH, STRIPPER 00002019 259466 5129 5630.6511 229.94 BOWL BRUSHES, TISSUE 00008088 259685 5159 5511.6511 1,378.89 346118 411412011 119507 PUKKA INC. 1,071.00 CAPS, VISORS 00006128 259467 BB00023 -IN 5440.5511 1,071.00 346119 411412011 100971 QUALITY WINE 646.13 259373 440524 -00 5842.5513 747.80 259374 440696 -00 5842.5513 . 113.60 259375 437517 -00 5842.5512 60.00- 259376 436470 -00 5822.5513 1,546.00 259508 440509 -00 5842.5512 1,939.41 259509 440510 -00 5842.5512 424.93 259510 440571 -00 5822.5512 .284.80 259511 440698 -00 5822.5513 POSTAGE PROFESSIONAL SERVICES PROFESSIONAL SERVICES GENERAL SUPPLIES 4/13/2011 7:45:22 Page- 20, Business Unit EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN SENIOR CITIZENS TREE REMOVAL TREE REMOVAL POLICE DEPT. GENERAL EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE ARENA ICE MAINT SERVICEiCONTRACTS EQUIPMENT POLICE DEPT: GENERAL CLEANING SUPPLIES CENTENNIAL LAKES CLEANING SUPPLIES ARENA BLDG/GROUNDS COST OF GOODS - PRO SHOP PRO SHOP RETAIL SALES 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 WINE 50TH ST SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR YORK SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR YORK SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR 50TH ST SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING R55CKREG LOG20000 CITY OF EDINA Council Check Register 4/11/2011 - 4/14/2011 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO`# Doc No Inv No Account No 413.33 259512 440522 -00 5822.5513 2,188.78 259513 440697 -00 5862.5513 950.93 259514 440663 -00 5862.5513 2,288.17- 259624. 440505 -00 5862.5512 128.00 259753 440969 -00 5822.5513 5911.6188 1628.6188 5841.6188 1470.6188 5821.6188 1622.6188 5511.6188 1646.6188 5932.6188 1550.6188 1550.6188 5420.6188 1628.6188 1550.6188 1550.6188 1552.6188 5913.6188 1400.6188 1646.6188 4090.6406 11,611.88 Page - 21 Subledger Account Description 346120 411412011 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 123898 QWEST' COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 56.00 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR 259301 032811 50TH ST SELLING 58.70 WELL PUMPS 259301 032811 TELEPHONE 114.23 TELEPHONE 259301 032811 50TH ST OCCUPANCY 117.47 SKATING & HOCKEY 259301 032811 TELEPHONE 138.59 TELEPHONE 259301 032811 CENTRAL SERVICES GENERAL 166.26 CENTRAL SERVICES GENERAL 259301 032811 TELEPHONE 228.73 TELEPHONE 259301 032811 CENTRAL SERVICES GENERAL 235.16 CENT SVC PW BUILDING 259301 032811 TELEPHONE 266.83 - 259301 032811 2,063.04 259301 032811 526.14 612 E01 -8392 259704 8392 -4/11 526.69 612,E24 -8657 259705 8657 -4/11 295.82 612 E24 -8656 259706 8656 -4/11 606.52 612 E01 -0426 259707 0426 -4/11 606.52 612 E12 -6797 259708 6797 -4/11 200.52 952 835-0661 259709 6661 -4/11 57.73 952 926-0092 259710 00924/11 18.69 651 281 71355 8001311 259711 1311 -4/11 121.90 952926 -0419 259712 0419 -4/11 6,405.54 346121 411412011 117692 R & B CLEANING INC. 2,009.25 RAMP STAIRWELL CLEANING 00001750 259418 914 2,009.25 346122 411412011 128343 RICHFIELD DQ GRILL AND CHILL 131.10 DILLY BARS 259686 551 131.10 346123 411412011 104308 RIO SUITES HOTEL 386.40 CONFERENCE LODGING 259585- 040411 1,159.20 CONFERENCE LODGING 259585 040411 1,545.60 5911.6188 1628.6188 5841.6188 1470.6188 5821.6188 1622.6188 5511.6188 1646.6188 5932.6188 1550.6188 1550.6188 5420.6188 1628.6188 1550.6188 1550.6188 1552.6188 5913.6188 1400.6188 1646.6188 4090.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES 50TH &FRANCE MAINTENANCE 5620.5510 COST OF GOODS SOLD EDINBOROUGH PARK 1400.6104 CONFERENCES &SCHOOLS POLICE DEPT. GENERAL 2310.6104 CONFERENCES &'SCHOOLS E911 4/13/2011 7:45:22 Page - 21 Subledger Account Description Business Unit 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 WINE 50TH ST SELLING TELEPHONE WELL PUMPS TELEPHONE SENIOR CITIZENS TELEPHONE YORK "OCCUPANCY TELEPHONE FIRE DEPT. GENERAL TELEPHONE 50TH ST OCCUPANCY TELEPHONE SKATING & HOCKEY TELEPHONE ARENA BLDG /GROUNDS TELEPHONE BUILDING MAINTENANCE TELEPHONE GENERAL STORM SEWER TELEPHONE CENTRAL SERVICES GENERAL TELEPHONE CENTRAL SERVICES GENERAL TELEPHONE CLUB HOUSE TELEPHONE SENIOR CITIZENS TELEPHONE 'CENTRAL SERVICES GENERAL TELEPHONE _ CENTRAL SERVICES GENERAL TELEPHONE CENT SVC PW BUILDING TELEPHONE DISTRIBUTION TELEPHONE POLICE DEPT. GENERAL TELEPHONE BUILDING MAINTENANCE GENERAL SUPPLIES 50TH &FRANCE MAINTENANCE 5620.5510 COST OF GOODS SOLD EDINBOROUGH PARK 1400.6104 CONFERENCES &SCHOOLS POLICE DEPT. GENERAL 2310.6104 CONFERENCES &'SCHOOLS E911 R55CKREG LOG20000 CITY OF EDINA 4/13/2011 7:45:22 Council Check Register Page - 22 4/11/2011 — 4/14/2011 Check # Date Amount Supplier/ Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit 348124 411412011 100987 SA-AG INC 702.24 SAND 00001207 259419 70031 5939.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES STORM SEWER SPECIAL PROJECTS 700.35 SAND 00001207 259420 70054 5939.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES STORM SEWER SPECIAL PROJECTS 1,402.59 346125 411412011 100988 SAFETY KLEEN 113.07 RECYCLE PARTS WASHER 00005895 259421 924003372 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 113.07 346126 411412011 101822 SAM'S CLUB DIRECT 177.31 ACCT #9350 CAMERA 259468 101.42 5410.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES GOLF ADMINISTRATION 5.78 ACCT #9350 PEANUTS 259469 MEMBER 101-42 5421.5510 COST OF GOODS SOLD GRILL 183.09 346127 411412011 104788 SANDY'S PROMOTIONAL STUFF 1,391.21 CONSTRUCTION HATS -OPEN HOUGE01224 259422 SH1112 5913.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES DISTRIBUTION 1,391.21 346128 411412011 127049 SCHNEIDER, KATHERINE 480.00 FITNESS TRAINING 259586 040511 1470.6104 CONFERENCES & SCHOOLS FIRE DEPT. GENERAL 480.00 346129 411412011 100995 SEH 102.29 RIDGE ROAD RECONSTR 259302 242113 03461.1705.20 CONSULTING DESIGN SS-461 RIDGE RD RECONSTRUCTION 170.48 RIDGE ROAD RECONSTR 259302 242113 05510.1705.20 CONSULTING DESIGN WM -510 RIDGE RD RECONSTRUCTION 1,159.25 RIDGE ROAD RECONSTR 259302 242113 01384.1705.20 CONSULTING DESIGN RIDGE ROAD RECONSTRUCTION 1,977.56 RIDGE ROAD RECONSTR 259302 242113 04374.1705.20 CONSULTING DESIGN STS -374 RIDGE ROAD 3,409.58 346130 4/14/2011 101862 SEVEN CORNERS HARDWARE INC. 64.08 DOOR HASPS 00001617 259303 156693 5921.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES SANITARY LIFT STATION MAINT 402.49 TARPS 00001659 259423 163347 1301.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES GENERAL MAINTENANCE 466.57 346131 4/1412011 103237 SHIRLEY, TOM 106.39 MILEAGE REIMBURSEMENT 259687 040411 5631.6107 MILEAGE OR ALLOWANCE CENTENNIAL ADMINISTRATION 106.39 346132 4114/2011 101000 SIR SPEEDY 40.61 BUSINESS CARDS 259304 68352 1550.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES CENTRAL SERVICES GENERAL 40.61 R55CKREG LOG20000 259515 1537474 CITY OF EDINA COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING 628.00 259516 1489662 Council Check Register COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING - 241.50 259517 1537475 4/11/2011 - 4/14/2011 VERNON SELLING Check # Date Amount Supplier I Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description 346133 4/1412011 5862.5512 103339 SMITH - SHARPE FIREBRICK SUPPLY VERNON SELLING 1.344.00 259754 1489664 5842.5513 80.67 DURABLANKET 00009179 259424 111298 5111.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES 80.67 346139 4114/2011 101016'. STREICHERS 1346134 4/1412011 126213 SORENSON, JULIA 1,379.75 AMMO' 259305 1825212 24.00 SUPER SUNDAY REFUND 259760 041111 1600.4390.15 GEN ADAPTIVE REC 259588 1826472 24.00 1,411.81 346135 4114/2011 122368 SOUTH METRO PUBLIC SAFETY 4114/2011 102639 STROHMYER, TOM 4,374.00 2ND OTR DUES 259470 8537 1470.6221 RANGE RENTAL 259715 040911 5,755.00 2ND QTR DUES 259470 8537 1400.6221 RANGE RENTAL . 10,129.00 346141 411412011 101017 SUBURBAN CHEVROLET 346136 411412011 127878 SOUTHERN WINE AND SPIRITS 51.49 LATCH 00005852 4/13/2011 7:45:22 Page - 23 Business Unit ART CENTER BLDG /MAINT PARK ADMIN. GENERAL FIRE DEPT. GENERAL POLICE DEPT. GENERAL 104.50 259515 1537474 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING 628.00 259516 1489662 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING - 241.50 259517 1537475 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 249.50 259518 1469660 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING 58.95 259625 1495402 5862.5512 COST OF.GOODS SOLD LIQUOR VERNON SELLING 1.344.00 259754 1489664 5842.5513 COST OF -GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 346137 4114/2011 104672_ SPRINT 440.95 CARD READERS 259587 312188813 -040 1470.6151 440.95 346138 411412011 102251 ST. ANDREWS PRODUCTS CO 188.64 MERCHANDISE 259688 0000640530 5440.5511 188.64 346139 4114/2011 101016'. STREICHERS 1,379.75 AMMO' 259305 1825212 1400.6551 32.06 UNIFORM PATCH SEWING 259588 1826472 1470.6180 1,411.81 346140 4114/2011 102639 STROHMYER, TOM 150.00 EP ENTERTAINMENT 4/28/11 259715 040911 5621.6136 150.00 346141 411412011 101017 SUBURBAN CHEVROLET 51.49 LATCH 00005852 259589 308999 1553.6530 80.36 BRACE 00005680 259689 296106 1553.6530 EQUIPMENT RENTAL. FIRE DEPT. GENERAL COST OF GOODS - PRO SHOP PRO SHOP RETAIL SALES AMMUNITION POLICE DEPT. GENERAL CONTRACTED REPAIRS FIRE DEPT. GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SVC - OTHER. -- EDINBOROUGH ADMINISTRATION REPAIR PARTS REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN R55CKREG LOG20000 Check # Date CITY OF EDINA Council Check Register 4/11/2011 - 4/1412011 Amount Supplier I Explanation' PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description 792.92 VEHICLE REPAIRS 00005944 259690 587268 1553.6180 CONTRACTED REPAIRS 1,578.00 346146 411412011 104932 TAYLOR MADE 1,396.80 GOLF CLUBS 259473`: 15383489 99.60 GOLF CLUB 259474 15391439 87.00 GOLF CLUB 259475 .15395365 627.40 MERCHANDISE 259476 15400548 388.80 MERCHANDISE 259477 15400546 275.67 MERCHANDISE 259478 15400547 69.60 MERCHANDISE 259479 15429040 87.00 MERCHANDISE 259692 15436970 87.00 MERCHANDISE 25.9693 15436971 3,118.87 346147 4/14/2011 101035 THORPE DISTRIBUTING COMPANY 590.90 259627 00774441 839.65 259628 634038 1,430.55 346148 411412011 101826 THYSSENKRUPP ELEVATOR CORP. 421.13 QTR MAINT CONTRACT 00008091 259694 837880 421.13 4/1312011 7:45:22 " Page - 24 Business Unit EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN MAGAZINE/NEWSLETTER EXPENSE COMMUNICATIONS ADVERTISING LEGAL ADVERTISING LEGAL DATA PROCESSING COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER 5440.5511 COST OF GOODS - PRO SHOP 924.77 COST OF GOODS - PRO SHOP 5440.5511 COST OF GOODS - PRO SHOP 5440.5511 346142 411412011 COST OF GOODS - PRO SHOP 100593 SULLIVAN, JOSEPH F COST OF GOODS - PRO SHOP 5440.5511 COST OF GOODS - PRO SHOP 5440.5511 COST OF GOODS - PRO SHOP 841.45 ABOUT TOWN COLUMNS 259691 040511 2210.6123 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER 641.45 346143 4/1412011 100900 SUN NEWSPAPERS 34.32 PUBLISH NOTICE 259471 1308227 1120.6120 42090 PUBLISH NOTICE 259472 1308226 1120.6120 77.22 346144 411412011 101910 SUNGARD PUBLIC SECTOR INC. 43.55 SHIPPING CHARGES FOR SERVER 259425'." 33727 - 1400.6160 43.55 346145 4/14/2011 120998 SURLY BREWING CO. 1,108.00 259519 02335 5822.5514 470.00 259626- 02338"' 5862.5514 1,578.00 346146 411412011 104932 TAYLOR MADE 1,396.80 GOLF CLUBS 259473`: 15383489 99.60 GOLF CLUB 259474 15391439 87.00 GOLF CLUB 259475 .15395365 627.40 MERCHANDISE 259476 15400548 388.80 MERCHANDISE 259477 15400546 275.67 MERCHANDISE 259478 15400547 69.60 MERCHANDISE 259479 15429040 87.00 MERCHANDISE 259692 15436970 87.00 MERCHANDISE 25.9693 15436971 3,118.87 346147 4/14/2011 101035 THORPE DISTRIBUTING COMPANY 590.90 259627 00774441 839.65 259628 634038 1,430.55 346148 411412011 101826 THYSSENKRUPP ELEVATOR CORP. 421.13 QTR MAINT CONTRACT 00008091 259694 837880 421.13 4/1312011 7:45:22 " Page - 24 Business Unit EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN MAGAZINE/NEWSLETTER EXPENSE COMMUNICATIONS ADVERTISING LEGAL ADVERTISING LEGAL DATA PROCESSING COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER 5440.5511 COST OF GOODS - PRO SHOP 5440.5511 -- COST OF GOODS - PRO SHOP 5440.5511 COST OF GOODS - PRO SHOP 5440.5511 COST OF GOODS - PRO SHOP 5440.5511 COST OF GOODS - PRO SHOP 5440.5511 COST OF GOODS - PRO SHOP 5440.5511 COST OF GOODS - PRO SHOP 5440.5511 COST OF GOODS - PRO SHOP 5440.5511 COST OF GOODS - PRO SHOP 5421.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER 5862.5514: COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER 5510.6105 DUES 8 SUBSCRIPTIONS ADMINISTRATION ADMINISTRATION POLICE DEPT. GENERAL 50TH ST SELLING VERNON SELLING PRO SHOP RETAIL SALES PRO SHOP RETAIL SALES PRO SHOP RETAIL SALES PRO SHOP RETAIL SALES . PRO SHOP RETAIL SALES PRO SHOP RETAIL SALES PRO SHOP RETAIL SALES PRO SHOP RETAIL SALES PRO SHOP RETAIL SALES GRILL VERNON SELLING ARENA ADMINISTRATION R55CKREG LOG20000 Business Unit ADVERTISING OTHER VERNON SELLING CITY OF EDINA 56TH ST SELLING ADVERTISING OTHER YORK SELLING Council Check Register 4/11/2011 - 4/14/2011 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No 346149 4/14/2011 120700 TIGER OAK PUBLICATIONS INC. 291.66 MAGAZINE ADVERTISING 259695 2011 -56455 5862.6122 291.67 MAGAZINE ADVERTISING 259695 2011 -56455 5822.6122 291.67 MAGAZINE ADVERTISING 259695 2011 -56455 5842.6122 875.00 346150 4114/2011 103331 TILSNER, DONNA 100.00 VAN VALKENBURG CONCESSIONS 259762 CASH FOR 4000.1040 100.00 346151 4/14/2011 123129 TIMESAVER OFF_ SITE SECRETARIAL 231.25 DRAFT MINUTES 3/15/11 259480 M18311 1120.6103 231.25 346152 4114/2011 101474 TITLEIST - 2,424.47 MERCHANDISE 259481 2392002 5440.5511 1,455.60 MERCHANDISE 259482 2396267 5440.5511 173.63 MERCHANDISE 259483 2422984 5440.5511 146.52 MERCHANDISE 259696 2431647 5440.5511 4,200.22 346153 411412011 101038 TOLL GAS & WELDING SUPPLY 227.19 WELDING GAS 00005834 259426 343585 1553.6580 40.80 WELDING SUPPLIES 00002020 259484 419886 5630.6406 11.18 WELDING GAS 00005945 259697 419885 1553.6580 279.17 346154 4/14/2011 - 124753 TOSHIBA FINANCIAL SERVICES 210.08 COPIER USAGE 259590 174875898 7410.6575 210.08 346165 411412011 101693 TOTAL REGISTER SYSTEMS 14.25 MONTHLY FTP FILE. 259342 26444 5820.6160 14.25 MONTHLY FTP FILE 259342 26444 5840.6160 14.25 MONTHLY FTP FILE 259342 26444 5860.6160 42.75 346156 4114/2011 120886 TRENCHLESS TECHNOLOGY CENTER 45.00 FORUM REGISTRATION 259591 040411 5919.6104 45.00 346167 .. 4/1412011 118190 TURFWERKS LLC 411312011 7:45:22 Page- 25 Subledger Account Description Business Unit ADVERTISING OTHER VERNON SELLING ADVERTISING OTHER 56TH ST SELLING ADVERTISING OTHER YORK SELLING CHANGE FUND WORK CAP BALANCE SHEET PROFESSIONAL SERVICES ADMINISTRATION COST OF GOODS - PRO SHOP PRO SHOP RETAIL SALES COST OF GOODS - PRO SHOP PRO SHOP RETAIL SALES COST OF GOODS - PRO SHOP PRO SHOP RETAIL SALES COST OF GOODS - PRO SHOP PRO SHOP RETAIL SALES WELDING SUPPLIES GENERAL SUPPLIES WELDING SUPPLIES PRINTING e DATA PROCESSING DATA PROCESSING DATA PROCESSING CONFERENCES & SCHOOLS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN CENTENNIAL LAKES EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN PSTF ADMINISTRATION 50TH STREET GENERAL LIQUOR YORK GENERAL VERNON LIQUOR GENERAL TRAINING R55CKREG LOG20000 CITY OF EDINA 4/13/2011 7:45:22 Council Check Register Page - 26 4/11/2011 - 4/14/2011 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit 556.11 HINGE ASSEMBLIES 00005894 259306 0123657 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 75.28 MOWER PARTS 00001515 259698 S126049A 1641.6530 REPAIR PARTS MOWING 631.39 346158 4/1412011 123969 TWIN CITIES OCCUPATIONAL HEALT • 120.00 PRE -EMP PHYSICALS 259307 101743682BAL 1550.6121 ADVERTISING PERSONNEL CENTRAL SERVICES GENERAL 120.00 346159 4/1412011 128912 TWIN CITY OUTDOOR SERVICES 244.27 HYDRANT METER RENTAL REFUND 259308 040111 5913.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES DISTRIBUTION 244.27 346160 4114/2011 115379 U.S. BANK 17.90 NET ZERO 259699 040411 1500.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES CONTINGENCIES 117.60 INTERNET 259699 040411 1550.6155 BANK SERVICES CHARGES CENTRAL SERVICES GENERAL 135.50 346161. 4/14/2011 103973 ULINE 717.57 TAKE -A- NUMBER SYSTEM 259592 37379811 7414.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES PUBLIC PROGRAMS 717.57 346162 4114/2011 101051 UNIFORMS UNLIMITED 356.50 UNIFORMS 259309 033111 1419.6203 UNIFORM ALLOWANCE RESERVE PROGRAM 380.10 UNIFORMS 259309 033111 1401.6203 UNIFORM ALLOWANCE EMERGENCY RESPONSE TEAM 2,042.86 UNIFORMS 259309 033111 1400.6203 UNIFORM ALLOWANCE POLICE DEPT. GENERAL 2,779.46 346163 4/1412011 103298 UPS STORE #1715, THE 27.85 MAIL SAMPLES 00001619 259427 TRAN:3014 5915.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES WATER TREATMENT 27.85 346164 411412011 101908 US FOODSERVICE INC 186.77 CUST 43805514 259485 033111 5421.6511 CLEANING SUPPLIES GRILL 195.44 CUST 43805514 259485 033111 5421.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES GRILL 468.88 CUST 43805514 259485 033111 5421.5510 COST OF GOODS SOLD GRILL 851.09 348185 411412011 114238 USA BLUE BOOK 1,042.06 WRENCHES, FITTINGS 00001606 259428 364509 5913.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES DISTRIBUTION 1,042.06 346166 411412011 122564 VALLEY NATIONAL GASES LLC R55CKREG LOG20000 CENT SVC PW BUILDING GENERAL SUPPLIES VERNON SELLING CITY OF EDINA VERNON SELLING PAPER SUPPLIES VERNON SELLING Council Check Register 4/11/2011 - 4/14/2011 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No 265.00 OXYGEN 00003649 259593 216027 1470.6510 265.00 346167 411412011 105910 VAN METER & ASSOCIATES INC. 135.00 TRAINING CONFERENCE 259310 040411 1400.6104 135.00 346168 411412011 101068 VAN PAPER CO. 37.88 CAN LINERS 00001647 259429 193267 -00 1552.6406 8.36 NEUTRAL CLEANER 259486 193334 -01 5862.6406 83.89 CAN LINERS, UTENSILS 259487 193334 -00 5862.6406 469.15 LIQUOR BAGS 259487 193334 -00 5862.6512 599.28 346169 411412011 101066 VIKING.ELECTRIC SUPPLY 542.78 WIRE, CONNECTORS 00001747 259700 5315222 05508.1705.31 542.78 346170 4/1412011 119454 VINOCOPUI 191.09 259520 0037616 -IN 5822.5513 642.60 259521 0037615 -IN 5862.5513 268.22 259629 0037614 -IN 5862.5512 1,101.91 346171 411412011 100023 VOGEL, ROBERT C. 900.00 CLG GRANT - EDINA WOMEN 259763 211010 - 1140.6103 900.00 346172 411412011 106699 WALSER CHRYSLER JEEP 190.53 INSULATORS 00005815 259430 176370CHWB 1553.6530 190.53- RETURN 00005815 259431 CM178370CHWB 1553.6530 119.47 SUPPORTS 00005815 259432 178418CHW8 1553.6530 119.47 346173 411412011 105440 ' WEIG,LE, SUE 167.41 PETTY CASH 259488 040611 1628.6406. 167.41 346174 411412011 106501 WERNER ELECTRIC SUPPLY 83.67 STAB ASSEMBLY 00001589 259433 S6406888.001 5913.6406 83.67 Subledger Account Description FIRST AID SUPPLIES 4/13/2011 7:45:22 Page - 27 Business Unit FIRE DEPT. GENERAL CONFERENCES & SCHOOLS POLICE DEPT. GENERAL GENERAL SUPPLIES CENT SVC PW BUILDING GENERAL SUPPLIES VERNON SELLING GENERAL SUPPLIES VERNON SELLING PAPER SUPPLIES VERNON SELLING MATERIALS/SUPPLIES WM -508 SCADA SYSTEM COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR PROFESSIONAL SERVICES REPAIR PARTS REPAIR:PARTS REPAIR PARTS GENERAL SUPPLIES ) GENERAL SUPPLIES 50TH ST SELLING VERNON SELLING VERNON SELLING PLANNING EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN SENIOR CITIZENS DISTRIBUTION R55CKREG LOG20000 CITY OF EDINA Council Check Register 4/11/2011 - 4/14/2011 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description 346175 4/1412011 103196 WHEELER HARDWARE CO 3,196.00 DOOR HINGES 00008093 259701 SPI13174 5511.6180 CONTRACTED_REPAIRS 3,196.00 346.176 4/1412011 101033 WINE COMPANY, THE 677.55 254.30 - 774.85 331.95 2,238.65 346177 4114/2011 101312 WINE MERCHANTS 9,995.01 221.62 4,055.80 1,021.51 15,293.94 346178 4/1412011 117482 WINECONNECT INC. 159.24 WEB - APRIL 2011 159.24 346180 411412011 124291 WIRTZ BEVERAGE MINNESOTA 10,270.20 - 35.03- 3,485.33 4,119.31 62.63 438.17 33.22 2,097.35 920.35 229.80 73.10 2,332.65 5,480.50 15,272.88 37.00 4,351.62 2.30 1,725.80 8,332.85 259522 266665 -00 5842.5513 259523 266661 -00 5822.5513 259524 266660 -00 5862.5513 " 259539 266668 -00 - 5842.5515, COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE COST" OF GOODS SOLD MIX 4/13/2011 7:45:22 Page - 28 Business Unit ARENA BLDG/GROUNDS YORK SELLING 50TH ST SELLING VERNON SELLING YORK SELLING 259377 356646 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 259630 357472, 5842.5513 I" COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 259631 357474 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 259632 357473 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE • 50TH ST SELLING 259343 -778 5842.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES' YORK SELLING 259378 -:549805 5842.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR YORK SELLING 259379 827262. 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 259525 553408 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 259526 "553409 5842.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR YORK SELLING 259527 553411 5842.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX YORK SELLING 259528 553406 5822.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR 50TH ST SELLING 259529 553407 5822.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX 50TH ST SELLING 259530 -553405 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING 259531 553241 5822.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR 50TH ST SELLING 259532 551655 5822.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR 50TH ST SELLING 259533 - 553402 5862.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX VERNON SELLING 259534 551654 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 259535 553401 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 259633 . 551656 5842.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR YORK SELLING 259634 546695 5842.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR YORK SELLING 259635 553403 5862.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR VERNON SELLING . . 259636 553404 5662.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR VERNON SELLING 259637 553325 5862.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR VERNON SELLING 259638 551652 5862.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR VERNON SELLING R55CKREG LOG20000 CITY OF EDINA 4/13/2011 7 :45:22 Council Check Register Page - 29 4/11/2011 - 4/14/2011 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit 149.15- 259639 827620 5842.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR YORK SELLING 155.15- 259640 827612 5842.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR YORK SELLING 58,925.73 346181 411412011 124529 WIRTZ BEVERAGE MINNESOTA BEER 3,734.15 259380 731374 5842.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER YORK SELLING 21.50 259381 731375 5842.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX YORK SELLING 1,193.50 259536 730735 5862.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER VERNON SELLING 763.30 259537 730238 5822.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER 50TH ST SELLING 805.25 259538 730239 5822.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER 50TH ST SELLING 898.00 259641 730736 5862.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER VERNON SELLING 94.90 259642 730472 5862.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX VERNON SELLING 642.60 259702 733081 5421.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER GRILL 1,680.18 259755 733086 5822.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER 50TH ST SELLING 740.85 259756 733085 5822.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER 50TH ST SELLING. 10,574.23 346182 411412011 106740 WSB & ASSOCIATES INC. 12.79 70TH ST CONSTRUCTION SERV 259344 5 -01686 -180 03457.1705.20 CONSULTING DESIGN SS457 W70TH TS IMPLEMENTATION 85.27 70TH ST CONSTRUCTION SERV 259344 5- 01686 -180 05503.1705.20 CONSULTING DESIGN WM -503 W70TH ST TRAFFIC STUDY 170.54 70TH ST CONSTRUCTION SERV 259344 5- 01686 -180 06043.1705.20 CONSULTING DESIGN TS43 W 70TH ST RECON 183.33 70TH ST CONSTRUCTION SERV 259344 5 -01686 -180 08057.1705.20 CONSULTING DESIGN L -57 W 70TH ST RECON. 208.91 70TH ST CONSTRUCTION SERV 259344 5 -01686 -180 06044.1705.20 CONSULTING DESIGN TS-44 W 70TH ST RECON 417.62 70TH ST CONSTRUCTION SERV 259344 5 -01686 -180 04369.1705.20 CONSULTING DESIGN STS -369 W 70TH STREET 3,184.84 70TH ST CONSTRUCTION SERV 259344 5- 01686 -180 01367.1705.20 CONSULTING DESIGN BA -367 W70TH TRAFFIC IMPLEMENT 4,263.50 346183 4/1412011 101726 XCEL ENERGY 327.74 51- 5634814 -2 259311 276348872 5934.6185 LIGHT & POWER STORM LIFT STATION MAINT 276.07 51- 6137136 -8 259312 276696576 5430.6185 LIGHT & POWER RICHARDS GOLF COURSE 742.35 51- 6979948 -4 259313 276559623 5821.6185 LIGHT & POWER 50T.H ST OCCUPANCY 1,257.97 51- 6979948 -4 259313 276559623 5861.6185 LIGHT & POWER VERNON OCCUPANCY 1,793.80 51- 6979948 -4 259313 276559623 5841.6185 LIGHT & POWER YORK OCCUPANCY 4,824.69 514966303 -6 259314 276398099 1330.6185 LIGHT & POWER TRAFFIC SIGNALS 33.22 51- 7567037 -0 259315 276869849. 1321.6185 LIGHT & POWER STREET LIGHTING REGULAR 21.83 5113151897 -6 259316 276824992 1646.6185 LIGHT & POWER BUILDING MAINTENANCE - 4,557.00 51- 6621207 -1 259317. 276856338 5913.6185 LIGHT & POWER DISTRIBUTION 375.42 51- 9013604-6 259318 276887878 5913.6185 LIGHT & POWER DISTRIBUTION 827.56 51- 5847121 -5 259434 277000393 5914.6185 LIGHT & POWER TANKS TOWERS & RESERVOIR 2,852.74 51- 6121102 -5 259757 277527034 1646.6185 LIGHT & POWER BUILDING MAINTENANCE 3,823.93 51- 6840050 -6 259758 277362187 5921.6185 LIGHT & POWER SANITARY LIFT STATION MAINT 21,714.32 CITY OF EDINA 4/1312011- 7:45:22 R55CKREG LOG20000 Council Check Register Page - 30 4/11/2011 — 4/14/2011 Check # Date Amount Supplier/ Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit 346184 4/1412011 100568. XEROX CORPORATION 195.67 MARCH USAGE - PARK & REC 00004322 259332 054079631 1550.6151 EQUIPMENT RENTAL CENTRAL SERVICES GENERAL 129.41 MARCH USAGE - BLDG/ENG 00004322 259333 054282257 1550.6151 EQUIPMENT: RENTAL;. _. CENTRAL SERVICES GENERAL 54.17 COPIER USAGE 259489 054079940 1628.6103, PROFESSIONAL SERVICES SENIOR CITIZENS 379.25 346186 4114/2011 119647 YOCUM OIL COMPANY INC: 16,250.10 UNLEADED FUEL 00001200 259435 429969 1553.6581 GASOLINE EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 16,250.10 346.186 411.4/2011 102491 S.O.TA. 200.00 RECOGNITION DINNER 259764 041211 1400.6106 MEETING EXPENSE POLICE DEPT. GENERAL , ' 200.00 976,410.47 Grand Total Payment Instrument Totals Check Total 976,410.47 Total -payments 976,410.47 R55CKSUM LOG20000 CITY OF EDINA 4/13/2011 7:46:22 Council Check Summary Page - 1 4/1112011 - 4/1412011 Company _ Amount 01000 GENERAL FUND 120,988.19 02200 COMMUNICATIONS FUND 1,150.65 02300 POLICE SPECIAL REVENUE 1,159.20 04000 WORKING CAPITAL FUND 20,412.86 04200 EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT FUND 160.60 - 05100 ART CENTER FUND 3,560.66 05200 GOLF DOME FUND 398.35 05300 AQUATIC CENTER FUND 1,696.03 05400 GOLF COURSE FUND . 22,281.95 05500 ICE ARENA FUND 76,120.92 - 05600 EDINBOROUGH/CENT LAKES FUND 5,437.15 05800 LIQUOR FUND 226,549.81 05900 UTILITY FUND 429,154.93 05930 STORM SEWER FUND 8,613.69 - 05950 RECYCLING FUND 38,820.60 07400 PSTF AGENCY FUND 19,905.48 Report Totals 976,410.47 'Ale confirm to the best of our knowledge and belief, that these claims comply in all material,respects with the requirements.of the City of Edina purchasing - policies nd Procedures d % Iq CITY OF EDINA CITY COUNCIL CREDIT-CARD PAYMENT REGISTER 2/26/11 - 3/25/11 Card Holder Aerchani Account Name Trans Date Amount Purchase Discription Merchant Name Merchant City State Code, JOHN KEPRIOS 2011/02/25 $15.84 ADAPTIVE REC SUPPLIES MICHAELS #3739 BLOOMINGTON MN 1629.6406 JOHN KEPRIOS 2011/02/25 $745.00 RAMP ROLL -A -RAMP 701- 2779471 ND 5620.6406 JOHN KEPRIOS 2011/02/26 $35.00 IN LIEU.OF TROPHY ADULT VB LUCKY 13 BLOOMINGTON MN 4077.6406 JOHN KEPRIOS 2011/03/02 $90.09 COMBINED MAIL/PHONE OFFICE MAX 800 - 283 - 7674 IL 5621.6406 JOHN KEPRIOS 2011/03/14 $1'00:00 POSTAGE PITNEYBOWES- POSTAGE 800 -468 -8454. CT 5621.6235 JOHN KEPRIOS 2011/03/14 $85.81 COMPUTER ROUTER BEST BUY MHT 00002816 RICHFIELD MN 5631.6513 JOHN KEPRIOS 2011103/23 $352.01 SOCKS VISR WWW.VISR.NE' NC 5620.5510 JOHN KEPRIOS 2011/03/23 $100.00 MEMBERSHIP UNITED STATES TENNIS 914 -696 -7000 NY 1623.6105 JEFF LONG 2011/03/09 $105.41 MEMORY CARD CASES AMAZON MKTPLACE PMTS AMZN.COM /BILI WA 1400.6408 JEFF LONG 2011/03/15 $31.00 GUN PARTS BROWNING WINCHESTER 801 - 8762711 UT 1400.6551 JEFF LONG 2011/03/16 $27.78 MEETING STARBUCKS USA 00025924 EDINA , MN 1400.6406 JEFF LONG 2011/03/17 $22.17 DEPLOYMENT BAG CHEAPER THAN DIRT 800 -421 -8047 TX 1400.6406 DEB MANGEN 2011/03/15 $297:96 CERTIFICATE FOLDERS BAUDVILLE, INC 616- 698 -0889 MI 1513.6103 DEB MANGEN 2011/03/18 $286.56 CONFERENCE BEST WESTERN HOTELS - ; ST. CLOUD MN 1180.6104 JOHN WALLIN 2011/02/27 $175.00 BRAEMAR GOLF DOME AD AOL *PATCH MEDIA CORP 212 - 274 -2245 VA 5210.6122 JOHN WALLIN 2011/03/01 $194.35 COUNCIL WORKSHOP D BRIAN'S DELI - #6 MINNEAPOLIS MN 1100.6106 JOHN WALLIN 2011/03/10 ,$1,398.01 4 RETIREMENT WATCHES MACY *S EAST #231 EDINA MN 1513.6103 JOHN WALLIN 2011/03/11. $38.00 CONFERENCE SENSIBLE LAND USE COAL 952 - 545 -0505 MN 1140.6104 JOHN WALLIN 2011/03/15 $270.30 COUNCIL WORKSHOP D BRIAN'S DELI -#6 MINNEAPOLIS MN 1100.6106 JOHN WALLIN 2011/03/19 $60.12 TV MOUNT FOR FRED RICHARD; MONOPRICE INC 909 - 989 -6887 CA 5430.6406 ROBERT WILSON 2011/03/18 :,$165.00_ 'USPAP UPDATE COURSE APPRAISAL INSTITUTE 888 - 7564624 IL 1190.6104 $4,595.41 We confirm to theabest of our knowledge and belief,-,.-that these claims comply in all, material respects with the requirements -of the City of Edina . purchasing po icl sand DrorPrh irac rin +e 4/ �H I 1 �n RE PO RURECO M M E N DATI O N To: MAYOR AND COUNCIL Agenda Item VII. A. DEBRA MANGEN Action From: CITY CLERK ❑ Discussion ® Information Date: APRIL 19, 2011 Subject: CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED SINCE LAST COUNCIL MEETING INFORMATION /BACKGROUND: Attached are copies of a -mails and letters received since the last Council meeting. ____ __ Susan Howl Subject: FW: Tribute - - - -- Original Message - - - -- " 7 �� V From: Mitzi Wicklund [mailto:mwicklun @comcast.net] APR 1 5 2011 Sent: Thursday, April 14, 2011 10:01 PM To: Lynette Biunno - -- ---- Subject: Tribute Honorable Mayor and Edina City Council Members, I request you reconsider adopting the practice of saying The Pledge of Allegiance before Council meetings. The purpose: to pay tribute to the forefathers of our country and all this country stands for. Imagine for a moment the unintended message you are sending to residents including residents who are Veterans or have family members currently serving in the armed forces, Boy and Girl Scouts, school children as well as the employees of the City of Edina by not adopting this practice. Most respectfully, Mitzi Wicklund 6905 Hillcrest Lane Edina, MN 55435 1 Susan Howl Subject: FVV: Suggestion for City Council Attachments: P1000723.jpg; ATT28891773.txt RECD IVE® 6� - - - -- Original Message - - - -- APR 11 2011 From: Kitty O'Dea [mailto:kodea.mn @gmail.com] - Sent: Thursday, April 14, 2011 1:11 PM - - - - -- -- To: Lynette Biunno Subject: Suggestion for City Council I have a suggestion about the Edina dog park. As an owner with a 9 month old puppy and an unfenced yard, I do a lot of walking. In the process, I have met a lot of other dog owners. When the subject of the dog park comes up, without exception, everyone said that they hadn't gone there because of the fee. Me included. I didn't know if my small dog would be OK at a dog park and took him to the free Saint Louis Dog Park to try it out. They have both small dog and large dog areas. He had a great time. I understand and appreciate why Edina has a fee to make sure that the dogs who use the park are vaccinated and licensed. Agree! But, $25 is a hurdle if you don't know if your dog (or you ) will like it. Here are my ideas to encourage people to try the dog park: 1. Offer a free 1 day pass to residents when they license their dogs. 2. Have a monthly FREE "Yappy Hour" for licensed Edina dogs. Have one day a month for residents to try the park for free. Alternate days to accommodate people's schedules. There wouldn't be any "cost" associated with these ideas other than a temporary pass. I know this isn't high on the Council's agenda, but these ideas may increase usage of this public amenity : -) woof i Susan Howl From: ent: i o: Cc: Subject: Hello there, Lynette Biunno Thursday, April 14, 2011 8:30 AM Scott Neal Susan Howl FW: WL CE9 V LS® APR 14 2011 This message has been forwarded to the Mayor and Council members and Scott Neal. Lynette Biunno, Receptionist 952 - 927 -8861 1 Fax 952 - 826 -0389 lbiunno(@ci.edina.mn.us I www.CityofEdina.com For Living, Learning, Raising Families & Doing Business -- original Message---- - From: Ruth and Lewis Marshall [mailto:mars7101 @comcast.net] Sent: Wednesday, April 13, 2011 5:37 PM To: Lynette Biunno Subject: Dear city council members and Mayor, I hope what I read about the "statement of unity" instead of the pledge of Allegiance to start your council meetings is incorrect. If it is true, I am extremely displeased and ashamed of you. It is a privilege to live here in the United States and the freedom we have is ours because of what other citizens have fought for. God has blessed our nation and we should acknowledge it. our forefathers did. Were they wrong? I don't believe so. I do vote and I remember. Do the right thing. Sincerely, Lewis Marshall 7101 Cornelia Drive Edina 1 Susan Howl From: Lynette Biunno April 08, 2011 4:27 PM ris Vet v Sent: Friday, �+ To: Scott Neal Susan Howl 20 ++ 1 11 Cc: Subject: FW: Grays Bay Dam Update I APR Hello there, This message has been forwarded to the Mayor and Council members and Scott Neal. Lynette Biunno, Receptionist 952- 927 -8861 1 Fax 952 -B26 -0389 Ibiunnora-ci.edina.mn.us I www.CitVofEdina.com ...For Living, Learning, Raising Families S Doing Bu-siness From: Telly Mamayek [ mailto :TMamayek @minnehahacreek.org] Sent: Friday, April 08, 20114:23 PM To: info @ci.minnetonka- beach.mn.us; Tom.Crosby @ci.medina.mn.us; jdoak.woodland @hotmail.com; cfischer @ci.minnetrista.mn.us; tfurlong @ci.chanhassen.mn.us; jmoeller @ci.long- lake.mn.us; citycouncil @cityofrichfield.ord; mahanus @frontiernet.net; info @ci.victoria.mn.us; Lynette Biunno; jacobsjeffrey @comcast.net; laketowntownship @broadband- mn.com; marvdjohnson @gmail.com; dkind100 @gmail.com bill @labellebarin.com; clizee @ci.shorewood.mn.us; linda .loomis @ci.goiden - valley.mn.us; emax33721 @aol.com; Imcmillan @ci.orono.mn.us; sgreinhardt @hotmail.com; nruehl @mchsi.com; jeremy .hanson @ci.minneapolis.mn.us; tschneider @eminnetonka.com; PaulSkrede @mchsi.com; KSlavik @ci.plymouth.mn.us; cityhall @mapleplain.com; watertowntownship @frontiernet.net; stboni @visi.com; KenWillcox @wayzata.org; tgerhardt @ci.chanhassen.mn.us; rgetschow @hopkinsmn.com; sgriffin @ci.minnetonka- beach.mn.us; jgunyou @eminnetonka.com; KandisHanson @cityofmound.com; tharmening @stiouispark.org; bheck @ci.shorewood.mn.us; dhemze @co.carver.mn.us; thirsch @ci.independence.mn.us; Scott Neal; county.admin @co.hennepin.mn.us; jkohimann @cityoftonkabay.net; kluger @ci.excelsior.mn.us; laketowntownship @broadband- mn.com; aio @wayzata.org; tpost @ci.iong- iake.mn.us; sheiley @cityofwoodiandmn.org; duram @ci.victoria.mn.us; jloftus @ci.orono.mn.us; administrator @greenwoodmn.com; DanaYoung @mchsi.com; cityhall @mapleplain.com Subject: Grays Bay Dam Update Mayors, Town Chairpersons, Managers & Administrators, The following message went out today to public works and emergency management officials across the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District. Please forward it to your city council /town or county board members or any other interested parties. Thank you. MCWD Partners: The level of Lake Minnetonka this week has remained relatively stable at 930.21' Taking the weather forecast into account, the discharge from Gray's Bay Dam has been reduced today (Friday) to 150 CFS. We will likely reduce flow again tomorrow (Saturday) to 50 CFS if the wet forecast holds for Sunday. Discharge will be increase to 250 CFS again on Monday or after the rain system this weekend has past. We will continue providing daily updates on our website www.minnehahacreek.org. Telly Mamayek I I Communications Manager I I Direct -Cell 952.641.4508 c Susan Howl %ubject: FW: County purposely hides SLP railroad re -route costs, among other details �E C : tVED From: Safety In the Park [ mailto :safetyinthepark @gmail.com] Sent: Sunday, April 10, 2011 1:44 PM To: undisclosed - recipients Subject: County purposely hides SLP railroad re -route costs, among other details -- APR 1 1 Below is a recent email from be re- routed through St. Louis Pak to make way for Southwest OLRT. This response sponse serves study how freight trains may be re 9 as summary for the entire study process- a sham that not only exposes Hennepin County's plans and how they cover up those plans with half- truths and delays, but it may also be illegal. that thy will do their best to Approximately one year ago, Hennepin County tives.a Pursutant to that goal hetCounty hire d 3 diffeerent consultants to study study all potential freight rail re-route three broad alternatives. The T refer ed by Hennepin County are-finished, complete with costs estimates thatfhavveer months, the study of routes NOT p Y been publicly shared. Meanwhile, after 8 months, the study for the route that Hennepin County is "railroading" into St. Louis Park is still not finished and still has no cost estimate! (see below in red) It is obvious that Hennepin County does alternative will cost and that t ceates unsafehunlvablelconditionstfor will two to three times what the most Park residents and school children. In addition, SLP residents believe the County is covering up this data long enough so that the preliminary engineering kstd phase has been awed since the very beginning, ovferrf8 months ago. Some St difficult. Park The County's St. Louis Par y City Council members have characterized the study as a "sham " - a process fraught with inconsistencies that include: • Sound and vibration studies using incorrect data. • Commissioner Dorfman contradicting her own consultant's findings and proclaiming one alternative to be unusable. • A $20M bridge deleted from plans by Commissioner Dorfman while on the phone to a television reporter. • An unanswered letter from the Mayor of St. Louis Park asking for simple answers from Commissioner Dorfman. • The County wholly dismissing SLP resident's mitigation requests. Mitigation which Commissioner Dorfman characterized as "on the table ". • SLP businesses told they would be potentially bull- dozed, only to be told later that plans have changed. • County officials claiming that MNDOT was inaccurate when they publicly laid out long term plans for additional heavy use of the SLP rail line. • re -route a "done deal" only to "regret" her statements later. Commissioner Dorfman proclaiming this • A controversial SLP switching arm removed from the plan, and then re- inserted. And now, (see below) instead of an the worksheet is published. publication of the Environm of influencing the ental plans, SLP's comments the open house will occur AFTER will merely be foot - noted. And most importantly: Still no cost estimates -after 8 months of study! The Met Council may, in fact, be making federal important uled mistake if they do not take a hard that he Met Council look at not fully analyze how thesCelntral to honestly analyze this situation. judge Corridor project will affect the s Paul anticipation of a potential class action suit involving high any profile attorneys have already agency complicit in met with St. Louis Park citizens p this "sham ". From: <Jeanne Witzi- gQkimley- horn.com> Date: Fri, 8 Apr 2011 15:35:40 -0400 To: <lapray5_comcast.net> Subject: RE: April Open House? Jami and others, the Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EAW) review and comment period is a defined 30 -day review period, which is dictated by the publication of the Minnesota Environmental Quality Board (Mn EQB Monitor) publication. which comes out every other Monday. During that 30 -day review and comment period an open house will be held on the MN &S Freight Rail Study EAW. Hence the EAW will indeed be out for public review prior to the open house (requirement of the state process). At this time, we are targeting an open house meeting in mid -May, based on the process,MnEQB publication noted above. A final date has not yet been confirmed at this time. During the EAW review and comment period, comments can be submitted on the information presented in the EAW. Following the close of the EAW official review and comment period (30 -day time period); responses to substantive comments will be prepared and an environmental determination rendered by Mn/DOT (the agency serving as the Responsible Governmental Unit for this EAW). Relative to your question regarding the capital cost estimates: we hope to finalize the estimates very soon. and will release them as soon as we are able to complete a thorough analysis. We will send out the open house date to all PMT members, and post it on the study website as soon as a date has been confirmed. Regards. Jeanne Witzig Thom Miller & Jami LaPray Safety in the Park! safetyinthepark@gmail.com Susan Howl Subject: FW: Grays Bay Dam Update Contacts: Mayor Joann Anderson; Mayor Thomas Crosby; Mayor James Doak; Mayor Cheryl Fischer; Mayor Tom Furlong; Mayor Tim Hultmann; Mayor Debbie Gottel; Mayor Mark Hanus; Mayor Mary Hershberger Thun; Mayor James Hovland; Mayor Jeff Jacobs; Chairman Charles Johnson; Mayor Marvin Johnson; Mayor Deb Kind; Mayor William LaBelle; Mayor Christine Lizee; Mayor Linda Loomis; Mayor Gene Maxwell; Councilor Lili McMillan; Mayor Sarah Reinhardt; Mayor Nick Ruehl; Mayor R. T. Rybak; Mayor Terry Schneider; Mayor Paul Skrede; Mayor Kelli Slavik; Mayor John Sweeney; Chairman Si Tesch; Mayor Rick Weibl% Mayor Ken Willcox From: Telly Mamayek [mailto:TMamayek @minnehahacreek.org] Subject: Grays Bay Dam Update APR 1 A 2011 i Mayors, Town Chairpersons, Managers & Administrators, The following message went out today to public works and emergency management officials across the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District. Please forward it to your city council /town or county board members or any other interested parties. Thank you. MCWD Partners: The lake level on Lake Minnetonka today is 930.22 feet. The discharge from Gray's Bay dam has been increased to 250 CFS. The rate is being increased to the maximum extent possible, given the creek capacity, to provide storage for upcoming rain events. The district will make adjustments to that discharge rate as the weather warrants. Updated data on lake levels and discharge can be found on the home page of our web site www minnehahacreek. - MCWD staff continue to monitor conditions around Lake Minnetonka and along Minnehaha Creek during this period of high water. The district will send out email updates with each new lake measurement and discharge rate. Telly Mamayek I I Communications Manager I I Direct -Cell 952.641.4508 18202 Minnetonka Blvd, Deephaven, MN 55391 I I Office 952.471.0590 x508 I I Fax 952.471.0682 I I www minnehahocreek.ora MINNEHAHA CREEK i WATERSHED DISTRICT v. r- QUALITY OF WATER, QUALITY OF LIFE 1 Onew;lvto . boost r.e lln Undorm'ity • Codes vary — making it tough for large waste producers like Starbucks,. By DAYNA SENNMY I Did you hear the one about the I latte company that couldn't recy- cle its one gallon milk cartons? It's true In the spirit of full disclosure, I am an avid Starbucks custom- er. I Came upon this information unwittingly, by asking a barista one day why she put used milk cartons into large plastic garbage bags. I was incredulous at the answer. It led me to track down information (based on the most conservative numbers I could find), through Starbucks' annual reports, its public - relations executives and employees. The numbers speak for themselves: The smallest Starbucks sites use 210 white, one- gallon milk cartons per week, or 10,920 per year, on average. With more than 17,000 cafes worldwide, we are talldn iibout more than 185 million cartons per year. Adding to the landfill problem is the fact that the cartons are collect- ed in large plastic garbage bags. . Next statistic. The most conservative num- bers I could find regarding landfill' decompo- I sition are these: It takes 500 years for a plastic garbage bag to decompose; it takes 1,000 years for a milk jug to decompose. As Starbucks celebrates its 40th anniver- sary this year, the first cartons it sent to land fills in garbage bags have barely begun to de- compose. If this sounds overwhelming, it is. The issue, obviously, is bigger than Starbucks. The issue is about the inconsistencies in cities' recycling codes that tie the hands of large companies. In Minnesota, a few Starbucks are able to-recycle milk cartons (a cafe in Plymouth does, a cafe within the Plymouth Target store does not). Starbucks is unable to recycle milk cartons in my urban city. In Seattle, stores in malls are un- able to recycle milk cartons, but many stand- alone stores can. You get the murky picture. As Starbucks turns-40; the first cartons it sent to landfills have barely begun to decompose: Starbucks is only too aware of the com- plexities presented here. "Finding a sustain- able recycling solution is a top priority for Starbucks," a company spokesperson wrote in a statement. "Inconsistencies make it difficult for a company like ours to effectively imple- ment a company -wide recycling program for items such as milk cartons." That is a true statement from a stellar com- pany that has won awards in many areas (from Fair Trade,coffee practices to composting to paper cup summits). Why begin with Starbucks? There are many other corporations I researched that face simi- lar gridlock Yet, Starbucks is poised to move on this. In its most recent annual report, Howard Schultz, chairman, president and CEO, writes, "Customers and employees have expressed they want to be a part of something bigger." And in several annual reports, he repeats the theme: coffee, customers, community. Starbucks has more than 160,000 employees (predominantly in the United States) and mil- lions of customers. This is an enormous grass- roots base. Moreover, Starbucks has huge part- ners in Macy's, Target and other national pow- erhouses within -store Starbucks sites. Jump - started by informed citizens, Starbucks can be empowered to hold game - changing discus- sions at the highest levels. Curbside recycling began with skepti- cism Now, it's a staple in our communities. If Starbucks takes the lead in improving unifor- mity between municipal codes that impede re- cycling, all large corporations will benefit. Still skeptical? Last year, the Seattle City Council passed an ordinance requiring all food service industry utensils and packaging to be compostable /recyclable. Clear and sim- ple. Done. It's another example of the power of one person and one idea. Starbucks complied before the deadline, paving the way for small- er companies. Landfill issues loom large, yet milk cartons are low- hanging fruit If articles like these make you feel immobilized, there is a remedy: Take action. Just for now, just for today, clip this arti- cle and pin it on the community bulletin board at your Starbucks, mail it to your elected repre- sentatives or share it with friends. 'Rine in around Earth Day next year to see - if Starbucks, and you and I, have made envi- ronmental changes and increased progress toward sustainability. Thanx Sincerely, Decaf, Grande, No Whip, Mocha in St. Paul. Dayna Kennedy is a stay -at -home mom in St. Paul. She pre- viously was a public- information employee for light rail for Metro Transit and for the St. Paul public schools. She can be reached at dayna.melissa @q.com. yew �v req �► �u2 4Y— Ms. Kathleen Meehan 5229 Hollywood Rd. Edina, MN 55436 -1422 Chief Jeff Long Edina Police Department 4801 West 50'' Street Edina, MN 55424 Direct: 612- 333 -9542 rbennett@izaskinsbennett.com BY FAX 952- 826 -1607 ECEOV'ba APR 13 2011 RE: April 11, 2011 Unprovoked Coyote Attack at My Edina Home at 6628 Kelsey Court Dear Chief Long: Yesterday morning a large adult male coyote came onto my property and first viciously attacked my dog on our rear porch. It then dragged my dog in its jaws off our property onto the next door neighbor's property toward the grassy area surrounding ponds in our back yard. My wife, who was just feet away in her office adjoining the porch, observed the attack and pursued the coyote. She managed to get the coyote to drop our dog once, then again after it snatched Smokey in its jaws for a second time several feet from my wife. Again, my wife got the coyote to drop Smokey and chased it 30 -40 feet away. She grabbed the dog only to have the coyote advance aggressively to within three feet of her while she was holding Smokey and screaming at the coyote. I contacted Edina Police who eventually had the animal control officer contact me and eventually my wife. I learned from him several things — among them: this is not the first recent coyote attack in our city; he views our pet as "a meal" for "Minnesota's most abundant large predator" which, according to the DNR, has no natural enemies other than "wolves" (which are not present in Hennepin County); and that, despite having a police shooter - sniper - hunter visit our neighborhood — nothing would be done to kill an animal or animals that any self - respecting . farmer, rancher, landowner or hunter outside of Hennepin County would shoot on sight and hunt if necessary. (4,000 are known to be hunted and killed each year in Minnesota.) Your animal control officer advised me of his interpretation of our city ordinance as prohibiting me from protecting my property, pets and person from such a predator by use of a firearm. I do not agree that his interpretation is correct. If my property, pets, grandchildren or wife are threatened, such action would not be proscribed by the ordinance anymore than the ordinance would prevent me from protecting myself by use of a firearm if an intruder were in my home in Edina. I am quite familiar with the use of force and the right of self - defense as legal matters. 333 South Seventh Street Suite 2900 Minneapolis, MN 55402 TEL 612.333.9500 Fax 612.333.9579 TOLL 866.397.4497 Chief Jeff Long April 12, 2011 Page 2 GASKINS BENNETT BIRRELL SCHUPP I continue to be willing (as do my neighbors) to allow your shooter - sniper- hunter access to our properties for the purpose of killing this (or any) brazen, aggressive large predator which is sensibly not protected by any federal or state law. Frankly, should you not choose this course, given the notice that this predator has acted in the way described above, if the coyote were to attack other pets, small children or any vulnerable person, the liability for inaction would be easy to assign. I am requesting that you make a different choice than what your animal control officer has made. I ask for the protection of our police from a predator who came onto my property, snatched and gravely injured my pet (who has managed to survive up north at our cabin where eagles, wolves, the occasional cougar and other predators roam), attacked my wife, and caused us to incur somewhere between $50041,000 in veterinary bills to date. That does not seem unreasonable. However, if the Edina Police will not protect my property, pets and person, I will be forced to do so myself. I understand and appreciate the ordinance, but I am not going to allow anymore coyote attacks on my property. Please feel free to call me to discuss this matter. Very truly yours, A&4Z^—C- Robert Bennett RB /mo c: Mayor James Hovland (by mail) MINNEHAHA CREEK The Minnehoho Creek Watershed District is committed to a leadership role in protecting, improving and managing the surface waters and affiliated groundwater resources within the District, including.their relationships to the ,ecosystems of which they are an integral part. We achieve our mission through regulation, capitol projects, education, cooperative endeavors, and other programs based on sound science, innovative thinking, an informed and engaged constituency, and the cost effective use of public funds. QUALITY OF WATER April 8, 2011 The Honorable James Hovland Mayor of Edina 4801 West 50th Street Edina, MN 55424 WATERSHED DISTRICT QUALITY OF LIFE 9C- EIV EW APR 15 2611 Re: DRAFT Stormwater Management and Administrative Rule Comments Dear Mayor Hovland, Thursday, March 31, 2011 marked the conclusion of the 45 -day public comment period for the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District's draft revisions to its Stormwater Management and Administrative rules. This 45 -day comment period was another step in the multi -year process used to develop water resource regulations that incorporate input from local communities, the public and other affected stakeholders, while also protecting water quality and managing our valuable water resources responsibly. The Board of Managers reviewed and discussed the comments submitted during the April 7, 2011 Board meeting, and is issuing this letter in response to the comments received. Enclosed, please find a document that contains each comment submitted and the District's response. For easy reference comments have been grouped into common themes and are labeled based on who submitted them. On April 14, 2011 the Board of Managers will meet to discuss potential changes to the draft Stormwater and Administrative rules in response to the comments received. At this time, the Board may also decide to schedule a public hearing for May 5, 2011. Should the Board of Managers decide to schedule a public hearing on that date, a public notice will be distributed along with redlined and clean copies of the most recent draft Stormwater Management and Administrative rules. The public hearing represents another opportunity for stakeholders to provide feedback on the draft rules prior to their adoption. Please share this information with your city council members. This information is also being sent directly to your city administrator and the city staff members involved in the Watershed District's Rule Making Task Force and Technical Advisory Committee. If you have questions about the rule revision process, you are encouraged to contact: James Wisker at Jwisker[7a minnehahacreek.ora or 952 -641 ,00no AA— . +nn4a nnidavard. nopnhaven. MN 55391 • 952- 471 -0590 • Fax: 952- 471 -0682 • www.minnehahacreek.orq 1 COMMENTS ON STORMWATER MANAGEMENT DEFINITIONS: 1. Minneapolis - Abstraction: Add "interception" to the list of practices. a. "Interception" will be added to the definition of Abstraction in response to this comment. 2. Minnetrista - Defmition of Impervious. Defining impervious by including all compacted soil is a deviation from the commonly accepted definition, and impacts the ability to relatively easily determine "impervious" changes. Who would be responsible for making that determine?" A site visit would no doubt be necessary to truly determine the extent of compaction. Proposed Solution: Remove "compacted soil' from the list of impervious surface inclusion, or clarify what is meant by the term. a. "Compacted soil" is no longer in the definition oflmpervious. 3. Mn/DOT - Linear Reconstruction Project: The definition of rehabilitation should be revised. When Mn/DOT Metro does mill and overlay projects and the while the pavement surface is removed, we also include replacement of deteriorated culverts, deteriorated stormwater pipes and deteriorated catch basins /manholes: We do this to avoid having to have patches in the pavement later on, to avoid excessive disruption to the traveling public and to save on costs. When we replace this drainage infrastructure, we disturb the soils underneath the pavement to remove the old structures and put the new ones in. We are not changing the quantity of impervious surface above these structures, we are simply replacing deteriorated drainage infrastructure. The replacement with new, intact structures, also prevents sediment from getting in and thus, reduces sediment deposition in drainage areas. We are requesting that "or the exposure of underlying soils" be removed from the definition of rehabilitation. a. -Linear Reconstruction Projects that do not increase impervious surface more than. 10,000 square feet are exempt, pursuant to Section 2: Regulation d(1). Therefore, in response to this comment the following language will be removed from the definition of Linear Reconstruction Project: "rehabilitation, including mill and overlay, of a road, sidewalk . or trail within existing right of way in a manner that disturbs and/or replaces only the existing pavement and does not involve the addition of impervious surface area or the exposure of underlying soils is not considered a Linear Reconstruction Project" 4. MPRB - The definitions of linear reconstruction project and linear transportation projects should be able to stand alone. The one definition references the other but does not help clarify what the definition. of a Linear Transportation Project is. Each definition should be clear. Please clarify these definitions so it is more easily understandable what falls under a Linear Reconstruction Project and a Linear Transportation Project. a. Linear Transportation Projects are defined as the new construction or reconstruction of a road, trail or sidewalk Linear Reconstruction Projects are a subset of Linear Transportation Projects,, and based on feedbackfrom the Technical Advisory Committee, a separate.more speck definition was included in the rule for these reconstruction projects. Plymouth - Definition "Impervious refers to surfaces that are compacted or covered with a layer of material such that it is highly resistant to infiltration of runoff including but not limited to gravel, rock, asphalt, concrete and non - pervious paver systems." The term "highly resistant" is subjective and open to interpretation. Has the MCWD considered a numeric standard? Why is a numeric standard for impervious surface not being applied? a. The District considered applying a numeric standard to define impervious surface, however since numeric definitions of impervious surface are variable, the District selected a definition that describes imperviousness and provides examples of several man made impervious surfaces. This definition is consistent with other metro watershed definitions of impervious surface. 6. Victoria - The definitions section provides a definition for Development and Redevelopment, but the rules provide requirements specifically for New Development and Redevelopment. The definition section should be changed to New Development to match the rules, or the rules should be changed to Development in order to be consistent. a. The definitions section will be changed to New Development in response to this comment. COMMENTS ON STORMWATER MANAGEMENT SECTION 2: REGULATION: 7. Minneapolis - Definitions and elsewhere: Clarify removing and replacing impervious surface is not "creating" impervious surface. For example, you could modify "creates ... impervious surface" to say "creates additional ... impervious surface ". a. During discussions, the Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) noted that, depending on the size of parcel and area of disturbance, opportunities to improve stormwater management exist on redeveloping sites. Consequently, the TAC recommended regulating removal and replacement of-impervious surface in various redevelopment scenarios, as outlined in Section 4 and 5. The definition of Redevelopment and Section 2: Regulation'will be revised to read "creates new or replaces existin impervious surface. .. " in response to this comment. 8. Mound What is the significance and documented scientific evidence for the 20 %, the 10 %, and the 40% threshold values as they relate to development and land cover? a. Gerald Kauffman and Tammy Brant in a 2000 report titled. "The Role of Impervious Cover as a Watershed -based Zoning Tool to Protect water Quality in the Christina River Basin of Delaware, Pennsylvania,. and Maryland" ' cited numerous studies (Arnold and Gibbons, 1996; Maxted and Shaver, 1994; Booth, 1991; Schueler, 1995; Galli, 1993; Pelley, 1997; Brant, 1999) that document water resource degradation occurring at relatively low levels of watershed imperviousness between 8 and 15 916. Following discussion with the Technical Advisory Committee (TAC), 20% impervious cover on parcels larger than I acre was established as a reasonable threshold for stormwater management regulation. b. During discussions the TAC agreed that the stormwater managem ent regulation should provide incentives for redevelopment that reduces overall impervious cover. Based on the collective experience in land use planning and water resource engineering, the TAC agreed that a 10% reduction in impervious cover represented a reduction substantial 2 enough, to provide water quality and water quantity improvements, while remaining an achievable standard by the development community. C. During discussion on stormwater management for redeveloping parcels, the TAC agreed that the opportunity for stormwater management on a site increased as the percentage of site disturbance increased. It was agreed that thresholds and requirements of the stormwater rule should be structured according these increasing levels of opportunity. In response, the District analyzed what percentage of a redeveloping site's disturbed area would need to be allocated for stormwater management in relation to percentage site disturbance. It was found that for site disturbances less than 40 %, the percentage of the area disturbed needed for stormwater management increased sharply, while for site disturbances between 40 and 70 %, the percentage of disturbed area needed for stormwater ranged between 7.8 °o and 4.5% respectively.- Therefore, 40% was selected a reasonable standard of site disturbance requiring stormwater management for redeveloping sites. It should be noted that this analysis did not include the possibility of sub- surface stormwater management, which would reduce the surface area needed to'be occupied by stormwater management facilities. 9. Richfield - (SS 2.c.2.) Any proposed activity disturbing less than 50% of the site and at least a ten percent reduction in impervious surface should be exempt. (SS 4.b. & c.) The trigger. should be 50% or more of the site. (SS 5.b & c.) The trigger should be 50% or more of the site. a. During discussion on stormwater management for redeveloping parcels, the TAC agreed that the opportunity for. stormwater management on a site increased as the percentage of site disturbance increased. It was agreed that thresholds and requirements of the stormwater rule should be structured according these increasing levels of opportunity. In response, the District analyzed what percentage of a redeveloping sites disturbed area would need to be allocated for stormwater management in relation to percentage site disturbance. It was found that for site disturbances less than 40% the percentage of the area disturbed needed for stormwater management increased sharply, while for site disturbances between 40 and 70 %, the percentage of disturbed area needed for stormwater ranged between 7.8% and 4.5% respectively. Therefore, 40% was selected a reasonable standard of site disturbance requiring stormwater management for redeveloping sites. It should be noted that this analysis did not include the possibility of sub - surface stormwater management, which would reduce the surface area needed to be occupied by.stormwater managementfacilities. 10. Chanhassen - It would be naive to argue that linear projects do not contribute to the degradation of surface waters. However, we strongly encourage you to reconsider a minimum threshold of 10,000 square feet in favor of a more attainable minimum threshold of one acre. Throughout Chanhassen are numerous areas that were developed long before today's engineering standards and practices came to be ... In many of these areas roads would need to be widened by as much as 13 feet just to meet design criteria for safety considerations. Compounding the issue i$ the fact that these areas are already deficient in right -of -way; making areas for treatment difficult to come by. If the threshold was to be increased, limited City resources could be better allocated to those projects that would result in the greatest benefit per dollar spent. a. During discussion of stormwater management for Linear Transportation Projects, the Technical Advisory Committee (TAC). acknowledged constraints associated with limited right -of -way, utilities and costs. The TAC discussed the need for de minimis exemptions from stormwater requirements for small scale road projects, while acknowledging that public projects should be held to similar standards as those established for private development and redevelopment (20% impervious on 1 acre parcel). After discussing the need to exempt small intersection, turn lane, or alley improvement projects, the TAC identified three Linear Transportation Project tiers (1) projects that result in a minor increase in impervious; (2) projects that result in a substantial increase in impervious; and (3) new road construction where no previous road existed. After discussion, the TAC suggested a 10, 000 square foot threshold for de minimis Linear Transportation Projects. 10 000 square feet represents a decrease in the regulatory threshold from the current stormwater management rule, parallels thresholds for private development, and appears to be a reasonable threshold for public Linear Transportation Projects. Finally based on recommendations from the TAC, the draft Stormwater Management rule includes provisions for regional treatment that serve to provide additional flexibility for public Linear Transportation Projects. 11. Minnetonka - Section 6(b), A standard engineering design for streets usually calls for a total width of 30 to 32 feet. The standard used by the city of Minnetonka for all of our new developments and street reconstruction projects is a face to face width of just 26 feet. The city of Minnetonka has a very robust street reconstruction program and the city usually reconstructs approximately two to four miles of streets every single year. In the past, we have had to reconstruct streets as narrow at 18 feet in width in a very limited right -of -way. Despite the fact that the city's standard is a significantly narrower street width than is common practice; we still have increases in impervious surface. By allowing an increase in impervious surface of only 10,000 square feet before phosphorus and rate control requirement are triggered, the city's ability to reconstruct our street may be limited. The city believes that the trigger from requiring phosphorus, rate control and volume should be one acre of new impervious surface. Any new impervious surface below that threshold should just require the installation of BMPs. a. During discussion of stormwater management for Linear Transportation Projects, the Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) acknowledged constraints associated with limited right -of -way, utilities and costs. The TAC discussed.the need for de minimis exemptions from stormwater requirements for small scale road projects, while acknowledging that public projects should be held to similar standards as those established for private development and redevelopment (20% impervious on 1. acre parcel). After discussing the need to exempt small intersection, turn lane, or alley improvement projects, the TAC identified three Linear Transportation Project tiers (1) projects that result in a minor increase in impervious; (2) projects that result in a substantial increase in impervious; and (3) new road construction where no previous road existed. After discussion, the TAC suggested a 10, 000 square foot threshold for de minimis Linear Transportation Projects. 10 000 square feet represents a decrease in the regulatory threshold from the current stormwater management rule, parallels thresholds for private development, and appears to be a reasonable threshold for public Linear Transportation Projects. Finally based on recommendations from the TAC, the draft Stormwater Management rule includes provisions for regional treatment that serve to provide additional flexibility for public Linear Transportation Projects. 12. Mn/DOT - Section 2 Regulation, part d, 1: Why does the requirement for transportation projects go down so low and not equally as low as for commercial, industrial and residential? This is not fair and needs to be made equal. Please either use 1 acre for transportation projects as well or use 10,000 square feet for residential, commercial and industrial. In addition, 4 transportation right -of -way is used for many things and is limited in size. For example, it is used for utilities, drainage ditches carrying both on -site and off -site water, public safety, transportation and stormwater treatment. a. During discussion of stormwater management for Linear Transportation Projects, the Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) acknowledged constraints associated with limited right -of -way, utilities and costs. The TAC discussed the need for de minimis exemptions from stormwater requirements for small scale road projects, while acknowledging that public projects should be held to similar standards as those established for private development and redevelopment (20% impervious on 1 acre parcel). After discussing the need to exempt small intersection, turn lane, or alley improvement projects, the TAC identi ed three Linear Transportation Project tiers (1) projects that result in a minor increase in impervious; (2) projects that result in a substantial increase in impervious; and (3) new road construction where no previous road existed After discussion, the TAC suggested a 10, 000 square foot threshold for de minimis Linear Transportation Projects. 10 000 square feet represents a decrease in the regulatory threshold from the current stormwater management rule, parallels thresholds for private development,. and appears to be a reasonable threshold for public Linear Transportation Projects: Finally based on recommendations from the TAC, the draft Stormwater Management rule includes provisions for regional treatment that serve to provide additional flexibility for public Linear Transportation Projects. 13. NIn/DOT - Section 6, part a: Why does the requirement for transportation projects go down so low and not equally as low as for commercial, industrial and residential? This is not fair and needs to be made equal. Either use 1 acre for transportation projects as well or use 10,000 square feet for residential, commercial and industrial. a. The threshold for commercial, industrial and residential is a I acre parcel size with 20% impervious surface, or approximately 8, 000 square feet. This threshold of impervious surface is consistent with the impervious threshold for Linear Transportation Projects of 10, 000 square feet. 14. Mn/DOT - Section 6, part b: Seem to be looking at the small .stuff for transportation projects. Our concern is that we will end up with little treatment areas all over. the place and not have the staff to inspect and maintain all of them. We prefer large treatment locations that can be . adequately inspected and maintained. For example, this small square footage requirement will trigger treatment for our overhead sign equipment inspection pads and State patrol pull -off pads. What kinds of BW's can be used for these small areas of pavement? Why isn't equal scrutiny being given to other land uses? Trigger should be the same as others, 1 acre. a: See previous answer (10 a) regarding 10, 000 square foot threshold for Linear Transportation Projects and opportunity to utilize regional treatment facilities. 15. Richfield - (SS 2.d.1.) The 10,000 square feet of impervious surface exemption should be increased to at least 20,000 square feet for linear projects. 10,000 SF is the equivalent of constructing a 6' wide sidewalk on two and one -half blocks. In a developed city like Richfield there is limited right -of -way which prevents boulevard space between the sidewalk and roadway. This trigger prohibits advancing the City's goal to provide positive quality of life changes through safety and mobility improvements and subsequently denies the public improved livability because the improvements become cost and/or space prohibitive. F1 a. During discussion of stormwater management for Linear Transportation Projects, the Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) acknowledged constraints associated with limited right -of -way, utilities and costs. The TAC discussed the need for de minimis exemptions from stormwater requirements for small scale road projects, while acknowledging that public projects should be held to similar standards as those established for private development and redevelopment (20% impervious on I acre parcel). After discussing the need to exempt small intersection, turn lane, or alley improvement projects, the TAC identified three Linear Transportation Project tiers (1) projects that result in a minor increase in impervious; (2) projects that result in a substantial increase in impervious; and (3) new road construction where no previous. road existed. After discussion, the TAC suggested a 10, 000 square foot threshold for de minimis Linear Transportation Projects. 10 000'sguare feet represents an increase in the regulatory threshold from the current stormwater management rule, parallel thresholds for private development, and appears to be a reasonable threshold for public Linear Transportation Projects. Finally based on recommendations from the TAC, the draft Stormwater Management rule includes provisions for regional treatment that serve to provide additional flexibility for public Linear Transportation Projects. 16. Orono - 2(d) Linear Transportation Project: The rule states that sites that are less than 10,000 square feet of impervious surface are exempt from the requirements of this rule. This requirement is specific, to new road construction and the reconstruction of an existing road, sidewalk, or other linear transportation project. This requirement is more restrictive than the current version of the MCWD stormwater rule. Concern: It is unclear from the rule if the 10,000 square foot exemption for a. reconstructed road, sidewalk, or other linear transportation project applies only to the increase in the impervious surface or if it applies based on the amount of the road that is being reconstructed. Proposed solution: We suggest that clarification be provided to this statement. Specifically, due to the difficulty in applying these requirements to linear transportation projects suggest that the requirement only apply to the new or additional impervious surface that is created at the project site. a. Stormwater management requirements for Linear Transportation Projects that - increase impervious surface more than 10, 000 square feet.apply only to the area of increased impervious surface. Section 6: Linear Transportation Project Requirements states that stormwater requirements apply to the "area of increased impervious surface " 17. Minnetrista - Linear Transportation Projects. The rule reads that any linear transportation project creating more than 10,000 sq. ft of impervious shall be subject to permitting. Proposed Solution: In order to clearly capture the intent as it is understood, adding the word "new" between "of' and "impervious" will clarify. a. Language within Section 6: Linear Transportation Project Requirements will be changed to include this clarifying language. 18. Mound - Why would the act of subdividing a parcel of land greater than 1 acre in size require a stormwater management plan to be created? It would be more relevant to place a hold on a building permit without development of a stormwater management plan. Please explain. 6 a. The District has long had a policy of encouraging the framing of stormwater management plans early in the development or redevelopment process. Doing so avoids the complexities associated with locating stormwater managementfacilities after a site plan has been completed. Review and approval of a stormwater plan at the subdivision stage also ensures that an integrated stormwater - management plan is provided for the development or redevelopment of a large area into individual residential parcels. Seeking to "hold" building permits pending completion of a stormwater management plan would unduly delay project planning and be more likely to create unnecessary conflicts that could be avoided by integrated planning earlier in the process. To ensure, to the greatest degree possible, that the regulation of subdivision is not in conflict with the exemption for single-family home construction or reconstruction, the District will add language clarifying that only subdivision of a property into three or more parcels is sub iect to the permit.reguirement. 19. Plymouth - The act of subdividing a property does not result in impacts water resources. What is the purpose of requiring a Stormwater Management permit and stormwater management plan meeting phosphorus, rate, and volume requirements from property owners who simply intend to subdivide their property? What are examples of information that would be required by the MCWD to be in a stormwater management plan in such a situation? a. Please see response 15a above. Further, the stormwater plan for subdivision would provide. for stormwater management for the planned development or redevelopment of the subdivided property. 20. Victoria - A definition of subdivision may be needed. It is unclear if an owner were to do a lot split (defined as a minor subdivision by the City of Victoria) and only one additional single family lot were created if a stormwater management plan would be required. Under the current language that appears to be the case for parcels larger than one acre, but this seems onerous to require for the creation of one lot. At the time of the lot split, the amount of impervious surface will not be known, so the applicant would not be able to state whether or not they meet the exemption under (b)(1). a. Please see response 15a above. The District understands subdivision to be the legal reconfiguration of a single property into multiple properties. Consistent with the desire to ensure early consideration of stormwater management requirements, a subdivision application could provide stormwater treatment for a likely development or redevelopment scenario — with additional details to be determined as plans evolve. To ensure, to the greatest degree possible, that the regulation of subdivision is not in conflict with the exemption for single-family home construction or reconstruction, the District will add language claming that only subdivision of property into three or more parcels is subiect to the ermit requirement. The purpose is to ensure that stormwater management plans are created and implemented for substantial development or redevelopment of land, not to regulate lot splits under which .a single family home is built on a property partitioned from another, larger one. 7 21. Mound - Please explain the intent of the Common Scheme of Development paragraph and how it will be applied. It would appear the MPCA Construction Permit does a better job at defining a "Common Plan of Development" and should be referenced. How is a gain or loss of ownership of an adjacent parcel affected before or after the date this rule takes affect? Your rule raises interpretive legal questions. If an adjacent parcel is owned by a common owner to a project parcel, but not part of the project it should not be affected by this rule simply by reason of who owns it. a. The Common Scheme of Development language represents no change from the District's existing stormwater management rule. The purpose of this language is to ensure that development occurring across multiple parcels under common ownership is not exempt from regulation because the proposed activity takes place on separate parcels that individually do not meet regulatory thresholds. 22. Victoria - Should the date the rule took effect remain June 2005, or should it be updated to reflect the adoption of the updated rules? a. The Common Scheme of Development language is within the current stormwater management rule, adopted in January 2005. Therefore, common or related ownership analysis will be applied back to January 2005. COMMENTS ON STORMWATER MANAGEMENT SECTION 3: REQUIREMENTS 23. Minneapolis - 3(c)(1) and 3(c)(2) There is an inconsistency between 3(c)(1) and 3(c)(2). For phosphorus control in 3(c)(2) we think you intend that the applicant should provide for phosphorus control in an amount equivalent to that which would be achieved through the abstraction of the first one inch of rainfall' from the site's impervious surface [as in 3(c)(1)], rather than the abstraction ofone inch of runoff from the site's impervious surfaces. a. Language within these sections will be modified for consistency. 24. Mn/DOT - Section 3, part a, 1: Please add "on- site" to the sentence — "projects shall result in no net increase in phosphorous loading from existing on -site conditions." Projects should not have to treat for off -site loading.. a. The intent of this section of the rule is to ensure no increase in phosphorus loading from existing conditions. Unless alterations are made by an applicant that change off site loading rates, the no net increase requirement will apply to on site changes that modem loading. Therefore, no change will be made. 25. Mn/DOT - Section 3, part c, 2: I don't understand why the last sentence is needed when no net increase in phosphorous is already required in part a, 1 already. Please explain or please remove "and phosphorus control in an amount equivalent to that which would be achieved through abstraction of 1 inch of runoff from the site's impervious surfaces." a. Language in, Section 3, part c, 2, provides an alternative frameworkfor compliance with the volume control requirements, where an applicant demonstrates that abstraction of 1 inch of rainfall is infeasible. To ensure nondegradation of downstream waterbodies, subsection 3(c)(2) requires phosphorus control in an amount equivalent to that obtained through one inch of volume control. For example, in the event that a redeveloping parcel 8 between 1 -5 acres that disturbs greater than 40% of the site and does not obtain a 10% reduction in impervious surface but cannot meet the volume control standard, phosphorus control in an equivalent amount is still required Since new roads and road reconstructions that increase impervious surface more than 10, 000 square feet are subject to no net increase in phosphorus requirements, this language would not apply to Linear Transportation Projects. Therefore, no change will be made to this section. 26. Minnetrista - Phosphorus Control. The City supports the proposal to require a reduction in phosphorus loading when agricultural property re- develops. Phosphorus reduction is a critical component to water quality. degradation in Lake Minnetonka, and conversion of land is a good time to apply a standard. However, we do not support using "meadow condition" as a baseline for nondegradation. Furthermore, we argue with the use of .04 mg/1 as the phosphorus load baseline -for meadows. This holds development in cities like Minnetrista that have primarily ag conversion to a unreasonably high standard, thus negatively impacting growth opportunities and potentially impacting the quality of discretionary aspects of development. Also, under the proposed rule, row crops are held to a higher standard than no net - increase, but what about land use conversions like point- source polluters or feedlots? Why are those types of uses not considered for a higher standard? Proposed Solution: Set a specific goal for phosphorus reduction per acre of property redeveloped, and provide flexibility in the achievement of that goal (regional management, infiltration, assisted filtration, or other means). a. During discussion of New Development standards in agricultural settings, the Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) recommended the use of meadow condition to define phosphorus loading standards 'as it is already being used by some communities. The event mean concentration of 0.04 mg/L is a standard used in both the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency's AN Stormwater Manual and a concentration used in the Districts Hydraulic, Hydrologic and Pollutant Loading Study. Since the event mean concentration of 0.04 mg/L being used for row crop lands is the same as Would be used, for meadow conditions and similar to concentrations used for other natural landscapes (forest, prairie), row crop lands are not being held to a higher standard. Feedlots have been added to row crops agricultural lands referenced under New Development, Section 3(a)(1)i. 27. Minnetrista - The city would like written confirmation from the District that any phosphorus reduction on previously agricultural land above the previous rule (no net increase) will be counted toward the city's allocation of phosphorus reduction, as previously verbalized many times. (This would provide a further incentive for cities to encourage developers to do better). Also, the city questions what standard will be used for fut&e TMDL implementation -the pre - development condition or post - development condition? a. During the development of the District's 3rd generation 2007 Comprehensive Water Resource Management Plan, loading allocations and MCWD capital improvements were based on the assumption that the District would adopt a no net increase in loading standard. Staff will recommend that load reductions achieved through development beyond no net increase be credited to the LGUvia the surface water management plan. However, please note that future municipal projects will still be required to satisfy regulatory requirements and that credit will not be granted for load reductions achieved through MCWD financial contributions. 1 _ :_ -- 28. 1Vlinnetrista - Rate Control. The. city is uncertain how depressions that have not historically out - flowed will be treated when. analyzing rate and volume control. Will there be no additional water permitted to over. -flow, when needed for flood control purposes? a.. The Districts current Stormwater Management rule contains language that states, "The volume of runoff may not increase due to the project when the receiving area of said runoff is landlocked and not capable of handling the increased volume of runoff. In addition, the applicant shall either own or have proper rights over the landlocked property to handle water from the development. Back -to -back 100 year runoff events will be used to analyze holding capacity and freeboard for landlocked areas. " The District will include this language in the proposed draft Stormwater Management rule. 29. Orono - 3(c)(2).- Volume Control: The. rule states "where an applicant demonstrates that it is infeasible to meet the one inch abstraction requirement through the use of volume control credits pursuant to subsection 3(c)(1), the sormwater management plan must provide for the abstraction of the runoff to the greatest extent feasible, and at least 0.5 inches, and phosphorus control in an amount equivalent to that which would be achieved through the abstraction of one inch of runoff from the site's imperious surfaces. Concern: Implementing this requirement does not align with the phosphorus reduction requirement of the rule stating that projects shall result in no net increase in phosphorus loading from existing conditions. Proposed Solution: We suggest that the ru le be changed to state the following "and phosphorus control equivalent to matching the phosphorus loading for the existing conditions." a. During discussion by the Technical Advisory Committee it was agreed that as parcel size and percentage disturbance increases for redevelopment, so does the opportunity to improve water quality through management of the sites sormwater runoff. Therefore, based on site. disturbance for medium to large redeveloping parcels, volume control is required. In the event these redevelopment projects are unable to meet the volume control requirement, phosphorus control in an equivalent amount is still required. Therefore, no change will be made to this section. 30. BATC -The alternative method for compliance with the one inch abstraction requirement is an absolute necessity given the varying site conditions throughout the district. While the alternative provides for much- needed flexibility in the abstraction requirement, the 0'.5 inch abstraction minimum requirement leaves legitimate feasibility questions for many projects throughout the district. BATC supports volume control goals and incentives, but remains opposed to fixed, numerical standards which are particularly onerous in lower grade soils. This could render projects infeasible and add significant costs throughout the district. Flexibility to account for limits on -site, which range from soil classification to zoning requirements, are an absolute must from an applicant's perspective. To ameliorate this issue, the rule should be amended to allow an applicant, at its own cost, to demonstrate that its infeasible to meet the one inch abstraction requirement through the use of volume control, but without the subsequent 0.5 -inch minimum requirement. In certain site conditions, the 0.5 -inch requirement is simply not feasible. This change would keep the 1 -inch goal in place where feasible, but it would also encourage alternatives while limiting feasibility and cost challenges that are tied to a fixed requirement over the district's diverse landscape. 10 a. The development of the District's volume control standard is consistent with other municipal and watershed standards across the metro, and is based on generally accepted principles that managing for volume control moves watershed systems towards their historic hydrology, thus providing benefits beyond improved water quality including enhanced stream base flow and groundwater recharge. In recognition of varied soil conditions and other site constraints, the District has included numerous alternative volume control practices including, underground infiltration (subsurface soils are often different than surficial soils), tree preservation, soil amendments, capture - reuse, enhancement of pervious areas and filtration. Where an applicant demonstrates, under the alternative compliance pathway in subsection 3(c)(2), that site constraints are such there are no feasible means of abstracting 1 inch of rainfall, the stormwater plan must provide the maximum possible abstraction rand at least 0.5 inches) and phosphorus reduction equivalent to that achieved through 1 inch of abstraction. Given the proposed level offlexibility, consistency with other metro standards, the many options available to achieve volume control and that the District is providing 50% volume control credit towards use offiltration, achieving 0.5 inch of volume control on a site has been determined to be a reasonable alternative minimum standard. For sites unable to utilize any of these options, the District has an Exception rule that allows for even further flexibility in how applicants choose to meet District standards: For sites where Exceptions fail to provide sufficient options, app. licants can pursue a variance. 31: Minneapolis - 3(c)(2) Delete " ... and at least 0.5 inches ... ". The statement already says "to the greatest extent feasible ", thus an amount is unnecessary. In fact, for Type D soils, this 0.5 inch requirement may render sites non - developable. To illustrate this infeasibility, I am enclosing three slides prepared by Bar Engineering for the MIDS process that is being led by the NTCA. Note on the first slide that, in order to drain. within 48 hours, a BMP on D soils needs to be extremely shallow. The third slide provides an example of a 10 -acre, 80% impervious commercial site; where infiltration of one inch from impervious surfaces would. require 2/3 of the site.. a. The development of the District's volume control standard is consistent with other municipal and watershed standards across the metro and is based on generally accepted principles that managing for volume control moves watershed systems towards their historic hydrology, thus providing benefits beyond improved water quality including enhanced stream base flow and groundwater recharge. In recognition of varied soil conditions and other site constraints, the District has included numerous alternative volume.control practices including, underground infiltration (subsurface soils are often different than surficial soils), tree preservation, soil amendments, capture - reuse, enhancement of pervious areas and filtration Where the applicant demonstrates, under the alternative compliance pathway in subsection 3(c)(2), that site constraints are such there are no feasible means of abstracting 1 inch of rainfall, the stormwater plan must provide the maximum possible abstraction (and at least 0.5 inches) and phosphorus reduction equivalent to that achieved through i inch of abstraction. Given the proposed level offlexibility, consistency with other metro standards, the many options available to achieve volume control and that the District is providing 50% volume control credit towards use of filtration, achieving 0.5 inch of volume control on a site has been determined to be a reasonable standard. For sites unable to utilize any of these options,, the District has an Exception rule that allows for even further flexibility in 11 how applicants choose to meet District standards: For sites where Exceptions fail to provide sufficient options, applicants can pursue a variance. 32. Mound - What is the purpose of having the minimum be "to the greatest extent feasible" AND 0.5 inch? The two values, when used in this manner, appear to be in conflict. Is it "to the greatest extent feasible" or is it a minimum of 0.5 inch? Please explain. a. The District has established a goal of achieving I inch of volume control for various development scenarios. In the event that applicants are unable to achieve this standard due to site - speck constraints, the District has provided an alternative compliance pathway in subsection 3(c)(2) whereby the stormwater plan must provide the maximum possible abstraction (and at least 0.5 inches) and phosphorus reduction equivalent to that achieved through 1 inch of abstraction. Therefore, applicants are required to provide as much volume control as feasible up to 1.0 inch but not less than 0.5 inch. For example, an applicant may demonstrate that 1.0 inch of volume control is infeasible, however they may be able to provide 0.75 inches of volume control. 33. Victoria - The rule requires abstraction of the first one inch of.rainfall from the sites impervious surface and provides a framework for conditions where it becomes infeasible to meet that requirement. In Victoria, the majority of the soil is type C and D. We do not have an understanding as to how developers will meet this standard and we are extremely concerned about the cost/ability for developers and land owners to do so. a. The development of the District's volume control standard is consistent with other municipal and watershed standards across the metro and is based on generally accepted principles that managingfor volume control moves watershed systems towards their historic hydrology, thus providing benefits beyond improved water quality including enhanced stream base flow and groundwater recharge. In recognition of varied soil conditions and other site constraints, the District has included numerous alternative volume control practices including, underground infiltration (subsurface soils are often different than su>ficial soils), tree preservation, soil amendments, capture - reuse, enhancement ofpervious areas andfiltration. Given the proposed level of flexibility, consistency with other metro standards, the many options available to achieve volume control and that the District is providing 50 % . volume control credit. towards use of filtration, achieving 0.5 inch of volume control on a site has been determined to be a reasonable standard. For sites unable to utilize any of these options, the District has an Exception rule that allows for even further flexibility in how applicants choose to meet District standards. For sites where Exceptions fail to provide sufficient options, applicants can pursue variances by demonstrating the hardships that are unique to the site. 34. Minnetrista - Volume Control. The City finds the requirement to control the volume of the first inch of rainfall, despite soil type, onerous for Minnetrista, given its hard -to- infiltrate soils. While it is appreciated to specify credits and provide for .5 inch of volume control under certain circumstances, soil type and associated infiltration capacity is not specifically considered as part of the rule. Proposed Solution: Provide a different standard for volume control (and associated phosphorus control) when C and D soils (.5 inch of rainfall) consist of the majority of the site (more than 70 %). 12 a. The development of the District's volume control standard is consistent with other municipal and watershed standards across the metro and is based on generally. accepted principles that managing for volume control moves watershed systems towards their historic hydrology, thus providing benefits beyond improved water quality including enhanced stream base flow and groundwater recharge. In recognition of varied soil conditions and other site constraints, the District has included numerous alternative volume control practices including, underground infiltration (subsurface soils are often different than surflcial soils), tree preservation, soil amendments, capture- reuse, enhancement of pervious areas and filtration. Given the proposed level offlexibility, consistency with other metro standards, the many options available. to achieve volume control and that the District is providing 50% volume control credit towards use offiltration,. achieving 0.5 inch ofvolume control on a site has been determined to be a reasonable standard. For sites unable to utilize any of these options, the District has an Exception rule that allows for even further flexibility in how applicants choose to meet District standards. For sites where Exceptions fail to provide sufficient options, applicants can pursue variances by demonstrating the hardships that are unique to the site. 35. Minneapolis - 3(c) We view infiltration as a methodology for removing pollutants. We would prefer that the pollutants be regulated, and not the methods for removing them. The proposer and not the regulator should be responsible for determining the method, using cost - benefit analysis and the proposer's judgment and decision making. In a fully built city, which was developed to drain quickly to storm sewers, there are many unknowns about changes that will occur with increased infiltration, and we advocate a cautionary approach. a The development of the District's volume control standardis consistent with other municipal and watershed standards .across the metro and is based on generally accepted principles that managing for volume control moves watershed systems towards their historic hydrology, thus providing benefits beyond improved water quality including enhanced stream base flow and groundwater recharge. Given the additional benefits volume control has on surface and ground waters, it was determined that the stormwater management rule should include provisions for both pollutant loading and for volume control. 36. Orono — 3(c)(1) - Volume Control: The rule states the stormwater plan must provide for the abstraction of the first one inch of rainfall from the site's impervious surface ". Concern: Volume control requirements in general are starting to be called into question. It's our understanding that the Minnesota Cities Storm water Coalition will be pushing back to the NUCA on proposed volume control requirements in the upcoming MS4 General Permit update. There.are concerns about groundwater contamination, dewatering of wetlands, costs of facilities, and the need for volume control at all. Proposed Solution: Volume control may not be necessary if rate control and water quality control criteria can be met. The volume control criteria should only be required in areas that have sensitive. streams downstream that could be subject to erosion. Beyond that volume control should be encouraged as a BMP to meet the water quality criteria in instances where infiltration is feasible and makes good engineering and scientific sense. 13 a. The development of the District's volume control standard is consistent. with other municipal and watershed standards across the metro and is based on generally accepted principles that managing for volume control moves watershed systems towards their historic hydrology, thus providing benefits beyond improved water quality including enhanced stream base flow and groundwater recharge.. Given the additional benefits volume control has on surface and ground waters, it was determined that the stormwater management rule should include provisions for both pollutant loading and for volume control. 37. Minneapolis - 3.(c)(2)(i.) To the list of variables, please add storm water hotspots *, and proximity to structures. * The 111PCA has defined "stormwater hotspot" as "any land use or activity that may generate a higher concentration of (hydrocarbons, trace metals, or toxic pollutants than are found in typical stormwater runoff. a. Section 3(c)(2)(i) states that variables that limit the feasibility of volume control "may include but are not limited to unified soil classification, soil contamination, proximity to bedrock; proximity to groundwater, zoning requirements and financial considerations. " Since the list of defined variables is not exclusive, an applicant has the ability to reference additional variables that limit the feasibility of volume control. Therefore, no change will be made to this section. 38. Mound - Projects that result in an increase in impervious surface will be required to infiltrate or "abstract" 1 inch of runoff from the sites impervious surface. Please clarify if that is referring to existing or proposed impervious surface. a. The -volume control requirements apply to a future proposed' condition. However, depending on the size of the parcel, and percent of the site disturbed volume control of I inch of runoffmay be required from impervious surfaces that existed prior to the redevelopment activity. For example, in some situations volume control is required only for new additional impervious surface, whereas in other cases volume control may be required across the entire site's impervious surface. 39. MPRB - The Minneapolis Park and Recreation Board (MPRB) supports the abstraction of 1 inch of rainfall as a goal. This may be very challenging to obtain in urban areas that have highly disturbed and compacted soils. The abstraction sequence outlined in 3(c) (2) for sites that have infiltration issues does lessen this abstraction to 0.5. inches. The MPRB's concern is that at sites where the 1 inch abstraction is not attainable, the provision in the rule that calls for phosphorus control in an amount equivalent to the one inch of rain abstraction is very difficult to obtain. If it is not possible to infiltrate on the site, it may be very difficult and unreasonable to meet the phosphorus reduction that would result from a 1 inch abstraction. a. Based on evaluation ofprecipitation frequency curves for the metro, the 1ffCA estimates that providing volume control. up to I inch captures 80 -90% of annual storm events. Therefore, 1 inch of volume control will reduce 80 -90% of annual nutrient loading. In instances where providing the full 1 inch of volume control is infeasible, a variety of other alternatives may be used to provide a equivalent level of phosphorus reduction. This level of treatment can be achieved by providing a combination of volume control, filtration, standard detention practices and newer practices such as the use of iron filings, therefore the District has determined this phosphorus control standard to be reasonable. 14 40. Orono - 3(c)(1) The rule states "the stormwater plan must provide for the abstraction of the first one inch of rainfall from the site's impervious surface ". Concern: There is no guidance provided to determine the volume of water that is to be .abstracted. Typically abstraction requirements are calculated in the following fashion: • Abstraction Volume Required = site area * rainfall amount * runoff coefficient Proposed solution: We suggest that the method used to determine the abstraction volume be provided in the rule and that it includes the runoff coefficient that shall be used in the calculation. We suggest using a runoff coefficient of 0.9. a. The District has not adopted a prescriptive methodology in how applicants calculate the volume of runoff generated from a sites impervious surface. A variety of runoff models, runoff coefficients and curve numbers exist. In order to provide maximum flexibility for applicants the District has not prescribed one specific method. 41. Plymouth - The draft Stormwater Management Rule does not mention well head protection or well head vulnerability areas. How will the District apply the Stcumwater Management Rule to well head protection or well head vulnerability areas? a. Given that wellhead sensitivity exhibits spatial variation and the Minnesota Department of Health requires different wellhead protection requirements for different classifications ofpublic water systems across the State, the District will address wellhead protection issues as they relate to the Stormwater Management rule on a case by case basis using all available information about a given development and the surrounding wellhead protection area. 42. Bancor - This new rule will result in a tripling of the amount of land required for storm water treatment. N a development such as Woodland Cove, which has 32% of the site as open space, is finding it difficult to meet your new rules, how is it going to be possible for other applicants to comply? a. The District carefully analyzed and considered, with substantial.input from its advisory bodies, the practical consequences of its revised management standards. The rule's applicability sections (4 -8) were carefully crafted to balance the burden of stormwater management on development/redevelopment plans, and the extent to which the standards are imposed increases as the extent of land disturbance increases (and the project proponent has consequentially greater opportunity to provide stormwater management). Further, the rule sets standards while providing applicants with great flexibility in how they meet the standards. The District is satisfied that the revised rule does not unreasonably burden development and redevelopment projects, and where unique circumstances present hardship, the District will consider exception or variance requests. SECTION 3(d) BMPs: 43. Minneapolis - 3(e) The draft language exposes people to variation in financial risks and safety risks. We recommend that the requirement for the vertical difference between low opening of 15 structures and the 100 -year high water elevation of stormwater BMPs be equal to the height required to store the volume of runoff from a 2 -year event. a. This language represents no substantive change from the existing rule and follows generally accepted engineering principles-that low openings of structures be located 2 vertical -feet above 100 year flood elevations of waterbodies, including stormwater management facilities to prevent flooding during high water. In areas of retrofit, applicants have historically met this requirement by creating 2 feet of separation through use of berms around the perimeter of the stormwater facility. Therefore, no change will be made to this section. 44. Richfield - (SS 3.e.1.) Richfield was fully developed prior to any guidance on high water elevations relating to building structure openings. The requirement of two vertical feet of separation is not an achievable or realistic goal for linear projects or any site improvements that do not require a full rebuild. This rule could prevent improvement within the City that the City fully encourages property owners to make. a This language represents no substantive change from the existing rule and follows generally accepted engineering principles that low openings of structures be located 2 vertical feet above 100 year flood elevations of waterbodies, including stormwater management facilities to prevent flooding during high water. In areas of retrofit, applicants have historically met this requirement by creating 2 feet of separation through use of berms around the perimeter of the stormwater facility. Therefore, no change will be made to this section. 45. Richfield - (SS 4.a.) Best Management Practices should be "encouraged where practical" rather than required. a. Best Management Practices (BMP's) are required for small scale projects under the existing version of the District's Stormwater Management rule and the District has always provided flexibility in the types of BMPs that can be used to meet this requirement. Therefore no change will be made to this section. COMMENTS ON STORMWATER MANAGEMENT SECTION 4: REDEVELOPMENT 46. Orono — Sections 4 and 5 - Redevelopment Requirements: The stormwater rule has language, to specify when stormwater requirements apply during redevelopment. Concern: The rule language in Sections 4 and 5 is not consistent with Tables 2 and 3. The tables have more specific language and are easier to understand. Proposed Solution: We suggest that the language under Sections 4 and 5 be removed and be replaced with Tables 2 and 3. a. The regulatory thresholds and exceptions in section 2 of the rule, as well as the applicability provisions in sections 4 and 5, are incorporated into tables 2 and 3 to ensure that the tables present a comprehensive picture of the rule's regulatory scheme. 16 47. Plymouth - Tables 2 & 3 are very helpful in understanding how the Stormwater Management Rule will be applied for redevelopment projects. Tables should also be provided for development and linear transportation projects. a. . The District will consider adding additional tables to the draft Stormwater Management rule. COMMENTS ON STORMWATER MANAGEMENT SECTION 6: TRANSPORTATION 48. Met Council - The MCES considers it pipelines similar to "Linear Transportation Facilities" and would request the District include our facilities in those definitions as shown in the attachment. The VICES often constructs underground facilities under the ground surface on property owned and maintained by others, resulting in the permitting and construction of storm water structures by MCES which are owned and maintained by others. In those cases, the MCES does not have the right to record maintenance plans, nor guarantee perpetual maintenance as those responsibilities would transfer to the underlying owner. As a result, the MCES requests a separate category for these types of situations. a. Underground utilities such as those installed by MCES will be included in the definition of Linear Transportation and Utili Projects as requested. However, since the District enters. into projects specific maintenance agreements with a variety ofpublic entities, language specific to MCES maintenance provisions will not be included. The District will continue to work on a case by case basis to develop maintenance agreements with public entities that reflect the unique nature of each project. 49. Orono — 6(b) - The rule states Linear reconstruction projects that will create between 10,000 square feet and one acre of impervious surface must meet the phosphorus control requirements in accordance with subsection 3(a) and rate control requirements in accordance with subsection 3(b) for the area of increased impervious surface ". 6( c) - The rule states Linear Reconstruction Projects that will create more than one acre of impervious surface must meet the phosphorus control requirements in accordance with subsection 3(a), rate control requirements in accordance with subsection 3(b), and volume control requirements in accordance with subsection 3(c) for the area of increased impervious surface." Concern: It is unclear from these statements if the trigger for requiring stormwater treatment is based on new impervious surface or the reconstructed impervious surface. Proposed Solution: We assume that the trigger for requiring stormwater treatment is based on new impervious surface; however, the rule should be revised for clarity. a. Stormwater Management requirements for Linear Transportation Projects are triggered by the addition of new impervious surface. This section of the rule will be revised to clarify based on this comment. 50. Victoria - The word "additional' should be stated prior to impervious surface under the exemptions and in Linear Reconstruction Projects (b) and (c) under 6. LINEAR TRANSPORTATION PROJECT REQUIREMENTS. 17 a. Stormwater Management requirements for Linear Transportation Projects are triggered by the addition of new impervious surface. This section of the rule will be revised to clarify based on this comment 51. Plymouth - Trail construction projects by municipal Parks and Recreation Departments or Park Districts appear to require a Stormwater Management permit, however, many trail systems are remote, constructed through existing open space, are designed to minimize other environmental impacts (ex. wetlands and trees), conform to existing contours and slopes, and are not otherwise associated with development or redevelopment projects. How would an applicant meet phosphorus, rate, and volume control requirements in such situations? a. Trails that are in remote areas and are constructed through open space would be able to meet the criteria of paragraph 2(d)(2) which exempts trails that do not exceed 12 feet in width and are bordered on the downgradient side(s) by a pervious buffer averaging at least one -half the width of the trail. 52. Minnetrista - Linear Transportation Projects. Requiring rate, volume, and phosphorus control for all new roads, sidewalks, or trails (or re- construction creating more than 1 acre of impervious) significantly increases the costs of such projects due to the land necessary for Best Management Practices (BUTS). The City strongly opposes such requirements because they run counter to design requirements set forth by MnDOT that cannot vary. This puts the city in a situation where the dollars provided for road upgrades cannot be used unless they meet specific design/safety criteria, which run counter to the District's goals. Proposed Solution: Eliminate the requirement for volume, rate, and phosphorus control for linear transportation projects or setting a higher threshold for increased impervious. a. During discussion of sormwater management for Linear Transportation Projects, the Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) acknowledged constraints associated with limited right -of -way, utilities and costs. The TAC discussed exemption standards for Linear Transportation Projects and generally agreed that new roads and reconstruction projects that resulted in large increases in impervious surface should be required to provide treatment for phosphorus, volume and rates. The TAC also acknowledged that public projects should be held to similar standards as those established for private development and redevelopment. After discussing the need to exempt small intersection, turn lane, or alley improvement projects, the TAC identified three Linear Transportation Project tiers (1) projects that result in a minor increase in impervious; (2) projects that result in a substantial increase in impervious; and (3) new road construction where no previous road existed. After discussion, the TAC suggested a 10, 000 square foot threshold for de minimis Linear Transportation Projects and I acre of additional impervious surface as a second tier threshold. The District is satisfied that 1 acre of additional impervious surface on Linear Transportation Projects represents a reasonable threshold for the application of Sormwater management requirements. 53. NmMOT - Section 3: To be clear, please add that the Stormwater Management Plan must meet Sections 6 -8 for linear transportation projects, not sections 4 -8, as stated on page 3. a. Section 3 of the Stormwater Management rule outlines general requirements for phosphorus control, rate control, volume control, best management practices and high water elevations. How these apply specifically to Linear Transportation Projects is 18 outlined in Section 6: Linear Transportation Project Requirements. Additional provisions for Regional Stormwater Management, Downstream Waterbodies, and Maintenance are provided in Section 7, 8 and 10 respectively. Therefore, no change will be made to this section. 54. Mn/DOT - Section 3, part a, 1: Having Linear Transportation in this section is confusing, please remove from this section. There is already a separate section 6 for linear transportation project requirements that explains the process really well. a. The purpose of referencing Linear Transportation Projects in 3(a)(1) is to differentiate between the phosphorus control standard for Linear Transportation Projects as compared to Redevelopment, and was requested by members of the Technical Advisory Committee. Section 6 does not describe the phosphorus control standard (i. e. no net increase), it only describes the thresholds that trigger the need to provide phosphorus control on Linear Transportation Projects. Therefore, no change will be made to this section. 55. Mn/DOT - Section 3, part c, 2, ii and iii: Public projects on established corridors should be exempt from these parts. For example, linear public highway transportation project improvements are based on increasing safety and mobility and on State and Federal road design standards, so reducing the size and scope and configuration is not possible. a. These design constraints could be explained by 119NDOT in Section 3, part c, 2, i, which requires a narrative be submitted to the District explaining variables that limit the feasibility of providing I inch of volume control. The District will work on a case by case basis with MNDOT on future projects to determine what design constraints exist. Therefore, no change will be made to this section. 56. Mn/DOT - Section 10, part f: This section only seems pertinent to non -State projects. For State projects, we do not need municipal consent in all'instances. Please add exemption for State projects. . a. This requirement represents no change from the existing Stormwater Management rule. If a project does not require municipal consent, an explanation can be provided with the permit application. Therefore, no exemption language will be added for State pr. ojects in this section. 57. Mn/DOT - Section 10, part g: Our construction contractors must sign the MPCA permit form and send it in to the MPCA. We cannot award our projects to a contractor without watershed district permits in hand. The process we have been using is: Nfi /DOT fills out the NIPCA NPDES permit application form and signs it; we send it along to contractor with our plans and specifications for the project. Then after project award to the contractor, they sign the application and send it in to the MPCA. In short, we can send the watershed district our signed application form, but it will not have the contractor signature on it yet. So; can sending our filled out form to the District qualify as proof that we intend to send the permit application to the MPCA via contractor as outlined above? Just need clarification and perhaps clarification in this section of the Rule. Process has been working fine as is for all these years now. a. The District will continue to work with the existing established process for Af\rDOT's NPDES permits. 19 58..Mn/DOT - Section 11: I would like a chance to review the District's Standard Maintenance Declaration while Rule N is still in draft format. Due to the size of Mn/DOT Metro's drainage system and based on our existing Agreement with the District which needed to have modifications to fit Mn/DOT's unique situation and the fact that we have drainage infrastructure in 35 watersheds within the Metro area, I am thinking that there are items in the proposed declaration that Mn/DOT will not be able to meet. a. The District entered into a Cooperative Agreement with MNDOT in 2006 which details maintenance provisions for wetland buffers and stormwater management facilities. This agreement may need updating to reflect changes within this draft stormwater management rule. However, public entities will retain the option of entering into programmatic agreements for maintenance rather than recording declarations. COMMENTS ON STORMWATER MANAGEMENT SECTION 7: REGIONAL MANAGEMENT: 59. Orono - 7( c) -Regional Stormwater Management: The rule states "individual project sites utilizing a regional facility to meet phosphorus, rate, or volume control requirements must incorporate BMPs ". Concern: Regional stormwater management is an approach that cities can use to meet stormwater management requirements on a regional rather than local (on -site) level. The requirement to include BMPs in addition to providing regional phosphorus, rate, and volume control goes above and beyond the requirements of the rule. Proposed Solution: If an applicant is able to successfully demonstrate that they are able to meet the requirements for phosphorus, rate, and volume control using regional storm water management within the same drainage area, they should not have to provide additional on -site BMPs. a. The District recognizes that use of regional facilities remains an important strategy for municipal management of stormwater runoff and has included provisions within the draft Stormwater Management rule that allows their continued use to meet volume control, phosphorus and rate control standards. However, managing stormwater runoff on an individual site basis provides benefits that cannot always be achieved on a large scale, regional basis. These may include the protection of waterbodies that exist between development and the regional facility; infiltration of water locally for plant uptake and local groundwater/wetland recharge. Therefore, the District has included language that requires individual site B111P's, that do not have to meet the volume /pollutant loading standards, to provide these localized benefits. 60. Victoria _ This is an important tool for providing cost effective stormwater management particularly in areas of significant redevelopment often occurring over time. It is not clear how the District will evaluate and measure the criteria in section 7b, 1 and 2. Additional BMPs should only be required in accordance with the rest of the rule criteria. a. The District recognizes that use of regional facilities remains an important strategy for municipal management of stormwater runoff and has included provisions within the draft stormwater Management rule that allows their continued use to meet volume control, phosphorus and rate control standards. However, managing stormwater runoff on an individual site basis provides benefits that cannot always, be achieved on a large scale, 20 regional basis. These may include the protection of waterbodies that exist between development and the regional facility, infiltration of water locally for plant uptake and local groundwater /wetland recharge. Therefore, the District has included language that requires individual site BW s, that do not have to meet the volumelpollutant loading standards, to provide these localized benefits. COMMENTS ON STORMWATER MANAGEMENT SECTION 8: DOWNSTREAM WATERBODIES: 61. Minnetrista - Bounce Allowances. Are the bounce allowances on a per - project basis, or overall bounce allowed? For example, if a project proposed a bounce of the. maximum allowable, would subsequent permits be allowed no additional bounce, or would it be a pro- rated percentage based on drainage tributary? ... a. Bounce allowances are based on a waterbodies sensitivity and are therefore overall allowances, not issued on a per project basis. The District has historically applied the bounce allowances as needed, with future projects being further limited in their ability to create water level bounce within receiving waters. 62. Orono - Table 1 - The rule requires that bounce must match existing conditions for the 1 -, 10 -,. and'100 -year event for lakes. Concern: This requirement would be difficult to prove for an applicant and could require the development of a detailed hydrologic model. Proposed Solution: The requirement for rate and volume control should be sufficient to control increases in bounce to lakes. We recommend that this requirement be removed from the storm water rule. a.. It is importantfor some flood sensitive lakes to not exhibit any increase in 100 year flood elevations as a result of upstream development. The District has a detailed hydrologic model for its entire drainage area that includes most of the lakes. This model in addition to site - specific model provided by the applicant can be used to demonstrate compliance with this requirement. Therefore, no change will be made to this section. COMMENTS ON STORMWATER MANAGEMENT SECTION 10 :. REQUIRED EXMITS:. 63. Bancor - Paragraph 10(b) requires soil borings to be taken prior to approval, 5 feet below the bottom of the proposed storm water infiltration area. This is not feasible or practical in areas where there will be .grade changes, i.e. if you need to test ten feet below the surface you wo 'Vld have a hole at least 20 feet wide. a. The proposed draft language requires applicants to submit a soil sampling plan and the resulting identification, description, permeability and approximate delineation of site soils. While the layout, number of samples and format of the sampling plan is flexible, the resulting samples are critical to document infiltration rates in areas proposed for stormwater management on a site and therefore cannot be waived. Soil borings are required to extend 5 feet below the bottom of a proposed infiltration area as soil profiles and hydrologic soil groups that determine permeability vary vertically. For example, highly permeable soils may lie below impermeable clay soils. These borings will determine if, through excavation, suitable soils can be reached and utilized for 21 infiltration practices. Further, soil borings do not have to be conducted through use of open pits, augered samples can also be supplied. 64. MPRB - Several times throughout the Stormwater Rule, the rule references following design practices and guidance from the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) Minnesota Stormwater Manual and subsequent revisions. Where this reference is made and where applicable (such as section 3 (d) (2) and section 10 (d)), the Rule should also reference forthcoming guidance and outcomes from the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency's Minimal Impact Design Standards (MIDS) process. a The District's rule cannot reference guidance that has not yet been completed and reviewed by the District. The rule may be revised in the future to reference the ASS guidance once it is completed. COMMENTS ON STORMWATER MANAGEMENT SECTION 11: MAINTENANCE: 65. Minnetonka - Section 11(a), "A public entity assuming the maintenance obligation may do so by filing with the District a document signed by an official with authority. " Maintenance of public stormwater management structures and facilities is already a requirement of the city's MS4 permit. Requiring additional maintenance agreements be filed with the District for every single new BMP is an unnecessary burden on cities and it creates additional paperwork and red -tape that isn't needed. - a. The District does not have the authority to enforce M34 maintenance requirements, therefore a separate maintenance agreement has historically been required for all permitted facilities. Public entities have the option of entering into programmatic maintenance agreements for all facilities permitted by the District to alleviate the need for project speck agreements. Further, the language references is intended to allow public entities such as municipalities to assume control over private facilities, should they desire to do so. COMMENTS ON STORMWATER MANAGEMENT APPENDIX A: 66. Minnetonka — Appendix A, "Enhancement of Pervious Area (wetland buffer not subject to Rule D, forest or prairie conservation or restoration) " Research has demonstrated that wetland buffers have a benefit to the water quality of the down- gradient water body. Regardless of the reason why a wetland buffer is installed there should still be a volume credit applied. Just because a wetland buffer is required by the district's rule doesn't mean that the water quality benefit is any less and that should be reflected in the stormwater credit given. a. The District will incorporate volume control credits associated with wetland buffers into Appendix A: Enhancement of Pervious Areas. 67. Plymouth - Appendix A: Enhancement of Pervious Area. It appears that wetland buffer subject to Rule D could not be applied to volume abstraction credits. Wetland buffers provide several benefits including habitat, nutrient assimilation, and volume control. Why would _applicants not be allowed to utilize wetland buffers for multiple requirements such as meeting the requirements of the Wetland Rule while also meeting requirements of the Stormwater Rule? 22 a. The District will incorporate volume control credits associated with wetland buffers into Appendix A: Enhancement of Pervious Areas. 68. Bancor - The new wetland buffer requirements increased the amount of wetland buffers on this site by at least 25 %. a. The District will incorporate volume control credits associated with wetland buffers into Appendix A: Enhancement of Pervious Areas. This will provide overlap between the amount of areas required for wetland buffers and stormwater management. 69. MPRB - Appendix A lists a table with associated credits. The MPRB is concerned that enhancements of pervious areas will not be credited if there is any likely human traffic such as pedestrians, bicycles or vehicles. The MPRB operates in a highly urbanized area where it . _.... . cannot control all human access. The MPRB believes these credits should still be available if there is human access. a. The intent of the Enhancement of Pervious Area volume control alternative is to provide credit for practices that would improve infiltration in pervious areas, such as replacing turf grass with deep- rooted prairie plantings. Areas that are subject to motorized vehicle, bike and foot traffic would become compacted and would not provide as much capacity for infiltration, therefore, they would not receive credit, as noted in footnote 7 of Appendix A. 70. Bancor - I would also like to address the proposed credits. Again using the Woodland Cove site we have calculated the approximate cost of creating one acre foot credit as follows: • Infiltration -Costs $ 25,000 - $100,000 per acre foot credit. (1 acre of land needed) • Infiltration Trench - $135,000 per acre foot credit (3/5 acre of land needed) • Saving Trees - Need to save 120 acres of trees for 1 acre foot credit Planting New Trees - Need to plant 15,000 2 1/2, trees (15' radius) at $ 250 each = $3,750,000 for 1 acre foot credit (300- 500 Acres) • Amended Soils - Depends on amendment requirements - $4,500 an acre to amend - Amend 25 +- acres = $112,500 = 1 acre foot credit (uses a lot of land/maintenance costs) (25 Acres) • Filtration - $150,000 - $200,000 per acre foot credit - (depends on engineered soils) (2 Acres) (Please note that none of these cost estimates include the cost of land, so in reality the costs would be far greater than the amount estimated above.) As you can see, these credits can be very expensive to create. The result is that they may not be a very practical alternative. a. Ae District realizes that compliance with stormwater management requirements.can be a significant cost for a development or redevelopment project. The District, with input from the advisory committees, carefully analyzed and considered the practical consequences of the abstraction (volume control) standard. Subsection 3(c) and Appendix A were designed to provide applicants with the flexibility necessary to find the most effective manner possible to meet the applied standard. The District is satisfied that the revised rule does not unreasonably burden development and redevelopmentprojects, and where unique circumstances present hardship, the District will consider exception or variance requests. 23 71. Mn/DOT - Appendix A, Soil Amendments: I am not clear on what is meant by soil amendments and how crediting will be done. Does this refer to bringing in engineered soils as a BMP for abstraction credit? Could examples of what types of soil amendments the District is thinking of be included? For example, I am assuming that if soils become compacted during construction and are uncompacted prior to project completion that no additional treatment is required and this is not apart of the impervious calculations. Mn/DOT Specification 2105.3 Construction Requirements, Part G Finishing Operations, requires that subsoiling to a depth of 20 inches is done to reduce soil compaction in all areas where turf establishment is'shown on the Plan. Please confirm that my assumptions are correct. a The AMStormwater Manual provides specifications for soil amendments that serve to reduce runoff volumes and typically involve decompaction in addition to the incorporation of organic matter in the form of compost. Decompaction alone will not count as a soil amendment under the draft Stormwater Management rule. 72. Mn/DOT - Appendix A, Filtration: Why only providing 50% credit for filtration practices? If water quality objectives for TSS and phosphorous are met and rate control is provided so that downstream erosion is not an issue, then why not give 100 % credit ?. a 'Appendix A provides volume reduction credit for a variety of practices.. Since filtration does not provide volume control in an amount equivalent to infiltration, it is only afforded 50% volume control credit. However; filtration also provides water quality benefits, which will be credited towards an applicant based on the estimated pollutant removal rates supplied during the application process. 73. Minnetrista - Abstraction Credit Schedule. More credit should be given for infiltration during storm events. A piece of property can abstract a large amount of water during a rain event before runoff occurs. This credit could cause un -duly large stormwater infrastructure to be constructed. Proposed Solution: Credit should be void volume provided plus amount of infiltration during storm event. a. See footnote 2 on Appendix A. Infiltration of rainfall during a storm event is not credited in order to ensure that a basin is designed conservatively to meet storage capacity and treatment requirements. As more information becomes available, the District may reconsider this approach. Therefore, no change will be made to the Appendix A at this time. 74, Orono - Appendix A; Footnote 2 - MCWD Volume Abstraction Credit Schedule: The rule states "volume infiltrated during a rainfall event shall not be credited towards the abstraction volume requirement ". Concern: This does not consider that rainfall will be infiltrating during a stormfall event. This may'result in minimal impacts for small projects; however, a large development resulting in a large increase in impervious surface will require the volume control BMPs to occupy a large footprint and therefore the potential to infiltrate during a stormfall event. 24 Proposed Solution: We recommend that the watershed explore this issue in further detail and allow the volume infiltrated during a rainfall event to be credited towards the abstraction volume. a. See footnote 2 on Appendix A. Infiltration of rainfall during a storm event is not credited in order to ensure that a basin is designed conservatively to meet storage capacity and treatment requirements.. As more information be available, the District may reconsider this approach. Therefore, no change will be made to the Appendix A at this time. 25 PROCEDURAL REQUIREMENTS RULE 1. Orono - Action on Permit Application: The rule states "the district shall act within 45 days of receipt of a complete application ". . Concern: There is no mention of the timeframe for the District to notify applicants that the application is considered complete or incomplete. - 'Proposed Solution: We recommend that the District notify applicants within 10 days of receipt of an application that it is considered complete or incomplete. a. State law (Minnesota Statutes section 15.99 , requires the District to alert an applicant within 15 business days that, an application is incomplete. The District will continue to process applications in compliance with this requirement and endeavor to alert applicants as quickly as possible when an application is incomplete. If the District does not note the applicant of incompleteness within the 15- business day period, the. application is deemed complete. PERMIT FEES RULE 2. Orono - The wording in 1.(c) of the Permit Fees Rule can be interpreted to mean that the District expects the entire set of taxpayers in the watershed to pay for a violation investigation, not just the violator. a. Paragraph l (c) of the rule will be corrected to clarify that watershed property owners should not pay costs caused violations. VARIANCES AND EXCEPTIONS RULE 3. Victoria - For the purposes of this rule, how is hardship determined? Does the District have a defmitiowfor hardship? a. Section 2. (a -e) identifies the standards that need to be met in order for a variance to be granted. . These standards focus on the site speck conditions that create hardship and . thus limit an applicant's ability to meet requirements of District rules. FINANCIAL ASSURANCES RULE 4. Victoria - Section 4 considers conditions for financial release. It seems like the specific items for final inspection compliance should be called out in a permit approval and not in the actual rule. a. The requirements for financial assurance release are included in Section 4 in order to identify when projects will be eligible for the release offunds. 26 2VAM TheMINNEAPOLIS FOUNDATION April 11, 2011 Mr. James L. Hobland City of Edina 4801 West 50th Street Edina, MN 55424 -1330 Dear Mr. Hobland: Rf�C�C� VEDD APR 15 2011 --------------- - - - - - -- -- I am pleased to acknowledge the contribution of $10,000.00 to the MSP Regional Economic Development Partnership Fund of The Minneapolis Foundation. For your records, the gift was received on 3/11/2011. In compliance with IRS requirements, we are confirming that The Minneapolis Foundation did not provide any goods or services in consideration, in whole or in part, for this contribution and that The Minneapolis Foundation has exclusive legal control of the assets contributed. You should retain this acknowledgment for tax purposes. Again, we are grateful for your support. If you have any questions about the Foundation, please do not hesitate to call on us. Sincerely, ->w Don W. Taylor Vice President, P ' opic 612 - 672 -3820 dtaylor@a mnlsfoundation.or� Services 800 IDS CENTER 80 SOUTH EIGHTH STREET MINNEAPOLIS MN 55402 1 612.672.3878 1 FA% 612.672.3846 1 MINNEAPOLISFOUNDATION.ORG I;i owe NPA�,� C 0 PORA�9� saes REPORT/RECOMMENDATION To: MAYOR AND COUNCIL Agenda Item VII. A. -2 DEBRA MANGEN F-1 Action From: CITY CLERK Discussion z Information Date: April 19, 2011 Subject: CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED AFTER PACKETS INFORMATION /BACKGROUND: Attached are copies of a -mails and letters received after the packets were delivered to you. Susan Howl r -rom Janet Skalicky[mailto:planet.janet @mac.com] REMN%IS© Sent: Tuesday, April.19, 2011 10:37 AM To: Lynette Biunno APR 19 2011 Subject: Construction Noise - Mayor James Hovland Mayor James Hovland and the Edina City Council For 14 years we have lived in our home on Halifax Lane in Edina. Our children have grown up feeding ducks in our backyard, discovering the Minnehaha Creek and playing at the neighborhood parks. My husband and I have enjoyed many evenings with neighbors catching up with a glass of wine on our patio.,or hosting the neighborhood book club. Our backyard patio is, an extension of our living space on summer days. We love our neighborhood and the tranquility it offers us. Unfortunately, this serenity changed a few years ago when TC Homebuilders began building on our block without regard to neighbors. We have watched 3 lovely homes nearby torn down and replaced with larger, imposing structures. While we are not opposed to remodeling improvements in any neighborhood,' we do have a strong aversion to the constant disruptive noise and debris that goes with it. We feel our quality of life has suffered immensely and feel the city should consider the effect of constant construction disruputions on its citizens when passing regulations regarding construction noise time limits. The noise that we've been forced to endure next door at 5500 Halifax Lane has been unbearable. Cutting of large blocks of stone took place from 7 am to 9 pm Monday - Saturday all spring and summer last year with an ,ccasional break on Sunday. We were forced to put up with the noise on Memorial Day, The Fourth of July, ,.,abor Day, Thanksgiving and Christmas Eve. Entertaining at our home simply was out of the question. The noise was so loud and constant that my children and I were forced to leave our house most summer days to get relief. TC Homebuilders does comply with construction time limits but most builders end their work day at 5 pm and do not work on weekends and do not use every allowable hour to their advantage. Why am I unable to enjoy my home because of the rights of a builder? Who is looking out for my rights as a citizen of Edina? During the summer of 2010 we were unable to open our windows for an entire summer because of the noise and dust. We were not able to go outside.until after 9:00 when construction stopped. Dinner was spent inside in our kitchen despite beautiful summer weather. On the rare occassion when construction was not in progress we would have to spray down, our patio and all furniture before sitting down to relax. The fact that we were:forced into this quality of life made us more and more resentful as the summer progressed. We believe that the city of Edina caters to the builders with `disregard to neighbors and their rights. During the school, year, my teen age children made a habit of doing their homework, in their rooms with noise reduction headphones over their ears to muffle the sounds. During their summer break they had to accept the fact that sleeping in would not be an option. They were forced up by 7 am all summer long. A neighbor a full block away phoned last summer because of the constant sawing noise. She found it hard to endure a block away and was wondering how I was coping with the noise just next door. In addition to the noise, the mess is also disheartening. Our blue spruce trees, dogwood and bushes on the 7onstruction side have all suffered damage and broken branches from the careless construction practices. When =- emolition took place we were left with glass, insulation and roof tiles littering our property. The climbing roses covering our house were littered with debris up to our roof line. Our stone walkway and gardens were covered in tiny pieces of glass from the shattered windows. i Debris remains on the site often blowing into the creek or our property. In fact, looking out on the property today I see a large pile of debris in the street opposite the construction site. The builder who lives 2 houses away, walks by the debris daily without picking it up. This is only a small portion of what we have suffered due to the inconsiderate practices of TC Homebuilders and their ability to work long days and weekends without consequence. I and other neighbors have contacted the Police and other city employees many times without much relief. We fear another nightmare summer is coming since landscaping has yet to begin at 5500 Halifax Lane and yet another home is set for demolition on the block. We are begging the city to set stricter time limits on this builder to give neighbors the ability to enjoy the quality of life that brought them to our Edina neighborhood in the first place. Thank you for your consideration. Sincerely, Janet Skalicky Brian Patty 5440 Halifax Lane Edina, MN 55424 952.924.0325 planet. ianetQmac. com IRnECEUMED APR 1 9 2011 + Susan Howl Subject: Excessive outdoor seating.in the back of MOZZA MIA 3910 W. 50th Street To the CITY COUNCIL of EDINA My name is Klaus Freyinger, and I am majority owner and managing partner of the shopping center at the NW corner of the intersection of 50th / France Ave.`reaching from Chico's at the corner all the way to Lady Slipper in the North. It includes 7 ground floor spaces , mostly retail and 4 offices and.a bridal shop on the Pleasesecond level. The street numbers run from 4954 to 4940 France Ave.,and!our.trade name is France Ave. Partnership, LLP.' I am an architect by profession and I am responsible for:'the. remodeling of .6 buildings on the North side of 50th - Street, all belonging' to EDINA PROPERTIES, which is the holding for the Lund's real estate..We have owned above shopping center for '25 years and improved it from a tired old building without a future to what is now a thriving .shopping center. Although I generally keep a, low profile, because I,do work rather than talk about work, i feel 'encouraged to address You in a rather delicate matter. Our'neighbor at 3910 W. 50th ST. is a new venture, MOZZA MIA, which I am sure You know. The restaurant occupies outdoor seating in the back, that is excessively arranged in a way that is, let's call it damaging to our shopping center and other shops in the area. I assume You are familiar with the area in the back of the buildings along 50th Str. It is a generous pedestrian area, that provides a West - East axis that parallels the parking ramp and extends onto the back of our center. At our center it turns towards 50th Str. and ends there. Since it is an important shortcut from the parking ramp, it was covered by a glass roof for convenience. Without exception all our rental spaces and some retailers in the next door Lund's properties DEPEND ON ACCESS FROM THE PEDESTRIAN AREA IN THE BACK to some degree. What was done at the back of Mozza Mia reduces that walkway at,,a critical point opposite the SPALON MONTAGE to, a "BOTTLENECK that is not adequate to handle pedestrian traffic the way it t is supposed to do and in my opinion it could very well present a safety issue. This impossible situation has existed last year already, we complained, but apparently to,no avail, it is here again ! I do not understand how a situation could be created in a city like Edina, where things are typically thoroughly discussed. And quite frankly I cannot understand, that NONE of .the.parties involved saw how impossible and embarrassing this whole situation is. I myself would not have created a situation like that ! I talked to Alan Ackerberg of MOZZA MIA about a slight modification of the outdoor seating, but did not get any place. His point is, that they are well within, what he calls the HISTORICAL boundaries established by his predecessor TEJAS. He does not know, that we already opposed the TEJAS concept for..the same reason. . I politely but urgently ask You to take a look at the place. It is so obvious a mistake, that it should not take a lot of discussion to correct it. lust think about the same outdoor seating.being in front of.the building along 50th St. and You would all say or at least think: NOT GOOD ! Or think of it as being in front of Your driveway ! I want to emphasize, that I love the outdoor seating principally, and I sit outside whenever I can, but it still has to'follow the rules of common sense. I'would love to discuss this with You and again with the neighbors Please let me know, when Your busy schedule allows this to happen. Wayne Houle received an E -mail from me and so did the mayor. So both could probably start a dialogue. Since the situation exists on public land, my action has to be now at the city level, before I take it again to the neighbors. Looking forward to hearing from You I stay Klaus C. Freyinger d.b.a. France Ave. Partnership.\ 1 Ua4d- 0 �ch,5�i C( - 5' kaJ�d- , d� E211 0F �kTtiecl C�-� t � I . RECEWED APR 19 2011 EDINA CITY COUNCIL. HAVING LIVED IN EDINA FOR OVER 20 YEARS AND HAVING COMMIVIENTED MANY TIMES IN FRONT OF THE-CAMERAS-ON MANY ISSUES, NEVER FEELING INTIMINATED, I FIND IT UNACCEPTABLE TO THINK THAT YOU WOULD ELEMINATE THAT PART OF COUNCIL MEETINGS WITH "COMMUNITY COMMENT ". SHAME ON OUR NEW MANAGER FOR SUGESTING SUCH A THING. AS A DISABLED USMC KOREAN WAR VETERAN, I STRONGLY DISAGREE WITH THE AGENDA CHANGE RE; THE "PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE ". I BELIEVE AMERICA CONTINUES TO LOSE ITS PATRIOTISM EACH AND EVERY DAY, NOW TO SAVE LITTLE COUNCIL TIME, THIS CHANGE SHOULD NOT BE APPROVED. I HAVE AND WILL CONTINUE TO FLY AMERICAN FLAG ALONG WITH THE USMC FLAG 24/7, IN HONOR TO ALL WHO SERVED,GAVE THEIR LIVES, INCLUDING THOSE STILL SERVING TO PROTECT THIS GREAT NATION. WE ALSO NEED YOUR CONTINUED PATRIOTISM ALONG WITH ADDITIONAL FUNDING FOR THE VETRANS MEMORIAL PROJECT. PLEASE SHOW VOTERS AN EXAMPLE OF COUNCIL TRANSPARENCY THE. CONTINUED VIEWING OF PUBLIC INFORMATION COMMENTS IS MORE IMPORTANT THAN CHANGES OF AGENDA TO SAVE TIME. . THANK YOU FOR YOUR SERVICE TO THIS GREAT CITY. ACK AM EDINA RESIDENT APRIL 14 2011 Lynette Biunno From: John and Jane Lonnquist fijlonnquist@earthlink.net] Sent: Tuesday, April 19, 2011 . 3:17 PM To: Lynette Biunno Subject: FOR TONIGHT: Comments on Proposed Country Club Change J Dear City Councilors and Mayor Hovland, Please don't change the side yard setbacks currently in place for the Country Club District. I have three concerns on this proposed action: 1) It is too broad for its stated purpose "to encourage... reconstruction of Colonial Style housing within the Country Club District." If that is truly the objective, then please add language that clarifies that the setback is only to be waived if a) the construction is new i.e. teardown of 'a,post =1944 home and b) the new construction is done in a Colonial style. Without these distinctions, the change is just an invitation to add massing in our historic neighborhood. 2) The need is not clearly defined. Colonials HAVE been built under the current guidelines. If new homes on the narrower lots choose a style that allows them to maximize lot coverage, you may see more Tudors added and Colonials precluded. But given the relatively small number of homes that are eligible for tear -down, this change seems unnecessary. 3) The neighbors were not informed of this change or given opportunities for input. Please don't unravel the good will that you established in 2008 when you responded to the opinion survey of residents and tightened the Plan of Treatment for Country Club. Neighbors want to keep massing under control -- please don't make hasty changes that lead to unintended consequences. apologize for not having time to clear my schedule to present these thoughts in person. _hank you for your consideration, Jane Lonnquist, 4510 Drexel Ave, Edina, MN 55424 1 Lunette Biunno From: Kristin Pierre [kristinpierre@comcast.net] `ent: Tuesday, April 19, 2011 3:29 PM i o: Lynette Biunno Subject: Country Club Side Yard Setback Ordinance Vote Dear City Council Members, We received.an email today from a''- concerned neighbor, which informed us that a vote is pending tonight to exempt the Country Club neighborhood from the side yard setback ordinance. We are concerned that this vote is apparently occurring without any opportunity for input, from the community. With the high percentage of homes in the Country Club neighborhood undergoing renovation or tear -down, .it is important that setback ordinances be carefully considered after 'a full opportunity for community comment. Accordingly, we request that this vote be deferred. Sincerely, Matt and Kristin Pierre 4618 Bruce Avenue. Edina, MN 55424 1 Page 1 of 1 Lynette Biunno From: Kathbegley@aol.com Sent: Tuesday, April 19, 2011 3:48 PM To: Lynette Biunno Subject: Proposed 0rrc inance change vote 4/19/11 Dear City Council: I understand the City `.Council-is voting tonight to EXEMPT COUNTRY CLUB from the Side Setback Ordinance and -that the staff has recommended waiving a second reading and approve this change tonight precluding resident input. I strongly oppose the City Council voting on this without citizen input. Further review of the Exemption's impact on the entire "neighborhood is necessary. What are the unintended consequences;that have not been identified and'do they outweigh the benefits of exemption? Who'will provide oversight 'for additions? Please defer a final vote on this exemption pending further review and community input. Sincerely, Kathleen Begley 4/19/2011 Page 1 of 1 Lynette Biunno From: joanne.farley @comcast.net Sent: Tuesday, April 19, 20113:51 PM To: Lynette Biunno Subject: Tonight's meeting Dear Council Members: It is with distress that I indicate to you my concern over this evening's vote for excluding the Country Club from what limitations have been placed on the construction or reconstruction of homes in our neighborhood. It seems .that we have found ourselves in a defensive position far too frequently. We absorbed the high cost of the infrastructure at sacrifice to some of us more than others,we lamented the construction of inappropriate homes being built and have had to live with those consequences and now we find another issue that seems to be more of concern to those of us who live among these homes than those who do not. I totally support the effort to provide a variety of homes which may be built here. I love cape cod and colonial homes for example and think we have hit a new low to have just one style invade the neighborhood because it fulfills the stated requirements. But I am deeply distressed that we were not informed about the potential affects of tonight's vote. I also believe that there are other solutions to the problem and perhaps input from others beyond those that you have sought might be well advised. Our voices in our community count and we would like to be heard. Thank you for your consideration of my concern. JoAnne M. Farley 4615 Bruce Avenue 4/19/2011 Lunette Biunno From: Ann Wordelman [wordelman@comcast.net] Sent: Tuesday, April 19, 2011 3:59 PM To: Lynette Biunno Cc: Josh Sprague Subject: Country club set back ordinance I respectfully request that you postpone voting on the side yard ordinance exemption for country club neighborhood to allow for a full review and discussion of this issue with community input. Maintaining the integrity of our historic neighborhood is of great importance to us as homeowners. Sincerely, J Ann and Erik Wordelman 4523 Bruce Ave Edina Sent from my iPhone 1 O e t, co 0 T as REPORT /RECOMMENDATION To: MAYOR AND COUNCIL Agenda Item Item No. VIII.A. From: James B. Hovland Mayor ❑ Action ® Discussion ❑ Information Date: April 19, 2011 Subject: Process For Student Board & Commissions Applications & Interviews ACTION REQUESTED: Discuss the process to be followed to interview student applicants. INFORMATION /BACKGROUND: , Staff has published a press release accepting applications for student members of the various boards and commissions through Monday, May 16, 2011. Students apply by the deadline and thereafter are interviewed and appointed by the Council before the end of the school year. The students take their seats beginning September 1St and serve for one year terms. The Council should discuss the process to be followed for student interviews during this appointment cycle. atte If-OW1MIAU REPORT /RECOMMENDATION To: MAYOR AND COUNCIL Agenda Item Item No. VIII.B. From: James B. Hovland Mayor ❑ Action ® Discussion ❑ Information Date: April 19, 2011 Subject: Park Board Vacancies ACTION REQUESTED: Discuss the process to use to fill the vacancies INFORMATION /BACKGROUND: Jennifer Kenny has resigned her position on the Park Board. She had a term that will expire 2/1/2012. 1 have also been informed by staff that our newest appointee David Deeds has a conflict with his teaching schedule this semester so he has missed the March and April meetings and will miss the May meeting of the Park Board. David's term runs until 2/1/2014. The following four persons applied board positions and were interviewed by the Council in January and February. Name Rick Hauser Susan Jacobson David Stevenson Daniel Gieske Attachment: Kenny Resignation Choice Ranking of Park Board 3 2 1 2 Deb Mangen From: Deb Mangen Sent: Friday, April 15, 201111:02 AM To: , Deb Mangen Subject: FW: April Park Board Meeting From: JIM_JEN [mailto ] Sent: Tuesday, April 12, 2011 8:06 AM To: John Keprios Cc: Janet Canton; Ed MacHolda; - : Re: April Park Board Meeting Hello Park Board Members, John, and Staff, I am unable to attend the meeting again this month as we are in Mexico. I also missed last month's meeting and will be unable to attend next month. My schedule has become busier than I expected and I feel that 1 am unable to serve the Park Board with the level of attention it deserves. Therefore, I am resigning my position. I apologize for the short notice. It has been a great experience serving with all of you and I wish you all the best in your future endeavors. Thank you. Jennifer Kenney `Y Minutes of the Regular Meeting of the Energy and Environment Commission Edina City Hall Community Room. Thursday, March 10, 2011, 7 P.M. Members In Attendance, and Roll Call: Dianne Plunkett Latham, Sarah Zarrin, Bill Sierks, Paul Thompson, Susan Tucker, Bob Gubrud, M. Germana Paterlini, Surya lyer, Karwehn Kata, Alma Pronove, Julie Risser Absent: Keith Kostuch Staff Present: Jane Timm, Jesse Struve 1. Welcome Meeting was called to order at 7:00 p.m. by Chair Latham. 2. Approval of Agenda and Topic Time Allocation The agenda was approved unanimously. 3. Approval of February 10, Minutes The February 10, 2011 minutes were unanimously approved with minor changes. 4. Community Comment Chair Latham welcomed resident Laura Eaton, 7452 Shannon Dr, Edina MN 55439. 5. , Chair Report Chair Latham explained to the commission that the May intern was Kyle Wagener and he would work with Commissioner Zarrin on a recycling project. He will give a report at the June 2011 EEC meeting. The commission discussed working group members. Commissioner Gubrud made a motion to add Laura Eaton to the Education and Outreach Working Group. Commissioner Thompson seconded.. Motion carried unanimously. Commissioner Sierks made a motion to add William Glahn to the Energy Working Group. Commissioner Tucker seconded. Motion carried unanimously. There was a discussion about filming commission meetings at the request of City Manager, Scott Neal. The consensus of�the commission was: filming would promote professionalism, frankness, and the opportunityato•educate viewers about EEC. They also thought that filming one to two meetings a year Would. give the EEC an opportunity to strategically plan the meetings and. give residents the most information. Chair Latham will answer the questions presented by City'Manager Neal and forward the answers to him. Chair Latham asked the commissioners if there were 'any comments about the newly drafted Board and Commission ordinance included in the packet: There were no comments. Chair Latham explained the nomination process for the Volunteer Recognition Reception. There was a discussion about exceptional volunteers and who would nominate the volunteers. Commissioner Gubrud made a motion to nominate four volunteers,-for the Volunteer Recognition Reception - Kevin Clay, Eric Burfeind, Bruce Coles, and Mike Seaman. Commissioner Sierks seconded. Motion carried unanimously. A Sun Current article asking for volunteers for the working groups was approved. Chair Latham will update and forward to the City Communications Department. There was a discussion about the EEC's portion of the website. The commission went over the suggested changes reflected in the packet. The working group chairs will take the proposed changes to the working groups and bring feedback to the April EEC meeting. V Pace 12 0 6. Carbon Disclosure Project (CDP) Commissioner Paterlini gave an update on the CDP. Commissioner Paterlini recommended that the City Edina continue with the project. 7. GreenStep Cities Report Chair Latham will log on to www.MnGreenStep.org and update City of Edina's portion of the website. She indicated this would be an ongoing project and after the initial information is entered other commission members would need to update also. 8. Solar Panel For City Hall Commissioner Sierks gave an update on adoption by City Council authorizing the execution of the Renewable Energy Grant March 15, 2011. Commissioners Sierks and lyer will meet with City Manager Neal regarding the McKinstry Report. The McKinstry Report will be in the EEC's April packet. 9. Turf Management Task Force No Report. 10. Energy Working Group Report Commissioner lyer gave an update on the last working group meeting and attached minutes. 11. Water Quality Working Group Report Commissioner Tucker gave an update on the completed Blue Star Assessment. The requirement is 60% of the points, but Edina only has 53% of the required points. They will go over all the paperwork again and check with Nine Mile Creek Watershed for their input. When they have the 60% it will be in the EEC's monthly packet. 12. Recycling and Solid Waste Working Group (RSW) Chair Latham gave an update of the Hennepin County Environmental Services 90 minute presentation. Hennepin County has an initiative to reduce waste and increase recycling county wide. RSW made a recommendation regarding House File 517 and 519 and would like the recommendation adopted by the EEC and then forwarded to the City Council for their approval. Commissioner Sierks made a motion to present the recommendation approved by RSW regarding House File 517 and 519 to the Edina City Council. They would contact City of Edina's House Representatives requiring the use of compostable yard waste bags. Commissioner lyer seconded. Motion carried unanimously. 13. Residential Energy Project Commissioner Sierks gave a summary of the article in the March 10, 2011 Edina Sun Current Newspaper regarding the Residential Energy Project. There was a discussion about an Eco Yard and Garden Tour for the summer of 2011. Chair Latham gave the commission an example of how this could be accomplished. 14. Education and Outreach Working Group Commissioner Thompson gave an update about receiving the Earth Hour Proclamation at the City Council meeting. Commissioner Thompson explained to the commission that the Edina School District would not support the Home Energy Squad (HES) grant program at schools stating a conflict of interest. There was a suggestion to check with Edina's private schools. Earth Day is April 22, 2011, and the working group is looking for projects. Any suggestions are welcome. The high school is doing a large project on refillable water bottles. Commissioner Thompson passed out a flyer about the Sustainable Workshop on April 8 and 9, 2011. Commissioner Thompson gave an update on the May 7 and 8, 2011 Living Green Expo, a statewide event. There was a short discussion on a Facebook Page for the Energy and Environment Commission,. This was tabled, but Commissioner Tucker would contact Jennifer Bennerotte for information. Commissioner Gubrud and the working group would like to consider doing an adult education class later in the year of 2011. This was tabled. 15. Sage Steps Website There was a discussion about the website. Commissioner Gubrud will investigate and report back to the commission in April. 16. Air Quality Working Group Commissioner Risser is working to get a meeting schedule for the working group. 17. Adjournment Commissioner Gubrud made a motion to adjourn. Commissioner lyer seconded. Motion carried unanimously. The meeting adjourned at 9:25 p.m. The next meeting will be the regularly scheduled meeting at 7:00 p.m. April 14, 2011 at Edina City Hall. Respectfully submitted, Jane M. Timm, Deputy City Clerk MINUTES Regular Meeting of the Heritage Preservation Board Tuesday, March 8, 2011, 7:00 PM Edina Community Room 4801 50th Street West MEMBERS PRESENT: Chair Joel Stegner, Chris Rofidal, Bob Schwartzbauer, Claudia Carr, Colleen Curran, Ross Davis, David Anger, Katherine McLellan and Lauren Thorson MEMBERS ABSENT: Jean Rehkamp Larson STAFF PRESENT: Joyce Repya, Associate Planner OTHERS PRESENT: Robert Vogel, Preservation Consultant New Member, David Anger was introduced to the Board. I. APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES: February 8, 2011 Member Curran suggested several changes to the minutes. The Board agreed with Ms. Curran's suggestions. Member Rofidal moved approval of the minutes from the February 8, 2011 meeting as amended. Member Schwartzbauer seconded the motion. All voted aye. The motion carried. II. COUNTRY CLUB DISTRICT: Certificates of Appropriateness (COA) A. H -10 -06 4901 Sunnyside Road — Change to a COA issued 12 -14 -2010 Mr. Andy Porter of Refined, LLC, contractor for the subject new home explained that at the December 2010 Heritage Preservation Board meeting a new home was approved and a Certificate of Appropriateness was issued for 4901 Sunnyside Road. As the project has proceeded into the framing phase, the buyers of the home have been able to better visualize the views provided by the abutting Minnehaha Creek, especially from the basement level. With this new vision in mind, they have requested the addition of three small windows at the lower level walkout. Mr. Porter concluded that the additional windows will add a great deal to the view of the creek from the lower level, however will be virtually unseen from any of the adjacent properties. Board members discussed the minimal impact the proposed change would have on the home, especially since it will not be visible from the front street. Member Rofidal opined that perhaps such a minor change should be handled administratively, and not brought back to the HPB. Several board members agreed with Member Rofidal, but pointed out that in the past they had determined that any change to a plan approved for a COA should R LA Minutes Heritage Preservation Board March 8, 2011 be brought back to the HPB for review. There was agreement that in the future the Board should consider establishing a policy that would allow the Planning Staff to administratively approve changes such as the one under consideration, which are not visible from the street and will not impact the historic integrity of the subject home, or those in the surrounding area. Following a brief discussion on the subject proposal, Member Schwartzbauer moved to approve the change to the lower level of the rear elevation providing additional windows facing Minnehaha Creek. Member Davis seconded the motion. All voted aye. The motion carried. Mr. Porter thanked the Board for allowing the additional windows on the rear of the home. He added that since he had submitted the information for the additional windows, his clients have asked that the rear walk -out design be reworked to provide for look -out windows instead of the doors that were approved. The Board agreed that changing the door to look -out windows on the rear elevation is minor, and would not impact the historic integrity of the new home or the surrounding homes. Member Rofidal moved for approval of the change to look -out windows on the rear elevation. Member Curran seconded the motion. All voted aye. The motion carried. III. ELECTION OF OFFICERS: Planner Repya announced that as called for in the Bylaws, it was time to elect a Chairman and Vice Chairman to serve a one year term. Member Schwartzbauer moved to reappoint Joel Stegner to the office of Chairman, and Claudia Carr to the office of Vice Chairman. Member Curran seconded the motion. No other nominations were presented. Members Stegner and Carr agreed that they would be willing to serve for a second term. The vote was taken. All voted aye. The motion carried - Joel Stegner will serve as Chairman, and Claudia Carr will serve as Vice Chairman for the next year. IV. MORNINGSIDE NEIGHBORHOOD OPEN HOUSE: Evaluation The Board agreed that they were pleased with the public turn -out for the open house. Members enjoyed visiting with the Morningside residents and liked the visual materials provided - particularly the "Anatomy of a Morningside Bungalow ". V. COMMUNITY COMMENT: None VI. BYLAWS AND RULES OF PROCEDURE: Change to reflect new Ordinances 1500 and 1504. Planner Repya explained that the changes proposed for the Bylaws and Rules of Minutes Heritage Preservation Board March 8, 2011 Procedure are suggested to reflect the newly adopted Ordinances #1500 and 1504, which define general provisions for all boards in #1500; and the make -up of the Heritage Preservation Board in #1504 — replacing the previous ordinance #801. Ms. Repya pointed out that when the HPB reviewed the new ordinances at the February meeting, several areas for clarification and change were identified. She suggested that since the City Council has already adopted the new code, the time to introduce potential changes will be at the joint meeting with the Council which is tentatively planned for Tuesday, May 3rd, at 5:00 p.m., prior to the City Council meeting. The Board briefly discussed some of the items they would like to share with the Council. Chairman Stegner suggested_ the subject be on, the April 12"' HPB meeting's agenda, when the Board can Orepare for the.joint meeting. Following a brief discussion, Member Curran moved approval of the proposed changes to the Bylaws and Rules of Procedure, bringing the document into compliance with the newly adopted Ordinances # 1500 and #1504. Member Davis seconded the motion. All voted aye. The motion carried. VII. . 2011 HERITAGE AWARD PREPARATION: Planner Repya reported that nominations for the 2011 Edina Heritage Award are open until April 6, 2011. The Board will review the submitted nominations at the regular meeting on April 12th and determine the 2011award winner. A plaque recognizing the winner will be presented at a City Council meeting during the month of May, which is Preservation Month. Notification of the nomination process has been issued in the Edina Sun Current, the City's "City Extra" email distribution, and the Edina Chamber of Commerce's March newsletter. An ad will also be included in the City's upcoming issue of the "About Town" magazine. Ms. Repya concluded that to date, no nominations have been submitted, and she. encouraged the Board members to consider submitting a nominee on the forms each of them: received. VIII. THE IMPACT OF WOMEN ON HERITAGE RESOURCES IN EDINA(CLG) PROJECT: Update Consultant Vogel provided the Board with a brief explanation of.the work undertaken thus far for "The impact of Women on Edina Heritage Resources" project. He pointed out that the project, which began in October 2010, will continue until July 31, 2011 when a final report is due to the Minnesota Historical Society (MHS). After the MHS has had an opportunity to opine on the document, it will be submitted to the HPB for final revisions and approval. 3 Minutes Heritage Preservation Board March 8, 2011 Mr. Vogel explained that thus far, research has proven that early on, women were very instrumental in formation of the Minnehaha Grange as well as the Morningside bungalow movement, where several women contractors left their mark on the neighborhood. He added that several women's clubs have had a marked impact on the history of Edina, however today, there are no structures remaining that reflect the clubs' roots. Mr. Vogel added that while there is no quantitative data, it appears that in the 1920's there were more women owned businesses in Edina, than there are today. Following a brief discussion, Board members thanked Mr. Vogel for his report and agreed that they looked forward to seeing the results of the study. OTHER BUSINESS: A. Filming of City Meetings — Survey /Feedback Planner Repya reported that City Manager Scott Neal and the City Council have asked for input from the Boards and Commissions regarding the filming of Board and Commission meetings. They have asked the boards to respond to the following 4 questions. The HPB responses will be aggrepted with the responses from the other groups for ultimate discussion at the April 19t Council meeting QUESTIONS: 1. Do you believe that filming your Commission meeting, and subsequently rebroadcasting the filmed meeting on cable television would change the manner in which commissioners or guests behave or participate in your Commission meeting? HPB Responses: • Yes, the meetings become more formal and streamlined .... the tone is changed. • Unless the meeting is filmed in the Council Chambers, it is difficult to provide visuals for the TV camera, and public participation is awkward. • Public comment can be compromised, with some people uncomfortable speaking up/ and others speaking to the camera i.e. "grandstanding ". 2. Do you believe there are circumstances where filming and rebroadcasting your Commission meetings would not be in the public interest? If so, what would be an example of such a circumstance? HPB Responses: • The Board did not identify a situation where filming or rebroadcasting would not be in the public interest. • If the decision is made to televise a Commission meeting, there should be no deviation from that decision. "You can't pick and choose." Minutes Heritage Preservation Board March 8, 2011 3.' Do you believe that filming and rebroadcasting your Commission meetings is an important tool in communicating your Commission's activities and discussions with the public? HPB Responses: • Yes, filming and rebroadcasting is the future .... how many people expect to access information.-1 • Does the cost benefit warrant the financial expenditure? This might not be a financially prudent tool if there are few viewers. • Rarely does a member of the public attend the HPB meetings if not interested in an agenda item, as evidenced in the lack of participation during the "Community Comment" 'portion of the meeting. 4. Do you have any other input that you would.like Scott Neal or the City Council to consider when forming a policy on this subject? HPB Responses: • The HPB consists of 11 members and the configuration of the Community.Room makes it difficult to set up the room to provide for spectator space as well as a place to provide visual information. (The screen is behind the area used for spectator chairs.) If the chairs are moved to the perimeter of the room where spectators can view the screen, Board members have their backs to the spectators. Filming in this room would be impossible. B. New (proposed) Ordinance — Setback Requirement for Single Dwelling Unit Lots for Edina-Heritage Landmark Properties —Update Planner Repya explained that the Planning Commission has continued the discussion on the proposed change to the Zoning Ordinance that would exempt heritage landmark properties from the side yard setback requirement of increasing the setback by 6, inches for each foot the building height of the structure exceeds 15 feet. The Planning Commission recognized that since -a Certificates of Appropriateness is not required for an.addition to a heritage landmark property, if an owner were' to take advantage of the proposed exemption, there would be n6dheck to ensure thatthe addition met'the criteria set out in the plan. of treatment for the property. The Planning Commissiowrecorrimends that as part of the subject change to .the,Zoning Ordinance, in the event the owner of a;heritage ,landmark property were to take advantage of the exemption to the side yard setback when adding an addition, the Heritage Preservation Board require that the project receive.a Certificate of Appropriateness. The Board briefly discussed the Planning Commission's suggestion and agreed that requiring a Certificate of Appropriateness for an addition to a landmark property that takes advantage of the side yard setback exemption was an excellent idea. C. Neighborhood Street Signs Planner Repya referred to an email exchange between City Manager, Scott Neal and the Morningside Neighborhood Steering Committee. In the email, the neighborhood Minutes Heritage Preservation Board March 8, 2011 steering committee requested that the City postpone any branding efforts for Morningside until a City policy for neighborhood branding has been developed. Mr. Neal assured the committee that the City would not proceed with the Morningside logo at this time. Following a brief discussion, the Board agreed that they would not consider a logo for the Morningside neighborhood at this time. No formal action was taken. D. 2011 Work Plan Planner Repya explained that the 2,011 Work Plan will be included on each meeting's agenda to provide the Board an opportunity to evaluate the progress made on established goals. All agreed that would be a worthwhile practice. E. Southdale Mall — Potential for Landmark Designation? Board members discussed the historic importance of Southdale Mall - being the first enclosed mall in the country, and wondered if there has ever been consideration of designating it as a heritage landmark property. Planner Repya explained that in 1990, the HPB approached the mall regarding potential landmark designation, and discovered that they were not interested, due to the concerns that historic designation would restrict their ability to be competitive with changes in the retail market over time. The owners at that time acknowledged the importance of the mall's history; and as a concession, created a pictorial kiosk display commemorating the development of the mall from a farm field to present day. Apparently, the display is stored in the basement of the mall and periodically moved to the garden court for the public to enjoy. Discussion ensued regarding memorable furnishings on the mall's interior that reflect back to its early days. Some of those items include the clock at the top of the escalator; the clerestory windows in the garden court, the bird cages (which are apparently in storage), a lantern sculpture, and a sculpture of children on stilts. Member Anger pointed out that in his readings, he discovered that at the time Southdale was built, 90% of the stores were locally owned — quite a change from the current day occupancy. Robert Vogel stated that while Southdale Mall is iconic, it would not be a manageable historic resource. Member Davis volunteered to talk to the Southdale management regarding the potential for recognizing interior elements of the mall for historic designation. The Board thanked Mr. Davis, pointing out that if nothing else, it would be good to know the mall's thoughts on recognizing its history, and perhaps there is a way the HPB can work with them to achieve a common goal. I Minutes Heritage Preservation Board March.8, 2011 IX. CORRESPONDENCE: 1. Article for Country Club District Newsletter 2. Email correspondence, from a Morningside resident. X. NEXT MEETING .DATE: April 12, 2011 XI. ADJOURNMENT: The meeting adjourned at 8:55 pm Respectfully submitted, Joyce Repya 7 i v: ,flu C� :. { i EDINA YOUTH HEALTH UPDATE 2010 - 2011 I- ALCOHOL • MARIJUANA • PHYSICAL ACTIVITY & NUTRITION • TOBACCO • TEEN PREGNANCY PREVENTION This YOUTH HEALTH UPDATE presents data from the Minnesota Student Survey for Edina students and summarizes information in the literature. Learn what you can do to support the health of Edina youth and what you can do to help youth avoid behaviors harmful to their health. TOP 11 THINGS PARENTS AND OTHER ADULTS CAN DO 1. Role model the behavior you expect from your teen. 2. Be involved in your teen's life. 3. Show your interest by asking questions that need a response other than "yes" or "no" and then listen. 4. Get to know your teen's friends. 5. Set clear expectations and rules concerning alcohol use, other substance use and other unhealthy, risky behavior. 6. Follow through with consequences if rules and expectations are broken. 7. Be active and live a healthy lifestyle. Invite your children to walk, bike, or do other activities with you 8. Be your teen's excuse not to break the rules. "My parents would be so angry if I ..." 9. Eat together as a family at least 2 -3 times a week. 10. Make it easy for teens to choose healthy foods at home and at school. 11. Let teens know when you think they've done well ALCOHOL Alcohol is the most frequently used drug among adolescents.' • The earlier teens start drinking the greater the danger.Z • The most common place to drink is someone else's home.3 • Those who drink usually drink with friends and in groups of 3 or more.3 • Ninth graders are more likely than twelfth graders to drink with their parents.3 • Those who drink in large groups are more likely to have 5 or more drinks at one time.3 HEALTHY YOUTH DEVELOPMENT PRINCIPLES 1. The goal is to foster physical and mental health; competence at school, work and in the community; confidence; character and connectedness with family and peers. 2. The process is enduring, comprehensive and engages youth. 3. Strategies go beyond the basics and include nurturing relationships and opportunities to try new roles and help others. 4. The commitment of caring adults everywhere in the community is a major factor in successful youth development approaches. 5. All parties that contribute to youth development should be committed to a common purpose and to rational action toward the purpose. 6. All youth are developing, have strengths, have needs, can contribute to their communities and are valued. All youth need the opportunity to take responsible roles and act constructively within their communities. Source: Pittman, K. and Irby, M., 1998. Reflections on a Decade of Promoting Youth Development. TOBACCO At least 80 percent of adults smokers report that they had their first cigarette before the age of 18. • Cigarette smoking by young people leads to immedi- ate and serious health problems including respiratory and non - respiratory effects, addiction to nicotine, and the associated risk of other drug uses • Cigarette smoking has steadily declined since 2000, but there has been no reduction in use of smokeless tobaccos Tobacco use continues to be the leading cause of premature death in the U.S.' ALCOHOL • MARIJUANA • PHYSICAL ACTIVITY 8r NUTRITION • TOBACCO • TEEN PREGNANCY PREVENTION NUTRITION & PHYSICAL ACTIVITY As a group, adolescents have poor eating and exercise habits which may result in nutritional deficiencies, obesity, eating disorders, and harmful long -term effects on their health. One reason for this is an environment that makes it easy for adolescents to live and be entertained with almost no physical effort. They are also surrounded by cheap, attractive foods high in sugar, fat and sodium but low in nutrients. These foods provided by adults are readily available in places where youth hang out — school, parks, fast food restaurants, concession stands, movie theaters and malls. Consequently, adolescents are: • More obese -4.6% in 1963 to 18.1 in 20088 • Snacking more — eating 23% of total daily calories from snacks in 2005 -2006 compared to 14% of total daily calories from snacks in 1977 -19789 • Not eating enough fruits, vegetables and calcium -rich foods10 • Eating excessive amounts of sugar, fat and sodium resulting in higher cholesterol and increased risk of heart disease "O Accumulating too much screen time -7 hours per day TV, computer, video games and movies" MARIJUANA Marijuana is the most widely used illegal drug among America's youth. 12 Marijuana use during adolescence and young adulthood increases the risk of psychotic symptoms Continued use may increase the risk for psychotic disorder in later life. 13 Marijuana is far more powerful today than it was 30 years ago. The chemical responsible for marijuana's effects (THC) has increased from a 1 percent potency level in the 1970's to more than 13 percent today (on average). Some samples contain levels of up to 33 percent. 14 • Parents are the biggest reason teens chose not to use marijuana. Two - thirds of youth ages 13 -17 say losing their parents' respect is one of the main reasons they don't smoke marijuana or use other drugs. 15 TEEN PREGNANCY PREVENTION The teen birth rate in the United States declined 6 percent in 2009 and is now at a record low. 16 The U.S. still has the highest rates of teen pregnancy and births when weighted against other comparable countries, however. Communi- ties must continue working together to help teens delay the onset of sexual activity until they are older and out of high school. 17 • Teen girls (73 %) are just as likely as teen boys (69 %) to believe that sexting leads to real -life hook-ups. 17 • Most teens (65% of girls and 57% of boys) who have had sex say they wish they had waited. 17 • Among those teens who have watched MTV's 16 and Pregnant, 82% think the show helps teens better understand the challenges of teen pregnancy and parenthood and how to avoid it. 17 • Eight in ten teens (80 %) say that it would be much easier for teens to delay sexual activity and avoid teen pregnancy if they were able to have more open, honest conversations about these topics with their parents. 17 References 1 The Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (SAMHSA). 2004. 2 Institute of Medicine, 2004. 3 University of Minnesota, http: / /www.epi.umn,edufalcohol /policy/hostliab.shtm 4 Clearway Minnesota, Blue Cross and Blue Shield of Minnesota, and Minnesota Depart- ment of Health, 2008. Creating a Healthier Minnesota: Progress in Reaching Tobacco Use 2 -33. 5 National Center for Chronic Disease Prevention and Health Promotion, Division of Adolescent and School Health, 2010. Tobacco Use and the Health of Young People. Available at: http:/f www ,cdc.gov /HealthyYouth/tobacco /facts.htm 6 Minnesota Department of Health Division of Health Policy Center for Health Statistics, 2008. Teens and Tobacco in Minnesota, the View from 2008 Results from the Minne- sota Youth Tobacco and Asthma Survey Executive Summary. 7 Minnesota Department of Health, 2004. Nutrition and Physical Activity in Children and Adolescents Fact Sheet, 8 Ogden and Carroll. 2010. Prevalence of Obesity Among Children and Adolescents: United States, Trends 1963 -1965 Through 2007 -2008 Health E -Stat (National Center for Health Statistics). 9 U.S. Department of Agriculture, Agricultural Research Service, Beltsville Human Nutri- tion Research Center, Food Surveys Research Group, 2010. Snacking Patterns of U.S. Adolescents, What We Eat in America, NHANES 2005 -2006 Data Brief. 10 Cavadini, Siega -Ruiz and Popkin, 2000. "US Adolescent Food Intake Trends from 1965 to 1996." Western Journal of Medicine 173(6): 378 -383. 11 Rideout, Foehr and Roberts. 2010. Generation M2: Media in the Lives of 8- to 18 -Year- Olds— A Kaiser Family Foundation Study 12 National Center on Addiction and Substance Abuse at Columbia University (CASA). 13 Kuepper, van Os, Lieb. Wittchen, Hbfler and Henquet. 2011. "Continued cannabis use and risk of incidence and persistence of psychotic symptoms: 10 year follow -up cohort study." British Medical Journal DOI: 10.1136/bmj.d738. 14 Office of National Drug Control Policy (ONDCP), 2008. 15 Partnership for a Drug -Free America. Attitude Tracking Study, 16 Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 2010. Found at http: // www. thenationalcampaign.org /press /press - release. aspx ?releaselD =202. 17 The National Campaign to Prevent Teen Pregnancy, 2010. With One Voice 2010: Amenca's Adults and Teens Sound Off About Teen Pregnancy. EDINA MINNESOTA STUDENT SURVEY TRENDS The Minnesota Student Survey (MSS) is administered every three years to 6t" 91H and 12" graders across the state. Student participation is voluntary. Ninth -grade data is used to monitor trends because these students historically have a high response rate. Survey results provide information about youth assets and risk behaviors. Data can be used as a tool for initiating & continuing conversations about youth health. ALCOHOL USE' Since 1998, alcohol consumption Alcohol Use Last 30 Days Edina 9th Grade has decreased significantly among 50% Edina 9th grade males and is the lowest it has ever been in 2010. t 40% --$-- Male —f— Female W 32.6% From 1998 to 2004, alcohol con- N 30% 25.3% 2a 7% 270% sumption declined among Edina o 9th grade females but increased ° 20% significantly in 2007. It declined 10% 11.0% 16.4% sharply in 2010 to the lowest it has a 0 12 7.9% ever been at 7.9 percent. 0% `The question format changed slightly from 1998 2001 2004 2007 2010 2004 to 2007. There is no data for 1992. TOBACCO USE Cigarette Use Last 30 Days Edina 9th Grade 50% Cigarette use among Edina 9th —4 Male Female grade males and females decreased w 40% 34.0% substantially from 1995 to 2004 but 30.0% saw a slight increase in 2007. N 30% 27.0% Rates dropped in 2010 to the lowest — 20% since 2004 for females and reached 24 6 14.0% 9.0% 12.7% a record low among males. a 10% 3.9% 0% 1992 1995 1998 2001 2004 2007 2010 SEXUAL ACTIVITY The percentage of Edina female Sexual Activity Edina 9th Grade 9th graders who report ever having sex increased from 2001 -2007 but y 40% —� —Male +Female slightly decreased in 2010. ° 30 /° 23 9% After a decrease in 2007, the 20.8% percentage of Edina male 9th 0 20% 17.5% 17.5% 17.0% graders who reported ever having o 13.5% 12.5% sex increased slightly in 2010. 10% Since 1992, a higher percentage a n ' 11.0° 6.5% 81% 7.4% of males have reported sexual 0 °i° 4.3% activity compared to females. 1992 1995 1998 2001 2004 2007 2010 continued MARIJUANA USE Marijuana use among Edina 9th 50 % Marijuana Use Last 12 Months Edina 9th Grade graders has fluctuated over the I years. Consistently, a higher per- .4 40 °i° Male -� Female centage of 9 1' grade males report use compared to females. 2 30% 27.5% 27.2% N 21.6 ° / Nearly 1 in 5 Edina 9th grade 0 20% 19.5% 18.1% 13.4°/ 14.0% males reported using marijuana in 18.7o the past year in 2010 compared to d 10% 13 50 1 in 17 females. 530/1 8 401, 10.8% 6.8% 6.2% 0% 1992 1995 1998 2001 2004 2007 2010 FRUIT & VEGETABLE CONSUMPTION Fruit and Vegetable Consumption Yesterday Fruit and vegetable consumption (5 or more servings) Edina 9th Grade among Edina 9th grade males has ° N 40% Male --f- Female increased since 2004 and increased 30.5% 7.4 th among Edina 9 grade females ° 30% 24.9% since 2001. 23.4% ♦� 28 `0 20% 17 -1 However, less than 1l3 of 9'h graders � �-%%�24.9% consumed the recommended 5 or a 10% 15 2 °', 12.4% more servings of fruits and vegeta- bles the day prior to the survey. 0% L 1998 2001 2004 2007 2010 PHYSICAL ACTIVITY In 2010, nearly 75% of Edina 91h grade males met recommendations for physical activity (30 minutes a day, 5 or more days per week). Since 2007, the percentage of 9`h grade females that met recommen- dations for physical activity has increased but continues to lag behind 9'h grade males. HEALTHY YOUTH DEVELOPMENT Overall, since 1992, the percentage of 91h graders who report they can talk with both of their parents about problems most of the time has increased with a record high per- centage in 2010. In 2010, a higher percentage of g1h grade males compared to 91h grade females reported being able to talk with both parents about problems. 100% 80% rn 60% 1 o c 40% d a 20% 0% 100% c 80% m y 60% o c 40% d d 20% 0% Moderate Physical Activity Edina 9th Grade -4-Male t Female 74.7% 63.5% 59.4% 64.3% .6% 65.8'%_ 59 1 55 -4'/0 . 42 9 ';�, 1998 2001 2004 2007 2010 Parental Connectedness Edina 9th Grade t Male f Female 67.7% 68.1% 65.2% 72.0% 75.6% 52 609% 71.9% 62.6% 59.6% 63.1% 63.5% 2 "'�. 1992 1995 1998 2001 2004 2007 2010 Had any alcoholic beverages (beer, wine, wine coolers, or liquor) in the last 30 days. ** 20% 18% 22% 9% Binge drinking (5 or more drinks in a row) in the past 2 weeks. 9% 9% 12% 4% Student use of alcohol or drugs is a problem at this school. (answered "agree" or "strongly agree ") 70% 46% 64% 31% Answered yes to "Do you ever use alcohol or other drugs before school ?" 4% 5% 6% 2% Used marijuana in the last 30 days. *' 13% 7% 11% 6% During the last 12 months, has anyone offered, sold, or given you an illegal drug on school property? (answered "yes') 21% 20% 18% 9% Smoked cigarettes in the last 30 days. 10% 6% 9% 4% Of those who used tobacco in the last 30 days, percent who got tobacco from friends. *' 60% 62% 71% 43% Can talk to your mother about your problems most or some of the time? 82% 83% ' 85% 88% Can talk to your father about your problems most or some of the time? 67% 70% 72% 79% How many of your teachers are interested in you as a person? (answered "most" or "all ") 1 41 % i 49% 0 44% 55% Answered "Yes, almost more than I could take" to the question, "During the last 30 days, have you felt you 21 % 19% 17% 13% were under any stress or pressure ?" Students reporting they feel adults in the community care about them "quite a bit" or "very much." 31% 37% ' 50% 56% Active 5 or more days of last week for 30 minutes a day (moderate activity). 48% 59% 60% 70% Spent 11 or more hours in a typical school week watching N, DVDs, or videos (not including playing video or computer games). 16% 16% 16% 15% Had 5 or more servings of fruits and vegetables yesterday. 19% 15% 26% 30% Had no milk yesterday (girls only). 22% 26% 23% 30% Students who used unhealthy methods to lose weight (e.g., fasting, cigarettes, diet pills, vomit, laxatives). 21% 21% 22% 9% At the present time, do you think you are overweight? (answered "yes ") 17% 17% 20% 15% Received most of your information about sex from friends or peers. ** 83% 73% 76% 64% Have you ever had sexual intercourse ( "had sex')? (answered "yes ") ** 10% 11% 10% 10% Answered yes to, "Has any adult in your household hit you so hard that you had marks or were afraid of that person? 7% 7% 7% 5% Students who agree or strongly agree that illegal gang activity is a problem at school. 9% 8% 9% 7% During the last 12 months, have you been pushed, shoved, or grabbed on school property? (answered "yes ") 42% 38% 37% 35% New questions in 2007 and 2010 Answered about once a week or more to "During the last 30 days, how often has another student or group of 37% 41 students made fun of or teased in a hurtful way, or excluded you from friends or activities ?" Answered about once a week or more to "During the last 30 days, how often have you on your own or as part of a group, made fun of or teased in a hurtful way, or excluded someone from friends or activities ?" ° ° 45% 42% Students who think their parents would disapprove or strongly disapprove if they smoked cigarettes. - 98% Students who think their parents would disapprove or strongly disapprove if they have drank alcohol. 97% Students who think their parents would disapprove or strongly disapprove if they smoked marijuana. 98% Students who think their parents would disapprove or strongly disapprove if they used other illegal drugs. - 98% Students who think there is great risk or moderate risk if they smoke one or more packs of cigarettes per day. 92% 95% Students who think there is great risk or moderate risk if they have five or more drinks of an alcoholic beverage once or twice a week. 84% 91% Students who think there is great risk or moderate risk if they smoke marijuana once or twice a week. 79% 82% ' Minnesota Student Survey ** The text for this question or response options changed slightly in 2007. EDINA YOUTH HEALTH UPDATE 2010 - 2011 f ALCOHOL • MARIJUANA • PHYSICAL ACTIVITY & NUTRITION • TOBACCO • TEEN PREGNANCY PREVENTION ABOUT TRI -CITY PARTNERS COALITION FOR HEALTHY YOUTH AND COMMUNITIES Tri -City Partners for Healthy Youth and Communities (TCP) is a collaboration of individuals and various com- munity sectors to promote health, reduce risks and build assets in our youth and communities. Started in 1995 to work on youth health issues, Tri -City Partners has increased its focus area and membership. TCP has a Steering Committee consisting of Bloomington, Edina and Richfield community members representing the faith community, parents, law enforcement, youth service organizations, city governments, youth, business, media, school districts and other citizens. Tri -Gitg r� Partners for Healthy Youth L Bloomington , and Communities STATEWIDE HEALTH IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM SHIP (Statewide Health Improvement Program) aims to give youth a brighter future by changing environmental conditions that contribute to a shortened life expectancy: poor nutrition, physical inactivity and tobacco exposure. SHIP is at the heart of a health reform package passed by the Minnesota Legislature. The Minnesota Department of Health awarded SHIP grant money to Bloomington Public Health Division in June 2010 to create environments that support health in Bloomington, Edina and Richfield. M I NN ESCXTA'S A ISI ©N Better State of ilealth Statewide Health SHIP Improe Xnt Program Youth Health Updates are a publication of Bloomington Public Health in collaboration with Tri -City Partners for Healthy Youth and Communities. Information in the publi- cation includes data from the 2001, 2004, 2007 and 2010 Minnesota Student Surveys. Data from 1995 and 1998 is available upon request. More information: 952 - 563 -8900 or www.tricitypartners.org. One question sometimes raised about student surveys is whether students' responses are honest and accurate. Researchers use a variety of data analysis techniques to examine the likely accuracy of anonymous surveys and these were applied to the student survey as well. Additionally, results are consistent over time and with state and National trends. Bloomington Public Health 1900 W. Old Shakopee Road • Bloomington, MN 55431 952 - 563 -8900 i Statewide Health Improvement Program VISION Click here to view as web page. April, 2011 In this issue Community Initiatives • Bloomington, Edina and Richfield childcares and preschools adopt policies to assure future health • Going tobacco free is "a walk in the Richfield parks" • Upcoming Community Garden Workshops School Initiatives • Edina and Richfield parents: Walk or Bike to School with your children in May • Bloomington, Edina and Richfield take steps for Safe Routes to School • New Richfield Schools policy will make exercise convenient for employees and set an example for students • Richfield Public Schools can get you growing in the garden Healthcare Initiatives • Northwestern Health Sciences University adopts new approach to bettering health • Welcome, Debbie Miller! SHIP Help us make our community better for our health! Share this eNewsletter with a friend. Join the SHIP eNewsletter mailing list. Reminder: Check our SHIP website for updates and current events. Community Initiatives Bloomington, Edina and Richfield childcares and preschools adopt policies to assure future health Children's early food and activity experiences can make a difference to developing lifelong healthy habits. With help from SHIP, many childcare and preschool facilities in Bloomington, Edina and Richfield have the training and resources to give children the BEST experiences with food and activity. Now SHIP is helping them take the critical step of adopting nutrition and physical activity policies to sustain their efforts in the future. SHIP is assisting childcare and preschool facilities overcome a barrier to adopting polices —time. SHIP staff provided draft policies for 11 childcare and preschool facilities based on best practices and in line with changes the center is making. Childcare and preschool directors can then tweak them to ensure they fit well for their facility. far, 19 sites have adopted and implemented nutrition policies. Fifteen sites have adopted and implemented physical activity policies. As a result, children in these facilities will have the opportunity to develop healthy eating and physical activity habits early. For more information or support in developing policies at your childcare center or preschool: Joan Bulfer at 952 - 563 -8992 orjbulfer @ci.bloomington.mn.us. Bock Going tobacco free is "a walk in the Richfield parks" So Now that spring is here, the parks are where we want to be. People using Richfield parks this spring can enjoy their time even more than before with cleaner air and less litter. That's because cigarette smoking in Richfield parks and recreation facilities is now prohibited to protect everyone's health. SHIP is helping the Richfield Recreation Services Department give friendly reminders about the tobacco free ordinance with posters and public service announcements. The new ordinance is similar to those in Bloomington, Edina and other Minnesota communities. You can help too. Tell others about the new ordinance, and if you're a smoker, restrain from smoking while enjoying the parks and recreation facilities. Tobacco free parks are what most people want and for many good reasons. Which of these reasons are yours? . Secondhand smoke is harmful. . Cigarette litter is dangerous if ingested by toddlers, pets, birds or fish. . Cigarette litter pollutes land and water. . Tobacco free environments promote positive community role modeling for our young people. . Most Minnesota residents (70 %) support tobacco -free park and recreation areas. In addition, 66% of golfers and 73% of families with children support these policies. Read about the Richfield campaign for tobacco -free parks on Richfield Patch.com. More information: Robyn Wiesman, SHIP Community Liaison at rwiesman @ci.bloomington.mn.us or Jim Topitzhofer, Recreation Services Director at JTopitzhofer @cityofrichfield.org Back Upcoming Community Garden Workshops Recruitment, Gardener Engagement and Group Decision - Making Saturday, April 16, 2011 9:00 a.m. —12:00 p.m. Bloomington Civic Plaza — Haeg Conference Room (2nd Floor) 1800 W. Old Shakopee Rd., Bloomington, MN 55431 Garden Site Design Tuesday, April 19, 2010 6:00 — 7:30 p.m. Southdale Library — Helen Young Room (2nd Floor) 7001 York Ave. S., Edina, 55435 Growing Vegetables Thursday, April 21, 2010 7:00 — 9:30 p.m. Civic Plaza — Rehearsal Hall 1800 W. Old Shakopee Rd., Bloomington, MN 55431 See flyer for more details on these workshops. tt t: If you are interested in attending any of these workshops: Please RSVP online at http: / /www.surveymonkey.com /s /communitygardenworkshops Back School Initiatives Edina and Richfield parents: Walk or Bike to School with your children in May Edina and Richfield parents, you have the chance to give your children an opportunity for more physical activity and enhanced well- being. Two "Walk or Bike to School" days are planned in L May. SHIP is assisting the Wellness Committees at Edina Creek Valley and Highlands Elementary Schools to hold their Walk or Bike to School Day on May 5. SHIP is assisting Richfield Middle School in holding theirs on May 3. Past Walk and Bike to School Days have been a big hit. Kids get excited! Each student who participates gets a sticker for recognition. Even better is seeing your children get excited about something that is so good for their health. Participate with your children to assure their safety, or find another parent to walk or bike with your children. You can also get a group together. There is safety in numbers, and gathering to share this common activity with neighbors builds a sense of community in which we all look out for each other. For more information or to get involved Edina Walk or Bike to School Day — Katherine Bass, parent: 612 - 597 -0714 or kmbass @gmail.com. Richfield Walk or Bike to School Day — Jessica Smith, SHIP school liaison: jessica .smith @richfield.k12.mn.us. Want to have a Bike or Walk to School Day at your school? Contact SHIP Community Liaison, Robyn Wiesman, for assistance: 952 - 563 -8917 or rwiesman @ci.bloomington.mn.us. Back Bloomington, Edina and Richfield take steps for Safe Routes to School Those who want it safer and easier for children to walk to school may see that happen. To get the ball rolling, SHIP staff encouraged people from Bloomington, Edina and Richfield to attend the Safe Routes for Healthy Kids Workshop on February 17. Elected officials, city staff members, school staff members and parents who attended the workshop accomplished three things. They 1) developed expertise in SRTS (Safe Routes to School) planning, 2) gained tools to develop plans for the next 12 months and 3) identified ways to position their communities to be competitive for funding to support SRTS. They will continue to make progress and finally implement their plans so that children WILL have an easier and safer walk to school. More information: Robyn Wiesman, SHIP Community Liaison at rwiesman @ci.bloomington.mn.us Back New Richfield Schools policy will make exercise convenient for employees and set an example for students Richfield Public Schools is using an effective approach to improve the health of their employees as well as their students. They are making it easier for School employees with busy schedules to be physically active and to model healthy behavior for students. Schools employee schedules include working before and after regular school hours. To make it easier for them to exercise, the district is developing a policy to give employees access to schools' workout facilities before and after school hours. This is good for employees because it will help them to increase their physical activity, but it is also good for students. Research shows school employees who take an interest in their own health are also more likely to take an interest in their students' health. Students are more likely to participate in health promoting activities when their teachers and school employees model those behaviors. The policy is part of a plan to develop a more comprehensive employee wellness program at Richfield Public Schools. Once approved by the Board, employees will have access to district workout facilities including the high school weight room, the high school track, the middle school pool, and gyms. This is one strategy the district is taking that will make it easier for employees to keep fit and it will also benefit students. More information: Jessica Smith, SHIP School Liaison, at Jessica .Smith @richfield.k12.mn.us Back Richfield Public Schools can get you growing in the garden What parent doesn't want their children to eat more fruits and vegetables? Growing your own may sound like a good solution, but not all families have the time or resources to make that happen. If gardening is something you want to get involved with but don't have the time or resources to do on your own, this is the perfect opportunity for you. With SHIP assistance, Richfield Public Schools has dedicated staff working on garden plans for the spring and would like to involve more community members and parents. rFI. For the last two years, the garden at Richfield STEM School has been so successful that Richfield Schools would like to offer the opportunity to more students in the district. The STEM school garden helped students improve their diets, physical activity, learning, and social development. As schools incorporate gardens into their curricula, they will sustain this opportunity for better health and learning for other students. If you are interested being part of the STEM School garden and helping out: Please contact SHIP School Liaison, Jessica Smith at Jessica. Smith @richfield.k 12.mn.us. Back Healthcare Initiatives Northwestern Health Sciences University adopts new approach to bettering health Hennepin county residents are getting more obese. According to a 2010 Hennepin County Survey (SHAPE), more than half (53 %) of Hennepin residents are classified as overweight or obese compared to 1998, when 14% of county residents were classified as overweight or obese. Obesity rates have increased with each survey (1998, 2002, 2006, and 2010). Clearly, Minnesotans need help beyond what's currently available to lose weight. SHIP is collaborating with interested healthcare clinics to adopt and implement ICSI guidelines to help with weight loss and address chronic disease. Bloomington Natural Care Center of Northwest Health Sciences University is taking a leadership role. The Care Center's approach is one of prevention utilizing motivational interviewing. In this approach, healthcare providers talk with their patients about nutrition and physical activity. More accurately, they listen. In the process they help patients find their own motivation for change. Patients have an active role in identifying areas they wish to work on whether it be improving their f diet, increasing physical activity or a combination of both - one small step at a time. The leadership exhibited by Northwestern Health Sciences University is a step toward an increased focus on prevention in the healthcare system. The focus will decrease the risk factors of physical inactivity, poor nutrition, and tobacco use and exposure. It will raise the health status of Minnesotans and decrease healthcare costs associated with managing chronic diseases. More information: Deborah Miller, SHIP Clinic Liaison at 952 - 563 -8928 or dmiller @ci.bloomington.mn.us Back Welcome, Debbie Miller! We would like to welcome Debbie Miller to our SHIP team. Debbie joins us as our SHIP Clinic Liaison and brings a wealth of experience in clinic management and systems improvement. Debbie will be working with local clinics to help them implement the Institute for Clinical Systems Improvement (ICSI) Guidelines for obesity and chronic disease prevention. Debbie graduated from Rochester School of Practical Nursing and has worked in a variety of healthcare settings during the past thirty years. Her experience includes more than two decades of clinic management experience in medical and natural healthcare settings. Her clinic leadership and experience in adoption of ICSI guidelines provides a valued resource for our intervention clinics. Back I Minutes of the Edina Public Art Committee March 3, 2011 Edina City Hall, Community Room MEMBERS PRESENT: Bernice Amacher, Brad Benn, Naomi Griffith, Amy Kerber, Bill McCabe, Lois Ring, Ruth Valgemae STAFF PRESENT: Diana Hedges, Anne Spooner INTRODUCTION OF GUESTS: Mark Lidke, Barbara La Valleur I. APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES Bill McCabe MADE A MOTION TO APPROVE THE FEBRUARY 3, 2011 EDINA PUBLIC ART COMMITTEE MINUTES. Naomi Griffith SECONDED THE MOTION. MINUTES APPROVED. II. FINANCIAL REPORT Mr. McCabe reported that a $10 donation was received and $9,079 is the new balance, a combination of the city and Community Foundation accounts. III. CONTINUING BUSINESS (Action List) A. Grants Update - Mr. McCabe started a draft of a narrative about EPAC for the Arts Initiative Grant through the Metropolitan Regional Arts Council, with an application due date of April 11, 2011. The decision date is June 29, and funds can't be used toward anything prior to June. He will be attending a meeting on Saturday to learn more about this. Mr. McCabe will send out the full package electronically for the committee to read. Comments and critiques are encouraged. Ms. La Valleur agreed to help proof the document. June 29 is their decision date. Four to five pages of financial information are also required. Mr. McCabe reported that in -kind donations cannot be included in the grant application. Ms. Hedges reminded EPAC to go through the Ways and Means Committee when approaching potential donors so as not to overlap efforts. Mr. McCabe also reported that there is a $1500 consulting fund grant available through Metropolitan Regional Arts Council and that EPAC does qualify. The funds from the grant provide a consultant who would be brought in to assist EPAC in operations. EPAC will use the Edina Community Foundation as a fiscal sponsor and by doing so, EPAC will qualify for the grant. EPAC is also in discussion with Tiffany & Co. to support this year's program. Ms. Hedges clarified that the Art Center is a municipality not a 501c3. B. Plaques - Mr. Benn reported that the plaques will be installed in the spring. C. Call For Sculptures Schedule 2011 - Mr. Benn showed a map of the Promenade to illustrate available areas for placement of new sculptures. Three spots at Grandview are also available. Mosaic Chairs was not a people's choice winner and will be removed. Mr. Benn concluded there is space for nine to eleven sculptures. He confirmed that reminders have been sent to artists to enter again this year. D. Donor Contact Letters - No new report. E. Police Dog Sculpture - No new report. F. Veterans Memorial - No new report. G. Membership - Guests Barbara La Valleur and Mark Lidke were cordially invited by Ms. Ring to officially join the committee. Brad Benn MOVED TO RECOMMEND AND ACCEPT Barbara La Valleur and Mark Lidke AS MEMBERS OF EPAC AND THAT IT GOES TO THE EDINA ART CENTER BOARD AND THEN ON TO CITY COUNCIL FOR ACCEPTANCE. Ruth Valgemae SECONDED THE MOTION. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. H. Marketing and Promotion - Ms. La Valleur offered to donate her photographs of Edina scenes and sculptures for inclusion in the Edina Town Planner calendar. I. Mosaics York Avenue Bridge - Ms. Hedges reported that Mr. Keprios sent a letter requesting official approval from the county. It is in process. Ms. Ring stated that EPAC's goal is to gain approval prior to the grand opening so the mosaics can be part of the celebration. J. EAC /EPAC Relationship Document - It was approved but a final copy needs to be presented. Ms. Valgemae will produce the final copy and send to Mr. McCabe for inclusion in the next EAC board meeting. K. Website Update - Ms. Hedges, Ms. Griffith and Ms. Ring have sent initial suggestions and improvements to Communications Director Jennifer Bennerotte. A meeting is necessary due to the amount of corrections needed. Art Dickey's photographs will also be included on the website and individual photographs are needed. Images of the Pinecone and Lionhead should also be included on the website. Ms. La Valleur offered her photos of Edina for inclusion on the website and agreed to work on this with the committee. Ms. Amacher identified the location of a watercolor by Mary Hertogs, as the senior center. L. EPAC Accomplishments Document Update - Ms. Griffith continues adding to this document. M. Art Loan Agreement - Ms. Ring arranged for art to be hung in Scott Neal's office and a loan agreement is being drawn up by Dick Crockett. N. Crosstown Camera Club - Mr. Benn reported that photographer Mark Karney of Crosstown Camera Club, offered to update the photographs in the community room at city hall. Several hanging options were discussed including "dye bond" as well as the need for larger scale pieces. Ms. Ring would like to see a sample of "dye bond" which is an unframed photo mounted on a very lightweight board. EPAC members agreed to look at the community room in order to determine how many are needed and then report back to Mr. Karney. More discussion to follow. IV. NEW BUSINESS A. People's Choice Winners - Ms. Ring reported that Stephen Fischer, Nicholas Legeros & Deb Zeller have accepted EPAC'S invitation to participate in the 2011 Call for Sculptures. Ms. Ring also extended an invitation to Perci Chester the 2009 winner. Mr. Benn reported that Stephen Fischer has a possible buyer for Holy Big Bird and will then donate the piece to the city. f` `e Brad Benn MOVED TO ACCEPT THE DONATION AND THE ART CENTER BOARD AND CITY COUNCIL WILL BE CONTACTED FOR ACCEPTANCE AS A GIFT TO THE CITY. Ruth Valgemae SECONDED THE MOTION. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. Brad Benn MADE A MOTION THAT Three Trees by Kevin Komadina BE ACCEPTED AS A GIFT GIVEN TO THE CITY AND BE ON PERMANENT DISPLAY IN EDINA. Ruth Valgemae SECONDED THE MOTION. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. Ms. Ring recommended that there should be wording in the artist contract that EPAC reserves the right to move the sculptures. Ms. La Velleur agreed and helped clarify this by saying EPAC reserves the right to move the sculptures as they see fit. All were in agreement that this should be included. B. The June 15 Exhibition Opening - Pinstripes will sponsor -a,reception at their beautiful facility with wine and appetizers. Ms. Ring suggested a 5 p.m. to 7 p.m. time frame for this event. She also made a few suggestions including asking artists to display their work during the reception or display photographs of the sculptures. Mr. Benn suggested projecting images onto the wall in the room at Pinstripes. Mr. Lidke expressed interest in helping out after some family obligations are met. He agreed to shadow Mr. Benn who will be retiring, and learn about the work of the sculpture liaison so that he can accept this responsibility in 2012. Ms. Ring asked for suggestions regarding reception logistics. Ms. Kerber and Ms. La Valleur suggested beginning the reception outside viewing the sculptures and then proceed indoors to Pinstripes. The Mayor will be invited to give an introductory speech on the promenade at 5 p.m. Inside at Pinstripes, several artists will be asked to briefly speak for approximately two minutes. If the Mosaics are included this may change. V. OTHER A. Volunteer,Awards - Ms. Ring announced the invitation to EPAC about the volunteer awards reception on April 28. Discussion prevailed re a nominee from EPAC. Amy Kerber NOMINATED: Bernice Amacher,FOR THIS YEAR'S VOLUNTEER OF THE YEAR AWARD. Ruth Valgemae SECONDED THE MOTION. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. B. Invitations - Photographs of the three People's Choice winners will be featured on the invite. Meeting adjourned at 5:12 p.m. Next meeting will be April 7, 2011 G /Public Art Committee /Agendas & Minutes