The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About2009-02-17_COUNCIL MEETINGli�_�Yvl � � r b F 3 - 3- 0° Recommendations for First Phase North /South Edina Bikeway September 20, 2008, Updated October 14, 2008 Presented by the Bike Edina Task Force to City Manager, Gordon Hughes for distribution This recommendation has been created by the Bike Edina Task force to correspond with The City of Edina Comprehensive Bicycle Transportation Plan and establish a "first phase" bikeway from the north end to the south end of Edina. Within this recommendation are both short -tern, low cost and longer term, more involved elements or options. It is the goal of this recommendation to concept that can be quickly and inexpensively implemented and then built on as demand justifies. The route is broken into segments that could be implemented individually or in combination. Sunnyside Rd. to Country Club Rd. By splitting bike traffic between Drexel and Wooddale, adequate space can be provided for a biking and parking. Sign Drexel "Share the Road" one -way north for bikes and Wooddale "Share the Road" one -way south for bikes. Automobile parking would permitted on the west side of the street on Drexel and on the east side of the street on Wooddale. Bike symbols on the road should clearly indicate the direction bicycles should use on the appropriate one way route. Explanation: Streets are narrow and the one -way bike traffic will reduce congestion for both bikers and automobiles. Keeping the bikes on the opposite side of the street from parking will encourage bikers to use the appropriate one -way route and be safer for bikes and automobiles, but will not preclude neighborhood bike traffic from using the streets in a specific direction. Wooddale Ave. from Country Club Rd. to 50th St. Share the Road" signs with bike symbols imbedded or paint into the road surface at a spacing of four per block. Explanation: Although parking is not permitted on either side of the street, the street is not of sufficient width to allow for designated bike lanes. Bike symbols on the roadway will alert car traffic to be aware of bike traffic. Intersection of Wooddale and 50`h St. Clearly defined "Bike Boxes" at the intersection should be painted for both north and south bound bikeways. These boxes should include a division for bikers proceeding straight through the intersection or turning left (see diagram). This would allow right turn car traffic to not be impeded by bikes waiting next to the curb for the light to change. Explanation: Bike boxes are used frequently in higher traffic urban areas to prevent collisions between bikes and automobiles when the automobile is turning and the bikers is continuing straight. It also allows the biker to clear the area in advance of the automobile when the light changes. Bike boxes require automobiles to stop for a red light behind the "box" similar to a crosswalk. Wooddale Ave from 50t' Street to Valley View Rd. Share the road signs with bike symbols imbedded in the pavement or painted in with four such symbols to the block; symbols to be placed far enough away from the curb so that a door opening on a parked automobile will not strike a biker. Elimination of the "fog line" or some modification to clearly designate the parking space on the east side of the road should not be used as a two way bike lane. Explanation: Although this section of Wooddale is wider than it is north of M" that fact parking is permitted on one side of the street makes negates the option of bike lanes. Eliminating parking does not appear to be a feasible option. A significant safety issue for this section is bike traffic traveling south on the east side of the road against traffic believing that the fog stripe designates a two way bike lane. Intersection Wooddale Ave. and Valley View Rd. No special treatment needed, however bike boxes could be employed during any planned restriping of the crosswalks. Explanation: Current three way stop signs will serve the needs of bicyclists. Bike boxes would emphasize the road as a bike route and improve awareness to car traffic and bikers. Valley View Rd. from Wooddale to 62 Crosstown Eliminate the turn lanes and stripe a bike lane on each side of the road. Explanation: It appears one of the consequences of creating turn lanes on Valley View is an increase in the speed of automobiles traveling on this section of Valley View. Bike lanes will not only provide a more comfortable environment for bikers but would also provide traffic calming and discourage speeding. Valley View Rd. — 62 underpass to 66th St. Painted bike lanes should be added on each side of the road. These lanes should be colored pavement that alert drivers to bike traffic and provide improved safety to bikers in this heavily trafficked area. Signs on the exit ramp alerting motorists to the presence of the bike lane ahead should also be added. Explanation: This section of the Phase I route presents the greatest challenge in creating a biking facility that holds promise of providing a route sufficiently safe so as to encourage bikers of a variety of biking skills. This section is critical to the success of a north/south route. It connects neighborhoods to schools, shopping, medical, and city amenities. These locations — most notably the Aquatic Center, Southdale and Southview Middle School /Concord/Community Center, were among the most frequently cited destination locations Edina residents wanted to reach by bike. 2 As a future consideration the pedestrian bridge over Hwy 62 at Rosland Park could be altered from stair access to ramp access. The bridge could then be designated as a pedestri an/bicycle route that could accommodate pedestrians, the handicapped and bicycles. Cyclists could travel easily from areas north of Hwy 62 down Wooddale to Rosland Park, the Aquatic Center, and .on to the Southdale /Galleria area and to the Centennial Lakes - Promenade. Bicyclists could come.froin south of Hwy 62 and travel to Southview Middle School and the Edina Community Center/Edina Family.Center. The distance from Wooddale at Valley .View to 66th Street would be mostly off road or on very low traffic roads. This route would to be advantageous to novice riders, families, and school age children. Valley View Rd. from 66`h Street. to 69`h Street Striped bike lanes on each side of.the street. Explanation: The road is sufficiently wide enabling the provisions of bike lanes to enhance the safety of bikers. Intersection 69th Street and Valley View Rd. No special treatment required at this time, however bike boxes could be employed as routine restriping of crosswalks is done. Explanation: The intersection does not see significant traffic or issues that warrant special treatment in the initial phase. Valley View Rd. 69`x' St to 70' St. Share the Road signs. Explanation: There is no parking on either side of this fairly narrow road. Without parking, on the road, Share the Road signs should be sufficient to designate the route. Intersection of Valley View Rd. and 70th St A roundabout could be employed that gives sufficient space for a bike lane. In the short-term no special treatment would be required other than bike boxes,as restriping occurs. Signage should be employed on 70`" on either side of the intersection-to alert drivers to bike traffic crossing 70`x. Explanation: The safest means for bikers coming south on Valley View Rd. to proceed east seems to be a roundabout at this location. That would also be in keeping with the three roundabouts existing on 70`t' Street. 70th Street from Valley View Rd. to France Ave. Striped bike lanes on each side of the road. Explanation: The width of the street is sufficient to provide for the added safety for bikers provided by designated bike lanes. 3 Intersection 70`h St. and France Clearly defined bike boxes and loop detectors. Explanation: A very busy intersection with a heavy volume of traffic turning on to France Ave. The bike boxes by allowing bikers to wait for the green light in advance of automobiles will lesson the chance for collisions between bikers and automobiles by allowing bikers to clear the intersection in advance of the automobiles turning. 70`" St. from France Ave. to the Promenade Share the Road signs. Explanation: Much of this stretch is very narrow which combined with the influence of the roundabout at the Promenade resulting in slow moving traffic compatible with bikes. Promenade and 70`h St. Interface. Curb cut creating a mountable curb to the bike lane on the Promenade. Explanation: The currently the only connection between the Promenade and 700' St. is the pedestrian path. It is a lay out with serious problems for bikers even if they were to opt to use the pedestrian path. 4 Bike Edina Task Force Minutes of 12 -11 -2008 Resolution: A resolution was adopted, by a unanimous vote, urging the City of Edina submit an application to TLC for funds available to communities on the short list. The application shall request financial assistance to make 54th Street a bike boulevard from Zenith Avenue to Wooddale Avenue; and bike lanes on Valley View Road from Wooddale to 70th Street. revs A l , c,---- 4 t4- f be Walnut RI g ;s Park r �.h eredesen ^ Park }� J Nrpe'L iCM/ l L -iBridge�.. I , Creekside Ir, :f �4 .,�� Y- Elementary5 N `+ School SC �'SA T .N'drmart SS $ g0 le Parkt� M,.Z j r• _ .F� Edina+` Middle andHlg OY4 Schook, Bridge y tna' Al pw iiM 1 i - r. Je� f•�' I � fi' •' _. -1 it ? .csu.,tb_.a. �; J �t3� .� IF_��1R. fi. �:alrn"••tt�_- •+.�. -_ J"� �• , City of Edina Overview Map e s Proposed Nine Mile Creek Regional Trail ThreeRiverSO Altemadw Nine Mlle Creek Regional Trail Alignment Lakes V _ Potennd Nine Mlk Creek Reglanel lFatl Alllgnment public grwla PARK DISTRICT i. Nl— MIMCreek W! >r i ..a Edina / Promenade 0 1.750 WE 5,250 menummum Feet Nine Mile Creek Regional Trail Frequently Asked Questions Is the trail route through Edina already established? No. An Assessment Team with representatives from Three Rivers Park District, City of Edina, Nine Mile Creek Watershed District, Edina School District and the Bike Edina Task Force are working together to review several different alternative trail routes. As part of the review process, community members are encouraged to submit comments through one of the following options. Open House Monday, March 9, 2009 6 -8PM " Edina City Hall 4801 W. 50th St., Edina Email Comments NinemilecreektrailCa threeriversoarkdistrict.org Written Comments Three Rivers Park District Nine Mile Creek Regional Trail 3000 Xenium Lane North" Plymouth, MN 55441 Feedback from the community as well 9 (erty, onmental impact, estimated cost, available public land, impact to private pro technical feasibil ity, and access to important local nodes such as parks, schand commercial areas will play a significant role in determining the preferred al trail route though Edina. Who approves the trail route? The Assessmeni'T m will identify a recommended trail route through Edina based on public. pUt-as w. I as other factors such as environmental impact, estimated cost,; a ilable public nd, impact to private .property, technical feasibility, and access tp important loca podes such as parks, schools, and commercial areas. If the trait' oute is loca" d on Edina School District property, the trail route will require appro I by th�els Ina School District Board. If the trail- route parpl the Nine Mile Creek, the trail route will require approval by the Nine Mile CreeleWatershed District. Upon approval from the School District and Watershed District, the recommended trail route will be forwarded to the Edina Park Board and Edina City Council for consideration and approval and then forwarded to Three Rivers Park District Board of Commissioners for consideration and approval. Will the trail be lit? No. There are no plans to light the regional trail. Will the trail be open 24 hours a day? lb No. Three Rivers Park District regional trail hours are currently 5 AM to 10 PM. Will the trail be open year round? Three Rivers Park District's present policy provides for the operation of regional trail corridors from March 15 - November 15. Local municipalities have the option to apply for a winter trail operations permit. Some communities choose to groom trails for cross - country skiing, while others choose to plow the trails for walking and winter bicycle use. If winter operations are permitted, the local municipality is responsible for operations and maintenance from November 15 through March 15. Does Three Rivers Park District salt regional trails in the winter? Three Rivers Park District does not operate regional trails between November 15 and March 15. Local municipalities may apply for a winter use permit to operate and maintain regional trails during this time. It is at the local municipality's discretion to determine the appropriate winter maintenance methods. Who is responsible to build, maintain, operate, 'd fund the trail? Three Rivers Park District is responsible r funding, construction and operations /maintenance (except in winter). T " Park istrict is an independent, special park district charged with the responsibi hies of ac�isition, development and maintenance of regional park reserves, regionat park regional special recreation features and regional trails for the benefit and us of the citizens of suburban Hennepin County, the seven -county Twin Cities metropolitan area and the State of Minnesota. The Park District works cooperatively with t e Metropolitan Parks and Open Space Commission, Council and State Legislature 1 of 10 implementing agencies of the Metropolitan Regional Parks and Trails System. The City of Edina is not required to fund development of the regional trail. The City of Edina will only pay fob -ope ations and maintenance if the City chooses to operate and maintain the trai �n the wm er. The Edina Public School District is not required to pay for developmeht operations or maintenance of the regional trail. How much will the trail cos _ Preliminary cost estimates will be developed and considered in conjunction with the alternative trail route assessm4b t phase. These estimates, although preliminary in nature, will reflect actual costs of- imilar recent projects including but not limited to pedestrian under and over passe trails through undeveloped areas, trails through developed areas, boardwalks, utility relocation, floodplain and wetland mitigation, and signage. As the agency responsible for trail development, operations and maintenance, Three Rivers Park District's Board of Commissioners will review potential costs prior to the Assessment Team's identification of a recommended trail route. The preliminary cost estimates will be made available for public review. How will the trail be maintained? Three Rivers Park District maintains trails in a manner to promote user safety, provide opportunity for high - quality experiences, protect natural resources, and protect trail infrastructure and investment. Trail surfaces are maintained in a generally smooth condition with limited cracks, bumps, potholes, and other irregularities, to enable users to have an enjoyable V experience. Debris is blown, swept, or otherwise removed from the trail on an as needed basis. Signage, pavement markings, bridges, culverts, tunnels, and other trail amenities such as benches, water fountains, and kiosks are regularly monitored and maintained in a clean and safe condition. Garbage is collected on a scheduled basis appropriate to trail use. Routine maintenance tasks are generally scheduled 'to occur ,two times per week between Memorial Day and Labor Day and may be reduced to once per week during the remainder of the season. Trail use, weather, budget, and other factors are taken into consideration when determining frequency of maintenance ta�ks. Trail surfaces are included in the Park District's Pavement Ma6agement Program and receive scheduled striping, crack filling, patching, seal cpatin and redevelopment according to Park District standards." Extraordinary maintenance will occur in response to storm dama a and other unplanned circumstances. I',.. How will the trail be funded? Regional trail development is typically funded through the Metropolitan Council Regional Parks Capital Improvemen Program, through Three Rivers Park District bonds, donations and /or other fund�g' source such as Safe Routes to School, Federal Recreation Trail Grant Progra and Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century Funds available at the time of d elop e(Int. , Annual operating costs are funded through he Park District's General Fund Budget. The primary source of funds is property to with some revenue received from the State of Minnesota as part of the Operations, nd Maintenance Fund allocations from the Metropolitan Council. The Park District' Park Maintenance and Rehabilitation Fund, which includes revenues from the State of Minnesota Lottery-in -Lieu, as well as Park Distrid— general obligation bonds may fund a portion of the annual rehabilitation costs.. Additie al funding opportunities through federal, state and county programs will be solicit edhen applicable. Who is respdRsible for, public safety? Three Rivers Pafk District's Public Safety Department is the law enforcement agency responsible for provi ing a safe environment along regional trails. In addition to the delivery of a variety of public safety services, members of the Public Safety Department protect the Park District's physical facilities and natural resources, are involved in public education regarding the use of the parks, and enforce applicable Park District ordinances and state statutes. All Park Police Officers are sworn, licensed peace officers. Additionally, each officer is an emergency medical technician trained to respond to medical emergencies and accidents which may occur in or near park lands. Assistance is provided to officers by Park Service Officers (PSOs), uniformed, non -sworn officers who patrol the parks and serve as a resource to guests. Regional trails are patrolled by two full time Park Police Officers and five Park Service Officers. Officers typically patrol on foot, bike, horse, ATV, or T3s (segway) and are trained as first responders. Although safety is the primary concern and duty, officers have a high degree of interaction with trail users and often provide non - emergency assistance to trail users. Are trails safe? Three Rivers Park District crime statistics indicate that Park District parks and trails are safe. There have not been any reports of personal or serious crimes along Park District regional trails and proactive measures are in place to maintain this level of public safety. 1\ Approximately 75% of the projected trail users will live withh)d 3 miles of the trail corridor. In other words, trail users are generally from yo r community and are likely the same people you might run into at the grocery s re, Zq7ee shop, or soccer game. Are bike lanes and regional trails the same thing? No. Bike lanes and regional trails are different. Bike lanes are on- street d d typically have a dedicated 5' travel lane, whereas, regional trails are independent, off -road facilities. In other words, bike lanes are located within the street immediately adjacent to vehicular traffic whereas regional trails are generally located adjacent to streets similar to sidewalks, in abandbFl_rail right -of -way, and within natural resource corridors and existing open space. Regional trails, are intended to provid a recr �11 ex perience to a diverse user group made up of bicyclists, children, w kers; a M ith strollers, in -line skaters, runners, dog - walkers, and much more. , like lanes, jus as name suggests, are only for bicyclists. Three Rivers Park District does not own, ' perate, or develop bike lanes; this responsibility falls on the agency with jurisdictional control of the roadway. Nine Mile Cre- dk,.is prone to flooding. How might the Creek's flooding tendenci and a,trb'l coexist? The bet of locatin a trail in a scenic area along a flood -prone creek must be weigh - against the po ntial to engineer a solution that minimizes environmental impacts. 6kevelopment of regional trail within the 100 -year floodplain would require three potent'al approache so as to not effect the floodplain. One approach is to raise the trail usi i aboard Ik or other raised structure that minimizes the need for floodplain mitig on: econd approach is to develop the trail at -grade using porous pavement and trail base designed for use in flood -prone areas. A third approach involves raising the4rail bed itself up out of the floodplain, along with use of culverts and floodplain mitigation. Each approach has it benefits and drawbacks, and each may be uniquely appropriate for certain segments of trails located in floodplains. What are the environmental impacts of the trail? Three Rivers Park District is committed to environmental stewardship and strives to be a role model of care and respect for the environment. In all aspects of planning and operations, the Park District will demonstrate this commitment by maximizing energy conservation, implementing sustainable design and construction practices, maintaining an aggressive recycling program, employing environmentally responsible operational practices, and promoting environmental stewardship through programs, services, and facilities. The Park District carefully studies new development initiatives to determine what, if any, potential development impacts exist and the best methods to eliminate or minimize potential impacts. An independent consulting firm will be hired to conduct an environmental assessment on each alternative trail route. The environmental assessment will evaluate the impact of the potential regional trail on wildlife, habitat, and water quality resources. This information will be considered in the determination of the recommended trail route during the alternative trail route assessment phase. The results of the environmental assessment will be made available for public review. How do trails affect property values? ]V will write this up ASAP. How many annual trail users are expected The Nine Mile Creek Regional Trail may generat 500 00 annual visits. However, much of that use will be dispersed across the length the trail, so it is unlikely that any one segment of trail will see 500,000 visits per yea Who is the typical trail user? Studies performed by the Metropolitan Council indicate th 50 percent of the users will live within 0.75 miles from the trail corridor and 75 percent will live within three miles of the trail corridor. Thikmeans many the trail users will be trail neighbors and come directly from the c mur)'ty. The typical trail vi yp sitdkprofile in icates that 60 percent of visits will be individuals, whereas 40 percent wifte groups -of families or friends. In addition, the majority of visitors will fall into the- bab boomer generation and have a higher than average education and income. How long is the trail? Nine Mile Creek Regional Trai is planned to traverse the Cities of Hopkins, Minnetonka, Edina, and Richfield and provide connections to the Minneapolis Grand Rounds Trails System at Lake Nokomis in Minneapolis and the Minnesota Wildlife Refuge Visitor Center in Bloomington. When complete the regional trail is expected to be about 17.5 miles. What trail uses are permitted? Three Rivers Park District Regional Trail System is comprised of multi -use paved trails. Regional trail uses provide opportunities during the non - winter months for walking, dog - walking, running /jogging, bicycling, and in -line skating. At this time, winter use is not proposed for the Nine Mile Creek Regional Trail, but may be considered in the future. ATVs, snowmobiles and other motorized recreation vehicles are not permitted. Will the trail be on private property? Whenever possible the regional trail will be located on public property that will potentially include city /county road right -of -way, city park land, and other city parcels. 0 The alignments currently being examined have five areas where an easement on private property may be needed: Segment 2: The creek -based route would cross Londonderry Road and then follow the south side of the creek. This alignment would require an easement from United Health. Segment 9: There are two instances where an easement from CP rail company may be needed - one for a short work around of a power lines lowler, and a second for a yet to be determined crossing of the rail line using a tuna I or bridge. Segment 19: as the trail follows the northbound en nce ram to Highway 100 there may be inadequate width for the regional trail without obtain an easement from the homeowners whose properties back up to the entranc ramp. The easements could be obtained through purchase or provision of a more 'sigikficant wall between the homes and the freeway. Segment 19: As the trail follows the golf course, it would be desirable to have a private easement across the back ot-s"e business property currently in the early stages of development. Segment 19: An easement is desired long the track side of two business parking lots so that the trail can access the futur site'o 'the pedestrian bridge across France Avenue. Is this a joint project with Nine Mile Creek Watershed District? Nine Mile Creek Watershed District is participating in the Assessment Team to help determine the feasibility of a trail along Nine Mile Creek. For segments where the trail is adjacent to the creek, the Watershed District may fund Will the tj alr provi safe routes for children to local parks and schools? One of he main goats Qf the trail through Edina is to provide safe connections to local rks and the Edna High School complex for children. Several of the alternati alignments ar located within or provide connection to existing City of Edina park pd. Depend, g on the recommended trail route, the trail may provide access to WaMu Ridge, redesen Park, Heights Park, the parkland along Nine mile Creek and Lakeina�,� red Richards Gold Course, Centennial Lakes Park, Yorktown Park, and Adams il�,Park. The alternative trail routes also provide opportunities to develop safe routes to schools. Currently students north of Highway 62 do not have a safe walking or bike route to Creekside Elementary or the Edina Middle and High School complex. The alternative trail routes include a new pedestrian bridge over Highway 62 from Bredesen Park to the schools located on the south side of Highway 62. This would provide a safe route to school for many students. The pedestrian bridge over Highway 62 also provides an opportunity to expand outdoor classroom learning opportunities to Bredesen Park. The alternative trail routes west of the school complex will also provide safe routes to school. Currently Tracey Avenue, Valley View, and Antrium experience significant vehicular and pedestrian congestion at the beginning and end of the school day. During these times a traffic monitor is in place to assist in the safe movement of traffic and pedestrians. The alternative trail routes west of the school will provide a safe off -road route for students living west of the school complex Will this be similar to the Cedar Lake LRT Regional Trail in Hopkins which was built within an abandoned railroad right -of -way or will be like the Rush Creek Regional Trail in Brooklyn Park which traverses through an undeveloped corridor? Cedar Lake LRT Regional Trail is a linking trail and its main purpo is to link regional trails, commercial nodes, parks, and other important areas a!p the corridor. The Rush Creek Regional, although also serves a linking function, +is a destination trail in that it incorporates areas of open space and significant 'n ura�"j�sources within the trail corridor. Essentially, the difference between, finking regional trail and destination regional trail is that a destination regional trail incori tra ates elements such as natural and cultural resources which draw users to the hand provide opportunity for a high - quality recreational experience. A linking regional °tail's main function is just that - to link important nodes within the community and region. The regional trail though Edina may have aspects of both a linking and destination regional trail depending on the regional, trail route selected. A route predominately along roads will be more similar to the `Cedar Lake LRT Regional Trail and route predominately located though existin open space will be more similar to the Rush Creek Regional Trail. r AGENDA EDINA HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY EDINA CITY COUNCIL FEBRUARY 17, 2009 7:00 P.M. ROLLCALL ADOPTION OF CONSENT AGENDA Adoption of the Consent Agenda is made by the Commissioners as to HRA items and by the Council Members as to Council items. All agenda items marked with an asterisk ( *) in bold print are Consent Agenda items and are considered routine and will be enacted by one motion. There will be no separate discussion of such items unless a Commissioner, 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 February 3, 2009 II. CONFIRMATION OF PAYMENT OF CLAIMS as per Pre -list Dated February 5, 2009, Total $7,350.00 III. ADJOURNMENT EDINA CITY COUNCIL * I. APPROVAL OF MINUTES - Regular Meeting of February 3, 2009 and Study Session of February 3, 2009 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 faimess 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. .. Agenda/Edina City Council February 17, 2009 Page 2 A. PUBLIC HEARING COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT 2009 - - Resolution No. 2009 -23 (Favorable majority vote of Council Members present) B. PUBLIC HEARING - WEST 70TH STREET - Traffic Study Recommendations (Favorable vote of majority Council Members present to approve) C. PUBLIC HEARING - APPEAL OF VARIANCE - 6120 Brookview Avenue, JMS Custom Homes - Resolution No. 2009 -28 (Favorable vote of majority Council Members present to approve) D. CONTINUE TO MARCH 3, 2009 PUBLIC HEARING - CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT Edina .School District, 5701 Normandale Road, Construct New Maintenance Building E. CANCEL PUBLIC HEARING - VACATION OF PORTION OF BELMORE LANE AND WATERMAIN EASEMENT III. PUBLIC COMMENT During "Public Comment, " the City Council will invite comments from those in attendance who 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 which 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 * A. Cushman Turf Truckster Utility Vehicle — Braemar Golf Course * B. Replacement Carpet for Warren C. Hyde Clubhouse — Braemar Golf Course * C. 2009 Chevrolet Silverado Pick Up Truck — Park Maintenance Department * D. Well No. 13 Rehabilitation - 6721 Second Street, Contract No. PW 09 -1, Imp. No. WM 491 V. REPORTS /RECOMMENDATIONS (Favorable vote of majority Council Members present to approve except where noted) A. Annual Appointment of Assistant Weed Inspector B. Resolution No. 2009 -25 Accepting Various Donations (Favorable rollcall vote of four Council Members to approve) C. Resolution No. 2009 -26 Setting Marph 17, 2009 Public Hearing Date for Road Improvement Projects - South Garden Estates & Mirror Lakes Neighborhood Street Reconstruction D. Resolution No. 2009 -27 "Edina Day of Service" *V- Agenda/Edina City Council February 17, 2009 Page 3 E. Appointments to Park Board, Planning Commission and Transportation Commission F. Membership in U.S. Highway 169 Corridor Coalition * G. Traffic Safety Minutes of February 4, 2009 VI. FINANCE (Favorable rollcall vote of majority Council Members present to approve) * A. CONFIRMATION OF PAYMENT OF CLAIMS As per Pre -List dated February 5, 2009, TOTAL $1,149,905.50; and dated February 12, 2009, TOTAL $1,100,750.95 and Credit Card Transactions From 12127/08 to 1/26/09 Total $2,618.41. VII. CORRESPONDENCE AND PETITIONS VIII. MAYOR AND COUNCIL COMMENTS IX. MANAGER'S COMMENTS X. ADJOURNMENT The City of Edina wants all residents to be comfortable being part of the public process. If you need assistance in the way of hearing amplification, an interpreter, large -print documents or something else, please call 952 - 927 -8861 72 hours in advance of the meeting. SCHEDULE OF UPCOMING MEETINGS /DATES /EVENTS Tues Feb 17 Closed Executive Session - Pending Litigation 5:30 P.M. COMMUNITY ROOM Tues Feb 17 Regular Meeting 7:00 P.M. COUNCIL CHAMBERS Tues Feb 24 Study Session - Boards & Commissions /Minutes Content 11:30 A.M. COMMUNITY ROOM Tues Mar 3 Work Session - Joint Meeting With BETF 5:30 P.M. COMMUNITY ROOM Tues Mar 3 Regular Meeting 7:00 P.M. COUNCIL CHAMBERS Mon Mar 16 Annual Meeting Of Boards & Commissions 5:00 P.M. WARREN HYDE CLUBHOUSE Tues Mar 17 Regular Meeting 7:00 P.M. COUNCIL CHAMBERS Tues Mar 24 Study Session - To be determined 7:00 A.M. COMMUNITY ROOM ",rues Apr 7 Regular Meeting 7:00 P.M. COUNCIL CHAMBERS TueS- Apr 21 Regular Meeting 7:00 P.M. COUNCIL CHAMBERS Wed Apr 22 Volunteer Recognition 5:00 P.M. EDINBOROUGH PARK Tues Apr 28 Study Session - To be determined 11:30 A.M. COMMUNITY ROOM MINUTES OF THE EDINA HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY HELD AT CITY HALL FEBRUARY 3, 2009 7:00 P.M. ROLLCALL Answering rollcall were Commissioners Bennett, Brindle, Housh, Swenson and Chair Hovland. CONSENT AGENDA APPROVED Motion made by Commissioner Brindle and seconded by Commissioner Housh for approval of the Edina Housing and Redevelopment Authority Consent Agenda as presented. Rollcall: Ayes: Bennett, Brindle, Housh, Swenson, Hovland Motion carried. *MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF JANUARY 20, 2009 APPROVED Motion made by Commissioner Brindle and seconded by Commissioner Housh approving the Minutes of the Regular Meeting of the Edina Housing and Redevelopment Authority for January 20, 2009. Motion carried on rollcall vote - five ayes. *CONFIRMATION OF CLAIMS PAID Motion made by Commissioner Brindle and seconded by Commissioner Housh approving the payment of claims dated January 21, 2009 TOTAL $46,138.00. Motion carried on rollcall vote — five ayes. There being no further business on the Edina Housing and Redevelopment Authority Agenda, Chair Hovland declared the meeting adjourned. Executive Director R55CKREC:' J20000 CITY ; NA 2i' 8:09:22 Council Check Register Page - 1 2/5/2009 — 215/2009 Check # Date. Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit 14020 215/2009 123263 - BENSON DESIGN INC. 7,350.00 PROMENADE SIGNS 204866 0854 -B 9132.6103 PROFESSIONAL `SERVICES CENTENNIAL LAKE TAX DISTRICT 7,350.00 7,350.00 Grand Total Payment Instrument Totals Check Total 7,350.00 Total Payments 7,350.00 R55CKSUM LOG20000 Company Amount 09000 HRA FUND 7,350.00 Report Totals 7,350.00 CITY OF EDINA Council Check Summary 2/5/2009 - 2/5/2009 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 policjes d Procedures date. A 214/2009 8:09:26 Page - 1 I MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE EDINA CITY COUNCIL HELD AT CITY HALL FEBRUARY 3, 2009 7:06 P.M. ROLLCALL Answering rollcall were Members Bennett, Brindle, Housh, Swenson and Mayor Hovland. CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS APPROVED Motion made by Member Brindle and seconded by Member Housh approving the Council Consent Agenda with the exception of Item V.D.2., Set Hearing Dates for Planning Items, Conditional Use Permit, Edina School District, 5701 Normandale Road, Construct New Maintenance Building. Rollcall: Ayes: Bennett, Brindle, Housh, Swenson, Hovland Motion carried. *MINUTES - REGULAR MEETING OF JANUARY 20, 2009, AND TOWN HALL MEETING OF JANUARY 27, 2009, APPROVED Motion made by Member Brindle and seconded by Member Housh approving the minutes of the Regular Meeting of January 20, 2009, and Town Hall Meeting of January 27, 2009. Motion carried on rollcall vote — five ayes. RESOLUTION NO. 2008 -18 ADOPTED ORDERING IMPROVEMENT NO. S -101 — FRANCE AVENUE SOUTH SIDEWALK Affidavits of Notice presented and ordered placed on file. Assistant Engineer Presentation Assistant Engineer Sullivan presented Public Improvement No. S -101, a petitioned request to install a sidewalk on the west side of France Avenue from 48th Street to Sunnyside Road. He stated a petition containing 43 residents' signatures (40 residents not living adjacent to the project) had been received. Mr. Sullivan said following a public informational meeting, another petition was received from 44 residents, of whom 14 were abutting property owners, not in favor of the sidewalk. Mr. Sullivan presented details of the project, noting it would complete a missing segment of sidewalk that had been identified in the Comprehensive Plan update. He advised that questions raised during the public informational meetings dealt with snow removal and storage, the number of trees to be removed, fences, retaining walls, landscaping, and the number of utility poles that would be relocated to fit the sidewalk in the limited amount of right -of -way. Mr. Sullivan stated temporary construction easements would be needed toward the south end of the project to construct the retaining wall. He displayed pictures of the project area including the wood fence and volunteer trees in the 4700 block of France Avenue. Mr. Sullivan presented the cost breakdown for this $300,000 project and said the financing would come from the City's MSA funds. Mr. Sullivan answered the Council's questions: explaining snow would be hauled from this site because there was not adequate right -of -way for snow storage, noting most of the wooden fence in the 4700 block would not be impacted, that a three to four lot section would require guardrail replacement, the City would be obligated to maintain fencing located on City easements, the retaining wall /fence combination would be designed to absorb energy to provide backyard safety, and the new fence would be located on top of a three to four foot retaining wall. It was noted that any residents could submit a petition it they felt a need existed within the City of Edina. City Engineer /Public Works Director Houle advised that in 2003, the City did a study of MSA sidewalks to identify missing links but the subject section of France Avenue was not caught. However, when the Comprehensive Plan was updated, the segment was added. Mr. Houle said the City did not have a priority list of MSA sidewalks, but staff typically initiated sidewalk projects in conjunction with road reconstruction projects. Mr. Houle explained that Edina received $1.1 million of State Page 1 Minutes /Edina City Council /February 12009 s Aid for construction projects and about $250,000 was used toward maintenance projects. If not used for this project, the funds could be used for other projects. Mayor Hovland opened the public hearing at 7:27 p.m. Public Testimony Mary Jo Aiken, 4548 France Avenue S., encouraged the Council to approve the sidewalk project, chiefly for pedestrian safety. Michael Casserly, 4701 Meadow Road, did not support the project. Mr. Casserly said only three of original, petitioners were from the abutting area, cited environmental concerns and stated a sidewalk was available on the east side. Fred Kraft, 4604 France.Avenue S., stated he had originally signed the petition in support, but now withdrew his support because there was a sidewalk on the east side of France Avenue. Conrad Razidlo, 4622 France Avenue S., opposed the project because persons could cross France Avenue at a semaphore and use the east side sidewalk. Jeremiah Mostrom, 4544 'France Avenue S., supported the sidewalk to increase safety of pedestrians along France Avenue. Kelly Mostrom, 4544 France Avenue S., supported the sidewalk to improve safety and noted she was a bus rider who had experienced �difficulty accessing bus stops on the west side of France. Dick BrozilEc, 4608 France Avenue S., questioned impact to the wooded area and sound wall and indicated he did not support the sidewalk. Gwen Martin, 4709 Meadow Road, stated her opposition to the sidewalk, which,would not lower traffic levels, and suggested the installation of a crosswalk option at 47th Street and ,France Avenue. Kathy Schmid, 4711 Meadow Road, opposed the sidewalk and read a statement listing her concerns. Jan Ferrell, 4704 West 70th Street, did not .support the sidewalk and questioned why State Aid funds should pay for 100% of a sidewalk project along a County Road. Richard Cook, 4360 France Avenue. S., Unit #7, supported the sidewalk for community walkability, enhanced safety of bus riders and beautification. Keith Harmon, 4703 Meadow Road cross France Avenue and will prefer posed the sidewalk the sidewalk on the east s that people will still need tc Heather Isaacs, 4640 France Avenue S., Apt. #1, asked where the utility poles would be relocated. Roberta Castellano, 4854 France Avenue S., believed the issue of sidewalk placement should be addressed during road reconstruction projects. Susan Wahman, 4715 Meadow Road, stated she was very opposed to the sidewalk. Karen Wille, 4701 Meadow Road, opposed the sidewalk. Member Housh made a motion, seconded by Member Swenson, to close the public hearing. Page 2 I Minutes /Edina City Council /February 3. 2009 Ayes: Bennett, Brindle, Housh, Swenson, Hovland Motion carried. Mr. Sullivan explained the utility poles would be relocated to the right -of -way line, the City could request the utility company remove duplicate and abandoned utility poles, and the 4600 France Avenue brick and block wall section would remain with the sidewalk abutting it. Mr. Houle advised that State Aid rules allowed use of these funds for sidewalks on County roadway systems. He explained that bollards had been used along areas of curvature but would not be needed in the eight -foot right -of -way area. Mr. Sullivan described the hardscape to be used, noting the stone wall would be constructed of large rough -faced landscape block with the decorative side facing the residents' property. Responding to the question whether the project was necessary, cost effective, and feasible, Mr. Houle explained the 2008 Comprehensive Plan update addressed Edina's overall Sidewalk System, and the France Avenue segment was identified as a "missing link." He presented the Capital Improvement Plan's list of projects to 2017 with projected costs, noting it was the City Council's discretion to determine whether the project was necessary. Mr. Sullivan addressed the resident's suggestion for a crosswalk advising Edina's current Crosswalk Policy would not recommend a crossing except at signalized locations. He explained that cobra -style streetlights were located at major intersections and several were mid - block, providing basic background lighting. Lights located closer to the ground would be needed for pedestrian safety lighting. Mr. Sullivan clarified rough boundaries were drawn around business district zones to determine the walking shed and; in this case, it overlapped into a residential area. The Council discussed: the need to assure safety for pedestrians and those who need an extra measure of safety, such as when debarking from a bus, that trees within the rights -of -way would be removed, but not other trees on residents' property, there would be no impact to the fence mentioned by Ms. Wille, and replacing trees would not qualify under State Aid rules for cost participation. Member Housh stated he would not support this project due to cost; an alternative sidewalk existing on the other side of France Avenue, and strong opposition by residents abutting the project. The majority of the Council spoke in support of the project because the City had an obligation to maintain public health and provide ease of access. The proposed section would: complete a network of sidewalks, linking linked two business districts, enhance safety for pedestrians and persons who get off the bus in the subject area, would beautify the neighborhood, and would serve the larger community. Member Swenson introduced Resolution No. 2009 -18, Ordering Improvement No. S -101, France Avenue Sidewalk and Authorizing Plans and Specifications to be Completed and Bids Taken. Member Bennett seconded the motion. Rollcall: Ayes: Bennett, Brindle, Swenson, Hovland Nays: Housh Motion carried. RESOLUTION NO. 2009 -19 ADOPTED APPROVING FINAL SITE PLAN — ALOFT HOTEL/ WAYZATA PROPERTIES, 4900 VIKING DRIVE Affidavits of Notice presented and ordered placed on file. Planner Presentation Planner Teague presented the final site and grading plans for the Aloft Hotel, 4900 Viking Drive, Phase I of the Gateway Development Project. He advised Edina Code required 755 parking stalls, so a variance was requested to allow 655 stalls. A parking study concluded that based on Page 3 Minutes /Edina City Council /February 3. 2009 uses of hotel and office;;) there would be enough parking due to shared uses and staggered peak times. The Planning Commission and Zoning Board of Appeals supported the project. Staff appealed the Zoning Board's action so the Council could take action on the entire project. The Council discussed the 100 -stall variance request and asked the proponent to present the building materials and color palette. Proponent Presentation Chris Hickok, Wayzata Properties, introduced the development team and managing partner and stated the project design had b ee held tqe me co tsisn entry since preliminary approvals. Mark Swenson, architect of project, displayed elevations and described building materials for the "hip and modern" faoade as being similar but using brighter colored materials than the Minneapolis Aloft Hotel. Mr. Swenson noted the LED lighting feature on the front elevation, swoop of the canopy on the top and narrow footprint orientated toward the residential area. The Council expressed concern with the color variance between faoade pictures provided and building materials presented by the proponent. Mr. Swenson explained the building material. and colors could vary from location to location. The Minneapolis Aloft Hotel used dark gray metal against light gray metal in consideration, of neighboring buildings. The Edina Aloft Hotel faoade would use a warm tereacotta color; soft yellow colored panels, and soft blue LED strip lights. Mayor Hovland opened the public hearing at 9:00 p.m. Public Testimony Arrie Larsen Manti; National Chamber of Commerce, spoke in support on the project on behalf of the Chamber of Commerce. She noted the Edina Chamber would office within the complex. Member Swenson made a motion, seconded by Member Bennett, to close the public hearing. Ayes: Bennett, Brindle, Housh, Swenson, Hovland Motion carried. Member Housh disclosed that his employer did business with Mortenson Development, but he did not believe it constituted a conflict. City Attorney Knutson agreed that was not a disqualifying conflict.' Member Swenson introduced Resolution No. 2009 -19 Approving a Final Site Plan with a Parking Stall Variance for Phase 1 of Gateway, with the following findings: 1. With , the exception of the variance, the proposal would meet. the required standards and ordinances for a Final Development Plan. 2. The Final Development Plan was consistent with the approved Preliminary Development Plan. 3. The proposal meets the required standards for a variance because: a. The proposed use was reasonable: It provided a reasonable on -site parking for the hotel and existing office ,buildings, based on the parking study that was performed by Keimley -Horn. b. The proposed hotel was Phase 1 of an Overall Development Plan for the site that includes new office buildings and parking ramps. Approval of the Final Development Plan was subject to the following conditions: 1. The site must be developed and maintained in conformance with the following plans, unless modified by the conditions below: • Site plan d to n stamped October 27, 2008 • Building elevations date stamped October 27, 2008 • Grading and drainage plan sdate stamped October 27, 2008 Page 4 Minutes /Edina City Council /February 3. 2009 • Utility plan date stamped October 27, 2008 • Landscape plan date stamped October 27, 2008 • Lighting plan date stamped October 27, 2008 • Building materials and colors must be the same as on the materials board presented to the City Council on February 3, 2009 2. Submit a copy of the Nine Mile Creek Watershed District Permit. The City may require revisions to the approved plans to meet the District's requirements. 3. Per Section 850.10 Subd. 3.6 of the City's Zoning Ordinance, a letter of credit, performance bond or cash deposit must be submitted in the amount equal to 150% of the proposed landscaping prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy for the building. 4. Compliance with all conditions listed by the City Engineer in his memo dated November 18, 2008. 5. Compliance with all conditions required by the Transportation Commission. 6. All Phase 1 public improvements, per the approved Development Agreement, must be installed prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy. Member Brindle seconded the motion. Rollcall: Ayes: Bennett, Brindle, Housh, Swenson, Hovland Motion carried. RESOLUTION NO. 2009 -24 ADOPTED DENYING APPEAL OF ADMINISTRATIVE PENALTY — CHUCK E. CHEESE — SALE OF ALCOHOL TO UNDERAGE PERSON — RESOLUTION 2009- 24 Affidavits of Notice presented and ordered placed on file. Deputy Chief Presentation Deputy Chief Long described the liquor compliance violation that occurred at Chuck E. Cheese on December 17, 2008, and recommendation for a $1,000 fine and suspension of the Chuck E. Cheese liquor license for three days, since this was a second violation within 24 months. It was noted that on February 25, 2008, a letter was mailed to all public establishments that serve alcohol informing of upcoming alcohol compliance inspections. In response to Council's questions, Deputy Chief Long explained that a Minnesota driver's license for someone younger than 21 clearly states "under 21" above the photo along with the date the holder will turn 21 years of age. Proponent Presentation Rick Asher, Manager at Chuck E. Cheese, 7505 France Avenue, stated he takes this matter very seriously. Mr. Asher described what he believed happened when the two Edina police officers and an underage decoy ordered three beers on December 17, 2008. Mr. Asher stated he took this very seriously and that Chuck E. Cheese had scheduled training this Thursday. Jim Ventura, attorney representing Mr. Asher, stated their position that it would be unfair to impose a three -day suspension of the license. Chuck E. Cheese had a corporate policy to limit sales to two beers per person, not serving to the point of intoxication. Mr. Ventura stated beer sales were not a main part of their business, estimating Chuck E. Cheese served fewer than 25 beers a week. He asserted the Police Department had not followed their policy because a copy the identifying information of the underage decoy had not been provided to him along with the police report. Mr. Ventura asserted the Police report was lacking, did not follow the City's policy, and asked if it had been demonstrated there was a violation. Mr. Ventura stated he believed that suspension of their license was a harsh policy because it would affect Chuck E. Cheese licensing applications in other cities. Mayor Hovland stated a violation had been demonstrated to the Police Department and provided Mr. Ventura with his copy of the decoy's picture and driver's license. Deputy Chief Long advised the decoy's photo had been taken the night of the compliance checks, and he was unsure why Mr. Ventura did not receive a copy because copies were attached to the report. Page 5 Minutes /Edina City Council /February 3, 2009 Mayor Hovland opened the public hearing at 9:18 p.m. Public Testimony No one appeared. Member Housh made a motion, seconded by Member Brindle, to close the public hearing. Ayes: Bennett, Brindle, Housh, Swenson, Hovland Motion carried. Member Housh introduced Resolution No. 2009 -24 Denying Appeal on' Selling or Furnishing Alcohol to an Underage Person. Member Bennett seconded the motion. The Council discussed: the need to assure liquor laws were followed through compliance checks, the advance notice given to licensees informing them checks would be conducted,.: suggesting to licensees it might be helpful to post the, nuoy Best date of birth that could be served,'and the proper process was followed for Chuck E Cheese leaving no reason to cancel the administrative penalty. Rollcall: Ayes: Bennett, Brindle, Housh, Swenson, Hovland Motion carried. PUBLIC COMMENT No one appeared. *AWARD OF BID — AMBULANCE REMOUNT —FIRE DEPARTMENT Motion made by Member Brindle and seconded by Member Housh awarding the bid for Type III Ambulance Remount, Fire Department, to the recommended low bidder, North Central Ambulance at $105,990.37. Motion carried on rollcall vote — five ayes. *AWARD OF BID - 2009 CHEVROLET SILVERADO PICK -UP — BRAEMAR ARENA Motion made by Member Brindle ,and seconded by Member Housh awarding the bid for 2009 Chevrolet Silverado One Ton Pick -Up Truck, Braemar Arena, to the" recommended low bidder, Car/Truck City (State "of Minnesota Contract #440137) at $21,580. Motion carried on rollcall vote - five ayes., *AWARD OF BID — REPLACEMENT OF PAMELA PARK PLAYGROUND EQUIPMENT Motion made by Member Brindle and seconded by Member Housh awarding the bid for replacement of Pamela Park playground equipment to the recommended low bidder, Power Play, LT Farmington, Inc. at $150,000. Motion carried on rollcall vote — five ayes. RECEIVED WEST 70TH STREET STUDY ADVISORY COMMITTEE PRESENTATION Geoff Waorkinger, Transportation Commission Chair, introduced members of the Study Advisory Committee present and provided a brief summary of the West 70th Street study which addressed traffic volume, safety, difficulty of driveway access and turning movements, and speed of travel. Steve Brown, Study Advisory Commission Chair, outlined the efforts made to gather public input, stating he believed the process had been open, and findings collaborative. He presented the Committee's recommendation to break the proposed improvements into three phases and described the 12 work tasks. Mr. Brown explained if the Council approved the recommended course of action that each phase be evaluated as implementeds. Mayor Hovland thanked all who served on this project for a job well done. Page 6 Minutes /Edina City Council /February 3. 2009 RESOLUTION NO. 2009 -20 APPROVED ACCEPTING VARIOUS DONATIONS Mayor Hovland explained that in order to comply with State Statutes; all donations to the City must be adopted by Resolution and approved by four favorable votes of the Council accepting the donations. Member Bennett introduced Resolution No. 2009 -20 accepting various donations. Member Housh seconded the motion. Rollcall: Ayes: Bennett, Brindle, Housh, Swenson, Hovland Motion carried. ORDINANCE NO. 2009 -3 ADOPTED — AMENDING SECTION 1020 FALSE ALARMS Deputy Chief Long advised this amendment would address the fine schedule relating to false alarms to which the Police Department responded. Member Swenson made a motion, seconded by Member Housh, to grant First and waive Second Reading adopting Ordinance No. 2009 -03, Amending Section 1020 False Alarms. Rollcall: Ayes: Bennett, Brindle, Housh, Swenson, Hovland Motion carried. *HEARING DATE OF FEBRUARY 17, 2009 SET FOR APPEAL OF VARIANCE DENIAAIL 6120 BROOKVIEW AVENUE Motion made by Member Brindle and seconded by Member Housh to set February 17, 2009, as the hearing date for Appeal of Variance Denial, 6120 Brookview Avenue, JMS Custom Homes. Motion carried on rollcall vote — five ayes. HEARING DATE OF MARCH 3. 2009 FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT EDINA SCHOOL DISTRICT MAINTENANCE BUILDING Member Housh made a motion, seconded by Member Swenson, to set March 3, 2009, as the hearing date for Conditional Use Permit, Edina School District, 5701 Normandale Road, Construct a New Maintenance Building. Ayes: Bennett, Brindle, Housh, Swenson, Hovland Motion carried. *RESOLUTION NO. 2009 -13 APPROVED — FINDINGS GRANTING VARIANCE 5349 KELLOGG AVENUE Motion made by Member Brindle and seconded by Member Housh to adopt Resolution No. 2009 -13 Findings Granting Variance 5349 Kellogg Avenue. Motion carried on rollcall vote — five ayes. *MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING APPROVED — BLOOMINGTON PUBLIC HEALTH Motion made by Member Brindle and seconded by Member Housh to approve Memorandum of Understanding, Bloomington Public Health. Motion carried on rollcall vote — five ayes. *T- MOBILE ANTENNA APPROVED AT PAMELA PARK Motion made by Member Brindle and seconded by Member Housh to approve T- Mobile antenna at Pamela Park. Motion carried on rollcall vote — five ayes. *CONFIRMATION OF CLAIMS PAID Motion made by Member Brindle and seconded by Member Housh approving payment of the following claims as shown in detail on the Check Register dated January 22, 2009, and consisting of 26 pages; General Fund $271,649.93; Communications Fund $10,352.14; City Hall Debt Service $2,000.00; PIR Debt Service Fund $2,000.00; Working Capital Fund $7,626.94; Art Center Fund $3,208.57; Golf Dome Fund $10,793.36; Aquatic Center Fund $79.10; Golf Course Fund $13,029.39; Ice Arena Fund $15,008.95; Edinborough /Centennial Lakes Fund $12,571.34; Liquor Fund $132,398.91; Utility Fund $56,591.10; Storm Sewer Fund $76.67; PSTF Agency Fund $716.35; TOTAL $538.102.75 and for approval of payment of claims dated January 29, 2009, and consisting Page 7 Minutes /Edina Citv Council /February 3. 2009 ' of 32 pages: General Fund $201,888.23; CDBG Fund $19,900.00; Communications Fund $3,471.38; Working Capital Fund $292,095.62; Construction Fund $69,361.20; Art Center Fund $17,723.18; Golf Dome Fund $19,103.40; Aquatic Center Fund $109.87; Golf Course Fund $3,442.93; Ice Arena Fund $893.91; Edinborough /Centennial Lakes Fund $22,253.37; Liquor Fund $177,624.19; Utility Fund $287,145.62; Storm Sewer Fund $30,115.33; PSTF Agency Fund $29.45; TOTAL $1,145,157.68. Motion carried on rollcall vote — five ayes. HUMAN RIGHTS AND RELATIONS COMMISSION DISCUSSED Member Brindle advised that the Human Rights and Relations Commission no longer existed due to resignations resulting from attendance requirements, term limits, and resignations. She suggested restructuring to a seven or nine member Commission. The Council discussed the attendance requirement and possible scenarios for restructuring of the Human Rights and Relations Commission. Consensus was reached to delay interviewing candidates for the Human Rights and Relations Commission until it had been determined how the Commission would be restructured, which would be discussed at the Mama!; 3, 20 February 24, 2009, Study Session. PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER VACATION OF PORTION OF BELMORE LANE CANCELED Member Swenson made a motion, seconded by Member Bennett, to cancel the . February 17, 2009, public hearing for Vacation of a. portion Belmore Lane. Ayes: Bennett, Brindle, Housh, Swenson, Hovland Motion carried. There being no further business on the Council Agenda, Mayor Hovland declared the meeting adjourned at 10:30 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Page 8 Debra A. Mangen, City Clerk MINUTES OF THE WORK SESSION OF THE EDINA CITY COUNCIL HELD AT CITY HALL FEBRUARY 3, 2009 5:30 P.M. Mayor Hovland called the meeting to order at 5:40 p.m. in the Community Room of City Hall. Answering rollcall were: Members Bennett, Brindle, Housh, Swenson and Mayor Hovland. Planning Commissioners present were: Commissioners Brown, Fischer, Forrest, Grabiel, Risser, Scherer, Schroeder, and Staunton. Staff present included: Gordon Hughes, City Manager; Heather Worthington, Assistant City Manager; Cary Teague, Planning Director; Kris Aaker, Assistant Planner; Roger Knutson, City Attorney; Ceil Smith, Assistant to City Manager; and Debra Mangen, City Clerk. Mayor Hovland stated the purpose of the meeting was to review issues of mutual interest to the Planning Commission and City Council and for the Council to hold a discussion of a potential City Council organizational development retreat. Planning Commissioner Fischer handed out the following list of zoning ordinance priorities which Planning Director briefly reviewed (Note: Page numbers quoted in the list refer to the Draft Comprehensive Plan): Zoning Ordinance Priorities 1. Comprehensive Plan inconsistencies. a. Height Standards — PRD4 Districts. Page 4 -56 of Comprehensive Plan (HDR area) limits height to 8- stories — Current code has no max. b. Height Standards — RMD & POD -2 Districts. Page 4 -56 of Comprehensive Plan (RMD area) limits height to 12- stories — Current Code has no max. C. Height Standards — PCD -3 District. Page 4 -56 of Comprehensive Plan (CAC area) limits height to 10 -12 stories — Current Code max. is 18 stories. d. Height Standards — PCD -3 District. Page 4 -56 of Comprehensive Plan (MXC area) limits height to 8- stories — Current Code has no max. e. Height Standards — MDD -6 District. Page 4 -56 of Comprehensive Plan (HDR & OR areas) limits height to 4 and 9 stories — Current Code has no max. f. Height Standards — POD -2 District. Page 4 -57 of Comprehensive Plan (O area) limits height to 8 stories — Current Code has no max. 2. PUD & CUP Ordinance /Development review process. Page 4 -59 of the Comprehensive Plan states that a Planned Unit Development zoning option be considered to incorporate design guidelines, including sustainable design etc... The CUP regulations could also be updated to incorporate these same standards. 3. Zoning Board review of variances associated with a `final development plan." Consideration of our variance review process, particularly when a variance is tied to another application. 4. Driveway width limitation /impervious surface max. Address the issue of excessively wide driveways for new home construction and establishing an impervious surface maximum to address drainage concerns /issues. (Page 4-44.) 5. Parking standards. Update the parking requirements. Reduce spaces required if appropriate, encourage shared parking and parking at the rear of buildings. (Page 4 -47.) 6. Urban forest protection. Consider. amendments to the landscaping requirements, including a tree preservation ordinance, and tree replacement requirement. (Page 4 -59.) 7. Garage placement. Minutes /Edina City Council Work Session /February 3. 2009 Consider an amendment to limit garage placement to prevent garages in front of the living space of a home. (Page 4 -45.) 8. Solar Ordinance. If recommended by the Energy and Environment Commission. (Page 12 -9.) 9. Massing study. Examination of the impacts of the recent Ordinance changes from 2008. (Page 4 -44 and City Council directed.) This would likely be an early 2010 project. The Council and Planning Commission discussed the priorities, and it was determined that the Planning Commission would work on drafting amendments to existing City Code to be reviewed within the next three to six months with the City Council. Mayor Hovland thanked the Planning Commission members for their work, and they left the meeting at 6:40 p.m. Manager Hughes noted the Council had held an organizational development retreat two years ago with positive results. Since there now was a new member on the Council he inquired about holding a similar retreat in the near future. Mr. Hughes listed firms that could potentially lead such a retreat. He noted this could be a good lead in to updated the City's VISION 20/20. Council directed Mr. Hughes to select a consultant and bring back possible dates in March or early April. There being no further business, Mayor Hovland adjourned the meeting at 6:55 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Debra Mangen, City Clerk 2 1. 0 e Cn �y 1 88 • 9• REPORT /RECOMMENDATION To: Mayor and Council Agenda Item # ll. A Consent ❑ . From: Joyce Repya Information Only ❑ Associate Planner Mgr. Recommends ❑ To HRA ® To Council Date: February 17, 2009 Action ❑ Motion ® Resolution Subject: 2009 CDBG Community ❑ Ordinance Development Block Grant ❑ Discussion Recommendation: Approve recommended 2009 CDBG budget for submission to Hennepin County. Info /Background: The CDBG Community Development Block Grant Program is a federal entitlement program administered by HUD who in turn, charges Hennepin County to oversee the distribution of funds to its communities. These funds are to be directed toward improving housing opportunities and providing a suitable living environment for persons with low and moderate incomes. As a recipient of HUD funds, the County, and each community must affirmatively further fair housing. Hennepin County encourages all communities to be proactive by addressing impediments to fair housing choices. As a potential condition to receiving future funds, HUD annually evaluates efforts to affirmatively further fair housing choice. To continue its support of countywide fair housing efforts, Hennepin County will allocate funds from its administrative budget for fair housing services. Services including outreach, counseling and referral services, training and education programs and enforcement of fair housing laws and ordinances, will be targeted to priority actions and services identified in the Regional-Analysis of Impediments and Fair Housing Action Guide. Communities are strongly encouraged to support similar efforts within their community using CDBG and /or local funds. _M Edina's 2009 budget allotment is $158,956, unchanged from the 2008 budget. Projects which may be funded with the CDBG monies are either public service or community development related. Public Services Funding for public services may not exceed 15% of the total budget. Edina's 2008 allotment for public services may not exceed $23,843. The Human Rights and Relations Commission (HRRC) usually reviews the requests for funding and submits their recommendation for Council consideration. However, due to the inability of the HRRC to hold a January meeting, the planning staff recommendation for funding is presented from the following agencies: • Jewish Vocational Services (JVS) — provides career development to income eligible families; • Senior Community Services (H.O.M.E. — Housing and Outdoor Maintenance for the Elderly) — provides housekeeping and chore services to Edina seniors who pay for services on a sliding fee scale; • Community Action Partnership for Suburban Hennepin (CAPSH) — provides housing programs for low and moderate income homeowners and homebuyers; and • HOME Line — provides tenant advocacy services for Edina renters. PROVIDER 2008 2009 2009 BUDGET REQUEST PROPOSED JVS - Career Dev. $ 2,720 $ 5,500 $ 5,505 H.O.M.E. $ 9,179 $ 12,800 $12,803 C.A.P.S.H. $ 3,462 $ 3,500 $ 3,505 HomeLine $ 988 $ 2,025 $ 2,030 School Readiness $ 7,494 0 0 TOTAL $23,843 $ 23,825 $23,843 Community Development After the $23,843 distribution for public services, $135,113 remains to be directed toward community development projects. Staff recommends directing $53,113 of these funds to the Rehabilitation of Private Property program which provides deferred repayment loans of up to $30,000 to make structural improvements to owner occupied single - family homes. Eligibility for the program is based on a household income schedule established by HUD for the Minneapolis /St. Paul area. The income limits may not exceed 80% of the median household income. In 2008, CDBG funds have assisted 4 homeowners to make structural improvements to their homes. Staff anticipates that the program will continue to attract income eligible homeowners interested in improving and maintaining their homes. West Hennepin Affordable Housing Land Trust (WHAHLT) is requesting $82,000 for their Homes Within Reach program to provide an affordable homeownership opportunity using the Community Land Trust model for one homebuyer. The Community Land Trust model removes the market value of the land from the mortgage equation, which reduces the cost of a home for a work -force family by approximately 35 -42 percent, making it more affordable than houses on the open real n estate market. WHAHLT owns the land and the homeowner owns the home. A Ground Lease signed by both parties defines and secures the roles and responsibilities of both WHAHLT and the homeowner, including, but not limited to a resale /recapture provision, and long -term rights and use of the land. You will recall that one of the strategies identified in the Housing element of the Comprehensive Plan states that the City is committed to fund and expand its financial and technical support of community land trusts. Attesting to this goal, the City has provided funding to WHAHLT in the following ways: In 2007, the Council redirected $245,481 of Scattered Site Affordable Housing Funds to WHAHLT, and with those funds, three homes were purchased, rehabilitated and sold using the land trust model. The 2008 CDBG contribution of $82,000 to WHAHLT has enabled them to purchase a fourth community land trust home in Edina. Moving forward, the proposed $82,000 to be directed toward WHAHLT's purchase of a fifth land trust home, reinforcing the City's commitment to providing affordable housing opportunities in the community. Staff recommends the following distribution of 2009 CDBG funds for community development purposes: 2008 2009 Activity Budget Proposal Rehabilitation of Private Property $ 53,113 $ 53,113 WHAHLT $ 82,000 $ 82,000 TOTAL $135,113 $135,113 January 20, 2009 Ms. Joyce Repya Planning Department City of Edina 4801 W. 50th St. Edina, MN 55424 Dear Ms. Repya: JVS, a division of Jewish Family and Children's Service (JFCS) of Minneapolis, is pleased to submit this request for $5,500 in Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) funding to provide employment services to low and moderate income Edina residents. As we start the new year, we find ourselves facing an unemployment crisis that is impacting so many individuals and families in our community. Edina residents and .residents in our surrounding communities need help sharpening their job search skills and focusing their search on jobs that are the "right fit." Assisting to resolve this crisis by helping people find suitable jobs is our highest priority. The following story is an example of the help a JVS staff member was able to offer a CDBG client: A client found me via a referral from a social services agency. She had just been fired from her job as a Bank Teller where she earned $10 dollars an hour. This client and I set up a weekly date to set goals, regroup, and strategize the job search. The client was able to keep all of her appointments. She followed the plan we created as a team, and within two months this client accepted a full time position earning $17.50 an hour in afield better suited to her academic background. She reported after a few weeks on the job that she is very satisfied with her decision and she feels competent in her position. T11 I i II1S is d division of Jewish Family and Giildren's Service of Allinneapolis Affiliate of IlUVS and Accredited I)v CARF JVS 13100 WAYZATA BLVD. SUITE 300 MIVNETONKA, MN 55305 phone 952.591 -0300 fax 952 - 591 -0227 e -mail jvs@jvsmn.org web wwtvjvsmn.org 430 FIRST AVE. NORTH SUITE 620 MINNEAPOLIS; MN 55401 phone 612 4692 -8920 fax 612 - 692 -8921 CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER Judy Halper JVS DIVISION DIRECTOR Larry S. Greenbaum JVS ASSISTANT DIRECTOR Carlo Richert FAMILY SERVICE DIVISION AND OPERATIONS DIRECTOR Mari Forbush BOARD OF DIRECTORS OFFICERS Jill Ann Marks, President' Debra Orbuch Grayson, President - Elect; Vice President of Board Development' Mike Badower, Vice President of investment' Marilyn Bmms, Vice President of Finance & Human Resources' Bob Edelstein, Vice President of Jewish Vocational Service Planning & Development' Robin Lundy, Vice President of Financial Development' Jason Rose, Vice President of Marketing' Jeff Mirviss, Immediate Past President' DIRECTORS Kerry Bader Jason Bass Rabbi Alexander Davis Judy Goviser Roni Gingold Barbara Goldberg Lynn Goldbloom Howard Kaminsky Eileen Kohn Robert Kra mer Laura Leventhal Amy Rosenblatt Lul Ann Miller David Nirenstein Larry Pepper Marc Ratner Mark Robbins Karen Rubin Adeel Saud Tom Segal Zel Shrell Mark Stipakov Jeff Swartz Harriet Swatez Jim Tankenoff Howard Torkoty Debbie Wolfe Howard Zack Danny Zouber ADVISORS TO THE BOARD Margo Abelson Genyo Buslovich Howard Held Robert Kelen Alan Ziskin ' F.xerutive C.nmmlttee Ms. Joyce Repya Page 2 JVS is committed to helping residents meet their employment needs. An additional allocation of CDBG funds will help JVS continue to serve residents in the City of Edina. If you have questions, please contact me at 952- 417 -2130 or swallace@jvsmn.org. I would be happy to provide additional information regarding this application or other JVS /JFCS programs and services. Sincerely, Sue Wallace Program Development Manager 2009 URBAN HENNEPIN COUNTY CDBG PROGRAM REQUEST FOR FUNDING (fillable form. Use one form per project) A. GENERAL INFORMATION 1. City: Edina 2. Project Name: JVS Career Development Contact Person/ Phone No. Sue Wallace / 952 -417 -2130 B. PROJECT DATA CDBG Funding Requested $ 5,500 (needs to be same as council resolution) 2. Is this an existing CDBG - funded project? ®Yes ONo 3. Project Location: Address . or Citywide X 4. Project Description: (Describe the project in as much detail as possible, including the local need(s) the project will address.) Founded in 1910, JVS has been providing career development and employment support to people of all backgrounds for almost 100 years. These services include career counseling, educational planning, job search skill training and assistance, placement assistance, and job retention support. Especially in our current economic crisis, helping Edina residents regain and advance in employment is a critical need that strengthens the financial 'independence of the family and strengthens the community as a whole. By leveraging CDBG funds, JVS' Career Development program will provide a comprehensive assessment of interests, skills, and work personality traits. A career counselor will review and interpret results, help determine career "fit" and develop a plan of action for choosing a career, acquiring needed education and skills, securing a new job, or advancing in a current field. In addition to meeting with residents in convenient neighborhood locations, JVS has started to create a relationship with the Edina Resource Center for referrals and to utilize space for meetings with residents where a JVS staff member addresses their employment needs. Residents who do not meet the CDBG income qualifications may access alternative JVS services, including JVS' new online employment service 1 website at www .ParnossahWorksMinnesota.org. Unlike other employment websites, JVS offers personalized service in addition to local employment opportunities. Consolidated Plan Priorities: Using the Priority Summary chart below, identify what priority(ies) the project will meet. (Note: If a proposed project is a low urban county priority, you must explain why it has a higher priority in your community.) Rr�orities. Use'X toindi6te Rental Housing Existing Housing Rehabilitation First Time Homeownership Homelessness Special Needs Housing Public Service X Nei borhood Revitalization Transportation Services 6. Describe anticipated results /accomplishments the project will have. (number of persons to receive services, number of affordable housing units to be rehabilitated or built, etc.) Last year, JVS was able to leverage the CDBG funds provided to serve over 320 people. With the current economy and increasing unemployment rates, we anticipate that a larger number of residents will be seeking employment assistance in the coming months. With the requested CDBG funding, JVS will serve a minimum of 10 Edina residents from July 2009 through June 2010. However, .based on the current unemployment crisis and experience over the last five months, JVS anticipates the ability to leverage these dollars to serve additional residents in need of employment services. 7. Implementation Schedule: (Identify major project tasks to occur during/ within the first 12 months of the 18 month expenditure period. Expenditure period begins July 1; 2009 and ends December 31, 2010.) Task: Individual comprehensive assessments of Date Ongoing interests, skills, work personality traits and the development of an action plan to choose a career, acquire education and skills, secure a new job, or advance in a current field. 8. Budget: (Specify total project budget by major funding sources. Attach additional listings where appropriate.) Please see attached budget. 2 JVS Division Program Budget Career Development Services Program Year 2008 -2009 Revenue Amount Committed Minneapolis Jewish Federation 71,200 Government Funding —City of Minneapolis 40,000 Government Funding — Hennepin County 50,000 Program Fees 8,500 Endowment Funds 3,000 Pending CDBG Funding —City of Edina 5,500 CDBG Funding —City of Richfield 7,700 CDBG Funding — City of Plymouth 2,000 CDBG Funding — City of Maple Grove 5,500 Anticipated RBC Foundation 3,000 Other Individuals Foundations & Corporate Giving Programs 6,800 CDBG Funding — Other cities and the consolidated pool 16,500 TOTAL REVENUE 219,700 Expenses Amount Specific- Assista nce 11000 Staff Wages 105,933 Taxes and Benefits 25,425 Professional Fees / Contracted Services 270 Supplies 1,470 Telephone & telecommunications 400 Postage & shipping 590 Printing & copying 1,300 Occupancy 4,725 Equipment rental & maintenance 210 Travel 3,145 Conferences, Training, Subscriptions 1,080 Depreciation 2,300 IT & clerical support 27,100 Other 960 Administration 33,792 TOTAL EXPENSESI 219,700 JVS Division Program Budget Career Development Services Program Year 2008 -2009 Revenue Amount Committed Minneapolis Jewish Federation 71,200 Government Funding — City of Minneapolis 40,000 Government Funding — Hennepin County 50,000 Program Fees 8,500 Endowment Funds 3,000 Pending CDBG Funding —City of Edina 5 500 CDBG Funding — City of Richfield 7,700 CDBG Funding —City of Plymouth 2,000 CDBG Funding — City of Maple Grove 5,500 Anticipated RBC Foundation 3,000 Other Individuals Foundations & Corporate Giving Programs 6,800 CDBG Funding — Other cities and the consolidated pool 16,500 TOTAL REVENUE 219,700 Expenses Amount Specific Assistance 11,000 Staff Wages 105,933 Taxes and Benefits 25,425 Professional Fees / Contracted Services 270 Supplies 1,470 Telephone & telecommunications 400 Postage & shipping 590 Printing & copying 1,300 Occupancy 4,725 Equipment rental & maintenance 210 Travel 3,145 Conferences, Training, Subscriptions 1,080 Depreciation 2,300 IT & clerical support 27,100 Other 960 Administration 33,792 TOTAL EXPENSES 219,700 Executive Committee Sharon Burnham President Marvin Johnson 1 st Vice President Cheryl Fischer 2nd Vice President Sharon Jensen Treasurer James Crist Secretary Jeanette Metz Member -at -Large Woody Love Memberat -Large David Fisher Past President Board Members John Gray Marty.Guritz Bonnie Hammel Sandy Hewitt Aiko Higuchi Ron Klecker Laurie Lafontaine John Lawson Dr. Chinyere (Ike) Njaka Senator Gen Olson Keith Stuessi Eugene Winstead Benjamin F Withhart Executive Director & C.E.O. Programs *Transportation *Community Senior Centers *Senior Outreach *H.O.M.E. *Health Insurance Counseling *Caregiver Support Services ID. - A United Way Supported Agency Charities Review Council oxembe► Eldercare Partners• January 21, 2009 Joyce Repya Associate Planner City of Edina 4801 West 50t' Street Edina, MN 55424 Dear Ms. Repya, Thank you for the opportunity to submit a CDBG application to the City of Edina for $12,800. The H.O.M.E. program operating budget for the City of Edina is $26,000. The Edina Housing Foundation has'partnered.with the H.O.M.E. program in the past to make up the difference in our operating budget for the city. Thank you for your consideration of our proposal to support Senior Community Services' H.O.M.E. program. Please let me know if you would like more information, With the support of the City of Edina, the H.O.M.E. program will continue to reach out to seniors with the homemaking and chore support they need to stay independent. Thank you for your generous past support of Senior. Community Services, and for your commitment to the health, safety and happiness of the seniors we serve. Sincerely, Deb Taylor jj Chief Operating Officer Senior Community Services * 10709 Wayzata. Boulevard, #111, a Minnetonka, MN 55305 0,952.541.1019 http: / /`Www.seniorcommunity.org 2009 URBAN HENNEPIN COUNTY CDBG PROGRAM REQUEST FOR FUNDING (fiIlable form. Use one form per project) A. GENERAL INFORMATION City: Edina 2. Project Name: H.O.M.E. (Household & Outside Maintenance for Elderly) Contact Person/ Phone No. Kitty Engle / (952) 888 -5530 B. PROJECT DATA CDBG Funding Requested $ 12,800 (needs to be same as council resolution) 2. Is this an existing CDBG - funded project? ®Yes ONo 3. Project Location: Address or Citywide X 4. Project Description: (Describe the project in as much detail as possible, including the local need(s) the project will address.) H.O.M.E. is a program operated by Senior Community Services (SCS), a well- respected Minnesota non - profit 501(c)(3) organization with over 58 years of experience in supporting positive aging. The mission of H.O.M.E. is to assist older adults to maintain their dignity and live independently by providing accessible, reliable, and affordable homemaker and maintenance services. H.O.M.E. has been serving the community since 1980. Currently, H.O.M.E. provides services to clients age 60 and older in the cities of Bloomington, Brooklyn Center, Crystal, Edina, Eden Prairie, Golden Valley, Hopkins, Minnetonka, New Hope, Plymouth, Richfield, Robbinsdale and St. Louis Park. As seniors age and begin to "slow down a little," they often struggle with routine homemaking tasks: dishes, vacuuming, and laundry, for example. Outside maintenance such as mowing, yard cleanup, and exterior painting are even more difficult to keep up with. Both for emotional ( "I should be able to take care of things myself') and financial reasons, many seniors have trouble addressing this growing need. Market -rate in -home professional help is simply out of reach for the low- or moderate- income seniors who make up most of the west suburban senior population. Even where there are some financial resources from either the senior or a caregiver, seniors who have always been independent often feel fear or lack of trust at the idea of letting a stranger into their home. The result of all this can be-that seniors who are otherwise healthy and functional enough to stay independent in their own home or apartment feel prematurely forced into an assisted living situation or even a nursing home. Sometimes, all it takes for seniors to continue living on their own is a little help with the inside and outside chores. That's where SCS' H.O.M.E. program can help. Ili 2008, H.O.M.E. assisted 1,038 individuals performing 10,072 household and maintenance jobs. H.O.M.E. services provided include routine indoor chores such as dishwashing, laundry, and cleaning; lawn mowing and snow removal; interior and exterior painting; seasonal outdoor work (pruning, weeding, mulching); minor repairs and disability - related projects (for example, installing grab bars). These services help seniors stay in their homes and apartments in dignity and safety. H.O.M.E. services meet seniors' special needs because H.O.M.E. is a trusted provider and because our services are available on a fair and affordable sliding fee scale. Program offices are located at Creekside Community Center, 9801 Penn Avenue South, Bloomington; 730 Florida Avenue South, Golden Valley; and Minnetonka Senior Center, 14600 Minnetonka Blvd. Minnetonka. Clients gain access to the program either directly by contacting one of the H.O.M.E. offices or by referral from an area agency. Revenues are derived from client fees, Metropolitan Area Agency on Aging (MAAA) in support of chore services, cities in which the program operates, United Way, private foundations, client contributions and Friends of H.O.M.E., an organization that solicits donations from businesses, churches and community groups. 5. Consolidated Plan Priorities: Using the Priority Summary chart below, identify what priority(ies) the project will meet. (Note: If a proposed project is a low urban county priority, you must explain why it has a higher priority in your community.) Priorities Use X to indicate Rental Housing Existing Housing Rehabilitation First Time Homeownership Homelessness Special Needs Housing Public Service X Neighborhood Revitalization Transportation Services 6. Describe anticipated results /accomplishments the project will have. (number of persons to receive services, number of affordable housing units to be rehabilitated or built, etc.) V, In 2008, H.O.M.E. served 109 Edina residents (94 households) providing a total of 1,144 jobs /projects. It is anticipated that H.O.M.E. will serve 139 Edina residents in 2009, an increase of 5 %. 7. Implementation Schedule: (Identify major project tasks to occur during/ within the first 12 months of the 18 month expenditure period. Expenditure period begins July 1, 2009 and ends December 31, 2010.) Ongoing delivery of H.O.M.E. services including Maintenance (minor carpentry, plumbing, electrical repairs and interior /exterior painting; Chore Services (lawn mowing and snow shoveling) and Homemaking (cleaning, vacuuming, dusting, washing clothes, and window cleaning). 8. Budget: (Specify total project budget by major funding sources. Attach additional listings where appropriate.) . FUNDING SOURCES AMOUNT Brooklyn Center CDBG $ 17,318 Eden Prairie CDBG $ 8,000 Edina CDBG $ 12,800 Edina EEHF $ 13,200 Minnetonka CDBG $ 14,000 Richfield CDBG $ 15,537 Bloomington CDBG $ 20,000 Bloomington HRA $ 24,005 Golden Valley $ 6,000 Plymouth $ 6,300 MAAA $ 77,123 United Way $ 96,311 Friends of H.O.M.E. $ 10,000 Client Fees $271,700 Program Revenue $ 7,000 PROJECT TOTAL $599,294 1 T Senior Community Services H.O.M.E. 2009 Budget Description H.O.M.E. United Way - Minneapolis $ 96,311 Government Revenue $ 214,283 Corp /Foundation Contributions $ 10,000 H.O.M.E. Revenue $ 192,500 Skillsbank Revenue $ 79,200 Other Program Revenue $ 7,000 Total Revenue & Support $ 599,294 Total Salaries & Wages $ 378,748 Total Benefits & Payroll Taxes $ 121,512 Occupancy $ 3,825 Telephone $ 3,480 Postage & Freight $ 4,200 Printing & Publications $ 6,000 Supplies /Office /Program $ 3,000 Professional /Contract Fees $ 200 Skillsbank Contractors $ 48,296 Mileage Reimbursement $ 14,176 Conference /Meetings/Workshops $ 1,275 Miscellaneous Expense $ 1,700 Admin. Allocation $ 51,931 Total Operating Expenses $ 138,083 Depreciation $ - Total Expenses $ 638,343 Change in Net Assets $ (39,049) C: \Documents and Settings \jrepya \Desktop\2009 Budget -H 0 M E .xis 1/28/2009 4:12 PM Helping People. Changing Lives. community tion. P A R T N E R S H/ P eaxr or OF SUBURBAN HENNEPIN If you have any questions, or need additional information, please do not hesitate to 33 10th Avenue South contact me at 952- 933 -9639 ext. 265. Suite 150 Hopkins, MN 55343 Tel 952-933-9639 weyv Fax 952 - 933 -8016 www.capsh.org and Community Developer 1(21 our mission: To improve the quality of life in suburban Hennepin County by creating and supporting links between individuals and OPPORTUNITY communities through: service, education, and collaboration. AMERICA's POVERTY FIGHTING NETWORK January 15, 2009 Energy Assistance Homebuyer Education City of Edina Associate Planner Foreclosure Prevention 4801 West 50th Street Reverse Mortgage Counseling Edina, MN 55424 Home Maintenance & Rehab Attn: Joyce Repya Homeless Services RE: Community Action Partnership of Suburban Hennepin Employment Counseling 2009 Application for CDBG Funding Budget Counseling Planning & Development Dear Ms. Repya Community Development Community Action Partnership of Suburban Hennepin ( "CAPSH ") is pleased to Tax Assistance submit its 2009 CDBG Public Service Funding request to the City of Edina. We are Voter Education & Registration requesting $3,500 for the purpose of funding the CAPSH Full -Cycle Home Asset Development Ownership Program. Homeless Services CAPSH, as the anti- poverty community action agency serving suburban Hennepin Fiscal Agent Services County, has provided residents of Edina with various services since 1992. CAPSH Individual Development Accounts services to the City of Edina includes: full -cycle homeownership, energy assistance, employment counseling and financial / budget counseling. We look forward to continuing the partnership between CAPSH and the City of Edina in providing appropriate services to Edina residents. The proposed CDBG funded Full -Cycle Home Ownership Program is a CAPSH funded program with assisted funding from the cities of Plymouth, New Hope, Minnetonka, Maple Grove, St. Louis Park, Brooklyn Park, along with funding from the Hennepin County Consolidated Pool. If you have any questions, or need additional information, please do not hesitate to 33 10th Avenue South contact me at 952- 933 -9639 ext. 265. Suite 150 Hopkins, MN 55343 Tel 952-933-9639 weyv Fax 952 - 933 -8016 www.capsh.org and Community Developer 1(21 our mission: To improve the quality of life in suburban Hennepin County by creating and supporting links between individuals and OPPORTUNITY communities through: service, education, and collaboration. 2009 URBAN HENNEPIN COUNTY CDBG PROGRAM REQUEST FOR FUNDING (fillable form. Use one form per project) A. GENERAL INFORMATION 1. City: Edina 2. Project Name: Community Action Partnership, of Suburban Hennepin "CAPSH" — Full Cycle Homeownership Program. Contact Person/ Phone No. Marcy Harris: Director of Planning and Development. (952) 933 -9639 Ext 225; mharris @capsh.org B. PROJECT DATA 1. CDBG Funding Requested $ 3,500 (needs to be same as council resolution) 2. Is this an existing CDBG- funded project? ®Yes ❑No 3. Project Location: The City of Edina and the rest of suburban Hennepin County 4. Project Description: (Describe the project in as much detail as possible, including the local need(s) the project will address.) Community Action Partnership of Suburban Hennepin (CAPSH) provides full -cycle homeownership services. These include: foreclosure prevention counseling and loan assistance; first -time homebuyer education and counseling; financial literacy and budget counseling; reverse mortgage counseling; and home rehab and maintenance counseling and education. Homeownership is still considered to be the crux of achieving the "American Dream" Of late, the dream of homeownership is turning into a nightmare for more and more families living in Suburban Hennepin County, including the city of Edina. Even current Edina homeowners, aren't immune from the falling home prices, rising foreclosure rate and tighter credit market. Program year 2008, CAPSH foreclosure prevention counselors experienced a rise in the number of city of Edina homeowners requesting foreclosure counseling. To help meet increasing demand for foreclosure counseling, CAPSH has expanded its foreclosure prevention staff ,level from 2.75 to 7.25FTE in 2008. The additional staff capacity allows CAPSH to dedicate a foreclosure prevention counselor to serve homeowners from the city of Edina and its surrounding communities. No matter the trend or state of the housing market, CAPSH City of Edina 1 CAPSH 2009 CDBG Application will continue partnering with the city of Edina to ensure housing or access to housing services available to low to moderate - income households. 5. Consolidated Plan Priorities: Using the Priority Summary chart below, identify what priority(ies) the project will meet. (Note: If a proposed project is a low urban county priority, you must explain why it has a higher priority in your community.) Priorities Use X to indicate Rental Housing Existing Housing (Rehabilitation) X First Time Homeownership X Homelessness Special Needs Housing Public Service Nei hborhood Revitalization Trans ortation Services 6. Describe anticipated results /accomplishments the project will have. (number of persons to receive services, number of affordable housing units to be rehabilitated or built, etc.) Anticipated Results: CAPSH anticipates providing the following units of housing service to residents of Edina (reported per individuals): 0 First -time homebuyer workshops /counseling: 10 0 Foreclosure prevention: 15 0 Rehab /maintenance assistance: 2 0 Reverse mortgage: 5 2008 Results: CAPSH's Full Cycle Homeownership Program provided housing service to a total of 4,356 (includes short-term services as referral) individuals and enrolled a total of 1,693 households in its housing programs. In regards to the city of Edina, a total 21 households enrolled in CAPSH'S housing program 2008 program year. Housing Proerams 2008 0 First -time homebuyer workshops /counseling: 8 0 Foreclosure prevention: 9 0 Rehab /maintenance assistance: 0 0 Reverse mortgage: 4 City of Edina 2 CAPSH 2009 CDBG Application Other Programs 0 Energy Assistance: 265HH 0 Budget Counseling: 48HH 0 Tax Assistance: 54HH 7. Implementation Schedule: (Identify major project tasks to occur during/ within the first 12 months of the 18 month expenditure period. Expenditure period begins July 1, 2009 and ends December 31, 2010.) Time Period Amount/Source Activity Person Responsib /1/2009 to $3,500 Ongoing full cycle homeownership services including: Scott Zemke, 6/30/2010 dina CDBG Director of First -time homebuyer workshops and counseling (financial Operations literacy training also provided) Foreclosure prevention counseling & loan assistance - Rehab/ home maintenance counseling and education (includes some emergency repair) - Reverse mortgage counseling Reporting Marcy Harris, Dir Planning & Dev.; Don Depree, Systems Admin. iCompletion Date Ngoing 8. Budget: (Specify total project budget by major funding sources. Attach additional listings where appropriate.) Please see attached budget chart. The italicized figures are funds that are pending. City of Edina 3 CAPSH 2009 CDBG Application Community Action Partnership of Suburban Hennepin Homeownership Programs Budget: 2009 Budget/Source of Funds Components a. Personnel (Direct Labor) Edina CDBG $3,500 HUD $ 58,389.00 Other Fed Share $ 99,827.00 State Share $ 90,982.00 Other CDBG $47,000.00 Other /Pending $ 44,360.00 Total $ 340,558.00 b. Fringe Benefits $ 15,198.00 $ 28,852.00 $ 43,420.00 $ 7,700.00 $ 95,170.00 c. Travel $ 12,060.00 $ 4,635.00 $ 3,000.00 $ 19,695.00 d. Equipment (only items > $5,000 depreciated value) $ e. Supplies (only items w /depreciated Value < $5,000) $ 10,560.00 $ 1,030.00 $ 1,030.00 $ 3,708.00 $ 16,328.00 f. Contractual $ 32,041.00 $ 25,307.00 $ 59,843.00 $ 6,288.00 $ 123,479.00 h. Direct Costs $ 225,000.00 $ 30,000.00 $ 255,000.00 Pending $ 40,000.001 $ 68,427.00 $ 60,000.00 $ 50,000.00 $ 218,42700 i. Subtotal of Direct Costs $ 73,587.00 $ 448,340.00 $ 263,801.00 $ 170,873.00 $ 62,056.00 $ 1,068,657.00 j. Indirect Costs (54.49/6 of direct salaries & benefits) - HUD approved $ 237,036.00 $1,524,120.00 Grand Total HOME 3455 Bloomington Ave Minneapolis, MN 55407 Joyce Repya Associate Planner City of Edina 4801 West 50th Street Edina, MN 55424 Dear Ms. Repya: Office Phone: 612/728 -5770 Hotline: 612/728 -5767 Fax: 612/728 -5761 www.homelinemn.org January 9, 2009 This letter is to request funding in the amount of $2,025 from the City of Edina's Community Development Block Grant Program to support HOME Line's services for renters. A copy of the 2009 CDBG Program Request for Funding is enclosed. Along with the CDBG Request Form, I am enclosing a one -page sheet summarizing our hotline's service to Edina residents. HOME Line is building upon our depth of experience in serving Edina. We are working to meet current challenges facing low- income renters and would like the City of Edina to continue as our partner in meeting these needs. We thank you for the opportunity to submit this application. If you have any questions or need additional information, please call me at 612/728 -5770, extension 107 or Mike Vraa, our managing attorney at extension 113. Sincerely, Beth Kodluboy Executive Director enclosures as noted Tenant Advocacy in Minnesota 2009 URBAN HENNEPIN COUNTY CDBG PROGRAM REQUEST FOR FUNDING A. GENERAL INFORMATION Community: HOME Line Project Name: Tenant Advocacy Services Contact Person/Phone Number /email Mike Vraa, 612 728 -5770 x 113,mikev @homelinemn.org B. PROJECT DATA Funding Request $_$2,025 2. Is this request to fund an existing CDBG - FUNDED project? . x Yes No 3. Project Location: Address: 3455 Bloomington Avenue, Minneapolis. 55407. HOME Line's tenant services are citywide. Tenants call our free hotline from their homes. Renter Education presentations are done in the local high schools. Immigrant Outreach would be with individual groups in the communities where they reside or where the social service provider is located. 4. Project Description: Briefly describe the proposed project. The narrative should include the need or problem to be addressed in relation to the Consolidated Plan (see attached table), as well as the population to be served or the area to benefit. Describe the work to be performed, including the activities to be undertaken or the services to be provided, the goals and objectives, method of approach, implementation schedule and anticipated results /accomplishments. We anticipate assisting approximately 90 Edina renter households over the hotline during the program year and offering educational presentations at Edina High School. Renters make up nearly 4,924 households in Edina, and many of these families have low incomes. When renters have problems involving their homes, those who don't know their rights and responsibilities can end up living in housing that is unsafe, lose security deposits that are rightfully theirs, or make decisions that cost them their home. HOME Line provides renters with the tools necessary to keep their homes safe and affordable. HOME Line will provide three distinct, but related, programs as part of this grant: a tenant hotline that provides free legal advice to tenants about landlord/tenant law, a high school educational program, and our expanded immigrant outreach program that provides services to new immigrants. These services prevent problems ranging from homelessness to illness from unsafe living conditions, and result in reducing the use of the city's emergency resources. Tenant Hotline The first of these programs is HOME Line's tenant hotline. The hotline began in 1992 as a service to Suburban Hennepin County residents. Today we serve the entire state (excluding Minneapolis) and have recently taken our 108,OOOth call. Three staff attorneys and a tenant advocate work full time on the hotline along with 40 -60 law student volunteers each year. Edina has accounted for 1,550 calls since 1992. Our tenant services to Edina have helped save tenants at least $33,000. We have also helped to prevent the eviction of 44 Edina families. Last year alone we advised 83 renter households from Edina. The most common reasons Edina residents call our hotline are repairs, security deposits, evictions; break lease questions, questions about how proper notice to vacate is given, and lease questions. The need for this service in Edina is apparent -- Edina residents already rely on this valuable service. High School Renter Education Program The second program is our high school presentation program. To date, we have spoken to 967 classes (over 26,500 students) throughout the metro area. This presentation has awards from both Best Prep and B.E.E.F. (Business Economic Education Foundation). It focuses on the things that future renters should know, including how to avoid evictions, how to select roommates, security deposits and understanding leases. Immigrant Outreach Project The third program focuses on immigrant outreach efforts. According to the 2000 census, foreign -born people make up at least 4,866 or 8.9% of the Edina population (a number which will surely continue to grow). Recognizing that many recent immigrants are not sure where to find a variety of useful resources, HOME Line has recently begun working to bridge this gap. Many recent immigrant groups live and work in Edina and many of them are living in rental housing with lower incomes and have no knowledge of their rental rights. It is important that we train and work with those social service providers who have contact with these new residents, so they too can use the tenant services to solve their rental problems. While our services are available to all renters free of charge, over 89% of our Edina callers have low or very-low incomes; almost three quarters (68 %) of these callers are women; 19% are racial minorities. Our programs are aimed at low- income renters, high school students who are about to enter the rental market, and recent immigrants. We identify the key demographics at the beginning of each call. 5. Consolidated Plan Priorities: Public Services: Family Services, Senior Services, and Youth Services. Priorities Use X to indicate Rental Housing Existing Housing (Rehabilitation) First Time Homeownership Homelessness Special Needs Housing Public Service X Neighborhood Revitalization Transportation Services 6. Describe anticipated results /accomplishments projects will have. (i.e.; number of persons/households to be assisted/served, number of housing units to be rehabilitatedibuilt, etc.) We anticipate between 85 and 100 callers utilizing our hotline services, representing 250 residents. We will offer our free high school training to Edina High School. The immigrant outreach will vary with community interest. Also see the attached one -page sheet, which covers what HOME Line has accomplished in Edina in the past. 7. Implementation Schedule: (Identify major project tasks to occur and date anticipated) Task: Renter counseling over hotline Date Ongoing Task: High school presentations Date Late fall and late spring Task: Immigrant Outreach Project Date Ongoing 8. Budget: (Specify total project budget by major funding sources. Attach additional listings where appropriate.) FUNDING SOURCES AMOUNT CDBG $ 55,906 Prior Y_ ear CDBG Funding (for this project) $ 24,929 Other Federal Funds (specify) $ 34,800 Low Income Housing Tax Credits $ . .... _ .._ _ 0 State (specify) MN DHS ! $ 21,100 Municipal $ 37,957 Metropolitan Council $ 0 Private (specify)_Foundations (attached) $ 231,000 Other (Training, Interest, Contributions)_ ; $ 4,700 $ 410,392 HOME Line Tenant Hotline Services Sources of Funds (Attachment) 75,00 0 Source: McKnight Foundation 80,00 0 Source: Funders Council (Foreclosure) 34,80 0 Source: Family Homeless Prevention & Assistance 30,00 0 Source: Hennepin County 25,00 0 Source: The Bigelow Foundation 21,10 0 Source: MN Department of Health and Human Ser. 15,00 0 Source: The Mardag Foundation 10,00 0 Source: The McNeely Foundation 11,00 0 Source: The, Hugh J. Andersen Foundation 5,000 Source: Pan African Foundation 4,000 Source: Duluth Superior Foundation .1,000 Source: Initiative Foundation — Alexandria 5,000 Source: Initiative Foundation — Central Minnesota 15,90 0 Source: Suburban Ramsey CDBG 8,000 Source: City of Plymouth CDBG 7,957 Source: City of Bloomington 5,060 Source: Hennepin County Consolidated CDBG 5,000 Source: City of Eden Prairie CDBG 9,475 Source: St. Paul COPP 3,000 Source: City of Maple Grove CDBG 988 Source: City of Edina CDBG 2,983 Source: City of Richfield CDBG 4,500 Source: City of Minnetonka CDBG 1,000 Source: City of New Hope CDBG January 2i. 2009 MS. Susan Sheiber0 City of Edina 4801 Wnt Q Sheet Edina, N N 55424 Dear Ms. Sheiber): In the CDBG application I.lrocess, 11OMI; Line has trodkionally submitted a one -page surnrnary of the Awk that I IO E line has dune since 1992. This letter is sent based on your request for more recent information concerning LIC)NIF. Line's tenant hotline. Ant, 1 will offer up some recent Elm demographic statistics from our hotline, co\ering, only the 2008 calendar year. . Caller's Race African - American: _ 18% Asian - Pacific Islander: 1% Caueaslan: 74°x, 1- 1lspa11iC: 6% Native American: 1% Caller's Income (as defined by HUD): Very -low: 81 % Low 144% Moderate: 50% Gender: Male: 28% Demme: 721%, Family Composition: Single - Mothers: 14`%, Total number of children in all 83 households: 65 1 Line also Docks the reasons for each call. In 2008, 1 ding callers contacted us about 23 different issues. Repairs, attempts to mcover security depAshs, evictions, discrimination, Lase questions and landlord Areclosures were among) the most fireduent topics covered. We directly helped prevent the eviction ol'2 I -Aina families during the last year. i_ast, HOME Line, depends On many separate sources of funding. In 2004 we anticipate receiving funding from at Nast 34 different SOInve5. Our 2009 tenant hotline budget is roughly $380001 and in 2008, Edina accounted for roughly .0075% of Our 1 K062 calls, \which translates into about $2,850 out of our hotline services. "] -his CD1:3G funding helps to legitimize the worl: that I-ION1117 Line does. Currently, eleven different cities /county governments give I-IOML Line funding of some type to support the wort; of the tenant hotline. This is critical in helping to convince 1OUndationS and other Supporters that helping lovw- income renters stabilize their hOUSing is a worthwhile goal. I hope this helps explain HOME Lane's work in Edina. Sincerely, Michael Vraa Managing Attorney 110 I Line HOME ]Line Renters' Hotline Edina Information on calls during the period 1/1/92 through 11/30/2008 Over the past seventeen years a total of 1,550 Edina renters have contacted HOME Line. This represents service to approximately 3,875 residents when all family members have been counted. The vast majority (over 89 %) of Edina callers to HOME Line are "low" or "very -low" income. These income categories are those used by the U.S. Department of H.U.D.: Very Low: incomes below 50% of the metro median Low: incomes between 50% and 80% of the metro median Moderate: incomes above 80% of the metro median. Renter's Education HOME Line's High School Renter's Program provides advice on tenant rights and responsibilities. This free presentation covers most things that first time renters are likely to encounter, including roommate problems, evictions, security deposits and repair problems. In the last sixteen years, HOME Line has been to Edina High School three times, speaking to 57 students. We have also been to Southview Middle School:for two classes, speaking to 60 students and Valley View Middle School 6 times, speaking to 330 students. HOME Line has also sent speakers to many property manager's . meetings, continuing legal education seminars and trainings for various shelters /resource centers. Number of Calls Per Year $4 Repairs 267 2. 127 „B ,29 Evictions 166 4. Notice to Vacate 156 5. Break Lease 146 6. Lease Questions 81 120 100 80 83 74 101 Rent Increase 58 9. Fees 77 7B Heat 97 105 B, 7, 94 7B 83 BO 40 20 0 92 93 94 95 96 07 BB BB 00 01 02 03 04 05 OB 07 OB Callers' Income 1992 -2008 Very Low Low 610/6 028016 Wderate 11% HOME Line has helped prevent 44 evictions in Edina in the last seventeen years. HOME Line has also helped Edina residents recover money from their landlords; $14,761 back from improperly withheld security deposits and $18,869 in rent abatements (refunds for substandard conditions). The Hotline receives . over 10,000 calls per year. Careful records are taken, for each call, including the reason the tenant called. These are the top ten topics in Edina over the last seventeen years (followed by the number of calls): 1. Repairs 267 2. Security Deposits 184 3. Evictions 166 4. Notice to Vacate 156 5. Break Lease 146 6. Lease Questions 81 7. Privacy /Intrusion 61 8. Rent Increase 58 9. Fees 50 10. Heat 40 Homes Reach- January 21, 2009 Joyce Repya City of Edina 4801 West 50th Street Edina, Minnesota 55424 -1394 Dear Joyce; Thank you for the opportunity to present the West Hennepin Affordable Housing Land Trust ( WHAHLT), known as Homes Within Reach (HWR), 2009 Edina CDBG application. WHAHLT is seeking financial support from the City of Edina to accompany other matching funding sources to create an affordable home in the City of Edina. This application will enable HWR to continue creating and preserving affordable homeownership in the City of Edina using the community land trust practice that allows homeownership to be affordable for low /moderate income work -force families, since it removes the market value of the land from the mortgage equation. All of the homes within the resale - restricted domain of the Community Land Trust are designed to remain affordable for low- and - moderate income homebuyers (term of lease -99 years) regardless the number of times the home sells. Therefore, we safeguard the community's investment in affordable housing using the community land trust practice. Homes Within Reach offers Edina and homebuyers the ability to sustain long -term affordable homeownership that fulfills a unique need in the community. As of December 31, 2008, HWR has created and preserved sixty -one (61) affordable homes and acquired sixty -three (63) properties, since its inception in 2002. Of which three affordable homes are located in Edina and the acquisition of the fourth will take place in February 2009. We appreciate the support the City of Edina has provided to those we serve in becoming homeowners. We look forward to continuing our partnership in addressing the.needs of affordable ownership housing. Thank you for taking the time to review and consider our proposal. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me at (952) 401 -7071. Sincerely, Janet A. Lindbo Executive Director West Hennepin Affordable Housing Land Trust 952. 401.7071 tel infi, i HomesWithinRcaeh.org 5101 Thimsen Avenue, Suite 200, Minnetonka, MN 55.345 952.224 -28.57 fax 19-_ , 2009 URBAN HENNEPIN COUNTY CDBG PROGRAM REQUEST FOR FUNDING (fillable form. Use one form per project) A. GENERAL INFORMATION 1. City: Edina 2. Project Name: Homes Within Reach Contact Person/Phone No. Janet Lindbo, 952- 401 -7071 B. PROJECT DATA CDBG Funding Requested $ 82,000 (needs to be same as council resolution) 2. Is this an existing CDBG - funded project? ❑Yes X No 3. Project Location: Address NA or Citywide Specific address has yet to be determined. Once the award has been determined, HWR will search for property to acquire based on purchase price, condition of property, location, matching contributions and applicants' needs. During the process of search and selection, HWR will make City staff aware of proposed property's location, for approval. 4. Project Description: (Describe the project in as much detail as possible, including the local need(s) the project will address.) Introduction: West Hennepin Affordable Housing Land Trust (WHAHLT) dba as Homes Within Reach (HWR) is a Community Land Trust providing permanent affordable homeownership to workforce families in west suburban Hennepin County. HWR was created in response to efforts by the City of Minnetonka to develop new methods and tools that would help increase the number of affordable homes available and make efficient use of financial resources for affordable housing. Land and housing costs have exceeded the means of many workforce households in the western suburbs of Hennepin County, including the City of Edina. Program Description Using the Community Land Trust practice, HWR acquires single - family properties, retains ownership of the land, and rehabs the homes to meet program requirements and then sells the homes on the land to qualifying families (50 % -80% AMI). The land is leased to homeowners through a 99 -year renewable Ground Lease that affords the owner most of the same rights as any other property owner. The removal of the market value of the land from the mortgage equation provides initial affordability. Permanent affordability is obtained through: A pricing formula that provides the owner with 35% of the appreciation (equity) while ensuring that the resale price of the home is affordable and 2. A resale restriction that requires the homeowner to sell the home either to another low -to moderate - income work -force household or to HWR. The resale - restricted requirement of WHAHLT/HWR is to keep the home affordable through one resale after another, regardless the number of times the homes sells. This commitment to the continuing affordability of owner - occupied housing is the cornerstone of the Community Land Trust practice and driving force of creating and preserving long -term affordability. In that WHAHLT/HWR owns the land and the homeowner owns the home, the homeowner and WHAHLT/HWR sign a long -term legal document called a Ground Lease, which defines the roles and responsibilities of both WHAHLT/HWR and the homeowner. In addition, the lease secures the homeowner long -term rights to the land. The Ground Lease protects the assets of the land by providing WHAHLT/HWR certain rights to safeguard the condition and affordability of the home. The homeowner may sell his/her home only to a qualified buyer or to WHAHLT/HWR. The resale price is limited by the above referenced pricing formula, which more than likely (based on market conditions) allows the seller to recover the original cost of the house plus a modest profit. The three principal features of the HWR program continues to appeal to our applicant pool, they include ➢ The cost of homes ➢ The quality of home ➢ Their location Community Need Over the past 12 years, housing prices have exceeded salary increases by some 30% nationally, including the past 18 months when property prices have adjusted depending on location condition and price. Who cannot afford to buy a home in Edina include ➢ Teachers ➢ Firefighters ➢ Clergy ➢ Retail Sales Staff ➢ Health Care Workers ➢ Office Clerks ➢ Customer Service Representatives and many more Many of the jobs that are being created and or replaced do not pay wages that are adequate to afford housing in the City of Edina. Many occupations necessary to support a community are below a fair threshold to own a home. The issue of affordable housing continues to be increasingly important in the community of Edina now and in the future. Please refer to the attached chart of the Twin Cities Region Affordable Housing Units Needed, 2011 to 2020 as determined by the Advisory Panel to Metropolitan Council Staff, estimating the needed affordable housing units in Edina of U 2012. The panel used four factors in allocating affordable housing needs across the Twin Cities for 2011 -2020. They include, household growth potential, ratio of local low -wage jobs to low -wage workers, current affordable housing and transit service. As the population and job patterns change and grow in Hennepin County's western suburban communities, the need for affordable housing continues to grow. Housing cost remains far out of the reach of many workforce families due to a number of factors including but not limited to; • the area's population growth, • new job and replacement openings, • reduction of available land for new development and • the cost of housing outpacing individual annual incomes This is experienced in the suburbs of Hennepin County. Depending on what report one is, reading (National Low Income Housing Coalition, Minneapolis Foundation and or Housing Needs Report among of few) the "housing wage" for the Twin Cities ($16.96 to $18.29) exceeds many work -force families ability to provide accurate shelter, nevertheless homeownership. Property Sale Prices The following chart is information from the Realtor Public Policy Partnership for 2002 -2007 and Regional Multiple Listing Service for 2008. The chart highlights the number of homes sales and median sales prices of homes, in the communities HWR serves. I have highlighted the Edina information in red . Overall the number of homes during 2008 was down only 3.5 percent from 2007. The median sale price fell 13.3 percent compared to 2007; however after reviewing the Edina data that did not accur in Edina. In addition, if you compare the reported median sale price for 2008 with the average sales price of our three HWR homeowners in Edina - $149,667 referenced in the following chart, you can understand the benefit and value provided in creating and preserving affordable homeownership using the Community Land Trust practice in Edina. Please review the following chart and if you so desire to review all communities in the Twin Cities area, please access the following website for the 2008 median sale prices and foreclosure sales by community — http• / /www startribune com/ homes /sell/ 37567314. html ?elr= KArksLckDiUvckDiUiacvK UUr SOURCE of2OOQ Data: Regional Multiple Listing Service SOURCE of2OD2_3OO7Data: Realtor Public Policy Partnership The flowing charts onozmuziaom the averages for the H\Y'R program from 2002-2008 (dl homes) 2008 production and the HVa homes in Edina created in 2007 and 2008 (3). Income % AMI Mo. Mortgage Previous Mo. Rent Sale Price Mortgage Amount Family size HWR 2008 $41,222 57.00% $969 $882 13 �5, 9 6 22 229 $13 7, E[ 3 .08 Change in �Di�g sales 14Dk7� price from 2007 to Brooklyn Park 992 S 175,000 1[ $7211 �7�50 21% L53% Eden Prairie 809 — $280,000 1 $115 000 57%�] 130 16% $288950 $294,000 �OO �90, $281,200 Minnetonk 528 IF$265,7950] $285,000 77 9% L34% $27 S 2 0 $241,750 Fs New Hope Richfield 1518�2] 407 $185,250 $221,700 -15%_] -15% 61 F 10 1711 25% $229,0 183,000 St. Louis IF604 Ls;727,000 11 F—:]l Park $233,250 -3 84 14% $23 $199,000 Edina IF-6-51 ] $388,250 11 $379,000 $27 53 8'Vo S185 000 Golden e Grove F9 Maple sf,5 oo]L - I S247,000 242,00 I o 4,9 �OO Fs F —10-/--Il SOURCE of2OOQ Data: Regional Multiple Listing Service SOURCE of2OD2_3OO7Data: Realtor Public Policy Partnership The flowing charts onozmuziaom the averages for the H\Y'R program from 2002-2008 (dl homes) 2008 production and the HVa homes in Edina created in 2007 and 2008 (3). Income % AMI Mo. Mortgage Previous Mo. Rent Sale Price Mortgage Amount Family size HWR 2008 $41,222 57.00% $969 $882 13 �5, 9 6 22 229 $13 7, E[ 3 .08 5. Consolidated Plan Priorities: Using the Priority Summary chart below, identify what priority(ies) the project will meet. (Note: If a proposed project is a low urban county priority, you must explain why it has a higher priority in your community.) Priorities Use to indicate. Rental Housing Existing Housing (Rehabilitation) First Time Homeownership X Homelessness Special. Needs Housing Public Service Neighborhood Revitalization Transportation Services 6. Describe anticipated results /accomplishments the project will have. (number of persons to receive services, number of affordable housing units to be rehabilitated or built, etc.) For a one -time investment per property, HWR creates and preserves one permanently affordable home average price of $149,667, at a time when the average median sales price for a home in Edina now exceeds $388,250 as referenced in the above property chart. Homes Within Reach efforts produce the following. ➢ Maximize the effectiveness of the public investment ➢ Provide benefits of homeownership to families that otherwise are unable. to purchase a home ➢ Collaborate public and private funds to address the need for affordable housing in Edina ➢ Preserve affordable housing and enhance community vitality Therefore; the program offers value and benefits in promoting stable families and a strong connnunity through housing and economic growth, increasing the labor pool available to the City of Edina, reducing freeway congestion as workers are given the opportunity live near their work and adding younger households to its housing stock. To' demonstrate the "depth and breadth of the program and its ability to transform people lives through homeownership the following is an excerpt from our Fall Newsletter with respect to a testimonial from one of HWR - Edina homeowners. Amid the ever - changing housing market, Homes Within Reach continues to work and serve its families to transform their lives through homeownership. We currently are serving 10 communities and the program continues to touch lives, as in the case of Towanda, who celebrated her one -year anniversmy in owning her home using the Community Land Trust practice. When Towanda moved back to the Twin Cities in 2004 with her two daughters, she had her priorities in order find a good job; liver closer to her brothers and sisters; and purchase a home in a quiet, safe community. "The girls were on the verge of becoming teenagers and so it was especially important that we live in a neighborhood that was stable and secure, " she explained. Her initial steps were frustrating because she could not find anything in her price range in a desirable location. "I was discouraged, but kept going and participated in Community Action Partnership of Suburban Hennepin (CAPSH) program. In the spring of 2007, they referred me to Homes Within Reach, " she said With their help, Towanda found an Edina home that suited her family and work situations. `I wanted that house the minute I saw it because it gave the girls the security they needed, the schools are excellent, and it's close to work and my family, " she said Purchasing a home requires much more than finding the right property, and HWR worked with Towanda through every step of the process, from making sure her credit was in good shape to meeting with an attorney to clarify all the legal requirements of home ownership. "This program made everything clear and understandable. I never would have thought it was possible to own a home in Edina, but we did it, " said Towanda. "Now we have a family dog and the girls are in junior high, have their own bedrooms, and I've got a short drive to work. It took awhile to get here, but it was worth the wait. " 7. Implementation Schedule: (Identify major project tasks to occur during/ within the first 12 months of the 18 -month expenditure period. Expenditure period begins July 1, 2009 and ends December 31, 2010.) The following are major steps to the Acquisition, Application and Selling phases of the program. No specific dates determined at this time. Projected all or at least the majority steps to be completed in 2009 and 2010. A. Property Search B. Property Selection Process • This step includes an action item requesting City approval based on location C. Purchase Offer of Selected Property D. Due - Diligence Period — PA Contingency Period • Includes at least three levels of review — o WHAHLT Property Manager • Contractor o House Masters and o Hennepin County E. Determine Rehab /Construction Requirements F. Finalize Offer and Remove Contingencies - G. Request and Finalize Line of Credit for acquisition H. Implement Pre - closing Action Items • Pursuant to HWR Property Acquisition Checklist I. Acquire Property J. Post Purchase Action Items • Ready the property to move to the Application and Selling Home Process and Procedures K. Applications Process: Attendance by prospective applicant to a HWR Informational Meeting L. HWR application process • Submission of HWR application with required financial attachments. M. Compliance with HWR and the City's qualifications and criteria Minimum qualifications for Purchasing a Home • Be at Least 21 years of age • Be a citizen of the United States or a legal resident • Have total household income less than 80 % of the Area Median Income (AMI) for the household size established by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) • Applicant (and co- applicant) must qualify for an approved mortgage and must have sufficient income to support housing costs • First- time homebuyers are preferred • Have a credit history acceptable to a lender • May not have other liquid assets, excluding retirement accounts, which total in excess of $25,000 • Preferences will be given to eligible households who live in or work in the City N. HWR orientation and completion of homebuyer education • Attendance at an approved homebuyer education workshop is required. This education is to provide basic tools to move through the process and own a home. Participation in the interview process with HWR staff Pre - approval from one of five lending institutions, Bremer Bank, Kate Wilson Team, MidCountry Mortgage, US Bank and Wells Fargo O. During the selling /selection process, a qualified family is approved by HWR and a lending institution and rehab /repair work has begun on the home and completed prior to selling the home. HWR supervises the process to sell the home using the Community Land Trust practice. P. HWR will identify and perform any rehabilitation work that is necessary to make the acquired homes appropriate and safe for permanent affordable housing and ready the home for sale to a qualified homebuyer. Key steps in the rehab process include but are not limited to: • Inspections • Cost estimates • Determine rehab work plan • Final inspection of work completed Q. Sell the home to a qualified household according to the principals of the community land trust. R. HWR Selection Committee approval S. Mortgage application and approval T. Attorney review of documents(including the ground lease) and process with prospective homebuyer U. Closing transaction • Selling of the home improvements • Execution of the ground lease V. After selling the home to the selected applicant, communications continue with HWR and the homebuyer regarding the responsibilities and issues relating to home ownership. ' In summary, the above referenced outline provides a brief overview of some of the key activities in implementing the HWR program. This outline does not include the steps of income verification and funding requirements because of their multifaceted nature. However, HWR does meet the requirements of the funding agencies. As referenced in the above outline, WHAHLT/HWR has procedural checklists for each area of responsibility in the transaction. Budget: (Specify total project budget by major funding sources. Attach additional listings where appropriate.) FUNDING SOURCES AMOUNT CDBG $ 82,000 Prior Year CDBG Funding (for this project) $ Other Federal Funds (specify) HOME $ 45,000 Low Income Housing Tax Credits $ State (specify) $ 12,000 Municipal $ Metropolitan Council $ 12,000 Private (specify) $ Other (specify) $ Project Total $151,000 Exhibit 2 Summary Table: Affordable Housing Need Allocation in the Twin Cities Metropolitan Area 2011. -2020 Growth Summarv: Housing Need Job Adjustment Factors Units Added/Subtracted per Factor New Affordable Housinq Transit Sewered Sewered Households Proximity' Stock Service' . Housing Communities ratio: lower- Pct. of units transit Units wage jobs to affordable at service level Job pox- Housing Transit Needed 2010 2020 Net lower -wage or below 60% 1 through 4 imityl Stock Service 3 2011 -2020 Growth workers Of HUD AM Hennepin County Bloomington 37,700 39,200 1,500 1.46 21% 2 213 41 92 627 Brooklyn Center 11,800 12,200 400 1.51 30% 2 63 0 25 163 Brooklyn Park 28,168 32,000 3,832 1.51 27% 2 600 35 23.5 1,590 Champlin 8500 9,200 700 .89 12% 3 -23 39 0 179 Corcoran 1,800 4,500 2,700 1.30 13% 4 247 141 -165 816 Crystal 9,700 10,100 400 1.57 26% 2 70 5 25 173 Dayton (pt.) 1,000 7,000 6,000 .78 22% 4 -406 147 -368 942 Deephaven 1,450 1,500 50 1.92 2% 3 14 4 0 26 Eden Prairie 24,200 25,500 1,300 2.01 1-0- % 3 402 80 0 685 Edina 21,600 22,000 400 1.93 20% 2 114 12 25 212 Excelsior 1,250 1,330 80 1.68 48% 3 17 -4 0 29 Golden Valley 9,000 9,200 200 1.87 18% 2 53 7 12 1.04 Greenfield 153 285 132 .83 12% 4 -7 7 -8 25 Greenwood 320' 330 10 1.92 5% 3 3 1 0 5 Hassan Twp. - 718 718 .95 4% 4 -10 57 -44 174 Hopkins 8,518 8,818 300 1.93 43% 2 85 -12 18 143 Independence 232 260 28 .77 2% 4 -2 2 -2 6 Long Lake 900 1,000 100 1.59 23% 3 18 2 0 40 Loretto 280 290 10 1.31 29% 4 1 0 -1 3 Maple Grove 24,500 30,144 5,644 1.14 7% 3 243 398 0 1,844 Maple Plain 922 950 28 1.14 36% 4 1 -1 -2 6 Medicine Lake 180 190 10 1.72 15% 3 2 0 0 4 Medina 1,118 2,240 1,122 1.38 5% 4 132 86 -69 384 Minneapolis 172,000 181,000 9,000 1.88 47% 1 2,415 -469 552 4,088 Minnetonka 221300 23,111 811 1.80 in. 2 199 45 50 421 Minnetonka Beach 236 238 2 1.74 3% 3 0 0 0 1 Minnetrista 1,600 2,700 1,100 1.09 2% 4 29 94 -67 306 Mound 4,350 4,600 I 1.13 28% 3 10 2 0 68 New Hope_ 9,100 9,600 500------1.60- 31 % 2 92 -2 31 213 Orono 2,256 2,950 69 41 _- 1.62 4% 3 133 55 - 0 311 Exhibit 2 Summary Table: Affordable Housing Need Allocation in the Twin Cities Metropolitan Area 2011 - 2020 *Cities that are split between two counties are shown in the county with the largest share of the population i Job Proximity Ratio: The ratio of local low -wage jobs (within 10 miles of the community's center - point, and paying less than $41,000) divided by local working residents (living within 10 miles of the center- point, earning less than $41,000). The ratio was calculated for each community by the Metropolitan Council using the US Census Bureau's Local Employment Dynamics data set for 2003. 21-Iousing Stock Affordability: The percentage of a community's total housing units that are affordable to low- income households (earning at or below -60% of the Twin Cities 13 -Gounty MSA Area Median Family Income (AMI), as determined by the U. S. Department of Housing & Urban Development). 3Transit Service Level: This number is a classification of transit service available in communities as determined by the Metropolitan Council. It is expressed as one of four levels: 1 = regular, frequent transit service to many points all through the day (only Minneapolis and St. Paul fall in this category); 2 = frequent service, but limited destinations (mostly inner -ring suburbs in this category); 3: some transit service, but very limited in frequency and destinations (many second and third -tier suburbs in this category); 4 = no regular transit service. Growth Summary: Housing Need Adjustment Factors Units Added/Subtracted per Factor New Affordable Job Housing Transit Sewered Sewered Households proximityl Stock Service' Housing Communities Ratio: lower- pct. of units transit Units wage jobs to affordable at service level Job prox- Housing Transit Needed Net lower -wage or below 60% Imityl Stock' 3 2011 -2020 2010 2020 1 through 4 Service Growth workers of HUD AN Hennepin County (cont.) Osseo 1,090 1,200 110 1.04 46% 2 1 -5 7 28 Plymouth 29,000 31,500 2,500 1.59 14% 3 455 123 0 1,045 Richfield 16,500 18,000 1,500 1.93 29% 2 427 5 92 765 Robbinsdale 6,500 7,000 500 1.65. 29% 2 100 2 31 222 Rogers 4,685 5,173 488 .92 5% 4 -13 37 -30 112 St. Anthony* 4,000 4,300 300 1.48 34% 2 44 -4 18 117 St. Bonifacius 1,100 1,100 _ .96 22% 3 0 0 0 _ St. Louis Park 22,000 23,000 1,000 1.86 26% 2 264 12 61 501 Shorewood 2,750 2,870 120 1.60 3% 3 22 10 0 53 Spring Park 1,000 1,080 80 1.71 40% 3 17 -2 0 31 Tonka Bay 744 760 16 1.67 8% 3 3 1 0 7 Wayzata 2,100 2,200 100 1.77 24% 3 24 2 0 44 Woodland 23 25 2 1 1.90 1% 3 1 1 0 0 1 *Cities that are split between two counties are shown in the county with the largest share of the population i Job Proximity Ratio: The ratio of local low -wage jobs (within 10 miles of the community's center - point, and paying less than $41,000) divided by local working residents (living within 10 miles of the center- point, earning less than $41,000). The ratio was calculated for each community by the Metropolitan Council using the US Census Bureau's Local Employment Dynamics data set for 2003. 21-Iousing Stock Affordability: The percentage of a community's total housing units that are affordable to low- income households (earning at or below -60% of the Twin Cities 13 -Gounty MSA Area Median Family Income (AMI), as determined by the U. S. Department of Housing & Urban Development). 3Transit Service Level: This number is a classification of transit service available in communities as determined by the Metropolitan Council. It is expressed as one of four levels: 1 = regular, frequent transit service to many points all through the day (only Minneapolis and St. Paul fall in this category); 2 = frequent service, but limited destinations (mostly inner -ring suburbs in this category); 3: some transit service, but very limited in frequency and destinations (many second and third -tier suburbs in this category); 4 = no regular transit service. `# REPORT /RECOMMENDATION To: Mayor & City Council From: Jack D. Sullivan, PE ,S. Assistant City Engin0eir Date: February 19 , 2009 Subject: Receive Greater Cornelia Area/West 70th Street Traffic Study Report: Agenda Item Consent Information Only Mgr. Recommends Action # II. B. ❑ToHRA ® To Council ® Motion ❑ Resolution Ordinance Discussion A Corridor Study of West 701h Street from Highway 100 to France Avenue was initiated over two years ago with a goal to develop possible solutions for transportation and land use issues within the corridor. A Study Advisory Committee (SAC) comprised of corridor residents, business owners and members of the Transportation and Planning commissions, was formed to complete the study. The Edina Transportation Commission at their January 15, 2009 meeting adopted the recommendations from the Study Advisory Committee's January 8, 2009 meeting. The ETC has integrated the SAC recommendations to lower speeds, reduced traffic volumes and increase safety along the corridor. SAC chair Steve Brown presented an overview of the process and study findings at the February 3`d council meeting and will recap the findings at the February 17th public hearing. See the attached correspondence regarding the Greater Cornelia Areamest 70th Street Traffic Study. G: \Engineering \Infrastructure \Streets \Traffic \STUDIES \Traffic Studies \W 70th Corridor -France to 100\Admin \REPORT\FI NAL\ 20090217 _RR_70thStreet_Study_.doc .14 9 I K E EDI N January 14, 2009 Edina Transportation Commission Edina City Hall 4801 W. 50th Street Edina, MN 55424 Dear Transportation Commission Member, In regard to the Greater Cornelia / West 70th Street Study and recommendations forwarded to you by the SAC this week, the Bike Edina Task Force would like to state its suport for an option that includes bike /multi - purpose lanes on both sides of 70 street. Having dedicated bike lanes increases the number of individuals commuting by bicycle, reduces and calms motorized traffic, improves bicycling safety and provides more opportunity for fitness and recreation. West 70th Street is one of the direct routes on the Safe Routes to Schools, outlined in the City of Edina Comprehensive Bicycle Transportation Plan. This plan's vision is a "progressive bicycle - friendly community where citizens can easily,integrate cycling into their daily lives." This important east -west roadway also enables bicycle users of all ages and abilities to reach important destinations, such as commuting to work, shopping, places of worship, and connecting to other roadways: As you might know, biking and walking facilities were indicated as the most desired improvement for which households were willing to support funding (2006 Edina Parks and Recreation survey). Thank you for your consideration of bike lanes on W. 70th Street to improve the quality of life in our community. Please contact me if you have any questions or feedback. Sincerely, Kirk Johnson Kirk.JohnsonQa LoganLogic.com 612- 916 -9966 Chair, Bike Edina Task Force Jack Sullivan From: Looieruth@aol.com Sent: Thursday, January 15, 2009 9:30 AM To: Jack Sullivan Subject: ARNESON PARKWAY Dear Mr Sullivan this The night is too cold for the old -if both were not true I would be at the ETC to present message. However, if I was not this old I would not have this message! eN04 _z* The first item on your phasing in process on the Draft Report is just great! I have written you before on the subject of the 'free right'. I honestly believe that if you take a traffic count on 100 going NORTH taking 70th EAST- before and after you close that thing, you will see a dramatic decrease in traffic and easier exits from driveways and side streets. Did I read in the draft that there could be a 25% decrease in traffic going South on 100 and East on 70th with some adjustment? There might be another 25% decrease with those going North- we might need one lane!!!! I was equally appalled at the 'back of the hand' reaction to renaming that one mile road Arneson Parkway. ►That step in your process would not only enhance the character of the road but , primarily, it would honor Mort Arneson for handing Edina a natural treasure. Arneson Nursery has been my back yard for 50 years -Mort said it was for kids and dogs. He loved them both and they could run free. (There was a stop sign at 70th and 100!J He drained a large pond because it was a danger to the kids. He loved to sit in his window and watch them slide down his hill. He was a Norwegian Immigrant and professional gardener. He grew and provided shrubs and trees for all Village of Edina locations. Before he turned this elegant property over to the Village he offered us all plantings across the back of our lots for'privacy' -we declined -we wanted to see what he did. A cursory glance at road names in Edina gave me over 50 named after people ,lakes or farms far less significant than Amason Acres. Mort should most certainly be so honored. It is. important , as well, to those of us who have worked with you so hard and for so long to protect the path through his neighborhood. Please share this with the ETC and the Council -the new people may not be aware of the Arneson story. Ruth C. Johnson 7020 West Shore Drive 952 - 922 -4814 2/13/2009 RECEIVED FEB 17 109 February 16, 2009 Re: W. 70'h Street Dear Mayor Hovland and members of the Edina City Council: I apologize for this late note before Tuesday night's City Council meeting, but I wanted to make a couple quick points for you to consider. 1. I would suggest that you make changes to W. 70'h in an incremental fashion. • We have lived in the second house from W. 70'h on Bristol Boulevard for over 20 years, and it is our observation, and I think your traffic counts will confirm, that traffic is no worse today than it was in 1988. • Given the fact that the Crosstown reconstruction is scheduled to be completed in two years, it does not seem prudent to put a lot of money at this time into radical changes to the roadway based on hypothetical future traffic counts. It is possible /probable that traffic levels may drop when the Crosstown project is completed. Time will tell. 2. It sounds like the current problems on W. 70th, both speed and accessibility, are worse on the western end closer to Highway 100 than they are when you get closer to France Avenue. This is understandable with the current situation at W. 701h and Hwy 100. Northbound Hwy 100 traffic going east on 70'h can hit the road at speeds already approaching 30 mph or higher. Also, eastbound cars on 70'h are jockeying for position as the road narrows from 2 lanes to I at the same time as cars in the left lane may be stopping to make a left hand turn into Christ Presbyterian Church (CPC) and cars in the right lane are slowing to turn right on Normandale Blvd. I would suggest: • Closing the "free right turn" from northbound 100'to eastbound W. 70'h, and making in a no turn on red as was done for southbound 100 to westbound 70th. This would stop traffic from entering onto W. 70`' at high rates of speed, and allow breaks in the traffic to give people on West Shore, Woodale, and other cross streets an opportunity to turn left onto W. 70`''. We may find that this one change alone could eliminate the need for a stoplight at West Shore altogether. • Eliminate left turns from W. 70'h into CPC altogether, as cars can easily go up the frontage road to W. 69th and enter the church parking lot from the north side. This would not affect drivers heading west on 701h from turning into the church, or people exiting the church from turning left to go east on W. 70th. It would, however, greatly improve the eastbound traffic flow in front of the church. Thank you for your consideration, Mark Chamberlain 7004 Bristol Boulevard Edina, MN 55435 952- 922 -6810 ppe4r7 C4:%:, - =qet?7 RECEIVED FEB 17 1009 To Mayor Hovland and City Council Members: At tomorrow night's city council meeting you will be asked to accept the "Greater West 70th Street Study" report and its design recommendation. As the civil engineer board member of the Greater West 701h Homeowner's Association, I have attempted to point out and correct the numerous inconsistencies, data errors, and false assumptions used by staff and their consultant (SRF). Yet to the study detriment, they were the only allowable "experts" in the 70th Street design process. Most of you are aware of my many concerns as well as the "Arneson Parkway" design I developed, most of our neighborhood supported, and which met almost all of the original expressed design goals of the 70th Street Study. But apparently to little avail. So before you vote to accept the report and its conclusions please consider the following: The recommend Phase 1 "improvements" are virtually identical to the design proposed by staff and SRF in 1984 in the previous 70th Street Study. Including eliminating the "free right turn" at Hwy. 100 (presumably blocked by DOT), a timed light at West Shore Drive (blocked by a corner neighbor), and school zone speed reductions (removed after a trial period for reasons I can't determine). SAC /ETC /staff and SRF are essentially recommending the same failed road design we have today except for additions not implemented in the 1980's. You should be supporting innovation in road design, not 25 year old conventional designs that were never intended and can't reduce traffic volume or speeds in what is supposed to be a residential neighborhood. 2. On road bike lanes need to a part of the road design. For several reasons. Bikers will continue to use 70th Street as they do now because it is the most direct route into Southdale area from the west. It is unlikely the Three Rivers Park District will be allowed to take 10+ feet of resident's lawns to create a direct, separate connection between its proposed scenic creek bikeways and Southdale. And even if 66th Street is the accepted alternate route, most bikers will still use 70th because the route is more direct. So bikers will be less safe unless lanes are provided. The Bike Edina Task force supports them. The Cornelia neighborhood overwhelmingly supported them in an Association petition and both 70`h Street Study surveys. And the support was not simply for biking, but because auto vehicle lanes would be narrowed to 10 or 11 feet from the current 12 feet to calm traffic, stay within the 40' roadbed and still provide on- street parking. It is unclear why bike lanes were removed in the final SAC meeting. A vocal few seem to be opposed — but not the neighborhood as a whole as expressed in the surveys. The proposed road design does not meet many of the intended study goals. Traffic volume is designed to increase to (up to) 18,000 to 19,300 cars er day, and not be reduced in any way. Even though you as a council voted last fall do downgrade 70 h Street to collector status. With the sole exception of signal timing, there is no mechanism to reduce average speeds along most of the length of 70th. Safety will be improved for pedestrian crossings, but in no other apparent way. An inherent design to slow traffic (such as narrowed lanes) is missing — the existing 12 foot lanes are now being recommended against expressed citizen intent. 4. Similar Options 1 and 2 were overwhelmingly supported in the survey sent to the 1000 residences of the neighborhood. The option SAC /SRF /staff and SRF recommended is closest to "Option 4 — Status Quo" but never included as a survey option. It came out of the "blue" and bypassed all public discussion. Please ask yourself why the process deviated so much from what the citizens wanted and net so few of the original study goals. And please consider an appropriately modified 70th Street design that works with and for the neighborhood instead of against it. Thank you. Ronald R. Rich Board Member, Greater West 70th Street Homeowner's Association 7008 West Shore Drive Edina, MN 55435 Aocoow m 0�j* 49' RECEIVED FEB 17 209 bear Mayor Hovland and Council Members, I live in South Garden Estates and have attended the public meetings regarding the 70th Street improvements. I completely agree with Ron Rich that the survey results, with the majority of residents choosing Options 1 or 2, should be the top considerations. I attended the meeting when the residents of 70th .Street decided on their recommendations. In my opinion, there was no consensus among the residents. Without more input from the larger community, it would be unfair for the council to adopt their plan which fails to address the needs of everyone. Thank youl Barbara Halloran 4516 Belvidere Lane A7end& 1eIYi �•�ECeweo FEB 17 2009 Dear council members: My husband and I have filled out numerous comment cards, written emails, etc. about not needing a stoplight on 70th and West Shore Drive. It appeared from the beginning that, no matter what else, a stop light was going to go on 70th. Since there is no point in fighting that, I signed a petition asking that it be moved into the second phase. We might find that the other improvements would suffice. Please support that. If you won't do that, I implore you to put an attractive, dark - colored stoplight (similar to those on 50th & Wooddale) that would signal a neighborhood /residential area. Not a blazing yellow industrial one screaming commercial /shopping district. We also definitely DO NOT need an arm with a left arrow. A yield on green would work just fine - especially since you are keeping a left turn lane. I am concerned because now that it was decided that parking was important to both sides of the street, we are back to bike lanes and even a 10 foot bike trail. The bike trail properly belongs on 66th street where it provides an scenic segment already linked to other trails. It follows the park and pool and is much safer. A trail on 70th street would be much less safe and doesn't provide the experience a trail should. Some are concerned about the hill. If one can't pedal up, one can walk. Biking and hiking trails are a wonderful part of Edina life, but within the park system and not on a major throughway. Thank you Joanne and Al Bolduc 7001 West Shore Drive A 3wn da =***r7 * I RECEIVE-: February 16, 2009 FEB 17 Z009 From: Germana Paterlini 5117 Duggan Plaza Chair, Climate Change Working Group To: Edina City Council Dear Members of the City Council, I am writing to express my strong support for the inclusion of bike paths and roundabouts in the proposed road improvement project for the Greater Comelia/West 70th St. area. By joining ICLEI /Cities for Climate Protection program in 2007, Edina started its journey toward reducing local greenhouse gas emissions, improve air quality, and enhance urban livability and sustainability. The addition of bike paths to West 70`h is a simple, but effective step toward achieving quantifiable sustainability goals. Bicycles are the most efficient mode of transportation. They produce no air pollution and place minimal burdens on natural resources. Bicycles are especially appropriate in reducing the number of short trips, calming traffic, and connecting with public transportations in the Southdale area. Contrary to common belief, bike paths also boost property values, as homebuyers increasingly seeks homes that combine green surroundings with the convenience of an urban setting. Roundabouts reduce greenhouse gas emissions and improve air quality by eliminating idling at intersections and slowing down traffic. On a personal note, I drive daily on West 70`h Street on my way to work at France Place (corner or France and 494W) from my home in the Brookview Heights area. It is only 2.5 miles, but I am unable to either ride my bike or walk to the beautiful Promenade because of traffic and the danger of crossing France Ave. Instead, by the end of the week, my car has used about two gallon of fuels, and generated 40 pounds of CO2. This is about the size of my trash can, which gets picked up once a week. Who picks up my CO2? A simple bike lane would help solve this dilemma. Thank you for your consideration of Edina sustainability goals. Please contact me if you have any questions or feedback on CO2 emissions from vehicles. Germana Paterlini, Commissioner, Energy & and Environment Commission & Chair, Climate Change Working Group. Cell: 612 - 804 -6616 Germana.paterlini(2 mail.com d& =It in =me at RECEIVED FEB 171009 DEAR MAYOR HOVLAND AND COUNCIL MEMBERS AS MOST OF YOU KNOW, THE SAC (INCLUDING THE TWO 70 TH STREET RESIDENTS) VOTED TO EXCLUDE BIKE LANES IN FAVOR OF EXISTING PARKING AT THEIR JANUARARY 8, 2008 MEETING. THE ETC IN TURN HAS APPROVED AND ACCEPTED THE SAC RECOMMENDATION SO BIKE LANES SHOULD NOT BE ON YOUR PLATE FOR CONSIDERATION AT THE 2117108 PUBLIC HEARING FOR THE WEST 70 TH STREET STUDY. THERE WILL BE PRESSURE PUT ON YOU TO REVIVE THE BIKE LANE PROPOSALS AS PRESENTED IN OPTION TWO OF THE STUDY.I HAVE NOTHING AGAINST BIKE LANES WHEN THEY DO NOT THREATEN OLD GROWTH TREES, INVADE LAWNS OR COMPOUND EXSISTING HAZARDOUS INGRESS AND EGRESS TO RESIDENT DRIVE WAYS. THIS WILL OCCUR AT THE WEST SHORE DRIVE AND WEST 70 TH STREET INTERSECTION. TWO AND POSSIBLY THREE DRIVEWAYS WILL REQUIRE APORN RECONSTRUCTION. I WAS HOPING THE RESULTS OF THE STUDY WOULD IMPROVE THE UNSAFE CONDITIONS THAT CURRENTLY EXIST AT THE WEST SHORE INTERSECTION. SOME OF THE PROPOSED MEASURES WILL ONLY COMPOUND OUR PROBLEM AND I DON'T FEEL THAT SAFETY IS BEING CONSIDERED. WHEN YOU CHOKE TRAFFIC DOWN BY REDUCING THE WIDTH OF TRAFFIC LANES TO ACCOMODATE TWO FIVE FOOT BIKE LANES AND USING AN UNWARRANTED SIGNAL TO SLOW TRAFFIC, I CONSIDER THIS OVER KILL AND A COMPROMISE OF NOT ONLY SAFETY BUT PRUDENT AND EFFICIENT TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT. BIKE LANES AS PROPOSED IN THE STUDY WILL REQUIRE A WIDENING OF OF THE CORRIDOR FROM 40 FT. TO 44 FT. MOVING THE CURB AND GUTTER ONTO THE BLVDS. FOR SOME 150+ FEET. AT THREE INTERSECTIONS THAT HAVE LEFT TURN LANE CONFIGURATIONS.( PLEASE REFER TO ATTACHMENTS) AN OLD GROWTH OAK TREE WOULD BE THREATENED AS WELL. IF FOR SOME REASON YOU FEEL THAT BIKE LANES AND WEST 70TH STREET ARE COMPA TABLE, THEN PLEASE KEEP THEM WITHIN THE EXISTING FORTY FOOT CORRIDOR AT ALL INTERSECTIONS. THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME AND CONSIDERATION. RESPECFULLY, HAROLD BABB 952 - 926 -9521 You can't always choose whom you love, but you can choose how to find them. Start with AOL Personals. .STRGAR- ROSCOE, INC. DcommIrm ti rwtN ltitq CITY OF EDINA W. 70TH STREET TRAFFIC STUDY LEFT TURN LA INTERSECTION GEOMETRICS n W W N 2 1- 4 N m J N N W N O V V O 100' m N 30:1 TAPER _ TURN LANE WEST 70TH STREET V _ - 14• ol 13' 14' _-- --- -- ~ 10-' 1 TAPER loot TURN LANE CROSSWALK MARKINGS TREATMENT TO BE USED AT: WEST SHORE DRIVE WOODDALE AVENUE CORNELIA DRIVE WEST SIDE W. 70TH STREET AT FRANCE AVENUE .STRGAR- ROSCOE, INC. DcommIrm ti rwtN ltitq CITY OF EDINA W. 70TH STREET TRAFFIC STUDY LEFT TURN LA INTERSECTION GEOMETRICS n 8' PARKING LANE 019C LAML 011i APPROi. rT 7: 7r Jack Sullivan From: Bob Kane [BKane@sssalesinc.com] Sent: Tuesday, February 17, 2009 3:03 PM To: Jack Sullivan Subject: West 70th Traffic Study Jack, Page 1 of 1 N�� -- I Thank you for taking my phone call earlier. I wish I could be at the meeting tonight, but will be traveling. Additionally, thank you for accepting my comments regarding the West 70th Traffic Study. Background: I live at 6629 Normandale Rd. I moved into my home in July, 2007. My previous residence was 6240 Peacedale Ave. I chose Normandale Rd because the home was newly built, I could stay in the Cornelia Elementary and Southview Middle School districts, and the appeal of the surrounding small lakes, walking /running paths, parks (including Normandale, west side of 100), and swimming pool. I have attended previous meetings, replied to questionnaires, and kept abreast of the West 70th Street developments. I empathize with the residents on West 70th Street and understand their concerns. I reviewed the recent recommendations of the SAC, as presented at the January 15th, 2009 meeting. I have a concern about item No. 11 of the Study Recommendation. While I don't oppose directing traffic to use Hwy 62 or 76th Street to reach Southdale or Richfield, I do oppose the suggestion of signage directing vehicles to use the Normandale frontage road to access West 66th Street. Concerns: • Normandale Rd is a one -way with fairly steady traffic that generally speeds. Edina Police often set -up patrol to ticket speeders (I had to contact Southview Middle School because the bus drivers were often driving at high speeds). • We have a large number of walkers, bikers and runners who use Normandale Rd because it's traffic is manageable and the road is accessible for their needs without safety concerns. • West 66th is a refuge for walkers, bikers, runners, children, animals, et. al. The lakes, parks and swimming area attract many visitors from Edina and the surrounding suburbs. • We already have postings for a deaf child, plus we have a down syndrome child living on Normandale Rd. More traffic is not recommended when children at risk are present. • Directing more traffic down a one -way street will devalue the home values of the residents on Normandale Rd. We already deal with the Hwy 100 noise, which we accept, but do not want additional traffic in front of our homes. Should we complain to the city about too much traffic noise from Hwy 100 AND Normandale Rd? It is similar to the complaints from the West 70th Street residents. • Why direct more traffic into other residential areas when it can be managed by updating the design of West 70th Street along with pursuing the 76th Street initiative (as this does not interfere with residents). Again, thank you for your consideration. Robert S. Kane Kane Companies, Inc. O: 763 - 476 -9599, ext. 21 F: 763 - 476 -7927 C: 952 - 270 -3672 bkane @sssalesinc.com www.sssalesinc.com 2/17/2009 February 2, 2009 Wayne Houle Director of Public Works City of Edina Dear Mr_ Houle, FEB -41009 CITY OF EDIfVA I reviewed the SAC recommendation to the City Council regarding the Greater Cornelia Area/70th Street Traffic Study. The recommendations will reduce traffic and speed, improve safety and increase neighborhood cohesiveness. This will definitely improve the Greater Cornelia Area. Please find attached a proposal that would enhance the landscaping along the corridor by establishing rain gardens on the 70th Street boulevards. I understand that with the slow down in the economy, it may be difficult to fund projects. I hope that if the entire proposal can not be funded, portions of the proposal could be implemented. I. appreciate your time in considering this proposal. Please feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you may have. Best regards, Marge Andre 4209 W 70th Street 952 - 915 -9221 mandre(&- mnwire.com Enclosure Proposal to City of Edina EM To Establish Rain Gardens on 70th Street Boulevards si 4e I I Executive Summary With more than 300 gardens planted since 1996, Maplewood is currently Minnesota's rain garden mecca. Over the past eight years, the City of Maplewood has established rain gardens as it repaves streets. The city pays to excavate the soil and buys the plant plugs while the homeowners do the planting. According to some of the residents, when you walk down the streets with rain gardens} it just looks Gke. a friendlier neighborhood with all the gardens out front. Rain gardens are a beautiful solution to water - quality problems and the colorful native plants don't need to be wild looking to help the environment. The pending resurfacing and redesign project of 70th Street in Edina will provide the. City of Edina a similar opportunity. The establishment of rain gardens will create a friendlier neighborhood. street while also improving the environment. Funding for this project is approximately $60000 to $100,,000 (depends on type of plants). The rain garden project provides the City of Edina the opportunity to transform this area to the rain garden mecca of the southwest metro. With additional rain garden projects, the City of Edina could become the rain garden mecca of Minnesota. Although local governments are experiencing reductions in revenue and may experience difficulty balancing their budgets* the Federal economic stimulus package may provide an opportunity for the City of Edina to receive funding for a project that improves water quality, reduces energy consumption and is aesthetically .pleasing. Statement of Need Much of the rainwater that falls in suburban area runs off driveways to streets, through the storm sewers to lakes, streams, or rivers without filtration or treatment. As it travels, the water picks up a variety of pollutants (including animal waste) and sediments. Anything that enters a storm sewer system is discharged untreated into the. water that-we (or our neighbors downstream) use for drinking, swimming and fishing. Polluted storm water runoff can have many adverse effects on people, fish and animals. Rain gardens are landscaped areas planted with wildflowers and other native vegetation that soak up rain water. The rain garden fills with a few inches of water after a storm and the water slowly filters into the ground, rather than flowing to a storm drain. A rain garden allows about 30Y° more water to soak into the ground than turf style lawns and 100% more than concrete or asphalt. The Energy and Environment Commission of Edina was established in April 2007 to help the City stay on the forefront of issues of sustainability. Some of the duties of the commission include: • Examining and recommending best practices for energy conservation for Edina's residents and businesses, including recommendations for a "green" building code, use of Energy Star appliances and other energy - reduction targets. • Examining and recommending changes in City purchases and operations to conserve energy. • Evaluating and monitoring the provision of a residential recycling_ program. • Evaluating and monitoring the provision of a privately provided solid waste program,. as well as a reduction. in municipal. solid wastes. • Evaluating and encouraging improvements in air and water quality. • Educating the public about energy issues, reduction, conservation, reuse, recycling_ and environmental protection. Establishing rain gardens in the boulevard areas on 70th Street between France Avenue and Highway 1.00 will assist the City of Edina in improving water quality and environmental protection by reducing the amount of pollutants and sediments that reach the storm sewer system and ultimately lakes, streams and rivers. As stated in the Storm Water Pollution Prevention Program (SWPP) for the Management of Municipal Separate Storm Sewer Systems within the City of Edina, a goal of the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System Permit is to restore and maintain the chemical, physical and biological integrity of waters of the state through the management and treatment of urban storm water runoff. 3 Minimum control measures were defined in the SWPP: • Public education and outreach on storm water impacts. Public participation/'involvement. • illicit discharge detection and elimination. • Construction site storm water runoff control. • Post construction storm water management in new development and redevelopment. Pollution prevention /good housekeeping for municipal operations. Establishing rain gardens in the boulevards on 70th Street-between France Avenue and Highway 100 will enable the City of Edina to meet three of the control measures: public education and outreach on storm water impacts, public participation/involvement and pollution prevention. Specific benefits of rain gardens are as follows: lncreases.the amount of water thatfilters into the ground, which recharges local and regional aquifers. Helps protect communities from flooding and drainage problems. • Helps protect streams and lakes from pollutants carried by urban storm water by reducing runoff from entering the street from the boulevard. • Conserves water & energy. • Plants survive drought seasons. Reduces garden maintenance. • Enhances the beauty of yards and neighborhoods. • Enhances sidewalk appeal. • Provides valuable habitat for birds, butterflies and many beneficial insects. Reduces mosquitoes since native plants provide habitat for insects that prey on mosquitoes (the water does not stand in the rain garden for days which is needed for mosquito reproduction) 4 Proiect Description In the fall of 2007, the City of Edina redesigned 70th Street between France Avenue and York Avenue. (Please see attached map). Three roundabouts and center medians with green space were established to improve safety, calm traffic and slow traffic. In addition to these successes, the roundabouts and center medians provide attractive green space that absorbs rain water, rather than concrete that allows storm water run off that will enter the storm sewer system and pollute lakes, streams and rivers. Currently, the City of Edina is considering several alternatives to increase the safety on 70th Street between France Avenue and Highway 100. In addition to the traffic calming measures being considered, establishing rain gardens on the 70th Street boulevards between France Avenue and Highway 100, will enable the City of Edina to stay on the forefront of environmental sustainability. Another benefit of the rain gardens is their beauty and cohesive streetscape which enhances the neighborhood feel of 70th Street. This may promote pedestrian traffic on 70th Street and residents would enjoy the beautify gardens as they walk to the shopping, entertainment and dining available at Southdale Center /Galleria The objective of the proposal is for the City of Edina to establish rain gardens on the boulevards on 70th Street between France Avenue and Highway 100 in order to improve the environment while also creating a friendlier neighborhood street. With Arneson Acres providing beautiful green space on the west end of 70th street, the rain gardens on the boulevards would be a continuation of that green space. Roundabouts at Highway 100 and Valley View Road would also contribute to the goals of an improved environment and friendlier neighborhood street The City of Edina Would: Educate the properly owners of the benefits of rain gardens in the city - owned boulevard Remove soil from the boulevards. The amount of soil removal depends on the depth of soil (in some areas, the soil is up to six inches above the sidewalk). and the grade of the slope. The rain garden should be level so the water doesn't pool at one end and overflow before it has a chance to infiltrate. For a typical rain garden. the depth depends on the slope. For boulevard rain gardens, the soil line should be one or two inches below the curb. 5 Develop and provide planting plan. The City would develop the plan so there is some uniformity in design. When developing the plan, consideration would be given to the height of each plant, bloom time and color and its overall texture. Plants would be used that bloom at different times to create a long flowering season while mixing heights, shapes and textures to give the garden depth and dimension. This will keep the rain garden looking interesting even when few wildflowers are in bloom. Attached are layouts provided by the City of Maplewood. One is a Perennial Rainbow Garden and the other a Minnesota Prairie Garden Layout. Since the rain gardens will abut a street with considerable salt usage, consideration will need to be given to the plants directly on the street. Provide native species perennial plants. Hardy native species that thrive in the Minnesota ecosystem without chemical fertilizers and pesticides are the best choices. Plants that tolerate drought and occasional drenching will do the best. As noted in the previous section, consideration should be given to the plants directly on the street. A number of websites provide lists of native plants by state. Two websites with detailed information are as follows: http: / /ptantnative.com and http: / /plants.usda.gov The specific choice of species depends on the size of the rain garden and whether the area has full or partial sun. The boulevard is six feet wide and the length varies depending on. spacing. of driveways. Typically there is 40 feet between driveways. This results in 240 square feet available for a rain garden. Atypical residential rain garden ranges from 100 to 300 square feet. Provide mulch. When the rain gardens are first established, two inches of mulch is sufficient ground cover.. After the first spring, when the rain garden is mowed, the mulch will be provided by the rain garden. Annually, mow /mulch the dead plant material. Annually} beginning in the second spring,.when the new growth is 4 to 6 inches tall, mow and mulch the dead plant material with the mowing deck at 6 inches. This will promote new growth and provide ground cover. The mulch produced can remain in the rain garden as ground cover. T The Neighborhood Would: Plant native species perennial plants (plugs). Boy Scout and Girl Scout troops and students from Cornelia Elementary School, Southview Middle School and Edina High School could participate in the planting day as a community service project. This could assist some of the residents not physically able to plant the plugs. Coordinating the entire rain garden project could be a requirement for an Eagle Scout candidate. Steps involved in planting,the plugs: ■ Lay out the plants as planned one to two feet apart in a grid pattern. ■ Dig each hole twice as wide as the plan plug and deep enough to keep the crown of the young plant level with the existing grade. Make sure the crown is level and then fill the hole and firmly tamp around the roots to avoid air pockets. ■ Apply double - shredded mulch evenly over the approximately two inches thick, but avoid burying the crowns of. the new transplants. Mulching is usually not necessary after the second growing season, but the spring time mowing /mulching could provide natural ground cover. ■ Stick plant labels next to each individual grouping. This will help identify the young native plants from non desirable species (weeds). Maintain the plants • Plants need one inch of water per week. Water immediately after planting and continue to water twice a week (if necessary) until the plugs are established. Once the plants are established, watering is not necessary • During the first two years, weeding is necessary. Use the plant labels to identify the plants from weeds. • After the second year, the full root system of the native species will out - compete the weeds.. This will eliminate the need for weeding. On occasion, weeding isolated patches might still be needed. Typically 80% of the plant is below ground (if plant is 2 feet tall, root. system is 8 feet deep). This full root system enables the native species to tolerate drought as well as wet conditions. • Fall — The majority of the stems and seed heads can be left for wildlife cover and bird food. This will also provide some protection from the salt that is applied to the street in the winter. It may also assist the sidewalk snowplow driver find the sidewalk when plowing. i7 Proiect Budget Educate the neighborhood. $7,500 to $10,000 Develop a brochure outlining the program and the benefits to water quality, the community and property owner. • Send the information to the property owners. • Hold an open house to discuss and gather public input. Add information to the City of Edina Website. Remove soil. $10,000 to $15,000 • There are approximately 60 boulevard areas on 70th Street between France Avenue and Highway 100. • Each boulevard area will require approximately 1 hour to remove the soil and level. • The soil that is removed can be used as fill in other city projects. Develop and provide planting plan. $0 to $5,000 • Some neighborhood groups such. as St Paul's Friends of Swede Hollow or Minneapolis' Friends of Bassett Creek have developed planting plans and may provide at no charge. • Landscape designers are available who specialize in designing rain gardens with native species. The Minnesota DNR provides an extensive list. • The City of Maplewood has developed 10 planting plans and they are available on the City's website. Provide native species perennial plants. $36,000 to $72,000 • There are approximately 60 boulevard areas on 70th Street between France Avenue and Highway 100. • Each boulevard area is approximately 200 square feet. • Approximately 1 plant is needed for each square foot. • Estimate cost per plant $3 to $6 (small plants in bulk quantities) Provide mulch. $5,000 to $7,500 • There are approximately 60 boulevard areas on 70th Street between France Avenue and Highway 100. • Each boulevard area is approximately 200 square feet. • Mulch should be 2 inches deep. 8 Moor /mulch the boulevard $1,000 • Annually, beginning in the second spring. 4 hours to mow /mulch the 2 miles of boulevards. Typically grants are available for the cost of native species plants. Assuming no grant, the total cost of the project is $59,500 to $110,500. The plants are approximately 60% of the total project. Grants could reduce the project cost significantly. z Conclusion Edina is a premier city which sets the standard for other communities. In the 1920's, Edina set the standard by developing. the one of the first planned communities in the Country Club District. In the 1950's, Edina set the standard by building the first enclosed. shopping centers at Southdale Center. Edina has set the standard in school excellence by consistently ranking in the top 100 school districts in the nation. Now, Edina has the opportunity to set the standard in reducing storm water runoff in an aesthetically pleasant manner by establishing rain gardens in the boulevard areas on 70th Street between France Avenue and Highway 100. The boulevard rain gardens will reduce the polluted storm water run off and increase the amount of water that filters into the ground. The boulevard rain gardens will protect the area from flooding and drainage problems. Since native species perennials can tolerate both dry and wet conditions, this will eliminate the need to water the boulevard which will result in conserving water. By converting the boulevards from turf grass to native species, mowing will only be necessary once a year to stimulate the native species growth. This will save a considerable amount of gas, not to mention the reduction in sound pollution. Establishing rain gardens on the 70th Street boulevards benefits the City of Edina, its residents and its many visitors. As more concrete and asphalt covers the land, storm water has fewer places to go. Rain gardens won't solve storm water problems entirely, but they are an easy and attractive way for communities to improve the environment by reducing. storm water run off while simultaneously creating friendlier neighborhood streets. [to] Examples of Boulevard Rain Gardens 11 Minnesota Prairie Garden Layout from City of Maplewood Website IAwH rtw:= .:nc�e1 heig ^,t 7•5 feet at:dsumrrar:o fro- J. Yeewrreo bane een� ry M:6 Aox M F.MM (L1.1.M Mw i.w1...D.IO. n , e _e ?ta l i Faro, ce:iw�orl Ochlbea millefd:i_–.� .161ack -E•,ed Swan lent: I rest - ht I 'eet iLdbeckia hint .Ps ce: I rod: Sp3Ce: I fc- 6 oorra 143j to k=t Hel`;h[ 1 •? feet 61d�rr.� i1a}' - IGne in.: I foe: e oom:: I,ta} to fra: Minnesota Prairie Garden Layout __ - ' 7 J �7 I, 7 Caece wr9a4 er IHelio0:11 nelismhoidesl N.sgst 3 -s t_ :pacz 30 Whes 6'C- .a: AN Pl^Imel i 651ue',e- in t:erbera Heii,ht 3 f:_: 5_Jce:5 feet E aom2 Rine to 5- --t 4L:te 3"_ = -em or ilium: Nei!z _a fee: :pace. Is inches +try to Fo- 1 i nrple Cone o.: er :Echince3 7llrpUrEL1 feet :pa:e_ fee: sloe-.:: 'une .o Pon This is an example of a rain garden layout that would adapt well to a boulevard. The height of all the plants is less than three feet which would be necessary for vehicle safety. Although the New England aster and sunflower can reach 5 feet, they could be trimmed mid season to control the height. 12 } A \ 0� e 0 KU'UK-1 %KLUUMMLN 1JA-11UN To: Mayor & City Council Agenda Item # II.0 I From: I Date: Subject: Kris Aaker Assistant Planner February 17, 2009 An appeal of the decision of the Zoning Board of Appeals denying application B- 09 -01, 6120 Brookview Ave. for JMS Custom Homes LLC, for a 7.14 foot front yard setback variance for new home construction. Zoning Board of Appeals Action: Consent ❑ Information Only ❑ Mgr. Recommends ❑ To HRA i\ To Council Action F-1 Motion ® Resolution Ordinance Discussion The Zoning Board of Appeals heard and denied application B -09 -01 for 6120 Brookview Avenue South for a 7.14 foot front yard setback variance. Info/Background: The Zoning Board of Appeals heard the applicant's 7.14 foot front yard setback variance request on, January 28, 2009. The five member Zoning Board denied the variance request unanimously. See the attached meeting minutes, the resolution adopted by the Zoning Board, the staff report and application information. If the City Council upholds the Zoning Board of Appeals Action, the Council should adopt the attached resolution denying the variance request. RESOLUTION NO. 2009-28 DENYING A FRONT YARD SETBACK VARIANCE AT 6120 BROOKVIEW AVENUE City of Edina BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Edina, Minnesota, as follows: Section 1. BACKGROUND. 1.01 On January 14, 2009 JMS Custom Homes filed an application with the City for a 7.14 front yard setback variance at 6120 Brookview Avenue. The application lists as the legal description of the property Lot 6 Block 23 Fairfax, but the Applicant owns the adjoining lot 5. City Code Section 850.07 Subd. 20(C) provides that abutting non- conforming lots in common ownership at any time after October 22,1951 are deemed one lot. Both Lots 5 and 6 are non - conforming in size and are therefore considered one lot under the City's zoning ordinance. The variance application is deemed to be for the combined lot. 1.02 On January 28, 2009 the Zoning Board of Appeals conducted a public hearing and considered the application for the setback variance. The Applicant was present and was represented by legal counsel. Following the close of the public hearing the Board unanimously denied the variance application based upon written Finding of Fact that the Board adopted. 1.03 On January 29, 2009 the Applicant filed a written appeal of the Board's decision to the City Council. 1.04 On February 17, 2009 the City Council conducted a public hearing on the appeal. Following the close of the hearing, the City Council adopted this resolution denying the variance application. 1.05 The request is for an after- the -fact variance for a home under construction. 1.06 A building permit was issued on Friday, December 5, 2008 for the home. The Applicant moved the home that was previously on the property off the property to a different lot. 1.07 The permit was issued based upon a survey prepared by the Applicant's surveyor which indicates that the required front yard setback based upon the average setback of homes on that side of the block was 31.6 feet. The building permit was issued based on thq survey, and the home was constructed with a 31.6 foot setback. City Hall 4801 WEST 50TH STREET EDINA, MINNESOTA, 55424 -1394 www.cityofedina.com 952 - 927 -8861 FAX 952 - 826 -0390 TTY 952 - 826 -0379 RESOLUTION NO. 2009-28 Page 2 1.08 The City received a complaint on January 5, 2009, regarding the front yard setback of the new home. The Applicant was promptly notified. The Applicant choose to continue construction. 1.09 The property owner's survey company, Landform, was contacted on January 5, 2009, the day the complaint was received, to determine how the setback was calculated. Landform was unable to respond to the question. The new data subsequently provided by Landform shows the average front yard setback of the seven homes located along the block excluding the subject home is 38.7 feet. The average is calculated by adding up the front yard setbacks of the seven homes and dividing that number by seven. The home under construction encroaches into the required front yard setback by 7.14 feet. The building permit was issued in error based upon the incorrect information furnished by the Applicant. 1.10 A "stop work" order was posted on the property on Wednesday, January 7, 2009. The owner of the property was notified that resolution of this issue may be pursued by either obtaining a variance to allow the house to remain at the same front yard setback or by modifying the construction to maintain the required front yard setback. 1.11 JMS Custom Homes filed a law suit against the City of Edina, and obtained an order granting a temporary injunction that allows JMS to continue work on the home. Section 2. FINDINGS. 2.01 The proposal does not meet the required standards for a variance, because: 1) The proposal does not meet the variance findings of Section 850.04 Subd.11 of the Zoning Ordinance. 2) The Applicant admits that if it had not started construction the required setback would not be an "undue hardship." The City's setback requirements are therefore not creating a hardship. The hardship is solely the result of the surveyor's error. The Applicant chose to continue with the construction knowing that a variance was needed. 3) There is no undue hardship. The City's regulations do not prevent a reasonable use of the property. The proposed new home can be moved or altered to meet the required front yard setback of 38.7 feet. The Applicant moved the home that was RESOLUTION NO. 2009-28 Page 3 previously on the property to a :different lot. ..The new home can be moved back 7.14 feet. 4) The only basis for the variance is the disruption to the Applicant's marketing plan and the cost of moving the home 7.14 feet. Economic considerations alone'," however, are not the basis for approval of a variance. 5) The Applicant's plight is not due to circumstances unique to the property. There is nothing unique about the property. 6) The hardship is self- created resulting from the Applicant's miscalculation of the required set back. 7) The variance would alter the essential character of the neighborhood by disrupting the average setback of the .homes on the block. 8) The variance would not meet the intent of the ordinance since: a. The setback that would be allowed by the variance would not be consistent with the homes to the south, or the established average setback on tle- block. b. The new home would be built in front of the home which has a setback 63 feet from the street, thereby blocking the front view to the north. c. The intent of the ordinance is to provide uniform front yard setbacks on a block. Having one home built 31.5 feet closer to the' street. than the adjacent home does not meet the intent in this instance. 9) Balancing the equities, the variance must be denied. Moving the home back on the lot is feasible. The out of character setback that would be allowed if. the variance is granted would be permanent. The Applicant is an experienced; professional custom home builder. The home has not been sold to an end user. The Applicant moved one home off the property to construct the home now under construction and therefore has the knowledge and ability to move the new, home. The home that was removed was centered on the lot. The location of the new home a few feet from the property line, although legal, infringes on the privacy of the historic home on the adjoining lot to the south and the setback if approved would worsen the situation. RESOLUTION NO. 2009-28 Page 4 Section 3. DENIAL. NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Edina, the requested front yard setback variance of 7.14 feet for property located at 6120 Brookview Avenue is denied. ADOPTED by the City Council on February 17, 2009. ATTEST: Debra A. Mangen, City Clerk James B. Hovland, Mayor STATE OF MINNESOTA ) COUNTY OF HENNEPIN )SS CITY OF EDINA ) RESOLUTION NO. 2009-28 Page, 5 CERTIFICATE OF CITY CLERK I, the undersigned duly appointed and- acting. City Clerk for the City of Edina do hereby certify that the attached and foregoing Resolution was duly adopted by .the Edina City Council at its Regular Meeting of February 17, 2009, and as recorded in the Minutes of.said Regular Meeting. WITNESS my hand and seal of said City this day of , 2009. City Clerk RESOLUTION., DENYING A FRONT YARD SETBACK VARIANCE AT 6120 BROOKVIEW AVENUE City of Edina BE IT RESOLVED by the Zoning Board of Appeals of the City of Edina, Minnesota, as follows: Section 1. BACKGROUND. -1.01 JMS Custom Homes have requested 'a 7.14 front yard setback variance. at, 6120 Brookview Avenue. 1.02 The request is an after -the -fact variance for a home under construction. 1.03 A building permit was issued on Friday, December 5, 2008 for the new home currently under - construction on the property. The City received a complaint on January 5, 2009, regarding the front yard setback of the new home. 1.04 The survey submitted for the building permit illustrates an established average front yard setback of 31.6 feet. A building permit was issued based on that survey, and the home was constructed at the proposed 31.6 foot setback. 1.05 The property owner's survey company, Landform, was contacted on January 5, 2009, to verify the how the average setback was calculated. The zoning ordinance requires that the average setback of existing buildings shall be maintained by all new or relocated buildings on the same side of the street between intersections. The data provided by Landform shows the average front yard .setback of the seven homes located along the block excluding the subject home is 38.7 feet. The average is calculated by adding up the front yard setbacks of the seven homes and dividing that number by seven. The home under construction therefore, over -laps the required front yard setback by 7.14 feet. The building permit was therefore issued in error based upon the incorrect information furnished by the applicant. 1.06 A "stop work" order was posted on the property on Wednesday, January 7, 2009. The owner of the property was notified that resolution of this. issue may be pursued by either filing for and obtaining.a variance to allow the house to remain at the same front yard setback or by modifying the construction to maintain the required front yard setback. 1.07 JMS Custom Homes filed a law suit against.the City of Edina, and won,an order granting a temporary injunction that allows them to continue work on the home. Section 2. FINDINGS 2.01 The - proposal does not meet the required standards for a variance, because: 1) The proposal does not meet the variance findings of Section 850.04:Subd:,1.F, of the Zoning Ordinance. City Mall 952- 927 -8861 4801 WEST 50TH STREET FAX 952 - 826 -0390 EDINAt M ESOTA, 55424 -1394 WWW.cityofedina.com TTY 952- 826 -0379 RESOLUTION Page Two 2) There is no unique hardship to the property. The proposed new home can be relocated to meet the required front yard setback of 38.7 feet. 3) When considering the equities of altering or moving the house to meet the required setback vs. the impact the proposed home built within the required setback would have on the neighborhood, complying with the ordinance is reasonable. 4) The need for the variance is self created. 5) The variance would alter the essential character of the neighborhood. 6) The variance would not meet the intent of the ordinance since: a. The variance would not be consistent with the homes to the south, or the established average setback on the block. b. The new home would be built essentially in front of the home to the south with is setback 63 feet from the street, thereby blocking their front view to the north. C. The intent of the ordinance is to provide uniform front yard setbacks on a block. Having one home built 31.5 feet closer to the street than the adjacent home does not meet the intent of the ordinance. d. The only basis for the variance is economic considerations alone which is not a sufficient basis. Section 3. DENIAL NOW THEREFORE, it is hereby resolved by the Zoning Board of Appeals of the City of Edina, to deny the requested front yard setback variance of 7.14 feet for property located at 6120 Brookview Avenue. Adopted by th Zoning Board of Appeals of the City of Edina, Minnesota, on January 28, 2009. RrA a (Ilk i ATTEST: Chair, Floyd Grabiel g oar Secretary, J ie ogenakker Special Zoning Board Meeting January 28, 2009 Minute Summary Members Present: Chair Floyd Grabiel, Arlene Forrest, Helen Winder, Mary Vasaly and Nancy Scherer B -09-01 JMS 6120 Brookview Avenue, Edina Request: 7.14 -Foot Front Yard Setback Variance Planner Presentation Planner Aaker informed the Board the applicant is in the process of building a 2,994 square foot home on the south portion of,a 13,362 square foot lot. The property is one buildable parcel made up of two 50 foot wide lots, (lots 5 and 6), platted as part of the original Fairfax subdivision. Planner Aaker explained a building permit was issued'on Friday, December 5, 2008 for the new home currently under construction on the property. The City received a complaint on January 5, 2009, regarding the front yard setback of the new home. Concern was raised that the home appeared to be closer to the street than code would allow. The survey submitted for the building permit illustrates an established average front yard setback of 31.6 feet. A building permit was issued based on that survey, and the home was constructed at the proposed 31.6 foot setback. The owner's survey company, Landform, was contacted on January 5, 2009, to ,verify how the average setback was calculated. The zoning ordinance requires that the average setback of existing buildings shall be maintained by all new or relocated buildings on the same side of the street between intersections. The data provided by Landformh shows that the average front yard setback of the seven homeq located along the block excluding the subject home is 38.7 feet, and not 31.6 feet as indicated on the survey submitted for the building permit. The home under construction therefore, over -laps the required front yard setback by 7.14 feet. The building permit was issued in error based upon incorrect information furnished by the applicant. A "stop work" order was posted on the property on Wednesday, January 7, 2009. The owner of the property was notified that resolution of this issue may be pursued by either filing for and obtaining a variance to allow the house to remain at the same front yard setback or by modifying the construction to maintain the required front yard setback. The owner has chosen to pursue a variance to allow the home to remain in its existing location. Planner Aaker reported that JMS Custom Homes filed a law suit and obtained a temporary injunction that allows them to continue work on the home pending the outcome of the law suit The suit is not relevant to the issue of whether or not a variance should be approved. The court documents are attached for informational purposes. Planner Aaker concluded that staff recommends denial of the requested 7.14 - foot front yard setback variance based on the following findings: 1) The proposal does not meet the variance findings of Section 850.04.Subd.1.F, of the Zoning Ordinance. 2) There is no unique hardship to the property. The proposed new home can be relocated to meet the required front yard setback of 38.7 feet. 3) When considering the equities of altering or moving the house to meet the required setback vs. the impact the proposed home built within the required setback would have on the neighborhood, complying with the ordinance is reasonable. 4) The need for the variance is self created. 5) The variance would alter the essential character of the neighborhood. The variance would not meet the intent of the ordinance since: a. The variance would not be consistent with the homes to the south, or the established average setback on the block. b. The new home would be built essentially in front of the home to the south with is, setback 63.1 feet from the street, thereby blocking their front view to the north. C. The intent of the ordinance is to provide uniform front yard setbacks on a block. Having one home built 31.5 feet closer to the street than the adjacent home does not meet the intent of the ordinance. d. The only basis for the variance is economic considerations alone which is not a sufficient basis. Considering the equities of altering or moving the house to meet the required setback vs. the impact the proposed home built within the required setback would have on the neighborhood, complying with the ordinance is reasonable. Appearina for the Applicant Peter Coyle, Rob Stefonowicz, Larkin Hoffman and Jeff Schoenwetter, property" owner. Chair Grabiel noted for the record that the Zoning Board packet #13-09 -01 contained a number of letters and a -mails from neighbors. Applicant Presentation Mr. Coyle told the Board he sincerely regrets the need for this proceeding; however, respectfully disagrees that a variance is needed. Mr. Coyle stated there are a couple key points he would like to make, one, the city's code is vague and conflicting, and secondly, the city approved and signed off on a building permit to construct the subject house. Mr. Coyle informed the Board that at this time the subject property is involved in litigation with the City and the Judge has noted that the code is susceptible to different interpretations Continuing, Mr. Coyle pointed out a licensed survey company (Landform) prepared the survey based on their professional interpretation of city code. On the plans submitted for a building permit steff corrected a side yard setback figure but did not correct the front yard setback. In January the City of Edina received a complaint from a neighbor "regarding the front yard setback of the new house. At the time the complaint was made the house was well into construction. The City issued a Stop Work Order on the house, and.JMS was made aware of the issue. Mr. Coyle said in his opinionthis issue is largely attributed to the vague and conflicting code, pointing. out the Judge found the code relies on terms not present in the code. Mr. Coyle stated the surveyor used his professional judgment and the dwelling under construction actually meets or exceeds the front yard setback of the majority of the homes on the block. Mr. Coyle reiterated the code is confusing, conflicting and unworkable. Mr. Coyle pointed out there are homes on the block that have amore favorable setback, adding from a professional standpoint they continue to believe the calculations were done correctly; however, understand that city,staff doesn't agree. Mr. Coyle said the variance "test" that questions whether "it will relieve an undue 'hardship which was not self- imposed or a mere inconvenience" has been met. Mr. Coyle pointed out a building permit was issued and the house was well along in the construction process before the Stop Work Order was issued. Mr. Coyle pointed out,both JMS and the city relied on the survey prepared by Landform, and the city issued the building permit. Mr. Coyle said moving the building back 7.14 -feet would be impractical and unduly expensive. Continuing, Mr. Coyle stated a hardship would be created for JMS if the house had to be moved farther back on the lot. Mr. Coyle explained that JMS has a contractual committeement to The Parade of Homes and if this house is not completed on schedule and does not meet the Parade of Homes deadline JMS would suffer a substantial hardship. Mr. Coyle noted the new home meets the city's established normal setback and exceeds the city's 30 foot setback minimum. Mr. Coyle stated if they complied with the city's direction and moved the house back on the lot another mature tree would need to be removed. That is also a hardship Mr. Coyle said another criteria that must be met is if the variance would "correct extraordinary circumstances applicable to this property but not applicable to other properties in the vicinity or zoning district" Mr. Coyle noted in his opinion the subject lot is being penalized because of the 63 -foot setback of a non - compliant structure to the south. Criteria 3 "Preserves a substantial property right possessed by other property in the vicinity and zoning district ". Mr. Coyle stated it is clear that the setback of the new house matches the majority average, and also matches those across the street. Mr. Coyle noted the present setback doesn't give the house a preferential setback on the block, pointing out two other homes are closer, adding JMS isn't asking for anything unique or unfair. Concluding Mr. Coyle said criteria 4 states that "not be materially detrimental to the public welfare of injurious to other property in the vicinity of zoning district ". Mr. Coyle said by meeting or exceeding the city code of 30 feet the new house isn't causing any harm, reiterating it is believed that the new house meets the average requirement and the front yard setback of the new house matches the front yard setback of the majority of the houses on the block and on the other side of the street Board Comments /Questions Chair Grabiel commented that whether or not the city code is good or bad is not the question before this board, adding this board doesn't have the jurisdiction to comment on that issue. Member Forrest questioned the multiple surveys and questioned who owned the home in August of 2008. Mr. Dodee responded that JMS was the homeowner at that time. With regard to the surveyor Mr. Schoenwetter said JMS hired Landform because they surveyed the subject site for the previous owner. Mr. Schoenwetter concluded that it made sense to him to hire Landform because they were familiar with the property. Member Vasaly commented assuming the home hadn't yet been built could the home be built according to code. Mr. Coyle responded there is ample rearyard area. Member Vasaly noted the impact on the neighboring house to the south, and asked why the new house was constructed so close to the south property line. Mr. Coyle responded the house was positioned in a conforming location. Member Vasaly pointed out the new house could have been placed closer to the north property line thereby positioning the new house farther away from the house that has the deepest setback on the block. Mr. Coyle responded that a business judgment was made on where to position the new house. Member Vasaly questioned the status of the project on January 7t'. Mr. Coyle responded that the house had been under construction for about one month. The house was framed, the footings were in, and the roof was partially done. Mr. Coyle submitted a series of photos along with the injunction allowing JMS to continue construction. Chair Grabiel noted for the record that Planner Teague submitted to the Board photo's dated January 16th and a copy of the temporary injunction. Chair Grabiel opened the public comment: Public Comment Eric Dodee, JMS said it is important to note that the calculation determining the 38.7- foot setback was not prepared by JMS, those calculations were done by the city. Chair Grabiel stated the Zoning Board is present this evening based on the 38.7 - foot setback and JMS is requesting a variance from that setback. Chair Grabiel said the Board can't discuss if 381 or 31.6 is correct. The city has determined the required setback at 38.7 with the finding that a 7.14 46ot front yard setback variance is needed. Dick Whitbeck 6128 Brookview Avenue told the Board in his opinion if the surveyor had difficulty interpreting city code he should have called the city for clarification, adding being in the Parade of Homes is not the neighborhoods problem. Mr: Whitbeck explained his home was constructed in 1866 and is one of the ,first homes built in Edina. Mr. Whitbeck said his family; along with the neighbors have been good ,stewards of this neighborhood. Mr. Whitbeck reported their house has been renovated with care, received a Heritage Award, pointing out as a result of this project they will now be looking at a solid wall blocking,their views. Mr. Whitbeck also asked the board to note that construction of this house in its present location caused the removal of a 200 year old Oak tree, and is "setting" up the property for future subdivision. Mr. Whitbeck added the placement of the house should have been approached with common sense, pointing out the new house was built well to one side of the lot, reiterating the potential for subdivision Concluding, Mr. Whitbeck stated the new house in its present location is detrimental to their property and out of character with the neighborhood. . Jackie Whitbeck, 6128 Brookview Avenue, presented to the Board photos of what she views today from her property. -She told the board the past house was situated in the middle of the lot(s) (at least 40 feet away from the common side property line and back from the street). Ms. Whitbeck asked the Board to note the entire JMS house is situated in front of her home, pointing out the new house has been constructed on only one portion of the lot(s). Continuing, Ms. Whitbeck said Landform surveyed the property for a previous developer and that developer walked away from the subdivision because of neighborhood opposition. Ms. Whitbeck pointed out JMS is familiar with the city's setback rules, they build in Edina. Ms. Whitbeck said when the building process started on this project the neighbors were very upset with the loss of the Oak tree. Ms. Whitbeck stressed this property is not subdivided, it's one 100 foot lot, and in her opinion it's obvious this house was positioned with a subdivision in mind. Cpntinuing with her comments Ms. Whitbeck explained that after the new house was framed she observed that in her opinion the new house was set too close to the street. She also observed the grade was changed with drainage now directed onto their property. Ms. Whitbeck further explained that because of the historic nature of her property the driveway is gravel and water run -off could become an issue. Concluding, Ms. Whitbeck stated in her opinion the survey presented by Landform is very misleading, certain items were excluded from the survey, and in her opinion the new house should be moved, it's been done before by JMS. Mr. Joseph Lawver, 6121 Brookview Avenue, told the Board in his opinion JMS is trying to circumvent the Code, adding he is also offended by the work of the surveyor. Mr. Lawver informed the Board he has been in contact with JMS via e- mail. Mr. Lawver said the neighborhood has been harmed as a result of this house and asked the Board to have the property owner move the new house 20 feet to the north and 7 feet to the rear. Mr. Lawver reiterated he is offended by JMS, adding there is no undue hardship to support approval of the variance. Concluding, Mr. Lawver pointed out the neighbors to the south directly adjacent to this property have lost all their privacy, reiterating the house should be moved. Ms. Carol Carmichiel,_6112 Brookview Avenue, (home to the north) told the Board she opposes the variance and asked the Board to deny this request. Ms. Carmichiel added that she also doesn't want to see future subdivision of this property. Continuing, Ms. Carmichiel stated in her opinion the new house is not in keeping with the neighborhood stressing the new house negatively impacts her property. The height of the new house impacts her privacy and her property values would be negatively impacted. Concluding, Ms. Carmichiel pointed out the house that was demolished was affordable and now has been replaced by a 900 - thousand dollar house. Ms. Jane Westin, 6136 Brookview Avenue, stated the correct legal description of the subject property is Lots 5 & 6, Fairfax, not Lot 6, Fairfax, which has been consistently used to describe this property. Ms. Westin with graphics displayed numerous surveys depicting the subject site, stressing this is one lot not two. Ms. Westin suggested that the new house be moved to a better location, not up against the south property line and too close to the street. Continuing, Ms. Westin pointed out the 6100 bock of Brookview is made up of modest, well kept homes, including one historic home and now the block includes one expensive overly large home. Concluding, Ms. Westin said the neighborhood is also unhappy with the 200 year old Oak tree that was removed to "make way" for the new house. Ms. Marion Clay, 6117 Brookview Avenue, urged the Planning Commission to deny the variance. Turk Miroslava, 6141 Brookview Avenue, stated in her opinion the new house is injurious to the block. Chair Grabiel thanked everyone for their input and said at this time the Board will discuss the requested 7.14 front yard setback variance. Chair Grabiel clarified that the Board cannot act on the removal of the Oak tree or a future subdivision request if that should occur. Board Comments and Action A discussion ensued with Board Members in agreement that the hardship test has not been met. Members sympathized that an error was made; however, there is no justification in granting the requested variance. Board Members did acknowledge that it wasn't the neighbor's responsibility to calculate setback, adding it was unfortunate that incorrect calculations Were made. Member Vasaly moved denial of B -09-01 based on staff findings and adoption of those findings. Member Scherer seconded the motion. Ayes; Forrest, Scherer,_Vasaly, Winder, Grabiel. Motion for denial carried. A Larkin Hoff 'man ATTORNEYS January 29, 2009 Mr. Cary Teague Planning Department City of Edina 4801 West 50th Street Edina, Minnesota 55424 Re. Variance Application for 6120 Brookview, Edina, MN Appeal of Denial by Zoning Board of Appeals Dear Mr. Teague: Iarldn Hoffman Daly & Lindgren Ltd. 1500 Wells Fargo Plaza 7900 Xerxes Avenue South Minneapolis, Minnesota 55431 -1194 GENERAL: 952 - 835-3800 FAX: 952 -896 -3333 WEB: www.larklnhoffmamcom Yia Email and U.S. Mail We represent JMS Custom Homes, LLC ( "JMS ") in connection with the above - referenced variance application. This letter shall serve as JMS's request for an appeal from the Zoning Board of Appeals' January 28, 2009 denial of JMS's variance request. JMS requests that the appeal of the variance denial be scheduled for the next regularly scheduled Edina City Council meeting. If you should have any questions concerning JMS's requested appeal or need any further information or documentation, please advise. Thank you. Sincerely, Rob A..Stefono cz, for Larkin Hoffman Daly & Lin ren Ltd. Direct Dial: 952- 896 -3254 Direct Fax: 952- 842 -1718 Email: rstefonowicz�iil larkinhoffman.com Cc: Jeff Schoenwetter Eric Doty Tom Scott, Esq. Peter Coyle, Esq. 1238657.1 o1 City of Edina January 29, 2009 JMS Custom Homes, LLC 5250 West 74h Street Edina, MN 55439 Re: B -09 -01 - A 7.14 foot front yard setback variance for a new home at 6120 Brookview Avenue, Edina, MN To Whom It May Concern: In connection with your recent request for the above referenced variance, which was heard by the Edina Zoning Board on Wednesday, January 28, 2009, may we advise you that same has been denied. If you wish to appeal the decision of the Zoning Board to the Edina City Council, a letter of intent must be submitted to the City Clerk no later than February 9, 2009. If you have further questions on this matter, please feel free to contact me at 952 - 826 -0465. Sincerely, \ Jackie -U Ho Secretary Zoning Board of Appeals I City Hall 952 - 927 -8861 4801 WEST 50TH STREET FAX 952 - 826 -0390 EDINA, MINNESOTA, 55424 -1394 www.cityofedina.com TTY 952 -826 -0379 0 IV ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS STAFF REPORT Originator Meeting Date Agenda # Kris Aaker January 28, 2009 B -09 -01 Assistant Planner Brief Description: A 7.14 foot front yard setback variance for a new home under construction at 6120 Brookview Avenue for JMS Construction. Recommended Action: Deny the 7.14 foot front yard setback variance request. Introduction /Background The applicant is in the process of building a 2,994 square foot home on the south portion of a 13,362 square foot lot. The property is one buildable parcel made up of two 50 foot wide lots, (lots 5 and 6), platted as part of the original Fairfax subdivision. A building permit was issued on Friday, December 5, 2008 for the new home currently under construction on the property. The City received a complaint on January 5, 2009, regarding the front yard setback of the new home. Concern was raised that the home appeared to be closer to the street than code would allow. The survey submitted for the building permit illustrates an established average front yard setback of 31.6 feet. (See attached survey.) A building permit was issued based on that survey, and the home was constructed at the proposed 31.6 foot setback. The owner's survey company, Landform, was contacted on January 5, 2009, to verify how the average setback was calculated. The zoning ordinance requires that the average setback of existing buildings shall be maintained by all new or relocated buildings on the same side of the street between intersections. The data provided by Landform shows that the average front yard setback of the seven homes located along the block excluding the subject home is 38.7 feet, and not 31.6 feet as indicated on the survey submitted for the building permit. The home under construction therefore, over- laps the required front yard setback by 7.14 feet. The building permit was issued in error based upon incorrect information furnished by the applicant. A "stop work" order was. posted on the property on Wednesday, January 7, 2009. The owner of the property was notified that resolution of this issue may be pursued by either filing for and 143562 obtaining a variance to allow the house to remain at the same front yard setback or by modifying the construction to maintain the required front yard setback. The owner has chosen to pursue a variance to allow the home to remain in its existing location. Law Suit JMS Custom Homes filed a law suit and obtained a temporary injunction that allows them to continue work on the home pending the outcome of the law suit The suit is not relevant to the issue of whether or not a variance should be approved. The court documents are attached for informational purposes. Front Yard Setback Calculation The required setback for the R -1 zoning district is 30 feet. However, Section 850.11. Subd. 7.A established special front yard setback requirements for single dwelling unit lots. There are three ways to calculate the front yard setback, as demonstrated below: 1) Established Average Setback. When more than 25 percent of the frontage on one side of the street between intersections is occupied by buildings having front street setbacks of more or less than 30 feet, the average setback of such existing buildings shall be maintained by all new or relocated buildings or structures or additions thereto on the same side of that street and between said intersections. The "special front yard setback" rule is required for the subject lot because there is more than 25 percent of the frontage on the subject side of the street between intersections occupied by buildings having front street setbacks of more or less than 30 feet. The block is fully developed so the standard 30 foot setback is not applied with the special setback requirements used instead in this instance. To determine the established average setback, the setbacks of the seven homes on the block are added together and divided by 7. The resulting average front yard setback is 38.7 feet for this block. The "average of the block front setback line" of 31.6 feet, as depicted on the survey, is in error, or 7.14 feet closer to the street. It appears that the surveyor simply connected a line from the homes on each corner. 2) If a building or structure or addition thereto is to be built or relocated where there is an established average setback and there are existing buildings on only one side of the built or relocated building or structure or addition thereto, the front street setback of said new or relocated building or structure or addition thereto need be no greater than that of the nearest adjoining principal building. This second paragraph of the special front yard setback requirements does not apply to the lot because there are existing buildings on both sides of the subject lot. 3) `If a building or structure or addition thereto is to be built or relocated where there is an established average setback, and there are existing buildings on both sides of 143562 the new or relocated building or structure or addition thereto, the front setback need be no greater than that which would be established by connecting a line parallel with the front lot line connecting the forward most portion of the adjacent principal building on each side." This third option could apply to the lot by connecting the forward most portions of the homes on either side. The survey did not illustrate the "connecting line" rule and in fact would have put the home farther back on the lot than the established average setback, because the home to the south is setback so far. The least restrictive setback in this instance is the established average setback. The least restrictive setback applicable is the established average setback. Primary Issue • Is the requested variance justified? Per Section 850.04.Subd.l.F, of the Zoning Ordinance, the following findings must be made: Findings for Variances. The Board shall not grant a petition for a variance unless it finds that the strict enforcement of this Section would cause undue hardship because of circumstances unique to the petitioner's property and that the grant of said variance is in keeping with the spirit and intent of this Section. "Undue hardship" means that (i) the property in question cannot be put to a reasonable use as allowed by this Section; (ii) the plight of the petitioner is due to circumstances unique to the petitioner's property which were not created by the petitioner; and (iii) the variance, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the property or its surroundings. Economic considerations alone shall not constitute an undue hardship if reasonable use for the petitioner's property exists under the terms of this Section. As demonstrated below; staff believes the proposal does not meet the variance standards; when applying the three hardship tests: 1) Is there an undue hardship that prevents a reasonable use of the property? No. Reasonable use does not mean that the applicant must show the land cannot be put to any reasonable use without the variance. Rather, the applicant must show that there is an undue hardship in complying with the Code that prohibits what is really a reasonable use. "Undue hardship" may include functional and aesthetic concerns. The proposed use is not reasonable because it does not fit into the character of the neighborhood. While two out of seven structures on the block are closer to 143562 the street than the subject home, a reduction in setback beyond the average on the block is excessive and out of character especially regarding the location of the neighboring home to the south. There is no undue hardship other then the hardship created by the applicant's error in calculating the set back. The partially built home can be moved back on the lot and meet set backs. When considering the equities of altering or moving the house to meet the required setback vs. the impact on the neighborhood, staff believes complying with the ordinance is reasonable. 2) Are there circumstances that are unique to the property, not common to every similarly zoned property, and that are not self - created? No. There are no unique or specific characteristics of the lot that would support granting a variance. A home can be built without encroaching beyond the average setback line. The lot is generous in area at 13,362 square feet, with ample room in which to locate at structure within the required setbacks. The need for the variance is entirely self created resulting from an error made by the applicant's surveyor. The applicant is a professional builder and its marketing plans for the home will be disrupted and costs will be incurred in moving the home back on the lot but economic considerations alone are not a basis for approving a variance. The applicant chose to proceed with constructing the home after being advised of the setback error. 3) Would the variance alter the essential character of the neighborhood? Yes. The new home would not be consistent with the homes to the south, which are setback 63.1 and 44.4 feet. The new home would be built essentially in front of the home to the south with is setback 63.1 feet from the front lot line, thereby blocking their front view to the north. A home of this size built this close to the street would alter the essential character of the neighborhood. Staff Recommendation Deny the requested 7.14 -foot front yard setback variance. Denial is based on the following findings: 1) The proposal does not meet the variance findings of Section 850.04.Subd.1.F, of the Zoning Ordinance. 2) There is no unique hardship to the property. The proposed new home can be relocated to meet the required front yard setback of 38.7 feet. 3) When considering the equities of altering or moving the house to meet the required setback vs. the impact the proposed home built within the 143562 required setback would have on the neighborhood, complying with the ordinance is reasonable. 4) The need for the variance is self created. 5) The variance would alter the essential character, of the neighborhood. 6) The variance would not meet the intent of the ordinance since: a. The variance would not be consistent with the homes to,the south, or the..established average setback on the block. ' b. The new home would be built'essentially in front of the home to the south with is setback 63.1 feet from the street, thereby blocking their front view to the north. C. The intent of the ordinance is to provide uniform front yard setbacks on a block. Having one home built 3 -1.5 feet closer to the street than the adjacent home does not meet the intent of the ordinance. d. The only basis for the variance is economic considerations alone which is not a sufficient basis. 7) Considering the equities of altering or moving the house to meet the required setback vs. the impact the proposed home built within the required setback would have on the neighborhood, complying with the ordinance is reasonable: Surrounding Land Uses There are single family homes on the north, south, east and west sides of the subject property. Site Features The property is 13,362 square feet and contains a partially constructed, two -story home with an attached three car garage. Planning Guide Plan Designation: R -1, single family residential Zoning: Residential 143562 5 Jan -16 -09 09:52am From- T -875 P.002/003 F -639 DISTRICT COURT STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF HENNEPIN FOURTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT JMS Custom Homes, LLC, Plaintiff, ORDER GRANTING TEMPORAJ,ZY INJUNCTION Court File No. 27 -CV -09 -830 vs. l-1 of Edina, a r;. -Imlpal romoratiori, Defendant. The above - entitled matter came on before the Honorable Marilyn Brown Rosenbaum for hearing on January 13, 2009 pursuant to the Motion of Plaintiff for a Temporary Restraining Order. After further submissions, a separate hearing was held on January 15, 2009 for a Temporary Injunction pursuant to Minn. R. Civ. P. 65.02. Rob A. Stefonowicz, Esq. appeared on behalf of Plaintiff. Thomas M. Scott, Esq. appeared on behalf of Defendant. Based upon the files, records, and proceedings herein, and being fully informed in the premises, the Court makes the following! ORDER 1. The Motion of Plaintiff JMS Custom Homes, LLC for a Temporary Restraining Order, or, in the alternative, for a Temporary Injunction, is granted. 2. Until further Order of the Court, Defendant City of Edina is enjoined from enforcement of the Stop Work Order, dated January 7, 2009, and/or the Amended Stop Work Order, dated January 9, 2009, for the single - family home located at 6120 Brookview Avenue, Edina, Hennepin County, Minnesota (the "Home "). Plaintiff JMS Custom Homes, LLC may proceed with construction of the Home. . Jan -16 -09 09:53am From- T -875 P- 003/003 F -639 No bond or security, pursuant to Minn. R. Civ. P. 65.03, shall be required of Plaintiff. The Court deems a bond to be unnecessary since Defendant has failed to establish any costs or damages which may be suffered if the City is wrongfully enjoined. 4. A separate Memorandum shall issue and be incorporated herein. i . 0A-i:r" Judge of District Court • Honorabli Marilyn Brown Rosenbaum 0) Jan - 16=09 02:47pm From- T -878 P.002 /010 F-643 DISTRICT COURT STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF I- IENNEPIlV FOURTH JUDICL4I. DISTRICT JMS Custom Homes, LLC, Plaintiff, AMENDED ORDER GRANTING TEMPORARY WjUNCTION vs. Court File No. 27 -CV -09 -830 City of Edina, a municipal corporation, Defendant. The above - entitled matter came on before the Honorable. Marilyn Brown Rosenbaum for hearing on January 13, 2009 pursuant to the Motion of Plaintiff for a Temporary Restraining Order. After further submissions, a separate hearing was held on January 15, 2009 for a Temporary Injunction pursuant to Minn. R. Civ. P. 65.02. Rob A. Stefonowicz, Esq. appeared on behalf of Plaintiff. Thomas M. Scott, Esq. appeared on behalf of Defendant. Based upon the files, records, and proceedings herein, and being fitlly informed in The premises, the Court makes the following 1. The Motion of Plaintiff JMS Custom Homes, LLC for a Temporary Restr aining Order, or, in the alternative, for a Temporary Injunction, is granted. 2. Until further Order of the Court, Defendant City of Edina is enjoined from enforcement of the Stop Work Order, dated January 7, 2009, and/or the Amended Stop Work Order, dated January 9, 2009, for the single - family home located at 6120 Brookvi.ew Avenue, Edina, Hennepin County, Minnesota (the "Home "). Plaintiff JMS Custom Homes, LLC may proceed with construction of the Home. 1 Jan -16-09 . 02:47Pm From- T -878 P.003 /010 F -643' 3. No bond or security, pursuant to Minn. R. Civ. P. 65.03, shall be required of Plaiaavff. The Court deems a bond to be unnecessary since Defendant has failed to establish any costs or damages which may be suffered if the City is wrongfully enjoined. 4. The attached Memorandum is incorporated herein. I Judge larilyn T3rown Rosenbaum Court Jan - 16-09. 02:47pm From- T -878 P.004 /010 F-643 MEMORANDUM PROCEDURAL POSTURE JMS Custom Homes, LLC ( "JMS ") is the owner of certain real properly located at 6120 Brookview Avenue in Edina, Hennepin County, Minnesota ( "the Property") In the fall of 2008, JMS applied for a building permit to be issued by Defendant City of Edina (` °Edina"), and submitted plans and specifications and a Certificate of Survey ( "the Survey"), prepared by Landform. The Survey identified the "average of block front setback line" of 31.6 feet. Edina reviewed these submissions, provided comments relating to the Survey, and commented on the side setback. On December 5, 2008, Edina issued a Building Permit and JMS commenced construction of a single - family home ( "the Home ") on the Property. On December 11, 2008, Edina inspected and approved the footings. On December 12, 2008, Edina inspected and approved the foundation reinforcement On December 15, 2008, Edina approved the as -built survey of the Property, which again identified the "average of block front setback line" of 31.6 feet. The parties stipulate that all surveys prepared in this matter identify the "average of block front setback line" of 31.6 feet. On December 19, 2008, Edina inspected and approved the foundation. On December. 30, 2008, Edina issued a permit for mechanical work. On January 5th, 2009, the neighbor residing in the south adjacent home contacted Edina to question the Home's compliance with the front setback requirement. On January 7, 2009, Edina issued a Stop Work Order due to an "incorrect setback, #92293 ", requiring JMS to immediately cease work until the setback issue is resolved. An Amended Stop Work Order was issued by email on January 9, 2009, allowing JMS to: (1) complete the roofing; (2) install house wrap, sheathing, and lath over exterior openings; (3) insulate between top plates and roof sheathing; (4) install a furnace to heat the basement only; and (5) remove excess fill. The Edina City Code ( "City Code ") § 850.07, subd. 11 provides as follows: Frontage of Lots on a Street. All lots shall have at least 30 feet of frontage on at least one street other than alleys or limited access roadways to which private access is prohibited. Private easements shall not be considered as frontage for purposes of this Subdivision. Notwithstanding the requirements of this subdivision, lots in a townhouse plat need not front on a street provided that the 3 Jan- 16 =09. 02 :47pm From- T-M P.005 /010 F -643 townhouse plat of which the lot is a part has at least 30 feet of frontage on at least one street- The City Code § 85o. 11, subd. 6 provides, in relevant part, as follows: Requirements for Building Coverage, Setbacks and Height. B. Minimum Setbacks (subject to the requirements of paragraph A. of Subd. 7 of this Subsection 850.11). 1. Single dwelling unit buildings on lots 75 feet or more in width — Front Street -- 3 0'. The City Code § 85 0.11, subd. 7 provides, in relevant part, as follows: Special Requirements. In addition to the general requirements described in Subsection 850.07, the following special requirements shall apply. A. Special Setback Requirements for Single Dwelling Unit Lots. 1. Established Average Setback. When more than 25 percent of the frontage on one side of a street between intersections is occupied by buildings having front street setbacks of more or less than 30 feet, the average setback of such existing buildings shall be maintained by all new or relocated buildings or structures or additions thereto on the same side of that street and between said intersections. If a building or structure or addition thereto is to be built or located where there is an established average setback and there are existing buildings on only one side of the built or relocated building or structure or addition thereto, the front street setback of said new or relocated building or structure or addition thereto need be no greater than that of the nearest adjoining principal building. If a building or structure or addition thereto is to be built or relocated where there is an established average setback, and there are existing buildings on both sides of the new or relocated building or structure or addition thereto, the front setback need be no greater than that which would be established by connecting a line parallel with the front lot line connecting the most forward portion of the adjacent principal building on each side. By certain photographs, exhibits, and testimony, JMS has shown that the ):Tome's foundation and framing have been completed, and the roofing materials are partially installed. JMS has established that it has contracted to participate in the Spring Parade of Jan-16 -09 02:47pm From— T -878 P.006 /010 F -643 Homes between February 28 and March 22, 2009. The contract provides for penalties if the Home is not completed. JMS's owner, Jeffrey Martin Schoenwetter ( "Schoenwetter ") testified that the Parade of Homes is the premier marketing event for JMS, That approximately 500 people attend during the weekend for three or four weeks, and that 80% of JMS's business comes from this event. Schoenwetter also testified that the I-Iome could still be completed by the Parade of Homes but, if forced to stop work and go through the variance process, it would be impossible to complete the Home in a timely manner. In addition, non - participation and the existence of the partially completed Home would harm JMS's reputation and would likely put JMS out of business. Schoenwetter stated that due to the Stop Work Orders, JMS is in default under the terms of its construction financing agreement, that building materials are at risk, and the terms of the Amended Stop Work Order are insufficient to adequately protect the Horne under existing extreme winter conditions. JMS seeks injunctive relief to enjoin the enforcement of the Stop Work Orders and to allow it to complete construction of the Home and participate in the Spring Parade of Homes. JMS claims that: (1) the City Code provisions are ambiguous, vague, and must be strictly construed against Edina; and (2) it has detrimentally relied on Edina's approvals, causing irreparable injury. Edina argues that the "special setback requirements" of City Code § 850.11, subd. 7.A.1 are clear, workable, and apply. Edina claims that JMS has adequate remedies in that it may request a variance at the next Zoning Board meeting on January 28, 2009, and, if a variance is denied, JMS would then have the right to appeal to Edina City Council at the next meeting on February 19, 2009. Edina also claims that it was not negligent in relying on the Survey and should be able to enforce the City Code at any time and under any circumstances. STANDARD FOR INJUNCTIVE REL) EF "Injunctive relief should be awarded only in clear cases, reasonably free from doubt and when necessary. to prevent great and irreparable injury.'." AM.F Finspotrers, Inc. v. Harkins Bowling, Inc., 110 N.W_2d 348, 351 (Minn. 1961). The following five factors are considered by the Court in determining whether to grant injunctive relief: _ 5 Jan -16 =09 02:47pm From— T -878 P.007 /010 F -643' (1) The nature and background of the relationship between the parties preexisting the dispute giving rise to the request for relief; (2) The harm to be suffered by plaintiff if the restraint is denied as compared to that inflicted on defendant if the injunction issues; (3) The likelihood that one party or the other will prevail on the merits when the fact situation is viewed in the light of established precedents fixing the limits of equitable relief, (4) The aspects of the fact situation, if any, which permit or require consideration of public policy expressed in the statutes, State and Federal ;. and (5) The administrative burdens involved in judicial supervision and enforcement of the temporary decree. Dahlberg Bros., Inc. v. Ford Motor Co., 137 N.W.2d 314, 321 -22 (Minn. 1965). The burden of proving that a preliminary injunction should be issued rests entirely with the moving patty Modern Computer Systems, Inc. v. Modern Banking Systems, Inc., 871 F.2d 734, 737 (8th Cir. 1989). The patty seeking the injunction must establish that the legal remedy is not adequate and that the injunction is necessary. to preven8N 2d irreparable injury. Cherne Industries, Inc. V. Grounds &Associates, Inc., 2 81, 92 (Minn. 1979) (citing North Central Public Service Co. v. Village of Circle Pines, 224N.W.2d 741, 746 (1974)). DECISION The Court has considered the relevant Dahlberg factors and Plaintiff's Motion for Order, or, in the alternative due to the fill hearing and testimony, Temporary Restraining ' plaintiff s Motion for a Temporary Injunction, should be granted. The nature and background of the relationship between the parties preeidstin18 the dispute giving rise to the request for relief. As set forth herein above,'the parties have an ongoing relationship based upon glee application of JMS for a residential building. permit for the constructi comply With eon of a single - family home in the City of Edina. JMS has attempted to very requirement Jan- 16 =09, 02:48pm From- T -878 P.008 /010 F -643 of the City Code, and, after obtaining the building permit, has commenced construction of the Home with a front setback of 31.6 feet. Edina's approval of the front setback, subsequent inspections, and later Stop Work Orders, along with the ambiguous, contradictory, and unworkable City Code provisions, all weigh in favor of granting a temporary injunction and allowing JMS to continue to construct the Home. Additionally, granting the Temporary Injunction allows jMS to mitigate substantial damages to the benefit of all parties. This factor clearly weighs in favor of the issuance of a Temporary Injunction. The harm to be suffered by Plaintiff if the iuj nctiorn is denied as compared to that inflicted on Defendant if the injunction issues. The immediate harm to be suffered by JMS relates to the damage to be inflicted on the building materials installed and on the site of the partially built Home as well as catastrophic financial damages to be suffered by JMS. The extremes of January weather can and will inflict damage to these materials and the structure itself and will affect the warranties attached to certain building materials. In February, the next harm will befall ims if the Home is not completed. JMS's opportunities to sell the Horne, as well as to market and negotiate future construction projects, depend on completing the Home ur time to participate in the Spring Parade of Homes. Failure to do so will result in harm to its reputation, the eventual destruction of the business, and the unavoidable effect on employees, subcontractors, and the termination of JMS's relationship with its lender. Edina argues that "there is apparent irreparable harm to a governmental unit by a continuous and knowing violation of that body's duly promulgated laws and regulations." Rockville Township v. Lang, 387 N.W2d 200, 205 (Minn. App. 1986). However, it is not established that the Home's setback is a continuing and 1Qaowing violation of the City Code, and the harm to JMS clearly outweighs any potential harm to Edina. This factor clearly weighs in favor of JMS and the issuance of a Temporary injunction. The likelihood that one party or the other will prevail on the merits when the facts are viewed in the light of 'established precedents fixing the limits of equitable relief. There are at least two possible legal arguments that must be explored when addressing the'possibility of success on the merits: (1) whether the City Code provisions 7 Jan- 15 -09. 02:48pm From- T-879 P.009 /010 F-843' are ambiguous, vague, or unworkable and should be construed strictly against Edina and in favor of JMS; and (2) whether Edina has an absolute right to enforce the City Code at any time, in light of the unique facts here, including the uncertainty that a knowing and continuous violation exists, JMS's claim of detrimental rdliance, and the potential substantial damage claim. Due to the vague, ambiguous, conflicting, and unworkable provisions of the City Code, the minimum setback of 30 feet, the setback consistency with the other homes on the block, and the reliance by all parties on the Survey, it is likely that JMS will prevail on the merits as to this issue. "Zoning ordinances must be considered in the light of their underlying policy goals" Rank's Nursery Sales, Inc. v City of .Roseville, 295 N.W.2d 604, 608 -9 (Minn. 1980). Secondly, "zoning ordinances should be construed strictly against the city and in favor of the property owner." Icy at 608. It is also likely that JMS will prevail as to the legal issue of whether Fdina can be estopped from enforcing the City Code. To date, the facts established in this matter tend to distinguish this case from Frank's Nursery Sales and other cases cited by Edina. This factor clearly weighs in favor of JMS and the issuance of a Temporary Injunction. The aspects of the fact situation, if any, which permit or require consideration of the public policy expressed in the statutes, State or Federal, Constitutions, Codes or Ordinances. Public policy does require Edina to attempt to gain full compliance with its City Code. However, when there is substantial deunnental reliance on the surveys, approvals, and inspections, there are parallel public policy concerns, including consideration of the rights of private property owners and the balancing of remedies to include application of equitable doctrines of detrimental reliance and equitable estoppel. This factor clearly weighs in favor of JMS and the issuance of a Temporary Injunction. The administrative burdens involved in judicial supervision and enforcement of the temporary decree. There are no administrative burdens, and this factor weighs in favor of granting the Temporary Injunction. 8 Security — Minn. R Crv, Jr- oo.w Eed without the Plaivntiff s request that the Temporary Injunction be, gran zequizement. o£ security or bond undez Mixin. R. Civ. P. 65.03(a) shoWd,be granted. The City has Failed to establish any costs or damages which may be suffered, so as to require a bond. NBR LOCATION MAP 6037 6045 6101 6025 6024 6706 6108 6029 6028 E 717 6120 6033 6032 E125 6129 6037 6036 6137 6039 6044 6061 6757 57 W 707 F-6;0- 6100 6105 6104 6109 6108 6113 6112 6117 6116 l' 6121 61208 6125 6124 p 6129 6128 I 6135 6132 i 1412 \ 6136 1401 LOCATION MAP 6037 6045 6101 6100 6109 6706 6108 6713 6112 E 717 6120 6121 6125 E125 6129 6133 6136 6137 6141 6145 6144 6117 6121 6128 61" 6137 6111 6}43 Pamela Pa1L 4118 82ND ST W 4305 4475 � 4101 4273 Gq4 0 4129 4125 4401 .719 x car0v.n hcMSGtgr ye:C;.O".sG laS ]708 ^ 111 B -09 -01 Front Yard Setback Variance PID:1902824430091 6120 Brookview Ave Edina, MN 55424 o le J �_ llllul Legend Highlighted Feature House Number Labels Street Name Labels City Limits Creeks Lake Names C Lakes Parks Parcels pN 0O ®\ CASE. NUMBER_DATE FEE PAID _5Oa -=° City of Edina Planning Department * vwvwr.cityofedina.com 4801 West Fiftieth Street * Edina, MN 55424 * (952) 826 -0369 * fax (952) 826- 0389 FEE: (IRES - $300.0W NON -RES - $500 APPLICANT: NAME: 7Akc, C.JSTOM �j S� LLC- (Signature required on back page) ADDRESS: TZ --SO lu D,xA PHONE: EMAIL: G . F3013 � _' jA&S 6o571 � 4C)A f 5 -UAA PROPERTY OWNER: NAME: JV 's (S..)5it yK ".5 (Signature required on back page) ADDRESS: V.jrr_ S_�74A� , G�n,.,,�,: PHONE: LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY (written and electronic form): LcT Q., . 9COce— ZS. F- q4_FAac "You must provide a full legal description. If more space is needed, please use a separate sheet. Note: The County may not accept the resolution approving your project if the legal description does not match their records. This may delay your project. PROPERTY ADDRESS: � I &D B&bJ�u -&-k) AV FyvJR PRESENT ZONING: P.I.D.# EXPLANATION OF REQUEST: Pcz � (Use reverse side or additional pages if necessary) ARCHITECT: NAME: Al-F AIJO&— 02Si(.y PHONE: EMAIL: At_CeAj C, -RPQ? ArOL.COM 95-z - g7.- 777 SURVEYOR: NAME: LAtJQFDM ��/��N �"�LI PHONE: EMAIL: 3 2PL -rrOA -NAi a LAAJO �b4A. je—t Minnesota Statues and Edina Ordinances require that the following conditions must be satisfied affirmatively. Please fully explain your answers using additional sheets of paper as necessary. The Proposed Variance will: YES NO Relieve an undue hardship which was not ❑ self- imposed or a mere inconvenience: Correct extraordinary circumstances ❑ applicable to this property but not applicable to other property in the vicinity or zoning district. , Preserve a substantial property right ❑ possessed by other property in the vicinity and zoning district. Not be materially detrimental to the public ❑ welfare or injurious to other property in the vicinity or zoning district. 2 APPLICANT'S STATEMENT This application should be processed in my name, and I am the party whom the City should contact about this application. By signing this application, I certify that all fees, charges, utility bills, taxes, special assessments and other debts or obligations due to the City by me or for this property have been paid. I further certify that I am in compliance with all ordinance requirements and conditions regarding other City approvals that have been granted to me for any matter. I have completed all of the applicable filing requirements and, to the best of my knowledge, the documents and information I have submitted are true and correct. t- Applicant's Signature 'Date OWNER'S STATEMENT I am the fee title owner of the above described property, and I agree to this application. (If a corporation or partnership is the fee title holder, attach a resolution authorizing this application on behalf of the board of directors or partnership.) owner s QIUI14MLUNU Note. Both signatures are required (if the owner is different than the applicant) before we can process the application, otherwise it is considered incomplete. Larkin Hoffman ATTORNEYS January 14, 2009 Mr. Cary Teague Planning Department City of Edina 4801 West 50th Street Edina, Minnesota 55424 Re: Variance Application for 6120 Brookview, Edina, MN Dear Mr. Teague: larldn Ho$nan Daly & Lindgren Ltd. 1500 Wells Cargo Plaza 7900 Xerxes Avenue South Minneapolis, Minnesota 55431 -1194 GENERAL: 952 - 835 -3800 FAX: 952- 879�6�- 13�3�33 WED: www.larldnhoffi man.corn We represent JMS Custom Homes, LLC ( "JMS'l in connection with the current residential construction project at the above - referenced site, together with the related litigation between JMS and the City of Edina. Enclosed for filing, please find the application of JMS for a variance from the City's front street setback standard. JMS objects to the need for a variance inasmuch as it believes its submitted survey and building plans in support of the.City's Building Permit was lawful and properly approved in full conformance with applicable City setback regulations. Therefore, by submitting this Variance Application, JMS is not waiving any claims it may have against the City relating to the Stop Work Order nor the validity of the City's alleged interpretation of its setback averaging Ordinance, Section 850.11, subd. 7.A.1. The pleadings and memoranda on file with Hennepin County District Court, File No. 27- CV -09- 830, set forth the factual and legal basis for JMS's position on whether a variance is needed. In the alternative, if a variance is needed, JMS contends that it meets the City's requirements to support approval of the requested front street setback. 1. Relieve an undue hardship which was not self-imposed or a mere inconvenience. The record reflects that the City and JMS have a professional dispute about the correct interpretation of the City's setback averaging Ordinance, Section 850.11, subd. 7.A.1. There is no allegation in the record from the City or any other source that the need for the alleged variance is self-imposed or otherwise assumed needed to resolve a mere inconvenience. Compliance with the City's alleged interpretation would cause undue damage to the approved residential structure and inflict substantial financial and business harm to JMS_ 2. Correct extraordinary circumstances applicable to this property but not applicable to other properly in the vicinity or zoning district. The approved residence structure currently satisfies the City's minimum front street setback of 30 feet. The as -built setback for the approved structure, at 31.6 feet, is in line with the existing residences on the same side of the block. Adherence to the City's alleged interpretation of its Mr. Cary Teague January 14, 2009 Page 2 — its setback averaging Ordinance would unfairly penalize JMS due to the placement of one or more structures on the block, which have the effect of skewing the setback, based on the City's interpretation of it. 3. Preserve a substantial propg= right possessed by other yroperty in the vicinity and zoning_ district. Approval of the requested variance would not harm any other property on the block or within the established zoning district. The as-built setback exceeds the City's 30 -foot minimum front street setback and would be consistent with 4 other residences on the block. Application of the City's alleged interpretation would impose a substantial hardship on JMS and penalize its use of property by placing its structure at a setback greater than the majority of the residences on the block. 4. Not be materially detrimental to the public welfare of injurious to other property in the vicinity or zoning district. JMS would not gain any setback advantage relative to the other existing residences on the block. The as-built setback applicable to the JMS structure is in line with other residences on the block, and exceeds the City's minimum setback. We understand that this request will be considered by the City's Board of Adjustment at a meeting scheduled for January 29, 2009. If you have any questions about the basis for the requested variance or need additional information, please call me immediately. rely Peter J. Coyle, for Larkin Hoffman Daly & Lindgren Ltd. Direct Dial: (952) 896 -3214 Direct Fax: (952) 842 -1704 Email: Rcoylena larkinhoffman.com Cc: Jeff Schoenwetter Eric Doty Tom Scott, Esq. Rob Stefonowicz, Esq. Attachment: Variance Application 1236589.1 SETBACK LINE EXHIBIT FOR: JMS CUSTOM HOMES — — — 34.6' MOST FORWARD CORNER I.. •34.7' —I L. -- I -- -- 63.1 T--- - -- - -� L - --- - - - -`�� BEST FIT LINE USED TO ESTABLISH AN AVERAGE _; 44 .2'-- SETBACK I I SCAM IN FEET JMWW" o sa SCALE IN FEET . MOST POPWARD CORNE2 2B.2' -� • • 600 c Butler Square M • • 100 North Sixth Street I I L .a a la F O R M Minneapolis, MN 55403 Web: landform. net Job No. JM505005 Dm*ng: hick e.hb,,_I By. JM? SETBACK LINE EXHIBIT FOR: JMS CUSTOM HOMES v SO3@BIN FEET -- 34.8' -` • aSCALE IN FEET -- - �- M05T FORWARD CORNER tau �� -- 3a. T • - -I �a ✓) 1 i I ---- 63.1'x-- - - - -"'7 I— —i 44.2' —!� �n< I II I I� I' C`tl • 1 . :/ ell 271 = ,� BEST FIT LINE USED TO ESTABLISH AN AVE12ACE SETBACK I I M05T FORWARD CORNER 28.2'- -i • • • • L A N D F 0 LJab No. M506005 800 c Butler Square R M 100 North Sixth Street o Minneapolis, MN 55403 4 Web: landform.net Drawing: setback vvh6n_I By. " k t �n .:.,' IK t T A �. !fl�O� �,yafY ti� 4��54 F k t �n .:.,' IK t T A �. !fl�O� �,yafY ti� CERTP' ATE OF SURVEY REVISION HISTORY � D.. FOR: Jhft� _jSTOM HOMES NOV 2 ZuUt'NORTH 08^3/08 ORICINAL • CXISTW TWO - STORY., 04/0?/Oa REVSW FOLAVATION ELEVATIONS I' y CLIENT Caj*NT WOOD FRAME HOUSE oq/c?/Oa 5 FIRST FLOOR (TwEsHao) 8q6.2 0611112 BROOK VEWDAVVE.., 10/01/aa CITY Cal*WS TOP Of, POURED FOUNDATION 895.7 FfEacr7.5 10130108 NOW ULONC R-ANS 0 2D 11/11/08 NEW OMD14 PLANS SCALE IN FEET O a95.9 IIIB/08 NE OULMC A-ANS 11//2440S. NEW BUILUN(i AND ADJUST LOCATON 819.4 EX15TNG 7� ep 9:7 GARAGE 9TNC DESCRIPTION EXISTWC DESCRIPTION - - E-YJ 'C BUILONC 0 POWEIZPOLE FWD P_ 689-2 / ovceNANG AIR CONVFTIONER - - - - - - -- CANOPY MUTOU STEM CAP OT70OR a'K'40wN EXBTNC � L, - 2. CONCRETE SURFACE 0 ELECTRIC METER CARACE 5'k'5.A 895.4 I - a•, , . "PC .,gq4.8 Ell '93 q14' SA4XI SHRUB LINE- 0 IRON MONUMENT FOUND BrTUMNOUS SURFACE L4J SANITARY SEWER LINE MAIN r" I.n-ge P1071 WATER GRAVEL SURFACE pral rered prior to L v _0T- OVERHEAD TELEPHONE aj:_osng any grades . : i CONTOUR _OTV- OVERHEAD TV Ll SILT FENCING I I . 51156 andlor drainage S .123.4 SPOT ELEVATION -GE,- OVERHEAD UTLITY LINES REQUIREN, CONCRETE CURB NOTE NUMBER 5 FT SIDE 5hffMr5ta_-_, N69047 SDP'F '(ZIA (D (B618) 4FT. WOOD -7 ------ It- HARP, DISTANCE PER FErIce 133-7 33.79(�)4� 11 MAPLE no.2 E�' ly rmckc (P) RECORDED PLAT 7 8q0.O WOOD RETAINING MEASURED DISTANCE n 0 r\", WALL (M) 1 94. 47.50 ao AVERAGE or woa OW12CO M.XTF1LE ST C PROPOSED FINISHED CRAPE f4ev -1 �__b _._i' PORCH FRM'SETBACK UW- SHPUB ELEVATION 130� ELSTR I FT. CH ?5q4.7 W.- TREES CANTILEVER xq PROPOSED FINISHED GRADE A 44.7---� MANIROLE CONTOUR CIO -3 Q 10.00 It- PROPOSM TWO -STORY WOM PFZN'%E HOUSE FULL 5--l' FVURE0 BASEMI!XT L THE DIMENSIONS SHOWN ARE TO THE WM LIEDCr-- 6194 �-2, PE2-N�- AND 0 BROOKYIEW AVE. Ilil a-.i x R III: SHIED CORNER 2ZOO 612 N . 11 2. THE SEVER AND WATERMAN UrLhY SERVICES SHOWN ARE APPROXIMATE LOCATIONS AARE ON 0 -P FROM MAPS P120VVEV By THE CITY OF EDNA ENCII-EERINC DEPARTMENT. L9TI OUI.Cft FIE ANY AND ALL FIELD CONDITIONS AND UTILITY LOCATIONS SH -LD VERIFIED PRIOR TO EXCAVATION/CON51RUCTION. 35.50 -Y, THE 5HEO LOCATED ON THE AOJONNC PROPERTY TO q4T : ' 30. DERIVE _j s'�T. ibe SETBACK Lwa7 T 3. AT THE TIME OF THIS SURVEY. 09 aqLq 36 THE SOUTH 00 NOT APPEAR TO HAVE A FOUNDATOK L 'n 7 'cH X, '-5HIZLS LINE ._EFT. WOOD A,150�1334�9(M), 33.78(Pj J -4FT. WOOD FENCE FENCE .. . ) j , -r - :�� '_ 'I -. .6 SURVEY. THE BEARINCS ARE BASED ON AN ASSUMED 811411 - 88q.7 4. FOR THE PURP05ES OF THIS - -I&M FC14 q N8 OMNRATION AND THE ELEVATIONS ARE BASED ON AN ASSU•IEV DATUM (BEWW S AS SHOWN ON MAP). ;z My EXISTINC TWO-STORY , W AVE. OP NUT HYDRANT LOCATED IN THE 50JTH1EAST CORNER OF WEST 61ST STREET WOOD FRAME HOUSE fir2a BQOOKVIEW AVIE AND BROOKVIEW AVENUE. FFC--5.-q15.6 ELEV - 1984.14 (NCVD?q) • AREA SUNINIARY LOT 6, BLOCK 23, FARFAX, CROSS BUILDING AREA 2,049 50. FT. OR 0.05 AC. I hereby certify that this survey, plan or report was • • 800 c Buller Square NIEKNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA. (50 50. FT. OF THE COVERED PORCH ALLOWED PER CITY CODE) prepared by me or under my direct superWslon and 100 North Sbdh SbW • that I am a duly licensed Land Surveyor under the L A N D F 0 R M Winneaporis, MN 55403 lows IF the State of MI CARACE FLOOR 895.0 NET BUILMN112 AREA 4999 50. FT. OR 0.05 AC • • TOP OF BLOCK Bq5.5 LOT 6 AREA - = 6.6701 50. FT . OR 0.15 AC. • Web. landfiorm.net F12ST FLOOR 896.1 1"RLVINC COVERAGE = 2q.q3% M. PrrTmANN Oak 08/o/08 Wr LOWEST FLOOR 886.25 Ilt, .11, 44647 ReAsst �U_09 LA..p _UZIL08 Job Na. JM50,3005 -Dm*g: -1tJ`IS0O5-r-5Fhr '10-l" "." /%:1 .... 7-.f-r /7 -1'70 Z /Slant A/p/'/v CORRESPOIDE110E Jackie Hoogenakker From: Stephanie Nelson [stephanie.b.nelson @hotmail.com] nt: Monday, January 26, 2009 10:14 PM To: Jackie _Hoogenakker Subject: C File 901 Members of the Edina Zoning Board, This email is in response to -the request of a 7.14 foot front yard set -back variance, Case File B- 09 -01, by JMS Custom Homes. I am a resident of Brookview Ave and I do not approve of this request. I do not want there to be a double standard in Edina, where builders can ask for forgiveness rather than permission. Respectfully, Stephanie Nelson 6133 Brookview Ave Edina MN 55424 Windows LiveTm Hotmail @: ... more than just e-mail. Check it out.. 1/27/2009 Jackie Hoogenakker From: JOSEPH P,REV CLAY [marian.joe @msn.com] Sent: Thursday, January 22, 2009 10:09 AM To: Jackie Hoogenakker Subject: Letter to Zoning Board relative to the property at 6120 Brookview To the Zoning Board: We live at 6117 Brookview, directly across from the new house being built by JMS Custom Homes. First, we would like to voice our strong objections to any future subdivision of this lot! Next, we ask that the 7.14 foot front yard setback variance not be granted. Why should JMS be allowed to disregard the City Code? The house looks much too close to the street compared with adjoining houses! The actions of this company - disregard of city rules and neighbor's objections to cutting down an old historic tree, e.g. - qualify as unscrupulous! The house under construction towers over the homes surrounding it on all sides. It just doesn't "fit in "! Thank you for your consideration to our concerns. Rev. Joseph P. and Marian R. Clay 1/22/2009 Jackie Hoogenakker From: barbara nelson [barbellen6 @earthlink.net] ent: Monday, January 19, 2009 5:12 PM To: Jackie Hoogenakker Subject: 6120 Brookview Avenue variance January 18, 2009 Barbara E Nelson 6137 Brookview Ave S Edina, MN 55424 City Hall Planning Department Zoning Board City Council Office of the Mayor 4801 West 50th Street Edina, MN 55424 To Whom It May Concern: I am writing in reference to the special meeting of the Edina Zoning Board for the purpose of detennining whether JMS Custom Homes may receive a variance for the property at 6120 Brookview Avenue. I have lived across street and down a few houses on Brookview for 20 years. I am writing to express my opinion as a long -time resident that this situation on our street is a mess. The new home sticks out like ftafe thumb. It may technically be within the legal setback of the side pro erty line (which was no doubt intended to apply to the average size homes on our block) but it looms large over the neighboring Edina historic home and looks awkward and oversized for its off - center position on the lot. On top of that JMS Builders are now requesting a variance for the front yard setback, which I am opposed to. These builders knew the requirements when they bought this lot and have pushed the limits already in many ways. The resulting problems are of their own making and cannot be considered hardships. What is happening with the other half of the lot? Any scenario that I can imagine is problematic. A bigger question is how did this company get as far as they did with this lot? I sincerely hope that something can be done to rectify the situation and prevent further impingements. If more laws are needed to prevent this from happening, then it is time to get them in place. The character of our neighborhood is at stake. Thank you for your consideration. Sincerely, ,arbara E Nelson January 21, 2009 Edina Zoning Board 4801 West 50th Street Edina, MN 55424 Re: Lots 5 and 6, Block 23, Fairfax Our File No. 7878.4 Dear Board Members: (612) 672 -3698 yawver@messeriikramer com My wife and I live at 6121 Brookview Avenue and strongly oppose the variance requested by JMS Custom Homes (Case No. B- 09 -01). Frankly, Mr. Schoenwetter comes to you with unclean hands and any claims of financial hardship should fall on deaf ears. To understand my reasoning, it is necessary to provide some history. JMS purchased the subject property after a prior developer withdrew his request to subdivide the property. The neighboring property owners had vehemently opposed subdivision of the property. Seizing upon an opportunity, JMS gave Mrs. Anderson a lowball offer to purchase her home knowing she was vulnerable. JMS heard from many of the neighbors including myself asking that he not only build a single home but try to save the beautiful oak tree that adorned the property. During Mr. Schoenwetter's conversations with the neighbors, he intimated he wanted to build two homes. The neighbors again advised this would be opposed. Subsequently, the existing home was sold and moved. The 200 year + old oak tree was removed and JMS surveyed the property and commenced construction of a home on the extreme south section of the property: As constructed, it dwarfs the neighboring homes and is so close to the Whitbecks' property line that all sense of privacy is lost. Prior to construction, I sent the attached letter to JMS advising them that their scheme of building the home first and then seeking to subdivide the property claiming some sort of hardship was ill conceived. The response was that I was misinformed and that they had no intensions of building a second home. Furthermore, we would be advised should he seek to subdivide. However, he continued his plan to circumvent the City of Edina's ordinances and neighbors' interest by seeking 'permission to subdivide through Hennepin County. This was denied (only after the county contacted the city). Board Members January 21, 2008 Page 2 It remains apparent to everyone Mr. Schoenwetter still intends to subdivide the property. No doubt, once the current home is built he will raise claims of economic hardship if he is not permitted to build a second home. What the hell? It looks weird to have the one home on top of one neighbor. Why not allow him to build the other one on top of the neighbor to the north to add balance? Besides he will add to the tax base. However, the law is clear a variance should not be permitted since the purported hardship is self- created. Why do I tell you this when the variance he seeks deals with a 7.1 ft violation of the front setback? If JMS and Mr. Schoenwetter understand that his intended subdivision will not be permitted, the economic hardships he now raises are greatly diminished. For the existing structure to make any sense and therefore have value to him or any buyer, it needs to be moved to the center portion of the property. This would satisfy the neighbors, improve the value of the structure and avoid protracted litigation which appears to be looming. It was a mistake of JMS to construct the house where located to begin with. The problem has been exacerbated by constructing it without paying attention to the front setback requirements. This is not an inexperienced builder. He has built many homes in Edina and surrounding cities. JMS' website claims they are recognized for their commitment to the communities they serve. To the contrary, they are quickly gaining the reputation as a builder of oversized houses with total disregard of the neighbors' interest. The surveyor was acting as his agent. The Master is responsible for the agent's negligence. I too find fault in the city's failure to provide proper oversight on the project. All these wrongs cannot be made right by the granting of a variance. The neighborhood and in particular the Whitbecks continue to suffer by having this home situated completely in front of their house so as to block all views to the north. I encourage each of you to drive by the property. You will understand how utterly ridiculous it was for him to build the home where he did. JMS's arrogance and greed must not be rewarded by your granting this request for variance. The only way to prevent further suffering from this awful situation is to deny the request and make it clear he will not be able to build a second home on the parcel. Respectfully, ose . Lawver JWUmpn Enclosure MESSERLI & KMMER ATTORNlYSATLAerP.0. ATTORNEYS AT LAW 1800 Fifth Street Towers 150 South Fifth Street Mlnneapolls. Minnesota 55402 -4218 December 5, 2008 main 612.6 2.37 7 fax 51x.b7zaTn wwwmesserl ikrameccom Additional offices in: St. Paul & Plymouth MN Authorized to practice law in: Minnesota, Colorado, District of Columbia, Illinois, Missouri. Montana, New York, South Dakota and Wisconsin Jeffrey Schoenwetter JMS Custom Homes Writer's contact: 5250 West 74th Street, Suite 8 (612) 672 -3698 Edina, MN 55439 jiawvei@messerfikramer.com Re: Fairfax, Block 23, Lot 5 and 6 Dear Mr. Schoenwetter: My wife and I live at 6121 Brookview Avenue, Edina, Minnesota. Your firm acquired the property directly across from us, sold and moved the existing house and removed a beautiful oak tree in excess of 250 years old with the stated purpose that you intended to build a single home upon the lot. Unfortunately, I returned from work yesterday and saw that your employees had staked off lines indicating your intent to build a home on the southern half of the property. It appears your intention is to subdivide the lot to build a second home on the northern half of the property. You are aware that a prior developer attempted to subdivide the property to allow construction of two homes on the site. This subdivision proposal garnered strong objection from the neighborhood. The builder subsequently withdrew his subdivision proposal and sold the property to your firm. It is my understanding that in order to subdivide the property a variance will be required and I hope that the City Planning Department did not mislead you into thinking that this would be an easy process. Specifically, I do not believe you can legally establish that a hardship exists or if so it is self- induced. The property is currently conforming and is well- suited for a single dwelling. If you intend to seek a subdivision I would have preferred that you be more direct and seek approval prior to building on the south lot. Your tactic appears to be an effort to circumvent the due process afforded neighbors to object to proposed subdivisions. I am told your firm builds quality homes and your website indicates that you have a commitment to the communities that you serve. Unless I am mistaken as to your intentions, your tactic of trying to force the city and neighborhood to accept a subdivision of the lot by proceeding prior to obtaining the necessary approvals shows a total disregard to the interests of the neighborhood. I ask that you reconsider the proposed construction and return to the plan of building a single dwelling upon the property. MS' rrcrwona wowawof Jeffrey Schoenwetter December 5, 2008 Page 2 Should you have any interests in discussing this matter, please feel free to contact me. Respectfully, MESSERLI & KRAMER P.A. o ep W. Lawver JWUmpn cc: Carey Teague Planning Commissioners 741673.1 Joseph W. Lawver From: Jeff Schoenwetter [Jeff @jmscompanies.com] Sent: Friday, December 05, 2008 1:43 PM To: Joseph W. Lawver Cc: cteague @ci.edina.mn.us; dwmusic @comcast.net Subject: RE: Joe , I appreciate your correspondence . However you are not completely informed. While we do understand our Property rights , we today are only building one home. Thanks for your interest . We'll try to build this home in 90 days as to minimize the noise and disruption , it promises to be a great home. If you have a need to talk , just call my office , and ask Darleen to set a conference call appointment. Thanks for your interest. We'll keep you posted if we elect to subdivide. From: Joseph W. Lawver [ mailto :]Lawver @MesserliKramer.com] Sent: Friday, December 05, 2008 10:46 AM To: Jeff Schoenwetter Cc: cteague @ci.edina.mn.us; dwmusic @comcast.net Subject: FW: Mr. Shoenwetter; I would appreciate'taIking to you about this if you have a moment. Joe Lawver Messerli & Kramer PA 1800 Fifth Street Towers 150 South 5th Street Minneapolis, MN 55402 Direct Phone: 612 - 672 -3698 Fax: 612 - 672 -3777 ilawverC�messerlikramer.com Confidentiality Note: This e -mail message is for the sole use of the intended recipient(s) and may contain confidential and privileged information. Any unauthorized review, use, disclosure or distribution of any kind is strictly prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender via reply e-mail and destroy all copies of the original message. Thank you. IRS REQUIRED DISCLOSURE: The IRS requires us to inform you that any federal tax advice in this email and any.attached documents is not intended or written to'be used, and cannot be used, (1) for the purpose of avoiding federal tax penalties or (2) promoting, marketing or recommending any transaction discussed in this communication to another person unless we expressly indicate otherwise. From: Mary P. Nygaard Sent: Friday, December 05, 2008 10:30 AM To: Joseph W. Lawver Subject: Mary Nygaard Legal Administrative Assistant Messerli & Kramer P.A. 1800 Fifth Street Towers 150 South Fifth Street Minneapolis, MN 55402 Direct: 612 - 672 -3622 . Fax: 612- 672 -3777 Email: mnygaard @messerlikramer.com Website: www.messerlikramer.com CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This e-mail message is for the sole use of the intended recipient(s) and may contain confidential and privileged information. Any unauthorized review, use, disclosure or distribution of any kind is strictly prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender via reply e-mail and destroy all copies of the original message. Thank you. Jackie'Hoogenakker From: Doug Nelson [dnelson @theminikandaclub.com] nt: Thursday, January 22, 2009 9:37 AM 10: Jackie Hoogenakker Subject: 6120 brookview avenue City Hall Planning Department I am writing to announce my displeasure in how the City of Edina has allowed the construction of a house 7 feet closer to the road than allowed by Code. How exactly does something like this happen? I have always thought that permits must be applied for, plans shown, and the OK to proceed must be given by the City of Edina before someone proceeds with a project. Someone here (the City, the surveyor, JMS ? ? ?) has certainly made a mistake and I think it should be rectified and not allowed to be completed as is. I have no problem with someone building a nice home in the neighborhood but I do believe that City Codes should be followed. My property backs up to the pile of dirt that currently has a beautiful back hoe on the top. I am sure this is the location of the second home JMS plans to build ..... once they have pushed their way past the CITY on this project. I will be out of town during the hearing but I certainly hope that the Board Members have a chance to review the property and the issues at hand. Doug Nelson 6117 Oaklawn Ave Edina, MN 55424 1/22/2009 January 22, 2009 Edina Zoning Board 4801 West 501h Street Edina, MN 55424 Dear Board Members, My husband and I live at 6104 Brookview Ave. and are writing in response to a letter we received from the city concerning Lot 6, Block 23, Fairfax. We strongly oppose the variance requested by JMS Custom Homes. We find it difficult to understand how a builder of such supposed repute would fail to catch an error of 7.14 feet front yard setback, and why the home is being built as close as possible to the Southern lot edge. This lot, or actually lots 5 & 6, has been of concern since the winter of 2008 when Grace Anderson's home was purchased by a developer with the intent to subdivide. For reasons unknown to us the property was sold to JMS Custom Homes. Suddenly the existing home was removed and a majestic 250+ year old oak tree cut down. Now a huge structure is being erected whose upper —level windows peer directly into our backyard; three lots away! We never had privacy concerns before because all of the homes were of similar stature. A recent Star Tribune article "Come Home to Edina" (1/11/09) chronicled how young couples who had been raised in Edina and wanted to return to raise their own families were unable to do so because of limited affordable homes. Mayor Hovland was quoted as saying, "Young families are part of Edina's "cycle of life "." Diverse demographics help create strong communities; allowing developers to replace solidly built starter homes with over -sized expensive home does not accomplish this intrinsic goal for the community. Perhaps the larger issue is: Are we as a community really welcoming to diverse demographics? As residents on this block, we have followed all available avenues to voice our concern about our neighborhood. And yet, the proceedings on use of the aforementioned property seemed less than transparent, vague and non - forthright. Now we are supposed to support a request for an oversight that very obviously should have been caught immediately. What next will be asked of the neighborhood? Our hands are tied. We do not, and will not support this variance. Sincerely, Trudy and Bill Landgren Edina residents and community taxpayers for 33 years c�o�, ai aoor _WRO Al � iv ice January 21, 2009 Edina Zoning Board 4801 West 50`h Street Edina, MN 55424 Re: Lots 5 and 6, Block 23, Fairfax Dear Board Members: My wife and I live at 6143 Brookvie.w Avenue and strongly oppose the variance requested by JMS Custom Homes. The house that has been built clearly does not fit into the neighborhood and is quite apparent that the builder plans on subdividing the lot. We were opposed to the previous builder's request to subdivide the lot. The builder also removed the beautiful 250 year old oak tree which is also very upsetting. JMS Homes seems to be trying to subdivide the lot without going through proper procedures and is now asking for a variance. The Whitbecks who live on the south side of the house have very carefully restored the old historic farm house in which they live. It is quite insulting to have a huge house built next door without any regard for the character of the neighborhood. Before building the present house, he removed the old house and transported it to another location. We would like to see this current house also moved and a single family house be built on the lot. Please deny his request for a variance to build another house on the property. Please contact me if you have further questions. My cell phone is 952- 201 -7031. S ncerely, R y M onen c: Planning Commission City Council Members Mayor 1/21/09 Edina Zoning Board 4801 West 50'' Street Edina, MN 55424 Re: Your file # B -09 -01 Dear Board Members, Before I go into detail, I must ask you to please drive by our home as soon as possible. My wife and•I live at 6128 Brookview Ave and we strongly oppose any variance given to JMS builders for 6120 Brookview.Ave. On December 8, 2008 my wife, Jackie, emailed the Edina Planning Commission and City Council an extensive description of our opposition and did not here one word in response. Further, a District Court Judge lifted a "stop work" order a while ago. I was told by Mr Teague that it was temporary and that there would be a formal hearing later. I asked why we were not informed of the first hearing and he said they only got about an hour notice. So what ?!! Then we discover that a 2nd hearing was held and, once again, we were not informed. The failure of the city to inform us of this 2nd hearing as well as the first basically denied us our right to due process. Now for some history: Before construction began at 6120 Brookview Ave, then president of JMS (the builder) came to our home to try to sell us on the idea of two homes (a subdivision) instead of one enormous home. The drawing of the single home looked like it would cover the lot from end to end. We told him we would not support subdividing the lot. (This same guy was at the hearing we all attended to object to the previous developer's attempt to subdivide so he knew how we felt.) Shortly before construction began, JMS came to us with a supposed new "vision" for the property. He said he wanted to build two homes on the property. We told him we were interested in seeing one nice home and saving the oak tree. He then began to offer us several "deals ". He offered to sell us 25 feet at $3,000.00 per foot. He said he would then build next to our neighbor to the north instead of next to us. Or, if he sold it to that neighbor first, then the house would be 5 feet from us. He also suggested that maybe the neighborhood should get together and buy the entire lot and use it for a "park ". His parting comment was, "If I save the oak tree, will you let me build two houses? He later approached other neighbors as well. In mid August, plans were submitted for a single home. Near the end of November / beginning of December, a survey was done again and laid out a subdivision. When the surveyors finished, it was clear that he was planning on two lots for two houses. My wife went to city hall to look at the plans. The plan for a large single home in the middle of the lot was gone and in its place a plan was submitted (dated November 26) to build a large home on just 50 feet. The builder was proceeding as if he was already granted a subdivision. Jackie asked the planning dept if there was anything we could do to stop this as it is obvious he is planning on a subdivision. Jackie was told he has a 100 foot lot, he can build where he wants. Both Joe Lawver and I wrote JMS to express our concern. Jackie called the city inspector and was told by him that JMS had an administrative subdivision for the property. Jackie told the inspector she thought he was mistaken. The city inspector said he would check and get back to her. He did call back 30 minutes later and informed Jackie that the city attorney informed him that he (the inspector) was wrong and that JMS did not have a subdivision. Jackie asked the inspector if JMS had led him to believe they had a subdivision and the inspector said, "yes ". On January 5, 2009 we met with city planner, Cary Teague, to inform him of all the shenanigans going on and to discuss the set back. Jackie told him she felt there was no way'the set back was according to code. The city then discovered the set back was wrong. A "Stop Work" order was issued by the city because the new house has an improper set back by 7 feet. The builder, JMS, went to district court and got the judge to lift the "stop work" order. This, according to Mr Teague, was a temporary injunction and he told me a more formal hearing would be held soon. It is important for me to reiterate that none of us were advised by the city that this was going to court.....either time. According to Mr Teague, JMS claimed to the court that if he did not have the house ready for the parade of homes, he would go out of business. This guy is bullying his way through this entire project. You know that he will ask for a subdivision next. Why else would he build on just half of the existing lot? In fact, JMS tried to circumvent approval from the city for a subdivision by going to Hennepin County instead. Hennepin County called Edina and told the guy no deal. They can take down the house (there is precedence for this) or move it to a proper location or cut off front 7 feet and put the garage on the north side of the home. Anyway you look at this, the current location of this house is WRONG. 2 We rely on or city officials to hold people to the letter, of the law and protect its citizens. Please help us in this matter. Respectfully, Dick Whitbeck 6128 Brookview Ave Edina, MN 55424 952- 926 -9927 3 1/22/09 Edina Zoning Board 4801 West 50'h Street Edina, MN 55424 Re: Your file # B -09 -01 Dear Board Members, I am completely against any variance being awarded to JMS Construction for the building at 6120 Brookview Ave. JMS has foolishly placed the home they are building on the extreme boundaries of their 100 foot lot. Not only does it look ridiculous, it promises to deliver a host of problems for my husband and I. The house that previously occupied the lot was positioned slightly under 40 feet from the side of the lot and slightly more than 40 feet from the front of the lot. This new house is set so far forward that the back of the house ends before the front of our house even begins. The house is so close to us that with this new altered grade, water diversion and snow accumulation are imminent problems. Our 40 + year old hedge is right in line with snow slides from the steep roof. Our driveway was not shown on the survey. It is right next to the side of our lot. It is gravel and therefore water diversion is no small issue here. We have lost our privacy, lost our view of the park, lost the charm and continuity of our neighborhood and probably lost property value as well. Who is going to compensate us for this loss? For JMS to build in this manner in the first place is beyond all measure of rudeness and greed. NO SLARIANCE! - Jackie ""a'55424 beck 6128 Bview Ave Edina, 952- 922 -5045 1/21/09 Edina Zoning Board 4801 West 50`h Street Edina, MN 55424 Dear Board Members, The attached email was sent to the Planning Commission and City Council December 8, 2008 regarding construction on 6120 Brookview Ave. No one ever replied, to me. Jacyie 'tbeck 61219 B ookview Ave Edina, MN 55424 Wed, Jan 21, 2009 3:16 PM Subject: Subdivision - Please Help! Attn: Members of the Edina Planning Commission and City Council Date: Monday, December 8, 2008 12:07 PM From: Dick Whitbeck <dwmusic @comcast.net> To: <edinamail @ci.edina.mn.us> Conversation: Subdivision - Please Help! Attn: Members of the Edina Planning Commission and City Council To the members of the Edina Planning Commission and City Council: This summer our neighborhood residents appeared before the planning commission in a rather lengthy meeting to try to prevent a developer from subdividing a 100, foot lot at 6120 Brookview Ave. The reasons for our opposition to this subdivision were many. 1) Subdivision to a 50 foot lot may have been suitable for the 1950s size homes but not for the larger homes built today. Jamming up two large homes on two small lots would not represent progress but simply manifest greed at the expense of the neighbors. 2) Our home (adjacent to the lot in discussion) is possibly the first house built in Edina in the 1860s.It was argued that it would be prudent to preserve one of the last remaining truly historical "pockets" in the city. Mayor Jim Hovland presented us with the Edina Heritage Award for Historical Preservation. A subdivision adjacent to us would reduce this historic site to an aesthetic joke. 3) Preservation of a majestic oak tree between 200 and 300 years old. A hallmark of the neighborhood 4) Many lots on our street are larger than 50 feet. 5) Protection from an eyesore for there is not one house on our block the size of the proposed new home. 6) Excavating 5 feet from our property line could prove a disaster as the subxoil structure on our lot is sand. Many other considerations were offered forth as well. In short, environmental, aesthetic, functional and preservation of our property values were in consideration. The planning commission debated the proposal and the issue was dismissed. The developer realized the neighborhood was passionate about preserving the integrity of our community and withdrew. Unknown to us, the president of JMS Builders was at this meeting. JMS soon purchased the property. Jeffrey M Shoenwetter, owner of JMS, met with many of the neighbors to propose a subdivision plan once again. All who were approached firmly apposed. Subsequently, JMS submitted a plan for one house on the property. We thought the conflict was over. Not to be. The beautiful oak tree was destroyed. On December 4, I noticed a new survey appearing to stake out the 100 foot lot into two 50 foot lots. I went to city hall to inquire about plans for the property. As expected, plans were for one home to be built on only 50 feet of the lot. Speaking with Kris Aaker about this I was told there was nothing the city could do about where a builder decides to place a home on the property if within legal guidelines. Page 1 of 2 It is fairly transparent as to what is going on here. JMs is creating its own subdivision for future development without applying for a subdivision permit denying all voices to ' heard. JMs is clearly disregarding and disrespecting all the neighbors on our block. Th is an abuse of the spirit and intent of the city's building codes. Whether one lopsided home on a 100 foot lot or two homes on each 50 foot lot becomes a reality, the developer will have destroyed the aesthetic continuity of yet another neighborhood in Edina. I am looking for help and guidance to protect our neighborhood. I am just sick that JMS can manipulate the system at all of our expense. I implore you. Is there anything that can be done before our neighborhood is forever ruined? Respectfully yours, Jackie Whitbeck 6128 Brookview Ave Edina, MN 55424 952 - 922 -5045 Page 2 of 2 January 22, 2009 Edina Zoning Board 4801 W. 50`}' St. Edina, MN. 55424 Property Address: 6120 Brookview Avenue Legal Description: Lots 5 and 6. Block 23 Fairfax Dear Board Members: The Edina Historical Society's records indicate that my house was built in 1930. I've lived here at 6112 Brookview since 1974. This year marks 35 years of being an Edina resident and taxpayer, current volunteer at Fairview Hospital, former ESL instructor in the 80's and I served on the Human Rights and Relations Commission for 10 years, from 1995 -2005. Most of my employment has also been in the City of Edina. I guess you could say I have "roots" here. I take this current situation very seriously and strongly oppose the variance requested by JMS Custom Homes (Case No. B -09 -01 and any future request to subdivide the property in order to build a second home. When my next door neighbor of over 30 years, felt the need to move from her home in May of 2008, I knew that change was on the way. The first interested developer planned to remove the home and build 2 smaller homes on the 100 foot lot. In order to do this he had to show financial hardship for a variance to build 2 houses. We, as a neighborhood, proved successful in blocking this project and he rescinded his plans. JMS Custom Homes became involved in this project last summer, buying the property and moving the existing home. They, too, wanted to build 2 houses and surveyed all of us in the neighborhood. Again, we vocalized that we would not approve any project for two homes. JMS then submitted plans to the City of Edina for one house that would be built in the center of the property. We had hopes that they would not remove the healthy old oak tree in the front yard. JMS removed this tree. Then, after surveying the property, and without requesting variances or communicating with any of us, almost overnight, they rescinded their earlier plans and began building a house right next to the Whitbeck's on the southern most part of the lot which to anyone would appear to mean that their intent is to build 2 houses. This new home hides the Whitbeck's charming historic home. How could JMS build this house without submitting new plans and without paying attention to front setback requirements? If the surveyor was acting as his agent, then they are also involved. I am also concerned about the height of this house. Is it a legal height? If you will review the December 30, 2008 Planning Commission meeting video, you will note that when discussing the referenced property, the word "subdivision" is mentioned. How can that be? Did the city approve the "subdivision" without notifying nearby neighbors? Lastly, I have concerns about the possible building of a second home that will be placed near my garage and home. It was noted during the construction digging that the soil would "give away." Did this developer complete soil testing before beginning this project? Yours truly, Carol Carmichiel CC /c Enclosure: 10 photos 2 St, Uo��ree, te:%n COK tjQ', �e�v2d - �� ous�, �� My vlevj (A ntuo VtL4-0, 00m.) � MA.ch,nec t� or. �fosecA JZdA1S V r)p, ga+age p (0\\z I . A_ - 1 ..J i C)� �e� If N"P..j {iflUS2, p�co x�c��Jy�O h�4Z, ors Wh��beck ,X,-ajlabl4 Cum, �m It 952-949-31 STOCK 10 CX ;, � ul�K .? � Sae SAAe. Miroslava (Mckie) 'Turk 6141 Brookview Avenue Edina, MN Zoning Board 4801 W. 5e. St. Edina, MN 55424 January 22, 2009 Dear Zoning Board Members, My name is Miroslava (Mickie) Turk. and I reside at 6141 Brookview Avenue, Edina, MN, down the street from the construction site of 6120 Brookview Avenue, Edina, MN/Fairfax, Block 23 Lot 5 and 6. 1 am writing you today because I am concerned about cagey tactics JMS Construction is using in constructing their house. Originally the owner inquired around the neighborhood, ascertaining the feelings and mood of the homeowners regarding the kind of house we would like to see built on the acquired lot. He found out everyone was deeply opposed to having two large, two -story houses crushed together on the 100 -foot lot. Afterwards, the owner submitted a plan for a single large house to sit in the middle of the lot. During this time JMS had applied to Hennepin County for a subdivison variance, which was turned down and brought to the attention of the City of Edina. Later, he surveyed his lot for two houses to be built side by side. He then resubmitted his building plan to build a house on the south side of the lot. Unfortunately he started building the house approximately six feet too close to the south side and next to the Whitbeck historic home, and also too close to the street by approximately six feet. The city granted JMS a permit, based on the surveyor's report and drawings. The surveyor made a huge mistake, knowingly or unknowingly, but which the Whitbecks found and brought to the attention of the City Planner. Shortly after, the city issued a stop work order. This stop work order was followed up by a TRO on January 8, then in court on January 13 and 15, an evidentiary hearing was held for JMS, on the merits of the case. Shockingly, the Whitbecks, whose house is most affected by the too -close building of the new construction, were not invited to testify. JMS has already imposed a hardship on the Whitbecks, cutting off their view of the park, and I feel strongly that by submitting and implementing plans to build a house outside the legal guidelines, JMS is presenting the neighborhood and city with a fait accompli. A way to eventually make room for a subdivision variance; to advance plans to build another house —too big and again too close, to another large house. I respectfully ask that the Zoning Board not reward JMS for breaking the law. I believe the new JMS construction needs to be moved, or demolished. The surveyor may be responsible for the expenses, unless he was misled by JMS, who may have told him that he already had a subdivision variance. Respectfully, Miroslava (Mickie) Turk ve s i d2 e-c- 24f7 16 "44c,4"I)v January 22, 2009 To: Edina Zoning Board Members /City Council Members Mayor Jim Hovland/City Manager Gordon Hughes Edina Planning Commission Members Edina City Hall 4801 West 50th St. Edina, MN 55424 Re: Case File B -09 -01 Issue of 7.14 ft. front setback variance and JMS Custom Homes, LLC Lots 5 and 6, Block 23, Fairfax (6120 Brookview Ave.) To all the above persons, We (Janey Westin and Charlie Hughes) live at 6136 Brookview Ave., two doors south of 6120. Every time we step out onto our driveway or froAt stoop, we are horrified at the monstrosity that is being built in full view (complete length of the home from its front to the back) only one neighbor away, to the north of us. We absolutely oppose any kind of variance of this property for Mr. Jeffrey M. Schoenwetter of JMS Custom Homes, LLC. Every step of the way, from how the home was purchased, up to today when the siding is being put on, has been carried out with callous disregard for the neighborhood, its environment and history; disregard for the city's setback code and ordinances; and, we believe, dishonesty when working with the city planning depart- ment. In May of 2008, JMS swooped in to take advantage of a vulnerable widow in purchasing the original home for $300,000 after the first builder, Navid Pouladian, backed out of a $330,000 purchase deal. Hennepin County's listed fair market value for the original home was $350,800. In early fall, the house and separate 2 car garage were both picked up and moved during the night early one week. The full basement of 8 ft. depth sat for the rest of the week with junk from the garage and the demolished back deck thrown into it. No fencing of any kind was put around it. There are 5 small children that live across the street and a few doors to the north. I called city inspections on Friday to report my concerns. A fence of flimsy support was finally placed around the basement in the afternoon of the following Monday - -6 days late, and a clear violation of ordinance. After earth moving equipment and a dumpster showed up and disposed of the basement remains, an unfenced pit of at least 4 foot depth was left until early December -- another danger to neighborhood kids, as well as ordinance violation. We also called city inspections about this on December 3rd. In early October, Mr. Schoenwetter himself was visiting the now homeless lot. I (Janey) expressed concerns to him about a beautiful, 42" diameter trunk, 81 ft. span burr oak tree that the previous home had been built off to the side of. I stated the value of the tree, how it was an asset to the lot, and how beautifully a single - family 1 1/2 story home could be placed under it. Mr. Schoenwetter then proceeded to make a verbal offer to sell the south 25' to me and the neighbors for $100,000 to save the tree. Ten minutes prior to this, he was making u verbal offers of different footage to the Whitbecks who live directly to the south at 6128 in the oldest (1866) historic home in the city. Mr. JMS did not reveal to either the Whitbecks or me that he had already submitted plans to the city for a very large single home on Aug. 13th. (See Doc. B, Cetif. of Survey, revision history). On October 16 and 17, when the Whitbecks were out of town (Teacher's Convention - -no school), JMS had the tr butchered and hauled away. (See Doc. A, photo) There was not one portion of rot anwhere in the whole tree. Was the timing of this removal just a coincidence with the Whitbeck's absence? The day after the city was called about the unfenced pit on Dec. 3rd, new stakes were placed on the south half of the lot (only on lot 6) with the dividing line between lots 5 and 6 clearly marked. JMS's intentions became alarmingly clear to us; to build a home wholely on one half of the 100 ft. lot, and then build a second one on the north half. The neighborhood had not been notified of any application for variance to divide. At this point, Joe Lawver at 6121 Brookview wrote .a letter to the city regarding concerns about this. We have since learned that JMS had approached the county to ask for a subdivision, hoping to avoid proper legal procedure of doing this through the city. The county contacted the city of Edina questioning it, and was told that JMS cannot do that. One of the more vexing parts of this whole mess is that when JMS submitted the certificate of survey to the city for his second proposed home at 6120, the legal description given is "Lot 6, Block 23," etc. Only measure- ments for Lot 6 are shown and outlined in bold. No location of the previous home is given. Please compare this survey (Doc.B) with a previous survey (Doc C.) which was used by Navid Pouladian when applying for a vari- ance to subdivide 6120 last Spring. Document C is dated 1- 25 -08. Compare this with dates of 8 -13 -08 and revised date of 11 -24 -08 on Document B. Both surveys were performed by Landform. By all appearances, it seems that JMS has clearly misrepresented the truth to both the surveyor and the City of Edina as far as whet' he had a variance to divide. Let's call a spade a spade here. Isn't this illegal ?! It is also equally disturbing that the Planning Dept. apparently did not question this fact. Even the notice sent to local property owners about the Jan. 28 Special meeting of the Edina Zoning Board describes the lot as "Lot 6, Block23", excluding Lot 5! People representing the Planning Dept. told the Whitbecks more than once that JMS had an "administrative subdivision ". What is going on here ?? On Jan. 20, 2009 I had a confirmation from Mitzi Wicklund in Assessing that there is NOT and NEVER has been a subdivision of the said lot (see Doc.D). This was also stated in a meeting that we (Jackie Whitbeck, Janey Westin and Charlie Hughes) had with Kris Aaker in Planning 2 weeks before. Now, we finally get to the direct issue of the setback from the street. The city code as written in Subd. 7 Special Requirements in addition to Subsection 850.07, may be lengthy, but not "ambiguous" and "vague" as argued by JMS in court on Jan. 13 and 15, 2009. Charlie and I had no problem figuring it out when we built a 1 1/2 story garage 2 years ago, and we are not builders by profession. We believe JMS is fully aware of what the setback codes are, especially given the fact that JMS has built a number of homes in Edina prior to this. For example, there are two.in the Country Club District, one on Bruce Ave. at 4608, the other on Drexel Ave., both in the last few years. Both of those homes raised great concerns as JMS appears to have pushed the limits of and violated the intention of the city building codes, with little consideration of neighbors. At 6120 Brookview, JMS has clearly crossed the line by placing the home 7.14 feet too close to the street. No consideration WHATSOEVER has been shown for the historic merits of the home at 6128 Brookview Avenue, or the 1 Whitbeck family that lives there. The back wall of the JMS monstrosity is FURTHER FORWARD than the front north corner of the Whitbeck home! (see Doc.B). To allow this structure to proceed sets a very dangerous precedence for future homes built in Edina, especially by a builder such as JMS. So far, it seems that if the builder doesn't like the rules, he can do whatever he wants as long as the Planning Dept. doesn't catch their misrepresentation or gross violation of building code right away. In addition, JMS argued in court Jan. 13 and 15 that "...non- participation [in the Parade of Homes] and the existence of the partially completed Home would harm JMS's reputation and would likely put JMS out of busi- ness." Through searching on the intemet, it seems to be quite apparent that Mr. Schoenwetter's financial prob- lems are not rooted in his project at 6120 Brookview Ave.: -- -- According to the Star Tribune, April 21, 2008, in "Part I, Minnesota's New Gost Towns ", (see Doc.E) JMS Homes was already in trouble with a "master- planned community" called Martin Farms in Otsego, Wright County, MN. Schoenwetter is quoted, "Builders were part of the problem." - - -- In the Mpls. /St.Paul Business Journal of June 10, 2008 (see Doc. F) it is reported that Schoenwetter's Martin Farms development and a Lakeville development called "Tullamore" were taken possession of by Wells Fargo Bank. Schoenwetter is quoted, "...it made sense to let the bank take over." - - - -In the April 4, 2008 posting of the Mpls. /St.Paul Business Journal (see Doc. G) it is reported that Anchor Bancorp had begun foreclosure proceedings on JMS Co.'s 25,000 sq. ft. office building at 6889 Rowland Road in Eden Prairie. A sheriff's sale of the building was scheduled for May 9, 2008. -----The Star Tribune, Nov. 30, 2008 reported in a listing of Business Bankruptcies (see Doc. H) that two businesses under the auspices of Jeffrey M. Schoenwetter had filed for Chapter 11 bankrupty on Nov. 17, 2008. They are Savage Development I and II. As you can see, Mr. Schoenwetter, who seems to operate under multiple business names, (of which JMS Custom Homes, LLC is just one), has a trail of immense financial problems preceding the issues we are now dealing with at 6120 Brookview Ave. They are NO EXCUSE for multiple violations of the city code. (This includes being woken up by workers' activities many mornings long before 7:00 a.m. - -yet another violation!) If JMS had conducted this project in an honest and ethical manner in the first place, he would have been able to make his deadline for the Parade of Homes. We believe he has brought ALL of these problems upon himself. JMS has moved one home from this lot before. HE CAN DO IT AGAIN! It should be placed in the middle of the lot with a proper setback. JMS should also be required to plant at least six new burr oaks to replace the one cut down. We ask that the City of Edina also ban Mr. Jeffrey M.- Schoenwetter from any future building or additons under any business name within the city limits for the next 50 years. Would you want him building a home next to you? Sincerely, Janey We Charlie H CERTIFICATE OF SURVEY b061AMey1+ C ) FOR: BRAVURA CONSTRUCTION I � J Lots 5 and 6. Block 23. rpJlcrA><, Mennepn t.o—y, NORTH SCALE: 1 " =20' SITE SYMBOLS: E %SYNC DESCRIPTION EXISTING DESCRIPTION ' 0 POWERPOLE' CANOPY / OVERHANG AC AIR CONDITIONER CONCRETE SURFACE ELECTRIC METER EM ® MARKED 'X' N CONCRETE C� BITUMINOUS SURFACE O SET X 14" IRON PIPE SET WITH PLASTIC CAP MONUMENT 7 I GRAVEL SURFACE •rYVe IRON nONUT7ENT FOUND +73 CONTOUR 155AN > 5ARTARY SEWER LIFE .173.4 SPOT ELEVATION 6'WTR WATER MAN > , �T— OVERHEAD TELEPHONE �i� CONCRETE CURB - - II �— (8615) --OTV— OVERHEAD TV FENCING —.X— OVERHEAD UTILITY LINES (D INING NOTE: '00 WOOD RETAINING NOTE NUMBER WALL 05TANCE PER .. SHRUB (P) RECORDED PLAT TREES (M) MEASURED DISTANCE MANHOLE tt JJ = = NOTES: L I J I. THE DPENSIOMS SHOWN ARE TO T}E BRICK LED - > APPROXIMATE 2. SEWER W HE TERMAN CITY OF EEOKI NGNEE91C OEPARTrE14 DERIVED FROM MAPS - S- 3. AT THE TIME OF THIS SURVEY, THE 5HED LOCATED ON THE ADJOINING PROPERTY TO UR TH; SOUTH DD NOT APPEAR TO HAVE A FOUNDATION. BASED ON AN - 4. FRENNA ION AND THE ELEVATIONS AS SURVEY. THE BEARINGS ARE ARE 8 ED ON AN ASSUMED DATUM (BENCHMARK i - AS SHOWN ON MAP). I hereby certify that this survey, pion or report was prepared by me or under my.direct supervision and that 1 am a duly license Land Surveyor under the laws df the State of Minnesota F :f�q f0 � _. A e o te:1 5 08 o JdMLha n M. PLLM Leeaee. No. 44647 SArTIH�_ - ARKS -e�� 800C BUTLER SQUARE 1 � r - - -- 100 NORTH 6TH STREET , RIM =99.67 eN. >83.6 �� Minneapolis, MN rm.net 55403-1610 www.lettdfonn.net Job No, BVC08003 Drarnq: hrdyBVC003.d g By: RC ii CERTIFICATE OF SURVEY oG u m V, n�' B _ •''_'' II ' - ORWINAL NOV 2 5 208 TM ' FOR: JMS CUSTOM HOMES S- olt 00 /13/08 • E%19TNC jyIP -9T I � a4 OATM 08 A DRY 09 /O /OB c ENT FOUND s ELEVAfK1D WOOD FiFN1E HOUSE - - 10/01/08 - ary CR4EMs 0 21) I FLP9r FLOoQ,`(nw:sHOLD) u 896.2 x`(112 BROOK VEW AVE. I 10/30/08 - NEW ULDN6 A qs TOP OF POURED FOUNDATION a 095.7 FFEe897.5 _ 41 /11/08 . - NEW BULONO PLANS SCALE IN FEET 89 .I 11/19/05 - NEW &LDIN6 KANS 1 NEW BI.LDDL' AND ADAW LOCATION 1 o .895.9 E89 4 • n E7(L91NG _ 4 ; � � - 94 h- .;V �' I " EXISTNG DESORPTION EXGTNC DESCRIPTION 1 -.:' C'Q ,.m _ BULDNG 0 POWERPOLE FrD P -s•7 ' Fra 9.6. 889.2 CANOPY /OVERHANG AC AIR CONDITIONER - - ru1PLE STEn e l qQp�, OAP�PO09 70 : ELECTRIC METER UiLNOWN CONCRETE SURFACE LM .,rrag5:; 1.- .�.- ..�_- .'. _1 .-.. kr_1_±•�• - \® -' .895.4 f .894.8 1 fi GARAGE ;O / .8g54 .893.914 5v2LrE !° J2.5 1 I _ •TYPE RON M,OAUMENT FOUPD .., SHRLE Lr•IE -' / ---r ._. >. - 1-,'., _::: :..t ?':- " " ^:''''. " BRUMRJOUS SURFACE °gs vt34. -B -SAN V- TR SANTARY SE WER LNE GRAVEL SURFACE WATER TAW radinOr4nage Pbl1 -or- ovEatEAD TELEPHONE rec3utred prior to L---i 89 .1 _ I '' 1 �' 7J+_.i- CONTOUR -v•V- OVERHEAD TV . 1 s .1. rl[2ering any grades SILT FENCING IS I _ 513.4 SPOT ELEVATION -0E- OVERHEAD uturY LINES .895.6 and/or drainage n�. ��p��7.. ', I - -. • n itr-QLJ1liC 94 _I I ''1: (B618) CURB O NOTE NlR'BER 5 FT. 9DE LINE S89 4 .',- 4FT. 4000 I ^ `eye 133.7'(M 133.79(P)® 9 HARd g 1 erart. nve �u *. +.ve (P) RECORDED PLAT FEMCE�______ �Z S 94. X89 94. •L MAPLE P i'� 890.0 - x- �---o-- c 7 I -' WOOD RE7AINNG (M) MEASURED DISTANCE _ YI -� _'j I •I :. -'�/ WALL PRQP�ED FQ'iSrC.D GRi1DE w j95 �I `ef 94. - - 47.50 COVERED___ iD AVEaAGE of BLOC4 �. :, i SrRUB ® ELEVATION BOX ELK/C-R 4 iE 7t4L rt894.7�- I FT. PORCH �+ ; FONT �SETBAL[ WIE Q •I _ - -� a .ti TREES �7J�� GRADE ruLTPLe ST CANMLEVE R A• i.`' PROPOSED ft•151ED 4A7 -- rn'899t X 94. lr Cp ' �_S. Q MANHOLE CONTOUR 6 10.00 Ili' e / `-` NOTE L THE OMEN9IOAH SHOWN ARE TO THR BRICK LEDGE- . +•) �_: , WOM FRN9E HOUSE ,j. - .. `� FULL 9' -T' POURED BABETENT :'"'i IFiNCE AND E- •D0 BRDOIGVIEIO AVE p' N m 'MIt'X ': °2 # < m s _ 2. THE SEWER AND WATERMAN UTLKY SERVICE5 SHOWN ARE APPROXMATE LOCATIONS 894. SI•['D CORDER 94. 22.00 0° N r f ss t8 DERIVED FROM MAPS PRWDED BY flE CfTY OF EDNA ENCNEERNC OEPARTI 'ENT. ON LpT ��E x� W ANY AND ALL FIELD CODDtt10NS AN7 I1rIJTT LOCATIONS SHOLAD BE FEW VERIFIED .894.7 , 95. _ PRIOR TO EXCAVATION /CONSTRUCIW 9' SPRUOE,f ^9c ,x94.8 �( qi 55.50 • / _ - - t ----------- ..-�% _ ,� .� _� •,+1 � /''� 1 3. AT THE irE OF iH9 SURVEY, THE SHED LOOMED ON THc ADJOINING PROPL'RT7 TO A' FND D LN'✓ 'rf'`%: Y"a�• iT r- - •FND�P / S FY. 9DE 9EfBAL[ ' � / 9 �9L9 / Q : � THE SOUTH OD NOT APPEAR TO HAVE A FOIA'DATDN. -SH81B LPE i p '` 9q_ $�`' 9(�() 33.780 •.,B.t 9 z - -_ -_-cf i� .6! 4 5Z� 4. FOR TtE PURPOSES OF TH9 SURVEY. THE BEARINGS ARE BASED ON AN ASSUMED ` -aFf. W000 FErfCE �O Ya �_6FrT WOOD 8944 N8 °4i'30 . iP7 - �9 ~ ' f I y " yt ORENTATION AND THE ELEVATIONS ARE BASED ON AN ASSUMED DATUM (13"N'IAR[.. b _ • . -� 1 { 889.7 AS SHOWN ON MAP). ,,�, y _ i ii g 1 "�.. / - -� ' �•1 - " TOP NUT H7DRANT LOCATED IN THE SOUTHEAST CORDER OF WEST 6BT STREET 3 E[00P AM HOUSE - SERVO Le$ -'� - -� "�� ' AND DR00[VEW AVE". WOOD FRAME HOUSE 1 - ,R 6RB �W AVE. - - /�2 °8., .,. - FFe -895.0 I sds. ELEV = 880.14 (ALVD29) t?d�A- • AREA SUrIMARY 800 c Butler Square I hereby certify that this survey, plan or report was • • tQQ North Sbdh StlBel LOT 6, BLOC[ 23, FAR IIL FAY, CROSS BDNC AREA m 2,049 Sd FT. OR 0.05 AC. - prepared by me or under my direct supervision and • • HEMEPN COIWY, M•DE5OTA. (50 SO. FT. OF THE COVERED PORCH ALLOWED PER CRY ) that I am a duly licensed Land Surveyor under the L A N p F Q R M nlraUlespofia, LIN 555403 laws the State of MI • GARAGE FLOOR m ts95.o • NET BUILDING AREA V199 SO. FT. OR 0.05 AC. 7An�y h V . . Weir landronn.net TOP C BLOCK s 8999 LOT 6 AREA 6,679 SO. Fr. OR 0.15 Ac. ^ 30 /o:- -=11 % pyg 08/l3/08 .41eWt NC CWFRACE 29.93X SO F7: JONATHAN Mt P647 JObNa JM508005 Drsatq eerLJ15005_rev8 BY JM'P LOWEST FLOOR a 086.125 o. LImIV.No 44647 Ra,i� II 4 08 W � D.., /.,.. /, llcae,lT.Yf /J') -rnZ / )�n Rlvnr i Property. ID Houser Street Name Unit 1 'Piotc(s) on file .. To a e' 1,� . day's d Release: 1.05.0213 1 Sl�etch(ez).an file 1°42 &26- a34G91 I Address: 112Q f�QCfstrNs�.� 41F Logged on usertvt�NIGKLUNLT -- fAsssssina- Mit<i'A'icklumd (PD SingleiPlD 1 Parcel Search 2Ctear 3 Pnnt �Virv; Photos - Parcel Status: ACTIVE f, -. Parcel Admmistrabon I�' . il,'; ; .. -,� r s _.r.. A,., 1. --'n r: t\x. tY -.. 7 s'.'.' 7 y Uc � rkb n °'� 4Pr 4- �.a'kir ' 5� Rol Panel tip formation 9 ��t0 ,.i <f. Sage i 'Clear tit Current Owners- '�' ' Pre \_pious O1riners r Nlulti Address � Per a� }LsessorComment� l ;.;� Parcel Divisioning , — __. __-- - - - - -- - -- i Vic. Temporary PID Updat i �':' Parcel Info (.� Legals 'Divisions � y' Project Update f Taxpaer Inquiry i xidition: Lot: G Erg `_, Elock: fi�3 r � Fairfax Parcel Info Mass I Ipd I .- :.' ..' , Parcel Mass Update •'' �- Metes and Bounds: Values Administration LOTS 5 AND 64 ® Values Information Hennepin Counts Traci,';_; Homestead Update !. ° .0 =i Homestead Rollover i::; ` l' SS Futu[e:to Current _ II y J, Sales Administration' - Sales Information Sates Ratios S 1 Comparables lnformaC -`,, - i p Property Characteristics Land ` Inspections Residential Y Commercial / Industns- ...� Multi -Famit Field Card Print 7.001) character rnaximurn.length. t K .. CAMA Division Information . _ S '' Partnt PID � . Divison Pranks Date: t; I = —'_ —'— ,? � Master Information ` Comments Division Number: Year'Splrt: . Mass Add - Mass Comments Updi Mass Payoff M .'-i. J ��i� ; _ k— t` _ S •r+ua 1. ay.LLUvLabaacwvaLwwUM uu}rJiwwrr.auuuawan.wus wwgaaawaia a...� au.o �awa):a ■u a /iJLTJT Staffribune.com I NIINNEAPOLIS - ST. PAUL. MINNESOTA Part 1: Minnesota's new ghost towns By CHRIS SERRES, JIM BUCHTA and GLENN HOWATT, Star Tribune staff writers April 21, 2008 For a brief while, as Crystal Colvin handed out lemonade to the sweaty hopsootchers on her front porch, it seemed like a picture-perfect afternoon at the Colvin house in Albertville. But inside, the atmosphere was tense. Jon Colvin, 38, a telephone network technician and father of six children, had just informed CitiFinancial that he would be unable to make his March mortgage payment, and would probably miss Aprils, too. He hoped the news would finally scare the bank into renegotiating a mortgage he can'.t afford for a house he can't sell — and now wishes he had never bought. "It's not something I feel proud doing," Colvin said of missing the payments. "But how else am I going to get the bank's attention ?" The reckoning inside the Colvin' four - year -old home is playing out at kitchen tables and corporate boardrooms across Minnesota — and the world. For the first time in decades, U.S. home values are plunging, dragging economies around the world down with them. The roots of that financial crisis can be found in places like Wright County, where the combination of affordable land, cheap money and boundless optimism lured builders and families chasing big homes in the kind of brand -new subdivisions they thought were beyond their reach. The county's population swelled nearly 30 percent in the past decade. Home prices seemed to climb with each arrival, making everyone feel rich. But the boom has unraveled as quickly as it began. While many established Wright County neighborhoods have avoided the worst of the housing market collapse, the county ranks as one of the state's worst areas hit by foreclosures. Pockets of this county, about 30 miles northwest of the Twin Cities, have seen home prices fag 30 percent or more in the past year. Families such as the Colvin are trapped in homes worth far less than what they paid. Speculators, who helped fuel both the boom and its collapse, are also studs, their get - rich -quick properties now money pits. Meanwhile, cities and townships such as Buffalo, Otsego, Albertville and St. Michael, which were in the throes of building schools, roads and expanded water-treatment plants to match their growing population, are left with big bills and the prospect of a dwindling tax base. There are few trees or hills in this flat, predominantly rural county to obscure the evidence: - Rows of vacant and unfinished homes, often with lockboxes on the front doors and foreclosure notices taped to the windows. Realtors call them "see -through houses," so 1 of 6 1/21/2009 4:09 PI rm t: mmesota's new gnost towns L p. l/ www .51rilLL1VU11G.VV1LFLULUllauG�l rllllL 1LlJ —uwiy l MILL-- A I7JL�.JT 'Doc, empty of furniture and curtains that it's possible to see right through them. "Based on what I see out here, we're headed for the Great Depression," said Dan Frie, a sales agent with Wright Sherburne Realty in Monticello, who has been in the business nearly 30 years. While Frie blames fraud for exacerbating the problem, many of the mortgages that are in default are held by people who believed — as many did and as the real estate community told them — that real estate doesn't lose its value. "And just because the national economy recovers doesn't mean that our local economy will recover, and thats what I'm worried about," Frie said. Creameries to communities Wright County is close enough to the Twin Cities to invite sprawl yet still rural enough that its easy to miss new developments, with evocative names like Sundance Ridge and Rodeo Hills. The county was settled by first- and second - generation German families that operated small dairy farms and delivered their milk to area creameries. After World War II, many of these farmers began working second jobs to make a living.. As the highways got closer, they began selling their land off to developers. By the late 1990s, with the Twin Cities suburbs filling fast, Wright County was a bargain for developers. In sleepy rural communities like St. Michael, land could be had for less than $10,000 an acre — just a quarter of prices closer to the Twin Cites. "The land was inexpensive, the community was cooperative and it was just a 10- minute drive past Maple Grove," said Hans Hagen, a Fridley -based home builder and developer, and one of the first to reach into Wright County. His pitch to lure buyers: "Drive 10 minutes and save $10,000." And buyers did. In St. Michael, the largest city in Wright County, almost 1,600 single - family houses, townhouses and condominiums were built between 2002 and 2007. In Otsego, almost 2,200 units were built during the same period. The county's average sale price jumped from $180,102 in 2001 to $234,009 in 2007, an increase of 30 percent. In Albertville, the gains were even sharper. 43 percent. "In 2005, my dog could have sold real estate in Wright County," Frie said. "A lot of people thought this was the next big growth market, and they wanted to be part of it." Buyers said they were lured by easy credit — often from aggressive loan officers who looked past their checkered credit histories and unstable income. Many of these ban officers worked for the financing arms of local builders, which had a vested interest in getting the houses sold regardless of whether people could afford them, real estate agents said. Subprime mortgages, which charge higher rates to riskier borrowers, proved especially popular. In Wright County, the percentage of homes purchased with sub prime mortgages doubled from 13 percent in 2004 to 26 percent in 2006 — two and a half times the rate in Minnesota as a whole. 1/21/2009 4:09 P1 2 of 6 Yat[ l : iviiffie50i3'S new Sl W W ns Iny." W W W aun u ivuuo.w..., wJUFLCL ,o, A i ., a a,.�_.aw =� �_•• • , . ,s .� Doe, F,-3 When the bottom fell out of the housing market, many homeowners found themselves in a virtual equivalent of debtors' prison, unable to refinance loans that are now larger than the value of their homes. "A lot of people out here feel trapped," said Dave Petersen, an agent with Keller Williams in Elk River, who has sold numerous houses in Otsego and St Michael. "They were enticed by easy credit to buy houses that were never worth what they thought they were worth." Ghost town subdivisions Newly married in 2005, James and Angela O'Hara, 25, fell in love with a tidy two -story townhouse in St. Michael with a brick fagade, wood floors and stainless steel appliances. The townhouse was to be part of a mixed -use project called "Town Center of St. Michael," which was designed to be a walk -about community with an urban feel. A real estate agent urged the couple to buy early, noting that other buyers would bid up prices by 5 to 10 percent once the rest of the project became reality. The couple were shown idealistic renderings of the project that featured narrow streets and small storefronts mixed in with housing and offices. "They sold the vision as much as the house," James said. "They said it would be this bustling neighborhood with all these attractions just a block away. We never imagined it would lose value." But the vision never materialized. Builders began pulling out of the project two summers ago, after the housing market collapsed. The shops and restaurants have been slow to arrive, though constriction of a retail building is expected to begin next month. "Everyone counted on the new residents [in the townhouses] to make it succeed," said Gary DiPilato, a sales agent with Darkenwald Real Estate, which is responsible for commercial land sales and retail leasing on the project. "Retailers need bodies to come in." Instead of living in a bustling urban village, the O'Haras look out on a field of weeds and townhouses with "Bank Owned" signs posted on their front doors. Several of the townhouses are clad in Tyvek HomeWrap, their brick facades still unfinished. The O'Haras need to move out of their townhouse by next summer, when James, a staff sergeant in the Marine Corps, reports for officer's training in Virginia. But the couple fear they won't be able to sell the unit for enough to repay the $190,000 mortgage. "It's become a huge albatross around our neck," James said, as he walked their dog, Oscar, through knee -high weeds in a field behind their house. There are several ghost town subdivisions like the Town Center of St. Michael across Wright County. The county is on pace to have a record 1,080 foreclosures this year, up 43 percent from a year earlier. That total is more than all the new houses built in fast - growing Albertville during the past six years. 3 of 6 1/21/2009 4:09 PI MR I; 1VLLUG,V145 LWW glue wwu, 4 of 6 �.�,wrvr .,,pauivu�n..wau waa�taav�ia a■an aauo .iwa�:uau a�i.�� -�.+? In Otsego there are 138 vacant houses. The vast majority are located in subdivisions built within the past five years. "The newer the project, the harder it fell," said Bruce McAlpin, an agent with Edina Realty in Monticello. In Otsego Preserve, a new housing project just a mile north of Interstate 94 in Otsego, more than half of 128 houses are vacant, according to city officials. Some houses in the subdivision have been empty or unfinished for more than a year. Garage doors are missing, unopened mail clogs mailboxes, and dormant lawns have turned into tangled masses of weeds. Some homes are priced for $80,000 to $100,000 less than their original price. "A lot of the prices that people were paying for property in Wright County had no basis in reality," said George Schmidt, a real estate agent with Remax in Anoka. "They were destined for foreclosure." The good life gone awry Not far from Otsego Preserve, a real estate developer and two investors spent $1.5 million preparing 350 acres of farmland for an ambitious new "master- planned community" called Martin Farms1 which was to include up to 400 homes priced between $350,000 and $550,000. They installed a swimming pool, clubhouse, several gazebos, soccer fields and walldng trails. A large sign invites passersby to "Step Up to the Good Life." But 18 months ago, after the initial houses didn't sell, the national builders who bought many of the lots in Martin Farms pulled out. Though all the amenities are still there, few people are living in the subdivision to enjoy them. The 30 houses that were built are now on the market for as low as $200,000 — about half the original asking price. Jeffrey Schoenwetter, chief executive of JMS Homes in Eden Prairie and one of the 'investors in Martin Farms, said 400 houses didn't seem excessive when the project was hatched in 2004. The project kept growing in size, he said, based on demands from builders. "When you have 10 builders come to you and say, we want to buy 10 lots a year, and then Mr. Builder says, 'I have five friends that want to come, too, could we have 100 lots ?' Then 1 said, 'OK, I'll develop 100 lots.'" Added Schoenwetter. "Builders were part of the problem. They kept moving forward when the wheels on the machine were wobbling and the tires were about to blow." As recently as last year, after the housing market had already shown signs of weakness, developers were throwing six-figure parties to market their projects. In the spring of 2005, more than 150 real estate agents showed up for a party to showcase new upscale homes at the Riverwood National Golf Course in Otsego. So many agents wanted to list the new houses, which were priced at up to $800,000, that a line of parked cars stretched a half-mile through the golf course. Today, about one -third of the 74 houses and townhomes in Riverwood National are vacant or in foreclosure. Empty lots bought for $139,000 or more sit vacant next to golf greens. 1/21/2009 4:09 P1 Yar[ 1: M1IIIIesacws new gROsiTOwns llLL�. // W W y, .J1alLL lUUl1G.WiLI W1al�/laWJ /a aqua aauu uwa),i uau a � i.�s -�.�� DOG, E'-5 - Laurie Karnes, a real estate broker who specializes in selling undeveloped land in the Twin Cities, blames today's problems on greed and a failure to acknowledge that the good times wouldn't last forever. "Logic would have told you, why would you build there ?" Karnes said of some of the county's overdeveloped communities. "But logic wasn't fueling this craziness." No one to bid In a sign of just how depressed the housing market is in Wright County, almost no one shows up for the sheriffs auction of foreclosed homes held each morning in a tiny room with faded carpets in the Wright County courthouse in downtown Buffalo. The home's owners and the occasional investor used to crowd into the room to bid on their property. But these days, the only bidders are representatives of lenders that own the mortgages. The auctions typically last no more than a few minutes. In the past four months, 86 percent of the homes sold in Wright County were bank -owned and 7 percent were short sales, or deals that were negotiated by homeowners who owed more than the house was worth, according to calculations by Frie. And those cut -rate deals are undercutting values of houses throughout the county. "The values were putting on houses is equal to what they were five years ago," he said. "And [homeowners] can't compete with lenders who are discounting them." Wanting out The Colvins have considered selling their house to avoid a foreclosure. But based on recent sales in their neighborhood, the couple estimates that the most a buyer would pay for their house is $250,000, not enough to pay off the couple's $330,000 mortgage after two refinancings. The Colvin say they were lured to buy their home, in a newer subdivision in Albertville called Heuring Meadows, by a mortgage broker with First Priority Mortgage in St. Michael. The broker, Paul Reese, said they could get around Jon's poor credit record with a higher - interest loan, which they could refinance after six months. By then, the property would be worth even more, so they could even take some equity out of the home and pay off some bills. But the bank wouldn't refinance, and with some missed payments, the couple's interest rate stands at 10.5 percent Reese said the refinancing plan he worked out with the Colvin might have worked had the couple stuck to his instruction. Unfortunately, in this market, it seems like people are looking to blame whomever they can for their own mistakes," said Reese, who has since closed his mortgage company. The couple have spent the past six months trying to negotiate a new mortgage with their lender, CitiFinancial, but the bards said it is focusing on borrowers with more serious problems. Jon, who's working a second full -time job at night and on weekends, decided to stop making the payments and put the money in a savings account. "It's a sad state of affairs when you have to miss a payment to get the bards to return your 1/21/2009 4:09 5 of 6 ran 1: M1DneSOUr8 UCW gUUJL WWLIJ uuy.1I n n rr.owauavuas..r�w/. /.�. �v — �_49 telephone calls," he said. Hilary BnjecK a University of Minnesota student reporter on assignment for the Star Tribune, contributed to this story. cserrestc'Di_startdbune.com • 612 - 673 -4308 612 -673 -7376 howattAlstartribune.com • 612 -673 -7192 O 2009 Star Tribune. All rights reserved. 1/21/2009 4:09 Y. 6 of 6 W Gl1J raigu Id&cno VVGl P1VJVLv1 LLL%JLbV6U, A_,arvv111G, 1W1LJ W JGIl ... LLtF.II r r W.VLZJLFUK 4 J.V%J 1 LW LLWAUVJ /JWl LV.LL.. Members: Log In I Not R, Minneapolls / St. Paul Bushwess Journal - June 1% 2008 http• / /tvAncdles btzoournals comftvAncitkWstoriwJ2008 /06/09 /daiNl8.htnd MINNEAPOLIS ST. PAUL D oc lil W1 BusMS 0 Tuesday, June 10, 2008 Wells Fargo takes over projects in Otsego, Lakeville; looks to sell Minneapolis / St. Paul Business Journal Wells Fargo & Co. has retained CB Richard Ellis to sell bank -owned residential lots and land in Otsego and Lakeville. The Otsego land, called the Marlin Farms development, has 150 vacant developed lots and io8 acres of residential land. It's priced at $1o.2 ion but is divisible. The Lakeville property, called Tulhnore, has about 81 residential -zoned acres with about 149 single - family plots. That property is marketed at $5.75 million. Eden Prairie -based In ' Development was the developer for both projects, according to the company's Web site and city records. Insignia didn't own either property, said Jeff Schoenwetter, CEO of JMS Cos., which owns Insignia. Some of Insignia's principals were investors in Tullamore, he said, while Martin Farms was partly owned by a former Insignia principal. San Francisco -based Wells Fargo (NYSE: WFQ took possession of both properties during a workout process in the past few months, Schoenwetter said. With residential sales down, it made sense to let the banitalze over, he said. But Schoenwetter said the properties are still valuable. "Someone will do well with both projects," he said. CB Richard Ellis Land Group will work to sell the land, led by Richard Palmiter and Brian Pankratz. All contents of this site © American City Business Journals Inc. All rights reserved. 1 of 1 1/21/2009 4:41 R DUK JWL; lurCL:1usLu G till WWI G1 zuW11 IA upm LY W rUULJL rl an 10 — 1v11... uLLp.i+ yr w yr .uayuLU uaLO.waur L" auL.au 01 DWI 1%001 �WUVI vti v i i owa) a a.aa .. Members: Log in -Not R Minnwpofis I St. Paul Business Journal - A O 7, 2008 http• / /twincitles btdournais. comltwinckies /storiesl2008104/07 /storyl1.Mmi Bus MINN EAPOLIS of PAUL Dvcumer�fi G- Friday, April 4, 2008 Bank starts foreclosure on River Knoll property in Eden Prairie Mirmeapolis / St. Patti Business Joumai- by Sam Black Staff Writer Anchor Bancorp. Inc. has begun the foreclosure process on a 25,000- square -foot building owned by Jeff Sehoenwetter, principal of JMS Cos. of Eden Prairie, according to Hennepin County notices. The property being foreclosed on is a,5- year-old office building called River Knoll Business Center, at 6889 Rowland Road. It is JMS's headquarters; half of the building is vacant. In February, Anchor Bank notified an entity controlled by Schoenwetter that it was in default on its $3.96 million mortgage. A sheriffs sale is scheduled for May 9. Schoenwetter will have until November to redeem the mortgage and avoid foreclosure. Hennepin County values the property at $3.93 million. Schoenwetter said the foreclosure is part of a "significant workout" he's in the midst of due to the slumping housing market. It isn't associated with any underlying weakness in the commercial real estate sector, he said. "I have a handful of residential real estate that's crossed the pulpit with some of our commercial stuff," he said. Schoenwetter hopes to find "a solution" before the foreclosure becomes final. "The fortunate thing is we're large enough and old enough and diverse enough that well work through all these issues," he said. Pete Stein, an attorney at St. Paul based Stein & Moore, which represents Anchor Bank, declined to comment. Schoenwetter, former president of the Builders Association of the Twin Cities and the Builders Association of Minnesota, owns several affiliated real estate companies, including a construction financing arm. Through various partnerships, he owns about a half- million square feet of industrial and office space in the southwest metro. He said he didn't expect the foreclosure notice of River Knoll would affect those properties. sblack @bizjournals.com 1 (612) 288 -21o3 All contents of this site © American City Business Journals Inc. All rights reserved. 1 of 1 1/21/2009 4:47 P DVa11Yrpa V1xVtu-41zd111wr4a - Y11: 1Y J.A'%IAI I LULIJ.1 /aaa.0v0.0w.w.uaa.uyn•• am- avw: wiY _unyuuy-�.iL.a�).u�Y:.a+saaua ... BOG, G"z , \\IL4.OMI 1011 IL Off 14.1 OI 1111 �r Mll111 - O' hFt(�rt1G _ > is71 v: ; J P 1 Ct Online access j DA Home UCC Business Services Account Session Briefcase Help /FAQs About Loain BUSINESS ORGANIZATIONS INQUIRY - VIEW ENTITY Filing Number: 2844837 -2 Entity Type: Original Date of Filing. 5/712008 Entity Status: Entity Date to Expire: Chapter: Good Standing: (date of last annual filing) Name: Registered Office Address: Home State: Agent Name: 6889 Rowland Road, LLC 730 2nd Ave S #1300 Mp1s, MN, 55402 MN No Agent Filed Additional Entity Detail I Retum to Search List New Search Limited Liability Company Active 322B �- o sln er i 's s ca, DA Home I OSS Home I Contacts I Privacy Policy I Terms & Conditions Use of this site and services indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use. ©Copyright 2001 , Minnesota Office of the Secretary of State. All Rights Reserved. 1 of 1 1/21/20094:50 P: DubujusJ UaLlou tywiub + oau JJLL / /LT StarTribune.com I MINNEAPOLIS - ST. PAUL, MINNESOTA Business bankruptcies November 30, 2008 This is a list of recent business - related bankruptcies filed in U.S. Bankruptcy Court in Minneapolis and St. Paul. The number following the filing date is the case number. A Chapter 7 petition is for liquidation of the businesses; Chapter 11 (or Chapter 12 for farmers or Chapter 13 for small businesses) gives protection from creditors while the business is reorganized. The individuals or organizations listed in bold are the ones filing for bankruptcy. MINNEAPOLIS Plug -N -Play Properties, doing business as Exterior Aesthetics, 1495 154th Lane NW., Andover, filed Nov. 12, 08-45892; Chap. 7; assets, $49,166; liabilities, $192,263. Scott Hegquist, manager. Molly P. O'Boyle, doing business as Mugs Gardining, 3953 36th Av. S., Minneapolis; filed Nov. 12, 08-45903; Chap. 7; assets, $162,070; liabilities, $286,799. Katherine Ann Grinnell, doing business as United Real Estate Associates Inc., Sartell, Minn.; filed Nov. 13, 08- 45925; Chap. 7; assets, $543,077; liabilities, $581,021. Amy Marie Raiber and Patrick Jay Raiber II, doing business as Max Investments, Litchfield, Minn.; filed Nov. 13, 08- 15928; Chap. 7; assets, $156,931; liabilities, $215,612. Roberta Jeanne Cain, formerly doing business as Young's Flowers On Nicollet and Young's Floral, 4228 Elliott Av. S., Minneapolis; filed Nov. 14, 08 -45933; Chap. 7; assets, $6,690; liabilities, $66,561. Tony Edward LaDuke and Jennifer Dawn LaDuke, doing business as Action Electrical Services, Sartell, Minn.; filed Nov. 14, 08- 45940; Chap. 7; assets, $69,029; liabilities, $100,995. Robert Lee Bannister, as surety for Bannister Custom Crafted Masonry Inc., and Renee Cheryl Bannister, 14971 Bluebird St. NW., Andover, filed Nov. 14, 08-45944; Chap. 7; assets, $360,229; liabilities, $517,961. Sheldon Lynn Carlson, doing business as Creative Names & More, St. Cloud, Minn.; filed Nov. 17, 08 -45973; Chap. 7; assets, $187,605; liabilities, $219,070. Savage Development I, 5250 W. 74th St., Edina; filed Nov. 17, 08 -45985; Chap. 11; no schedules filed. Jeffrey M. Schoenwetter, chief manager. Savage Development II, 5250 W. 74th St., Edina; filed Nov. 17, 08 -45986; Chap. 11; no schedules filed. Jeffrey M. Schoenwetter, chief manager. John M. Bailey and Monique A. Liberty - Bailey, as surety for At the Beach Tanning Inc. and Liberty Bailey, 2824 Rice Creek Pkwy.,,,Blaine; filed Nov. 17, 08-45993; Chap. 7; assets, $345,479; liabilities, $479,633. 1 of 3 1/21/2009 4:06 PI CERTIFICATE OF SURVEY FOR JMS CUSTOM HOMES PM,ZT4RESAMV BM L TOP OP 27 —A ION aqa.7 8q�,7 Fw "YA7 TM 60.4 SqS4 Sww Lkx--, radin Driflage PIM 1160u►-ed PnQr to 4FT. r001) fft,MT 8 8 .1. s1terin AMA andl 5 FT. SM NOV 2 6 200 rw" a 20 SCALE IN FEET -. MLTPLAB STw 8q 4.7 NET OLLOIC AREA 44.7- • LOT 6 AREA 6.679 Sa Fr. OR 0.19 AC. : M!T.tlt.� lM.-_,1t0Ib,qr,J,.q*ONGCOVERAC6 844 AND CO,bffR LgA.Lr rl7jifi SFRlXl?. j;:LS _q4.8 40- I Fpq P Li7-: 1-4pl. k wow W-ow emsym TOO-31 any gradep , drainage 133.77(M)133 mi ro 09 8106 lo w/08 lixt '711 16/'y 11. /. ftvwO FAIVATON USVAn%8 - CLEW GaMr9w3 arry CaTINTS Nev KLMC KAM New "" R.Ma New OLLONG FW5 WV BuLmC A ADAM WCATON NOV 2 6 200 rw" a 20 SCALE IN FEET w-loam canry. mhwesam (SO Sa. FT. OF THE COVERED PORCH ALLOWED PER Crry COOS) ation�� CAPACD FLOOR - afto NET OLLOIC AREA 1,949 Sa Fl. OR 0.0 AC. TOP OF BLOCIL 895.5 LOT 6 AREA DOCRIPTION CMTM MCRFTION " NAMC 0 POWERP 8012 CANOPY / OVERHANG AIR capnowe CONCRETE S"ACe 111 ELOCTRIC MEYER - 843 Ell PITLEISM SURFACE e— RON MONLAIENT FOLND SANTARY SEWER LW GRAVEL SURFACE "-6VTR WATER MIN L_ -----Or— OvMeAD TELERPM cowast -----arV— OVERHEAD TV ,SILT PE-N;CrNG .03.4 SPOT ELEVATION —OE-- OVMeAD UTILITY LINES REQUIMRE CONCQETC CLIRS frr om wu"*R (E[615) (D 791P MAPLE (p) VISTANM M M. : 1 5 �10.? Sqo.O MICNC RECORM PLAY of _ Wqyll I i , (M) MASLIRW VISTANCli WOOV RETAINDIC WALL Jr OLO. t ' I i, �. .. .* - ZL�11. ;;� SHRLS A-1h PROPOSED FINISWD CQAOe ewVATION COW" Lx @,! 1- t, CANUMVER x < cV 0 0, PROPOSM MWOM QZA[* c 0 MANHOLE 6 !qo.3 10.00 RXIM PFtA PJLLP,v"l �papEar I. 22.00 1" 15M� AVEL --- �7 - = = :: LOT 6. HOC[ 29, FAWAX. GROSS 11MANNIC AREA - 7.049 Sa FT. 02 0.05 AC. w-loam canry. mhwesam (SO Sa. FT. OF THE COVERED PORCH ALLOWED PER Crry COOS) ation�� CAPACD FLOOR - afto NET OLLOIC AREA 1,949 Sa Fl. OR 0.0 AC. TOP OF BLOCIL 895.5 LOT 6 AREA 6.679 Sa Fr. OR 0.19 AC. : M!T.tlt.� lM.-_,1t0Ib,qr,J,.q*ONGCOVERAC6 - 2495% MPpMw;Fwzy- Z L1 ORMNIATION AND THR CLIVATIONS ARe BA5BASED ON AN A33LA EW DAYM (Bft4CWM- 44- AS SHOWN ON MAP). SHIfts Lm - TOP NUT HYDRANT LOCATED IN THI SOLITHEAST CORNER OF WEST Gar STROT avn Ti AND PROOMEW AMIX. ELEV v 884.14 (NCVD29) MICA- I hereby tartly that thle report -A 0 0 Sao c BuuwSqu= prepared by me or under my tfrvt oupervfstan and a a that I am a duty licensed Land Surveyor under the 100 NaM Sbdh S" lore the State o1 YNne s o L A N D F 0 R M Mhunipa5g, MN 65403 Weir landfam.not JONATHAN M PITIMANN Dahr o0/13/08 Lk-NL 44647 JobN& _IV21LOB _ �08005 Dusirg 005-8 Of. JV A..,1,1 ..r /7 -1 -7 & 7. 1.1-)A AlPtw,luoi) 441P L IND OMNSIONS 9MW ARE TO IM MM LWM- qLy.% 2. THE SEVER AND WAYMAN LITIM SEgVMS SHOWN ARE APPROOIATO LOCATIONS VERIVEP FROM MAPS PRoymp BY 11e ary OF EDKA EWNEERN2 OWARTMW. A ANY AND ALL FrdD CONDITIONS AND UYLITY LOCATIONS "" R FEW VE019 PRIOR TO EXCAVATION/C0145TALICTION. 11 !aq,q lqo,l- 3. AT THE TM OF TM SLMY. THE 914ED LOCATED ON Ite AUMNIC mopmry TO 60 pg SajTH OD NOT APPEAR TO HAVE A FOUNDATION. 8647 4. FOR THE PURPOSES OF IM 515"Y. THE DEAMO ARE BASED ON AN A99J`KD MPpMw;Fwzy- Z L1 ORMNIATION AND THR CLIVATIONS ARe BA5BASED ON AN A33LA EW DAYM (Bft4CWM- 44- AS SHOWN ON MAP). SHIfts Lm - TOP NUT HYDRANT LOCATED IN THI SOLITHEAST CORNER OF WEST Gar STROT avn Ti AND PROOMEW AMIX. ELEV v 884.14 (NCVD29) MICA- I hereby tartly that thle report -A 0 0 Sao c BuuwSqu= prepared by me or under my tfrvt oupervfstan and a a that I am a duty licensed Land Surveyor under the 100 NaM Sbdh S" lore the State o1 YNne s o L A N D F 0 R M Mhunipa5g, MN 65403 Weir landfam.not JONATHAN M PITIMANN Dahr o0/13/08 Lk-NL 44647 JobN& _IV21LOB _ �08005 Dusirg 005-8 Of. JV A..,1,1 ..r /7 -1 -7 & 7. 1.1-)A AlPtw,luoi) 441P Jackie Hoogenakker From: Bluewayzata @aol.com Sent: Wednesday, February 11, 2009 11:55 AM To: Jackie Hoogenakker Subject: City Coucil Meeting Dear City Council Members, My name Is James Blue and I'm currently involved in a lawsuit against JMS for fraudulent misrepresentation in relation to the boundary lines of my spec home that I purchased from JMS in 2005, located in Minnetonka . JMS over sodded approximately 2500 square feet, put my sprinkler control box and three sprinkler heads on the builders property next door. Also a rock wall constructed on that side of my property is directly on the true property line which violates city code. I have to carry a lawn mower over the wall to get to my property. When I purchased the house, the lots on both sides of my house were bare dirt and my house was the only one constructed. JMS walked the lot lines with my parents, who financed the home, and stated that the edge of the sod is my property line and that the markings on the edge of the sod were accurate. JMS's president, at the time, was Andy Porter who also claimed 1 could put a pool in on that side of the house. None of this was true and now my property value has decreased considerably and I will lose approximately $150,000- $200,000 on the resale due to the lost land. JMS has tried to bully us and has verbally threatened my family. I feel JMS thinks they can do whatever they want with no consequences and they could care less about who's toes they step in order to make money. I never would have bought my property with the true lot lines and it will be very difficult to sell. Now, I'm beginning to realize that there are more people out there like me who have had similar problems with JMS and it seems like a pattern is forming with this particular builder. Someone needs to take a stand against JMS. Some of these builders move their assets to make it look like they have nothing so they can avoid being sued for their actions, and if you do spend the money to sue them they threaten bankruptcy leaving little recourse for the victims. However, I will spend whatever it takes even if I receive nothing to let them know that you can't bully people and that it's time for JMS to be held accountable for their actions. Thank you for your time and I will see you on the 17th. Sincerely, James Blue, Court file number 27 -CV -08 -18116 (MID) The year's hottest artists on the red carpet at the Grammy Awards. AOL Music takes you there. 2/11/2009 SIEGEI._ BR1L..1_. .:�,•;: +�.i�� ,., ,�„;,. iii FOS TFR JAMES A. YAROSH 612 -337 -6112 jimyarosh ii)sbgdf.coin February 12, 2009 Mayor James Hovland VIA EMAIL - .jhoogenakker(oDci.edina.mn.us Members of the Edina City Council 4801 West 50c' Street Edina, MN 55424 Re: JMS Custom Homes, LLC Application for Variance Case No. B -09 -01 Our File No.: 25,282 -AG -000 Dear Mayor and Members of the Council: This. firm represents Dick and Jackie Whitbeck, neighbors of the property owned by JMS at 6120 Brookview Avenue in Edina (the "Property ") owned by JMS Custom Homes, LLC. JM.S, a developer, seeks a variance from the front setback requirement in the R -1 zoning district from the required 38.7 feet to 31.6 feet. Approval of this variance, however, is not permitted because it does not meet the legal standards for granting a variance. The Edina standards for granting a variance are nearly identical to the state law requirements.' Under those requirements, an applicant may be granted a variance only when it shows that strict enforcement of a zoning ordinance would cause "undue hardship" because of circumstances unique to the property and when the applicant demonstrates that such a variance "is in keeping with the spirit and intent of this Section. "Z In this case, JMS has not shown undue hardship nor has it demonstrated that lessening the front yard setback is consistent with the spirit and intent of the City's zoning ordinance. I. JMS Has Not Met The Requirements For Establishing Undue Hardship. JMS has not established undue hardship sufficient to obtain a variance from the front yard setback because the proposed front yard setback is unreasonable in the circumstances, there is nothing unique about the property justifying the variance and the proposal alters the essential character of the neighborhood as described in the City's own zoning ordinance. The Edina ordinance, consistent with state law, defines the existence of undue hardship as follows: + See, Edina, Minnesota § 850.04, subd. I(F) and Minn. Stat. § 462.357, subd. 6(2). 2 Edina, Minnesota § 850.04, subd. 1(F). Mayor James Hovland Members of the Edina City Council February 12, 2009 Page 2 (1) When the property in question cannot be put to a reasonable use as allowed by this Section [zoning ordinance]; (2) The plight of the petitioner is due to circumstances unique to the petitioner's property which were not created by the petitioner; and (3) The variance, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the property or its surroundings. To establish undue hardship justifying the grant of the variance, all three of the above requirements must be.met.3 A. JMS's application is unreasonable because it is out of character with the surrounding neighborhood. Minnesota courts have interpreted the first requirement of undue hardship as requiring the applicant to show that it would like to use its property in a reasonable manner that is prohibited by the ordinance.4 In .4lohler v. City of St. Louis Park, the court determined that if the proposal is out of character with the surrounding neighborhood then the proposed use is unreasonable.' In Mohler, an applicant sought a variance to increase the height of a garage from 12 feet to 16 feet. The City granted the variance, but the Minnesota Court of Appeals reversed the district court that had affirmed the City's decision to grant the variance. The Court of Appeals held that the proposed use was "out of character with the surrounding neighborhood" and, therefore, it concluded the first element of undue hardship; i, e., that the proposed use is reasonable, was not met. Specifically, the court concluded the garage was out of character with the neighborhood because other nearby residents did not use their property for a similar use.t' Similarly, JMS seeks a variance to reduce the setback of the house it is constructing. The City's zoning ordinance has separate front yard setback calculations precisely to maintain the character of the neighborhood. The standard 30 foot setback in the R -1 zonino is insufficient because in some cases a different setback better fits the character of the neighborhood. The 6100 block of Brookview Avenue is such a case. The vast majority of the houses on the block are further from the street than the subject home. As such, JMS' proposal is unreasonable and, as a result, it cannot meet the undue hardship standard. 3 Mohler v. City ofst. Louis Park, 643 N.W.2d, 623, 631 (Minn. Ct. App. 2002) (emphasis added). 4 Rowell v. Board ofAdjustment of the City, of Moorhead, 446 N.W.2d 917, 922 (Minn. Ct. App. 1989), rev. denied, (December 15, 1989). 3 Xfohler at 631. 6 ,Mohler at 631. Mayor James Hovland Members of the Edina City Council February 12; 2009 Page 3 B. JMS has created the need for a variance because there is nothing unique about the property that requires a lessening of the setback. The second factor for determining undue hardship is that the plight of the landowner is due to circumstances unique to the property not created by the landowner. There is nothing unique about the Property that requires a violation of the setback ordinance. The lot is more than sufficient for a home because it is a large lot containing 13,362 square feet. There is no justification for JMS's inability to fit within the established average setback as set forth in the Edina City Code. Granting a variance when there is excessive space on the Property to comply with the ordinance, contravenes the standards required for obtaining a variance. C. Granting JINIS' variance alters the character of the neighborhood. The third requirement for showing "undue hardship" is that the variance must not alter the essential character of the neighborhood. The City's zoning ordinance, by setting forth three ways to calculate a front yard setback in the R -I zoning district, establishes that non - compliance with the ordinance affects the character of the neighborhood. The goal of the established average setback ordinance is to keep all of the houses on the block somewhat similar in terms of the setback from the street. This creates a better aesthetic for the neighborhood. 'there already exists an exaggerated difference between the subject property and the property immediately to the south. Allowin, an additional 7.14 feet exacerbates the problem. Moreover, the subject house is nearly 3,000 square feet and having it built so close to the street, as compared to most of the other houses on the block, creates a negative view altering the essential character of the neighborhood. Thus, because a granting of the variance would alter the essential character of this neighborhood, the applicant cannot meet its burden of showing "undue hardship." H. JMS Cannot Show That The Grant Of This Variance Would Be Consistent With The Spirit And Intent Of The City's Zoning Ordinance. Assuming that JMS establishes each of the three requirements for undue hardship —an unlikely task —it still cannot meet the required showing that lessening the amount of the front yard setback is consistent with the spirit and intent of the City's zoning ordinance. Under the City zoning code, a petition must show undue hardship and that the grant of the variance "is in keeping with the spirit and intent of this [ordinance]. "7 The spirit and intent of the Edina ordinance with respect to front yard setback in the R -1, district can be easily discerned given the three ways of calculating the front yard setback. The intent is to create a consistent, symmetrical aligiunent as much as possible. That is why the simple 30 foot standard setback is insufficient. Because the proposed variance goes beyond the setback permitted under the ordinances, a grant of the variance is not in keeping with the spirit 7 Hina, Minnesota § 850.04, subd. 1(F). Mayor James Hovland Mennbers of the Edina City Council February 12, 2009 Page 4 and intent of the Edina ordinances. Thus, JMS cannot show that its requested variance is consistent with the spirit and intent of the zoning ordinance and, therefore, its variance request must be denied. We are aware of the existing lawsuit between JMS and the City and have reviewed the Court's January 16, 2009 Amended Order Granting Temporary Injunction. There is nothing in that order that prohibits the City from denying JMS' request for a variance. The Court has not ordered the City to grant the variance. It has simply temporarily enjoined the City from enforcing its Stop Work Orders until further order from the Court. The existence of the lawsuit, therefore, is irrelevant to the City's determination of JMS's variance application on its merits. Cities have a great deal of discretion in deciding whether to grant variances. In granting a variance, the City must make specific findings as to how the applicant's proposal meets the legal requirements under the City's zoning ordinance. In this case, the applicant must establish that it meets all three standards of "undue hardship" and that the proposal meets the spirit and intent of the ordinance. As demonstrated, the JMS proposal cannot meet one, much less all, of the legal requirements for this variance. As a consequence, the city should affirm the decision of its board of zoning appeals and reject JMS's request for the variance. Very truly yours, James A. Yarosh JAY rnkf cc: Dick and Jackie Whitbeck (via email) Anthony J. Gleekel, Esq. (via email) Jackie Hoogenakker From: Jane Grivna [jarbag @usfamily.net] it: Monday, February 09, 2009 5:38 PM Jackie Hoogenakker Subject: new house at 6120 Brookview please forward to all city council members and the mayor Dear Members of the Edina City Council and Mayor Hovland, My name is Jane Grivna and I am a longtime resident of Edina. I grew up in Edina at 4709 West 60th Street. My husband and I moved to Edina more than 22 years ago and live at 6017 Concord. I am writing to express my concern about how the Edina City Council is handling the issue of the new house that has been built at 6120 Brookview. The builder of this home has been allowed to: 1) violate code rules for placement of the home - the setback of this home is 7 feet off of the average setback for the street 2) disregard the Whitbecks (who live at 6128 Brookview) by building within inches of the lot line, imposing on their privacy and potentially ruining their hedge 3) raise the grade of the property, which is diverting water onto the Whitbeck's driveway 4) attempt to bend the rules so that he can build one more house on the other half of the property w that the neighbors have come to many city council meetings and expressed their concerns about this lot ever since the p—perty changed hands many months ago. Are you members of the City Council listening to any of their concerns? Isn't it your job to support the citizens of Edina OVER builders who come in and try to bend the laws and codes ? ? ?? You have been elected to represent the people of Edina and not to stand up for builders who have no interest in anything but making money! As is stated in the Edina City webpage "The Council is accountable to the residents of the city." Please be accountable!!!!!! I have known the Whitbecks, who live next door at 6128 Brookview, for many years and have watched as they have succeeded in keeping the historical integrity of their home completely intact with EVERY thing they have done! Now it is your turn to keep the integrity of our city and this neighborhood, and enforce the code rules for this builder the same way you would enforce rules for homeowners who remodel. Please think about this issue and how it would impact you if you were the unlucky resident to have this happening in your neighborhood! Thank you for listening to my concerns! SIncerely, T"-e Grivna G Get FREE High Speed Internet from USFamilv.Net! - -- 2/10/2009 Date of this letter: Feb. 12, 2009 This is an addendum to letter dated Jan. 22, 2009 To: Edina City Council Members Mayor Jim Hovland City Manager Gordon Hughes Edina Planning Commission Members Edina City Hall 4801 W. 50th St. Edina, MN 55424 From: Janey Westin & Charlie Hughes at 6136 Brookview Ave. Re; Case File B -09 -01 Issue of 7.14 ft. front setback variance and JMS Custom Homes, LLC Lots 5 & 6, Block 23, Fairfax (6120 Brookview Ave.) To all the above Persons, Please refer to our previous letter, dated Jan. 22, 2009. On page 2, 3"d paragraph of that letter we pointed out how JMS has misrepresented the legal property description for 6120 Brookview Ave. Full legal description is is Lots 5 & 6, Block 23, Fairfax. Additional documents have come to light which clearly illustrate JMS's intent to misrepresent the property as a divided lot, when he has not gone through the proper legal process of applying for a variance to divide. In a certificate of survey (Document I) dated October 1, 2008, the outline of a previously planned single home for 6120 Brookview Ave. is indicated. In this survey, JMS has no problem showing the full legal property description of Lots 5 & 6, Block 23, Fairfax. However, from November 24, 2008 onward, JMS refers to 6120 Brookview Ave. as only Lot 6 (see Document B) or only as Lot 5 (see Documents J and K). On December 17, 2008, Dave Miller of JMS filled out and applied for a building permit for an additional house for Lot 5, including with this a certificate of survey dated December 19, 2008. This was rejected. (see Document L -Memo) Kris Aaker, assistant planner told Dave Miller that 2 houses cannot be built on one lot. Please note the legal description of the lot on Doc. K. Please note on Doc. J that the box is checked stating that NO VARIANCE is required, and also see the description of 6120 Brookview Ave. as Lot 5. Where is Lot 6? The brazen audacity of this building permit application is astounding! Document M, the variance application for 6120 Brookview Ave., Case #B -09 -01 has a misrepresented legal description showing only Lot 6. Time and again, JMS and his representatives have dishonestly submitted documents to the City of Edina, acting as if he already has a division for 6120 Brookview Ave., which in fact, JMS DOES NOT. The "Setback Line Exhibit" (Document N) submitted by JMS in court raises serious questions. Why was an outline of a non - existent house on Lot 5 for which a building permit was rejected a month before even allowed in court as a truthful document? The print on Lot 5 is so miniscule that it cannot be read without a powerful magnifying glass. It states that it is a "proposed" house. This is very deceptive. The new house being built should not have been shown on the drawing because it is not a factor in figuring the setback. The previously existing house for 6120 was glaringly not indicated on Documents N and B, when it should have been. It should have been factored into the average setback. Its setback distance was 43.2 ft. The super -fine print in front of the Lot 6 foundation outline states, "Average of 1 block house setback line ", whereas further down the dashed line is another arrow pointing toward it with readable size print stating, "Best fit line used to establish an average setback". Surveyor J.Pittman seems to have failed basic math and does not understand what the simple process of averaging is. I recall being taught this skill in 611 grade. The Temporary Injunction granted by Judge Rosenbaum on January 15, 2009, is only that— temporary. For JMS to proceed with construction on the structure has been at HIS OWN RISK. We understand that the city would not be in contempt of court in refusing to grant JMS's variance to allow the house to stay in its current location. JMS's predicament is ENTIRELY of his own doing. When the Stop Work Order was placed on the JMS house by the City of Edina on January 7, 2009, the structure was a framed shell with no windows or doors, no plumbing or electric, no concrete garage floor, and only 1/3 of the roofing installed —a structure that could very feasibly be unbolted from the foundation, lifted and moved to the center of the lot. Offing House Movers (hired by JMS) picked up and moved the original house and two car garage with excellent, professional skill. The Whitbecks, at 6128 Brookview Ave., lifted half of their historic 1866 home and chimney on I -beams and cribbing 4 years ago, to dig and place block for a new basement under it where none existed before. To move the JMS house is entirely and reasonably feasible. To allow the JMS house to remain where it currently stands does irreparable harm first and foremost to the Whitbecks at 6128, directly to the south. It devalues their property. It devalues the oldest, historic, awarding winning home in the city. To allow this variance, sets a dangerous legal precedent for any future home builder to do whatever they like and thumb their nose at the City of Edina's laws, ordinances and codes. Do what is right, and deny this variance/ Janey Westin & Charlie Hughe �r L 2 CERTIFICATE OF SURVEY Nov 2 5 ZOO FOR JMS CUSTOM HOMES IT • ejagTHG TWO-STORY I 41 V • 6Q0CK VRW AVE. W 108. New a SCALE IN FEET axE TI -096.7 I Bcw Frp, . I '. , a- PLPM aq AW AWW LOCA110N �:5 .aq5.q DESCRIPTION E-)M mscm-WN TW EMS POwfRPcu • FD IP NCE 8042 -MIe STEW m uxcw MIER K Em Mq *Type PON MON":NT POUND J wnXICIUS SURFACE SHRUB UND, SAXTARY Sevw Lm .--.6-WTe— - WATER MAN • OVERHEAD TELEPHO Apvqgl#, CRAM SURFACE OVERHEAD M CONTout OVERHEAD Ty requtred PflQr W —M— MRWAP UTILITY I":$ F SUIT .1. altering any grad. .03.4 SPOT EL&VAIM FENCING IS — - CURS twu mmm Bq5.(, oadr drainage MQ! FF-r— car) Tc (D 5 PT. SIX 9'47L —mm, (p) DWANCS PER 1,33.79(P ORDEP PIAT 4FT. WOOD ------ "94, F",w REG PENCE 94. f33 sq.0.0 VOW RETANM (M) MASMED CSTMM .95.2 I WALL j� sv4am <9�) 11.11A11011 LE 4. 47.50 rz=op peoposW FINSHED GRAM cove TDACL MA.TFLA ST(dNi ma94.7 PORCH -$ CONTOM BOX nvegn 14 0 0 PR OPosw Fmsmv GRADE CANWVE -ab 44. ; � 7 i NOTES ICLOO 61 m -00 MIER" %V4N An To THI' 0= PCLN= RAPIE17. TEW" rf*= AND •120 BROCKVIEW AVE' 2. 11E SEVER W SE 22.00 MA F ED= 24ULLP W FIELD VERFRO 1. FULL W.1 VEI PR OCA TMO-STOW 'Coo Fle� HOLow, 9 094 FELO CC=" AND UnHY IL SHED COWER ANY AND EXC OM 04'f: PRIOR AYAT1QN1GON%RXr1OK -r SPRUCE -Y — LOCATED ON 1N6 ADJONW P.ROP'RTY To "L_ 7_ �T THE TM OF TM SURVEY, THE 11WA111 30 THE SO" po NOT App,,A To FAYE A FND P 5 FT. WE SETBACt SURVEY. THE BEARNC9 ARE BASEO ON AN ASSUMED 94. 33.7flp, ScL7 4. ��ZNO:W WYATUAS ARE BASED ON M ASSLrW PATUM(UNC."J"' tg a FOR IM PURPOSES OF TM SMY� 101. WOOD Ffie FENCE a . q *1 THE SOUTHEAST COWER OF WEST 619T STREET roP NUT H=ANTv=.TE" 6011w Two-STORY./ Lee W A SHRUD e AND BROOF-VIE WOOD FRAIe HOUSE 6na BROOKIIEW AVE. ELIV - B84.14 (HCYOV) FFB L e. 800 c Guller Sqm AREA SUMNIAlly I hereby 1crf1fY Mot rf- 2.04q So. PT. OR 0.09 AC. I d ..d IDD North Gbdh Str" CROSS MADIC AM - prepared by me or undo (50 SOL FT. OF T,:COVERED poqcH ALLOWED PER cr� duly ms-A Land Surveyor order the D NnnBspolls. MN 55403 • L A N LOT G. [LOCK 23. PARPAX, d I F 0 M I= —a !the State of U�� Wift landform-not : COUNTY. 11,HES07A. GARAGE T MAXW AREA Lq" Sa FT. 09 OM AC. LOT 6 AREA GA7q So, FT. OR 0.5 AC. 30-;r2DW,7 08713/00 Jobbla —,-L-001-1) ef. TOP OP MOCK eq-3_1 Sq. Fr. JONATHAN nj� Rowimet 11 �08 749371 MST;Lc. Bq6.1 16 .4e q+Jww COVERACe loome K. LOWEST aa6.29 �um§2 M.-O 0 ., /J wf 0 y U0 l� CERTIFICATE OF SURVEYffo -s c 14- •::•., FOR: JMS CUSTOM HOMES REVISION • HISTORY NORTH WOOD FRAME STOR _ 08/13/08 _ ORCIMAL FIRST FLOOR (THRESHOLD) . 896.2 '61r2 BROOK VFW A I Oq /07 /08 - REVNSEO FO.f,DAT04 ELEVATIONS TOP Of POURED FOJNDATIDN .895.7 FFE.847,5 I ! 09/12/00 - GLENT COMMENTS a gO •I i IO /01 /08 - MY COMMENTS SCALE IN FEET .895.9 I { EXBiNC EXISTNC DESCRIPfm EXI5TWC DESCRIPTION .. GARAGE N89 °47r3t) y .a9i.7 GTE -e w.L�•: )33.80(P LH4 -/ m `m ¢i ! BULDNC N POWERPOLE AID o PNLHEOO ' . + � . I � , 0, ERVAEHC ILl AIR CONDITIONER ffwv UNCNOWH 6FT. We SETBACK Lk*--, el) . d'9 i° N 94. 0° W IrH004 J0 '6 ? 47 y8 .a9i.7. ; .T - _ � -' • _ _ �� _ J_ t - ,r; -.X._ .T.... .. � � , . { Q ELECTRIC PETER BB a _ 1 _ - C'Sl1R EX6TNC "der_ ) 0.5A '1 'r8g4.8 •TYPE GARAGED 1 v8 r897.9u• SPZUCE I I JQ ,., 5� IRON MOMII"ENt FAD APE 1 WELL ; ?'S - 199- ' r ' �, X 0 7.0 , o85AN SANIARY SEWER LNE S $ �` n0" __: i M `�' '' CRAVEL SURFACE 6• /TR \..• WATER MAEJ ✓ I �V1J� I i 7 .. T- OVERHEAD TE-LEA40NE -OTV- OVERHEAD TV W y Bg5.1. " 893. ,N PROPOSED T1U0.870RH' < d ` ( L i j i �� c1 c -1-u°� e - -0E- OVERHEAD UTILITY LASS .895.6 I FULL SBJD T. POURED�BA6En¢NT n PFdP06ED I'; 1 � • �`B�RETF 0��''-:. NOTE NUMBER Lf 7-N- _ JV .. l C 1 ' BID O .. .. O '� ___________i_________ iD0 ELROCTKNEW AYE. 4Fr• WOOD w 54.9_____ 4. } DISTANCE PER •1 vA Qa I 05 FENCE':' L• 8 Cr HNRd_ LO ... J .arrr. TYPE/ rLn9. rrn FENCP4C (P� _ � `•Z .895.7 nApLE B �.• %- -� RECORDED PLAT ,8 5.7 Op,. -^ . , 43 , I 1 90.7 - ! 890.0 W000 RETANNG (M) I'LEASUREO DISTANCE 00 Q ! 95. G9s.l 1f.s0 2. LO . f *�'.7 O! ! I r D CRADE MAfHvI,E STEM H :4' °BRUCE _________52.9 �� Lt� { SHRUB PROPOSED FINISHED .894.7 6.0 95. 95. 95. .... _._ 100. i I!. BOX ELLE4 15 % . iv v c _ - ; L -. •� TREES PROPOSED FLASHED CRAVE _ -03�_ ' x •+ y 895 S'� ; •� I ®I MANHOLE CONTOUR. °0 $ - •Hpr�A4• a! D Bl F7. :I °0.9 ` S _ 1 . Vi vol 6 12.5 wH" n /..\ $ t�m �, RIVEWAY: ; -- .894.5 h a • l.9 I L THE DEENSiON5 SHOWN ARE TO THE BRICK LEDCE. ~ .8971 r ,FENCE AND I FT. LANTLEVER -' .( 'I 7. THE $EWER AND WATERMAN UTLRY SERVICES SHOWN ARE APPROKMATE LOCATIONS 9*9 CORNER A p S , i , �P� f %'� �C a .° . a _ ;. r DERIVED L4d'1 MAPS FRONDED BY THE CITY OF EpU ENIGI.EERNC DEPARTMENT. ARE OH LOT LNE 48' ON 94. ,t. 93. a®t, 0 - 30.0 __�_ 89Li? ANY AND ALL FEUD CONDITIONS AND UTILITY LOCATIONS SHOULD Be FIELD VERIFIED ( .894.7 ; 24.00. PRIOR TO EXCAVATION /CONSTRUCTION. q' SPRUCE..:... Y891,8 r1 , t L ., •,,• .,,,• . -�.: _,. r;. ' gj t 3. AT THE THE OF TfO SURVEY, THE SHED LOCATED ON THE AOJONNC PROPERTY TO -ND V OPEN AFT 90.1 Kj 11pp {, THE SOUTH DO NOT APPEAR TO HAVE A 10U DA101* _SHRUB LINE B91A pp°A' SHED y 9•l.i ,M+P•!" .3r?.69(M)133. 78(P),•.. - 8a7q : :._ 9L0 a I� - 4. ORENIIATION MO THE ELEVATIONS SURVEY. 8119�ED ON AN A9S JtEED DATIAµ(B�ENCHlARK �1 -4PT. WOOD "'ICE > (6F T. WOOD fey - FENCE ga4,9_ N89 °47'30 "W 9 ^qj'�` ' . 1 _ I @° t 889.1 AS SHOWN ON MAP). ' ;; I 870 4 C � E;M§1 TWO STORY ' HOUSE (/ SHRUB LINE- TOP NUT HYDRANT LOCATED N THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF WEST 651 STREET 6W AVE. 9 y� AND BROOKVEW AVENUE. .:, .0 ELEV n 8154.14 (NCVD79) . LEGAL DESCRIPTION 915' LOTS 5 AND 6, BLOCK 23, FAIRFAX, HENEPN COUNTY, McESOTA. I hereby certify that this survey, plan or report was • • 800 C Buller Square prepared by me or under my direct supervision and 0 e v e E 4 that 1 am a duly licensed Land Surveyor under the L A N D F O R M �� North Sbdh $Ural I the Stole of Minn F Mlnneapdis, MN 55403 CARACE FLOOR 895.0 LOTS 5 AND 6' •• L3,367 50. FT, OR 0.31 AC. /jam TOP OF BLOCK (0 REAR) 8%.0 BULONCS 3,004 SO. FT. OR 0.07 AC. _ � / .K � • • Web: landform.net TOP OF BLOCK IS FRONT) . BgS3 G LOWEST FLOOR 086.5 LOT COVERAGE . 27.5% JONATHAN M. 4647 rNN Dell 08/13/08 L'anm. NO. 44647 Revoetl: 10/01/05 Joh NO. JMISO8003•• DreehlQ cercJM500S_rw3 By. JRC 5.813..d'liL'' �u �, 7�- OCT 1 2008 (:TTY OF tU I NA is CITY OF EDINA Do�urn PERIUIIT NUMBI 4801 50"' Street West, Edina, MN 55424 -13 Buildin Inspections Department HERBAGE LAND 9 _ p p CASE NUMBER ' (952) 826-0372 FAX (952) 826 -0389 TDD (952) 826 -0379 www.d.edina.mmus for office use onN Building Permit Application, PRINT OR TYPE APPLICATION Site Infor atlon Address 40 Z� C n.� r %e �.�J Suite /Unit nur rP " ': - a ®r-<I A Lot S Block Subdivision : ,4 raFAx TenantBuilding name Is a variance required? ❑Yes ffiNo If yes, provide Planning Department case number Work Description Proposed starting date 116—/©9 Completion•date_�� [ 1 New ❑ 2 Addition ❑ 3 Alteration ❑ 3 Remodel ❑ 4 Repair ❑ 4 Replace mgle Family Detached Li Single Family Attached []Residential Garage /Addn ❑Residential Addition/Porch ❑Residential Deck/Shed ❑Reroof ❑Interior Remodel ❑Basement Finish ❑2 Family Residential Job Description W Family Residential & More Residential Store Garage/Ramp Station/Repair Garage ❑ Recreation/Amusement ❑Grade /FiIVExcavate Only ❑Demolition Single Family ❑ Demolition 2 Family ❑Demolition 3 &4 Family ❑Demolition 5 &More Family ❑Other Demolition ❑Industrial Building ❑Public School ❑Private School ❑Church/Religious Bldg. ❑HospitaVinstitutional Bldg ❑Antenna/Tower /Dish/Etc. ❑Other Nonresidential Bldg ❑Pools ❑City Owned []Heritage Landmark Di, ❑ Retaining Wall Construction Ell-A []I-B ❑II -A ❑II -B ❑III -A ❑III -B []IV-HT ❑V -A ❑V -B ' Fire Sprinklered ❑Yes ❑No Energy Code Comp/Iance: ❑option (a) n--(b) - submit Energy Code Worksheet with this application Va/uat/on o49L Applicant Is cam© <Dc��a I I LjOwner XContractor ❑Designer Contractor Information Company name Sl" s 44 L MN Contractors License #—,q 0 37 a5r Gt;2 Address _•C?_ T-o z.,j .7 4/'± ST City State�� Contact person name 134 �E �r� R s/.-- S.C'� -• Phone 9.5 -4 - 99-Y - 91. 3t3 Cell Its-z —33- 5,A 8 EMail Fax 9, .2 -- 9,�7 -3730 Designer Information Company name A< <� r�z.. k�,7 i = _ ...' L'�• �� pArchitect ❑Engineer ❑ Designer Address City 4-f:174 2,9' -4 State,,-7%v Zip Contact person name k,a .- Phone ��3- - s� �. 3 - R Y-7-7 Cell MN License /Registration # COMPLETE APPLICATION ON FiF-VFHSE 51DE -> -tip. -Rz -- /T/2!2 -5 ddreSS .S -Z.t'� t� 7yf�` Sr/Jd•�T City E'clr,.�a State /1'1r✓ Zip s's-y39 / Phone 17r-;- - .99y_ .Oz7R Cell /r 7_ - 347- YAs-.Q Par Fax 9_f-2 - 7y4- 3 zt, Applicant Signature I hereby apply for a permit and attest to the following: •AII information on this application is complete and accurate. *All work will comply with Edina City Code and Minnesota State Building Code. •l understand this is an application only, not a permit. Work will not start without an approved permit. •AII work will be done according to plans approved by the City of Edina when approved plans are required._ •Erosion and sediment control, when applicable, will be installed before starting work • Existing grades Widdid ainage will not be altered without approved grading/drainage plans and schedule. Applicant's signature or Owner/Applicant Statement - To be completed only when the homeowner is the permit applicant 1 understand the State of Minnesota requires residential contractors, residential remodelers and residential roofers be licensed to work in the State unless they qualify for a specific exemption from the licensing requirements. By signing this statement, I certify that I am building or improving this dwelling myself. I claim to be exempt from state licensing requirements because I am not in the business of building on speculation or for resale. I certify I have not built or improved any other residential structures in the State within the past twenty-four months. I also acknowledge that, because I do not have a state license, 1 forfeit any mechanic's lien rights to which I may otherwise have been entitled under MS 514.01. 1 further acknowledge I may be hiring independent contractors to perform certain aspects of the improvements on this dwelling, and I understand some of these contractors may be required to be licensed by the State. I understand unlicensed residential contracting, residential remodeling and residential roofing activity is a misdemeanor under Minnesota law, and I forfeit my rights to reimbursement from the Contractors Recovery Fund In the event any contractors I hire are unlicensed. Homeowner's signature Date Homeowner's typed.or printed name Contact the Minnesota Department of Commerce, Enforcement Division to determine if a contractor is licensed or exempt or to check on contractor status. Metro 651- 296 -6319, Outstate: 1 - 800 - 657 -3978 or www..state.mn.us and follow links to License Lookup Approvals or office use only Building Inspections Dept By Date Engineering Dept By Date Planning Dept/Heritage Preservation Board B J Date / Health Dept By Date Fire Dept By Date Assessing Dept By Date GAf6rms\app1- BLD -r4 Fees or office use only Permit fee ❑Yes ❑No Plan review fee ❑Yes ❑No State surcharge []Yes ❑No Contractor license fee ❑Yes ❑No Investigation fee ❑Yes ❑No SAC fee ❑Yes ❑No # of units Sewer assessment ❑Yes []No Water assessment ❑Yes ❑No Park dedication fee ❑Yes ❑No TOTAL CERTIFICATE OF SURVEY rUK: JMb Wb I UM HOMES EXISTING ELEVATICNS wow KAM HOUSE lu FIRST FLOW (rAiE940LD)' s 896.2:.: 9112 BROOK V*W AVE. TOP OF POURED FOUNDATION a 895.7 FFE-8915 4 N59S.q W7- N .4 E .0.0 GARAGE HE FND IP PW•ED - 885.1 qq� aq 2 P1. Ma T .�& - ---- -1 f - :F,; - ARCAU =15 "Woe ZrL J 95; 94. FWNT SETBACK LINIE 49 1 FT Q SHas LINE-) . 1. *16 . 14 I C 9 I.A LO 5 x g PROPOOM TWO- U10M FRAM WMW FULL !W-1'P0JQW BAW-04T 10-00 �-32.2 Cb rCAL J.Sq4. 9A X>OOC EVROCKVIEW AWL at P. XaCM 22.0. 644.1 - Sq4 0 4FT. W000_ M50 FENCE 7 ------ ------- ri C4 q, F4ARp 5 FT. SIDE SETBALX C• ge Q4110.7 aq5. .133.77(M)11,33.79 . a,11 STE MLTPLE -rf 4L.1 N89*47'30"W BOX ELDER 67C91ING FOUNDATION FULL 9-7* MILKED BASEMENT 6120 IWOOKVIEW AVE TOP OF F0UNPAT04=8953 YeNM AND 5q4. 51-W CORNER xx 14M cN t - - i,�. . �. irLm -sq4 9 ci, 4.7 cr, SPRUCEr.", dF . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48' -OAK-- FND P 74 e a A. 3 -SORLIB LINE • aq4.9 9 %-6r-T. VOOD '-4FT. W.01 Flel [-S e:6 FENCE F7 WOOD HOUSE,- 61`28 BROOKVIEW AVE.,-. FFE-806.6 E=89!5.0 I FGAI r]FSCRIPTION ARFA SLINIMAPY -T 5- m= 23. FAIRME GROSS BUILOW, AREA 2,049 50. FT. OR 0.05 AC. I hereby certify that this survey. plan or rd WtMPW COUNTY. ttag• TA. (50 Sa. FT. OF THE COVERED PORCH ALLOWED PER a" CODE) prepared by me or under my direct supgrvf PP•P• SED ELEVATIONS that I am a duty licensed Land Surveyor uji (STEP GARAGE I FOOT) WT SULLAPINC AREA Lqqq 50. FT. 02 0.05 AC. laws the State of Minn GARAGE FLOOR - 895.7 LOT 6 AREA---,, = 6,683 Sa FT. OR 0.14 AC. TOP OF FOUNDATION . 896.2 BULDNG COVERAGE 29L91% FIRST FLOOR = 8%.8 JONATHAN n pITTMANN DW 12/19/ LOWEST FLOOR - 886.93 LbumNa 44647 Rwsad -T- V)es A hie. . Memo To: File From: Cary Teague, City Planner City of Edina =1 Dave Miller, of JMS submitted the attached building permit for construction of a second home on this site. Jackie Onischuk, building secretary, asked Mr. Miller for an address. Mr. Miller stated that this site is going through the subdivision process to create the lot. Ms. Onischuk then brought the plans to the planning department for review. Kris Aaker, - assistant planner, stated that the applicant cannot build two homes on one lot, and that application has not been made for subdivision of this property. Planning staff has had conversations with employees of JMS regarding the process for subdivision of this property. Staff has also given JMS applications for a subdivision, so JMS should be aware of the process before a building permit may be issued. Ms. Onischuk then phoned Mr. Miller, and informed him that the City of Edina would not accept the . building permit application, as there already is a home on the lot, and no subdivision has been applied for. She asked Mr. Miller to pick up the plans and .permit. Attached are copies of the plans and permit that were submitted. A VARIANCEPPLICATION �A 'j • �: boGU�rn �e►�ri' :A: o e 1� 8 + CD 0 � O� CN CASE. NUMBER�DATE l °I FEE PAID 3oD,ro City of Edina Planning Department * www.cityofedina:corrtl 4801 West Fiftieth Street * Edina, MN 55424 * (952).826 -0369 * fax, (952) 826 - 0389 FEE: ES - $300.0 NON -RES - $500 APPLICANT ,v NAME:ySi3M I'{JES . ( Sign requir ature ed - on age) back p ADDRESS wgSw _D'x* ,PHONE• 75. . �'' c EMAIL:2.�G . bc71 f Ca%yV� S C�S7 r1ES :� pn/l PROPERTY OWNER s II NAME JVv�S CAS -k�✓yC -fans (Signature required on back page) s-- ADDRESS. .?SLSb 1 P �4 . G`no 'PHONE- ESCRRrIP�TwION^Jdo PROPERTY '(written.and electronic form) . - - - YOU R1USt provide a full legal description. If more space is needed; please use a separate sheet Note: The County may not accept the resoluffori approiririg: yourpibject if the legal description does noimatcll their records. This may delay your project. PRO PERTYADDRESS: •`lWo ' Waw-ew ,Ay&VJZ1�1. :'...' 'tip PRESENT ZONING:- P.I.D.# - EXPLANATION OF REQUEST: Pte. (Use. reverse side or additional pages if necessary) ARCHITECT: -NAME: A"P_ - -Dora_ Ol2Sc(,� PHONE. 9Sz- 7 �7T7 'EMAIL: Pe AjCjAI*P AOL.0 M.: . S R: 94A PHONE: NAME. . L,PctiDFDZtA = � .+�/�.. PHONE. ;::(,�2: �03�' -pZ30 ;. FEMAIL:: J Pi , -4 61 2/11/09 To: Mayor James Hovland and members of the Edina City Council. From: Dick Whitbeck Re: Variance Request from JMS Builders for 6120 Brookview Ave. and hearing February 17, 2009. Dear Mayor Hovland and Council Members, As I am sure you are quite aware, we have a very serious situation on the 6100 block of Brookview Ave. I know that you will receive or have received a tremendous amount of communications from concerned Edina residents as well as informational documents. I implore you to please go over all documents thoroughly. I realize there is so very much to take in. And, at times, the paper trail might need a deeper look than usual. If a variance is granted, the damage to our property value will far outweigh the cost of JMS moving their house. And, there would be irreparable damage to our neighborhood. Also, I would suspect that the cost of litigation would be greater than the cost of moving the house as well. The Planning Staff recommended a denial of the variance on all counts. The Zoning Board unanimously voted against the variance request. All of us on Brookview are counting on you to stand for what is the right thing to do here and deny the variance. Thank you very much, Sincerely, Dick Whitbeck 6128 Brookview Ave Edina, MN 55424 952- 926 -9927 2/12/09 Dear Mayor Hovland and Members of the Edina City Council My husband and I are property owners of 6128 Brookview Ave, I would first like to address the Circuit Court hearing regarding JMS. We were not present at the TRO hearing. As the party most directly affected by the results of the hearing, we were shocked that our .voices were not heard. And, I know we would have contributed valuable information that would have had an effect on the judge's ruling. The surveyor's affidavit was sketchy, misleading and incomplete. According to the surveyor's affidavit, he spoke with someone at City Hall. Who did he talk to at City Hall? No one in the planning department has any recollection of speaking with him about this issue and the surveyor did not identify who he allegedly spoke with. The surveyor has completed 3 surveys of the property and in each one he has calculated a different average front setback. How is this possible? The diagram submitted by the surveyor illustrating front property set -backs is misleading. It Includes one property that does not exist and another that should not be considered in the average since it is under construction. No mention was made that the pre- existing home was set back 44 feet. The photos presented at the court hearing were misleading as they did not show the entire situation — deceptive as usual. My husband stated in the 2007 edition of the "Edina Magazine" that we entered the driveway at 6128 for the first time and before entering the house he said, "this is it!" It had the feeling of "leaving the hustle of the city behind" that attracted him. This aesthetic is now completely gone. It is like buying lakeshore property and someone takes away the lake. The value of our property has been totally compromised. We value privacy and greenery. We would never purchase a home next to such a white elephant. Who would buy our house with such an imposing eyesore? Passers by would often stop and ask if we would ever consider selling. Those days are gone if the house is not moved or torn down. JMS claims it will suffer severe consequences if it is not in the Parade Of Homes. According to JMS, the Parade constitutes 80% of its marketing. Why is it a foregone conclusion that this will be a positive marketing experience? Our neighborhood is so outraged at this project that we will have the most aggressive negative yet legal signage possible posted in the neighborhood. The effect will hardly be positive. The idiotic positicning of the home on the lot will be anything but positive. Since the day JMS purchased the property at 6120 Brookview, we have suffered threats, lies, deception and misrepresentation of fact. Unfortunately, this seems to be a recurring theme with JMS. JMS' initial presentation to us was more of a threat than a proposal. JMS said if we did not support the subdivision, they would build one monster home massing out the 100 foot lot. JMS purchased the property May 19, 2008. Building plans were submitted August 13. Nothing happened. The beautiful 250 + oak tree was hacked down. New plans were submitted October 30. Deadline for the Parade of Homes application was November 5 even before the new building plans had been approved on November 25. A new survey was taken and a whirlwind construction project began December 5. JMS proceeded to build in the extreme edge of the property as if he had obtained a subdivision which he did not. JMS then lied to the city inspector and told him they had an "administrative subdivision ". They did not. JMS tried to circumvent the city and went to Hennepin County to obtain a building permit. They were denied. JMS submitted another application for a building permit with Edina with inaccurate and untruthful information. They were turned away again. JMS has consistently used incorrect legal descriptions of the property. Why did JMS continue to build without their variance? Why are they assuming they will be granted a variance for a subdivision? JMS is arrogantly and brazenly building according to his own agenda disregarding Edina city codes. A builder does not have the authority to decide they are going to subdivide a property without going through proper legal process. JMS has snubbed his nose at the city and almost dared the city to stop him. This sets a dangerous precedent for the city and sends a message to builders that the city is soft, does not uphold its codes and is afraid of litigation. You are our voice. This house must be torn down or moved. It never should have been built where it is in the first place. JMS has shirked its responsibility to act in a fair manor. It is city's responsibility to make things right. This variance must be looked at solely on its own merits and not in connection with any possible legal repercussions. The Zoning Board's recommendation stands alone on the 2 merits of this case. As such, there can be no other choice but to deny the variance request i Jac ie 'tbeck 612 ookview Ave Edina. MN 55424 952- 922 -5045 3 1300 washm pon Square SIEGEL BRILL 100 washinplon Avenue South Minneapnhs, Miw wsota 55401 GR.EUPN,ER DUFFY T (61:') 33I 6100 F (612) 339 6'..91 & FOSTER. P.A. JAMES A. YAROSH 612- 337 -6112 jimyarosh @sbgdf.com February 12, 2009 Mayor James Hovland VIA EMAIL - jhoogenakkerna ci.edina.mn.us Members of the Edina City Council 4801 West 5e Street Edina, MN 55424 Re: JMS Custom Homes, LLC Application for Variance Case No. B -09 -01 Our File No.: 25,282 -AG -000 Dear Mayor. and Members of the Council: This firm represents Dick and Jackie Whitbeck, neighbors of the property owned by JMS at 6120 Brookview Avenue in Edina (the "Property ") owned by JMS Custom Homes, LLC. JMS, a developer, seeks a variance from the front setback requirement in the R -1 zoning district from the required 38.7 feet to 31.6 feet. Approval of this variance, however, is not permitted because it does not meet the legal standards for granting a variance. The Edina standards for granting a variance are nearly identical to the state law requirements.' Under those requirements, an applicant may be granted, a variance only when it shows that strict enforcement of a zoning ordinance would cause "undue hardship" because of circumstances unique to the property and when the applicant demonstrates that such a variance "is in keeping with the spirit and intent of this Section." 2 In this case, JMS has not shown undue hardship nor has it demonstrated that lessening the front yard setback is consistent with the spirit and intent of the City's zoning. ordinance. I. JMS Has Not Met The Requirements For Establishing Undue Hardship. JMS has not established undue hardship sufficient to obtain a variance from the front yard setback because the proposed front yard setback is unreasonable in the circumstances, there is nothing unique about the property justifying the variance and the proposal alters the essential' character of the neighborhood as described in the City's owm zoning ordinance. The Edina ordinance, consistent with state law, defines the existence of undue hardship as follows: t See, Edina, Minnesota § 850.04, subd. I(F) and Minn. Stat. § 462.357, subd. 6(2). 2 Edina, Minnesota § 850.04, subd. I(F). Mayor James Hovland Members of the Edina City Council February 12, 2009 Page 2 (1) When the property in question cannot be put to a reasonable use as allowed by this Section [zoning ordinance]; (2) The plight of the petitioner is due to circumstances unique to the petitioner's property which were not created by the petitioner; and (3) The variance, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the property or its surroundings. To establish undue hardship .justifying the grant of the variance, all three of the above requirements must be met.3 A. JMS's application is unreasonable because it is out of character with the surrounding neighborhood. Minnesota courts have interpreted the first requirement of undue hardship as requiring the applicant to show that it would like to use its property in a reasonable manner that is prohibited by the ordinance.4 In Mohler v. City of St. Louis Park, the court determined that if the proposal is out of character with the surrounding neighborhood then the proposed use is unreasonable.' In Mohler, an applicant sought a variance to increase the height of a garage from 12 feet to 16 feet. The City granted the variance, but the Minnesota Court of Appeals reversed the district court that had affirmed the City's decision to grant the variance. The Court of Appeals held that the proposed use was "out of character with the surrounding neighborhood" and, therefore, it concluded the first element of undue hardship; i.e., that the proposed use is reasonable, was not met. Specifically, the court concluded the garage was out of character with the neighborhood because other nearby residents did not use their property for a similar use.6 Similarly, JIVIS seeks a variance to reduce the setback of the house it is constructing. The City's zoning ordinance has separate front yard setback calculations precisely to maintain the character of the neighborhood. The standard 30 foot setback in the R -1 zoning is insufficient because in some cases a different setback better fits the character of the neighborhood. The 6100 block of Brookview Avenue is such a case. The vast majority of the houses on the block are further from the street than the subject home. As such, JMS' proposal is unreasonable and, as a result, it cannot meet the undue hardship standard. 3 Mohler v. City of St. Louis Park, 643 N. W.2d, 623, 631 (Minn. Ct. App. 2002) (emphasis added). Rowell v. Board of Adjustment of the City of Moorhead, 446 N.W.2d 917, 922 (Minn. Ct. App. 1989), rev. denied, (December 15, 1989). Mah er at.631. 6 ,wohler at 631. Mayor James Hovland Members of the Edina City Council February 12, 2009 Page 3 B. JMS has created the need for a variance because there is nothing unique about the property that requires a lessening of the setback. The second factor for determining undue hardship is that the plight of the landowner is due to circumstances unique to the property not created by the landowner. There is nothing unique about the Property that requires a violation of the setback ordinance. The lot is more than sufficient for a home because it is a large lot containing 13,362 square feet. There is no justification for JMS's inability to fit within the established average setback as set forth in the Edina City Code. Granting a variance when there is excessive space on the Property to comply with the ordinance, contravenes the standards required for obtaining a variance. C. Granting JMS' variance alters the character of the neighborhood. The third requirement for showing "undue hardship" is that the variance must not alter the essential character of the neighborhood. The City's zoning ordinance, by setting forth three ways to calculate a front yard setback in the R -1 zoning district, establishes that non - compliance with the ordinance affects the character of the neighborhood. The goal of the established average setback ordinance is to keep all of the houses on the block somewhat similar in terms of the setback from the street. This creates a better aesthetic for the neighborhood. There already exists an exaggerated difference between the subject property and the property immediately to the south. Allowing an additional 7.14 feet exacerbates the problem. Moreover, the subject house is nearly 3,000 square feet and having it built so close to the street, as compared to most of the other houses on the block, creates a negative view altering the essential character of the neighborhood. Thus, because a granting of the variance would alter the essential character of this neighborhood, the applicant cannot meet its burden of showing "undue hardship." 11. JMS Cannot Show That The Grant Of This Variance Would Be Consistent With The Spirit And Intent Of The City's Zoning Ordinance. Assuming that JMS establishes each of the three requirements for undue hardship —an unlikely task —it still cannot meet the required showing that lessening the amount of the front yard setback is consistent with the spirit and intent of the City's zoning ordinance. Under the City zoning code, a petition must show undue hardship and that the grant of the variance "is in keeping with the spirit and intent of this f9rdinance]. 0 The spirit and intent of the Edina ordinance with respect to front yard setback in the R -1 district can be easily discerned given the three ways of calculating the front yard setback. The intent is to create a consistent, symmetrical alignment as much as possible. That is why the simple 30 foot standard setback is insufficient. Because the proposed variance goes beyond the setback permitted under the ordinances, a grant of the variance is not in keeping with the spirit 7 Edina, Minnesota § 850.04, subd. I (F). Mayor James fIovland Members of the Edina City Council February 12, 2009 Page 4 and intent of the Edina ordinances. Thus, JMS cannot show that its requested variance is consistent with the spirit and intent of the zoning ordinance and, therefore, its variance request must be denied. We are aware of the existing lawsuit between JMS and the City and have reviewed the Court's January 16, 2009 Amended Order Granting Temporary Injunction. There is nothing in that order that prohibits the City from denying JMS' request for a variance. The Court has not ordered the City to grant the variance. It has simply temporarily enjoined the City from enforcing its Stop Work Orders until further order from the Court. The existence of the lawsuit, therefore, is irrelevant to the City's determination of J.IVIS's variance application on its merits. Cities have a great deal of discretion in deciding whether to grant variances. In granting a variance, the City must make specific findings as to how the applicant's proposal meets the legal requirements under the City's zoning ordinance. In this case, the applicant must establish that it meets all three standards of "undue hardship" and that the proposal meets the spirit and intent of the ordinance. As demonstrated, the JMS proposal cannot meet one, much less all, of the legal requirements for this variance. As a consequence, the city should affirm the decision of its board of zoning appeals and reject JMS's request for the variance. Very truly yours, CA James A. Yarosh JAY /mkf cc: Dick and Jackie Whitbeck (via email) Anthony J. Gleekel, Esq. (via email) From: Bluewayzata @aol.com Date: February 11, 2009 11:54:41 AM CST To: ihoogenakker @ci.edina.mn.us Subject: City Coucil Meeting Dear City Council Members, My name Is James Blue and I'm currently involved in a lawsuit against JMS for fraudulent misrepresentation in relation to the boundary lines of my spec home that I purchased from JMS in 2005, located in Minnetonka. JMS over sodded approximately 2500 square feet, put my sprinkler control box and three sprinkler heads on the builders property next door. Also a rock wall constructed on that side of my properly is directly on the true property line which violates city code. I have to carry a lawn mower over the wall to get to my properly. When I purchased the house, the lots on both sides of my house were bare dirt and my house was the only one constructed. JMS walked the lot lines with my parents, who financed the home, and stated that the edge of the sod is my property line and that the markings on the edge of the sod were accurate. JMS's president, at the time, was Andy Porter who also claimed I could put a pool in on that side of the house. None of this was true and now my properly value has decreased considerably and I will lose approximately $150,000- $200,000 on the resale due to the lost land. JMS has tried to bully us and has verbally threatened my family. I feel JMS thinks they can do whatever they want with no consequences and they could care less about who's toes they step in order to make money. I never would have bought my property with the true lot lines and it will be very difficult to sell. Now, I'm beginning to realize that there are more people out there like me who have had similar problems with JMS and it seems like a pattern is forming with this particular builder. Someone needs to take a stand against JMS. Some of these builders move their assets to make it look like they have nothing so they can avoid being sued for their actions, and if you do spend the money to sue them they threaten bankruptcy leaving little recourse for the victims. However, I will spend whatever it takes even if I receive nothing to let them know that you can't bully people and that it's time for JMS to be held accountable for their actions. Thank you for your time and I will see you on the 17th. Sincerely, James Blue, Court file number 27 -CV -08 -18116 (MID) Frorn- Jane Grivna <jarbag(9 usfamily.net> Subject: copy of my letter to city council ►as::: February 9, 2009 5:39:25 PM CST °o: Jackie and Dick Whitbeck <dwmusic@comcast.net> please forward to all city council members and the mayor Dear Members of the Edina City Council and Mayor Hovland, My name is Jane Grivna and I am a longtime resident of Edina. I grew up in Edina at 4709 West 60th Street. My husband and I moved to Edina more than 22 years ago and live at 6017 Concord. I am writing to express my concern about how the Edina City Council is handling the issue of the new house that has been built at 6120 Brookview. The builder of this home has been allowed to: 1) violate code rules for placement of the home - the setback of this home Is 7 feet off of the average setback for the street 2) disregard the Whitbecks (who live at 6128 Brookview) by building within inches of the lot line, imposing on their privacy and potentially ruining their hedge 3) raise the grade of the property, which is diverting water onto the Whltbeck's driveway 4) attempt to bend the rules so that he can build one more house on the other half of the property I know that the neighbors have come to many city council meetings and expressed their concerns about this lot ever since the property changed hands many months ago. Are you members of the City Council listening to any of their concerns? Isn't It your job to support the citizens of Edina OVER builders who come in and try to bend the laws and codes ? ? ?? You have been elected to represent the people of Edina and not to stand up for builders who have no interest in anything but making money! As is stated in the Edina City webpage "The Council is accountable to the residents of the city." Please be accountable111111 I have known the Whitbecks, who live next door at 6128 Brookview, for many years and have watched as they have succeeded in keeping the historical integrity of their home completely intact with EVERY thing they have done! Now It Is your turn to keep the Integrity of our city and this neighborhood, and enforce the code rules for this builder the same way you would enforce rules for homeowners who remodel. Please think about this issue and how it would impact you if you were the unlucky resident to have this happening in your neighborhood! Thank you for listening to my concerns! Sincerely, Jane Grivna -- Get FREE High Speed Internet from USFamily.Net! - -- From: dulas001@msn.com To: edinamail@ci.edina.mn.us Subject: 6120 Brookview Avenue - Please forward to the members of the City Council Date: Thu, 12 Feb 2009 13:56:05 -0600 Dear Members of the Edina City Council, After driving by the project and reviewing the plans at 6120 Brookview Ave, I feel compelled to submit a letter asking you to uphold the ruling of the Zoning Board of Appeals which denied a 7.14 foot front yard setback variance on JMS' nearly completed single home construction project. In looking at the survey from Landform (job no. JMS08005), I am frustrated that the error was not caught by the builder. If the front yard setback was determined, in error, to be 31.6 feet on the survey, it should have occurred to the builder to question that number since there is only one house (at the corner) with a front yard setback that is less, at 28.2 feet. The other front yard setbacks on that side of the block are listed as: 34.8, 34.51 34.71 31.71 63.1, and 44.2 feet, and the average of the seven homes calculates out to 38.7 feet. I live across the street from a JMS project at 4608 Bruce Avenue that I and neighbors discovered during construction had numerous errors. The project should have required a variance for the driveway, which ended up being narrower than mandated in city building code (12 feet for new construction). After construction was started, it was also discovered that there was not enough width to accommodate a driveway plus a necessary retaining wall due to missing information on the survey. The survey was missing grade elevations that would have alerted the city that, in comparison to the house to the south, there was a lower grade at the side and back elevations, and that allowing additional width for a retaining wall on the south side of the driveway would be necessary. The driveway slopes down from street -level to a tuck -under attached garage at the basement level of the home. Construction was halted so the builder and city could figure out how a retaining wall could be built. In our historic neighborhood, we now have a non - historic 3/4 inch steel retaining wall at the south property line and a driveway width that is less than the 12 feet required by city code. Once again, an error on a survey of a JMS home has been found, which again results in a negative impact on the surrounding homes. I strongly believe that the appropriate action for the City Council is to demonstrate that it can and will support enforcement of building codes and city ordinances by upholding the January 28, 2009 decision of the Zoning Board of Appeals. I agree that there is no unique hardship. I would also like to see the builder made responsible to correct the situation, as I do not feel that the neighbors should have to live with the consequences of JMS' error or oversight. Thank you in advance for your time and attention. Cheryl Hirata -Dulas 4609 Bruce Avenue 2/12/09 To: Mayor James Hovland and Edina City Council members. The attached articles are from the Pope County Tribune. The short version of this is that the subject 3,000 square foot building was in violation of the County's setback rules. "A summary judgement from district court authorized Pope County to `take all necessary steps to abate the violation, including but not limited to complete removal of the offending structure."' The structure was razed. Dick Whitbeck 6128 Brookview Ave Edina, MN 55424 On Monday, July 16, Pope County authorized the demolition of John Pryzmus' 3,000 square foot garage /loft on Lake Leven. 2/12/09 10:50 AM Dctribune.com Pope County Press Inc. Thu N Sat P- F w,- 1 HI� ZSF HI'. 20F NC ?.OF Lo: 1OF Lo: SF Lo: 2F www,weathaforyou.com Community Calendar Toms Food Pride weekly ad Glenwood & Beyond Giving Campaign Form Legals Pope County Tribune Local Starbuck Times Sports School Opinion Obituaries Classifieds Business Directory Calendar About Us Contact Us About Pope County Message Board Penpals List Gallery Subscribe Pope County Summary Financial Statement Search Search I Advanced SeaMIT 6ro�16ereto�gaaD for anoapne sabsrkpduotolhe PopeBo"triiume NLAKS EM .t r Click to View Pages Read the Canary ONLINE LflJ wisper: iN7rPNE4CS 666.3P4 773! year r*a. mom'« % home : pope county tnbune : local February 12, 2009 7/242007 3:27:00 PM E:rnail this artlrle • Prinl this artide On Monday, July 16, Pope County authorized the demolition of John Pryzmus' 3,000 square foot garagelloft on Lake Leven. Several years of back - and -forth battles between Pope County Commissioners and Villard properly owner John Pryzmus came to a dramatic end with the smashing thud of bricks and lumber demolished and carried away in trucks. The building was in violation of the county's lake setback rules. The morning of Monday, July 16, the Pope County Board authorized the demolition of Pryzmus' 3,000 square foot, two -story, brick garage/loft structure. Heavy machinery was brought in to raze the building and remove the debris. When asked for his reaction to the demolition of his property, Pryzmus told the Tribune, "From now until I get things organized, every day that goes by is one day closer to hell for those bastards who did this to me" Pryzmus complied last year with the order to move his 1,585 square foot house back from the lake, but, after several notices and deadline extensions from the county board, he did not take action to move the garage/loft. The Pope County Board of Commissioners had set May 15, 2007, as the deadline for Pryzmus to move or remove the garage/oft. A summary judgement from district court authorized Pope County to "take all necessary steps to abate the violation, including but not limited to complete removal of the offending structure." The cost of removing the structure will be taxed to Pryzmus' property. Background on the violation According to the county, the garage/loft, built on the west side of Lake Leven, was in violation of the county's land use rules requiring new structures be built 200' back from a natural environment lake's ordinary high water level. The garage/loft was reportedly located 145' from the water. After several runs through Pope County District Court and a State Court of Appeals opinion, the courts ruled in favor of Pope County's order to move or remove the structure. The State Supreme Court denied a petition to review the Pryzmus case. Through litigation and variance applications, Pryzmus claimed the garage/loft setback should be "grandfathered -in" as he added on to the original, small, one -story cabin by salvaging joists, studs and a furnace, and reused them in the build. According to court documents, when Pryzmus applied for the original building permit, he was told an addition that removes 50 percent of the value of the existing structure must conform to the 200' setback. What happened that morning? That morning, around 7:45 a.m., Pope County Land and Resource Management staff and Sheriff Tom Larson and four deputies arrived at the Pryzmus property. Larson said law enforcement was involved because, "Some threats were made and we knew this could potentially be very emotional. This has been a five -year strain on both the county and Mr. Pryzmus and we wanted to be sure enough people were there to handle anything that may have happened" Nothing did happen, Larson said. 'Things went smoothly. Mr. Pryzmus was cordial and allowed us to remove the violation" The sheriff said law enforcement was involved to provide a safe, secure scene for the demolition CIREOFT UNION TT"Vt tttt� GIACIAL RIDGE HEALTH SYSTEM Fu�utIR,OOrwewn ^ a�ooe r man: »o•vxuw GLENWODD STATE BANK New Construction! Smrtud e M A u r G` 107,, t.VAlFy Ale, F*1 ?�® Heatthiand. MINN Click for more info http: / /www.pctribune.com /main. asp? SectionlD= 1 &subsectionlD= 16 &articlelD =4466 Page 1 of 2 on Monday, July 16, Pope County authorized the demolition of John Pryzmus' 3,000 square foot garage /loft on Lake Leven. 'I crews, but cis also, to direct any media, like Twin Cities television crews, that may have been at the stwtu Charnim, scene. No media arrived at the Pryzmus property. of Comwdwft After the building was razed, it was reported that dump trucks made six or seven trips to a landfill; three, 12 -yard dumpsters were used for concrete debris; and four or five, 30 -yard dumpsters were used for other debris. After about 11 a.m., Larson was the only law enforcement presence at the site- all county staff and deputies left the property. County's comment When the Tribune contacted Pope County's Vllard -area, Fifth District Commissioner Randy Shaw, County Board Chairman Dean Paulson and Land Resource and Management Director Steve Lawrence, all declined comment on the Pryzmus razing and referred media inquiries to the office of Pope County Coordinator Riaz Aziz. Wednesday afternoon, Aziz said there wasn't much more to say about the razing. 'The board told us to take care of it and we took care of it;' he said. Article Comment Submission Form Please feel free to submit your comments. Article comments are not posted immediately to the Web site. Each submission must be approved by the Web site editor, who may edit content for appropriateness. There may be a delay of 24 -48 hours for any submission while the web site editor reviews and approves it. Note: All information on this form is required. Your telephone number is for our use only, and will not be attached to your comment. Name: j Telephone: E -mail: Passcode: This forth will not send your comment unless you copy exactly the passoode seen below Into the text field. This Is an anti -spam device to help reduce the automated email spam coming through this form. r{F Please copy the passcode exactly It Is case sensitive. Message: Submit Clear Form Proven Professionals — Effective Legal Solutions. www.doeb6erdaw com • ooe66ert Law Offices Pope County Press, Inc. 14 First Avenue Southeast • Glenwood, MN 66334. 1320) 634.4571 Software ®1998.2009 tuol Software . All Rights Reserved 2/12/09 10:50 �M http: / /www.pctribune.com /main. asp? SectionlD= 1 &subsectioniD= 16 &articlelD =4466 Page 2 of Deadline for Lake Leven garage move nctribune.com Thu Fri Sat RS _ � 4 HI' 25F HI'. 2OF HI: OF Lo. IOF to: 5F Lo: -.2F www. weath eforYou.co m Community Calendar Toms Food Pride weekly ad Glenwood & Beyond Giving Campaign Form Legals Pope County Tribune Local Starbuck Times Sports School Opinion Obituaries Classifieds Business Directory Calendar About Us Contact Us About Pope County Message Board Penpals List Gallery Subscribe Pope County Summary Financial Statement �----S—e—a�rch---� l Search l Advanced Search Pri161t bt�a to ISI9a nD for anDam SnbscrWonlo Ihlt Pope Conngtl Tr�mn�ge 1.11V � �L AS03S Amok 0"M r Ctick to View Pages Read the Canary ONLINE 2/12/09 10:52 AM Pope County Press Inc. Ljwisper ll,,r SPEED K66. 394 7737 ynu• w Od, .,.c:,"i. home : pope county tnbune : local February 12, 2009 518@007 1:59:00 PM F:rtlBil „th! _article, • Print this art oc Deadline for Lake Leven garage move Amv Chaffins News Editor The house - moving case on Lake Leven once again has the county's attention. This time, a May 15 deadline is set for moving a garage with a loft above. The house in question was built within 145 feet of the ordinary high water mark of Lake Leven, a natural environment lake located near Villard. Pope County zoning regulations mandate that a house cannot be built within 200 feet of such a lake. - A summary judgement from Pope County District Court in 2004 ordered property owner John Pryzmus, to move the 1,589- square -foot brick structure to meet the setback requirements. Pryzmus moved the house. County sets May 15 deadline to move garage/loft During a county board meeting on April 3, Pope County Commissioners were told that a contract was cancelled by Pryzmus to move the garage formerly attached to the house. During that meeting, Commissioner Randy Shaw, who represents the Lake Leven area, said, "It's an unfortunate thing, but if it's in violation of ordinances, he's gotta move it.” On April 19, the county sent Pryzmus a letter notifying him, "With a 5 -0 vote, the county board agreed they have no other alternative than to require that the structure [garage and loft] which is still in violation of the District Court Order be moved. The letter continued, "Furthermore, it was determined that the structure must be moved or removed no later than May 15, 2007. If the violation has not been remedied by May 16, 2007, county staff has been instructed to proceed in taking actions to remove the structure. The removal cost will be charged against the property." Pryzmus says garage/loft "never non - conforming" Pryzmus told the Tribune last week that the garage and loft were never part of the original court order and moving it was "tacked on at the very end." "I moved the 1,589 square foot house and did what the county said to do," he said. 'The garage and loft were never non - conforming [to the county's ordinance]." The garage and loft sit on the original footprint of the small, one -story cabin Pryzmus originally purchased in 1991. "I'm not going to do anything at this point," he said. If it's not moved Pope County Attorney Belvin Doebbert said, 'The simplest solution that's least expensive to the county is to have it demolished and landfilled." Doe rt said the the county has considered moving the garage and loft, but said it's potentially full of complications. "That would be doing business the county probably shouldn't do- moving the structure, acquiring GLACIAL RIDGE HEALTH SYSTEM GLENWO0D STATE BANK r re r C�REDIrT� UNION l #iur71d,1 X GMftM0dlVF-32Q,9UA4W New Construction! Smr6uck J S @inl"mp:x Clw-A ri 6crcl 107 �I Minnesotar ;�. .'!� 1�� Healthland. 1i; aPder k• Web Sites , . http: / /www.pctribune.com /main. asp? SectionlD= 1 &subsectionlD= 16 &articlelD =4299 Page 1 of; Deadline for Lake Leven garage move 44 property for it, building a foundation and then getting rid of [the property];' Doebbert said. Stari Chamber Any cost to the county for demolition or moving the garage and loft would be assessed back to of cornmeeae the property. Article Comment Submission Form Please feel free to submit your comments. Article comments are not posted immediately to the Web site. Each submission must be approved by the Web site editor, who may edit content for appropriateness. There may be a delay of 24 -48 hours for any submission while the web site editor reviews and approves it. Note: All Information on this form Is required. Your telephone number is for our use only, and will not be attached to your comment. Name: Telephone: E -mail: Passcode' This form will not send your comment unless you copy exactly the passcode seen below into the text field. This Is an anti-spam device to help reduce the automated email spam coming through this form. j 4. r. Ht Please copy the passcode exactly - It Is case sensitive. 96 Message: Submlt Clew Form" Proven Professionals — ONctive Legal Solutions. `www.do�96e dCaw.co.m Ox66e'rtLaw.offkes Pope County Press, Inc. 14 First Avenue Southeast • Glenwood, MN 66334 • (320) 634 -4671 Software ®1996 -2009 Not Software . All Rights Reserved 2/12/,0910:52, M http: / /www.pctribune.com /main. asp? SectionlD= 1 &subsectionlD= 16 &articlelD =4299 Page 2 of 2 From: Jane Grivna <jarbag @ usfamily. net> Subject: copy of my letter to city council Date: February 9, 2009 5:39:25 PM CST To: Jackie and Dick Whitbeck <dwmusic@ comcast. net> ... .......... .. I I ...... - .......... .................... .... ........ .................. ..... ..... . ....... ...._ ... _ _ ......... _ ... ...... .. .... please forward to all city council. members and the mayor Dear Members of the Edina City Council and Mayor Hovland, My name is Jane Grivna and I am a longtime resident of Edina. I grew up in Edina at 4709 West 60th Street. My husband and I moved to Edina more than 22 years ago and live at 6017 Concord. I am writing to express my concern about how the Edina City Council is handling the issue of the new house that has been built at 6120 Brookview. The builder of this home has been allowed to: 1) violate code rules for placement of the home - the setback of this home Is 7 feet off of the average setback for the street 2) disregard the Whitbecks (who live at 6128 Brookview) by building within Inches of the lot line, imposing on their privacy and potentially ruining their hedge 3) raise the grade of the property, which is diverting water onto the Whitbeck's driveway 4) attempt to bend the rules so that he can build one more house on the other half of the property I know that the neighbors have come to many city council meetings and expressed their concerns about this lot ever since the property changed hands many months ago. Are you members of the City Council listening to any of their concerns? Isn't it your job to support the citizens of Edina OVER builders who come in and try to bend the laws and codes ? ? ?? You have been elected to represent the people of Edina and not to stand up for builders who have no interest in anything but making money! As is stated in the Edina City webpage "The Council is accountable to the residents of the city." Please be accountable!!!!!! I have known the Whitbecks, who live next door at 6128 Brookview, for many years and have watched as they have succeeded in keeping the historical Integrity of their home completely intact with EVERY thing they have done! Now it Is your turn to keep the Integrity of our city and this neighborhood, and enforce the code rules for this builder the same way you would enforce rules for homeowners who remodel. Please think about this issue and how it would impact you if you were the unlucky resident to have this happening in your neighborhood! Thank you for listening to my concerns! Sincerely, Jane Grivna - -- Get FREE High Speed Internet from USFamily.Net! - -- y MESSERLI & KRAMER February 12, 2009 Messerll & Kramer P.A. ATTORNEYS AT LAW 1600 Fifth Street Towers 150 South Fifth Street Minneapolis. Minnesota 55402.4218 main 612.672.3500 fax 612.672.3777 www.messerl i kromer com Additional offices in: St Paul & Plymouth, MN Authorized to practice law In: Minnesota, Colorado, District of Columbia. Illinois, Missouri, Montana, New York, South Dakota and Wisconsin Edina City Council Writer's 2) co Edina City Hall (6612) 672 --3636 98 4801 West 50th Street jlawver@messerlikramer.com Edina, MN 55424 Re: Appeal of Variance Denial, 6120 Brookview Avenue Custom Homes Dear Mayor Hoveland and Council Members: My wife and I live have resided at 6121 Brookview Avenue for 30 years and submit this letter memorandum in opposition to JMS Custom Homes, LLC ( "JMS ") appeal from the denial of its application for variance at 6120 Brookview Avenue. Furthermore, we join in the arguments presented to the City Planner's office and counsel for the Whitbecks. FACTUAL BACKGROUND In March, 2008 Bravura Construction purchased the property at 6120 from Grace Anderson and immediately applied to have the property subdivided. The neighbors appeared in mass and objected. In order to subdivide the split of the property would result in making the properties non - conforming to the area requirements under the city ordinances. After hearing arguments from the neighbors, it was obvious to all that the Planning Commission was prepared to deny the request to subdivide. The Commission focused on the "self- created hardship" and the neighbors' strong appeals to save the centuries old oak tree on the property. Bravura Construction withdrew its application and cancelled the purchase agreement to the property. A representative of JMS was present at the hearing. JMS subsequently purchased the property from Grace Anderson for $30,000 less than had been offered by Bravura Construction. JMS spoke to many of the neighbors and in particular the property owners of the adjacent properties. Offers to buy the consent to the subdivision of the property to allow the construction of two homes were rebuffed and it was made very clear to JMS that any efforts to subdivide the property would meet strong neighborhood resistance. JMS subsequently submitted plans to the city planner indicating an intention to build one home on the property. However, JMS mSl'N.-.,. - ORK WC NTIMY NETWORLGWmE Edina City Council February 12, 2009 Page 2 embarked upon an ill conceived plan to subdivide the property without submitting a formal application for subdivision thereby. denying comment from the neighborhood. In late fall 2008 the existing home was sold and moved. Shortly thereafter JMS applied for a building permit for two homes with the Hennepin County Building Inspections Department. The Edina City Planner's office was notified of this improper attempt to subdivide the property. Hennepin County was advised of the City's objection to the issuance of the building permit and the County subsequently denied JMS' application. JMS then submitted plans for the construction of a single home on Lot 6 of the parcel legally described as Lots 5 and 6, Block 23 Fairfax. JMS immediately chopped down the centuries old oak tree and obtained a building permit on December 5, 2008. The plans submitted to the City Planner's office included a certification from Jonathan M. Pittman that the proposed plan was in compliance with Edina City Code regarding the front setback requirements. In a self - serving affidavit submitted by Jonathan M. Pittman, he acknowledges he was confused in determining the proper setback provisions. Rather than determining the arithmetic average of the block, Mr. Pittman determined the "average" by connecting the line between the first structure on the block and the last structure on the block. In doing so, he completely ignored the setbacks of all other properties on the block. The negligent calculation by Mr. Pittman determined the average setback to be 31.6 feet. The actual average of the setback on the block is 38.7 feet. Thus, the structure is 7.14 feet in violation of the City Code setback requirements. In December, 2008 knowing full well that the City has not approved subdivision, JMS submitted an application for a building permit of a second home on the subject property. This application was rejected by the City Planner's office as only one home is permitted on the property. After the City's issuance of a stop work order, JMS commenced suit and obtained a temporary injunction enjoining enforcement of the stop work order dated January 7, 2009. A trial date has not been determined. JMS Custom Homes, LLC v. City of Edina, Hennepin County District Court File No. 27 -CV -09 -830. On January 14, 2009, JMS submitted a variance application and incorrectly identified the legal description of the property as Lot 6, Block 23, Fairfax. A public hearing was held before the Zoning Appeal Board on January 28, 2009, at which time the five member appeal board unanimously denied the variance application. Edina City Council February 12, 2009 Page 3 ARGUMENT I. A PARTY SEEKING EQUITABLE RELIEF WILL BE PRECLUDED FROM RECOVERY IF IT IS DETERMINED THAT IT HAS UNCLEAN HANDS. JMS has acted unfairly throughout the construction project. Specifically, it has misrepresented to both the City and County officials that it had an administrative subdivision -to the subject property which would permit it to construct two dwellings. Knowing these assertions to be untrue, JMS callously and in total disregard of the interests of the adjoining property owners chopped down a centuries old oak tree and began construction of a home which sits completely forward of the adjacent property and a mere five feet from the side property lines. To exacerbate the problem, JMS' surveyor certified compliance with the front setback requirements even though he was not able to calculate an arithmetic average. JMS' total disregard for City ordinances and blatant efforts to deny adjoining property owners the opportunity to express their concerns and protect their interests precludes JMS' equitable relief for the grant of a variance based upon hardship. Where a party has acted with unclean hands and behaves "unfairly" to the prejudice of other parties it is not entitled to equitable relief. Predictably, counsel for JMS will cite to Judge Rosenbaum's Temporary Injunction Order as having effectively usurped the City Council's authority to review the variance application. Such argument is misplaced. Judge Rosenbaum's Order merely precludes enforcement of the stop work order. JMS proceeded with its construction at its own risk and that the existing Order is temporary and subject to a final determination at a trial which will presumably allow full testimony from those that are harmed by JMS' wrongful conduct. II. THE RESULTING HARM CAUSED BY JMS' WILLFUL OR NEGLIGENT DISREGARD OF THE INTERESTS OF THE ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNERS GREATLY OUTWEIGHS THE ECONOMIC IMPACT THE DENIAL OF THE VARIANCE WILL HAVE UPON JMS. Many, if not all of the council members, have driven by the subject property and no doubt are appalled by the location of the structure and no doubt realize how all aspects of privacy and quiet enjoyment of the property have been plucked away from the Whitbecks due to the negligent construction by JMS. Surely the Whitbecks are economically affected by the location of the JMS structure which completely blocks all site lines to the north. However, their loss of privacy and quiet enjoyment cannot be quantified in mere dollars and cents. While JMS will soon move from our neighborhood, the Whitbecks daily will have to suffer the intrusions caused by this Edina City Council February 12, 2009 Page 4 negligent construction. In over 25 years of the practice of law I have encountered many "bullies ". Often times bullying tactics achieve their intended results. However, the side effects can also be devastating to innocent parties. It is the responsibility of the City and the City Council to protect the interests of its residence. Everyone viewing the property recognizes this is an atrocity brought on by JMS' own misconduct and should not be tolerated. I therefore request that the City, affirm the decision of the Zoning Board of Appeals, and deny JMS' request for variance. Respectfully, MESSERLI & KRAMER P.A. f¢ I ' osep W. Lawver JWUmpn City of Edina 2009 New Massage Business Checklist City of Edina application Proof of Capital Investment, must be over $10,000(1341.07 subd 7). References including one bank reference. (1341.03 H). Release of Information forms completed by all required individuals. Trade Name Certificate (if applicable). True copy of partnership agreement (if applicable). Copy of lease (if applicable). Certificate of Good Standing, Articles of Incorporation, Assoc. Agreement (if applicable). 1341.03 D2. If foreign corp. Certificate of Authority Workers' Compensation Form Fees $ 286 Annual Fee $1500 Investigation Fee Section 185A) Y t To: Mayor & City Council From: Cary Teague Planning Director KEPOK 11KECOMMEN VA IUN Agenda Item II.D. Consent Information Only Date: February 17, 2009 Mgr. Recommends F-1 To HRA Subject: Conditional Use Permit to ® To Council build a maintenance building Action ® Motion at 5701 Normandale Road. Resolution Deadline for a city decision: March 17, 2009 ❑ Ordinance Discussion Recommended Action: Continue the public hearing to March 3, 2009. To: Mayor & City Council From: Debra Mangen City Clerk Date: February 17, 2009 Subject: Cancel Belmore Lane Vacation Hearing REPORT/RECOMMENDATION Agenda Item II.E. Consent Information Only ❑ Mgr. Recommends ❑ To HRA ® To Council Action ® Motion ❑ Resolution ❑ Ordinance ❑ Discussion Recommendation: Motion cancelling Belmore Lane Vacation Hearing. Info /Background: The City Council had previously scheduled a public hearing to consider a request for the vacation of a portion of Belmore Lane. Interlachen Golf Club has asked that the request be tabled indefinitely in order for them to consider revisions to their plans. By cancelling the previously scheduled public hearing we can accommodate this request. w 91�1r�� o e �o REQUEST. FOR PURCHASE TO: FROM: VIA: SUBJECT: DATE: Mayor Hovland and Members of the City Council John Keprios, Director of Parks and Recreation Gordon Hughes, City Manager REQUEST FOR PURCHASE IN EXCESS OF $15,000 February 17, 2009 AGENDA ITEM: IV. A. ITEM DESCRIPTION: Cushman Turf Truckster Utility Vehicle — Braemar Golf Course DATE BID OPENED OR QUOTE RECEIVED: BID OR QUOTE EXPIRATION DATE: January 27, 2009 February 27, 2009 Company _Amount of Ouote or Bid 1. Turfwerks 1. $17,692.85 2. MTI Distributing 2. $18,080.09 RECOMMENDED QUOTE OR BID: ACCOUNT #: 5400.1740 Turfwerks $17,692.85 (includes sales tax) GENERAL INFORMATION: This is for purchase and delivery of a 2009 Cushman turf truckster utility vehicle for Braemar Golf Course. This is a 32 horse power utility vehicle with a 60" steel box with a hydraulic dump and has a 2,850 pound load capacity. This vehicle is used for a variety of landscape and turf maintenance tasks at the golf course. The $17,692.85 bid includes a $300.00 credit for the trade -in of a 1993 Cushman utility vehicle that is no longer operable. The transmission on the 1993 Cushman has failed. This purchase is part of the 2009 Braemar Golf Course maintenance equipment replacement fund, which currently has a balance of $91,281.00. Staff recommends award of bid to Turfwerks for $17,692.85. John Kegfids, Director This Recommended bid is within budget not within Edina Park and Recreation Department l) i allin/Vinance Director Gordon ITughe&City Manager otte REQUEST FOR PURCHASE C§%.'. TO: Mayor Hovland and Members of the City Council FROM: John Keprios, Director of Parks and Recreation VIA: Gordon Hughes, City Manager SUBJECT: REQUEST FOR PURCHASE IN EXCESS OF $15,000 DATE: February 17, 2009 AGENDA ITEM: IV. B. ITEM DESCRIPTION: Replacement Carpet for Warren C. Hyde Clubhouse — Braemar Golf Course DATE BID OPENED OR QUOTE RECEIVED: January 29, 2009 Company 1. LaVan Floor Covering 2. Beckers 3. DelPrado RECOMMENDED QUOTE OR BID: LaVan Floor Covering $22,989.00 BID OR QUOTE EXPIRATION DATE: March 1, 2009 Amount of Ouote or Bid 1. $22,989.00 2. $27,101.00 3. $27,693.00 ACCOUNT #: 5400.1720 GENERAL INFORMATION: This is for purchase and installation of new carpeting for the grill and banquet area (Braemar Room), corridor and office area at the Warren C. Hyde Clubhouse at Braemar Golf Course. This purchase includes removal and recycling of the old carpet which was installed in 1997 in the grill and north office areas; plus, the banquet area (Braemar Room) and its hallway that were installed in 2002. All of these carpeted areas are worn and in need of replacement. All 728 square yards will have the exact same matching carpet. If approved by Council, the removal and installation will take approximately one week and will be installed prior to the beginning of the 2009 outdoor golf season. John Kedrids, Director This Recommended bid is ' within budget Edina Park and Recreation- Department not within budget /-7 JTA Walli Director Hughes, Ci f)kManager o e a0 REQUEST FOR PURCHASE � less TO: FROM: VIA: SUBJECT: DATE: Mayor Hovland and Members of the City Council John Keprios, Director of Parks and Recreation Gordon Hughes, City Manager REQUEST FOR PURCHASE IN EXCESS OF $15,000 February 17, 2009 AGENDA ITEM: IV. C. ITEM DESCRIPTION: 2009 Chevrolet Silverado Pick Up Truck — Park Maintenance Department DATE BID OPENED OR QUOTE RECEIVED: BID OR QUOTE EXPIRATION DATE: NA 2010 Company Amount of Quote or Bid 1. Car /Truck City 1. $22,044.00 (State Bid Contract #440137) RECOMMENDED QUOTE OR BID: Car/Truck City $22,044.00 ACCOUNT #: 1650.6710 GENERAL INFORMATION: This is for purchase of a 2009 Chevrolet Silverado 1500 crew cab, 4 doors, 4X2 pick up truck for the Park Maintenance Department. This is a Flexf iel vehicle that will replace pick up truck #47.208, a similar 2000 Chevrolet %2 ton extended cab pick up truck that will be sent to public auction this fall. This purchase is funded by the equipment replacement budget and is being purchased under the Minnesota State Bid Contract #440137. John Ke1Srrbs, Director This Recommended bid is within budget Edina Park and Recreation Department not within budget,./ Jo W- aAnq Yinar4ji Director Hughes, City :q1 REQUEST FOR PURCHASE TO: Mayor & City Council FROM: Wayne D. Houle, PE, Director of Public Works / City Engineer VIA: Gordon Hughes, City Manager SUBJECT: REQUEST FOR PURCHASE IN EXCESS OF $15,000 DATE: February 12, 2009 AGENDA ITEM IV. D. ITEM DESCRIPTION: Well No. 13 Rehabilitation, 6721 2n° Street Contract No. PW 09 -1; Improvement No. WM -491 DATE BID OPENED OR QUOTE RECEIVED 11 BID OR QUOTE EXPIRATION DATE February 12, 2009 April 12, 2009 Company 1. E. H. Renner & Sons, Inc. 2. Bergerson Caswell, Inc. 3. Keys Well Drilling Company 4. Mark J Traut Wells, Inc. RECOMMENDED QUOTE OR BID: E. H. Renner & Sons, Inc. GENERAL INFORMATION: Amount of Quote or Bid. $ 81,241.00 $ 87,410.00 $ 93,800.00 $139,985.00 $81,241.00 This purchase is for the general overhaul and renovation of Well No. 13, located at 6721 2nd Street. The project includes the rehabilitation of the pump and redeveloping of the well. This project is in the Capital Improvement Plan, which allocated $150,000 for this project. The Water Utility Fund will fund this improvement. Staff recommends awardinq this bid to E.H. Renner and Sons. Signature The Recommended Bid is within budget not within Public Works — Utilities Department JRanal I Hughes, Ity 4 nance Director nager GAEngineering \Contract Numbers\2009 \PW 09 -1 Well No. 13 Rehab 6721 2nd StWDMIN \MISC \PW 09-1 RFP.doc REPORT /RECOMMENDATION To: City Council Agenda Item V.A. From: Debra Mangen Consent City Clerk Information Only ❑ Date: February 17, 2009 Mgr. Recommends ❑ To HRA ® To Council Subject: Annual Appointment of Weed Inspector Action ® Motion ❑ Resolution ❑ Ordinance ❑ Discussion Recommendation: Appoint Vince Cockriel, Park Superintendent, as Assistant Weed Inspector for calendar year 2009. Info /Background: The duties of the Assistant Weed Inspector are to carry out the enforcement of the City of Edina's Nuisance Ordinance regarding Section 1050 — Maintenance of Vegetation. Primarily, the Assistant Weed Inspector identifies and eradicates noxious weeds as defined by the State Commission of Agriculture and mandated by Minnesota Statutes. The duties also include identifying and cutting turf grasses and weeds throughout the City of Edina-that exceed ten inches in height that are subject to Edina Code Section 1050.05. Edina's Park Superintendent, Vince Cockriel has successfully served as the Assistant Weed Inspector for the past several years. REPORT/RECOMMENDATION To: Mayor & City Council Agenda Item V.B. From: Debra Mangen Consent ❑ City Clerk Information Only ❑ Date:. February 17, 2009 Mgr. Recommends ❑ To HRA ® To Council Subject: Resolution Receiving Donations Action ® Motion ❑ 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 various donors, their gifts and the recipient departments for your consideration. RESOLUTION NO. 2009-25 ACCEPTING DONATIONS ON BEHALF OF THE CITY OF EDINA WHEREAS, Minnesota Statute 465.03 allows cities to accept grants and donations of real or personal property for the benefit of its citizens; WHEREAS, said donations must be accepted via a resolution of the Council adopted by a two thirds majority of its members. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Edina City Council accepts with sincere appreciation the following listed donations on behalf of its citizens. Donation to Edina Art Center: Marty Stanger $10.00 John King Media Equipment John & Donna Skagerberg $50.00 Movie Projector, Slide Project, Editor, Film Splicer, Rick & Eddi Fesler $100.00 White Board, and Title Letter Kit Donation to Edina Park Department: Edina Community Foundation $15,500.00 Kelodale Garden Club $1,500.00 Dated: February 17, 2009 Attest: Debra A. Mangen, City Clerk STATE OF MINNESOTA ) COUNTY OF HENNEPIN )SS CITY OF EDINA ) From A Grant From Fairview Southdale Hospital For Buckthorn Removal At Rosland Park CERTIFICATE OF CITY CLERK James B. Hovland, Mayor I, the undersigned duly appointed and acting City Clerk for the City of Edina do hereby certify that the attached and foregoing Resolution was duly adopted by the Edina City Council at its Regular Meeting of February 17, 2009 and as recorded in the Minutes of said Regular Meeting. WITNESS my hand and seal of said City this day of , 20_. City Clerk REPORT /RECOMMENDATION To: Mayor & City Council Agenda Item # V. C. From: Jack D. Sullivan, P S. Consent Assistant City EngiV Information Only ❑ Date: February 17, 2009 Mgr. Recommends ❑ To HRA ® To Council Subject: Set Public Hearing Date for Action ® Motion Mirror Lakes Neighborhood ® Resolution Roadway Improvements: ❑ Ordinance No. BA -356 and for South Garden Estates ❑ Discussion Neighborhood Roadway Improvements: No. BA -358 Recommendation: Approve resolution calling for Public Hearing on March 17, 2009 for roadway improvements in the Mirror Lakes Neighborhood, Improvement No. BA -356, and South Garden Estates Neighborhood, Improvement No. BA -358. Info /Background: City staff is requesting these street improvements based on the condition of the streets. Staff has reviewed each project and has determined them to be feasible. A neighborhood informational meeting was held on Monday, February 9 for the South Garden Estates project, and on Thursday, February 12 for the Mirror Lakes project. A feasibility study will be completed for each project and submitted to the City Council prior to the Public Hearing. Staff suggests scheduling a Public Hearing for March 17, 2009. G: \Engineering\Improvements\BA356 Mirror Lakes N'hood Imp\ADMIN\MISC\20090213_RR request _public _hearing_BA35 6_BA35 8.doc 1\ w9 RESOLUTION N0.2009 -26 o� e • fN�M� �BeO SET PUBLIC HEARING OF MARCH 17, 2009, AND RECEIVE FEASIBILITY STUDIES City of Edina FOR MIRROR LAKES NEIGHBORHOOD STREET RECONSTRUCTION IMPROVEMENT NO. BA -356 AND SOUTH GARDEN ESTATES NEIGHBORHOOD STREET RECONSTRUCTION IMPROVEMENT NO. BA -358 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF EDINA, MINNESOTA, that a public hearing shall be held on the 17th day of March, 2009, in the Council Chambers at City Hall at 7:00 p.m. to consider street reconstruction in the neighborhoods of Mirror Lakes and South Garden Estates, Improvement Project Nos. BA -356 and BA -358. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Clerk shall give mailed and published notice of such hearing and improvements as required by law. ADOPTED this 17th day of February, 2009. ATTEST: City Clerk STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF HENNEPIN CITY OF EDINA )SS CERTIFICATE OF CITY CLERK Mayor I, the undersigned duly appointed and acting City Clerk for the City of Edina do hereby certify that the attached and foregoing Resolution was duly adopted by the Edina City Council at its Regular Meeting of February 17, 2009, and as recorded in the Minutes of said Regular Meeting. WITNESS my hand and seal of said City this day of , 2008. 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 teif�pi\"m : REPORT /RECOMMENDATION �aaa To: MAYOR AND COUNCIL From: Heather Worthington Assistant City Manager Agenda Item: V.D. Consent Information Only ❑ Date: February 17, 2009 Mgr. Recommends ❑ To HRA Subject: ® To Council Resolution establishing October Action ❑ Motion 24, 2009 as the Edina Day of Service Resolution Ordinance El Discussion Recommendation: Adopt Resolution establishing October 24, 2009 as the Edina Day of Service. Info /Background: Attached is the copy of the proposed Resolution which was passed by the Board of Directors for Connecting With Kids on February 9, 2009. This resolution establishes October 24, 2009 as the first Edina Day of Service. r RESOLUTION NO. 2009 -27 Edina Day of Service 2009 Resolution 2009 -27 WHEREAS, serious social problems concern our nation and threaten its future; and WHEREAS, connecting with others and working together through volunteer service can bridge the differences that separate people and help solve serious social problems; and WHEREAS, our children are the greatest assets for the future of this community; and WHEREAS, we, the residents of Edina, have a proud tradition of philanthropy and volunteerism; and WHEREAS, millions of self- sacrificing individuals touch and enhance the lives of millions each year by doing good by giving where there is a need, rebuilding what had been torn down, teaching where there is a desire to learn and inspiring those who have lost hope; and WHEREAS, volunteer service is an investment in the future we all must share; NOW, THEREFORE, The City Council of the City of Edina does hereby establish a 2009 Edina Day of Service, to take place on October 24, 2009; further, the Council will partner with Connecting With Kids in organizing this project. Signed this 17th day of February, 2009 Attest: City Clerk Mayor STATE OF MINNESOTA ) COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) SS CITY OF EDINA ) CERTIFICATE OF CLERK I, the undersigned duly appointed and acting City Clerk for the City of Edina, do hereby certify that the attached and foregoing Resolution is a true and correct copy of the Resolution duly adopted by the Edina City Council at its Regular Meeting of February 17, 2009, and as recorded in the Minutes of said Regular Meeting. WITNESS my hand and seal of said City this e day of , ,2009. City Clerk PHealthy Kids = Healthy Commui ty Connecting With Kids r Xz h� Resolution Recognizing Edina Day of SeTVice WHEREAS, serious social problems concern our nation and threaten its future; and WHEREAS, connecting with others and working together through volun- teer service can bridge the differences that separate people and help solve serious social problems; and WHEREAS, our children are the greatest assets for the future of this com- munity; and WHEREAS, we, the residents of Edina, have a proud tradition of philan- thropy and volunteerism; and WHEREAS, millions of self - sacrificing individuals touch and enhance the lives of millions each year by doing good by giving where there is a need, rebuilding what had been torn down, teaching where there is a desire to learn and inspiring those who have lost hope; and WHEREAS, volunteer service is an investment in the future we all must share; NOW; THEREFORE, The Board of Directors of Connecting With Kids does hereby establish a 2oo9 Edina Day of Service, to take place on Octo- ber 24, 2009; further, the board solicits the help of community partners, including the City of Edina, the Edina Public Schools, the Edina Commu- nity Foundation, and the Edina Chamber of Commerce to help organize and promote this day. Signed this 9th day of February, 2009. WX"4 k W. Peterson Chairman REPORT/RECOMMENDATION To: City Council Agenda Item V. E. From: James B. Hovland Consent ❑ Mayor Information Only ❑ Date: February 17, 2009 Mgr. Recommends ❑ To HRA ® To Council Subject: Appointments to Park ® Motion Board, Planning Action Commission and ❑ Resolution Transportation Commission ❑ Ordinance ❑ Discussion Recommendation: Endorse Mayor's recommendations for appointment as presented. Info /Background: Interviews have been completed for Park Board, Planning Commission and Transportation Commission. Assistance has been provided by Board and Commission Chairs in the interview process along with myself and Council Members Housh, Swenson and Bennett. Following are the recommendations for appointments: Planning Commission - Jeff Carpenter, Park Board - Jennifer Kenney, Kathryn Peterson and Bill Lough, Transportation- Usha Abra_ movitz. All members would be appointed to three year terms ending February 1, 2012. W REPO RURECOM MEN DATION To: Mayor & City Council Agenda Item V. F. From: Gordon Hughes, City Manager Consent ❑ Information Only ❑ Date: February 17, 2009 Mgr. Recommends ❑ To HRA ® To Council Subject: MEMBERSHIP IN U. S. HIGHWAY 169 CORRIDOR Action ® Motion COALITION ❑ Resolution ❑ Ordinance ❑ Discussion Recommendation Review attached materials and discuss membership. Info /Background Since last summer, governmental jurisdictions have been meeting for the purpose of creating a 169 Corridor Commission similar to that in place for 1-494. Mayor Hovland has participated in these meetings. We have now been asked to join this organization and enter into a joint powers agreement (JPA) with respect to the coalition. The draft JPA and other supporting materials are attached for reference. According to the materials, the organization has targeted a 2009 "Seed Contribution" to the new organization of $3,000 for Edina and other similar cities. Presumably, the JPA will decide on future dues on a year -to -year basis, but I gather that it will likely be based on the relative burdens identified in the attachments. According to my conversations with fellow city managers, Eden Prairie, Minnetonka, Plymouth and Hopkins have declined membership. Bloomington and Golden Valley are considering membership but haven't decided as yet. I do not know the status of other cities or counties. If the Council wishes to pursue,.membership, I recommend that the draft JPA be forwarded to the City Attorney for review. MAN February 4, 2009 1 Mr. Gordon Hughes, City Manager City of Edina 4801 W. 5& Street Edina, MN 55424 -1330 Re: U.S. Highway 169 Corridor Coalition Dear Mr. Hughes: Since June, 2008, cities, counties and other local government agencies, have been meeting to discuss the creation of a U.S. Highway 169 Corridor Coalition that extends from Blue Earth County to the interchange at 194/1694. The Steering Committee of the Coalition developed a mission statement. It is as follows: "Working together to enhance safety, reduce congestion and maximize economic development along the U.S. Highway 169 inter - regional corridor." As a local government along or impacted by U.S. Highway 169, you are aware of the importance this corridor has on your community. It is imperative that it receives the attention and resources from the Minnesota Department of Transportation and its share of potential federal funding. To have a stronger voice in this process requires us to be organized and acting together with a unified agenda. The Steering Committee of the Coalition is now asking communities to consider making a commitment to the U.S. Highway 169 Corridor Coalition by entering into a proposed Joint Powers Agreement (JPA) and making a financial commitment to support the Coalition's initial work program efforts. We are requesting that your entity have the enclosed JPA, work plan and financial structure reviewed and approved on or before March 15, 2009. The proposed JPA has been approved by the Steering Committee which your entity may or may not have had representation on during the past several months. Although the JPA uses standard agreements approved by the League of Minnesota Cities (LMC), Association of Minnesota Counties (AMC) and the Minnesota Counties Insurance Trust (MCIT), I would suggest that you have the JPA reviewed by your entity's attorney. If there are some concerns regarding the JPA please respond to Susan 'McNellis via email at smcnellis@ - ,o.scott.mn.us by February 17th. It is imperative that you have your legal- review done as soon as possible. As part of the JPA, we are asking that each local government designate a primary representative (elected official) and alternate (elected or appointed official) to the Coalition. We also request that when your local unit of government approves the JPA, you are also making a financial commitment per the proposed fee structure. As part of the JPA approval. we are asking that you provide your owls signature format and page. Please forward an original of the signature page and authorizing resolution to: Tracy Cervenka, Clerk to the Scott County Board 200 4t' Avenue West Shakopee, MN 55379 The Scott County Clerk will hold the agreement and signature pages on behalf of the Coalition. General questions regarding the Coalition and its purpose can be directed to any of the following individuals: • Lezlie Vermillion, Director of Public Works, Scott County, 952- 496 -8062 or Ivennillion@co.scott.mn.us • Lisa Freese, Transportation Manager, Scott County, 952- 496 -8363 or lfreesenco.scott.mn.us • Michael Leek, Director of Community Development, City of Shakopee, 952- 233 -9346 or mleek@ci.shakolpee.nm.us • Ed Shukle, City Administrator, City of Jordan, 952- 492 -2535 or eshukle@ci.jordan.mn.us In conclusion, we strongly urge you to consider joining the Coalition. We finely believe that with membership in the Coalition stretching from Mankato to Brooklyn Park along U.S. Highway 169, our voices will be heard by those making decisions on how transportation dollars should be spent in Minnesota. Since ly on s F ayor, Jordan/Acting Chair U.S. Highway 169 Corridor Coalition Suggest Target 2009 "Seed" Contribution for US Highway 169 Corridor Coaltion Proposed Option Belle Plaine $ 1,000 Bloomington $ 3,000 Edina $ 3,000 Golden Valley $ 1,000 Hopkins $ 1,000 Jordan $ 1,000 Le Sueur $ 1,000 Mankato $ 3,00(Y Minnetonka $ 3,000 New Hope $ 1,000 North Mankato $ 1,000 Plymouth $ 3,000 Shakopee $ 3,000 St Peter $ 1,000 St Louis Park $ 1,000 Blue Earth $ 10,000 Hennepin $ 10,000 Le Sueur $ 1,000 Nicollet $ 1,000 Scott $ 10,000 Sibley $ 1,000 Region 9 $ 1,000 Total $ 61,000 Proposed Option Criteria: Cities over 25,0000 contribute $3,000, all others $1,000, Townships $250, Regional Development Commissions $1,000, Counties over 40,000 contribute $10,000, all others $1,000.00 JOINT POWERS AGREEMENT ESTABLISHING THE U.S. HIGHWAY 169 CORRIDOR COALITION THIS AGREEMENT is entered into by and between the undersigned counties, cities, towns, and regional development commissions (hereinafter the "Parties ") all being political subdivisions of the State of Minnesota, by and through their respective governing bodies pursuant to the authority contained in the Minn. Stat. § 471.59. WHEREAS, all of the Parties have land in, or are impacted by, the U.S. Highway 169 inter - regional corridor, extending from Hennepin County through Blue Earth County; and WHEREAS, the counties, cities, towns, and regional development commissions along the U.S. Highway 169 Corridor recognize that the corridor is experiencing issues regarding traffic congestion, safety, freight movement, transit and development related concerns; and WHEREAS, the Parties wish to collaboratively address these issues and concerns in order to protect, promote and enhance the safety of the public, economic development opportunities, and the quality of life of the people living, working and traveling the corridor; and WHEREAS, the mission statement of the coalition is as follows: Working together to enhance safety, reduce congestion and maximize economic development along the U.S..Highway 169 inter - regional corridor. NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual promises and benefits that shall be derived, the Parties hereby enter into this joint powers agreement for the purposes herein. ARTICLE I. PURPOSE This Agreement has been executed by the Parties for the purpose of cooperatively and jointly providing an organized effort to address the issues and concerns generated by the growth within the U.S. Highway 169 Corridor, to facilitate traffic safety and mobility, to increase economic development and improve quality of life. Specifically, the Parties will form a joint powers board to (1) exercise leadership in the development of policies, programs and projects that will promote the mission described above; (2) enlist the assistance and cooperation of the private sector in achieving the mission; and (3) enlist the assistance and cooperation of the federal, state and regional agencies in achieving the mission. ARTICLE II. DEFINITIONS Governmental Unit: For purposes of this agreement, a governmental unit is a county, city, town, or regional development commission either in the U.S. Highway 169 corridor, or impacted by the U.S. Highway 169 corridor. Voting Member: A Voting Member shall be a dues - paying governmental unit either in the U.S. Highway 169 corridor, or impacted by the U.S. Highway 169 corridor. Ex- Officio Member: Ex- Officio Members shall be non -dues paying governmental entities, such as but not limited to, Mn/DOT, community development agencies, Metropolitan Council (metropolitan planning organizations). Affiliate Member: Affiliate Members shall be any dues paying individuals, private businesses, organizations, local non -profit organizations, or other non -city, town or county organization that wish to support the Coalition's mission. Board: The Joint Powers Board of the U.S. Highway 169 Corridor Coalition, which shall consist of representatives from, and appointed by, each of the voting members. U.S. Highway 169 Corridor Coalition: The geographical boundaries of the Coalition are from and including Blue Earth County to the south to Interstate 94/694 to the north. Representative: An elected official of a county, city or town, the administrator of a regional development commission, or an appointed alternate, of a Voting Member. ARTICLE III. JOINT POWERS BOARD A. Creation and Composition of the Joint Powers Board. A joint powers board, known as the U.S. Highway 169 Corridor Coalition Board of Directors, is hereby established for the purposes contained herein with the powers and duties set forth in this Agreement. The Board shall be a public entity separate from the Parties and shall not be deemed to be an agent or partner of the Parties to this Agreement, or any grantee, nor shall the Parties be liable for the actions of the Board or any grantee. The governing body of each Voting Member shall appoint, by resolution, one (1) representative to the U.S. Highway 169 Coalition, together with one (1) alternate. In the absence of an appointed representative at a meeting, an appointed alternate representative may exercise the voting rights of the Voting Member. This Agreement shall be effective, and the joint powers board established herein may commence exercising the powers and authorities in this Agreement, on the day that the Agreement has been approved by resolution and duly executed by at least ten (10) of the governmental units, as described in Article II, and shall continue until terminated or dissolved as provided herein. The governmental units that have entered into this Agreement shall individually and collectively be referred to as the "Parties ". B. Voting. Each governmental unit shall be entitled to one (1) vote. The U.S. Highway 169 Coalition shall function by a majority vote of the representatives present. A quorum of the Board shall be at least sixty (60 %) of the Voting Members. 2 ARTICLE IV. DUTIES OF THE BOARD The Board shall have the responsibility to: A. Provide an organized effort to prepare and advance the inter- regional plan for the U.S. Highway 169 corridor to facilitate traffic flow and capacity on U.S. Highway 169 in its region. B. To seek passage of legislation by local, state, and federal governments to enhance the movement of people and goods and relieve congestion in the U.S. Highway 169 corridor. C. To cooperate with federal, state and regional entities to advance such an inter- regional plan. D. To research and recommend funding strategies and seek legislation to enhance the movement of people and goods and relieve congestion in the U.S. Highway 169 corridor; to create alternatives to traveling on U.S. Highway 169, and to increase and improve the transportation of people and goods in the U.S. Highway 169 corridor. E. To research travel demand management strategies and ordinances, develop model ordinances and recommend joint action on such strategies and ordinances by the members. F. To cooperate with state and federal agencies in the development of transit operations plans that impact the U.S. Highway 169 corridor. G. To monitor land use development, traffic volumes and travel characteristics in the U.S. Highway 169 corridor. H. To research and make recommendations to the members regarding other matters related to the U.S. Highway 169 Corridor Coalition's purpose. I. To provide for such public participation in the conduct of its activities as will promote understanding of its activities among the public and local governmental units affected by the activities and the informal resolution of disputes or complaints. ARTICLE V. POWERS OF THE BOARD A. The Board may enter into any contract necessary or proper for the exercise of its powers or the fulfillment of its duties and enforce such contracts to the extent available in equity or at law. The Chair or Vice Chair may approve any contract relating to its administration up to $10,000. Any contract in excess of $10,000 must be approved by the Board. 3 B. No payment of any invoice for services performed by a consultant or any other person or organization providing services in connection with this Agreement shall be authorized unless approved by the Chair (as hereinafter defined) or such officer designated by the Board or By -laws to approve such payments. C. The Board may employ agents and employees, and fix their compensation and all other terms and conditions of employment. D. The Board shall adopt such by -laws necessary or desirable for the conduct of its business. Such by -laws shall be consistent with this Agreement and any applicable laws or regulations. E. The Board may apply for and accept gifts, grants or loans of money, other property or assistance from the United States Government, the State of Minnesota, or any person, association or agency, including its Members, for any of its purposes; enter into any agreement in connection therewith; and hold, use and dispose of such money, other property to the parties and assistance in accordance with the terms of the gift, grant or loan, the terns of this Agreement, and any applicable public policy or law. F. The Board may sue and be sued in its own name, purchase insurance as is deemed advisable and may otherwise take action to enforce its rights in equity or in law. G. The Board may incur liabilities or obligations in accordance with the provisions of this Agreement. H. The Board may exercise all other powers necessary and incidental to the implementation of the purposes and powers set forth in this Agreement. ARTICLE VI. OFFICERS AND STRUCTURE OF THE JOINT POWERS BOARD A. Terms. Each Voting Member's representative and alternate shall be appointed for a two - year (2) term, except that the terms of the initial Voting Members shall extend from the date of their appointment through December 31, 2010. In the event that any Voting Member's representative or alternate shall not have been appointed by its governing board prior to expiration of the representative's term, the incumbent representative shall serve until a successor has been appointed. B. Vacancies. If the appointment of any representative or alternate is vacated before the end of the term, the vacancy shall be filled by appointment by the appropriate Voting Member's governing body. Vacancies shall be filled within thirty (30) days of their occurrence. A vacancy shall be deemed to have occurred when any of the conditions 4 specified in Minn. Stat. § 351.02 exist or if a representative fails to qualify or act as a county commissioner, city council or town board member, or regional development commission administrator. C. Chair and Vice - chair. The U.S. Highway 169 Corridor Coalition shall elect a chair and a vice -chair from its voting membership for one -year (1) terms. The chair shall preside at all meetings of the U.S. Highway 169 Corridor Coalition and shall perform other duties and functions as may be determined by the U.S. Highway 169 Corridor Coalition. The vice -chair shall preside over and act for the U.S. Highway 169 Corridor Coalition during the absence of the chair. D. Secretary. The U.S. Highway 169 Corridor Coalition shall elect a secretary from its voting membership for a one -year (1) term. The secretary shall prepare and circulate meeting notices and agendas, and shall submit all minutes of U.S. Highway 169 Corridor Coalition meetings for approval by the Board. E. Treasurer. The U.S. Highway 169 Corridor Coalition shall elect a treasurer from its voting membership for a one -year (1) term. The treasurer shall assist the chair in overseeing the budget and finances of the U.S. Highway 169 Corridor Coalition. F. Meetings. The U.S. Highway 169 Corridor Coalition shall have meetings at such times and dates as the Board shall determine and establish in its By -laws. Special meetings may be held on reasonable notice by the chair or by a majority of the Board. The U.S. Highway 169 Corridor Coalition shall be subject to the requirements of the Open Meeting Law, Minn. Stat. Chap. 13D. G. Committees. The Board may establish committees and set forth establishment and governing rules in its By -laws, as may be necessary. It is not required that persons appointed to committees be Voting Members or representatives of governmental units H. Staff. Voting Members may be requested to provide staff to provide technical and other types of input as needed. Legal services shall be provided by and rotated among the counties on an annual basis as needed by the US Highway 169 Corridor Coalition, and in accordance with law. 5 ARTICLE VII. ANNUAL ADMINISTRATIVE BUDGET AND FUNDING A. Budget. On or before July 1St of each year, the Board shall adopt a general administrative budget for the ensuing year and decide upon the total amount necessary for the general fund. The Treasurer of the Board shall certify the budget on or before September 1 s' to the clerk of the each Voting Member governmental unit and Affiliate Member, together with a statement of the proportion of the budget to be contributed by each Voting Member and Affiliate Member as annual dues. The fiscal year shall be the same as a calendar year. B. Fes. Each Voting Member agrees to contribute annual dues to a general fund of the U.S. Highway 169 Corridor Coalition, said fund to be used for general administration purposes, including, but not limited to, contracts for services and goods, salaries, supplies, carrying out the purposes of this Agreement, insurance and bonds. The annual dues to be contributed by each Voting Member shall be determined in accordance with a funding formula approved by the Board and shall be paid by January 1St of each year. Each Affiliate Member agrees to contribute annual dues to a general fund of the U.S. Highway 169 Corridor Coalition, for the purposes stated above, in accordance with a funding formula approved by the Board and shall be paid by January 1St of each year. C. Expenditure Policy. The U.S. Highway 169 Corridor Coalition funds may be expended by the Board in accordance with this Agreement and in a manner determined by the Board. In no event shall there be a disbursement of U.S. Highway 169 Corridor Coalition funds without the signature of at least two (2) of the designated authorized signatories. D. Fiscal Agent. The Board may contract with one of the Voting Members to provide any and all budgeting and accounting services necessary or convenient for the Board's administrative budget. Such services may include, but are not limited to: management of all funds, including member contributions and grant monies, payment for contracted services, and relevant bookkeeping and recordkeeping. G1 E. Accountability. All funds shall be accounted for according to generally accepted accounting principles. A report on all receipts and disbursements shall be forwarded to the Board on a quarterly basis by the Treasurer. The members have, at any time, the authority to request and receive reports pertaining to any and all budgeting and accounting services. All interest earned from established Board funds shall be credited back to that same fund. ARTICLE VIII. NON VOTING MEMBERS The U.S. Highway 169 Corridor Coalition may designate entities and individuals, as stated in Section II, with an interest in the U.S. Highway 169 corridor as non - voting member with the powers and responsibilities set forth as follows: A. Ex -Officio Members. Ex -Officio Members may participate in discussions of the U.S. Highway 169 Corridor Coalition but may not vote. Voting Members may nominate an Ex- Officio Member who must be approved by a majority vote of the Board. The U.S. Highway 169 Corridor Coalition may establish such further rules for Ex- Officio Members as is deems fit and proper, including notice requirements and terms of withdrawal, that are not inconsistent with this Agreement. Ex -Officio Members are not required to pay dues. B. Affiliate Members. Affiliate Members may participate in discussions of the U.S. Highway 169 Corridor Coalition but may not vote. An Affiliate Member must be approved by a majority vote of the Board. The U.S. Highway 169 Corridor Coalition may establish such further rules for Affiliate Members as is deems fit and proper, including notice requirements and terms of withdrawal, that are not inconsistent with this Agreement. Affiliate Members are required to pay dues as set forth by the Board. A withdrawing Affiliate Member shall be responsible for payment of its annual dues for the year in which it withdraws, and shall not be entitled to any refund from the U.S. Highway 169 Corridor Coalition. ARTICLE IX. WITHDRAWAL OF VOTING MEMBERS Any Voting Member may withdraw from this Agreement upon giving six (6) months' written notice to the Board. Notice shall be effective upon delivery to the Chair of the Board of a certified copy of a resolution of the Voting Member's governing body indicating its intent to withdraw from this Agreement. Upon receipt of the resolution, the Chair of the Board shall forward a copy of the resolution to each of the Voting Members. In the event of withdrawal by any Voting Member, this Agreement shall remain in full force and effect as to all remaining Voting Members. 7 The Voting Member's representatives may vote on all other matters until the effective date of withdrawal. Withdrawal shall not act to discharge the withdrawing Voting Member from any liability incurred or chargeable to the withdrawing Voting Member before the effective date of withdrawal. Such liability shall continue until appropriately discharged by law or agreement. The withdrawing Voting Member shall be responsible for payment of its annual dues for the year in which it withdraws, and shall not be entitled to any refund from the U.S. Highway 169 Corridor Coalition. ARTICLE X. TERMINATION This Agreement shall terminate upon the occurrence of any one of the following events: 1. When necessitated by operation of law or as a result of a decision by a court of competent jurisdiction; or 2. When 2/3 of the Voting Members agree, by written agreement, to dissolve the U.S. Highway 169 Corridor Coalition and all obligations of the Board shall have been paid or otherwise discharged in full. Termination shall not discharge any liability incurred by the Board or by the Voting Members during the term of this Agreement. Upon termination or dissolution, all property of the U.S. Highway 169 Corridor Coalition shall be sold and the proceeds, together with monies on hand, shall be distributed to the Voting Members and Affiliate Members in proportion to their annual dues required and paid by the last annual budget or as agreed to by the Board to further the purposes of this Agreement. The Board shall approve a final report of its activities and affairs on the expiration of thirty (30) days and there from, shall cease to exist. ARTICLE XI. NOTICES For purposes of delivery of any notices to the Parties hereunder, the notice shall be effective if delivered in writing to the designated Clerk or Administrator of each Party and Voting Member. A listing of the name and address of each Clerk or Administrator shall be maintained by the Secretary. ARTICLE XII. INDEMNIFICATIONALIABILITY A. Applicability. The U.S. Highway 169 Corridor Coalition shall be considered a separate and distinct public entity to which the Parties have transferred all responsibility and control for actions taken pursuant to this Agreement. U.S. Highway 169 Corridor Coalition shall comply with all laws and rules that govern a public entity in the State of Minnesota and shall be entitled to the protections of Minn. Stat. Chap. 466. B. Indemnification and Hold Harmless. The U.S. Highway 169 Corridor Coalition shall fully defend, indemnify and hold harmless the Parties and members against all claims, losses, liability, suits, judgments, cost and expenses by reason of the action or inactions of the Board and/or employees and/or the agents of the U.S. Highway 169 Corridor Coalition, except for any act or omission for which the Party's employee is guilty of malfeasance, willful neglect of duty or bad faith. This Agreement to indemnify and hold harmless does not constitute a waiver by the U.S. Highway 169 Corridor Coalition, any member or any participant of the limitations on liability provided under Minn. Stat. §466.04. To the full extent permitted by law, actions by the Parties pursuant to this Agreement are intended to be and shall be construed as a "cooperative activity" and it is the intent of the Parties that they shall be deemed a "single governmental unit" for the purposes of liability, all as set forth in Minn. Stat. §471.59, subd. la(a); provide further that for purposes of that statute, each Party to this Agreement expressly declines responsibility for the acts or omissions of the other Parties . The Parties to this agreement are not liable for the acts or omissions of the other participants to this Agreement except to the extent to which they have agreed in writing to be responsible for acts or omissions of the other Parties. Each Party acknowledges and agrees that it is insured or self - insured consistent with the limits established in Minnesota State Statute. Each Party agrees to promptly notify all Parties if it becomes aware of any potential Board related claim(s) or facts giving rise to such claims. ARTICLE XIII. DATA PRIVACY The Parties agree to abide by all applicable federal and state laws and regulations concerning the handling and disclosure of private and confidential information concerning individuals and/or data, including but not limited to, information made non - public by such laws or regulations. All contracts entered into by the U.S. Highway 169 Corridor Coalition shall contain a provision which requires the vendor to comply with and defend and indemnify the Parties for a violation of this provision. ARTICLE XIV. GOVERNING LAW The laws of the State of Minnesota shall govern all questions and interpretations concerning the validity and construction of this Agreement and the legal relations and performance obligations between the Parties herein. The appropriate venue and jurisdiction for any litigation hereunder shall be those courts located within the State of Minnesota. Litigation, however, in the federal courts involving Parties herein shall be in the appropriate federal court within the State of Minnesota. If any provision of this Agreement is held invalid, illegal or unenforceable, the remaining provisions shall not be affected. W ARTICLE XV. MISCELLANEOUS A. Amendments. This Agreement may be amended only by unanimous agreement of the Parties as evidenced by resolutions adopted by their respective governing bodies. B. Records, Accounts and Reports. The Board shall establish and maintain such funds and accounts as may be required by good accounting practices. The books and records of the Board shall be subject to the provisions of Minn. Stat. Chap. 13, the Minnesota Government Data Practices Act, related Minnesota Rules, and Minn. Stat. § 16C.05, subd. 5. The Board, within one hundred and twenty (120) days after the close of each fiscal year, which shall be January 1 to December 31, shall give a complete written report of all financial activities for such fiscal year to the members. C. Counterparts. This Agreement may be executed in two or more counterparts, each of which shall be deemed an original, but all of which shall constitute one and the same instrument. D. Severability. The provisions of this Agreement are severable. If any paragraph, section, subdivision, sentence, clause, or phrase of the Agreement is for any reason held to be contrary to law, or contrary to any rule or regulation having the force and effect of law, such decision shall not affect the remaining portions of this Agreement. The laws of the State of Minnesota shall govern all questions and interpretations concerning the validity and construction of this Agreement and the legal relations and performance obligations between the parties herein. E. Entire Agreement. This Agreement constitutes the entire agreement between the Parties and supersedes all prior written or oral agreements relating to the formation of the Board. F. Dispute Resolution. Disputes between the members may be addressed by any means agreed upon by them, and may include the procedures set forth at Minn. Stat. § 103B.345. G. Legal Counsel for the Parties. Each Party shall provide its own legal counsel. 10 H. Non - discrimination —Affirmative Action. In accordance with federal, state and local laws, rules and ordinances, no person shall be excluded from full employment rights with, participation in, or the benefits of any program, service, or activity of the U.S. Highway 169 Corridor Coalition on the grounds of race, color, creed, religion, age, sex, disability, marital status, affectional/sexual preference, public assistance status, ex- offender status, or national origin. Nor shall any person who is protected by applicable Federal or State laws, rules or regulations against discrimination be otherwise subjected to discrimination. ARTICLE XVI. EFFECTIVE DATE This Agreement shall be effective after all Parties file a certified copy of a resolution approving the Agreement and upon execution of this Agreement by all Parties. Each Party shall file the resolution and signed Agreement with the Clerk of the Board of Scott County, Minnesota, who shall notify the Parties in writing when all Parties have done so. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned government units, by action of their Governing Bodies, have caused this Joint Powers Agreement to be executed in accordance with authority of Minn. Stat. § 471.59. COUNTY OF SCOTT Date: .2009 Jon Ulrich, Chair Scott County Board of Commissioners Attested to: Date: .2009 Gary Shelton Interim County Administrator Approved as to form: Date: Susan K. McNellis Assistant County Attorney m 11 U.S. HIGHWAY 169 CORRIDOR COALITION Proposed Work Plan MISSION STATEMENT: Working together to enhance safety, reduce congestion and maximize economic development along the U.S. Highway 169 inter - regional corridor. f.. 2008 Work Tasks Initiated: 1) Organization and Administration: < a) Organize and begin regular meetings of the Steering Comrruttee, Policy Committee, and Technical Committee. '> b) Establish regular meeting schedules -for the above -named committees, and a quarterly meeting schedule for the"Coalition once, formed. c) Establish regular processes for administrative tasks such as keeping minutes r and financial records. d) Develop a "draft" joint powers agreement (JPA) for the establishment of the Coalition that will be adopted-by, the Steering Committee by the end of 2008. e) Develop a "seed" capital funding plan for 2009 activities; have the funding plan adopted by the Steering Commit ee; and-begin to secure funding commitments-for 2009 from cities'and countes'in the Corridor. 2) Project Funding a) Prepare "a-letter for Coalition submittal (approve at Jan. 22, 2009 General Meeting) to Federal Delegation and DOT Commissioner regarding stimulus package including." i) -= US, 169/1494 ii) US 169 and Lind/Webster Interchange iii) Le Sueur Over passe, iv) Members to add any other "ready to go" projects 2009 Work Plan: 1) Project Funding: a) Secure a Federal Transportation Reauthorization Bill (FTRB) appropriation in the range of about $1.5 million to $5 million for studies throughout the corridor, right -of -way acquisition and possible projects. i) Prepare applications to Congressional and Senate representatives for the designation of TH 169 in the FTRB. Key Congressional partners include Rep. Walz, Rep. Oberstar, Rep. Kline, Rep. Paulsen, U.S. Senator Elect ( ?) and U.S. Senator Klobuchar and the rest of the State's Federal Delegation as appropriate. C:\Documents and Settings \daults \Local Settings \Temporary Internet Files\ Content. Outlook \1HGVHWTG\ProposedUS169 -2009 Work Plan.doc ii) If the appropriation is secured, it can also be used to defray the ongoing cost of engineering and publication work related to the Corridor and Coalition. b) Prioritize identified studies, right of way needs, and projects in the Corridor for funding, paying particular attention to geographic balance in project investment. c) As a part of the project identification and prioritization processes, insure that transit mode and alignment of transit, as well as possible project investments, in the TH 169 Corridor is identified d) Assist local agencies with materials and message delivery for use in their activities in Washington, D.C. and at the state legislature:.; 2) Organization and Administration: J a) Develop a budget for 2009. b) Organize and begin regular meetings of the String Committee, Policy Committee, and Technical Committee. c) Establish regular meeting schedules fgthe above -named committees, and a quarterly meeting schedule for the,Coalition once formed. d) Establish regular processes for administrative tasks such as keeping minutes and financial records. \\ ' e) Adopt a joint powers agreement (JPA) for th�establishment of the Coalition that was recommended by'tlZe Steering Committee,by the end of 2008. f) Develop a "seed" capital funding plan for 2009 activities; have the funding Co plan adopted by the Steering,m mittee; and begin -'to secure funding commitments of at least $60,000.00- for i2009 from cities and counties in the Corridor. 3) Coalition Building: a) Develop'a request for qualifications, (RFQ) through the Technical Advisory Committee for the services of a " corridor advocate" who would; i) Recruit additional governmental agencies for membership in the Coalition; ii) Raise interest in the business community in the Corridor iii) Perform work on behalf-of the Coalition on local, state and federal issues. b)" Interview and select a "corridor advocate." c)' Develop and put in place published materials and communications that will assist the "corridor advocate" and the Coalition in building interest in the Corridor, the Coalition and its activities. These would include, but would not be limited to; i) Establishment, production and distribution of a print and/or electronic Corridor newsletter; ii) Design, establishment and update of a Corridor website. 2010 and Beyond: I) Project Funding. a) Identify and secure additional Federal and State funding for future studies throughout the corridor, right -of -way acquisition and additional projects. C:\Documents and Settings \daults \Local Settings \Temporary Internet 2 Files\Content. Outlook\ I HGVHWTG\ProposedUS169 -2009 Work Plan.doc 2) 3) 4) b) Assist local agencies with materials and message delivery for use in their activities in Washington, D.C. and at the state legislature. Organization and Administration: a) Hold regular meetings of the Coalition board, the Steering Committee, Policy Committee, and Technical Advisory Committee. b) Establish the annual Coalition budget and membership fee schedule. c) Maintain Coalition administrative and financial records. Coalition Building: a) Recruit additional governmental agencies for membership in the Coalition; b) Raise and maintain interest in the business community in the Corridor, the Coalition and the work of the Coalition. i) Maintain and, as needed, develop new published materials and communications that will assist the "corriddr advocate" and the Coalition in building interest in the Corridor, the Coalition and its activities. Consultants: Retain consultants as necessary.,to,biuld and advance the interests of the Coalition f C� C:\Documents and Settings \daults \Local Settings \Temporary Internet 3 Files\ Content. Out look \1HGVHWTG\ProposedUS169 -2009 Work Plan.doc U.S. HIGHWAY 169 CORRIDOR COALITION Draft 2009 Budget Project Funding, Organization and Administration: $36,000.00 Coalition Building, $13,000.00 TOTAL $49,000.00 C:\Documents and Settings \daults\Local Settings\Temporary Intemet 4 Files \Content. Outlook \l HGVHWTG\ProposedUS 169 -2009 Work Plan.doc i.> 1. }t , C:\Documents and Settings \daults\Local Settings\Temporary Intemet 4 Files \Content. Outlook \l HGVHWTG\ProposedUS 169 -2009 Work Plan.doc i.> 1. C:\Documents and Settings \daults\Local Settings\Temporary Intemet 4 Files \Content. Outlook \l HGVHWTG\ProposedUS 169 -2009 Work Plan.doc x o e • f �CbR600 �// REPORT /RECOMMENDATIO,N To: Mayor & City Council From: Boyd Tate Information Only Traffic Safety Coordinator Date: February 17, 2009 Subject: Traffic Safety Staff Review for Action February 4, 2009 Recommendation: Agenda Item V. G. Consent Information Only ❑ Mgr. Recommends ❑ To HRA ® To Council Action ® Motion ❑ Resolution ❑ Ordinance ❑ Discussion Review and approve Traffic Safety Staff Review of Wednesday, February 4, 2009. Info /Background: SECTION B: Item 1. Request to restrict parking on the west end of Creek Valley Road, next to the high school property, to "2 -Hour Parking, Mon. -Fri., 7 AM to 5 PM." The Traffic Safety Committee is recommending denial of this request as a result of a survey sent out to residents. Cheryl Norton, 5854 Creek Valley Road, would like to be included on the February 17, 2009, Council Agenda, to address this denial. TRAFFIC SAFETY STAFF REVIEW Wednesday, February 4, 2009 The staff review of traffic safety matters occurred on February 4, 2009. Staff present included the City Engineer, Assistant City Engineer, City Planner, Traffic Safety Coordinator, Sign Coordinator, Traffic Safety Sergeant 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 February 17, 2009, Council Agenda. SECTION A: Requests on which staff recommends approval: 1. Request to change the time restrictions on the no parking sign located on the north end of Lochmere Terrace at the turn around. This request comes from an Edina Public Schools bus driver who drives the Lochmere Terrace (bus 76) route. He states that it is impossible for him to turn the bus around at the end of the cul -de -sac when cars are parked in this area. Cars are legally parked because there has been a change in pick up and drop off times. He states he is forced to back up the bus in order to turn around and that backing up poses a real safety issue. Lochmere Terrace is a cul -de -sac located just north of W. 78th Street and to the west of Glasgow Drive. The 22 homes on this street are located on the north and west sides. The turn around at the north end of Lochmere Terrace is narrow due to a center median. The original parking restriction sign was put up in 1999 and read; "No Parking 8 -9 AM & 3 -5 PM, Mon. -Fri, 10 -feet on either side of sign." Requestor believes this sign may have been posted when the kids affected were on an elementary school schedule. Pick up and drop off times have since changed. Students are now picked up between 7 -8 AM and dropped off between 2 -3 PM. Staff feels that the request for the time restriction change is appropriate in order to ensure the safety of bus riders. Traffic Safety Staff Review February 4, 2009 Page 1 of 3 G:\ Engineering\ Infrastructure \Streets \Traffic \Traffic Advisory Committee\Staff Review Summaries \09 TSAC & Min \Traffic Safety Review 02 -04 -09 r Staff recommends the approval of changing the existing sign to read, "No parking 7 -8 AM & 2 -4 PM Mon.-Fri., SECTION B: Requests on which staff recommends denial of request. 1. Request to restrict parking on the west end of Creek Valley Road, next to the high school property, to "2 -Hour Parking, Mon. -Fri., 7 AM to 5 PM." This request comes from a resident who lives on Creek Valley Road near the end of the cul -de -sac which is adjacent to school property. She states that several high school students park in this area for the entire school day and that their cars frequently get plowed in during the winter months. This causes the street to narrow making it difficult for residents and service vehicles to enter and exit. The turn around area of the cul -de -sac is currently posted "No Parking Anytime." Students park further to the east, in front of residents' homes, in order to avoid these signs. Edina High School has approximately 400 parking spots in their two lots. Students are required to purchase parking permits ($112.00 per semester or $3.00 per day) in order to park on site. School official state there are approximately 1,800 students in grades 10 -12. Many students park off site in order to avoid paying these fees and also to avoid the lengthy wait to exit the school lots. A survey was sent to all 37 homes on Creek Valley Road seeking input on this request. (30 of 37 surveys were returned). Feelings were mixed but the majority of the residents at the end of the cul -de -sac, which is the area affected, did not want any parking restrictions placed in front of their homes. Many felt that student parking was a non - issue. As a result of this survey, staff recommends the denial of the request to restrict parking at the west end of Creek Valley Road. SECTION C: Requests that are deferred to a later date or referred to others. 1. Request from an EPD officer concerning several complaints received during the past months regarding Sunday parking on residential streets in the neighborhoods surrounding Wooddale Church, 5532 Wooddale Avenue. Traffic Safety Staff Review February 4, 2009 Page 2 of 3 G:\Engineering \Infrastructure \Streets \Traffic \Traffic Advisory Committee\Staff Review Summaries \09 TSAC & Min \Traffic Safety Review 02 -04 -09 . Complaints have been for vehicles parked too close to private driveways and intersections as well as the narrowing of streets due to heavy parking on both sides. Staff will be sending letters to residents and work with church officials to obtain input on this issue. 2. Request from Council Member Bennett regarding residents concerns about speeding vehicles along West 42nd Street between France Avenue and Grimes Avenue. Staff will be conducting traffic volume and speed studies in this area, as soon as weather permits, and await further direction from council regarding any additional studies. Traffic Safety Staff Review February 4, 2009 Page 3 of 3 G:\Engineering\ Infrastructure \Streets \Traffic \Traffic Advisory Committee \Staff Review Summaries \09 TSAC & Min \Traffic Safety Review 02 -04 -09 R55CKREC. G20000 CITY NA Council Check Register 2/2/2009 = 2/5/2009 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description 318895 212/2009 104146 R.E.C.INC 168,569.48 CLARK TIF NOTE 204695 012909 1000.1303 DUE FROM HRA 2, 12:57:52 Page- 1 Business Unit GENERAL FUND BALANCE SHEET COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX 50TH ST SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX YORK SELLING EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE POLICE DEPT. GENERAL EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE POLICE DEPT. GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES GENERAL (BILLING) CONTRACTUAL SERVICES GRILL CONTRACTED REPAIRS FIRE DEPT. GENERAL GENERAL SUPPLIES PSTF OCCUPANCY REGISTRATION FEES PARK ADMIN. GENERAL GENERAL SUPPLIES COMMUNICATIONS NEW EQUIPMENT COMMUNICATIONS CONFERENCES & SCHOOLS EMERGENCY RESPONSE TEAM 168,569.48 318896 2/512009 102971 ACE ICE COMPANY 13.04 204561 0312378 5822.5515 50.64 204774 0721807 5842.5515 63.68 318897 21512009 123309 ACTION FLEET INC. 292.49 VEHICLE SERVICE 204515 6356 1400.6215 334.41 VEHICLE SERVICE 204655 6317 1400.6215 626.90 318898 2/512009 100616 ACTION MAILING SERVICES INC. 612.10 MAIL PROCESSING 204516 212578 5910.6103 612.10 318899 2/5/2009 100617 ADAM'S PEST CONTROL 96.09 PEST CONTROL 00006190 204517 487275 5421.6102 96.09 318900 2/5/2009 105262 ALEX AIR APPARATUS INC. 405.08 TOOL REPAIRS 204696 15601 1470.6180 405.08 318901 215/2009 100575 ALL SAFE INC. 68.69 EMERGENCY LAMP 204697 91846 7411.6406 68.69 318902 2/5/2009 122151 ALL TIME FAVORITES INC. 300.00 DJ FOR SWEETHEART DANCE 204620 012909 1600.4390 300.00 318903 215/2009 103357 ALPHA VIDEO & AUDIO INC. 235.58 EQUIPMENT RENTAL 204826 ALERTINV11113 2210.6406 181.05 EDITING KEYBOARD 204827 INV122408DB 2210.6711 416.63 318904 2/5/2009 123987 AMERICAN LASER LLC 20.00 ERT PLAQUE 204828 2008111 1401.6104 20.00 2, 12:57:52 Page- 1 Business Unit GENERAL FUND BALANCE SHEET COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX 50TH ST SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX YORK SELLING EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE POLICE DEPT. GENERAL EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE POLICE DEPT. GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES GENERAL (BILLING) CONTRACTUAL SERVICES GRILL CONTRACTED REPAIRS FIRE DEPT. GENERAL GENERAL SUPPLIES PSTF OCCUPANCY REGISTRATION FEES PARK ADMIN. GENERAL GENERAL SUPPLIES COMMUNICATIONS NEW EQUIPMENT COMMUNICATIONS CONFERENCES & SCHOOLS EMERGENCY RESPONSE TEAM R55CKREG LOG20000 CITY OF EDINA 2/4 /2009 12:57:52 Council Check Register Page - 2 2/2/2009 -2/5/2009 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit 318905 21512009 101479 AMERICAN SERVICE CORP. 5,865.75 CARDBOARD bOMPACTOR - BALEM0005395 204518 7273 4090.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES STREET REVOLVING 5,865.75 318906 2/5/2009 101601 AMUNDSON, ERIK 75.00 IAFCI MEMBERSHIP 204656 012809 1400.6104 CONFERENCES & SCHOOLS POLICE DEPT. GENERAL 75.00 318907 2/512009 103680 ARAMARK REFRESHMENT SRVCS 252.31 COFFEE 204407 411491 1550.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES CENTRAL SERVICES GENERAL 88.41 COFFEE 204698 411439 7411.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES PSTF OCCUPANCY 340.72 318908 215/2009 103191 ARBOR DAY FOUNDATION 15.00 TREE CITY USA SUBSCRIPTION 204405 012709 1640.6105 DUES & SUBSCRIPTIONS PARK MAINTENANCE GENERAL 15.00 318909 2/5/2009 103191 ARBOR DAY FOUNDATION 15.00 MEMBERSHIP - VINCE COCKRIEL 204406 012809 1640.6105 DUES & SUBSCRIPTIONS PARK MAINTENANCE GENERAL 15.00 318910 215/2009 114475 ARMOR SECURITY INC. 494.16 FIRE ALARM INSPECTION 00001271 204408 131302 1646.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES BUILDING MAINTENANCE 426.00 FIRE ALARM INSPECTION 00001269 204409 131208 1646.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES BUILDING MAINTENANCE 920.16 318911 215/2009 102120 ATOL, ROBERT 50.25 CONFERENCE EXPENSE 204410 012309 5410.6107 MILEAGE OR ALLOWANCE GOLF ADMINISTRATION 52.15 CONFERENCE EXPENSE 204410 012309 5410.6104 CONFERENCES & SCHOOLS GOLF ADMINISTRATION 102.40 318912 2/5/2009 102615 BADGER METER INC 989.00 UTILITY SERVICE AGREEMENT 00001322 204519 944116 5916.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES METER READING 989.00 318913 215/2009 102195 BATTERIES PLUS 114.25 BATTERIES 204657 18- 230595 1400.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES POLICE DEPT. GENERAL 34.06 BATTERIES 204658 18- 230590 1400.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES POLICE DEPT. GENERAL 148.31 318914 215/2009 102449 BATTERY WHOLESALE INC. R55CKREG -,G20000 CITY NA 1 12:57:52 Council Check Register Page - 3 2/2/2009 -- 2/5/2009 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit 686.00 BATTERIES 00001668 204520 C8071 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 55.00- CREDIT 00001668 204659 C8094 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 631.00 318915 215/2009 100607 BAUER, MICHAEL 93.94 UNIFORM PURCHASE 204621 012909 1301.6201 LAUNDRY GENERAL MAINTENANCE 93.94 318916 215/2009 101355 BELLBOY CORPORATION 2,058.08 204453 47736900 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 18.95 204454 47737600 5842.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX YORK SELLING 283.10 204455 47736800 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 153.88 204456 81828000 5842.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX YORK SELLING 2,514.01 318917 2/5/2009 117379 BENIEK PROPERTY SERVICES INC. 625.00 SNOW REMOVAL 204699 133325 7411.6136 SNOW & LAWN CARE PSTF OCCUPANCY 625.00 318918 2/5/2009 117697 BENSON, NANCY 89.05 ART WORK SOLD AT EAC 204829 012109 5101.4413 ART WORK SOLD ART CENTER REVENUES 89.05 318919 2/5/2009 115067 BENSON, RON PAUL 39.00 ART WORK SOLD AT EAC 204602 012309 5101.4413 ART WORK SOLD ART CENTER REVENUES 39.00 318920 215/2009 100648 BERTELSON OFFICE PRODUCTS 54.03 OFFICE SUPPLIES 00009463 204521 OE- 183825 -1 5110.6513 OFFICE SUPPLIES ART CENTER ADMINISTRATION 143.79 INK AND PENS 00009344 204622 OE- 183413 -1 5110.6513 OFFICE SUPPLIES ART CENTER ADMINISTRATION 110.69 INK CARTRIDGES 00009344 204623 OE- 183396 -1 5110.6513 OFFICE SUPPLIES ART CENTER ADMINISTRATION 69.22 INKJET CART 00009344 204624 OE- 183413 -2 5110.6513 OFFICE SUPPLIES ART CENTER ADMINISTRATION 6.53 RUBBER FINGER PADS 204830 WO- 534049 -1 1180.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES ELECTION 47.82 ENVELOPES 204831 WO- 534255 -1 1180.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES ELECTION 432.08 318921 215/2009 123989 BIG SKY RACKS INC 2,645.55 GUN RACKS, LOCKS, GUARDS 00003071 204865 54640 1400.6710 EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT POLICE DEPT. GENERAL 2,645.55 318922 2/512009 117013 BILL'S HOME REPAIR & REMODELIN 7,525.00 PARTIAL PAYMENT /IMPROVEMENTS 204700 012609 2127.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES COMM DEV BLK GRANT R55CKREG LOG20000 100.00 CITY OF EDINA 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 414.00 318926 Council Check Register 122688 BMK SOLUTIONS 318931 21512009 21212009 -2/5/2009 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description GENERAL SUPPLIES 012809 7,525.00 80.38 BINDERS FOR TRAINING 204702 318923 2/5/2009 CONFERENCES & SCHOOLS 104053 BIOCLEAN MOBILE WASH INC. CONFERENCES & SCHOOLS 212.68 PRINTER CARTRIDGES, PURELL 204702 929.21 WASH ALL PUBLIC WORKS VEHICLM9001572 "204522 5056 1553.6238 CAR WASH GOLF DOME PROGRAM 46.89 929.21 00003801 204703 47678.1 1460.6104 318924 21512009 103866 BLALOCK, KAREN 39.00 ART WORK SOLD AT EAC 204603 012309 5101.4413 ART WORK SOLD 116306 BOHLINGER, JENNIFER 39.00 318925 21512009 ART WORK SOLD AT EAC 100711 BLOOD, DAVID 012309 5101.4413 21412009 12:57:52 Page - 4 Business Unit EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN ART CENTER REVENUES 100.00 POLICE SERVICE 204400 020509 1419.6102 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES RESERVE PROGRAM FIRE DEPT. GENERAL CIVILIAN DEFENSE FIRE DEPT. GENERAL CIVILIAN DEFENSE ART CENTER REVENUES ART CENTER REVENUES FIRE DEPT. GENERAL 414.00 100.00 94587 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 414.00 318926 21512009 122688 BMK SOLUTIONS 318931 21512009 100663 BRAEMAR GOLF COURSE 780.57 PRINTER CARTRIDGES 00003798 204701 47620 1476.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES 012809 5410.6406 80.38 BINDERS FOR TRAINING 204702 47678 1460.6104 CONFERENCES & SCHOOLS 5410.6104 CONFERENCES & SCHOOLS 212.68 PRINTER CARTRIDGES, PURELL 204702 47678 1470.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES GENERAL SUPPLIES GOLF DOME PROGRAM 46.89 BINDERS 00003801 204703 47678.1 1460.6104 CONFERENCES & SCHOOLS GRILL 1,120.52 318927 21512009 116306 BOHLINGER, JENNIFER 46.80 ART WORK SOLD AT EAC 204604 012309 5101.4413 ART WORK SOLD 46.80 318928 21512009 117698 BONNIWELL, PELAGRA 32.50 ART WORK SOLD AT EAC 204612 012309 5101.4413 ART WORK SOLD 32.50 318929 21512009 105367 BOUND TREE MEDICAL LLC 1,703.86 AMBULANCE SUPPLIES 00003799 204704 87040202 1470.6510 FIRST AID SUPPLIES 1,703.86 318930 21512009 119351 BOURGET IMPORTS FIRE DEPT. GENERAL CIVILIAN DEFENSE FIRE DEPT. GENERAL CIVILIAN DEFENSE ART CENTER REVENUES ART CENTER REVENUES FIRE DEPT. GENERAL 414.00 204457 94587 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 414.00 318931 21512009 100663 BRAEMAR GOLF COURSE 8.55 PETTY CASH 204523 012809 5410.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES GOLF ADMINISTRATION 25.00 PETTY CASH 204523 012809 5410.6104 CONFERENCES & SCHOOLS GOLF ADMINISTRATION 27.10 PETTY CASH 204523 012809 5210.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES GOLF DOME PROGRAM 30.16 PETTY CASH 204523 012809 5421.6201 LAUNDRY GRILL CITY %. AA 21•. 12:57:52 R55CKREG _.uG20000 Council Check Register Page - 5 2/2/2009 --2/5/2009 Check # Date Amount Supplier/ Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit 36.50 PETTY CASH 204523 012809 5410.6107 MILEAGE OR ALLOWANCE GOLF ADMINISTRATION 42.00 PETTY CASH 204523 012809 5410.6235 POSTAGE GOLF ADMINISTRATION 50.00 PETTY CASH 204523 012809 5401.4553 CLUBHOUSE GOLF REVENUES 124.72 PETTY CASH - 204523 012809 5422.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES MAINT OF COURSE & GROUNDS 344.03 318932 2/5/2009 119826 BRYANT GRAPHICS INC. 827.65 NEWSLETTER 00008222 204524 16705 1628.6575 PRINTING SENIOR CITIZENS 827.65 318933 215/2009 103244 BURTIS, ROBERT 250.00 ENTERTAINMENT 2/6/09 204819 020209 5610.6136 PROFESSIONAL SVC - OTHER ED ADMINISTRATION 250.00 318934 2/5/2009 103244 BURTIS, ROBERT 150.00 ENTERTAINMENT 2/12/09 204822 2/2109 5610.6136 PROFESSIONAL SVC - OTHER ED ADMINISTRATION 150.00 318935 215/2009 100776 BUTLER, GEORGE 100.00 POLICE SERVICE 204399 020509 1419.6102 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES RESERVE PROGRAM 100.00 318936 2/5/2009 119455 CAPITOL BEVERAGE SALES 82.35 204458 14201 5842.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX YORK SELLING 6,150.75 204459 14202 5842.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER YORK SELLING 6,233.10 318937 215/2009 116683 CAT & FIDDLE BEVERAGE 635.00 204460 80946 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 118.18 204775 80961 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING 753.18 318938 2/512009 100681 CATCO 303.94 BEARINGS, CYLINDER 00001780 204832 1 -63712 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS EOUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 303.94 318939 21512009 103079 CEDAR SMALL ENGINE 66.46 COIL 00001761 204625 21013 1325.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES STREET NAME SIGNS 66.46 318940 2/5/2009 112561 CENTERPOINT ENERGY 5,340.11 5546504 -1 204411 012109 1470.6186 HEAT FIRE DEPT. GENERAL R55CKREG LOG20000 20,038.48 CITY OF EDINA 318941 Council Check Register 101815 CENTRAIRE INC. 2/212009 -2/5/2009 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description 11,228.65 5591458 -4 204412 JAN2109 1551.6186 HEAT 68.42 5584310 -6 204705 JAN1609 7413.6186 HEAT 3,391.01 5584304 -9 204706 1/16/09 7411.6186 HEAT 10.29 5590919 -6 204707 01/21/09 7413.6582 FUEL OIL REPAIR PARTS PRINTING GENERAL SUPPLIES GENERAL SUPPLIES SEWER & WATER SEWER & WATER SEWER & WATER 2/4/2009 12:57:52 Page - 6 Business Unit CITY HALL GENERAL PSTF FIRE TOWER PSTF OCCUPANCY PSTF FIRE TOWER FIRE DEPT. GENERAL COMMUNICATIONS CENTRAL SERVICES GENERAL ADAPTIVE RECREATION BUILDING MAINTENANCE 50TH ST OCCUPANCY VERNON OCCUPANCY REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE FIRE DEPT. GENERAL EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE FIRE DEPT. GENERAL COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX YORK SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD CENTENNIAL LAKES 20,038.48 318941 215/2009 101815 CENTRAIRE INC. 379.00 IGNITION KIT 00001616 204708 17324 1470.6530 379.00 318942 21512009 119661 CENTRAL ENVELOPE CORPORATION 154.00 EMPLOYEE NEWSLETTER 204525 65589 2210.6575 154.00 318943 21512009 116353 CHIPPEWA GRAPHICS INC. 497.67 ENVELOPES 204526 22394 1550.6406 497.67 318944 2/5/2009 102691 CHRISTOFFER, KELLI 211.58 CRAFT SUPPLIES 204833 020209 1629.6406 211.58 318945 2/5/2009 122084 CITY OF EDINA - UTILITIES 67.99 00077443- 0200650027 204413 0200650027 -1/09 1646.6189 71.16 00102561- 0200862003 204527 0200862003 -1/09 5821.6189 87.49 00102561- 0203163012 204528 0203163012 -1/09 5861.6189 226.64 318946 2/5/2009 100689 CLAREYS SAFETY EQUIP. 75.22 ALTERNATOR BELT 00001447 204414 123028 1553.6530 294.00 SCBA MAINTENANCE 204709 123116 1470.6215 211.61 SCBA MAINTENANCE 204834 122606 1470.6215 580.83 318947 2/512009 100692 COCA -COLA BOTTLING CO. 395.00 204461 0168569820 5842.5515 395.00 318948 215/2009 101227 COFFEE MILL INC. 434.00 COCOA AND CAPPUCCINO MIX 00002334 204660 0739820 -IN 5630.5510 434.00 REPAIR PARTS PRINTING GENERAL SUPPLIES GENERAL SUPPLIES SEWER & WATER SEWER & WATER SEWER & WATER 2/4/2009 12:57:52 Page - 6 Business Unit CITY HALL GENERAL PSTF FIRE TOWER PSTF OCCUPANCY PSTF FIRE TOWER FIRE DEPT. GENERAL COMMUNICATIONS CENTRAL SERVICES GENERAL ADAPTIVE RECREATION BUILDING MAINTENANCE 50TH ST OCCUPANCY VERNON OCCUPANCY REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE FIRE DEPT. GENERAL EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE FIRE DEPT. GENERAL COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX YORK SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD CENTENNIAL LAKES R55CKREG 620000 CITY l JA 2h 12:57:52 Council Check Register Page- 7 2/2/2009 -- 2/5/2009 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit 318949 21512009 101323 CONNEY SAFETY PRODUCTS 255.90 GLOVES, HAND SANITIZER 00001649 204415 03399822 1552.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES CENT SVC PW BUILDING 110.70 GLOVES 00001655 204529 03400553 1552.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES CENT SVC PW BUILDING 166.10 GLOVES 00001655 204529 03400553 1646.6610 SAFETY EQUIPMENT BUILDING MAINTENANCE 532.70 318950 2/5/2009 121267 CREATIVE RESOURCES 2,322.78 TIE DYE SHIRTS 204710 383402 5620.5510 COST OF GOODS SOLD EDINBOROUGH PARK 554.03 TATTOOS 204711 3837 5620.5510 COST OF GOODS SOLD EDINBOROUGH PARK 2,876.81 318951 2/5/2009 100130 DAKOTA COUNTY 300.00 OUT OF COUNTY WARRANT 204530 012709 1000.2055 DUE TO OTHER GOVERNMENTS GENERAL FUND BALANCE SHEET 300.00 318952 2/5/2009 104020 DALCO 709.29 ICE MELT 00001619 204531 2061454 4090.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES STREET REVOLVING 445.40 LPS 00001491 204532 2061429 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 215.30 TILEX, WHISTLE CLEANER 00001633 204533 2061606 1646.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES BUILDING MAINTENANCE 52.98 ALL PURPOSE CLEANER 00001633 204534 2061487 1646.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES BUILDING MAINTENANCE 94.80 CASCADE POWDER 00009449 204626 2059946 5111.6511 CLEANING SUPPLIES ART CENTER BLDG /MAINT 649.92 DEGREASER, WYPALL, LINERS 00002326 204661 2061497 5630.6511 CLEANING SUPPLIES CENTENNIAL LAKES 198.32 FLOOR SEALER, POLISH 204662 2062026 5841.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES YORK OCCUPANCY 102.33 DISINFECTANT 00001652 204663 2062745 1552.6511 CLEANING SUPPLIES CENT SVC PW BUILDING 227.91 MAT 00003774 204835 2054857 45008.6710 EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT FIRE STATION #1 RENOVATION 2,696.25 318953 2/5/2009 102478 DAY DISTRIBUTING CO. 1,939.00 204462 490551 5842.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER YORK SELLING 22.40 204463 490552 5842.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX YORK SELLING 895.00 204776 491048 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING .06 204777 491049 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 2,856.46 318954 2/512009 118490 DEEP ROCK WATER COMPANY 4.79 609425 WATER 204416 6672523 5311.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES POOL OPERATION 4.79 318955 215/2009 105930 DELL MARKETING L.P. 13.84 COMPUTER PARTS 204836 XD2KKFW68 1400.6160 DATA PROCESSING POLICE DEPT. GENERAL 13.84 R55CKREG LOG20000 204464 177875 CITY OF EDINA COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 2,163.57 204465 177865 Council Check Register VERNON SELLING 597.54 204466 177863 5862.5513 2/2/2009 — 2/5/2009 10.38- Check # Date Amount Supplier/ Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description 318956 2/5/2009 5842.5513 100899 DEPARTMENT OF LABOR & INDUSTRY YORK SELLING 668.14 204637 177870 15.00 LICENSE FEE - LOW VOLTAGE 204417 074841 -RT 5410.6105 DUES & SUBSCRIPTIONS 15.00 318962 2/5/2009 123960 ELDER, BOB 318957 2/5/2009 111120 DESIGN N PRINT ART WORK SOLD AT EAC 204605 012309 5101.4413 ART WORK SOLD ART CENTER REVENUES 979.89 2009 BROCHURES 204712 34625 5621.6575 PRINTING 318963 2/512009 979.89 318958 215/2009 204837 121546 DICK, KENNA 5921.6180 CONTRACTED REPAIRS SANITARY LIFT STATION MAINT 4,115.26 SCADA REPAIRS 204838 45.91 TRAINING EXPENSE 204535 012709 1400.6104 CONFERENCES & SCHOOLS 45.91 318964 2/5/2009 101956 EMERGENCY APPARATUS MAINTENANC 318959 215/2009 116357 DUNHAM ASSOCIATES INC. 1,559.37 E -83 REPAIRS 204715 40207 1470.6180 CONTRACTED REPAIRS 7,200.00 MCQUAY ENGINEERING 204713 200903486 5600.1740 MACHINERY & EQUIPMENT 7,200.00 318960 2/512009 121439 E GROUP INC. 1,873.12 T- SHIRTS FOR RESALE 204714 5126733 5620.5510 COST OF GOODS SOLD 1,873.12 318961 2/5/2009 100739 EAGLE WINE 214/2009 12:57:52 Page- 8 Business Unit GOLF ADMINISTRATION EDINBOROUGH ADMINISTRATION POLICE DEPT. GENERAL EB /CL BALANCE SHEET EDINBOROUGH PARK 601.18 204464 177875 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 2,163.57 204465 177865 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 597.54 204466 177863 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 10.38- 204467 769615 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 46.30- 204468 769614 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 668.14 204637 177870 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING 3,973.75 318962 2/5/2009 123960 ELDER, BOB 41.60 ART WORK SOLD AT EAC 204605 012309 5101.4413 ART WORK SOLD ART CENTER REVENUES 41.60 318963 2/512009 106194 EMA INC. 4,950.00 PLC REPAIR 204837 5604 - 90013979 5921.6180 CONTRACTED REPAIRS SANITARY LIFT STATION MAINT 4,115.26 SCADA REPAIRS 204838 5604- 90013978 5911.6180 CONTRACTED REPAIRS WELL PUMPS 9,065.26 318964 2/5/2009 101956 EMERGENCY APPARATUS MAINTENANC 1,559.37 E -83 REPAIRS 204715 40207 1470.6180 CONTRACTED REPAIRS FIRE DEPT. GENERAL 1,559.37 R55CKREG 320000 CITY � AA 2J 12:57:52 Council Check Register Page - 9 2/2/2009 -2/5/2009 Check # Date Amount Supplier/ Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit 318965 2/512009 104733 EMERGENCY MEDICAL PRODUCTS INC 103.71 AMBULANCE SUPPLIES 00003653 204716 INV1137452 1470.6510 FIRST AID SUPPLIES FIRE DEPT. GENERAL 79.48 AMBULANCE SUPPLIES 00003652 204717 INV1136954 1470.6510 FIRST AID SUPPLIES FIRE DEPT. GENERAL 183.19 318966 215/2009 122951 ETICA FAIR TRADE WINE 650.00 204562 1450 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 650.00 318967 2/512009 101603 FLAHERTY'S HAPPY TYME CO. 524.65 204469 012209 5862.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX VERNON SELLING 180.60 204778 1 /22/09STMT 5822.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX 50TH ST SELLING 705.25 318968 21512009 103985 FLOR, JON 2,300.00 AD DESIGN 204536 2130 2210.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES COMMUNICATIONS 2,300.00 318969 2/5/2009 117674 FOURTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT 1,130.96 2009 UNIFORM CITATIONS 204537 200941 1400.6575 PRINTING POLICE DEPT. GENERAL 1,130.96 318970 2/5/2009 122074 FULTON, LAURA 20.40 PETTY CASH 204664 013009 5631.6105 DUES & SUBSCRIPTIONS CENTENNIAL ADMINISTRATION 61.76 PETTY CASH 204664 013009 5630.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES CENTENNIAL LAKES 74.86 PETTY CASH 204664 013009 5631.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES CENTENNIAL ADMINISTRATION 157.02 318971 215/2009 100764 G & K SERVICES 61.92 SHOP TOWELS 204418 1006378465 5422.6201 LAUNDRY MAINT OF COURSE & GROUNDS 61.92 318972 2/5/2009 100775 GENERAL SPORTS CORPORATION 156.00 ICE RINK JACKETS 204718 77937 1623.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES TENNIS INSTRUCTION 156.00 318973 215/2009 101103 GRAINGER 19.73 BITS 00001647 204419 9820649284 1301.6556 TOOLS GENERAL MAINTENANCE 243.68 BITS, CUTTERS 00001647 204420 9820649292 1301.6556 TOOLS GENERAL MAINTENANCE 20.88 CUTTERS 00001647 204665 9823827887 1301.6556 TOOLS GENERAL MAINTENANCE 284.29 R55CKREG LOG20000 YORK SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR CITY OF EDINA YORK SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR YORK SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX YORK SELLING Council Check Register YORK SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 2/212009 - 2/5/2009 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No 318974 2/5/2009 VERNON SELLING 102217 GRAPE BEGINNINGS INC 50TH ST SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX 50TH ST SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING 768.25 50TH ST SELLING 204470 107160 5842.5513 YORK SELLING 244.50 204563 107207 5822.5513 1,012.75 318975 2/5/2009 122746 GREEN, MICHELE 120.00 INSTRUCTION AC 204627 012909 5110.6103 120.00 318976 2/5/2009 100782 GRIGGS COOPER & CO. 114.95 204471 177879 5842.5515 120.63 204472 177686 5842.5512 114.71 204473 177874 5842.5512 9,988.10 204474 177880 5842.5512 80.65 204475 177877 5842.5515 2,280.15 204476 177876 5842.5513 1,096.50 204477 177797 5862.5513 1,695.15 204478 177866 5862.5513 114.71 204479 177864 5862.5512 3,329.27 204480 177868 5862.5512 215.85 204481 176735 5862.5513 726.40- 204482 769698 5862.5513 3.45- 204483 768302 5862.5513 32.00- 204484 768120 5862.5513 26.00 204564 177872 5822.5515 47.99- 204565 769722 5822.5515 568.85 204638 177871 5822.5513 427.49 204779 177873 5822.5512 311.36- 204780 770092 5862.5512 66.52- 204781 769400 5842.5512 18,985.29 318977 2/5/2009 100788 H &L MESABI 337.06 POLY BLADE 00001550 204421 76735 1648.6530 337.06 318978 2/5/2009 114129 HALDEMAN HOMME INC. 186.91 GYM FLOOR CLEANER 00002141 204719 130494 5620.6511 186.91 318979 2/5/2009 102426 HALE, WILLIAM 250.00 ENTERTAINMENT 2/6/09 204820 020209 5610.6136 Subledger Account Description COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 2/4/2009 12:57:52 Page- 10 Business Unit YORK SELLING 50TH ST SELLING PROFESSIONAL SERVICES ART CENTER ADMINISTRATION COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX YORK SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR YORK SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR YORK SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR YORK SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX YORK SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR VERNON SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR VERNON SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX 50TH ST SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX 50TH ST SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR 50TH ST SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR VERNON SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR YORK SELLING REPAIR PARTS CLEANING SUPPLIES PROFESSIONAL SVC - OTHER SKATING RINK MAINTENANCE EDINBOROUGH PARK ED ADMINISTRATIC"' R55CKREG .G20000 CITY � AA Council Check Register 2/2/2009 —2/5/2009 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description 2Z 12:57:52 Page - 11 Business Unit WATER TREATMENT SUPPLIES WATER TREATMENT ART WORK SOLD ART CENTER REVENUES COST OF GOODS SOLD GRILL DUES & SUBSCRIPTIONS FIRE DEPT. GENERAL BOARD & ROOM PRISONER LEGAL SERVICES EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT POLICE DEPT. GENERAL EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT POLICE DEPT. GENERAL CLEANING SUPPLIES EDINBOROUGH PARK CLEANING SUPPLIES EDINBOROUGH PARK COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER YORK SELLING GENERAL SUPPLIES EDINBOROUGH PARK CHEMICALS EDINBOROUGH PARK 250.00 318980 2/512009 100797 HAWKINS INC. 4,555.15 CHEMICALS 00005755 204422 1268887 5915.6586 4,555.15 318981 2/512009 100800 HEDGES, DIANA 89.05 ART WORK SOLD AT EAC 204606 012309 5101.4413 89.05 318982 2/5/2009 101209 HEIMARK FOODS 205.44 MEAT PATTIES 204423 021554 5421.5510 205.44 318983 215/2009 101871 HENNEPIN COUNTY FIRE CHIEFS AS 100.00 DEPT DUES 204720 013009 1470.6105 100.00 318984 2/5/2009 100801 HENNEPIN COUNTY TREASURER 2,916.00 ROOM & BOARD DEC 2008 204839 200812 -EDNA 1195.6225 2,916.00 318985 215/2009 116680 HEWLETT - PACKARD COMPANY 202.35 MONITOR SPEAKERS 00003065 204538 45478844 1400.6710 7,351.70 COMPUTERS AND MONITORS 00003065 204539 45482527 1400.6710 7,554.05 318986 215/2009 103753 HILLYARD INC - MINNEAPOLIS 47.74 RESTROOM CLEANER 00002150 204721 2751418 5620.6511 268.18 SOAP, TOWELS 00002142 204722 2745619 5620.6511 315.92 318987 2/5/2009 104375 HOHENSTEINS INC. 1,340.07 204639 476095 5842.5514 1,340.07 318988 215/2009 100417 HORIZON COMMERCIAL POOL SUPPLY 233.47 POOL TILE 00002131 204723 9010710 5620.6406 206.93 POOL SCALE REMOVER 00002143 204724 9011409 5620.6545 440.40 318989 2/5/2009 100808 HORWATH, THOMAS 2Z 12:57:52 Page - 11 Business Unit WATER TREATMENT SUPPLIES WATER TREATMENT ART WORK SOLD ART CENTER REVENUES COST OF GOODS SOLD GRILL DUES & SUBSCRIPTIONS FIRE DEPT. GENERAL BOARD & ROOM PRISONER LEGAL SERVICES EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT POLICE DEPT. GENERAL EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT POLICE DEPT. GENERAL CLEANING SUPPLIES EDINBOROUGH PARK CLEANING SUPPLIES EDINBOROUGH PARK COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER YORK SELLING GENERAL SUPPLIES EDINBOROUGH PARK CHEMICALS EDINBOROUGH PARK R55CKREG LOG20000 CITY OF EDINA 214/2009 12:57:52 Council Check Register Page - 12 2/2/2009 - 2/5/2009 Check # Date Amount Supplier/ Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit 107.80 MILEAGE REIMBURSEMENT 204618 012909 1644.6107 MILEAGE OR ALLOWANCE TREES & MAINTENANCE 219.96 MILEAGE REIMBURSEMENT 204824 JAN09 1644.6107 MILEAGE OR ALLOWANCE TREES & MAINTENANCE 327.76 318990 215/2009 112092 HUB HOBBY CENTER INC. 131.55 MODEL TRAIN SUPPLIES 00002110 204840 6396 5620.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES EDINBOROUGH PARK 131.55 318991 215/2009 101997 HUDSON MAP COMPANY 79.88 CUSTOM MAPS 204725 3547 1419.6104 CONFERENCES & SCHOOLS RESERVE PROGRAM 79.88 318992 21512009 101426 HUGHES, GORDON 327.80 MILEAGE REIMBURSEMENT 204763 020209 1120.6107 MILEAGE OR ALLOWANCE ADMINISTRATION 327.80 318993 215/2009 119808 INTEGRA TELECOM 283.37 PHONE/INTERNET 204726 4356953 7411.6188 TELEPHONE PSTF OCCUPANCY 283.37 318994 21512009 101861 J.H. LARSON COMPANY 35.74 STUDS, MUD RINGS 00001762 204666 4211020 -01 1642.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES FIELD MAINTENANCE 35.74 318995 2/5/2009 101400 JAMES, WILLIAM F 100.00 POLICE SERVICE 204404 020509 1419.6102 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES RESERVE PROGRAM 100.00 318996 2/5/2009 100741 JJ TAYLOR DIST. OF MINN 115.25 204566 1243052 5822.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER 50TH ST SELLING 132.85 204782 1243099 5842.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX YORK SELLING 3,618.05 204783 1243098 5842.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER YORK SELLING 3,866.15 318997 21512009 123959 JODEIT, ANN 31.00 CLASS REFUND 204601 012809 5101.4607 CLASS REGISTRATION ART CENTER REVENUES 31.00 318999 2/5/2009 100835 JOHNSON BROTHERS LIQUOR CO. 2,650.23 204485 1572066 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 2,037.71 204486 1572062 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 913.44 204487 1572745 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING R55CKREG jG20000 CITY . :NA z 12:57:52 Council Check Register Page - 13 2/2/2009 -- 2/5/2009 Check # Date Amount Supplier/ Explanation. PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit . 4.83- 204488 405618 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 380.25 204567 1572055 5822.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR 50TH ST SELLING 455.70 204568 1572056 5822.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR 50TH ST SELLING 278.90 204569 1572052 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING 631.51. 204570- 1572053 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING 271.64 204571 1572054 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING 7.58- 204572 405620 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 14.00- 204573 405691 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 30.16- 204574 404469 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 62.25- 204575 406068 5822.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR 50TH ST SELLING 2,295.31 204640 1575489 5862.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR VERNON SELLING 1,341'.45 204641 1575487 5862.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR VERNON SELLING 220.24 204642 1575485 5862.5512 COST OF GOODS.SOLD LIQUOR VERNON SELLING " 2,461.81 204643 1575486 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 1,585.06 204644 1575488 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 455.22 204784 1575472 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING 405.60 204785 1575470 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING 1,204.15 204786 1575469 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING 708:72 204787 1575474 5822.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR 50TH ST SELLING 1,016.24 204788 1575473 5822.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR 50TH ST SELLING 2,667.97 204789 1575483 5842.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR YORK SELLING 183.74 204790 1575476 5842.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR YORK SELLING 1.12 204791 1575475 5842.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR YORK SELLING 1,897.97 204792 1575480 5842.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR YORK'SELLING 35.11 204793 1575482 5842.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX YORK SELLING 31.37 204794 1575484 5842.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX YORK SELLING 1.726.21. - 204795 .1575481 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 324.48 204796 1575478 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 1,704.43 204797 1575479 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 4,733.86 204798 1575477 5842.5513 COST.OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 6.24- 204799,' 406927, 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 32.494.38 319000 2/5/2009 102719 JOHNSON, PHILLIP 73.73 SUPPLIES_ REIMBURSEMENT 204628 012809 5111.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES ART CENTER 6LDG/MAINT 214.52 SUPPLIES REIMBURSEMENT 204628 012809 5125.6406 GENERAL-SUPPLIES MEDIA STUDIO .288.25' 319001 2/5/2009 102113 JOHNSTONE SUPPLY 116.08 VISIOIVPRO 00001613 204727 007685 1470.6530 REPAIR PARTS FIRE DEPT. GENERAL 116.08 R55CKREG LOG20000 CITY OF EDINA Council Check Register 2/2/2009 - 2/5/2009 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Iriv No Account No Subledger Account Description 319002 215/2009 102603 JONAS, LENORE 74.81 SUPPLIES REIMBURSEMENT 204629 012909 5110.6564 CRAFT SUPPLIES 74.81 319003 21512009 111018 KEEPRS INC. 268.94 UNIFORMS 00003785 204728 109364 1470.6558 DEPT UNIFORMS 268.94 319004 215/2009 118352 KENNEDY, DONNA 27.00 ART WORK SOLD AT EAC 204617 012309 5101.4413 ART WORK SOLD 27.00 319005 2/5/2009 120624 KOCHEVAR, BARBARA 42.21 ART WORK SOLD AT EAC 204841 012909 5101.4413 ART WORK SOLD 42.21 319006 2/5/2009 100848 LABOR RELATIONS ASSOCIATES INC 1,710.00 DEC 2008 MEETINGS 204842 010509 1120.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 1,710.00 319007 21512009 100852 LAWSON PRODUCTS INC. 190.85 NUTS, O- RINGS, ELBOWS 00001660 204630 7701166 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS 50.00 DRILL BITS, WASHERS 00001252 204843 6279280 1301.6556 TOOLS 50.00 DRILL BITS, WASHERS 00001252 204843 6279280 1646.6556 TOOLS 50.00 DRILL BITS, WASHERS 00001252 204843 6279280 5912.6556 TOOLS 106.48 DRILL BITS, WASHERS 00001252 204843 6279280 1553.6556 TOOLS 447.33 319008 2/512009 101552 LEAGUE OF MINNESOTA CITIES 406.22 DEDUCTIBLE 204844 123108 1550.6200 INSURANCE 406.22 319009 2/512009 123955 LEWIS, JOHN 400.00 RENTAL DEPOSIT REFUND 204424 012609 5601.4555 CENTENNIAL LAKES PARK 400.00 319010 215/2009 101453 LUTZ, RICHARD M. 258.38 UNIFORM PURCHASE 204540 012709 1400.6203 UNIFORM ALLOWANCE 258.38 319011 215/2009 122472 M & I BANK 45.00 SUPPLIES 204729 011409 7410.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES 2/4/2009 12:57:52 Page - 14 Business Unit ART CENTER ADMINISTRATION FIRE DEPT. GENERAL ART CENTER REVENUES ART CENTER REVENUES ADMINISTRATION EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN GENERAL MAINTENANCE BUILDING MAINTENANCE WELL HOUSES EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN CENTRAL SERVICES GENERAL EB /CL REVENUES POLICE DEPT. GENERAL PSTF ADMINISTRATION R55CKREG .G20000 CITY NA 2, 12:57:52 Council Check Register Page- 15 2/2/2009 -2/5/2009 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit 200.05 SUPPLIES 204729 011409 7411.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES PSTF OCCUPANCY 245.05 319012 2/5/2009 112577 M. AMUNDSON LLP 1,079.57 204576 54668 5822.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX 50TH ST SELLING 2,067.95 204800 54472 5842.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX YORK SELLING 3,147.52 319013 21512009 103206 M/A ASSOCIATES INC. 252.62 CLEANER 00003775 204730 1326 1470.6511 CLEANING SUPPLIES FIRE DEPT. GENERAL 252.62 319014 2/5/2009 100864 MACQUEEN EQUIP INC. 104.16 CABLE THROTTLE 00001665 204425 2091008 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 104.16 CABLE THROTTLE 00001667 204541 2091066 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 2,210.94 ROLLERS, BEARINGS 00001748 204631 2091063 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 2,419.26 319015 215/2009 100868 MARK VII SALES 2,333.20 204489 425718 5842.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER YORK SELLING 2,535.70 204490 426437 5842.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER YORK SELLING 43.00 204491 426438 5842.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER YORK SELLING 837.44 204577 425543 5822.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER 50TH ST SELLING 100.00 204578 425544 5822.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER 50TH ST SELLING 5,849.34 319016 215/2009 105252 MATEFFY AND COMPANY 6,000.00 LEADERSHIP WORKSHOP 204845 1 -EDINA 1550.6121 ADVERTISING PERSONNEL CENTRAL SERVICES GENERAL 6,000.00 319017 2/512009 100875 MCCAREN DESIGNS INC. 936.14 PLANTS 00002140 204731 45092 5620.6620 TREES, FLOWERS, SHRUBS EDINBOROUGH PARK 936.14 319018 215/2009 105370 MCGAA, ED 45.50 ART WORK SOLD AT EAC 204607 012309 5101.4413 ARTWORK SOLD ART CENTER REVENUES 45.50 319019 2/512009 103944 MED COMPASS 212.00 MEDICAL EVALUATION 204732 13680 1470.6175 PHYSICAL EXAMINATIONS FIRE DEPT. GENERAL 212.00 R55CKREG LOG20000 CITY OF EDINA Council Check Register 212/2009 - 2/5/2009 Check # Date Amount Supplier/ Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description 319020 2/512009 105603 MEDICINE LAKE TOURS 2,564.50 PROM CENTER TRIP 204542 012809 1628.6103.07 TRIPS PROF SERVICES 2,564.50 319021 21512009 103720 MEDTECH 2,458.05 WRISTBANDS 00002136 204733 IN000270508 5621.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES 2,458.05 319022 215/2009 101483 MENARDS 6.35 LUMBER 00001650 204426 9031 44005.6710 EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT 105.86 MAPLE BOARDS, DOOR STOPS 00001650 204427 9027 44005.6710 EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT 150.14 SCREWS, LUMBER 00001261 204428 8805 1646.6577 LUMBER 69.54 POWERLOCK TAPE, LUMBER 00001741 204543 9408 44005.6710 EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT 31.91 SAW BLADES 00001751 204667 10365 1553.6556 TOOLS 89.49 LUMBER, JOINT COMPOUND 00001755 204734 10432 45008.6710 EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT 60.07 SAND 00002147 204735 8796 5620.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES 513.36 319023 21512009 101987 MENARDS 41.33 DUCT TAPE 00002153 204736 57316 5620.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES 41.33 319024 215/2009 114002 MERCHANT, RON 26.00 ART WORK SOLD AT EAC 204608 012309 5101.4413 ART WORK SOLD 26.00 319025 2/5/2009 102507 METRO VOLLEYBALL OFFICIALS 106.00 OFFICIATING FEES 204737 3499 4077.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 106.00 319026 215/2009 101471 MGCSA 420.00 MEMBERSHIP DUES (4) 204764 012909 5410.6105 DUES & SUBSCRIPTIONS 420.00 319027 21512009 103186 MIDWEST FUELS 298.50 DIESEL 00005252 204429 42339 5422.6581 GASOLINE 755.88 GASOLINE 00006463 204430 42338 5422.6581 GASOLINE 1,054.38 319028 2/512009 101260 MIDWEST LIGHTING PRODUCTS 520.89 LENS, REFLECTORS 00001071 204846 00050463 1322.6530 REPAIR PARTS 520.89 2/4/2009 12:57:52 Page - 16 Business Unit SENIOR CITIZENS EDINBOROUGH ADMINISTRATION CITY HALL BLDG IMPROVEMENTS CITY HALL BLDG IMPROVEMENTS BUILDING MAINTENANCE CITY HALL BLDG IMPROVEMENTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN FIRE STATION #1 RENOVATION EDINBOROUGH PARK EDINBOROUGH PARK ART CENTER REVENUES EDINA ATHLETIC ASSOCIATION GOLF ADMINISTRATION MAINT OF COURSE & GROUNDS MAINT OF COURSE & GROUNDS STREET LIGHTING ORNAMENTAL R55CKREG �G20000 CITY � JA Council Check Register 2/2/2009 -- 2/5/2009 Check # Date Amount Supplier/ Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description 319029 2/5/2009 119738 MIDWEST MINIMELTS 700.00 ICE CREAM 204738 12229 5620.5510 COST OF GOODS SOLD 700.00 319030 2/5/2009 122473 MILLER, CHICHI 33.80 ART WORK SOLD AT EAC 204609 012309 5101.4413. ART WORK SOLD 33.80 319031 2/5/2009 100913 MINNEAPOLIS & SUBURBAN SEWER & 2,530.00 WATER SERVICE REPAIR 00001703 204739 33333 5913.6180 CONTRACTED REPAIRS 2,530.00 319032 2/512009 118144 MINNESOTA PREMIER PUBLICATIONS 289.00 INSERT PRINTING 204632 58589 5822.6575 PRINTING 289.00 INSERT PRINTING 204632 58589 5842.6575 PRINTING 289.00 INSERT PRINTING 204632 58589 5862.6575 PRINTING 867.00 319033 2/512009 101459 MINNESOTA RECREATION & PARKAS 90.00 MRPA AWARDS LUNCHEON 00007072 204431 6130 1600.6106 MEETING EXPENSE 90.00 319034 2/5/2009 100908 MINNESOTA WANNER CO. 115.02 4° x 1/4° PIECE 00001654 204545 0078754 -IN 1301.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES 115.02 319035 215/2009 102775 MN DNR WATERS 140.00 2008 WATER USE FEE 00001270 204432 1998 -6041 4086.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 140.00 319036 2/5/2009 102487 MN /SCIA 18.00 MEMBERSHIP - LUTZ 204668 M07 -84 1400.6105 DUES & SUBSCRIPTIONS 18.00 319037 2/5/2009 120996 MOBILE MINI INC. 93.54 STORAGE 204740 151019348 7412.6153 STORAGE 93.54 319038 2/5/2009 122019 MOORE CREATIVE TALENT 500.00 HOSTING FEE 204544 125721 2210.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 500.00 2J, 12:57:52 Page - 17 Business Unit EDINBOROUGH PARK ART CENTER REVENUES DISTRIBUTION 50TH ST SELLING YORK SELLING VERNON SELLING PARK ADMIN. GENERAL GENERAL MAINTENANCE AQUATIC WEEDS POLICE DEPT. GENERAL PSTF RANGE COMMUNICATIONS CITY OF EDINA 2/4 /2009 12:57:52 R55CKREG LOG20000 Council Check Register Page - 18 2/2/2009 —2/5/2009 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit 319039 2/5/2009 122611 MORNINGSIDE BUILDERS LLC 3,103.00 SHOWER REPAIR 204741 1181 1470.6180 CONTRACTED REPAIRS FIRE DEPT. GENERAL 3,103.00 319040 2/5/2009 100906 MTI DISTRIBUTING INC. 285.59 SCREWS, SHAFT 00006397 204433 650835 -00 5422.6530 REPAIR PARTS MAINT OF COURSE & GROUNDS 224.61 SEALS 00006395 204434 650291 -00 5422.6530 REPAIR PARTS MAINT OF COURSE & GROUNDS 510.20 319041 2/512009 105175 MYRON CORP. 908.50 PENS 204847 68519792 1550.6121 ADVERTISING PERSONNEL CENTRAL SERVICES GENERAL 908.50 319042 2/512009 103007 NELSON, DAVID 65.00 ART WORK SOLD AT EAC 204610 012309 5101.4413 ART WORK SOLD ART CENTER REVENUES 65.00 ART WORK SOLD AT EAC 204669 012309 5101.4413 ART WORK SOLD ART CENTER REVENUES 130.00 319043 215/2009 106334 NELSON, PEGGY 132.00 INSTRUCTION AC 204619 012609 5125.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES MEDIA STUDIO 429.00 INSTRUCTION AC 204825 JAN2609 5125.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES MEDIA STUDIO 561.00 319044 2/512009 106662 NET LITIN DISTRIBUTORS 1,401.17 PLASTICWARE FOR RESALE 204742 1062 5620.5510 COST OF GOODS SOLD EDINBOROUGH PARK 1,401.17 319045 2/5/2009 108678 NEWMECH COMPANIES INC. 112.00 REPAIR LEAKY VALVE 204743 775546 7411.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES PSTF OCCUPANCY 112.00 319046 215/2009 119145 NIEBRES, CAROLINA 15.60 ART WORK SOLD AT EAC 204611 012309 5101.4413 ART WORK SOLD ART CENTER REVENUES 15.60 319047 215/2009 100724 NISSEN, DICK 100.00 POLICE SERVICE 204403 020509 1419.6102 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES RESERVE PROGRAM 100.00 319048 2/5/2009 117102 NORTH AMERICAN SALT CO. 5,144.37 SALT 00005306 204670 70310421 1318.6525 SALT SNOW & ICE REMOVAL CITY. NA 2 12:57:52 R55CKREG jG20000 Council Check Register Page- 19 2/2/2009 -215/2009 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit 5,144.37 319049 2/5/2009 115616 NORTH IMAGE APPAREL INC. 161.00 2009 UNIFORM PURCHASES 00005413 204435 NIA3841B 1552.6511 CLEANING SUPPLIES CENT SVC PW BUILDING 313.00 2009 UNIFORM PURCHASES 00005413 204435 NIA3841B 1551.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES CITY HALL GENERAL 606.00 2009 UNIFORM PURCHASES 00005413 204435 NIA3841B . 1260.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES ENGINEERING GENERAL 974.50 2009 UNIFORM PURCHASES 00005413 204435 NIA3841B 1553.6201 LAUNDRY EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 1,690.25 2009 UNIFORM PURCHASES 00005413 204435 NIA3841B 5422.6201 LAUNDRY MAINT OF COURSE & GROUNDS 2,879.00 2009 UNIFORM PURCHASES 00005413 204435 NIA3841B 5913.6201 LAUNDRY DISTRIBUTION 2,969.25 2009 UNIFORM PURCHASES 00005413 204435 NIA3841B 1646.6201 LAUNDRY BUILDING MAINTENANCE 5,080.25 2009 UNIFORM PURCHASES 00005413 204435 NIA3841B 1301.6201 LAUNDRY GENERAL MAINTENANCE 40.00 JACKET, T- SHIRTS 00005413 204671 NIA3841D 1552.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES CENT SVC PW BUILDING 14,713.25 319050 2/5/2009 104232 NORTHERN SAFETY TECHNOLOGY 304.81 LIGHTS, MOUNT KITS 00001430 204848 19446 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 304.81 319051 2/5/2009 100712 NORTHERN WATERWORKS SUPPLY 332.81 CB REPAIR TOPS 00001757 204546 S01182473.002 5913.6530 REPAIR PARTS DISTRIBUTION 332.81 319052 2/512009 117830 NORTHLAND BUSINESS SYSTEMS INC 142.54 DIGITAL RECORDER REPAIRS 204547 83587 1400.6215 EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE POLICE DEPT. GENERAL 142.54 319053 2/5/2009 100933 NORTHWEST GRAPHIC SUPPLY 70.68 SIGNET BRISTLE FILBERTS 00009462 204548 36896800 5120.5510 COST OF GOODS SOLD ART SUPPLY GIFT GALLERY SHOP 70.68 319054 2/5/2009 101842 NOTABLE SINGERS 100.00 ENTERTAINMENT 2/10/09 204821 020209 5610.6136 PROFESSIONAL SVC - OTHER ED ADMINISTRATION 100.00 319055 215/2009 123984 NSRMAA ANNUAL SCHOOL 130.00 ANNUAL SCHOOL - TOM JENSON 204744 013009 1470.6104 CONFERENCES 8 SCHOOLS FIRE DEPT. GENERAL 130.00 319056 2/5/2009 123956 OAKS PROPERTIES 37.02 OVERPAYMENT REFUND 204549 012809 5900.2015 CUSTOMER REFUND UTILITY BALANCE SHEET 37.02 R55CKREG LOG20000 CITY OF EDINA Council Check Register 2/2/2009 -2/5/2009 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description 319057 2/512009 103578 OFFICE DEPOT 36.23 LABELS 00006034 204550 460217388 - 001 5410.6513 OFFICE SUPPLIES 1400.6203 1647.6103 1470.6180 1470.6180 1600.4390.47 1646.6556 1400.6175 1470.6175 1,221.00 204492 36.23 5862.5513 34.25- 204493 319058 2/512009 52.25- 102265 OLSON, TIM 8211287 -CM 5842.5513 919.40 204645 79.99 UNIFORM PURCHASE 204551 012709 8211780 -IN 5822.5513 79.99 204802 8211662 -IN 5842.5513 319059 21512009 120860 OLSSON ASSOCIATES 319065 2/512009 102406 PETSMART #458 293.45 ENGINEERING SERVICES 204849 122909 59.86 293.45 319060 215/2009 100315 OMEGA INDUSTRIES 99.92 SAW REPAIRS 204745 10052 52.96 SAW REPAIRS 204746 10053 152.88 319061 2/5/2009 122529 ONCE UPON A STAR 192.00 JAN 19 PARTY SERVICES 204633 EDINAP/R 192.00 319062 21512009 104163 ORECK SALES LLC 287.46 VACUUM CLEANER 00001267 204436 214353 287.46 319063 215/2009 100941 PARK NICOLLET CLINIC 364.00 FITNESS FOR DUTY 204850 010909 1,665.50 TB SCREEN & SET -UP 204850 010909 2,029.50 319064 21512009 100347 PAUSTIS & SONS 1400.6203 1647.6103 1470.6180 1470.6180 1600.4390.47 1646.6556 1400.6175 1470.6175 1,221.00 204492 8211606 -IN 5862.5513 34.25- 204493 8209317 -CM 5862.5513 52.25- 204494 8211287 -CM 5842.5513 919.40 204645 8211601 -IN 5822.5513 468.50 204801 8211780 -IN 5822.5513 1,871.50 204802 8211662 -IN 5842.5513 4,393.90 319065 2/512009 102406 PETSMART #458 59.86 CANINE GROOMING 00003053 204672 T -9102 4607.6406 59.86 UNIFORM ALLOWANCE 2/4/2009 12:57:52 Page - 20 Business Unit GOLF ADMINISTRATION POLICE DEPT. GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES PATHS & HARD SURFACE CONTRACTED REPAIRS FIRE DEPT. GENERAL CONTRACTED REPAIRS FIRE DEPT. GENERAL SPRING BREAK HS MUSICAL PARTY PARK ADMIN. GENERAL TOOLS PHYSICAL EXAMINATIONS PHYSICAL EXAMINATIONS COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE BUILDING MAINTENANCE POLICE DEPT. GENERAL FIRE DEPT. GENERAL VERNON SELLING VERNON SELLING YORK SELLING 50TH ST SELLING 50TH ST SELLING YORK SELLING GENERAL SUPPLIES EDINA CRIME FUND K9 DONATION R55CKREG _ G20000 CITY. NA - 2i 12:57:52 Council Check Register Page - 21 2/2/2009 -2/5/2009 Check # Date Amount Supplier %Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger, Account Description Business Unit 319066 2/5/2009 100743 PHILLIPS WINE B SPIRITS 45.07 204495 2709097. 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 535.84 204496 2709096 5842.5513 COST:OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK, SELLING .56 204497 2709094 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 1,434.80 204498 2709095 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS,SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 81.12- 204499 3402078 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE"- VERNON SELLING 966.44 204579 2709092 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING 1,879.27 204580 2709090 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD,WINE 50TH ST SELLING 106.72- 204581 3401519 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING - 38.07- 204582 3392627 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD, WINE c 50TH ST SELLING 383.14 204646 2711699 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON'SELLING 2,043.69 204647 2711698 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 284.74 204803 2711693 5822.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR 50T1-1 ST SELLING 2,555.50 204804 2711692 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST.SELLING 290.24 204805 2711701 5862.5513 COST.OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 5,364.47 204806 2711694 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 232.21 204807 2711695 5842.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR YORK SELLING 1,062.31 204808 271.1696 5842.5512 COST OF, GOODS SOLD' LIQUOR YORK SELLING 596.13 204809 2711697 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING " 17,448.50 319067 2/512009 100953 PHYSIO- CONTROL INC. 937.50 LIFEPAK MAINTENANCE 00003644 204747 PH523308 1470.6215 EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE FIRE DEPT. GENERAL 937.50 319068 2/5/2009 101138 PLEAA 150.00 2009 MEMBERSHIP (5) 204673 013009 1400.6105 DUES & SUBSCRIPTIONS POLICE DEPT. GENERAL' 150.00 319069 2/512009 119620 POMP'S TIRE SERVICE INC. 21.00 CASINGS 00001495 204437 .482936 1553.6583 TIRES 8 TUBES. = EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 21.00 319070 2/5/2009 106152 POWERPLAN 70.26 REAR VIEW MIRROR 00001669 204634. P41665 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS. EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 70.26 319071 2/5/2009 112873 PRAMANN, TINA` 26.00 ART WORK SOLD AT EAC 204613 012309 5101.4413 ART WORK SOLD ART CENTER REVENUES 26.00 R55CKREG LOG20000 CITY OF EDINA Council Check Register 2/2/2009 - 2/5/2009 Check # Date Amount Supplier/ Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No 319072 215/2009 123961 PRIMUS, J 66.95 ART WORK SOLD AT EAC 204614 012309 5101.4413 66.95 319073 2/5/2009 YORK SELLING 100968 PRIOR WINE COMPANY YORK SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 327.90 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 204500 177869 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 327.90 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 319074 2/5/2009 VERNON SELLING 102354 PRO GUARD SPORTS INC. YORK SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR 195.11 TAPE 00008097 204438 288198 5510.5510 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 195.11 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 319075 2/5/2009 50TH ST SELLING 111600 PUBLIC SAFETY CENTER INC. 50TH ST SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 290.44 TOWELETTES 204552 1713821N 1400.6610 290.44 319077 215/2009 100971 QUALITY WINE 1,341.00 204501 114507 -00 5842.5512 3,005.11 204502 114568 -00 5842.5512 720.02 204503 113645 -00 5842.5513 3.22 204504 114341 -00 5842.5513 796.81 204505 112407 -00 5842.5513 2,227.58 204506 114348 -00 5842.5513 2,005.80 204507 113974 -00 5842.5513 2,448.67 204508 114342 -00 5862.5513 1,670.60 204509 114633 -00 5862.5513 1,909.60 204510 114569 -00 5862.5512 91.60- 204511 109873 -00 5842.5513 9.33- 204512 109809 -00 5842.5513 1,051.65 204583 114570 -00 5822.5512 55.16- 204584 109173-00 5822.5512 728.00- 204585 107437 -00 5862.5513 630.00- 204586 106358 -00 5862.5513 200.00- 204587 104060 -00 5862.5513 200.00- 204588 104516 -00 5862.5513 1,069.31 204648 113975 -00 5822.5513 316.28 204810 114343 -00 5822.5513 129.60 - 204811 113265 -00 5822.5513 52.80- 204812 113087 -00 5862.5513 30.25- 204813 112526 -00 5842.5512 13.33- 204814 112525 -00 5842.5512 16,425.58 2/4/2009 12:57:52 Page - 22 Subledger Account Description Business Unit ART WORK SOLD ART CENTER REVENUES COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD SAFETY EQUIPMENT ARENA ADMINISTRATION POLICE DEPT. GENERAL 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 WINE YORK SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR VERNON SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR 50TH ST SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR 50TH ST SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR YORK SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR YORK SELLING CITY L AA 21• 12:57:52 R55CKREG _ ,jG20000 Council Check Register Page - 23 2/212009 -2/5/2009 Check # Date Amount Supplier/ Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit 319078 2/5/2009 118956 QUINN, RYAN 99.99 UNIFORM SHOES 204748 012809 1470.6558 DEPT UNIFORMS FIRE DEPT. GENERAL 99.99 319079 2/5/2009 123898 QWEST 39.70 952 922 -9246 204674 9246 -1/09 1400.6188 TELEPHONE POLICE DEPT. GENERAL 78.36 952 929 -9549 204765 9549 -1/09 5841.6188 TELEPHONE YORK OCCUPANCY 208.29 952 927 -8861 204766 8861 -1/09 1550.6188 TELEPHONE CENTRAL SERVICES GENERAL 55.12 952 929 -0297 204767 0297 -1109 4090.6188 TELEPHONE STREET REVOLVING 381.47 319080 2/5/2009 102277 RASKIN, PHIL A. 28.60 ART WORK SOLD AT EAC 204851 010909 5101.4413 ART WORK SOLD ART CENTER REVENUES 28.60 319081 2/5/2009 102221 RECYCLING ASSOC OF MINNESOTA 75.00 MEMBERSHIP DUES 204768 8013 5952.6105 DUES & SUBSCRIPTIONS RECYCLING 75.00 319082 215/2009 102408 RIGID HITCH INCORPORATED 170.21 RECEIVER 00001648 204439 1006711 -01 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 162.69 SWIVEL JACK, TOW RING 00001521 204553 1007265 -01 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 101.64 CONNECTOR, PINTLE HOOK 00001523 204675 1007752 -01 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 434.54 319083 2/512009 100980 ROBERT B. HILL CO. 122.93 SOFTENER SALT 00003648 204749 00215939 1470.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES FIRE DEPT. GENERAL 30.63 SOFTENER SALT 00003648 204750 00216258 1470.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES FIRE DEPT. GENERAL 153.56 319084 2/5/2009 123988 ROCKET CRANE SERVICES INC. 1,640.00 SET SCULPTURE 204852 C170335 07102.1705.30 CONTRACTOR PAYMENTS S102 PROMENADE IMP PHASE 1 1,640.00 319085 2/5/2009 101311 ROOT- O -MATIC SEWER SERVICE 410.00 REPAIR FROZEN MAINLINE 00001391 204554 29532 1646.6180 CONTRACTED REPAIRS BUILDING MAINTENANCE 410.00 REPAIR FROZEN SEWER LINE 00001396 204635 29535 1646.6180 CONTRACTED REPAIRS BUILDING MAINTENANCE 820.00 319086 2/5/2009 102614 ROTARY CLUB OF EDINA 290.00 DUES 204440 1378 2210.6105 DUES 8 SUBSCRIPTIONS .COMMUNICATIONS R55CKREG LOG20000 CITY OF EDINA 2/4 /2009 12:57:52 Council Check Register Page - 24 2/2/2009 —2/5/2009 Check # Date Amount Supplier/ Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit 290.00 DUES 204853 1177 2210.6105 DUES & SUBSCRIPTIONS COMMUNICATIONS 580.00 319087 21512009 120457 RSC EQUIPMENT RENTAL 7,455.00 SCISSOR LIFT 00002149 204751 39730398 -001 5600.1740 MACHINERY & EQUIPMENT EB /CL BALANCE SHEET 7,455.00 319088 2/5/2009 102040 RYGG, JAMES 99.79 TRAINING EXPENSE 204555 012809 1400.6104 CONFERENCES & SCHOOLS POLICE DEPT. GENERAL 99.79 319089 2/5/2009 101963 S & S SPECIALISTS 330.00 OAK WILT PROGRAM 00001392 204556 27027 1644.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES TREES & MAINTENANCE 330.00 319090 215/2009 104087 SAFE ASSURE CONSULTANTS INC. 3,700.00 SAFETY TRAINING 204854 141 1550.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES CENTRAL SERVICES GENERAL 3,700.00 319091 215/2009 116644 SANDON, PATRICK 100.00 UNIFORM SHOES 204752 013009 1470.6558 DEPT UNIFORMS FIRE DEPT. GENERAL 100.00 319092 2/5/2009 105442 SCHERER BROS. LUMBER CO. 103.50 LUMBER 00001258 204441 40719236 1646.6577 LUMBER BUILDING MAINTENANCE 103.50 319093 2/5/2009 120997 SHIRTYSOMETHING 1,065.00 SOT UNIFORMS 00003747 204855 17145 1470.6558 DEPT UNIFORMS FIRE DEPT. GENERAL 261.00 UNIFORMS 00003747 204856" 17188 1470.6558 DEPT UNIFORMS FIRE DEPT. GENERAL 1,326.00 319094 2/5/2009 120458 SIEMENS WATER TECHNOLOGIES COR 644.06 WATER TREATMENT 00008090 204442 2664216 5511.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES ARENA BLDG /GROUNDS 644.06 319095 2/5/2009 121382 SIGNATURE AQUATICS 260.47 REPAIR POOL PIPE LEAK 204753 187 5620.6180 CONTRACTED REPAIRS EDINBOROUGH PARK 1,359.35 BALANCE TANK REPAIR 204754 187 5620.6180 CONTRACTED REPAIRS EDINBOROUGH PARK 13,678.00 POOL DRAIN RENOVATION 204755 183 5620.6180 CONTRACTED REPAIRS EDINBOROUGH PARK 15,297.82 R55CKREG' -uG20000 REPAIR PARTS 125.14 1553.6530 CITY'' NA 319100 2/512009 EQUIPMENT. OPERATION GEN 101007 STAR TRIBUNE GENERAL SUPPLIES PSTF RANGE Council Check Register 2,740.94 WANT ADS 204857 123108 2/2/2009 - 2/512009 Check # Date Amount Supplier/ Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description 319096 21512009 POLY EDGE 00001570 1101383 SIITARI, MICHAEL 12460 394.05 CUTTING EDGE KITS 00001571 204445 370.00 UNIFORM PURCHASE 204676 013009 1400.6203 UNIFORM ALLOWANCE 319102 370.00 101015 STREICHERS 319097 2/5/2009 PUSH'BUMPERS 00001459 119422 SIZER, CORA LEE 1592259 31:95 BORE.BRUSHES 204756 30.55 ART WORK SOLD AT EAC 204615 012309 5101.4413 ART WORK SOLD 1591494 30.55 431.21 319103 319098 2/5/2009 121681 SUMMIT CONSULTING 110977. SOW, ADAMA 2,429.63 ENGINEERING /CONSULTING 204858 70.00 ART WORK SOLD AT EAC 204636 012909 5101.4413 ART WORK SOLD • 319104 281.00 INSTRUCTION AC 204636 012909 5110.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 59.85 507.00 CLEANING SERVICES 204636 012909 5111.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 85800 319105 2/512009: 100794 SWANSON, HAROLD 319099 21512009 101004 SPS COMPANIES 125.14 REGULATORS, SPRINGS 00001259 204443 S1979700.001 1646.6530 REPAIR PARTS 2 12:57:52 Page- 25 Business Unit POLICE DEPT. GENERAL ART CENTER REVENUES ART CENTER REVENUES ART CENTER ADMINISTRATION ART CENTER BLDG/MAINT BUILDING MAINTENANCE 1550.6121 ADVERTISING PERSONNEL CENTRAL SERVICES GENERAL 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS 125.14 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 319100 2/512009 EQUIPMENT. OPERATION GEN 101007 STAR TRIBUNE GENERAL SUPPLIES PSTF RANGE 7412.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES 2,740.94 WANT ADS 204857 123108 2,740.94 ` 319101 215/2009 112668- STONEBROOKE'EQUIPMENT INC. 452.44 POLY EDGE 00001570 204444 12460 394.05 CUTTING EDGE KITS 00001571 204445 12459 846.49 319102 2/512009 101015 STREICHERS 170.39 PUSH'BUMPERS 00001459 204677 1592259 31:95 BORE.BRUSHES 204756 1592478 228.87 PATCHES, SOLVENT 204757 1591494 431.21 319103 : 21512009 121681 SUMMIT CONSULTING 2,429.63 ENGINEERING /CONSULTING 204858 1265275 ' 2,429.63 • 319104 2/5/2009 123985 ,SURVEYMONKEY.COM 59.85 QUARTERLY SUBSCRIPTION 204758 013009 59.85 319105 2/512009: 100794 SWANSON, HAROLD REPAIR PARTS 2 12:57:52 Page- 25 Business Unit POLICE DEPT. GENERAL ART CENTER REVENUES ART CENTER REVENUES ART CENTER ADMINISTRATION ART CENTER BLDG/MAINT BUILDING MAINTENANCE 1550.6121 ADVERTISING PERSONNEL CENTRAL SERVICES GENERAL 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT. OPERATION GEN 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 1553.6585 ACCESSORIES;, EQUIPMENT. OPERATION GEN 7412.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES PSTF RANGE 7412.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES PSTF RANGE 5600.1740 MACHINERY& EQUIPMENT EB /CL BALANCE SHEET 1470.6104- CONFERENCES & SCHOOLS FIRE DEPT. GENERAL R55CKREG LOG20000 CITY OF EDINA 2/4 /2009 12:57:52 Council Check Register Page - 26 2/2/2009 -2/5/2009 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit 100.00 POLICE SERVICE 204402 020509 1419.6102 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES RESERVE PROGRAM 100.00 319106 2/512009 119424 SWANSON, SUSAN 42.25 ART WORK SOLD AT EAC 204616 012309 5101.4413 ART WORK SOLD ART CENTER REVENUES 42.25 319107 2/5/2009 120297 TADYCH, BRIAN 252.51 2009 UNIFORM PURCHASE 204446 012609 1301.6201 LAUNDRY GENERAL MAINTENANCE 252.51 319108 2/5/2009 101693 TOTAL REGISTER SYSTEMS 371.69 UPDATE ARS SOFTWARE 204769 23711 5840.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES LIQUOR YORK GENERAL 898.86 UPDATE TRS SOFTWARE 204770 23713 5820.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES 50TH STREET GENERAL 898.86 UPDATE TRS SOFTWARE 204771 23712 5860.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES VERNON LIQUOR GENERAL 420.69 REGISTER SCANNERS 204772 23716 5842.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES YORK SELLING 841.34 REGISTER SCANNERS 204772 23716 5862.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES VERNON SELLING 3,431.44 319109 2/512009 116535 TRAVELERS 1,000.00 DEDUCTIBLE 204859 000308281 1550.6200 INSURANCE CENTRAL SERVICES GENERAL 1,000.00 319110 215/2009 101048 TRI COUNTY BEVERAGE & SUPPLY 419.50 204589 215544 5862.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER VERNON SELLING 419.50 319111 215/2009 101403 TRUCK BODIES & EQUIP INTL INC 1,068.75 CYLINDER 00001464 204678 160485 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 1,066.75 319112 2/512009 123969 TWIN CITIES OCCUPATIONAL HEALT 105.00 FITNESS EXAM 204679 101515857 1470.6175 PHYSICAL EXAMINATIONS FIRE DEPT. GENERAL 105.00 319113 215/2009 101047 TWIN CITY GARAGE DOOR CO 1,289.89 SPRINGS, PLUGS 00001754 204447 309459 1552.6530 REPAIR PARTS CENT SVC PW BUILDING 1,289.89 319114 2/512009 123957 TWINCITIESGOLF.COM 200.00 ADVERTISING 00006191 204557 4795 5410.6122 ADVERTISING OTHER GOLF ADMINISTRATION 200.00 R55CKREG _,1G20000 CITY . NA 2 12:57:52 Council Check Register Page - 27 21212009 — 215/2009 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit 319115 2/512009 104223 UNITED PROPERTIES INVESTMENT I 557,859.61 TIF ASSISTANCE - PAY 2008 204654 012909 1000.1303 DUE FROM HRA GENERAL FUND BALANCE SHEET 557,859.61 319116 2/5/2009 100668 URS CORPORATION 2,923.43 COMP PLAN UPDATE 204864 013009 1140.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES PLANNING 2,923.43 319117 215/2009 103500 VALLEY PAVING INC. 13,432.50 PATHWAY RENOVATION 00007066 204860 4339 1647.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES PATHS & HARD SURFACE 13,432.50 319118 215/2009 101058 VAN PAPER CO. 268.34 UTENSILS, PLATES, BOWLS 00001651 204448 109633 -00 1552.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES CENT SVC PW BUILDING 649.79 TISSUE, TOWELS, CAN LINERS 00001263 204449 109116 -00 1645.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES LITTER REMOVAL 57.25 SOAP 00003804 204759 109461 -01 1470.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES FIRE DEPT. GENERAL 334.39 PAPER PRODUCTS 00003804 204760 109461 -00 1470.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES FIRE DEPT. GENERAL 1,309.77 319119 21512009 120627 VISTAR CORPORATION 485.88 FOOD 00002335 204680 24793457 5630.5510 COST OF GOODS SOLD CENTENNIAL LAKES 485.88 319120 2/5/2009 101080 WALSH, WILLIAM 100.00 POLICE SERVICE 204401 020509 1419.6102 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES RESERVE PROGRAM 100.00 319121 2/5/2009 101944 WATERSTREET, JOAN M 45.00 UNIFORM PURCHASE 204681 013009 1400.6203 UNIFORM ALLOWANCE POLICE DEPT. GENERAL 45.00 319122 2/5/2009 103266 WELSH COMPANIES LLC 576.65 FEB 2009 MAINTENANCE 204450 012809 5841.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES YORK OCCUPANCY 576.65 319123 2/512009 103309 WERGES, GREG 148.97 UNIFORM PURCHASE 204558 012709 1646.6201 LAUNDRY BUILDING MAINTENANCE 148.97 319124 2/5/2009 103196 WHEELER HARDWARE CO 967.14 REPAIR DOORS 00008001 204451 060322 5511.6180 CONTRACTED REPAIRS ARENA BLDG /GROUNDS R55CKREG LOG20000 CITY OF EDINA 2/4 /2009 12:57:52 Council Check Register Page - 28 2/2/2009 -2/5/2009 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit 967.14 319125 2/5/2009 101033 WINE COMPANY, THE 897.70 204590 210911 -00 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 12,00- 204591 209398 -00 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 148.00- 204592 210594 -00 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 444.97 204649 210910 -00 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING 974.65 204650 210800 -00 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 2,157.32 319126 2/5/2009 101312 WINE MERCHANTS 1,132.32 204513 260824 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 326.36 204593 260659 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING 75.57- 204594 41638 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 15.59- 204595 41659 5662.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 10.67- 204596 41613 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 9.69- 204597 41611 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 17.34- 204598 41612 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 11.66- 204599 41610 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 221.81 204651 261480 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 851.02 204652 261478 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 655.54 204815 261477 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING 808.08 204816 261479 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 3,854.61 319127 2/5/2009 123655 WISCONSIN LIGHTING INC. 115.60 204653 41941 5842.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX YORK SELLING 115.60 319128 2/5/2009 101086 WORLD CLASS WINES INC 705.37 204514 223851 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 624.80 204600 223853 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 423.80 204817 223942 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 363.00 204818 223852 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING 2,116.97 319129 2/5/2009 123948 WYNKOOP, ANNE 71.50 ART WORK SOLD AT EAC 204861 122308 5101.4413 ART WORK SOLD ART CENTER REVENUES 71.50 319130 2/512009 101726 XCEL ENERGY 60.67 51- 4420190 -3 204452 182548816 1321.6185 LIGHT & POWER STREET LIGHTING REGULAR CIT1 IINA 3 12:57:52 R55CKRE. JG20000 Council Check Register Page - 29 2/211009 -2/5/2009 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit 59.46 51- 6692497 -0 204559 182919345 1460.6185 LIGHT & POWER CIVILIAN DEFENSE 637.11 51- 5005454 -3 204682 183042393 5913.6185 LIGHT & POWER DISTRIBUTION 32,487.92 514621797 -2 204683 183040228 1321.6185 LIGHT & POWER STREET LIGHTING REGULAR 36.34 51- 6892224 -5 204684 183086237 1330.6185 LIGHT & POWER TRAFFIC SIGNALS 531.33 51- 8324712 -5 204685 183107285 1321.6185 LIGHT & POWER STREET LIGHTING REGULAR 12.14 51- 6541084 -2 204686 183078404 1646.6185 LIGHT & POWER BUILDING MAINTENANCE 9.03 51- 6050184 -2 204687 183067014 4086.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AQUATIC WEEDS 431.03 51- 6046826 -0 204688 183067750 5422.6185 LIGHT & POWER MAINT OF COURSE & GROUNDS 2,186.36 51- 6223269 -1 204689 183070609 5210.6185 LIGHT & POWER GOLF DOME PROGRAM 127.81 51- 6229265 -9 204690 183069758 1481.6185 LIGHT & POWER YORK FIRE STATION 2,197.10 51- 6229265 -9 204690 183069758 1470.6185 LIGHT & POWER FIRE DEPT. GENERAL 108.31 51- 8526048 -8 204691 183114881 1322.6185 LIGHT & POWER STREET LIGHTING ORNAMENTAL 1,110.58 51- 5107681 -4 204692 183046885 5111.6185 LIGHT & POWER ART CENTER BLDG/MAINT 1,734.13 51- 5547446 -1 204693 183054953 1628.6185 LIGHT & POWER SENIOR CITIZENS 8,564.11 51- 6644819 -9 204694 183081112 5620.6185 LIGHT & POWER EDINBOROUGH PARK 6,397.59 51- 6955679 -8 204773 183247912 i 1551.6185 LIGHT & POWER CITY HALL GENERAL 73.65 51- 8102668 -0 204823 183104172 1321.6185 LIGHT & POWER STREET LIGHTING REGULAR 1,787.19 51- 6840050 -6 204862 182923650 5911.6185 LIGHT & POWER WELL PUMPS 58,551.86 319131 2/5/2009 100568 XEROX CORPORATION 128.12 DEC USAGE 204863 038030852 5110.6151 EQUIPMENT RENTAL ART CENTER ADMINISTRATION 128.12 319132 21SM009 123958 XS SIGHT SYSTEMS INC. 1,732.50 RIFLE PROJECT 204560 58184 1400.6710 EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT POLICE DEPT. GENERAL 1,732.50 319133 2/5/2009 101089 ZEE MEDICAL SERVICE 345.09 FIRST AID SUPPLIES 204761 54164800 5621.6610 SAFETY EQUIPMENT EDINBOROUGH ADMINISTRATION 84.22 FIRST AID SUPPLIES 00008010 204762 54064198 5510.6610 SAFETY EQUIPMENT ARENA ADMINISTRATION 429.31 319134 214/2009 100961 POSTMASTER -USPS 263.13 POSTAGE 204964 020409 1550.6235 POSTAGE CENTRAL SERVICES GENERAL 263.13 1,149,905.50 Grand Total Payment Instrument Totals Check Total 1,149,905.50 Total Payments 1,149,905.50 R55CKSUM LOG20000 CITY OF EDINA 214/2009 12:59:29 Council Check Summary Page - 1 2/2/2009 - 2/5/2009 Company Amount 01000 GENERAL FUND 892,228.79 02100 CDBG FUND 7,525.00 02200 COMMUNICATIONS FUND 3,950.63 04000 WORKING CAPITAL FUND 9,084.20 05100 ART CENTER FUND 4,677.93 05200 GOLF DOME FUND 2,213.46 05300 AQUATIC CENTER FUND 4.79 05400 GOLF COURSE FUND 5,139.87 05500 ICE ARENA FUND .1.890.53 05600 EDINBOROUGH/CENT LAKES FUND 56,569.83 05800 LIQUOR FUND 137,824.23 05900 UTILITY FUND 23,474.64 05950 RECYCLING FUND 75.00 07400 PSTF AGENCY FUND 5,246.60 Report Totals 1,149,905.50 We confirm to the best of our knowledge and belief, that these claims comply in all material respects with the requirements of the City of Edina purchasing poll ies nd procedures da �' a R55CKREG _JG20000 TECHNICAL SERVICE 205037 7634 CITY . NA POLICE DEPT. GENERAL 576.25 Council Check Register 102171 ANDERSON -JOHNSON ASSOCIATES 3,899.50 2/912009 -- 2/12/2009 1621.6103 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description 319135. 2/9/2009 102775 MN DNR WATERS 5,440.00 BESLAN SPEAKER 205322 1191 7410.6218 35,257.00 WATER APPROPRIATIONS PERMIT 205321 1973-1119 5913.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 35,257.00 119645 ARCSTONE INFORMATION SERVICES 319136 2112/2009 15669 118261 2ND WIND EXERCISE INC. ADVERTISING OTHER GOLF ADMINISTRATION 30.00 121.50 TREADMILL REPAIR 205152 21- 019269 5620.6180 CONTRACTED REPAIRS 121.50 319137 2/1212009 102971 ACE ICE COMPANY 59.12 204965 0312377 5862.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX 24.08 204966 0721808 5862.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX 51.20 205202 0721822 5842.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX 134.40 319138 2/12/2009 123309 ACTION FLEET INC. 395.60 VEHICLE INSTALLATION 205035 6361 1400.6215 EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE 379.15 SQUAD MAINTENANCE 205153 6382 1400.6215 EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE 774.75 319139 2/12/2009 103285 AMEM 100.00 DUES - MIKE SIITARI 205036 020309 1460.6105 DUES & SUBSCRIPTIONS 100.00 319140 2/12/2009 100630 ANCHOR PAPER CO. INC. 686.38 COPIER PAPER 204867 10190321 -00 1550.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES 686.38 319141 2/1212009 102109 ANCOM TECHNICAL CENTER 2 9 7:26:57 Page- 1 Business Unit DISTRIBUTION EDINBOROUGH PARK VERNON SELLING VERNON SELLING YORK SELLING POLICE DEPT. GENERAL POLICE DEPT. GENERAL CIVILIAN DEFENSE CENTRAL SERVICES GENERAL 576.25. TECHNICAL SERVICE 205037 7634 1400.6230 SERVICE CONTRACTS EQUIPMENT POLICE DEPT. GENERAL 576.25 319142 2112/2009 102171 ANDERSON -JOHNSON ASSOCIATES 3,899.50 ARCHITECTURAL SERVICES 204915 080720109 1621.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES ATHLETIC ACTIVITIES 3,899.50 319143 2/12/2009 124001 ARCHANGEL CORP. 5,440.00 BESLAN SPEAKER 205322 1191 7410.6218 EDUCATION PROGRAMS PSTF ADMINISTRATION 5,440.00 319144 2/12/2009 119645 ARCSTONE INFORMATION SERVICES 30.00 EBROCHURE 00006324 205154 15669 5410.6122 ADVERTISING OTHER GOLF ADMINISTRATION 30.00 R55CKREG LOG20000 ENGINEERING SERVICES 205323 CITY OF EDINA 05483.1705.21 CONSULTING INSPECTION WM483 WELLHOUSE 5233 HALIFAX 584.00 SANITARY SEWER COMP PLAN Council Check Register 232701-106.00 -15 5923.6136 PROFESSIONAL SVC - OTHER COLLECTION SYSTEMS 3,499.69 219/2009 - 2/12/2009 205325 Check # Date Amount Supplier/ Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description 319145 2/12/2009 102774 ASPEN WASTE SYSTEMS 319151 2/12/2009 120447 BEC CORPORATION 174.16 WASTE DISPOSAL 205155 020209 7411.6182 RUBBISH REMOVAL 817.85 PRESSURE TRANSMITTER 174.16 14173 5921.6530 REPAIR PARTS 319146 2/12/2009 100256 AT&T MOBILITY 48.36 205156 870517029X2409 5420.6188 TELEPHONE 48.36 WINDOW REPLACEMENT 00005991 205326 08 -852 -2 319147 2M212009 BUILDING MAINTENANCE 100637 AUTOMOBILE SERVICE CO. 65.79 ALIGNMENT 00001581 204868 52903 1553.6180 CONTRACTED REPAIRS 65.79 1,060.28 319148 211212009 47822700 104069 B.B. WATSON GRAPHIC DESIGN COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 107.55 169.26 BUSINESS CARDS 205157 455 1400.6575 PRINTING 50TH ST SELLING 661.50 169.26 204969 47822800 5822.5513 319149 2/1212009 41.02 100638 BACHMAN'S 204970 81857300 5822.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX 225.55 FLOWERS 00006198 205158 104480372 5400.2072 MEN'S CLUB 5774800 5862.5515 225.55 VERNON SELLING 37.56 319150 2/1212009 5862.5515 100643 BARR ENGINEERING CO. VERNON SELLING 2112/2009 7:26:57 Page- 2 Business Unit PSTF OCCUPANCY CLUB HOUSE EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN POLICE DEPT. GENERAL GOLF BALANCE SHEET 615.00 ENGINEERING SERVICES 205323 232701-173.03 -2 05483.1705.21 CONSULTING INSPECTION WM483 WELLHOUSE 5233 HALIFAX 584.00 SANITARY SEWER COMP PLAN 205324 232701-106.00 -15 5923.6136 PROFESSIONAL SVC - OTHER COLLECTION SYSTEMS 3,499.69 MANHOLE INSPECTIONS 205325 23270G96.00 -18 5923.6136 PROFESSIONAL SVC - OTHER COLLECTION SYSTEMS 4,698.69 319151 2/12/2009 120447 BEC CORPORATION 817.85 PRESSURE TRANSMITTER 00001389 205038 14173 5921.6530 REPAIR PARTS SANITARY LIFT STATION MAINT 817.85 319152 2112/2009 123796 BEISSEL WINDOW AND SIDING 932.00 WINDOW REPLACEMENT 00005991 205326 08 -852 -2 1646.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES BUILDING MAINTENANCE 932.00 319153 2/1212009 101355 BELLBOY CORPORATION 1,060.28 204967 47822700 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 107.55 204968 47822900 5822.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR 50TH ST SELLING 661.50 204969 47822800 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING 41.02 204970 81857300 5822.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX 50TH ST SELLING 172.18 204971 5774800 5862.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX VERNON SELLING 37.56 204972 81738000 5862.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX VERNON SELLING CITY l AA 2/ I 7:26:57 R55CKREG .G20000 Council Check Register Page - 3 219/2009 - 2/12/2009 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit 145.21 204973 81857100 5862.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX VERNON SELLING 135.15 204974 81857200 5842.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX YORK SELLING 1,481.85 205203 47823200 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 3,842.30 319154 2112/2009 117379 BENIEK PROPERTY SERVICES INC. 1,305.00 SNOW REMOVAL 205159 133438 7411.6136 SNOW & LAWN CARE PSTF OCCUPANCY 1,305.00 319155 2/1212009 101191 BENNEROTTE, JENNIFER 177.95 SUPPLIES REIMBURSEMENT 205293 020509 2210.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES COMMUNICATIONS 177.95 319156 2/12/2009 119213 BENTLEY, MACHELL 95.97 AWARD SUPPLIES REIMBURSEMENT 205039 020309 1400.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES POLICE DEPT. GENERAL 95.97 319157 2/1212009 100648 BERTELSON OFFICE PRODUCTS 11.25 OFFICE SUPPLIES 204916 WO- 544519 -1 1600.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES PARK ADMIN. GENERAL 82.45 PHONE ACCESSORIES 205040 WO- 545321 -1 1550.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES CENTRAL SERVICES GENERAL 43.07 LABELS 205041 WO- 544620 -1 1550.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES CENTRAL SERVICES GENERAL 92.27 PHONE ACCESSORIES 205042 WO- 545632 -1 1550.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES CENTRAL SERVICES GENERAL 4.84- RETURN 205043 CP- WO- 545321 -1- 1550.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES CENTRAL SERVICES GENERAL 2 65.71- RETURN 205044 CP- WO- 545321 -1- 1550.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES CENTRAL SERVICES GENERAL 1 66.03 OFFICE SUPPLIES 205160 WO- 545740 -1 1600.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES PARK ADMIN. GENERAL 45.13 HEADPHONES, RUBBER BANDS 205294 OE- 184492 -1 1260.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES ENGINEERING GENERAL 269.65 319158 2112/2009 100659 BOYER TRUCK PARTS 300.27 SLACK ADJUSTERS 00001670 204917 267623 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 379.24 BRAKE PARTS 00001671 204918 267665 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 722.44 SLACK ADJUSTERS, SEALS 00001670 204919 267538 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 64.46 CLAMPS 00001524 204920 267954 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 207.00 MODULE 00001526 204921 268431 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 186.38- CORE RETURN 00001429 204922 258068 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 99.85- CREDIT 00001465 204923 264388C 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 85.20- CREDIT 00001670 204924 267538C 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 226.00- CREDIT 00001671 204925 267665C 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 216.41 MUFFLER STRAPS 00001532 205109 269185 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 93.47 FRONT FENDER 00001522 205110 267685X1 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN R55CKREG LOG20000 CITY OF EDINA Council Check Register 2/9/2009 - 2/12/2009 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description 68.89 FUEL ADDITIVE 00001680 205111 269842 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS 5822.6575 5842.6575 5862.6575 5410.6406 5410.6406 5842.5514 5822.5514 5822.5514 PRINTING PRINTING PRINTING GENERAL SUPPLIES GENERAL SUPPLIES 2/12/2009 7:26:57 Page - 4 Business Unit EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 50TH ST SELLING YORK SELLING VERNON SELLING GOLF ADMINISTRATION GOLF ADMINISTRATION COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER YORK SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER 50TH ST SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER 50TH ST SELLING 1400.6203 UNIFORM ALLOWANCE POLICE DEPT. GENERAL 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS 1,454.75 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 319159 2/12/2009 EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 119826 BRYANT GRAPHICS INC. REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 166.77 NEWSLETTER 205112 16748 166.77 NEWSLETTER 205112 16748 166.78 NEWSLETTER 205112 16748 500.32 319160 2/12/2009 102149 CALLAWAY GOLF 2,014.51 RENTAL CLUBS 205327 917129543 350.29 RENTAL CLUBS 205328 917107879 2,364.80 319161 2/12/2009 119455 CAPITOL BEVERAGE SALES 2,001.10 204975 14271 387.35 204976 14266 737.75 204977 14200 3,126.20 319162 2/1212009 103268 CARLSON, DAVID 101.82 UNIFORM PURCHASE 205045 020309 101.82 319163 2/12/2009 116683 CAT & FIDDLE BEVERAGE 410.00 205204 81015 410.00 319164 2/1212009 100681 CATCO 240.90 KITS 00001787 204869 3 -66147 112.42 COUPLERS, ELBOWS, FITTINGS 00001790 204870 1 -67414 70.28 FITTINGS, COUPLERS 00001790 204871 3 -66485 38.63 COUPLERS 00001790 204872 B- 39649 462.23 319165 2/12/2009 123998 CELEBRATION BRASS 150.00 PERFORMANCE 2/17/09 205291 020909 150.00 319166 2/12/2009 102804 CENTURY COLLEGE 150.00 AHATRAINING 205295 00321100 150.00 5822.6575 5842.6575 5862.6575 5410.6406 5410.6406 5842.5514 5822.5514 5822.5514 PRINTING PRINTING PRINTING GENERAL SUPPLIES GENERAL SUPPLIES 2/12/2009 7:26:57 Page - 4 Business Unit EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 50TH ST SELLING YORK SELLING VERNON SELLING GOLF ADMINISTRATION GOLF ADMINISTRATION COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER YORK SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER 50TH ST SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER 50TH ST SELLING 1400.6203 UNIFORM ALLOWANCE POLICE DEPT. GENERAL 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 5610.6136 PROFESSIONAL SVC - OTHER ED ADMINISTRATION 1470.6104 CONFERENCES & SCHOOLS FIRE DEPT. GENERAL R55CKREG _JG20000 CITY . NA 2, d 7:26:57 Council Check Register Page - 5 2/9/2009 -2112/2009 Check # Date Amount Supplier/ Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit 319167 2/12/2009 119725 CHISAGO LAKES DISTRIBUTING CO 400.15 204978 383658 5822.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER 50TH ST SELLING 400.15 319168 2/12/2009 100692 COCA -COLA BOTTLING CO. 277.60 204979 0128068921 5862.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX VERNON SELLING 277.60 319169 211212009 101345 COLOURS 500.00 CREATIVE SERVICES 205296 10056 2210.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES COMMUNICATIONS 2,239.00 LOGO DESIGN 205329 9966 2210.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES COMMUNICATIONS 2,739.00 319170 2/12/2009 120433 COMCAST 59.00 8772 10 614 0199138 205046 012409 5422.6188 TELEPHONE MAINT OF COURSE & GROUNDS 61.90 8772 10 614 0177449 205047 012509 5420.6188 TELEPHONE CLUB HOUSE 74.95 8772 10 614 0165667 205048 012309 5424.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES RANGE 123.80 8772 10 614 0164959 205049 1/25/09 5430.6188 TELEPHONE RICHARDS GOLF COURSE 319.65 319171 2/12/2009 101395 COMMISSIONER OF TRANSPORTATION 150.00 PLAN REVIEW & INSPECTION CLASS 205297 020609 1260.6104 CONFERENCES & SCHOOLS ENGINEERING GENERAL 150.00 319172 2112/2009 120819 COMPLETE HELICOPTERS INC. 570.00 AERIAL DEER SURVEY 00001401 205113 1195 1509.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES DEER CONTROL 570.00 319173 2/12/2009 101323 CONNEY SAFETY PRODUCTS 71.51 SAFETY GLASSES 00001775 205050 03404784 1552.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES CENT SVC PW BUILDING 79.49 SAFETY GLASSES 00001775 205050 03404784 5913.6610 SAFETY EQUIPMENT DISTRIBUTION 36.52 SAFETY GLASSES, GLOVES 00001760 205051 03404154 1646.6610 SAFETY EQUIPMENT BUILDING MAINTENANCE 49.41 SAFETY GLASSES, GLOVES 00001760 205051 03404154 1553.6610 SAFETY EQUIPMENT EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 57.78 SAFETY GLASSES, GLOVES 00001760 205051 03404154 5913.6610 SAFETY EQUIPMENT DISTRIBUTION 125.02 SAFETY GLASSES, GLOVES 00001760 205051 03404154 1301.6610 SAFETY EQUIPMENT GENERAL MAINTENANCE 48.66 SAFETY GLASSES, MATS 00001778 205114 03405396 5913.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES DISTRIBUTION 94.79 SAFETY GLASSES, MATS 00001778 205114 03405396 1301.6610 SAFETY EQUIPMENT GENERAL MAINTENANCE 26.00 SAFETY GLASSES, GLOVES 00001792 205161 03406084 1301.6610 SAFETY EQUIPMENT GENERAL MAINTENANCE 60.00 SAFETY GLASSES, GLOVES 00001792 205161 03406084 1553.6610 SAFETY EQUIPMENT EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 166.39 SAFETY GLASSES, GLOVES 00001792 205161 03406084 1552.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES CENT SVC PW BUILDING 815.57 R55CKREG LOG20000 CITY OF EDINA 2/12/2009 7:26:57 Council Check Register Page - 6 2/9/2009 — 2/12/2009 Check # Date Amount Supplier/ Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit 319174 2/12/2009 101974 CONNIE'S CATERING 287.78 CATERING FOR SWEETHEART DANCE 205298 020609 1600.4390 REGISTRATION FEES PARK ADMIN. GENERAL 287.78 319175 2/12/2009 101329 CONSTRUCTION MATERIALS INC. 70.88 FORM TUBES 00001765 205052 0026946 -IN 1322.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES STREET LIGHTING ORNAMENTAL 70.88 319176 2/12/2009 100697 COOL AIR MECHANICAL INC. 2,311.20 COMPRESSOR REPAIRS 00008012 204926 66569 5521'.6180 CONTRACTED REPAIRS ARENA ICE MAINT 100.00- FILTER CREDIT 204927 66538 5521.6180 CONTRACTED REPAIRS ARENA ICE MAINT w. 2,211.20 319177 2112/2009 101832 CORNERHOUSE 2,500.00 2009 FORENSIC INTERVIEW SERV 205053 010109 1400.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES POLICE DEPT.. GENERAL. 2,500.00 319178 2/1212009 100513 COVERALL OF THE TWIN CITIES IN 2,742.38 CUSTODIAL SERVICES 205054 7070139312 1551.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES CITY HALL GENERAL 2,742.38 319179 2112/2009 101495 CREATIVE IMAGES ON RIBBON INC. 231.97 CLASS RIBBONS 00008015 205299 8106 5510.6513 OFFICE SUPPLIES ARENA ADMINISTRATION 231.97 319180 2/12/2009 121267 CREATIVE RESOURCES 1,512.79 SHIRTS FOR RESALE 205162 383403 5620.5510 COST OF GOODS SOLD EDINBOROUGH PARK 1,512.79 319181 2/1212009 100706 D.C. ANNIS SEWER INC. 635.00 ANNUAL DRAIN CLEANING 205300 67438 1470.6215 EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE FIRE DEPT. GENERAL 635.00 319182 2/12/2009 104020 DALCO 1,075.33 CLEANING SUPPLIES 00008000 204928 2063737 5511.6511 CLEANING SUPPLIES ARENA BLDG /GROUNDS 156.02 ' BLEACH, GRILL CLEANER 00006197 205055 2062765 5421.6511 CLEANING SUPPLIES GRILL 85.20 FILTER BAGS, HOSE, BRUSH 00001652 205056 2063736 1552.6511 CLEANING SUPPLIES CENT SVC PW BUILDING 989.49 KLEENEX, TISSUE, TOWELS 00001752 205115 2064432 1552.6511 CLEANING SUPPLIES CENT SVC PW BUILDING 159.11 LENS CLEANING STATION 00001652 205163 2065261 1552.6530 REPAIR PARTS CENT SVC PW BUILDING 2,465.15 CITY. Z d 7:26:57 R55CKREG LOG20000 ,NA. Council Check Register Page - 7 2/9/2009 - 2/12/2009 Check # Date Amount Supplier/ Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit 319183 2/1212009 102478 DAY DISTRIBUTING CO. 1,980.31 204980 490594 5862.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER VERNON SELLING 59.85 204981 490593 5862.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX VERNON SELLING 240.00 204982 491279 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING 937.25 204983 490550 5822.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER 50TH ST SELLING 720.00 204984 490553 5842.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER YORK SELLING 3,414.30 204985 491333 5842.5514 COST. OF GOODS SOLD BEER YORK SELLING 22.40 204986 491334 5842.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX YORK SELLING 30.00 204987 491335 5842.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX YORK SELLING 535.00 205205 491277 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING .06 205206 491278 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 1,009.32 205207 491332 5822.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER 50TH ST SELLING 8,948.49 319184 2/12/2009 122135 DENFELD, SCOTT 46.82 MINI DV TAPES 205301 020509 2210.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES COMMUNICATIONS 46.82 319185 2/1212009 100899 DEPARTMENT OF LABOR & INDUSTRY 3,434.13 SURCHARGE JAN 2009 205385 5919053060 1495.4380 SURCHARGE INSPECTIONS 3,434.13 319186 211212009 102831 DEX EAST 55.00 204929 012709 5430.6188 TELEPHONE RICHARDS GOLF COURSE 137.00 204929 012709 5511.6188 TELEPHONE ARENA BLDG /GROUNDS 162.00 204929 012709 5420.6188 TELEPHONE CLUB HOUSE 271.05 204929 012709 5210.6122 ADVERTISING OTHER GOLF DOME PROGRAM 443.00 204930 JAN2709 5610.6122 ADVERTISING OTHER ED ADMINISTRATION 1,068.05 319187 2112/2009 123995 DICK'S/LAKEVILLE SANITATION IN 6,891.86 REFUSE 205149 943534 4095.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 50TH STREET RUBBISH 4,110.96 REFUSE 205150 944434 4095.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 50TH STREET RUBBISH 11,002.82 319188 2/1212009 112663 DOLLARS & SENSE 716.66 DIRECT MAIL COUPON 204873 23994 5822.6122 ADVERTISING OTHER 50TH ST SELLING 716.66 DIRECT MAIL COUPON 204873 23994 5842.6122 ADVERTISING OTHER YORK SELLING 716.68 DIRECT MAIL COUPON 204873 23994 5862.6122 ADVERTISING OTHER VERNON SELLING 2,150.00 319189 2112/2009 121500 DORMAN, SARAH R55CKREG LOG20000 CITY OF EDINA 2/12/2009 7:26:57 Council Check Register Page - 8 2/9/2009 - 2/12/2009 Check # Date Amount Supplier/ Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit 324.00 INSTRUCTION AC 205302 020409 5110.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES ART CENTER ADMINISTRATION 324.00 319190 2/12/2009 123997 DROZD, KATHLEEN 79.00 COURSE REFUND 205164 020209 7401.4390 REGISTRATION FEES PSTF REVENUE 79.00 319191 2/12/2009 100739 EAGLE WINE 232.40 204988 180965 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING 140.40 204989 171879 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 1,890.03 205208 180969 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 135.80 205209 179266 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 2,969.01 205210 180960 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 1.15 205211 179818 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 7.99- 205212 770182 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 5,360.80 319192 2/12/2009 101630 EDINA PUBLIC SCHOOLS 198.33 CATALOG ADVERTISING 205116 7475 5822.6122 ADVERTISING OTHER 50TH ST SELLING 198.33 CATALOG ADVERTISING 205116 7475 5842.6122 ADVERTISING OTHER YORK SELLING 198.34 CATALOG ADVERTISING 205116 7475 5862.6122 ADVERTISING OTHER VERNON SELLING 275.00 CATALOG ADVERTISING 205165 7472 5210.6122 ADVERTISING OTHER GOLF DOME PROGRAM 870.00 319193 2/12/2009 102955 EDINA PUBLIC SCHOOLS 118.88 1/25/09 LIBRARY TRIP 205166 09 -012 1600.4390.15 GEN ADAPTIVE REC PARK ADMIN. GENERAL 118.88 319194 2/12/2009 100549 ELECTRIC PUMP INC. 45.20 WASHERS 00001707 205057 0038085 -IN 5921.6530 REPAIR PARTS SANITARY LIFT STATION MAINT 45.20 319195 2/12/2009 123996 ELGIN SWEEPER COMPANY 1,500.00 TRAINING CLASSES (3) 205167 020609 1281.6104 CONFERENCES 8 SCHOOLS TRAINING 1,500.00 319196 2/1212009 104733 EMERGENCY MEDICAL PRODUCTS INC 172.38 AMBULANCE SUPPLIES 00003651 205058 INV1136950 1470.6510 FIRST AID SUPPLIES FIRE DEPT. GENERAL 455.37 AMBULANCE SUPPLIES 00003652 2.05059 INV1137748 1470.6510 FIRST AID SUPPLIES FIRE DEPT. GENERAL 627.75 3119197 2/12/2009 101937 EMS INSIDER R55CKREG _OG20000 CITY INA 2 i9 7:26:57 Council Check Register Page - 9 2/9/2009 -211212009 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanatlon PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit 215.00 SUBSCRIPTION RENEWAL 205168 020509 1470.6105 DUES & SUBSCRIPTIONS FIRE DEPT. GENERAL 215.00 319198 2/1212009 100018 EXPERT T BILLING 5,555.00 JANUARY TRANSPORTS 205060 020309 1470.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES FIRE DEPT. GENERAL 5,555.00 319199 2112/2009 102485 FAHRENKRUG, ROGER 640.00 GROUP INSTRUCTION 205169 020509 5210.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES GOLF DOME PROGRAM 640.00 319200 2/12/2009 102003 FASTSIGNS BLOOMINGTON 93.72 SIGNS 205170 190 -35624 5620.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES EDINBOROUGH PARK 93.72 319201 2/12/2009 104474 FILTERFRESH 371.40 COFFEE 00001807 205117 79472121 1552.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES CENT SVC PW BUILDING 371.40 319202 2/1212009 120831 FIRST SCRIBE INC. 425.00 ROWAY 205303 16854 1260.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES ENGINEERING GENERAL 425.00 319203 2/12/2009 113987 FISHER, PETER 279.52 TRAINING EXPENSE 205330 020509 1470.6104 CONFERENCES 8 SCHOOLS FIRE DEPT. GENERAL 279.52 319204 2/12/2009 101475 FOOTJOY 129.73 MERCHANDISE 205171 5454162 5440.5511 COST OF GOODS - PRO SHOP PRO SHOP RETAIL SALES 53.50- CREDIT 205331 6763618 5440.5511 COST OF GOODS - PRO SHOP PRO SHOP RETAIL SALES 73.71 MERCHANDISE 205332 5409427 5440.5511 COST OF GOODS - PRO SHOP PRO SHOP RETAIL SALES 79.31 MERCHANDISE 205333 5418233 5440.5511 COST OF GOODS - PRO SHOP PRO SHOP RETAIL SALES 73.71 MERCHANDISE 205334 5425523 5440.5511 COST OF GOODS - PRO SHOP PRO SHOP RETAIL SALES 302.96 319205 2/12/2009 102727 FORCE AMERICA 172.90 KITS 00001528 204874 01315763 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 619.40 HOUSING KIT 00001528 205118 01315911 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 792.30 319206 2/12/2009 122614 FRUCHI 348.00 CONCESSION PRODUCT 205172 1 -975 5620.5510 COST OF GOODS SOLD EDINBOROUGH PARK R55CKREG LOG20000 CITY OF EDINA Council Check Register 2/9/2009 -2112/2009 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description 2/12/2009 7:26:57 Page - 10 Business Unit CONFERENCES & SCHOOLS GOLF ADMINISTRATION 348.00 GOLF ADMINISTRATION PROFESSIONAL SERVICES ART CENTER ADMINISTRATION TELEPHONE FIRE DEPT. GENERAL 319207 2/1212009 101662 GCSAA 150.00 SEMINAR REGISTRATION 205119 020409 5410.6104 300.00 SEMINAR REGISTRATION 205120 020509 5410.6104 450.00 319208 2/12/2009 104652 GILLIS, LOUISE 120.00 INSTRUCTION AC 205335 020409 5110.6103 120.00 319209 2(11 212009 118941 GLOBALSTAR USA 12.14 R -91 PHONE 205061 1258220 1470.6188 12.14 319210 2/12/2009 103316 GOETSCH, SAM L. 1,590.00 INTERPRETING SERVICES 205121 013009 4078.6103 1,590.00 319211 2/1212009 102385 GOLF MINNESOTA 675.00 DIRECTORY AD ,205173 0909 5410.6122 675.00 319212 2/12/2009 101679 GOLFCRAFT INC. 225.06 SHIPPING CHARGES 00006178 205062. 21435 5440.6122 225.06 319213 2/12/2009 104775 GOVERNMENT TRAINING SERVICES 225.00 MCMA CONFERENCE 204931 16046005 1120.6104 225.00 319214 2/12/2009 101103 GRAINGER 11.33 TONG HANGER 00001758 204875 9826098668 1551.6406 88.99 SILICONE, WHISK BROOMS 00001753 204876 9826098650 1553.6530 11.33 TONG HANGER 00001758 204877 9826098643 1551.6406 38.22 SAFETY GLASSES 00001775 204878 9828882143 5912.6406 43.12 BATTERIES, SPRAY PAINT 00001769 204879 9828316866 1646.6406 100.00 BATTERIES, SPRAY PAINT 00001769 204879' 9828318866 5912.6406 100.00 BATTERIES, SPRAY PAINT 00001769 204879 9828318866 1301.6406 392.99 319215 2/12/2009 102217 GRAPE BEGINNINGS INC 2/12/2009 7:26:57 Page - 10 Business Unit CONFERENCES & SCHOOLS GOLF ADMINISTRATION CONFERENCES & SCHOOLS GOLF ADMINISTRATION PROFESSIONAL SERVICES ART CENTER ADMINISTRATION TELEPHONE FIRE DEPT. GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES ADVERTISING OTHER ADVERTISING OTHER INCLUSION PROGRAM GOLF ADMINISTRATION PRO SHOP RETAIL SALES CONFERENCES & SCHOOLS ADMINISTRATION GENERAL SUPPLIES REPAIR PARTS GENERAL SUPPLIES GENERAL SUPPLIES GENERAL SUPPLIES GENERAL SUPPLIES GENERAL SUPPLIES CITY HALL GENERAL EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN CITY HALL GENERAL WELL HOUSES BUILDING MAINTENANCE WELL HOUSES GENERAL MAINTENANCE R55CKREG LOG20000 VERNON SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR CITY , NA 50TH ST SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR Council Check Register COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR YORK SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING 2/912009 - 2/1212009 Check # Date Amount Supplier/ Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX 252.50 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 205213 107513 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX 954.00 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 205214 107511 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR 1,206.50 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX VERNON SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR VERNON SELLING 319216 2112/2009 VERNON SELLING 101518 GRAUSAM, STEVE 16.12 RUBBER BANDS, PENS, STAPLES 205373 020909 5840.6513 24.98 STOCK PAPER FOR SIGNS 205373 020909 5842.6512 41.10 319218 2/1212009 100782 GRIGGS COOPER & CO. 4,921.75 204990 177867 5862.5512 560.82 204991 180967 5822.5512 366.65 204992 179824 5822.5513 822.45 204993 180966 5822.5513 6,000.97 204994 177878 5842.5512 112.46 204995 149295 5842.5512 40.00- 204996 770047 5822.5513 66.74- 204997 769608 5842.5512 17.38- 204998 769639 5842.5512 11,476.57 205215 180973 5842.5512 7,334.27 205216 179826 5842.5512 60.10 205217 180972 5842.5515 2,199.90 205218 179827 5842.5513 1,577.85 205219 180970 5842.5513 138.20 205220 180971 5842.5515 2,160.30 205221 180961 5862.5513 1,466.60 205222 179822 5862.5513 4,445.39 205223 180962 5862.5512 118.59 205224 180963 5862.5515 1.15 205225 180788 5862.5512 5,879.95 205226 179823 5862.5512 49,519.85 319219 2/12/2009 100787 GRUBER'S POWER EQUIPMENT 1,154.46 GENERATOR, CHAINSAW 00001804 205174 10121 5932.6406 1,154.46 319220 2/12/2009 102301 HARTLAND FUEL PRODUCTS LLC 14,062.02 GAS 00005413 204880 124237 1553.6581 14,062.02 319221 2112/2009 100797 HAWKINS INC. Subledger Account Description COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE OFFICE SUPPLIES PAPER SUPPLIES 2 9 7:26:57 Page- 11 Business Unit YORK SELLING VERNON SELLING LIQUOR YORK GENERAL YORK SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR VERNON SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR 50TH ST SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR YORK SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR YORK SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR YORK SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR YORK SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR YORK SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR YORK SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX YORK SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX YORK SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR VERNON SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX VERNON SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR VERNON SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR VERNON SELLING GENERAL SUPPLIES GASOLINE GENERAL STORM SEWER EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN R55CKREG LOG20000 CITY OF EDINA 2/1212009 7:26:57 Council Check Register Page - 12 2/9/2009 —211212009 Check # Date Amount Supplier/ Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subiedger Account Description Business Unit 3,018.45 CHEMICALS 00005755 205122 1271749 5915.6586 WATER TREATMENT SUPPLIES WATER TREATMENT 3,018.45 319222 2/12/2009 122093 HEALTH PARTNERS 183,867.20 PREMIUM 205175 31369459 1550.6040 HOSPITALIZATION CENTRAL SERVICES GENERAL 183,867.20 319223 2/1212009 101576 HEGGIES PIZZA 422.20 PIZZA- 205063 13108 5421.5510 COST OF GOODS SOLD GRILL 422.20 319224 2/12/2009 102070 HENNEPIN COUNTY CHIEFS OF POLI 210.00 DUES 205064 010409 1400.6105 DUES & SUBSCRIPTIONS POLICE DEPT. GENERAL 210.00 319225 2/12/2009 103838 HENNEPIN TECHNICAL COLLEGE 235.00 EMT REFRESHER 00001407 205123 00168183 1640.6027 TRAINING PARK MAINTENANCE GENERAL 1,254.69 APPARATUS OPERATOR TRAINING 205336 00167930 1470.6104 CONFERENCES & SCHOOLS FIRE DEPT. GENERAL 1,489.69 319226 2/12/2009 116680 HEWLETT - PACKARD COMPANY 1,039.14 LAPTOP FOR MECHANICS 00004462 205379 45401063 1553.6556 TOOLS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 353.77 LCD MONITORS 00004301 205380 45452170 1400.6710 EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT POLICE DEPT. GENERAL 421.55 LCD MONITORS 00004301 205380 45452170 5923.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES COLLECTION SYSTEMS 2,063.44 COLOR LASERJET 00004300 205381 45424531 5923.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES COLLECTION SYSTEMS 2,063.44 COLOR LASERJET 00004300 205381 45424531 5913.6406 GENERAL' SUPPLIES DISTRIBUTION 20.23 SPEAKERS 00004301 205382 45452168 5923.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES COLLECTION SYSTEMS 20.24 SPEAKERS 00004301 205382 45452168 1400.6710 EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT POLICE DEPT. GENERAL 5,981.81 319227 2/1212009 101073 HIGHWAY TECHNOLOGIES INC. 519.72 SIGN STANDS, SIGNS 00001743 205124 65012161 -001 5923.6406.. GENERAL SUPPLIES COLLECTION SYSTEMS 519.72 319228 2112/2009 103753 HILLYARD INC - MINNEAPOLIS 329.25 SOAP, TOWELS 00002152 205176 2755867 5620.6511 CLEANING SUPPLIES- EDINBOROUGH PARK 329.25 . 319229 2/12/2009 - 100805 HIRSHFIELD'S 30.49 PAINT 00006189 205177 003326621 5420.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES CLUB HOUSE 30.49 R55CKREG _)G20000 CITY NA Council Check Register 219/2009 -- 2/12/2009 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description 319230 2112/2009 105962 HOFF, BRUCE 194.00 INSTRUCTION AC 205337 020409 5110.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES Z ! 7:26:57 Page 13 Business Unit ART CENTER ADMINISTRATION COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER VERNON SELLING 194.00 VERNON SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER 50TH ST SELLING 319231 211212009 104375 HOHENSTEINS INC. 753.42 204999 476201 5862.5514 51.90 205000 476211 5862.5515 138.50 205001 476202 5822.5514 2,436.40 205227 476754 5842.5514 3,380.22 319232 2/12/2009 101858 HOLIDAY INN HOTEL & SUITES 389.90 TRAINING EXPENSE 00003048 205065 E1610 1400.6104 389.90 319233 211212009 100267 HOPKINS WESTWIND BAND 100.00 PERFORMANCE 2/15/09 205290 020909 5610.6136 100.00 319234 211212009 108692 HUGHES, MICHAEL 805.00 TRAINING EXPENSE 205338 020509 1470.6104 805.00 319235 2/12/2009 105007 HUTCHINSON TELEPHONE COMPANY 557.72 EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE CONTRACT 205089 0112459 -FEB09 1400.6230 557.72 319236 211212009 121629 ICLEI 600.00 2009 DUES 204932 M2008 -519 1122.6103 600.00 319237 2/12/2009 100416 INDEPENDENT EMERGENCY SERVICES 173.54 RADIO REPAIRS 205066 IESINV002081 1400.6215 173.54 319238 2/12/2009 116191 INSTY- PRINTS 763.62 TRAFFIC STUDY - DRAFT REPORT 205305 81959 1265.6406 763.62 319239 2/12/2009 102024 IRRIGATION BY DESIGN INC. 297.45 SPRINKLER REPAIR 00001085 205339 00126457 01213.1705.20 297.45 Z ! 7:26:57 Page 13 Business Unit ART CENTER ADMINISTRATION COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER VERNON SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX VERNON SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER 50TH ST SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER YORK SELLING CONFERENCES & SCHOOLS POLICE DEPT. GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SVC - OTHER ED ADMINISTRATION CONFERENCES & SCHOOLS FIRE DEPT. GENERAL SERVICE CONTRACTS EQUIPMENT POLICE DEPT. GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES ENERGY & ENVIRONMENT COMM EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE POLICE DEPT. GENERAL GENERAL SUPPLIES CONSULTING DESIGN TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION PHASE 1 ARDEN, BRUCE, CASCO R55CKREG LOG20000 205228 1243145 5842.5514 CITY OF EDINA YORK'SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR YORK SELLING 319245 2/12/2009 100833 JOHN HENRY FOSTER MINNESOTA IN COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE Council Check Register 67.73 AIR COMPRESSOR OIL 00001768 204933 1094454 -01 5915.6406 67.73 2/9/2009 -- 2/12/2009 319247 2/12/2009 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description 319240 2/12/2009 5842.5513 122073 IRTH SOLUTIONS INC. 205012 406928 5842.5512 20.76- 205013 406929 2,167.50 ONE CALL LOCATING SOFTWARE 00001706 205067 INVO01679 5913.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 205015 407853 2,167.50 134.54 205229 1576384 5862.5513 319241 2/12/2009 101861 J.H. LARSON COMPANY 551.58 CONDUIT 00001774 204881 4211279 -01 1322.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES 551.58 319242 2/12/2009 102136 JERRY'S TRANSMISSION SERVICE 130.11 SWITCHES, DOOR CHECK SLIDES 00001536 205125 0012583 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS 130.11 319243 2112/2009 102146 JESSEN PRESS 302.19 COUNCIL STATIONERY 205126 11391 1100.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES 165.08 COUNCIL BROCHURES 205127 11390 1100.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES 467.27 319244 2/12/2009 100741 JJ TAYLOR DIST. OF MINN 37.20 205002 1243091 5862.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX 6,129.38 205003 1243090 5862.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER 2,028.20 205004 1243138 5822.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER 1,322.85 205005 1243092 5822.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER 2,427.10 205006 1243117 5842.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER 8,545.30 205007 1243100 5842.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER 252.00 205008 1243123 5842.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER 20400 205009 1217577 5862 5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 5,853.76 205228 1243145 5842.5514 26,799.79 YORK'SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR YORK SELLING 319245 2/12/2009 100833 JOHN HENRY FOSTER MINNESOTA IN COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 67.73 AIR COMPRESSOR OIL 00001768 204933 1094454 -01 5915.6406 67.73 319247 2/12/2009 100835 JOHNSON BROTHERS LIQUOR CO. 2,294.16 205010 1575471 5822.5513 291.36 205011 1572068 5842.5513 18.04- 205012 406928 5842.5512 20.76- 205013 406929 5842.5512 9.00- 205014 407852 5842.5513 4.83 - 205015 407853 5842.5513 134.54 205229 1576384 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER GENERAL SUPPLIES 2/12/2009 7:26:57 Page - 14 Business Unit DISTRIBUTION STREET LIGHTING,ORNAMENTAL EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN CITY COUNCIL CITY COUNCIL VERNON SELLING VERNON SELLING 50TH ST SELLING 50TH ST SELLING YORK SELLING YORK SELLING YORK SELLING VERNON SELLING YORK SELLING WATER TREATMENT COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR YORK'SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR YORK SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK.SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING R55CKREG .G20000 CITY NA Z a 7:26:57 Council Check Register Page - 15 219/2009 -- 2/12/2009 Check # Date Amount Supplier/ Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit 1.12 205230 1576383 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 74.24 205231 1576385 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 3,891.00 205232 1575778 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 1,170.32 205233 1579100 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 242.02 205234 1579097 5842.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR YORK SELLING 3,671.69 205235 1579099 5842.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR YORK SELLING 540.02 205236 1579092 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 2,479.29 205237 1579098 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 5,512.25 205238 1575779 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 538.90 205239 1579095 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 2,654.40 205240 1579109 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 1,020.38 205241 1579104 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING .56 205242 1579094 5862.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR VERNON SELLING 4,705.70 205243 1579110 5862.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR VERNON SELLING 70.74 205244 1579108 5862.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX VERNON SELLING 1.12 205245 1579096 5862.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX VERNON SELLING 4,281.96 205246 1579101 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 4,739.15 205247 1579102 5842.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR YORK SELLING 1.12 205248 1579093 5842.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX YORK SELLING 692.31 205249 1579103 5862.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR VERNON SELLING 1,699.58 205250 1579107 5862.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR VERNON SELLING 1,296.59 205251 1579106 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 176.37- 205252 406930 5862.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR VERNON SELLING 57.87- 205253 407478 5862.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR VERNON SELLING 41,717.65 319248 2/12/2009 100919 JOHNSON, NAOMI 16.65 PETTY CASH 205306 020409 5110.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES ART CENTER ADMINISTRATION 16.90 PETTY CASH 205306 020409 5111.6511 CLEANING SUPPLIES ART CENTER BLDG/MAINT 21.75 PETTY CASH 205306 020409 5120.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES ART SUPPLY GIFT GALLERY SHOP 26.48 PETTY CASH 205306 020409 5111.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES ART CENTER BLDG /MAINT 53.55 PETTY CASH 205306 020409 5110.6564 CRAFT SUPPLIES ART CENTER ADMINISTRATION 58.71 PETTY CASH 205306 020409 5112.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES ART CENTER POTTERY 179.51 PETTY CASH 205306 020409 5101.4413 ARTWORK SOLD ART CENTER REVENUES 373.55 319249 211212009 113988 JOHNSON, SETH H 80.00 TRAINING EXPENSE 205340 020509 1470.6104 CONFERENCES & SCHOOLS FIRE DEPT. GENERAL 80.00 319250 2/1212009 121481 KAPLAN PROFESSIONAL SCHOOLS 75.00 ALARMS DATABASE TRAINING 205068 9010011 1400.6104 CONFERENCES & SCHOOLS POLICE DEPT. GENERAL R55CKREG LOG20000 CITY OF EDINA 2/12/2009 7:26:57 Council Check Register Page - 16 2/9/2009 -- 2/12/2009 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit 75.00 319251 2/1212009 111018 KEEPRS INC. 24.99 BELT 00003782 205307 111549 1470.6558 DEPT UNIFORMS FIRE DEPT, GENERAL 78.99 UNIFORMS 00003573 205341 86150 1470.6558 DEPT UNIFORMS FIRE DEPT. GENERAL 3.00- 205342 86150 -80 1470.6558 DEPT UNIFORMS FIRE DEPT. GENERAL 316.98 UNIFORMS 00003572 205343 86449 1470.6558 DEPT UNIFORMS FIRE DEPT. GENERAL 32.00 UNIFORMS 00003578 205344 85528 1470.6558 DEPT UNIFORMS FIRE DEPT. GENERAL 75.99 UNIFORMS 00003572 205345 86449 -01 1470.6558 DEPT UNIFORMS FIRE DEPT. GENERAL 525.95 319252 2/12/2009 124002 KIMLEY -HORN AND ASSOCIATES INC 960.71 MEETING SERVICES 205346 3750977 01237.1705.20 CONSULTING DESIGN A -237 50TH &FRANCE RENOVATION 960.71 319253 2/1212009 115192 KNUDSON, DEBBIE 480.00 GROUP INSTRUCTION 205178 020509 5210.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES GOLF DOME PROGRAM 480.00 319254 2/12/2009 106094 KOUTSKY, DEAN 86.40 INSTRUCTION 205347' 020509 5125.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES MEDIA STUDIO 86.40 319255 2/12/2009 100845 KREMER SPRING & ALIGNMENT INC. 144.29 BUSHINGS 00001575 204882 INV0033935 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 144.29 319256 2112/2009 101935 KUSTOM SIGNALS INC. 335.95 PROLASER III REPAIRS 205069 380929 1400.6215 EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE POLICE DEPT. GENERAL 335.95 319257 2/12/2009 105531 LAW ENFORCEMENT OPPORTUNITIES 530.00 CAREER FAIR 205070 020409 1400.6104 CONFERENCES & SCHOOLS POLICE DEPT. GENERAL 530.00 319258 2/12/2009 100852 LAWSON PRODUCTS INC. 147.43 LINCH PINS, COTTER CLIPS 00001770 205128 7725082 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 246.78 FITTINGS, PRY BARS 00001772 205129 7725083 1325.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES STREET NAME SIGNS 394.21 319259 2/12/2009 101741 M. SHANKEN COMMUNICATIONS INC. 36.00 WINE SPECTATOR 205348 167140 5822.6105 DUES & SUBSCRIPTIONS 50TH ST SELLING R55CKREG LOG20000 CITY, NA Council Check Register 2/9/2009 - 2/12/2009 Check # Date Amount Supplier/ Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description 1190.6105 DUES & SUBSCRIPTIONS Business Unit ASSESSING 21 d 7:26:57 Page - 17 5862.5514 36.00 VERNON SELLING 5862.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER VERNON SELLING 319260 211212009 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER 101165 M.A.A.O. 5862.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER VERNON SELLING 5862.5515 150.00 2009 DUES 5822.5514 204934 020309 5842.5514 150.00 YORK SELLING 5842.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER YORK SELLING 319261 211212009 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX 100868 MARK VII SALES 5842.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER YORK SELLING 668.00 205016 425961 2,171.85 205017 425735 .03 205018 425734 2,982.80 205019 428075 100.00 205020 428076 595.65. 205021 427887 2,209.23 205022 428062 3,883.00 205023 428805 90.40 205024 428806 3,833.45 205254 430452 16,534.41 319262 2112/2009 103280 MARLIN COMPANY, THE 547.10 COMMUNICATIONS PROGRAM 00001801 205071 468333 547.10 319263 2112/2009 124000 MARTIN, KAYLIN 10.35 SUPPLIES REIMBURSEMENT 205308 020509 42.35 MILEAGE REIMBURSEMENT 205308 020509 52.70 319264 2/1212009 123994 MCCORKLE, BOYCE 25.42 OVERPAYMENT REFUND 205130 020409 25.42 319265 2/12/2009 101483 MENARDS 39.32 SCREWS, GYPSUM 00001764 205072 10651 65.24 SCREWS, VULKEM 00001272 205131 10429 168.25 HEATERS 00001756 205132 10383 272.81 319266 2/12/2009 100885 METRO SALES INC 116.00 COPIER SERVICE CONTRACT 00006173 205179 314867 6,242.00 COLOR COPIER 00006173 205309 49401A 6,358.00 1190.6105 DUES & SUBSCRIPTIONS Business Unit ASSESSING 21 d 7:26:57 Page - 17 5862.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER VERNON SELLING 5862.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER VERNON SELLING 5862.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER VERNON SELLING 5862.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER VERNON SELLING 5862.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX VERNON SELLING 5822.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER 50TH ST SELLING 5842.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER YORK SELLING 5842.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER YORK SELLING 5842.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX YORK SELLING 5842.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER YORK SELLING 1280.6104 CONFERENCES & SCHOOLS SUPERVISION & OVERHEAD 2210.6406 2210.6107 5900.2015 1470.6406 1646.6406 1646.6556 5410.6230 5410.6575 GENERAL SUPPLIES MILEAGE OR ALLOWANCE CUSTOMER REFUND GENERAL SUPPLIES GENERAL SUPPLIES TOOLS COMMUNICATIONS COMMUNICATIONS UTILITY BALANCE SHEET FIRE DEPT. GENERAL BUILDING MAINTENANCE BUILDING MAINTENANCE SERVICE CONTRACTS EQUIPMENT GOLF ADMINISTRATION PRINTING GOLF ADMINISTRATION R55CKREG LOG20000 CITY OF EDINA Council Check Register 2/9/2009 211212009 Check # Date Amount Supplier/ Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No 319267 2/12/2009 102507 METRO VOLLEYBALL OFFICIALS 106.00 OFFICIATING FEES 205310 3506 4077.6103 106.00 319268 2/12/2009 100886 METROPOLITAN COUNCIL 1,980.00 SAC JAN 2009 205386 020909 1,980.00 319269 2/12/2009 122304 METROPOLITAN COUNCIL 753.99 DIAL -A -RIDE DEC 2008 205349 891576 753.99 319270 2/12/2009 100887 METROPOLITAN COUNCIL ENVIRONME 344,406.11 SEWER SERVICE 205133 0000891363 344,406.11 319271 2/1212009- 102729 METROPOLITAN FORD OF EDEN PRAI 212.93 VEHICLE REPAIRS 00001579 204883 FOCS152892 212.93 319272 2/12/2009 102068 METROPOLITAN MECHANICAL CONTRA 309.38 BOILER REPAIR 205180 205045692 309.38. 319273 2/1212009 101471 MGCSA 75.00 SEMINAR REGISTRATION 205134 020408 75.00 . 319274 2/12/2009 104650 MICRO CENTER 191.69 COMPUTER PARTS 00003073 205073 2081604 191.69- RETURN 205074 2081603 255.58 COMPUTER PARTS 00003073 205075 2081435 51.04 COMPUTER SUPPLIES 00009460 205076 2070887 42.56- RETURN 205077 2070886 59.04 COMPUTER SUPPLIES 00009460 205078 2069325 138.37 COMPUTER SUPPLIES 00009460 205078 2069325 42.58 COMPUTER PARTS 00003079 205079 2099094 149.05 COMPUTER PARTS 00004468 205135 2090494 74.54 VIDEO CARDS 00004304 205383 2082872 74.54 VIDEO CARDS 00004304 205383 2082872 186.34 NETWORK CABLES 00004302 205384 2069573 1495.4307 1514.6103 5922.6302 1553.6180 5620.6180 5410.6104 1400.6160 1400.6160 1400.6160 5125.5510 5125.5510 5125.6406 5125.5510 1400.6160 1554.6406 1400.6710 5923.6406 1554.6406 Subledger Account Description PROFESSIONAL SERVICES SAC CHARGES PROFESSIONAL SERVICES SEWER SERVICE METRO CONTRACTED REPAIRS CONTRACTED REPAIRS CONFERENCES & SCHOOLS DATA PROCESSING DATA PROCESSING DATA PROCESSING COST OF GOODS SOLD COST OF GOODS SOLD GENERAL SUPPLIES COST OF GOODS SOLD DATA PROCESSING GENERAL SUPPLIES EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT GENERAL SUPPLIES GENERAL SUPPLIES 2/12/2009 7:26:57 Page - 18 Business Unit EDINA ATHLETIC ASSOCIATION INSPECTIONS DIAL -A -RIDE PROGRAM SEWER TREATMENT EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN EDINBOROUGH PARK GOLF ADMINISTRATION POLICE DEPT. GENERAL POLICE DEPT. GENERAL POLICE DEPT. GENERAL MEDIA STUDIO MEDIA STUDIO MEDIA STUDIO MEDIA STUDIO POLICE DEPT. GENERAL CENT SERV GEN - MIS POLICE DEPT. GENERAL COLLECTION SYSTEMS CENT SERV GEN - MIS 21 d 7:26:57 Page - 19 Business Unit DISTRIBUTION CITY HALL GENERAL CITY HALL GENERAL BUILDING MAINTENANCE DISTRIBUTION GRILL SKATING RINK MAINTENANCE PARK MAINTENANCE GENERAL PARK MAINTENANCE GENERAL 150.00 PERFORMANCE 2/19109 205292 020909 5610.6136 PROFESSIONAL SVC - OTHER ED ADMINISTRATION 150.00 319284 2112/2009 117246 MT GLOBAL 617.30 205255 5169 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 617.30 CITY I AA R55CKREG _JG20000 Council Check Register 2/9/2009 — 2/1212009 Check # Date Amount Supplier/ Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description 988.52 319275 211212009 116103 MID -WEST INDUSTRIAL SERVICE CO 200.00 THAW FROZEN WATER SERVICE 00001707 205181 39167 5913.6180 CONTRACTED REPAIRS 200.00 319276 2112/2009 101161 MIDWEST CHEMICAL SUPPLY 1,099.08 SUPPLIES 205350 26712 1551.6512 PAPER SUPPLIES 1,177.89 SUPPLIES 205350 26712 1551.6511 CLEANING SUPPLIES 2,276.97 - 319277 2112/2009 102582 MINN DEPT. OF LABOR & INDUSTRY 70.00 ELECTRICAL PERMIT 205137 020209 1646.6260 LICENSES & PERMITS 70.00 319278 2112/2009 103216 MINNEAPOLIS FINANCE DEPARTMENT 23,514.00 WATER PURCHASE 205311 020309 5913.6601 WATER PURCHASED 23,514.00 319279 2/12/2009 102174 MINNEAPOLIS OXYGEN COMPANY 19.81 CARBON DIOXIDE 205182 R101090127 5421.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES 19.81 319280 2112/2009 102770 MINNESOTA CASTERS INC. 208.03 WHEELS W /SPANNERS 00001268 205136 5019 1648.6530 REPAIR PARTS. 208.03 319281 2112/2009 101912 MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF AGRICU 70.00 PESTICIDE LICENSES 205312 2009 1640.6260 LICENSES & PERMITS 70.00 319282 2/12/2009 104147 MINNESOTA SOCIETY OF ARBORICUL 40.00 MEMBERSHIP RENEWAL 00001402 205138 012509 1640.6105 DUES & SUBSCRIPTIONS 40.00 319283 2112/2009 108668 MORRIS, GRAYLYN 21 d 7:26:57 Page - 19 Business Unit DISTRIBUTION CITY HALL GENERAL CITY HALL GENERAL BUILDING MAINTENANCE DISTRIBUTION GRILL SKATING RINK MAINTENANCE PARK MAINTENANCE GENERAL PARK MAINTENANCE GENERAL 150.00 PERFORMANCE 2/19109 205292 020909 5610.6136 PROFESSIONAL SVC - OTHER ED ADMINISTRATION 150.00 319284 2112/2009 117246 MT GLOBAL 617.30 205255 5169 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 617.30 R55CKREG LOG20000 CITY OF EDINA Council Check Register 2/9/2009 - 2/12/2009 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description 319285 2/1212009 100906 MTI DISTRIBUTING INC. 37,535.69 4500 -D ROTARY MOWER 00006250 205183 652012 -00 5400.1740 MACHINERY & EQUIPMENT 37,535.69 319286 2/12/2009 100076 NEW FRANCE WINE CO. 2/12 /2009 7:26:57 Page - 20 Business Unit GOLF BALANCE SHEET 896.50 205256 53455 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 733.50 205257 53453 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 407.50 205258 53454 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING 2,037.50 319287 2/12/2009 101620 NORTH SECOND STREET STEEL SUPP 187.44 STEEL 00001529 205139 145448 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 187.44 319288 2/12/2009 104232 NORTHERN SAFETY TECHNOLOGY 174.31 HALOGEN BACK -UPS, BRACKETS 00001531 205080 19881 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 551.57 LED BACK -UP LIGHTS 00001442 205081 19687 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 725.88 319289 2/12/2009 100051 NORTHWEST CHAPTER FBINAA 75.00 DUES - MIKE SIITARI 205082 020309 1400.6105 DUES & SUBSCRIPTIONS POLICE DEPT. GENERAL 75.00 319290 2/12/2009 100933 NORTHWEST GRAPHIC SUPPLY 894.33 ARTISTS OIL 00009461 205083 36894400 5120.5510 COST OF GOODS SOLD ART SUPPLY GIFT GALLERY SHOP 20.88 LIQUITEX MATTE 00009457 205084 36886701 5120.5510 ,. COST OF GOODS SOLD ART SUPPLY GIFT GALLERY SHOP 276.83 MAX OIL, D'ARCHES 00009464 205085 36916900 5120.5510 COST OF GOODS SOLD ART SUPPLY GIFT GALLERY SHOP 72.96 SIGNET BRISTLE FILBERT 00009462 205086 36896801 5120.5510 COST OF GOODS SOLD ART SUPPLY GIFT GALLERY SHOP 86.28 PERMALBA OIL 00009461 205087 36894401 5120:5510 COST OF GOODS SOLD ART SUPPLY GIFT GALLERY SHOP 226.92 CANVAS, PENCILS, LTX TUBES 00009467 205088 36936000 5120.5510 COST OF GOODS SOLD ART SUPPLY GIFT GALLERY SHOP 1,578.20 319291 2/12/2009 100936 OLSEN COMPANIES 98.13 GLOVES, WRENCH 00001395 205140 537281 1646.6556 TOOLS BUILDING MAINTENANCE 96.67 SHACKLES 00001398 205313 537558 1644.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES TREES & MAINTENANCE 194.80 319292 2/12/2009 101104 OLSEN FIRE PROTECTION INC. 249.00 REPLACE SPRINKLER HEAD 00007073 205184 49374 1621.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES ATHLETIC ACTIVITIES 249.00 R55CKREG LOG20000 CITY. NA Council Check Register 2/9/2009 -- 2/12/2009 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description 319293 2/1212009 101659 ORKIN PEST CONTROL 107.24 PEST CONTROL 205090 43561830 1551.6180 CONTRACTED REPAIRS 107.24 319294 2/12/2009 101470 ORVIS, JOAN 67.31 NAME BADGE HOLDERS 205141 020509 5510.6513 OFFICE SUPPLIES 67.31 319295 2/12/2009 104916 PAINTERS GEAR INC. 92.64 VALVE KIT 00001776 204884 7656 1335.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES 92.64 319296 2/12/2009 101718 PARTS PLUS 2,409.75 AUTO PARTS 205142 013109 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS 2,409.75 319297 2/12/2009 100347 PAUSTIS & SONS 2,814.50 205259 8212418 -IN 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 2,827.31 205260 8212413 -IN 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 834.15 205261 8212415 -IN 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 6,475.96 319298 2/12/2009 102963 PELUF, JIM 109.99 UNIFORM PURCHASE 204935 020209 1301.6201 LAUNDRY 109.99 319299 2/12/2009 100945 PEPSI -COLA COMPANY 465.56 205091 47013362 5630.5510 COST OF GOODS SOLD 465.56 319300 211212009 100950 PETTY CASH 1.95 205151 020509 1001.8060 CASH OVER AND UNDER 6.41 205151 020509 1301.6610 SAFETY EQUIPMENT 6.94 205151 020509 1627.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES 24.75 205151 020509 2210.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES 28.00 205151 020509 1600.6107 MILEAGE OR ALLOWANCE 30.00 205151 020509 1550.6121 ADVERTISING PERSONNEL 30.16 205151 020509 5923.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES 39.75 205151 020509 5840.6107 MILEAGE OR ALLOWANCE 40.00 205151 020509 1513.6218 EDUCATION PROGRAMS 48.01 205151 020509 1190.6106 MEETING EXPENSE 48.53 205151 020509 1265.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES 2 d 7:26:57 Page- 21 Business Unit CITY HALL GENERAL ARENA ADMINISTRATION PAVEMENT MARKINGS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN VERNON SELLING YORK SELLING 50TH ST SELLING GENERAL MAINTENANCE CENTENNIAL LAKES GENERAL FUND REVENUES GENERAL MAINTENANCE SPECIAL ACTIVITIES COMMUNICATIONS PARK ADMIN. GENERAL CENTRAL SERVICES GENERAL COLLECTION SYSTEMS LIQUOR YORK GENERAL EMPLOYEE PROGRAMS ASSESSING TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION CITY OF EDINA 2/12/2009 7:26:57 R55CKREG LOG20000 Council Check Register Page - 22 2/912009 - 2/12/2009 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit 52.78 205151 020509 2210.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES COMMUNICATIONS 60.40 205151 020509 5860.6107 MILEAGE OR ALLOWANCE VERNON LIQUOR GENERAL 60.45 205151 • 020509 2210.6107 MILEAGE OR ALLOWANCE COMMUNICATIONS 72.17- 205151 020509 1120.6104 CONFERENCES & SCHOOLS ADMINISTRATION 83.96 205151 020509 1140.6106 MEETING EXPENSE PLANNING '. 140.62 205151 020509 1260.6107 MILEAGE OR ALLOWANCE ENGINEERING GENERAL 774.88 319301 2/12/2009 103512 PETTY CASH 18.00 PETTY CASH - CHECKBOOK 205387 020909 1400.6105 DUES & SUBSCRIPTIONS POLICE DEPT. GENERAL 25:00 PETTY CASH - CHECKBOOK 205387 020909 1400.6104 CONFERENCES & SCHOOLS POLICE DEPT. GENERAL 27.99 PETTY CASH - CHECKBOOK 205387 020909 1400.6203 UNIFORM ALLOWANCE POLICE DEPT. GENERAL 73.97 PETTY CASH - CHECKBOOK 205387 020909 1400.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES POLICE DEPT. GENERAL 137.00 PETTY CASH - CHECKBOOK 205387 020909 1400.6106 MEETING EXPENSE POLICE DEPT. GENERAL 503.47 PETTY CASH - CHECKBOOK 205387 020909 1400.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES POLICE DEPT. GENERAL 785.43 319302 2/1212009 100274 PGI COMPANIES INC 867.98 DRIVER INSPSECTION FORMS 00001568 205185 13149 1553.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 867.98 319303 2/12/2009 100743 PHILLIPS WINE & SPIRITS 49.12 205262 2714324 5842.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX YORK SELLING 1,106.35 205263 2714326 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING. 2,343.61 205264 2714323 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 2,145.27 205265 2714325 5842.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR YORK SELLING 506.42 205266 2712257 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 1,318.70 205267 2714330 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 957.36 205268 2714332 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 2,381.49 205269 2714328 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 49.12 205270 2714329 5862.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX VERNON SELLING 2,092.80 205271 2714331 5862.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR VERNON SELLING 58.92- 205272 3403064 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 12,891.32 319304 2112/2009 101110 POLLY NORMAN PHOTOGRAPHY 60.00 ABOUT TOWN PHOTOS 205314 020309 2210.6123 MAGAZINEINEWSLETTER EXPENSE COMMUNICATIONS 60.00 319305 2/12/2009 119620 POMP'S TIRE SERVICE INC. 387.71 TIRE REPAIRS 00001789 204885 498402 1553.6583 TIRES & TUBES EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 1,001.43 TIRES 00001495 204886 506127 1553.6583 TIRES & TUBES EQUIPMENT OPEWW-"N.GEN CITY NA 2 3 7:26:57 R55CKRE6 G20000 Council Check Register Page - 23 2/9/2009 - 2/12/2009 Check # Date Amount Supplier/ Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit 1,337.01 TIRES 00001676 205092 50829 1553.6583 TIRES & TUBES EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 2,726.15 319306 2/1212009 100961 POSTMASTER - USPS 180.00 PRESORT PERMIT PI 3932 205143 020209 1550.6235 POSTAGE CENTRAL SERVICES GENERAL 180.00 319307 2/12/2009 100961 POSTMASTER - USPS 168.00 STAMPS 205315 FEB42009 5110.6235 POSTAGE ART CENTER ADMINISTRATION 168.00 319308 2/1212009 100961 POSTMASTER - USPS 2,400.00 MAILING 205316 020909 5110.6235 POSTAGE ART CENTER ADMINISTRATION 2,400.00 319309 211212009 116396 PRAXAIR DISTRIBUTION INC 19.56 CO2 TANKS 205186 32170135 7413.6545 CHEMICALS PSTF FIRE TOWER 19.56 319310 211212009 100966 PRINTERS SERVICE INC 631.35 BLADE SHARPENING 00008013 205187 239586 5521.6215 EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE ARENA ICE MAINT 631.35 319311 2/1212009 100968 PRIOR WINE COMPANY 295.85 205025 180968 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING 2,263.30 205273 179825 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING ° 219.85 205274 180974 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 861.15 205275 180964 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 3,640.15 319312 2112/2009 106322 PROSOURCE SUPPLY 506.75 CUPS, ROLL TOWELS, TISSUE 00002339 205093 4392 5630.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES CENTENNIAL LAKES 1,719.73 ROLL TOWEL, LINERS, KLEENEX 00002115 205188 4394 5620.6511 CLEANING SUPPLIES EDINBOROUGH PARK 2,226.48 319313 2112/2009 100971 QUALITY WINE 195.20 205026 117002 -00 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING 997.30 205027 116464 -00 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING 458.49 205028 117059 -00 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING 123.20 205029 117241 -00 5822.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR 50TH ST SELLING 720.02 205030 116063 -00 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 3,717.13 205031 117239 -00 5842.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR YORK SELLING CITY OF EDINA 2/12/2009 7:26:57 R55CKREG LOG20000 Council Check Register Page- 24 2/9/2009 - 2/12/2009 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit 1,591.70 205276 117296-00 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 3,066.38 205277 117058 -00 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 1,484.60 205278 117240 -00 5862.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR VERNON SELLING 1,370.50 205279 116463 -00 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 2,457.05 205280 117057 -00 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 16,181.57 319314 2/1212009 123898 QWEST 55.27 204936 012809 5911.6188 TELEPHONE WELL PUMPS 57.96 204936 012809 1628.6188 TELEPHONE SENIOR CITIZENS ' 83.27 204936 012809 5861.6188 TELEPHONE VERNON OCCUPANCY 96.65 204936 012809 5821.6188 TELEPHONE 50TH ST OCCUPANCY 102.00 204936 012809 5841.6188 TELEPHONE YORK OCCUPANCY 115.09 204936 012809 1470.6188 TELEPHONE FIRE DEPT. GENERAL 161.64 204936 012809 5610.6188 TELEPHONE ED ADMINISTRATION 164.17 204936 012809 1622.6188 TELEPHONE SKATING & HOCKEY 232.74 204936 012809 1646.6188 TELEPHONE BUILDING MAINTENANCE 264.33 204936 012809 5932.6188 TELEPHONE GENERAL STORM SEWER 291.63 204936 012809 5511.6188 TELEPHONE ARENA BLDG /GROUNDS 2,085.85 204936 012809 1550.6188 TELEPHONE CENTRAL SERVICES GENERAL 770.40 612 E01 -0426 205365 0426 -2/09 1550.6188 TELEPHONE CENTRAL SERVICES GENERAL 280.94 612 E24 -8656 205366 8656 -2/09 1628.6188 TELEPHONE SENIOR CITIZENS 500.18 612 E24 -8657 205367 8657 -2/09 5420.6188 TELEPHONE CLUB HOUSE 499.65 612 E01 -8392 205368 8392 -2/09 1550.6188 TELEPHONE CENTRAL SERVICES GENERAL 86.48 952 926 -0419 205369 0419 -2109 1646.6188 TELEPHONE BUILDING MAINTENANCE 17.76 651 281 -1355 B001311 205370 1355 -2/09 1400.6188 TELEPHONE POLICE DEPT. GENERAL 51.64 952 926 -0092 205371 0092 -2/09 5913.6168 TELEPHONE DISTRIBUTION 1,312.46 612 E12 -6797 205372 6797 -2/09 1550.6188 TELEPHONE CENTRAL SERVICES GENERAL 7,230.11 319315 2112/2009 117692 R & B CLEANING INC. 1,001.10 RAMP STAIRWELL CLEANING 00001799 205094 483 4090.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES STREET REVOLVING 1,001.10 319316 2/12/2009 100972 R &R SPECIALTIES OF WISCONSIN I 942.84 REPLACE ZAMBONI TIRES 00008002 204887 0042099 -IN 5521.6180 CONTRACTED REPAIRS ARENA ICE MAINT 687.68 ZAMBONI REPAIRS 00008006 204888 0042098 -IN. 5521.6180 CONTRACTED REPAIRS ARENA ICE MAINT 1,630.52 319317 2/1212009 105324 READY WATT ELECTRIC 565.00 WALKWAY LIGHT REPAIRS 00002337 205095 94163 5630.6180 CONTRACTED REPAIRS CENTENNIAL LAKES 565.00 R55CKREG OG20000 CITY %. AA Council Check Register 2/9/2009 - 2112/2009 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description 319318 211212009 104643 RECREATION SUPPLY COMPANY 1,547.65 POOL BENCHES 205189 171245 5620.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES 1,547.65 319319 2/12/2009 100977 RICHFIELD PLUMBING COMPANY 253.90 INSTALLED CAST IRON PIPE 205096 51672 1551.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES 253.90 319320 2112/2009 118658 RIGHTWAY GLASS INC. 242.68 WINDSHIELD REPAIRS 00001578 204889 53769 1553.6180 CONTRACTED REPAIRS 225.73 WINDSHIELD REPAIRS 00001580 204890 53767 1553.6180 CONTRACTED REPAIRS 224.80 WINDSHIELD REPAIRS 00001582 204891 54071 1553.6180 CONTRACTED REPAIRS 225.73 WINDSHIELD REPAIRS 00001573 204892 54050 1553.6180 CONTRACTED REPAIRS 918.94 319321 2112/2009 102408 RIGID HITCH INCORPORATED 48.95 TUBE INSERT, RECEIVER TUBE 00001527 205097 1008329 -01 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS 36.15 HITCH PINS, CLIPS 00001788 205190 1009163 -01 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS 85.10 319322 2/12/2009 117073 RINEHART, THOMAS 15.00 APPRENTICE REGISTRATION 205144 020309 1281.6104 CONFERENCES & SCHOOLS 30.00 POWER LIMITED LICENSE 205144 020309 1281.6104 CONFERENCES & SCHOOLS 45.00 319323 2/12/2009 100980 ROBERT B. HILL CO. 605.99 SOFTENER SALT 00008007 205191 00217450 5511.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES 605.99 319324 2112/2069 118779 ROGGEMAN, ERIC 41.22 SHIPPING CHARGES 205317 020609 1550.6235 POSTAGE 195.00 MNCPA DUES 205317 020609 1160.6105 DUES & SUBSCRIPTIONS 236.22 319325 211212009 101311 ROOT -O-MATIC SEWER SERVICE 410.00 SEWER LINE CLEANING 00001404 205145 29559 1646.6180 CONTRACTED REPAIRS 330.00 SEWER LINE CLEANING 00001405 205146 29576 1646.6180 CONTRACTED REPAIRS 740.00 319326 2/1212009 106988 SAFETY KLEEN 112.26 RECYCLE PARTS WASHER 00001797 205098 MB02535161 1552.6180 CONTRACTED REPAIRS 2! J 7:26:57 Page- 25 Business Unit EDINBOROUGH PARK CITY HALL GENERAL EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN TRAINING TRAINING ARENA BLDG /GROUNDS CENTRAL SERVICES GENERAL FINANCE BUILDING MAINTENANCE BUILDING MAINTENANCE CENT SVC PW BUILDING CITY OF EDINA 2112/2009 7:26:57 R55CKREG LOG20000 Council Check Register Page - 26 2/9/2009 - 2/12/2009 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit 112.26 319327 2/12/2009 105442 SCHERER BROS. LUMBER CO. 90.18 LUMBER, PLYWOOD 00001390 205147 40723562 1646.6577 LUMBER BUILDING MAINTENANCE 90.18 319328 211212009 104151 SCHINDLER ELEVATOR CORP. 661.71 MAINTENANCE CONTRACT 00001781 204893 8102276504 1375.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES PARKING RAMP 661.71 319329 2/12/2009 112875 SECOND FOUNDATION SCHOOL 285.00 FACE PAINTING TROUPE OUTREAC90009455 205099 147 -B 5110.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES ART CENTER ADMINISTRATION 285.00 319330 2/12/2009 120784 SIGN PRO 325.89 PROP FOR COMMERCIAL 205318 3013 2210.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES COMMUNICATIONS 325.89 319331 2/12/2009 105739 SNAZA, DAVID 90.65 UNIFORM PURCHASE 205374 020909 1301.6201 LAUNDRY GENERAL MAINTENANCE 90.65 319332 2/1212009 101021 SPEEDWAY SUPERAMERICA LLC 151.74 PROPANE 00001779 204937 012509 1301.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES GENERAL MAINTENANCE 151.74 319333 2/1212009 103277 ST. JOSEPH EQUIPMENT CO INC 189.44 OIL FILTERS, KEYS 00001674 204894 5169740 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 106.95 MIRROR 00001674 204895 VI19324 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 296.39 319334 2/1212009 121357 STARK, KRISTI 75.00 WEBSITE GRAPHIC 204938 012809 2210.6124 WEB DEVELOPMENT COMMUNICATIONS 75.00 319335 2/12/2009 122290 STRATUS TECHNOLOGIES IRELAND L 6,180.00 SERVICE CONTRACT FOR SERVERS 205100 SVC117122 1400.6230 SERVICE CONTRACTS EQUIPMENT POLICE DEPT. GENERAL 6,180.00 319336 2/12/2009 101017 SUBURBAN CHEVROLET 1,870.12 VEHICLE REPAIRS 00001576 204896 CTCB550287 1553.6180 CONTRACTED REPAIRS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 34.26 HANDLE 00001530 204897 154807CVW 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN R55CKREG �JG20000 CITY �. Council Ch 2/9/2009 Check # Date Amount Supplier/ Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No 322.07 HUB 00001675 204898 153981CVW 4,379.29 VEHICLE REPAIRS 00001566 205101 CVCB549836 AA eck Register -2/12/2009 Account No Subledger Account Description 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS 1553.6180 CONTRACTED REPAIRS 1265.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES 21 j 7:26:57 Page - 27 Business Unit EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION 5440.5511 6,605.74 PRO SHOP RETAIL SALES 5440.5511 COST OF GOODS - PRO SHOP 319337 211212009 5440.5511 121065 SULLIVAN, JACK PRO SHOP RETAIL SALES 5440.5511 COST OF GOODS - PRO SHOP 122.27 BINDERS/TABS - STUDY REPORT 205319 020609 5440.5511 122.27 PRO SHOP RETAIL SALES 5862.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER 319338 2/12/2009 102140 SUN MOUNTAIN SPORTS INC. 81.18 MERCHANDISE 205192 306084 123.36 MERCHANDISE 205193 306154 104.05- REBATE 205194 888538 132.58 MERCHANDISE 205351 297728 519.46 SPEED CARTS 205352 302754 97.33 MERCHANDISE 205353 302979 849.86 319339 2112/2009 120998 SURLY BREWING CO. 681.00 205032 JM7032 681.00 319340 2/12/2009 102063 SWENSON, THOMAS 62.95 TURFGRASS DISEASES REFERENCE 205195 020509 62.95 319341 2/12/2009 120595 T- MOBILE 41.63 SURVEYING PHONE 205320 012709 41.63 319342 2/1212009 118133 TCIC INC. 1,029.57 SERVICE AGREEMENT FOR SCADA00001347 204939 00082250 2,745.50 SERVICE AGREEMENT FOR SCADA00001347 204939 00082250 3,088.70 SERVICE AGREEMENT FOR SCADA00001347 204939 00082250 6,863.77 319343 2/12/2009 123993 THERMAL TECHNOLOGIES INC. 439.50 BOILER REPAIR 205102 516856 439.50 319344 2/12/2009 101035 THORPE DISTRIBUTING COMPANY 65.55 205033 527255 5,064.00 205034 527254 AA eck Register -2/12/2009 Account No Subledger Account Description 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS 1553.6180 CONTRACTED REPAIRS 1265.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES 21 j 7:26:57 Page - 27 Business Unit EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION 5440.5511 COST OF GOODS - PRO SHOP PRO SHOP RETAIL SALES 5440.5511 COST OF GOODS - PRO SHOP PRO SHOP RETAIL SALES 5440.5511 COST OF GOODS - PRO SHOP PRO SHOP RETAIL SALES 5440.5511 COST OF GOODS - PRO SHOP PRO SHOP RETAIL SALES 5440.5511 COST OF GOODS - PRO SHOP PRO SHOP RETAIL SALES' 5440.5511 COST OF GOODS - PRO SHOP PRO SHOP RETAIL SALES 5862.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER VERNON SELLING 5431.6406 1260.6188 5932.6103 5913.6103 5923.6136 1551.6180 5862.5515 5862.5514 GENERAL SUPPLIES TELEPHONE RICHARDS GC MAINTENANCE ENGINEERING GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES GENERAL STORM SEWER PROFESSIONAL SERVICES DISTRIBUTION PROFESSIONAL SVC - OTHER COLLECTION SYSTEMS CONTRACTED REPAIRS CITY HALL GENERAL COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX VERNON SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER VERNON SELLING R55CKREG LOG20000 CITY OF EDINA 2112/2009 7:26:57 Council Check Register Page - 28 219/2009 -- 2/12/2009 Check # Date Amount Supplier/ Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit 4.00 205103 527084 5421.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER GRILL 5,133.55 319345 2/12/2009 120700 TIGER OAK PUBLICATIONS INC. 500.00 MAGAZINE ADVERTISING 204899 2009 -27388 5822.6122 ADVERTISING OTHER 50TH ST SELLING 500.00 MAGAZINE ADVERTISING 204899 2009 -27388 5842.6122 ADVERTISING OTHER YORK SELLING 500.00 MAGAZINE ADVERTISING 204899 2009 -27388 5862.6122 ADVERTISING OTHER VERNON SELLING 175.00 MAGAZINE ADVERTISING 204900 2009 -27400 5822.6122 ADVERTISING OTHER 50TH ST SELLING 175.00 MAGAZINE ADVERTISING 204900 2009 -27400 5842.6122 ADVERTISING OTHER YORK SELLING 175.00 MAGAZINE ADVERTISING 204900 2009 -27400 5862.6122 ADVERTISING OTHER VERNON SELLING 175.00 MAGAZINE ADVERTISING 204901 2009 -27411 5822.6122 ADVERTISING OTHER 50TH ST SELLING 175.00 MAGAZINE ADVERTISING 204901 2009 -27411 5842.6122 ADVERTISING OTHER YORK SELLING 175.00 MAGAZINE ADVERTISING 204901 2009 -27411 5862.6122 ADVERTISING OTHER VERNON SELLING 2,550.00 319346 2/12/2009 101474' TITLEIST 372.42 GOLF BALLS 205354 0149988 5440.5511 COST OF GOODS - PRO SHOP PRO SHOP RETAIL SALES 147.54 BAGS 205355 0185997 5440.5511 COST OF GOODS - PRO SHOP PRO SHOP RETAIL SALES 80.50 MERCHANDISE 205356 0241739 5440.5511 COST OF GOODS - PRO SHOP PRO SHOP RETAIL SALES 202.49 MERCHANDISE 205357 0243108 5440.5511 COST OF GOODS - PRO SHOP PRO SHOP RETAIL SALES 155.11 MERCHANDISE 205358 0249499 5440.5511 COST OF GOODS - PRO SHOP PRO SHOP RETAIL SALES 282.24 GOLF BALLS 205359 0189855 5440.5511 COST OF GOODS - PRO SHOP PRO SHOP RETAIL SALES 484.00- CREDIT 205360 6403569 5440.5511 COST OF GOODS - PRO SHOP PRO SHOP RETAIL SALES 756.30 319347 2/12/2009 101038 TOLL GAS & WELDING SUPPLY 46.35 WELDING GAS 00001811 205196 465036 1553.6580 WELDING SUPPLIES EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 46.35 319348 2112/2009 104064 TRANS UNION LLC 12.30 BACKGROUND LEAKS 205197 01926746 1400.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES POLICE DEPT. GENERAL 12.30 319349 2/12/2009 122221 UNITED RENTALS NORTHWEST INC. 595.32 DRILL, TORCH 00001766 205198 79317780 -001 1301.6556 TOOLS GENERAL MAINTENANCE 595.32 - 319350 2/1212009 105911 UPPER MIDWEST COMMUNITY POLICI - 330.00 INVESTIGATIONS TRAINING 205104 975 1400.6104 CONFERENCES & SCHOOLS POLICE DEPT. GENERAL 330.00 319351 2/12/2009 101908 US FOODSERVICE INC R55CKREG LOG20000 CITY, NA Council Check Register 2/9/2009 - 2/12/2009 Check # Date Amount Supplier/ Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description 166.37 CUST 114300 205199 013109 5421.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES 489.49 CUST 114300 205199 013109 5421.5510 COST OF GOODS SOLD FIRST AID SUPPLIES CUSTOMER REFUND GENERAL SUPPLIES GENERAL SUPPLIES 2 9 7:26:57 Page - 29 Business Unit GRILL GRILL FIRE DEPT. GENERAL UTILITY BALANCE SHEET BUILDING MAINTENANCE PSTF OCCUPANCY CONFERENCES 8 SCHOOLS FIRE DEPT. GENERAL CONTRACTED REPAIRS PROFESSIONAL SERVICES PROFESSIONAL SERVICES CONTRACTED REPAIRS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 50TH STREET RUBBISH 50TH STREET RUBBISH ARENA BLDG /GROUNDS COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 655.86 YORK SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 319352 2/12/2009 122554 VALLEY NATIONAL GASES LLC 25.56 OXYGEN FOR TRAINING 00003649 205361 322498 1470.6510 25.56 319353 2112/2009 113950 VICTORSEN, JON 48.27 OVERPAYMENT REFUND 205200 020409 5900.2015 48.27 319354 211212009 101069 VOSS LIGHTING 123.54 LIGHTING 00001742 204902 15121272 -00 1646.6406 115.41 LIGHTING 00001763 204903 15121657 -00 7411.6406 238.95 319355 2/12/2009 120720 WAKEFIELD, TODD 89.68 TRAINING EXPENSE 205362 020509 1470.6104 89.68 319356 2/1212009 106699 WALSER CHRYSLER JEEP 185.63 VEHICLE REPAIRS 00001577 204940 CHCS310603 1553.6180 185.63 319357 2/12/2009 103466 WASTE MANAGEMENT - SAVAGE MN 99.49 REFUSE 205363 4864705 4095.6103 1,537.85 REFUSE 205364 4865827 4095.6103 1,637.34 319358 2/1212009 103196 WHEELER HARDWARE CO 799.14 DOOR REPAIRS 00008009 204904 060471 5511.6180 799.14 319359 2/12/2009 101033 WINE COMPANY, THE 1,531.65 205281 211348 -00 5862.5513 744.50 205282 211227 -00 5842.5513 839.95 205283 211226 -00 5822.5513 3,116.10 319360 2/12/2009 101312 WINE MERCHANTS 2,795.36 205284 262299 5842.5513 FIRST AID SUPPLIES CUSTOMER REFUND GENERAL SUPPLIES GENERAL SUPPLIES 2 9 7:26:57 Page - 29 Business Unit GRILL GRILL FIRE DEPT. GENERAL UTILITY BALANCE SHEET BUILDING MAINTENANCE PSTF OCCUPANCY CONFERENCES 8 SCHOOLS FIRE DEPT. GENERAL CONTRACTED REPAIRS PROFESSIONAL SERVICES PROFESSIONAL SERVICES CONTRACTED REPAIRS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 50TH STREET RUBBISH 50TH STREET RUBBISH ARENA BLDG /GROUNDS COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING R55CKREG LOG20000 Check # Date. Amount - Supplier/ Explanation 113.12 1,087.50 3,995.98 CITY OF EDINA Council Check Register 2/9/2009 -- 2/12/2009 PO # Doc No Inv No . Account No 205285 262298 5842.5513 205286 262300 5862.5513 319361 2112/2009 101086 WORLD CLASS WINES INC 891.70 1,293.60 1,297.37 3,482.67 319362 2/12/2009 249.03 254.88 111.57 111.17 124.67 994.09 1,348.75 1,946.81 26,894.16 237.40 5,580.30 1,216.53 3,412.94 2,038.88 7,173.84- 17,088.47 4,386.08 3,481.69 62,303.58 101726 XCEL ENERGY 51- 8987646 -8 514827232 -6 51- 5938955 -6 51- 4156445 -0 51- 5634814 -2 51- 6979948 -4 51- 69799484 51- 69799484 514888627 -1 51- 6137136 -8 514966303 -6 51- 5847121 -5 51- 6621207 -1 514159265-8 514888627 -1 51- 5605640 -1 51- 6824328 -7 51- 6121102 -5 205287 224195 205288 224191 205289 224193 204905 183293438 204906 183129731 204907 183232816 204908 183198324 204909 183233264 204910 183602567 204910 183602567 204910 183602567 204911 183718088 204912 183739395 204913 183215045 205105 183748871 205106 183747201 205201 183026869 205375 183794793 205376 184047338 205377 184239068 205378 183953600 319363 2/12/2009 100568 XEROX CORPORATION 144.73 JAN USAGE - PARK & REC 00004322 204914 038314031 106.80 JANUARY USAGE 205107 038314240 251.53 319364 2112/2009 102500 ZIMMERMAN, TIM 80.00 SAFETY SHOES 205108 - 020409 80.00 1,100,750.95 Grand Total 5822.5513 5842.5513 5862.5513 1321.6185 5311.6185 4086.6185 5932.6185 5933.6185 5821.6185 5861.6185 5841.6185 5511.6185 5430.6185 1330.6185 5914.6185 5913.6185 7411.6185 5511.6185 5913.6185 5420.6185 1646.6185 1550.6151 5110.6151 1646.6201 Subledger Account Description COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE Payment Instrument Totals COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE LIGHT & POWER LIGHT & POWER LIGHT & POWER LIGHT & POWER LIGHT & POWER LIGHT & POWER LIGHT & POWER LIGHT& POWER LIGHT & POWER LIGHT & POWER LIGHT & POWER LIGHT & POWER LIGHT & POWER LIGHT & POWER LIGHT & POWER LIGHT & POWER LIGHT & POWER LIGHT & POWER EQUIPMENT RENTAL EQUIPMENT RENTAL LAUNDRY 2112/2009 7:26:57 Page - 30 Business Unit YORK SELLING VERNON SELLING 50TH ST SELLING YORK SELLING VERNON SELLING STREET LIGHTING REGULAR POOL OPERATION AQUATIC WEEDS GENERAL STORM SEWER PONDS & LAKES 50TH ST OCCUPANCY VERNON OCCUPANCY YORK OCCUPANCY ARENA BLDG /GROUNDS RICHARDS GOLF COURSE TRAFFIC SIGNALS TANKS TOWERS & RESERVOIR DISTRIBUTION PSTF OCCUPANCY ARENA BLDG /GROUNDS DISTRIBUTION CLUB HOUSE BUILDING MAINTENANCE CENTRAL SERVICES GENERAL ART CENTER ADMINISTRATION BUILDING MAINTENANCE R55CKREL-. XG20000 Check # Date Amount Supplier/ Explanation PC CM JINA Council Check Register 2/912009 — 2112/2009 Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Check Total 1,100,750.95 Total Payments 1,100,750.95 Business Unit J9 7:26:57 Page - 31 R55CKSUM LOG20000 CITY OF EDINA 2/12/2009 7:28:43 Council Check Summary Page - 1 219/2009 2/12/2009 Company Amount 01000 GENERAL FUND 290,081.59 02200 COMMUNICATIONS FUND 3,615.34 04000 WORKING CAPITAL FUND 16,706.99 05100 ART CENTER FUND 5,841.84 05200 GOLF DOME FUND 1,666.05 05300 AQUATIC CENTER FUND 254.88 05400 GOLF COURSE FUND 56,908.22 05500 ICE ARENA FUND 27,401.76 05600 EDINBOROUGH/CENT LAKES FUND 8,523.97 05800 LIQUOR FUND 230,451.60 05900 UTILITY FUND 447,442.50 05930 STORM SEWER FUND 2,684.20 07400 PSTF AGENCY FUND 9,172.01 Report Totals 1,100,750.95 We confirm to the best of our knowledge and belief, that these claims comply In all material respects with the requirements of the City of Edina purchasing poll ies and procedures �' g- a CITY OF EDINA CITY COUNCIL CREDIT CARD PAYMENT REGISTER 12/27/08 -1/26/09 Card Holder Aerchanl Account Name Trans Date Amount Purchase Discription Merchant Name Merchant City State Code JOHN KEPRIOS 2008/12/31 $75.00 MEMBERSHIP NCTRC 845 - 6391439 NY 5610.6105 JOHN KEPRIOS 2009/01/05 $100.00 POSTAGE PITNEYBOWES POSTAGE 800 -468 -8454 CT 5610.6235 JOHN KEPRIOS 2009/01/09 $29.36 EQUIPMENT RENTAL PITNEY BOWES RENTAL 800 - 228 -1071 CT 5610.6235 JOHN KEPRIOS 2009/01/14 $24.24 ADAPTIVE REC SUPPLIES TARGET 00002600 ST. LOUIS PAR MN 1629.6406 JOHN KEPRIOS 2009/01/16 $230.00 ADAPTIVE REC PROGRAM MN ORCHESTRA 612- 3715656 MN 1629.6406 JOHN KEPRIOS 2009/01/20 $100.00 POSTAGE PITNEYBOWES POSTAGE 800 -468 -8454 CT . 5610.6235 JOHN KEPRIOS 2009/01/21 $880.69 REPLACEMENT PART CUTTING EDGE CREA00 OF 651- 2098600 MN 5620.6180 JOHN KEPRIOS 2009/01/22 $182.50 ADAPTIVE REC PROGRAM BLOOMINGTON CIVIC THEA 952 - 5638574 MN 1629.6406 DEB MANGEN 2009/01/23 $400.00 CONFERENCE GOVTTRNGSVC 651 - 222 -7409 MN 1180.6104 MIKE SIITARI 2009/01/13 $25.61 MEMORY CARD MICRO CENTER #045 RETAI ST LOUIS PARK MN 1400.6160 MIKE SIITARI 2009/01/14 $122.94 SIGHT TOOL GLOCK INC 770 - 319 -4794 GA 1400.6104 MIKE SIITARI 2009/01/16 $10.69 TASK FORCE SUPPLIES TARGET 00023135 EDINA MN 1400.6406 MIKE SIITARI 2009/01/21 $75.88 OFFICE SUPPLIES BACHMAN'S INC #0002 877 - 222 -4626 MN 1400.6406 MIKE SIITARI 2009/01/23 $18.59 PHONE TARGET 00000059 BLOOMINGTON MN 1400.6406 JOHN WALLIN 2009/01/03 $106.88 COMPUTER SOFTWARE DRI *ACRONIS, INC. WWW.MYORD., MN 1554.6406 JOHN WALLIN 2009/01/06 $162.83 COUNCIL WORKSHOP PANERA BREAD #1307 SAINT LOUIS P MN 1100.6106 JOHN WALLIN 2009/01/16 $73.20 ADMIN MEETING DAVANNI'S #15 EDINA MN 1120.6106 $2,618.41 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 poliCieq and procedures ig r To: Mayor & City Council From: Debra Mangen City Clerk Date: February 17, 2009 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 L I . U Discussion 11 Info /Background: Attached are copies of a -mails and letters received since the last Council meeting. MESSERLI & KRAMER RECEIVED February 12, 2009 FEB 13 2009 Messerli & Kramer P.A. ATTORNEYS AT LAW 1800 Fifth Street Towers 150 South Fifth Street Minneapolis, Minnesota 55402 -4218 main 612.672.3600 fax 612.672.3777 www.messerlikramer.com Additional offices in: St. Paul & Plymouth, MN Authorized to practice law in: Minnesota, Colorado, District of Columbia, Illinois, Missouri, Montana, New York, South Dakota and Wisconsin Edina City Council Writer's contact; Edina City Hall (612) 672 -3698 4801 West 50th Street jiawver@messerlikramer.com Edina, MN 55424 Re: Appeal of Variance Denial, 6120 Brookview Avenue Custom Homes Dear Mayor Hoveland and Council Members: My wife and I live have resided at 6121 Brookview Avenue for 30 years and submit this letter memorandum in opposition to JMS Custom Homes, LLC ( "JMS ") appeal from the denial of its application for variance at 6120 Brookview Avenue. Furthermore, we join in'the arguments presented to the City Planner's office and counsel for the Whitbecks. FACTUAL BACKGROUND In March, 2008 Bravura Construction purchased the property at 6120 from Grace Anderson and immediately applied to have the property subdivided. The neighbors appeared in mass and objected. In order to subdivide the split of the property would result in making the properties non - conforming to the area requirements under the city ordinances. After hearing arguments from the neighbors, it was obvious to all that the Planning Commission was prepared to deny the request to subdivide. The Commission focused on the "self- created hardship" and the neighbors' strong appeals to save the centuries old oak tree on the property. Bravura Construction withdrew its application and cancelled the purchase agreement to the property. A representative of JMS was present at the hearing. JMS subsequently purchased the property from Grace Anderson for $30,000 less than had been offered by Bravura Construction. JMS spoke to many of the neighbors and in particular the property owners of the .adjacent properties... Offers to buy the consent to the subdivision of the property to allow the construction of two homes were rebuffed and it was made very clear to JMS that any efforts to subdivide the property would meet strong neighborhood resistance. JMS subsequently submitted plans to the city planner indicating an intention to build one home on the property. However, JMS it MS I xeEMMK WO UKUW i Edina City Council February 12, 2009 Page 2 embarked upon an ill conceived plan to subdivide the property without submitting a formal application for subdivision thereby denying comment from the neighborhood. In late fall 2008 the existing home was sold and moved. Shortly thereafter JMS applied for a building permit for two homes with the Hennepin County Building Inspections Department. The Edina City Planner's office was notified of this improper attempt to subdivide the property. Hennepin County was advised of the City's objection to the issuance of the building permit and the County subsequently denied JMS' application. JMS then submitted plans for the construction of a single home on Lot 6 of the parcel legally described as Lots 5 and 6, Block 23 Fairfax. JMS immediately chopped down the centuries old oak tree and obtained a building permit on December 5, 2008. The plans submitted to the City Planner's office included a certification from Jonathan M.- Pittman that the proposed plan was in compliance with Edina City Code regarding the - front setback requirements. In a self - serving affidavit submitted by Jonathan M. Pittman, he acknowledges he was confused in determining the proper setback provisions. Rather than determining the arithmetic average of the block, Mr. Pittman determined the "average" by connecting the line between the first structure on the block and the last structure on the block. In doing so, he completely ignored the setbacks of all other properties on the block. The negligent calculation by Mr. Pittman determined the average setback to be 31.6 feet. The actual average of the setback on the block is 38.7 feet. Thus, the structure is 7.14 feet in violation of the City Code setback requirements. In December, 2008 knowing full well that the City has not approved subdivision, JMS submitted an application for a building permit of a second home on the subject property. This application was rejected by the City Planner's office as only one home is permitted on the property. After the City's issuance of a stop work order, JMS commenced suit and obtained a temporary injunction enjoining enforcement of the stop work order dated January 7, 2009. A trial date has not been determined. JMS Custom Homes LLC v. City of Edina, Hennepin County District Court File No. 27 -CV -09 -830. On January 14, 2009, JMS submitted a variance application and incorrectly identified the legal description of the property as Lot 6, Block 23, Fairfax. A public hearing was held before the Zoning Appeal Board on January 28, 2009, at which time the five member appeal board unanimously denied the variance application. Edina City Council February 12, 2009 Page 3 ARGUMENT I.. A PARTY SEEKING EQUITABLE RELIEF WILL BE PRECLUDED FROM RECOVERY IF IT IS DETERMINED THAT IT HAS UNCLEAN HANDS. JMS has acted unfairly throughout the construction project. Specifically, it has misrepresented 'to both the City and County officials that it had an administrative subdivision to the subject property which would permit it to construct two dwellings. Knowing these assertions to be untrue, JMS callously and in total disregard of the interests of the adjoining property owners chopped down a centuries old oak tree and began construction of a home which sits completely forward of the adjacent property and a mere five feet from the side property lines. To exacerbate the problem, JMS' surveyor certified compliance with the front setback requirements even though he was not able to calculate an arithmetic average. JMS' total disregard for City ordinances and blatant efforts to deny adjoining property owners the opportunity to express their concerns and protect their interests precludes JMS' equitable relief for the grant of a variance based upon hardship. Where a party has acted with unclean hands and behaves "unfairly" to the prejudice of other parties it is not entitled to equitable relief. Predictably, counsel for JMS will cite to Judge Rosenbaum's Temporary Injunction Order as having effectively usurped the City Council's authority to review the variance application. Such argument is misplaced. Judge Rosenbaum's Order merely precludes enforcement of the stop work order. JMS proceeded with its construction at its own risk and that the existing Order is temporary and subject to a final determination. at a trial which will presumably allow full testimony from those that are harmed by JMS' wrongful conduct. II. THE RESULTING HARM CAUSED BY JMS' WILLFUL OR NEGLIGENT DISREGARD OF THE INTERESTS OF THE ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNERS GREATLY OUTWEIGHS THE ECONOMIC IMPACT THE DENIAL OF THE VARIANCE WILL HAVE UPON JMS. Many, if not all of the council members, have driven by the subject property and no doubt are appalled by the location of the structure and no doubt realize how all aspects of privacy and quiet enjoyment of the property have been plucked away from the Whitbecks due to the negligent construction by JMS. Surely the Whitbecks are economically affected by the location of the JMS structure which completely blocks all site lines to the north. However, their loss of privacy and quiet enjoyment cannot be quantified in mere dollars and cents. While JMS will soon move from our neighborhood, the Whitbecks daily will have to suffer the intrusions caused by this Edina City Council February 12, 2009 Page 4 negligent construction. In over 25 years of the practice of law I have encountered many "bullies ". Often times bullying tactics achieve their intended results. However, the side effects can also be devastating to innocent parties. It is the responsibility of the City and the City Council to protect the interests of its residence. Everyone viewing the property recognizes this is an atrocity brought on by JMS' own misconduct and should not be tolerated. I therefore request that the City, affirm the decision of the Zoning Board of Appeals, and deny JMS' request for variance. Respectfully, MESSERLI & KRAMER P.A. fQ, osep W. Lawver JWUmpn Mr. Jonathan Vlaming Senior Manager of Planning. Three Rivers Park District CC. John Keprios /Park $ Rec Director /Edina Joni Bennett /City Council Mayor James Hovland Mary Brindle /City Council Ann Swenson /City Council Scott Housh /City Council Dear Mr. Vlaming: RECEIVED FEB 12 2009 We thought the open house last night was a good first step in helping Edina residents understand the impact of the proposed trail routings. Thank you. We had some questions that didn't get answered last night and I hope you will help us. 1. DECISION RIGHTS - There was a lot of residual confusion about decision rights that I hope you can help us clarify. In discussions with Joni Bennett and Kelly Grissman, we heard variously that: a) the decision on routing is a joint City of Edina/Three Rivers Park District decision; b) that the decision is a Three Rivers Park District decision; and c) that the decision is a joint Three Rivers Park District /Nine Mile Creek Watershed District decision. Can you please clarify for us who will make the decision on the routing of the proposed trail? I think it would be very helpful to have at the next open house some clarity on decision rights and also on the dates and locations at which the routing is going to be reviewed with the City Council and the Edina School District. The interests of all Edina residents on all sides of this issue should be represented at those meetings, not just the Edina Bike Task Force or other proponent of any particular route. 2. NEXT STEPS - Can you please advise us also: i) when will the dates, times and locations of the next City Council and Board of Education meetings to discuss the routing be known and how we can find out well in advance? ii) what kind of notification of the next open house and the public meetings regarding the trail will be sent and when and to whom? As Edina residents whose residences are directly affected by the Three River Park District's preferred routing, it was very disappointing to not be advised about the open houses or the process by the the District or the City. We only found out about the issue from the Star Tribune article. The City and the .Park District owe it to citizens directly affected to give them notice well in advance of these meetings. 3. COSTS - when is cost going to be put on the table? One of the posters last night mentioned that cost will be estimated once the route is chosen, but cost must be one of the factors in the choice, not just a consequence of it. With the US economy tanking and Governor Powlenty announcing a US$7 billion state deficit and slashing money for everything, how can cost be an afterthought to ANY routing of the trail? As taxpayers we want costs of maintenance as well as construction on the table when discussing routing. 4. OPEN MEETING - ATTENDEES Finally, since people were asked to sign in as a condition of participation in the open house, I would like to have a copy of the sign in list, so that all sides of this issue can communicate with those who have demonstrated an interest in this issue. Heather would not commit to give me a copy, asserting "confidentiality ". ? ?? While I certainly recognize Heather isn't making that decision, I would like your explanation for denying me a copy of what clearly is public information. If this information isn't going to be used to communicate with people by the Park District or EBTF or other proponents of the trail and particular routings, why did you collect email and other addresses? We are happy to have our information listed as persons interested in this issue. I look forward to your prompt response. H. Jed Hepworth RECEIVED FEB 111009 Edina Police Department 4801 West 50'h St. Edina, MN 55424 -1394 Dear Chief Siitari: 4300 Glumack Drive, A2220 -C St Paul, MN 55111 b U.S. Customs and °i' +tA� secg Border Protection I would like to extend my appreciation to K -9 Handler Mike Seeger for his support and involvement with the Customs and Border Protection special operation "Cannabis Cup" at the Port of Minneapolis. Officer Seeger was able to respond to assist the Port of Minneapolis in narcotics detection on little or no prior notice. Due to Officer Seegers assistance we were able to screen approximately 1800 pieces of luggage and were successful in intercepting various amounts of marijuana, hashish, mushrooms and other narcotics related paraphernalia. Please present this U.S. Customs and Border Protection letter to Officer Seeger and extend our thanks and appreciation to him for his invaluable assistance with the success of the operation. Officer Seegers professionalism, motivation and dedication to duty reflects highly on him and your department as a whole. We look forward to working with your department in the future and maintaining our strong working relationship. Sincerely, ald "Buck" Durand Assistant Port Director Tactical Operations RECEIVED FEB 1 2 2009 Dear Members of the Edina City Council, After driving by the project and reviewing the plans at 6120 Brookview Ave, I feel compelled to submit a letter asking you to uphold the ruling of the Zoning Board of Appeals which denied a 7.14 foot front yard setback variance on JMS' nearly completed single home construction project. In looking at the survey from Landform (job no. JMS08005), I am frustrated that the error was not caught by the builder. If the front yard setback was determined, in error, to be 31.6 feet on the survey, it should have occurred to the builder to question that number since there is only one house (at the corner) with a front yard setback that is less, at 28.2 feet. The other front yard setbacks on that side of the block are listed as: 34.8, 34.5, 34.7, 31.7, 63.1, and 44.2 feet, and the average of the seven homes calculates out to 38.7 feet. I live across the street from a JMS project at 4608 Bruce Avenue that I and neighbors discovered during construction had numerous errors. The project should have required a variance for the driveway, which ended up being narrower than _mandated in city building code (12 feet for new construction). After construction was started, it was also discovered that there was not enough width to accommodate a driveway plus a necessary retaining wall due to missing information on the survey. The survey was missing grade elevations that would have alerted the city that, in comparison to the house to the south, there was a lower grade at the side and back elevations, and that allowing additional width for a retaining wall on the south side of the driveway would be necessary. The driveway slopes down from street -level to a tuck -under attached garage at the basement level of the home. Construction was halted so the builder and city could figure out how a retaining wall could be built. In our historic neighborhood, we now have a non - historic 3/4 inch steel retaining wall at the south property line and a driveway width that is less than the 12 feet required by city code. Once again, an error on a survey of a JMS home has been found, which again results in a negative impact on the surrounding homes. I strongly believe that the appropriate action for the City Council. is to demonstrate that it can and will support enforcement of building codes and city ordinances by upholding the January 28, 2009 decision of the Zoning Board of Appeals. I agree that there is no unique hardship. I would also like to see the builder made responsible to correct the situation, as I do not feel that the neighbors should have to live with the consequences of JMS' error or oversight. Thank you in advance for your time and attention. Cheryl Hirata -Dulas 4609 Bruce Avenue RECEIVED FEB n L vc v CAIV �� Q �k RQ �{ �„ C'Cuk cAil Ca III ii MINN -APT)tTSTIT RECEIVED FEB 122 �0 1 I ' RECEIVED FEB 10 2009 2/9/09 TO: Mayor James Hovland Council Member Joni Bennett Council Member Scot Housh Counsel Member Linda Masica Counsel Member Ann Swenson Re: Gateway Project - Poppy Lane Residents Dear Mayor and Council Members: As a homeowner living on Poppy Lane who is directly affected by the proposed Gateway Project construction, I am disturbed and angered that I have received no response to my previous correspondence to the City of Edina relative to legitimate, verified concerns regarding the potential negative effects this new construction will have on homeowners in the Poppy Lane vicinity whose property is directly adjacent to the on -ramp to Hwy. 100. Attached are copies of an e-mail dated 7/22/07 relative to the Draft AUAR Report - Edina and a letter dated 11/14/07 addressed to the City of Edina Planning Department together with an attachment, Summary of Noise Studies. As you can see from the attached Summary of Noise Studies, our area has for several years been acknowledged as one requiring noise barriers. This need has become increasingly more necessary with the natural added volume of traffic over the years, but will become absolutely critical as the Gateway. Project becomes more of a reality with the additional number of residents living in multiple unit dwellings in the area as well as added businesses. I demand a written response to my very urgent concerns. I know my neighbors all share the same level of concern and deserve a response as we are all directly affected by these construction plans. Please note that I also left a call for Wayne Houle in October, 2008. He never had the courtesy (or courage ?) to return my call. This deliberate avoidance is inexcusable. Your response will determine whatever further action is necessary in the process of obtaining noise barriers. Thank you for your time. Bette Anderson 4936 Poppy Lane Edina, MN 55435 952 - 486 -8834 (Home) 612 - 339 -2500 (Work - Henson & Efron, PA Law Firm) BETTE ANDERSON 4936 POPPY LANE MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55435 (952) 48()-8834 betteanderson@yaboo.com November 14, 2007 City of Edina Planning Department 4801 West 50a' Street Edina, MN 55424 Dear Sir/Madam: In response to your latest invitation to submit further comments relative to the Final Alternative Urban Areawide Review for the Gateway Study Area, I am attaching a copy of a Summary of Noise Studies Presented in the I -494 EIS For the City of Edina which was provided to me several years ago. This had to do with improvements including the TH 100 Interchange just past 77h Street., Please note the studies at that time indicated excessive noise levels along this corridor. At the time the report was written, it stated, "Current Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) and MnDOT policies require [emphasis added] implementation of feasible and reasonable noise mitigation measures." Note also that they indicated that an economic reasonableness study showed that noise mitigation was cost effective at a few locations along the corridor, one of them being the Poppy Lane neighborhood in Edina, which is my neighborhood. This neighborhood is located northeast of the intersection of 77`x' Street at TH 100. Considering the fact that the report was issued years ago and that it was determined then that noise levels were excessive and required mitigation, the present and future need for a noise barrier in our area is even greater, especially considering the proposed development which will increase traffic and its resultant noise and air pollution in the form of gas fumes, etc. I strongly urge that the construction of a noise barrier be included in any plans for development in this area which includes residents of Poppy Lane whose backyards border the on ramp to Highway 100 northbound off of 77`h Street. Considering the studies previously done, this should be made a mandatory part of any construction plan in the Gateway development project. Thank you. Sincerely, Bette Anderson Summary of Noise Studies Presented in the I -494 EIS For the City of Edina Are Noise Studies Required for I -494 Reconstruction? The I -494 corridor is not located in Edina but does skirt the far southeastern comer of the City. As part of the I -494 reconstruction, the TH 100 Interchange and a portion of TH 100 will be rebuilt. Reconstruction of TH 100 will extend north into the City of Edina just past 77h Street. Both federal and state noise regulations apply to the reconstruction of I -494. Noise studies are required for this project because noise levels along the corridor exceed federal criteria and state standards. Noise studies have been completed as part of a Final Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS) which addresses the reconstruction and improvement of I -494 from I -394 south and east to the I -494 Minnesota River crossing. Existing noise levels were measured, future noise levels were predicted and the effectiveness of noise mitigation was analyzed. Current Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) and MnDOT policies require implementation of feasible and reasonable noise mitigation measures. An analysis of economic reasonableness or cost effectiveness is the first step in determining whether noise mitigation should be implemented at given locations. An analytical methodology for evaluating the cost effectiveness of noise mitigation measures (noise walls) has been developed by MnDOT with Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) concurrence. Results of this methodology are expressed as cost per decibel reduction per residence. To qualify as cost effective and reasonable, noise mitigation must provide at least 5 decibels of noise reduction at a cost below $3,250 per decibel per residence. Will Noise Walls be Built as Part of the Reconstruction? Results of a recent economic reasonableness study performed for the I -494 FEIS using the approach described above show that noise mitigation is cost effective at a few locations along the corridor. One of these locations, the Puppy Lane neighborhood, is in the City of Edina. This neighborhood is located northeast of the intersection of 77`s Street at TH 100. Two other neighborhoods in Richfield (north of I -494, roughly between Portland and 12s' Avenues and north of I -494, roughly between Xerxes and Penn Avenues) were found to meet the cost effectiveness criteria. In general, neighborhoods that meet the cost effectiveness criteria typically have high receptor density (small lots or apartment buildings) and are located close to the roadway. Weren't Noise Walls Previously Proposed? The Draft Environmental Impact Statement for the 1-494 reconstruction and improvement project, prepared in 1992, identified a number of locations along the 1494 -corridor for which noise mitigation would likely be warranted. However, this document was prepared before the cost effectiveness methodology described above had been put into use. Thus, no reasonableness studies were conducted in I'or the 1992 document. How Will the Project Affect Noise Levels? Projected year 2022 noise levels for receptors in the City of Edina are no more than one decibel greater than existing noise levels. Based on the MPCA publication A Guide to Noise Control in Minnesota, a three decibel change in noise levels is the threshold of human perception. An increase in traffic noise of one decibel is considered to be imperceptible. If a noise barrier were constructed at Poppy Lane, noise levels would be reduced by more than 10 decibels. A decrease of 10 decibels would seem like noise levels were half as loud. How Can I Get More Information? You can visit the MnDOT noise web site at: www.dot.state.mn.us / metro /tps /htms /noise /env_planning.htmI Page 1 of 1 ' Sul* Draft aura Report - Edina Date: 7/22/2007 5:00:11 PM Central Daylight Time From: To: Hello, I have received notice of the upcoming meeting on July 24 regarding the AUAR Report to review the results of the environmental review process for the Gateway Area. My backyard property at 4936 Poppy Lane is adjacent to and directly behind the entry ramp onto Hwy. 100 North from 77th Street. The homeowners whose property borders the entry ramp onto Hwy. 100 N. from 77th Street have already pled their case in the past regarding the noise and exhaust pollution due to our proximity to the highway. Especially during peak traffic times, conversations cannot be heard while sitting on the deck of my home due to the noise, nor can the stench of exhaust fumes be tolerated while outside in the backyard. We petitioned for a noise barrier of some sod but were told they would only build one 8 feet tall and that we would have to pay for it. This blatant disregard for the health and well -being of Edina's citizens was considered to be an abomination at that time. Should the Gateway development be allowed to go forward, I fear that the noise and pollution will only become more unbearable and will severely depreciate the value of our existing properties. The increase in traffic over the years has only lessened the appeal for potential buyers of our properties, and any additional adverse effects will only serve to further diminish the value. Should there be changes slated to the intersection at 100 and 77th in an effort to widen and expand it, I would demand that concrete noise barriers be erected along the entrance ramp onto 100 N from 77th Street, similar to the noise barrier at Hwy 100 N and W. 70th Street. The irony is that there aren't even homes directly behind that noise barrier which has been there for many years now, but those living with the on -ramp literally in their backyards haven't been able to realize an effective wall against the traffic noise and exhaust pollution. There is also the question of their obtaining easements to access some of our backyard property to expand the on -ramp to 100 N from 77th Street. I as well as my neighbors would appreciate being informed of any potential of this occurring. In addition, currently the stoml sewer drainage hole located between my property and that of my neighbor's to the south of me routinely overflows when we have heavy rains such that a large amount of debris of all sorts is left on our yards when the water subsides. This would only worsen if this development goes forward and something would have to be done to remedy the situation. These are my concerns regarding the Gateway development as a resident within the affected area. I would appreciate special consideration given to these issues as well as any feedback you could provide. Thank you. Bette Anderson 4936 Poppy Lane Edina, MN 55435 952 -486 -8834 Get a sneak peek of the all -new Sunday, July 22, 2007 America Online: BetteEdina City of Edina February 11, 2009 Mrs. Addie Fitzsimmons 5025 Yvonne Terrace Edina, MN 55436 Dear Mrs. Fitzsimmons: Thank you for attending our 2009 Town Hall Meeting on January 27. Among the issues you addressed was the service of our ambulance paramedics. You mentioned a.problem with the oxygen mask and supply that was used in connection with a call for service. Fire Chief Marty Scheerer advises me that your call occurred on March 3, 2006. According to Chief Scheerer, the call record does not indicate anything unusual with the care you received that day and the paramedics involved do not recall your particular case. I recommend though that you call Chief Scheerer at your convenience to discuss your concern. He would be very glad to speak with you. He can be reached at (952) 826 -0332. Thank you for sharing Sinc ly on L. Hughes City Manager c: City Council Chief Marty Scheerer City Hall 4801 WEST 50TH STREET EDINA, MINNESOTA, 55424 -1394 issues and concerns at the Town Hall meeting. www.cityofedina.com 95L -9L/ -13013 1 FAX 952 - 826 -0390 TTY 952 - 826 -0379 City of Edina February 11, 2009 Inna Hays 5857 Creek Valley Road Edina, MN 55439 Dear Inna: Thanks for attending our Town Hall Meeting on January 27. On that occasion, you inquired about 1) recent snow plowing activities and 2) settlement around manholes on Creek Valley Road. As to snowplowing, I'm advised by our Public Works Department that in late January we were asked to "wing back" snow by the Postal Service which was apparently having trouble with mail delivery. We sometimes also do this to provide additional capacity for future snow falls. I'm not aware that any yard damage occurred as a result of this work. However, if damage did occur, we re -sod in the spring on request. As to settlement around manholes, I'm told that this sometimes occurs in areas of unstable soils. The sewer line and manholes apparently remain in place, but the road surface "floats" due to freeze /thaw during the winter. Public Works will look at this in the spring to determine if any repairs are needed. Thanks for sharing your tho is with us. Sincere , Gor L. Hughes City Manager c: City Council Wayne Houle, Director of Public Works City Hall 952- 927 -8861 FAX 952 - 826 -0390 4801 WEST 50TH STREET TTY 952 - 826 -0379 EDINA, MINNESOTA, 55424 -1394 www•cityofedina.com City of Edina February 11, 2009 Sandy Fox 5801 West 68th Street Edina, MN 55439 Re: Street Improvement Priorities Dear Sandy: Thank you for attending our Town Hall Meeting on January 27. On that occasion, you inquired about the method used by the City to prioritize street improvements. We recently prepared the enclosed brochure entitled "A Guide to Edina's Street Reconstruction Process." This brochure includes a section that addresses your question. I hope you will find this information useful. In addition to the brochure, our City website -- cityofedina.com — includes a map showing the approximate schedule for neighborhood street reconstructions. This can be found under the Engineering Department's web page under "construction projects." Thanks again for sharing your thoughts with us. Gordon L. Hu City Manager c: City Council 952 - 927 -8861 City Hall FAX 952 - 826 -0390 4801 WEST 50TH STREET WWW.Cityofedinaxom TTY 952 -826 -0379 EDINA, MINNESOTA, 55424 -1394 v City of Edina February 11, 2009 Mr. Charles Hughes 6136 Brookview Avenue Edina, MN 55424 Re: 6145 Oaklawn Avenue Dear Mr. Hughes: Thank you for attending our Town Hall Meeting on January 27. On that occasion, you mentioned the unsightly power pole that had been installed in front of the subject address. As you may or may not know, this pole and other similar poles in the City are owned and maintained by Excel Energy. According to our Engineering Department, this pole was relocated by Excel as part the intersection realignment of Oaklawn and Valley View. As I understand it, there weren't other feasible locations given Excel's and the City's design requirements. I'm sorry for the stark appearance of the pole, but the City doesn't have much latitude in Excel's choice of poles. In the future, the entire power line along West 62nd may be placed underground, thus eliminating the need for the poles. This is very expensive, however, and was not deemed feasible to do as part of the intersection project. `' oughts. City Manager c: City Council City Hall 952- 927 -13101 `7 FAX 952 -826 -0390 4801 WEST 50TH STREET ww.ciofedina.com TTY 952- 826 -0379 EDINA, MINNESOTA, 55424 -1394 Page 1 of 1 RECEIVE; FEB 12 2W9 Mike Siitan To: Kudos File Subject: FW: Friday, February 6, 2009 From:-Vicki Engelhard [mailto:vjeng @netzero.net] Sent: Fr!day, February 06, 2009 7:48 PM To: Molly Anderson Subject: Friday, February 6, 2009 I work in the building at 3400 West 66th Street. Between 2:30 and 3:00 p.m. Friday afternoon, I happened to look out the window and saw an elderly women pushing a shopping cart walking west in the eastbound lanes of 66th Street near Barrie Road. I'm sure she was trying to avoid the sidewalks because that area is really icy, even though the temperature*was in the high 30s. An Edina, officer just happened to drive by. He turned the squad lights on, stopped his car and got out to talk to the woman. I figured he was just going to help her across the street. Next thing I know, he was helping her get in his car, he loaded up the shopping cart in the trunk and gave her a ride, I'm assuming to her home. - I thought it was so cute. It made my day!!. I know their job is to protect the public, but this was going above and beyond. I'm sure you know who the officer is and I hope you will pass my message on to him. Thanks for the work you do protecting all of us. God Bless all of you. Vicki Engelhard vjeng@netzero.com FTD.com Shop now and save $15 on Flowers and Gifts from FTD! Page 1 of 1 RECEIVED FEB 10 2009 Susan Heiberg From: Lynette Biunno Sent: Tuesday, February 10, 2009 2:14 PM Cc: Susan Heiberg Subject: FW: 6120 Brookview Ave From: Kathryn Kieser [ mailto:KKieser @HaworthMedia.com] Sent: Tuesday, February 10, 2009 1:53 PM To: Lynette Biunno Subject: 6120 Brookview Ave Edina City Council- I am writing to let you know that I hope the city does not let ]MS Custom Homes succeed in their end run attempt around city code. If JMS Custom Homes is successful in acquiring their variance after the fact why would any builder doing business in Edina follow City Code and Regulations in the future? I would assume the survey company has some type of insurance to cover an error of this nature. This home should be moved back within the setback requirements. Mr. Schoenwetter's attempt to sub - divide the lot thru the county and not centering the new home on the double lot are indications that his ultimate goal is to circumvent the city. We should not reward his behavior by letting him achieve his goal. When Mr. Schoenwetter purchased the property he knew the lot could not be sub - divided per your earlier ruling. Thank you for putting Edina residents first. Best Regards, Kathryn Kieser 3601 West 61st Street Edina, MN 2/10/2009 City of Edina MEMORANDUM TO: City of Edina staff FROM Jennifer Bennerotte, Communications & Marketing Director If DATE: Feb. 10, 2009 RE: City website — January 2009 Activity on the City of Edina website reflected the following activity during the month of January 2009: Total visits: 75,308 Number of visitors: 44,253 Total number of hits: 2,450,768 Average time of each visit: 11 minutes, 43 seconds Total page views: 220,052 Average page views per day: 7,098 Busiest day of the month: Jan. 6 with 107,843 The page most visited was the Centennial Lakes Park skating page, with 4,384 visits. Other top pages included the following (with number of visits): Centennial Lakes Park — 3,988 Edinborough Park — 3,223 Job Listings — 2,642 Administration & Jobs — 2,293 Edinborough Park General Information — 2,023 Edinborough Park Adventure Peak —1,996 Park & Recreation —1,587 Edinborough Park Hours —1,487 Telephone Numbers & Contacts — 1,428 The most frequently accessed PDF among visitors was the Braemar Arena open skating calendar which was downloaded 1,314 times. Other frequently downloaded PDFs included the following (with number of downloads): City Hall 952- 927 -8861 `7 FAX 952 - 826 -0390 4801 WEST 50TH STREET TTY 952- 826 -0379 EDINA, MINNESOTA, 55424 -1394 www.cityofedina.com Winter Park & Recreation Insider — 951 Final Edina bike plan — 589 Edinborough Park Park Press — 533 2008 Comprehensive Plan Appendix D — 499 Employment Application — 436 Community Street Map — 417 Autumn About Town — 415 Braemar Arena Spring Skating Schedule — 359 Land Use Chapter of 2008 Comprehensive Plan -- 358 Though the website has grown substantially in the past year, interest still needs to be generated among the public. To gain that interest and generate more hits, please attempt to include the Uniform Resource Locator (URL), www.CityofEdina.com, on all correspondence. We have been streaming video on our website for more than a year. The most requested videos in December were the Jan. 6 City Council meeting (103 views), Jan. 20 City Council meeting (93), December Planning Commission meeting (84), Get Fit PSA (99), Hiring a Contractor PSA (77), Snow Removal PSA (66), Smart Winter Driving PSA (63), January episode of "Agenda: Edina" (38), City Council Town Hall meeting (26) and the January episode of "In Edina" (23). Please continue to tell others about our website and think about ways to improve it. If you have suggestions or questions, contact Communications & Marketing Director Jennifer Bennerotte, 952- 833 -9520. Page 1 of 1 RECEIVED FEB 0 51009 Susan Heiberg From: Lynette Biunno Sent: Thursday, February 05, 2009 10:14 AM To: Wayne Houle Cc: Susan Heiberg Subject: FW: sidewalks on France avenue From: Thomas Amatruda [mailto: Thomas .Amatruda @NorthMemorial.com] Sent: Thursday, February 05, 2009 9:51 AM To: Lynette Biunno Subject: sidewalks on France avenue Please forward to Council members, and to Mayor Hovland. Dear representatives: I am an Edina resident, living at 4001 W. 48th St in Edina. We are 4 houses away from France Avenue. We have lived in this house for 16 1/2 years. For all of this time, we have walked to 44th St by crossing France Avenue and using the Minneapolis sidewalks. This pathway, to cross the street and use the sidewalk, was not unduly burdensome, even when we walked with our two year old son (now 18!). Crossing the street did not present a major problem, even with a stroller or a walking toddler. It seems to be a frivolous waste of resources to spend $300,000 to build a sidewalk on the west side of France Avenue. First, this is a foolish way to spend that money. There are many more pressing needs within our community. Secondly, the neighborhood immediately impacted does not wish to see this sidewalk installed. Third, the construction will probably disrupt the roots of some vintage trees, leading to their deaths, and possibly leading to hazards of failing trees or limbs that would affect the houses on Meadow route. I strongly urge you to reconsider the decision, made recently in the City Council changes, to waste our tax money on this unnecessary project. Of the arguments that were made, the most compelling was the need for a safe exit for the #6 bus on the west side of France. This problem could be addressed by buiding a small platform for the bus stop, at the corner of 48th street. Tom Amatruda Thomas T. Amatruda, MD Director, Melanoma Program Director, Cancer Genetics Program Hubert H. Humphrey Cancer Center 763 786 1620 Fax: 763 780 3099 tomas amatruda(abnorthmemorial.com 2/5/2009 RECEIVED Jeremiah Mostrom FEB 0 4 2009 4544 France Ave South Edina, MN 55410 February, 4`h 2009 To: Mayor Jim Hovland CC: City Council Members: Ann Swenson, Scott Housch, Linda Masica, Joni Bennett Engineering Dept: Wayne Houle, Jack Sullivan 4801 West 50a' Street Edina, MN 55424 I just wanted to thank you for your support in favor of the France Ave Sidewalk Improvement No: S101. I think this is a project that desperately needed to better our neighborhood. Yesterday was the first time my wife and I have ever been to a city counsel meeting. I wasn't sure we were going to make it, as I just returned from a long business trip. I was fortunate that my flight arrived early, so it was possible for us to make it on time. Attending the meeting last night was a great reminder of how privileged we are as citizens of Edina, to participate in our local government. In response to the trees that will be lost because of this project, I would be interested in making a donation that would go towards re- planting, etc. I would also be interested in helping to raise additional funds to help the cause. If you could please advise how I could be involved in this process, I would greatly appreciate it. Thanks again for your support and service to the city of Edina. Warmest Regards, Jeremiah and Kelly Mostrom 4544 France Ave South Edina, MN 55410 To strengthen and promote cities as centers of opportunity, leadership, and RECEIVED February 5, 2009 governance 13 2009 National League of Cities The Honorable James Hovland Mayor City of Edina 1301 Pennsylvania Ave., N.W. 4801 W 50th St Washington, DC 20004 -1763 Edina, MN 55424 -1330 202 - 626 -3000 Fax: 202 -626 -3043 Dear Mayor Hovland: www.nic.org 2009 Officers As you know, cities are on the front line during these trying economic times. President Kathleen M. Novak Because your city is a former member city of the National League of Cities, I am Mayor Northglenn, Colorado writing to tell you about some programs that NLC is currently offering to its members to help cities and their citizens save time and money. I hope that these First Vice President Ronald 0. Lovay offers, along with the other important work NLC is doing, will entice you to rejoin Mayor Mayor Riverside, California NLC at a special rate we are currently offering. Second Vice President James E. Mitchell, Council Membeer r One of the most exciting new programs at NLC is the Prescription Discount Card Charlotte, North Carolina Program. This is a program for member cities to help residents cope with the high Immediate Past President cost of prescription drugs. Residents of your city who are without health insurance, James C. Hunt Council Member a traditional pharmacy benefit plan, or have prescriptions not covered by insurance Clarksburg, West Virginia can save an average of 20% off the full retail price of prescription medications. Executive Director There is no cost for your city to participate in the program and offer this Donald J. Borut savings to your residents, but you must be a current NLC member city to participate in this program. In addition, NLC offers access to the U.S. Communities Government Purchasing Alliance, NLC's national purchasing cooperative that can save your city, schools and non - profit organizations money by offering the most favorable government pricing on a wide range of products and services, including thousands of eco- friendly products for cities looking to implement or expand a "green" purchasing program. These programs, along with the wealth of educational, training and research resources that NLC provides, offer effective solutions for cities while helping to help keep them strong. Information on these money saving programs can be found on the NLC website at: www.nle.org/inside nlc/business solutions.aspx Past Presidatim John DeStefano, Jr, Mayor, New Haven; Connecticut'• Brian J. O'Neill :Councilman; Philadelphia, Pennsylvania Directors John S. Brenner, Mayor, York, Pennsylvania •Cad Brewer, Mayor, Wichita, Kansas •William G. "Bill" Brooks, Mayor, Bell Isle, Florida • Jim Byerd, Jr Mayor, Prattville, Alabama • Malcom Chapman, Alderman, Rapid City, South Dakota • Miguel M. Chavez Councilor/Mayor Pro Tem, Santa Fe, New Mexico • Bred Cale. Mayor, Carbondale. Illinois • Mildred C. Crump, Councilwoman at- Large. Newark. New Jersey • Joseph A. Curtatone, Mayor, Somerville, Massachusetts • Joe Davis, Sr., Alderman, Milwaukee, Wisconsin • Gretchen Driskell, Mayor, Saline, Michigan •Doug Echols, Mayor, Rock Hill, South Carolina •James J. Finley, Jr, Executive Director and CEO, Connecticut Conference of Municipalities • Larry G; Prong, Executive Director, Illinois Municipal League • J. David Fraser, Executive Director, Nevada League of Cities and Municipalities • Miriam Hair, Executive Director, Municipal Association of South Carolina • Rep Hankins, Council Member, Trotwood, Ohio • Deborah A. Hill, Councilwoman, Warrensville Heights, Ohio • Edna Branch Jackson, Mayor Pro-Tem/Alderman at- Large, Savannah, Georgia • Bobby G. Kilgore, Mayor, Monroe, North Carolina • George Lewis, Executive Director, Mississippi Municipal League • Sylvia L Lovely, Executive Director, Kentucky League of Cities, Inc. • Robin Lowe, Council Member, Hemet. California • Myron Lowery, Council Member, Memphis. Tennessee Sam Mamet Executive Director, Colorado Municipal League • James F. Miller, Executive Director, League of Minnesota Cities • Mark Mitchell, Council Member, Tempe, Arizona • Garret L Noncolas, Mayor, Caldwell, Idaho • Frank C. Ortis, Mayor. Pembroke Pines, Florida • Tzeitel Paras- Caracci, Council Member, Duarte. California • Elizabeth C. Peterson, Mayor, Mansfield, Connecticut • Randall W. B. Purvis, Council Member, Colorado Springs, Colorado • Debbie W. Guinn, Councilmember, Fairhope, Alabama • Sonia Reece, Mayor Pro Tem, Normal, Illinois • Ed P. Reyes, Councilmember, Los Angeles, California • Sergio Rodriguez Alderman, New Haven, Connecticut • Steve Salazar, Councilmember, Dallas, Texas • Audwin M. Samuel, Mayor Pro Tem, Recycled Paper Beaumont. Texas • Sharyn T. Tallman, Councilor, Parkersburg, West Virginia • James Taylor, Councilman, Littleton, Colorado The Honorable James Hovland February 5, 2009 Page Two NLC continues to build better cities and towns of all sizes by providing effective solutions and having influence over issues that directly impact cities. NLC's responsive and effective grassroots network of municipal officials and staff monitor and influence the actions that affect municipal governments in a strong, unified partnership with the state municipal leagues. We want the City of Edina to reconnect with NLC because, more than ever, we want you to be a part of an organization that knows the most about cities and the challenges you face — one that has the information, resources, and experience to help you. Enclosed is an application to re join NLC. If you re join now, you will save 15% off for a one year membership or 35% off a two year membership and be able to participate in the NLC Prescription Discount Card Program. In addition, you will be eligible for the special NLC member registration fee for our upcoming Congressional City Conference on March 14 -18, 2009 in Washington, D.C. This conference is of particular importance this year as a new Administration and Congress will have a significant impact on the future of our cities and towns. If you prefer to rejoin NLC on -line, please visit the NLC website at: httv://www.nlc.org/INSIDE NLC /MEMBERSHIP /ioinNLC.asax. If you have any questions about membership, please contact the NLC Membership Office at (202) 626 -3000 or membership(iDmIc.or . I hope that you will consider re- joining the NLC family and help your city save time and money. Sincerely, Pew/ Donald J. Borut Executive Director Enclosure NATIONAL LEAGUE OF CITIES 2009 MEMBERSHIP APPLICATION 1301 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW #550 • Washington, DC 20004 • PHONE (202) 626 -3000 • FAX (202) 626 -3043 • v,wrw.nlc.org TAKE ADVANTAGE — 01� aOmembe of its NLC ao /ffil off or Two ated state municipal•IeagueFn order r t become arTWO ber of NRC.� ears lapsed. (Note: A municipality must Name of Municipality Municipal Address Chief Elected Official Name/Title E -mail Address Telephone Number Population City Tenn Expiration Municipal Web Address Fax Number State Zip Manager's Name (City Clerk in non - manager city) Email Address ,. _ I V. Provide additional names under separa te cove Date 2009 MEMBERSHIP PAYMENT Dues Amount $ (Please refer to dues schedule on the reverse side or visit the website at www.nlc.org) ❑ One -Year Membership ❑ Two -Year Membership ❑ Check Enclosed ❑ Send Invoice Expiration Date ❑ Bill to Credit Card ❑ Visa ❑ MasterCard Credit Card # Name as it appears on Credit Card (Please Print) Date Signature of Card Holder RETURN THIS FORM TO: National League of Cities Membership 1301 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW, #550 • Washington, D.C. 20004 • Fax (202) 626 -3043 A portion of the dues includes the cost of an annual subscription to Nation's Cities Weekly newspaper for eligible officials from your city. Questions? Contact: (202) 626 -3000 Term Exp E -mail Address Name Title Term Exp E -mail Address Name Title Term Exp E -mail Address Name Title Tenn Exp E -mail Address Name Title Term Exp E -mail Address Name Title Term Exp E -mail Address Name Title Term Exp E -mail Address Name Title Term Exp E -mail Address Name Title Title Authorized Signature Date 2009 MEMBERSHIP PAYMENT Dues Amount $ (Please refer to dues schedule on the reverse side or visit the website at www.nlc.org) ❑ One -Year Membership ❑ Two -Year Membership ❑ Check Enclosed ❑ Send Invoice Expiration Date ❑ Bill to Credit Card ❑ Visa ❑ MasterCard Credit Card # Name as it appears on Credit Card (Please Print) Date Signature of Card Holder RETURN THIS FORM TO: National League of Cities Membership 1301 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW, #550 • Washington, D.C. 20004 • Fax (202) 626 -3043 A portion of the dues includes the cost of an annual subscription to Nation's Cities Weekly newspaper for eligible officials from your city. Questions? Contact: (202) 626 -3000 February 6, 2009 RECEIVED To: Mayor Hovland and council members, FEB 0 61009 A resident at the Feb.3, 2009 Council Meeting hit the nail on the head. The process is confusing and arbitrary. Neighbors are angry at other neighbors. Both sides are righteous and want city council approval. Please fix the process. We need a clear straight forward list of priorities subject only to adjustment when unforeseen condition arises, not resident driven. # 1 The city needs to identify its road reconstruction & overlay projections not just for 4 years at a time but also long term. A road that needs reconstruction and is approved in 1996 should not be delayed to'2008, then moved to overlay in 2009. 1 am referring to 701h and Metro as an example but there are others that are scheduled and rescheduled for years. The 70th and Metro is now forecasted for 2017 in the CIP that was just passed. The geometrics that prohibit a left turn from northbound Metro Blvd to westbound 70th Street needs to be corrected. The 2017 plan still does not correct the geometric flaw. In the future, city vehicles leaving the maintenance garage that will be located on Metro*Blvd will go east only. Please prioritize not defer. This. would provide for long term budget forecasts. # 2 Sidewalks, sidewalks, sidewalks. Prioritize and make available a list of missing links in the sidewalk system and declare a clear policy of additional sidewalk improvements and how they will be funded with a consistent policy. The comprehensive plan does not satisfy this "to do" list. If traffic counts deem one road a higher priority, move it up the list. Either we have "walk to school sidewalks", or we do not. Resident voting for or against sidewalks is arbitrary, leaving residents and students without sidewalks. Resident request for sidewalks would diminish because they could see the list with an expected year for completion and funding source. # 3 Bike trails, bike lanes and bike /sidewalk sharing. The EBTF with BC /BS bike report was entered into the city's 2008 Comp plan.. The city needs to delineate recreational use and transit focused biking in Edina. The prioritized sidewalks could be overlaid with bike use considerations. Higher traffic count roads could have a 7 -8 foot wide sidewalk to accommodate safe use by walkers and bikes, avoiding expensive duplicating improvements. Primary use. of our roads is still auto based transport. The Met Council's evaluation of a circulator bus in Edina indicated that ridership would not be sufficient to support that mode of transportation in our community. Unfortunately we will not have the opportunity to leave our cars in the garage and hop a bus. This is a deterrent to aging in place. Has there been a study to determine what usage the bike trail and bike lanes will have in Edina. This is MN. Three Rivers Park does not clear bike trails in winter. Edina needs to determine the extent we need to invest in exclusive bike trails and bike lanes. How extensive of a recreational system or bike transit system is needed and to what extent it will be utilized? What will be the funding source? Just as our land use and zoning regulations are planned city wide so should sidewalks and bike zones. Residents should not be subject to not knowing if the city is planning to install bike lanes in front of their homes, the park, plan next year maybe 10' asphalt bike trails in their front yard (right of way) or if sidewalks are in or out this vote. I understand that our city departments have a tremendous responsibility and do their best to provide residents and council with direction and support. More transparent priority lists and a clear funding policy would assist all city staff from not being put in the middle to explain action or inaction by the city. Respectfully submitted, Jan Ferrell 4704 West 701h Street .N �Q I o REPORT /RECOMMENDATION To: Mayor & City Council Agenda Item VII. From: Debra Mangen Consent ❑ City Clerk Information Only Date: February 17, 2009 Mgr. Recommends ❑ To HRA ® To Council Subject: Correspondence Action ❑ Motion ❑ Resolution ❑ Ordinance ❑ Discussion Info /Background: Attached is correspondence received after the packets went out. Jim and Anne Hildebrand 6808 Brook Drive Edina, MN 55439 RECEIVED FEB 17 2009 February 12, 2009 Subject: Proposed Nine Mile Creek Bike Path Dear Mayor James Hovland, My wife Anne and I have lived in Edina for twenty five years at 6808 Brook Drive It is our home. It has wetlands where wildlife such as herons, fox, owls, deer and mink live. It is secluded and quiet. To me it would be a nightmare to see this destroyed by an asphalt bike path running along the creek or on a long boardwalk over the creek (a solution described at the meeting as a way to avoid destroying the wetlands.) We see the following issues: The Environment: The Three Rivers Park District states that it has the mission of environmental stewardship But a bike path through numerous back yards that goes thru wetlands and increases the traffic in these areas will have the effect of destroying the environment and natural habitat. Has the US Core of Engineers been consulted on the proposed path along the creek There is a wetlands protection act. I believe that increased traffic will drive away the wildlife that currently lives there. Also, I currently clean out the creek each spring of stuff that floats down from somewhere. Who will be responsible for cleaning up after a multitude of hikers and bikers who may not all have the motto of "no trace left behind ?" I believe the second issue noted on their survey was concern for the environment. Traffic and Safety: Mostly Edina citizens use our street, but the stated purpose of the bike path is "from Hopkins through Edina and Richfield perhaps with trails splitting off there to link with trails in Minneapolis and Bloomington." (Star Tribune). This is the purpose of streets and more specifically highway 100. I personally would not feel safe night or day with the possibility of anyone wandering through my back yard and looking in my windows. What we would be going from is a secluded but relatively inaccessible area to a secluded and highly accessible area by anyone in the twin cities area. Changing the rules: Edina is a developed suburb. While Minneapolis has Lake Harriet with a walk around path this decision was made when development occurred. When Edina was developed and our lots were platted, I am My previous neighbor told me the developer specifically extended the lots to the center of the creek to prevent a horse or bike path going through the back yards. This was a covenant between the city and the homeowners, and I do not believe it should be broken. The Process: I would very much like to understand the process for the selection of and approval of an Edina bike path. At the information session on February 11t' which was held at the Edina City hall, I received conflicting information. John Keprios, the Edina Park and Recreation Director, indicated that the Edina City Council had the final say on whether a bike path would be approved and if so, what the route would be. That the city council would hold a meeting/ information session for Edina residents before deciding anything. Representatives of Three Rivers Park District who ran the information session on February 11 d' and implied that it was their decision and that they would select the route of the path. Uncompensated and unable to sell:. My lot runs to the middle of the creek, and in the paper and from the Three Rivers representative the idea was stated that an easement could be gotten from the courts for "pinch points. ", or in other words, my back yard. This would severely impact the value of my property. It was also stated at the information session that I needn't worry, that the bike path wouldn't be put in for two or three years. My question is when would I be reimbursed for my loss if the route through my back yard is approved? Who and how would the size of the devaluation be decided? Since part of my yard often floods, do you intend to take our entire property? Once the route is approved, and the devaluation of my property has occurred, I would not be able to sell the house for what it is currently worth. We do not think it fair to be asked to wait years for reimbursement. In summary, we strongly oppose routing a bike path along nine mile creek and through ours and our neighbors back yards. It jeopardizes the environment and our safety. With an easement, our home and the environment as we know it will be destroyed. We respectfully ask you to reconsider the direction this is taking. Sincerely, Jim and Anne Hildebrand 952- 941 -0586 RECEIVED AVIVAGE MASSAGE, 5100 Edina Industrial Blvd., Ste 231 FEB 17 2009 Edina, MN 55439 PH: 952888 -8883 Dear Council Members, I am hoping you can assist me with a policy dilemma I am having with the City of Edina. I am a small business owner who has held a business license for a therapeutic massage center in the City of Edina for 5 years, i.e., since 2002. However, due to the encumbrance imposed by the City of Edina to provide FEDERAL TAX INFORMATION by May 30th -- BEFORE the IRS extension deadline of October 15th -- each year my RENEWAL license application has been turned into the city clerk's office a few days to two weeks late. Regardless of how late, the City of Edina, in "past practice," has accepted these late renewal applications without imposing any penalties or late fees. In 2008, 1 did NOT receive a renewal application from the City of Edina through the mail, as I had in previous years. Instead, without warning, on July 1, 2008, 1 received a certified letter from the City of Edina, stating I must desist from further using my massage office. Due to various business and health issues, it took more time than usual to compile all federal tax documents and I finally submitted my renewal application to the clerk's office on October 15, 2008. City Clerk Deb Mangen and Jane Timm of the City Health Department, the same two individuals who had previously set the aforementioned "late acceptance policy" precedent, refused to accept my application stating that it was just "too" late. They further stated that I now needed to go through the entire laborious application process all over again, as though I had never been licensed with the City of Edina before. In other words, I would have to re- submit a check for $1,500.00, re -fill out a voluminous amount of paperwork, complete another background investigation, pay the license fee of $286.00, and wait for up to three months for the application process to be competed -- before I could work in my office again! When I asked Mangen and Timm for a written copy of Edina's policy regarding late renewals, they stated that the city did not have one. I then spoke to City Manager, Gordon Hughes, who reiterated that the City of Edina did not have any formal policy regarding late renewal applications. This is unfair and confusing for me as, how am I supposed to know when a renewal application is just late, or when it is "too" late? IE Please note: I currently hold licenses in the cities of St. Paul and Bloomington. The written policy (see attached) for St. Paul is, if a licensee submits a renewal application late, he or she must pay a late fee of $30 per month -- up to three months ($90). Bloomington's written policy (see attached) is very similar, although their late fee is $55 per month -- up to three months ($165). 1 would expect that the City of Edina would have a similar written policy, instead, it appears that the matter is capriciously decided upon by Ms. Mangen and Ms. Timm. Due to the current economy crisis and the subsequent decrease in business, it is an extreme hardship for me to have to re- submit a check for $1,500.00, and begin the lengthy licensing process all over again. Please advise me if there is anyway I can appeal this. Your assistance and collaboration in bringing resolution to this matter would be greatly appreciated. Finally, I would like to petition the City of Edina Council Members to consider adopting their own 90 -day late application policy, and also, to allow renewal applicants to provide their federal tax information AFTER the IRS October 15th deadline, to relieve the burden on small, struggling, "mom & pop" business owners. Sincerely yours, Janet Price Owner, AVIVAGE MASSAGE-of EDINA Edina Energy and Environment Commission Resolution 09 -01 Urging support of trail and pathway projects throughout the City WHEREAS, residents have expressed a desire to have more trails and pathways through their feedback in the City's Parks Survey; and WHEREAS, the City has embraced the Healthy Living initiative, which encourages biking, walking, and less use of motorized transportation; and WHEREAS, pathways and trails are a natural connection between our parks and other greenspaces; and WHEREAS, dedicated rights of way for bicycling and walking greatly enhance the safety of cyclists and pedestrians; and WHEREAS, the City has obtained funding for past and future projects, which will greatly improve non - motorized transit throughout Edina; and WHEREAS, bicycling and walking reduce the amount of carbon dioxide in our environment, and serve to improve health, and our air quality; NOW, THEREFORE, be it resolved that the Edina Energy and Environment Commission does hereby urge the Edina City Council to carefully consider and when appropriate, approve the installation of additional pathways and trails throughout the City to improve connectivity, reduce emissions, and encourage our residents to add physical exercise to their daily regimen. REPORT /RECOMMENDATION To: Mayor & City Council From: Boyd Tate Traffic Safety Coordinator Date February 17, 2009 Subject: Traffic Safety Advisory Committee 2008 Annual Report. Agenda Item: Consent Information Only Mgr. Recommends Action The following traffic safety issues were handled in 2008. Total traffic safety requests acted upon in 2008: Requests sent to the Traffic Safety Committee: Requests handled outside of Committee: Traffic Safety Committee recommendations submitted to City Council: Approved: Denied: Referred /deferred: Traffic Safety Committee 2008 Annual Report February 19, 2008 209 72 137 WE 12 15 3 ❑ To H RA ❑ To Council ❑ Motion ❑ Resolution ❑ Ordinance ❑ Discussion Page 1 of 5 Traffic safety issues handled in committee /not sent to Council: 38 Approved: 3 Denied: 7 Referred /deferred: 13 No action taken /needed: 14 Pending 1 The following is a breakdown of the 72 requests that went before the Traffic Safety Advisory Committee: Requests for stop signs: 11 Requests for other signs (Slow Children /No Left Turn/ Yield, etc.) 16 Requests concerning parking restrictions: 11 Traffic speed and volume concerns: 7 Requests for pedestrian crosswalks: 6 Parking problems: 5 Traffic signal timing concerns: 2 Request for in- street pedestrian sign: 2 Clear view issues: 3 Miscellaneous: 9 Total: 72 Traffic Safety Committee Page 2 of 5 2008 Annual Report February 17, 2009 1 Request for stop signs: 11 Approved: 3 Denied: 8 Requests for "other' signs: 16 Approved: 8 Denied: 7 Refer /study /no action: 1 Requests for pedestrian crosswalks: 6 Approved: 2 Denied: 3 Refer /study /no action: 1 A total of 59 traffic safety studies were conducted on the following 49 streets in 2008. All studies (traffic volume, direction and speed) were for a minimum 7 -day period. 01. 54th Street @ Minnehaha Creek Bridge 02. 56th Street @ Minnehaha Creek Bridge 03. 59th Street east of Beard Ave 04. 66th Street @ Rosland Park 05. 69th Street, York Ave to France .Ave (both directions; locations) 06. 70th Street, York Ave to France Ave (round -a -bout directions; 6 separate locations) 07. Belmore Lane west of Griffit Street 08. Concord Ave south of 58th Street 09. Concord Ave south of 60th Street 10. Concord Ave south of Concord Terrace 11. Concord Ave south of School Road 12. Division Street west of Brookside Ave 13. Division Street west of Oxford Ave 14. Division Street west of Rutledge Ave 15. Division Street west of Vandervork Ave 16. Dovre Drive east of Lincoln Drive 17. Gleason Road north of Indian Hills Pass 6 separate study; both Traffic Safety Committee Page 3 of 5 2008 Annual Report February 17, 2009 18. Gleason Road south of Indian Hills Pass 19. Halifax Ave @ 5115 20. Halifax Ave @ 5300 21. Hazelton Road, York Ave to France Ave (both directions; 6 separate locations) 22. Lakeview Drive east of St. Andrews Ave 23. Lakeview Drive north of Lexington Street 24. Lexington Street east of Lakeview Drive 25. Lincoln Drive north of Langford Drive 26. Lincoln Drive south of Londonderry Road 27. Mark Terrace Drive @ 7128 28. McCauley Trail north of West Trail 29. McCauley Trail west of Gleason Road 30. Normandale Road north of Richmond Drive 31. Normandale Road south of Eden Ave 32. Normandale Road south of Kent Ave 33. Normandale Road south of Normandale Court 34. Towns Road south of 48th Street 35. Tracy Ave north of Colonial Way 36. Tracy Ave south of Countryside Road 37. Tracy Ave south of Hawks Terrace 38. Tracy Ave south of Ridgeway Road 39. Valley View Road south .of Brookview Ave 40. Valley View Road west of Tingdale Ave 41. Vernon Ave west of Ayrshire Blvd. (40 mph zone speed study) 42. View Lane @ 5720 43. Warren Ave @ 6454 44. West Shore Drive north of 70th Street 45. West Shore Drive @ 6717 46. West Shore Drive south of 66th Street 47. Wooddale Ave south of 52 "d Street 48. Woodland Road @ #22 49. Woodland Road east of Wooddale Ave In addition to the above, there were numerous informal telephone conversations and in person street contacts where traffic safety issues were discussed, but not documented. Traffic Safety Committee Page 4 of 5 2008 Annual Report February 17, 2009 Respectively submitted, Boyd Ta Traffic Safety Coordinator Traffic Safety Committee Page 5 of 5 2008 Annual Report February 17, 2009 `w MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE EDINA HERITAGE PRESERVATION BOARD TUESDAY, JANUARY 13, 2009, AT 7:00 P.M. EDINA CITY HALL — COMMUNITY ROOM 4801 WEST 50TH STREET MEMBERS PRESENT: Chair Chris Rofidal, Jean Rehkamp Larson, Laura Benson, Arlene Forrest, Connie Fukuda, Karen Ferrara, Lou Blemaster, and Elizabeth Montgomery MEMBERS ABSENT: Bob Kojetin STAFF PRESENT: Joyce Repya and Jackie Hoogenakker OTHERS PRESENT: Robert Vogel, HPB Consultant I. APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES: December 9, 2008, December 15, 2008 Member Blemaster moved approval of the minutes from the December 9, 2008, meeting. Member Rehkamp Larson seconded the motion. All voted aye; motion carried. Member Benson moved approval of the minutes of the special meeting from the December 15, 2008, meeting. Member Forrest seconded the motion. All voted aye; motion carried. II. COUNTRY CLUB DISTRICT: A. Certificate of Appropriateness 1. H -09 -1 4634 Casco Avenue - New Detached Garage PLANNER PRESENTATION: Planner Repya explained that the subject request involves building a new, 440 square foot detached garage in the southwest corner of the rear yard, and converting the existing 2 -stall attached garage into living space. The plan illustrates the new structure will maintain 3 foot setback from the rear (west) and A HPB Minutes January 13, 2009 Page 2 of 11 south lot line. A new curb cut will not be required since the proposed garage will be accessed by the existing driveway. The new 2 -stall detached garage is proposed to measure 22'x 20' feet in area. The design of the structure is proposed to compliment the Tudor Revival architectural style of the home with stucco clad walls, a designer overhead door and an asphalt shingled roof. Attention to detail with windows and doors is demonstrated on all four elevations. The height of the proposed garage is shown to be 16' 3 7/8" at the highest peak. The new height requirement set out in the revised Plan of Treatment (no taller than 10% of the average height of existing detached garages on adjacent lots) was considered in the design of the garage, which meets the maximum height allowed when the heights of the adjacent detached garages were taken into consideration. The height at the mid -point of the gable is shown to be 11' 2 3/8 ", and a height of 8' 4 3/8" is provided at the eave line. The ridge line is shown to be 20' in length. The maximum lot coverage allowed for the property is 30 %. The proposed conversion of the attached garage to living space has been scaled back to ensure that with the addition of the 440 square foot detached garage does not push the property's lot coverage over the maximum allowed. Planner Repya informed Members that Consultant Vogel reviewed the plans indicating that the proposed garage replaces a non - historic outbuilding. From the plans, it appears to be compatible in size, scale, and texture with the historic Tudor Revival style house at 4634 Casco and with other historic homes in the district. From the narrative that accompanies the plans Consultant Vogel said he believes that the exterior finish of the garage will be stucco; the pattern is not specified but probably does not need to match that of the house. The decorative gable -end treatment and upper window on the west elevation appears to adequately mitigate any adverse visual effects arising from the undecorated lower wall surface (which also appears to be partly screened by the fence that runs along the rear property - line). The clipped or "jerkin- head" gable proposed for the garage nicely matches the shape of the roof on the house and the garage door, window boxes and lanterns are appropriate for the property. Planner Repya noted Consultant Vogel recommended approval of the COA subject to the plans presented and a year built plaque to be displayed on the structure. Findings: Planner Repya offered the following findings supporting the subject COA request: • The plans provided with subject request clearly illustrate the scale and HPB Minutes January 13, 2009 Page 3 of 11 scope of the project. • The information provided supporting the subject Certificate of Appropriateness meets the requirements of the Zoning Ordinance and the Country Club District Plan of Treatment. Staff Recommendation: Planner Repya concluded that staff recommends approval of the Certificate of Appropriateness for the new garage subject to: • The plans presented. • The condition that a year built (2008) plaque or sign is placed on the new detached garage as well as the addition to the home. APPEARING FOR THE APPLICANT: Jeri Zuber, Horty Elving & Associates BOARD MEMBER COMMENTS: Member Rehkamp Larson suggested that the windows, door(s) and rake of the proposed detached garage be trimmed with materials that match the existing house. Mr. Zuber agreed with those suggestions. MOTION AND VOTE: Member Ferrara moved approval of the Certificate of Appropriateness subject to staff conditions noting the revised setbacks with the further recommendation that trim be placed on the door, rake board and windows. Member Rehkamp Larson seconded the motion. All voted aye; motion carried. 2. H -09 -2 4602 Bruce Avenue — Demolish existing home and construction of a new home PLANNER PRESENTATION Planner Repya informed the Board the subject property is located on the west side of the 4600 block of Bruce Avenue. The existing 1 -story Ranch style home was constructed in 1972, and has an attached front loading 2 -car garage. HPB Minutes January 13, 2009 Page 4 of 11 The COA request involves demolishing existing home and garage with the intention of building a new home /garage that meets the district's plan of treatment criteria. The home is not considered an historic resource since it was constructed in 1972, thus the demolition of the existing home is not part of the COA review. The construction of a replacement home is subject to the HPB review and approval. The proposed replacement home is a two -story, Neo -Tudor style with an attached 2 -car, 484 square foot garage in the rear of the home. The garage is accessed by a new driveway on the north side of the property. The proposed driveway is nine feet in width, with an 11 foot setback from the side property line (providing for a one foot green space on either side.) Edina's Zoning Ordinance requires a 12 foot wide driveway for residential properties, thus a variance is required. The variance process has begun with the decision pending input from the HPB. The proposed height of the home at the peak is 29 feet, meeting the Plan of Treatment recommendation of no taller than 10% higher than the average heights of the adjacent homes to the north and south. The proposed average grade of the lot will be reduced to 894.2, providing for the original slope of the lot relative to the adjacent properties. The side yard setback to the south is five feet with an inset to 7 feet allowing for window wells. An 11 foot setback is provided on the north side. The materials proposed for the home include Hardi -Board stucco panels, Miratec trim board, fascia and soffit, cedar brackets, natural stone for the entry stoop and asphalt shingles. Planner Repya asked the Board to note Consultant Vogel's observations that the existing house at 4602 Bruce was constructed in 1972; therefore, it is not considered a heritage preservation resource. Architecturally, it represents an example of the Ranch style that became popular throughout the country during the post -World War II era. It was not present during the period when the Country Club District attained historical significance .(1924-1944) and is, therefore, considered a noncontributing resource within the Heritage Landmark district. When the Country Club District was placed on the National Register of Historic Places in 1980, this house was classified as "intrusive" due to its age (less than 50 years old) and Modern design characteristics. It does not independently meet the city's heritage landmark eligibility criteria and would not be considered an historic property under the current National Register program regulations. The proposed new home designed by Refined, LLC is perhaps best described as an example of the Neo -Tudor style (sometimes referred to as "neo- eclectic ") and in a sense it represents a 21st Century continuation of the Tudor style that was popular between roughly 1900 and 1940. Like the historic Tudor style homes HPB Minutes January 13, 2009 Page 5 of 11 built in the Country Club District before 1940, it is loosely based on late medieval English folk architecture prototypes; this particular design emulates many of the traditional period revival style features, including the steeply - pitched, front - facing gable, ornamental half- timbering, paired and "ribbon" windows, stucco wall finish, and patterned stonework. The simple hip roof (with its axis oriented parallel to the street) that covers the body of the house is similar in shape to those seen on many two -story homes in the district that are architecturally categorized as examples of the Tudor, French Eclectic, or "Mediterranean" styles. It also incorporates an attached rear garage, a design feature common to Country Club homes built during the district's period of historical significance. The preferred treatment for heritage preservation resources in the Country Club District is rehabilitation, which the city code (echoing the Secretary of the Interior's standards for rehabilitation) defines as the process of returning a property to a state of utility through repair or alteration which makes possible an efficient contemporary use while preserving those portions or features which are significant to its historical'and architectural values. Because the Country Club District derives its primary significance from being a planned development, it is treated as a single heritage resource with over 500 contributing components (i.e., the houses built between 1924 and 1944). The goal of design review in cases involving teardowns of non - historic homes is to ensure that the replacement houses are compatible in size, scale, color, materials, and character with adjacent historic properties and the neighborhood as a whole. In other words, new construction should be permitted whenever it is appropriately designed and will not disturb, alter, or destroy any significant heritage preservation resource. 4602 Bruce Avenue occupies an original Thorpe Bros. platted lot but was unbuilt during the district's period of historical significance; therefore, it would be unreasonable to expect the owner to "restore" the property to a vacant lot. Likewise, it would not be reasonable for the city to require the developer to reproduce the exact form and details of an historic house, when demolition does not result in any loss of historic fabric or character. While the National Register program guidelines allow for new construction in historic districts based on contemporary designs and materials (as opposed to imitation historic buildings), the City of Edina has adopted a different approach with respect to design parameters for new buildings in the Country Club District. The district plan of treatment states that new homes "will be compatible with the original (1924 -1944) Country Club District deed restrictions relating to architecture" -- notwithstanding the fact that the Thorpe deed restrictions deal with form, shape, massing, and setback issues rather than architectural style -- and requires their facades to be "architecturally similar to existing historic homes" in the immediate vicinity. HPB Minutes January 13, 2009 Page 6 of 11 Planner Repya stated Consultant Vogel believes the design is compatible in size, scale, massing, orientation, setback, and texture with historic homes on Bruce Avenue and elsewhere in the district. The developer has demonstrated compliance with applicable zoning and building code requirements in such a manner that the essential character of the district is respected. Although it is in all respects a modern suburban house, the proposed new construction uses traditional forms, detailing, and finishes achieving harmony with the streetscape. Ample precedent exists for allowing the use of contemporary materials in new construction in the district and the proposed new home will not compromise the integrity or harm to the appearance of adjacent historic homes. The developer also proposes to restore the lot to something that more closely resembles its original grade (or at least modifying it to a grade that is more compatible with those of nearby historic properties). Planner Repya reported Consultant Vogel recommends approval of the COA subject to the plans presented and a year build plaque is displayed on the home. Continuing, Planner Repya explained the proposed structure is in compliance with the requirements set out in the City's Zoning Ordinance regarding setbacks, height and lot coverage, the plan calls for a driveway less then the 12 foot width required for residential properties. The applicant, Mr. Porter requested a three foot driveway width variance to provide for a nine foot driveway on the north side of the property from the Zoning Board of appeals at their December 18, 2008 meeting. At that time, a design for the home had not been created because the applicant was waiting for a decision on his variance request prior to designing the home. The Zoning Board advised the applicant that they were not comfortable ruling on the variance request without the inclusion of the house plans demonstrating the necessity for a narrower driveway, and the opinion of the HPB on said plans. The decision was made to table the variance request to enable the applicant to design the home and receive an opinion from the HPB which could then be presented to the Zoning Board for their review. After consulting with the surrounding neighbors, Mr. Porter revised his variance request to allow for an 11 foot setback for the driveway from the property line which would accommodate a one foot green space on either side of the proposed nine foot wide driveway. Mr. Porter is proposing to revisit the Zoning Board on February 5, 2009 when the original Board who heard his request will readdress the proposal with the proposed house plans and comments from the HPB. HPB Minutes January 13, 2009 Page 7 of 11 APPLICANT COMMENTS: Andy Porter, 6125 Westridge Boulevard, addressed the Board and explained he approached the COA by looking at the project three ways: 1) Process: • With regard to process he needs to know the parameters, pointing out that driveway width is " fuzzy" between zoning code requirements and HPB guidelines, thereby requiring public hearings before two bodies. 2) Design: • The proposed house complies with all setback, height and hardcover requirements as stipulated by code and HPB guidelines. • A variance from the Zoning Board of Appeals is needed for the proposed driveway. The new driveway is proposed at 9 feet with a 2 foot buffer between the proposed house and driveway. The Zoning Board of Appeals is scheduled to rehear the driveway width variance request on February 5, 2009. • An attached garage is proposed providing more rear yard area. • The grade of the site will be lowered. 3) Materials • Natural stone on front fagade • Asphalt shingles • Hardi Board • Stucco panels • Cedar brackets • Meritic trim board PUBLIC COMMENTS: Vicki Slomiany, 4604 Bruce Avenue, informed the Board that in her opinion the size of the proposed house is not in keeping with the size of the houses found on the 4600 block of Bruce Avenue. Continuing, Ms. Slomiany said she prefers a detached garage, not attached as proposed. Concluding,. Ms. Slomiany stated she believes the subject house would fit better on Moorland Avenue. Kitty O'Dea, 4610 Bruce Avenue pointed out to the Board the proposed house is actually larger than the home that was recently constructed at 4608 Bruce Avenue. Ms. O'Dea presented photos of some of the Tudor homes found in the district. HPB Minutes January 13, 2009 Page 8 of 11 David Anderson, 4603 Casco Avenue, addressed the Board and explained he lives directly behind the subject site, adding in his opinion what is proposed is best. He pointed out a detached garage "eats up" much of the rear yard and the neighbor that lives to the rear is left to view the back of a garage and "dead space." Bill McLean, 4604 Edina Boulevard and 4602 Bruce Avenue, told the Board he loves living in the district and purchased 4602 Bruce in 2006 and found after working with an architect to renovate the house that it would be best to demolish it and rebuild. Mr. McLean said he believes what is proposed fits the neighborhood, pointing out the present home is contemporary in style and not compatible with the historic nature of the district. Dan Dulas, 4609 Bruce Avenue, stated he believes the proposed home would tower over the house to the north, adding he also supports a detached garage, not attached as proposed. BOARD MEMBER COMMENTS: Member Blemaster asked Mr. Porter if he considered a detached garage. Mr. Porter responded that a detached garage wouldn't work with his design. Mr. Porter said clients prefer bedrooms on the upper level. Member Forrest stated the Board shouldn't be concerned whether a project is profitable or not. Economics is not considered in the Board's decision making process. Member Rehkamp Larson stated in her opinion the massing and overall shape of the proposed house is good. Ms. Rehkamp Larson said she doesn't really like the tall double windows on the front facade. Continuing, Member Rehkamp Larson added that she likes the attention paid to the details; especially the half timber cut outs in the stucco. With regard to attached vs. detached garage. Member Rehkamp Larson said she would prefer detached; however, believes the Board shouldn't dictate that. Concluding, Member Rehkamp Larson suggested that the applicant address on the west; the shed roof, on the north; step in the wall west of the gable end and reduce the height of the ridge on the attached garage. Member Fukuda stated that she feels the garage should be detached. Member Ferrara stated she likes the proposed house, scale and mass are fine and pointed out if the garage were detached as suggested the 4th bedroom would be lost. HPB Minutes January 13, 2009 Page 9 of 11 Member Blemaster said it is difficult considering two standpoints one marketability and the other neighborhood property rights. Member Blemaster stated in her opinion the proposed house is too large. Member Blemaster asked what the goal of the Board is this evening. Chair Rofidal said the Board is to look at each application on a case by case basis and act. Chair Rofidal pointed out the present house is non - historic in nature and it isn't unrealistic to expect that redevelopment would occur on this lot. Chair Rofidal pointed out the proposed building height meets the stipulations of the both the Plan of Treatment and City Code. Chair Rofidal also noted the increased setback on the north side and the lower grade is a plus. Concluding Chair Rofidal said there are good things about this proposal, adding he likes the large two story front window(s), but is concerned that the other windows /door appear larger than those on neighboring houses. Member Forrest stated she doesn't like the 2 story window, adding she would like a break between the 1St and 2nd story, adding she likes the proportions and use of materials. Continuing, Member Forrest said a concern she has is with the proposed driveway. Member Forrest explained she would like to see greenspace added on both sides of the driveway, not just the one. Member Forrest said providing additional greenspace on the neighbors' side should prevent any damage to that property. Planner Repya reported that at this time the City is -considering amending the codes 12 foot driveway width requirement. Planner Repya pointed out in Edina's smaller lot neighborhoods a 12 foot wide driveway can be a hardship. A discussion ensued between HPB Members and neighbors focusing on the size and scale of the proposed house and if the garage should be attached or detached. A number of neighbors indicated they felt the proposed house didn't belong in the Fairway section of the district, it's too large. They also stressed that constructing a detached garage would reduce the mass and scale of the house and be more in keeping with the 4600 block of Bruce Avenue; however, there was support from one neighbor for the plans as presented with the attached garage. MOTION AND VOTE: Member Benson moved preliminary approval of the COA based on staff findings, subject to staff conditions and the following additional conditions that reduce the scale and massing for the proposed new house: • Reduce the height of the ridge line of the attached garage, and • Step -in the north wall (west) of the gable end roof Member Ferrara seconded the motion. Ayes; Benson, Ferrara, Fukuda, Rehkamp Larson, Bemaster, Rofidal. Nay, Forrest. Motion carried. HPB Minutes January 13, 2009 Page 10 of 11 Mr. Porter asked that the HPB specifically address the driveway width. He explained the Zoning Board of Appeals requested at their meeting that the HPB comment on the reduced driveway width before the Board meets again on the driveway width variance request. Member Rehkamp Larson moved to recognize that a 12 -foot wide driveway width is inappropriate for this property. Member Ferrara seconded the recognition. Members unanimously agreed that a driveway width of 12 feet is not appropriate in the District. III. PUBLIC COMMENT: None IV. CALL FOR NOMINATIONS: 2009 HERITAGE PRESERVATION AWARD: Planner Repya informed the Board that nominations will be taken for the 2009 Heritage Preservation Award, which will be awarded in May. Planner Repya added the award process will be advertised in the Sun Current. V. SECRETARY OF THE INTERIOR'S STANDARDS: Chair Rofidal acknowledged receipt of the Secretary's of Interior's Standards for Archeology and Historic Preservation. VI. OTHER BUSINESS: A. Heritage Preservation Resource Library Member Forrest told the Board funding has been received from the Edina Foundation to move forward on purchasing 2 sets of resources from the list complied by Consultant Vogel. These sets will establish a heritage preservation resource library. Chair Rofidal thanked Member Forrest for her work on this project. Planner Repya reported that although the Hennepin County Library declined to shelve the items from the resource list at the Edina Libraries, upon a request from Board Member Lou Blemaster, the librarians researched the all resources on the list and reported that some of them would be purchased as part of their inventories for the Southdale and Ridgedale libraries. They also reported on the items available on line as well as those which are out of print. Ms. Repya and all HPB Minutes January 13, 2009 Page 11 of 11 the members of the HPB commended Member Blemaster for her perseverance with the library staff. B. COA Procedure Committee Report No committee report. More time is needed to discuss procedures. It was suggested that the committee meet soon. Planner Repya would work with committee members to schedule a date and time. VII. CORRESPONDENCE: Chair Rofidal told the Board he believes a "work session" with the City Council will be scheduled for sometime in May, VIII. NEXT MEETING DATE: February 10, 2009 IX. ADJOURNMENT: The meeting was adjourned at 9:30 pm Jackie, 9coge vt.adck Submitted by �/►`�/09 �� sl� S�rc�u� TRANSPORTATION RESEARCH BOARD of ME NANO" ACAMM1E2 About 1 RB Annual Meeting Caiendar Committees S Panels News Programs Publications Resources 8 Databases - Contact TRB Search TRB NCHRP 09-41 [Completed] Performance and Maintenance of Permeable Friction Courses Project Data Funds: $249,994 Research Agency: Bums Dennis Cooley, Inc. Principal Investigator: L. Allen Cooley, Jr. Effective Date: 3!8/2005 Completion Date: 2128/2009 Comments: The project final report will be published as an NCHRP Report in mid -2009. BACKGROUND Permeable friction courses (PFC), which include new generation open - graded friction courses, asphalt- rubber friction courses, and porous: European mixes (PEM), have gained wide acceptance throughout the southern and western portions of the United States. PFC mixtures are rapidly gaining popularity due to their ability to reduce hydroplaning, splash and spray, and pavement noise, and to improve ride quality and the visibility of pavement markings in wet weather. There are numerous differences between PFC and the first generation open - graded friction courses (OGFC) widely introduced in the 1970s. PFC typically contains at least 20 percent more asphalt binder (by volume) than conventional OGFC. PFC is generally designed to have at least 18 percent air voids, whereas conventional OGFC mixtures typically contained between 10 and 15 percent air voids. The void structure of PFC allows the mix to be more permeable than conventional OGFC and less likely to trap water that could freeze. PFC-- unlike conventional OGFC mixes - -may contain fibers, polymer modifiers, or asphalt- rubber, alone or in combination. PFC mixtures are typically placed in thicker layers than conventional OGFC (1.0 to 2.0 inches as opposed to 1.0 inch or less). The thicker, more open matrix allows PFC to drain larger volumes of water off the roadway faster than conventional OGFC and keeps the void structure clean through the flushing action of high -speed traffic, therefore reducing the potential for loss of permeability over time. All these differences have contributed to a longer reported performance life for PFC compared with conventional OGFC. Research on PFC indicates that the mixes typically last between 10 to 14 years, significantly longer than the first generation OGFC mixtures, which typically lasted between 5 and 7 years. No widespread performance problems such as raveling have been, reported with PFC, but concerns remain whether PFC mixes will experience the same performance problems that plagued the first generation OGFC mixes used in freeze -thaw environments. In these environments, the. benefits of PFC have generally been perceived to be outweighed by the associated inconveniences and increased cost of winter maintenance and the possible related formation of glaze ( "black ice "). While black ice can form on any pavement under the right environmental conditions, there is anecdotal information that it is likely to form earlier on PFC and last longer than it does on other hot mix asphalt surfaces. These concerns are a likely reason that PFC mixes are used predominately in warmer climates found in the southern and western regions of the United States and are not used widely in areas that experience frequent freeze -thaw cycles. Pavement maintenance issues and snow and ice removal are also often cited as obstacles to further increased use of PFC in colder climates. OBJECTIVE The objective of this project is to recommend design, construction, and maintenance guidelines that will maximize the advantages and minimize the disadvantages associated with PFC use. In the context of this project, PFC is generally but not exclusively defined as a highly permeable mix containing polymer- modified asphalt or asphalt- rubber, and fibers- -alone or in combination. Accomplishment of the project objective will require the following tasks. TASKS (1.) Conduct a comprehensive review of worldwide literature dealing with (1) the. design methodology; construction, maintenance, and rehabilitation strategies; safety; and performance of PFC, conventional OGFC, and similar materials; and (2) their advantages and disadvantages. (2.) Survey highway agencies in the United States and worldwide on their experience with the design, construction, maintenance, safety, performance, and volume of use of PFC, conventional OGFC, and similar materials. Interview experts in state highway agencies and other organizations to identify the advantages and disadvantages of PFC use. Summarize the current PFC mix and structural design procedures, design features, specifications, and construction procedures.. Identify the functional and materials performance failure criteria used by the agencies to evaluate PFC. (3.) Based on the results of Tasks 1 and 2, develop a summary of the state of the practice in PFC design, ,construction, maintenance, and performance. In the summary, identify key advantages and disadvantages associated with the use of PFC, with attention to snow and ice removal, anti -icing technology, safety, ride quality, noise abatement, design considerations, and maintenance. Submit the summary as an interim report that also includes (1) an annotated bibliography of the Task 1 results, (2) a tabular summary of the Task 2.survey findings, (3) a preliminary outline of the Task 4 guidelines developed from the results of Tasks 1 and 2, and (4) any recommended research needs based on the results of Tasks 1 and 2 in the form of 1 -page objective and scope statements. Meet approximately 1 month later with the NCHRP project panel to present the results of Tasks 1 and 2 and the outline of the Task 4 guidelines. (4.) Using the results of Tasks 1 through 3, prepare guidelines for the use of PFC that deal at a minimum with the following topics: 1. Design Features, including structural value, thickness required to remove water volume, safety, noise, preparation of existing pavements for PFC placement in rehabilitation projects, and treatment of existing PFC that has reached the end of its service life. 2. Construction, including acceptance testing (e.g., permeability), placement requirements, and procedures for placement of PFC on existing pavements in rehabilitation projects. 3. Maintenance, including preventive maintenance and repair techniques, snow and ice removal and anti -icing methods, pavement markings, and vacuum cleaning to restore or maintain permeability. 4. Materials, including mix design procedures, volumetric and permeability requirements, use of additives (binder modification, anti -strip agents, and fibers), test procedures and tolerances, aggregate types and gradation bands, pavement marking adhesion, and anti -icing technology (including the use of built -in -place materials or devices). 5. Criteria to guide the proper use of PFC in environmental and climatic conditions that lead to frequent occurrence of black ice conditions. 6. Issues judged relevant but not covered in 1 through 5. (5.) Prepare a final report that presents the results and summarizes the findings and conclusions of the project. In the report, include (1) the Task 4 guidelines in the form of an AASHTO recommended practice, AASHTO standard methods of test, or both; and (2) the Task 3 summary of the state of the practice in PFC design, construction, maintenance, and performance, including (a) the summary of the Task 1 comprehensive review and the annotated bibliography, (b) the summary of the Task 2 survey results, and (c) the recommended research needs statements. Status: The project final report will be published as an NCHRP Report in mid -2009. Product Availability: The project final report is available for loan on request to NCHRP. To create a link to this page, use this URL: htt�.// www.trb.om/trbnetlorojectdisplay .asp ?growectid =975 Copyright © 2009. National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved. THE NATIONAL ACADEMIES P g S.F. No. 373, as introduced - 86th Legislative Session (2009 -2010) [09 -04391 1.1 A bill for an act 1.2 relating to traffic regulations; enacting the Safe School Zone Law; making 1.3 clarifying and technical changes; amending Minnesota Statutes 2008, sections 1.4 169.011, by adding a subdivision; 169.14, subdivisions 2, 4, 5a. 1.5 BE IT ENACTED BY THE LEGISLATURE OF THE STATE OF MINNESOTA: 1.6 Section 1. Minnesota Statutes 2008, section 169.011, is amended by adding a 1.7 subdivision to read: 1.8 Subd. 69a. School zone. "School zone" means that section of a street or highway 1.9 that abuts the grounds of a school where children have access to the street or highway 1.10 from the school property or where an established school crossing is located; provided, 1.11 the school advance sign prescribed by the Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices 1.12 adopted by the commissioner of transportation under section 169.06 is in place. 1.13 Sec. 2. Minnesota Statutes 2008, section 169.14, subdivision 2, is amended to read: 1.14 Subd. 2. Speed limits. (a) Where no special hazard exists the following speeds shall 1.15 be are lawful, but any speeds speed in excess of weir these limits shall -be is rima facie 1.16 evidence that the speed is not reasonable or prudent and that it is unlawful; except that the 1.17 speed limit within any municipality shall be is a maximum limit and any speed in excess 1.18 flict coF shall be of that limit is unlawful: 1.19 (1) 30 miles per hour in an urban district or on a town road in a rural residential 1.20 district; 1.21 (2) 65 miles per hour on noninterstate expressways, as defined in section 160.02, 122 subdivision 18b, and noninterstate freeways, as defined in section 160.02, subdivision 19; 1.23 (3) 55 miles per hour in locations other than those specified in this section; Sec. 2. 1 i + S.F. No. 373, as introduced - 86th Legislative Session (2009 -2010) [09 -0439] 2.1. (4) 70 miles per hour on interstate highways outside the limits of any urbanized area 2.2 with a population of greater than 50,000 as defined by order of the commissioner of 2.3 transportation; 2.4. (5) 65 miles per hour on interstate highways inside the limits of any urbanized area 2.5 with a population of greater than 50,000 as defined by order of the commissioner of 2.6 transportation; 2.7 (6) ten miles per hour in a*eys alleyways; wtd 2.8 (7) 25 miles per hour in residential roadways if adopted by the road authority having 2.9 jurisdiction over the residential roadway.; and 2.10 (8) 25 miles per hour in school zones. 2.11 (b) A speed limit adopted under paragraph (a), clause (7), is not effective unless the 2.12 road authority has erected signs designating the speed limit and indicating the beginning 2.13 and end of the residential roadway on which the speed limit applies. 2.14 (c) For purposes of this subdivision, "rural residential district" means the territory 2.15 contiguous to and including any town road within a subdivision or plat of land that is built 2.16 up with dwelling houses at intervals of less than 300 feet for a distance of one - quarter 2.17 mile or more. 2.18 (d) Notwithstanding section 609.0331 or 609.101 or other law to the contrary, 2.19 a person who violates a speed limit established in this subdivision, or a speed limit 2.20 designated on an appropriate sign under subdivision 4, 5, 5b, 5c, or 5e, by driving 20 miles 2.21 per hour or more in excess of the applicable speed limit, is assessed an additional surcharge 2.22 equal to the amount of the fine imposed for the speed violation, but not less than $25. 2.23 Sec. 3. Minnesota Statutes 2008, section 169.14, subdivision 4, is amended to read: 2.24 Subd. 4. Establishment of zones by commissioner. (a) Except as provided in 2.25 subdivision 5a, on determining upon the basis of an engineering and traffic investigation 2.26 that,any speed set forth in this section is greater or less than is reasonable or safe under the 2.27 conditions found to exist on any trunk highway or uM on any part thereof of the trunk 2.28 highway, the commissioner may erect appropriate signs designating a reasonable and safe 2.29 speed limit thereat, which speed ihnit ahn becomes effective when saeh the signs are 2.30 erected there. Any speeds speed in excess of sack these limits shall be is prima facie 2.31 evidence that the speed is not reasonable or prudent and that it is unlawful; except that any 2.32 speed limit within any municipality shall bc or within any school zone is a maximum limit 2.33 and any speed in excess of that limit is unlawful. Sec. 3. 2 'f i S.F. No. 373, as introduced - 86th Legislative Session (2009 -2010) [09 -0439] 3.1 LbjOn determining upon that basis that a part of the trunk highway system outside a 3.2 municipality should be a zone of maximum speed limit, the commissioner may establish 3.3 that part as such a zone by_ 3.4 erecting appropriate signs showing the beginning and end of the zone; 3.5 (2) designating a reasonable and safe speed therefor for the zone, which may be 3.6 different than the speed set forth in this section;; and that 3.2 (3) designating it is as a zone of maximum speed limit. 3.8 (c) The speed so designated by the commissioner within any such zone shall be is a 3.9 maximum speed limit, and'speed in excess of such that limit shall be is unlawful. The 3.10 commissioner may in the same manner fieni thne to tinle�: _ 3.11 1) alter the boundary of sttch a zone and the its speed limit therein= or 3.12 (2) eliminate such the zone. 3.13 Sec. 4. Minnesota Statutes 2008, section 169.14, subdivision 5a, is amended to read: 3.14 Subd. 5a. Speed zoning in school zone; surcharge. (a) A local atrtherities road 3.15 authority, with the agreement of a school board or nonpublic school administration, may 3.16. establish a seheel speed limit that is less than 25 miles per hour within a school zone of a 317 public or nonpublic school 3.18 esm ibed by the commissionet of trwispai tation located on a street or highway within 3.19 the jurisdiction of the local road authority. The establishment of a school speed limit 3.20 that is more than or less than 25 miles per hour on any trunk highway shat} must be with 3.21 die consent by agreement of the commissioner of transportation with the school board 3.22 or, in the case of a nonpublic school, with the school's administrator. Such School speed 3.23 limits sha}I -be are in effect when children are present, going to or leaving school during 3.24 opening or closing hours, or during school recess periods. The school speed iii,nit shall n 3.25 be lower than H miles pe. hout mid shall not be mote dimi 36 miles per hetu- below the 3.26 3.27 (b) The school speed limit shall be becomes effective upon the erection of 3.28 appropriate signs designating the speed and' indicating the beginning and end of the 3.29 reduced speed zone. Any speed in excess of such the posted school speed limit is 3.30 unlawful. All such These signs shalf must be erected by the local road authorities on those 3.31 streets and highways under their respective jurisdictions and by the commissioner of 3.32 transportation on bunk highways. 3.33 (c) Fat die ptnpose of diis subdiv.sion, 3.34 or highway which abuts die greands ofa school where.childien have aceess to die stleet 3.35 o. highway fient the achool pieperty or where mi established school ciussing is located Sec. 4. 3 S.F. No. 373, as introduced - 86th Legislative Session (2009 -2010) [09 -0439] 4.1 4.2 device., adopted by the conintissionet oftimispettation parstiant to section !69.66 is in 4.3 place. All signs erected by local authorities to designate speed limits in school zones sha* 4.4 must conform to the Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices. 4.5 (d) Notwithstanding section 609.0331 or 609.101 or other law to the contrary, 4.6 a person who violates a speed limit established under this subdivision is assessed an 4.7 additional surcharge equal to the amount of the fine imposed for the violation, but not 4.8 less than $25. Sec. 4. CERTIFICATE OF SURVEY FOR: JMS CUSTOM HOMES XISTING EXISTING TWO -STORY ELEVATIONS WOOD FRAME HOUSE FIRST FLOOR (THRESHOLD) = 896.2 6112 BROOK VIEW AVE. ` TOP OF POURED FOUNDATION = 895.7 / FFE=897.5 ' 89 .I r, g X8115A '} 3 Q t x89:7 GARAGE GFE =896.1 F �� Ui a a t FIND fP PNCNE� S. 5.? 5 i UI_TiPLE STEM -- -- FrD 99 UNKNOWN r�9 0A`J. CAP #17009 30 s .8953 y_ EXISTING , GARAGE O % q5 4 x895.4 { Y x894.8 t I � x8 x893.g14� SPRUCE SHRUB LINE q2. ;x92.5 9s f }}��(t 1rr1,, Grading and �f'iT N Z I L 1 tea r- a f �. rr�•crjflred prior to I o i 8 Ix aller,09 any grades ► I iii L I ;; r or drainage SILT FENCING IS ;% _ x845.6 �y� v $ 5 FT, SIDE LINE - -, 889 °47 „ REQUIFE�9u 4 FT. WOOD ,,. M ti FENCE- T - - - - -- q2 a9c i 894.6 133.77(M) 733.79(P) Bs4. 9" HARP', s9 MAPLE I pJ.2 X895.2 �. 1 p 93` 7 I t y �{ x q5.1, 47.50 5.0 -7AVERAGE OF BLOCK- MIL TPI -E 5TCgl ��''4 �PRUCE � COVERED___ L 11 jx8P4.7 FRONT 'SETBACK LINE --- - _ - BOX ELt�ER z, .,_.I ; , I FT. -! PORCH µ F y CANTILEVER N. 894.9 ----- ++ - - - - -N - ; - -- 44.7 - - - -- € `8o X 894.9 Ga , ��} `� �i _ `''- T - - - - -- 31.6' - - - - - -- L O ' 10.3 • - • - .A p X� �;a 10.00 ' PROPOSED TWO-STORY PROPOS t1% s��cn ~ DR1AY a5' N wooD FRAME HOUSE r� 0 X09'4 r FULL 5' -1' POURED BASEL tENr r7 gg4.6X FENCE AND i �- e,120 BROOKVIEW AVc. cN rn 0 ' �� X �� ° o' L + - SHED CORNER 894. 22.00 c, €' co rJ 7 V, °i . ?ARE ON L T LINE 'X� _ T? __.. M °� lu p � � 30.0 I � c1L''!9� j x894.7 µ' " ` 895.0 ; I j 9' ax�i94. _ co 35.50 o 48' OtKs�' r --- ----- -- -- rN I _ FIND IP 5 FT SIDEaSETBACK LUG 7 R1 e..1.�� pC . a3 rtz ..f LO y.. °f , ' g In FIND p (1PEK' 3-"0 eR CP 9q qA J-33-.-q9( SHRUB LINE 8 °19 1/ 30 �6 f 'SHED A I � �x) W. 78(E) -& 2�9 ; . T - i -: 5 ; v -4Fr. WOOD FEr E 6FT. WOOD r� ' O 1 FENCE 894 9 ". N89 °4 %��V fl i�.�'..,_ '. �. _,i� a°� 1�1 pJ 3 EXISTING TWO-STORY,- WOOD FRA HOUSE ! SHRUB LINE- ME 6128 BROOKVIEW AVE. �'-'- FFE =895.6 I RlE1 ?• ` GFE =895.0 LOT 6, BLOCK 23, FAIRFAX. GROSS BUILDING AREA = 2,049 SQ. FT. OR 0.05 AC. HENNEPW COUNTY, MINNESOTA. (50 SO. FT. OF THE COVERED PORCH ALLOWED PER CITY CODE) NET BUILDING AREA GARAGE FLOOR = 895.0 LOT 6 AREA TOP OF BLOCK = 895.5 FIRST FLOOR = 896.1 ,jd�." 10 *.yr Y44KLPNC COVERAGE _ LOWEST FLOOR = 886.25 ■. - -a . - 1,999 SQ. FT. OR 0.05 AC. 6,679 SQ. FT. OR 0.15 AC. 29.93% EXISTING REVISION HISfORY 08/13/08 - ORIGINAL 09/02/08 - REVISED FOUNDATION ELEVATIONS 09112108 - CLIENT COMMENTS 10/01/08 - CITY COt4ENTS 10/30/08 - NEW SULDNG PLANS 11/11/08 - NEW BULOW PLANS 11/18/08 - NEW BULDNG PLANS 11/24/08 - NEW BULDNG AND ADJUST LOCATION EXISTING DESCRIPTION P.0 BUILDING 2 -_j - -y CANOPY / OVERHANG a CONCRETE SURFACE BITUMINOUS SURFACE •TYPE GRAVEL SURFACE 5'SAN -> -° CONTOUR x 123.4 SPOT EL'cVATION OT CONCRETE CURB OTV (E36 18) HEIGHT, TYPE HEIQIT, TYPE FENCING 890.0 -X- -�-- WOOD RETAINING WALL NOV Z ') M 61NIORTH 0 20 SCALE IN FEET EXISTING DESCRIPTION SHRUB 100.3 PROPOSED FINISHED GRADE ELEVATION TREES PROPOSED FINISHED GRADE MANHOLE CONTOUR • I. THE DIMENSIONS SHOWN ARE TO THE BRICK LEDGE. 2. THE SEWER AND WATERMAIN UTILITY SERVICES SHOWN ARE APPROXIMATE LOCATIONS DERIVED FROM MAPS PROVIDED BY THE CITY OF EDINA ENCINEERNG DEPARTMENT. ANY AND ALL FIELD CONDITIONS AND UTILITY LOCATIONS SHOULD BE FIELD VERIFIED PRIOR TO EXCAVATION /CONSTRUCTION. 3. AT THE TIME OF THIS SURVEY, THE SHED LOCATED ON THE ADJOINING PROPERTY TO THE SOUTH DID NOT APPEAR TO HAVE A FOUNDATION. 7 4. FOR THE PURPOSES OF THIS SURVEY. THE BEARINGS ARE BASED ON AN ASSUMED ORIENTATION AND THE ELEVATIONS ARE BASED ON AN ASSUMED DATUM (BENCHMARK AS SHOWN ON MAP). TOP NUT HYDRANT LOCATED IN T*C SOUTHEAST CORNER OF WEST 61ST STREET AND BROOKVEW AVENUE. ELEV = 884.14 (NGV029) I hereby ;:ertify that this survey, plan or report was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that I orr a duly licensed Land Surveyor under the laws f the State of Minne - JONATHAN M. PITTMANN Date: 08/13/06 License. No. 44647 Revised: 11/24/08 r • • 800 c Butler Square ' • 100 North Sixth Street L A N D F O R M Minneapolis, MN 55403 • • Web: landform.net Job No. JM503005 Drawing: certJM5005_rev8 By. JMP ,Q., / , •, .. ,- / r,eT /7-) -� a z POWERPOLE P.0 AIR CONDITIONER ELECTRIC METER 0 •TYPE IRON MONUMENT FOUND 5'SAN -> -° SANITARY SEWER LINE WATER MAIN OT OVERHEAD TELEPHONE OTV OVERHEAD TV - OE - - OVERHEAD UTILITY LINES ONOTE NUMBER (P) DISTANCE PER RECORDED PLAT (M) MEASURED DISTANCE SHRUB 100.3 PROPOSED FINISHED GRADE ELEVATION TREES PROPOSED FINISHED GRADE MANHOLE CONTOUR • I. THE DIMENSIONS SHOWN ARE TO THE BRICK LEDGE. 2. THE SEWER AND WATERMAIN UTILITY SERVICES SHOWN ARE APPROXIMATE LOCATIONS DERIVED FROM MAPS PROVIDED BY THE CITY OF EDINA ENCINEERNG DEPARTMENT. ANY AND ALL FIELD CONDITIONS AND UTILITY LOCATIONS SHOULD BE FIELD VERIFIED PRIOR TO EXCAVATION /CONSTRUCTION. 3. AT THE TIME OF THIS SURVEY, THE SHED LOCATED ON THE ADJOINING PROPERTY TO THE SOUTH DID NOT APPEAR TO HAVE A FOUNDATION. 7 4. FOR THE PURPOSES OF THIS SURVEY. THE BEARINGS ARE BASED ON AN ASSUMED ORIENTATION AND THE ELEVATIONS ARE BASED ON AN ASSUMED DATUM (BENCHMARK AS SHOWN ON MAP). TOP NUT HYDRANT LOCATED IN T*C SOUTHEAST CORNER OF WEST 61ST STREET AND BROOKVEW AVENUE. ELEV = 884.14 (NGV029) I hereby ;:ertify that this survey, plan or report was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that I orr a duly licensed Land Surveyor under the laws f the State of Minne - JONATHAN M. PITTMANN Date: 08/13/06 License. No. 44647 Revised: 11/24/08 r • • 800 c Butler Square ' • 100 North Sixth Street L A N D F O R M Minneapolis, MN 55403 • • Web: landform.net Job No. JM503005 Drawing: certJM5005_rev8 By. JMP ,Q., / , •, .. ,- / r,eT /7-) -� a z - ' S-O "wti- - 90 CT it C) N'S - !,-q) , 2 32 37,2 ��' ER a, 9d ADDREESS A 7; rr-'ClU.�rvad for p�' 'Id It llj ", ESILTL FENCINGIS RE QUIRED � W � and ro-PIDOOMOMWAff lines must bo elzed to COO, Sizes W-Us".. be Consistent f rqM z;.'fUCtUrz to vlater main TemPorary Rock Construction Ext'. 46 ffftt Yard Setbaok lfn* aftr batkfilt • 12" SWAFM WARDIFE WLIS W1 16" 4ASVE MAZE 4 CAP wl cfwm TRIM I I NOV 25 Z008 tog M Iii G r W FLOOR OF sum P MOMS ELEVS kR SHAKE SIDJWs L V S DW 4 OR TRIM 506. FER ELEVs M PER ELEV6 jimmisagimi SCALISs VW a P-04 r ¢l 2 2 OF Ga Z P�� tilt, Pea" 111: ill- I- NOV 2 5 2UU8 XPS or to!) faced polyiso,yanurate XPS plus frame wall Existing concrete wall and interior gain Z"XPS rigid foam insulation (Junfaced) —jMew tape alljoints -adhete:to foundation wall — VXPS rigid foam insulation (Unfaced); tape all joints Existing concrete slab � perforated drainfite placed in free draining stone trenchllnW with geo textile fabric mi, � y :» COPYRIGHT 200S, ALEXANDER DESIGN »»O:- �| a \« %§+ � \ j# �\ ¥ % V § + » » : 4 I I Big I m 'F .............. 2* k Awl IV EM m 5 $-Os 1. W-10 I 0 m E-M- RA, 0 z �� 0 Mla. 21 am M, 0.- 9 I is Ir ti to x� x 1 X1}#