Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
2008-03-18_COUNCIL MEETING
AGENDA EDINA HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY EDINA CITY COUNCIL MARCH 18, 2008 7:00 P.M. WN.T.C'AT.T. 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, Council Member or citizen 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 March 3, 2008 II. PAYMENT OF CLAIMS (Favorable rollcall vote of majority Members present to approve) A. CONFIRMATION OF PAYMENT OF CLAIMS As per Pre -List dated March 6, 2008 TOTAL $82.50. . III. ADTOURNMENT EDINA CITY COUNCIL I. APPROVAL OF MINUTES - Regular Meeting of March 3, 2008 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 ORDINANCE NO. 2008 -01 - Zoning Ordinance Amendment 850.14 Subd. 8 Minimum Tract Area MDD -6 (First Reading: favorable vote of majority of Council Members present to approve - Waiver of Second Reading: favorable rollcall vote of four Council Members to approve) Agenda/ Edina City Council March 18, 2008 Page 2 B. PUBLIC HEARING Overall Development Plan, Comprehensive Guide Plan Amendment and Rezoning For Wayzata Properties, Pentagon Office Park, 77th Street (Favorable rollcall vote of three Council Members to approve Overall Development Plan - Favorable rollcall vote of four Council Members to approve Comprehensive Plan Amendment) C. PUBLIC HEARING Preliminary Development Plan and Preliminary Rezoning, Opus LLC, 5146 Eden Avenue (Favorable rollcall vote of three Council Members to approve) - Continue to future meeting. III. PUBLIC COMMENT During "Public Comment," the City Council will invite comments from those in attendance u7ho would like to speak about something not on tonight's agenda. Individuals must limit their comments to three minutes and cannot speak to an issue for zvhich a public hearing was held by the Council within the last thirty days or a matter scheduled for a future hearing on a specific date. Individuals should not expect the Mayor or Council to respond to their comments. Instead, the Council might refer the matter to staff for consideration at a future meeting. IV. AWARD OF BID (Favorable rollcall vote of majority of Council Members present to approve) A. Country Club Area Sewer, Water & Street Reconstruction: Contract No. ENG 08 -1; Improvement Nos. A -213, A -214, SS -413, STS -297, WM -436, L-43 & L -49 B. Well House #20 - Contract # PW 08 -3 V. REPORTS/ RECOMMENDATIONS (Favorable rollcall vote of majority of Council Members present to approve except where noted) , A. Ordinance No. 2008 -05 Amending Section 1225.03 Adding A Member to The Edina Transportation Commission (First Reading. favorable vote of majority of Council Members present to approve - Waiver of Second Reading. favorable rollcall vote of four Council Members to approve) B. RENEWAL WINE & 3.2 BEER LICENSES - Chapati's, Inc. and Dinos Gyro's of Edina, Inc. C. Appointment to Board of Appeal & Equalization. D. Set Hearing Date, Earl Isensee, Jr. Appeal of Public Health & Housing Code Violations (4 -1 -08) E. Resolution No. 2008 -29 Accepting Various Donations (Favorable rollcall vote of four Council Members to approve) * F. Ratify School Board Appointment to Human Rights And Relations Commission G. Resolution No. 2008 -30 Certifying That No Funds Have Been Invested in a Targeted List of Companies Whose Operations Are Deemed To Be Complicit With the Government of Sudan's Genocidal Activities in Darfur, Sudan, and Prohibiting the Purchase of Such Securities in the Future H. Resolution No. 2008 -31 Calling for a Public Hearing on an Issue of Revenue Bonds by City of Minneapolis on Behalf of Fairview Health Services (4- 15 -08) ; 1. Traffic Safety Report of March 6, 2008 Agenda /Edina City Council March 18, 2008 Page 3 J. Set Hearing Date - Improvement No. BA -342 - Highlands Sewer, Water, and Street Reconstruction - Resolution No. 2008 -32 (4- 15 -08) K. Renewal of Local 1275 Contract - Firefighters VI. FINANCE (Favorable rollcall vote of majority Council Members present to approve) A. CONFIRMATION OF PAYMENT OF CLAIMS As per Pre -List dated March 6, 2008 TOTAL $655,289.64; and March 13, 2008 TOTAL $480,249.77. VII. CORRESPONDENCE AND PETITIONS VIII. MAYOR AND COUNCIL COMMENTS IX. MANAGER'S COMMENTS X. ADTOURNMENT 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 Tues Mar 18 Interviews Edina Trans. Commission 5:30 P.M. Tues Mar 18 Regular Meeting 7:00 P.M. Tues Mar 25 Study Session - To be determined 7:00 A.M. Thu Mar 27 Public Hearing Edina Comprehensive Plan 7:00 P.M. Tues Apr 1 Regular Meeting 7:00 P.M. Tues Apr 15 Regular Meeting 7:00 P.M. Tues Apr 22 Study Session - To be determined 11:30 A.M. Tues Apr 22 Volunteer Recognition Reception 5:00 P.M. Tues May 6 Regular Meeting 7:00 P.M. Tues May 20 Regular Meeting 7:00 P.M. Mon May 26 MEMORIAL DAY HOLIDAY OBSERVED - City Hall Closed Tues Mar 27 Study Session - To be determined 7:00 A.M. Tues June 3 Regular Meeting 7:00 P.M. Tues June 17 Regular Meeting 7:00 P.M. Tues July 1 Regular Meeting 7:00 P.M. Fri July 4 INDEPENDENCE DAY OBSERVED - City Hall Closed Tues July 15 Regular Meeting 7:00 P.M. COMMUNITY ROOM COUNCIL CHAMBERS COMMUNITY ROOM COUNCIL CHAMBERS COUNCIL CHAMBERS COUNCIL CHAMBERS COMMUNITY ROOM EDINBOROUGH PARK COUNCIL CHAMBERS COUNCIL CHAMBERS COMMUNITY ROOM COUNCIL CHAMBERS COUNCIL CHAMBERS COUNCIL CHAMBERS COUNCIL CHAMBERS MINUTES OF THE EDINA HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY MARCH 3, 2008 7:00 P.M. ROLLCALL Answering rollcall were Commissioners Bennett, Housh, Masica, Swenson and Chair Hovland. CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS APPROVED Motion made by Commissioner Masica and seconded by Commissioner Swenson approving the Consent Agenda for the Edina Housing and Redevelopment Authority as presented. Rollcall: Ayes: Bennett, Housh, Masica, Swenson, Hovland Motion carried. *MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE EDINA HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY FEBRUARY 19, 2008, APPROVED Motion made by Commissioner Masica and seconded by Commissioner Swenson approving the Minutes of the Regular Meeting of the Edina Housing and Redevelopment Authority from February 19, 2008 Motion carried on rollcall vote — five ayes. CALVIN CHRISTIAN SCHOOL REQUEST FOR REVENUE BONDS DENIED Affidavits of Notice were presented approved and ordered placed on file. Executive .Director Hughes noted the HRA on February 4, 2008, set a public hearing date to consider the issuance of revenue bonds on behalf of the Calvin Christian School. If approved the proceeds of the bond issue will be used by the Calvin Christian School to finance the addition to their school. Mr. Hughes noted that according to the City's tax exempt revenue bond financing guidelines the City will be paid an issuance fee of 1/2% of the principal amount of the bond issue. He said other out -of- pocket costs of the City will be reimbursed if the HRA authorizes the bond sale. Mr. Hughes also said if the HRA authorized the sale, the City Council must also adopt a resolution authorizing the issuance. Mr. Hughes noted receipt of a letter from Teresa Nelson of the American Civil Liberties Union of Minnesota maintaining that issuance of the requested bonds would violate the establishment of religion clauses of both the Constitution of the United States and the Minnesota Constitution. Mr. Hughes introduced Dick Helde, of Dorsey & Whitney LLP, the City's bond counsel for this issue. Mr. Helde answered questions of the Council regarding whether or not the issuance of the bonds violate the religious clauses of the state and federal constitutions, who would pay for litigation, and who would benefit from the bond sale. Mr. Helde said he was satisfied that all legal requirements have been met after review of the pertinent constitutional provisions. He referred to the Hawk case on which the Minnesota Supreme Court upheld the sale of the bond. Mr. Helde said bond purchasers could lose the tax exempt status of their bonds and that Calvin Christian School would have some liability in a lawsuit. He added that Minnesota revenue bond statutes were neutral as to religion. Public Comment Minutes/Edina HRA/March 3, 2008 Steve Fenlon, Midwest Healthcare Capital, 665 Woodridge Drive, Mendota Heights, listed several schools with religious affiliations with which he had been involved regarding the issuance of revenue bonds. He said the academic spaces of Calvin Christian School had been studied and would be kept from the religious areas of the buildings. Mr. Fenlon urged approval of the bonds. Caroline Jackson, 5716 Continental Drive, requested the HRA deny the request. Jonathan Gross, 4208 Grimes Avenue, opposed the issuance of the revenue bonds. Steve Timmer, 5348 Oaklawn Avenue, opposed the issuance of the revenue bonds. Steve Groen, 5736 Drew Avenue, Calvin Christian School Superintendent, said the School has been a positive member of the community since 1961. Mr. Groen urged approval of the requested bonds adding the addition to the School will enhance the community. Commissioner Swenson made a motion, seconded by Commissioner Housh to close the public hearing. Ayes: Bennett, Housh, Masica, Swenson, Hovland Motion carried. Following the closure of the public hearing, the HRA continued their discussion of the requested revenue bonds. Concerns were expressed that included: whether academic and religious spaces could be kept separate, other revenue bond issues such as Fairview Hospital and the Volunteers .of America clearly had public benefits to community of a non sectarian nature, and the possible precedential nature of issuing bonds for a religious institution. The Council asked additional questions -of the bond counsel; Mr. Hel& Following- the discussion, - Commissioner Housh made a motion introducing Resolution No. 2008 -03 and moved its adoption authorizing the sale of a revenue note pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 469.152 to 469.1651, as amended at the request of Calvin Christian School in the principal amount of $1,500,000, and approving forms of documents in connection therewith. Commissioner Swenson seconded the motion. Ayes: Housh Nays: Bennett, Masica, Swenson, Hovland Motion failed. There being no further business on the HRA Agenda, the Chair declared the meeting adjourned at 7:45 p.m. Executive Director Page 2 R55CKREG. .G20000 Check # Date 14002 3/612008 CITY l JA Council Check Register 3/6/2008 —3/6/2008 Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No 100049 EHLERS & ASSOCIATES INC 82.50 CALCULATIONS 181154 336609 9134.6103 82.50 82.50 Grand Total Subledger Account Description PROFESSIONAL SERVICES Payment Instrument Totals Check Total 82.50 Total Payments 82.50 3/: 9:10:59 Page- 1 Business Unit GRANDVIEW TAX DISTRICT R55CKSUM LOG20000 Company 09000 HRA FUND Amount 82.50 Report Totals 82.50 CITY OF EDINA Council Check Summary 3/6/2008 - 3/6/2008 Sr We confirm to the best of our knowledge and belief, that these claims comply In all material respects with the requirements of the City of Edina purchasing policies and procedures date o P 3/5/2008 9:11:02 Page - 1 MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE EDINA CITY COUNCIL HELD AT CITY HALL MARCH 3, 2008 7:00 P.M. ROLLCALL Answering rollcall were Members Bennett, Housh, Masica, Swenson and Mayor Hovland. CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS APPROVED Motion made by Member Masica and seconded by Member Swenson approving the Council Consent Agenda as presented with the exception of Item I. Minutes of Regular Meeting of February 19, 2008, and Minutes of February 26, 2008, Study Session; Item V. K. Resolution No. 2008 -27 Calling For Legislation Studying The Feasibility Of 25 MPH Speed Limit Metro -Wide; and Item V.M. Receive Updated Comprehensive Plan and Set Public Hearing Date (03/27/08). Rollcall: Ayes: Bennett, Housh, Masica, Swenson, Hovland Motion carried. MINUTES OF FEBRUARY 19, 2008, REGULAR MEETING AND FEBRUARY 26, 2008, STUDY SESSION APPROVED Member Bennett said she asked to have the minutes removed from the Consent Agenda to discuss some items in both sets of minutes. Following discussion, motion made by Member Bennett and seconded by Member Swenson approving the minutes of the February 26, 2008, Study Session as corrected. Ayes: Bennett, Housh, Masica, Swenson, Hovland Motion carried. The Council discussed two items contained in the February 19, 2008, minutes then directed staff to review the meeting's video and make corrections which would agree with the video. The first item was on page four, paragraph three, sentence three; and the second item was on page six, paragraph three. Member Bennett made a motion, seconded by Member Housh to approve the minutes of the February 19, 2008, Regular Meeting as corrected. Ayes: Bennett, Housh, Masica, Swenson, Hovland Motion carried. PUBLIC HEARING - RESOLUTION NO. 2008 -26 ADOPTED ORDERING IMPROVEMENT NO. BA -343 RICHMOND HILLS NEIGHBORHOOD STREET RECONSTRUCTION Affidavits of Notice presented and ordered placed on file. Assistant Engineer Sullivan reviewed the proposed project using PowerPoint. He noted the project was initiated by the staff and would involve reconstructing the existing roadway including adding new concrete curb and gutters, and upgrading water main, and sanitary and storm sewer. He said the estimated project cost was $871,500 which would include the roadway project and City -owned utility repairs. Mr. Sullivan explained the roadway portion of the project estimated to be $480,000 would be funded from special assessments as per MS 429 against the 47 properties at approximately $10,500 over ten years; and the City -owned utility repairs would be funded from the respective utility funds.. He concluded, stating staff had analyzed the project and felt it was feasible from an engineering standpoint. Page 1 Minutes/Edina City Council/March 3, 2008 The Council asked questions regarding the proposed project including: private irrigation systems and pet containment systems location, potential damage and repair, what portion of special assessments were tax deductible, when would the special assessment payments begin, storm sewer upgrades, what would be considered traffic calming, would traffic calming proposed in the project reduce asphalt, and how would the curb and gutter be funded. Mr. Sullivan, City Attorney Elliot Knetsch, and Engineer Houle answered the questions. Damage to private irrigation systems and pet containment systems would be corrected at the end of the project by the property owners' contractors and paid by the City; payments on the special assessments would begin with the property taxes following the year the project was specially assessed by the City Council, only the interest on special assessments would be tax deductible, the intersections in the neighborhood would be tightened and realigned slightly reducing the asphalt pavement, and the storm sewer utility would fund the curb and gutter. Public Comment John Menke, 5301 Pinewood Trail, said he believed the neighborhood needed the streets, but asked that the City fund between 25 and 50 percent because of the damage caused during the four years of construction of Grandview Square. Richard Dahlquist, 5220 Richwood Drive, asked what triggered the timing of the project, were there any state or federal monies to fund the project, what style of curbing was planned and was there any planned mitigation of the existing drainage problems. Steve Ullom, 5229 Richwood Drive, said he supported the project and praised the informational meeting. - Jack Abrahamson, 5209 Richwood Drive, . said there should be some method of notifying residents two to five years in advance of a project to allow them to arrange financing of the assessment. He also asked what interest rate would be charged. Eric Hoegger, 5257 Richwood Drive, said he supported the project and wanted the curb and gutter. Member Masica made a motion seconded, by Member Housh to close the public hearing. Ayes: Bennett, Housh, Masica, Swenson, Hovland Motion carried. Staff answered questions of the residents, noting that in 2003 Ron Clark Construction paid for a mill and overlay to Sherwood, improvement projects were scheduled based upon an analysis of City roadways and utilities and were placed into the Capital Improvement Program with approximately four to five million dollars completed each year, the streets in the Richmond Hills neighborhood were approximately fifty years old, last year the special assessment interest rate was 5.9 %, Senior Citizen Deferrals were explained briefly, both the Five Mile Creek and Minnehaha Watershed Districts will review the proposed project, Mr. Sullivan reviewed the proposed placement of storm sewer improvements and agreed that there should be improvements to drainage issues, and the proposed curb and gutter would be the bulkhead style. Member Swenson made a motion to adopt Resolution No. 2008 -26 receiving the Feasibility Report, ordering Improvement BA -343, appointing the City Engineer and authorizing bids. Member Housh seconded the motion. Page 2 Minutes/Edina City Council/ March 3, 2008 Rollcall: Ayes: Bennett, Housh, Masica, Swenson, Hovland Motion carried. LEWIS PARK DONATION Affidavits of Notice presented and ordered placed on file. Park Director Keprios explained Edina resident Carolyn Kohrs first approached the Park Board at their October 9, 2007, meeting and proposed to offer $500,000 in seed capital to replace the existing park shelter building at Lewis Park with a two -story building that would be 2,000 to 2,500 square feet including a separate room to serve hot and cold food and beverages run by private citizens. Her proposal stated that "The building would be owned by the investors until such a time that the original investors were reimbursed for their seed capital plus a 5% annual investment return." Mr. Keprios said, at the October 9, 2007, meeting, the Park Board asked Ms. Kohrs to come back to the Park Board in a month or two with more information, including: • Determination of whether the neighboring residents and businesses were in support of the concept. • A business plan showing all costs, liability insurance and rental plans. • Determination if there was adequate space for the proposed facility. • Determination of code requirements that must be met, such as, ADA requirements when a two -story building was constructed. Mr. Keprios reported Ms. Kohrs addressed the Park Board at their November 2007 meeting. At that meeting, Ms. Kohrs stated that her proposal had been modified in that as soon as the building was constructed it would immediately be donated to the city. She also reported she had met with residents, local businesses, conducted an online survey and established a website for this proposal. Mr. Keprios noted copies of input from residents and local businesses had been included in the Council's packet. Mr. Keprios said after lengthy discussion and considerable public comment, the Park Board requested Ms. Kohrs come back to the Park Board at their. January 8, 2008, meeting with a more definitive plan in writing that outlined her proposed financial agreement, maintenance agreement, and determined if the property needed to be re- zoned. Mr. Keprios stated after lengthy discussion and more community testimony, the Park Board passed a motion at their January 8, 2008, meeting to approve the proposal in concept and send the matter to the City Council to determine what should be the next step in the process. Carolyn Kohrs, using a PowerPoint presentation, reviewed her proposal which she stated had evolved over time to her final request that was: • Create a Gathering Place for All Citizens in All Seasons • Enhance Uses Of Our Public Park Building • Serve Many Future Generations of Edina Residents with a Safe, Comfortable, and Multi-Use Facility • $500,000 Donation to Fund Design and Construction of the Multi- Season Park Building at Lewis Park (In Memory of Dean Lumbar) • Food and Beverage Concession Managed on a Volunteer Basis o All Revenue Applied to Cover Costs of Operation and Maintenance of the Concession Facilities Page 3 Minutes/Edina City Council/March 3, 2008 • Excess Revenues Applied to Public Purposes or Programs • No Funds Returned to the Donor • If Concession Finances Fail, City Has Discretion to: ■ Modify or Discontinue the Concession Operation ■ Use Building For Any Other Park Purpose ■ No Obligation to Repay Any Part of the Donation • Details of the Donation and Concession Operation Reflected in Mutually - Acceptable Agreements Member Housh stated he wanted to clarify that he personally knew the Kohrs and that the firm he worked for did business with Mr. Kohr's firm. Mr. Knetsch said that since Member Housh had neither a disqualifying interest in the proposal nor direct financial interest he could discuss the issue and vote on it. The Council asked questions of and discussed the proposal with Ms. Kohrs then opened the issue to public comment. Their questions included: did the design include space for a zamboni, potential hours of operation, would the building be staffed at all times, what was the proposed marketing plan, what products were proposed to be sold at the concession plan, where would the rental proceeds be directed, what would happen if the building bid came in at $750,000, what if the concession stand ran in the red. Ms. Kohrs said most of the issues were yet to be negotiated in an operating agreement with the city. She said if more than $500,000 was needed she would be committed to raising the funds needed, and that she would absorb the cost of operating losses. Public Comment Robert Maginnis, 7510 Cahill Road, voiced opposition for the proposal for Lewis Park. Ann Newman, 7408 Shannon Drive, voiced support for the proposal for Lewis Park. Steve Winnick, 7117 Lanham Lane, thanked Ms. Kohrs for the generous offer, but said the professionals should determine where monies should be spent. He expressed concern for businesses at 70th & Cahill. Mark Litman, 7227 Lewis Ridge Parkway, applauded donation but opposed it because of the impact on business community. Virgil Dissmeyer, 7250 Lewis Ridge Parkway, #218, opposed proposed donation, stating a real donation would be freely given without conditions. Linda Tapseck, 7224 Lewis Ridge Parkway, opposed proposed donation, cautioned that Council exercise care and expressed concern about precedential nature of donation. Pat Sheehy, 7423 Coventry Way, said he and friends skate daily at Lewis Park, and he supported the donation. Mr. Sheehy said a new warming house was badly needed. Greg Frey, 6021 Killarney Lane, said that he felt the concerns expressed were all "not in my back yard" issues and he supported the proposed donation. Barbara LaRose, 7456 Shannon Drive, offered her support for the proposed donation. Page 4 Minutes/Edina City Council/ March 3, 2008 Kay Mrachek, 7301 Shannon Drive, supported the proposed donation. Phil Berling, 4129 West 62nd Street, offered his support both as a private citizen on behalf of the Edina Soccer Association Board member. Greg Good, 7028 Shannon Drive, supported the proposed donation. Laura Kakalios, 4908 Arden Avenue, said she was an Edina High School junior and took issue with speakers' view of teens. She said Edina teens attend school, have jobs, were active in the community and would like a place to hang out together. She supported the proposal. Cassandra Mihalchick, 7227 Lewis Ridge Parkway, representing the Lewis Park Neighborhood Association, opposed the proposal. Ms. Mihalchick read a letter of opposition for Katie Bredesen, 7048 Cahill, who was unable to attend the meeting. Robyn Green, 5723 Long Brake Trail, supported the proposed donation. Kathy Zuspan, 6513 Navaho Trail, opposed the proposal because of all the restrictions attached. David Cherner, 5829 Dewey Hill Road, offered support for the proposal. Camille Nash, 6920 Hillcrest Lane, supported the proposed donation. Jeff Melin, 23115 Lafayette Road, Wayzata, representing the 70t" and Cahill businesses, opposed the proposal. Chris Green, Co- owner, Honking Joes, 7015 Amundson Avenue, opposed the proposed donation. Alice Hulbert, 7221 Tara Road, opposed the proposed donation. Dianne Plunkett Latham, 7013 Comanche Court, expressed concerns and opposed the proposed donation. Larry Leistiko, 7033 Lanham Lane, opposed the proposed donation. Britta Sheehy, 7423 Coventry Way, supported the proposed donation. Elini Glerum, 6208 Loch Moor Drive, supported the proposed donation. Brent Fischer, Sammy's Subs and Salads, 7031 Cahill, opposed the concession stand in the proposed donation. Sharon Burns, 6012 Dublin Circle, offered the support of the Edina Hockey Association and her personal support of the proposed donation. Mike Morgan, 7300 Tara Road, supported the proposed donation. Amy Collins, 7420 Coventry Way, supported the proposed donation. Page 5 Minutes/Edina City Council/March 3, 2008 Linda Presthus, 4521 Belvedere Lane, opposed the proposed donation. Patty Plourde, 6721 Hillside Lane, supported the donation. Duke Bascom 7505 Gleason Road supported the donation. Lisa Zacharias, owner of Edina Market and Cahill Coffee, 7102 Amundson Avenue, opposed the proposed donation. George Klus, 5233 Lochloy Drive, supported the donation. Motion made by Member Housh and seconded by Member Swenson to close the public hearing. Ayes: Bennett, Housh, Masica, Swenson, Hovland Motion carried. The Council thanked Ms. Kohrs for the generosity of her proposed donation. They asked questions of staff about concession operations at other City facilities, whether additional parking would be necessary at Lewis Park and the amount of staff time invested in the proposal to date. Concern was expressed on the part of the Council about the privatization of a city owned park, competition with existing businesses in the area, and not enough details in the proposal to properly weigh the issue. Following the discussion Member Swenson made a motion, seconded by Member Housh to accept the donation with conditions: 1. No favorable competitive advantage - very limited product selection at current market prices 2. No outside speakers 3. Rental goes to building upkeep with catering only from Cahill businesses 4. Steering Committee to be made up of: City Management person, Park and Recreation Department person, Caroline Kohrs, food service business owner, Lewis Park resident and near neighborhood resident a. Steering Committee to determine hours of operation, volunteer expectations- (training, age level), and offerings/ pricing 5. Ten Year time limit Rollcall: Ayes: Housh, Swenson, Hovland Nays: Bennett, Masica Motion failed, four affirmative votes were required for passage. PUBLIC COMMENT Gene Persha, 6917 Cornelia Drive, asked if an audience member requestsed to have a consent item removed from the agenda, could that person then speak to the issue. He also stated he felt there had not been adequate public process on the Comprehensive Plan. Alice Hulbert, 7221 Tara Road, asked for guidance for the Bike Edina Task Force and their work on the Blue Cross/ Blue Shield grant. "AWARD OF BID GARDEN PARK TRAIL IMPROVEMENTS CONTRACT NO. 08 -2PK Motion made by Member Masica and seconded by Member Swenson approving the award of Page 6 Minutes/Edina City Council/ March 3, 2008 bid for Garden Park Trail Improvements Contract No. 08 -2PK to the recommended low bidder Valley Paving in the amount of $88,768.00. Motion carried on rollcall vote - five ayes. *AWARD OF BID MCGUIRE PARK PLAYGROUND EQUIPMENT IMPROVEMENT CONTRACT NO. 084PK Motion made by Member Masica and seconded by Member Swenson approving the award of bid for McGuire Park Playground Equipment Improvement Contract No. 08-4PK to the recommended low bidder Flanagan Sales in the amount of $115,952.00. Motion carried on rollcall vote - five ayes. *AWARD OF BID YORK PARK PLAYGROUND EQUIPMENT IMPROVEMENT CONTRACT NO. 08 -3PK Motion made by Member Masica and seconded by Member Swenson approving the award of bid for York Park Playground Equipment Improvement Contract No. 08 -3PK to the recommended low bidder Koolmo Construction, Inc. in the amount of $106,374.00. Motion carried on rollcall vote- five ayes. *AWARD OF BID 2WD PICK -UP TRUCK - PARK MAINTENANCE DEPARTMENT Motion made by Member Masica and seconded by Member Swenson approving the award of bid for one 2 Wheel Drive Pick -up truck for the Park Maintenance Department to recommended low bidder Car/Truck City (State Contract #438678) in the amount of $16,184.55. Motion carried on rollcall vote- five ayes. *AWARD OF BID TWO 4WD CHEVROLET TAHOE - FIRE DEPARTMENT Motion made by Member Masica and seconded by Member Swenson approving the award of bid for two 4 Wheel Drive Chevrolet Tahoe SUV for the Fire Department to recommended low bidder Thane Hawkins Polar Chevrolet (State Contract #436612) in the amount of $60,226.00. Motion carried on rollcall vote - five ayes. *AWARD OF BID 80 kW PORTABLE POWER GENERATOR Motion made by Member Masica and seconded by Member Swenson approving the award of bid for one 80 kW portable power generator - Contract No. PW 08 -1, to recommended low bidder Ziegler, Inc. at $46,566.00. Motion carried on rollcall vote - five ayes. *AWARD OF BID 1 -3/4 TON PICK -UP TRUCK AND ONE CARGO VAN - PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT Motion made by Member Masica and seconded by Member Swenson approving the award of bid for one 1 -3/4 ton pick -up truck and one cargo van - Public Works Department to recommended low bidder Car/Truck City (State Contract #438678) in the amount of $36,547.96. Motion carried on rollcall vote - five ayes. *AWARD OF BID TWO SINGLE AXLE TRUCK CHASSIS - PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT Motion made by Member Masica ' and seconded by Member Swenson approving the award of bid for two single axle truck chassis - Public Works Department to recommended low bidder Boyer Truck (State Contract #439006) in the amount of $139,938.87. Motion carried on rollcall vote - five ayes. Page 7 Minutes/Edina City Council/March 3, 2008 ORDINANCE NO. 2008 -03 ADOPTED - AMENDING SECTION 815 ALLOWING ANTENNAS /CELLULAR TOWERS IN CEMETERIES Member Masica made a motion to adopt Ordinance No. 2008 -03 amending Section Ordinance No. 2008 -3, amending Section 815 of Edina City Code to allow antenna/cellular towers in cemeteries Member Housh seconded the motion. Ayes: Bennett, Housh, Masica, Swenson, Hovland Motion carried. *SECOND READING - ORDINANCE NO. 2008-02 AN ORDINANCE AMENDNG SECTION 1100 REGARDING SEWER AND WATER CONNECTIONS - CONTINUED TO APRIL 1, 2008 Motion made by Member Masica and seconded by Member Swenson continuing until April 1, 2008, the Second Reading - Ordinance No. 2008 -02 An Ordinance Amending Section 1100 Regarding Sewer and Water Connections. Motion carried on rollcall vote - five ayes. BIKE EDINA TASK FORCE COMP PLAN DISCUSSED Mr. Sullivan reviewed the Edina Transportation Commissions recommendation regarding the Bike , Edina Task Force's Comprehensive Bicycle Transportation Plan. The Council discussed how the Bicycle Plan should be incorporated into the Draft Comp Plan with staff and the application of the Blue Cross/ Blue Shield grant application and the potential future .of the Bike Edina Task Force. Council directed staff to bring back an amendment to Edina Code increasing the membership of the Edina Traffic Commission by one member. Said member shall be a member of the Bike Edina Task Force. Staff should continue work on the Blue Cross/ Blue Shield grant. ON -SALE INTOXICATING, CLUB ON -SALE, AND SUNDAY SALE LIQUOR LICENSE RENEWALS APPROVED Mr. Hughes said renewal applications of On -Sale Intoxicating, Club On -Sale and Sunday On -Sale Liquor Licenses have been reviewed by the Administration and Edina Police Departments and renewals were recommended. Applicants' paperwork has. been submitted in accordance with City Ordinances and State Statutes. Member Masica made a motion approving renewals for the following: ON -SALE INTOXICATING AND SUNDAY SALE: Big Bowl Cafe, California Pizza Kitchen, Crave Restaurant, Eden Avenue Grill, Edina Grill Restaurant, Kozy's Steaks and Seafood, Maggiano's Restaurant & Bakery, P.F. Chang's Bistro, Romano's Macaroni Grill, Ruby Tuesday, Salut Bar Americain, Tejas, The Cheesecake Factory, and Via; and CLUB and SUNDAY SALE: Edina Country Club and Interlachen Country Club. Member Housh seconded the motion. Ayes: Bennett, Housh, Masica, Swenson, Hovland Motion carried. WINE LICENSE RENEWALS APPROVED Mr. Hughes presented the list of restaurants holding On -Sale Wine and On -Sale 3.2 Beer Licenses recommended for approval. Mr. Hughes said all necessary documentation has been submitted for renewal, fees collected and the Administration and Police Department have recommended approval. He noted two licensees: Chapati's and Dino's Gyros of Edina have not filed complete applications. Member Bennett made a motion approving the following ON -SALE WINE and ON -SALE 3.2 BEER license renewals as follows: Beaujo's, Chipotle Mexican Grill, Chuck E. Cheese's, D'Amico & Sons, Good Earth Restaurant, Marriott Residence Inn, Noodles & Company and Szechuan Star Restaurant. Member Housh seconded the motion. Page 8 Minutes/Edina City Council/ March 3, 2008 Ayes: Bennett, Housh, Masica, Swenson, Hovland Motion carried. 3.2 BEER LICENSE RENEWALS APPROVED Mr. Hughes presented a list of applicants for renewal of their 3.2 beer licenses, both On -Sale and Off -Sale. All documentation has been submitted for renewal, fees have been collected and the Administration and Police Departments have recommended approval. Member Swenson made a motion approving issuance of beer license renewals as follows: ON- SALE 3.2 BEER LICENSES: Davanni's Pizza/Hoagies, and TJ's Family Restaurant, OFF -SALE 3.2 LICENSES: Cub Foods, Holiday Stationstore #217, Jerry's Foods and Speedway Superamerica LLC. Member Masica seconded the motion. Ayes: Bennett, Housh, Masica, Swenson, Hovland Motion carried. RESOLUTION NO. 2008 -23 APPROVED, ACCEPTING VARIOUS DONATIONS Mayor Hovland explained 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 Resolution No. 2008 -23 accepting various donations. Member Masica seconded the motion. Ayes: Bennett, Housh, Masica, Swenson, Hovland Motion carried. *HEARING DATE OF APRIL 1, 2008, SET FOR TEMPORARY INTOXICATING LIQUOR LICENSE FOR EDINA CHAMBER OF COMMERCE Motion made by Member Masica and seconded by Member Swenson setting April 1, 2008, as hearing date for Temporary Intoxicating Liquor License for Edina Chamber of Commerce. Motion carried on rollcall vote - five ayes. *HEARING DATE OF MARCH 18, 2008, SET FOR PLANNING ITEMS Motion made by Member Masica and seconded by Member Swenson setting March 18, 2008, as hearing date for: 1. Zoning Ordinance Amendment to Section 850.14 Subdivision 8, Minimum Tract Area MDD -6 2. Overall Development Plan, Comprehensive Guide Plan Amendment and Rezoning For Wayzata Properties, Pentagon Office Park 77th Street 3. Preliminary Development Plan and Preliminary Rezoning, Opus LLC, 5146 Eden Avenue. Motion carried on rollcall vote - five ayes. *RESOLUTION NO. 2008 -25 AUTHORIZING HENNEPIN COUNTY RECYCLING GRANT FOR 2008 -2010 ADOPTED Motion made by Member Masica and seconded by Member Swenson to adopt Resolution No.2008 -25 authorizing the 2008 -2010 Hennepin County Recycling Grant. Motion carried on rollcall vote - five ayes. RESOLUTION NO. 2008 -27 CALLING FOR LEGISLATION STUDYING THE FEASIBILITY OF 25 MPH SPEED LIMIT METRO -WIDE ADOPTED Following discussion, motion made by Page 9 Minutes/Edina City Council/March 3, 2008 Member Bennett and seconded by Member Masica to adopt Resolution No.2008 -27 calling for legislation studying the feasibility of 25 MPH speed limit metro -wide. Ayes: Bennett, Housh, Masica, Swenson, Housh, Hovland Motion carried. APPROVAL DENIED TO CALVIN CHRISTIAN SCHOOL TO SELL REVENUE BONDS Motion made by Member Swenson and seconded by Member Bennett to deny adoption of Resolution No.'2008 -28 authorizing the Calvin Christian School Sale of Revenue Bonds. Ayes: Bennett, Masica, Swenson, Hovland Nay: Housh Motion carried. UPDATED COMPREHENSIVE PLAN RECEIVED AND PUBLIC HEARING SET FOR MARCH 27, 2008 John Bohan, 800 Coventry Place, asked that the Draft Comprehensive Plan Draft be frozen to allow community members to adequately review the document He suggested the review of the chapters be taken up .in an orderly fashion. Following discussion, motion made by Member Housh and seconded by Member Swenson to receive the Updated Comprehensive Plan and set the Public Hearing on March 27, 2008, at 7:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers of Edina City Hall. Ayes: Housh, Swenson, Hovland Nays: Bennett, Masica Motion carried. *CONFIRMATION OF CLAIMS PAID Motion made by Member Masica and seconded by Member Swenson approving payment of the following claims as shown.in detail on the Check Register dated February 21, 2008, and consisting of 29 pages; General Fund $369,764.84; Communications Fund $9,166.14; Working Capital Fund $284,046.42; Art Center Fund $5,865.73; Golf Dome Fund $20,741.74, Aquatic Center Fund $546.28; Golf Course Fund $7,854.67; Ice Arena Fund $33,398.12, Edinborough/Centennial Lakes Fund $26,924.50; Liquor Fund $222,765.31; Utility Fund $29,214.57; Storm Sewer Fund $103.95; PSTF Agency Fund $2,199.45; TOTAL $1,012,591.72; and for approval of payment of claims dated February 28, 2008, and consisting of 26 pages: General Fund $350,463.45; Communications Fund $3,216.60; Working Capital Fund $24,924.35; Construction Fund $4,916.36; Art Center Fund $2,268.55; Golf Dome Fund $3,016.92, Aquatic Center Fund $8,950.00; Golf Course Fund $17,068.56; Ice Arena Fund $2,192.25; Edinborough/Centennial Lakes Fund $10,829.12; Liquor Fund $148,614.12; Utility Fund $226,142.08; PSTF Agency Fund $6,770.86; TOTAL $809,373.22. Motion carried on rollcall vote - five ayes. There being no .further business on the Council Agenda, Mayor Hovland declared the meeting adjourned at 12:40 a.m. Respectfully submitted, Page 10 Debra A. Mangen, City Clerk A,�� �1 o e Staff Recommended Action Waive the second reading and approve the ordinance amendment on page Al. Planning Commission Recommended Action The Planning Commission unanimously recommended approval of the ordinance amendment, however, recommended a minimum acreage of 30 acres rather than 40. They believed that 30 acres would allow a greater potential for other MDD -6 zoning opportunities. (See minutes on pages A2 -A3.) Background Wayzata Properties is proposing to redevelop the 43 acre Pentagon Park area. They are proposing to tear down the buildings on the Pentagon Tower and Pentagon Quads site and build 634 senior housing units, an 80,000 square foot hotel, two office towers that would total 737,000 square feet, and two above ground parking structures. To accommodate the request a rezoning of the property to MDD -6 is being requested. Section 850.14, Subdivision 8.A. of the Edina Zoning Ordinance requires the minimum tract area for an MDD -6 development district be 50 acres. This zoning district was specifically created for Centennial Lakes, which is 90 acres in size. The intent was to encourage a mixture of uses over a large area. However, the 50 acre minimum effectively eliminates the possibility of any future MDD -6 zoning districts, given the minimum acreage requirement. Since the Wayzata Properties project is 43 acres in size; therefore, the applicant is proposing an amendment to the minimum lot area requirement to 40 acres. REPORT/RECOMMENDATION To: Mayor & City Council Agenda Item II.A Consent ❑ From: Cary Teague Planning Director Information Only Date: March 18, 2008 Mgr. Recommends ❑ To HRA Subject: An ordinance amendment to ® To Council decrease the minimum tract area for an MDD -6 district from Action ® Motion 50 acres to 40 acres. Resolution Deadline for a city decision: May 20, 2008 ® Ordinance Discussion Staff Recommended Action Waive the second reading and approve the ordinance amendment on page Al. Planning Commission Recommended Action The Planning Commission unanimously recommended approval of the ordinance amendment, however, recommended a minimum acreage of 30 acres rather than 40. They believed that 30 acres would allow a greater potential for other MDD -6 zoning opportunities. (See minutes on pages A2 -A3.) Background Wayzata Properties is proposing to redevelop the 43 acre Pentagon Park area. They are proposing to tear down the buildings on the Pentagon Tower and Pentagon Quads site and build 634 senior housing units, an 80,000 square foot hotel, two office towers that would total 737,000 square feet, and two above ground parking structures. To accommodate the request a rezoning of the property to MDD -6 is being requested. Section 850.14, Subdivision 8.A. of the Edina Zoning Ordinance requires the minimum tract area for an MDD -6 development district be 50 acres. This zoning district was specifically created for Centennial Lakes, which is 90 acres in size. The intent was to encourage a mixture of uses over a large area. However, the 50 acre minimum effectively eliminates the possibility of any future MDD -6 zoning districts, given the minimum acreage requirement. Since the Wayzata Properties project is 43 acres in size; therefore, the applicant is proposing an amendment to the minimum lot area requirement to 40 acres. Primary Issue 0 Should the minimum acreage for an MDD -6 development be reduced to 40 acres? Yes. Staff believes that it is reasonable to amend the ordinance for the following three reasons: 1. The 50 acre minimum was established solely for the Centennial Lakes development which was 90 acres in size. As mentioned, the MDD -6 zoning district and all of its standards were created specifically for the Centennial Lakes project. 2. By requiring a minimum of 50 acres for large scale mixed use project, it effectively eliminates the possibility of rezoning to the MDD -6 district. To assemble 50 acres of land in a fully developed community is virtually impossible. The City of Edina does not have a Planned Unit Development (PUD) ordinance. Typically, cities offer a PUD to encourage land owners to develop a mixture of uses or flexibility in conventional zoning. The closest thing Edina has to a PUD is the MDD, Mixed Development District. The MDD -6 District requires a mixture of land uses, by only allowing non residential uses based on the number of residential dwellings within that MDD -6 District. For every one dwelling unit, 3,650 square feet of non - residential square footage may be built. However, when comparing the minimum lot area required for a PUD in other cities to Edina's minimum requirement of 50 acres in an MDD -6 District, it seems that the City's current standard does not promote mixed use development for large scale projects. As demonstrated in the survey below minimum lot sizes for a PUD of local cities range in size from no minimum to 20 acres. Survey of Cities City PUD - Minimum Acreage Minnetonka 5 acres Apple Valley 20 acres St. Louis Park 2 acres Bloomington No minimum New Brighton 2 acres Hopkins No minimum Wayzata No minimum Mounds View 3 acres Burnsville Underlying district minimum Eden Prairie Underlying district minimum Plymouth No minimum Richfield 1 acre Based on the above, it seems reasonable to allow a 40 acre lot area minimum for an MDD -6 development, as suggested by the city council during the preliminary review of the Gateway project. a y ORDINANCE NO. 100-81-01 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING'SECTION 850.14 REGARDING MINIMUM LOT AREA FOR AN MDD -6 DISTRICT The City Of Edina Ordains: Section 1. Section 850.14, Subdivision 8.A, is hereby amended as follows: A. Minimum Tract Area. The minimum tract area for subdistrict MDD -5 shall be five acres. The minimum tract area for subdistrict MDD -6 shall be -50 VO acres. Section 2. Effective Date. This ordinance shall be in full force and effect after it adoption and publication according to law. Passed and adopted this day of 2008. First Reading: ' Second Reading: Published: Attest Debra A. Mangen, City Clerk James Hovland, Mayor R �)* Zoning Ordinance Amendment 850.14, Subd. 8 Staff Presentation: Planner Teague addressed the Commission and explained Wayzata Properties is proposing to redevelop the 43 acre Pentagon Park office site and rezone the site to MDD -6. Planner Teague explained that Zoning Ordinance 850.14 Subd. 8A. requires that the minimum tract area for an MDD -6 development district be 50 acres. At this time staff is recommending an ordinance amendment to decrease the minimum tract area for the MDD -6 district from 50 to 40 acres. Planner Teague concluded staff believes it is reasonable to amend the ordinance for the following three reasons: 1. The 50 acre minimum was established solely for the Centennial Lakes development which was 50 acres in size. As mentioned, the MDD -6 zoning district and all of its standards were created specifically for the Centennial Lakes project. 2. By requiring a minimum of 50 acres for large scale mixed use project, it effectively eliminates the possibility of rezoning to the MDD -6 district. To assemble 50 acres of land in a fully developed community is virtually impossible. 3. The City of Edina does not have a Planned Unit Development (PUD) ordinance. Typically, cities offer a PUD to encourage land owners to develop a mixture of uses or flexibility in conventional zoning. The closest thing Edina has to 'a, PUD is the MDD, Mixed Development District. The MDD -6 District requires a mixture of land uses, by only allowing non residential uses based on the number of residential dwellings within that MDD -6 District. For every one dwelling unit, 3,650 square feet of non- residential square footage may be built. Concluding, Planner Teague stated staff believes it is reasonable to allow a 40 acre lot area minimum for an MDD -6 development. Commission Comment: Commissioners expressed interest in further reducing the allowed acreage minimum in the MDD -6 district to 30, or even 20 acres instead of 40 acres as proposed by staff. Commissioners questioned the reasoning behind the acreage requirement chosen, even at 50 acres. Planner Teague explained when the City proposed and approved the creation of the MDD -6 zoning district it was formulated around the Centennial Lakes development. Planner Teague acknowledged he didn't know the exact reason the 50 acre requirement was implemented for the MDD -6 zoning district. Continuing, Planner Teague said at this time the proposed reduction in acreage would accommodate the Gateway development. Commissioners acknowledged Edina is almost completely developed, adding there are limited single or contiguous parcels over 40 acres owned by a single property owner. Public Comments: Mr. John Bohan, 800 Coventry Place, Edina, questioned if the proposed ordinance change would impact Centennial Lakes and its present MDD -6 zoning. Planner Teague responded he believes there would be no impact, adding if someone would pursue re- parceling Centennial Lakes they would have to request an amendment to the Centennial Lakes overall development plan and all that would entail. Concluding, Planner Teague pointed out the proposed change to the MDD -6 district is only for a decrease in tract area. Commission Comment: A discussion ensued with the acknowledgement that the updated Comprehensive Plan will encourage the development of a PUD district, and if a new PUD sub district is developed the MDD zoning district would probably not be used, with that noted Commissioners indicated they are comfortable with changing the Code language to reflect 30 acres. Commission. Action: Commissioner Fischer moved to recommend approval of an amendment to Zoning Ordinance 850.14 Minimum Tract Area (The minimum tract area for subdistrict MDD -5 shall be five acres. The minimum tract area for subdistrict MDD-6 shall be 30 acres). Commissioner Brown `seconded the motion. All voted aye; motion carried. Z -08 -5 Overall velopment Plan ; Comprehensive--Guide Plan Amendment Rezoning�,� Wayzata Properties —pentagon Office Park/77th Street Staff presentation Planner Teagueinformed the Commission the Edina City Council heard and approved the pr liminary development plan and rezoning of the subject site J .,, o e In \fN�Grtrosv''� // To: Mayor & City Council From: Cary Teague Planning Director Date: March 18, 2008 KhFUK'1 %KECUMMLN UA 1 lUN Agenda Item II.B Consent F Information Only Mgr. Recommends 1-1 To HRA Deadline for a city decision: May 20, 2008 Recommended Action: Waive the second reading, and approve the project subject to conditions. Planning Commission Recommendation The Planning Commission unanimously recommended approval of the request subject to the conditions above. (See minutes on pages A34 -A39.) Introduction The applicant is proposing to tear down the buildings on the Pentagon Tower and Pentagon Quads site and build 634 senior housing units, an 80,000 square foot hotel, two office towers that would total 737,000 square feet, and two above ground parking structures. The Pentagon Tower and Quad sites contain 660,500 square feet of office space today. Included in the project area are Burgundy Place, Walsh Title and 7600 Parklawn office building, which will remain. (See narrative on pages A5 -A17, and the development plan book.) The total site area is 43.18 acres. The City Council approved the preliminary development plan and rezoning of the site at their December 18, 2007 meeting. (See minutes on pages A23 -A26.) Approval of the preliminary ® To Council Subject: Wayzata Properties is requesting a Comprehensive Action ® Motion Plan Amendment, an Overall Development Plan and � Resolution Rezoning f or the Pentagon Park area along 77th Street. ® Ordinance (See project location on page A18.) ❑ Discussion Deadline for a city decision: May 20, 2008 Recommended Action: Waive the second reading, and approve the project subject to conditions. Planning Commission Recommendation The Planning Commission unanimously recommended approval of the request subject to the conditions above. (See minutes on pages A34 -A39.) Introduction The applicant is proposing to tear down the buildings on the Pentagon Tower and Pentagon Quads site and build 634 senior housing units, an 80,000 square foot hotel, two office towers that would total 737,000 square feet, and two above ground parking structures. The Pentagon Tower and Quad sites contain 660,500 square feet of office space today. Included in the project area are Burgundy Place, Walsh Title and 7600 Parklawn office building, which will remain. (See narrative on pages A5 -A17, and the development plan book.) The total site area is 43.18 acres. The City Council approved the preliminary development plan and rezoning of the site at their December 18, 2007 meeting. (See minutes on pages A23 -A26.) Approval of the preliminary development plan allows the applicant to pursue and overall development plan, and final TL rezoning. The proposal before the City Council is as follows: A Comprehensive Guide Plan Amendment from Office to Mixed Use. The mixed use designation would allow office, retail and residential uses. 2. Final Rezoning from PCD -2, Commercial and Planned Office Development (POD -1 and POD -2) to Mixed Development District 6. (MDD -6.) An Overall Development Plan for the entire project. The number of housing units and square footage from the original approval has remained the same; however, the applicant has slightly altered the plans. The office site has been revised from three buildings to two. (See comparison on pages A21 -A22.) The heights of these two buildings have increased from 123 feet to 139 feet and from 144 feet to 151 feet. The increase in height is generally due to a-R increase in ceiling heights by one -foot on each floor. The project is proposed to be developed in five phases. (See phasing plan on page A22a.) The first phase (2008) would be for the hotel proposed along Normandale Road. The second phase (2009 -10) would a portion of senior housing, southeast of the golf course. The third phase (2011- 13) would be the 10 -story office building. The fourth phase (2014 -15) would be another portion of the senior housing; and the final phase (2017) would be the 11 -story office and remaining senior housing piece. The phasing would allow existing buildings to function along with the new buildings. (See the phasing plans within the development plans within the attached 3 -ring binder.) Primary Issues Is the proposed comprehensive plan amendment reasonable? Yes. Staff believes the proposal is reasonable for six reasons: As demonstrated on pages 8 -9 of this report, the proposal meets the criteria for considering rezoning, as outlined in Section 850.04.Subd. 2.5. of the Zoning Ordinance. In addition the plans are consistent with the draft comprehensive plan update recommended by the city's comprehensive plan task force. The update calls for this area to be office/ residential. (See page A20a.) 2. The proposed mixture of uses would be compatible within the area. Senior housing adjacent to a golf course would complement one another. Residents would benefit by the close access and views of the golf course; and the golf course benefits by having additional users to the course. The senior housing also would provide a buffer between the residential uses to the north, and the more intensive uses on the south side of 77th Street. The maximum of 4- stories on the north side of 77th Street provides a stepping up appearance to the taller buildings on the South side of 77th.. With Edina's aging population, senior housing is a need for the City. 3. The project would encourage pedestrian movement throughout the development. The proposal encourages pedestrian movement to and from the senior housing site by Ir providing a large sidewalk along 77th Street, and providing connections to a potential walking path around the senior housing south of the golf course. Sidewalks would also be provided throughout and around the office development. Ultimately all the buildings within this area would be connected. Bike connections are also contemplated on the site plan. (See applicant's development book.) 4. ' The project would use sustainable development principles. They have pledged to implement LEED (Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design) Standards for the commercial office portion of the development. (See pages A8 -A9 of the applicant's narrative.) The applicant proposes to use green roofs, and would increase pervious surface from 20 % to 39 % at the senior housing site and from 29 % to 56 % at the office site. The total green space on the two sites combined would increase from 24% to 43 %. (See page A17a.) Additionally, they propose to use energy- efficient, recycled and environmentally friendly construction materials. They would utilize rainwater harvesting for irrigation. They would utilize indoor air quality techniques. The developer would continue to work with members of Edina's Energy and Environment Commission. Between the Pentagon Quad and Tower sites, there are 326 existing over -story trees. The applicant has stated that they would plant 880 over - story, evergreen and ornamental trees. The landscaping and tree plans would be reviewed more closely and regulated specifically as part of the final development plan review for each site. 5. The proposed office space would generally replace the office space that exists today. As previously mentioned, the two office towers would total 737,000 square feet, and existing offices at the Pentagon Tower and Quad sites contain 660,500 square feet today. Additionally, the traffic would be shifted away from 77th street, closer to the access to Highway 100. Senior housing does not generate as much traffic as an office or retail uses, and the trips generated would generally be at off -peak times. 6. The proposed project would generate traffic volumes that are within the parameters of the Alternative Urban Area -wide Review (AUAR) that has been done in this area. A traffic study was conducted by Kimley -Horn and Associates for the Development. (See the attached study.) The study concludes that some roadway improvements are expected to be necessary into the future to accommodate the redevelopment of the Pentagon Towers and Pentagon Quads sites. (Please refer to the attached memo and list of conditions from the City Engineer on pages A27 -A28.) Also page A22b shows the timing of roadway improvements, and who is responsible for the improvements. The Transportation Commission met on February 21, 2008 to review the traffic study. The Commission recommended approval of the project. (See minutes and conditions on pages A31 -A33.) Is the MDD -6 Zoning District appropriate for the site? Yes. As recommended as part of the Preliminary Development Plan approval, staff believes that the MDD -6 is appropriate for the site including the existing Burgundy Place and Walsh Title site. The rezoning would ensure that housing would be built within the district. The Overall Development plan essentially becomes the zoning for an MDD -6 District. Per Section 850.14. Subd. 5.B. for every 3,650 square feet of non - residential use, one dwelling unit must be built in the MDD -6 District. Therefore, non - residential uses cannot be built without residential dwelling units. Because the Mixed Development District requires a mixture of uses, each site is impacted by how other sites develop. As an example, if the development were approved as proposed; and five years later the property owner decided that they did not want to develop the Burgundy Place, it becomes very difficult to redevelop with something different. Burgundy Place was approved for 36 units of residential housing, therefore, it would allow for 131,400 square feet of development elsewhere within the District. The implication of removing Burgundy Place would be that 131,400 square feet of non - residential development would have to be removed in another location within the district. A property would always have the right to request a change to the plan; however, it would have to fit into the overall development and the entire Mixed Development District. Concern was been raised by nearby residents in regard to future use of the Burgundy Place site and impact on the low- density residential area to the north; therefore, the following were added as conditions of approval of the Preliminary Development Plan: Buildings at 4930 West 77th Street shall be limited to 4 stories or 50 feet, whichever would be less, and must maintain a 50 -foot setback from the rear lot line. With the exception of the buildings at 4930 77th Street West, future buildings North of West 77th Street development will be limited to four stories or 58 feet in height. Convenience gasoline stations and drive- through windows shall be prohibited on the north side of 77th Street. These would also be made conditions of approval of the overall development plan. The proposed uses would be permitted in the MDD -6 district, and would meet all zoning ordinance requirements. The applicant is requesting an ordinance amendment to reduce the minimum acreage of an MDD -6 District from 50 acres to 40 acres. Is there adequate sewer capacity to serve this development? Yes. There is adequate sewer capacity to serve this development. As mentioned in the AUAR, there is a capacity issue in this area. Currently the sewer lines from this site go to the City of Bloomington. Because the sewer line crosses a municipal boundary it becomes a Metropolitan Council sanitary sewer line. The Met Council line is at or near capacity. To address this issue, a portion of the sewer discharge will be directed into Edina and a portion to the City of Bloomington, as a result there would be adequate capacity. Please refer to the City Engineer's memo on pages A27 -A28 for greater detail on this issue. Would the project require infrastructure improvements? Yes. The certain infrastructure improvements such as roadway, sewer and water line improvements would be required over the life of the development. Please refer to the City Engineer's memo regarding these improvements, when they would be needed and who would pay for them. Generally, the developer would pay for improvements that are a direct result of their project. The specifics of these improvements and who pays for them would be clearly outlined in an overall development agreement, and subsequent developer agreements/ contracts that would be done as part of each phase of development. The city attorney is currently drafting an overall development agreement that will spell out parameters of the development over time. The Council would review the overall development agreement at a future meeting. The specific triggers for when the improvements would be required, and who pays for what, is shown on in attached memo from the City Engineer dated March 14, 2008. Staff Recommendation Comprehensive Guide Plan Amendment 1. Recommend that the city council adopt the resolution on page Al -Ala, approving a Comprehensive Guide Plan Amendment from Office to Mixed Use. Approval is based on the following findings: A. The guide plan change is consistent with the adjacent land uses. B. The senior housing provides a good land use transition from the golf course to the north, and the light industrial and office uses to the south. C. The project would meet all zoning ordinance requirements. D. The guide plan change would be consistent with the public health, safety, and welfare. E. Senior housing is a need given Edina's aging population. Rezoning & Overall Development Plan 2. Recommend that the city council waive second reading and adopt the ordinance on page A2 -A4, approving the final rezoning of the entire site from PCD -2, Commercial and Planned Office Development (POD -1 and POD -2) to Mixed Development District 6. (MDD -6.) Approval includes overall development plan approval. Approval is based on the following findings: A. The rezoning is consistent with the adjacent land uses. B. The senior housing provides a good land use transition from the golf course to the north, and the light industrial and office uses to the south. C. The project would meet all zoning ordinance requirements. D. The guide plan change would be consistent with the public health, safety, and welfare. E. The rezoning would be consistent with the proposed guide plan designation. F. The proposed development would not have an adverse impact on neighborhood traffic or property values. G. The Overall Development Plan is generally consistent with approved Preliminary Development Plan approved by the City Council on December 18, 2007. " Approval is subject to the following conditions, which would also be required at the time of final development plan: A. Future developments must be consistent with the Overall Development Plan dated January 31, 2008. Any changes would require an amendment to the Overall Development Plan. B. Sustainable design. The design and construction of the entire project must be done with the Sustainable Initiatives as outlined in the applicant's narrative. C. Trail and sidewalk connections must be included as demonstrated and public easements must be established over all public sidewalks. D. Dedication of a right -of -way to straighten out the curve at 77th Street and Parklawn (this area of easement would be subject to approval of the City Engineer). E. The easternmost entrance off of 77th Street into the senior housing development must be designed as a shared entrance (with the golf course). F. The four -story senior independent buildings that face 77th street must be designed so as not to appear as the back side of buildings. G. All traffic mitigation measures and conditions as required by the Transportation Commission and traffic study must be followed. H. The developer/ applicant would be responsible to pay their fair share of any mitigation measures that would be required as part of an approval of the overall development plan for the site. All buildings must be built with sprinkler systems, subject to review and approval of the Fire Marshall. Buildings at 4930 West 77th Street shall be limited to 4 stories or 50 feet, whichever would be less, and must maintain a 50 -foot setback from the rear lot line. K. Convenience gasoline stations and drive - through windows shall be prohibited on the north side of 77th Street. L. Compliance with all of the conditions outlined in the City Engineer's memo dated February 22, 2008. M. With the exception of Burgundy Place, the housing within this development must be senior housing. N. Following completion of the proposed hotel, a large percentage of senior housing must be built prior to or along with non - residential uses. O. Bike and bus traffic circulation be carefully considered throughout the development. P. With the exception of the buildings at 4930 77th Street West, future buildings North of West 77th Street development will be limited to four stories or 58 feet in height. Q. A "master development agreement" for the overall project subject to review and approval by the city attorney and city council. Final site plan approval for each phase of the project would include subsequent agreements. SUPPORTING INFORMATION Surrounding Land Uses Northerly: Fred Richards golf course; zoned and guided as a park. Easterly: Office and light industrial uses; zoned and guided for industrial use. . Southerly: Office and light industrial uses; zoned and guided for industrial use. Westerly: Highway 100. Existing Site Features The subject property is 43 acres in size, and contains 17 office buildings that total 660,500 square feet of office space. (See page A18.) Planning Guide Plan designation: Office Zoning: POD,1 and POD, 2 Planned Office District; and PCD -2, Planned Commercial District. Rezoning & Final Development Plan Review Section 850.04.Subd. 2.5. requires the City Council to make the following findings for approval of a Rezoning and Overall Development Plan: a) is consistent with the comprehensive plan; The applicant is requesting an amendment to the comprehensive plan. The plan is consistent with the draft comprehensive plan update recommended by the city's comprehensive plan task force. The update calls for this area to be office/ residential. (See page A20a.) b) is consistent with the Preliminary Development Plan as approved and modified by the Council and contains the Council imposed conditions to the extent the conditions can be complied with by the Final Development Plan; The proposed plan is consistent with the preliminary development plan, and would meet the conditions imposed by the City Council. These conditions would be carried out in subsequent final development plan requests. c) will not be detrimental to properties surrounding the tract; The plans would benefit the adjacent golf course by providing additional users. The senior housing would provide a buffer for the low- density residential uses to the north to the office/ industrial uses south of the property. The office uses would be shifted closer to Highway 100. Therefore, the proposal should therefore, not be detrimental to the surrounding properties. d) will not result in an overly- intensive land use; The proposal would not result in an overly - intensive land use. The proposed office space would generally replace the office space that exists today. As previously mentioned, the three office towers would total 737,000 square feet, and existing offices at the Pentagon Tower and Quad sites contain 660,500 square feet today. Additionally, the traffic would be shifted away from 77th street, closer to the access to Highway 100. Senior housing does not generate as much traffic as an office or retail uses, and the trips generated would generally be at off -peak times. The proposed project would generate traffic volumes that are within the parameters of the Alternative Urban Area -wide Review (AUAR) that has been done in this area. e) will not result in undue traffic congestion or traffic hazards; The proposed project would generate traffic volumes that are within the parameters of the Alternative Urban Area -wide Review (AUAR) that has been done in this area. A traffic study was conducted by Kimley -Horn and Associates for the Development. (See the attached study.) The study concludes that some roadway improvements are expected to be necessary into the future to accommodate the redevelopment of the Pentagon Towers and Pentagon Quads sites. (Please refer to the attached memo and list of conditions from the City Engineer on pages A27 -A28.) The Engineer's memo also outlines the specific timing for roadway improvements. The Transportation Commission met on February 21, 2008 to review the traffic study. The Commission recommended approval of the project. (See minutes and conditions on pages A31 -A33.) fi conforms to the provisions of this Section and other applicable provisions of the Code; and The project would be in conformance with the zoning ordinance. g) provides a proper relationship between the proposed improvements, existing structures, open space and natural features. There are no significant open spaces or natural features on the existing site. It is primarily made of buildings and parking lots with minimal landscaping. (See page A18.) As mentioned, the applicant is adding green space and more plantings than exist today. There would however, be some mature trees that would be removed. Grading/Drainage/Utilities The City Engineer has reviewed the proposed plans and found them to be acceptable subject to the comments and conditions outlined on the attached pages A27 -A28. A more detailed review of each parcel would be done as part of any subsequent final development plan review. Parking The parking for a mixed development district is based on the square footage of the buildings. Non - residential uses require one space per 300 square feet. Therefore, the 940,567 square feet of non - residential uses would require 3,135 stalls. The applicant is proposing 3,285 stalls. The MDD -6 zoning district does not have a provision for senior housing. The regulation is simply for residential uses. The Code requires 1 enclosed space and .75 surface stalls per unit. Therefore, the 670 units would require 670 enclosed stalls and 502 surface stalls for a total of 1,172 stalls. The proposal includes 842 enclosed stalls, and 413 surface stalls. The plans were designed to meet the zoning ordinance; however, they likely would not need that much parking. Senior housing does not typically require as much parking as standard marking rate multiple - family units. Senior housing developments in other zoning districts would be required to provide .25 enclosed parking spaces and .5 surface parking spaces per unit. Staff would recommend that the City Council authorize the planning commission to consider and make a recommendation to amend the MDD -6 zoning regulations to address senior housing. Then when the senior housing is ready to develop, they would not have to provide parking spaces that are not needed. 10 Compliance Table * The applicant is requesting a Zoning Ordinance revision to reduce me minimum ucreuse to 40 "c, es. Deadline for a city decision: May 20, 2008 11 City Standard (MDD =6) Proposed Setback requirement: 35 feet or increase .5 feet for each foot the building exceeds the setback requirement Senior Housing - Setbacks Front Setback - 77th Street & Parklawn 46 feet (based on 58' tall building) 49 & 75 feet Rear - Golf Course 35 feet 40 feet Side - East side 35 feet 60 feet Office/Hotel Site - Setbacks The 10 -story Office 90 feet (based on a 146 -foot tall building) TQO feet (4 -story portion) 51 feet (based on 67 -foot tall building) 53 feet The 12 story Office 96 feet (based on a 158 -foot tall building) 104 feet (4 -story portion) 51 feet (based on a 67 -foot tall building) 56 feet The 7 story Hotel 64 feet (based on a 92 -foot tall building) 77 feet Parking Structure nt /street 75 feet (based on height of structure) 75 feet Building Height No maximum requirement The 10 -story Office (east) - 146' The 11 story Office -158' The 7 story Hotel - 92' Parking lot and drive aisle setback 20 feet (street) 20 feet Building Coverage 30% 30% Maximum Floor Area Ratio (FAR) 50% - Non - residential Uses 50% 50% -Residential Uses 50% 1,881,134 square foot site 1,881,134 s.f. total proposed 940,567 s.f. - residential 940,567 s.f. - non - residential Parking Stalls - Mixed Development Non Residential: 940,567 s.f. /300 = 3,135 3,285 stalls District stalls required (77ze MDD District does not have Residential - 670 units; 1 enclosed & .75 842 enclosed & 413 surface stalls parking standards for senior housing) surface stalls per unit = 670 enclosed stalls proposed (1,255 total) and 502 surface required (1,172 total) Minimum Lot Size 50 acres 43 acres* An * The applicant is requesting a Zoning Ordinance revision to reduce me minimum ucreuse to 40 "c, es. Deadline for a city decision: May 20, 2008 11 l 1 To: M ayor & City Counci l From: Debra M angen City Clerk D ate: March 18, 2008 Subject: Correspondence Received from proponent REPORT /RECOM M EN DATI ON Agenda Item I I.B. Consent Information Only M gr. Recommends ❑ To H RA ® To Council A cti on ® M oti on Resol uti on ❑ Ordinance ❑ Discussion nfo /Background: We received the attached letter today from Wayzata Properties, LLC. NM Wayzata Properties, LLC March 18, 2008 TO: Mayor James Hovland and Members of the Edina City Council On July 28, 2006, Wayzata Properties received final approval for the retail and condominium housing project, now known as Burgundy Place, to be built on the site of the office building at 4930 West 77'h Street. Following a period of several months in which the office tenants were relocated, the building was demolished in the Spring of 2007 in anticipation of an early Fall construction start. The project's sales trailer was moved on to the site and its interior finishing was completed. By the third quarter of 2007, the market had recognized both the precipitous decline in condominium sales, as well as the reversal of the stable credit market conditions of the preceding several years. This negatively impacted lenders' willingness to commit to construction loans on proposed projects. As for Burgundy Place, the original source of construction financing withdrew from the market, and in fact, the institution no longer exists. During the approval process of the Edina Gateway Preliminary Development Plan wluch took place late last Fall, as well as the current process seeking Overall Development Plan approval and rezoning to MDD -6, including the Burgundy Place site, we have naturally received questions as to when construction of Burgundy Place would begin. To-provide an update of our plans for Burgundy Place, we offer the following: • Since Fall 2007, we have been working to arrange suitable construction financing for the project under current adverse capital market conditions. We have obtained a commitment from a lender. We are evaluating the terms of that commitment and the advisability of beginning construction during the current challenging condominium sales market. • We will make a decision in the next several weeks to either begin construction on or about June 151 or to delay the start until market conditions are more favorable. • We are committed to the plan for Burgundy Place that has previously been approved and have no thought of changing the design or property use. • If we elect not to begin construction on June 151, our existing approval will expire on July 28, 2008. Before the expiration, we would submit a letter to the City requesting an extension, so that we could begin construction of the previously approved plan at a time in the future when market conditions are more favorable. • We have applied for and received an extension for the pennit for Burgundy Place from the Nine Mile Creek Watershed district. Corporate Office Downtown The Parkdales 294 Grove Lane East, Suite 100 501 Marquette Avenue, Suite 160 1660 South Highway 100, Suite 100 Wayzata, MN 55391 Minneapolis, MN 55402 St. Louis Park, MN 55416 v- SEqL MAR 1 " 1008 3vECE /VED Pentagon Park 4940 Viking Drive, Suite 220 Edina, MN 55435 ON o When weather conditions permit this Spring, we will clean up, grade, seed and maintain the dirt portion of the lot where the office building was located. We would be pleased to respond to additional questions if you have them. We hope this clarifies our current considerations and plans for Burgundy Place. Sincerely, Wayzata Properties, LLC e Chri lc o , CCIM Vice President — Development cc: Edina City Manager- Gordon Hughes Edina City Planner — Cary Teague RESOLUTION NO. 2008- RESOLUTION APPROVING A GUIDE PLAN AMENDMENT FROM OFFICE TO MIXED USE FOR THE GATEWAY REDEVELOPMENT AREA BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Edina, Minnesota, as follows: Section 1. BACKGROUND. 1.01 Wayzata Properties is requesting a redevelopment of the Pentagon Park area along 77th Street for senior housing and office use. Section 2. FINDINGS 2.01 Approval is subject to the following findings: A. The guide plan change is consistent with the adjacent land uses. B. The senior housing provides a good land use transition from the golf course to the north, and the light industrial and office uses to the south. C. The project would meet all zoning ordinance requirements. 1 D. The guide plan change would be consistent with the public health, safety, and welfare. E. Senior housing is a need given Edina's aging population. Section 3. APPROVAL 3.01 The guide plan amendment of the following described property is approved: See attached Exhibit A. Adopted by the Edina City Council this _ day of 2008. Attest: Debra A. Mangen, City Clerk James B. Hovland, Mayor AI 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 City Council Minutes is a true and correct copy of the Resolution duly adopted by the Edina City Council at its regular meeting of 2008, and as recorded in the Minutes of said regular meeting. WITNESS, my hand and seal of said City this day of k11 11: Debra A. Mangen, City Clerk PROPOSED DESCRIPTIONS FOR DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT Parcel 1 - Quads - Proposed Block 1 Tracts A, B, C, D, E, F, G, H, and I, Registered Land Survey No. 1218, Hennepin County, Minnesota. Parcel 2 - Towers - Proposed Block 2 All of the following described land: Those parts of Tracts A and B lying Southerly of the following described line: Beginning at a point on the West line of said Tract B distant 220 feet North of the Southwest comer thereof; thence run Northeasterly to a point on the North line of said Tract B distant 170 feet West of the Northeast comer thereof; thence run Northeasterly to a point on the East line of said Tract A distant 40 feet North of the Southeast comer thereof and there terminating, Tract C, Tracts E and F, except those parts thereof lying Northerly of the following described line: Beginning at a point on the East line of Tract A, distant 40 feet North of the Southeast comer thereof; thence run Northeasterly to a point distant 120 feet West and 32 feet South of the Northeast comer of said Tract E; thence run Easterly parallel with the North line of said Tract E for 30 feet; thence deflect to the left at an angle of 90 degrees 00 minutes 00 seconds for 12 feet; thence run Easterly and Southeasterly parallel with the Northerly and Northeasterly lines of said Tracts E and F to its intersection with the following described line: Beginning at a point on the Southwesterly line of Tract S distant 105 feet Southeasterly of the West line of said Tract S (when measured along said Southwesterly line); thence run Southwesterly at right angles to said Southwesterly line for 100 feet and there terminating. Tract G, Tract H, and That part of Tract U, lying East of the West 260 feet thereof; All in Registered Land Survey No. 1050, Hennepin County, Minnesota. Parcel 3 - Burgundy and Walsh - Proposed Block 3 All of the following described tract: The South 275 feet of the East 380 feet of Tract A, Registered Land Survey No. 679, except that part which lies Westerly of a line run parallel with and distant 355 feet Westerly of the East line of the above described tract; except that part of the remainder thereof which lies Southerly of the following described line; Beginning at a point on the East line the above described exception, distant 225 feet South of its intersection with the North line of the above described tract; thence run Southeasterly to a point on a line run parallel with and distant 315 feet West of the East line of said tract distant 20 feet North of its intersection with the South line of said tract; thence run Southeasterly to a point on the South line of said tract distant 100 feet West of the Southeast comer thereof and there terminating. Tract S, Registered Land Survey No. 1050, Hennepin County, Minnesota. (All are Torrens Property) AIJ6 �L CUTLOT LU LU LOT 0. t i Or -- •••Z.•.• —_ "r6 'r-- �u.c�- L;.uLlt LOT l -L• J „ I - off, LOT 2 T LL {�.�/ .(-, • `•WEST 77ut `swu L! I �-t _ � Im IIIr • � � � -I. PAR W � " ^ •L/ 1 I `1 u I `/ � .-. I � `, __ � vJ Iv I o c _JI � r •S VIKING DRIVE V r- xmvrr uw ..•.j �.. -.... - - emw�. d.. �i � r—ii. NO SCALE .. -off ...:......,...,.. ' ,,..,_.. �... .,..., ... � ..• ... � ..........._: ,ti " _' ,u.� MeyHom -- _ -. and ASSDCIStK fine FEma, DIUMC TME• EDINA GATEWAY C010"0` 1 Pentagon Park Redevelopment °`'`g 03-13-2008 d Re- Zoning and Overall Plan °H1N dig CESCEEO: EdIne, Minnesota ®z°m uav dm.tek w.mie.e.e. nv. CONCEPTUAL PRELIMINARY PLAT EDINA GATEWAY R -9r ORDINANCE NO. 2008- AN ORDINANCE REZONING THE GATEWAY REDEVELOPMENT AREA FROM PCD -2, POD I AND 2 TO MDD -6 INCLUDING AN OVERALL DEVELOPMENT PLAN The City Of Edina Ordains: Section 1. 1.01 The subject property is hereby rezoned from PCD -2, Planned Commercial District; POD 1 & 2, Planned Office District to MDD -6, Mixed Development District based on the following findings: A. The rezoning is consistent with the adjacent land uses. B. The senior housing provides a good land use transition from the golf course to the north, and the light industrial and office uses to the south. C. The project would meet all zoning ordinance requirements. D. The guide plan change would be consistent with the public health, safety, and welfare. E. The rezoning would be consistent with the proposed guide plan designation. F. The proposed development would not have an adverse impact on neighborhood traffic or property values. G. The Overall Development Plan is consistent with approved Preliminary Development Plan approved by the City Council on December 18, 2007. Section 2. 2.01 The subject property is legally described as follows: See attached Exhibit A. p, Section 3. 3.01 This ordinance, in addition to the rezoning hereby adopts an overall development plan for the property. Adoption is based on the findings above. Approval is subject to the following conditions, which would also be required at the time of final development plan: A. Future developments must be consistent with the Overall Development Plan dated January 31, 2008. Any changes would require an amendment to the Overall Development Plan. B. Sustainable design. The.design and construction of the entire project must be done with the Sustainable Initiatives as outlined in the applicant's narrative. C. Trail and sidewalk connections must be included as demonstrated and public easements must be established over all public sidewalks. D. Dedication of a right -of -way to straighten out the curve at 77th Street and Parklawn. (This area of easement would be subject to approval of the City Engineer.) E. The easternmost entrance off of 77th Street into the senior housing development must be designed as a shared entrance (with the golf course). F. The four -story senior independent buildings that face 77th street must be designed so as not to appear as the back side of buildings. G. All traffic mitigation measures and conditions as required by the Transportation Commission and traffic study must be followed. H. The developer /applicant would be responsible to pay their fair share of any mitigation measures that would be required as part of an approval of the overall development plan for the site. I. All buildings must be built with sprinkler systems, subject to review and approval of the Fire Marshall. J. Buildings at 4930 West 77th Street shall be limited to 4 stories or 50 feet, whichever would be less, and must maintain a 50 -foot setback from the rear lot line. K. Convenience gasoline stations and drive- through windows shall be prohibited on the north side of 77th Street. A3 L. Compliance with all of the conditions outlined in the City Engineer's memo dated February 22, 2008. M. With the exception of Burgundy Place, the housing within this development must be senior housing. N. Following completion of the proposed hotel, a large percentage of senior housing must be built prior to or along with non - residential uses. O. Bike and bus traffic circulation be carefully considered throughout the development. P. With the exception of the buildings at 4930 77th Street West, future buildings North of West 77th Street development will be limited to four stories or 58 feet in height. Q. A "master development agreement" for the overall project subject to review and approval by the city attorney and city council. Final site plan approval for each phase of the project would include subsequent agreements. First Reading: Second Reading: Published: ATTEST: Debra A. Mangen, City Clerk James B. Hovland, Mayor Please publishing in the Edina Sun Current on Send two affidavits of publication Bill to Edina City Clerk PROPOSED DESCRIPTIONS FOR DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT Parcel 1 - Quads - Proposed Block 1 Tracts A, B, C, D, E, F, G, H, and I, Registered Land Survey No. 1218, Hennepin County, Minnesota. Parcel 2 - Towers - Proposed Block 2 All of the following described land: Those parts of Tracts A and B lying Southerly of the following described line: Beginning at a point on the West line of said Tract B distant 220 feet North of the Southwest comer thereof; thence run Northeasterly to a point on the North line of said Tract B distant 170 feet West of the Northeast comer thereof; thence run Northeasterly to a point on the East line of said Tract A distant 40 feet North of the Southeast comer thereof and there terminating, Tract C, Tracts E and F, except those parts thereof lying Northerly of the following described line: Beginning at a point on the East line of Tract A, distant 40 feet North of the Southeast comer thereof; thence run Northeasterly to a point distant 120 feet West and 32 feet South of the Northeast comer of said Tract E; thence run Easterly parallel with the North line of said Tract E for 30 feet; thence deflect to the left at an angle of 90 degrees 00 minutes 00 seconds for 12 feet; thence run Easterly and Southeasterly parallel with the Northerly and Northeasterly lines of said Tracts E and F to its intersection with the following described line: Beginning at a point on the Southwesterly line of Tract S distant 105 feet Southeasterly of the West line of said Tract S (when measured along said Southwesterly line); thence run Southwesterly at right angles to said Southwesterly line for 100 feet and there terminating. Tract G, Tract H, and That part of Tract U, lying East of the West 260 feet thereof; All in Registered Land Survey No. 1050, Hennepin County, Minnesota. Parcel 3 - Burgundy and Walsh - Proposed Block 3 All of the following described tract: The South 275 feet of the East 380 feet of Tract A, Registered Land Survey No. 679, except that part which lies Westerly of a line run parallel with and distant 355 feet Westerly of the East line of the above described tract; except that part of the remainder thereof which lies Southerly of the following described line; Beginning at a point on the East line the above described exception, distant 225 feet South of its intersection with the North line of the above described tract; thence run Southeasterly to a point on a line run parallel with and distant 315 feet West of the East line of said tract distant 20 feet North of its intersection with the South line of said tract; thence run Southeasterly to a point on the South line of said tract distant 100 feet West of the Southeast comer thereof and there terminating. Tract S, Registered Land Survey No. 1050, Hennepin County, Minnesota. (All are Torrens Property) A+ ®Mw •n -- a ^�� nuv ••n.� `II - I � or L �U b l v V ,1 \ fr `F t 7snl $% Or 1 dt �or2 _ =L �'rr nn+ srnwr � I -1 F -T-r- .-LLL f ®® 1QV,,If� ®dL�`I�lWI�I�Q W"�wiauft EDINA GATEWAY cams No_- KMMIZ CROM IMM Dam=es Pentagon Park Redevelopment um -13 -2ooa Re- Zoning and Overall Plan EUMNARY Pi ��� ����Y�T EIMo R-9r lrun®si a MINAGATEWAY rm 02W f� meiafa ee i mar �.. ra•r,r. _...srr �.p..r� �. mrr...•awr„m. r.... w.e x: z..�_�� NO sc" ®® 1QV,,If� ®dL�`I�lWI�I�Q W"�wiauft EDINA GATEWAY cams No_- KMMIZ CROM IMM Dam=es Pentagon Park Redevelopment um -13 -2ooa Re- Zoning and Overall Plan EUMNARY Pi ��� ����Y�T EIMo R-9r lrun®si a MINAGATEWAY rm 02W f� meiafa ee i MEMORANDUM miller d u nwi d d ie 123 North Third Street Suite 1114 Minneapolis MN 55401 -1657 www.miUerdimwiddia.com p 612- 337 -D00D f 612- 337 -0031 ARCHITECTURE Date: January 31, 2008 Project: Edina Gateway — Pentagon Park Redevelopment: Overall Development Plan RE: Project ,Narrative Background The Edina Gateway redevelopment consists of over 43 acres.of property along West 77th Street, including all of the area known as Pentagon Park. Constructed in the 1950's as a prime office address within the City of Edina, Pentagon Park has aged, become underutilized, and lost its position i.n the office market. It is, however, a prime location with potential to be re- developed. The Edina Gateway redevelopment will once again position this area of the City as a leader in the Twin Cities mixed use office / residential market. Process This submittal is the second of a three stage application to the City of Edina for: • Zoning Ordinance Amendment • Comprehensive Plan Amendment • Overall Development Plan • Re- zoning Upon approval of the above, Final Development Plans for each individual site/ building phase will be submitted to the Planning Commission and City Council for approval. It is anticipated that subsequent phases will be submitted over the next 7 to 10 years. Zoning Ordinance Amendment Request An amendment to Section 850.14 — Mixed Development District (MDD) in the form of a reduction of the Minimum Tract Area required for the MDD -6 subdistrict. A minimum tract area of 40 acres is proposed. At present, Edina is fully built and large tracts qualifying for this subdistrict are increasingly rare or absent. This reduction would allow continued application and viability of this subdistrict as a redevelopment tool in the City of Edina. Zoning Request MDD -6 is proposed for all areas of the project. Currently, the parcels are zoned POD -1, POD -2, . and PCD -2. The MDD -6 zoning district encourages a mix of uses within the City, and permits larger areas of property to be developed with additional height following strict setback standards. The proposed redevelopment will not require any variances. A'�- Edina Gateway January 31, 2008 Page .2 Comprehensive Plan A change to the comprehensive plan is included in this request. The proposed change from Office /Industrial to Mixed -Use with Residential is following the direction and character expressed in the public meetings and process established in the development of in the ongoing Edina Comprehensive Plan Update 2008 document. The Edina Gateway development team will continue to be involved in the ongoing refinement and public process for the Comprehensive Plan update. Project Vision Goal Edina Gateway will become a premier mixed -use community in the Twin Cities, providing intergenerational residential living, state -of- the -art Class A commercial space and innovative business traveler accommodations. The transformation of this commercial area of Edina into a vibrant district will include new uses, community connections and creative environmental design that will demonstrate Edina's position as a premier community for living and working. History and Market Demand When Pentagon Park was developed in the. early 1960's, it was among the Twin Cities' first and most prominent suburban office parks. Built out to 680,000 square feet, Pentagon Park led the dynamic growth of the suburban office market to Southeast Edina and West Bloomington during the 1960's and '70's to the point of its being referred to as the Twin Cities' "third downtown ". Local, regional and national businesses sought to locate in this highly desirable facility with great access to major highways, the airport and the growing, affluent residential communities to the Southwest of Minneapolis and St. Paul. The development of retail, office and industrial properties surrounding Pentagon Park in the decades that followed helped forge Edina's national reputation as a well - planned and well- governed community with a balanced tax base, outstanding educational, park and recreation programs, and a solid growth environment for both residential and commercial real estate values. Over the past twenty -five years, its age and physical obsolescence have moved Pentagon Park to Class C in the local office market from a rental rate and economic perspective, but its .location remains a very strong and competitive Class A. The redevelopment of its office space as part of a mixed use community which addresses current physical, technological, and environmental standards required by Class A office tenants, will bring the buildings and the image of this Gateway area back to a level which, matches its unquestioned Class A location. It would once again place Edina in a position to compete for corporate and institutional Class A tenants, rather than to concede their occupancy to new buildings in adjacent communities. An Underserved Population The most salient fact of the demographic information being used in the analysis of Edina's Comprehensive Plan update is that the City's senior citizens (65 and over) represent approximately 20% of its current population, and that the next 25 years will see a 68% growth in that age category from its current level. Other studies demonstrate a strong desire and tendency of Edina's seniors to remain in the community when they have raised their families and reached retirement age. The popularity of townhome and condominium properties among seniors in all price categories is testimony to the strength of those inclinations, as is the demand for those senior housing properties that have been developed to date. Ap - U: \KAM\KAM0612 \Present \SD \08 01 31 Overall Plan Submittal\Narrative \Submittal Narrative - Final 013108.doc Edina Gateway January 31, 2008 Page 3 The need and demand for more senior living facilities in Edina is obvious, as the generation which helped create the success of the community's institutions, services and neighborhoods wishes to live out its years in the environment it has fostered and with which it is familiar. The most significant void in senior residential living facilities is one which incorporates the "continuum of care" concept in a single location. This concept can accommodate housing facilities of various styles (townhome, condominium, assisted living, specialized care facilities) that provide for the needs of the "active adult" lifestyle of persons in their 60's and 70's with independent residential facilities, dining, recreational and service amenities appropriate to that age group, along with the transitional housing accommodations that address assisted living needs, memory care and other specialized health issues of the older adult population. The 27 acre parcel on the north side of 77th Street, south of the Fred Richards golf course, is a -truly unique opportunity within Edina and other first or second tier suburbs to accommodate such an integrated senior housing and care facility. Other locations in the community for senior housing and health care are limited by their size to providing a single aspect of housing or care for their residents. The "Pentagon Quads" site presents an opportunity to create an outstanding integrated housing and care facility for the community which takes advantage of the recreational opportunities of the golf course and potentially enhanced park amenities, nearby medical clinic facilities, restaurant and service retail uses that are a part of the overall mixed use environment. Several leading senior housing and care facility operators are expressing strong interest in the proposed senior housing site. The developer has targeted a mid to late March, 2008, timetable to announce his selection of a top level senior housing operator to proceed with the development of this acknowledged high quality site. Livable Communities Edina Gateway seeks to redevelop Pentagon Park in a way that improves the quality of life within the surrounding community. The project team will continue to apply the American Institute of Architects — Livable Communities Principles to the redevelopment process. 1. Design on a Human Scale Compact, pedestrian - friendly communities allow residents to walk to shops, services, cultural resources, and jobs and can reduce traffic congestion and benefit people's health. 2. Provide Choices People want variety in housing, shopping, recreation, transportation, and employment. Variety creates lively neighborhoods and accommodates residents in different stages of their lives. 3. Encourage Mixed -Use Development Integrating different land uses and varied building types creates vibrant, pedestrian - friendly and diverse communities. 4. Preserve Urban Centers Restoring, revitalizing, and infilling urban centers takes advantage of existing streets, services and buildings and avoids the need for new infrastructure. This helps to curb sprawl and promote stability for city neighborhoods. Al U:\KAMKAM0612\PresenhSD\08-01-31 Overall Plan SubmittaRNarrative \Submittal Narrative - Final 013108.doc Edina Gateway January 31, 2008 Page 4 5. Vary Transportation Options Giving people the option of walking, biking and using public transit, in addition to driving, reduces traffic congestion, protects the environment and encourages physical activity. 6. Build Vibrant Public Spaces Citizens need welcoming, well - defined public places to stimulate face -to -face interaction, collectively celebrate and mourn, encourage civic participation, admire public art, and gather for public events. 7. Create a Neighborhood Identity A "sense of place" gives neighborhoods a unique character, enhances the walking environment, and creates pride in the community. 8. Protect Environmental Resources A well- designed balance of nature and development preserves natural systems, protects waterways from pollution, reduces air pollution, and protects property values. 9. Conserve Landscapes Open space, farms, and wildlife habitat are essential for environmental, recreational, and cultural reasons. 10. Design Matters Design excellence is the foundation of successful and healthy communities. As a part of providing transportation options, the Edina Gateway project team will meet with the Bike Edina Task Force and make every effort to aid in implementation of the Edina bicycle plan and it's potential connections through the Pentagon Park area. Sustainability A.goal of Edina Gateway is to preserve and enhance our natural environment through sustainable (green) building and site design and construction. It is the intent of the Developer, through all of its projects to achieve a high level of environmental performance, durability, and healthy indoor air quality through integrated design, best practices and emerging technologies. Successful sustainable (green) design integrates a variety of practices and features that have multiple benefits. Edina Gateway has. pledged to implement LEED (Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design) standards for Commercial Office portions of the project, with a goal of becoming LEED Certified. The Edina Gateway project team will continue to review the project with members of the Edina Energy and Environment Commission, and will discuss ways the project may . demonstrate Edina's goals for a sustainable future. Design and construction at Edina Gateway will strive to incorporate the following sustainable (green) initiatives: Materials and Use: Use materials that minimize environmental impact; are made of engineered, reclaimed, recycled - content; have minimal packaging waste; and are low toxic, durable, and easily recycled after use. Design for adaptability and minimize material use. Encourage waste �: UAKAM\KAM0612 \Present \SD \08_01_ 31 _ Overall Plan SubmittaRNarrative \Submittal Narrative - Final 013108.doc Edina Gateway January 31, 2008 Page 5 reduction and recycling with a jobsite waste management plan and convenient recycling stations. Energy - Efficiency. Energy efficiency methods should be considered in all aspects of facility design, including HVAC and lighting needs. Maximize solar access. Harvest natural energy sources such as daylight and geothermal heat. Make use of natural ventilation. Consider alternative energy sources such as fuel cells, photovoltaics, wind, and geothermal pumps. Encourage reduced electricity consumption and energy equipment through efficient thermal envelopes, efficient space and water heating, lighting, and appliances. Water Efficiency and Use: Consider innovative water technologies. Minimize use of potable water. Consider water efficient technologies and cascading water use systems. Utilize rainwater harvesting for irrigation. Indoor Air Quality: Aim to reduce pollutant sources in both interior and exterior environments by the design of mechanical systems and choice of interior materials. Minimize chemical usage during all project phases. Avoid ozone depleting chemicals in mechanical equipment and insulation. Protect the health of worker occupants and construction staff. Include systems for air cleaning, humidity control, and thermal comfort. Outdoor Environment. Minimize environmental disturbances during construction. Site buildings for efficient building footprint and orientation. Reduce the amount of excavation. Maintain site water flows to minimize erosion and on -site erosion control. Utilize innovative storm -water management techniques, such as bio- swales, rain gardens, and green roofs. Encourage infiltration. Implement low impact/low maintenance landscaping. Utilize rainwater harvesting for irrigation. Increase pervious surface area. Transportation: Promote use of energy efficient/alternative fuel vehicles. Provide convenient and safe access to public transportation and bike routes. Include on -site bicycle facilities, such as secure parking. Ensure convenient and safe pedestrian connectivity with surrounding neighborhood. 0 U: \KAM \KAM0612 \Present \SD \08_01_31_Overall Plan Submittal\Narrative \Submittal Narrative - Final 013108.doc Edina Gateway Implementation January 31, 2008 Page 6 Height & Massing The proposed redevelopment of the Pentagon towers and Pentagon Quads site will follow the height and massing regulations of the MDD -6 zoning, with no variances. Setback from the property lines will be per MDD -6 requirements. The housing redevelopment on the Pentagon'Quads site proposes lower scale, 1 to 1 -1/2 story Town -homes along the Fred Richards Golf Course, with 4 story Independent Senior Living and Assisted Senior Living buildings along West 77th Street and Parklawn Avenue. Building location and massing enables vistas into the golf course from all areas of the development with active and invigorated pedestrian scale along West 77th and within the development. Edina Gateway creates a new neighborhood setting not previously present in this part of Edina. The mixed -use office redevelopment on the Pentagon Towers site will follow the strict setback and height regulations of the MDD -6 zoning code. The Edina code has no maximum height limit, as it is a form -based standard, dictated by the distance (setback) from the property line. The development proposes a 7 story hotel, and 2 office buildings stepping back in height from 4 to 11 stories. Each structure fits well within the height guidelines. The arrangement of the building forms reflects a desire to provide views and natural light into and out of the site, and improved exterior pedestrian environments along West 77th Street and within the site. Phasing & Sequencing The redevelopment at both Pentagon Towers and Pentagon Quads will be implemented in phases over a period of 7 to 10 years, subject to the demands and opportunities of the marketplace. A coordinated implementation plan includes selective demolition of existing structures as new buildings'are constructed. This strategy will maintain a balance of new and existing buildings until all phases are completed, with the net increase in total square feet of approximately 240,000 by the completion of phase 5. This is further outlined in the,graphics portion of this submittal. • Phase 1 (2008 completion): Hotel on Towers site • Phase 2(2009-2010 completion): Independent, Assisted and Townhome Living on Quad site • Phase 3 (2011 -2013 completion): Townhomes on Quad site,/ West Office Building on Tower site • Phase 4 (2014 -2015 completion): Townhome and Independent Living on Quad site • Phase 5 (2017 completion): Assisted living on Quad site; East office building on Tower site *parking associated with each phase will be completed simultaneously with new buildings Towers site: It is expected that the Towers site would have 3 phases, constructed from west to east, the first new structure being a hotel with high visibility from Highways 100 and 494. The center and eastern office structures, with associated parking, would follow in 2 subsequent phases. The redevelopment is organized on this site to permit flexibility to respond to market and aesthetic demands. Quads site: The Pentagon Quads site development plan provides the ability to be implemented in 4 phases. The initial phase would include both town house, independent and assisted living residences located at the eastern portion of the site.. Subsequent phases would be redeveloped from east to west. ra U:\ KAM\ KAM0612 \Present\SD \08_01_31_Overall Plan Submittal\Narrative \Submittal Narrative - Final 013108.doc K/UM0812'EO|NAGATEhVAY 11-18-2007 U:\KAM\KAN40612\PresemKSD\07_11_28_P|anninOCommisoion'2\ cr 11M Page I In", B TOWER SENIOR Xq-[Ll- VV HU TOTAL parcel GSF 527,670 1.,1831896 L; ILI GSF parcel acreage 12.11 27.18 ED Ul Acreage 43.18 area 146,100 planting 326,500 509,100 pervious paving area 73,500 87,900 ! wC., 1X0 of site 14% 7% nq 9 reen roof area 77,600 46,900 W_ ET 136,900 TOTAL PERVIOUS AREA' 297,200 461,3 planting area 154,300 239,700 430,500 of site LU % of site TOTAL PERVIOUS AREA 154,300 239,700 ��d 29% 20oycl K/UM0812'EO|NAGATEhVAY 11-18-2007 U:\KAM\KAN40612\PresemKSD\07_11_28_P|anninOCommisoion'2\ cr `= Page `= Edina Gateway 2. Stalls Provided (Full Build) a. Burgundy Place = 75 stalls (20 surplus) b. Walsh Title = 77 stalls (7 surplus) c. 7600 Parklawn = 400 stalls (115 surplus) * d. Hotel = 275 stalls e. W Building = 1258 stalls f. E Building = 1200 stalls Total = 3285 stalls provided (149 surplus) *Surface parking at 7600 Parklawn is shared with Senior Housing End 417 U:\KAUKAM0612\Present\SD\08-01-31—OveralI Plan Submittal\Narrative \Submittal Narrative - Final 013108.doc January 31, 2008 Page 13 Edina Gateway 3. Enclosed Stalls Provided Townhomes Ind. Living Assisted Living Total 4. Exterior Stalls Required 5. Exterior Stalls Provided On Street Assisted Living 7600 Parklawn surplus* Total 6. Enclosed Stalls Surplus January 31, 2008 Page 12, = 124 = 374 = 381 = 879 (245 stall surplus) = 476 stalls = (634 units x .75 stalls ext/unit req.) = 111 =61 = 115 = 287 (189 stalls deficient) = 240 (surplus from #3 above) Total Senior Units Parking Required = 634units x 1.75 stalls required = 1,110 stalls required Total Senior Units Parking Provided = 1,166 stalls provided (879 + 287) (56 stalls surplus) D. MDD -6 Non - Residential Area Calculation - Full Build (Section 850.14) 1. Allowed Non - Residential Area 2. Existing or Approved Buildings Burgundy Place Walsh Title 7600 Parklawn 3. Proposed Buildings Hotel W Building E Building 4. Total Non -Res. Existing / Proposed = 940,567 GSF (.5 FAR) = 123,192 GSF = 16,560 GSF = 21,000 GSF = 85,632 GSF = 817,375 GSF = 80,000 GSF = 377,375 GSF = 360,000 GSF = 940,567 GSF E MDD -6 Non - Residential Parking Calculation (Section 850.08, W) 1. Stalls Required (Full Build) a. Burgundy Place = 16,560 / 300 = 55 stalls b. Walsh Title = 21,000 / 300 = 70 stalls c. 7600 Parklawn = 85,632 / 300 = 285 stalls d. Hotel = 80,000 / 300 = 267 stalls e. W Building = 377,375 / 300 = 1258 stalls f. E Building = 360,000 / 300 = 1200 stalls Total = 940,567 / 300 = 3135 stalls I! U: \KAM\KAM0612 \Present \SD \08_01_31_Overall Plan SubmittaRNarrative \Submittal Narrative - Final 013108.doc Edina Gateway January 31, 2008 Page 11 Project Narrative — Units and Parking -' The following calculations represent an application. of Edina Code Section 850.08 Parking and Circulation and Section 850.14 MDD District to the Overall Development Plan submitted on January 31, 2008 by Eberhardt Advisory. In the event of a discrepancy between these calculations and those identified in the Overall Plan Submittal Document, the calculations in this document supersede all others. A. MDD -6 Residential and Non - Residential Area Maximums Calculation 1. Total Site Area = 1,881,134 gsf *site area calculated from existing surveys and Hennepin County Property information — total site area to be verged by survey during Preliminary Platting process 2. FAR Allowed 1.0 = 1,881,134 gsf FAR Non- Residential Max Allowed = .5 = 940,567 gsf 3. Residential Lot Area Required = 3,300 gsf / unit without allowances (however Section 850.08 W requires all MDD residential units to have 1 enclosed stall) Therefore allowance (a) is.automatic ( -500 gsf) Therefore Lot Area Required = 2,800 gsf /unit for all units 4. Residential Unit Calculation with allowance (a): 1,881,1341.2,800 sf = 671 units maximum 5. Calculate Allowable Non - residential Floor Area for MDD -6 = 1,750 gsf / residential unit per Section 850.14 Subd 5, B, 2 1,750 sf x 671 units = 1,174,250 sf 1,174,250 gsf (Non - Residential Area based on unit calculation) MDD -6 940,567 gsf (FAR .5 Non - Residential Allowed) Therefore 940,657 gsf used for Non - Residential Area B. MDD -6 Non - Residential Area by Units Proposed 1. 670 Units x 1750 gsf = 1,172,500 gsf 1,172,500 gsf > 940,567 gsf (.5 FAR) Therefore 940,567 gsf is maximum allowed Non - Residential Area for Overall Plan C. MDD -6 Residential Unit Calculation by Parkins Required - Full Build (Section 850.08, W) Given - all units require enclosed stalls 1. Proposed Residential Units = 670 . Senior Site = 634 Burgundy Place = 36 (Burgundy Place self parks with 49 stalls enclosed and 89 exterior stalls) Senior Housing Parking Calculation �. 2. Enclosed Stalls Required = 634 stalls per (Section 850.08, W) Al�* U:\KAM\KAM0612\Present\SD\08-01-31 Overall Plan Submittal \Narrative \Submittal Narrative - Final 013108.doc Edina Gateway January 31, 2008 Page 10 educational opportunities for the public on Best Management Practices for stormwater. The Edina Pentagon Park Overall Development Plan works to minimize excessive expanses of manicured turf and to develop bioretention garden spaces that will change seasonally and add additional interest to the neighborhood. Stormwater capture practices will provide supplemental irrigation water for landscape elements as well as some of the water features, specifically those in the Towers Site. Green roofs will be integrated into the overall environment, blurring the lines between building and landscape. Existing Vegetation / Tree Inventory Much of the existing landscaping on the project site will be lost due to grading activities necessary to develop the site. The removal of this material will be phased in conjunction with the building phasing. Interim open or cleared spaces will be landscaped and provide a buffer between the different building phases. Many of the existing trees and shrubs within the redevelopment boundary are near the end of their healthy lifecycle. Years of neglect, lack of care, lack of proper nutrients and growing space or simple over pruning can be seen in some of the more mature tree species. Of the trees that are worth saving, the Developer will visually evaluate them to determine if spading and relocation are possible. Some trees will be protected during the grading process with the goal of integrating them into the new landscape design. Most of these trees reside at the perimeter of the Quad site, near the golf course. Lastly, trees, specifically the oaks, will be evaluated for the possible use of lumber or other wood byproduct within the new development. Although the City currently does not have a tree preservation policy, we have been proactive by inventorying the existing trees and recording their general size. Our illustrative plan proposes, in combination, over 880 overstory, evergreen and ornamental trees. This is roughly 565 more than what the current, City Code requires based on the project perimeter linear footage. The site currently contains approximately 450 trees. Preliminary Plant and Materials Schedule PLANT AND MATERIALS SCHEDULE PLANT TYPE SPECIES OPTIONS SIZE ROOT SPACING REMARKS OVERSTORY DECIDUOUS TREE MAPLE, OAK HONEYLOCUST. NACKBERRY. LINDEN 7 -1R -4• CAL BM5 PER PLAN SINGLE STET, SPECIMEN EVERGREEN TREE BLACK HILLS SPRUCE, SCOTCH PINE, RED PINE, WHITE PINE B -17 B66 PER PLAN FULL AND NATURAL FORK SPECIMEN MULTLSTEM ORNAMENTAL TREE RIVER SIRCN, TREE LILAC. AMUR MAPLE SERVICEBERRY. DOGWOOD S HT. B&B PER PLAN SINGLE AND MULTI-STEM. SPECRE N ORNAMENTAL TREE HAWTHORN. CRABAPPLE, DDGWOCD P CAL -S HT. CONT. PER PLAN SPECIMEN DECIDUOUS SHRUBS DDGW000, VDJURNUµ EUONYMUS, SPBLEA. SHRUB ROSES. LONI(fAA HYDRANGEA 03-85 CONT. 7.4' O.C. LOCATED TO ACCENT OUTDOOR SPACES. BUILDING FOUNDATIONS AND ENTRIES DECIDUOUS SHRUB HEDGE - COTONEASTER. ALPINE CURRENT W . CANT. 7.7 0.C. LOCATED FOR HEDGES AND SCREENING CONIFEROUS YEW. SEA GREEN JUNIPER, JUNIPER VARIETIES NAT CONT. 7.4'O.C. LOCATED TO ACCENT OUTDOOR SPACES, BUILDING FOUNDATIONS AND ENTRIES PERENNIAL PLANTS MULTIPLE VARIETIES (40 TO 50) R7 CUNT. VARIES FOR PLANTING BEDS AT FOUNDATION, ACCENT, AND INFILTRATION AREAS MN007 SEED MIXTURE 775 NATIVE SEDGE I PRAIRIE MEADOW MIX (WETLAND RESTORATION) SEED FOR EDGES NEAR THE WETLAND(S) IN QUADS SITE SOD - BLUEGRASS - LAWN I N04AM MOL RTF(FESCUES) BWEGRA55 LAWNIN MANICURED AREAS. RTF FESCUESIN AREAS OF LOWER MAINTENANCE EDGER COMMERCIAL GRADE STEEL AND VWYL EDGER SURROUNDS PLANTING BEDS ADJACENT TO SOD AREAS MULCH SHREDDED HARDWOOD MINIMUM 4' DEPTH FOR PLANTING BEDS AND RINGING TREE BASE Al� U: \KAM\KAM0612 \Present \SD \08_01_31_Overall Plan Submittal \Narrative \Submittal Narrative - Final 013108.doc Edina Gateway January 31, 2008 Page 9 Development proposed on the Quads Site is anticipated to use many of the same low impact development strategies as planned for Towers Site. However, with lower densities than the Towers Site, greater areas of at-grade infiltration would be proposed on the Quads Site. Underground storage and pervious pavements will also be utilized to reduce overall storm water volume and peak discharge rates. Nine Mile Creek Watershed District is in the process of updating storm water management rules. The Development Team has met with the Watershed District staff, has obtained the draft rules, and is designing the storm water management systems to meet or exceed the new rules. The new rules create a mechanism for "volume banking," that is, providing more than the required stormwater infiltration volume or water quality treatment volume on a project so that the credit can be used on a subsequent project. Volume banking is not required by the Edina Gateway project, but may employed to provide flexibility in each phase of the Edina Gateway project. Each phase of the Edina Gateway project meets the Watershed District draft rules. See the stormwater management plans in the Engineering portion of the submittal for summary information about infiltration and water quality treatment for the phased implementation. Edina Gateway Landscape Design Concept The landscape design for the Towers Site will reflect and support the building architecture by reinforcing circulation patterns, defining outdoor spaces and by using materials that complement the buildings and the site. The transitional spaces between the buildings and streets will focus on the pedestrian by creating an environment that encourages walking and spending time in inviting outdoor spaces. Water features, as functioning elements of the site stormwater �- management, will also serve as anchors to those outdoor spaces, providing sound, movement and color in the pedestrian environment. Sidewalks and plazas will connect all outdoor spaces within the site and to adjacent properties. These connections will be lined with trees and other landscape elements to help create human scale. The landscape design for the Quads Site will reflect traditional residential design, using familiar patterns that include sidewalks, streets and yards commonly found in an established Edina neighborhood. Boulevard trees, turf grass, stormwater raingardens, shrubs and perennials will help define the internal street environment and visually connect adjoining yard spaces using these common landscape elements. Gardens and even small orchards will give residents opportunities to grow and harvest some of their own fruit and vegetables and create opportunities to commune with neighbors and friends. Landscape design on the Quads site will take advantage of the proximity of the site to the Fred Richards golf course by creating vistas focused on the pastoral setting of the course's open space, trees and water features. Neighbors to the north and golf course users will look south into the site viewing pergolas, gardens and other neighborhood scale site improvements. Connections and multiple pedestrian access opportunities are a key concept within the Overall , Development Plan. Numerous sidewalks and pathways connect spaces within the development, reducing automobile trips, encouraging wellness and exercise and building on and supplementing established and future community patterns. The site will be linked more regionally by connecting to existing sidewalks and even becoming a destination for trail users wishing to use the amenities provided in this development. Through the use of native vegetation and plant materials that do not require excessive water or �. fertilizers, the landscape design for both sites will focus on sustainability and provide A(3 U:\KAM\KAM0612\Present\SD\08-01-31—OveralI Plan Submittal \Narrative \Submittal Narrative - Final 013108.doc Edina Gateway January 31, 2008 Page 8 Wetland delineation was performed on the Towers Site on October 12, 2007. Based on the site history, development and maintenance of the site as an office park, and the lack of any wetland indicators (hydrology or wetland vegetation), it is our conclusion that there are no wetlands present within the boundaries of the Pentagon Park — Towers Site. Domestic Water Water service to the Pentagon Park Development is currently provided by the City of Bloomington's water system. The City of Edina proposes to provide water service to the Towers Site and Quads Site. As identified in the Gateway Study Area AUAR, sufficient capacity exists within both cities water system to handle development on the scale of that proposed in the Edina Gateway Overall Development Plan. As each phase of Edina Gateway is developed, the City of Edina watermain will be expanded and looped to provide robust domestic water and fire protection service. The infrastructure improvements will be constructed in phases as the Edina Gateway project develops. See the utility plans for phased implementation. The Seagate manufacturing facility south of W 77U' Avenue will remain on the City of Bloomington water system. City of Bloomington watermain will need to be extended along Computer Avenue and W 77th Avenue to provide continued service to Seagate. Sanitary Sewer The existing Towers Site and Quads Site are currently sewered by a 9 -inch Metropolitan Council Environmental Services (MCES) sanitary sewer main, located in Computer Avenue, running south into Bloomington. The Edina Gateway project is expected to add a peak flow of 820,000 gallons per day. This amount of additional sewerage will exceed the capacity of the existing 9 -inch MCES sanitary sewer main. Further downstream, a MCES lift station is currently at 98% capacity. When buildings are demolished, capacity will return to the system, but additional capacity will be needed as final build out occurs. The development proposed in the Overall Development Plan will push the lift station beyond its current design capacity. The City of Edina proposes to redirect sanitary sewer flows in excess of the MCES capacity into the City of Edina sanitary sewer system to the west of the Quads Site. The infrastructure improvements will be constructed in phases as the Edina Gateway project develops. See the utility plans for phased implementation. Storm Water Management As identified in the Gateway Study Area AUAR, the Pentagon Park neighborhood has experienced frequent flooding during large rain events and some storm sewers surcharge in the 10 year event. Storm water management strategies for the Pentagon Park Overall Development Plan include bioretention, filtration, rainwater capture, green or eco- roofs, permeable pavements, and other Low Impact Development storm water Best Management Practices. Development proposed on the Towers site plans to utilize green roofs on portions of the proposed buildings and parking structures. These vegetated surfaces would be used to both detain water on site, reducing peak runoff rates and improve overall water quality through filtration. It is anticipated that a combination of extensive and intensive green -roofs would be used. Low impact strategies at grade would include using on -site infiltration, pervious pavements, and underground storage. Water from underground storage will be recycled for irrigation water and other non - potable water needs. hlj� U:\ KAM\ KAM0612 \Present\SD \08_01_31_Overall Plan Submittal \Narrative \Submittal Narrative - Final 013108.doc Edina Gateway January 31, 2008 - Page 7 Access The primary external access to the Pentagon Towers site will be provided by the main .north/south roadway that intersects with W 77th Street and Viking Drive. In order to provide efficient access to the two parking ramps on the Pentagon Towers site and distribute the traffic onto the surrounding roadway network, each ramp will have two entry/exit points, including direct access from the east ramp onto Computer Avenue. Primary access to the hotel will be on the TH 100 Frontage Road (Normandale Road). It was assumed that a small percentage of office traffic would use the hotel driveway to access the executive parking under the west office building. External access to the Pentagon Quads will be via two full- access driveways on W 77th Street and. a secondary access on Parklawn Avenue, with internal circulation provided by a primary east -west roadway on the site and both east -west and north -south walkways to provide pedestrian circulation throughout the site. Two service drives will also be provided on W 77th Street; these areas will. only be used for deliveries and service operations,, and will not be used for resident pick -up or drop -off (right -in, right -out only). Additional information regarding turning movements at access locations can be found in the Traffic Analysis. Traffic/Transportation A Traffic Impact Analysis of the Pentagon Park redevelopment was prepared according to the City of Edina guidelines and. based on land use and site plan information at the Overall Development Plan level of detail. The detailed methodology, assumptions, and results of the traffic analysis are contained in the attached Traffic Study Report. The traffic study documents the existing traffic conditions in the vicinity of the site, estimated the net traffic generated by each phase of the development, assigned these trips to the adjacent roadway system, and evaluated the traffic operations of key intersections near -the site and those providing access to and from the site. Based on the analysis, roadway or traffic control improvement measures were recommended to accommodate future traffic volumes. Also included in the Traffic Study Report are identification of existing and, proposed pedestrian, bicycle and transit facilities that will provide multi -modal transportation opportunities for each site and a travel demand management plan to reduce vehicle traffic to the sites, particularly single occupant vehicle trips. Parking Projected parking demand for Pentagon Park Preliminary Development Plan was calculated using City of Edina Zoning Code. For all uses , MDD- 6'standards have been applied. See attached parking and unit calculation. Wetland Delineation Based on the National Wetland Inventory Map and the Gateway Study Area AUAR, a wetland may be located along the northern boundary of the Pentagon Quads Site adjacent to the Fred Richards Golf Course. Wetland delineation on the Quads Site is unnecessary at this time because no Final Development Plans are anticipated to be submitted for the Quads Site during 2008. Al� i U: \KAM\KAM0612 \Present \SD \08_01_31_Overall Plan Submittal\Narrative \Submittal Narrative - Final 013108.doc LOGISMap Output Page City of Edina Page 1 of 2 a arm' �, r "g . '.� + Legend y ��'. �Y PRO +t. —M. P, Str-ert Name Latir pum tw A 'IM City Limits; 4b jj kv ,-n rlr I Lake Names Willie , GO AUK 6— rim An E � a � >i i ! `J Su8)Et1 S ItE GISMan OV &ClientVersi... 10/24/2007 LOGISMap Output Page Citv of Edina �' Lake Ed Ina - E 8 __G Gls= -u 0 >1 :I111Li _� zolvimG kil Page 1 of 2 Legand 8t set Name Labe .1 City Umits fA/ Crawks DLake Names Lakes D Parks Zoning ® APD iAmn.in►it Poem DaDDiiaet. Dewey ■ aaD•siat oCd D.Mw D°zft ■ xa•1lPmnm ce.m. ® PCD•2lab..en Gear. ® 4GDS IPas.en Coors DVn MUSUCd Atl.Nrl D .on -1 ipm.m On—., ❑ PDD•liPb...donmi ■ P20 -1 Mmum Rmodm ® PRD•240m.m Rom. ® PRD- llrm.m Re ® PRDiiem-d Ramc ® PAD -S iPb..ed R ®c ■ P�lilPm..d Safa-1 4-1 Ok q* Dwdlmp U. ® R- r!iDOY.Y DaoYmpU DRND:R.R.-:%I= -- DParcels http:// gis. logis. org/ LOGIS_ArcIMS /ims ?ServiceName =ed LOGISMap_OV &ClientVersi... 10/24/2007 _y6 S .WV LISE UES�RaIIN C mrr pnim ks�sn�c J `nu�m�m esi�n�e � im�u msm �imrt�e L� 01E1�1 _ City of Edina '�� e '� �O1�1�►R��ii�S14� Land Use Plan X10 ...for- living. learning, raising families & doing business J 2008 Comprehensive Plan Edina Comp Plan Update 2008 - Working Draft 01-25-08 L.p—d LIM (W. 01fi- OSP S4— --d P-1. LDO L.. I--) M-d-- MC M." N, C.— PSF S—PWA., LWR 1A.I.- U....y Ft—d.akd GM 6 — aI FA—I U -- Rogi—, HL.P - H,gh D-0y k—I.Ma CAC C—I—F-Y h—I C-0- N, - N0919.11-0 Q M� �2 W iM. 1. 3 L 5 3 5] /HER 3-5 W �.Ih 51 1s 1 C51h S, :12 3-5 ,E6 :12 3-5 CAC 5 3 w ;urn el 3 O 0e a 3 3 I N LN 4 HDR t-tj—, A- HDR 9 4 — 1IDR OR S3 3 OR- Determined � 2 --t N'I O R 0 V) All- Future Land Use Plan with Building Heights City of Edina Southeast Quadrant 2008 Comprehensive Plan Updj e Figure 4.6B Data Source: URS 6,J bi e 4 1 5 /Aie" Edina Comp Plan Update 2008 /'J 0� Chapter 4: Land Use and Community Design (Working Draft 01- 25-08) 59-,. 0REjwj1MfJARj 4E`Qf;Cbf#4%;#JT ftA#J - .: Ilk 7600 PARKLAWN $5,632 GSF f/J 285 STALLS REQUIRED / 400 STALLS PROVIDED 115 STALLS SURPLUS 9Ott r4 BURGUNDY PLACE ,• r - (MIXED- USE) x•S E . 36 UNITS - 16,560 GSF ~ F G TOWNHOMES 55 STALLS REQUIRED 62 UNITS 75 STALLS PROVIDED 124 ENCLOSED STALLS A - NW BUILDING ] „ 1 230 K GSF OFFICE WALSH TITLE I Is (4 -10 STORIES) 21,000 SF OFFICE �k�� w *,• 1 r q o -. -r 100 STALLS - 70 STALLS REQUIRED 77 STALLS PROVIDED — C -WEST PARKING '— •y {i -- 1-' - 7LEVELS - V Jill .T� a: 1350 STALLS 1 1 I� X61► r " ` J - ASSISTED LIVING E - E BUILDING r _' i F 206 UNITS 260 K GSF OFFICE 'Kw JM'T H - INDEPENDENT �: 105 STALLS @ GRADE S ; (4 -10 STORIES) t LIVING 300 STALLS ENCLOSED 100 STALLS z i 366 UNITS, o--- --�Iw, S _ - �" 369 ENCLOSED STALL .I EXISTING BUILDING l B - HOTEL t: 80,000 GSF - ' EAST PARKING" 'Y�,�.:1Kr17 _ , � ��� �� � PROPOSED BUILDING 150 ROOMS 5 LEVELS D - SW BUILDING 1050 STALLS rr 247 K GSF OFFICE 1 r (4 -12 STORIES) rr I �� �. r r. ; 4 [] F 100 STALLS tiaam 1` _I REVISED 24 OCTOBER 2007 TOTAL DENSITY IN NEW COMMERCIAL - ADDITIONAL DATA SENIOR HOUSING -ADDITIONAL DATA NOTES: MDD -6 DISTRICT TOTAL GSF = 817,375 TOTAL NEW UNITS 634 PARKING AND UNIT CALCULATION FOUND IN NARRATIVE TOTAL GSF 940,567 737,375 GSF OFFICE + B0,000 GSF HOTEL PARKING REQUIRED 1,110 STALLS DOCUMENT ADDENDUM DATED 24 OCTOBER 2007 0 125 250 TOTAL RES, UNITS = 670 PARKING REQUIRED = 2733 STALLS PARKING PROVIDED 1,117 STALLS PARKING PROVIDED = 2733 STALLS THIS GRAPHIC SUPERSEDES ALL OTHER GRAPHICS IN SCALE IN FT. N (INCLUDES BURGUNDY PLACE, INCLUDES 104 ON STREET STALLS SUBMITTAL FOR UNIT COUNT AND PARKING WALSH TITLE, 7600 PARKLAWN) -. - -- - - miller dunwiddie ��� Kimley -Horn 6RCN IMIJR[ and Associates. Inc. EDINA GATEWAY pan, :, S.,ae+�h. _�:: PROPOSED SITE PLAN Pentagon Park Redevelopment EDINA GATEWAY - FULL 911E S -2 C ,ZJN.rth Thkd5U6.161me106 Wayzata P— p.,..i., LLC. Re- Zoning and Preliminary Plan Mi=p.U. IAN 55601 -1651 717* lit I ."V_ A' 1� i t 4pr TA 1 � / w_w MI IL J At -— 0 125 250 ACTIVE PHASE PROPOSED BUILDING ■ EXISTING BUILDING :I SCALE IN FT. Pi A- LOFT HOTEL 6 ; WEST PARKING EAST BUILDING (4 -11 STORIES: W. `O T n 150 O gsf 6 LEVELS 360,000 gsf 150 ROOMS 1,200 STALLS 0 4D EAST PARKING K TOWNHOMEI TOWNHOME2 BLEVELS 15 7600 PARKLAWN S 18 UNITS 18 UNITS 1,200 STALLS 85,632 gsf m Q INDEPENDENT LIVING 1 INDEPENDENT LIVING 2 ASSISTED LIVING 2 1© BURGUNDY PLACE w 122 UNITS YI 122 UNITS 103 UNITS 36 UNITS (MIXED USE) 16,560 gsf o ASSISTED LIVING 1 TOWNHOME 3 9 103103U�— 26 UNITS 18 WALSH TITLE 21,000 gsf (OFFICE) ® WEST BUILDING (4 -10 STORIES) Sri INDEPENDENT LIVING 3 377,375 gsf (OFFICE) W 122 UNITS nKC 1mc pn,.mr, rllum:n miller dunes -Alle a =„ KlmleyHorn r.uuc: cam. Ka: KAM061 — pb and Associates. Inc. EDINP 'VAv ,w D,m 37 JANUARY 7005 PROPOSED SITE PLAN Pentagon P. ielopment djg EDINA GATEWAY - COMPLETE PROJECT S-2. P 173 North Third 5", ULm. Mlnnupohs MN 55801 -1657 way :. ca Pry +POrcle :. uc. Re- Zoning .,all Plan Izo+�l CIIF.CI(6p: www..11l.rdr.w�ddi.rmm [A��e \A�nn..nlq E mol 8 a 5 G i W. TM STREET ' -fin ,f '�nlr �., ~_ ``• j'� y, II III Illlu'Cr`: 4 g� DZ — �,'•f- - - - - - - -- mar _ �wMO 0RI NO CHANGE TO 7600 PARKLAWN AVENUE –SEE NARRATIVE :- 1't'�i'!larltcir'ifrlirl-- "n rItimil!Tiilln, _ I iii; ili nlll!I( -1:L 1,111 J TOWERS SITE _ 7_ -- lillll llllllT.I T i1lULW1LUliU1W1LL� 1 t -- - W. Im STREET - - - - -- RPVi9i0n9 APP' GATEYlHASE01 �_❑ IGmley -Horn DESIGNED BY: DGL ��rr��rr.���y ���a�rr.� DRAWN ,. HMW and Asso 1aZW1 Inc. CHECKED BY: DJC >m ure.msrt AK � ayR aW p la7 emu -eni �.,r PTnlnppe Pr. .eP_Ipeum+ rAA PROJECT N0. KOW QUADS SITE miller dunmume PENTAGON PARK REDEVELOPMENT OVERALL DEVELOPMENT PLAN I?7".,AmdS"d Sub101, WaZaaaa Proper Epp -pew MM 65101.167 [IPe. LLC. �. rem OVERALL P 612-Z� 1 612 -MY-M1 PHASING PLAN s w® HOpZON1Al .Al M FEET SHEET N0. C -3 n 0 I m a 0 t C7 ��w s�... -ice Ire -% - - EOINA INWSTRIAtBOUIEVARD- 'T1s ljkiii /_ � � ✓L E R 1 r -. YN, _ ... - ► r •' � .: err .� � � ' - '-u Mir 201 _ FaNfESOTA s _ } A., cc '� :.irk �-, -_ .,' tC ,4� ?,i - `- •. -j1..� ` "r!� '#�` ", �� �% �i'I• ' r� . 1. • P '141 SUMMARY TRAFFIC MITIGATION PLAN - 2121108 PENTAGON PARK REDEVELOPMENT OVERALL DEVELOPMENT PLAN PRELIMINARY - Exact financial arranqement for improvements subject to negotiation in the Development Agreement. ` r, - LEGEND BACKGROUND GROWTH . PENTAGON PARK REDEVELOPMENT - SHARED NEED /BENEFIT — ❑E❑ ad h9BOd",1ne. MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE EDINA CITY COUNCIL HELD AT CITY HALL DECEMBER 18, 2007 7:00 P.M. ROLLCALL Answering rollcall were Members Bennett, Housh, Masica, Swenson and Mayor Hovland. Member Swenson appri Roll call: Ayes: Bennett, Housh, Motion carried. [S APPROVED Motion made by Meat er the Council Consent Agenda as presented. ?a, Swenson, Hovland *MINUTES OF THE REGULA] DECEMBER 4.2007 APPROVED approving the Minutes of the Re 2007. Motion carried on a roll call v THE OF DEC' Bennett and seconded by AND WORK mL�e by Member Bennett and seconded by Member Swenson eeting of December 4, 2007, and Work Session of December 4, = five ayes. MEETING X CORRECTED Memb7!kIoush pointed out he had not attend s the Monday, December 3, 2007, Truth In Taxation hearing, bu ,was listed as present and voting in theiztes. Member Housh made a motion, seconded by Me er Bennett to approved the December 3,200,7 T�uth In Taxation Hearing Minutes as corrected. Ayes: Benne ;Housh,- Masica, Swenson, Hovland Motion carri d. RESOLUTION NO. 2007 -134 ADOPTED GRANTING PRELIMINARY DEVELOPMENT PLAN AND PRELIMINARY REZONING - 77m & PARKLAWN AREA - WAYZATA PROPERTIES (GATEWAY) Affidavits of Notice were presented, approved and ordered placed on file. Planning Director Teague gave an overview of the proposed redevelopment for the Pentagon Tower and Pentagon Quads site. He said the applicant was proposing to build 634 senior housing units, an 80,000 square foot hotel, three office towers that would total 737,000 square feet and two above ground parking structures. He said the Pentagon Tower and Quad sites currently contained 660,500 square feet of office space. Mr. Teague said included in the project area were Burgundy Place, Walsh Title and the office building at 7600 Parklawn, which would remain. He reported the total site was 43.18 acres. Mr. Teague said the current proposal before the Council was a Preliminary Development Plan Review, and that eventually the request would, require: • Comprehensive guide plan amendment from Office to Mixed Use. The mixed use designation would allow office, retail and residential uses; Rezoning from Planned Commercial District (PCD -2) and Planned Office District (POD) to Mixed Development District 6 (MDD -6); Zoning Ordinance Amendment for the MDD -6 District to reduce the minimum acreage from 50 acres to 20 acres; and Final Development Plans for each site. Mr. Teague explained in order to obtain the above mentioned approvals, the applicant would need to complete a three step process consisting of: 1. Preliminary Development Plan - review by the Planning Commission and City Council, in which approval simply would allow the applicant to prepare an Overall Development Page 1 Q3 Minutes/Edina City Council/December 18, 2007 Plan. Approval of the Preliminary Development Plan would not guarantee approval of the next steps. 2. Overall Development Plan - Overall Development Plan would be the official approval/ denial state of the project. It would include official action on the comprehensive guide plan amendment, and the rezoning. 3. Final Development Plan - Each phase of this proposed multiple phase development would be subject to final site plan review by the planning commission and the city council. Final development plan would follow the same process as the overall development plan. Mr. Teague said the first phase of the development would be the hotel, followed by a portion of the senior housing. The third phase would be more senior housing and a portion of the office towers; the 4th phase would be more senior housing; and the last phase would finish the senior housing and office towers. Mr. Teague reported the Planning Commission recommended approval of the Preliminary Development Plan subject to the following conditions on an 8 -1 vote. 1.. The Overall Development Plan must be generally consistent with approved Preliminary Development Plan dated September 28, 2007, and revised October 4, 2007. 2. Sustainable design. The design and construction of the entire project must be done with the Sustainable Initiatives as outlined in the applicant's narrative. 3. Trail and sidewalk connections must be included as demonstrated and public easements must be established over all public sidewalks. 4. Dedication of a right -of -way to straighten out the curve at 77th Street and Parklawn (this area of easement would be subject to approval of the City Engineer). 5. The easternmost entrance off of .77th Street into the senior housing development must be designed as a shared entrance (with the golf course). 6. The four -story senior independent buildings that face 77th street must be designed so as not to appear as the back side of buildings. 7. All traffic mitigation measures as required by the Transportation Commission and traffic study must be followed. 8. The directional flows of the sanitary system must be resolved prior to any construction of the project. 9. The developer/ applicant would be responsible to pay their fair share of any mitigation measures that would be required as part of an approval of the overall development plan for the site. 10. All buildings must be built with sprinkler systems, subject to review and approval of the Fire Marshall. 11. Buildings at 45W West 77th Street shall be limited to 4 stories or 50 feet, whichever would be less, and must maintain a 50 foot setback from the rear lot line. 12. Convenience gasoline stations and drive - through windows shall be prohibited on the north side of 77th Street. 13. Compliance with all of the conditions outlined in the City Engineer's memo dated November 20, 2007. The Council asked questions including: was the parking as proposed for the site adequate, with Barr Engineering excluded from the re- development could the requested rezoning then be considered spot zoning the Barr site; why were the existing Medical Office Building and Burgundy Place included in the re- development proposal, what heights would be allowed in the various MDD zoning districts, why was the MDD -6 district being suggested; how would the senior housing vs. market housing be preserved. Following staff's answers to Council questions, the proponent was introduced. Jim Nelson, Wayzata Properties, 7790 Lochmere Terrace, stated he was the developer and was excited about the proposed project. Mr. Nelson said`the first phase of the project would include the hotel which would be a Starwood business traveler hotel. He also said senior housing would be a part of the first phase, but at this time they were not sure which operator would be running the housing. Mr. Nelson Page 2 h �_$ Minutes/Edina City Council/December 18,200 introduced Paul May and Dan Green of Miller Dunwiddie, Architects, who using a PowerPoint presentation reviewed the proposed Preliminary Development Plan for the Gateway Project as follows: • Proposed NW office building - 230 GSF Office space (4-10 stories) with 100 parking stalls • West parking ramp - proposed at 7 levels -1350 parking stalls • East office building - 260 GSF office space (4 -10 stories) with 100 parking stalls • East parking ramp - proposed at 5 levels -1050 parking stalls • Hotel 80,000 GSF, 150 proposed hotel rooms • 62 townhouse units (11/2 stories) with 124 enclosed parking stalls • 366 independent living units with 309 enclosed parking stalls • 206 assisted living units with 105 parking stalls at grade and 300 enclosed parking -stalls Mr. May and Mr. Green showed graphic depictions of the proposed re- development, outlined proposed access, egress and streets throughout the development; and displayed views of the site in its present development plus future depictions from different vantage points in adjoining residential neighborhoods. The development team answered Council's questions relative to the proposed re- development, phasing, height of proposed buildings, traffic circulation, busing, and site development. Public Comment Dwaine Lindberg, 7200 York Avenue South, represented the Bike Edina.Task Force and stated the Task Force wanted to work with the developer in providing a connection to the promenade. Ari Nelson Manti, Edina Chamber of Commerce President, 7701 Normandale Boulevard, spoke to the Chamber's resolutions in support of the proposal. Gene Persha, 6917 Cornelia Drive, expressed concern over the phasing and length of time until the project would be complete. He asked about the completion of Burgundy Place, for a tree replacement policy and that sufficient bike lanes be provided. Tom Fletcher, 4445 West 77th Street, said he generally supported the proposed redevelopment, but expressed concern that the project's length of time until completion was very long. Mr. Fletcher asked that when demolition happened, the developer be required to either commence building or to landscape the site. He also asked to be involved in any discussion of a median on West 77th Street. Joellen Deever, 7405 Oaklawn Avenue, read a prepared statement expressing her concerns with the proposed development. Dave Born, 4701 Hibiscus Avenue, expressed concern with height of the proposed development. He noted the pedestrian and bike path would be a good addition, but would not be without issues due to proximity to the golf course. Member Housh made a motion to close the public hearing. Member Swenson seconded the motion. Ayes: Bennett, Housh, Masica, Swenson, Hovland Motion carried. During the Council discussion, concern was expressed regarding the requested change in zoning, the proposed heights of the office buildings, the expansiveness of the proposed rezoning to MDD -6, traffic circulation, the view from West 77th Street and the phasing of the development. Member Swenson made a motion introducing Resolution No. 2007 -134 and moving its adoption granting preliminary development plan and preliminary rezoning for the proposed re- development of the 7701 & Parklawn Area for Wayzata Properties (Gateway) with the following conditions: 1. The Overall Development Plan must be generally consistent with approved Preliminary Development Plan dated September 28, 2007, and revised October 4, 2007. Page 3 4d'- Minutes/Edina City Council/December 18, 2007 2. Sustainable design. The design and construction of the entire project must be done with -the ' Sustainable Initiatives as outlined in the applicant's narrative. 3. Trail and sidewalk connections must be included as demonstrated and public easements must be established over all public sidewalks. 4. Dedication- of a right -of -way to straighten out the curve at 77th Street and Parklawn (this area of easement would be subject to approval of the City Engineer). 5. The easternmost entrance off of 77th Street into the senior housing development must be designed as a shared entrance (with the golf course) 6. The four -story senior independent buildings that face 77th street must be designed so as not to appear as the back side of buildings. 7. All traffic mitigation ' measures as required by the Transportation. Commission and traffic study must be followed. 8. The directional flows of the sanitary system must be resolved prior to any construction of the project. 9. The developer/applicant would be responsible to pay their fair share of any mitigation measures that would be required as part of an approval of the overall development plan for the site. 10. All buildings must be built with sprinkler systems, subject to review and approval of the Fire Marshall. 11. Buildings at 493 West 77th Street shall be limited to 4 stories or 50 feet, whichever would be less, and must maintain a 50 -foot setback from the rear lot line. 12. Convenience gasoline stations and drive- through windows shall be prohibited on the north side of 77th Street, 13. Compliance with all of the conditions outlined in the City Engineer's memo dated November 20, 2007, 14. The housing within this development must be senior housing; 15. Following completion of the proposed hotel, a large percentage of senior housing must be built prior to or along with non - residential uses; 16. Bike and bus traffic circulation be carefully considered throughout the development; and 17. With the exception of the buildings at 4930 77th Street West, future buildings North of West 77th Street development will be limited to four stories or 58 feet in height; Member Housh seconded the motion Ayes: Housh, Masica, Swenson, Hovland Nay: Bennett Motion carried PUBLIC COMMENT No one appeared to offer public comment. FIRST READING GRANTED TO ORDINANCE NO. 2007 -21 AMENDING SECTION 180 OF THE CITY CODE TO REQUIRE REMOVAL OF MEMBERS FROM BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS WHO FAIL TO COMPLY WITH ATTENDANCE REQUIREMENTS Mr. Hughes reviewed Ordinance No. 2007 -21, which had been prepared at the direction of the City Council. The ordinance would amend Section 180 of the City Code with respect to the attendance requirements of board and commission members. ' Mr. Hughes explained the proposed amendment provided that a board, commission or committee member would be deemed to have resigned if they miss three consecutive meetings or failed to attend at least 75 percent of the. regular or special meetings during a calendar year. The amendment would take effect for meetings January 2, 2008, and later. Member Masica made a motion granting first reading to Ordinance No. 2007 -21 amending Section 180 of the City Code to require removal of members from boards, commissions and committees who fail to comply with attendance requirements. Member Housh seconded the motion. Ayes: Bennett,.Housh, Masica, Swenson, Hovland Motion carried. �a6 Page 4 o e LO MEMORANDUM - Plan Review � ay ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT CITY OF EDINA DATE: February 22, 2008 TO: Cary Teague - Planning Director FROM: Wayne Houle — City Engineer i C: Jack Sullivan — Assistant City Engineer SUBJECT: Gateway Redevelopment West 77th Street Engineering has reviewed the overall development plans for the above stated project and offer the following comments: • Attached you will find the Edina Transportation Commission (ETC) draft minutes that reviewed this project from a transportation perspective. The ETC made recommendations based on Jack Sullivan's memo dated February 21, 2008, see attached. The conditions are stated below: ■ The one condition of the ETC's approval states the Gateway Development will be required to include, in the developers agreement, cost participation guidelines by the developer for roadway improvements necessary to mitigate traffic issues generated by the Gateway Development. The graphic titled "Summary Traffic Mitigation Plan- 2121108" shall be used as a basis for defining the cost participation. • Staff also recommends that the Gateway Development be responsible for their share of future upgrades of West 77th Street. • Staff recommends that the north entrance to the hotel be restricted to a right -in / right -out entrance and the plan should indicate a "pork- chop" island that will prohibit left turns. • Staff recommends that the water main proposed for the "Burgundy' be extended to West 77th Street. • Staff recommends that a sidewalk from the "Burgundy" entrance be extended along the northerly boulevard of the Walsh Title property to the existing sidewalk at Computer Avenue and West 77th Street. • Staff recommends that the "Burgundy" property be reanalyzed to accommodate an additional west -bound to north -bound TH100 right -turn bay. • Staffs analysis of the sanitary sewer reveals that Phase 1 and 2 can be completed as planned, see attached analysis. The remaining Phases will need further analysis of the Metropolitan Council interceptor system through Bloomington. Staff has been continually meeting with Bloomington and Met Council staff to agree to a solution to this issue. • This plan is indicating that water for this project come from the City of Edina; currently water along West 77th Street is supplied by Bloomington through a City of Edina water main. Staff has analyzed the water system and feels that the Development can be served by City of Edina water without any issues as to supply and treatment of the water. Please contact me if you have any questions regarding this first ,review. Thanks GAEngineering \Genera1\70 - 79 Streets \77th Street West - AUAR\Preliminary Plans\20080222 WH Gateway memo to CT.doc A27 SANITARY SEWER ANALYSIS GATEWAY DEVELOPMENT Note: Additional SAC's to MCES BN -399 AFFECTS OF GATEWAY DEVELOPMENT PHASE EXIST PROPOSED TOTAL SAC TO Ending SAC PHASE TOTAL SAC'S SAC MCES EDINA 75 210 1 9 75 75 63 0 2 63 246 -63 246 87 3 87 314 314 4 374 4 43 - 148 148 NEED FURTHER ANALYSIS 5 5 38 234 134 100 TOTAL FROM PROPOSED GATEWAY DEVELOPMENT TO MCES BN -399 240 608 TOTAL DRAINING TO City of Edina SYSTEM 346 TOTAL SAC 240 1017 608 346 Note: Additional SAC's to MCES BN -399 AFFECTS OF GATEWAY DEVELOPMENT PHASE 'Beginning SAC Demo Add Ending SAC OK TO MCES 1 144 9 75 210 OK - Below 240 2 210 63 0 147 OK - Below 240 3 147 87 314 374 NEED FURTHER ANALYSIS 4 374 43 148 479 NEED FURTHER ANALYSIS 5 479 38 134 575 NEED FURTHER ANALYSIS 'Assume 60% occupancy for existing SAC's 9:42 AM 2/22/2008 Page 1 of 2 Edina Transportation Commission Item M. b. REGULAR TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MEETING °I REPORT /RECOMMENDATION To: Transportation Commissioners Agenda Item No.: IV.b From: Jack Sullivan, PE ACTION: . Assistant City Engineer ® Recommendation /Motion Date: February 21, 2008 ® Discussion Subject: Edina Gateway ❑ Information Traffic Study — Overall Development Plan The uniqueness of zoning district MDD 6 requires a three step application process; a usual project requires only two steps. The three steps are: 1. Preliminary Development Plan 2. Overall Development Plan 3. Final Development Plan The development team presented to the ETC on January 17, 2008 to discuss step 1, "Preliminary Development Plan ". The ETC concurred with the staff recommendation that the Preliminary Development Plan is in compliance with the AUAR. The development team has now moved on to step 2, "Overall Development Plan ". This requires the Transportation Commission review the transportation impact analysis for concurrence with the recently approved AUAR and to start looking more closely at the details of the entire project site and overall .transporation issues. The Transportation Commission and staff have received a much more detailed transportation impact analysis for review. This increased level of detail can be seen by the very complex analysis and shear size of the report. In addition, the City has contracted with WSB to look at "traffic triggers ". The "traffic triggers" will help determine when physical improvements to the roadway network will be necessary. Improvements will be required when traffic volumes approach or will exceed the capacity at the time of a development or phasing of the project. This data will help the Commission and / I' a l G:\Engineering\lnfrastructure \Streets \Traffic \Transportation CommissionWgendas\2008 R&R\20080221—Edina Gateway_Traffic_study.doc .Page 2 of 2 Item III. b. Edina Transportation Commission staff with review and recommendations. These triggers are still being finalized due to the complexity of the site and will be available at the February 21, 2008 ETC meeting. When individual buildings within the project area are being proposed the.development team will be required to submit a "Final` Development Plan" which is yet a more detailed transportation study. This .is the next phase of their project; the ETC could expect to see a "Final Development Plan" yet this spring fora limited number of buildings within the project boundaries. Recommendation: Review the following attached documents: • Transportation Impact Analysis submitted by Miller Dunwiddie and Kimley -Horn dated January 2008 for Edina Gateway Pentagon Park Redevelopment — Overall Development Plan. • Review Memo from WSB dated January 29, 2008. ® As a result of the Memo the Development Team submitted a Supplemental Transportation Impact Analysis dated February 2008 based on WSB comments. ■ Second review memo from WSB dated February 14, 2008. If so desired by the Transportation Commission, adopt a motion recommending that the Edina Gateway Pentagon Park Redevelopment "Overall Development Plan" Transportation Impact Analysis is within the parameters set forth in the AUAR study and that the plan outlines mitigation measures necessary to offset impacts to the transportation system in the area. There are a few minor,outstanding items as listed in the memo by Chuck Rickart of WSB dated February 14, 2008 that we believe will be com�leted prior to the ETC meeting and addressed with the commission members on the 21s of February by both staff and the development team. Info /Background: The developer came to the City in the spring of 2007 about a possible redevelopment of the area near 77th Street from Trunk Highway 100 to Minnesota Boulevard. The consulting firm of WSB and Associates completed an Alternative Urban Area wide Review (AUAR) of the project site. One of the components of an AUAR is transportation impacts to the project site. The ETC have reviewed the AUAR and recommended that the draft AUAR document be released for public comment on June 21, 2007. Since that time the final AUAR document has been approved by all regulatory agencies as well as the Edina City Council on November 5, 2007. A36 G: \Engineering\Infrastructure \Streets \Traffic \Transportation CommissionWgendas \2008 R&R\2008022]_Edina Gateway_Traffic_study.doc MINUTES OF THE Edina Transportation Commission o e � Thursday, February 21, 2008 o Edina City Hall �y 4801 West 501" Street '1N 8BB Council Chambers MEMBERS PRESENT: Les Wanninger, Jean White, Marc Usem, Paul Mooty, Warren Plante MEMBERS ABSENT: Hilah Almog, Steve Brown, Geof Workinger STAFF PRESENT: Wayne.Houle, Jack Sullivan, Sharon Allison,., I. Call to Order The meeting was called to order by out -going chair `Vllanninger. II. Chairperson Voting Out -going chair Wanninger said at the -last ETC meeting, he was re- elected to another term as chair and Commissioners asked that Council make an exception to their 2 -year term limit for chairs: Commissioner Wanninger said he`consulted with the Mayor and Council and they were not willing to make an exception; therefore" a ,new chair would need to be elected. Commissioner Workinger was elected by Commissioner Plante and the nomination was seconded by Commissioner Usem. There being no other nominations Commissioner Usem moved to close the nomination-and the .motion was seconded by Commissioner White. All voted aye. Commissioner Wanninger asked that someone else chair the meeting in Commissioner Workinger's absence. Commissioner Usem was nominated as interim chair. III. Comments a. Chairman Comments Prior to turning over leadership, Commissioner Wanninger noted that Commissioner Thorpe resigned from the ETC after January's meeting. He expressed gratitude for the terrific job she has done. Commissioner Thorpe was one of the original members. b. Public Comments David Pearson, 4513 Brownd'ale Avenue Mr. Pearson said he is the spokesperson for some residents in the Country Club Neighborhood that is conducting a survey to gauge the attitude of residents on the traffic calming measures that was approved for installation. He said after the most recent Council meeting, residents discovered that others have been unaware of the planned measures. He said the perception is that the neighborhood wants these measures. He said they are surveying the residents and asked that the ETC evaluate the surveys. He said there appear to 431 be mixed feelings on traffic issues, but everyone is firm on not wanting the approved traffic measures. Kyle Simmons 5038 Bruce Place Mr. Simmons said based on survey responses it is not conclusive if speeding, safety and cut - thru traffic are a problem. He said of 140 respondents, 20 -30% feel the current plan is the best solution; 65% feel increased law enforcement would help; and 55% feel law enforcement is best for reducing speeding. IV. Old Business a. Opus Development - Existing Public Works Facility,:51-46 Eden Avenue Assistant City Engineer Sullivan said the site red evelopment -plan. that was first presented at the January 17 meeting was larger with 751 parking stalls;--and' a= p"otgntial park and ride. The site has since been scaled down to 575 parking stalls,_and =no park�and ride. The proposed redevelopment is a medical facility and a parking ramp' The site would -be accessible from Eden Avenue and access to the parking ramp would- be-from Arcadia Avenue, Initial concerns included the 4 -way stop sign at Eden and Arcac!L,Avenues, as well as the =lnterlachen Blvd and Vernon Avenue intersection. - - In reference to the park and ride, Mr. Sullivan said ±the= siterwas identified by'Metro Transit as a potential park and ride sometime ago;,-however, when=t, ey °were contacted recently, they said they did not have the funding at this time City staff is evaluating other park and ride locations, including space in Jerry's Ramp that _y,- pity employees and for parking equipment, and 70th and Metro Blvd. Mr. Sullivan said staff recommends approvalof the_project use the redevelopment will not negatively impact the surroundingtransportatio =s system; however, there is indication that the 4 -way stop sign at Eden and ArcadiaiAvenues -will need to be reconfigured to a traffic signal in the near future an`dNth~e development team haste agreed to pay a fair share to upgrade this intersection as a condition to theap:proval� Improvements at the Interlachen Blvd and Vernon Avenue intersection will =b_e_done by the =City (d_e.ntified by the NE Edina Traffic Study). Commiss,io;ner W5H inner motioned to accept staff's recommendation. Motion was seconded by Commissioner Moot & -All votedaye. b" -Edina Gateway = =Fentag6n7 Redevelopment Assistant`C:ity�ngineer Sullivian said staff has been meeting with the development team for the past six montls� regarding tlae- multi - development site which will include a hotel, office space, condos and sen orassisted= living facility. Mr. Sullivan said the=site =will be developed over a number of years and therefore, traffic impact will be gradual. Together, they've identified intersections that will need to be improved and the next step will be to identify who is responsible for the improvements (City of Edina, City of Bloomington, Mn /DOT, Hennepin County and /or the developer). Mr. Sullivan said these improvements should be down within the next 5 -10 years. He said a limited amount of funding is available because some of the improvements are in the Capital Improvement Plan. A detailed traffic analysis will be done in 2011 and again in 2013. The detailed traffic reports from the development team showed that some traffic increases are development- driven, but most of the increased traffic will be due to other planned redevelopments in both Edina and Bloomington. n 3a 2 AC Mr. Jim Nelson, of 7790 Lochmere Terrace, and advisor to the development team said the re- development will be phased in over 7 -10 years and the rezoning district is the same as Centennial Lakes, Mixed District 6. Daniel Coyle, civil engineer, of Kimley Horn Associates, said the six phases will be in the following order: hotel, residential units, offices, townhouses, another phase of offices, and finally the senior - assisted living units. JoNette Kuhnau, transportation engineer, of Kimley -Horn and Associates, Inc., said traffic volume forecasting was done for each phase using a 'no- build' and 'build' scenario. The forecasting showed that for some phases improvements aye necessary, but overall, the redevelopment would not significantly change the surrounding transportation system. Commissioner Wanninger motioned to accept staffs recommendation to approve the Pentagon Park Redevelopment moving to.the next phase, Phase 3,'-and including in the developer's agreement cost participation guidelines by the developer for roadway improvements necessary to mitigate traffic issues generated by the development. Motion was seconded by Commissioner Mooty. All voted aye. 433 3 proposed and approved the creation of the MDD -6 zoning district it was formuloted around the Centennial Lakes development. Planner Teague acknowl60ed he didn't know the exact reason the 50 acre requirement was implemented for the MDD -6 zoning district. Continuing, Planner Teague said at this time the proposed reduction in acreage would accommodate the Gateway development. Commissioners acknowledged Edina is almost completely developed, adding there are limited single or contiguous parcels over 40 acres owned by a single property owner. Public Comments: Mr: John Bohan, 800 Coventry Place, Edina, questioned if the proposed ordinance change would impact Centennial Lakes and its present MDD -6 zoning. Planner Teague responded he believes there would be no impact, adding if someone would pursue re- parceling Centennial Lakes they would have to request an amendment to the Centennial Lakes overall development plan and all that would entail. Concluding, Planner Teague pointed out the proposed change to the MDD -6 district is only for a decjease in tract area. Commission Comment: A discussion ensued with the acknowledgement that the updated Comprehensive Plan will encourage the development of a PUD district, and if a new PUD sub district is developed the MDD zoning districfwould probably not.be used, with that noted Commissioners indicated they are comfortable with changing the Code language to reflect 30 acres. Commission Action: Commissioner Fischer moved to recommend approval of an amendment to Zoning Ordinance 850.14 Minimum Tract Area (The` minimum tract area for subdistrict MDD -5 shall be five acres. The minimum tract area for subdistrict MDD -6 shall be 30 acres). Commissioner Brown seconded the motion. All voted aye; motion carried. Z -08 -5 1�G . - D 4P\ 6 TI - Overall Development Plan 'Comprehensive Guide Plan Amendment Rezoning Wayzata, Properties — Pentagon Office Park/77th Street Staff presentation Planner Teague informed the Commission the Edina City Council heard and approved the preliminary development plan and rezoning of the subject site A3-f at their December 18, 2007 meeting. Planner Teague explained approval of the preliminary development plan paved the way for the applicant to pursue an overall development plan, and final rezoning. Planner Teague stated at this time the applicant is requesting approval for a Comprehensive Guide Plan Amendment, Final Rezoning and an Overall Development Plan for the entire project. Planner Teague stated staff believes that the City Council should adopt a resolution approving a Comprehensive Guide Plan Amendment from Office to Mixed Use based on the following findings: A. The guide plan change is consistent with the adjacent land uses. B. The senior housing provides a good land use transition from the golf course to the north, and the light industrial and office uses to the south. C. The project would meet all zoning ordinance requirements. D. The guide plan change would be consistent with the public health, safety, and welfare. E. Senior housing is a need given Edina's aging population. Planner Teague recommended Rezoning from R -2, POD -1 & POD -2 to MDD -6 based on the following findings and Overall Development Plan approval based on the following findings: A. The guide plan change is consistent with the adjacent land uses. B. The senior housing provides a good land use transition from the golf course to the north, and the light industrial and office uses to the south. C. The project would meet all zoning ordinance requirements. D. The guide plan change would be consistent with the public health, safety, and welfare. E. The rezoning would be consistent with the proposed guide plan designation. F. The proposed development would not have an adverse impact on neighborhood traffic or property values. G. The Overall Development Plan is generally consistent with approved Preliminary Development Plan approved by the City Council on December 18, 2007. Approval of the Rezoning and Overall Development Plan should also be subject to the following conditions: A. Future developments must be consistent with the Overall Development Plan dated January 31, 2008. Any changes would require an amendment to the Overall Development Plan. B. Sustainable design. The design and construction of the entire project must be done with the Sustainable Initiatives as outlined in the applicant's narrative. 435- C. Trail and sidewalk connections must be included as demonstrated and public easements must be established over all public sidewalks. D. Dedication of a right -of -way to straighten out the curve at 77th Street and Parklawn (this area of easement would be subject to approval of the City Engineer). E. The easternmost entrance off of 77th Street into the senior housing development must be designed as a shared entrance (with the golf course). F. The four -story senior independent buildings that face 77th street must be designed so as not to appear as the back side of buildings. G. All traffic mitigation measures and conditions as required by the Transportation Commission and traffic study must be followed. H. The developer /applicant would be responsible to pay their fair share of any mitigation measures that would be required as part of an approval of the overall development plan for the site. I. All buildings must be built with sprinkler systems, subject to review and approval of the Fire Marshall. J. Buildings at 4930 West 77th Street shall be limited to 4 stories or 50 feet, whichever would be less, and must maintain a 50 -foot setback from the rear lot line. K. Convenience gasoline stations and drive - through windows shall be prohibited on the north side of 77th Street. L. Compliance with all of the conditions outlined in the City Engineer's memo dated February 22, 2008. M. With the exception of Burgundy Place, the housing within this development must be senior housing. N. Following completion of the proposed hotel, a large percentage of senior housing must be built prior to or along with non - residential uses. O. Bike and bus traffic circulation be carefully considered throughout the development. P. With the exception of the buildings at 4930 77th Street West, future buildings North of West 77th Street development will be limited to four stories or 58 feet in height. Appearing for the applicant: Jim Nelson, Real Estate Strategies, LLC, Paul May and Dan Brown of Miller Dunwiddie were present. Applicant Presentation: With graphics Mr. Nelson gave a general history and brief overview of the proposed project. Mr. Brown further highlighted aspects of the project and explained the project would be implemented in phases over a period of 7 to 10 years. Mr. Brown A 3� outlined the phased development as follows: Phase 1, hotel on towers site; Phase 2, independent, assisted and townhome living on quad site; Phase 3, townhomes on quad site /west office building; Phase 4, townhome and independent living on quad site; Phase 5, assisted living on quad site; east office building on tower site. Completion. Chair Lonsbury opened the hearing for public testimony. Public Testimony Mr. Ronald Rich, 7008 West Shore Drive, suggested, that the curve of West 77th Street connecting at Parklawn Avenue be reconstructed with a gentler curve (if any changes to the roadway are planned). Mr. Rich pointed out since redevelopment will occur in this area, now is the time to address roadway changes, adding he believes this change would be an improvement. A brief discussion ensued regarding the merit in rearranging the link between West 77th Street at Parklawn Avenue pointing out this project will be developed in phases and if the City Engineer deems it appropriate to realign this intersection changes would be implemented. Commissioners also acknowledged any changes made to the roadway would require the cooperation of individual landowners. Commissioner Fischer moved to close the public hearing. Commissioner Scherer seconded the motion. All voted aye; public hearing closed. Commission Comment A discussion ensued with regard to constraints that could be placed on the project if approval is limited to "senior housing only ", pointing out if the senior housing market softens the development could be compromised. It was also acknowledged if the proposed housing element were changed from senior to general public parking demands would also change. The Commission also noted parking ratios are based on the MDD -6 zoning designation. Commissioners indicated their support for the project, noting in their opinion the senior housing element is a major win for the City. Commissioners' reiterated development will occur in phases and if there are any changes in the market or otherwise those changes would be addressed during the Final Development approval process of each phase. Commissioners also applauded the developer on their holistic approach to the development. 437 In conclusion the Commission applauded the development team and the project expressing their overall support. Commission Action Chair Losnbury suggested that the motion be made in two parts; first Comprehensive Guide Plan Amendment and second Rezoning and Overall Development Plan approval. Commissioner Brown moved to recommend Comprehensive Guide Plan Amendment. Commissioner Fischer seconded the motion. All voted aye; motion carried. Commissioner Forrest moved to recommend Rezoning and Overall Development Plan Approval subject to the following conditions: A. Future developments must be consistent with the Overall Development Plan dated January 31, 2008. Any changes would require an amendment to the Overall Development Plan. B. Sustainable design. The design and construction of the entire project must be done with the Sustainable Initiatives as outlined in the applicant's narrative. C. Trail and sidewalk connections must be included as demonstrated and public easements must be established over all public sidewalks. D. Dedication of a right -of -way to straighten out the curve at 77th Street and Parklawn (this area of easement would be subject to approval of the City Engineer). E. The easternmost entrance off of 77th Street into the senior housing development must be designed as a shared entrance (with the golf course). F. The four -story senior independent buildings that face 77th street must be designed so as not to appear as the back side of buildings. G. All traffic mitigation measures and conditions as required by the Transportation Commission and traffic study must be followed. H. The developer /applicant would be responsible to pay their fair share of any mitigation measures that would be required as part of an approval of the overall development plan for the site. I. All buildings must be built with sprinkler systems, subject to review and approval of the Fire Marshall. J. Buildings at 4930 West 77th Street shall be limited to 4 stories or 50 feet, whichever would be less, and must maintain a 50 -foot setback from the rear lot line. K. Convenience gasoline stations and drive - through windows shall be prohibited on the north side of 77th Street. A-3g L. Compliance with all of the conditions outlined in the City Engineer's memo dated February 22, 2008. M. With the exception of Burgundy Place, the housing within this development must be senior housing. N. Following completion of the proposed hotel, a large percentage of senior housing must be built prior to or along with non - residential uses. O. Bike and bus traffic circulation be carefully considered throughout the development. P. With the exception of the buildings at 4930 77th Street West, future buildings north of West 77th Street development will be limited to four stories or 58 feet in height. Commissioner Forrest also suggested that point O. should reflect that the Transpiration Commission and the Bike Edina Task Force have weighed in the project and both have recommended approval of the project. Commissioner Grabiel seconded the motion. All voted aye; motion carried. P -08 -1 Preliminary Development Plan & Preliminary Rezoning Opus Northwest LLC 5146 Eden . enue Planner Teague told the Commission the applicant is proposing to tear down the existing public works building and build a four -story 114,764 square foot office building with attached four -level parking ramp. Planner Teague explained the request requires the following: Comprehensive Guide Plan Amendment; Rezoning from Planned Industrial District (PID) to Planned Commercial District 2 (PCD -2) Planner Teague pointed out to the Commission the project also requires building setback variances, parking structure setback variance and a building height variance. Planner Teague stated staff recommends approval of the preliminary development plan and preliminary rezoning for the proposed office building subject to the following conditions: . 1. The Final Development Plan must be generally consistent with approved Preliminary Development Plan date stamped January 31, 2008. 2. The design and construction of the entire project must be done with the Sustainable Initiatives as outlined in the applicant's narrative. 3. Trail and sidewalk connections must be included as demonstrated on the preliminary plans. Public easements must be established over all public sidewalks. L11 o e % MEMORANDUM — Plan Review �o ay ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT " CITY OF EDINA DATE: March 14, 2008 TO: Cary Teague - Planning Director FROM: Wayne Houle — City Engineer Jack Sullivan — Assistant City Engineer SUBJECT: Gateway Redevelopment — Overall Plan Mitigation Issues The framework for the mitigation for the overall plan is as follows: Traffic: Based off the traffic analysis throughout this area, staff is recommending that the developer be responsible for the improvements adjacent to the overall development plan. The other intersections such as along France Avenue will be the responsibility of the City, County, State, and City of Bloomington to work together to improve these intersections. The mitigation measures as tied to the phasing required by the developer are: A — Phase 1 mitigation at point 4 and 4a • Point 4 — Designate second north bound left -turn lane as shared through /left -turn lane at 77th Street/Trunk Highway 100 north bound. • . Point 4a - Add a second west bound right -turn lane at 77th Street to north bound Trunk Highway 100. Due to limited road right of way in this location the City is requesting that additional property be obtained from the developer in the northeast corner of the intersection, commonly referred to as the Burgundy Site. B — Phase 2 mitigation at point 7 • Add a second south bound left -turn lane at 77th Street/Minnesota Drive /Johnson Avenue. C — Phase 3 mitigation at points 3 and 5 • Point 3 — Designate north bound through lane as shared through /right -turn lane at 77t"' Street/Trunk Highway 100 South Bound. • Point 5 — Designate 77th Street/Pentagon Towers access as right in /right out for the north bound approach. D — Phase 4/5 mitigation at point 6 • Realignment of 77th Street and Parklawn Avenue to create a sweeping curve for the east/west movement. Refer to the attached "Summary Traffic Mitigation Plan — 2/21/08" for intersection point locations. GAEngineering \Genera1\70 - 79 Streets \77th Street West - Gateway \Overall Plan\20080314 WH Gateway memo to CT.doc r Sanitary Sewer: Staff is recommending that the following mitigation measures to the sanitary sewer system be implemented prior to approving certain phases: A — Phase 3: • Additional capacity to Metropolitan Council Environmental Services (MCES) interceptor 3 -BN -499. This interceptor drains through the City of Bloomington and is the MCES's responsibility. Both city staff's have been working with the MCES to develop a plan and schedule to upgrade this line within the next couple of years. • Upgrade of sanitary sewer along Computer Avenue from West 77th Street to Viking Drive. GAEngineering \General \70 - 79 Streets \77th Street West - Gateway \Overall Plan\20080314 WH Gateway memo to CT.doc 0 ..� r.r +JL' aw A-A. 2 4a°� ir 4 e p017 ! aw.� _ - - MDOEROTA 4� AW �+» 4 safrw"Mr'r. Vf SUMMARY TRAFFIC MITIGATION PLAN - 2/21/08 PENTAGON PARK REDEVELOPMENT OVERALL DEVELOPMENT PLAN PRELIMINARY - Exact financial arrangement for improvements s To: Mayor & City Council From: Cary Teague Planning Director Date: March 18, 2008 Subject: Preliminary Development Plan and Preliminary Rezoning, Opus Northwest LLC, 5146 Eden Avenue. Information /Background: KLYUK'11KhC L)MMbN1JA'1'1UN Agenda Item II. C. Consent Information Only Mgr. Recommends To HRA ® To Council Action Motion Resolution Ordinance Discussion At the request of the applicant Opus Northwest LLC, their application for Preliminary Development Plan and Preliminary Rezoning approval for the subject property located at 5146 Eden Avenue (Public Works site) has been continued. TO: Mayor & City Council REQUEST FOR PURCHASE FROM: Wayne D. Houle, PE, City Engineer VIA: Gordon Hughes, City Manager SUBJECT: REQUEST FOR PURCHASE IN EXCESS OF $15,000 DATE: March 18, 2008 AGENDA ITEM IV. A. ITEM DESCRIPTION:Country Club Area Sewer, Water and Street Reconstruction: Contract No. ENG 08 -1; Improvement Nos. A -213, A -214, SS -413, STS -297, W M -436, L-43 & L -49 Company 1. Palda & Sons, Inc. 2. Veit & Company, Inc. 3. Northwest Asphalt, Inc. 4. Max Steininger, Inc. 5. S. M. Hentges & Sons, Inc. 6. Lametti & Sons, Inc. RECOMMENDED QUOTE OR BID: Palda & Sons, Inc. Amount of Quote or Bid $ 14,165.325.32 $ 14,348,756.04 $ 14,493,631.32 $ 14,928,821.13 $ 16,508,855.09 $ 16,653,700.00 $ 14,165.325.32 GENERAL INFORMATION: This project is for reconstructing the water main system, repairing and upgrading the sanitary sewer system, upgrading the storm sewer system, replacing the street lighting system, and reconstructing the roadways within the Country Club District. If you recall, all components of the Northeast Edina Transportation Study (NEETS), as they relate to the Country Club District, have been incorporated into this project. Also recall that the following groups reviewed the proposed project prior to the City Council authorizing the project at the December 4, 2007 Project Public Hearing: • Edina Transportation Commission — recommendation of plan is consistent with NEETS. • Edina Bike Task Force • Edina School Bus • Edina Fire Department • Edina Preservation Board — recommended Certificate of Appropriateness. cont'd GENERAL INFORMATION: (cont'd) This project is designed for a two year staged reconstruction, with the northerly portion of the Country Club being reconstructed in 2008 and the southerly portion being reconstructed in 2009. The project is scheduled to begin March 31, 2008. The project is funded through special assessments, utility funds, and general fund. The analysis of the bid indicates the total project cost is $587,000 below project costs stated in the feasibility study. The feasibility study stated that $918,000 would be needed for the traffic safety improvements. This amount at the time of feasibility included most of the traffic safety improvements such as the speed humps, raised intersection and cross walks, and the brick crosswalks. The project cost from the bid for the traffic safety improvements identified in the NEETS is $277,197; this is the amount funded through the general fund. The bids ,also reflect preliminary assessment amounts of $16,665 for Assessment District A -213 and $23,278 for Assessment District A -214, compared to the feasibility study of $18,210 and $22,900 respectively. Bids were opened on March 6, 2008. The apparent low bid was Northwest Asphalt, Inc. (NA); however, after tabulating the bids a math error was discovered in NA's bid, which moved them to third place. NA's mistake was in the written unit price of an item. The City uses a unit price bid system for all roadway and utility projects, which is the standard bidding process with all municipalities, county, and state agencies. NA's attorneys has submitted a letter requesting that the City ignore this mistake and award the project to NA; see attached letter. Palda & Sons, Inc., along with their attorney, has also submitted letters stating that the City should abide by our specifications and award the project to Palda & Sons, Inc. Paul Pasko, III, with SEH, Inc., has submitted a letter analyzing the bids and recommends Palda & Sons, Inc. Our City attorney has counseled staff on this decision and feels that the City is in the right to award this project to Palda and Sons, Inc. Signature The Recommended Bid is within budget not within 71 GAEngineering\Conlrad Numbers\2008 \ENG 08 -1 Country Club Reconstr\ADMIN\MISC\20080318 ENG 08 -1 RFP.doc Public Works - Engineering Department lin, Finance Director Manager LI' all FA13YANSKE WESTRA HART & THOMSON Patrick J. Lee - O'Halloran . Direct: 612-359.7609 PROFESSK)NAL ASSOpATION PaWcki@fwtulaw.com March 7, 2008 .Y U F`4-- X218 U.S. IL Mayor Jaynes Hovland V [A X 95 182�3Sy Edina City Council E & U S. MJL Edina City Hail 4801 West 50" Street Wayne Houle Edina, MN 55424 Edina Cit y Engineer Edina City Hall 4801 West 50th Stmt VIA AX 9, 826 -0390 Edina. MN 55424 U.S. IL Edina City Council VIA EMAIL Edina City Hall 4801 & UMA�L Paul I, p asko III, West 50th Street PE S.E.H Edina, MN 55424 . 10901 Red Gi+c1e Drive, Suite 200 Minnetonka, MN 55343 Re: Country Club Area Sew Contract No. 08- 1(ENGq' Water and Street Reconstruction Improve ) rnent �Nos. -413; STS 29.1; V -436 A -213 (the upro�t „) SS & A -214; L_43 & L49 Dear Mayor.Hovland, City Council Members, Mr. Houle, and Mr. Pasko: I write on behalf of my client, Northwest Asphalt In The u c. ('Northwest "). P purposes of this letter are Contract to Northwest threefold: (1) to request that the Cit. Of the Project, the to west,.responsive and yes y award the Pro Jest's contract to any bidder other responsible bidder Ject's the City to reject all bids and rebid the Projects. Northwest• ' (2) to Protest the award and (3) in the alternative, to request 1. Award pto eft'& Contr ct to Northwest Northwest received the tabulation . identified Cry Engineer's bid tabu $14,493,631.32. Northwest as the third-lowest der aon yesterda Northwest should have est bidder with a y afternoon- The identified in its bid been identified total contract $745 was $13,748,628.27. the low bidder because the total Ce °f '� too high Thus, the total The City Engineer's tabulation is approximately Price $14,165,325.32 price from the co \Vile 11vo111PL183864183864-001 %98756.doc ntractor whom the City 800 LaSalleAveppe, Spite 1900, Minneapolis, Minnesota 554A2 Main; 612.359.7600 Fa=:6t2.359.7602 wwwfwhtlawcom March 7, 2008 Page 2 identified as the low bidder, Palda & Sons, Inc., is actually bid. 1119&9.7.05 higher than Northwest's En The $745,000 discrepancy between Northwest's bid total and the tabulation from the City gineer_ resgited .f, Qm a. hand titten error _on. Northwest's bid, form. The error,- .which is obvious in retrospect, concerns the unit price actually entered on the bid for Line Item No. (Cementitious Manhole Liner) and the unit price used to calculate the extended price shown on the bid and used to calculate the total. The bid's total extended price of $82,779.00 for Item No. 99 is correct and based on a $123.00 unit price multiplied by 673 units. However, the unit price actually printed in Northwest's bid is $1,230.00 /unit, ten times higher than the price used to calculate the correct extended price. When the incorrect $1,230.00 unit price is used, it results in an extended price of $827,'790 for Item No. 99. There is no ambiguity in Northwest's bid because the discrepancy between the unit price and extended amount for Item No. 99 is obvious on the face of Northwest's bid. That the $1,230.00 unit price is a transcription error in the placement of the decimal point is made even more apparent when Northwest's bid is compared to the unit price supplied by other bidders for Item No. 99. Each of the five other bidders identified a unit price for Item No. 99 from $108.00 /unit, at the lowest, to $180.00, at the highest. Northwest's actual bid price of $123.00 per unit is well within this range, but the $1,230 figure entered on the bid is.ten times higher. The manifest inconsistency between the $1,230.00 unit price and the other bids is illustrated by the following table: The City and its Engineer may question whether they have the authority to correct this obvious transcription error and reconcile the mistaken unit price of $1,230.00 when the extended price of $82,779.00. clearly shows that a $123.00 unit price was used by Northwest. Federal courts consistently allow public bodies to make this correction in instances such as this on Federal decisions agree that the correct extended price wilt prevail over the erroneous unit price when the unit price is totally inconsistent with other bids and there is no room for doubt that the intended unit price was reflected in the extended price. The following two cases are exemplary and involve nearly identical situations as presented by Northwest's bid. In both cases, the bidder was permitted to correct an erroneous unit price simply by moving the decimal point one space to the left: llrile l %vol 1 %PL%83864X83864-001l698756.doc t'atda & Sons Veit & Company Northwest (Transcription Northwest Max (Corrected) Steininger t & Error) He g es & Slams Unit Price for item $115.00 $108.00 $1,230.00 $123.00 $112.41 Sons $116.00 $180.00 No. 99 Extended $77,395.00 $72,684.00 $827,790.00 $82,779.00 $75,651.93 $78,068:00 $121,140.00 673 wets The City and its Engineer may question whether they have the authority to correct this obvious transcription error and reconcile the mistaken unit price of $1,230.00 when the extended price of $82,779.00. clearly shows that a $123.00 unit price was used by Northwest. Federal courts consistently allow public bodies to make this correction in instances such as this on Federal decisions agree that the correct extended price wilt prevail over the erroneous unit price when the unit price is totally inconsistent with other bids and there is no room for doubt that the intended unit price was reflected in the extended price. The following two cases are exemplary and involve nearly identical situations as presented by Northwest's bid. In both cases, the bidder was permitted to correct an erroneous unit price simply by moving the decimal point one space to the left: llrile l %vol 1 %PL%83864X83864-001l698756.doc March 7, 2008 Page 3 • In Matter of J & J Maintenance, Inc., 93 -1 CPD P 187, 1993 WL 67965 (Comp. Gen. 1993),' the Comptroller General permitted .a downward correction in the bid to reflect a unit price of $5,400 instead of $54,000. The corrected unit price was consistent with the extended price. Otherwise, the uncorrected unit price otheturi would baye been out pf line with! the government's :estimate and out of line with the other bidders. The Comptroller General determined that only the extended price could reasonably be regarded as having been the intended bid. • In 36 Comp. Gen. 429 (1956), the Comptroller General permitted recalculation when a bid showed a unit price for an item of $8.74, but the extended price was calculated based on a unit price, of $0.874. The bid was the lowest bid only if the extended price was used. The extended price was accepted because the unit price was totally inconsistent with the other bids and the engineer's estimate.2 The Comptroller General is the federal office responsible for deciding questions about federal procurements. Because the federal government is the largest consumer of construction services in the world, states frequently look to Comptroller General cases for guidance on public bidding questions. We are unaware of any Minnesota case addressing the issue encountered in this case, but resolved by the Comptroller General numerous times — i.e., that a municipality has authority to resolve an obvious transcription error in a unit price and use the correct extended amount from a bidder's bid form. There is only one conclusion to be drawn from the bid submitted by Northwest, particularly in comparison with the other bids. The $1,230.00 unit price was a transcription error from placing the decimal point one space off. The extended price clearly reflected the actual unit price used — $123.00 — which is consistent and within a reasonable range of the unit prices for Item No. 99 submitted by each of the other bidders. According to Minn. Stat. § 471.345, the City of Edina ( "City") must award the contract for the Project to the lowest, responsive and responsible bidder. Accordingly, Northwest requests =that the` Project's contract be awarded to it. This result is not only consistent with the law, but will result in 1. 697.05 in savings to the City. 2. Northwest Will Protest an Award to Any Other Bidder If the City awards the contract to Palda & Sons, Inc., as the second- lowest bidder, please consider this Northwest's official notice of intent to file a bid protest and seek injunctive relief. I caution the City against entering a contract with any other bidder because the City would. be, solely responsible for any damages suffered as that contract- will be determined to be illegal and void. ' A copy of this case is enclosed for your reference. 2 Here, although Northwest did receive an estimate from the City Engineer of the total project price, Northwest was not privy to the Engineer's estimate of Line Item No. 99 or any other line item. Northwest assumes, however, that the Engineer's estimate for Item No. 99 is far closer to $123.00 than $1,230.00. Mile le l Wo11 \PL\83864\83864-0011698756.doc .i March 7, 2008 Page 4 Please advise whether the City has issued a Notice signed a contract for the of Award or a City has or will take an Protect' Northwest intends to Notice to Proceed y of those actions. seek immediate in'u eed or J active relief is the 3. Re'eC an Finally, the City has a third option. The a rebid. A rebid generally aves e City has the authority Thus, the City owner money beCause bid to reject all bids y could achieve significant cost savings if it elects o dos are often lower onanad order I look forward rebid. rabid. this matter. �d.to a productive discussion with You and a favorable .. response regarding. Sincerely, PaAl � Enclosure Patrick I Iee_O Halloran PJL'kJ cc: Michael Pfeiffer (Northwest Asphalt) "file I %"I''PU83864%3"4 -Op 1 %698756.doc J B- 251355, -93 -1 CPD P 187, 1993 WL 67%5 (Comp.Gen.) Page I H B 251355, 93 -1 CPO P 187, 1993 WL 67965 (,Comp..Gen..):: COMPTROLL99 GENERAL *1 Matter of: J & J Maintenance, Inc. March 1, 1993 Donald E. Barnhill, Beg., and Joan K. Fiorino, Esq., East & Barnhill, for the pro - tester. Dennis E. Jontz, Esq., Civerolo,-Wolf, Gralow & Hill, for Phillips National, Inc., an. inner ested party,. Thomas A. Mason, Jr., Esq., Department of Transportation, for the agency. Andrew T. Pogany, Esq., Office of the General Counsel, GAO, participated is the preparation of the decision. DIGEST 4:1 a disCr.,pie .bete t uniC a$ .eteat%L `pe fog teat, did tTday lIe cirrecl ed dwarf rob a: unit .price lrit. is c9rieistedG wi81i Cte= eitead price if - the unit price dlearriy ie out of line wrest moth the gpve.rrt- `edbipF�;te arm the pri CM4 offered Lay . tiie o�isez bideiers, and- only the extended ice rda haply, can, be regarded as- fiaving 'breea.the intended b-Ur- DECISION J & J Maintenance, Inc. protests the proposed award of a contract to Phillips Na- tional, Inc. under invitation for bide (IFB) No. DTCG41- 93- B- QWE201, issued by the United States Coast Guard, peparte�eat..of Transportation, for f ac! l.i.ties mainten- ance aid supps7rt servicea J`& J contends that the contracting officer improperly g#tCer Piilli.e to cerre litter i;dei titiG:ioE "[;o[k_ i� 2idmpi({`iil ._wtth '' G)3e ei�bsetiec pride in °- :vio3ation cif tYie::terins: of`.the f�oiCZ:tatioe.. an d competitive bidding procedures. We deny the protest. The bid schedule solicited prices for numerous. line items for 1 base year and 4 t,!m Mears. k: , _16 addition, the:.sead "u1e• regaested each bidder to provide it t-0vta ice for each year. Phillips submitted a tot 1 bid of X8,387,882 and was initially determined to be the apparent low bidder. 1) J & J, initially determined to be the second .low 0 2008 Thomson /West. No Claim to Orig. U.S. Govt. Works. B- 251355,93-1 CPD P 187, 1993 WL 67965 (Comp-Gen-) Page 2 bidder, submitted a total bid of $8,392,30-4. in reviewing Phillips's bid, the con- _* . ATA. tra,ctiag officer dipcOvVed -, -hich called f6r a monthly unit price for refuse collection and disposal services and a corresponding extended price based on a stated "quantity" of 12 months. Spec if icAl ly,. Phillips 'tib& P y t rs ldr this I item ranged from $3.468 to $15,433. The government estimate was $7,508 per month, and the current prices being paid for these services by the agency was $4,978 per month. Since Phillips bid a unit price of $5,460 and an extended price of $64,800 for each of the corresponding option year line items for refuse collection ser- vices; and in view of the fact that the hi.q.4,etst.,bid xe.geived for this line item from any bidder was $15,433, 4 a dtii0th4171 re '14 on the basis of a clerical mis- take, after receiving verification of the intended bid-price from Phillips. This protest followed: pro�te*&_ that 'if thi*Ve JR,A(,. OU-094 tK"Y" betwee •, xWt,- gv ,q:- ce-s- price : is pr ;td-lie e6ir dt, subject to correction to the same extent and manner as any other mistake. In view of this provision, J & J contends that the unit price of $54,000 must be presumed to be correct, so that Phillips's total bid should. be $8,971,.082, which would make J & J the low bidder. J J argues that a.unit price Of $54,000 is reasonable considering that Phillips is not the incumbent and therefore will have substantial' start-up costs for equip- ment. J & J also argues that since Phillips's bid contains two prices for the item, only one of which would make Phillips low, the bid is ambiguous and should. have been rejected by the agency. w2 The agency asserts that the. intended unit price of $5.,460 for item No.. 0001All is evident from Phillips's bid itself because 12 times-the unit price noted on the bid would equal an amount far in excess of the other bid amounts and the.govqrn- mdnt estimate, and because the total of the bid reflects the extended amount of the intended unit price—The ageppy also states that refuse, collection 'services require no costs: . a,re. t ically pubcqhtracte4 locally And Lre start -up M , � 16S W :-. wo dolt n- .�.6f 440 ?,r-J#V .. -Frontier Contracting Co. , Inc.., -0. 9-214260.2, July 11, 1984, 84-2 CPD 1 40. The factors that go into such a determ7 . AtiQjx may- inv1Ud4:.0dMV W WWd - .aFige,_,-See Federal Aviation Administration, Bid correct ion, B'_187220, Odt. 84 197-Cp 7.6 -2 CPD 1.-326.. alips's unit Pic ice'oU$54,000.is totally out of.line with the other bidder d would result in uni.t prices an an extended price that is approxi"tely seven ® 2008 Thomson/West. No Claim to Orig. U.S. Govt. Works. R B- 251355,93-1 CPD P 187, 1993 WL 67965 (Comp.Gen.) Page 3 times ti►e government estimate. Ia such a situation, correction of 4 unit price to do- r -Ogoo" to a9 attended prift is. pr4pper, tizi 4r S. tltlit, �iPi4 � w E } art ex Awl oil to r -- Phillips's extended bid price, which corresponds. to its total bid, obviously was the firm's intended offer to the government. Therefore, the contracting officer properly allowed correction. See DaNeal Constr., Inc., B- 208469, Dec. 28, 1982, 82 -2 CPD 1 584. The..prQtest is denied. for James F. Hinchman General Counsel FN1 Phillips's total bid amount of $8,387,882 reflects the upward correction by the agency of Phillips's bid due to several minor arithmetic errors in the amount of $2,880. These arithmetic corrections were recorded in the bid abstract and raised Phillips's total bid from $8,385,002 to $8,387,882. The record shows that these minor arithmetical corrections were not material since they had no effect on the standing of bidders.. We will not discuss them further. FN2 J & J also argues that the agency, in requesting Phillips to verify its bid, `went beyond seeking a verification and sought the advice of. Phillips," and that Phillips, in response, `launche(dj into an explanation and clarification of the particular line item in question." In view of our conclusion that Phillips's'cler- ical mistake was apparent on the face of its bid, the extent and manner of veri- fication is not material. 0 2008 Thomson /West. No Claim to Orig. U.S. Govt. Works. FA ECG RE RECEIVED BENSON X1120 «► CITY OF EDINA UNITED STATES I ENGLAND I GERMANY I CHINA WILLIAM R JOYCE WJoycc@fwgre.com (612) 766 -7663 March 10, 2008 VIA FACSIMILE AND U.S. MAIL TO ALL Mayor James Hovland. Wayne Houle Edina City Council Edina City Engineer Edina City Hall Edina City Hall 4801 West 50th Street 4801 West 50th Street Edina, MN 55424 Edina, MN 55424 Edina City Council Paul J. Pasko III, PE Edina City Hall S.E.H. 4801 West 50th Street 10901 Red Circle Drive, Suite 200 Edina, MN 55424 Minnetonka, MN 55343 Re: Country Club Area Sewer, Water and Street Reconstruction, Contract N. 08 -1 (ENG), Improvement Nos. SS -413, STS 297; WM- 436; A -213; A- 214; L-43 & L -49 Dear Mayor Hovland, City Council Members, Mr. Houle and Mr. Pasko: We represent Palda & Sons, Inc. ( "Palda ") who has been informed orally that it is the lowest responsible, responsive bidder on the project described in the re line of this letter. We have also been provided a letter written by counsel for Northwest Asphalt, Patrick J. Lee - O'Halloran, wherein he demands that the contract be awarded to Northwest Asphalt or that the project be rebid. We think neither course of action is warranted in this case and that the contract should be awarded to Palda as the clear lowest, responsible, responsive bidder under the bid documents related to the project and under controlling Minnesota law. First, Northwest Asphalt claims that its bid error regarding unit price for bid item 99 (Cementitious Manhole Liner) is merely a transposition error and should be corrected, thus making them the apparent low bidder. However, case law in Minnesota supports the position that any errors with regard to pricing cannot be corrected after the bids are opened and doing so violates Minnesota's public bidding laws. And second, Northwest Asphalt's bid is, as a matter of law, non - responsive, and thus must be rejected. 2200 WELLS FARGO CENTER 1 90 SOUTH SEVENTH STREET I MINNEAPOLIS MINNESOTA 55402 -3901 TELEPHONE 612 - 766 -7000 1 FACSIMILE 612- 766 -1600 1 WWW.FAEGRE.COM March 10, 2008 Page 2 First, Northwest Asphalt's legal argument requesting a change in its bid cites clearly distinguishable and non - binding federal law, and ignores controlling, well - settled Minnesota law to the contrary. Mr. Lee- O'Halloran's letter argues that his client made a "transcription" error, changing the final amount of its bid. Mr. Lee - O'Halloran demands that the City correct that error. Because the corrected amount would then come in below Palda's winning bid, Mr. Lee - O'Halloran commands that the City "must" award the contract to his client, citing two federal government bid procurement cases. These cases are very different from the present case. In the present case, Section 1206.1 of the Minnesota Standard Specifications for Construction applicable to this project clearly state that in the case of a discrepancy between the extended price and the unit price, the unit price will govern. For Northwest Asphalt to now claim that the unit price should be trumped by the extended price would be directly contrary to the express provisions of these standard provisions applicable to this project. In other words, the possibility of a conflict between a unit price and an extension has already been provided for in the specifications and resolved in favor of the unit price. Furthermore, Minnesota law is absolutely clear -cut in disallowing any material changes, most notably to the final amount, following opening of the bids. Lovering- Johnson v. City of Prior Lake, 558 N.W.2d 499, 502 (Minn. App. 1997). Failure to abide by this long - standing law is not only patently illegal, but results in an award of bid preparation costs to anyparty thereby losing out on the contract. Id. at 503 -04. Since at least 1947, the Minnesota Supreme Court has held that once a bid has been opened, the public entity has no authority to make any material changes or modifications to the bid. Coller v. City of St. Paul, 26 N.W.2d 835, 841 (Minn. 1947). A change or variance is material when the change gives a bidder a substantial advantage or benefit not enjoyed by other bidders. Carl Bolander & Sons Co. v. City of Minneapolis, 451 N.W.2d 204, 206 (Minn. 1990). The Minnesota Supreme Court has explicitly stated that price or "other things that go into the actual determination of the amount of the bid" are deemed to affect the substance of a competitive bid. Foley Bros v. Marshall, 123 N.W.2d 387, 390 (1963). Under Foley, modifications in price affecting a bid's amount are deemed material. Id.; City of Prior Lake, 558 N.W.2d at 503. Mr. Lee- O'Halloran's legal argument is therefore bewildering. Despite what two clearly distinguishable federal decisions, one more than fifty years old, and neither having any authority under Minnesota law, may say, Minnesota courts require public entities to refrain from making oy price- related changes to bids once the bids have been opened. For example, in Lovering- Johnson v. City of Prior Lake, the court there faced this same situation. 558 N.W.2d at 501. A bidder asked a city government to change its bid based on a clerical error following the opening of the bids. Id. There, the bidder had placed a "plus" sign beside items that the bidder had actually intended to be deductions from the total price. Id. The city in that case decided to go through with what Mr. Lee - O'Halloran is requesting, allowing the bidder to change its bid price after opening. Id. After litigation, the court rejected this change, and granted bid preparation costs to the party that would have been the March 10, 2008 Page 3 low bidder but for this post - opening "clerical" modification. Id. at 503. Even though there was testimony from a city architect that it was apparent that the number in question was actually intended to be a deduct, this fact only came to light in discussions following the opening of the bid. Id. The court explained that it was precisely this type of inquiry or supplementation of a bid after bids have been opened that Minnesota law demands be avoided, as doing so "undermines the competitive bidding process." Id. The law is settled in this area. The Minnesota Supreme Court has stated that "no material change may be made in any bid after the bids have been received and opened since to permit such change would be to open the door to fraud and collusion." Griswold, 65 N. W.2d at 652. Minnesota courts have been absolute in enforcing the integrity of the bid process, disallowing bids that do not follow requirements even where the error only amounts to $6.00. J.L. Manta, Inc. v. Braun, 393 N.W.2d 490, 492 (Minn. 1986). And for good reason: If parties such as Northwest were awarded bids following correction of one price item, bidders would be able to submit bids that contained one dramatically high -priced item, keep the award for that price if still coming in lowest, but retain the ability to request the bid be corrected if not coming in lowest. Doing so would, as the Minnesota Supreme Court said, open the door wide to fraud and collusion. Because of the danger of the appearance of fraud and collusion, should the City of Edina do what Mr. Lee - O'Halloran asks and award the contract to Northwest Asphalt, Palda would be entitled to its bid preparation costs under Minn. Stat. § 471.345, subd. 14, and the bid would be susceptible to legal challenge. In addition, even if Northwest Asphalt's bid error with regard to the unit price of bid item 99 was a mere transcription error that could be corrected under Minnesota bidding laws, Northwest Asphalt's bid, on its face, is non - responsive for an additional material reason as well. Under the bid documents addendum 2, page PF -13 all bidders were required to list their subcontractors performing pipe lining for the sanitary sewer work and provide documentation and certifications that clearly show the product used has been tested and used successfully and the subcontractor installing the liner is experienced, qualified and certified to perform the work under the project specifications (three years active experience, at least 500 successful installations, certification that product will be installed in accordance with the project specifications). Northwest Asphalt and Palda both received bids from at least two subcontractors, Lametti and Sons ( "Lametti ") and Gene's Sewer and Water ( "Gene's "). Lametti's bid was $1,365,406 while Gene's bid was only $813,960, more than a $550,000 difference. On the face of Gene's proposal, it indicated that "Gene's Water and Sewer will line the sewer laterals from the property line to the city main with the NuFlow system which may or not meet the city specifications." Upon further review, Palda determined that Lametti was the only subcontractor bid it received that could meet the project specifications and listed Lametti as its subcontractor on the project, including the appropriate documentation and certifications required in the bid documents. From the bid tabulation, it is clear that Northwest Asphalt used Gene's bid since its price for that work is well under the Lametti bid and in line with Gene's bid, even though Gene cannot provide the appropriate documentation and certifications required under the bid documents. Under Minnesota March 10, 2008 Page 4 bidding laws, this material deviation from the specification requirements by Northwest Asphalt makes their bid undeniably non - responsive. Bolander, 451 N.W.2d at 207; Coller, 26 N.W.2d at 840. Accordingly, Northwest Asphalt's bid must be rejected. On the other hand, Northwest Asphalt has raised no specific objections to Palda's bid, claiming only that once the transcription error is corrected, Northwest Asphalt would be the lowest responsible, responsive bidder. Given that' Northwest" Asphalt's bid is non - responsive as a matter of law, as well as higher once the correction is made with regard to the unqualified subcontractor, and there are no material discrepancies in Palda's bid, the City of Edina is well within>the bidding laws of Min' nnesota -toy award the contract to Palda. Any threat of a bid protest by Northwest Asphalt would be frivolous in light of their multiple, material bid errors. Any award of the contract to Northwest Asphalt would subject the City to a legitimate, bid protest by Palda. Thus, we strongly recommend that the bidding laws be followed and the contract for the project be awarded to Palda. Very truly yours, FAEGRE & BENSON LLP William R. Joyce WRJ J oywr Enclosure cc: Jay J. Palda 1b.us.2686969.01 Proposal P�QSAL Mi1T18D 1'O: Edina County Club Restoration Project We bemby anbmlr chit prVPMd for: PROPOSAL SIMMUTED BY: Geae'g Water & Sewer 4500 Lyndale Ave. K Minneapolis, MN 55412 61781-3737/ FAX 612- 781 -3513 Gme's Water and Severer wal lino the sewer beta iris f m the property line to the city main win the NaFlow cysrcm whi& tt13I1r at Ma nct moetyhe ft MLWfiadiods. Does not include nay vacuum atoavadon ur barY511ing of hale needed to install liner, .,. .� Aryn,�y� �gmdum plcasc cal um et 612 -761 3737 of 612429-2714 tell ,r* 'W°Y '• �',y ' We lire hemby proposing in furnish labor, paulls and paterisly complete in aceordIM with the abo'Ye 1peeiRCafibds for the 1oa of: $3,410,00 Terms- payment In fall upon eompletlon. All n{a1C W it PUBM=d ID be M RxxifiaL All Work in a workmanlike manner according; to stamlbud pmetfcoa. Any alteration er deviation atom dwve tperifceVegn mvuivigf, niters Coss, wM be et MUM&I unly dpon verbal noocation, snd will baconrc m nabs dhargs ovcr and above the esthume_ All agreemfiu4t Wmtjngpnt upon strikers. arcidads or delays beyond our eontral, (fur workers are fully covered by Anthorlged $1g�luflE' ua,c:_�� Tj* pmpmd is .arid fiem 315 days Gam ismonce cim's water & Sawa owns all of die piping that fs intaMod und7 it hog been paid in full, wA dhouldthc owner fail to poy hilUt invoice m full Oerm'a WatcT do sewer my di$ cep and remove the new pipin& me proptual dots not ittdude oausnd ru�nd tomink utch es burled dcbrik underground spdakling syste+ar, high *rater rablea. n* curb or gutter replacement4 end any other tm must ground Condition ilroac itan+ if ahoonoiemd will he tin Gcora Clharge m thane i4amg tmc nor included >athe oaf&d proposal Gene's Water & ticwcr Inc. cannot be mvwlbls for &W violet damp orsimilar damage resalting linm the actual repairs the are made wt; do Compact the mfr aft are mpatr has bow made, but rannol. parantoc ttmr the Found inn not soda "cr. we cannot be rm7onsl6to far wry dwmogo to ttaea, s m*s, lawn or con—tc steps. walkwvr. nr driveways, bur will MAC Cray effort to promet them A roeebmiex Res may mhamelicaiiy be filed 15 days aft *A dale of servioe, ,ate ACCEPTANCE OF PROPMAL Accepted lty: —Oat' �--- please mailA3nt (lea dipped agreement to Gene's Water & &Iwo. The above prices, specifhcosmu and Conditions MM ead*igg and are hereby aoccWA Gene's Watcr & Sewn is wAotizW to do the were as Spot3ried above, and f apa'ee to abide by the payatoAr amts oufliaed 4bove. 'Ilhe individual or perscm who bas sipped the M=CM Mpresolls and wBr" that to or & is dniy wffioriad to m7m- al and bind The 0wder(s) and M410 0116 dpjt mitt+ PUCI►te&s of such soft ft will bo *cxi m Civil and criminal peaslticl, 1 have read sad MW=tsnd all of the amts and am tifons 6omalned in ihi8 document %M@G� M& A kw§@T 4600 Am N -IN" Ewa 612.7614M/ Fax 012. 7814513 i.00/100q9 ,d 8065 'ON ONI SNOS HV V01Vd ZZl9 WVLS: l l 900Z 'fl „WV �•M ■ • r, � t Paida &Sons Inc GENERAL CONTRACTOR C. H. Palda 147''4 1462 Dayton Ave. St Paul, MN 55104 -6308 N. J. Palda President and Treasurer (651) 644 -1604 Fax (651) 644 -5599 Jay C. Palda d y de nt ryl . ECEI VE®anc 03 -11 -08 �4A 12 20 CITY OF EDINA City Of Edina. ENGINEERING DEPT 4801 West 50th Street Edina, MN 55424 Attn: Wayne Houle City Engineer RE: Country Club Area Project City Project #08 -1 (ENG) Edina, MN Dear Mr. Houle: With respect to the above referenced project and the pending recommendation of it's award, I would like to offer the following for your consideration. Within your contract specifications, under the Instructions to Bidders, page I13-3, section 12.0, COMPARISON OF _BIDS, it clearly states; Comparison of bids will be based on the correct summation of item "totals, obtained from the unit prices bid. Given this information as presented by the City of Edina to all bidders of this project, it is apparent to all bidders, prior to bidding on this project, that they must take responsibility for the unit prices that, they provide to the City for each and every bid item on this project. We ask that you consider this information when deciding on the recommendation of award for this project. Thank you for your time. Respectfully Submitted, Pald and Sons, Inch , ay C Palda Vice President Cc Paul Pasko -Short Elliott Hendrickson THIS COMPANY IS AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER -M/F C be submitted personally to the City Engineer. Bids received by the City of Edina, either through the mail or by personal submission, after the time set for receiving them may be returned unopened. 8.0 REJECTION OF PROPOSALS Proposals may be rejected if they show any omission, alteration of form, additions not called or, con i iona i s or alternate bids not specified or irregularities of any kind. ftRR! c mabeeeced s y ncsae sue- 9.0 WITHDRAWAL OF PROPOSALS A bidder may withdraw his proposal without prejudice to himself, provided he /she files a written request with the City Clerk before the hour of letting, and such withdrawn proposal may be modified and resubmitted by the bidder at any time prior to the hour set for the opening of bids. 10.0 PUBLIC OPENING OF PROPOSALS Proposals will be opened publicly and read aloud in such place as designated at the time and the date set in the Advertisement for Bids. Bidders or their authorized agents re- invited to be present. 11.0 DISQUALIFICATION OF BIDDERS More than one proposal for the same project from an individual, firm, partnership or corporation under the same or different names will not be considered. Evidence that any bidder is interested in more than one proposal for the same work will cause rejection of all such proposals. Collusion between the bidders will be considered sufficient cause for the rejection of all bids so affected. Failure on the part of any bidder to carry out previous contracts satisfactorily or his/her lack of the experience or equipment necessary for the satisfactory completion of the work may be deemed sufficient cause for his disqualification. 12.0 COMPARISON OF BIDS Comparison of bids will be based on the correct summation of item totals, obtained from the unit prices bid. 13.0 EQUIPMENT When requested by the City, the bidder shall furnish a complete statement of the make, size, weight (where weight is one of the specified requirements) condition and previous length of service of all equipment to be used in the proposed work. February 2007 I13-3 SEH March 11, 2008 Wayne Houle, PE D irector of Public Works and City Engineer City of Edina 4801 West.501h Street Edina,'MN 55424 -1394 Dear Wayne: RE: Edina, Minnesota Country C1ub,Area Sewer, Water, and Street Reconstruction Recommendation to Award Construction Contract City Contract No. 08 -1 (ENG) SEH No. A- EDINA0503.01 14.00 REC t jp , MAR 1 1 2008 CITY OF EDINA As requested by the City of Edina (City), Short Elliott Hendrickson Inc.® (SEH) has completed its review the bids submitted to the City on March 6, 2008 for the three (3) lowest bidders. At the bid opening, the apparent three (3) lowest bidders in ascending order were Northwest Asphalt Inc. (Northwest), Palda & Sons, Inc. ( Palda), and.Veit & Company, Inc. (Veit). However, during preparation of our tabulation of bidders (bid tab), we discovered math errors in Northwest's and Palda's bids. The resulting correction of these math errors as described by Article 12.0 of the City's Instructions' to Bidders, revised August 2007, changed the order of the three (3) lowest bidders in ascending order to Palda, Veit, and Northwest. For your convenience, we have enclosed the bid tab with this letter. For Palda, Veit, and Northwest, we then reviewed the items that the instructions on page PF -I 1 of the bid form dated March 4, 2008 required be included with their bid. A summary of our review of these items for Palda, Veit, and Northwest is enclosed with this letter. The summary is a table titled Comparison of Items Submitted with Bids on March 6, 2008. As described by Article 3.0 of the Special Conditions, and based on both our bid tab and comparison of items submitted with bids on March 6, 2008, we recommend that the City award the contract for the referenced project to Palda and Sons, Inc. -as the lowest, responsible bidder. In the meantime, = please contact, me at 952.912.2611 or ppasko n sehinc.com with questions or comments. Sincerely, Paul J. asko:Il1, PE /Principal Project Manager Enclosure c: Dave Halter, SEH (with Enclosures) PAAE \E \Edina \050301 \IGenl \14\3 11 08 awrd rec.doc Short Elliott Hendrickson Inc., 10901 Red Circle Drive, Suite 200, Minnetonka, MN 55343 -9301 SEH is an equal opportunity employer I www.sehinc.com 952.912.2600 1 800.734.6757 1 952.9.12.2601 fax Shaded area denotes corrected fi ure SEH TAzmamm OF BIDS JJ �� i �r '-N Country Club Area Swer, Witter and Street Reconstruction Edina, Minnesota Contract No. ENG 084 (ENG) Improvement Nos. SS-413; STS - 297; WMAN; A-213 & A -214; L-43 & L-49 SEH No. EDINA0503.01 Bid Date 11:00 a.m., Thumday, March 6, 2008 Palda & Sons, Inc. 1462 Dayton Avenue SL Paul, MN 55104 $14,165,325.32 Veit & Company. Inc. 14000 Veit Place Rogers, MN 55374 $14,348.756.04 Northwest Asphalt Inc. 1451 Stagecoach Road Shakopee. MN 55379 $14.493.631.32 No. Item Unit Est Quantity Unit Cost Amount Unit Cost Amount Unit Cost Amount 1 MOBILIZATION LS 1 $868,800.00 $868,800.00 $413,000.00 $413,000.00 $720,000.00 $720.000.00 2 PRE - CONDITION SURVEY LS 1 470,000.00 470,000.00 422,000.00 422,000.00 170,000.00 170,000.00 3 SURVEY QUALITY LOCATES LS 1 20,000.00 20,000.00 23,500.00 23,500.00 10,000.00 10,000.00 4 VIBRATION MONITORING LS 1 175,000.00 175, 000.00 64, 000.00 84,000.00 35,000.00 35,000.00 5 TREE AND PRIVATE LANDSCAPING PROTECTION LS 1 10,000.00 10,000.00 236,000.00 236,000.00 270,000.00 270,000.00 6 CLEARING TREE 3 830.00 2,490.00 2,100.00 6,300.00 750.00 2,250.00 7 GRUBBING TREE 3 830.00 2,490.00 2,100.00 6,300.00 250.00 750.00 8 REMOVE CONCRETE CURB & GUTTER LIN FT 41,307 0.01 413.07 2.50 103,287.50 2.50 103287.60 9 REMOVE CONCRETE SIDEWALK SQ FT 29,421 0.46 13,533.66 0.30 8,826.30 0.60 14,710.50 10 REMOVE CONCRETE DRIVEWAY PAVEMENT SO YD 3,672 7.47 27,429.84 &W 11,016.00 7.50 27,540.00 11 REMOVE CONCRETE DRIVEWAY APRON SQ YD 2,699 7.47 20,161.53 3.00 8,097.00 7.50 20,242.50 12 REMOVE AND REPLACE CONCRETE STAIRS TREAD FT 184 79.00 14,536.00 37.00 6,806.00 85.00 15,640.00 13 REMOVE AND REPLACE CONCRETE STAIRS - SPECIAL TREAD FT 254 155.00 39.370.00 185.00 46.990.00 176.00 44,450.00 14 REMOVE BITUMINOUS DRIVEWAY PAVEMENT SO YD 54 10.00 540.00 2.00 106.00 5.00 270.00 15 REMOVE EXISTING SANITARY SEWER PIPE LIN FT 1,877 0.01 18.77 6.00 15.016.00 12.00 22,524.00 16 REMOVE EXISTING STORM SEWER PIPE UN FT 1,567 9.50 14,886.50 9.00 14,103.00 10.00 15,870.00 17 REMOVE EXISTING WATERMAIN LIN FT 6,879 0.01 68.79 7.00 48,153.00 10.00 88,790.00 18 REMOVE WATER MAIN PIPE - WOODDALE AVENUE BRIDGE LS 1 5.000.00 5,000.00 4,500.00 4,500.00 1,500.00 1,500.00 19 REMOVE EXISTING GATE VALVE ASSEMBLY EACH 51 200.00 10,200.00 28.00 1,428.00 538.36 27,354.36 20 REMOVE EXISTING HYDRANT & GATE VALVE ASSEMBLY EACH 48 250.00 12.000.00 352.00 18,896.00 590.00 28,320.00 21 REMOVE EXISTING SANITARY STRUCTURE EACH 7 500.00 3,500.00 300.00 2.100.00 500.00 31500.00 22 REMOVE EXISTING STORM STRUCTURE EACH 22 300.00 6,600.00 300.00 8,800.00 500.00 11.000.00 23 REMOVE LIGHTING SERVICE CABINET EACH 7 200.00 1,400.00 211.00 1.477.00 212.00 1,484.00 24 REMOVE LIGHT BASE EACH 73 275.00 20,075.00 290.00 21,170.00 295.00 21,635.00 25 SALVAGE LIGHTING UNIT EACH 76 160.00 11,400.00 74.00 5,824.00 75.110 51700.00 26 SALVAGE BRICKISTONE PAVERS SO FT 326 10.00 3.260.00 5.00 11830.00 5.00 1,630.00 27 SALVAGE SIGN TYPE C EACH 242 20.00 4,840.00 20.00 4,840.00 25.00 8,060.00 28 SALVAGE SIGN TYPE SPECIAL EACH 33 25.00 825.00 19.00 827.00 25.00 825.00 29 SAWING CONCRETE PAVEMENT (FULL DEPTH) UN FT 6,000 3.28 19,680.00 3.00 18.000.00 3.60 21,000.00 30 SAWING BITUMINOUS PAVEMENT (FULL DEPTH) LIN FT 2,549 1.45 3,696.05 2.00 5,098.00 2.501 6.372.50 'Elliott Hendrickson Inc. Pe fie W �Y 1 R O� Shaded area denotes J- correded figure Country Club Area Samr. Water and Street Reconstruction Edina, Minnesota Contract No. ENG 084 (ENG) Improvement Nos. SS -413; STS -297; WM-436; A -213 & A-214; L-43 & L-49 SEH No. EDINA0503.01 Bid Data 11:00 a.m., Thursday, March 6, 2008 Pakia 8 Sons, Inc. 1462 Dayton Avenue St. Paul, MN 55104 $14,165,325.32 Veit 8 Company, Inc. 14000 Veit Place Rogers, MN 55374 $14,348,766.04 Nortln■est Asphe 1451 Stagecoach Road Shakopee, MN 55379 $14,493,631.32 No. 31 Item REMOVE CASTING Unit EACH BACH Est Quantity 103 0 Unit Cost 0.01 Amount 1.03 0.00 Unit Cost 30.00 0.00 Amount 3,090.00 0.00 Unit Cost 50.00 Amount 5,150.00 0.00 33 34 ISALVAGE SALVAGE 8 REINSTALL CASTING 8 REINSTALL STORM SEWER PIPE EACH UN FT 83 416 50.00 35.00 4,150.00 14,560.00 225.00 22.00 18,675.00 9,152.00 100.00 35.00 8,30 0.00 14,560.00 35 ISALVAGE & REINSTALL STORM STRUCTURE EACH 6 1,000.00 6,000.00 880.00 5,280.00 1,200.00 7,200.00 36 ISALVAGE CURB STOP EACH 52 25.00 1,300.00 11.00 572.00 100.00 5,200.00 37 ISALVAGE GATE VALVE EACH 16 100.00 1,600.00 34.00 544.00 600.00 8,000.00 38 JABANDON PIPE LIN FT 4751 13.06 6,203.50 14.00 6,650.00 10.00 4,750.00 39 COMMON LABORER HOUR 80 51.00 4,080.00 64.00 5,120.00 65.00 5,200.00 40 EQUIPMENT RENTAL HOUR 80 130.00 10,400.00 430.00 34,400.00 175.00 14,000.00 41 TEMPORARY SANITARY FACILITIES EACH 4 1,500.00 6,000.00 2,000.00 8,000.00 1,500.00 6,000.00 42 STREET SWEEPER (WITH PICKUP BROOM) HOUR 160 175.00 28,000.00 125.00 20,000.00 150.00 24,000.00 43 WATER FOR DUST CONTROL M GALS 2.500 35.00 87,500.00 5.00 12,500.00 0.01 25.00 44 CALCIUM CHLORIDE SOLUTION GALS 8,000 1.25 10,000.00 2.00 16,000.00 1.25 10,000.00 45 TEST ROLLING RD STA 274 1.00 274.00 29.50 8,083.00 26.00 6,850.00 46 COMMON EXCAVATION (EV)(P) CU YD 29,814 17.19 512,502.66 13.50 402,489.00 10.35 308,674.90 47 48 COMMON EXCAVATION - HYDRO EXCAVATION (EV) ISUBGRADE EXCAVATION (EV) CU YD CU YD 1,683 906 77.05 10.00 129,675.15 9,060.00 142.00 13.50 238,986.00 12,231.00 100.00 13.10 168,300.00 11,668.60 49 SELECT GRANULAR BORROW - MODIFIED 7% (CV) CU YD 1,629 30.00 48,870.00 18.00 29,322.00 20.00 32,660.00 50 SELECT GRANULAR BORROW (CV) CU YD 960 20.00 19,200.00 13.25 12,720.00 18.00 17,280.00 51 TOPSOIL BORROW (CV) CU YD 2,623 25.99 68,171.77 21.00 55,083.00 1425 37,377.75 52 STABILIZING AGGREGATE TON 100 30.00 3,000.00 33.00 3,300.00 27.00 2,700.00 53 ISUBGRADE PREPARATION RD STA 271 132.001 35,772.00 169.00 45,799.00 125.00 33,875.00 54 AGGREGATE BASE PLACED, CLASS 5 TON 33,453 17.61 589,107.33 12.60 418,162.50 12.75 426,525.75 55 TRENCH REPLACEMENT BACKFILL TON 1,000 0.01 10.00 12.50 12,600.00 28.00 28,000.00 56 TYPE LVNW35030B NON WEARING COURSE MIXTURE TON 7,742 34.00 263, 228.00 44.00 340,648.00 46.50 360,003.00 57 TYPE MVWE45035B WEARING COURSE MIXTURE TON 7,405 79.00 584,995.00 49.00 362,845.00 51.00 377,655.00 58 JBITUMINOUS MATERIAL FOR TACK COAT GAL 2,9231 2.001 5,846.00 3.00 8,769.00 2.60 7,307.50 59 IPARABOLIC SPEED HUMP EACH 91 750.001 6,750.001 1,000.001 9,000.001 2,000.00 18,000.00 Short Elliott Hendrickson Inc. Page 2 of 16 /' Shaded area derwles J_ corteded ure ectl �Aawu■ ta-4p .wu A! =11ne 7GI7 ■ Avvalm s .v" ..■ Pa Ida Sons, Inc. Veit any. - country Club Area Sower, Water an Street Reconstruc n 14000 Veit Place 1451 Stagecoach Road Edina, Minnesota 1462 Dayton Avenue St. Paul, MN 55104 Rogers, MN 55374 Shakopee, MN 55379 Contract No. ENG 084 (ENG) Improvement Nos. SS -413; STS -287; VYM-436; A-213 & A-214; L-43 3 L-49 SEH No. EDINA0503.01 114,165,325.32 $74,348,756.04 114,493,631.32 Bid Date 11:00 a.m., Thursday, March 6, 2008 Rom Unit Est. Quantity Unit Cost Amount Unit Cost Amount Unit Cost Amount No. 60 SAW AND SEAL TRANSVERSE CRACK CONTROL LIN FT 19,360 1.44 27,878.40 1.50 29,040.00 1.50 29,040.00 61 JOINT 4 -INCH BITUMINOUS WEAR COURSE MIXTURE SO YD 11 90.00 990.00 79.50 874.50 60.00 WIF 62 FOR DRIVEWAYS 124NCH RC PIPE SEWER, DESIGN 3006, CLASS V LIN FT 747 58.37 43,602.39 33.00 24,651.00 29.85 22,297.95 63 15 -INCH RC PIPE SEWER, DESIGN 3006, CLASS V LIN FT 443 51.94 23,009.42 35.00 15,505.00 29.58 13,103.94 6IN FT g 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0•w 65 16 4NCH RC PIPE SEWER, DESIGN 3006, CLASS V LIN FT 20 62.15 1,243.00 37.50 750.00 33.58 671.60 66 1244NCH RC PIPE SEWER, DESIGN 3006, CLASS III LIN FT 60 78.50 4,710.00 42.60 2,550.00 47.98 2,878.80 67 274NCH RC PIPE SEWER, DESIGN 3006, CLASS III LIN FT 352 85.50 30,096.00 50.00 17,600.00 43.42 15,283.84 68 18 -INCH EO RC ARCH PIPE SEWER LIN FT 258 91.00 23,478.00 49.00 12,642.00 41.28 10,86024 69 44NCH PVC SCH 35 SUMP DRAIN PIPE LIN FT 242 17.00 4,114.00 24.00 5,808.00 20.30 4,912.60 70 6 -INCH PVC SCH 35 SUMP DRAIN PIPE LIN FT 511 21.00 10,731.00 25.00 12,775.00 21.05 10,756.55 71 LINER FOR 18 -INCH RCP STORM PIPE LIN FT 615 61.00 37,515.00 54.00 33,210.00 59.00 36,285.00 72 IPIPE IPIPE LINER FOR 27 -INCH RCP STORM PIPE LIN FT 669 72.00 48,168.00 63.00 42,147.00 70.00 46,830.00 73 IPIPE LINER FOR 304NCH RCP STORM PIPE LIN FT 431 109.00 46,979.00 93.00 40,083.00 102.00 43,962.00 74 ICONNECT TO EXISTING SANITARY SEWER EACH 38 602.00 19,076.00 1,400.00 53200.00 800.00 22.800.00 75 8-INCH PVC SDR 35 SANITARY SEWER PIPE (0 FT- LIN FT 1.876 47.84 89,747.84 30.00 56.280.00 24.70 46.33720 76 10 FT) 8-INCH PVC SDR 35 SANITARY SEWER PIPE (10 LIN FT 411 47.84 19,66224 33.00 13,563.00 26.49 10,887.39 77 FT -12 FT) 84NCH PVC SDR 35 SANITARY SEWER PIPE (12 LIN FT 76 47.84 3,635.84 33.00 2,508.00 29.51 2,242.76 78 FT -14 FT) IPIPE LINER FOR 64NCH VCP SANITARY SEWER LIN FT 11,589 38.00 440,382.00 33.00 382,437.00 41.00 476,149.00 79 IPIPE LINER FOR 8 -INCH VCP SANITARY SEWER LIN FT 3,199 44.00 140,756.00 28.50 91,171.50 31.00 99.169.00 80 PIPE LINER FOR 8-INCH VCP SANITARY SEWER - LIN FT 812 80.00 64,960.00 46.00 36,640.00 6925 56,231.00 EDGEBROOK BACKYARD 81 PIPE LINER FOR 94NCH VCP SANITARY SEWER LIN FT 522 47.001 24,534-001 32.00 16.704.00 38.00 19,836.00 82 SANITARY SEWER SPOT REPAIR 64NCH PVC SDR 135 LIN FT 125 98.211 12276.25 100.00 12,500.00 80.70 10.087.50 (0 FT -10 FT) I rt Elliott Hendrickson Inc. P. f 16 Shaded area denotes corrected figure $EH TABULATION OF BIDS Country Club Area Sewer, Water and Street Reconstruction Pakia & Sons, Inc. Veit & Company, Inc. Northwest Asphalt Inc. Edina, Minnesota 1462 Dayton Avenue 14000 Veit Place 1451 Stagecoach Road Contract No. ENG 08 -1 (ENG) St. Paul, MN 55104 Rogers, MN 55374 Shakopee, MN 55379 Improvement Nos. SS -413; STS -297; WM-436; A-213 & A-214; L-43 & L-49 SEH No. EDINA0503.01 Bid Date 11:00 a.m., Thursday, March 6, 2008 $14,165,325.32 $14,346,756.04 $14,493,631.32 Est No. Item Unit Quantity Unit Cost Amount Unit Cost Amount Unit Cost Amount 83 SANITARY SEWER SPOT REPAIR 6 -INCH PVC SDR LIN FT 10 200.00 2,000.00 100.00 1,000.00 175.52 1,755.20 35 (10 FT -12 FT) 84 SANITARY SEWER SPOT REPAIR 84NCH PVC SDR LIN FT 20 200.00 4,000.00 100.00 2,000.00 81.50 1,630.00 35 (0 FT -10 FT) 85 SANITARY SEWER SPOT REPAIR 8 -INCH PVC SDR LIN FT 20 200.00 4,000.00 100.00 2,000.00 81.50 1,630.00 35 (10 FT -12 FT) 86 SANITARY SEWER SPOT REPAIR 8 -INCH PVC SDR LIN FT 50 132.00 6,600.00 100.00 5,000.00 86.42 4,321.00 35 (12 FT -14 FT) 87 SANITARY SEWER SPOT REPAIR 8 -INCH PVC SDR LIN FT 50 168.00 8,400.00 100.00 5,000.00 92.04 4,602.00 35 (14 FT -16 FT) 88 SANITARY SEWER SPOT REPAIR 8 -INCH PVC SDR LIN FT 75 144.00 10,800.00 100.00 7,500.00 106.08 7,956.00 35 (16 FT -18 FT) 89 8 -INCH HDPE SDR 11 SANITARY SEWER (DIPS) LIN FT 5,046 58.60 295,695.60 54.00 272,484.00 113.31 571,76226 PIPE BURSTING 90 REMOVE AND REPLACE SANITARY SEWER EACH 10 1,371.00 13,710.00 11850.00 18,500.00 1,083.33 10,833.30 SERVICE WYE -CIPP 91 INSTALL SANITARY SEWER SERVICE WYE -PIPE EACH 161 1,426.00 229,586.00 1,850.00 297,850.00 1,048.33 168,781.13 BURSTING 92 INSTALL SANITARY SEWER SERVICE WYE - CIPP EACH 281 728.00 204,568.00 1,850.00 519,850.00 1,048.33 294,580.73 93 6 -INCH X 6 -INCH PVC SANITARY SEWER SERVICE EACH 60 100.00 6,000.00 124.00 7,440.00 330.00 191600.00 WYE 94 REMOVE AND REPLACE SANITARY SEWER EACH 272 1,723.00 468,656.00 2,800.00 761,600.00 1,645.00 447,440.00 SERVICE PIPE 95 PIPE LINER FOR SANITARY SEWER SERVICE EACH 238 6,556.00 1,560,328.00 4,950.00 1,178,100.00 3,900.00 928,200.00 PIPE - BRACED 96 ISANITARY SEWER CLEAN OUT EACH 2 350.00 700.00 2,000.00 4,000.00 200.00 400.00 97 CONSTRUCT BULKHEAD IN SANITARY MH EACH 14 100.00 1,400.00 176.00 2,464.00 231.00 3,234.00 98 CONSTRUCT SANITARY MANHOLE BENCH EACH 73 200.00 14,600.00 500.00 36,500.00 693.00 60,589.00 99 CEMENTITIOUS MANHOLE LINER LIN FT 673 115.00 77,395.00 108.00 72,684.00 1,230.00 827,790.00 100 2 -INCH RIGID INSULATION SO YO 500 25.00 12,500.00 12.00 6,000.00 18.00 91000.00 101 TEMPORARY WATER LS 1 168,750.00 168,750.00 243,000.00 243,000.00 127,000.00 127,000.00 102 TEMPORARY WET TAP WATER MAIN VALVE EACH 6 6,000.00 36,000.00 8,200.00 49,200.00 5,720.00 34,320.00 103 12-INCH CONNECT TO EXISTING WATERMAIN EACH 39 602.00 23.478.00 1,500.00 58,500.00 760.00 29,250.00 104 SDR 40 PVC IRRIGATION CONDUIT LIN FT 50 20.00 1,000.00 24.00 1,200.00 10.43 521.50 Short Elliott Hendrickson Inc. Page 4 of 16 Shaded area denotes corrected figure SEH TABULATION OF BIDS Country Club wer, Water an treat Reconstruction Edina, Minnesota Contract No. ENG 08 -1 (ENG) Improvement Nos. SS -413; 8TS -297; WW-436; A-213 & A-214; L-43 & L-49 SEH No. EDINA0503.01 Bid Date 11:00 a.m., Thursday, March 6, 2008 PaIda A Sons, Inc. 1462 Dayton Avenue St. Paul, MN 55104 $14,165,325.32 Veft & Company. Inc. 14000 Veit Place Rogers, MN 55374 $14,348,756.04 Northwest Asphalt Inc. 1451 Stagecoach Road Shakopee, MN 55379 $14.493,631.32 No. hem Unit Est Quantity Unit Cost Amount Unit Cost Amount Unit Cost Amount 105 6-INCH GATE VALVE AND BOX EACH 37 1,801.00 66,637.00 1,020.00 37.740.00 1,700.00 62,900.00 106 84NCH GATE VALVE AND BOX EACH 37 1,916.00 70,892.00 1,300.00 48.100.00 1,950.00 72.150.00 107 HYDRANT AND GV ASSEMBLY EACH 55 5,363.00 296,065.00 5,700.00 313,500.00 5,374.67 295,606.85 108 64NCH DIP WATER MAIN CL 52 LIN FT 688 74.98 51,586.24 32.50 22,360.00 33.67 23,164.96 109 6 -INCH PVC SDR 18 WATER MAIN LIN FT 3,330 38.70 128,871.00 28.00 93,240.00 23.71 78,954.30 110 84NCH PVC SDR 18 WATER MAIN UN FT 3,517 40.90 143,845.30 31.00 109,027.00 25.25 88,80425 111 6 -INCH HDPE SDR 11 (DIPS) PIPE BURSTING LIN FT 11,964 50.50 605,192.00 45.00 539,280.00 80.66 969,02624 112 6 -INCH HDPE SDR 11 (DIPS) PIPE BURSTING LIN FT 5,722 60.20 344,464.40 55.00 314,710.00 89.06 509,801.32 113 POTHOLE WATER MAIN EACH 111 750.00 83,250.00 2,100.00 233,100.00 90525 100,482.75 114 DIP WATERMAIN FITTINGS LOS 7,555 5.75 43,441.25 10.00 75,550.00 7.33 55,378.15 115 REMOVE AND REPLACE WATER SERVICE PIPE EACH 392 2,212.00 867,104.00 2,925.00 1,146,600.00 2,615.00 1,025.080.00 116 REMOVE AND REPLACE WATER SERVICE PIPE - BRACED EACH 126 2,212.00 278,712.00 3,500.00 441,000.00 2,615.00 329,490.00 117 REMOVE AND REPLACE WATER SERVICE PIPE - RELOCATE CURB STOP BOX EACH 40 2,732.00 109,280.00 4,300.00 172,000.00 2,615.00 104,600.00 118 REMOVE AND REPLACE WATER SERVICE PIPE - RELOCATE CURB STOP BOX - BRACED EACH 9 2,732.00 24,588.00 4,300.00 38,700.00 4,815.00 41,535.00 119 REMOVE AND REPLACE WATER SERVICE PIPE - TRENCHLESS EACH 4 3,532.00 14,128.00 5,800.00 23.200.00 2.598.00 10,392.00 120 CONNECT TO EXISTING STORM SEWER EACH 52 602.00 31,304.00 704.00 36,608.00 600.00 31,200.00 121 CONNECT 4-INCH PVC TO 64NCH PVC SCH 35 EACH 12 200.00 2,400.00 197.00 2,364.00 400.00 4,800.00 122 CONNECT 6 -INCH PVC EXISTING STORM STRUCTURE EACH 3 200.00 600.00 550.00 1,650.00 1,000.00 3,000.00 123 TYPE BB DRAINAGE STRUCTURE (2 FT x 3 FT BOX) EACH 13 1,631.00 21.203.00 1,500.00 19,500.00 870.00 11,310.00 124 TYPE CC DRAINAGE STRUCTURE (48 -INCH DIA.) (0-8 FT DEPTH) EACH 13 2,224.00 28,912.00 2,530.00 32,890.00 1,900.00 24,700.00 125 TYPE CC DRAINAGE STRUCTURE (60 -INCH DIA.) (0-8 FT DEPTH) EACH 3 3,257.00 9,771.00 3,350.00 10,050.00 2.567.00 7,701.00 126 TYPE CC DRAINAGE STRUCTURE (84 -INCH DIA.) (0-8 FT DEPTH) EACH 1 6,586.00 6,586.00 5,500.00 5,500.00 4,486.00 4,466.00 127 TYPE CC DRAINAGE STRUCTURE (MINCH DIA.) (0-8 FT DEPTH) EACH 1 9,770.00 9,770.00 7,000.00 7,000.00 5,900.00 5,900.00 128 TYPE CC DRAINAGE STRUCTURE WITH WEIR (60- INCH DIA.) (0-8 FT DEPTH) EACH 1 3,757.00 3,757.00 3,400.00 3,400.00 2,900.00 2,900.00 Elliott Hendrickson Inc. Pa 16 JShaded area denotes corrected fi ure SEN TABULATION OF BIDS Country Club-Area Sewer, Water and Street Reconstruction Pa Ida & Sons, Inc. Veft & Company. Inc. Northwest Asphalt Inc. Edina, Minnesota 1462 Dayton Avenue 14000 Veit Place 1451 Stagecoach Road Contract No. ENG 08-1 (ENG) St. Paul, MN 55104 Rogers. MN 55374 Shakopee, MN 55379 Improvement Nos. SS -413; STS497; WM -336; A -213 & A -214; L-43 & L-49 SEH No. EDINA0503.01 Bid Date 11:00 a.m., Thursday, March 6, 2008 $14,165.325.32 $14,348,756.04 $14,493,531.32 Est No. Item Unit Quantity Unit Cost Amount Unit Cost Amount Unit Cost Amount 129 TYPE CC DRAINAGE STRUCTURE WITH WEIR (84- EACH 1 6,436.00 6,436.00 9,325.00 9.325.00 5,330.00 5,330.00 INCH DIA.) (0-8 FT DEPTH) 130 TYPE CC DRAINAGE STRUCTURE WITH WEIR (96- EACH 1 11,970.00 11,970.00 12,250.00 12.250.00 6,640.00 6,640.00 INCH DIA.) (0-8 FT DEPTH) 131 TYPE DD DRAINAGE STRUCTURE (48 -INCH DIA.) EACH 5 2,284.00 11,420.00 2,700.00 13,500.00 3,040.00 15,200.00 (0-8 FT DEPTH) 132 48 -INCH DUI. SANITARY SEWER MANHOLE (0-8 EACH 12 2,798.00 33,576.00 2,050.00 24,600.00 1,925.00 23,100.00 FT) 133 48 -INCH DIA. MANHOLE EXTRA DEPTH LIN FT 33 100.00 3,300.00 102.00 3,366.00 100.00 3,300.00 134 SANITARY SEWER 48 -INCH DIA. OUTSIDE DROP EACH 1 4,016.00 4,016.00 5,700.00 5,700.00 3,675.00 3,675.00 MANHOLE (0-8 FT') 135 60 -INCH DIA. MANHOLE EXTRA DEPTH LIN FT 9 250.00 2,250.00 165.00 1,485.00 170.00 1,530.00 136 84 -INCH DIA. MANHOLE EXTRA DEPTH LIN FT 6 300.00 1,800.00 315.00 1,890.00 335.00 2,010.00 137 WINCH DUI. MANHOLE EXTRA DEPTH LIN FT 81 400.00 3,200.00 415.00 3,320.00 450.00 3,600.00 138 STORMWATER TREATMENT MANHOLE 1A OrCH 1 68,914.00 68,914.00 43,500.00 43,500.00 44,771.00 44,771.00 139 STORMWATER TREATMENT MANHOLE IS EACH 1 108,907.00 108,907.00 57,500.00 57,500.00 57,445.00 57,445.00 140 STORMWATER TREATMENT MANHOLE 2A EACH 1 55,690.00 55,690.00 28,500.00 _ 28,500.00 29,211.46 29,211.46 141 STORMWATER TREATMENT MANHOLE 2B EACH 1 50,268.00 50,268.00 23,000.00 23,000.001 24,322.46 24,322.46 142 CASTING ASSEMBLY R -1733 EACH 41 500.00 20,500.00 487.00 19,967.00 290.00 11,890.00 143 CASTING ASSEMBLY R -1733 W/ SELF SEALING EACH 68 500.00 34,000.00 507.00 34.476.00 310.00 21,080.00 LID 144 CASTING ASSEMBLY R -1733 WITH SELF SEALING EACH 10 500.00 5,000.00 507.00 5,070.00 310.00 3,100.00 LID - LOW PROFILE 145 CASTING ASSEMBLY R- 3067 -V EACH 32 600.00 19,200.00 412.00 13,184.00 410.00 13,120.00 146 CASTING ASSEMBLY R- 3501 -TR EACH 1 700.00 700.00 454.00 454.00 450.00 450.00 147 CASTING ASSEMBLY R- 3501 -TL EACH 3 700.00 2,100.00 454.00 1,362.00 450.00 1,350.00 148 ADJUST CATCH BASIN/MANHOLE EACH 237 468.00 110,916.00 222.00 52,614.00 555.00 131,535.00 149 RECONSTRUCT MANHOLE LIN FT 280 407.00 113,960.00 488.00 136,640.00 300.00 84,000.00 150 4 -INCH CONCRETE WALK - SO FT 39,358 2.95 116,106.10 5.60 220,404.80 3.55 139,720.90 151 4 -INCH CONCRETE WALK - STAMPED SO FT 244 9.00 2,196.00 11.00 2,684.00 9.25 2,257.00 152 CONCRETE CURB & GUTTER, DESIGN 8618 LIN FT 42,039 0.01 420.39 153 CONCRETE CURB AND GUTTER, DESIGN 8618 - j LIN FT 800 9.00 378,351.00 8.75 367,641.25 HAND FORM -1 12.50 1 10,000.00 17.50 14,000.00 13.00 10,400.00 Short Elliott Hendrickson Inc. Page 6 of 16 -A �/ Shaded area denotes corteded it ure SEH TABULATION OF BIDS Country Club Area Sewer, Water and 3 treat Reconstruction Edina. Minnesota Contract No. ENG 08 -1 (ENG) Improvement Nos.-SS-413; STS -297; WM -436; A-213 & A-214; L-43 S L-49 , Inc- 1462 Dayton Avenue St. Paul, MN 55104 Veit & Camp any, Inc. 14000 Veit Place Rogers, MN 55374 o wes Inc. 1451 Stagecoach Road Shakopee, MN 55379 SEN No. EDINA0603.01 Bld Date 11:00 a.m., Thursday, March 6, 2008 $14,165,325.32 $14,348,756.04 $14,493,631.32 Est No. 154 Item 6 -INCH CONCRETE DRIVEWAY PAVEMENT WITH 6 INCH CLASS V AGGREGATE BASE Unit SO YD Quantity 3,974 Unit Cost 43.00 Amount 170,882.00 Unit Cost 41.00 Amount 162,934.00 Unit Cost 44.00 Amount 174,856.00 155 6 -INCH CONCRETE DRIVEWAY APRON WITH 6- INCH CLASS 5 AGGREGATE BASE SO YD 2,707 43.00 116,401.00 44.00 119,108.00 44.00 119,108.00 156 157 7 -INCH CONCRETE VALLEY GUTTER PRE - FABRICATED TRUNCATED DOME FOR PEDESTRIAN RAMP SO YD SO FT 29 177 50.00 45.00 1,450.00 7,965.00 47.50 39.50 1,377.50 6,991.50 45.00 47.50 1,305.00 8,407.50 158 159 160 161 162 163 IBRICK CROSSWALK JINsTALL BRICK/STONE PAVERS BOLLARD, STONE VENEERED TRAFFIC CONTROL SIGN PANEL TYPE C FURNISH AND INSTALL SIGN PANEL TYPE 'SPECIAL 1' SO FT SO FT EACH LS SO FT EACH 19,637 326 3 1 866 4 11.90 15.00 2,800.00 50,000.00 38.00 300.00 233,680.30 4,890.00 8,400.00 50.000.00 32,908.00 1,200.00 11.00 13.00 8,400.00 31,600.00 32.00 233.00 216,007.00 4,238.00 25,200.00 31,600.00 27,712.00 932.00 13.15 9.50 7,000.00 30,000.00 30.00 300.00 258,226.55 3,097.00 21,000.00 30,000.00 25,980.00 1,200.00 164 FURNISH AND INSTALL SIGN PANEL TYPE 'SPECIAL 2' EACH 291 300.00 8,700.00 258.00 7,482.00 300.00 8.700.00 165 166 167 PAVEMENT MESSAGE (RIGHT ARROW) EPDXY PARABOLIC SPEED HUMP MARKINGS 12 -INCH SDR 11 HDPE DIRECTIONAL DRILL WATER MAIN EACH SQ FT. LIN FT 2 2,730 200 147.00 8.45 79.00 294.00 23.068.50 15,800.00 155.00 14.50 150.00 310.00 39,585.00 30,000.00 150.00 15.00 106.00 300.00 40.050.00 21,200, 00 168 169 170 171 172 173 174 4 -INCH SOLID LINE WHITE -EPDXY 24 -INCH STOP LINE WHITE - EPDXY 4-INCH DOUBLE SOLID LINE YELLOW - EPDXY NMC LOOP DETECTOR (6 FT X 6 FT) SILT FENCE, TYPE MACHINE SLICED CONSTRUCTION FENCE FLOTATION SILT CURTAIN, TYPE MOVING WATER UN FT LIN FT LIN FT EACH LIN FT LIN FT LIN FT 1061 75 915 8 1,643 513 400 0.35 7.00 0.72 1,300.00 1.80 1.50 16.26 37.10 525.00 658.80 10,400.00 2,957.40 769.50 6.504.00 0.35 7.25 0.7b 1,250.00 2.50 1.50 10.00 37.10 543.75 886 25 10,000.00 4,107.50 769.50 4,000.00 0.35 7.00 0.72 1,200.00 2.15 2.00 37.10 525.00 658.80 9,600.00 3,532.45 1,026.00 17.00 6,800.00 175 176 177 178 179 180 ISHRUBS, INLET PROTECTION, TYPE B INLET PROTECTION, TYPE A REPLACEMENT TREE PERENNIALS, NO. 1 CONTAINER GRASSES, NO. 1 CONTAINER NO.2 CONTAINER EACH EACH EACH EACH EACH EACH 108 90 2 108 82 40 175.00 175.00 400 .110 15.00 15.00 25.00 18.900.00 15,750.00 800.00 1,620.00 1,230.00 1,000.00 424.001 424.00 350.00 12.50 12.50 22.001- 45,792.00 38,180.00 700.00 1,350.00 1,025.00 880.001 200.001 200.00 350.00 15.001 21,600.00 18,000.00 700.00 1,620.00 1,230.00 1.000,00 15.001 25.00 Elliott Hendrickson Inc. Pas JShaded area denotes correded figure SEH TABULATION OF BIDS Country Club Area Sewer, Water and Street Reconstruction Edina, Minnesota Contract No. ENG 08 -1 (ENG) Improvement Nos. SS-413; STS -297; WM -436; A -213 & A -214; L-43 & L -49 SEH No. EDINA0503.01 Bid Date 11:00 a.m., Thursday, March S. 2008 Palda & Sons, Inc. 1462 Dayton Avenue SL Paul, MN 55104 $14,165.325.32 Veit & Company, Inc, 14000 Veit Place Rogers, MN 55374 $14,348,756.04 Northwest Asphalt Inc. 1451 Stagecoach Road Shakopee, MN 55379 $14,493,631.32 No. Item Unit Est. Quantity Unit Cost Amount Unit Cost Amount Unit Cost Amount 181 SODDING TYPE LAWN W/ FERTILIZER SO YD 16,146 3.39 54,734.94 2.50 40.365.00 3.85 62.162.10 182 SHREDDED HARDWOOD MULCH, 3 -INCH DEPTH CUYD 5 75.00 375.00 63.00 315.00 75.00 375.00 183 REINFORCED SOIL SQ YD 701 40.00 28,040.00 13.00 9,113.00 25.00 17,525.00 184 TEMPORARY ELECTRIC POWER SYSTEMS LS 1 5,135.00 5,135.00 5,423.64 5,423.64 5,500.00 5,500.00 185 SERVICE CABINET EACH 2 4,585.00 9,170.00 4,800.00 9,600.00 4,885.00 9,770.00 186 SERVICE CABINET FOUNDATION EACH 2 920.00 1,840.00 971.00 1.942.00 1,000.00 2,000.00 187 LIGHTING UNIT (ARLINGTON LANTERN) EACH 72 2,920.00 210,240.00 2,550.00 183,600.00 2,580.00 185,760.00 188 LIGHT BASE FOUNDATION, DESIGN 3 MOD. EACH 72 1,000.00 72,000.00 528.00 38,016.00 535.00 38,520.00 189 1 1/2 -inch NONMETALLIC CONDUIT (DIRECT BORE) L.F 21,405 6.63 141,915.15 7.00 149,835.00 7.10 151,975.50 190 UNDERGROUND WIRE, 1 CONDUCTOR NO.4 L.F 45,600 1.57 71,592.00 1.50 68,400.00 1.70 77,520.00 191 UNDERGROUND WIRE, 1 CONDUCTOR NO.6 GND L.F 22,750 1.08 24,570.00 1.10 25,025.00 1.15 26,162.50 192 UNDERGROUND WIRE, 1 CONDUCTOR NO. 12 LIN FT 3,888 0.39 1,516.32 0.40 1,555.20 0.40 1,555.20 193 HANDHOLE EACH 18 370.00 6,660.00 390.00 7,020.00 400.00 7,200.00 194 STORMWATER TREATMENT MANHOLE 3A EACH 1 81,315.00 81,315.00 37,000.00 37,000.00 33,365.46 33,365.48 195 STORMWATER TREATMENT MANHOLE 4A EACH 1 86,220.00 86,220.00 38,000.00 38,000.00 34,962.46 34,962.46 196 STORMWATER TREATMENT MANHOLE 48 EACH 1 87,825.00 87,825.00 40,000.00 40,000.00 36,560.46 36,560.46 TOTAL PROJECT $14,166,328.32 $14,348,756.04 $14,493,63L32 Northwest Asphalt Inc. - multiplication error and column adding error correct amount is shown. Palda & Sons - column adding error correct amount is shown. Short Elliott Hendrickson Inc. Page 8 of 16 JShaded area deroes correded figure SEH TABULATION OF BIDS Country Club Area Sewer, Water and Street Reconstruction Edina, Minnesota Contract No. ENG 08-1 (ENG) Improvement Nos. SS-413; STS -297; WM -436; A-213 & A-214; L-433 & L-49 SEH No. EDINA0603.01 Bid Date 11:00 a.m., Thursday, March 6, 2008 Max Steininger Inc. 3080 Lexington Ave S Eagan. MN 55121 $14,928,821.13 S.M. Hentges & Sons, Inc. 650 Quaker Avenue Jordan, MN 55352 $16,508,855.09 Lametli & Sons, Inc. 16028 Forest Blvd N. #477 Hugo, MN 55038 $16,653,700.00 No. Item Unit Est. Quantity Unit Cost Amount Unit Cost Amount Unit Cost Amount 1 MOBILIZATION LS 1 $3,360,000.00 $3,360,000.00 $553,922.51 $553,922.51 $670,194.00 $670,194.00 2 PRE - CONDITION SURVEY LS 1 125,454.58 125,454.58 173,300.00 173,300.00 350,000.00 350,000.00 3 SURVEY QUALITY LOCATES LS 1 54,827.83 54,827.83 140,000.00 140,000.00 75,000.00 75,000.00 4 VIBRATION MONITORING LS 1 67,243.65 67,243.65 16,400.00 16,400.00 80,000.00 80,000.00 5 TREE AND PRIVATE LANDSCAPING PROTECTION LS 1 10,036.37 10,036.37 200,000.00 200,000.00 60,000.00 60,000.00 6 CLEARING TREE 3 501.82 1,505.46 325.00 975.00 500.00 1,500.00 7 GRUBBING TREE 3 301.09 903.27 325.00 975.00 500.00 1,500.00 8 REMOVE CONCRETE CURB & GUTTER LIN FT 41,307 1.68 69,395.76 6.00 247,842.00 3.00 123,921.00 9 REMOVE CONCRETE SIDEWALK SO FT 29,421 0.49 14,416.29 0.50 14,710.50 1.00 29,421.00 10 REMOVE CONCRETE DRIVEWAY PAVEMENT SO YD 3,672 6.76 24,822.72 18.00 66,096.00 8.00 29,376.00 11 REMOVE CONCRETE DRIVEWAY APRON SO YD 2,699 7.12 19,216.88 18.00 48,582.00 8.00 21,592.00 12 REMOVE AND REPLACE CONCRETE'STAIRS TREAD FT 184 84.43 15,535.12 460.00 84,640.00 125.00 23,000.00 13 REMOVE AND REPLACE CONCRETE STAIRS - SPECIAL TREAD FT 254 54.23 13,774.42 325.00 82,550.00 190.00 48,260.00 14 REMOVE BITUMINOUS DRIVEWAY PAVEMENT SO YD 54 10.04 542.16 30.00 1,620.00 5.00 270.00 15 REMOVE EXISTING SANITARY SEWER PIPE LIN FT 1,877 5.45 10,229.65 8.00 15,016.00 9.00 16,893.00 16 REMOVE EXISTING STORM SEWER PIPE LIN FT 1,567 8.37 13,115.79 8.00 12,536.00 14.00 21,938.00 17 REMOVE EXISTING WATERMAIN LIN FT 6,879 6.15 42,305.85 9.00 61,911.00 1 8.00 55,032.00 18 REMOVE WATER MAIN PIPE - WOODDALE AVENUE BRIDGE LS 1 2,193.07 2,193.07 3,000.00 3,000.00 6,000.00 6,000.00 19 REMOVE EXISTING GATE VALVE ASSEMBLY EACH 51 54.87 2,798.37 700.00 35,700.00 150.00 7,650.00 20 REMOVE EXISTING HYDRANT & GATE VALVE ASSEMBLY EACH 48 109.64 5,262.72 825.00 39,600.00 500.00 24,000.00 21 REMOVE EXISTING SANITARY STRUCTURE EACH 7 328.12 2,296.84 300.00 2,100.00 1,100.00 7,700.00 22 REMOVE EXISTING STORM STRUCTURE EACH 22 328.12 7,218.64 350.00 7,700.00 400.00 8,800.00 23 REMOVE LIGHTING SERVICE CABINET EACH 7 200.73 1,405.11 207.00 1,449.00 250.00 1,750.00 24 REMOVE LIGHT BASE EACH 73 250.91 18,316.43 285.00 20,805.00 300.00 21,900.00 25 SALVAGE LIGHTING UNIT EACH 76 70.25 5,330.001 72.50 51510.00 150.00 11,400.00 26 SALVAGE BRICK/STONE PAVERS SO FT 326 10.04 3,273.04 4.00 1,304.00 8.00 2,608.00 27 SALVAGE SIGN TYPE C EACH 242 19.07 4,614.94 21.00 5,082.00 20.00 4,840.00 28 SALVAGE SIGN TYPE SPECIAL EACH 33 18.07 596.31 26.00 858.00 20.00 660.00 29 SAWING CONCRETE PAVEMENT (FULL DEPTH) LIN FT 6,000 2.86 17,160.00 5.00 30.000.00 6.00 36,000.00 30 ISAWING BITUMINOUS PAVEMENT (FULL DEPTH) LIN FT 2,5491 0.88 2,243.12-1 4.001 10,196.00 4.00 10,196.00 Elliott Hendrickson Inc. Pagk JShaded area denotes A aonveled figure SEH TABULATION OF BIDS Country Club Area Sewer, Water and Street Reconstruction Edina, Minnesota Contract No. ENO 08 -1 (ENG) Improvement Nos. SS-4113; STS - 297; WM-436; A-213 & A-214; L-43 & L49 Max Steininger Inc. 3080 Lexington Ave S Eagan, MN 55121 . Hentges & Sons, Inc. 650 Quaker Avenue Jordan, MN 55352 Lamettl A Sons, Inc. 16028 Forest Blvd N, $477 Hugo, MN 55038 SEH No. EDINA0503.01 Bid Date 11:00 a.m., Thursday, March 6, 2008 $14,928.821.13 $16,508,855.09 $16,653,700.00 EsL No. 31 Item REMOVE CASTING Unit EACH Quantity 103 Unit Cost 100.36 Amount 10,337.08 Unit Cost 75.00 Amount 7,725.00 Unit Cost 200.00 Amount 20.600.00 EA6N 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 SALVAGE 8 REINSTALL CASTING SALVAGE & REINSTALL STORM SEWER PIPE SALVAGE & REINSTALL STORM STRUCTURE SALVAGE CURB STOP SALVAGE GATE VALVE ABANDON PIPE COMMON LABORER EQUIPMENT RENTAL TEMPORARY SANITARY FACILITIES STREET SWEEPER (WITH PICKUP BROOM) WATER FOR DUST CONTROL CALCIUM CHLORIDE SOLUTION TEST ROLLING COMMON EXCAVATION (EV)(P) COMMON EXCAVATION - HYDRO EXCAVATION (EV) EACH LIN FT EACH EACH EACH LIN FT HOUR HOUR EACH HOUR M GALS GALS RD STA CU YD CU YD 831 416 6 52 16 475 80 80 4 160 2,500 8,000 274 29,814 1,683 501.82 21.38 1,153.12 146.16 109.64 7.26 55.20 150.55 2,107.64 100.00 20.07 0.95 75.95 19.69 352.94 41,651.06 8,894.08 6,918.72 7,600.32 1,754.24 3,448.50 4,416.00 12,044.00 8,430.56 16,000.00 50,175.00 7,600.00 20,810.30 587,037.66 593,998.02 200.00 28.00 850.00 100.00 100.00 12.25 56.00 150.00 2,025.00 115.00 20.00 1.85 25.00 12.50 55.00 16,600.00 11,648.00 5,100.00 5,200.00 1,600.00 5,818.75 4,640.00 12,000.00 8,100.00 18,400.00 50,000.00 14,800.00 6,850.00 372,675.00 92,565.00 750.00 40.00 1,200.00 160.00 250.00 15.00 70.00 150.00 4,000.00 120.00 30.00 1.50 50.00 14.00 250.00 62,250.00 16.640.00 7,200.00 9,360.00 4,000.00 7,125.00 5,600.00 •12.000.00 16,000.00 19,200.00 75,000.00 12,000.00 13.700.00 417,396.00 420,750.00 48 49 SUBGRADE EXCAVATION (EV) SELECT GRANULAR BORROW - MODIFIED 796 (CV) CU YD CU YD 906 1,629 20.91 175.41 18,944.46 285,74239 16.00 16.90 14,496.00 27,530.10 11.00 50.00 9,968.00 81,450.00 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 SELECT GRANULAR BORROW (CV) TOPSOIL BORROW (CV) STABILIZING AGGREGATE SUBGRADE PREPARATION AGGREGATE BASE PLACED, CLASS 5 TRENCH REPLACEMENT BACKFILL TYPE LVNW35030B NON WEARING COURSE MIXTURE CU YD CU YO TON RD STA TON TON TON 960 2,623 1001 271 33,453 1,000 7,742 9.32 21.98 25.22 202.33 7.14 11.20 42.07 8,947.20 57,653.54 2,522.00 54,831.43 238,854.42 11,200.00 325,705.94 16.90 20.00 25.00 150.00 14.50 10.00 45.55 16,224.00 52,460.00 2,500.00 40,650.00 485,068.50 10.000.00 352,648.10 22.00 18.00 35.00 125.00 21,120.00 47,214.00 3,500.00 33,875.00 12.00 15.00 47.00 401,436.00 15,000.00 363,874.00 57 TYPE MVWE45035B WEARING COURSE MIXTURE TON 7,405 46.63 345.295.15 50.75 375,803.75 62.00 385,060.00 58 IB 59 ITUMINOUS MATERIAL FOR TACK COAT PARABOLIC SPEED HUMP GAL EACH 2,9231 9 2.18 912.31 6,372.14 8,210.79 2.101 1,295.00 6,138.30 11,655.00 3.00 1.500-001 8,769.00 13,500.00 Short Elliott Hendrickson Inc. Page 10 of 16 1, Shaded area denotes 'A corrected figure SEH TABULATION OF BIDS Country Club Area Sewer, Water and Street Reconstruction Edina, Minnesota Contract No. ENG 08 -1 (ENO) Improvement Nos. SS -413; STS -297; WM436; A-213 IL A-214; L-43 & L-49 SEH No. EDINA0503.01 Bid Date 11:00 a.m., Thursday, March 6, 2008 Max Steininger Inc. 3080 Lexington Ave S Eagan, MN 55121 $14.928,821.13 S.M. HeMgas & Sons, Inc. 650 Quaker Avenue Jordan. MN 55352 $16,508,855.09 V me ns, Inc. 16028 Forest Blvd N. 111477 Hugo, MN 55038 816.653,700.00 No. 60 61 62 63 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 Item SAW AND SEAL TRANSVERSE CRACK CONTROL JOINT 4 -INCH BITUMINOUS WEAR COURSE MIXTURE FOR DRIVEWAYS 124NCH RC PIPE SEWER, DESIGN 3006, CLASS V 15 -INCH RC PIPE SEWER, DESIGN 3006, CLASS V Unit LIN FT SO YD LIN FT LIN FT I:IN LIN FT LIN FT LIN FT LIN FT UN FT LIN FT LIN FT LIN FT UN FT EACH 7 IN FT Est Quantity 19,360 11 747 443 8 20 60 352 258 242 511 615 669 431 38 1,876 Unit Cost 1.45 20.27 24.61 26.63 0.00 29.25 35.61 44.99 39.44 9.28 10.29 55.35 65.42 95.61 6001 21.38 Amount 28,072.00 222.97 18,383.67 11,797.09 0.00 585.00 2,136.60 15,836.48 10,175.52 2,245.76 5,258.19 34,040.25 43,765.98 41,207.91 23,016.98 40,108.88 Unit Cost 1.50 51.00 26.00 27.75 0.00 34.00 36.00 42.00 39.75 10.00 11.00 82.00 102.00 107.00 3,200.00 27.00 Amount 29,040.00 561.00 19,422.00 12,293.25 0.00 680.00 2,160.00 14,784.00 10,255.50 2,420.00 5,621.00 50,430.00 68,238.00 46,117.00 121,600.00 50,652.00 Unit Cost 1.50 125.00 80.00 Amount 29,040 00 1,375.00 59,760.00 80.00 0.00 35,440.00 18 -INCH RC PIPE SEWER, DESIGN 3006, CLASS V 24 -INCH RC PIPE SEWER, DESIGN 3006, CLASS III 27 -INCH RC PIPE SEWER, DESIGN 3006, CLASS 111 18 -INCH EQ RC ARCH PIPE SEWER 44NCH PVC SCH 35 SUMP DRAIN PIPE 64NCH PVC SCH 35 SUMP DRAIN PIPE PIPE LINER FOR 18 -INCH RCP STORM PIPE PIPE LINER FOR 27 -INCH RCP STORM PIPE PIPE LINER FOR 30 -INCH RCP STORM PIPE CONNECT TO EXISTING SANITARY SEINER 8 -INCH PVC SDR 35 SANITARY SEWER PIPE (0 FT- 10 FT) 0.00 90.00 1,800,00 200.00 12,000.00 125.00 44,000.00 85.00 21,930,00 20.00 4,840.00 22.00 80.00 100.00 105.00 11,242.00 49,200.00 66,900.00 45,255.00 1,200.00 45,600.00 90.00 168,840.00 76 77 78 79 80 8SANITARY 8d35 8 -INCH PVC SDR 35 SANITARY SEWER PIPE (10 FT -12 FT) 8 -INCH PVC SDR 35 SANITARY SEWER PIPE (12 FT -14 FT) PIPE LINER FOR 6 -INCH VCP SANITARY SEWER PIPE LINER FOR 8 -INCH VCP SANITARY SEWER PIPE LINER FOR 8 -INCH VCP SANITARY SEWER - EDGEBROOK BACKYARD PIPE LINER FOR 9 -INCH VCP SANITARY SEWER SEWER SPOT REPAIR 6-INCH PVC SDR (0 FT -10 FT) LIN FT LIN FT LIN FT LIN FT LIN FT LIN T LIN 411 76 11,589 3,199 812 522 125 22.59 23.80 38.24 29.19 65.42 35.22 195.38 9,284.49 1,808.80 443,163.36 93,376.81 53,121.04 18,384.84 24,422.50 27.00 27.00 39.00 43.00 46.00 58.00 11,097.00 80.00 38,990 00 2,052.00 95.00 7,220.00 451,971.00 137,557.00 38.00 440,382,00 42.00 134,358.00 37,352.00 45.00 38,640.00 29,232.00 80.00 31,320.00 106.00 13,250.00 240 00 30,00000 'lliott Hendrickson Inc. Page 1 l� Shaded area denotes corraded figure SEH TABULATION OF BIDS Country Club Area Sewer, Water and Street Reconstruction Max Steininger Inc. S.M. Hentiles & Sons, Inc. Lametti & Sons, Inc. Edina, Minnesota 3080 Lexington Ave S 650 Quaker Avenue 16028 Forest Blvd N, 0477 Contract No. ENG 08.1 (ENG) Eagan, MN 55121 Jordan, MN 55352 Hugo, MN 55038 Improvement Nos. SS-413; STS -297; WM-436; A-213 & A -214; L-43 & L-49 SEH No. EDINA0503.01 Bid Date 11 :00 a.m., Thursday, March 6, 2008 $14,928,821.13 $16,508,855.09 $16,653.700.00 Est No. Item Unit Quantity Unit Cost Amount Unit Cost Amount Unit Cost Amount 83 SANITARY SEWER SPOT REPAIR 6 -INCH PVC SDR LIN FT 10 328.93 3,289.30 106.00 1,060.00 250.00 2,500.00 35 (10 FT -12 FT) 84 SANITARY SEWER SPOT REPAIR 8 -INCH PVC SDR LIN FT 20 166.03 3,320.60 107.00 2,140.00 260.00 5,200.00 35 (0 FT -10 FT) 85 SANITARY SEWER SPOT REPAIR 8 -INCH PVC SDR LIN FT 20 166.03 3,320.60 107.00 2,140.00 270.00 5,400.00 35 (10 FT -12 FT) 86 SANITARY SEWER SPOT REPAIR 84NCH PVC SDR LIN FT 50 113.07 5,653.50 107.00 5,350.00 280.00 14,000.00 35 (12 FT -14 FT) 87 SANITARY SEWER SPOT REPAIR 8 -INCH PVC SDR LIN FT 50 113.07 5,653.50 107.00 5,350.00 290.00 14,500.00 35 (14 FT -16 FT) 88 SANITARY SEWER SPOT REPAIR 8 -INCH PVC SDR LIN FT 75 107.83 8,087.25 107.00 8.025.00 300.00 22.500.00 35 (16 FT -18 FT) 89 8 -INCH HDPE SDR 11 SANITARY SEWER (DIPS) LIN FT 51046 58.50 295,191.00 52.50 264,915.00 125.00 630.750.00 PIPE BURSTING 90 REMOVE AND REPLACE SANITARY SEWER EACH 10 1,540.25 15,402.50 2,350.00 23,500.00 3,600.00 36,000.00 SERVICE WYE -CIPP 91 INSTALL SANITARY SEWER SERVICE WYE -PIPE EACH 161 1,540.25 247,980.25 2.560.50 412,240.50 2,700.00 434,700.00 BURSTING 92 INSTALL SANITARY SEWER SERVICE WYE - CIPP EACH 281 1,54025 432,810.25 2.560.50 719,500.50 2,700.00 758,700.00 93 8 -INCH X 6 -INCH PVC SANITARY SEWER SERVICE EACH 60 161.39 9,683.40 66.00 3.960.00 150.00 91000.00 WYE 94 REMOVE AND REPLACE SANITARY SEWER EACH 272 1,030.17 280,206.24 2,948.00 801,856.00 3,200.00 870,400.00 SERVICE PIPE 95 PIPE LINER FOR SANITARY SEWER SERVICE EACH 238 3.813.82 907,689.16 7,637.00 1,817,606.00 4,750.00 1.130,500.00 PIPE - BRACED 96 SANITARY SEWER CLEAN OUT EACH 2 302.81 605.62 300.00 600.00 800.00 1,600.00 97 CONSTRUCT BULKHEAD IN SANITARY MH EACH 14 138.39 1,937.46 244.00 3,416.00 200.00 2,800.00 98 CONSTRUCT SANITARY MANHOLE BENCH EACH 73 5137 37,472.36 700.00 51,100.00 1,600.00 116,800.00 99 CEMENTITIOUS MANHOLE LINER LIN FT 673 112.41 75,651.93 116.00 78,068.00 160.00 121,140.00 100 2 -INCH RIGID INSULATION SO YD 500 19.06 9,530.00 10.00 5,000.00 20.00 10,000.00 101 TEMPORARY WATER LS 1 182,759.45 182,759.45 78,000.00 78,000.00 350,000.00 350,000.00 102 TEMPORARY WET TAP WATER MAIN VALVE EACH 6 7,196.43 43,178.58 9,500.00 57,000.00 3,000.00 18,000.00 103 CONNECT TO EXISTING WATERMAIN EACH 39 753.08 29,370.12 875.00 34,125.00 1.700.00 66,300.00 104 2 -INCH SDR 40 PVC IRRIGATION CONDUIT LIN FT 50 11.80 590.00 7.00 350.00 15.00 750.00 Short Elliott Hendrickson Inc. Page 12 of 16 Shaded area denotes correded fi ure SEH TABULATION OF BIDS Country Club Area Sewer, Water and Street Reconstruction Edina, Minnesota Contract No. ENG 08 -1 (ENG) Improvement Nos. SS -413; STS -297; WM- 36; A -213 & A-214; L-433 & L-49 SEW No. EDINA0503.01 Bid Date 11:00 a.m., Thursday. March 6, 2008 Max Steminger Inc. 3080 Lexington Ave S Eagan, MN 55121 $14,928,821.13 S.M. Hentges; & Sons, Inc, 650 Quaker Avenue Jordan, MN 55352. $16,508,855.09 Lametti & Sons, Inc. 16028 Forest Blvd N. #477 Hugo, MN 55038 $16,653,700.00 No. Item Unit Est. Quantity Unit Cost Amount Unit Cost Amount Unit Cost Amount 105 6 -INCH GATE VALVE AND BOX EACH 37 1,036.12 38,336.44 1.127.00 41,699.00 1.000.00 37,000.00 106 8-INCH GATE VALVE AND BOX EACH 37 1,433.44 53,037.28 1,353.00 50,061.00 1,300.00 48,100.00 107 HYDRANT AND GV ASSEMBLY EACH 55 3,975.41 218,647.55 4,200.00 231,000.00 5,200.00 286,000.00 108 6 -INCH DIP WATER MAIN CL 52 LIN FT 688 28.95 19,917.60 22.25 15,308.00 60.00 41,280.00 109 6-INCH PVC SDR 18 WATER MAIN LIN FT 3,330 19.27 64,169.10 13.75 45,787.50 38.00 126,540.00 110 8 -INCH PVC SDR 18 WATER MAIN LIN FT 3,517 22.09 77,690.53 16.00 56,272.00 45.00 158,265.00 111 6-INCH HDPE SDR 11 (DIPS) PIPE BURSTING LIN FT 11,984 49.32 591,050.88 57.00 683,088.00 77.00 922,768.00 112 8 -INCH HDPE SDR 11 (DIPS) PIPE BURSTING LIN FT 5,722 61.83 353,791.26 62.00 354,764.00 85.00 486,370.00 113 POTHOLE WATER MAIN EACH 111 365.55 40,576.05 500.00 55,500.00 1,250.00 138,750.00 114 DIP WATERMAIN FITTINGS LBS 7,555 7.77 58,702.35 3.00 22,665.00 4.00 30,220.00 115 REMOVE AND REPLACE WATER SERVICE PIPE EACH 392 1,269.22 497,534.24 4,569.00 1,791,048.00 1,600.00 627,200.00 116 REMOVE AND REPLACE WATER SERVICE PIPE - BRACED EACH 126 2,109.35 265,778.10 5,569.00 701,694.00 2,100.00 264,600.00 117 REMOVE AND REPLACE WATER SERVICE PIPE - RELOCATE CURB STOP BOX EACH 40 1,366.66 54,666.40 5,087.00 203,480.00 2,000.00 80,000.00 118 REMOVE AND REPLACE WATER SERVICE PIPE - RELOCATE CURB STOP BOX - BRACED EACH 9 2,136.08 19,224.72 6,087.00 54,783.00 3,200.00 28,800.00 119 REMOVE AND REPLACE WATER SERVICE PIPE - TRENCHLESS EACH 4 2,348.51 9,394.04 7,095.00 28,380.00 2,300.00 9,200.00 120 CONNECT TO EXISTING STORM SEWER EACH 52 605.71 31,496.92 1,200.00 62,400.00 , 600.00 31,200.00 121 CONNECT 4 -INCH PVC TO 6-INCH PVC SCH 35 EACH 12 283.34 3,400.08 107.00 1,284.00 120.00 1,440.00 122 CONNECT 6-INCH PVC EXISTING STORM STRUCTURE EACH 3 24229 726.87 11950.00 51850.00 250.00 750.00 123 TYPE BB DRAINAGE STRUCTURE (2 FT x 3 FT BOX) EACH 13 723.83 9,409.79 1,338.00 17,394.00 1,500.00 19,500.00 124 TYPE CC DRAINAGE STRUCTURE (484NCH DIA.) (0-8 FT DEPTH) EACH 13 1,159.28 15,070.64 1,875.00 24,375.00 1,800.00 23,400.00 125 TYPE CC DRAINAGE STRUCTURE (604NCH DIA.) (0-8 FT DEPTH) EACH 3 1,562.65 4,687.95 3,475.00 10,425.00 3,300.00 9,900.00 126 TYPE CC DRAINAGE STRUCTURE (844NCH DIA.) (0-8 FT DEPTH) EACH 1 5,541.08 5,541.08 6,075.00 6,075.00 5,600.00 5,600.00 127 TYPE CC DRAINAGE STRUCTURE (96 -INCH DIA.) (0-8 FT DEPTH) EACH 1 8,005.19 8,005.19 9,315.00 9,315.00 10,500.00 10,500.00 128 TYPE CC DRAINAGE STRUCTURE WITH WEIR (60- INCH DIA.) (0-8 FT DEPTH) EACH 1 3,134.68 3,134.68 4,180.00 4,180.00 4,300.00 4,300.00 Elliott Hendrickson Inc. Peg( 16 JShaded area denotes corrected figure SEH TABULATION OF BIDS Country Club Area Sewer, Water and Street Reconstruction Edina, Minnesota Contract No. ENG 08 -1 (ENG) Improvement Nos. SS-413; STS -297; W111-436; A -213 & A-214; L-43 & L-49 SEH No. EDINA0803.01 Bid Date 11:00 a.m., Thursday, March 6, 2008 Max Steininger Inc. 3080 Lexington Ave S Eagan, MN 55121 $14,928,821.13 S.M. Hentges & Sons, Inc. 650 Quaker Avenue Jordan, MN 55352 $16,508,855.09 Lame Sons, Inc. 16028 Forest Blvd N. $477 Hugo, MN 55038 $16.653,700.00 No. Item Unit Est. Quantity Unit Cost Amount Unit Cost Amount Unit Cost Amount 129 TYPE CC DRAINAGE STRUCTURE WITH WEIR (84 INCH DIA.) (0-8 FT DEPTH) EACH 1 6,688.56 6,688.56 9,625.00 9,625.00 7,300.00 7,300.00 130 TYPE CC DRAINAGE STRUCTURE WITH WEIR (96- INCH DIA.) (0-8 FT DEPTH) EACH 1 9,070.46 9,070.46 12,600.00 12,600.00 11,500.00 11,500.00 131 TYPE DD DRAINAGE STRUCTURE (48 -INCH DIA.) (0-8 FT DEPTH) EACH 5 1,421.03 7,105.15 3,085.00 15,425.00 2,100.00 10,500.00 132 48 -INCH DIA. SANITARY SEWER MANHOLE (0-8 FT) EACH 12 1,328.03 15,936.36 2,350.00 28,200.00 2,500.00 30,000.00 133 48 -INCH DIA. MANHOLE EXTRA DEPTH LIN FT 33 104.90 3,461.70 430.00 14,190.00 180.00 5,940.00 134 SANITARY SEWER 48 -INCH DIA. OUTSIDE DROP MANHOLE (0-8 FT') EACH 1 3,917.92 3,917.92 4,095.00 4,095.00 3,700.00 3,700.00 135 60 -INCH DIA. MANHOLE EXTRA DEPTH LIN FT 9 172.08 1,548.72 610.00 5,490.00 200.00 1,800.00 136 84 -INCH DIA. MANHOLE EXTRA DEPTH LIN FT 6 356.27 2,137.62 870.00 5,220.00 350.00 2,100.00 137 96 -INCH DIA. MANHOLE EXTRA DEPTH LIN FT 8 528.14 4,225.12 1 1,020.00 8,160.00 450.00 3,600.00 138 STORMWATER TREATMENT MANHOLE 1A EACH 1 47,597.91 47,597.91 54,171.00 54,171.00 49,000.00 49,000.00 139 STORMWATER TREATMENT MANHOLE 1B EACH 1 61,276.32 61,276.32 73,845.00 73,845.00 75,000.00 75,000.00 140 STORMWATER TREATMENT MANHOLE 2A EACH 1 28,550.70 28,550.70 34,539.00 34,539.00 35,000.00 35,000.00 141 STORMWATER TREATMENT MANHOLE 28 EACH 1 22,378.58 22,378.58 27,640.00 27,640.00 43,000.00 43,000.00 142 CASTING ASSEMBLY R -1733 EACH 41 420.52 17,241.32 640.00 26,240.00 300.00 12,300.00 143 ILID CASTING ASSEMBLY R -1733 W/ SELF SEALING EACH 68 420.52 28,595.36 660.00 44,880.00 350.00 23,800.00 144 CASTING ASSEMBLY R -1733 WITH SELF SEALING LID - LOW PROFILE EACH 10 401.05 4,010.50 660.00 6,600.00 350.00 - 3,500.00 145 ICASTING ASSEMBLY R- 3067 -V EACH 32 553.16 17,701.12 505.00 16,160.00 400.00 12,800.00 146 ICASTING ASSEMBLY R- 3501 -TR EACH 1 593.41 593.41 550.00 550.00 450.00 450.00 147 ICASTING ASSEMBLY R- 3501 -TL EACH 3 593.41 1,780.23 550.00 1,650.00 450.00 1,350.00 148 JADJUST CATCH BASIN/MANHOLE EACH 237 393.83 93,337.71 175.00 41,475.00 650.00 154,050.00 149 150 RECONSTRUCT MANHOLE 4-INCH CONCRETE WALK LIN FT SO FT 280 39,358 394.80 2.86 110,544.00 112,563.88 152.00 3.80 42,560.00 149,560.40 600.00 5.00 168,000.00 196,790.00 151 152 4 -INCH CONCRETE WALK - STAMPED CONCRETE CURB & GUTTER, DESIGN 8618 SO FT LIN FT 244 42,039 8.29 8.38 2,022.76 352,286.82 16.00 9.42 3,904.00 396,007.38 8.00 11.00 1,952.00 462,429.00 153 CONCRETE CURB AND GLITTER, DESIGN 8618 - HAND FORM LIN FT 800 12.55 10,040.00 27.00 21,600.00 15.00 12,00030 Short Elliott Hendrickson Inc. Page 14 of 16 Shaded area denotes corrected fi ure SEH TABULATION OF BIDS Country Club Area Sewer, Water and Street Reconstruction Edina, Minnesota Contract No. ENG 084 (ENG) Improvement Nos. SS-413; STS -297; WM -436; A -213 & A-214; L-43 & L-49 SEH No. EDINA0503.01 Bid Date 11:00 a.m., Thursday, March 6, 2008 Max Steininger Inc. 3080 Lexington Ave S Eagan, MN 55121 $14.928.821.13 S.M. Hentges & Sons, Inc. 650 Ouaker Avenue Jordan, MN 55352 $16,508,855.09 Lametti & Sons, Inc. 16028 Forest Blvd N. #477 Hugo, MN 55038 $16,653.700.00 No. Item Unit Est. Quantity Unit Cost Amount Unit Cost Amount Unit Cost Amount 154 6-INCH CONCRETE DRIVEWAY PAVEMENT WITH 6 INCH CLASS V AGGREGATE BASE SO YD 3,974 37.13 147,554.62 68.80 273,41120 50.00 198,700.00 155 6 -INCH CONCRETE DRIVEWAY APRON WITH 6- INCH CLASS 5 AGGREGATE BASE SO YD 2,707 37.13 100,510.91 68.80 186,241.60 50.00 135,350.00 156 7 -INCH CONCRETE VALLEY GUTTER SO YD 29 42.15 1,222.35 80.00 2,320.00 70.00 2,030.00 157 PREFABRICATED TRUNCATED DOME FOR PEDESTRIAN RAMP SO FT 177 45.16 7,993.32 50.00 8,850.00 33.00 5,841.00 158 BRICK CROSSWALK SO FT 19,637 11.38 223,469.06 11.00 216,007.00 15.00 294,555.00 159 INSTALL BRICKISTONE PAVERS SO FT 326 15.05 4,906.30 6.00 1,956.00 17.00 5,542.00 160 ISOLLARD, STONE VENEERED EACH 3 5,817.75 17,453.25 7,500.00 22,500.00 7,500.00 22,500.00 161 TRAFFIC CONTROL LS 1 34,625.46 34,625.46 30,550.00 30,550.00 75,000.00 75,000.00 162 SIGN PANEL TYPE C SO FT 866 31.11 26,941.26 38.75 33.557.50 30.00 25,980.00 163 FURNISH AND INSTALL SIGN PANEL TYPE "SPECIAL 1" EACH 4 220.80 883.20 296.00 1,164.00 300.00 1,200.00 164 FURNISH AND INSTALL SIGN PANEL TYPE "SPECIAL 2" EACH 29 245.89 7,130.81 296.00 8,684.00 300.00 8,700.00 165 PAVEMENT MESSAGE (RIGHT ARROW) EPDXY EACH 2 250.91 501.82 150.00 300.00 150.00 300.00 166 PARABOLIC SPEED HUMP MARKINGS SO FT 2,730 4.01 10,947.30 14.50 38,585.00 15.00 40,950.00 167 12 -INCH SDR 11 HDPE DIRECTIONAL DRILL WATER MAIN LIN FT 200 163.31 32,662.00 107.00 21,400.00 175.00 35,000.00 168 4 -INCH SOLID LINE WHITE -EPDXY LIN FT 106 1.35 143.10 0.3 37.10 0.50 53.00 169 241NCH STOP LINE WHITE - EPDXY LIN FT 75 8.03 602.25 7.00 525.00 7.00 525.00 170 4-INCH DOUBLE SOLID LINE YELLOW - EPDXY LIN FT 915 2.71 2,479.65 0.75 686.25 1.00 915.00 171 NMC LOOP DETECTOR (6 FT X 6 FT) EACH 8 752.73 6,021.84 880.00 7,040.00 750.00 6,000.00 172 SILT FENCE, TYPE MACHINE SLICED LIN FT 1,643 1.71 2,809.53 2.50 4,107.50 3.00 4,929.00 173 CONSTRUCTION FENCE UN FT 513 2.01 1,031.13 4.00 2,052.00 3.00 1,539.00 174 FLOTATION SILT CURTAIN, TYPE MOVING WATER LIN FT 400 12.55 5,020.00 19.00 7,600.00 15.00 6,000.00 175 INLET PROTECTION, TYPE B EACH 108 200.73 21,678.84 250.00 27.000.00 450.00 48,600.00 176 INLET PROTECTION, TYPE A EACH 90 200.73 18,065.70 50.00 4,500.00 400.00 36,000.00 177 REPLACEMENT TREE EACH 21 281.02 562.04 340.00 680.00 350.00 700.00 178 IPERENNIALS, NO. 1 CONTAINER EACH 108 6.82 736.56 13.00 1,404.00 15.00 1,620.00 178 GRASSES, NO.1 CONTAINER EACH 82 733 592.86 13.00 1,066.00 15.00 1,230.00 180 ISHRUBS, NO.2 CONTAINER EACH 40 28.10 1,124.00 22.00 880.00 25.001 1,000.00 Elliott Hendrickson Inc. Peg 16 Shaded area denotes J- corrected fi ure A-rse -__wMmm M�■wu we momm 6 J16" 5 aao%aaaw ■ ■vam r■ a ■�.. Country Club Area Sewer, Water an treet ffieconstruction Edina, Minnesota Contract No. ENG 08-1 (ENG) Improvement Nos. SSA13; STS -297; WM-436; ,0-213 & A -214; L-43 & L-49 SEH No. EDINA0503.01 Bid Date 11:00 a.m., Thursda .:March 6, 2008, ax Staininger Inc. 3080 Lexington Ave S Eagan, MN 55121 $14,928,821.13 S.M. Hentges & Sons, Inc. 650 Quaker Avenue Jordan, MN 55352 $16,508,855.09 atti & Sons, Inc. 16028 Forest Blvd N. 0477 Hugo, MN 55038 $16,653,700.00 No. 181 182 Item SODDING TYPE LAWN _W/ FERTILIZER SHREDDED HARDWOOD MULCH, 3 -INCH DEPTH_ Unit SO YD CUYD Est Quantity 16,146 5 Unit Cost 2.01 52.19 Amount 32,453.46 260.95 Unit Cost 2.20 60.00 Amount "" `35;521 20 300.00 Unit.Cost 5.00 100.00 Amount 80.730.00 500.00 183 REINFORCED SOIL SQ:YD 7011 71.26 49,953.28 44:00 30;844.00 30.00 21,030.00- 184 TEMPORARY ELECTRIC. POWER-SYSTEMS LS 1 5,153.67 5,153.67 12,725.00 12,725.00 15,000.00 15,000.00 185 - SERVICE CABINET EACH 2 4,601.67 9,203.34 4,677.00 9,354.00 4,600.00 9,200:00 186 = SERVICE CABINET FOUNDATION EACH 2 923.35 1,846.70 940.00 1,880.00 950.00 1,900.00 187 LIGHTING UNIT (ARLINGTON LANTERN) EACH 72 2,428.80 174,873.60 2,470.00 177,840.00 2,600.00 180,000.00 188 LIGHT BASE FOUNDATION, DESIGN _MOD. EACH 72 501.82 36,131.04 510.00 - 36;720.00 500.00 38,000.00 189 1 1 /24nch NONMETALLIC CONDUIT (DIRECT BORE) L.F 21,405 6.65 142,343.25 6.80 145,554.00 7.00 149,635.00 190 UNDERGROUND WIRE, 1- CONDUCTOR NO.4 L.F ` - 45,600 1.58 72,048.00 1.60. 72,960,00 2.00 91.200.00 191 UNDERGROUND WIRE; T CONDUCTOR'NO. 6 GND L.F 22,750 1.08 24,570.00 1.10 25,025.00 1.20 27,300.00 192 UNDERGROUND WIRE: 1 CONDUCTOR -NO. 12 LIN FT 3,688 0.39 1,516.32 0A01 1,555.20 „6,786:00 0.50 1,944.00 193 HANDHOLE EACH 18 371.35 6,684.30 377.00 400.00 7,200:00` 194 STORMWATER TREATMENT - MANHOLE 3A EACH 1 33,033.47 33;033.47. 38,700.00 :- 38,700.00 5 1,000:00 61,000.00 195 STORMWATER TREATMENT MANHOLE 4A, EACH 1 34,757.71 340757.71 401590.00 40,590.00 531000.00 53,000.00. 196 STORMWATER TREATMENT MANHOLE 4B= EACH 1 36,481.85 36,481.85 41,900:00 41,900.00 57,0w.00I 57,000:00 TOTAL PROJECT 314,928,821.13. ' :16,608,866,09 r 318,885,700.00 Short Elliott Hendrickson Inc. Page 16 of 16 SEH City of Edina Edina Country Club Area Sewer, Water, and Street Reconstruction Contract No. 08 -1 (ENG) Improvement No. SS -413; STA -297; WM -436; A -213 & A -214; Comparison of Items Submitted with Bids on March 6, 2008 March 10, 2008 P:WE \E \Edina \050301 \Bidding \[Items Sub with Bids.xls]Sheet1 Item A. Pipe bursting L -43 & L -49 1. Name of pipe bursting contractor along with a list of the last 5 residential water main reconstruction pipe bursting projects performed by that contractor. For each of the five (5) projects, submit the projects location, name and telephone number of the owner, dates the project was accomplished, and the length and size of the rehabilitated pipe. 2. Documentation that the pipe bursting contractor is licensed by the patent owner of the particular pipe bursting methodology to perform this particular methodology. Par 15 Palda & Sons I Veit I Northwest Asphalt submitted I submitted I 4 projects listed submitted I submitted I submitted Item Palda & Sons Veit- Northwest Asphalt 3. Documentation that the pipe bursting contractor is trained and certified by the respective manufacturer of the pipe bursting equipment being used on the Project. Documentation shall be in the form of a certificate from the manufacturer that the Contractor is trained and proficient in the use of the submitted submitted submitted equipment. Only the Contractor's employees trained and certified by the manufacturer shall be allowed to operate the equipment during the Project. 4. Documentation that the pipe bursting contractor has successfully completed at least 10,000 feet of pipe bursting which includes one static pipe bursting project. To document this requirement, the pipe bursting contractor shall submit a list of their projects that add up to the 10,000 foot requirement. Identify on this list which of the projects involved static pipe bursting method. Include for each project on the list what kind of pipe submitted - 2,732 submitted - submitted - 6,350 was burst (i.e storm sewer, sanitary sewer, water main, etc.), the project linear feet 2,732 linear feet linear feet owner name, owner addresses and phone numbers, project engineer name, and the date that the project was competed. The City reserves the right to waive this 10,000 foot requirement. B. Horizontal Directional Drilling 1. Name of horizontal directional drilling contractor with a listing of the last 5 projects completed in Minnesota. submitted submitted submitted C. Cured -in -place Pipe Lining for Trunk Storm and Sanitary Sewer Pipes 1. Manufacturer's certificate of compliance with provisions of the referenced standards in the specifications. submitted submitted submitted 2. Detailed technical information pertaining to the long -term design considerations of the proposed product. submitted submitted submitted F3. A copy of the license or certificate verifying the manufacturer's or licenser's approval of the Installer. submitted submitted submitted Page 2 of 5 Item Palda & Sons Veit Northwest Asphalt 4. Evidence of the Installer's Experience. a. Installers evidence shall feature five (5) "Water Inversion and Cure Method," projects similar in scope to this project that were accomplished by the Installer. Three (3) of the projects must have been in the State of Minnesota. For each of the five (5) projects, submit the projects location, submitted submitted submitted name and telephone number of the owner, dates the project was accomplished, and the length and size of the rehabilitated pipe. 5. Manufacturer's product literature and application and installation requirements for materials used in the liner. submitted submitted not submitted (1) D. Rehabilitation of Sanitary Manholes with Cemenitious Liners 1. Installer Qualifications: Submit list of a minimum of 10 manhole rehabilitation projects completed during past 3 years. For each of the 10 projects, submit projects location, name and telephone number of the submitted not submtted not submitted Owner, dates the project was accomplished, and the number of manholes rehabilitated. E. A written memo describing how the Contractor will execute their program described in special provision Vibration Monitoring and Condition Surveys for work occurring in both 2008 and 2009. At a minimum, the memo shall cover the following items: 1. The name of the subcontractor performing these inspections. submitted submitted not submitted 2. The method the Contractor will use to contact residents to schedule appointments to perform the initial or subsequent survey and if necessary submitted submitted not submitted reschedule a survey. 3. The method the Contractor will use to perform the initial or subsequent survey itself and document the survey. submitted submitted not submitted 4. The method the Contractor will use to file the results of the initial or subsequent survey and share the surveys results with the resident. submitted not submitted not submitted 3of5 5 Item Palda A Sons Veit. Northwest Asphalt 5. How the Contractor will .use the results of the initial or subsequent survey to, discuss resident claims that reconstruction has damaged their structure. not submitted not submitted not submitted 6. Whether or not the Contractor will monitor vibrations. If the Contractor will, then how many seismographs and -their locations that the Contractor will set out in the project area.. Also, how the Contractor will protect these seismographs during the duration of the project. submitted submitted not submitted 7. The method the Contractor will use to monitor, document, and file the - results of the outputs from its; seismographs. submitted submitted not submitted 8.. The method the Contractor will use to document residents refusing to schedule appointments to perform:the initial or subsequent survey. submitted submitted not submitted F. Pipe Liner for Sanitary Sewer Service Pipes 1. Product Itself a. Documentation of a minimum of 750 successful sanitary sewer service - lateral- installations in the US' to assure commercial viability. submitted submitted not submtted b. Documentation stating_ that.the manufacturer provided the product continuously for at least three years. submitted submitted not submtted c. Documentation that the, manufacturer of the product has sufficient in- house engineering support and manufacturing quality control. submitted submitted not submtted d. The minimum thickness of the installed liner -shall be 4 mil. submitted submitted not submtted e. The resin - impregnated liner must be made of a non -woven material. Knit or woven material i& not acceptable. submitted' submitted not submtted f. Manufacturer's certificate of compliance,vith provisions of the referenced standards in the specifications. submitted submitted not submtted Page 4 of 5 Item Palda & Sons Veit Northwest Asphalt g. Detailed technical information pertaining to the long -term design considerations of the proposed product. submitted submitted not submtted h. Unless specifically called for in the plans, the resulting in -place liner product cannot leave a clean -out along the length of the lined service submitted submitted not submtted pipe. 2. Contractor Installing Product a. Documentation that the Contractor has at least three years active experience in the commercial installation of the product. submitted submitted not submitted b. Documentation that the Contractor has successfully installed the lining product in at least 500 sanitary sewer service pipes. not submitted submitted not submitted c. Documentation certifying that the installation of the product will be done in accordance with manufacturer's recommended procedures. submitted submitted not submitted d. A memo containing a step -by -step description of how the product is installed into the service pipe through the vacuumed excavation. The memo must include details such as the size of site footprint needed to insert the pipe into the service pipe, how large a hole must be made in submitted not submtted not submitted the existing service pipe, how the hole in the existing service pipe is repaired, how the liner is secured at the wye, how long it takes to cure the liner. P' N of 5 Wavne Houle From: Jennifer Bennerotte Sent: Thursday, March 13, 2008 12:00 PM To: Wayne Houle Subject: FW: Country Club'Traff!c Plan Jennifer Bennerotte Communications & Marketing Director City of Edina 952 - 833 -9520 FAX 952- 826 -0390 jbennerotte @ci.edina.mn.us -'- Original Message---- - From: Andrea Knoll [mailto:aknolll @comcast. net] Sent: Thursday, March 13, 2008 11:51 AM To: Jennifer Bennerotte Subject: Country Club Traffic Plan To Wayne Houle - Dear Wayne: We are writing to express our support for the Country Club Neighborhood traffic calming measures. We feel the City has been responsive to neighborhood concerns about traffic by delaying our sewer and street reconstruction projects to develop a plan that included traffic calming measures. We commend the City staff and Council in their efforts to communicate with residents on this issue of the past several years. We live at the corner of Arden and Bridge Lane. Both speed and volume of traffic are a problem. We have over 75.children that live on Arden. Each morning, 20 children get on the bus at our elementary school bus stop alone! We need safer streets and the current measures are not working. From our vantage point on the corner, we see cars regularly exceeding the posted speed limit and completely ignoring the stop signs that are intended to limit the impact of the traffic passing through the neighborhood. When traffic officers are posted at our corner, they continually pull over cars for traffic violations. Then, when the officer is gone, the abuses resume. We need speed bumps to slow traffic, better delineation of crosswalks to protect pedestrians and diverting measures to discourage commuter cut - through traffic. One of the strengths of the plan, as drafted, is that the.neighborhood's traffic was considered as a whole. We strongly urge that any plans adopted continue to have this view. In the past, decisions were allowed that put undue traffic burden on streets, with .;easy access to 50th street and France,Avenue. We feel there have been ample opportunities for residents to express their opinions on this plan and that the City has communicated effectively. It makes no sense to tear up the streets for'sewer and water without addressing this long - standing issue'that impacts our neighborhood's quality of life and the safety of our children. We strongly urge the City to stay with the plan.as drafted by the City engineers and the outside consultants. Thank you for your consideration of our views. Sincerely, Andrea and Ben Knoll 4601 Arden Avenue 1 Wayne Houle From: Julie Armbrust gulie@armbrustsales.com] Sent: Tuesday, March 11, 2008 10:18 AM To: Wayne Houle Subject: FW: re: Country Club traffic Calming Measures City Engineer, Wayne Houle, I have lived at 4516 Moorland Ave in the Country Club area of Edina for 23 years. I am very 'upset to find out that traffic calming measures have been tied into the sewer /water construction project. I just recently found out about this in a letter I received from the city. I can't believe that there wasn't more information on this. I don't feel that the Country club area has a severe problem with traffic. I strongly urge that a new traffic study be conducted. When there was construction on Highway 100 and on the 50th and France area, we did see more traffic. But now that those projects are completed, I don't see any issues. I also would expect that there be a survey of the Country club residents. The plan that you are proposing will ruin the beauty of this Historical area, taking away the gentle curves at intersections and installing chokers. I urge you to separate the traffic calming plan in its entirety from the sewer /water construction. I understand the need for and support the plan to redo the sewer and watt construction. However, I do not see the need or the desire to significantly change our neighborhood streets with raised cross- walks, narrowed streets, concrete dividers, speed bumps, and ugly signs. I also have not seen any information of how this project is to be funded. We are already facing huge assessments for the water /sewer project that we all know we need. I sought the Country Club neighborhood for its community feel, its historic preservation status and its location. These new plans for construction of the traffic calming measures, don't work with the aesthetics of our historical area. We need appropriate action by you now! Thank you. Julie Armbrust Armbrust Sales & Marketing 952 - 941 -7191 1 March 8, 2008 Dear Mr. Houle, We are writing to you today to express our opposition to the Traffic Calming Plan because of its aesthetic impact and resulting expense. We'do,not want to reconstruct our neighborhood streets using speed humps. with reflective markings, raised cross- walks, one -ways, narrowed streets, concrete dividers and increased sheet metal signage.. We believe this plan will compromise the graceful flowing transitions at major intersections and negatively alter the neighborhood environment I have long admired and enjoyed. We am not asking you to delay or stop the sewer and water repair project, which is desperately needed. We have signed a petition asking the Edina City Council and city administrators to separate the water and sewer project from the traffic calming plan and solicit alternate bids that repair o streets AS IS. AS IS meaning -- no traffic calming street modif cations and devices. We must maintain the integrity of our neighborhood and appropriate action by our City Council is needed now. On a final note, the addition of speed humps to the 4900 block of Arden will bracket our home (within a couple of house) on either side. It will further reduce already scare parking availability and will do nothing to improve the quality of life. Thanks you for your attention to our concerns. Sincerely, Kakalios L' A 4 Therese Kakalios 4908 Arden Ave. Edina, MN 55424 SEAL '� MAR 14 1008 RECEIVED March 14, 2008 Dear Council Member: Rick W. Webb 4612 Edina Boulevard Edina, MN 55424 952 - 920 -0040 rick.webb @mac.com I am writing to you today to express my opposition to the Traffic Calming Plan because of its aesthetic impact and resulting expense. I do not want to reconstruct our neighborhood streets using speed humps with reflective markings, raised cross - walks, one -ways, narrowed streets, concrete dividers, and increased sheet metal signage. I believe this plan will compromise the graceful flowing transitions at major intersections and negatively alter the neighborhood environment I have long admired and enjoyed. I am not asking you to delay or stop the sewer and water repair project, which is desperately needed. I have signed a petition asking the Edina City Council and city administrators to separate the water and sewer project from the traffic calming plan and solicit alternate bids that repair our streets AS IS. AS IS meaning - no traffic calming street modifications and devices. We must maintain the integrity of our neighborhood and appropriate action by our City Council is needed now. Sincerely, Rick W. Webb r/ SEAL MAR 14 From RWLamberton @aol.com [mailto:RWLamberton @aol.com] Sent: Thursday, March 13, 2008 5:53 PM To: Jennifer Bennerotte Cc: RWLamberton @aol.com Subject: Country Club Traffic Calming Plan and Sewer project Dear Council Member: I am writing you for two purposes: First, we are opposed to the Traffic Calming Plan because of its aesthetic impact and resulting expense. We do not want to reconstruct our neighborhood streets using speed humps with reflective markings, raised cross - walks, one -ways, narrowed streets, concrete dividers and increased sheet metal signage. We believe this plan will compromise the graceful flowing transitions at major intersections and negatively alter the neighborhood environment we have long admired and enjoyed. We must maintain the integrity of our neighborhood and appropriate action by our City Council is needed now. Secondly, having researched the sewer projects in other communities within the Hennepin County area, the previous projects in these other areas have assessed the residents based on. frontage foot of their property. My understanding is that the project that the Council has approved concerning the sewer and water repair is NOT based on frontage foot. On what date did the Council decide not to assess based on frontage foot? Where in the minutes of the planning commission or Council discussions was the protocol of Hennepin County discussed? Why has the. City Council gone against this measure for assessing Country Club residents for the sewer and water project? We look forward to your response. Mary Lou and Ron Lamberton 4108,Sunnyside Road MAR r From: Blemaster, Lou [mailto:LouBlemaster @edinarealty.com] `J"Y Sent: Thursday, March 13, 2008 11:13 PM To: Jennifer Bennerotte Subject: Traffic calming If the traffic calming issue comes before the City Council again I feel it must be noted and disclosed that council member Joni Bennett, who I feel since her election, has been a hard working and diligent council member, as an activist she spearheaded the opposition to the traffic calming issues in the Country Club District. Respectfully, Lou Blemaster 1010" 53P. MWte1% 952 - 924 -8744 952 - 920 -3442 \rGIT C! O SEAL F9 - MAR 1 4 -1008- . ----- Original Message- - - - - RECEIVED From: Michael Fernandez [mailto:mhfernandez@msn.com] BY Sent: Friday, March 14, 2008 8:55 AM To: Jennifer Bennerotte Subject: FW: traffic plan for country club > From: mhfernandezCDmsn.com > To: slilliehaug@ci.edina.mn.us > Subject: traffic plan for country club > Date: Fri, 14 Mar 2008 08:40:41 -0500 > I support the calming traffic plan the city council originally was to implement. > The city has already spent plenty of time and money on this project. I spent my own time going to the meetings, voicing my concerns along with many other residents. This was suppose to be done. Why. is it necessary to rehash everything again? We all had opportunities to support or reject this plan months ago, please move forward. Stick to your word and no more debates. > Heather Fernandez Deb Mangen From: Jennifer Bennerotte Sent: Tuesday, March 04, 2008 2:21 PM Cc: Deb Mangen; Wayne Houle Subject: FW: Traffic Calming, Country Club Jennifer Bennerotte Communications & Marketing Director City of Edina 952 - 833 -9520 FAX 952 - 826 -0390 jbennerotte@ci.edina.mn.us From: Bob De brey [mailto:RJD33 @isd.net] Sent: Tuesday, March 04, 2008 12:23 PM To: Jennifer Bennerotte Subject: Traffic Calming, Country Club Please redirect this email to: Mayor Council Member Council Member Council Member Council Member Public Works Dear Council Members and Mr. Houle: SEAL -1 MAR - 4 1000 , "..oVED Wayne Houle James Hovland Joni Bennett Scot Housh Linda Masica Ann Swenson We have lived in the Country Club District on Browndale Ave.for 40 years. We are quite disturbed by the proposed traffic calming measures and designs proposed for this neighborhood in the coming months and will completely change its historic character. Traffic in this district is not a problem since the recent upgrade of Hwy. 100. These modifications are not needed for the stated purposes, we do not want them, and I suggest that, if the residents understood the true dimensions of the plan, they would not want them either, nor the increased taxes to pay for them. We urge you to completely delete the traffic calming structures, all the two and three dimensional communication devices that go with them, and the re- contouring of the intersections. Further, when you drop off that portion of this unprecedented assessment everyone will be much happier. Lastly, please listen to what the residents are telling you on this matter. Robert J. and Claudette K. De brey 3/4/2008 Deb Mangen From: Jennifer Bennerotte Sent: Tuesday, March 04, 2008 2:03 PM Cc: Deb Mangen Subject: FW: Neighbor Input Jennifer Bennerotte Communications & Marketing Director City of Edina 952 - 833 79520 FAX 952 - 826 -0390 jbennerofte@ci.edina.mn.us From: Jeffthalll @aol.com [mailto:Jeffthalll @aol.com] Sent: Tuesday, March 04, 2008 1:55 PM To: Jennifer Bennerotte Cc: scot.housh @willis.com; jhovland @krauserollins.com Subject: Neighbor Input Hi Scott and Jim, Just wanted to let you know I visited the Country Club neighborhood architectural open house on February 25 and had a nice discussion with the planner. Margaret and I greatly appreciate all the hard work of everyone involved. We're expressing our concerns to you both so you understand our viewpoint, since I'm sure on many of these issues you only hear from certain very involved individuals. We love the neighborhood. Our main concerns involve: 1. Unnecessary tear downs that detract from our historical architecture /scale, and 2. Traffic The Traffic group has worked very hard over several years with much public input to develop a plan, which we support. We like the urban feel of the neighborhood and the sidewalks, but are most concerned about speeds given the huge density of small children, bikers and pedestrian. We trust the implementation of Traffic group's recommendations will assist with these concerns, although it would certainly be helpful to have more police enforcement of speeds /stop signs (since we rarely see enforcement). We believe the new architectural guidelines are a step in the right direction regarding tear downs and other architectural concerns, since it gives the planner and City a little more say regarding roof lines, etc. We're still a little worried that there aren't enough teeth in some of these guidelines, but hopefully it will be a step in the right direction. We believe the City made mistakes on certain redeveloped sites (right behind us 4501 Wooddale, and the house on Bruce that is a higher elevation than every other house), but also that some lessons have been learned by those involved. As you may know, we did an extensive renovation of our own home last year. We took great pains, and 3/4/2008 spent a great deal of extra time and money on design, to be sure that our scale and architecture were consistent with the neighborhood. Hopefully we were successful in that, and we have been encouraged by dozens of neighbors who have commented positively on.that issue. We hope we are doing our part to keep the neighborhood the kind of urban/family- friendly neighborhood we all love and enjoy. Thank you both for you your incredible commitment and dedication to the City, and we hope our comments are helpful as you consider to deal with these issues. Jeff Hall Real Estate Recycling 90 S. 7th Street, Suite 4500 Minneapolis, MN 55402 (612) 904 -1513 ext. 11 It's Tax Time! Get tips forms and advice on AOL Money & Finance. 3/4/2008 Deb Man en ,om: Jennifer Bennerotte Sent: Wednesday, March 05, 2008 6:21 AM Cc: Deb Mangen Subject: FW: For the city council Jennifer Bennerotte Communications & Marketing Director City of Edina 952 - 833 -9520 FAX 952- 826 -0390 jbennerotte @ci.edina.mn.us - - - -- Original Message---- - From: Ted Adams [mailto:tadams6 @comcast.net] Sent: Tuesday, March 04, 2008 4:53 PM To: Jennifer Bennerotte Cc: Rob Webb Subject: For the city council Council Members, As a 30 year resident of the country club district, first on Sunnyside and now on Edgebrook, I would like to weigh in with my thoughts regarding the planned changes to the streets. The supposed objective of the speed bumps, stop signs and other new traffic control mechanisms is to reduce the thru traffic in the neighborhood. In the thirty years that I have been here (most of it on "busy" Sunnyside Road), I can tell you that thru traffic or excessive traffic is definitely NOT a problem and never has been. Now that I am retired, I walk through the neighborhood at all times of the day and there is never a time when car traffic is even mildly excessive. The addition of dozens of stop signs which replaced the old yield signs and the changes to the triangles at the end of several streets about 10 years ago did nothing to change the amount of outside traffic (which was very little) or the speed of traffic in the neighborhood and only increased the inconvenience of those who live here while costing the city a lot of wasted money. The new changes (especially the unwanted speed bumps) will only further inconvenience those who live here and cost the city even more money putting them in and taking them out again ten years (or sooner, hopefully) from now. The amount of traffic in the area won't change because virtually all of it is made up of vehicles of residents or service vehicles attending to the homes. There are very few outside cars to eliminate. The density of useless stop signs already in the area has created a situation where most of them are ignored making the situation more dangerous than it was with the old yield signs. It is unfortunate that all the residents do not have a chance to vote on the proposed changes. I know you had ample hearings and some. questionnaires but those vocal few who no respond do not reflect the views of the majority of the homeowners. I hope common sense will prevail and you either leave things as they are or change them back to the way they were 15 years ago. Ted Adams 4618 Edgebrook Place 1 Deb Mangen From: Jennifer Bennerotte Sent: . Thursday, March 06, 2008 10:54 AM _ Cc: Deb Mangen Subject: FW: Traffic Calming Measures.for Country Club Jennifer Bennerotte Communications & Marketing Director City of Edina 952 - 833 -9520 FAX 952 -826 -0390 jennerotte@ci.edina:mn.us From: Dr. Day [mailto:dr.day @nweyeclinic.com] Sent: Thursday, March 06, 2008 8:40 AM . To: Jennifer Bennerotte Cc: Deborah L Day Subject: Traffic Calming Measures for Country Club Mayor Hovland, and Council Members Bennett, Housh, Masica and Swenson MqR 44 �6 U�/ 2me � I live at 4513 Edina Boulevard and have been aware of the upcoming sewer project in the Country Club Neighborhood. I don't think the communication regarding the project has been satisfactory, especially the communication about the traffic calming features. I have only recently learned the details and the costs of this aspect of the work. The small maps you have supplied never gave enough details. I think that more input from the people who live in the neighborhood should have been sought for the above ground ramifications. Daniel K. Day 3/6/2008 Deb Mangen rom: Jennifer Bennerotte Sent: Thursday, March 06, 2008 4:15 PM Cc: Deb Mangen Subject: FW: Proposed speed bumps in the Country Club District Jennifer Bennerotte Communications & Marketing Director 8� City of Edina 952 -833 -9520 FAX 952 - 826 -0390 jbennerotte @ci.edina.mn.us - - - -- Original Message---- - From: Craig Bentdahl [mailto:craigbentdahl @mac.com] Sent:_Thursday, March 06, 2008 11:36 AM To: Jennifer Bennerotte Subject: Proposed speed bumps in the Country Club District City Council Members, I'm writing to voice my strong opposition to the plan to add speed bumps and other traffic calming measures in the Country Club District. Excessive speeding is not a significant problem in our neighborhood, and the volume of cut through traffic has decreased since the third lane tpansion of Hwy 100 was completed. The plan attempts to solve problems that are minor, ad would create a daily burden on residents of our neighborhood. I'm also very disappointed with the City's failure to adequately communicate this plan to the neighborhood prior to approving it. I hope that you will listen to your constituents and stop this flawed and wasteful plan. Thank you. Sincerely, Craig Bentdahl 4505 Wooddale Avenue Edina, MN 55424 952 - 926 -8192 1 UBY Dear Council Members:_ I am writing to you today to express my opposition to the Traffic Calming Plan because of its aesthetic impact and resulting expense. I do not want to reconstruct our neighborhood streets using speed humps with reflective markings, raised cross - walks, one -ways, narrowed streets, concrete dividers and increased sheet metal signage. I believe this plan will compromise the graceful flowing transitions at major intersections and negatively alter the neighborhood environment I have long .admired and enjoyed. I am not asking you to delay or stop the sewer and water repair project, which is desperately needed. I have signed a petition asking the Edina City Council and city administrators to separate the water and sewer project from the" traffic calming plan and solicit alternate bids that repair our streets AS IS. AS IS meaning -- no traffic calming street modifications and devices. We must maintain the integrity of our neighborhood and appropriate action by our City Council is needed now. Sincerely, � R `S Please refer to the City of Edina website (transportation commission section /NE Traffic Study and view pictures /Figures 1 -7 /2005) and www.speedhumps.net for detailed information. Mayor James Hovland 612- 874 -8550 Council Member Joni Bennett 952- 927 -0661 Council Member Scot Housh 763 - 302 -7174 Council Member Linda Masica 952- 942 -6770 Council Member Ann Swenson 952- 927 -7524 Or write to us at edinarnail ci.edina.rnn.us. Dear Council Member: SEAL _' MAR 1 4 ZOO RECEIVED I am writing to you today to express my opposition to the Traffic Calming Plan because of its aesthetic impact and resulting expense. I do not want to reconstruct our neighborhood streets using speed humps with reflective markings, raised cross- walks, one -ways, narrowed streets, concrete dividers and increased sheet metal signage. I believe this plan will compromise the graceful flowing transitions at major intersections and negatively alter the neighborhood environment I have long admired and enjoyed. I am not asking you to delay or stop the sewer and water repair project, which is desperately needed. I have''signed a petition asking the Edina City Council and city administrators to separate the water and sewer project from the traffic calming plan and solicit alternate bids that repair our streets AS IS. AS IS meaning -- no traffic calming street modifications and devices. We must maintain the integrity of our neighborhood and appropriate action by our City Council is needed now. �1 (),rj Sincerely, v GI j Please refer tote City of Edina website (transportation commission section /NE Traffic Study and view pictures /Figures 1 -7 /2005) and www.sgeedhumr)s.net for detailed information. Mayor James Hovland �. 612- 874 -8550 Council Member Joni Bennett 952- 927 -0661 cof VA Council Member Scot Housh 763- 302 -7174 3 "I Council Member Linda Masica g —6 39 d 952 -942 -6770 Council Member Ann Swenson 952 -927 -7524 Cr write to us at edinamail d.edina.mn.us. .n: zineJl BLV06 90 b6 JB -- Original Message---- - From: Andrea Knoll [mailto :aknolll @comcast.net] Sent: Thursday, -March 13, 2008 11:47 AM To: Jennifer Bennerotte Subject: Country Club Traffic Plan Dear City Council members: se MAR 7 4 10UB 3v�C���FD . We are writing to express our support for the Country Club Neighborhood traffic calming measures. We feel the City has been responsive to neighborhood concerns about traffic by delaying our sewer and street reconstruction projects to develop a plan that included traffic calming measures. We commend the City staff and Council in their efforts to communicate with residents on this issue of the past several years. We live at the corner of Arden and Bridge Lane. Both speed and volume of. traffic are a problem. We have over 75 children that live on Arden. Each morning, 20 children get on the bus at our elementary school bus stop alonel We need safer streets and the current measures are not working. From our vantage point on the corner, we see cars regularly exceeding the posted speed limit and completely ignoring the stop signs that are intended to limit the impact of the traffic passing through the neighborhood. When traffic officers are posted at our corner, they continually pull over cars for traffic violations. Then, when the officer is gone, the abuses resume. We need speed bumps to slow traffic, better delineation of crosswalks to protect pedestrians and diverting measures to discourage commuter cut - through traffic. One of the strengths of the plan, as drafted, is that the neighborhood's traffic was considered as a whole. We strongly urge that any plans adopted continue to have this view. In the past, decisions were allowed that put undue traffic burden on streets with easy access to 50th street and France Avenue. We feel there have been ample opportunities for residents to express their opinions on this plan and that the City has communicated effectively. It makes no sense to tear up the streets for sewer and water without addressing this long- standing issue that impacts our neighborhood's quality of life and the safety of our children. We strongly urge the City to stay with the plan as drafted by the City engineers and the outside consultants. Thank you for your consideration of our views. Sincerely, Andrea and Ben Knoll 4601 Arden Avenue Page 1 of 4 Susan Heiberg From: Jennifer Bennerotte Sent: Thursday, March 13, 2008 2:28 PM Cc: Susan Heiberg SEAL MAR 1 4 1 RECEIVED Subject: FW: Please forward to City Council, Staff and Transportation Commission Attachments: False_Sign.JPG; Christensen_Letter.pdf Jennifer Bennerotte Communications & Marketing Director City of Edina 952 - 833 -9520 FAX 952 - 826 -0390 jennerotte @ci.edina.mn.us From: Miller, Marty [mailto:mmiller @safenetconsulting.com] Sent: Thursday, March 13, 2008 12:05 PM To: jhovland @krauserollins.com; Jennifer Bennerotte; Wayne Houle; Immasica @aol.com; swensonboys @aol.com; ghughes @cityofedina.com Subject: Please forward to City Council, Staff and Transportation Commission Dear City Council, Staff and Transportation Commission Members, Please see the "E -Mail (March 12, 2008)" attached below from Bruce Christensen. This is being sent throughout the neighborhood in small batches. In this letter he informs residents of a City decision, then infuses it with his biases and personal opinions. In his last paragraph he speaks of the developers original. plan and vision and that traffic calming was not part of that [in the 1920's]. Well, If we restore Eden Prairie, Chaska and Chanhassen to farmland, remove half the cars from the roads to get back to 1920's ownership levels and also reinstall the Trolley Line, I guarantee you, and I'm not even a traffic engineer, that this would fix our traffic problem; But I don't see that as an option. So we are left with the need to not ignore this problem and do something to help the neighborhood. I am getting letters from him now on a regular basis, at least 4 in the past month and I just received one from him today in response to a reply he received from the attached e-mail. He also somehow has obtained my work email address. This group, as I have mentioned before, has a website that is full of lies and half- truths in an attempt to whip the residents into a frenzy and create a pitchfork and burning torch mob for the sole purpose of invalidating a public, methodical and fact -based process that the council approved on November 6, 2006. At that meeting, the Council praised the work of the SAC Committee following Les' presentation which concluded at approximately 5 hours and 30 minutes into the meeting. The following comments after the 5:30:00 mark were made: 3/14/2008 Page 2 of 4 Mayor Hovland — "Thank you [Les) and the Commission for a tremendous piece of work." Councilmember Housh — "I doubted this could happen, but you have done a great job." Councilmember Masica - "I am pleased the entire commission voted to accept this plan in concept... Frankly, I think this is one of the best studies I have ever seen. - Councilmember Swenson — "I think the work is excellent." Councilmember Housh — "We implemented a plan...And this is for the good of everyone." The council then unanimously approved the plan and Mayor Hovland closed with "Kudos to everyone." This meeting was a long time ago so memory begins to fade on what a wonderful accomplishment this was. For many years, before you commissioned this study in July of 2005, hundreds of concerned residents had stood in front of you and asked the City.to do something about the traffic in the neighborhood. The Southwestern Suburbs have exploded in growth and as you know the inadequate road system around Edina has created this problem. This plan needs to be implemented in its entirety, professional traffic consultants have told us that. Bruce Christensen is not a traffic engineer, he doesn't design roadways. Yet he is the self- appointed neighborhood "Traffic Guru" and "Country Club Heritage Protector ". I sat in every public meeting and listened to the SRF consultants explain to the commission that they are amazed at the large and dangerous volumes of traffic in the NE Edina quadrant. He has filled residents full of propaganda and given them marching orders. He has people going door to door throughout the neighborhood in a last ditch effort to further divide the residents. and to recruit more to his cause. In the past few days, I was informed of 2 separate representatives tat have sat' in my neighbors living rooms and told them incorrectly that "there will be multiple assessments for this because of traffic calming" and that "there will be reflective paint on the speed humps and crosswalks of the neighborhood ". Both of these statements are false. There will not be multiple assessments and the speed humps and raised crosswalks actually have an old -style cobblestone look, not covered with reflective paint. If a resident does not have the true facts from either the City Engineers, the almost 200 page SRF Transportation Study or the almost 200 page Feasibility Study, they don't have the real information. They have misinformation given to them by Bruce Christensen and are then told to contact the city to stop this. His website has a link to 4 excerpts from the July 19, 2005 meeting attempting to get across the fact that there isn't a problem and that the neighborhood doesn't want this. He forgot to link the videos of the parade of concerned residents who talked in front of the council that day, only the few oppositions. Does Councilmember. Masica know that she is now on Youtube thanks to Bruce Christensen? He also forgot to go back over the past decade (you could go back further) to find the lines of residents who have stood in front of the Council asking for help. As further examples of his propaganda, please open the attachment to this e-mail (False_Sign.jpg). This is a sign that is in a residents front yard, given to them by Bruce Christensen. This sign says "Coming Soon: Street Signs - Don't drive thru Country Club This isn't a statement meant to inform a resident. It is propaganda meant to direct someone to action, Bruce Christensen's action. Are there any signs coming in 2008 that say "Don't drive through Country Club "? I looked in the Feasibility Study and I can't find any. Three days ago the neighborhood received "another mailing from Bruce with the attached letter, please open the 2nd attachment to this e-mail (Christensen — Letter.pdf). In his e-mail, he asked that residents forward the attached "draft letter" on to you and all city staff stating their opposition. 3/14/2008 Page 3 of 4 The Council did the right thing almost three years ago when you directed the study, then again did the right thing a year and a half ago when you listened to the traffic professionals and an informed Transportation Commission and unanimously approved the plan. Please don't let these underhanded tactics of propaganda and deceit enter our city process. After unanimous approval by the entire Traffic Commission and unanimous approval by the City Council, you can't allow an 11th hour insurgent group who has been waiting for this moment to halt the implementation. The leaders of this group knew exactly what the process was and were involved in the process. Some of them spoke at Council meetings, they just didn't like the outcome. They knew on November 6, 2006 that the plan was approved and they could have tried to derail the implementation anytime over the last year and a half but they didn't. Bruce Christensen waited until a month ago, just before implementation, to misrepresent the CCNA directory and spread his biased opinions to the neighborhood in an attempt to put together a group for the sole purpose of attacking your decision. This is a classic "last minute" dirty politics tactic and I hope you stand strong against it. In closing, I hope that I will never have to bother you again with letters like this. I don't enjoy doing these types of things, I don't do this because I find it entertaining. I do this because my children and hundreds of other children play on the sidewalks and ride their bikes through the streets of this neighborhood. I just want them to have a peaceful and safe neighborhood to grow up in. Thank you again for your time and all of your hard work for the City of Edina. Sincerely, Marty Miller Drexel Avenue E -Mail (March 12, 2008 From: Bruce Christensen [mai Ito: nospeed bu mpsplease@ live.com] Sent: Wednesday, March 12, 2008 3:57 AM To: jccp @usinternet.com; mkeyes @umn.edu; lizzierae @aol.com; clmiller @flash.net; annie.obrien @earthlink.net; garywidell @aol.com; Miller, Marty; david.hoven @rbcdain.com; tom.rock @comcast.net; jwidell @aol.com; rmlayton @comcast.net; kevin @techlinetwincities.com; zanna_mcferson @cargill.com; chris.obrien @chrobinson.com; kittyodea @comcast.net; margthall @aol.com; aknolli @comcast.net; abbylieber @hotmail.com; tom_mcferson @cargill.com; rherda @earthlink.net; scoggimmn@aol.com Subject: 11th Hour Historic District Execution Appeal Fails Process dealt good judgment a final blow last night. After two and a half hours of word -by -word review of the planned Country Club historic preservation building guidelines document, the Heritage Preservation Board (HPB) heard testimony from a group of concerned Country Club residents. That group challenged the HPB to reconsider its November 13th approval of a Certificate of Appropriateness (COA) for the upcoming roadway redesign of the Historic Country Club District. City of Edina Planner, Joyce Repya, advised the Board that after the ten -day appeal process the Board cannot withdraw an issued COA. Jean Rehkamp Larson, the sole professional architect on the HPB, whose motion at the November 13th meeting enabled the COA, asked fellow members to clarify their position with the City Council. There ensued a great deal of discussion about process which clouded the basic issue — is the planned use of 3/14/2008 Page 4 of 4 speed humps, choker islands and other traffic calming devices consistent with the developer's" original plan and- vision? Rehkarnp Larson made a motion to clarify, in letterform, the HPB's COA approval given the neighborhood's desire for an "as is" restoration alternative. She stated that it would be historically preferable to restore rather than reinvent street design.. Karen Ferrara seconded the motion. Newly appointed Board Chair, Chris Rofidal, defended the prior City process during discussion, abstained. Rehkamp Larson and Ferrara voted in favor. Lou Blemaster and Laura Benson voted against the measure, thus killing the motion. This is a puzzling decision in light of the Heritage Board's own position statement. "The design and placement of the sidewalks, boulevards, streets, median islands, and residential driveways reflect the original plan of development and are historic landscape features worthy of preservation in their own right. " Country Club residents are left wondering what this Board is trying to preserve. 3/14/2008 ,.'-C 2 oir 7 4P I-A Tj J. :-' 71' x N ; - } N3N�ll 1" m l. r Dear Council Member: I am writing to you today to express my opposition to the Traffic Calming Plan because of its aesthetic impact and resulting expense. I do not want to reconstruct our neighborhood streets using speed humps with reflective markings, raised cross - walks, one -ways, narrowed streets, concrete dividers and increased sheet metal signage. I believe this plan will compromise the graceful flowing transitions at major intersections and negatively alter the neighborhood environment I have long admired and enjoyed. I am not asking you to delay or stop the sewer and water repair project, which is desperately needed. I have signed a petition asking the Edina City Council and city administrators to separate the water and sewer project from the traffic calming plan and solicit alternate bids that repair our streets AS IS. AS IS meaning -- no traffic calming street modifications and devices. We must maintain the integrity of our neighborhood and appropriate action by our City Council is needed now. Sincerely, Please refer to the City of Edina website (transportation commission section/NE Traffic Study and view pictures/Figures 1 -7 /2005) and ,Vww.speedhurnps.net for detailed information. Mayor James Hovland, ihovland a,krauserollins.com, 612 =874 -8550 Council Member Joni Bennett, edinamail ci.edina.mn_us, 952- 927 -0661 Council Member Scot Housh, edinamail(a-)ci.edina.mn.us,_763- 302 -7174 Council Member Linda Masica, Immasica(aaol.com, 952- 942 -6770 Council Member Ann Swenson, swensonboysac aol.com, 952- 927 -7524 Or write to us all at edinamail &i.edina.mn.us, subject line: Deliver to Council Members Today City Manager, Gordon Hughes, ghughes@cityofedina.com. 952 -826 -0401 City Engineer, Wayne Houle, whoule(a�cityofedina.com, 952- 826 -1610 -s SEAL MAR 13 1008 March 12, 2008 RECEIVED Dear Council Members, I am writing today to clarify the context in which I motioned for a Certificate of Appropriateness for the Country Club Area Sewer, Water and Street Reconstruction Residential Area Safety Improvement Plan. At the November meeting of the Historic Preservation Board the extensive redesign of the streetscape was presented by the city engineer and consultants and it was my understanding that HPB role was limited to commenting on and making minor adjustments to the elements of The Plan. I understood that the speed bumps, chokers, raised crosswalks, neighborhood entrance sign, etc. were required to be in The Plan by mandate and that our role as a board was to offer helpful comments and suggestions as to how they could be more in keeping with the historic character of the neighborhood. For example, it was suggested that the bright brass plaque on the neighborhood entrance sign instead be a more subtle bronze or cut limestone but I did not think we were being asked or were able to comment on whether the sign itself was historically appropriate. I thought I was making a motion to approve our comments and suggestions that had been incorporated into the plan. It was not clear that we could have suggested elimination of any elements of the plan. I want to clarify that I do not think these traffic calming measures are historic to the neighborhood. This fundamental question was never on the table for discussion at the HPB meetings. If an alternate to remove some or all of the traffic calming items had been on the table for our review as a. board I would not have motioned for the approval of The Plan as it stands because these items are not original to the neighborhood. I joined the Historic Preservation Board to help the community assess the historic elements of designated districts and buildings in Edina. If our job, as a board, is to advise the City Council, it is only appropriate that we be made aware of the broader ramifications of our limited scope of influence. I believe it is important that the HPB has a transparent understanding of how issues that come before us will affect the community. Sincerely, Jean Rehkamp Larson, AIA Edina HPB member Dear Council Member: I am writing to you today to express my opposition to the Traffic _ .,ming Plan because ,of its aesthetic impact and resulting expense.. I do not want to reconstruct our neighborhood sheets using speed humps with reflective markings, raised cross - walks, one -ways, narrowed streets, concrete dividers and increased sheet metal signage. I believe this plan will compromise the graceful flowing transitions at major intersections and negatively alter the neighborhood environment I have long admired and, enjoyed. I am not asking you to delay or stop the sewer and water repair project, which is desperately needed. I have signed a petition asking the Edina City Council and city administrators to separate the water and sewer project from the traffic calming plan and solicit alternate bids that repair our streets AS IS. AS IS meaning -- no traffic calming street modifications and devices. We must maintain the integrity of our neighborhood and approp Jc di action by our City Council is needed now. o•� SEAL MAR 1 3 2008 Sincere , 1 DECEIVED BY Please refer to the City of Edina website ansportation commission section /NE Traffic Study and view pictures /Figures 1 -7 /2005) and www.speedhumps.net for detailed information. Mayor James Hovland ti 612 -874 -8550 /OC Council Member Joni Bennett 952- 927 -0661 J' Council Member Scot Housh 763 -302 -7174 sica Council Member Linda M a 952- 942 -6770 Council Member Ann Swenson 952- 927 -7524 Or write to us at edinamail @ci.edina.mn.us. SEAL From: michael fernandez [ mailto: mfernandez @integrityliving.com] MAN 13 ?008 Sent: Wednesday, March 12, 2008 4:07 PM RECEIVED To: Jennifer Bennerotte qL, Y Subject: sewer and traffic City Council: I support the plan the city. has put together for the Country Club neighborhood. There has been months upon months of work by the public, city and consultants to put this plan together. The public has known this and the city has been open for communication all along. I have not participated in a last second "unofficial' surveys and will not. I support the studies and 'official" plan the city has proposed. Mike Fernandez 4630 Arden Ave. Edina, MN 55424 SEAL MAR 13 7008 - - - -- Original Message - - - -- RECEIVED From: Joanne Patterson [mailto: jccp@usinternet.com] SY Sent: Wednesday, March 12, 2008 5 :54 PM To: Jennifer Bennerotte Cc: Joanne Patterson Subject: Traffic Calming Measures for Country Club Neighborhood To the Edina City Council and Staff, It is with a heavy heart that I write this letter. After all the surveys, discussions, meetings, open houses and proposals it seems that again, the approved traffic calming measures for the Country Club Neighborhood are in jeopardy because of a small, very vocal minority of residents. The frustration I feel about this issue is immense. I became concerned and involved with the traffic issue over seven years ago and I have learned a lot about the political process during these years. The most important lesson I did learn was to go through the correct channels. This is what those of us who want traffic calmed in this neighborhood did, at the request of the city. Now, after all these years, a group of residents, many of them whom have not lived in the neighborhood for more than a year or two and who DO NOT Know the history of the traffic issues in this neighborhood are now trying to stop the installation of the calming devices. I am confused as to why this group Speedhumps.net has suddenly decided to voice their concerns now, at the eleventh hour. The City has given this neighborhood every opportunity to voice concern, to offer feedback, to ask questions by holding open houses, sending mailings, informing the public about meetings, etc. With this public feedback, the city voted to move forward with the traffic calming measures. In the nine years that we have lived in our house at 4218 Sunnyside Road traffic has not slowed down, has not diminished. As I wrote to you three years ago, the traffic gets worse every year, even with the widening of Highway 100. Evey day, during every hour I watch many, many cars traveling west on Sunnyside Road ignore the stop sign at Sunnyside Road and Wooddale Road. I watch cars speed, airborne, at the top of Sunnyside Road near Cascoe Road. I don't understand how at this late date the City Council could even be considering abandoning the traffic calming measures and /or conducting another survey of the residents of this neighborhood to learn if there is a cut - through traffic problem. There is. I live it every day. I have already filled out three surveys over the past seven years. I simply don't understand why the city cannot stand by its decision. Please, please follow through with this plan that you agreed upon. Sincerely, Joanne and Bill Patterson 4218 Sunnyside Road Edina, MN 55424 952- 92601894 •cr From: Weiler, A R [mailto:A.R.Weiler @ingenix.com] MAR _cyL -t _ 3100 Sent: Wednesday, March 12, 2008 8:33 PM RE . _ . -.. 8 To: Jennifer Bennerottey CEIVED - Subject: In support of the Traffic Measure in Country Club _1_.'O Dear City of Edina, I am in favor of the traffic measures proposed for the Country Club neighborhood. These were carefully considered, well publicized to all citizens prior to and during the design phase, and appropriately validated. To have a minority of Country Club residents now re -open the issue in the 11th hour is utterly absurd, and clearly an abrogation of the process laid out and vetted by all. I look forward to the City moving forward with the agreed -upon plan with alacrity. Thank you and regards, A.R. Weiler 4512 Edina Blvd. This e -mail, including attachments, may include confidential and/or proprietary information, and may be used only by the person or entity to which it is addressed. If the reader of this e-mail is not the intended recipient or his or her authorized agent, the reader is hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying of this e -mail is prohibited. If you have received this e-mail in error, please notify the sender by replying to this message and delete this e-mail immediately. March 13, 2008 City Council Members Gordon Hughes, City Manager City of Edina 4801 West 50' Street Edina, MN 55424 HAND DELIVERED Dear Members of the Council and Mr. Hughes, SEAL MAR 13 2008 RECEIVED We are requesting that the City Council consider our petition at the March 18, 2008 Council meeting. This effort is only four days old and we'll need another day or so to make certain all neighbors have had the opportunity to respond. This is particularly important since the work related to this petition will be considered at that meeting. Our petition reads as follows: Petition To Modify Improvement Numbers A -213 & A- 214 Country Club Neighborhood To members of the Edina City Council, We the undersigned, residents of the Country Club District request the City of Edina obtain and present a street reconstruction bid to repair and restore our streets as they are currently configured, and to forgo any traffic calming elements. As a resident group unfamiliar with city process we beg the Council understanding and . request that we be allowed to supplement this request letter with the actual petition results by the close of business March 17, 2008. This issue has resulted in great financial burden to the residents with cost increases of nearly 100% from 2005. Its roots are based on perceptions of traffic problems not necessarily grounded in fact as evidenced by the July 2005 Council meeting where the City's own engineer and a traffic consultant testified that compared with other Edina neighborhoods there weren't traffic or speed problems in Country Club. Our hope is that the City would update its neighborhood traffic counts to determine the impact on the improvements at Highway 100 and the partial improvements at 50th & France. There were quite a number of recommendations from the NE Edina Traffic Study that have yet to be addressed but those two are most important to the traffic issues in Country Club. Council Members Gordon Hughes, City Manager City of Edina Page 2 Most important, our representative group believes this plan will impair a City historical resource — "The design and placement of the sidewalks, boulevards, streets, median islands, and residential driveways reflect the original plan of development and are historic landscape features worthy of preservation in their own, right. " This language is from the Edina Heritage Preservation Board web site. Our goal is progress toward replacement of our sewer, water, roadways, and lighting not to be viewed as obstructionist. spectively ubmitted, �' < C Bruce Christensen Pat D 1 As evidence of our petition efforts the following is a list of our street captains: BLOCK CAPTAINS: Arden - 4500 block — Ruth Melcher — 920 -3061 Arden - 4600 block - Kate Boyer - 920 -4466 Arden 4600 block - Sue Goldstein — 922 -2510 Bruce - 4500 block -Linda Smith - 922 -4620 Bruce - 4600 block - Karen Tully - 926 -0391 Bruce - 4600 block - Ardelle Schultz - 922 -5670 Bruce — 4500 block - Madeline Cushman — 920 -5920 Bruce - 4500 block - Stephanie Ryan - 836 -1748 Casco - 4600 block — Jeanne Johnston — 927 -8059 Casco - 4600 block,— Mary Grieg - Krieter — 926 -0055 Country Club Road — Anne Hall — 929 -1227 Drexel - 4500 block-, Patty Kivestu - 927 -0629 Drexel - 4600 block — Hillary Seaton = 929 -3680. Edina Blvd — 4500 block - Cynthia Hager.— 927 -5531 Edina Blvd — 4600 block — William MacLean — 926 -6742 Wooddale — 4500 block -'Brian Lavin 920 -3153 Wooddale — 4500 block Bill Kelly 925 -0071 Wooddale — 4600 block - Mike Fitzgerald 285 -9929 Moorland - 4500 block - Maryann Parker - 927 -9380 Moorland - 4600 block - Wendy Powell - 929 -7405 Council Members Gordon Hughes, City Manager City of Edina Page 3 Moorland - Pat McKinley — 926 -1199 Browndale - 4400 & 4500 block - Steve Alpeter - 928 -3749 Browndale - 4600 - Dave Pearson - 928 -9416 Edgebrook Place - Nancy Otterness - 927 -4857 Wooddale — Brain Lavin — 920 -3153 Sunnyside — Sheila Lind — 926 -8279 Sunnyside — Bob Dillon — 920 -4128 pI SEAL MAR 2 7fitiR - - - -- Original Message - - - -- RECici�E® From: StakeFam@cs.com [mailto:StakeFam@cs.com] BY —'°` Sent: Wednesday, March.12, 2008 9 :38 AM To: Jennifer Bennerotte Subject: Traffic Redesign in Country Club I am NOT in favor of the new traffic plans for Country Club. I agree that the speed on some on the streets needs ,to be reduced during certain weekend hours and at rush hour but the plan seems to be overkill to me. Is there a budget for this? How much will it cost? It should be rethought with the historic image of Country Club in mind. I regret I did not see the info in more detail earlier. I am on the mailing list for the City newsletter but must not have seen the plan. Mimi Stake 4617 Edina Blvd < /HTML> SEAL MAR 1 2 7008 RECEIVED From: Blemaster, Lou Sent: Wednesday, March 05, 2008 8:23 PM To: 'nospeedbumpsplease @live.net Cc: 'whoule @ci.edina.mn.us'; 'Joyce Repya' Subject: Traffic calming in the Country Club neighborhood The City of Edina has been working on the'traffic calming' issue in the Country Club neighborhood for at least three years. There have been many meetings open to the residents. Rob Webb has been very conscientious about getting notices out to the residents. He and others gave a marvelous presentation to the City showing the need for traffic calming. A great deal of money has been spent by the City to get expert help on this issue. A lot of thought and planning has gone into the visual impact on the neighborhood. It is important to the safety of all of our children to install these improvements on the neighborhood streets. I feel the proposal will curtail the cut through traffic and speeding on our streets. Children on Sunnyside, Wooddale and Edina Blvd. cannot cross their streets without parental escort to catch their school bus because of cars cutting through the neighborhood at rates above the posted speed limit. It was once clocked that 3000 cars went by my house on Sunnyside Rd in a day and 60% of those cars did not live in the neighborhood. My own children have long been grown and gone but I am deeply concerned about the safety of the hundreds of wee ones in the neighborhood. Please reconsider your opposition to the corrective measures that are planned. Respectfully, Lou Blemaster .eau J3&mwtm 952 - 924 -8744 952 - 920 -3442 Spat MAR i 2 IV cEIVigD From: Blemaster, Lou [ mailto :LouBlemaster @edinarealty.com] Sent: Wednesday, March 12, 2008 11:39 AM To: Jennifer Bennerotte Subject: Traffic calming I am in favor of the traffic'calming measures that are proposed for the Country Club District. It is a well thought out and widely researched plan and needs to move forward. If it saves one wee child from being hurt on our streets it's value is immeasurable. Respectfully, Lou Blemaster B= J3&M4"ten 952 - 924 -8744 952 - 920 -3442 a CITYC SEAL C MAR 1 2 1008 From: BRETT HEFFES [mailto:bheffesl @ msn.com] Sent: Tuesday, March 11, 2008 5:48 PM To: jhovland @krauserollins.com; Immasica @aol.com; swensonboys @aol.com; Jennifer Bennerotte Subject: Dear Council Members and Mayor Hovland, I am writing to you today to express my opposition to the Traffic Calming Plan because of its aesthetic impact and resulting expense. I do not want to reconstruct our neighborhood streets using speed humps with reflective markings, raised cross - walks, one -ways, narrowed streets, concrete dividers and increased sheet metal signage. I believe this plan will compromise the graceful flowing transitions at major intersections and negatively alter the neighborhood environment I have long admired and enjoyed. I am not asking you to delay or stop the sewer and water repair project, which is desperately needed. We must maintain the integrity of our neighborhood and appropriate action by our City Council is needed now. Sincerely, Brett Heffes 4521 Casco Avenue Edina resident since 2002 Brett Heffes H: 952 - 926 -2076 W: 763 - 520 -8415 bheffesl @msn.com T (BY Y S EAL - - -'-- Original Message - - - -- MAR 2 2008 From: Watchmaker, Todd A [mailto:twatchmaker@kpmg.com] RECEIVED Sent: Tuesday, March 11, 2008 4:52 PM � To: Jennifer Bennerotte Subject: "Deliver to Council Members Today" -- Country Club Residential Area Safety Improvements City Council Members: Respectfully, I disagree with most if not all of the $1.7 million in safety designated improvements for the Country Club District. Cost is not a consideration in my disapproval; rather, when I walk /drive the neighborhood with the modification proposals in hand, I cannot believe these changes will cause a betterment in safety, convenience or aesthetics for the neighborhood. If speed is a concern, reducing the speed limit to 25 mph would address the issue, together with enforcement by an occasional patrol officer. We live on Bruce Avenue and do not notice excessive flow- through traffic when compared to traffic patterns during the balance of our 16 years living here. Narrowing intersections from my perspective converts the flow of our neighborhood to nothing more special than city of Minneapolis blocks. While I understand action has been taken by the City Council to approve these improvements and you may feel this ship has sailed, I believe many in the neighborhood were unaware of the proposal. I encourage you to consider this and other input you receive and demonstrate sound, considered judgement in re- evaluating the neighborhood's concerns. Regards, Todd A. Watchmaker Partner, KPMG LLP ` **** ANY TAX ADVICE IN THIS COMMUNICATION IS NOT INTENDED OR WRITTEN BY KPMG TO BE USED, AND CANNOT BE USED, BY A CLIENT OR ANY OTHER PERSON OR ENTITY FOR THE PURPOSE OF (I) AVOIDING PENALTIES THAT MAY BE IMPOSED ON ANY TAXPAYER OR (ii) PROMOTING, MARKETING OR RECOMMENDING TO ANOTHER PARTY ANY MATTERS ADDRESSED HEREIN. * ** Any advice in this communication is limited to the conclusions specifically set forth herein and is based on the completeness and accuracy of the stated facts, assumptions and /or representations included. In rendering our advice, we may consider tax authorities that are subject to change, retroactively and /or prospectively, and any such changes could affect the validity of our advice. We will not update our advice for subsequent changes or modifications to the laws and regulations, or to the judicial and administrative interpretations thereof. SEAL MAR 1, 2 2008 From: Burnett [ mailto :susantiurnett @comcast.net] SY - Sent: Tuesday, March 11, 2008 9:23 PM To: jhovland @krauserollins.com; Jennifer Bennerotte; Immasica @aol.com; swensonboys @aol.com Subject: Country Club Traffic restraint Dear Mayor and Council Members, I hope this communication is not an intrusion, but these addresses were published as a means to express citizen viewpoints to you. My wife and I have lived on Wooddale (4514) for 31 years and have always hoped that there would be better traffic /speed control and restraints to commuting through our residential neighborhood. In sum, we express very affirmative support for any positive action you will take to achieve these goals. Thank you. Susan and Michael Burnett �O - SEAL " MAR 12 7000 Subject: FW : Country Club Neighborhood Traffic BY RECEIVED Dear Council and staff: Below is an email from a resident providing input earlier in the NE Edina traffic process. This dates over three years ago showing the extended time period over which residents have been participating in the process, and some of the views. - - - -- Original Message---- - From: Wayne Whitman [mailto:wwhitman@fastmail.fm] Sent: Saturday, November 27, 2004 4:01 PM To: slillehaug@ci.edina.mn.us Cc: CCNA Subject: Country Club Neighborhood Traffic Dear Steve, I am a Country Club neighborhood resident who is very concerned about cut - through traffic in our area and I am willing to support any measures to reduce the volume of this traffic. While we no longer have small children in our house, many residents on Drexel Ave. do and the children are frequently playing on front lawns and the city sidewalks. It concerns me greatly to see many vehicles travelling down our street quite often above the speed limit, with no regard for the local residents safety. I suspect this is also the case on a few other Country Club streets such as Wooddale Ave. and Edina Blvd. To be frank, I am tired of living on a speedway for Morningside and Minneapolis residents on their way to Hwy 100. or points west. Any action you can take to improve this situation would be welcome. Thanks, Wayne Whitman Cell: 612-270-1522 wwhitman@fastmail.fm PSEA C -- Original Message - - - -- ��� From: PattiKivestu@comcast. net (ma i Ito: PattiKivestu @comcast.net] - -- - �f- Sent: Tuesday, March 11, 2008 4:25 PM MAR 12 2008 To: Jennifer Bennerotte eY CEtVED Subject: Attn: Edina City Council - Traffic Calming Plan Dear Members of the Edina City Council, I am writing to you today to express my opposition to the Traffic Calming Plan which both my husband and I believe will have a negative impact on the intrinsic beauty of Country Club. I am not asking you ' to halt the much - needed sewer and water repair project, but I am asking you to please curtail the traffic calming portion of the construction. I have signed a petition asking the Edina City Council and city administrators to separate the water and sewer project from the traffic calming plan and solicit alternate bids that repair our streets AS IS. AS IS meaning -- no traffic calming street modifications and devices. We must do everything we can to maintan the integrity of our neighborhood and appropriate action by our City Council is needed now. Sincerely, Patti Kivestu 4404 Sunnyside Road 0 SEAL From: Patricia Dill [mailto:pledili @yahoo.com] Sent: Tuesday, March 11, 2008 11:11 PM �RECEIVED y To: Jennifer Bennerotte Cc: jhovland @krauserollins.com Subject: Country Club NEET /RASI Plan Honorable mayor,Jim Hovland, Our objection to SEH's concept and plan of our neighborhood is that we enjoy it "s historical and dignified traditional beauty without the commercialization effects of the colorful and invasive RASI calming. Please help us reconstruct our failing sewer,water and lights systems without the additional expensive and unnecessary calming measures. We can control and accept the flow of normal traffic with at -hand tools: police enforcement and self - education of present traffic controls and policy knowing it will only improve after the real problem -- -France Avenue at 50th,49 1/2, and 44th street intersections - - -is solved. Respectfully,Pat Dill 4610 Edina Blvd. Be a better friend, newshound, and know -it -all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try it now. Susan Heiberg I ci rp 8444 From: Gina Trierweiler [ginatrierweiler @hotmail.com] Rec V V .. EO Sent: Wednesday, March 12, 2008 8:27 AM To: Jennifer Bennerotte Subject: country club traffic measures Dear Council members, Page 1 of 1 We are in favor of implementing measures to slow down auto traffic in the Country Club district. We would like to see more traffic signs, brick crosswalks and perhaps closing off streets to cut through traffic. . - (�C41a a4r-L& Chad TrWwP,i,Le - 4623 Artie vAvel Connect and share in new ways with Windows Live. Get it now! 3/12/2008 Susan Heiberg om: Rebecca Walser [walserbecky @yahoo.com] MAR 7 2 2008 Sent: Wednesday, March 12, 2008 7:37 AM BY RECEIVE[) To: Jennifer Bennerotte Subject: Joni Bennett - Traffic Calming.... bear Council Member: I am writing to you today to express my opposition to the Traffic Calming Plan because of its aesthetic impact and resulting expense. I do not want to reconstruct our neighborhood streets using speed humps.with reflective markings, raised cross - walks, one -ways, narrowed streets, concrete dividers and increased sheet metal signage. I believe this plan will compromise the graceful flowing transitions at major intersections and negatively alter the neighborhood environment I have long admired and enjoyed. I am not asking you to delay or stop the sewer and water repair project, which is desperately needed. I have signed a petition asking the Edina City Council and city administrators to separate the water and sewer project from the traffic calming plan and solicit alternate bids that repair our streets AS IS. AS IS meaning -- no traffic calming street modifications and devices. -ow We must maintain the integrity of our neighborhood and appropriate action by our City Council is needed Sincerely, Becky and Paul Walser (4609 Browndale AVenue) Susan Heiberg From: Kristin Veker [knveker @gmail.com] Sent: Wednesday, March 12, 2008 7:58 AM To: Jennifer Bennerotte Subject: Deliver to council members today Attachments: Council_Mailing.doc Dear council members, Page 1 of 1 'SEAL '� MAR 1 2 10118 RECEIVED In addition to the attachment included here, we would like to add that, in the 12 years we've been in Country club, our 4 kids (ages now: 10 -15) have played and ridden their bikes outside without any concern with the traffic. We feel that this neighborhood is very safe and that motorists are respectful. The sidewalks are a big reason that we enjoy this comfort, and we are frankly puzzled that the traffic calming measures are being considered - they are totally unnecessary! Thanks for all of your hard work. Please give West 70th or other projects, your time and attention. Respectfully, Kristin and Steve Veker 3/12/2008 SEAL MAR t � NQ RECEIVED Dear Council Member: I am writing to you today to express my opposition to the Traffic Calming Plan because of its aesthetic impact and resulting expense. I do not want to reconstruct our neighborhood streets using speed humps with reflective markings, raised cross - walks, one -ways, narrowed streets, concrete dividers and increased sheet metal signage. I believe this plan will compromise the graceful flowing transitions at major intersections and negatively alter the neighborhood environment I have long admired and enjoyed. I am not asking you to delay or stop the sewer and water repair project, which is desperately needed. I have signed a petition asking the Edina City Council and city administrators to separate the water and sewer project from the traffic calming plan and solicit alternate bids that repair our streets AS IS. AS IS meaning -- no traffic calming street modifications and devices. We must maintain the integrity of our neighborhood and appropriate action by our City Council is needed now. Sincerely, Kristin and Steve Veker 4605 Browndale Ave. Please refer to the City of Edina website (transportation commission section/NE Traffic Study and view pictures/Figures 1 -7 /2005) and www.speedhumps.net for detailed information. Mayor James Hovland, jhovland@krauserollins.com, 612 - 874 -8550 Council Member Joni Bennett, edinamail@ci.edina.mn.us, 952- 927 -0661 Council Member Scot Housh, edinamail@ci.edina.mn.us, 763 - 302 -7174 Council Member Linda Masica, lmmasica@AQI.com, 952- 942 -6770 Council Member Ann Swenson, swensonboys(a,aol.com, 952- 927 -7524 Or write to us all at edinamail@ci.edina.mn.us, subject line: Deliver to Council Members Today City Manager, Gordon Hughes, ghugheskcityofedina.com, 952- 826 -0401 City Engineer, Wayne Houle, whoulega cityofedina.com, 952- 826 -1610 Page 1 of 1 r Susan Heiberg FN G1 rf SEAL MAR 1 9 ,, From: Bob Fried [bobfried @earthlink.net] By CEjyED Sent: Wednesday, March 12, 2008 8:04 AM To: Jennifer Bennerotte Subject: Traffic "I'm in favor of the traffic measures proposed for the Country Club neighborhood." Bob Fried Arius Chamber Music Society 4914 Bruce Ave Edina, MN 55424 bobfried@ariuschambermusic.org 952- 960 -9093 Fax: 425 - 944 -3891 Cell: 612- 382 -6600 www.ariusc hambermusic.org 3/12/2008 SEAL MATI From: Douglas Gervais [mailto:digervais @comcast.net] 2 2008 Sent: Wednesday, March 12, 2008 9:10 AM RECEIVED To: Jennifer Bennerotte BY Subject: Traffic We are in favor of the traffic measures proposed for the Country Club Neighborhood. Doug and Lisa Gervais 4514 Drexel ctl F A E&G RE �S��l1p0e BENSON - F►EG���ED UNITED STATES ENGLAND I GERMANY CHINA WILLIAM R_ JOYCE WJoyceQafaegre.com (612) 766 -7663 March 10, 2008 VIA FACSIMILE AND U.S. MAIL TO ALL Mayor James Hovland Wayne Houle Edina City Council Edina City Engineer Edina City Hall Edina City Hall 4801 West 50th Street 4801 West 50th Street Edina, MN 55424 Edina, MN 55424: Edina City Council Paul J. Pasko III, PE Edina City Hall S.E.H. 4801 West 50th Street 10901 Red Circle Drive, Suite 200 Edina, MN 55424 Minnetonka, MN 55343 Re: Country Club Area Sewer, Water and Street Reconstruction, Contract N. 084 (ENG), Improvement Nos. SS -413, STS 297; WM- 436• A -213• A -214• L-43 & L -49 Dear Mayor Hovland, City Council Members, Mr. Houle and Mr. Pasko: We represent Palda & Sons, Inc. ( "Palda ") who has been informed orally that it is the lowest responsible, responsive bidder on the project described in the re line of this letter. We have also been provided a letter written by counsel for Northwest Asphalt, Patrick J. Lee - O'Halloran, wherein he demands that the contract be awarded to Northwest Asphalt or that the project be rebid. We think neither course of action is warranted in this case and that the contract should be awarded to Palda as the clear lowest, responsible, responsive bidder under the bid documents related to the project and under controlling Minnesota law.. First, Northwest Asphalt claims that its bid error regarding unit price for bid item 99 (Cementitious Manhole Liner) is merely a transposition error and should be corrected, thus making them the apparent low bidder. However, case law in Minnesota supports the position that any errors with regard to pricing cannot be corrected after the bids are opened and doing so violates Minnesota's public bidding laws. And second, Northwest Asphalt's bid is, as a matter of law, non - responsive, and thus must be rejected. 2200 WELLS FARGO CENTER I 90 SOUTH SEVENTH STREET I MINNEAPOLIS MINNESOTA 55402 -3901 TELEPHONE 612 - 766 -7000 FACSIMILE 612 - 766 -1600 1 WWW.FAEGRE.COM March 10, 2008 Page 2 First, Northwest Asphalt's legal argument requesting a change-in its bid cites clearly distinguishable and non_ binding federal law, and ignores controlling, well - settled Minnesota law to the contrary. Mr. Lee- O'Halloran's letter argues that his client made a "transcription" error, changing the final amount of its bid. Mr. Lee - O'Halloran demands that the City correct that error. Because the corrected amount would then come in below Palda's winning bid, Mr. Lee - O'Halloran commands that the City "must" award the contract to his client, citing two federal government bid procurement cases. These cases are very different from the present case. In the present case, Section 1206.1 of the Minnesota Standard Specifications for Construction applicable to this project clearly state that in the case of a discrepancy between the extended price and the unit price, the unit price will govern. For Northwest Asphalt to now claim that the unit price should be trumped by the extended price would be directly contrary to the express provisions of these standard provisions applicable to this project. In other words, the possibility of a conflict between a unit price and an extension has already been provided for in the specifications and resolved in favor of the unit price. Furthermore, Minnesota law is absolutely clear -cut in disallowing any material changes, most notably to the final amount, following opening of the bids. Lovering- Johnson v. City of Prior Lake, 558 N.W.2d 499, 502 (Minn. App. 1997). Failure to abide by this long- standing law is not only patently illegal, but results in an award of bid preparation costs to any party thereby losing, out on the contract. Id. at 503 -04. Since at least 1947, the Minnesota Supreme Court has held that once a bid has been opened, the public entity has no authority to make any material changes or modifications to the bid. Coller v. City of St. Paul, 26 N.W.2d 835, 841 (Minn. 1947). A change or variance is material when the change gives a bidder a substantial advantage or benefit not enjoyed by other bidders. Carl Bolander & Sons Co. v. City of Minneapolis, 451 N.W.2d 204, 206 (Minn. 1990). The Minnesota Supreme Court has explicitly stated that price or "other things that go into the actual determination of the amount of the bid" are deemed to affect the substance of a competitive bid. Foley Bros v. Marshall, 123 N.W.2d 387, 390 (1963). Under Foley, modifications in price affecting a bid's amount are deemed material. Id.; City of Prior Lake, 558 N.W.2d at 503. Mr. Lee- O'Halloran's legal argument is therefore bewildering. Despite what two clearly distinguishable federal decisions, one more than fifty years old, and neither having any authority under Minnesota law, may say, Minnesota courts require public entities to refrain from making 4ny price - related changes to bids once the bids have been opened. For example, in Lovering- Johnson v. City of Prior Lake, .the court there faced this same situation. 558 N.W.2d at 501. A bidder asked a city government to change its bid based on a clerical error following the opening of the bids. Id. There, the bidder had placed a "plus" sign beside items that the bidder had actually intended to be deductions from the total price. Id. The city in that case decided to go through with what Mr. Lee - O'Halloran is requesting, allowing the bidder to change its bid price after opening. Id. After litigation, the court rejected this change, and granted bid preparation costs to the party that would have been the March 10, 2008 Page 3 low bidder but for this post - opening "clerical" modification. Id. at 503. Even though there was testimony from a city architect that it was apparent that the number in question was actually intended to be a deduct, this fact only came to light in discussions following the opening of the bid. Id. The court explained that it was precisely this type of inquiry or supplementation of a bid after bids have been opened that Minnesota law demands be avoided, as doing so "undermines the competitive bidding process." Id. The law is settled in this area. The Minnesota Supreme Court has stated that "no material change may be made in any bid after the bids have been received and opened since to permit such change would be to open the door to fraud and collusion." Griswold, 65 N. W.2d at 652. Minnesota courts have been absolute in enforcing the integrity of the bid process, disallowing bids that do not follow requirements even where the error only amounts to $6.00. J.L. Manta, Inc. v. Braun, 393 N.W.2d 490, 492 (Minn. 1986). And for good reason: If parties such as Northwest were awarded bids following correction of one price item, bidders would be able to submit bids that contained one dramatically high -priced item, keep the award for that price if still coming in lowest, but retain the ability to request the bid be corrected if not coming in lowest. Doing so would, as the Minnesota Supreme Court said, open the door wide to fraud and collusion. Because of the danger of the appearance of fraud and collusion, should the City of Edina do what Mr. Lee - O'Halloran asks and award the contract to Northwest Asphalt, Palda would be entitled to its bid preparation costs under Minn. Stat. § 471.345, subd. 14, and the bid would be susceptible to legal challenge. In addition, even if Northwest Asphalt's bid error with regard to the unit price of bid item 99 was a mere transcription error that could be corrected under Minnesota bidding laws, Northwest Asphalt's bid, on its face, is non - responsive for an additional material reason as well. Under the bid documents addendum 2, page PF -13 all bidders were required to list their subcontractors performing pipe lining for the sanitary sewer work and provide documentation. and certifications that clearly show the product used has been tested and used successfully and the subcontractor installing the liner is experienced, qualified and certified to perform the work under the project specifications (three years active experience, at least 500 successful installations, certification that product will be installed in accordance with the project specifications). Northwest Asphalt and Palda both received bids from at least two subcontractors, Lametti and Sons ( "Lametti ") and Gene's Sewer and Water ( "Gene's "). Lametti's bid was $1,365,406 while Gene's bid was only $813,960, more than a $550,000 difference. On the face of Gene's proposal, it indicated that "Gene's Water and Sewer will line the sewer laterals from the property line to the city main with the NuFlow system which mayor may not meet the city specifications." Upon further review, Palda determined that Lametti was the only subcontractor bid it received that could meet the project specifications and listed Lametti as its subcontractor on the project, including the appropriate documentation and certifications required in the bid documents. From the bid tabulation, it is clear that Northwest Asphalt used Gene's bid since its price for that work is well under the Lametti bid and in line with Gene's bid, even though Gene cannot provide the appropriate documentation and certifications required under the bid documents. Under Minnesota March 10, 2008 Page 4 bidding laws, this material deviation from the specification requirements by Northwest Asphalt makes their bid undeniably non - responsive. Bolander, 451 N.W.2d at 207; Coller, 26 N.W.2d at 840. Accordingly, Northwest Asphalt's bid must be rejected. On the other hand, Northwest Asphalt has raised no specific objections to Palda's bid, claiming only that once the transcription error is corrected, Northwest Asphalt would be the lowest responsible, responsive bidder. Given that Northwest Asphalt's bid is non - responsive as a matter of law, as well as higher once the correction is made with regard to the unqualified subcontractor, and there are no material discrepancies in Palda's bid, the City of Edina is well within the bidding laws of Minnesota to award the contract to Palda. Any threat of a bid protest by Northwest Asphalt would be frivolous in light of their multiple, material bid errors. Any award of the contract to Northwest Asphalt would subject the City to a legitimate bid protest by Palda. Thus, we strongly recommend that the bidding laws be followed and-the contract for the project be awarded to Palda. Very truly yours, FAEGRE & BENSON LLP William R. Joyce WRJ: j oywr Enclosure cc: Jay J. Palda fb- us.2686969.01 SEAL 1 MAR 1 12008 Dear Council Members: We are writing to you today to express our SUPPORT of the Traffic 6ekdrg Plan . We would rather reconstruct our neighborhood streets using speed humps with reflective markings, raised cross - walks, one -ways, narrowed streets, concrete dividers and increased sheet metal signage than risk having _a child hurt or killed_ due to the high speeds and increased traffic. We hope this plan will compromise the graceful flowing transitions at major intersections and alter the neighborhood environment so that it is no longer viewed as a quick pass through. We do question the need for the sewer and water repair project, but realize that our knowledge in this area is limited and trust our city officials. We must maintain the SAFETY of our neighborhood and appropriate action by our City Council is needed now. Sincerely, Charles and Raquel Layton 4501 Casco Ave. P.S. Please review the necessity of speed bumps near the Browndale Ave. bridge. It seems that because of the curve there and the narrowing at the bridge, most cars are already slowed. We request that speed bumps be considered on Sunnyside, between the stop signs at Arden and Wooddale. We invite you to sit in our backyard and witness the high speeds along that stretch. SEAL `1 MAR i 1 1006 RECEIVED Dear City Council Members, BY I am an 18 year resident of The Country Club neighborhood at 4504 Sunnyside o own and operate a business in our wonderful city. The reason we moved to Edina was for the education of our children and the character/beauty of the neighborhood. The thought of what the city is planning in these "calming" measures deeply saddens and angers me and my family. We live in a city, not on a cul -de -sac in Eden Prairie. The infrastructure needs (sewer &water) are a priority but speed humps and choker islands are a travesty. Seventy nine years of beautiful flowing streets to be altered by a vocal MINORITY is just not right. Country Club is recognized as one of the prime sections in our metro area and probably in our state yet we are thinking about adding speed humps. It doesn't make sense. I have met with all of you over the last two weeks. I was encouraged by some of the meetings and extremely disappointed by others. The issue is a difficult one because of history with a small group of neighbors yet the world has changed in the same period. The right thing from a fiscal/aesthetic perspective is to get bids on an as is basis and survey the residents. I have signed a petition that supports such an action. Please reconsider this plan and do the right thing. Bill Kelly First Premier Capita! LLC 5201 Eden Ave. .Suite 180 Edina, Minn. 55436 952- 224 -2477 F SEAL, MAR r 1 zoos Dear City Council and Staff, CE;VED I am in complete agreement with the sentiments expressed by Mr. Webb below iin su'�pport of the planned remedies for traffic abatement. My understanding is that the city and concerned citizens worked on this for plan for many years, with appropriate engineering expertise. I agree that the "1111 hour' lobbying by a certain vocal few should not be allowed to derail the process. The safety of our children, in light of the current traffic situation, is a daily concern for our family, and unquestionably trumps all theoretical concerns about aesthetic impact or the "look" of the neighborhood. Sincerely, Elsie Wang Weiler, M.D. 4512 Edina Blvd. From: Rob Webb [mailto:rwebb3 @comcast.net] Sent: Friday, February 29, 2008 4:27 PM To: 'edinamaiMci.edina.mn.us' Subject: Northeast Edina Traffic Dear City Council and Staff, I am writing because it has come to my attention that a few residents are lobbying to change the long - running traffic process. If you are hearing from one side of the issue, it is because no notification has been sent to the residents that there is any process to consider this issue. The Country Club Neighborhood Association has worked hard to work within the city's processes, and to encourage constructive resident input into those processes. Given that there is no active process, there are no active communications from the neighborhood association. I hope that we do not need to train the residents that constant banter is required to get action. Out of concern that we may be returning to the days of not having a process to guide us, I'm providing input proactively. There is significant agreement that there is a problem with residential traffic in Northeast Edina. This is based on facts collected and analyzed by an independent resident traffic commission, city staff and traffic engineers, NOT solely on resident outcry. The problem has not been remedied by the capacity added to Hwy 100 or the passage of time. Despite agreement on the problem, there will always be disagreement on how to remedy the situation. Residents seem to have no limit on their appetite to play engineer and to debate humps, bumps, neckdowns, chokers, circles, etc despite having very few qualifications on the subject. This is a dangerous approach that generally leads to poor solutions or inaction. We have seen a significant reduction in the amount of banter and unconstructive debate by channeling that energy into a constructive traffic process guided by the engineers. The city worked for years to develop and execute a process that can address traffic issues effectively. The process garnered good participation, and the communications are a matter of public record, but I'd add that the neighborhood association sent 14 emails to over 450 Country Club homes encouraging participation throughout the process. The process was sound. [t has come to my attention that a few Country Club residents would like to usurp that process -a process that has run over the course of years -and return to the banter of street -by- street interests of the old days that led to paralysis while a well documented traffic problem continued to run unabated. Even the "survey" that was sent out intended to inflame division among residents by introducing the link with the sentence, "the neighbors opposed to speed humps are interested in surveying Country Club residents," and "please email us at nospeedbumpsplease(a)live.com ." The associated web site is filled with editorial commentary and their own interpretation of facts, much of it in direct contrast to conclusions drawn by the engineers and final NE Study report, to try to make a case against traffic measures. What demographic is going to respond to a highly biased group that misappropriated their email for their special interest and has no official designation? We have progressed so far as a community with the implementation of a rational, fact -based process, please do not return us to "volume- meter" governance. I see no reason why resident input cannot continue to be incorporated into the plan. If the residents are interested in roviding constructive input versus derailing a valid and long- standing process at the 11 hour, then allowing the engineers to respond to their input should be sufficient. If this is an effort to say, "I didn't like the outcome of the process, so I'm going to try to get it thrown out so I can give it another try with a new commissions, a new council, a new . process, etc." then God be with us all if we go down that path. If almost half the U.S. population doesn't like who is elected president in November (a likely outcome)? Do we let public outcry have us rerun the caucuses, the fund - raising, the debates, the proposals, the election, in an effort to continue to redo it until the unhappy people get the answer they wanted? Do we let the presidential office sit vacant until we can all agree on one candidate? Of course not. I don't see why we are expecting so much more out of our city -level processes. The transit system has been demonstrated by the engineers to be working improperly, they've proposed a solution that requires the least amount of intervention as possible, and we're here at the 11th hour after years of process. We need to move forward, we need to determine when we've performed beyond a reasonable doubt despite the ever - present doubters. Please take input at all times, but keep the city moving forward. Sincerely, Rob Webb 4516 Drexel Appendix Above is what I had to say. If you are interested, below I provide one resident's input on the various questions that I've heard emerge with the recent "noise" around this issue. It is voluminous, consistent with appendix material. I put headers in to allow indexing to any topics of interest. Has anything changed about the circumstances of the study? Did Hwy 100 remedy the situation? The engineers that worked on the NE Edina design were well aware that Hwy 100 would likely be repaired at some point in the planning horizon. They were creating a plan that was, intended to work for decades, not a few years. They identified that there were many other sources of issues than just Hwy 100, such as 50th & France and 44th & France that would continue to push volumes of cars onto residential streets. Speaking from the vantage of someone on Drexel, we have seen very little reduction in traffic since the remedy of Hwy 100. Why are we hearing less from the residents about traffic, have people stopped caring about this issue? It isn't that the problem has gone away, or that people have stopped caring or,expressing concern, it is that the residents have confidence in the City's .process, which is a stark contrast to the past. The long - standing mantra was that the engineers should design a traffic system that worked -use the arterials, not neighborhood streets to move people and goods. The residents aren't qualified to be designing a traffic system, so they should provide input and stand back. My parallel continues to be that I fly a lot, and I'd love to provide input into the design of the planes, but I guarantee you that I could not design one that could fly. Worse, put every flyer in a room and ask us to agree on a design that meets all of our unique needs, and you'd have mayhem. I fly coach, so I'd vote to get rid of first class to allow more room in coach, first class would vote to compress coach seating further, I'd get rid of cargo to allow more baggage for passengers, etc. We would never agree. That is what the traffic process of old was like, and it was miserable for everyone. A committee advising some engineers with additional input along the way is more rational, which is exactly the process that the City wisely implemented for the traffic process. Once residents saw a rational and fact -based process, and experts engaged in the process, people went on with their lives. Prior to the process, many residents felt like they needed to be constantly harping to have any shot at getting anything done. It was a broken governance process. Do we want to go back to that process? People were not quiet during the established process. Many residents wrote letters, showed up for committee meetings, open houses, hearings. The difference is that it was constructive input that shaped the outcome of the process versus neighbor- versus - neighbor banter. As residents gained confidence in the traffic commission and city staff, the feedback was only incremental to provide input where there may have been gaps in perspective. Was the process a function of a "few vocal neighbors" while the "silent majority" wasn't heard from? This could not be _further from the truth, and is a complete under - estimation of the sophistication and care taken by the city to run an effective process. The process was driven by facts and engineering. A city- supported survey was delivered to residents' homes in 2001 in which 274, or 51 %, of the homes responded and 79% agreed or strongly agreed that there was too much traffic in the neighborhood (considering that a few streets have rather modest traffic volumes, this is significant data). Traffic counts were taken, and traffic patterns were studied in great detail. These counts validated that it was not just a perception problem, that neighborhood streets were in fact being used in unintended ways, as arterials, instead of as residential. An independent traffic commission, city staff and consultants worked for months and months to collect data and design mitigating remedies. They concluded that they needed to put some measures in the neighborhood, a step that I think most people would like to avoid, but the math showed that without them traffic would continue to deviate from the arterials since it requires —33% less time to cut through the neighborhood. Was the process inclusive, provide adequate notice and communications, etc? The communications regarding this process were extensive. I know that there is some question about how far in advance notice was sent. From my experience of organizing events for the neighborhood, it doesn't help to send notice too far in advance. People don't plan their lives around these things, and they forget about it. I believe that the city communications were well timed to get participation. All the commission meetings were open to the public, there were Sun Current articles, there were open houses and public hearings, the neighborhood association sent 14 emails on the subject, the materials, were on the city's web site, the city sent letters and flyers, and the open house and public hearing process accepted written comments for extended periods of time (30 days officially, longer unofficially) before and after each step in the process. The NE Edina traffic recommendations were made and approved in the fall of 2006 -over 15 months ago. Significant notice was provided about the recommendations, and their approval, and we've had 15 months'to address any concerns that residents had. Why are you hearing a bunch of concerns now? As you know, a few neighbors are hoping to change the outcome of a long -run, thorough process. You aren't hearing from much of the rest of the neighborhood because they think it is done. The neighborhood has worked hard to stay within the city's process, so, since there is no official process at this time, there are no efforts to try to make sure that you hear from all the people in favor of the plan (also see first point on why it is quieter on the Country Club traffic front). Do we need to train the residents that constant banter is required for action? Or, can we reinforce that there are processes, and they should participate when they run so that the city can be run in an orderly fashion? That being said, I won't suggest that the process needs to be overly rigid. I don't know why the concerns can't be considered now to see if there are actions that can be taken to address concerns. I know that many of the concerns that you are hearing were expressed during the process, and they were evaluated, but there were limitations based on the interconnectivity of all the plans' working parts. This is the "group of people designing the plane" problem. If everyone gets the feature they want, the plane won't fly. I think some people have decided that they may, be able to hold up the whole process to try to get what they want. Also, there are areas of the neighborhood that are not impacted by traffic as much as others. For example, there are a few streets that have significantly less traffic than others. In addition, people that don't have small children perceive the issue differently, and many of them raised children in the neighborhood at a time when the traffic in the neighborhood was a fraction of what it is today. So, for some of that demographic, their perception is that it was fine for their kids and should be fine for the families with young children today. However, things have changed dramatically, volumes have grown significantly on many of the streets, and it has become a more frantic type of traffic that is dangerous. Ask Bob Fried, a Bruce resident, who was struck by a car on Bruce in November 2007, and was left on the street to die by a driver that didn't stop. He spent weeks in a coma, and now is rehabilitating -from a brain injury. Anyway, some of these factions only see downside in the plan. "what if my street gets even more traffic as a result of these changes?". "what if it is inconvenient for me to drive over a speed- hump?" Many people have expressed fear of the unknown. People avoid fear. People have expressed first hand that while they don't like the current situation, they are too afraid that it will be worse to be able to move forward. It's the paratrooper that can't move their legs until they believe the plane is crashing. I think you see this a lot, I don't envy your role, but the .city can't become paralyzed by their fear. What about this survey? Sadly, the survey is conducted with such poor hygiene that it is of little use. 1) the survey is introduced with significant bias against traffic calming; 2) the web site uses data that is misleading, including what appears to be city documents that were edited to suit the group's purposes; 3) it was sent only via email so it didn't reliably reach many residents; 4) it was emailed using resident emails that were provided to the neighborhood association with the understanding that they wouldn't be used for special- interest so they started off on the wrong foot with many residents and many chose not to participate .(not to mention they damaged the reputation of the neighborhood association); 5) their only verification method of residency is to have the respondent type in their address, which is very weak confirmation; 6) it is not from a group that is recognized by the resident. Also, many of the questions are asking about the features and functions of the plan, again "passengers designing the plane." Does anyone want to drive over a speed hump? Of course not, that's the point, it deters traffic that isn't committed to being there. Does anyone want a root canal? No, but they don't want the other consequences either. Does anyone want to drive over a speed hump if they don't perceive an issue in front of their house; probably not. We can't expect "treat your neighbor as yourself' behavior out of everyone. I haven't seen a willingness to represent the data with impartiality either, in that they stood in Council Chambers and represent the survey responses of 100 as directionally valid when it had been emailed to very few people at that point, and was handled by a member of the group with a stated bias. The neighborhood has conducted surveys in the past. As mentioned, a city- supported survey delivered to the residence was conducted in 2001 with high participation rates. We did`a survey through the neighborhood association for the architectural standards, which was delivered via the web site with password sign -on AND mail to the homes. The survey was unbiased_ and introduced without bias. I think this was valuable. In contrast, this group approached the neighborhood association about conducting a survey and decided to go on their own after it was requested that they reduce the bias of their statements in order to protect the integrity of the survey. Instead, they typed in the email addresses from the directory, despite clear indications that it is not to be used for solicitations, and sprayed it to the neighborhood. What is biased about their materials? First, the survey is introduced with the statement, "The neighbors opposed to speed bumps are interested in surveying the Country Club residents," and "If you have questions or concerns, please email us at nospeedbumpspleaseglive.com." What demographic is going to respond to this? If you are in favor of the measures are you going to send it to a group that is openly opposed to your point of view, misappropriated your email address, and has no official designation? The "facts" on their web site (www.speedhumps.net) were represented to the Council as . including only material that is available on the City web site (Bruce Christianson comments during Feb 19, 2007 Council meeting), yet 60% of the links are to documents that were created by this group for their interests. The data points are highly selective to support their point of view, and they twist many of the facts or completely misrepresent them. For example, the site claims "our property values could be hurt." If one takes the time to. read the article associated served as "fact" with that comment, the article concludes, "It is not evident that speed humps in a neighborhood will affect property values in any predictable way." Yet most residents will stop at the inflammatory comment versus reading the article. Many of the data points are from the inner workings of the Traffic Commission, and they appear to have been massaged to suit their purpose. For example, the related traffic chart looks modified, the site doesn't claim that it is an SRF document, but it still has SRF's logo on it (http: / /www.speedhumps. net / Documents /Z- ADTVNEETS091806.pdf ). They list 85% speeds that appear reasonable. While they imply that 15% of traffic should be removed from consideration for speeding because 85% of the volume is at lower speeds, but if you're on Sunnyside, as one example, that's over 400 cars per day traveling at high speeds a few feet from your lawn. They have a document on the web site titled "speed humps not warranted, a resident analyzes the data." What are the qualifications of that resident? The Steve Lillehaug email, which is from the inner working of the Commission, says that speed humps have little impact on vehicles traveling less than 25 MPH. This fact is twisted to support the conclusion that speed humps will not reduce speeds in the neighborhood. An equally valid interpretation would be that they are a good measure because they selectively impact the speeders. The "Frequently Asked Questions" document is an editorial. The site says, "The approved humps.will compromise emergency response time." While perhaps a true fact if taken in isolation, all things considered it is a factor that can be managed. The final traffic report concludes, "Both the City's Fire Chief and the Supervisor of Transportation for the Edina Public Schools have reviewed the RASI elements proposed for the neighborhood. They . both concluded that, if quality and care is taken in their final design, the impacts to their operations caused by the proposed RASI elements are satisfactory." The point is that a survey introduced in this context is not valid. SEAS MAR 1] 21 From: Willie Eden [mailto:willie th @yahoo.com] e1' W"rED Sent: Monday, March 10, 2008 6:02 PM To: jhoviand @krauserollins.com; Immasica @aol.com; swensonboys @aol.com; ghughes @cityofedina.com; whoule @cityofedina.com; Jennifer Bennerotte Subject: Deliver to Council Members Today /Country Club Traffic Calming Plan I am writing to you today to express my opposition to the Traffic Calming Plan because of its aesthetic impact and resulting expense. I do not want to reconstruct our neighborhood streets using speed humps with reflective markings, raised cross - walks, one -ways, narrowed streets, concrete dividers and increased sheet metal signage. I believe this plan will compromise the graceful flowing transitions at major intersections and negatively alter the neighborhood environment I have long admired and enjoyed. I am not asking you to delay or stop the sewer and water repair project, which is desperately needed. I have signed a petition asking the Edina City Council and city administrators to separate the water and sewer project from the traffic calming plan and solicit alternate bids that repair our streets AS IS. AS IS meaning -- no traffic calming street modifications and devices. We must maintain the integrity of our neighborhood and appropriate action by our City Council is needed now. Sincerely, Willie & Doug Eden 4501 Browndale Avenue Edina, MN 55424 Edina City Council Members Gordon Hughes, City Manager Wayne Houle, City Engineer Re: Street Improvements 213 & 214 Country Club District Dear City Representatives, SEAL MAR 1 1 1008 As a forty -year Country Club resident, I am troubled by the City's approach to neighbor concern about the traffic calming plan's impact on our neighborhood. Since the final plan's unveiling in November and Council approval shortly thereafter, many of us are disappointed with the City's communication effort and consequently left out of a normal public comment period. This historic district is recognized as such due in no small measure to its "streetscapes ". "The unique rhythm of the streetscapes in the Country Club is primarily the result of the developer's original plan." This plan will redesign these streetscapes in such a way as to leave our neighborhood no different than those of southwest Minneapolis. I urge you to give the City flexibility and time to allow proper neighborhood input on this issue. This will also allow time to study the positive impact the Northeast Edina Traffic Study recommendations have already generated. Absent a promptly developed base plan for the restoration of our streets and gutters to "as is" condition, leaves the project vulnerable to a legal challenge which might jeopardize the infrastructure project for 2008. There are side benefits of such a base bid. It will establish the excess costs for specific neighborhood improvements beyond the essential scope of work. This will be helpful during the assessment hearing phase. It will allow for transparency, which in the opinion of many of our fellow neighbors has been missing during this process. It is inconceivable that a project with an estimated assessment of $23,000, most likely the largest such neighborhood assessment in City history, would proceed without a base alternative, given wide spread neighborhood concerns. Prior to spending a substantial amount of City and homeowner resources on a problem with a debatable factual basis, let's consider a more fiscally prudent alternative. Increased law enforcement, education tools such as portable radar speed units, and a neighborhood awareness campaign all would serve as a community building platform. Help us keep this infrastructure plan moving forward. Respectfully submitted, Bruce Christensen 4515 Browndale (1992 — present) 4900 Sunnyside (1986 — 1992) Dear Council Members: >' SEAL _" MAR i 12000 RECENEp I am writing to you today to express my opposition to the Traffic Calming' - Plan because of its aesthetic impact and resulting expense. I do not want to reconstruct our neighborhood streets using speed humps with reflective markings, raised cross - walks, one -ways, narrowed streets, concrete dividers and increased sheet metal signage. I believe this plan will compromise the graceful flowing transitions at major intersections and negatively alter the neighborhood environment I have long admired and enjoyed. I am not asking you to delay or stop the sewer and water repair project, which is desperately needed. I have signed a petition asking the Edina City Council and city administrators to separate the water and sewer project from the traffic calming plan and solicit alternate bids that repair our streets AS IS. AS IS meaning -- no traffic calming street modifications and devices. We must maintain the integrity of our neighborhood and appropriate action by our City Council is needed now. Sincerely, Brad Stone 4400 Sunnyside Road cell #612 - 226 -6066 Brad Stone Frontenac Partners, LLC work # 952- 933 -5157 mobile # 612- 226 -6066 Supercharge your AIM. Get the AIM toolbar for your browser. March 10th, 2008 ' SEAL MAR 1 12008 RECEIVED Dear Council Member: I am writing to you today to express my opposition to the' Traffic Calming Plan because of its aesthetic impact and resulting expense. I do not want to reconstruct our neighborhood streets using speed humps with reflective markings, raised cross - walks, narrowed streets, concrete dividers and increased sheet metal signage. I believe this plan will compromise the graceful flowing transitions at major intersections and negatively alter the neighborhood environment I have long admired and enjoyed. I am not asking you to delay or stop the sewer and water repair project which is desperately needed. I have signed a petition asking the Edina City Council and city administrators to separate the water and sewer project from the traffic calming plan and solicit alternate bids that repair our streets as is .... meaning no traffic calming street modifications and devices. We must maintain the integrity of our neighborhood and appropriate action by our City Council is needed now. Thank you for your attention to this matter. Sincerely, Mike Fitzgerald 4624 Wooddale Avenue SEAL From: THOMAS W ANDERSON [mailto:tk4603 @msn.com] RECEIVED Sent: Monday, March 10, 2008 9:29 PM Bye_ To: Jennifer Bennerotte Subject: Please Stop Proposed Speed Humps Dear Mayor Hovland and Council Members Bennett, Housh, Masica and Swenson: We have loved living in the Country Club neighborhood for the past 25 years. We are very concerned about the Traffic Calming Measures slated to happen in our neighborhood and believe that the plan will have a highly negative impact on the stately beauty of the area. We also have not found traffic in the neighborhood to be a significant problem. We are in favor of efforts to separate the sewer and water repair project, which we support, from the Traffic Calming Plan, which we strongly oppose. Please remove the Traffic Calming Plan from the other necessary projects! Thank you for your attention. Sincerely, Tom Anderson and Kathryn Hagen 4603 Drexel Ave. Edina, MN 55424 FNAR SEAL March 11, 2008 1 2Ug8 RECEIVED Rv Dear Council Member: I am writing to you today to express my opposition to the Traffic Calming Plan because of its aesthetic impact and resulting expense. I do not want to reconstruct our neighborhood streets using speed humps with reflective markings, raised cross - walks, one -ways, narrowed streets, concrete dividers and increased sheet metal signage. I believe this plan will compromise the graceful flowing transitions at major intersections and negatively alter the neighborhood environment I have long admired and enjoyed. I am not asking you to delay or stop the sewer and water repair project, .which is desperately needed. I have signed a petition asking the Edina City Council and city administrators to separate the water and sewer project from the traffic calming plan and solicit alternate bids that repair our streets AS IS. AS IS meaning -- no traffic calming street modifications and devices. We must maintain the integrity of our neighborhood and appropriate action by our City Council is needed now. Sincerely, Tom and Susan Wilson 4519 Casco Avenue Edina, MN 55424 952.925.5077 FABYANSKE WESTRA HART & THOMSON PROFESSIONAL ASSOCIATION VIA FAX (952) 826 -0390 & U.S. MAIL Mayor James Hovland Edina City Council Edina City Hall 4801 West 50th Street Edina, MN 55424 VIA FAX (952) 826 -0390 & U.S. MAIL Edina City Council Edina City Hall 4801 West 50`h Street Edina, MN 55424 Patrick J. Lee- O'Halloran Direct: 612.359.7609 patrickl @fwhtlaw.com March 7, 2008 VIA FAX (952) 826 -0389 EMAIL & U.S. MAIL Wayne Houle Edina City Engineer Edina City Hall 4801 West 50'b Street Edina, MN 55424 VIA EMAIL & U.S. MAIL Paul J. Pasko III, PE S.E.H. 10901 Red Circle Drive, Suite 200 Minnetonka, MN 55343 SEAL MAR 1 01008 RECEIVED Re: Country Club Area Sewer, Water and Street Reconstruction Contract No. 08- 1(ENG) Improvement Nos. SS -413; STS 297; WM -436; A -213 & A -214; L -43 & L -49 (the "Project ") Dear Mayor Hovland, City Council Members, Mr. Houle, and Mr. Pasko: I write on behalf of my client, Northwest Asphalt, Inc. ( "Northwest "). The purposes of this letter are threefold: (1) to request that the City award the Project's contract to Northwest as the lowest, responsive and responsible bidder; (2) to protest the award of the Project's contract to any bidder other than Northwest; and (3) in the alternative, to request the City to reject all bids and rebid the Project. 1. Award Project's Contract to Northwest Northwest received the City Engineer's bid tabulation yesterday afternoon. The tabulation identified Northwest as the third- lowest bidder with a total contract price of $14,493,631.32. Northwest should have been identified as the low bidder because the total price identified in its bid was $13,748,628.27. The City Engineer's tabulation is approximately $745,000 too high. Thus, the total $14,165,325.32 price from the contractor whom the City \\file 1 \vol l \PL \83864 \83864- 001 \698756.doc 800 LaSalleAvenue, Suite 1900, Minneapolis, Minnesota 55402 Main: 612.359.7600 Fax: 612.359.7602 www.fwhtlaw.com March 7, 2008 Page 2 identified as the low bidder, Palda & Sons, Inc., is actually $416,697.05 higher than Northwest's bid. The $745,000 discrepancy between Northwest's bid total and the tabulation from the City Engineer resulted from a handwritten error on Northwest's bid form. The error, which is obvious in retrospect, concerns the unit .price actually entered on the bid for Line Item No. 99 (Cementitious Manhole Liner) and the unit price used to calculate the extended Price. shown on the bid and used to calculate the.total. The bid's total extended price of $82,779.00 fr Item No. 99 is correct and based on a $123.00 unit price multiplied by 673 units. However, the unit price actually printed in Northwest's bid is $1,230.00 /unit, ten times higher than the price used to calculate the correct extended price. When the incorrect $1,230.00 unit price is used, it results in an extended price of $827,790 for Item No. 99. There is no ambiguity in Northwest's bid because the discrepancy between the unit price and extended amount for Item No. 99 is obvious on the face of Northwest's bid. That the $1,230.00 unit price is a transcription error in the placement of the decimal point is made even more apparent when Northwest's bid is compared to the unit price supplied by other bidders for Item No. 99. Each of the five other bidders identified a unit price for Item No. 99 from $108.00 /unit, at the lowest, to $180.00, at the highest. Northwest's actual bid price of $123.00 per unit is well within this range, but the $1,230 figure entered on the bid is ten times higher. The manifest inconsistency between the $1,230.00 unit price and, the other bids is illustrated by the following table:, The City and its Engineer may question whether they have the authority to correct this obvious transcription error and reconcile the mistaken unit price of $1,230.00 when the extended price of $82,779.00 clearly shows that a $123.00 unit price was used by Northwest. Federal courts consistently allow public bodies to make this correction in instances such as this one. Federal decisions agree that the correct extended price will prevail over the erroneous unit price when the unit price is totally inconsistent with other bids and there is no room for doubt that the intended unit price was reflected in the extended price. The following two cases are exemplary and involve nearly identical situations as presented by Northwest's bid. In both cases, the bidder was permitted to correct an erroneous unit price simply by moving the decimal point one space to the left: \\file 1 Wol l \PL \83864 \83864 - 001 \698756.doc Palda & Veit & Northwest Northwest Max S.M: Lametti & Sons Company (Transcription (Corrected) Steininger Hentges & Sons Error) . . Sons. Unit Price $115.00 $108.00 $1,230.00 $123.00 $112.41 $116.00 $180.00 for Item No. 99 Extended $77,395.00 $72,684.00 $827,790.00 $82,779.00 $75,651.93 $78,068.00 $121,140.00 Price @ 673 units The City and its Engineer may question whether they have the authority to correct this obvious transcription error and reconcile the mistaken unit price of $1,230.00 when the extended price of $82,779.00 clearly shows that a $123.00 unit price was used by Northwest. Federal courts consistently allow public bodies to make this correction in instances such as this one. Federal decisions agree that the correct extended price will prevail over the erroneous unit price when the unit price is totally inconsistent with other bids and there is no room for doubt that the intended unit price was reflected in the extended price. The following two cases are exemplary and involve nearly identical situations as presented by Northwest's bid. In both cases, the bidder was permitted to correct an erroneous unit price simply by moving the decimal point one space to the left: \\file 1 Wol l \PL \83864 \83864 - 001 \698756.doc March 7, 2008 Page 3 In Matter of J & J Maintenance, Inc., 93 -1 CPD P 187, 1993 WL 67965 (Comp. Gen. 1993),' the Comptroller General permitted a downward correction in the bid to reflect a unit price of $5,400 instead of $54,000. The corrected unit price was consistent with the extended price. Otherwise, the uncorrected unit price otherwise would have been out of line with the government's estimate and out of line with the other bidders. The Comptroller General determined that only the extended price could reasonably be regarded as having been the intended bid. In 36 Comp. Gen. 429 (1956), the Comptroller General permitted recalculation when a bid showed a unit price for an item of $8.74, but the extended price was calculated based on a unit price of $0.874. The bid was the lowest bid only if the extended price was used. The extended price was accepted because the unit price was totally inconsistent with the other bids and the engineer's estimate.Z The Comptroller General is the federal office responsible for deciding questions about federal procurements. Because the federal government is the largest consumer of construction services in the world, states frequently look to Comptroller General cases for guidance on public bidding questions. We are unaware of any Minnesota case addressing the issue encountered in this case, but resolved by the Comptroller General numerous times — i.e., that a municipality has authority to resolve an obvious transcription error in a unit price and use the correct extended amount from a bidder's bid form. There is only one conclusion to be drawn from the bid submitted by Northwest, particularly in comparison with the other bids. The $1,230.00 unit price was a transcription error from placing the decimal point one space off. The extended price clearly reflected the actual unit price used — $123.00 — which is consistent and within a reasonable range of the unit prices for Item No. 99 submitted by each of the other bidders. According to Minn. Stat. § 471.345, the City of Edina ( "City ") must award the contract for the Project to the lowest, responsive and responsible bidder. Accordingly, Northwest requests that the Project's contract be awarded to it. This result is not only consistent with the law, but will result in $416,697.05 in savings to the City. 2. Northwest Will Protest an Award to Any Other Bidder If the City awards the contract to Palda & Sons, Inc., as the second - lowest bidder, please consider this Northwest's official notice of intent to file a bid protest and seek injunctive relief. I caution the City against entering a contract with any other bidder because the City would be solely responsible for any damages suffered as that contract will be determined to be illegal and void. 1 A copy of this case is enclosed for your reference. 2 Here, although Northwest did receive an estimate from the City Engineer of the total project price, Northwest was not privy to the Engineer's estimate of Line Item No. 99 or any other line item. Northwest assumes, however, that the Engineer's estimate for Item No. 99 is far closer to $123.00 than $1,230.00. Wile WolI\PL \83864 \83864 - 001 \698756.doc March 7, 2008 Page 4 Please advise whether the City has issued a Notice of Award or a Notice to Proceed or signed a contract for the Project. Northwest intends to seek immediate injunctive relief is the City has or will take any of those actions. 3. Reject and Rebid Finally, the City has a third option. The City has the authority to reject all bids and order a rebid. A rebid generally saves an owner money because bid prices are often lower on a rebid. Thus, the City could achieve significant cost savings if it elects to do a rebid. I look forward to a productive discussion with you and a favorable response regarding this matter. J Sincerely, Patrick J. Lee- O'Halloran Enclosure PJUkj cc: Michael Pfeiffer (Northwest Asphalt) Wile I Wol I \PL\8 3 864\83 864-00 1 \698756.doc 7 a B- 251355,93-1 CPD P 187, 1993 WL 67965 (Comp.Gen.) :l B- 251355, 93 -1 CPD P 187, 1993 WL 67965 (Comp.Gen.) COMPTROLLER GENERAL *1 Matter of: J & J Maintenance, Inc. March 1, 1993 Page 1 Donald E. Barnhill, Esq., and Joan K. Fiorino, Esq., East & Barnhill, for the pro- tester. Dennis E. Jontz, Esq., Civerolo, Wolf, Gralow & Hill, for Phillips National, Inc., an interested party. Thomas A. Mason, Jr., Esq., Department of Transportation, for the agency. Andrew T. Pogany, Esq., Office of the General Counsel, GAO, participated in the preparation of the decision. DIGEST Where bid contains a discrepancy between the unit and extended.prices for an item, the bid may be-corrected downward to reflect a unit price that is consistent with the extended price if -the unit price clearly is out of line with both the govern- ment estimate and the prices offered by the other bidders, and only the extended price reasonably can be regarded as having been the intended bid. DECISION J & J Maintenance, Inc. protests the proposed award of a contract to Phillips Na- tional, Inc. under invitation for bids (IFB) No. DTCG41- 93- B- QWE201, issued by the United States Coast Guard, Department of Transportation, for facilities mainten- ance and support services. J & J contends that the contracting officer improperly permitted Phillips to correct a line item unit price to make it compatible with the extended price in violation of the terms of the solicitation and competitive bidding procedures. We deny the protest. The bid schedule solicited prices for numerous line items for 1 base year and 4 option Years. Each.,:line: item included columns..for. unit prices and corresponding extended prices. In addition, the schedule requested each bidder to provide its total price for each year. Phillips submitted a total bid of $8,387,882 and was initially determined to be the apparent low bidder. [FN1] J & J, initially determined to be the second low 0 2008 Thomson /West. No Claim to Orig. U.S. Govt. Works. B- 251355, 93 -1 CPD P 187, 1993 WL 67965 (Comp.Gen.) Page 2 bidder, submitted a total bid of $8,392,364. In reviewing Phillips's bid, the con- tracting officer discovered a mistake in line item No. 0001A11, which called for a monthly unit price for refuse collection and disposal services and a corresponding extended price based on a stated "quantity" of 12 months. Specifically, Phillips bid:4 unit, price of $54,000 per_month• and an extended price of $64,800 for the 12 -month period. The unit prices bid by the eight other bidders for this line item ranged from $3,468 to $15,433. The government estimate was $7,508 per month, and the current prices being paid for these services by the agency was $4,978 per month. Since Phillips bid a unit price of $5,400 and an extended price of $64,800 for each of the corresponding option year line items for refuse collection ser- vices, and in view of the fact that the highest bid received for this line item from any bidder was $15,433, the contracting officer made a determination to allow downward correction of the unit price to $5,400 on the basis of a clerical mis- take, after receiving verification of the intended bid price from Phillips. This protest followed. The solicitation provides that if there is a discrepancy between a unit price and extended price, the unit price is presumed to be correct, subject to correction to the same extent and manner as any other mistake. In view of this provision, J & J contends that the unit price of $54,000 must be presumed to be correct, so that Phillips's total bid should be $8,971,082, which would make J & J the low bidder. J & J argues that a unit price of $54,000 is reasonable considering that Phillips is not the incumbent and therefore will have substantial start -up costs for equip- ment. J & J also argues that since Phillips's bid contains two prices for the item, only one of which would make Phillips low, the bid is ambiguous and should have been rejected by the agency. *2 The agency asserts that the intended unit price of $5,400 for item No. 00olAll is evident from Phillips's bid itself because 12 times the unit price noted on the bid would equal an amount far in excess of the other bid amounts and the govern- ment estimate, and because the total of the bid reflects the extended amount of the intended unit price. The agency also states that refuse collection services are typically subcontracted locally and require no start -up costs. We.agree that it s. apparent on the face of Phillips's.bid.that a mistake was made -- N22 in the unit price. �F Where it is clear from the bid itself what price was .actu- ally intended, or where.on the basis of logic and experience it can be determined that one price makes sense while the other does not, correction of a bid and dis- placement of another bidder is allowed. Frontier Contracting Co., Inc., B- 214260.2, July 11, 1984, 84 -2 CPD ¶ 40. The factors that go into such a determ- ination may include comparison °,with -the -other bid prices and the °government estim- ate. See Federal Aviation Administration -Bid Correction, B- 187220, Oct. 8, 1976, 76 -2 CPD ¶ 326. Phillips's unit price of $54,000 is totally out of line with the other bidders' unit prices and would result in an extended price that is approximately seven 0 2008 Thomson /West. No Claim to Orig. U.S. Govt. Works. B- 251355, 93 -1 CPD P 187, 1993 WL 67965 (Comp.Gen.) Page 3 times the government estimate. In such a situation, correction of a unit price to correspond to an extended price is proper, notwithstanding the standard solicita- tion provision that a unit price governs where there is a discrepancy with the ex- tended price, since the latter represents the only reasonable interpretation of :t e;.intehded• bid. Ideker, Inc., B- 194293, May 25, 1979, 79 -1 CPD ¶ 379. Phillips's extended bid price, which corresponds to its total bid, obviously was the firm's intended offer to the government. Therefore, the contracting officer properly allowed correction. See DaNeal Constr., Inc., B- 208469, Dec. 28, 1982, 82 -2 CPD ¶ 584. The protest is denied. for James F. Hinchman General Counsel FN1 Phillips's total bid amount of $8,387,882 reflects the upward correction by the agency of Phillips's bid due to several minor arithmetic errors in the amount of $2,880. These arithmetic corrections were recorded in the bid abstract and raised Phillips's total bid from $8,385,002 to $8,387,882. The record shows that these minor arithmetical corrections were not material since they had no effect on the standing of bidders. We will not discuss them further. FN2 J & J also argues that the agency, in requesting Phillips to verify its bid, "went beyond seeking a verification and sought the advice of Phillips," and that Phillips, in response, launched] into an explanation and clarification of the particular line item in question." In view of our conclusion that Phillips's cler- ical mistake was apparent on the face of its bid, the extent and manner of veri- fication is not material. B- 251355, 93 -1 CPD P 187, 1993 WL 67965 (Comp.Gen.) END OF DOCUMENT 0 2008 Thomson /West. No Claim to Orig. U.S. Govt. Works. •- SEAL " MAR 1 0 2008 RECEIVED From: Brian Lavin [mailto:brian.lavin @ampf.com] Sent: Monday, March 10, 2008 8:08 AM To: Jim Hovland; shoush @ci.edina.mn.us; Imasica @ci.edina.mn.us; aswenson @ci.edina.us; jbennett@ci.edina.us Cc: Jennifer Bennerotte; ghughes @ci.edina.us; whoule @ci.edina.us Subject: Stop the Traffic Calming Plan Dear Council Member: I am writing to you today to express my opposition to the Traffic Calming Plan because of its aesthetic impact and resulting expense. I do not want to reconstruct our neighborhood streets using speed humps with reflective markings, raised cross - walks, one -ways, narrowed streets, concrete dividers and increased sheet metal signage. I believe this plan will compromise the graceful flowing transitions at major intersections and negatively alter the neighborhood environment I have long admired and enjoyed. I am not asking you to delay or stop the sewer and water repair project, which is desperately needed. I have signed a petition asking the Edina City Council and city administrators to separate the water and sewer project from the traffic calming plan and solicit alternate bids that repair our streets AS IS. AS IS meaning -- no traffic calming street modifications and devices. We must maintain the integrity of our neighborhood and appropriate action by our City Council is needed now. Sincerely, Brian Lavin 4503 Wooddale Ave FYI...... As I mentioned in our meetings at Ellie Lucas' house, I am extremely disappointed in the process and feel it unfair and not representative. Please take this under consideration. Brian Lavin I High Yield Sector Manager Fixed Income Investment Department RiverSource Investments, LLC (An Ameriprise Financial Company) RiverSource Investments, LLC 263 Ameriprise Financial Center I Minneapolis, MN 55474 From: Donald L. Nygaard [ mailto :donald.nygaard @comcast.net] MAN >I 1008 Sent: Monday, March 10, 2008 8:02 AM HEC'EIVED To: Jennifer Bennerotte Subject: Deliver to Council Members Today Dear Mayor and City Council Members: I am writing to reiterate my expressed disinterest in, dissatisfaction with, and opposition to the addition of traffic calming measures within the Country Club neighborhood. It is my opinion, based upon daily observation of traffic patterns within Country Club and elsewhere in Edina, that such measures are quite simply unnecessary. It is not clear to me that the traffic management study demonstrated a compelling need for traffic calming within the neighborhood compared with other parts of the city. Lastly, I am unaware of any injuries or property damage related to vehicular traffic within the neighborhood, nor do I believe the area to be at high risk for such occurrences. On the other hand, I fully support the update to decaying sewer, water, and curb /gutter /roadway project. This work addresses a real problem. The number of water main breaks and sewer backups have a real associated cost, and the potential for worsening over time. Now, I know that you're not going to pull the plug on traffic calming solely upon my recommendation. Therefore, I encourage you to go to the residents of the Country Club neighborhood and ask them what they wish to see done with their money. If you find, as I suspect, there's significant opposition to the proposed solution and /or disagreement about the extent of traffic problems, you will be compelled based upon the evidence to disapprove or significantly alter the traffic calming portion of the Country Club project. There are better, cheaper solutions available, e.g., post a 25 MPH speed limit, and better investments to be made, e.g., fund the schools so that each student can have a science text book. It would not be appropriate to run out the clock on this in order to deliver an unsupported solution as a fait accompli. Respectfully, Don Nygaard 4513 Moorland Avenue Edina MN 55424 h. 952 - 920 -0100 c. 612.804.9239 e. donald.nvaaard(cDcomcast.net �, SEAL S MAR I n X0118 From: JAAINVST @aol.com [mailto:JAAINVST @aol.com] Sent: Saturday, March 08, 2008 4:17 PM To: Jennifer Bennerotte Subject: Please Deliver to Council Members Today Dear City Council Members, I'm writing to express my concerns regarding the "traffic calming" measures that are included in the upcoming construction plans for the Country Club District. While I agree the infrastructure replacement for utilities is an immediate need, I believe the measures in the plan to calm traffic are excessive in both cost and impact on the neighborhood. Those measures will place undue burden on the neighborhood 100% of the time. Since I live here, I will encounter speed bumps, raised crosswalks, and one -way restrictions each and every time I come and go from my residence. If such measures are intended to discourage thru - traffic, how discouraging to live with it 24/7! 1 think the concerns that have surfaced periodically over the years regarding the neighborhood traffic flows have settled out with the improvements to Hwy 100 and are no longer the intensity they may have been in the past. Please do not subject me and many of my neighbors who will hopefully speak for themselves, to burdensome costs and restrictions. Please separate the needed utility upgrades from the traffic calming measures and only move forward with utility upgrades and surface replacement "as -is" at this time. Thank you for your consideration. Sincerely, Jim Anderson 4621 Edina Blvd Edina, MN 55424 It's Tax Time! Get tips forms and advice on AOL Money & Finance. - - - -- Original Message - - - -- v SEgL yc From: Mary -Hogg [mailto:mfhogg@visi.com] BAR -7 � Sent: Saturday, March 08, 2008 2:38 PM REC To: jhovland@krauserollins.com; Jennifer Bennerotte By F` lili)g ED Subject: Please Deliver to Council Members Today Dear Council Members: My name is Alan Hogg and I live at 4520 Browndale Avenue, which is located in Country Club. I am writing to you today to express my opposition to the Traffic Calming Plan because of its aesthetic impact and resulting expense. I do not want to reconstruct our neighborhood streets using speed humps with reflective markings, raised cross = walks, one -ways, narrowed streets, concrete dividers and increased sheet metal signage. I believe this plan is not needed and will compromise the neighborhood environment I have long admired and enjoyed. I have spent time reviewing the plan and various meetings on the subject from the last few years. Here is my assessment of the facts: 1) There is not a traffic problem in our area. The city engineer agreed and others have agreed as well. 2) Based upon a recent simple survey of the neighborhood, a majority of the residents are apposed to the project. 3) Traffic study information that motivated the project was gathered prior to the significant changes that occurred to Highway 100. I believe the results of a new study would confirm that traffic in Country Club is much lower than prior to the changes to 100. 4) It is my understanding that there has not been an assessment hearing on the traffic calming project. I am already concerned about the high assessment that I will receive for repairing the sewers, water and streets. I am not interested in spending money on traffic calming, which I believe is not needed. I am not asking you to delay or stop the sewer and water repair project, which is desperately needed. I have signed a petition asking the Edina City Council and city administrators to separate the water and sewer project from the traffic calming plan and solicit alternate bids that repair our streets AS IS. AS IS meaning -- no traffic calming street modifications and devices. I greatly appreciate your consideration and would be happy to discuss this with anyone. SEAL " MAR 1, n 1008 From: Sheila Lind [mailto:lind @visi.com] Sent: Sunday, March 09, 2008 12:33 PM To: Jennifer Bennerotte Subject: deliver to city council members on 3 -10 -08 Dear Council Member, I have lived in the Country Club area of Edina for 28 years. My husband and I purchased our home at 4402 Sunnyside Road in November of 1985, having lived at 4611 Casco before that. I am writing to you about the traffic calming measures planned for the Country Club neighborhood. I urge you to separate the traffic calming plan in its entirety from the sewer /water construction. I understand the need for and support the plan to redo the sewer and water construction. However, I do not see the need for, nor understand the desire to significantly change the islands and add speed bumps. Please solicit alternative bids so that we would have a figure for keeping our streets as originally designed, without modifications and devices that would change the historic feel of our neighborhood. We sought the Country Club neighborhood for its community feel, its historic preservation status and its location. The proposed changes will significantly affect us as we are in between two proposed "choker" island changes on Wooddale and Edina Boulevard at Sunnyside Road. Please reconsider attaching the traffic calming to the water and sewer reconstruction before you have adequately surveyed residents of the Country Club area. We will be the first to experience traffic calming measures on such a large scale in Edina and I do not think people will find our neighborhood as beautiful or desirable after they are in place. Thank you. Sheila Lind 4402 Sunnyside Road Susan Heiberg From: Julie Armbrust [Julie @armbrustsales.com] Sent: Sunday, March 09, 2008 1:20 PM To: Jennifer Bennerotte Subject: TO:: Scot Housh re Country Club calming measures Dear Council Member, Scot Housh, ' SEAL c MAR i o 2008 Page 1 of 1 I have lived at 4516 Moorland Ave in the Country Club area of Edina for 23 years. I am very upset to find out that traffic calming measures have been tied into the sewer /water construction project. I just recently found out about this in a letter I received from the city. I can't believe that there wasn't more information on this. I don't feel that the Country club area has a severe problem with traffic. I strongly urge that a new traffic study be conducted. When there was construction on Highway 100 and on the 50th and France area, we did see more traffic. But now that those projects are completed, I don't see any issues. I also would expect that there be a survey of the Country club residents. The plan that you are proposing will ruin the beauty of this Historical area, taking away the gentle curves at intersections and installing chokers. I urge you to separate the traffic calming plan in its entirety from the sewer /water construction. I understand the need for and support the plan to redo the sewer and water construction. However, I do not see the need or the desire to significantly change our neighborhood streets with raised cross - walks, narrowed streets, concrete dividers, speed bumps, and ugly signs. I also have not seen any information of how this project is to be funded. We are already facing huge assessments for the water /sewer project that we all know we need. I sought the Country Club neighborhood for its community feel, its historic preservation status and its location. These new plans for construction of the traffic calming measures; don't work with the aesthetics of our historical area. We need appropriate action by our City Council now! Thank you. Julie Armbrust ,Armbrust Sales & Marketing 952 - 941 -7191 3/10/2008 SEAL `' MAR i n 1008 From: Laurie Zenner [mailto:lzenner @comcast.net] Sent: Saturday, March 08, 2008 6:51 PM To: Jennifer Bennerotte Subject: Country Club traffic Please forward this email to the Mayor and every city council member. Dear Mayor and Members of the City Council, We are residents of the Country Club neighborhood. We moved here in 1992 and raised four children in this neighborhood. We are strongly opposed to the traffic modifications that have been proposed, such as adding speed bumps and additional traffic medians. We believe these are unnecessary, a waste of taxpayers' money, and will cause our property value to decrease. In our experience, these types of proposals are often driven by a very vocal minority of the residents, who fail to appreciate the historic aspects of the neighborhood and who exaggerate the traffic problems. We believe that a majority of the residents living in this neighborhood share our opinion and concerns. We urge you to reconsider. Laurie Zenner and Michael Bleck 4515 Drexel Avenue o SAL From: SAYLAS @aol.com [mailto:SAYLAS @aol.com] 1009 Sent: Monday, March 10, 2008 1:33 PM �pR i �► To: Jennifer Bennerotte _ aEGE�VE� Subject: Deliver to Council Member Scot Housh Today gY�" Dear Council Member Housh: We are writing to you today to express our opposition to the Traffic Calming Plan because of its aesthetic impact and resulting expense. We do not want to reconstruct our neighborhood streets using speed humps with reflective markings, raised cross - walks, one -ways, narrowed streets, concrete dividers and increased sheet metal signage. We believe this plan will compromise the graceful flowing transitions at major intersections and negatively alter the neighborhood environment we have long admired and enjoyed. We have been residents of the Country Club neighborhood for 25 years. We are not asking you to delay or stop the sewer and water repair project, which is desperately needed. We have signed a petition asking the Edina City Council and city administrators to separate the water and sewer project from the traffic calming plan and solicit alternate bids that repair our streets AS IS. AS IS meaning -- no traffic calming street modifications and devices. We must maintain the integrity of our neighborhood and appropriate action by our City Council is needed now. Sincerely, Jo Ellen and H. L. Saylor 4900 Bruce Avenue Edina, MN 55424 952- 929 -2271 It's Tax Time! Get tips forms and advice on AOL Money & Finance. It's Tax Time! Get tips forms and advice on AOL Money & Finance. O SEAL `< From: Laurie DeMartino [ mailto: laurie @lauriedemartinodesign.com] MAR `1 0 1008 Sent: Monday, March 10, 2008 12:57 PM To: Jennifer Bennerotte BY CEIVED Cc: ghughes @cityofedina.com; whoule @cityofedina.com Subject: Please Deliver to Council Members Today Dear Council Member, We are writing to you today to express our opposition to the Traffic Calming Plan because of its aesthetic impact and resulting expense. We do not want to reconstruct our neighborhood streets using speed humps with reflective markings, raised cross - walks, one -ways, narrowed streets, concrete dividers and increased sheet metal signage. We believe this plan will compromise the graceful flowing transitions at major intersections and negatively alter the neighborhood environment we admire and enjoy. We are not asking you to delay or stop the sewer and water repair project, which is desperately needed. We are asking the Edina City Council and city administrators to separate the water and sewer project from the traffic calming plan and solicit alternate bids that repair our streets AS IS. AS IS meaning -- no traffic calming street modifications and devices. We must maintain the integrity of our neighborhood and appropriate action by our City Council is needed now. Sincerely, Laurie DeMartino and Charles Anderson 4616 Browndale Avenue Laurie DeMartino Design Co 124 North First Street Third Floor Minneapolis, MN 55401 PH 612.332.3987 FX 612.332.0330 http://www.lauriedemartinodesign.com Page 1 of 1 Susan Heiberg '- SEAL MAR i n 7 From: HJHMMH @aol.com qy Sent: Sunday, March 09, 2008 10:00 PM To: Jennifer Bennerotte Subject: Please Deliver To All Council Members Today I am writing today to express my opposition to the "traffic calming plan" for the Edina Country Club area. Please take time to review the video of the council meeting of July, 2005. At that meeting the facts were quite clearly presented that the country club area did NOT have a traffic issue. Be leaders. That is why you have been elected to do what is prudent and not what a few squeaky wheels have initiated. We do not have a traffic issues in country club. You all have a fiduciary duty to do what is best for our city and it is not to spend money on a problem that does not exist. The delay "studying" the nonexistent traffic problem has already increased the expense to the taxpayer by almost 100 %. This should not have been tolerated at the July, 2005 meeting and should stop right now. I have signed a petition asking the Edina City Council to repair our streets as is...meaning no traffic calming street modifications and devices. Sincerely, Margo Hoppmann 4602 Moorland Ave. It's Tax Time! Get tips forms and advice.on AOL Money & Finance. 3/10/2008 Page 1 of 1 Susan Heiberg From: Haseaton @aol.com Sent: Sunday, March 09, 2008 9:47 PM To: Jennifer Bennerotte Subject: Traffic Calming Plan - SEAL MAR a 0 1000 Dear Mayor Hovland and Council Members Housh, Masica, Bennett and Swenson: We are writing to express our opposition to the " Traffic Calming Plan" for the Country Club area. The plan is inconsistent with the character of this historic neighborhood, which led to our decision to move to Country Club in 1986. Every neighbor we have spoken to is also opposed to this plan. Why can't the city just enforce the present traffic stop signs and speed limits in the neighborhood and target the lawbreakers, rather than impose this ugly, costly, and irreversible construction "solution" on the neighborhood? Please don't punish and compromise the neighborhood with this illusory cure. Let's have a zero tolerance policy for speeders and stop sign runners instead, and perhaps inititiate a "Slow Down" sign campaign such as that used in southwest Minneapolis. Sincerely, Doug & Hilory Seaton 4306 Sunnyside Road It's Tax Time! Get tips forms and advice on AOL Money & Finance. 3/10/2008 CIT L seat l� MAR 1 01008 From: Bob De brey [mailto:RJD33 @isd.net], Sent: Sunday, March 09, 2008 4:53 PM - To: Jennifer Bennerotte Subject: Fw: Traffic Calming, Country Club Please redirect this email to: Mayor James Hovland Council Member -Joni Bennett Council Member Scot Housh Council Member Linda Masica Council Member Ann Swenson Public Works Wayne Houle Dear Council Members and Mr. Houle: I did have the opportunity to express my feelings at a recent Council meeting but, once again, I urge you to completely delete the traffic calming structures, the two and three dimensional communication devices that go with them, and the re- contouring of the intersections in the Country Club District. Thank you, Robert J. De brey Susan H From: Gretchen Banks [gretchenbanks @mac.com] Sent: Sunday, March 09, 2008 8:22 PM C►TY To: Jennifer Bennerottea`� 8147AL �< Cc: Mark_W_Banks @bluecrossmn.com MAR I n 2088 Subject: Country Club Traffic Plan > > > > To: Council Member Ann Swenson: >>>> My husband and I are very disappointed to learn how poorly the City >>>> of Edina has addressed the issue of alleged traffic or speed >>>> problems in in the Country Club area. Rather than following the >>>> rules and conducting surveys as is required, the City. chose to slip »» the Traffic Calming Plan into the sewer and water repair project in >>>> order to gain approval without getting consensus. We would have >>>> expected the City to have been much more transparent about >>>> something like this. We are writing today to express our >>>> opposition to the Traffic Calming Plan. >>>> Please separate the water and sewer project from the Traffic >>>> Calming Plan and solicit alternate bids to repair our streets AS >>> IS. AS IS meaning - -no traffic calming modifications or devices. >>>> Then please follow the rules when it comes to concerns about >>>> traffic management and seek the necessary the input rather than >>>> trying to slip it post your constituents. We expect more from our >>>> City leaders. > > > > Sincerely, >> >> Gretchen and Mark Banks > > > > 4634 Edgebrook Place >>>> Edina, MN 55424 1 r SEAL ` ' MAR - - - -- Original Message - - -- From: Goldstein, Sue [mnilto:sue.goldstein @ xcelenergy.com] Sent: Monday, March 10, 2008 10:29 AM To: Jennifer Bennerotte Subject: Deliver to Council Members Today Dear Council Members: I am writing to you today to express my opposition to the Traffic Calming Plan because of its aesthetic impact and resulting expense. I do not want to reconstruct our neighborhood streets using speed humps with reflective markings, raised cross - walks, one -ways, narrowed streets, concrete dividers and increased sheet metal signage. I believe this plan will compromise the graceful flowing transitions at major intersections and negatively alter the neighborhood environment I have long admired and enjoyed. I am not asking you to delay or stop the sewer and water repair project, which is desperately needed. I have signed a petition asking the Edina City- Council and city administrators to separate the water and sewer project from the traffic calming plan and solicit alternate bids that repair our streets AS IS. AS IS meaning -- no traffic calming street modifications 'and devices. We must maintain the integrity of our neighborhood and appropriate action by our City Council is needed now. Sincerely, Sue Goldstein 4912 Arden Ave. Edina, MN 55424 oar SEAL ' 9 � MAR 161 1008 From: Carol Turner [mailto:cturner3 @comcast.net] Sent: Monday, March 10, 2008 9:32 AM To: Jennifer Bennerotte Cc: ghughes @cityofedina.com; whoule @cityofedina.com Subject: Deliver to Council Members Today Dear Mayor James Hovland, Council Member Joni Bennett, Council Member Scot Housh, Council Member Linda Masica, and Council Member Ann Swenson: We are writing to you today to express our opposition to the Traffic Calming Plan because of its aesthetic impact and resulting expense. We do not want to reconstruct our neighborhood streets using speed bumps with reflective markings, raised cross - walks, one -ways, narrowed streets, concrete dividers and increased sheet metal signage. We believe this plan will compromise the graceful flowing transitions at major intersections and negatively alter the neighborhood environment we have lontg admired and enjoyed. We are not asking you to delay or stop the sewer and water repair project, which is desperately needed. We have signed a petition asking the Edina City Council and city admihnistrators to separate the water and sewer project from the traffic calming plan and solicit alternate bids that repair our streets AS IS. AS IS MEANING - - -NO TRAFFIC CALMING STREET MODIFICATIONS AND DEVICES. We must maintain the integrity of our neighborhood and appropriate action by our City Council is needed now. Sincerely, Tom and Carol Turner 4500 Moorland Ave 612.220.7300 and 612.220.7309 Copy to: City Manager Gordon Hughes, City Engineer Wayne Houle OWN � " MAR 1 n INS From: Frank B. Bennett [mailto:fbennett@ lindquist.com] Sent: Monday, March 10, 2008 8:56 AM To: jhovland @krauserollins.com; Jennifer Bennerotte; Immasica @aol.com; swensonboys @aol.com Subject: To: The honorable James Hovland, Joni Bennett, Scot Housh, Linda Masica, and Ann Swenson. Ladies and gentlemen, I am writing on behalf of my mother, Jane Jacobs, who has lived at 4901 Browndale since 1960. She has asked me to express her concern over the new Traffic Calming Plan. She attended City Council t meetings on this topic and to be frank, felt that the plan was railroaded through and that the legitimate concerns of many neighbors were not fully listened to in the process. She sits three houses off of the water falls and sees all of the traffic that goes in and out of the country club neighborhood from this venue. She is adamant that the current volume of traffic is not materially different than what she has experienced and seen out her front window for almost 50 years. She actually commented that the traffic seems less than that in the 60's and 70's when the population of homes with teenage children was much larger than it is today. The main difference she has noticed is the number of service trucks, home remodeling trucks, etc., serving the residents of the neighborhood that were not as common in earlier days. She is very concerned that speed humps with reflective markings, narrowed streets, concrete dividers, round abouts, raised crosswalks, one'way streets etc will negatively change the character of the. neighborhood. She asks that you thoughtfully reconsider actions that will be costly, unsightly, and unnecessary. Thank you for all of your time and effort on this important issue. Thank you Frank Bennett Frank Bennett Attorney 4200 IDS Center s 80 South Eigntl- ,3trael 1,liruic il_i lis, bal J 5402 Office. 61:- 1 --931 Far; 6,12-3-11,1-320,, LI \TDQL�IST&'ENT \'L.':C webs-Re I liir I e -nail I ,Card I map NOTICES IRS Circular 230 Notice: To ensure compliance with requirements imposed by the IRS, we inform you that, except to the extent expressly provided to the contrary, any federal tax advice contained in this communication (including any attachments) is not intended Deb Mangen From: Betsy Cussler [betsycussler @comcast.net] Sent: Monday, March 10, 2008 12:33 PM To: Jennifer Bennerotte CITY C` Subject: Country Club Traffic Calming p�� SEAL MAR 10 2008 To: Mayor James Hovland �:!tiED Council Member Joni Bennett Council Member Scot Housh Council Member Linda Masica Council Member Ann Swenson We have lived in our house at 4502 Sunnyside Road in the beautiful Country Club neighborhood since 1980. Every time we drive down the tree -lined streets or walk the dog around the sidewalk -paved blocks, we enjoy the serenity and loveliness of our neighborhood. We are currently in Florida, receiving one after the other distressing notices and emails about plans that we feel will permanently damage the beauty of the Country Club while providing little relief to the perceived traffic and safety issues. When we originally filled out the survey, we identified ourselves as "opposed "; as we consider the specifics of the city's plan more closely, "strongly opposed" is a more accurate statement of our feelings. Therefore, we are writing to you today to express our opposition to the Traffic Calming Plan because of its aesthetic impact and resulting expense. We do not want to reconstruct our neighborhood streets using speed humps with reflective markings, raised cross - walks, one -ways, narrowed streets, concrete dividers and increased sheet metal signage. We believe this plan will compromise the graceful flowing transitions at major intersections and negatively alter the neighborhood environment I have long admired and enjoyed. We am not asking you to delay or stop the sewer and water repair project, which is desperately needed. We have notsigned the petition asking the Edina City Council and city administrators to separate the water and sewer project from the traffic calming plan, on /y because we are in Florida for the winter months We do support the petition to separate the water and sewer project from the traffic calming plan and to solicit alternate bids that repair our streets AS IS. AS IS meaning -- no traffic calming street modifications and devices. We must maintain the integrity of our neighborhood and appropriate action by our City Council is needed now. Please reward and justify the faith in you that we expressed when we elelcted you! Sincerely, Betsy and Edward Cussler 4502 Sunnyside 952 - 922 -2299 941- 876 -3203 (Florida) 612 - 636 -6333 (cell) Betsy and 3/10/2008 Deb Mangen From: Sent: To: Cc: Subject: March 10th, 2008 Dear Council Member: Cheryl Kreofsky [cheryl @maxmedinc.com] Monday, March 10, 2008 12:30 PM Jennifer Bennerotte ghughes @cityofedina.com; whoule @cityofedina.com Deliver to Council Members Today i SEAL MAR I RECiEJVEr6" I am writing to you today to express my opposition to the Traffic Calming Plan because of its aesthetic impact and resulting expense. I do not want to reconstruct our neighborhood streets using speed humps with reflective markings, raised cross - walks, narrowed streets, concrete dividers and increased sheet metal signage. I believe this plan will.compromise the graceful flowing transitions at major intersections and negatively alter the neighborhood environment I have long admired and enjoyed. I am.not asking you to delay or stop the sewer and water repair project which is desperately needed. I have signed a petition asking the Edina City Council and city administrators to separate the water and sewer project from the traffic calming plan and solicit alternate bids that repair our streets as is .... meaning no traffic calming street modifications and devices. We must maintain the integrity of our neighborhood and appropriate action by our City Council is needed now. Thank you for your attention to this matter. Sincerely, Cheryl Kreofsky 4624 Wooddale Avenue 1 G(!R SEAL From: allysonaldrich @aol.com [mailto:allysonaldrich @aol.com] AR 1 2009 Sent: Monday, March 10, 2008 9:42 AM EGENEE_ra To: Jennifer Bennerotte Y-- Subject: Deliver to Council Members today (3/10) Dear Council Members: We are writing to you today to express our opposition to the Traffic Calming Plan for the Country Club area because of its aesthetic impact and resulting expense. We do not want to reconstruct our neighborhood streets using speed humps with reflective markings, raised crosswalks, one -ways, narrowed streets, concrete dividers, and increased sheet metal signage. We believe this plan will compromise the graceful flowing transitions at major intersections and negatively alter the neighborhood environment we have long admired and enjoyed. We are not asking you to delay or stop the sewer and water repair project, which is desperately needed. We have signed a petition asking the Edina City Council and city administrators to separate the water and sewer project from the traffic calming plan and solicit alternate bids that repair our streets AS IS. AS IS meaning - -no traffic calming street modifications and devices. We must maintain the integrity of our neighborhood and appropriate action by our City Council is needed now. Sincerely, Allyson and Todd Aldrich 4518 Browndale Ave. Supercharge your AIM. Get the AIM toolbar for your browser. ,, /CITY C SEAL MAR 1 n 2008 From: Soucyassoc @aol.com [mailto:Soucyassoc @aol.com] PSCEIVLO Sent: Monday, March 10, 2008 11:57 AM BY To: Jennifer Bennerotte Subject: Deliver to Council Members today Dear Council Member, I do not want speed bumps on our streets, nor do I want additional signs all over. I oppose the Traffic Calming Plan. It is not needed and would be a waste of money and effort in my opinion. This plan will not enhance our neighborhood which is very special. It would not be as special with speed bumps and added signage and one way streets. The Country Club neighborhood does need the water and sewer project to go forward AS IS, without any traffic calming street modifications and devices. Sincerely, Barbara Soucy 4607 Drexel Av It's Tax Time! Get tips forms and advice on AOL Money & Finance. Page 1 of 1 SEAL 'I MAR, i 1 2006 Susan Heiberg From: Lederle, Frank [frank.lederle @va.gov] Sent: Tuesday, March 11, 2008 2:43 PM To: Jennifer Bennerotte; jhovland @krauserollins.com; whoule @cityofedina.com; ghughes @cityofedina.com Subject: Deliver to Council Members Today Dear Council Members and City Officials: I am writing to you today to express my opposition to the Traffic Calming Plan because of its aesthetic impact and resulting expense. I do not want to reconstruct our neighborhood streets using speed humps with reflective markings, raised cross - walks, one -ways, narrowed streets, concrete dividers and increased sheet metal signage. I believe this plan will compromise the graceful flowing transitions at major intersections and negatively alter the neighborhood environment I have long admired and enjoyed. I have signed a petition asking the Edina City Council and city administrators to separate the water and sewer project from the traffic calming plan and solicit alternate bids that repair our streets AS IS. AS IS meaning -- no traffic calming street modifications and devices. We must maintain the integrity of our neighborhood and appropriate action by our City Council is needed now. Sincerely, Frank Lederle 4507 Browndale Ave. Edina, MN 55424 952 927 -7564 1/1 1 /1)MR Page 1 of 2 SEAL Susan Heiberg MAR t 1 1008 From: Clayton Miller [cmiller @stonearchcapital.com] X Sent: Tuesday, March 11, 2008 2:46 PM To: Immasica @aol.com; jonibennett12 @comcast.net; jhovland @krauserollins.com; swensonboys @aol.com; Jennifer Bennerotte Cc: ghughes @cityofedina.com; whoule @cityofedina.com Subject: Country Club Traffic Measures Dear City Council Members, We are 10 year residents of The Country Club neighborhood at 4600 Sunnyside Rd. Years ago we decided to move to Edina for the outstanding education offered to our children and the classic characteribeauty of the Country Club neighborhood. Like many of our neighbors, we have invested heavily on both a personal as well as economic basis, in our Country Club home, our neighborhood, our Edina schools and in the Edina Community at large. The thought of what the city is currently planning in these so—called "calming" measures deeply saddens and angers me and my family. We live in a beautiful, well planned and classic city, not on a cul -de -sac in Eden Prairie or Chaska. The infrastructure needs (sewer`& water) are a priority but speed humps and choker islands are a travesty and will scar the neighborhood permanently. The possibility that almost eight decades of beautiful flowing streets and classic homes will be blighted by the demands of a vocal MINORITY is fundamentally wrong — particularly when it debatable whether or not there is even a legitimate traffic problem now that Hwy 100 has been redone — and certainly when a small minority attempts to misrepresent themselves as spokesmen for all of Country Club - I assure you they do not speak for me or most of our neighbors. Country Club is recognized as one of the prime sections in our metro area and probably in our state yet we some are considering defacing this historic area for good. It _doesn't make sense to me and it seems clear to many of us that the solution here is far worse than any perceived problem. Many of us that live in Country Club have met with you over the last several weeks to express our concerns and frustrations over the proposed changes. I think it is undeniable that a significant percentage of Country Club is strongly opposed to these measures. As such I strongly urge the City Council to separate the needed sewer and water project from any future traffic measures until the issue can be more fully studied and quantified and ALL the residents of Country Club have had the opportunity to weigh in on the matter. I am confident that when you do you will find those in favor of the proposed "traffic calming measures" are a distinct minority and certainly NOT the voice of the Country Club neighborhood they portend to be. The right thing to do on March 18th is to detach the traffic and sewer /water projects from one another so that the sewer and water project may proceed as planned and traffic issue can receive the full discussion and analysis it deserves. I have signed a petition that supports such an action and strongly urge you to vote accordingly. Clay & Lisa Miller F. Clayton Miller Partner 3/11/2008 Dear Mayor and Council Members, Sic YFCFI 11'8 � VFO We are writing to express our opposition to the Traffic Calming Plan because of thselKtic impact and the additional expense. We don't want our neighborhood streets reconstructed using speed humps with reflective markings,one ways,raised crosswalks, narrowed streets,concrete dividers and increased disfiguring metal signage. This plan will compromise the intersections and also negatively alter the neighborhood environment. The sewer and water project is definitely needed and should proceed as planned. We have signed a petition asking the Edina City Council and city administrators to separate the water and sewer project from the traffic calming plan and solicit alternate bids that repair our streets AS IS. This means no traffic calming street modifications or devices. PLEASE maintain the integrity of our neighborhood. Appropriate action by our City Council is needed now. Sincerely, Norma and Bob Ramsay 4507 Edina Blvd It's Tax Time! Get tips forms and advice on AOL Money & Finance. Page 1 of 1 TV. �. Wayne Houle From: Anderson, Dave (50th and France) [DaveAnderson @edinarealty.com] Sent: Tuesday, March 18, 2008 2:29 PM To: Jennifer Bennerotte; Immasica @aol.com; ghughes @cityofedina.com; Jennifer Bennerotte; Wayne Houle; jhovland @krauserollins.com Subject: Council meeting and Country Club Traffic calming debate! Mayor and City Council Members, It is my opinion that the parties opposing the previously approved upon traffic calming solutions are self - serving individuals who are showing.up too little and to late to influence a predetermined resolution. Please act in accordance with the wishes of the majority and stand by the previously agreed upon plan Dave Anderson DAVE ANDERSON EDINA REALTY 952- 924 -8724 direct 612- 750 -2209 cell 3/18/2008. Page 1 of 1 Wayne Houle From: Bruce A. Christensen [BChdstensen @CG- IRI.com] Sent: Tuesday, March 18, 2008 1:48 PM To: Gordon Hughes; Wayne Houle; Jennifer Bennerotte Subject: Last Minute Appeal - Please deliver to the Council Today From: Bruce A. Christensen Sent: Tuesday, March 18, 2008 1:46 PM To: Immasica @aol.com; jonibennettl2 @comcast.net; scot.housh @willis.com; jhovland @krauserollins.com; swensonboys @aol.com Cc: Doug Seaton; Ellie Lucas; clmiller @flash.net; gretchenbanks @mac.com; brian.lavin @ampf.com; bkelly @firstpremiercapital.com; aschristensen @comcast.net Subject: Last Minute Appeal Dear Members of the Council, As you consider the Country Club's future tonight please take seriously our petition. Our goal, simply put, is let the residents decide on this outcome. We can meet the needs of the City and its management team without a lingering question about whether work will commence. All we ask is to survey the district with a simple yes or no question. A much less sophisticated approach was employed July 19, 2005 at a cost of many millions to the city and residents. Gordon Hughes and Wayne Houle met with Doug Seaton and I last Friday and confirmed that the bid as proposed can be used with an "as is" restoration. We understand that engineering drawings will be needed but their cost is insignificant to the cost of the proposed traffic plan and the possibility of delay. I'm certain that this survey can be completed by mid -April which should not impact the project timeline. We hope our efforts over the past three months are viewed as a deeply passionate but respectful, engaged citizenry, voicing concern about the impairment of an old historic neighborhood's assets. Not that anyone cares to continue the facts debate, but, the communication issue is very real. We did a little math to help quantify what percentage of residents the city heard from at the two open houses on the NEETS. There are approximately 1500 homes in the study area. Info on the city's website shows that the city received 39 comment cards at the January 26, 2006 Open House, which represents hearing from about 3% of households. Info on the city's website shows that the city received 40 comment sheet surveys at the May 11, 2006 Open House, which also represents about 3% of households. Contrast this to the percentages required in the NTMP. In the petition -to -study step (step 3, which defines the issue and surveys residents to see if they agree with the issue definition), the NTMP requires 51 % of surveys be returned, with 65% agreement in returned surveys. If they fail to reach either number, the study doesn't qualify to proceed. Our 51 % petition response in opposition suggests a great deal of caution and concern should be given before proceeding with the Traffic plan as proposed. Respectfully submitted, Bruce Christensen 3/18/2008 Wayne Houle From: Jennifer Bennerotte Sent: Tuesday, March 18, 2008 10:19 AM Cc: Susan Heiberg Subject: FW: Country Club Traffic Plan Jennifer Bennerotte Communications & Marketing Director City of Edina 952 -833 -9520 FAX 952 -826 -0390 "ibennerotte @ci.edina.mn:us - - - -- Original Message---- - From: Andrea Knoll [mailto:akno111Qcomcast.net] Sent: Tuesday, March 18, 2008 10:17 AM To: Jennifer Bennerotte Subject: Re: Country Club Traffic Plan Dear City Council Members and Wayne Houle- - There is growing concern among neighbors 'on-Arden that more traffic will inadvertently be funneled on..to our block with this new plan. Intersections on other blocks are narrowed, and diverting islands at other intersections are expanded. It seems that the traffic'moving through the neighborhood between 50th and Sunnyside will be encouraged to travel on Country Club road and on Arden. Traffic.plans in the past resulted in distributing more traffic onto Arden, and there is reason to be concerned it will happen again with this plan. The 4600 block is a long street, with a hill, and many children. Traffic does not slow down. The intersection we live on,. at Arden and Bridge, is a well - used pedestrian and bike route through the.neighborhood. We want to support the plan and see the changes implemented. But, please assure the neighbors on Arden, and the users of the pedestrian routes that cross it, that the plan will not increase traffic on Arden. For residents of Arden to feel the City has heard our longstanding concerns, we will need assurances that Arden will not see an increase in traffic and that more speed bumps will be considered if necessary. Thank you -- Andrea Knoll 4601 Arden Avenue 1 Wayne Houle From: James Hovland Ohovland @krauserollins.com] Sent: Monday, March 17, 2008 3:44 PM To: Gordon Hughes; Wayne Houle Subject: FW: letter of clarification fyi James B. Hovland Krause & Rollins, Chtd. 310 Groveland Avenue Minneapolis, MN 55403 612 - 874 -8550 612 - 874 -9362 (fax) - - - -- Original Message---- - From: Jean Rehkamp Larson [mailto:jean @rehkamplarson.com] Sent: Monday, March 17, 2008 9:19 AM To: James Hovland Subject: RE: letter of clarification Mayor, I was on the board in November when the Wayne, the city engineer, and consultants brought this design before our board. The plan was presented as though all traffic calming measures were required and not open for elimination. we did not step back and review the plan with an eye to historic preservation of the streetscape. Instead, we massaged all the traffic calming elements as best we could. If at the time the plan was presented, all traffic calming measures were, in fact, a mandate then we did the best we could. Howevc I now understand that this was not the case and thus, I do not think we had the right information in front of us at the time I motioned for the COA. I am available for a conversation on this topic if it would be of help. 612 - 285 -7275 Respectfully, Jean Rehkamp Larson - - - -- Original Message---- - From: James Hovland [ mailto :jhovland@krauserollins.com] Sent: Sunday, March 16,-2008 8:38 PM To: Jean Rehkamp Larson Subject: RE: letter of clarification JEAN, were you on HPB when the traffic safety procedures were reviewed? Regarding the review, I think Joyce was thorough in describing the role of HPB and I think you performed your role as advisor to the Council on the historic preservation aspects of the proposed safety improvements. If you think otherwise, please advise. I understand you group had a difficult meeting the other night. I will discuss with the Council. - - - -- Original Message---- - From: "Jean Rehkamp Larson" <jean@rehkamplarson.com> To: "jhovland@krauserollins.com" <jhovland@krauserollins.com> Sent: 3/15/08 11:05 PM Subject: FW: letter of clarification 1 Dear Mayor, It has come to my attention that you may not have been unable to open my attached letter sent Wednesday 3/12/08. I am resending it within the text of the email below to ensure that it is accessible. I would like to stress that I object to the current plan because when the review of it occurred it was not understood that we could reject it in favor of historical integrity. In this drastic revision we.lose part of the streetscape what was intended to be preserved. March 12, 2008 Dear Mayor, I am writing today to clarify the context in which I.motioned for a Certificate of Appropriateness for the Country Club Area Sewer, Water and Street Reconstruction,Residential Area Safety Improvement Plan. At the November meeting of the Historic Preservation Board the extensive redesign of the streetscape.was presented by the city engineer and consultants and.it was my understanding that HPB role was limited to commenting on and making minor adjustments to the elements of The Plan. I understood that the speed bumps, chokers, raised crosswalks, neighborhood entrance sign, etc. were required to be in The Plan by mandate and that our role as a board was to offer helpful comments and suggestions as to how they could be more in keeping with the historic character of the neighborhood. For example, it was suggested that the bright brass plaque on the neighborhood..entrance sign instead be a more subtle bronze or cut limestone but I did not think we were being asked or were able to comment on whether the sign itself was historically „appropriate. I thought I was making a motion to approve our comments and suggestions that had'been incorporated into the plan. It was not clear that we could have suggested elimination of any elements of the plan. ,I want to clarify that I do not think these traffic calming measures are historic to the neighborhood. This fundamental,question was never on the table for discussion at the HPB meetings. If an alternate to remove some or all of the traffic calming items had been on the table for our review as a board I would not have motioned for the approval of The Plan as it stands because these items are not original to the neighborhood. I joined the Historic Preservation Board to help the community assess the historic elements of designated districts and buildings in Edina. -- -If our- job, - -as- a board -, —is -to -- advise- the _City--Council,- it is only_- appropriate - ._that -we be -- made aware of the ,broader ramifications of our limited scope of influence. I believe it is important that the HPB has a transparent understanding of how issues that come before us will affect the community. 2 Sincerely, Jean Rehkamp Larson, AIA Edina HPB member email_signature_jean Page 1 of 2 Wayne Houle From: Fogelberg, Brian @ Minneapolis [Brian. Fogelberg @cbre.com] Sent: Monday, March 17, 2008 12:41 PM To: Jennifer Bennerotte; jhovland @krauserollins.com; Jennifer Bennerotte; Wayne Houle; Immasica @aol.com; ghughes @cityofedina.com Subject: Country Club Neighborhood Traffic Plan: Please Forward to Council Members & Staff Dear Council Members & Staff: This email in' written in support of the proposed traffic calming measures to be incorporated with the sewer and water line project; all approved over a yearlago. The Traffic. Plan was an engineering solution based upon a study of; among other things, neighborhood traffic counts, traffic patterns and speed. The Study also noted that the streets are older and narrow,'and it took into account all possible sources of information. The process was overseen by an advisory panel of 19 people, a Commission of 9 people and was scrutinized at 5 open houses and 2 public hearings. This Process ensured all interested persons had an opportunity to provide input and that the solutions were based upon professional engineering, not lay opinions, to ensure the best results for the whole neighborhood and not just select areas or streets. Now, just as bids are to be awarded to implement the unanimously supported plan, an attack comes from a group of residents who are being led by people using false claims to rally support and inflame passions. The central theme appears to be that the changes will adversely impact the "character" of the neighborhood. I am sure some people in this group believe that, and they are certainly entitled to their opinion and have a right to be heard. But there is a process to accommodate that, and it all ended over a year ago. I personally participated in that process and received numerous notices inviting me to do so. I also do not agree that it will adversely impact the character of our neighborhood - -in fact I think it will improve it. What we do know is that the study showed there is a traffic problem. My biggest concern, and that of most people involved for the past 5 or more years, is the safety of the residents -- especially children. Lots of traffic, traveling fast on narrow streets lined with kids, is a recipe for disaster. If someone gets injured or killed, will these same people be outspoken in support of no traffic calming measures? Or instead will they disappear and leave the City to be sued and vilified in the streets. and in the press for failing to implement an approved traffic plan based on its own study? I havei seen the emails from this group and had one of their team come to my house to discuss it. While the conversation ended pleasantly, I can tell you it had nothing to do with getting my "opinion" fora survey, and was all about attacking the plan with statements thatare not supported by the facts. Anybody who experienced this "suiyey' style but who:was not involved first hand in the process would be not in a positiori to counter the statements and would just want it to end. What also became clear through the. discussion was that these people were not interested in what is best for the neighborhood but rather their own personal bias. That shoul¬ surprise anyone reading this email because that it is typical.of City issues, but the fact that it is being misrepresented by the leaders of this'group is important because it completely undermines what they claim in terms of support to derail the approved Tiaffc Plan. I myself gained fame through the efforts of this group by their emailing a link to a clip from a city council meeting where 1 a seen asking a question. The clip was then intentionally edited to give the opposite impression to those viewing it. That, along with making changes to one of the traffic engineers document without disclosing it and countless other misleading tactics are the foundation of their campaign. Please - -do the RIGHT thing on Tuesday night: • Stand by the legitimate process that was completed. 3/17/2008 Page 2 of 2 • Stand by the Study and Plan, which is the only non - biased information before you. • Do NOT reward a campaign who's leaders have engaged in misleading residents. • Do not establish a precedent that the City's process is meaningless. • Provide safety to the residents, particularly the children; it is your highest responsibility Brian Fogelberg Bruce Avenue 3/17/2008 Page 1 of 4 Wayne Houle From: Marie Jackson [mariedjackson @gmail.com] Sent: Monday, March 17, 2008 8:29 AM To: jhovland @krauserollins.com; Jennifer Bennerotte; Wayne Houle; Immasica @aol.com; ghughes @cityofedina.com Subject: Being Lied Too About Traffic Dear City Council, Staff and Transportation Commission Members, Attached =Please find a copy of the letter that Marty Miller sent you. I agree with everything Marty states in his letter. A bigger issue is I feel like I have been lied too by my neighbors. A women come to my home, told me many erroneous lies about the traffic calming including the following: Large Signs will be erected all over Country Club area, The raise cross walks will be eye soars with large reflectors painted bright orange, .The ci doesn't vet have the money to pay for the traffic calming, More traIc will be funnelled down Drexel Avenue. You will find my name and address on a petition to halt the current traffic calming plan. Based on new and current knowledge please disregard my signature as I was lied to in order to obtain my signature. It is really sad that you have worked so hard to do something to make our streets safer for our children and a few people are wanting to due away with your good work. Please know these people are running a scare campaign and that you must not let them win. Thank you Marie D Jackson 4.004 Drexel Ave Edina, MN Please see the "E -Mail (March 12, 2008" attached below from Bruce Christensen. This is being sent. throughout the neighborhood in small batches. In this letter he informs residents of a City decision, then in it with his biases and personal opinions. In his last paragraph he speaks of the developers original plan and vision and that traffic calming was not part of that [in the 1920's]. Well, If we restore Eden- Prairie,- Chaska -and- Chanhassen -to- farmland; remove -half the- cars-from the =roads to get- back -to 1920's ownership levels and also reinstall the Trolley Line, I guarantee you, and I'm not even a traffic engineer, that this would fix our traffic problem; But I don't see that as an option. So we are left with the need to not ignore this problem and do something to help the neighborhood. 3/17/2008 Page 2 of 4 I am getting letters from him now on a regular basis, at least 4 in the past month and I just received one from him today in response to a reply he received from the attached e-mail. He also somehow has obtained my work email address. This group, as I have mentioned before, has a website that is full of lies and half- truths in an attempt to whip the residents into a frenzy and create a pitchfork and burning torch mob for the sole purpose of invalidating a public, methodical and fact -based process that the council approved on November 6, 2006. At that meeting, the Council praised the work of the SAC Committee following Les' presentation which concluded at approximately 5 hours and 30 minutes into the meeting. The following comments after the 5:30:00 mark were made: Mayor Hovland — "Thank you [Les] and the Commission for a tremendous piece of work." Councilmember Housh — "I doubted this could happen, but you have done a great job." Councilmember Masica — N am pleased the entire commission voted to accept this plan in concept... Frankly, I think this is one of the best studies I have ever seen." Councilmember Swenson — "I think the work is excellent." Councilmember Housh — "We implemented a plan ... And this is for the good of everyone." The council then unanimously approved the plan and Mayor Hovland closed with "Kudos to everyone." This meeting was a long time ago so memory begins to fade on what a wonderful accomplishment this was. For many years, before you commissioned this study in July of 2005, hundreds of concerned residents had stood in front of you and asked the City to do something about the traffic in the neighborhood. The Southwestern Suburbs have exploded in growth and as you know the inadequate road system around Edina has created this problem. This plan needs to be implemented in its entirety, professional traffic consultants have told us that. Bruce Christensen is not a traffic engineer, he doesn't design roadways. Yet he is the self- appointed neighborhood "Traffic Guru" and "Country Club Heritage Protector ". I sat in every public meeting and listened to the SRF consultants explain to the commission that they are amazed at the large and dangerous volumes of traffic in the NE Edina quadrant. He has filled residents full of propaganda and given them marching orders. He has people going door to door throughout the neighborhood in a last ditch effort to further divide the residents and to recruit more to his cause. In the past few days, I was informed of 2 separate representatives that have sat in my neighbors living rooms and told them incorrectly that "there will be multiple assessments for this 3/17/2008 Page 3 of 4 because of traffic calming" and that "there will be reflective paint on the speed humps and crosswalks of the neighborhood ". Both of these statements are false. There will not be multiple assessments and the speed humps and raised crosswalks actually have an old -style cobblestone look, not covered with reflective paint. If a resident does not have'the true facts from either the City Engineers, the almost 200 page SRF Transportation Study or the almost 200 page Feasibility Study, they don't have the real information. They have misinformation given to them by Bruce Christensen and are then told to contact the'city to stop this. His website has a. link to 4 excerpts from the July 19, 2005 meeting attempting to get across the fact that there isn't.a problem and that the neighborhood doesn't want this. He forgot to link the videos of the parade of concerned residents who talked in front of the council that day, only the few oppositions. Does Councilmember Masica know that she is now on Youtube thanks to Bruce Christensen ?. He also forgot to -go back. over the past decade (you could go back further) to find the lines of residents who have stood in front of the Council asking for help. As further examples of his propaganda, please open the attachment to this e-mail (False_Sign.jpg). This is a sign that is in a residents front yard, given to them by Bruce Christensen. This sign says "Coming Soon: Street Signs - Don't drive thru Country Club ". ,This isn't a statement meant to inform a resident. It is propaganda meant to direct someone to action, Bruce Christensen's action. Are there any signs coming in 2008 that say "Don't drive through Country Club "? I looked in the Feasibility Study and I can't find any. Three days ago the neighborhood received another mailing from Bruce with the attached letter, please open the 2nd attachment to this e-mail (Christensen_Letter.pdf). In his e-mail, he asked that residents forward the attached "draft letter" on to you and all city staff stating their opposition. The Council did the right thing almost three years ago when you directed the study, then again did the right thing a_year and a half ago when you listened to the traffic professionals and an informed Transportation Commission and unanimously approved the plan. Please don't let these underhanded tactics of propaganda and deceit enter our city process. After unanimous approval by the entire Traffic Commission and unanimous approval by the City Council, you can't allow an 11th hour insurgent group who has been waiting for this moment to halt the implementation. The leaders -of this group knew exactly what the process was and were involved.,in the process. Some of them spoke at Council meetings, "they just didn't like the outcome. They knew on November 6, 2006•that the plan was approved and they could have tried to °derail the implementation anytime over the last year and a half but they didn't. Bruce Christensen waited until a month ago, just before - implementation, to misrepresent the CCNA directory and spread his biased opinions to the neighborhood in an attempt to put together a group for the sole purpose of attacking your decision. This is a classic "last minute" dirty politics tactic and I hope you stand strong against it. In closing, I hope that I will never have to bother you again with letters like this. I don't enjoy doing these types of things, I don't do this because I find it entertaining. I do this because my children and hundreds of other children play on the sidewalks and ride their bikes through the streets of this 3/17/2008. Page 4 of 4 neighborhood. I just want them to have a peaceful and safe neighborhood to grow up in. Thank you again for your time and all of your hard work for the City of Edina. Sincerely, Marty Miller Drexel Avenue 3/17/2008 W dW Miq r Lm-- m 1940"k U MR 1 Al OWN W kw,vv IN ,,q vmaL�4Lw,%& .,E&. MCI �91111'11!j 0 law 4'. gap I . qvm;�ffio- 9'�r March 15, 2008 To: Hon. James Hovland All Edina City Council. Members Gordon Hughes From: Chris Rofidal Chairman, Heritage Preservation Board After a few days of reflection I wanted to take a moment to provide both feedback on the Heritage Preservation Meeting (March 11, 2008) and state my opinion on the matter of the Edina Country Club Street Reconstruction project. Since numerous emails and misinformed rumors are swirling, I thought it was best to be on record with that evening from my point of view. As will be recorded in the minutes, a small group of residents from the Country Club District chose to use ° Concems of Residents" to voice their opinion on the reconstruction project. After giving them probably more latitude than I should have, it became apparent that their goal on that given night was to derail this project in the 11th hour. Whether they had valid points or not, the tone and verbal threats at the HPB where out of order. After it was clear that the HPB was getting divisive in its own mind and the atmosphere was deteriorating I offered up a few ways to end the issue. 1) We could ignore them since this issue was in "Concerns of Residents" an 7 action is required 2) Each HPB member was told they could personally comment on this information in their own time 3) the City Council could refer back to us for additional insight 4) we could have a vote on a motion by a Board member if they so chose. Ultimately solution 4 was selected and as the minutes will show the motion was voted down. The bottom line for me personally was that we were now hearing from one group of residents and this was not the appropriate meeting to reverse action from November 2007. It would not be fair to the process or the people in support of this to reverse an earlier decision without the total package of information before us. Second, when you start threatening your own "residents or neighbors" with legal action and being told you are a "pawn in the City's chess game" that is clearly not appropriate for a board of VOLUNTEERS to listen to. Finally, not only was the integrity of the HPB on the line, but the whole public process that many dedicated people worked very hard at over the past few years were in jeopardy as well. In my opinion, when a group of residents comes to a volunteer Board that mad and using the HPB as their last ditch effort to derail this project, somewhere or somehow the process broke down. My perception is that some members of the public did not pay attention to the process anc did not voice their opinion when they should have. Of course I would be a hypocrite if I did not also state that people back in 2005 could have followed the initial process and it may not have reached this point either. I did not follow the North East Study closely, but in doing research recently I am comforted by the numerous meetings, mailings and public input opportunities t have occurred since 2005 I have been asked by some, what next, should anything be changed? If certain aspects. of the traffic calming measures are not necessary, then an amendment could be considered. The visual /historical problem in my opinion is that changing sidewalks, crosswalks, islands, new pavement and freshly painted lines will change the District because they are- "new". That said, at certain points in time infrastructure needs to be updated and the time in the Country Club has long come due. Furthermore, if the analysis shows that all of these traffic aspects are needed for safety and are further supported by the dedicated work of the Traffic Commission, then let the process come to completion in its entirety. Which aspects from a Heritage Preservation Board perspective could be amended? That would be a question that the entire HPB would have to weigh in on, because again you need to have all the information present to make the best possible decision. (Not just information from one group) Furthermore you need to have your duly appointed board, give you The Edina City Council the best possible advice. Thanks for the opportunity to serve in this capacity and thanks for trying to do what is right for the City of Edina. Respectfully, Chris Rofidal Chairman, Edina Heritage Preservation Board March 14, 2008 Dear City Council, On January 7, 2005, the City of Edina informed the residents of the Country Club of its intent to reconstruct the neighborhoods sewer, water main and streets. After three years of comprehensive study and extensive communications, it is my understanding the City Council will consider the commissioning of this project, including the installation of traffic- cahning measures, at their March 18th meeting. As a resident that has closely followed the process, I encourage the City Council to move forward on this project as tentatively scheduled for 2008 and 2009. There is irrefutable evidence a longstanding and well - documented traffic problem exists in NE Edina. The NE Edina Traffic study confirmed results from numerous objective and subjective studies conducted by various constituencies in the past. SRF and the Metropolitan Council have suggested a 900 to 1,000 daily traffic count guideline as a safety and resident comfort threshold for residential streets. There are a number of residential streets in NE Edina in which daily traffic counts are a multiple of 3 or 4 times this threshold guideline. The proposed Country Club reconstruction project appears to strike a balance between maintaining open access to all streets and deployment of effective traffic - calming measures. Note: The closure of streets, a major point of contention for traffic - calming opponents, was deliberately excluded from consideration. Accordingly, the proposal does not benefit one street (or neighborhood) at the expense of another. Additionally; the NE Edina study represents a "break- through" in process and may very well become a future model in addressing traffic or other municipal challenges for the following reasons: Comprehensive Study Area.— In many traffic studies conducted by municipalities, attention is generally focused to a specific, problematic street or neighborhood without consideration to the implications of contiguous streets /neighborhoods (i.e. closure of Lynn Ave in SLP and diagonal diverters in SW Mpls). In contrast, the scope and breadth of this study extended beyond a street, neighborhood or even greater NE Edina; it considered the potential impact to area business districts, and portions of St. Louis Park and Minneapolis. It addresses the root of the problem (i.e. bottlenecks on Hwy 100 and 50`s& France) vs. just attempting to treat the symptoms (extraordinarily high traffic counts on a number of streets in NE Edina). Inclusiveness/ Public Notice — The study was inclusive in nature. The NE Edina SAC consisted of a cross - functional group of stakeholders including NE Edina residents, Edina city staff, ETC members, business owners from three adjacent business districts, residents from contiguous neighborhoods in St. Louis Park and Minneapolis, SLP and Minneapolis city staff, Hennepin County, MnDot, and SRF consultants. The Edina City Council was formally briefed twice during the study period. In addition, residents from Edina, SLP, and Minneapolis were given the opportunity to attend three Public Open Houses, a Public Hearing, and submit input during a one -month Comment Period. This process was followed by public notice and a public hearing conducted by the City Council in December 2007. Essentially, any interested or affected party was given the opportunity to render their opinion/input for consideration over the course of three years. Transparency — There was public transparency through -out the past three years. All ETC meetings, NE Edina SAC meetings, Edina City Council meetings, Business Owner meetings, Open Houses, Public Hearings were open to the general public. All related documents including meeting dates and agendas, summaries, notes, outlines, data, cost analysis, Open House comments, maps, survey results, press releases and advertisements were posted on a dedicated page on the City's website. A notice /invitation for the July 2006 Public Hearing and Dec 2007 City Council Public Hearing was mailed to every NE Edina resident. In addition, a number of articles written by various journalists have been publicly published (i.e. Sun Current). Additionally, the Country Club Neighborhood Association (CCNA) kept the residents abreast of developments on at least a dozen occasions. In summary, the City of Edina has exercised every conceivable and reasonable precaution to ensure the comprehensiveness, inclusiveness, and transparency of the NE Edina Traffic Study and Country Club reconstruction project. The study and recommendations are. fact -based and reasonable. They, are not. representative of any one individual, street, neighborhood, NE Edina,: SLP, Minneapolis, Hennepin County, or MnDot; rather the findings and recommendations are the collection of all stakeholders. Therefore, we would encourage City approval for the Country Club reconstruction project as scheduled for 2008 and 2009. Keith and Barb Wolf 4600 Wooddale TO: FROM: VIA: Mayor & City Council REQUEST FOR PURCHASE Wayne D. Houle, PE, City Engineer Gordon Hughes, City Manager SUBJECT: REQUEST FOR PURCHASE IN EXCESS OF $15,000 DATE: March 18, 2008 AGENDA ITEM IV. B. ITEM DESCRIPTION: Contract No. PW 08 -3: Well House No. 20, 6321 Gleason Road Improvement No. WM -480 Comaany 1. EnComm Midwest, Inc. $ 354,453.00 2. American Liberty $ 361,300.00 3. Magney Construction, Inc. $ 379,600.00 4. TDJ Construction, Inc. $ 382,850.00 5. Rice Lake Construction Group $ 402,900.00 6. Crossroads Construction, Inc. $ 428,000.00 7. Meisinger Construction Company, Inc. $ 437,000.00 RECOMMENDED QUOTE OR BID: EnComm Midwest, Inc. $ 354,453.00 GENERAL INFORMATION: This project is for the pump house for Well No. 20. The well construction was awarded last fall to Keys Well Drilling Company. The status of the well is on schedule and will be completed this May. During the award of bid for the Council requested that they see the landscaping plan for this site. The landscaping for this site will be completed in- house, we have attached a copy of the proposed landscaping plan. Staff has also included a copy of the elevations for this building. This project is in the Capital Improvement Plan, which allocated $800,000 for this project. The contract amount for the well is $297,890.00, therefore the total construction cost for this project is $652,343.00 plus the landscaping costs. The water utility fund will fund this improvement. Staff recommends awarding the project to EnComm Midwest, Inc., since EnComm Midwest, Inc. has completed a number of projects satisfactorily for the City. I/ The Recommended Bid is within budget not within Public Works - Utilities Department Gordon Hughes,10ty GAEngineeri4Contract Numbers\200TENG 07 -2 Woodhill and Southdale N'hood Improvements \ADMIN\MISC\20070309 ENG 07 -2 Finance KEY NOTES REMOVE EIOSRNG CURB AND CUTTER TO AN E KISITING JOINT. REMOVE EXISTING BITUMINOUS PATH TO CONSTRUCTION LIMITS. SAW CUT AT REMOVAL L" TS REGRADE TO MATCH DRIVEWAY ELEVATIONS © INSTALL AND MAINTAIN TREE PROTECTION AT DRIPUNE_ MMNTAJN TEMP My CHAIN LINK SECURITY FENCE AND SILT FENCE. ADD ADDITIONAL FENCING AS NEEDED OR AS DIRECTED BY OWNER. 'ROVIDE (1) SUGAR MAPLE ACER SACCHARUM) THIS AREA ALSAM PINE IMEA) THIS AREA CENOM NOTES. 1. (;BADE AT WEWIOUSE BUILDING IS 884 (0.5 FEET BELOW THE F.F.E. OF 884.6) AND SLOPES AWAY AT A 1V:311 TO THE 575 CONTOUR, AS SHOWN. 2. USE MECHANICAL RESTRAINED JOINTS (U.S. PIPE TR FLEX OR APPROVED EQUAL) FOR ALL BURIED WATERMAIN RESTRAIN FOR DISTANCE RECOMMENDED BY PIPE MANUFACTURER. 3. STATE LAW: 48 HOURS BEFORE EXCAVATING OR DEMOUSHING BUILDINGS CALL (651) 454 -0002 FOR FIELD LOCATION OF UNDERGROUND UTILITY LINES (THIS SERVICE LOCATES UTIUTY OWNED LINES NOT PRIVATE UNES) 4. FIELD VERIFY LOCATION AND ELEVATION OF ALL UTILITIES IT AT ARE SHOWN AND ALL URUTIES THAT ARE NOT SHOWN PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION. S THE CONTRACTOR S11.ALL USE APPROPRIATE CONSTRUCTION METHODS TO STAY WITHIN THE CONSTRUCTION UMI1S 6. CONTRACTOR SNAIL PROVIDE A MINIMUM OF 7s OF COVER FOR PROPOSED WATERMAIN AND BRAIN PIPES, UNLESS ODIERVASE APPROVED BY ENGINEER. 7. MAINTAIN AND REPLACE TEMPORARY CHAIN LINK FENCE AND SILT FENCE AND SILT FENCE AS NEEDED OR AS DIRECTED BY OWNER_ B. ALL DISTURBED AREAS SNAIL BE RESTORED TO MATCH EXISTING AND TO MEET CITY OF EDINA 51ANDARD SPECIFICATIONS, UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED IN THESE DRAWINGS. 9. SITIMINOUS INSTALLED By CITY. AY AND REPLACED BITUMINOUS PATH WILL BE INSTAl1 CONTRACTOR IS PROVIDE COMPACTED SUBGTADE. CONTACTOR TO GRADE AND COMPACT SUBGRADE AND PROVIDE GRADE AND COMPACT CLASS S AGGREGATE RASE TO A THICKNESS OF 6'. CONTRACTOR TO COORDINATE VATH CITY. 10. CONCRETE WALKWAY AND REPLACED CONCRETE DRIVEWAY WIIL. BE INSTALLED BY CITY. CONTACTOR TO GRADE AND COMPACT SU9GTADE AND PROVIDE GRADE AND COMPACT CLASS 5 AGGREGATE BASE TO A THICKNESS OF 6'. CONTRACTOR TO COORDINATE 1WD1 CITY. scxE x RFI U 20 40 LEGEND .1006- COMING COIN IOURS —1006— PRM09D OCNICLRLS — •— — COSTING WATER MAIN -� — . —. —.— PROPOSED WATER MAIN PROPOSED BITUMINOUS PAVING © PROPOSED CONCRETE WAIXWAT A _ FINAL PLANS 1 01124008 I "fneav vgtlfv trWf twslwA �tsuacm Harr r, DESIDNED: JA1 We01 —Na. 20 Cilyal EMna,MN JOBNO. 165UE FM PROGRESSIVE f _ .ouqurc. vE �norfsequ�ra. nufmfn na uws cs Tne 07037 A CONSULTI NG srMea NSa+fFn ow.wN: Do (TT'rt -xTf DPAWIND NO. n:G1 EER Imo( n >s n e�cxATlnt� 2CC[ -GL �Y�.6t� ` CNECNED: NO SITE PLAN C I -IIF DESCRIPTION DATE NAME NAEEMOURESIIi A,E I Z8 Olygio qs t1M1 IIAlE "'�� 011241M i STANDING SEAM METAL ROOFING 14 CEDAR SNAKES. 1. 1 -STAIN PROVIDE FLAT BLOCK @ ELECT. SERVICE CONCRETE BLOCK LocariON -VERIFY- 50UTN ELEVATION 1 3/Ibn a I w STANDING SEAM PREFINISWED CEDAR SNAKES METAL ROOFING METAL LOUVER � -STAIN �ROCKFACE W.M. DOOR / B' 1; 3FACE CONCRETE BLOCK FRAME -PAINT CONCRETE BLOCK WOOD UNDO GLAD WOOD WINDOW, n WEST ELEVATION n EAST ELEVATION nfc ✓ u1 -oI -9998 3 /Ibn = I'-Oa PREFAB. SKYLIGHT 1NDING SEAM fAL ROOFING EDAR TRIM — BETWEEN EDALLIONS' 'P. (STAIN) ,ETE BLOCK CONCRETE BLOCK SILL ROCKFACE ETE BLOCK STANDING SEAM METAL ROOFING CEDAR SHAKES �2 -STAIN e I— n NORTH ELEVATION � 3/16n v II_OII Q OERTEL ARCHITECTS 1795 Saint Clair Avenue St. Paul, Minnesota 55105 1631)696 -3186 rel (631)696 -3188 Fu mw.oeneleaMmne.cmo EDINA WELLHOUSE #20 EDINA, MN +man xwam 07 -HO NIf RSYIR JANUARY 24, 2008 r .r9 JLo I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS DOCUMENT WAS PREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECT SUPERVISION AND THAT I AM A DULY REGISTEREO ENGINEER IN THE STATE OF MINNESOTA MI MTE vca.Ilna JANUARY 24, 2008 .ran,.,... 18247 I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS DOCUMENT WAS PREPARED BY WE OR UNDER MY DIRECT SUPERVISION AND THAT I AM A DULY REGISTERED ARCHITECT IN THE STATE OF MINNESOTA �A16 JANUARY 24, 2008 xL9crlurox I5B40 van —E: ELEVATIONS __A3 _7 = M51,121 S8 r r • ' r IX CEDAR BETWEEN r •. BURNISHED BLOCH FRAME -PAINT �������������■ ■w_imm ■ ■�■ m� P mmmmmm ■M =iEMM■ ■� ■` 115AEm�-■ PROVIDE FLAT BLOCK @ ELECT. SERVICE CONCRETE BLOCK LocariON -VERIFY- 50UTN ELEVATION 1 3/Ibn a I w STANDING SEAM PREFINISWED CEDAR SNAKES METAL ROOFING METAL LOUVER � -STAIN �ROCKFACE W.M. DOOR / B' 1; 3FACE CONCRETE BLOCK FRAME -PAINT CONCRETE BLOCK WOOD UNDO GLAD WOOD WINDOW, n WEST ELEVATION n EAST ELEVATION nfc ✓ u1 -oI -9998 3 /Ibn = I'-Oa PREFAB. SKYLIGHT 1NDING SEAM fAL ROOFING EDAR TRIM — BETWEEN EDALLIONS' 'P. (STAIN) ,ETE BLOCK CONCRETE BLOCK SILL ROCKFACE ETE BLOCK STANDING SEAM METAL ROOFING CEDAR SHAKES �2 -STAIN e I— n NORTH ELEVATION � 3/16n v II_OII Q OERTEL ARCHITECTS 1795 Saint Clair Avenue St. Paul, Minnesota 55105 1631)696 -3186 rel (631)696 -3188 Fu mw.oeneleaMmne.cmo EDINA WELLHOUSE #20 EDINA, MN +man xwam 07 -HO NIf RSYIR JANUARY 24, 2008 r .r9 JLo I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS DOCUMENT WAS PREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECT SUPERVISION AND THAT I AM A DULY REGISTEREO ENGINEER IN THE STATE OF MINNESOTA MI MTE vca.Ilna JANUARY 24, 2008 .ran,.,... 18247 I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS DOCUMENT WAS PREPARED BY WE OR UNDER MY DIRECT SUPERVISION AND THAT I AM A DULY REGISTERED ARCHITECT IN THE STATE OF MINNESOTA �A16 JANUARY 24, 2008 xL9crlurox I5B40 van —E: ELEVATIONS __A3 _7 To: Mayor & City Council From: Gordon Hughes Date: March 18, 2008 Subject: ORDINANCE NO. 2008 -05 ADDING A MEMBER TO THE EDINA TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION Recommendation: Grant First Reading. REPORT /RECOMMENDATION Agenda Item V.A. Consent Information Only ❑ Mgr. Recommends ❑ To HRA ® To Council Action ® Motion ❑ Resolution ® Ordinance ❑ Discussion R Info /Background: In accordance with your direction, the attached amendment adds a tenth member to the ETC. This member would be from the BETF or otherwise have an expertise of interest in bicycling as a mode of transportation. ORDINANCE NO. 2008-05 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTION 1225.03 ADDING A MEMBER TO THE EDINA TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDINA ORDAINS: Section 1. Subsection 1225.03 of Edina Code is hereby amended to read as follows: "1225.03 Membership. The Commission shall consist of nine ten members appointed by the Mayor with the consent of the majority of the Council. The Mayor shall endeavor to appoint members such that the Commission is reflective of the different geographic areas of the City. One member of the Commission shall also be a member of the Planning Commission. One member of the Commission shall also be a member of the Bike Edina Task Force. One member of the Commission may be a high school student, who shall serve as a non - voting member of the Commission. Members shall serve until a successor has been appointed. All members of the Commission shall be residents of the City and shall be appointed for a term of three years except any student member shall be appointed for a term of one year, commencing on a date determined by the Mayor with the consent of the Council. The Council may stagger the terms of the first Commission appointed. Upon termination of a member's term, that member's successor shall be appointed for the remainder of such term. Members of the Commission shall serve without compensation and may resign voluntarily or be removed by a majority vote of the Council pursuant to Section 180 of this Code. Commission members who discontinue legal residency in the City may be removed from office by the Mayor with the consent of a majority of the Council." Section 2. The effective date of this Ordinance shall be the day of 2008. First Reading: Second Reading: Published: Attest Debra A. Mangen, City Clerk James B. Hovland, Mayor 0 To: Mayor & City Council From: Debra Mangen City Clerk Date: March 18, 2008 Subject: Wine & Beer License Renewal — Late Applicants REPORT /RECOMMENDATION Agenda Item V.B. Consent Information Only ❑ Mgr. Recommends ❑ To HRA ® To Council Action ® Motion ❑ Resolution ❑ Ordinance ❑ Discussion Recommendation: Motion approving renewal of On -Sale Wine and 3.2 Beer Licenses to Chapati's Dino's Gyros of Edina, Inc., dba as Dino's Gyros of Edina beginning April 1, 2008, and ending March 31, 2009. Info /Background: Chapati's Restaurant and Dino's Gyros of Edina, Inc. have completed their renewal license applications and paid the appropriate renewal fees. . The Administration Department has reviewed the submittals and finds that they comply with code requirements. The Police Department has completed their investigation. Attached is the memo stating the findings of their review and background investigation. The renewal licenses are placed on the agenda for consideration by the Council. 0 Memo TO Chief of Police Mike Siitari From: Sergeant Scott Kuyper Date: March 10, 2008 Re: - Liquor License Renewals Background checks have been completed for the 2008 -2009 licensing period for the following Wine and 3.2 Beer licenses: Chapati Dino's Gyros of Edina Chapati and Dino's Gyros of Edina comply with City Code; an unqualified recommendation for approval of this renewal application is warranted. or>-I � /, o/ o6 11-P 0 Page 1 REPORT /RECOMMENDATION To: Mayor & City Council Agenda Item V.C. From: Gordon Hughes Consent Information Only ❑ Date: March 18, 2008 Mgr. Recommends ❑ To HRA ® To Council Subject: APPOINTMENT TO BOARD OF APPEAL AND Action ® Motion EQUALIZATION ❑ Resolution ❑ Ordinance ❑ Discussion Recommendation: Appoint Kenneth W. Sorteberg to the Board of Appeal and Equalization. Info /Background: Mr. Sorteberg would replace Amy Jo Wimmer on the Board of Appeal and Equalization. The term would be one year. To: Mayor & City Council From: Solvei Wilmot Assistant Sanitarian Edina Health Department REPORT /RECOMMENDATION Agenda Item V.D. Consent Recommendation: Set Hearing Date for April 1, 2008, for appeal of Public Health and Housing Code Violations at Earl Isensee's property. Info /Background: Mr. Isensee is appealing due to inappropriate notification as outlined under City Code 725.05 Subd. 1. See attached letter. Information Only ❑ Date: March 18, 2008 Mgr. Recommends ❑ To HRA ® To Council Subject: Set Hearing Date Action ® Motion Earl Isensee, Jr., Appeal of Public Health and Housing Code Violations ❑ Resolution ❑ Ordinance ❑ Discussion Recommendation: Set Hearing Date for April 1, 2008, for appeal of Public Health and Housing Code Violations at Earl Isensee's property. Info /Background: Mr. Isensee is appealing due to inappropriate notification as outlined under City Code 725.05 Subd. 1. See attached letter. Earl H.A. Isensee, Jr. ATTORNEY AT LAW March 7,2008 City Clerk City Hall 4801 West 50th Street Edina, Minnesota 55424 -1394 Re: Notice of Appeal Dear Clerk: 4617 Golf Terrace Edina, Minnesota 55424 (952) 926 -1121 Please be advised that the undersigned Appeals from the Letter of February 26,2008, a copy of which is attached hereto and incorporated herin by reference. The Notice is defective for the following reasons: Service of the same is in violation of Health 725.05 Subd. 1. Yo s very truly arl A. Isensee,Jr. CC: Solvei Wilmont, R.S. Edina Health Department C ��cCcl�tE008 1-rl lb o e co REPORT/RECOMMENDATION To: Mayor & City Council Agenda Item V.E. From: Debra Mangen Consent ❑ City Clerk Information Only ❑ Date: March 18, 2008 Mgr. Recommends F-1 To HRA ® To Council Subject: Resolution Receiving Action ® Motion Donation Resolution Ordinance Discussion Recommendation: Adopt Resolution. Info/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 donor, the gift and the recipient department for your consideration. RESOLUTION NO. 2008-29 ACCEPTING DONATION ON BEHALF OF THE CITY OF EDINA WHEREAS, Minnesota Statute 465.03 allows cities to accept grants and donations of real or personal property for the benefit of its citizens; WHEREAS, said donations must be accepted via a resolution of the Council adopted by a two- thirds majority of its members. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Edina City Council accepts with sincere appreciation the following listed donation on behalf of its citizens. Donation to the Edina Fire Department: Residential Mortgage Group $150.00 Dated: March 18, 2008 Attest: . Debra A. Mangen, City Clerk STATE OF MINNESOTA ) COUNTY OF HENNEPIN)SS CITY OF EDINA ) James B. Hovland, Mayor CERTIFICATE OF CITY CLERK I, the undersigned duly appointed and acting City Clerk for the City of Edina do hereby certify that the attached and foregoing Resolution was duly adopted by the Edina City Council at its Regular Meeting of March 18, 2008 and as recorded in the Minutes of said Regular Meeting. WITNESS my hand and seal of said City this day of . , 20 City Clerk To: Mayor & City Council From: Susan Heiberg Date: March 18, 2008 Subject: RATIFICATION OF EDINA SCHOOL BOARD APPOINTMENT Recommendation: REPORT /RECOMMENDATION Agenda Item V.F. Consent Information Only ❑ Mgr. Recommends ❑ To HRA ® To Council Action ® Motion ❑ Resolution ❑ Ordinance ❑ Discussion That the Edina City Council ratify the following Edina School Board appointment to the Edina Human Rights & Relations Commission: • Peter Brauer for a three -year term effective immediately through January 31, 2010 4 524 FOR ACTION INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DISTRICT 273 Regular Meeting, February 25, 2008 Volume 79, Report 274 SUBJECT: APPOINTMENT TO THE EDINA HUMAN RIGHTS AND RELATIONS COMMISSION Be it Resolved, That The Board of Education Appoint Peter Brauer to the Edina Human Rights and Relations Commission for a three -year term effective immediately, through January 31, 2010. BACKGROUND INFORMATION Mr. Brauer has agreed to be appointed to the Edina Human Rights and Relations Commission as one of six School Board - appointed community representatives. The committee also includes six representatives appointed by the City. Mr. Brauer will fill a position that has been open for some time. The three -year term he is filling is through January 31, 2010. School Board Community Appointees Luis Bartolomei Lindah Mhando Emery Erickson Opee Peter Brauer Mary Brindle Colleen Feige Edina School District Policy 8140 Term Expires 1/31/09 1/31/09 1/31/10 1/31/10 1/31/11. 1/31/11 M REPORURECOMMENDATION To: Mayor & City Council Agenda Item V.G. From: Susan Heiberg Consent ❑ Information Only ❑ Date: March 18, 2008 Mgr. Recommends ❑ To HRA ® To Council Subject: RESOLUTION NO. 2008 -30 Certifying That No Funds Have Been Invested in Action ® Motion A Targeted List of Companies Whose Operations Resolution Are Deemed to be Complicit with Genocidal Activities ❑ Ordinance ❑ Discussion Recommendation: That the City Council approve a resolution prepared by the Human Rights & Relations Commission certifying that no funds have been invested in a targeted list of companies whose operations are deemed to be complicit with the government of Sudan's genocidal activities in Darfur, Sudan, and prohibiting the purchase of such securities in the future. Info /Background: Dr. Ellen Kennedy, Outreach Coordinator for the Minnesota Center for Holocaust and Genocide Studies, appeared before the members of the Human Rights & Relations Commission on November 27, 2007. She presented a draft resolution as entitled above. Because of the genocidal activities occurring in Darfur, Dr. Kennedy stated that economic pressure must be placed on the government of Sudan, assuring that factions within the Sudanese government have no way of benefiting from investments. At this time, there is no need for the City of Edina to divest because it does not have money invested in the targeted companies. However, by pledging to become involved, the City will receive reports from the Sudan Divestment Task Force which highlight companies being scrutinized. The attached resolution has been reviewed and edited by the City Manager and the City Attorney. RESOLUTION NO. 2008-30 CITY OF EDINA COUNTY OF HENNEPIN STATE OF MINNESOTA A RESOLUTION CERTIFYING THAT NO FUNDS HAVE BEEN INVESTED -City of Edina IN A TARGETED LIST OF COMPANIES WHOSE OPERATIONS ARE DEEMED TO BE COMPLICIT WITH THE GOVERNMENT OF SUDAN'S GENOCIDAL ACTIVITIES W DARFUR, SUDAN, AND PROHIBITING THE PURCHASE OF SUCH SECURITIES IN THE FUTURE WHEREAS, on July 23, 2004, the United States' Congress declared that "the atrocities unfolding in Darfur, Sudan are genocide "; and WHEREAS, on April 16, 2007, the University of Minnesota adopted a policy of targeted divestment from companies that support the genocidal government of Sudan; and WHEREAS, on May 23, 200.7, the State of Minnesota passed. a bill divesting Minnesota's State Board of Investment from companies complicit in the genodde; and WHEREAS, on July 3, 2007, the City of Edina became the third city in the United States to pass a resolution urging that the`United States government safeguard the security of innocent non-combatant men, women and children in Darfur, Sudan where the United States has declared genocide to be occurring; and WHEREAS, on December 31, 2007, the President of the United States signed into law the Sudan Accountability and Divestment Act of 2007..which authorizes state and local governments to divest from Sudan; and WHEREAS, the City of Edina is concerned not only with financial repercussions but also with the moral implications of complicit investments; and WHEREAS, the City of Edina acknowledges that a refusal to invest in and divestment from complicit operations is a course of last resort that should be used sparingly, consistent with a City's fiduciary duties and only under extraordinary circumstances, and that this Resolution is not mended to set precedent with regard to investment and divestment policies and practices of the City of Edina but is solely in response to the xigencies of the declaration of genocide; and WHEREAS, the Finance Director of the City of Edina has determined that the City does not now own any investments' in the scrutinized companies identified by the Sudan Divestment Task Force. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the .City of Edina directs that no investments shall he made in any company or corporation identified as a scrutinized company by the Sudan Divestment Task Force. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City of Edina directs that any investment held by the City—which later becomes identified as a scrutinized company —be sold at the earliest opportunity. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that this Resolution shall remain in effect only insofar as it continues to be consistent with, and does not unduly interfere with, the foreign policy of the United States as determined by the Federal Government Passed and adopted by the City Council of the City of Edina this 18' day of March, 2008. „ Attest Debra A. Mangen, City Clerk James B. Hovland, Mayor STATE OF MINNESOTA ) COUNTY OF HENNEPIN) SS CITY 10P EDINA ) CERTIFICATE OF CITY CLERK I, the undersigned duly appointed and acting City Clerk for the City of Edina do. hereby certify that the attached and foregoing Resolution was duly adopted by the Edina City Council at its Regular Meeting of March, 18, 2008, and as recorded in the Minutes of said Regular Meeting. WTIWESS my hand and seal of said City this _day of , 20 City Clerk City Hall 952- 927 -8861 4801 WEST 50TH STREET FAX 952 - 826 -0390 EDINA, MINNESOTA; 55424 -1394 www.cityofedina.com TTY 952 -826 -0379 14 To: Mayor & City Council From: Gordon Hughes Date: March 18, 2008 Subject: SET HEARING DATE ISSUANCE OF REVENUE BONDS BY CITY OF MINNEAPOLIS ON BEHALF OF FAIRVIEW HEALTH SERVICES Recommendation: Set hearing date for April 15, 2008. Info /Background: REPORT /RECOMMENDATION Agenda Item V.H. Consent ❑ Information Only ❑ Mgr. Recommends ❑ To HRA ® To Council Action ® Motion ® Resolution ❑ Ordinance ❑ Discussion The attached memorandum from the City Bond 'Counsel, Jerry Gilligan, provides the background for this request. 1 )� 0ORSEY DORSEY,B WHITNEY LLP MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and Members of the City Council Gordon Hughes, City Manager FROM: Jerome P. Gilligan DATE: March 12, 2008 RE: Proposed Issuance of Revenue Bonds by the-City of Minneapolis for Fairview Hospital and Healthcare Services - The City has received.a request from Fairview Health Services ( "Fairview") that the City consent to the issuance by the City of Minneapolis of tax - exempt revenue bonds under Minnesota Statutes, Section 469.152 to. 469.165, a portion of which will be used to refund bonds previously issued by the Minnesota Agricultural and Economic Development Board in 1997 and by the City of Minneapolis in 2005, to finance or refinance improvements at Fairview Southdale Hospital. The City has previously consented to the City of Minneapolis issuing revenue bonds under this authority on behalf of Fairview to finance or refinance improvements to Fairview Southdale Hospital, most recently in 2005. The City has also previously approved other cities issuing revenue bonds to finance facilities of other non- profit corporations in the City. Federal law for tax - exempt bonds requires that the City hold a public hearing on the proposed bond issue prior to giving such approval. The bonds would be issued as part of a larger issue by Minneapolis to finance projects at University of Minnesota Medical Center, Fairview in Minneapolis, and at other Fairview hospitals in Burnsville, Hibbing, Red Wing and Wyoming, and to refund the 1997 bonds of the Minnesota Agricultural and Economic Board and bonds issued by the City of Minneapolis on behalf of Fairview in 2004 and 2005. The bonds being refunded financed or refinanced improvements at other Fairview hospitals in addition to Fairview Southdale Hospital. The debt service on the bonds will be payable solely from payments to be made by Fairview, and the City will not, have any liability with respect to the bonds and will not be required to enter into any agreements with respect to the bonds. Fairview will pay all City expenses,with'respect to the bonds. If the City Council wishes to proceed with the issuance of the bonds it should adopt a resolution setting a public h e a r i n g on the, bonds for the April 15th City Council meeting. DORSEY 8 WHITNEY LLP RESOLUTION CALLING FOR A PUBLIC HEARING ON AN ISSUE OF REVENUE BONDS BY CITY OF MINNEAPOLIS ON BEHALF OF FAIRVIEW HEALTH SERVICES BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Edina, Minnesota (the "City "), as follows: 1. With the approval of this Council and at the request of Fairview Health Services, a Minnesota nonprofit corporation ( "Fairview "), the Minnesota Agricultural and Economic Development Board (the "Board ") has issued its Health Care System Revenue Bonds, Series 1997A (Fairview Hospital and Healthcare Services) (the "Series 1997A Bonds "), a portion of which were used to refund bonds issued by the City to finance the construction of improvements to Fairview Southdale Hospital, an acute care hospital and other health care - related facilities located at 6401 and 6400 France Avenue South in the City (the "Edina Facilities ") and the acquisition and installation of equipment therein. 2. With the approval of this Council and at the request of Fairview, the City of Minneapolis ( "Minneapolis ") has issued its Health Care System Revenue Refunding Bonds, Series 2005A, 2005B and 2005C (Fairview Health Services) (the "Series 2005ABC Bonds ") for the purpose of, among others, refunding a series of bonds issued by the Board for the purpose of, among others, financing the construction of an addition to and the renovation of the Edina Facilities and the acquisition and installation of items of equipment therein and of a new parking ramp to serve the Edina Facilities. 3. With the approval of this Council and at the request of Fairview, Minneapolis has also issued its Health Care System Revenue Bonds (Fairview Health Services), Series 2005D (the "2005D Bonds "; together with the Series 2005ABC Bonds, the "Series 2005D Bonds ") to finance the construction of improvements to and remodeling of the Edina Facilities and the acquisition and installation of items of equipment therein. 4. Fairview has advised this Council of its desire to refund all or a portion of the outstanding Series 1997A Bonds and all or a portion of the outstanding Series 2005 Bonds (together, the "Refunded Bonds ") with revenue bonds (the "Revenue Bonds ") issued by the City of Minneapolis under the authority of Minnesota Statutes, Sections 469.152 through 469.165. 5. The portion of the Refunded Bonds and the portion of the Revenue Bonds allocable to the Edina Facilities is herein referred to as the "Edina Portion." Section 147(f) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended and regulations promulgated thereunder, require that prior to the issuance of the Revenue Bonds, this Council approve the issuance of the Revenue Bonds by Minneapolis to refund the Edina Portion, after conducting a public hearing thereon. A public hearing on the proposal that Minneapolis issue the Revenue Bonds to refund the Edina Portion is hereby called and shall be held on April 15, 2008, at 7:00 o'clock P.M., at the City Hall. 6. The City Clerk shall cause notice of the public hearing, in substantially the form attached hereto as Exhibit A, to be published in a newspaper of general circulation in the City, once not less than 14 days prior to the date fixed for the public hearing. 011I1I:1 Attest: Adopted by the City Council of the City of Edina on this 18th day of March, City Clerk Mayor EXHIBIT A CITY OF EDINA 4801 WEST 50TH STREET EDINA, MINNESOTA 55424 NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING ON THE ISSUANCE OF REVENUE BONDS UNDER MINNESOTA STATUTES, SECTIONS 469.152 - 469.165 NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the City Council of the City of Edina, Minnesota (the "City "), will meet on April 15, 2008, at 7:00 o'clock P.M., at the City Hall, 4801 West 50'' Street, in Edina, Minnesota, for the purpose of conducting a public hearing on a proposal that the City of Minneapolis, Minnesota ( "Minneapolis ") issue revenue bonds (the "Revenue Bonds ") on behalf of Fairview Health Services (the "Corporation "), in one or more series, under Minnesota Statutes, Sections 469.152 through 469.165, in order to (a) refund bonds previously issued by the Minnesota Agricultural and Economic Development Board (the "Board "), a portion of which were used to refund bonds issued by the City to finance the construction of improvements to Fairview Southdale Hospital, an acute care hospital and other health care- related facilities owned and operated by the Corporation and located at 6401 and 6400 France Avenue South in the City (the "Edina Facilities ") and the acquisition and installation of equipment therein and (b) refund bonds previously issued by Minneapolis for the purpose of, among others, (i) refunding a series of bonds issued by the Board for the purpose of, among others, financing the construction of an addition to and the renovation of the Edina Facilities and the acquisition and installation of items of equipment therein and of a new parking ramp to serve the Edina Facilities and (ii) financing the construction of improvements and remodeling of the Edina Facilities and the acquisition and installation of items of equipment therein. The Revenue Borids will not be issued by the City. The Revenue Bonds will be issued as part of a larger bond issue by Minneapolis in an aggregate amount which is not expected to exceed $850,000,000, the proceeds of which will be issued to finance or refinance the acquisition, construction, renovation, remodeling and equipping by the Corporation or its affiliates of health care facilities located in the cities of Minneapolis, Princeton, Red Wing, Hibbing, Wyoming and Burnsville, Minnesota as well as the City. All persons interested may appear and be heard at the time and place set forth above, or may file written comments with the City Clerk prior to the date of the hearing set forth above. Dated: March 18, 2008. BY ORDER OF THE CITY COUNCIL Debra Mangen, City Clerk ane REPORT/RECOMMENDATION To: Mayor & City Council From: Boyd Tate Traffic Safety Coordinator Date: March 18, 2008 Subject: Traffic Safety Staff Review for March 6, 2008 Recommendation: Agenda Item: Consent Information Only Mgr. Recommends Action Review and approve Traffic Safety Staff Review of Thursday, March 6, 2008. Info /Background: V. I. ❑ To H RA ® To Council ❑ Motion ❑ Resolution ❑ Ordinance ❑ Discussion It is not anticipated that residents will be in attendance at the Council meeting regarding any of the attached issues. G:\ Engineering\ Infrastructure \Streets \Traffic \Traffic Advisory Committee \Staff Review Summaries \08 TSAC & Min \03- 06- 08.doc TRAFFIC SAFETY STAFF REVIEW Thursday, March 6, 2008 The staff review of traffic safety matters occurred on March 6, 2008. Staff: present included the City Engineer, Assistant City Engineer, City Planner, Traffic Safety Coordinator, Sign Coordinator and Chief of Police.. 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 March 18, 2008 Council Agenda. SECTION A: Requests on which staff recommends approval: 1. Request from the staff at South View Middle School to change the restricted parking on four (4) parking spots on the south side of South View Lane, adjacent to South View Middle School, from "20- Minute Parking" to "Two Hour Parking." The area in question is at the front entrance of South View Middle School. There is room for approximately 12 vehicles to park in this location. All 12 parking spots are currently posted "20- Minute" parking. School staff is requesting that four. spots, to the east of the school entrance, be changed to "2 -Hour" parking. School staff wants the front of the building to be a place where parents and, visitors can park for quick and short-term access to the building while keeping South View Lane less cluttered. The school has received complaints from visitors stating that the 20- minute parking restriction is not long enough: Staff recommends approval of chanp-ink the parking restriction on four (4) narking snots. iust east of the main entrance to South View "2- Hour" Traffic Safety Staff Review Page 1 of 2 March 6, 2008 r , ik SECTION B• None for Thursday, March 6, 2008 meeting. SECTION C: None for Thursday, March 6, 2008 meeting. Traffic Safety Staff Review Page 2 of 2 March 6, 2008 _. ° e o REPORT /RECOMMENDATION To: Mayor & City Council Agenda Item # V. J. From: Wayne Houle, PE Consent City Engineer Information. Only ❑ Date: March 18, 2008 Mgr. Recommends ❑ To HRA ® To Council Subject: Set Public Hearing Date for Action. ® Motion Highlands Neighborhood ® Resolution Roadway Improvements: El Ordinance No. BA -342 I-I Discussion Recommendation: Approve resolution calling for Public Hearing on April 15, 2008 for roadway improvements in the Highlands Neighborhood, Improvement No. BA -342 Info /Background: City staff is requesting these street improvements based on the condition of the streets. Staff has reviewed this project and has determined it is feasible. A neighborhood informational meeting was held on Wednesday, February 13 for this project. A feasibility study will be completed and submitted to the City Council prior to the Public Hearing. Staff suggests scheduling a Public Hearing for April 15, 2008. G: \Engineering \Improvements \BA342 Highlands Area \ADMIN \MISC\20080318_RR_request _public _hearing_BA342.doc RESOLUTION NO. 20;08-32 CALLING PUBLIC HEARING FOR IMPROVEMENT PROJECT BA -342 HIGHLANDS NEIGHBORHOOD AREA SEWER, WATER AND STREET RECONSTRUCTION City of Edina „ WHEREAS, it is proposed to improve roadways and utilities in the Highlands Neighborhood Roadway Improvements (Ayrshire Boulevard, Croyden Lane, Duncraig Road, Glenbrae Circle, and Lochloy. Drive);. BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of Edina that a public hearing shall be held on April 15, 2008, at 7:00 p.m. in the Council-Chairiber of Edina City; 4801 West 50th Street, Edina, MN to consider the making of Improvement Nos. BA -342, SS -438, STS -343, WM -476, and L -50, in the Highlands Neighborhood (Ayrshire Boulevard, Croyden Lane, Duncraig Road, Glenbrae Circle, and Lochloy Drive). BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the City Clerk shall give mailed and published notice of such hearing and improvements as required by law. Dated: March 18, 2008 Attest: Debra A. Mangen, City Clerk James B. Hovland, Mayor STATE OF MINNESOTA ) COUNTY OF HENNEPIN)SS CITY OF EDINA ) CERTIFICATE OF CITY CLERK I, the undersigned duly appointed and acting City Clerk for the City of Edina do hereby certify that the attached and foregoing Resolution was duly adopted by the Edina City Council at its Regular Meeting of March 18, 2008, and as recorded in the Minutes of said Regular Meeting. WITNESS my hand and seal of said City this day of o20— City Clerk City Hall 952- 927 -8861 4801 WEST 50TH STREET FAX 952 - 826 -0390 EDINA, MINNESOTA, 55424 -1394 www.cityofedina.com TTY 952 -826 -0379 o e To: Mayor & City Council From: Ceil Smith, Assistant to City Manager Date: March 18, 2008 Subject: Renewal of Local 1275 Contract Firefighters Recommendation: Approve Contract REPORT /RECOMMENDATION Agenda Item V.K. Consent Information Only ❑ Mgr. Recommends ❑ To HRA ® To Council . Action ® Motion ❑ Resolution ❑ Ordinance ❑ Discussion Info /Background: The City and Local 1275 have agreed to the following issues for a contract period of 2008 thru 2009. 1. Duration - January.1, 2008 thru December 31, 2009. 2. Wages — 3.5% for 2008 and 3.5% for 2009. 3. Insurance - $25 per month increase for 2008, and the Union agrees to the increase granted to all other employees for 2009. 4. Sick Leave — Increase the sick leave accrual amount from 6.92 to 7.38 for employees working a 24 hour shift. t � R55CKREG LOG20000 28.60 CITY OF EDINA 497706 5842.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX YORK SELLING Council Check Register 180728 497705 5822.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX 50TH ST SELLING 2/2912008 -3/6/2008 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description 306965 2129/2006 36.60 105848 WILKIE SANDERSON 180875 497707 5862.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX VERNON SELLING 75.00 STAIN MATERIALS 180923 022808 1551.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES 75.00 306969 3/612008 306966 3/6/2008 118261 2ND WIND EXERCISE INC. 518.64 5,430.44 TREADMILL 00002268 181088 22- 014857 5620.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES GENERAL (BILLING) 5,430.44 518.64 306967 3/6/2008 100613 AAA 316/2008 105162 ADT SECURITY SERVICES 9.50 LICENSE TABS FOR 26.191 180919 022608 1553.6260 LICENSES & PERMITS 29.41 ALARM SERVICE 9.50 66089030 5111.6250 ALARM SERVICE ART CENTER BLDG/MAINT 306968 3/6/2008 29.41 102971 ACE ICE COMPANY 3/5/2008 9:03:13 Page- 1 Business Unit CITY HALL GENERAL EDINBOROUGH PARK EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 28.60 180727 497706 5842.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX YORK SELLING 17.56 180728 497705 5822.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX 50TH ST SELLING 31.56 180874 0610062 5862.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX VERNON SELLING 36.60 180875 497707 5862.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX VERNON SELLING 114.32 306969 3/612008 101441 ADECCO EMPLOYMENT SERVICES 518.64 UB TEMP 180974 63899108 5910.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES GENERAL (BILLING) 518.64 306970 316/2008 105162 ADT SECURITY SERVICES 29.41 ALARM SERVICE 181089 66089030 5111.6250 ALARM SERVICE ART CENTER BLDG/MAINT 29.41 306971 3/6/2008 120904 ALCORN BEVERAGE CO INC. 257.40 180729 520368 5842.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER YORK SELLING 257.40 306972 3/612008 102715 ALLEGRA PRINT & IMAGING 298.20 CALENDARS 181004 69856 5610.6575 PRINTING ED ADMINISTRATION 298.20 306973 3/612008 100630 ANCHOR PAPER CO. INC. 647.06 PAPER 181137 10147863 -00 1550.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES CENTRAL SERVICES GENERAL 647.06 306974 3/6/2008 122218 ANDOR, LYNETTE 20.00 PROGRAM REFUND 180989 022108 1600.4390.26 TEA FOR TWO PROGRAM PARK ADMIN. GENERAL 20.00 R55CKREG LOG20000 CITY OF EDINA 3/5/2008 9:03:13 Council Check Register Page - 2 2/29/2008 -3/6/2008 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit 306975 3/612008 102646 AQUA LOGIC INC. 352.32 ACID, CALHYPO 00002221 181150 31502 5620.6545 CHEMICALS EDINBOROUGH PARK 352.32 306976 3/6/2008 102573 ASSOCIATION OF RECYCLING MANAG 20.00 MEMBERSHIP - SOLVEI WILMOT 181090 022908 5952.6105 DUES & SUBSCRIPTIONS RECYCLING 20.00 306977 3/6/2008 100643 BARR ENGINEERING CO. 472.50 GENERATOR SPECIFICATIONS 180804 23271-1878301 -1 5900.1740 MACHINERY & EQUIPMENT UTILITY BALANCE SHEET 1,492.40 PROMENADE STORMWATER 180920 2327354 - 157 04347.1705.20 CONSULTING DESIGN STS -347 PROMENADE IMP PHASE 1 1,964.90 306978 3/6/2008 121083 BARR, FRANK 97.50 ART WORK SOLD AT EAC 181047 022608 5101.4413 ART WORK SOLD ART CENTER REVENUES 97.50 306979 3/612008 102195 BATTERIES PLUS 124.19 3V PHOTO LITHIUM 00003102 181005 18- 201045 1400.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES POLICE DEPT. GENERAL 21.98 BATTERIES 00003101 181006 18- 200905 1400.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES POLICE DEPT. GENERAL 146.17 306980 3/6/2008 102449 BATTERY WHOLESALE INC. 1,880.28 BATTERIES 00006167 180805 C5560 5423.6530 REPAIR PARTS GOLF CARS 394.19 BATTERIES 00005165 180921 C55558 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 2,274.47 306981 3/612008 100607 BAUER, MICHAEL 30.00 LICENSE RENEWAL 180990 022808 1281.6104 CONFERENCES & SCHOOLS TRAINING 195.00 ELECTRIC CODE UPDATE CLASS 180990 022808 1281.6104 CONFERENCES & SCHOOLS TRAINING 225.00 306902 31612008 102346 BEARCOM 121.47 RADIO REPAIR 00003099 181007 3739721 1400.6215 EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE POLICE DEPT. GENERAL 121.47 306983 3/6 /2008 101355 BELLBOY CORPORATION 142.60 180730 43846700 5862.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR VERNON SELLING 66.31 180731 80483900 5822.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX 50TH ST SELLING 120.20 180732 43846900 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING 1,067.15 180733 43835900 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING t CITY OF EDINA 3 /5 /20utf 9:03:13 R55CKREG LOG20000 Council Check Register Page - 3 2129/2008 --3/6/2008 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit 104.65 180876 80483500 5842.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX YORK SELLING 167.95 180877 5632000 5862.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX VERNON SELLING 74.69 180878 80484000 5862.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX VERNON SELLING 955.47 180944 43846800 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 2,699.02 306984 3/612008 100661 BENN, BRADLEY 53.86 PUBLIC ART SUPPLIES 181048 022908 4105.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES PUBLIC ART 518.00 INSTRUCTOR AC 181048 022908 5110.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES ART CENTER ADMINISTRATION 110.50 ART WORK SOLD AT EAC 181049 022608 5101.4413 ART WORK SOLD ART CENTER REVENUES 682.36 306985 316/2008 115067 BENSON, RON PAUL 65.00 ART WORK SOLD AT EAC 181050 022608 5101.4413 ART WORK SOLD ART CENTER REVENUES 65.00 306986 3/6/2008 100648 BERTELSON OFFICE PRODUCTS 19.68 OFFICE SUPPLIES 180806 WO- 490785 -1 1495.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES INSPECTIONS 207.42 FOAM BOARD, EASELS, SCALES 180807 OE- 148838 -1 1260.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES ENGINEERING GENERAL 28.08 OFFICE SUPPLIES 180808 WO- 488850 -1 1550.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES CENTRAL SERVICES GENERAL 28.08- RETURN 180809 CP- W0488850 -1 1550.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES CENTRAL SERVICES GENERAL 18.91 OFFICE SUPPLIES 180810 W0 -489808 -1 1550.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES CENTRAL SERVICES GENERAL 18.91- RETURN 180811 CP- WO- 489808 -1 1550.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES CENTRAL SERVICES GENERAL 187.76 OFFICE SUPPLIES 180975 OE- 147195 -1 5862.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES VERNON SELLING 213.88 OFFICE SUPPLIES 00003097 181008 WO- 493956 -1 1400.6513 OFFICE SUPPLIES POLICE DEPT. GENERAL 628.74 306987 31612008 122248 BLICK ART MATERIALS 26.22 ART CENTER AUCTION SUPPLIES 00009307 181091 00011075 5120.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES ART SUPPLY GIFT GALLERY SHOP 26.22 306988 3/6/2008 100711 BLOOD, DAVID 100.00 POLICE SERVICE 180798 030808 1419.6102 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES RESERVE PROGRAM 100.00 306989 31612008 100664 BRAUN INTERTEC 980.00 GEOTECHNICAL EVALUATION 180791 289966 01343.1705.21 CONSULTING INSPECTION BA -343 RICHMOND HILLS 2ND ADD 1,200.00 GEOTECHNICAL EVALUATION 180791 289966 01342.1705.21 CONSULTING INSPECTION BA -342 HIGHLANDS AREA 1,500.00 GEOTECHNICAL EVALUATION 180791 289966 01345.1705.21 CONSULTING INSPECTION BA -345 WOODLAND CIR 3,000.00 GEOTECHNICAL EVALUATION 180791 289966 01334.1705.21 CONSULTING INSPECTION BA -334 DEVER DR 6,680.00 R55CKREG LOG20000 180734 60064 CITY OF EDINA COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX 50TH ST SELLING 2,243.75 180879 10067 Council Check Register COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER YORK SELLING 67.75 180880 10066 2129/2008 - 316/2008 YORK SELLING Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description 306990 3/6/2008 122229 BRICHTA, EMERICH 306997 3/6/2008 116683 CAT & FIDDLE BEVERAGE 56.03 WATER DAMAGED RUG CLEANING 180991 022708 5913.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES 77333 5842.5513 56.03 YORK SELLING 346.00 180882 77342 306991 316/2008 YORK SELLING 100873 BROCKWAY, MAUREEN 180945 78257 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING 378.00 INSTRUCTOR AC 181051 022608 5110.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 306998 31612008 378.00 306992 3/612008 00005176 180976 101241 BROWN TRAFFIC PRODUCTS 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 34.08 108.63 WIND COLLARS 00005206 180812 007297 1330.6215 EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE 102372 CDW GOVERNMENT INC. 108.63 306993 3/612008 122250 BROWN, JEFF 63.98 COMPUTER BAG 181138 030308 1490.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES 63.98 306994 3/612008 100776 BUTLER, GEORGE 100.00 POLICE SERVICE 180797 030808 1419.6102 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 100.00 306995 31612008 102046 CAMPE, HARRIET 376.00 INSTRUCTOR AC 181052 022908 5110.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 376.00 306996 316/2008 119455 CAPITOL BEVERAGE SALES 3/5/2008 9:03:13 Page- 4 Business Unit DISTRIBUTION ART CENTER ADMINISTRATION TRAFFIC SIGNALS PUBLIC HEALTH RESERVE PROGRAM ART CENTER ADMINISTRATION 23.80 180734 60064 5822.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX 50TH ST SELLING 2,243.75 180879 10067 5842.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER YORK SELLING 67.75 180880 10066 5842.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX YORK SELLING 138.70 180881 60111 5822.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER 50TH ST SELLING 2,474.00 306997 3/6/2008 116683 CAT & FIDDLE BEVERAGE 73.50 180735 77333 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 346.00 180882 77342 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 195.00 180945 78257 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING 614.50 306998 31612008 100681 CATCO 34.08 UNION TEES 00005176 180976 3416755 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 34.08 306999 3/612008 102372 CDW GOVERNMENT INC. CITY OF EDINA 315/2008 9:03:13 R55CKREG LOG20000 Council Check Register Page - 5 2/29/2008 -3/6/2008 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit 183.79 MONITOR 00004332 180813 JKW3699 5610.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES ED ADMINISTRATION 1,047.05 PRINTER 00004331 180814 JKW5341 5610.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES ED ADMINISTRATION 1,230.84 307000 3/6/2008 112561 CENTERPOINT ENERGY 332.24 5596524 -8 180789 FEB152008 5430.6186 HEAT RICHARDS GOLF COURSE 10,823.45 5591458 -4 180790 022008 1551.6186 HEAT CITY HALL GENERAL 3,404.68 5584304 -9 181092 2 -15 -08 7411.6186 HEAT PSTF OCCUPANCY 368.19 5584310 -6 181093 02/15/08 7413.6186 HEAT PSTF FIRE TOWER 20.96 5590919 -6 181094 FEB202008 7413.6582 FUEL OIL PSTF FIRE TOWER 14,949.52 307001 3/6/2008 103040 CITY PAGES 80.66 MAGAZINE ADVERTISING 180815 D10000653 5822.6122 ADVERTISING OTHER 50TH ST SELLING 80.66 MAGAZINE ADVERTISING 180815 D10000653 5842.6122 ADVERTISING OTHER YORK SELLING 80.68 MAGAZINE ADVERTISING 180815 D10000653 5862.6122 ADVERTISING OTHER VERNON SELLING 242.00 307002 3/6/2008 105693 CITYSPRINT 155.53 LOGIS COURIER 180816 9634 1554.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES CENT SERV GEN - MIS 155.53 307003 31612008 105316 CLARK, PENNY 54.60 ART WORK SOLD AT EAC 181053 022908 5101.4413 ART WORK SOLD ART CENTER REVENUES 54.60 307004 3/612008 116304 CLAY, DON 647.00 MEDIA INSTRUCTOR 181054 022908 5125.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES MEDIA STUDIO 647.00 307005 316/2008 120167 CLIA LABORATORY PROGRAM 150.00 24D1057528 CERTIFICATE FEE 180992 LAB FEE 1470.6260 LICENSES & PERMITS FIRE DEPT. GENERAL 150.00 307006 3/6/2008 122233 COHEN, EILEEN 84.00 INSTRUCTOR AC 181055 022908 5110.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES ART CENTER ADMINISTRATION 84.00 307007 316/2008 101323 CONNEY SAFETY PRODUCTS 21.76 WELDING GLOVES 00005322 180922 03225913 1553.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 231.97 LOTION, TAPE, GLOVES 00005331 181009 03227237 1552.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES CENT SVC PW BUILDING 66.61 SAFETY GLASSES 00005327 181010 03226816 1646.6610 SAFETY EQUIPMENT BUILDING MAINTENANCE R55CKREG LOG20000 Check # Date 307008 3/6/2008 307009 3/612008 307010 3/6/2008 307011 3/6/2008 307012 3/6/2008 307013 3/6/2008 307014 3/6/2008 CITY OF EDINA 3/5/2008 9:03:13 Council Check Register Page - 6 212912008 --3/6/2008 Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit 101275 CUSTOM/ PSC SUPPLY 285.95 SIDEWALK DE -ICER 00001849 180817 4231 1647.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES PATHS & HARD SURFACE 285.95 103176 DANICIC, JOHN 69.55 ART WORK SOLD AT EAC 181056 022908 5101.4413 ART WORK SOLD ART CENTER REVENUES 69.55 102478 DAY DISTRIBUTING 107.00 180883 446590 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING 278.00 180884 446735 5822.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER 50TH ST SELLING 1,915.79 180885 446736 5842.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER YORK SELLING 19.80 180886 446737 5842.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX YORK SELLING 535.00 180887 446591 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 19.80 181111 446734 5862.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX VERNON SELLING 2,641.90 181112 446733 5862.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER VERNON SELLING 5,517.29 101657 DEHN, BRUCE 20.85 AFTER HOURS WORK MEAL 180818 022508 5913.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES DISTRIBUTION 20.85 100718 DELEGARD TOOL CO. 59.37 PISTON, LEVER, PIN 00005064 180819 92119 1553.6556 TOOLS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 613.66 AUTO MANUAL CHARGERS 00005170 180820 98728 1553.6556 TOOLS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 47.68 SCREWDRIVER SET, SOCKETS 00005072 180924 99292 1553.6556 TOOLS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 720.71 122234 DEVRIES, NICHOLAS i .84.00 INSTRUCTOR AC 181057 022908 5110.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES ART CENTER ADMINISTRATION 84.00 i 102831 DEX EAST 474.00 180821 314229383 5610.6122 ADVERTISING OTHER ED ADMINISTRATION 21.00 180822 314229335 5430.6188 TELEPHONE RICHARDS GOLF COURSE 111.00 180822 314229335 5210.6122 ADVERTISING OTHER GOLF DOME PROGRAM 133.50 180822 314229335 5511.6188 TELEPHONE ARENA BLDG /GROUNDS 201.90 180822 314229335 5420.6188 TELEPHONE CLUB HOUSE 941.40 CITY OF EDINA 3/5120uti 9:03:13 R55CKREG LOG20000 Council Check Register Page - 7 2/29/2008 3/6/2008 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit 307015 3/6/2008 121500 DORMAN, SARAH 486.00 INSTRUCTOR AC 181058 022908 5110.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES ART CENTER ADMINISTRATION 486.00 307016 316/2008 100730 DORSEY & WHITNEY LLP 1,720.00 LEGAL 180823 1468867 1195.6131 PROFESSIONAL SERV - LEGAL LEGAL SERVICES 1,720.00 307017 3/612008 100731 DPC INDUSTRIES 2,480.95 CHEMICALS 00005905 180824 82700196 -08 5915.6586 WATER TREATMENT SUPPLIES WATER TREATMENT 2,480.95 307018 3/6/2008 117435 DUNCAN, PATRICIA 84.00 INSTRUCTOR AC 181059 022908 5110.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES ART CENTER ADMINISTRATION 84.00 307019 316/2008 100739 EAGLE WINE 957.63 180888 13619 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 92.95 180889 13615 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING 139.95 180946 722662 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 1,190.53 307020 316/2008 122231 EBERHARDT CO. 1,054.90- REFUND SEWER CHARGE 181095 022808 5901.4626 SALE OF WATER UTILITY REVENUES 3,692.15 REFUND SEWER CHARGE 181095 022808 5901.4641 SEWER CHARGES UTILITY REVENUES 2,637.25 307021 3/612008. 100049 EHLERS & ASSOCIATES INC 95.00 OPUS NEGOTIATORS 180825 336610 4402.6710 EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT PW BUILDING 95.00 3071122 3/6/2008 122230 ELK RIVER POLICE DEPARTMENT 50.00 COURSE FEE 181011 022808 1400.6104 CONFERENCES & SCHOOLS POLICE DEPT. GENERAL 50.00 307023 3/612008 104195 EXTREME BEVERAGE LLC. 96.00 180890 648344 5862.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX VERNON SELLING 96.00 307024 3/612008 100146 FACTORY MOTOR PARTS COMPANY 245.04 ROTORS 00005172 180826 6- 1017155 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 245.04 R55CKREG LOG20000 CITY OF EDINA Council Check Register 2/29/2008 —3/6/2008 Check # Date Amount Supplier/ Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description 307025 316/2008 102003 FASTSIGNS BLOOMINGTON 227.38 VINYL DESIGNS & LETTERS 00002064 181012 190 -33294 5630.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES 227.38 307026 3/612008 120329 FIRE EQUIPMENT SPECIALTIES INC 1,556.95 TURN -OUT GEAR 00003625 180993 5554 1470.6552 PROTECTIVE CLOTHING 1,556.95 307027 316/2008 122236 FITZPATRICK, YASMIN BAUTISTA 52.33 ART WORK SOLD AT EAC 181063 022908 5101.4413 ART WORK SOLD 52.33 307028 3/612008 101603 FLAHERTY S HAPPY TYME CO. 505.40 180891 1 /11 /08STMT 5862.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX 505.40 307029 3/6/2008 103985 FLOR, JON 125.00 AD DESIGN 180827 2076 2210.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 125.00 307030 31612008 105824 FLYING CLOUD ANIMAL HOSPITAL 193.87 K9 -2 PHYSICAL 181013 324758 4607.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES 193.87 307031 3/6/2008 117674 FOURTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT 1,198.59 2008 CITATIONS 181014 200841 1400.6575 PRINTING 1,198.59 307032 316/2008 101022 FRAME, SUSAN 600.00 INSTRUCTOR AC 181060 022908 5110.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 600.00 307033 31612008 120113 FRANCIS, JOYCE 55.90 ART WORK SOLD AT EAC 181064 022908 5101.4413 ART WORK SOLD 55.90 307034 3/612008 122235 FRANK, VALERIE 108.00 INSTRUCTOR AC 181061 022908 5110.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 108.00 307035 31612008 103039 FREY, MICHAEL 3/5/2008 9:03:13 Page- 8 Business Unit CENTENNIAL LAKES FIRE DEPT. GENERAL ART CENTER REVENUES VERNON SELLING COMMUNICATIONS EDINA CRIME FUND K9 DONATION POLICE DEPT. GENERAL ART CENTER ADMINISTRATION ART CENTER REVENUES ART CENTER ADMINISTRATION R55CKREG LOG20000 CITY OF EDINA Council Check Register 2/29/2008 -3/6/2008 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description 3,632.00 INSTRUCTOR AC 181062 022908 5110.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES PROFESSIONAL SERVICES ART WORK SOLD PROFESSIONAL SERVICES PROFESSIONAL SERVICES ARTWORK SOLD 3/512008 9:03:13 Page - 9 Business Unit ART CENTER ADMINISTRATION ART CENTER ADMINISTRATION ART CENTER REVENUES ART CENTER ADMINISTRATION INCLUSION PROGRAM ART CENTER REVENUES TOOLS DISTRIBUTION COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING PROFESSIONAL SERVICES COMMUNICATIONS COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR VERNON SELLING 3,632.00 YORK SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR 307036 31612008 50TH ST SELLING 101867 GETSINGER, DONNA 288.00 INSTRUCTOR AC 181065 022908 5110.6103 81.25 ART WORK SOLD AT EAC 181066 022608 5101.4413 369.25 307037 3/6/2008 104652 GILLIS, LOUISE 240.00 INSTRUCTOR AC 181067 022608 5110.6103 240.00 307038 316/2008 103316 GOETSCH, SAM L. 1,277.66 INTERPRETER 181015 022808 4078.6103 1,277.66 307039 316/2008 117811 GOLDBERG, CAROLYN 96.85 ART WORK SOLD AT EAC 181068 022608 5101.4413 96.85 307040 316/2008 101103 GRAINGER 234.22 CUT OFF TOOL 00005326 180977 9574191038 5913.6556 234.22 307041 3/6/2008 102670 GRAND PERE WINES INC 112.00 180947 00020843 5862.5513 112.00 307042 3/6/2008 120201 GRANICUS, INC 779.00 WEBSTREAMING 180828 6129 2210.6103 779.00 307043 3/612008 102217 GRAPE BEGINNINGS INC 837.55 181113 98406 5822.5513 837.55 307044 3/612008 100782 GRIGGS COOPER & CO. 1.05 180736 10177 5862.5512 702.64 180737 12048 5842.5512 59.39- 180738 745746 5842.5513 221.00- 180739 744837 5842.5512 98.11- 180740 745403 5822.5512 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES ART WORK SOLD PROFESSIONAL SERVICES PROFESSIONAL SERVICES ARTWORK SOLD 3/512008 9:03:13 Page - 9 Business Unit ART CENTER ADMINISTRATION ART CENTER ADMINISTRATION ART CENTER REVENUES ART CENTER ADMINISTRATION INCLUSION PROGRAM ART CENTER REVENUES TOOLS DISTRIBUTION COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING PROFESSIONAL SERVICES COMMUNICATIONS COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR VERNON SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR YORK SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR YORK SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR 50TH ST SELLING R55CKREG LOG20000 CITY OF EDINA 3/5/2008 9:03:13 Council Check Register Page- 10 2129/2008 --3/6/2008 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation Pb # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit 31.12- 180741 745751 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING, 8,777.86 180892 13621 5842.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR YORK SELLING ! 2,718.95 180893 '13620 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 294.58 180894 13546 5842.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX YORK SELLING 35.73 180895 13612 5862.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX VERNON SELLING 145.60 180896 13617 5822.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX 50TH ST SELLING! 1,022.81 180897 13549 5822.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR 50TH ST SELLING, 48.97 180898 13550 5822.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX 50TH ST SELLING] 1,210.19 180948 13616 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING' 730.80 180949 12047 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 2,128.99 180950 13611 5862.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR VERNON SELLING 17,408.55 307045 3/6/2008 100918 GRIMSBY, NANCY . 55.25 ART WORK SOLD AT EAC 181069 022608 5101.4413 ART WORK SOLD ART CENTER REVENUES 55.25 307046 3/6/2008 100797 HAWKINS INC. 1,985.76 TONKAZORB 00005241 180829 1158123 5915.6586 WATER TREATMENT SUPPLIES WATER TREATMENT 1,985.76 307047 3/612008 102190 HAYNES, PATRICIA 221.00 ART WORK SOLD AT EAC 181070 022608 5101.4413 ART WORK SOLD ART CENTER REVENUES 221.00 307048 3/6/2008 106062 HAYNES, STEPHEN 10.00 SUPPLIES REIMBURSEMENT 181071 022908 5125.6564 CRAFT SUPPLIES MEDIA STUDIO 62.50 INSTRUCTOR 181071 022908 5125.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES MEDIA STUDIO 72.50 307049 3/6/2008 121601 HEARTLAND DISTRIBUTION LLC i 257.69 TIRES 00005073 180978 005555 1553.6583 TIRES & TUBES EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 257.69 I 307050 3/6/2008 100802 HENNEPIN COUNTY MEDICAL CENTER 296.00 EMT COURSE 180994 18789 1470.6104 CONFERENCES & SCHOOLS FIRE DEPT. GENERAL 296.00 307051 3/6/2008 100801 HENNEPIN COUNTY TREASURER 4,174.50 JAN 2008 181016 002283 1195.6225 BOARD & ROOM PRISONER LEGAL SERVICES 4,174.50 R55CKREG LOG20000 Check # Date 307052 316/2008 307053 31612008 307054 3/612008 307055 3/6/2008 307056 . 3/6/2008 307057 3/6/2008 307058 3/6/2008 307059 3/6/2008 307060 3/6/2008 3/5/2008 9:03:13 Page- 11 Business Unit TRAFFIC SIGNALS PSTF RANGE FIRE DEPT. GENERAL FIRE DEPT. GENERAL ADMINISTRATION CENT SERV GEN - MIS EDINBOROUGH PARK EDINBOROUGH PARK EDINBOROUGH PARK ART CENTER REVENUES EDINBOROUGH PARK 1,647.00 180742 CITY OF EDINA 5862.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER VERNON SELLING Council Check Register 180743 444476 5822.5514 2/29/2008 -3/6/2008 868.05 Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description 197.50 101717 HENNEPIN COUNTY TREASURER 445131 5862.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER 1,423.53 COUNTDOWN TIMERS 00005336 180830 WORK00144 1330.6215 EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE 1,423.53 101717 HENNEPIN COUNTY TREASURER 210.00 HAZMAT LICENSE FEE 181096 11910 7412.6215 EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE 210.00 106371 HENNEPIN FACULTY ASSOCIATES 2,333.08 MEDICAL DIRECTOR SERVICES 180803 030608 1470.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 2,333.08 - 103838 HENNEPIN TECHNICAL COLLEGE 900.00 EMT REFRESHER COURSE (4) 180995 00145688 1470.6104 CONFERENCES & SCHOOLS 900.00 116680 HEWLETT - PACKARD COMPANY 619.83 LCDS 00004325 180831 43674151 1120.6710 EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT 6,084.35 HP PROLIANT DL380 G5 00004333 180832 43799646 1554.6710 EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT 6,704.18 103753 HILLYARD INC - MINNEAPOLIS 109.50 VACUUM BAGS 181017 2406018 5620.6511 CLEANING SUPPLIES 269.56 SOAP, TOWELS 00002292 181018 2410294 5620.6511 CLEANING SUPPLIES 343.48 AUTO FAUCET 00002291 181019 2410295 5620.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES 722.54 118463 HIPP, LILLIAN 45.50 ART WORK SOLD AT EAC 181072 022908 5101.4413 ART WORK SOLD 45.50 100805 HIRSHFIELD'S 155.87 PAINT 00002287 181020 026246390 5620.6532 PAINT 155.87 104375 HOHENSTEINS INC. 3/5/2008 9:03:13 Page- 11 Business Unit TRAFFIC SIGNALS PSTF RANGE FIRE DEPT. GENERAL FIRE DEPT. GENERAL ADMINISTRATION CENT SERV GEN - MIS EDINBOROUGH PARK EDINBOROUGH PARK EDINBOROUGH PARK ART CENTER REVENUES EDINBOROUGH PARK 1,647.00 180742 444473 5862.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER VERNON SELLING 98.00 180743 444476 5822.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER 50TH ST SELLING 868.05 181114 445052 5842.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER YORK SELLING 197.50 181115 445131 5862.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER VERNON SELLING 2,810.55 R55CKREG LOG20000 CITY OF EDINA 3/5/2008 9:03:13 Council Check Register Page- 12 2/29/2008 —3/6/2008 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit 307061 3/6/2008 105461 HOLL, SHELLEY 204.00 MEDIA INSTRUCTOR 181073 022908 5125.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES MEDIA STUDIO 204.00 307062 316/2008 100808 HORWATH, THOMAS 324.21 MILEAGE REIMBURSEMENT 180996 022608 1644.6107 MILEAGE OR ALLOWANCE TREES & MAINTENANCE 324.21 307063 3/6/2008 101426 HUGHES, GORDON 324.21 MILEAGE REIMBURSEMENT 181139 030308 1120.6107 MILEAGE OR ALLOWANCE ADMINISTRATION 324.21 307064 3/612008 121161 IDEARC MEDIA CORP 44.00 PHONE LISTING 180833 390012962302 5841.6188 TELEPHONE YORK OCCUPANCY 44.00 307065 3/6/2008 101714 IDENTISYS INC. 5,023.69 SOFTWARE 00004083 181097 36396 5310.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES POOL ADMINISTRATION 5,023.69 307066 316/2008 101183 INSPECTRON INC. 2,007.50 JAN INSPECTIONS 181098 022008 1495.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES INSPECTIONS 2,007.50 307067 316/2008 104157 INTERNATIONAL CODE COUNCIL INC 92.75 CODE BOOK 180925 0959512 -IN 1495.6405 BOOKS & PAMPHLETS INSPECTIONS 92.75 307068 316/2008 103193 INTOXIMETERS INC. 103.50 MOUTHPIECES 181021 241962 1400.6510 FIRST AID SUPPLIES POLICE DEPT. GENERAL 103.50 307069 3/6/2008 101861 J.H. LARSON COMPANY 382.70 PARTS FOR BATTERY CHARGERS 00005334 180926 4154936 -01 1400.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES POLICE DEPT. GENERAL 196.85 ELECTRICAL SUPPLIES 00001900 180927 4145408 -01 1301.6556 TOOLS GENERAL MAINTENANCE 205.41 ELECTRICAL SUPPLIES 00001900 180927 4145408 -01 5422.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES MAINT OF COURSE & GROUNDS 784.96 307070 3/6/2008 101400 JAMES, WILLIAM F 100.00 POLICE SERVICE 180802 030808 1419.6102 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES RESERVE PROGRAM 100.00 R55CKREG LOG20000 CITY OF EDINA 3/5/2008 9:03:13 Council Check Register Page - 13 2/29/2008 -31612008 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit 307071 316/2008 121075 JIMMY S JOHNNYS INC. 529.39 HOLDING TANK SERVICE 180997 20410 1470.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES FIRE DEPT. GENERAL 529.39 307072 3/6/2008 100741 JJ TAYLOR DIST. OF MINN 6,400.45 180744 1143297 5862.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER VERNON SELLING 1,835.62 181116 1143337 5862.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER VERNON SELLING 829.65 181117 1143338 5822.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER 50TH ST SELLING 9,065.72 307075 316/2008 100835 JOHNSON BROTHERS LIQUOR CO. 39.62 180745 1398471 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 6,037.96 180746 1398472 5862.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR VERNON SELLING 4,101.64 180747 1398473 5862.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR VERNON SELLING 1,161.22 180748 1398470 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 1,985.05 180749 1398474 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 384.42 180750 1398458 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING 449.32 180751 1398456 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING 1,835.22 180752 1398459 5822.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR 50TH ST SELLING 726.87 180753 1398457 5822.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR 50TH ST SELLING 1,12 180754 1392500 5842.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR YORK SELLING 245.00 180755 1398678 5842.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR YORK SELLING 1.12 180756 1398903 5822.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR 50TH ST SELLING ; 7.65- 180757 369819 5822.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR 50TH ST SELLING 95.11- 180758 369004 5862.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR VERNON SELLING 9.08- 180759 367535 5862.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR VERNON SELLING 38.32- 180760 368663 5842.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR YORK SELLING 8.50- 180761 369820 5842.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR YORK SELLING 6.08- 180762 369998 5842.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR YORK SELLING 11.61- 180763 369821 5842.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR YORK SELLING 22.91- 180764 366934 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 6.20- 180765 368660 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 6.00- 180766 368662 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 8.32- 180767 368798 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 12.40- 180768 368799 5842.5613 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 16.67- 180769 368868 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 31.37 180951 1401720 5842.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX YORK SELLING 936.34 180952 1401721 5842.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR YORK SELLING 66.22 180953 1401723 5842.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX YORK SELLING 250.08 180954 1401718 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 1,044.71 180955 1401722 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 1,488.12 180956 1401727 5862.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR VERNON SELLING R55CKREG LOG20000 CITY OF EDINA 3/5/2008 9:03:13 Council Check Register Page - 14 2/2912008 -316/2008 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit 195.24 180957 1401724 5862.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR VERNON SELLING 986.43 180958 1401728 5862.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR VERNON SELLING 425.40 181118 1401711 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING 111.36 181119 1401710 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING 324.82 181120 1401709 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING 62.74 181121 1401713 5822.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX 50TH ST SELLING 928.94 181122 1401712 5822.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR 50TH ST SELLING 1.12 181123 1399110 5862.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR VERNON SELLING 1.68 181124 1401715 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 2,318.51 181125 1401717 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 3,290.63 181126 1401719 5842.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR YORK SELLING 29,183.42 307076 316/2008 102719 JOHNSON, PHILLIP 11.17 MICROPHONE RENTAL 181099 022208 5125.6564 CRAFT SUPPLIES MEDIA STUDIO 40.71 FILM HOLDERS FOR SCANNER 181099 022208 5125.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES MEDIA STUDIO 94.47 KEYBOARD, MOUSE PAD, ARMREST 181099 022208 5125.6513 OFFICE SUPPLIES MEDIA STUDIO 146.35 307077 3/6/2008 102341 JOHNSON, RICHARD W. 792.00 MEDIA INSTRUCTOR 181074 022808 5125.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES MEDIA STUDIO 792.00 307078 3/6/2008 102603 JONAS, LENORE 124.99 REIMBURSE FOR VENDING ITEMS 181075 022908 5110.6564 CRAFT SUPPLIES ART CENTER ADMINISTRATION 124.99 307079 31612008 122239 KANDIKO, GEORGIA 75.00 INSTRUCTOR AC 181076 022908 5110.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES ART CENTER ADMINISTRATION 75.00 307080 316/2008 122232 KARTOL, RASHAWN 172.00 CLASS REFUND 181100 021308 5101.4607 CLASS REGISTRATION ART CENTER REVENUES 172.00 307081 3/612008 101340 KOCHENASH, RICK 300.00 INSTRUCTOR AC 181077 022908 5110.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES ART CENTER ADMINISTRATION 300.00 307082 3/612008 122203 KOKTAVY, JAMES J 1,400.00 REFUND - APPLICATION FEES 180834 022608 1140.4361 PLANNING FEES PLANNING 1,400.00 3/5/2008 9:03:13 Page- 15 Business Unit EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN ART CENTER ADMINISTRATION EMPLOYEE PROGRAMS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 445.00 WYGANT SERVICE 181025 50931 CITY OF EDINA SERVICE CONTRACTS EQUIPMENT R55CKREG LOG20000 445.00 307088 316/2008 122204 LUTHER BROOKDALE CHEVROLET Council Check Reglsler 28.75 2129/2008 --3/6/2008 223716CVW Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description 307083 3/612008 100845 KREMER SPRING & ALIGNMENT INC. 100864 MAC QUEEN EQUIP INC. 2,306.90 EQUIPMENT REPAIRS 00005430 181022 INV0027001 1553.6180 CONTRACTED REPAIRS 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS 313.04 ALIGNMENT 00005429 181023 INV0027002 1553.6180 CONTRACTED REPAIRS 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS 2,619.94 591.03 307084 31612008 122243 KRUSE, MELISSA 100868 MARK VII SALES 74.00 INSTRUCTOR AC 181087 022908 5110.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 5862.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER 74.00 699.90 180771 294092 307085 3/6/2008 VERNON SELLING 100605 LANDS' END BUSINESS OUTFITTERS 180772 293809 5862.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER 128.55 LOGO CLOTHING 181151 06067004 1513.6203 UNIFORM ALLOWANCE 5822.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER 128.55 1,768.80 180899 294557 307086 316/2008 YORK SELLING 100852 LAWSON PRODUCTS INC. 180900 294558 5842.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER 351.78 BITS, HOLESAWS, FITTINGS 00005323 181024 6563477 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS 351.78 307087 316/2008 106301 LOFFLER COMPANIES INC. 3/5/2008 9:03:13 Page- 15 Business Unit EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN ART CENTER ADMINISTRATION EMPLOYEE PROGRAMS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 445.00 WYGANT SERVICE 181025 50931 1400.6230 SERVICE CONTRACTS EQUIPMENT POLICE DEPT. GENERAL 445.00 307088 316/2008 122204 LUTHER BROOKDALE CHEVROLET 28.75 OIL PRESSURE SWITCH 00005076 180835 223716CVW 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 28.75 307089 3/612008 100864 MAC QUEEN EQUIP INC. 138.87 CLEVIS ROD, CYLINDER PIN 00005341 180928 2081629 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 452.16 LEVER ASSEMBLY, SPRING BASE 00005070 181026 2081713 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 591.03 307090 31612008 100868 MARK VII SALES 800.00 180770 294093 5862.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER VERNON SELLING, 699.90 180771 294092 5862.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER VERNON SELLING 1,520.74 180772 293809 5862.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER VERNON SELLING 538.00 180773 293603 5822.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER 50TH ST SELLING 1,768.80 180899 294557 5842.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER YORK SELLING 59.85 180900 294558 5842.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER YORK SELLING 307091 316/2008 101146 MATRIX TELECOM INC. 250.99 180998 606642709 1550.6188 TELEPHONE CENTRAL SERVICES GENERAL CITY OF EDINA 3/5/2008 9:03:13 R55CKREG LOG20000 Council Check Register Page - 16 2/29/2008 -3/6/2008 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit 250.99 307092 3/6/2008 100875 MCCAREN DESIGNS INC. 1,742.34 PLANTS 00002283 181027 42585 5620.6620 TREES, FLOWERS, SHRUBS EDINBOROUGH PARK 1,742.34 307093 3/6/2008 103287 MCPA 60.00 MEMBERSHIP - KRIS EIDEM 181028 022208 1400.6105 DUES & SUBSCRIPTIONS POLICE DEPT. GENERAL 60.00 307094 3/6/2008 101483 MENARDS 59.94 REFLECTIVE NUMBERS, CASTERS 00006164 180836 10614 5422.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES MAINT OF COURSE & GROUNDS 70.12 LUMBER, PAINT SUPPLIES 00005329 180979 13309 5820.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES 50TH STREET GENERAL 28.36 LUMBER, NAIL PULLER, BLADES 00005328 180980 13308 1301.6556 TOOLS GENERAL MAINTENANCE 83.16 LUMBER, NAIL PULLER, BLADES 00005328 180980 13308 1344.6577 LUMBER RETAINING WALL MAINTENANCE 241.58 307095 3/6/2008 101987 MENARDS 45.45 PAINT 00002063 180837 70425 5630.6532 PAINT CENTENNIAL LAKES 45.45 307096 316/2008 100882 MERIT SUPPLY 1,086.00 CLEANING SUPPLIES 00001853 180981 73530 1646.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES BUILDING MAINTENANCE 1,086.00 307097 3/612008 102507 METRO VOLLEYBALL OFFICIALS 51.00 OFFICIATING FEES 181140 030308 4077.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES EDINA ATHLETIC ASSOCIATION 51.00 307098 316/2008 104650 MICRO CENTER 15.97 CD CASES 00004338 180838 1695750 1554.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES CENT SERV GEN - MIS 42.59 WIRELESS MOUSE 00004338 180838 1695750 1260.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES ENGINEERING GENERAL 58.56 307099 3/6/2008 116103 MID -WEST INDUSTRIAL SERVICE CO 20.00 SHEARING FEE 00005166 180839 37786 1553.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 20.00 307100 3/6/2008 100692 MIDWEST COCA -COLA BOTTLING CO. 411.10 180901 0158560526 5842.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX YORK SELLING 371.10 180902 0158560413 5862.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX VERNON SELLING 782.20 R55CKREG LOG20000 CITY OF EDINA Council Check Register 2129/2008 -- 3/6/2008 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description 307101 3/6/2008 121053 MILLER, SUSAN 222.29 PETTY CASH 181029 022908 5620.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES COST OF GOODS SOLD DUES & SUBSCRIPTIONS LICENSES & PERMITS 3 /5Ptu.,., 9:03:13 Page - 17 Business Unit EDINBOROUGH PARK ART SUPPLY GIFT GALLERY SHOP ASSESSING COLLECTION SYSTEMS PROFESSIONAL SVC - OTHER ARENA BLDG /GROUNDS CONFERENCES & SCHOOLS PLANNING DUES & SUBSCRIPTIONS POLICE DEPT. GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SVC - OTHER ARENA BLDG /GROUNDS REPAIR PARTS REPAIR PARTS DATA PROCESSING EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN POLICE DEPT. GENERAL 222.29 307102 3/6/2008 102014 MINNESOTA CLAY USA 384.00 STONEWARE 00009302 181101 51713 5120.5510 384.00 307103 3/6/2008 115975 MINNESOTA LEGAL REGISTER 85.00 2008 MN LEGAL REGISTER 180840 00353 1190.6105 85.00 307104 3/6/2008 101537 MINNESOTA POLLUTION CONTROL AG 23.00 CERTIFICATION FEE - S. HAMER 181141 022708 5923.6260 23.00 307105 3/6/2008 122228 MINNESOTA STATE HIGH SCHOOL LE 601.19 TAXES- SECTION GAMES 2AA & 6AA 180999 022708 5511.6136 601.19 307106 3/6/2008 122249 MN APA 40.00 CONFERENCE FEE 181142 030308 1140.6104 40.00 307107 3/6/2008 102487 MN /SCIA 18.00 MEMBERSHIP - MIKE LUTZ 181030 M08 -84 1400.6105 18.00 307108 3/6/2008 122176 MORK, KATIE 87.00 LESSON REFUND 181143 030308 5511.6136 87.00 307109 3/6/2008 121491 MORRIE'S PARTS & SERVICE GROUP 169.91 PADS 00005173 180982 452584F6W 1553.6530 69.90 HINGE ASSEMBLIES 00005171 180983 452496F6W 1553.6530 239.81 307110 3/6/2008 100912 MOTOROLA INC. 2,139.43 SERVICE CONTRACT 181031 78080552 1400.6160 2,139.43 COST OF GOODS SOLD DUES & SUBSCRIPTIONS LICENSES & PERMITS 3 /5Ptu.,., 9:03:13 Page - 17 Business Unit EDINBOROUGH PARK ART SUPPLY GIFT GALLERY SHOP ASSESSING COLLECTION SYSTEMS PROFESSIONAL SVC - OTHER ARENA BLDG /GROUNDS CONFERENCES & SCHOOLS PLANNING DUES & SUBSCRIPTIONS POLICE DEPT. GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SVC - OTHER ARENA BLDG /GROUNDS REPAIR PARTS REPAIR PARTS DATA PROCESSING EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN POLICE DEPT. GENERAL R55CKREG LOG20000 CITY OF EDINA 3/512008 9:03:13 Council Check Register Page - 18 2/29/2008 -- 3/6/2008 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit 307111 3/6/2008 100906 MTI DISTRIBUTING INC. 398.11 WHEEL, BLADES 00006170 180841 607505 -00 5422.6530 REPAIR PARTS MAINT OF COURSE & GROUNDS 398.11 - 307112 316/2008 103191 NATIONAL ARBOR DAY FOUNDATION 129.00 TREE SEMINAR 00005119 180929 5403 1644.6104 CONFERENCES & SCHOOLS TREES & MAINTENANCE 129.00 307113 316/2008 101359 NIBBE, MICHAEL 62.24 DISPATCH CARTRIDGES 181032 022508 1400.6160 DATA PROCESSING POLICE DEPT. GENERAL 62.24 307114 3/612008 101958 NICOL, JANET 367.50 MEDIA INSTRUCTOR 181078 022908 5125.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES MEDIA STUDIO 367.50 307115 3/6/2008 100724 NISSEN, DICK 100.00 POLICE SERVICE 180801 030808 1419.6102 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES RESERVE PROGRAM 100.00 307116 31612008 117102 NORTH AMERICAN SALT CO. 10,144.64 DE -ICER SALT 00005404 180930 70160707 1318.6525 SALT SNOW & ICE REMOVAL 10,144.64 307117 316/2008 115616 NORTH IMAGE APPAREL INC. 27.00 UNIFORM PURCHASE 00005413 180984 NIA3108C 1646.6201 LAUNDRY BUILDING MAINTENANCE 27.00 307118 3/6/2008 102652 NORTHLAND CHEMICAL CORP. 325.53 CHEMICALS 00001846 180842 5010455 1646.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES BUILDING MAINTENANCE 325.53 307119 31612008 100933 NORTHWEST GRAPHIC SUPPLY 110.85 LANAQUARELLE WIC 00009308 181102 35531200 5120.5510 COST OF GOODS SOLD ART SUPPLY GIFT GALLERY SHOP 110.85 307120 3/6/2008 121551 NYNGAR, BATBAATAR 1,100.00 CLEANING / MAINTENANCE 181079. 022908 5111.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES ART CENTER BLDG/MAINT 1,100.00 307121 316/2008 105575 NYSTROM PUBLISHING CO. INC 1,069.26 AQUATIC CENTER BROCHURE 180843 22197 5310.6575 PRINTING POOL ADMINISTRAT'- R55CKREG LOG20000 CITY OF EDINA 3/5/20ud 9:03:13 Council Check Register Page - 19 2/29/2008 -3/612008 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit 1,069.26 307122 3/612008 116114 OCE 163.53 OCE MAINTENANCE 180844 986287795 1495.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES INSPECTIONS 163.53 307123 3/6/2008 105901 OERTEL ARCHITECTS 19,876.20 CONSULTING SERVICES 180796 013108 4402.6710 EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT PW BUILDING 19,876.20 307124 3/6/2008 102712 OFFICE OF ENTERPRISE TECHNOLOG 414.25 JAN 2008 180845 W08010603 5420.6188 TELEPHONE CLUB HOUSE 19.60 ARNESON 180846 W08010596 1646.6188 TELEPHONE BUILDING MAINTENANCE 39.20 GREENHOUSE 180846 W08010596 1646.6188 TELEPHONE BUILDING MAINTENANCE 78.40 180846 W08010596 5821.6188 TELEPHONE 50TH ST OCCUPANCY 78.70 180846 W08010596 5311.6188 TELEPHONE POOL OPERATION 98.00 CARD ACCESS -PARKS 180846 W08010596 1646.6188 TELEPHONE BUILDING MAINTENANCE 98.00 180846 W08010596 1550.6188 TELEPHONE CENTRAL SERVICES GENERAL 98.11 180846 W08010596 5861.6188 TELEPHONE VERNON OCCUPANCY 98.54 HISTORICAL 180846 W08010596 1646.6188 TELEPHONE BUILDING MAINTENANCE 117.60 180846 W08010596 1481.6188 TELEPHONE YORK FIRE STATION 125.24 180846 W08010596 5210.6188 TELEPHONE GOLF DOME PROGRAM 128.98 180846 W08010596 5111.6188 TELEPHONE ART CENTER BLDG/MAINT 157.04 180846 W08010596 5841.6188 TELEPHONE YORK OCCUPANCY 198.18 180846 W08010596 1622.6188 TELEPHONE SKATING & HOCKEY 537.79 180846 W08010596 5610.6188 TELEPHONE ED ADMINISTRATION 2,287.63 307125 3/6/2008 100936 OLSEN COMPANIES 279.24 RATCHETS, TUBE CUTTER 00005317 180847 489362 5923.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES COLLECTION SYSTEMS 279.24 307126 3/612008 120860 OLSSON ASSOCIATES 1,750.00 PATHWAY ENGINEERING SERVICES 180848 109897 47051.6710 EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT GARDEN PARK PATHWAY 1,750.00 307127 3/6/2008 101470 ORVIS, JOAN 20,516.75 SKATING INSTRUCTOR 180849 022508 5510.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES ARENA ADMINISTRATION 20,516.75 307128 3/6/2008 102440 PASS, GRACE 468.00 INSTRUCTOR AC 181080 022908 5110.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES ART CENTER ADMINISTRATION R55CKREG LOG20000 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation YORK SELLING 180904 603.00 POTTERY MAINTENANCE COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING 1,071.00 8174151 -CM 307129 3/6/2008 YORK SELLING 100347 PAUSTIS & SONS 8176597 -IN 5862.5513 1,454.16 VERNON SELLING 180960 8176594 -IN 6.50 - COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING 180961 60.80- 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 1,299.11 3379299 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 689.84 180781 3379156 5842.5513 121.25- YORK SELLING 180782 3379155 3,254.56 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 307130 3/612008 2576728 100945 PEPSI -COLA COMPANY COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR YORK SELLING 168.00 2576732 5862.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR 168.00 181128 307131 3/612008 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 100743 PHILLIPS WINE & SPIRITS 181129 2576729 946.31 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 181130 53.12 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING 869.42 2576726 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 832.47 181132 2576725 5822.5512 98.11 50TH ST SELLING 33.06- 10.03- 619.72- 57.44- 446.10 216.86 1,381.63 2,035.26 847.40 R77 77 CITY OF EDINA Council Check Register 2/29/2008 -316/2008 PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description 181080 022908 5112.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 3/5/2008 9:03:13 Page - 20 Business Unit ART CENTER POTTERY 180903 8176588 -IN 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 180904 8176119 -CM 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING 180905 8174151 -CM 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 180959 8176597 -IN 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 180960 8176594 -IN 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING 180961 8176134 -CM 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 181033 00443070 5630.5510 COST OF GOODS SOLD CENTENNIAL LAKES 180774 2574142 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 180775 2574141 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 180776 2574134 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING 180777 2574132 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING 180778 2574133 5822.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR 50TH ST SELLING 180779 3379352 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 180780 3379299 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 180781 3379156 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 180782 3379155 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 180962 2576728 5842.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR YORK SELLING 180963 2576732 5862.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR VERNON SELLING 181128 2576727 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 181129 2576729 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 181130 2576724 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING 181131 2576726 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING 181132 2576725 5822.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR 50TH ST SELLING 307132 316/2008 102748 PIRTEK PLYMOUTH 134.32 PLUG KIT 00006164 180850 S1168022.001 5422.6530 134.32 307133 3/6/2008 101110 POLLY NORMAN PHOTOGRAPHY 180.00 PHOTOS 180851 021708 2210.6408 180.00 REPAIR PARTS MAINT OF COURSE & GROUNDS PHOTOGRAPHIC SUPPLIES COMMUNICATIONS R55CKREG LOG20000 180908 975759 -00 5842.5512 CITY OF L-NA YORK SELLING 30.00 180909 975123 -00 5842.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER Council Check Register 909.94 180910 975122 -00 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 2/29/2008 -316/2008 180911 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description 307134 3/6/2008 YORK SELLING 121436 POWER/MATION 180913 975125 -00 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING 343.36 RELAY OUTPUT ACCESS CARDS 00001999 180852 2035671 -00 5913.6530 REPAIR PARTS 50TH ST SELLING 29.15 343.36 975546 -00 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING 307135 3/6/2008 975994 -00 106152 POWERPLAN COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 512.04 180966 975534 -00 289.01 CABLE, SPRING 00005173 181034 P29931 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS 975884 -00 5862.5513 289.01 VERNON SELLING 1,393.90 180968 975760 -00 307136 3/6/2008 VERNON SELLING 100968 PRIOR WINE COMPANY 181127 974400 -00 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 566.85 180906 13618 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 307140 3/6/2008 101965 QWEST 10.00- 180907 745579 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 112.46 952 920 -8166 180853 517.75 1550.6188 180964 13614 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 181036 9246 -2108 1,074.60 TELEPHONE POLICE DEPT. GENERAL 307137 31612008 106341 PRIORITY DISPATCH 3/5/2008 9:03:13 Page- 21 Business Unit DISTRIBUTION EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN YORK SELLING YORK SELLING 50TH ST SELLING 78.00 MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT 181035 34865 1400.6230 SERVICE CONTRACTS EQUIPMENT POLICE DEPT. GENERAL 78.00 307138 3/6/2008 100969 PROGRESSIVE CONSULTING ENGINEE 14,092.61 WELLHOUSE #20 180792 07037.03 05480.1705.24 CONSULTING CONSTR MGMT WM -480 NEW WELL #20 PHASE 2 14,092.61 307139 3/6/2008 100971 QUALITY WINE 2,123.77 180908 975759 -00 5842.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR YORK SELLING 30.00 180909 975123 -00 5842.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER YORK SELLING 909.94 180910 975122 -00 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 634.90 180911 975124 -00 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 1,222.11 180912 975533 -00 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 2,587.60 180913 975125 -00 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING 457.09 180914 975761 -00 5822.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR 50TH ST SELLING 29.15 180915 975546 -00 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING 2,670.36 180965 975994 -00 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 512.04 180966 975534 -00 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 186.30 180967 975884 -00 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 1,393.90 180968 975760 -00 5862.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR VERNON SELLING 125.31- 181127 974400 -00 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 12,631.85 307140 3/6/2008 101965 QWEST 112.46 952 920 -8166 180853 8166 -2108 1550.6188 TELEPHONE CENTRAL SERVICES GENERAL 39.50 952 922 -9246 181036 9246 -2108 1400.6188 TELEPHONE POLICE DEPT. GENERAL R55CKREG LOG20000 ART CENTER BLD,G/MAINT 188.53 CITY OF EDINA PROFESSIONAL SERVICES EDINA ATHLETIC ASSOCIATION PROFESSIONAL SVC - OTHER 307142 Council Check Register 100974 RAYMOND HAEG PLUMBING 2/29/2008 --3/6/2008 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description 78.35 952 929 -9549 181146 9549 -2/08 5841.6188 TELEPHONE 122.48 952 927 -8861 181147 8861 -2/08 1550.6188 TELEPHONE 54.97 952 929 -0297 181148 0297 -2108 4090.6188 TELEPHONE 407.76 3/6 /2008 102327 RECREATION SPORTS OFFICIALS AS 307141 3/6/2008 100466 R & R PRODUCTS INC. 936.00 OFFICIATING FEES 188.53 BEARINGS, GRASS SHIELD 00006165 180854 CD 1060523 5422.6530 REPAIR PARTS 3/5/2008 9:03:13 Page- 22 Business Unit YORK OCCUPANCY CENTRAL SERVICES GENERAL STREET REVOLVING MAINT OF COURSE & GROUNDS REPAIR PARTS ART CENTER BLD,G/MAINT 188.53 ART CENTER BLDG/MAINT PROFESSIONAL SERVICES EDINA ATHLETIC ASSOCIATION PROFESSIONAL SVC - OTHER 307142 3/6/2008 100974 RAYMOND HAEG PLUMBING - 122.00 WATER PIPE REPAIRS 181103 021508 5111.6530 632.50 WATER PIPE REPAIRS 181103 021508 5111.6180 754.50 307143 3/6 /2008 102327 RECREATION SPORTS OFFICIALS AS 936.00 OFFICIATING FEES 181104 022708 4077.6103 936.00 307144 3/6/2008 122170 REGION 3AA 7,816.00 % 6AA & 2AA SEMI - FINALS 180855 022508 5511.6136 7,816.00 307145 3/6 /2008 122253 REICHOW -LUTZ, LIZ 262.00 SPRAY NOZZLE COVER 00005434 181144 245123 1314.6180 262.00 307146 316/2008 101232 SALUD AMERICA INC. 614.00 180969 EMLS020708 5862.5513 614.00 307147 316/2008 100990 SCHARBER & SONS 58.58 SWITCH 00005351 180985 392874 1553.6530 58.58 307148 3/6/2008 105442 SCHERER BROS. LUMBER CO. 92.52 LUMBER, NAILS 00001847 180856 40598664 1646.6577 92.52 307149 . 3/612008 101577 SCHMOLL, RUTH _ 335.19 PETTY CASH 181000 022508 1470.6406 335.19 3/5/2008 9:03:13 Page- 22 Business Unit YORK OCCUPANCY CENTRAL SERVICES GENERAL STREET REVOLVING MAINT OF COURSE & GROUNDS REPAIR PARTS ART CENTER BLD,G/MAINT CONTRACTED REPAIRS ART CENTER BLDG/MAINT PROFESSIONAL SERVICES EDINA ATHLETIC ASSOCIATION PROFESSIONAL SVC - OTHER ARENA BLDG /GROUNDS CONTRACTED REPAIRS STREET RENOVATION COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN LUMBER BUILDING MAINTENANCE GENERAL SUPPLIES FIRE DEPT. GENERAL R55CKREG LOG20000 Check # Date 307150 3/6/2008 CITY Or _ .AA Council Check Register 2129/2008 --3/6/2008 Amount Supplier/ Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No 100992 SEARS COMMERCIAL ONE ACCOUNT 188.21 CAMERA 00005092 181037 T245846 4090.6406 188.21 307151 3/6/2008 100995 SEH 122097 SORENSON, LYLE 2,739.18 CONSTRUCTION PHASE SERVICES 180857 0173871 4,357.00 CONSTRUCTION PHASE SERVICES 180858 0173872 4,308.25 BID DOCUMENT PREP & ASSISTANCE 180859 0173870 5,744.33 BID DOCUMENT PREP & ASSISTANCE 180859 0173870 18,669.08 BID DOCUMENT PREP & ASSISTANCE 180859 0173870 18,669.08 BID DOCUMENT PREP & ASSISTANCE 180859 0173870 30,875.78 BID DOCUMENT PREP & ASSISTANCE 180859 0173870 30,875.78 BID DOCUMENT PREP & ASSISTANCE 180859 0173870 34,465.98 BID DOCUMENT PREP & ASSISTANCE 180859 0173870 176.37 COUNTRY CLUB CONSTRUCTION 181152 0172380 764.26 COUNTRY CLUB CONSTRUCTION 181152 0172380 764.26 COUNTRY CLUB CONSTRUCTION 181152 0172380 2,087.03 COUNTRY CLUB CONSTRUCTION 181152 0172380 2,087.04 COUNTRY CLUB CONSTRUCTION 181152 0172380 156,583.42 S1806239.001 1551.6406 307152 316/2008 101380 SHAUGHNESSY, SANDRA 119.76 SUPPLIES REIMBURSEMENT 181081 022908 594.00 INSTRUCTOR AC 181081 022908 1,684.00 POTTERY MAINTENANCE 181081 022908 2,397.76 180986 S162497 1553.6530 01337.1705.21 01338.1705.21 08043.1705.24 08049.1705.24 03413.1705.24 04297.1705.24 01213.1705.24 01214.1705.24 05436.1705.24 08043.1705.20 03413.1705.20 04297.1705.20 01214.1705.20 01213.1705.20 5110.6564 5110.6103 5112.6103 307153 3/6/2008 122097 SORENSON, LYLE 365.00 INSTRUCTOR AC 181082 022908 5110.6103 365.00 307154 3/6/2008 110977 SOW, ADAMA 868.00 CLEANING 181083 022908 5111.6103 879.00 INSTRUCTOR AC 181083 022908 5110.6103 1,747.00 307155 3/6/2008 101004 SPS COMPANIES 9.57 VALVE STOP, FITTINGS 00005318 180931 S1806239.001 1551.6406 9.57 307156 3/6/2008 103277 ST. JOSEPH EQUIPMENT CO INC 174.00 SPRING, DAMPER 00005074 180986 S162497 1553.6530 Subledger Account Description GENERAL SUPPLIES CONSULTING INSPECTION CONSULTING INSPECTION CONSULTING CONSTR MGMT CONSULTING CONSTR MGMT CONSULTING CONSTR MGMT CONSULTING CONSTR MGMT CONSULTING CONSTR MGMT CONSULTING CONSTR MGMT CONSULTING CONSTR MGMT CONSULTING DESIGN CONSULTING DESIGN CONSULTING DESIGN CONSULTING DESIGN CONSULTING DESIGN CRAFT SUPPLIES PROFESSIONAL SERVICES PROFESSIONAL SERVICES PROFESSIONAL SERVICES PROFESSIONAL SERVICES PROFESSIONAL SERVICES GENERAL SUPPLIES REPAIR PARTS 3/5/x- _ - 9:03:13 Page - 23 Business Unit STREET REVOLVING BA -337 WOODHILL NEIGHBORHOOD BA -338 SOUTHDALE 1 ST ADDITION L -43 COUNTRY CLUB L -49 PHASE 1 ARDEN, BRUCE, CASCO SS PHASE 1 ARDEN, BRUCE, CASCO ST PHASE 1 ARDEN, BRUCE, CASCO PHASE 2 DREXEL, WOODDALE, EDIN PHASE 1 ARDEN, BRUCE, CASCO WM L43 COUNTRY CLUB PHASE 1 ARDEN, BRUCE, CASCO SS PHASE 1 ARDEN, BRUCE, CASCO ST PHASE 2 DREXEL, WOODDALE, EDIN PHASE 1 ARDEN, BRUCE, CASCO ART CENTER ADMINISTRATION ART CENTER ADMINISTRATION ART CENTER POTTERY ART CENTER ADMINISTRATION ART CENTER BLDG/MAINT ART CENTER ADMINISTRATION CITY HALL GENERAL EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN R55CKREG LOG20000 CITY OF EDINA 3/5/2008 9:03:13 Council Check Register Page - 24 2/2912008 - 3/6/2008 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit 174.00 307157 3/6/2008 101628 STATE OF MINNESOTA 55.00 SURVEYOR MAILING LIST 180932 022808 1495.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES INSPECTIONS 55.00 307158 3/6/2008 122241 STERNITZKE, KIMBERLEY 108.00 INSTRUCTOR AC 181084 022908 5110.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES ART CENTER ADMINISTRATION 108.00 307159 3/612008 106452 STONE, HOLLY 240.00 INSTRUCTOR AC 181085 022908 5110.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES ART CENTER ADMINISTRATION 240.00 307160 3/612008 120998 SURLY BREWING CO. 450.00 180916 189584 5822.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER 50TH ST SELLING 450.00 307161 3/612008 100794 SWANSON, HAROLD 100.00 POLICE SERVICE 180800 030808 1419.6102 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES RESERVE PROGRAM 100.00 307162 3/6/2008 120297 TADYCH, BRIAN 87.97 UNIFORM PURCHASE 180860 022508 1301.6201 LAUNDRY GENERAL MAINTENANCE 87.97 307163 3/6/2008 117686 TECHNAGRAPHICS 450.61 PRINT UTILITY BILL STUFFERS 180861 6790012 5910.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES GENERAL (BILLING) 450.61 307164 3/6/2008 101326 TERMINAL SUPPLY CO 349.48 MINI COILS, RECEPTACLES 00005169 180933 67405 -00 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 65.41 WHELEN STROBE TUBE 00005158 180934 65254 -01 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 414.89 I 307165 3/6/2008 101035 THORPE DISTRIBUTING COMPANY 32.00 180783 480180 5862.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX VERNON SELLING 3,234.10 180784 480179 5862.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER VERNON SELLING 5,181.95 181133 481171 5862.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER VERNON SELLING 124.50 181134 481170 5862.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX VERNON SELLING 8,572.55 R55CKREG LOG20000 162.50 CITY OF - _.,aA 3/5120ud 9:03:13 307171 3/612008 Council Check Register INTL INC Page - 25 580.80 2129/2008 - 3/6/2008 43223 1553.6530 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit 307166 3/6/2008 661.87 122205 TIFTON PHYSICAL SOIL TESTING L 307172 3/6/2008 470.00 SOIL TESTING 180862 L45 -08 5422.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES MAINT OF COURSE & GROUNDS 711.54 FLAGS, FAIRWAY MARKERS 470.00 SI12412 5422.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES 711.54 307167 316/2008 120700 TIGER OAK PUBLICATIONS INC. 307173 316/2008 102255 TWIN CITY OXYGEN CO 500.00 MAGAZINE ADVERTISING 180935 2008 -15189 5822.6122 ADVERTISING OTHER 50TH ST SELLING 764853 1470.6510 500.00 MAGAZINE ADVERTISING 180935 2008 -15189 5842.6122 ADVERTISING OTHER YORK SELLING 500.00 MAGAZINE ADVERTISING 180935 2008 -15189 5862.6122 ADVERTISING OTHER VERNON SELLING 1,500.00 431.25 PAYING AGENT 181105 2094543 5910.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 307168 316/2008 431.25 102742 TKDA ENGINEERS ARCHITECTS PLAN 181106 2094541 3101.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 8,273.73 WATERMAIN LINING PROJECT 180793 000200800625 05479.1705.20 CONSULTING DESIGN WM-479 M'SIDE H2OMAIN EXC /PREP 17,566.11 DREDGING PROJECT 180794 000200800603 04322.1705.24 CONSULTING CONSTR MGMT STS -322 STORMWATER DREDGING 2,704.06 LIFT STATION #22 180863 000200800616 10038.1705.20 CONSULTING DESIGN LS38 LS REHAB @ FRANCE AVE 689.52 LIFT STATION #21 180864 000200800615 10037.1705.20 CONSULTING DESIGN LS37 LS REHAB @ WALNUT DRIVE 29,233.42 307169 3/6/2008 116302 TRI -ANIM HEALTH SERVICES INC 809.14 AMBULANCE SUPPLIES 00003509 181001 MMH80425056 1470.6510 FIRST AID SUPPLIES FIRE DEPT. GENERAL 243.59 AMBULANCE SUPPLIES 00003509 181002 MMH80454472 1470.6510 FIRST AID SUPPLIES FIRE DEPT. GENERAL 1,052.73 307170 3/612008 101048 TRI COUNTY BEVERAGE & SUPPLY 162.50 181135 202751 5842.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER YORK SELLING EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN MAINT OF COURSE & GROUNDS FIRE DEPT. GENERAL GENERAL (BILLING) GENERAL DEBT SERVICE REVENUES 162.50 307171 3/612008 101403 TRUCK BODIES & EQUIP INTL INC 580.80 CYLINDER 00001894 180987 43223 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS 81.07 HOSE, FITTINGS, CLAMPS 00005062 181038 43229 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS 661.87 307172 3/6/2008 118190 TURFWERKS LLC 711.54 FLAGS, FAIRWAY MARKERS 00006133 180865 SI12412 5422.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES 711.54 307173 316/2008 102255 TWIN CITY OXYGEN CO 119.83 OXYGEN 00003649 181003 764853 1470.6510 FIRST AID SUPPLIES 119.83 307174 31612008 103048 U.S. BANK 431.25 PAYING AGENT 181105 2094543 5910.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 431.25 PAYING AGENT 181106 2094541 3101.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN MAINT OF COURSE & GROUNDS FIRE DEPT. GENERAL GENERAL (BILLING) GENERAL DEBT SERVICE REVENUES R55CKREG LOG20000 CITY OF EDINA 3/5/2008 9:03:13 Council Check Register Page - 26 2/29/2008 3/6/2008 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit 375.00 PAYING AGENT 181107 2094750 3301.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES PIR DS REVENUES 402.50 PAYING AGENT 181108 2093284 3101.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES GENERAL DEBT SERVICE REVENUES 402.50 PAYING AGENT 181109 2093880 3301.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES PIR DS REVENUES 431.25 PAYING AGENT 181110 2092044 5910.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES GENERAL (BILLING) 2,473.75 307175 3/6/2008 103248 ULLRICH, CINDY 86.92 SHOVEL, WATERING TOOLS 181039 022908 5620.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES EDINBOROUGH PARK 86.92 307176 3/6/2008 122221 UNITED RENTALS NORTHWEST INC. 4.57 SAFETY GLASSES 00005231 160988 71708503 -001 1301.6610 SAFETY EQUIPMENT GENERAL MAINTENANCE 83.95 UNIFORM PURCHASE 00005231 180988 71708503 -001 1301.6201 LAUNDRY GENERAL MAINTENANCE 664.81 HAMMER DRILL, ROTARY HAMMER00005231 180988 71708503 -001 1301.6556 TOOLS GENERAL MAINTENANCE 753.33 307177 3/612008 101055 UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA 300.00 PAVEMENT MGMT CLASS (2) 00005927 180866 1049409,1049410 1260.6104 CONFERENCES & SCHOOLS ENGINEERING GENERAL 300.00 307178 3/6/2008 100668 URS CORPORATION 3,999.50 COMP PLAN CONSULTING 180867 3235700 1140.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES PLANNING 3,999.50 307179 3/612008 103500 VALLEY PAVING INC. 5,231.53 FINAL PAYMENT 180936 030708 01230.1705.30 CONTRACTOR PAYMENTS A -230 LINCOLN DR M &O 8,940.53 FINAL PAYMENT 180936 030708 01231.1705.30 CONTRACTOR PAYMENTS A -231 W 49 1/2 ST M &O 8,940.53 FINAL PAYMENT 180936 030708 01232.1705.30 CONTRACTOR PAYMENTS A -232 W 51 ST ST M &O 10,593.76 FINAL PAYMENT 180936 030708 01233.1705.30 CONTRACTOR PAYMENTS A -233 HALIFAX M &O 16,859.67 FINAL PAYMENT 180936 030708 01234.1705.30 CONTRACTOR PAYMENTS A -234 50th STREET M &O 50,566.02 307180 31612008 103590 VALLEY -RICH CO. INC. 884.00 CONTRACT HOE 00005246 181145 13099 5932.6180 CONTRACTED REPAIRS GENERAL STORM SEWER 884.00 307181 3/612008 106308 VEITH, MICHELLE 500.00 AR &LE SPRING CATALOG 180868 801 1629.6575 PRINTING ADAPTIVE RECREATION 500.00 307182 316/2008 101063 VERSATILE VEHICLES INC. 64.65 SEAT COVERS 00006168 180869 35167 5423.6530 REPAIR PARTS GOLF CARS R55CKREG LOG20000 221794 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE CITY OF EuiNA 180786 3/5/2008 9:03:13 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 180787 36752 Council Check Register COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE Page - 27 180788 367535 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 212912008 -- 3/6/2008 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 189.48 BATTERY CABLES 00006166 180870 21408002 5423.6530 REPAIR PARTS GOLF CARS 254.13 307183 3/6/2008 102542 WALKER PARKING CONSULTANTS INC 5,130.00 2008 CERTIFICATION 180795 21347700002 1260.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES ENGINEERING GENERAL 5,130.00 307184 3/6/2008 101080 WALSH, WILLIAM 100.00 POLICE SERVICE 180799 030808 1419.6102 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES RESERVE PROGRAM 100.00 307185 316/2008 103266 WELSH COMPANIES LLC 696.50 MARCH 2008 MAINTENANCE 180871 030108 5841.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES YORK OCCUPANCY 696.50 307186 3/6/2008 122242 WILLIAMS, SYLVIA 162.00 INSTRUCTOR AC 181086 022908 5110.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES ART CENTER ADMINISTRATION 162.00 307187 3/612008 101033 WINE COMPANY, THE 1,942.95 180917 187629 -00 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 339.37 180970 187746-00 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 391.85 180971 187639 -00 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING 307188 3/6/2008 161312 WINE MERCHANTS 493.60 92.12 - 9.33- 307189 3/612008 101086 WORLD CLASS WINES INC 607.50 307190 3/6/2008 105740 WSB & ASSOCIATES INC. 5,748.50 70TH ST ROUNDABOUTS 5,748.50 180785 221794 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING 180786 36918 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 180787 36752 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 180788 367535 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 181136 222521 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING 180918 207704 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING 180972 207703 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 180973 207705 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 181153 11- 1128/08 01336.1705.24 CONSULTING CONSTR MGMT BA336 W70TH - FRANCE TO YORK R55CKREG LOG20000 Check # Date 307191 316/2008 307192 3/6/2008 Amount Supplier / Explanation 01338.1705.30 101726 XCEL ENERGY 58.66 51- 4420190 -3 10,167.00 51- 8625216 -2 8.52 51- 6050184 -2 8,431.34 51- 6644819 -9 2,037.76 51- 6223269 -1 32.27 51- 6892224 -5 8.52 51- 6541084 -2 619.03 51- 5005454 -3 1,245.35 51- 5107681 -4 5,815.33 51- 6955679 -8 59.02 51- 6692497 -0 1,535.42 51- 5547446 -1 111.46 514827232 -6 150.89 51- 4156445 -0 31,556.33 51 -4621797 -2 15,824.87 51- 5605640 -1 77,661.77 101091 ZIEGLER INC 37.20 NUTS, BOLTS 37.20 655,289.64 Grand Total PO # CITY OF EDINA Council Check Register 2/29/2008 —3/612008 Doc No Inv No Account No 180872 514420190 -3 180873 142898241 180937 143758436 180938 143771782 180939 143762363 180940 143776695 180941 143769076 180942 143732895 180943 143735721 181040 143985811 181041 143979640 181042 143951680 181043 143934335 181044 143916118 181045 143931898 181149 144038929 Subledger Account Description 1321.6185 LIGHT & POWER 01338.1705.30 CONTRACTOR PAYMENTS 4086.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 5620.6185 LIGHT & POWER 5210.6185 LIGHT & POWER 1330.6185 LIGHT & POWER 1646.6185 LIGHT & POWER 5913.6185 LIGHT & POWER 5111.6185 LIGHT & POWER 1551.6185 LIGHT & POWER 1460.6185 LIGHT & POWER 1628.6185 LIGHT & POWER 5311.6185 LIGHT & POWER 5932.6185 LIGHT & POWER 1321.6185 LIGHT & POWER 5913.6185 LIGHT & POWER 00005352 181046 PC001056577 1553.6530 Payment Instrument Totals Check Total 655,289.64 Total Payments 655,289.64 REPAIR PARTS 3/512008 9:03:13 Page- 28 Business Unit STREET LIGHTING REGULAR BA -338 SOUTHDALE 1ST ADDITION AQUATIC WEEDS EDINBOROUGH PARK GOLF DOME PROGRAM TRAFFIC SIGNALS BUILDING MAINTENANCE DISTRIBUTION ART CENTER BLDG/MAINT CITY HALL GENERAL CIVILIAN DEFENSE SENIOR CITIZENS POOL OPERATION GENERAL STORM SEWER STREET LIGHTING REGULAR DISTRIBUTION EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN R55CKSUM LOG20000 Company Amount 01000 GENERAL FUND 115,109.31 02200 COMMUNICATIONS FUND 1,084.00 03100 GENERAL DEBT SERVICE FUND 833.75 03300 PIR DEBT SERVICE FUND 777.50 04000 WORKING CAPITAL FUND 177,897.57 04800 CONSTRUCTION FUND 3,000.00 05100 ART CENTER FUND 20,728.64 05200 GOLF DOME FUND 2,274.00 05300 AQUATIC CENTER FUND 6,283.11 05400 GOLF COURSE FUND 5,271.65 05500 ICE ARENA FUND 29,154.44 05600 EDINBOROUGH/CENT LAKES FUND 20,125.72 05800 LIQUOR FUND 122,731.33 05900 UTILITY FUND 106,468.05 05930 STORM SEWER FUND 39,526.74 05950 RECYCLING FUND 20.00 07400 PSTF AGENCY FUND 4,003.83 Report Totals 655,289.64 CITY OF t..,, +A 3/5/20u. 9:05:09 Council Check Summary Page - 1 212912008 - 316/2008 4n We confirm to the best of our knowledge and belief that these claims comply In all material respects with the requirements of the City of Edina purchasing policies and procedures date CITY OF EDINA 3/1212008 8:14:52 R55CKREG LOG20000 Council Check Register Page - 1 3/13/2008 -- 3/13/2008 Check # Date Amount Supplier/ Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit 307193 3/13/2008 108757 3D SPECIALTIES 2,564.90 SIGNS 00005215 181406 426446 1325.6531 SIGNS & POSTS STREET NAME SIGNS 2,564.90 307194 3/13/2008 101833 A.T.O.M. 175.00 2008 MEMBERSHIP RENEWAL 181529 MEMB 1400.6104 CONFERENCES & SCHOOLS POLICE DEPT. GENERAL 25.00 LAW ENFORCEMENT TRAINING 181530 11104408 1400.6104 CONFERENCES & SCHOOLS POLICE DEPT. GENERAL 225.00 LAW ENFORCEMENT TRAINING 181531 11105825 1400.6104 CONFERENCES & SCHOOLS POLICE DEPT. GENERAL 425.00 307195 3/13/2008 102971 ACE ICE COMPANY 44.60 181285 0610105 5842.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX YORK SELLING 44.60 307196 3/1312008 101441 ADECCO EMPLOYMENT SERVICES 225.94 UB TEMP 181358 63912522 5910.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES GENERAL (BILLING) 225.94 307197 3/13/2008 122271 ADELSMAN, GAYLE 88.00 CLASS REFUND 181552 022908 5101.4607 CLASS REGISTRATION ART CENTER REVENUES 88.00 307198 3/13/2008 111228 ALDEN POOL & MUNICIPAL SUPPLY 1,411.13 HYDRAULIC SCALE 00005320 181155 800083 5911.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES PUMP & LIFT STATION OPER 1,411.13 307199 311312008 .100575 ALL SAFE INC. 146.76 KITCHEN HOOD INSPECTION 00006470 181407 82903 5421.6230 SERVICE CONTRACTS EQUIPMENT GRILL 146.76 307200 3/1312008 120168 ALLIANCE ELECTRIC INC. 954.50 ELEVATOR REPAIRS 181408 5093 5620.6180 CONTRACTED REPAIRS EDINBOROUGH PARK 954.50 307201 3113/2008 103357 ALPHA VIDEO & AUDIO INC. 228.58 EQUIPMENT RENTAL 181156 ALERTINV09819 2210.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES COMMUNICATIONS 587.34 EQUIPMENT REPAIR 181157 SVCINV08688 2210.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES COMMUNICATIONS 815.92 307202 3/13/2008 100867 ALSTAD, MARIAN 914.00 INSTRUCTOR AC 181553 030708 5110.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES ART CENTER ADMINISTRATION , 914.00 R55CKREG LOG20000 CITY OF EDINA Council Check Register 3/13/2008 -- 3/13/2008 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description 307203 3/13/2008 101478 AMSTERDAM 571.29 CITY LOGO PENS 181321 0783470 1550.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES 5421.6511 CLEANING SUPPLIES 5421.5510 COST OF GOODS SOLD 1550.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES 1550.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES 5210.5510 COST OF GOODS SOLD 5410.6122 ADVERTISING OTHER 1600.4390.15 GEN ADAPTIVE REC 1622.6107 MILEAGE OR ALLOWANCE 294.44 RECYCLING SERVICES 571.29 181325 6513343 -IN 1550.6103 294.44 307204 3113/2008 102172 APPERT'S FOODSERVICE 307210 3/13/2008 104069 B.B. WATSON GRAPHIC DESIGN 290.97 169.26 181409 912251 181412 446 425.54 169.26 181409 912251 716.51 102195 BATTERIES PLUS 307205 3/1312008 BATTERIES 103680 ARAMARK REFRESHMENT SRVCS 18- 201431 1470.6406 62.25 BATTERIES 141.78 COFFEE 18- 201391 181322 408279 BATTERIES 00003107 298.70 COFFEE 1400.6406 181323 408242 186.00 COFFEE 181410 408360 626.48 307206 3/13/2008 119645 ARCSTONE INFORMATION SERVICES 30.00 EBROCHURE 00006469 181411 12339 30.00 307207 3/13/2008 122265 ARENSON, DIANE 27.00 PROGRAM REFUND 181324 030508 27.00 307208 3/13/2008 105342 ARNOLD, MATTHEW 627.78 MILEAGE REIMBURSEMENT 181532 030608 627.78 307209 3/13/2008 101405 ASSET RECOVERY CORP. 5421.6511 CLEANING SUPPLIES 5421.5510 COST OF GOODS SOLD 1550.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES 1550.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES 5210.5510 COST OF GOODS SOLD 5410.6122 ADVERTISING OTHER 1600.4390.15 GEN ADAPTIVE REC 1622.6107 MILEAGE OR ALLOWANCE 294.44 RECYCLING SERVICES 181325 6513343 -IN 1550.6103 294.44 307210 3/13/2008 104069 B.B. WATSON GRAPHIC DESIGN 169.26 BUSINESS CARDS 181412 446 1400.6104 169.26 307211 3/13/2008 102195 BATTERIES PLUS 76.31 BATTERIES 00003627 181413 18- 201431 1470.6406 62.25 BATTERIES 00003105 181414 18- 201391 1400.6406 110.42 BATTERIES 00003107 181415 18- 201597 1400.6406 248.98 3/12/2008 8:14:52 Page- 2 Business Unit CENTRAL SERVICES GENERAL GRILL GRILL CENTRAL SERVICES GENERAL CENTRAL SERVICES GENERAL GOLF DOME PROGRAM GOLF ADMINISTRATION PARK ADMIN. GENERAL SKATING & HOCKEY PROFESSIONAL SERVICES CENTRAL SERVICES GENERAL CONFERENCES & SCHOOLS POLICE DEPT. GENERAL GENERAL SUPPLIES FIRE DEPT. GENERAL GENERAL SUPPLIES POLICE DEPT. GENERAL GENERAL SUPPLIES POLICE DEPT. GENERAL CITY OF EuiNA 31121-7_., 8:14:52 R55CKREG LOG20000 Council Check Register Page - _ 3 3/13/2008 - 3/13/2008 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit 307212 3/13/2008 116151 BCA - BTS 100.00 RECERTIFICATION CLASSES 181416 2086081,2085347 1400.6104 CONFERENCES & SCHOOLS POLICE DEPT. GENERAL 100.00 307213 3/13/2008 122268 BECKELMAN, BRENDA 145.00 PASS REFUND 181528 030708 5601.4532 SEASON TICKETS EB /CL REVENUES 145.00 307214 3/1312008 100646 BECKER ARENA PRODUCTS 168.80 RINKBOARD PARTS 00008011 181417 00067427 5521.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES ARENA ICE MAINT 168.80 307215 3/13/2008 101343 BEHR, JASON 17.59 PRINTER INK 181418 030608 1400.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES POLICE DEPT. GENERAL 17.59 307216 3113/2008 120517 BEITEL, DAWN 80.80 MILEAGE REIMBURSEMENT 181533 030708 1621.6107 MILEAGE OR ALLOWANCE ATHLETIC ACTIVITIES 80.80 307217 3/13/2008 101355 BELLBOY CORPORATION 161.10 181255 43898500 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 187.77 181256 80501800 5862.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX VERNON SELLING 104.10 181257 43911300 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING 52.65 181258 60501700 5822.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX 50TH ST SELLING 2.24- 181259 80463400 5862.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX VERNON SELLING 224.40 181286 43898300 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING 15.60- 181387 80511600 5842.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX YORK SELLING 28.00- 181388 80510700 5842.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX YORK SELLING 132.81 181389 80501900 5842.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX YORK SELLING 20.49 181390 80486900 5842.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX YORK SELLING 6.86- 181561 80510400 5822.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX 50TH ST SELLING 830.62 307218 3/1312008 117379 BENIEK PROPERTY SERVICES INC. 657.00 SNOW REMOVAL 181419 131544 7411.6136 SNOW & LAWN CARE PSTF OCCUPANCY 657.00 307219 3113/2008 101191 BENNEROTTE, JENNIFER 17.00 ROTARY MEETING 181158 030308 2210.6106 MEETING EXPENSE COMMUNICATIONS 59.45 EGGS FOR EGG SCRAMBLE 181158 030308 2210.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES COMMUNICATIONS 76.45 R55CKREG LOG20000 FEB 2008 PRODUCTION 181424 030108 CITY OF EDINA PROFESSIONAL SERVICES PSTF ADMINISTRATION 321.52 Council Check Register 307224 3/13/2008 103005 C &H DISTRIBUTORS 3113/2008 - 3/13/2008 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description 307220 3/13/2008 124.19 100648 BERTELSON OFFICE PRODUCTS 00005079 181335 10372671 1551.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES CITY HALL GENERAL 42.04 WRIST RESTS 181238 WOA95351 -1 1550.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES 19.13 WRIST REST 181239 WOA95752 -1 1550.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES 5.64 OFFICE SUPPLIES 181326 WOA93200 -1 1600.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES FIRE DEPT. GENERAL 19.75 VIEW BINDERS 181327 WOA93319 -1 1550.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES 140.55 LABELS 181328 WO- 493516 -1 1550.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES 2,061.87 61.92 OFFICE SUPPLIES 181329 WOA93309 -1 1550.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES 7.03 OFFICE SUPPLIES 181330 WOA95021 -1 1550.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES 83.79 OFFICE SUPPLIES 181331 WOA94793 -1 1550.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES 140.55 LABELS 181332 WO- 496368 -1 1550.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES 40.12 OFFICE SUPPLIES 181333 WOA92327 -1 1550.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES 153.42 RIBBONS 181334 WO- 492934 -1 1550.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES 117.38 OFFICE SUPPLIES 181362 WOA96409 -1 1600.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES 620.16 BINDERS 00003620 181420 OE- 149527 -1 1470.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES 131.52 OFFICE SUPPLIES 181421 WOA96449 -1 1400.6513 OFFICE SUPPLIES 18.20- RETURN 181422 CP -WO- 490924 -1 1400.6513 OFFICE SUPPLIES 1,564.80 307221 311312008 102545 BLUE CROSS /BLUE SHIELD 156.06 AMBULANCE OVERPAYMENT 181423 WERNER GEBHARD 1470.4329 AMBULANCE FEES 156.06 307222 3/13/2008 122263 BUGENSTEIN, ROBERT 75.44 AMBULANCE OVERPAYMENT 181237 030408 1470.4329 AMBULANCE FEES 75.44 307223 3113/2008 122187 BULLIS, JUSTIN 3/1212008 8:14:52 Page- 4 Business Unit CENTRAL SERVICES GENERAL CENTRAL SERVICES GENERAL PARK ADMIN. GENERAL CENTRAL SERVICES GENERAL CENTRAL SERVICES GENERAL CENTRAL SERVICES GENERAL CENTRAL SERVICES GENERAL CENTRAL SERVICES GENERAL CENTRAL SERVICES GENERAL CENTRAL SERVICES GENERAL CENTRAL SERVICES GENERAL PARK ADMIN. GENERAL FIRE DEPT. GENERAL POLICE DEPT. GENERAL POLICE DEPT. GENERAL FIRE DEPT. GENERAL FIRE DEPT. GENERAL 321.52 FEB 2008 PRODUCTION 181424 030108 7410.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES PSTF ADMINISTRATION 321.52 307224 3/13/2008 103005 C &H DISTRIBUTORS 185.02 SHELVES 00005333 181159 10391364 1551.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES CITY HALL GENERAL 124.19 SHELVES 00005079 181335 10372671 1551.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES CITY HALL GENERAL 309.21 307225 3/13/2008 103896 CAD ZONE, THE 209.00 FIRE ZONE UPGRADE 181425 23914 1470.6160 DATA PROCESSING FIRE DEPT. GENERAL 209.00 307226 3113/2008 108688 CANTON COMMUNICATIONS INC. 2,061.87 CABLE ADS 181426 080303 -1 5210.6122 ADVERTISING OTHER GOLF DOME PROGr R55CKREG LOG20000 CITY OF EuINA 311212uu8 8:14:52 Council Check Register Page - 5 3/13/2008 3/1312008 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit 2,061.87 307227 3/13/2008 119455 CAPITOL BEVERAGE SALES 5,112.40 181287 10129 5842.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER YORK SELLING 14.65 181288 60169 5822.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX 50TH ST SELLING 363.60 181289 60170 5822.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER 50TH ST SELLING 5,490.65 307228 3/1312008 100681 CATCO 251.00 TAP KITS 00005075 181160 3 -46848 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 22.37 ORB PLUGS 00005237 181359 7 -69290 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 28.86 FITTINGS 00005452 181360 1 -18659 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 150.45 FITTINGS 00005452 181361 3 -47055 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 452.68 307229 3/13/2008 102372 CDW GOVERNMENT INC. 114.74 PORTABLE HARD DRIVE 00004335 181161 JLS6880 1400.6160 DATA PROCESSING POLICE DEPT. GENERAL 114.74 307230 3/13/2008 117187 CHEM SYSTEMS LTD 4,044.81 EQUIPMENT REPAIRS 00008005 181427 514522 5511.6180 CONTRACTED REPAIRS ARENA BLDG /GROUNDS 4,044.81 307231 3/13/2008 119725 CHISAGO LAKES DISTRIBUTING CO 168.23 181260 359052 5822.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER 50TH ST SELLING 168.23 307232 3/13/2008 117048 CITY OF ANDOVER 5,724.27 ASPHALT PATCHER 181534 030608 1305.6710 EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT 5,724.27 307233 3/13/2008 100684 CITY OF BLOOMINGTON 500.00 PINNACLE ACADEMY 181428 40516 1400.6104 CONFERENCES & SCHOOLS POLICE DEPT. GENERAL 500.00 307234 3/13/2008 105693 CITYSPRINT 117.27 COURIER 181240 10001 1554.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES CENT SERV GEN - MIS 117.27 307235 311312008 120433 COMCAST 59.00 8772 15 614 0433136 181241 022408 5422.6188 TELEPHONE MAINT OF COURSE & GROUNDS 61.89 8772 15 614 0387019 181429 022508 5430.6230 SERVICE CONTRACTS EQUIPMENT RICHARDS GOLF COURSE R55CKREG LOG20000 317.68 CITY OF EDINA 307236 311312008 Council Check Register 101323 CONNEY SAFETY PRODUCTS 3/13/2008 -- 3/13/2008 54.43 Check # Dale Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description 61.89 8772 15 614 0406553 181430 2/25108 5420.6188 TELEPHONE 74.95 8772 15 614 0388355 181431 . 022308 5424.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES 59.95 8772 15 614 0408237 181432 2123/08 1470.6160 DATA PROCESSING 5913.6610 1646.6610 1140.6103 7413.6406 1301.6406 1646.6406 5913.6406 1552.6406 1550.6406 1551.6103 5521.6406 5421.5510 5842.5513 5842.5514 5822.5513 SAFETY EQUIPMENT SAFETY EQUIPMENT 3/12/2008 8:14:52 Page - 6 Business Unit CLUB HOUSE RANGE FIRE DEPT. GENERAL DISTRIBUTION BUILDING MAINTENANCE PROFESSIONAL SERVICES PLANNING GENERAL SUPPLIES GENERAL SUPPLIES GENERAL SUPPLIES GENERAL SUPPLIES GENERAL SUPPLIES GENERAL SUPPLIES PROFESSIONAL SERVICES GENERAL SUPPLIES COST OF GOODS SOLD COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE PSTF FIRE TOWER GENERAL MAINTENANCE BUILDING MAINTENANCE DISTRIBUTION CENT SVC PW BUILDING CENTRAL SERVICES GENERAL CITY HALL GENERAL ARENA ICE MAIN 1, GRILL YORK SELLING YORK SELLING 50TH ST SELLING' 317.68 307236 311312008 101323 CONNEY SAFETY PRODUCTS 54.43 SAFETY GLASSES 00005346 181162 03229643 67.07 HAIR COVERS, GLOVES 00005346 181162 03229643 121.50 307237 3/13/2008 119839 CORNEJO CONSULTING 3,100.00 COMP PLAN CONSULTING 181336 030108 3,100.00 307238 3/13/2008 114323 CORONA INTEGRATED TECHNOLOGIES 2,190.00 SMOKE FLUID 00004094 181551 80306 2,190.00 307239 3/13/2008 103800 CORPORATE EXPRESS INC. 113.84 OFFICE SUPPLIES 181433 84897451 113.84 OFFICE SUPPLIES 181433 84897451 113.85 OFFICE SUPPLIES 181433 84897451 325.44 OFFICE SUPPLIES 181433 84897451 1,708.39 OFFICE SUPPLIES 181433 84897451 2,375.36 307240 3/1312008 100513 COVERALL OF THE TWIN CITIES IN 2,742.38 CUSTODIAL SERVICES 181242 7070128658 2,742.38 307241 3/13/2008 101705 CROWN PLASTICS 335.02 PLEXIGLASS PIECE 00008003 181434 00080822 335.02 307242 311312008 100710 DAVE'S DAIRY 69.21 DAIRY 181435 021808 69.21 307243 3/13/2008 102478 DAY DISTRIBUTING 104.00 181290 447553 2,377.70 181291 447648 315.00 181292 447554 5913.6610 1646.6610 1140.6103 7413.6406 1301.6406 1646.6406 5913.6406 1552.6406 1550.6406 1551.6103 5521.6406 5421.5510 5842.5513 5842.5514 5822.5513 SAFETY EQUIPMENT SAFETY EQUIPMENT 3/12/2008 8:14:52 Page - 6 Business Unit CLUB HOUSE RANGE FIRE DEPT. GENERAL DISTRIBUTION BUILDING MAINTENANCE PROFESSIONAL SERVICES PLANNING GENERAL SUPPLIES GENERAL SUPPLIES GENERAL SUPPLIES GENERAL SUPPLIES GENERAL SUPPLIES GENERAL SUPPLIES PROFESSIONAL SERVICES GENERAL SUPPLIES COST OF GOODS SOLD COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE PSTF FIRE TOWER GENERAL MAINTENANCE BUILDING MAINTENANCE DISTRIBUTION CENT SVC PW BUILDING CENTRAL SERVICES GENERAL CITY HALL GENERAL ARENA ICE MAIN 1, GRILL YORK SELLING YORK SELLING 50TH ST SELLING' R55CKREG LOG20000 CITY OF EDINA 3/12/2uu8 8:14:52 Council Check Register Page - 7 3/13/2008 -- 3/13/2008 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit 28.60 181293 447647 5822.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX 50TH ST SELLING 1 912.50 181294 447646 5822.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER 50TH ST SELLING 3,540.10 GENERAL SUPPLIES ED ADMINISTRATION TOOLS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 4,737.80 EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN TOOLS GENERAL MAINTENANCE TOOLS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 307244 3/13/2008 100713 DAY - TIMERS INC. 27.40 STAPLER 00002499 181436 57660236 -002 5610.6406 27.40 307245 3/1312008 100718 DELEGARD TOOL CO. 319.44 TIRE TOOL 00005175 181163 100199 1553.6556 60.55 SCREWDRIVER SET 00005072 181164 100414 1553.6556 307.34 SOCKETS, FLASHLIGHT 00005438 181363 102544 1301.6556 1.33 SOCKET 00001728 181364 102541 1553.6556 688.66 307246 311312008 100720 DENNYS 5TH AVE. BAKERY 25.77 BAKERY 181535 265394 5421.5510 25.77 307247 3113/2008 100899 DEPARTMENT OF LABOR & INDUSTRY 2,567.84 FEB 2008 181337 3559135026 1495.4380 2,567.84 307248 3/13/2008 102812 DEPARTMENT OF LABOR & INDUSTRY 210.00 2008 CCLD SPRING SEMINAR 181536 2008CCLD 1495.6104 210.00 307249 3113/2008 100731 DPC INDUSTRIES 1,674.20 CHEMICALS 00005905 181437 82700260 -08 5915.6586 1,674.20 307250 3113/2008 122264 E C DESIGN GROUP 3,500.00 IRRIGATION FEASIBILITY STUDY 00006455 181243 2235 5422.6103 3,500.00 307251 3/1312008 100739 EAGLE WINE 1,453.70 181261 13609 5862.5513 84.30 181295 17233 5822.5513 1,967.55 181391 17237 5842.5513 34.55 181392 17238 5842.5515 3,540.10 GENERAL SUPPLIES ED ADMINISTRATION TOOLS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN TOOLS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN TOOLS GENERAL MAINTENANCE TOOLS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN COST OF GOODS SOLD GRILL SURCHARGE INSPECTIONS CONFERENCES & SCHOOLS INSPECTIONS WATER TREATMENT SUPPLIES WATER TREATMENT PROFESSIONAL SERVICES MAINT OF COURSE & GROUNDS COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX YORK SELLING R55CKREG LOG20000 CITY OF EDINA 3/1.2/2008 8:14:52 Council Check Register Page - 8 3/13/2008 — 3/13/2008 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit 307252 3/13/2008 100740 EARL F. ANDERSEN INC. 1,374.12 TRAFFIC CONES 00005197 181338 0081493 -IN 1335.6532 PAINT PAVEMENT MARKINGS 1,374.12 307253 3/13/2008 101321 EDINA•HARDWARE 89.27 PAINTING SUPPLIES 00009314 181438 62732 5111.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES ART CENTER BLDG/MAINT 89.27 307254 3/13/2008 106020 EDINA RESOURCE CENTER 36,113.00 2008 FUNDING 181365 030508 1507.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES FAMILINK EDINA 36,113.00 307255 3/13/2008 116448 EGAN OIL COMPANY 22,021.69 GAS 00005413 181165 148203 1553.6581 GASOLINE EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 22,021.69 307256 3113/2008 100746 ELECTRIC MOTOR REPAIR 259.36 FASCO MOTORS 00005350 181166 355875 5840.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES LIQUOR YORK GENERAL 259.36 307257 3113/2008 115342 ELSEVIER 20.00 EMS INSIDER 181537 97445241 1470.6105 DUES & SUBSCRIPTIONS FIRE DEPT. GENERAL 20.00 307258 3/1312008 106194 EMA INC. 640.00 SCADA SYSTEM SUPPORT 181167 5604 - 90012754 05465.1705.30 CONTRACTOR PAYMENTS WM-465 SCADA UPGRADES 640.00 307259 3/1312008 101956 EMERGENCY APPARATUS MAINTENANC 825.42 T -90 REPAIRS 181439 34749 1470.6180 CONTRACTED REPAIRS FIRE DEPT. GENERAL 825.42 307260 3/13/2008 104733 EMERGENCY MEDICAL PRODUCTS INC 513.49 AMBULANCE SUPPLIES 00003874 181440 INV1036014 1470.6510 FIRST AID SUPPLIES FIRE DEPT. GENERAL 513.49 307261 3/13/2008 100018 EXPERT T BILLING 6,221.75 FEB TRANSPORTS 181339 030308 1470.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES FIRE DEPT. GENERAL 6,221.75 307262 3/13/2008 102497 EXPLORER POST 925 6,653.33 COMPETITION CONTRIBUTIONS 181538 030608 1419.6104 CONFERENCES & SCHOOLS RESERVE PROGRAl" 3/12/2uu8 8:14:52 Page - 9 Business Unit EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN PSTF ADMINISTRATION FIRE DEPT. GENERAL EDINA CRIME FUND K9 DONATION EDINA CRIME FUND K9 DONATION 150.00 PERFORMANCE 3/16108 CITY OF EDINA 030708 R55CKREG LOG20000 PROFESSIONAL SVC - OTHER ED ADMINISTRATION 150.00 Council Check Register 307268 3/13/2008 102456 GALLS INC. 3/13/2008 - 3/13/2008 Check # Dale Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description 5929444601012 1400.6203 6,653.33 POLICE DEPT. GENERAL 23.41 307263 3/13/2008 5897300801028 100146 FACTORY MOTOR PARTS COMPANY UNIFORM ALLOWANCE POLICE DEPT. GENERAL 111.90 53.72- CREDIT 181366 6- 1017304 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS 307269 60.80 REGULATOR 00005178 181367 6- 1019618 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS 73.38 OIL COOLER LINE 00005178 181368 6- 1019822 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS 181447 780233 19.00 THERMOSTAT, CAP 00005178 181369 6- 1019611 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS 44.99 99.46 307264 3/13/2008 122077 FIELDS, DEBRA 319.90 FILEMAKER PRO SOFTWARE 181441 030408 7410.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 25498 5210.6513 319.90 GOLF DOME PROGRAM 31.95 307265 3/13/2008 120329 FIRE EQUIPMENT SPECIALTIES INC 307271 3/1312008 1,606.95 TURN OUT GEAR 00003629 181442 5558 1470.6552 PROTECTIVE CLOTHING 1,606.95 LOCATING SERVICES 00005252 181449 8020453 5913.6103 307266 3/13/2008 105824 FLYING CLOUD ANIMAL HOSPITAL 303.05 91.18 VET EXAM 181443 325024 4607.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES 534.10 VET EXAM 181444 325668 4607.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES 625.28 307267 3/13/2008 100457 FRASIER, SCOTT 3/12/2uu8 8:14:52 Page - 9 Business Unit EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN PSTF ADMINISTRATION FIRE DEPT. GENERAL EDINA CRIME FUND K9 DONATION EDINA CRIME FUND K9 DONATION 150.00 PERFORMANCE 3/16108 181527 030708 5610.6136 PROFESSIONAL SVC - OTHER ED ADMINISTRATION 150.00 307268 3/13/2008 102456 GALLS INC. 88.49 BINOCULARS 181445 5929444601012 1400.6203 UNIFORM ALLOWANCE POLICE DEPT. GENERAL 23.41 BEENIE 181446 5897300801028 1400.6203 UNIFORM ALLOWANCE POLICE DEPT. GENERAL 111.90 307269 3/13/2008 118941 GLOBALSTAR USA 44.99 PHONE R -91 181447 780233 1470.6188 TELEPHONE FIRE DEPT. GENERAL 44.99 307270 3/13/2008 100779 GOPHER CASH REGISTER 31.95 REGISTER TAPE 00006467 181448 25498 5210.6513 OFFICE SUPPLIES GOLF DOME PROGRAM 31.95 307271 3/1312008 100780 GOPHER STATE ONE -CALL INC. 303.05 LOCATING SERVICES 00005252 181449 8020453 5913.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES DISTRIBUTION 303.05 R55CKREG LOG20000 181263 15366 5862.5513 CITY OF EDINA VERNON SELLING 146.00 181264 15284 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE Council Check Register 7.44- 181265 739726 5862.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR VERNON SELLING 3/13/2008 -- 3/13/2008 739725 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description 307272 3113/2008 181268 101103 GRAINGER 5862.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR VERNON SELLING 802.09 181296 17235 47.03 DEMOLITION HAMMER, BATTERIES00005337 181168 9575979019 1552.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES 17234 5822.5512 558.51 DEMOLITION HAMMER, BATTERIES00005337 181168 9575979019 5913.6556 TOOLS 5822.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR 178.46 DOOR CLOSER, DRILL BIT 00006172 181451 9573938223 5422.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES YORK SELLING 980.85 309.59 LABEL PRINTER, TAPE 00006172 181452 9574191046 5422.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES 7.11 CUT OFF WHEEL 181453 9577052542 7412.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES 1,100.70 307273 3113/2008 102217 GRAPE BEGINNINGS INC 255.90 181262 98407 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 291.90 181562 98567 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 187.90 181563 98569 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 735.70 307274 3/1312008 101518 GRAUSAM, STEVE 15.98 CLEANING SUPPLIES 181450 030708 5821.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES 84.19 CLEANING SUPPLIES 181450 030708 5841.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES 100.17 307275 3/13/2008 100783 GRAYBAR ELECTRIC CO. INC. 205.42 LOCK 00005321 181370 932315033 7411.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES 1,874.53 LIGHTING SYSTEM 00005451 181371 932377325 1322.6530 REPAIR PARTS 52.27- INVOICE PAID TWICE 181372 930046619CR 1322.6185 LIGHT & POWER 2,027.68 307276 3/13/2008 122260 GRAYBOW COMMUNICATIONS GROUP 1,338.38 EQUIPMENT RENTAL 181244 0347614 2210.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 1,338.38 307277 3/1312008 100782 GRIGGS COOPER & CO. 3/1212008 8:14:52 Page - 10 Business Unit CENT SVC PW BUILDING DISTRIBUTION MAINT OF COURSE & GROUNDS MAINT OF COURSE & GROUNDS PSTF RANGE VERNON SELLING 50TH ST SELLING YORK SELLING 50TH ST OCCUPANCY YORK OCCUPANCY PSTF OCCUPANCY STREET LIGHTING ORNAMENTAL STREET LIGHTING ORNAMENTAL COMMUNICATIONS 1,488.35 181263 15366 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 146.00 181264 15284 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING 7.44- 181265 739726 5862.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR VERNON SELLING 4.00- 181266 739725 5862.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX VERNON SELLING 38.15- 181267 745994 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 133.38- 181268 746021 5862.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR VERNON SELLING 802.09 181296 17235 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING 558.64 181297 17234 5822.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR 50TH ST SELLING 5,651.60 181298 15368 5822.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR 50TH ST SELLING 2,703.56 181393 17241 5642.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 980.85 181394 15370 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING R55CKREG LOG20000 CITY OF EuiNA 3/12i-0 8:14:52 Council Check Register Page - 11 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES PROFESSIONAL SERVICES ART CENTER ADMINISTRATION INCLUSION PROGRAM WATER TREATMENT SUPPLIES WATER TREATMENT WATER TREATMENT SUPPLIES WATER TREATMENT EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT FIRE STATION #1 RENOVATION EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT FIRE STATION #1 RENOVATION COST OF GOODS SOLD GRILL CONTRACTED REPAIRS BUILDINGS CONFERENCES & SCHOOLS POLICE DEPT. GENERAL HAZ. WASTE DISPOSAL SUPERVISION & OVERHEAD RUBBISH REMOVAL, MAINT OF COURSE & GROUNDS 3113/2008 - 3/13/2008 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit 5,577.44 181395 17240 5842.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR YORK SELLING 150.21 181396 17239 5842.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX YORK SELLING 12,959.69 181397 13545 5842.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR YORK SELLING 10,997.20 181398 15369 5842.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR YORK SELLING 130.58 181564 17230 5862.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX VERNON SELLING 1,354.63 181565 17229 5862.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR VERNON SELLING PROFESSIONAL SERVICES PROFESSIONAL SERVICES ART CENTER ADMINISTRATION INCLUSION PROGRAM WATER TREATMENT SUPPLIES WATER TREATMENT WATER TREATMENT SUPPLIES WATER TREATMENT EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT FIRE STATION #1 RENOVATION EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT FIRE STATION #1 RENOVATION COST OF GOODS SOLD GRILL CONTRACTED REPAIRS BUILDINGS CONFERENCES & SCHOOLS POLICE DEPT. GENERAL HAZ. WASTE DISPOSAL SUPERVISION & OVERHEAD RUBBISH REMOVAL, MAINT OF COURSE & GROUNDS 43,317.87 307278 3/13/2008 121379 GRIMES, JUDY 1,887.00 INSTRUCTOR AC 181554 030708 5110.6103 1,887.00 307279 3/13/2008 119001 GROSS, JESSICA 300.00 INTERPRETER 181373 022908 4078.6103 300.00 307280 3113/2008 100797 HAWKINS INC. 2,005.34 TONKAZORB 00005245 181171 1160015 5915.6586 1,985.76 TONKAZORB 00005253 181454 1162451 5915.6586 3,991.10 307281 3/13/2008 119474 HAY DOBBS 15,783.14 ARCHITECTURAL CONSULTING 181455 6004.006 -9 45008.6710 75.62 ARCHITECTURAL CONSULTING 181456 6004.006 -11 45008.6710 15,858.76 307282 3/13/2008 101576 HEGGIES PIZZA 263.40 PIZZA 181457 1014079 5421.5510 263.40 307283 3/13/2008 120054 HEINEMAN PAINTING INC. 642.50 PAINT CHEM ROOM 00005248 181172 022908 5912.6160 642.50 307284 3/1312008 100802 HENNEPIN COUNTY MEDICAL CENTER 888.00 FIRST RESPONDER COURSE 181458 18788 1400.6104 888.00 307285 3/13/2008 101717 HENNEPIN COUNTY TREASURER 210.00 00008609 05304750 HAZ WASTE 00005437 181169 11909 1280.6271 315.00 00008609 05300919 HAZ WASTE 181170 11908 5422.6182 525.00 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES PROFESSIONAL SERVICES ART CENTER ADMINISTRATION INCLUSION PROGRAM WATER TREATMENT SUPPLIES WATER TREATMENT WATER TREATMENT SUPPLIES WATER TREATMENT EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT FIRE STATION #1 RENOVATION EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT FIRE STATION #1 RENOVATION COST OF GOODS SOLD GRILL CONTRACTED REPAIRS BUILDINGS CONFERENCES & SCHOOLS POLICE DEPT. GENERAL HAZ. WASTE DISPOSAL SUPERVISION & OVERHEAD RUBBISH REMOVAL, MAINT OF COURSE & GROUNDS R55CKREG LOG20000 CITY OF EDINA 3/12/2008 8:14:52 Council Check Register Page - 12 3/13/2008 -- 3/13/2008 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit 307286 3/13/2008 116680 HEWLETT - PACKARD COMPANY 3,139.12 PCS AND LCDS 00004334 181173 43804540 1495.6710 EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT INSPECTIONS 514.47 PCS AND LCDS 00004328 181174 43800881 1120.6710 EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT ADMINISTRATION 993.95 PCS AND LCDS 00004328 181174 43800881 5900.1730 OFFICE FURN & EQUIPMENT UTILITY BALANCE SHEET 2,105.70 PCS AND LCDS 00004328 181174 43800881 1400.6710 EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT POLICE DEPT. GENERAL 2,644.79 PCS AND LCDS 00004328 181174 43800881 1160.6710 EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT FINANCE 9,398.03 307287 3/13/2008 101073 HIGHWAY TECHNOLOGIES INC. 614.20 CUTTER WHEELS, SPACERS 00005312 181175 64971011 -001 1301.6556 TOOLS GENERAL MAINTENANCE 614.20 307288 3/13/2008 103753 HILLYARD INC - MINNEAPOLIS 408.13 SOAP, MOPS 00002294 181459 2416604 5620.6511 CLEANING SUPPLIES EDINBOROUGH PARK 408.13 307289 3/13/2008 104375 HOHENSTEINS INC. 367.50 181269 444478 5822.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER 50TH ST SELLING 440.00 181299 445752 5822.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER 50TH ST SELLING 685.52 181399 445671 5842.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER YORK SELLING 1,493.02 307290 3/13/2008 102044 HOISINGTON KOEGLER GROUP INC. 2,152.50 ARCHITECTURAL SERVICES 181539 007 -054 -2 47056.6710 EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT MASTER PLAN: COUNTRYSIDE 2,152.50 307291 3113/2008 101618 HOPKINS PET HOSPITAL 14,342.40 2007 IMPOUNDS 181594 279173 1450.6217 KENNEL SERVICE ANIMAL CONTROL 14,342.40 307292 3113/2008 102562 IAFCI 75.00 2008 MEMBERSHIP 181460 030608 1400.6104 CONFERENCES & SCHOOLS POLICE DEPT. GENERAL 75.00 307293 3/13/2008 101732 INDUSTRIAL DOOR CO. INC. 335.46 DOOR REPAIRS 181461 0128341 -IN 1470.6180 CONTRACTED REPAIRS FIRE DEPT. GENERAL 335.46 307294 3/13/2008 122114 INTENCITY LIGHTING, INC. 916.56 STREET LIGHTING 00001533 181245 83 1322.6530 REPAIR PARTS STREET LIGHTING ORNAMENTAL 916.56 R55CKREG LOG20000 CITY OF EUINA 3/12i-a 8:14:52 Council Check Register Page - 13 3/13/2008 -- 3/13/2008 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit 307295 3/13/2008 122269 IPROMOTEU 358.34 TATTOOS 181540 170420MPT 1400.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES POLICE DEPT. GENERAL 358.34 307296 3/13/2008 100829 JERRY'S HARDWARE 8.78 181374 022908 1260.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES ENGINEERING GENERAL 9.48 181374 022908 5840.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES LIQUOR YORK GENERAL 15.64 181374 022908 5511.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES ARENA BLDG /GROUNDS 15.68 181374 022908 4090.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES STREET REVOLVING 20.98 181374 022908 1495.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES INSPECTIONS 22.48 181374 022908 5422.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES MAINT OF COURSE & GROUNDS 23.74 181374 022908 1400.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES POLICE DEPT. GENERAL 30.00 181374 022908 1325.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES STREET NAME SIGNS 38.38 181374 022908 5630.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES CENTENNIAL LAKES 42.52 181374 022908 7411.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES PSTF OCCUPANCY 47.54 181374 022908 1551.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES CITY HALL GENERAL 59.67 181374 022908 1322.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES STREET LIGHTING ORNAMENTAL 82.08 181374 022908 5620.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES EDINBOROUGH PARK 90.94 181374 022908 5210.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES GOLF DOME PROGRAM 96.43 181374 022908 1553.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 106.32 181374 022908 1470.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES FIRE DEPT. GENERAL 113.81 181374 022908 5820.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES 50TH STREET GENERAL 137.04 181374 022908 1301.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES GENERAL MAINTENANCE 139.04 181374 022908 5913.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES DISTRIBUTION 206.24 181374 022908 1646.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES BUILDING MAINTENANCE 302.02 181374 022908 5420.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES CLUB HOUSE 1,608.81 307297 3/13/2008 100741 JJ TAYLOR DIST. OF MINN 53.00 181270 1143345 5842.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX YORK SELLING 9,250.55 181271 1143342 5842.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER YORK SELLING 5,466.00 181300 1143356 5842.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER YORK SELLING 34.50 181301 1143378 5822.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX 50TH ST SELLING 3,127.00 181566 1143376 5822.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER 50TH ST SELLING 7,404.60 181567 1143387 5842.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER YORK SELLING 25,335.65 307298 3/13/2008 100835 JOHNSON BROTHERS LIQUOR CO. 75.52 181272 1401726 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 1.12 181273 1401716 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 1,175.18 181274 1401725 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING R55CKREG LOG20000 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation 4,651.98 234.22 330.22 3,408.27 513.60 3,763.98 470.12 198.95 1,495.78. 1,300.42 157.92 1,643.83 224 307299 3/1312008 1401.6203 122266 JOHNSON, MARY EMERGENCY RESPONSE TEAM Council Check Register 51.00 TRIP REFUND UNIFORM ALLOWANCE 3113/2008 51.00 POLICE2 /29 307300 3/13/2008 Inv No 101918 JUNGWIRTH, MARK Subledger Account Description Business Unit 86.97 UNIFORM PURCHASE 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 86.97 181568 307301 3/13/2008 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 111018 KEEPRS INC. 181569 1405153 51.86 UNIFORMS 50TH ST SELLING 181570 688.89 UNIFORMS COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR YORK SELLING 1,058.94 UNIFORMS 5842.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR 75.99 UNIFORMS 1405165 5842.5512 31.98 UNIFORMS 181573 1405163 16.99 UNIFORMS YORK SELLING 181574 1,924.65 5842.5513 307302 3/1312008 181575 102322 KLEVE HEATING 5862.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR 401.60 PERMIT REFUND 1405170 5862.5512 401.60 VERNON SELLING 307303 3/13/2008 5862.5512 120511 KUSKE, BRANDON VERNON SELLING 181578 2,000.00 TUITION REIMBURSEMENT COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 2,000.00 1405158 307304 3/13/" YORK SELLING 116399 L- HEUREUX, ADAM 181375 030608 1628.4392.07 SENIOR TRIPS SENIOR CITIZENS 181376 030508 5913.6201 LAUNDRY DISTRIBUTION 181462 CITY OF EDINA 1401.6203 3/1212008 8:14:52 EMERGENCY RESPONSE TEAM Council Check Register POLICE2 /29 Page - 14 UNIFORM ALLOWANCE 3113/2008 -- 3/1312008 POLICE2 /29 1400.6203 PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit 181275 1401729 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 181568 1405154 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING 181569 1405153 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING 181570 1405164 5842.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR YORK SELLING 181571 1405161 5842.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR YORK SELLING 181572 1405165 5842.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR YORK SELLING 181573 1405163 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 181574 1405160 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 181575 1405171 5862.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR VERNON SELLING 181576 1405170 5862.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR VERNON SELLING 181577 1405167 5862.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR VERNON SELLING 181578 1405166 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 181579 1405158 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 181580 1405162 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 181375 030608 1628.4392.07 SENIOR TRIPS SENIOR CITIZENS 181376 030508 5913.6201 LAUNDRY DISTRIBUTION 181462 POLICE2 129 1401.6203 UNIFORM ALLOWANCE EMERGENCY RESPONSE TEAM 181462 POLICE2 /29 1419.6203 UNIFORM ALLOWANCE RESERVE PROGRAM 181462 POLICE2 /29 1400.6203 UNIFORM ALLOWANCE POLICE DEPT. GENERAL 00003573 181463 84762 1470.6558 DEPT UNIFORMS FIRE DEPT. GENERAL 00003562 181464 85743 1470.6558 DEPT UNIFORMS FIRE DEPT. GENERAL 00003630 181465 84593 -80 1470.6558 DEPT UNIFORMS FIRE DEPT. GENERAL 181541 ED087038 1495.4110 181466 030608 1400.6104 HEATING & VENTING LICENSE INSPECTIONS CONFERENCES & SCHOOLS POLICE DEPT. GENERAL CITY OF L-NA 31122-_ _., 8:14:52 R55CKREG LOG20000 Council Check Register Page - 15 3113/2008 -- 3/13/2008 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit 45.36 EMT CLASS EXPENSES 181467 030608 1400.6104 CONFERENCES & SCHOOLS POLICE DEPT. GENERAL 45.36 307305 3/13/2008 100852 LAWSON PRODUCTS INC. 52.32 SOCKETS 00005349 181468 6589062 1301.6556 TOOLS GENERAL MAINTENANCE 258.47 NUTS, WASHERS, HOLESAWS 00005347 181469 6583784 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 310.79 307306 3/13/2008 100853 LEEF SERVICES 35.05 SHOP TOWELS 181176 1475903 5422.6201 LAUNDRY MAINT OF COURSE & GROUNDS 35.05 307307 3/13/2008 100857 LITTLE FALLS MACHINE INC. 732.99 SHAFT, SPRINGS, TUBE 00001882 181177 00039320 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 732.99 307308 3/13/2008 122262 LOPEZ, FRANCISCO 551.00 AMBULANCE OVERPAYMENT 181246 030408 1470.4329 AMBULANCE FEES FIRE DEPT. GENERAL 551.00 307309 3/13/2008 101792 LUBE -TECH 146.46 DELO GREASE 00005431 181470 1510164 1553.6584 LUBRICANTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 146.46 307310 3/1312008 101453 LUTZ, RICHARD M. 198.00 UNIFORM PURCHASE 181471 030608 1400.6203 UNIFORM ALLOWANCE POLICE DEPT. GENERAL 198.00 307311 3/13/2008 118096 M -B COMPANIES INC 331.13 AIR BLOWERS 00005433 181472 123881 1335.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES PAVEMENT MARKINGS 331.13 307312 3/13/2008 101741 M. SHANKEN COMMUNICATIONS INC. 18.00 WINE SPECTATOR 181340 755239 5822.6105 DUES & SUBSCRIPTIONS 50TH ST SELLING 18.00 307313 3/13/2008 101165 M.A.A.O. 100.00 ETHICS FOR MN ASSESSORS 181341 030508 1190.6104 CONFERENCES & SCHOOLS ASSESSING 100.00 307314 311312008 105677 MAGC 150.00 NORTHERN LIGHTS AWARD ENTRIES 181542 031008 2210.6104 CONFERENCES & SCHOOLS COMMUNICATIONS R55CKREG LOG20000 CITY OF EDINA 3/1212008 8:14:52 Council Check Register Page - 16 3/13/2008 -- 3/13/2008 Check # Date Amount Supplier 1 Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit 150.00 307315 3113/2008 100868 MARK VII SALES 1,603.15 181276 296007 5822.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER 50TH ST SELLING 36.90 181277 296008 5822.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX 50TH ST SELLING 2,143.55 181278 296190 5842.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER YORK SELLING 4,560.35 181302 296970 5842.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER YORK SELLING 36.40 181303 296971 5842.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX YORK SELLING 8,380.35 307316 3/1312008 102560 MAXIMUM SOLUTIONS INC. 300.00 SOFTWARE SERVICE AGREEMENT 181342 8104 1600.6105 DUES & SUBSCRIPTIONS PARK ADMIN. GENERAL 300.00 307317 3113/2008 122261 MCNEILL, BETTY 137.50 CAMERA OPERATOR 181247 022908 2210.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES COMMUNICATIONS 137.50 307318 3/13/2008 105603 MEDICINE LAKE TOURS 1,413.75 HUTCHINSON TRIP 181377 030408 1628.6103.07 TRIPS PROF SERVICES SENIOR CITIZENS 1,413.75 307319 3/13/2008 101483 MENARDS 34.39 MAILBOX PARTS 00005345 181178 13879 1318.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES SNOW & ICE REMOVAL 108.23 MAPLE BOARDS, SEALER 00005096 181343 9140 1551.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES CITY HALL GENERAL 37.87 SHELVING 00005105 181344 9365 1551.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES CITY HALL GENERAL 180.49 307320 3/13/2008 100882 MERIT SUPPLY 388.09 PRESSURE WASH SPRAY 00006180 181473 73558 5422.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES MAINT OF COURSE & GROUNDS 234.17 GRILL CLEANER, CARPET CLEANERI0006468 181474 73476 5421.6511 CLEANING SUPPLIES GRILL 1,159.68 CLEANING SUPPLIES 00008012 181475 73588 5511.6511 CLEANING SUPPLIES ARENA BLDG /GROUNDS 1,781.94 307321 3/1312008 101891 METRO ATHLETIC SUPPLY 1,378.32 SOFTBALLS 181248 105268 4077.6105 DUES & SUBSCRIPTIONS EDINA ATHLETIC ASSOCIATION 1,378.32 307322 3/13/2008 100041 METRO CISM TEAM 400.00 CONFERENCE REGISTRATION 181543 34 1400.6104 CONFERENCES & SCHOOLS POLICE DEPT. GENERAL 400.00 1 I R55CKREG LOG20000 CITY OF EDINA Council Check Register 3/13/2008 --3/1312008 Check # Date Amount Supplier/ Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description 307323 3/13/2008 122062 METRO LEAK DETECTION INC. 220.20 LEAK LOCATING 00005247 181179 1123 5913.6180 CONTRACTED REPAIRS 220.20 307324 3/13/2008 100885 METRO SALES INC Business Unit DISTRIBUTION 3/12/2008 8:14:52 Page - 17 5,030.07 QTRLY COPIER USAGE 181476 279349 1550.6230 SERVICE CONTRACTS EQUIPMENT CENTRAL SERVICES GENERAL 5,030.07 307325 3/13/2008 102507 METRO VOLLEYBALL OFFICIALS 102.00 OFFICIATING FEES 181477 3327 4077.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES EDINA ATHLETIC ASSOCIATION 102.00 307326 3113/2008 100886 METROPOLITAN COUNCIL 1,806.75 FEB 2008 181345 030308 1495.4307 SAC CHARGES INSPECTIONS 1,806.75 307327 3/13/2008 100692 MIDWEST COCA -COLA BOTTLING CO. 16480 181279 0148545121 5822.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX 50TH ST SELLING MAINT OF COURSE & GROUNDS MAINT OF COURSE & GROUNDS EDINBOROUGH PARK DISTRIBUTION 275.00 TRAINING /CONFERENCE 181481 030608 1400.6104 CONFERENCES & SCHOOLS POLICE DEPT. GENERAL 275.00 307332 3/1312008 120301 MINNESOTA MULCH & SOIL 6,172.74 DISPOSAL OF SWEEPINGS 00005424 181183 10973 1314.6180 CONTRACTED REPAIRS STREET RENOVATION 6,172.74 307333 3/13/2008 101376 MINNESOTA PIPE & EQUIPMENT 164.80 307328 3/1312008 103186 MIDWEST FUELS 499.20 DIESEL 00005252 181180 45376 5422.6581 GASOLINE 1,228.25 GAS 00006252 181181 45476 5422.6581 GASOLINE 1,727.45 307329 3/13/2008 119738 MIDWEST MINIMELTS 588.75 ICE CREAM 181478 11356 5620.5510 COST OF GOODS SOLD 588.75 307330 3/13/2008 100913 MINNEAPOLIS & SUBURBAN SEWER & 2,047.50 WATER SERVICE REPAIR 00005249 181182 33101 5913.6180 CONTRACTED REPAIRS 2,047.50 307331 3/13/2008 101684 MINNESOTA CHIEFS OF POLICE ASS MAINT OF COURSE & GROUNDS MAINT OF COURSE & GROUNDS EDINBOROUGH PARK DISTRIBUTION 275.00 TRAINING /CONFERENCE 181481 030608 1400.6104 CONFERENCES & SCHOOLS POLICE DEPT. GENERAL 275.00 307332 3/1312008 120301 MINNESOTA MULCH & SOIL 6,172.74 DISPOSAL OF SWEEPINGS 00005424 181183 10973 1314.6180 CONTRACTED REPAIRS STREET RENOVATION 6,172.74 307333 3/13/2008 101376 MINNESOTA PIPE & EQUIPMENT R55CKREG LOG20000 PERFORMANCE 3/20/08 181525 030708 CITY OF EDINA PROFESSIONAL SVC - OTHER ED ADMINISTRATION 150.00 Council Check Register 307339 3/13/2008 120551 MPROA 3113/2008 - 3/13/2008 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description 1,088.80 METER BATTERIES 00001698 181188 0219993 5917.6530 REPAIR PARTS 365.76 1" COUPLINGS 00005319 181189 0219936 5913.6530 REPAIR PARTS 1032214 -2008 5410.6105 1,454.56 GOLF ADMINISTRATION 275.00 307334 3113/2008 101459 MINNESOTA RECREATION & PARKAS 122259 NELSON, KATELYN 15.00 SAFETY CAMP ROUND TABLE 181544 031108 1470.6104 CONFERENCES & SCHOOLS MILEAGE OR ALLOWANCE COMMUNICATIONS 20.00 SAFETY CAMP ROUND TABLE 181544 031108 1600.4390.06 SAFETY CAMP 35.00 307335 3/13/2008 101556 MINNESOTA SHREDDING LLC. 426.00 FILE SHREDDING 181479 253310257 1400.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 426.00 307336 3/13/2008 117106 MJL IMPRESSIONS 854.00 FRAMING 00006450 181480 6982 5420.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES 854.00 307337 3/13/2008 120996 MOBILE MINI INC. 599.91 TRAILER RENTAL 181482 151009447 1470.6151 EQUIPMENT RENTAL 599.91 307338 3/1312008 108668 MORRIS, GRAYLYN 3/12/2008 8:14:52 Page - 18 Business Unit METER REPAIR DISTRIBUTION FIRE DEPT. GENERAL PARK ADMIN. GENERAL POLICE DEPT. GENERAL CLUB HOUSE FIRE DEPT. GENERAL 150.00 PERFORMANCE 3/20/08 181525 030708 5610.6136 PROFESSIONAL SVC - OTHER ED ADMINISTRATION 150.00 307339 3/13/2008 120551 MPROA 360.00 2008 MEMBERSHIPS 181545 030108 1419.6104 CONFERENCES & SCHOOLS RESERVE PROGRAM 360.00 307340 3/13/2008 103267. NATIONAL GOLF FOUNDATION 275.00 MEMBERSHIP RENEWAL 181546 1032214 -2008 5410.6105 DUES & SUBSCRIPTIONS GOLF ADMINISTRATION 275.00 307341 3/13/2008 122259 NELSON, KATELYN 61.11 MILEAGE REIMBURSEMENT 181249 030408 2210.6107 MILEAGE OR ALLOWANCE COMMUNICATIONS 61.11 307342 3/13/2008 120142 NELSON, TEDD 209.87 INSPECTION EQUIPMENT 181184 030408 1495.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES INSPECTIONS 209.87 307343 3113/9' 106662 NET LITIN DISTRIBUTORS i CITY OF � NA 3 /12r-a 8:14:52 R55CKREG LOG20000 Council Check Register Page - 19 3/13/2008 3/1312008 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit 575.91 PLASTICWARE FOR RESALE 181483 30706 5620.5510 COST OF GOODS SOLD EDINBOROUGH PARK 575.91 307344 3/13/2008 100076 NEW FRANCE WINE CO. 105.25 181304 48263 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE. 50TH ST SELLING 584.75 181400 48264 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 690.00 307345 3/13/2008 100922 NEWMAN TRAFFIC SIGNS 1,473.00 SIGNS 00005233 181185 TI- 0189624 1325.6531 SIGNS & POSTS STREET NAME SIGNS 1,473.00 307346 3/13/2008 102735 NORTH MEMORIAL EMS EDUCATION 208.00 ACLS REFRESHER COURSE 181484 3456 1470.6104 CONFERENCES & SCHOOLS FIRE DEPT. GENERAL 208.00 307347 311312008 113948 NORTHSTAR FIRE PROTECTION 300.00 SPRINKLER WORK 181346 3512 1551.6180 CONTRACTED REPAIRS CITY HALL GENERAL 300.00 307348 3/13/2008 100930 NORTHWESTERN TIRE CO. 448.13 TIRES 00005038 181186 NW- 111692 1553.6583 TIRES 8 TUBES EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 448.13 307349 3113/2008 105575 NYSTROM PUBLISHING CO. INC 848.81 AQUATICS POSTCARDS 181347 22220 5310.6575 PRINTING POOL ADMINISTRATION 947.85 AQUATICS CTR POCKET BROCHURE 181348 22219 5310.6575 PRINTING POOL ADMINISTRATION 1,796.66 307350 3/13/2008 103578 OFFICE DEPOT 174.20 FILE DRAWER, MARKER BOARD 181485 420517881 -001 5620.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES EDINBOROUGH PARK 234.81 CAMERA 181486 420518078 -001 5620.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES EDINBOROUGH PARK 409.01 307351 3/13/2008 100936 OLSEN COMPANIES 40.97 SWAGED SLINGS 00005432 181187 490460 5923.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES COLLECTION SYSTEMS 40.97 307352 3/13/2008 104303 OLSON, TOM 266.21 UNIFORM PURCHASE 181487 030608 1400.6203 UNIFORM ALLOWANCE POLICE DEPT. GENERAL 266.21 R55CKREG LOG20000 119372 PETSMART #463 VERNON SELLING CITY OF EDINA VERNON SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 78.90 K9 DOG FOOD 00003106 181490 Council Check Register 4607.6406 YORK SELLING 78.90 YORK SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX YORK SELLING 3113/2008 - 3/13/2008 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Descriptlon 307353 3/13/2008 65514C 101659 ORKIN PEST CONTROL 867.98 103.93 PEST CONTROL 181349 35747792 1551.6180 CONTRACTED REPAIRS 103.93 511.84 181280 2577356 307354 3/1312008 4,217.02 100940 OWENS COMPANIES INC. 181281 2577357 5862.5513 1,638.94 319.00 FURNACE REPAIR 00006458 181488 20128 5420.6180 CONTRACTED REPAIRS 1,233.40 31.51 BELTS 00006458 181489 20111 5410.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES 350.51 2579595 5842.5512 763.02 307355 3/13/2008 2579597 121490 PANERA LLC 889.52 181583 2579596 90.04 DINNER MEETING FOOD 181250 122707 1100.6106 MEETING EXPENSE 2579598 5842.5513 90.04 37.12 181585 2579599 307356 3113/2008 16,173.68 101718 PARTS PLUS 757.19 AUTO PARTS 181378 022908 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS 757.19 307357 3/13/2008 100347 PAUSTIS & SONS 521.23 181305 8177294 -IN 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 1.499.01 181401 8177280 -IN 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 307358 3113/2008 119372 PETSMART #463 VERNON SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 78.90 K9 DOG FOOD 00003106 181490 T -9414 4607.6406 YORK SELLING 78.90 YORK SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX YORK SELLING 307359 3/1312008 100274 PGI COMPANIES INC 867.98 INSPECTION FORMS 00001886 181350 65514C 1553.6406 867.98 307360 3/13/2008 100743 PHILLIPS WINE & SPIRITS 511.84 181280 2577356 5822.5513 4,217.02 181281 2577357 5862.5513 1,638.94 181282 2576731 5862.5513 1,233.40 181283 2576730 5862.5513 62.62 181581 2579595 5842.5512 763.02 181582 2579597 5842.5512 889.52 181583 2579596 5842.5513 6,820.20 181584 2579598 5842.5513 37.12 181585 2579599 5842.5515 16,173.68 i GENERAL SUPPLIES GENERAL SUPPLIES 3112/2008 8:14:52 Page - 20 Business Unit CITY HALL GENERAL CLUB HOUSE GOLF ADMINISTRATION CITY COUNCIL EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 50TH ST SELLING YORK SELLING EDINA CRIME FUND K9 DONATION EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 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 VERNON SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR YORK SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR YORK SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX YORK SELLING R55CKREG LOG20000 181306 976607 -00 CITY OF EDINA COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 96.00 .181307 976803 -00 Council Check Register COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 894.92 181308 977159 -00 3/13/2008 -- 3/13/2008 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description 307361 3/1312008 181310 111779 PIONEER RESEARCH CORPORATION 5842.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR YORK SELLING 732.80 1,631.09 SALT FOR RAMP 00005457 181547 203004 1375.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES VERNON SELLING 550.72 1,631.09 977440 -00 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 307362 3/13/2008 181313 119146 PLYMAT, AMY 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 645.75 61.10 ART WORK SOLD AT EAC 181560 030708 5101.4413 ART WORK SOLD VERNON SELLING 978.15 61.10 976525 -00 5822.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR 307363 3/13/2008 181316 121436 POWER/MATION 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 10.42- 555.85 OUTPUT CARDS 00001999 181190 2035671 -01 5913.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES YORK SELLING 21.67- 555.85 ,974397 -00 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 307364 3/13/2008 181403 122061 PRESTIGE BUILDERS OF MINNESOTA 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 3/12/2uU8 8:14:52 Page - 21 Business Unit PARKING RAMP ART CENTER REVENUES DISTRIBUTION 9,975.00 MAINTENANCE GARAGE CONSTR 181548 APPL 3 47050.6710 EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT COURTNEY PARK MAINT GARAGE 9,975.00 307365 3/13/2008 100966 PRINTERS SERVICE INC 198.00 BLADE SHARPENING 00008013 181491 233099 5521.6215 EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE ARENA ICE MAINT 198.00 307366 3/1312008 100968 PRIOR WINE COMPANY 168.95 181402 17236 5842.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX YORK SELLING 168.95 307367 3/13/2008 100971 QUALITY WINE 200.00 181306 976607 -00 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 96.00 .181307 976803 -00 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 894.92 181308 977159 -00 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 1,076.66 181309 978238 -00 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 2,307.08 181310 978531 -00 5842.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR YORK SELLING 732.80 181311 977797 -00 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 550.72 181312 977440 -00 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 1,293.93 181313 978245 -00 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 645.75 181314 978642 -00 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 978.15 181315 976525 -00 5822.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR 50TH ST SELLING 520.00- 181316 971823 -00 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 10.42- 181317 975414 -00 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 21.67- 181318 ,974397 -00 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING 3,426.31 181403 978744 -00 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 97.15 181404 979224 -00 5842.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR YORK SELLING 1,976.72 181586 978524 -00 5862.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR VERNON SELLING 212.30 181587 978246 -00 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING R55CKREG LOG20000 CITY OF EDINA 3/12/2008 8:14:52 Council Check Register Page - 22 311312008 -- 3/1312008 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit 2,098.83 181588 978745 -00 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING 16,035.23 307368 3/13/2008 101965 QWEST 55.14 181379 022808 5911.6188 TELEPHONE PUMP & LIFT STATION OPER 57.82 181379 022808 1628.6188 TELEPHONE SENIOR CITIZENS 83.14 181379 022808 5861.6188 TELEPHONE VERNON OCCUPANCY 96.29 181379 022808 5821.6188 TELEPHONE 50TH ST OCCUPANCY 101.59 181379 022808 5841.6188 TELEPHONE YORK OCCUPANCY 106.45 181379 022808 1470.6168 TELEPHONE FIRE DEPT. GENERAL 161.49 181379 022808 5610.6188 TELEPHONE ED ADMINISTRATION 168.88 181379 022808 1622.6188 TELEPHONE SKATING & HOCKEY 232.19 181379 022808 1646.6188 TELEPHONE BUILDING MAINTENANCE 263.67 181379 022808 5932.6188 TELEPHONE GENERAL STORM SEWER 292.09 181379 022808 5511.6188 TELEPHONE ARENA BLDG /GROUNDS 2,064.83 181379 022808 1550.6188 TELEPHONE CENTRAL SERVICES GENERAL 3,683.58 307369 3113/2008 117692 R & B CLEANING INC. 1,001.10 RAMP CLEANING 00005447 181351 258 1375.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES PARKING RAMP 1,001.10 307370 3/13/2008 100975 RED WING SHOE STORE 135.96 SAFETY BOOTS 00005189 181492 7250000000766 5511.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES ARENA BLDG /GROUNDS 157.21 SAFETY BOOTS 00005189 181492 7250000000766 1301.6610 SAFETY EQUIPMENT GENERAL MAINTENANCE 169.96 SAFETY BOOTS 00005189 181492 7250000000766 5431.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES RICHARDS GC MAINTENANCE 331.71 SAFETY BOOTS 00005189 181492 7250000000766 1646.6610 SAFETY EQUIPMENT BUILDING MAINTENANCE 794.84 307371 3113/2008 102011 RIVER CITY JAZZ ORCHESTRA 150.00 PERFORMANCE 3/18/08 181526 030708 5610.6136 PROFESSIONAL SVC - OTHER ED ADMINISTRATION 150.00 307372 3/13/2008 104602 ROAD MACHINERY & SUPPLIES CO. 1,053.87 STINGER POINT TOOL 00005077 181352 S26790 5913.6530 REPAIR PARTS DISTRIBUTION 1,053.87 307373 3/13/2008 100980 ROBERT B. HILL CO. 445.71 SOFTENER SALT 00008009 181493 00204421 5511.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES ARENA BLDG /GROUNDS 445.71 307374 3/13/7- 101979 ROFIDAL, KEVIN 4 R55CKREG LOG20000 CITY OF r-NA 3 /12r-d 8:14:52 Council Check Register Page - 23 3113/2008 -- 3113/2008 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit 371.00 CONFERENCE AIRFARE 181494 030708 1400.6104 CONFERENCES & SCHOOLS POLICE DEPT. GENERAL 371.00 307375 3/13/2008 106171 ROSE, SARAH 73.45 ART WORK SOLD AT EAC 181559 030708 5101.4413 ART WORK SOLD ART CENTER REVENUES 73.45 307376 3/13/2008 100988 SAFETY KLEEN 330.08 PARTS. WASHER SERVICE 181191 0035879111 5422.6182 RUBBISH REMOVAL MAINT OF COURSE & GROUNDS 241.80 USED OIL FILTERS DISPOSAL 181192 M004714841 5422.6182 RUBBISH REMOVAL MAINT OF COURSE & GROUNDS 571.88 307377 3/1312008 101431 SCAN AIR FILTER INC. 2,926.82 FILTERS AND SEALS 181251 104718 1551.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES CITY HALL GENERAL 265.10 FILTERS 00005201 181495 104717 5420.6530 REPAIR PARTS CLUB HOUSE 3,191.92 307378 3/13/2008 101577 SCHMOLL, RUTH 110.39 MILEAGE REIMBURSEMENT 181496 030608 1470.6107 MILEAGE OR ALLOWANCE FIRE DEPT. GENERAL 110.39 307379 3/13/2008 104689 SERIGRAPHICS SIGN SYSTEMS INC. 187.98 NEW NAME SIGN 181497 39495 1100.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES CITY COUNCIL 149.50 DESK SIGN 181498 39506 1120.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES ADMINISTRATION 337.48 307380 3/13/2008 101380 SHAUGHNESSY, SANDRA 128.05 ART WORK SOLD AT EAC 181558 030708 5101.4413 ART WORK SOLD ART CENTER REVENUES 128.05 307381 3/13/2008 120458 SIEMENS WATER TECHNOLOGIES COR 585.51 SOFTENER SUPPLIES 00008004 181499 2380557 5511.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES ARENA BLDG /GROUNDS 585.51 307382 3/1312008 120292 SIGNATURE CONCEPTS 1,272.30 UNIFORM SWEATSHIRTS 181500 241947 7411.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES PSTF OCCUPANCY 1,272.30 307383 3/13/2008 101000 SIR SPEEDY 46.33 BUSINESS CARDS 181193 56546 1550.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES CENTRAL SERVICES GENERAL 46.33 R55CKREG LOG20000 CITY OF EDINA 311212008 8:14:52 Council Check Register Page - 24 3/13/2008 - 3/13/2008 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit 307384 3/13/2008 122270 SPACE ADVANTAGES - MURPHY BED 7,009.00 BEDS FOR DORM 00003623 181549 10337 45008.6710 EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT FIRE STATION #1 RENOVATION 7,009.00 307385 3/13/2008 116682 SPECIALTY WINES & BEVERAGES 1,176.50 181319 19133 5842.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR YORK SELLING 1,176.50 307386 3/13/2008 101021 SPEEDWAY SUPERAMERICA LLC 135.40 PROPANE 00005442 181194 022508 1301.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES GENERAL MAINTENANCE 135.40 307387 3/13/2008 116856 SPRINT 333.60 NEXTELS 181501 021508 1470.6188 TELEPHONE FIRE DEPT. GENERAL 333.60 307388 3/13/2008 121357 STARK, KRISTI 75.00 WEBSITE GRAPHICS 181252 KS EDINA 08 5110.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES ART CENTER ADMINISTRATION 75.00 WEBSITE GRAPHICS 181252 KS EDINA 08 5620.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES EDINBOROUGH PARK 120.00 WEBSITE MAINTENANCE 181252 KS_EDINA_08 2210.6124 WEB DEVELOPMENT COMMUNICATIONS 270.00 307389 3/13/2008 105352 STEPHENSON, TED 125.77 SEMINAR EXPENSES 181503 030708 5610.6105 DUES & SUBSCRIPTIONS ED ADMINISTRATION 125.77 307390 3/13/2008 101015 STREICHERS 186.34 TELESCOPING MIRRORS 181502 1496417 1400.6104 CONFERENCES & SCHOOLS POLICE DEPT. GENERAL 186.34 307391 3/1312008 100900 SUN NEWSPAPERS 64.35 PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE 00014798 181195 1071285 1120.6120 ADVERTISING LEGAL ADMINISTRATION 75.08 PW 08 -3 NOTICE 00014798 181196 1069486 1120.6120 ADVERTISING LEGAL ADMINISTRATION 57.20 AD FOR BID 181504 1073386 1120.6120 ADVERTISING LEGAL ADMINISTRATION 46.48 PUBLISH NOTICE 00014798 181505 1073387 1120.6120 ADVERTISING LEGAL ADMINISTRATION 28.60 PUBLISH NOTICE 00014798 181506 1073388 1120.6120 ADVERTISING LEGAL ADMINISTRATION 271.71 307392 3/13/2008 121492 SUPERIOR TURF SERVICES INC. 1,419.09 FERTILIZER 00006140 181197 4075 5422.6540 FERTILIZER MAINT OF COURSE & GROUNDS 1,419.09 k R55CKREG LOG20000 CITY OF -AA 3/1�,_ 8:14:52 Council Check Register Page - 25 3/13/2008 - 3113/2008 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit 307393 3/13/2008 101027 TARGET 55.52 9 -555- 029 -840 00006466 181507 021808 5410.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES GOLF ADMINISTRATION 55.52 307394 3/13/2008 118133 TCIC INC. 1,021.60 SCADA SOFTWARE SERV AGREEMENT 181380 20080290 5932.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES GENERAL STORM SEWER 2,724.28 SCADA SOFTWARE SERV AGREEMENT 181380 20080290 5913.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES DISTRIBUTION 3,064.80 SCADA SOFTWARE SERV AGREEMENT 181380 20080290 5923.6136 PROFESSIONAL SVC - OTHER COLLECTION SYSTEMS 6,810.68 307395 311312008 117686 TECHNAGRAPHICS 351.09 POLICE ADVISORY CARDS 181508 6875011 1400.6575 PRINTING POLICE DEPT. GENERAL 351.09 307396 3/13/2008 101326 TERMINAL SUPPLY CO 287.61 4 WAY MINI COILS 00005169 181509 67405 -01 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 287.61 307397 3113/2008 122258 TONKA PLUMBING 100.00 OVERCHARGE ON WATER METER 181253 030408 5901.4627 SALE OF WATER METERS UTILITY REVENUES 100.00 307398 3/13/2008 104064 TRANS UNION LLC 12.30 FEB 2008 181510 02831716 1400.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES POLICE DEPT. GENERAL 12.30 307399 3/13/2008 101403 TRUCK BODIES & EQUIP INTL INC 523.87 RESERVOIR 00005353 181511 43274 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 523.87 307400 3/13/2008 118190 TURFWERKS LLC 89.79 AIR FILTERS, BEARINGS 00006171 181198 T118615 5422.6530 REPAIR PARTS MAINT OF COURSE & GROUNDS 170.35 JOINT 00006173 181199 0113577 5422.6530 REPAIR PARTS MAINT OF COURSE & GROUNDS 163.49 SHIELDS, FILTERS 00006171 181200 S112999 5422.6530 REPAIR PARTS MAINT OF COURSE & GROUNDS 423.63 307401 3/13/2008 101360 TWIN CITY HARDWARE 93.91 DOOR BOTTOMS 00005033 181201 284277 5820.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES 50TH STREET GENERAL 93.91 307402 3/13/2008 102255 TWIN CITY OXYGEN CO 56.83 OXYGEN 00003649 181512 870055 1470.6510 FIRST AID SUPPLIES FIRE DEPT. GENERAL R55CKREG LOG20000 CITY OF EDINA Council Check Register 3/13/2008 - 3/13/2008 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation - PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subiedger Account Description 56.83 307403 3/13/2008 120675 ULTRAMAX 4,280.00 AMMO 00003091 181513 095337 1400.6551 AMMUNITION 4,280.00 307404 3/1312008 101053 UNITED ELECTRIC COMPANY 50.54 WIRE MARKER, RAIL 00005335 181514 652816 5912.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES 50.54 307405 3/1312008 101908 US FOODSERVICE INC 1,222.92 114300 FOOD 00006346 181515 33279475 5421.5510 COST OF GOODS SOLD 1,222.92 307406 3/13/2008 100410 USA MOBILITY WIRELESS INC. 10.98 PAGER 181353 R6096083B 1550.6188 TELEPHONE 10.98 307407 3113/2008 101058 VAN PAPER CO. 55.03 TOWELS, UTENSILS 00007513 181202 072355 -00 5862.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES 461.97 LIQUOR BAGS 00007513 181202 072355 -00 5862.6512 PAPER SUPPLIES 450.22 LIQUOR BAGS 181203 072356 -00 5822.6512 PAPER SUPPLIES 14.89- CREDIT 181204 072410CM 5822.6512 PAPER SUPPLIES 294.20 LIQUOR BAGS 00007512 181354 072357 -00 5842.6512 PAPER SUPPLIES 13.96- CREDIT 181355 072408CM 5842.6512 PAPER SUPPLIES 1,232.57 307408 3/13/2008 101069 VOSS LIGHTING 34.51 LIGHTING 00005332 181205 15097930 -00 5860.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES 101.60 LIGHTING 00005332 181205 15097930 -00 1552.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES 472.29 LIGHTING 00005332 181205 15097930 -00 1551.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES 608.40 307409 3113/2008 102023 WAGNER, DOUGLAS 3/12/2008 8:14:52 Page - 26 Business Unit POLICE DEPT. GENERAL BUILDINGS GRILL CENTRAL SERVICES GENERAL VERNON SELLING VERNON SELLING 50TH ST SELLING 50TH ST SELLING YORK SELLING YORK SELLING VERNON LIQUOR GENERAL CENT SVC PW BUILDING CITY HALL GENERAL 55.00 EMT CLASS EXPENSES 181516 030608 1400.6104 CONFERENCES & SCHOOLS POLICE DEPT. GENERAL 55.00 307410 311312008 122267 WEATHER COMPANY LLC, THE 176.79 MERCHANDISE 00006470 181550 7433 5440.5511 COST OF GOODS - PRO SHOP PRO SHOP RETAIL SALES 176.79 307411 3113/7- - 116516 WELDON, KEN F R55CKREG LOG20000 CITY OF EuINA 3 /12P[uU8 8:14:52 Council Check Register Page - 27 3/13/2008 - 3/13/2008 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit 13.65 ART WORK SOLD AT EAC 181557 030708 5101.4413 ART WORK SOLD ART CENTER REVENUES 13.65 307412 3/1312008 105566 WERRE & BETZEN SALES INC. 91.80 GLOVES 00006382 181518 1486 5440.5511 COST OF GOODS - PRO SHOP PRO SHOP RETAIL SALES 91.80 307413 3/1312008 120169 WHAT WORKS INC. 1,235.00 CONSULTING SERVICE 181381 ED08 -02 2210.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES COMMUNICATIONS 1,235.00 307414 3/13/2008 101153 WHITMAN, DONNA 42.90 ART WORK SOLD AT EAC 181556 030708 5101.4413 ART WORK SOLD ART CENTER REVENUES 42.90 307415 3/13/2008 101033 WINE COMPANY, THE 444.80 181320 188178 -00 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE '50TH ST SELLING 551.50 181405 188061 -00 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 996.30 307416 3113/2008 101312 WINE MERCHANTS 676.09 181284 222523 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 645.74 181589 223294 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING 716.36 181590 223296 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 1,250.92 181591 222522 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 12.41- 181592 37116 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 3,276.70 307417 3/13/2008 102019 WOIT, DIANE 30.88 ART WORK SOLD AT EAC 181555 030708 5101.4413 ART WORK SOLD ART CENTER REVENUES 30.88 307418 3/13/2008 101086 WORLD CLASS WINES INC 842.80 181593 208099 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING 842.80 307419 3/1312008 120223 WORTHINGTON, HEATHER 220.00 CONFERENCE REGISTRATION 181517 031008 1120.6104 CONFERENCES & SCHOOLS ADMINISTRATION 220.00 307420 3/13/2008 101726 XCEL ENERGY 84.56 51- 5938955 -6 181206 144152264 4086.6185 LIGHT & POWER - AQUATIC WEEDS R55CKREG LOG20000 3113/2008 GENERAL SUPPLIES CITY OF EDINA CENTRAL SERVICES GENERAL EQUIPMENT RENTAL ART CENTER ADMINISTRATION Council Check Register 137.85 FEB USAGE - PARK & REC 00004322 181211 3/13/2008 - 3/1312008 Check # Date Amount Supplier/ Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description 35.62 51- 8102668 -0 181207 144015323 1321.6185 LIGHT & POWER 407.21 51- 6046826 -0 181208 144154824 5422.6185 LIGHT & POWER 114.69 51- 5634814 -2 181209 144145108 5933.6185 LIGHT & POWER 5,260.76 51- 4966303 -6 181210 144134187 1330.6185 LIGHT & POWER 998.39 51- 5847121 -5 181382 144652168 5914.6185 LIGHT & POWER 981.36 181383 144668701 5821.6185 LIGHT & POWER 1,313.19 00005104 181383 144668701 5861.6185 LIGHT & POWER 1,758.75 157.79 181383 144668701 5841.6185 LIGHT & POWER 14.33 51- 4151897 -6 181384 144620154 1646.6185 LIGHT & POWER 2,617.32 51- 6621207 -1 181385 144662141 5913.6185 LIGHT & POWER 31.69 51- 7567037 -0 181386 144676111 1321.6185 LIGHT & POWER 15,628.14 51- 4888627 -1 181519 144789579 5511.6185 LIGHT & POWER 3,983.85 51- 6824328 -7 181520 144993277 5420.6185 LIGHT & POWER 3,191.37 51- 6840050 -6 181521 145165322 5911.6185 LIGHT & POWER 2,120.76 51- 4159265 -8 181522 143916920 7411.6185 LIGHT & POWER 38,541.99 355.00 REGISTRATION - JEFF LONG 181595 031108 307421 3113/2008 GENERAL SUPPLIES 100568 XEROX CORPORATION SERVICE CONTRACTS EQUIPMENT CENTRAL SERVICES GENERAL EQUIPMENT RENTAL ART CENTER ADMINISTRATION 137.85 FEB USAGE - PARK & REC 00004322 181211 031148978 1550.6406 28.66 FEB USAGE - BLDG/ENG 00004322 181212 031148977 1550.6406 420.00 FAX MAINTENANCE 181356 031148979 1550.6230 103.93 FEB USAGE 181523 031149134 5110.6151 690.44 307422 311312008 104324 YOUNGBLOOD LUMBER CO. 157.79 LUMBER 00005104 181357 563155 1551.6406 157.79 307423 3/13/2008 101091 ZIEGLER INC 612.30 THERMOSTAT 181254 SW050110755 1551.6180 345.00 GENERATOR MAINTENANCE 181524 E3809748 1551.6103 957.30 307424 3/13/2008 101684 MINNESOTA CHIEFS OF POLICE ASS 355.00 REGISTRATION - JEFF LONG 181595 031108 1400.6104 355.00 480,249.77 Grand Total Payment Instrument Totals Check Total 480,249.77 Total Payments 480,249.77 3/12/2008 8:14:52 Page - 28 Business Unit STREET LIGHTING REGULAR MAINT OF COURSE & GROUNDS PONDS & LAKES TRAFFIC SIGNALS TANKS TOWERS & RESERVOIR 50TH ST OCCUPANCY VERNON OCCUPANCY YORK OCCUPANCY BUILDING MAINTENANCE DISTRIBUTION STREET LIGHTING REGULAR ARENA BLDG /GROUNDS CLUB HOUSE PUMP & LIFT STATION OPER PSTF OCCUPANCY GENERAL SUPPLIES CENTRAL SERVICES GENERAL GENERAL SUPPLIES CENTRAL SERVICES GENERAL SERVICE CONTRACTS EQUIPMENT CENTRAL SERVICES GENERAL EQUIPMENT RENTAL ART CENTER ADMINISTRATION GENERAL SUPPLIES CONTRACTED REPAIRS PROFESSIONAL SERVICES CONFERENCES & SCHOOLS CITY HALL GENERAL CITY HALL GENERAL CITY HALL GENERAL POLICE DEPT. GENERAL R55CKSUM LOG20000 CITY OF EUINA Council Check Summary 3/13/2008 - 3/13/2008 Company Amount 01000 GENERAL FUND 183,602.53 02200 COMMUNICATIONS FUND 3,934.36 04000 WORKING CAPITAL FUND 37,580.00 05100 ART CENTER FUND 3,507.23 05200 GOLF DOME FUND 2,370.76 05300 AQUATIC CENTER FUND 1,796.66 05400 GOLF COURSE FUND 18,788.95 05500 ICE ARENA FUND 23,009.36 05600 EDINBOROUGH /CENT LAKES FUND 4,041.42 05800 LIQUOR FUND 164,072.55 05900 UTILITY FUND 29,009.46 05930 STORM SEWER FUND 1,399.96 07400 PSTF AGENCY FUND 7,136.53 Report Totals 480,249.77 We confirm to the best of our knowledge and belief, that these claims comply In all material respects with the requirements of the City 3/12/k.-., 8:16:37 Page- 1 To: Mayor & Council From: Debra Mangen Date: March 18, 2008 Subject: Correspondence Received Since Last Council Meeting REPORT /RECOMMENDATION Agenda Item VII. Consent ❑ Information Only Mgr. Recommends ❑ To HRA ® To Council Action ❑ Motion ❑ Resolution ❑ Ordinance ❑ Discussion Info /Background: Attached are copies of a -mails and letters received since the last Council meeting. From: Blemaster, Lou [ma i Ito: Lou Blemaster @edinarealty.com] v SF� Sent: Monday, March 17, 2008 11:04 PM MAR � 8 ?' To: Jennifer Bennerotte Subject: Thank you ByFCE��ED To; Joni Bennett c/o Edina City Council Joni, I enjoyed having diner with you tonight. It was very important to me to show that two ladies with different opinions on a volatile issue could enjoy each other's company as people. I will not achieve your level of credential but I am working hard at accruing wisdom. Thank you for the work you do to make Edina a better place. Sincerely, Lou Blemaster PS I did not know any other way to reach you. .eau 5 &jttwt" 952- 924 -8744 952 - 920 -3442 Dear Edina City Council: SEAL 'e MAR l 8 1008 RECEIVED March 17, 2008 When my great grandfather designed the Edina Country Club in the 1920s, it was designed as a desirable place to live for families with attention to aesthetics. This included rules on types of trees that could be grown, where garbage could be placed, and other regulations, in attempt to create quality. In particular, it promised not to have excessive levels of traffic. In 1920, the Edina Country Club District was at the edge of development in the Twin Cities and traffic in this neighborhood was not a problem.' It is unlikely that my great grandfather had input from a traffic engineer in designing the Country Club. The assistance of traffic engineers are now commonplace when designing a community. Over the last 90 years, many changes have been made to the Edina Country Club to preserve its desirability. Some, but certainly not all, of these changes have involved previous changes to the streets and traffic signs. In 2008, the Edina Country Club is no longer at the edge of Minneapolis and traffic in the neighborhood has increased to levels that I doubt my great grandfather ever foresaw. You are now in a position to implement changes to the streets of this community, which have been recommended by professional traffic engineers, to address the concern of excessive traffic levels. I believe the recommendations of the traffic engineers are reasonable changes that can be made to 'retro -fit' the area to address the growing concern of excessive traffic. All change has pros and cons. I think given the specific situation the Edina Country Club is currently in, that the proposed changes are reasonable, and ultimately the pros will outweigh the cons for the majority of its citizens. I hope you will have the courage to do what is right for the community as a whole and not allow the vocal minority distract you from doing what is necessary to preserve the integrity of this historic neighborhood. Thank you for taking your time to read my thoughts. Sincerely: Richard S. Thorpe Susan Heiberg From: Jennifer Bennerotte Sent: Monday, March 17, 2008 5:35 AM Cc: Susan Heiberg Subject: FW: Traffic Calming Measures Jennifer Bennerotte Communications & Marketing Director City of Edina 952- 833 -9520 FAX 952 - 826 -0390 jbennerotte@ci.edina.mn.us From: Lance Silverman [ mailto:LSilverman2 @Comcast.net] Sent: Monday, March 17, 2008 1:24 AM To: Jennifer Bennerotte Subject: Traffic Calming Measures Dear City Council Members: SEAL -c 2009 RECEBIlE® Page 1 of 7 I am sorry that I did not respond to some of the misinformation circulating through our neighborhood sooner. Please see the below claims, responses and published public health data I am happy to make available to you. welcome your calls and questions. Claim #1: Traffic Calming measures would violate the assets of our historic district. False Country Club District: Edina's First Planned Community (1921 to 1950) http: / /www.ci. edina. mn. us/ citycouncil /HistoricContextsStudy.htm The Country Club District epitomizes Edina's transformation from a rural village to a commuter suburb. It was Edina's first real estate development platted and landscaped as a single - stratum community for financially well- 3/18/2008 Page 2 of 7 off (upper - middle income) urbanites and it was built around the automobile - - although it was within the service are of the streetcar system, the success of the Thorpe Bros. Development depended almost entirely on commutinz by personal motor car to successfully combine rural solitude with urban comfort.. It was also a planned community — individual houses' high architectural design values, as well as their relationship to each other and their environment, reflected conscious decisions made during the original conception and planning of the subdivision. Rural solitude does not exist with the increasing through vehicular traffic. The Northeast Edina Transportation Study found that *Approximately 30 percent of the evening peak hour traffic in the Northeast Edina study area neighborhoods is through traffic. *Daily traffic volumes on most residential streets that were measured within the study area exceed 900 vehicles per day And there is no end in sight. Drivers will not change their behavior when it is faster to drive through a neighborhood. The Northeast Edina Transportation Study found that *Motorists traveling on the arterial routes (50th Street and France Avenue) experience travel times of approximately 11 minutes during the evening peak hour. Routes through the Northeast Edina neighborhoods have shorter travel times of 3/18/2008 Page 3 of 7 approximately 8 minutes. *Worries about shunting traffic to smaller streets are unfounded as they are even slower and less attractive. Claim #2: Choker islands and raised crosswalks will take away from the beauty of the neighborhood. False A living street treet (sometimes known as Home zones or by the Dutch word woonerf, as the concept originated in the Netherlands) is a street in which the needs of car drivers are secondary to the needs of users of the street as a whole; traffic calming principles are integrated into their design. Choker Islands are covered with trees, shrubs, and grass in the middle of what had been pavement. This builds upon the theme created 60 years ago when the first trees were planted. We all benefit by the beautiful canopy which provides a warm organic feeling and adds a living history to the neighborhood. Raised crosswalks covered with brick demonstrate strength of commitment to the historic paths to our homes and encourage pedestrians to use them. ■ According to Traffic Logix (Traffic Logix is a member of the Institute of Traffic Engineers (ITE), the American Public Works Association (APWA), and the National League of Cities (NLC). Traffic calming solutions present numerous benefits. • Pollution decreases as traffic volume is lessened and safer roads lead more individuals to walk or cycle instead of driving. • Traffic calming measures reduce noise levels by 4 -5 decibels in most areas. • Solutions result in more aesthetically pleasing streets as well by reducing space devoted to streets and parking and creating more green space, providing both financial 3/18/2008 Page 4 of 7 and environmental benefit. • Neighborhood crime has been shown to decrease with the installment of traffic calming techniques as decreased accessibility deters potential thieves and criminals. • Traffic calming measures additionally benefit neighborhoods by increasing the value of property. In areas with lower traffic volume and slower average speeds, streets are safer, causing homes to sell at a premium. Many housing developments now include traffic calming in the initial street design in response to its attractiveness to homebuyers. Claim #3: A silent majority do not wish these measures. False • 79% of people in Country Club believe there is a traffic problem. As an Orthopedic Surgeon I see the effects of an Automobile vs Pedestrian accident. As one of the 3 Minneapolis area surgeons who take Orthopedic Emergency call at Minneapolis Children's Hospital I have a terrifying firsthand appreciation for these effects on children. The damage wrought by a child hit is life altering to life ending. Children don't simply heal bones and bounce back. If they survive the first 24 hours of the "Golden Period," the time in which a hospital trauma team can do the most good to victims of high energy trauma (20001b car traveling at 30+ MPH striking a 50 -100 lbs person constitutes high energy); the recovery is brutal. Simple fractures don't just mend overnight. They take months to heal. Children are scarred physically and emotionally; they are never the same. The lose strength, balance, endurance and function that never returns. While they suffer, their family suffers with them. Children fall behind in school and lose carefully crafted social networks; parents miss time from work during 3/18/2008 Page 5 of 7 hospital stays and doctor's visits; interfamily stress builds. The effects are astounding when children survive. Imagine how catastrophic it is when a child dies. • A careful read of Northeast Edina Transportation Study finds that: *The percentage of vehicles traveling over the posted 30 mph speed limit in a 24 -hour period exceeds 10 percent on many residential streets within the study area. • *Pedestrian injuries caused by automobile collisions are a leading cause of death among CHILDREN aged 5 to 14 _years. • We don't need to wait for one to happen in our neighborhood. ■ The American Journal of Public Health found • Children living near traffic calming devices were 50% less likely to be hit and injured by an automobile in their neighborhood. • Children living within a block of a speed hump were even less likely to be struck by a vehicle. • The study found an astounding 53-60% reduction in the odds of injury or death among children in neighborhoods with traffic calming measures. • Traffic calming has proven far more effective in preventing child pedestrian injuries than road safety 3/18/2008 Page 6 of 7 education, which has been "unable to exert meaningful changes in the behavior of children" • "Mean Streets 2000" (a report from the Surface Transportation Policy Project) analyzes federal safety and spending databases and found • Per mile traveled, walking s 36 times more dangerous than drivin . • In 59% of cases for which information is available, pedestrians died in places where they could not, find a crosswalk. Across the globe, traffic calming measures have effectively reduced the number of accidents, injuries, and deaths. • For decades European countries such as Denmark, the Netherlands, and Great Britain, as well as Australia and New Zealand, have implemented and tested the effects of traffic calming.6 • A report published in British Columbia summarized 43 international studies that demonstrated reductions in collision frequency rates ranging from 8% to 100% after implementation of traffic calming measures.6 • A Danish study showed that, in comparison with control streets, 72% fewer injuries occurred on experimental streets incorporating a variety of traffic calming measures in addition to new speed zoning requirements.9 2/1 R / ?f1f1R Page 7 of 7 LANCE M. SILVERMAN MD SILVERMAN ANKLE & FOOT 952- 649 -0068 (CELL) 952 - 920 -4333 (OFFICE) 3/18/2008 Susan Heiberg From: Jennifer Bennerotte Sent: Monday, March 17, 2008 5:39 AM Cc: Susan Heiberg Subject: FW: Proposed Traffic Calming in Country Club neighborhood Jennifer Bennerotte Communications & Marketing Director City of Edina 952 - 833 -9520 FAX 952 - 826 -0390 jennerotte @ci.edina.mn.us From: The Gaskill Family [mailto:gaskillmn @comcast.net] Sent: Sunday, March 16, 2008 9:11 PM To: Jennifer Bennerotte Subject: Proposed Traffic Calming in Country Club neighborhood Dear City of Edina City Council Members, SEAL `' MAR 18 1008 FIEUEIVED Page 1 of 2 We would like to express our support for the proposed traffic calming measures for our neighborhood. We believe that this is an important action to protect the residents in the Country Club Neighborhood. We have over 75 children that live on Arden Avenue. We have seen close calls as drivers have plowed down our street during rush hour, using our street as a cut through from 50th to Sunnyside. Drivers have even refused to abide to our closing notices when we have our block parties in the summer. We had a near miss this last year with several children believing they were safe to be in the street. We have noticed a marked increase in traffic after the diamond was placed at Wooddale and 50th, thus diverting more traffic on our narrow street. Certain streets were designed to carry more traffice. Arden Ave. is not one of them. As we live on a longer than average block, drivers tend to pick up speed as they travel to Bridge. Every morning at our bus stop is stressful. It is a rare occasion when drivers actually stop at the intersection of Arden and Country Club. We are very aware that most of these drivers are not from our neighborhood. Past actions to deal with traffic issues in our neighborhood have not considered our neighborhood as a whole. One action to calm traffic for one street has been to the detriment of several other streets. These past actions have turned normal rational people into raging idiots. Hopefully, the City Counsel has learned from that lesson alone. We all agree that it is important to protect the historic nature of our neighborhood. A continued thoughtful approach will maintain the historic integrity while keeping .the 3/18/2008 Page 2 of 2 cut through traffic to a minimum. The power of the proposed plan is that the neighborhood's traffic was finally considered as a whole. Any action taken must continue take this approach in order to stop the madness. There will always be those who oppose whatever action is finally taken. But, a thoughtful and reasonable approach that considers our neighbor as a whole has the only chance of success, whether it is the current proposal or any others that may be on the table. We are now facing major street and sewer work in 2009. It makes absolutely no sense to rip up our streets without having a plan to calm them. If we need to revamp the current traffic calming measures, we would continue to support any measure that considers our historic neighborhood as a whole and keeps in mind that the current traffic issues will only get as the Minneapolis area continues to grow. Our final hope is that measures are taken before we have an injured child and not as a result. Thank you for listening to our concerns. Sincerely, Bob and Anne Gaskill 4624 Arden Ave. 3/18/2008 Susan Heiberg From: Jennifer Bennerotte Sent: Monday, March 17, 2008 5:41 AM Cc: Susan Heiberg Subject: FW: Edina Country Club Traffic Calming Measures Jennifer Bennerotte Communications & Marketing Director City of Edina 952 - 833 -9520 FAX 952 - 826 -0390 jennerotte @ci.edina.mn.us From: Betsyvk @aol.com [mailto:Betsyvk @aol.com] Sent: Sunday, March 16, 2008 8:17 PM To: Jennifer Bennerotte Subject: Edina Country Club Traffic Calming Measures W SF�� MAR .18 In Page 1 of 1 We are writing to state our opposition to the traffic calming measures included with the sewer and water road reconstruction plan. Both the City Engineer and Traffic consultant indicated that Country Club did not have a traffic or speed problem when compared to other Edina neighborhoods. Also, the addition of a lane on Hwy 100 has, according to the DOT, significantly improved the flow of traffic making that a desirable alternative vs use of city streets. The addition of speedbumps, raised cross walks (which are in effect speed bumps) and narrowing of streets at triangles addresses a problem which does not exist. Furthermore, bypassing the NTMP survey process eliminated the input of Country Club residents on these substantial changes to a unique and historic neighborhood. Betsy von Kuster Paul von Kuster 4500 Sunnyside Road Edina, MN * * * * * * * * * * * * ** It's Tax Time! Get tips, forms, and advice on AOL Money & Finance. (http: / /money.aol.com /tax ?NCID= aolprf00030000000001) 3/18/2008 Page 1 of 1 SEAL Susan Heiberg From: Jennifer Bennerotte RECEIVED EY Sent: Monday, March 17, 2008 5:42 AM Cc: Susan Heiberg Subject: FW: Highlands Proposed Project Jennifer Bennerotte Communications & Marketing Director City of Edina 952 -833 -9520 FAX 952 - 826 -0390 jennerotte@ci.edina.mn.us From: Ed Stych [mailto:estych @srspeedy.com] Sent: Sunday, March 16, 2008 4:42 PM To: Jennifer Bennerotte Subject: Highlands Proposed Project To the Members of the City Council: I want to voice my support for the proposed Upper Highlands Reconstruction project. My support is not enthusiastic. The proposed assessment will be difficult for my family to pay for, and I don't support every part of the project. But I believe that parts of the project are necessary. I strongly support the work on the water mains. The water main in front of my house has ruptured three times in the last five years. It appears that it's necessary to replace the water mains in the neighborhood. My biggest objection is the proposed sidewalk along Ayrshire from Vernon to Doncaster. I don't think this is necessary, and there is only one small stretch of that road segment that is used frequently by pedestrians. That segment is from Duncraig to Lochloy, which students use when cutting through the neighborhood from Highlands School. Sincerely, Ed Stych 5257 Lochloy Dr. Work: 612 - 376 -0688 Home: 952 - 925 -0162 estych@srspeedy.com 3/18/2008 Susan Heiberg From: Jennifer Bennerotte Sent: Monday, March 17, 2008 5:47 AM Cc: Susan Heiberg Subject: FW: letter of clarification Jennifer Bennerotte Communications & Marketing Director City of Edina 952 - 833 -9520 FAX 952 - 826 -0390 jbennerotte @ci.edina.mn.us From: Jean Rehkamp Larson [mailto:jean @rehkamplarson.com] Sent: Saturday, March 15, 2008 10:59 PM To: Jennifer Bennerotte Subject: letter of clarification Y" SEAL ' MAR 7 8 1001 RECE6VEp Ae• Page 1 of 2 Please kindly forward this letter on to the city council and mayor a second time to ensure that it reaches them in a readable format. Dear City Council members, It has come to my attention some of you were unable to open my attached letter sent Wednesday 3/12/08. 1 am resending it within the text of the email below to ensure that it is accessible. I would like to stress that I object to the current plan because when the review of it occurred it was not understood that we could reject it in favor of historical integrity. In this drastic revision we lose part of the streetscape what was intended to be preserved. March 12, 2008 Dear Council Members, I am writing today to clarify the context in which I motioned for a Certificate of Appropriateness for the Country Club Area Sewer, Water and Street Reconstruction Residential Area Safety Improvement Plan. At the November meeting of the Historic Preservation Board the extensive redesign of the streetscape was presented by the city engineer and consultants and it was my understanding that HPB role was limited to commenting on and making minor adjustments to the elements of The Plan. I understood that the speed bumps, chokers, raised crosswalks, neighborhood entrance sign, etc. were required 3/18/2008 Page 2 of 2 to be in The Plan by mandate and that our role as a board was to offer helpful comments and suggestions as to how they could be more in keeping with the historic character of the neighborhood. For example, it was suggested that the bright brass plaque on the neighborhood entrance sign instead be a more subtle bronze or cut limestone but I did not think we were being asked or were able to comment on whether the sign itself was historically appropriate. I thought I was making a motion to approve our comments and suggestions that had been incorporated into the plan. It was not clear that we could have suggested elimination of any elements of the plan. I want to clarify that I do not think these traffic calming measures are historic to the neighborhood. This fundamental question was never on the table for discussion at the HPB meetings. If an alternate to remove some or all of the traffic calming items had been on the table for our review as aboard I would not have motioned for the approval of The Plan as it stands because these items are not original to the neighborhood. I joined the Historic Preservation Board to help the community assess the historic elements of designated districts and buildings in Edina. If our job, as a board, is to advise the City Council, it is only appropriate that we be made aware of the broader ramifications of our limited scope of influence. I believe it is important that the HPB has a transparent understanding of how issues that come before us will affect the community. Sincerely, Jean Rehkamp Larson, AIA Edina HPB member ■JEAN REHKAMP LARSON, AIA REHKAMP LARSON 2732 west 43rd Stress, Minneaaohs. MN 5' .410 612 -285 -7275 , 612 -285 -7274 3/18/2008 Page 1 of 4 Susan Heiberg From: Jennifer Bennerotte Sent: Monday, March 17, 2008 5:48 AM SEAL < MAR j g 2008 Cc: Susan Heiberg Subject: FW: Proposed Comprehensive Plan Is To Drastic in Its Scope of Change Jennifer Bennerotte Communications & Marketing Director City of Edina 952 - 833 -9520 FAX 952 - 826 -0390 jennerotte @ci.edina.mn.us From: Lelalulit @aol.com [mailto:Lelalulit @aol.com] Sent: Saturday, March 15, 2008 9:32 PM To: jonibennettl2 @comcast.net; jhovland @krauserollins.com; Immasica @aol.com; scot.housh @willis.com; anns @hoigaards.com; Jennifer Bennerotte; Cary Teague; Heather Worthington; Gordon Hughes Subject: Proposed Comprehensive Plan Is To Drastic in Its Scope of Change I am writing on behalf of Edina in general, and also, specifically for our neighborhood association, now renamed the Cahill /Lewis Park Neighborhood Association. The new name reflects the broadening base of members that have joined together to protest drastic proposed changes in the latest version of the Comprehensive Plan. We feel that the direction is too extreme, too drastic, and negative in its impact on not just our neighborhood but all of Edina. Edina has been a successful first ring suburb as evidenced by'its historically strong tax base, high property values, nationally ranked schools, low crime rate, and sought after lifestyle. The interplay of several factors have worked in balance to maintain that success. Among these factors are low density residential areas, large lot sizes, majority owned and well- maintained upper and middle class housing stock, large amounts of green space and parks, clustered commercial, medical and retail areas, tolerable traffic, low crime, strong schools, and an infrastructure designed to support a suburban model. Life has been good for those of us that worked hard to achieve and maintain the community. Edina has been something to strive for and that our children have been raised to work towards. This model has proved successful not only in Edina but also in other middle /upper middle class suburbs throughout our country. The current proposed Comprehensive Plan, if adopted, would change this proven suburban model. At previous Comprehensive Planning Committee hearings the repeated message delivered by property owners and residents has been to keep the density low, retain green space, keep buildings low profile so the sky can be enjoyed by all, keep the traffic flowing and at a minimum and keep our property values high. This message is not incorporated into the current Comprehensive Plan for all 3/18/2008 Page 2 of 4 neighborhoods. There is a disconnnect, as though the message was not heard or was ignored. Because our neighborhoods are interconnected, any dramatic change to one neighborhood will cause a spill -over affect onto others. The most drastic proposed change is to the Cahill Gardens area and overflows to the Lewis Park area. Although this area is currently zoned industrial, it should not suffer the brunt of any experimental direction. The most recent Comprehensive Plan proposes doubling the population density in this area which joins and commingles into the Lewis Park neighborhood area, allowing progressively higher buildings, offering incentives for "affordable housing ' and in its current form having a devastating effect on our entire neighborhood. The status quo, of quiet, low profile warehouses, is far better than densely packed high rises, stacked with affordable or low income residences. We believe that the current mix in Edina of 80/20 affordable housing works well. The Met Council had proposed 212 affordable units between the years 2010 -2020 as sufficient to meet any perceived need. (Drive down Cahill or on West 70th and you will see repeated vacancy signs at both existing low income and affordable housing complexes). For the Comprehensive Planning Committee to arbitrarily double this number to over 500 affordable units is an unwarranted stress on the community. Any touted benefits of more affordable housing, increased density, and high rises in a suburban setting, do not outweigh the counterbalances of more traffic, strain on the infrastructure, burden on the schools, and a likely higher rate of crime. We believe that Edina in general has adequate affordable /low income housing options, particularly in apartments, condos, and townhomes and if there is any need for additional equivalent housing, it should only be in the area of single family homes. We also believe that no one neighborhood in Edina should have more than 10% of the affordable /low income housing units or it would create a de facto poor part of town and put that area out of balance with the rest of the community. Specifically for the Cahill /Lewis Park Neighborhood, we believe that: 1. Density should not be doubled for the entire area of GMU area as proposed. That growth is too large and too concentrated and needs to be scaled back. The traffic problems would become horrendous. (Try getting onto West 70th or West 76th at rush hour now, even before the Grammercy is fully sold or occupied.) These two inlet roads, the only ones with access to the east, can not handle much more capacity. 2. We suggest a maximum of only 3 stories on Cahill (with no incentive or bonus heights given for any reason) to assure that the street does not look out of balance or heavy on one side. Currently the buildings bordering on the west side of Cahill are at a maximum height of 3 stories, we believe that should be consistent on both sides. We think this building height limit should apply all the way to Bush Lake Road. And then from east of Bush Lake Road to Highway 100 we suggest a maximum_ height of 3 -5 stories with no incentives or bonus heights given for any reason. Only in areas immediately contiguous to Highway 100 do we suggest allowing anything over 5 stories, and even there we think you should be considerate of the people on the east side of Highway 100 that would have to look into those buildings. 3. Low income /Affordable Housing - We believe the current split of 80/20 and current number of units is working well and that to tip the balance more towards 3/18/2008 Page 3 of 4 affordable /low income would have negative consequences for the entire City. If any additional low income /affordable units are added between 2010 -2020, it should be at the minimum suggested by the Met Council of 212 and we do not think these should be stacked or added either in Cahill /Lewis Park neighborhood nor in Southdale area because these two neighborhoods already have a higher share of these options available. Affordable housing in the form of single family homes should be the only ones considered and no compulsory affordable housing should be mandated to developers. 4. Also, we are concerned about potential waste management sites being considered for the Cahill /Lewis Park neighborhood possibly at the new City Works site. We would request that it not be put there or anywhere in any neighborhood near residences or offices. The smell and traffic from garbage trucks would negatively affect property values. More appropriate sites for this away from residences (rifle range at Braemar off of 169, or further out in the country near other waste sites) would make more sense. Does the City, and the Cahill Garden area need updating and renovation? Yes, but do it wisely and in a circumspect and respectful way that preserves the middle /upper middle class suburban experience. We are asking that you listen to our community. We do not want high rises, anywhere. They are an eyesore, ruin the suburban vista and horizon, and block the sun and the rising moon and the airflow. It will also put further stress on waste and water flow, which is already the subject of problems and issues within Edina. We do not want increased density, as it causes traffic problems and puts pressure on a sensitive infrastructure that was conceived and implemented with lower density in mind. We do not want more affordable or low income housing. We have sufficient options available as witnessed by the constant vacancy signs on the complexes available. We think the current Comprehensive Plan has gone overboard in trying to encourage affordable housing by mandating that any new development incorporate it and by offering incentives in the form of additional building heights to those developers building affordable /low income housing. It appears that the housing section of the Comprehensive Plan was drafted by someone that did not appreciate the history and success of suburban living. Hard work and perserverence have historically been rewarded with a better lifestyle and attractive living situations. It is something earned and was revered in the past. Most of us, or our families, worked hard, and continue to work hard to achieve and maintain a standard of living to afford to be able to live in Edina. We should not deny that feeling of satisfaction that comes with being self - reliant and successful on one's own merits without the need.for assistance from others. It builds self - confidence and self -worth. A suburban lifestyle is one to strive towards and motivates one to keep achieving. This has helped our suburb, our state and our country be successful. Do not destroy that which has worked. Sincerely, Casandra Mihalchick, President of Cahill /Lewis Park Neighborhood Association, Lelalulit(a aol.com 11/1 R / ?()()R Susan Heiberg From: Jennifer Bennerotte Sent: Monday, March 17, 2008 5:49 AM Cc: Susan Heiberg Subject: FW: Deliver to Council Members Today Jennifer Bennerotte Communications & Marketing Director City of Edina 952 - 833 -9520 FAX 952 - 826 -0390 jennerotte@ci.edina.mn.us From: DWMacLennan [mailto:dwmaclennan @aol.com] Sent: Saturday, March 15, 2008 5:18 PM To: Jennifer Bennerotte Subject: Deliver to Council Members Today TO THE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE EDINA CITY COUNCIL: - SEAL `I MAR i R 7nnq Page 1 of 1 WE MOVED TO THE COUNTRTY CLUB NEIGHBORHOOD OF EDINA IN 1968 AND OWN A HOME ON MOORLAND AVENUE. We are writing to you today to express our opposition to the Traffic Calming Plan because of its aesthetic impact and resulting expense. We do not want to reconstruct our neighborhood streets using speed humps with reflective markings, raised cross - walks, one -ways, narrowed streets, concrete dividers and increased sheet metal signage. We believe this plan will compromise the graceful flowing transitions at major intersections and negatively alter the neighborhood environment we have long admired and enjoyed. We am not asking you to delay or stop the sewer and water repair project, which is desperately needed. We have signed a petition asking the Edina City Council and city administrators to separate the water and sewer project from the traffic calming plan and solicit alternate bids that repair our streets AS IS. AS IS meaning -- no traffic calming street modifications and devices. We must maintain the integrity of our neighborhood and appropriate action by our City Council is needed now. Sincerely, DAVID W. AND KATHLEEN MACLENNAN Supercharge your AIM. Get the AIM toolbar for your browser. vi ui1)nnQ Susan Hei -rom: Sent: Cc: Subject: Jennifer Bennerotte Monday, March 17, 2008 5:49 AM Susan Heiberg FW: country club traffic measures Jennifer Bennerotte Communications & Marketing Director City of Edina 952- 833 -9520 FAX 952- 826 -0390 jbennerotte@ci.edina,.mn.us - - - -- Original Message---- - From: dock [mailto :dack@dack.com] Sent: Saturday, March 15, 2008 5:39 PM To: Jennifer Bennerotte Subject: country club traffic measures 4i: SEAL MAR 1 R 1008 RECEIVED I'm in favor of the traffic measures proposed for the Country Club neighborhood. Thanks for listening. back Ragus 4614 Arden Ave. Susan Heiberg From: Jennifer Bennerotte Sent: Monday, March 17, 2008 5:50 AM Cc: Susan Heiberg Subject: FW: North East traffic improvement plan Jennifer Bennerotte Communications & Marketing Director City of Edina 952 - 833 -9520 FAX 952 -826 -0390 jbennerotte @ci.edina.mn.us From: Mike Martin [mailto:mmartin4905 @earthlink.net] Sent: Saturday, March 15, 2008 5:13 PM To: Jennifer Bennerotte Subject: North East traffic improvement plan SEAL RECEIVED Page 1 of 1 Note: please forward this note to all city council members and Mayor prior to the council meeting on 3/18 Dear Mayor and City Council member, My name is Mike Martin and I reside at 4905 Maple Road in Edina. I am aware that there is an important council meeting on the 18th of March to discuss the northeast Edina traffic improvement plan. Unfortunately I will not be able to attend the meeting. I was recently made aware of a plan to augment the current plan so that only a few streets in Country Club would be modified with traffic calming devices. While I support the plan as described in the Edina City website, I do not support removing any of the traffic calming devices to provide an augmentation of the plan. This is because many streets, such as Maple Road, Arden or Bruce may be left with no calming devices at all. Furthermore, there is a danger of traffic redistribution which will only serve to divide our northeast Edina community. In lieu of an augmented or reduced plan, I would rather see the Council reject the plan in it's entirety and recommend further study or abandonment of any further proposals at this time. To summarize my point, either approve and implement the current comprehensive traffic plan or reject the entire plan. Thanks you for considering my opinion here. p.s. In my discussions with city engineer Wayne Houle this week, he has informed me that he does not recommend modifying the current plan. Please respect the guidance of the engineering department in making your decision. Sincerely, Michael W Martin H - 952 - 926 -8172 M - 952 -484 -7838 1;/1 R /200R Page 1 of 1 Susan Heiberg From: Jennifer Bennerotte ), SEAL `, MAR 18 2000 RECEIVED a� Sent: Monday, March 17, 2008 5:50 AM Cc: Susan Heiberg Subject: FW: Opposition to Traffic Calming Measures in Country Club Neighborhood Jennifer Bennerotte Communications & Marketing Director City of Edina 952 - 833 -9520 FAX 952- 826 -0390 jbennerotte @ci.edina.mn.us From: Michael Hartmann [mailto:mjh403 @earthlink.net] Sent: Saturday, March 15, 2008 3:25 PM To: Jennifer Bennerotte Subject: Opposition to Traffic Calming Measures in Country Club Neighborhood Dear Council Members, Mayor and /or City Staff, We are writing to express our concern and opposition to the Traffic Calming Plan being considered for the Country Club Neighborhood. We are new to the neighborhood as of June 2007 and were not aware, nor able to express our opinion regarding these proposed changes. We have since researched the available information and, along with our experience while living here, strongly oppose the Traffic - Calming Plan. We fully support the sewer and water repair, understanding that investment in the infrastructure is necessary (the fact that when we purchased our house, we didn't know about a "planned assessment" of $10,000 to $18,000 is our fault for not researching). We have a 2 year old, a baby on the way and hope to live in this area for a long time and raise our family. We do not want to reconstruct our neighborhood streets and believe that this plan will compromise the graceful flowing transitions and negatively alter the neighborhood environment without adding safety to our neighborhood. We have signed a petition asking the Edina City Council and city administrators to seperate the water and sewer project from the traffic calming plan and solicit alternate bids that repair our streets AS IS. We must maintain the integrity of our neighborhood and appropriate action by our City Council is needed now. Michael and Tracy Hartmann 4611 Bruce Ave 3/18/2008 Susan Heiberg From: Jennifer Bennerotte Sent: Monday, March 17, 2008 5:52 AM Cc: Susan Heiberg Subject: FW: Traffic calming measures in the Country Club District Jennifer Bennerotte Communications & Marketing Director City of Edina 952 - 833 -9520 FAX 952- 826 -0390 jennerotte@ci.edina. mn. us From: Karen Ferrara [mailto:kbfer @comcast.net] Sent: Saturday, March 15, 2008 2:20 PM To: Jennifer Bennerotte Subject: Traffic calming measures in the Country Club District /GIT� SEAL � MAR 18 1006 RECEIVED Page 1 of 1 My name is Karen Ferrara, I live at 4200 W 44th St. I live in the Grimes House, which is on the Federal Historic Register. I am on the Edina Historic Preservation Board. I am writing in regards to the COA that was obtained for traffic calming measures in the Country Club District. At our last meeting we heard from a group of concerned citizens in that area,who also have a signed petition, that there are quite a few people (in fact maybe a majority) that donot want these measure. I am not happy with the way it was presented to out board as an already done deal and part and parcel of the sewer and utility package, pardon the pun, but I smell a rat here. I think this was pushed through not though the appropriate traffic committee, but through the public utility ( or sewer and waste commitee) and that people were not appropriately notified. This hearkens back to a meeting in the old city hall, when the CC District want to close the area off to outside traffic, at that time notification was a problem. I see a trend here and I don't like it. These measures should have gone through the appropriate committee and appropriate notification should have been made. I don't know what can be done, but it is not a done deal yet, so I suggest you take a second look at it. Thank you for your attention. Karen B Ferrara 3/18/2008 Susan Heiberg From: Jennifer Bennerotte Sent: Monday, March 17, 2008 5:53 AM Cc: Susan Heiberg Subject: FW: Deliver to Council Members Monday (3/17) Jennifer Bennerotte Communications & Marketing Director City of Edina 952 - 833 -9520 FAX 952 - 826 -0390 jennerotte@ci.edina.mn.us From: allysonaldrich @aol.com [mailto:allysonaldrich @ aol.com] Sent: Friday, March 14, 2008 10:44 PM To: Jennifer Bennerotte Subject: Fwd: Deliver to Council Members Monday (3/17) To the City Council Members, CIT c SEAL MAR 18 2008 RECEIVED Page 1 of 2 Todd and I are unable to attend the Council meeting on Tuesday night regarding the Sewer/Water and Traffic Calming project for the Country Club neighborhood, but we would like you to know that we are opposed the traffic calming portion of the project. We ask you to please proceed with the plumbing improvements only. The aesthetics of the historic neighborhood will be ruined if the speed humps, raised sidewalks, added signage, etc. are put in place. Thank you, Allyson Aldrich - - - -- Original Message---- - From: allysonaldrich @aol.com To: edinamail @ci.edina.mn.us Sent: Mon, 10 Mar 2008 9:41 am Subject: Traffic Calming Plan Dear Council Members: We are writing to you again to express our deep opposition to the Traffic Calming Plan for the Country Club area because of its aesthetic impact and resulting expense. We do not want to reconstruct our neighborhood streets using speed humps with reflective markings, raised crosswalks, one -ways, narrowed streets, concrete dividers, and increased sheet metal signage. We believe this plan will 3/18/2008 Page 2 of 2 compromise the graceful flowing transitions at major intersections and negatively alter the neighborhood environment we have long admired and enjoyed. We are not asking you to delay or stop the sewer and water repair project, which is desperately needed. We have signed a petition asking the Edina City Council and city administrators to separate the water and sewer project from the traffic calming plan and solicit alternate bids that repair our streets AS IS. AS IS meaning - -no traffic calming street modifications and devices. We must maintain the integrity of our neighborhood, and appropriate action by our City Council is needed now. Sincerely, Allyson and Todd Aldrich 4518 Browndale Ave. Supercharge your AIM. Get the AIM toolbar for your browser. Supercharge your AIM. Get the AIM toolbar for your browser. 11/1 R/70OR Susan Heiberg r "rom: Jennifer Bennerotte ��' "l Monday, March 17, 2008 5:54 AM �O .SEAL Sent: MAR i R 1008 Cc: Susan Heiberg Subject: FW: Speed humps RECEIVED Jennifer Bennerotte Communications a Marketing Director City of Edina 952 - 833 -9520 FAX 952- 826 -0390 jbennerotte@ci.edina.mn.us ----- Original Message----- From: Ruth Melcher [ mailto :ruthmelcher@usfamily.net] Sent: Friday, March 14, 2008 8:29 PM To: Jennifer Bennerotte Subject: Speed humps TO Edina City Council Members FROM: Ruth Melcher, 4624 Bruce Ave., 920 -3061 RE: Country Club Neighborhood Speed Humps This afternoon I saw something that really concerned me: a school bus, headed east on 50th turned left onto Arden. WHAT WILL THAT SCHOOL BUS DO WHEN THERE IS A TRAFFIC CHOKER RIGHT ON THAT END OF ARDEN, RIGHT AT THE INTERSECTION? It will have to stop, or at least slow down, before the speed hump; with its tail end protruding into 50th St. How many other hidden problems like this are there with the planned traffic - control devices? - -- Get FREE High Speed Internet from USFamily.Netl -- http: / /www.usfamily.net /mkt - freepromo.html - -- 1 FW: Country Club Calming Measures Susan Heiberg From: Jennifer Bennerotte Sent: Monday, March 17, 2008 5:55 AM Cc: Susan Heiberg Subject: FW: Country Club Calming Measures Jennifer Bennerotte Communications & Marketing Director City of Edina 952 - 833 -9520 FAX 952- 826 -0390 iennerotte @ci.edina.mn.us From: Maureen Brener [ mailto : Maureen. Brener @genmills.com] Sent: Friday, March 14, 2008 5:59 PM To: Jennifer Bennerotte Subject: Country Club Calming Measures MAR 1 R 1006 RECEIVED Page 1 of 1 I am a resident of the Country Club neighborhood and I would like to extend my strong support of the city's recent proposal regarding its' calming measures. I understand that it has been difficult to find a reasonable balance with an issue that has, in many respects, struck such a polarized chord within the community. I appreciate the effort that the Council has taken with respect to this issue. With the safety of my 3 small children in mind, I would strongly hope that the recent recommendations find favorable passage in its' upcoming vote. Sincerely , Maureen Brener 4621 Wooddale Avenue 1/1 R/2008 Page 1 of 4 Susan Heiberg SEAL From: Jennifer Bennerotte RECEIVED Sent: Monday, March 17, 2008 8:49 AM 6✓Y Cc: Susan Heiberg Subject: FW: Being Lied Too About Traffic Jennifer Bennerotte Communications & Marketing Director City of Edina 952 - 833 -9520 FAX 952 - 826 -0390 jbennerotte@ci.edina.mn.us From: Marie Jackson [ mailto:mariedjackson @gmail.com] Sent: Monday, March 17, 2008 8:29 AM To: jhovland @krauserollins.com; Jennifer Bennerotte; Wayne Houle; Immasica @aol.com; ghughes @cityofedina.com Subject: Being Lied Too About Traffic Dear City Council, Staff and Transportation Commission Members, Attached Please find a copy of the letter that Marty Miller sent you. 1 agree with everything Marty states in his letter. A bigger issue is 1 feel like I have been lied too by my neighbors. A women came to my home told me many erroneous lies about the traffic calming including the following: Lo r a Signs will be erected all over Country Club area, The raise crosswalks will be eye soars with large reflectors painted bright orange, The city doesn't yet have the money to pay for the tragic calming, More traffic will be funnelled down Drexel Avenue. You will find my name and address on a petition to halt the current traffic calming plan. Based on new and current knowledge please disregard my signature as I was lied to in order to obtain my signature. It is really sad that you have worked so hard to do something to make our streets safer for our children and a few people are wanting to due away with your good work. Please know these people are running a scare campaign and that you must not let them win. 3/18/2008 Page 2 of 4 Thank you (RECEIVED CIT C SEAL � Marie D Jackson 4604 Drexel Ave Edina, MN Please see the "E -Mail (March 12, 2008)" attached below from Bruce Christensen. This is being sent throughout the neighborhood in small batches. In this letter he informs residents of a City decision, then infuses it with his biases and personal opinions. In his last paragraph he speaks of the developers original plan and vision and that traffic calming was not part of that [in the 1920's]. Well, If we restore Eden Prairie, Chaska and Chanhassen to farmland, remove half the cars from the roads to get back to 1920's ownership levels and also reinstall the Trolley Line, I guarantee you, and I'm not even a traffic engineer, that this would fix our traffic problem; But I don't see that as an option. So we are left with the need to not ignore this problem and do something to help the neighborhood. I am getting letters from him now on a regular basis, at least 4 in the past month and I just received one from him today in response to a reply he received from the attached e-mail. He also somehow has obtained my work email address. This group, as I have mentioned before, has a website that is full of lies and half- truths in an attempt to whip the residents into a frenzy and create a pitchfork and burning torch mob for the sole purpose of invalidating a public, methodical and fact -based process that the council approved on November 6, 2006. At that meeting, the Council praised the work of the SAC Committee following Les' presentation which concluded at approximately 5 hours and 30 minutes into the meeting. The following comments after the 5:30:00 mark were made: Mayor Hovland — "Thank you [Les] and the Commission for a tremendous piece of work." Councilmember Housh — "I doubted this could happen, but you have done a great job." Councilmember Masica — "I am pleased the entire commission voted to accept this plan in concept... Frankly, I think this is one of the best studies I have ever seen." Councilmember Swenson — "I think the work is excellent." Councilmember Housh — "We implemented a plan ... And this is for the good of everyone." The council then unanimously approved the plan and Mayor Hovland closed with "Kudos to everyone." 1/1 R/2008 Page 3 of 4 This meeting was a long time ago so memory begins to fade on what a wonderful accomplishment this was. For many years, before you commissioned this study in July of 2005, hundreds of concerned residents had stood in front of you and asked the City to do something about the traffic in the neighborhood. The Southwestern Suburbs have exploded in growth and as you know the inadequate road system around Edina has created this problem. This plan needs to be implemented in its entirety, professional traffic consultants have told us that. Bruce Christensen is not a traffic engineer, he doesn't design roadways. Yet he is the self- appointed neighborhood "Traffic Guru" and "Country Club Heritage Protector ". I sat in every public meeting and listened to the SRF consultants explain to the commission that they are amazed at the large and dangerous volumes of traffic in the NE Edina quadrant. He has filled residents full of propaganda and given them marching orders. He has people going door to door throughout the neighborhood in a last ditch effort to further divide the residents and to recruit more to his cause. In the past few days, I was informed of 2 separate representatives that have sat in my neighbors living rooms and told them incorrectly that "there will be multiple assessments for this because of traffic calming" and that "there will be reflective paint on the speed humps and crosswalks of the neighborhood ". Both of these statements are false. There will not be multiple assessments and the speed humps and raised crosswalks actually have an old -style cobblestone look, not covered with reflective paint. If a resident does not have the true facts from either the City Engineers, the almost 200 page SRF Transportation Study or the almost 200 page Feasibility Study, they don't have the real information. They have misinformation given to them by Bruce Christensen and are then told to contact the city to stop this. His website has a link to 4 excerpts from the July 19, 2005 meeting attempting to get across the fact that there isn't a problem and that the neighborhood doesn't want this. He forgot to link the videos of the parade of concerned residents who talked in front of the council that day, only the few oppositions. Does Councilmember Masica know that she is now on Youtube thanks to Bruce Christensen? He also forgot to go back over the past decade (you could go back further) to find the lines of residents who have stood in front of the Council asking for help. As further examples of his propaganda, please open the attachment to this e-mail (False_Sign.jpg). This is a sign that is in a residents front yard, given to them by Bruce Christensen. This sign says "Coming Soon: Street Signs - Don't drive thru Country Club". This isn't a statement meant to inform a reside nt. It propaganda s meant to direct someone to action, Bruce Christensen's action. Are there p g any signs coming in 2008 that say "Don't drive through Country Club "? I looked in the Feasibility Study and I can't find any. Three days ago the neighborhood received another mailing from Bruce with the attached letter, please open the 2nd attachment to this e-mail (Christensen_Letter.pdf). In his e-mail, he asked that residents forward the attached "draft letter" on to you and all city staff stating their opposition. The Council did the right thing almost three years ago when you directed the study, then again did the right thing a year and a half ago when you listened to the traffic professionals and an informed 1/18/2008 Page 4 of 4 Transportation Commission and unanimously approved the plan. Please don't let these underhanded tactics of propaganda and deceit enter our city process. After unanimous approval by the entire Traffic Commission and unanimous approval by the City Council, you can't allow an 11th hour insurgent group who has been waiting for this moment to halt the implementation. The leaders of this group knew exactly what the process was and were involved in the process. Some of them spoke at Council meetings, they just didn't like the outcome. They knew on November 6, 2006 that the plan was approved and they could have tried to derail the implementation anytime over the last year and a half but they didn't. Bruce Christensen waited until a month ago, just before implementation, to misrepresent the CCNA directory and spread his biased opinions to the neighborhood in an attempt to put together a group for the sole purpose of attacking your decision. This is a classic "last minute" dirty politics tactic and I hope you stand strong against it. In closing, I hope that I will never have to bother you again with letters like this. I don't enjoy doing these types of things, I don't do this because I find it entertaining. I do this because my children and hundreds of other children play on the sidewalks and ride their bikes through the streets of this neighborhood. I just want them to have a peaceful and safe neighborhood to grow up in. Thank you again for your time and all of your hard work for the City of Edina. Sincerely, Marty Miller Drexel Avenue 3/18/2008 Susan Heiberg From: Jennifer Bennerotte Sent: Monday, March 17, 2008 1:10 PM Cc: Gordon Hughes; Susan Heiberg Subject: FW: Country Club Neighborhood Traffic Plan Jennifer Bennerotte Communications & Marketing Director City of Edina 952 - 833 -9520 FAX 952 - 826 -0390 ibennerotte @ci.edina.mn.us Page 1 of 2 SEAL MAR 18 1008 Please Forward to Council Members & Staff From: Fogelberg, Brian @ Minneapolis [mailto: Brian. Fogelberg @cbre.com] Sent: Monday, March 17, 2008 12:41 PM To: Jennifer Bennerotte; jhovland @krauserollins.com; Jennifer Bennerotte; Wayne Houle; Immasica @aol.com; ghughes @cityofedina.com Subject: Country Club Neighborhood Traffic Plan: Please Forward to Council Members &Staff Dear Council Members & Staff: This email in written in support of the proposed traffic calming measures to be incorporated with the sewer and water line project, all approved over a year ago. The Traffic Plan was an engineering solution based upon a study of, among other things, neighborhood traffic counts, traffic patterns and speed. The Study also noted that the streets are older and narrow, and it took into account all possible sources of information. The process was overseen by an advisory panel of 19 people, a Commission of 9 people and was scrutinized at 5 open houses and 2 public hearings. This Process ensured all interested persons had an opportunity to provide input and that the solutions were based upon professional engineering, not lay opinions, to ensure the best results for the whole neighborhood and not just select areas or streets. Now, just as bids are to be awarded to implement the unanimously supported plan, an attack comes from a group of residents who are being led by people using false claims to rally support and inflame passions. The central theme appears to be that the changes will adversely impact the "character" of the neighborhood. I am sure some people in this group believe that, and they are certainly entitled to their opinion and have a right to be heard. But there is a process to accommodate that, and it all ended over a year ago. I personally participated in that process and received numerous notices inviting me to do so. I also do not agree that it will adversely impact the character of our neighborhood - -in fact I think it will improve it. What we do know is that the study showed there is a traffic problem. My biggest concern, and that of most people involved for the past 5 or more years, is the safety of the residents -- especially children. Lots of traffic, traveling fast on narrow streets lined with kids, is a recipe for disaster. If someone gets injured or killed, will these same people be outspoken in support of no traffic calming measures? Or instead will they disappear and leave the City to be sued and vilified in the streets and in the press for failing to implement an approved traffic plan based on its own study? 1/1 R /2008 Page 2 of 2 I have seen the emails from this group and had one of their team come to my house to discuss it. While conversation ended pleasantly, I can tell you it had nothing to do with getting my opinion for a survey, and was all about attacking the plan with statements that are not supported by the facts. Anybody who experienced this "survey' style but who was not involved first hand in the process would be not in a position to counter the statements and would just want it to end. What also became clear through the discussion was that these people were not interested in what is best for the neighborhood but rather their own personal bias. That should not surprise anyone reading this email because that it is typical of City issues, but the fact that it is being misrepresented by the leaders of this group is important because it completely undermines what they claim in terms of support to derail the approved Traffic Plan. myself gained fame through the efforts of this group by their emailing a link to a clip from a city council meeting where I am seen asking a question. The clip was then intentionally edited to give the opposite impression to those viewing it. That, along with making changes to one of the traffic engineers document without disclosing it and countless other misleading tactics are the foundation of their campaign. Please - -do the RIGHT thing on Tuesday night: • Stand by the legitimate process that was completed. • Stand by the Study and Plan, which is the only non - biased information before you. • Do NOT reward a campaign who's leaders have engaged in misleading residents. • Do not establish a precedent that the City's process is meaningless. • Provide safety to the residents, particularly the children; it is your highest responsibility Brian Fogelberg Bruce Avenue 3/18/2008 Susan Hei rrom: Sent: Cc: Subject: Jennifer Bennerotte Monday, March 17, 2008 1:17 PM Susan Heiberg FW: Country Club "traffic calming measures" Jennifer Bennerotte Communications & Marketing Director City of Edina 952- 833 -9520 FAX 952- 826 -0390 jbennerotte@ci.edina.mn.us - - - -- Original Message---- - From: Charles Buth [mailto:buthy4ftol.com] Sent: Monday, March 17, 2008 12:57 PM To: Jennifer Bennerotte Subject: Country Club "traffic calming measures" MAR 1 R 1008 RECEIVED ifter reviewing all of the correspondence that has been done on the sewer improvements required and the "traffic calming measures" included with the proposal my wife and I are at a loss to understand how the City Counsel will not listen to the residents of the area. Clearly there is a mandate from the residents to do the sewer project but there is very strong opposition to the traffic measures. It seems the minority voice is getting what it wants while the majority is being swept over by excuses and procedural matters. To have this expense of $20,000 plus rammed down our throats by a minority of those who want it (and a mayor that no longer lives there - - -and who coincidentally sold his home in Country Club very near HWY 100 after passing and building a sound wall at residents expense), with the traffic costs appearing to be a significant part of the expense is wrong. We would like to be on record as strongly opposed to the traffic calming measure portion of the sewer upgrade project. Chuck and Jan Buth 1 Susan Hei . rom: Sent: Cc: Subject: Jennifer Bennerotte Monday, March 17, 2008 2:28 PM Susan Heiberg FW: country club traffic calming measures Jennifer Bennerotte Communications & Marketing Director City of Edina 952 -833 -9520 FAX 952- 826 -0390 jbennerotte@ci . edina. mn. us - - - -- Original Message---- - From: Kelly Jackson [mailto: jackson4626@mac.com] Sent: Monday, March 17, 2008 2:19 PM To: Jennifer Bennerotte Subject: country club traffic calming measures MAR 18 1008 RECEIVED ear City Council Members and City of Edina Staff, I am in favor of the traffic calming measures proposed for the Country Club Neighborhood. Sincerely, Kelly Jackson 4626 Drexel Ave. gyp` SEAL March 15, 2008 MAR 1 8 1008 RECEIVED To: Hon. James Hovland BY —�°- All Edina City Council Members Gordon Hughes From: Chris Rofidal Chairman, Heritage Preservation Board After a few days of reflection i wanted to take a moment to provide both feedback on the Heritage Preservation Meeting (March 11, 2008) and state my opinion on the matter of the Edina Country Club Street Reconstruction project. Since numerous emails and misinformed rumors are swirling, I thought it was best to be on record with that evening from my point of view. As will be recorded in the minutes, a small group of residents from the Country Club District . chose to use "Concerns of Residents to voice their opinion on the reconstruction project.. After giving them probably more latitude than I should have, it became apparent that their goal on that given night was to derail this project in the 1 1th hour. Whether they had valid points or not, the tone and verbal threats at the HPB where out of order. After it was clear that the HPB was getting divisive in its own mind and the atmosphere was deteriorating I offered up a few ways to end the issue. 1) We could ignore them since this issue was in "Concerns of Residents" and no action is required 2) Each HPB member was told they could personally comment on this information in their own'time 3) the City Council could refer back to us for additional insight 4) we could have a vote on a motion by a Board member if they so chose. Ultimately solution 4 was selected and as the minutes will show the motion was voted down. ineD0U0M111151Y1111r, this was not the a ro riate meeting to reverse action from November 2007. It would not be fair to the process or the people in support of this to reverse an earlier decision without the total package of information before us. Second, when you start threatening your own "residents or neighbors" with legal action and being told you are a "pawn in the City's chess game" that is clearly not appropriate for a board VOLUNTEERS e Who whole prolcess that Finally, any only was people worked integrity of the HPB on the line, public very hard at over the past few years were in jeopardy as well. In my opinion, when a group of residents comes to a volunteer Board that mad and using the HPB as their last ditch effort to derail this project, somewhere or somehow the process broke down. My perception is that some members of the public did not pay attention to the process and did not voice their opinion when they should have. Of course i would be a hypocrite if I did not also state that people back in 2005 could have followed the initial process and it may not have reached this point either. I did not follow the North East Study closely, but in doing research recently I am comforted by the numerous meetings, mailings and public input opportunities that have occurred since 2005 I have been asked by some, what next, should anything be changed? If certain aspects of the traffic calming measures are not necessary, then an amendment could be considered. The visuallhistorical problem in my opinion is that changing sidewalks, crosswalks, islands, new pavement and freshly painted lines will change the District because they are "new". That said, at certain points tin time infrastructure needs to be updated and the time in the Country Club has long come due. Furthermore, if the analysis shows that all of these traffic aspects are needed for safety and are further supported by the dedicated work of the Traffic Commission, then let the process come to completion in its entirety. Which aspects from a Heritage Preservation Board perspective could be amended? That would be a question that the entire HPB would have to weigh in on, because again you need to have all the information present to snake the best possible decision. (Not just information from one group) Furthermore you need to have your duly appointed board, give you The Edina City Council the. best possible advice. Thanks for the opportunity to serve in this capacity and thanks for trying to do what is right for the City of Edina. Respectfully, Chris Rofidal Chairman, Edina Heritage Preservation Board T SEAL From: Harrison, Chrissy [mailto:chrissy @ibsys.com] MAR 1 R 7008 Sent: Tuesday, March 18, 2008 8:56 AM RECEIVED To: Jennifer Bennerotte By° — Subject: Traffic calming measures in Country Club neighborhood importance: High March 17, 2008 Dear City of Edina Managers and City Council Members: We are writing to express our support for traffic calming measures in the Country Club Neighborhood. We feel the City has been responsive to neighborhood concerns about traffic by delaying our sewer and street reconstruction projects to develop a plan that included traffic calming measures. We commend the City staff and Council in their efforts to communicate with residents on this issue over the past several years. We believe, however, that the current plan as proposed will have a disparate impact upon Arden Avenue. Under the proposed plan, much has been done to narrow certain streets, increase the size of or add various traffic triangles, and create incentives to reduce traffic on certain streets. While the original intent in implementing any plan was to look at the neighborhood as a whole, and to not advocate any measures that would redirect traffic, we believe that the proposed plan will have this result. Every street, and every block within each street, must receive the same traffic calming measures in order for the plan to be successful, and to avoid redirecting traffic onto another street. We cannot implement another plan that narrows the entrances to some streets, and not others, or increases or adds traffic triangles for some streets, and not others. Our traffic committee representatives in the past have been advised that the plan will, in fact, redistribute traffic to our street. Unfortunately, past history has taught us this lesson. The neighborhoods' 1993 traffic calming plan had exactly the impact we fear under this plan. The addition of traffic triangles within the neighborhood under the 1993 plan redirected a significant amount of traffic from those streets that were designed to be the collector streets, greatly increasing traffic on the narrower streets that were not designed to carry through traffic. Under the 1993 plan, our street experienced a 62% increase in traffic. Only after the plan was implemented was it made known that .a major objective of the plan was to redirect traffic. In a November 29h, 1995 memo from the city consultant to the city engineer, it stated "The 'through' traffic that has remained on the neighborhood streets has been redistributed. Traffic on Wooddale and Browndale Avenues has been reduced significantly which was a major objective of the traffic management plan." For those arguing that the addition of traffic calming measures will impact the historical character of the neighborhood, we believe that returning the neighborhood to its original state, and removing all of the traffic triangles that redirected traffic under the 1993 plan, is a viable option that should be considered. These arguments cannot be given weight, however, if the same opponents are willing to retain what was already a historical shift from the neighborhood's original character, and from which they benefitted. We have over 75 children that live on our block. Each day we notice tremendous safety issues with these children trying to cross the street. And yet, there are no traffic calming measures proposed for our block. Many of us are willing to have a speed hump in front of our homes in order to make our street safer. From our point of view on Arden, we see cars regularly exceeding the posted speed limit, ignoring stop signs and seemingly unaware of the residents. While stop signs are intended to limit the impact, these measures clearly do not deter unsafe driving. When traffic officers are posted at our corner, they continually pull over cars for traffic violations. Then, when the officer is gone, the abuses resume. We need speed bumps to slow traffic, better delineation of crosswalks to protect pedestrians and diverting measures to discourage commuter cut - through traffic. We believe that traffic calming is essential for the neighborhood, and essential for the safely of children residing in the neighborhood. We also believe that with some input from the City engineers and consultants, we can make some minor modifications to the plan to make certain it is fair for all concerned. We also feel that the Historic Preservation Board should be given the full history of traffic calming measures in the past, as well as the opportunity to provide meaningful input on a revised and fair plan. It makes no sense to tear up the streets for sewer and water without addressing this long- standing issue that impacts our neighborhood's quality of life and the safety of our children. Thank you for your consideration of our views. Chrissy and Randy Harrison 4631 Arden Avenue Edina, MN 55424 (MAR SEAS, 1 R 2008 - -- Original Message---- - From: buthy4 @aol.com [moilto:buthy4@aol.com] Y CEIVEO Sent :. Tuesday, March 18, 2008 12:04 AM �_• To: Jennifer Bennerotte Subject: Fwd: Re: Country Club "traffic calming measures" - - - -- Original Message---- - From: buthy4 @aol.com To: scot.housh @willis.com Sent: Mon, 17 Mar 2008 8:04 pm Subject: Re: Country Club "traffic calming measures" Dear Scott and the rest of the Edina City Council, We also thank you for your response. Your implication that we have not been following all the correspondence is not really true. While we have seen much on the the sewer project there had been little that has made an impression on us in terms of the traffic calming measures other than that the transportation study that has been studying it. Our other concern is that it put off the sewer project and now it has become an increased assessment. I have to say that I have felt the traffic calming measures parts remind me of government earmarks. As I hope you know I have a great deal of respect for our city government and the huge amount of time you all spend to do the best for our community. I have two things to say that really . bother me. First of all, the cut through traffic is typical of a first rung community as ours is, I would think. To compare, when Hwy 100 and 394 are backed up and we cut through south Minneapolis should they also do something to stop all of us and others who find other routes. Will this really help or hurt us who come in and out of the neighborhood often. I'm assuming many people who live on Browndale and Wooddale are not happy with the amount of traffic. My guess is Sunnyside as well.My observance after 20 some years living on Sunnyside is that the worst speeders are the teenagers and homeowners. Honestly, I don't have statistics but its an assumption that I would be interested in an answer to. You buy a house on a busy street and you will get traffic. You buy a house on a park and you get people that go there and use it. You live on a golf course and you have carts and golfers that drive by your property. After receiving an email from Dr. Silverman and his discussion of safety, have we been given the amount of injuries we have had in the past? I know of only one slight accident where no serious injuries occurred and as you know our community has a pretty good pipeline when it comes to incidents. Also, the last time we put in traffic "measures" we had the confusing stop signs at Wooddale and Drexel installed, They are anything but helpful.. Will these kind of measures now be magnified? Many of us have been upset about the sound wall that also went through after a long thorough process. While being in favor of it for those that lived next to the expressway we never wanted to pay for it where we live and expressed that. It was never a huge problem for us then. It is now with more noise coming from the lower edges of the wall and we pay the same assessment that those closest to the highway pay. Obviously, Mayor Hovland is not responsible for this and I'm assuming he reclused himself from any part in that particular issue. It is not an easy job that you all do and we thank you for the time you all put in, Many of my comments are not backed by a study or statistics but I have never felt that some of the findings we have heard of are specific to CountryClub but more in general what traffic calming measure can impact in general. Please, whatever happens respond to me and let me know where I am misinformed. It is a shame how disenchanted people who thoroughly love their community can get. Very Respectfully, Jan and Chuck Buth - - - -- Original Message---- - From: Housh, Scot < scot. housh@willis.com> To: buthy4@ool.com Sent: Mon, 17 Mar 2008 11:52 am Subject: Country Club "traffic calming measures" Dear Chuck and Jan - Thanks for sharing your perspective regarding the traffic calming portions of the Country Club infrastructure project. We will be discussing this at our meeting on March 18th. We have heard from a number of residents who apparently had not been following the City's NE Edina Transportation Study and its findings. These findings were the basis of the changes outlined in the project. We have now heard from many in the the district who do not want changes made to our existing roadways. This input will be considered as a part of our deliberation on the issue. Thanks again for sharing your thoughts with us. Regards, Scot Housh - - - -- Original Message---- - From: Charles Buth [mail to:buthy4@aol.com] Sent: Monday, March 17, 2008 12:57 PM To: Jennifer Bennerotte Subject: Country Club "traffic calming measures" After reviewing all of the correspondence that has been done on the sewer improvements required and the "traffic calming measures" included with the proposal my wife and I are at a loss to understand how the City Counsel will not listen to the residents of the area. Clearly there is a mandate from the residents to do the sewer project but there is very strong opposition to the traffic measures. It seems the minority voice is getting what it wants while the majority is being swept over by excuses and procedural matters. To have this expense of $20,000 plus rammed down our throats by a minority of those who want it (and a mayor that no longer lives there - - -and who coincidentally sold his home in Country Club very near HWY 100 after passing and building a sound wall at residents expense), with the traffic costs appearing to be a significant part of the expense is wrong. We would like to be on record as strongly opposed to the traffic calming measure portion of the sewer upgrade project. Chuck and Jon Buth For information pertaining to Willis' email confidentiality and monitoring policy, usage restrictions, or for specific company registration and regulatory status information, please visit http-://www.willis.com/email—traile.r.aspx S L MAR � -- Original Message - - - -- 81p08 From: Ruth Melcher [ mailto :ruthmelcherCOusfamily.net] Sent: Tuesday, March 18, 2008 9:13 AM Aa To: Jennifer Bennerotte Subject: Please do NOT approve the proposed traffic- control device plan Dear City Council Member, Seven years ago, members of a neighborhood traffic committee supported the use of some . traffic control devices. The plan the city is considering is way beyond what most of us imagined and will also cause the following: Compromised access to our neighborhoods by emergency vehicles, school buses, moving vans, etc. In particular, does anyone know how these vehicles will navigate narrowed lanes and two speed humps in a row in icy or snowy conditions? • The inconvenience of going over two speed humps and /or through narrowed lanes each time we enter or leave the neighborhood. • Increased costs related to the great number of traffic- control devices. • Possible traffic redistribution due to an imbalance in number and placement of these devices. (Wider streets will receive more than their share of traffic- control devices in the form of narrowed lanes and traffic chokers). PLEASE DO NOT APPROVE THE TRAFFIC- CONTROL PLAN TONIGHT. Thank you, Ruth Melcher 4624 Bruce Ave. SEAL MAR 7 g 1068 REC�9�SC� From: scoggimmn@aol.com [mailto:scoggimmn@aol.com] Sent: Tuesday, March 18, 2008 9:40 AM To: Jennifer Bennerotte Subject: Concerns with Traffic Calming Measures and their Impact on Arden Avenue The attached letter represents the concerns of those residents residing on the 4600 block of Arden Avenue. While we are absolutely in support of traffic calming for the neighborhood, we are concerned that the current plan further redirects traffic onto our street. We would greatly appreciate the opportunity to speak at this evening's meeting, and .express our views. With over 75 children on our block, we are greatly alarmed that the impact of this plan could be to increase traffic on what is an already an incredibly busy street. Arden was not designed to be a commuter street for the neighborhood, and yet we have seen a huge increase in traffic since the implementation of the last traffic calming plan. Thank your for your work on behalf of all of us. Anne Scoggin 4610 Arden Avenue Supercharge your AIM. Get the AIM toolbar for your browser. i ' SEAL `' MAR 1 R 711(•8 RECEIVED Dear Council Member: I am writing to you today to express my opposition to the Traffic Calming Plan because of its aesthetic impact and resulting expense. I do not want to reconstruct our neighborhood streets using speed humps with reflective markings, raised cross - walks, one -ways, narrowed streets, concrete dividers and increased sheet metal signage. I believe this plan will compromise the graceful flowing transitions at major intersections and negatively alter the neighborhood environment I have long admired and enjoyed. I am not asking you to delay or stop the sewer and water repair project, which is desperately needed. I have signed a petition asking the Edina City Council and city administrators to separate the water and sewer project from the traffic calming plan and solicit alternate bids that repair our streets AS IS. AS IS meaning -- no traffic calming street modifications and devices. We must maintain the integrity of our neighborhood and appropriate action by our City Council is needed now. Sincerely, Kristin and Steve Veker 4605 Browndale Ave. Please refer to the City of Edina website (transportation commission section/NE Traffic Study and view pictures/Figures 1 -7 /2005) and www.speedhumps.net for detailed information. Mayor James Hovland, jhovlandgkrauserollins.com, 612 - 874 -8550 Council Member Joni Bennett, edinamail ci.edina.mn.us, 952- 927 -0661 Council Member Scot Housh, edinamail@ci.edina.mn.us, 763 - 302 -7174 Council Member Linda Masica, lmmasica@AgLI.com, 952- 942 -6770 Council Member Ann Swenson, swensonboyskao, 952- 927 -7524 Or write to us all at edinamailga ci.edina.mn.us, subject line: Deliver to Council Members Today City Manager, Gordon Hughes, ghughes@cityofedina.com, 952- 826 -0401 City Engineer, Wayne Houle, whoulegcityofedina.com, 952- 826 -1610 OV SEAL " - - - -- Original Message - - - -- MAR 7 R 2008 From: Michael Fernandez [mailto:mhfernandez @ msn.com] RECEIVED Sent: Monday, March 17, 2008 8:47 PM To: Jennifer Bennerotte Subject: RE: traffic plan for country club Jennifer, Please pass this along. I do not support the current calming traffic plans the city has for the country club neighborhood. I have looked into the plans in more detail and now see Arden Ave receiving only speed bumps and the remaining streets having or-receiving chokers. Hence more traffic will filter to Arden and Bruce, the streets not receiving the chokers. We on Arden and Bruce should not have to bare the traffic so Drexel and Casco can now push their traffic problems to us. Traffic calming on all the streets in Country Club should be addressed equally and not simply pushed to someone else's street, hence new problem. Arden's traffic increased 62% when the Woodale choker was put into place. What is the estimate for increase when Drexel and Casco have chokers. Will 4 speed bumps detract cars from Arden Avenue then? Seems like robbing Peter to pay Paul. This problem will not go away until each street is treated equally. Heather Fernandez 4630 Arden Ave ---------------------------------------- > Subject: RE: traffic plan for country club > Date: Fri, 14 Mar 2008 09:17:43 -0500 > From: TBennerotte@ci.edina.mn.us > To: mhfernandez @msn.corn > Dear Ms. Fernandez: > Thank you for your interest in the City of Edina. Your message was > forwarded upon receipt to members of the Edina City Council. If I can > be of additional assistance, please contact me. > Jennifer Bennerotte > Communications & Marketing Director > City of Edina > 952 - 833 -9520 > FAX 952- 826 -0390 > jbennerotte @ci.edina.mn.us > - - - -- Original Message---- - > From: Michael Fernandez [mailto:mhfernandez @msn.com] > Sent: Friday, March 14, 2008 8:55 AM > To: Jennifer Bennerotte > Subject: FW: traffic plan for country club > ---------------------------------------- >> From: mhfernandez @msn.com >> To: slilliehaug @ci.edina.mn.us >> Subject: traffic plan for country club >> Date: Fri, 14 Mar 2008 08:40:41 -0500 >> I support the calming traffic plan the city council originally was to > implement. >> The city has already spent plenty of time and money on this project. > I spent my own time going to the meetings, voicing my concerns along > with many other residents. This was suppose to be done. Why is it > necessary to rehash everything again? We all had opportunities to > support or reject this plan months ago, please move forward. Stick to > your word and no more debates. >> Heather Fernandez From: hmelloh @comcast.net [mailto:hmelloh @comcast.net] per`- SEAL -<, Sent: Monday, March 17, 2008 5:45 PM MAR i To: Jennifer Bennerotte 7Ri18 Subject: Fw: Country Club Neighborhood Traffic Plan RECEIVED I strongly support the position relayed to you by Brian Fogelberg. Heather Melloh 4629 Bruce Avenue Edina, MN 55424 From: Fogelberg, Brian @ Minneapolis [mailto:Brian.Fogelberg @cbre.com] Sent: Monday, March 17, 2008 12:41 PM To: edinamail @ci.edina.mn.us; James Hovland; jbennerotte @ci.edina.mn.us; Wayne Houle; Immasica @aol.com; ghughes @cityofedina.com Subject: Country Club Neighborhood Traffic Plan: Please Forward to Council Members & Staff Dear Council Members & Staff: This email in written in support of the proposed traffic calming measures to be incorporated with the sewer and water line project, all approved over a year ago. The Traffic Plan was an engineering solution based upon a study of, among other things, neighborhood traffic counts, tra ffic patterns and speed. The Study also noted that the streets are older and narrow, and it took into account all possible sources of information. The process was overseen by an advisory panel of 19 people, a Commission of 9 people and was scrutinized at 5 open houses and 2 public hearings. This Process ensured all interested persons had an opportunity to provide input and that the solutions were based upon professional engineering, not lay opinions, to ensure the best results for the whole neighborhood and not just select areas or streets. Now, just as bids are to be awarded to implement the unanimously supported plan, an attack comes from a group of residents who are being led by people using false claims to rally support and inflame passions. The central theme appears to be that the changes will adversely impact the "charact er" of the neighborhood. I am sure some people in this group believe that, and they are certainly entitled to their opinion and have a right to be heard. But there is a process to accommodate that, and it all ended over a year ago. I personally participated in that process and received numerous notices inviting me to do so. I also do not agree that it will adversely impact the character of our neighborhood - -in fact I think it will improve it. What we do know is that the study showed there is a traffic problem. My biggest concern, and that of most people involved for the past 5 or more years, is the safety of the residents — especially children. Lots of traffic, traveling fast on narrow streets lined with kids, is a recipe for disaster. If someone gets injured or killed, will these same people be outspoken in support of no traffic calming measures? Or instead will they disappear and leave the City to be sued and vilified in the streets and in the press for failing to implement an approved traffic plan based on its own study? I have seen the emails from this group and had one of their team come to my house to discuss it. While the conversation ended pleasantly, I can tell you it had nothing to do with getting my "opinion" for a survey, and was all about attacking the plan with statements that are not supported by the facts. Anybody who experienced this "survey' style but who was not involved first hand in the process would be not in a position to counter the statements and would just want it to end. What also became clear through the discussion was that these people were not interested in what is best for the neighborhood but rather their own personal bias. That should not surprise anyone reading this email because that it is typical of City issues, but the fact that it is being misrepresented by the leaders of this group is important because it completely undermines what they claim in terms of support to derail the approved Traffic Plan. I myself gained fame through the efforts of this group by their emailing a link to a clip from a city council meeting where I am seen asking a question. The clip was then intentionally edited to give the opposite impression to those viewing it. That, along with making changes to one of the traffic engineers document without disclosing it and countless other misleading tactics are the foundation of their campaign. Please —do the RIGHT thing on Tuesday night: • Stand by the legitimate process that was completed. • Stand by the Study and Plan, which is the only non - biased information before you. • Do NOT reward a campaign who's leaders have engaged in misleading residents. • Do not establish a precedent that the City's process is meaningless. • Provide safety to the residents, particularly the children; it is your highest responsibility Brian Fogelberg Bruce Avenue ********************************** * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * ** * * * * * * * * * * * * * "This message and any attachments are solely for the intended recipient and may contain confidential or privileged information. If you are not the intended recipient, any disclosure, copying, use, or distribution of the information included in this message and any attachments is prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please notify us by reply e-mail and immediately and permanently delete this message and any attachments. Thank you." ********************************** * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * ** * * * * * * * * * * * ** Page 1 of 1 Susan Heiberg SEAS From: Alex Christianson [tofte @earthlink.net] RECEIVED Sent: Monday, March 17, 2008 5:07 PM To: Jennifer Bennerotte Subject: traffic claming in country club To Whom it concerns: I'm in favor of the traffic measures proposed for the Country Club neighborhood. Actually, I would like to see more to be done such as Speed bumps in the middle of blocks but I know that is pushing it- for now we love the pot hole on Drexel b/c it acts as a speed bump!! I am deeply concerned by the massive division this issue is producing. The division is becoming very icky- a division between those with children living at home and those without children at home- basically it is becoming a "fight" between two generations. It is a sad state of affairs and the sadest thing is it is an issue between the safetyof our residents and things looking pretty. Good luck. Regards - Alexandra Christianson Drexel Ave 3/18/2008 an Heibe Sent: Cc: Subject: Jennifer Bennerotte Tuesday, March 18, 2008 10:05 AM Susan Heiberg FW: 4600 Block of Arden Ignored in Current Plan Jennifer Bennerotte Communications 8 Marketing Director City of Edina 952- 833 -9520 FAX 952- 826 -0390 jbennerotteCOci . edina. mn . us - - - -- Original Message---- - From: Karol Saunders [ mailto:karolsaunders@yahoo.com] Sent: Tuesday, March 18, 2008 10:03 AM To: Jennifer Bennerotte Subject: 4600 Block of Arden Ignored in Current Plan Jear Mr. Hovland, Ms. Bennett, Mr. Housch, Ms. Masica, Ms. Swenson and Mr. Houle, )' SEAL � MAR 1 R 1008 RECEWED aV The 4600 block of Arden Avenue is the major cut - through from France Avenue, a very narrow street and home to 75 children. I could cite countless instances of speeding and traffic violations. I have witnessed near fatal accidents involving cars and children. Why is our street ignored in the current plan? I do not care what it looks like; PLEASE put a speed bump in the middle of 4600 Arden Avenue. When the traffic triangles were installed on Wooddale and Drexel, Arden's traffic increased by over 60 percent. The proposed changes to every other street in the neighborhood will significantly increase our traffic. Please consider the safety of our children as well as the others in the neighborhood. Thank you for your work for the city. Sincerely, Karol Saunders 4617 Arden Avenue Be a better friend, newshound, and know -it -all with Yahool Mobile. Try it now. http: / /mobile.yahoo.com /; _ylt= A hu06i62sP.8HDtbypao8Wc j9tAcJ 1 Page 1 of 1 Susan Heiberg From: Jennifer Bennerotte MAR 1 R ?11�ie Sent: Tuesday, March 18, 2008 10:09 AM ,z Y C�lVj;p Cc: Susan Heiberg Subject: FW: Country Club Traffic Jennifer Bennerotte Communications & Marketing Director City of Edina 952 - 833 -9520 FAX 952 - 826 -0390 jbennerotte @ci.edina.mn.us From: Slomovas @aol.com [mai Ito: Slomovas@aol.com] Sent: Tuesday, March 18, 2008 10:08 AM To: Jennifer Bennerotte Subject: Country Club Traffic Mayor and City Council I have lived in Country Club for 13 years. I believe we do not have a traffic safety problem in our neighborhood. Please do not waste city and homeowner money. Please do not proceed with the proposed traffic calming measures. Thank you for listening. Vicky Slomiany 4604 Bruce Ave. Edina MN 55424 It's Tax Time! Get tips forms and advice on AOL Money & Finance. 3/18/2008 Susan Heibe . rom: Jennifer Bennerotte Sent: Tuesday, March 18, 2008 10:19 AM Cc: Susan Heiberg Subject: FW: Country Club Traffic Plan Jennifer Bennerotte Communications & Marketing Director City of Edina 952- 833 -9520 FAX 952- 826 -0390 jbennerotte@ci.edina.rnn.us - - - -- Original Message---- - From: Andrea Knoll [mailto:aknolll@comcast.net] Sent: Tuesday, March 18, 2008 10:17 AM To: Jennifer Bennerotte Subject: Re: Country Club Traffic Plan Year City Council Members and Wayne Houle -- SEAL c MAR 18 1008 RECEIVED There is growing concern among neighbors on Arden that more traffic will inadvertently be funneled on to our block with this new plan. Intersections on other blocks are narrowed, and diverting islands at other intersections are expanded. It seems that the traffic moving through the neighborhood between 50th and Sunnyside will be encouraged to travel on Country Club road and on Arden. Traffic plans in the past resulted in distributing more traffic onto Arden, and there is reason to be concerned it will happen again with this plan. The 4600 block is a long street, with a hill, and many children. Traffic does not slow down. The intersection we live on, at Arden and Bridge, is a well -used pedestrian and bike route through the neighborhood. We want to support the plan and see the changes implemented. But, please assure the neighbors on Arden, and the users of the pedestrian routes that cross it, that the plan will not increase traffic on Arden. For residents of Arden to feel the City has heard our longstanding concerns, we will need assurances that Arden will not see an increase in traffic and that more speed bumps will be considered if necessary. Thank you- - Andrea Knoll 4601 Arden Avenue Susan Heiberg rrom: Jennifer Bennerotte CMAR SE,q�Sent: Tuesday, March 18, 2008 10:52 AM Cc: Susan Heiberg 1 8 1008 Subject: FW: Comment for Council y CE ►0/ED Jennifer Bennerotte Communications 8 Marketing Director City of Edina 952 - 833 -9520 FAX 952 - 826 -0390 jbennerotte@ci.edina.mn.us - - - -- Original Message---- - From: Room Parent 101 [ mailto ,.RoomParent101@comcast.net] Sent: Tuesday, March 18, 2008 10:39 AM To: Jennifer Bennerotte Cc: Joyce Repya subject: Comment for Council To: City Council : Re: Country Club Bids I am writing in SUPPORT of the proposed safety improvements in the Country Club neighborhood and ask that Council approve the bids tonight and move forward on the project. Please do not waste 5 years of work. There was plenty of opportunity to learn about the project and provide input. I feel that the opposition has distorted the facts and misinformed the residents via their website and e- mails. I think much of the opposition would wane if the facts were known. Specifically: From speedhumps.net The City has now approved The Plan which includes homeowner assessments of $23,000 for homes west of Drexel and $18,000 on Drexel and east. Aside from inflation the only difference between The Plan and the utility reconstruction plan from 2005 is the "traffic calming" program. Fact: While the website implies that the safety improvements are driving the increased cost from 2005, the REALITY is that Hurricane Katrina and China have driven up road construction costs nationwide. The safety improvements are a small portion of the increase. From speedhumps. net The website sites sources claiming that speed humps are not effective. I did a google search and found a lot of data stating that, speed humps are effective including http: / /www.ite.org /traffic /hump.htm More importantly, shouldn't we rely on the experts who recommended the plans (Wayne, Traffic Commission, SEH etc...)? 1 The survey the opposition conducted was very biased and not valid. he opposition have claimed that the changes will impact the historic features of the neighborhood. Bob Sykes, a landscape architecture professor at the University of Minnesota and expert on the Country Club neighborhood provided input on the plans to Joyce Repya. Joyce, what was Bob's feedback on the plan? Do the changes negatively impact the historic features of the neighborhood? A neighbor was seriously injured by a hit and run driver on the 4900 block of Bruce' last fall. Yes, the safety improvements MAY cause some inconvenience and cost some money, but if they help prevent another car /pedestrian accident, they are well worth it. Please approve the bids and move on with this project. Sincerely Kitty kittyodea@hotmaii.com or New comcast e-mail: kitty—pdea@comcast.net F) Susan Heiberg From: Jennifer Bennerotte Sent: Tuesday, March 18, 2008 10:53 AM Cc: Susan Heiberg Subject: FW: Traffic Calming Plan Jennifer Bennerotte Communications & Marketing Director City of Edina 952 -833 -9520 FAX 952 - 826 -0390 jennerotte@ci.edina.mn.us ►` SEAL %+ MAR 1 8 2008 RECEIVED Page 1 of 1 From: bmellum @comcast.net [mailto:bmellum @comcast.net] Sent: Tuesday, March 18, 2008 10:36 AM To: Jennifer Bennerotte; Jim Hovland; shoush @ci.edina.mn.us; Imasica @ci.edina.mn.us; aswenson @ci.edina.us; j ben nett@ci.edina.us; ghughes @ci.edina.us; whoule @ci.edina.us Cc: brent.mellum @usbank.com Subject: Traffic Calming Plan To the Mayor, City Council, City Manager and City Engineer, It is my understanding that there is a City Council meeting tonight and the new traffic plan for the Country Club Neighborhood will be discussed. Unfortunately, neither my husband nor I will be able to make it. We would like to state our opinion for the record concerning this matter. We are opposed to the Traffic Calming Plan for various reasons. We believe the large expense for the Plan will not produce the desired outcome. Also, the aesthetic impact to our neighborhood will be negatively altered. To reduce the traffic speed, there are a couple of other solutions. One, park a police car on a street. Two, put a speed indicator on a street with a camera. The speed humps proposed will most likely not slow down the traffic. It is our experience that cars will accelerate up to the desired speed directly after the speed hump. Or, they will just bottom out their car and not slow down. The Country Club residents need to use the streets to get in and out of the neighborhood. The traffic calming techniques proposed will, we believe, have a negative impact to the streets. Thank you for your consideration, Brent and Lisa Mellum 4802 Sunnyside Road 3/18/2008 Edina Traffic Plan Susan Heiberg From: Jennifer Bennerotte Sent: Tuesday, March 18, 2008 11:00 AM Cc: Susan Heiberg Subject: FW: Edina Traffic Plan Jennifer Bennerotte Communications & Marketing Director City of Edina 952 - 833 -9520 FAX 952 - 826 -0390 jennerotte @ci.edina.mn.us SEAL MAR 1 8 2008 RECEIVED From: Tom_McFerson @cargill.com [ mailto :Tom_McFerson @cargill.com] Sent: Tuesday, March 18, 2008 10:55 AM To: Jennifer Bennerotte; Jennifer Bennerotte; Immasica @aol.com; ghughes @cityofedina.com Subject: Edina Traffic Plan Page 1 of 2 From what I have read about the approved plan an what I have been, able to discern from multiple conversation with those that know more that I do, I am in support of this project. We are relatively new residents living on 4518 Arden Ave having moved in in May of'05. It is clear that Arden has as much traffic and most likely more than all other surface roads in the country club area. Having 2 fourth graders and a neighborhood full of young children, my primarily concern is the safety of our children as well as all residence. My support is grounded in the assumption that once implemented our neighborhood will realize: • The same or less traffic • A significant reduction in speed of passing cars • Quantifiable efforts by City of Edina in speed limit enforcement and appropriate behavior regarding stop sign rules (IE No rolling stops) • City of Edina's willingness to validate the success of the plan and /or the need to make adjustments within a "reasonable length of time. Thank you, TMcF Tom McFerson National Account Manager, Fermentation Cargill, Inc. 15407 McGinty Road West, MS 62 Wayzata, MN 55391 -2399 3/18/2008 Page 1 of 1 T Susan Heiberg From: Jennifer Bennerotte MAR 18 2008 Sent: Tuesday, March 18, 2008 11:29 AM DRECEI'VED Cc: Susan Heiberg Subject: FW: Proceed with Country Club improvements Jennifer Bennerotte Communications & Marketing Director City of Edina 952 -833 -9520 FAX 952 - 826 -0390 jennerotte@ci.edina.mn.us From: O'Shaughnessy, Eileen [ mailto: Eileen.O'Shaughnessy @hcmed.org] Sent: Tuesday, March 18, 2008 11:19 AM To: Jennifer Bennerotte Subject: Proceed with Country Club improvements Hello, I live at 4216 Sunnyside Road and have been a resident there for twelve years. I would like you to approve the current transportation plan for the Country Club district. I have received many a -mails recently with thoughts of stopping the process once again. Please do not do this. The - transportation and street issue has been discussed and studied for years. This process has been researched many times and residents have been involved along the way. I think the current plan is a good one. The streets and sewers need to be redone. Residents have been informed of this and we have plans to proceed. Don't stop this again. I like the traffic calming measures. We need them. Times have changed since the district was developed and we need the safety measures for pedestrians as time goes forward. Our section of Sunnyside has a speed bump in the alley. It is not inconvenient and it has slowed traffic at a difficult section with a blind entrance. I am not able to come to the meeting tonight. I suspect there will be more acrimony and bad behavior. I would like my elected officials to look past this and simply approve this long researched, thoughtful plan which has been in the process for years. Eileen O'Shaughnessy '1/1 R /20OR Susan Heiberg From: Jennifer Bennerotte Sent: Tuesday, March 18, 2008 11:30 AM Cc: Susan Heiberg Subject: FW: Water in Morningside - Edina Jennifer Bennerotte Communications & Marketing Director City of Edina 952 -833 -9520 FAX 952- 826 -0390 jbennerotte @ci.edina.mn.us From: debbi [maiIto:deblantz @comcast.net] Sent: Tuesday, March 18, 2008 11:26 AM To: Jennifer Bennerotte Subject: Water in Morningside - Edina Dear City Council Members, �- SEgt', MAR 81008 Page 1 of 1 It has been brought to my attention that through the Comprehension Plan that thoughts or plans are being made that Morningside water supply that currently comes from Minneapolis may be converted to Edina water in the future. I am writing to you as a Morningside resident that I want us to continue to use Minneapolis water. I think it taste better, there is no need for a water softener and I know we pay more for it than Edina water. I wish to continue with it Debbi Lantz 4213 Scott Terr Edina,Mn 55416 3/18/2008 Susan Heiberg From: Jennifer Bennerotte Sent: Tuesday, March 18, 2008 11:49 AM Cc: Susan Heiberg Subject: FW: Jennifer Bennerotte Communications & Marketing Director City of Edina 952 - 833 -9520 FAX 952 - 826 -0390 jbennerotte @ci.edina.mn.us From: Chris & Annie O'Brien [ mailto :annie.obrien @earthlink.net] Sent: Tuesday, March 18, 2008 11:39 AM To: Jennifer Bennerotte Subject: 4- SFk MAR 8 inn, RECEo�ED Page 1 of 1 Dear City Council, We are in favor of the traffic measures proposed for Country Club neighborhood. There is no doubt that there is a traffic problem. We live on Drexel Avenue and the amount of cut through traffic along with the speed they travel is unacceptable and dangerous for a residential street. Please take this into account for the safety of everyone... children and adults. Chris and Annie O'Brien 3/18/2008 n He From: Jennifer Bennerotte Sent: Tuesday, March 18, 2008 12:02 PM To: Susan Heiberg Subject: FW: "Yes" for Traffic Managemnt Plan! Jennifer Bennerotte Communications ' & Marketing Director City of Edina 952 -833 -9520 FAX 952- 826 -0390 jbennerotte @ci . edina. mn. us - -- Original Message---- - From: Etzwiler, David [ mailto :david.etzwiler @medtronic.com] Sent: Tuesday, March 18, 2008 11:52 AM To: Jennifer Bennerotte Subject: FW: "Yes" for Traffic Managemnt Plan! Hi Joni, v 8SAL MAR j 8 2008 �YECElVED Just touching base on the vote tonight to encourage your approval. With three young children, my wife and I are anxious to have traffic calming measures in place as soon as possible. Our neighbors agree as do the majority of residents. (The fact that opposition has only been able to get 4 or 5 people to post yards signs is quite a statement by the way). Looking forward to worrying a lot less about my children! Thanks for your leadership. David Etzwiler [CONFIDENTIALITY AND PRIVACY NOTICE] Information transmitted by this email is proprietary to Medtronic and is intended for use only by the individual or entity to which it is addressed, and may contain information that is private, privileged, confidential or exempt from disclosure under applicable law. If you are not the intended recipient or it Page 1 of 2 Susan Heiberg From: Jennifer Bennerotte Sent: Tuesday, March 18, 2008 3:50 PM Cc: Susan Heiberg Subject: FW: Email To Edina City Council Jennifer Bennerotte Communications & Marketing Director City of Edina 952 - 833 -9520 FAX 952- 826 -0390 jennerotte@ci.edina.mn.us From: marie thorpe [mailto:marie thorpe@msn.com] Sent: Tuesday, March 18, 2008 3:49 PM To: Jennifer Bennerotte Subject: Email To Edina City Council MAR 1 8 2008 RECEIVED Please share with the Council for tonights meeting. Thank you! March 17, 2008 To friends, neighbors, and to the Edina City Council: As a former Edina Transportation Commission member and resident of the Country Club District (CCD), I feel compelled to send his correspondence in response to misleading, untrue, and fear - inducing emails and information in circulation regarding proposed traffic implementations stemming from the Northeast Edina Traffic Study. This plan was devised from a study which took the entire northeast quadrant of Edina into consideration and was approved by the Edina City Council in November 2006. The study process involved significant public input. I would first like to take this opportunity to address misconceptions regarding the notion that the fixes to Highway 100 have resolved the NE quadrant traffic issues. Transportation engineers report that this major roadway will reach capacity again in a matter of time. tTho com�Qund the �rob9ehr ,the 5 th andt France it t rsgeuai� antilof � P991 impact t �ies�� along wifli direct imp c on thlos nei orhoo s loca ed in e premises, further compelled the Edina Transportation Commission to propel this study forward. Given the research and findings of excessive traffic through the CCD and locations in the NE quadrant, the upcoming street reconstruction project in the CCD was thought to be an opportunistic time to implement measures to discourage cut - through traffic not only through the iI oi1)nn4 Page 2 of 2 CCD, but also the NE quadrant, and to encourage traffic to stay on the arterial roadways. Furthermore, proposed measures were developed as well for other areas in the NE quadrant. The Heritage Preservation Board (HPB) approved a Certificate of Appropriateness for the proposed Plan. The purview of the HPB is to ensure that proposed changes do not have a detrimental effect on the historic integrity of a district or landmark. In the case of the CCD, there were no significant heritage resources that were proposed to be destroyed or removed. It was felt that the Plan took into consideration what was there, and adding the proposed implementations did not detract from the overall character of the neighborhood. Simply untrue are the statements that the changes will render the Country Club District unrecognizable and significantly changed beyond what it is today. The proposed measures have been carefully analyzed and planned to fit in with the aesthetics of the neighborhood. With vested interest in the County Club District neighborhood as the great - grandson of the developer, my husband, Richard, is very much in support of the proposed changes. He trusts the recommendations of the traffic engineers, and believes the proposed changes are reasonable in an effort to mitigate the effects of the both present day traffic along with the predicted increases. The NE Edina Traffic Study was reviewed over long hours, weeks, and months, of research, planning, and deliberation at the Edina Transportation Commission level, the city level, and public level. A Study Advisory Board was involved early on, with representatives from the city of Edina and surrounding communities. There are misconceptions feeding fears that this was a secret process behind closed doors, that all options were not explored, and it is ill -fated for the historic character of the CCD, all of which are untrue. I strongly urge all of you to be objective about the facts and the Plan. It is my hope that this process be one of peace and objectivity with the awareness and realization of this. unique opportunity in front of us. Excessive traffic is not a historic characteristic of the any of the beautiful neighborhoods of this NE quadrant of Edina; this is truly a plan that will act to maintain the safety, integrity, and livability of this entire area. With regards, Marie Thorpe 11 ii 0 i1)nn4 Susan Heiberg From: Jennifer Bennerotte Sent: Tuesday, March 18, 2008 3:43 PM Cc: Susan Heiberg Subject: FW: traffic Jennifer Bennerotte Communications & Marketing Director City of Edina 952 -833 -9520 FAX 952 - 826 -0390 jennerotte @ci.edina.mn.us From: michael fernandez [ mailto: mfernandez @integrityliving.com] Sent: Tuesday, March 18, 2008 3:02 PM To: Jennifer Bennerotte Cc: mhfernandez @msn.com Subject: traffic MAR ' 8 7008 RV t, 'EIyEp Page 1 of 1 City Council: I would like to retract my statement that I support the traffic calming e-mail I sent on 3/12/08. Since no study on how Arden Ave. will be affected with triangles on Edina, Wooddale, Drexel and Casco I suggest nothing be done. If all streets are treated the same with chokers and triangles I would support the proposal. Mike Fernandez 4630 Arden ave Edina MN 55424 11 ii 0 /1) ()()Q Susan Heiberg Cl Page 1 of 1 From: Jennifer Bennerotte MAR i R 1008 Sent: Tuesday, March 18, 2008 3:40 PM Y�C`1f�Ep Cc: Susan Heiberg - Subject: FW: Council meeting and Country Club Traffic calming debate! Jennifer Bennerotte Communications & Marketing Director City of Edina 952 - 833 -9520 FAX 952 - 826 -0390 jennerotte@ci.edina.mn.us From: Anderson, Dave (50th and France) [ mailto :DaveAnderson @edinarealty.com] Sent: Tuesday, March 18, 2008 2:29 PM To: Jennifer Bennerotte; Immasica @aol.com; ghughes @cityofedina.com; Jennifer Bennerotte; Wayne Houle; jhovland @krauserollins.com Subject: Council meeting and Country Club Traffic calming debate! Mayor and City Council Members, It is my opinion that the parties opposing the previously approved upon traffic calming solutions are self - serving individuals who are showing up too little and to late to influence a predetermined resolution.- Please act in accordance with the wishes of the majority and stand by the previously agreed upon plan Dave Anderson DAVE ANDERSON EDINA REALTY 952 - 924 -8724 direct 612 - 750 -2209 cell • /1 0 /nnno \�pclr usan Heiberg MAR 1 S 1009 From: Jennifer Bennerotte RECEIVED Sent: Tuesday, March 18, 2008 3:39 PM BY Cc: Susan Heiberg Subject: FW: Attn. Mayor Hovland and City Mgr. Hughes Importance: High Jennifer Bennerotte Communications & Marketing Director City of Edina 952 - 833 -9520 FAX 952- 826 -0390 jbennerotte@ci.edina-mn.us - -- Original Message---- - From: Blair.Tremere @co.hennepin.mn.us [mailto: Blair. Tremere @co.hennepin.mn.us] Sent: Tuesday, March 18, 2008 3:29 PM 'o: Jennifer Bennerotte Subject: Attn. Mayor Hovland and City Mgr. Hughes Importance: High Dear Mayor Hovland: Thank you for taking the time to appear before the Hennepin County Board today to voice your opinion about the proposed metropolitan sales tax for transit. As I suggested to you both in my e-mail notice last week, and in our discussion after your testimony today, please put this issue before your city council so the city could officially weigh in. The timing of this issue due to statutory deadlines is very tight; thus, I urge you to try to put this on your council agenda tonight. Thank you for your continuing interest in and support of metropolitan transportation issues. Linda Koblick, Commissioner Hennepin County District 6 Phone: 612 - 348 -7886 linda.koblick@co.hennepin.mn.us 1 SEAL �Isan Heiberg From: Jennifer Bennerotte �� CE ►VED Sent: Tuesday, March 18, 2008 2:01 PM Cc: Susan Heiberg Subject: FW: Move Forward With Country Club Street Reconstruction Jennifer Bennerotte Communications & Marketing Director City of Edina 952- 833 -9520 FAX 952 -826 -0390 jbennerotte@ci . edina. mn. us - - - -- Original Message---- - From: Dahl family [mailto:dahl4@earthiink.net] Sent: Tuesday, March 18, 2008 1:47 PM To: Jennifer Bennerotte Subject: Move Forward With Country Club Street Reconstruction City Council Members: Please move forward with the current plan for Country Club street construction, including traffic calming measures (speed bumps, constriction points, one ways, etc). This project has been delayed long enough. Thank You, David C. Dahl 4216 Sunnyside Road 952- 920 -9812 1 Susan Heiberg From: Jennifer Bennerotte Sent: Tuesday, March 18, 2008 2:01 PM Cc: Susan Heiberg Subject: FW: Last Minute Appeal - Please deliver to the Council Today Jennifer Bennerotte Communications & Marketing Director City of Edina 952 - 833 -9520 FAX 952 - 826 -0390 jbennerotte @ci.edina.mn.us From: Bruce A. Christensen [ mailto:BChristensen @CG- IRI.com] Sent: Tuesday, March 18, 2008 1:48 PM To: Gordon Hughes; Wayne Houle; Jennifer Bennerotte Subject: Last Minute Appeal - Please deliver to the Council Today Page I of 2 CITi% SEAL '. RECEWED BY- From: Bruce A. Christensen Sent: Tuesday, March 18, 2008 1:46 PM To: Immasica @aol.com; jonibennettl2 @comcast.net; scot.housh @willis.com; jhovland @krauserollins.com; swensonboys @aol.com Cc: Doug Seaton; Ellie Lucas; cimiller @flash.net; gretchenbanks @mac.com; brian.lavin @ampf.com; bkelly @firstpremiercapital.com; aschristensen @comcast.net Subject: Last Minute Appeal Dear Members of the Council, As you consider the Country Club's future tonight please take seriously our petition. Our goal, simply put, is let the residents decide on this outcome. We can meet the needs of the City and its management team without a lingering question about whether work will commence. All we ask is to survey the district with a simple yes or no question. A much less sophisticated approach was employed July 19, 2005 at a cost of many millions to the city and residents. Gordon Hughes and Wayne Houle met with Doug Seaton and I last Friday and confirmed that the bid as proposed can be used with an "as is" restoration. We understand that engineering drawings will be needed but their cost is insignificant to the cost of the proposed traffic plan and the possibility of delay. I'm certain that this survey can be completed by mid -April which should not impact the project timeline. We hope our efforts over the past three months are viewed as a deeply passionate but respectful, engaged citizenry, voicing concern about the impairment of an old historic neighborhood's assets. Not that anyone cares to continue the facts debate, but, the communication issue is very real. We did a little math to help quantify what percentage of residents the Page 2 of 2 city heard from at the two open houses on the NEETS. There are approximately 1500 homes in the study area. Info on the city's website shows that the city received 39 comment cards at the January 26, 2006 Open House, which represents hearing from about 3% of households. Info on the city's website shows that the city received 40 comment sheet surveys at the May 11, 2006 Open House, which also represents about 3% of households. Contrast this to the percentages required in the NTMP. In the petition -to -study step (step 3, which defines the issue and surveys residents to see if they agree with the issue definition), the NTMP requires 51% of surveys be returned, with 65% agreement in returned surveys. If they fail to reach either number, the study doesn't qualify to proceed. Our 51 % petition response in opposition suggests a great deal of caution and concern should be given before proceeding with the Traffic plan as proposed. Respectfully submitted, Bruce Christensen Susan Heiberg From: CASTLMSP @aol.com Sent: Tuesday, March 18, 2008 1:02 PM To: Jennifer Bennerotte Subject: Country Club District �clrY� SEAL MAR 18 1008 Page 1 of 1 Dear City Council, Please do not proceed with the Country Club Traffic Calming Measures. First, I am not convinced that we need these measures now that the construction on Highway 100 and the 50th and France area have been completed. The amount and speed of the traffic through our neighborhood has lessened since the construction was completed. Second, I do not believe these proposed measures will help any of the traffic concerns. Third, the appearance of the measures will detract from the beauty of our neighborhood. Fourth, the cost certainly does not equal any benefits that might occur (see second point above). These added costs are also difficult for families that need to pay for the high cost sewer project. Finally, the communication regarding the measures was greatly lacking. Luckily the neighborhood groups brought it to the residents' attention! Cheryle Atkin Country Club District Resident It's Tax Time! Get tips forms and advice on AOL Money &_Finance. Attn: Edina City Council, Regarding: Edina Country Club District street reconstruction re... Page 1 of 1 Susan Heiberg From: daniel.l.kraft @wellsfargo.com Sent: Tuesday, March 18, 2008 12:45 PM To: Jennifer Bennerotte 4',CITYC SEAL 1 MAR t & 1001 FiECEIVEI) *v Subject: Attn: Edina City Council, Regarding: Edina Country Club District street reconstruction resident comments Dear Council Members & Staff: As a 10 year resident of Bruce Avenue, I am writing to voice my approval for the traffic calming measures proposed and approved for the Country Club District. I know there is a vocal minority that is trying to sap council support for this previously debated and approved work. I think these are residents hoping to save some money and hassle in the short -term and willing to sacrifice the long -term safety and viability of our neighborhood. Certainly an 80 year old street plan is a great candidate for updating considering the increased automobile traffic on all four sides of the neighborhood. I hope the council follows through on their good work and proceeds with the project as previously debated and approved. Sincerely, Dan Kraft 4607 Bruce Ave 952 - 922 -5563 i �n _ �y�ll \AL3V� n P7 �I Deb Mangen From: Jennifer Bennerotte Sent: Tuesday, March 04, 2008 2:25 PM Cc: Deb Mangen Subject: FW: City Council Thank You Jennifer Bennerotte Communications & Marketing Director City of Edina 952- 833 -9520 FAX 952 - 826 -0390 jennerotte @ci.edina.mn.us From: Michelle Horan [mailto:mhoranl @comcast.net] Sent: Monday, March 03, 2008 8:36 PM To: Jennifer Bennerotte Subject: City Council Thank You SSAL c MAR - 1 pD8 vIVZD To the members of the Edina City Council - As a resident of Edina, I thank you for your service to our city. Your time, energy and talents are very much appreciated. Dave Horan IN 1A / Nnno o- SEAL MAR 1 0 1008 From: Jane Lonnquist [mailto: jjlonnquist @earthlink.net] R�CEONro Sent: Sunday, March 09, 2008 1:32 PM Y To: Jennifer Bennerotte Subject: Attn: Planning Commission, City Council, Heritage Preservation Board I am writing to endorse the proposed renovation guidelines for the Country Club District. I urge the City Council to adopt them. My reasons are as follows: 1) The City long ago decided to designate the neighborhood a historic district. Clearly, preservation of the neighborhood (in particular, the size of homes and street - facing facades) was the intent of that designation. The existing rules leave the HPB largely . powerless to stop developers from erecting large scale modern "McMansions" inconsistent with the original intent, as has been clearly demonstrated over the past few years. If the historic designation means this, why have the designation at all? The new rules give the HPB are a step forward and will enable the HPB to adhere to its original mission. 2) Very clear and large majorities within the neighborhood support the new rules. This was clearly demonstrated last year from the results of the neighborhood survey. 70 - 80% of residents clearly wanted more oversight of developers and cited the historic nature of the neighborhood as a major reason for their living in Edina (and supporting the tax base). In addition, a similar percentage believed that the historic nature of the neighborhood enhanced their property values. These results alone should mandate that all the relevant city authorities support these new rules. I would note that most developers do not live in the neighborhood (and some not even in'Edina), and therefore do not have to live next to their mistakes. I urge you to re -read the results from that survey. 3) Other than a small minority of actual Country Club residents, the only group which appears to oppose these new guidelines is developers. Much of their reasoning is spurious at best ( "houses need to be updated to be made safer etc" - - in any event, no one opposes interior renovations) and self- serving at worst. Clearly, both developers and residents would benefit from new, clearer guidelines. Another significant beneficiary here Would be the city authorities themselves -- it will free you up from spending more time on having to deal with what will otherwise be a continuing issue. Clearly the neighborhood wants more oversight of developers seeking to erect houses inconsistent with the historic nature of the neighborhood, which has already been given preservation status. By setting reasonable guidelines now, you will save yourselves a great deal of time and energy which can be better spent on other issues. In brief, there are compelling reasons to support the new guidelines and support the original intent of Council some years ago. I urge you to side with the clear majorities. Sincerely, John Lonnquist 4510' Drexel Ave. W: 612- 303 -6308 SEAL _1 MAR 14 1018 From: galerandk @comcast.net [mailto:galerandk @comcast.net] Sent: Thursday, March 13, 2008 2:40 PM To: Jennifer Bennerotte Subject: Dan Patch Commuter Rail Line - In support To whom it should concern: This is to express my support as a citizen of Edina for the'development of the Dan Patch Commuter Rail Line through Edina, MN. This city and the wider metropolitan area will not be able to count itself among the world's more advanced city areas until we develop a comprehensive rail transit system. No other city /metropolitan area in the world of our size is as woefully and pitifully void of any rail transit alternatives for its citizens and visitors. The Dan Patch Line is the additional corridor the west side of the metro has, but is not utilizing, to move traffic off our freeways and reduce the amount of vehicular traffic moving through our community. It offers an excellent alternative for commuters both north and south of our community as well as our own citizens to commute to their /our workplaces. . While this line most certainly would take auto traffic commuting to Minneapolis off 135/TH 100/TH 169 it would also provide relief on these routes as well as the east/west connectors (TH62/I494 /and arterial and side streets running east/west) by providing a commuter rail alternative for employees working in the southwest industrial park area. The industrial park area in the southwest quadrant of the city (south of W70th/north of 1494 between Cahill and France) offers a desirable possibility for two way commuting - a very rare and unique situation for commuter rail systems which usually haul the majority of its riders to and from a central urban core. This group of commuters (those working in our industrial park area) represents a very large and visible part of the commuting traffic on TH100, not to mention I494 and most likely I35W. A station could be situated near the railroad tracks passing directly through the industrial park. Circulator buses could operate on a frequent schedule during rush hours to provide near door step service for commuters. This could improve the viability of this underutilized asset in the city and grow -our tax base in a direction other than high rises. The two way haul possibility also changes the usual cost/benefit analysis numbers to determine the economic viability of commuter rail. Having commuters using the facility in both directions make it much more viable. Whether this has been factored into previous cost/benefit analyses of the line should be reviewed. As for the equity of having rail passenger trains passing ua ietly through residential areas (past houses abutting the rail property) during the morning and evening rush hours, it must be recognized that the presence of the rail line had to be very evident to the property purchasers at the time of purchase. It would be no different than for someone who purchased property abutting a known possible highway corridor right of way. When I purchased my home at 5708 West 70th Street I had only one chance to see it before making the decision to buy and that was on a Saturday afternoon in early Fall. There was no traffic whatsoever but I did notice that the road was concrete (likely 10 ton - rated), it was striped with turning lanes, it had bus stop signs as well as snow emergency route signs. Imagine my "surprise" when it took me nearly 10 minutes to back out of my driveway my first day going to work. So who's fault was it that the roa d wound up being used for commuting... why the city's and its citizens, of course! Now, shouldn't I receive some sort of compensation for the impact of that traffic on my property value? Or maybe the city should put up gates so no one can use the transportation corridor in my front yard. Let them use someones else's road. No, I'm not serious, I just wanted to point out the iniquity of allowing some property owners along the rail line to hold up something that would bring so much value and worth to the rest of the community. Well, actually, the more I think about it, I want to be compensated for my own idiocy for thinking there wasn't going to be a lot of traffic on my road after I moved in ... after all, isn't that what the Dan Patch property abutters are demanding and seem to have achieved by getting legislation passed that goes so far as to prohibit even the discussion or mention of the Dan Patch line by an government employee. Wish I had that kin d of power. So, what's it gonna be ... Edina remains and will remain another cold suburb to a cold Omaha, or will the city step up to it's reputation for progressive and forward thinking and actions for it's citizens and support the repeal of the legislation currently blocking the opportunity for commuter rail in our community? This is to request the responsible individuals in our city government, Mayor, Council Members, etc., express Edina's opposition to the anti -Dan Patch legislation and support its removal. Thanks for your consideration ... if you read this far. Robert Gale 5708 West 70th Street Edina, MN 55439 952- 996 -0226 LiJohn T. Beecher, M.D., A.B.F.P. is James A. Rohde, M.D., A.B.F.P. r�i 1.. i D14,1Ic4Y, /7111c Mumtaz, A. Kazim,M.D.,A.B.F.P. �� a 0�� MAR 1 1 2008 eY CEIVED / March 10, 2008 Mayor James Hovland and The Edina City Council The City of Edina Edina City Hall 4801 W. 50" Street Edina MN 55424 Dear Mayor Hovland and The Edina City Council: Sheldon R. Burns, M.D., A.B.F.P. Anthony E. Smith,M.D., A.B.F.P. Barbara R. Gamradt, M.D., A.B.F.P. Linda C. Johnson, M.D., A.B.F.P. Daniel B. Peterson, M.D., A.B.F.P. On behalf Edina Family Physicians we are sending this letter to inform you that we are determined, excited, and committed to continuing our growth in the City of Edina. Edina Family Physicians has been in existence for over 28 years and some of our patients have been seeking care from various physicians in our group since 1945. We are a well established medical practice that has been a staple of the Edina community for many years. In order to learn more about our practice, we would encourage you to look at our website at http• / /www.edinafamilyphysicians.com. Together our current physicians have over 200 years of practice experience and last year we had over 50,000 patient visits. As you know, we have been working exclusively with Opus for the better part of 18 months to create a truly unique medical facility to allow for our growth in Edina. With help from Opus we have created a unique plan for the City of Edina's Public Works Facility. Together, we decided that if we are to grow, we need do so in a way that would benefit the overall community to create a center of medical excellence. Today, we are pleased to announce that along with our practice, we will be joined by Minneapolis Heart Institute, Virginia Piper Breast Center, The Sister Kinney Medical Facility and several other outstanding medical specialty groups to create a state of the art, highest quality medical facility to serve the needs of our patients here in Edina. In addition, we plan to have urgent care available as close to 24/7 as feasible. Opus is acting as our designer and builder and our current plan is to acquire the facility from Opus upon completion. Today's medical profession requires private practices like ours to grow. We have outgrown our current facility and this opportunity represents the only available, acceptable solution in Edina for us to accommodate this growth. 5301 Vernon Avenue South * Edina, MN 55436 -2303 • Phone: 952.925.2200 • Fax: 952.925.0335 www.edinafamilyphysicians.com Page 2 March 10, 2008 We realize that there has been much discussion about the future use of the Public Works Facility. We respect the fact that there are many differing views on the potential land uses. We believe that our use of the site provides Edina an immediate and economically viable redevelopment plan while simultaneously offering the city a very attractive solution for a new Public Works Facility. We are committed to this project; however, we are not in a position to delay. Opus and Edina Family Physicians have followed all of the directives received from The City of Edina. Contrary to recent public speculation, this was a very "Public Process ". Edina Family Physicians and .Opus responded to a "Request for Proposal" (RFP). Our response to the RFP was a medical office facility not a Mixed Use Redevelopment. The Council voted in favor of our land use in November; 2007. Since that time Opus has spent hundreds of thousands of dollars advancing this plan on our behalf; and, we have spent hundreds of hours in planning under the belief that this land use was acceptable to the City of Edina. We have outgrown our current facility and want to stay in Edina as we grow. We respectfully ask for your support of this project. Yours Very Truly, nloGu.. r&u-d, -- John T. Beecher, M.D.,A.B.F.P. K&I -, Mumtaz Kazim, M.D., A.B.F.P. Cc: Gordon Hughes, Edina City Manager, Tim Murnane, Opus Corp James A. Rohde, M.D., A.B.F.P. Anthony E. Smith, M.D., A.B.F.P. Barbara R.Gamradt, M.D., A.B.F.P. �oIT CAF SEAL 9 MAR 1 3 2008 RECEIVED U ' a�t'7 Kmet Axe 71� doi J'm-- Aut-1 vttl Ap,,e a-vto " I,--A - SEAL . '9 MAR l 1►1000 FkFCFIVED — t a c0sm, — 7Wt5A es i ol SEAL 1 MAR n 2008 From: Virgil Dissmeyer [mailto:virgedina @worldnet.att.net] Sent: Saturday, March 08, 2008 4:39 AM To: Jennifer Bennerotte Subject: Mayor James Hovland I am commenting upon the conduct of the City Council meeting last Monday night, March 3. When the issue of the Lewis Park Warming House donation was discussed you - 1. Allowed Kohrs supporters to applaud when they made a point but you reprimanded, rightly so, the man whose cell phone went off. Kohrs supporters should have likewise been reprimanded. They sat right behind me and I did so - but was ignored. 2. Tried to sway Linda and Joni when you saw the vote was going to be 3 to 2. By asking how you could word a resolution to satisfy them, you were in effect trying to have them compromise their convictions that public and private ventures should stay separate. 3. Allowing Kohrs to set the conditions of her donation without a competitive bid on the concessions. I am sure you let bids on the Braemer facilities. I was offended when you lost your cool and reprimanded the residents, Linda and Joni for not accepting the donation. I thought it was out of order and after watching the televised replay, it is even more obvious that you were mad at the outcome. We voiced our opinions as did the Kohrs and the decision should have been left to stand on its own merits. The City needs a written stated policy on donations for any purposel Finally, the word is that the owner of the property at 70th and Cahill was threatened by Mr. Kohrs with having his tenants backballed. A couple of residents heard the exchange - I did not. You might want the City to call him and verify the threat. If it was made, a follow -up call should be made to the Kohrs to call them to task for trying to strong arm these taxpayers. It is to bad that when people have too much money they think they can buy their way to special privileges. You have run a fine City but last Monday night was not one of your better performances. Virgil M. Dissmeyer 7250 Lewis Ridge Pkwy, #218 Edina, MN 55439 per' REAL Front: Sue Aura [mailto:sueaura @hotmail.com] MAR y n ?008 Sent: Saturday, March 08, 2008 2:28-PM RgQElVED To: Jennifer Bennerotte EY Subject: Lewis Park Thank you, council members Masica and Bennett for your thoughtful votes blocking the privitization of Lewis Park. I'm so glad you voted with your conscience. Having worked for the Edina Public Schools as a playground supervisor for 6 years, I know just how difficult it is to get parent volunteers to watch our children. The issue of park supervision was not even addressed. I kept wondering who would be volunteering to supervise the additional kids that would be frequenting the warming house /Cafe. Our health associate is busy from the time recess begins until long after it ends. I can only imagine the volunteer concessioneers dealing with head injuries, fights, 911 calls, etc. I see the wisdom of your vote on so many different levels. By the way, so does my mother -in -law, long time resident, Fran Aura Sue Aura 5900 Oaklawn Avenue Edina 55424 Shed those extra pounds with MSN and The Biggest Loser! Learn more. SEAL From: kmlin @aol.com [mailto:kmlin @aol.com] tE�EOVED Sent: Saturday, March 08, 2008 11:51 AM SY�� To: Jennifer Bennerotte Subject: E -MAIL. FOR MAYOR JAMES HOVLAND Dear Mayor Hovland: I want to thank you for getting back to us this past fall in regards to a concern our family had regarding Edina travel basketball. Back in the fall, our family was very concerned with what happened during the try-out. During the tryout, the travel basketball president of Edina, Pat Kline, came out to me while I was sitting in my car and informed me that despite my son's ( Kevin ) very strong play in the try-out process, he would cut Kevin from Edina if I attended the Eden Prairie basketball tournament in two months. This was extremely unfair and shocking . Why would Eden Prairie worry about me attending their tournament? Why would Eden Prairie be worried about where Kevin Linehan was playing? Why would Pat Kline feel the need to comply with Eden Prairie's request? Isn't it unusual that ' Eden Prairie would be so concerned about the possibility of a young man playing for another team and the implications and effects upon them? There are many,many questions to ask. The season had two occurrences that have yet to be explained to our family. On two different occasions, Eden Prairie has refused to send the proper message of good sportsmanship to their players and our players because adults from Eden Prairie have refused to shake all the participants hands during the end of the game handshake. What a terrible example for the children. In the second act of poor sportsmanship, the individual from Eden Prairie who would not participate fully in the after game handshake, was one of the two individuals who unfairly banned my children from playing football in Eden Prairie. With that as the case, I was so impressed that my twelve year old son still fully participated in the after game handshake. Kevin was able to do this despite some unexpected changes. Kevin's coach, Russ Johnson, had very much praised Kevin throughout the year. During the week of practice, Coach Russ even came over to my car and complemented Kevin and urged him to remeber that he is the leader of the team and to continue to direct the team. In the game we played against the team coached by the individual who had banned my children in football, the strategy talked about all week abruptly changed. Kevin felt and still feels this was somewhat of an accomodating geature on Edina's part comparable to Edina's action regarding the Eden Prairie tournament. I have a little concern also, because when I asked about the change in strategy, I received two different answers. Our family thinks Russ Johnson is a great guy even though there seems to have been confusion in communication. Russ is a gentleman, a good coach, and has an absolutely amazing knowledge of the game of basketball. The players and parents on the team have been absolutely wonderful. Can't say it enough, absolutely wonderful. Mayor, if you can, please request from Edina travel basketball that they contact Eden Prairie travel basketball and have Eden Prairie Travel basketball issue apologies to my son Kevin for their unsportsmanlike behavior. ,Also; if possible, we would like to get statements from Pat Kline (and possibly a few other Edina people) in ' regards to some discussions that have taken place with individuals from Eden Prairie. If possible, could we get 'these statements taken in your office ? In addition, could you ask Pat Kline to refrain from contact with my family. -He has done enough to make it difficult for Kevin to transition into Edina basketball. Children are very, aware. Kevin sees the rude conduct by Eden Prairie AND he sees NOTHING -BEING DONE BY EDINA TO RESPOND TO IT!! In yesterday's paper, we see the very disappointing news from a Burnsville sports group. Nationally in scope, we have seen damaging situations in sports because of collusion and cover -ups. We need to work hard to ensure that, our children's athletic opportunities are not derailed by politics.l thank you for your help in the past and look forward to talking with you this week. I J Thank You. Sincerely, Mark Linehan 952- 210 -7867 Supercharge your AIM. Get the AIM toolbar for your browser. 0 FSEAL '1 MAR 12 2008 From: O'Neill, Karen [ mailto :Karen.ONeill @genzyme.com) RECEIVED Sent: Wednesday, March 12, 2008 11:28 AM BY To: Jennifer Bennerotte Subject: potential land sale Dear City Hall, I am a resident of Edina and recently received the information below. This is very concerning to myself and many others that the City of edina would sell just valuable land to possibly builders. I hope that there will be a statement in the paper about this. It just doesn't make a lot of sense. "I recently became aware that the City of Edina is preparing to sell the Public Works Department land (located near Highway 100 and Vernon Avenue) to a developer to build another generic office building." Please do not sell this valuable land. Thank you for your time, Karen O'Neill Deb Mangen From: Jennifer Bennerotte Sent: Tuesday, March 04, 2008 2:24 PM Cc: Deb Mangen Subject: FW: Calvin Christian School HRA revenue bond proposal ... SEAL MAR - 4 2008 Jennifer Bennerotte RECEIVED Communications & Marketing Director BY City of Edina 952 - 833 -9520 FAX 952 - 826 -0390 jennerotte@ci.edina.mn.us From: Steve Timmer [ mailto :stimmer @planetlawyers.com] Sent: Monday, March 03, 2008 9:07 PM To: Jennifer Bennerotte Subject: Calvin Christian School HRA revenue bond proposal ... Please forward to members of the City Council Ladies and Gentlemen, I want to write to you about the HRA deliberations tonight while the subject is fresh on my mind. You clearly made the right, and I believe only legal, decision. All, or most of you anyway, seemed to readily grasp the pervasive nature of the religious instruction at CCS; it obviated the need for me to ask a question of you, and especially of bond counsel. That is: have you ever been in Calvin Christian School? If you have, then you know that the school makes no effort to segregate religious and secular teaching. It does, in fact, the reverse, and the evidence is everywhere. Everywhere. You could more easily unscramble an egg than segregate religious and secular at CCS. I also have to admit to you that I was hardly impressed by the supercilious bond lawyer —I've already forgotten his name —who showed up for the city. Other than praising you for your insightful questions, he added nothing to the discussion. He obviously knew little or nothing about the nature of the institution being discussed and was only prepared to talk about the law as it applied to CCS in the vaguest of terms. Even there, I am not sure he got it quite straight. The case he referred to— remember now, he's the bond lawyer, not me— involved the issue of state revenue bonds for construction of facilities at private colleges where the instruction is easily segregated from religious worship. And you don't even have to be a Christian to go to most private colleges in Minnesota. The head of the religion department at St. Olaf, where my son attends, is a practicing Hindu. CCS, on the other hand, is a K -8 "Christian" school that only takes students from families where at least one of the parents is a "practicing Christian," as attested to by a Christian clergy member. But learned bond counsel obviously didn't know that. The only thing that a prospective plaintiff in an Establishment Clause case would have to do is take a video tour of CCS. Religious imagery and paraphernalia are omnipresent. Based on the community comment and the interest of the MCLU, I think you could have expected a suit if you had proceeded. 3/4/2008 If you ever head down this road again, I think at a minimum you need a bond opinion that sets forth an accurate and detailed set of facts upon which the opinion is made, not someone who stands at the podium without notes and tells the council "It's been done before, and gosh, it seems okay here" just before the Council votes on a significant point of constitutional law. I am relieved that you voted as you did. Steve Timmer 5348 Oaklawn Avenue Edina, MN 55424 stimmer @planetlaywers.com 3/4/2008 Deb Mangen From: Jennifer Bennerotte Sent: Tuesday, March 04, 2008 2:24 PM Cc: Deb Mangen Subject: FW: Lewis Park o� ?� SEAL ry� U! MAR -, 41008 Jennifer Bennerotte VkEQSvEID Communications & Marketing Director [3Y City of Edina 952 - 833 -9520 FAX 952 - 826 -0390 jennerotte@ci.edina.mn.us From: Splewis5 @aol.com [mailto:Splewis5 @ aol.com] Sent: Tuesday, March 04, 2008 12:33 AM To: Jennifer Bennerotte Subject: Lewis Park Please direct this e-mail to Mayor Hovland, Council Member Housh and Council Member Swenson, As a neighbor of Lewis Park (7419 Coventry Way) and supporter of the proposal for a new warming house at the pars., I want to thank you for your comments this evening. I appreciate your persistent efforts to convince the other Council Members to at least offer up a counter - proposal to Ms. Kohrs. I do not understand their adamant opposition to at least trying to come up with a compromise. I think compromises were offered as regards the concessions (perhaps simple vending machines), and it certainly appeared to me that the ball would be in the city's court as to hours, what concessions could be offered, etc. I agree with Mayor Hovland that this proposal would not make or break the businesses.at 70th and Cahill. In fact, listening to some of the attendees as they were leaving the meeting, I think some of those business may have lost customers tonight. Personally, as someone whose family does NOT use the ice rink or current warming house, the idea of having available (decent) bathrooms the rest of the year was delightful! Thank you for your efforts on behalf of the residents of our SW corner of Edina. Sincerely,. Susan Lewis It's Tax Time! Get tips, forms and advice on AOL Money & Finance 3/4/2008 Deb Mangen From: Jennifer Bennerotte Sent: Tuesday, March 04, 2008 2:22 PM Cc: Deb Mangen Subject: FW: To all City Council Members Jennifer Bennerotte Communications & Marketing Director City of Edina 952 - 833 -9520 FAX 952 - 826 -0390 jennerotte @ci.edina.mn.us From: RHTHARRINGTON @aol.com [mailto:RHTHARRINGTON @ aol.com] Sent: Tuesday, March 04, 2008 11:58 AM To: Jennifer Bennerotte Subject: Re: To all City Council Members Thank you. It's Tax Time! Get tips, forms and advice on AOL Money & Finance. 3/4/2008 Deb Mangen From: Jennifer Bennerotte Sent: Wednesday, March 05, 2008 9:50 AM Cc: Deb Mangen .Subject: FW: Thank you- from Jim and Therese Kakalios Jennifer Bennerotte Communications & Marketing Director City of Edina 952 - 833 -9520 FAX 952 - 826 -0390 jbennerotte @ci.edina.mn.us - - - -- Original Message---- - .From: Kakalios [mailto:kakalios @umn.edu] Sent: Tuesday, March 04, 2008 4:47 PM To: Jennifer Bennerotte Subject: Thank you — from Jim and Therese Kakalios Dear Mayor Hovland, i, 5 h� Q� \ 0y I wanted to thank you for your support for the Lewis Park project during last night's council meeting. My husband and I have been very close friends of Carolyn and Doug Kohrs and family since we each moved to Edina eighteen years ago. I have been Carolyn's sounding board on this project since its inception. As you know, they were deeply committed to working with the city, the citizens (even their most ardent critics) and business community to.create a much needed gathering place in that neighborhood. Throughout the process, to its very end, Carolyn had been happy to accept input and revision to make the project truly collaborative and inclusive. I am grateful for your example of leadership and I share with you the strongest conviction that this project would have benefited the common good. I am somewhat troubled that in their zeal to keep this perceived competition at bay from the businesses at Cahill, Council members Masica and Bennet are in effect propping up businesses unable to make it in their own. As you are probably aware, there has been tremendous turnover in that development (three coffee shops, Subway, a cleaners, and a video store come to mind). The existent businesses will either survive or fail based on their own merit. Further, if the condo owners were sincere in their support of these businesses, they could most effectively demonstrate this by patronizing them.I did not find the many distortions of the project helpful. The meeting was very long, and since my daughter Laura was compelled.to speak, I felt one Kakalios at the podium was probably enough. I do continue to have strong feelings about this issue and while it appears this project will not "get off the ground ", I wanted to assure you the Kohrs are people of intergrity, generosity and a sense of committment. Jim and I are proud to consider them close friends. I am deeply appreciative that even after it was evident that this project would not obtain sufficient votes, you shared your feelings and thoughts. Jim and I are grateful for your leadership. Therese and Jim Kakalios 1 Deb Mangen om: Jennifer Bennerotte Sent: Wednesday,. March 05, 2008 9:30 AM Cc: Deb Mangen Subject: FW: Lewis Park Jennifer Bennerotte Communications & Marketing Director City of Edina 952 - 833 -9520 FAX 952 - 826 -0390 jbennerotte @ci.edina.mn.us -- Original Message---- - From: Kristi Mensch [mailto:kmensch @gmail.com] Sent: Wednesday, March 05, 2008 6:43 AM To: Jennifer Bennerotte Subject: Lewis Park Dear Mayor, and Council members, 5 ,ho I have been an Edina resident for 40 years, and am extremely disappointed by the results of Monday night's meeting. It is Inconceivable to me that the generous gift of Carolyn Kohrs was not gratefully accepted. ouncil member Joni Bennett was concerned by the commercial aspect of this project. The arming house would sell concessions, but I don't see how that's any different from concession sales at Braemar or the Edina pool, since the profits go to the city of Edina. Also, When I go to the Edina pool in the summer I can often buy corn or watermelon at a stand there. I don't have any problem with the fruit stand, but it does seem like an inconsistency. I'm also guessing those guys don't send in their profits. The Cahill businesses were not in favor of this project, but I could imagine it actually helping their businesses. I think this project could draw more people into the neighborhood which would be good for business. I also could picture communication between the warming house and the businesses. One idea might be to have a menu of Sami's Subs (and other merchants) available during soccer tournaments, so that Subs could be ordered from the warming house to be picked up and delivered to the warming house. It could be a win win situation. The other problem seems to be the strings attached to the donation. The major one being Carolyn's managing of the warming house. Could we compare Carolyn's resume with those of the people managing Weber warming house or the Edina pool's concession stand? I'm guessing that having a person with Carolyn's education, and work experience would be a coup in itself, and then add to that, her vested interest in the project, that she doesn't want a salary, and she'll cover operating loses. I am truly perplexed that her idea has not been embraced by everyone. The precedent that Carolyn was willing to set, by donating a building that clearly needs replacing, working for free, and even covering losses, seems like a model that the city should have embraced My thanks to Mayor Hovland, Scot Housh and Ann Swenson for supporting this project. Sincerely, Kristi Mensch 4800 Larkspur Lane 1 > Dear Mayor and Council Members, • I live in Edina and would like to express my support for replacing the • park building at Lewis Park using donated funds from a local community • group in partnership with the City. I read about the project on the • website: www.forabetterlewispark.org. This building is in need of • replacement now and it would be beneficial to our community to have a • park building that serves a greater population on a year round basis. • The proposal is valuable to our city and community and allows us to • enhance our community • without increasing taxes. Please consider the • benefit of the project to our community and vote YES at your March 3rd • meeting! > Sincerely, > Jon Stechmann > 7460 Shannon Drive > Edina, MN 55439 2 �� • r... Deb Mangen om: Jennifer Bennerotte Sent: Wednesday, March 05, 2008 6:24 AM Cc: Deb Mangen Subject: FW: Lewis Park Jennifer Bennerotte Communications & Marketing Director City of Edina 952 - 833 -9520 FAX 952 - 826 -0390 jbennerotte @ci.edina.mn.us - - - -- Original Message---- - From: Jonathan Stechmann [ mailto:jon_stechmann @yahoo.com] Sent: Tuesday, March 04, 2008 5:20 PM To: Jennifer Bennerotte Subject: RE: Lewis Park Thank you Jennifer, Please pass on my disappointment over the council's decision last night not to approve the Lewis Park proposal. I find it very concerning and fiscally irresponsible not to take advantage of this amazing pportunity. I would like to know who voted against this proposal, why, and what is the plan to improve the current building. Regards, Jon Stechmann - -- Jennifer Bennerotte <JBennerotte @ci.edina.mn.us> wrote: > Dear Mr. Stechman: • Thank you for your interest in the City of Edina. • Your message was • forwarded upon receipt to members of.the Edina City Council. If I can • be of additional assistance, please contact me. > • Jennifer Bennerotte • Communications & Marketing Director • City of Edina • 952 - 833 -9520 • FAX 952 - 826 -0390 • jbennerotte @ci.edina.mn.us > - - - -- Original Message---- - From: Jonathan Stechmann [ mailto:jon_stechmann @yahoo.com] • Sent: Monday, March 03, 2008 4:49 PM • To: Jennifer. Bennerotte • Cc: jstechmann @oppenheimer.com • Subject: Lewis Park 1 Deb Manger From: Jennifer Bennerotte Sent: Wednesday, March 05, 2008 6:12 AM Cc: Deb Mangen Subject: FW: PLS FORWARD TO C.MEMBER BENNETT Jennifer Bennerotte Communications & Marketing Director City of Edina 952 - 833 -9520 FAX 952 -826 -0390 jbennerofte@ci.edina.mn.us From: stephen winnick [mailto:winsteve @comcast.net] Sent: Tuesday, March 04, 2008 9:03 PM To: Jennifer Bennerotte Subject: PLS FORWARD TO C.MEMBER BENNETT Councilmember Bennett: It is unfortunate that feelings have to "ramp up" beyond reason on so many Community issues; this Lewis Park Gift proposal being one.Now that this skirmish is over,.) would hope that healing could start at the Council level and filter down to the various community groupings. The Mayor's closing comments were unfortunate and some very sad things were later said in the hallway by some ardent supporters: I am sure you will do your part to spread some good will. If I can do anything, please do not hesitate to ask. Thank you again for your kind gesture last night. Should you wish one more sounding board on issues that may arise in the future, please feel free to contact me. Best Regards..... Steve Wiinnick winsteve@comcast. net (952)942 -5777 . 3/5/2008 S� Deb Mangen From: Jennifer Bennerotte Sent: Wednesday, March 05, 2008 6:11 AM Cc: Deb Mangen Subject: FW: PLS FORWARD TO C.MEMBER MASICA Jennifer Bennerotte Communications & Marketing Director City of Edina 952 - 833 -9520 FAX 952 - 826 -0390 jennerotte @ci.edina.mn.us From: stephen winnick [mailto:winsteve @comcast.net] Sent: Tuesday, March 04, 2008 9:09 PM To: Jennifer Bennerotte Subject: PLS FORWARD TO C.MEMBER MASICA Councilmember Masica: Its tough being in your seat when heated issues arise; made even tougher by certain statements, possible overreactions and mischaracterizations. I am most appreciative of your well reasoned analysis, probative questions and your position on the Lewis Park Gift Proposal. Thank You.... Steve Winnick win steve(cDcomcast. net 952 942 -5777 3/5/2008 Deb Mangen From: Jennifer Bennerotte Sent: Wednesday, March 05, 2008 2:00 PM Cc: Deb Mangen Subject: FW: Mayor Hovland, Members Swenson and Housh Jennifer Bennerotte Communications & Marketing Director City of Edina 952- 833 -9520 FAX 952 - 826 -0390 jbennerofte@ci.edina.mn.us From: Geoff Nash [mailto:nashg @visi.com] Sent: Wednesday, March 05, 2008 12:28 PM To: Jennifer Bennerotte Subject: CC: Mayor Hovland, Members Swenson and Housh Dear Council Members Bennet and Masica, >` SEAL N MAR -5.= RECEIVED W I was very disappointed that the City Council failed to support the Lewis, Park project. I think you should understand that turning down this generous offer, and some of the very unkind as well as inaccurate things that were said by critics the other night will affect the way others may feel about making donations or contributions to the City. I don't know why anyone would set themselves up for some of the treatment the Kohrs received. r I spoke the night of the City Council meeting and described how my family used and enjoyed Centennial Lakes Park. Please help me to understand why a concession is acceptable there and not at Lewis Park. Although the council didn't seem to appreciate this, I'd like to reiiterate that having the opportunity to purchase a light refreshment at a park, provides a reason to linger, to visit, it provides another reason for the destination, a cup of coffee while chatting with neighbors. I look forward to your response. Sincerely, Camille Nash 6920 Hillcrest Lane Edina MN 55435 3/5/2008 Deb Mangen "om: Jennifer Bennerotte Sent: Wednesday, March 05, 2008 1:59 PM Cc: Deb Mangen Subject: FW: Disappointed Edina Resident Jennifer Bennerotte V, SEAL Communications & Marketing Director City Edina MAR _5 of 952 - 833 -9520 REC1 FAX 952 - 826 -0390 6Y jbennerotte @ci.edina.mn.us - - - -- Original Message---- - From: Susan Furlow [ mailto:susanfurlow @comcast.net] Sent: "Wednesday, March 05, 2008 1:09.PM To: Jennifer Bennerotte Subject: Disappointed Edina Resident Jennifer -- I will thank you to forward this on to the Edina City Council members. Thanks so much! Susan Furlow and Larry McCann Dear City Council Members, s 12 -year residents of Edina (and with two children in Edina Public Schools), we have _earned how much this community has to offer a family. In keeping with that community spirit, the plan and proposal that the Kohrs and others brought forward was, in our opinion, an excellent one: to build a drop -in center /gathering place at Lewis Park. We had the funding and the plan to support a wonderful community.gathering place and replace a sadly outdated warming house to boot! It would have been a great prototype for other such centers throughout our community, with an eye toward creating multiple, neighbor- hood -based centers for our children, teens and adults. We felt this was a very forward- thinking idea. I was at the Council meeting on Monday of this week for one and half hours waiting for this to be addressed. Due to the fact that the proposal was last on the agenda for discussion, I ran out of time to stay to hear it out and participate. I am hoping you can provide me with.an explanation of why this was objected to; please tell me it'was.because there are other, bigger plans in the works for a badly- needed, new Edina Social Center that would serve all ages! Susan Furlow (and Larry McCann) 952 - 944 -5212 1 Deb Mangen From: Jennifer Bennerotte Sent: Thursday, March 06, 2008 10:45 AM Cc: Deb Mangen Subject: FW: Lewis Park Proposal Jennifer Bennerotte Communications & Marketing Director City of Edina 952 - 833 -9520 FAX 952 - 826 -0390 jennerotte@ci.edina.mn.us From: claudia vieira [mailto:vieiral3 @hotmail.com] Sent: Thursday, March 06, 2008 9:33 AM To: Jennifer Bennerotte . Subject: Lewis Park Proposal Please forward to Mayor Hovland and City Council Members. I am writing to thank Mayor Hovland and Council Members Housh and Swenson for their support of the Lewis Park Proposal. It is unfortunate Council Members Masica and Bennet were unwilling to be open minded and voted to reject a (generous) donation of $500, 000 to the City of Edina, (not to mention all the persona/ volunteer time offered from this donor. I felt Council Members Masica and Bennett treated this generous donor as a big time "for proFt" developer and this was very unfortunate). They also sent the message that community and city can not work together, they came up with no solutions to make it work. This is a community that has always been proud of its quality of life, and this was an opportunity to continue to offer high quality park facilities without using public money - this generous donation has now been wasted. I have concerns about the direction Council Members Masica and Bennett are taking our proud City of Edina. The actions taken by these two council members do not appear to be in the best interest of our families /children. I know there area lot of citizens very disappointed with the outcome of the City Council's vote on Monday. We must respect the democratic process of our local government. However, I intend to vote for better leaders next election time. Now that this opportunity has been rejected, I have some questions. When and how will we renovate the existing structure? Who will pay for it? How will the job get done? I direct the questions to council members Masica and Bennett for it was clear they had no interest in trying to come up with a solution with Carolyn Kohrs. Edina resident, Claudia Westholder 3/6/2008 Deb Mangen From: Jennifer Bennerotte Sent: Thursday, March 06, 2008 5:34 AM Cc: Deb Mangen Subject: FW: Denial of Calvin Christian bond plan was correct �4 SEq� C Jennifer Bennerotte MAR `6 ?ODg Communications & Marketing Director hr� City of Edina 952 - 833 -9520 FAX 952 - 826 -0390 jennerotte @ci.edina.mn.us From: Fred Johnson [mailto:fajohnson @sbcglobal.net] Sent: Thursday, March 06, 2008 2:38 AM To: Jennifer Bennerotte Subject: Denial of Calvin Christian bond plan was correct Dear Gentle Council Members All: Congratulations for choosing the right path resisting public sponsorship of a bond to build a private Christian school. Nice to see someone get it right the first time. Such a plan would clearly have breached the Wall of Separation that Madison, Jefferson, and the other Founding Fathers erected between church and state in the First Amendment. Madison wanted not "three pence" of taxpayer funds spent to promote religion. Suppose this school had not been a Christian school, but instead a madrassah or a Jewish day school? Same thing. Same decision required. Also, what demoralizing message would you have given to the public schools in your area by sponsoring bonding of this private religious school? In the past seven years the line of demarcation in the use of public funds to promote religion has been blurred by vested interests with big appetites for funds or for votes. No matter what your own private religious views may be, as public officials, standing up to the hew for use of public sponsorship was a courageous act. I only hope more municipalities, states, and the federal government itself will follow your good example and reverse the trend of public sponsorship of religious initiatives that seems to be in vogue of late. Fred Johnson Palo Alto, CA Internal Virus Database is out -of -date. Checked by'AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.516 / Virus Database: 269.19.2/1223 - Release Date: 1/13/2008 8:23 PM 3/6/2008 Deb Mangen From: Jennifer Bennerotte. Sent: Wednesday, March 05, 2008 4:13 PM Cc: Deb Mangen Subject: FW: Donation for Warming House�T Jennifer Bennerotte Communications & Marketing Director City of Edina 952 - 833 -9520 FAX 952 - 826 -0390 jbenn6rotte@ci.edina.mn.us From: DANIEL L TAYLOR [mailto:d_etaylor @msn.com] Sent: Wednesday, March 05, 2008 4:09 PM To: Jennifer Bennerotte Subject: Donation for Warming House MAR -6 �� RECEIVED . 1 \, ---,/ , I watch the March 4th hearing with respect to the generous offer of a donation of $500,000.00 from the Kohrs' family for a warming house at Lewis Parka I was extremely disappointed that the Council chose to decline this offer. It takes a village, does not apply in Edina; when the Council would not even entertain the possibility of proceeding with negotiations to work out details of this offer. I don't think the Kohrs have a sinister agenda. I have lived and paid taxes in this community since 1985. Ironically, I received my property tax statement in the mail today after the Council turned down the Kohrs donation. Eileen Taylor 3/5/2008 Deb Mangen From: Jennifer Bennerotte Sent: Thursday, March 06, 2008 5:36 AM Cc: Deb Mangen Subject: FW: Lewis Park Proposal W, Jennifer Bennerotte Communications & Marketing Director AE/ City of Edina 952 - 833 -9520 FAX 952 - 826 -0390 jennerotte@ci.edina.mn.us From: kcollins67 @comcast.net [mailto:kcollins67 @comcast.net] Sent: Wednesday, March 05, 2008 11:44 PM To: Jennifer Bennerotte Subject: Lewis Park Proposal Please forward to Mayor Hovland and City Council Members. 1 am writing to thank Mayor Hovland and Council Members Housh and Swenson for their support of the Lewis Park Proposal. It is unfortunate Council Members Masica and Bennet were unwilling to be open minded and voted to reject a (generous) donation of $500, 000 to the City of Edina, (not to mention all the personal volunteer time offered from this donor. I felt Council Members Masica and Bennett treated this generous donor as a big time ' for profit" developer and this was very unfortunate). This is a community that has always been proud of it's quality of life, and this was an opportunity to continue to offer high quality parkfacilities without using public money - this generous donation has now been wasted I have concerns about the direction Council Members Masica and Bennett are taking our proud City of Edina. The actions taken by these two council members do not appear to be in the best interest of our families /children. I know there are a lot of citizens very disappointed with the outcome of the City Council's vote on Monday. We must respect the democratic process of our local government. However, I intend to vote for better leaders next election time. Amy Collins 7420 Coventry Way 3/6/2008 Deb Mangen From: Jennifer Bennerotte Sent: Thursday, March 06, 2008 5:36 AM Cc: Deb Mangen; Cary Teague; Gordon Hughes Subject: FW: Introduction - Corridor Housing Initiative Jennifer Bennerotte Communications & Marketing Director City of Edina 952 - 833 -9520 FAX 952- 826 -.0390 jbennerotte @ci.edina.mn.us - - - -- Original Message:--- - From: Gretchen Nicholls [mailto:gnichollp@lisc.org] Sent: Wednesday, March 05, 2008 10:16 PM To: Jennifer Bennerotte Subject: Introduction - Corridor Housing Initiative Greetings Mayor and Council Members, Cary Teague and Gordon Hughes! AEG�v� After reading Sunday's Strib article (Edina residents say their city isn't listening) I wanted to send information about the Corridor Housing,Initiative. Mayor Hovland was briefly introduced to the resource a while back through Ann Forsyth, previously with the University of Minnesota's Metropolitan Design Center. The Corridor Housing Initiative (CHI) is a proactive planning process to assist the planning, design and development along major corridors. CHI fosters an exciting partnership among community stakeholders, city government, and a technical team of development consultants, design experts, and facilitators to connect market opportunities with neighborhood and city goals and raises the level of dialogue around redevelopment issues. A nationally award winning community planning process, CHI helps to raise the level of dialogue around design and development issues and gives local residents the skills to be active participants in shaping future development. The heart of the process involves an interactive exercise that gives participants a hands -on opportunity to explore different housing, mixed use, and commercial options on specific sites, and instantly run the numbers to determine whether the project would be financially viable. Please let me know if you would be interested in an informational meeting about the Corridor Housing Initiative, and ways that it might support the City of Edina in it's planning and development efforts. For further information, you can also visit our web site: www.housinginitiative.org Some of the previous suburban project areas that we have supported include Fridley (University Avenue), Richfield (3 development sites), and Brooklyn Park (Huntingon Pointe). The March MNAPA Newsletter has an article about the Corridor Housing Initiative in Fridley (see attached). Thanks for your consideration! Gretchen Nicholls Program Officer / Corridor Housing Initiative Twin Cities LISC 651- 265 -2280 gnicholls@lisc.org www.housinginitiative.org Deb Mangen From: Jennifer Bennerotte Sent: Thursday, March 06, 2008 4:14 PM Cc: Deb Mangen Subject: FW: Lewis Park Vote Jennifer Bennerotte Communications & Marketing Director City of Edina 952 - 833 -9520 FAX 952 -826 -0390 jennerotte@ei.edina.mn.us From: Julie James [mailto:bigshopper @gmail.com] Sent: Thursday, March 06, 2008 11:43 AM To: Jennifer Bennerotte Subject: Lewis Park Vote � SF AJ_ MAR-620, RECEIVED RY I am writing to thank Mayor Hovland and Council Members Housh and Swenson for their support of the Lewis Park Proposal. It is unfortunate Council Members Masica and Bennet were unwilling to be open minded and voted to reject a (generous) donation of $500,000 to the City of.Edina, (not to mention all the personal volunteer time offered from this donor. I felt Council Members Masica and Bennett treated this generous donor as a big time "for profit" developer and this was very unfortunate). This is a community that has always been proud of it's quality of life, and this was an opportunity to continue to offer high quality park facilities without using public money - this generous donation has now been wasted. I have concerns about the direction Council Members Masica and Bennett are taking our proud City of Edina. The actions taken by these two council members do not appear to be in the best interest of our families /children. I know there are a lot of citizens very disappointed with the outcome of the City Council's vote on Monday. We must respect the democratic process of our local government. However, I intend to vote for better leaders next election time. Thanks again for your support. Julie James 3/6/2008 Deb Mangen From: Jennifer Bennerotte. Sent: Thursday, March 06,•2008 4:07 PM Cc: Deb Mangen Subject: FW: Outcome of Lewis Park Jennifer Bennerotte Communications & Marketing Director City of Edina 952 - 833 -9520 FAX 952 - 826 -0390 jennerotte@ci.edina.mn.us From: Roger Erny [mailto:rogererny @mac.com] Sent: Thursday, March 06, 2008 4:01 PM To: Jennifer Bennerotte Subject: Outcome of Lewis Park Y SFAL -'N MAR - 6 2008; RECEIVEp We are writing to thank Mayor Hovland and Council Members Housh and Swenson for their support of the Lewis Park Proposal. It is unfortun Council Members Masica and Bennet were unwilling to be open minded and voted to reject a generous donation of $500,000 to the City of Edina, (not to mention all the personal volunteer time offered from this donor.) We feel Council Members Masica and Bennett treated this generous donor as a big time "for profit" developer and this was very unfortunate. This is a community that has always been proud of its quality of life, and this was an opportunity to continue to offer high quality park facilities without using public money. This generous donation has now been wasted. . We have grave concerns about the direction Council Members Masica and Bennett are taking our proud City of Edina. The actions taken by these two council members do not appear to be in the best interest of our families /children. We know there are many citizens very disappointed with the outcome of the City Council's vote on Monday. We must respect the democratic process of our local government. However, we intend to vote for better leaders next election time. Disappointed and concerned Edina residents, Roger, Dorren, Emma, Hannah and Charlie Erny 3/6/2008 PROJECT READ. Motion March 10, 2008 Edina Police Department 4801 5oth Street West Edina, Minnesota 55424 To the Edina Police Department: GJ:S:tc.s-e. * U S A VA TA L-A SEAL MAR 14 1008 RECEIVED I want to take this opportunity to thank your department for responding so quickly and well to my request. My car was damaged in a parking lot on France Avenue on March 4 .and the driver did not stop. We were able to get his license number which we gave to Officer Kapela. She was prompt, efficient and courteous in her response to my call. Your department also followed through and found the person who was responsible for the damage. All of this, in my judgment, equals a department which is responsible, dedicated and professional. I truly appreciate everything you did in my behalf and I am sharing this with others. Again, thank you and a special thank you to Officer Kapela. Since e�rely,�`_ Mary Lee Enfield, Ph.D. 10,000 Maple Circle Bloomington, MN 55431 1620 W. 98th St., Suite 130 Bloomington, MN 55431 phone: 800.450.0343 fax: 952.884.6787 mm web site: www.proiectread.com March 7, 2008 Chief Mike'Sitari Edina Police Department 4801 West 50th Street Edina, MN 55424 Dear Chief Sitarl, SEAL N MAR 14 2009 RECEIVED ..4•. I am very.thankful for the excellent work Officer Eric Cgrlson.did gn my.... case, which involved someone harassing me through the mail. I filed a report, believing that determining who was doing this would be difficult to impossible, but I felt Officer Carlson listened and took an interest in what I was saying. I did what I could do to gather information, but it was through Officer Carlson's willingness to' pursue this case and gather more information that he identified a suspect and succeeded in getting a taped admission. I am thankful for his efforts, and wanted to pass that along. Sincerely, l/ Jennifer Janovy 4016 Inglewood Ave. Edina SEAL c, MAR 14 ?008 RECEIVED * macys loss prevenTTon February 25,•2008 Chief Mike Siitari Edina Police Department 4801 W 50th Street Edina, MN 55424 Chief Siitari, I want to extend our appreciation and thanks for the partnership and professionalism of your office. In January 2008, Macy's Investigators presented information to Edina Police officer, Joel Moore, regarding an employee suspected of stealing merchandise. Following this contact, Macy's Investigators worked with numerous officers in your command to coordinate a search warrant and further the investigation into the employee's theft. This effort, while under the direction of Officer Moore, resulted in the following: • One successful search warrant and the arrest of the suspect. • The seizure of over $64,000 in suspected stolen merchandise. • A civil agreement between Macy's and the suspect resulting in $10,000 restitution By closing this case in such an efficient manner, a significant impact has been made on the ever growing issue of retail crime. Additionally, we would like to extend our appreciation to the following law enforcement professionals involved in the case: Officer Behr Officer Lindman CSO Pesek Officer Conboy Officer Seeger On behalf of Macy's, please pass along our thanks to these officers. Respectfully, Steve Brophy Vice President Macy's Loss Prevention t - cc: Sgt. Tom Draper 4 MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE EDINA HERITAGE PRESERVATION BOARD TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 12, 2008, AT 7:00 P.M. EDINA CITY HALL — COMMUNITY ROOM 4801 WEST 501H STREET MEMBERS PRESENT: Bob Kojetin, Karen Ferrara, Chris Rofidal, Lou Blemaster, Laura Benson, Jean Rehkamp Larson, Connie Fukuda, Nancy Scherer, and Sara Rubin MEMBERS ABSENT: None STAFF PRESENT: Joyce Repya, Associate Planner OTHERS PRESENT: Robert Vogel, Preservation Consultant Tom Mason, 4622 Drexel Avenue Brandon Merrill, MA Peterson Design Build Joe Sullivan, 4504 Casco Avenue Cheryl Dulas, 4609 Bruce Avenue APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES: January 8, 2008 Member Rofidal moved approval of the Minutes from the January 8, 2008 meeting. Member Scherer seconded the motion. All voted aye. The motion carried. II. COUNTRY CLUB DISTRICT: A. Certificates of Appropriateness (COA) 1. H -08 -1 4622 Drexel Avenue Changes to a COA previously approved for a new home Planner Repya reported that the subject property is located on the west side of the 4600 block of Drexel Avenue. The existing home, constructed in 1941 is identified as a Neo- Colonial. A two stall, front loading garage is located on the north side of the house. On October 26, 2006, the Heritage Preservation Board approved a Certificate of Appropriateness to demolish the existing home and build a new home. Since that time, the project was abandoned, the property was sold, and a new plan for the home is now proposed. Minutes — February 12, 2008 Edina Heritage Preservation Board The subject request addresses new construction which includes removing the existing attached garage and replacing it with a new attached, front - loading, 2 stall garage; recessed 8.33 feet from the front building wall. The existing hip roof is proposed to be replaced with a new, higher pitched roof with gable ends on all four elevations. An 850 square foot, 2 -story addition is proposed to be added to the rear of the home - set back 3.96 from the south building wall of the existing home, and 15.46 feet from the southerly lot line; 43 feet from the rear (or westerly) lot line; and 14 feet from the north lot line. The property owner has indicated that the plans are influenced by the English Cottage architectural style; utilizing a massed square ground plan configuration. The roof pitch is proposed to be changed from low, hip style to a higher pitch with ridge lines and gable ends, in an attempt to more closely match the pitch of surrounding homes. The exterior finishes proposed are tumbled stone, cedar shakes and cedar trim, with asphalt shingles. Planner Repya observed that an important element when reviewing home construction in the Country Club District, in addition to the architectural style, is to determine how the home will compare in size and massing to the adjacent homes. The following comparison of the elevations at the street, first floor and ridge line for the subject home and the adjacent homes to both the north and south were provided: Address 4620 - north 4622 - proposed 4624 - south Note: The differe in parentheses. Street 887.66 886.53 886.32 !nce in grac 1 st Floor ( +9.3') 896.69 ( +8.3') 894.87 ( +8.1') 894.42 le from street to 1 st fl Ridge Line _ ( +26.5') 923.22 ( +27.6') 922.47 (919.98 original) ( +27') 921.48 oor and 1St floor to ridge line is indicated Comparisons for the building heights of the subject and adjacent homes demonstrate. the following: (Measurements taken from grade, not 1St floor elevation.) Address Highest Peak Eave Line 4620 — north 277' 16'5" 4622 — proposed 287' 177' (original home 25'5" peak, 19'2" eave) 4624 — south 26'4" 20'4" Preservation Consultant Robert Vogel reviewed the plans submitted with the Certificate of Appropriateness application and opined that a new COA is required because the proposed work will obliterate the existing house (while recycling some of its structural components) and replace it with an entirely new architectural creation. r. Minutes – February 12, 2008 Edina Heritage Preservation Board The design does not attempt to imitate a particular architectural style or period, but interprets both -the Colonial and Tudor styles as well as some notable Midwestern vernacular themes that are also reflected in older homes in the district. The overall impression is of a Neo- Eclectic house consciously designed to be compatible with adjacent historic facades —it certainly makes an interesting transition between the neighboring homes. Mr. Vogel explained that the composition of the facade is based on traditional rather than modern shapes and textures, and in his opinion, the designer did an excellent job of integrating the attached, front - loading garage with the rest of the facade. Vogel noted that the compound plan, with its combination of side and front - facing gables (a form referred to as "cross- gabled "), is a characteristic shared by numerous Tudor Revival homes in the district, which also often have mixed wall cladding materials. The open entry porch is a very nice touch because it helps offset the mass of the facade (builders in the 1920s -30s installed the same porches /porticoes on both Colonial Revival and Tudor style houses throughout the district). The wood brackets under the eaves are neither Colonial nor Tudor inspired, at least in an architectural history sense, but decorative brackets can be seen on Italian Renaissance styled homes in the district (where many of the Tudors have "colonial" decorative shutters) and here they are placed in a somewhat inconspicuous location. Mr. Vogel concluded that he would recommend approval of the COA for new construction, subject to the plans presented and a 2008 year built plaque be displayed on the exterior of the home. FINDINGS- Planner Repya provided the following findings: • The proposed new construction is architecturally compatible in scale, building materials, and texture with the nearby historic homes and the streetscape. • The historic integrity of nearby historic facades will not be impaired. • The plans provided with subject request clearly illustrate the scale and scope of the project. • The information provided supporting the subject Certificate of Appropriateness meets the requirements of the Zoning Ordinance and the Country Club Plan of Treatment STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Ms. Repya concluded that staff recommends approval of the Certificate of Appropriateness for the new construction subject to: • The plans presented, and • The condition that a year built plaque or sign is placed on the structure. 3 Minutes — February 12, 2008 Edina Heritage Preservation Board BOARD MEMBER COMMENTS: Member Blemaster • Questioned the placement of the garage on the front elevation of the home; recalling that under the original plan for the district, Samuel Thorpe required that the garage not be visible from the front street. • Cautioned the Board to be careful when making suggestions - not to redesign the home — the homeowner needs to have choices. Member Scherer • Reiterated Member Blemaster's concern regarding the placement of the front loading garage, and added that the front elevation has so many elements in play that the plan appears hodge -podge to her. Member Rehkamp Larson • Observed that the plan demonstrates great scale and massing. The form also works with.the plan. The original house structure will be maintained. The front facing garage is not a problem — it has been set back from the front building wall to reduce the impact on the front elevation and sits below a lower hip roof. And the front entry has good proportion. • Questioned whether the following details were in keeping with the historic neighborhood: 1. The eave /overhang on the front gable has a large boxed piece that might be reduced. 2. The garden gate on the front south elevation is connected to the eave and could be more connected to the house. 3. Tongue and groove siding — could it be setting a precedence? • Questioned whether this plan would be setting a precedence for future requests for new construction from an historic context. Member Ferrara • Observed that the Board needs to be sensitive to a homeowner's preferences for materials and design as long as what is proposed falls within the suggested design guidelines • Pointed out that when looking at changes which have taken place in the district, it is very difficult to determine precedence. Member Koietin • Pointed out that it is the responsibility of the Board to evaluate the plans as they relate to the criteria set out in the plan of treatment. 4 Minutes — February 12, 2008 Edina Heritage Preservation Board Member Fukuda • Observed that the plans appear to meet the criteria of the plan of treatment. Member Benson • Observed that it is important that the neighbors have had an opportunity to review the plans and that their concerns have been addressed. HOMEOWNER COMMENTS: Tom Mason, Spyglass Properties Responding to questions from the Board, the owner /contractor, Tom Mason explained the following: • The existing home has a front loading garage, and because there is not enough room on the side of the home for a driveway to access a garage in the rear of the home, we have attempted to lessen the impact of the garage by recessing it from the front building wall. • The existing pitch of the roof is very low compared with the neighboring homes. The new gabled roof was designed to be more in keeping with the surrounding historic architecture. • The stone veneer proposed for the fagade is a natural tumbled stone. • As the plans for the home were designed, meetings were held with city staff, preservation consultant, and abutting neighbors. MOTION: Member Ferrara moved approval of the Certificate of Appropriateness application, subject to the plans presented and a year date plaque be affixed to the exterior of the home. Member Kojetin seconded the motion. DISCUSSION: Member Rehkamp Larson stated that she was pleased with the overall design of the home, however would be more comfortable if the following changes were considered: 1. Reworking the front overhanging eave and removing the box on either end. 2. The peak of the rear addition is about six inches higher than the peak of the existing home. To bring the addition peak in line with the home would be a refinement to the plan. Mr. Mason explained that the larger overhang eave was designed to prevent ice dam problems which can occur with smaller eaves. Also, the higher ridge of the addition is not visible from the front street due to the grading of the lot. However, he stated that he could agree to Ms. Rehkamp Larson's suggestions. 5 Minutes — February 12, 2008 Edina Heritage Preservation Board VOTE: Following a brief discussion, Member Ferrara amended her motion to include Member Rehkamp Larson's two suggestions. Member Kojetin agreed to the amended motion. Members Rofidal, Benson, Fukuda, Scherer, Ferrara, Kojetin and Rubin voted aye. Member Blemaster voted nay, pointing out that she did not agree with the front facing garage. The motion carried. 2. H -08 -2 4629 Bruce Avenue Construct a new 2 -car detached garage Planner Repya explained that the subject property is located on the east side of the 4600 block of Bruce Avenue. The existing home is an English Tudor style constructed in 1935. A 2 -car detached garage is located in the southeast corner of the rear yard, accessed by a driveway running along the south property line. The subject request involves demolishing the existing 583.7 square foot detached garage which was constructed in 1999, and building a new, 583.7 square foot detached garage in the same location. The plan illustrates the new structure will continue to maintain 5 foot setback from the rear lot line and 6.4 foot setback from the south side lot line. A new curb cut is not required since the existing driveway will provide access to the proposed garage. Ms. Repya pointed out that the new 2 stall detached garage is proposed to have the same footprint as the garage to be demolished; 24' 2 "x 247' or 583.7 square feet in area. The design of the structure is proposed to compliment the architectural style of the home. Attention to detail is demonstrated on all four elevations. Stucco siding with trim boards applied in a similar style found on the front of the home is proposed for the walls, and shake shingles are proposed for the roof. The height of the proposed garage is shown to be 21 feet at the highest peak, 15.5 feet at the mid -point of the gable, and 9 feet at the eave line. The ridge line is shown to be 25.5 feet in length. Furthermore, the lot coverage for the property with the proposed garage will not change since the proposed garage will be no larger than the existing garage. The proponent has provided information regarding characteristics of garages to the south and east of the subject property. The data indicates that the property to the south, (4628 Arden Avenue) has a 488 square foot detached garage with a hip roof measuring 12.75 feet to the peak, set back 5 feet from the shared property line. The detached garage for the home to the south (4631 Bruce Avenue) measures 540 square feet in area and 26 feet in height to the peak; it is situated in the southeast corner of the yard approximately 28 feet from the shared lot line shared with the subject property. R Minutes — February 12, 2008 Edina Heritage Preservation Board Preservation Consultant Vogel reviewed the plans and,observed that the. drawings, submitted with the subject Certificate of Appropriateness application demonstrate that the new garage will match the 1935 Tudor dwelling very well. The existing wood fence in backscreens the lower part of the east (rear) elevation, where the texture of the exterior wall finish and the gable -end treatment are sufficient, an&will, add enough visual character to the only wall that lacks windows /doors. It is a good "design and the shed- roofed dormers are an interesting touch — Country;.Club Tudors often have these little shed dormers. Mr. Vogel' recommended approval of the Certificate of Appropriateness for the new garage with the condition'that a year, built sign or plaque be placed somewhere on the structure to differentiate it as new construction. FINDINGS: Planner Repya presented the following findings: • The plans provided with subject request clearly illustrate the scale and scope of the project. • The information provided support ing the subject Certificate of Appropriateness meets the requirements of the Zoning Ordinance and the Country Club Plan of Treatment STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Ms. Repya concluded that Staff recommends approval of the Certificate of Appropriateness for the, new garage subject to: • The plans presented, and • The condition that a year built plaque or sign is placed on the structure. BOARD MEMBER COMMENTS: Members Schererand Bleriaster . • Inquired about the upstairs room — what it would be used for and how it would be accessed? Member Rehkamp Larson • ' Stated that she thought the garage plan was great. Member Rofidal • Stated that he liked the plan, however questioned the 21 foot height of the roof considering the garage to the east was only 14 feet high. Member Rehkamp.Larson.explained that she lived in the home to the east and the 7 foot height difference between the two garages did not bother her. 7 Minutes — February 12, 2008 Edina Heritage Preservation Board APPLICANT'S COMMENTS: Brandon Merrill, MA Peterson Design Build • Responding to the questions about the upstairs room, Mr. Merrill explained that the upstairs will be accessed by stairs — it will not be insulated and will be used for storage. MOTION AND VOTE: Following a brief discussion, Member Rehkamp Larson moved approval of the Certificate of Appropriateness request to build a new detached garage subject to the plans presented and the condition that a year built plaque be placed on the exterior of the structure. Member Benson seconded the motion. Members Ferrara, Blemaster, Kojetin, Rubin, and Fukuda voted aye. Members Rofidal and Scherer voted Nay. The motion carried. B. Survey Progress Report — January Consultant Vogel reported that most of the work during the first half of the month was spent preparing for the HPB meeting on January 8 and the HPC -City Council workshop on January 15. Review and organization of the survey data continued with the goal to assemble an update the list of all of the homes in the district with each property's street address, date of construction, architectural classification, and statement of significance (contributing or noncontributing). Work also continued to revise the plan of treatment to reflect comments received from members of the city council and city staff. Some additional research was required relating to definition of terms and the policy implications of some of the plan features. Board members thanked Mr. Vogel for his report. III. COUNTRY CLUB DISTRICT OPEN HOUSE - February 25th Board members discussed the format and information that would be provided at the February 25th open house. It was agreed that research data should be presented as well as the possible changes to the plan of treatment. Members emphasized that this would be an opportunity for the residents of the neighborhood to learn about the research data and provide a forum for the HPB to listen to resident concerns and vision for their neighborhood. All agreed that a notice of the open house should be mailed to all residents as well as providing a press release. It was suggested that emphasis be made in the notice that "possible changes to the plan of treatment could have an impact on contemplated changes to the exterior of the homes." Planner Repya stated that she would ensure that the notices will be sent no less than 10 days prior to the open house. Minutes — February 12, 2008 Edina Heritage Preservation Board IV. OTHER BUSINESS: A. Joint Meeting with City Council — January 15th: Outcome Discussion Board members discussed their reflections of the meeting with the Council Members. Member Rofidal • Received the impression that some of the council members preferred maintaining the contributing and non - contributing designations for the properties, but at the same time they would prefer the regulations be the same for both designations. • Need to keep in mind that we are entering into a new era — the older homes are expensive to maintain and it might not always be in the best interest of the district to have a blanket prohibition of tear downs. • Have spoken with some residents of the district who do not want a restriction to the tear down of homes. Member Scherer • Four homes have been torn down in the district since the landmark designation in 2003, which is a small number. However, a large number of new homes could change the character of the district. • If the tear down of homes is permitted, the Board needs better guidance when reviewing the plans. Member Blemaster • It may appear the plan of treatment is vague, however it needs to be to provide individuality and creativity within the historic framework. • It is through the Certificate of Appropriateness process that the integrity of the district will be maintained. It is encouraging that some of the builders associated with Certificates of Appropriateness have been very sensitive to the input from the neighborhood. It is important that new buyers in the district are educated about the landmark designation and the responsibilities associated with that. Member Koietin • The responsibility for education about the landmark designation lies with the HPB, but also the realtors, home sellers and the neighborhood in general. 9 Minutes — February 12, 2008 Edina Heritage Preservation Board Member Rehkamp Larson • Observed that it is the broader elements of massing and scale that give the district its character. • Would like clarification of the design guidelines regarding which elements are recommended and which are discouraged. It is important to make expectations clear. Consultant Vogel • It is imperative to know what is being preserved. • Preservation education is a consistent struggle in landmark districts because the stakeholders come and go. The historic information needs to be continually available. • It should not be the HPB job to prohibit change — the to control new construction to ensure the historic integrity of the district is maintained. • The concern for a large number of teardowns just isn't there. With the rate of four tear downs in five years in a district of 550 homes, the rate of change would take hundreds of years. • Residents are doing an excellent job of maintaining the character of the district. V. CONCERN OF RESIDENTS: Joe Sullivan — 4504 Casco Avenue Mr. Sullivan expounded upon a letter to the editor he submitted to the Edina Sun Current regarding the possible restriction of tear downs in the district, stating the following: • Preservation in the district is a difficult job due to its subjectiveness. • The district has been evolving for 80 years, and has been well maintained. • He has been a resident for 2 years and was attracted due to the location, sidewalks and young families, not necessarily the architectural styles of the homes. • The regulations need to be pragmatic — the houses are aged and won't last forever. • The regulations should not over mandate — the residents should be encouraged to invest in their properties. • Some older residents in the district are afraid of change. • The importance of a neighborhood is people. • His home has had numerous poorly constructed additions, which over time will require that he make a considerable investment to create a safe and more livable home, which will enhance the neighborhood. • The residents in the district need to be comfortable with the HPB. 10 Minutes — February 12, 2008 Edina Heritage Preservation Board Cheryl Dulas — 4609 Bruce Avenue Ms. Dulas shared the following concerns: • There are some homes in the district that deserve to be preserved, such as the 8 model homes built by Mr. Thorpe. • For the most part, the residents of the district have voluntarily maintained the historic integrity of their homes when undertaking changes to their homes. It is the speculative buyer, particularly on the smaller lots on the east side of the district who have demonstrated a disregard for the history of the district. • Ms. Dulas questioned the precedence for demolishing homes in the district. VI. CORRESPONDENCE: None VII. NEXT MEETING DATE: March 11, 2008 VIII. ADJOURNMENT 10:00 p.m Respectfully submitted, Joyce Repya 11 Ca' EDINA HUMAN RIGHTS & RELATIONS COMMISSION TUESDAY, JANUARY 22, 2008 7:00 PM - MAYOR'S CONFERENCE ROOM Members Present Luis Bartolomei Mary Brindle Emery Erickson Idelle Longman JoAnn McGuire Debby McNeil Sharon Ming Andy Otness Wayne Prochniak Members Absent Lindah Mhando Sarah Ratner Hamdi Yusuf Guest Joyce Repya Staff Susan Heiberg CDBG Funding Proposed Joyce Repya, the City's Associate Planner, was welcomed to discuss the portion of CDBG funding for 2008 to be proposed for human services. She shared that 1596 of the total amount to be allocated to Edina is earmarked for human services, which is expected to be $24,101 this year. She also reported that there is a new funding proposal from ,Community Education for School Readiness Scholarship and Transportation. Mrs. Repya explained that the Commission could consider reallocating the remaining $26,900 from daycare (VS) to the rehab of private property. The following was discussed: • A story about CAPSH should be featured in About Town or the Sun Current so that more people will learn that it is a resource and utilize its services. • Feature all the service providers who are funded by CDBG in a story or article. • HRRC has the responsibility to make sure the community has the opportunity to be familiarized with these service providers. • The Commission could consider meeting at the sites of various service providers. • A schedule could be developed for inviting the providers to attend Commission meetings. • JVS could be invited to attend, the April Commission meeting to share their plan of action regarding career counseling and assessment services. Member Bartolomei seconded the motion of Member Otness that the 2008 CDBG funding for human services be distributed in the following way: H.O.M.E. Program $ 9;276 HOME Line $ 1,000 JVS (career development) $ 2,750 CAPSH $ 3,500 School Readiness/Transportation $ 7,575 TOTAL $24,101 The motion carried. 16 Member Longman seconded the motion of Member Bartolomei that the previously - allocated CDBG funds in the amount of $35,150 be re- programmed in the following way: Rehab of private property $26,900 JVS (career development) $8,250 TOTAL $35,150 The motion carried. Member Prochniak seconded the motion of Member Ming that the amounts be redistributed pro rata if the County's budgeted amount varied; the motion carried. Member Prochniak seconded the motion of Member Ming that if the County does not approve Community Education's program for funding (School Readiness/Transportation), the amount of $7,575 would instead be added to the JVS allocation to become $10,325, and the reallocation of funds to JVS would become $675. The motion carried. Minutes Approved Regarding the minutes of November 27, 2007, it was noted thatHamdi Yusuf had not been recorded as absent Member Longman seconded Member Bartolomei's motion to approve the minutes of November 27, 2007, with the correction made; the motion carried. Resolution Approved Regarding Investment in Companies Connected with Sudan The Commissioners reviewed Ellen Kennedy's edited resolution regarding the divestment of any City- invested funds that would benefit factions within the Sudanese government The resolution serves as an investment strategy, ensuring that no City investments reach the Sudanese government Member Bartolomei seconded Member Prochniak's motion to approve the edited resolution for Gordon Hughes and the City Attorney to scrutinize before going to the City Council for adoption. The motion carried. Recruitment of New Members Encouraged With Members Ming and McNeil leaving the Commission, the Commissioners were encouraged to keep their eyes and ears open for potential new Members and invite them to apply. Reports from Human Rights Activities Shared 2' Vice Chair Longman distributed materials from the 36' Annual Conference of the League of Minnesota Human Rights Commissions held in September at the Grand Casino Convention Center in Mille Lacs. The theme was "Human Rights, Civil Rights, Treaty Rights: Minnesota Challenges", and the keynote speaker was Morris Dees. On December 7'h, she also attended the Human Rights Day Forum and was impressed with the sharing of the keynote speaker, Mike Farrell. At this event, there was a workshop presented by the City of Bloomington entitled "Building Inclusive Communities —The Bloomington Human Rights Commission's Experience." Materials from this workshop were distributed to the Commissioners. Finally, an event was announced entitled "Heading Home Hennepin," 4.1 which will be a "major effort to eliminate homelessness in ten years." It will be held on February 21° at 7 PM at Temple Israel, and the event is sponsored by the Minneapolis League of Women Voters, Lutheran Social Services, Temple Israel and Catholic Charities. Slate of Officers Submitted and Approved The Nominating Committee--�consisting of Members Otness, Bartolomei and Longman — presented the following slate of officers for 2008: Chair Luis Bartolomei 1° Vice .Chair Emery Erickson r Vice Chair Idelle Longman There were no other nominations. Member McGuire seconded Member Otness' motion to approve this slate of officers as presented; the motion carried. Chair Brindle was thanked for serving two years as .Chair. Well-Wishes Shared with Member Ming After 20 years of service to the Commission and this being her last meeting, Member Ming was thanked for her generous work. The Commissioners offered their appreciation with her offer to help in the development of an enhanced care team model for RPC. How To Do Diversity Training Member Prochniak suggested engaguig Rotary, colleges and businesses to disclose successful methods of diversity training. What has worked, and what can we learnP Colonial Church's hand Use Discussed Member Ming reported that Colonial Church's land next to the Fire Station is under consideration for redevelopment. There is a task force in place for the process of submitting proposals. Ideas being mentioned are creating senior and low- income housing. Adiournment There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 9:15 PM: MB /sh Respectfully submitted, .Mary Brindle, Chair Edina Human & Relations Commission March 17, 2008 Petition Signatures 274 Edina Blvd. 4500 9 Edina Blvd. 4600 16 Moorland 4500 18 Moorland 4600 11 ;Browndale 4400/4500 14 ° Browndale 4600 12 Browndale 4900 1 Edgebrook Place 9 Country Club Road 9 Arden 4500 9 Arden 4600 0 Arden 4600 11 Bruce 4500 15 Bruce 4600 18 Bruce 4900 5 Casco 4500 18 Casco 4600 22 Drexel 4500: 13 Drexel 4600 3 Wooddale 4500 14 Wooddale 4500 15 Sunnyside Road 32 -- -�- :fir-- - - - - -- f 4=' RAWIVO r-5- yg •�. �� j �_ 3 a K Gr✓ l F VR `� 2 - - ..� e /!i,' Petition . To Modify Improvements Numbers A -213 & A -214 Country Club Neighborhood Jo. members of the Edina City Council, We the undersigned, residents of the Country Club District request the City of Edina obtain and present a street reconstruction bid to repair and restore our streets_ as they are currently configured, and to forgo:any, traffic calming elements. Name Address 2. `I 3. T21—fx�� T- MRWIS-114, �S-L3 kw uL A-V-C, �. Cam. -S�K �yC r_ 7*V Y-S 0 Avg'. 13. I 15. - Z 16. 17. 22. 23. 24. 25. 26. 27. 28. 29 -16900 blof"4. O F Gks,/-o Petition To Modify Improvement Numbers A -213 & A- 5 214 Country Club Neighborhood To members of the Edina City Council, We the undersigned, residents of the Country Club District request the city of Edina obtain and present a street reconstruction bid to repair and restore our streets as they are currently configured, and to forgo any traffic calming elements. Name _ z J rv� ��ss�l b��`c �� Z3 L L w� lq q C, �-5 C 6-S C 0 zq;�" -5 VY4� "ft 3�Io ` ®O 4 (0 0 C'D 6 e--t N10 / . 3 YO hatomw � - Id - 0 to 3 A ,�J 1 h> O G{L o Petition C� To Modify Improvement. Numbers A -213 & A- 214 Country Club :Neighborhood To members of the Edina City Council, We the undersigned, residents of the :Country Club District request the City of Edina obtain and present a street reconstruction bid to repair and restore our streets as they are currently configured, and to forgo any traffic calming elements. Name mace- k Un DA. CAS C_O ,A,i c L I vt Ar / /kri Ste¢ z 4- ..Fb t, PD BLL0 A qsa- 112-ia -8 «(0 JSZ_ 52z -t-190 ^'may � `•- � � c�1 �.2 rr_,���` c�� ? 2-T- _ q z - 2O Q„Le" HkJ L'V h Petition To Modify Improvements Numbers A-213 & A-214 Country Club Neighborhood To members of the Edina City Council,, We the undersigned, residents of the Country, Club District request the City of'Edina obtain and present a street reconstruction bid -to _repair and restore our streets as they are currently configured, and to forgo any traffic calm'ing.e�le' ments. Name CA) 3) ,�d� 8�rn^9- LA- kw r�. MaGhaw YS>o G SL/ k', "SA ek� /r"O 460 S,m �5 I-OU Pe,;�`:i 4 t��s S�� Hyde f1�( y7o3�xnryys,�JQ ,L�,� 41 C> 7 CA i-'� 1017 71", 4705-.-: ;40J �17 Petition To Modify Improvements Numbers A -213 & A -214 Country Club Neighborhood To members of the Edina City Council, We the undersigned, residents of the Country Club District request the.City of Edina- obtain and present a street reconstruction bid to repair and restore our streets as they are currently configured, and to forgo any traffic calming elements. Name /3)✓` 1 (G� /7) /�O � ✓"'vN sips° �� y �,.Zoy s&�Nyss�� 0 <3 z4c Petition To Modify Improvements Wumbers A- 213.: & A -214 Country Club Neighborhood To members of the Edina City Council, We the undersigned, residents of the Country Club District request the City of Edina obtain and present a street reconstruction bid to repair and restore our streets as they are currently configured, and to forgo any traffic calming elements. Name 5� �5 Address ' j'am.. - ysil ArJeu" O�te. 4511 Afc6: 4t LCV 62 Petition /To Modify Improvements Numbers A-213 & A-214 Country Club Neighborhood To members of the Edina City Council, We the undersigned, residents of the Country Club District request the City of Edina obtain and present a street reconstruction bid to repair and restore our streets as thtsy are currently configured, and to forgo any traffic calming elements. Name "Cl 16 fuel en Ai �A L4 - iZII�2 b"e- h:5 06rwHCYz-- 11 ILA Iq ( -) IYR A/e- .31U j 06 -2 ley 11 1 0-8 �Ild Id,y 2 .W Z-Z /-ZZ-O? Oly Petition �� � ,P 1 � ' To Modify Improvement Numbers A-213 & A -214 Country Club Neighborhood To members of the Edina City Council, We the undersigned, residents of the Country Club District, request the City of Edina obtain and present a street reconstruction bid to repair and restore our streets as they are currently configured, and to forgo any traffic calming elements. Name Address Date flu - V - cw- Petition To Modify Improvements Numbers A -213 & A -214 Country Club Neighborhood To members of the Edina City Council, We the undersigned, residents of the Country Club District request the City of Edina obtain and present a street reconstruction bid to repair and restore our streets as they are. currently configured,-and to forgo any traffic calming elements. Name 1) `. :�0 " ir►v 2) - U 3). 4) 5) 6) 7) 8) 9) 10)= 11)_ 12) 13) 14) 15) 16) 17) Z Y `f Petition s To Modify Improvements fjl p eints Numbers A -213 & 14 -214 Country Club, Neighborhood 5- � 2-,::2 1 % To members of the Edina City Council, We the undersigned, residents of the Country Club District request the City of Edina. obtain and present a street reconstruction bid to repair and restore our streets' as they are currently configured, and to forgo any traffic calming elements. Namet� A S)b[-jA JP a �10'' �k,16 3 to Petition /i ,�{•#,f+ To Modify Improvements Numbers A -213 & A -214 Country Club Neighborhood To members of the Edina City Council, We the undersigned, residents of the Country Club District request the City of Edina obtain and present a street reconstruction bid to repair and restore our streets as they are currently configured, and to forgo any traffic calming elements. Name'- 46LCf h�-A U O s) + 3 i 13-r A� - 3 o 3 1�1 1 i Petition EV/ f try To Modify Improvements Numbers A -213 & A -214 Country Club Neighborhood To members of the Edina City Council We the undersigned, residents of the Country Club District request the City of Edina obtain. and present a street reconstruction bid to repair and restore our streets as they are currently configured, and to forgo any traffic calming elements'. Name -I�.1 5 I_c .r i7 - r&J C J, jv,D 7 tj Petition To Modify Improvement Numbers A -213 & A- 214 Country Club Neighborhood To members of the Edina City Council, We the undersigned, residents of the Country Club District request the City of Edina obtain and present a street reconstruction bid to repair and restore our streets as they are currently configured,, and to-forgo any traffic calmin g elements. ' Are A a "M I ks 7 J, ---------- - -- a Petition To Modify Improvements Numbers A -213 & A -214 Country Club Neighborhood To members of the Edina City Council, We the undersigned, residents of the Country Club District request the City of Edina -= obtain and present a street reconstruction bid to repair and restore our streets as they are currently configured, and to forgo any traffic calming elements. Name 18,A -L're ss tw, M k2rA 4&L-tj 7A ft� XY ✓� .d Petition To Modify Improvements Numbers A -213 &-A-214 Country Club Neighborhood To members of the Edina City Council, We the undersigned, residents of the Country Club District request the City of Edina obtain and present a street reconstruction bid to repair and restore our streets as they are currently configured, and to forgo any traffic calming elements. Name /3) may) ?� /- t yIIX t�ulcs Address q5D 2 - C �S cc, � let qs1( LAvo Ate': ysoY CaSCa 4u-e 4501f Casco Ave. 14,5-0 (' . C/j'SC G 6- !°.v-e. .4STS cv- q.j 2 3 J CA tom.:. Petition To Modify Improvements Numbers A-213 & A-214 Country Club Neighborhood To members of the Edina City Council, We the undersigned, residents of the Country Club District request the City of Edina obtain and present a street reconstruction bid to repair and restore our streets as they are currently configured, and to forgo any traffic calming elements. Name Address : c-_- 4&0, e'AS&',O /f k C- 'a.9 Cie/ L"n t,14 r° w Petition„ a . To Modify Improvement Numbers A -213 & A- 214►, L� L. Country Club Neighbor -hood To members of the Edina City Council, We the undersigned, residents of the Country Club District, request the _- City of Edina obtain and present a street reconstruction bid to repair and restore our streets as they are currently configured, and to forgo any traffic calming elements. Name Address Date Ab +.+. Av e. 1 i o n u- 3 4K l S 4404. o y f Petition �y ,�g, " rl" 1 To Modify Improvement Numbers A -213 & A -214 Country Club Neighborhood To members of the Edina City Council, We the undersigned, residents of the Country Club District, request the City, of Edina obtain and present a street reconstruction bid to repair and restore our streets as they are currently configured, and to forgo any traffic calming elements. Name Address Date 1) 19ru%�:• yh!oy S&nVsee V. (31, of J H 7_ Vft-9-3 Ua�sY�m '+so£s pr�eQ M760` 31 C,108 o 9. ko V71 r. n �511 b � 0 cl �; B : Petition To Modify Improvements Numbers A -213 &A-214 Country Club Neighborhood To members of the Edina City Council, We the undersigned, residents of the Country Club District request the City of Edina obtain and present a street reconstruction bid to repair and restore our streets as they are currently configured, and to forgo any traffic calming elements. Name 0�' 3 Address PH M- OC wve A, LAC wu014=ti"'"p`s„ . , V// Vv Petition To Modify Improvement Numbers A -213 & A - 214 Country Club Neighborhood To members of the Edina City Council, We the undersigned, residents of the Country Club District request the City of Edina obtain and present a street reconstruction bid to repair and restore our streets as they are currently configured, and to forgo any traffic calming elements. Name -1, �15a3 1) 3) CGi�ue �s o 7�-P- 4) i i 16 1 tai u'o d 4 c: l t— A j e. 1`6-0 a- V 5 - f Petition To Modify Improvement Numbers A -213 & A- 214 Country Club- Neighborhood To members of the Edina City Council, We the undersigned, residents of the Country Club District request the City of Edina obtain and present a street reconstruction bid to repair and restore our streets as they are currently configured, and to forgo any traffic calming elements. Name "" UN r _rf Lp� 1-3- 0) O-b �-AAL- 4U.0 -) ie�(, Ax" � YVl L �— ,' . Cow C.e.h i ea 0*60A� 8 Reuu v�— I a Petition 1, \ To Modify Improvement Numbers A -213 & A- 214 Country Club Neighborhood To members of the Edina City Council, We the undersigned, residents of the Country Club District -: request the City of Edina obtain and present a street reconstruction bid to repair and restore our streets as they are currently configured, and to forgo any traffic calming elements. Name _ r 1/ I Z'. -I p R Petition' To odify Improvement Numbers A -213 & A- `� 214 Country Club Neighborhood X To members of the Edina City Council, We the undersigned, residents of the Country Club District request the City of Edina obtain and present a street reconstruction bid to repair and restore our streets as they are currently configured, and to forgo any traffic calming elements. Name 1) -f - J /'17/4 �i0117 �ooc�c�a -� �•� ^-s c C� L raj 4t4g- 16 / Nl"l YID Woo OW, A-'1 — 'e4 9. / rev Petition ' To Modify Improvement Numbers A -213 & A- 214 Country Club Neighborhood `- �x To members of the Edina City Council, We the undersigned, residents of the Country Club District request the City of Edina obtain and present a street reconstruction bid to repair and restore our streets as they are currently configured, and to forgo any traffic calming elements. Name I v V 1 Petition To Modify Improvements Numbers.,A -213 & A -214 Country Club Neighborhood To members of the Edina City Council, We the undersigned, residents of the Country Club District request the City of Edina obtain and present a street reconstruction bid to repair and restore our streets as they are currently configured, and to forgo any traffic calming elements. Name 1) Address r� 9 Petition To Modify Improvement Numbers A-213 & A- 214 Country Club Neighborho d To members of the Edina City Council, We the under I si.gned, residents of the Country Club District request the City Of Edina .obtain and present a street. reconstruction bid to repair and restore our streets as they are currently configured, and to -forgo any traffic calming elements. Name A 1.4 "K, U -sod -3 -(A 3110 log I't _q log L4,AIA- I R L�( 3/ 1 to, q501i Cf VD 6 6 -d' I � Tell /x x PAX" Petition To Modify Improvements Numbers :A -213 & A -214 Country Club Neighborhood To members of the Edina City Council, We the undersigned, residents of the Country Club District request the City of Edina obtain and present a street reconstruction bid to repair and restore our streets as they are currently configured, and to forgo any traffic calming elements. Name Address AAakt 17 (zcvict 13 lvd —Pwvw I xc Ozr4t NK \ Petition, To Modify Improvement Ntibers A -213 & A- A 214 Country Club ft6ighborhood To members of the Edina City Council, We the undersigned, residents of the Country Club District request the City of Edina obtain and present a street reconstruction bid to repair and restore our streets as they are currently configured, and to forgo any traffic calming elements. Name 3�ad'1��� -rte c�ectivl, 1 �3-i /IVb -S,j(t 03 3/ ulo8 3 3 /1, /o' 31 a 169 s /!l. -P V 13/0g d)x V I 11jr7aT Address ,-1&01 C')wo (46a y &a, 4 �, of 41d, kz, 4� of Petition To Modify Improvement Numbers A -213 & A- 214 Country Club Neighborhood t *V To members of the Edina City Council, We the undersigned, residents of the Country Club District request the City of Edina obtain and present a street reconstruction bid to repair and restore our streets as they are currently configured, and to forgo any traffic calming elements. Name 1) 14 V" (& � 4-6 / S lAlfoov-ta--Y� Ave—, -, -,N , a nv-N Fcl�' I , Ll '15 t -1 IN-� W v/- loin dO- ---1 -1 -r'n h2i�- 0 ei Petition To Modify Improvement Numbers A-213 & 214 Country Club Neighborhood To members of the Edina City Council, We the undersigned, re,-,Ide:�jjts of t.rIe Country Club District request the City of Edina obtain and present a street reconstruction bid to repair and restore our streets as they are currently configured, and to forgo any traffic calming elen-.ents. Name JAA� A L Jan(�, Ob2-(re�rx-LN-�l "O.00t 1Cj'()cj 5z A Ar 3 C hod O ��,a�k �i W. M Cc Len 0140 Rork" Ave, N r� 11/ 4ts..%�,��G r d 7 Petition To Modify Improvements Numbers A -213 & A -214 Country Club Neighborhood, To members of the Edina City Council, We the undersigned, residents of the Country Club District request the City of Edina obtain and present a street reconstruction bid to repair and restore our streets as they are currently configured, and to forgo any traffic calming elements. Name �CL�cJx:• �'��Z f� Address yS /d 1odr/4,C/ eP y'J *50 moue I f r � -� a� Petition To Modify Improvements Numbers A -213 & A -214 Country Club, Neighborhood To members of the Edina City Council, We the undersigned, residents of the Country Club District request the City of Edina obtain and present a street reconstruction bid to repair and restore our streets as they are currently configured, and to forgo any traffic calming elements. .Name Address �ar(�NcQ Ave v"e- 1� q &o6 Mp0 l 2-) 0 Petition. a' To Modify Improvement Numbers A -213 & A- 214 Country Club Neighborhood To members of the Edina City Council, We the undersigned, residents of the Country Club District request the City of Edina obtain and present a street reconstruction bid to repair and restore our streets as they are currently configured, and to forgo any traffic calming elements. Name Ie l� - V �l � aim 40ZZMI w1aPa' �. �2) �3� Is Petition To Modify Improvement Numbers A -213 & A- 214 Country Club. Neighborhood To members of the Edina City Council, We the undersigned, residents of the - Country Club District request the City of Edina obtain and present a street reconstruction bid to repair and restore our streets as they are currently configured, and to forgo any traffic calming elements. Name 4/6, o.Z 3� r (� b-, e? I��' c r-e� Aan rtp cz,� r cal z ( u'-'h l �1Q�rri1 S V 6 . (,tuw UosiedzalK J Petition To Modify Improvement Numbers A -213 & A -214 Country Club Neighborhood To members of the Edina City Council, - We the undersigned, residents of the Country Club District request the City of Edina obtain and present a street reconstruction bid to repair and restore our streets as they are currently configured, and to forgo any traffic calming elements. 1 11 I I I � WA DO E IN F POP N WA W97 a I ir#04 PP A RMAW, s _ / 1 • 1 % ,, Petition To Modify Irnproveme.nt Numbers A -213 & A- 214 Country Club Neighborhood To members of the Edina City Council, We the undersigned, residents of the Country Club District _ request the City of Edina obtain and present a street reconstruction bid to repair and restore our streets as they are currently configured, and to forgo any traffic calming elements. Name 1�1 6. 7• 4 . qV, -)--7 a vCrk�1 y{ V� 'U u Petitions "�,G�' To Modify Improvement Numbers A -213 & A- 214 Country Club Neighborhood To members of the Edina City Council, We the undersigned, residents of the Country Club District request the City of Edina obtain, and present a street reconstruction bid to repair and restore our streets as they are currently configured, and to forgo any traffic calming elements. Name 1 Ad'aGeoi ROOM-- 1. C F r; Petition To Modify Improvement Numbers A -213 & A- i 214 Country Club Neighborhood���1 To members of the Edina City Council, We the undersigned, ,residents of the Country Club District request the City. of Edina obtain and present a street reconstruction bid to repair and restore our streets as they are currently configured, and totforgo any traffic calming elements. Name," Addre ss �d �. CA ,� �AnP. C�i� 4 tft 46 -Z Z, a4e' bran k PI440, v v° Petition To Modify Improvement Numbers A -213 & A- 214 Count ry Club Neighborhood To members of the Edina City Council, We the undersigned, residents of the Country Club District request the City of Edina obtain and ,present a street reconstruction bid to repair and restore our streets as they are currently configured, and to forgo any traffic calming elements. Name a *1 IVI$__ r" If C �, Petition oS L�GY1 -L�v S To Modify Improvements Numbers A -213 & A -214 Country Club Neighborhood To members of the Edina City Council, We the undersigned, residents of the Country Club District request the City of Edina obtain and present a street reconstruction bid to repair and restore our streets as they are currently configured, and to forgo any traffic calming elements. Address ('30& 5c4 /in ysic& 44 Ff Petition To Modify Improvement Numbers A -213 & A- 214 Country Club Neighborhood To members of the Edina City Council, We the undersigned, residents of the Country Club District request the City of Edina obtain and present a street reconstruction bid to repair and restore our streets as they are currently configured, and to forgo any traffic calming elements. Name 1) 5� -t L.C. Z Lz.,(- uK{ 3� M8zK �Icgrc21 0oPrt4�'j �c ) 7 r 1 44otS -50+jNYsfoer KD LIH00 AE J', (A cl) 2 DSO / %&O r /a .1 O ► y