Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2013-10-01_COUNCIL MEETING"e •R AGENDA CITY COUNCIL MEETING CITY OF EDINA, MINNESOTA CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS TUESDAY, OCTOBER 1, 2013 7:00 P.M. 1. CALL TO ORDER II. ROLL CALL III. APPROVAL OF MEETING AGENDA IV. ADOPTION OF CONSENT AGENDA All agenda items listed on the consent agenda are considered routine and will be enacted by one motion. There will be no separate discussion of such items unless requested to be removed from the Consent Agenda by a Member of the City Council. In such cases the item will be removed from the Consent Agenda and considered immediately following the adoption of the Consent Agenda. (Favorable rollcall vote of majority of Council Members present to approve.) A. Approval of Minutes — Regular Meeting of September 17, 2013, Closed Session of September 17, 2013 and Joint Work Session With Heritage Preservation Board of September 17, 2013 B. Receive Payment of Claims as Per: Pre -List Dated, 9/19/2013, TOTAL $2,004,031.08; Pre -List Dated, 9/26/2013, TOTAL $513,917.87; and Credit Card Transaction Dated, 7/26/2013- 8/25/2013, TOTAL $37,788.41 C. Authorize Amendment VI To The Medical Control And Direction Agreement, Hennepin HealthCare System, Inc. D. Request For Purchase — Contract No. ENG 13 -19NB — Industrial Park Sidewalk E. Resolution No. 2013 -86 Supporting Application For Hennepin County's 2014 Sidewalk Participation Program F. Master Agreement Professional Engineering Services - BARR G. Engineering Services — Appeal Of FEMA Proposed Flood Hazard Determinations H. Resolution No. 2013 -87 Authorizing Joint Powers Agreement With The State Of Minnesota - Minnesota Internet Crimes Against Children Task Force V. SPECIAL RECOGNITIONS AND PRESENTATIONS A. Hennepin County Commissioner Jan Callison B. Proclamation Declaring Fire Prevention Week C. 2013 MNAPA's Excellence In Community Engagement Award Draft Agenda/Edina City Council October I, 2013 Page 2 VI. PUBLIC HEARINGS During "Public Hearings," the Mayor will ask for public testimony after City staff members make their presentations. If you wish to testify on the topic, you are welcome to,do so as long as your testimony is relevant to the discussion. To ensure fairness to all speakers and to allow the efficient conduct of a public hearing, speakers must observe the following guidelines: • Individuals must limit their testimony to three minutes. The Mayor may modify times, as deemed necessary. • Try not to repeat remarks or points of view made by prior speakers and limit testimony to the matter under consideration. • In order to maintain a respectful environment for all those in attendance, the use of signs, clapping, cheering or booing or any other form of verbal or nonverbal communication is not allowed. A. PUBLIC HEARING — ,Resolution No. 2013 -82; Preliminary Plat, 6609 Blackfoot Pass; Great Neighborhood Homes Inc. on behalf of Douglas Johnson. (Favorable vote of majority of Council Members present to approve) . B. PUBLIC HEARING — Resolution No. 2013 - 84; Preliminary Plat at 5 Merilane for John Adams on' behalf of Ted Warner. (Favorable vote of majority of Council Members present to approve) VII. COMMUNITY COMMENT During "Community; . Commeni " . -the City Council : will invite residents to share new issues or concerns that haven't been considered in the:-past 30 'days by the Council or which aren't slated for future `consideration. Individuals .,must limit their comments to three minutes. The Mayor may limit the number of speaks on the same issue in the interest o f time and topic. Generally speaking, items that are elsewhere on tonight's agenda may not be faddressed during Community Comment Individuals should not expect the Mayor or Council to respond to their comments tonight Instead the Council might refer the matter to staff for consideration at a future meeting. VIII. REPORTS /RECOMMENDATIONS: (Favorable vote of majority of Council Members present to approve except where noted) A. Resolution No. 2013 -85 Accepting Donations B. Resolution No. 2013 -77 Silver Oak Development On Behalf Of IRET Properties; Site Plan Review With A Parking Ramp Setback And Parking Stall Variance At 6525 -45 France Avenue. C. Restoration of Neighborhood Reconstruction Projects IX. CORRESPONDENCE AND PETITIONS A. Correspondence B. Edina Human Rights & Relations Commission Advisory Communication- Immigration Reform Recommendation C. Receive Petition: I. Dale Rasmussen Opposing Sidewalk Improvement D. Minutes I. Energy & Environment Commission, July 11, 2013 and August 8, 2013 2. Veterans Memorial Committee, August 23, 2013 3. Transportation Commission August 15, 2013 j1 Draft Agenda/Edina City Council October 1, 2013 Page 3 4. Planning Commission, September 11, 2013 5. Arts & Culture Commission, August 22, 2013 6. Human Rights & Relations Commission, August 27, 2013 X. AVIATION NOISE UPDATE A. Authorize Public Comments To Federal Aviation Administration XI. MAYOR AND COUNCIL COMMENTS XII. MANAGER'S COMMENTS XIII. 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. II, . SCHEDULE OF UPCOMING MEETINGS /DATES /EVENTS �I Tues Oct I Closed Meeting 5:00 P.M. COMMUNITY ROOM Tues Oct I Work Session — Boards & Commissions 2014 Work Plan Review 6:00 P.M. COMMUNITY ROOM Tues Oct I Regular Meeting 7:00 P.M. COUNCIL CHAMBERS Mon Oct 14 Work Session — Business Meeting/Utility Rate Study 5:30 P.M. COMMUNITY ROOM Mon Oct 14 Regular Meeting 7:00 P.M. COUNCIL CHAMBERS Mon Nov 4 Work Session — Human Services Task Force Study 5:30 P.M. COMMUNITY ROOM Mon Nov 4 Regular Meeting 7:00 P.M. COUNCIL CHAMBERS Mon Nov I I VETERANS DAY HOLIDAY OBSERVED — City Hall Closed Tues Nov 19 Work Session — Final Budget Review /Finalize 2014Work Plan 5:30 P.M. COMMUNITY ROOM Tues Nov 19 Regular Meeting 7:00 P.M. COUNCIL CHAMBERS Thur . Nov 28 THANKSGIVING HOLIDAY OBSERVED — City Hall Closed Fri Nov 29 DAY AFTER THANKSGIVING HOLIDAY OBSERVED — City Hall Closed Tues Dec 3 Work Session —joint Meeting With Edina Housing Foundation 5:30 P.M. COMMUNITY ROOM Tue Dec 3 Regular Meeting 7:00 P.M. COUNCIL CHAMBERS Tues Dec 10 Special Meeting - Public Improvement Hearings 6:00 P.M. COUNCIL CHAMBERS Tues Dec 17 Work Session — TBD Tues Dec 17 Regular Meeting 7:00 P.M. COUNCIL CHAMBERS Tues Dec 24 CHRISTMAS EVE HOLIDAY OBSERVED —City Hall Closed at Noon Wed Dec 25 CHRISTMAS DAY HOLIDAY OBSERVED — City Hall Closed Tues Dec 31 NEW YEAR'S EVE HOLIDAY OBSERVED — City Hall Closed at Noon Wed Jan 1 NEW YEAR'S DAY HOLIDAY OBSERVED —City Hall Closed MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE EDINA CITY COUNCIL HELD AT CITY HALL SEPTEMBER 17, 2013 7:00 P.M. I. CALL TO ORDER Mayor Hovland called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. H. ROLLCALL Answering rollcall were Members Bennett, Brindle, Sprague, Swenson and Mayor Hovland. Ill. MEETING AGENDA APPROVED Member Swenson made a motion, seconded by Member Sprague, approving the amended meeting agenda. Ayes: Bennett, Brindle, Sprague, Swenson, Hovland 'Motion carried. IV. CONSENT AGENDA ADOPTED Member, Swenson. made a motion, seconded by Member Brindle, approving the consent agenda, as follows: IV.A. Approve regular and work session meeting minutes of September 3, 2013 IV.B. Receive payment of the following claims as shown in detail on the Check Register dated September 5, 2013, and consisting of 27 pages; General Fund $167,239.89; DNU Old Communications Fund $32.17; Working Capital Fund $232,754.84; Equipment Replacement Fund $14,821.43; Art Center Fund $2,846.02; Golf Dome Fund $3,551.07; Aquatic Center Fund $9,730.83; Golf Course Fund $24,808.31; Ice Arena Fund $2,593.55; Edinborough Park Fund $13,180.91; Centennial Lakes Park Fund $2,608.20; Liquor Fund $137,212.32; Utility Fund $100,024.27; Storm.Sewer Fund $20,731.85; PSTF Agency Fund $6,961.13; Centennial TIF District $90.53; Payroll Fund $3,605.76; TOTAL $742,793.08 and for receipt of payment of claims dated September 12, 2013, and consisting of 31 pages; General Fund $423,390.02;. Police Special Revenue $1,582.41; Working Capital Fund $64,616.49; Equipment Replacement Fund $77,996.99; Art Center Fund $2,509.05; Golf Dome Fund $554,884.34; Aquatic Center Fund $11,840.45; Golf Course Fund $24,195.85; Ice Arena Fund $63,849.80; DNU OldEdinbor /Cent Lakes Fund $150.00; Edinborough Park Fund $29,380.52; Centennial Lakes Park'Fund $6,208.23; Liquor Fund $246,271.80; Utility Fund $447,081.48; Storm Sewer Fund $18,794.76; PSTF Agency Fund $1,195.96; Centennial TIF District $65.36; TOTAL $1,974,013.51; and Credit Card Transactions dated September 4, 2013; TOTAL $31,753.52 IV.C. Adopt Resolution No. 2013 -75 approving Setting the Hearing Dates for Special Assessments & Utility Certification (10/14/2013) IV.D. Request for Purchase, 2012 12 Ft. Ford Box Truck — Edina Liquor Stores, awarding the bid to the recommended low bidder, Roseville Midway Ford, at $28,060 IV.E. Adopt Resolution No. 2013 -78, approving Lot Division — 5100 Mirror Lakes Drive /Interlachen Country Club, Michael Gorman IV.F. Request for Purchase, Replacement of West Arena Low E Ceiling — Braemar Arena, awarding the bid to the recommended low bidder, Energie Innovation Inc., $47,480.00 Rollcall: Ayes: Bennett, Brindle, Sprague, Swenson, Hovland Motion carried. V. SPECIAL RECOGNITIONS AND PRESENTATIONS None. Page 1 Minutes /Edina City Council /September 17, 2013 Vt. PUBLIC HEARINGS HELD — Affidavits of Notice presented and ordered placed on file. VI.A. ACTION CONTINUED TO OCTOBER 1, 2013 SILVER OAK DEVELOPMENT ON BEHALF OF THE IRET PROPERTIES; SITE PLAN REVIEW WITH A PARKING RAMP SETBACK AND PARKING STALL VARIANCE AT 6525 -45 FRANCE AVENUE - RESOLUTION NO. 2013-77 Community Development Director Presentation Community Development Director Teague presented the request of Silver Oak Development on behalf of the IRET Properties to build a four -story 60,000 square -foot medical office expansion, and new parking ramp expansion to the existing 273,000 square -foot Southdale Medical Office building located at 6525 -45 France Avenue. The new addition would be located on the south side of the existing building and west of the existing parking ramp. Mr. Teague explained that to accommodate the proposed addition, the following was requested: Site Plan Review; Parking Ramp Setback Variance from 40 feet and 34.5 feet to 34.5 feet, 28 feet, and 20 feet for the new parking deck to match the existing parking ramp setback; and, Parking Stall Variance from 1,715 spaces to 1,577 spaces. Mr. Teague stated a proof of parking plan had been provided for an additional deck to expand parking to 1,749 spaces. Mr. Teague stated on August 28, 2013, a Planning Commission motion to approve the proposed Site Plan and Variances subject to findings and conditions failed on a 4 -5 vote. Planning Commission concerns included the location and screening of the loading dock, conflict between truck traffic and pedestrian and vehicle circulation, and width of drive entrance /exit from 66th Street. The proponent submitted revised plans to address concerns raised by the Planning Commission. Mr. Teague stated WSB & Associates conducted a parking impact study, which concluded that the proposed parking should adequately serve the site. WSB and Associates also completed a traffic impact study to analyze impacts on the adjacent roadways. The study concluded that existing adjacent roadways would support the proposed addition. However, should delays and queuing ever become an issue at the France Avenue /651h Street intersection in the future, minor intersection turn lane and phasing improvements might be necessary. Should these improvements be required in the future, the Southdale Medical site would be responsible for its share of those improvements. Mr. Teague stated staff recommended that the City Council approve the Site Plan with Variances for the property located at 6525 -45 France Avenue, subject to the conditions and findings outlined in Resolution No. 2013 -77. Chuck Rickart, WSB & Associates, provided an overview and answered questions of the Council relating to the Southdale Medical Campus Expansion Traffic and Parking Study. The Council discussed whether to include a sidewalk to connect the west side of the building to the north side of 66th Street, concern relating to safety in the loading dock area, bike rack locations, the central plant proposed to be located on top of the parking ramp, and the proposed access points. Proponent Presentation James O'Shea, Collaborative Design Group, presented the proposed site plan for the Medical Campus Expansion at 6525 -45 France Avenue. Mr. O'Shea stated initial goals set out were improvements to accessibility, safety, and efficiency of parking in any location that the site would be affected, as well as to provide a new model for the delivery system that did not currently exist. Mr. O'Shea discussed the parking plan, the proposed central plant, the loading dock area, the intent to install new permeable pavers along 66th Street and Drew Avenue, and the intent not to change existing entrances to the site. Mr. O'Shea presented the materials board for review by the Council and answered questions relating to the proposed site plan and materials. Mayor Hovland opened the public hearing. Page 2 Minutes /Edina City Council /September 17, 2013 Public Testimony No one appeared to comment. Member Sprague made a motion, seconded by Member Brindle, to close the public hearing. Ayes: Bennett, Brindle, Sprague, Swenson, Hovland Motion carried. The Council discussion included support of postponing approval of the proposed site plan to ensure additional review by the Council of the following: addition of a sidewalk connection from the west end of the building to the north side of 66`h Street, colored concrete to clearly denote the sidewalks on the site, additional landscaping along the loading dock area, driveway width reduction with details relating to turning ratios to be discussed with the City Engineer, 7 p.m. to 6 a.m. and weekends for.loading zone hours, separation of the concrete area intended for truck turning radius from the interior sidewalk, expanding bike rack locations to the west and the north, incorporation of public art, confirmation of a sidewalk extension to the glassed corner area of the parking ramp, increased plantings around the parking ramp, aesthetic improvements to the parking ramp design (including the HVAC system /Central Plant) and parking ramp materials (potential for louvers) to be discussed with the Community Development Director, the incorporation of a mechanical system or alternative solution to separate the loading dock area from the drive lane into the parking ramp. Mr. Teague stated the conditions included in the proposed resolution would be revised according to the Council's comments. Member Swenson made a motion, seconded by Member Sprague, to continue consideration of Resolution No. 2013 -77, Approving a Site Plan With Variances At 6525 -45 France Avenue To Build a 60,000 Square Foot Addition And Parking Ramp Expansion For The Southdale Medical Office Campus, to October 1, 2013. Ayes: Bennett, Brindle, Sprague, Swenson, Hovland Motion carried. Vll. COMMUNITY COMMENT No one appeared to comment. VIII. REPORTS/ RECOMMENDATIONS VIII.A. RESOLUTION NO. 2013 -79 & RESOLUTION NO. 2013 -80, AWARDING SALE OF G.O. BONDS SERIES 2013A & 2013B —ADOPTED Manager Neal requested Council consideration of Resolution No. 2013 -79 and 2013 -80, awarding the sale of G.O. Bonds Series 2013A & 20136. Mark Ruff, Ehlers and Associates, reviewed the two purposes of the $8,265,000 General Obligation Bonds, Series 2013A. The first purpose would be to effect a current refunding of the HRA's Taxable Public Project revenue bonds, Series 2009B (Build America Bonds). The second purpose would be to fund approximately $2,630,000 in principal to the Permanent Improvement Revolving (PIR) Fund to finance the City's street reconstruction projects constructed in 2013 and assessed in 2014. The 2009B Bonds were originally issued through the HRA and as such, the HRA needed to adopt a resolution to redeem the 2009B Bonds as a separate action within the HRA agenda. Mr. Ruff reported on the City's AAA bond rating assigned by Moody's and Standard and Poor's. The low bid offered on Series 2013A was at a 2.67% interest rate. Member Bennett introduced and moved adoption of Resolution 2013 -79, Awarding Sale of G.O. Bonds Series 2013A. Member Swenson seconded the motion. Ayes: Bennett, Brindle, Sprague, Swenson, Hovland Motion carried. Mr. Ruff explained the purpose of the $1,125,000 General Obligation Bonds, Series 2013B, to finance the portion of the Braemar Golf Dome improvements project, net of insurance payments. The low bid offered Page 3 Minutes /Edina City Council /September 17, 2013 on Series 2013B was at a 3% interest rate. Member Sprague introduced and moved adoption of Resolution 2013 -80, Awarding Sale of G.O. Bonds Series 2013B. Member Swenson seconded the motion. Ayes: Bennett, Brindle, Sprague, Swenson, Hovland Motion carried. VIILB. SKETCH PLAN REVIEW — 6725 YORK AVENUE (WICK'S SITE) AND FIVE SINGLE FAMILY HOMES ON XERXES AVENUE TO THE EAST OF 6725 YORK - REVIEWED Community Development Director Presentation Mr. Teague presented the request of. Lennar Multifamily Investors, LLC for sketch plan review of its proposal to redevelop the property 'at 6725 York Avenue. The proposed project would also include five single - family houses on Xerxes Avenue. The proponent was in negotiations with these property owners to purchase and incorporate the houses into.the development. Mr. Teague stated the property at b`72S York (the former Wick's building site) was currently zoned PCD -3, Planned Commercial District -3, and guided CAC, Community Activity Center. The five- single family houses were zoned and guided for low- density residential use. The proponent was requesting consideration of a proposal to tear down the existing commercial building and the five single- family houses and build a six -story, 273 unit, and upscale apartment building with 22,289 square feet of retail on,the first .level: A parking lot was proposed in front of the retail store on York . Avenue and underground parking. for residents. Surface spaces would be available along the north and south lot lines for resident's guests. The loading area for the market would be at the rear of the retail building and south side of the apartment building. Mr. Teague advised that to accommodate the request, four amendments. to the Comprehensive Plan would be required: Building Height from 4 stories and 48 feet to 6 stories and 66 feet; Housing Density from 30 units per acre to 59 units per acre; Floor Area Ratio from 1.0 to 1.55; Re'-guiding the land use for the six single - family houses from Low Density Residential to Community Activity Center. In ;addition to the amendments, a rezoning of all the properties would then be required to Planned Unit Development (PUD). Mr. Teague stated the Planning Commission reviewed the sketch plan and provided comments relating to reducing the buildings impact on Xerxes Avenue, increasing greenspace where possible, consideration of the City Comprehensive Plan during the design process, reconsidering the fagade of the building as it relates to Xerxes Avenue, need for continued work on the loading dock area and the underground parking access, and incorporation of affordable housing. Proponent Presentation Peter Chmielewski, Lennar Multifamily Investors, LLC, introduced the concept of the sketch plan for the property located at 6725 York Avenue with five single - family houses on Xerxes Avenue to the east of 6725 York Avenue. Mr. Chmielewski discussed the intent to build a high -end luxury multifamily rental community with complimentary retail. Aaron Russet, ESG Architects, provided a presentation on the subject sketch plan, the setback on Xerxes Avenue, landscaping, walking path /sidewalk network, gathering spots, outdoor seating area, retail element, landscape buffer, and parking. The Council discussion included concern relating to the six story height across from single - family houses, the importance to include affordable units, incorporating a green roof over the market, option of utilizing podium height along Xerxes Avenue, improving the articulation /fagade of the market area, reduction in density, including some smaller units in unit mix, greenspace, additional work needed on the appearance of the townhouses, concern with the loading dock area and underground parking access, and concern with the concept of routing truck traffic onto Xerxes Avenue. VIII.C. SECOND READING GRANTED — ZONING ORDINANCE AMENDMENT REGARDING THE R -1 & R -2 ZONING DISTRICT REQUIREMENTS; ORDINANCE NO. 2013-09 — ADOPTED Community Development Director Presentation Page 4 r Minutes /Edina City Council /September 17, 2013 Mr. Teague stated proposed Ord in °46:2013 -09 reflected the Council's recommendation to include an option for side yard setback on lots 61 -74 feet in width. The options included meeting the current setback requirements and the revised setbacks proposed by the Planning Commission. Mr. Teague explained if the ordinance was adopted tonight, the effective date for the new requirements would be January 1, 2014. The Council discussion included the effective date of January 1,'2014 and the second -story setback rule reflected in the proposed ordinance. The Council directed inclusion of the following language as contained in the supplemental pages presented to the Council this evening for consideration: Page 4, Section 2, H: "...a combination of at least two (2) of the following architectural features: utilitarian features within every thirty (30) feet or less..." Member Swenson made a motion to grant Second Reading adopting .Ordinance No. 2013 -09, An Ordinance Amendment Regarding the R -1, Single Dwelling Unit, and R -2, Double Dwelling Unit District Requirements For Building Coverage, Setback, Height and General Regulations, as amended. Member Brindle seconded the motion. Rollcall: Ayes: Brindle, Sprague, Swenson, Hovland Nays: Bennett Motion carried. WILD. RESOLUTION NO. 2013 -76 ADOPTED — ACCEPTING VARIOUS DONATIONS Mayor Hovland explained that in order to comply with State Statutes; all donations to the City must be adopted by Resolution and approved by four favorable votes of the Council accepting the donations. Member Bennett introduced and moved adoption of Resolution No. 2013 -76 accepting various donations. Member Swenson seconded the motion. Rollcall: Ayes: Bennett, Brindle, Sprague, Swenson, Hovland Motion carried. VIII.E. RESOLUTION NO. 2013 -81 EMINENT DOMAIN ACQUISITION OF PROPERTY AT 3944 WEST 49 -X STREET — ADOPTED Mayor Hovland explained the City Council meeting would be recessed with the HRA meeting opened to hold the public hearing on the eminent domain acquisition of property at 3944 West 49 -Y: Street. City Attorney Knutson explained the public hearing process that allowed anyone to speak to the topic with a three - minute time limit. Member Sprague made a motion, seconded by Member Bennett, to recess the City Council meeting. Ayes: Bennett, Brindle, Sprague, Swenson, Hovland Motion carried. The meeting was recessed at 10:10 p.m. Member Bennett made a motion, seconded by Member Brindle, to reconvene the City Council meeting. Ayes: Bennett, Brindle, Sprague, Swenson, Hovland Motion carried. The City Council meeting was reconvened at 11:06 p.m. The Council discussion included the valuation process under Eminent Domain proceedings, potentially tabling action for two to four weeks to allow time to research additional information that might be available, the good faith attempt that had been made by the City to negotiate with the property owner, and future parking needs for the 50th and France area. Page 5 Minutes /Edina City Council /September 17, 2013 Mr. Neal stated approval of the resolution to proceed with eminent domain proceedings would trigger additional discussion for both parties and the City would continue to seek a willing buyer /willing seller transaction. Mr. Neal noted there were alternatives to the ultimate condemnation of the property and the City intended to propose all of those options if the Council approved the draft resolution. Member Sprague introduced and moved adoption of Resolution No'. 2013 -81, Eminent Domain Acquisition'— Authorizing the Acquisition of a Fee Simple Interest in Property located at 3944 West 49 -Y Street. Member Swenson'seconded the motion. Mr. Neal explained that at the end of the 60 -day time period, there would be another opportunity for Council evaluation prior to voting on whether to proceed to condemnation of the property. Ayes: Bennett, Sprague, Swenson Nays Hovland; Brindle Motion carried. IX. CORRESPONDENCE AND PETITIONS IX.A. CORRESPONDENCE Mayor Hovland acknowledged the Council's receipt of various correspondence. IX. B. :. MINUTES: 1. PARK BOARD MINUTES, AUGUST 13, 2013 2. HERITAGE PRESERVATIOMBOA'RD MINUTES, AUGUST 13, 2013 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES, AUGUST 28, 2013 4 TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MINUTES, JULY 18, 2013 Informational; no action required. X. AVIATION NOISE UPDATE — Received X1. MAYOR AND COUNCIL COMMENTS — Received XII. MANAGER'S COMMENTS — Received X111. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business on the Council Agenda, Mayor Hovland declared the meeting adjourned at 11:50 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Jane Timm, Deputy City Clerk Minutes approved by Edina City Council, October 1, 2013. James B. Hovland, Mayor Video Copy of the September 17, 2013, meeting available. Page 6 MINUTES OF THE CLOSED WORK SESSION OF THE EDINA CITY COUNCIL HELD AT CITY HALL SEPTEMBER 17, 2013 5:30 P.M. Mayor Hovland called the work session of the Edina City Council to order at 5:30 p.m. ROLL CALL Answering roll call were: Members Bennett, Brindle, Sprague, Swenson and Mayor Hovland. Edina City Staff attending the meeting: Annie Johnson, City Manager Intern; Roger Knutson, City Attorney; Karen Kurt, Assistant City Manager; Scott Neal, City Manager; Bill Neuendorf, Economic Development, Manager; Cary Teague, Community Development Director; Jane Timm, Deputy City Clerk; David Trevor, Attorney, Dorsey and Whitney. SESSION CLOSED Member Swenson made a motion, seconded by Member Sprague to move into closed session per Attorney - Client Privilege regarding the condemnation of the real property located at 3944 West 49 Street. Ayes: Bennett, Brindle, Sprague, Swenson, Hovland Motion carried. Member Sprague made a motion seconded by Member Bennett to adjourn the closed session and reconvene the work session at 6:00 p.m. Ayes: Bennett, Brindle, Sprague, Swenson, Hovland. Motion carried. Respectfully submitted, Minutes approved by Edina City Council, October 1, 2013. Jane M. Timm, Deputy City Clerk James B. Hovland, Mayor MINUTES OF THE JOINT WORK SESSION OF THE EDINA CITY COUNCIL AND HERITAGE PRESERVATION BOARD HELD AT CITY HALL SEPTEMBER 17, 2013 6:00 P.M. CALL TO ORDER Mayor Hovland called the meeting to order at 6:00 p.m. in the Community Room of City Hall. ROLL CALL Answering roll call were Members Bennett, Brindle, Sprague, Swenson and Mayor Hovland. Heritage Preservation Board Members attending were: Michael Birdman, Jennifer Christiaansen, Connie McDermott, Joyce Mellom, Robert Moore, Tim O'Brien, Peter Sussman and Ryan Weber. Member Tracy Holtan entered the meeting at 6:45 p.m. Edina City Staff attending the meeting included: Karen Kurt, Assistant City Manager; Scott Neal, City Manager Joyce Repya, Senior Planner; Cary Teague, Community Development Director; and Jane Timm, Deputy City Clerk. Mayor Hovland stated the purpose of the meeting was to review the 2013 and 2014 Work Plans and discuss items of mutual interest. HERITAGE BOARD MEMBER EDUCATION Senior Planner, Repya explained to the City Council the Heritage Preservation Board (HPB) had five new members this year. Ms. Repya presented the City Council members with the new HPB Resource Booklet that was given to all members. 2013 WORK PLAN UPDATE Chair Moore and Ms. Repya reviewed the 2013 Work Plan. The Board and City Council discussed the progress to date including: 1. Midcentury Modern Historic Context Study and the next steps; 2. Voluntary Heritage Landmark Designations; 3. Landmark designation for 2013 was the Wooddale Bridge; 4. Southdale Center was given the Edina Heritage Award for 2013; and 5. Guidelines for sustainability when rehabilitating historic buildings have been adopted and the document has been scheduled to go online. 2014 PROPOSED WORK PLAN. The Council and Board discussed items and initiatives that were identified for inclusion in the 2014 Work Plan: 1. Developing videos on Edina Heritage Landmarks and Heritage Preservation Program; 2. Updating accessibility to buildings, i.e. Tupa Park's Cahill School and Grange Hall; 3. Developing a Heritage Resources Disaster Management Plan; 4. Updating Edina's Heritage Resources Inventory & converting data an electronic format; and 5. Increasing board member participation at State & National preservation conferences. . Mayor Hovland and the City Council thanked the Board for their work on behalf of the City. Mayor Hovland declared the meeting adjourned at 6:55 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Minutes approved by Edina City Council, October 1, 2013. Jane Timm, Deputy City Clerk James B. Hovland, Mayor R55CKREG LOG20000 CITY OF EDINA 9/18/2013 7:53:24 Council Check Register Page - 1 911912013 - 911912013 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit 375382 9/1912013 102971 ACE ICE COMPANY 109.20 324401 1720486 5842.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX YORK SELLING 27.60 324402 1720481 5822.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX 50TH ST SELLING 136.80 375383 9/19/2013 100575 ALL SAFE INC. 213.29 EXTINGUISHER MAINTENANCE 324165 123746 1400.6514 INSPECTION EXPENSES POLICE DEPT. GENERAL 667.25 EXTINGUISHER MAINTENANCE 324468 123748 1470.6216 EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE FIRE DEPT. GENERAL 41.78 EXTINGUISHER MAINTENANCE 324469 123747 1470.6215 EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE FIRE DEPT. GENERAL 922.32 375384 9/19/2013 100058 ALLIED WASTE SERVICES #894 34,192.80 RECYCLING 324363 3279809 5952.6183 RECYCLING CHARGES RECYCLING 34,192.80 375385 911912013 102109 ANCOM TECHNICAL CENTER 114.60 PAGER REPAIRS 324470 40331 1470.6180 CONTRACTED REPAIRS FIRE DEPT. GENERAL 198.18 HEADSET REPAIR 324471 40332 1470.6180 CONTRACTED REPAIRS FIRE DEPT. GENERAL 181.04 HEADSET REPAIR 324472 40333 1470.6180 CONTRACTED REPAIRS FIRE DEPT. GENERAL 493.82 375386 9119/2013 102171 ANDERSON -JOHNSON ASSOCIATES 990.00 BALL FIELD RENOVATIONS 324166 121000813 47085.6710 EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT GARDEN PK BASEBALL FIELD 990.00 375387 9/19/2013 102172 APPERrs FOODSERVICE 845.24 FOOD 324268 1986954 5421.5510 COST OF GOODS SOLD GRILL 845.24 375388 911912013 103680 ARAMARK REFRESHMENT SRVCS 424.13 COFFEE 324167 1086811 1550.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES CENTRAL SERVICES GENERAL 424.13 375389 911912013 114475 ARMOR SECURITY INC. 154.38 ALARM MONITORING SERVICE 324504 173004 1646.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES BUILDING MAINTENANCE 102.92 ALARM MONITORING SERVICE 324505 173005 1646.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES BUILDING MAINTENANCE 257.30 375390 9/1912013 132031 ARTISAN BEER COMPANY 1,607.00 324311 27135 5842.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER YORK SELLING 961.00 324312 27136 5862.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER VERNON SELLING 2,568.00 R55CKREG LOG20000 CITY OF EDINA 9/18/2013 7:53:24 Council Check Register Page - 2 9/19/2013 - 9/19/2013 Check # Date Amount Supplier/ Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit 375391 911912013 102774 ASPEN WASTE SYSTEMS 258.54 324388 9/01/2013 7411:6182 RUBBISH REMOVAL PSTF OCCUPANCY 258.54 375392 911912013 101195 AUTO ELECTRIC OF BLOOMINGTON 1 208.41 ALTERNATOR 00005550 324506 153970 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 208.41 375393 911912013 103241 BALDINGER, WENDY 150.00 EP ENTERTAINMENT 9/12113 324162 083113 5710.6136 PROFESSIONAL SVC - OTHER EDINBOROUGH ADMINISTRATION 150.00 375394 911912013 100643 BARR ENGINEERING CO. 685.32 GIS MAPPING 324473 23271068.300 -14 5913.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES DISTRIBUTION 685.32 376396 911912013 102195 BATTERIES PLUS 40.08 BATTERY 00006364 324269 018- 312291 5431.6530 REPAIR PARTS RICHARDS GC MAINTENANCE 40.08 375398 911912013 100646 BECKER ARENA PRODUCTS INC. 160.31 EDGER RENTAL 324168 00095187 5521.640.6 GENERAL SUPPLIES ARENA ICE MAINT 160.31 375397 911912013 101355 BELLBOY CORPORATION 182.29 324313 89016700 5822.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX 50TH ST SELLING 178.16 324314 88945400 5842.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX YORK SELLING 81.60- 324315 88966700 5842.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX YORK SELLING 284.45 324403 79753900 5862.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR VERNON SELLING 3.00- 324404 79753900C 5862:5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR VERNON SELLING 123.55 324405 79754100 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 683.85 376398 911912013 125139 BERNICK'S 352.00 324406 83170 5842.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER YORK SELLING 352.00 375399 9119/2013 100648 BERTELSON OFFICE PRODUCTS 80.02 PENS, TAPE 324169 WO- 877687 -1 1550.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES CENTRAL SERVICES GENERAL 133.87 OFFICE SUPPLIES 00003011 324364 WO- 878009 -1 1400.6513 OFFICE SUPPLIES POLICE DEPT. GENERAL 79.04 OFFICE SUPPLIES 00003012 .324365 WO- 878140 -1 1400.6513 OFFICE SUPPLIES POLICE DEPT. GENERAL CITY OF EDINA 9/18 /2013 7:53:24 R55CKREG LOG20000 Council Check Register Page - 3 9/19/2013 —9/19/2013 Check # Date Amount Supplier/ Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit 292.93 375400 911912013 131494 BONNER & LEACH LLP 18,727.50 AUG 2013 SERVICES 324270 090613 1195.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES LEGAL SERVICES 18,727.50 375401 9119/2013 119351 BOURGET IMPORTS 350.00 324316 115441 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 1,375.00 324407 115497 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 1,725.00 375402 9/19/2013 103239 BRIN NORTHWESTERN GLASS CO. 310.53 REPAIR BROKEN SIDELITE 324170 522600S 5720.6180 CONTRACTED REPAIRS EDINBOROUGH OPERATIONS 310.53 375403 9/19/2013 101241 BROWN TRAFFIC PRODUCTS INC. 1,501.59 SIGNAL MODULES 00001837 324271 040208 1330.6215 EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE TRAFFIC SIGNALS 5,018.85 TRAFFIC LIGHTS 324507 040235 1330.6215 EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE TRAFFIC SIGNALS 6,520.44 375404 911912013 129290 BROWN, SHELLEY 5.00 PROGRAM CANCELATION 324366 REFUND 1600.4390.15 GEN ADAPTIVE REC PARK ADMIN. GENERAL 5.00 375405 911912013 121518 BUSHNELL OUTDOOR PRODUCTS 221.87 RANGE FINDER 324367 929622 5440.5511 COST OF GOODS - PRO SHOP PRO SHOP RETAIL SALES 221.87 375406 911912013 102149 CALLAWAYGOLF 96.04 GOLF CLUB 324368 924691049 5440.5511 COST OF GOODS - PRO SHOP PRO SHOP RETAIL SALES 96.04 375407 9119/2013 119455 CAPITOL BEVERAGE SALES 4,867.90 324317 354333 5842.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER YORK SELLING 42.95 324318 354334 5842.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX YORK SELLING 69.25 324319 354336 5822.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX 50TH ST SELLING 798.95 324320 354335 5822.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER 50TH ST SELLING 5,779.05 375408 9/1912013 132774 CARLSON, NANCY 150.00 FILM FESTIVAL POSTER 324369 JUDGE 5110.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES ART CENTER ADMINISTRATION 150.00 R55CKREG LOG20000 CITY OF EDINA 9/18/2013 7:53:24 Council Check Register.. Page - 4 9119/2013 - 9/1912013 Check # Date Amount Supplier/ Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit 375409 9119/2013 116683 CAT & FIDDLE BEVERAGE 487.50 324321 96621 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 287.50 324322 96622 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 775.00 375410 9119/2013 100897 CENTERPOINT ENERGY 15.92 324171 090413 5821.6186 HEAT 50TH ST OCCUPANCY 27.25 324171 090413 5430.6186 HEAT RICHARDS GOLF COURSE 33.34 324171 090413 5851.6186 HEAT VERNON OCCUPANCY 33.38 324171 090413 5422.6186 HEAT MAINT OF COURSE & GROUNDS 34.03 324171 090413 5841.6186 HEAT YORK OCCUPANCY 46.27 324171 090413 1481.6186 HEAT YORK FIRE STATION 88.71 324171 090413 1628.6186 HEAT SENIOR CITIZENS 113.92 324171 090413 5921.6186 HEAT SANITARY LIFT STATION MAINT 115.93 324171 090413. 5420.6186 HEAT CLUB HOUSE 125.83 324171 090413 5913.6186 HEAT DISTRIBUTION 133.57 324171 090413 5761.6186 HEAT CENTENNIAL LAKES OPERATING 253.94 324171 090413 5111.6186 HEAT ART CENTER BLDG/MAtNT 273.82 324171 090413 1552:6186 HEAT CENT SVC PW BUILDING 348.61 324171 090413 1646.6186 HEAT BUILDING MAINTENANCE 1,063.25 324171 090413 5911.6186 HEAT WELL PUMPS 2,894.48 324171 090413 5511.6186 HEAT ARENA BLDG/GROUNDS 5,602.25 375411 911912013 123898 CENTURYLINK 606.52 612 E01 -0426 324172 0426 -9113 1554.6188 TELEPHONE CENT SERV GEN - MIS 606.52 612 E12 -6797 324173 6797 -9/13 1554.6188 TELEPHONE CENT SERV GEN - MIS 109.74 952 835 -1161 324272 1161 -9/13 5720.6188 TELEPHONE EDINBOROUGH OPERATIONS 210.92 952 835 -6661 324273 6661 -9/13 1552.6188 TELEPHONE CENT SVC PW BUILDING 104.93 612 E23 -0652 GV911 324274 0652 -9/13 2310.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES E911 1,638.63 375412 9119/2013 117187 CHEM SYSTEMS LTD 234.06 SCRUBBER REPAIR 324174 517667 5511.6180 CONTRACTED REPAIRS ARENA BLDG/GROUNDS 234.06 375413 911912013 123148 CHRISTIANSEN, STEVEN 191.64 VIDEO PRODUCTION 324474 061713 1130.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES COMMUNICATIONS 191.64 375414 911912013 116681 CLEAR CHANNEL BROADCASTING INC CITY OF EDINA 9/18/2013 7:53:24 R55CKREG LOG20000 Council Check Register Page - 5 9/19/2013 — 9119/2013 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit 600.00 RADIO ADS 324175 094 - 195944 5760.6122 ADVERTISING OTHER CENTENNIAL LAKES ADMIN EXPENSE 800.00 RADIO ADS 324175 094 - 195944 5410.6122 ADVERTISING OTHER GOLF ADMINISTRATION 1,400.00 375415 911912013 100692 COCA -COLA REFRESHMENTS 246.60 324323 0178329720 5842.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX YORK SELLING 246.60 375416 911912013 101507 COIT SERVICES 2,606.78 DUCT CLEANING 324389 M- 715503 7411.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES PSTF OCCUPANCY 1,029.84 324390 M- 715506 7411.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES PSTF OCCUPANCY 3,636.62 375417 9/1912013 120826 COMCAST SPOTLIGHT 836.33 CABLE TV ADVERTISING 324475 EDINA 5822.6122 ADVERTISING OTHER 50TH ST SELLING LIQUOR -8/13 836.33 CABLE TV ADVERTISING 324475 EDINA 5842.6122 ADVERTISING OTHER YORK SELLING LIQUOR -8113 836.34 CABLE TV ADVERTISING 324475 EDINA 5862.6122 ADVERTISING OTHER VERNON SELLING LIQUOR -8/13 2,509.00 375418 9/1912013 101329 CONSTRUCTION MATERIALS INC. 1,225.34 REBAR 00001835 324176 0101624 -IN 47078.6710 EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT COUNTRYSIDE PK PLAYGROUNDBPATH 1,225.34 375419 9/1912013 100695 CONTINENTAL CLAY CO. 111.64 GLAZE 00009285 324177 R200389333 5110.6564 CRAFT SUPPLIES ART CENTER ADMINISTRATION 111.64 375420 911912013 100699 CULLIGAN BOTTLED WATER 218.69 114 - 10014090 -3 324178 083113 1400.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES POLICE DEPT. GENERAL 111.08 114 - 09855685 -4 324391 114 - 09855685 -4- 7411.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES PSTF OCCUPANCY 8/13 329.77 375421 911912013 104020 DALCO 128.42 PEROXIDE FLOOR CLEANER 00002208 324179 2648464 5720.6511 CLEANING SUPPLIES EDINBOROUGH OPERATIONS 128.42 375422 9/19/2013 116713 DAVEY TREE EXPERT CO., THE 1,743.22 REMOVE DISEASED ELMS 324508 907166712 1644.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES TREES 8 MAINTENANCE R55CKREG LOG20000 48.75 CITY OF EDINA 9/18/2ui3 7:53:24 911912013 124503 EDEN PRAIRIE WINLECTRIC CO. Council Check Register Page - 6 37.48 LIGHTBULBS 324476 10234300 9/19/2013 - 9/1912013 231.43 Check # Date Amount Supplier I Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit 1,743.22 274.98 375429 375423 911912013 102478 DAY DISTRIBUTING CO. 310.00 5,084.20 324393 324324 718104 5842.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER YORK SELLING 89.60 324325 718105 5842.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX YORK SELLING 1,119.80 324326 718102 5862.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER VERNON SELLING 113 -077 6,293.60 85.75 375424 9/1912013 9119/2013 100720 DENNYS 5TH AVE. BAKERY 102340 EDMUNDS, LIZ 119.70 BAKERY 324275 471839 5421.5510 COST OF GOODS SOLD GRILL 90.60 324276 471840 5421.5510 COST OF GOODS SOLD GRILL 210.30 375425 911912013 182.21 182:21 375426 911912013 53.46 102831 DEX MEDIA EAST INC. 651972955 324380 651972955 -8113 5760.6122 123162 DISH 8255 7070 8142 2839 324392 090413 7411.6406 53.46 375427 911912013 132762 DURAN, ROBERTO 48.75 UTILITY OVERPAYMENT REFUND 324277- 6348 JOSEPHINE 5900.2015 AVE 5861.6406 1646.6578 1646.6578 5900.2015 1122.6103 5842.5515 ADVERTISING OTHER GENERAL SUPPLIES CUSTOMER REFUND GENERAL SUPPLIES LAMPS & FIXTURES LAMPS & FIXTURES CUSTOMER REFUND PROFESSIONAL SERVICES CENTENNIAL LAKES ADMIN EXPENSE PSTF OCCUPANCY UTILITY BALANCE SHEET VERNON OCCUPANCY BUILDING MAINTENANCE BUILDING MAINTENANCE UTILITY BALANCE SHEET ENERGY & ENVIRONMENT COMM COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX YORK SELLING 48.75 375428 911912013 124503 EDEN PRAIRIE WINLECTRIC CO. 37.48 LIGHTBULBS 324476 10234300 231.43 RECEPTICALES 00001804' 324509 10189202 6.07 COVERS 00001834 324510 10209701 274.98 375429 9/1912013 121333 EDINAFOOTBALLASSOCIATION 310.00 CHECK DEPOSITED IN ERROR 324393 REFUND 310.00 375430 911912013 102955 EDINA PUBLIC SCHOOLS 85.75 TOUR OF EDINA BUS TRIP 324478 113 -077 85.75 375431 9119/2013 102340 EDMUNDS, LIZ 255.50 324327 984 5861.6406 1646.6578 1646.6578 5900.2015 1122.6103 5842.5515 ADVERTISING OTHER GENERAL SUPPLIES CUSTOMER REFUND GENERAL SUPPLIES LAMPS & FIXTURES LAMPS & FIXTURES CUSTOMER REFUND PROFESSIONAL SERVICES CENTENNIAL LAKES ADMIN EXPENSE PSTF OCCUPANCY UTILITY BALANCE SHEET VERNON OCCUPANCY BUILDING MAINTENANCE BUILDING MAINTENANCE UTILITY BALANCE SHEET ENERGY & ENVIRONMENT COMM COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX YORK SELLING GEN'ADAPTIVE REC 9/18/2013 7:53:24 Page - 7 Business Unit CENTENNIAL TIF DISTRICT GENERAL (BILLING) PARK ADMIN. GENERAL CONFERENCES 8 SCHOOLS FIRE DEPT. GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES FIRE DEPT. GENERAL REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN REPAIR PARTS BUILDING MAINTENANCE CONTRACTOR PAYMENTS WATER METER REPLACEMENT GENERAL SUPPLIES PSTF OCCUPANCY PROFESSIONAL SERVICES ENGINEERING GENERAL CITY OF EDINA R55CKREG LOG20000 375433 911912013 Council Check Register 9/19/2013 — 9/19/2013 Check # Date Amount Supplier/ Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description 255.50 5.00 375432 9119/2013 100049 EHLERS 150.00 TIF PUBLICATION 324511 346821 9232.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 90000 UTILITY RATE ANALYSIS 324512 346822 5910.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES GEN'ADAPTIVE REC 9/18/2013 7:53:24 Page - 7 Business Unit CENTENNIAL TIF DISTRICT GENERAL (BILLING) PARK ADMIN. GENERAL CONFERENCES 8 SCHOOLS FIRE DEPT. GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES FIRE DEPT. GENERAL REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN REPAIR PARTS BUILDING MAINTENANCE CONTRACTOR PAYMENTS WATER METER REPLACEMENT GENERAL SUPPLIES PSTF OCCUPANCY PROFESSIONAL SERVICES ENGINEERING GENERAL 1,050.00 375433 911912013 132773 ESPINOSA, KARI 5.00 PROGRAM CANCELATION 324370 REFUND 1600.4390.15 5.00 375434 9/1912013 104004 ESSIG, CRAIG 4,095.00 TUITION REIMBURSEMENT 324477 091213 1470.6104 4,095.00 375435 9/1912013 100018 EXPERT T BILLING 6,162.00 AUGUST 2013 BILLINGS 324180 090513 1470.6103 6,162.00 375436 9/19/2013 100146 FACTORY MOTOR PARTS COMPANY 76.84 BATTERY 324181 69- 111616 1553.6530 44.27 FILTERS 324278 69- 112138 1553.6530 64.36 FVP 24FXHD 324513 69- 111854 1553.6530 185.47 375437 9/1912013 106035 FASTENAL COMPANY 6.93 HARDWARE 00001879 324514 MNSTU49483 1646.6530 6.93 375438 9/19/2013 126004 FERGUSON WATERWORKS 5,436.67 PARTIAL PAYMENT NO. 15 324526 092013 05536.1705.30 5,436.67 375439 911912013 116189 FILTRATION SYSTEMS INC. 2,301.89 AIR FILTERS 324394 55447 7411.6406 2,301.89 375440 9119/2013 120831 FIRST SCRIBE INC. - 425.00 ROWAY 324479 2460696 1260.6103 425.00 375441 911912013 126444 FISH WINDOW CLEANING GEN'ADAPTIVE REC 9/18/2013 7:53:24 Page - 7 Business Unit CENTENNIAL TIF DISTRICT GENERAL (BILLING) PARK ADMIN. GENERAL CONFERENCES 8 SCHOOLS FIRE DEPT. GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES FIRE DEPT. GENERAL REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN REPAIR PARTS BUILDING MAINTENANCE CONTRACTOR PAYMENTS WATER METER REPLACEMENT GENERAL SUPPLIES PSTF OCCUPANCY PROFESSIONAL SERVICES ENGINEERING GENERAL R55CKREG LOG20000 CITY OF EDINA Council Check Register 9/19/2013 9/19/2013 Check # Dale Amount Supplier/ Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description 641.50 WINDOW WASHING 324480 FIRE STATION 1 1470.6180 CONTRACTED REPAIRS PROFESSIONAL SERVICES LAUNDRY LAUNDRY LAUNDRY. LAUNDRY CLEANING SUPPLIES LAUNDRY - LAUNDRY COURSE BEAUTIFICATION CONTRACTED REPAIRS CONTRACTED REPAIRS 9/18/k -j 7:53:24 Page - 8 Business Unit FIRE DEPT. GENERAL BUILDING MAINTENANCE ARENA BLDG/GROUNDS BUILDING MAINTENANCE DISTRIBUTION BUILDING MAINTENANCE CENT SVC PW BUILDING EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN GENERAL MAINTENANCE MAINT OF COURSE & GROUNDS ARENA ICE MAINT ARENA ICE MAINT TOOLS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 641.50 CENTENNIAL LAKES OPERATING REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN REPAIR PARTS 375442 911912013 100758 FLANAGAN SALES INC. 281.38 PLAYGROUND REPLACEMENT PARTS 324515 14666 1646.6103 281.38 375443 9119/2013 100764 G & K SERVICES 14.16 324279 . 083113 5511.6201 74.60 324279 083113 1646.6201 77.16 .324279: 083113 5913.6201 98.46 324279 083113 1646.6201 119.59 324279 083113 1552.6511 178.48 324279 083113 1553.6201 231.96 324279 083113 1301:6201 794.41 375444 911912013 123080 GARDENVIEW GREENHOUSE 21.16 MUMS 324280 475510 5422.6275 21.16 375445 911912013 100768 GARTNER REFRIGERATION & MFG IN. 308.00 COMPRESSOR REPAIR 324182 42819 5521.6180 309.00 COMPRESSOR REPAIR 324183 42826 5521.6180 618.00 375446 911912013 100920 GENUINE PARTS COMPANY -MINNEA 24.47 AUTO PARTS 324281 083113 1553.6556 145.29 AUTO PARTS 324281 083113 5761.6556' 355.03 AUTO PARTS 324281 083113 1553.6530 411.59 AUTO PARTS 324281 083113 5422.6530 936.38 375447 911912013 130052 GLOWSHOT TARGETS LLC 697.30 TARGETS 324395 284 7414.6406 697.30 375448 911912013 100781 GRAFIX SHOPPE 262.82 VEHICLE REPAIRS 324381 89092 421400.6710 262.82 375449 911912013 101103 GRAINGER PROFESSIONAL SERVICES LAUNDRY LAUNDRY LAUNDRY. LAUNDRY CLEANING SUPPLIES LAUNDRY - LAUNDRY COURSE BEAUTIFICATION CONTRACTED REPAIRS CONTRACTED REPAIRS 9/18/k -j 7:53:24 Page - 8 Business Unit FIRE DEPT. GENERAL BUILDING MAINTENANCE ARENA BLDG/GROUNDS BUILDING MAINTENANCE DISTRIBUTION BUILDING MAINTENANCE CENT SVC PW BUILDING EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN GENERAL MAINTENANCE MAINT OF COURSE & GROUNDS ARENA ICE MAINT ARENA ICE MAINT TOOLS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN TOOLS CENTENNIAL LAKES OPERATING REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN REPAIR PARTS MAINT OF COURSE & GROUNDS GENERAL SUPPLIES PUBLIC PROGRAMS EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT POLICE EQUIPMENT CITY OF EDINA 9/18/2013 7:53:24 R55CKREG LOG20000 Council Check Register Page - 9 9/19/2013 — 9/19/2013 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit 417.49 AIR CONDITIONER -WELL CONTROLS0006229 324282 9228659539 5422.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES MAINT OF COURSE & GROUNDS 146.45 DIGITAL CLAMP 00001873 324283 9232248501 1301.6556 TOOLS GENERAL MAINTENANCE 563.94 375450 9/19/2013 100785 GREUPNER, JOE 3,230.00 GROUP LESSONS 324371 091213 5410.6132 PROFESSIONAL SVCS - GOLF GOLF ADMINISTRATION 3,230.00 375451 911912013 129108 HAAG COMPANIES INC. 137.58 SOD, BLACK DIRT 324382 083113 1314.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES STREET RENOVATION 616.89 SOD, BLACK DIRT 324382 083113 5913.6543 SOD & BLACK DIRT DISTRIBUTION 1,152.16 SOD, BLACK DIRT 324382 083113 1643.6543 SOD & BLACK DIRT GENERAL TURF CARE 1,806.08 MULCH, SOIL 324382 083113 5761.6540 FERTILIZER CENTENNIAL LAKES OPERATING 3,712.71 375452 9/1912013 102426 HALE, WILLIAM 250.00 EP ENTERTAINMENT 9/05/13 324160 083113 5710.6136 PROFESSIONAL SVC - OTHER EDINBOROUGH ADMINISTRATION 250.00 375453 9/19/2013 106431 HALL, MARY 150.00 EP ENTERTAINMENT 9/19/13 324164 090113 5710.6136 PROFESSIONAL SVC - OTHER EDINBOROUGH ADMINISTRATION 150.00 375454 911912013 102618 HARDWOOD CREEK LUMBER INC 218.87 HUBS, LATHS 324481 9394 01393.1705.31 MATERIALS/SUPPLIES MENDELSSOHNA 218.87 HUBS, LATHS 324481 9394 01398.1705.31 MATERIALS /SUPPLIES LAKE EDINA B 437.74 375455 911912013 120227 HARTSHORN, BOB 1,237.44 SENIOR SOFTBALL EXPENSES 324482 090913 1628.4392.03 SENIOR SOFTBALL SENIOR CITIZENS 1,237.44 375456 9119/2013 100797 HAWKINS INC. 560.02 CHLORINE, SODIUM HYDROXIDE 324184 3506061 5311.6545 CHEMICALS POOL OPERATION 560.02 375457 9/19/2013 127071 HELMER PRINTING INC. 135.00 EMPLOYEE NEWSLETTER 324483 148337 1130.6575 PRINTING COMMUNICATIONS 135.00 375458 911912013 100801 HENNEPIN COUNTY TREASURER 825.06 SPEC [AL ASSESSMENTS 324185 091013 1000.1303 DUE FROM HRA GENERAL FUND BALANCE SHEET R55CKREG LOG20000 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation 1,921.58 SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS 12,125.15 SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS 14,871.79 375459 9/1912013 104375 HOHENSTEINS INC. CITY OF EDINA Council Check Register. 9/19/2013 9/19/2013' PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description 324185. 091013 5820.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 324185 091013 1503.6915 SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS 9/18/2013 7:53:24 Page - 10 Business Unit 50TH STREET GENERAL SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER VERNON SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER YORK SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX VERNON SELLING PROFESSIONAL SVC - OTHER EDINBOROUGH ADMINISTRATION PROFESSIONAL SERVICES TREES & MAINTENANCE COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER YORK SELLING SALE OF WATER UTILITY REVENUES PROFESSIONAL SVC - OTHER EDINBOROUGH ADMINISTRATION ADVERTISING OTHER GOLF ADMINISTRATION GENERAL SUPPLIES RUBBISH REMOVAL ENGINEERING GENERAL MAINT OF COURSE & GROUNDS 2,163.50 324328 665576 5862.5514 2,672.50 324329 665779 5842.5514 56.00 324408 665577 5862.5515 4,892.00 375460 911912013 103302 HONEYWELL CONCERT BAND 50.00 EP ENTERTAINMENT 9/22/13 324484 090113 5710.6136 50.00 375461 9119/2013 100808 HORWATH, THOMAS 368.95 MILEAGE REIMBURSEMENT 324516 091113 1644.6103 368.95 375462 9119/2013 131544 INDEED BREWING COMPANY 555.00 324409 14236 5842.5514 555.00 375463 911912013 105694 INFRATECH 1,076.13 HYDRANT USAGE REFUND 324533 091213 $901.4626 1,076.13 375464 9119/2013 123035 INVER HILLS COMMUNITY BAND 150.00 EP ENTERTAINMENT 9/15/13 324163 090113 5710.6136 150.00 375465 911912013 125031 J.S. PALUCH COMPANY INC. 36.20 ST PATRICK CHURCH AD 324284 1225394 -8113 5410.6122 36.20 375466 9119/2013 100830 JERRY'S PRINTING 273.60 FINAL INSPECTION FORMS 00002545 324485 62169 , 1260.6406 273.60 375467 911912013 121075 JIMMY'S JOHNNYS INC. 230.30 TOILET SERVICE 324372 68536 5422.6182 230.30 9/18/2013 7:53:24 Page - 10 Business Unit 50TH STREET GENERAL SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER VERNON SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER YORK SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX VERNON SELLING PROFESSIONAL SVC - OTHER EDINBOROUGH ADMINISTRATION PROFESSIONAL SERVICES TREES & MAINTENANCE COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER YORK SELLING SALE OF WATER UTILITY REVENUES PROFESSIONAL SVC - OTHER EDINBOROUGH ADMINISTRATION ADVERTISING OTHER GOLF ADMINISTRATION GENERAL SUPPLIES RUBBISH REMOVAL ENGINEERING GENERAL MAINT OF COURSE & GROUNDS R55CKREG LOG20000 CITY OF EDINA 9/18/2013 7:53:24 Council Check Register Page - 11 9/19/2013 - 9/19/2013 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit 375468 9119/2013 100741 JJ TAYLOR DIST. OF MINN 1,947.05 324330 2119717 5822.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER 50TH ST SELLING 6,637.34 324331 2119767 5842.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER YORK SELLING 96.35 324332 2119768 5842.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX YORK SELLING 36.00 324333 2119769 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 217.00 324373 2132679 5421.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER GRILL 4,247.55 324416 2119752 5862.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER VERNON SELLING 13,181.29 375469 911912013 124104 JOHN DEERE LANDSCAPES INC. 186.24 ROUND -UP 00001901 324517 66016993 1643.6546 WEED SPRAY GENERAL TURF CARE 186.24 375471 911912013 100836 JOHNSON BROTHERS LIQUOR CO. 2,302.70 324411 1667298 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 1,805.36 324412 1667300 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 6,701.71 324413 1667295 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 2,24 324414 1667273 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 1,212.32. 324415 1667274 5822.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR 50TH ST SELLING 131.07 324416 1667275 5822.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR 50TH ST SELLING 417.63 324417 1667277 5822.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR 50TH ST SELLING 111.89 324418 1667281 5822.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR 50TH ST SELLING 4,071.10 324419 1667297 5862.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR VERNON SELLING 1,119.80 324420 1667299 5862.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR VERNON SELLING 1,362.86 324421 1667296 5862.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR VERNON SELLING 292.32 324422 1667301 5862.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR VERNON SELLING 306.22 324423 1667294 5842.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR YORK SELLING 64.49 324424 1667292 5842.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX YORK SELLING 3.662.15 324425 1667291 5842.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR YORK SELLING 1,12 324426 1667279 5842.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR YORK SELLING 7,331.64 324427 1667289 5842.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR YORK SELLING 1,540.20 324428 1667288 5842.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR YORK SELLING 5,344.58 324429 1667287 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 1,12 324430 1667271 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 3,422.84 324431 1667293 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 2,483.29 324432 1667290 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 225.16 324433 1667282 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 6.67- 324434 590043 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 43,907.14 375472 911912013 103230 JOHNSTON'S SALES & SERVICE 139.84 VACUUM REPAIR 324486 4920 5821.6530 REPAIR PARTS 50TH ST OCCUPANCY R55CKREG LOG20000 CITY OF EDINA Council Check Register v 9/19/2013 — 9/19/2013 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description 139.84 375473 9/19/2013 132778 JURISZ, BEN 125.00 MEDIA EXTREME TRAINING 324487 1 1130.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 9/18/2013 7:53:24 Page - 12 Business Unit COMMUNICATIONS PROFESSIONAL SVC - OTHER ARENA BLDG/GROUNDS DEPT UNIFORMS FIRE DEPT. GENERAL DEPT UNIFORMS FIRE DEPT. GENERAL DEPT UNIFORMS FIRE DEPT. GENERAL DEPT UNIFORMS FIRE DEPT. GENERAL REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN SENIOR TRIPS SENIOR CITIZENS GENERAL SUPPLIES STREET LIGHTING ORNAMENTAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES CENTRAL SERVICES GENERAL SAND GRAVEL & ROCK MAINT OF COURSE & GROUNDS CONFERENCES 8 SCHOOLS TRAINING 125.00 375474 9119/2013 132761 KAO, TINA 12.00 CLASS OVERPAYMENT REFUND 324285 090913 5511.6136 12.00 375475 9119/2013 111018 KEEPRS INC. 520.18 UNIFORMS 00003652 324488 222974 1470.6558 185.83 00003652 324489 222974 -01 1470.6558 389.93 00003630 324490 218269 -02 1470.6558 36.99 00003671 324491 225752 1470.6558 1,132.93 375476 911912013 - 100845 KREMER SERVICES LLC 96.10 RISER BLOCK 00005424 324186 0000027097 1553.6530 96.10 375477 911912013 129813 LA VALLEUR, BARBARA 77.00 DULUTH TRIP REFUND 324286 091113 1628.4392.07 77.00 375478 9119/2013 100852 LAWSON PRODUCTS INC. 256.63 DRILL BITS, METAL SCREWS 00001610 324518 9301788398 1322.6406 256.63 375479 911912013 101552 LEAGUE OF MINNESOTA CITIES 2,040.00 PREVENTING HARASSMENT TRAINING 324492 EDINA STAFF 1550.6103 2,040.00 375480 911912013 100854 LEITNER COMPANY 2,551.99 SAND 324287 083113 5422.6517 2,551.99 375481 9119/2013 101465 LOCAL 49 TRAINING CENTER 1,350.00 EQUIPT OPERATOR TRAINING 324288 BOB STEINMETZ 1281.6104 1,350.00 375482 9119/2013 100858 LOGIS 9/18/2013 7:53:24 Page - 12 Business Unit COMMUNICATIONS PROFESSIONAL SVC - OTHER ARENA BLDG/GROUNDS DEPT UNIFORMS FIRE DEPT. GENERAL DEPT UNIFORMS FIRE DEPT. GENERAL DEPT UNIFORMS FIRE DEPT. GENERAL DEPT UNIFORMS FIRE DEPT. GENERAL REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN SENIOR TRIPS SENIOR CITIZENS GENERAL SUPPLIES STREET LIGHTING ORNAMENTAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES CENTRAL SERVICES GENERAL SAND GRAVEL & ROCK MAINT OF COURSE & GROUNDS CONFERENCES 8 SCHOOLS TRAINING CITY OF EDINA 9/18/2013 7:53:24 R55CKREG LOG20000 Council Check Register Page - 13 9/1912013 — 9/19/2013 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit 1,759.00 324374 37248 1554.6160 DATA PROCESSING CENT SERV GEN - MIS 2,717.00 324374 37248 1120.6160 DATA PROCESSING ADMINISTRATION 3,289.00 324374 37248 1554.6160 DATA PROCESSING CENT SERV GEN - MIS 3,336.00 324374 37248 1495.6160 DATA PROCESSING INSPECTIONS 5,406.00 324374 37248 5910.6160 DATA PROCESSING GENERAL (BILLING) 5,591.00 324374 37248 1190.6160 DATA PROCESSING ASSESSING 6,384.00 324374 37248 1160.6160 DATA PROCESSING FINANCE 28,482.00 375483 911912013 112577 M. AMUNDSON LLP 968.09 324334 159578 5822.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX 50TH ST SELLING 968.09 375484 9119/2013 131685 MAILFINANCE INC. 209.16 POSTAGE MACHINE RENTAL 324289 N4178233 1400.6235 POSTAGE POLICE DEPT. GENERAL 209.16 375485 9/1912013 100869 MARTIN- MCALUSTER 850.00 PERSONNEL EVALUATION 324187 8327 1550.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES CENTRAL SERVICES GENERAL 1,700.00 ASSESSMENT SERVICES 324493 8647 1470.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES FIRE DEPT. GENERAL 2,550.00 375486 9/19/2013 125941 MCQUAY INTERNATIONAL 570.73 EXHAUST FAN REPAIR 324188 2602797 5511.6180 CONTRACTED REPAIRS ARENA BLDGIGROUNDS 1,469.00 MAINTENANCE CONTRACT 324189 75764 5510.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES ARENA ADMINISTRATION 2,039.73 375487 9/19/2013 101483 MENARDS 46.32 BATTERIES, BITS 00001892 324519 36309 1322.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES STREET LIGHTING ORNAMENTAL 46.32 375488 911912013 100913 MINNEAPOLIS & SUBURBAN SEWER S 1,225.00 WATER SERVICE REPLACEMENT 00001930 324190 34526 5913.6180 CONTRACTED REPAIRS DISTRIBUTION 1,225.00 000011931 324191 34520 5913.6180 CONTRACTED REPAIRS DISTRIBUTION 1,102.50 000011928 324192 34532 5913.6180 CONTRACTED REPAIRS DISTRIBUTION 857.50 REPAIR CURB STOP 00001929 324193 34531 5913.6180 CONTRACTED REPAIRS DISTRIBUTION 1,960.00 WATER SERVICE REPLACEMENT 00001933 324290 34535 5913.6180 CONTRACTED REPAIRS DISTRIBUTION 1,715.00 00001932 324291 34538 5913.6180 CONTRACTED REPAIRS DISTRIBUTION 3,001.25 00001928 324292 34539 5913.6180 CONTRACTED REPAIRS DISTRIBUTION 11,086.25 375489 9119/2013 102174 MINNEAPOLIS OXYGEN COMPANY R55CKREG LOG20000 CITY OF EDINA .;Council Check Register' 9/19/2013 - 9/19/2013 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger' Account Description 26.51 CO2, METH AIR 324396 171077185 7413.6545., CHEMICALS DUES & SUBSCRIPTIONS CONTRACTED REPAIRS PROFESSIONAL SERVICES CONFERENCES & SCHOOLS CONFERENCES & SCHOOLS CONFERENCES & SCHOOLS CONFERENCES & SCHOOLS -'CONFERENCES & SCHOOLS CONTRACTED REPAIRS PRINTING GENERAL SUPPLIES GENERAL SUPPLIES 9/18/2013 7:53:24 Page - 14 Business Unit PSTF FIRE TOWER COMMUNICATIONS 50TH ST OCCUPANCY DISTRIBUTION FINANCE FINANCE FINANCE FINANCE FINANCE FIELD MAINTENANCE COMMUNICATIONS CENT SVC PW BUILDING FIRE DEPT. GENERAL SERVICE CONTRACTS EQUIPMENT E911 26.51 375490 9/1912013 117724 MINNEAPOLIS /ST PAUL BUSINESS J 163.00 3 YR SUBSCRIPTION 324194 9102889 1130.6105 163.00 375491 9/19/2013 127062 MINNEHAHA BLDG. MAINT,INC. 10.69 WINDOW WASHING 324195 928014388 5621.6160 10.69 375492 9119/2013 101899 MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC 100.00 HAZARDOUS CHEMICAL FEE 324534 2706000772012M- 5913.6103 59174 100.00 375493 911912013 118129 MINNESOTA SOCIETY OF CPA 169.00 ACCELERATED TIME MANAGEMENT 324363 ERIC ROGGEMAN . 1160.6104 ' 169.00 BUSINESS PROCESS MAPPING 324383 ERIC ROGGEMAN 1160.6104 169.00 IPAD: EFFECTIVE BUSINESS TOOL 324383 ERIC ROGGEMAN 1160.6104 169.00 PDF FORMS 324383 ' :ERIC ROGGEMAN- 1160.6104 269.00 THE MOBILE OFFICE 324383 ERIC ROGGEMAN 1160.6104' 945.00 375494 9/19/2013 100908 MINNESOTA WANNER CO. 27.66 FIELD SPRAYER PARTS 00001890 324520 0101353 -IN 1642.6180 27.66 375495 9/19/2013 128914 MINUTEMAN PRESS 52.56 SAVE SPAULDING POSTERS 324196 13992 1130.6575 52.56 375496 911912013 102812 MN DEPARTMENT OF LABOR & INDUS 50.00 BOILER INSPECTION 324521 ABR00767801 1552.6406 50.00 375497 911912013 100159 MOOERS PRINTING INC. 380.83 BUSINESS CARDS 00003662 324494 6009 1470.6406 380.83 376498 911912013 100912 MOTOROLA INC. 1,635.12 SERVICE AGREEMENT 324293 78242697 2310.6230 DUES & SUBSCRIPTIONS CONTRACTED REPAIRS PROFESSIONAL SERVICES CONFERENCES & SCHOOLS CONFERENCES & SCHOOLS CONFERENCES & SCHOOLS CONFERENCES & SCHOOLS -'CONFERENCES & SCHOOLS CONTRACTED REPAIRS PRINTING GENERAL SUPPLIES GENERAL SUPPLIES 9/18/2013 7:53:24 Page - 14 Business Unit PSTF FIRE TOWER COMMUNICATIONS 50TH ST OCCUPANCY DISTRIBUTION FINANCE FINANCE FINANCE FINANCE FINANCE FIELD MAINTENANCE COMMUNICATIONS CENT SVC PW BUILDING FIRE DEPT. GENERAL SERVICE CONTRACTS EQUIPMENT E911 9118/2013 7:53:24 Page - 15 Subledger Account Description Business Unit PROFESSIONAL SERVICES ADMINISTRATION PROFESSIONAL SERVICES GENERAL TURF CARE CONFERENCES & SCHOOLS CENTRAL SERVICES GENERAL CONTRACTOR PAYMENTS CONTRACTOR PAYMENTS CONTRACTOR PAYMENTS CONTRACTOR PAYMENTS CONTRACTOR PAYMENTS CONTRACTOR PAYMENTS CONTRACTOR PAYMENTS CONTRACTOR PAYMENTS CONTRACTOR PAYMENTS CONTRACTOR PAYMENTS CONTRACTOR PAYMENTS CONTRACTOR PAYMENTS PROFESSIONAL SERVICES PROFESSIONAL SERVICES CONTRACTOR PAYMENTS A253 RTTURN ON VERNON &HANSEN NORMANDALE RECON NORMANDALE NORMANDALE RECON NORMANDALE RECON L -59 BRAEMAR HILLS B BRAEMAR HILLS B RECON BRAEMAR HILLS C BRAEMAR HILLS B RECON BRAEMAR HILLS B RECON LAKE EDINAA BRAEMAR HILLS B DISTRIBUTION GENERAL STORM SEWER 5108 SCHOOL ROAD CITY OF EDINA R55CKREG LOG20000 Council Check Register 9/19/2013 — 9/19/2013 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No 1,635.12 375499 9/1912013 131577 MRA -THE MANAGEMENT ASSOCIATI 750.00 SUPERVISOR TRAINING 324294 09011311 1120.6103 750.00 375500 9/19/2013 100906 MTI DISTRIBUTING INC. 120.18 IRRIGATION SUPPLIES 00001882 324522 927604 -00 1643.6103 120.18 375501 911912013 101575 MUNICIPALS 152.00 FALL BUSINESS MEETING (4) 324495 091613 1550.6104 152.00 375502 911912013 121497 NORTHWEST ASPHALT INC. 55,642.62 PARTIAL PAYMENT NO. 1 324527 13 -17NB 01253.1705.30 55,642.62 375503 911912013 121497 NORTHWEST ASPHALT INC. 13,293.64 PARTIAL PAYMENT NO.4 324528 ENG -13 -2 04390.1705.30 21,584.95 PARTIAL PAYMENT NO. 4 324528 ENG -13 -2 01394.1705.30 87,440.75 PARTIAL PAYMENT NO. 4 324528 ENG -13 -2 03474.1705.30 104,741.97 PARTIAL PAYMENT NO. 4 324528 ENG -13 -2 05530.1705.30 227,061.31 375504 911912013 121497 NORTHWEST ASPHALT INC. 380.00 PARTIAL PAYMENT NO. 4 324529 ENG 13 -3 08059.1705.30 2,992.50 PARTIAL PAYMENT NO. 4 324529 ENG 13 -3 05531.1705.30 16,285.17 PARTIAL PAYMENT NO. 4 324529 ENG 13 -3 01396.1705.30 19,570.00 PARTIAL PAYMENT NO. 4 324529 ENG 13 -3 03475.1705.30 23,254.56 PARTIAL PAYMENT NO.4 324529 ENG 13 -3 04391.1705.30 69,278.29 PARTIAL PAYMENT NO. 4 324529 ENG 13 -3 01397.1705.30 116,810.61 PARTIAL PAYMENT NO. 4 324529 ENG 13 -3 01395.1705.30 248,571.13 375505 9/1912013 121497 NORTHWEST ASPHALT INC. 142.50 PARTIAL PAYMENT NO. 2 324530 ENG 13 -14 5913.6103 19,063.27 PARTIAL PAYMENT NO. 2 324530 ENG 13 -14 5932.6103 182,529.60 PARTIAL PAYMENT NO. 2 324530 ENG 13 -14 07108.1705.30 201,735.37 375506 9/1912013 100933 NORTHWEST GRAPHIC SUPPLY CO. 9118/2013 7:53:24 Page - 15 Subledger Account Description Business Unit PROFESSIONAL SERVICES ADMINISTRATION PROFESSIONAL SERVICES GENERAL TURF CARE CONFERENCES & SCHOOLS CENTRAL SERVICES GENERAL CONTRACTOR PAYMENTS CONTRACTOR PAYMENTS CONTRACTOR PAYMENTS CONTRACTOR PAYMENTS CONTRACTOR PAYMENTS CONTRACTOR PAYMENTS CONTRACTOR PAYMENTS CONTRACTOR PAYMENTS CONTRACTOR PAYMENTS CONTRACTOR PAYMENTS CONTRACTOR PAYMENTS CONTRACTOR PAYMENTS PROFESSIONAL SERVICES PROFESSIONAL SERVICES CONTRACTOR PAYMENTS A253 RTTURN ON VERNON &HANSEN NORMANDALE RECON NORMANDALE NORMANDALE RECON NORMANDALE RECON L -59 BRAEMAR HILLS B BRAEMAR HILLS B RECON BRAEMAR HILLS C BRAEMAR HILLS B RECON BRAEMAR HILLS B RECON LAKE EDINAA BRAEMAR HILLS B DISTRIBUTION GENERAL STORM SEWER 5108 SCHOOL ROAD R55CKREG LOG20000 CITY_OFEDINA Council Check Register. - 9/19/2013 - 9/19/2013 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No 107.88 ART SUPPLIES 00009281 324197 44561901 5120.6564 558.64 OIL PAINTS, SKETCH PADS 00009287 324198 44685600 5120.6564 666.52 375507 911912013 103578 OFFICE DEPOT 54.30 TABLE 324295 671792880002 5410.6406 54.30 375508 9/19/2013 102712 OFFICE OF ENTERPRISE TECHNOLOG 374.13 324496 W13080654 5420.6188 23.94 324497 W13080649 5311.6188 23.94 324497 W13080649 1646.6188 23.94 324497 W13080649 1554.6188 47.88 324497 W13080649 5111.6188 47.88 324497 W13080649 1646.6188 47.88 324497 W13080649 5821.6188 47.88 324497 W13080649 5913.6188 71.82 324497- W13080649 1481:6188 71.82 324497 W13080649 5841.6188 71.82 324497 W13080649 5861.6188 71.82 324497 W13080649 1646.6188 119.70 324497 W13080649 1646.6188 167.58 324497 W13080649 5760.6188 167.58 324497 W13080649 5710.6188 172.46 324497 W13080649 5410.6188 215.46 324497 W13080649 1622.6188 1,767.53 375509 911912013 130294 O'MALLEY CONCRETE 2,420.50: REMOVE/REPLACE APRON &DRIVEWAY 324498 412 KRESSE CIR 01393.1705.21 2,420.50 375510 911912013 104895 OVERHEAD DOOR CO. 116.49 GARAGE DOOR SENSOR 324499 80295 5841.6530 116.49 375511 911912013 124519 OVERHOLT, JAMES 355.95 MILEAGE REIMBURSEMENT 324523 091113 1644.6103 355.95 375512 911912013 100940 OWENS COMPANIES INC. 720.75 HVAC CONTRACT 324384 52344 5761.6230 Subledger Account Description CRAFT SUPPLIES CRAFT SUPPLIES GENERALSUPPLIES TELEPHONE TELEPHONE TELEPHONE., TELEPHONE TELEPHONE TELEPHONE TELEPHONE TELEPHONE TELEPHONE TELEPHONE TELEPHONE TELEPHONE TELEPHONE TELEPHONE TELEPHONE TELEPHONE TELEPHONE CONSULTING INSPECTION REPAIR PARTS PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 9/18/2ui3 7:53:24 Page - 16 Business Unit ART SUPPLY GIFT GALLERY SHOP ART SUPPLY GIFT GALLERY SHOP GOLF ADMINISTRATION CLUB HOUSE POOL OPERATION BUILDING MAINTENANCE CENT SERV GEN - MIS ART CENTER BLDG/MAINT BUILDING MAINTENANCE 50TH ST OCCUPANCY DISTRIBUTION YORK FIRE STATION YORK OCCUPANCY VERNON OCCUPANCY BUILDING MAINTENANCE BUILDING MAINTENANCE CENTENNIAL LAKES ADMIN EXPENSE EDINBOROUGH ADMINISTRATION GOLF ADMINISTRATION SKATING & HOCKEY MENDELSSOHN A YORK OCCUPANCY TREES & MAINTENANCE SERVICE CONTRACTS EQUIPMENT CENTENNIAL LAKES OPERATING R55CKREG LOG20000 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation YORK SELLING 720.75 50TH ST SELLING 375513 9/1912013 YORK SELLING 121026 PALDA & SONS INC. 54995000 13,642.00- PARTIAL PAYMENT NO. 4 764.50 97,170.93 PARTIAL PAYMENT NO. 4 444,466.54 PARTIAL PAYMENT NO. 4 527,995.47 375514 9/19/2013 121026 PALDA & SONS INC. 19,821.75 PARTIAL PAYMENT NO. 3 5862.5513 36,717.30 PARTIAL PAYMENT NO. 3 113,994.25 PARTIAL PAYMENT NO. 3 5842.5513 135,539.75 PARTIAL PAYMENT NO. 3 306,073.05 8415446 -IN 375515 9/19/2013 129485 PAPCO INC. 109.42 CLEANING SUPPLIES CITY OF EDINA Council Check Register 9/1912013 —9/1912013 PO # Doc No Inv No , Account No Subledger Account Description 324531 ENG 13 -4 324531 ENG 13 -4 324531 ENG 13-4 324532 ENG 13 -1 324532 ENG 13 -1 324532 ENG 13 -1 324532 ENG 13 -1 324397 79702 324398 80659 324399 80544 05533.1705.30 04393.1705.30 01398.1705.30 03473.1705.30 01393.1705.30 04389.1705.30 05529.1705.30 7411.6406 7411.6406 7411.6406 375516 9/19/2013 VERNON SELLING 118872 PARK SUPPLY OF AMERICA INC. YORK SELLING COST OF GOODS.SOLD LIQUOR 50TH ST SELLING 764.50 YORK SELLING SHOWER ASSEMBLIES 00002198 324199 54995000 5720.6406 VERNON SELLING 764.50 50TH ST SELLING 375517 911912013 100347 PAUSTIS & SONS 235.25 324335 8415427 -IN 5862.5513 2,689.01 324336 8415401 -IN 5842.5513 165.25 324337 8415446 -IN 5822.5512 134.25 324435 8414821 -IN 5842.5512 109.25 324436 8415650 -IN 5842.5512 134.25 324437 8414822 -IN 5862.5512 13425 324438 8414820 -IN 5822.5512 CONTRACTOR PAYMENTS CONTRACTOR PAYMENTS CONTRACTOR PAYMENTS CONTRACTOR PAYMENTS CONTRACTOR PAYMENTS CONTRACTOR PAYMENTS CONTRACTOR PAYMENTS GENERAL SUPPLIES GENERAL SUPPLIES GENERAL SUPPLIES GENERALSUPPLIES 9118/2013 7:53:24 Page - 17 Business Unit LAKE EDINA A RECON LAKE EDINAA RECON LAKE EDINA B MENDELSSOHN A RECON MENDELSSOHN A MENDELSSOHN A RECON MENDELSSOHN A RECON PSTF OCCUPANCY PSTF OCCUPANCY PSTF OCCUPANCY EDINBOROUGH OPERATIONS COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING COST OF GOODS.SOLD LIQUOR 50TH ST SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR YORK SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR YORK SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR VERNON SELLING COST OF GOODS'SOLD LIQUOR 50TH ST SELLING 375518 911912013 100945 PEPSI -COLA COMPANY 377.84 324200 16933174 5520.5510 COST OF GOODS SOLD 497.88 324296 16933303 5421.5510 COST OF GOODS SOLD 875.72 375519 911912013 130228 PERNSTEINER CREATIVE GROUP INC 100.00 INVITATION DESIGN 324201 090513 -1 1130.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES ARENA CONCESSIONS GRILL COMMUNICATIONS R55CKREG LOG20000 155.00 CITY OF EDINA 9/18/2W3 7:53:24 350.00 NEWSLETTER POSTAGE 324298 091013 1628.6235 Council Check Register Page - 18 375525 911912013 9/19/2013 - 9/19/2013 168.33 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger, Account Description Business Unit 128861 PRIMARY PRODUCTS COMPANY 125.00 NEWSPAPER AD DESIGN 324202 090513 -2 1130.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES COMMUNICATIONS 225.00 375520 9/1912013 124239 PERSONNEL EVALUATION INC. 20.00 JV PEP BILLING 324297 05541 1400.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES POLICE DEPT. GENERAL 20.00 375521 911912013 119936 PET CROSSING 1,488.59 K9 PHYSICAL EXAM 324375 128019 4607.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES EDINA CRIME FUND K9 DONATION 1,488.59 375522 911912013 100743 PHILLIPS WINE & SPIRITS 114.24 324439 2483853 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 1,409.86 324440 2483861 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 1,197.32 324441 2483859 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 46.00 324442 2482976 5862.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER VERNON SELLING 1.12 324443 2483852 5862.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR VERNON SELLING 1,915.52 324444 2483660 5862:5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR VERNON SELLING 4.48 324445 2483850 5842.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR YORK SELLING 3,256.02 '324446 2483857 5842.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR YORK SELLING 1,734.31 324447 2483856 5842:5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 232.96 324448 2483851 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 4,195.22 324449 2483858 5842.5513 C0ST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 255.36- 324450 3511941 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 92.08- 324451 3511893 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 13,759.61 375523 9/1912013 101138 PLEAA 155.00 FALL TRAINING SESSION 324385 OCT 23/24 1400.6104 CONFERENCES & SCHOOLS POLICE DEPT. GENERAL SENIOR CITIZENS STREET LIGHTING ORNAMENTAL EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 155.00 375524 9119/2013 100961 POSTMASTER - USPS 350.00 NEWSLETTER POSTAGE 324298 091013 1628.6235 POSTAGE 350.00 375525 911912013 119429 POVOLNY SPECIALTIES 168.33 PHOTOCELLS 00005463 324299 36684 1322.6530 REPAIR PARTS 168.33 375526 911912013 128861 PRIMARY PRODUCTS COMPANY 69.00 NITRLE GLOVES 00005465 324203 51435 1553.6610 SAFETY EQUIPMENT 69.00 SENIOR CITIZENS STREET LIGHTING ORNAMENTAL EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 9/18/2013 7:53:24 Page - 19 Business Unit ARENA ICE MAINT 50TH &FRANCE MAINTENANCE ARENA BLDG /GROUNDS MAINT OF COURSE & GROUNDS MAINT OF COURSE & GROUNDS UTILITY REVENUES CENTRAL SERVICES GENERAL ARENA BLDG/GROUNDS FIRE DEPT. GENERAL 150.00 EP ENTERTAINMENT 9/08/13 324161 083113 5710.6136 PROFESSIONAL SVC - OTHER EDINBOROUGH ADMINISTRATION 150.00 CITY OF EDINA R55CKREG LOG20000 375535 911912013 100988 SAFETY KLEEN 418.80 PARTS WASHER SERVICE 324303 61483292 5422.6182 RUBBISH REMOVAL MAINT OF COURSE & GROUNDS 418.80 Council Check Register 375536 911912013 117807 SAM'S CLUB 53.46 CUPS, COFFEE CREAMER 324400 090713 7411.6406 9/19/2013 — 9/19/2013 53.46 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description 375527 911912013 100966 PRINTERS SERVICE INC 180.00 ZAMBONI BLADE SHARPENING 324204 266706 5521.6215 EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE 180.00 375528 911912013 117692 R & B CLEANING INC. 2,538.26 RAMP STAIRWELL CLEANING 324535 1365 4090.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES 2,538.28 375529 911912013 100974 RAYMOND E. HAEG PLUMBING 1,152.20 PLUMBING REPAIR 324205 16023 5511.6180 CONTRACTED REPAIRS 1,152.20 375530 911912013 125936 REINDERS INC. 142.17 CUP CUTTER 00006476 324300 3022446 -00 5422.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES 2,131.25 FUNGICIDE 00006485 324301 3022708 -00 5422.6545 CHEMICALS 2,273.42 375531 911912013 104793 RESTORATION SYSTEMS INC. 1,060.14 HYDRANT DEPOSIT REFUND 324206 090913 5901.4626 SALE OF WATER 1,060.14 375532 911912013 101000 RJM PRINTING INC. 92.45 BUSINESS CARDS 324302 77538 1550.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES 92.45 375533 9/19/2013 100980 ROBERT B. HILL CO. 633.80 SOFTENER SALT 324207 00288470 5511.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES 160.58 SOFTENER SALT 324500 00288979 1470.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES 794.38 375534 911912013 103461 ROSEVILLE BIG BAND 9/18/2013 7:53:24 Page - 19 Business Unit ARENA ICE MAINT 50TH &FRANCE MAINTENANCE ARENA BLDG /GROUNDS MAINT OF COURSE & GROUNDS MAINT OF COURSE & GROUNDS UTILITY REVENUES CENTRAL SERVICES GENERAL ARENA BLDG/GROUNDS FIRE DEPT. GENERAL 150.00 EP ENTERTAINMENT 9/08/13 324161 083113 5710.6136 PROFESSIONAL SVC - OTHER EDINBOROUGH ADMINISTRATION 150.00 375535 911912013 100988 SAFETY KLEEN 418.80 PARTS WASHER SERVICE 324303 61483292 5422.6182 RUBBISH REMOVAL MAINT OF COURSE & GROUNDS 418.80 375536 911912013 117807 SAM'S CLUB 53.46 CUPS, COFFEE CREAMER 324400 090713 7411.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES PSTF OCCUPANCY 53.46 R55CKREG LOG20000 Check # Date 375537 9/1912013 - 375538 911912013 375539 911912013 375540 9119/2013 375541 911912013 375542 911912013 CITY OF EDINA Council Check Register 9/19/2013 - 9/19/2013 - Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description 118168 SANSIO 50.00 EMS FAXING 324501 INV -12946 -2013 1470.6160 DATA PROCESSING 50.00 103278 SCHATTAUER, JIM 200.00 EP ENTERTAINMENT 9/26/13 324502 090113 5710.6136 200.00 100991 SCHWAB - VOLLHABER - LUBRATT 648.40 HVAC - REPLACEMENT MOTOR 324208 INV086142 1551.6180 648.40 116533 SHRM 180.00 MEMBERSHIP - LISA SCHAEFER 324209.: 733215- RENEWAL 1120.6105 180.00 120784 SIGN PRO 555.75 CITY SEAL ICE LOGOS 324210 7024 5511.6406 555.75 132195 SMALL LOT MN 487.50 324452 313 5842.5513 9118/2013 7:53:24 Page - 20 Business Unit FIRE DEPT. GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SVC - OTHER EDINBOROUGH ADMINISTRATION .CONTRACTED REPAIRS CITY HALL GENERAL DUES & SUBSCRIPTIONS ADMINISTRATION GENERAL SUPPLIES ARENA BLDG/GROUNDS COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 375543 9/1912013 102935 SOUTH TOWN REFRIGERATION INC 50.73 REFRIGERATOR BULBS 324376 41300 5421.6180 CONTRACTED REPAIRS GRILL 50.73 375544 911912013 127878 SOUTHERN WINE AND SPIRITS 817.00 324338 1073877 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING 205.50 324339 1072725 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 7,961.50 324340, - 1073882 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 4,044.50 324341 1073984 5862.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR VERNON SELLING 2,255.05 324342 1073883 5862.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR VERNON SELLING 483.00 324343 5002439 5862:5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 185.00 324344 5002522 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 169.00 324345 5002520 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING 758.43 324346 1073878 5822.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR 50TH ST SELLING 169.00 324347 5002521 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 8,135.00 324348 1073879 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 6,067.00 324349 1073881 5842.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR YORK SELLING CITY OF EDINA 9/18/2013 7:53:24 R55CKREG LOG20000 Council Check Register Page - 21 9/19/2013 — 9119/2013 Check # Dale Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit 7,227.02 324350 1073880 5842.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR YORK SELLING 343.37 324453 1075297 5862.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR VERNON SELLING 38,820.37 375545 9119/2013 122455 SPRING LAKE ENGINEERING 3,300.00 SCADA PROGRAMMING 00005430 324211 1315 5913.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES DISTRIBUTION 3,300.00 375546 9119/2013 105135 STANDARD WATER CONTROL SYSTEMS 77.80 PERMIT REFUND 324212 ED124069 1495.4111 BUILDING PERMITS _ INSPECTIONS 77.80 375547 9/19/2013 102390 STRAND MANUFACTURING CO INC 144.28 SLEEVE IMPELLER 00001594 324213 28609 5913.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES DISTRIBUTION 159.03 NUT/SOCKET 00001594 324214 28608 5913.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES DISTRIBUTION 303.31 375548 9119/2013 101017 SUBURBAN CHEVROLET 1,654.75 VEHICLE REPAIRS 324215 635145 1553.6180 CONTRACTED REPAIRS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 1,654.75 375549 9119/2013 103964 SWANSON, MICHAEL 243.94 UNIFORM PURCHASE 324216 090513 1301.6201 LAUNDRY GENERAL MAINTENANCE 243.94 375550 9/1912013 106673 TAPCO 1,592.44 TRAFFIC SIGNS 00001819 324524 1432714 1330.6215 EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE TRAFFIC SIGNALS 1.592.44 375551 911912013 120325 TCC MATERIALS 332.63 MORTAR 00001870 324217 0000626359 5932.6520 CONCRETE GENERAL STORM SEWER 332.63 375552 911912013 101029 TESSMAN COMPANY, THE 18.70 FLAG STICK PARTS 324304 5183093 -IN 5422.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES MAINT OF COURSE & GROUNDS 18.70 375553 9/1912013 121253 THAYER, LARRY 155.38 MILEAGE REIMBURSEMENT 324537 091613 1652.6107 MILEAGE OR ALLOWANCE WEED MOWING 155.38 375564 911912013 101035 THORPE DISTRIBUTING COMPANY R55CKREG LOG20000 CITY OF EDINA 9/18/2013 7:53:24 i Council Check Register Page - 22 9/19/2013 - 9/19/2013 Check # Date Amount Supplier/ Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No 'Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit 910.00 324377 00771284 5421.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER GRILL 167.20 324454 776292 5862.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX VERNON SELLING 2,159.30 324455 776293 5862.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER VERNON SELLING 3,236.50 375555 911912013 123129 TIMESAVER OFF SITE SECRETARIAL 109.00- PARK BOARD MEETING MINUTES 324218 M19996 1600.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES .J PARK ADMIN. GENERAL 160.95 VET MEMORIAL MEETING MINUTES 324219 M19999 1600.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES PARK ADMIN. GENERAL 269.95 375556 911912013 120595 T MOBILE 32.63 SURVEY PHONE 324536 477067848 -8/13 1260.6188 TELEPHONE ENGINEERING GENERAL 32.63 375557 911912013 101038 TOLL GAS & WELDING SUPPLY 37.65 OXYGEN 00001849 324305 150456 1646.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES BUILDING MAINTENANCE 31.53 WELDING TANKS 324386 466486 5761.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES CENTENNIAL LAKES OPERATING 69.18 375558 9/1912013 116779 U.S. BANK 17.90 NET ZERO 324220 090413 1500.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES CONTINGENCIES 17.90 375559 911912013 125032 UNI- SELECT USA 57.17 AUTO PARTS 324221 083113 1314.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES STREET RENOVATION 795.97 AUTO PARTS 324221 083113 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 853.14 376560 911912013 101908 US FOODS 91.69 324379 CUST 43805514 5421.6511 CLEANING SUPPLIES GRILL 286.15 324379 CUST 43805514 5421.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES GRILL 3,796.01 324379 CUST 43805514 5421.5510 COST OF GOODS SOLD GRILL 4,173.85 375561 911912013 103590 VALLEY -RICH CO. INC. 12,578.75 UTILITY HOOKUP 324538 19115 47078.6710 EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT COUNTRYSIDE PK PLAYGROUND &PATH 12,578.75 375562 911912013 101058 VAN PAPER CO. 16.06 PAPER PLATES, UTENSILS 324306 283342 -00 5862.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES VERNON SELLING 386.23 LIQUOR BAGS 324306 283342 -00 5862.6512 PAPER SUPPLIES VERNON SELLING 402.29 CITY OF EDINA 9/18/2013 7:53:24 R55CKREG LOG20000 Council Check Register Page - 23 9/19/2013 -- 9/1912013 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit 375563 911912013 101063 VERSATILE VEHICLES INC. 72.12 TRACTOR RESTRAINTS 00002029 324387 70263 5761.6530 REPAIR PARTS CENTENNIAL LAKES OPERATING 72.12 375564 9/1912013 101066 VIKING ELECTRIC SUPPLY 103.37 WIRE, TAPE, CONDUIT 00001868 324222 7602767 1646.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES BUILDING MAINTENANCE 147.89 WIRE, TAPE, CONDUIT 00001868 324222 7602767 1322.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES STREET LIGHTING ORNAMENTAL 130.22 ELECTRICAL SUPPLIES 00001878 324525 7606806 1646.6578 LAMPS & FIXTURES BUILDING MAINTENANCE 381.48 375565 911912013 120627 VISTAR CORPORATION 45.70 CONCESSION PRODUCT 324223 37333174 5520.5510 COST OF GOODS SOLD ARENA CONCESSIONS 178,17 324224 37425741 5520.5510 COST OF GOODS SOLD ARENA CONCESSIONS 432.08 324225 37443997 5520.5510 COST OF GOODS SOLD ARENA CONCESSIONS 416.33 -324226 37492518 5520.5510 COST OF GOODS SOLD ARENA CONCESSIONS 1,072.28 375566 911912013 103410 W.W. GOETSCH ASSOCIATES INC. 514.07 SERVICE PUMP BEARINGS 00002200 324228 91190 5720.6180 CONTRACTED REPAIRS EDINBOROUGH OPERATIONS 514.07 375567 911912013 100423 WACONIA FARM SUPPLY 127.44 SOD CUTTER BLADE 324307 77358 1646.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES BUILDING MAINTENANCE 180.19 IDLER PULLEYS, DRIVE BELT 00005512 324308 73118 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 307.63 375568 9/19/2013 131542 WAGNER, JOSH 269.43 TRAINING EXPENSES 324539 091613 5919.6104 CONFERENCES & SCHOOLS TRAINING 269.43 375569 911912013 130839 WALTON'S HOLLOW 680.00 PETTING ZOO, PONY RIDES 324227 090913 1600.4390.49 BARNYARD BOOGIE PARK ADMIN. GENERAL 680.00 375570 9119/2013 123616 WATER CONSERVATION SERVICE INC 273.52 LEAK LOCATE 00001944 324540 4222 5913.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES DISTRIBUTION 273.52 375571 911912013 132775 WILLIS OF MINNESOTA 165.00 OVERPAYMENT FOR GOLF LESSONS 324378 REFUND 5401.4602 LESSONS GOLF REVENUES 165.00 R55CKREG LOG20000 CITY OF EDINA 9/18/2013 7:53:24 Council Check Register Page - 24 9/19/2013 - 9/19/2013 Check # Date Amount Supplier/ Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business.Unit 375572 9/19/2013 101033 WINE COMPANY,•THE 3,952.60 324351 339768 -00 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 695.87 324352 339763 -00 5842.5_513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 4,648.47 375573 9/1912013 101312 WINE MERCHANTS 3,100.64 324456 470809 5B62.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING .56 324457 470806 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 156.24 324458 470805 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 1,839.54 324459 470808 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 10.67- 324460 62516 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING 33.30- 324461 62517 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING 137.12- 324462 62518 584.2.5513 COST OF GOODS_ SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 4,915.89 375574 911912013 124291 WIRTZ BEVERAGE MINNESOTA 2,451.72 - 324358 1080083313 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 3,423.10 324354 1080081811 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 2,641.09 324355 1080083312 5862.5512 _ COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR VERNON SELLING 3,428.74 324356 1080083347 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 934.60 324357 1080083344 5822.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR 50TH ST SELLING 4,514.25 324358, 1080083346 5842.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR YORK SELLING 211.74 324359 1080083348 5842.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX YORK SELLING 17,605.24 375575 9/19/2013 124529 WIRTZ BEVERAGE MINNESOTA BEER 124.45 324309 1090105352 5430.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER RICHARDS GOLF COURSE 3,060.40 324360 1090106969 5842.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER YORK SELLING 695.00 324361 1090106970 5842.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER YORK SELLING 43.00 324362 1090106991 5842.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX YORK SELLING 316.00 324463 1090109495 5842.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER YORK SELLING 3,142.89 324464 1090109494 5842.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER YORK SELLING 1,589.60 324465 1090109449 5862.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER VERNON SELLING 120.00 324466 1090109450 5862.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER VERNON SELLING 45.60 324467 1090109491 5862.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX VERNON SELLING 9,136.94 375576. 9/1912013 118395 WITMER PUBLIC SAFETY GROUP INC 38.00 SHIELD 00003655 324503 E1103803.001 1470.6552 PROTECTIVE CLOTHING FIRE DEPT. GENERAL 38.00 CITY OF EDINA 9/1812013 7:53:24 R55CKREG LOG20000 Council Check Register Page - 25 9/1912013 9119/2013 Check # Dale Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit 375577 9/19/2013 101726 XCEL ENERGY 3,730.47 51- 6840050 -6 324229 382190882 5921.6185 LIGHT & POWER SANITARY LIFT STATION MAINT 5,280.25 51- 5888961 -7 324230 382348804 1375-6185 LIGHT & POWER PARKING RAMP 394.44 51- 5619094 -8 324231 382344811 1552.6185 LIGHT & POWER CENT SVC PW BUILDING 690.46 51- 4197645 -8 324310 382509905 1322.6185 LIGHT & POWER STREET LIGHTING ORNAMENTAL 10,095.62 376578 911912013 100568 XEROX CORPORATION 235.45 AUG 2013 - PARK & REC 00004322 324232 069806325 1550.6151 EQUIPMENT RENTAL CENTRAL SERVICES GENERAL 235.45 376579 9/19/2013 129331 YOUNG, PAUL 175.00 DJ SERVICES - BARNYARD BOOGIE 324233 090913 1600.4390.49 BARNYARD BOOGIE PARK ADMIN. GENERAL 175.00 375580 9/19/2013 101091 ZIEGLER INC 112.37 FILTERS 00005423 324234 PC050122295 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 166.75 FILTERS 00005422 324235 PC001496212 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 467.39 PADS, BOLTS, NUTS 00005425 324236 PC001496466 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 525.53 PADS, WASHERS, NUTS 00005425 324237 PC001496467 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 450.00 GENERATOR MAINTENANCE 324238 E6395954 1551.6180 CONTRACTED REPAIRS CITY HALL GENERAL 1,722.04 375581 911912013 132804 . BOETTCHER, ERIC 400.00 BARNYARD BOOGIE 324577 CHANGE FUND 1624.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES PLAYGROUND & THEATER 400.00 2,004,031.08 Grand Total Payment Instrument Totals Check Total 2,004,031.08 Total Payments 2,004,031.08 R55CKSUM LOG20000 CITY.OF DINA" 9/18i__ .., 7:55:20 Council Check Summary Page - 1 9/19/2013 9/1912013 Company Amount 01000 GENERAL FUND 113,672.49 02300 POLICE SPECIAL REVENUE 1,740.05 02500 PEDESTRIAN AND CYCLIST SAFETY 55,642.62 04000 WORKING CAPITAL FUND 909,731.66 04200 EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT FUND 262.82 05100 ART CENTER FUND 1,229.98 05300 .AQUATIC CENTER FUND 583.96 05400 GOLF COURSE FUND 18,739.54 05500 ICE ARENA FUND 9.944.61 05700 EDINBOROUGH PARK FUND 3,094.84 05750 CENTENNIAL LAKES PARK FUND 3,859.13 05800 LIQUOR FUND 182.691.68 05900 UTILITY FUND 392,638.14 05930 STORM SEWER FUND 267,109.28 05950 RECYCLING FUND 34,192.80 07400 PSTF AGENCY FUND 8,547.48 09232 CENTENNIAL TIF DISTRICT 150.00 Report Totals 2,004,031.08 We .confirm to the best of our knowledge and belief, that these claims comply in,all material respects With the requirements of the City of Edina purchasing policies and proce res date -/ - /�3 145. .S7.._.i1-1ar%b r ctnr R55CKR2 LOGIS100 138.00 CITY OF EDINA 1720480 5862.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX VERNON SELLING Council Check Register by GL 158.00 324781 1723646 Council Check Register and Summary YORK SELLING 14.00 9126/2013 - 9/26/2013 1723641 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description 375582 9/26/2013 324980 129456 1ST LINEILEEWES VENTURES LLC 5862.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX VERNON SELLING 195.50 CONCESSION PRODUCT 324605 104413 4075.5510 COST OF GOODS SOLD 95.50 324606 104530 4075.5510 COST OF GOODS SOLD 129458 ACME TOOLS 99.50 324607 104745 4075.5510 COST OF GOODS SOLD 390.50 510.21 CHAIN SAW, CASE, OIL 00001965 324844 2154968 375583 912612013 REPAIR PARTS 124613 ABM JANITORIAL -NORTH CENTRAL INC. 510.21 320.63 JANITORIAL SERVICES -POLICE 324744 5680423 1551.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 320.63 912612013 132835 ADCOCK, MARIAN 375584 9/26/2013 102971 ACE ICE COMPANY 9/2512013 8:28:41 Page- 1 Business Unit VANVALKENBURG VANVALKENBURG VANVALKENBURG CITY HALL GENERAL 138.00 324541 1720480 5862.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX VERNON SELLING 158.00 324781 1723646 5842.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX YORK SELLING 14.00 324979 1723641 5822.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX 50TH ST SELLING 135.60 324980 1723640 5862.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX VERNON SELLING 445.60 375585 9126/2013 129458 ACME TOOLS 510.21 CHAIN SAW, CASE, OIL 00001965 324844 2154968 1322.6530 REPAIR PARTS STREET LIGHTING ORNAMENTAL 510.21 375586 912612013 132835 ADCOCK, MARIAN 15.41 ART WORK SOLD 324700 091013 5101.4413 ART WORK SOLD ART CENTER REVENUES 15.41 375587 9126/2013 130792 AIRGAS NATIONAL CARBONATION 165.20 CARBON DIOXIDE 325045 31126176 5330.6545 CHEMICALS FLOWRIDER 165.20 375588 912612013 100575 ALL SAFE INC. 65.14 DELIVER CAP & CHAIN 324745 123663 1552.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES CENT SVC PW BUILDING 57.39- RETURN 324746 124095 1552.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES CENT SVC PW BUILDING 7.75 375589 9/2612013 100867 ALSTAD, MARIAN 52.00 ART WORK SOLD 324701 091013 5101.4413 ART; WORK SOLD ., ART CENTER REVENUES 52.00 375590 9/2612013 102172 APPERrS FOODSERVICE 567.56 FOOD 324632 1990904 5421.5510 COST OF GOODS SOLD GRILL 567.56 R55CKR2 LOGIS100 CITY OF EUINA 9/2512x._ 8:28:41 Council Check Register by GL Page - 2 Council Check Register and'Summary 9/26/2013 - 9/26/2013 Check # Date Amount Supplier/ Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No AccounlNo . Subledger Account Description Business Unit 375590 9126/2013 102172 APPERT S FOODSERVICE Continued... 376691 912612013 129075 APWA -MN CHAPTER 1,980.00 UUCIS COURSE FEES (4) 324608 REGISTERATION 5919.6104 CONFERENCES & SCHOOLS TRAINING 495.00 UUCIS COURSE FEE 324609 KUZNIA 1260.6104 CONFERENCES & SCHOOLS ENGINEERING GENERAL 2,475.00 375592 912612013 103680 ARAMARK REFRESHMENT SRVCS 98.16 COFFEE 324816 1087579 5430.5510 COST OF GOODS SOLD RICHARDS GOLF COURSE 113.89 -BREW FILTER 324911 1088274 7411.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES PSTF OCCUPANCY 212.05 375593 9/2612013 131832 ARROW GLOBAL ASSET DISPOSITION INC. 601.95 RECYCLE ELECTRONICS 324730 6533908 =1N'• 1554.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES CENT SERV GEN - MIS 601.95 975594. 912612013 132031 ARTISAN BEER COMPANY 450.00 324542 27351 5822.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER 50TH ST SELLING 1,461.00 .324647 27642 5862.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER VERNON SELLING 1,194.00, 324648 27641 5842.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER YORK SELLING 324.00 324981 28039 5862.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER VERNON SELLING 1,126.00 324982 27870 5822.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER 50TH ST SELLING 369.00 324983 28038 5842.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER YORK SELLING 4,924.00 375595 912612013 120995 AVR INC. 1,082.75 READY MIX 324845 64557 1314.6520 CONCRETE STREET RENOVATION 1,312.43 READY MIX 324846 84650. 1365.6520 CONCRETE SIDEWALKS 8 PATH MAINTENANCE 1,034.55 READY MIX 324847 84746 5913.6520 CONCRETE DISTRIBUTION 602.24 READY MIX 324848 85296 1314.6520 CONCRETE STREET RENOVATION 736.37 READY MIX 324849 85407 1314.6520 CONCRETE STREET RENOVATION 4,768.34 375596 912612013 101355 - BELLBOY CORPORATION 590.13 324543 636500 5862.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX VERNON SELLING 145.30 324544 89053000 5862.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX VERNON SELLING 36.55 324545 79754000'. 5862.5515 COST -OF GOODS SOLD MIX VERNON SELLING 387.60 324649 79754200 5842.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR YORK SELLING 123.55- 324660 79766400 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 196.21 324782 89053200 5842.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX YORK SELLING 20.50 324783 79754300 5842.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX YORK SELLING CITY OF EDINA 9125/2013 8:28:41 R55CKR2 LOGIS100 Council Check Register by GL Page - 3 Council Check Register and Summary 9/26/2013 - 9/26/2013 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit 375596 912612013 101355 BELLBOY CORPORATION Continued... 318.15 324984 6367700 5862.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX VERNON SELLING 129.54 324985 89085800 5862.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX VERNON SELLING 1,700.43 375597 912612013 100661 SENN, BRADLEY 15.60 ARTWORK SOLD 324702 091013 5101.4413 ART WORK SOLD ART CENTER REVENUES 15.60 375698 912612013 101191 BENNEROTTE, JENNIFER . 33.91 FRINGE FOR HOMECOMING FLOAT 324912 092013 1550.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES CENTRAL SERVICES GENERAL 33.91 375599 912612013 132807 BENNETT, DAVIS 355.56 REIMBURSE FOR TOW CHARGES 324610 091713 5913.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES DISTRIBUTION 355.56 375600 9126/2013 125139 BERNICK'S 42.00 324546 83171 5822.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX 50TH ST SELLING 180.17 324547 83172 5822.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER 50TH ST SELLING 364.05 324650 83173 5862.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER VERNON SELLING 40.00 324651 83174 5862.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX VERNON SELLING 626.22 375601 912612013 100648 BERTELSON OFFICE PRODUCTS 56.30 OFFICE SUPPLIES 324693 OE- 328759 -1 5840.6513 OFFICE SUPPLIES LIQUOR YORK GENERAL 26.03- RETURN 324694 CP -OE- 328759 -1 5840.6513 OFFICE SUPPLIES LIQUOR YORK GENERAL 30.27 376602 912612013 132641 BEST, KATIE 26.65 ART WORK SOLD 324703 091013 5101.4413 ART WORK SOLD ART CENTER REVENUES 26.65 375603 912612013 122688 BMK SOLUTIONS 175.89 OFFICE SUPPLIES 00003677 324747 90374 1470.6513 OFFICE SUPPLIES FIRE DEPT. GENERAL 175.89 375604 912612013 132444 BOLTON & MENK INC. 11,834.00 SANI SEWER LINING PROJECT 324611 0159293 03485.1705.20 CONSULTING DESIGN TRUNK SS LINING 11,834.00 R55CKR2 LOGIS100 EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN REPAIR PARTS CITY OF EDINA EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN Council Check Register by GL EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN REPAIR PARTS CLUB HOUSE GENERAL SUPPLIES Council Check Register and Summary COURSE BEAUTIFICATION MAINT OF COURSE & GROUNDS CLUBHOUSE GOLF REVENUES DUES & SUBSCRIPTIONS 9/26/2013 - 9/26/2013 Check # Date Amount Supplier/ Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No 375605 912612013 119351 BOURGET IMPORTS 153.50 324548 115442 5822.5513 524.50 324661 115569 5842.5513 270.50 324784 115579 5862.5513 473.50 324986 115564 5822.5513 1,422.00 375606 912612013 100659 BOYER TRUCK PARTS 667.97- CREDIT 00005197 324913 CM731141 1553.6530 151.71 WELDED YOKE 00005414 324914 772118 1553.6530 227.99 FILTERS 00005527 324915 777311 1553.6530 28.30 FILTERS 00005527 324916 777311X1 1553.6530 28.05 RADIO ANTENNA 00005530 324917 778660 1553.6530 1,109.95 RADIATOR 00005531 324918 778794 1553.6530 108.03 PANEL 00005535 324919 779607 1553.6530 986.06 376607 912612013 100663 BRAEMAR GOLF COURSE 61.90 PETTY CASH 324817 091913 5420.6530 13.91 PETTY CASH 324817 091913 5422.6406 29.50 PETTY CASH 324817 091913 5422.6275 40.00 PETTY CASH 324817 091913 5401.4553 35.00 PETTY CASH 324817 091913 5410.6105 48.26 PETTY CASH 324817 091913 5421.5514 46.00 PETTY CASH 324817 091913 5410.6235 274.57 375608 912612013 100664 BRAUN INTERTEC 4,581.75 MATERIALS TESTING 324920 375035 5200.1727 4,581.75 376609 912612013 100667 BROCK WHITE COMPANY 471.50 KNEELERS, KNEEBOARD 324850 12351548 -00 1301.6610 471.50 375610 912612013 131731 BROWNING, RYAN 80.33 CONFERENCE EXPENSES 324921 090913 2310.6104 80.33 375611 9/2612013 103995 BRYAN, LINDA NELSON 11.34 ARTWORK SOLD 324704 091013 5101.4413 Subledger Account Description Continued... COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 9/25/2013 8:28:41 Page - 4 Business Unit 50TH ST SELLING YORK SELLING VERNON SELLING 50TH ST SELLING REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN REPAIR PARTS CLUB HOUSE GENERAL SUPPLIES MAINT OF COURSE & GROUNDS COURSE BEAUTIFICATION MAINT OF COURSE & GROUNDS CLUBHOUSE GOLF REVENUES DUES & SUBSCRIPTIONS GOLF ADMINISTRATION COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER GRILL POSTAGE GOLF ADMINISTRATION GOLF DOME SAFETY EQUIPMENT CONFERENCES & SCHOOLS ART WORK SOLD GOLF DOME BALANCE SHEET GENERAL MAINTENANCE E911 ART CENTER REVENUES 9/25/2013 8:28:41 Page - 5 Business Unit CENTENNIAL LAKES ADMIN EXPENSE CENTENNIAL LAKES OPERATING 494.46 GOLF BALLS CITY OF EDINA 5440.5511 R55CKR2 LOGIS100 217.00- CREDIT 324634 924619780 5440.5511 COST OF GOODS - PRO SHOP PRO SHOP RETAIL SALES Council Check Register by GL 277.46 Council Check Register and Summary 375614 912612013 119455 CAPITOL BEVERAGE SALES 9126/2013 - 9/26/2013 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description 375611 912612013 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER 103995 BRYAN, LINDA NELSON Continued... 60.60 11.34 5842.5515 COST-OF GOODS SOLD MIX YORK SELLING 375612 9/26/2013 459.00 122074 BUIE, BARB 324987 358117 5822.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER 50TH ST SELLING 62.43 PETTY CASH 324818 091613 5760.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES 141.89 PETTY CASH 324818 091613 5761.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES 116683 CAT & FIDDLE BEVERAGE 204.32 375613 912612013 79.50 102149 CALLAWAY GOLF 324654 96642 5842.5513 9/25/2013 8:28:41 Page - 5 Business Unit CENTENNIAL LAKES ADMIN EXPENSE CENTENNIAL LAKES OPERATING 494.46 GOLF BALLS 324633 924699281 5440.5511 COST OF GOODS - PRO SHOP PRO SHOP RETAIL SALES 217.00- CREDIT 324634 924619780 5440.5511 COST OF GOODS - PRO SHOP PRO SHOP RETAIL SALES 277.46 375614 912612013 119455 CAPITOL BEVERAGE SALES 3,272.45 324652 358115 5842.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER YORK SELLING 60.60 324653 358116 5842.5515 COST-OF GOODS SOLD MIX YORK SELLING 459.00 324987 358117 5822.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER 50TH ST SELLING 3,792.05 375615 9126/2013 116683 CAT & FIDDLE BEVERAGE 79.50 324654 96642 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 79.50 375616 912612013 103711 CENTERPOINT ENERGY SERVICES INC. 6,555.89 324578 2692912 5311.6186 HEAT POOL OPERATION 464.32 324579 2692472 5720.6186 HEAT EDINBOROUGH OPERATIONS 7,020.21 375617 912612013 123898 CENTURYLINK 60.58 952 944 -1841 324580 1841 -9/13 1640.6188 TELEPHONE PARK MAINTENANCE GENERAL 159.10 952 285 -2951 324581 2951 -9113 1470.6188 TELEPHONE FIRE DEPT. GENERAL 59.93 952 944 -6522 324582 6522 -9/13 5511,.6188 TELEPHONE ARENA BLDG/GROUNDS 279.61 375618 912612013 114639 CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 360.50 HIGHLANDS EXPLORERS VISIT 324583 091613 1624.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES PLAYGROUND 8 THEATER 360.50 375619 9/2612013 100692 COCA -COLA REFRESHMENTS 196.20 324988 0198021709 5862.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX VERNON SELLING 196.20 R55CKR2 LOGIS100 104020 DALCO CITY OF'EDINA Council Check Register by GL 300.11 SQUEEGEES 00001454 324584 2644129 Council Check Register and Summary GENERAL SUPPLIES CENT SVC PW BUILDING 297.40 9/26/2013 -- 9/26/2013 Check # Date Amount Supplier/ Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No 375619 9126/2013 HAND TOWELS 100692 COCA -COLA REFRESHMENTS . 324586'. 2649495 375620 912612013 CENT SVC PW BUILDING 120433 COMCAST 791.91 TISSUE, TOWELS, MOP HANDLES 00001902 79.09 8772 10 614 0419858 324922 419858 -9/13 5510.6105 BUILDING MAINTENANCE 29.08 8772 10 614 0220686 325046 220686 -9/13 5710.6105 324854 2651477A 1646.6406 ` 108.17 BUILDING MAINTENANCE 375621 9/26/2013 00001902 116356 CONSTRUCTION MIDWEST INC. 1646.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES BUILDING MAINTENANCE 383.04 STAKES 00001894 324851 517353 1314.6406 383.04 375622 9/2612013 102596 CROWN TROPHY 34.22 ENGRAVING 324731 1757 4105.6103 34.22 Subledger Account Description Continued... DUES & SUBSCRIPTIONS DUES & SUBSCRIPTIONS GENERAL SUPPLIES 9/25/2013 8:28:41 Page- 6 Business Unit ARENA ADMINISTRATION EDINBOROUGH ADMINISTRATION STREET RENOVATION PROFESSIONAL SERVICES PUBLIC ART 376623 912612013 104020 DALCO 300.11 SQUEEGEES 00001454 324584 2644129 1552.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES CENT SVC PW BUILDING 297.40 SCRUBBING PADS. CLEANERS, 00001454 .324585 2646838. 1552.6406 , . : • GENERAL SUPPLIES CENT SVC PW BUILDING 189.04 HAND TOWELS 00001454 . 324586'. 2649495 155i.6406. GENERAL SUPPLIES CENT SVC PW BUILDING 791.91 TISSUE, TOWELS, MOP HANDLES 00001902 324852 2651477 1646.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES BUILDING MAINTENANCE 26.23 MOP HANDLE 00001902 324854 2651477A 1646.6406 ` GENERAL SUPPLIES BUILDING MAINTENANCE 26.23- CREDIT 00001902 324923 2651477C 1646.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES BUILDING MAINTENANCE 1,578.46 375624 9/26/2013 103020 DALCO ROOFING & SHEET METAL 950.00 ROOF REPAIRS 324732 049952 5861.6180 CONTRACTED REPAIRS VERNON OCCUPANCY 890.00 ROOF REPAIRS 324733 049951 5841.6180 CONTRACTED REPAIRS YORK OCCUPANCY 1,840.00 376626 912612013 103176 DANICIC, JOHN 27.30 ARTWORK SOLD 324705 091013 5101.4413 ART WORK SOLD ART CENTER REVENUES 27.30 375626 912612013 102478 DAY DISTRIBUTING CO. 752.75 324549 718103 5822.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER 50TH ST SELLING 1,403.15 324655 719228 5842.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER YORK SELLING 115.20 324656 719229 5842.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX YORK SELLING 2,733.55 324989 719225 5862.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER VERNON SELLING 22.40 324990 719226 5862.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX VERNON SELLING 284.20 324991 719227 5822.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER 50TH ST SELLING 5,311.25 CITY OF EDINA 9125/2013 8:28:41 R55CKR2 LOGIS100 Council Check Register by GL Page - 7 Council Check Register and Summary 9/26/2013 — 9126/2013 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit 375626 9126/2013 102478 DAY DISTRIBUTING CO. Continued... 375627 912612013 129884 DEARBORN NATIONAL LIFE INSURANCE CO. 2,347.84 STD INSURANCE 324612 F018342 -OCT 9900.2033.16 LTD - 99 PAYROLL CLEARING 2013 2,347.84 375628 9/2612013 131551 DELANEY CONSULTING LLC 2,573.33 CONSULTING / TRAINING 324734 1284 5820.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 50TH STREET GENERAL 2,573.33 CONSULTING / TRAINING 324734 1284 5840.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES LIQUOR YORK GENERAL 2,573.34 CONSULTING /TRAINING 324734 1284 5860.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES VERNON LIQUOR GENERAL 7,720.00 375629 912612013 100718 DELEGARD TOOL CO. 781.99 IMPACT WRENCH, GRINDER 00005494 324855 830921 1553.6556 TOOLS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 23.16 BELT INSTALLER 00005496 324856 833130 1553.6556 TOOLS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 347.34 SOCKETS, WRENCHES - 00005496 324857 833151 1553.6556 TOOLS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 1,152.49 375630 912612013 100720 DENNYS 5TH AVE. BAKERY 77.15 BAKERY 324635 473109 5421.5510 COST OF GOODS SOLD GRILL 56.41 324636 473073 5421.5510 COST OF GOODS SOLD GRILL 133.56 375631 9/2612013 122234 DEVRIES, NICHOLAS 150.00 JURIED SHOW JUDGE 324735 091913 5120.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES ART SUPPLY GIFT GALLERY SHOP 150.00 375632 912612013 102831 DEX MEDIA EAST INC. 26.00 650487671 324924 650487671 -9/13 5511.6188 TELEPHONE ARENA BLDG/GROUNDS 26.00 375633 912612013 132853 DEZIEL, MARY 50.00 JURIED SHOW AWARD 324769 091913 5110.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES ART CENTER ADMINISTRATION 50.00 375634 912612013 100571 DIAMOND VOGEL PAINTS 416.08 STRAINERS, FLEX GUN, TIPS 00001889 324858 802148337 1325.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES STREET NAME SIGNS 793.01 TRAFFIC PAINT 00001852 324925 802148011 1335.6532 PAINT PAVEMENT MARKINGS 866.44 00001852 324926 802148037 1335.6532 PAINT PAVEMENT MARKINGS 1,702.31 00001852 324927 802148224 1335.6532 PAINT PAVEMENT MARKINGS R55CKR2 LOGIS100 CITY OF EDINA 9/25/2013 8:28:41 Council Check Register by GL Page - 8 Council Check Register and Summary 9/26/2013 - 9/26/2013 Check # Date. Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit 375634 912612013 100571 DIAMOND 'VOGEL PAINTS , Continued... 3,777.84 376635 912612013 129191 DICK & RICK'S AUTO INTERIORS 401.83 REPAIR CUSHIONS, BACKREST 60005587 324859 30404 1553.6180 CONTRACTED REPAIRS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 401.83 375636 912612013 123995 DICK'S /LAKEVILLE SANITATION INC. 3,560.04 REFUSE 324613 .570269 4095.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 50TH STREET RUBBISH 2,105.96 REFUSE 324614 570270 - . 4095.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 50TH STREET RUBBISH 5,666.00 375637 9/2612013 132810 ECM PUBLISHERS INC. 51.96 PUBLISH NOTICE.. 324615 20320 1120.6103= PROFESSIONAL SERVICES ADMINISTRATION 207.84 PUBLISH NOTICE - HOOTEN CLEANERS 324616 20319 9232.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES CENTENNIAL TIF DISTRICT 170.00 BRAEMAR ICE AD 324928 1456871 5510.6105 DUES & SUBSCRIPTIONS ARENA ADMINISTRATION 429.80 375638 912612013 124503 EDEN PRAIRIE WINLECTRIC CO. 12.99 REWIRING FOR INTERVIEW RMS 00001898 324771 10259700 1400.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES POLICE DEPT. GENERAL 66.21 COUPLINGS 00001822 324860 10251600 1646.6578 LAMPS & FIXTURES BUILDING MAINTENANCE 5.97 SWITCH 00001885 324861 10246000 1646.6578 LAMPS & FIXTURES BUILDING MAINTENANCE 85.17 375639 912612013 100744 EDINA CHAMBER OF COMMERCE 15.00 EMERGING LEADERS - BROWNING 324929 33551 1554.6104 CONFERENCES & SCHOOLS CENT SERV GEN - MIS 15.00 EMERGING LEADERS - BISEK 324930 33619 1554:6104 CONFERENCES & SCHOOLS CENT SERV GEN - MIS 30.00 375640 9/2612013 103694 EDINALARM INC. 34.20 FIRE INSPECTION- CONTROL PANEL 324931 83353 5841.6250 ALARM SERVICE YORK OCCUPANCY 34.20 375641 912612013 132851 EGAN, MICHAEL 100.00 JURIED SHOWAWARD 324764 091913 5110.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES ART CENTER ADMINISTRATION 100.00 375642 912612013 126291. EXCEL TURF AND ORNAMENTAL 1,004.63 FERTILIZER 324819 09830 5431.6540 FERTILIZER RICHARDS GC MAINTENANCE 1,004.63 R55CKR2 LOGIS100 CITY OF EDINA 9/25/2013 8:28:41 Council Check Register by GL Page - 9 Council Check Register and Summary 9/26/2013 - 9/26/2013 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit 375643 9126/2013 100146 FACTORY MOTOR PARTS COMPANY Continued... 228.74 FUEL MOD KIT 324862 69- 113255 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 157.50 BATTERIES, HALOGEN CAPSULES 324863 69- 112322 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 70.23 FUEL FILTER 324864 69- 112277 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 5.13 MINIATURE LAMPS 324865 1- 4267284 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 39.27 FILTERS 324866 69- 112323 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 89.54 PART 324867 1- 4268917 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 82.60 BATTERY 00005548 324868 1- 4266033 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 673.01 375644 9126/2013 124088 FAGERSTROM, JOHN 6.50 ARTWORK SOLD 324706 091013 5101.4413 ART WORK SOLD ART CENTER REVENUES 6.50 375645 9/26/2013 132859 FAHRMANN, AARON 144.00 MODEL 324820 092013 5110.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES ART CENTER ADMINISTRATION 144.00 375646 9126/2013 122549 FARNER- BOCKEN COMPANY 630.08 FOOD 324637 2282110 5430.5510 COST OF GOODS SOLD RICHARDS GOLF COURSE 630.08 375647 9/2612013 106035 FASTENAL COMPANY 79.22 KEY DRIVERS, BOLT GAUGE 324869 MNTC2119407 1314.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES STREET RENOVATION 79.22 I 375648 9/26/2013 126004 FERGUSON WATERWORKS 89.88 WRENCH 00001927 324617 0047984 5913.6556 TOOLS DISTRIBUTION 5,394.45 METERS 00001927 324618 0047826 5917.6530 REPAIR PARTS METER REPAIR 2,186.47 CS PARTS 00001935 324619' 0049027 5913.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES DISTRIBUTION 1,447.96 METER BOXES 00001912 324642 0049462 5916.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES METER READING 9,118.76 375649 912612013 119211 FIRSTLAB 39.95 PRE - EMPLOYMENT DRUG TEST 324932 00690068 1550.6121 ADVERTISING PERSONNEL CENTRAL SERVICES GENERAL 39.95 375650 912612013 129500 FLAT EARTH BREWING CO. 296.00 324992 7254 5862.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER VERNON SELLING 322.00 324993 7253 5842.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER YORK SELLING 618.00 R55CKR2 LOGIS100 CITY OF EDINA 9/25/2o-i3 8:28:41 Council Check Register by GL Page- 10 Council Check Register and Summary 9/26/2013 - 9/26/2013 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit 375650 9/26/2013 129500 FLAT EARTH BREWING CO. Continued... 375651 912612013 101512 FLEXIBLE PIPE TOOL COMPANY 5,777.20 REPLACE CABLE ASSEMBLY 00001758 324587 16736 5923.6180 CONTRACTED REPAIRS COLLECTION SYSTEMS 5,777.20 375652 9/2612013 121386 FLINT HILLS RESOURCES LP 16,856.42 CRS -2 324870 14881606 -0 1314.6519 ROAD OIL STREET RENOVATION 16,856.42 375653 9/2612013 101475 FOOTJOY 81.20 MERCHANDISE 324638 5211368 5440.5511 COST OF GOODS - PRO SHOP PRO SHOP RETAIL SALES 81.20 375664 9/2612013 126725 FORTNER, NOLA 22.75 ARTWORK SOLD 324707 091013 5101.4413 ARTWORK SOLD ART CENTER REVENUES 22.75 375655 912612013 120113 FRANCIS, JOYCE 3.84 ART WORK SOLD 324708 091013 5101.4413 ART WORK SOLD ART CENTER REVENUES 3.84 375656 912612013 102540 GOERGEN, DAVID 187.58 MILEAGE REIMBURSEMENT 324933 091613 5919.6104 CONFERENCES & SCHOOLS TRAINING 187.58 375657 912612013 101103 GRAINGER 8.21 BATTERIES 00005462 324871 9233175083 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 162.83 LIGHT WANDS 00005462 324872 9233175075 1325.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES STREET NAME SIGNS 11.44 BATTERIES 00005464 324873 9233175091 1130.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES COMMUNICATIONS 389.61 ROTARY GEAR PUMP 00005492 324874 9235426328 1553.6556 TOOLS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 92.87 EARPLUGS, LED HEADLIGHTS 00001897 324875 9239079669 1301.6556 TOOLS GENERAL MAINTENANCE 16.18 PHOTOCONTROL 00001872 324876 9240252941 1322.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES STREET LIGHTING ORNAMENTAL 681.34 375658 9/2612013 124711 GRANDVIEW TIRE & AUTO - CAHILL 64.95 ALIGNMENT 00005586 324877 57207 1553.6180 CONTRACTED REPAIRS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 64.95 375659 9/26/2013 102217 GRAPE BEGINNINGS INC 194.25 324550 156798 5822.5513: COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING 9/25/2013 8:28:41 Page - 11 Business Unit 501 H 51 StLLINU MAINT OF COURSE & GROUNDS ART CENTER REVENUES HUMAN RESOURCES PAYROLL CLEARING CENTRAL SERVICES GENERAL 2,413.84 CHEMICALS 00001250 324588 3510828 CITY OF EDINA WATER TREATMENT SUPPLIES R55CKR2 LOGIS100 2,413.84 375665 912612013 Council Check Register by GL Council Check Register and Summary PIPE, COUPLINGS 00001943 324589 8448677 5923.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES COLLECTION SYSTEMS 9/26/2013 — 9/26/2013 1,179.49 Check # Date Amount Supplier/ Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subiedger Account Description 375659 9/2612013 101209 HEIMARK FOODS 102217 GRAPE BEGINNINGS INC Continued... 146.25 BEEF PATTIES 324994 157071 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE COST OF GOODS SOLD GRILL 340.50 153.12 375660 912612013 120834 GREEN, RICK 115599 HENNEPIN COUNTY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE 158.34 FALL DISPLAY DECORATIONS 324821 091813 5422.6275 COURSE BEAUTIFICATION 324934 092313 2340.6103 158.34 DWI FORFEITURE 20.25 375661 912612013 100155 GRITTON, KAY 375668 912612013 100801 _ HENNEPIN COUNTY TREASURER 50.05 ART WORK SOLD 324709 091013 5101.4413 ART WORK SOLD 1,567.00 50.05 324822 1000034760 1195.6225 BOARD & ROOM PRISONER 375662 9/2612013 1,567.00 124775 HAMLINE UNIVERSITY 50.00 CRITICAL CONVERSATIONS SERIES 324772 JESSICA NIKUNEN 1170.6104 CONFERENCES & SCHOOLS 50.00 375663 9126/2013 125270 HARTFORD • PRIORITY ACCOUNTS 5,551.03 OCT 2013 PREMIUM 324748 6464952 -8 9900.2033.05 LIFE INSURANCE - 99 117.57 COBRA LIFE 324749 OCT 2013 1550.6043 COBRA INSURANCE 5,668.60 375664 912612013 100797 HAWKINS INC. 9/25/2013 8:28:41 Page - 11 Business Unit 501 H 51 StLLINU MAINT OF COURSE & GROUNDS ART CENTER REVENUES HUMAN RESOURCES PAYROLL CLEARING CENTRAL SERVICES GENERAL 2,413.84 CHEMICALS 00001250 324588 3510828 5915.6586 WATER TREATMENT SUPPLIES WATER TREATMENT 2,413.84 375665 912612013 100012 HD SUPPLY WATERWORKS LTD 1,179.49 PIPE, COUPLINGS 00001943 324589 8448677 5923.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES COLLECTION SYSTEMS 1,179.49 375666 912612013 101209 HEIMARK FOODS 153.12 BEEF PATTIES 324639 024766 5421.5510 COST OF GOODS SOLD GRILL 153.12 375667 912612013 115599 HENNEPIN COUNTY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE 20.25 DWI FORFEITURE 324934 092313 2340.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES DWI FORFEITURE 20.25 375668 912612013 100801 _ HENNEPIN COUNTY TREASURER 1,567.00 AUG 2013 ROOM & BOARD 324822 1000034760 1195.6225 BOARD & ROOM PRISONER LEGAL SERVICES 1,567.00 R55CKR2 LOGIS100 - -CITY, OF EDINA 9/25/2013 8:28:41 CouncilCheck Register GL, Page- 12 .by. , C6uncil:6eck Register and Summary;:. " 9/26/2012;.- ','.+9/26/2013 Check # Date Amount Supplier/ Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit 375669 9/2612013 105436 HENNEPIN COUNTY TREASURER Continued... 2,084.70 RADIO ADMIN FEE 324590 130838015 1400.6230 SERVICE CONTRACTS EQUIPMENT POLICE DEPT. GENERAL 2,084.70 375670 912612013 102484 HIRSHFIELD'S PAINT MANUFACTURING 921.80 FIELD PAINT 00001346 324878 099225 1642.6544 LINE MARKING POWDER FIELD MAINTENANCE 921.80 375671 912612013 104375 HOHENSTEINS INC. 1,154.00 324551 665578 . 5822.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER 50TH ST SELLING 855.50 324662 666588 5862.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER VERNON SELLING 634.50 324663 666643 5822.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER 50TH ST SELLING 1,834.95 324664 666859 5842.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER YORK SELLING 238.50 324995 667279 5862.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER VERNON SELLING 172.50 324996 667280 5822.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER 50TH ST SELLING 4,889.95 375672 812812013 102044 HOISINGTON KOEGLER GROUP INC. 554.56 COUNTRYSIDE PK PROJECT - '324620 012 - 042 -13 47078.6710 EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT COUNTRYSIDE PK PLAYGROUNDBPATH 554.56 375673 912612013 131734 .HORWITZNSI 2,779.99 COMPRESSOR SERVICE 00001656 '324591 W29219 1552.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES CENT SVC PW BUILDING 2,880.40 ` HEAT PUMP REPAIR 00001656 324879 W29277, 1552.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES CENT SVC PW BUILDING 5,660.39 375674 912612013 132383 I LOVE A PARADE 9.75 ART WORK SOLD 324710 091013 5101.4413 ART WORK SOLD ART CENTER REVENUES 9.75 375675 912612013 120085 IDEAL SERVICE INC. 1,261.94 VFD REPAIR - 00001945 324592„ 60.04 5912.6180 CONTRACTED REPAIRS WELL HOUSES 1,261.94 375676 912612013 100814 INDELCO PLASTICS CORP. 31.27 PVC, CEMENT 00001938. 324750 797470 5923.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES COLLECTION SYSTEMS 31.27 375677 912612013 119808 INTEGRA 27.74 ISP BUNDLE 324935 11288960 7411.6188 TELEPHONE PSTF OCCUPANCY 27.74 375681 912612013 100828 JERRY'S FOODS 53.49 PLAYGROUND 8 THEATER CITY OF EDINA R55CKR2 LOGIS100 POLICE DEPT. GENERAL 11.14 1100.6406 5.98 CITY COUNCIL 75.20 1628.6406 Council Check Register by GL SENIOR CITIZENS 375682 912612013 121075 JIMMY'S JOHNNYS INC. 115.15 Council Check Register and Summary 115.15 47080.4760 375683 912612013 100741 JJ TAYLOR DIST. OF MINN 9/26/2013 - 9/2612013 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No 375677 9126/2013 8.80- 119808 INTEGRA 125.00 375678 912612013 5842.5515 118322 ITL PATCH COMPANY INC. YORK SELLING 1,439.00 5842.5514 479.81 TIE TACK PINS 324773 31435 1400.6203 5842.5514 14,646.25 479.81 '324823 2132749 5421.5514 375679 9126/2013 324997 2119793 104198 JACK MCCLARD $ ASSOCIATES INC. COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX VERNON SELLING 53.87 HOIST RUNNER WHEELS 00005542 324880 51793 1553.6530 VERNON SELLING 324999 2119786 53.87 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER 50TH ST SELLING 375680 9/2612013 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX 103067 JENSON, THOMAS 325001 2133421 5842.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER 275.00 FIRE SAFETY INSTRUCTOR 324751 #5 1470.6103 275.00 375681 912612013 100828 JERRY'S FOODS 53.49 PLAYGROUND 8 THEATER 18.50 1400.6406 9.99 POLICE DEPT. GENERAL 11.14 1100.6406 5.98 CITY COUNCIL 75.20 1628.6406 174.30 SENIOR CITIZENS 375682 912612013 121075 JIMMY'S JOHNNYS INC. 115.15 TOILET SERVICE 115.15 47080.4760 375683 912612013 100741 JJ TAYLOR DIST. OF MINN 1,558.90 5430.6182 7,974.80 RICHARDS GOLF COURSE 17.55 5822.5514 12.75- 50TH ST SELLING 8.80- 5842.5514 125.00 YORK SELLING 77.60 5842.5515 3,298.15 YORK SELLING 1,439.00 5842.5514 53.80 YORK SELLING 123.00 5842.5514 14,646.25 YORK SELLING Subledger Account Description Continued... UNIFORM ALLOWANCE REPAIR PARTS PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 9/25/2013 8:28:41 Page - 13 Business Unit POLICE DEPT. GENERAL EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN FIRE DEPT. GENERAL 324621 083113 1624.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES PLAYGROUND 8 THEATER 324621 083113 1400.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES POLICE DEPT. GENERAL 324621 083113 1100.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES CITY COUNCIL 324621 083113 1628.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES SENIOR CITIZENS 324621 083113 1470.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES FIRE,DEPT. GENERAL 324621 083113 47080.4760 DONATIONS - GOVT FUND EDIBLE PLAYGROUND 324640 68537 5430.6182 RUBBISH REMOVAL RICHARDS GOLF COURSE 324552 2119750 5822.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER 50TH ST SELLING 324785 2133402 5842.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER YORK SELLING 324786 2133405 5842.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX YORK SELLING 324787 2133401 5842.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER YORK SELLING 324788 2126801 5842.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER YORK SELLING '324823 2132749 5421.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER GRILL 324997 2119793 5862.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX VERNON SELLING 324998 2119789 5862.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER VERNON SELLING 324999 2119786 5822.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER 50TH ST SELLING 325000 2119787 5822.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX 50TH ST SELLING 325001 2133421 5842.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER YORK SELLING R55CKR2 LOGIS100 CITY OF. EDINA Councif Check Register by GL Council Check, Register and Summary. 9/26/2013 - . 9/26/2013 Check # Date Amount Supplier/ Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No 375684, 9/2612013 124104 :JOHN DEERE LANDSCAPES INC. 291.63 FITTINGS, SWING JOINTS., 00006487 .3241824`659418441 5422.6611 291.63 375686 912612013 100835 JOHNSON BROTHERS LIQUOR CO. COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING 1,014.92 324553 1667272 5822.5513 741.22 324554 1667276 5822.5513 1,363.18 324555 1667280 5822.5513 .54 324556 1656401 5862.5512 309.52 324789 1672719 5842.5512 56.29 324790 1672707 5842.5513 2,424.64 324791 1672717 5842.5512 95.86 324792 1672716 5842.5515 1,254.63 324793' 1672715 5842.5512 2,738.33 324794 1672718_ 5842.5513 3,335.61 324795 1672713. 5842.5513 3,085.39 324796 1672714 5842.5513 .84 324797 1672699 5842.5512 8,389.07 324798 1672712 5842.5512 1,472.00 324799 1672723 5862.5513 2,671.66 324800 1672725 5862.5513 4,733.39 324801 1672722 5862.5513 1,132.05 324802 1672702 5862.5513 377.84 325002 1672721 5862.5512 889.14 325003 1672724 5862.5512 296.91 325004 1672726 5862.5512 1,090.10 325005 1672705 _ 5822.5513 692.34 325006 1672703, 5822.5513 1,862.81 .325007 1672701•', -' 5822.5513 59.99 325008- 1671400 =' 5822.5514 1,015.25 325009\ 1672698' 5822.5512 1,971.47 325010 1667278 5822.5512 307.84 325011 1672706 5822.5512 373.69 325012 4672704' 5822.5512 264.96 325013 = 588369 5842.5513 231.60 325014 1673280 5842.5513 7,611.15 325015 1672720 5862.5512 .28 325016 1672700 5862.5512 4.60- 325017 592559 5822.5513 16.67- 325018 592558 5822.5513 51, 843.34 9/25/2013 8:28:41 Page - 14 :Subledger Account Description Business Unit Continued... IRRIGATION EQUIPMENT MAINT OF COURSE.& GROUNDS "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 LIQUOR VERNON SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR YORK SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR YORK SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX 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 LIQUOR YORK SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR YORK 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 LIQUOR VERNON SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR VERNON SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR 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 BEER 50TH ST SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR 50TH ST SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR 50TH ST SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR 50TH ST SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR 50TH ST SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR VERNON SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR VERNON SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING Subledger Account Description Continued... ARTWORK SOLD GENERAL SUPPLIES OFFICE SUPPLIES CRAFT SUPPLIES COST OF GOODS SOLD GENERAL SUPPLIES 9/25/2013 8:28:41 Page - 15 Business Unit ART CENTER REVENUES ART CENTER ADMINISTRATION ART CENTER ADMINISTRATION ART CENTER ADMINISTRATION ART SUPPLY GIFT GALLERY SHOP ART CENTER BLDG /MAINT PROFESSIONAL SERVICES CONTINGENCIES DEPT UNIFORMS FIRE DEPT. GENERAL CONSULTING INSPECTION LAKE EDINA B ART WORK SOLD ART CENTER REVENUES ART WORK SOLD ART CENTER REVENUES PROFESSIONAL SERVICES DWI FORFEITURE GENERAL SUPPLIES 50TH ST SELLING GENERAL SUPPLIES YORK SELLING GENERAL SUPPLIES VERNON SELLING CITY OF EDINA R55CKR2 LOGIS100 Council Check Register by GL Council Check Register and Summary 9/26/2013 - 9126/2013 Check # Date Amount Supplier/ Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No 375686 912612013 100835 JOHNSON BROTHERS LIQUOR CO. 375687 912612013 100919 JOHNSON, NAOMI 6.50 PETTY CASH 324736 091813 5101.4413 174.63 PETTY CASH 324736 091813 5110.6406 24.66 PETTY CASH 324736 091813 5110.6513 24.32 PETTY CASH 324736 091813 5110.6564 34.24 PETTY CASH 324736 091813 5120.5510 36.06 PETTY CASH 324736 091813 5111.6406 300.41 375688 912612013 131439 KAPLAN KIRSCH & ROCKWELL LLP 2,488.50 FLIGHT TRACK CHANGES MSP 324936 14656 1500.6103 2,488.50 375689 912612013 111018 KEEPRS INC. 114.99 UNIFORMS 00003674 324752 226065 1470.6558 114.99 375690 912612013 105990 KELLY GREEN IRRIGATION INC. 148.11 SPRINKLER REPAIR 324622 85683 01398.1705.21 148.11 375691 912612013 124348 KILBANE, CHRIS 120.25 ART WORK SOLD 324712 091013 5101.4413 120.25 375692 912612013 130215 KUEHL, RHONDA 13.00 ART WORK SOLD 324711 090113 5101.4413 13.00 375693 912612013 116776 KUSTOM KARRIERS 153.74 DWI TOW 324937 092313 2340.6103 153.74 375694 912612013 100605 LANDS' END BUSINESS OUTFITTERS . 267.75 LOGO APPLICATION FEE 324753 SIN1061758 5822.6406 267.75 LOGO APPLICATION FEE 324753 SIN1061758 5842.6406 267.75 LOGO APPLICATION FEE 324753 SIN1061758 5862.6406 803.25 Subledger Account Description Continued... ARTWORK SOLD GENERAL SUPPLIES OFFICE SUPPLIES CRAFT SUPPLIES COST OF GOODS SOLD GENERAL SUPPLIES 9/25/2013 8:28:41 Page - 15 Business Unit ART CENTER REVENUES ART CENTER ADMINISTRATION ART CENTER ADMINISTRATION ART CENTER ADMINISTRATION ART SUPPLY GIFT GALLERY SHOP ART CENTER BLDG /MAINT PROFESSIONAL SERVICES CONTINGENCIES DEPT UNIFORMS FIRE DEPT. GENERAL CONSULTING INSPECTION LAKE EDINA B ART WORK SOLD ART CENTER REVENUES ART WORK SOLD ART CENTER REVENUES PROFESSIONAL SERVICES DWI FORFEITURE GENERAL SUPPLIES 50TH ST SELLING GENERAL SUPPLIES YORK SELLING GENERAL SUPPLIES VERNON SELLING R55CKR2 LOGIS100 CITY OF EDINA 9/25/2013 8:28:41 Council Check'Register by GL Page - 16 Council Check Register and Summary 9/26/2013 - 9/26/2013 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit 375695 912612013 121656 LAVEN, JANE Continued... 58.50 ART WORK SOLD 324713 091013 5101.4413 ART WORK SOLD ART CENTER REVENUES 58.50 375696 9/26/2013 100852 LAWSON PRODUCTS INC. 187.04 FITTINGS 00005420 324881 9301891688 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 867.57 TAPS, SCREWS, HOSE, DISCS 00005467 324882 9301900767 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 220.68 BRAKE CLEANER, LUBRICANT 00001843 324883 9301872017 1314.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES STREET RENOVATION 23.17 ANCHORS 00005534 324884 9301913812 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 1,298.46 375697 912612013 132852 LEE, JOHN 50.00 JURIED SHOW AWARD 324766 091913 5110.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES ART CENTER ADMINISTRATION 50.00 375698 912612013 128234 LEFFLER PRINTING COMPANY INC. 7,403.00 PARK & REC DIRECTORY 324825 18093 1600.6575 PRINTING PARK ADMIN. GENERAL 3,620.02 PARK & REC'DIRECTORY 324825 18093 5110.6575 PRINTING ART CENTER ADMINISTRATION 11,023.02 375699 912612013 132809 LOEKS, JORDAN 200.25 TRAINING EXPENSES 324623 091613 1640.6104 CONFERENCES & SCHOOLS PARK MAINTENANCE GENERAL 200.25 375700 912612013 106301 LOFFLER COMPANIES INC. 185.29 COPIER USAGE 324885 1625317 1553.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 185.29 375701 9126/2013 123573 LOGIN I IACP NET 1,100.00 ANNUAL MEMBERSHIP 324695 21805 1400.6105 DUES & SUBSCRIPTIONS POLICE DEPT. GENERAL 1,100.00 375702 912612013 100858 LOGIS 396.00 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES .324826 37222 1554.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES CENT SERV GEN - MIS 49.50 WIFI WORK FOR.ROSLAND 324826 37222 4413.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES CITY WIFI PROJECT 173.25 METRO TRANSIT TRAINING PREP 324826 37222 7411.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES PSTF OCCUPANCY 24.75 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 324827 37323 1554.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES CENT SERV GEN - MIS 148.50 ICE ARENA NETWORK 324827 37323 5511.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES ARENA BLDG/GROUNDS 24.75 METRO TRANSIT TRAINING PREP 324827 37323 7411.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES PSTF OCCUPANCY 415.05 BACKUP TAPES 324828, 37303 1554.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES CENT SERV GEN - MIS 910.53 ARCSERV RENEWAL 324828 37303 1554.6160 DATA PROCESSING CENT SERV GEN - MIS R55CKR2 LOGIS100 CITY OF EDINA 9/25/2013 8:28:41 Council Check Register by GL Page - 17 Council Check Register and Summary 9126/2013 - 9/2612013 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit 375702 912612013 100858 LOGIS Continued... 4,149.06 INSIGHT LICENSES . 324938 37290 1500.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES CONTINGENCIES 6,291.39 375703 8126/2013 101792 LUBE -TECH 545.03 GAS 00006136 324829 2263488 5423.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES GOLF CARS 1,021.69 GAS 00006136 324830 2263487 5422.6581 GASOLINE MAINT OF COURSE & GROUNDS 1,505.31 DIESEL 00006137 324831 2263486 5422.6581 GASOLINE MAINT OF COURSE & GROUNDS 3,072.03 375704 9126/2013 101078 LUBE -TECH ESI 515.00 LEAK DETECTOR TEST 324886 2518 1553.6180 CONTRACTED REPAIRS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 515.00 375705 912612013 112577 M. AMUNDSON LLP 1,051.34 324803 159972 5842.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX YORK SELLING 1,051.34 375706 912612013 130851 MARSHALL'S FARM 194.00 HAY BALES, CORNSTALKS 324939 755288 1600.4390.49 BARNYARD BOOGIE PARK ADMIN. GENERAL 194.00 375707 912612013 132863 MARTIN COUNTY 280.00 OUT OF COUNTY WARRANT 324940 092313 1000.2055 DUE TO OTHER GOVERNMENTS GENERAL FUND BALANCE SHEET 280.00 375708 912612013 122878 MARTTI, DOROTHEA 320.00 HOSTING FEE 324887 187 1130.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES COMMUNICATIONS 320.00 375709 912612013 105297 MAYER ELECTRIC CORP. 3,909.66 TATTLETALE ALARM SYSTEM 324942 13249 5500.1705 CONSTR. IN PROGRESS ICE ARENA BALANCE SHEET 363.66 MONTHLY RENTAL FEE 324943 13308 5500.1705 CONSTR. IN PROGRESS ICE ARENA BALANCE SHEET 363.66 324944 13512 5500.1705 CONSTR. IN PROGRESS ICE ARENA BALANCE SHEET 363.66 324945 13708 5500.1705 CONSTR. IN PROGRESS ICE ARENA BALANCE SHEET 363.66 324946 14095 5500.1705 CONSTR. IN PROGRESS ICE ARENA BALANCE SHEET 363.66 324947 14465 5500.1705 CONSTR. IN PROGRESS ICE ARENA BALANCE SHEET 363.66 324948 14760 5500.1705 CONSTR. IN PROGRESS ICE ARENA BALANCE SHEET 363.66 324949 14849 5500.1705 CONSTR. IN PROGRESS ICE ARENA BALANCE SHEET 363.66 324950 15165 5500.1705 CONSTR. IN PROGRESS ICE ARENA BALANCE SHEET 363.66 324951 15288 5500.1705 CONSTR. IN PROGRESS ICE ARENA BALANCE SHEET R55CKR2 LOGIS100 142.68 COPIER USAGE - ART CENTER CITY OF ELANA 1554.6230 SERVICE CONTRACTS EQUIPMENT CENT SERV GEN - MIS Council Check Register by GL COPIER USAGE - BLDG DEPT 324738 551235 - :. 1554.6230 SERVICE CONTRACTS EQUIPMENT ;Council Check Register and Summery• 3,731.69 9/26/2013 — 9/26/2013- Check # Date Amount Supplier/ Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description_ 375709 9/2612013 105297 MAYER ELECTRIC CORP. Continued... AUG 2013 SAC 7,182.60 1495.4307 SAC CHARGES INSPECTIONS 375710 912612013 7,231.95 105603 MEDICINE LAKE TOURS 2,765.75 DULUTH HARBOR CRUISE 324593 9 -19 -13 TRIP 1628.6103.07 TRIPS PROF SERVICES 2,765.75 _ 375711 912612013 APPLE SUPPLIES 00004350 101483 MENARDS 1554.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES CENT SERV GEN - MIS 249.11 CONCRETE SEALER, BOLTS, WRENOD001960 324888 36916 47078.6710 EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT 249.11 375715 912612013 375712 912612013 100885 METRO SALES INC 9/25/2.... 8:28:41 Page - 18 Business Unit SENIOR CITIZENS COUNTRYSIDE PK PLAYGROUNDBPATH 142.68 COPIER USAGE - ART CENTER 324737 548267 1554.6230 SERVICE CONTRACTS EQUIPMENT CENT SERV GEN - MIS 3,589.01 COPIER USAGE - BLDG DEPT 324738 551235 - :. 1554.6230 SERVICE CONTRACTS EQUIPMENT CENT SERV GEN - MIS 3,731.69 376713 912612013 100886 METROPOLITAN COUNCIL 7,231.95 AUG 2013 SAC 324696 091713 1495.4307 SAC CHARGES INSPECTIONS 7,231.95 375714 912612013 104650 MICRO CENTER 96.17 APPLE SUPPLIES 00004350 324739 4619083 1554.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES CENT SERV GEN - MIS 96.17 375715 912612013 100892 MIDWEST BADGE & NOVELTY CO. INC. 53.94 RIBBONS, ROSSETTES 324832 113404 5120.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES ART SUPPLY GIFT GALLERY SHOP 53.94 375716 912612013 101161 MIDWEST CHEMICAL SUPPLY 460.00 BOWL CLEANER, LINERS, BLEACH 324754 34998 1551.6511 CLEANING SUPPLIES CITY HALL GENERAL 1,172.89 TISSUE, TOWELS, PLATES, CUPS 324754 34998 1551.6512 PAPER SUPPLIES CITY HALL GENERAL 1,632.89 375717 912612013 100913 .MINNEAPOLIS& SUBURBAN SEWER & WATER 1,776.25. WATER SERVICE REPLACEMENT 00001949 324643 34542 5913.6180 CONTRACTED REPAIRS DISTRIBUTION 1,776.25 375718 912612013 102174 MINNEAPOLIS OXYGEN COMPANY. 9.31 METHANE AIR 324952 171076748 7413.6545 CHEMICALS PSTF FIRE TOWER 9.31 9/25/2013 8:28:41 Page - 19 Business Unit YORK OCCUPANCY VERNON OCCUPANCY 50TH ST OCCUPANCY GENERAL MAINTENANCE DISTRIBUTION MOWING ARENA ADMINISTRATION ART CENTER REVENUES ART CENTER REVENUES POLICE DEPT. GENERAL MAINT OF COURSE & GROUNDS ART CENTER REVENUES PONDS & LAKES CITY OF EDINA ' R55CKR2 LOGIS100 Council Check Register by GL Council Check Register and Summary 9/26/2013 - 9/2612013 Check # Dale Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description 375719 9/2612013 127062 MINNEHAHA BLDG. MAINT. INC. Continued... 21.38 WINDOW WASHING 324953 928015054 5841.6180 CONTRACTED REPAIRS 16.09 WINDOW WASHING 324954 928015055 5861.6180 CONTRACTED REPAIRS 5.34 WINDOW WASHING 324955 928015387 5821.6180 CONTRACTED REPAIRS 42.81 375720 912612013 112908 MINNESOTA ROADWAYS CO. 350.02 EMULSION 324889 69791 1301.6519 ROAD OIL 350.02 375721 912612013 100908 MINNESOTA WANNER CO. 332.60 FABRICATE ADAPTERS 00001964 324755 0101478 -IN 5913.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 47.07 MOWER PART 00001777 324890 0101395 -IN 1641.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES 379.67 375722 912612013 128914 MINUTEMAN PRESS 52.56 POSTERS 324956 13951 5510.6105 DUES & SUBSCRIPTIONS 52.56 375723 912612013 117420 MOE, MARK 16.25 ART WORK SOLD 324714 091013 5101.4413 ART WORK SOLD 16.25 375724 9126/2013 129086 MONTGOMERY, MEREDITH 2.44 ARTWORK SOLD 324715 091013 5101.4413 ART WORK SOLD 2.44 375725 9/2612013 108537 MOORE, JOEL 252.59 UNIFORM PURCHASE 324774 091913 1400.6203 UNIFORM ALLOWANCE 252.59 375726 912612013 100906 MTI DISTRIBUTING INC. 1,352.61 VALVE, HEADS 00006434 324833 929650 -00 5422.6611 IRRIGATION EQUIPMENT 1,352.61 375727 912612013 114343 MULLEN, JANET 26.00 ART WORK SOLD 324762 091013 5101.4413 ART WORK SOLD 26.00 375728 912612013 105066 NATURAL REFLECTIONS LLC 327.40 AERATOR REPAIRS AT MELODY LAKE 324594 1848 5933.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 9/25/2013 8:28:41 Page - 19 Business Unit YORK OCCUPANCY VERNON OCCUPANCY 50TH ST OCCUPANCY GENERAL MAINTENANCE DISTRIBUTION MOWING ARENA ADMINISTRATION ART CENTER REVENUES ART CENTER REVENUES POLICE DEPT. GENERAL MAINT OF COURSE & GROUNDS ART CENTER REVENUES PONDS & LAKES R55CKR2 LOGIS100 124089 OHMANN, NANCY 1,415.50 CITY OF EDINA 72.80 375737 912612013 114004 O'LEARY, JOHN Council Check Register by GL 912612013 50.00 102551 NFPA 375738 912612013 Council Check Register and Summary 9/26/2013 -- 9126/2013 Check # Date Amount Supplier I Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description 375728 912612013 913.19 105666 NATURAL REFLECTIONS LLC Continued... 327.40 375732 912612013 375729 912612013 121125 NEMER, KAREN 52.00 ART WORK SOLD 324716 091013 5101.4413 ART WORK SOLD 324765 091913 52.00 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 375730 912612013 100076 NEW FRANCE WINE CO. 9/25/2u i J 8:28:41 Page - 20 Business Unit ART CENTER REVENUES 669.00 324665 84634 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 746.50 324666 84618 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING FIRE DEPT. GENERAL ART CENTER ADMINISTRATION ART SUPPLY GIFT GALLERY SHOP ART CENTER REVENUES 325019 1690 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING 375736 912612013 124089 OHMANN, NANCY 1,415.50 ARTWORK SOLD 324718 091013 5101.4413 ARTWORK SOLD 72.80 375737 912612013 114004 O'LEARY, JOHN 375731 912612013 50.00 102551 NFPA 375738 912612013 100936 OLSEN COMPANIES 913.19 BROCHURES 00003668 324756 5909 MY 1470.6614 FIRE PREVENTION 913.19 375732 912612013 101729 NORMAN, POLLY 100.00 JURIED SHOW AWARD 324765 091913 5110.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 100.00 375733 912612013 100933' NORTHWEST GRAPHIC SUPPLY CO. 208.27 ARTISTS OILS, SKETCH PADS 00009287 324740 44665601 5120.6564 CRAFT SUPPLIES 208.27 375734 912.612013 131662 NOVAK, BERNADINE 2.28 ARTWORK SOLD 324717 091013 5101.4413 ART WORK SOLD 2.28 376735 912612013 130141 OENO DISTRIBUTION LLC FIRE DEPT. GENERAL ART CENTER ADMINISTRATION ART SUPPLY GIFT GALLERY SHOP ART CENTER REVENUES 325019 1690 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING 375736 912612013 124089 OHMANN, NANCY 72.80 ARTWORK SOLD 324718 091013 5101.4413 ARTWORK SOLD 72.80 375737 912612013 114004 O'LEARY, JOHN 50.00 JURIED SHOW AWARD 324770 091913 5110.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 50.00 375738 912612013 100936 OLSEN COMPANIES ART CENTER REVENUES ART CENTER ADMINISTRATION R55CKR2 LOGIS100 CITY OF EDINA 9/25/2013 8:28:41 Council Check Register by GL Page - 21 Council Check Register and Summary 9/26/2013 - 9126/2013 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit 375738 912612013 100936 OLSEN COMPANIES Continued... 117.28 STRAP 00001924 324595 524282 5916.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES METER READING 142.03 WRENCH, PLIERS 00001862 324624 523967 5911.6556 TOOLS WELL PUMPS 259.31 375739 912612013 123786 OLSON, VICKI 39.00 ART WORK SOLD 324719 091013 5101.4413 ART WORK SOLD ART CENTER REVENUES 39.00 375740 9126/2013 130333 O- MALLEY, MARYANNE 7.80 ART WORK SOLD 324720 091013 5101.4413 ART WORK SOLD ART CENTER REVENUES 7.80 375741 9126/2013 129824 PARK AND RECREATION CONSULTANTS LLC 800.00 SPORTS DOME ADDENDUM 324625 4 -2013 1500.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES CONTINGENCIES 800.00 375742 9126/2013 116603 PARKER, KATHLEEN 13.98 ART WORK SOLD 324721 091013 5101.4413 ART WORK SOLD ART CENTER REVENUES 13.98 375743 9/2612013 102440 PASS, GRACE 42.25 ART WORK SOLD 324722 091013 5101.4413 ART WORK SOLD ART CENTER REVENUES 68.08 SUPPLIES REIMBURSEMENT 324729 091913 5110.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES ART CENTER ADMINISTRATION 110.33 375744 912612013 131053 PATE, DAN 100.00 JURIED SHOW AWARD. 324768 091913 5110.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES ART CENTER ADMINISTRATION 100.00 375745 912612013 100347 PAUSTIS & SONS 1,712.03 324557 8415423 -IN 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING 5,188.05 324667 8416385 -IN 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 1,959.51 324668 8416392 -IN 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 166.25 324669 8416399 -IN 5842.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR YORK SELLING 9,025.84 375746 912612013 132860 PENTEON 1,325.00 CITY EXTRA, HOSTING, LISTS 324957 30012 1130.6124 WEB DEVELOPMENT COMMUNICATIONS 62.50 CITY EXTRA, HOSTING, LISTS 324957 30012 01393.1705.21 CONSULTING INSPECTION MENOELSSOHN A 62.50 CITY EXTRA, HOSTING, LISTS 324957 30012 01394.1705.21 CONSULTING INSPECTION NORMANDALE R55CKR2 LOGIS100 CITY OF EDINA 9/25/2013 8:28:41 Council Check Register by GL Page - 22 Council Check Register and,Suinmary 9/26/2013 - 9/26/2013 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit 375746 912612013 132860 PENTEON Continued... 62.50 CITY EXTRA, HOSTING, LISTS 324957 30012 01395.1705.21 CONSULTING INSPECTION BRAEMAR HILLS B 62.50 CITY EXTRA, HOSTING, LISTS 324957 30012 01396.1705.21 CONSULTING INSPECTION BRAEMAR HILLS C 62.50 CITY EXTRA, HOSTING, LISTS 324957 30012 01397.1705.21 CONSULTING INSPECTION LAKE EDINAA 62.50 CITY EXTRA, HOSTING, LISTS 324957 30012 01398.1705.21 CONSULTING INSPECTION LAKE EDINA 8 1,700.00 375747 9/2612013 100945 PEPSI -COLA COMPANY 387.60 324558 16925215 5862.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX VERNON SELLING 82.50 324559 16925224 5822.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX 50TH ST SELLING 287.20 324804 17277193 5842.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX YORK SELLING 125.30 325020 17277205 5842:5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX YORK SELLING 556.30- 325047 16933322 5320.5510 COST OF GOODS SOLD POOL CONCESSIONS 326.30 375748 9126/2013 100743 PHILLIPS WINE & SPIRITS - - 727.32 324560 2483848' ;f;: `.., 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING 65.12 324561 2483849~ 5822:5515- COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX 50TH ST SELLING 562.72 324562 248+3854'!' "' .: 5822.5513' r COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING y _ 73.85- 324563 351P041:'. 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING 178.08 324805 2487485 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 1,178.85 324806 2487494 ` 5862:5513 ., COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 3,469.48 324807 2497492 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 687.48 324808, 2487490 5842.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR YORK SELLING 1,502.13 324809 2487491 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 1,761.36 324810 2487489 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 228.48 324811 2487484 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 933.38 325021 2487486 5822.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR 50TH ST SELLING 280.90 325022 2487487 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING 1,154.79 325023 2487483 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING 70.12 325024 2487493 5862:5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR VERNON SELLING 12, 726.36 376749 912612013 124176 PINNACLE DISTRIBUTING 224.00 325025 19274 5862.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX VERNON SELLING 224.00 375750 912612013 100964 PIONEER RIM & WHEEL CO. 199.81- CREDIT 324958 1- 204302 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 57.80 BOLTS, NUTS, SPRINGS 324959 1- 211428 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 57.80 BOLTS, NUTS, SPRING 324960 1- 212609 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN Subledger Account Description Continued... REPAIR PARTS REPAIR PARTS AMBULANCE FEES 9/25/2013 8:28:41 Page - 23 Business Unit EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN FIRE DEPT. GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SVC - OTHER EDINBOROUGH ADMINISTRATION PHOTOGRAPHIC SUPPLIES COMMUNICATIONS TIRES & TUBES EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN MAGAZINE/NEWSLETTER EXPENSE COMMUNICATIONS PAINT PAVEMENT MARKINGS GENERAL SUPPLIES POOL ADMINISTRATION GENERAL SUPPLIES EDINBOROUGH ADMINISTRATION ALARM SERVICE ARENA BLDG/GROUNDS PROFESSIONAL SERVICES ART CENTER ADMINISTRATION CITY OF EDINA R55CKR2 LOGIS100 Council Check Register by GL Council Check Register and Summary 9/26/2013 — 9/26/2013 Check # Date Amount Supplier/ Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No 375750 912612013 100954 PIONEER RIM & WHEEL CO. 75.39 FLOOD LIGHTS 00005526 324961 1- 214899 1553.6530 11.33 BUSHINGS 00005536 324962 1- 215668 1553.6530 2.51 375751 912612013 132808 PLANTE, WILLIAM 1,610.00 AMBULANCE OVERPAYMENT REFUND 324626 091713 1470.4329 1,610.00 375752 912612013 104235 PLATENBERG, KATHY 125.00 EP ENTERTAINMENT 10/03/13 324780 091913 5710.6136 125.00 375753 912612013 101110 POLLY NORMAN PHOTOGRAPHY 272.53 PARK BOARD PHOTO, STAFF PHOTOS 324963 091013 1130.6408 272.53 375764 912612013 119620 POMP'S TIRE SERVICE INC. 903.22 TIRES 00005549 324891 210079120 1553.6583 903.22 375755 9126/2013 100961 POSTMASTER - USPS 6,211.81 ABOUT TOWN POSTAGE 324965 092013 1130.6123 6,211.81 375756 912612013 118747 POTTERS INDUSTRIES LLC 4,704.00 HIGHWAY REFLECTING MATERIALS00001855 324966 90874190 1335.6532 4,704.00 375757 912612013 129706 PREMIUM WATERS INC. 157.64 609425 325048 609425 -8113 5310.6406 73.76 622833 325049 622833 -8/13 5710.6406 231.40 375758 9/2612013 103094 PROTECTION ONE 184.05 ALARM SERVICE 324964 RE:12743654 5511.6250 184.05 375759 912612013 105103 QUINLIVAN, MARY 100.00 JURIEDSHOWAWARD 324763 091913 5110.6103 100.00 Subledger Account Description Continued... REPAIR PARTS REPAIR PARTS AMBULANCE FEES 9/25/2013 8:28:41 Page - 23 Business Unit EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN FIRE DEPT. GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SVC - OTHER EDINBOROUGH ADMINISTRATION PHOTOGRAPHIC SUPPLIES COMMUNICATIONS TIRES & TUBES EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN MAGAZINE/NEWSLETTER EXPENSE COMMUNICATIONS PAINT PAVEMENT MARKINGS GENERAL SUPPLIES POOL ADMINISTRATION GENERAL SUPPLIES EDINBOROUGH ADMINISTRATION ALARM SERVICE ARENA BLDG/GROUNDS PROFESSIONAL SERVICES ART CENTER ADMINISTRATION R55CKR2 LOGIS100 ' CITY OF.EDINA 9/25/2013 8:28:41 :,Council Check Register by GL Page - 24 Council�.Check Register and Summary 9/26/2013 =- 9/26/2013 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit 375759 912619013 105103 OUINLIVAN, MARY Contlnued... 375760 912612013 132834 R2R PUBLICATIONS 96.09 ARTWORK SOLD 324723 091613 5101.4413 ARTWORK SOLD ART CENTER REVENUES 96.09 375761 912612013 132858 REUTER WALTON CONSTRUCTION 263.75 PERMIT REFUND 324834 ED124729 1495.4111 BUILDING PERMITS INSPECTIONS 263.75 375762 912612013 123757 RIECHMANN PEDERSON DESIGN INC 2,282.50 ABOUT TOWN AD SALES COMMISSION 324967 913151 -7 1130.6123 MAGAZINE/NEWSLETTER EXPENSE COMMUNICATIONS 2,282.50 375763 912612013 102408 RIGID HITCH INCORPORATED 44.92 HITCH BAR REDUCERS 00005202 324892 1927461160, 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS EOUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 44.92 - ; 375764 912612013 132840 RIVAMONTE, LIA 150.00 JURIED SHOW JUDGE 324741 091913 5120.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES ART SUPPLY GIFT GALLERY SHOP 150.00 375765 912612013 101000 RJM PRINTING INC. 49.70 BUSINESS CARDS 324835 78446" 1550.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES CENTRAL SERVICES GENERAL 49.70 375766 912612013 127774 ROOTSTOCK WINE COMPANY 113.50 324564 70065 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING 113.50 375767 912612013 102614 ROTARY CLUB OF EDINA' 162.98 FUNDRAISER RAFFLE TICKETS 324836 BRAEMAR GOLF 5410.6122 ADVERTISING OTHER GOLF ADMINISTRATION COURSE 162.98 375768 9/2612013 106448 RUMMELHOFF, TIM' 50.00 JURIED SHOWAWARD 324767 091913 5110.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES ART CENTER ADMINISTRATION 50.00 375769 912612013 121678 SAABYE, PETER 254.53 MILEAGE REIMBURSEMENT 324968 062313 5510.6107 MILEAGE OR ALLOWANCE ARENA ADMINISTRATION CITY OF EDINA 9/25/2013 8:28:41 R55CKR2 LOGIS100 Council Check Register by GL Page- 25 Council Check Register and Summary 9/26/2013 — 9/26/2013 Check # Date Amount Supplier/ Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit 375769 912612013 121678 SAABYE, PETER Continued... 254.53 375770 912612013 129348 SAFETY ON SITE LLC 655.00 FORKLIFT TRAINING 324893 91013 1281.6104 CONFERENCES & SCHOOLS TRAINING 655.00 375771 912612013 104788 SANDY'S PROMOTIONAL STUFF 277.88 IPHONE BUTTONS 324969 SH2171 1554.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES CENT SERV GEN - MIS 277.88 375772 912612013 118168 SANSIO 753.00 EMS SUBSCRIPTION 324757 INV- 13274 -2013 1470.6160 DATA PROCESSING - FIRE DEPT. GENERAL 753.00 375773 912612013 124780 SCHAUER, LAUREN 26.00 ARTWORK SOLD 324724 091213 5101.4413 ART WORK SOLD ART CENTER REVENUES 26.00 375774 9/26/2013 132862 SCHRADE, BRAD 141.00 SKATING CLASS REFUND 324970 092313 5511.6136 PROFESSIONAL SVC - OTHER ARENA BLDG/GROUNDS 141.00 375775 912612013 100995 SEH 930.45 VERNON WET DELIN PROJ 324627 272449 5932.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES GENERAL STORM SEWER 930.45 375776 912612013 130047 SELECTACCOUNT 590.50 FSA & HRA ADMINISTRATION 324628 008816 -9/13 1550.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES CENTRAL SERVICES GENERAL 590.50' 375777 9126/2013 101380 SHAUGHNESSY, SANDRA 156.49 MEETING EXPENSE 324728 091913 5110.6106 MEETING EXPENSE ART CENTER ADMINISTRATION 156.49 375778 912612013 103237 SHIRLEY, TOM 137.75 MILEAGE REIMBURSEMENT 324971 091613 5760.6107 MILEAGE OR ALLOWANCE CENTENNIAL LAKES ADMIN EXPENSE 137.75 375779 9/2612013 120784 SIGN PRO 118.50 GRAPHICS FOR CITY HALL 324596 7004 1551.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES CITY HALL GENERAL R55CKR2 LOGIS100 Check # Date Amount Supplier I Explanation 375779 9/26/2013 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR 120784 SIGN PRO COST OF GOODS SOLD'MIX YORK SELLING 197.72 DASHERBOARD COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 197.72 DASHERBOARD- REGISTRATION FEES 324775 513.94 1400.6104' 375780 9126/2013 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR 105654 SIMPLEX GRINNELL LP COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR 375783 9126/2013 1,224.29 SPRINKLER/FIREALARM COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR 50TH ST SELLING 1,224.29 VERNON SELLING 375781 9126/2013 5862.5512 132861 SMITH, JAMES CITY OF EDINA Council Check Register by GL Council Check Register and Summary 9/26/2013 - 9/26/2013 PO # Doc No Inv No Account No 324597 7048 5511.6103 324598 7052 5511.6103 325050 76424743 5710.6230 9/25/2013 8:28:41 Page - 26 Subledger Account Description Business Unit Continued... PROFESSIONAL SERVICES ARENA BLDGIGROUNDS PROFESSIONAL SERVICES ARENA BLDG/GROUNDS 207.86 ICE RENTAL REFUND 324972 092313 5511.6136 207.86 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR YORK SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD'MIX YORK SELLING 375782 912612013 122368 SOUTH METRO PUBLIC SAFETY COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR 2,685.00 REGISTRATION FEES 324775 8948 1400.6104' 2,685.00 YORK SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR VERNON SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR 375783 9126/2013 127878 SOUTHERN WINE AND SPIRITS VERNON SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR 50TH ST SELLING .08 VERNON SELLING 324670 1056774 5862.5512 .29 324671 1059276 5862.5512 312.46 324672 1076403 5842.5512 2,232.38 324673 1076404 5842.5512 40.62 324674 1096405 5842.5515 90.41 324675 1076406 5842.5512 5,799.22 324676 1076402 5842.5513 757.77 324677 1076399 5822.5512' 220.50 324678 1076397 5822.5512 2,898.68 324679' 1076407 5862.5513 .50 324680 1076401 5842.5512 32.67- 324681 '. 9011973. 5862:5512 J 32.00- 324682 9009780 5862.5512 74.85 325026 - 1077895 5862.5512 156.23 325027 1076398 5822.5512 3,990.74 325028 1076409 5862.5512 1.903.50 325029 1077894 5842.5513 375784 912612013 110977 SOW, ADAMA 9.75 ARTWORK SOLD 324725 091213 5101.4413 9.75 SERVICE CONTRACTS EQUIPMENT EDINBOROUGH ADMINISTRATION PROFESSIONAL SVC - OTHER ARENA BLDG/GROUNDS CONFERENCES & SCHOOLS POLICE DEPT. GENERAL COST. OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR VERNON SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR VERNON 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 LIQUOR 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 LIQUOR YORK SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR VERNON SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR VERNON SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR VERNON SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR 50TH ST SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR VERNON SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING ART WORK SOLD ART CENTER REVENUES CITY OF EDINA 9/25/2013 8:28:41 R55CKR2 LOGIS100 Council Check Register by GL Page - 27 Council Check Register and Summary 9/26/2013 - 9/26/2013 Check # Date Amount Supplier I Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit 375785 9126/2013 101004 SPS COMPANIES . Continued... 28.34 FITTINGS 00001937 324644 S27B7646.001 5917.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES METER REPAIR 950.44 FITTINGS 00001939 324645 S2788945.001 5917.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES METER REPAIR 110.57 COUPLINGS 00001975 324759 S2790175.001 5917.6530 REPAIR PARTS METER REPAIR 1,089.35 375786 9/2612013 132841 STANNARD, BRAD 6,930.00 WEED HARVESTING AT MILL POND 324758 090313 5938.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES MILLPOND LK VEGETATION CONTROL 6,930.00 375787 9126/2013 129409 STEEN, BARB 2.28 ART WORK SOLD 324726 091013 5101.4413 ART WORK SOLD ART CENTER REVENUES 2.28 375788 912612013 112668 STONEBROOKE EQUIPMENT INC. 697.89 UNDERCARRIAGE 00005427 324894 27090 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 697.89 375789 912612013 101015 STREICHERS 1,201.39 BALL. VEST 324599 11042753 1400.6203 UNIFORM ALLOWANCE POLICE DEPT. GENERAL 23.98 BOONIE HATS 324776 11045247 1401.6203 UNIFORM ALLOWANCE EMERGENCY RESPONSE TEAM 1,225.37 375790 912612013 101017 SUBURBAN CHEVROLET 229.62 BUSHINGS, HANDLE, ARMREST 00005529 324895 500390 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 119.08 PEDAL 00005426 324896 500561 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 308.12 SUPPORTS, BOLTS, LINKS 00005585 324897 501824 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 656.82 375791 9/2612013 105874 SUBURBAN TIRE WHOLESALE INC. 665.62 TIRES 00005525 324898 10119957 1553.6583 TIRES & TUBES EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 1,278.48 TIRES 00005532 324899 10120130 1553.6583 TIRES & TUBES EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 1,944.10 375792 9126/2013 121161 SUPER MEDIA LLC 35.08 PHONE LISTING 324742 090413 5821.6188 TELEPHONE 50TH ST OCCUPANCY 35.08 PHONE LISTING 324742 090413 5B41.6188 TELEPHONE YORK OCCUPANCY 35.09 PHONE LISTING 324742 090413 5861.6188 TELEPHONE VERNON OCCUPANCY 105.25 375793 9126/2013 116868 SWENSON, SUSAN R55CKR2 LOGIS100 112.65 GOLF CLUB CITY OF EDINA , 5440.5511 COST OF GOODS - PRO SHOP PRO SHOP RETAIL SALES Council Check Register by GL 112.65 Council Chick Register .and Summary 375796 912612013 9/26/2013 — 9126/2013` Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description 375793 9/2612013 116868 SWENSON, SUSAN Continued... 324974 092313 9.75 ART WORK SOLD 324727 091013 5101.4413 ART WORK SOLD 9.75 375794 9126/2013 130357 TASC 375797 912612013 135.00 COBRA ADMIN FEE 324973 IN175130 1550.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 135.00 48.19 376795 9/2612013 324600 091713 104932 TAYLOR MADE' UNIFORM ALLOWANCE 9/25/2013 8:28:41 Page - 28 Business Unit ART CENTER REVENUES CENTRAL SERVICES GENERAL 4,207.12 375800 9/2612013 123129 TIMESAVER OFF SITE SECRETARIAL INC. 204.85 COUNCIL MINUTES 9/03113 324629 M20028 1120.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 204.85 375801 9/26/2013 102742 TKDA ENGINEERS ARCHITECTS PLANNERS 2,612.19 78TH ST BRIDGE REHAB 324601 002013002667 10098.1705.20 CONSULTING DESIGN 2,612.19 375802 9/2612013 128347 TKO WINES INC. 945.00 325032 718286 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 945.00 ADMINISTRATION BR8 78TH STREET BRIDGE REHAB YORK SELLING 112.65 GOLF CLUB 324641 21206863 5440.5511 COST OF GOODS - PRO SHOP PRO SHOP RETAIL SALES 112.65 375796 912612013 120602 TEAGUE, CARY 146.90 MILEAGE REIMBURSEMENT 324974 092313 1140.6107 MILEAGE OR ALLOWANCE PLANNING 146.90 375797 912612013 102471 THOLEN, BRIAN 48.19 UNIFORM PURCHASE 324600 091713 1400.6203 UNIFORM ALLOWANCE POLICE DEPT. GENERAL 48.19 375798 912612013 102798 THOMSON REUTERS - WEST 795.99 AUG 2013 INFORMATION CHARGES 324697. 827953269 1400.6105 DUES & SUBSCRIPTIONS POLICE DEPT. GENERAL 795.99 376799 9/2612013 101035 THORPE DISTRIBUTING COMPANY 81.75 325030 777786 5862.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX VERNON SELLING 4,125.37 325031 777787 5862.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER VERNON SELLING 4,207.12 375800 9/2612013 123129 TIMESAVER OFF SITE SECRETARIAL INC. 204.85 COUNCIL MINUTES 9/03113 324629 M20028 1120.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 204.85 375801 9/26/2013 102742 TKDA ENGINEERS ARCHITECTS PLANNERS 2,612.19 78TH ST BRIDGE REHAB 324601 002013002667 10098.1705.20 CONSULTING DESIGN 2,612.19 375802 9/2612013 128347 TKO WINES INC. 945.00 325032 718286 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 945.00 ADMINISTRATION BR8 78TH STREET BRIDGE REHAB YORK SELLING R55CKR2 LOGIS100 CITY OF EDINA Council Check Register by GL Council Check Register and Summary 9/26/2013 -- 9/26/2013 Check # Date Amount Supplier/ Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description 375803 9/26/2013 101038 TOLL GAS & WELDING SUPPLY Continued... 67.81 ARGON 00006489 324837 _ 151910 5422.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES 880.43 ACETYLENE TANKS 00001235 324900 137513 1553.6585 ACCESSORIES 42.04 WELDING GAS 324901 466485 1553.6580 WELDING SUPPLIES 990.28 375804 912612013 124753 TOSHIBA FINANCIAL SERVICES 212.10 COPIER USAGE 324975 236457065 7410.6575 PRINTING 212.10 375805 912612013 101403 TRUCK BODIES & EQUIP INTL INC 1,952.61 TAILGATE REPAIRS 00005511 324902 LC00019713 1553.6180 CONTRACTED REPAIRS 52.26 ASSEMBLY PIN 00005533 324903 LC00019799 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS 2,004.87 375806 912612013 118190 TURFWERKS LLC 103.19 BELTS, SPRING, CABLE 324838 0131976 5431.6530 REPAIR PARTS 272.62 FUEL PUMP, VALVE 00005459 324904 0132023 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS 375.81 375807 9/26/2013 132832 TWIN CITY ROOFING 66.60 PERMIT REFUND 324698 ED124360 1495.4111 BUILDING PERMITS 66.60 375808 9126/2013 102150 TWIN CITY SEED CO. 769.50 SEED 00006491 324839 31040 5422.6543 SOD & BLACK DIRT 769.50. 375809 9/2612013 101051 UNIFORMS UNLIMITED 1,726.61 UNIFORMS 324777 083113 1400.6203 UNIFORM ALLOWANCE 111.00 UNIFORMS 324777 083113 1401.6203 UNIFORM ALLOWANCE 1,837.61 375810 9/2612013 130874 UNITED RENTALS (NORTH AMERICA) INC. 247.96 COMPACTOR 00001884 324905 113893903 -001 47078.6710 EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT 247.96 375811 912612013 100410 USA MOBILITY WIRELESS INC. 182.60. PAGERS 324778 W03192461 1400.6151 EQUIPMENT RENTAL 182.60 9/25/2013 8:28:41 Page - 29 Business Unit MAINT OF COURSE & GROUNDS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN PSTF ADMINISTRATION EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN RICHARDS GC MAINTENANCE EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN INSPECTIONS MAINT OF COURSE & GROUNDS POLICE DEPT. GENERAL EMERGENCY RESPONSE TEAM COUNTRYSIDE PK PLAYGROUND &PATH POLICE DEPT. GENERAL R55CKR2 LOGIS100 CITY OF EDINA Council Check Register by GL " Council Check Register and 'Summary 9126/2013 - 9126/2013 Check# Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No '- !-Account No Subledger Account Description 375812 912612013 102906' VADNAIS, SCOTT Continued... 203.95 BOOTS 324760 091813 1476.6558 DEPT UNIFORMS 203.95 375813 912612013 - 103590 VALLEY -RICH CO. INC. 5,719.50 SERVICE LINE REPLACEMENT 00001951 324761 19171, 5913.6180, CONTRACTED REPAIRS 5,719.50 375814 912612013 101058 VAN PAPER CO. 153.76 LIQUOR BAGS 324602 286306 -00 5822.6512 PAPER SUPPLIES 270.53 LIQUOR BAGS 00007512 324630'X,286305-00. 5842.6512 PAPER SUPPLIES 36.57- CREDIT '324631' 286175CM 5842.6512 PAPER SUPPLIES 108.68 TISSUE, LINERS 324699 286308 -00 . 5862.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES 505.79 LIQUOR BAGS 324699 286308 -00, 5862.6512 PAPER SUPPLIES 858.25 TISSUE, TOWELS, CUPS, LINERS 324840 286460 -00.' - 5421.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES 1,860.44 375815 9/26/2013 102970 VERIZON WIRELESS 92.21 324779 9711282818 2310.6188 TELEPHONE 92.21 375816 9/2612013 101063 VERSATILE VEHICLES INC. 761.11 CHARGERS 324841. 70148 5423:6530 REPAIR PARTS 280.69 FILTER 00006488 324842 70550 5423.6530 REPAIR PARTS 1,775.00 GOLF CART RENTAL 00006210 324843 70561 5423.6216 LEASE LINES 2,816.80 375817 9/2612013 101066 VIKING ELECTRIC SUPPLY 44.42 SENSOR 324906 7630478 1551.6530 REPAIR PARTS 44.42 375818 912612013 119454 VINOCOPIA 324565 0083040 -IN 5862.5512 9/25/2013 8:28:41 Page - 30 Business Unit FIRE DEPT. GENERAL DISTRIBUTION 50TH ST SELLING YORK SELLING YORK SELLING VERNON SELLING VERNON SELLING GRILL E911 GOLF CARS GOLF CARS GOLF CARS CITY HALL GENERAL COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR VERNON SELLING 375819 9126/2013 121042 WALLACE CARLSON PRINTING 229.78 ENVELOPES PRINTING 324743 59657 5110.6575 PRINTING ART CENTER ADMINISTRATION 229.78 375820 9126/2013 106699 WALSER CHRYSLER JEEP. • . 12.74- CREDIT 00005471 324976 CM617302 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN CITY OF EDINA 9/2512013 8:28:41 R55CKR2 LOGIS100 Council Check Register by GL Page - 31 Council Check Register and Summary 9/26/2013 - 9126/2013 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit 375820 9126/2013 106699 WALSER CHRYSLER JEEP Continued... 6.61- CREDIT 00005471 324977 CM617322 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 134.99 VEHICLE REPAIRS 00005545 324978 55863 1553.6180 CONTRACTED REPAIRS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 115.64 _ 375821 912612013 101033 WINE COMPANY, THE 573.20 324566 339650 -00 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING 1,860.30 324683 340368 -00 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD.WINE YORK SELLING 1,816.05 324684 340364 -00 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 432.25 325036 340629 -00 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 829.20 325037 340365 -00 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING 5,611.00 375822 912612013 101312 WINE MERCHANTS 452.48 324567 470804 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING 208.91 324812 471763 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 241.12 324813 471760 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 988.75 324814 471762 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 554.72 325038 471759 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING 2,445.98 375823 912612013 124291 WIRTZ BEVERAGE MINNESOTA 2,692.49 324568 1080083345 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING 15.00- 324569 2080011669 5862.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR VERNON SELLING 20.00- 324570 2080011679 5862.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR VERNON SELLING 10.00- 324571 2080011652 5862.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR VERNON SELLING 29,17- 324572 2080011684 5862.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR VERNON SELLING 8.00- 324573 2080011699 5862.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR VERNON SELLING 18.52- 324574 20800117112 5862.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR VERNON SELLING 9,280.90 324685 1080085964 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 284.49 324686 1080085971 5842.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR YORK SELLING 8,992.45 324687 1080085970 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 6,616.61 324688 1080085969 5842.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR YORK SELLING 130.97 324689 1080085972 5842.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX YORK SELLING 160.93- 324690 2080016004 5842.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR YORK SELLING 106.65- 324691 2080015832 5842.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR YORK SELLING 113.60- 324692 2080015854 5842.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR YORK SELLING 5,867.87 324815 1080085883 5862.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR VERNON SELLING 118.95 325033 1080085966 5862.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX VERNON SELLING 2,599.52 325034 1080085967 5822.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR 50TH ST SELLING 697.80 325035 1080085968 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING R55CKR2 LOGIS100 CITY OF:EDINA _- 9/25/2013 8:28:41 Council Check Regis4e by GL Page - 32 Council Check Register :and:Summary , 9/26/2013 .9/26/2013 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit 375823 9/2612013 124291 WIRTZ BEVERAGE MINNESOTA Continued... 36,800.38 375824 9/26/2013 124529 WIRTZ BEVERAGE MINNESOTA BEER INC 1,511.75 324575 1090109492 5822.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER 50TH ST SELLING 21.50 324576 1090109493 5822.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX 50TH ST SELLING 1,785.75 324657 1090109800 5862.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER VERNON SELLING 3,387.65 324658 1090110471 5842.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER YORK SELLING 553.50 324659 1090110472 5842.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER YORK SELLING 45.60 325039 1090112828 5862.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX VERNON SELLING 2,592.65 325040 1090112827 5862.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER VERNON SELLING 72.00 325041 1090112830 5822.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER 50TH ST SELLING 1,499.95 325042 1090112829 5822.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER 50TH ST SELLING 686.25 325043 1090112881 5842.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER YORK SELLING 172.00 325044 1090112882 5842.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER YORK SELLING 12,328.60 376825 9.12612013 101726 XCEL ENERGY - 3,963.99 51- 6227619 -3 324603 382910132 5761.6185 LIGHT & POWER CENTENNIAL LAKES OPERATING 50,065.58 51- 5605640 -1 324604 382718268 5911.6185 LIGHT & POWER WELL PUMPS 50.61 51- 5276505 -8 324646 383228812 1330.6185 LIGHT & POWER TRAFFIC SIGNALS 54,080.18 375826 9126/2013 119647 YOCUM OIL COMPANY INC. 19,836.44 UNLEADED GAS ,324907 578639 . " 1553.6581 GASOLINE EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 19,836.44 375627 912612013 101091 71EGLER INC 521.06 BATTERIES 00005538 324908L P,CO01498225 1553:6530 REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 14.06 FLAT SCREWS 00005540 - 324909 PC001498226. 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 467.39- CREDIT 324910 PR000132269 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 67.73 513,917.87 Grand Total Payment Instrument Totals Check Total 513,917.87 Total Payments 513,917.87 R55CKS2 LOGIS100 CITY OF EDINA Council Check Summary 9/26/2013 - 9/26/2013 Company Amount 01000 GENERAL FUND 137,108.48 02300 POLICE SPECIAL REVENUE 346.53 04000 WORKING CAPITAL FUND 10,402.35 05100 ART CENTER FUND 6,532.60 05200 GOLF DOME FUND 4,581.75 05300 AQUATIC CENTER FUND 6,322.43 05400 GOLF COURSE FUND 13,226.28 05500 ICE ARENA FUND 8,901.56 05700 EDINBOROUGH PARK FUND 1,916.45 05750 CENTENNIAL LAKES PARK FUND 4,306.06 05800 LIQUOR FUND 209,001.00 05900 UTILITY FUND 94,416.78 05930 STORM SEWER FUND 8,187.85 07400 PSTF AGENCY FUND 561.04 09232 CENTENNIAL TIF DISTRICT 207.84 09900 PAYROLL FUND 7,898.87 Report Totals 513,917.87 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 polici s and procedures 9/25/2013 8:28:49 Page- 1 CITY OF EDINA CITY COUNCIL CREDIT CARD PAYMENT REGISTER 07/26/13- 08/25/13 Account Name Date Amount Description Merchant Name City State Account * *6043 LISA SCHAEFER 2013/08/14 $197.12 Lodging ARROWWOOD RESORT CONFALEXANDRIA MN 1170.6104 * *6043 LISA SCHAEFER 2013/08/14 $197.12 Lodging ARROWWOOD RESORT CONFALEXANDRIA MN 1170.6104 * *6043 LISA SCHAEFER 2013/08/20 $799.00 Conference ACT *NEOGOV -USER CONF 877- 551 -5560 CA 1170.6104 * *6043 LISA SCHAEFER 2013/08/20 $699.00 Conference ACT *NEOGOV - USER CONF 877 -551 -5560 CA 1170.6104 * *6043 LISA SCHAEFER 2013/08/20 $675.60 Airline SUN COUNTRY 337061279597800 - 3596786 MN 1170.6104 * *6043 LISA SCHAEFER 2013/08/21 $73.92 Lodging MONTE CARLO ADV RESERVAI LAS VEGAS NV 1170.6104 * *6043 LISA SCHAEFER 2013/08/21 $73.92 Lodging MONTE CARLO ADV RESERVAI LAS VEGAS NV 1170.6104 * *7693 MARTY SCHEERER 2013/07/29 $63.14 Supplies TARGET 00023135 EDINA MN 1470.6406 * *7693 MARTY SCHEERER 2013/07/30 $51.95 Clothing LANDS END BUS OUTFITTERS 800 - 587 -1541 WI 1470.6558 * *7693 MARTY SCHEERER 2013/08/07 $20.00 Data plan - Scheerer VZWRLSS *PRPAY AUTOPAY 888 - 294 -6804 CA 1470.6188 * *7693 MARTY SCHEERER 2013/08/15 $20.00 Data plan - Medzis VZWRLSS *PRPAY AUTOPAY 888 - 294 -6804 CA 1470.6188 * *7693 MARTY SCHEERER 2013/08/15 $20.00 Data plan VZW R LSS * P R PAY AUTOPAY 888 - 294 -6804 CA 1470.6188 * *7693 MARTY SCHEERER 2013/08/15 $20.00 Data plan VZWRLSS *PRPAY AUTOPAY 888 - 294 -6804 CA 1470.6188 * *7693 MARTY SCHEERER 2013/08/15 $20.00 Data plan VZWRLSS *PRPAY AUTOPAY 888 - 294 -6804 CA 1470.6188 * *7693 MARTY SCHEERER 2013/08/23 $13.92 Software APL *APPLE ITUNES STORE 866 - 712 -7753 CA 1470.6406 * *7693 MARTY SCHEERER 2013/08/23 $16.08 Software APL *APPLE ITUNES STORE 866 - 712 -7753 CA 1470.6406 * *7693 MARTY SCHEERER 2013/08/23 $94.77 Supplies RESTAURANT EQUIPPERS 800 - 235 -3325 OH 1470.6406 * *0127 KAREN KURT 2013/08/12 $225.00 Membership URBAN LAND INSTITUTE 800 - 321 -5011 DC 1120.6104 * *0168 SCOTT NEAL 2013/07/29 $62.03 Food MOZZA MIA EDINA- MN 1120.6106 * *0168 SCOTT NEAL 2013/07/30 $41.86 Food ROJO MEXICAN GRILL EDINA MN 1120.6106 * *0168 SCOTT NEAL 2013/08/02 $32.36 Food EDINA GRILL EDINA MN 1120.6106 * *0168 SCOTT NEAL 2013/08/02 $60.40 Food SALUT BAR AMERICAIN EDINA MN 1120.6106 * *0168 SCOTT NEAL 2013/08/08 $43.37 Food GOOD EARTH I EDINA MN 1120.6106 * *0168 SCOTT NEAL 2013/08/09_ $41.67 Food EDINA GRILL EDINA MN 1120.6106 * *0168 SCOTT NEAL 2013/08/12 $800.00 Office Services ICMA INTERNET 800 - 745 -8780 DC 1120.6104 * *0168 SCOTT NEAL 2013/08/14 $93.71 Cell phone SPRINT *WIRELESS 800 - 639 -6111 KS 1120.6188 * *0168 SCOTT NEAL 2013/08/15 $50.95 Food GOOD EARTH I EDINA MN 1120.6106 * *8738 SUSAN HOWL 2013/07/25 $32.50 Food PATISSERIE MARGO EDINA MN 1100.6106 * *8738 SUSAN HOWL 2013/07/25 $54.77 Food JERRY'S FOODS OF ED EDINA MN 1100.6106 * *8738 SUSAN HOWL 2013/07/25 $29.93 Food STARBUCKS #02592 EDINA U EDINA MN 1100.6106 * *8738 SUSAN HOWL 2013/08/05 $213.09 Food D'AMICO & SONS /EDINA EDINA MN 1100.6106 * *8738 SUSAN HOWL 2013/08/19 ($149.98) Disputed transaction -r WALGREENS #13753 EDINA MN 1120.6406 * *8738 SUSAN HOWL 2013/08/20 $193.82 Food PINSTRIPES EDINA MN 1100.6106 G: \Purchf--'?g cards\2013 purchasing card electronic files\2013 USB Puy -teasing Card Register.xlsx 9/25/2013 CITY C' -r)INA CITY COUNCIL 'CREDIT.(` ).:PAYMENT `REGISTER 07/26/;13= 08/25/13 Account Name Date Amount Description Merchant,.Name City State Account * *8738 SUSAN HOWL 2013/08/23 $34.50 Food PATISSERIE MARGO EDINA MN 1100.6106 * *8738 SUSAN HOWL 2013/08/23 $14.96 Food STAR BUCKS. #02592 EDINA U EDINA MN 1100.6106 * *9159 CARY-TEAGUE 2013/08/08 $16.80 Personal - repaid LAKEVIEW GENERAL STORE DETROIT LAKES MN 1140.6406 * *0176 JOHN WALLIN ' 2013/08/01 $225.00 MnGFOA Conference- I.MINNESOTA GOVERNMENT F 651 - 7927036 MN 1160.6104 * *0176 JOHN WALLIN 2013/08/02 $18.25 Transaction Fee PAYFLOW /PAYPAL 888- 883 -9770 TX 1550.6155 * *0176 JOHN WALLIN 2013/08/02 $19.95 Transaction Fee PAYFLOW /PAYPAL 888 - 883 -9770 TX 1550.6155 * *0176 JOHN WALLIN 2013/08/07 $225.00 MnGFOA Conference -J MINNESOTA-GOVERNMENT F 651 - 7927036 MN 1160.6104 * *0176 JOHN WALLIN 2013/08/.15 $45.00 Product GOVERNMENT FINANCE OFFIC 312 - 977 -9700 IL 1160.6405 * *0176 JOHN WALLIN 2013/08/21 $250.00 Conference 123SIGNUP 877 - 6919951 CA 1160.6104 * *0143 DEB MANGEN 2013/08/20 $195.00 Conference EB *2013-MCFOA ADVANCE EVENTBRITE.CO CA 1180.6104 * *0184 ROBERT WILSON 2013/08/06 ($5.00) License VUE *LICENSING, 800 - 274 -3444 MN 1190.6105 * *0184 ROBERT WILSON 2013/08/19 $38.57 .Office Supplies FRANKLINCOVE_YPRODUCTS 800- 819 -1812 UT 1190.6406 * *0184 ROBERT WILSON 2013/08/20 $230.00 Registration MINNESOTA-ASSOC OF ASSES 763- 569 73357 MN 1190.6104 *. *0101 WAYNE HOULE 2013/07/30 $741.71 .Microsoft License _PAYPAL * EDINA STORE 402- 935 -7733 MN 421260.6710 * *0101 WAYNE HOULE 2013/07/31 $12.86 Office Supplies STAPLES-. 00119180 BLOOMINGTON MN 1260.6406 *: *0101 WAYNE HOULE 2013/07/31 $265.00 Conference PAYPAL_ *MNAPA 402 - 935 -7733 CA 1260.6104 * *0101 WAYNE HOULE 2013/08/09 $235.95 Office' Supplies USPS 26632704333409905 MINNEAPOLIS MN 01416.1705.31 * *0101 WAYNE HOULE 2013/08/22 $52.35 Office Supplies AP „BOCIKSTORE.COM -800- 3536798 CA 1260.6406 * *2522 BRIAN OLSON 2013/08/07 $569.28.- Education MNSCU 877- 4666728 MN 1281.6104 * *6999 DAN MCMAHON 2013/08/20 $50.00 Education DEPARTMENT OF LABOR AND 651- 2845528 MN 1240.6105 * *6999 DAN MCMAHON 2013/08/24 $658.98 Electronics AMAZON.COM AMZN.COM /BILL WA 1552.6406 * *7013 GARY WELLS 2013/07/26 $235.00 Business Expense MINNESOTA RURAL WATER AE 218 - 685 -5197 MN 5913.6105 * *7013 GARY WELLS 2013/08/07 $33.05 Supplies WW GRAINGER 877 - 2022594 PA 5921.6530 * *7013 GARYWELLS 2013/08/07 $88.18 Supplies WW GRAINGER 877- 2022594 PA 5916.6406 * *7013 GARY WELLS 2013/08/12 $740.93 .Supplies USA BLUE BOOK 800- 493 -9876 IL 5932.6406 * *7013 GARY WELLS 2013/08/12 $286:04 ;Supplies WW GRAINGER 877 - 2022594 PA 5932.6406 * *7013 GARY WELLS 2013/08/14 $125.00 Business, Expense MINNESOTA RURAL WATER AE 866 - 9177368 MN 5913.6104 * *7013 GARY WELLS 2013/08/15 $365.27 'Supplies WW GRAINGER 877- 2022594 PA 5921.6530 * *2929 DAVID NELSON 2013/08/17 $42.79 Supplies GIH *GLOBALINDUSTRIALEQ 800- 645 -2986 FL 1400.6406 * *4334 RYAN SCHULTZ 2013/07/30 $537.41. Uniforms SCHATZLEIN SADDLE 63 612- 825 -2459 MN 1400.6203 * *4334 RYAN SCHULTZ 2013/07/30 ($395.00) Conference refund SUNGARD PUBLIC SECTOR INC 407. 3043448 FL 1400.6104 * *4334 RYAN SCHULTZ 2013/07/31 $33.64 Supplies N AMERICA RESCUE PRODUCT 864 - 6759800 SC 1400.6104 * *4334 RYAN SCHULTZ 2013/08/05 $72.48 Supplies N AMERICA RESCUE PRODUCT 864 - 6759800 SC 1400.6104 G: \Purchasing cards \2013 purchasing card electronic files\2013 USB Purchasing Card Register.xlsx 9/25/2013 G: \Purch ' -1g cards\2013 purchasing card electronic files \2013 US PL hasing Card Register.xlsx 9/25/2013 CITY OF EDINA CITY COUNCIL CREDIT CARD PAYMENT REGISTER 07/26/13- 08/25/13 Account Name Date Amount Description Merchant Name City State Account * *4334 RYAN SCHULTZ 2013/08/15 ' $466.80 Lodging SHERATON HOTELS GREENSBC GREENSBORO NC 1400.6104 * *4334 RYAN SCHULTZ 2013/08/15 $466.80 Lodging SHERATON HOTELS GREENSBC GREENSBORO NC 1400.6104 * *4334 RYAN SCHULTZ 2013/08/22 $399.00 Training APCO INTERNATIONAL INC 386 - 9442422 FL 2310.6104 * *9221 JEFF LONG 2013/07/28 $146.58 Lodging ROSEN HOTELS CENTRE ORLANDO FL 1400.6104 * *9221 JEFF LONG 2013/07/31 $533.09 Lodging ROSEN HOTELS SHNGL CRK ORLANDO FL 1400.6104 * *9221 JEFF LONG 2013/07/31 $435.36 Lodging ROSEN HOTELS SHNGL CRK ORLANDO FL 1400.6104 * *9221 JEFF LONG 2013/08/06 $84.23 Food DAVANNI'S #15 EDINA MN 1400.6406 * *9221 JEFF LONG 2013/08/06 $44.46 Food DAVANNI'S #15 EDINA MN 1400.6406 * *9221 JEFF LONG 2013/08/14 $240.00 Supplies HOLLOTEC 662- 230 -1167, LA 1400.6160 * *9221 JEFF LONG 2013/08/15 '$34.60 Adapter BATTERYSPACE 510- 525 -2328 CA 1400.6160 * *9221 JEFF LONG 2013/08/21 $117.46 Permits MINNESOTA CHIEFS OF POLIC 651 - 4570677 MN 1400.6405 * *1996 GUNNAR KAASA 2013/07/25 $473.60 Vehicle Expense AMERICAN VAN 732 - 9055900 NJ 1553.6530 * *1996 GUNNAR KAASA 2013/07/25 $37.54 Supplies SPRINT STORE #1558 EDINA MN 1553.6406 * *1996 GUNNAR KAASA 2013/08/15 $244.84 Tools NOR *NORTHERN TOOL 800 -222 -5381 MN 1553.6585 * *1996 GUNNAR KAASA 2013/08/19 $53.63 Vehicle Expense MISTER CAR WASH #601 EDINA - MN 1553.6238 * *1996 GUNNAR KAASA 2013/08/23 $107.07 Office Supplies AMAZON MKTPLACE PMTS AMZN.COM /BILL WA 1553.6556 * *1996 GUNNAR KAASA 2013/08/22 $2,477.10 Vehicle Expense AMERICAN VAN 732- 9055900 NJ 1553.6585 * *1996 GUNNAR KAASA 2013/08/24 $122.20 Office Supplies AMAZON.COM AMZN.COM /BILL WA 1553.6556 * *8753 RYAN BROWNING 2013/07/25 $376.98 Software AMAZON MKTPLACE PMTS - AMZN.COM /BILL WA 1554.6160 * *8753 RYAN BROWNING 2013/07/27 $107.26 Software DRI *VMWARE 866 - 3774710 MN 1130.6410 * *8753 RYAN BROWNING 2013/07/30 $46.28 Mouse for Katie AMAZON.COM AMZN.COM /BILL WA 1554.6406 * *8753 RYAN BROWNING 2013/07/30 $86.92 Antenna Mounts TESSCO INCORPORATED 800 - 472 -7373 MD 4413.6103 * *8753 RYAN BROWNING 2013/08/01 $56.10 UB Card Swipe AMAZON MKTPLACE PMTS AMZN.COM /BILL WA 5910.6406 * *8753 RYAN BROWNING 2013/08/01 $26.70 Smart Phone Case AMAZON MKTPLACE PMTS AMZN.COM /BILL WA 5913.6406 * *8753 RYAN BROWNING 2013/08/01 $26.70 Smart Phone Case AMAZON MKTPLACE PMTS AMZN.COM /BILL WA 1314.6406 * *8753 RYAN BROWNING 2013/08/01 $26.70 Smart Phone Case AMAZON MKTPLACE PMTS AMZN.COM /BILL WA 1552.6406 * *8753 RYAN BROWNING 2013/08/01 $100.00 FTP Server Software CRUSHFTP LLC 608- 360 -9047 NV 1554.6160 * *8753 RYAN BROWNING 2013/08/06 $600.74 Server Software DRI *VMWARE 866 - 377 -4710 MN 1554.6160 * *8753 RYAN BROWNING 2013/08/07 $16.76 Cell Antenna AMAZON.COM AMZN .,COM /BILL WA 1400.6160 * *8753 RYAN BROWNING 2013/08/06 $371.04 Wireless Service -IT VZWRLSS *MY VZ VB P 800- 9220204 GA 1554.6188 * *8753 RYAN BROWNING 2013/08/06 $185.52 Wireless Service -Fire VZWRLSS *MY VZ VB P 800 - 9220204 GA 1470.6188 * *8753 RYAN BROWNING 2013/08/06 $123.68 Wireless Service -Eng. VZWRLSS *MY VZ VB P 800 - 9220204 GA 1260.6188 * *8753 RYAN BROWNING 2013/08/06 $46.69 Wireless Service - Plan's VZWRLSS *MY VZ VB P 800- 9220204 GA 1140.6188 G: \Purch ' -1g cards\2013 purchasing card electronic files \2013 US PL hasing Card Register.xlsx 9/25/2013 CITY C 'DINA CITY COUNCIL CREDIT � J PAYMENT REGISTER 07/26/13- 08%25/13 Account Name Date Amount Description Merchant Name City * *8753 RYAN BROWNING 2013/08/08 $41.84 Cable APPLE STORE #R054 EDINA * *8753 RYAN BROWNING 2013/08/09 $199.00 Admin Tools 2CO.COM *DOVESTONE 8772940273 * *8753 RYAN BROWNING 2013/08/13 $55.00 Food CARLOS BRAZILIAN INTERNAT ROANOKE * *8753 RYAN BROWNING 2013/08/14 $162.98 Office for Mac AMAZON MKTPLACE PMTS AMZN.COM /BILL * *8753 RYAN BROWNING 2013/08/12 $50.00 Airfare USAIRWAYS 0372324811914 MINNEAPOLIS * *8753 RYAN BROWNING 2013/08/14 $299.00 Remote Control Tool WWW.LOGMEIN.COM 888 - 326 -2642 * *8753 RYAN BROWNING 2013/08/16 $173.10 Conference -Car ENTERPRISE RENT -A -CAR ROANOKE * *8753 RYAN BROWNING 2013/08/16 $24.99 Vehicle Expense KROGER #3325 ROANOKE * *8753 RYAN BROWNING 2013/08/16 $50.00 Airfare USAIRWAYS 0372325340444 ROANOKE * *8753 RYAN BROWNING 2013/08/24 $79.00 Amazon Prime Service AMAZON PRIME 866 - 557 -2820 * *5546 KRISTIN AARSVOLD 2013/07/25 $265.37 Food CUB FOODS #3128 EDINA * *5546 KRISTIN AARSVOLD 2013/07/25 $10.55 Food JERRY'S FOODS OF ED EDINA * *5546 KRISTIN AARSVOLD 2013/08/06 $35.54 Supplies MICHAELS STORES 3739 BLOOMINGTON * *5546 KRISTIN AARSVOLD 2013/08/14 $54.42 Supplies TARGET 00023135 EDINA * *5587 DAWN BEITEL 2013/07/25 $5.59 Supplies TARGET 00002600 ST LOUIS PARK * *5587 DAWN BEITEL 2013/07/25 $46.07 Supplies MICHAELS STORES 3739 BLOOMINGTON * *5587 DAWN BEITEL 2013/07/26 $72.86 Food DQ G R I LL&CH I LL #41184 EDINA * *5587 DAWN BEITEL 2013/07/26 $31.53 Picture JERRY'S PRINTING MINNEAPOLIS * *5587 DAWN BEITEL 2013/07/25 $30.00 Gift Cards CARIBOU COFFEE CO #1151 EDINA * *5587 DAWN BEITEL 2013/07/29 $2.56 Supplies MICHAELS STORES 3739 BLOOMINGTON * *5587 DAWN BEITEL 2013/08/01 ($11.99) OTHER JO -ANN ETC #2026 EDINA * *5587 DAWN BEITEL 2013/08/08 $329.00 Field Trip BALLPARK MN TWINS 4 800 - 3389467 * *6841 ANN KATTREH 2013/08/22 $20.00 Data Plan -Ann VZWRLSS* P RPAY AUTO PAY 888 - 294 -6804 * *4509 DONNA TILSNER 2013/07/25 $18.23 Office Supplies OFFICE MAX ST LOUIS PARK * *4509 DONNA TILSNER 2013/07/30 $350.00 Conference MN RECREATION AND PARK A 763 - 571 -1305 * *4509 DONNA TILSNER 2013/07/29 $1,551.00 Senior Golf FRED RICHARDS GOLF EDINA * *4509 DONNA TILSNER 2013/08/06 $702.35 Food DAVANNI'S #15 EDINA * *4509 DONNA TILSNER 2013/08/09 $122.14 Food DAVANNI'S #15 EDINA * *4509 DONNA TILSNER 2013/08/16 $449.00 Registration NRPA- CONGRESS 703 - 858 -2179 * *0756 BOB PRESTRUD 2013/08/08 $203.52 Phone holders RIPOFFS DIVISION OF US AR 717 - 295 -6804 * *0756 BOB PRESTRUD 2013/08/08 $21.44 Supplies MICHAELS STORES 9700 MINNETONKA * *0756 BOB PRESTRUD 2013/08/09 ($21.44) Supplies MICHAELS STORES 6733 EDEN PRAIRIE * *0756 BOB PRESTRUD 2013/08/09 $26.81 Supplies MICHAELS STORES 6733 EDEN PRAIRIE G: \Purchasing cards\2013 purchasing card electronic files\2013 USB Purchasing Card Register.xlsx State Account MN 1554.6406 1554.6160 VA 1554.6406 WA 1554.6160 MN 2310.6104 MA 1554.6406 VA 2310.6104 VA 2310.6104 VA 2310.6104 NV 1554.6406 MN 1624.6406 MN 1624.6406 MN 1629.6406 MN 47080.4760 MN 1624.6406 MN 1624.6406 MN 1624.6406 MN 1624.6406 M N 1624.6406 MN 1624.6406 MN 1624.6406 MN 1624.6406 CA 1600.6188 MN 1600.6406 MN 1600.6104 MN 1628.6103.02 MN 1624.6406 MN 1623.6406 VA 1600.6104 PA 1647.6103 MN 1647.6103 MN 1647.6103 MN 1647.6103 9/25/2013 Account Name CITY OF EDINA CITY COUNCIL CREDIT CARD PAYMENT REGISTER 07/26/13- 08/25/13 Date Amount Description * *0756 BOB PRESTRUD 2013/08/08 * *0756 BOB PRESTRUD 2013/08/21 * *0756 BOB PRESTRUD 2013/08/22 * *2293 JENNIFER BENNEROT12013 /07/27 * *2293 JENNIFER BENNEROT12013 /07/29 * *2293 JENNIFER BENNEROT12013 /07/30 * *2293 JENNIFER BENNEROT12013 /07/30 * *2293 JENNIFER BENNEROT12013 /07/30 * *2293 JENNIFER BENNEROT12013 /07/31 * *2293 JENNIFER BENNEROT12013 /07/31 * *2293 JENNIFER BENNEROT12013 /07/30 * *2293 JENNIFER BENNEROT12013 /08/02 * *2293 JENNIFER BENNEROT12013 /08/02 * *2293 JENNIFER BENNEROT12013 /08/02 * *2293 JENNIFER BENNEROT12013 /08/05 * *2293 JENNIFER BENNEROT12013 /08/07 * *2293 JENNIFER BENNEROT12013 /08/06 * *2293 JENNIFER BENNEROT12013 /08/08 * *2293 JENNIFER BENNEROT12013 /08/11 * *2293 JENNIFER BENNEROT12013 /08/12 * *2293 JENNIFER BENNEROT12013 /08/13 * *2293 JENNIFER BENNEROT12013 /08/14 * *2293 JENNIFER BENNEROT12013 /08/18 * *2293 JENNIFER BENNEROT12013 /08/17 * *2293 JENNIFER BENNEROT12013 /08/17 * *2293 JENNIFER BENNEROT12013 /08/21 * *2293 JENNIFER BENNEROT12013 /08/22 * *2293 JENNIFER BENNEROT12013 /08/22 * *8300 MARY WOOLDRIDGE 2013/07/27 * *8300 MARY WOOLDRIDGE 2013/07/28 * *8300 MARY WOOLDRIDGE 2013/07/27 * *8300 MARY WOOLDRIDGE 2013/07/29 * *8300 MARY WOOLDRIDGE 2013/07/30 Merchant Name City State Account $589.28 Education MNSCU 877 - 4666728 MN 1647.6103 $8.00 Vehicle Expense MISTER CAR WASH #601 EDINA MN 1647.6103 $360.00 Education ACT *UNIVERSITY OF MINN 877 -551 -5560 CA 1647.6103 $21.44 Mac OS APL *APPLE ITUNES STORE 866 - 712 =7753 CA 1130.6410 $13.24 Supplies TARGET ° 00023135 EDINA MN 5210.6122 $14.91 Supplies JERRY'S FOODS OF ED EDINA MN 5210.6122 $143.84 Rechargeable Batterie! AMAZON MKTPLACE PMTS AMZN.COM /BILL WA 1130.6410 $29.93 Food STARBUCKS #02592 EDINA U EDINA MN 5210.6122 $59.14 AV Supplies AMAZON MKTPL"ACE PMTS AMZN.COM /BILL WA 1130.6410 ($4.83) Supplies TARGET 00023135 EDINA MN 5210.6122 $133.02 Food EDIBLE ARRANGEMENTS - MINNEAPOLIS MN 5210.6122 $149.00 Software -Final Cut PAYPAL *BSTREETENTG 402- 935 -7733 CA 1130.6410 $21.14 Cables SF CABLE 510- 324 -2299 CA 1400.6710 $20.00 Data Plan- Jennifer VZWRLSS *PRPAY AUTOPAY 888- 294 -6804 CA 1130.6160 $53.63 Software ADOBE SYSTEMS, INC. 800 - 833 -6687 WA 1130.6406 $18.00 OTHER SF CABLE 510- 324 -2299 CA 1130.6406 $53.63 Software ADOBE SYSTEMS, INC. 800 - 833 -6687 WA 1130.6406 $330.00 Membership PUBLIC RELATIONS SOCIE 212- 460 -1400 NY 1130.6105 $20.00 Data Plan -Scott VZWRLSS *PRPAY AUTOPAY 888 - 294 -6804 CA 1130.6160 $32.17 Software ADOBE SYSTEMS, INC. 800- 833 -6687 WA 1130.6406 $20.00 Data Plan-Councilmem VZWRLSS*PRPAY AUTOPAY 888 -294 -6804 CA 1100.6160 $32.17 Software ADOBE SYSTEMS, INC. 800 - 833 -6687 WA 1130.6406 $5.00 Software AKSMT.COM 877 - 273 -3049 CA 1130.6124 $20.00 Data Plan - Kaylin VZWRLSS *PRPAY AUTOPAY 888 - 294 -6804 CA 1130.6160 $29.95 Software 2NDSITE FRESHBOOKS 416 - 481 -6946 ON 1130.6103 ($149.00) Software PAYPAL *BSTREETENTG 4029357733 CA 1130.6410 $81.00 Software PAYPAL *HEATHOTHOTI 402- 935 -7733 CA 1130.6410 $20.00 Data Plan- Swenson VZW R LSS * P R PAY AUTOPAY 888 - 294 -6804 CA 1100.6160 $13.45 Advertising FACEBK *V74FE4J532 WWW.FB.ME /CC CA 5410.6122 $20.00 Data Plan IGUEL L 888 - 294 -6804 CA 5440.6406 $47.49 Supplies EDINA HARDWARE EDINA MN 5423.6406 $26.12 - Shipping THE UPS STORE 1715 EDINA MN 5440.6122 $31.84 Advertising FACEBK *GDLAG4S532 WWW.FB.ME /CC CA 5410.6122 G: \Purch, ' 7g cards\2013 purchasing card electronic .fi les\201 3 US PL"-- -asing Card Register. xlsx 9/25/2013 CITY C 7)INA CITY COUNCIL CREDIT L`' _j PAYMENT REGISTER 07/26/13- 08/25/13 Account Name Date Amount Description * *8300 MARY WOOLDRIDGE 2013/08/02 $1,289.17 Supplies * *8300 MARY WOOLDRIDGE 2013/08/04 $39.1 2 Advertising * *8300 MARY WOOLDRIDGE 2013/08/05 $29.04 Advertising * *8300 MARY WOOLDRIDGE 2013/08/07 $14.45 Shipping * *8300 MARY WOOLDRIDGE 2013/08/07 $238.78 Office Services * *8300 MARY WOOLDRIDGE 2013/08/12 $16.93 Office Supplies * *8300 MARY WOOLDRIDGE 2013/08/12 $15.07 Office Supplies * *8300 MARY WOOLDRIDGE 2013/08/19 $50.00 Advertising * *8300 MARY WOOLDRIDGE 2013/08/20 $17.69 OFFICE SUPPLIES * *8300 MARY WOOLDRIDGE 2013/08/21 $190.00 Advertising * *8318 TOM SWENSON 2013/08/15 $214.53 Tools * *6428 TODD ANDERSON . 2013/07/30 $38.60 Propane * *6428 TODD ANDERSON 2013/08/01 $12.33 OFFICE SUPPLIES * *6428 TODD ANDERSON 2013/08/13 $21.41 Office Supplies * *7838 DOUG BAUMAN 2013/07/31 $450.00 .'Lodging * *3792 MICHAEL FREY 2013/07/29 $1,056.00, ?Postage * *5821 AMY SMITH 2013/07/25 $66.40 Liquor * *5821 AMY SMITH 2013/07/29 $351:00 Liquor . * *5821 AMY SMITH 2013/07/31 $202.50 Liquor * *5821 AMY SMITH 2013/07/30 $87.87 Supplies * *5821 AMY SMITH 2013/08/02 $54.00 Liquor * *5821 AMY SMITH 2013/08/02 $25.50. Liquor * *5821 AMY SMITH 2013/08/07 $160.77 Supplies * *5821 AMY SMITH 2013/08/08 $81.00 Liquor * *5821 AMY SMITH 2013/08/14 $113.25 Liquor * *5821 AMY SMITH 2013/08/14 ($27:00) Liquor * *9665 SUSAN FAUS 2013/07/25 $255.54 Postcards' * *9665 SUSAN FAUS 2013/08/01 $30.00 Data Plan * *9665 SUSAN FAUS 2013/08/03 $35:61 Rental Charges * *9665 SUSAN, FAUS 2013/08/12 $35.00 Gift Cards * *9665 SUSAN FAUS 2013/08/21 $500.00 Membership * *1282 PATRICIA MCGRATH 2013/07/31 $802.04 Socks * *6906 TOM SHIRLEY 2013/08/02 $20.78 Supplies Merchant Name City State Account BRAEMAR1'GOLF?000RSE EDINA. MN 5410.6122 'FACEBK *KRSGK4E532 WWW.FB.ME /CC CA 5410.6122 .FACEBK *BWALN4S532 WWW.FB.ME /CC CA 5410.6122 FEDEX 795806047247 800 - 4633339 TN 5440.6122 GOOGLE *ADWS5364407810 CC @GOOGLE.COM CA 5410.6122 OFFICE DEPOT #415 EDEN PRAIRIE MN 5410.6406 OFFICE DEPOT #415 EDEN PRAIRIE MN 5440.6122 FACEBK *HNA8Q46532 WWW.FB.ME /CC CA 5410.6122 OFFICE DEPOT #415 EDEN PRAIRIE MN 5410.6406 COMCAST SPOTLIGHT CHIC 847- 384 -5000 MI 5410.6122 NORTHERN TOOL EQUIP MINNETONKA MN 5422.6530 SUPERAMERICA 4047: EDINA MN 5721.6406 OFFICE'DEPOT #415 EDEN PRAIRIE MN 5410.6406 MICRO CENTER #045 RETAIL -ST LOUIS PARK MN 5410.6406 LODGE AT SUGAR LAKE 218- 3271462 MN 5510.6104 USPS,26633204233409178 MINNEAPOLIS MN 5110.6803 EDINA-LIQUOR YORK EDINA MN. 5420.5513 EDINA LIQUOR YORK EDINA, MN 5421.5513 EDINA LIQUOR YORK EDINA MN 5420.5513 -JOHNSTONS SALES AND SERVI" RICHFIELD MN 5421.6180 EDINA LIQUOR YORK EDINA MN 5421.5513 EDINA LIQUOR YORK EDINA MN 5420.5513 PMT *IGLOO -STORE 800 - 3645566 CT 5421.6406 EDINA LIQUOR YORK EDINA MN 5420.5513 EDINA LIQUOR YORK EDINA MN 5420.5513 EDINA LIQUOR YORK . EDINA MN 5420.5513 POSTCARDS.COM 888 - 663 -7080 CA 5110.6575 VZWRLSS *PREPAID PYMNT 888 - 294 =6804 CA 1600.6103 PITNEY BOWES* 800- 228 -1071 CT 5710.6235 BUNNY'S BAR & GRILL ST LOUIS PARK MN 1621.6406 NRPA /AMERICAS BACKYARD 703 - 858 -2179 VA 1600.6105 VISR WWW.VISR.NET NC 5720.5510 MENARDS 3297 RICHFIELD MN 5761.6406 G: \Purchasing cards\201.3 purchasing -card electronic files\2013 USB Purchasing .Card Register.xlsx. 9/25/2013 CITY OF EDINA CITY COUNCIL CREDIT CARD PAYMENT REGISTER 07/26/13- 08/25/13 Account Name Date Amount Description Merchant Name City State Account * *6906 TOM SHIRLEY 2013/07/29 $6.73 Supplies DELEGARD TOOL COMPANY BLOOMINGTON MN 5761.6406 * *6906 TOM SHIRLEY 2013/07/30 $189.54 Supplies GRAYBAR ELECTRIC CLAYTON MO 5761.6406 * *6906 TOM SHIRLEY 2013/07/30 $28.90 Handbell ASIMPLERTIME- BRASSBELL 952- 851 -9600 NC 5761.6406 * *6906 TOM SHIRLEY 2013/07/31 $705.48 General Electric Lightir GRAYBAR ELECTRIC CLAYTON MO 5765.6406 * *6906 TOM SHIRLEY 2013/07/31 $71.64 Dry Erase Board OFFICE MAX EDINA MN 5760.6406 * *6906 TOM SHIRLEY 2013/08/01 $340.00 Conference MN RECREATION AND PARKA 763- 571 -1305 MN 5760.6104 * *6906 TOM SHIRLEY 2013/08/02 $60.40 Supplies MENARDS 3297 RICHFIELD MN 5761.6406 * *6906 TOM SHIRLEY 2013/08/05 $119.80 Office Supplies AMAZON MKTPLACE PMTS AMZN.COM /BILL WA 5760.6406 * *6906 TOM SHIRLEY 2013/08/05 $21.43 Large Donut MENARDS 3297 RICHFIELD MN 5761.6406 * *6906 TOM SHIRLEY 2013/08/06 $110.84 Office Supplies DISPLAYS2GOCOM 401 - 2470333 RI 5760.6406 * *6906 TOM SHIRLEY 2013/08/06 $75.42 Blank Poster FDX OFFICE #82 00000828 214- 5507000 TX 5760.6406 * *6906 TOM SHIRLEY 2013/08/07 $19.25 Supplies ABC & TOY ZONE RICHFIELD MN 5760.6406 * *6906 TOM SHIRLEY 2013/08/07 $95.53 Supplies MENARDS 3297 RICHFIELD MN 5761.6406 * *6906 TOM SHIRLEY 2013/08/09 $48.23 Supplies US PLASTICS /NEATLY SMART 419 - 228 -2242 OH 5761.6530 * *6906 TOM SHIRLEY 2013/08/14 $45.99 Office Supplies AMAZON.COM AMZN.COM /BILL WA 5760.6513 * *6906 TOM SHIRLEY 2013/08/14 $79.54 Supplies MENARDS 3297 RICHFIELD MN 5761.6406 * *6906 TOM SHIRLEY 2013/08/16 $387.51 Bike Racks THE PARK IT BIKE RACKS C 877 - 249 -0479 IL 5761.6406 * *6906 TOM SHIRLEY 2013/08/16 $392.13 Supplies GRAYBAR ELECTRIC CLAYTON MO 5761.6406 * *6906 TOM SHIRLEY 2013/08/20 $61.58 Supplies MENARDS 3297 RICHFIELD MN 5761.6406 * *6906 TOM SHIRLEY 2013/08/21 $55.70 Supplies ACE HARDWARE - FRATTAL BLOOMINGTON MN 5761.6406 * *6906 TOM SHIRLEY 2013/08/23 $194.09 Supplies MENARDS 3021 BURNSVILLE MN 5761.6406 * *0093 STEVEN GRAUSAM 2013/07/26 $11.25 Supplies JERRY'S DO IT BEST HAR EDINA MN 5822.6406 * *0093 STEVEN GRAUSAM 2013/08/01 $114.23 Food D'AMICO & SONS /EDINA EDINA MN 5840.6106 * *0093 STEVEN..GRAUSAM 2013/08/07 $16.40 White Index Cards OFFICE MAX EDINA MN 5820.6513 * *0093 STEVEN GRAUSAM 2013/08/07 $16.41 White Index Cards OFFICE MAX EDINA MN 5860.6513 * *0093 STEVEN GRAUSAM 2013/08/16 $32.14 Halogen Bulbs JERRY'S DO IT BEST HAR EDINA MN 5841.6406 * *7021 DEB FIELDS 2013/07/26 $64.35 Speakers BEST BUY MHT 00006114 EDEN PRAIRIE MN 7411.6406 * *7021 DEB FIELDS 2013/07/26 $16.28 Office Supplies OFFICE DEPOT #415 EDEN PRAIRIE MN 7411.6406 * *7021 DEB FIELDS 2013/07/27 $185.00 Training Pistol ARMSUNLIMITED.COM 760 - 360 -3795 CA 7414.6406 * *7021 DEB FIELDS 2013/07/29 $40.47 Supplies THE WEBSTAURANTSTORE 717 - 392 -7974 PA 7414.6406 * *7021 DEB FIELDS 2013/07/29 $28.96 Supplies PIER 1 00008359 RICHFIELD MN 7411.6406 * *7021 DEB FIELDS 2013/08/01 $42.33 Office Services EMA *EMMA EMAIL MARKETIP 800 - 5954401 TN 7410.6122 * *7021 DEB FIELDS 2013/08/03 $9.00 Food MAINSTREET BAKERY EDINA MN 7414.6106 G: \Purchp -;ng cards\2013 purchasing card electronic files\2013 USB Purchasing Card Register.xlsx 9/25/2013 CITY C" 71NA CITY COUNCIL CREDIT C' PAYMENT REGISTER 07/26/13:-0W25/13 Account Name Date Amount Description. * *7021 DEB FIELDS 2013/08/08 $125.71 Safety Supplies * *7021 DEB FIELDS 2013/08/09 $30.72 Office Services * *7021 DEB FIELDS 2013/08/14 $27.53 Supplies - * *7021 DEB FIELDS 2013/08/15 $29.99 Groupon * *7021 DEB.FIELDS 2013/08/22 $94.83 Food * *7039 GERALD KOPLOS 2013/07/25 $61.05. Ammo. * *7039 GERALD_ KOPLOS 2013/07/25 $37.78 Supplies. * *7039 GERALD KOPLOS 2013/07/31 $29150 Supplies * *7039 GERALD KOPLOS 2013/07/31 $83.55 Supplies * *7039 GERALD KOPLOS 2013/08/02 $41.41 Repair Parts * *7039 GERALD KOPLOS 2013/08/05 $87.67 Supplies * *7039 GERALD KOPLOS 2013/08/09 $61.05 Ammo * *7039 GERALD KOPLOS 2013/08/09' ,$45.33 Supplies * *7039 GERALD KOPLOS 2013/08/09 $20.53 Supplies * *7039 GERALD KOP.LOS. 2013/08/13 $7.98 Food * *7039 GERALD KOPLOS 2013/08/22 $37.54 .Supplies * *7039 GERALD KOPLOS 2013/08/22 $36.97 Supplies * *7039 GERALD KOPLOS 2013/08/23 $11.96 Food City of Edina 2013/08/12 ($856.04) REBATE $37,788.41 Merchant Name City State Account ESAFETY SUPPLIES, 626- 369 -1280 CA 7414.6406 GOGGLE *ADWS5107668870 CC@GOOGLE.COM CA 7410.6122 WAL - MART #1855 EDEN PRAIRIE MN 7414.6406 GROUPON INC 877- 788 -7858 IL 7411.6406 DOMINO'S 1927 320 -235 -8277 MN 7413.6106 WAL -MART #1855. EDEN PRAIRIE MN 7411.6406 THE HOME DEPOT 2812 EDEN PRAIRIE MN 7411.6406 OLSEN CHAIN AND CABLE EDINA MN 7412.6530 THE HOME DEPOT 2812 EDEN PRAIRIE MN 7411.6406 SPS COMPANIES #1 SAINT LOUIS P MN 7411.6530 THE HOME DEPOT 2812 "EDEN PRAIRIE MN 7411.6406 WAL -MART #1855 EDEN PRAIRIE MN 7411.6406 OLSEN CHAIN AND CABLE EDINA MN 7412.6530 ARNZEN.ARMS LLC EDEN PRAIRIE MN 7412.6406 CUB FOODS EDEN:PRAI EDEN PRAIRIE MN 7414.6406 BEST.BUY MHT 00006114 EDEN PRAIRIE MN 7411.6406 MENARDS 3268 EDEN PRAIRIE MN 7412.6406 TARGET 00002204 EDEN PRAIRIE MN 7411.6406 US Bank Edina MN 1001.8070 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 dAe 4 G: \Purchasing cards \2013 purchasing, card electr6nic: files \2013 USB •Purchasing -Card Register.xlsx 9/25/2013 �91��1� Ow e� Cn • ,�roRPORP`TF9 • ieee To: MAYOR AND COUNCIL Agenda Item #: IV. C. From: Scott H. Neal, City Manager Action ❑x Discussion ❑ Date: October I, 2013 Information ❑ Subject: Authorize Amendment VI to the Medical Control and Direction Agreement with Hennepin HealthCare System, Inc. Action Requested: Authorize Amendment VI Information I Background: The City requires a Chief Medical Officer in order to operate its ambulance service. The City has been outsourcing this service with Dr. Jeffery Ho of Hennepin County Medical Center since 2002. The current agreement has not been reviewed since 2009 and thus, in calendar year 2014 HCMC is requesting approximately a 3% increase in the total amount on the contract. This percentage increase is consistent with the CPI for Medical Care of Professional Services. I have met with Dr. Ho to discuss the amendment. The Fire Department has a strong working relationship with Dr. Ho and wishes to maintain his services as our Medical Director. I believe the amendment is acceptable. It has been reviewed by the City Attorney. I recommend the City Council approve the amendment. ATTACHMENTS: Amendment VI City of Edina a 4801 W. 50'" St • Edina. MN 55424 AMENDMENT VI TO THE MEDICAL CONTROL AND DIRECTION AGREEMENT The Medical Control and Direction Agreement effective July 1, 2002 ( "Initial Effective Date "), by and between the City of Edina ( "Edina ") and Hennepin Faculty Associates ( "HFA ") and Assigned to Hennepin Health System Inc. doing business as Hennepin County Medical Center ( "HCMC ") pursuant to an Assignment of Contract entered into among HFA, HCMC and Edina dated December 15, 2011 'is hereby amended. Article III Payment is amended to reflect an increase in compensation due HCMC for calendar year 2014, as follows: ARTICLE III Payment In consideration of HCMC providing medical control and medical direction services as described in this Agreement, Edina shall annually pay HCMC the sum of $30,600 Edina certifies that such compensation paid to HCMC is fair market value for medical leadership and is attributable solely to HCMC's services to the Edina .Police Department, Edina Fire Department and Edina Ambulance Services. On or before each December 1, HCMC and Edina shall review and approve the amount to be paid to HCMC for providing the services described in the Agreement for the following calendar year. If parties do not approve a change in the amount paid to HCMC under the Agreement for the following calendar year, HCMC shall be paid for such calendar year the same amount payable under this Agreement for the prior calendar year. This Amendment shall be effective January I", 2014.Except as described herein, all terms and conditions of the above referenced Medical Control and Direction Agreement remain in full force and effect. CITY OF EDINA By: Mayor Printed Name: Date: And City Manager Printed Name: Date: HENNEPIN HEALTHCARE SYSTEM, INC., doing business as Hennepin County Medical Center By: Chief Financial Officer Printed Name: Larry Kryzaniak Printed Title: Date: PLJRCHAS : I1N :XC :SS OO F $20,000 /CHANG : G M D IM, To: MAYOR AND COUNCIL From: Wayne D. Houle, Director of Engineering Date: October 1, 2013 CIO c f,�roRppppitf`��9 0 t86B Agenda Item M IV. D. The Recommended Bid is ® Within Budget ❑ NotWithin Budget Subject: Request For Purchase - Contract No. ENG 13 -19NB — Industrial Park Sidewalk Date Bid Opened or Quote Received: September 19, 2013 Company: C.R. Fischer & Sons, Inc. Northwest Asphalt, Inc. O'Malley Concrete Recommended Quote or Bid: C.R. Fischer & Sons, Inc. Bid or Expiration Date: November 19, 2013 Amount of Quote or Bid: $89,164.05 $96,709.75 $238,183.25 $89,164.05 General Information: This project is for the construction of a sidewalk from the Public Works & Park Maintenance Facility to Edina Industrial Boulevard along the west side of Metro Boulevard. Staff has had discussions with the property owners and the response has been positive. Staff has seen numerous pedestrians walking in the roadway along Metro Boulevard to access the businesses at Metro and Edina Industrial Boulevards typically around lunchtime and also during morning and afternoon bus departures. This sidewalk will provide a pedestrian link for the local businesses to that area. The project is scheduled to be completed by November I, 2013. This project will be funded by the Pedestrian and Cyclist Safety (PACS) Fund. Staff recommends awarding the project to C.R. Fischer, Inc. G:\PW\CENTRAL SVCS \ENG DIV\PROJECfS \CONTRACTS\2013 \ENG 13 -19NB Industrial Park SidewalMADMIN\M1SC\ltem Request for Purchase - Contract No. ENG 13 -19NB - Industrial Park Sidewalkdocx City of Edina • 4801 W. 50th St. • Edina, MN 55424 R :PORT / � COO MM : NDATI®N To: MAYOR AND COUNCIL From: Mark Nolan, Transportation Planner Date: October 1, 2013 91 �vne (t. Agenda Item #: IV. E. Action Discussion ❑ Information ❑ Subject: Resolution No. 2013 -86 Supporting Application for Hennepin County's 2014 Sidewalk Participation Program Action Requested: Adopt the attached resolution. Information / Background: The Hennepin County Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) 2014 Sidewalk Participation Program assists in funding to develop and implement effective sidewalk projects that extend the system of sidewalks along Hennepin County roads, provide pedestrian safety improvements at intersections, provide ADA compliant facilities, support local plans, and support the implementation of the Hennepin County Transportation Systems Plan including the Hennepin County Complete Streets Policy. Applications were prepared for three sidewalk project on Vernon Avenue and York Avenue (see attached resolution). Council and community support are among the factors considered for the award of funds (County cost participation is up to 25% to a maximum of $50,000 for each project). Edina Transportation Commission (ETC): Time did not allow for the ETC to review these applications at its September 19 meeting; however, they have been sent to ETC members for their review and comment. ATTACHMENTS: • Resolution No. 2013 -86 • Three (3) Supplemental Applications for Hennepin County 2014 Sidewalk Participation Program: • York Avenue — from 66th Street to Southdale Transit Center Sidewalk (Edina City Project No. S 1 19) • Vernon Avenue — from Gleason Road to Blake Road (Edina City Project No. S 1 I6) • Vernon Avenue — from Doncaster Way to Ayrshire Boulevard (Edina City Project No. S118) G :~INFRASIAGENCIESICOUNTIES\HENN CTY\2013 Sidewalk Participation Program \Item ME Resolution No. 2013 -86 Supporting Application for Hennepin County's 2014 Sidewalk Participation Prograrn.doo City of Edina • .4801 W. 50' St. • Edina, MN 55424 RESOLUTION NO. 2013 -86 Supporting Application for Hennepin County's 2014 Sidewalk Participation Program For Sidewalks On Vernon Avenue (on.the north side, from Gleason Road to Blake Road and from Doncaster Way to Ayrshire Boulevard) and York Avenue (on the west side, from 66th Street West to the Southdale Transit Hub) WHEREAS, the City of Edina has identified the importance of sidewalk and pedestrian planning through the Transportation Comprehensive Plan and its Living Streets Policy; WHEREAS, the City. of Edina Transportation Comprehensive Plan identify projects needed to achieve the City's overall vision for a comprehensive community of non- motorized transportation system; and, WHEREAS, the construction of safe and convenient pedestrian facilities near schools, commercial areas and parks will provide transportation access to potentially vulnerable users not traveling by vehicle; and, WHEREAS, County funds will be used to supplement the Pedestrian and Cyclist Safety (PACS) Fund, for these projects, leveraging these funds to make the City more walkable. NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, the City of Edina endorses the application for funds as administered by Hennepin County. Dated: October 1, 2013 Attest: Debra A. Mangen, City Clerk STATE OF MINNESOTA . ) COUNTY OF HENNEPIN )SS. ' CITY OF EDINA ) James B. Hovland, Mayor CERTIFICATE OF CITY CLERK I, the undersigned duly appointed and acting City Clerk for the City of Edina do hereby certify that the attached and foregoing Resolution was duly adopted by the Edina City Council at its Regular Meeting of October 1, 2013, and as recorded in the Minutes of said Regular Meeting. WITNESS my hand and seal.of said:City this day of , 20_ City Clerk ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT 7450 Metro Boulevard • Edina, Minnesota 55439 wwwEdinaMN.gov • 952- 826 -0371 . Fax 952 - 826 -0392 a HENNEPIN COUNTY .ay SUPPLEMENTAL APPLICATION - 2014 SIDEWALK •,�. PARTICIPATION PROGRAM CITY OF EDINA DATE: OCTOBER 4, 2013 1. PROJECT NAME: York Avenue — from 66th Street to Southdale Transit Center Sidewalk Edina City Project No. S119 2. APPLICANT: City of Edina Mark Nolan, Transportation Planner 7450 Metro Boulevard Edina, MN 55439 952.826.0322 MNolan @EdinaMN.gov 3. PROJECT LOCATION: West Side of County Road 31 (York Avenue), from County Road 53 (66th Street) to Southdale Center Transit Center. See attached Figure A for the project location map. See attached Figure A -1 for the proposed Southdale Transit Center from Metro Transit. See attached Figure A -2 for the Southdale Place development project. . TOTAL COST OF THE PROJECT: Total Project Costs: $111,000 Funding Source: City of Edina's Pedestrian and Cyclist Safety (PACS) Fund 5. AMOUNT REQUESTED: Project design and plan preparation (25% of total): $6,000 Construction of Infrastructure (25% of total): $21,000 6. PROJECT DEVELOPMENT SCHEDULE: Submit for Hennepin County Grant October 4, 2013 Notification of Grant Status November 2013 Hennepin County Board to Select Grant Recipients December 2013 Begin Design and Preparation of Bidding Documents January 2014 Bid Opening April 2014 Award Construction Contract May 2014 Estimated Start of Construction June 2014 Estimated Construction Completion; Sidewalk Open to Users August 2014 7. PROJECT READINESS: Hennepin County Supplemental Application — 2014 Sidewalk Participation Program York Avenue — from 66th Street to Southdale Transit Center Sidewalk, No. S119 October 4, 2013 8. ALIGNMENT WITH PROGRAM PRIORITIES: t The proposed 710 -foot long 6 -foot wide concrete sidewalk will complete a vital sidewalk link between County Road 53 (66th Street) and 69th Street on the east side of the Southdale shopping mall complex. This area serves numerous transit, medical, commercial, retail, restaurants and housing units in the heart of Edina. The sidewalk will provide a user link to the proposed Metro Transit Southdale Bus Transit Center; and connect to a proposed 6 -foot concrete walk as part of the Southdale Place Project at the south Project limit. Hennepin County's Pedestrian Plan Implementation has identified the area of the proposed sidewalk as high priority. T; W' =City is capable of implementing both design and construction in 2014. ThCity is currently coordinating with Simon properties, the managers of Southdale Mall, to donate the easements necessary to construct the sidewalk. Safety Currently, the lack of sidewalks on the vyest side of York Avenue just -south of 66th Street forces pedestrians to ,travel ffi <existing parking lots. As they exit the parking lots,, pedestrians must `cross' `the Southdale Service Road, where no clearly identified or`marked crossings exist. The addition of the'proposed sidewalk will provide a safer route for pedestrians to access Southdale Mall and substantially mitigate Metro Transit bus and vehicle traffic encounters. The proposed Metro Transit Southdale Bus Transit Center includes delineated crosswalks at th41 Southdale Service Road. System Connectivity The Proposed-Sidewalk has been identified as a high priority for the City to complete The proposed sidewalk will connect to the Southdale Place Project sidewalk segment to the south. Combined, these sidewalk segments will provide improved pedestrian access on the west side of York Avenue from 66th Street to 69th Street. `' Major trip generators within Y 2 mile of the Proposed Sidewalk include, but are not limited to: Bus routes and Multiple bus routes serve the Metro Transit transitways Southdale Bus Transit Center as shown in Figure C attached Transit hubs and /or Metro Transit Southdale Bus Transit Center stations adjacent to sidewalk as shown in Figure C attached Park and ride facilities At least two (2) Metro Transit Park and Ride parking lots adjacent to sidewalk as shown in Figure C attached Commercial nodes • Southdale Mall with over 120 stores Page 2 of 4 Hennepin County Supplemental Application — 2014 Sidewalk Participation Program York Avenue — from 66th Street to Southdale Transit Center Sidewalk, No. S119 October 4, 2013 Community:Support . The Edina Transportation .Commission (ETC) was established to help guide the City m.'implementing its vision for an integrated, multi -modal local transportation system,* as stated in the City's Comprehensive Plan. The proposed sidewalk segment_ aligns perfectly with this vision, and members of the ETC have been sent the draft application for their review. ,,In" the summer of 2013, the Edina City Council adopted a Living Streets Policy. The \ Living Streets philosophy encourages the City to balance the needs of mofori.sts, bicyclists, pedestrians and transit riders in ways that promote safety and convenience, enhance community identity, create economic vitality, improve environmental sustainability, and provide meaningful opportunities for active living and better health. In addition, the City of Edina has formed a partnership with Blue Cross and Blue Shield of Minnesota along with the Cities of Bloomington and Richfield in a pilot program branded as do.town that encourages exercise and eating healthy foods. Both of these initiatives align seamlessly with the addition of sidewalks as a critical infrastructure investment. Protect or program connectivity The Southdale Place Project, a 232 unit apartment complex, is currently under construction directly south of the project limits. The sidewalk network is being Page 3 of 4 • Galleria Mall with over 60 stores • AMC Movie Theater located in Southdale Mall • Multiple vibrant strip malls located northeast and east of sidewalk • Super Target with full grocery • Cub Foods grocery store across York Avenue Employment centers . Multiple Medical Professional Buildings • Numer..ou- ''business professional buildings in all directions Schools Libraries Hennepin County Library south on York Ave Public service centers Hennepin County Southdale Service Center or other public buildin "s south on York Avenue Apartment buildings or Multiple High Density housing complexes in all other high density `directions , housing Parks Three.City parks within ' /z mile Other (please describe) Fairview Southdale Hospital, a Level III Trauma ,facility directly north of the sidewalk Approximately 30 restaurants within % mile - The Westin Hotel with 225 luxury rooms • Single Family Housing in established neighborhoods to both the north and east Community:Support . The Edina Transportation .Commission (ETC) was established to help guide the City m.'implementing its vision for an integrated, multi -modal local transportation system,* as stated in the City's Comprehensive Plan. The proposed sidewalk segment_ aligns perfectly with this vision, and members of the ETC have been sent the draft application for their review. ,,In" the summer of 2013, the Edina City Council adopted a Living Streets Policy. The \ Living Streets philosophy encourages the City to balance the needs of mofori.sts, bicyclists, pedestrians and transit riders in ways that promote safety and convenience, enhance community identity, create economic vitality, improve environmental sustainability, and provide meaningful opportunities for active living and better health. In addition, the City of Edina has formed a partnership with Blue Cross and Blue Shield of Minnesota along with the Cities of Bloomington and Richfield in a pilot program branded as do.town that encourages exercise and eating healthy foods. Both of these initiatives align seamlessly with the addition of sidewalks as a critical infrastructure investment. Protect or program connectivity The Southdale Place Project, a 232 unit apartment complex, is currently under construction directly south of the project limits. The sidewalk network is being Page 3 of 4 Hennepin County Supplemental Application — 2014 Sidewalk Participation Program York Avenue — from 66th Street to Southdale Transit Center Sidewalk, No. S119 October 4, 2013 constructed for the complex, and completes the southern connection of the sidewalk segment along the west side of York Avenue near Southdale mall. Lennar Multifamily is currently proposing to demolish an existing under - utilized retail site to construct a 273 unit upscale apartment building on the east side of York Avenue across from the proposed sidewalk. Page 4 of 4 In addition to permanent residents, the Southdale area, due to its mix of retail, restaurants and medical services draws many visitors to the area. It is quite common for this mix to generate a substantial number of pedestrians. 9. OTHER CIRCUMSTANCES >� OR IMPORTANT ITEMS TO CONSIDER e WHEN EVALUATING THE PROJECT: The proposed sidewalk segment will complete a vital sidewalk route within one of the regions busiest retail, restaurant, transit, entertainment, medical, business and residential centers. This unique combination creates an extensive amount of pedestrian trip generators. 10. CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION OF SUPPORT: See attached City Council Resolution of Support, Dated October 1, 2013. Maintenance.of the sidewalk, including plowing will be the responsibility of .snow the City's Public Works,Department and'will be added to their already extensive sidewalk system maintenance program. Page 4 of 4 = ♦ + t � 3425 a. A SOUTHDALE � , Le end g'`;° `~ - ,MALL PLANNED 6' CONCRETE SIDEWALK — �'�t� sae .•��._. �•. WITH 8 TURF BOULEVARD` BY SOUTHDALE PLACE PROJECT)' - PROPOSED 6' CONCRETE SIDEWALK ° WITH 8' TURF BOULEVARD r� r ■ ■ ■ PROPOSED PEDESTRIAN CROSSWALK 300 !' 6636 • G I , �, FUTURE METRO TRANSIT CROSSWALK r■-� -. FOR TRANSIT CENTER` :y' - ' a METRO `�TR�A�NSI�T \ m PROPOSED TREE REMOVAL BUS�,?TRAN I<T FUTURE METRO TRANSIT BUS 4 CENTER ���r. ® WAITING PLATFORM AND SHELTER - - =� •- 0 � � as .V ) - ' <.'� 4•J N ��I .•,a +_sea•' _)1 a '_�\ ...� Y Y:..� 1 !1• l �i i' � '� •d .,� I � yy �:� `w at + �'�_ • _._ ....., :��%Y�`.:..�::- ....+r,'-:yy�.: .,.,•..:.- ..- .�.•wr. �:�c ^ -r..s: Rrs.: r.... �:r„ y.[.. -.' _•ems ,.>�,: >�S. ! �I." ^.r -.ate li;i n a; I At s � � fY , ( lffixh44 all, m\ r war sus: iiy_� ram Y ,?c •`� yj'_Y ��• , - 7a �; ,y �t d��� ��`��R'�T�� 'iIS• - 'I _ °' v "'F - e �� .'�� ��� � �_�� Lr,�,, �k °<+ � n75T85 :. �, � ��; _ -' s - -, yr M r �:L - -�a T •,,� � - `_ - � k s, U• x � . r �t � .aE .� il'.. ` � `' r '(� � ,• ± � :.. ll � ,`t a �. _ _ l . ', \ !� �t..� . - - *! � 3230 r v t S t . a .i} g 1� � •� . y � ' d ,S 1g, i 324 . • . 'a, 7 25 . -10 675 t AIM 3200 • 4 .L E a- 3220 �. 3 A � i• � -� ,i � -I �, .Jr,• .y a 3. 11 ID t • p n _ 6803 - -t► � •� : ' • , �. �'�,� 3210 � • e— /A• ' g� G z n Project: SIDEWALK A 4tn� EDINA 125581 York Avenue - 66th Street to Southdale Transit Hub CIL L �j e Figure N '' �� Print Date: 0 45 90 No. S119 A LSEH '�4T: =��'' 9/17/2013 Feet Edina, Minnesota TN. map anewer, legally rewrded map nor suwey map and is not Intended to m used as ma. This map is a compilation of records, mformaaon• and data gathered from various sources Rated en Cris map and a to be used for reference purposes only. SEH does not warrant that the Geographic lni mmlbn system (GIs) Data used b prepare Nis map are error free, and SEH does not represent Cut the cis Data can be used far rasgelbrul, bzaldrg, or any other pupose mquldng exacting measurement of distance or direction or precision In the depldion of geog'm;c features The user of this map acknowledges that SEH shall not be sable for any damages which arise out of the users access or use of data proNded. 7WIn Cities Metropolitan Area Southdale Transit Center I Park Bus Operations FIGURE A l- I Rule Final Plan o 2012 Layout Map by John Dillmy " June6, W3 0 30 60 120Feet w u Abletropolllnn Counell tfa M&oTramit "")L I � I I1 I I�. 1 I I 1 I I ~l I I I _® 1 I I I I. 4�� I '�9 I NOTE REMOVAL$ CONCRETE, GRADING, AND ALL ASSOCIATED WORK INCLUD HO TURF ESTABUSHMENT FOR THIS SIDEWALK CONNECTION TO THE TRANSIT STATION SMALL BE INCLUDED IN THE SCOPE OF WORK. m rs O 6' PROPOSED WDE SIDEWALKI - p B' TURF BOULEVARD YORK AVENUE YpIXAVEMIE 1 -7 LOCATION MAP 60HIC SCALE w FEET 0 GRAPHIC SCALE IN FEET w v0 �0 K 7 `G R -O U P Architecture Interior Design Landscape Architecture Engineering Boarman Kroos Vogel Group Inc 222 North Second Street kinneapoPs' MN., 55901 Telephone 612- 339 -3752 Facslmflei 612.339 =6212 www t%kvgroup.com Kimley -Hon and Associates, Inc. 23W aMHA W AIL WEST. =1126 af. PALL, —cs A aLN 7d m a!I oiYalA !AX M uF asane SOUTHDALE PLACE —VINO + .QW10C SCALE IN RXT camncnnorL �A,eb�msyu�suhp� a� �y ciEi�rtlun adty . - Dm�+edRdeatavlBpia+ ON1212013 21431 OFF -SITE IMPROVEMENTS PLAN C2o2 O 2011 B1N Cvgq,tic EOE o e HENNEPIN COUNTY �y SUPPLEMENTAL APPLICATION - 2014 SIDEWALK •,�. PARTICIPATION PROGRAM CITY OF EDINA DATE: OCTOBER 4, 2013 1. PROJECT NAME: Vernon Avenue — from Gleason Road to Blake Road Edina City Project No. S116 2. APPLICANT City of Edina Mark Nolan, Transportation Planner 7450 Metro Boulevard Edina, MN 55439 952.826.0322 MNolan @EdinaM.N.gov 3. PROJECT LOCATION North Side of County Road 158 (Vernon Avenue), from Gleason Road to Blake Road. See attached Figure B for a location map. 4. TOTAL COST OF THE PROJECT Total Project Costs: $246,000 5. AMOUNT REQUESTED 6. PROJECT DEVELOPMENT SCHEDULE 7. PROJECT READINESS Funding Source: City of Edina's Pedestrian and Cyclist Safety (PACS) Fund Project design and plan preparation: $3,000 Construction of Infrastructure (25% of total): $47,000 Submit for Hennepin County Grant October 4, 2013 Notification of Grant Status November 2013 Hennepin .County Board to Select Grant Recipients December 2013 Begin Design and Preparation of Bidding Documents January 2015 Bid Opening April 2015 Award Construction Contract May 2015 Estimated Start of Construction June 2015 Estimated Construction Completion; Sidewalk Open to Users August 2015 This proposed 1,742' long 5' wide sidewalk would complete a vital sidewalk route that serves numerous transit, churches, parks and neighborhoods in the City of Edina. Hennepin County Supplemental Application — 2014 Sidewalk Participation Program Vernon Avenue — from Gleason Road to Blake Road. Edina City Project No. S116 October 4, 2013 The proposed sidewalk will link existing sidewalks on the north side of Vernon Avenue between the intersections of Gleason Road and Blake Road respectively. 8. ALIGNMENT WITH PROGRAM PRIORITIES Hennepin County's Pedestrian Plan Implementation has identified the area of the proposed sidewalk as medium to high priority. The City is capable of implementing both design and construction in 2015. Safe - Currently, pedestrians north of Vernon Avenue are forced to cross the street where no clearly identified or marked crossings exist in order to reach the multi- use trail along the south side of the street. 5 Metro Transit bus stops exist along this proposed sidewalk segment. Buses coupled with heavy vehicle and truck traffic create many crossing conflicts for pedestrians. Metro Transit bus riders are forced to either wait in the street or on the turf boulevard at bus stops. This creates a safety hazard, specifically in the winter when roads are narrower from snow and ice accumulation and boulevards are used for snow storage. System Connectivity The proposed sidewalk has been identified as a medium priority for the City to complete. As shown in Figure B, the proposed sidewalk will link existing sidewalks on the north side of Vernon Avenue between the intersections of Gleason Road and Blake Road respectively. The proposed sidewalk will also allow users from the future Three Rivers Park District Nine Mile Creek Regional Trail near the west project limits to traverse the north side of Vernon Avenue. Transportation purpose and proximity to pedestrian trip generators. Major trip generators within % mile of the Proposed Sidewalk include, but are not limited to: Bus routes and transitwa s Two (2) Metro Transit bus routes use this portion of Vernon Avenue Transit hubs and /or stations Five (5) Metro Transit bus stops exist along the proposed sidewalk Park and ride facilities - N/A Commercial nodes . N/A Employment centers N/A Schools N/A Libraries N/A Public service centers or other public buildings N/A Apartment buildings or other high density housing Multiple High Density housing complexes in all directions Parks Walnut Ridge and Bredesen Parks within' /2 mile Page 2 of 3 Hennepin County Supplemental Application — 2014 Sidewalk Participation Program Vernon Avenue — from Gleason Road to Blake Road. Edina City Project No. S116 October 4, 2013 9. OTHER CIRCUMSTANCES OR IMPORTANT ITEMS TO CONSIDER WHEN EVALUATING THE PROJECT 10. CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION OF SUPPORT Other (please describe) Single Family Housing in established neighborhoods with many active families A Church is immediately west of the Proposed Sidewalk. Community Support The Edina Transportation Commission (ETC) was established to help guide the City in implementing its vision for an integrated, multi -modal local transportation system as stated in the City's Comprehensive Plan. The proposed sidewalk segment aligns perfectly with this vision, and members of the ETC have been sent the draft application for their review. In the summer of 2013, the Edina City Council adopted a Living Streets Policy. The Living Streets philosophy encourages the City to balance the needs of motorists, bicyclists, pedestrians and transit riders-in ways that promote safety and convenience, enhance community identity, create economic vitality, improve environmental sustainability, and provide meaningful opportunities for active living and better health. In addition, the City of Edina has formed a partnership with Blue Cross and Blue Shield of Minnesota along with the Cities of Bloomington and Richfield in a pilot program branded as do.town that encourages exercise and eating healthy foods. Both of these initiatives align seamlessly with the addition of sidewalks as a critical infrastructure investment. The City has received numerous informal resident votes of support for the project. Protect or program connectivity The proposed sidewalk will connect to existing sidewalks on Blake Road and Vernon Avenue, west of Gleason Road. Hennepin County recently completed paving and restriping of Vernon Ave to include designated bike lanes in both directions. With established bike lanes, pedestrians will be provided an even safer route along the proposed sidewalk. The proposed sidewalk segment will complete a vital sidewalk route. Construction of this sidewalk will further enhance the City's system of sidewalks and trails. See attached City Council Resolution of Support, Dated October 1, 2013. Maintenance of the sidewalk, including snow plowing will be the responsibility of the City's Public Works Department and will be added to their already extensive sidewalk system maintenance program. Page 3 of 3 -r -�}a -_ -- - 1- -- --- - r —s�7 ii -- - - •r3 -- - , -- ,;, .67;1 'r - - -w - -- , :} w Qr( - •-.n �,J�;t.a�_�__'1- 11i S._ -' 1L..s�l..:f�. .L'tiit ___ /Zi�ii �'•' ,F _.'. .A� `ti' �rfZ� ILSJ '�.,[,�` �: - • 1: • •4 •1•• • - •1 �� [r,- _C•.!_J IR`J 1 � !r • +� � i � ' � � js •�• - .i�_ - ' Q y 0 � Ti'.rlR'Sl'.l �� �. ' �� r • I I • •� :` +; �t , - � - -- Legend , ' _ h.1 . 1 1 _ I �-I �` ., /. /, 'til t• �1 i,�Y 4: A .+ i RELOCATE POLE GUY WIRE T., REMOVE AND REPLACE DRIVEWAY APRON. -09m NEW TCONCRETE APRON. MATCH DRIVEWAY aw REPLACEMENT IN �,` i 1' fir" T a t�3 j _.1r TRANSIT EXISTING METRO 0 BUS STOP 7Y _ BITUMINOUS PROPOSED CONCRETE PAD El FOR BUS STOP EXISTING `' >� ' ° ". '- % '.r' f y' ' t fir. '1, 1 • I r CONCRETE EXISTING `' •t • 1•. / /��'. �• ,,f �,. J. ,,�•�,�.i _ 1'� '� '-^.' �� �I •1 •,r� i PROPOSED 5• t • Ltiv , \\ �. `- v• �' �,� �, `w •r - I i r.. `�, : • j `r• , _ v r, ` i F: c ` CONCRETE AGGREGATE AND PROPOSED ` r't t N�\ ", ' /r r.y/ .\Q\ �t� t� \�` •� • f }l �-s.-- - _.r _ - - ___I PROPOSED 5'CONCRETE SIDEWALK WITH UTURF BOULEVARD �i }, 't"4s` °�•�\ M-;7 -�, „'fi /•� _ PROPOSED • • t CURB f • 1 �. : 1' +: > \ \'p �. r /t />✓ iRr tTl�f t S.I` `t. '•' •1` i _ - i Ar PROPOSED LANNON STONE Em O� � r +_C y� 'fti ej } r r. d .r •` S _..� i P ika t. oil FUTURE THREE RIVERS PARK DISTRICT NINE MILE CREEK REGIONAL TRAIL PROPOSED PEDESTRIAN CROSSWALK i. r: 44 -. \. `t - w ii: f N.i�P`ir t -"r' rif_" i. `a, • {' Mq - .�- _� 1;r {x., \ t� �, ° ts` c` Jy• L - /r' 4� �' �`�•�L'� i ti ��^ ti.. '� .� -' :�,1 •,� -,-' ` "�: al� ;r -' �d r.�r: ;•mot,`' , _i /r�' �,�•,� .. ,�� !` - r. �.., i .. {,.�° .. y ,; `'\ ®� ,r• f' �, ,• �e' yrF.q �.t ✓lN��• _ ♦ t�\ \ ' � r!� �. ,�:n�z.'' j� ; d C -''Y >'K,. , tt St.. �Y� � 1 � is ' ?�: `�! i �., J 3.:;, r ,><• . 4 . `,.. ��4. ' • • ( t ��' ,:�:wJ•r - -- -�� •'.' }. . !.✓s \. ,t : 1 '0• -`:/' ,fr '. :�}'y (;�r.t'���,f��.�'�" \�F yl+ •` I• `�: 't1 .iry�74if /. .. / • - %.' - ,~ F. 'S -:. tt"'sr9s ^.;•yy : Jn 3 '� �.r ^�t. t. S _- r -7.:.d .,�. .`� t' 1 �`,• _ri�` �• \\ �, .t J `�J�.r„Q'�,/ r%t�r, r.� ', ^ . �. i`. �i : � - . -t. ' 4.- - �-,y I � ,''• . .i. �(, ..5, '. \. / / - 'a °S., a :}l ,,/J_r r "efJ .�. 3i'.ri .�- �.. /�_ -- -'t i �,,.:h.d�• , _�. ' "t ,� .\ it K`�.�.s, j•.+. .rr }'t..r..,- � �' y � ���•' � ., �7 j �-"• ,,-.� i.+�,,.. ... '1. i ti C• • fS 1 - .JY':�ti. Y>t 0 Ir °ti _ to -\ Y ` �' a4T- i jI • 1' �- %r. fit •S' -�.� - {'fit• --.6 v +: I T .\. '4L J.+.•5,. ,y . t i��r ' 'v , �� ,p' . r/ T if `� - .1+7;r •r' y. I" � � .T y.,.f 'M'A• 'j: f1r i,{:`••• � a ...� .r , /I �! { ,'t: , '•fir �y .�. _ � � .,• `•\ S - .y� �` ':.CX, +, c *�.xi• COUNTY; _ •. r � �•� �' 1. / 'I sd #�r { • � I I '�n'R w ;ti;(�, -� �. f •� -• ' �' ' / • t� °�. ,. ,t?: r1 i. {� ••/ } ,1„'•i ^• _�_ �'R' � \ \.:� . ; j. I ,,�,.. a4i� ^� a .lai s r .1.: '1'. (3i7 �' •c �� _'/f" 11 b..ir,a \ I ra+•�, F'� "•S. - •' _ 1 • +�`�� �. S'te 1 -��ia t t -1 ,{ }l- , .J.�.�, •, l ..'T' `•M '\ � > ��f r ,• II �\ • 1 . `1 tl' Fa'L hi'�,�.++i / "e t�+ir'+,�`.t •`; ,y �'� .� % �... v, � it: `�t �r .��y'� ��4, �r _ ,F ��;,� +. .•Jre F- f���Y, �,.1� f• .� i , �. ,0�.- +- -L mil- -� �� '�' 1 -f t �. 'r. •• - J- i +d _ ar ra +. t�,'1 r+h -'"�, - _ f lr• - ii ' \„ s r¢",+. ;�i "' - +. 1�. -',• '} _ _ • ��yj* [. _ - .ti.. - ,�.7 �_., ♦y. -1•- `_1;-.-�[j tif.!_{ " /" /- i r .\ i. � .h • � � ,-1'l .`.,,�. � J _ 'y` � -_ .y + %lY!- r ��� -\\"� � +: i._- f'�+.i�l • i �t,}r��• .;fr ,,�. /r` ' �-: � :! • 1 ,s`r��� .� 1 .. _ :,t� t. �J K 'ir '�4, is � ,ti. p•• i. b -ir- i�� •11 `� \�. _ •PI. �I + �IIIrr f_ ', v - _ ,.-!f` �Y. r, ".i. •� il� l� •1 �'Ij, / ..rte, '., r �i Al :�. i j,�;�•�,.:I I � It - - � If`f�, �} r 1 _ _ '. .♦ • , . t . _ - I I ; "\ / s ii �.!S .. � .,. T 1 1 I f • 1 • • , I V I � 1 ''.L '��c '•: -v . ``\ Cir T _ _ f.'r t° �' • 1 .i( I i �. �ry� �� Q' If � . �. ''A � � I /r , i •'CaY JI Lc '?�j \\ 'ti•`� .7 _ ,i�. j~ � ,` E c. ji � ti:1T•�� "I •.' /'•�. •4 $' -L i J$s.1�{ �0. I`� t i .i �a.�`$T1�ir pl '.. • .. II `IWt -4 :•4 I�% ,,` i { y } r - •f[ +; J l r+ - ,� .'�. I. �ri a\ �,' : 7 '1 'ii y- • } '' . }}, �/ t •. �Y •JI. %k fs. r•.. `y. ;� a•,.v,": lr[ �.• ,:\ .;/ fi. S 'ir-: y .� /.r`,1 f i_`„ }, .. Rim [A 1 ,I •^�.�,: -G:'Y. ' ,1 ,..N' ,� .R.• 4. 4• i' s , .�jY {. ,� \,- 'A;t si /I�...a•"�".J® L } "i _ -__ I`___ i..ra . `` - ' • - .i' ...3 • .'i. i.R4 N !�` ^Y .tf`-,1 t. •.i'°c 'ls- _ _�d :J� "-s.- - - .I'-- :�,s -. °. 't- •' Y• I( ,i `,., -'+r� ,.a,r,•� .►••. .! ``Z •'1 . �, . �, � , __ _ r,ea,,r .. _ _ -_ J� Z r ' �,., _ I r •� t� l `•r -.. `�•'� : .3rK ... _ •� •' • � r, ij �' ,1, w� }� rZ•t V JJ'{ CC'JIrS; � i �. CxANJ► �' �"•._ IR � ��s I ,�,r ;! ._�' ti'.F *i Zt'I t =.T = _ -_I Q' I ! •I• I � � W .+� ;,y,._rt�+l� i� = _ _- - i� r. 'f - .. - it .# . '� •e Sr p ry ' r�WI I�I�i .s.ial - > :." S �r'11� �-'�.' , I' '1 ' , II .r ` • .i!, •' 1 +" i} • 1 �'� I-, - '., I� f. ' of 'i' r•r7, {.•.! .:,++;:' ��• ,.� •�,'.� =' I •� ;.� �'/ r•r'- GX/ � , L : t '.t ,� .N1 I r� � �'� I 1 �' -.1 .�. 'Jl ��:. :,J .i. �.i','� * -" 1 ��4• `s "_ •'11 �',' - • •,r, - a .J�' � ++ '�`'•';r • • - - -✓ -�. I; ,. y o-o B` -• - -42YOO o 00 � -C�C�' - Ilofl��� --y� °- t;�• =�:• ' }� _.%_ �:. _i-- I• -�i `�_��.. .J. _t�' �i- J�_s:m'�•� - -- ��� _ .1>_- -- -- -- - _:.��,_.._�_ - It_.__ - -- -- � 'C- - - °_._ °�... .�_..rrs�;_'°_J vtva�rr• ♦�t� •-' Vernon Avenue - Gleason Road to Blake An w9sA1r ok a vi HENNEPIN COUNTY y SUPPLEMENTAL APPLICATION - 2014 SIDEWALK PARTICIPATION PROGRAM CITY OF EDINA DATE: OCTOBER 4, 2013 1. PROJECT NAME: Vernon Avenue — from Doncaster Way to Ayrshire Boulevard Edina City Project No. S118 2. APPLICANT City of Edina Mark Nolan, Transportation Planner 7450 Metro Boulevard Edina, MN 55439 952.826.0322 MNolan @EdinaMN.gov 3. PROJECT LOCATION North Side of County Road 158 (Vernon Avenue), from Doncaster Way to Ayrshire Boulevard. See attached Figure C for a location map. 4. TOTAL COST OF THE PROJECT Total Project Costs: $200,000 5. AMOUNT REQUESTED 6. PROJECT DEVELOPMENT SCHEDULE 7. PROJECT READINESS Funding Source: City of Edina's Pedestrian and Cyclist Safety (PACS) Fund Project design and plan preparation (25% of total): $11,000 Construction of Infrastructure (25% of total): $38,000 Submit for Hennepin County Grant October 4, 2013 Notification of Grant Status November 2013 Hennepin County Board to Select Grant Recipients December 2013 Begin Design and Preparation of Bidding Documents January 2015 Bid Opening April 2015 Award Construction Contract May 2015 Estimated Start of Construction June 2015 Estimated Construction Completion; Sidewalk. Open to Users August 2015 This proposed 1,190' long 5' wide sidewalk would complete a vital sidewalk route within the City that serves numerous transit, churches, schools, parks and neighborhoods of Edina. Hennepin County Supplemental Application — 2014 Sidewalk Participation Program Vernon Avenue — from Doncaster Way to Ayrshire Blvd Edina City Project No. S118 ')ctober 4, 2013 8. ALIGNMENT WITH PROGRAM PRIORITIES i The proposed sidewalk will link existing sidewalks on the north side of Vernon Avenue from the intersection of Doncaster Way to the existing sidewalk on the east side of Ayrshire Boulevard. Hennepin County's Pedestrian Plan Implementation has identified the area of the proposed sidewalk as medium to high priority. The City is capable of implementing both design and construction in 2015. Safety Currently, pedestrians are forced: to "cross Vernon Avenue where no clearly identified or marked crossings exist in order to reach the multi -use trail along the south side of the street. Many,people, including children, use the trail to walk to the Highlands Elementary School directly north of the proposed sidewalk. A Metro Transit bus stop along this segment adds to crossing conflicts for pedestrians. Metro Transit bus riders are forced to' either wait in the street or on the turf boulevard at bus stops. This creates a safety hazard, specifically in the winter when roads are narrower from snow and ice accumulation and boulevards are used for snow storage. The existing guard rail at Ayrshire Boulevard creates confusion and hazards for pedestrians on the north side of Vernon Avenue. The guard rail is adjacent to the existing curb, and vegetation behind .it has made traversing the area difficult. By installing tfie proposed sidewalk, pedestrians will have a clear, safe means to Walk on the north side of Vernon Avenue, behind the existing guard rail. The guard rail will,not rieed to be adjusted for the sidewalk. The proposed sidewalk has been identified as a medium /high priority for the City to complete. As shown.in Figure C, the proposed sidewalk will link existing sidewalks on the north side of Vernon Avenue between the intersections of Doncaster Way and Ayrshire Boulevard respectively. Transportation purpose and proximity to pedestrian trip generators. Major trip generators within 'h mile of the Proposed Sidewalk include, but are not limited to: Bus routes and transitwa s Two (2) Metro Transit bus routes use this portion of Vernon Avenue Transit hubs and /or stations One (1) Metro Transit bus stops exists along the proposed sidewalk Park and ride facilities N/A Commercial nodes N/A Employment centers Multiple professional businesses to the northeast Page 2 of 4 Hennepin County Supplemental Application — 2014 Sidewalk Participation Program Vernon Avenue — from Doncaster Way to Ayrshire Blvd _Edina City Project No. S118 October 4, 2013 Schools Highlands Elementary School Libraries Edina Hennepin County Library Public service centers N/A or other public buildings City in implementing its vision for an integrated, multi -modal local transportation Apartment buildings or Multiple High Density housing complexes in all other high density directions housing sent the draft application for their review. Parks Garden and Highlands Parks within Y2 mile Other (please describe) Single Family Housing in established neighborhoods with many active families Page 3 of 4 Community Support The Edina Transportation Commission =(ETC) was established to help guide the City in implementing its vision for an integrated, multi -modal local transportation system as stated in the City's Comprehensive Plan. The proposed sidewalk segment aligns perfectly wit °this vision;' and members of the ETC have been sent the draft application for their review. In the summer of 2013, the Edina City Council adopted a Living Streets Policy. The Living Streets philosophy, encourages the City to. balance the needs of motorists, bicyclists, pedestrians ,arid' transit riders in ways that promote safety and convenience, enhance community identity, create economic vitality, improve environmental ,sustainability, and provide meaningful opportunities for active living and better,health. In .addition, the City of Edina has formed a partnership with Blue Cross .. and Blue -' ".Shield of Minnesota along with the Cities of Bloomington and Richfield in \ a : pilot program branded as do.town that encourages exercise. and eating healthy foods. Both of these initiatives align seamlessly.with the addition of sidewalks as a critical infrastructure investment. The City has received numerous informal resident votes of support for the project. Project or proaram connectivity The proposed sidewalk will connect to existing sidewalks on Doncaster Way and Ayrshire Boulevard.,. Hennepin: County recently completed paving and restriping of Vernon Ave to include designated bike lanes in both directions. With established bike lanes, pedestrians will be provided an even safer route along the proposed sidewalk. 9. OTHER CIRCUMSTANCES OR IMPORTANT ITEMS TO CONSIDER WHEN EVALUATING THE PROJECT The proposed sidewalk segment will complete a vital sidewalk route. Construction of this sidewalk will further enhance the City's system of sidewalks and trails. Page 3 of 4 Hennepin County Supplemental Application — 2014 Sidewalk Participation Program Vernon Avenue — from Doncaster Way to Ayrshire Blvd Edina City Project No. S118 ')ctober 4, 2013 10. CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION OF SUPPORT See attached City Council Resolution of Support, Dated October 1, 2013. Maintenance of the sidewalk, including snow plowing would be done by the City, as this would be added to their already extensive sidewalk system maintenance program. Page 4 of 4 • Page 4 of 4 Al • . .. . . • , •I�. � i � � � +�. �' ,\ 1''S drys i 4t rf. Tl\ I _ : I - • • - • - • . . I' _ k�r a . � ( � ��✓ ,� i i .w �I. ��`���«�r' �s` xi A. Af •• i, y.'�W' :A/�'/ -\ Jf— _ _ - +:3�i'� 'I /� /'yj { i 4 , 1 • _ i! �� I I I t11 / - �_-' . - � � , � � I � �' I �' • l - � EMI\/ ' k !i w� r. � �� I +� 1.. ` - - `J- � J i �' i � 4 ` �� -` , � .' ♦ � .:.+.. 3�.!r 111 '•' r � � —5 w - — �yi� / y►� I �,-' V •• 1 f _— r 7i r ►`� r' it cn 1` tom-% � t +"�► :..: 5 I : ( i r' 1 . ly �� � % � Z • TJ � t•i - i i /' �r n ,_,i{ 1 3', ! I of �t I I •4. 1_ Cw,� w I� � �� ,� •i \, J'A i a Vii' r I ��, �✓ V, -,s �Ixi �r ;e�C �• i4 ry I If ti ►+ .`1;; ,la .II Aw i \�_ a'� = =i- R'�—' - - -�':.•' - ' - � r, � �`;' COUNTY �i 1 r' � V. � L. x � i ' {.. ..fir•.• �1 _ � f'Ky _ r�•� -\ . ,f, ,�'.i:� q \�� . j � - � il' sC �'•A':4R '1R " - i ._ - '� - ..;'; ., -', s 1r- ®' 1 � - CJ CIA! ,s .:'�' N, _ / , r �• - �- `'�+ I ,, -- , _. - _ . - . `�� - �°� -�-�'- _ ,PEE_ t '� �� j• �� �,, - _ _ s. ;: = mss• DER, ; tS .1 Lp i fit• - � � 'fy � ,-', L y �.'� \ "},i �ti, I ii• �� _0 !�^ 'i� •1 _ M.,, �O _,\ 1•M `934 �... �'� _. 1w, . - � � ' 'a .. • I I( �.: • 11 .. , Z 1. •+ b t/7 • r d \ ' r'�.� Sri � a+ �' :: I' r - �1 =r� , � �• 1 `? 1 i :.• E � ��f j,a� - 11:� it r _ L-- - of \ ^4•_,n: ` i + J x �- 1 � --11 _'•� -- __ , _ - _- -_ _' _ -_ ____• _ - _ z —¢'_I� ��` ,:A r�r � � `� �'-_ .,� �` y �E.. ,S '�. y ,,\ i�A ` � �l � , � li ,t _ 1 l �, V �+��s -� Yd - y,t �.w �,ir,'" - � , _ 'e 1 I .,� ..Kii% f '1Y •� •+ .�.: • I • i� \`:.: C`l•�i`J- 1 st., �� � - :I � J ' .• �`� ,I; "_ ,, •1- i' � ,, � x .y _t -�, �' t' �' '�' .s�° •,�a� �'. '`� 1 � {���r��[.�_t�•'7.ri li �, • 1 t _ ' -t 3 , t - 4v. _ _ , �I ..114 °; • _ ' i r.' ' is t� �'s J E - ♦ iE;'s`•. -; I I a Project: SIDEWALK C EDINA 125581 ' � �••�, ;.� r , , i . � ' ' � � ' � t. �( , � �r V r _ y� Ef �- .�.,��, � .if �,,.. +. is \ - . i ' � �tt.F _.�} - _'�-� r - � II _ _ :� r i � -.; ��. o: • �5 ,.." t.' -`. �`.= � - •1: -_ _ It _�. .,,., '- �I `1 . -4 i�;�.�. �.y�� e ° o D `•'''o o �7ti.•o o 00 o °��i °��o -n. °� .� ° WtM (1 l' R :PORT / :COO MME ND1�TI®N To: MAYOR AND COUNCIL From: Wayne D. Houle, PE, Director of Engineering Date: October I, 2013 Subject: Master Agreement Professional Engineering Services - BARR /k O i� Agenda Item #: IV. F. Action .Discussion ❑ Unformation ❑ Action Requested: Authorize Mayor and City Manager to sign attached Master Agreement for Professional Engineering Services. Information / Background: Our City Attorney recommended that we enter into a Master Agreement for Professional Engineering Services with all of our consultants. Attachments: Master Agreement for Professional Engineering Services G: \PW\ADMIN \COMM\ INTERNAL \CORR -ENG \Consultants \BARR \Item IV. _ Master Agreement Professional Engineering Services - BARR door City of Edina 4801 W. 50th St. Edina, MN 55424 MASTER AGREEMENT FOR PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERING SERVICES AGREEMENT made between the CITY OF EDINA, a Minnesota municipal corporation, hereinafter called the "OWNER ", and BARR ENGINEERING COMPANY., hereinafter called the "ENGINEER ". OWNER intends to secure professional ENGINEERING services, according to the terms of this Agreement. 1. SUPPLEMENTAL AGREEMENT OWNER intends to secure professional consulting engineering, architectural, planning and/or land survey services on an ongoing basis for general City services and multiple projects, according to the terms of this agreement. OWNER and ENGINEER shall enter into project specific supplemental agreements. This Master Agreement shall be deemed incorporated into the Supplemental Agreements unless a Supplemental Agreement specifically provides that it is not incorporated. If there is a conflict between the terms of the Supplemental Agreement and the Master Agreement, the terms of the Master Agreement shall control unless the Supplemental Agreement specifically provides that despite the conflict the terms of the Supplemental Agreement apply. 2. PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT PROJECT SERVICES OF ENGINEER 2.1 STUDY AND REPORT PHASE / FEASIBILITY REPORT 2.1.1. Consult with OWNER to clarify and define OWNER'S requirements for the Project, review available data and attend necessary meetings and be available for general consultation. 2.1.2. Advise OWNER as to the necessity of OWNER'S providing or obtaining from others data or services of the types described in paragraph 4, and assist OWNER in obtaining such data and services. 2.1.3. Identify and analyze requirements of governmental authorities having jurisdiction to approve the design of the Project and participate in consultations with such authorities. 2.1.4. Provide analyses of OWNER'S needs, planning surveys, site evaluations and comparative studies of prospective sites and solutions. 2.1.5. Provide a general economic analysis of OWNER'S requirements applicable to various alternatives. 2.1.6. The ENGINEER shall conduct and prepare preliminary studies, layouts, sketches, preliminary field work, preliminary cost estimates, estimates of assessment rates, and shall assist the OWNER in obtaining required subsurface investigations as required for the preparation of the Feasibility Reports. The Feasibility Reports shall conform to the requirements of Minn. Stat. Doc. #170480v.1 RNK: 5/23/2013 Chapter 429 if the cost of the project may be assessed in whole or part. The report shall contain schematic layouts, sketches and conceptual design criteria with appropriate exhibits to indicate clearly the considerations involved (including applicable requirements of governmental authorities having jurisdiction as aforesaid) and the alternative solutions available to OWNER and setting forth ENGINEER'S findings and. recommendations. This Report will be accompanied by ENGINEER'S opinion of probable costs for the Project, including the following which will be separately itemized: construction cost and indirect cost consisting of engineering costs and contingencies, and (on the basis of information furnished by OWNER) allowances for such other items as charges of all other professionals and consultants, for the- cost of land and rights -of -way, for compensation for or damages to properties, for interest and financing charges and for other services to be provided by others for OWNER. The total of all construction and indirect costs are hereinafter called "Total Project Costs ". 2.1.7. Furnish five (5) printed copies of the Study and Report documents and one(]) electronic file and review them in person with OWNER. 2.1.8. The ENGINEER shall assist with presenting the Feasibility Reports to the proper reviewing agencies and to the City Council. The ENGINEER shall appear at the public hearing to present the information. 2.2 PRELEVIINARY'DESIGN PHASE 2.2.1. In consultation with OWNER and on, the basis of the accepted Study and Report documents, determine the general scope, extent and character of the Project; attend necessary meetings and be available for general consultation. 2.2.2. Prepare Preliminary Design documents consisting of final design criteria, preliminary drawings, outline specifications and written descriptions of the Project. 2.2.3. Advise OWNER if additional data or services of the types described in paragraph 4.4 are necessary and assist OWNER in obtaining such data and services. 2.2.4. Based on the information contained in the Preliminary Design documents, submit. a revised opinion of probable Total Project Costs. 2.2.5. Furnish preliminary legal descriptions and exhibits for all permanent and temporary easements anticipated to construct the Project. 2.2.6. Furnish three (3) copies of the above Preliminary Design documents and one (1) electronic copy and present and review them in person with OWNER 2.3 FINAL DESIGN PHASE 2.3.1. On the basis of the accepted Preliminary Design documents, the City's design standards, and the revised opinion of probable Total Project Costs prepare for incorporation in the Bidding Documents final drawings to show the general scope, extent and character of the work to be furnished and performed by Contractor(s) (hereinafter called "Plans ") and Specifications. Doc. #170480v.1 2 RNK: 5/23/2013 2.3.2. Provide technical criteria, written descriptions and design data for use in filing applications for permits with or obtaining approvals of such governmental authorities as have jurisdiction to approve the design of the Project, and assist OWNER in consultations with appropriate authorities. The ENGINEER shall submit all applications and permit support data to the appropriate agencies and submit copies to the OWNER. 2.3.3. Based on property information received from Owner in accordance with Paragraph 4.4, provide legal descriptions and exhibits for all easements, property surveys or related engineering services needed for the transfer of interests in real property and field surveys for design purposes and engineering surveys and staking to enable Contractor(s) to proceed with their work. 2.3.4. Advise OWNER of any adjustments to the latest opinion of probable Total Project Costs caused by changes in general scope, extent or character or design requirements of the Project or Construction Costs. Furnish to OWNER a revised opinion of probable Total Project Costs based on the Plans and Specifications. 2.3.5. Prepare for review and approval by OWNER, its legal counsel and other advisors contract agreement forms, general conditions and supplementary conditions, and (where appropriate) bid forms, invitations to bid and instructions to bidders, and assist in the preparation of other related documents. 2.3.6. Attend necessary hearings and meetings and be available for general consultation. 2.3.7. Furnish three (3) copies of the listed Final Design documents, including the Plans and Specifications, and present and review them in person with OWNER. 2.3.8. The ENGINEER shall furnish one copy of all design calculations when requested by OWNER. 2.4 BIDDING OR NEGOTIATING PHASE 2.4.1. The ENGINEER shall prepare and forward the Advertisement for Bids to the designated publications, official newspaper and the OWNER. The ENGINEER shall supply up to thirty (30) sets of full.size final Plans and Specifications for use in obtaining bids and submitting for general review. The ENGINEER shall maintain a record of prospective bidders to whom Bidding Documents have been issued, attend pre -bid meetings and receive and process deposits for Bidding Documents. 2.4.2. Prepare Contract Documents. 2.4.3. Issue addenda as appropriate to interpret, clarify or expand the Bidding Documents. 2.4.4. Consult with and advise OWNER as to the acceptability of the prime contractor and subcontractors, suppliers, and other persons and organizations proposed by the prime contractor(s) (herein called "Contractor(s) ") for the portions of the work where acceptability is required by the Bidding Documents. Doc. #170480v.1 3 RNK: 5/23/2013 2.4.5. Consult with and advise OWNER concerning and determining the acceptability of substitute materials and equipment proposed by Contractor(s) when substitution prior to the award of contracts is allowed by the Bidding Documents. 2.4.6. Attend the bid opening, prepare bid tabulation sheets and assist OWNER in evaluating bidder qualifications and recommendations on bids, and in assembling and awarding contracts for construction, materials, equipment and services. 2.5 CONSTRUCTION PHASE 2.5.1. General Administration of Construction Contract. ENGINEER shall consult with and advise OWNER and act as OWNER'S representative. All of OWNER'S instructions to Contractor(s) will be issued through ENGINEER who will have authority to act on behalf of Owner to the extent provided in the General Conditions except as otherwise provided in writing. The General Conditions shall not be modified without the written agreement of the OWNER. 2.5.2. Visits to Site and Observation of Construction. In connection with observations of the work of Contractor(s) while it is in progress: 2.5.2.1. ENGINEER shall make visits to the site at intervals appropriate to the various stages of construction as ENGINEER deems necessary in order to observe as an experienced and qualified design professional the progress and quality of the various aspects of Contractor(s) work. In addition, if requested by OWNER, ENGINEER shall provide the services of a Resident Project Representative (and assistants as agreed) at the site to assist ENGINEER and to provide more continuous observation of such work. Based on information obtained during such visits and on such observations, ENGINEER shall endeavor to determine in general if the work is proceeding in accordance with the Contract Documents and ENGINEER shall keep OWNER informed of the progress of the work. 2.5.2.2. The Resident Project Representative (and any assistants) will be ENGINEER'S agent or employee and under ENGINEER'S supervision. 2.5.2.3. The purpose of the ENGINEER'S visits to and representation by the Resident Project Representative (and assistants, if any) at the site will be to enable ENGINEER to better carry out the duties and responsibilities assigned to and undertaken by ENGINEER during the Construction Phase, and, in addition, by exercise of ENGINEER'S efforts as an experienced and qualified design professional, to provide for OWNER a greater degree of confidence that the completed work of Contractor(s) will conform to the Contract Documents and that the integrity of the design concept as reflected in the Contract Documents has been implemented and preserved by Contractor(s). On the other hand, ENGINEER shall not, during such visits or as a result of such Doc. #170480v.1 4 RNK: 5/23/2013 observations of Contractor(s)' work in progress, supervise, direct, or have control over Contractor(s)' work, nor shall ENGINEER have control or charge of and shall not be responsible for the Contractor(s)' means, methods, techniques, sequences, or procedures of construction selected by Contractor(s), for safety precautions and programs incident to the work of Contractor(s) or for any failure of Contractor(s) to comply with laws, rules, regulations, ordinances, codes, or orders applicable to Contractor(s) furnishing and performing their work. Accordingly, ENGINEER can neither guarantee the performance of the construction contracts by Contractor(s) nor assume responsibility for Contractor(s)' failure to furnish and perform their work in accordance with the Contract Documents. 2.5.2.4. If ENGINEER observes or otherwise becomes aware of defects or deficiencies in the work, or nonconformance to the Contract Documents, ENGINEER shall promptly give written notice thereof to OWNER. 2.5.3. Defective Work. During such visits and on the basis of such observation, ENGINEER may disapprove of or reject Contractor(s) work while it is in progress if ENGINEER believes that such work will not produce a completed Project that conforms generally to the Contract Documents or that it will prejudice the integrity of the design concept of the Project as reflected in the Contract Documents. 2.5.4. Interpretations and Clarifications. ENGINEER shall issue necessary interpretations and clarifications of the Contract Documents and in connection therewith prepare work directive changes and change orders as required for OWNER'S approval. 2.5.5. Shop Drawings. ENGINEER shall review and approve (or take other appropriate action in respect of) Shop Drawings, samples and other data which Contractor(s) are required to submit, but only for conformance with the design concept of the Project and compliance with the information given in the Contract Documents. Such reviews and approvals or other action shall not extend to means, methods, techniques, sequences or procedures of construction or to safety precautions and programs incident thereto. 2.5.6. Substitutes. ENGINEER shall evaluate and determine the acceptability of substitute materials and equipment proposed by Contractor(s). 2.5.7. Inspections and Tests. ENGINEER shall have authority, . as OWNER'S representative, to require special inspection or testing of. the work by Contractor, and shall receive and review all certificates of inspections, testing and approvals required by laws, rules, regulations, ordinances, codes, orders or the Contract Documents (but only to determine generally that their content complies with the requirements of, and the results certified indicate compliance with, the Contract Documents). ENGINEER shall be entitled to rely on the results of such tests. 2.5.8. ENGINEER shall respond to all written claims submitted by Contractor in a timely fashion. ENGINEER shall not be liable for the results of any such interpretations or decisions rendered in good faith. Doc. #170480v.1 5 RNK: 5/23/2013 2.5.9. Applications for Payment. Based on ENGINEER'S on -site observations as an experienced and qualified design professional, on information provided by the Resident Project Representative and on review of applications for payment and the accompanying data and schedules: 2.5.9.1. ENGINEER shall determine the amounts owing to Contractor(s) and recommend in writing payments to Contractor(s) in such amounts and the OWNER shall verify the amounts. Such recommendations of payment will constitute a representation to OWNER, based on such observations and review, that the work has progressed to the point indicated, and that, to the best of ENGINEER'S knowledge, information and belief, the quality of such work is generally in accordance with the Contract Documents (subject to an evaluation of such work as a functioning whole prior to or upon Substantial Completion, to the results of any subsequent tests called for in the Contract Documents and to any other qualifications stated in the recommendation). In the case of unit price work, ENGINEER'S recommendations of payment will include final determinations of quantities and classifications of such work (subject to any subsequent adjustments allowed by the Contract Documents). 2.5.9.2. By recommending any payment ENGINEER will not thereby be deemed to have represented that exhaustive, continuous or detailed reviews or examinations have been made by ENGINEER to check the quality or quantity of Contractor(s)' work as it is furnished and performed beyond the responsibilities specifically assigned to ENGINEER in this Agreement and the Contract Documents. ENGINEER'S review of Contractor(s)' work for the purposes of recommending payment will not impose on ENGINEER responsibility to supervise, direct or control such work or for the means, methods, techniques, sequences or procedures of construction or safety precautions or programs incident thereto or Contractor(s)' compliance with laws, rules, regulations, ordinances, codes or orders applicable to their furnishing and performing the work. It will also not impose on ENGINEER responsibility to make any examination to ascertain how or for what purposes any Contractor has used the money paid on account of the Contract Price, or to determine that title to any of the work, materials or equipment has passed to OWNER free and clear of any lien, claims, security interests or encumbrances, or that there may not be other matters at issue between OWNER and Contractor that might affect the amount that should be paid. 2.5.10. Contractor(s)' Completion Documents. ENGINEER shall receive and review maintenance and operating instructions, schedules, guarantees, bonds and certificates of insurance, tests and approvals which are to be assembled by Contractor(s) in accordance with the Contract Documents (but such review will only be to determine that their content complies with the Doc. #170480v.1 RNK: 5/23/2013 requirements of, and in the case of certificates on inspection, tests and approvals the results certified indicate compliance with, the Contract Documents); and shall transmit them to OWNER with written comments. 2.5.11. Inspections. ENGINEER shall conduct an inspection to determine if the work is substantially complete and a final inspection to determine if the completed work is acceptable so that ENGINEER may recommend, in writing, final payment to Contractor(s) and give written notice to OWNER and the - Contractor(s) that the work is acceptable (subject to any conditions therein expressed), but any such recommendation and notice will be subject to the limitations expressed in paragraph 2.5.5: 2.5.12. Limitation of Responsibilities. ENGINEER shall riot be responsible for the acts or omissions of any Contractor, or of any subcontractor or supplier, or any of the Contractor(s)' or subcontractors' or suppliers' agents or employees of any other persons (except ENGINEER'S own employees and agents) at the site or otherwise furnishing or performing any of the Contractor(s)' work; however, nothing contained in paragraphs 2.5.1 through 2.5.12 inclusive, shall be construed to release ENGINEER from liability for failure to properly perform duties and responsibilities assumed by ENGINEER in the Contract Documents. 2.6 OPERATIONAL PHASE 2.6.1. Provide assistance in the closing of any financial or related transaction for the Project. 2.6.2. Provide assistance in connection with the refining and adjusting of any equipment or system 2.6.3. Assist OWNER in training OWNER'S staff to operate and maintain the Project. Extensive training shall be mutually agreed upon within the Supplemental Agreement as Additional Services as defined in Section 3 of this agreement. 2.6.4 Assist OWNER in developing systems and procedures for control of the operation and maintenance of and record keeping for the Project. 2.6.5. Within ninety (90) days after completion of a Project, prepare a set of reproducible record prints of Drawings and an electronic version that satisfy the City of Edina Record Drawing requirements, attached hereto, showing.those changes made during the construction process, based on the marked -up prints, drawings and other data furnished by Contractor(s) to ENGINEER and which ENGINEER considered significant. ENGINEER will not be responsible for any errors or omissions in the'information provided by Contractor that is incorporated in the record drawings and record documents. Final payment will be made only after record drawings are received by the OWNER. 2.6.6. In company with OWNER, visit the Project to observe any apparent defects in the completed construction, assist OWNER in consultations and discussions with Contractor(s) concerning correction of such deficiencies, and make recommendations as to replacement or correction of defective work. Doc. #170480v.1 7 RNK: 5/23/2013 2.6.7. Assist OWNER in preparation of assessment roll for City improvement projects, and attend assessment hearings. 3. ADDITIONAL PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT PROJECT SERVICES OF ENGINEER 3.1 SERVICES REQUIRING ADVANCE AUTHORIZATION. If authorized in writing by OWNER, ENGINEER shall furnish or obtain from others Additional Services of the types listed in paragraphs 3.1.1 through 3.1.12; inclusive. These services are not included as part of Basic Services except to the extent provided otherwise by attached Supplemental Agreement or Work Order and will be paid for by OWNER as indicated in Section 6. 3.1.1. Preparation of applications and supporting documents (in addition to those fumished under Basic Services) for private or governmental grants, loans or advances in connection with the Project; preparation or review of environmental assessments and impact statements; review and evaluation of the effect on the design: requirements of the Project of any such statements and documents prepared by others; and .assistance in obtaining approvals of authorities having jurisdiction over the anticipated environmental impact of the Project. 3.1.2. Field Services to make measured drawings of or to investigate existing conditions or facilities, or to verify the accuracy of drawings or other information furnished to OWNER by others, including surveys to verify location .or improve accuracy of record information provided by Contractor under Paragraph 2.6.5. 3.1.3. Services resulting from significant changes in the general scope, extent or character of the Project or its design including, but not limited to, changes in size, complexity, OWNER'S schedule, character of construction or method. of financing; and revising previously accepted studies, reports, design documents, or Contract Documents when such revisions are required by changes in Iaws, rules, regulations, or'din'ances, codes or orders enacted subsequent to the preparation of such studies, reports or documents, or are due to " any other causes beyond ENGINEER'S control. 3.1.4. Providing renderings or models for OWNER'S use. . 3.1.5. Preparing documents for alternate bids requested by OWNER for Contractor(s)' work which is not executed or documents for out -of- sequence work. 3.1.6. Investigations and studies involving, but not limited to, detailed consideration of operations, maintenance and overhead expenses; providing value engineering during the course of design; the preparation of feasibility studies, cash flow and economic evaluations, rate schedules and appraisals; assistance in obtaining financing for the Project; evaluating processes available for licensing; assisting OWNER in obtaining process licensing; detailed quantity surveys of material, equipment and labor; and audits or inventories required in connection with construction performed by OWNER. 3.1.7. Furnishing services of independent professional associates and consultants for other than Basic Services (which include, but are not limited to, customary civil, structural, mechanical and electrical engineering and customary architectural design incidental thereto); and providing data Doc. #170480v.1 8 RNK: 5/23/2013 or services of the types described in paragraph 4.4 when OWNER employs ENGINEER to provide such data or services in lieu of furnishing the same in accordance with paragraph 4.4. 3.1.8. Services during out -of -town travel required of ENGINEER other than visits to the site or OWNER'S office. 3.1.9. Assistance in connection with bid protests, rebidding or renegotiating contracts for construction, materials, equipment or 'services, except when such assistance is required to complete services called for in paragraph 2.4. 3.1.10. Preparation of operating, maintenance and staffing manuals to supplement Basic Services under paragraph 2.5.10. 3.1.11. Preparing to serve or serving as a consultant or witness for OWNER in any litigation, arbitration or other legal or administrative proceeding involving the Project unless the ENGINEER is a defendant (except for assistance in consultations which is included as part of Basic Services. 3.1.12. Additional services in connection with the Project, including services which are to be furnished by OWNER in accordance with Section 4, and services not otherwise provided for in this Agreement. 3.2 SERVICES NOT REQUIRING ADVANCE AUTHORIZATION. When required by the Contract Documents in circumstances beyond ENGINEER'S control, ENGINEER shall furnish or obtain from others, as circumstances require during construction and without waiting for specific authorization from OWNER, Additional-Services listed in paragraphs 3.2.1 through 3.2.5, inclusive. These services are not included as part of Basic Services except to the extent provided otherwise by attached Supplemental Agreement. ENGINEER shall advise OWNER promptly after starting any such additional services which will be paid for by OWNER. 3.2.1. Services in connection with work directive changes and change orders to reflect changes requested by OWNER if the resulting change in compensation for Basic Services is not commensurate with the additional services rendered. 3.2.2. Services in making revisions to Plans and Specifications occasioned by the acceptance of substitutions proposed by Contractor(s); and services after the award to each contract in evaluating and determining the acceptability of an unreasonable or excessive number of substitutions proposed by Contractor. 3.2.3. Services resulting from significant delays, changes or price increases occurring as a direct or indirect result of material, equipment or energy shortages. 3.2.4. Additional or extended services during construction made necessary by (1) work damaged by fire or other cause during construction, (2) a significant amount of defective or neglected work of any Contractor, (3) acceleration of the progress schedule involving services beyond normal working hours, and (4) default by any Contractor. Doc. #170480v.1 9 RNK: 5/23/2013 3.2.5. Services (other than Basic Services during the Operational Phase) in connection with any partial use of any part of the Project by OWNER prior to Substantial Completion. 4. OWNER'S PUBLIC EVIPROVEMENT PROJECT RESPONSIBILITIES. OWNER shall do the following: 4.1 Designate in writing a person to act as OWNER'S representative with respect to the services to be rendered under this Agreement, such person shall have complete authority to transmit instructions, receive information, interpret and define OWNER'S policies and decisions with respect to ENGINEER'S services for the Project. 4.2 Provide criteria and information as to OWNER'S requirements for the Project, including design objectives and constraints, space, capacity and performance requirements, flexibility and expandability, and any budgetary limitations; and furnish. copies of design and construction standards OWNER will require to be included in the Plans and Specifications. 4.3 Assist ENGINEER by placing at ENGINEER'S disposal all available information pertinent to the Project including previous reports and any other data relative to design or construction of the Project. 4.4 Furnish to ENGINEER as required for performance of ENGINEER'S Basic Services except to the extent provided otherwise, by attached amendment, the: following: 4.4.1. Data prepared by or services of others, including without limitation, borings, and subsurface explorations, hydrographic surveys, laboratory 'tests and inspections of samples, materials and - equipment; 4.4.2. Appropriate professional interpretations of all the foregoing; 4.4.3. Environmental assessment and impact statements, if needed; 4.4.4. Property, boundary, easement, right -of -way, topographic and utility surveys; 4.4.5. Property descriptions; and 4.4.6. Zoning, deed and other land use restrictions; All of which ENGINEER may use and rely upon in performing services under this Agreement. 4.5 Provide engineering surveys or authorize ENGINEER to establish reference points for construction to enable Contractor(s) to proceed with the layout of the work. 4.6 Arrange for access to and make all provisions for ENGINEER to enter upon public and private property as required for ENGINEER to perform services under this Agreement. 4.7 Examine all studies, reports, sketches, Drawings, Specifications, proposals and other documents presented by ENGINEER. Obtain advice of an attorney, insurance counselor and other Doc. #170480v.1 10 RNK: 5/23/2013 consultants as OWNER deems appropriate for such examination and render in writing decisions pertaining thereto within a reasonable time so as not to delay the services of ENGINEER. 4.8 Prepare applications and provide support for approvals and permits from all governmental authorities having jurisdiction over the Project and such approvals and consents from others as may be necessary for completion of the Project. 4.9 Provide such accounting, independent cost estimating and insurance counseling services as may be required for the Project, such Iegal services as OWNER may require or ENGINEER may reasonably request with regard to legal issues pertaining to the Project including any that may be raised by Contractor(s), such auditing service as OWNER may require to ascertain how or for what purpose any Contractor has used the monies paid under the construction contract, and such inspection services as OWNER may require to ascertain that Contractor(s) are complying with any law, rule, regulations, ordinance, code or order applicable to their furnishing and performing the work. 4.10 If OWNER designates a person to represent OWNER at the site who is not ENGINEER or ENGINEER'S agent or employee, the duties,. responsibilities and limitations of authority of such other person and the affect thereof on the duties and responsibilities of ENGINEER and the Resident Project Representative (and any assistants) will be set forth in a supplemental agreement. 4.11 If more than one prime contract is to be awarded for construction, materials, equipment and services for the entire Project, designate a person or organization to have authority and responsibility for coordinating the activities among the various prime contractors. 4.12 Furnish to ENGINEER data or estimated figures as to OWNER'S anticipated costs for services to be provided by others for OWNER so that ENGINEER may make the necessary findings to support opinions of probable Total Project Costs. 4.13_ Attend the pre -bid meeting, bid opening, pre - construction meetings, construction progress and . other job ,related meetings and substantial completion inspections and final payment inspections. 4.14 Give prompt written notice to ENGINEER whenever OWNER observes or otherwise becomes aware of any development that affects the scope of timing of ENGINEER'S services, or any defect or nonconformance in the work of any Contractor. 4.15 Furnish, or direct'ENGINEER to provide, Additional Services as stipulated in paragraph 3.1 of this Agreement or other services as required. 4.16 Require all Private Utilities with facilities in the OWNER'S right of way to: (a) Locate and mark said utilities upon request; (b) Relocate and /or protect said, utilities as determined necessary to accommodate the proposed Work; (c) Submit a schedule of the necessary relocation/protection activities to the OWNER for review. Doc. #170480v.1 11 RNK: 5/23/2013 4.17 Bear all costs incident to compliance with the requirements of this Section 4. 5. PERIODS OF PROJECT SERVICE 5.1 The provisions of Section 6 and the various rates of compensation for ENGINEER'S services provided for elsewhere in this Agreement have been agreed to in anticipation of the orderly and continuous progress of the Project through completion of the Construction Phase. ENGINEER'S obligation to render services hereunder will extend for a period which may reasonably be required for the design, award of contracts,' construction and initial operation of the Project including extra work and required extensions thereto. 5.2 The services called for in the Study and Report Phase will be completed and the Report submitted within the agreed period after written authorization to proceed with that phase of services which will be given by OWNER. 5.3 After acceptance by OWNER of the Study and Report Phase documents indicating any specific modifications or changes in the general scope, extent or character of the Project desired by OWNER, and upon written authorization from OWNER, ENGINEER shall proceed with the performance of the services called for in the Preliminary Design Phase, and shall submit preliminary design documents and a revised opinion of probable Total Project Costs within the agreed period. 5.4 . After acceptance by OWNER of the Preliminary Design Phase documents and revised opinion of probable Total Project Costs, indicating any specific modifications or changes in the general scope, extent or character of the Project desired b' OWNER, and upon written authorization from OWNER, ENGINEER shall proceed with the performance of the services called for in the Final Design Phase; and shall deliver Contract Documents and a revised opinion of probable Total Project Costs for all work of Contractors) on the Project within the agreed period. 5.5 ENGINEER'S services under the Study and Report Phase, Preliminary'Design Phase, and Final Design Phase, shall each be considered complete when the submissions for that phase have been accepted by OWNER. 5.6 After acceptance by OWNER of the ENGINEER'S Drawings, Specifications and other Final Design Phase documentation including the most recent opinion of probable, Total Project Costs and upon written authorization to proceed, ENGINEER shall proceed with performance of the services called for in the Bidding or Negotiating phase. This Phase shall tenninate and the services to be rendered thereunder shall be considered complete upon commencement of the Construction Phase or upon cessation of negotiations with prospective Contractor(s). 5.7 The Construction Phase will commence with the execution of the first prime contract to be executed for the work of the Project or any part thereof, and will terminate upon written recommendation by ENGINEER of final payment on the last prime contract to be completed. Construction Phase services may be rendered at different times in respect of separate prime contracts if the Project involves more than one prime contract. Doc. #170480v.1 12 RNK: 5/23/2013 5.8 The Operational Phase will commence during the Construction Phase and will. terminate upon the last of the following events: (1) one year after the date of Substantial Completion, as defined in the ' Contract Documents, if the last prime contract for construction, materials and equipment on which substantial completion is achieved; (2) after final payment to the Contractor(s); (3) after all known issues have been satisfactorily resolved. 5.9 If OWNER requests significant modifications or changes in the general scope, extent or character of the Project, the time of performance of ENGINEER'S services shall be adjusted equitably. 5.10 OWNER shall give prompt authorization to proceed or not proceed with any phase of services after completion of the immediately preceding phase. 5.11 In the event that the work designed or specified by ENGINEER is to be furnished or performed under more than one prime contract, or. if ENGINEER'S services are to be separately sequenced with the work of one or more prime contractors (such as in the case of fast - tracking), OWNER and ENGINEER shall, prior to commencement of the Final Design Phase, develop a schedule for performance of ENGINEER'S services during the Final Design, Bidding or Negotiating and Construction Phases in order to sequence and coordinate properly such services as are applicable to the work under such separate contracts. 6. PAYMENTS TO ENGINEER 6.1 PAYMENT. For Project services, ENGINEER will be paid in accordance with the Supplemental Agreement between the parties for the Project. 6.2 OTHER PROVISIONS CONCERNING PAYMENTS. 6.2.1. If OWNER fails to make any payment due ENGINEER for services and expenses within thirty five (35) days after receipt of ENGINEER'S statement therefor, the amounts due ENGINEER will be increased at the rate of one-half 'percent (1/2%) per month from said thirtieth day, and in addition, ENGINEER may, -after giving seven (7) days' written notice to OWNER, suspend services under this Agreement until ENGINEER has been paid in full all amounts due for services, expenses and charges. 6.2.2. In the event of termination by OWNER under paragraph 8.1 upon the completion of any phase of the Basic Services, progress payments due ENGINEER for services rendered through such phase shall constitute total payment for such services. In the event of such termination by OWNER during any phase of the Basic Services, ENGINEER will be paid for services actually and necessarily rendered during that phase by ENGINEER'S principals and employees engaged directly on the Project, on the basis of ENGINEER'S Hourly Costs based upon the fee schedule on file with the City. In the event of any such termination, ENGINEER also will be reimbursed for the reasonable charges of independent professional associates. and consultants employed by ENGINEER to render Basic Services, and paid for all unpaid Additional Services and unpaid reimbursables. Doc. #170480v.1 13 RNK: 5/23/2013 6.2.3. Records of ENGIIVEER'S time pertinent to ENGINEER'S compensation under this Agreement will be kept in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles. Copies will be made available to OWNER at cost on request prior to final payment for ENGINEER'S services. 6.2.4. ENGINEER shall comply with Minnesota Statute § 471.425. ENGINEER must pay Subcontractor for all undisputed services provided by Subcontractor within ten (10) days of ENGINEER'S receipt of payment from OWNER. ENGINEER must pay interest of one and five - tenths percent (1.5 %) per month or any part of a month to Subcontractor on any undisputed amount not paid on time to Subcontractor. The minimum monthly interest penalty payment for an unpaid balance of One Hundred Dollars ($100) or more is Ten Dollars ($10). 7. CONSTRUCTION COST AND OPINIONS OF COST 7.1 CONSTRUCTION COST. The construction cost of the entire Project (herein referred to as "Construction Cost ") means the total cost to OWNER of those portions of the entire Project designed and specified by ENGINEER, but it will not include indirect costs such as ENGINEER'S compensation and expenses, the cost of land, rights -of -way,' or compensation for or damages to, properties unless this Agreement so specifies, nor will it include OWNER'S legal, accounting, insurance counseling or auditing services, or interest and financing charges incurred in connection with the Project or the cost of other services to be provided by others to OWNER pursuant to paragraph 4. (Construction Cost is one of the items comprising Total Project Cost which is defined in paragraph 2.2.6). 7.2 OPINIONS OF COST. Since ENGINEER has no control over the cost of labor, materials, equipment or services furnished by others, or over the Contractor(s) methods of determining prices, or over competitive bidding or market conditions, ENGINEER'S opinions of probable Total Project Costs and Construction Cost provided for herein are to be made on the basis of ENGINEER'S experience and qualifications and represent ENGINEER'S best judgment as an experienced and qualified professional engineer, familiar with the construction industry; but ENGINEER cannot and does not guarantee that proposals, bids or actual Total Project or Construction Costs will not vary from opinions of probable cost prepared by ENGINEER. 8. GENERAL 8.1 INDEPENDENT CONTRACTOR. The City hereby retains the Engineer as an independent contractor upon the terms and conditions set forth in this Agreement. The Engineer is not an employee of the City and is free to contract with other entities as provided herein. Engineer shall be responsible for selecting the means and methods of performing the work. Engineer shall furnish any and all supplies, equipment, and incidentals necessary for Engineer's performance under this Agreement. City and Engineer agree that Engineer shall not at any time or in any manner represent that Engineer or any of Engineer's agents or employees are in any manner agents or employees of the City. Engineer shall be exclusively responsible under this Agreement for Engineer's own FICA payments, workers compensation payments, unemployment compensation payments, withholding amounts, and /or self - employment taxes if any such payments, amounts, or taxes are required to be paid by law or regulation. Doc. #170480y.1 14 RNK: 5/23/2013 8.2 TERMINATION. OWNER may terminate this Agreement and any Supplemental Agreement without cause by written notice delivered to the ENGINEER. Upon termination under this provision if there is no fault of the ENGINEER, the ENGINEER shall be paid for services rendered and reimbursable expenses until the effective date of termination. If however, the OWNER terminates the Agreement because the ENGINEER has failed to perform in accordance with this Agreement, no further payment shall be made to the ENGINEER, and the OWNER may retain another contractor to undertake or complete the work identified in the Contract Documents. If as a result, the OWNER incurs total costs for the work (including payments to both the present contractor and a future contractor) which exceed ,the not to exceed amount specified in the Contract Documents, if'any, then the ENGINEER shall be responsible for the difference between the cost actually incurred and the Agreement amount. 8.3 DOCUMENTS. All documents including Plans and Specifications prepared or furnished by ENGINEER (and ENGINEER'S independent professional associates and consultants) pursuant to this Agreement are instruments of service in respect of the Project and the OWNER will be provided with information and reference in connection with the use and occupancy of the Project by OWNER and others; however, such documents are not intended or represented to be suitable for reuse by OWNER or others on extensions of the Project or on any other project. Any reuse without written verification or adaptation by ENGINEER for the specific purpose intended will be at OWNER'S sole risk. If the OWNER or ENGINEER terminates this Agreement, copies of all files, records, and drawings in ENGINEER'S possession relating to service performance for OWNER shall be turned over to OWNER without cost to OWNER. 8.4 MINNESOTA GOVERNMENT DATA PRACTICES ACT. The ENGINEER must comply with the Minnesota Government Data Practices, Act, Minnesota Statutes Chapter 13, as it applies to (1) all data provided by the City pursuant to this Agreement, and (2) all data, created, collected, received, stored, used, maintained, or disseminated by the ENGINEER pursuant to this Agreement. The ENGINEER is subject to all the provisions of the Minnesota Government Data Practices Act, including but not limited to the civil remedies of Minnesota Statutes Section 13.08, as if it were a government entity._ In the event the ENGINEER receives a request to release data, the ENGINEER must immediately notify the OWNER. The OWNER will give the ENGINEER instructions concerning the release of the data to the requesting party before the data is released and the ENGINEER will be reimbursed as Additional Public Improvement Services by OWNER under Paragraph 3.1for ENGINEER'S reasonable costs in complying with a request to release data. ENGINEER agrees ` to defend, indemnify, and hold the OWNER, its officials, officers, agents, employees, and volunteers harmless from any claims resulting from ENGINEER'S officers', agents', "owners', partners', employees', volunteers', assignees' or subcontractors' unlawful disclosure and/or use of protected data. The terms of this paragraph shall survive the cancellation or termination of this Agreement. 8.5 INSURANCE 8.5.1. ENGINEER shall secure and maintain such insurance as will protect ENGINEER from claims under the Worker's Compensation Acts, automobile liability, and from claims for bodily injury, death, or property damage which may arise from the performance of services under this Agreement. Such insurance shall be written for amounts not less than: Doc. #I70480v.1 15 RNK: 5/23/2013 Commercial General Liability $2,000,000 each occurrence /aggregate Automobile Liability $2,000,000 combined single limit Excess/Umbrella Liability $2,000,000 each occurrence /aggregate The OWNER shall be named as an additional insured on the general liability and umbrella policies on a primary and non - contributory basis. That part of the Excess/Umbrella Liability Insurance limit in excess of the required Excess/Umbrella coverage may be utilized to supplement and meet the required limits for Commercial General and Automobile Liability Insurance, 8.5.2. Professional Liability Insurance. The ENGINEER shall secure and maintain a professional liability insurance policy. Said policy shall insure payment of damages for legal liability arising out of the performance of professional services for the OWNER, in the insured's capacity as ENGINEER, if such legal liability is caused by a negligent act, error or omission of the insured or any person or organization for which the insured is legally liable. Said policy shall provide minimum limits of $1,000,000 with a deductible maximum of $50,000 unless the OWNER agrees to a high deductible. 8.5.3. Before commencing work the ENGINEER shall provide the OWNER a certificate of insurance evidencing the required insurance coverage in a form acceptable to OWNER. The certificate shall provide that such insurance will not be canceled, materially changed, or renewal refused until at least 10 days prior written notice has been given to ENGINEER and OWNER in the case of cancellation due to non - payment of premium and at least 30 days prior written notice for any other reason, or such longer notification periods as may be required by statute. Within three days of receipt of such written notice, ENGINEER shall provide a copy of the notice to OWNER. 8.6 INDEMNIFICATION. The ENGINEER agrees, to the fullest extent permitted by law, to indemnify and hold OWNER harmless from any damage, liability, or cost (including reasonable attorney's fees and costs of defense) to the extent caused by ENGINEER's acts, errors, or omissions in the performance of professional services under this Agreement and those of his or her subcontractors or anyone for whom the ENGINEER is liable. 8.7 PROFESSIONAL STANDARDS. ENGINEER shall exercise the same degrees of care, skill, and diligence in the performance of the Services as is ordinarily possessed and exercised by a professional engineer under similar circumstances. No other warranty, expressed or implied, is included in this Agreement. ENGINEER shall comply with applicable laws, statutes, ordinances, and regulations and the OWNER's mandated standards that OWNER has provided ENGINEER in writing. OWNER shall not be responsible for discovering deficiencies in the accuracy of ENGINEER'S services. 8.8 NO THIRD PARTY BENEFICIARIES. Nothing in this Agreement shall be construed to give any rights to anyone other than OWNER and ENGINEER. Doc. #170480•.1 16 RNK: 5/23/2013 8.9 CONTROLLING LAW/VENUE. This Agreement shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of the State of Minnesota, without giving effect to the principles of conflict of laws. All proceedings related to this contract shall be venued in the Hennepin County District Court. 8.10 SUCCESSORS AND ASSIGNS 8.10.1. OWNER and ENGINEER each is hereby bound and the partners, successors, executors, administrators and legal representatives of OWNER and ENGINEER are hereby bound to the other party, to this Agreement and to the partners, successors, executors, administrators and legal representatives (and said assigns) of such other party, in respect of all covenants, agreements, and obligations of this Agreement. 8.10.2. Neither OWNER nor ENGINEER shall assign, sublet or transfer any rights under or interest in (including, but without limitation, monies that may become due or monies that are due) this Agreement without the written consent of the other, except to the extent that any assignment, subletting or transfer is mandated by law or the effect of this limitation may be restricted by law. Unless specifically stated to the contrary in any written consent to an assignment, no assignment will release or discharge the assignor from any duty or responsibility under this Agreement. Nothing contained in this paragraph shall prevent ENGINEER from employing such independent professional associates and consultants as ENGINEER may deem appropriate to assist in the performance of services hereunder. 8.10.3. Nothing under this Agreement shall be construed to give any rights or benefits in this Agreement to anyone other than OWNER and ENGINEER, and all duties and responsibilities undertaken pursuant to this Agreement will be for the sole and exclusive benefit of the OWNER and ENGINEER and not for the benefit of any other party. 8.11 PROMPT PAYMENT TO SUBCONTRACTORS. Pursuant to Minn. Stat. §471.25, Subd. 4a, the Contractor must pay any subcontractor within ten (10) days of the Contractor's receipt of payment from the City for undisputed services provided by the subcontractor. The Contractor must pay interest of 11/2 percent per month or any part of the month to the subcontractor on any undisputed amount not paid on time to the subcontractor. The minimum monthly interest penalty payment for an unpaid balance of $100.00 or more is $10.00. For an unpaid balance of less than $100.00, the Contractor shall pay the actual penalty due to the subcontractor. A subcontractor who prevails in a civil action to collect interest penalties from the contractor shall be awarded its costs and disbursements, including attorney's fees, incurred in bringing the action. 8.12 COPYRIGHT/PATENT INFRINGEMENT. ENGINEER shall defend actions or claims charging infringement of any copyright or patent by reason of the use or adoption of any designs, Drawings or Specifications supplied by it, and it shall hold harmless the OWNER from loss or damage resulting there from. 8.13 NOTICES. Any notice required under this Agreement will be in writing, addressed to the appropriate party at its address on the signature page and given personally, by facsimile, by registered or certified mail postage prepaid, or by a commercial courier service. All notices shall be effective upon the date of receipt. Doc. #170480v.1 17 RNK: 5/23/2013 - 8.14 SURVIVAL. All express representations, waivers, indemnifications, and limitations of liability included in this Agreement will survive its completion or termination for any reason. 8.15 SEVERABILITY. Any provision or part of the Agreement held to be void or unenforceable under any Laws or Regulations shall be deemed stricken, and all remaining provisions shall continue to be valid and binding upon OWNER and ENGINEER, who agree that the Agreement shall be reformed to replace such stricken provision or part thereof with a valid and enforceable provision that comes as close as possible to expressing the intention of the stricken provision. 8.16 WAIVER. A party's non - enforcement of any provision shall not constitute a waiver of that provision, nor shall it affect the enforceability of that provision or of the remainder of this Agreement. 9. PRIOR AGREEMENT This Agreement supersedes all prior written and oral contracts and agreements except for the following: IN WITNESS WHEREOF, -the parties hereto have made and executed this Agreement as of the day and year first above written. OWNER: ENGINEER: CITY OF EDINA BY: Its Mayor AND Its City Manager ADDRESS FOR GIVING NOTICES: Wayne D. Houle, PE Director of Engineering City of Edina 7450 Metro Blvd Edina, MN 55439 Doc. #170480v.1 RNK: 5/23/2013 18 BARR ENGINEERING COMPANY B s csr t ADDRESS FOR GIVING NOTICES: Brian LeMon or Bob Obermeyer Vice President Barr Engineering Company 4700 West 77th Street Edina, MN 55435 R :PORT / R `C®MM�:NDATI oON 11A, o e�, Cn o o To: MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL Agenda Item IV. G. From: Laura Adler, Water Resources Coordinator Action Discussion ❑ Date: October I, 2013 Information ❑ Subject: Engineering Services — Appeal of FEMA Proposed Flood Hazard Determinations Action Requested: Authorize City Manager to approve attached proposal for Engineering Services. Information / Background: The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) has been revising the flood plain maps throughout Hennepin County since 2004. They issued a set of Preliminary Flood Insurance Rate Maps (FIRMS) and the accompanying Flood Insurance Study (FIS) for Hennepin County and started a 90 -day review period on April 5, 2013. FEMA and its contractors developed the proposed flood plain map using hydrologic models and more accurate elevation information than was available in the at the last map revision in 2004. During the official 90 -day appeal period, City staff notified over 800 residents of the proposed changes and identified three areas where an appeal appeared to be justified. On June 4, 2013, Council approved a proposal for Barr Engineering to perform a technical evaluation of the three areas to determine if they warrant appeal. Barr's evaluation identified issues significant enough to warrant appeals in each of the three areas. City staff worked with Barr to prepare the appeals and submitted them to FEMA on July 3, 2013. The technical evaluation, preparation of appeals, and subsequent correspondence with FEMA has concluded the work included in the prior contract with Barr Engineer. This request for purchase will provide a continuation of the technical work required to pursue the appeals. It is possible for the appeals process to progress through a number of stages, and the proposal includes cost estimates for each potential stage. The work provided by Barr Engineering under the original proposal was instrumental in getting FEMA to become aware of and take seriously the issues that warranted the appeals. Barr provided thorough evaluations of each study area and compelling arguments regarding the errors in the flood maps. The issues identified, particularly in the Rolling Green area, are complex and require additional technical support as City staff pursues the appeals. Status of Appeals Nine Mile Village The preliminary flood maps include a large area near Bredesen Park that has not previously been in the flood plain. Barr determined that this was due to an incorrectly placed flood elevation and imprecise City of Edina • 4801 W. 50th St. Edina, MN 55424 REPORT / RECOMMENDATION Page 2 topographical data in the ditch along Highway 62. City. staff surveyed the ditch area, and Barr Engineering clarified with Atkins the correct placement of the elevation. The-result is the removal of the large area included in the preliminary flood plain. This affects 24 homeowners in.Nine Mile Village, preventing FEMA from erroneously placing them within the floodplain. In communications with Atkins and FEMA, they have agreed to make the changes included in the appeal. There will be no additional cost to the City for this appeal. Morningsicl This area is.currently a Zone A flood plain, which means that there is no flood elevation associated with the shape on the map. The City has additional data from its Comprehensive Water Resources Management Plan that show a flood elevation for the area. The appeal submitted by the City would use that elevation along with existing topographical data to redraw the flood plain. FEMA has determined that since this area was not changed in the preliminary flood maps issued in 2012 (the area has been on the maps without change since at least 1982) that they could not accept an appeal for the area. FEMA has advised the City to submit a Letter of Map Revision (LOMR) to incorporate the data into the maps. There will be no fee charged for the LOMR, but there will be some work involved in preparing'the existing materials for submission. Staff has agreed with this direction, with the understanding that the changes shall be included on the issued maps, not as a change after the publication of the new maps. The changes: remove three properties and an additional seven homes from the floodplain. The changes also make it significantly easier for homeowners to show FEMA when they have a portion of their property, but not their home, within the floodplain and eliminate the requirement for flood insurance. The anticipated cost for completing the LOMR for the Morningside Area is $3,765. The proposal includes an additional $1,020 to address any follow-up with FEMA that may be necessary. Rolling Green The preliminary flood maps include a large change in Rolling Green neighborhood that was not in the most recently issued flood maps. Barr Engineering reviewed the model. used to determine the flood elevations along Minnehaha Creek and found some issues. The biggest concern was'an error that incorrectly added a significant amount of water that does not exist, which raises the flood elevation. In order to fix this error, the model would need analysis and modification. FEMA typically would like the requester (the City of Edina) to make these changes, along with recreating the map that shows the flood plain. The model covers the entire length of Minnehaha Creek from Lake Minnetonka to the Mississippi River, far beyond Edina's boundaries. It is not an option to change only the portion of the flood plain within Edina because the flood elevations along the creek cannot have significant decreases or increases. The flood elevations must come together within a reasonable difference of elevation, generally six inches. City staff and Barr Engineering believe that due to the creek -wide scope of this error, it is unreasonable to expect a single city to take responsibility for all of the necessary changes to the model and map, and that FEMA should make those changes. During a conference call on September 5, 2013, including City staff, Barr Engineering, Atkins, FEMA, Department of Natural Resources (IDNR), and the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District (MCWD), Atkins and FEMA stated that they would further discuss the appeal and the issue of who may be responsible for the changes to the model and map. MCWD, the original creator of the model, will .4 REPORT/ RECOMMENDATION Page 3 also consider its possible involvement. City staff have made it clear to all involved that although Edina will not take on the responsibility of revising the model and remapping the flood plain, the City will continue to pursue the appeal through all available avenues. If FEMA does not grant this appeal, there will be a significant effect on over 40 homeowners in the Rolling Green area. The maps will place many new properties within the floodplain, which, in addition to triggering a requirement for flood insurance, significantly limits the ability to add -on or rebuild on some properties, thereby negatively affecting property values. Although City staff and Barr do not believe that the responsibility for modifying the model lies with the City, there is a benefit to identifying the precise issues that cause the model errors. Armed with this information, City staff will be in a better position to argue that FEMA can and should revise the model to predict flood elevations correctly along Minnehaha Creek. The attached proposal includes this additional technical work. If FEMA is unwilling to make changes at this collaborative stage of the appeal, the information will be also useful in the potential future stages (review by an independent, third -party Scientific Resolution Panel, FEMA administrative hearing, and appeal to the United States District Court). Current Request The attached proposal outlines the appeal process and potential associated costs. The goal of these additional services is to resolve the appeals favorably and as expediently as possible, but if FEMA's determination is not acceptable to the City, the proposal includes the costs to pursue the appeals further. The total potential cost included in the proposal is $29,865 and is broken down as follows: Morningside Preparation and submittal of LOMR: $3,765 Potential follow -up with FEMA: $1,020 Rolling Green Troubleshooting the current model: $6,200 Additional communications during the current collaborative stage: $6,145 Potential Scientific Resolution Panel review process: $5,015 Potential FEMA Administrative Hearing process: $7,630 Total: Attachments: BARR Engineering Co. Proposal $29,865 GAPW\INFRAS \UTILITIES DIV\STORM SEWER \Flood Plain \20131001 Council \Engineering Services - Continuation of Appeal of FEMA Proposed Flood Hazard Determinations.docx resourceful. naturally. engineering and environmental consultants BARR Memorandum To: Laura Adler, City, of Edina From: Janna Xieffer Subject: Scope of services: Continued technical support for City of Edina's appeal of FEMA proposed flood hazard determinations Date: September 23, 2013 c: Ross Bntner, City ofEdina Sarah Stratton, Barr Engineering Co.. Barr has been assisting the City of Edina with review and appeal of the proposed Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) flood hazard determinations for three areas within the city: Momingside, Nine Mile Village, and Rolling Green. Per your request we have developed a scope of services for additional technical support related to follow -up tasks for the Morningside area and continuation of the FEMA appeal process in the Rolling Green area. The primary tasks and estimated costs are summarized briefly below, with more detailed information provided in Table 1. Completion of the work tasks and tracking of associated costs will be completed in close coordination with City staff. Task 1. LOMR Submittal for Morningside Area Background: FEMA's contractor has indicated that they are unable to update the floodplain mapping and I ONyear flood elevation in the Morningside area as requested in the City's July 3, 2013 appeal. However, FEMA's contractor has indicated that the City could submit the revised floodplain mapping and supporting hydrologic and hydraulic modeling as part of a Letter of Map Revision (CONK), which would likely result in the revised floodplain in the Morningside area being included on the new Hennepin County flood insurance rate maps. Subtask 1A. Morningside Limited Detail LOMB Submittal Barr.will prepare the necessary supporting information and documentation for LOMR submittal and associated coordination with City staff. Note that this task assumes Electronic submittal of a limited detail LOMR. Subtask IA. Estimated cost: $3,765 Barr Engineering Co. 4700 West 771h Street, Suite 200, Minneapolis, MN 55435 952.832.2600 www.barr.corn Page: 2 Subtask 1 B. Potential Follow -up with FEMA If necessary, Barr will work with FEMA (and their contractor) to address any follow -up questions and/or provide any additional information needed for acceptance of the limited detail LOMB. Subtask 1B. Estimated cost: $1,020 Task 2. Rolling Green Appeal Process Background: FEMA's contractor has indicated that the City of Edina has a basis for their appeal due to mathematical error in the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District (MCWD) XP -SWMM hydrologic and hydraulic modeling. However, they have additional concerns about the reliability of the results, using a more up -to -date version of the XP -SWMM software. Discussions between FEMA and their contractor.are still underway regarding acceptance of the City's appeal and steps for proceeding. Subtask 2A. Consultation with local Government As identified in 44 CFR Part 67, the first step in resolving a community appeal is through consultation with officials of a community. Subtask 2A includes work tasks for continued support of discussions with FEMA and their contractor, with a.goal of resolving the appeal at this level. The work tasks generally include: • Further evaluation of the MCWD XP -SWMM model and communication with XP -SWMM software company experts to address remaining model concerns identified by FEMA's contractor • Communication and coordination w /FEMA and their contractors regarding follow up questions Subtask 2A. Estimated cost: $12,435 Subtask 2B. Independent Review Another.potential means to resolve a community appeal, as identified in 44 CFR Part 67, is through submittal of conflicting data to an independent scientific body or appropriate Federal agency for advice. As part of Subtask 2B, Barr will assist City staff by gathering and submitting necessary information in support of an independent review. Barr will also. coordinate with FEMA, FEMA's contractor, and the review agency, as requested by City staff. Subtask 2B. Estimated cost: $5,015 Subtask 2C. Administrative. Hearing As identified in 44 CFR Part 67, if the community appeal cannot . be resolved by consultation with officials of the community or by submitting the conflicting data to an independent scientific body or appropriate Federal agency for advice, then FEMA shall hold an administrative hearing to resolve the appeal. As part of Subtask 2C, Barr will provide requested assistance to City staff to help prepare for a hearing, including participation. in the hearing if so requested. Subtask 3A. Estimated cost: $7,630 r Page: 3 Cost Summary Table 2 summarizes the estimated costs identified above in Tasks 1 and 2. Barr will perform the described scope of services on a time and expense basis. Task Task Description Estimated Cost IA Morningside- Limited Detail Letter of Map Revision (LOMR) Submittal $3,765 1B Morningside- Potential Follow -up with FEMA $1,020 2A Rolling Green Appeal Process - Consultation with Local Government $12,435 2B Rolling Green Appeal Process - Independent Review $5,015 2C Rolling Green Appeal Process- Administrative Hearing $7,630 Total $29,865 We appreciate the opportunity to continue providing engineering services to the City of Edina and look forward to working with you on this project. If the proposed scope of services and associated fees are satisfactory, please sign a copy of this letter in the space provided, and return it to us at your earliest convenience. Sincerely, BARR ENGINEERING CO. By Janna M. Kieffer Its Vice President Accepted this _ day of , 20 CITY OF EDINA Un Its Table 1. Summary of Work Tasks and Estimated Costs Tasks Total Hours Review of requirements for MT -2 form, Communications w /DNR regarding Limited Detail versus Detail LOMR submittal, Identification of tasks 9 $1,160 Checking XP -SWMM model - open In new version, make sure runs to completion and closes properly, document version 3 921n data for MT -2 forms - Aquiring certified topo documentation from both Edina and SLP lering and /or developing supporting data for MT -2 forms - pulling together hydrology information - info from the City's plan should for Limited Detail -tevt wat —hart min a il­e.. I ._ ---- ._ __.... ___ __11 - - — ­­­1 _ go - -_ nsu Jt�u Gathering and /or developing supporting data for MT -2 forms - pulling together any supporting hydraulic information - e.g., storm sewer /GIS /CAD data or map; SWMM node figure; storage Information; etc. Use existing data from the City's plan, where possible 2 $255 Gathering and /or developing supporting data for MT -2 forms - acquiring signatures from the (1) requester, (2) community official ( "CEO ") - mayor /City manager, and (3) engineer (Barr) 1 $125 Gathering and /or developing supporting data for MT -2 forms - create annotated FIRM figure - use the figure Barr already created, just need to change the title; create separate topo map showing floodplain polygons; make sure shapefiles are cleaned up 4 $385 Filling out MT -2 Forms - Form 1- Overview & Concurrence Form and Form 2 - Rlverine H & H Form (attaching supporting documentation described above) 4 $430 Navigating the online submittal process (filling out all online Information) 5 $470 Final review of submittal package (Barr engineer will need to slgn) 2 $255 Subtotal 34 $3,765 Subta3k 1B potential Foljow' rip with,FEMA Coordinate w/ FEMA (answer follow -up questions, if necessary) 8 $1,020 u total 8 $1020 SObtask 2A Rolhngtireen ,;Appeals Process Consultation with locajgovglnment _ Communications w/ DNR, City, FEMA, and Atkins (FEMA contractor) regarding status of City's appeal and next steps (includes preparation for, participation In, and follow -up tasks from August 14, 2013 call with Atkins and Sept. 5, 2013 call with DNR, City, FEMA, and Atkins) 15 $1,945 Receive correct "final" XP -SWMM model from Atkins, run model and cursory assessment of differences from model provided by DNR 2 $195 Review of formal appeal process (CFR Part 67 and 68), communications w /City staff regarding process and options for path forward, documentation of next steps 13 $1,630 Troubleshooting Atkins remaining issues w/XP -SWMM model (non- convergences and making sure the model completes and closes without errors so that the results can be reviewed using the XP tables & summary memo), Including communication w/XP -SWMM and applicable documentation 60 $6,200 Additional communications w/ City, DNR, FEMA, and Atkins regarding appeal, Including discussions on mapping and tie -ins outside of Edina (time estimate assumes two additional rounds of discussion) 20 1 $2,465 u tota 110 $12,435 Suptask 2B: Ro)hgg Green A `eels Process .Independent,RevJew -, pp. Gathering and submitting any additional data that may be required 30 $1,190 Communications w/ DNR, FEMA, Atkins and Independent reviewer and necessary follow -up 20 $2,550 Coordination /meetings with City 10 $1,275 Subtotal 40 $5,015 Suht?is k 2G:RoIIIn Green_ A g ` g,- ppeals Process_, Administrative Hearin - Pre - hearing prep work- meeting(s) with Barr and /or City attorneys 4 $510 Pre - hearing prep work - review of all materials 24 $3,060 Coordination /meetings with City 24 $3,060 Attendance /participation at Administrative Hearing 8 $1,000 Subtotal 60 1 $7,630 Totall 252 1 $29,865 To: Mayor and City Council Agenda Item #: IV. H. From: Jeff Long, Chief of Police Action Discussion ❑ Date: October 1, 2013 Information ❑ Subject:' Resolution No. 2013 -87. Authorizing Joint Powers Agreement With The State of Minnesota - Minnesota Internet Crimes Against Children Task Force Action Requested: That the Edina Police Department be authorized to continue its participation in a Multi- Agency Agreement with the Minnesota Internet Crimes Against Children (MICAC) Task Force, which is administered by the State of Minnesota. The goal of MICAC is to protect children through prevention, education, and enforcement. INFORMATION /BACKGROUND: The Edina Police Department first partnered with the ICAC Task Force in 2007. The training provided through this partnership gives police departments' standardized investigative techniques so investigators nationwide are processing cases in a similar manner. This training is used with our local cases and also cases discovered anywhere in the United States that lead back to Edina. This Joint Powers Agreement (JPA) allows the Edina Police Department to get national training, funded by a grant through the State of Minnesota. The Minnesota Bureau of Criminal Apprehension is the administrator of the Minnesota Internet Crimes Against Children. Task Force (MICAC). This transitioned our original agreement from St. Paul PD and the national ICAC group, to the Minnesota Bureau of Criminal Apprehension. This agreement will be in effect until May 31, 2016. ATTACHMENTS: Resolution copy City of Edina r 4801 W. 50th St • Edina, MN 55424 RESOLUTION NO. 20113-87 AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF JOINT POWERS AGREEMENT CITY OF EDINA AND STATE OF MINNESOTA WHEREAS, the Edina Police Department originally entered into a Multi- Agency Law Enforcement Agreement with the City of St. Paul and the Internet Crimes Against Children (ICAC) Task Force in 2007 to investigate and combat the exploitation of children through the use of computers. WHEREAS, this project has transitioned and is now, being operated through the Minnesota Department of Public Safety (MNICAC). As a requirement to continue in this program, the City of Edina must authorize a Joint Powers Agreement between the City of Edina and the State of Minnesota acting through its Department of Public Safety, Bureau of Criminal Apprehension. NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that this Joint Powers Agreement will cover the July 1, 2013 — May 31, 2016 granfcycle which will expire on May 31, 2016. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Council is now hereby authorizing the City of Edina Mayor, City Manager, and Chief of Police to execute the renewal of the Joint Powers Agreement on behalf of the Edina Police Department. Adopted this 1st day of October, 2013 Attest: Debra A. Mangen, City Clerk STATE OF MINNESOTA) COUNTY OF HENNEP.I'N) SS CITY OF EDINA ) James B. Hovland, Mayor CERTIFICATE OF CITY CLERK I, the undersigned duly appointed and acting City Clerk for the City of Edina do hereby certify that the attached and foregoing Resolution was duly adopted by the Edina City Council at its Regular Meeting of October 1, 2013, and as recorded in the Minutes of said Regular Meeting. WITNESS my hand and seal of said City this day of City Clerk ; If t Contract No. 62649 Minnesota Internet Crimes Against Children Task Force Multi- Agency Law Enforcement Joint Powers Agreement This Multi- Agency Law Enforcement Joint Powers Agreement, and amendments and supplements thereto, ( "Agreement ") is between the. State of Minnesota, acting through its Commissioner of Public Safety, Bureau of Criminal Apprehension ( "Grantee "), empowered to enter into this Agreement pursuant to Minn. $tat. § 471.5 9, Subd. 10'& 12, and City of Edina, acting through its Edina Police Department located at 4801 We4'50th Street, Edina, 5542+4. ( "Undersigned Law Enforcement Agency "), empowered to enter into this Agreement pursuant to Minn: Stat. § 471.59, subd. 10, Whereas, the above subscribed parties have joined together in a multi- agency task force intended to investigate and prosecute crimes committed against children and the criminal exploitation of children that is committed and/or facilitated by or through the.use of computers, and to disrupt and dismantle organizations engaging in such activity; and Whereas, the undersigned agencies agree to utilize applicable state and federal laws to prosecute criminal, civil, and forfeiture actions against identified violators, as appropriate; and Whereas; the Grantee is the recipient of a federal grant (attached to this Agreement as Exhibit A)disbursed liy the Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention ( "OJJDP ") in ;Washington, D.C. to assist law enforcement in investigating and combating the exploitation of children which occurs through the use of computers by providing funding for equipment, training, and expenses, including travel and overtime funding, which are incurred by law enforcement as a result of such investigations; and Whereas; the OJJDP Internet Crimes Against Children ( "ICAC ") has established a Working Group of Directors representing each of the existing ICAC Task Forces to oversee the operation of the grant and. sub -grant recipients; and the State of Minnesota, acting through its Commissioner of Public Safety, Bureau of Criminal 'Apprehension has designated Donald Cheung as the Commander of the Minnesota ICAC Task Force. Now Therefore, the parties agree as follows: 1. The Undersigned Law Enforcement Agency approves, authorizes, and enters into this Agreement with the purpose of implementing a three- pronged approach to combat Internet Crimes Against Children: prevention, education and enforcement; and 2. The Undersigned Law Enforcement Agency shall adhere to the Minnesota ICAC Task Force Program Standards contained in Exhibit B attached to this Agreement, in addition to complying with applicable Minnesota state and federal laws in the performance of this Page 1 of r , V Contract No. 62649 Agreement, including conducting undercover operations relative to ICAC, ; a list of Regional ICAC Task Force, Minnesota State Affiliate Agency and Training & Technical Assistance Program contact information is available at hqp://www.oudp.goy/progmmgprogsummn.asp?pi=3#Resources; and 3. Exhibits A and B are incorporated into this Agreement and made a part thereof. In the event of a conflict between this Agreement and the Exhibits, the terms of the Exhibits prevail; and 4. The Undersigned Law Enforcement Agency and the Grantee agree that each party will be responsible for its own acts and the results thereof to the extent authorized by law and shall not be responsible for the acts of any others and the results thereof. The Grantee's liability shall be governed by the provisions of the Minnesota Tort Claims Act, Minnesota Statutes, Section 3.736, and other applicable law. The Undersigned Law Enforcement Agency's liability shall be governed by the provisions of the Municipal Tort Claims Act, Minnesota Statutes, Section 466.01 - 466.15, and other applicable law; and 5. All members of the Undersigned Law Enforcement Agency shall continue to be employed and directly supervised by the same Law Enforcement Agency employer which currently employs the member performing Minnesota ICAC Task Force assignments; and all services, duties, acts or omissions performed by the member will be within the course and duty of that employment, and therefore, are covered by the Workers Compensation programs of that employer; will be paid by that employer and entitled to that employer's fringe benefits; and 6. The Undersigned Law Enforcement Agency must first submit a written request for funds and receive approval for the funds from the Grantee to receive any funds from the Grantee; and 7. The Undersigned Law Enforcement Agency must supply original receipts to be reimbursed on pre- approved requests. Approved reimbursement will be paid directly by the Grantee to the Undersigned Law Enforcement Agency within 30 days of the date of invoice, with payment made out to the City of Edina and mailed to the Edina Police Department, 4801 West 50th Street, Edina, W,55424. 8. The Undersigned Law Enforcement Agency shall maintain accurate records pertaining to prevention, education, and enforcement activities, to be collected and forwarded monthly to the Minnesota ICAC Task Force Commander or his designee for statistical reporting purposes; and 9. The Undersigned Law Enforcement Agency shall participate fully in any audits required by the OJJDP. In addition, under Minn. Stat. § 16C.05, subd. 5, the Undersigned law Enforcement Agency's books, records, documents, and accounting procedures and practices relevant to this Agreement are subject to examination by the Grantee and/or the Minnesota State Auditor or Legislative Auditor, as appropriate, for a minimum of six years from the end date of this Agreement; and 10. The Undersigned Law Enforcement Agency shall make a reasonable good faith attempt to be represented at any scheduled regional meetings in order to share information and resources Page 2 of 5 0_ e. 2{ Contract No. 62649 amongst the multiple entities; and 11. The Undersigned Law Enforcement Agency shall be solely responsible for forwarding information relative to investigative targets to the Child Pornography Pointer System (CPPS) pursuant to the OJJDP guidelines; and 12. The Undersigned Law Enforcement Agency shall provide the Minnesota ICAC Task Force Commander in a timely manner all investigative equipment that was acquired through OJJDP grant funding; in the event that future federal funding is no longer available, the Undersigned Law Enforcement Agency decides to dissolve its binding relationship with the Minnesota ICAC Task Force and'the State of Minnesota Department of Public Safety, or the Undersigned Law Enforcement Agency breaches the Agreement. 13. That the Grantee may reimburse, the Undersigned Law Enforcement Agency for the following duties: A. Investigations by the Undersigned Law Enforcement Agency under this agreement should be conducted in accordance with the OJJDP ICAC Task Force Program.Standards contained in Exhibit B, and concluded in a timely manner. The Undersigned Law Enforcement Agency will only be reimbursed by the Grantee for overtime hours inclusive of fringe benefits of actual hours and/or actual expenses incurred related to performing Minnesota ICAC Task Force assignments and /or training approved by the Minnesota ICAC Task Force Commander through the term of this agreement or until all Federal funds under the OJJDP grant have been expended, whichever comes first. B. The Grantee has a TOTAL Expense Budget of $347,101.00 that was approved under the OJJDP Internet Crimes Against Children ( "ICAC ") Grant for investigative hours and expense reimbursement. The Undersigned Law Enforcement Agency participating in the Minnesota ICAC Task Force investigations will be reimbursed by the Grantee for actual costs as defined in Clause 13, Section A., to the extent such actual costs have been reviewed and approved by the Minnesota ICAC Task Force Commander. 14. Any amendment to this Agreement must be in writing and will not be effective until it has been executed and approved.by the same parties who executed and approved the original agreement, or their successors in office. 15. The Undersigned Law Enforcement Agency and the Grantee may terminate this Agreement at any time, with or without cause, upon 30 days' written notice to the other party. 16. Terms of this agreement: This Agreement shall be effective on the date the Undersigned Law Enforcement Agency obtains all required signatures under Minn. Stat. § 16C.05, Subd. 2, and shall remain in effective through May 31, 2016 unless terminated or canceled. Upon the effective date of this Agreement, the Undersigned Law Enforcement Agency will be entitled to reimbursements approved by the Grantee dating back to July 1, 2013 for overtime Page of Contract No. 62649 salary including fringe benefits, equipment, training and expenses to the extent Grantee has available funds to pay such and they have been approved consistent with Clausel3, Section B. Nothing in this Agreement shall otherwise limit the jurisdiction, powers, and responsibilities normally possessed by an employee as a member of the Undersigned Law Enforcement Agency. 1. Undersianed Law Enforcement Agency Undersigned Law Enforcement Agency certifies that the appropriate person(s) have executed the Agreement on behalf of the Undersigned Law Enforcement Agency and its jurisdictional government entity as required by applicable articles, laws, by -laws, resolutions, or ordinances By and Title Undersigned Law Enforcement Aaencv Title: City of Edina Title: City of Edina Mayor or Board Chair City of Edina Page4of5 Date Date Date Date . � a 2. Department or Public Safety, Bureau of Criminal Apprehension Name: Signed: Title: Contract No. 62649 (With delegated authority), Date 3. Commissioner of Administration By and Title MN Department of Administration (With delegated authority) Page 5 of 5 Date 1�A o Le �y \�� 18888 AGENDA ITEM V. A. Jan Callison Hennepin County Commissioner [-] No packet data Oral presentation Information coming M Y To: Mayor and Council From: Jeff Siems, Fire Marshal Date: Oct. 1, 2013 Subject: Proclamation Declaring Fire Prevention Week Action Requested: Information I Background: of Vu Agenda Item #: V. B. Action ❑ Discussion ❑ Information Fire Prevention Week was established by President Woodrow Wilson in 1920 to commemorate the Great Chicago Fire, which killed more than 250 people, left 100,000 homeless and destroyed more than 17,400 structures on Oct. 8 -9, 187 1. It also commemorates another large fire, the Peshtigo Fire, the most devastating forest fire in American History. The fire, which also occurred Oct. 7, 1871, burned 16 towns, killing 1,152 people and destroying 1.2 million acres in Wisconsin. Fire Prevention Week has been observed every year since 1922, spanning Sunday through Saturday of the week in which Oct. 9 falls. Fire Prevention Week is reportedly the longest running public health and safety observance on record. This year's Fire Prevention Week theme is "Prevent Kitchen Fires," and stresses the importance cooking safely and how to prevent cooking fires and is recognized Oct. 6 -12, 2013. In 2010, U.S. fire departments responded to 369,500 home structure fires, resulting in 2,640 deaths and $6.9 billion in damage. Residential Building Cooking Fires have increased 3 percent nationally to 166,600 fires per year between 2007 and 2011, according to the U.S. Fire Administration. Additionally, numerous other kitchen and cooking fires go unreported. These fires result in 400 civilian deaths, 5,080 injuries and $853 million in direct damages. Two out of every five home fires begin in the kitchen. The Edina Fire Department recommends the following tips to prevent kitchen fires: • Stay in the kitchen when you are frying, grilling, broiling or boiling food. • If you must leave the room, even for a short period, turn off the stove. City of Edina • 4801 W. 50th St • Edina, MN 55424 REPORT / RECOMMENDATION Page 2 • When you are simmering, baking or roasting food, check it regularly, stay in the home and use a timer to remind you. • If you have young children, use the stove's back burners whenever possible. Keep children and pets at least three away from the stove. • When you cook, wear clothing with tight- fitting or short sleeves. • Keep potholders, oven mitts, wooden utensils, paper and plastic bags, towels, and anything else that can burn, away from your stovetop. • Clean up food and grease from burners and stovetops. Visit www.FirePreventionWeek.org for more information and tips about home escape planning and practice. 4i " . _K REPORT / RECOMMENDATION A PROCLAMATION FOR FIRE PREVENTION WEEK WHEREAS, the City of Edina is committed to ensuring the safety and security of all those living in and visiting our City; and WHEREAS, fire is a serious public safety concern both locally and nationally, and homes are the locations where people are at greatest risk from fire; and Page 3 WHEREAS, cooking is the leading cause of home fires in the United States and home fires killed more than 2,500. people in the United States in 2011, according to the National Fire Protection Association (NFPA); and WHEREAS, two of every five home fires start in the kitchen and .unattended equipment was a factor in one - third of the reported cooking fires, and WHEREAS, 57 percent of reported non -fatal home cooking fire injuries occurred when the victims tried to fight the fire themselves; and WHEREAS, Edina's residents should stay in the kitchen when frying food on the stovetop, keep a three -foot kid -free zone around cooking areas and keep anything that can catch fire away from stove tops; and WHEREAS, working smoke alarms cut the risk of dying in reported home fires in half, and WHEREAS, residents who have planned and practiced a home fire escape plan are more prepared and will therefore be more likely.to survive a fire; and WHEREAS, Edina's first responders are dedicated to reducing the occurrence of home fires and home fire injuries through prevention and protection education; and WHEREAS, Edina's residents are responsive to public education measures and are able to take personal steps to increase their safety from fire, especially in their homes; and.. WHEREAS, the 2013 Fire Prevention Week theme, "Prevent Kitchen Fires!" effectively serves to remind us to stay alert and use caution when cooking to reduce the risk of kitchen fires. THEREFORE, 1, James B. Hovland, Mayor of Edina, do hereby, proclaim October 6 -12, 2013 as Fire Prevention Week throughout the City,. and I urge all the people of Edina by checking their kitchens for fire hazards and using safe cooking practices during Fire Prevention Week 2013, and to support the many public safety activities and efforts of Edina's fire and emergency services. James B. Hovland, Mayor a- PC m i) i - A Cary Teague From: Cary Teague Sent: Tuesday, October 01, 2013 2:17 PM To: 'John T. Wanninger'; James Hovland Cc: Scott & Margaret Busyn; Christopher Johnson; Scott Neal Subject: RE: jtw- 6609 Blackfoot subdivision Thanks John, We will get them both scheduled for the 14th. The public hearing tonight on the Subdivision will simply be continued to the 14`h; and we will get the Variance notifications mailed out this Friday. Cary �. Cary Teague, Community Development Director TWI). 952 - 826 -0460 I Fax 952 - 826 -0389 1 Cell 952 - 826 -0236 4801 W. 50th St. I Edina, MN 55424 cteague0EdinaMN.gov I www.EdinaMN.gov /Planning ,-= ...For Living, Learning, Raising Families &. Doing Business From: John T. Wanninger [mailto:jtwWakesmn.com] Sent: Tuesday, October 01, 2013 1:17 PM To: Cary Teague; James Hovland Cc: Scott & Margaret Busyn; Christopher Johnson; John T. Wanninger Subject: jtw- 6609 Blackfoot subdivision Cary, Please reschedule the subdivision and variance hearing for the next council meeting in a couple of weeks. Please send out the notice for both the subdivision and the variance. It makes sense to hear both matters at the same time. I've confirmed this is OK with the owner, as well as Scott Busyn. Regards, jtw John T. Wonninger Lakes I Sotheby's International Realty 3217L Galleria Edina, MN 55435 Office 952.240.7600 1 itw @lakesmn.com Click Here to View Our Summer Online Property Gallery r7lOO RT / R i COO MM `NDATIOO N � � I O To: MAYOR AND COUNCIL Agenda Item #: VI.A. From: Cary Teague, Community Development Director Action ❑x Discussion ❑ Date: October I, 2013 Information ❑ Subject: PUBLIC HEARING — Resolution No. 2013 -82, Preliminary Plat, 6609 Blackfoot Pass; Great Neighborhood Homes Inc. on behalf of Douglas Johnson. Action Requested: Adopt the attached resolution. Information / Background: Great Neighborhood Homes Inc. on behalf of Douglas Johnson is proposing to subdivide the property at 6609 Blackfoot Pass into two lots. The existing home would be torn down, and two new homes built on the new lots. (See applicant narrative and plans on pages A4 —A16 of the planning commission staff report.) The. request heard before the Planning Commission included a front yard setback Variance request for Lot 2. However, the applicant is only requesting action on the Preliminary Plat by the City Council at this time; as proper notice was not given for the Variance hearing. If the Council approves the Preliminary Plat, the applicant would then go back to the Planning Commission at a later date for a variance on specific house plan. Within this neighborhood; the median lot area is 27,131 square feet, median lot depth is 183 feet, and the median lot width is ,146 feet. The proposed new lots would meet these median width, depth, and lot size requirements..Anew home could be built on Lot 2 without the need for a variance, however, in doing so some of the best trees on the site would be removed (large Oak trees); more slopes would be disturbed, and the home would be located much closer to the existing home at 6705 Cheyenne Trail. Planning Commission Recommendation: The planning commission recommend denial of -the preliminary plat based on the findings that the proposed subdivision would be out of character with the neighborhood, and that it would be inconsistent with the goal of the Comprehensive Plan to preserve neighborhood character. Motion to deny carried on a vote of 6 -2. City of Edina 4801 W. 50th St. Edina, MN 55424 The Planning Commission's recommendation is based on the following considerations from the Subdivision Ordinance. Please note that these considerations are subjective. The proposed subdivision meets the City's minimum size regulations. Subd. 1 Considerations. The Commission in reviewing proposed plats and subdivisions and in determining its recommendation to the Council, and the Council in determining whether to approve or disapprove of any plat or subdivision, may consider, among other matters, the following: A. The impact of the proposed plat or subdivision, and proposed development, on the character and symmetry of the neighborhood as evidenced and indicated by, but not limited to, the following matters: 1. The suitability of the size and shape of the lots in the proposed plat or subdivision relative to the size and shape of lots in the neighborhood; and 2. The compatibility of the size, shape, location and arrangement of the lots in the proposed plat or subdivision with the proposed density and intended use of the site and the density and use of lots in the neighborhood. B. The impact of the proposed plat or subdivision, and proposed development, on the environment, including but not limited to, topography, steep slopes, vegetation, naturally occurring lakes, ponds and streams, susceptibility of the site to erosion and sedimentation, susceptibility of the site to flooding and water storage needs on and from the site. C. The consistency of the proposed plat or subdivision, and proposed development, and compliance by the proposed plat or subdivision, and the proposed development, with the policies, objectives, and goals of the Comprehensive Plan. D. The compliance of the proposed plat or subdivision, and the proposed development with the policies, objectives, goals and requirements of Section 850 of this Code including, without limitation, the lot size provisions and the Floodplain Overlay District provisions of Section 850 of this Code. E. The impact of the proposed plat or subdivision, and proposed development on the health, safety and general welfare of the public. F. The relationship of the design of the site, or the improvements proposed and the conflict of such design or improvements, with any easements of record or on the ground. G. The relationship of lots in the proposed plat or subdivision to existing streets and the adequacy and safety of ingress to and egress from such lots from and to existing streets. H. The adequacy of streets in the proposed plat or subdivision, and the conformity with existing and planned streets and highways in surrounding areas. Streets in the proposed plat or subdivision shall be deemed inadequate if designed or located so as to prevent or deny public street access to adjoining properties, it being the policy of the City to avoid landlocked tracts, parcels or lots. I. The suitability of street grades in relation to the grades of lots and existing or future extension of the City's water, storm and sanitary sewer systems. J. The adequacy and availability of access by police, fire, ambulance and other life safety vehicles to all proposed improvements to be developed on the proposed plat or subdivision. K. Whether the physical characteristics of the property, including, without limitation, topography, vegetation, susceptibility to erosion or siltation, susceptibility to flooding, use as a natural recovery and ponding area for storm water, and potential disturbance of slopes with a grade. of 18 percent or more, are such that the property is not suitable for the type of development or use proposed. L. Whether development within the proposed plat or subdivision will cause the disturbance of more than 25 percent of the total area in such plat or subdivision containing slopes exceeding 18 percent. M. Whether the proposed plat or subdivision, or the improvements proposed to be placed thereon are likely to cause substantial environmental damage. ATTACHMENTS: • Resolution No. 2013 -82 • Draft minutes from the September 11, 2013 Edina Planning Commission meeting • Planning Commission Staff Report, September 11, 2013 • Letter from Malkerson Gunn Martin LLP RESOLUTION NO. 2013-82 APPROVING A PRELIMINARY PLAT AT 6609 BLACKFOOT PASS BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Edina, Minnesota, as follows: Section 1. BACKGROUND. 1.01 Great Neighborhood Homes Inc. on behalf of Douglas Johnson is proposing to subdivide the property at 6609 Blackfoot Pass into two lots. The existing home would be torn down, and two new homes built on the new lots. 1.02 The following described tract of land is requested to be divided: Lot 4, Block 3, Indian Hills, Hennepin County, Minnesota. 1.03 The owner of the described land desires to subdivide said tract in to the following described new and separate parcels (herein called "parcels ") described as follows: Lots 1 and 2, Block 1, Great Neighborhood Homes 1.04 Within this neighborhood, the median lot area is 27,131 square feet, median lot depth is 183 feet, and the median lot width is 146 feet. The proposed new lots would meet these median width, depth, and lot size requirements. 1.05 The proposed subdivision meets all minimum zoning ordinance requirements. 1.06 On July 24:.2013, the Planning Commission recommended denial of the. Preliminary Plat. finding :that the resulting lots would out of character with the neighborhood; and that they would be inconsistent with the goal of the Comprehensive Plan to preserve, neighborhood character. Motion to deny carried on a vote of 6 -2. Section 2. FINDINGS 2.01 Approval is based.on the following findings: 1. The proposed Plat meets all required standards and ordinances for a subdivision. 2. The subdivision would meet the neighborhood medians for lot width and depth and area. CITY OF EDINA 4801 West 50th Street • Edina, Minnesota 55424 www.EdinalVlN.gov • 952- 927 -8861 • Fax 952 - 826 -0390 RESOLUTION NO. 2013-82 Page Two Section 3. APPROVAL NOW THEREFORE, it is hereby resolved by the City Council of the City of Edina, approves the Preliminary Plat for the proposed subdivision of 6609 Blackfoot Pass. Approval is, subject to the following Conditions: 1. The city must approve the final plat within one year of preliminary approval or receive a written application for a time extension or the preliminary approval will be void. ' . 2. Prior to issuance of a building permit, the following items must be submitted: a. If required, submit evidence of Nine Mile Watershed District approval. The City may require revisions to the preliminary plat to meet the district's requirements. b. A curb -cut permit must be obtained from the Edina Engineering department. c. Utility hook -ups . are subject to review of7the city engineer. d. Grading and drainage plans. specific to any proposed house would be reviewed at the time of building permit, and shall be'aubject to review and approval of the city engineer. Drainage-from any new home, garage or driveway would have to be directed to the street. e. The -applicant work With the city forester in regard to tree preservation and removal of Buckthorn. 3. Park dedication fee of $5,000 must be. paid prior to release of the final plat. 4. Drainage for construction of the new homes shall be directed away from adjacent property toward the street to greatest extent possible. Drainage plans for individual homes wouldi subject to review and approval of the city engineer at the time of building permit approval. 5. A 10 -foot conservation easement must be established along the lot lines to preserve the vegetation areas along the streets and along the north and south lot lines; and to assist with drainage and runoff from the site. Adopted this _ day of 12013. ATTEST: Debra A. Mangen, City Clerk James B. Hovland, Mayor RESOLUTION NO. 2013-82 Page Two STATE OF MINNESOTA ) COUNTY OF HENNEPIN )SS CITY OF EDINA 1 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 , 2013, and as recorded in the Minutes of said Regular Meeting. WITNESS my hand and seal of said City this day of , 2013. City Clerk opportunity for the property o to increase the squ ge of their home without that approval. Motion Commissioner Fischer move nce approval b on staff findings, subject to the staff conditions and noting wi the aid of a variance th 's no opportunity for the property owner to increase of their home. Commissioner seconded the motion. All voted aye; mot��rried. B. Preliminary Plat. Scott Busyn. 6609 Blackfoot Pass, Edina, MN Planner Presentation Planner Teague informed the Commission Great Neighborhood Homes Inc. on behalf of Douglas Johnson is proposing to subdivide the property at 6609 Blackfoot Pass into two lots. The existing home would be torn down, and two new homes built on the new lots. The new home on Lot 1 would be located generally where the existing home is located. The home on Lot 2, would be located toward the street in an area away from the adjacent home to the south, to avoid large Oak trees and some of the'steeper slopes on the site. To accommodate the request the following is required: 1. A subdivision; 2. Front yard setback variance from 100 feet to 45 feet for proposed Lot 2. Teague explained that both lots would gain access off Blackfoot Pass. Within this neighborhood, the median lot area is 27,131 square feet, median lot depth is 183 feet, and the median lot width is 146 feet. The new lots would meet the median width, depth, and lot size requirements. A new home could be built on Lot 2 without the need for a variance, however, in doing so some of the best trees on the site would be removed (large Oak trees); more slopes would be disturbed, and the home would be located much closer to the existing home at 6705 Cheyenne Trail. Planner Teague concluded that staff recommends that the City Council approve the proposed two lot subdivision of 6609 Blackfoot Pass with a Front Yard Setback variance for Lot 2 from 100 feet to 45 feet from Blackfoot Pass and Cheyenne Trail based on the following findings: 1. The proposed Plat meets all required standards and ordinances for a subdivision. Page 4 of 15 2. The subdivision would meet the neighborhood medians for lot width and depth and area. 3. The proposal meets the required standards for a variance, because: a. The practical difficult unique to the property is caused by the large mature Oak trees and slopes on the east half of Lot 2 where a code compliant building pad would be located. These are natural conditions, not caused by property owner. b. The requested variances are reasonable in the context of the immediate neighborhood. There are two homes with similar front yard setbacks at 6621 and 6624 Cheyenne Trail. C. There is 18 -20 feet of green space in the right -of -way of Cheyenne Trail, which would result in a 65 -foot setback from the edge of the paved roadway. d. The variance results in the saving of mature Oak trees, protection of slopes, and moves the home further away from the existing home at 6705 Cheyenne Trail. Approval is also subject to the following conditions: 1. The city must approve the final plat within one year of preliminary approval or receive a written application for a time extension or the preliminary approval will be void. 2. Prior to issuance of a building permit, the following items must be submitted: a. If required, submit evidence of Nine Mile Watershed District approval. The City may require revisions to the preliminary plat to meet the district's requirements. b. A curb -cut permit must be obtained from the Edina Engineering department. C. Utility hook -ups are subject to review of the city engineer. d. Grading and drainage plans specific to any proposed house would be reviewed at the time of building permit, and shall be subject to review and approval of the city engineer. Drainage from any new home, garage or driveway would have to be directed to the street. 3. Any new home on Lot 2 would be limited to a ridge line height of 35 feet. 4. A 10 -foot conservation easement must be established along the lot lines to preserve the vegetation areas along the streets and along the north and south lot lines. 5. A slope and tree conservation easement must be placed over the large Oak trees and slope areas to be preserved by moving the home toward the street. Page 5 of 15 Appearing for the Applicant Scott Busyn, Great Neighborhood Homes Discussion Chair Grabiel asked if the proposed subdivision conforms to the subdivision ordinance. Planner Teague responded in the affirmative. Commissioner Grabiel pointed out the slopes on the property and asked if City ordinance addresses slopes. Planner Teague responded City ordinance addresses slopes in excess of 18 %. Teague noted this site contains steep slopes; however, it meets the ordinance pertaining to slopes. Commissioner Fischer stated he was struck by the diagram indicating the 500 -foot neighborhood, adding in his opinion the "500 -foot neighborhood" appears to contain two completely different neighborhoods. Fischer stated he struggles with the difference between these two different neighborhoods adding to him this subdivision feels wrong. Applicant Presentation Scott Busyn addressed the Commission acknowledging that Indian Hills is a very unique neighborhood. Busyn added he believes what he-has presented -works best with the sloped topography of the lot. Busyn explained that he sent a letter to all the homeowners within the 500 -foot neighborhood informing them of the proposed subdivision and also held a neighborhood meeting at the site on August gth. Busyn said the neighborhood meeting was attended by a number of the adjacent neighbors. Busyn reported as a result of that meeting he is proposing a 10 -foot conservation easement to ensure that the wooded look of the property remains. Concluding, Busyn said he was open to questions or any ideas the Commission may have on this proposal. Discussion Commissioner Forrest asked Mr. Busyn howhe plans on implementing the conservation easement. Busyn responded he would work with :the City Forrester on identifying the trees that need to be saved within the 10 -foot conservation easement. Planner Teague added that the conservation easement could be handled similar to the easement that was placed on the Acres DuBois plat. If approved the easement would be recorded with the plat. Commissioner Forrest noted that this issue was previously tabled and.questioned the reason. Mr. Busyn responded that he tabled the subdivision to workout and add the conservation easement to the proposal. Page 6 of 15 Commissioner Platteter referred to the grove of oak trees on Lot 2 and asked if the conservation easement would be expanded to capture those oaks. Mr. Busyn responded that Planner Teague suggested that the conservation easement includes those trees; however, much depends on final house placement; with or without variance. Neighbors also indicated they would like to retain the stone retaining wall on the south end of Blackfoot Pass and Cheyenne Trail. Commissioner Scherer noted the Commission is in receipt of letters from neighbors opposing the project and asked Mr. Busyn if during the neighborhood meeting neighbors indicated which building pad location they preferred on Lot 2. Mr. Busyn responded that neighbors indicated they want the site to retain its forested look and maintain privacy. Busyn stated he is open to each option and would do whatever the Commission suggests with regard to Lot 2. A discussion ensued on the sites steep slopes, grading, retaining walls and drainage with Commissioners acknowledging this site is unique because of the slopes and the natural wooded nature of the area. Commissioners stressed if approved careful attention needs to be paid to drainage to ensure site disruption doesn't negatively impact the site or the surrounding neighbors. Chair Staunton opened the public hearing. Public Hearing The following residents addressed the Commission and spoke in opposition to the request by Great Neighborhood Homes to subdivide 6609 Blackfoot Pass into two (2) single dwelling unit lots. T. Dev, 6804 Cheyenne Trail, Edina, MN Charles and Liberta Ledder, 6709 Cheyenne Trail, Edina, MN Tim Keane, attorney representing residents of Indian Hills David Evinger, 4 Merilane, Edina, MN James Schwender, 6700 Cheyenne Trail, Edina, MN Pat Kreuziger, 6705 Cheyenne Trail, Edina, MN William Lund, 6308 Indian Hills Road, Edina, MN David Frauenshuh, 6401 Indian Hills Road, Edina, MN Mary Swenson, 6617 Cheyenne Trail, Edina, MN Page 7 of 15 Residents that testified expressed the following: • Residents indicated they purchased their homes in the Indian Hills neighborhood for the natural wooded nature of the area, its larger lots, winding roads and privacy. • Residents of the, area expressed the opinion that the. "500-foot neighborhood" established by ordinance captures two completely different neighborhoods; and does not adhere to the original Indian Hills plat. The smaller residential suburban lots (east of, the subject site) were included in the calculations skewing the outcome and negatively impacting the character of the area. • The Planning Commission has the discretion to deny the preliminary plat based on character. • The loss of existing vegetation and the disruption of the steep slopes would change the character of the lot and neighborhood even with the variance option on Lot 2. • Residents acknowledged the two building pad options for Lot 2; one conforming and one requiring a variance, reiterating disruption would occur regardless. • To provide new building pads there is the potential for construction of high retaining walls and also the potential for drainage problems as a result of building pad placement and grading of the site. • Vehicle and pedestrian safety is important pointing out the streets in the area are winding and the street also curves along the subject site. • Driveway placement is a concern; again because of the safety issue. Chair Staunton asked if anyone else would`like to speak to the issue; being none, Commissioner Potts moved to close the public hearing. Commissioner Platteter seconded the motion. All voted aye; motion to close the public hearing approved. Mr. Busyn addressed the Commission and explained in providing two building pad locations for Lot 2 they felt'it would make things better and create abetter plat. Busyn said their goal is to pull the building.pads away from the lot lines to ensure privacy and accommodate the proposed conservation strip. Continuing, Busyn reported that extensive soil testing was done to ensure that any redevelopment would:improve the site not negatively impact it. Concluding, Busyn stated all testing supported the position that the site can accommodate two building pads. Commissioner Scherer asked Planner Teague to clarify the action for this proposal Planner Teague responded the Commission can recommend denial or approval, adding if the Commission recommends approval they need to stipulate what option they want for Lot 2; variance or no variance. Commissioner Potts stated in his opinion due to multiple factors the subject site should remain one lot. Potts agreed with the.observation that the Indian Hills neighborhood is different from the neighborhood to its east. Potts noted to redevelop this site too much-disruption would occur. Vegetation would be loss and the site would require extensive grading and retaining Page 8 of 15 walls. Potts concluded as previously mentioned if approved the change to neighborhood character would be dramatic. Commissioner Grabiel pointed out the project as submitted meets subdivision ordinance requirements. Grabiel said he also understands the property owners desire to maximize the real estate value of his property. With respect to trees it is difficult because at this time the City of Edina doesn't have a tree ordinance. Continuing, Grabiel acknowledged that the character of the 500 -foot neighborhood is varied. Concluding, Grabiel said from the plans presented it appears Mr. Busyn attempted to mitigate the issues of drainage, tree loss etc. Grabiel said he also appreciates Mr. Busyn limiting building height to 35 -feet. Commissioner Scherer stated this is a tough issue for the Commission; however, she continues to have concerns about drainage, tree loss, driveway safety, etc. Scherer said taking all things into consideration that she cannot support the request as submitted. Commissioner Schroeder asked Planner Teague if the City defines neighborhood character. Planner Teague responded City ordinance doesn't define neighborhood character. Continuing, Schroeder said specific factors are unique to Indian Hills and if the Commission recommends approval of this request the essential character of Indian Hills would change. Commissioner Forrest acknowledged she has been going back and forth with this proposal. She stated she agrees the City doesn't define neighborhood character; however, would the "sense" of place be compromised if approved. Forrest added she agrees that Mr. Busyn has given a lot of thought to this project; adding she could support the proposal with specific conditions. Concluding, Forrest said to would like to see more creativity in building plans. Commissioner Fischer said when he views this project it appears to him that it's one lot for one structure. Fischer did acknowledge that neighborhood character can be changed one parcel at a time; however, the builder has an excellent reputation and he would hate to take a risk with another builder. Motion Commissioner Grabiel moved to recommend preliminary plat approval based on staff findings and subject to staff conditions. Motion failed for lack of second. Commissioner Schroeder moved to recommend denial of the preliminary plat based on the findings that if approved the subdivision would render the lot out of character with the neighborhood. Commissioner Scherer seconded the motion. Ayes; Scherer, Schroeder, Potts, Fischer, Platteter, Forrest. Nay, Grabiel, Staunton. Motion to deny carried 6 -2. Page 9 of 15 t�'gS�1l� H 0 PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT Originator Meeting Date Agenda #. Cary Teague September 11, 2013 VLB Director of Planning INFORMATION & BACKGROUND Project Description Great Neighborhood Homes Inc. on behalf of Douglas Johnson is proposing to subdivide the property at.6609 Blackfoot Pass into two lots. (See property location on pages Al A3.) The existing home would be torn down, and two new homes built on the new lots. (See applicant narrative and plans on pages A4— A16.) The new home on Lot 1 would be located generally where the existing home is located. -The- home -on Lot 2, would be located toward the street in an area away from the adjacent home to the south, to avoid large Oak trees and some of the steeper-.slopes on'the site. (See page A14.) To accommodate the request the following is required: 1. A subdivision; 2. Front yard setback variance from 100 feet to 45 feet for proposed Lot 2.: Both lots would gain.access off Blackfoot Pass. Within this neighborhood, the median lot area is 27,131 square feet, median lot depth is 183 feet; and the .median lot width is 146 feet.. (See attached median calculations on page A16.) The new lots would meet the median width, depth, and lot size requirements. A new home could be built on Lot 2 without the need for a variance, however, in doing so some of the best trees on the site would be removed. (large Oak trees); more slopes would be disturbed, and the home would be located much closer to the. existing home at 6705 Cheyenne Trail. (See page A.) Surrounding Land Uses The lots on all sides of the- subject properties are zoned and guided low- density residential: Existing Site Features The existing site contains a single - family home and attached garage. This lot is larger than most in the neighborhood, contains slopes with mature trees. (See pages A1, A2 and Al 1.) Planning Guide Plan designation: Zoning: Lot Dimensions Single- dwelling residential R -1, Single- dwelling district As demonstrated above, the proposed subdivision would meet all minimum lot size requirements. Grading /Drainage and Utilities Grading and drainage plans specific to any proposed house would be reviewed at the time of building permit. Drainage from any new home, garage or driveway would have to be directed to Blackfoot Pass and Cheyenne Trail. Sewer and water are available to the site. Specific hook -up locations would be reviewed at the time of a building permit for each lot. A Nine Mile Creek Watershed District permit would also be required. Primary Issue • Is the proposed Plat with a front Yard Setback Variance reasonable for this site? Yes. Staff believes that the proposed Plat with the front yard setback variance for Lot 2 is reasonable for the site for the following reasons: 1. Both of the proposed lots meet the City of Edina's minimum lot size requirements. (See above table.) K Area Lot Width Depth REQUIRED 27,131 s.f. 146 feet 183 feet Lot 1 46,473s.f. 153 feet 268 feet Lot 2 30,920 s.f. 150 feet 323 feet As demonstrated above, the proposed subdivision would meet all minimum lot size requirements. Grading /Drainage and Utilities Grading and drainage plans specific to any proposed house would be reviewed at the time of building permit. Drainage from any new home, garage or driveway would have to be directed to Blackfoot Pass and Cheyenne Trail. Sewer and water are available to the site. Specific hook -up locations would be reviewed at the time of a building permit for each lot. A Nine Mile Creek Watershed District permit would also be required. Primary Issue • Is the proposed Plat with a front Yard Setback Variance reasonable for this site? Yes. Staff believes that the proposed Plat with the front yard setback variance for Lot 2 is reasonable for the site for the following reasons: 1. Both of the proposed lots meet the City of Edina's minimum lot size requirements. (See above table.) K 2. Building pads have been located on the site to cause the least amount of impact on the sites mature trees and slopes. (See page A14.) 3. The proposed building pad for Lot 2 would be located further away from the existing home at 6705 Cheyenne Trail, than would a code compliant home. (See pages A14 —A15.) 4. The findings fora variance for the building pad for Lot 2 would be met. Per,atate_ law and the Zoning Ordinance, a variance should not be granted unless it is found that the enforcement of the ordinance would cause practical difficulties in _complying with the zoning ordinance and that the use is reasonable. As demonstrated below, staff believes the proposal meets the variance standards, when, applying the three conditions: a) Will the proposal relieve practical difficulties that prevent a reasonable use from complying with the ordinance requirements? Yes. Reasonable use does not mean that the applicant must show the land cannot be put to any reasonable use without the variance. Rather, the applicant must show that there are practical difficulties in complying with the code and that the proposed use is reasonable. "Practical difficulties" may include functional and aesthetic concerns. The practical difficulty is caused by the, existing high quality mature Oak trees and slopes located in the area where a code compliant building pad would be. (See pages A14 —A15.) In addition, if a home were constructed in the code compliant. building pad area, it would be located closer to the home at 6705 Cheyenne Trail. By moving the home on Lot 2 up closer to the street, it would not only preserve the mature Oaks and slopes, but also the vegetation that provides a natural screen between the two properties. (See page A14.) Staff would. recommend requiring a conservation easement over the slope and Oak trees that are to be preserved to permanently preserve those resources. D There are circumstances that are unique to the property, not common to every similarly zoned. property, and that are not self- created? The. circumstances of the mature trees, slopes and proximity of the adjacent home to the south are not created by the applicant and are generally unique in the R -1 District. 3 Additionally, there is an extra area of green space within the right -of- way of Cheyenne Trail. This area is between 18 -20 feet, which from the street would give the appearance of a greater front yard setback. A typical green space within the right -of -way is between 5 -8 feet. Therefore, the home would be set 65 feet back from the edge of the paved roadway. (See page A14.) c) Will the variance alter the essential character of the neighborhood? No. The proposed building location at 45 feet from Blackfoot Pass and Cheyenne Trail would not alter the character of the neighborhood. The home at 6621 Cheyenne Trail has a front yard setback of 42 feet and 6624 Cheyenne Trail has a front yard setback of 45 feet. (See page Ala and A2.) The applicant is also agreeable to not construct a home to maximize the height allowed by code. He would limit the total building height to 35 feet, when the code would allow a home to be 40 feet tall to the ridge line of the home. Staff Recommendation Recommend that the City Council approve the proposed two lot subdivision of 6609 Blackfoot Pass with a Front Yard Setback variance for Lot 2 from 100 feet to 45 feet from Blackfoot Pass and Cheyenne Trail. Approval is based on the following findings: The proposed Plat meets all required standards and ordinances for a subdivision. 2. The subdivision would meet the neighborhood medians for lot width and depth and area. 3. The proposal meets the required standards for a variance, because: a. The practical difficult unique to the property is caused by the large mature Oak trees and slopes on the east half of Lot 2 where a code compliant building pad would be located. These are natural conditions, not caused by property owner. b. The requested variances are reasonable in the context of the immediate neighborhood. There are two homes with similar front yard setbacks at 6621 and 6624 Cheyenne Trail. 4 C. There is 18 -20 feet of green space in the right -of -way of Cheyenne Trail, which would result in a 65 -foot setback from the edge of the paved roadway. d. The variance results in the saving of mature Oak trees, protection of slopes, and moves the home further away from the existing home at 6705 Cheyenne Trail. Approval is subject to the following conditions: The city must approve the final plat within one year of preliminary approval or receive a written application for a time extension or the preliminary approval will be void. 2. Prior to issuance of a building permit, the following items must be submitted: a. If required, submit evidence of Nine Mile Watershed District approval. The City may require revisions to the preliminary plat to meet the district's requirements. b. A curb -cut permit must be obtained from the Edina Engineering department. C. Utility hook -ups are subject to review of the city engineer. d. Grading and drainage plans specific to any proposed house would be reviewed at the time of building permit, and shall be subject to review and approval of the city engineer. Drainage from any new home, garage or driveway would have to be directed to the street. 3. Any new home on Lot 2 would be limited to a ridge line height of 35 feet. 4. A 10 -foot conservation easement must be established along the lot lines to preserve the vegetation areas along the streets and along the north and south lot lines. 5. A slope and tree conservation. easement must be placed over the large Oak trees and slope areas to be preserved by moving the home toward the street. Deadline for a City Decision: November 4, 2013 ` Interact Ve Maps :71 LA t ti� t 7 J. r Property Map \Y � f ' BALpER.L _. z ['j /i :�! , -- -ice, �•`r 1 1'I`� J� I. i } t (I Parcel 06- 116 -21 -42 -0010 ID: Parcel 6609 Blackfoot Pass Address: Edina, MN 55439 Property Residential Type: Horne- Homestead stead: Parcel 1.76 acres Area: 76,652 sq ft Sale Code: ill. ! Map Scale: V = 400 ft. N Print Date: 915/2013 -(k This map is a compilation of data from various sources and is furnished "AS IS" with no representation or warranty expressed or implied, including fitness of any particular purpose, merchantability, or the accuracy and completeness of the information shown. COPYRIGHT © HENNEPIN COUNTY 2013 zA T1ii,:.Green! Interact e 06- 116 -21 -42 -0010 ID: Property D L Johnson Etal Map�// Parcel 6609 Blackfoot Pass Map Edina, MN 55439 630E Residential 6600 650` Home- Homestead stead: 0502 1.76 acres Area: 76,652 sq ft 0404 C'400 6604 6613 6601 1 6612 6G1 C. C•60 0 _ _ C F, 2 1 I cc<< 6_.617 (i -,4C, 66•.05 6620 Glfnsr�FJ ifr; �r C401 6621 6624 6628 6632 6609 ! 4�. 6212 I / x620 6205 6204 @„ 6216 6200 24 OR 6705 6215 6209. C) i 020 5 - i 6201 C? (,700 74 i � i I 6704 I 6709 I 6703 6713 i Parcel 06- 116 -21 -42 -0010 ID: Owner D L Johnson Etal Narne: Parcel 6609 Blackfoot Pass Address: Edina, MN 55439 Property Residential Type: Home- Homestead stead: Parcel 1.76 acres Area: 76,652 sq ft �f -1 Map Scale: 1" = 200 ft. /N Print Date: 9/512013 This map is a compilation of data from various sources and is furnished "AS IS" with no representation or warranty expressed or implied, including fitness of any particular purpose, merchantability, or the accuracy and completeness of the informal on shown. COPYRIGHT @ HENNEPIN COUNTY 2013 .A, Tiliir'.. Green! Hennepin vS.y:. . jo s �.ttt .' -t�`f+�:. (' � t ' �l t _ ' a '' t,. �- .`,,,ate•►., ennepin %l i• '�� � *` • -�.�� ti .ice,._ � ' _.. •�.,y �� i,Yyf � 1 • j '� 1 y al 11'17 � - ,1 * �, . -4 `�'* - � . '!.' .1 f -Cry •. Pit" �.?r ^rte }�; 1 �R.;.A �� •�f 7 tx�} ��iti 9� b,�4�k• - t� S �,..��At3 .�. .; "%^ 'd rw• at. nr.qj t- •!�,�._... Apet if, eu1 14A ft AT IV t*-- From: Scott Busyn — Great Neighborhood Homes To: Corey Teague Community Development Director City of Edina Subject: Subdivision of 6609 Blackfoot Pass into Two Separate Lots Date: July l7, 2013, Revised September 3, 2013 Please find the attached Subdivision Application for 6609 Blackfoot Pass. Great Neighborhood Homes will be purchasing this property from Mr. Douglas L. Johnson contingent upon obtaining a successful subdivision from the City. It is our intention to subdivide the parcel into two separate lots, noted as Lot 1 and Lot 2 on the survey. Per the attached 500 foot area study, the subdivided lots will be above the mean lot size; width, and depth of the lots in the neighbothood. Upon obtaining approval, we will be building single family homes on each lot. The survey shows the potential building pads of each home. The proposed building pad for Lot 1 will be close to the location of the exiting home on the site. We are adjusting the building pad to have a better presence on the lot (entry facing Blackfoot Pass) and to allow for better main floor exposure to the back yard (the current home has the first floor elevation at 927.0 feet and a lower level entry at 918.9 feet). The front setback of the home on Lot 1 is being proposed no closer than 53.5 feet from Blackfoot Pass. This is the average setback of-the existing home at 6605 Blackfoot Pass and the proposed home on Lot 2 of 6609 Blackfoot pass. The first level floor height of the Lot 1 home will have a maximum elevation of 928. The proposed home will meet all other zoning requirements. The proposed building paA for the Lot 2 will have a proposed front yard setback no closer than 45' from Blackfoot Pass and no closer than 45' from Cheyenne Trail. This is in character with other front yard setbacks in the neighborhood, specifically the two other homes at the intersection ofBlackfootPass and Cheyenne Trail. 6621 Cheyenne Trail has a front yard setback of 42' and 6624 Cheyenne Trail has a front yard setback of 45'. Positioning the Lot 2 building pad in the proposed location will maximize the distance of the home from 6705 Cheyenne Trail, minimize the disruption of the >18% slope, and keep the new home away from the grove of oak trees in the rear of Lot 2. In addition, there Lfi an existing opening on the natural forest where we are locating the driveway entrance (see exhibit A). The proposed home on Lot 2 will have a maximum first floor height of 901. This will allow adequate drainage around the home. The new home will meet all zoning setbacks except for the front setback. We sent a letter out to all homeowners within 500' and held a neighbor meeting at the site on August 8h. The meeting was attended by the adjacent neighbors at 6605 Blackfoot Pass, 6601 Blackfoot Pass, 6621 Cheyenne Trail, and 6705 Cheyenne Trail. The feedback 0 from the meeting was that we do what we can to maintain the wooded look of the front and sides of the lot. There is also a stone retaining wall on the south end of the corner of Blackfoot Pass and Cheyenne Trail that the neighbors hoped we did not remove. Based on this feedback, we are proposing a 10' conservation easement to maintain the wooded look of the property from the street (see exhibit B and Q. This easement is shown on the survey and will cover the north and south lot lines, as well as the front portions of the lot as shown on the survey. The only exceptions to this easement will be the driveway entrances for Lots l and Lots 2. Please let me know if you have any questions about this application. I can be reached at 952 -807 -8765 or scoff r , rig eatneighborlioodhomes.coui. Thank you for reviewing this application. Afi _ f ' yv 6609 Blackfoot Pass Variance Application Great Neighborhood Homes We are proposing a variance for the front yard setback for the pr'o'posed home on Lot 2 of 6609 Blackfoot Pass. As lot 2 is a corner lot, city ordinance requires the home to meet the front setbacks of 6605 Blackfoot Pass (62.0 feet) and 6705 Cheyenne Trail (100.9 feet). We are proposing a front setback of 45 feet from Blackfoot Pass and 45 feet from Cheyenne Trail. The proposed variance will relieve practical difficulties in complying with the zoning ordinance for front setbacks on corner lots. Meeting the setback of the home at 6705 Cheyenne Trail (100.9 feet) would require the home to be built far back on the lot and into a steep slope (survey shows where position of home would be without a variance). Placing the home in this location would create the following practical difficulties: 1. The home would need to be built into a steep slope, requiring substantial retaining walls to access the rear yard. 2. The home would be built much closer to the neighbor at 6705 Cheyenne Trail. When I toured the site with here she much preferred the home be built further away. 3. Building the home here would be much more disruptive to the virgin forest and require the removal of many more mature oak trees than on the pad closer to the street. 4. The deeper location would require a much longer driveway, increasing the impervious surface on the site. S. The home would have to be built at a much higher elevation and appear much taller from the street. 6. The home would block the natural drainage flow of the slope on Lot 2. 7. The homeowner would have minimal backyard without building a tall retaining wall. The use of Lot 2 for building a home is a reasonable use of the property. The proposed variance will correct the following extraordinary circumstances applicable to this property but not applicable to other properties in the vicinity: 1. Most lots in Indian Hills are not corner lots and thus do not need to meet the zoning requirements of 6609 Blackfoot Pass. In addition, other existing corner lots in Indian Hills do not have adjacent homes built as far back from the street as seen at 6705 Cheyenne Trail (see 6617 Cheyenne Trail, 6621 Cheyenne Trail, 6821 Cheyenne Trail, 6601 Blackfoot Pass, 6600 Blackfoot Pass, 6401 Indian Hills Road), or were built without having to meet the setbacks of both adjacent homes (see 6820 Cheyenne Trail,). 2. Allow. for 45 foot front setbacks similar to adjacent properties at 6621 Cheyenne Trail (42 feet) and 6624 Cheyenne Trail (45 feet). k6 3. Allow for flat front and backyard area as is found on most homes in the area. The proposed variance will be in harmony and intent of the zoning ordinance as follows: 1. I believe the ordinance for corner lots was written to avoid homes being built that would break up the streetscape on more dense urban, gridded streets. 6609 Blackfoot Pass is a very wooded site and the proposed home will be built almost 100 feet from the next closest home. The existing woods and our proposed conservation easement will prevent the proposed home from breaking up the streetscape. 2. Our proposed conservation easement and positioning of the driveway entrance will maintain the same streetscape that exists today. There is a natural opening in the forest where we are positioning the driveway entrance. The proposed variance will not alter the essential character of the neighborhood as follows: 1. Our proposed conservation easements will maintain the wooded look of the property from the front streets as well as the adjacent neighbors. 2. As stated above, there are homes near the corner of Blackfoot Pass and Cheyenne Trail that have approximately 45' front setbacks. 3. Indian Hills is Edina's most eclectic neighborhood. There are no two lots that are alike as far as setbacks, position of the homes, etc. This variance is in character with the overall eclecticism of the neighborhood. The building pad at the 45 foot front setback is a much more optimal location for the home. In addition, l can limit the building height to 35' if we build on this more level location. A7 ,,,. . z I-- r-I / I -,,? /_ L- /� _I SITE ADDRESS: 6609 BULRFOOT PASS MINA MN 55139 PRELIMINARY PLAT FOR: 126 -13 REF: 31 -13 128/63 GREAT NEIGHBORHOOD HOMES I <g..d O Vmdaf. C°p.l Pda 1 e 1y6m.1 nr.l. 6�.e �• ) 6ry,bne 6.1.iv16 ,161 I _J P�W...6 4wh'n6 ,600aM1 f.P d rm Ora6m I __ ryDrr• v..we vnw I -� Irs .a s.1A.a 6N SA. YN s.O..i Rfr Fee Y... S.Na-4 I 1 . On.ay. Ow. Ymmr¢ rw�0 I II _ - ,i,D. ^I . / - 1 , e °o+m 6uDrr - s16, r mG E —1 - uinn 4 �ra 'IrQa•3 a �/Y 1 'T ,j / < A(( NOT TO SCALE oo4b ab 1 I vl�wLrv�1AP Ld c] Ld <[ F- Li ) . c3 V) <C 61 27 .49 PLAN PU7 P­- 1 -1 MWa I.-, X.— J NeN (d w 5. ) _ IniI I, 411-45-14 I l- --.d 1.1 a - Dg600 Sr w 471 A— (dsSR )_11618 I eeos elreaoar vAa . 6zv 4--- _r'9 / \\ \ 6036 QLt9NE TftAt _ IAD'3 'S✓ ���� ' rADPCWiY atS[WPnIXt �ta4�C �^„xdN�MLLS. \ i \\\iii\ \ 6FHJ1wv9r: TCH /.`^nl el Se. .f a.Ya.ne .I.em VNE IEa s.ve1. @. YoL rr r^/ E. +.nab \\ IOIF: 1M bmVCn d s. Wytl.f M•m an Imn. Pbn, rubs b/ NUe avniante.Nnea G ' ' 4YAtY .Or<A _ loimd bcala: Glrv�. 6iy xy ..a.wH.n l � r 1 Ar.b/ nM1)> Du, tv ��a•....�r a aep.M1 .a. p.pw.0 q \ Y sip � u m mE.1 I an . tm rhww I.w +�M �.... rmn. rn.e., U 1 • x ./ e, x f1.... 1.r wF`.:. r�tiy ° :v w�.a.1dq wa. (ra. u....0 W'.adm A 6rmn. RLs. {/N R"cG 1521(1 •�. �'drr. A.a�.O - 11ISU r a..i rwi•rr vm� _ Doestr M -DV -3011 Imt 6 w4ray :yY,.! � Ie4 1 . x ./ IN a IWU Po.Ged .1 1W..' mr . Gm. Va.'mn� .! fss Art.N. Ilm. �a Y.i1� 9 WN. •w�4�+9 A(( NOT TO SCALE oo4b ab 1 I vl�wLrv�1AP Ld c] Ld <[ F- Li ) . c3 V) <C Concrete Curb Timber Retaining Wall Keystone Retaining WaQ Proposed Retalning Wall Exlating Elevation iop of Wall Elevation Exlating Contour Proposed Contour Front Yard Setback Side Yard Setback Rear Yard Setback i Monument Found 1 /Y x 14' Plaatla Cap LS. 15230. 5 +[ y I F I � = 120 SF 7153 SF ON PASS IONS: 927.6 291 B.8 = 018.4 — 810.0 yQ / B / mnr ha p�M u 4 v � a,ar :r1.07 Acrw iS3.8 FL 41 or 0.71 Ac' < e 150.1 Ft HIIam !t . 4. Block 3. INDLAN HILLS. repin County, klinn —ta. lost Side of Cheymna Tr. Between 08. Elevation — 091,08, —J _ J —r —L — 2 1 L /'\ r L _ . V I VICINITY NOT TO S 1 .t� Ilm 22. 1s.E ram 1.07 153.6 r 0.71 150.1 c Y /all Clevalian ! I _ _ Cpnlour ra.�` f� II VICINITY NOT TO Sc ' Tt� , Clock 3, 1.11nn MU-S. eota. :dn CmrnP7, Lltnneta. \ jo pI Cheyenne Tr. IM.aen ` Invntlan — 89l.00, 'or w,y Emernanta \ ties shown ors from plan+ ecmpnnles ono arc \ —a should Le naGhad pa.n vo doR.q any excavation. f� II VICINITY NOT TO Sc ' Tt� alt Etevo;bn � I 5_lb�ic l� i SctGfl J� � I 11 I I — I 0 8 SF %a 4 1j Ct n 4 ! r` Na SB'E 1UT—: — FAS- �r r' r r �• y 11 a 1 1 fMl.�•_ , i _, a. y�� 41L 1 ` N HUS• oaota. \ \ Jenne lr. Oelr�ern 89 1. 08. \ t. \ \ wrn pb— ore 'a roGried vation. — L. I !1 T L_ V 1 v I — 1 Q � n .40 PUT 48 *45W MIL � I/ �4 i —r - - - -Al� .pa4 nsa / lollk y `A cC CJ L � tr u �IJ I F_ 1 I,a Ld a i GJ .J �I I °°o °c p vyO11 � AN �1V1 1 4 I I �[ ° � J II Tr i � F- I I f VICINITY MAP NOT 10 SCALE a :bock I rock Sock I1 nd r r l / r• r 61.11 O O/1ve1G p Is -j ; fvl6� ' I np a Y \ 9 . F 1 l _ _ ' r 1 L n -i _ \J 1 f,. 1 1 1 el `I J 1 --4S87'48r45 by ,247.7o pmt 246.9 MEAS. f" 17 — -- - _ ' - - - -- Interactive - -- - - - - - -- _ - - - ------ - — - - -- - -- - ... - - Property Maps / S \ 6705 Map T— 6308 6600 6605 - -" - _ -,_ 6201 o 6609 660, 6404 6312 6400 6604 24 6601 6.613 6704 6617 709 SdO- 6612 -. 6616 - 1 6600 06- 116 -21 -42 -0010 1 6621 A CG � S 6617 q � �A 1� D L Johnson Etal 66GS 5405, �q3 I f 6605 Name: �5 6620 GLEASON TER 6401 i 6521 Address: Edina, MN 55439 f�1� 6624 6628 6632 Property yr' a - �0, , 6609 6620 �� L, sources and is furnished "AS IS" with no 6212 i 6208 6204 '30 I oil 6216 6200 24 implied, including fitness of any particular 6624 S \ 6705 6215 6209 a' 6205 - 6700 ; - -" - _ -,_ 6201 o DO- 24 6704 709 SdO- -. 6708 6713 1 Parcel ID: 06- 116 -21 -42 -0010 LT a A CG � S Map Scale: 1" = 200 ft. N Print Date: 9/512013 A Owner D L Johnson Etal Name: Parcel 6609 Blackfoot Pass i Address: Edina, MN 55439 Property Residential Type: This map is a compilation of data from various sources and is furnished "AS IS" with no Home- Homestead representation or warranty expressed or stead: implied, including fitness of any particular purpose, merchantability, or the accuracy and completeness of the information shown. Parcel 1.76 acres Area: 76,652 sq ft COPYRIGHT © HENNEPIN COUNTY 2013 A 'D fink Greeri! Z�t-- PROPERTY AREA, LOT DEPTH, LOT WIDTH & MEDIAN VALUE EXHIBIT FOR POSSIBLE LOT SPILT OF 6609 BLACKFOOT PASS, LOT 4, BLOCK 3, INDIAN HILLS 6609 BLACKFOOT PASS SEAL September 26, 2013 I SEP26 2013 To The Edina City Council: My Name is Douglas L. Johnson. My wife Peggy and I have owned the property at 6609 Blackfoot Pass since 1967. We were particularly attracted to it because we bath spent a good portion of our youth in forested environments, I in northern Minnesota and she in the heart of the Ozarks. I am extremely hard of hearing to the point of being functionally deaf. I will not have understood anything that has been said here tonight either by the public or the.council. I know this because I attended the Planning Commission hearing on this topic in this very room. I could.understand.nothing that was said, even though I'was provided with some hearing devices. However, my son accompanied me and gave me his understanding of some things that were said. I would like to address two disturbing accusations, which were probably repeated here tonight: 1. I am environmentally insensitive. 2. I am sacrificing the environment to greed. Some trees were removed by the previous owner of the property in anticipation of construction but none were removed by me. Elms and oaks have succumbed to disease. They,have been promptly removed and properly disposed of.at considerable expense. A number of elms have been treated for elm disease at considerable expense, but even so, two of those died and had to be removed. In 1993, I planted 24 walnut seedlings. Some of these directly replaced removed trees. Nine of these have survived as well as a green ash planted some time later. Squirrels have planted several more volunteer walnuts over the years. But today there are no.squirrels.. I visited the house on Saturday,.September 21 to continue removing household items and. found the parking pad .littered with whole green walnuts. I was astounded. The squirrels do not let this happen. The walnuts are long removed before,they drop. There is.also always a red squirrel that takes. over the tree next to. the parking pad. He was not there. The scene was unchanged again the next day. This has happened only once before, about 8 - 10 years ago.. At.that time I found two dying squirrels•by the driveway. Disease maybe? Then a couple of days later I found :a dead.hawk while mowing the lawn. Then it dawned on me,. the - squirrels were poisoned and the hawk had eaten one or more of them. Hawks do not catch live,. healthy squirrels. So today some neighbor is again poisoning the squirrels, If that neighbor is here tonight impugning -my environmental conscience I would quote Mr. Shakespeare when he wrote "me thinks he doth.protest too loud ". I retired from 3M in 1987 with a fixed pension of $36,000 plus Social Security. That is now about $52,000 a year total, but the purchasing power of the dollar is about half of what it was 26 years ago. Starting in 1990 I noticed some changes in my wife's health. She became sensitive to moderate heat, became unsteady on her feet, experience forgetfulness and other things: In 1995 after several doctors and numerous tests she was diagnosed with primary progressive MS. This is he less common type. It gradually gets worse and never remits. She preceded to develop muscle spasms, seizures, balance problems, both urinary and fecal incontinence and worst of all a near total loss of memory. I finally had to hire daytime in -home nursing help to bathe and tend to her. Finally in late June 2004, the nurse said she thought Peggy was having trouble breathing. Her nursing supervisor said we should get her to the emergency room. She had a pulmonary embolism, blood clots in the lungs. They also discovered that she had had a silent heart attack. Her heart was impaired. By then she couldn't walk, couldn't even crawl. I had to admit her to the Edina Care Center. Peggy spent eight years and eight months at the Edina Care Center. I visited her twice a day seven days a week for all that time. I have not been out of the Twin Cities for 15 years. She died February 28, 2013. The nursing home had cost $600,000 during that time. Add to that at least one hospital stay every year, medical bills, drug bills, physical therapy bills, almost 3 years of in -home nursing and it comes to at least $700,000 over 23 years. That shot a huge hole in my life savings. I am now 84 years old, 85 yet this year. I did all the car, house and yard care work myself except the last year or two when neighbor Kathryn Dusenbury.'s son, graciously cleared snow and mowed the grass. My children and grandchildren helped too. I may well be faced with nursing home expenses myself before long. So it came-time finally to sell the property and recover as much income producing cash as I could. The realtor suggested that it would bring some $200,000 more if sub - divided. I thought long and hard about that but decided that the builder, Mr. Busyn was and ecofriendly person and that the sub - division as proposed especially with the varience would eliminate few trees. The Edina Planning Dept report agrees with that. The variance would eliminate few trees. The trees to be removed are elms, which will die sooner or later and cottonwoods which I had considered taking out almost every spring when they make a great mess for 4 - 6 weeks. Others in the neighborhood have done the same. One neighbor even took down a 150 year old oak tree because it was shading her garden. I removed two tree sized limbs from a 3 foot in diameter oak because they were shading a neighbors grass. She has no trees. I do not know if non - technical factors are a- consideration in these matters. If items such as public sensibilities, neighborhood character and environment are to be considered then human welfare is certainly equally as important. I am trying to salvage a few years of decent rest and retirement after 70 years of being in the harness of responsibility. I would not call that greed or insensitivity. I think of myself as a survivor. I leave it up to the council to decide. Thank you, Douglas L. Johns n Mayor Jim Hovland and Members of the City Council From Pat Kreuziger, 6705 Cheyenne Trail Re: Proposed Subdivision of 6609 Blackfoot Pass Date: September 25, 2013 As one whose property abuts this Blackfoot Pass property on the south, I have many concerns and unanswered questions. Four of us neighbors met with Scott Busyn on August 8`h at his invitation. The copy of his proposed plat to the City of Edina stated his proposed lot sizes as Lot 1 at 1.32 acres and Lot 2 at .46 acre. He promptly informed us that his surveyor makes a lot of mistakes and those numbers were wrong. They instead should have been 1.07 and .71 respectively. I do not know where those property lines would be and it makes very nervous to have someone building next to me who makes these kinds of mistakes. I totally agree with the members of the Planning Commission who feel that the 500 foot radius rule isn't fair or correct when you mix neighborhoods that are vastly different. Safety is an issue on Blackfoot Pass. I have an accident report from 2009 when a car coming southwest on the Pass hit the mailbox at 6700 Cheyenne Trail and a tree on my front lawn across the street. The car was impacted to the point that it could not be driven. It was fortunate that it did not hit a child or other pedestrian. If two driveways are put at 6609 and close to the intersection of Cheyenne Trail it will make an already blind intersection even more dangerous. If this sub - division were to be granted the character of the neighborhood would DRASTICALLY change. 1. Trees that are decades old would be removed. 2. Drainage and water issues would be a significant problem. 3. Noise would become an issue with two homes on the lot, more people, more hard surfaces and fewer trees as a sound buffer. 4. 16 foot retaining walls made from interlocking prefabricated blocks are certainly not characteristic of our beautiful neighborhood. I could go on and on, but I know you are receiving many letters so I will let others expound on the character. It greatly concerns me that if a sub - division were granted in Indian Hills it would destroy our historic and unique neighborhood forever. In my opinion, it would be extremely short- sighted to think that a decision to grant sub - division stands alone rather than setting a PRECEDENT. It is my hope that you elected members of the City Council will give this whole matter your deepest concern and act as the Planning Commission did in rejecting this subdivision. My sincere thanks go to all of you on the Council and I deeply appreciate those of you who took time to come to view the properties in person. Most respectfully, Pat Kreuziger Jackie Hoogenakker From: Sent: To: Subject: Dear Ms Hoogenakker dusen001 @umn.edu Wednesday, September 25, 2013 11:52 AM Jackie Hoogenakker proposed subdivision of 6609 Blackfoot Pass I received notice of the upcoming City Council meeting to discuss the proposed subdivision of 6609 Blackfoot Pass in Edina. I own and reside.in the adjacent property to the. north at 6605 Blackfoot Pass and feel there are several compelling reasons to deny the request. The purpose of this letter is to express my concerns,and opposition to the subdivision. The topography of the lot at 6609 Blackfoot Pass is very steep. The current house sits atop the only logic_ al location for a home, with the rest of the terrain at a very steep incline. The proposed second home would not only require a series of tall retaining walls to hold back the hill, but would sacrifice a beautiful stand of mature oak trees. Moreover, the new homesite is proposed to be located extremely close to the home on Cheyenne Trail, leaving only about 30 feet between the homes. The homeowner on Cheyenne Trail already suffers from drainage issues whenever there is a heavy rain. The addition of a home closer to her house will only exacerbate those issues. I was. at the city planning meeting and the builders only plan to address this concern was to contour the area so as to "push" the rain water towards Blackfoot Pass. As we do not have sidewalks and sewer drains, I worry that this plan is very short sighted. Retaining ponds seem to me to be a better idea. Although the subdivision would result in 2 sizeable lots (1 acre and 0.7 acres respectively), the other homes on Blackfoot Pass are larger and average 0.93 acres (1.02, 2.11 and 0.68 acres). I am aware that city ordinance suggests allowing a minimum lot size of the average for homes in a 500 foot radius of the proposed subdivision. In this situation the 500 foot radius ends up including lots in newer, non - contiguous neighborhoods.Those homes were not part of the original Indian Hills and have a separate identity . If the purpose of this ordinance is to preserve the integrity of neighborhoods, it doesn't make sense to me.to use those lots outside of our neighborhood to calculate the:minimum lot size. In summary, I strongly oppose the subdivision of the lot at 6609 Blackfoot Pass. I plan to attend the upcoming City Council meeting. Thank you for you consideration: Kathryn E Dusenbery.MD - Levitt Chair in Radiation Oncology Head and Associate Professor University of MN Minneapolis, MN 55455 academic office 612 - 626 -6146 clinic 612 - 273 - 6700 pager. 612- 899 -7199 1 Deb Mangen From: Tara Dev <taradev @gmail.com> Sent: Tuesday, September 24, 2013 4:01 PM To: Edina Mail;jonibennettl2 @comcast.net; Mary Brindle (Comcast);joshsprague @edinarealty.com; swensonannl @gmail.com; Cary Teague; Kris Aaker Subject. INDIAN HILLS NEIGHBORHOOD SUBDMSION 6609 Blackfoot Pass, Edina, MN 55439 Dear Mr. Mayor and council members & Mr. Teague I am writing to support the OPPOSITION of the proposed subdivision of 6609 Blackfoot Pass, Indian Hills, EDINA. I had the opportunity to voice my views at the city planning meeting but wanted to reiterate my position once again. I currently reside at 6804 Cheyenne Trail, just down the road from the proposed subdivision but more importantly, right next door to Mr. Scott Busyn (builder of Great Neighborhood homes) most recent project in our neighborhood at 6808 Cheyenne Trail (entrance on Cheyenne Circle). When Mr. Busen approached me to support the variance he requested for the home belonging to Mr Joel Anderson at 6808, We did so in good faith. This lot had been vacant for many years (almost since we purchased our house 7 years ago). It was a beautiful wooded lot and we welcomed a new home fitting of the lot. Though Mr. Busyn has in fact built a lovely home but one that I strongly feel is becoming a trademark of certain builders in Edina, to fill up as much of the lot as possible and build as close to the property line as possible as well. In doing so destroy the innate beauty of Edina's old established neighborhoods, which can only grow with time. We live in an older part of the city with beautiful trees that grace our neighborhoods, winding roadways, privacy and in fact created by previous builders who respected the neighborhood. Homes are staggered next to each other, some higher, some lower, some forward and some setback. In the preceding year since the house has been completed, we have been greatly disappointed for several reasons which I will list below: During construction part of our fence was removed that surrounded our pool. In the Spring, when we had to replace the fence at our own expense and we had the pins identified on our property. We realized that in fact the owner had no right removing our existing fence and the the builder had failed to identity the pins for the owners and us the neighbors, thus creating undue tension between us. In the process of contruction, many old trees were taken down and our lot (as are several of the prime lots in Indian hills) has lost all of it's privacy and beauty between the homes. It's not that the lot that Mr. Busen chose to build on was not big enough, in fact he has built a large home with much yard in front but has sandwiched the house in the back next to ours. We now have direct views to not one but two homes (Cheyenne Circle) as well - into driveways and homes. The loss of aged trees cannot be replaced and though we have now fenced and replanted at our own expense and a heavy expense I might add as well as having to raise up our property due to the large dip between our two properties that would cause a huge run off during the rains and snow melt. It is deeply saddeing to see Mr. Busyn attempt to ravage another piece of land. We have lived in 3 different part of Edina. Each neighborhood has it's own unique character and I see this as a larger problem that does not only affect our neighborhood but many of those in the city. Edina, is a wonderful city, which provides many diverse housing opportunities, for those wishing to buy homes. Edina is known for its old established neighborhoods that have stood the test of time. How terrible is it destroy the beauty as well as created hazards by proposing huge retaining walls on a virtually unbuildable got. Blind corner drives which ice over and are sure to cause pause to school buses, young drivers, and children walking around that corner. I would ask you to truly consider preserving a beautiful plot and give weight to those to are opposed to this subdivision. It is also perhaps time to revisit some of the building codes that do NOT in fact seem to be protecting our neighborhoods. Sincerely Tara Dev Tara email: taradevAmmail.com cell: 612.227.7711 2 Cary Teague From: Tara Dev <taradev @gmail.com> Sent: Tuesday, September 24, 2013 4:01 PM To: Edina Mail; jonibennettl2 @comcast.net; Mary Brindle (Comcast); joshsprague @edinarealty.com; swensonannl @gmail.com; Cary Teague; Kris Aaker Subject: INDIAN HILLS NEIGHBORHOOD SUBDMSION 6609 Blackfoot Pass, Edina, MN 55439 Dear Mr. Mayor and council members & Mr. Teague I am writing to support the OPPOSITION of the proposed subdivision of 6609 Blackfoot Pass, Indian Hills, EDINA. I had the opportunity to voice my views at the city planning meeting but wanted to reiterate my position once again. I currently reside at 6804 Cheyenne Trail, just down the road from the proposed subdivision but more importantly, right next door to Mr. Scott Busyn (builder of Great Neighborhood homes) most recent project in our neighborhood at 6808 Cheyenne Trail (entrance on Cheyenne Circle). When Mr. Busen approached me to support the variance he requested for the home belonging to Mr Joel Anderson at 6808, We did so in good faith. This lot had been vacant for many years (almost since we purchased our house 7 years ago). It was a beautiful wooded lot and we welcomed a new home fitting of the lot. Though Mr. Busyn has in fact built a lovely home but one that I strongly feel is becoming a trademark of certain builders in Edina, to fill up as much of the lot as possible and build as close to the property line as possible as well. In doing so destroy the innate beauty of Edina's old established neighborhoods, which can only grow with time. We live in an older part of the city with beautiful trees that grace our neighborhoods, winding roadways, privacy and in fact created by previous builders who respected the neighborhood. Homes are staggered next to each other, some higher, some lower, some forward and some setback. In the preceding year since the house has been completed, we have been greatly disappointed for several reasons which I will list below: During construction part of our fence was removed that surrounded our pool. In the Spring, when we had to replace the fence at our own expense and we had the pins identified on our property. We realized that in fact the owner had no right removing our existing fence and the the builder had failed to identity the pins for the owners and us the neighbors, thus creating undue tension between us. In the process of contruction, many old trees were taken down and our lot (as are several of the prime lots in Indian hills) has lost all of it's privacy and beauty between the homes. It's not that the lot that Mr. 8usen chose to build on was not big enough, in fact he has built a large home with much yard in front but has sandwiched the house in the back next to ours. We now have direct views to not one but two homes (Cheyenne Circle) as well - into driveways and homes. The loss of aged trees cannot be replaced and though we have now fenced and replanted at our. own expense and a heavy expense I might add as well as having to raise up our property due to the large dip between our two properties that would cause a huge run off during the rains and snow melt. It is deeply saddeing to see Mr. Busyn attempt to ravage another piece of land. We have lived in 3 different part of Edina. Each neighborhood has. it's own unique character and I see this as a larger problem that does not only affect our neighborhood but'.many,of those in the city. Edina, is a wonderful city, which provides many_.diverse,housing opportunities, for those wishing to buy homes. Edina is known for its old established neighborhoods that have stood the test of time.'l How terrible is it to destroy the beauty as well as created hazards by proposing huge retaining walls on a virtually unbuildable lot. Blind - corner drives which ice over and are sure to cause pause to school buses, young drivers, and, children walking around that corner. I would ask you to truly consider preserving.abeautiful plot and give weight to those to are opposed to this subdivision. It is also perhaps time to revisit some;of the building codes that do NOT in fact seem to be protecting our neighborhoods. Sincerely .Tara Dev Tara email:. taradev(ftmail.com cell: 612.227.7711 z TO: Planning Commission Members and City Council Members FROM: Bert and Charles Ledder, 6709 Cheyenne Trail, Edina, MN 55439 Date: September 6, 2013 RE: Proposed Subdivision and Variance of 6609 Blackfoot Pass We are writing in opposition to the proposed subdivision and set back variance of the property at 6609 Blackfoot Pass. Our primary objection is to the variance requested to alter the front setback to 45 feet from the street. The adjacent property to the south 6705 Cheyenne Tail has a setback of 100.9 feet, moving the proposed building site 55.9 feet closer to the street, and the adjacent property to the north 6605 Blackfoot Pass has a setback of 62 feet, moving the building 17 feet closer to the street. Great Neighborhood Homes' use of setback averages of homes on the island block on the opposite side of the street is not relevant to the sight lines of the street. As this is a corner lot, specific codes apply, and should not be dismissed simply because these are wooded lots. A building of this size, this close to the street will have an obvious impact as well as safety concerns for traffic on this blind corner. The placement of a building on the proposed sites also will displace and greatly alter water drainage onto the lot to the south, 6705 Cheyenne Trail. The terminal moraine terrain of these lots together creates a bowl, with water pooling from the drainage off the hills surrounding the properties into the proposed building site. This was very obvious during heavy rains in the past month as well as the storm of July 23, 1987 when water flooded and pooled in this area. This drainage issue does not comply with Section 1. Subsection 850.07. Subd. 7 of the Edina City Zoning Ordinances. The developer's numbers do not reflect the accurate square footage of the properties located on the non - meandering body of water known as Indianhead Lake. The square footage as stated by the developer does not include the fully taxable land /water area. If the water receded homeowners on that land could use this part of their property for their desired usage. Obviously, no one will build a home in the middle of the lake to diminish their site. This is also true for properties located at 6709 Cheyenne Trail and 6713 Cheyenne Trail. These lots, while they appear smaller in square footage, have back yards that abut the St. Alban's Church property which requires by Code a 3 acre lot size. Thus, their properties appear larger in keeping with the large lot appearance of the neighborhood. There is no hardship that requires building on this site. 'It is not a homeowner requesting a variance to expand their home or to use it in a different fashion. This is an unbuildable section of a property that is being purchased by a developer for the purpose of building a speculation home. If the subdivision and variance request is allowed, the developer moves on, leaving the residents of the neighborhood with a permanent undesirable change. Indian Hills is a neighborhood of large wooded lots that will have constant pressure for subdivision. Each subdivision diminishes the character of the neighborhood, shrinks the average lot size, and makes it easier for the next to pass. Now is the time to halt that process and leave the beauty of the neighborhood intact for its residents. Subdivision of this lot would change the character of the Indian Hills neighborhood forever. IX Jackie Hoogenakker From: Susan Brunn <sbrunn @me.com> Sent: Sunday, September 08, 2013 8:38 PM To: Jackie Hoogenakker Subject: Proposed Subdivision of 6609 Blackfoot Pass Dear Planning Commission Members: I am writing to you regarding the proposed subdivision of the lot located at 6609 Blackfoot Pass. As a 20 year resident of the Indian Hills neighborhood, and specifically, of a property at 6601 Blackfoot Pass, I am against this subdivision for the following reasons: 1. I believe that it sets a dangerous precedent regarding the "downsizing" of the beautiful, large lots in Indian Hills. One of the things that drew me to the neighborhood was the beautiful, generous, wooded lots in the area. To begin chopping these up into smaller lots would change the character of this well established and sought after neighborhood. 2. Large properties in Edina are becoming rare. When the news is constantly full of complaints from neighbors regarding large houses being built on small lots throughout. Edina, it seems that this large lot would be appealing to a potential homeowner or developer as it is. There are fewer large lots available, and yet the, demand for large houses continues. It seems that it would behoove the City of Edina to maintain these large parcels as they are. 3. Great Neighborhood Homes, the pending buyer of the property, recently completed another home in my neighborhood, on Cheyenne Trail. The new house that they built completely dwarfs the surrounding homes, in spite of the seemingly generous lot size. I am extremely concerned that the two houses that are being proposed will not be in proportion to the new lot sizes, and will stick out like sore thumbs, instead of blending in and looking like part of an established neighborhood. I plan on attending the City Council meeting this Wednesday, September 11th, to voice my concerns. Thank you for your consideration. Sincerely, Susan Harker Brunn 6601 Blackfoot Pass Edina MN 55439 Jackie Hoogenakker From: Kris Aaker Sent: Monday, September 09, 2013 8:16 AM To: Jackie Hoogenakker; Cary Teague Subject: FW: Subdivision of lot 6609 Blackfoot Pass Kris Aaker, Assistant City Planner f`jai ': `' ?`j 952-826-04611 Fax 952 - 826 -0389 t KAaker(cDEdinaMN.gov I www.EdinaMN.gov /Planning -'` ...For Living, Learning, Raising Families 6z Doing Business From: dmswan2124 @aol.com [mailto:dmswan2124C)aol.coml Sent: Friday, September 06, 2013 5:12 PM To: dmswan21240aol.com Subject: Subdivision of lot 6609 Blackfoot Pass My husband Dean and I live at 6617 Cheyenne Trail, two houses away from the proposed subdivision. We are totally and firmly against this subdivision for the following reasons. 1. We bought our home in 1984 after looking for the home that captured our heart and fit the pocketbook. We lived in Burnsville for 22 years and this was to be our last move. 2. We bought, not so much for the house, but for the fabulous, wooded, natural landscaping in the neighborhood. We are tree huggers and totally for a green environment and this was it. Could not believe how lucky we were. 3. Over the years houses have been torn down and rebuilt, but for the most part the new people have respected our natural, green lots. 4. To start a precedent of dividing the original plotted lots, will be the beginning of changing this neighborhood with the essence of woods, large lots, many old oak trees in to a neighborhood that resembles many others in Edina. Right now, we have a distinct look that may forever be gone. 5. We look at the beautiful lot at 6609 Blackfoot Pass and love the beautiful irreplaceable trees. If this lot is allowed to be divided, we will be looking at green fertilized grass, sprinkling systems running down the street, landscape boulders and perhaps some "new ", perfect trees. Here are some photos I took while on a walk through the neighborhood to show how some lots are being destroyed y This is what we Love ❑ 4 N.+ We cry when we see all the trees cut down - on Indian Hills Rd It..» „.. Years ago, this was a tree filled lot Please, don't start a precedent by dividing the lots in Indian Hills. Thank you for taking the time to hear our input, Mary and Dean Swanson z Jackie Hoogenakker From: Kris Aaker Sent: Monday, September 09, 2013 8:16 AM To: Jackie Hoogenakker Subject: FW: proposed subdivision of 6609 Blackfoot Pass s` ;r Kris Aaker, Assistant City Planner i 952 - 826 -0461 I Fax 952-826-0389 KAakerAEdinaMN.gov l www.EdinaMN.gov/Planninq ...For Living, Learning, Raising Families & Doing Business From: Lynn Laaksonen fmailto :goldielaxacomcast.net] Sent: Friday, September 06, 2013 11:12 PM To: Kris Aaker Subject: FW: proposed subdivision of 6609 Blackfoot Pass From: Lynn Laaksonen [mailto:goldielax(&comcast.net] Sent: Thursday, September 05, 2013 5:59 PM To: 'cteague @EdinaMN.gov' Subject: proposed subdivision of 6609 Blackfoot Pass This letter is to state our opposition to the subdivision of 6609 Blackfoot Pass. We have been residents of Indian hills for over 36 years and we strongly oppose this subdivision. Indian Hills has always been the part of Edina where you could have a big lot — or 2 big lots — with a wild area surrounding your home and see the deer, fox, coyotes, raccoons and wild turkeys. You can picture what it was like before the highways and the shopping areas and you can enjoy the quiet. You can have a big house or a very big house and no one complains that you're too big because the lots are big enough to still give you privacy. We don't want to be the Country Club area . We don't want to be a "renamed neighborhood" of Indian Hills. This proposed subdivision is in the heart of the original Indian Hills and all of the homes that were added to the new neighborhood are adding data and averages that are making it look like we all have smaller lots with homes close to the street . Several homeowners in the heart of Indian Hills actually have 2 lots so they have a bigger footprint. Over 30 years ago there was a proposed subdivision at 6520 Indian Hills Road. The threat was that if the lot wasn't subdivided, a HUGE house would be built. Well, the subdivision was strongly opposed in the neighborhood and it did NOT go through. A HUGE house was built — it has since been torn down and an even bigger house was built and no one complained because the lot was big enough to support it. We don't want 6609 Blackfoot Pass subdivided. The proposed lots are out of scale and will not provide the 30' conservation easement. This will NOT be good for Indian Hills. This will NOT be good for Edina. You have the chance to avoid the problems that we are seeing in Country Club — don't bring them to Indian Hills. Kay and Lynn Laaksonen 6404 Indian Hills Road Jackie Hoogenakker 'rom: Kris Aaker Sent: Monday, September 09, 2013 8:16 AM To: Cary Teague; Jackie Hoogenakker Subject: FW: Indian Hills Subdivision Kris Aaker, Assistant City Planner 952-826-04611 Fax 952 - 826 -0389 KAaker @EdinaMN.gov I www.EdinaMN.gov /Planning ...For Living, Learning, Raising Families & Doing Business - - - -- Original Message - - - -- From: kelly a jungels [mailto:Kiungels @comcast.netl Sent: Sunday, September 08, 2013 12:41 PM To: Kris Aaker Subject: Indian Hills Subdivision Kris, I live at 6400 Indian Hills Road and I do not support the subdivision. I feel that to subdivide the lot is not in the best interest of the neighborhood. It may be a large lot but if the builder used the average means of lots that are actual lots in INDIAN HILLS and not lots in Gleason Court, the lot may not seem that large. To allow for a house to be built 45 ft from the street in Indian Hills changes the "feel" of the neighborhood. I have lived in Morningside and Country Club neighborhoods. Each neighborhood has its own " #eel" please uphold Indian Hills "feel." We moved from Drexel Ave to Indian Hills because of the neighborhood. Please consider what subdividing the lot means to our neighborhood. Thank you KellyJungels 1 Jackie Hoogenakker From: Kris Aaker Sent: Monday, September 09, 2013 8:17 AM To: Cary Teague; Jackie Hoogenakker Subject: FW: Proposed Subdivision of 6609 Blackfoot Pass Kris Aaker, Assistant City Planner t�I iffl�0.`. ?;`i 952 - 826 -0461 1 Fax 952 - 826 -0389 waakerCa)EdinaMN.gov 1 wvuw.EdinaMN.aov /Planning ...For Living, Learning, Raising Families 6t Doing usiness g From: Susan Brunn [mailto:sbrunnOme.coml Sent: Sunday, September 08, 2013 8:35 PM To: Kris Aaker Subject: Proposed Subdivision of 6609 Blackfoot Pass Dear Kris Aaker: I am writing to you regarding the proposed subdivision of the lot located at 6609 Blackfoot Pass.' As a 20 year resident of the Indian Hills neighborhood, and specifically, of a property at 6601 Blackfoot Pass, I am against this subdivision for the following reasons: 1. I believe that it sets a dangerous precedent regarding the "downsizing" of the beautiful, large lots in Indian Hills. One of the things that drew me to the neighborhood was the beautiful, generous, wooded lots in the area. To begin chopping these up into smaller lots would change the character of this well established and sought after neighborhood. 2. Large properties in Edina are becoming rare. When the news is constantly full of complaints from neighbors regarding large houses being built on small lots throughout Edina, it seems that this large lot would be appealing to a potential homeowner or developer as it is. There are fewer large lots available, and yet the demand for large houses continues. It seems that it would behoove the City of Edina to maintain these large parcels as they are. 3. Great Neighborhood Homes, the pending buyer of the property, recently completed another home in my neighborhood, on Cheyenne Trail. The new house that they built completely, dwarfs the surrounding homes, in spite of the seemingly generous lot size. I am extremely concerned that the two houses that are being proposed will not be in proportion to the new lot. sizes, and will stick out like sore thumbs, instead of blending in and looking like part of an established neighborhood. I plan on attending the City Council meeting this Wednesday, September 11 th, to voice my concerns. Thank you for your consideration. Sincerely, Susan Harker Brunn 6601 Blackfoot Pass Edina MN 55439 2 Jackie Hooqenakker From: kelly a jungels <kjungels @comcast.net> Sent: Tuesday, September 10, 2013 7:22 PM To: Jackie Hoogenakker Subject: Indian hIlls subdivision I just wanted to let it be know that 1 do not support the subdividing of the 6609 Blackfoot Pass lot. I live at 6400 Indian Hills rd. I have lived in a few different neighborhoods in Edina. I started in Morningside neighborhood, had 2 homes in the Country Cneighborhoodlub neighborhood and now live in Indian Hills. I like it here. I moved out of Country Club neighborhood because I wanted more space, privacy and a different feel. Each neighborhood has its own feel. Subdividing 6900 lot will change the feel of our neighborhood. I know the lot itself is big but it is not being divided equally and one of the lots will have the home 45 Ft from the street. That is not in line with the Indian Hills neighborhood. Drive through our neighborhood and you will understand what I mean. Please Please consider the neighborhood and not just the builder. Thank you Kelly Jungels Cary Teague From: Lynn Laaksonen <goldielax @comcast.net> Sent: Thursday, September 05, 2013 5:59 PM To: Cary Teague Subject: proposed subdivision of 6609 Blackfoot Pass This letter is to state our opposition to the subdivision of 6609 Blackfoot Pass. We have been residents of Indian hills for over 36 years and we strongly oppose this subdivision. Indian Hills has always been the part of Edina where you could have a big lot — or 2 big lots -:with a wild area surrounding your home and see the deer, fox, coyotes, raccoons and wild turkeys. You can picture what it was like before the highways and the shopping areas and you can enjoy the quiet. You can have a big house or .a very big house and no one!complains.that you're too big because the lots are big enough to still give you privacy.' We don't want to be the Country, Club area. We don't want to be a "renamed neighborhood". of Indian Hills. This proposed subdivision is in the heart of the original Indian Hills and all of tiie homes that were added to the new neighborhood are adding data and averages that are making it look like we all have smaller lots with homes close to the street . Several homeowners in the heart of Indian Hills actually have 2 lots so they have a bigger footprint. Over 30 yearsago there was a:proposed subdivision at 6520 Indian Hills Road. The threat was that if the lot wasn't subdivided, a HUGE house would be built. Well, the subdivision was strongly opposed in the neighborhood and it did NOT go through. A HUGE house was built— it has since been torn down and an even bigger house was built and no one complained because the lot. was big enough to support it. We don't want 6609 Blackfoot Pass subdivided. The proposed lots are out of scale and will not provide the 30' conservation easement. This will NOT be good for Indian Hills. This will NOT be good for Edina. You have the chance to avoid the problems that we are seeing in Country Club — don't bring them to Indian Hills. Kay and Lynn Laaksonen 6404 Indian Hills Road Cary Teague From: Lynn Laaksonen <goldielax @comcast.net> Sent: Tuesday, September 24, 2013 5:05 PM To: Edina Mail; jonibennettl2 @comcast.net; Mary Brindle (Comcast); joshsprague @edinarealty.com; swensonannl @gmail.com; Cary Teague Subject: oppose subdivision of 6609 Blackfoot Pass As 36 year residents of 6404 Indian Hills Road my husband and I oppose the subdivision of 6609 Blackfoot Pass We moved from Minneapolis to give our children the opportunity to grow up in an area of trees and hills, large.yards, and a feeling of being in the country while keeping us near our jobs and the advantages of city life. We found that opportunity in Indian Hills. We have neighbors but there are enough trees and wild area between the houses that we can't see the houses behind us or on either side. Our sons could have a fort in the woods and not leave our yard. We have a swimming pool and most of our neighbors don't even know that it's there. Our yard is frequented by deer (including a 10 point buck), turkeys (up to 23 atone time), birds, ducks, coyotes , fox and even 2 opossum. Our yard was established in 1952/1953 so the white oak, red oak, maple, white pine and other evergreens are large, mature trees that we have an arborist monitor and prune on a yearly basis. We do this to maintain both the value of our property and the value of our property to the neighborhood. Indian Hills is distinct in that we do have large lots. Some of the neighbors have purchased an adjoining lot to make their property even bigger. We have traditionally opposed subdivision to keep builders from starting the trend of smaller homes or large homes on smaller lots. We see the problems that are causing so much stress in Country Club and we don't want Indian Hills to have to deal with all of those issues. Our neighborhood is made up of large wooded lots with a generous wild area on both sides and to the back of the lot. We don't have homes directly on the street and we don't have fences or retaining walls merely to separate the lots. As those of us who live on a hill know, drainage issues and erosion are very real concerns. The property at 6609 Blackfoot Pass is a very steep hill with one house proposed at the top of the hill and one house at the bottom of the hill. The lower property appears to be in the drainage area of the upper property. Any fill on the lower property will have a major impact on the existing trees and the ultimate result is the removal of the trees. We also know that changing the elevation of one piece of property always affects the adjoining property and streets. The adjoining properties include those on both Blackfoot Pass and Cheyenne Trail. The impact to the neighborhood regarding the drainage and erosion is well past the property lines of 6609 Blackfoot Pass. Once you start changing the character of Indian Hills by sticking houses in wherever a builder wants to put one, you can never undo it or stop it from happening again. Once you set the precedence, you will have changed over 60 years of the lifestyle of Indian Hills. This is our neighborhood. Please do not let a builder come in and change the character and lifestyle of our neighborhood. Kay and Lynn Laaksonen 6404 Indian Hills Road MALKERSON GUNN MARTIN 1900 U.S_ BANK PLAZA SOUTH TOWER 220 SOUTH SIXTH STREET MINNEAPOLIS, MINNESOTA 55402 TELEPHONE 612-344 =1 1 1 1 FACSIMILE 612 -344,- 1 4 1 4 TIMOTHY J. KEANE 612- 455 -6633 DIRECT T1M.KEANECQ MGMLLP.COM September 25, 2013 Mayor James Hovland and Members of the City Council City of Edina 4801 W. 50' St. Edina, MN 55424 Re: 6609 Blackfoot Pass - Applications for Subdivision and Variance Our File No. 2763.001 Dear Mayor Hovland and Members of the City Council: This letter is offered on behalf of our client, several property owners who are longtime residents of the Indian Hills Neighborhood. The purpose of this letter is to note the objections to the applications of Great American Homes, Inc. to the proposed subdivision of the property at 6609 Blackfoot Pass (the "Subject Property ") into two lots ( "the Project "). The Project presents issues of interpretation of the subdivision, and variance regulations, as well as the Comprehensive Plan. The reason the Subject Property is the largest lot in Indian Hills is because much. of the parcel is not buildable without drastic alteration of the unique topography. What is a neighborhood? Indian Hills was developed .as. a master planned. community over 50 years ago and built out over the next decade. Indian Hills is a remarkable neighborhood noted for its meandering streets; thickly wooded, steep, and rolling .topography; significant stands of deciduous and hardwood forestation; and large estate ,lots supporting home sites respectful of the natural environment. The Indian Hills Neighborhood is one that has evolved as a close -knit community with a sense of neighborhood and community pride. In many ways, Indian Hills represents much of the heritage of the strengths. of Edina reflected in the Community Profile in the Edina Comprehensive Plan. Blackfoot Pass and Cheyenne Trail form a sub- neighborhood of approximately 15 lots within Indian Hills that is characterized by steep slopes and heavily wooded lots. Mayor James Hovland and Members of the City Council City of Edina September 24, 2013 Page No. 2 For purposes of the Subdivision Regulations, the Edina City Code defines "a neighborhood" at Section 810.02: Neighborhood. All lots in the Single Dwelling Unit District as established by Section 850 of this Code which are wholly or partially within 500 feet of the perimeter of the proposed plat or subdivision, except: A. Lots used for publicly owned parks, playgrounds, athletic facilities and golf courses; B. Lots used for conditional uses as established by Section 85.0 of this Code; or C. Lots separated' from the proposed plat or subdivision by the right of way of either T.H. 100 or T.H, 62., If the neighborhood includes only a part of a lot, then the whole of that lot shall be included in the neighborhood. As to streets on the perimeter of the proposed 'plat or subdivision, the 500 feet shall be measured from the common line of the street and the proposed plat or subdivision. Edina Code of Ordinances, Section 810.02. This definition of "neighborhood" in the Code of Ordinances provides for an indiscriminate geometric 'radius of 500 feet that does not take into account actual neighborhood. boundaries or characteristics. For purposes of the Project applications, the 500 foot perimeter from the :Subject Property extends east toward Gleason Road into two cul -de -sac neighborhoods that share little in common with the Indian Hills Neighborhood and nothing in common with the identity : of the Indian Hills Neighborhood. The lots on Gleason Terrace.and St. Alban's Circle, while contiguous to the Indian Hills Neighborhood, are generally less than 50% of the lot area of the lots in Indian Hills. The Gleason Terrace and St. Alban's Circle subdivisions were developed more than a decade after Indian Hills and are not subject to the master planned community characteristics or restrictions that control the Indian Hills Neighborhood. The Project proposed by the Developer would not be possible for consideration, as a subdivision if the Subject Property was not in close proximity to the smaller lots in the Gleason Terrace and St. Alban's Circle subdivisions. {160119.DOC- 9/25/20131 Mayor James Hovland and Members of the City Council City of Edina September 24, 2013 Page No. 3 Moreover, if approved, the bar for the next lot division in this neighborhood would be lowered two notches. The logical extension of each lot division lowers the average for the next. The City of Edina 2008 Comprehensive Plan (the "Comp Plan") provides for an extensive discussion and examination of the importance of neighborhood . types throughout the City. Indian Hills Neighborhood is described as follows: Post -War Garden Revival is a term used to describe one specific district: The Indian Hills Neighborhood and vicinity north of the Braemer Park Golf Course in the City's hilly southwest quadrant. This area is similar to the earlier Interlachen area in that streets wind around the steep contours, lots are large and a high proportion of trees have been retained. [Emphasis added]. The Comp Plan provides at Section 4.4 of the Goals and Policies section that sets forth the following land use goal: Protect and preserve the essential character of existing residential neighborhoods. Comp Plan, p. 4 -21. Applicant Cannot Satisfy Subdivision Findings. The subdivision of lots is governed by the requirements set forth in Chapter 810 of the Edina Code of Ordinances. The criteria to be considered by the Council in determining whether to approve or disapprove a subdivision are set forth at Section 810.11. Set forth below is a discussion of the criteria applicable to the Project proposed on the Subject Property as follows: A. The impact of the proposed plat or subdivision, and proposed development, on the character and symmetry of the neighborhood as evidenced and indicated by, but not limited to, the following matters: 1. The suitability of the size and shape of the lots in the proposed plat or subdivision relative to the size and shape of lots in the neighborhood; and 2. The compatibility of the size, shape, location and arrangement of the lots in the proposed plat or subdivision with the proposed density and intended use of the site and the density and use of lots in the neighborhood. 1 160119.DOC- 9/25/2013} Mayor James Hovland and Members of the City Council City of Edina September 24, 2013 Page No. 4 Response: The Project requires mass grading of steep slopes, construction of retaining walls and significant tree removal that is not compatible with existing neighborhood. Indian Hills as originally developed was designed to minimize grading and preserve significant vegetation. The heavily wooded home sites built into the natural topographic contours reflect the distinct character of Indian Hills. B. The impact of the proposed plat or subdivision, and proposed development, on the environment, including but not limited to, topography, steep slopes, vegetation, naturally occurring lakes, ponds and streams, susceptibility of the site to flooding and water storage needs on and from the site. Response: See response to A. above. The topography of the Indian Hills neighborhood was shaped at the retreat of the last period of glaciation as a terminal moraine. The subdivision requires mass grading of steep slopes shaped by these glacial deposits and the loss of mature vegetation. C. The consistency of the proposed plat or subdivision, and proposed development, and compliance by the proposed plat or subdivision, and the proposed development, with the policies, objectives, and goals of the Comprehensive Plan. Response: The subdivision is inconsistent with the Edina Comprehensive Plan which provides Goal 4.4 to "protect and preserve the essential character of the existing neighborhood." This finding reflects the heart of the concerns of the Indian Hills residents. Specifically, the subdivision not only requires shoe - horning two lots in where one existed for over 50 years, but the mass grading and tree removal necessary to create a second buildable lot will permanently alter the character neighborhood. D. Whether the physical characteristics of the property, including, without limitation, topography, . vegetation, susceptibility to erosion or siltation, susceptibility to flooding, use as a natural recovery and ponding area for storm water, and potential disturbance of slopes with a grade of 18 percent or more, are such that the property is not suitable for the type of development or use proposed. { 160119.DOC- 9/25/20131 Mayor James Hovland and Members of the City Council City of Edina September 24, 2013 Page No. 5 Response: Most of the Subject Property is defined by heavily wooded hillsides. The soils are glacial till of a high- gravel content. The subdivision would require substantial vegetation removal and grading of highly- erodible soils. The natural features of the Subject Property are not suitable for development. E. Whether development within the proposed plat or subdivision will cause the disturbance of more than 25 percent of the total area in such plat or subdivision containing slopes exceeding 18 percent. Response: The subdivision will require substantial grading, removal of mature oaks, and disturbance of steep slopes. F. Whether the proposed plat or subdivision, or the improvements proposed to be placed thereon are likely to cause substantial environmental damage. Response: As discussed. above, the subdivision cannot be developed without.the potential for substantial environmental damage, including: the removal of mature trees, erosion due to exposure of highly- erodible soils and added threat of stormwater damage to adjacent properties. Applicant Cannot Satisfy Variance Findings: The standards and findings required for granting a variance are set forth in the zoning ordinance and are set- forth:. below: Finding a): Will the proposal relieve practical difficulties that prevent a reasonable use from complying with the ordinance requirements? Response: No. Reasonable use in this context means that the land cannot be put to ,any reasonable use without the variance. The Subject Property is currently put to the reasonable use of a .lot for a single family home. The practical difficulties in complying with the code are self- imposed and created by the applicant who is attempting to develop steep hills and slopes. Finding b): There are circumstances that are unique to the property, not common to every similarly zoned property, and that are not self= created? ( 160119.DOC- 9/252013) Mayor James Hovland and Members of the City Council City of Edina September 24, 2013 Page No. 6 proximity of the adjacent home to the south are entirely created by the applicant and are not unique to the neighborhood. Findin c : Will the variance alter the essential character of the neighborhood? Response: Yes. The proposed building location is a 55% setback reduction and would alter the essential character of the neighborhood. The development of the Subject Property as proposed will result in the removal of significant mature vegetation and mass grading requiring retaining walls up to 12 feet in height. These alterations are not in keeping with the essential character of the neighborhood. Conclusion. The Subject Property was platted as the largest lot within Indian Hills because of the development limitations imposed by the extraordinary topography and exquisite mature vegetation. The developer cannot demonstrate findings for approval of the subdivision or variance applications. As such, the residents of the Indian Hills neighborhood respectfully request denial of the subdivision and variance applications for the Project. Respectfully submitted, MALKERSON GUNN MARTIN LLP Timothy J. Keane TJK/ban cc: Dr. Charles and Bert Ledder (160119,DOC- 9/25/2013) Deb Mangen From: Lynn Laaksonen <goldielax @comcast.net> Sent: Tuesday, September 24, 2013 5:05 PM o: Edina Mail; jonibennettl2 @comcast.net; Mary Brindle (Comcast); joshsprague @edinarealty.com; swensonannl @gmail.com; Cary Teague Subject: oppose subdivision of 6609 Blackfoot Pass As 36 year residents of 6404 Indian Hills Road my husband and I oppose the subdivision of 6609 Blackfoot Pass. We moved from Minneapolis to give our children the opportunity to grow up in an area of trees and hills, large yards, and a feeling of being in the country while keeping us near our jobs and the advantages. of city life. We found that opportunity in Indian Hills. We have neighbors but there are enough trees and wild area between the houses that we.can't see the houses behind us or on either side. Our sons could have a fort in the woods and not leave our yard. We have a .swimming pool and most of our neighbors don't even know that it's there. Our yard is frequented by deer (including a 10 point buck), turkeys (up to 23 at one time), birds, ducks, coyotes , fox and even 2 opossum. Our yard was established in 1952/1953 so the white oak, red oak, maple, white pine and other evergreens are large, ,mature trees that we have an arborist monitor and prune on a yearly basis. We do this to maintain both the value of our property and the value of our property to the neighborhood. Indian Hills is distinct in that we do have large lots. Some of the neighbors have purchased an adjoining lot to make their property even bigger. We have traditionally opposed subdivision to keep builders from starting the trend of smaller homes or large homes on smaller lots. We see the problems that are causing so much stress in Country Club and we don't want Indian Hills to have to deal with all of those issues. Our neighborhood is made up of large wooded lots with a generous wild area on both sides and to the back of the lot. We don't have homes directly on the street and we don't have fences or retaining walls merely to separate the lots. As those of us who live on a hill.know, drainage issues and erosion are very real concerns. The property at 6609 Blackfoot Pass is a very steep hill with one house proposed at the top of the hill and one house at the bottom of the trill. The lower property appears to be in the drainage area of.the upper property. _ Any fill on the lower property will have a najor impact on the existing trees and the ultimate result is the removal of the trees. We also know that changing the elevation of one piece of property always affects the adjoining property and streets. The adjoining properties include those on both Blackfoot Pass and Cheyenne Trail. The impact to the neighborhood regarding the drainage and erosion is well past the property lines of 6609 Blackfoot Pass. Once you start changing the character of Indian Hills by sticking houses in wherever, a builder wants to put one, you can never undo it or stop it from happening again. Once you set the precedence, you.will have changed over 60 years of the lifestyle of Indian Hills. This is our neighborhood. Please do not let a builder come,in and change the character and lifestyle of our neighborhood. Kay and Lynn Laaksonen 6404 Indian Hills Road i Deb Mangen From: james schwender <jdschwender @yahoo.com> Sent Tuesday, September 24, 2013 6:49 PM To: Edina Mail; jonibennettl2 @comcast.net; Mary Brindle (Comcast); joshsprague @edinarealty.com; swensonannl @gmail.com Dear City Council Members: I live on 6700 Cheyenne Trail directly in front to the sub - division in question. I strongly disagree that the builder is making his best effort to leave the property 'in order' with the surrounding neighborhood. If he were there would be no subdivision and a new single family home would be built on the existing property. Many lots in this community, including mine, are of similar size. I think this subdivision effort would have lasting consequences in this part of Edina to set precedence. In addition, there are many mature trees that will need to be sacrificed for his personal gain. I share all the concerns of my current neighbors in regard to the "real" flood problems that currently occur after heavy rains and the traffic problems. The intersection between Cheyenne trail and Blackfoot pass is already dangerous and by adding two driveways on the existing property will only make this intersection even more dangerous and unsafe for the many children in the area. Please consider doing everything in your elected power to help our community and not a specific individual Thank you for your time James Schwender Deb Mangen From: Susan Brunn <sbrunn @me.com> ant: Tuesday, September 24, 2013 8:28 PM Edina Mail Subject Opposition to the Subdivision of 6609 Blackfoot Pass Dear Mayor Hovland: I am writing in opposition to the proposed subdivision of the property at 6609 Blackfoot Pass. As a 20 year resident of the property at 6601 Blackfoot Pass, I urge the Edina City Council to deny the proposed subdivision in order to maintain the character and integrity of the Indian Hills neighborhood, which is known for its large and spacious lots. The property in question is a challenging lot at best, and is particularly ill- suited for subdivision. My.neighbors and I have a long list of concerns, including such long term questions as water run -off and drainage, what would happen to the many mature trees on the lot, proximity to the adjacent lot /neighbor, and issues regarding how average lot sizes are calculated in our neighborhood. In my opinion, it does not serve the city of Edina, nor its comprehensive development plan, to begin to chisel away at the few neighborhoods left where relatively large lots are the norm. When so many of the other neighborhoods in Edina are complaining of too -large houses being built on too -small lots, it seems a shame to eliminate these large and very desirable lots from the Edina real estate landscape. I urge you to vote agains this proposed subdivision. Thank you very much for your consideration. .,incerely, Susan Harker Brunn 6601 Blackfoot Pass Edina MN 55439 Deb Mangen From: deanandmary@aol.com Sent Tuesday, September 24, 2013 10:32 PM To: Edina Mail Subject Subdivision of 6609 Blackfoot Pass Dean and Mary Swanson 6617 Cheyenne Trail We have lived in our home since 1984. It was the character and charm of the Indian Hills neighborhood that made our jaws drop when we first saw it. There is not a neighborhood like it in all of Edina. Huge, beautiful trees, wild areas of untouched land: Half of our lot is native land, untouched except for the removal of buckthorn. Our first concern is changing the character of our neighborhood. Following the 500 ft mean will eventually make all the perimeter lots fold in, huge trees removed, and over the years it will look like every other neighborhood, manicured lawns, boulders, etc. Second,' we cannot imagine how the proposed subdividing of 6609 Blackfoot Pass can have proper drainage so as to not affect the neighboring properties and the street. The existing trees and wild growth absorb so much water. When it rains, the water does collect on the street now. Proper drainage of this lot has to be a huge engineering challenge that one engineer in our, neighborhood thinks impossible. We will all be crying when all the savanaugh oak trees are cut down, over a hundred years. old. It appears to the engineer in the neighborhood that 90% of the trees will have to be removed to accommodate all the retaining walls and steep slopes. Dean counted 57 trees on this lot and the builder has not. said what will be removed. This lot is STEEP. The two proposed driveways are on a. blind corner that looks unsafe to us. We beg you not to put us at the forefront of.this slippery slope of subdivision that will most certainly be regretted at some future date. Respectfully, Dean and Mary Swanson Deb Mangen From: Jennifer Rowland <jenniferrowland @comcast.net> ant: Wednesday, September 25, 2013 9:14 AM Jackie Hoogenakker Cc: Edina Mail; Mary Brindle (Comcast); joshsprague @edinarealty.com; swensonannl @grnail.com Subject: Re: Proposed Blackfoot Pass Lot Subdivision >To the Edina Planning Commision and City Council Members, > > I am writing on behalf of my husband David Rowland and myself to address a.proposed subdivision of a recently purchased lot on Blackfoot Pass in the Indian hills neighborhood in which we reside. We have lived in two homes in Edina for most of the past 21 years and we have enjoyed both homes for their unique qualities. Our first home was at 5003 Arden Avenue. in the-Brucewood neighborhood of Edina. We enjoyed the many amenities of living in close proximity to 50th & France and Arden Park as our children grew up. Our second home in Edina is located at 6605 Dakota Trail. This property includes a second parcel, 6601 Dakota Trail which the previous owners had purchased and combined to create an even larger property in the beautiful Indian Hills neighborhood. We chose this home after learning more about the west side of Edina and came to appreciate the larger lots, beautiful trees and more country-like feel. Although we moved out of the east side of Edina, we had come to learn that the features of the Indian Hills neighborhood met our needs an desires for our current phase of life. > The neighborhood diversity in Edina makes it a stronger community. The distinct characteristics of each neighborhood allows Edina to meet the needs of a variety of people with a variety of needs and desires. The proposed subdivision is inconsistent with the unique characteristics provided in the Indian Hills neighborhood. It would be a mistake to allow `pis sort of transformation to occur, and it would weaken an important strength of the city of Edina. > Thank you for the consideration of our perspective in this matter. > David and Jennifer Rowland > 6605 & 6601 Dakota Trail > Edina, Mn 55439 > 1 Deb Mangen From: Bert Ledder <Isledder @aol.com> Sent Wednesday, September 25, 2013 10:29 AM To: Edina Mail; jonibennettl2 @comcast.net; Mary Brindle (Comcast);joshsprague @edinarealty.com; swensonannl @gmail.com; Cary Teague Subject: Letter for the City Council for October 1st Council Meeting from Pat Kreuziger Attachments: Pat Kreuziger's Letter.docx Please include this in the October 1, 2013 City Council Meeting Packet. Sincerely, Pat Kreuziger 6709 Cheyenne Trail Edina, MN 55439 Mayor Jim Hovland and Members of the City Council From Pat Kreuziger, 6705 Cheyenne Trail Re: Proposed Subdivision of 6609 Blackfoot Pass Date: September 25, 2013 As one whose property abuts this Blackfoot Pass property on the south, I have many concerns and unanswered questions. Four of us neighbors met with Scott Busyn on August 8th at his invitation. The copy of his proposed plat to the City of Edina stated his proposed lot sizes as Lot 1 at 1.32 acres and Lot 2 at .46 acre. He promptly informed us that his surveyor makes a lot of mistakes and those numbers were wrong. They instead should have been 1.07 and .71 respectively. I do not know where those property lines would be and it makes very nervous to have someone building next to me who makes these kinds of mistakes. I totally agree with the members of the Planning Commission who feel that the 500 foot radius rule isn't fair or correct when you mix neighborhoods that are vastly different. Safe is an issue on Blackfoot Pass. I have an accident report from 2009 when a car coming southwest on the Pass hit the mailbox at 6700 Cheyenne Trail and a tree on my front lawn across the street. The car was impacted to the point that it could not be driven. It was fortunate that it did not hit a child or other pedestrian. If two driveways are put at 6609 and close to the intersection of Cheyenne Trail it will make an already blind intersection even more dangerous. If this sub - division were to be granted the character of the neighborhood would DRASTICALLY change. 1. Trees that are decades old would be removed. 2. Drainage and water issues would be a significant problem. . 3. Noise would become an issue with two homes on the lot, more people, more hard surfaces and fewer trees as a sound buffer. 4. 16 foot retaining walls made from interlocking prefabricated blocks are certainly not characteristic of our beautiful neighborhood. I. could go on and on, but I know you are receiving many letters so I will let others expound on the character. It greatly concerns me that if a sub - division were granted in Indian Hills it would destroy our historic and unique neighborhood forever. In my opinion, it would be extremely short - sighted to think that a decision to grant sub - division stands alone rather than setting a PRECEDENT. It is my hope that you elected members of the City Council will give this whole matter your deepest concern and act as the Planning: Commission did in rejecting this subdivision. My sincere thanks go to all of you.on the Council and I deeply appreciate those of you who took time to come to view the properties in person. Deb Mangen From: glmarsha1107 @comcast.net Sent: Wednesday, September 25, 2013 11:47 AM To: Edina Mail ;joshsprague @edinarealty.com; swensonannl @gmail.com; Mary Brindle (Comcast);jonibennettl2 @comcast.net Subject Blackfoot Pass Proposed Sub - division Dear Council Members, What a disappointment to find out that the neighborhood in which I grew up is being considered for sub - division! You are faced with a significant choice that will have monumental effects on the future of Indian Hills, the surrounding neighborhoods, and the city of Edina. I ask that you please vote against the proposed sub - division on Blackfoot Pass. Thank you! Laurie Marshall EHS `84 graduate Deb Mangen From: Bert Ledder <Isledder @aol.com> �int: Wednesday, September 25, 2013 11:53 AM Edina Mail;jonibennettl2 @comcast.net; Mary Brindle ( Comcast );joshsprague @edinarealty.com; swensonannl @gmail.com Subject: Letter for Council October 1, 2013 Meeting Packet Attachments: September 25.docx Please send this letter to the City Council and include it in with there Council Packet for the Proposed Subdivision of 6609 Blackfoot Pass. Thank you. Bert Ledder 6709 Cheyenne Trail Edina, MN 55439 September 25, 2013 Dr. Charles & Bert Ledder 6709 Cheyenne Trail Edina, MN 55439 Honorable Mayor Hovland and Edina City Council The City of Edina 4801 W. 50`h Street Edina, MN 55424 Dear Mayor Hovland and Council Members: We are writing you to again express our disapproval of the proposed subdivision of 6609 Blackfoot Pass. We believe the Edina City Planning commission had it correct when they voted to not let this property be subdivided and their remarks indicate why. Indian Hills is a unique area in Edina with its own very distinct characteristics. The hills area terminal moraine from the Glacier Era and are small stones and sand deposited at the end of the glacier. In living with this land for over 27 years, we know that if disturbed this land washes and becomes a serious and dangerous issue. We experienced this personally in the July 23, 1987 flood when the hill behind us collapsed and the sand, stones and trees washed into the back of our home. We do not have a home behind us, rather we have the parking lot of St. Alban's Church about 100 feet behind our home with a substantial drain at the north end of their property. The much larger pine trees did not fall into our home but were affected. Since then, we have terraced the back yard with the back yard with retaining walls of wooded beams to keep in character with the neighborhood. This has helped but we still have waterfalls in the spring from melting snow off of the parking lot. The Church property committees as well as we have worked hard to preserve the natural wooded land as any disturbance in it would cause significant harm to our property. This is just a sample of what could potentially happen to a home on the proposed subdivided lot. This "new" lot would not have a 100 foot wooded area for water to soak into. A 16 foot retaining wall of prefabricated interlocking stones does not suit the character of the neighborhood nor would it hold to eliminate the run off from the land 20 feet above. It is important that you be aware of what can, does and will happen to this property if subdivided. There are significant water and drainage issues that cannot be over looked. We appreciate your time with this matter and for all that you do for the City. Sincerely, Dr. Charles T. Ledder and Bert Ledder Deb Manqen From: dusen001 @umn.edu int: Wednesday, September 25, 2013 11:58 AM Edina Mail; jonibennettl2 @comcast.net; joshsprague @edinarealty.com; swensonannl @gmail.com; Mary Brindle subject: proposed subdivision of 6605 Blackfoot Pass Dear Mayor and City Council Members I received notice of the upcoming City Council meeting to discuss the proposed subdivision of 6609 Blackfoot Pass in Edina. I own and reside in the adjacent property to the north at 6605 Blackfoot Pass and feel there are several compelling reasons to deny the request. The purpose of this letter is to express my concerns and opposition to the subdivision. The topography of the lot at 6609 Blackfoot Pass is very steep. The current house sits atop the only logical location for a home, with the rest of the terrain at a very steep incline. The proposed second home would not only require a series of tall retaining walls to hold back the hill, but would sacrifice a beautiful stand of mature oak trees. Moreover, the new homesite is, proposed to be located extremely close to the home on Cheyenne Trail, leaving only about 30 feet between the homes. The homeowner on Cheyenne Trail already suffers from drainage issues whenever there is a heavy rain. The addition of a home closer to her house will only exacerbate those issues. I was at the city planning meeting and the builders only plan to address this concern was to contour the area so as to "push" the rain water towards Blackfoot Pass. As we do not have sidewalks and sewer drains, I worry that this plan is very short ighted: etaining ponds seem to me to be a better idea. Although the subdivision would - result in 2 sizeable lots (1 acre and 0.7 acres respectively), the other homes on Blackfoot Pass are larger and average 0.93 acres (1.02,.2.11 and 0.68 acres). I am aware that city ordinance suggests allowing a minimum lot size of the average for homes in a 500 foot radius of the proposed subdivision. In this situation the 500 foot radius ends up including lots in. newer, non - contiguous neighborhoods._ Those homes were not part of the original Indian Hills and have a separate identity. If the purpose of this ordinance is to preserve the integrity of neighborhoods, it doesn't make sense to me to use those lots outside of our neighborhood to calculate.the minimum lot size. In summary, I strongly oppose the subdivision of the lot at 6609 Blackfoot Pass. l plan to attend the. upcoming City Council meeting. Thank you for you consideration. Kathryn E Dusenbery MD Levitt Chair in Radiation Oncology Head and Associate Professor University of MN Minneapolis, MN 55455 . academic office 6.1.2- 626 -6146 clinic 612- 273 -6700 pager 612- 899 -7199 1 September 26, 2013 Honorable Mayor and City Council members Please find attached a Petition circulated just 3 nights supporting our stance on the Opposition of the Proposed Subdivision of 6609 Blackfoot Pass. We have had only one person who refused to sign this petition, the owner of 6808 Cheyenne Trail, the home built by the same Developer who is requesting subdivision. ALL other neighbors in the 500 foot radius have signed this petition including neighbors who where home on St. Albans Circle and Gleason Terrace. We also had others in the neighborhood who opposed this subdivision. Please strongly consider this Petition as you make your decision. Thank you. NNA / / Bert Ledder 6709 Cheyenne Trail Edina, MN 55439 A.9 AL s w wj w s • The City Council City of Edina Petition z�A., DATE RECEIVED: �jy. City of Edina, Minnesota o tz CITY COUNCIL [� �; �.� 4801 West 50th Street - Edina, Minnesota 55424 °• t,,e (952) 927 -8861 - (952) 927 -7645 FAX - (612) 927 -5461 TDD m PETITION TO THE CITY COUNCIL ❑ SIDEWALK ❑ ALLEY PAVING ❑ WATER MAIN ❑ STORM SEWER ❑ . SANITARY SEWER ❑ STI"T LIGHTING ❑ CURB AND GUTTER ONLY ❑ PERMANENT STREET ( OTHEM. , SURFACING WITH CURB AND GUTTER To the Mayor and City Council: The persons who have signed this petition ask the City Council to not approve Subdivision of 6609 Blackfoot Pass. LOCATION: 6609 Blackfoot Pass, tdina Minnesota 55439 • No Subdivision of property PROPERTY OWNER'S SIGNATURE OWNER'S NAME (PRINTED) vv kiftt1te, V—v A \N i I Cry V✓GIe_ This petition was'circulated by: PROPERTY ADDRESS (PRINTED) (o ND 1W f(6u5 6 fo tr-� 1 Tim uecp'�l NANIE ADbRESS PHONE There is space for more signatures on the back. APRIL 2008 PROPERTY OWNER'S SIGNATURE OWNER'S NAME (PRINTED) Cie, L,z e.- —�---- - - - «6 ��- 0:S 4 0 la, 2.11 ry nl 0, Ja LEE -2y 6W CA Ketl� A- �1Uone.r,15 PROPERTY ADDRESS (PRINTED) to too I W C14VO i sd � X105 11K�A oe r i 2 gay_ 4�40T &ql tiffs c�► -i�o �i�� � ls_ D �Lu SaYJ jLr �s -, 7( / / -C/ PHONE The Minnesota Data Practices Act requires that we inform you of your rights about the private data we are requesting on this form. Under the law, your telephone number is private data. This petition when submitted will become public information: There is no consequence for refusing to supply this information. You may attach extra pages with signatures. APRIL 2008 PROPERTY OWNER'S SIGNATURE OWNER'S NAME (PRINTED) Jv/v 0 e-W ! CV Mark w l kow-, � 11-49 M115 -� �c1S ; l 1� �J 6,an e ff e Slw� kk �fA l Um 11 ` \\L /lei/ M/ // 5rle- u-F-Ar fi -aSaut Ira calm U011% G `cV-+, � PROPERTY ADDRESS (PRINTED) zaz 6&W 0�e yent-we f ray( Wi ,u; IN 71 f�$7,D C (fl e e e- 6-2,0 CopyPvlV1 e C(Vz.(e i_ - ' I (%h-LE-"- (f � ew r C. Lfo «- �foCav\[9l� l Y�\ �twft'-,L This petition was circulated by: t�e� - 6 ZZ3 NAME ADDRE89 PHONE The Minnesota Data Practices Act requires that we inform you ofyour rights about the private data we are requesting on this form. Under the law, your telephone number is private data. This petition when submitted will become public information. There is no consequence for refusing to supply this information. You may attach extra pages with signatures. APRIL 2008 PROPERTY O'WNER'S PROPERTY ADDRESS (PRINTED) ��JG his petition was circulated by: nDDxE 96;� 'he Minnesota Data Practices Act requires that we inform you ofyour rights about the rives PHONE Under the law, your telephone number is private data. This petition when submitted will become public information: p to data we are requesting on this form. consequence for refusing to supply this information. f ation: There is no You may attach extra pages with signatures. APRIL 2008 S� PROPERTY OWNER'S OWNER'S NAME PROPERTY ADDRESS SIGNATUrRE (PRINTED) Q (PROD) TAL Uzi, T12 ThiS'' as �Vated by: 76; NAME ADD R46 PHONE The Minnesota Data Practices Act requires that we inform you ofyour rights about the private data we are requesting on this form. Under the law, your telephone number is private data. This petition when submitted will become public information: There is no consequence for refusing to supply this information. You may attach extra pages with signatures. APRIL 2008 4 a R � PORT / R � COMI�i �wNDATIOO N WA- � nn, To: MAYOR AND COUNCIL o, o ,aea Agenda Item #: VI.B. From: Cary Teague, Community Development Director Action Discussion F Dates October 1, 2013 Information 0. Subject: PUBLIC HEARING - Resolution No. 2013 -84; Preliminary Plat at 5 Merilane for John Adams on behalf of Ted Warner. Action Requested: Adopt the attached resolution. Information / Background: John Adams, on behalf of property owner Ted Warner is proposing to subdivide the property at 5 Merilane into three lots. The existing home is located in the middle of the property, and would remain as proposed. A new driveway would be constructed to serve the existing home, as the current driveway would be located on proposed Lot 3. The existing driveway would be used for access to a new home on Lot 3. (See applicant narrative.and plans on pages A5 —A13 of the Planning Commission staff report.) The proposal meets all minimum lot size requirements. Within this neighborhood, the median lot area is 48,249. square feet, median lot depth is 277 feet, and the median lot width is 192. (See attached median . calculations on pages A7 —A9. of the Planning Commission staff report.). Planning Commission Recommendation: A motion to approve the request failed for a lack of a second. Motion to approve was based on the findings and conditions in the Planning Commission staff report., A motion to deny the, request failed on a vote of 3 -5. Motion to deny. was. based on the finding that the subdivision as proposed would change the character and symmetry of the Rolling Green neighborhood, and in particular'based on changes to the character and symmetry that would occur as the result of new house placement in proximity to existing homes. ICity of Edina • 4801 W. 501h St. • Edina, MN 55424 ri, The second motion to deny the request is based on the following considerations from the Subdivision Ordinance. Please note that these considerations are subjective; the proposed subdivision meets the City's minimum size regulations. Subd. 1 Considerations. The Commission in reviewing proposed plats and subdivisions and in determining its recommendation to the Council, and the Council in determining whether to approve or disapprove of any plat or subdivision, may consider, among other matters, the following: A. The impact of the proposed plat or subdivision, and proposed development, on the character and symmetry of the neighborhood as evidenced and indicated by, but not limited to, the following matters: 1. The suitability of the size and shape of the lots in the proposed plat or subdivision relative to the size and shape of lots in the neighborhood; and 2. The compatibility of the size, shape, location and arrangement of the lots in the proposed plat or subdivision with the proposed density and intended use of the site and the density and use of lots in the neighborhood. B. The impact of the proposed plat or subdivision, and proposed development, on the environment, including but not limited to, topography, steep slopes, vegetation, naturally occurring lakes, ponds and streams, susceptibility of the site to erosion and sedimentation, susceptibility of the site to.flooding and water storage needs on and from the site. C. The consistency of the proposed plat or subdivision, and proposed development, and compliance by the proposed plat or subdivision, and the proposed development, with the policies, objectives, and goals of the Comprehensive Plan. ,. D. The compliance of the proposed plat or subdivision, and the proposed development with the policies, objectives, goals and requirements of Section 850 of this•Code including, without limitation, the lot size provisions and the Floodplain Overlay District provisions of Section 850 of this Code. E. The impact of the proposed plat or subdivision, and proposed development on the health, safety and general welfare of the public. F. The relationship of the design of the site, or the improvements proposed and the conflict of such design or improvements, with any easements of record or on the ground. G. The relationship of lots in the proposed plat or subdivision to existing streets and the adequacy and safety of ingress to and egress from such lots from and to existing streets. H. The adequacy of streets in the proposed plat or subdivision, and the conformity with existing and planned streets and highways in surrounding areas. Streets in the proposed plat or subdivision shall be deemed inadequate if designed or located so as to prevent or deny public street access to adjoining properties, it being the policy of the City to avoid landlocked tracts, parcels or lots. I. The suitability of street grades in relation to the grades of lots and existing or future extension of the City's water, storm and sanitary sewer systems. I The adequacy and availability of access by police, fire, ambulance and other life safety vehicles to all proposed improvements to be developed on the proposed plat or subdivision. K. Whether the physical characteristics of, the property, including, without limitation, topography, vegetation, susceptibility to erosion or siltation, susceptibility to flooding, use as a: natural recovery and ponding area for storm water, and potential disturbance of slopes with a grade of 18 percent or more, are such that the property is not suitable for the type of development or use proposed. L. Whether development within the proposed plat or subdivision will cause the disturbance of more than 25 percent of the total area in such plat or subdivision containing slopes exceeding 18 percent. M. Whether the proposed plat or subdivision, or the improvements proposed to be placed thereon are likely to cause substantial environmental damage. ATTACHMENTS: • Resolution No. 2013 -84 o Draft minutes from the September 11, 2013 Edina Planning Commission meeting • Planning Commission Staff Report, September 11, 2013 RESOLUTION NO. 2013-84 APPROVING A PRELIMINARY PLAT AT 5 MERILANE BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Edina, Minnesota, as follows: Section 1. .. BACKGROUND. 1.01 John Adams, on behalf of property owner Ted Warner is proposing to subdivide the property at 5 Merilane into three lots. 1.02 The existing home is located in the middle of.the property, and would remain as proposed. A new driveway would be constructed to serve the existing home, as the current driveway would be located on proposed Lot 3. The existing driveway would be used for. access to a new home on Lot 3. 1.03 Within this neighborhood, the median lot area is 48,249 square feet, median lot depth is 277 feet, and the median lot width is 192. All three meet the above medians. 1.04 The following described tract of land is requested to be divided: 1.05 1.06 1.07 Lot 5 Rolling Green, Hennepin County, Minnesota. The owner of the described land desires to subdivide said tract in to the following described new and separate parcels (herein called "parcels') described as follows: Lots 1, 2 and 3 Warner. Estates The proposed subdivision: meets all minimum zoning ordinance requirements. On July 24; 2013, the Planning Commission considered the request for subdivision. The following motions failed: 1. 2 A motion to approve the request failed for a lack of a second. Motion to approve was based on the findings and conditions in the Planning Commission staff report. A motion to deny the request failed on a vote of 3 -5. Motion to deny was based on the finding that the subdivision as proposed would change the character and symmetry of the Rolling Green neighborhood, and in particular based on changes to the character and symmetry that would occur as the result of new house placement in close proximity to existing homes. CITY OF EDINA 4801 West 50th Street Edina, Minnesota 55424 wwwEdinaMN.gov •.952- 927 -8861 • Fax 952 - 826 -0390 RESOLUTION NO. 2013-84 Page Two Section 2. FINDINGS 2.01 Approval is based on the following findings: 1. The proposed Plat meets all required standards and ordinances for a subdivision. 2. The subdivision would meet the neighborhood medians for lot width and depth and area. 3. The applicant has located the driveways and home to minimize tree and slope disturbance. Section 3. APPROVAL NOW THEREFORE, it is hereby resolved by the City Council of the City of Edina, approves the Preliminary Plat for the proposed subdivision of 6609 Blackfoot Pass. Approval is subject to the following Conditions: 1. The City must approve the final plat within one year of preliminary approval or receive a written application for a time extension or the preliminary approval will be void. 2. Park dedication fee of $10,000 must be paid prior to release of the final plat. 3. Prior to issuance of a building permit, the following items must be submitted: a. Submit evidence of a N innehaha Creek Watershed District approval. The City may require revisions to the preliminary plat to meet the district's requirements. b. Curb -cut permits must be obtained from the Edina engineering department. Driveway plans must be consistent with the proposed grading plan to preserve as many trees as possible. C. A grading plan subject to review and approval of the city engineer. d. A construction management plan will be required for the construction of the new homes. e. Utility hook -ups are subject to review of the city engineer. RESOLUTION NO. 2013-84 Page Two Adopted this _ day of 2013. ATTEST: Debra A. Mangen, City Clerk James B. Hovland, Mayor STATE OF MINNESOTA ) COUNTY OF HENNEPIN )SS CITY OF EDINA ) CERTIFICATE OF CITY CLERK I, the undersigned duly appointed and acting City Clerk for the City of Edina do hereby certify that the attached and foregoing Resolution was duly adopted by the Edina City Council at its Regular Meeting of 2013, and as recorded in the Minutes of said Regular Meeting. WITNESS my hand and seal of said City this day of 2013. �G C. Preliminary Plat. John Adams on behalf of Ted E. Warner, 5 Merilane, Edina, MN Planner Presentation Planned Teague reported that John Adams, on behalf of property owner Ted Warner is proposing to subdivide the property at 5 Merilane into three lots. The existing home is located in the middle of the property, and would remain as proposed. A new driveway would be constructed to serve the existing home, as the current driveway would be located on proposed Lot 3. The existing driveway would be used for access to a new home on Lot 3. To accommodate the request the following is required: Preliminary & Final Plat. Continuing, Teague explained that the proposal meets all minimum lot size requirements. Within this neighborhood, the median lot area is 48,249 square feet, median lot depth is 277 feet, and the median lot width is 192. All three lots would gain access off Merilane. Planner Teague concluded that because the proposed subdivision meets all of Edina's Zoning Ordinance requirements; recommend that the City Council approve the proposed three lot subdivision of 5 Merilane. Approval is based on the following findings: 1. The proposal meets all the required standards and ordinances for a subdivision. 2. The applicant has located the driveways and home to minimize tree and slope disturbance. Approval is also subject to the following conditions: 1. The City must approve the final- plat within one year of preliminary approval or receive a written application for a time extension or the preliminary approval will be void. 2. Park dedication fee of $10,000 must be paid prior to release of the final plat. 3. Prior to issuance of a building permit, the following items must be submitted: a. Submit evidence of a Minnehaha Creek Watershed District approval. The City may require revisions to the preliminary plat to meet the district's requirements. b. Curb -cut permits must be obtained from the Edina engineering department. Driveway plans must be consistent with the proposed grading plan to preserve as many trees as possible. C. A grading plan subject to review and approval of the city engineer. Page 10 of 15 d. A construction management plan will be required for the construction of the new homes. e. Utility hook -ups are subject to review of the city engineer. Appearing for the Applicant John Adams, Coldwell Banker Applicant Presentation John Adams introduced Ted Warner property owner and Mark Gronberg Engineer. Mr. Adams informed the Commission the current Warner house will remain and the intent is to build new homes on Lots 1 and 3. Adams told the Commission the Warner family hired Kramer to custom design and build the new homes. Adams noted that as proposed the subdivision meets ordinance requirements. He also reported he met with adjoining neighbors to discuss the proposed plat. Continuing, Adams said to accommodate the new building pads little grading would occur, attention would be paid to driveway placement and the existing vegetation would be retained where possible. Concluding, Adams asked the Commission for their support. Ted Warner addressed the Commission and explained that he grew up in the house, adding the family takes this subdivision very seriously and believes the layout of the proposed lots would work. This subdivision would also provide them the opportunity to remain in the neighborhood. Chair Staunton opened the public hearing. Public Hearing The following residents addressed the Commission and spoke in opposition to the request by John Adams on behalf of Ted Warner to subdivide 5 Merilane into three (3) single dwelling unit lots. Mark Genau, 6 Merilane, Edina, MN Dave Evinger, 4 Merilane, Edina, MN James Ganley, 4704 Merilane, Edina, MN Mike Callan, 10 Merilane, Edina, MN Mary Pohlad, 7 Merilane, Edina, MN Page 11 of 15 Sandy Genau, 6 Merilane, Edina, MN Pat Maloney, 5804 Mait Lane, Edina, MN Phil Broat, 4820 Rolling Green Parkway, Edina, MN Tom Owens, representing Ms. Pohlad, 7 Merilane, Edina, MN Residents that testified expressed the following: • The plat as presented creates three lots; however, to comply with Zoning Ordinance requirements the three building pads have been clustered at the top of the hill virtually "cramming" the new homes on top of the existing homes at 6 and 7 Merilane. • The proposal as submitted negatively impacts the character of the Rolling Green neighborhood. If subdivided to comply with the Zoning Ordinance there will be five homes in close proximity to each other. Rolling Green is not a "high- density" neighborhood. • Residents purchased their homes in Rolling Green for the large lots and generous spacing between homes. This subdivision would compromise those standards. • If approved to comply with the Zoning Ordinance these three new homes wouldn't have rear yards. • The Commission has the discretion to deny the plat based on character and symmetry of the neighborhood. • There is the concern if the three lot subdivision is approved that slowly the neighborhood "average" will change piece by piece with lots becoming smaller and smaller over time. • Consider a two lot subdivision; not three. Consider variance for house placement. • There is an issue of vehicle and pedestrian safety. The subject lot is curved; a reversed pie and a traffic study should be conducted. Charlie Carpenter, attorney representing the applicant addressed the Commission and stated the plat as depicted meets the subdivision ordinance requirements and in their opinion makes sense. Carpenter also noted that the applicant has indicated they would minimize any disruption to the site through driveway placement and the retention of existing vegetation. Chair Staunton asked if anyone else would like to speak to the issue; being none Commissioner Platteter moved to close the public hearing. Commissioner Fischer seconded the motion. All voted aye; motion carried. Page 12 of 15 Discussion Chair Staunton suggested that the Commission meet with the City Attorney regarding subdivisions to clarify what action the Commission can take when a plat technically meets Ordinance requirements. Planner Teague said he would speak with the City Attorney, Roger Knutson and set up a work session to discuss subdivision and other planning issues. Commissioner Schroeder stated it appears to him that this subdivision feels more like in -fill development, adding if approved there will be a distinct change in this neighborhood. Commissioner Grabiel said the applicant has indicated they would do their best to retain the vegetation along Merilane and minimize driveway placement, adding he can support the subdivision request as submitted. Motion Commissioner Grabiel moved to recommend preliminary plat approval for 5 Merilane based on staff findings and subject to staff conditions. Motion failed for lack of second. Discussion Commissioner Scherer stated it's very obvious to her that the subdivision as presented creates three pie shaped lots that without the relief of a variance from the Zoning Ordinance would cluster three homes at the top of the hill. Scherer reiterated the clustering of homes bothers her; however, a variance may mitigate that issue. Commissioner Fischer stated he struggles with this request, adding the plat as presented complies with the Ordinance and provides three buildable lots, adding the applicant has indicated from the street that they intend to minimize driveway placement and preserve trees and vegetation along the street. Fischer did acknowledge this would be a change. Motion Commissioner Schroeder moved to recommend denial of the preliminary plat for 5 Merilane based on the finding that the subdivision as proposed would change the character and symmetry of the Rolling Green neighborhood, and in particular denial is based on changes to the character and symmetry that would occur as the result of new house placement in close proximity to existing homes. Commissioner Scherer seconded the motion. A discussion occurred on the character and symmetry of the Rolling Green neighborhood. It was pointed out that the lots on the west side of Merilane are platted completely different from the lots to the east. It was further noted that spacing between the homes on the west Page 13 of 15 side of Merilane is generous; however, if the subdivision is approved and house placement occurs as presented the new homes on the east side of Merilane would be clustered together at the top in close proximity to each other and the existing homes on Lots 6 and 7 Merilane- completely out of character with the neighborhood. The discussion continued with Commissioners acknowledging that the presented preliminary plat meets Subdivision Ordinance requirements for area, width and depth and if the subdivision were approved it doesn't_ necessarily mean the houses would be built as depicted. The-Zoning Ordinance provides the opportunity through the variance process to be flexible with house placement. It was further noted that the applicant has the option of withdrawing the request to revise the plat.to include front yard setback variance options or the Commission can vote on the motion. Mr. Adams in response to the discussion on character and symmetry and front yard setback /house placement stated that the reason the new homes are positioned with such deep front.yard setbacks is to match the front yard setbacks established by the neighboring properties. This is a requirement of the Zoning Ordinance. Ayes; Scherer, Schroeder, Potts. Nays; Fischer, Platteter, Forrest, Grabiel, Staunton: Motion failed.5 -3. VIII. CORRESPONDENCE AND RECOMMENDATIONS Chair Staunton acknowledged. back of packet materials. IX. CHAIR AND COMMISSION COMMENTS Chair Staunton welcomed Mike Fischer back to the Commission. Staunton explained the City Council appointed Mike Fischer to replace Commissioner Carpenter who recently resigned from the Commission. Chair Staunton commented that staff is continuing their work on finalizing the Commissions 2014 Work Plan. Continuing, Staunton reiterated that staff is also working on setting dates for a work session with Roger Knutson, City Attorney and Cindy.Larson, Redevelopment Coordinator. Planner Teague responded he would work on scheduling work sessions; adding he believes October Stn would work well for Cindy Larson. Commissioner. Fischer said in the work session with Roger Knutson he would like to discuss and ask for clarification on the 500 -foot neighborhood requirement previously mentioned by Chair Staunton. Questioning if the 500 -foot Page 14.of 15 4,91�1r.L �y PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT Originator Meeting Date Agenda # - Cary- Teague - September 11, 2013 VI.C. - Community Development Director INFORMATION & BACKGROUND Project Description John Adams, on behalf of property owner Ted Warner is proposing to subdivide the property at 5 Merilane into three lots. (See property location on pages Al A4.) The existing home is located in the middle of the property, and would remain as proposed. A new driveway would be constructed to serve the existing home, as the current driveway would be located on proposed Lot 3. The existing driveway would be used for access to anew -home on Lot 3. (See applicant. narrative and plans on pages A5 —A13.) To accommodate the request the following is required: 1. Preliminary &.Final Plat. The proposal meets all minimum lot size requirements. Within this neighborhood, the median lot area is 48,249 square feet, median lot depth is 277 feet, and the median lot width is 192. (See attached median calculations on pages A7—A9.) All three lots would gain access off Merilane. (See page Al 3.) Surrounding Land Uses The lots on all-sides, of the subject properties are single - family homes, zoned and guided low- density residential. Existing Site Features The existing site is located on the curved portion of Merilane. The site is 3.48 acres in size, and contains a single family home. The site contains some gradual slopes and mature trees. (See pages A3, A4 and Al 3.) Planning Guide Plan designation Zoning: Lot Dimensions Single- dwelling residential R -1, Single- dwelling district The proposed subdivision meets all lot dimension requirements. Grading /Drainage and Utilities The city engineer has reviewed the proposed plans and found them generally acceptable. Adequate drainage and utility easements are proposed along all the lot lines. The detailed grading plans would be reviewed by the city engineer at the time of building permit application for each lot. A construction management plan will be required for the construction of the new homes. A Minnehaha Creek Watershed District permit would also be required. Park Dedication As with all subdivision proposals, park dedication is required. Edina City Code requires a park dedication fee of $5,000 for each additional lot created. Therefore a park dedication fee of $10,000 would be required. Primary Issue • Is the proposed subdivision reasonable for the site? Yes. Staff believes that the proposed subdivision is reasonable for the following reasons: 1. The proposed subdivision meets all minimum zoning ordinance requirements. As such, the applicant is entitled to subdivide the property. Area Lot Width Depth REQUIRED 48,249 s.f. 192 feet 277 feet Lot 1 50,863 s.f. 281 feet 337 feet Lot 2 50,511 s.f. 202 feet 373 feet Lot 3 50,455 s.f. 268 feet 334 feet The proposed subdivision meets all lot dimension requirements. Grading /Drainage and Utilities The city engineer has reviewed the proposed plans and found them generally acceptable. Adequate drainage and utility easements are proposed along all the lot lines. The detailed grading plans would be reviewed by the city engineer at the time of building permit application for each lot. A construction management plan will be required for the construction of the new homes. A Minnehaha Creek Watershed District permit would also be required. Park Dedication As with all subdivision proposals, park dedication is required. Edina City Code requires a park dedication fee of $5,000 for each additional lot created. Therefore a park dedication fee of $10,000 would be required. Primary Issue • Is the proposed subdivision reasonable for the site? Yes. Staff believes that the proposed subdivision is reasonable for the following reasons: 1. The proposed subdivision meets all minimum zoning ordinance requirements. As such, the applicant is entitled to subdivide the property. 2. The applicant has located the driveways so as not to disturb the mature trees on the site. (See page A13.) 3. Building pad locations would meet all minimum setback requirements. (See pages Al2 —A13.) The front yard setback requirements are established by the average of the two homes on either side. With the existing home to remain, the front yard setbacks for Lots 1 & 3 are established by the average setback of the existing home on Lot 2 and the adjacent- homes-. - - Staff Recommendation Because the proposed subdivision meets all of Edina's Zoning Ordinance requirements, recommend that the City Council approve the proposed three lot subdivision of:5 Merilane. Approval is based on the following findings: 1. The proposal:meets all the required standards and ordinances fora subdivision: 2. The applicant has located the driveways and home to minimize tree and slope disturbance. Approval is subject to the following conditions: 1. The .City must approve the:final plat within one year of preliminary approval or receive a written application for a time extension or the preliminary approval will be void. 2. Park dedication fee of $10,000 must be paid prior to release of the final plat. 3:. Prior to issuance of a building permit, the following items: must be submitted: a. Submit evidence of a Minnehaha Creek Watershed District approval. The City. may require revisions to the preliminary plattto meet the district's requirements. b. Curb -cut permits must be obtained from the Edina engineering department. Driveway plans must be consistent with the proposed grading plan to preserve as many trees as possible. C. A grading plan subject to review and approval of the city engineer. 3 d. A construction management plan will be required for the construction of the new homes. e. Utility hook -ups are subject to review of the city engineer. Deadline for a City Decision: November 4, 2013 4 Interactive I laps f W = r, Property Map 0EADO'A BRuOKLAKE f I T. Lea Tod _ ; it _ `itP+ 1_ ._ Cfs- •.G��C'�.�- Q.Q. -__� :`' cr_ X111'' yElt C.3 pPEPilk o 4 5. _ W ( W f t• It1TFRL .CHr r9 BLVD INTCELA.HEN BiVf) J.i a s '• ( LL o Highlands Park r _ ti LU l7 Parcel 29- 117 -21 -12 -0009 ID: Owner H David Warner Etal Name: Parcel 5 Merilane Address: Edina, MN 55436 Property Residential Type: Home- Homestead stead: Parcel 3.48 acres Area: 151,680 sq ft A( Highlands Park Map Scale: 1" = 800 ft. Print Date: 9/5/2013 f � —r- This map is a compilation of data from various sources and is furnished "AS IS" with no representation or warranty expressed or implied, including fitness of any particular purpose, merchantability, or the accuracy and completeness of the information shown. COPYRIGHT © HENNEPIN COUNTY 2013 A Wnl Green! Interact ve - -• Maps �X/ 201 4300 24 30 4602 4612 4608 4604 44603 41 -111 6. 416 4603 4602 4604 4605 5804 5800 5808 4700 t•,1AIT LA 6 4 r5 4701 5305 I 4700 4600 Property Map 27 29 25 4708 23 2 29- 117 -21 -12 -0009 19 21 24 I 4708 29- 117 -21 -12 -0009 19 Owner I 14 7 H David Warner Etal Name: Parcel — 4705 Address: Edina, MN 55436 Property - Residential �., Home- 17 4712 -- 4704 Parcel 3.48 acres Area: 24 4715 24 `` 8 l- 15 4708 4724 li ` 4721 4725 4729 i 4733 4800 9 kft'n'b'dAV [Sfi -- 4800 tf 9 : r ° o� 24 6 4808 {iy 20 4801 I 7 it 4801 4C g ,C 1 13 4 4812 4805 c1 4877 19 }1° lU 5 Cy ' 4811 4820 s;1, .4810. 18 Parcel 29- 117 -21 -12 -0009 ID: Owner H David Warner Etal Name: Parcel 5 Merilane Address: Edina, MN 55436 Property Residential Type: Home- Homestead stead: Parcel 3.48 acres Area: 151,680 sq ft M Map Scale: 1" = 400 ft. Print Date: 9/5/2013 nVoThy This map is a compilation of data from various sources and is furnished "AS IS" with no representation or warranty expressed or implied, including fitness of any particular purpose, merchantability, or the accuracy and completeness of the information shown. COPYRIGHT © HENNEPIN COUNTY 2013 .A Thh'k Green! Interactive Maps Parcel 29- 117 -21 -12 -0009 ID: Owner H David Warner Etal Name: Parcel 5 Merilane Address: Edina, MN 55436 Property Residential Type: Home- Homestead stead: Parcel 3.48 acres Area: 151,680 sq ft V i C.' k A3 Property Map Map Scale: 1" = 200 ft. N Print Date: 915/2013 -(k This map is a compilation of data from various sources and is furnished "AS IS" with no representation or warranty expressed or implied, including fitness of any particular purpose, merchantability, or the accuracy and completeness of the information shown. COPYRIGHT © HENNEPIN COUNTY 2013 ., Think Green! Inte Lt Mar Parcel 29- 117 -21 -12 -0009 ID: Owner H David Warner Etal Name: Parcel 5 Merilane Address: Edina, MN 55436 Property Residential Type: Home- Homestead stead: Parcel 3.48 acres Area: 151,680 sq ft A` 4 Property Map Map Scale: V = 100 ft. N Print Date: 9/5/2013 -(k This map is a compilation of data from various sources and is furnished "AS IS" with no representation or warranty expressed or implied, including fitness of any particular purpose, merchantability, or the accuracy and completeness of the information shown. COPYRIGHT © HENNEPIN COUNTY 2013 A Think Green! NPLICAL-PT AI*R OT/ U E- From: Ted E. Warner and John F. Adams I Coldwell Banker Burnet To: Cary Teague Community Development Director City of Edina Subject: Subdivision of 5 into 3 separate lots total. (2 additional lots) Date: August. 8, 2013 My family, the Warner family, has owned this property for almost 50 years. We have watched Rolling Green undergo marry changes; .Including numerous subdivisions and many new homes built in place of older homes being torn down. We currently have the second largest parcel in the neighborhood, almost 3.5 acres, other than the "Short Property" which is 15 acres. It: is our intention to subdivide the parcel into three separate logs, noted as Lot I. Lot 2 and .1 of 3 on the survey. Per the attached 500 foot area study, the subdivided lots will be above the mean lot size, width and depth of the logs in the-neighborhood. We have executed contracts with. John. Kraemer & Sons, Inc. on l.,ots 1. and 2, contingent upon obtaining our subdivision approval. It: is Gary Kraemer's (President: of John Kraemer & Sons, Inc.) intention to .leave the existing house on Lot 2 until he gets a client put in place that decides ,vhether they want to remodel the existing house or tear it down and build a new single family home on 1,ot 2. Upon obtaining approval., Kraena.er would also be building a single fancily home on Lot: 1. The sur\,ey shows the building pads for botli Lot. 1, gander contract: with Kraemer. and Lot 3 currently either being sold or possibly kept by a family member. Our proposed subdivision complies Niri.th al.l. of the City's ordinances and. we are not seeking any variances. If you have any questions about this application, please contact John F..:-\dams at 612.720.4827 or-jAdams@,cbburnet.com. p�G ®g 2pi3 WARNER ESTATES PRELIMINARY PLAT FOR THE H. D. WARNER ESTATE OF LOT 5, ROLLING GREEN HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA :4. ----------- A Is 21p. I 108m S.F. LOT I 1.17a -ACRES aa LOT WIDTH=281 LOTOEPTH=337 LOT WDTIHTO PERIMETER RATIO-328 'to Ir SETBACKOr WS THIS WTIS IU75SO Frr so LOTW �.AREA' LOT D LOT PERIMETER _J L wi \-- - OT 1 51 -so PRO I ,III oli a ' \ tt LOT 3 50455- S.F. 1.15r-ACRES LOT DEPTH -334 --T LOT DEPTH-334 LOT PERIMETER -668 e—p' OF PAGE'. LOT WIDTH TO PERIMETER RAT1 - 9 AH, BOOK 160D OF DEEDS PAGE 132 P-- EXISTING HOUSi IT ..'e THIS LOT Is 191.3 X 9= 0 30 60 120 Lot contains 3.48-- acres SCALE IN FEET LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF PREMISES SURVEYED: Lot 5, ROLLING GREEN This survey shows the boundaries and topography of the above described property, and the location of an existing house and driveway. It does not purport to show any other improvements or encroachments. OWNERS NOTE: The land surveyed covers the entire parcel and there are no gaps or overlaps JOAN A. WARNER, DAVID A. WARNER AND TED E. WARNER with adjoining parcels. C/O JOHN ADAMS, AGENT • Iron marker found COLDWELL BANKER BURNET • iron marker set 201 E. LAKE STREET Existing contour (City of Edina datum) WAYZATA. MN 55391 Bearings shown are based upon an assumed datum 612-72OA827 Trees shown are in the areas of the proposed drives and houses and 8" diameter and larger. jaclams@cbburnetcom P I D: 29-117-21-12-0009 CURRENT R-1 -Iby- r—M—I �I_ GRONBERG & ASSOCIATES, INC. KtVIJI DATE I By RENI� RIGS -1-1 IV In*—N CIVIL ENGINEERS ; LAND SURVEYORS, LAND PLANNERS S-- I 1TREES .MILITIE 0 ;V4-1-1 '1 uus 445 N. WILLOW DRIVE LONG LAKE, MN 55356 GRONBERG & ASSOCIATES, INC. SURVEYING, ENGINEERING AND LAND PLANNING 445 N. WILLOW DRIVE LONG LAKE, MINNESOTA S5356 952- 473 -4141 FAX: 952- 473 -4435 5 MERILANE H. D. WARNER ESTATE ,MEDIAN LOT AREA WITHIN 50W JULY 31, 2013 ADDRESS LOT AREA* S.F. RANK 8 Merilane 657,865 1 7 Merilane 68,206 5 6 Merilane 56,087 7 4 Merilane 51,305 10 2 Merilane 120,550 3 4600 Merilane 112,227 4 4602 Merilane 47,933 15 4603 Merilane 18,649 28 4604 Merilane 36,258 21 4608 Merilane 34,273 23 4612 Merilane. 37,479 20 4616 Merilane 51,057 12 4700 Merilane 48,249 14 Median 4704 Merilane 48,435 13 4708 Merilane 43,958 17 4733 Annaway Dr. 51,227 11 4729 Annaway Dr. 45,696 16 4725 Annaway Dr. 41,138 18 4715 Annaway Dr. 52,805 9 4705 Annaway Dr. 57,352 6 4701 Annaway Dr. 52,969 8 4605 Annaway Dr. 30,014 25 4602 Annaway Dr. 28,737 26 4601 Annaway Dr. 38,799 19 5808 Mait La. 30,779 24 5805 Mait La.' 131,677 2 5804 Maifla.. 35,640 22 5800 Mait La. 24,817 27 * From Hennepin County property records ° 5805 Mait La. is in 3 parcels. � 14 NOTE: 14 & 15 are tied for the median. We used the higher number 14 to be conservative. c��j GRONBERG & ASSOCIATES, INC. SURVEYING, ENGINEERING AND LAND PLANNING 445 N. WILLOW DRIVE LONG LAKE, MINNESOTA 55356 952 - 479 -4141 FAX: 952- 473 -4435 5 MERILANE H. D. WARNER ESTATE MEDIAN WIDTH WITHIN 500' JUNE 31, 2013 ADDRESS LOT WIDTH* FT RANK 8 Merilane 580 1 7 Merilane 202 9 6 Merilane 178 18 4 Merilane 176 19 2 Merilane 60 27 4600 Merilane 180 17 4602 Merilane 30 28 4603 Merilane 94 26 4604 Merilane 228 6 4608 Merilane 212 8 4612 Merilane - 192 14 Median' 4616 Merilane 139 23 4700 Merilane 140 22 4704 Merilane 260 5 4708 Merilane 282 3 4733 Annaway Dr. 290 2 4729 Annaway Dr. 200 11 4725 Annaway Dr. 201 10 4715 Annaway Dr. 195 13 4705 Annaway Dr. 191 15 4701 Annaway Dr. 187 16 4605 Annaway Dr. 110 25 4602 Annaway Dr. 281 4 4601 Annaway Dr. 213 7 5808 Mait La. 112 24 5805 Mait La.' 162 20 5804-Mait La. 196 12 5800 Mait La. 141 21 * Distance scaled from Hennepin County maps ° 5805 Mait La. is in 3 parcels. NOTE: 14 & 15 are tied for the median. We used the higher number 14 to bed;.;: conservative. GRONBERG & ASSOCIATES, INC. SURVEYING, ENGINEERING AND LAND PLANNING 445 N. WILLOW DRIVE LONG LAKE, MINNESOTA SS356 952- 473 -4141 FAX: 952- 473 -4435 5 MERILANE H. D. WARNER ESTATE MEDIAN LOT DEPTH WITHIN 500' JULY 31, 2013 ADDRESS LOT DEPTH* FT RANK 8 Merilane 922 1 7 Merilane 340 6 6 Merilane. 321 7 4 Merilane 293 10 2 Merilane 612 2 4600 Merilane 537 5 4602 Merilane 558 4 4603 Merilane 148 27 4604 Merilane 168 24 4608 Merilane 165 25 4612 Merilane 173 22 4616 Merilane 271 16 4700 Merilane 318 8 4704 Merilane 172 23 4708 Merilane 265 17 4733 Annaway Dr. 290 11 4729 Annaway Dr. 230 18 4725 Annaway Dr. 205 19 4715 Annaway Dr. 280 13 4705 Annaway Dr. 300 9 4701 Annaway Dr. 286 12 4605 Annaway Dr. 275 15 4602 Annaway Dr. 118 28 4601 Annaway Dr. 188 20 5808 Mait La. X277 14 Median' 5805 Mait La.' 588. 3 5804 Mait La. 183 21 5800 Mait La. 154 26 * scaled from Hennepin County half section maps ° 5805 Mait La. is in 3 parcels. . ill -., 4�.L4 ♦' NOTE: 14 & 15 are tied for the median. We used the higher number 14 to e" conservative. B 1. 2. 3 GRONBERG & ASSOCIATES, INC. SURVEYING, ENGINEERING AND LAND PLANNING 445 N. WILLOW DRIVE LONG LAKE, MINNESOTA 55356 952- 473 -4141 FAR: 952- 473 -4435 5 MERILANE H. D. WARNER ESTATE JULY 31, 2013 MEAN LOT AREA, DEPTH & WIDTH OF LOTS WITHIN 500' Mean lot area Total of 28 parcels = 2,054,181 - 28 = 73,364 S.F. Mean lot depth Total of 28 parcels = 8637 - 28 = 308 Ft. Mean lot width Total of 28 parcels = 5432 - 28 = 194 Ft. Alb PROPERTY OWNERS ADDRESSES, NAMES & LEGAL DESCRIPTIONS WITHIN 500 FEET OF 5 MERILANE (FROM HENN. CO. PROPERTY TAX RECORDS) H. D. WARNER ESTATE ADDRESS NAME 8 Merilane 7 Merilane 6 Merilane 4 Merilane 2 Merilane 4600 Merilane 4602 Merilane 4603 Merilane 4604 Merilane 4608 Merilane 4612 Merilane 4616 Merilane 4700 Merilane Marion Short Mary Ingebrand- Pohlad Michael & Sandra Genau David & Lynn Evinger George & Linda Sherman Laurene Meger Charlotte Ketcham William Riley Mark & Hedwig Holmberg Robert Perry John Raskind & Katherine Kendall Jane Hulbert Scott & Tiffany Stuart 4704 Merilane James & Katheryn Ganley 4708 Merilane 4733 Annaway Dr. 4729 Annaway Dr. 4725 Annaway Dr. 4715 Annaway Dr. 4705 Annaway Dr. 4701 Annaway Dr. 4605 Annaway Dr. 4602 Annaway Dr. 4601 Annaway Dr. 5808 Mait La. 5805 Mait La. 5804 Mait La. 5800 Mait La. James Lopesio David & Ann Wichmann Frank Gougeon Scott & Jennifer Gill Sheila Walsh Octavio & Jody Portu Jr. David & Patricia Murphy Larry & Terrie Rose John Otterlei Stephen & Susann Stenbeck Jeffrey & Olivia Hornig R. J. Sheehy & A. Kmetz- Sheehy Patricia Maloney Howell & Carrie McCullough JULY 31, 2013 LEGAL DESCRIPTION Part of Lot 8, Rolling Green Part of Lot 8, Rolling Green West'' /2 of Lot 6, Rolling Green Lot 1, Bl. 1, Replat of Part Of Lot 6, Rolling Green Part of Lot 7, Rolling Green Lot 3, Bl. 1, Wallings Add. 1St Replat Lot 2, Bl. 1, Wallings Add. 1St Replat Lot 1, Bl. 1, Wallings Add. 1St Replat Lot 12, Bl. 1, Gunnar Johnsons 2nd Rgt Rolling Green Lot 11, Bl. 1, Gunnar Johnsons 2 "d Rgt Rolling Green Lot 10, Bl. 1, Gunnar Johnsons 2nd Rgt Rolling Green Lot 9, Bl. 1, Gunnar Johnsons 2 "d Rgt Rolling Green Part of Lot 60 & 60A, Rolling Green Sec. 2 & Lot 1, Bl 1 Gunnar Johnsons Rgt Rolling Green Part of Lot 60A, Rolling Green Sec. 2 & Lot 1, Bl. 1, Gunnar Johnsons Rgt Rolling Green Lot 2, Bl. 1, Gunnar Johnson Rgt Rolling Green Lot 3, Bl. 1, Gunnar Johnsons Rgt Rolling Green Lot 4, Bl. 1, Gunnar Johnsons Rgt Rolling Green Lot 5, Bl. 1, Gunnar Johnsons Rgt Rolling Green Lot 52, Rolling Green Sec. 2 Lot 53, Rolling Green Sec. 2 Lot 54, Rolling Green Sec. 2 Lot 5, Bl. 1, Gunnar Johnsons 2nd Rgt Rolling Green Part of Lot 3, Bl. 1, Gunnar Johnsons 2 "d Rgt Rolling Green Lot 4 & Part of Lot 3, Bl. 1, Gunnar Johnsons 2nd Rgt Rolling Green Lot 6, Bl. 1, Gunnar Johnson 2nd R&t Rolling Green Lot 59, Rolling Gunnar Johnsons 2" Rgt Rolling Green Lot 7, Bl. 1, Gunnar Johnson 2nd Rgt Rolling Green Lot 8, Bl. 1, Gunnar Johnson 2nd Rgt Rolling Green •�G�ti RIM EIEU•BD12o NV EtEV-485.55 — —. — — _ .rme• ST NV ELEWS511VL — Y�� 1 RIM INV ELEVWASS W LN17 • ST MANHOLE / Pis ' K INV EELEV405.45 or / � _r, =r�s>•s V R ST IiA6•e'^'�� LWLE NN ElEV.655E MAN �y RIM ELEV -BMW 9N/ EIEV6690.47N / / / 24 / .. ... �7� La R= 27519 le /// i� /' — 425 =•'r� I / •• I I RI MANHOLE . !1885.® / P INV £/ LOT 1 SS MANHOLE / / / 50863+- S.F. • RIM EIZA- i.79 NV ELEV -M99 / / / T W ACRES g; I j, LOOT IDTH =281 ✓?; LOT DEPTH =337 LOT PERIMETER =1004 I I LOT WIDTH TO PERIMETER RATIO =0.28 I E{EV -M.33 -_ ELEV- 885.76 S,SW,WaNE a / , \ \ \•• - I I ELEV=eB6.0 NwasE // / \ \ •• �B39LAco NE MANHOLE IELEV =591. O �'_ ELEV -8,__ EX \ \\ I IU) HIS LIOT A& IEA- OT 2 j` r 50 +- S.F. 1.16 + - ES m \ ` I I 81S.F. LOT WIDTH =20 LOT DEPTH =373 UILDABLDABLE AREA II I I I I LOT PERIMETER =$ J a I 1 LOT WIDTH TO PERIMETER RA�f0=0.21 I I I I 2 I > G) I cp 10 1 G \ I 91 4� y WHOLE 1 - LEVB- ee6'Oi1� o I PROPOSED gqRAINAGE AND, . •' — — — 1� — _ S pLOO� OPINE \ I IF' UTILITY EASE ENTS (fYP) I 1 I 101 1 S_ — =_ ER I 1 11 LOT F. �, u I.OhR1C , / OLE I 1.15 + -ACRES s 75 / sT 1 LOT WIDTH =268 INV ELEV-effi �2+1 \ \ LOT DEPTH =334 (7 1 \ LOT PERIMETER = 968 \` ��� s/ 10oKU 391 of oEEM F LOT WIDTH TO PERIMETER RAT10 Q28 i AND BOOK 1600 OF DEE SS MANHOLE RIM EIEV -W221 \\ \ \ CONTROL • -/ / /s - INV EIEV 8(/.51 ` \ PANEL BOX '• -1 / - �`� ST MANHOLE RIM ELI V y b.4221 B' •" \ \ INV ELF/ -0BGS3 EXISTING H -iU'i ST MANH / \ \ \ \ ^ \ \ / THIS LOT IS O 1911..3 FT. BACK ON RIM ELEV���2229 RIM 5 // INV / SS MAL9I0 IE / RIM NV R95 F1FV=576. / INV ELEV=876 -%N \\ \ 65 MANHOLE \ RIM ELEY -8n9/ 0 �70 60 20 •••s'. ••• INV ELEV878.61W \ \ INV ELEV -UM54E as awa«a RAW II PK.aa •• a a4wa,E w P1EV•M1.)OE 'O erM..en sa Wwa,e RY eE,s.,a, 9P/•41a61 9T WERa,E ' RIM ELEV`! X w HENlRBS _ — — — RIM 1.120- 1.71 P/l ' W ELE — / / NJ ElEV.e�.81 IIIV ElEV�1.139 / / — • RTWa9101E // .1 ��1(�? ST ua .,:., '• RBI EtEV•1 4 V. h 9N �4R1 / 24 �r POLE fFA _ RV751 go BT RW EIEV•4ID.N F RIA M EL na,aE �� LO H528-r • Ev -079" i- /e-- y, LOkPERIAh�JEiER =1064 / / /'COT NAOYH T�� R RATIO 9. _ •\ \ \ \\ \ I \ M m .waNE / / / / / — a�� n 017- LAN �' / ' / lr / i' ' ' Q A.a \ \ ` \ \ I I • aEr. — I all Q � E� \ Ic \\ / // / /�/ -/ � / •• a� .5. \� I \, EXISTING HOUSE SETBACKON / ' \ / / %ry / / // /, ,// •., / B \\ I \\ THIS LOT [S175.0 FT. ICE T2/ i ELEVN4t,t WNHOIE I `I 7 - Y rr I III S.F ••A� , ; a I a g 7 W LDAB T �kdE �3R 61 as25 51 = RT �OT Q P M R 1 I I \ \ EIEVMai. - f I I I I , I I I 7 1 1 1 I o \ I \ I I \ \�V27 -D 93 \\\ \/ �>i• I \ ae.1 PROPOSE° ,\ `` a, � — 139.51 \ \\ 1 \\ \\ \ \ i + ACR S I \ \ \ \ \ \ LOT WIDITH`1� \ 1 \ \ \ \ \ \ LO QEPTP334 \ \ \ \ g / / 10 FT UTILITY EASEMENT PER I I \ \ \ \ \LOT frFRIME R= Q BOOK 1391 OF DEEDS, PAGE 438 •$ST EtEVroPZ2� I \ \ \ \ \ COT WIDDTH TO�ER7 TIO= B, ,o / / / AND BOOK 1890 OF DEEDS PAGE 132 IRV ELEV•liaf \ \ \ \ �L /x as RlM AT \ \ \\ \ Alm AElIH�VaP2�t _ ° \ / EXISTING HOUSE SETSACKON •k � \'��\ �Z\ \\ \ "•� \\ \\ \/ 1/ '\\ .. THIS LoT15191.s Fr.yo As M41ma RIM • as W,i',� \� \ \ \� , � \\ , S - p ®� 201 ' 1', •` wElE�.51E Lot contains 3.48 + - acres I F(-.Ai nFSr.RIPT10W C)F PREMISES SURVEYED: \. \ \ / 413 Jackie Hooaenakker From: Jennifer Rowland <jenniferrowla nd @comcast. net> Sent: Wednesday, September 25, 2013 9:14 AM To: Jackie Hoogenakker Cc: Edina Mail; Mary Brindle (Comcast); joshsprague @edinarealty.com; swensonannl @gmail.com Subject: Re: Proposed Blackfoot Pass Lot Subdivision > To the Edina Planning Commision and City Council Members, >. I am writing on behalf of my husband David Rowland and myself to address a proposed subdivision of a recently purchased lot on Blackfoot Pass in the Indian hills neighborhood in which we reside. We have lived in two homes in Edina for most of the past 21 years and we have enjoyed both homes for their unique qualities. Our first home was at 5003 Arden Avenue in the Brucewood neighborhood of Edina. We enjoyed the many amenities of living in close proximity to 50th & France and Arden Park as our children grew up. Our second home in Edina is located at 6605 Dakota Trail. This property includes a second parcel; 6601 Dakota Trail which the previous owners had purchased and combined to create an even larger property in the beautiful Indian Hills neighborhood. We chose this home after learning more about the west side of Edina and came to appreciate the larger lots, beautiful trees and more country -like feel. Although we moved out of the east side of Edina, we had come to learn that the features of the Indian Hills neighborhood met our needs an desires for our current phase of life. > The neighborhood diversity in Edina makes it a stronger community. The distinct characteristics of each neighborhood allows Edina to meet the needs of a variety of people with a variety of needs and desires. The proposed subdivision is inconsistent with the unique characteristics provided in the Indian Hills neighborhood. It would be a mistake to allow this sort of transformation to occur, and it would weaken an important strength of the city of Edina. > Thank you for the consideration of our perspective in this matter. > David and Jennifer Rowland > 6605 & 6601 Dakota Trail > Edina, Mn 55439 > > 1 Jackie Hoogenakker From: Alvina Janda <alvina janda @gmail.com> Sent: Sunday, September 22, 2013 11:23 PM To: Jackie Hoogenakker Cc: mgenau78 @gmail.com Subject: Lot 5 Rolling Green Proposed subdivision To the Edina City Council Members Dear Council Members, As an Edina resident of the Rolling Green Neighborhood, my husband and I have resided at 4603 Merilane for 28 years. am writing to give you feedback on the proposed Warner subdivision at 5 Merilane. I believe I speak with knowledge of the community of Rolling Green. The Warner property is a beautiful piece of wooded hilly land with several wetlands at it's base along Merilane. While a 3.48 acre piece of property would seem adequate for 3 homes with just over 1 acre of property each, the nature of the property and existing surrounding homes that dictate set back create an artificial and "forced" crowding of 3 houses at the apex of a pie shaped lot. There is no other area in Rolling Green where 5 homes (the 3 proposed on the Warner property and the Genau and Pollad properties that surround it) would be placed so tightly together. The proposed new homesites would lack a true back yard. No doubt they would be large, 2+ story homes and create significant shadows on their neighbors' yards and homes. Any attempt to plant tall shrubs or bushes as a buffer would only partially screen the imposing structures. No matter how beautiful the home or landscaping, one cannot escape the crowding effect this would have. It will adversely impact the property value of the immediate neighbors on either side. The wetlands at the base of the Warner lot will likely be eliminated as we have seen occur on other recent nearby new homesites. The ambiance of the Rolling Green neighborhood has been one of openness, and space. It has never been and we hope, will never become, with all due respect, a "Country Club" of Edina. The space between homes in Rolling Green is uniquely what distinguishes this area. I would strongly urge you to maintain the appearance of the neighborhood all of us "bought into" when we chose Rolling Green over other areas. The Edina City Council has an obligation to look at more than just "legalities" when reviewing this type of request for subdivision. There is the need to look at "context" and fairness to the neighbors. Thank you for your time. Respectfully, Alvina M. Janda, MD 4603 Merilane Edina MN 55436 alvina.ianda @gmail.com Sent from my iPad Cary Teague Community Development Director City of Edina September 10`h, 2013 Dear Cary: I am writing to submit feedback on the proposed subdivision of 5 Merilane. Our family lives a short distance away from the site. Unfortunately I have to be out of town on business during the planning commission meeting on September 11`h, but I wanted to make sure my perspective (shared by several neighbors) was presented to the commission as part of that meeting. While it may appear that the subdivision complies with current city ordinances, I believe it is important for the planning commission and the city council to take into account the very first element of land use in the Edina comprehensive plan: "Protect and preserve the essential character of existing residential neighborhoods." In reality, this subdivision proposal is a request to build three 6,000+ sq.ft. (or likely much larger) homes on roughly an acre of property - right at the "center of the pizza," if you will, that is defined by the setback on the current lot — so about 1/3 acre per home (see figure to the right, from proposal). While the total lot sizes may meet the mean requirements, the actual housing density in the proposal is much higher than anywhere else in the neighborhood. I believe this implied density needs to be considered as part of the subdivision application. I would encourage any commission members that have not done so to visit the lot to really understand what the illustration to the right will look like in practice versus the surrounding area. It seems that a reasonable outcome would be a • ;�:, _sue Y.. -, _ _._._. LOT jL �• /. ! 1 -7 i •.LOT 2 7 ���; �r =1Y xi 1x I.or3 a Hl.Caai ^, ,.,,�•1;`I` I ��'� ....c.:..�rw+.,.�w..�n'�1�A •as �i� P'`�N4 �'� w.;!'L. _ r . subdivision into two lots, allowing the owner to reap the substantial value increase of the land and reflecting the changing lot size dynamics within the neighborhood - while staying aligned with the comprehensive plan for Edina. Regards, Scott Gill 4725 Annaway Drive :.f Ca rY Teague, Community Development Director - + 952- 826 -0460 1 Fax 952- 826 -0389 1 Cell 952 - 826 -0236 cteagueAEdinaMN.gov I www.EdinaMN.gov /Planning ...For Living, Learning, Raising Families & Doing Business From: Scott Gill [ mailto:Scott.Gill @milestone.com] Sent: Monday, September 09, 2013 2:02 PM To: Cary Teague Subject: 5 Merilane Subdivision Proposal Feedback Process Cary- Hello, my name is Scott Gill and I live near the proposed subdivision of 5 Merilane in Edina. I was wondering if there is an opportunity for neighbor comments at the Wednesday planning commission meeting, or if it is simply the presentation of the proposal by the owner's representative? My assessment of the subdivision is that it is really a request to build (3) likely 6,000+ sq.ft. (or even much bigger) homes on about an acre of property - the "center of the pizza ", if you will, that is defined by the setback — so roughly 1/3 acre per home. While the total lot sizes may meet the mean requirements, the actual density of the proposal is much higher than anywhere else within the neighborhood. I believe this very high implied density needs to be considered as part of the subdivision application. I'd appreciate any insight into the commission meeting process so I can make sure I provide my feedback through the appropriate channels. Best Regards, Scott Scott Gill {thief' Executive Officer Milestone AV Technologies scott.gill(aD-milestone.com +1.952225.6860 1� Jackie Hoogenakker From: Mark Holmberg <mark.holmberg @comcast.net> Sent: Tuesday, September 10, 2013 4:20 PM To: Jackie Hoogenakker Subject: Proposed Subdivision of 5 Merilane, Edina Edina City Council Edina Planning Commission Re: Proposed Subdivision of 5 Merilane, Edina My husband and I have lived in the Rolling Green neighborhood at 4604 Merilane for 21 years and chose this neighborhood because of the large lots; it is like living in the country but having the amenities that only the community of Edina can provide. We have seen the proposed subdivision of 5 Merilane into three lots and the proposed placement of the homes on these three building sites. If three homes were to be built on these pie- shaped lots they would have to be crowded together at the back of each property to satisfy the setback requirements; this would destroy the character of the Rolling Green neighborhood and impact on the property values of the neighbors. Already Rolling Green is beginning to look like the Country Club neighborhood on steroids. John Adams stated in a letter that the lot can be subdivided into three lots without a variance, and if that is accurate, then the neighbors will have to accept that. However, should the future owners of these lots and their builders request a variance of the set back requirements or any lot line variances we will oppose.those requests. Rolling Green is a beautiful neighborhood and I:ask you to please preserve its unique character and charm by . not allowing the .subdivision of this property into three lots. Thank you, Hedy and. Mark Holmberg 4604 Merilane Edina, MN 55436 1 Neighbors to 5 Merilane Re: Proposed Subdivision of the Warner Estate I am in receipt of an email sent to you Thursday afternoon, September 5, 2013 by Sandi Genau, one of 2 neighbors that abut the Warner property. There was some misinformation in that email that I would like to clarify. First, it was stated that Kraemer & Sons have already purchased two lots and suggested that was "a little presumptuous" given that the City hasn't yet approved the proposed subdivision. To be clear, we do have executed contracts with John Kraemer & Sons to buy 2 of the 3 proposed lots, however, both of those contracts are contingent upon receiving plat approval from the City of Edina. Such "pre- sale" of lots on contingent contracts is ordinary. That is not to say, however, that we are unsure of whether the proposed plat complies with city ordinances. Our proposed subdivision was carefully planned to comply with all of the ordinances of the City of Edina and we have worked closely with the City Staff to satisfy the City's protocols in processing the subdivision application. Secondly, Ms. Genau implied in her email that we are seeking a 10' side yard setback in order to "squeeze" in 3 houses. In fact, the side yard setback of 10' is set by city code and applies throughout Rolling Green. It would apply to the Warner property (including the boundary shared with the Genau's) regardless if it was a 2 lot subdivision or a 3 lot subdivision. That having been said, we believe that homes can be well placed on the 3 lots so as not to appear "squeezed" onto the property. We selected John Kraemer & Sons as the builder to develop the homes on this property because of his long standing, impeccable reputation in the community. He is mindful of the neighbors' concerns and expects to work with them in regard to the placement of the homes. We believe he is a quite capable builder, well suited to accomplish this. In fact, Mary Pohlad, the neighbor on the other side, stated to me if she was going to build a home for herself, if would be with John Kraemer & Sons because of their reputation. We are confident that he will do a very nice job. Also, please be aware that I have had a conversation with Sandi Genau in which she indicated that she would support our subdivision if we encouraged the buyer of lot 1 (adjacent to her) to seek permission from the City to move a new home further away from her — closer to the street. This would have the effect of increasing the distance between that home and her lot. I discussed this with Gary Kraemer who agreed that this would only make sense for all parties concerned to give more privacy to everybody. Upon securing an end user for lot 1, Gary is very receptive to working with the Genau's to give both parties maximum privacy, through both home placement and screening. The Warners have lived at 5 Merilane for almost 50 years. They have seen many changes in Rolling Green in that time, including other subdivisions, homes torn down and new very large homes built. Those subdivisions on which, some of your homes are built were allowed because the City of Edina ordinances permitted them. Similarly, Warner's proposed subdivision is legally permitted by the current city ordinances and, we think, is in keeping with the neighborhood standards. For example, one of the ordinances requires lot sizes larger than the median lot size within 500' of the property. Our lots are larger and satisfy that requirement. The Warners have the same right as other property owners before them to subdivide their property in compliance of the City's ordinances. The proposed subdivision complies with the City's ordinances. It does not require any variances from the code. When the time comes to build new homes on lots 1 and 3, John Kraemer & Sons will work with the adjacent property owners and the City to provide appropriate home placement and mutually beneficial screening to maximize privacy for all parties. So suffice to say, we, too, hope to maintain the beautiful aesthetic of the neighborhood. I would ask that you acknowledge the Warner family's long standing presence in the community by supporting their subdivision request. Gary Kraemer, with John Kraemer& Sons, and I met with Sandi Genau today for 25 hours in an attempt to address her concerns. I think we made some progress in a positive direction. Please feel free to call me if you have any questions at 612.720.4827.. John Adams NI�i ATI ON To: MAYOR & COUNCIL From: Debra Mangen City Clerk Date: October 1, 2013 Subject: Resolution No. 2013 -85 Accepting Various Donations Action Requested: Adopt Resolution. Information / Background: /9 Ow Fe Agenda Item #: VIII. A. Action Discussion ❑ Information ❑ U) O e 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 recipients departments for your consideration. Attachments: Resolution No. 2013 -85 City of Edina • 4801 W. 50th St Edina, MN 55424 RESOLUTION NO. 2013-85 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. Edina Art Center: Ruth & Mark Valgemae $500.00 2013 Members Juried Show Elizabeth Eisenbrey $100.00 2013 Members Juried. Show Jerry's Foods $100.00 2013 Members Juried Show Jean Adams $50.00 2013 Members Juried Show Susan Lloyd $50.00 2013 Members Juried Show Barbara McGregor Oil,Paints Carter Gruss Acrylic Paiints Barbara Bindgen $30.00 2013 Members Juried Show Linda Masica $100.00 2013 Members Juried Show Mary Dvorak $50.00 2013 Members Juried Show Norma & Ray Anderson 26 Assorted Frames Faye Grady Various Art Materials Heather Randall King $100.00 2013 Members Juried Show LuAnn Rosenthall- Erickson $10.00 2013 Members Juried Show Bill McCabe & Debra Neuger $250.00 2013 Members Juried Show Bill McCabe & Debra Neuger $250.00 Jim Van Valkenburg Memorial Pinstripes Dessert Platter 2013 Members Juried Show Lunds & Byerlys Gift Card 2013 Members Juried Show Jason's Deli Fruit Platters 2013 Members Juried Show Salut Bar Americain Food 2013 Members Juried Show Wet Paint Gift Cards 2013 Members Juried Show Q Cumbers Gift Cards 2013 Members Juried Show JH Larson Advertising 2013 Members Juried Show Edina Fire Department: Cela Dolan $100.00 Edina Braemar Memorial Fund For Future Golf Course Equipment Purchases: Robert Malby $125.00 Dated October 1, 2013 Attest: Debra A. Mangen, City Clerk James B. Hovland, Mayor i1 Deb Mangen _ From: Sandi Genau <sgenau79 @gmail.com> Sent: Tuesday, October 01, 2013 1:43 PM To: Edina Mail Subject: 5 Merilane Avenue, Edina, MN Attachments: City Council Letter.docx Dear City Council Members, We are submitting this letter to you for consideration prior to the discussion about the above property at tonight's meeting. Thank you, Sandi & Mike Genau 6 Merilane Ave. Edina, MN 55436 1 September 28 2013 Mike and Sandi Genau 6 Merilane Avenue Edina, MN 55436 Edina City Council Members Edina City Council 4801 W. 50t� Street Edina, Minnesota 55424 Dear City Council Members, As each of you knows, the proposed subdivision of 5 Merilane is,on the agenda for tonight's meeting. We appreciate your consideration and the time that several of you have taken to come by and speak with us. We are immediate neighbors of 5 Merilane Avenue. We purchased our home at 6 Merilane last December 2012, after being especially drawn to Rolling Green's large lots, rolling lawns and mature trees. We have deep concerns about the possibility of 5 Merilane being divided into three lots resulting in five homes being closely packed into a very small area. This is not the Rolling Green that we invested in and not what we would expect our City Council to approve based on what is published the Edina Comprehensive Plan. We understand that the Warner's feel entitled to subdivide this property and are determined to divide into three lots at all costs. While it might be technically possible to squeeze three homes onto the smallest part of this property, it doesn't make the best use of this land and it changes the eastern side of Merilane substantially. Having five homes on top of each other is unprecedented in Rolling Green and will significantly affect the property values of those of us who live in the immediate vicinity. The unfortunate fact is that 5 Merilane is a large reverse pie shaped lot. It is not well suited to hold 3 large homes at its apex due to the irregular shaped lots and difficult building pads that would be created. The Edina Comprehensive Plan states that the council should consider suitability when deciding such matters. Planner Teaque has written in his new staff report that in his opinion, "considerations regarding anything other than the minimum size restrictions are subjective ". Is he saying that these other criteria are irrelevant? What is the point of having these other considerations if they are not valued in any way? Why are they published in the Edina Comprehensive Plan if they really have no impact? What protects the integrity of each neighborhood if these criteria are removed from consideration? They should be as equally important as the lot size and minimum setbacks as they define the very essence of our neighborhood. Late Friday afternoon we were made aware of an alternative proposal that the Warners expect to discuss at this meeting. We are referring to the change of the front setback lines to 130' and the addition of conservation easements along the sides of lots 1 and 3 and at the rear of all three lots. It is important to note that this new plan moves the building pad on Lot Leven more directly into our view. Unfortunately, we have not had any time to. consult with experts to see how we can work with this plan. If this becomes a serious discussion at the meeting, then we would minimally ask the council to consider the use or an arborist, possibly setting up an escrow account to replace mature trees if they die in a year or two, tagging significant trees to be saved and extending the proposed conservation easements to the street. We would expect the Warners to be required to go through the usual steps to procure a variance for the new front setbacks and not be allowed to slide this through in a hurry. This short notice does not afford the rest of the neighbors any opportunity to give consideration to these changes to the original proposal. We would also like you to consider house height. The new home going up across the street from us is significantly tall. We are very concerned by what could become a giant monstrosity in our view. There will be no escaping it regardless of how many new trees are planted. Planning Commissioner Floyd Grabiel, even commented in the last planning meeting that he was surprised by the height of this new house and cautioned everyone that this should be a consideration and could be a problem going forward. While there may be a handful of instances of homes somewhat closer together in Rolling Green, the east side of Merilane (and the neighborhood in general) is characterized by large lots with much space between homes. Dividing the Warner property into two larger lots would leave much more room between the homes and keep the same feeling along this side of Merilane. The homes would no longer have to be on top of each other and also would not obstruct our views. Damage to mature trees along the property lines and in the above mentioned conservation easements could be minimized. We believe this really captures the feeling of the neighborhood and in particular the east side of Merilane. We ask each of you to consider this option instead. We do believe there would be much community support for this scenario. Finally, we are aware of many concerns regarding traffic on this narrow end of Merilane. It has been made even more dangerous due to the constant stream of construction vehicles in the area. For this reason, we ask that the city not make a decision on this without input from a traffic engineer. As our City Council we know that you are considering the impact to the residents involved. Those of us who do reside in Rolling Green are simply interested in protecting our investment in our homes, quality of life and the quiet enjoyment of our properties. Thank you for your time and consideration, Mike and Sandi Genau TO FROM: Date: RE:' -T-t-,. ,� v k . � . Edina City Council James and Kathryn Ganley, Owners 4704 Merilane Avenue September 27, 2013 SUBDIVISION OF 5 MERLIANE INTO THREE LOTS COUNCIL MEMBERS: SEAL SEP 3 0 2013 As a direct neighbor facing #5 Merilane, I am opposed to the subdivision of 5 Merilane into three lots. ISSUE BEFORE THE COUNCIL The only issue pending before the Council is whether 5 Merilane can be subdivided into three lots. At this stage the owners /developers of 5 Merilane do not request any variance. Any variance request with respect to 5 Merilane will generate a broader and different discussion. ADDITIONAL ISSUES FOR CONSIDERATION As a signor of the letter dated September 27, 2013 from RESIDENTS OF ROLLING GREEN I am offering this letter to focus`on additional issues that I believe are relevant to the issue before the council. Proximity and House Size Together Houses in Rolling Green were originally planned balancing home size, lot size and proximity - collectively to help define the character of the neighborhood. By jamming large homes together into odd shaped lots, the, developer's plans are entirely contrary to the character of th'e neighborhood and ignore the detrimental impact on the character of Rolling Green., The various restrictions that arise due to the unusual shape of the owner's lot; combined with the set =back restrictions dictated by ordinance and location of the existing house, create an odd result for a three lot subdivision. To be clear, I am not objecting to a subdivision of a,3+ acre lot, but this application is not a good option as it was designed to avoid a variance request and. not to respect the character of the neighborhood. Any rational plans for dividing a lot of this size and shape would not result in crowding three large homes into such a tight position while leaving no room for back yards or consideration of the odd position of the existing home. It certainly ignores the impact on'the neighbors. It's also important to note.that as these houses are set far back from the road and situated far up a hill, and therefore will appear even closer together than houses built closer to the road. Depending on the size, shape and use of the buildable plot, it might be very difficult to see any distance at all between the homes and as a resident I am concerned that the collection of large homes pushed back into the corners, seemingly attached to one another, will create an imposing fortress of homes on the hill. Odd Shaped Lots, Odd Results and No Backyards While the lot size is generous and large enough to subdivide, the position of the existing house at #5 and strange lot shape make subdividing the plots into three impractical. The current house is large and built.very close to the property dividing line and we should expect the future houses will be similar. Another important issue for consideration is the position of the existing house. The existing house does not face the road but is perpendicular, almost facing away from the road in certain spots. While the position of the existing home is unusual, the heavily wooded lot, set far back*om the street.and at considerable distance to existing neighbors afforded this unique design. This will certainly change as the lot is cleared of its wooded barrier (n.-b. this is happening already as the woods are being cleared on a daily basis and the densely wooded lot is disappearing), and additional homes are built near one another and their neighboring homes. The developer has not shared their building plans and subsequently we have no idea what the homes will look like, what direction they will face, how large they will be, how close together they will be, etc. If the new homes are built facing the street things will become even more random; front doors will look at side doors and back doors. Strange. Because of the aforementioned restrictions and lot shape, the three houses as planned will have virtually no backyards, and certainly not anything commensurate with the size of the homes to be built. This of course assumes they are built facing the street. This is entirely inconsistent with other homes. in Rolling Green which have backyards that accommodate green space, play areas, pools etc. As one of the neighbors facing these homes I am greatly concerned that what is now a generous front lawn will become a series of backyards that are visible from the street. Looking out my front door I will see the large edifice of #7 Merliane facing the street with another lot possibly facing away from the street. This would be entirely out of character with the current neighborhood and in stark contrast to the homes adjacent and surrounding #5. This issue has not been'addressed in the current application for subdivision, and will materially impact the feel of the neighborhood and the home values of adjacent properties. Developers vs. Residents When my wife and I purchased our home.four years ago the character of the neighborhood was a_n important factor in our decision. We paid a premium, but felt the character of the neighborhood warranted the premium. If we wanted to live in a densely packed the there were plenty of choices but instead we chose Rolling Green for the precise reason that it is not dense. Allowing this subdivision would destroy the character of the neighborhood and certainly impact the premium that is attached to homes in the area of today. So now we must ask ourselves why someone would take this decision. It should be clearly noted that this request for subdivision is from a developer and NOT a resident. I suspect this is a common issue before the council. At the recent Planning Commission Advisory meeting on September 11, 2013 the developer could not even bother to attend the meeting to help inform the Planning Commission. At that meeting, current residents were asked to "trust" the developer because of their perceived strong reputation for building large homes. That is not a risk we can afford to take and given the lack of engagement from the developer would be an entirely foolish leap of faith. The developer does not reside in Rolling Green and the current owners are not committing to staying in the neighborhood, so why should they care. The owners who are selling and the developer are entirely driven by profit, which is their right, but it is not their right to profit at the expense of rest of the neighborhood and the material impact to the houses closest to #5. The current owners of #5 have their rights but so too do the remaining residents who will continue to reside in the neighborhood after the new homes are built and the current owners and developers are long gone. For the current residents, this Council is our last line of defense against the intentions of those that only consider profit and ignore the impact on the surrounding community. As residents, we rightly wish to protect the value of our homes as they are substantial investments, and in the Rolling Green area we pay substantial taxes based on the perceived value of these homes. But we also value living in the neighborhood and enjoying its unique character of wooded streets, and generous spacing between homes on larger lots. It's this council's job to protect us from profit motivated development at the expense of current residents. Finally, please consider the impact that a decision to allow this subdivision will have on the neighborhood in years to come. Each planning decision creates potential ]mock on effects. The residents of Rolling Green wish to protect the character of the neighborhood today and for years to come. Please also see the attached Powerpoint presentation that attempts to inform the council on the issue of character and some of the points raised in this letter through pictures of the neighborhood and the property under consideration. Finally, I strongly urge council members to walk the property before making a decision as the true impact of the developer and owner's plans can only be truly appreciated with one's own eyes. Thank you for your consideration. Respectfully, V 1,�. ���w 7 mes P. Can 4704 Merilane Avenue tv i s i o n Su-.b.d of #5 Merilane Avenue • The current plans to- ,subdivide #5 Merilane are inconsistent with the character of .the Rolling Green neighborhood and should be denied in its current form. • This short presentation is to assist the Council in better evaluating the subdivision plans by the developers by reviewing — The "character" of Rolling Green — Property in question • The council should seriously consider walking this lot to get a true perspective of the — tightness of the proposed lots — the lack of any back yard space (not being considered /addressed) — Odd position of adjacent houses due to unusual position of . #5 which was afforded by large wooded lot — would no longer be true — Collection of large houses jammed together would create an imposing physical presence with distance.from the road making them look on top of one another • Finally it should be noted that currently we have no indications of the sizes and styles of the houses that could be built on the lots which could have an even greater impact given the likely home size and buildable lot given the large plot. • Current setback limitations squeeze all the houses together �Kl nnorilnno Ax/nniic � � .: ►► •., .�..• �Y' 1 A � r,. {. � �.. 7..� �' f �.r►v•. • .' ..Fr ..,,fir . �' �. �� .fir .�� fr i�'Y Y'�rvn `' � � •,' '.! ��" •� Aa. 4k IP . , � ... ,.�. ..ate •. :Z!g ►V/ rAT.M i jOK jai IL AA!L At - t%, •,�' -� -♦ flt!`�+� I d • '� ` jib.~ �'�� i � � l + fir• Z. * �/ . �► Y. s irka �` Ar 1' :�y►•�rmFrr:� Apt. 'or 147P Jt� IK ----saw 400' 0i • r: no of M Frr: x �7�` •yti a � r;�,�r r Y� rA '�` ✓ 5 �"'� 14 ' ' r� . ' • .� " ;h •'� -k `tea. `�_ ' +. � i 'yam �1~ .. 2; � .� � � = ,`���� •4 r -�:.}� .� » _ . id i i Approach to #7 1 G� #7 Merilane Wooded lot, set back no houses in close proximity #7 and #5 Merilane Current View #5 Merilane view from street Wooded lot, set back no houses in close proximity =••• .. WWI -1`,� I g House trom Roat n _ rY sew. Y •-f p�.,� :+ ♦,, v` • r �. — Any,, .'1 �' .. . t +; , •„ yid • . Proposed building site lot 3 Notice size of house next door, proximity of large house directly behind. Refer to previous picture to with reference to spot of driveway • -If I • lk View from side of new proposed house lot 3 Note existing house faces sideways or backwards to new house. Was OK on big lot but not crowded by other houses ght Spaces, B-Ig Hc .i 47W I r •: ''`fir ��„ � -. ,+t' 1 { � y .,��% � .i - �. �, �y. •.r, .�y�`�/] its .%�} �" • �.� v �� •��•` "� 4T �� "mss ''�,:oa''+,:,.F''�/; r �.�r +� ,� AX '# ;' pimp 10 e- Al Y71� rr. ol MwErm VA rwi 9 1 M 111.0 AT w ah A* Slf wt. . N ta IL 14 %`%W, - Lots get very tight as pie shapes meet Two additonal large houses with no 1 1 '1 With large houses in such tight proximity set back so far from the street it will be difficult to perceive any space between them — and there will not be much. Adjacent neighbors highly impacted. Will have material financial impact Village on The Hill 7:11 TO: EDINA CITY COUNCIL FROM: RESIDENTS OF ROLLING GREEN DATE: September 27, 2013 RE: SUBDIVISION OF 5 MERILANE INTO THREE LOTS COUNCIL MEMBERS: w SEAL -S SEP 3 0 2013 RECEIV® As residents of the Rolling Green neighborhood, we are opposed to the subdivision of 5 Merilane into three lots. ISSUE BEFORE THE COUNCIL The only issue pending before the Council is whether 5 Merilane can be subdivided into three lots. At this stage, the owners /developers of 5 Merilane do not request any variance. Any variance request with respect to 5 Merilane will generate a broader and different discussion. PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND AND SCOPE OF REVIEW At the recent Planning Commission hearing regarding the subdivision of 5 Merilane, the Commission did not vote to recommend subdividing 5 Merilane into three lots. Some Commission members, along with the Development Director, suggested that the Commission did not have discretion to oppose because the subdivision meets the minimum requirements relating to the median lot size, width, and depth of other lots within 500 feet of 5 Merilane. In determining whether a particular lot can be subdivided, the median lot size, width, and depth within 500 feet of other property are only the first elements to consider. If the minimum criteria are not met, the Planning Commission and the Council will not subdivide a lot unless a variance is applied for and granted. Even if the minimum criteria are met, then the Planning Commission and the Council must consider all other relevant Edina ordinances and the 2008 Edina Comprehensive Plan. The Edina Land Use, Planning and Zoning ordinances apply here, and particularly Section 810 -Plat and Subdivisions. As articulated in Subsection 810.01, a purpose and objective of this Section is to support and further the City's Comprehensive Plan and to protect the character and symmetry of neighborhoods in the City. 347615 Subsection 810.11 provides the guidelines and criteria to use in evaluating the situation here. This subsection, in part, states as follows: 810.11 Guidelines and Criteria for Evaluating Plats and Subdivisions. Subd.1 Considerations. The Commission in reviewing proposed plats and subdivisions and in determining its recommendation to the Council, and the Council in determining whether to approve or disapprove of any plat or subdivision, may consider among other matters, the following: A. The impact of the proposed plat or subdivision, and proposed development, on the character and symmetry of the neighborhood as evidenced and indicated by, but not limited to, the following matters: 1. The suitability of the size and shape of the lots in the proposed plat or subdivision relative to the size and shape of lots in the neighborhood and 2. The compatibility of the size and shape, location and arrangement of the lots in the proposed plat or subdivision with the proposed density and intended use of the site and the density and use of lots in the neighborhood. B. The impact of the proposed plat or subdivision, and proposed development, on the environment, including but not limited to, topography, steep slopes, vegetation, naturally occurring lakes, ponds and streams, susceptibility of the site to erosion and sedimentation, susceptibility of the site to flooding and water storage needs on and from the site. C. The consistency of the proposed plat or subdivision, and proposed development, and compliance by the proposed plat or subdivision, and the proposed development,. with the policies, objectives, and goals of the Comprehensive Plan. The 2008 Edina Comprehensive Plan provides additional guidance and direction. As stated in Section 4.1 of Chapter 4, "It is widely recognized that the appearance and compatibility of a particular land use with its surroundings are as important as the use itself." In Section 4.4 of Chapter 4, the very first item listed for land use goals in Edina is to: 1. Protect and preserve the essential character of existing residential neighborhoods. 2 347615 Later in this same subsection, under the heading "Future Land Use Plan," it states: A basic theme of the land use plan is that Edina's low density residential neighborhoods, which make up over 50% of this City's land area, are expected to remain largely unchanged. It would be wrong for the Council to blindly apply the median 500 foot criteria for lot size, width, and depth measurements in determining whether to subdivide 5 Merilane into three lots. The Council must consider the broader picture outlined here, and consider the impact on Rolling Green and its other residents. THE IMPACT OF SUBDIVIDING 5 MERILANE IS TOO GREAT 5 Merilane is a wooded and pie- shaped lot located at the north end of Merilane where the street turns 90 degrees and continues to the east. The curved portion of the lot line of 5 Merilane would create an almost perfect circle if extended all the way around. The straight portions of the lot lines of 5 Merilane (the side next to 6 Merilane and the side next to 7 Merilane) create a wide angle of about 150 degrees. The proposed subdivision of 5 Merilane cuts this large piece of pie into three smaller slices. The proposed subdivision creates lot lines with sharp angles of about 40 to 50 degrees. There are some odd shaped lots in Rolling Green, and some that are pie- shaped. But there is no collection of lots in all of Rolling Green with such severely restricted lot angles. The proposed shape of these subdivided lots is unique and not matched anywhere in the neighborhood. Though the sizes of the proposed subdivided lots are larger than many lots within 500 feet on the left side of Merilane (west side of the north/south axis, and north side of east/west axis), the sharp angled shapes of the proposed lots are totally out of character. And six of the.smaller lots on the left side of Merilane adjoin the Meadowbrook Golf Course providing a high level of open space. This is not true for the proposed subdivided lots. Significantly, the proposed subdivided lots are smaller than all lots located on the same side of Merilane within 500 feet, and even farther. The proposal locates three structures at the pointed end of each lot. If this proposal is allowed, three homes on the subdivided lots will crowd up against the homes now located at 6 and 7 Merilane. Nowhere in Rolling Green are five homes located so close to one another. The location, arrangement, and proposed density of the structures on these subdivided lots will be unprecedented in Rolling Green. If this subdivision is allowed, five significant homes will be clumped together at the top of the hill. If allowed, this newly created subdivision of five homes in Rolling Green will be known as the "Village on the Hill." 3 347615 The curve of Merilane where number 5 is located is already a dangerous stretch of road. It is dangerous for drivers, but it is more dangerous for children, pedestrians and bicyclists. The subdivision of 5 Merilane will add two additional driveways at the most dangerous spot along the street. The subdivision of 5 Merilane into three lots will change the character of Rolling Green, and it will adversely affect those who live in the immediate vicinity. A BROADER VIEW There are many large lots in Rolling Green, and the 2008 Edina Comprehensive Plan specifically acknowledges that Rolling Green is special for that reason. How the Council addresses the issue of 5 Merilane will clearly bear on what may ultimately happen with numbers 8, 9, and 7 Merilane, and other lots throughout Rolling Green. If the Council blindly applies the 500 foot criteria involving size, width, and depth in determining whether to allow subdivision of lots in Rolling Green, the character of Rolling Green will be destroyed. Each time a subdivision is made, it will reduce the denominator for the next subdivision. There are three streets that go into Rolling Green from Interlachen Blvd. These are Merilane, Rolling Green Parkway, and Bywood West. On these three streets a number of the lots are well within 500 feet of Interlachen Blvd., and streets that run from Interlachen Blvd. to the south. If the Council blindly applies the 500 foot subdivision criteria, many lots in Rolling Green can be subdivided based upon lot size, width, and depth of lots located on Interlachen Blvd., Mirror Lakes Drive, Interlachen Circle, and possibly Interlachen Bluff. If the Council blindly applies the 500 foot formula to 5 Merilane, precedent is set for Rolling Green lots that are located near Interlachen Blvd. Subdividing lots in Rolling Green is a significant and long term issue. It needs to be addressed carefully and with complete understanding of the scope and impact throughout the Rolling Green neighborhood. Before making any decision to subdivide 5 Merilane, the City should calculate the theoretical maximum number of lots that could be created in Rolling Green. Are we looking at 10, 20 or 30 additional lots? The City and the residents of Rolling Green need to address these issues together. Many people made significant investments in Rolling Green. The tax assessment values in Rolling Green are some of the highest in Edina. Subdividing Rolling Green into smaller and smaller lots will hurt everyone's property values. Living in the constant construction zones that follow the subdivision of lots in Rolling Green also adversely affects property values. 4 347615 CONCLUSION Dividing 5 Merilane into three sharp -angled pie- shaped lots will change Merilane. It will create a configuration of lots that does not exist anywhere else in Rolling Green. Squeezing three new homes at the back of each subdivided lot will cram five homes together. To everyone who drives by, it will be viewed as the "Village on the Hill." The character of Rolling Green will change and the property values will suffer. If two more driveways are added to this already dangerous curve on Merilane, someone will get hurt —or worse. We urge the Council to vote against subdividing 5 Merilane into three pointed, pie- shaped lots. 5 347615 Name Address:D� NafW Address*_A"... Address: ZI 740 ® 4AAn* WA )( DR sv6 Name Address: WE- 01,41 W-- M Address: -�°� B / r, 347615 _ Name lqaine ' Name , Name 347615 i Name dd ; 644� Address: 7 Z Name Address: Name Address: Name Address: To: Edina City Council Members Gl-Eq [via e-mail to Jackie Hoogenakker] V September 301h, 2013 Dear Council Members: I am writing to submit feedback on the proposed subdivision of 5 Merilane under review during the October 1, 2013 public hearing. Our family lives a short distance away from the site. While it may appear that the subdivision complies with current city ordinances, I believe it is important for the City Council to take into account the very first element of land use in the Edina comprehensive plan: "Protect and preserve the essential character of existing residential neighborhoods." In reality, this subdivision proposal is a request to build three 6,000+ sq.ft. (or likely much larger) homes on roughly an acre of property - right at the "center of the pizza," if you will, that is defined by the setback on the current lot — so about 1/3 acre per home (see figure to the right, from the actual subdivision proposal). While the total lot sizes may meet the mean requirements, the actual housing density in the proposal is much higher than anywhere else in the neighborhood. I believe this implied density needs to be considered as part of the subdivision application. I would encourage any Planning Commission or City Council members that have not done so to visit the lot to really understand what the illustration to the right will look like in practice versus the surrounding area. Zi LOT I Y 7 J I. I 11 I �, •� ti�� .. y � 'q LOT 3 It seems that a reasonable outcome for all parties would be a subdivision into two lots, allowing the owner to reap the substantial value increase of the land and reflecting the changing lot size dynamics within the neighborhood - while staying aligned with the comprehensive plan for Edina. Regards, Scott Gill 4725 Annaway Drive R � PORT / R � C®MtM� :�NDATI©N o � 0 ,eae To: MAYOR AND COUNCIL Agenda Item #: VIII.B. From: Cary Teague, Community Development Director Action X❑ Discussion X❑ Date: October 1, 2013 Information Subject: Resolution No. 2013 -77. Silver Oak Development on behalf of the IRET Properties; Site Plan Review with a parking ramp setback and parking stall Variance at 6525 -45 France Avenue. Action Requested: Approve the attached resolution, which includes conditions recommended by the City Council at the last Council meeting. Planning Commission Recommendation: On August 28, 2013, a motion to approve the proposed Site Plan and Variances subject to findings and conditions failed on a 4 -5 Vote. (See attached minutes from the Planning Commission meeting.) Planning Commission concerns included the location and screening of the loading dock conflict between truck traffic and pedestrian and vehicle circulation, and width of drive entrance/exit from 66`x. The applicant has submitted revised plans to address concerns raised by the Planning Commission. (See attached.) Information /Background: (Deadline for a City Council Decision — October 14, 2013) Silver Oak Development on behalf of the IRET Properties is proposing to build a four story 60,000 square foot medical office expansion, and new parking ramp expansion to the existing 273,000 square foot Southdale Medical Office building located at 6525 -45 France Avenue. To accommodate the proposed addition, the following is requested: 1. Site Plan Review. 2. Parking Ramp Setback Variance from 40 and 34.5 feet to 34.5, 28 and 20 feet for the new parking deck to match the existing parking ramp setback. Differing setbacks are required for the ramp structure because the ramp itself is 34.5 feet tall; and the structure around the stairs is 40 feet tall. 3. Parking Stall Variance from 1,715 spaces to 1,577 spaces. A proof of parking plan for an additional deck could expand parking to 1,749 spaces has been provided. The applicant has revised the plans to address the concerns raised by the City Council. (See attached.) ATTACHMENTS: • Resolution No. 2013 -77 • Revised Narrative & Plans date stamped September 26, 2013 — Revised Plans are to address Council concerns. • Draft minutes from the August 28, 2013, Edina Planning Commission meeting • Planning Commission Staff Report, August 28, 2013 City of Edina • 4801 W. 50' St. • Edina, MN 55424 i SEP 2 ou 2013 1 !A 4 r ~rFmi-- -�� = -- _- 74 -'1 r IRET INVESTORS REAL ESTATE TRUST IRET INVESTORS REAL ESTATE TRUST IRET INVESTORS REAL ESTATE TRUST IRET INVESTORS R =AL ESTATE TR;;ST IRET INVESTORS R -AL ESTATE TRUST 11 Mf gs14 y � II 1 a IRET INVESTORS REAL'S -A1F TRUST �'O -•' y�$ wage .y, , `w"v r'°Xm t._s a ."?'a �' S ' •,:;�- ,� , "�:,- ..a, �u�s +""'� ate• *ray •sa,�c +'3`�c'i r3� �,� �` v °�` ° �-�4�. , A " ... x 'lpw- - - Southdale Medical Office Building City Council Presentation • 'p!��� � � X11.. J- •� �� • � I • I � y ■� 4.. i A " ... x 'lpw- - - Southdale Medical Office Building City Council Presentation • d K J Southdale Medical Office Building City Council Presentation NZ I. _ / b. . . . k� .am . .r roc J Southdale Medical Office Building City Council Presentation AIIO�� � 7.�++d�ld 1■11 1 T I Southdale Medical Office Building City Council Presentation 13 ,w- r..�.� � � , � ■� .� ` p \ w- : IJ liivprso , I , oil '17= I I I I IRET�NVE,i�jR, REAL I SIAI� i rz; A IRETiNVE��1-11� �'A� i �!A:� TRUST IRET !N VES1��rk5 ktAl E.` 1— 'T "F;l rcnw IRET INVESTORS REAL ESTATE TRUST 66t- h Street Existing Parking Spaces Required Parking Spaces Based on New Office Building Proposed Parking Spaces 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 1100 1200 1300 1400 1500 1600 1700 1800 Parking Statistics IRET INVESTORS REAL ESTATE TRUST �r y, IRET N VE � TOR, P Ai STATr TRUST IRET INVF.STORS REAI. ESTATE TRUST Southdale Medical Office Building City Council Presentation 07 IRET INVESTORS R AL ESTATE TRU', Aerial from Drew Avenue re j; it I fp, IR�T NVE� KCAL I � iAT.. TRUST W 0 Southdale Medical Office Building City Council Presentation Iiv SEP -. ': 2013 View from Drew Avenue i s� P Z IRET INVESTORS REAL ESTATE TRUST View from 65th Street IRET rr � rwpiY7�il`�, r�y WO rr� fiJ r ;r r of IRET IRET INVESTORS REAL ESTATE TRUST Aerial from SEP rik'iii �► �t f+aX IRET INVESTORS REAL ESTATE TRUST RESOLUTION NO. 2013-77 RESOLUTION APPROVING A SITE PLAN WITH VARIANCES AT 6525 -45 FRANCE AVENUE TO BUILD A 60,000 SQUARE FOOT ADDITION AND PARKING RAMP EXPANSION FOR THE SOUTHDALE MEDICAL OFFICE CAMPUS BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Edina, Minnesota, as follows: Section 1. BACKGROUND. 1.01 Silver Oak Development on behalf of the IRET P 60,000 square foot medical office expansion, and 273,000 square foot Southdale Medical Office bu 1.02 To accommodate the proposed addition, the 1. Site Plan Review. 2. Parking Ramp Setback Variance from 40 and 34.� parking deck to match the existing parking ramp setbacks are required for the ramp structure beca structure around the stairs is 40 feet tall. 3. Parking Stall Variance from 1,715 spaces to 1,577 additional deck could expand parking to 1,749 sl The property is legally described as follows: See attached. 1.02 With the exception of the requested Variances, the Ordinance Requirements. 1.03 On August 28, 2013, a motion to approve the propo findings and conditions failed on a 4 -5 Vote by the 1.04 The applicant submitted revised plans to address Commission. 1.05 On September 17, 2013 the City Council considered October 1, 2013 and recommended changes to the s: 1.05 On September 26, 2013 the applicant submitted the City Council. CITY OF EDINA ties is proposing to build a four story parking ramp expansion to the existing located at 6525 -45 France Avenue. is requested: feet to 34.5, 28 and 20 feet for the new setback. (See page A16a.) Differing ise the ramp itself is 34.5 feet tall; and the ?s. A proof of parking plan for an has been provided. plans meet all minimum Zoning Site Plan and Variances subject to g Commission. raised by the Planning request and continued action to plan and parking ramp. plans to address concerns raised by 4801 West 50th Street • Edina, Minnesota 55424 www.EdinaMN.gov . 952 - 927 -8861 • Fax 952 - 826 -0390 1 RESOLUTION NO. 2013-77 Page Two Section 2. FINDINGS Approval is subject to the following findings: The proposal would meet the required standards and ordinances for a Site Plan with the exception of the parking space and ramp variances. 2. WSB conducted a parking and traffic impact study. The study concluded that the existing roadway system would support the proposed project; and the parking on the site -would contain adequate parking to support the expansion and existing uses., 3.- The variances'are reasonable. As mentioned, the setbacks for the parking ramp expansion, match the existing setbacks. The parking study concludes that the proposed addition and existing .uses 'on the site would be supported by the existing parking facilities. Traditionally, the City of Edina has not required parking stalls, when they are not needed. Additional parking could be provided by adding levels to the existing parking ramps if needed. 4. The parking ramp could be expanded should there ever be a need for additional parking for the site. Section 3. - APPROVAL NOW THEREFORE, it is hereby resolved by the City Council of the City of Edina, approval of the Site Plan and Variances at 6525 -45 France Avenue for Silver Oak Development on behalf of IRET Properties. Approval is subject to the following Conditions: Subject to staff approval, the site must be developed and maintained in substantial conformance with.the following plans, unless modified by the conditions below: • Site plan date stamped July 26, 2013 & September 10 & 26, 2013. • Grading plan date stamped July 26, 2013. • Landscaping plan date stamped July 26, 2013 & revised on September 11 & 26, 2013 • Lighting plan date stamped July 26, 2013. • Building elevations date stamped July 26, 2013, September 10, 2013, and September 26, 2013. • Building materials as presented at the Planning Commission and City Council meeting. 2. Prior the issuance of a building permit, a final landscape plan must be submitted, subject to staff approval. Trees planted in front of the loading dock shall be 12 feet tall at the time of planting. Additionally, a performance bond, letter -of- credit, or cash RESOLUTION NO. 2013-77 Page Two deposit must be submitted for one and one -half times the cost mount for completing the required landscaping, screening, or erosion control measures. The property owner is responsible for replacing any required landscaping that dies. 4. Submit a copy of the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District permit. The City may require revisions to the approved plans to meet the district's requirements. 5. Compliance with the conditions required by the city engineer in his memo dated August 22, 2013. 6. Should delays and queuing become an issue at the France Avenue/ 65 Street intersection in the future, minor intersection turn lane and phasing improvements may be necessary. Should these improvements be required in the future Fairview Southdale Hospital will be responsible for their share of those improvements. 7. Building plans are subject to review and approval of the fire marshal at the time of building permit. 8. The driveway entrance/ exit off 66th shall be reduced in width subject to review and approval of the plans by the city engineer at the time of building permit approval. Sidewalk crossing across the drive entrance/ exit shall be stamped or colored concrete. 9. The applicant must enter into a proof of parking agreement with the City to ensure the necessary parking space will be provided if needed. Should parking become a significant problem, staff will require the proof of parking stalls constructed by adding the addition to the parking ramp. 10. A total of 75 bike racks shall be installed as close to public entrances as possible. 11. A sidewalk connection west of the new entrance/ exit must be added to connect to the sidewalk along the front of the building facing France Avenue., The sidewalk crossing the drive aisle shall be built with a stamped or colored concrete. 12. Parking ramp facades must include design elements such as louvers for screening. 13. Semi -truck deliveries shall be limited to only between the hours of 7:00 pm to 6:00 am weekdays and weekends. 14. The replaced sidewalks along Drew and 66th Street shall be constructed with permeable pavers subject to review and approval of the city engineer. 15. Create a daytime lane separation for truck traffic in front of the loading dock. Eliminate the connection of the sidewalk just south of the loading dock from connecting to the ramp. Lane separation shall be subject to review and approval of the city engineer. RESOLUTION NO. 2013-77 Page Two 16. Add public art in the boulevard to the new turn around in front of the new building. 17. Increased and mature landscaping must be added along Drew Avenue to screen the ramp. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Edina, Minnesota, on October 1, 2013. ATTEST: Debra A. Mangen, City Clerk James B. Hovland, Mayor STATE OF MINNESOTA ) COUNTY OF HENNEPIN )SS CITY OF EDINA CERTIFICATE OF CITY CLERK I, the undersigned duly appointed and acting City Clerk for the City of Edina do hereby certify that the attached and foregoing Resolution was duly adopted by the Edina City Council at its Regular Meeting of October 1, 2013, and as recorded in the Minutes of said Regular Meeting. WITNESS my hand and seal of said City this day of 2013 City Clerk Exhibit A TRACT A, REGISTERED LAND SURVEY NO. 1728, HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA. AND . TRACT. B, REGISTERED LAND SURVEY NO 1728, HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA. AND THE EAST 2 1/2 ACRES OF LOT 1, "CASSIN'S OUTLOTS" ALL BEING SUBJECT TO EASEMENTS, RESTRICTIONS OF RECORD, IF ANY. SEP 10 2013 C i T0f F COLLABORATIVE DCSlgnGr01lp,i",.. September 17, 2013 City Council and Planning Staff City of Edina 4801 W. 501' St. Edina, MN 55424 Re: Southdale Medical Office Building Dear Council and Staff: At the September 3, 2013 Planning Commission meeting, a few of the Commissioners expressed concern over the items noted below. We offer the following adjustments and clarifications with regards to these items. Architecture Engineering Interiors Planning Preservation 1. Commission expressed concern over the size of the trees at the delivery area screening. We have increased the size of the plantings at this area (see renderings). Additionally, there is a low stone wall and berm at this location, amounting to approximately 3' high, to enhance the landscaping and provide further screening. If the Council feels additional plantings or an increase in the wall or berm height would-be beneficial we would be happy to do this. 2. Commission expressed concern over the landscaping along Drew Ave. We are proposing to install all new landscaping and paver walks for the entire length of Drew Ave. We will work closely with the City Arborist to determine what existing trees can be saved. Our preference is to always save "quality old growth trees ". 3. Commission expressed concern over the ability of delivery vehicles to access the delivery area. The majority of the campus's delivery vehicles are the 30', or less, box truck type vehicles (UPS, coffee, shredding, office supplies, water, linens, etc.) with infrequent deliveries handled by a tractor trailer, 75' or less, (clinic moves, medical equipment; specialized delivery, etc.). We have included in the Council packets diagrams showing how a 30' box truck and 75' semi would access this area. 4. Commission expressed concern about safety and confusion for deliveries, vehicle ramp access and pedestrian access. Currently, deliveries occur throughout the project site at several locations, however the bulk of the delivery traffic currently is using the South lot of the 6545 building and entering the site from 661' St. This has created safety concerns for patients and pedestrians accessing the building(s). Early in the design, the team identified the need and desire to consolidate and control the delivery services to a greater degree. Therefore, a single location on the South side of the proposed new building was determined to be. the best way to provide better safety and control. Affirmative Action, Equal Opportunity Employer 100 Portland Avenue South, Suite 100 Minneapolis, Minnesota 55401 t612332.3654 f332-3626 www.collaborativedesigngroup.com SEP 10 2013 Additionally, the building management has in place delivery policies that preclude large deliveries from occurring during active hours. As noted in the Southdale Medical Center Rules and Regulations; "After initial occupancy, movement in or out of the building of furniture or office equipment, or dispatch or receipt by Lessee of any bulky material, merchandise or materials which required use of elevators or stairways, or movement through the building entrances or lobby will be restricted to weekends and between the hours of 5:00 p.m. and 7.00 a.m. on weekdays." Such pre- arrangement initiated by Lessee will include determination by Lessor, and subject to its decision and control............ n 5. Commission expressed concern over the width of the new entrance at the South side of the site. The existing entrance configuration at the South side of the site includes two separate entrances, one in /out access and one right in only. We are proposing to eliminate both of these entrances and provide a new "right in, right out" divided entrance. This provides us with the greatest amount of safe traffic flow, for both vehicles and pedestrians. We feel this is a safer condition because pedestrians have to be concerned about one direction of traffic from each crossing only. However, if the Council feels a single undivided entrance that accommodates both in and out traffic with out division is better, we would be happy to do this. V truly) C laborative V mes O'Shea Principal Southdale Medical Office Building and Parking Ramp ice- ' i City of • • Council Presentation IRET INVESTOR_ REAL ESTATE TRUST -A SEP 10 2013 AM IRET INVESTORS REAL ESTATE TRUST r r,�►� � � �Y CF j5' MAI - , �. �Inl��It •��, As AM IRET INVESTORS REAL ESTATE TRUST (1) D Q N U L n SEP 2013 1% , 66th Street Q% > Q V 0 c cc IRET INVESTORS REAL ESTATE TRUST Existing Parking Spaces Required Parking Spaces Based on New Office Building Proposed Parking Spaces 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 1100 1200 1300 1400 1500 16UU 1(UU 18UU Parking Statistics SEP - ?Oi3 IT ;,...; s�wrra�rrr.r.ws r• r . tp�r� „r MIX d._ IRET INVESTORS REAL ESTATE TRUST View from 66th Street S E ° u 2013 Y - r•. f � !r r IRET INVESTORS REAL ESTATE TRUST r= n ti t I f� FF tT J. � r IRET INVESTORS REAL ESTATE TRUST View from 66th Street S E P 1 0 2013 IRET INVESTORS REAL ESTATE TRUST View from 66th Street s IRET INVESTORS REAL ESTATE TRUST View from 66th Street S E P - 201: IRET INVESTORS REAL ESTATE TRUST Aerial from Drew Avenue ., 201 IRET INVESTORS REAL ESTATE TRUST T■ I Southdale Medical Office Building City Council Presentation 10 View from Drew Avenue © <v c \ q \} J P % s� ! �: • p _.., .. . _ IRET INVESTORS REAL ESTATE TRUST View from 65th Street IRET INVESTORS REAL ESTATE TRUST Aerial from 66th Street SEP . 0 2013 ll q' r r ' i 1 1 yqf!* f r� IRET INVESTORS REAL ESTATE TRUST Ait r uplo r6nl- IRET INVESTORS REAL ESTATE TRUST Ll rr rnr 7 4 . Amino -.dw w mwmm.-- IRET INVESTORS REAL ESTATE TRUST Commissione rabiel asked Planner Teague what the zoning classificap'aff is on the properties to the west. TeaNe responded that the zoning classification for t - djacent properties to the west is PID, Plan ne dustrial District, with the City of Bloomi on also to the west. Commissioner Carr asked t applicant if the variance s approved does he plan on re- landscaping the site. Mr. Kelli n responded in th irmative, adding a retailing wall, new sod and plantings will be added. Public Hearing Chair Staunton asked if anyon ould like t eak to the it being none, Commissioner Grabiel moved to close th ublic hearing. Co issioner Potts seconded the motion. All voted aye; public hearing clo Motion Commis ' ner Grabiel moved variance approval based on ff findings and subject to staff cond' ons. Commissioner Forrest seconded the motion. All voted aye; motion carried. C. Site Plan with Variances. Paul Reinke /Oak Development. 6545 France Avenue, Edina, MN. Planner Presentation Planner Teague reported that Silver Oak Development on behalf of the IRET Properties is proposing to build a four story 60,000 square foot medical office expansion, and new parking ramp expansion to the existing 273,000 square foot Southdale Medical Office building located at 6525 -45 France Avenue. The new addition would be located on the south side of the existing building and west of the existing parking ramp. Teague stated to accommodate the proposed addition, the following is requested; Site Plan Review., Parking Ramp Setback Variance from 40 and 34.5 feet to 34.5, 28 and 20 feet for the new parking deck to match the existing parking ramp setback. Differing setbacks are required for the ramp structure because the ramp itself is 34.5 feet tall; and the structure around the stairs is 40 feet tall and a parking stall Variance from 1,715 spaces to 1,577 spaces. A proof of parking plan for an additional deck could expand parking to 1,749 spaces has been provided. Planner Teague concluded that staff recommends that the City Council approve the Site Plan with Variances for the Southdale Medical building expansion based on the following findings: Page 3 of 14 1. The proposal would meet the required standards and ordinances for a Site Plan with the exception of the parking space and ramp variances. 2. WSB conducted a parking and traffic impact study. The study concluded that the existing roadway system would support the proposed project; and the parking on the site would contain adequate parking to support the expansion and existing uses. 3. The variances are reasonable. As mentioned, the setbacks for the parking ramp expansion, match the existing setbacks. The parking study concludes that the proposed addition and existing uses on the site would be supported by the existing parking facilities. Traditionally, the City of Edina has not required parking stalls, when they are not needed. Additional parking could be provided by adding levels to the existing parking ramps if needed. 4. The parking ramp could be expanded should there ever be a need for additional parking for the site. Approval of the Site Plan is also subject to the following conditions: 1. Subject to staff approval, the site must be developed and maintained in substantial conformance with the following plans, unless modified by the conditions below: • Site plan date stamped July 26, 2013. • Grading plan date stamped July 26, 2013. • Landscaping plan date stamped July 26, 2013. • Lighting plan date stamped July 26, 2013. • Building elevations date stamped July 26, 2013. • Building materials board as presented at the Planning Commission and City Council meeting. 2. Prior the issuance of a building permit, a final landscape plan must be submitted, subject to staff approval. Additionally, a performance bond, letter -of- credit, or cash deposit must be submitted for one and one -half times the cost amount for completing the required landscaping, screening, or erosion control measures. 3. The property owner is responsible for replacing any required landscaping that dies. 4. Submit a copy of the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District permit. The City may require revisions to the approved plans to meet the district's requirements. 5. Compliance with the conditions required by the city engineer in his memo dated August 22, 2013. 6. Should delays and queuing become an issue at the France Avenue /65 Street intersection in the future, minor intersection turn lane and phasing improvements may be necessary. Should these improvements be required in the future Fairview Southdale Hospital will be responsible for their share of those improvements. 7. Building plans are subject to review and approval of the fire marshal at the time of building permit. Page 4 of 14 8. The applicant must enter into a proof of parking agreement with the City to ensure the necessary parking space will be provided if needed. Should parking become a significant problem, staff will require the proof of parking stalls constructed by adding the addition to the parking ramp. Appearing for the Applicant Paul Reinke Discussion Commissioner Carpenter asked Planner Teague who determines the "share" a business pays for street improvements. Chuck Rickart addressed the question and explained that the cost a business pays for street improvements is determined by a sliding scale process taking into account the size of the expansion including the change in traffic patterns, increase in trip generations, etc. Rickart pointed out in this area; especially on this corner (West 65th Street) there are a number of players that would be responsible for the improvements, pointing out each "corner" is and or will be undergoing expansion. With regard to the Proof of Parking (POP) agreement recommended in the staff report Commissioner Carpenter asked what triggers it. Planner Teague explained that Edina Ordinance indicates that the City Manager is the "body" that determines if the POP should be implemented. Commissioner Grabiel asked Teague if he recalls the City Manager initiating a POP. Teague responded to date he's not aware of any POP agreement(s) that have been implemented at the request of the City Manager. Most businesses police themselves. Commissioner Forrest indicated she is hesitant to support the loading dock in the new location. Continuing, Forrest also questioned how the traffic analysis calculated vehicle trips. Mr. Rickart responded that the parking analysis viewed this site as a medical use site. Forrest pointed out the site is also planned for retail. Rickart responded a small retail component was also included in the calculations (Regional Medical with Retail Component), adding the majority of medical uses including hospitals operate some form of onsite retail. Commissioner Potts asked Planner Teague who reviews the internal traffic circulation on the plans. Teague responded that the City Engineer reviews all internal vehicle movements. Commissioner Schroeder asked Mr. Rickart if he believes the ingress /egress is necessary at 48- feet, adding it's rather wide. Schroeder commented that in his opinion safety in pedestrian navigation is important and would be compromised with 48 -feet of lane(s) to navigate. Commissioner Carr referred to the landscaping plan and suggested that the applicant take another look at it and plant trees taller than indicated. Planner Teague commented that the Page 5 of 14 proposed landscaping plan exceeds ordinance; however, the Commission can request extra, taller plantings because of the need for a variance. Commissioner Grabiel asked Planner Teague if he knows what the zoning is on the opposite side of the street (Drew). Planner Teague responded the zoning on the east side of Drew is also Regional Medical (RMD). Applicant Presentation Paul Reinke addressed the Commission and introduced the development team, Gail , property manager and James O'Shea, architect. Mr. Reinke said they were very excited about the proposed expansion. Mr. O'Shea addressed the comments on the loading dock and explained the existing facility doesn't have a "true" loading dock area and the goal of this design is to have one consolidated loading dock for the entire site. O'Shea said the new design can incorporate two semi - trailer loading berths and 1 small loading berth for the smaller delivery vehicles. Continuing, O'Shea further explained with regard to the proposed drive aisle width that it was felt that the larger width would provide a wider turning radius for the larger vehicles. Concluding, O'Shea reported that the new office building is proposed at 60,000 square feet, including a new parking garage /ramp with 1,180 parking spaces, adding these spaces will accommodate existing and future parking levels. O'Shea said that at this time their thought is that the parking will be built first. With regard to West 66th Street it will be enhanced with landscaping including an enhancement of Drew Avenue. Discussion Commissioner Carr commented that she has a concern with the location of the loading dock and questioned if it could be placed in another location; possibly to the rear. Mr. O'Shea responded that they considered different locations for the garage; however, found no viable alternatives. He explained working with large semi - trailers poses a challenge. Carr also stated she wants the pedestrian walkways to be clearly delineated to ensure that both the pedestrians and vehicles are aware of these walkways. Commissioner Platteter stated that he agrees with Commissioner Schroeder's observation that the widths of the drive aisles entering and exiting the site are large. Platteter asked if vegetation would be planted to screen the new loading dock. Mr. O'Shea responded in the affirmative, adding their intent is to plant Spruce trees. O'Shea also noted there is a retaining wall /berm in this area along 66th Street that would also help screen the loading dock. Platteter asked the height of the new trees. O'Shea responded their intent is to plant 6 -foot trees. Page 6of14 Commissioner Forrest told the applicant she wants them to make every effort to completely screen the loading dock. She also expressed concern about truck maneuvering (backing up) and pedestrian safety in this area. Continuing, Forrest noted there is a discrepancy in parking numbers depicted on the 2007 submittal vs. this submittal, adding she wants assurances the parking is adequate. Chair Staunton opened the public hearing; being none Commissioner Grabiel moved to.close the public hearing. Commissioner Potts seconded the motion. All voted aye; motion carried. Further Discussion and Motion Commissioner Carr stated she has reservations about the location of the new loading dock. Continuing, she reiterated she wants all walkways clearly delineated and would like more attention paid to landscaping along Drew Avenue and West 66th Street. Carr indicated as submitted she couldn't support the request as submitted. Commissioner Forrest reiterated her concern is about the differences in the parking calculations on the 2007 plan vs. the calculations submitted for this project. Forrest acknowledged the POP agreement; adding she doesn't want to see the site over parked but wants to ensure it is adequately parked. Forrest also noted she can't support the proposal as submitted, the loading dock needs further attention along with the ingress /egress. Chair Staunton pointed out that the applicant has presented a POP agreement indicating if more parking spaces are needed parking spaces would be increased per agreement. Commissioner Scherer asked to note for the record the overall plan provides 1,577 parking spaces and if the POP agreement is initiated there will be a total of 1,752 parking spaces. Commissioner Schroeder stated he doesn't like the way this project interfaces with West 66th Street. Schroeder reiterated that the ingress /egress is too wide, too much pavement for pedestrians to navigate and the minimal space for semi - trucks backing in and out makes him uncomfortable Continuing, Schroeder said he has no issue with the building, his issue is with site access and loading dock area. Continuing, Schroeder commented in order to get a "better product" the Commission could entertain the idea of approving setback variances to achieve a better development. Schroeder acknowledged a setback variance is needed for the ramp but with flexibility more may be able to be done with relief to the building setback. Chair Staunton agreed with Schroeder's comment and asked Mr. Reinke if they ever considered expanding to the west. Mr. Reinke said expanding toward France Avenue wasn't considered because of the internal orientation of the building and setback. Continuing, Staunton asked if there was another place for the loading dock. Mr. Reinke responded as previously mentioned this is the best location for the loading dock because it reduces internal congestion and it consolidates the loading, delivery and trash removal. Reinke also noted this configuration also provides management with the opportunity to better manage all vehicle and pedestrian circulation. Reinke said that all deliveries from the semi - trucks would be coordinated so no Page 7 of 14 large vehicle deliveries would occur during peak hours. Large deliveries would take place in the early am or late pm managed by building management. Gayle Greion told the Commission that this project if approved would allow the site to accommodate deliveries from large vehicles; presently the site cannot accommodate large deliveries which are a detriment to the tenants. Greion said they are very happy to have a more formal delivery area that can accommodate large vehicles and lessen the harshness of Minnesota winter weather. Commissioner Platteter asked Mr. Greion to reiterate office management can regulate times when semi - trucks can deliver. Ms. Greion responded that delivery times can be scheduled through management and won't disrupt regular business hours. Commissioner Carr said another concern she has is with the proximity of the loading dock to other vehicles and pedestrian traffic. The discussion continued on the loading dock, traffic circulation, width of the drive aisles, landscaping, etc. with some Commissioners expressing the opinion that they couldn't support the proposal as submitted. Planner Teague reminded the Commission this project is for site plan approval adding what's requested is permitted. Commissioner Grabiel asked Planner Teague if the City Engineer has reviewed the project. Teague responded in the affirmative. Motion Commissioner Platteter moved to recommend Site Plan approval with Variance based on staff findings and subject to staff conditions including the additional conditions: increase landscaping along Drew Avenue, plant taller trees (12 -foot) on West 66th Street to better screen the loading dock area, clearly delineate all pedestrian walkways and a reduce the width of the ingress /egress. Commissioner Potts seconded the motion. Commissioner Carr asked Planner Teague if this motion should be done in two parts. Teague responded that the actions are tied so one motion is sufficient. Ayes; Platteter, Potts, Grabiel, Staunton. Nays; Scherer, Schroeder, Carpenter, Carr, Forrest. Motion failed 4 -5 VII. REPOAND RECOMM A. Sketch Plan Revie_WoOI9%AL_York Avenue, the Wicks site Pte8 of 14 491�1r.�, o e �o �o PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT a Originator Meeting Date Agenda # Cary Teague August 28, 2013 WC Community Development Director INFORMATION/BACKGROUND Project Description Silver Oak Development on behalf of the IRET Properties is proposing to build a four story 60,000 square foot medical office expansion, and new parking ramp. expansion to. the existing 273,000 square foot Southdale Medical Office building' located,'at 6525=45 France Avenue. (See location on pages Al —A2.) The new. addition would be located on the south side of the existing building and west of the existing parking ramp. .(See applicant narrative on pages A3 A10 and the proposed plans on pages Al2 —A32.) To accommodate the proposed addition, the following is requested: 1. Site Plan Review. 2. Parking Ramp Setback Variance from 40 and 34.5 feet to 34.5, 28 and 20 feet for the new. parking deck to, match the existing parking ramp setback. (See page Al 6.a.) - Differing setbacks are required for the ramp structure because.the ramp itself is 34.5,feet tall; and the structure around the stairs is 40 feet tall: 3. Parking Stall Variance from 1,715 spaces to 1,577 spaces. A proof of ,parking plan for an additional deck could expand parking to 1,749 spaces has been provided. Surrounding Land Uses Northerly: Southdale Fairview Hospital; zoned and guided for regional medical office uses. Easterly: A variety of off medical and office uses; zoned and guided for medical office uses. Southerly: Southdale; zoned and guided for commercial uses. Westerly: Point of France; zoned and guided high density residential. Existing Site Features The subject property is 9 acres in size, contains the Southdale Medical Center building and a parking ramp. The site is relatively flat. (See page A2.) Planning Guide Plan designation: RM, Regional Medical. (See page A11.) Zoning: RMD, Regional Medical District. Compliance Table 2 City Standard Proposed Building Front — France Avenue 65.5 feet 100+ feet Side Street — 66th Street 65.5 feet 75 feet Side Street — Drew 65.5 feet 100+ feet Side Street — 65th Street 65.5 feet 100+ feet Parking Ramp Front — France Avenue 34.5 & 40 feet 100+ feet Side Street — 66th Street 34.5 & 40 feet 34.5 feet* Side Street — Drew 34.5 & 40 feet 20 -28 feet* Side Street — 65th Street 34.5 & 40 feet 7.4 feet (existing condition) Building Height 12 stories, and 144 feet 4 stories, and 65.5 feet Floor Area Ratio 100% 84% Parking lot and drive aisle 20 feet (street) 10 -20 feet (all parking setback areas and drive - aisles are existing; no changes proposed) Parking Stalls 1,715 stalls 1,577 stalls proposed (1,752 stalls with the proof -of- parking) Over -story Trees 59 required 75 existing trees (number is based on the perimeter of the site) 2 Grading /Drainage /Utilities The city engineer has reviewed the proposed utilities and grading and drainage plans and found them to be generally acceptable. (Seethe City Engineer's comments on pages All 06 —Al 10.) A condition of approval should include meeting all of the conditions outlined in the city engineer's memo. A permit would also be required from the Nine Mile Creek Watershed district. Parking. There are currently three parking levels in the existing ramp. Levels one and two were constructed in 1964, and are in need of significant repair. Level three was constructed in 2002. The addition to the parking ramp would consist of removing and replacing levels one and two. Level three would be extended to the south end of the ramp and a new level four would be added. The new ramp would total 1,180 spaces. There are 397 surface stalls on the site. The overall site would therefore, provide 1,577 parking spaces. Based on the square footage of the existing building and proposed addition, 1,715 spaces are, required. A proof -of- parking plan has been provided, that shows an additional 175 spaces could be added to the top level of the parking ramp to meet the city code. (See page A9.) The applicant does not believe that these stalls will be needed, but have agreed to construct them if parking becomes a problem. A condition of any approval should be that if parking becomes a problem, the additional stalls must be provided. WSB & Associates conducted a parking study, which concludes that the proposed parking should adequately serve the site. (See page A50.) Site Access & Traffic Currently there are two access points off of 66th Street. These two would be combined into one entrance, which would be 'a right in and right out only. All other access points would remain the same, including into the parking ramp. (See pages All 4 and All 6.) WSB and Associates also completed a traffic study to analyze impacts on the adjacent roadways. (See study on pages A36—Al 05.) The study concludes that the existing adjacent roadways would support the proposed addition. However, as with all development proposed within this area recently, should delays and queuing ever become an issue at the France Avenue /65 Street intersection in the future, minor intersection turn lane and phasing improvements may be necessary. Should these improvements be required in the future, the Southdale Medical site will be responsible for their share of those improvements. (See page A50.) Building Design The addition would be constructed primarily of glass /glazing with masonry/architectural precast with composite aluminum panels. The ramp would also be made of masonry architectural precast with the stairwells to be made of glass /glazing to match the building. (See attached pages Al2 —A13.) The building has been designed to match or blend with the existing six -story building on the site and to match /blend with the parking_ ramp. Landscaping There are 75 mature trees around the perimeter of the site, which is more than required by code. Additional shrubs and plantings would be provided at the entrance and along 66th Street to enhance the existing landscaping. (See pages A21 —A22.) Mechanical Equipment A new mechanical room is planned to be located within the parking ramp, at the north end. (See pages A24 A28.) The mechanical equipment would be screened on the roof. of the parking ramp. (See page Al 3.) Loading Dock The loading dock for the new building would be located on the south side of the building facing 66th Street. The loading area meets the required front yard setback. Extra landscaping is proposed along 66th, to provide screening of the area, including five Black Hills Spruce. (See pages A21 —A22.) Variance — Parking Structure Per the Zoning Ordinance, a variance should not be granted unless it is found that the enforcement of the ordinance would cause practical difficulties in complying with the zoning ordinance and that the use is reasonable. As demonstrated below, staff believes the proposal does meet the variance standards, when applying the three conditions: Minnesota Statues and Edina Ordinances require that the following conditions must be satisfied affirmatively. The Proposed Variance will: 1) Relieve practical difficulties that prevent a reasonable use from complying with ordinance requirements. Reasonable use does not mean that the applicant must show the land cannot be put to any reasonable use without the variance. Rather, the applicant must show that there are practical difficulties in complying with 4 the code and that the proposed use is reasonable. "Practical difficulties" may include functional and aesthetic concerns.---- Staff believes the proposed variance is reasonable. The location of the parking ramp is an existing. condition; the variances are requested to enlarge the ramp by adding levels. A proof of parking plan was granted to add a fourth level to the ramp in 2007 as part of the most recent expansion to the Southd,ale Medical Office (See Council minutes from that approval including the conditions of approval on pages A33 —A35.) The practical difficulty is caused by the existing location of the ramp. It would not be reasonable to require the ramp to be relocated to meet the required setback. The encroachment into the required is minor compared to the mass of the structure that complies with the ordinance. (See page Al 6a.) 2) There are circumstances that are unique to the property, not common to every. similarly zoned property, and that are not self - created? . Yes. The unique circumstances are the location of the existing building and parking ramp that would make it difficult to relocate to meet the required setbacks. The;proposed expansion is reasonable given the proposal does not exceed the FAR requirement of 1.0 for the site. 3) Will the variance alter the essential character of the neighborhood? No. A parking ramp already exists at the proposed setbacks. The addition of levels to the parking ramp would not alter the character of the neighborhood. Variance — Parking Stalls Per the Zoning Ordinance, a variance: should not be granted unless it is found that the enforcement of the ordinance would cause practical difficulties in complying with the zoning ordinance and that the use is reasonable. As demonstrated below, staff believes the proposal does meet the variance standards, when applying the three .conditions: Minnesota Statues and Edina Ordinances require that the following conditions must be satisfied affirmatively. The Proposed Variance will: 1) Relieve practical difficulties that prevent a reasonable use from complying with ordinance requirements. Reasonable use does not mean that the applicant must show the land cannot be put to any reasonable use without the variance. Rather, the applicant must show that there are practical difficulties in complying with 5 the code and that the proposed use is reasonable. "Practical difficulties" may include functional and aesthetic concerns. Staff believes the proposed. parking stall variance is reasonable. A parking study was conducted by WSB Associates that concludes that the City Code required parking is not necessary for the site. The study concludes that the medical office uses could function. adequately with 1,422 spaces. There would be 1,577 spaces on the site with the add.ition.to the parking ramp. (See page A50 of the parking study.) A proof-of-parking plan has been. provided, that shows an additional 175 spaces could be added to the top level of the parking. ramp to meet the city code. (See page A9.) The applicant does not believe that these.stalls will be needed, but have agreed to construct them if parking. that, problem. A condition of any approval should be that if parking becomes a ._.problem, the additional stalls must be provided. 2) There are circumstances that are unique to the property, not common to every similarly zoned property, and that are not self - created? Yes. The unique circumstance is the existing location of the buildings and parking ramp on the site. It has been the city's general policy with previous similar requests, to not build parking stalls when they are not needed. 3) Will the variance alter the essential character of the neighborhood? No. The alternative to the variance would be to require the applicant to construct a larger and taller structured parking ramp. Based on the parking study done by WSB, this parking would not be needed. PRIMARY ISSUES /STAFF RECOMMENDATION Primary Issue Is the proposed addition and associated Variances reasonable for this site? Yes. Staff believes the proposal is reasonable for the following reasons: 1. The proposed use is permitted in the RMD, Regional Medical District. 2. The proposed building setbacks are met for the medical office addition, and the setbacks for the parking ramp expansion meet the existing parking ramp setbacks. Cei 3. The proposed addition would be supported by the existing roadway system, based on the traffic and parking study done by WSB and Associates. (See pages A36— A105.) 4. The variances are reasonable. As mentioned, the setbacks for the parking ramp expansion, match the existing setbacks. The parking study concludes that the proposed addition and existing uses on the site would be supported by the existing parking facilities. Traditionally, the City of Edina has not required parking stalls, when they are not needed. Additional parking could be provided by adding levels to the existing parking ramps if needed. 5. The Southdale Medical Building and associated medical office uses provide a convenient community asset. Staff Recommendation Recommend that the City Council approve the Site Plan with Variances for the Southdale Medical building expansion. Approval is based on the following findings: The proposal would meet the required standards and ordinances for a Site Plan with the exception of the parking space and ramp variances. 2. WSB conducted a parking and traffic impact study. The study concluded that the existing roadway system would support the proposed project; and the parking on the site would contain adequate parking to support the expansion and existing uses. 3. The variances are reasonable. As mentioned, the setbacks for the parking ramp expansion, match the existing setbacks. The parking study concludes that the proposed addition and existing uses on the site would be supported by the existing parking facilities. Traditionally, the City of Edina has not required parking stalls, when they are not needed. Additional parking could be provided by adding levels to the existing parking ramps if needed. 4. The parking ramp could be expanded should there ever be a need for additional parking for the site. Approval of the Site Plan is subject to the following conditions: N Subject to staff approval, the site must be developed and maintained in substantial conformance with the following plans, unless modified by the conditions below: • Site plan date stamped July 26, 2013. • Grading plan date stamped July 26, 2013. • Landscaping plan date stamped July 26, 2013. • Lighting plan date stamped July 26, 2013. • Building elevations date stamped July 26, 2013. • Building materials board as presented at the Planning Commission and City Council meeting. 2. Prior the issuance of a building permit, a final landscape plan must be submitted, subject to staff approval. Additionally, a performance bond, letter -of- credit, or cash deposit must be submitted for one and one -half times the cost amount for completing the required landscaping, screening, or erosion control measures. 3. The property owner is responsible for replacing any required landscaping that dies. 4. Submit a copy of the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District permit. The City may require revisions to the approved plans to meet the district's requirements. 5. Compliance with the conditions required by the city engineer in his memo dated August 22, 2013. 6. Should delays and queuing become an issue at the France Avenue /65 Street intersection in the future, minor intersection turn lane and phasing improvements may be necessary. Should these improvements be required in the future Fairview Southdale Hospital will be responsible for their share of those improvements. 7. Building plans are subject to review and approval of the fire marshal at the time of building permit. 8. The applicant must enter into a proof of parking agreement with the City to ensure the necessary parking space will be provided if needed. Should parking become a significant problem, staff will require the proof of parking stalls constructed by adding the addition to the parking ramp. Deadline for a city decision: October 15, 2013 Interactive Property Maps /// Map /Z 7� 1 _ W nT 7, L Pamela Park 'T �1 Aj T _L� r) ST L`NL T 1�.. fX- T �T V., 7 I - Rosland Park H I Z_ r 7— Parcel 29-028-24-23-0172 ID: Owner Smb Operating Company Llc Name: Parcel 6545 France Ave S Address: Edina, MN 55435 Parcel 5.86 acres Area: 255,138 sq ft 6T4S' rRAMCL A( Map Scale: 1" = 1600 ft. Print Date: 8/21/2013 11 This map is a compilation of data from various sources and is furnished "AS IS" with no representation or warranty expressed or implied, including fitness of any particular purpose, merchantability, or the accuracy and completeness of the information shown. COPYRIGHT@ HENNEPIN COUNTY 2013 JA —5hink Green! A �7 CJ ;tt_ I F.E F . 1... W IV! i-1, kv Map Scale: 1" = 1600 ft. Print Date: 8/21/2013 11 This map is a compilation of data from various sources and is furnished "AS IS" with no representation or warranty expressed or implied, including fitness of any particular purpose, merchantability, or the accuracy and completeness of the information shown. COPYRIGHT@ HENNEPIN COUNTY 2013 JA —5hink Green! _ Interactive Property Maps Map lam f yr ,�•; �� � .K -- 16 PROF i t iLr,R f '` _ "� sal .L "� ... _ ob •! "K .P Parcel 29-028-24-23-0172 Map Scale: 1" = 200 ft. ID: Print Date: 8/21/2013 Owner Name: Smb Operating Company Llc I Parcel 6545 France Ave S Address: Edina, MN 55435 Parcel 5.86 acres Area: 255,138 sq ft Aa This map is a compilation of data from various sources and is furnished "AS IS" with no representation or warranty expressed or implied, including frtness of any particular purpose, merchantability, or the accuracy and completeness of the information shown. COPYRIGHT © HENNEPIN COUNTY 2013 ow T ,vh A P rl / V (:,�- COLLABORATIVE Design( ot ip, i,,�!. July 26, 2013 Cary Teague Community Development Director City of Edina 4801 W. 501' St. Edina, MN 55424 Re: Proposed Southdale Medical Office Building Dear Cary: As noted in the City of Edina — Site Plan Application, a "written statement describing the intended use of the property and why the City should approve the request ", shall be included. Please find requested information below: The proposed project will include approximately 60,000 square feet of new medical office building, a new loading dock to serve the entire campus, a new central plant for cooling and heating and a new parking garage with 1,180 parking spaces. , Architecture Engineering Interiors Planning Preservation Office Building The new office building component is approximately 60,000 square feet and 4 stories with a partial basement for in and a underground tunnel connection to the existing facility for building services. The new building is specifically designed to accommodate medical office uses and to support such uses. Retail, restaurant or other service providers are anticipated at the ground floor level of the building. The building is 15, 000 square feet per floor and 14 feet floor to floor. The office is anticipated to attract "Class-A "medical office tenants. Loading Dock The existing facility does not have a "true "loading dock. The new design will incorporate 2 full size loading berths and 1 small loading berth with a raised dock area, dock levelers, dock seal and dock bumpers. This loading facility is needed as the overall campus building size has grown to 333,000 square feet and the current loading situation is creating traffic and pedestrian safety concerns. The new dock area will alleviate this problem. Cen tral Plan t The existing Medical Office Building shares an agreement with Southdale Fairview Hospital to provide steam and chilled water for heating and cooling of their facility. As hospital demand has grown the Medical Office Building has struggled to maintain summer cooling, especially during the worst days. In anticipation of even greater decreased supply from the hospitals central plant the Medical Office Building is proposing providing their own central plant, therefore guaranteeing appropriate utilities for the future. 100 Portland Avenue South, Suite 100 Minneapolis, Minnesota 55401 t612.332.3654 f332.3626 Affirmative Action, Equal Dpporiunity Emiiloyer (� www .collaborativedesigngroup.com Parking G_ ara�e There are currently 3 parking levels in the existing garage providing approximately 738 parking spaces. The third level was constructed in 2002 and levels one and two were constructed in 1964. Levels one and two are both in need of significant repair and have seen their useful service period. The proposed garage anticipates demolishing level one and two and leaving the current, newer, level three. New levels one and two will be built, level three will be extended to south end of the site and a new level four will be added. The total new parking ramp will provide 1,180 spaces. This new ramp and additional parking is needed to meet the current parking needs as well as the expanded need due to the addition of the 60,000 square foot office building. Request Approval The City should approve this request because: - The project will create greater safety for pedestrians and vehicular traffic. - The project will consolidate and organize the loading, delivery and trash removal. This has the added benefit of allowing building management to more closely regulate and monitor these activities. - Parking additions are being made to satisfy the current need and added building square footage. Ourgoals is not to "over park" but appropriately park" - The potential addition of the central plant will better serve the existing and new tenants. The building will be better positioned to appropriately control building systems and energy cost This will have a significant impact on the campus in the future as energy cost rise. - The additional medical office space will benefit the hospital and community by allowing critical medical services to expand in a location that directly supports the hospital's mission and ail surrounding businesses. Very truly yours, Collaborative Design Group, Inc. /iQark Beckman Project Architect Enclosures 0 a COLLABORATIVE July 26, 2013 Cary Teague Community Development Director City of Edina 4801 W. 501' St. Edina, MN 55424 Re: Variances for Southdale Medical Office Building Parking Ramp Dear Cary: The attached Variance Application includes three variances related to the proposed parking ramp at the east side of the Southdale Medical Office Building Campus. The inter - related variances are as follows: 1. Fewer parking spaces than required by the Zoning Ordinance. 2. Reduced setbacks from the lot lines. 3. Increase in building height relative to set backline locations. As noted in the City of Edina —Variance Application (page 2) the following four items are addressed. • The proposed variance will relieve some practical difficulties relative to set back and height of the parking ramp. The parking ramp needs to be expanded to four levels to meet the parking requirements. The existing three level ramp, structurally designed for vertical expansion, is at or over the setbacks for three levels. It would be difficult and costly to not add to the existing structure. • Adding on to the existing ramp already too close to the property line is an extraordinary circumstance unique to this property. • The proposed variances will be in harmony with the general purpose and intent of the zoning ordinance. The new four level ramp will generally meet height and set back requirements along 66th Street and will be unchanged along 651' Street. • The proposed variance will not alter the essential character of the neighborhood. The adjacent blocks contain hospital, retail, and offices occupancies that will not be adversely affected by the granting of these variances. A detailed explanation of each variance and supporting data is attached. Affirmative Action, Equal Opportunity Ernployer rN;f rIP'-e Architecture Engineering Interiors Planning Preservation 100 Portland Avenue South, Suite 100 Minneapolis, Minnesota 55401 t 612.332.3654 f 332.3626 www .collaborativedesigngroup.com Very truly yours, Collaborative Design Group, Inc. ,Mark Beckman / Project Architect Enclosures A a Variance No. 1: Parking Spaces Provided Explanation of Request: Applicant is seeking a variance to provide fewer parking spaces than what is required by the Zoning Ordinance. Per SubSection 850.08, Subd. 1, paragraph M, parking spaces shall be provided at the rate of 1 space for each 200 square feet of gross floor area, plus one space for each physician or dentist. Parking Calculations and Analysis: Existing office buildings @ 273,000 sq. ft. + new office building @ 60,000 sq. ft. _ 333,000 sq. ft. gross / 200 sq. ft. = 1,665 cars + 50 physicians (estimated number on site at one time) = 1,715 cars total required on site. Analysis of existing parking lot and ramp usage in June 2013 indicates that approximately 932 spaces, or 74.3 %, of the available 1254 are being utilized at any one time. ( See Attached Exhibit B — Existing Parking Utilization) Based on existing usage of 932 plus full requirement of 300 spaces for the new 60,000 sq. ft. office building the owner would like to propose the initial construction of 4 level ramp accommodating 1,180 spaces. The parking ramp plus the other 397 spaces on site would provide a total of 1,577 parking spaces on the campus. 1,577 is 92% of the required 1,715 parking stalls. See attached Survey and parking ramp plans A fifth level on the parking ramp, accommodating 175, is proposed as "proof of parking," bringing the potential total to 1,752 spaces. See attached Exhibit C — Parking Summary and parking ramp plans. A7 Exhibit B - Parking Utilization Analysis Southdale Medical Campus Between June 11 and 17, 2013 a parking utilization analysis was conducted on the existing parking facilities (surface lots and parking ramp) Numbers below indicate the parking spaces recorded as open at the times indicated. Tues 6/11 — Surface lots — 33 open, Ramp 249 open — 10 AM 75 open, 263 open — 3 PM Wed 6/12 — Surface lots — 70 open, Ramp 243 open — 10 AM 49 open, Ramp 269 open — 3 PM Thurs 6/13 Surface lots — 31 open, Ramp 250 open — 10 AM 97 open, Ramp 271 open — 3 PM Fri 6/14 Surface lots — 105 open, Ramp 279 open — 10 AM 132 open, Ramp 307 open — 3 PM Mon 6/17 Surface lots — 19 open, Ramp 224 open — 10 AM 55 open, Ramp 275 open — 3 PM After deleting the smallest and largest numbers, the average number of open spaces on site at any given time is 322. 1254 spaces on site minus 322 = 932 occupied spaces. w Exhibit C - Project Parking Count Summary Southdale Medical Campus July 26, 2013 Zoning Requirements: 1 car per 200 sq. ft. gross floor area, plus 1 car per doctor 333,000 sq. ft. gross / 200 sq. ft. = 1,665 cars + 50 physicians (estimated number on site at one time) = 1,715 cars total Proposed Project Parking: Existing Parking to Remain: Surface Parking (west and north lots) Lower Level Parking (6525 Building): "Courtyard" Parking: Total Existing Parking: New /Remodeled Parking Ramp: Basement Level: First Level (Grade): Second Level: Third Level: Fourth Level: Total Parking in Ramp: South Surface Lot (new) Total Parking Proposed: Proof of Parking: (future, if needed) Ramp Fifth Level: Total Parking 310 75 6 391 129 256 276 281 238 1,180 6 1,577 Al kI 175 1,752 Variance No. 2: Parking Ramp Setbacks Explanation of Request: Applicant is seeking a variance for front and side yard setbacks exceeding those allowed by the zoning ordinance. Per paragraph G of Subd 5 of SubSection 850.08 the required front and side yard setback is 20 feet plus 1 foot for each foot of height exceeding 20 feet. It is proposed that the existing parking ramp, three levels at the north end and two levels at the south end, be expanded vertically to a height of four levels (five levels with "proof of parking "). The existing parking ramp width and structural column grid will be maintained. The existing three level ramp is already over the set back lines along 65th Street and Drew Avenue. Setback Summary Data: Building height equals the required setback. Proposed height: Four level ramp at top of parapet: 34' -6" Five level ramp at top of parapet: 44' -6" Proposed height: Top of stair tower at southeast corner: 39' -8" Top of stair tower at southeast corner: 49' -8" Existing height: Top of parapet at speed ramp at 65th St.: 23' -6" Proposed Setbacks from property lines: Drew Avenue at 65th Street (north end of site): 20.06 ft. Drew Avenue at 66th Street (south end of site): 28.54 ft. 66th Street at stair tower: 35.0 ft. 65th Street at existing speed ramp: 7.4 ft. (existing condition) A10 ...for living, learning, raising families & doing business 2008 Comprehensive Plan Figure 4.3 e City 3 Y of Edina Future Land Use Plan '- 2008 Comprehensive Plan Update Data Source: URS I—l�7 0 0 5 /✓rues Edina Comp Plan Update 2008 Chapter 4: Land Use and Community Design 4 -25 Southdale Medical Campus 3800 West 66th Street I Project and Zoning Data ranter �.amaa rfx wr. x. ern rnr,xe.. F.bxre wtweoF.r: tlf.w,. •rw., euMfnNr: M.Ntar lMx. Me.,,�1 x�w.x.�., f.x�M rwfM esrw: raft xw.,w...ff.f f.w.e e.,aw trtf Project Location S. RFFr . F.e.,w eF, Fxf,f x,.,«a... 7i..>.�...,�. e.,.e�.,x +.,,.,x...f..x.. w „..�......�.�...... sn.aw.f� n aunt: reM [.laen rMxn: a, nFwterr +r.wts�wt. Iwri la,f.t a,y otit9 n ews Tga:vrfre weyaf. AVlr � rel�Mlre Edina, Minnesota r�F+Mrr ++Yw, Mfre4ti 4iiittv� CM FMrr /lai/tnM •eaNfd: �Ifttne:,lbM,wr• efffti,i elrer: e COLLABORATIVE Designcroup�f. LO >Z (B U v cB� W � N �I� f (0011 w SITE PLAN APPROVAL JULY 26, 2013 rams_. SHEET INDEX, CODE DATA, PROJECT TEAM AND LOCATION MAP a000 w I - MEDICAL CAMPUS VIEW FROM 66th STREET& DREW IIr� T MEDICAL OFFICE BUILDING VIEW OF LINK TO EXISTING BUILDING MEDICAL CAMPUS & PARKING RAMP VIEW FROM URLW MEDICAL CAMPUS & PARKING RAMP VIEW FROM 66th STREET SOUTH ELEVATION - MATERIALS & HEIGHTS SCALE: ye - 1' -0' COLLABORATIVE Designcroup,— N Cam. C U C� G SITE PLAN APPROVAL JULY 26, 2013 BUILDING ELEVATION PERSPECTIVES A400 I ` � z -, II Q _— o - e rsnl� -. , °�rcTO � � - c 0 - - -._ -- — - �c •T_ _ - - . - _ _ _ - - -- J —.- I - _ - .._ li �,� � �. -_ � \ � - eon e l -- - • - - � -� " G =,�,. _ . • � � j � _ . � i ' _. • ... -�'� rrru .s ersr j -- - � •�" `t' :ail I — COLLABORATIVE D®gncroup,r pro N Q U cv ca G1 d � v;o 0 of ow SCHEMATIC DESIGN Not for Construction 0 E %ISTING r+txtnl CONDITIONS [m��MYB910W. r cmltaa.,�ra, a 30 6 - ,l, o C101 U� I r vl ' o I I 1 � I I QIQ a _ Ey n dD es o- /1y I Y I J-4 . I �Iw Lf rE>j i t eke .000510 115' L. GGTH STREET REST I I — _ _. .. Jam' IL I I II t�.l ~w �. ,..e,..,,. �,...... III • ..., w we %, dw one .nm •r ,w vw o',�.ermro 'I ,I 'I I ,I. �L',_ I I I� li II I; II I . I � . I; I; I; I I • ■ i 0 NORTH ,Y I'Jeew06111Below. � CdlbEta v-ft 0 20 40 cc COLLABORATIVE Dealgn(aoup,- 3 Q R U CW G _ � o �+ 3 ; f ,,0A 0o d SCHEMATIC DESIGN Not for Construction DEMOLITION C102 I _ r ° i - 1 —\ GI-ILIR1E I r vl ' o I I 1 � I I QIQ a _ Ey n dD es o- /1y I Y I J-4 . I �Iw Lf rE>j i t eke .000510 115' L. GGTH STREET REST I I — _ _. .. Jam' IL I I II t�.l ~w �. ,..e,..,,. �,...... III • ..., w we %, dw one .nm •r ,w vw o',�.ermro 'I ,I 'I I ,I. �L',_ I I I� li II I; II I . I � . I; I; I; I I • ■ i 0 NORTH ,Y I'Jeew06111Below. � CdlbEta v-ft 0 20 40 cc COLLABORATIVE Dealgn(aoup,- 3 Q R U CW G _ � o �+ 3 ; f ,,0A 0o d SCHEMATIC DESIGN Not for Construction DEMOLITION C102 ---------- 7 — — —.-- . , . L . ----------- f- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Wrl. 0 callbot—youft 0 30 6. to CL E (D L 10 SCHEMATIC DESIGN Not for Construction OVERALL SITE PLAN 0200 65Tff STREET WEST 1— —1 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — tie f SSrrrnY - - — — — — — — — — — 7-- — — — — --------------- F. -T. --------------------- J ZI I I 4c -HH- "K LD T- ----------- ------------ pr I i Z di 936 W— 11-1 IT. I... 6. 0 NORTH Know whors Below. Cold before you dig. 0 30 60 mATr-WLAE W. L.", - -- --------- - ___..o. -- Of 9F9 �4- - - - - - - - - - - - - -- - - - - - 7— 77,' —7=,, 66TH STREET WEST 0 Cd1brilMyouft 0 20 40 WIJJIBORATIVE CL 00 E ��w SCHEMATIC DESIGN Not for Construction rw_ SITE PLAN C201 4L, to ta; Is, —7 Eirmfm I Aiil SKI 11 0 Cd1brilMyouft 0 20 40 WIJJIBORATIVE CL 00 E ��w SCHEMATIC DESIGN Not for Construction rw_ SITE PLAN C201 7 4 T— -7— — — --------------- -------- bT MATCWL64E .4-- 7 Ix f "A r af -------------------- - 4F E nK ED----------------- Z-- F— E L!2!; MATv4LIF4E MB LM� 41 mzz- o 152) L o 14 ILI, Ei7 a -E. ­U --L WTO .. 714. -P7 17 f a" 66TH STREET WEST —7-7- ........ - ----- CCMbl..YWft M^� a 20 .0 DeelgnCtrnfprr U) CL E z (D (D ISCHEMATIC DESIGN Not for Construction DRAINAGE, PAVING, & EROSION CONTROL PLAN C301 ENLARGED AREA t neeue BBV ENLARGED AREA Y as w. t°;eia�..,.n..us.ntmwett.+[m�;e p7r •'ter T .a'u .av e.m� mnie� epn..s � Dom w— aNORTH 0 Call tabuTenOmp 0 20 .0 cowleor�arnE DaigncawP,� Q. V _V A� SW wG' W 0 U) O 3 � f N R SCHEMATIC DESIGN Not toy Construction DETAILED GRADING PLAN C302 qj-20. � _ 4=1 ;it I I. --- - -------- ------------ -- MATrWLAE II ,X, ITI MATC14041F o OR, \I N e9 52 PI; b� CL FE 17 -22 2 0 SCHEMATIC DESIGN Not for Constwctlon TIT., II - — — — I ® .... UTILITIES W. ccmbd..Vft D 20 0 C401 i� �rlGf ■ ■■ ■MEMO ■ ■ ■ ■� :� NONE MEMMEMEMEMMI ti ' ■ NEI ■1 =xm Ica malmm mummoctm IM I Pr � it °po • °~ ,, ■1 ��m ®� ®�� 'SRI ■ o ■ni MUM ■; - ■n■ 1 ■� ■� ■!� ■ ■n■ Mil ■ ;o� Nn■ i ■I ■11• No on ■ ■■imom 1E■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■■■ !� I■■° IEEE Pi N, i ■■ . ■- �� °jFlaki *� � • o sw•oeos � +i':w a '• { .i; ••• ��- Ee °s iti °!s'a1°a` *y�t�i 11 ee °e °• I ■. `�R- Ji 11F1�I�i #1�����te�l` �1•�e,'� Q s wr q ►vrr�� s. CONIFEROUS TREE PLANTING I b 6 PLAEED PARKING ISLAND A BICYCLE RACK DETAIL i q, v rI/ f. _IIi�NI� .0 DA ,tl IIWI Yrll Nml wa INIhWI III NY A0 -uLu�nml Intl PIA�nM IIIN z. III NN 1. — I Im -Null W73B�: ,° I �fA�IINi I!I�G'llsllN!1= IINI =Null- INNI�@9�JNN?I!III! a I �/► •0� IHileNMUr �.��nn�e�'��NI� II�IIIIIIII,, PERENNIAL PLANTING 4 EDGING AT PLANTING BED NORTH r— ertnBelow. C011bil owyari $ o 10 .20 ODUABORAME H 7 CL E V 'D .0 fO °c a3� w oo N � SCHEMATIC DESIGN Not for Conslnutlon - LANDSCAPE DETAILS A701 —.06) T(, 1 ' a ' T. T 1 ' ' T 1 B) to t1 iz I] to ta.t is 16 I1 1e te) i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i l I ------ i------- -- - --i - -- - -i- - i /71 � �� �� 1 � Vi I I _I I I I I I 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I I I I I I I I 1 i_ A �i � . I I I I I I I I I II Z� t u E BASMENTT LEVEL PARKING PLAN AP00 x n 117 STANDARD PARKING 12 COMPACT PARKING 129 TOTAL OFFICE BUILDING (FOR REFERENCE ONLY, SEE SHEET A210) ca COLLABORATIVE neeignGroup,- cn CL cc CD ca .a i� SITE PLAN APPROVAL JULY 26, 2013 BASEMENT LEVEL PARKING PLAN A200 v f G _ / � ',�;,�Illllllllllllr Iiiliillliiil '1►e1 l►1 •r. COLLABORATIVE Dmignq -up,- C. U ca U ,a W y 5 eN YI O/� $ ' VI W 31 SITE PLAN APPROVAL JULY 26, 2013 I I -- I i FIRST LEVEL PARKING PUN A201 T IT m 1� P na 1 I I I I Ib 1 1 1 I 11 i _ i_ � _i ►- I= i I_ i� I i i I ;; _ i I I i_ 1 i m_ 1 11 147 ITT iitTF I I III I I I I I I IT IT]I I I I k I I I I I I I I I 1 v.}.. 1 m 1 1 Id - b 1� � 1 I I - - -�- -- - - - - m 1 1 V I 1 1 1 --------------- 246 STANDARD PARKING 28 COMPACT PARKING OFFICE B U I.L D I N G (FOR REFERENCE ONLY, 276 TOTAL SEE SHEET A212) Z( g SECOND LEVEL PARKING PLAN COLLABORATIVE Deeigncroup,m.. CL U c6 U N CD VI w SITE PLAN APPROVAL JULY 26, 2013 SECOND LEVEL PARKING PLAN A2 ®2 O 0 0 0 0 O O O O m m® T m ®® m m m m T ® T ITT WIN 5. •' i I 1 -------- - ---- 241 STANDARD PARKING 40 COMPACT PARKING OFFICE B U I L D I N G 281 TOTAL (FOR SEE SHEET A212) 2e t THIRD LEVEL PARKING PLAN _ COLJABORATiVE Dtelgncroup,... 0 c. E U co v 0 cu D oo_ to w SITE PLAN APPROVAL JULY 20, 2013 THIRD LEVEL PARKING PLAN A203 T TIT 1z n le u.t is Ie II le le `m J z1 n -I Y \Ir \I( Y 7 7 I 1 c� C W-1 17F,-T, I I II i ' 1 I � I4 I I I I II I I I I i I I 6 - I� C I t l I .._��. I� I —► I .�I� I I I' I I I �...�I jj I III 1 I —► s l I I I I 1I 1 }.A_'il I I I I° I I I I 11 . 4 ---- -- I — it I < — lliff ii m 1 S1 i 1 F I 1 --------------- PARKING 43 COMPACT PARKING OFFICE BUILDING (FOR REFERENCE ONLY, 238 TOTAL SEE SHEET A2121 21--F� 1 FOURTH LEVEL PARKING PLAN ca COLLA130RATIVE DCdgnGZOUP,- N CL M. V SITE PLAN APPROVAL JULY 26, 2013 FOURTH LEVEL PARKING PLAN A204 '�- I �' II g I W-1 �II I I 4` V 1 • I I 1 _ I I I 1 4- 1 t j =i= i I I i I i I i I i I w_d � [77[T _ I A I I I I I I I I I ° I 11 I.° I I I I I ���-► I �I I i I I I -i1 - _ -I w 4t- u 148 STANDARD PARKING 27 COMPACT PARKING OFFICE BUILDING ROOFTOP 175 TOTAL Z® t FIFTH LEVEL PARKING PLAN COLLABORATIVE Deltign—up,- Im�sw� m CL E U v a` W A♦ N N N � 5 5 �o V o ! R W SITE PLAN .. APPROVAL JULY 26, 2013 �InmflO FIFTH LEVEL PARKING PLAN A205 ire COLLABORATIVE DeelgnGTOup,- cn E ca U cc a c m $ o m � C o c SITE PLAN APPROVAL JULY 26, 2013 OFFICE BUILDING BASEMENT LEVEL FLOOR PLAN A210 S n i e 1 - - - -- -- --- 1----- 1 - - - - -t - -- f - - - -- - - - - -- on BASEME T LEVEL FLOOR PLAN 13AS 0 ire COLLABORATIVE DeelgnGTOup,- cn E ca U cc a c m $ o m � C o c SITE PLAN APPROVAL JULY 26, 2013 OFFICE BUILDING BASEMENT LEVEL FLOOR PLAN A210 ox c--j FIRSTTLEVEL FLOOR PLAN u .. e IuneoRnrn� a1gOGroup;.� N a E ca U cu v. :a m Aa . 5 0 m � �+ e SITE PLAN APPROVAL OFFICE BUILDING FIRST LEVEL FLOOR PLAN A2'11 n 1 n n n W V 51 5I7 57 b 55 56 Tim t TYPICAL SECOND THIRD 6 FOURTH LEVEL FLOOR PLAN couneoRnTlve DemgDCroup.t -. N C. E cu U cB co 'a � � 9 SITE PLAN APPROVAL JULY 26, 2013 OFFICE BUILDING TYPICALSECOND, THIRD 8. FOURTH LEVEL FLOOR PLAN A212 .............. ............. ------------------- _7 ------------- tp . . . . .. .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . .. . . . . . . . . . . ... .. . . . . . . . X T . . . . . . .. . . . . . 7 - -- - - - - - - - j . . . . . . . .. . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- - - -- - - - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - 7 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. --- - - - - - - - SITE POINT BY POINT CALCS SEBESTA BLOMBERG I-- - C. fB 0 02. o July 26, 2013 SITE PLAN POINT BY POINT CALCULATIONS E01 MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE EDINA CITY COUNCIL HELD AT CITY HALL JULY 17, 2007 7:00 P.M. ROLLCALL "answering rollcall were Members Bennett, Housh, erica, Swenson and Mayor Hovland. \\ / CONSENT AGENDA's, UEMS APPROVED Motion ma y Member Masica and seconded by Member Swenson approv the Council ConZov da as presented. Rollcall: Ayes: Bennett, Housh, Masica, enson, H Motion carried. 2007 IMAGES OF EDINA PHO TEST WINNERS RECOGNIZED Communications Director Bennerotte introduced a winners c e 2007 Images of Edina Photo Contest: "Good Hair Day" by Polly Norman for e "Doing Business ategory; "Puppy Love" by Libby Pastor for the "Raising Families" catego ; "Fall at Cornelia" by Bar a Nichols for the "Living" category; "Spark" by Diane Schroeder the "Learning" category; and " cie �the Shutterbug" taken by 5 -year old Grace Hendricks o , for the "Judges Choice Award." Mayor land presented the awards to each recipient whil eir photos were displayed. OF Y 3.2007 SESSION 2007 PROVED.Motion made by Member Masica and seconded by &I'amber Swenson approving as resented the minutes of the Regular Meeting Of July 3, 2007, and Work Session of June 19, / Motion carried on rollcall vote - five ayes. RESOLUTION NO 2007 -78 ADOPTED APPROVING FINAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN, SOUTHDALE MEDICAL BUILDING OPERATING CO., 6545/25 FRANCE AVENUE, BUILDING EXPANSION Affidavits of notice were presented approved and ordered placed on file. Planner Teague explained the applicant, SMB Operating Company requested Final Development Plan to allow the expansion of the Southdale Medical Building located at 6545/25 France Avenue. Mr. Teague said the proponent was present and would address the proposal with the Council. He reported the Planning Commission. recommended the City Council consider approving the requested final development plan based on the following findings: • The proposal would meet the required standards and ordinances for a#inal development plan, and • The parking stalls would meet the city code with the proof of parking plan. Further, Mr. Teague the Planning Commission recommended the final development plan be subject to the following conditions: 1. Subject to staff approval, the site must be developed and maintained in substantial conformance with the following plans, unless modified by the conditions below: • Site plan date stamped June 6, 2007 date changed to July 11, 2007. • Grading plan dated June 6, 2007. • Landscaping plan date stamped June 6, 2007. • Building elevations date stamped June 6, 2007. Page 1 - A3-3 A inutes/Edina City Council/July 17, 2007 0 Proof of Parking Plan date stamped June 6, 2007. 2. The property owner will be responsible for replacing any required landscaping that dies. The applicant must enter into a proof of parking agreement with the City to ensure the necessary parking space will be provided if needed. Should parking become a significant problem, staff will require the proof of parking stalls be constructed by adding the addition to the parking deck, and increasing the number of compact stalls. 4. Submit a copy of the Nine Mile Creek watershed district permit. The city may require revisions to the approved plans to meet the district's requirements. 5. All mitigation measures required by the transportation commission and by the transportation studies must be completed by the applicant. 6. All conditions required by the City Engineer in his June 15, and June 22, 2007 memorandum. 7. The realigned access on 66th Street will be subject to Hennepin County approval. 8. The property owner would be required to pay their fair share of the cost of a traffic signal on 65th Street, per city policy if warrants were met for installation. Dennis Zylla, 5353 Wayzata Boulevard, Developer, introduced the development team, of Todd Young, KKE Architects, Tom Wenz Sr., Investors Real Estate Trust and John Crawford of URS Corporation. Mr. Zylla reviewed the proposed addition to the Southdale Medical Building using graphic displays and narrative. Issues discussed by Council included: location where existing contract parking customers will be sent, methodology of determining parking adequacy of site, concern about parking adequacy with aging community, how would signage be addressed, traffic congestion concern, potential need for a signal, location of the proposed sidewalk, whether there was a need for a bike rack, why the traffic consultant used the ITE trip generation manual instead of an actual count, traffic circulation on the site, the curb cut on W 66th Street, proposed building materials, review of the proposed addition, landscaping, islands proposed in the parking lot, West 65th Street turn lane, signage and drainage issue. Various members of the development team and city staff answered the questions. Public Comment Kathryn Friedell, 6566 France Avenue, President of Point of France Homeowners, expressed concern regarding traffic congestion, signage, landscaping and drainage. Linda Schmitz, 6583 Barrie Road, expressed concern with traffic on Barrie Road and requested adequate signage. Dr. Anthony Shibley, Ob Gyn Specialists, PA, 3625 France Avenue, urged approval of the proposed addition, stating it was needed. He indicated that during his ten years of tenancy he had not seen a parking problem. Member Swenson made a motion, seconded by Member Housh to close the public hearing. Ayes: Bennett, Housh, Masica, Swenson, Hovland Motion carried. Member Swenson made a motion introducing and adopting Resolution No. 2007 -78 approving the Final Development Plan for Southdale Medical Operating Company for the building expansion at 6545/25 France Avenue with the following conditions: 1. Subject to staff approval, the site must be developed and maintained in substantial conformance with the following plans, unless modified by the conditions below: • Site plan date stamped June 6, 2007 date changed to July 11, 2007. Page 2 A 3 Minutes/Edina City Council/Tuly 17, 2007 • Grading plan dated June 6, 2007. • Landscaping plan date stamped June 6, 2007. • Building elevations date stamped June 6, 2007. • Proof of Parking Plan date stamped June 6, 2007. 2. The property owner will be responsible for replacing any required landscaping that dies. 3. The applicant must enter into a proof of parking agreement with the City to ensure the necessary parking space will be provided if needed. Should parking become a significant problem, staff will require the proof of parking stalls be constructed by adding the addition to the parking deck, and increasing the number of compact stalls. 4. Submit a copy of the Nine Mile. Creek watershed district permit. The city may require revisions to the approved plans to meet the district's requirements. 5. All mitigation measures required by the Transportation Commission and by the Transportation Studies must be completed by the applicant. 6. All conditions required by the City Engineer in his June 15, and June 22, 2007 memorandums. 7. The realigned access on 66th Street will be subject to Hennepin County approval. 8. Install traffic signal per city policy if warrants were met. Member Housh seconded the motion. Rollcall: Ayes: Bennett, Housh, Masica, Swenson, Hovland Motion carried. PUBLIC HEARING FOR REQUESTED CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT & VARIANCE, CALVIN CHRISTIAN SCHOOL, 4015 INGLEWOOD AVENUE, BUILDING EXPANSION CONTINUED TO AUGUST 7, 2007 Mr. Teague explained that due to a deficiency in the mailed notices staff recommended the Calvin Christian School public hearing be continued until August 7, 2007. Member Swenson moved to continue the hearing for the requested conditional use permit by Calvin Christian School, 4015 Inglewood Avenue allowing a proposed building expansion until August 7, 2007. Member Housh seconded the motion. Ayes: Bennett, Housh, Masica, Swenson, Hovland Motion carried. ADOPT RESOLUTION NO. 2007-79 GRANTING VARIANCE, 4548 OXFORD AVENUE Affidavits of notice were presented approved and ordered placed on file. Assistant Planner . Aaker explained the Zoning Board of Appeals had granted a variance to the property owners at 4548 Oxford Avenue, to allow the homeowners to construct an addition to their home. She noted the Zoning Board approved the request on a majority vote of 2 members to 1 member. Mr. Richard Miller, 5340 Hollywood Avenue, had requested the City Council consider his appeal of the Zoning Board's decision. Ms. Aaker explained the property currently accessed the home from Hollywood, but after the proposed addition the property would have access from Oxford. She added the property was a corner lot and therefore subject to two front yard setbacks. Ms. Aaker stated the homeowners originally submitted plans that would have placed the proposed addition much closer to Hollywood. She noted the revised plan kept the garage in -line and at the same setback as the existing non - conforming setback of the home from Oxford Avenue and also increased the proposed setback of the new side wall of the garage to 15 feet from Hollywood. Dick Miller, 5340 Hollywood Road, presented his appeal of the granted variance. He pointed out the entire home located at 4548 Oxford was built outside of the buildable area. Mr. Miller said granting Page 3 A 3 S �� Infrastructure a Engineering ■ Planning ■ Construction 701 Xenia Avenue South Suite #300 ® Minneapolis, MN 55416 & Associates; Inc. Tel: 763 541 -4800 Fax: 763 541 -1700 Memorandum DATE: August 22, 2013 To: Mr. Cary Teague, Planning Director Mr. Wayne Houle, Director of Engineering City of Edina FRom. Charles Rickart, P.E., PTOE RE: Southdale Medical Campus Expansion Traffic and Parking Study City of Edina, MN WSB Project No. 1686 -45 Background The purpose of this study is to determine the potential traffic and parking impacts the proposed expansion of the Southdale Medical Campus will have on the adjacent roadway system as well as the existing medical office parking and site circulation: The site is located north of 66th Street (CSAH 53) between France Avenue (CSAH 17) and Drew Avenue. The project location is shown on Figure 1. The proposed plan .includes: construction of a 60,000 sf expansion to the existing medical office campus, and;: the expansion/reconstruction of the existing parking ramp with the addition of 1180 new parking spaces. Access'to'the existing site is from two full movement driveways on 65th Street, a full movement driveway to the parking ramp from Drew Avenue, a right - in/right -out driveway -from 66th Street and a right -in only driveway from 66th Street. The proposed site plan will modify the access on 66th Street, eliminating the right -in only access and shifting the right - in/right -out access approximately 100 feet west. This access modification will require approval from Hennepin County. The proposed site plan is shown in Figure 2. The traffic impacts of the existing and proposed site expansion were evaluated at the following locations. • France Avenue at 66th Street • France Avenue at 65th Street • 65th Street at Southdale Medical Office west driveway/Hospital entrance • 65`h Street at Southdale Medical Office east driveway • Drew Avenue at Southdale Medical Office Parking Ramp driveway • 65th Street at Drew Avenue • 66th Street at Drew Avenue • 66th Street at Southdale Medical Office Right- in/Right -out driveway • 66th Street at Southdale Medical Office Right -in only driveway 434 Southdale Medical Campus Expansion City of Edina August 22, 2013 Page 2 of 16 The following sections of this report document the analysis and anticipated impacts of the proposed redevelopment. Existing Traffic Characteristics The existing lane configuration and traffic control include: France Avenue (CSAH 17) is north/south a 6 -lane divided Arterial roadway from south of 66th Street to north of 65th Street. Primary access to France Avenue is by local streets and major development driveways. The posted speed limit on France Avenue in the vicinity of the site is 40 mph. 66th Street (CSAH 53) is an east /west 4 -lane divided Minor Arterial roadway. Street access and access to adjacent developments including the Southdale Medical Office and Southdale Shopping Center is provided from this roadway. The speed limit posted on 66th Street is 35 mph. 65th Street 65th Street is an east/west City street with numerous access driveways. The existing roadway configuration includes a single lane in each direction. All the driveway access points are controlled with stop signs, stopping the exiting movements from the developments. A 30 mph speed limit is posted on this roadway. Drew Avenue is a north/south City street with numerous access driveways. The existing roadway configuration between 66th Street and 65th Street includes a single lane in each direction with a continuous center left turn lane (three lane section). All the driveway access points are controlled with stop signs, stopping the exiting movements. from the developments. A 30 mph speed limit is posted on this roadway. Drew Avenue north of 65th Street is a two -lane street providing access around Fairview Southdale Hospital. The lane configurations at each of the study area intersection are as follows: France Avenue at 66th Street — Traffic Signal Control SB France Ave approaching 66t" St — one right/through, two through, one left NB France Ave approaching 66th St.— one right, three through, one left EB-66th St approaching France Ave — one right, two through, one left V, TB 66th St approaching France Ave — one right, two through, two left France Avenue at 65th Street — Traffic Signal Control SB France Ave approaching 65th St — one right/through, two through, one left NB France Ave approaching 65th St — one right/through, two through, one left EB 65th St approaching France Ave — one right/through, one left WB 65th St approaching France Ave — one right, one through/left 65th Street at Southdale Medical Office/Hospital west driveway — Side Street Stop SB Hospital driveway approaching 65th St — one right/through/left NB Southdale Medical Office driveway approaching 65th St — one right/through/left EB 65th St approaching Hospital /Southdale Medical Office driveway — one right/through/left WB 65th St approaching Hospital /Southdale Medical Office driveway - one right/through /left AV Southdale Medical Campus Expansion City of Edina August 22, 2013 Page 3 of 16 65th Street at Southdale Medical Office east driveway— Side Street Stop NB Southdale Medical Office driveway approaching.65th St — one right/left EB 65th St approaching Southdale Medical Office driveway — one right /through WB 65th St approaching Southdale Medical Office driveway - one through/left 65th Street at Drew Avenue - Side Street Stop SB Drew Ave approaching 65th St — one right, one through/left NB Drew Ave approaching 65th St — one right /through, one left EB 65th St approaching Drew Ave — one right/through/left WB 65th St approaching Drew Ave — one right / through/left Drew Avenue at Southdale Medical Office parking ramp driveway - Side Street Stop SB Drew Ave approaching Southdale Medical Office driveway — one right/through. NB Drew Ave approaching Southdale Medical Office driveway — one through, one left EB Southdale Medical Office driveway approaching Drew Ave — one right/left 66th Street at Drew Avenue /Southdale Center Access — Traffic Signal Control SB Drew Ave approaching 66th St — one right/through, one left NB Southdale Center Access approaching 66.1, St -:inbound lanes only EB 66th St approaching Drew Ave — one right, two through, one left WB 65th St approaching France Ave — one right /through, two through, one left 66th Street at Southdale Medical Office Right- in/Right -out driveway — Side Street Stop SB Southdale Medical Office driveway appr6aching,y66th St — one right WB 65th St approaching Southdale Medical Office,driveway — one right/through, two through 66th Street at Southdale Medical Office Right -in orily`driveway — inbound only WB 65th St approaching Southdale Medical Office driveway — one right/through, two through AM and PM peak hour turning movement counts and daily hourly approach counts were conducted during the week on April 1, 2013 and the week of June 10, 2013. These counts were used as the existing baseline conditions for the area. Figure 3 shows the existing intersections and driveways along each corridor that were analyzed as part of this traffic study, with the existing 2013 AM and PM peak hour and traffic volumes. The traffic count data is included in the Appendix. Background (Non Development) Traffic Growth Traffic growth in the vicinity of a proposed site will occur between existing conditions (2013) and any given future year due to other development within the region. This background growth must be accounted for and included in future year traffic forecasts. Reviewing the historical traffic counts in the area, traffic has stayed somewhat constant or dropped in the past few years. However, in order to account for some background growth in traffic the Hennepin County State Aid traffic growth projection factor of 1.1 over a20 year period was used to project traffic to the 2015 and 2030 analysis years. A 3% Southdale Medical Campus Expansion City of Edina August 22, 2013 Page 4 of 16 In addition to the regional background traffic growth, other specific none development related traffic near the site was determined and included with the overall background traffic. These projects included: Fairview Southdale Hospital Expansion — The proposed plan includes the expansion of the emergency center, urgent care, behavioral health and observation area. The proposed expansion consists of a 77,500 sf (gross area), two -story building located on the north side of the existing hospital building. This project has been approved by the City Council. It is assumed that it will be completed in 2014 and included in the background traffic for the 2015 and 2030 analysis. Edina Medical Plaza (6500 France Avenue) — The City recently apyroved the redevelopment of the properties in the southwest quadrant of France Avenue and 65 Street. The proposed site included redevelopment of both the 6500 France Avenue site and the 4005 65t" Avenue site with a five story 96,500 sf medical office building with an attached 3 story parking structure. However, recently the City was presented a revised site plan changing the use on the site to a 209 unit senior housing and skilled care facility. This proposal is currently being reviewed by the Planning Commission and City Council. With this change, it is assumed that this project will not be open and will not be included with 2015 analysis but, will be fully developed and included in the 2030 background traffic. Southdale Residential - The City recently approved the addition of 232 apartment units with associated parking in the existing Southdale Shopping Center parking lot. The site is located in the northwest quadrant of 69th Street and York Avenue. This project is currently under construction. It is assumed that the project will be open and is included as part of the 2015 and 2030 background traffic. Additional Southdale Mall Development - Based on the information received from Southdale Center about the current vacancy rates and plans for renovations, it was determined that following the renovations, the mall would have an additional 143,880 sf of leasable space available. This figure includes leasable retail and food court space. The analysis assumes that all leasable space will be occupied and included in the background traffic for the 2015 and 2030 analysis. Future Restaurant Development — A future restaurant is anticipated in the northeast quadrant of France Avenue and 69th Street in the Southdale Center Parking lot. The restaurant was assumed to be 8,000 sf in size with approximately 300 seats. The analysis assumes the restaurant will not be developed by 2015 but, will be open and included and included as part of the 2030 background traffic. The estimated trip generation for the additional background traffic is shown below in Table 1. The trip generation rates used to estimate the additional development traffic is based on extensive surveys of the trip - generation rates for other similar land uses as documented in the Institute of Transportation Engineers Trip Generation Manual, 9th Edition. The table shows the AM and PM peak hour trip generation for the proposed uses. A3A Southdale Medical Campus Expansion City of Edina August 22, 2013 Page 5 of 16 Table I - Estimated Additional Background Trip Generation Use Size AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Total In Out Total In Out Hospital Expansion 77,500 sf 36 21 15 24 10 14 Senior Housing 209 units 27 18 9 40 18 22 Apartments 232 units 118 24 94 144 94 50 Shopping Center 143,880 sf 138 86 52 533 256 277 Restaurant 8000 sf 87 48 39 79 47 32 Total New Trips 1 406 197 209 820 425 1 395 Source: Institute of Transportation Engineers Trip Generation Manual, 9th Edition Site Expansion Trip Generation The estimated trip generation from the proposed site expansion is shown below in Table 2. The trip generation rates used to estimate the proposed site traffic are based on extensive surveys of the trip - generation rates for other similar land uses as documented in the Institute of Transportation Engineers Trip Generation Manual, 9t' Edition. The table shows the total daily, AM peak hour and PM. peak hour trip generation for the proposed site. Table 2 - Estimated Expansion Trip Generation — ITE Rates Use Size SF ADT AM Peak PM Peak Total In I Out Total In Out Total In Out Medical Office 1 60 1 2168 1084 1084 144 114 30 215 60 155 (1) - Source: Institute of Transportation Engineers Trip Generation Manual, 9th Edition Traffic Distribution Background and site - generated trips were distributed to the adjacent roadway system based on several factors including the existing Annual Average Daily Traffic (AADT) and the travel sheds for the major routes that serve the area. In general the Trip Distribution was assumed: • 30% to the north • 40% to the south • 15% to the east • 15% to the west A40 Southdale Medical Campus Expansion City of Edina August 22, 2013 Page 6 of 16 The additional background trips from adjacent developments were assigned to 65th Street, 66th Street, Drew Avenue and France Avenue based on the overall directional distribution and ratio of existing AADT volumes on each respective roadway. The generated trips for the proposed Southdale Medical Office expansion were assumed to arrive or exit using driveways on 65th Street, 66th Street and Drew Avenue and circulate through the site. These trips were assigned based on the ratio of existing traffic patterns on each respective roadway. Future Year Traffic Forecasts Traffic forecasts were prepared for the year 2015 which is the year after the proposed expansion would be completed and assumed to be fully occupied and for the 2030 conditions which represents the City's Comprehensive Plan development time frame. Three improvement alternatives were evaluated. 1. Existing Conditions — Assumes existing lane configuration and traffic control. 2. No -Build — Assumes existing lane configuration and traffic control without the proposed Southdale Medical Office expansion. 3. Build — Assumes existing lane configuration and traffic control with the proposed Southdale Medical Office expansion. The traffic forecasts were prepared by adding the projected annual background traffic growth and the projected non - development background traffic growth to the existing 2013 traffic counts to determine the "No- Build" traffic conditions. The anticipated Southdale Medical Office expansion traffic was then added to the no -build to determine the "Build" traffic conditions. Figures 4 — 7 shows the. projected 2015 and 2030 No -Build and Build AM and PM peak hour traffic volumes. Traffic Operations Existing and /or forecasted traffic operations were evaluated for the impacted intersections and access driveway adjacent to the hospital. The analysis was conducted for the following scenarios. 1. Existing 2013 Conditions 2. Projected 2015 No Build 3. Projected 2015 Build 4. Projected 2030 No Build 5. Projected 2030 Build This section describes the methodology used to assess the operations and provides a summary of traffic operations for each scenario. Ast Southdale Medical Campus Expansion City of Edina August 22, 2013 Page 7 of 16 Analysis MethodoloQy The traffic operations analysis is derived from established methodologies documented in the Highway Capacity Manual 2000 (HCM). The HCM provides a series of analysis techniques that are used to evaluate traffic operations. Intersections are given a Level of Service (LOS) grade from "A" to "F" to describe the average amount of control delay per vehicle as defined in the HCM. The LOS is primarily a function of peak traffic hour turning movement volumes, intersection lane configuration, and the traffic controls at the intersection. LOS A is the best traffic operating condition, and drivers experience minimal delay at an intersection operating at that level. LOS E represents the condition where the intersection is at capacity, and some drivers may have to wait through more than one green phase to make it through an intersection controlled by traffic signals. LOS F represents a condition where there is more traffic than can be handled by the intersection, and many vehicle operators may have to wait through more than one green phase to make it through the intersection. At a stop sign - controlled intersection, LOS F would be characterized by exceptionally long vehicle queues on each approach at an all -way stop, or long queues and /or great difficulty in finding an acceptable gap for drivers on the minor legs at a through -street intersection. The LOS ranges for both signalized and un- signalized intersections are shown in Table 3. The threshold LOS values for un- signalized intersections are slightly less than for signalized intersections. This variance was instituted because drivers' expectations at intersections differ with the type of traffic control. A given LOS can be altered by increasing (or decreasing) the number of lanes, changing traffic control arrangements, adjusting the timing at signalized intersections, or other lesser geometric improvements. LOS also changes as traffic volumes increase or decrease. Table 3 - Intersection Level of Service Ranges Source: HCM A *a Control Delay (Seconds) Signalized Un- Signalized A <10 <10 B 10 -20 10 -15 C 20 -35 15 -25 D 35 -55 25 -35 E 55-80 35-50 F >80 >50 Source: HCM A *a Southdale Medical Campus Expansion City of Edina August 22, 2013 Page 8of16 LOS, as described above, can also be determined for the individual legs (sometimes referred to as "approaches ") or lanes (turn lanes in particular) of an intersection. It should be noted that a LOS E or F might be acceptable .or justified in those cases where a leg(s) or lane(s) has a very low traffic volume as compared to the volume on the other legs. For example, improving LOS on such low- volume legs by converting a two -way stop condition to an all -way stop, or adjusting timing at a signalized intersection, could result in a significant penalty for the many drivers on the major road while benefiting the few on the minor road. Also, geometric improvements on minor legs, such as additional lanes or longer turn lanes, could have limited positive effects and might be prohibitive in terms of benefit to cost. Although LOS A represents the best possible level of traffic flow, the cost to construct roadways and intersection to such a high standard often exceeds the benefit to the user. Funding availability might also lead to acceptance of intersection or roadway designs with a lower LOS. LOS D is generally accepted as the lowest acceptable level in urban areas. LOS C is often considered to be the desirable minimum level for rural areas. LOS D or E may be acceptable for limited durations or distances, or for very low- volume legs of some intersections. The LOS analysis was performed using Synchro /SimTraffic: Synchro, a software package that implements Highway Capacity Manual (HCM) methodologies, was used to build each signalized intersection and provide an input database for turn ing- movement volumes, lane geometrics, and signal design and timing characteristics. In addition, Synchro was used to optimize signal timing parameters for future conditions. Output from Synchro is transferred to SimTraffic, the traffic simulation model. • SimTraffic is a micro - simulation computer modeling software that simulates each individual vehicle's characteristics and driver behavior in response to traffic volumes, intersection configuration, and signal operations. The model simulates drivers' behaviors and responses to surrounding traffic flow as well as different vehicle types and speeds. It outputs estimated vehicle delay and queue lengths at each intersection being analyzed. Existing Level of Service Summary Table 4, below, summarizes the existing LOS, at the primary intersections in the study area based on the current lane geometry, .traffic. control and traffic volumes. The table shows that all intersection are operating at an overall LOS D or better during both the AM and PM peak hours with all movements operating at LOS E or better. A table showing the LOS and delays by approach is included in the Appendix. A� J Southdale Medical Campus Expansion City of Edina August 22, 2013 Page 9 of 16 Table 4 - Existing Level of Service C = Overall LOS, (D) = Worst movement LOS Source: WSB & Associates, Inc. Forecast Traffic Operations A capacity and LOS analysis was completed for the study area intersections for 2015 which is the year after the proposed Southdale Medical Office expansion would be fully developed and for the 2030 conditions which represents the City's Comprehensive Plan development time frame. The results of the analysis are discussed below and shown in Tables S and 6. Detailed tables showing the LOS and delays by approach are included in the Appendix. Table S — Forecasted No Build, shows that all intersection will continue to operate at overall LOS D or better in 2015 and 2030 during both the AM and PM peak hours. However, with the increase in traffic, some additional movements will be operating at LOS E. Overall delays will also increase slightly from the existin conditions to the 2030 conditions, especially at the major intersections on France Avenue at 65t' Street and 66th Street and on 66th Street at Drew Avenue /Southdale entrance. By 2030 the analysis indicates that at the intersection of 65th Street and France Avenue potential . issues on the 65th Street approaches and France Avenue left turns may exist. With minor intersection and signal improvements (additional turn lane length and signal phasing changes), these issues would be minimized, improving the overall intersection LOS back to a C with 20 to 25 sec delays. Ac�� AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Intersection Overall Overall LOS Delay LOS Delay sec /veh sec /veh France Ave at 65th St C (D) 20.9 C (E) 22.55 France Ave at 66th St C (D) 22.5 C (D) 25.1 65th St at Southdale Medical Office A (A) 4.5 A (C) 6.6 west driveway / Hospital entrance 65t St at Southdale Medical Office A (A) 2.3 A (A) 2.4 east driveway 65th St at Drew Ave A (A) 6.6 A (A) 5.6 Drew Ave at Southdale Medical . A (A) 0.8 A (A) 1.6 Office driveway 66th St at Drew Ave C (D) 24.7 C (D) 24.5 66t St at Southdale Medical Office A (A) 1.5 A (A) 1.5 Right- in/Right -out 66 St at Southdale Medical Office A (A) 1.3 A (A) 1.7 Right -in only C = Overall LOS, (D) = Worst movement LOS Source: WSB & Associates, Inc. Forecast Traffic Operations A capacity and LOS analysis was completed for the study area intersections for 2015 which is the year after the proposed Southdale Medical Office expansion would be fully developed and for the 2030 conditions which represents the City's Comprehensive Plan development time frame. The results of the analysis are discussed below and shown in Tables S and 6. Detailed tables showing the LOS and delays by approach are included in the Appendix. Table S — Forecasted No Build, shows that all intersection will continue to operate at overall LOS D or better in 2015 and 2030 during both the AM and PM peak hours. However, with the increase in traffic, some additional movements will be operating at LOS E. Overall delays will also increase slightly from the existin conditions to the 2030 conditions, especially at the major intersections on France Avenue at 65t' Street and 66th Street and on 66th Street at Drew Avenue /Southdale entrance. By 2030 the analysis indicates that at the intersection of 65th Street and France Avenue potential . issues on the 65th Street approaches and France Avenue left turns may exist. With minor intersection and signal improvements (additional turn lane length and signal phasing changes), these issues would be minimized, improving the overall intersection LOS back to a C with 20 to 25 sec delays. Ac�� Southdale Medical Campus Expansion City of Edina August 22, 2013 Page 10 of 16 Table 5 - Forecasted No Build Level of Service C = Overall LOS, (D) = Worst movement LOS Source: WSB & Associates, Inc. Table 6 - Forecasted Build with Soutdale Medical Office Expansion, shows that all intersection will continue to operate at overall LOS D or better in 2015 and 2030 during both the AM and PM peak hours with some movements at LOS E. Similar to the Forecasted No -Build conditions the intersection of 65th Street and France Avenue will have potential delay issues. With minor intersection and signal improvements (additional turn lane length and signal phasing changes), these issues would be minimized, improving the overall intersection LOS back to a C with 20 to 25 sec delays. In addition the intersection of 65th Street and the Southdale Medical Office/Hospital Entrance driveway will experience increased delays, although they do not indicate a need for potential mitigation. The analysis of the relocated and combined access on 66th Street does not indicate any issues for traffic exiting the site. There are sufficient gaps in westbound traffic from the signal at Drew Avenue to allow vehicles to access 66th Street and cross to the left lane to turn south on France Avenue. Aq-5'- 2015 2030 AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Intersection Overall Overall Overall Overall LOS Delay LOS Delay LOS Delay LOS Delay sec /veh sec /veh sec /veh sec /veh France Ave at 65th St C (D) 21.5 C (E) 23.3 C (D) 25.7 D (E) 36.2 France Ave at 66th St C (D) 23.1 C (D) 26.6 C (D) 24.5 C (E) 25.0 65th St at SMO west driveway / Hospital A (A) 4.3 A (C) 7.6 A (C) 5.6 C (E) 32.6 entrance 65th St at SMO east A (A) 2.1 A (A) 2.5 A (A) 2.2 A (C) 9.4 driveway 65th St at Drew Ave A (A) 6.6 A(A) 5.9 A (A) 7.6 A(B) 8.0 Drew Ave at SMO A (A) 0.8 A (A) 1.6 A (A) 0.9 A (A) 1.7 driveway 66th St at Drew Ave C (D) 24.5 C (D) 25.0 C (D) 24.4 C (D) 23.9 66th St at SMO Right- A (A) 1.4 A (A) 1.4 A (A) 1.4 A (A) 1.6 in/Right -out 66 St at SMO Right -in A (A) 1.3 A (A) 1.8 A (A) 1.4 A(A) 2.0 only C = Overall LOS, (D) = Worst movement LOS Source: WSB & Associates, Inc. Table 6 - Forecasted Build with Soutdale Medical Office Expansion, shows that all intersection will continue to operate at overall LOS D or better in 2015 and 2030 during both the AM and PM peak hours with some movements at LOS E. Similar to the Forecasted No -Build conditions the intersection of 65th Street and France Avenue will have potential delay issues. With minor intersection and signal improvements (additional turn lane length and signal phasing changes), these issues would be minimized, improving the overall intersection LOS back to a C with 20 to 25 sec delays. In addition the intersection of 65th Street and the Southdale Medical Office/Hospital Entrance driveway will experience increased delays, although they do not indicate a need for potential mitigation. The analysis of the relocated and combined access on 66th Street does not indicate any issues for traffic exiting the site. There are sufficient gaps in westbound traffic from the signal at Drew Avenue to allow vehicles to access 66th Street and cross to the left lane to turn south on France Avenue. Aq-5'- Southdale Medical Campus Expansion City of Edina August 22, 2013 Page 11 of 16 Tahle 6 - Forecast Build with Hospital Expansion C = Overall LOS, (D) = Worst movement LOS Source: WSB & Associates, Inc. Vehicle Oueuinz Analysis A queuing analysis for the existing and future 2015 and 2030 conditions was prepared evaluating the anticipated vehicle queuing impacts at the intersections in the study area. The analysis was conducted using the SimTraffic simulation software. The results found that during both the AM and PM peak hours, for the existing, and future no- build and build 2015 and 2030 conditions, the average queues in the corridors do not exceed any of the available turn lane storage. In some cases however, for the 2030 no -build and build conditions, the maximum queues were exceeded, specifically; on 65th Street between France Avenue and the Southdale Medical Office west driveway/Hospital Entrance. The maximum queue represents the longest length of queue that was observed during the analysis period. The observations were typically identified one or two times during the peak periods with an extremely short duration of less than 4 to 6 seconds. The potential future mitigation at the 65th Street and France Avenue intersection discussed above will improve the flow of traffic on 65th Street and also minimize traffic blocking the Southdale Medical Office west driveway/Hospital Entrance. Additional signage could also be added indicating "do not block intersection" and /or "no left turns during peak hours" should this AG 2015 2030 AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Intersection Overall Overall Overall Overall LOS Delay LOS Delay LOS Delay LOS Delay sec /veh sec /veh sec /veh sec /veh France Ave at 65th St C (D) 22.6 C (E) 32.8 C (D) 28.2 D (E) 36.6 France Ave at 66th St C (D) 22.85 C (D) 26.3 C (D) 24.6 C (E) 29.7 65 1h St at SMO / Hospital A (C) 5.4 C (D) 22.6 A (D) 7.5 D (E) 33.1 west driveway 6 St at SMO east A (B) 2.5 A (C) 4.1 A (A) 2.7 A (C) 8.4 d r ivewa 65th St at Drew Ave A (A) 6.8 A(B) 5.5 A (B) 7.2 A(B) 6.5 Drew Ave at SMO A (A) 0.9 A (A) 1.7 A (A) 0.9 A (A) 1.7 driveway 66th St at Drew Ave C (D) 23.2 C (D) 24.8 C (D) 22.7 C (D) 26.7 661b St at SMO Right- A (A) 2.3 A (A) 3.1 A (A) 2.3 A (A) 3.2 in/Right -out 66 St at SMO Right -in NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA only C = Overall LOS, (D) = Worst movement LOS Source: WSB & Associates, Inc. Vehicle Oueuinz Analysis A queuing analysis for the existing and future 2015 and 2030 conditions was prepared evaluating the anticipated vehicle queuing impacts at the intersections in the study area. The analysis was conducted using the SimTraffic simulation software. The results found that during both the AM and PM peak hours, for the existing, and future no- build and build 2015 and 2030 conditions, the average queues in the corridors do not exceed any of the available turn lane storage. In some cases however, for the 2030 no -build and build conditions, the maximum queues were exceeded, specifically; on 65th Street between France Avenue and the Southdale Medical Office west driveway/Hospital Entrance. The maximum queue represents the longest length of queue that was observed during the analysis period. The observations were typically identified one or two times during the peak periods with an extremely short duration of less than 4 to 6 seconds. The potential future mitigation at the 65th Street and France Avenue intersection discussed above will improve the flow of traffic on 65th Street and also minimize traffic blocking the Southdale Medical Office west driveway/Hospital Entrance. Additional signage could also be added indicating "do not block intersection" and /or "no left turns during peak hours" should this AG Southdale Medical Campus Expansion City of Edina August 22, 2013 Page 12 of 16 become an issue. Tables showing the average and maximum queue lengths by movement and approach are included in the Appendix. Parking Impact Analysis The parking impacts to the existing Southdale Medical Office Campus were analyzed based on the current use of the site and anticipated expansion. Currently there is one primary parking structure located adjacent to Drew Avenue and surface spaces located throughout the site. The proposed plan removes some surface parking spaces to accommodate the building expansion and new entrance modifications. In addition the proposed parking ramp will be reconstructed to add additional parking spaces. Table 7 below shows a summary of the existing and proposed parking available on the site. These locations are shown on the site plan in Figure 2. Table 7 —Available Parking Location Existing Spaces Proposed Spaces Surface Spaces 513 397 Parking Ramp 741 1180 Total Parking Spaces 1254 1577 In order to provide a base line of the parking demand for the site, the existing parking utilization was counted in June 2013. Table 8 shows the average and peak number of occupied spaces throughout the site. Currently the site has an average utilization of 74% and a peak utilization of 81%. Table 8 — Current Parking Utilization Location Average Occupied Spaces Peak Occupied Spaces Surface Spaces 450 494 Parking Ramp 482 517 Total Parking Spaces 932 1011 Based on the City Code the existing Southdale Medical Office Campus would require approximately 1407 parking spaces. With the proposed expansion the site would require 1715 parking spaces. Based on these requirements a parking variance would be required for 153 and 138 spaces respectively. Table 9 shows the required parking based on the City Code. 01 Southdale Medical Campus Expansion City of Edina August 22, 2013 Page 13 of 16 Table 9 — Parking Required per City Code Use Existing Parking Required proposed Parking Required Medical Office 273,000 sf 1365 333,000 sf 1665 Medical Office 42 Doe/Dent 42 50 Doe/Dent 50 7F Total Parkin Spaces R uired 1407 1715 —1 The parking demand for the site was also estimated based on the parking surveys of the parking generation for other similar land uses as documented in the Institute of Transportation Engineers Parking Generation Manual, 4`" Edition. Table 10 below shows a summary of what the anticipated peak parking demand would be for a typical weekday. This would represent the worst case condition for the parking on the site assuming the existing and proposed uses. Table 10 — Parking Demand per ITE Use Existing Parking proposed Parking Re uired Required Medical Office 273,000 sf 1166 333,000 sf 1422 Based on the above parking summaries, there is and would be sufficient parking available on site for the proposed Southdale Medical Office Campus expansion. With a peak utilization of 81% indicating a need for 1390 parking and an ITE parking demand indicating a need for 1422 parking spaces, it can be concluded that the 1577 parking spaces being provided with this plan would be adequate, even though the City Code requires 1715 parking spaces. In addition, the developer has identified a "proof of parking" plan for an additional 175 parking spaces by adding a fifth level of the parking ramp. With this additional parking, the site would meet City Code and would not need any parking variances, now or with the proposed expansion. Conclusions /Recommendation Based on the analysis documented in this memorandum, WSB has concluded the following: • The proposed Southdale Medical Office Expansion project includes the construction of an additional 60,000 sf of medical office and parking ramp expansion. The site is anticipated to generate an additional 144 trips in the AM peak hour and 214 trips in the PM peak hour. Alf I& Southdale Medical Campus Expansion City of Edina August 22, 2013 Page 14 of 16 • Additional trips will be generated from other approved or anticipated development in the surrounding area. These uses will generate an additional 406 trips in the AM peak hour and 820 trips in the PM peak hour. • Existing traffic operations at the intersections and driveways in the study area on 65tth Street, Drew.Avenue and 66th Street are all operating at overall LOS D or better for the both the AM and- PM,peak hours. Intersection traffic operations for the No -Build conditions in 2015 and 2030 will continue to operate at an overall LOS D or better for the AM and PM peak.hours. However, some movements, specifically at the 65th Street and France Avenue intersection will be operating at LOS E. By 2030 the analysis: indicates that at the intersection may have potential issues on the 65th Street approaches and France Avenue left turns. With minor intersection and signal improvements (additional turn lane lengths and signal phasing changes), these issues would be minimized, improving the overall intersection LOS back to a C. • Intersection traffic operations for the Forecasted Build alternative (with the Southdale Medical Office Expansion traffic) in 2015 and 2030 will continue to operate at an overall LOS D or better during the AM and PM peak hours. Similar to the Forecasted No -Build conditions the intersection of 65th Street and France Avenue may have potential delay issues. With the minor intersection and signal improvements (additional turn lane length and signal phasing changes), these issues would be minimized, improving the overall intersection LOS back to a C. • The results of the queuing analysis found that during both the AM and PM peak hours, for the existing, and future no -build and build-2015-and 2030 conditions, the average queues in the corridors do not exceed any of the available turn lane storage. In some cases however, for the 2030 no -build and build conditions, the maximum queues were exceeded, specifically; on 65th Street between France Avenue and the Southdale medical Office/Hospital Entrance driveway: The potential future mitigation at the 65th Street and France Avenue intersection will improve the flow of traffic on 65th Street and also minimize traffic blocking the' Southdale Medical Office/Hospital Entrance driveway. Additional signage could also be added at the driveway should this become an issue. • The developer would be required to secure access modification approval from Hennepin County for the proposed.access changes on 66th Street. The existing or proposed available parking does not or will not meet the City's Code with the current parking conditions or with the proposed Medical Office Campus Expansion. With the proposed Medical Office expansion 1715 parking spaces would be required based on City Code. The current plan provides for 1577 parking spaces. This would require a variance for 138 parking spaces. The proposed plan includes prof of parking for 175 parking spaces with the addition of a fifth level to the parking ramp, which would bring the site into compliance and would not require a variance. t Southdale Medical Campus Expansion City of Edina August 22; 2013 Page 15 of 16 • Based on the current parking utilization and the ITE parking generation estimates the total parking needed for the Southdale Medical Office Campus site would range between 1390 and 1422 spaces. With these estimates, no parking variance would be required. Based on these conclusions the following is recommended. 1. Provide the proposed site access and circulation improvements as shown on the proposed site plan (Figure 2). 2. Although no improvements to the France Avenue.at 65'1' Street intersection are specifically required at;this time. Should elays and queuing become an issue in the future, minor intersection turn lane and p)�asing improvements may be necessary. Should these improvements be required in the future Southdale - Medical .Office will be responsible for their .share of those improvements., 3. No additional roadway improvements or dditional parking would be required to accommodate the proposed Southdale M 'dical.Office Campus Expansion project. A S"O M r1 R :PORT / R . COMMA : NDATI®•N To: MAYOR AND COUNCIL From: Wayne D. Houle, PE, Director of Engineering Date: October I, 2013 Subject: Restoration of Neighborhood Reconstruction Projects Action Requested: None. Agenda Item #: VIII. C. Action 11 Discussion F� Information N Information / Background: Please recall the attached memorandum was presented to the council at the award of each of our 2013 Local Roadway Improvement Projects. The memorandum provides the reasons why we are hydro- seeding this year. This report is a status update on how this type of turf establishment is working. The Lake Edina project had hydro- seeding completed in early August. The attached photos show the stages of the hydro- seeding process. Even with the dry conditions of August, most of the turf created by hydro - seeding has been met or exceeded our expectations and project specifications up to this point. Keep in mind, seed, just as sod, needs 2 -3 years to fully establish a sound root system with adequate moisture levels. There are locations where it has not performed to our expectations or according to the project specifications. The contractor is under contract to maintain and establish turf for 90 -days from the installation date. Multiple fertilizer applications have been completed and re- seeding in areas deemed bare is also occurring. Areas deemed inadequate after the 90 -day warranty period will be re -done. Communications with residents have occurred with a neighborhood wide letter dated September 13, 2013 discussing the reasons why we are hydro- seeding. The day of the hydro- seeding, the Hydro -seed Installation and Care Sheet is provided in every resident's front door to provide additional information about hydro - seeding. Hydro- seeding has also been discussed in the weekly City Extra's. Note that a few residents have decided to sod their boulevard areas at their own cost. These areas will not be maintained or fall under the project warranty since it is outside the project contract. Attachments: Memorandum on Turf Establishment in Reconstruction Projects dated March 5, 2013 Lake Edina Neighborhood Roadway Improvements, Stages of Hydro- seeding Lake Edina Neighborhood Roadway Reconstruction Letter dated September 13, 2013 Hydro -seed Installation and Care Sheet GA MCENTRAL SWMENG DhAPRO ECTMCONTRACTSUO MENG 13 -1 Mendelssohn MADMIMMISCUtem Turf Establishment Re ort.dooc City of Edina 4801 W. 50th St Edina, MN 55424 it� CITY ®F : DIANA Ingineering Department - Phone 952 - 826 -0371 ax 952 - 826 -0392 - www.CityofEdina.com Date: March 5, 2013 To: Mayor and City Council From: Wayne D. Houle, PE, Director of Engineering Re: Turf Establishment in Reconstruction Projects MEMO O �y Summary: Staff is recommending the use of hydro -seed on the 2013 projects with a revised contractor maintenance period of 90 -days. Staff feels hydro -seed will better meet the long term needs of the property owners for turf establishment and at the same time reduce special assessment amounts. Background Information: Restoration of areas disturbed by construction operations has typically been done with the use of sod. The contractor was responsible for the establishment of sod for a period of 6 weeks (42 days) from the date of installation. After the 6 week maintenance period, areas of dead sod were removed and replaced with new sod. Maintenance on all sod after the 6 week maintenance period then became the responsibility of the property owner. During 2012, residents and staff noticed portions of the sod installed during the. 2011 construction season were not healthy. 2012 saw drought conditions for most of the year. Many of the new sod areas were brown and dormant and /or dead. This reflects badly on the construction project even though continued maintenance of the sod is the responsibility of the homeowner. Staff hosted a "Construction Contractor Think Tank" meeting. The goal of this meeting was to determine the advantages and disadvantage of sod and hydro- seeding. We wanted a turf product that I roperty owners would take ownership of. One they would perform the proper maintenance on to establish long lasting turf. Staff invited industry experts for this meeting held on January 7, 2013 at the Public Works and Park Maintenance Facility. Attendees included turf experts, contractors, and consultants familiar with City of Edina practices and clients. Topics discussed included watering, maintenance periods, proper long term care, turf color, installation techniques, drought, fertilizer, chemical treatments, equipment, installation dates and foot traffic. Based on past experience and information learned from the "Think Tank" session, staff is recommending the use of hydro -seed on the 2013 projects with a revised maintenance period of 90- days. Staff feels hydro -seed will better meet the long term turf needs of the property owners. The requirements of the Contractor include placing 6- inches of topsoil in a level and smooth manner free of stones or other debris that are over 1.5- inches in diameter. Seed, fertilizer, and soil stabilizer is placed in a uniform manner. The quality of the turf establishment is reviewed after the maintenance period. If the maintenance period does not conclude by Nov. 1, the remaining balance of the maintenance will carry over to begin on April 15 of the following year. Any turf areas' deemed unacceptable at the end of the maintenance period shall be re hydro- seeded at no cost to the City. Staff realizes that resident education and communications is a key component in the establishment of turf using either method; sod or hydro- seed. - Construction update- letters.and..City- Extra.e -mails -will- - - -.. -- Engineering Department - 7450 Metro Blvd Edina, MN 55439 MEMO 49IN�� A o e A ., Cn ssa be used to educate the residents on proper maintenance procedures. Turf maintenance is the responsibility of the property owner after the 90 -day turf maintenance period. Table I. Comparison of Sod and Hydro -Seed Item Sod Hydro -Seed Cost $5.00 - $6.00 / SY 25 -50% less than sod Water Equal Equal Drought Resistance Less than seed Tolerant of dry conditions Maintenance Identified by Property Owner Appears complete, less realization of maintenance needs Maintenance needs are apparent Color Some issues, defined line between new and existing turf Tends to blend with existing turf Appearance Appears instant Established over time Installation Labor intensive Simple Installation Dates Not recommended during July / early August but can be accomplished Not recommended from June until July 20 but can be accomplished Installation Maintenance Period 90 days recommended 90 days recommended Foot Traffic Not an issue As little as possible until germination Repairs — Cost $5.00 - $6.00 / SY 25 -50% less than sod Repairs — Installation Labor intensive Simple Repairs — Disturbance Some Minimal Environmental Footprint Sod is planted off -site, harvested, transported, and replanted. Hydro -seed is planted on -site and remains on -site. Based on a research with other communities that use hydro -seed and experience on the West 44th Street project and on information learned from the "Think Tank" session, staff is recommending the use of hydro -seed on the 2013 projects with a revised maintenance period of 90 -days. Staff feels hydro -seed will better meet the long term turf needs of the property owners. I%Ed- nt8Xengpubwks %PNACENTRAL SVCSIENG DIVIPROJECTMCONTRACTSU0131ENG 13.1 Mendelssohn AWDMINIMISC\Sod_Seed Mtg120 1 3 02 27 WH Memo Turf Est In Recon Proi.doa Engineering Department • 7450 Metro Blvd • Edina, MN 55439 Lake Edina Neighborhood Roadway Improvements Stages of Hydro- Seeding Stage 1. Preparation of the Boulevard Stage 2. Hydro- seeding of the Boulevard Stage 3.3 -4 weeks after hydro- seeding Stage 4.4 -6 weeks after hydro- seeding Lake Edina Neighborhood Roadway Reconstruction Sept. 13, 2013 Dear Resident: The reconstruction project in your neighborhood is nearing completion. Crews are currently working on site cleanup and miscellaneous restoration items in all stages. The contractor will return this week and hydro -seed areas in Stage 3 and add additional seed to areas that did not establish in Stages I and 2. Over the next few weeks, you may see crew members on -site taking care of the remaining details. This includes site cleanup, paving the final layer of bituminous asphalt near the end of the month, and performing a "saw and seal" treatment to the new bituminous pavement, which helps control expansion and contraction of the pavement. We have received many questions concerning "why hydro -seed and not sod?" In past projects, lawns disturbed by roadway construction have typically been restored with the use of sod. The contractor was responsible for the establishment of sod for a period of six weeks (42 days) from the date of installation. After the six -week maintenance period, the property owner is then responsible for the sod. During 2012, residents and staff noticed portions of sod installed during previous construction seasons were not healthy. 2012 saw drought conditions for most of the year. Most of the new sod areas were brown, dormant and /or dead. This reflected badly on the construction project even though continued maintenance of the sod is the responsibility of the homeowner. City staff hosted a "Construction Contractor Think Tanle' meeting in January 2013 to determine the advantages and disadvantages of sod and hydro -seed. We wanted a turf product that property owners could properly maintain to establish long- lasting turf. Staff invited industry experts to this meeting including turf experts, contractors and consultants familiar with City of Edina's practices and clients. Topics discussed included cost, watering, maintenance periods, proper long -term care, turf color, installation techniques, drought, fertilizer, chemical treatments, equipment, installation dates and foot traffic. It was determined that all construction projects in 2013 would be hydro - seeded in lieu of sod in an effort to keep costs down and provide a long - lasting product that can withstand long -term dry weather conditions. This product was used on the 44`h Street Project between France Avenue and Highway 100 during 2011 if you would like to see an example project. ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT 7450 Metro Boulevard . Edina, Minnesota 55439 www.EdinaMN.gov • 952- 826 -0371 . Fax 952 - 826 -0392 A final inspection of all hydro- seeded areas will be made as the maintenance period nears completion in each respective stage. Please note, the contractor is required to maintain hydro - seeded areas for a period of 90 growing days from the date of installation. If the maintenance period does not-end by Nov. I, the remaining balance of the maintenance will carry over to 2014 and begin on April 15. Any turf areas' deemed unacceptable at the end of the maintenance period will be re- hydro- seeded at no cost to the contract. The contactor may apply a selected herbicide later in the,year to control other weeds as needed. Healthy lawns are the best defense against weeds. The -green mulch material is placed to keep the soil underneath moist for ideal growing conditions. In some cases, the grass may not appear through the mulch material right away. The plant needs to establish a root system that is strong enough to get through the mulch material. Fall seeding also has the benefit that after the first frost of the year, grass tends to limit growth upwards and instead it focuses on establishing a strong root system. This system will assist it in the spring to continue growing. This may be the final letter you receive from us. The final assessment amount will not be known until around September 2014. At that time, you will receive a notice of the final assessment amount, the date of the assessment hearing and details of the payment options. Upon completion, the project will be placed in a 2 -year warranty period. Palda & Sons, Inc. and the City of Edina staff thank you for your patience and cooperation over the past few months of reconstruction. Regards, Aaron Kuznia Engineering Technician 952 - 826 -0444 akuznia _ EdinaMN.gov HYDROSEED INSTALLATION The disturbed areas of your lawn will be revegetated with hydroseed. Hydroseed is a product that contains seed, mulch, and fertilizer. It is sprayed directly onto the topsoil utilizing a water slurry. Hydroseed is a proven performer, producing robust and healthy lawns in variety of conditions. Mature, seeded lawns are more resistant to pests and harsh weather than sod as they are grown in place from a seed mix specially selected for the area. The contractor will apply the hydroseed and maintain it for 90 days. They will water and later, apply herbicides if needed. Even though the contractor is responsible for a good end result, you may assist the contractor by helping keep the grass moist. If you notice any large areas drying out, or if you haven't seen watering take place for several days, please call me and I will review the situation with the contractor. HOW TO CARE FOR YOUR LAWN NEXT YEAR WATER Water your new lawn whenever the rainfall is less than an inch a week during mild weather or when rainfall is less than 2 inches a week during hot periods. New lawns need extra watering for their first two summers until 'hey become deeply rooted. FERTILIZE A commercial fertilizer is applied with your hydroseed. This initial application will not need to be supplemented until late next spring. When you do fertilize, use a slow release fertilizer and follow the written instructions. MOWING A new lawn should not be mowed until it is 4" to 5" high and begins to lay over. The longer grass blades allow for more vigorous root growth. When you mow' keep the mower blades sharp to cut the grass cleanly. Set the mower deck at the highest setting for the first year. Do not collect the clippings. Let them biodegrade within the new turf. This helps feed the soil and grass while accelerating development. PREVENTING WEEDS Some weeds will likely appear in your new lawn. The contractor will control them by applying a selective herbicide. Weeds are best controlled by being crowded out by good, healthy grass. If you have any questions or concerns, feel free to call me at 652 - 826 -0444 or by emailing me at akuzniaQedinamn.gov Thank you for your continued patience and cooperation. laron Kuznia — Engineering Technician. ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT 7450 Metro Boulevard • Edina, Minnesota 55439 www.EdinaMN.gov • 952- 826 -0371 • Fax 952 - 826 -0392 ©M ORT CM NAT©N ,lrlr U) Ally) a',�RYORP`�E9 • lass To: Mayor and Council Members Agenda Item #: IX. A. From: Debra Mangen Action ❑ City Clerk Discussion ❑ Date: October 1, 2013 Information EK Subject: CORRESPONDENCE Action Requested: Attached is correspondence received since the last Council Meeting. No action is requested. City of Edina • 4801 W. 50Th St • Edina, MN 55424 a e D--; 1 HUMAN RIGHTS & 'RELATIONS COMMISSION September 27, 2013 To: Mayor Jim Hovland and the Edina City Council From: Arnie Bigbee, HRRC Chair on behalf of the Edina Human Rights and Relations Commission At its August 27, 2013 meeting, the Edina Human Rights and Relations Commission unanimously recommended that the Edina City Council adopt the attached resolution related to immigration reform. Immigration reform is currently under consideration by the United States Congress. Early last summer the United States Senate, by a 68 -32 bipartisan vote, passed S 744, the "Border Security, Economic Opportunity, and Immigration Modernization Act ". The bi- partisan compromise is designed to improve border security and citizen verification while providing a path to citizenship, elimination of an immigration backlog, and increased penalties for both human smuggling and child trafficking. President Obama supports the compromise, but the House of Representatives has yet to act on the legislation. This is an important issue for Edina. The foreign born population in Edina has nearly doubled since 2000, bringing the foreign born population to over 9% of the total population, and many are non- citizens. Many businesses in Edina employ foreign born people and face bureaucratic hurdles and difficulties hiring employees with foreign backgrounds.' The American Action Network estimates that passage of the immigration reform would create approximately 41,982 jobs, including 12,850 in Congressional District 3 and 13,098 in Congressional District S. Passage of immigration reform will provide a boost to our economy, but more importantly it will allow millions of people to come out of the shadows and become full participants in our society. In recent years the Edina City Council provided important public leadership on human rights issues impacting our residents (and in this instance positive economic impact). We hope you will do so again on immigration reform, by passing this resolution and circulating it as widely as possible, including to our Minnesota Congressional Delegation. Thank you for considering the HRRC recommendation. MARK E. MOORE 5152 TIFTON DRIVE EDINA, MN 55439 OFFICE (952) 564 -3808 HOME (952) 947 -0752 Mr. James Hovland Mayor City of Edina 4801 W. 50' St. Edina, MN 55424 Re: Proposed Increase in Taxes Dear Mayor: DATE: September 19, 2013 The Council has recently approved a levy increase of some $700,000 annually to cover miscellaneous increases in the cost of running our City. Your year ending 2012 financial statements which are found on the City of Edina Web Site indicates that you have restricted and unrestricted cash reserves of approximately $68,000,000. The unrestricted portion alone is approximately $44,000,000. Would ybu please explain to the citizens of Edina why you need an increase in taxe$ when you have these enormous reserves to draw on? Also, I am tired of hearing that "its only $24.00 a house ". We have had too many increases in our property taxes where the justification is only a certain amount of money per house. They have all added up to substantial increases over the years. I would appreciate-it if you would take some time dusting the-Council meting to explain publicly the purpose of these huge reserves and why you are not drawing on them to fund the increase in operating expenses of the City. Thank you. Mark E. Moore 5505 Brookview Avenue Edina, Minnesota 55424 25 September 2013 Chad Milliner City of Edina V, Sew: i yFC�s?�i3 In re: Replacement of shrubbery destroyed during 2011 road work Dear Mr. Milliner: I am writing to you to once again request that my Alpine Snow shrubs be replaced which were destroyed during the 2011 Minnehaha Woods road reconstruction.. As I indicated to you in my message: 1) Our hedge used to run across the entire front lawn. Only four plants survived the construction. 2) We were never asked about plant replacement at any time during the project, so we assumed that we had to assume the loss, as the shrubs had been planted on city property. 3) Since all of the cement works, which included custom brick paving and decorative staircases were replaced on all other properties which were damaged during the construction, it would seem only fair that our little hedge could be replaced as well. In your phone messages, you seem to indicate that: 1) The remaining four plants are all that was originally there; 2) That the plants' poor condition was the result of "poor maintenance ", and not from the fact that they were rescued after laying on top of a dirt pile all summer. Please find enclosed all correspondence from the city with regard to this project, none of which contain any requests for the replacement of destroyed greenery. Thank you, cc: James Hovland V_,g<7 SEAL September 26, 2013 l ---2 --- To The Edina City Council: My Name is Douglas L. Johnson. My wife Peggy and I have owned the property at.6609 Blackfoot Pass since 1967. We were particularly attracted to it because we bath spent a good portion of our youth in forested environments, I in northern Minnesota and she in the heart of the Ozarks. I am .extremely hard of hearing to the point of being functionally deaf. Twill 'not have understood anything that has been said here tonight either by the public or the council. I know this because I attended the Planning Commission hearing on this topic in this very room. I could understand nothing that was said, even though I'was provided with some hearing devices. However, my son accompanied me and gave me his understanding of some things that,.were said. I would like to address two disturbing accusations- ,'which were probably repeated here tonight: 1.. I am environmentally, insensitive. 2. I am sacrificing, the environment to greed. Some trees were removed by the previous owner of the property in anticipation of construction but none were removed by me. Elms and oaks have succumbed,to disease. They have been promptly removed and properly disposed of.at considerable expense. A number of elms have been treated for,..elm disease at considerable expense, but even so, two of those died and had to be removed. In 1993, I planted 24 walnut seedlings. Some of these directly replaced removed trees. Nine of these have survived as well as a green ash planted some time later: Squirrels have planted several more volunteer walnuts',over the years. But today there are no squirrels. I visited the house on Saturday, September 21 to continue removing household items and found the parking pad littered with whole green walnuts. I was astounded. The squirrels do not let this happen. The walnuts are long removed before they drop. There is also always a red squirrel that takes over the tree next to the parking pad. He was not there. The scene was unchanged again the next day. This has happened only once before, about 8 - 10 years ago. At that time I found two dying squirrels by the driveway. Disease maybe? Then a couple of days later I found a dead hawk while mowing the lawn. Then it dawned on me, the squirrels were poisoned and the hawk had eaten one or more of them. Hawks do not catch live, healthy squirrels. So today some neighbor is again poisoning the squirrels. If that neighbor is here tonight impugning my environmental conscience I would quote Mr. Shakespeare when he wrote "me thinks he doth, protest too loud ". I retired from 3M in 1987 with a fixed pension of $36,000 plus Social Security. That is now about $52,000 a year total, but the purchasing power of the dollar is about half of what it was 26 years ago. Starting in 1990 I noticed some changes in my wife's health. She became sensitive to moderate heat, became unsteady on her feet, experience forgetfulness and other things: In 1995 after several doctors and numerous tests she was diagnosed with primary progressive MS. This is he less common type. It gradually gets worse and never remits. She preceded to develop muscle spasms, seizures, balance problems, both urinary and fecal incontinence and worst of all a near total loss of memory. I finally had to hire daytime in -home nursing help to bathe and tend to her. Finally in late June 2004, the nurse said she thought Peggy was having trouble breathing. Her nursing supervisor said we should get her to the emergency room. She had a pulmonary embolism, blood clots in the lungs. They also discovered that she had had a silent heart attack. Her heart was impaired. By then she couldn't walk, couldn't even crawl. I had to admit her to the Edina Care Center. Peggy spent eight years and eight months at the Edina Care Center. I visited her twice a day seven days a week for all that time. I have not been out of the Twin Cities for 15 years. She died February 28, 2013. The nursing home had cost $600,000 during that time. Add to that at least one hospital stay every year, medical bills, drug bills, physical therapy bills, almost 3 years of in -home nursing and it comes to at least $700,000 over 23 years. That shot a huge hole in my life savings. I am now 84 years old, 85 yet this year. I did all the car, house and yard care work myself except the last year or two when neighbor Kathryn Dusenbury.'s son, graciously cleared snow and mowed the grass. My children and grandchildren helped too. I may well be faced with nursing home expenses myself before long. So it came-time finally to sell the property and recover as much income producing cash as I could. The realtor suggested that it would bring some $200,000 more if sub - divided. I thought long and hard about that but decided that the builder, Mr. Busyn was and ecofriendly person and that the sub - division as proposed especially with the varience would eliminate few trees. The Edina Planning Dept report agrees with that. The variance would eliminate few trees. The trees to be removed are elms, which will die sooner or later and cottonwoods which I had considered taking out almost every spring when they make a great mess for 4 - 6 weeks. Others in the neighborhood have done the same. One neighbor even took down a 150 year old oak tree because it was shading her garden. I removed two tree sized limbs from a 3 foot in diameter oak because they were shading a neighbors grass. She has no trees. I do not know if non - technical factors are a consideration in these matters. If items such as public sensibilities, neighborhood character and environment are to be considered then human welfare is certainly equally as important. I am trying to salvage a few years of decent rest and retirement after 70 years of being in the harness of responsibility. I would not call that greed or insensitivity. I think of myself as a survivor. I leave it up to the council to decide. Thank you, /V d -t Douglas L. Johns n Deb Manaen crom: Mary Brindle <mbdndle @comcast.net> Thursday, September 26, 2013 4:28 PM Lynette Biunno Subject: Fw: Construction inspection today Attachments: Nordstrom garage project.docx Hi Lynette, Would you please forward the attached letter from Burke Ellingson, 5019 Arden Avenue, to the rest of the council, city manger, community development and engineering? Thank you. Mary Brindle From;, bueke ellingson Sente Thursday, September 26, 2013. 3:.12 PM? To: mbrindlePcomcast net Subject: Construction inspection today Thanks again for your time today Mary. I have attached the letter I provided to the builder. I was appreciative that Josh came over during the inspection, acknowledged receiving the letter, and tried to explain how my concerns were being addressed. That said, I am still concerned about what the future will bring. Burke J. Ellingson Ellingson Law Office, LLC 4555 Erin Drive, Suite 225 3gan, MN 55122 -3334 Phone (612) 987 -0456 Fax (651) 905 -4917 bellin gson @ellingsonlawoffice.com September 20, 2013 Mr. Josh Ortmeier Project Manager Reuter Walton Construction Inc. 2919 Knox Ave. S. Suite 200 Minneapolis, MN 55408 RE: Mike and Kelly Nordstrom 5017 Arden Ave. Edina, MN 55424 Dear Mr. Ortmeier: As you are likely aware from our exchange of multiple phone messages, I am the owner of the home located at 5019 Arden which is directly adjacent to your project identified above. I look forward to meeting your clients (my new neighbors) as they come highly recommended from my former neighbors, Frank and Ann Delmont. I know you have had multiple contacts with adjacent property owners regarding this project. While we have spoken directly only once, I have left you a couple of voicemails identifying.the limited concerns I have about the project. I am aware that you have offered to meet with the adjacent property owners to address their concerns. I appreciate your efforts in this regard. Since it has not proven possible to schedule an in person meeting, I thought I would send you a letter outlining my concerns so they could be remediated if possible. First, the relocation of the driveway from the North side of the property to the South side will undoubtedly change the previously existing drainage pattern for the property. I don't know if the City advised you, or if you otherwise noticed during a physical inspection of the property, but we have an egress window just a couple of feet from the property line. In constructing the egress window, we employed a hand -dug natural sump rather than installing a mechanical sump pump as there has never been a history of water problems in that location. Not unexpectedly, to date we have not had any water issues. My concern with the relocation of the driveway is the transformation of that portion of the project area from a porous surface to a hardscape which could potentially push water under the fence and onto my property. I have also heard a rumor circulating that the drainage plan for the project is to push all of the water (rain and snow melt) from the backyard down the driveway to the front yard. If the rumor is true, that would obviously exacerbate the amount of water potentially coming onto my property. Is there a plan to create a curb along the fence line on the South side of the property in order to prevent inordinate runoff, and to better funnel water from the back of the property out to Arden Avenue? Given the proximity of the driveway to my property, as well as the existing location of my egress window, I would appreciate consideration of a curb if one is not already planned. If a curb is not planned, or is not otherwise possible, I would welcome an understanding of how the project's design prevents drainage onto my property as this has never been an issue given the previously existing slope and ground conditions which have now been altered by the project. Second, I noticed that substantial excavation was required to provide a foundation to support the garage structure. I am sure your excavator was as careful as possible in this process, but I am concerned about unintended damage to the root structure of the very large tree in the backyard. As you may have noticed, that tree overhangs my home and property. It is also immediately adjacent to the bedrooms occupied by my children and our master bedroom. My only request is that the health of the tree be closely monitored for the next year orItwo. If the tree shows signs of instability, or ill health due to unintended damage to the root structure, I ask for an assurance that the problem would be quickly addressed by the Nordstroms. Hopefully, any damage to the roots was minor and the tree will continue to thrive as it's a gorgeous tree and I am grateful that you made an effort to preserve it. Finally, while it's never pleasant to reside next to a construction project, your crews have generally been courteous and kept the project site in good order. The only issue in this regard has been that some of your crews continue to park in front of my home which is the designated school bus stop. I don't mind that your crews park in front of the home during the day, but please ask that they not park there during the times the school buses are picking up and dropping off. Again, I thank you for your efforts to minimize the impact of the project on the adjacent properties and I look forward to hearing from you on the foregoing. Sincerely, Burke J. Ellingson bellinUson2ell ing-sonlawoffice.com Deb Man en From: Mary McDonald <marymarymcmc @yahoo.com> Sent Thursday, September 26, 20.13 7:55 PM To: Cary Teague Cc: Scott Neal; Edina Mail; Councilmember Joni Bennett; Mary Brindle (Comcast); Councilmember Josh Sprague; Councilmember Ann Swenson Subject: Re: CUP at Interlachen - Complaint First, we understand the CUP's no- parking -on- neighborhood - streets rule to apply to all situations; not just employee parking: A number of Belmore neighbors read the CUP (Sec. 3, item 5) as saying that Maloney and Belmore may not be used 1) by construction vehicles, or 2) for parking. We found nothing in the CUP. that indicates the no- parking rule applies only to the maintenance buildings,. In 2008 and 2009, when Interlachen wanted to construct its buildings on Belmore, a critical issue was whether Interlachen's members, employees, guests, delivery people, etc. would park in the Belmore neighborhood. Both the City and Interlachen constantly assured us they would not allow this. This condition was so _important it was carried over to the CUP approved for Maloney. The City's concern was never only for where the employees might park, but for where all those coming to Interlachen might.park. Second, there are staff members at Interlachen who did not comply, with the CUP's conditions: Referring to Interlachen's new buildings, the CUP (Sec. 3, Item 4) says "access to the buildings shall be .. . from Waterman Avenue and Interlachen Boulevard, and not Maloney Avenue or Belmore Lane ". Part of the new buildings is a caddy shack. Thus, the CUP says access to this caddy shack shall not be from Maloney or Belmore. But the Caddy Master told people to park on Belmore. The Pool Manager also told people to park on Belmore. Thus, it seems that at least two Interlachen staff members - and Managers at that - may not have been made familiar with the CUP's conditions. Third, were the hired police officers told that parking on Belmore and Maloney was prohibited? The officers were hired for the distinct purpose of directing traffic. It would seem that Interlachen's management - wanting them to do a good job - would have emphasized to those officers that Belmore and Maloney were off - limits. Possibly Interlachen did do this. We don't know where, besides Waterman, the officers were stationed. The officers may have been fully informed of the prohibitions and yet, because of where they were stationed, fully unaware that people were parking on Belmore. A point made by several neighbors is that the caddies, swimmers, et al, entered Interlachen through an unlocked gate on Belmore and that Interlachen can easily discourage violations of the CUP by keeping that gate locked at all times. Parking on Belmore for an event held every 4 or 5 years is not the worst violation. We don't expect perfection in Interlachen's adherence to the CUP conditions: Interlachen can't have a guard 24 -7 on Belmore. But we are trying to ensure that we, the City, and Interlachen all have a correct understanding of the CUP and will make every reasonable effort to prevent true violations of the CUP. Thank you, Cheryl Bristol Mary McDonald Jill Rivard and Bill McGilvray Rick and Sue Windham -om: Cary Teague <cteague(cDEdinaMN.gov> o: "'marymarymcmc @yahoo.com "' <marymarymcmc anyahoo.com> Cc: Scott Neal <snealaEdinaMN.gov> Sent: Tuesday, September 17, 2013 4:16 PM Subject: CUP at Interlachen - Complaint Mary, Thank you for the written documentation including the pictures regarding the Interlachen Country Club. Staff followed up with staff at Interlachen and discussed the issue. The event that took place July 26 -28th did not have anything to do with the maintenance building. It was for a special swim meet that takes place between the local country clubs. Interlachen hosts this event every 4 -5 years. Edina's police department was hired to direct traffic. This is not viewed as a violation of the Conditional Use permit for the expansion of the maintenance facility. The condition of that CUP was to prevent employees of the maintenance facility buildings from parking on Maloney, Belmore and Interlachen Boulevard. Staff at Interlachen stated that they understand the conditions that they are required to meet as a result of the construction of the new maintenance building. Please let us know if you have any other concerns regarding the Country Club. Thanks Cary �*.` Cary Teague, Community Development Director 'w -e ' "' f 952- 826 -04601 Fax 952- 826 -03891 Cell 952 -826 -0236 :� ,.;•, ; cteaeueaEdinaMN.eov I www.EdinaMN.gov/Plannin a `� ...For Living, Learning, Raising Families & Doing Business Manu and Neera Madhok 4924 Interlachen Court Edina, MN 55436 9/15/13 James Hovland, Mayor, City of Edina Subject: Commendable handing of theft in our home Dear Mr. Hovland, We wanted to bring to your attention the commendable work by Sergeant Conboy and officer Cizek of Edina Police Department. We have been Edina residents for the last 11 years and living near Bredesen Park with our two Middle school children and senior parents. We recently moved on August 19th to our new home on Interlachen Court. Unfortunately, we had a theft in our home on the evening of Friday, September 13th, while we were having dinner at our next -door neighbor's home. It was a very unreal experience coming home and finding a lot of precious jewelry, cash and expensive silverware etc. gone from the bedroom dresser drawers and no outward sign of break in. We were shaken up, agitated and morose at the same time when we called 911 and officer Cizek showed up with in minutes. He was extremely patient and professional despite our obvious frustration and disgust with feeling of having been violated. He led us through the process of documenting what we could see without touching and opening drawers till the crime investigator could come and take pictures and fingerprints. Sergeant Conboy came later and brought in canine team to investigate the property line where it backs into Van Valkenburg Park and portion of city fence was missing. This could be a site for access to our property from other than the street side. We were sitting by the window in our neighbor's house and did not see any commotion outside. Sergeant Conwoy had to rush out to another reported break in around the block. However, when we called back, they assured us that there was no human scent traced and we could sleep peacefully. We were very impressed by the promptness and professional behavior of Edina Police Department staff. They have been very patient in answering our numerous questions and an investigator has been assigned to this case. Edina is a very diverse community and home to many young Indian professional families also who take pride in being American Indian and still keeping their culture and`traditions vibrant. Our Hindu Temple of Minnesota was vandalized and in coping with it, all Minnesotans came together to support their fellow friends. Finally, even justice was an example of compassion and provided opportunity to the perpetrators to serve the community and grow within. Now, we also have a beautiful SV Temple in,Edina itself and draws folks from all around. We are very hopeful that the_ Edina Police and investigators will be able to solve the crime and keep Edina, one of the best, communities to live in! I hope that the Edina Police officers Sergeant Conboy and officer Cizek get acknowledged for the hard work they do to keep us all -safe. Thanks, k& K4� Drs Manu and Neera Madhok Deb Mangen From: ellen.gans @gmail.com ant: Tuesday, September 17, 2013 6:13 PM ,p: Edina Mail Subject: Contact Us form submission Name: Ellen Gans Organization: Website Address 1: 4113 Monterey Ave Address 2: City: Edina State: MN Zip_Code: Email: ellen.gansQgmail.com 'hone:6127087950 Referrer: google Message: The new flight pattern is disproportionately affecting the NE comer of the Morningside neighborhood. We now have -- literally -- a CONSTANT stream of air traffic directly over our house. They're flying lower, too -- enough to shake the house and wake me up. During peak hours, there is absolutely no respite between one plane and the next. We can no longer comfortably sit outside due to the noise, and now we can't escape indoors, either, because they are so loud and frequent. I have made several reports to the MAC website, but that appears to be a black hole. There must be something else that we can do. We NEVER would have purchased this house if we'd known that the change would occur, and our resale value is definitely affected. Deb Manaen From: prodnich @gmail.com on behalf of Paul Nicholas <pnicholas @straticom.us> Sent: Thursday, September 19, 2013 11:41 AM To: Cindy Larson Cc: Steve Kirchman; Edina Mail;jonibennettl2 @comcast.net; Mary Brindle (Comcast);joshsprague @edinarealty.com; swensonannl @gmail.com Subject We shouldn't have to put up with this Attachments: 2013 -09 -19 08 48_37jpg;2013 -09 -19 08 48_46jpg Follow Up Flag: Follow up Flag Status: Flagged I won't go into a lot of detail because I know our issues with the construction site next door to us are well known and documented. Out of exhaustion and futility with the city we have stopped contacting you and have gone out of our way to avoid any contact with the individuals at the Sicora construction site to our north (even though site violations continue). However, attached are the latest examples of the mentality of people we're dealing with. I had come to the conclusion that the people from Sicora were simply sociopaths since they promised multiple times to address certain issues which had never been taken care of. Now - coming home to feces (I assume dog feces but not sure) thrown against our home - I believe we are dealing with evil. The fact that the city has allowed the situation to reach this point is incomprehensible. Sicora made our lives a living hell for the past 6 months and if there was any way I could pursue restitution for what they did to my family and our home, I would. Sicora should be banned from ever working on another project in Edina. Paul Nicholas 4016 Lynn Ave (612) 269 -7300 �? .a i a T ftM' t� •SkZ rr�M.'„ — ° arwV UY i S i r h - :p:u •. �4 r ?rII .x r .r t .�r � 4'r Deb Mangen From: David Endriai <endriai @juno.com> Sent: Friday, September 20, 2013 1:21 PM To: Edina Mail Subject: Fred Richards golf course Attn: James Hovland Joni Bennett Mary Brindle Josh Sprague Ann Swenson Please do not, I repeat do not do anything that is going to destroy the Fred Richards golf course. I belong to the Edina Senior Center golf league and we golf there in the summer. I also golf there Every chance I get. So please do not destroy this golf course. Dave Endrizzi 612- 669 -9542 1. Honorable James Hovland, Mayor, City of Edina Subject: theft in our Edina home Dear Mayor Hovland, Manu Madhok, MD Neera Madhok, BDS 4924 Interlachen Court Edina, MN 55436 9/19/13 We have been Edina residents for the last 11 years and living near Bredesen Park with our two Middle school children and senior parents. We recently moved on August 19th to our new home on Interlachen Court. Unfortunately, we had a theft in our home on the evening of Friday, September 13th, while we were having dinner at our next -door neighbor's home. It was a very unreal experience coming home to find a lot of precious jewelry, cash and expensive silverware etc. gone from the bedroom dresser drawers and no outward sign of break in. We were shaken up, agitated and morose at the same time. We were totally shocked that something like this could happen in Edina, which we thought of as a very safe community to live in the Twin Cities. We could not believe that this could be happening to us. We were glad that when we called 911, officer Cizek showed up with in a few minutes. He was extremely patient and professional despite our obvious frustration and disgust with feeling of having been violated. He led us through the process of documenting what we could see without touching and opening drawers till the crime investigator could come and take pictures and fingerprints. Sergeant Conboy came later and brought in canine team to investigate the property line where it backs into Van Valkenburg Park and portion of city fence was missing. This could be a site for access to our property from other than the street side. We . were sitting by the window in our neighbor's house and did not see any commotion outside. Sergeant Conwoy had to rush out to another reported break in around the block. However, when we called back, they assured us that there was no human scent traced and we could sleep peacefully. We took our report of stolen items to the Edina Police office on Tuesday and were informed that an investigator has been assigned to this case. We spoke to Mr. Carlson later in the week and he has all the information provided to police officers regarding all our service providers namely cleaning service, lawn care and handyman, and also workers from our neighbor's home where a lot of remodeling work is going on. ,Our hope is that this investigation can be expedited and we feel safe again, especially having elderly parents and children in the house. We were very impressed by the promptness and professional behavior of Edina Police Department staff. They have been very patient in answering our numerous questions. Edina is a very diverse community and home to many young Indian professional families also who take pride in being American Indian and still keeping their culture and traditions vibrant. Our Hindu Temple of Minnesota was vandalized and in coping with it, all Minnesotans came together to support their fellow friends. Finally, even justice was an example of compassion and provided opportunity to the perpetrators to serve the community and grow within. Now, we also have a beautiful SV Temple in Edina itself. Our Hindu festival of Diwali is coming up in November and we hope to see you there. We are very hopeful that the Edina Police and investigators will be able to solve the crime and keep Edina one of the best communities to live in! We hope that you would help, expedite this investigation., I hope that the Edina Police officers Sergeant Conboy and officer Cizek get acknowledged for the hard work,they do to keep us all -safe. Thanks, Dr. Manu Madhok, MD Director, Pediatric EM Fellowship Children's Hospital of Minnesota Dr. Neera Madhok, BDS Primary Care Dental Services University of Minnesota Deb Mangen '"om: mark epple <markepple @msn.com> nt: Monday, September 23, 2013 8:47 AM o: Edina Mail;jonibennetl2 @comcast.net; Mary Brindle ( Comcast );joshsprague @edinarealty.com; swensonannl @gmail.com Subject: Reconstruction of 54th Street Follow Up Flag: Follow up Flag Status: Flagged Dear City Council- My name is Mark Epple and I live at 5336 Kellogg Avenue (NW corner at the intersection of Kellogg Ave and West 54th Street). 'I am writing to you hoping to get an answer to a question I have regarding the 2014 Reconstruction of 54th Street. Below is a brief summary of the project in,question that is posted on the city's website. I would like to know where the "requirement" for bike lanes and sidewalk is coming from. This requirement appears to have a great impact on the initial proposed designs presented to the community at the August 19th meeting. Please advise. Thank you. Mark "Reconstruction of 54th Street i 2014, the City will reconstruct 54th Street from France Avenue to Wooddale Avenue, including the 54th street bridge over Minnehaha Creek. The road is badly deteriorated, is a safety hazard to pedestrians and cyclists, and the bridge is at the end of its useful life. A state -aid designated roadway, 54th Street must meet State requirements; the State will pay for approximately 80 percent of the reconstruction. A city- maintained sidewalk on at least one side of the street and bicycle lanes are also required. The project offers an excellent opportunity to update the roadway to current standards and better meet community needs. We need community input, ideas, and feedback on a variety of design options:'' , Mark Epple 5336 Kellogg Avenue Edina, MN 55424 -1305 952.929.7344 Deb Mangen From: Andie Schieffert <schiefta @msn.com> Sent: Monday, September 23, 2013 12:34 PM To: Edina Mail Subject: Construction Concern Follow Up Flag: Follow up Flag Status: Flagged Hello Mayor, First, thank you for your service to Edina! I write to ask you to visit the building site of 5017 Arden Avenue. The new homeowners of this property are remodeling the home. The four surrounding neighbors have been greatly impacted by the elevation of their rear yard and driveway /garage addition. I'm afraid I cannot appropriately articulate my shock and unhappiness when I saw the foundation for the garage and was told of the plans. I'm told by city employees the plans all meet current city codes. I was also told no city employee visited the site before approving plans. Here are some of my concerns: DRIVEWAY /RAISED ELEVATION: Aside from the aesthetics, the driveway is raised well above adjacent yards. The homeowners repurposed the existing tandem garage to living space. So, they wanted a new garage. City codes would not allow the homeowners to attach a new garage, so they designed a detached garage. The new driveway and garage now encompass the vast majority of their south side and rear yard. Because of the concrete covering, drainage that used to flow east down a grass covered slope has to be redirected west toward the front of the home. This, and the fact the homeowners wanted a service door for their garage, forced the homeowners to raise the elevation of their yard greatly. It is raised at least 4 -6 feet in the back of the yard. The driveway will be 6 feet above my property a foot away. Because there is little to no green space in the rear and side yards, snow removal is intended to be pulled from the back to the front yard. The passage between the back and front is narrow. The driveway will run right along the property line the whole length of the south side of their yard. Neighbors are concerned about drainage. The driveway also curves around the back of the property to the garage. I'm told homeowners needed a place to back -out of garage and turnaround to drive forward out the narrow driveway. DETACHED GARAGE Aside from the aesthetics, the garage is tall. The new retaining wall (just the portion by the garage) is 4 feet in height right on the property line. The new detached garage is set 4 feet from the property line. The garage is 18 feet tall, on top of a foot or two of exposed concrete, which is on top of a four foot boulder retaining wall- - about 24 feet high just a few feet from adjacent properties. The garage towers over three yards. Also, there are no windows on the garage facing the neighbors to the north and east. The builder was not able to construct the garage without trespassing. Neighbors wonder how the homeowners will maintain the garage and gutters without also trespassing. RETAINING WALL: Aside from the aesthetics of boulder rocks in our 1940's neighborhood, the builder was not able to install the retaining wall without trespassing. Most of the wall is right on or inches from the property line butting two other properties. 1 Lastly, the surrounding neighbors have very little recourse to "screen" or "soften the impact" of the new structure and driveway and stay within city codes. If I install a six foot fence in my backyard, it will not block ie new driveway which is elevated to 6 feet. So, 6 feet above my property there will be cars driving two feet from yard which is close to my patio and home.:l am concerned about car headlights and garage lighting shining into my home. I'm concerned about noise from the cars in the back yard, but also the snow removal service the homeowner told me he hired. Again, all the snow will have to be moved from the back to the front. The builder has offered to consider planting some screening plants on the east and north by the garage. I was told by the builder the plants to the east can only be planted in the neighbors property as their is no room on the homeowner's property. Needless to say, I feel helpless and upset. The four surrounding homeowners feel our properties have been greatly affected. My hope is that I can prevent such a construction project from happening elsewhere in Edina. I urge you and your fellow council members to visit the 5017 Arden site. But, most importantly, stand . in the four surrounding yards to get a feel for the impact. We hope the council will visit expanding codes to include limits on lot elevation and detached garage setbacks. Please contact me anytime to discuss. Thanks for your time and reading my long rant. Best regards, Andie Schieffert ,044 Juanita Ave 612.940.4419 2 Deb Mangen From: Hasselbring, Bruce <bruce.h @ace- aircontrolessentials.com> Sent: Monday, September 23, 2013 4:45 PM To: Hasselbri ng, Bruce Subject: Business Owner Questions Met Council's Plan to Take Businesses Attachments: Ace Supply- press release.doc Brace A. Hasselbring President ace sulrK.Itmu . Air COP0 l EnenUtlr PRESS RELEASE For Immediate Release September 24, 2013 Contact: Bruce Hasselbring, 952 - 929 -1618 Business Owner Questions Met Council's Plan to Take Businesses Met Council Wants to Make Way for $65 Million "Southern Arm" ST. LOUIS PARK — Ace Supply Company and approximately 11 other small businesses in St. Louis Park seem to be forgotten stakeholders in recent discussions about Southwest Light Rail (SWLRT) and freight rail. This spring the Met Council told owners of these longtime businesses that should the "southern arm," a new train ramp and bridge, be built, their businesses will be taken. "Our modest business -to- business operations reside in Skunk Hollow," says Bruce Hasselbring, president and CEO of Ace Supply Company, referring to one of the oldest pockets of St. Louis Park, south of Highway 7 and near Louisiana Avenue. "Ace and other businesses in Skunk Hollow may not be flashy or draw much attention, but we have done business in this location since 1958, employing several dozen people and paying taxes to St. Louis Park and Hennepin County all the while." The Met Council has proposed the southern arm, a $65 million new train ramp and bridge that, instead of taking trains north (known to many as the reroute), would take trains south through Edina, Bloomington and eventually to the Minnesota River docks. The southern arm would replace the single -track switching yard, commonly known as the switching wye. However, says Hasselbring, "that seems to be a poor tradeoff when our tiny switching yard hasn't been used for years and a new uninterrupted track without switches will surely bring more noise, vibration and danger to our community as locomotives drag railcars up a steep grade and wheels grind around a curve at higher speeds." Hasselbring and other community members further assert that the entire southern arm isn't needed. "The SWLRT can get where it needs to go without the southern arm and without disrupting our long- standing St. Louis Park businesses," he says. "By tacking on the southern arm to the SWLRT, it seems clear that certain leaders in St. Louis Park and the Met Council want to do away with our small industrial operations and arbitrarily expand other businesses at tax payers' expense." Finally, Hasselbring notes that losing their buildings, finding a new location and moving will be costly. "A new spot may not be as centrally located as our current site," he says, adding that the company's location is an important attribute since it serves contractors throughout the metro area. Several other businesses in the neighborhood are similarly structured. "We value our location and have long enjoyed a solid relationship with the City of St. Louis Park. It's been a great place to do business for 55 years, and we would like to keep it that way." Deb Mangen From: Mary Ingebrand - Pohlad < marypohlad @me.com > mt: Tuesday, September 24, 2013 10:36 AM ,o: Edina Mail Subject: Pohlad request Dear Mayor Hovland, We have met at Rolling Green neighborhood meetings and I appreciate your past support of our causes. I have lived next door to the Warner estate at 5 Merilane in Rolling Green for 22 years. As you know, the Warner property has been proposed for subdivision into three pie shaped lots. For a multitude of reasons, I feel that should the proposal pass, (with or without variances) , the results would prove disastrous and greatly compromise the character of the neighborhood as we know it. I invite you to join me for a 10 minute walk on the property so that you can see where the realtor /developer are suggesting potential placement of 3 new houses. Driving by on the street will NOT give you an accurate picture. I am available Sunday afternoon at 3pm. Should this time not work for you, please contact me to arrange another time. I appreciate your willingness to give this important matter your most thoughtful consideration. Respectfully, Mary I Pohlad Deb Manaen From: Michael D. Long <coachmd long @gmail.com> Sent Tuesday, September 24, 2013 11:04 AM To: Edina Mail;jonibennettl2 @comcast.net; Mary Brindle (Comcast);joshsprague @edinarealty.com; swensonannl @gmail.com Subject Eind Sports Dome Edina Mayor and City Council Members, As a coach of Edina Varsity and.youth sports, I can tell you honestly that our kids, and athletic teams are suffering from not having a dome of our own. The time and money it takes to use other domes is great and hurts our ability to conduct training. We are long overdue for a dome. As a community that considers itself among the top in the state, it is an embarrassment that we do not have a sports dome. . Putting the fact that people are worried about being able to see it from their houses is a terrible argument. I can see the lighst from Kuhlman from my house. This should not be a reason to hurt our athletics and the people that put so much time and effort into the youth of Edina. Thank you for.your hard work in getting this dome up. "Michael Long Edina HS Boys Assistant Varsity Coach Edina Lacrosse Association Coach Edina Youth Lacrosse Coaching Director 1 0 Yeb Manaen From: Rickert, Paige @ Minneapolis <Paige.Rickert@cbre.com> ant: Tuesday, September 24, 2013 11:44 AM .o: Edina Mail Subject: Message for Mayor Hovland Good afternoon Mayor, It was nice to see you at Hello Pizza a few weeks ago. That place has become a family favorite. I have two items for your consideration: First, I was just made aware that the Edina Dome proposal will be on the council's agenda in October. I'm hoping that the silver lining on this multi -year pursuit is a unanimous vote by the council to move forward with this project. I think we will all be amazed at the amount of use and benefit this facility will have for our community. Secondly, I was hoping you and I could meet for a quick conversation on my second passion, field space. I have found the difference between the school district and working with the City are significant. My hope was to try and find a path the would be the most efficient. I am hoping you can provide me with some direction. Appreciate your support on all of the above and look forward to your response. Paige Paige Rickert I Senior Vice President CBREJ Occupier Services 81 S. 9th Street #400 1 Minneapolis, MN 55402 T 612 336 4318 1 F 612 336 4320 oaioe.rickerta,cbre.com I www.cbre.com /paige.rickert 1 Deb Mangen ' ' From: liz kinney <lizkinney @gmail.com> Sent: Tuesday, September 24, 2013 12:02 PM To: Travis-talvitie@klobuchar.senate.gov Subject: RNAV flight path changes As a homeowner in the area affected by the proposed changes to air traffic routes, I am very concerned about the potential increase in airplane noise and all the detrimental effects that it will have. I am sure you are aware of the issues involved and the depth of feeling evoked by them. I am asking you, as an elected official representing the interests of people who will be negatively impacted if RNAV is adopted in it's present form, to advocate for the following: • Equal distribution of airport noise across all neighborhoods • Firm noise and air pollution limits including the amount of environmental impact over homes, schools, and parks • Expansion of alternative airports and regional rail that will alleviate the growth pressure on MSP and spur economic development of greater Minnesota • Retention of the current flight paths and departure percentages throughout the area I urge you to work with the neighborhood leaders on these goals and find a way to balance the growth of the airport with the livability of our neighborhoods. Regards, Liz Kinney September 19, 2013 TO: List of FR: Travis Germundson. er nagement Specialist PH: (651) 297 -4958 RE: Notice of Filing and Public Hearing, Hennepin Conservation District Discontinuance A petition to discontinue the Hennepin Conservation District has been filed by Hennepin County with the Board of Water and Soil Resources. Copies of the petition and legal notice are attached. The proposed discontinuance would transfer the duties and authorities of the Hennepin Conservation District to the Hennepin County Board of Commissioners. The public hearing on the petition will be held on Monday, October 21, 2013, beginning at 7:00 PM in the lunch room at the Plymouth City Hall located at 3400 Plymouth Boulevard in Plymouth. The purpose of the public hearing is to receive comments on the petition. Prior to the hearing, written comments may be entered into the hearing record by submittal to me at the,St. Paul address listed below and received, not postmarked, by 4:00 PM on October 21, 2013. At the hearing, all interested persons . will be given opportunity to submit pertinent information. The hearing record will close at the end of the public hearing on October 21, 2013. All information contained in the, hearing record will be considered before a decision is made on the petition. Please contact me if you have any questions. Attachments (Legal Notice, Petition, List of Addressees) cc: Board Members: B. Napstad, J. Collins, F. Sleeper, R. Flood, C. Fogarty, J. Ditmore Ste` �5 BWSR: John Jaschke, Steve Woods, Sarah Strommen, Jim Haertel, Brad Wozney gEP 2`4 2 kI 3emidji Brainerd Duluth Fergus Falls Mankato Marshall 403 Fourth Street NW 1601 Minnesota Drive 394 S. Lake Avenue 1004 Frontier Drive 12 Civic Center Plaza 1400 East Lyon Street Suite 200 Brainerd, MN 56401 Suite 403 Fergus Falls, MN 56537 Suite 30008 Marshall, MN 56258 Bemidji, MN 56601 (218) 828 -2383 Duluth, MN 55802 (218) 736 -5445 Mankato, MN 56001 (507) 537 -6060 (218) 755 -2600 (218) 723 -4752 (507) 344.2821 central Office / Metro Office 520 Lafayette Road North Saint Paul, MN 55155 Phone: (651) 296 -3767 www.bwsr.state.mn.us TTY: (800) 627 -3529 An equal opportunity employer r" New Ulm Rochester 261 Highway 15 South 3555 9" Street NW New Ulm, MN 56073 Suite 350 (507) 359 -6074 Rochester, MN 55901 (507) 206 -2889 Fax: (651) 297 -5615 List of Addressees Hennepin Conservation District Discontinuance Notice of Filing and Public Hearing September 19, 2013 Hennepin County Board of Commissioners Hennepin Conservation District Mayor, City of Bloomington Mayor, City of Brooklyn Center Mayor, City of Brooklyn Park Mayor, City of Champlin Mayor, City of Chanhassen Mayor, City of Corcoran Mayor, City of Crystal Mayor, City of Dayton Mayor, City of Deephaven Mayor, City of Eden Prairie Mayor, City of Edina Mayor, City of Excelsior Mayor, City of Golden Valley Mayor, City of Greenfield Mayor, City of Greenwood Mayor, City of Hanover Mayor, City of Hopkins Mayor, City of Independence Mayor, City of Long Lak_ e Mayor, City of Loretto Mayor, City of Maple'Grove Mayor, City of Maple Plain Mayor, City. of Medicine Lake Mayor, City. of Medina Mayor, City of Minneapolis Mayor, City of Minnetonka Mayor, City of Minnetonka Beach Mayor, City of Minnetrista Mayor, City of Mound Mayor, City of New Hope Mayor, City of Orono Mayor, City of Osseo Mayor, City of Plymouth Mayor, City. of Richfield Mayor, City of Robbinsdale Page 1 of 2 List of Addressees - continued Hennepin Conservation District Discontinuance Notice of Filing and Public Hearing September 19, 2013. Mayor, City of Rockford Mayor, City of Rogers Mayor, City of Shorewood Mayor, City of Spring Park Mayor, City of St. Anthony Village Mayor, City of St. Bonifacius Mayor, City of St. Louis Park Mayor, City of Tonka Bay Mayor, City of Wayzata Mayor, City of Woodland Clerk, Town of Hassan Bassett Creek Watershed Management Commission Elm Creek Watershed Management Commission Lower Minnesota River Watershed District Minnehaha Creek Watershed District Mississippi Watershed Management Organization Nine Mile Creek Watershed District Pioneer -Sarah Creek Watershed Management Commission Richfield- Bloomington Watershed Management Organization Riley- Purgatory-Bluff Creek Watershed District Shingle Creek Watershed Management Commission West Mississippi Watershed Management Commission Three Rivers Park District . Carl Michaud, Hennepin County Environmental Services Director LeAnn Buck, MN Association of Soil and Water Conservation Districts Judy Sventek, Metropolitan Council Page 2 of 2 NOTICE OF FILING AND PUBLIC HEARING HENNEPIN CONSERVATION DISTRICT DISCONTINUANCE Minnesota Board of Water and Soil Resources 520 Lafayette Road North Saint Paul, Minnesota 55155 In the matter of the petition for the discontinuance of the Hennepin Conservation District pursuant to the 2013. Laws of Minnesota, Chapter 114, Article 4, Section 96. Whereas, the subject petition was filed by Hennepin County with the Board of Water and Soil Resources (Board) on September .17, 2013. Now therefore, the Board hereby issues the following: NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that a:public hearing on the petition will be held on Monday, October 21, 2013, beginning at 7:00 PM at the Plymouth City Hall lunchroom, 3400 Plymouth Boulevard, Plymouth, Minnesota. The purpose of the public hearing is to invite comments on the,petition. Written comments will ,be received by the Board at the address listed above until 4:00 PM on October 21, 2013 and entered into the hearing, record. At the hearing, all interested.persons will be given opportunity.to submit pertinent information. All coments in the hearing record'will be considered before a decision is made on the petition: T e.- proposed discontinuance would transfer the duties and authorities of the Hennepin Conservation District to the Hennepin County Board of Commissioners. Tlie main purposes of a soil and water conservation district are to deliver the conservation services identified in Minnesota Statutes Chapter 103C. The Board must review the petition for conformance with state law and rule. A copy of the petition is available for inspection during normal business hours at the Board's.office.at the address listed above. For further information contact Travis Germundson of the Board at 651- 297 -4958. Dated in Saint Paul, Minnesota this 18th day of September, 2013. /s/ Travis Germundson Water Management Specialist PETITION to DISCONTINUE THE HENNEPIN SOIL and WATER CONSERVATION DISTRICT and TRANSFER DUTIES and AUTHORITIES to the HENNEPIN COUNTY BOARD of COMMISSIONERS Whereas, the responsibilities and authorities of the Hennepin Soil and Water Conservation District are consistent with the Hennepin County's mission, vision and overarching goals; and Whereas, the conservation programs and services identified in Minnesota Statutes Chapter 103C are important for maintaining a healthy and clean environment for the more than one million residents of Hennepin County; and Whereas, Hennepin County has delivered the conservation services identified in Minnesota Statutes Chapter 103C under county auspices since 2003; and Whereas, Hennepin County has provided technical services regarding the state cost -share program, Reinvest In Minnesota program and the Wetland Conservation Act pursuant to a cooperative agreement since 2006; and Whereas, .there are 45 municipalities involved in regulating development that affects natural resources in Hennepin County, and Whereas, there are 12 watershed management organizations in Hennepin County charged with protecting water and land resources; and Whereas, there have been substantial changes in environmental management and conservation funding in the past ten years; and Whereas, the Hennepin Soil and Water Conservation District lacks the financial and technical resources to address these complex issues and opportunities; and Whereas, the Hennepin Soil and Water Conservation District, for the past ten years, has not secured financial resources from other sources to fulfill its programmatic responsibilities; and Whereas, Hennepin County strives to provide services in an efficient and fiscally responsible way; and Whereas, it is more efficient and fiscally responsible to provide all conservation services through Hennepin County, which eliminates the costs associated with negotiating and executing cooperative agreements with the Hennepin Soil and Water Conservation District Board of Supervisors as well as the administrative costs associated with maintaining the Hennepin Soil and Water Conservation District Board of Supervisors. Therefore Be It Resolved, that the Hennepin County Board of Commissioners petitions the Minnesota Board of Water and Soil Resources pursuant to 2013 Laws of Minnesota, Chapter.114, Article 4, Section 96, codified as M.S. 383B.761, for the discontinuance of the Hennepin Soil and Water Conservation District and the transfer of district duties and authorities to the Hennepin County Board of Commissioners. , Er J I- S\NI Oy� LA & _fix- El nmyvri ru 22 September 2013 Dear Edina HRA members, We attended the HRA meeting last Tuesday evening, and we are very disappointed in the outcome of the vote. We do not think that it speaks well of our city and how it treats people who have been contributing the tax base and Edina residents for many years. We believe that the City of Edina should treat business owners fairly, using eminent domain only when necessary, and offering proper negotiation and a fair price for private property. We do not believe that there is sufficient evidence that the City must have the former Hooten Cleaners building immediately to provide sufficient parking, or that the need for additional parking spaces is sufficient reason to force a private citizen to sell their property to the city at an unknown price determined in the "quick take" process. We do appreciate Mayor Hovland's recommendation to consider more evidence, and his and Mary Brindle's vote against the resolution. Sincerely, Joy and Liana Hazucha 4420 Vandervork Ave Edina, MN 55436 0' .Se At SEp 2 4 2013 MARK E. MOORE 5152 TIFTON DRIVE EDINA, MN 55439 DATE: September 19, 2013 OFFICE (952) 564 -3808 HOME (952) 947 -0752 Mary, Brindle City of Edina 4801 W. 50T" St. Edina, MN 55424 Re: Proposed Increase in Taxes Dear Mayor: The Council has recently approved. a. levy increase of some $700,000 annually tp cover, miscellaneous increases in the cost of running'our City. Your year ending 2012 financial statements which are found on the City of Edina Web Site indicates that you have restricted and unrestricted cash pserves of-\ approximately $68,000,000. The unrestricted portion alone is approximately $44,000,000. Would you please explain nto .the, citizens of Edina why you need an increase in taxes when you have these enormous reserves to draw on ?. Also, I am tired of hearing that "its only $24.00 a house ". We have had too many increases in�our property taxes where the justification is only a certain amount of money per house. They have all added up to substantial increases over the ' years. I would appreciate, it if you. would take some time during the Council meeting to explain publicly the purpose of these huge reserves and why you are not drawing on them to find the increase in operating expenses of the City. Thank you. Mark E. Moore CC:: M. Brindle Sept 18, 2013 Mayor James Hovland City of Edina 4801 W. 50t' St. Edina, Minnesota 55424 Dear Mr. Mayor, Over the past year or so I have frequently engaged you and other City Council members on the Citizens United Supreme Court case and the impact this decision has had on our recent Federal, State and Local campaigns. During the Legislative session this past winter, we worked closely with Sen. John Marty to get a resolution (SF17) passed in the Senate and we basically ran out of time to get the companion bill (HF276) passed in the House. Chief author Rep. Ray Dehn will be re- introducing this bill when the session restarts in February. We are urging the Edina City Council to stand behind this bill by either passing your own resolution (as we have suggested before) or to express your support to Rep. Dehn and our local Representative, Ron Erhardt. I enclose a copy of HF 276. This takes on a new sense of urgency and relevance, for on Oct 8, the Supreme Court will hear a new case (McCutcheon /GOP vs. FEC) that would essentially remove all limits on campaign contributions at all levels. The foundation of the McCutcheon case is Citizens United. I enclose some information about this case. Several of you have asked for some examples of local relevance for CU and now McCutcheon. It is worth noting that the Franzen /Downey campaigns spent in the range of $800,000 and the Minneapolis mayor race is projected to be in the $1,000,000 range. It is not too difficult to imagine the free flow of money into city council elections, school board elections, judicial elections, county boards, etc. I would hope that you may collectively and individually voice your concern on this issue to our other public officials. Minnesota would join 16 other states that have already passed such resolutions. Sin r ly, �D W. Beaver 5624 Melody Lake Drive Edina, Minn. 55436 Enclosures: 01/14/13 REVISOR JRM/Dl 13 -0052 This Document can be made available �° 18S in alternative formats upon request State of Minnesota Page No. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES EIGHTY-EIGHTH SESSION H. F. No. 276 01/312013 Authored by Dehn R; Hornstein; Fischer, Atkins; Nelson and others The bill was read for the first time and referred to the Committee on Elections 03212013 Adoption of Report: Pass and re- referred to the Committee on Civil Law D4/022013 Adoption of Report: Pass and Read Second Tune ffil A joint resolution 1.2 requesting that Congress propose a constitutional amendment and, if Congress does 1.3 not propose an amendment, applying to Congress to call a constitutional convention 1.4 to propose an amendment clarifying that the rights protected under the Constitution 1.5 are the rights of natural persons and not the rights of artificial entities and that 1.6 spending money to influence elections is not speech under the First Amendment. 1.7 WHEREAS, under Article V of the Constitution of the United States, the Congress, 1.8 whenever two- thirds of both Houses shall deem it necessary, shall propose amendments to the 1.9 Constitution; and 1.10 WHEREAS, under Article V of the Constitution of the United States, the Congress, on 1.11 the application of the legislatures of two- thirds of the several states, shall call a convention for 1.12 proposing amendments to the Constitution of the United States that shall be valid to all intents 1.13 and purposes if ratified by the legislatures of three- fourths of the several states, or by conventions 1.14 in three - fourths thereof, as one or the other mode of ratification may be proposed by Congress; 1.15 NOW, THEREFORE, 1.16 BE IT RESOLVED by the Legislature of the State of Minnesota that it requests that 1.17 Congress propose an amendment to the Constitution that shall substantially read as follows: 1.18 "(1) The rights protected by the Constitution of the United States are the rights of natural 1.19 persons only. 1.20 (2) Artificial entities, such as corporations, limited liability companies, and other entities, 1.21 established by the laws of any State, the United States, or any foreign state shall have no rights 1.22 under this Constitution and are subject to regulation by the People, through Federal, State, or 1.23 local law. 1 01/14/13 REVISOR JRM/DI 13 -0052 2.1 (3) The privileges of artificial entities shall be determined by the People, through Federal, 2.2 State, or local law, and shall not be construed to be inherent or inalienable. 2.3 (4) Federal, State, and local government shall regulate, limit, or prohibit contributions and 2.4 expenditures, including a candidate's own contributions and expenditures, to ensure that all 2.5 citizens, regardless of their economic status, have access to the political process, and that no 2.6 person gains, as a result of their money, substantially more access or ability to influence in any 2.7 way the election of any candidate for public office or any ballot measure. 2.8 (5) Federal, State, and local government shall require that any permissible contributions 2.9 and expenditure's be publicly disclosed. 2.10 (6) The judiciary shall not construe the spending of money to influence elections to be 2.11 speech under the 1 st Amendment. 2.12 (7) Nothing contained in this amendment shall be construed to abridge the freedom of 2.13 the press." 2.14 BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that if Congress does not propose the amendment language 2.15 or substantially similar amendment language as contained in this resolution, the Legislature of the 2.16 State of Minnesota applies to the Congress of the United States to call a constitutional convention 2.17 for the purpose of proposing the amendment language or substantially similar amendment language 2.18 as contained in this resolution as an amendment to the Constitution of the United States; and 2.19 BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Legislature of the State of Minnesota and the 2.20 people of Minnesota demand that if Congress does not propose the amendment language in this 2.21 resolution and if at least two-thirds of state legislatures have applied to Congress to call for a 2.22 constitutional convention to adopt the same or substantially similar constitutional amendment 2.23 language contained in this resolution, then the Congress must exercise its constitutional duty to 2.24 call a constitutional convention, and that the constitutional convention shall be called within six 2.25 months from the date that at least two- thirds of state legislatures have made the same or similar 2.26 application to Congress; and 2.27 BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Legislature of the State of Minnesota calls on other 2.28 states to join with the Legislature of the State of Minnesota in this action by passing the same 2.29 or similar resolutions; and 2.30 BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Secretary of State of Minnesota is directed to 2.31 prepare copies of this resolution and transmit them to the Speaker and the Clerk of the United 2 01/14/13 REVISOR JRM/DI 13 -0052 3.1 States House of Representatives, the President and the Secretary of the United States Senate, the 3.2 United States Secretary of State, and Minnesota's Senators and Representatives in Congress. 3 9/18113 Another Citizens United, but Worse, Goes to the Supreme Court: The New Yorker THE NEW YORKER • « Podcast: Motown Down • Main • How Egypt Will Shake the World » July 30, 2013 Another Citizens United but Worse Posted by Jeffrey Toobin • Print • More Share Close 0 • Reddit • Linked In o Email Think the Supreme Court's decision in Citizens United was bad? A worse one may be on the horizon. To recognize the problem, it's necessary to review some of the Court's gnarled history on the subject of campaign finance. In Citizens United, which was decided in 2010, the Court rejected any limits on what a person or corporation (or labor union) could spend on an independent effort to help a candidate win an election. Thus the rise of Super PACs; that's why Sheldon Adelson could spend sixty million dollars to help Mitt Romney in 2012. But, though Citizens United deregulated independent expenditures on behalf of candidates, the case said nothing about direct contributions to the candidates themselves. That's where the new case comes in. Current federal law allows individual donors to give up to two thousand six hundred dollars to any one candidate during a single election. In addition, they can give only an aggregate hundred and twenty-three thousand dollars to candidates, political action committees, and parties over a two -year period. Shaun McCutcheon, an Alabama Republican, wants to give more money to the candidates he supports, so he has sued to invalidate the rules limiting the over- all amounts he can give. (Indeed, the patriotically minded McCutcheon wanted to give "$1,776" to enough candidates to _ b F mmneny iw.coml online /blogs /commenM13107 /supra court- anoffw- citizens udted- but - worse .html?pnntablc=true&currenPage =all 1/4 9118/13 Another Citizens United, but Worse, Goes to the Supreme Court: The New Yorker exceed the current limits on direct contributions.) The Supreme Court will hear his case in the fall, and he has a good chance of winning. To see why McCutcheon may win, one must examine the strange reasoning that governs the Supreme Court's decisions on campaign finance. In his brief to the Justices, McCutcheon makes an argument that is breathtaking for its candor. He says that when Congress fast upheld limits: on contributions, in the 1976 case of Buckley v. Valeo, the limits on aggregate giving served a useful purpose. Without the ceiling, the Court explained, a person could legally "contribute massive amounts of money to a particular candid_ ate through the use of unearmarked contributions to political committees likely to contribute to that candidate, or [make] huge contributions to the candidate's political party. But that, McCutcheon points out, was before the days of Citizens United. Now, he implies, Citizens United has undermined so many of the old rules that they are kind of irrelevant at this point. Indeed, the lower -court judge who considered the McCutcheon case.upheld the existing rules but raised the "possibility that Citizens United undermined the entire contribution limits scheme." The reason the contribution levels might be in jeopardy rests on the rationale the Justices now demand for all campaign - finance Imiits. According to Justice Anthony M. Kennedy's opinion in Citizens United, the government's interest in preventing the actuality and appearance of corruption is "limited to quid pro quo corruption." Congress can regulate campaign contributions only to stop. contributors from demanding, and receiving, quid pro quos. The Court forbids_ other justifications for contribution limits —like levelling the playing field. Quid pro quos are, of course, very difficult to prove. So unless the government can prove that the limits on aggregate contributions prevent quid - pro -quo corruption (and how, really, can the government do that ?), these rules might fall, too. Such an outcome is especially hkely because the current Court has such an exalted idea of the importance of campaign contributions as a form of'individual expression. In other words, money equals speech. The speech of wealthy people is a source of particular, almost poignant concern. As Justice Kennedy wrote, the fact that contributors "may have influence over or access to elected officials does not mean that those officials are corrupt." Indeed, he observed further, "political speech cannot be limited based -on a speaker's wealth." Citizens United was not an aberration for this Court. It emerged from a definite view about the intersection of campaigns and free speech. The Justices in the majority are engaging in a long -term project to deregulate campaigns. A blessing on unlimited aggregate contributions is the next logical step for them to take —and they have five votes. Illustration by Barry Blitt. Keywords • politics Newsletters t3 s This Week: Links to articles and Web -only features in your inbox every Monday. I Cartoons: A weekly note from the New Yorker's cartoon editor. 1 Daily: What's new today on newyorker.com. www.newyorker. corn /oriline/blogs /comment=13/07/ supreme - court - another - citizens -uNted -but- worse .t*d7printable= true&currentPage =all 2(4 Deb Man en 'rom: Louise Kurzeka <LKURZEKA1 @comcast.net> nt: Tuesday, September 24, 2013 7:47 PM _a: Edina Mail Subject Thank you for your diligence in the freight issue Dear Mayor Hovland, I am a lifelong resident of St. Louis Park, having grown up and still living just two blocks from the current MN &S spur line. I have been involved in the issue for several years, actively keeping other members of the Lenox Neighborhood aware of developments in the re -route question. So I am very aware of the positions and actions of several public officials. I want to thank you for your efforts on the Corridor Management Committee. I am most appreciative that you continue to ask the hard questions and put the voice of reason forth during the meetings. And while your efforts are especially important to myself and my neighbors, I believe the re -route as currently proposed through St. Louis Park is important to our greater metro area. I am concerned of the political strategies that shelved some of the co- locate options for reasons that also should have shelved the two options for re- routing. I am glad you have your eye on this issue and can see that winnowing down to two more expensive options "tunnel and Brunswick central options vs. co- location at grade relocating the bike path) is not necessarily government acting at it's best and in the interest of the citizenry. I worry that all this posturing may result in the Brunswick Central as the only default option if down the road a tunnel co- location choice is determined technically impossible. I ask that you continue to keep the people of St. Louis Park in mind and keep the Met Council honest in their actions for all communities on the SWLRT line. Thank you again, for being a "squeaky wheel." Regards, Lduy & K,r trbek -al Everything's TogetherA® Organization You Can Live With Celebrating 20 years in business! Golden Circle Member NAPO; Founding Member and Chapter President NAPO -MN, Past ICD Teleclass Director (formerly NSGCD) Member Minnesota Hoarding Task Force 3301. Library Lane 1 St. Louis Park, MN 55426 -4210 (952) 939 -8080 2 Deb Manqen 'nom: Stephanie Schmidt <sgcina @comcast.net> ant: Tuesday, September 24, 2013 11:00 PM ,o: Edina Mail Cc: Peter Schmidt Subject Thank you To Mayor Hovland, Thank you for all you have done for St. Louis Park regarding the SWLRT /freight collocation vs. reroute issue. We appreciate all of your efforts regarding this issue. Our sincere thanks, Stephanie & Peter Schmidt 3741 Glenhurst Ave. So. St. Louis Park 1 Deb Mannen From: Tara Dev <taradev @gmail.com> Sent Tuesday, September 24, 2013 4:01 PM To: Edina Mail; jonibennettl2 @comcast.net; Mary Brindle ( Comcast );joshsprague @edin area lty.com; swensonannl @ gmail.com; Cary Teague; Kris Aaker Subject: INDIAN HILLS NEIGHBORHOOD SUBDMSION 6609 Blackfoot Pass, Edina, MN 55439 Dear Mr. Mayor and council members & Mr. Teague I am writing to support the OPPOSITION of the proposed subdivision of 6609,13lackfoot Pass, Indian Hills, EDINA. I had the opportunity to voice my views at the city planning meeting but wanted to reiterate my position once again. I currently reside at 6804 Cheyenne Trail, just down the road from the proposed subdivision but more importantly, right next door to Mr. Scott Busyn (builder of Great Neighborhood homes) most recent project in our neighborhood, at 6808 Cheyenne Trail (entrance on Cheyenne Circle).' When Mr. Bus en approached me to support the variance he requested for the home belonging to Mr Joel Anderson at 6808, We did so in good faith.;This lot had been vacant for, many years (almost since we purchased our house 7; years ago). It was a beautiful wooded lot and we ,'welcomed a new home fitting of the lot. Though Mr. Busyn has'in fact built a lovely home but one that I strongly feel is becoming a trademark of certain builders in Edina, to fill up as much of the lot as possible and, build as close to the property line as possible as well. In doing so destroy the innate beauty of Edina's old established neighborhoods, which can only grow with time. We live in an older part of the city with beautiful trees that grace our neighborhoods, winding roadways, privacy and iii fact created by previous builders who respected the neighborhood. Homes are staggered next to each other, some higher, some lower, some forward and some setback. In the preceding year since the house has been completed, we have been greatly disappointed for several reasons which I will list below: During construction part of our fence was removed that surrounded our pool. In the Spring, when we had to replace the fence at our own expense and we had the pins identified on our property. We realized that in fact the owner had no right removing our existing fence and the the builder had failed to identity the pins for the owners and us the neighbors, thus creating undue tension between us. In the process of contruction, many old trees were -taken down and our lot (as are several of the prime lots in Indian hills) has lost all of it's privacy and beauty between the homes. It's not that the lot that Mr. Busen chose to build on was not big enough, in fact he has.built a large home with much yard in front but has sandwiched the house in the back next to ours. We now have direct views to not one but two homes (Cheyenne Circle) as well - into driveways and homes. The loss of aged trees cannot be replaced and though we have now fenced and replanted at our own expense and a heavy expense I might add as well as having to raise up our property due to the large dip between our two properties that would cause a huge run off during the rains and snow melt. It is deeply saddeing to see Mr. Busyn attempt to ravage another piece of land. We have lived in 3 different part of Edina. Each neighborhood has it's own unique character and I see this as a larger problem that does not only affect our neighborhood but many of those in the city. Edina, is a wonderful city, which provides many diverse housing opportunities, for those wishingito buy homes. Edina is known for its old established neighborhoods that have stood the test of time. How terrible is it .► destroy the beauty as well as created hazards by proposing huge retaining walls on a virtually unbuildable got.. Blind corner drives which ice over and are sure to cause pause to school buses, young drivers, and children walking around that corner. . I would ask you to truly consider preserving a beautiful plot and give weight to those to are opposed to this subdivision. It is also perhaps time to revisit some of the building codes that do NOT in fact seem to be protecting our neighborhoods. Sincerely Tara Dev Tara email: taradev(c- gmail.com cell: 612.227.7711 Deb Manaen From: Lynn Laaksonen <goldielax @comcast.net> Sent Tuesday, September 24, 2013 5:05 PM To: Edina Mail; jonibennettl2 @comcast.net, Mary Brindle ( Comcast );joshsprague @edinarealty.com; swensonannl @gmail.com; Cary Teague Subject: oppose subdivision of 6609 Blackfoot Pass As 36 year residents of 6404 Indian Hills Road my husband and I oppose the subdivision of 6609 Blackfoot Pass. We moved from Minneapolis to give our children the opportunity to grow up in an area of trees and hills, large yards, and a feeling of being in the country while keeping us near our jobs and the advantages of city life. We found that: opportunity in Indian Hills: We have neighbors but there are enough trees and wild area between the houses that we can't see the houses behind us or on either side. Our sons: could have a fort in the woods and not leave our yard. We have a swimming pool and most of our neighbors don't even know that it's there. Our yard is frequented by deer (including a 10 point buck), turkeys (up to 23 at one time), birds, ducks, coyotes , fox and even 2 opossum. Our yard was established in 1952/1953 so the white oak, red oak, maple, white pine -and other evergreens are large, mature trees that we have an arborist monitor and prune on a yearly basis. We do this to maintain both the value of our property and the value of our property to the neighborhood. Indian Hills is distinct in that we do have large lots. Some of the neighbors have purchased an adjoining lot to make. their property even bigger. We have traditionally opposed subdivision to keep, builders from starting the trend of smaller homes -or large homes on smaller lots. We see the problems that are causing so much stress in Country Club and we don't want Indian Hills to have to deal with all of those issues. Our neighborhood is made up of large wooded lots with a generous , wild area on both sides and to the back of the,lot. We don't have homes directly on the street and we don't have fences' or retaining walls merely to separate the lots. As those of us who live on a hill know, drainage issues and erosion are very real concerns. The property at 6609 Blackfoot Pass is a very steep hill with one house proposed at the top of the hill and one house at the bottom of,the hill. The lower property appears to be in the drainag,e'ar'ea of the upper property. Any fill on the lower property will have a major impact on the existing trees and the ultimate result is the removal of the trees. We also know that changing the elevation of one piece of property always affects the adjoining property and streets. The adjoining properties include those on both Blackfoot Pass and Cheyenne'Trail. The, impact to the neighborhood regarding the drainage and erosion is well past the property lines of 6609 Blackfoot Pass. Once you start changing the character of Indian Hills by sticking houses in wherever a builder wants to put one, you can never undo it or stop it from happening again. Once you set the precedence, you will have changed over 60 years of the lifestyle of Indian Hills. This is our neighborhood. Please do not let a builder come in and change the character and lifestyle of our neighborhood. Kay and Lynn Laaksonen 6404 Indian Hills Road Deb Mangen '-om: james schwender <jdschwender @yahoo.com> Tuesday, September 24, 2013 6:49 PM o; Edina Mail; jonibennettl2 @comcast.net; Mary Brindle (Comcast);joshsprague @edinarealty.com; swensonannl @gmail.com Dear City Council Members: I live on 6700 Cheyenne Trail directly in front to the sub - division in question. I strongly disagree that the builder is making his best effort to leave the property'in order' with the surrounding neighborhood. If he were there would be no subdivision and a new single family home would be built on the existing property. Many lots in this community, including mine, are of similar size. I think this subdivision effort would have lasting consequences in this part of Edina to set precedence. In addition, there are many mature trees that will need to be sacrificed for his personal gain. I share all the concerns of my current neighbors in regard to the "real" flood problems that currently occur after heavy rains and the traffic problems. The intersection between Cheyenne trail and Blackfoot pass is already dangerous and by adding two driveways on the existing property will only make this intersection even more dangerous and unsafe for the many children in the area. Please consider doing everything in your elected power to help our community and not a specific individual Thank you for your time James Schwender Deb Manoen From: Susan Brunn <sbrunn @me.com> Sent Tuesday, September 24, 2013 8:28 PM To: Edina Mail Subject: Opposition to the Subdivision of 6609 Blackfoot Pass Dear Mayor Hovland: I am writing in opposition to the proposed subdivision of the property at 6609 Blackfoot Pass. As a 20 year resident of the property at 6601. Blackfoot Pass, I urge the Edina City Council to deny the proposed subdivision in order to maintain the character and integrity of the Indian Hills neighborhood, which is known for its large and spacious lots. The property in question is a challenging lot at best, and is particularly ill- suited for subdivision. My neighbors and I have a long list of concerns, including such long term questions as water run -off and drainage, what would happen to the many mature,trees on the lot, proximity to the adjacent lot /neighbor, and issues regarding how average lot sizes are calculated in our neighborhood. In my opinion, it does not serve the city of Edina, nor its corn prehensiv "e development plan, to begin to chisel away at the few neighborhoods left where relatively large lots are the norm:_ When so many of the other neighborhoods in Edina are complaining of too -large houses being built on too - small lots, it seems a shame to eliminate these large and very desirable lots from the Edina real-estate landscape. I urge you to vote agains this proposed subdivision. Thank you very much for your consideration. Sincerely, Susan Harker Brunn 6601 Blackfoot Pass Edina MN 55439 1 Deb Man en - -am; deanandmary@aol.com Tuesday, September 24, 2013 10:32 PM Edina Mail Subject. Subdivision of 6609 Blackfoot Pass Dean and Mary Swanson 6617 Cheyenne Trail We have lived in our home since 1984. It was the character and charm of the Indian Hills neighborhood that made our jaws drop when we first saw it. There is not a neighborhood like it in all of Edina. Huge, beautiful trees, wild areas of untouched land. Half of our lot is native land, untouched except for the removal of buckthorn. Our first concern is changing the character of our neighborhood. Following the 500 ft mean will eventually make all the perimeter lots fold in, huge trees removed, and over the years it will look like every other neighborhood, manicured lawns, boulders, etc. Second, we cannot imagine how the proposed subdividing of 6609 Blackfoot Pass can have proper drainage so as to not affect the neighboring properties and the street. The existing trees and wild growth absorb so much water. When it rains, the water does collect on the street now. Proper drainage of this lot has to be a huge engineering challenge that one engineer in our neighborhood thinks impossible. We will all be crying when all the savanaugh oak trees are cut down, over a hundred years old. It appears to the engineer in the neighborhood that 90% of the trees will have to be removed to accommodate all the retaining walls and steep slopes. Dean counted 57 trees on this lot and the builder has not said what will be removed. This lot is STEEP. The two proposed driveways are on a blind corner that looks unsafe to us. We beg you not to put us at the forefront of this slippery slope of subdivision that will most certainly be regretted at some future date. Respectfully, Dean and Mary Swanson Deb Mangen From: Jennifer Rowland <jenniferrowland @comcast.net> Sent Wednesday, September 25, 2013 9:14 AM To: Jackie Hoogenakker Cc: Edina Mail; Mary Brindle (Comcast); joshsprague @edinarealty.com; swensonannl @gmail.com Subject Re: Proposed Blackfoot Pass Lot Subdivision > To the Edina Planning Commision and City Council Members, > I am writing on behalf of my husband David Rowland and myself to address a proposed subdivision of a recently . purchased lot on Blackfoot Pass in.the Indian hills neighborhood in which we reside. We have lived ;in two homes in Edina for most of the past 21 years and we have enjoyed both homes for their unique qualities. Our first home was at 5003 Arden Avenue in the Brucewood neighborhood of Edina. We enjoyed the many amenities of living in close I roximity to 50th & France and Arden Park as our children grew up. Our second home in Edina is located at 6605 Dakota Trail. This property includes a second parcel, 6601 Dakota Trail which the previous owners had purchased and combined to create an even larger property in the beautiful Indian Hills neighborhood. We chose this home after learning more about the west side of Edina and came to appreciate.the larger lots, beautiful trees and more country-like feel. Although We moved out of the east side of Edina, we had come to learn that the features of the Indian Hills neighborhood met our needs an desires for our current phase of life. > The neighborhood diversity in Edina makes it a stronger community. The distinct characteristics of each neighborhood allows Edina to meet the needs of a variety of people with a variety of needs and desires. The proposed subdivision is inconsistent with the unique characteristics provided in the Indian Hills neighborhood. It would be a mistake to allow this sort of transformation to occur, and it would weaken an important strength of the city of Edina. > Thank you for the consideration of our perspective in this matter. > David and Jennifer Rowland > 6605 & 6601 Dakota Trail > Edina, Mn 55439 Deb Man en Bert Ledder <Isledder @aol.com> rnt: Wednesday, September 25, 2013 10:29 AM 10; Edina Mail ;jonibennettl2 @corncast.net; Mary Brindle (Comcast);joshsprague @edinarealty.com; swensonannl @gmail.com; Cary Teague Subject: Letter for the City Council for October 1st Council Meeting from Pat Kreuziger Attachments: Pat Kreuziger's Letter.docx Please include this in the October 1, 2013 City Council Meeting Packet. Sincerely, Pat Kreuziger 6709 Cheyenne Trail Edina, MN 55439 1 Mayor Jim Hovland and Members of the City Council From Pat Kreuziger, 6705 Cheyenne Trail Re: Proposed Subdivision of 6609 Blackfoot Pass Date: September 25, 2013 As one whose property abuts this Blackfoot Pass property on the south, I have many concerns and unanswered questions. Four of us neighbors met with Scott Busyn on August 8th at his invitation. The copy of his proposed plat to the City of Edina stated his proposed lot sizes as Lot 1 at 1.32 acres and Lot 2 at .46 acre. He promptly informed us that his surveyor makes a lot of mistakes and those numbers were wrong. They instead should have been 1.07 and .71 respectively. I do not know where those property lines would be and it makes very nervous to have someone building next to me who makes these kinds of mistakes. I totally agree with the members of the Planning Commission who feel that the 500 foot radius rule isn't fair or correct when you mix neighborhoods that are vastly different. Safety is an issue on Blackfoot Pass. I, have an accident report from 2009 when a car coming southwest on the Pass hit the mailbox at 6700 Cheyenne Trail and a tree on my front lawn across the street. The car was impacted to the point that it could not be driven. It,was fortunate that it did not hit a child or.. other pedestrian. If two driveways are, put at 6609 and close to the intersection of Cheyenne Trail it will make an already blind intersection even more dangerous. f If this sub - division were to be granted the character of the neighborhood would DRASTICALLY change. 1. Trees that are decades old would be removed. 2. Drainage and water issues would be a significant problem. . 3. Noise would become an issue with two. homes on'the lot, more people, more hard surfaces and fewer trees as a sound buffer. 4. 16 foot retaining walls made from interlocking prefabricated blocks are certainly not characteristic of our beautiful neighborhood. I could go on and on, but I know you are receiving many letters:so.l_will let others expound on the character. It greatly concerns me that if a sub - division were granted in Indian Hills it would-destroy our historic and unique neighborhood forever. In my opinion, it would be extremely short- sighted to think that a decision to grant sub - division stands alone rather than setting a PRECEDENT. It is my hope that you elected members of the City Council will give this whole matter your deepest concern and act as the Planning Commission did in rejecting this subdivision. My sincere thanks go to all of you on the Council and I deeply appreciate those of you who took time to come to view the properties in person. Most respectfully, Pat Kreuziger i I Deb Man en From: glmarsha1107 @comcast.net nt: Wednesday, September 25, 2013 11:47 AM i0: Edina Mail; joshsprague @edinarealty.com; swensonannl @gmail.com; Mary Brindle (Comcast);jonibennettl2 @comcast.net Subject: Blackfoot Pass Proposed Sub - division Dear Council Members, What a disappointment to find out that the neighborhood in which I grew up is being considered for sub - division! You are faced with a significant choice that will have monumental effects on the future of Indian Hills, the surrounding neighborhoods, and the city of Edina. I ask that you please vote against the proposed sub - division on Blackfoot Pass. Thank you! Laurie Marshall EHS '84 graduate 1 ' 1 Deb Mangen From: Bert Ledder <Isledder @aol.com> Sent Wednesday, September 25, 2013 11:53 AM To: Edina Mail; jonibennettl2 @comcast.net; Mary Brindle (Comcast); joshsprague @edinarealty.com; swensonannl @gmail.com Subject: Letter for Council October 1, 2013 Meeting Packet Attachments: September 25.docx Please send this letter to the City Council and include it in with there Council Packet for the Proposed Subdivision of 6609 Blackfoot Pass. Thank you. Bert Ledder 6709 Cheyenne Trail Edina, MN 55439 September 25, 2013 Dr. Charles & Bert Ledder 6709 Cheyenne Trail Edina, MN 55439 Honorable Mayor Hovland and Edina City Council The City of Edina 4801 W. 50th Street Edina, MN 55424 Dear Mayor Hovland and Council Members: We are writing you to again express our disapproval of the proposed subdivision of 6609 Blackfoot Pass. We believe the Edina City Planning commission had it correct when they voted to not let this property be subdivided and their remarks indicate why. Indian Hills is a unique area in Edina with its own very distinct characteristics. The hills are a terminal moraine from the Glacier Era and are small stones and sand deposited at the end of the glacier. In living with this land for over 27 years, we know that if disturbed this land washes and becomes a serious and dangerous issue. We experienced this personally in the July 23, 1987 flood when the hill behind us collapsed and the sand, stones and trees washed into the back of our home. We do not have a home behind us, rather we have the parking lot of St. Alban's Church about 100 feet behind our home with a substantial drain at the north end of their property. The much larger pine trees did not fall into our home but were affected. Since then, we have terraced the back yard with the back yard with retaining walls of wooded beams to keep in character with the neighborhood. This has helped but we still have waterfalls in the spring from melting snow off of the parking lot. The Church property committees as well as we have worked hard to preserve the natural wooded land as any disturbance in it would cause significant harm to our property. This is just a sample of what could potentially happen to a home on the proposed subdivided lot. This new lot would not have a 100 foot wooded area for water to soak into. A 16 foot retaining wall of prefabricated interlocking stones does not suit the character of the neighborhood nor would it hold to eliminate the run off from the land 20 feet above. It is important that you be aware of what can, does and will happen to this property if subdivided. There are significant water and drainage issues that cannot be over looked. We appreciate your time with this matter and for all that you do for the City. Sincerely, Dr. Charles T. Ledder and Bert Ledder Deb Mangen j From: dusen001 @umn.edu Sent Wednesday, September 25, 2013 11:58 AM To: Edina Mail; jonibennettl2 @comcast.net; joshsprague @edinarealty.com; swensonannl @gmail.com; Mary Brindle Subject: proposed subdivision of 6605 Blackfoot Pass Dear Mayor and City Council Members I received notice of the upcoming City Council meeting to discuss the proposed subdivision of 6609 Blackfoot Pass in Edina. I own and reside in the adjacent property to the north at 6605 Blackfoot Pass and feel there are several compelling reasons to deny the request. The purpose of this letter is to express my concerns and opposition to the subdivision. The topography of the lot at 6609 Blackfoot Pass is very steep. The current house sits atop the only logical location for a home, with the, rest of the terrain at a very steep incline. The proposed second home would not only require a series of tall retaining walls to hold back the hill, but would sacrifice a beautiful stand of mature oak trees. Moreover, the new homesite is proposed to be located extremely close to the home on Cheyenne Trail, leaving only about 30 feet between the homes. The homeowner on Cheyenne Trail already suffers from drainage issues whenever there is a heavy rain. The addition of a home closento her house will only exacerbate those issues. I was at.the city planning meeting and the builders only plan to address this concern was to contour the area so as to "push ", the a; rain water towards Blackfoot Pass. As we do not have sidewalks and sewer drains, I worry that this plan is very short sighted. Retaining ponds seem to me to be a better idea. Although the subdivision would result in 2 sizeable lots (1 acre and 0.7 acres respectively), the other homes on Blackfoot Pass are larger. and average 0.93 acres (1.02, 2.11 and 0.68 acres). I am aware that city ordinance suggests allowing a minimum lot size of the average for homes in a 500 foot radius of the proposed subdivision. In this situation the 500 foot radius ends up including lots in newer, non- contiguous neighborhoods. Those homes were not part of the original Indian Hills and have a-separate identity. If the purpose of th.is.ordinance is to preserve the integrity of neighborhoods, it doesn't make sense to me to use those lots outside of our neighborhood to calculate the minimum lot size. In summary, I strongly oppose the subdivision of the lot at 6609 Blackfoot Pass. I plan to attend the upcoming City Council meeting. Thank you for you consideration. Kathryn E Dusenbery MD Levitt Chair in Radiation Oncology Head and Associate Professor University of MN Minneapolis, MN 55455 academic office 612 - 626 -6146 clinic 612 - 273 -6700 pager 612 - 899 -7199 Deb Man en om: Kathy Frey <kathy.r.frey @gmail.com> At Wednesday, September 25, 2013 3:58 PM 1,0: Edina Mail; James Hovland Subject Hooten Dry Cleaners Dear Mayor and city council, I attended a Senate district meeting last night where I learned about your attempted take over of the Park's property on 49 1/2 Street. I think this behavior is reprehensible. I understand that the vote to do this was not unanimous. This is underhanded, mean - spiritied, and unethical. It is NOT what I expect from a city council fi om Edina. If we need this property as a city, then offer the family fair market value for it. Do you really want the negative exposure of stealing what is not yours? heard that there was a ridiculous offer followed by a better one. If you cannot match what they could do with their property by leasing it, then don't force it away from them via eminent domain. That is being a bully and would be bullyish behavior. See definition of a bully below. Yoru behavior fits right in. I understand that the Parks have a son who is currently serving in the United States Air Force as a Lieutenant Colonel. Is this how you show your appreciation of his fine service to our country by attempting to deprive his parents of their hard earned retirement income? You should be ashamed of yourselves as a council. Justice Brandeis once said that the greatest disinfectant is sunshine. There are a ton of people who are disgusted with this who are more than willing to shine a light on it for the world to see. Do you really want that for our city? 1 Undo this mess you created and remember, "Thou shalt not steal ". Katherine Frey 6021 Killarney Lane, Edina, MN 55436 cell: 952- 41.2 -3515 Definition of a bully: bully l (bFOTE) n. pl. bul -lies 1. A person who is habitually cruel or overbearing, especially to smaller or weaker people. 2. A hired ruffian; a thug. 3. A pimp. v.lb ul•lied, bul•ly-ing, M& -lies v. tr. 1 To,treat in an overbearing or intimidating manner. See Synonyms at. intimidate. 2. To make (one's way) aggressively: v. intr. 2 Deb'Man en '-om: Marty Anderson < martyanderson@comcast.net > nt: Wednesday, September 25, 2013 9:25 PM ,o: Edina Mail Subject: Reverse the Hooten decision Dear Joni, Josh and Ann, I believe if you search your heart, you will realize that your vote to take the Hooten property was unfair and a mistake. But that's ok because we all make mistakes. The question is whether you'll have the courage to admit it and correct it. I believe you will. The Hootens and this city is counting on you to do so. We want to live in a city who respects ALL their citizens and who wants to be proud of its city council. I pray that you reconsider your vote and seek to change it and correct this error. Thank you for listening and than you for your service. Sincerely, Marty Anderson Edina resident since 1999. 5105 William Avenue Edina, MN 55436 1 Deb Man en From: Carter Freeman <c27freeman @gmail.com> Sent Wednesday, September 25, 2013 10:02 PM To: Edina Mail Subject Edina Sports Dome Support Dear Mayor Hovland, I am writing in support of the proposed Edina Sports Dome. This has been too many years in the research and study phase - it is now time. For years we have cobbled together inadequate rental arrangements at inconvenient times throughout various communities around the metro area in order to provide enough green space for our teams to play and compete. I greatly appreciate the support this last initiative has received and I am hopeful that with your leadership we can build this dome. I have spent my entire life in Edina and am proud of our commitment to excellence in so many areas. It is a special place to live and raise a family. But all of us involved in athletics know that our community lacks adequate space for our teams. This sports dome will begin to alleviate the exponential demand our athletic fields are encountering. I urge your support of the sports dome in the upcoming "vote. Thank you for your consideration and leadership. Respectfully, Carter- Freeman Head Baseball Coach Edina High School 952 -221 =1348 1 Deb Man en •om: Carter Freeman <c27freeman @gmail.com> nt: Wednesday, September 25, 2013 10:02 PM io: Edina Mail Subject: Edina Sports Dome Support Dear Mayor Hovland, I am writing in support of the proposed Edina Sports Dome. This has been too many years in the research and study phase - it is now time. For years we have cobbled together inadequate rental arrangements at inconvenient times throughout various communities around the metro area in order to provide enough green space for our teams to play and compete. I greatly appreciate the support this last initiative has received and I am hopeful that with your leadership we can build this dome. I have spent my entire life in Edina and am proud of our commitment to excellence in so many areas. It is a special place to live and raise a family. But all of us involved in athletics know that our community lacks adequate space for our teams. This sports dome will begin to alleviate the exponential demand our athletic fields are encountering. I urge your support of the sports dome in the upcoming vote. Thank you for your consideration and leadership. Respectfully, ': arter Freeman :lead Baseball Coach Edina High School 952 - 221 -1348 1 Deb Man en From: Duke Miller, Chelsea A <Chelsea.DukeMiller @edinaschools.org> Sent Thursday, September 26, 2013 9:34 AM To: Edina Mail Subject: Edina Sports Dome Vote on October 14th Dear Mayor James Hovland, I am writing in support of the proposed Edina Sports Dome. I started out as a student - athlete at Edina, playing lacrosse on city parking lots, and now find myself coaching the very same team that I once played on. As the sport has grown over the last thirteen years, so has the competition level. In order to be able to promote Edina's excellence and continue the ongoing tradition, we need proper space for our teams to practice and play on. For years the Edina Girls, Lacrosse Team has pieced together inadequate rental arrangements at inconvenient times throughout various communities around the metro area in order to provide enough green space for our teams to play and compete. I greatly appreciate the support this last initiative has received and I am hopeful that with your leadership we can build the sports dome. This sports dome will begin to alleviate, the exponential demand our at fields are encountering. I urge your support of the sports dome in the upcoming vote. Thank you for your consideration and leadership. Respectfully, I I 11 Activities Department Administrative Assistant Varsity Girls Lacrosse Coach Edina High School 6754 Valley View. Road Edina, Minnesota 55439 T: 952/848 -3817 F: 952/848 -3818 Chelsea DukeMiller @edinaschools.ore home ts edinaschools.ore If the information in this email relates to an individual or student it may be private data under state or federal privacy laws. This individual private data should not be reviewed, distributed or copied by any person other than the intended recipient(s), unless otherwise permitted under low. if you are not the intended recipient any further review, dissemination, distribution, or copying of this electronic communication or any attachment is strictly prohibited. If you have received an electronic communication in error, you should immediately return it to the sender and delete it from your system. Thank you for your compliance. Deb Man en -•om; Tim Budig <tim.budig @ecm- inc.com> Wednesday, September 25, 2013 9:39 AM Edina Mail Subject: media question Mayor Hovland: My name is Tim Budig and I am the State Capitol reporter for ECM Publishers. We have newspapers in Edina and elsewhere in the metro. I am trying to put together a story on roundabouts. I believe Edina has several, and I am wondering how they're working out? Have they reduced the number of traffic accidents? Do residents like them? Do you anticipate the city having more? I have seen you at the State Capitol appearing on behalf of transportation issues, so I know transportation is a big deal for you. Thanks. 1 REPORT RECOMMENDATION o e Cn _ th, �A� To: MAYOR AND COUNCIL From: Debra Mangen . I City Clerk Date: October 1, 2013 Subject:. CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED AFTER PACKETS Agenda Item #: IX. A. Action ❑ Discussion ❑ Information Action Requested: Attached is correspondence received after the packets were delivered to you. No action is necessary. City of Edina 4801 W. 50`" St Edina, MN 55424 IA -BUM a -fire- cyvev3 — A-r It;o av -o w j � Le -H v-C- 4-tfaq � Lo+ 1 Sp ec i -h 3aj -fvy etc �r Hmq Mavirnic J l\ 2o x3 *Do k•v� �P Date: Sept 26, 2013 . To: Mayor James Hovland From: John Lundquist Subject: Fred Richards Golf Course I am writing this to encourage you to keep Fred Richards as a golf course. It is a great course for the medium skilled golfers. There are 8 leagues that play at Fred Richards and if the course closes a number of them will end. While they might: be able to transfer their league to another location -it is very doubtful,,they could maintain their current tee times and would result in losing members. Included in this is the youth golfers.- It represents quality of life to a great number of men and women. Further, the Edina Senior League pays in advance rather than each time we play. The City has use of the money whether an I ndividual plays every week or not. A while ago Sue Weigle brought me over to a Park Board meeting to offer suggestions to grow use of Fred Richards. I offered a number of suggestions that would help this. I noticed a number of heads nodding in agreement as I was talking. Unfortunately nothing was implemented. None of the suggestions were big cost items. I don't feel offering Braemar. is a realistic answer. A lot of Fred Richards golfers would not be comfortable playing there. Finally, this is part of the,quality of life that Edina is known for. It is exercise, fellowship, and being active. Keep it as a golf course and let's take steps to improve it visibility and use. Thank you John W. Lundquist 7220 York Ave South #309 Edina, MN 55435 jwlsrfhk @comcast.net Deb Mannen From: SheriMotz @aol.com Sent: Saturday, September 28, 2013 11:35 AM To: Edina Mail Subject: Eminent Domain re: Hooten Cleaners Dear Mayor Hovland, Thank you! lam p leased with your vote NOT to impose Eminent Domain on the property of the Parks. This action voted by the city-council' by a 3/2- margin just feels wrong. In addition to the following questions and the vote's unfairness to the Parks, I do not think Edina needs another liquor store. Here are some questions left to be answered: Why move forward now on the Parks' property, just after a purchase of the, Edina Realty building next door where a parking ramp will be built? • Was there ever a written offer made to the Parks by the City staff? • Doesn't this aggressive action exposethe City. and taxpayers to expensive legal fees and a process more costly than other;:parking options for 50th & France? Why should businesses, in'Edlna not be afraid that their business could be taken by the city in the future? Sincerely; Sheri Peterson 6121 Arctic Way Edina, IVIN 55436 1 Deb Man en From: Skip Thomas <skipthomasremax @gmail.com> -Sent: Saturday, September 28, 2013 11:55 AM To: Edina Mail Subject: You did the right thng for Hooten (Parks) at 50th Sprague, Swenson & Bennett need to voted out Skip Thomas -------- ReMax Hall of Fame -- -Edina Business Person of the Year -- -Edina W.I.S.E. Person of the Year - - - -- -Edina Chamber Volunteer of the Year-- - - - - -- -Edina Athletic Hall of Fame - - - - -- University of Minnesota_ M Man (Hockey) ----------- ReMax Results-- - - - - -- -Edina Minnesota 55436 -------- 612 - 701 - 5023 - -- www.SkipThomas.com ---------------------------------- - - - - -- 1 Deb Man en From: Claudette <4502 @comcast.net> Sent: Saturday, September 28, 2013 1:51 PM To: Edina Mail Subject: Fw: Eminent Domain Same message, with correct name spelling. Sorry. Please disregard the previous email sent. - - - -- Original Message - - - -- From: Claudette To: mail(abedinamn.pov Sent: Saturday, September 28, 2013 12:45 PM Subject: Eminent Domain Dear Mayor Hovland, Thank you so much for voting against the right of Eminent Domain in the case of the Hooton's owners. I find it hard to believe that this takeover by our Edina City Council of this privately owned land could happen in my hometown of Edina. We are to treat others as we would like to be treated. This is no longer the case in our own community. Regards, Claudette De brey 4502 Browndale Avenue Edina, MN 55424 Deb Manaen From: Johnson, Seth H <sjohnson @cbburnet.com> Sent Sunday, September 29, 2013 2:11 PM To: Edina Mail; Mary Brindle ( Comcast );jonibennet @comcast.net; joshsprague @edinarealty.com; swensonannl @gmail.com Subject Eminent Domain Edina Council Members, This is an egregious use of power by a governing body. Eminent domain should ONLY be used under extreme limited circumstances. Convenience to the shoppers for certain establishments does not qualify. I am ashamed of the Edina Council members voting yes to this, abuse of power. Government at all levels is� becoming tyrannical. Seth H. Johnson Edina, MN The information in this electronic mail message is the sender's confidential business and may be legally privileged. It is intended solely for the addressee(s). Access to this internet electronic mail message by anyone else is unauthorized. If you are not the intended recipient, any disclosure, copying, distribution or any action taken. or omitted to be taken in reliance on it is prohibited and may be unlawful. The sender believes that this E -mail and any attachments were free of any virus, worm, Trojan horse, and /or malicious code when sent. This message and its attachments could have been infected during transmission. By reading the message,and opening any attachments, the recipient accepts full responsibility for taking protective and remedial action about viruses and other defects. The sender's company is not liable for any loss or damage arising in any way from this message or its attachments. Nothing in this email shall be deemed to create a binding,contract to purchase /sell real estate. The sender of this email does not have the authority to bind a buyer or seller to a contract via written or verbal communications including, but not limited to, email communications. 1 Deb Manaen From: Steven J. Timmer <stimmer @planetlawyers.com> Sent Sunday, September 29, 2013 8:24 PM To: Edina Mail ` Cc: jeancolweII13 @gmail.com; Dennis La France; mark epple; John Crabtree Subject: 54th Street redesign Attachments: bridge - 130928 jpg; eastside- 130928 jpg; westside - 130928 jpg Mayor Hovland, members.of the Council and city administration, On behalf of my neighbors, .I want to thank,the Mayor and each member of the Council for walking along 54th Street with us to listen.to our concerns about the consequences to our neighborhood of some of the ideas advanced for the redesign of the street. As the people who actually live along 54th Street, we've frankly been alarmed at the unresponsiveness of the Public Works Department and its consultants to our concerns. There is a. meeting. scheduled, of course, for the evening of September 3oth to discuss "design concepts" based on "input from neighbors." As the neighbors, we've come up with a plan that we think accomplishes the goals of the city without some of,the attendant disruption and urbanization proposed by the Public Works Department in� its earlier "design concepts." We call it "The Neighborhood. Plan'.', Attached are three p'relim'inary renderings of the plan, which is described as follows: Several.of the neighbors along 54th Street have had a chance to examine the requirements for our street, and the city's comprehensive plan as well and we have conceived a plan that that we believe meets these requirements' - actually exceeds them for a secondary route — and provides safety for pedestrians, bicyclists, and motorists. The scale of it is smaller than the plans produced by the Public Works Department and persons consulting with it. It provides less disruption to the homeowners on the street, does not destroy some mature. trees and some very old oak trees, and results in less thermal and sediment load to the Minne.haha Creek watershed. Here are its principal elements: 1) On the part of the street west of the creek, limit hard surface development, including all the elements, curbs, sidewalks, drive lanes, and bike accommodations to a maximum of 34 feet. 2) This width consists of 2 ten -foot drive lanes, 2 four -foot bike lanes, shared or dedicated, 1 five -foot sidewalk, and 2 six -inch curbs, with no boulevard between the curb and the sidewalk, just as is the case on Wooddale and other streets in the immediate vicinity, or on 44th, west of Browndale, for that matter. 3) The hard surface area, curb back to far edge of the sidewalk, is centered in the road right of way. 4) No on- street parking on this portion of 54th Street. � VIA .:�• it i �- 4{ :'� - � �_ �. fit � � _y � ~ 4 �.� � 1 ■[q , s - 11 ff� ga ���da •"s^' .. w R n� Y • �' 'T .�.11� __ _ ay r -' I I ii7l ► f_. - � _ _ i1< � :4V2> r:_ �T_ �� �.�►,•� 1 �L � 31 � - '_�,.'' I rA r'- "�"7 , � r � i���+�?4 ^ _ �: 1 �; i Tar .:� e'- ',,t1,.�.,;� _ '�y �` �•y 7i ri ,��.�`• rI°�'n'.aj'i ,'L 1: ,,-l. tt,.pa ,x�,. • ip1 4f�-_ �LA��i , f ?k `�- (r. / _ ><. F 1 .l,Jl na' � A�l 1 L • 'A tip �. t � u j � " ..'tic ♦fit I �,; _^'`��•� t; 0 lir "164 AAA / t4�_ . ........ 1p.. 46 Au . . . . . . . . .... vat. -Ago :--A Z*z. 07-" 5) The bike lane consists of a gutter strip for the entire width of the bike lane. The contrasting material will identify it as a bike lane without the need for an excessively wide stripe like the one that currently exists on the street. Moreover it is safer for bicyclists than having a seam running down the bike lane; if the caulking protrudes from the seam, it can cause bikes to lose control, and if the caulk does not cover the seam, the seam can catch a narrow -tired bike, and cause an over - the -top of the handlebars accident, one of the most dangerous types for head injuries and broken bones. This is why many veteran riders prefer to avoid bike lanes in the first place. (An accident like this happened to the author of this note on 50th Street /Grandview near Eden Avenue several years ago, causing a bike helmet cracked in two and a broken collarbone. ST) 6) On the part of the street east of the creek, narrow the street as much as possible to include parking and bike accommodation, 10 -foot drive lanes and a sidewalk. Bump outs to the street to be included to protect parking and visually narrow the street. 7) The existing stop sign remains at its location, and crosswalks are marked /painted on the street at crossings. There are, however, no flashing lights or overhead signage. 8) The bridge and approaches are designed with the quaint character of the neighborhood in mind, with curving approaches to the bridge and the bridge moved somewhat to the south, which will show off the "rapids" to better effect. 9) The current excessive and over -large signage is reduced, both in amount and in size, again, more in keeping with the character of the neighborhood. 10) The speed limit on the street is reduced to 25 mph and enforced. Some of us took a look at west 44th Street west of Browndale; it is actually a little narrower than that proposed above, but we think it is a pretty good template for the street west of the creek. We urge everyone to look seriously at this proposal. Thank you on behalf of my neighbors and me, Steve Timmer Steve Timmer stimmer @planetlawyers.com Deb Mangen From: Kathy Frey <kathy.r.frey @gmail.com> ;ent: Sunday, September 29, 2013 10:00 PM ro: James Hovland Subject: Re: Hooten Dry Cleaners Dear City Council and mayor, This family had tenants ready to lease their property to. This would have generated revenue for them for their retirement. It isn't a matter of disagreeing with eminent domain, you guys have no right to take their property! You are bullies and there is not other word for it. I noted that you chose not to respond to the fact that their son is serving our country and this. is how you say thank- you? What kind of a city council are you? You are acting like a bunch of thugs. This is despicable. :Kathy Frey On Thu, Sep 26, 2013 at 9:02 AM, James Hovland <JHovland@edinamn.>;ov> wrote: Kathy, The city did offer over fair market value for the Hooten property. The tax value is under $800,000. Our offer was way over that. We bought the Edina Realty Building in june and the Hooten building in land is much smaller so we have a current comparison for pricing. As a city we waited until they had shut down their business before we proceeded. We have spent a year talking to the Parks. This is not something we did on the spur of the moment. I understand that you may not agree with the process of eminent domain. Sincerely, Ann Swenson, council From: Kathy Frey [mai Ito: kathy. r.frey gmail.com] Sent: Wednesday, September 25, 2013 3:58 PM To: Edina Mail; James Hovland Subject: Hooten Dry Cleaners Dear Mayor and city council, I attendeda Senate district meeting last night where I learned about your attempted take over of the Park's property on 49 1/2 Street. I think this behavior is reprehensible. I understand that the vote to do this was not unanimous: This is underhanded, mean.spiritied, and unethical. It is NOT what I expect from a city ..council from Edina. If we need this property as a city, then, offer the family fair market value for it. Do you really want the negative exposure 'of stealing what is not yours? I heard that there was a ridiculous offer followed by a better one. If you cannot match what they could do with their property by leasing it, then don't force it away fiom them via eminent domain. That is being a bully and would be bullyish behavior. See definition of a bully below. Yoru behavior fits right in. I understand that the Parks have a son who is currently serving in the United States Air Force as a Lieutenant Colonel. Is this how you show your appreciation of his fine service to our country by attempting to deprive his parents of their hard earned retirement income? 2 You should be ashamed of yourselves as a council. Justice Brandeis once said that the greatest disinfectant is sunshine. There are a ton of people who are disgusted with this who are more than willing to shine a light on it for the world to see. Do you really want that for our city? Undo this mess you created and remember, "Thou shalt not steal ". Katherine Frey 6021. Killarney Lane, Edina, NN 55436 cell: 952- 412 -3515 Definition of a bully: bul - ly ' (bl- n. pL bul• lies 3 10 A person who is habitually cruel or overbearing, especially to smaller or weaker people. 2. A hired ruffian; a thug. 3. A pimp. v.bul °lied, bul•ly•ing, bullies v. tr. 1. To treat in an overbearing or intimidating manner. See Synonyms .at intimidate. 2. To make (one's way) aggressively. v. intr. 4 Deb Man en From: Steven J. Timmer <stimmer @planetlawyers.com> Sent: Monday, September 30, 2013 8:11 AM To: Edina Mail Cc: jeancolweII13 @gmail.com; Dennis La France; mark epple; John Crabtree Subject: 54th Street redesign II The plan described in this email, and some photos of the street, and our gatherings with Mayor Hovland and the members of the Council, as well, can be found on the tumbir website: http•// occupy54thstreet.turTibir.com /. Mayor Hovland, members of the Council and city administration, On behalf of my neighbors, I want to thank the Mayor and each member of the Council for walking along 54th Street with us to listen to our concerns about the consequences to our neighborhood of some of the ideas advanced for the redesign of the street. As the people who actually live along 54th Street, we've frankly_been alarmed at the unresponsiveness of the Public Works Department and its consultants to our concerns. There is a meeting scheduled, of course, for the evening of September 3oth to discuss "design concepts" based on "input from neighbors." As the neighbors, we've come up with a plan that we think accomplishes the goals of the city without some of the attendant disruption and urbanization proposed by the Public Works Department in its earlier "design concepts." We call it "The Neighborhood Plan." Attached are three preliminary renderings of the plan, which is described as follows: Several of the neighbors along 54th Street have had a chance to examine the requirements for our street, and the city's comprehensive plan as well, and we have conceived a plan that that we believe meets these requirements — actually exceeds them for a secondary route — and provides safety for pedestrians, bicyclists, and motorists. The scale of it is smaller than the plans produced by the Public Works Department and persons consulting with it. It provides less disruption to the homeowners on the street, does not destroy some mature trees and some very old oak trees, and results in less thermal and sediment load to the Minnehaha Creek watershed. Here are its principal elements: 1) On the part of the street west of the creek, limit hard surface development, including all the elements, curbs, sidewalks, drive lanes, and bike accommodations to a maximum of 34 feet. 2) This width consists of 2 ten -foot drive lanes, 2 four -foot bike lanes, shared or dedicated, 1 five -foot sidewalk, and 2 six -inch curbs, with no boulevard between the curb and the sidewalk, just as is the case on Wooddale and other streets in the immediate vicinity, or on 44th, west of Browndale, for that matter. 3) The hard surface area, curb back'to far edge of the sidewalk, is centered in the road right of way. 4) No on- street parking on this portion of 54th Street. 5) The -bike lane consists of a gutter strip for the entire width of the bike lane. The contrasting material will identify it as a bike lane without the need for an excessively wide stripe like the one that'currently exists on the street. Moreover it is -safer for bicyclists than having a seam running down the bike lane; if the caulking protrudes from the seam, it can.cause bikes.to lose control, and if the caulk does not cover the seam, the seam can catch a narrow - tired bike, and cause an over - the -top of the handlebars accident, one of the most dangerous types for head injuries and broken bones. This is why many veteran riders prefer to avoid bike lanes in the first place. (An accident like this happened.to the author of this note on 50th Street /Grandview near. Eden Avenue several years ago, causing a bike helmet cracked in two and a broken collarbone. ST) 6) On the part of the street east of the creek, narrow the street as much, as possible to include parking and bike accommodation, 10- foot'drive lanes and a sidewalk. Bump outs to the street to be included to protect parking and visuaaly narrow the street. 7) The existing stop sign remains at its location, and crosswalks are marked /painted on the street at crossings. There are, however, rib flashing lights or overhead signage. 8) The bridge and approaches are designed 'with the - quaint character of the neighborhood in mind, with curving approaches to the bridge and the bridge moved somewhat to the south, which will show off the "rapids" to better effect. 9) The current excessive and over -large signage is reduced, both in amount and in size, again, more in keeping with the character of the neighborhood. 10) The speed limit on the street is reduced to 25 mph and enforced. Some of us took a look at west 44th Street west of Browndale; it is actually a little narrower than that proposed above, but we think it is a pretty good template for the street west of the creek. We urge everyone to look seriously at this proposal. Thank you on behalf of my neighbors and me, Steve Timmer Steve Timmer stimmer@planetlawVers.com Deb Man en From: Sunnyslope Neighborhood <sunnyslopedirectory@gmail.com> Sent: Monday, September 30, 2013 9:05 AM To: Scott Neal; Karen M. Kurt Cc: James Hovland;jhovland @krausehovland.com Subject: Thank you for Saturday Neighborhood Association Training Session Dear Scott, Thank you for your prompt reply. I decided to bring our neighborhood's questions to Saturday's Neighborhood Association Training Session. You should be pleased to know that Karen and Jennifer did an excellent job of presenting the program in a thorough yet concise manner. By the end of the 3 hours all of my questions were answered and I left the meeting feeling equipped to summarize and endorse the program to my neighborhood. Karen, thank you for your patience with all my questions on Saturday. I thought you might be interested in reading the summary I sent out to my neighbors yesterday (attached). I look forward to working with you on this very worthwhile program. Best wishes, Kathy Sandy 4800 E. Sunnyslope Road c (952) 237 -6938 h (952) 942 -6122 sunnyslopedirectorygamail.com kathymsandygyahoo.com Hi Kathy - My assistant city manager, Ms. Karen Kurt, is the City's point person on neighborhood association development. She is best equipped to respond to your questions on the subject. I will ask her to contact you directly. Scott Sent from my iPhone On Sep 29, 2013, at 2:36 PM, "Grill Wigley" <g_riff(cr�wi;leyandassociates .coin <mailto:griff2wi;leyandassociates.com>> wrote: -.-==Original Message - - -- From: Sunnyslope Neighborhood <sunnyslopedirectoryna gmail.com< mailto: sunnyslopedirectory -na,gmail.com» To: scott.neal < scott. nealg edinacitizenengayement .orj4<mailto:scott.nealgedinacitizenengdgement.org > Cc: Amy Kelly <alkelly84@,gmail. com <mailto:alkelly84@,gmail.com 5.>; Andy Faris <andy.farisghardware.com< mailto :andy.faris@hardware.com »; Anne Whitsitt <Anne WhitsittQyahoo. com <mailto:Amie Whitsitt@yahoo.com>>; Axel and Loreli Steuer <asteuergic :edu <mailto:asteuer(a,ic.edu >>; Barb Hegenes <barbhegenes@comcast.net< mailto :barbhe_genes@comcast.net >>; Becky O'Grady <becky.ogrady@gei-mills.com< mailto:becky:ogrady(2 enmills.com >>; Bill Bailey <bails@,prodigy. net <mailto:bailsgprodig .nnet »; Bill Messer <bill.messeigyahoo.com< mailto :bill:messer(aDyahoo.com »; Bill Whitsitt <Bill Whitsittgyahoo.com <mailto:Bi11 Whitsittgyahoo.com >>; Brant Pallazza <bpallazza(a�hotmail. com <mailto:bbpallazzaghotmail.com >>; Brock and Lisa Maiser <lisakandersonghotmail.com< mailto :lisakandersonQhotmail.com »; Bryan and Jessica Wilkinson <bwilkinsonQcsc. com <mailto:bwilkinsongcsc.com >>; Chandra Fels <chandra.felsgoutlook.com< mailto :chandra.felsgoutlook.com »; Chris and Sheilah Pesek < Sheilah Pesekgyahoo.com <mailto:Sheilah Pesek(a),yahoo.com »; Dan and Roxane Lehmann <rlehmarin@umn. edu <mailto:rlehinann@,umn.edu >>; Dan Dokman <Dan@,ctiresources. com <mailto:Dangctiresources.com >>; Dan Dokman <dangctlresources. com <mailto:dangctlresources.com >>; Dana Dokman <danadokmanO.aol. com <mailto:danadokmangaol.com >>; Dave and Shelley Shirley <shelleyn shirle house corn< mailto :shelley(Qshirleyhouse.com »; David and Marie Goblirsch <gobli006(2cbmcast. net <mailto:gobli006@comcast.net >>; Delia Dall'Arancio <delia00I comcast .net <mailto:delia001 gcomcast.net>>; Demos Iskos and Amy Durtschi <amydurtschi001 @ comcast .net <mailto:amydurtschi001 gcomcast.net >>; Douglas and Helene Haugland <hau landhpaaol.com <mailto:hau lg andhpgaol.com >>; Erin Buss <erin.bussgp,mail. com <mailto:erin.bussggmail'.com >>; Gaylen and Maggie Knack <maggie.knack(a.comcast.net< mailto :maggie.knack(2comcast.riet >>; Gig Ginkel <c�i Gnkel ,email. com< mailto:gigginkel(a,,gmail.com >>; Greg McGrane < gregm @projeetconsultinggroup.corn< mailto: gregm (a�proiectconsultinggroun.com >>; Hans and Siri Quitmeyer <sir. guit(a�aol. com <mailto:siriiguit(a.aol.com >>; Heidi Faris <hfaris @comcast. net <mailto:hfarisgeomcast.net >>; Janet Dietrich <jUan aard. msn.com <mailto:jaan acrd 1p n.com >>; Jayne M. Clairmont <jclainnontna englishrosesuites.com< mailto: jclairmont Oeriglishrosesuites.com >>; Jeannine Currie <jeanninecurrie(a�gma ll.com< mailto :,ieanninecurrie@gmail.com >>; Jessica Wilkinson < jessica wilkinson@hotmail.com< mailto: jessica .wilkinsonahotmail.com >>; Jim and Lori Vogl <vogllawgaol. com <mailto:vogllawgaol.com >>; Jim Fricton <frict001(a),umn. edu <mailto:frict001(a,urml.edu »; Jim Schell <jimschell(a�sheltercorp :corn <mailto:jimschellna sheltercorp.com> >; Jodi Zgutowicz <� towiczna email. com <mailto:jzgutowiczgg�mail.com >>; Joe and Barry Eilers <barryeilers@mac. com< mailto:barryeilers(cr�mac.com »; Joe Jasper <kellyiasper@visi. com< mailto:kellyj asp er(q-).visi.com >>; John Currie <curriewrks@aol. com <mailto;curriewrksoaol.com »; John Duffey <jpduffeyya msn. corn <mailto:jpduffey(a msn.com >>; Julie Vessel <julievessel�a yahoo.com< mailto :iulievesselga,yahoo.com >>; Karine Watne <karine.watne@ oro.com< mailto :karine.watne(&,toro.com >>; Kathy Bailey <kbailey924@a comcast.net< mailto :kbailey924(a,comcast.net >>; Kathy Sandy <kathymsandy@,y.ghoo. com <mailto:kathymsandynyahoo.com >>; Katie Boylan and Steve Peckham < Katie m boylanggmail.com <mailto:Katie m.boylali@gmail.com >>; Katy LeBarron <katy.lebarron(a,comcast.net< mailto :katy.lebarron@comcast.net>>; Kevin Carlson <kevin_carlsonga,uhc. com <mailto:kevin_carlsonguhc.com >>; Krisanne Hogan <kahoganga comcast. net <mailto:kahog�angcomcast.net>>; Kristen Conner <Kristenkrush@hotmail.com< mailto :Kristenkrush@hotmail.com >>; Kurt and Robin Hansen <spnnm4 gaol .com <mailto:sprmm4@aol.com >>; Laura Carlson <lakecarlson(2msn. com <mailto:lakecarlson@msn.com >>; Lew Sandy < Lewis G Sandyguhg com <mailto:Lewis G Sandynuhg.com >>; Lisa Sporcich < Lisa. sporcich( a, oracle.com <mailto:lisa.sporcich ,oracle.com >>; Lynn Schell < lcarlsonsche ll(2sheltercorp.com< mailto: lcarlsonsche ll(a,sheltercorp.com >>; Mark and Jackie Hegman <hegmarunark@aol. com <mailto:hegmanmark(a ol.com >>; Mark and Vicki Brunsvold <vjbrunsvold@ ol. com <mailto:yibrunsvoldnaol.com >>; Mark Sparano <msparano gniail. com <mailto:msparanona,gmail.com »; Mark Zgutowicz <nlzgutowicz(a yahoo.com< mailto :mzgutowicz(a�yahoo.coin >>; Melody Baron and Mark Peterson <melodybaron(2yah6o .com <mailto`rnelod aron@yahoo.com >>; Mick and Donna McCormick <donnakmc6@cjnail. com <mailto:donnakmccggmail.com >>; Nancy Sparano <nancy_sparano(2g�mail. com< mailto:nan6ysparano@gmail.com >>; Paul Vessel <paul vessel@ ahoo.com <mailto:paul vessel@yahoo.com »; Randy and Jenn Lewis <rlewismn@comcast. net <mailto:rlewismngcomcast.net >>; Ray Kelly <raykelly84ggmail .c6m <mailto:raykelly84 Lgmail.com >>; Robert and Marilyn Marshall <marsha119432(2msn. com <mailto:marshaII9432@msn.com >>; Rogier and Karin Vandendool <karinvandendool c2gmail .com <mailto:karinvandendool(a gmail.com >>; Sara McGrane <saramcgrane(ghotmail. com <mailto:saramc rane(2hotmail.com >>; Scarlett Branton <scarlettbranton@yahoo.com< mailto :scarlettbranton(2yahoo.com »;Scott Sporcich <scott sporcich@thecreativepartnersgroo.com< mailto: scott. sporcich (cr�thecreativepartnersQroup .com »; Shawn O'Grady <shawn.ogrady(a�genmills.com <mailto:shawn.o rg_adyna,genmills.com >>; Steve and Ann Makredes <amakrkmsn .com <mailto:amakr@msn.com >>; Steve and Cindy Snyder <stephen.sny der (a snyderattorneys.com< mailto: stephen .snyderna,snyderattomeys.com >>; Steve Buss <buss.steven(2gmail. com <mailto:buss.steven@gmail.com »; Steve Dietrich <stevedietrich@live.com< mailto :stevedietrich(a,live.com >>; Steve Watne <scwatne@gmail. com <mailto:scwatne(a,gmail.com >>; Ted Hogan <tedmhogan(2gmail. com <mailto:tedmhogariggmail.com >>; Tom Conner <Tomnconner@yahoo. com< mailto:Tomnconnergyahoo.com >>; Wendy Doster <wendy.doster @yahoo.com< mailto :wendy.doster(a,yahoo.com >>; Wickberg, Lana <lanawickbergggmail.com< mailto :lanawickberg(2gmail.com >>; Woody Ginkel <woody@ginkelproperties. com <mailto:woody@ginkelproperties. com» Sent: Fri, Sep 27, 2013 9:57 pm Subject: Neighborhood Association Questions Dear Scott, I live in the Sunnyslope neighborhood, which has an active yet informal neighborhood association. We put out a mailing requesting dues each year, while making it very clear they are strictly voluntary. We use the funds to help pay for two neighborhood parties, printing of a Directory, holiday greenery at the entrances to the neighborhood, and things like daffodil plantings, etc. We also have established a website on Nextdoor, which I am hoping we will use more actively as more people see the benefits. https://nextdoor.com/fmd- neighborhood/mn/edina/ One of my neighbors sent around a notice last evening about tomorrow's Neighborhood Association training session. So far the email is eliciting mixed reactions: some negative, some neutral, but all have the common feature of being very perplexed about the city's objectives and the strict guidelines it mandates. What is the purpose of this program? If it is not a substitute for traditional communication and advocacy mechanisms, then.what value added will it bring? If is purely. voluntary, why are there so many specific requirements? What if our neighborhood decides not to formally become "recognized" due to the formalization required (bylaws, officers, meeting notices etc). Can we just provide a few contact names to the city to facilitate communication and information exchange? I personally feel It would-be, shortsighted of the City to only work with formally recognized Associations; I would guess some other local neighborhoods might feel the same, while others might choose to be recognized. I am just speaking for myself, and there maybe others in our Sunnyslope neighborhood who would like to pursue formal recognition; but my sense is that many just don't see the point in it. Thank you for any information you can provide on this. Kindest regards, Kathy Sandy 4800`E. Sunnyslope Road c (952) 237 - 693'8 <tel: %x28952 %29 %2023.7 -6938> h(95 )942- X6'122 <tel %x28952 %29 %20942 -6122> sunny slopedirectory(a� - ail.com <mailto sgpUi slopedirectoryggmail.com> kathymsandj@yahoo com <mailto:kathymsandy@yahoo.com> Kathy Sandy 4800 E. Sunnyslope Road c (952) 237 -6938 h (952) 942 -6122 sunnvslouedirectory(a grriail.com kathymsandy gyahoo. com 4 Deb Manaen From: Sunnyslope Neighborhood <sunnyslopedirectory@gmail.com> Sent: Monday, September 30, 2013 9:17 AM To: Scott Neal; Karen M. Kurt Cc: James Hovland ;jhovland @krausehovland.com; Annie Johnson Subject: Corrections! Attachments: Neighborhood Association Meeting Recap -Ldocx Dear Scott and Karen, I made two errors in the email I just sent you. That will teach me to write emails in the middle of the night again! First.of all, when I mentioned that Karen and "Jennifer" had done a good job, I meant to.say.Annie Coyle. Second, I believe the attached word doc was.left off my first mailing to you. Thank you! Kathy Sandy 4800 E. Sunnyslope Road c (952) 237 -6938 h (952) 942 -6122 sunnyslopedirectory9gmail. com kath. my_sandygyahoo.com 1 Dear Neighbor, I went to yesterday's Neighborhood Association Training Workshop. It went from 9 to 12:00, and about 40 people were in attendance. Here's what I learned: The City wants to promote Neighborhood Associations for several reasons: • Neighborhood Associations improve the quality of life in cities (something we already enjoy). Neighborhood Blog Entry - Benefit of Neighborhoods • It would give the City a single point of contact for each neighborhood • The City would be able to reach out to residents with neighborhood- specific communications - Examples: street reconstruction projects, redevelopment (allowing review of sketches), land use planning, park development, local crime notification, power outages, etc. • Adopting the Neighborhood Association model of city management follows the national trend Neighborhood Associations - Best Local Govt Practice The City made it clear it will only offer the communications to "officially" recognized neighborhoods. Participation in the program is voluntary (we can stay as we are if we like), but any neighborhood that opts out, will not be able to receive the targeted outreach. The City said it will continue to inform all Edina residents about goings on in the City as it always has (via Patch, Edina website, "Extra" push emails) but it will only 'work with' and offer neighborhood - specific communications to "officially" recognized neighborhoods. As I understand it, the reason for requiring that Neighborhood Associations become formalized is because if the City is going to be communicating with one individual from each neighborhood, it needs to know that the Neighborhood Representative was chosen in a Democratic process and that the Representative is disseminating information in a nondiscriminatory manner. At the same time, the City does not presume that "official" Associations speak for all residents, and Associations are not a formal administrative body. Further, the City allows only one officially recognized Association for each neighborhood. The City will support officially recognized Associations by offering each Association: a landing page on the City website; listing in the About Town magazine; modest copying services; meeting space; City staff as guest speakers; assistance in setting up the Association; assistance with technology, (setting up email lists, Directories, Nextdoor websites, etc.) The City will communicate with Associations in two ways: through email to the Association Representative(s) and via the online social media program Nextdoor. We have a head start on Nextdoor, as we have been members since 2010. It is important to know that while the City will be able to post information and notices on our Sunnyslope Nextdoor website, However, it will not be able to see our personal information, profiles or posts. In conclusion, if we want to take advantage of what the City is offering, we have to go through the procedures and formality of becoming "recognized ". However, questions and answers yesterday indicated that the process does not have to be a big deal. The City seems realistic about several key things: not everyone participates; we are all very busy and have no interest in a lot of 'process'; how involved we become as an Association is up to each neighborhood. We can keep it simple if that is the way we want to roll. What do you think? Thanks, Kathy Sandy Deb Mangen . From: John Hatzung <johnhatzung @usfamily.net> Sent: Monday, September 30, 2013 9:08 AM To: Edina Mail Subject: Sports dome Dear Mayor Hovland: I'm writing you this email in support of building the sports dome. Our daughter Greta, a sophomore.at EHS plays lacrosse. Our son Jack at Southview may turn his focus to soccer. .For me, the most compelling reason Edina should have a sports dome is that it will be another draw for families moving into the area and a reason for growing families to stay. A sports dome would be an asset where kids develop skills, relationships and loyalty to our community. Edina is a great place to live, but no city remains great without investment in the infrastructure and opportunities -for its citizens. A sports dome would make Edina a better place. John Hatzung 6024 York AJe.,S, 952 270 8321 1 Deb Man en From: Sent: To: Subject Mayor Hovland, Doug deGrood <DdeGrood @always - thinking.com> Monday, September 30, 2013 12:14 PM Edina Mail Complaint I'm writing to register a complaint about what I perceive to be the over - zealous policing of hwy 62 in Edina between hwy 100 and hwy 169. Last night, I was driving my son to Braemar Arena. On my way there, the highway looked like it was lit up for Christmas with 'a11 the patrol carlights flashing. Same thing on my way back. I think I counted six cars stopped by the side of the road. I remarked to myself it was like the police were 'shooting fish in a barrel'. It was then, just west of 100, that I became one of the fish. I was driving the speed limit, so you can imagine my curiosity as to why I was being pulled over. According to the officer (.who shall remain nameless unless you want to know), I was driving with my high beams on. I told the officer I was totally unaware of this. (In fact, I'm still not 100% convinced they were on.) I further explained that I was driving a loaner vehicle, and - -not being fully accustomed to the instrument panel - -it's possible they could have become jostled on and I just didn't know it. I, or anyone I know, would have expected the officer to show someunderstanding of my situation and issue me a warning. Boy, was Iwrong. Not only did he write me a citation,.but his manner was flat out rude and confrontational. And he wasn't content to leave it there. He then asked for the car's rental agreement. Not being totally familiar with the car, I couldn't find it. So I was issued a citation for that as well. (I would later learn from mywife that the rental company told her specifically not to leave it in the glove box because it contained our credit card number.) I understand that what I did is a violation of the law, if strictly interpreted. So is driving 56 in a 55 zone,. but people don't get tickets for that. That area of Edina is already notorious for being over - policed. This particular officer's behavior just rubbed salt in the wound. I have to wonder what the objective of the Edina police is in this over -the -top policing of this stretch of road. Is it one of the state's most dangerous roadways, on par with Shephard Road in St. Paul? Is Edina so lacking in crime that there's nothing else for the police to do? Or is it just an easy way to fatten county or state coffers, you know, since those Edina motorists can afford it? I have since learned that according to a WCCO study conducted last year, Edina issues five times more tickets than St. Paul and 12 times more tickets than Minneapolis, the state's two largest cities. The chief of Edina police stated in 1 the report that they're just doing their job and that these aren't frivolous tickets. Based on my experience, I disagree. All I'm saying is this:-how 'bout a little less zeal and a littlemore common- sense restraint? It's not like I was knowingly driving recklessly. It',s bad enough I'm out a couple hundred dollars for the citation plus whatever I'll end up paying in increased insurance premiums. Did the officer have to 'charge me interest' in the form of his rude, combative behavior? I lost a lot of respect for Edina's men and women in blue last night. And .I know that isn't what you want. Respectfully, Doug deGrood � .Cd :M Doug deGrood Creative Director ddearood(Walways-thinking.com P: 612- 547 -5001 608 2nd Avenue South. Suite 129 Minneapolis. Minnesota 55402 http://www.always-thinking.com/ 2 MAYOR tI'v� 1- S 0 �Ge7 -1 SOILJ T -r#r,T its %c,RS 7i UL,-,- .9 ROSS T DUNLOP Page 2 of 2 Statement Date: 09/10/13 0000001 FIS33339 C 4 000 N Z 10 13/09/10 Page 2 of 2 00287 MA MA 20556 25310000040462055802 TO: FROM: DATE: RE: EDINA CITY COUNCIL RESIDENTS OF ROLLING GREEN September 27, 2013 SUBDIVISION OF 5 MERILANE INTO THREE LOTS COUNCIL MEMBERS: i SEAL SEP 0 2013 RECEIVED As residents of the Rolling Green neighborhood, we are opposed to the subdivision of 5 Merilane into three lots. ISSUE BEFORE THE COUNCIL The only issue pending before the Council is whether 5 Merilane can be subdivided into three lots. At this stage; the owners/developers of 5 Merilane do not . request any variance. Any variance request with respect to 5 Merilane will generate a broader and different discussion. PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND, AND SCOPE OF REVIEW: At the recent Planning Commission hearing regarding the subdivision of 5 Merilane, the Commission did not vote to recommend subdividing 5 Merilane into three lots. Some Commission members, along wvlthAhe Development Director, suggested that the Commission did not have discretion to oppose because the subdivision meets the minimum requirements relating to the median lot size, width, and depth of other lots within 500 feet of 5 Merilane. In, determining whether a particular lot can be subdivided, the median lot size, width, and depth within 500 feet of other property are only the first elements to consider. If the minimum criteria are not met, the Planning Commission and the Council will not subdivide a lot unless a variance is applied for and granted. Even if the minimum criteria are met, then the Planning Commission and the Council must consider all other relevant Edina ordinances and the 2008 Edina Comprehensive Plan. The Edina Land Use, Planning and Zoning ordinances apply here, and particularly Section 810 -Plat and Subdivisions. As articulated in Subsection 810.01, a purpose and objective of this Section is to support and fiirther the City's Comprehensive Plan and to protect the character and symmetry of neighborhoods in the City. 347615 Later in this same subsection, under the heading "Future Land Use Plan," it states: A basic theme of the land use plan is that Edina's low density residential neighborhoods, which make up over 50% of this City's land area, are expected to remain largely unchanged. It would be wrong for the Council to blindly apply the median 500 foot criteria for lot size, width, and depth measurements in determining whether to subdivide 5 Merilane into three lots. The Council must consider the broader picture outlined here, and consider the impact on Rolling Green and its other residents. THE IMPACT OF SUBDWML`4G 5 MERILANE IS TOO GREAT 5 Merilane is a wooded and pie - shaped lot located at the north end of Merilane where the street turns 90 degrees and continues to the east. The curved portion of the lot line of 5 Merilane would create an almost perfect circle if extended all the way around. The straight portions of the lot lines of 5 Merilane (the side next to 6 Merilane and the side next to 7 Merilane) create a wide angle of about 150 degrees. The proposed subdivision of 5 Merilane cuts this large piece of pie into three smaller slices. The prop osed.subdivision creates lot lines with sharp angles of about 40 to 50 degrees. There are some odd shaped lots in Rolling Green, and some that are pie - shaped. But there is no collection of lots in all of Rolling Green with such severely restricted lot angles. The proposed shape of these subdivided lots is unique and not matched anywhere in the neighborhood. Though the sizes of the proposed subdivided lots are larger than many lots within 500 feet on the left side of Merilane (west side of the north/south axis, and north side of east/west axis), the sharp angled shapes of the proposed lots are totally out of character. dowbrook Golf And six of the .smaller lots on the left side of �s �notdjtrue for the proposed subdivided Course providing a high level of open space. lots. Significantly, the proposed subdivided lots are smaller than. all lots located on the same side of Merilane within 500 feet, and even farther. The proposal locates three structures at the pointed end of each lot. If this proposal is allowed, three homes on the subdivided lots will crowd up against the homes now located at 6 and 7 Merilane. Nowhere in Rolling Green are five homes located so close to one another. The location, arrangement, and proposed density of the structures on these subdivided lots will be unprecedented in Rolling Green. If this subdivision is allowed, five significant homes will be clumped together at the top of the hill. If allowed, this newly created subdivision of five homes in Rolling Green will be known as the "Village on the Hill." 3 347615 CONCLUSION Dividing 5 Merilane into three sharp - angled pie- shaped lots will change Merilane. It will create a configuration of lots that does not exist anywhere else in Rolling Green. Squeezing three new homes at the back of each subdivided lot will cram five homes together. To everyone who drives by, it will be-viewed as the "Village on the Hill." The character. of Rolling Green will change and the property values will suffer. If two more driveways are added to this already dangerous curve on Merilane, someone will get hurt —or worse. We urge the Council to vote against subdividing 5 Merilane into three pointed, pie- shaped lots. 61 347615 Name u Address:-'�Z, f Name Address. Name Address: Name Address:—LJ—��'�� 347615 TO: Edina City Council FROM: James and Kathryn Ganley, Owners 4704 Merilane Avenue Date: September 27, 2013 RE; SUBDIVISION OF 5 MERLIANE INTO THREE LOTS COUNCIL.MEMBERS: SEAL SEP 3,0 2013 As a direct neighbor facing #5 Merilane, I am opposed to the subdivision of 5 Merilane into three lots. ISSUE BEFORE THE COUNCIL The only issue pending before the Council is whether 5 Merilane can be subdivided into three lots. At this stage the owners /developers of 5 Merilane do not request any variance. Any variance request with respect to 5 Merilane will generate a broader and different discussion. ADDITIONAL ISSUES FOR CONSIDERATION As a signor of the letter. dated September 27, 2013 from RESIDENTS OF ROLLING.GREEN I am offering this letter to focus on additional issues that I believe are relevant to the issue before the council Proximity and House Size Together Houses in Rolling Green were originally planned balancing home size, lot size and proximity - collectively to help define the character of the neighborhood. By Jamming large homes together into'odd shaped lots, the developer's plans are entirely contrary to the character of the neighborhood and ignore the detrimental impact on the character of Rolling Green, The various restrictions that arise due to the unusual shape of the owner's lot, combined with the set -back restrictions dictated by ordinance and location of the existing house, create an odd result for a three lot subdivision. To be clear, I am not objecting to a subdivision of a 3+ acre lot, but this application is not a good option as it was designed to avoid a variance request and not to respect the character of the neighborhood. Any rational plans for dividing a lot of this size and shape would not result in crowding three large homes into such a tight position while leaving no room for back yards or consideration of the odd position of the existing home. It certainly ignores the impact on the neighbors. It's also important to note that as these houses are set far back from the road and situated far up a hill, and therefore will appear even closer together than houses built closer to the road. Depending on the size, shape and use of the buildable plot, it might be very difficult to see any distance at all between the homes and as a It should be clearly noted that this request for subdivision is from a developer and NOT a resident. I suspect this is a common issue before the council. At the recent Planning Commission Advisory meeting on September 11, 2013 the developer could not even bother to attend the meeting to help inform the Planning Commission. At that meeting, current residents were asked to "trust" the developer because of their perceived strong reputation for building large homes. That is not a risk we can afford to take and given the lack of engagement from the developer would be an entirely foolish leap of faith. The developer does not reside in Rolling Green and the current owners are not committing to staying in the neighborhood, so why should they care. The owners who are selling and the developer are entirely driven by profit, which is their right, but it is not their right to profit at the expense of rest of the neighborhood and the material impact to the houses closest to #5. The current owners of #5 have their rights but so too do the remaining residents who will continue to reside in the neighborhood after the new homes are built and the current owners and developers are long gone. For the current residents, this Council is our last line of defense against the intentions of those that.only consider profit and ignore the impact on the surrounding community. As residents, we rightly-wish to protect the value of our homes as they are substantial investments, and in the Rolling Green area we pay substantial taxes based on the perceived value of these homes. But we also value living in the neighborhood and enjoying its unique character of wooded streets, and generous spacing between homes on larger lots. It's this council's job to protect us from profit motivated development at the expense of current residents. Finally, please consider the impact that a decision to allow this subdivision will have on the neighborhood in years to come. Each planning decision creates potential knock on effects. The residents of Rolling Green wish to protect the character of the neighborhood today and for years to come.. Please also see the attached Powerpoirit presentation that attempts to inform the council on the issue of character and some of the points raised in this letter through pictures of the neighborhood and the property under consideration. Finally, I strongly urge council members to walls the property before making a decision as the true impact of the developer and owner's plans can only be truly appreciated with one's own eyes. Thank you for your consideration. Respectfully, -dames P. Gan1e3!`_� 4704 Merilane Avenue • The current plans to subdivide #5 Merilane are inconsistent with the character of the Rolling Green neighborhood and should be denied in its current form. • This short presentation is to assist the Council in better evaluating the subdivision plans by the developers by reviewing — The "character" of Rolling Green — Property in question • The council should seriously consider walking this lot to get a true perspective of the — tightness of the proposed lots — the lack of any back yard space (not being considered /addressed) — Odd position of adjacent houses due to unusual position of #5 which was afforded by large wooded lot — would no longer be true — Collection of large houses jammed together would create an imposing physical presence with distance from the road making them look on top of one another • Finally it should be noted that currently we have no indications of the sizes and styles of the houses that could be built on the lots which could have an even greater impact given the likely home size and buildable lot given the large plot. • Current setback limitations squeeze all the houses together rI r4l � `f�Y M �' Iw•R" L 1 � • �~ �.� .. - ''`.. � '1' w +.icy -��•� 7A ��_ N � .. r. t rI _ ���fff •�•l, a 4 , . obf .4 Iw� :Opp° 1� : }:i►vra a Frir: ..�..► � ,ir • _ o �, � t ` ;� % ��'a� � 'fit.. :� °'�..''it r� +� ? ? ^��i'�� Vh :' ''Q " i` sA_ �+ .. r� ��� •.�; ..:.► �, �Y � js .rJij j _.Yy.. r' t � sis •M 1i i r•i'f l ti ��y�y�Jy , r lu• +... • h � "'� rA Ir M :-'`V. ,!' " _ yp v '�• • ti !�� {�, . �, - ;�. a -' ` `stp M� 7 i •- ti • . ✓5� ��yy_`p� � j�� _ � . all "t•- L^ /t $i . . r•'af� w�►. �1� � ��al• 4 � ir �� i i � _ ttt� ',� • • � V ��, _. AO E� �t t. � r 1 `. ■ 1i[����r� �uiyfl'lr tit+t."' R . t�y': d t. •� �r. . tom:, _ . K .: i ti ti ri J1 •• � ♦ +• ,ij ^ r� T'�l � - �� i4 { _ M a � 't . �` k -�•, - ��� Y�t' ��Jy' �,�'S�i?,4 . � ^:i. ` � 11C;.' �•.,e�j�•t �.- �:1� _,�,` r +• yet + ' �� �.Q.r, .• �yb;j,y a fl �': E a r:r � r1.i � �• - mrM rs} .�� _• f �„O,r,.,..►�p.. �.�' -_ :;: `ILL_ '.�. ` ...: ".r` .,,,,,,:. `�: �� t. dolp eJim LTA vwjr1r.l 9taurokam Iro] It 1.Y1c:ve Mir �i, •� 1 , ��, �.f�r� I - t f t, � *`� �: Y .. �� ' . y ''. 'IV tor Igloo •�. i . _ x .. _ .. ice' .i �}.� � ?iY`�G i�•'Y,;,' n. R. v� #' _ter M Awk Proposed building site lot 3 Notice size of house next door, proximity of large house directly behind. Refer to previous picture to with reference to spot of driveway �A 611 M M to, MAP NI Plain to 01901 *I0 •, � n — _ Ir Pip a", rsaesmvirmlr1ruu . •r � �Y.- �I+✓:. 'tor ��� . , � � �. ` �•' ,� '.•:',J. �'t� • �l ; S�' ��,r� • ^iN`�•'1�y['.�yi►,7. Y y t� i�� `� '- -rte +a brrr'' '� '• ' `�" �. ,.�' M • .. "�,�' •k ` '�•Sy ``�•�:'�nK '•,;i `�• 'r1 too ,t.. r '•4 :I �► t'►'�r* ' ... � %,'i4.jw�` : ' �.. • -` Ilk,\ Via'• t ` )j \,,,1�, �f1I .w �+..w R"r"% AV ,y , r-1 s *1AN Mr A Deb Man en From: Sandi Genau <sgenau79 @gmail.com> Sent Tuesday, October 01, 2013 1:43 PM To: Edina Mail Subject: 5 Merilane Avenue, Edina, MN Attachments: City Council Letter.docx Dear City Council Members, We are submitting this letter to you for consideration prior to the discussion about the above property at tonight's meeting. Thank you, Sandi & Mike Genau 6 Merilane Ave. Edina, MN 55436 1 t Sep ember 28; 2013 Mike and Sandi Genau 6 Merilane Avenue Edina, MN 55436 Edina City Council Members Edina City Council 4801 W. 5011, Street Edina, Minnesota 55424 Dear City Council Members, As each of you knows, the proposed subdivision of 5 Merilane is.on the agenda for tonight's meeting. We appreciate your consideration and the time that several of you have taken to come by and speak with us. We are immediate neighbors of 5 Merilane Avenue. We purchased our home at 6 Merilane last December 2012, after being especially drawn to Rolling Green's large lots, rolling lawns and mature trees. We have deep concerns about the possibility of 5 Merilane being divided into three lots resulting.in five homes being closely packed into a very small area. This is not the Rolling Green that we invested in and not what.we would expect our City Council to approve based on what is published the Edina Comprehensive Plan. We understand that the Warner's feel entitled to subdivide this property and are determined to divide into three lots at all costs. While it might be technically possible to squeeze three homes onto the smallest part of this property, it doesn't make the best use of this land and it changes the eastern side of Merilane substantially. Having five homes on top of each other is unprecedented in Rolling Green and will significantly affect the property values of those of us who live in the immediate vicinity. The unfortunate fact is that 5 Merilane is a large reverse pie shaped lot. It is not well suited to hold 3 large homes at its apex due to the irregular shaped lots and difficult building pads that would be created. The Edina Comprehensive Plan states that the council should consider suitability when deciding such matters. Planner Teaque has written in his new staff report that in his opinion, "considerations regarding anything other than the minimum size restrictions are subjective ". Is he saying that these other criteria are irrelevant? What is the point of having these other considerations if they are not valued in any way? Why are they published in the Edina Comprehensive Plan if they really have no impact? What protects the integrity of each neighborhood if these criteria are removed from consideration? They should be as equally important as the lot size and minimum setbacks as they define the very essence of our neighborhood. Late Friday afternoon we were made aware of an alternative proposal that the Warners expect to discuss at this meeting. We are referring to the change of the front setback lines to 130' and the addition of conservation easements along the sides of lots 1 and 3 and at the rear of all three lots. It is important to note that this new plan moves the building pad on Lot 1 even more directly into our view. Unfortunately, we have not had any time to consult with experts to see how we can work with this plan. If this becomes a serious discussion at the meeting, then we would minimally ask the council to consider the use or an arborist, possibly setting up an escrow account to replace mature trees if they die in a year or two, tagging significant trees to be saved and extending the proposed conservation easements to the street. We would expect the Warners to be required to go through the usual steps to procure a variance for the new front setbacks and not be allowed to slide this through in a hurry. This short notice does not afford the rest of the neighbors any opportunity to give consideration to these changes to the original proposal. We would also like you to consider house height.' The new home going up across the street from us is significantly tall. We are very concerned by what could become a giant monstrosity in our view. There will be no escaping it regardless of how many new trees are planted. Planning Commissioner Floyd Grabiel, even commented in the last planning meeting that he was surprised by the height of this new house and cautioned everyone that this should be a consideration and could be a problem going forward. While there may be a handful of instances of homes somewhat closer together in Rolling Green, the east side of Merilane (and the neighborhood in general) is characterized by large lots with much space between homes. Dividing the Warner property into two larger lots would leave much more room between the homes and keep the same feeling along this side of Merilane. The homes would no longer have to be on top of each other and also would not obstruct our views. Damage to mature trees along the property lines and in the above mentioned conservation easements could be minimized. We believe this really captures the feeling of the neighborhood and in particular the east side of Merilane. We ask each of you to consider this option instead. We do believe there would be much community support for this scenario. Finally, we are aware of many concerns regarding traffic on this narrow end of Merilane. It has been made even more dangerous due to the constant stream of construction vehicles in the area. For this reason, we ask that the city not make a decision on this without input from a traffic engineer. As our City Council we know that you are considering the impact to the residents involved. Those of us who do reside in Rolling Green are simply interested in protecting our investment in our homes, quality of life and the quiet enjoyment of our properties. Thank you for your time and consideration, Mike and Sandi Genau 0 To: Edina City Council Members %' &Cl$4 [via e-mail to Jackie Hoogenakker] !, September 301h, 2013 Dear Council Members: I am writing to submit feedback on the proposed subdivision of 5 Merilane under review during the October 1, 2013 public hearing. Our family lives a short distance away from the site. While it may appear that the subdivision complies with current city ordinances, I believe it is important for the City Council to take into account the very first element of land use in the Edina comprehensive plan: "Protect and preserve the essential character of existing residential neighborhoods." In reality, this subdivision proposal is a request to build three 6,000+ sq.ft. (or likely much larger) homes on roughly an acre of property - right at the "center of the pizza," if you will, that is defined by the setback on the current lot — so about 1/3 acre per home (see figure to the right, from the actual subdivision proposal). While the total lot sizes may meet the mean requirements, the actual housing density in the proposal is much higher than anywhere else in the neighborhood. I believe this implied density needs to be considered as part of the subdivision application. I would encourage any Planning Commission or City Council members that have not done so to visit the lot to really understand what the illustration to the right will look like in practice versus the surrounding area. LOT 3 rFUr IN It seems that a reasonable outcome for all parties would be a subdivision into two lots, allowing the owner to reap the substantial value increase of the land and reflecting the changing lot size dynamics within the neighborhood - while staying aligned with the comprehensive plan for Edina. Regards, Scott Gill 4725 Annaway Drive ADVISORY COMMUNICATION To: MAYOR & COUNCIL From: Lisa Schaefer Human Resources Director Date: October 1, 2013 Subject: Immigration Reform Attachments: HRRC Resolution ow Le Yr ti,' 0 t�3d Action Requested: Move to add HRRC Immigration Reform Resolution to a future Council Agenda for consideration. Situation: On August 27, 2013 the Edina Human Rights and Relations Commission passed a motion recommending that the City Council adopt the attached immigration reform resolution and that it be circulated as widely as possible, including to the Minnesota Congressional Delegation. Background: Immigration Reform is not currently part of the. Commission or Council's Work Plan but the HRRC would like to present a recommendation at a future council meeting. The Edina Human Rights and Relations Commission is charged by the City Council to advocate for basic human rights and needs.in the Edina community. Citing the impacts of immigration issues on the people of Edina, the Human Rights and Relations Commission researched. and discussed the benefits of the U.S. House of Representatives adopting a comprehensive immigration reform. The U.S. Senate already adopted the Immigration Reform Bill (5744) which has bi- partisan support, and is estimated to create 12,850 new jobs in MN Congressional District 3 and 13,098 new jobs in Congressional District 5. In addition, Edina has an estimated foreign - born population of over 9 %. Assessment: Adoption of the Immigration Reform Bill (S744) would give all citizens and qualified immigrants equal access to employment, housing, public accommodations and services, education, and mechanisms to support their homes and families in the City of Edina. Recommendation: Staff has no legal or procedural concerns. Page 2 WHEREAS: It is the public policy of the City of Edina to secure for all of the residents of the City freedom from discrimination because of race, color, creed, religion, age, sex, sexual orientation, gender expression, marital status, disability, status with regard to public assistance, familial status or national on in in connection with employment, housing and real property, public accommodations, public services, credit and education, and to support the home, family and human relations in the City; and WHEREAS: Edina has a foreign born population from throughout the world that increased nearly 50% in the last decade, from 2874 in the year 2000 to of 4307 in 2010, bringing the estimated 2012 foreign born population to, over 9% of the total population; and WHEREAS: Edina now ranks 66th among the 613 Minnesota cities in the percentage of the population that is foreign born; and WHEREAS: The current - United States immigration- policy has resulted in large immigration backlogs, divided families, bureaucratic hurdles and difficulties for employers seeking to hire employees from foreign countries, and an estimated 11 million undocumented. people from foreign countries who must live in the shadows of society where they are vulnerable,to exploitation; and WHEREAS: Immigration laws have important impacts on many em.ployers and residents in Edina, and WHEREAS: The United States Senate has recently passed, by -a vote of 68 -32, a bi- partisan comprehensive immigration reform bill that provides for securing the borders, upgrading,the e- verify system for citizenship verification, eliminating the immigration backlog by 2021, providing a path to citizenship, increased penalties for human smuggling and child trafficking, and creating 'a large pool of talented employees to support our economy, and WHEREAS: The non - partisan Congressional Budget Office has estimated that the proposed Senate immigration reform bill would not only greatly improve our economy, but would reduce the federal deficit by approximately $875 billion `in the next twenty years; and WHEREAS: A recent American Action Network study estimates that passage of S 744 would create approximately 41,982 new jobs in Minnesota, including 12,850 in Congressional District 3 and, 13,098 in Congressional District 5, and WHEREAS: The Senate immigration bill is a compromise that is supported by both the AFL -CIO and U.S. Chamber of Commerce, and a broad coalition that includes almost all religious groups in America, and WHEREAS: The United States House of Representatives must still pass comprehensive immigration reform before it can become law, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED: That the Edina City Council hereby urges the Congress to pass comprehensive immigration reforms similar to those proposed in S 744, the 'Border Security, Economic Opportunity, and Immigration Modernization Act". To: MAYOR & COUNCIL From: Debra Mangen City Clerk Date: October 1, 2013 Subject: Receive Petition: I. Dale Rasmussen Opposing Sidewalk Improvement Action Requested: Motion receiving- 1. Petition of Dale Rasmussen opposing sidewalk Improvement. .w91N�11,�, O �+ • ,NroAf'ORj`TF9 • 1888 Agenda Item #: IX. C. Action X Discussion ❑ Information ❑ Information / Background: On September 16, 2013, Dale Rasmussen presented a petition to the City opposing a sidewalk at his property located at 5112 Valley View Road. The Birchcrest B Neighborhood Roadway Improvements will be considered by the City Council during the Improvement Project Public Hearing December 2013. Attachment: Petition City of Edina 4801 W. 50th St. • Edina, MN 55424 9 The City Council City of Edina eti"ti-on Petition Instructions This petition form is to be used to ask the Edina City Council to consider the following types of improvements: SIDEWALK ALLEY PAVING WATER MAIN STORM SEWER PERMANENT STREET SURFACING WITH CURB AND GUTTER CURB AND,GUTTER ONLY (WITHOUT PERMANENT STREET SURFACING) SANITARY' SEWER STREET LIGHTING or another improvement you describe (called OTHER on this for-m).,, You may use another petition form if you wish but t66 6ty council, may -reject such petitions unless they contain the following information: 1. Type of improvement(s) requested, e.g., SIDEWALK, STORM SEWER, WATER MAIN, ETC. 2. Precise locations(s) of the requested improvements. 3. A statement that all who sign the petition understand that the city council may assess the costs of these improvements against the ;pr.00erties benefiting from the improvements in amounts determined by the Council. 4. Printed name of property owner, owner's signature and phone number, and property address. 5. Signature of person circulating the petition. If you have questions, please call the City Clerk at 952 -927 -8861 between 8:00 a.m. and 4:30 p.m. DEBRA MANGEN CITY CLERK APRIL 2008 .r rr� City of Edina, Minnesota 04 e , CITY COUNCIL /0 4801 West 50 "' Street • Edina, Minnesota 55424 °• <,„� „? (952) 927 -8861 • (952) 927 -7645 FAX a (612) 927 -5461 TDD DATE RECEIVED: C-4/ to/ 13 �-- PETITION TO THE CITY COUNCIL SIDEWALK ❑ ALLEY PAVING ❑ WATER MAIN ❑ STORM SEWER ❑ SANITARY SEWER ❑ STREET LIGHTING ❑ CURB AND GUTTER ONLY ❑ PERMANENT STREET SURFACING WITH CURB AND GUTTER To the Mayor and City Council: ❑ OTHER: The persons who have signed this petition ask the City Council to consider the improvements listed above to the locations listed below. (J between and LOCATION OF IMPROVEMENT BY STREET NAME ADDRESS ADDRESS LOCATION OF IMPROVEMENT BY STREET NAME between and ADDRESS ADDRESS LOCATION OF IMPROVEMENT BY STREET NAME ADDRESS LOCATION OF IMPROVEMENT BY STREET NAME ADDRESS ADDRESS ADDRESS IMPORTANT NOTE: THE PERSONS- WHO HAVE SIGNED THIS PETITION UNDERSTAND THAT THE CITY COUNCIL MAY ASSESS THE COSTS OF THESE IMPROVEMENTS AGAINST THE PROPERTIES BENEFITING FROM THE IMPROVEMENTS IN AMOUNTS DETERMINED BY THE COUNCIL AS AUTHORIZED BY CHAPTER 429, MINNESOTA STATUTES. OPERTY OWNER'S OWNER'S NAME PROPERTY ADDRESS /JSIG AT E II (PRINTED) (PRINTED) QCk �312�2Skv., LLS$etJ 5 ✓fl2 ��I12 /�GU �ie This e I on was c' lated by: 5 VQ II / �.5” �� NAME ADDRES PHONE There is space for more signatures on the back. APRIL 2008 PROPERTY OWNER'S OWNER'S NAME PROPERTY ADDRESS SIGNATURE (PRINTED) (PRINTED) This petition was circulated by: NAME ADDRESS PHONE The Minnesota Data Practices Act requires that we inform you of your rights about the private data we are requesting on this form. Under the law, your telephone number is private data. This petition when submitted will become public information. There is no consequence for refiusing to supply this information. You may attach extra pages with signatures. APRIL 2008 September 16, 2013 SEAL SEP 16 2013 Mayor James Hovland and City Council Members: Attached is a petition in opposition to the Birchcrest B Improvement N, o. BA 410 initiative. The signatures affixed to the petition do not want the proposed Valley View Sidewalk and feel that the endeavor does not comply with the Living Streets Policy. The proposed sidewalk goes "no where" and does not contribute to balancing the needs of motorists, home owners or bicyclists, or promote safety and convenience as outlined in the Living Streets Policy. In fact the proposed Valley View Road to Code Avenue will actively divert pedestrian's and bicyclists away from the main hub of the local merchants, wreak havoc on the environment and won't link community members to any city parks or environmentally friendly points of interest. Nor does it support the bike to school or walk to school argument as we are not in the concord, or South View Middle Schools District In addition, the proposed Valley View Road Sidewalk presents a financial hardship for homeowners existing landscaping, irrigation systems. Also, tree loss negatively impacts neighborhoods and homeowners environmentally. The removal of trees incurs larger heating and cooling bills. Smaller parcels also diminish property values by placing homes closer to sidewalks and streets. We the undersigned respectively request that you accept the signed petition and reconsider the proposed Valley View Sidewalk as it negatively impacts our environment, does not comply with the Living Streets Policy. Valley View Residents. PO 7 z o IL rA / u ZV w. � S S e. V` 2 ' I Z\ • za 13� �. J9 45 Or ^�1 y yezLez L �M MCALY)� U��� n- --v % ,Oti Z 0 P. 0 T C20tro o I z- Un I V e;-L, 12V du i 9-T-13 S1 2- EL,,,/ IV-.-2 sy 771 (13 i;� IREP©RT / lili5lii OO MM : NDATION To: MAYOR AND COUNCIL From: Debra Mangen City Clerk Date: October 1, 2013 Subject: CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED AFTER PACKETS 1r 1 Y 0 `��RPORp`�6/ 1a66 Agenda Item #: IX. A. Action Requested: Attached is correspondence received after the packets were delivered to you. No action is necessary. City of Edina • 4801 W. 50' St. • Edina, MN 55424 Action ❑ Discussion ❑ Information ❑X tilloa Whoie hunch� �� dire Gvevo �h D Voa& � 4- ! S p ecial �s 36LI -fvy ate -tvlAr . Hmq Date: Sept 26, 2013 To: Mayor James Hovland From: John Lundquist Subject: Fred Richards Golf Course I am writing this to encourage you to keep Fred Richards as a golf course. -it is a great course for the medium skilled golfers. There are 8 leagues that play at Fred Richards and if the course closes a number of them will end. While they might be able to transfer their league to another location it is very doubtful they could maintain their current tee times and L would result in losing members. Included in. this is the youth golfers. It represents quality of life to a great number of men and women. Further, the Edina Senior League pays in advance rather than each time we play. The City has use of the money whether an individual plays every week or not. A while ago Sue Weigle brought me over to a Park Board meeting to offer suggestions to grow use of Fred Richards. I offered a number of suggestions that would help this. I noticed a number of heads nodding in agreement as I was talking. Unfortunately nothing was implemented. None of the suggestions were big cost items. I don't feel offering Braemar is a realistic answer. A lot of Fred Richards golfers would not be comfortable playing there. Finally, this is part of the quality of life that Edina is known for. It is exercise, fellowship, and being active. Keep it as a golf course and let's take steps to improve it visibility and use. Thank you John W. Lundquist 7220 York Ave South #309 Edina, IVIN 55435 jwisrfhk @comcast.net Deb Manoen From: SheriMotz @aol-com Sent Saturday, September 28, 2013 11:35 AM To: Edina Mail Subject Eminent Domain re: Hooten Cleaners Dear Mayor Hovland, Thank you!. I am pleased with your vote NOT to impose Eminent Domain on the property of the Parks. This action voted by the city council by a 312 margin just feels wrong. In addition to the following questions and the vote's unfairness to the Parks, I do not think Edina needs another liquor store. Here are some questions left to be answered: • Why move forward now on the Parks' property; just after a purchase of the Edina Realty building next door -where -a parking ramp will be built? Was there ever a written offer made,to.the Parks by the City staff? • Doesn't this aggressive - action expose the City and taxpayers to expensive legal fees and a process more costly than other parking options for 50th & France? Why should businesses in Edina not be afraid that their business could betaken by the city in the future? Sincerely, Sheri Peterson 6121 Arctic Way Edina, MN- ,55436 1 Deb Manqen From: Skip Thomas <skipthomasremax @gmail.com> Sent: Saturday, September 28, 2013 11:55 AM To: Edina Mail Subject You did the right thng for Hooten (Parks) at 50th Sprague, Swenson & Bennett need to voted out Skip Thomas -------- ReMax Hall of Fame -- -Edina Business Person of the Year -- -Edina W.I.S.E. Person of the Year - - - -- -Edina Chamber Volunteer of the Year-- - - - - -- -Edina Athletic Hall of Fame - - - - -- University of Minnesota M Man (Hockey) ----------- ReMax Results-- - - - - -- -Edina Minnesota 55436 -------- 612 - 701 - 5023 ------ www.SkipThomas.com ---------------------------------- - - - - -- 1 Deb Man en From: Claudette <4502 @comcast.net> Sent Saturday, September 28, 2013 1:51 PM To: Edina Mail Subject: Fw: Eminent Domain Same message, with correct name spelling. Sorry. Please disregard the previous email sent. - - - -- Original Message - - - -- From: Claudette To: mail ccbedinamn.QOv Sent: Saturday, September 28, 2013 12:45 PM Subject: Eminent Domain Dear Mayor Hovland, Thank you so much for voting against the right of Eminent Domain in the case of the Hooton's owners. I find it hard to believe that this takeover by our Edina City Council of this privately owned land could happen in my hometown of Edina. We are to treat others as we would like to be treated. This is no longer the case in our own community. Regards, Claudette De brey 4502 Browndale Avenue Edina, MN 55424 1 Deb Mangen ?rom: Johnson, Seth H <sjohnson @cbburnet.com> gent: Sunday, September 29, 2013 2:11 PM To: Edina Mail; Mary Brindle (Comcast);jonibennet @comcast. net ;joshsprague @edinarealty.com; swensonannl @gmaiCcom Subject: Eminent Domain Edina Council Members, This is an egregious use of power by a governing body. Eminent domain should ONLY be used under extreme limited circumstances. Convenience to the shoppers for certain establishments does not qualify. I am ashamed of the Edina Council members voting yes to this abuse of power. Government at all levels is becoming tyrannical. Seth H. Johnson Edina, MN The information in this electronic mail message is the sender's confidential business and may be legally privileged. It is intended solely for the addressee(s). Access to this internet electronic mail message by anyone else is unauthorized. If you are not the intended recipient, any disclosure, copying, distribution or any action taken or omitted to be taken in reliance on it is prohibited and may be unlawful. The sender believes that this E -mail and any attachments were free of any virus, worm, Trojan horse, and /or malicious code when sent. This message and its attachments could have been infected during transmission. By reading the message and opening any attachments, the recipient accepts full responsibility for taking protective and remedial action about viruses and other defects. The sender's company is not liable for any loss or damage arising in any way from this message or its attachments. Nothing in this email shall be deemed to create a binding contract to purchase /sell real estate. The sender of this email does not have the authority to bind a buyer or seller to a contract via written or verbal communications including, but not limited to, email communications. 1 Deb Mangen From: Steven J. Timmer <stimmer @planetlawyers.com> Sent: Sunday, September 29, 2013 8:24 PM To: Edina Mail Cc: jeancolweII13 @gmail.com; Dennis La France; mark epple; John Crabtree Subject: 54th Street redesign Attachments: bridge- 130928jpg; eastside- 130928jpg; westside- 130928jpg Mayor Hovland, members of the Council and city administration, On behalf of my neighbors, I want to thank the Mayor and each member of the Council for walking along 54th Street with us to listen to our concerns about the consequences to our neighborhood of some of the ideas advanced for the redesign of the street. As the people who actually live along 54th Street, we've frankly been alarmed at the unresponsiveness of the Public Works Department and its consultants to our concerns. There is a meeting scheduled, of course, for the evening of September 3oth to discuss "design concepts" based on "input from neighbors." As the neighbors, we've come up with a plan that we think accomplishes the goals of the city without some of the attendant disruption and urbanization proposed by the Public Works Department in its earlier "design concepts." We call it "The Neighborhood Plan." Attached are three preliminary renderings of the plan, which is described as follows: Several of the neighbors along 54th Street have had a chance to examine the requirements for our street, and the city's comprehensive plan as well, and we have conceived a plan that that we believe meets these requirements — actually exceeds them for a secondary route — and provides safety for pedestrians, bicyclists, and motorists. The scale of it is smaller than the plans produced by the Public Works Department and persons consulting with it. It provides less disruption to the homeowners on the street, does not destroy some mature trees and some very old oak trees, and results in less thermal and Sediment load to the Minnehaha Creek watershed. Here are its principal elements: 1) On the part of the street west of the creek, limit hard surface development, including all the elements, curbs, sidewalks, drive lanes, and bike accommodations to a maximum of 34 feet. 2) This width consists of 2 ten -foot drive lanes, 2 four -foot bike lanes, shared or dedicated, 1 five -foot sidewalk, and 2 six -inch curbs, with no boulevard between the curb and the sidewalk, just as is the case on Wooddale and other streets in the immediate vicinity, or on 44th, west of Browndale, for that matter. 3) The hard surface area, curb back to far edge of the sidewalk, is centered in the road right of way. 4) No on- street parking on this portion of 54th Street. 5) The bike lane consists of a gutter strip for the entire width of the bike lane. The contrasting material will identify it as a bike lane without the need for an excessively wide stripe like the one that currently exists on the street. Moreover it is safer for bicyclists than having a seam running down the bike lane; if the caulking protrudes from the seam, it can cause bikes to lose control, and if the caulk does not cover the seam, the seam can catch a narrow -tired bike, and cause an over - the -top of the handlebars accident, one of the most dangerous types for head injuries and broken bones. This is why many veteran riders prefer to avoid bike lanes in the first place. (An accident like this happened to the author of this note on 50th Street /Grandview near Eden Avenue several years ago, causing a bike helmet cracked in two and a broken collarbone. ST) 6) On the part of the street east of the creek, narrow the street as much as possible to include parking and bike accommodation, 10 -foot drive lanes and a sidewalk. Bump outs to the street to be included to protect parking and visually narrow the street. 7) The existing stop sign remains at its location, and crosswalks are marked /painted on the street at crossings. There are, however, no flashing lights or overhead signage. 8) The bridge and approaches are designed with the quaint character of the neighborhood in mind, with curving approaches to the bridge and the bridge moved somewhat to the south, which will show off the "rapids" to better effect. 9) The current excessive and over -large signage is reduced, both in amount and in size, again, more in keeping with the character of the neighborhood. 10) The speed limit on the street is reduced to 25 mph and enforced. Some of us took a look at west 44th Street west of Browndale; it is actually a little narrower than that proposed above, but we think it is a pretty good template for the street west of the creek. We urge everyone to look seriously at this proposal. Thank you on behalf of my neighbors and me, Steve Timmer Steve Timmer stimmer @planetlawyers.com �r �� •"� ° rte` '` UrTV- r Ar *, 11 � - r � ��— ,� �''�:,�'�!'-•a. ' � ti P 'tic. ✓ .� .. -, . 1 ' " . � a ' �!?� � f � }!y� �'i;'�•' � rte; ' i_( 4 :y ' p�,� JI -, �- r �.� ^ -}.. ,. j- .�..`-tir lltrr111ai ✓!!i, +�+1`"�C' r� :—•' �'.a�� . .. R - wi t .fir, 1 _ t� � i • Deb Manaen From: Kathy Frey <kathy.r.frey @gmail.com> Sent: Sunday, September 29, 2013 10:00 PM To: James Hovland Subject: Re: Hooten Dry Cleaners Dear City Council. and mayor, This family had tenants ready to lease their property to. This would have generated revenue for them for their retirement. It isn't a matter of disagreeing with eminent domain, you guys have no right to take their property! You are bullies and there is not other word for it. I noted that you chose not to respond to the' fact that their son is serving our country and this is how you say thank - you? What kind of a city council are you? You are acting like a bunch of thugs. This is despicable. Kathy Frey On Thu, Sep 26, 2013 at 9:02 AM, James Hovland <JHovland&edinamn.gov> wrote: Kathy; The city did offer over fair market value for the Hooten property. The tax value is under $800,000. Our offer was way over that. We bought the Edina Realty Building in june and the Hooten building in land is much smaller so we have a current comparison for pricing. As a city we waited until they had shut down their business before we proceeded. We have spent a year talking to the Parks. This is not something we did on the spur of the moment. I understand that you may not agree with the process of eminent domain. Sincerely, Ann Swenson, council From: Kathy Frey [mailto:kathy.r.frey@gmail.com] 1 Sent: Wednesday, September 25, 2013 3:58 PM To: Edina Mail; James Hovland Subject: Hooten Dry Cleaners Dear Mayor and city council, I attended a Senate district meeting last night where I learned about your attempted take over of the Park's property on 49 1/2 Street. I think this behavior is reprehensible. I understand that the vote to do this was not unanimous.' This is underhanded, mean- spiritied, and unethical. It is NOT what I expect from a city council fi om Edina. If we need this property as a city, then offer the farnily fair market value for it. Do you really want the negative exposure of stealing what is not yours? I heard that there was a ridiculous offer followed by a better one. If you. cannot match what they could do with their property by leasing it, then don't force it away fi•om them via eminent domain. That is being a bully and would be bullyish behavior. See definition of a bully below. Yoru behavior fits right in. I understand that the Parks have a son who is currently serving in the United States Air Force as a Lieutenant Colonel. Is this how you show your appreciation of his fine service to our country by attempting to deprive his parents of their hard earned retirement income? 2 You should be ashamed of yourselves as a council. Justice Brandeis once said that the greatest disinfectant is sunshine. There are a ton of people who are disgusted with this who are more than willing to shine a light on it for the world to see. Do you really want that for our city? Undo this mess you created and remember, "Thou shalt not steal ". Katherine Frey 6021. Killarney Lane, Edina, MN 55436 cell: 952-412-3515 Definition of a bully: bul . ly ' (bI n. pLbul-lies E 1. A person who is habitually cruel or overbearing, especially to smaller or weaker people. 2. A hired ruffian; a thug. 3. A pimp. v.bul• lied, bul•ly•ing, bul.- ies y. tr. L. To treat in an. overbearing or intimidating manner. See Synonyms at intimidate. 2. To make (one's way) aggressively. v. intr. 4 Deb Man en cram: Steven J. Timmer <stimmer @planetlawyers.com> ent Monday, September 30, 2013 8:11 AM To: Edina Mail Cc: jeancolweII13 @gmail.com; Dennis La France; mark epple; John Crabtree Subject 54th Street redesign II The plan described in this email, and some photos of the street, and our gatherings with Mayor Hovland and the members of the Council, as well, can be found on the tumblr website: http• / /occupy54thstreet.turiblr.com /. Mayor Hovland, members of the Council and city administration, on behalf of my neighbors, I: want to thank the Mayor and each member of the Council for walking along 54th Street with us to listen to our concerns about the consequences to our neighborhood of some of the ideas advanced for the redesign of the street. As the people who actually live along 54tH Street, we've frankly been alarmed at the unresponsiveness of the Public Works Department and its consultants to our concerns. There is a meeting scheduled, of course, for the evening of September 3oth to discuss "design concepts" based on "input from neighbors." As the neighbors, we've come up with a plan that we think accomplishes the goals of the city without some of the attendant disruption and urbanization proposed by the Public Works Department in its earlier "design concepts." We call it "The Neighborhood Plan. Attached are three preliminary renderings of the plan, which is described as follows: Several of the neighbors along 54th Street have had a chance to examine the requirements for our street, and the city's comprehensive plan as well, and we have conceived a plan that that we believe meets these requirements — actually exceeds them for a secondary route — and provides safety for pedestrians, bicyclists, and motorists. The scale of it is smaller than the plans produced by the Public Works Department and persons consulting with it. It provides less. Aisruption.to, the homeowners on the street, does not destroy some mature trees and some very old oak trees, and results in less thermal and sediment load to the Minnehaha Creek watershed. Here are its principal elements: 1) on the part of the street west of the creek, limit hard surface development, including all the elements, curbs, sidewalks, drive lanes, and bike accommodations to a maximum of 34 feet. 2) This width consists of 2 ten -foot drive lanes, 2 four -foot bike lanes, shared or dedicated, 1 five -foot sidewalk, and 2 six -inch curbs, with no boulevard between the curb and the sidewalk, just as is the case on Wooddale and other streets in the immediate vicinity, or on 44th, west of Browndale, for that matter. 3) The hard surface area, curb back to far edge of the sidewalk, is centered in the road right of, way. 4) No on- street parking on this portion of 54th Street. 5) The bike lane consists of a gutter strip for the entire width of the bike lane. The contrasting material will identify it as a bike lane without the need for an excessively wide stripe like the one that currently exists on the street. Moreover it is safer for bicyclists than having a seam running down the bike lane; if the caulking protrudes from the seam, it can cause bikes to lose control, and if the caulk does not cover the seam, the seam can catch a narrow -tired bike, and cause an over - the -top of the handlebars accident, one of the most dangerous types for head injuries and broken bones. This is why many veteran riders prefer to avoid bike lanes in the first place. (An accident like this happened to the author of this note on 50th Street /Grandview near Eden Avenue several years ago, causing a bike helmet cracked in two and a broken collarbone. ST) 6) On the part of the street east of the creek, narrow the street as much as possible to include parking and bike accommodation, 10 -foot drive lanes and a sidewalk. Bump outs to the street to be included to protect parking and visually narrow the street. 7) The existing stop sign remains at its location, and crosswalks are marked /painted on the street at crossings. There are, however, no flashing lights or overhead signage. 8) The bridge and approaches are designed with the quaint character of the neighborhood in mind, with curving approaches to the bridge and the bridge moved somewhat to the south, which will show off the "rapids" to better effect. 9) The current excessive and over -large signage is reduced, both in amount and in size, again, more in keeping with the character of the neighborhood. 10) The speed limit on the street is reduced to 25 mph and enforced. Some of us took a look at west 44th Street west of Browndale; it is actually a little narrower than that proposed above, but we think it is a pretty good template for the street west of the creek. We urge everyone to look seriously at this proposal. Thank you on behalf of my neighbors and me, Steve Timmer Steve Timmer stimmer@planetlawVers.com Deb Man en From: Sunnyslope Neighborhood <sunnyslopedirectory@gmail.com> Sent: Monday, September 30, 2013 9:05 AM To: Scott Neal; Karen M. Kurt Cc: James Hovland;jhovland @krausehovland.com Subject: Thank you for Saturday Neighborhood Association Training Session Dear Scott, Thank you for your prompt reply. I decided to bring our neighborhood's questions to Saturday's Neighborhood Association Training Session. You should be pleased to know that Karen and Jennifer did an excellent job of presenting the program in a thorough yet concise manner. By the end of the 3 hours all of my questions were answered and I left the meeting feeling equipped to summarize and endorse the program to my neighborhood. Karen, thank you for your patience with all my questions on Saturday. I thought you might be interested in reading the summary I sent out to my neighbors yesterday (attached). I look forward to working with you on this very worthwhile program. Best wishes, Kathy Sandy 4800 E. Sunnyslope Road c (952) 237 -6938 h (952) 942 -6122 sunnyslopedirectoagIsmail. com kathymsandyna yahoo.com Hi Kathy - My assistant city manager, Ms. Karen Kurt, is the City's point person on neighborhood association development. She is best equipped to respond to your questions on the subject. I will ask her to contact you directly. Scott Sent from my iPhone On Sep 29, 2013, at 2:36 PM, "Griff Wigley" < riff �wigleyandassociates. com< mailto :griffa,wigleyandassociates .com» wrote: - - - -- Original Message---- - From: Sunnyslope Neighborhood < sunnyslopedirectorya,gmai1.com< mailto: sunnysloRedirectory@gmail.com > To: scott.neal <scott neal gedinacitizenengagement.org< mailto: scott. neal pedinacitizenengagement.org» Cc: Amy Kelly <alkelly84ggmail. com <mailto:alkelly84@,g�mail.com >>; Andy Faris <andy fans@hardware.com< mailto :andy.faris(Qhardware.com >> Anne Whitsitt <Anne Whitsitt ,yahoo: com <mailto:Anne Whitsitt&yahoo.com >>; Axel and Loreli Steuer <asteuergic .edu <mailto:asteuer(a,ic.edu >>; Barb Hegenes <barbhegenesgeomcast.net< mailto :barbhegenes@comcast.net »; Becky O'Grady < becky. ogrady @fzenmills.com <mailto :becky.o argr dyngenmills.com >>; Bill Bailey <bails(a,prodig}�. net <mailfo:bailskprodig� net »; Bill Messer <bill.messer@yAhoo.com< mailto:bill.messergyahoo.com >>; Bill Whitsitt <Bill_Whitsittkyahoo. com <mailto:Bill Whitsitt@yahoo.com »; Brant Pallazza <bpallazza@a hotmail. com< mailto:bpallazza,@hotinail.com >>; Brock and Lisa Maiser <lisakandersorighotmail.com< mailto ;lisakanders6n(a,hotmail.com >>; Bryan and Jessica Wilkinson <bwilkinson@csc. com <inailto:bwilkinsori(c csc.com >> Chandra Fels <chandra.felsgoutlook.com< mailto :charidra.fels@outlook.com >>; Chris and Sheilah Pesek < Sheilah Pesek ,yahoo.com< mailto Sheilah Pesek cgyahoo.com »; Dan and Roxane Lehmann <rlehriiann(a�umn. edu <mailto:rlelunanii@umn.edu >>;'Dan Dokman < Dan(2ctiresources.com <mailto:Dan( ctiresources.com >>; Dan Dokman a <dan ctlresources. com <mailto:dan@a ctlresources.com >>; ,Dana Dokman <danadokmanna,aol. com <mailto:danddokmangaol.com >>; Dave and Shelley Shirley <shelleygshirleyhouse.com< mailto :shelley(c shirleyhouse.com >>; David and Marie Goblirsch <gobli006 6omcast. net <mailto:gowi006gcomcast.net >>; Delia Dall'Arancio <delia001�comcast .net <mailto:delia00f comcast.net> >; Demos Iskos and Amy Durtschi <amydurtschi001gcomcast.net< mailto :amydurtschi001@comcast.net> >; Douglas and Helene Haugland <hau llandhp(a aol.com <mailto:hau lg andhbra aol.com »; Erin Buss <erin.buss@email. com <mailto:erin.bus'§g mail.com >>; Gaylen and Maggie Knack <maggie.knackp,comcast.net< mailto,mai gie knack cr comcast.net >>; Gig Ginkel <gigg_inkel@gmail.com <mailto:gi g�`inkel ohn ! :com >; Greg McGrane <gre m�projectconsultinggroup.com< mailto :gregm(a,projectconsultinggroup .com »; Hans and Siri Quitmeyer <siryguit@aol. com< mailto siriiduit@aol.com >>; Heidi Faris <hfarisa comcast. net <mailto:hfarisgcomcast.net >>; Janet Dietrich <jgrangaard�a�,msn. com< mailto:jgrangaard(cr�,msn.com >>; Jayne M. Clairmont < jclairmoilt(a)enalishrosesuites. com <mailto:jclairmontgeni lishrosesuites .com >>; Jeannine Currie <ieanninecurrie(a� nail.com< mailto :jeannulecurrie@gmail.com »; Jessica Wilkinson < jessica wilkinson(c�hotmail.com< mailto: iessica.wilkinsonghotmail.com >>; Jim and Lori Vogl <vogllaw@aol. com <mailto:vogllawgaol.com >>; Jim Fricton <frict00l gams n. edu <mailto:frict001giumi.edu >>; Jim Schell <jimschell(a�sheltercorp.com< mailto :jimschellgsheltercorp.coin »; Jodi Zgutowicz < z gtowicz ,email. com <mailto:j zgutowiczQgmail.com >>; Joe and Barry Eilers <bgMeilersgmac. com <mailto:barryeilers@illac.com >>; Joe Jasper <kelly 'as per(a visi. com <mailto:kellyjaspernvisi.com »;John Currie <curriewrks(a,aol. com <mailto:cui -riewrks@aol.com >>; John.Duffey <jpduffey@ms n. com <mailto:jpduffey@msn.com >>; Julie Vessel <julievesselga yahoo. com <mailto:julievesselgyahoo.com >>; Karine Watne <karine.watne@ oro.com< mailto :karine.watne(a,toro.com >>; Kathy Bailey <kbailey924@a comcast .net <mailto:kbailey924 .comca.st.net >>; Kathy Sandy <kathymsandyg yahoo. com <mailto:kathymsandygyahoo.com >>; Katie Boyl an and Steve Peckham <Katie m boylan gmail.com <mailto:Katiem.boylang mail.com >>; Katy LeBarron <katy.lebarron@comcast.net< mailto :katy.lebarron@comcast.net>>; Kevin Carlson <kevin_carlson@uhc. com <mailto:kevin`carlson@uhc.com >>; Krisanne Hogan <kahogan(a,comcast. net <mailto:kahogan@comcast.net>>; Kristen Conner <Kristenkrush@hotmail.com< mailto :Kristenkrush@hotmail.com >>; Kurt and Robin Hansen <sprmm4gaol .com <mailto:sprmm4@aol.com >>; Laura Carlson <lakecarlson@msn. com <mailto:lakecarlson@a,msn.com >>; Lew Sandy < Lewis G Sandy@uhg com <mailto:Lewis G SandyAjtg com >>; Lisa Sporcich <lisa.sporcich@a,oracle.com< mailto :lisa.sporcich(a,oracle.com >>; Lynn Schell <] carlsonsche ll(2sheltercorp.com< mailto: lcarlsonschell@sheltercoM.com >>; Mark and Jackie Hegman <hegmanmark@aol. com <mailto:heg_manmark(a,aol.com >>; Mark and Vicki Brunsvold <v_ibrunsvold@aol. com <mailto:vibrunsvold@aol.com >>; Mark Sparano <ms�arano gmail. com <mailto:msparano(agmail. com >>; Mark Zgutowicz < mzgutowicz (a,yahoo:com <mailto:mz towicz ,yahoo.com »;.Melody Baron and Mark Peterson <nielodybaron yahoo.com< mailto imelodybaron(a,yahoo.com >>; Mick and Donna McCormick <doiuiakmccggmail. com <mailto:donnakmcc@ mail.com »;.Nancy Sparano <nancy.sparano@gmail.com< mailto :nanc�.sparano@gmail.com >>; Paul Vessel <paul vessel @yahoo. com <mailto:paul_vessel@yahoo.com >>; Randy and Jenn Lewis <rlewismn c2comcast: net< mailto:rlewismnncomca.st.net> >; Ray Kelly <raykelly84na Qmail. com <mailto:raykelly84@gmail.com >>; Robert and Marilyn Marshall <marsha119432@msn.com< mailto:marshaII9432@Msn.com >>; Rogier and Karin Vandendool <karinvaiidendool(a,gmail.com< mailto:karinvandendool(c gmail.com >>; Sara McGrane <saramc ane ,hotmail.com< mailto :saramcgrane@hotmail.com »; Scarlett Branton <scarlettbrantongyahoo.com< mailto :scarlettbranton@yahoo.com >>; Scott Sporcich <scott sporcich@a thecreativepartnersgroup com< mailto: scott.sporcich @thecreativepartnersgroup.com »; Shawn O'Grady <shawn.ogrady@genmills. com <mailto:shawn.o rady@genmills.com »; Steve and Ann Makredes <amakr@msn .com <mailto:amakrQmsn.com >>; Steve and Cindy Snyder <stephen.snyder@snyderattomg sy com< mailto: stephen .snyder@snyderattomeys.com >>; Steve Buss <buss.steven@gmail.com< mailto :buss.steven@a,gmail.com >>; Steve Dietrich <stevedietrichna,live.com< maiIto: stevedietrich(2live.com »; Steve Watne <scwatne@,gmail. com <mailto:scwatnen gmail.com >>; Ted Hogan <tedmhogan@gmail. com <mailto:tedmhogan@gmail.com >>; Tom Conner <Tomnconner@yahoo.com< mailto:Tomnconner@yahoo.com >>; Wendy Doster <wendy.doster@a,yahoo.com< mailto:wendy.dostergyahoo.com >>; Wickberg, Lana < lanawickberg_@ ga iail. com< mailto:lanawickberg@gmail.com >>; Woody Ginkel <woody@ginkelproperties .com <mailto:wood ginkelproperties.com>> Sent: Fri, Sep 27, 2013 9:57 pm Subject: Neighborhood Association Questions Dear Scott, I live in the Sunnyslope neighborhood, which has an active yet informal neighborhood association. We put out a mailing requesting dues each year, while making it very clear they are strictly voluntary. We use the funds to help pay for two neighborhood parties, printing of a Directory, holiday greenery at the entrances to the neighborhood, and things like daffodil plantings, etc. We also have established a website on Nextdoor, which I am hoping we will use more actively as more people see the benefits. h"s://nextdoor.com/find- neighborhood/mn/edina/ One of my neighbors sent around a notice last evening about tomorrow's Neighborhood Association training session. So far the email is eliciting mixed reactions: some negative, some neutral, but all have the common feature of being very perplexed about the city's objectives and the strict guidelines it mandates. What is the purpose of this program? If it is not a substitute for traditional communication and advocacy mechanisms, then what value added will it bring? If is purely voluntary, why are there so many specific requirements? What if our neighborhood decides not to formally become "recognized" due to the formalization required (bylaws, officers, meeting notices etc). Can we just provide a few contact names, to the city to facilitate communication and information exchange? - I personally feel It would be shortsighted of the City to only work with formally recognized Associations; I would guess some other local neighborhoods might feel the same, while others might choose to be recognized. I am just speaking for myself, and there may be others in our Sunnyslope neighborhood who would like-to pursue formal recognition, but my sense is that many just don't see the point in.it. Thank you for any information you can provide on this. Kindest regards, Kathy Sandy 4800 E. Sunnyslope Road c (952) 237 - 6938 <tel: %28952 %29 %20237 -6938> h (952) 942- 6122 <tel - %28952 %029 %020942- 6.122> sunnysl opedirectory (d�gmail.com <mailto: sunnyslopedirectory@gmail.com> kath my sandyg yahoo. com <mailto:kathymsandy@yahoo.com> Kathy Sandy 4800 E. Sunnyslope Road c -(952) 237 -6938 h (952) 942 -6122 sunnyslopedirectoKy9email. com kathymsandy (2yahoo. com . 4 Deb Manoen From: Sunnyslope Neighborhood <sunnyslopedirectory@gmail.com> Sent: Monday, September 30, 2013 9:17 AM To: Scott Neal; Karen M. Kurt Cc: James Hovland; jhovland @krausehovland.com; Annie Johnson Subject: Corrections! Attachments: Neighborhood Association Meeting Recap - l.docx Dear Scott and Karen, I made two errors'in the email I just sent you. That will teach me to write emails in the middle of the night again! First of all, when I mentioned that Karen and "Jennifer" had done a good job, I meant to say Annie Coyle. Second, I believe the attached word doc was left off my first mailing to you. Thank you! Kathy Sandy 4800 E. Sunnyslope Road c (952) 237 -6938 h.(952) 942 -6122 sunnyslopedirectoryggmail. com kathymsandy@yahoo.com 1 Dear Neighbor, I. went to yesterday's Neighborhood Association Training Workshop. It went from.9 to 12:00, and about 40 people were in attendance. Here's what -I learned: The City wants to promote Neighborhood Associations for several reasons: Neighborhood Associations improve the quality of life in cities (something we already enjoy). Neighborhood Blog Entry - Benefit of Neighborhoods • It would give the City a single point of contact for each neighborhood • The City would be able to reach out to residents with neighborhood- specific communications.- Examples; street reconstruction projects, redevelopment (allowing review of sketches), land use planning, park development, local crime notification, power outages, etc. • Adopting the Neighborhood Association model of city management follows the national trend Neighborhood Associations -Best. Local Govt Practice The City made it clear it will only offer the:communications to "officially" recognized neighborhoods.: Participation in the. program is voluntary . (we can stay as we are if we like), but any neighborhood that opts out, will not be able to receive the.torgeted outreach. The City said it will continue to inform all Edina residents.about goings on in the Gty as it always has (via Patch, Edina website, "Extra" push emails) but it will only 'work with' and offer= neighborhood : - specific communications to "officially.." recognized neighborhoods. As I understand it, the reason for requiring that Neighborhood Associations become formalized is because if the City is going to be commurncating with one individual from each neighborhood, it needs to know that the Neighborhood Representative was chosen in a Democratic process and that the Representative is disseminating information in a nondiscriminatory manner. At the same time, the City does not presume that "official" Associations speak for all residents; and Associations are not a formal administrative body. Further, the City allows only one officially recognized Association for each neighborhood. The City will support officially recognized Associations by offering each Association: a landing page on the City website; listing in the About Town magazine; modest copying services; meeting space; City staff as guest speakers; assistance in setting up the Association; assistance with technology, (setting up email lists, Directories, Nextdoor websites, etc.) The City will communicate with Associations in two ways: through email to the Association Representative(s) and via the online social media program Nextdoor. We have a head start on . Nextdoor, as we have been members since 2010. It is important to know that while the City will be able to post information and notices on our Sunnyslope Nextdoor. website, However, it will not be able to see our personal information, profiles or posts'. In conclusion, if we want to take advantage of what the City.is offering, we have to go through the procedures and formality of becoming "recognized ". However, questions and answers yesterday indicated that the process does not have to be a big deal. The City seems realistic about several key things: not everyone participates; we are all very busy and have no interest in a lot of 'pro cess'; how involved we become as an Association is up to each neighborhood. We can keep it simple if that is the way we want to roll. What do you think? Thanks, Kathy Sandy Deb Mangen From: John Hatzung <johnhatzung @usfamily.net> Sent: Monday, September 30, 2013 9:08 AM To: Edina Mail Subject: Sports dome Dear Mayor Hovland: I'm writing you this email in support of building the sports dome. Our daughter Greta, a sophomore at EHS plays lacrosse. Our son Jack at Southview may turn his focus to soccer. For me, the most compelling reason Edina should have a sports dome is that it will be another draw for families moving into the area and a reason for growing families to stay. A sports dome would be an asset where kids develop skills, relationships and loyalty to our community. Edina is a great place to live, but no city remains great without investment in the infrastructure and opportunities for its citizens. A sports dome would make Edina a better place. John Hatzung 6024 York Ave. S 952 270 8321 Deb Man en From: Sent: To: Subject. Mayor Hovland, Doug deGrood <DdeGrood @always - thinking.com> Monday, September 30, 2013 12:14 PM Edina Mail Complaint I'm writing to register a complaint about what .I perceive to be the over - zealous policing of hwy 62 in Edina between hwy 100 and hwy 169. Last night, I was driving my son to Braemar Arena. On my way there, the highway looked like it was lit up for Christmas with b11 the patrol carlights flashing. Same thing on my way back. I think I counted six cars stopped by the side of the road. I remarked to myself it was like the police were 'shooting fish in a barrel'. It was then, just west of 100, that I became one of the fish. I was driving the speed limit, so you can imagine my curiosity as to why I was being pulled over. According to the officer (who shall remain nameless unless you want to know), I was driving with my high beams on. I told the officer I was totally unaware of this. (In fact, I'm still not 100% convinced they were on.) I further explained that I was driving a loaner vehicle, and - -not being fully accustomed to the instrument panel - -it's possible they could have become jostled on and I just didn't know it. I, or anyone I know, would have expected the officer to show someunderstanding of my situation and issue me a warning. Boy, was Iwrong. Not only did he write me a citation, but his manner was flat out rude and confrontational. And he wasn't content to leave it there. He then asked for the car's rental agreement. Not being totally familiar with the car, I couldn't find it. So I was issued a citation for that as well. (I would later learn from mywife that the rental company told her specifically not to leave it in the glove box because it contained our credit card number.) I understand that what I did.is a violation of the law, if strictly interpreted. So is driving 56 in a 55 zone, but people don't get tickets for that. That area of Edina is already notorious for being over- policed. This particular officer's behavior just rubbed salt in the wound. I have to wonder what the objective of the Edina police is in this over- the -top policing of this stretch of road. Is it one of the state's most dangerous roadways, on par with Shephard Road in St. Paul? Is Edina so lacking in crime that there's nothing else for the police to do? Or is it just an easy way to fatten county or state coffers, you know, since those Edina motorists can afford. it I have since learned that according to a WCCO study conducted last year, Edina issues five times more tickets than St. Paul and 12 times more tickets than Minneapolis, the state's two largest cities. The chief of Edina police stated in 1 the report that they're just doing their job and that these aren't frivolous tickets. Based on my experience, I disagree. All I'm saying is this: how 'bout a little less zeal and a littlemore common- sense restraint? It's not like I was knowingly driving recklessly. It's bad enough I'm out a couple hundred dollars for the citation plus whatever I'll end up paying in increased insurance premiums. Did the officer have to 'charge me interest' in the form of his rude, combative behavior? I lost a lot of respect for Edina's men and women in blue last night. And I know that isn't what you want. Respectfully, Doug deGrood Doug deGrood Creative Director ddegrood(Malways- thinking.com P: 612- 547 -5001 608 2nd Avenue South, Suite 129 Minneapolis, Minnesota 55402 hftp:/Iwww.always-thinking.com 2 1i S /L �S ROSS T DUNLOP Page 2 of 2 Statement Date: 09/10/13 0000001 FIS33339 C 4 000 N Z 10 13/09/10 Page 2 of 2 00287 MA MA 20558 25310000040462055802 C TO: EDINA CITY COUNCIL FROM: RESIDENTS OF ROLLING GREEN DATE: September 27, 2013 RE: SUBDIVISION OF 5 MERILANE INTO THREE LOTS COUNCIL MEMBERS: As residents of the Rolling Green neighborhood, we are opposed to the subdivision of 5 Merilane into three lots. ISSUE BEFORE THE COUNCIL The only issue pending before the Council is whether 5 Merilane can be subdivided into three lots. At this stage, the owners /developers of 5 Merilane do not request any variance. Any variance request with respect to 5 Merilane will generate a broader and different discussion. PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND AND SCOPE OF REVIEW At the recent Planning Commission hearing regarding the subdivision of 5 Merilane, the Commission did not vote to recommend subdividing 5 Merilane into three lots. Some Commission members, along with the Development Director, suggested that the Commission did not have discretion to oppose because the subdivision meets the minimum requirements relating to the median lot size, width, and depth of other lots within 500 feet of 5 Merilane. In determining whether a particular lot can be subdivided, the median lot size, width, and depth within 500 feet of other property are only the first elements to consider. If the minimum criteria are not met, the Planning Commission and the Council will not subdivide a lot unless a variance is applied for and granted. Even if the minimum criteria are met, then the Planning Commission and the Council must consider all other relevant Edina ordinances and the 2008 Edina Comprehensive Plan. The Edina Land Use, Planning and Zoning ordinances apply here, and particularly Section 810 -Plat and Subdivisions. As articulated in Subsection 810.01, a purpose and objective of this Section is to support and further the City's Comprehensive Plan and to protect the character and symmetry of neighborhoods in the City. 347615 Later in this same subsection, under the heading "Future Land Use Plan," it states: A basic theme of the land use plan is that Edina's low density residential neighborhoods, which make up over 50% of this City's land area, are expected to remain largely unchanged. It would be wrong for the Council to blindly apply the median 500 foot criteria for lot size, width, and depth measurements in determining whether to subdivide 5 Merilane into three lots. The Council must consider the broader, picture outlined here, and consider the impact on Rolling Green and its other residents. THE IWACT OF SUBDIVIDING 5 MERILANE IS TOO GREAT 5 Merilane is a wooded and pie - shaped lot located at the north end of Merilane where the street turns 90 degrees and continues to the east. The curved portion of the lot line of 5 Merilane would create an almost perfect circle if extended all the way around. The straight portions of the lot lines of 5 Merilane (the side next to 6 Merilane and the side next to 7 Merilane) create a wide angle of about 150 degrees. The proposed subdivision of 5 Merilane cuts this large piece of pie into three smaller The here proposed . subdivision creates lot lines with sharp angles of about 40 to 50 degrees. are some odd shaped lots in Rolling Green, and some that are pie- shaped. But there is no collection of lots in all of Rolling Green with such severely restricted lot angles. The proposed shape of these subdivided lots is unique and not matched anywhere in the neighborhood. Though the sizes of the proposed subdivided lots are larger than many lots within 500 feet on the left side of Merilane (west side of the northlsouth axis, and north side of east/west axis), the sharp angled shapes of the proposed lots are totally out of character. And six of the .smaller lots on the left side of Merilane adjoin the Meadowbrook Golf Course providing a high level of open space. This is not true for the proposed subdivided lots. Significantly, the proposed subdivided lots are smaller than all lots located on the same side of Merilane within 500 feet, and even farther. The proposal locates three structures at the pointed end of each lot. If this proposal is allowed, three homes on the subdivided lots will crowd up against the homes now located at 6 and 7 Merilane. Nowhere in Rolling Green are five homes located so close to one another. The location, arrangement, and proposed density of the structures on these subdivided lots will be unprecedented in Rolling Green. If this subdivision is allowed, five significant homes will be clumped together at the top of the hill. If allowed, this newly created subdivision of five homes in Rolling Green will be known as the "Village on the Hill." 347615 CONCLUSION Dividing 5 Merilane into three sharp - angled pie- shaped lots will change Merilane. It will create a configuration of lots that does not exist anywhere else in Rolling Green. Squeezing three new homes at the back of each subdivided lot will cram five homes together. To everyone who drives by, it will be- viewed as the "Village on the Hill." The character of Rolling Green -will change and the property values will suffer. If two more driveways are added to this already dangerous curve on Merilane, someone will get hurt —or worse. We urge the Council to vote against subdividing 5 Merilane into three pointed, pie- shaped lots. 5 347615 Name u Address: r Naive Address: r Name Address: r• ' Name rr Address: / -1 �.t�'"�� 0 347615 FROM: James and Kathryn Ganley, Owners 4704 Merilane Avenue Date: September 27, 2013 RE; SUBDIVISION OF 5 MERLIANE INTO THREE LOTS COUNCIL MEMBERS: ' SEAL SEP 3 0 2013 r) As a direct neighbor facing #5 Merilane, I am opposed to the subdivision of 5 Merilane into three lots. ISSUE BEFORE THE COUNCIL The only issue pending before the Council is whether 5 Merilane can be subdivided into three lots. At this stage the owners /developers of 5 Merilane do not request any variance. Any variance request with respect to 5 Merilane will generate a broader. and different discussion. ADDITIONAL ISSUES FOR CONSIDERATION As a signor of the letter dated September 27, 2013 from RESIDENTS OF ROLLING,GREEN I am offering this letter to focus on additional issues that I believe are relevant to the issue before the council. Proximity and House Size Together Houses in Rolling Green were originally planned balancing home size, lot size and proximity collectively to.help define the character of the neighborhood. By jamming large homes together into odd shaped lots, the developer's plans are entirely contrary to the character of the neighborhood and ignore the detrimental impact on the character of Rolling Green. The various restrictions that arise due to the unusual shape of the owner's lot, combined with the set -back restrictions dictated by ordinance and location of the existing house, create an odd result for a three lot subdivision. To be clear, I am not objecting to a subdivision of a 3+ acre lot, but this application is not a good option as it was designed to avoid a variance request and not to respect the character'of the neighborhood. Any rational plans for dividing a lot of this size and shape would not result in crowding three large homes into such a tight position while leaving no room for back yards or consideration of the odd position of the existing home. It certainly ignores the impact on the neighbors. It's also important to note that as these houses are set far back from the road and situated far up a hill, and therefore will appear even closer together than houses built closer to the road. Depending on the size, shape and use of the buildable plot, it might be very difficult to see any distance at all between the homes and as a It should be clearly noted that this request for subdivision is from a developer and NOT a resident. I suspect this is a common issue before the council. At-the recent Planning Commission Advisory meeting on September 11, 2013 the developer could not even bother to attend the meeting to help inform the Planning Commission. At that meeting, current residents were asked to "trust" the developer because of their perceived strong reputation for building large homes. That is not a risk we can afford to take and given the lack of engagement from the developer would be an entirely foolish leap of faith. The developer does not reside in Rolling Green and the current owners are not committing to staying in the neighborhood, so why should they care. The owners who are selling and the developer are entirely driven by profit, which is their right, but it is not their right to profit at the expense of rest of the neighborhood and the material impact to the houses closest to #5: The current owners of #5 have their rights but so too do the remaining residents who will continue to reside in the neighborhood after the new homes are built and the current owners and developers are long gone. For the current residents, this Council is our last line of defense against the intentions of those that only consider profit and ignore the impact on the surrounding community. As residents, we rightly wish to protect the value of our homes as they are substantial investments, and in the Rolling Green area we pay substantial taxes based on the perceived value of these homes. But we also value living in the neighborhood and enjoying its unique character of wooded streets, and generous spacing between homes on larger lots. It's this council's job to protect us from profit motivated development at the expense of current residents. Finally, please consider the impact that a decision to allow this subdivision will have on the neighborhood in years to come, Each planning decision.creates potential knock on effects. The residents of Rolling Green wish to protect the character of the neighborhood today and for years to come. Please also see the attached Powerpoint presentation that attempts to inform the council on the issue of character and some of the points raised in this letter through pictures of the neighborhood and the property under consideration. Finally, I strongly urge council members to walls the property before making a decision as the true impact of the developer and owner's plans can only be truly appreciated with one's own eyes. Thank you for your consideration, Respectfully, dames P. Ganlcy-___ 4704 Merilane Avenue • The current plans to subdivide #5 Merilane are inconsistent with the character of the Rolling Green neighborhood and should be denied in its current form. • This short presentation is to assist the Council in better evaluating the subdivision plans by the developers by reviewing — The "character" of Rolling Green — Property in question • The council should seriously consider walking this lot to get a true perspective of the — tightness of the proposed lots — the lack of any back yard space (not being considered /addressed) — Odd position of adjacent houses due to unusual position of #5 which was afforded by large wooded lot — would no longer be true — Collection of large houses jammed together would create an imposing physical presence with distance from the road making them look on top of one another • Finally it should be noted that currently we have no indications of the sizes and styles of the houses that could be built on the lots which could have an even greater impact given the likely home size and buildable lot given the large plot. • Current setback limitations squeeze all the houses together LfQ KAimrilnnin LXx/pniiP Ir ,C ol 0 ;* .0 ill obs MA ra a Fo, TITJmh 7 a : .IP- �,� .� , , s \ _ � .. Y y, .i . � �� • �Y. ` '( � lair i ��� �+ ,+Sgt . Y�''� - - �� •. , r f - It it let" At IA ol •-well +o • t1 -T4'.�fr• ■r "Mr. la■Mmisim- +ti. `,1•!� r[:�r.,eAt' y ,°f l i,, `�y��� `� 4 - �� �.i.��j �trr'..� r r � 1 � ♦f yu�,: '.. - yam. . !r /c ,,�7r. �. �.. .•..i7i .� 'f fir,. Ar �: j - , . R YEN .. �►s . �,�. A qmpoY .( A ODAF ip or ��i ravira r its] S A�.y Gin i: .r '1k'1 � '•"�� • � '.ti � i' � Kr s Aw WWI , F Proposed building site lot 3 Notice size of house next door, proximity of large house directly behind. Refer to previous picture to with reference to spot of driveway M I LOIZE to ro � * ' � '�� �►� L� � 1- '�. s .day � �(' ' a UA .j2eFA►TJ r.191r.3 to ow ;, - � � �.,, �ti ,• ' . �•� '. may, • , ' • .1, tit . � t � ` ••.� "�ki�( v. � �' �� � CAS ems.. ��� �•..r� wt'� v� � � , ..fie - � �'��� •!~ 'Y�VA -i . • � � • rt. �, '•7e ,...... 1ti � •1� . -... dial. . •'-Z .e. .i .. � mow. .. ♦t � .. _� �i. "b� ^� .�� r L .♦ Si. o aclaitonai iarge Houses wan no DaCKyarus j' r. Deb Mangen From: Sandi Genau <sgenau79 @gmail.com> Sent: Tuesday, October 01, 2013 1:43 PM To: Edina Mail Subject: 5 Merilane Avenue, Edina, MN Attachments: City Council Letter.docx Dear City Council Members, We are submitting this letter to you for consideration prior to the discussion about the above property at tonight's meeting. Thank you, Sandi & Mike Genau 6 Merilane Ave. Edina, MN 55436 1 f t 8 l 'September 28, 2013 Mike and Sandi Genau 6 Merilane Avenue Edina, MN 55436 Edina City Council. Members Edina City Council 4801 W. 50th Street Edina, Minnesota 55424 Dear City Council Members, As each of you knows, the proposed subdivision of 5 Merilane is.on the agenda for tonight's meeting. We appreciate your consideration and the time that several of you have taken to come by and speak with us. We are immediate neighbors of 5 Merilane Avenue. We purchased our home at 6 Merilane last December 2012, after being - especially drawn to Rolling Green's large . lots, rolling lawns and mature trees. We have deep concerns about the possibility of 5 Merilane being divided into three lots resulting in five homes being closely packed into a very small area. This is not the Rolling Green that we invested in and not what we would expect our City Council to approve based on what is published the Edina Comprehensive Plan. We understand that the Warner's feel entitled to subdivide this property and are determined to divide into three lots at all, costs. While it might be technically possible to squeeze three homes onto the smallest part of this property, it doesn't make the best use of this land and it changes the eastern side of Merilane substantially. Having five homes on top of each -other is unprecedented in Rolling Green and will significantly affect the property values of those of us who live. in the immediate vicinity. The unfortunate fact is that 5 Merilane is a large reverse pie shaped lot. It is not well suited to hold 3 large homes at its apex due to the irregular shaped lots and difficult building pads that would be created. The Edina Comprehensive Plan states that the council should consider suitability when deciding such matters. Planner Teaque has written in his new staff report that in his opinion, "considerations regarding anything other than the minimum size restrictions are subjective ". Is he saying that these other criteria are irrelevant? What is the point of having these other considerations if they are not valued in any way? Why are they published in the Edina Comprehensive Plan if they really have no impact? What protects the integrity of each neighborhood if these criteria are removed from consideration? They should be as equally important as the lot size and minimum setbacks as they define the very essence of our neighborhood. Late Friday afternoon we were made aware of an alternative proposal that the Warners expect to discuss at this meeting. We are referring to the change of the front setback lines to 130' and the addition of conservation easements along the sides of lots 1 and 3 and at the rear of all three lots. It is important to note that this new plan moves the building pad on Lot 1 even more directly into our view. Unfortunately, we have not had any time to consult with experts to see how we can work with this plan. If this becomes a serious discussion at the meeting, then we would minimally ask the council to consider the use or an arborist, possibly setting up an escrow account to replace mature trees if they die in a year or two, tagging significant trees to be saved and extending the proposed conservation easements to the street. We would expect the Warners to be required to go through the usual steps to procure a variance for the new front setbacks and not be allowed to slide this through in a hurry. This short notice does not afford the rest of the neighbors any opportunity to give consideration to these changes to the original proposal. We would also like you to. consider house height. The new home. going up across the street from us is significantly tall. We are very concerned by what could become a giant monstrosity in our view. There will be no escaping it regardless of how many new trees are planted. Planning Commissioner Floyd Grabiel, even commented in the last planning meeting that he was surprised by the height of this new house and cautioned everyone that this should be a consideration and could be a problem going forward. While there may be a handful of instances of homes somewhat closer together in Rolling Green, the east side of Merilane (and the neighborhood in general) is characterized by large lots with much space between homes. Dividing the Warner property into two larger lots would leave much more room between the homes and keep the same feeling along this side of Merilane. The homes would no longer have to be on top of each other and also would not obstruct our views. Damage to mature trees along the property lines and in the above mentioned conservation easements could be minimized. We believe this really captures the feeling of the neighborhood and in particular the east side of Merilane. We ask each of you to consider this option instead. We do believe there would be much community support for this scenario. Finally, we are aware of many concerns regarding traffic on this narrow end of Merilane. It has been made even more dangerous due to the constant stream of construction vehicles in the area. For this reason, we ask that the city not make a decision on this. without input from a traffic engineer. As our City Council we know that you. are considering the impact to the residents involved. Those of us who do reside in Rolling Green are simply interested in protecting our investment in our homes, quality of life and the quiet enjoyment of our properties. Thank you for your time and consideration, Mike and Sandi Genau To: Edina City Council Members v� [via e-mail to Jackie Hoogenakker] `mod 30th September 30, 2013 P Dear Council Members: I am writing to submit feedback on the proposed subdivision of 5 Merilane under review during the October 1, 2013 public hearing. Our family lives a short distance away from the site. While it may appear that the subdivision complies with current city ordinances, I believe it is important for the City Council to take into account the very first element of land use in the Edina comprehensive plan: "Protect and preserve the essential character of existing residential neighborhoods." In reality, this subdivision proposal is a request to build three 6,000+ sq.ft. (or likely much larger) homes on roughly an acre of property - right at the "center of the pizza," if you will, that is defined by the setback on the current lot — so about 1/3 acre per home (see figure to the right, from the actual subdivision proposal). While the total lot sizes may meet the mean requirements, the actual housing density in the proposal is much higher than anywhere else in the neighborhood. I believe this implied density needs to be considered as part of the subdivision application. I would encourage any Planning Commission or City Council members that have not done so to visit the lot to really understand what the illustration to the right will look like in practice versus the surrounding area. ,!• ay /: .z�.:. LOT 7 z.=. •. �..¢` /lP�\ i � . c : it . - ��'Uc:� r� It seems that a reasonable outcome for all parties would be a subdivision into two lots, allowing the owner to reap the substantial value increase of the land and reflecting the changing lot size dynamics within the neighborhood - while staying aligned with the comprehensive plan for Edina. Regards, Scott Gill 4725 Annaway Drive Vi1` r. is —:',, ��'� .. ... LOTS � �"'��` — �.:7:T_ — _�•j�, z.=. •. �..¢` /lP�\ i � . c : it . - ��'Uc:� r� It seems that a reasonable outcome for all parties would be a subdivision into two lots, allowing the owner to reap the substantial value increase of the land and reflecting the changing lot size dynamics within the neighborhood - while staying aligned with the comprehensive plan for Edina. Regards, Scott Gill 4725 Annaway Drive MINUTES CITY OF EDINA MINNESOTA ENERGY & ENVIRONMENT COMMISSION EDINA CITY HALL COMMUNITY ROOM Thursday July 11, 2013 I. CALL TO ORDER 7:12p.m. II. ROLL CALL Answering Roll Call was Brandt, Gubrud, Heer, Howard, Kostuch, Risser, Rudnicki, Thompson, Zarrin and Chair Sierks Absent: Latham, Sokol Staff Present: Ross Bintner and Rebecca Foster III. APPROVAL OF MEETING AGENDA Motion made by Member Thompson and seconded by Member Rudnicki to approve the Agenda. Motion carried unanimously. IV. ADOPTION OF CONSENT AGENDA A. Minutes. B. Attendance report and roster. C. Workgroup list and minutes Motion made by Member Heer and seconded by Member Gubrud to approve the Consent Agenda. Motion carried unanimously. V. COMMUNITY COMMENT. No Comment. VI. REPORTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS A. ,Public Building Energy Financing Options i. Continuous Commissioning and Guaranteed Energy Savings Program. ChairSierks explained the difference between State Guarantee Energy Savings Program and the staff proposal for continuous commissioning. Mr. Bintner, Mr. Barnes, Facility Manger, City Finance staff, staff from the Dept. of Commerce Guarantee Energy Savings Program, Mark Hancock, CEE, and Chair Sierks meet on July 2 "d to discuss the different programs. Chair Sierks said that the State Guarantee Energy Savings Program reviews deep energy retrofits which achieve bigger energy savings than do all low hanging fruit changes offered in the sfaff proposal. The goal is to reduce carbon reduction of 15% by 2015, 25% by 2025, and 80% by 2050 greenhouse gas reduction. There are 19 City buildings that would to be audited for energy savings under the staff proposal. Member Rudnicki excused himself from the meeting at 8:29p.m. Chair Sierks will summarize the top 10 values of both programs for EEC Members to review. The EEC Members are requesting to meet Tim Barnes, Facility Manager, at a future meeting. B. Air and Water Quality WG. Member Risser said the Working Group's next meeting will be at the Fishing Derby held in Rosland Park on July 25th: They'll provide information on water conservation, WHPP, etc. to the residents. Member Risser would like to meet with the Education and Outreach WG to help engage residents on surface water. C. Education Outreach WG. Member Gubrud said the July 4th parade was a success. Article in About Town on Home Energy Squad visits. Member Thompson said he is doing a Workshop August 15th at.Southview Middle School on the Cool Planet grant from Hennepin County. Night to Unite is August 6th and the EEC doesn't have an event planned due to Members being out of town. D. 'Energy WG., GESP discussed earlier. i. Home energy squad task force. E. Recycling & Solid Waste WG. No Comment. i. Business recycling task force. Member Zarrin said two Edina Liquor and Centennial Lakes were audited on recycling. Hennepin County said they do recycle, but could do a betterjob at it. One suggestion -was to use compostable utensils and,plates, so Member Zarrin spoke with Karen Kurt, Assistant City Manager, to purchase those products. Hennepin County received a recycling grant and will be using it to help Edina Businesses learn about recycling. Member Zarrin is going to talk to the 22 haulers to ask what type of promotion they can do to get businesses to recycle better. F. Student Initiatives. No Comment. VII. CORRESPONDENCE & PETITIONS. No Comment. VIII. CHAIR AND COMMISSION MEMBER COMMENTS A. Review Council work session. Chair Sierks said Working Groups might need to be structures by topic or scope with listed goals. A possible task force could be created to review Comp Plan Chapter 10. The EEC does a great job with Event driven success. Member Brandt excused himself from the meeting at 9:06p.m. IX. STAFF COMMENTS A. EEC 2013 summary and draft schedule. Mr. Bintner suggested a Public Infrastructure tour for the August meeting to visit Water Treatment Plant #6, 72nd Sanitary Sewer Lift Station, Reservoir, etc. B. Announcements. Mr. Bintner asked for volunteers for the Human Services Task Force. Mr. Bintner reported that Energy Working Group Member Brad Hanson passed away. There being no further business on the Commission Agenda, Chair.Sierks declared the meeting adjourned at 9:14p.m. Motion made by Member Risser and seconded by Member Zarrin to adjourn meeting., Motion carried unanimously. Respectfully submitted, Rebecca Foster GIS Administrator MINUTES CITY OF EDINA MINNESOTA ENERGY & ENVIRONMENT COMMISSION Thursday August 8, 2013 CALL TO ORDER 4:40p.m. ROLL CALL Answering Roll Call was Heer, Howard, Kostuch, and Zarrin Absent: Bale, Gubrud, Latham, Risser, Rudnicki, Sokol, Thompson Late Arrival: Chair Sierks Staff Present: Ross Bintner and Dave Goergen REPORTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS The regular meeting of the EEC was replaced with a tour of City Infrastructure 4:30PM Meet at the top level of parking ramp behind Jerry's Foods: Tour water treatment plant 6: Water production Former public works site: Soils, materials and waste, redevelopment 5:30PM Travel to Dublin reservoir by way of Tracy Avenue: Tracy Avenue: Complete Streets Dublin Reservoir: Water storage 5:45PM Travel to Public Works Facility: Public Works Facility: Redevelopment, Stormwater Control, Building Recommissioning 6:OOPM Travel to lift station 6 by way of Lake Edina neighborhood: Lake Edina Neighborhood: Neighborhood Reconstruction Program. Sanitary Lift Station 6: Sanitary conveyance system There being no further business on the Commission Agenda, Chair Sierks declared the meeting adjourned at 7:00p.m. Respectfully submitted, Rebecca Foster GIS Administrator 1. MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE VETERANS MEMORIAL COMMITTEE HELD AT CITY HALL AUGUST 23, 2013 7:30 AM I. CALL TO ORDER Chairman Olson called the meeting to order at 7:35 am I/. ROLLCALL Answering roll call were Members Cardarelle, Christiaansen, Crain, Elliot, Kojetin, Olson, and Schwartz. Staff in attendance: Kristin Aarsvold, Edina Park and Recreation Department Supervisor Others in attendance: None. I//. APPROVAL OF MEETING AGENDA - - -- -- Motion by- Member -- Cardarelle and seconded by Member. Kojetin to_ approve the meeting agenda, as presented. Ayes: Cardarelle, Christiaansen, Crain, Elliot, Kojetin, Olson, and Schwartz. Motion carried. IV. ADOPTION OF CONSENT AGENDA A. Approval of the June 21, 2013 Veterans Memorial Committee Meeting Minutes. Motion by Member Kojetin and seconded by Member Cardarelle to approve the meeting minutes from the June 21, 2013 meeting as presented. Ayes: Cardarelle, Christiaansen, Crain, Elliot, Kojetin, Olson, and Schwartz. Motion carried. V. COMMUNITY COMMENT There were no members of the general public present at the meeting. VI. INTRODUCTION OF NEW MEMBERS Chair Olson introduced the newest members of the Board and asked that they tell the Committee a bit about themselves. A. Peter Crain Peter Crain stated that he owns a construction company based in Edina and has also been involved on the Parade Committee for a few years. B. Lance Elliott Lance Elliott stated that.he is a Civil Engineer and owns a civil engineering and construction company. He advised that he has five children and also lives in Edina. He advised that he has 15 years of experience in design build projects, similar to this type of project. He confirmed that he was brought into the Committee through his neighbor, Peter Crain, as they believed that together they could assist in the project. V11. THOUGHTS ON GOING FORWARD A. Retain Elliott Design Chair Olson stated that.SEH has quoted an additional $38,000 for the site plans. He noted that Member Elliott would be willing to charge $19,000 and donate the additional $19,000 in a gift in kind. He stated that he has spoken with City Manager Scott Neal and the City is willing to pay the $19,000 so that the Committee will not have to dip into their funds. He confirmed that the Committee Members were comfortable hiring Member Elliott to complete the work, Member Schwartz stated that he did not believe that the Committee has any loyalty to SEH and was excited to see a member of the community and a Member of the Committee involved in the project. Member Christiaansen n- stated that the Committee should recognize that there may be changes and tweaks going forward and noted that it would be helpful to be aware of cost savings measures. as this moves forward. Member Elliott stated that his intent would be to have an end project that meets. the concept plan developed by SEH. He stated that during the design phase he will show alternatives including the materials- proposed by -SEH as well as additional 'materials_--- that the Committee could choose. Chair Olson was encouraged that the right; people were now on the Committee to assist in this portion of the project and noted that Members can now focus on their area of expertise as this project is actually moving forward. He questioned how, the payment to Member Elliott should occur. Member Elliott stated that he Is flexible. with payment timing. Member Crain stated that usually there is a retainer of 10 percent and then the remaining. balance could be paid when the work is complete or the payment could,be' split throughout the process into two payments. He stated that possibly Member Elliott may incur costs throughout the process and did not feel that he should have to front those costs, noting that those costs could be estimated and paid. Chair Olson confirmed that there would not be a conflict of interest for Member Elliott to be a Member of the Committee and to be paid for this work. He noted that only projects with a cost exceeding $25,000 must be bid. He advised that City Manager Scott Neal has approved this and is excited. He noted that he has also met with the Mayor. Mrs. Aarsvold stated that the check must be approved at a Council meeting, so timing wise the Committee would need to be conscious of that. Chair Olson stated that he will work with Member Elliott and City staff to work out the details of the payment. Motion by Member Kojetin and seconded by Member Schwartz to retain Elliott Design to design construction documents and bid specifications. Ayes: Cardarelle, Christiaansen, Crain, Kojetin, Olson, and Schwartz. Abstained: Elliot. Motion carried. B. Funds from City No additional comments made. Vill. SURVEY Member Cardarelle confirmed that he has completed the soil borings for the site and advised of the site conditions, noting the placement of underground efectric and water infrastructure. Ms. Aarsvold stated that she would scan the documents and email copies to the necessary Members. Member Cardarelle stated that he would recommend moving the site ahead approximately 15 feet due to the underground infrastructure. Chair Olson. stated that the first option would be to move the placement. Member Schwartz stated that the one issue that was brought forward by residents at - -- -the Fourth. of July- Parade was- whether trees would- be- cut.down. Member Cardarelle stated that the monument should be shifted slightly without the need to remove trees. Member Christiaansen stated that the monument could be moved slightly and would not be directly over the infrastructure. Member Crain stated that in his experience there are things over infrastructure and noted that this would be included in the survey work or the work completed by Member Elliott. Ms.-'Aarsvold stated that she could provide the survey to the City Engineers in attempt to gain any feedback. Member Crain stated that in his opinion he would like to keep the monument where it was proposed because of the location of the trees and roots. Ms. Aarsvold stated that she would provide the feedback from the City Engineer to Members Crain and Elliott. IX.. WATERSHED DISTRICT Member Kojetin provided information regarding the Watershed District. He referenced an onsite bathroom that is on the five year Plan for the City to be remodeled and also referenced a canoe landing. He stated that he has another meeting with the Watershed District and there is a chance for the City to partner with the City to do improvement work along the shoreline. He stated that if that work is done proactively in a cost -share opportunity with the City and the Watershed District that work would not be required to be done in conjunction with the memorial. Member Crain questioned if anyone had actually asked the Watershed District what would be required for simply this project and not the entire park. Member Kojetin confirmed that the plan includes the necessary improvement that would be needed for simply the monument but noted that the overall improvement for the park will be needed and this would be an opportunity for the City to cost -share the work with the Watershed District. He explained that overall improvement would offset the memorial and therefore the Committee would not be responsible for the raingarden work. Member Crain noted that the sidewalk should be added to the survey as well. X. SUB- COMMITTEE REPORTS A. Fundraising No report. B. Design of Eagle Ms. Aarsvold provided an update noting that there would be some copyright information. She confirmed that the original artist was paid $3,800 but advised that it was believed that the design word could be completed by another firm for a lesser amount. She confirmed that the funds were used to develop a model for the sculpture and advised that because of copyright issues the model could not be used. She provided a recap of the progress that Member Reed had been making with a sculpture in Wisconsin but stated that she did not have another update at this time. She stated that she would speak with the City Manager /City Attorney to determine how to terminate the agreement with the original artist. She advised that she would provide an update to the Committee at the next meeting. C. Marketing Ms. Aarsvold stated that perhaps someone should speak with the Edina Community Foundation to gain a more visible and easy to find spot on the website. Chair Olson noted that the Parade started their own webpage. Member Crain questioned how many hits the Committee has received from this page. Ms. Aarsvold provided a demonstration of how to access the group under the Edina Community Foundation website. It was found that the information was very out of date and it was difficult to find how to make a contribution. Member Crain stated that the Committee could make their own website, which links to the donation page. A NEXT STEPS A. What We Need to be Successful Chair Olson stated that he believed that the players needed were now in the room and recapped the actions that the Members will take in the next month. He encouraged fundraising efforts to continue to move this project forward. Motion by Member Cardarelle and seconded by Member Crain to adjourn the meeting. Ayes: Cardarelle, Christiaansen, Crain, Kojetin, Olson, and Schwartz. Abstained: Elliot. Motion carried. Meeting adjourned at 8:38 a.m. MINUTES OF CITY OF EDINA, MINNESOTA TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION COMMUNITY ROOM AUGUST 15, 2013 6:00 P.M. ROLL CALL Answering roll call was members Bass, Boettge, Franzen, La Force, Nelson, Sierks, Spanhake and Whited. APPROVAL OF MEETING MINUTES REGULAR MEETING OF JULY 18, 2013 — Approved as corrected. Motion was made by member LaForce and seconded by member Franzen to approve the revised minutes of July 18, 2013. All voted aye. Motion carried. COMMUNITY COMMENT — None. New member Emily Boettge was welcomed to the ETC. REPORTS /RECOMMENDATIONS Mr. Mike Eastling, director of public works for the City of Richfield, was in attendance to explain his City's approach to dealing with congestion on TH -62. Mr. Eastling said they received federal funds to reconstruct 66th Street but first they must deal with the congestion on the crosstown in order to achieve their goal on 661h Street. Mr. Eastling said the number of vehicles traveling on 66th Street is due to a lack of capacity on the regional system, i.e. crosstown is the only highway for traveling east /west, whereas north /south has TH -494, TH -169, and TH -100. He said the recent expansion of 35W was good but it created choke points on the crosstown and this is a regional problem that MNDOT needs to address. Mr. Eastling's idea is to add one lane in each direction on the crosstown using the existing right -of -way and portions of the frontage road. He said this is feasible without the need for additional right -of -way (buying out homes). Mr. Eastling is looking for general support of the concept and will seek ETC support as he moves it forward to MNDOT. 2014 Work Plan Update Staff clarified that $10,000 budgeted under Living Streets was coming from the PACS fund for graphics and mapping. Member Bass suggested adding a safety campaign to have respect for all modes of transportation as they move towards a multi -modal community. She also suggested working on a plan to look at alternatives like traffic circles for calming traffic (stop signs are most often requested by residents). Director Houle suggested getting through the Living Streets plan first. He noted that they once had the NTMP with alternatives for traffic calming but it was_not used by residents. Chair Nelson suggested adding Southwest LRT under 'Ongoing Responsibilities.' The work plan will be submitted to City Council in Sept. or Oct. for approval. Motion was made by member Bass and seconded by member Whited to forward the 2014 Work Plan, as amended, to City Council. Traffic Safety Committee Report of August 7, 2013 After a brief discussion, motion was made by member Franzen and seconded by member Spanhake to forward the Traffic Safety Committee Report of August 7, 2013, to the City Council. Updates Student Members - None Bike Edina Task Force — no update. Received minutes of July 11, 2013. Living Streets Working Group Transportation planner Nolan said assistant city manager Kurt would be presenting the Living Streets policy to the City Council on Tuesday for approval. He also said the $5,000 grant for promotion of the policy increased to $10,000 and staff will hire a firm to help with outreach; and the Living Streets Advisory Group will hold its first meeting on Sept. 4. Communications Committee — no update. CORRESPONDENCE AND PETITIONS A. Correspondence relating to transportation issues —letter from Dr. McKlveen and Ms. Ellen Jones to Hennepin County regarding Vernon Avenue. The ETC agreed that the location identified was a problem area and that the residents' recommendation was good. Director Houle said Hennepin County has offered to turnback Vernon Avenue to the City but they've always refused because of financial reasons. He said now might be a good time to take it back to get local control — the County has no plans for improvements for at least 10 years. There was consensus for taking it back so that the City could make improvements along the corridor. The communications committee will draft a response to Dr. McKlveen and Ms. Jones. CHAIR AND COMMISSION MEMBER COMMENTS Member Franzen said he is lives'in a neighborhood'that is currently,being reconstructed and it has been a pleasant experience. He said he was asked why not all aprons were being replaced and director Houle said the determination is made based on structural integrity. Member La Force said the sidewalk in the cul -de -sac looks good (part of School Road Sidewalk). He asked if staff has ever considered way - finding signs in neighborhoods, e.g. 'This waylo freeway.' After a brief discussion, the consensus was to not post these types of signs. Member Whited asked when the parking lanes on- Xerxes Avenue would be striped and about plans for the old public works site. Director Houle said the re= striping would be done after the Penn Avenue Bridge re- opens. He said the advisory team for the Grandview District will begin meeting soon to guide redevelopment plans for the old public l works site (member Janovy is co -chair of the advisory team). Member Spanhake said there are various projects that they are working on at the University of Minnesota that the ETC and staff might want to be a part of. She offered to add commissioners' email address to a listserv. Member Boettge asked if there were any plans to reduce the speed limit. Director Houle said the State has given cities the option to reduce the speed limit to 25 mph and locally, they have reduced the speed on two streets with bike lanes. STAFF COMMENTS Updates from director Houle: • The right -in /right -out lane at Byerly's is under construction; the City will pay 80% of the cost. • Another Urban Design meeting is scheduled for Aug. 21. • Next week, Centerpoint will be on France Avenue, between 701h & 76th, upgrading their high pressure gas main; in 2017 they will be back to replace a main line that circles the city and staff is working with them to put the main on the eastside of France so that they do not disturb the work that the City will be doing in 2014 (contingent on getting easements on the eastside). • Hennepin County will begin the mill and overlay on Vernon Avenue next week. • Neighborhood projects are progressing on schedule. 2 • The section of School Road Sidewalk up to the school will be completed before school starts and the rest in two weeks. • The first public meeting for the W. 54th Street Reconstruction and Arden Park Stormwater Management Plan is scheduled for Aug. 19. Updates from transportation planner Nolan: • Handout from member Janovy - Considerations for Sidewalk Prioritization (Draft); • The PACS fund has a remaining balance of $360,651 that could be spent in 2013 or roll over to 2014. Four small segments of sidewalks were suggested and two were recommended for construction in 2013. They were: • Vernon Avenue (north side, Gleason Road to Blake Road) [Recommended, est. $273,000] • Vernon Avenue (north side, Schaeffer Road to Blake Road — portion of Vernon Avenue above) • Interlachen Blvd (south side, Oxford Avenue to Hankerson Avenue) [Recommended, est. $136,000] • Metro Blvd (Public Works facility to Industrial Blvd) After a brief discussion, the consensus was to accept the recommendation and next year, distribute the funds in other quadrants of the city. ADJOURNMENT Meeting adjourned. ATTENDANCE ..TRAN$PORTATION4COMMIS.4tON ATTENDANCE - 201',3': NAME TERM J F M A M J J A S O N D Work Session # of Mtgs Attendance % Meetings/Work Sessions 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 9" Bass, Katherine 2/1/2014 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 7116 1 8, 89% Boett e, Emil 2/1/2014 Braden, Ann" 2/1/2014 1 1 1 1 1 Franzen, Nathan 2/1/2016 1 1 1 1 1 1 6, I er, Su rya 2/1/2015 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 7 7M/6 Janovy, Jennifer 2/1/2014 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 8, 8.9% LaForce, Tom 2/1/2015 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 9: 1O12"/a; Nelson, Paul 2/1/2016 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Schwei er, Steven student 1 1 1 3 Sierks, Caroline student 1 1 1 1 1 1 6 670/14 S anhake, Dawn 2/1/2016 1 1 1 1 4 Whited, Courtney 2/1/2015 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 8� 89% 3 r, MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION CITY OF EDINA, MINNESOTA CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS SEPTEMBER 11, 2013 7:00 PM I. CALL TO ORDER II. ROLL CALL Answering the roll call were: I Scherer, Schroeder, Potts, Fischer, Platteter, Forrest Grabiel Absent from the roll: Carr, Kilberg III. APPROVAL OF MEETING AGENDA Chair Staunton noted the change in Agenda order; Item VII. A. Lot Division will be heard first. Commissioner Platteter moved approval of the meeting Agenda with the change. Commissioner Scherer seconded the motion. All voted aye; motion carried. IV. APPROVAL OF CONSENT AGENDA Commissioner Potts Moved approval of the August 28, 2013, meeting minutes. Commissioner Scherer seconded the motion. All voted aye; motion carried. V. COMMUNITY COMMENT Chair Staunton asked if anyone would like to speak; being none, Commissioner Potts moved to.close community comment. Commissioner Fischer seconded the motion. All voted aye; public comment closed. VI. REPORTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS .: A. Lot Division — 5100 Mirror Lakes Drive /Interlachen Country Club Planner Presentation Planner Teague reported that Michael Gorman is requesting to shift the existing lot line that divides his property at 5100 Mirror Lakes Drive and the Interlachen Country Club property. The purpose of the request is to shift the rear lot line of the Gorman property into the golf course property to match a fence line that was installed by the previous owner of 5100 Mirror Lakes Drive. Page 1 of 15 Teague concluded that staff recommends that the City Council approve the Lot Division of 5100 Mirror Lakes Drive and the Interlachen Golf Course subject to the following findings: The proposed lot line adjustment does not create a new lot; the division legally establishes the lot line that has been used in practice as a result of the. previous property owner's installation of a fence on the golf course property; and the resulting lots are still larger than most lots in the area. Motion Commissioner Grabiel moved to recommend lot division approval based on staff findings. Commissioner Fischer seconded the motion. All voted aye; motion carried. VII. PUBLIC HEARINGS A. Variance. Casey Holley. 5616 Woodcrest Drive, Edina, MN Planner Presentation Planner Aaker reported that the subject property is located on the west side of Woodcrest Drive consisting of a 2 story walk -out home with an attached two car garage. The home backs up to a pond and provides a 23 foot setback from the water body. The zoning ordinance requires a minimum 50 foot setback from naturally occurring lakes, ponds .and streams. The existing home is nonconforming and is 27 feet into the. required setback. Over. three fourths of the home is within the nonconforming pond setback. Continuing, Aaker explained that the property owners would like to expand the second floor to include two new, Bedrooms. The second floor addition will match the existing nonconforming setback of the back wall of the home. There is no opportunity for a first floor expansion due to lot coverage requirements and the living room on the front side of the home has a vaulted ceiling and is not conducive to a second floor expansion. The zoning ordinance requires a minimum 50 foot setback for structures near a pond. The ordinance has been amended as required by the Department of Natural resources over the years with increased setbacks required from all water bodies, regardless of where the existing structure is located. The City of Edina retains the authority to process variances from water body setbacks. Planner Aaker noted the proposed second story addition complies with all of the setback and height requirements with the exception of the existing nonconforming setback from the pond. The only opportunity for expansion of the home is to the second floor. Planner Aaker concluded that staff recommends that the Planning Commission approve the variance. Approval is based on the following findings: Page 2 of 15 • The proposed use of the property is reasonable; as it slightly alters existing conditions without reducing setback or impacting the surrounding- neighbors. • The imposed setback and existing house location do not provide opportunity for an increase in second floor area • The original placement of the home closer to the pond than currently allowed prohibits expansion on the second floor without the benefit of a variance Approval of the variance is also subject to the following condition: 1) Subject to staff approval, the site must be developed and maintained in substantial conformance with the following plans, unless modified by the conditions below: Appearing for the Applicant Mr. and Mrs. Holley Applicant Presentation Mr. Holley addressed the Commission and informed them they purchased their home two years ago and at that time they weren't aware of the setback requirement from the pond and they were already non - conforming. Mrs. Holley noted that they are staying within the existing footprint. Discussion Commissioner Platteter asked the applicants if they "heard" any objections or concerns from immediate neighborhoods. Mrs. Holley responded that to date they haven't received any negative comments from neighbors. Public Hearing Chair Staunton asked if anyone from the audience would like to speak to the issue; being none Commissioner Scherer moved to close the public hearing. Commissioner Platteter seconded the motion. All voted aye; public hearing;closed. Further Discussion and Motion Commissioner Potts commented after reviewing the building plans and aerial it appears that the subject house is the same distance from the water as neighboring properties. Potts pointed out the applicant is building on top of the existing house, not adding to the footprint, concluding that he finds the request reasonable and can support the variance as presented. Commissioner Fischer stated he agrees with Commissioners Potts comments, adding in his opinion the hardship is very clear. Without variance approval there would virtually be no Page 3 of 15 opportunity for the property owners to increase the square footage of their home without that approval. Motion Commissioner Fischer moved variance approval based on staff findings, subject to the. staff. conditions and noting without the aid of a variance there is no opportunity for the property owner to increase the size of their home. Commissioner Potts seconded the motion. All voted aye; motion carried. B. Preliminary Plat. Scott Busyn. 6609 Blackfoot Pass, Edina, MN Planner Presentation Planner Teague informed the Commission Great Neighborhood Homes lnc. on behalf of Douglas Johnson is proposing to subdivide the property at 6609 Blackfoot Pass into two.lots. The existing home would be torn down, and two new homes built on the new lots. The'new home on Lot.1 would be located generally where the existing home is located. The home on Lot 2, would be located toward the street in an, area away from the adjacent home to the south, to: avoid large Oak trees and some of the steeper slopes on the site. To accommodate the request the following is required: 1. A subdivision; 2. Front yard setback variance from 100 feet to 45 feet for proposed .Lot 2. Teague explained that both lots would gain access off Blackfoot Pass. Within this neighborhood, the median lot area is 27,131 square feet, median lot depth is 183 feet, and the median lot width is 146 feet. The new lots would meet the median width, depth, and lot size requirements. A new home could be built on Lot 2 without the need for a variance, however, in doing so some of the best trees on the site would be removed (large Oak trees); more slopes would be disturbed, and the home would be located much closer to the existing home at 6705 Cheyenne Trail. Planner Teague concluded that staff recommends that the City Council approve the proposed two lot subdivision of 6609 Blackfoot Pass with a Front Yard Setback variance for Lot 2 from 100 feet to 45 feet from Blackfoot Pass and Cheyenne Trail based on the following findings: 1. The proposed Plat meets all required standards and ordinances for a subdivision. Page 4 of 15 2. The subdivision would meet the neighborhood medians for lot width and depth and area. 3. The proposal meets the required standards for a variance, because: a. The practical difficult unique to the property is caused by the large mature Oak trees and slopes on the east half of Lot 2 where a code compliant building pad would be located. These are natural conditions, not caused by property owner. b. The requested variances are reasonable in the context of the immediate neighborhood. There are two homes with similar front yard setbacks at 6621 an'd 6624 Cheyenne Trail. C. There is 18 -20 feet of green space in the right -of -way of Cheyenne Trail, which would result in a 65 -foot setback from the edge of the paved roadway. d. The variance results in the saving of mature Oak trees, protection of slopes, and moves the home further away from the existing home at 6705 Cheyenne Trail. Approval is also subject to the following conditions: 1. The city must approve the final plat within one year of preliminary approval.or receive a written application for a time extension or the preliminary approval will be void. 2. Prior to issuance of a building permit, the following items -must be submitted: a. If required, submit evidence of Nine.Mile Watershed District approval. The City may require revisions to the preliminary plat to meet the district's requirements. b. A curb -cut permit must be obtained from the Edina Engineering department. C. Utility hook -ups are subject to review of the city engineer. d. Grading and drainage plans specific to any proposed house would be reviewed at the time of building permit, and shall be subject to review and approval of the city engineer. Drainage from any new home; garage or driveway would have to be directed to the street. 3. Any new home on Lot 2 would be limited to a ridge line height of 35 feet. 4. A 10 -foot conservation easement must be established along the lot lines to preserve the vegetation areas along the streets and along the north and south lot lines. 5. A slope and tree conservation easement must be placed over the large Oak trees and slope areas to be preserved by moving the home toward the street. Page 5 of 15 Appearing for the Applicant Scott Busyn, Great Neighborhood Homes Discussion Chair Grabiel asked if the proposed subdivision conforms to the subdivision ordinance. Planner Teague responded in the,affirmative. Commissioner Grabiel pointed out the slopes on the property and-asked if City ordinance addresses slopes. Planner Teague responded City ordinance addresses slopes in excess of 18 %. Teague noted this site contains steep slopes; however, it meets the ordinance pertaining to slopes. Commissioner Fischer stated he was struck by the diagram indicating the 500 -foot neighborhood, adding in his opinion the "500 -foot neighborhood" appears to contain two completely different neighborhoods.. `Fischer stated he struggles with the difference between these two different neighborhoods adding to him this subdivision feels wrong. Applicant Presentation Scott Busyn addressed the Commission.acknowledging that Indian Hills is a very unique neighborhood. -Busyn added'he believes what he has_.presented works best with the sloped topography of the lot. Busyn' explained "that he sent a letter to all the homeowners within the 500 -foot neighborhood informing,them of the proposed subdivision and also held a neighborhood meeting at the.site on. August 8th,. Busyn said the neighborhood meeting was attended by a number of the adjacent neighbors. Busyn reported as a result of that meeting he is proposing a 10 -foot conservation easement to ensure that.the wooded look of the property remains. Concluding, Busyn said he was "open to questions or any ideas the Commission may have on this proposal. Discussion Commissioner Forrest asked Mr. Busyn how he plans on implementing the conservation easement. Busyn responded he would work with the City Forrester on identifying the trees that need to be saved within the 10 -foot conservation easement. Planner Teague added that the conservation easement could be handled similar to the easement that was placed on the Acres DuBois plat. If approved the easement would be recorded with the plat. Commissioner Forrest noted that this issue was previously tabled and questioned the reason. Mr. Busyn responded that he tabled the subdivision to work out and add the conservation easement to the proposal. Page 6 of 15 Commissioner Platteter referred to the grove of oak trees on Lot 2 and asked if the conservation easement would be expanded to capture those oaks. Mr. Busyn responded that Planner Teague suggested that the conservation easement includes those trees; however, much depends on final house placement; with or without variance. Neighbors also indicated they would like to retain the stone retaining wall on the south end of Blackfoot Pass and Cheyenne Trail. Commissioner Scherer noted the Commission is in receipt of letters from neighbors opposing the projeaand asked Mr. Busyn if during the neighborhood meeting neighbors indicated which building pad location they preferred on Lot 2. Mr. Busyn responded that neighbors indicated they want,the site to retain its forested look and maintain privacy. Busyn stated he is open to each option and would do whatever the Commission suggests with regard to Lot 2. A discussion ensued on the sites steep slopes, grading, retaining walls and drainage with Commissioners acknowledging this site is unique because of the slopes and the natural wooded nature of the area. Commissioners stressed if approved careful attention needs to be paid to drainage to ensure site disruption doesn't negatively impact the site or the surrounding neighbors. Chair Staunton opened the public hearing. Public Hearing The following residents addressed the Commission and spoke in opposition to the request by Great Neighborhood Homes to subdivide 6609 Blackfoot Pass into two (2) single dwelling unit lots. T. Dev, 6804 Cheyenne Trail, Edina, MN Charles and Liberta Ledder, 6,709 Cheyenne Trail, Edina, MN Tim Keane, attorney representing residents of Indian Hills David Evinger, 4 Merilane, Edina, MN James Schwender, 6700 Cheyenne Trail, Edina, MN Pat Kreuziger, 6705 Cheyenne Trail, Edina, MN. William Lund, 6308 Indian Hills Road, Edina, MN David Frauenshuh, 6401 Indian Hills Road, Edina, MN Mary Swenson, 6617 Cheyenne Trail, Edina, MN Page 7 of 15 Residents that testified expressed the following: • Residents indicated they purchased their homes in the Indian Hills neighborhood for the natural wooded nature of the area, its larger lots, winding roads and privacy. • Residents of the area expressed the opinion that the "500 -foot neighborhood" established by ordinance captures two completely different neighborhoods; and does not adhere to the original Indian Hills plat. The smaller residential suburban lots (east of the subject site) were included in the calculations skewing the outcome and negatively impacting the character of the area. • The Planning Commission has the discretion to deny the preliminary plat based on character. • The..loss of existing vegetation and the disruption of the steep slopes would change the character of the lot and neighborhood even with the variance option on Lot 2. • Residents acknowledged the two building pad options for Lot 2; one conforming and one requiring a variance;'reiterating disruption would occur regardless. • To provide new-building`pads there is the potential for construction of high retaining walls and also the potential for drainage problems as a result of building pad placement and grading of the site. • Vehicle and,pedestrian safety is'importantpointing out the streets in the area are winding and the street also curves along the subject site. • Driveway placement is a concern; again because of the safety issue. Chair Staunton asked if anyone else would like to speak to the issue; being none•`Com mission er Potts moved to close the public Bearing. Commissioner Platteter seconded the motion. All voted aye; motion'to close the public hearing approved. Mr. Busyn addressed the Commission and explained ir. providing two building pad locations for; Lot 2 they felt it would'make things better and create a better plat. Busyn said their goal is to pull the building pads away from the lot lines to ensure privacy and accommodate the proposed conservation strip. Continuing, Busyn reported that extensive soil testing was done to ensure that any redevelopment would improve the site not negatively impact it. Concluding, Busyn stated all testing supported the position that the site can accommodate two building pads. Commissioner Scherer asked Planner Teague to clarify the action for this proposal. Planner Teague responded the Commission can recommend denial or approval, adding if the Commission recommends approval they need to stipulate what option they want for Lot 2; variance or no variance. Commissioner Potts stated in his opinion due to multiple factors the subject site should remain one lot. Potts agreed with the observation that the Indian Hills neighborhood is different from the neighborhood to its east. Potts noted to redevelop this site too much disruption would occur. Vegetation would be loss and the site would require extensive grading and retaining Page 8 of 15 walls. Potts concluded as previously mentioned if approved the change to neighborhood character would be dramatic. Commissioner Grabiel pointed out the project as submitted meets subdivision ordinance requirements. Grabiel said he also understands the property owners desire to maximize the real estate value of his property. With respect to trees it is difficult because at this time the City of Edina doesn't have a tree ordinance. Continuing, Grabiel acknowledged that the character of the 500 -foot neighborhood is varied. Concluding, Grabiel said from the plans presented it appears Mr. Busyn attempted to mitigate the issues of drainage, tree loss etc. Grabiel said he also appreciates Mr. Busyn limiting building height to 35 -feet. Commissioner Scherer stated this is a tough issue.for the Commission; however, she continues to have concerns about drainage, tree loss, driveway safety, etc. Scherer said taking all things into consideration that she cannot support the request as submitted. Commissioner Schroeder asked Planner Teague if the City defines neighborhood character. Planner Teague responded City ordinance doesn't define neighborhood character. Continuing, Schroeder said specific factors are unique to Indian Hills and if the Commission recommends approval of this request the essential character of Indian Hills would change. Commissioner Forrest acknowledged she has been going back and forth with this proposal. She stated she agrees the City doesn't define neighborhood character; however, would the "sense" of place be compromised if approved. Forrest added she agrees that Mr. Busyn has given a lot of thought to this project; adding she could support the proposal with specific conditions. Concluding, Forrest said to would like to see more creativity in building plans. Commissioner Fischer said when he views this project it appears to him that it's one lot for one structure. Fischer did acknowledge that neighborhood character can be changed one parcel at a time; however, the builder has an excellent reputation and he would hate to take a risk with another builder. Motion Commissioner Grabiel moved to recommend preliminary plat approval:based.on staff findings and subject to staff 'conditions. Motion failed for lack of second. Commissioner Schroeder moved to recommend.denial of the preliminary plat based on the findings that if approved the subdivision would render the lot out of character with the neighborhood. Commissioner Scherer seconded the motion. Ayes; Scherer, Schroeder, Potts, Fischer, Platteter, Forrest. Nay, Grabiel, Staunton. Motion to deny carried 6 -2. Page 9 of 15 C. Preliminary Plat. John Adams on behalf of Ted E. Warner, 5 Merilane, Edina, MN Planner Presentation Planned Teague reported that John Adams, on behalf of property owner Ted Warner is proposing to subdivide the property at 5 Merilane into three lots. The existing home is located in the middle of the property, and would remain as proposed. A new driveway would be constructed to serve the existing home, as the current driveway would be located on proposed Lot 3. The existing driveway would be used for access to a new home on Lot 3. To accommodate the request the following is required: Preliminary & Final Plat. Continuing, Teague explained that the proposal meets all minimum lot size requirements. Within this neighborhood, the median lot area is 48,249 square feet, median lot depth is 277 feet, and the median lot width is 192. All three lots would gain-access off Merilane. Planner Teague concluded that becauseahe proposed subdivision meets all of Edina's Zoning, Ordinance requirements; recommend that the City Council approve the proposed three lot subdivision of 5 Merilane. Approval,is based on the following findings: 1. The proposal meets all the required standards and ordinances for a subdivision. 2. The applicant has located the driveways and home to minimize tree and slope disturbance. Approval is also subject to the.following conditions: 1. The City must approve the final plat within one year of preliminary approval or receive a written application for a time extension or the preliminary approval will be void. 2. Park dedication fee of $10,000 must be paid prior to release of the final plat. 3. Prior to issuance of a building permit, the following items must be submitted: a. Submit evidence of a Minnehaha Creek Watershed District approval. The City may require revisions to the preliminary plat to meet the district's requirements. b. Curb -cut permits must be obtained from the Edina engineering department. Driveway plans must be consistent with the proposed grading plan to preserve as many trees as possible. C. A grading plan subject to review and approval of the city engineer. Page 10 of 15. d. A construction management plan will be required for the construction of the new homes. e. Utility hook -ups are subject to review of the city engineer. Appearing for the Applicant John Adams, Coldwell Banker Applicant Presentation John Adams introduced Ted Warner property owner and Mark Gronberg Engineer. Mr. Adams informed the Commission the current Warner house will remain and the intent is to build new homes on Lots 1 and 3. Adams told the Commission the Warner family hired Kramer to custom design and build the new homes. Adams noted that as proposed the subdivision meets ordinance requirements. He also reported he met with adjoining neighbors to discuss the proposed plat. Continuing, Adams said to accommodate the new building pads little grading would occur, attention would be paid to driveway placement and the existing vegetation would be retained where possible. Concluding, Adams asked the Commission for their support. Ted Warner-addressed the Commission and explained that he grew up in the house, adding the family takes this subdivision very seriously and believes the layout of the proposed lots would work. This subdivision would also provide them the opportunity to remain in the neighborhood. Chair Staunton opened the public hearing. Public Hearing The following residents addressed the Commission and spoke in opposition to the request by John Adams on behalf of Ted Warner to subdivide 5 Merilane into three (3) single dwelling unit lots. Mark Genau, 6 Merilane, Edina, MN Dave Evinger, 4 Merilane, Edina, MN James Ganley, 4704 Merilane, Edina, MN Mike Callan, 10 Merilane, Edina, MN Mary Pohlad, 7 Merilane, Edina, MN Page 11 of 15 Sandy Genau, 6 Merilane, Edina, MN Pat Maloney, 5804 Mait Lane, Edina, MN Phil Broat, 4820 Rolling Green Parkway, Edina, MN Tom Owens, representing Ms. Pohlad, 7 Merilane, Edina, MN Residents that testified expressed the following: • The plat as presented creates three lots; however, to comply with Zoning Ordinance requirements the three building pads have been clustered at the top of the hill virtually "cramming" the new homes on top of the existing homes at 6 and 7 Merilane. • The proposal as submitted negatively impacts the character of the Rolling Green neighborhood. If subdivided to comply with the Zoning Ordinance there will be five homes in close proximity to each other. Rolling Green is not a "high- density" neighborhood. • Residents purchased their homes in Rolling Green for the large lots and generous spacing between homes. This subdivision would compromise those standards. • If approved to comply with the Zoning Ordinance these three new homes wouldn't have rear yards. • The Commission has the discretion to deny the plat based on character and symmetry of the neighborhood. • There is the concern if the three lot subdivision is approved that slowly the neighborhood "average" will change piece by piece with lots becoming smaller and smaller over time. • Consider a two lot subdivision; not three. Consider variance for house placement. • There is an issue of vehicle and pedestrian safety. The subject lot is curved; a reversed pie and a traffic study should be conducted. Charlie Carpenter, attorney representing the applicant addressed the Commission and stated the plat as depicted meets the subdivision ordinance requirements and in their opinion makes sense. Carpenter also noted that the applicant has indicated they would minimize any disruption to the site through driveway placement and the retention of existing vegetation. Chair Staunton asked if anyone else would like to speak to the issue; being none Commissioner Platteter moved to close the public hearing. Commissioner Fischer seconded the motion. All voted aye; motion carried. Page 12 of 15 Discussion Chair Staunton suggested that the Commission meet with the City Attorney regarding subdivisions to clarify what action the Commission can take when a plat technically meets Ordinance requirements. Planner Teague said he would speak with the City Attorney, Roger Knutson and set up a work session to discuss subdivision and other planning issues. Commissioner Schroeder stated it appears to him that this subdivision feels more like in -fill development, adding if approved there will be a distinct change in this neighborhood. Commissioner Grabiel said the applicant has indicated they would do their best to retain the vegetation along Merilane and minimize driveway placement, adding he can support the subdivision request as submitted. Motion Commissioner Grabiel moved to recommend preliminary plat approval for 5 Merilane based on staff findings and subject to staff conditions. Motion failed for lack of second. Discussion Commissioner Scherer stated it's very obvious to her that the subdivision as presented creates three pie shaped lots that without the relief of a variance from the Zoning Ordinance would cluster three homes at the top of the hill. Scherer reiterated the clustering -of homes bothers her; however, a variance may mitigate that issue. Commissioner Fischer stated he struggles with this request, adding the plat as presented complies with the Ordinance and provides three buildable lots, adding the applicant has indicated from the street that they intend to minimize driveway placement and preserve trees and vegetation along the street. Fischer did acknowledge this would be a change. Motion Commissioner Schroeder moved to recommend denial of the preliminary plat for 5 Merilane based on the finding that the subdivision as proposed would change the, character and symmetry of the Rolling Green neighborhood, and in particular denial is based on changes to the character and symmetry that would occur as the result of new house placement in close proximity to existing homes. Commissioner Scherer seconded the motion. A discussion occurred on the character and symmetry of the Rolling Green neighborhood. It was pointed out that the lots on the west side of Merilane are platted completely different from the lots to the east. It was further noted that spacing between the homes on the west Page 13 of 15 side of Merilane is generous; however, if the subdivision is approved and house placement occurs as presented the new homes on the east side of Merilane would be clustered together at the top in close proximity to each other and the existing homes on Lots 6 and 7 Merilane- completely out of character with the neighborhood. The discussion continued with Commissioners acknowledging that the presented preliminary plat meets Subdivision Ordinance requirements for area, width and depth and if the subdivision were approved it doesn't necessarily mean the houses would be built as-depicted. The Zoning Ordinance provides the opportunity through the variance process to be flexible with house placement. It was further noted that the applicant has the option of withdrawing the request to revise the plat to include front yard setback variance options or the Commission can vote on the motion. Mr. Adams in response to the discussion on character and symmetry and front yard setback /house placement stated that the reason the new homes are positioned with such deep front yard setbacks is to match the front yard setbacks established by the neighboring properties. This is a requirement of the Zoning Ordinance. Ayes; Scherer, Schroeder, Potts. Nays; Fischer, Platteter, Forrest, Grabiel, Staunton. Motion failed.5 -3. VIII. CORRESPONDENCE AND RECOMMENDATIONS Chair Staunton acknowledged, bac of packet materials. IX. CHAIR AND COMMISSION COMMENTS Chair Staunton welcomed Mike Fischer back to the Commission. Staunton explained the City Council appointed Mike Fischer to replace Commissioner Carpenter who recently resigned from the Commission. Chair Staunton commented that staff is continuing their work on finalizing the Commissions 2014 Work Plan. Continuing, Staunton reiterated that staff is also working on setting dates for a work session with Roger Knutson, City Attorney and Cindy Larson, Redevelopment Coordinator. Planner Teague responded he would work on scheduling work sessions; adding he believes October Stn would work well for Cindy Larson. Commissioner Fischer said in the work session with Roger Knutson he would like to discuss and ask for clarification on the 500 -foot neighborhood requirement previously mentioned by Chair Staunton. Questioning if the 500 -foot Page 14 of 15 neighborhood establishes the neighborhood or can the Commission rely solely on character and symmetry. Commissioner Potts said he would like Cindy Larson to provide the Commission with examples of what she's found in the field. Chair Staunton told Commissioners if they have any questions for Roger or Cindy to e-mail those questions to Planner Teague prior to the work sessions. Commissioner Platteter informed the Commission he, along with Commissioner Carr attended their first Living Streets meeting. Commissioner Grabiel commented in reference to the Commission's action on the previous subdivision that in his opinion the Commission didn't send a clear message to the Council on where the Commission stands. Chair Staunton said the Commission could discuss subdivision at the work session with Roger Knutson. X. STAFF COMMENTS Planner Teague apprised the Commission that the City Council denied the two -lot subdivision request for the Shanight property at 5612 Tracy Avenue; however at their last meeting they referred the subdivision request back to the Commission for re- review. Council further directed the applicant to prepare another plat reflecting their objection of a shared driveway for both lots. Teague stated he believes the Commission will hear this request at their second meeting in October. XI. ADJOURNMENT Commissioner Scherer moved to adjourn; Commissioner Platteter seconded the motion. All voted aye; meeting adjourned at 9:45 PM Ja"Ie &oo Respectfully submitted Page 15 of 15 Edina Arts and Culture Commission Meeting Meeting Minutes City of Edina, Minnesota Edina City Hall Community Room August 22, 2013 4:30 P.M. I. Call to Order Mr. Bouassida called the meeting to order at 4:37 p.m. II. Roll Call Commissioners Present: Hafed Bouassida, Kandace Ellis, Dana Lappin, Barbara La Valleur, Ray Meifert, and Colin Nelson. Commissioners Absent: Kitty O'Dea, Paul Peterson, Thomas Raeuchle and John Swon. Staff Present: Michael Frey, General Manager, Edina Art Center. Community Members Present: Naomi Griffith. III. Approval of Meeting Agenda Chair Bouassida noted the meeting agenda had been circulated and asked if there were requests for additions or changes. No additions to the agenda voiced. The agenda as stated is approved and will be followed. IV. Adoption of Consent Agenda A. Approval of the Regular Meeting Minutes of July 25, 2013 B. Edina Film Festival Report C. Music in Edina Group Report D. Public Art Committee Report E. Art Center General Manager Monthly Report — August 2013 Chair Bouassida asked if there were changes or corrections to the minutes of the Regular Meeting of July 25, 2013. No changes voiced. Motion by Commissioner La Valleur and seconded by Commissioner Nelson that the Arts and Culture Commission approve the Consent Agenda as presented. Ayes: Hafed Bouassida, Kandace Ellis, Dana Lappin, Barbara La Valleur, Ray Meifert, and Colin Nelson. Motion carried. V. Community Comment Naomi Griffith referenced an article in the newest edition of Mpis St. Paul Magazine that she believed would benefit the Commission. Chair Bouassida noted that many Commissioners have copies of the magazine at their homes and recommended that they read the article. VI. Reports /Recommendations A. 2014 Arts and Culture Commission Work Plan Chair Bouassida stated that at the last meeting it was discussed that the City expects the Commission to present a Work Plan for 2014, which needs to outline the short-term and long -term goals of the Commission, including financial figures. Mr. Frey referenced the Work Plan form that was included in the Commission packet sent by US Mail in June 2013, which needs to be filled in and submit to City staff by September 14th, noting that the document would then be ?viewed by the City Council at a Worksession on October 15t. He stated that the Chair and Staff Liaison for each -'ommission will attend the Worksession with City Council to present their Work Plan for the upcoming year. Chair Bouassida stated that the Commission is under the gun, as this document needs to be ready within approximately two weeks. He stated that because the Commission is so new there are limited activities that the Commission has ' ongoing. Commissioner Nelson discussed an increase regarding literature and noted that item would need to be included on a funding list but did not believe the item would need a separate working group. Mr. Frey noted that he and Chair Bouassida presented the 2013 Work Plan to the City Council the previous year. He passed the 2013 Work Plan to Commissioners to give them a better idea of the format and type of information that would need to be included. Commissioner La Valleur questioned if this process would include budgeting or simply ideas. Mr. Frey stated that there is a space listed on the document for a budget amount. He noted that the previous year the Public Art Committee had asked for $20,000 on the Work Plan. Council approved $10,000. Commissioner La Valleur referenced vandalism acts within the City that recently occurred and questioned if lighting for the sculpture area could be included. Chair Bouassida confirmed that each Commissioner should be listing their initiatives in the appropriate part of the Work Plan and advised that the request will then go before the City Council and they will make the decision on whether the item would be funded. He confirmed that Commissioner Peterson should be contacted to provide an approximate budget for the Music in Edina item. He also believed that Commissioner Swon should be contacted in regard to the Edina Film Festival item. He stated that Mr. Frey and the Art Center are on a different budget cycle proce'ssand asked for additional information. Mr. Frey stated that the.City is starting to work on budgets in a different cycle. He explained that during this process he planned the Art Center budget for 2014 -2015 and advised that the process began in Marchand all information, had to be submitted by July 8th. He advised that the Art Center budget is set on a two -year cycle while the Work Plan is'something required on an annual basis. Chair Bouassida stated that he would work with Mr. =Frey to combine the efforts and not ask for duplicate efforts. Mr. Frey agreed with Commissioner Nelson that expanding the literature efforts would be a good-item" to include on the Plan. Commissioner Ellis questioned if the efforts would be focused on adults or children as well. She referenced a children's course she was aware of that is heavily attended and believed there could be benefit to opening a program geared towards children as well. Commissioner Nelson confirmed that any additions should be returned to Mr. Frey within one week. Commissioner Meifert discussed the possibility of creating a Theater Group, noting the benefit.that could be provided and that it could also tie in with'The Authors Studio. Mr. Frey stated that the Work Plan includes only few lines for a title. He asked that Commissioners include a brief synopsis as he and Chair Bouassida will present the information to Council and need to have additional details. He stated that Edina has had a community theater program previously and noted that it may be beneficial to speak to members of the public that were involved or had past experience. B. Arts and Culture Commission Working Groups Chair Bouassida discussed the Working Groups'and whether additional groups would be necessary. He advised that the Working Groups should be composed of several Commissioners, but not more than a quorum, with additional members from outside of the Commission. Commissioner Lappin noted that Commissioner Swon will be leaving the Commission at the end of the year and the Edina Film Festival will need to be discussed. Mr. Frey noted the connection between the Art Center and the Film Festival. He provided clarification as to the difference between the Commission, a Working Group and a Committee. It was the consensus of the Commission that the Film Festival would remain as a Working Group at this time. Chair Bouassida stated that it would also be beneficial to continue the Art Center Working Group and noted that in the future that group could be transformed more globally into a 'Friends of the Arts' Working Group. He confirmed the formation of a Marketing Promotion and Fundraising Working Group and that Mr. Freya nd possibly Commissioner it O'Dea could be on that group. Commissioner Meifert provided a recap of the efforts discussed including the different Working Groups. Jlr. Frey suggested that the Art Center Working Group be titled Friends of the Arts rather than the Edina Art Center. Commissioner Ellis stated that many of the Working Groups seem appealing and questioned the level of, involvement each Commissioner should have. Chair Bouassida stated that each Commissioner should Chair only one Working Group but advised that one Commissioner could Chair one Working Group and become a member of another Working Group. He stated that the first step would be to develop the Working Groups and the intent of each group and at the next meeting it could be decided who would best fit for each group. Commissioner Meifert discussed the possibility of a Dance Working Group and noted that he could speak with his wife to gather additional information and contacts. He confirmed that he would also provide information on the Theater Working Group. Chair Bouassida reviewed each of the Working Groups and, the Commissioners that would be working on each item. VII. Correspondence and Petitions Chair Bouassida asked if there was any correspondence or petitions. None voiced. VIII. Chair and Commissioners Comments Commissioner Lappin referenced the September meeting date. Mr. Frey stated that the regularly scheduled September meeting falls on the same date as the Juried Show. He asked for input from the Commission. Commissioner Meifert stated that perhaps the Commission should be required to attend the Juried Show rather than bolding a September meeting. Commissioner Lappin stated that it used to be a requirement of the Board that the Board /Commission Members be greeters at the Juried Show. Commissioner La Valleur confirmed that the Juried Show would begin at 5:00 p.m. and suggested that the regular September Commission meeting be held at 4:00 p.m. at the Art Center, so that business could be taken care of quickly and Commissioners can attend the Juried Show. Commissioner Lappin stated that would be a long time between meetings if no meeting was held. Mr. Frey noted that the November and December. meetings will need to be rescheduled because of holidays and stated that usually one meeting is canceled during the year. Chair Bouassida stated that the options would be to cancel the meeting or to hold the meeting at 4:00 p.m. at the Art Center. Commissioner Lappin stated that she would prefer to hold a meeting at the Art Center in September and then cancel the November meeting if necessary. It was the consensus of the Commission to hold the September meeting at 4:00 p.m. at the Edina Art Center. Mr. Frey noted that he would handle the change in time and location for the public notice. Commissioner La Valleur referenced the Grandview location for a possible center for the arts and noted the location is in a strong discussion with the City Council at this time and questioned whether the Commission should be commenting. She stated that other interests and requests are being heard. Chair Bouassida stated that he is aware of what is going on and acknowledged that this is one of the pains of being a ew Commission; to determine the place the Commission has and what is expected or reasonable for the Commission. Ae stated that somehow he believes the Commission should connect with the City Council and advised that Commissioner Raeuchle will attend the meetings on behalf of the Commission. Mr. Frey referenced the meeting he attended the previous day.in regard to how the Commission should participate. He stated that he has been told that the request from the Commission was received too late but acknowledged that there would still be benefit that the Commission could provide in this.process. He advised that these planning meetings are open to the public and stated that Commissioner Raeuchle will attend those meetings and noted that he will as well. Commissioner La Valleur referenced the Fairview Southdale Group and noted that the first meeting went great: She advised of a person that would like to join the group. Chair Bouassida stated that there was not enough information to make a decision at that time and stated that it is not up to the Commission to say who joins that group. He explained that there was not enough information at the previous time of request and that is why the Commission- chose to have Commissioner'La Valleur and Bill McCabe attend the meeting on behalf of the Commission. He stated that updates have been provided and questioned how the Commission would like to move forward, whether they should continue to be involved. Commissioner La Valleur stated that Bill McCabe provided a great report and was an active part of discussion during the meeting. Mr. Frey stated that while the person Commissioner La Valleur speaks of is very,interested in representing the Commission at the meetings, he advised that the decision was made at the last meeting to have a Commissioner attend along with Mr. McCabe. He also noted that this individual is not a member of the Commission or EPAC currently. Chair Bouassida stated that the Commission is not in the business of nominating outside people to attend other meetings. He stated that she can either participate on her own or become apart of EPAC of which Commissioner La Valleur's is Chair of to become involved. He stated that there would not be a cap on the number of members for a Working Group. Mr. Frey confirmed that the individual may join Commissioner La Valleur's Working Group to become involved. IX. Staff Comments Mr. Frey stated that there are two new student representatives that will be joining the Commission, noting that Student Commission member training was held the previous day. He noted the students asked very , compelling questions at orientation. He reiterated that reports did not come to him on Monday as requested and instead were distributed to the Commission, which is a violation of the Open Meeting Law. He advised that all reports should be sent directly to him and he will send them to the Commission. He advised4hat included in the packet was a list,of the new Commission By- laws with the name Arts and Culture Commission, and also the Commission member attendance record. X. Adjournment The meeting was adjourned by the Chair at 6:18 p.m. MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE HUMAN RIGHTS & RELATIONS COMMISSION August 27, 2013 7:00 P.M. I. CALL TO ORDER Chair Bigbee called the meeting to order at 7:02 PM. II. ROLL CALL Answering roll call were Commissioners Arsenault, Bigbee, Davis, Lagerstrom, Seidman, Stanton, Winnick and Staff Liaisons Lisa Schaefer and Annie Johnson. III. APPROVAL OF MEETING AGENDA Chair Bigbee asked that the Southview Incident (Item A) be moved so that it could be in conjunction with item K.V. Bias /Hate Response Plan. Motion was made by Commissioner Stanton to approve the meeting agenda of the August 27, 2013 meeting as revised. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Winnick. Motion carried. . IV. ADOPTION OF CONSENT AGENDA A. Approval of Minutes - Regular Meeting of July 23, 2013 Motion was made by Commissioner Stanton to approve the consent agenda; the motion was seconded by Commissioner Davis. Motion carried. V. COMMUNITY COMMENT There were no community comments. VI. REPORTS /RECOMMENDATIONS A. Immigration Reform. Commissioner Stanton provided an updated version of the draft resolution. Changes included: removal of reference to poll data, which was replaced by American Action Network Study Data; reference to the U.S. Chamber; correction of grammar; updating the reference to estimated foreign -born population; and the removal of clause regarding whom to send the resolution. Additional data used was from the U.S. Department of Commerce. Commissioners offered additional revisions. A cover memo will be included with suggestions of whom to send the resolution. Motion was made by Commissioner Stanton to recommend to the City Council that they adopt the revised resolution and that it be circulated as widely as possible, including the Minnesota Congressional Delegation; the motion was seconded by Commissioner Winnick. Motion carried. B. Appoint Members for Community Outreach Working Group. Edina Human Rights & Relations Commission Agenda Page 2 Commissioner Davis reported that Commissioner Cashmore has been out of town. Commissioner Winnick provided an update from Cashmore regarding membership. Chair Bigbee expressed concern with the delay in the working groups' membership, and both asked and offered help to the group. Commissioner Davis had been in contact with all prospective members earlier this summer; she will reconnect with,each. Her intention is to have the group determine the mission of the Community Outreach. Working Group at the first meeting. Chair Bigbee.requested that workshop sessions be set, volunteers identified, and broadened participation teed up,by the September.HRRC meeting; he will meet with Commissioner Davis and Cashmore to help implement. C. Appoint Members for Quasquicentennial Working Group. Commissioner Lagerstrom reported that she has two community volunteers for the working group. The individual.that responded to the press release has not responded to additional communications to work with the group. Commissioner Lagerstrom °also requested that the two new student commissioners be appointed to the working group as well. The initiative will wrap up in at the end <of December;. Founder's Day is December 12`h and Commissioner Lagerstrom has been in touch with the City's Director of Communications to prepare. Motion was made by Commissioner Lagerstrom.to appoint Ailleen Foley, Laura Nisi, Paige Harrington, and Molly Haeg to the Quasquicentennial Working Group; motion was seconded by Commissioner Seidman. Motion carried. Jessi Kingston arrived to the meeting at 7:29pm. D. Southview Middle School & Bias /Hate Response Plan. Commissioner Winnick provided an update on the Bias /Hate Response Plan; copies,of the existing plan were distributed to commissioners. Commissioner Winnick reported that he was setting up a meeting with the Edina'Police Chief when the incident at Southview Middle School occurred on Sunday morning, August 11; paint was sprayed on three sides of the building. There were references to marijuana and also derogatory references to school staff. There were also racial references made in the vandalism. The graffiti had been removed by the afternoon of the day it occurred. The police reported that the incident will not be charged as a hate.crime, and three juvenile individuals are being formally referred to the Hennepin County Attorney's Office with a charge of defaming and destruction of public property: Commissioner Winnick reminded commissioners that the Human Rights and Relations Commission's role is primarily advisory to the City Council. The matter is still under investigation by the police. Commissioner Kingston requested that the City -issue a blanket statement against the actions, regardless of who committed the act. Commissioner Stanton reported that other HRRC groups take a more active role in these types of incidents, but that the City Council has only charged the EHRRC with an advisory role. Chair Bigbee asked that the commission be aware of the School District's role; as the incident occurred on their property. Commissioner Lagerstrom provided a statement from the Southview Principal which was sent to Southview parents via email. Copies were distributed to the members of the commission. There has been no communication from the School District. There has been no communication to the greater community impacted by the incident. Edina Human Rights & Relations Commission Agenda Page 3 Commissioner Kingston moved to have Chair Bigbee urge the City Council and Mayor to issue a public statement against the incident at Southview Middle School and to reiterate that the City of Edina is an inclusive community which does not tolerate this type of activity; the motion was seconded by Commissioner Davis. Motion carried; Chair Bigbee abstained. The motion will be supported by the Commission's work plan and initiatives to be more inclusive and support anti - bullying initiatives. Chair Bigbee and Commissioner Winnick will meet with the Mayor to deliver the Commission's message. No additional specific action by the Commission is planned. E. New Student Orientation and Mentoring. Commissioner Seidman reported that the new student orientation occurred on the morning of the Edina High School orientation day and was hosted by Karen Kurt, Assistant City Manager, and Annie Johnson, City Manager Fellow. The students completed a mock meeting and were given a presentation on the roles and responsibilities of being a commissioner. The student will continue meeting on a quarterly basis. There are not currently any city guidelines for commission mentorships. Staff Liaison Johnson reported that the student applications will be provided to the Commission at the September meeting. Both student commissioners are seniors at Edina High School and have both never served on a commission before. Mentors are needed to provide a 30 minute update and work plan review before the September meeting. Commissioner Lagerstrom volunteered to be a mentor; she, Commissioner Seidman, and Staff Liaison Johnson will meet with the students at 6:30 September 24tH Johnson passed out updated Commission roster information. Commissioner Seidman reported that there may be an Edina High School Anti - Bullying club this year. Bound for Great Leadership Program. Chair Bigbee reported that the NFL anti - bullying program was suggested to the School District, which responded that the HRRC should be involved. This was referred back to the School District because it was beyond the scope of the HRRC Work Plan and budget; however Bigbee told Superintendent Rick Dressen that the HRRC would be a partner on initiative if they decided to take it up. G. SHIP /Public Health Update. Commissioners received a copy of the most recent program update. The cities of Edina, Richfield, and Bloomington are involved in do.Town. Chair Bigbee reported that transportation issues are involved, such as sidewalks and livability issues for the community. Issues with a walking path near Cornelia School had brought out some Not - In-My- Back -Yard conversations by community members at the City Council level, which makes Edina less inclusive and welcoming to all people who need basic infrastructure; the City Council adopted the sidewalk infrastructure. Southview International Festival. Chair Bigbee reported that the Southview International Festival 'Taste of Southview' was brought up at the last work session by Councilmember Sprague. The Festival of Nations in Saint Paul is a much larger, similar event. There has not been much support Edina Human Rights & Relations Commission Agenda Page 4 for a separate event, but instead the Commission could issue a statement of support for .the Southview event and Commissioners could attend if possible. I. Appoint an Edina Resource.Center Council Representative. Commissioner Winnick reported that he has been the representative for the Edina Community Council the past couple of years. He asked if any other commissioners were interested in serving. There are-5-6 meetings per year at 7:30am at the Community Center. If Winnick is reappointed, he will serve at the Council Chair. Commissioner Kingston moved to appoint Commissioner Steve Winnick to the Edina Community Council Board for the next year as the Chairperson; the motion was seconded by Commissioner Seidman. Motion carried. J. Draft 2014 Work Plan. Chair Bigbee drew the Commission's attention to the draft work plan provided in the meeting packet. No specific events for 2014 have yet been selected; the work plan highlights general initiatives. The anti - bullying initiative will happen in the 1St or 2nd quarter of 2014. Commissioner Lagerstrom suggested that the HRRC sponsor a book reading for elementary kids with Nancy Carlson, Edina native. The budget for the total initiative will be $800. The Community Outreach Initiative .will, be complete by the end of March 2014, with a budget of $500 for beverages and snacks for listening sessions. The-Police Department, Parks and Rec Department, and School Liaisons are also to be listed as initiative partners. The Neuro- Diversity Fair was revised to be the Disability Awareness Campaign, with target completion by October 2014 and a $300 budget. Days of Remembrance will require a $1500 budget to bring in Ellen Kennedy and to do three events in 2014. Two of three days have been confirmed. Events:may include a play, speaker, and video screening. Staff Liaison Schaefer submitted a preliminary budget to City Council for HRRC that was between $3,000 - $3,500 for 2014. Commissioner Kingston moved to adopt the 2014 HRRC Work Plan as revised; Commissioner Seidman seconded the motion. Motion carried. Staff will send the revised Work Plan to Chair Bigbee before submission to Assistant City Manager Kurt. K. General Work Plan Updates /Updates from Teams. i. Monitoring Domestic Partner Legislation Commissioner Stanton reported that there are no urgent updates; the City ordinance regarding Domestic Partner Ordinance may need to be revised based on recent DOMA changes. The IRS guidelines are still needed, and there is a risk for the law to be overturned in the future. The registration could still apply to individuals who have a committed relationship, but are not married. Staff Liaison Johnson reported that City Attorney Knutson indicted there are no issues with leaving the ordinance as -is or revising. Edina Human Rights & Relations Commission Agenda Page 5 Group Health insurance would require a change in the statue to allow domestic partners to have family /dependent insurance coverage. The HRRC had discussed this issue in the past and the legislation had not been moved at the state level, but the bill is still up for consideration in the next session. This item will be added to the Monthly Work Plan document for consideration by HRRC in March of 2014. ii. Quasquicentennial Commissioner Lagerstrom provided a request for a $500 budget for the Quasquicentennial event in December 2013 for a banner. The banner will be freestanding and can be donated to the Historical Society after the event. Staff will clarify if the budget request needs approval for the September meeting. Staff will pull out existing HRRC banners for the September meeting VII. CORRESPONDENCE AND PETITIONS None. VIII. CHAIR AND COMMISSION MEMBER COMMENTS None. IX. STAFF COMMENTS Staff Liaison Johnson reported that Suburban Human Rights Commission Liaisons have started meeting and there is a potential November event for Commissioners from Eden Prairie, Bloomington, Falcon Heights, Red Wing. Bloomington HRC extended an invitation to the EHRRC for a Human Rights event they are sponsoring in September 2013. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business on the Commission Agenda, Commissioner Seidman moved and Commissioner Winnick seconded adjournment of the meeting. Motion carried. Chair Bigbee declared the meeting adjourned at 9:11 PM. Respectfully submitted, Annie Johnson, HRRC Staff Liaison Minutes approved by HRRC, September 24, 2013 Arnie Bigbee, HRRC Chair