Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2013-10-14_COUNCIL MEETINGAGENDA CITY COUNCIL MEETING CITY OF EDINA, MINNESOTA CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS TUESDAY, OCTOBER 14, 2013 7:00 P.M. 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 October 1, 2013, Closed Session of October 1, 2013 and Work Session of October 1, 2013 B. Receive Payment of Claims as Per: Pre -List Dated, 10/3/2013, TOTAL $1,195,247.96 and Pre - List Dated, 10/ 10/2013 TOTAL $1,622,185.67 C. Authorization To Participate In 2014 -2015 Fuel Consortium D. Request For Purchase — Contract For City Facility Refuse And Recycling Collection For 2014 — 20 15 With Waste Management E. Traffic Safety Reports Of August 7, 2013 and September 4, 2013 F. Request For Purchase — Wexford Road Storm Sewer Improvement — ENG 13 -21 NB G. Engineering-Services — Flood Protection And Clean Water Improvement Study H. Human Rights And Relations Commission Request For Training I. Resolution No. 2013 -105 Approving the submittal of portions of the 1 -35W/1 -494 Interchange Improvement Project for Consideration by the State of Minnesota 2013 Corridors of Commerce Program. V. SPECIAL RECOGNITIONS AND PRESENTATIONS A. Proclamation — Going The Extra Mile 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. Agenda/Edina City Council October 14, 2013 Page 2 • 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 — Special Assessments (Favorable rollcall majority vote of Council Members present to approve) i. Aquatic Weeds Improvement No. AQ -13 — Resolution No. 2013 -88 ii. Tree Removal — Improvement No. TR -13 — Resolution No. 2013 -89 iii. Weed Mowing Improvement No. WD -13 — Resolution No. 2013 -90 iv. 50th & France Maintenance Improvement No. M -13 — Resolution No. 2013 -91 v. Grandview Business District Maintenance Improvement No. G -13 — Resolution No. 2013 -92 vi. Tracy Ave Roadway Improvements, Improvement No. BA -368 — Resolution No. 2013 -93 vii. Countryside Neighborhood Roadway Improvement, Improvement No. BA -385 — Resolution No. 2013 -94 viii. Arctic Way, Improvement No. BA -386 — Resolution No. 2013 -95 ix. Glacier Place, Improvement No. BA -400— Resolution No. 2013 -96 x. Gleason Court, Improvement No. BA -401— Resolution No. 2013 -97 A. Polar Circle, Improvement No. BA -402 — Resolution No. 2013 -98 xii. Vernon Court and Vernon Hills Court, Improvement No. BA -403 — Resolution No. 2013 -99 xiii. Valley Estates Neighborhood Roadway Improvement, Improvement No. BA -387 — Resolution No. 2013 -100 xiv. Richmond Hills Park Neighborhood Roadway Improvement, Improvement No. BA -388 — Resolution No. 2013 -101 B. PUBLIC HEARING —Certification of Delinquent Utilities — DU -13 —Resolution No. 2013 -102 (Favorable rollcall majority vote of Council Members present to approve) C. PUBLIC HEARING CONTINUED FROM 10 -1 -2013 — Resolution No. 2013 -82 & Resolution No. 2013 -83 — Preliminary Plat & Front Yard Setback Variance, 6609 Blackfoot Pass; Great Neighborhood Homes Inc. on behalf of Douglas Johnson. (Favorable vote of majority of Council Members present to approve) D. PUBLIC HEARING — Resolution No. 2013 -103 — Preliminary Plat and Variances, 5820 Brookview, Avenue; AKARE Companies LLC on behalf of John Peterson. (Favorable vote of majority of Council Members present to approve) VII. COMMUNITY COMMENT During "Community Comment" the City Council will invite residents to share new issues or concerns that haven't been considered in the past 30 days by the Council or which aren't slated for future consideration. Individuals must limit their comments to three minutes. The Mayor may limit the number of speaks on the same issue in the interest of time and topic Generally speaking items that are elsewhere on tonight's agenda may not be addressed during Community Comment Individuals should not expect the Mayor or Council to respond to their comments tonight Instead the Council might refer the matter to staff for consideration at a future meeting. Agenda/Edina City Council October 14, 2013 Page 3 VIII. REPORTS /RECOMMENDATIONS: (Favorable vote of majority of Council Members present to approve except where noted) A. Proposals For Sports Dome, Outdoor Refrigerated Rink And Pamela Park Improvements B. Ordinance No. 2013 -10 Regarding Chapter 9 Liquor (First Reading: favorable vote of majority of Council Members present to approve - Waiver of Second Reading: favorable rollcall vote of four Council Members to approve) C. Resolution No. 2013 -104 Accepting Donations IX. CORRESPONDENCE AND PETITIONS A., Correspondence B. Energy & Environment Commission Advisory Communication: Comprehensive Plan Chapter 10 Carbon Reduction Goal C. Minutes 1. Park Board, September 10, 2013 2. Heritage Preservation Board, September 10, 2013 3. Arts & Culture Commission, September 26, 2013 X. AVIATION NOISE UPDATE 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. SCHEDULE OF UPCOMING MEETINGS /DATES /EVENTS 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 is Dec 17 Regular Meeting 7:00 P.M. COUNCIL CHAMBERS .es 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 OCTOBER 1, 2013 7:00 P.M. CALL TO ORDER Mayor Hovland called the meeting to order at 7:10 p.m. II. ROLLCALL Answering rollcall were Members Bennett, Brindle, Sprague, Swenson and Mayor Hovland. 111. MEETING AGENDA APPROVED Member Bennett made a motion, seconded by Member Swenson, approving the meeting agenda. Ayes: Bennett, Brindle, Sprague, Swenson, Hovland Motion carried. IV. CONSENT AGENDA ADOPTED Member Sprague made a motion, seconded by Member Bennett, approving the consent agenda as revised to remove Items W.A., Regular meeting minutes of September 17, 2013; and, IV.G., Engineering Services, Appeal of FEMA Proposal Flood Hazard Determinations, as follows: W.A. Regal, Approve closed and joint work session with Heritage Preservation Board meeting minutes of September 17, 2013 IV.B. Receive . payment of the following claims as shown in detail on the Check Register dated September 19, 2013, and consisting of 25 pages; General Fund $113,872.49; Police Special Revenue $1,740.05; Pedestrian and Cyclist Safety $55,642.82; Working Capital Fund $909,731,66; Equipment Replacement Fund $262.82; Art Center Fund $1,229.98; Aquatic Center Fund $583.96; Golf Course Fund $18,739.54; Ice Arena Fund $9,944.51; Edinborough Park Fund $3,094.84; Centennial Lakes Park Fund $3,859.13; Liquor Fund $182,691.68; Utility Fund $392,638.14;. Storm Sewer Fund $267,109.28; Recycling Fund $34,192.80; PSTF Agency Fund $8,547.48; Centennial TIF District $150.00; TOTAL $2,004,031.08 and for receipt of payment of claims dated September 26, 2013, and consisting of 32 pages; General Fund $137,108.48; Police Special Revenue $346.53; Working Capital Fund $10,402.35; Art Center Fund $6,532.60; Golf Dome Fund .$4,581.75; Aquatic Center Fund $6,322.43; Golf Course Fund $13;226.28; Ice Arena Fund $8,901.56; Edinborough Park Fund $1,916.45; Centennial Lakes Park Fund $4,306.06; Liquor Fund $209,001.00; Utility Fund $94,416.78; Storm Sewer Fund $8,187.85; PSTF Agency Fund $561.04; Centennial TIF District $207.84; Payroll Fund .$7,898.87; TOTAL $513,917.87; and, Credit Card-Transactions dated July 26, 2013— August 25, 2013,JOTAL $37.788.41 IV.C. Authorize Amendment VI to the Medical Control and Direction Agreement, Hennepin HealthCare System, Inc. IV.D. Request for Purchase, Contract No. ENG 13 -19NB, Industrial Park Sidewalk, awarding the bid to the recommended low bidder, C.R. Fischer & Sons, Inc. at $89,164.05 IV.E. Adopt Resolution No. 2013 -86, Supporting Application for Hennepin County's 2014 Sidewalk Participation Program IV.F. Approve Master Agreement Professional Engineering Services — BARR IV G Engineering SeFyi..es Appeal G f FEMA PFGP _Sal Peed Hazard Determinations. IV.H. Adopt Resolution No. 2013 -87, Authorizing Joint Powers Agreement with the State of Minnesota - Minnesota Internet Crimes Against Children Task Force Rollcall: Ayes: Bennett, Brindle, Sprague, Swenson, Hovland Motion carried. Page 1 Minutes /Edina City Council /October 1, 2013 ITEMS REMOVED FROM THE CONSENT AGENDA W.A. REGULAR MEETING MINUTES OF SEPTEMBER 17, 2013 —APPROVED WITH AMENDMENTS Member Bennett requested that the following new paragraph be added to the September 17, 2013 regular meeting minutes on page five following the first motion indicating: "Member Bennett stated she supported two elements: the reduction in height and elimination of the second story setback, but that the changes all together did not, in her opinion, make the code clearer, more practical or more enforceable, as had been her goal, or reduce the possible mass of new construction." Member Bennett made a motion, seconded by Mayor Hovland, approving the above stated amendment to the September 17, 2013 regular session minutes. Ayes: Bennett, Sprague, Hovland Nays: Brindle, Swenson Motion carried. Member Bennett made a motion, seconded by Mayor Hovland, approving the amended September 17, 2013 regular session minutes. Ayes: Bennett, Sprague, Hovland Nays: Brindle, Swenson Motion carried. IV.G. ENGINEERING SERVICES, APPEAL OF FEMA PROPOSAL FLOOD HAZARD DETERMINATIONS — APPROVED The City Council discussed its past action that resulted in successfully removing townhouses and single - family houses from the floodplain and that the City had underwritten those costs. Staff was asked how related costs could be charged to benefited property owners. City Engineer Houle explained this involved a holistic consideration and better quality of life issue, similar to that of a Storm Water Utility Fund. He indicated only the City could make such an appeal and these costs would not fund a remodel of the Creek but to indicate to FEMA that its approved model was incorrect. Mr. Houle indicated that should an additional appeal be required, staff would consider options for funding. Member Swenson made a motion, seconded by Member Bennett, approving engineering services, appeal of FEMA Proposal Flood Hazard Determinations. Ayes: Bennett, Brindle, Sprague, Swenson, Hovland Motion carried. V. SPECIAL RECOGNITIONS AND PRESENTATIONS V.A. HENNEPIN COUNTY COMMISSIONER JAN CALLISON — UPDATE PROVIDED Commissioner Callison provided an update on the Hennepin County's 2014 budget with a .98% increase over the current levy, youth sports grants, termination of passport services at Southdale due to changing federal regulations, increase in Library hours, 2014 wheelage tax, and topics of interest for Edina constituents. She recognized Member Brindle for her work on the southwest light rail corridor as well as Mayor Hovland for his contribution to the Corridor Management Committee. The Council described several project needs along the York Avenue corridor and asked for Commissioner Callison's assistance to develop a partnership with Hennepin County to further those projects. The Council thanked Commissioner Callison for representing the interests of Edina. V. B. 2013 FIRE PREVENTION WEEK — PROCLAIMED Mayor Hovland read in full a proclamation declaring Fire Prevention Week. Member Sprague made a motion, seconded by Member Swenson, approving proclamation declaring October 6 -12, 2013, Fire Prevention Week in the City of Edina. Ayes: Bennett, Brindle, Sprague, Swenson, Hovland Page 2 Minutes /Edina City Council /October 1, 2013 Motion carried. Interim Fire Chief Todd accepted the proclamation, described the educational programs offered, and thanked the Council for its continued support of the Fire Department. V. C. 2013 MNAPA'S EXCELLENCE IN COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT AWARD — PRESENTED Member Brindle announced the City of Edina had received the 2013 Minnesota Chapter American Planning Association's (MNAPA's) Excellence in Community Engagement Award acknowledging the City's do.town initiative, and its vision and core values for quality of life for its residents. VI. PUBLIC HEARINGS HELD - Affidavits of Notice presented and ordered placed on file. VI.A. PRELIMINARY PLAT, 6609 BLACKFOOT PASS; GREAT NEIGHBORHOOD HOMES, INC. ON BEHALF OF DOUGLAS JOHNSON - RESOLUTION NO. 2013-82 - POSTPONED TO OCTOBER 14, 2013 Mayor Hovland., announced that the proponent had requested postponement to October 14, 2013. Member Sprague. made a motion, seconded by Member: Brindle, postponing consideration of the Preliminary Plat, 6609 Blackfoot Pass; Great Neighborhood Homes, Inc. on behalf of Douglas Johnson and Resolution.No. 2013 -82, to October 14, 2013. Ayes: Bennett, Brindle, Sprague, Swenson, Hovland Motion carried. VI. B. PRELIMINARY PLAT AT 5 MERILANE FOR JOHN ADAMS ON BEHALF OF TED WARNER —APPROVED RESOLUTION NO. 2013-84 —ADOPTED Community Development Director Presentation Community Development Director Teague presented the request of Ted Warner for a Preliminary Plat to subdivide 5 Merilane into three lots. He stated the median lot area in this neighborhood was 48,249 square feet, median lot depth was 277 feet, and median lot width was 192 feet. The proposed new lots would meet all minimum lot size requirements. If approved, the existing house would remain on Lot 2 and a new driveway constructed to serve the existing house as the current driveway would be located on proposed Lot 3. Mr: Teague reviewed the consideration of the Planning Commission and advised that a motion to approve the request based on the findings and conditions as contained in the Planning Commission staff report failed for lack of a second. A motion to deny the request based on the finding that the subdivision as proposed would change the character and symmetry of the Rolling Green neighborhood, as a result of new house placement in close proximity to existing homes failed on a vote of 3 -5. Mr. Teague stated staff recommended approval, as it meets the ordinance's subjective standards, subject to the findings and conditions as detailed in the staff report. City Attorney Knutson advised that when considering a plat approval, the Council was acting in a quasi - judicial capacity in applying City ordinances and Statute to the facts as presented to determine whether it met the requirements of the ordinance. It was not a consideration of establishing policy. City Attorney Knutson stated if the subdivision met ordinance standards, the City lacked discretion to deny. He explained that courts construed the City's ordinances in the least restrictive manner to allow property owners to do what they wished with their property. The purpose of tonight's public hearing was to gather information on whether the facts as presented met the ordinance requirements. Denial could not be based on neighborhood comment but had to be based on the objective standards within the ordinance. He explained that conditions could be imposed that were ordinance based to assure compliance with ordinance standards. Proponent Presentation Charlie Carpenter, attorney representing the Warner family, thanked the Council for visiting the site and discussing the proponent's plans to become familiar with the proposed plat. Mr. Carpenter stated the Page 3 Minutes /Edina City Council /October 1, 2013 subjective statements /conditions set forth in the subdivision ordinance (protecting character /symmetry of the community) distinguished from the standards relating to lot size and width. He read three statements from Minnesota Courts relating to consideration by local authorities of subdivisions and stated it was the proponent's position that statements within the City's ordinance lacked in providing a clear and objective standard. Mr. Carpenter stated the proponent believed the subdivision request did comply with the City's objective standards as contained in its ordinances and that "neighborhood" goes beyond the adjacent lots. Mr. Carpenter addressed the drawing presented by John Adams last week based on comments by the Planning Commission relating to aesthetics of placing houses at the back of the three lots and suggestion to seek a variance to bring the house location forward. He displayed a new plan prepared by the proponent's surveyor to bring the houses forward to the 130 -foot setback line and to add a buffer zone /conservation easement to provide screening to the Pohlad and Genau houses as well as between the three lots as viewed from the street. Mr. Carpenter stated based on this new plan, the proponent would agree to the following: to request variances to the front yard setback to the 130 -foot line conditioned upon creating a permanent conservation easement to be recorded against each of the three lots; to be obligated to plant vegetation and trees according with a landscaping plan approved by the City; to construct no buildings in the conservation zone; to agree with a restrictive covenant that vegetation and trees within the conservation easement would remain in place; and, that it would be a perpetual conservation easement and binding on future owners of the three lots. Mr. Carpenter requested Council approve the preliminary plat as submitted and provide guidance whether the neighborhood would be better served with the new plan that would require variances to the front yard setback of the three lots. If so, the proponent would petition the City for variances, work with the City Attorney to draft the conservation easement, and work with staff to develop the landscape plan. Mr. Teague explained the process to consider approval of the preliminary plat and a subsequent variance application that would be considered by the Planning Commission. He indicated those considerations could occur separately, or together. The Council asked questions of Mr. Carpenter relating to the genesis of the new plan that would require three front lot setback variances. Mr. Carpenter stated it was developed at the suggestion of the Planning Commission and he believed the conservation easement should be linked with the variance requests. John Adams, realtor with Coldwell Banker Burnet representing the Warner family, stated he also received an e-mail from a resident suggesting the houses be moved forward to create more space in between. He explained the 130 -foot setback was the average front yard setback along that side of the street. This method of calculating an average front yard setback had been used in Edina -until three years ago. He described how the area of the conservation easement was customized and stated they were willing to run the 25 -foot conservation easement along the property lines to the street. The Council asked how the proponent could be legally bound to return with variance requests and conservation easement should the Preliminary Plat be approved tonight. Mr. Adams suggested a condition of approval to require the proponent to make variance application. City Attorney Knutson stated if the proponent agreed to that requirement, it would be legally binding. Mayor Hovland opened the public hearing at 8:16 p.m. Public Testimony Tom Owens, real estate lawyer representing Mary Pohlad of 7 Merilane and Michael and Sandra Genau of 6 Merilane, addressed the Council and requested a five - minute recess to consider the information just received. The Council agreed to briefly recess the meeting following Public Testimony. Gerald Hulbert, 4616 Merilane Avenue, addressed the Council. Page 4 Minutes /Edina City Council /October 1, 2013 James Ganley, 4704 Merilane A e, addressed the Council.. Donna Roback, 18 Merilane , addressed the Council. Suzanne Knelman, 4812 Rolling Green Parkway, addressed the Council. Michael Genau, 6 Merilane e, addressed the Council. David Evinger, 4 Merilane �, addressed the Council. Member Swenson made a motion, seconded by Member Sprague, to recess the public hearing at 8:37 p.m. Ayes: Bennett, Brindle, Sprague, Swenson, Hovland Motion carried. Member S ew Spr g made a motion, seconded by Member Sys g Be enn^tt, to reconvene the public hearing at 8:47 p.m. Ayes: Bennett, Brindle, Sprague, Swenson, Hovland Motion carried. Tom Owens; real estate lawyer representing Mary Pohlad of 7 Merilane, and Mike and Sandy Genau of 6 Merilane, addressed the Council. Member Sprague made a motion, seconded by Member Swenson, to close the public hearing at 8:50 P.m. Ayes: Bennett, Brindle, Sprague, Swenson, Hovland Motion carried. The Council. confirmed that houses could be constructed on each of the three lots without front yard setback variances or conservation easements. The Council asked staff to respond to questions relating to the accuracy of the median lot data as, presented in the staff report from t +",+ w. proponent's surveyor. Mr. Teague stated the Council could table consideration to allow time for staff to verify the numbers or a condition could be added that approval was subject to re- verification and that the new lots must meet.,all median lot size requirements. City Attorney Knutson recommended the proponent submit survey information for review by staff and if needed, the City would hire an outside consultant for verification. In addition, staff could review data provided by other surveyors to 'Verify accuracy. The Council acknowledged that a number of variances, at least seven, had: been- issued -in- this general area. With regard to area of notification and definition of "neighborhood," the Council considered whether an ordinance should be created that was neighborhood specific or included properties within the.same plat. It was noted that Statute required notification to properties within 350 feet of the subject site; however, the City provided notice to properties within 500 feet of the subject site. The Council discussed the difference in ordinance guideline language between Sections . :i&!0(2) ^ ^'' 4 9^ 4� 810 and 85n City Attorney Knutson pointed out that regardless of the Section, the ordinance language related to "guidelines." The Council reviewed ordinance Section 8^1� ii�3) 810.11 subd. 1. C. relating to guidelines as contained in the Comprehensive Plan. City Attorney Knutson stated the purpose of the Comprehensive Plan was to provide guidance in drafting ordinances. The Council asked whether shape of lot was a consideration. City Attorney Knutson stated it was the Council's judgment whether the lot shape was m ihie6ti;4 obi 'ective� ; heweveF, he ^^+ eensideF + +„ "^ su6j; Gtiv^. Mr. Teague stated he had generally looked at the issue of shape, finding other pie- shaped .lots, but had not measured angles. The Council .acknowledged the City had a single zoning code that Page 5 Minutes /Edina City Council /October 1, 2013 applied to lots throughout the City even though there was great variation (lot sizes /topography) between and within neighborhoods, which raised the question of whether the code was adequate. The issue was raised whether a professional planning consultant should be considered to review and standardize the code. The Council found the essence of the issue was that while the lot qualified for a legal subdivision under the subjeetive objective standards of the code, it raised the eeneeFA of clusteri„g —three heuses An the Fidgeline. subdivision would cause impact on surrounding properties by clustering three houses on the back of the lots at the top of the hill. In addition, the supplemental information asked if there was some objectivity in using the old methodology to measure front yard setbacks and proffering a variance request to separate houses from each other and neighboring houses along with conservation easements to protect woodlands. The Council found a conservation easement would be an enhancement and align interests of the developer and adjacent neighbors. The Council asked how staff would proceed to at+ea -e# verify the numbers to assure the Council based its decision on accurate objective information. Mr. Teague stated the calculations were difficult, time intensive, and if directed, the City could engage a new consultant but it might take one month to complete that analysis. He stated the proponent had one year from the date of preliminary plat approval to submit the final plat. The City Attorney stated if the Council considered the preliminary plat tonight, resolution language could be included that the applicant shall apply for front yard setback variances for the three proposed lots and provide conservation easements over areas indicated at tonight's meeting in conjunction with the variance. He stated the conservation easement would result in adjusting the location of building pads to protect privacy of adjacent and existing houses. Mr. Carpenter stated the resulting building area on Lot 1 would be within the setbacks and further constricted by the easement. The Council supported consideration of a setback from the conservation easement to create maximum privacy for abutting and neighboring houses. Mr. Carpenter assured the Council that would be accomplished by the conservation easement and he believed the market was a positive force because buyers want privacy. The Council acknowledged the genesis of the new plan was in response to the suggestion by the Planning Commission for variances and conservation easements and letter from a resident encouraging relocating the houses on the lot. The Council agreed that a solution to address clustering would be to separate the houses, move the houses toward the street, and off the bluff. City Attorney Knutson stated staff would verify ownership of the outlot, lake area, and impact to the median calculation. Member Swenson introduced and moved adoption of Resolution No. 2013 -84, Approving a Preliminary Plat at S Merilane, 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. And 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. d. A construction management plan will be required for the construction of the new homes. Page 6 Minutes /Edina City Council /October 1, 2013 e. Utility hook -ups are subject to review of the City Engineer. 4. The applicant must apply for a variance for front yard setbacks for all three lots,.consistent with the plan map presented at the October 1, 2013, Council meeting. The plan map included 130 -foot front yard setbacks and conservation easements along the outer side lot lines in the rear yard to ensure house separation and tree preservation. S. The 500 -foot median calculations must be verified to ensure compliance with all minimum lot standards. Member Sprague seconded the motion. Ayes: Bennett, Brindle, Sprague; Swenson, Hovland Motion carried. VII. COMMUNITY COMMENT No one appeared to comment. Vlll.. REPORTS / RECOMMENDATIONS VIII.A. RESOLUTION NO. 2013-85. 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 Sane IlBe introduced and moved adoption of Resolution No. 2013 -85 accepting various. donations., Mdmber.Brindle seconded the motion. Rollcall: Ayes: Bennett; Brindle; Sprague, Swenson, Hovland Motion carried. VIII.B. RESOLUTION NO. 2013 -77 ADOPTED - SILVER OAK DEVELOPMENT ON BEHALF OF 'IRET PROPERTY; SITE PLAN REVIEW WITH A PARKING RAMP SETBACK AND PARKING STALL VARIANCE AT 6525 -45 FRANCE AVENUE — APPROVED Community Development Director Presentation Mr. Teague. reviewed that this item had been tabled at the last meeting to allow time for the proponent to address issues that had been raised. Proponent Presentation James O'Shea, Collaborative Design Group, presented revised plans for a four - story, 60,000 square foot medical office building expansion,.and new parking ramp expansion to the Southdale Medical Office. building. He noted the plans included taller trees around the parking ramp, intensive plantings along 66th Street and Drew Avenue ti^^ ^{ bieyele �W� new locations for more bicycle racks, addition sidewalk into the site west of the drive entrance from West 66th Street;- permeable paver drive,per City standard, and public art in the central plaza.. He.stated the proponent's engineer would work with City staff to address appropriate driveway width. - Reid Schulz, Civil Engineer with Landform Professional Services, described the redesigned two -way, 24 -foot wide, delivery access to the loading area. He also described the minimized apron and drive aisle within the paved setback, remaining truck apron to accommodate truck movements, and how a box truck would maneuver to back into the loading area. Mr. Schulz then presented details of the landscaping, noting incorporation of a retaining wall, with the backside of the five -foot berm planted with mature trees and incorporation of a plaza area and two sidewalks. The Council voiced support for the alternate design as it separated truck and car traffic and slowed the speed of vehicles. Mr. O�5 a d` isplayed pictures of the existing garage and stated they now proposed to remove the ramp, return the north setback to the City, and address the street with landscaping. He then displayed a Page 7 Minutes /Edina City Council /October 1, 2013 picture of the new proposed ramp, noting the location of the plaza to better engage citizens and the street in a primary, secondary, and tertiary manner. Mr. Schulz stated the vertical element depicted in grey would create depth and the canopy at the corner would be extended down the wall. He stated this was a modern classical design with the lower one or two levels open and the use of maintenance free silver colored metal material /mesh (50% transparent) instead of louvers. The Council considered whether it would be more architecturally interesting to have the same elements through out with more space (transparency) to allow a higher level of light entry and eliminate the traditional ramp appearance. Mr. O'Shea stated that option could be drawn up to determine whether it would be more aesthetically pleasing. Mr. !Sehulic O'Shea stated they might consider precast on the office building as well to assure consistency. Paul Reinke, Silver Oak Development, explained that as Condition 13 was worded, it would create conflict with tenant agreements allowing delivery from 5 p.m. to 7 a.m. The Council agreed to consider this revision. Member Swenson introduced and moved adoption 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, based on the following findings: 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. And 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: • Site plan date stamped July 26, 2013 and September 10 and 26, 2013 • Loading Dock Alternative #1 presented at the Council meeting on October 1, 2013 • 66`h Street Parking Ramp Elevation presented at the Council meeting on October 1, 2013 • Grading plan date stamped July 26, 2013 • Landscaping plan date stamped July 26, 2013 and revised on September 11 and 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 to 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 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 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`h Street intersection in the future, minor intersection turn lane and phasing improvements may be necessary. Should these Page 8 Minutes /Edina City Council /October 1, 2013 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 66`h 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,fa�ades must include design elements such as louvers for screening. 13. Semi -truck deliveries shall be limited to only between the hours of 5:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m. weekdays and weekends. 14. The replaced sidewalks along Drew and 66`h 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. 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. Member Brindle�seconded the motion. . Ayes: Bennett, Brindle, Sprague, Swenson, Hovland Motion carried. Ted Holms, IRET, thanked the Council for this consideration and stated they were excited to complete this project. Vlll.C. RESTORATION OF NEIGHBORHOOD RECONSTRUCTION PROJECTS Engineer Houle explained the rationale to no longer restore boulevards with sod, benefits of using hydro - seeding, and reported on the status of turf restoration following neighborhood reconstruction projects. The Council discussed boulevard restoration conditions along collector streets and whether it delivered what residents had expected. It was pointed out that the City delivered more value in rights -of -way with sidewalk and pedestrian ways; however, turf restoration had not always achieved the same level of expectation. Mr. Houle stated there was now a 90 -day watering requirement that had.produced better results. He indicated that with Tracy Avenue ra_n7oth Street; staff would OteFFniRe whether *h^ h^„leVaFd had t^^ FnaRy weeds and should be t. °,* °^review boulevard conditions and determine whether further restorative work and /or weed management was necessary. He also n d thatpan&tke ,t .;^., wag t^ r^st^.^ with day Lilies ..,tti^, than to in eeneral. another boulevard option was to restore th day lilies rather than turf! .. The Council agreed that at some point, property owners need to take 'ownership" of the boulevard area outside of the contractor's maintenance period. It was discussed whether a longer contractor maintenance period should be consider on collector roadways, as "ownership" by the adjacent property owner was lower than experienced along residential roadways. The Council supported use of hydro- seeding with a 90 -day contractor warranty and asked staff to assure the use of salt resistant seed along collector streets that were salted during winter weather conditions. Page 9 Minutes /Edina City Council /October 1, 2013 Staff was also asked to determine whether there would be cost benefit for the City, rather than contractor, to hydro seed. IX. CORRESPONDENCE AND PETITIONS IX.A. CORRESPONDENCE Mayor Hovland acknowledged the Council's receipt of various correspondence. IX.B. EDINA HUMAN RIGHTS & RELATIONS COMMISSION ADVISORY COMMUNICATION — IMMIGRATION REFORM RECOMMENDATION— RECEIVED IX.C. RECEIVE PETITION: IX. C. 1. DALE RASMUSSEN OPPOSING SIDEWALK IMPROVEMENT — RECEIVED IX. D. MINUTES: 1. ENERGY & ENVIRONMENT COMMISSION, JULY 11, 2013, AND AUGUST 8, 2013 2. VETERANS MEMORIAL COMMITTEE, AUGUST 23, 2013 3. TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION, AUGUST 15, 2013 4. PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES, SEPTEMBER 11, 2013 5. ARTS & CULTURE COMMISSION, AUGUST 22, 2013 6. HUMAN RIGHTS & RELATIONS COMMISSION, AUGUST 27, 2013 Informational; no action required. X. AVIATION NOISE UPDATE X.A. AUTHORIZE PUBLIC COMMENTS TO FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION —APPROVED The Council reviewed and discussed a draft letter requesting the Federal Aviation Administration to conduct a full environmental impact assessment prior to Performance Based Navigation (PBN) implementation. Member Swenson made a motion, seconded by Member Bennett, authorizing the City Manager to prepare and execute a letter on behalf of Edina indicating the City wanted RNAV implementation to be subject to environmental review. Ayes: Bennett, Brindle, Sprague, Swenson, Hovland Motion carried. Xl. MAYOR AND COUNCIL COMMENTS — Received The Council discussed whether the subdivision ordinance should be revised to separate subdivisions requiring variances, to address whether bodies of water should be included within lot area, and areas of notification. The Council agreed the Planning Commission does not have time to take on this task in its full form so in this instance, other options should be considered. Manager Neal stated staff would review options and provide a recommendation. XII. MANAGER'S COMMENTS — Received XIII. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business on the Council Agenda, Mayor Hovland declared the meeting adjourned at 11:24 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Jane Timm, Deputy City Clerk Minutes approved by Edina City Council, October 14, 2013. James B. Hovland, Mayor Video Copy of the October 1, 2013, meeting available. Page 10 MINUTES OF THE CLOSED WORK SESSION OF THE EDINA CITY COUNCIL HELD AT CITY HALL OCTOBER 1, 2013 5:00 P.M. Mayor Hovland called the work session of the Edina City Council to order at 5:00 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; Jane Timm, Deputy City Clerk; and David Trevor, Attorney, Dorsey and Whitney. SESSION CLOSED Member Swenson made a motion, seconded by Member Brindle 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 Swenson made a motion seconded by Member Brindle to adjourn the closed session and reconvene the work session at 6:04 p.m. Ayes: Bennett, Brindle, Sprague, Swenson, Hovland. Motion carried. Respectfully submitted, Minutes approved by Edina City Council, October 14, 2013. Jane M. Timm, Deputy City Clerk James B. Hovland, Mayor MINUTES OF THE WORK SESSION OF THE EDINA CITY COUNCIL AND BOARD & COMMISSION CHAIRS HELD AT CITY HALL OCTOBER 1, 2013 6:04 P.M. CALL TO ORDER Mayor Hovland called the meeting to order at 6:04 p.m. in the Community Room of City Hall. ROLL CALL Answering roll call were Members Bennett, Brindle, Sprague, Swenson and Mayor Hovland. Commission Representatives attending included: Hafed Bouassida, Arts & Culture Commission; Matt Doscotch, Edina Community Health Committee; Bill Sierks, Energy & Environment Commission; Bob Moore, Heritage Preservation Board; Arnie Bigbee, Human Rights & Relations Commission; Ellen Jones, Park Board; Kevin Staunton & Michael Platteter, Planning Commission; and Paul Nelson, Transportation Commission. Edina City Staff attending the meeting: Jennifer Bennerotte, Communications and Technology Services Director; Ross Bintner, Environmental Engineer; Laurene Draper, Civilian Services Manager; Michael Frey, Art Center Director; Wayne Houle, Director of Engineering; Annie Johnson, City Manager Intern; Ann Kattreh, Park & Recreation Director; Karen Kurt, Assistant City Manager; Scott Neal, City Manager; Cary Teague, Community Development Director; and Jane Timm, Deputy City Clerk. Assistant City Manager Kurt stated the reason for the meeting was to get an overview of the 2014 Work Plans for the boards and commissions and to discuss items of mutual interest. WORK PLANS PRESENTED The following presented their 2014 Work Plans to the Council: • Arts & Culture Commission: Chair Hafed Bouassida stated that this was the first few months of the Commission, and they were handling many housekeeping issues. He went over the new initiatives including: Cultural Entrepreneurship, expanding literature programming and writing classes, bringing community theatre back to Edina, an emerging artist program, and a new Music in Edina Working Group. He also reviewed the ongoing responsibilities. • Energy & Environment Commission (EEC): Chair Bill Sierks stated the EEC would like to see the City lead by example over the long term by prioritizing energy- efficiency and greenhouse gas reduction. A new initiative in 2014 would be reviewing practices for keeping bees and chickens on residential lots and to propose changes to .the ordinance. He reviewed the continuing initiatives and ongoing responsibilities. • Heritage Preservation Board (HPB): Chair Bob Moore stated the new initiatives included: developing videos on Edina Heritage Landmarks and Heritage Preservation program, updating accessibility to buildings, developing a Heritage Resources Disaster Management Plan, updating Edina's Heritage Resources Inventory and converting data to an electronic format, and increasing board member participation at conferences. He reviewed the ongoing responsibilities. • Human Rights & Relations Commission (HRRQ Chair Arnie Bigbee thanked the staff and City Council for their continued support. He went over the new initiatives, citing Days of Minutes - Work Session /Edina City Council /October 1, 2013 Remembrance, an anti - bullying event, community outreach, and a Disability Awareness Campaign. He reviewed the ongoing responsibilities. • Park Board: Chair Ellen Jones reported the Park Board would be conducting a comprehensive needs assessment to allow evaluation of programming needs and community desires. Ms. Jones stated the other initiatives included: an Arneson Acres Master Plan, a barrier -free playground at Wooddale Park, the athletic field renovation of Pamela Park, green initiatives, and fundraising. The ongoing responsibilities and initiatives were also discussed. City Council asked if a timeline of park projects could be put on the website. • Planning Commission: Chair Kevin Staunton reported on various components of the zoning ordinance amendments in the 2014 Initiatives. Mr. Staunton reported the Commission would be considering some policy recommendations, and he reviewed the plan to conduct a small area plan for the Wooddale and Valley View commercial area. The ongoing responsibilities and initiatives were reviewed. • Edina Transportation Commission: Chair Paul Nelson discussed the new Living Streets Plan, the Valley View Road between Gleason and Antrim initiative to address the. traffic issues, an annual meeting with Police and Public Works Departments regarding education, and the Education Safety Campaign. The ongoing responsibilities and initiatives were reviewed. • Community. Health. Committee: -Chair Matt Doscotch. stated the 20.14 Work Plan is a function of work done over the last year. The, new initiatives included: Working with Edina Resource Center and Bloomington Public Health increasing focus and awareness on: resources available, mental health issues and resources,,stress management tools, healthy eating and living choices for at -risk population, and senior mobility., Other, initiatives included: coordinating with Chemical Health Coordinator and Edina School District, working with Bloomington .Public Health and the City to improve benchmarking, identifying two health improvement opportunities, working with staff_on? policy changes, and in an increased health presence on the website. The ongoing responsibilities and initiatives were reviewed. The Council and Commission Chairs discussed items and initiatives that were identified in the 2014 Work Plans. The Mayor and Councif thanked the participants for their dedication and hard work. Mayor Hovland declared the meeting adjourned at 6:57 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Jane M. Timm, Deputy City Clerk Minutes approved by Edina City Council, October 14, 2013. James B. Hovland, Mayor R55CKR2 LOGIS100 CITY OF EDINA 1012/2013 8:56:22 Council Check Register by GL Page - 1 Council Check Register and Summary 10/3/2013 -- 10/312013 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit 375828 10/3/2013 132833 612BREW LLC 280.00 325674 726 5842.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER YORK SELLING BUILDING PERMITS INSPECTIONS COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX YORK SELLING 280.00 50TH ST SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX VERNON SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX VERNON SELLING 375829 10/3/2013 132869 ABLE RESTORATION GROUP INC. . 133.80 PERMIT REFUND 325167 ED123705 1495.4111 133.80 375830 1.01312013 102971 ACE ICE COMPANY 121.20 325561 1725215 5842.5515 51.60 325562 1725210 5822.5515 114.80 325675 1725209 5862.5515 126.80 325676 1728010 5862.5515 414.40 375831 1013/2013 129468 ACME TOOLS 147.44 SHOVELS 325512 2171776 1301.6556 147.44 375832 101312013 100617 ADAM'S PEST CONTROL 28.00 PEST CONTROL 325513 832139 5421.6102 28.00 375833 101312013 102172 APPERT'S FOODSERVICE 399.06 CONCESSION PRODUCT 325051 1986923 5730.5510 568.53 CONCESSION PRODUCT 325052 1994646 5730.5510 967.59 375834 10/312013 130217 APPLIED ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES INC. 3,390.65 AIR QUALITY TESTING 00001040 325504 29397 5913.6103 3,390.65 375835 101312013 103680 ARAMARK REFRESHMENT SRVCS 282.33 COFFEE 325053 1069026 1550.6406 282.33 375836 101312013 132589 ARIZON STRUCTURES WORLDWIDE LLC 227,426.23 BRAEMAR GOLF DOME 325469 BP1 13A 5200.1727 227,426.23 375837 101312013 132031 ARTISAN BEER COMPANY BUILDING PERMITS INSPECTIONS COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX YORK SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX 50TH ST SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX VERNON SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX VERNON SELLING TOOLS GENERAL MAINTENANCE CONTRACTUAL SERVICES GRILL COST OF GOODS SOLD EDINBOROUGH CONCESSIONS COST OF GOODS SOLD EDINBOROUGH CONCESSIONS PROFESSIONAL SERVICES DISTRIBUTION GENERAL SUPPLIES CENTRAL SERVICES GENERAL GOLF DOME GOLF DOME BALANCE SHEET R55CKR2 LOGIS100 CITY OF EDINA 10/2/2013 8:56:22 Council Check Register by GL Page - 2 Council Check Register and Summary 10/312013 - 10/3/2013 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit 375837 1013/2013 132031 ARTISAN BEER COMPANY Continued... 680.00 325134 28137 5842.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER YORK SELLING 783.00 325135 28138 5862.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER VERNON SELLING 1,463.00 375838 101312013 100256 AT&T MOBILITY 25.93 IPAD DATA SERVICE 325054 287240706569X91 1130.6160. DATA PROCESSING COMMUNICATIONS 713 25.93 375839 10/312013 104069 B.B. WATSON GRAPHIC DESIGN 64.90 BUSINESS CARDS 325620 497 1400.6575 PRINTING POLICE DEPT. GENERAL 64.90 375840 10/3/2013 100646 BECKER ARENA PRODUCTS INC. 134.24 ROPE 325621 00094243 5761.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES CENTENNIAL LAKES OPERATING 134.24 375841 101312013 101355 BELLBOY CORPORATION 83.38 325136 89053100 5842.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES YORK SELLING 690.15 325137 79838300. 5862.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR VERNON SELLING 63330 325563 79945500 5B22.5512' COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR 50TH ST SELLING 703.75 325564 79936300 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 1,865.10 325565 79938100 5842.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR YORK SELLING 191.04 325677 89116300 5842.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX YORK SELLING 1.55 325678 79938200 5842.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX YORK SELLING 20.50 325679 79946200 5862.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX VERNON SELLING 76.54 325680 89119800 5862.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX VERNON SELLING 205.52 325681 6370300 5862.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX VERNON SELLING 4,470.83 375842 10/3/2013 126139 BERNICK'S 453.60 325682 79854 5842.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER YORK.SELLING 414.20 325683 83904 5842.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER YORK SELLING 867.80 375843 101312013 126847 BERRY COFFEE COMPANY 150.95 COFFEE 325516 1121051 1552.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES CENT SVC PW BUILDING 150.95 375844 10/312013 100648 BERTELSON OFFICE PRODUCTS R55CKR2 LOGIS100 CITY OF EDINA Council Check Register by GL Council Check Register and Summary 10/3/2013 -- 10/3/2013 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No 375844 101312013 100648 BERTELSON OFFICE PRODUCTS 170.31 OFFICE SUPPLIES 325514 WO- 881271 -1 1550.6406 19.25 SORTER 325515 WO- 881182 -1 1550.6406 189.56 375845 1013/2013 132921 SEVIER, MIKE 118.13 CREDIT SAL ON FINALLED ACCT 325484 6216 SANDPIPER 5900.2015 118.13 375846 1013/2013 125209 BISEK, KATIE 315.84 MILEAGE REIMBURSEMENT 325661 092713 1554.6107 315.84 375847 101312013 103250 BLOOMINGTON MEDALIST CONCERT BAND 75.00 EP ENTERTAINMENT 10/13/13 325166 092613 5710.6136 75.00 375848 101312013 102545 BLUE CROSS & BLUE SHIELD OF MN 19,568.00 PREMIUM 325622 15013 -9/13 1550.6043 171,723.50 OCT PREMIUM 325623 15013 -OCT 1550.6040 191,291.50 375849 10/312013 122688 BMK SOLUTIONS 36.39 OFFICE SUPPLIES 00001437 325517 90489 1552.6406 36.39 375850 101312013 101010 BORDER STATES ELECTRIC SUPPLY 105.71 WIRE BENDER, STRIPPER /CUTTER 00001987 325518 906246788 1330.6406 105.71 i 375851 1013/2013 105367 BOUND TREE MEDICAL LLC 301.44 AMBULANCE SUPPLIES 00003675 325485 81205985 1470.6510 1,671.60 AMBULANCE SUPPLIES 00003675 325486 81205984 1470.6510 1,973.04 375852 101312013 119351 BOURGETIMPORTS 220.50 325196 115667 5822.5513 519.50 325566 115668 5842.5513 202.50 325567 115676 5862.5513 942.50 Subledger Account Description Continued... GENERAL SUPPLIES GENERAL SUPPLIES CUSTOMER REFUND 1012/2013 8:56:22 Page- 3 Business Unit CENTRAL SERVICES GENERAL CENTRAL SERVICES GENERAL UTILITY BALANCE SHEET MILEAGE OR ALLOWANCE CENT SERV GEN - MIS PROFESSIONAL SVC - OTHER EDINBOROUGH ADMINISTRATION COBRA INSURANCE HOSPITALIZATION GENERAL SUPPLIES GENERAL SUPPLIES FIRST AID SUPPLIES FIRST AID SUPPLIES COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE CENTRAL SERVICES GENERAL CENTRAL SERVICES GENERAL CENT SVC PW BUILDING TRAFFIC SIGNALS FIRE DEPT. GENERAL FIRE DEPT. GENERAL 50TH ST SELLING YORK SELLING VERNON SELLING R55CKR2 LOGIS100 -CITY OF EDINA 1012/2013 8:56:22 Council Check Register by GL Page - 4 Council Check Register and Summary 10/3/2013 - 10/3/2013 Check # Date Amount Supplier/ Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit 375853 1013/2013 119826' BRYANT GRAPHICS INC. Continued... 827.63 NEWSLETTER 00008290 325487 32357 1628.6575 PRINTING SENIOR CITIZENS 827.63 375854 10/312013 115346 CALHOUN BEACH FRAMING 45.00 PUZZLE MOUNTING 325055 020004341 1130.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES COMMUNICATIONS 45.00 375855 101312013 102149 CALLAWAY GOLF 123.21 MERCHANDISE 325519 924720228 5440.5511 COST OF GOODS - PRO SHOP PRO SHOP RETAIL SALES 67.82 GOLF CLUB 325520 924723902 5440.5511 COST OF GOODS - PRO SHOP PRO SHOP RETAIL SALES 191.03 375856 101312013 120935 CAMPBELL KNUTSON 10,880.09 LEGAL COUNSEL 325624 2851G -8/13 1195.6131 PROFESSIONAL SERV - LEGAL LEGAL SERVICES 10,880.09 375857 101312013 119455 CAPITOL BEVERAGE SALES ~ 3,253.40 325138 362120 5842.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER YORK SELLING 94.40 325139 362121 5842.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX YORK SELLING 1,683.50 325197 362122 5822.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER 50TH ST SELLING 5,031.30 375858 10/312013 130641 CARR, CLAUDIA 535.14 CONFERENCE EXPENSES 325168 LANESBORO 1140.6104 CONFERENCES & SCHOOLS PLANNING 535.14 375859 101312013 116683 CAT & FIDDLE BEVERAGE 277.50 325140 96676 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 277.50 375860 1013/2013 123561 CATALYST GRAPHICS INC. 301.71 ACCIDENT REPORT FORMS 325625 82801 1400.6575 PRINTING POLICE DEPT. GENERAL 301.71 375861 10/312013 112561 CENTERPOINT ENERGY 178.49 8034001 -1 325169 8034001 -9/13 1552.6186 HEAT CENT SVC PW BUILDING 1,537.85 5591458 -4 325488 5591458 -9/13 1551.6186 HEAT CITY HALL GENERAL 427.55 5546504 -1 325489 5546504 -9/13 1470.6186 HEAT FIRE DEPT. GENERAL 19.21 5596524 -8 325521 5596524 -9113 5430.6166 HEAT RICHARDS GOLF COURSE 205.32 5584304 -9 325522 5584304 -9/13 7411.6186 HEAT PSTF OCCUPANCY R55CKR2 LOGIS100 CITY OF EDINA 101212013 8:56:22 Council Check Register by GL Page- 5 Council Check Register and Summary 10/3/2013 - 10/3/2013 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit 375861 1013/2013 112561 CENTERPOINT ENERGY Continued... 15.92 5584310 -6 325523 5584310 -9/13 7413.6186 HEAT PSTF FIRE TOWER 90.84 5590919 -6 325524 5590919 -9113 7413.6582 FUEL OIL PSTF FIRE TOWER 2,475.18 375862 10/3/2013 123898 CENTURYLINK 58.51 952 920 -1586 325170 1586 -9113 1554.6188 TELEPHONE CENT SERV GEN - MIS 67.49 952 922 -2444 325171 2444 -9/13 1554.6188 TELEPHONE CENT SERV GEN - MIS 57.23 952 920 -8632 325525 8632 -9113 5913.6188 TELEPHONE DISTRIBUTION 41.48 952 922 -9246 325626 9246 -9113 1400.6188 TELEPHONE POLICE DEPT. GENERAL 224.71 375863 1013/2013 100683 CHEMSEARCH 717.79 WATER TREATMENT PROGRAM 325056 1232977 5510.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES ARENA ADMINISTRATION 258.68 BALL VALVE 325057 1233800 5511.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES ARENA BLDG /GROUNDS 976.47 375864 101312013 122317 CITY OF EDINA -COMMUNICATIONS 100.00 FACEBOOK ADVERTISING 325532 COM -0082 5410.6122 ADVERTISING OTHER GOLF ADMINISTRATION 100.00 FACEBOOK ADVERTISING 325533 COM -0083 1120.6575 PRINTING ADMINISTRATION 200.00 375865 101312013 122084 CITY OF EDINA - UTILITIES 342.66 00113667- 0120835016 325172 120835016 -9113 5111.6189 SEWER & WATER ART CENTER BLDG / MAINT 2,822.63 00077479- 0113317143 325173 113317143 -9/13 5720.6189 SEWER & WATER EDINBOROUGH OPERATIONS 83.73 00102561- 0112920000 325174 112920000 -9/13 5841.6189 SEWER & WATER YORK OCCUPANCY 218.31 00113607- 0170005201 325490 170005201 -9/13 1470.6189 SEWER & WATER FIRE DEPT. GENERAL 1,337.88 00103650- 0155251008 325526 155251008 -9/13 7411.6189 SEWER & WATER PSTF OCCUPANCY 74.56 00110793 - 0173001001 325527 173001001 -9/13 5210.6189 SEWER & WATER GOLF DOME PROGRAM 51.20 00110793 - 0173001000 325528 173001000 -9/13 5424.6189 SEWER & WATER RANGE 99.07 0155250018- 00110793 325529 155250018 -9/13 5422.6189 SEWER & WATER MAINT OF COURSE & GROUNDS 51.20 00110793- 0155250009 325530 155250009 -9/13 5422.6189 SEWER & WATER MAINT OF COURSE & GROUNDS 3,944.03 00110793 - 0155200000 325531 155200000 -9/13 5420.6189 SEWER & WATER CLUB HOUSE 9,025.27 375866 1013/2013 130477 CLEAR RIVER BEVERAGE CO 359.10 325198 4062 5822.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER 50TH ST SELLING 359.10 375867 101312013 100692 COCA -COLA REFRESHMENTS 236.40 325568 0148156720 5842.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX YORK SELLING R55CKR2 LOGIS100 CITY OF EDINA Council Check Register by GL Council Check Register and Summary 10/3/2013 -- 10/3/2013 Check # Dale Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No 375867 10/3/2013 100692 COCA -COLA REFRESHMENTS 236.40 375868 1013/2013 129820 COLLIERS INTERNATIONAL 892.18 OCT 2013 SERVICES 325175 10/13 5841.6103 892.18 375869 10/3/2013 120433. COMCAST 110.61 8772 10 6140396908 325627 396908 -9/13 5760.6105 110.61 375870 1013/2013 121066 COMMERCIAL ASPHALT CO. 472.56 ASPHALT 00001249 325058 083113 1301.6518 22,380.98 ASPHALT 00001249 325058 083113 1314.6518 3,605:43 ASPHALT 00001249 325058 083113 591.3.6518 26,458.97 375871 1013/2013 121267 CREATIVE RESOURCES 285.37 MOOD PENCILS 325059 24107 5720.5510 807.52 MOOD CUPS - 325060, 24103. 5720.5510 1,852.17 DRAWSTRING BACKPACKS 325061 24095. 5720.5510 2,945.06 375872 101312013 104020 DALCO 153.00 FLOOR CLEANER 00002218 325062- 2653775 5720.6511 79.74 DISINFECTANT 00001454 325534 2656077 1552.6406, 232.74 375873 10/312013 103020 DALCO ROOFING & SHEET METAL 21,570.70 BRAEMAR GOLF DOME 325476 1 5200.1727 21,570.70 376874 101312013 102478 DAY DISTRIBUTING CO. 48.00 325141 720235 5842.5515 1,542.99 325142 720236 5842.5514 66.30 325143 720231 5862.5515 2,369.40 325144 720232 5862.5514 761.95 325199 720233 5822.5514 877.15 325684 720736 5842.5514 5,665.79 1012/2013 8:56:22 Page- 6 Subledger Account Description Business Unit Continued... PROFESSIONAL SERVICES YORK OCCUPANCY DUES & SUBSCRIPTIONS CENTENNIAL LAKES ADMIN EXPENSE BLACKTOP GENERAL MAINTENANCE BLACKTOP STREET RENOVATION BLACKTOP DISTRIBUTION COST OF GOODS SOLD EDINBOROUGH OPERATIONS COST OF GOODS SOLD EDINBOROUGH OPERATIONS COST OF GOODS SOLD EDINBOROUGH OPERATIONS CLEANING SUPPLIES EDINBOROUGH OPERATIONS GENERAL SUPPLIES CENT SVC PW BUILDING GOLF DOME GOLF DOME BALANCE SHEET COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER YORK SELLING YORK SELLING VERNON SELLING VERNON SELLING 50TH ST SELLING YORK SELLING 325628 650243624 -9/13 5760.6122 ADVERTISING OTHER 1012/2013 8:56:22 Page- 7 Business Unit GRILL INSPECTIONS CENTENNIAL LAKES ADMIN EXPENSE 375878 101312013 132870 DIVISION V SHEET METAL INC. CITY OF EDINA R55CKR2 LOGIS100 16,340.00 BRAEMAR GOLF DOME 325475 1 5200.1727 GOLF DOME GOLF DOME BALANCE SHEET Council Check Register by GL 375879 Council Check Register and Summary 131298 DOMACE VINO LLC 10/3/2013 — 10/3/2013 Check # Dale Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description 375875 101312013 100720 DENNYS 5TH AVE. BAKERY Continued... 375880 1013/2013 55.83 BAKERY 325535 473894 5421.5510 COST OF GOODS SOLD 51.28 28,948.40 325536 474074 5421.5510 COST OF GOODS SOLD GOLF DOME_ GOLF DOME BALANCE SHEET 107.11 28,948.40 375876 10/312013 100899 DEPARTMENT OF LABOR & INDUSTRY 101312013 131164 DONALD R FRANTZ CONCRETE CONSTRUCT LLC 8,193.53 AUG 2013 SURCHARGE 325063 17666053060 1495.4380 SURCHARGE 18,439.50 8,193.53 5200.1727 GOLF DOME GOLF DOME BALANCE SHEET 375877 101312013 18,439.50 102831 DEX MEDIA EAST INC. 325628 650243624 -9/13 5760.6122 ADVERTISING OTHER 1012/2013 8:56:22 Page- 7 Business Unit GRILL INSPECTIONS CENTENNIAL LAKES ADMIN EXPENSE 375878 101312013 132870 DIVISION V SHEET METAL INC. 16,340.00 BRAEMAR GOLF DOME 325475 1 5200.1727 GOLF DOME GOLF DOME BALANCE SHEET 16,340.00 375879 101312013 131298 DOMACE VINO LLC 241.00 325685 6342 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING 241.00 375880 1013/2013 131164 DONALD R FRANTZ CONCRETE CONSTRUCT LLC 28,948.40 BRAEMAR GOLF DOME 325468 13284 5200.1727 GOLF DOME_ GOLF DOME BALANCE SHEET 28,948.40 375861 101312013 131164 DONALD R FRANTZ CONCRETE CONSTRUCT LLC 18,439.50 BRAEMAR GOLF DOME 325471 1328C2 5200.1727 GOLF DOME GOLF DOME BALANCE SHEET 18,439.50 375882 1013/2013 131164 DONALD R FRANTZ CONCRETE CONSTRUCT LLC 38,369.55 BRAEMAR GOLF DOME 325472 1328B2 5200.1727 GOLF DOME GOLF DOME BALANCE SHEET 38,369.55 375883 101312013 132923 EDELMANN & ASSOCIATES INC. 149.98 RELIEF VALVE 00001908 325505 135912 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 597.70 BRACKETS, BALL BEARING 325506 135913 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 747.68 375884 1013/2013 124503 EDEN PRAIRIE WINLECTRIC CO. 2.60 OUTLET COVERS 00001834 325537 10209700 1322.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES STREET LIGHTING ORNAMENTAL 2.60 R55CKR2 LOGIS100 Check # Date Amount 375884 101312013 375885 10/3/2013 182.76 182.76 375886 101312013 445.61 445.61 375887 10/312013 3,301.46 356.26 2,155.66 5,813.38 375888 1013/2013 195.58 195.58 375889 101312013 79.46 95.14 174.60 375890 10/312013 465.25 465.25 375891 10/312013 1,137.75 116.10 35.65 1,289.50 375892 101312013 480.94 480.94 375893 101312013 169.57 CITY OF EDINA ' Council Check Register by GL Council Check Register and Summary 1013/2013 — 10/3/2013 Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No 124503 EDEN PRAIRIE WINLECTRIC CO. 104004 ESSIG, CRAIG TEXTBOOKS 325491 092513 1470.6104 124245 FARMER BROS. CO. COFFEE 325538 58627949 5421.5510 126004 FERGUSON WATERWORKS METERS 00001954 325064 0048872 .5917.6530 E CODERS 00001954 325065-''0049459 5916.6406 METERS 00001958 325507= 0050381 5917.6530 132866 FLAGSHIP RECREATION LLC PLAYGROUND PARTS 00001881 325176 F1859 1646.6530 101475 FOOTJOY SHOES 325539 5222492 5440.5511 SHOES 325540 5222294 5440.5511 125450 FRIENDS OF FIRKIN LLC 325145 1251 5842.5515 132389 GAZICH, KATHLEEN SKATE CLASS JACKETS 325177 SKATING PROG 5511.6201 SKATE CLASS JACKETS 325177 SKATING PROG 5511.6201 SKATE CLASS SUPPLIES 325177 SKATING PROG 5511.6406 124541 GEYEN GROUP CARPET CLEANING 325541 23113 5420.6180 102645 GRAFFITI CONTROL SERVICES REMOVE GRAFFITI 325662 851 1645.6406 10/2/2013 8:56:22 Page- 8 Subledger Account Description Business Unit Continued... CONFERENCES & SCHOOLS FIRE DEPT. GENERAL COST OF GOODS SOLD GRILL REPAIR PARTS METER REPAIR GENERAL SUPPLIES METER READING REPAIR PARTS METER REPAIR REPAIR PARTS BUILDING MAINTENANCE COST OF GOODS - PRO SHOP PRO SHOP RETAIL SALES COST OF GOODS - PRO SHOP PRO SHOP RETAIL SALES COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX YORK SELLING LAUNDRY ARENA BLDG /GROUNDS LAUNDRY ARENA BLDG /GROUNDS GENERAL SUPPLIES ARENA BLDG/GROUNDS CONTRACTED REPAIRS CLUB HOUSE GENERAL SUPPLIES LITTER REMOVAL CITY OF EDINA 10/2/2013 8:56:22 R55CKR2 LOGIS100 Council Check Register by GL Page - 9 Council Check Register and Summary 10/312013 — 1013/2013 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit 375893 1013/2013 102645 GRAFFITI CONTROL SERVICES Continued... 169.57 375894 101312013 101103 GRAINGER 143.79 FILTERS 00002213 325066 9240257890 5720.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES " EDINBOROUGH OPERATIONS 189.25 DIGITAL CLAMP ON AMMETER 00001988 325542 9247617096 1301.6556 TOOLS GENERAL MAINTENANCE 146.45- RETURN 325543 9247617104 1301.6556 TOOLS GENERAL MAINTENANCE 186.59 375895 10/312013 102217 GRAPE BEGINNINGS INC 146.25 325200 157360 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING 493.50 325201 157358 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 542.25 325686 157359 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 1,182.00 375896 10/3/2013 102125 GREG LESSMAN SALES 104.81 PENCILS 325544 50669 5410.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES GOLF ADMINISTRATION 104.81 375897 101312013 100785 GREUPNER, JOE 12,701.00 FINAL QTRLY PAYMENT 2013 325545 092513 5410.6132 PROFESSIONAL SVCS - GOLF GOLF ADMINISTRATION 12,701.00 375898 1013/2013 132867 HABEN, DAVE 3,329.75 REFUND - CHECK SENT IN ERROR 325178 UTILITY PAYMENT 5900.2015 CUSTOMER REFUND UTILITY BALANCE SHEET 3,329.75 375899 1013/2013 125270 HARTFORD -PRIORITY ACCOUNTS 3,602.55 OCT 2013 PREMIUM 325629 6478817 -7 9900.2033.16 LTD - 99 PAYROLL CLEARING 3,602.55 375900 101312013 120227 HARTSHORN, BOB 333.08 SOFTBALL PICNIC SUPPLIES 325492 092513 1628.4392.03 SENIOR SOFTBALL SENIOR CITIZENS 333.08 375901 101312013 100797 HAWKINS INC. 4,763.83 CHEMICALS 00001250 325508 3513509 5915.6586 WATER TREATMENT SUPPLIES WATER TREATMENT 6,003.74 CHEMICALS 00001250 325509 3516024 5915.6586 WATER TREATMENT SUPPLIES WATER TREATMENT 10,767.57 375902 1013/2013 122093 HEALTH PARTNERS R55CKR2 LOGIS100 CITY OF EDINA 10/2/2013 8:56:22 Council Check Register by GL Page - 10 Council Check Register and Summary 10/3/2013 — 10/3/2013 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit 375902 10/3/2013 122093 HEALTH PARTNERS Continued... 11,768.36 OCT 2013 PREMIUM 325630 44431918 1550.6040 HOSPITALIZATION CENTRAL SERVICES GENERAL 1,137.33 COBRA 325631 44422853 1550.6043 COBRA INSURANCE CENTRAL SERVICES GENERAL 12,905.69 375903 10/3/2013 106371 HENNEPIN COUNTY. MEDICAL CENTER 2,475.08 MEDICAL DIRECTOR SERVICES 325632 31104 1470.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES FIRE DEPT. GENERAL 2,475.08 375904 10/312013 105436 HENNEPIN COUNTY TREASURER 2,064.00 RADIO ADMIN FEE 325493 130838014 1470.6151 EQUIPMENT RENTAL FIRE DEPT. GENERAL 651.90 RADIO ADMIN FEE 325510 130838075 1301.6151 EQUIPMENT RENTAL GENERAL MAINTENANCE 2,715.90 375905 10/3/2013 115377 HENRICKSEN PSG 60.00 CHAIR REPAIR 325546 526559 1551.6530 REPAIR PARTS CITY HALL GENERAL 60.00 375906 10/312013 116680 HEWLETT - PACKARD COMPANY 1,316.73 NEW REPLACEMENT LAPTOPS 00004350 .325067 53335260 1554:6710 EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT CENT SERV GEN - MIS 1,316.73 375907 10/312013 104375 HOHENSTEINS INC. 1,016.00 325146'. 667585 5862.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER VERNON SELLING 390.50 325202 667586 5822.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER 50TH ST SELLING 2,038.95 325569 667840 5842.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER YORK SELLING 3,445.45 375908 10/3/2013 131043 HOLTZ, DOUGLAS 800.00 INSTRUCTOR FEES 325547 091613 7410.6218 EDUCATION PROGRAMS PSTF ADMINISTRATION 800.00 375909 10/312013 100417 HORIZON COMMERCIAL POOL SUPPLY 360.89 CHEMICALS FOR REFILL 00002207 . 325068. 13090351 5720.6545 CHEMICALS EDINBOROUGH OPERATIONS 360.89 376910 10/312013 101697 HORIZON GRAPHICS INC 628.69 BIRTHDAY PARTY INVITES 325069 32534 5710.6575 PRINTING EDINBOROUGH ADMINISTRATION 628.69 375911 10/312013 131734 HORWITZ NSI R55CKR2 LOGIS100 CITY OF EDINA Council Check Register by GL Council Check Register and Summary 10/3/2013 — 1013/2013 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description 375911 101312013 131734 HORWITZ NSI Continued... 33,345.00 BRAEMAR GOLF DOME 325479 1 5200.1727 GOLF DOME 33,345.00 375912 1013/2013 129508 IMPACT PROVEN SOLUTIONS 593.34 MAIL UTILITY BILLS 3,508.75 MAIL UTILITY BILLS 4,102.09 375913 1013/2013 131544 INDEED BREWING COMPANY 791.00 325494 81756 5910.6103 325663 81861 5910.6103 325570 14422 5862.5514 325687 14469 5842.5514 375914 10/312013 100814 INDELCO PLASTICS CORP. 14.98 TAPE, FITTINGS 00001955 325070 798020 5912.6406 14.98 375915 10/3/2013 132871 INGLAS LLP 18,050.00 BRAEMAR GOLF DOME 325478 1 5200.1727 18,050.00 375916 10/312013 101861 J.H. LARSON COMPANY 240.00 LAMPS 00001973 325071 5100483172.001 1322.6406 240.00 375917 1013/2013 102146 JESSEN PRESS 171.00 LETTERHEAD 325072 39233 1550.6406 171.00 375918 1013/2013 100741 JJ TAYLOR DIST. OF MINN 99.00 325571 2056037 5430.5514 551.00 325572 2140019 5420.5514 106.80 325572 2140019 5421.5514 6,208.82 325573 2133435 5862.5514 93.80 325574 2133436 5862.5515 7,090.30 325575 2133448 5842.5514 30.09- 325576 2133447 5842.5514 3,414.69 325688 2133443 5822.5514 17,534.32 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 1012/2013 8:56:22 Page - 11 Business Unit GOLF DOME BALANCE SHEET GENERAL (BILLING) GENERAL (BILLING) COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER VERNON SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER YORK SELLING GENERAL SUPPLIES WELL HOUSES GOLF DOME GOLF DOME BALANCE SHEET GENERAL SUPPLIES STREET LIGHTING ORNAMENTAL GENERAL SUPPLIES CENTRAL SERVICES GENERAL COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER RICHARDS GOLF COURSE CLUB HOUSE GRILL VERNON SELLING VERNON SELLING YORK SELLING YORK SELLING 50TH ST SELLING R55CKR2 LOGIS100 CITY OF EDINA 10/2/2013 8:56:22 Council Check Register by GL Page - 12 Council Check Register and Summary 10/3/2013 - 10/3/2013 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description B_ usiness Unit 375919 10/312013 124104 JOHN DEERE LANDSCAPES INC. Continued... 40.90 IRRIGATION PARTS 00001995 325073 66023853 1643.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES GENERAL TURF CARE 68.81 IRRIGATION PARTS 00001981 325074 66114190 1643.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES GENERAL TURF CARE 109.71 375921 1013/2013 100835, JOHNSON BROTHERS LIQUOR CO. 237.70 325147 1670471 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 133.34 325148 1670472 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 1.12- 325149 592259 5822.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR 50TH ST SELLING 788.70- 325150 591889 5862.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR VERNON SELLING 1,860.32 325577 1677799 5822.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR 50TH ST SELLING 66.74 325578 1677805 5822.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX 50TH ST SELLING 274.99 .325579 1677807- .. 5822.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR 50TH ST SELLING 1,399.56 325580 1677825 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 2,168.21 325581 1677828 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 911.20 325582 1677829 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 3,952.92 325583 1677822 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING .09 325584 1677802 5862.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR VERNON SELLING 2,194.69 325585,' 1677826 ,. 5862.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR VERNON SELLING 35.37 325586 1677827 5862.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX VERNON SELLING 1,806.27 325587 1677823 5862.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR VERNON SELLING 89.98 325588' 1677830 5862.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR VERNON SELLING 354.68 325589 1677824 5862.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR VERNON SELLING 2,749.86 325590 1677813 5842.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR YORK SELLING 3,816.21 325591 1677816 5842.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR YORK SELLING 129.48 325592 1677817 5842.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX YORK SELLING 469.77 325593 1677821 5842.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR YORK SELLING 4,269.14 325594 1677812 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 2,469.32 325595 1677815 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 2,977.53 325596 1677818 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 20.99 325597 1677819 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 911.20 325598 1677820 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 595.94 325689 1677803 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING 930.75 325690 1677800 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING 1,372.85 325691 1677806 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING 60.05- 325692 593006 5842.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR YORK SELLING 35,349.23 375922 101312013 114049 JOHNSON, DICK 91.05 FLOWERS FOR GOLF BANQUET 325664 092613 1628.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES SENIOR CITIZENS 91.05 CITY OF EDINA 10/2/2013 8:56:22 R55CKR2 LOGIS100 Council Check Register by GL Page- 13 Council Check Register and Summary 10/312013 — 10/312013 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit 375922 10/312013 114049 JOHNSON, DICK Continued... 376923 101312013 111018 KEEPRS INC. - 12137 UNIFORMS 00003671 325495 225752 -01 1470.6556 DEPT UNIFORMS FIRE DEPT. GENERAL 36.99 UNIFORMS 00003648 325496 221704 -90 1470.6558 DEPT UNIFORMS FIRE DEPT. GENERAL 159.36 375924 10/312013 122028 KELLEHER LLC, KEVIN J. 600.00 FIELD TRAINING OFFICER COURSE 325633 8190. 1400.6104 CONFERENCES & SCHOOLS POLICE DEPT. GENERAL 600.00 375925 101312013 105606 KELLINGTON CONSTRUCTION INC. 13,995.40 BRAEMAR GOLF DOME 325474 BP2 6A 5200.1727 GOLF DOME GOLF DOME BALANCE SHEET 13,995.40 375926 10/312013 105730 KJOS, PHIL 150.00 PIANO TUNING 325497 092513 1628.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES SENIOR CITIZENS 150.00 375927 101312013 132922 LEMKE, LINDA 70.00 NORDIC WALKING INSTRUCTION 325498 20130023 1628.4392.09 SENIOR SPECIAL EVENTS SENIOR CITIZENS 70.00 375928 101312013 132752 LINCO FAB INC. 14,074.25 BRAEMAR GOLF DOME 325473 2 5200.1727 GOLF DOME GOLF DOME BALANCE SHEET 14,074.25 375929 101312013 120856 LLOYD'S CONSTRUCTION SERVICES 41,698.58 BRAEMAR GOLF DOME 325481 2 5200.1727 GOLF DOME GOLF DOME BALANCE SHEET 41,698.56 375930 1013/2013 127057 MARSDEN BLDG MAINTENANCE LLC 3,095.10 SEPT 2013 SERVICES 325099 123107 5510.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES ARENA ADMINISTRATION 3,095.10 375931 101312013 101146 MATRIX 329.03 325100 608163542 1554.6188 TELEPHONE CENT SERV GEN - MIS 329.03 375932 101312013 101790 MCMAHON, DANIEL 74.58 MILEAGE REIMBURSEMENT 325101 092413 1322.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES STREET LIGHTING ORNAMENTAL R55CKR2 LOGIS100 CITY OF EDINA., 10/212013 6:56:22 Council Check Register by GL Page - 14 Council Check Register and Summary 10/3/2013 - 10/312013 Check # Date Amount Supplier I Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit 375932 101312013 101790 MCMAHON, DANIEL Continued... 74.58 375933 10/3/2013 113941 MEDICA 425.62 AMBULANCE OVERPAYMENT REFUND 325673 JEAN TEMPLE 1470.4329 AMBULANCE FEES FIRE DEPT. GENERAL 425.62 375934 101312013 105603 MEDICINE LAKE TOURS 3,024.50 FALL TRIP TO WINONA 325102 092313 1628.6103.07 TRIPS PROF SERVICES SENIOR CITIZENS 3,024.50 375935 101312013 101483 MENARDS 10.87 ZIP TIES 00001952 325103 ' 37228 5923.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES COLLECTION SYSTEMS 36.25 GLOVES, SHOP TOWELS 00001991 325548 37317 1330.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES, TRAFFIC SIGNALS 56.50 DRAIN TILE 00001916 325665 36683 `1646.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES BUILDING MAINTENANCE 152.12 CONCRETE CRACK SEALER 00001918 325666 36696 47078.6710 EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT COUNTRYSIDE PK PLAYGROUNDBPATH 477.98 NAILS, LUMBER 00001983.'.1 325667 37202 1648.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES SKATING RINK MAINTENANCE 84.20 CONCRETE MIX, PATCHING 00001994 325668 37514 47078.6710 EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT COUNTRYSIDE PK PLAYGROUND &PATH 47.24 LUMBER 00001999 325669 37510 1646.6577 LUMBER BUILDING MAINTENANCE 46.74 FENCE REPAIR SUPPLIES 00001007 325670 37594 1646.6530 REPAIR PARTS BUILDING MAINTENANCE 911.90 375936 101312013 101987 MENARDS 125.76 SUPPLIES 00002211 325104 .21435 5720:6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES EDINBOROUGH OPERATIONS 125.76 375937 1013/2013 102007 MINNCOR INDUSTRIES 427.50 FOAMING HAND SOAP 00001978 325549 SOI- 017415 1552.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES CENT SVC PW BUILDING 427.50 375938 10/312013 100913 MINNEAPOLIS & SUBURBAN SEWER $ WATER 1,592.50 WATER SERVICE REPLACEMENT 00001957 325105 34546 5913.6180 CONTRACTED REPAIRS DISTRIBUTION 1,592.50 375939 101312013 102174 MINNEAPOLIS OXYGEN COMPANY 61.21 CO2 CYLINDER 325550 183097784 7413.6545 CHEMICALS PSTF FIRE TOWER 61.21 375940 101312013 101746 MINNESOTA COUNTY ATTORNEYS ASSOCIATION 77.14 INVENTORY RECEIPT FORMS 325179 18152980 '1400.6575 PRINTING POLICE DEPT. GENERAL 77.14 10/2/2013 8'56:22 Page - 15 Business Unit GOLF REVENUES GOLF REVENUES GOLF REVENUES DWI FORFEITURE EDINBOROUGH CONCESSIONS EDINBOROUGH ADMINISTRATION PROMENADE EXPENSES GOLF DOME BALANCE SHEET GOLF DOME BALANCE SHEET 50TH ST SELLING YORK SELLING VERNON SELLING CENTENNIAL LAKES OPERATING CITY OF EDINA R55CKR2 LOGIS100 Council Check Register by GL Council Check Register and Summary 10/3/2013 -- 10/3/2013 Check 4 Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description 375940 10/312013 101746 MINNESOTA COUNTY ATTORNEYS ASSOCIATION Continued... 375941 101312013 100905 MINNESOTA GOLF ASSOCIATION 15.00 GHIN FEES 325551 45- 0150 -21 -9/13 5401.4603 COMPUTERIZED HANDICAPS 66.00 325552 45- 0150 -13 -9/13 5401.4603 COMPUTERIZED HANDICAPS t i 506.00 325553 45- 0150 -16 -9/13 5401.4603 COMPUTERIZED HANDICAPS 587.00 375942 101312013 106193 MINNESOTA HIGHWAY SAFETY AND 792.00 EVOC LAW ENFORCEMENT 325634 629430 -3478 2340.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES 792.00 375943 101312013 132597 MIXMI BRANDS INC. 70.00 CONCESSION PRODUCT 325106 212913140 5730.5510 COST OF GOODS SOLD 70.00 375944 101312013 108668 MORRIS, GRAYLYN 200.00 EP ENTERTAINMENT 10110/13 325165 092613 5710.6136 PROFESSIONAL SVC - OTHER 200.00 375945 1013/2013 100906 MTI DISTRIBUTING INC. 64.04 IRRIGATION SUPPIES 00002031 325635 931307 -00 5765.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES 64.04 375946 101312013 132591 MUSKA ELECTIRC COMPANY 28,500.00 BRAEMAR GOLF DOME 325470 3 5200.1727 GOLF DOME 28,500.00 375947 10/312013 132691 MUSKA ELECTIRC COMPANY 42,750.00 BRAEMAR GOLF DOME 325480 2 & 3 5200.1727 GOLF DOME 42,750.00 375948 101312013 100916 MUZAK LLC 264.57 MUSIC SERVICES 325107 900AL18461 5822.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES 264.57 MUSIC SERVICES 325107 900AL18461 5842.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES 264.57 MUSIC SERVICES 325107 900AL18461 5862.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES 793.71 375949 101312013 100916 MUZAK LLC 248.48 MUSIC SERVICES 325636 AK61924 5761.6105 DUES & SUBSCRIPTIONS 248.48 10/2/2013 8'56:22 Page - 15 Business Unit GOLF REVENUES GOLF REVENUES GOLF REVENUES DWI FORFEITURE EDINBOROUGH CONCESSIONS EDINBOROUGH ADMINISTRATION PROMENADE EXPENSES GOLF DOME BALANCE SHEET GOLF DOME BALANCE SHEET 50TH ST SELLING YORK SELLING VERNON SELLING CENTENNIAL LAKES OPERATING R55CKR2 LOGIS100 CITY OF EDINA 10/2/2013 8:56:22 Council Check Register by GL Page - 16 . Council Check Register and Summary 10/3/2013 -- 10/3/2013 Check # Date Amount Supplier/ Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit 375949 10/312013 100916 MUZAK LLC - Continued... 375950 10/312013 106662 NET LITIN DISTRIBUTORS 892.23 TABLE COVERS 325108 246056 5720.5510 COST OF GOODS SOLD EDINBOROUGH OPERATIONS 99.14 TABLE COVERS 325109 247598 5720.5510 COST OF GOODS SOLD EDINBOROUGH OPERATIONS 17.00- CREDIT 325110 245727 5720.5510 COST OF GOODS SOLD EDINBOROUGH OPERATIONS 974.37 376951 1013/2013 100076: NEW FRANCE WINE CO. 275.00 325203 84791 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 275.00 375952 101312013 104350 NIKE USA INC. 65.16 MERCHANDISE 325554 953524017 5440.5511 COST OF GOODS - PRO SHOP PRO SHOP RETAIL SALES 65.16 375953 10/312013 131740 NISSEN, DIETRICH 176.28 MILEAGE REIMBURSEMENT 325111 092413 1130.6107 MILEAGE OR ALLOWANCE COMMUNICATIONS 176.28 375954 101312013 102652 NORTHLAND CHEMICAL CORP. 381.86 HAND SOAP - 00001978 325112 5051525 1646.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES BUILDING MAINTENANCE 381.66 375955 101312013 132364 OASIS GROUP, THE 658.75 EAP - OCT 2013 325499 3548 1550.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES CENTRAL SERVICES GENERAL 658.75 375956 10/312013 103578 OFFICE DEPOT 24.24 CLIPBOARDS 325113 676783871001 5710.6513 OFFICE SUPPLIES EDINBOROUGH ADMINISTRATION 50.28 OFFICE SUPPLIES 325114 676783259001 5710.6513 OFFICE SUPPLIES EDINBOROUGH ADMINISTRATION 74.52 375957 101312013 130127. OLD TOWNE GLASS COMPANY 455.00 GLASS REPLACEMENT 325637 W1364 -1 5841.6180 CONTRACTED REPAIRS YORK OCCUPANCY 455.00 375958 101312013 100936 OLSEN COMPANIES 40.78 PLAYGROUND CHAIN 00001913 325115 524868 1646.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES BUILDING MAINTENANCE 40.78 10/212013 8:56:22 Page - 17 Subledger Account Description Business Unit Continued... YORK SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING CITY OF EDINA R55CKR2 LOGIS100 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 WINE 50TH ST SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE Council Check Register by GL Council Check Register and Summary 1013/2013 -- 10/3/2013 Check # Dale Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No 375959 101312013 100347 PAUSTIS & SONS 93.50 325151 8416390 -IN 5822.5513 2,138.05 325152 8417300 -IN 5862.5513 136.25- 325153 8416668 -CM 5842.5513 7.00- 325154 8416304 -CM 5842.5513 1,276.75 325204 8417289 -IN 5842.5513 162.25 325599 8417335 -IN 5842.5512 980.75 325693 8417295 -IN 5822.5513 4,508.05 375960 1013/2013 100945 PEPSI -COLA COMPANY 942.37 325116 16933302 5520.5510 942.37 375961 101312013 130228 PERNSTEINER CREATIVE GROUP INC. 100.00 POSTCARDS 325117 091913 -5 1130.6103 100.00 375962 1013/2013 119372 PETSMART#463 32.71 K9 FOOD 00003013 325638 T -7660 4607.6406 94.39 K9 FOOD 00003016 325639 T -1085 4607.6406 127.10 375963 1013/2013 100743 PHILLIPS WINE & SPIRITS 620.32 325600 2490902 5842.5513 691.85 325601 2490907 5842.5513 2,237.97 325602 2490906 5842.5513 516.07 325603 2490905 5842.5512 335.93 325604 2490908 5862.5512 3,363.26 325605 2490909 5862.5513 49.12 325606 2490903 5862.5513 2,075.84 325607 2490910 5862.5513 46.12 325608 2490900 5822.5512 1,774.60 325694 2490899 5822.5513 388.48 325695 2490901 5822.5513 12,099.56 375964 10/3/2013 100119 PING 117.31 IRONS 325555 11993527 5440.5511 117.31 10/212013 8:56:22 Page - 17 Subledger Account Description Business Unit Continued... YORK SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR YORK SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD ARENA CONCESSIONS PROFESSIONAL SERVICES COMMUNICATIONS GENERAL SUPPLIES EDINA CRIME FUND K9 DONATION GENERAL SUPPLIES EDINA CRIME FUND K9 DONATION 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 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 50TH ST SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING COST OF GOODS - PRO SHOP PRO SHOP RETAIL SALES R55CKR2 LOGIS100 EDINBOROUGH OPERATIONS CLEANING SUPPLIES CITY OF EDINA GENERAL SUPPLIES PROMENADE EXPENSES GENERAL SUPPLIES Council Check Register by GL Council Check Register and Summary 10/3/2013 — 10/3/2013 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No 375965 10/3/2013 130926 PLANTSCAPE INC. 2,376.75 PLANT MAINTENANCE 325118 319082 5720.6620 2,376'.75 375966 101312013 129593 PROFESSIONAL LAW ENFORCEMENT TRAINING 50.00 REGISTRATION -DAVID CARLSON 325640 01033 1400.6104 50.00 376967 10/312013 106322 PROSOURCE SUPPLY 291.98 FLOOR CLEANER, GLOVES 00002205 325119 6535 5720.6511' 239.19 TISSUE, LINERS; SPONGES "00002210 325120 6541 5720.6511 507.28 LINERS, TOWELS, SOAP 325641 6534 5765.6406 585.82 TISSUE, LINERS, TOWELS 325642 ,6545 5761.6406 1,624.27 376968 10/312013 105324 READY WATT ELECTRIC 610.00 PAVILLION RECEPTACLE REPAIRS 325643 97663 5765.6180 610.00 375969 101312013 125936 REINDERS INC. 1,060.73 FERTILIZER 00001905 325121 3022974 -00 1643.6540 1,149.76 FERTILIZER, FUNGICIDE 325644 3022896 -00 5765.6540 2,210.49 375970 101312013 125178 RJM CONSTRUCTION LLC 48,530.34 BRAEMAR GOLF DOME 325482 1305018704 5200.1727 48,530.34 375971 10/312013 101000 RJM PRINTING INC. 92.45 BUSINESS CARDS 325645 78516 1550.6406 92.45 375972 10/312013 100980 ROBERT B. HILL CO. 633.80 SOFTENER SALT 325122 00289318 5511.6406 179.84 SOFTENER SALT 00001907 325123 00289128 1552.6406 813.64 375973 10/3/2013 132933 RUSNAK, ROBERT 304.00 AMBULANCE OVERPAYMENT REFUND 325704 093013 1470.4329 304.00 Subledger Account Description Continued... TREES, FLOWERS, SHRUBS 1012/2013 8:56:22 Page - 18 Business Unit EDINBOROUGH OPERATIONS CONFERENCES 8 SCHOOLS POLICE DEPT. GENERAL CLEANING SUPPLIES EDINBOROUGH OPERATIONS CLEANING SUPPLIES EDINBOROUGH OPERATIONS GENERAL SUPPLIES PROMENADE EXPENSES GENERAL SUPPLIES CENTENNIAL LAKES OPERATING CONTRACTED REPAIRS PROMENADE EXPENSES FERTILIZER GENERAL TURF CARE FERTILIZER PROMENADE EXPENSES GOLF DOME GOLF DOME BALANCE SHEET GENERAL SUPPLIES CENTRAL SERVICES GENERAL GENERAL SUPPLIES ARENA BLDG /GROUNDS GENERAL SUPPLIES CENT SVC PW BUILDING AMBULANCE FEES FIRE DEPT. GENERAL R55CKR2 . LOGIS100 CITY OF EDINA Council Check Register by GL Council Check Register and Summary 10/3/2013 -- 10/3/2013 Check # Dale Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description - 375974 10/312013 101963 S & S TREE SPECIALISTS Continued... 2,495.53 AERATE, TOPDRESS AT LEWIS PK 325646 71518 1643.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 2,495.53 375975 10/312013 129460 SAWYER, KYLE 155.94 MILEAGE REIMBURSEMENT 325500 092613 1160.6107 MILEAGE OR ALLOWANCE 155.94 375976 101312013 101431 SCAN AIR FILTER INC. 73.27 FILTERS 00001962 325501 125932 1470.6530 REPAIR PARTS 73.27 375977 10/312013 128052 SECAP 282.30 POSTAGE MACHINE SUPPLIES 325124 B1146126 1550.6235 POSTAGE 282.30 375978 10/3/2013 100995 SEH 893.68 EDINA ANTENNA PROJECTS 325125 272915 1001.4722 RENTAL OF PROPERTY 893.68 376979 10/312013 132865 SEXTON, MATTHEW 8.64 AMBULANCE OVERPAYMENT REFUND 325180 092513 1470.4329 AMBULANCE FEES 8.64 375980 1013/2013 120784 SIGN PRO 156.18 SIGNAGE 325127 7086 1646.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 156.18 375981 1013/2013 100999 SIGNAL SYSTEMS INC. 166.35 TIME CLOCK LEASE 325126 13061118 5310.6105 DUES & SUBSCRIPTIONS 166.35 375982 101312013 132930 SIMON, PETER 10/2/2013 8:56:22 Page - 19 Business Unit GENERAL TURF CARE FINANCE FIRE DEPT. GENERAL CENTRAL SERVICES GENERAL GENERAL FUND REVENUES FIRE DEPT. GENERAL BUILDING MAINTENANCE POOL ADMINISTRATION 279.00 MAINLINE BACK -UP REPAIRS 325671 REIMBURSEMENT 5923.6136 PROFESSIONAL SVC - OTHER COLLECTION SYSTEMS 279.00 375983 1013/2013 131885 SISINNI FOOD SERVICES INC. 54.40 HOT DOG BUNS 325128 227041 5520.5510 COST OF GOODS SOLD ARENA CONCESSIONS 54.40 375984 1013/2013 127878 SOUTHERN WINE AND SPIRITS R55CKR2 LOGIS100 CITY OF EDINA 10/2/2013 8:56:22 Council Check Register by GL Page - 20 Council Check Register and Summary 10/3/2013 -- 10/3/2013 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit 375964 1013/2013 127878 SOUTHERN WINE AND SPIRITS Continued... 2,909.56 325155 1079345 5862.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR VERNON SELLING .25 325156 1078386 5862.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR VERNON SELLING - 1,347.50 325157 1077896 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 61.18- 325158 0004878 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 1,082.12 325205 1079339 5822.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR 50TH ST SELLING 1,110.00 325206 1076400 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING 4,565.35 325207 1079341 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 858.00 325208 1079340 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD.WINE YORK SELLING 8,425.40 325209 1079344 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 1,366.00 325609 1079342 5842.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR YORK SELLING 230.50 325696 1081169 5842.5513. COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 2,209.40 325697 1079338 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING 24,042.90 375985 101312013 104672 SPRINT 1.53 325483 873184124130 1190.6188' TELEPHONE ASSESSING 476.55 325483 873184124130 1470.6151 EQUIPMENT. RENTAL FIRE DEPT. GENERAL 50.01 325483 673184124130 1490.6188 TELEPHONE PUBLIC HEALTH 72.79 325483 673164124130, ' 1495.6188 TELEPHONE INSPECTIONS 464.08 325483 873184124130 .1400.6188 = - TELEPHONE POLICE DEPT. GENERAL 882.72 325483 873164124130 1400.6160 ` DATA PROCESSING POLICE DEPT. GENERAL 194.85 325483 873164124130 1301.6186 TELEPHONE GENERAL MAINTENANCE 492.42 325483 873164124130 1640.6188 TELEPHONE PARK MAINTENANCE GENERAL 447.76 325483 873164124130 1260.6188 TELEPHONE ENGINEERING GENERAL 63.41 325483 873184124130 1553.6188 TELEPHONE EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 177.48 325483 873164124130 1322.6188 TELEPHONE STREET LIGHTING ORNAMENTAL 88.23 325483 873184124130 1240.6188 TELEPHONE PUBLIC WORKS ADMIN GENERAL 95.20 325483 873184124130 1552.6188 TELEPHONE CENT SVC PW BUILDING 28.90 325483 873184124130 1140.6188 TELEPHONE PLANNING 34.17 325483 873184124130 4090.6168 TELEPHONE 50TH&FRANCE MAINTENANCE 61.68 325463 873184124130 5422.6186 TELEPHONE MAINT OF COURSE 8 GROUNDS 3.57 325483 873184124130 5511.6186 TELEPHONE ARENA BLDG/GROUNDS 27.20 325483 873184124130 5720.6188 TELEPHONE EDINBOROUGH OPERATIONS 486.55 325483 873164124130 5910.6188 TELEPHONE GENERAL (BILLING) 37.23 325483 873184124130 7411.6188 TELEPHONE PSTF OCCUPANCY 4,188.53 375986 1013/2013 101004 SPS COMPANIES 126.19 FITTINGS 00001953 325129 52791703.001 5917.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES METER REPAIR R55CKR2 LOGIS100 CITY OF EDINA Council Check Register by GL Council Check Register and Summary 10/3/2013 — 10/3/2013 Check # Date Amount Supplier/ Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No 375986 10/3/2013 101004 SPS COMPANIES 375987 1013/2013 103658 ST LOUIS PARK COMMUNITY BAND 75.00 EP ENTERTAINMENT 1016/13 325164 092613 5710.6136 75.00 375988 101312013 102251 ST. ANDREWS PRODUCTS CO 194.29 PENCILS 325556 0000711096 5410.6406 194.29 375989 101312013 101015 STREICHERS 39.99 UNIFORM 325647 11046338 1401.6203 202.91 MACE 325648 11046901 1400.6610 242.90 375990 101312013 106673 TAPCO 1,071.68 TRAFFIC SIGN 00001554 325130 1429146 1330.6215 1,071.68 375991 101312013 101035 THORPE DISTRIBUTING COMPANY 489.00 325610 00771322 5421.5514 2,769.10 325611 779196 5862.5514 3,258.10 375992 101312013 103982 TRAFFIC CONTROL CORPORATION 4,958.67 TRAFFIC SIGNALS 00001914 325511 0000061494 1330.6215 4,958.67 375993 101312013 100682 TRUGREEN PROCESSING CENTER 101.91 BLVD.LAWNS 325131 11486260 1643.6103 101.91 375994 1013/2013 123969 TWIN CITIES OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH PC . 270.00 PRE - EMPLOYMENT PHYSICAL 325503 102113274 1550.6121 270.00 375995 101312013 101047 TWIN CITY GARAGE DOOR CO 208.57 GARAGE DOOR REPAIR 325649 399277 5761.6180 208.57 375996 101312013 101063 VERSATILE VEHICLES INC. 10/212013 8:56:22 Page - 21 Subledger Account Description Business Unit Continued... PROFESSIONAL SVC - OTHER EDINBOROUGH ADMINISTRATION GENERAL SUPPLIES GOLF ADMINISTRATION UNIFORM ALLOWANCE EMERGENCY RESPONSE TEAM SAFETY EQUIPMENT POLICE DEPT. GENERAL EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE TRAFFIC SIGNALS COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER GRILL COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER VERNON SELLING EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE TRAFFIC SIGNALS PROFESSIONAL SERVICES GENERAL TURF CARE ADVERTISING PERSONNEL CENTRAL SERVICES GENERAL CONTRACTED REPAIRS CENTENNIAL LAKES OPERATING R55CKR2 LOGIS100 572.35 CITY OF EDINA 3136 5862.5513 572.35 Council Check Register by GL 376000 101312013 119454 VINOCOPIA Council Check Register and Summary 1,322.00 1013/2013 - 1013/2013 0084087 -IN Check # Dale Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description 375996 10/3/2013 101063 VERSATILE VEHICLES INC. Continued... 1,045.00 GOLF CART RENTAL 325557 70815 5423.6216 LEASE LINES 5520.5510'; 1,045.00 CONCESSION PRODUCT 325182 37584031 375997. 10/312013 57.71 128660 VIDACARE CORPORATION 325183 37459147 5520.5510 663.43 AMBULANCE SUPPLIES 00003654 325502 92659 1470.6510 FIRST AID SUPPLIES 5520.5510 663.43 END OF SEASON RETURNS 325185 EDINA POOL 376998 10/3/2013 314.59 101066 VIKING ELECTRIC SUPPLY 376002 10/312013 184.94 ELECTRICAL PANEL, PLUG INS 00001970 _ 325558 7646686 1646.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES 66.01 SENSOR 00001970 325558 7646686 1551.6406 - GENERAL SUPPLIES 5720.6406 250.95 375999 1013/2013 125327 VINOANDES 10/2/2013 8:56:22 Page - 22 Business Unit FIRE DEPT. GENERAL BUILDING MAINTENANCE CITY HALL GENERAL COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE ` VERNON SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD COST OF GOODS SOLD COST OF GOODS SOLD COST OF GOODS SOLD COST OF GOODS SOLD GENERAL SUPPLIES COST OF GOODS SOLD CONFERENCES & SCHOOLS ARENA CONCESSIONS ARENA CONCESSIONS ARENA CONCESSIONS ARENA CONCESSIONS POOL CONCESSIONS EDINBOROUGH OPERATIONS ARENA CONCESSIONS PLANNING 572.35 325210 3136 5862.5513 572.35 376000 101312013 119454 VINOCOPIA 1,322.00 325211 0084087 -IN 5862.5513 1,322.00 376001 1013/2013 120627 VISTAR CORPORATION 425.00 CONCESSION PRODUCT 325181 37555723 5520.5510'; 57.98 CONCESSION PRODUCT 325182 37584031 5520.5510 57.71 CONCESSION PRODUCT 325183 37459147 5520.5510 20.19- CREDIT 325184 37462063 5520.5510 205.91- END OF SEASON RETURNS 325185 EDINA POOL 5320.5510 314.59 376002 10/312013 132864 WATERTEK 462.61 OPTIPURE QUIK -TWIST TWIN SYS 00002212 325132 47475 5720.6406 462.61 376003 10/3/2013 130574 WATSON COMPANY 422.80 CONCESSION PRODUCT 325133 831181 5520.5510 422.80 376004 1013/2013 132868 WEBER, RYAN 562.10 CONFERENCE EXPENSES 325186 LANESBORO 1140.6104 562.10 10/2/2013 8:56:22 Page - 22 Business Unit FIRE DEPT. GENERAL BUILDING MAINTENANCE CITY HALL GENERAL COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE ` VERNON SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD COST OF GOODS SOLD COST OF GOODS SOLD COST OF GOODS SOLD COST OF GOODS SOLD GENERAL SUPPLIES COST OF GOODS SOLD CONFERENCES & SCHOOLS ARENA CONCESSIONS ARENA CONCESSIONS ARENA CONCESSIONS ARENA CONCESSIONS POOL CONCESSIONS EDINBOROUGH OPERATIONS ARENA CONCESSIONS PLANNING CITY OF EDINA 10/2/2013 8:56:22 R55CKR2 LOGIS100 Council Check Register by GL Page - 23 Council Check Register and Summary 1043/2013 -- 10/3/2013 Check # Dale Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit 376005 10/312013 103196 WHEELER HARDWARE CO Continued... 4,245.33 BRAEMAR GOLF DOME 325477 2 5200.1727 GOLF DOME GOLF DOME BALANCE SHEET 4,245.33 376006 101312013 114588 WILSON, ROBERT C. 143.07 CONFERENCE EXPENSES 325559 MAAO FALL 1190.6104 CONFERENCES & SCHOOLS ASSESSING 143.07 376007 10/312013 101033 WINE COMPANY, THE 1,081.45 325212 341022 -00 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 1,359.80 325698 341023 -00 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 910.85 325699 341021 -00 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING 3,352.10 376008 101312013 101312 WINE MERCHANTS 1,852.32. 325612 472684 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 2,053.12 325613 472687 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 363.36 325614 472685 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 2,508.88 325615 472688 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 444.48 325700 472683 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING 7,222.16 376009 101312013 124291 WIRTZ BEVERAGE MINNESOTA 1,878.18 325159 1080088858 5842.551 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 2,345.62 325213 1080088830 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 112.84 325214 1080088860 5842.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX YORK SELLING 4,049.11 325215 1080088857 5842.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR YORK SELLING 1,37600 325216 1080088833 5822.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR 50TH ST SELLING 2,721.63 325217 1080088829 5862.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR VERNON SELLING 210.94 325701 1080088832 5662.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX VERNON SELLING 12,694.42 376010 1013/2013 124529 WIRTZ BEVERAGE MINNESOTA BEER INC 5,324.35 325160 1090113901 5842.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER YORK SELLING 43.00 325161 1090113902 5842.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX YORK SELLING 2,134.50 325162 1090113188 5862.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER VERNON SELLING 107.50 325163 1090113189 5862.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER VERNON SELLING 196.10 325616 1090116425 5862.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX VERNON SELLING 72.00 325617 1090116424 5662.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER VERNON SELLING 600.00 325618 1090116426 5862.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER VERNON SELLING 151.00- 325619 209001493 5421.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER GRILL R55CKR2 LOGIS100 Check # Date 376010 1013/2013 CITY OF EDINA ' Council Check Register by GL Council Check Register and Summary 10/3/2013 - 10/312013 Amount Supplier / Explanation _ PO # Doc No Inv No Account No 124529 WIRTZ BEVERAGE MINNESOTA BEER INC 1,200.00 325702 1090116430 5842.5514 2,117.85 325703 1090116423 5862.5514 11,644.30 376011 10/3/2013 105740 WSB & ASSOCIATES INC. 2,492.97 GATEWAY AUAR UPDATE 2,492.97 376012 1013/2013 25.53 49.07 22.40 82.83 36.36 39.65 33.59 109.88 119.71 16.02 4,141.09 153.68 20.93 59.39 101.76 243.16 14,870.75 2,624.94 2,220.66 34,878.88 59,850.28 101726 XCEL ENERGY 51- 9770163 -6 51- 8997917 -7 51- 8976004 -9 51- 6541084 -2 51- 0223133 -2 51- 0194596 -8 51- 0160483 -1 51- 9770164 -7 51- 6050184 -2 51- 0193479 -4 51- 9011854-0 51- 9608462 -5 51- 8976004 -9 51- 4420190 -3 51- 6692497 -0 51- 8987646 -8 51- 6644819 -9 51- 5547446 -1 51- 5107681 -4 51- 4621797 -2 325650 6- 01686 -370 1140.6103 325187 384344463 325188 384336157 325189 384338586 325190 384306199 325191 384201189 325192 384200856 325193 384201244 325194 384345919 325195 384300357 325651 384362558 325652 384518821 325653 384532924 325654 384516414 325655 384444303 325656 384483374 325657 384518470 325658 384482222 325659 384461946 325660 384454573 325672 384795162 376013 1013/2013 101089 ZEE MEDICAL SERVICE 72.70 FIRST AID SUPPLIES 00006498 325560 54060116 72.70 1,195,247.96 Grand Total 1321.6185 1321.6185 1321.6185 1646.6185 1322.6185 1321.6185 1330.6185 1321.6185 4086.6103 5934.6185 5913.6185 5921.6185 1321.6185 1321.6185 1460.6185 1321.6185 5720.6185 1628.6185 5111.6185 1321.6185 5422.6406 Subledger Account Description Continued... COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER Payment Instrument Totals Check Total 1,195,247.96 Total Payments 1,195,247.96 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES LIGHT & POWER LIGHT & POWER LIGHT & POWER LIGHT & POWER LIGHT & POWER LIGHT & POWER LIGHT & POWER LIGHT & POWER PROFESSIONAL SERVICES ; LIGHT & POWER LIGHT & POWER LIGHT & POWER LIGHT & POWER LIGHT & POWER LIGHT & POWER LIGHT & POWER LIGHT & POWER LIGHT & POWER LIGHT & POWER LIGHT & POWER GENERAL SUPPLIES 1002013 8:56:22 Page - 24 Business Unit YORK SELLING VERNON SELLING PLANNING STREET LIGHTING REGULAR STREET LIGHTING REGULAR STREET LIGHTING REGULAR BUILDING MAINTENANCE STREET LIGHTING ORNAMENTAL STREET LIGHTING REGULAR TRAFFIC SIGNALS STREET LIGHTING REGULAR AQUATIC WEEDS STORM LIFT STATION MAINT DISTRIBUTION SANITARY LIFT STATION MAINT STREET LIGHTING REGULAR STREET LIGHTING REGULAR CIVILIAN DEFENSE STREET LIGHTING REGULAR EDINBOROUGH OPERATIONS SENIOR CITIZENS ART CENTER BLDG /MAINT STREET LIGHTING REGULAR MAINT OF COURSE & GROUNDS CITY OF EDINA 10/2/2013 8:56:44 R55CKS2 LOGIS100 Council Check Summary Page- 1 10/312013 - 10/312013 Company Amount 01000 GENERAL FUND 328,559.33 02300 POLICE SPECIAL REVENUE 792.00 , 04000 WORKING CAPITAL FUND 517.30 05100 ART CENTER FUND 2,563.32 05200 GOLF DOME FUND 596,357.84 05300 AQUATIC CENTER FUND 39.56- 05400 GOLF COURSE FUND 21,735.95 05500 ICE ARENA FUND 7,938.51 05700 EDINBOROUGH PARK FUND 27,884.78 05750 CENTENNIAL LAKES PARK FUND 3,707.80 05800 LIQUOR FUND 161,072.63 05900 UTILITY FUND 37,991.09 05930 STORM SEWER FUND 16.02 07400 PSTF AGENCY FUND 2,548.40 09900 PAYROLL FUND 3,602.55 Report Totals. 1,195,247.96 We confirm to the best of our knowledge and belief, that these claims comply Imbill material respects with the requirements of the City of Edina purchasing; polici s and procedures dgie� Iv f 3 R55CKR2 LOGIS100 CITY OF EDINA 1018/2013 9:13:37 Council Check Register by GL Page - 1 Council Check Register and Summary 10/10/2013- 10/10/2013 Check # Date Amount Supplier I Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit 376014 1011012013 105696 3CMA 150.00 DUPLICATE AWARDS 325801 E -MN -3CMA 1130.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES COMMUNICATIONS -z 150.00 376015 10/1012013 132833 612BREW LLC - 112.00 = 325826 "'727 5862.5514 COST OF GOODS -SOLD BEER VERNON SELLING 56.00 _ - 326006 725 5822.5514 COST OF GOODS 'SOLD BEER 50TH ST SELLING 168.00 . 376016 10/1012013 101971 ABLE HOSES RUBBER LLC 267:56'' .HOSE, COUPLINGS 00005627 325927 1- 852924 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 267.56 376017 1011012013 102971 ACE ICE COMPANY 101.20 326007 1726911 5842.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX YORK SELLING 101.20 376018 1011012013 129458 ACME TOOLS 1,282.50 STIHL SAW 00001048 325745 2164731 5932.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES GENERAL STORM SEWER 339.15 SAW ACCESSORIES 00001047. 325746 2165807- 5932.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES GENERAL STORM SEWER 1,621.65 376019 1011012013 132967 ALL METRO EXCAVATING 2,500.00 REFUND1ESCROW -5524 WARDEN AVE 325973 ED123598 1495.4109 CONSTRUCTION DEPOSIT INSPECTIONS 2,500.00 376020 10110/2013 101115 AMERIPRIDE SERVICES 275.60 326153 093013 1551.6201 LAUNDRY . a CITY HALL GENERAL 465.84 ''326153 093013 1470.6201 LAUNDRY FIRE DEPT. GENERAL 242.79 326153 093013 1470.6201 LAUNDRY FIRE DEPT. GENERAL 188.33 326153 093013 5421.6201 LAUNDRY GRILL 144.22 326153 093013 5861.6201 LAUNDRY' VERNON OCCUPANCY 104.83 326153 093013 5841.6201 LAUNDRY YORK OCCUPANCY 68.61 326153 093013 5821.6201 LAUNDRY 50TH ST OCCUPANCY" 1,490.22 376021 10/10/2013 102172 APPERT'S FOODSERVICE 720.15 CONCESSION PRODUCT 326091 1999807 5730.5510 COST OF GOODS SOLD EDINBOROUGH CONCESSIONS 624.98 FOOD 326092 1994744 5421.5510 COST OF GOODS SOLD GRILL , 604.47 FOOD 326093 1998639 5421.5510 COST OF GOODS SOLD GRILL 1,949.60 - - - - - R55CKR2 LOGIS100 132953 ARTS IN THE PARK 457.68 BEER S WINE PROCEEDS 457.68 CITY OF EDINA 102774 ASPEN WASTE SYSTEMS 207.79 RUBBISH 208.31 GENERAL MAINTENANCE 208.32 Council Check Register by GL 66.29 RUBBISH 33.28 CENT SVC PW BUILDING 360.03 Council Check Register and Summary RUBBISH 56.55 FIRE DEPT. GENERAL 68.66 100113 44.71 10/10/2013- 10/10/2013 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No 376021 10110/2013 1645.6182 102172 APPERrS FOODSERVICE LITTER REMOVAL 326094 100113 376022 1011012013 REMOVAL 103680 ARAMARK REFRESHMENT SRVCS 100113 1628.6182 RUBBISH REMOVAL SENIOR CITIZENS 309.16 COFFEE 5111.6182 325974 427976 7411.6406 326094 100113 309.16 RUBBISH REMOVAL CLUB HOUSE 326094 100113 376023 1011012013 REMOVAL 132975 ARCHER, JESSICA 100113 5430.6182 RUBBISH REMOVAL RICHARDS GOLF COURSE 23.73 MILEAGE REIMBURSEMENT 326154 100213 1495.6107 23.73 376024 1011012013 101677 ARMCOM DISTRIBUTING CO. 55.04 LIGHT LENS 00001967 325737 10059261 5420.6530 55.04 376025 10/1012013 132031 ARTISAN BEER COMPANY 905.00 325827 28643 5842.5514 91.94 326008 28642 5862.5514 59.99 326009 28646 5862.5514 549.00 326010 28644 5862.5514 993.00 326011 28645 5822.5514 70.00 326012 28357 5822.5514 2,668.93 376026 10110/2013 132953 ARTS IN THE PARK 457.68 BEER S WINE PROCEEDS 457.68 CITY HALL GENERAL 376027 1011012013 102774 ASPEN WASTE SYSTEMS 207.79 RUBBISH 208.31 GENERAL MAINTENANCE 208.32 100113 66.29 RUBBISH 33.28 CENT SVC PW BUILDING 360.03 100113 89.76 RUBBISH 56.55 FIRE DEPT. GENERAL 68.66 100113 44.71 RUBBISH 131.26 YORK FIRE STATION 217.25 100113 73.92 RUBBISH 10/8/2013 9:13:37 Page - 2 Subledger Account Description Business Unit Continued... GENERAL SUPPLIES PSTF OCCUPANCY MILEAGE OR ALLOWANCE INSPECTIONS REPAIR PARTS CLUB HOUSE COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER YORK SELLING VERNON SELLING VERNON SELLING VERNON SELLING 50TH ST SELLING 50TH ST SELLING 325928 100313 5840.8070 MISCELLANEOUS REVENUE LIQUOR YORK GENERAL 326094 100113 1551.6182 RUBBISH REMOVAL CITY HALL GENERAL 326094 100113 1301.6182 RUBBISH REMOVAL GENERAL MAINTENANCE 326094 100113 1552.6182 RUBBISH REMOVAL CENT SVC PW BUILDING 326094 100113 1470.6182 RUBBISH REMOVAL FIRE DEPT. GENERAL 326094 100113 1481.6182 RUBBISH REMOVAL YORK FIRE STATION 326094 100113 1645.6182 RUBBISH REMOVAL LITTER REMOVAL 326094 100113 1645.6182 RUBBISH REMOVAL LITTER REMOVAL 326094 100113 1645.6182 RUBBISH REMOVAL LITTER REMOVAL 326094 100113 1628.6182 RUBBISH REMOVAL SENIOR CITIZENS 326094 100113 5111.6182 RUBBISH REMOVAL ART CENTER BLDG / MAINT 326094 100113 5420.6182 RUBBISH REMOVAL CLUB HOUSE 326094 100113 5422.6182 RUBBISH REMOVAL MAINT OF COURSE & GROUNDS 326094 100113 5430.6182 RUBBISH REMOVAL RICHARDS GOLF COURSE • R55CKR2 LOGIS100 CITY OF EDINA, 10/8/2013 9:13:37 Council Check Register by GL Page - 3 Council Check Register and Summery 10/1012013 -- 10/10/2013 Check # Date Amount Supplier /Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No, Account No,, Subledgers= • Account Description Business Unit 376027 10/1012013 102774 ASPEN WASTE SYSTEMS - Continued... 269.56 _ 326094 100113 5511.6162. RUBBISH REMOVAL,. ARENA BLDG/GROUNDS - 646.03 326094 100113 5720.6182 = RUBBISH REMOVAL EDINBOROUGH OPERATIONS .99.35 326094 100113 5861.6182 RUBBISH REMOVAL VERNON OCCUPANCY 186.79 326094 100113 5841.6182 RUBBISH REMOVAL YORK OCCUPANCY 33.00 32609.4 100113 5821.6182 RUBBISH REMOVAL 50TH ST OCCUPANCY 3,000.86 376028 1011012013 119465 ASSOCIATION OF MINNESOTA COUNTIES 50.00 WEBSITE JOB POSTING.. 326155 37544 1550.6121 ADVERTISING PERSONNEL CENTRAL SERVICES GENERAL 50.00 376029 1011012013 101195 AUTO ELECTRIC OF BLOOMINGTON INC. 276.75 ALTERNATOR 00005588 325855-M13561 - 1553.6530 REPAIR.PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 276.75 376030 10110 /2013 119206 AZTECA SYSTEMS INC. 2,250.00 CITYWORKS, SERVER AMS 00002540 325802 8733 5913.6103 PROFESSIONAL'SERVICES DISTRIBUTION 2,250.00 CITYWORKS SERVER'AMS 00002540 325802- 8733 5923.6103 PROFESSIONAL,SERVICES COLLECTION.SYSTEMS • 2,250.00 CITYWORKS SERVER AMS 00002540 325802 8733 5932.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES GENERAL STORM SEWER , 6,750.00 376031 .1011012013 132977 BAKER, DONNA - 100.00. REFUND FOR CANCELATION 326156 BRAEMAR GC 5401.4553 CLUBHOUSE GOLF REVENUES 100.00 376032 10/10/2013 100643 BARR ENGINEERING CO. 22,756.50 STORMWATER MGMT 7 FEMA 325747 23270354.00 -199 5960.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES. ENGINEER SERVICES - STORM 5,687.50 SE SANITARY SEWER ANALYSIS 325748 23271180.00 -15 5925.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES ENGINEER SERVICES - SEWER 11,805.12 ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES 326095 23271292.04 -1 9232.6133 PROFESS SERVICES - ENGINEERING CENTENNIAL TIF DISTRICT 2,080.58 3930 BLDG ENVIRON SERVICES " 326157 23271292.02 -3 9232.6136 PROFESSIONAL SVC : OTHER CENTENNIAL TIF DISTRICT 42,329.70 376033 1011012013 101355 BELLBOY CORPORATION 188.02 325940 79952200 5862.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR VERNON SELLING - 533.15 326013 80038200 5842.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR YORK SELLING 41.00 326014 80038300 5842.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX YORK SELLING 393.15 326015 80038400 5862.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR VERNON SELLING 44.75 326016 89119700 5822.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX 50TH ST SELLING 29.33 326016 89119700 5822.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES 50TH ST SELLING 1,229.40 R55CKR2 LOGIS100 Check # Date Amount 376033 1011012013 376034 1011012013 583.54 99.00 682.54 376035 1011012013 703.01 703.01 376036 1011012013 185.50 185.50 376037 1011012013 140.69 112.36 100.99 210.18 45.26- 24.30 543.26 376038 1011012013 2,200.00 2,200.00 376039 1011012013 11, 834.00 11,834.00 376040 1011012013 777.94 777.94 376041 10110/2013 37.41 104.19 81.65 19.48 CITY OF EDINA Council Check Register by GL Council Check Register and Summary 10/10/2013 - 10/10/2013 Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No 101355 BELLBOY CORPORATION 117379 BENIEK PROPERTY SERVICES INC. OCT 2013 LAWN CARE 325975 141880 7411.6136 IRRIGATION SERVICE 325976 141804 7411.6136 125139 BERNICK'S 325828 83905 5862.5514 126847 BERRY COFFEE COMPANY COFFEE 326158 1117101 5520.5510 100648 BERTELSON OFFICE PRODUCTS OFFICE SUPPLIES 325749 OE- 331480 -1 1260.6406 MESSAGE FLAGS 00003015 325803 WO- 881323 -1 1400.6513 LAMINATING ROLL REFILL 325929 OE- 332779 -1 5840.6513 OFFICE SUPPLIES 326096 WO- 882028 -1 1550.6406 RETURN 326097 CP- WO- 881271 -1 1550.6406 MARKERS 326098 WO- 882895 -1 1550.6406 100653 BITUMINOUS ROADWAYS INC. FINAL PAYMENT 326198 101113 5960.6103 132444 BOLTON & MENK INC. TRUNK SEWER RELINING 325750 0159963 03485.1705.20 101010 BORDER STATES ELECTRIC SUPPLY CORD REEL, ELEC SUPPLIES 325751 906235506 1551.6406 100659 BOYER TRUCK PARTS FREIGHT ONLY 00005178 325856 CM756314 1553.6530 CHAMBER 325857 783234 1553.6530 MOTOR ASSEMBLY 00005632 325858 783728 1553.6530 HOSE 00005629 325859 783580 1553.6530 10/8/2013 9:13:37 Page- 4 Subledger Account Description Business Unit Continued... SNOW & LAWN CARE PSTF OCCUPANCY SNOW & LAWN CARE PSTF OCCUPANCY COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER VERNON SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD ARENA CONCESSIONS GENERALSUPPLIES OFFICE SUPPLIES OFFICE SUPPLIES GENERAL SUPPLIES GENERAL SUPPLIES GENERALSUPPLIES ENGINEERING GENERAL POLICE DEPT. GENERAL LIQUOR YORK GENERAL CENTRAL SERVICES GENERAL CENTRAL SERVICES GENERAL CENTRAL SERVICES GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES ENGINEER SERVICES - STORM CONSULTING DESIGN TRUNK SS LINING GENERALSUPPLIES CITY HALL GENERAL REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN R55CKR2 LOGIS100 Business Unit Continued... REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN CITY OF EDINA REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN CONTRACTED REPAIRS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN Y Council Check Register by GL MORNINGSIDE NHOOD RECON CONSULTING DESIGN HAWKES NHOOD RECON CONSULTING DESIGN WARDEN AVE Council Check Register and Summary WALNUT RIDGE NHOOD RECON CONSULTING DESIGN CLOVER LAKE NHOOD RECON - CONSULTING DESIGN EDINA TERRACE NHOOD RECON CONSULTING INSPECTION 10/10/2013— 10/10/2013 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No 376041 10/1012013 WM -501 RAW WATER WELL9 TO WTP6 CONSULTING INSPECTION 100659' BOYER TRUCK PARTS EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT ..YORK COMMUNITY GARDEN PARK LOT' PRINTING 50TH ST SELLING PRINTING 85.03 PRINTING OIL SEALS, GASKETS 00005635 325860 784217 1553.6530 19.54 HOSE 00005629 325861 784461 1553.6530 .39.59 GOVERNOR 00005635 325862 784432 15516530 457.58 VEHICLE REPAIRS 00005637 325863 262175 1553.6180 844.47 376042 1011012013 100664 BRAUN INTERTEC 3,250.00 GEOTECHNICAL EVALUATION. _ 325752 374998 01406.1705.2 1,650.00 GEOTECHNICAL EVALUATION 325753 374999 01407.1705.2 1,580.00 GEOTECHNICAL EVALUATION '' 325754 375000 01408.1705.2 2,470.00 GEOTECHNICAL EVALUATION 325755 375.001 01409,1705.2 3,050.00 GEOTECHNICAL EVALUATION 325756 375002 01410.1705.2 2,620.00 GEOTECHNICAL EVALUATION 325757 375003 01411.1705.2 812.00 MATERIALSrTESTING 325758 374981 04398.1705.2 731.75 MATERIALS: TESTING 325759 374982 01394.1705.2 536.00 MATERIALS TESTING 325760 374983 01395.1705.2 780.50_ MATERIALS TESTING 325761 374984 01398.1705.2 360.50 MATERIALS TESTING 325761 374984 04393.1705.2 312.00 MATERIALS TESTING 325762 374985 05501.1705.2 1,575.00 MATERIALS TESTING 325763 374986 .07108.1705.2 480.25 MATERIALS TESTING 325764 374987 47088.6710 20,208.00 , 376043 10/1012013 119826' BRYANT GRAPHICS INC. 176.27 . EDINA LIQUOR NEWSLETTER 325930 32478 5822.6575 - 176.27 - EDINA LIQUOR NEWSLETTER 325930 32478 5842.6575 176.26 EDINA LIQUOR NEWSLETTER 325930 - 32478 5862.6575 528.80 376044 1011012013 132978, BUCKLEY, TOM 183.84 LMC TRAINING EXPENSES 326159 100713 1281.6104 183.84 376045 10110/2013 121518' BUSHNELL OUTDOOR PRODUCTS 290.33 MERCHANDISE 326160 326614 5440.5511 290.33 376046 1011012013 116114 CANON SOLUTIONS AMERICA INC. 67.94 OCE MAINTENANCE . 325765 988079359 1552.6103 67.94 10/8/2013 9:13:37 Page- 5 Subledger Account Description Business Unit Continued... REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN CONTRACTED REPAIRS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN Y CONSULTING DESIGN MORNINGSIDE NHOOD RECON CONSULTING DESIGN HAWKES NHOOD RECON CONSULTING DESIGN WARDEN AVE CONSULTING DESIGN WALNUT RIDGE NHOOD RECON CONSULTING DESIGN CLOVER LAKE NHOOD RECON - CONSULTING DESIGN EDINA TERRACE NHOOD RECON CONSULTING INSPECTION CLOVER LAKE NHOOD RECON CONSULTING INSPECTION NORMANDALE CONSULTING INSPECTION _ BRAEMAR HILLS B CONSULTING INSPECTION LAKE EDINA B CONSULTING INSPECTION LAKE EDINAA RECON CONSULTING INSPECTION WM -501 RAW WATER WELL9 TO WTP6 CONSULTING INSPECTION S108 SCHOOL ROAD EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT ..YORK COMMUNITY GARDEN PARK LOT' PRINTING 50TH ST SELLING PRINTING YORK SELLING PRINTING VERNON SELLING CONFERENCES 8 SCHOOLS TRAINING COST OF GOODS - PRO SHOP PRO SHOP RETAIL SALES PROFESSIONAL SERVICES CENT SVC PW BUILDING R55CKR2 LOGIS100 112561 CENTERPOINT ENERGY CITY OF EDINA 10/8/2013 9:13:37 19.28 9546705 -6 325709 Council Check Register by GL 5911.6186 Page - 6 28.97 9941020 -1 326099 9941020 -9/13 Council Check Register and Summary 28.97 9941026 -8 326100 9941026 -9/13 9232.6406 10/10/2013- 10/10/2013 15.98 9941012 -8 Check # Date Amount Supplier I Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit 376046 1011012013 116114 CANON SOLUTIONS AMERICA INC. Continued... 376047 1011012013 119455 CAPITOL BEVERAGE SALES 342.71 13.95 325710 325829 366070 584.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX YORK SELLING 57.04 952 929 -0297 2,663.05 0297 -9/13 325830 366069 5842.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER YORK SELLING 952 831 -0024 325712 137.50 1552.6188 326017 367050 5842.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER YORK SELLING 2,814.50 376051 1011012013 122317 CITY OF EDINA - COMMUNICATIONS 376048 1011012013 116683 CAT & FIDDLE BEVERAGE FACEBOOK ADVERTISING 325804 COM -0126 5842.5513 376049 1011012013 112561 CENTERPOINT ENERGY 19.28 9546705 -6 325709 9546705 -9113 5911.6186 28.97 9941020 -1 326099 9941020 -9/13 9232.6406 28.97 9941026 -8 326100 9941026 -9/13 9232.6406 15.98 9941012 -8 326101 9941012 -9/13 9232.6406 15.98 9941021 -9 326102 9941021 -9113 9232.6406 109.18 376050 10110/2013 123898 CENTURYLINK 342.71 952 927 -8861 325710 8861 -9113 1554.6188 57.04 952 929 -0297 325711 0297 -9/13 4090.6188 123.53 952 831 -0024 325712 0024 -9/13 1552.6188 523.28 376051 1011012013 122317 CITY OF EDINA - COMMUNICATIONS 100.00 FACEBOOK ADVERTISING 325804 COM -0126 1120.6406 450.00 ABOUT TOWN AD 326103 COM -0114 5410.6122 50.00 FACEBOOK POST 326104 COM -0127 5410.6122 600.00 376052 1011012013 122084 CITY OF EDINA - UTILITIES 342.66 00079303- 0155300018 326161 155300018 -9113 5511.6189 1,814.87 00079303 - 0155300010 326162 155300010 -9113 5511.6189 881.89 00079303- 0155300009 326163 155300009 -9/13 5511.6189 3,039.42 376053 10/1012013 100687 CITY OF RICHFIELD 14,343.00 SEALCOATING ON XERXES AVE 00001998 326164 5691 1314.6180 14,343.00 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING HEAT GENERAL SUPPLIES GENERAL SUPPLIES GENERAL SUPPLIES GENERAL SUPPLIES TELEPHONE TELEPHONE TELEPHONE GENERAL SUPPLIES ADVERTISING OTHER ADVERTISING OTHER SEWER & WATER SEWER & WATER SEWER & WATER CONTRACTED REPAIRS WELL PUMPS CENTENNIAL TIF DISTRICT CENTENNIAL TIF DISTRICT CENTENNIAL TIF DISTRICT CENTENNIAL TIF DISTRICT CENT SERV GEN - MIS 50TH &FRANCE MAINTENANCE CENT SVC PW BUILDING ADMINISTRATION GOLF ADMINISTRATION GOLF ADMINISTRATION ARENA BLDG/GROUNDS ARENA BLDG/GROUNDS ARENABLDG/GROUNDS STREET RENOVATION R55CKR2 `LOGIS100 CITY OF EDINA 10/8/2013 9:13:37 Council Check Register by GL Page- 7 Council Check Register and Summary 10110/2013 -- 10/1012013 Check # Date Amount Supplier/ Explanation PO # Doc No Inv.No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit 376053 10/1012013 100687 - CITY OF RICHFIELD Continued... 376054 1011012013 120433 COMCAST 90.90 8772 10 614 0164959 326105 164959 -9/13 5430.6188 TELEPHONE RICHARDS GOLF COURSE 90.90 376055 10110/2013 121066 COMMERCIAL ASPHALT CO. 7,516.68 ASPHALT 325864 '130915 1647.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES PATHS & HARD SURFACE 24,095.42 ASPHALT 325864 130915 1314.6518 BLACKTOP STREET RENOVATION 207.88 ASPHALT 325864 130915 1301.6518 BLACKTOP GENERAL MAINTENANCE 3,944.35 ASPHALT 325864" 130915 5913.6518 BLACKTOP DISTRIBUTION . 35,764.33 - 376056 .1011012013 132954 CRONQUIST, KATHLEEN 22.00 DEFENSIVE DRIVING CLASS 325931 REFUND 1628.4392.09 SENIOR SPECIAL EVENTS SENIOR CITIZENS '. 22.00 376057 10/1012013 100706 D.C. ANNIS SEWER INC. 440.00 PUMP SUMP 325977 98116 1470.6215 EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE FIRE DEPT. GENERAL 440.00 376058 1011012013 104020 DALCO 628.43 TISSUE DISPENSERS 00001979 325713 2654799 1646.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES BUILDING MAINTENANCE - 223.37 GRILL CLEANER 326106 2658760 5421.6511 CLEANING SUPPLIES GRILL 851.80 376059 10/1012013 132356 DAVE ALAN HOMES INC. 2,500.00 REFUND ESCROW -5501 LAKEVIEW DR 325978 ED123638 1495.4109 CONSTRUCTION DEPOSIT INSPECTIONS 2,500.00 376060 10110/2013 102478 DAY.DISTRIBUTING CO. 3,712.42 325832 721286 5842.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER J YORK SELLING 44.80 325833 721287 5842.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX YORK SELLING. 586.60 325834 720727 5862.5514 COST OF GOODS, SOLD BEER VERNON SELLING 1,885.10 325941 721284 5822.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER 50TH ST SELLING 270.40 326018. 720735 5822.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER 50TH ST SELLING 22.40 326019 721285 5822.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX 50TH ST SELLING 6,521.72 376061 1011012013 100720 DENNYS 5TH AVE. BAKERY 85.74 BAKERY 326107 474644 5421.5510 COST OF GOODS SOLD GRILL R55CKR2 LOGIS100 CITY OF EDINA 10/8/2013 9:13:37 Council Check Register by GL Page - 8 Council Check Register and Summary 10/10/2013— 10/1012013 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit 376061 1011012013 100720 DENNYS 5TH AVE. BAKERY Continued... 66.63 326108 474927 5421.5510 COST OF GOODS SOLD GRILL 152.37 376062 10/10/2013 118375 DEPAUL LETTERING 326.00 POLOS FOR TRAINING 325805 9089 1400.6104 CONFERENCES & SCHOOLS POLICE DEPT. GENERAL 326.00 378063 1011012013 132610 DERING PIERSON GROUP 77,418.48 APPL #3 COUNTRYSIDE PARK 326165 35 47078.6710 EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT COUNTRYSIDE PK PLAYGROUNDBPATH 77,418.48 376064 1011012013 102831 DEX MEDIA EAST INC. 1,576.76 110311893 326109 110311893 -10/13 5410.6122 ADVERTISING OTHER GOLF ADMINISTRATION 89.00 651972955 326110 651972955 -9/13 5760.6122 ADVERTISING OTHER CENTENNIAL LAKES ADMIN EXPENSE 1,665.76 376065 1011012013 123995 DICK'SILAKEVILLE SANITATION INC. 3,799.23 REFUSE 326199 596198 4095.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 50TH STREET RUBBISH 4,702.05 REFUSE 326200 596199 4095.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 50TH STREET RUBBISH 8,501.28 376066 1011012013 112663 DOLLARS & SENSE 883.33 DIRECT MAIL COUPON 325738 32319 5822.6122 ADVERTISING OTHER 50TH ST SELLING 883.33 DIRECT MAIL COUPON 325738 32319 5842.6122 ADVERTISING OTHER YORK SELLING 883.34 DIRECT MAIL COUPON 325738 32319 5862.6122 ADVERTISING OTHER VERNON SELLING 2,650.00 376067 1011012013 124438 DONNAY HOMES 2,500.00 REFUND ESCROW -6605 PARKWOOD RD 325979 ED123629 1495.4109 CONSTRUCTION DEPOSIT INSPECTIONS 2,500.00 376068 1011012013 100730 DORSEY S WHITNEY LLP 5,405.00 3944 HOOTEN ACQUISITION 326111 1690610 9232.6131 PROFESSIONAL SERV - LEGAL CENTENNIAL TIF DISTRICT 1,859.00 SOUTHDALE DEVELOPMENT PROD 326112 1890609 9232.6131 PROFESSIONAL SERV - LEGAL CENTENNIAL TIF DISTRICT 165.00 SOUTHDALE DEVELOPMENT PROJ 326113 1895739 9232.6131 PROFESSIONAL SERV - LEGAL CENTENNIAL TIF DISTRICT 4,219.62 3944 HOOTEN ACQUISITION 326114 1895740 9232.6131 PROFESSIONAL SERV - LEGAL CENTENNIAL TIF DISTRICT 11,648.62 376069 10110/2013 129718 DREW'S CONCESSIONS LLC 144.00 CARAMEL CORN 00002037 325980 1663 5761.5510 COST OF GOODS SOLD CENTENNIAL LAKES OPERATING R55CKR2 LOGIS100 CITY OF EDINA Council Check Register by GL Council Check Register and Summary 10/10/2013— 10/10/2013 Check # Date Amount Supplier/ Explanation : PO # Doc No Inv No Account No 376069 1011012013 129718• -DREW'S CONCESSIONS iLC 72.00 CARAMEL CORN 326115 1661 5730.5510 72.00 CARAMEL CORN 326116 1662 5320.5510 288.00 376070 10110/2013 132810 ECM PUBLISHERS INC. 51.96 PUBLISH NOTICE 325865 25810 1120.6120 . 220.83 PUBLISH ORD 2013 -8 325866. 23801 1120.6120 305.00 NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION AD`: 326117 26398 1120.6120 577.79 = 376071 10/1012013 132923 EDELMANN & ASSOCIATES INC. _ ' 597.70 BRACKETS, BALL BEARING' -. 325506 135913. 1553.6530 1,491.98 RELIEF VALVE 00001908 325867 135912 15516530 2,089.68 376072 10/10/2013 124503 EDEN PRAIRIE WINLECTRIC CO. 40.95 ADAPTERS, PIGTAILS 00001980 325714 10288600 1646.6578 40.95 376073 10110/2013 122079:' EDINA COMMUNITY EDUCATION 15.00 ECC RM 351 MEETING 325868 1314 -2129 1120.6106 15.00 376074 10110/2013 101341- EDINA FIREFIGHTER'S RELIEF ASSOCIATION 292,244.33 •STATEFIREAID, 326118 100413 1400.4218 292,244.33 376075 10/1012013 105224 EDINA POLICE RESERVES 350.00 SUSAN KOMEN 3 -DAY WALK 325869 AUG 23 1428.6010 350.00 376076 '10/1012013 129947 EHLERS INVESTMENT PARTNERS - 91.60 MANAGEMENT FEE, 325932 093013 1550.6155 91.60 376077 10/1012013 104733 EMERGENCY MEDICAL PRODUCTS INC. - 4,083.33 AMBULANCE SUPPLIES 00003878 325981 1585816 1470.6510 4,083.33 376078 10/1012013 132979 ERICKSON, HEATHER . Subledger Account Description Continued... COST OF GOODS SOLD COST OF GOODS SOLD ADVERTISING LEGAL ADVERTISING LEGAL, ADVERTISING LEGAL REPAIR PARTS REPAIR PARTS -_ LAMPS & FIXTURES 10/8/2013 9:13:37 Page - 9 Business Unit EDINBOROUGH CONCESSIONS POOL CONCESSIONS ADMINISTRATION ADMINISTRATION ADMINISTRATION EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN BUILDING MAINTENANCE MEETING EXPENSE ADMINISTRATION POLICEAID 1% _ POLICE DEPT. GENERAL - SALARIES REGULAR EMPLOYEES OFF DUTY EMPLOYMENT BANK SERVICES CHARGES N. FIRST AID SUPPLIES CENTRAL SERVICES GENERAL FIRE DEPT. GENERAL R55CKR2 LOGIS100 EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN REPAIR PARTS CITY OF EDINA GEN REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN Council Check Register by GL EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN REPAIR PARTS Council Check Register and Summary GEN REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 10/10/2013— 10/10/2013 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No 376078 1011012013 132979 ERICKSON, HEATHER 44.32 UTILITY OVERPAYMENT REFUND 326166 321 WASHINGTON 5900.2015 AVE 44.32 376079 1011012013 130846 ETHICAL LEADERS IN ACTION LLC 900.00 BLDG DEPT ANALYSIS 325982 1165 1495.6103 900.00 376080 1011012013 130604 EUREKA CONSTRUCTION 1,921.13 FINAL PAYMENT 326201 082213 01244.1705.30 626.96 FINAL PAYMENT 326201 082213 08058.1705.30 15,447.67 FINAL PAYMENT 326201 082213 01368.1705.30 4,003.36 FINAL PAYMENT 326201 082213 03472.1705.30 3,062.00 FINAL PAYMENT 326201 082213 05526.1705.30 5,733.94 FINAL PAYMENT 326201 082213 04388.1705.30 30,795.06 376081 1011012013 101476 EVERGREEN LAND SERVICES 92.00 COURTHOUSE FEE, RECORDING FEE 325766 00 -10847 10044.1705.20 92.00 376082 1011012013 100018 EXPERT T BILLING 6,422.00 SEPT BILLINGS 326119 100313 1470.6103 6,422.00 376083 10110/2013 100158 EXPLORE MINNESOTA GOLF ALLIANCE 1,950.00 ANNUAL DUES 326120 18 5410.6105 1,950.00 376084 10/1012013 102497 EXPLORER POST 925 262.50 SUSAN KOMEN 3 -DAY WALK 325870 AUG 23 1428.6010 262.50 376085 1011012013 100146 FACTORY MOTOR PARTS COMPANY 115.18 CERAMIC PADS, ROTORS 325871 69- 113406 1553.6530 232.13 SENSORS 325872 1- 4275811 1553.6530 36.37 FILTER 325873 1- 4275636 1553.6530 163.65 PARTS 325874 69- 113408 1553.6530 39.42 SILICONE BRAKE LUBE 325875 1- 4278202 1553.6530 19.71 SILICONE BRAKE LURE 325876 69- 113774 1553.6530 a. Subledger Account Description Continued... CUSTOMER REFUND 10/8/2013 9:13:37 Page - 10 Business Unit UTILITY BALANCE SHEET PROFESSIONAL SERVICES INSPECTIONS CONTRACTOR PAYMENTS CONTRACTOR PAYMENTS CONTRACTOR PAYMENTS CONTRACTOR PAYMENTS CONTRACTOR PAYMENTS CONTRACTOR PAYMENTS A -244 TRACY AVE LANDSCAPING L -58 TRACY AVE LIGHTING BA -368 TRACY AVE RECON TRACY AVE TRACY AVE TRACY AVE CONSULTING DESIGN LS44 LIFT STATION 1 REHAB PROFESSIONAL SERVICES FIRE DEPT. GENERAL DUES & SUBSCRIPTIONS GOLF ADMINISTRATION SALARIES REGULAR EMPLOYEES OFF DUTY EMPLOYMENT 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 R55CKR2 LOGIS100 Business Unit Continued... CITY OF EDINA REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN Council Check Register by GL EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN Council Check Register and Summary EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 10/10/2013 -- 10/10/2013 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No 376085 1011012013 100146 FACTORY MOTOR PARTS COMPANY 276.38 PAD SETS, ROTORS 325877 69- 113750 1553.6530 6.06 SPRING SETS, INSULATOR 325878 1- 4279230 1553.6530 69.47 ABSORBERS 325879 69- 113920 1553.6530 126.63 ROTORS 325880 1- 4279146 1553.6530 5.75 ALL -IN -ONE KIT 325881 70- 161513 1553.6530 89.50 BATTERY 325882 1- 4277076 1553.6530 118.58 BATTERIES 325883 1- 4271495 1553.6530 1,298.83 376086 10110/2013 122649 FARNER - BOCKEN COMPANY 490.16 FOOD 326121 2445964 5430.5510 490.16 376087 10/1012013 114339 FELDMANN IMPORTS 8.05 LOCKS 00005556 325884 438442 1553.6530 8.05 376088 10110/2013 120831 FIRST SCRIBE INC. 425.00 ROWAY 325885 2460935 1263.6103 425.00 376089 1011012013 127172 FLOORS BY BECKERS INC. 4,150.00 FLOORING REPAIRS 325806 152908 1399.6103 4,660.00 FLOORCOVERING / INSTALLATION 325807 152909 1500.6103 8,810.00 376090 '1011012013 101475 FOOTJOY 90.24 SHOES 326167 5225861 5440.5511 70.13 SHOES 326168 5238423 5440.5511 160.37 376091 1011012013 103039 FREY, MICHAEL 173.61 REIMBURSEMENT 325918 100113 5110.6106 37.18 REIMBURSEMENT 325918 100113 5110.6406 210.79 . 376092 10/1012013 100768 GARTNER REFRIGERATION & MFG INC 814.49- CREDIT 326202 41264 5521.6180 679.00- CREDIT 326203 42396 5521.6180 549.00 COMPRESSOR REPAIRS 326204 42616 5521.6180 10/8/2013 9:13:37 Page - 11 Subledger Account Description Business Unit Continued... 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 COST OF GOODS SOLD RICHARDS GOLF COURSE REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN PROFESSIONAL SERVICES ENVIRONMENT PROFESSIONAL SERVICES PROFESSIONAL SERVICES COST OF GOODS - PRO SHOP COST OF GOODS - PRO SHOP MEETING EXPENSE GENERAL SUPPLIES CONTRACTED REPAIRS CONTRACTED REPAIRS CONTRACTED REPAIRS PW SPECIAL PROJECTS CONTINGENCIES PRO SHOP RETAIL SALES PRO SHOP RETAIL SALES ART CENTER ADMINISTRATION ART CENTER ADMINISTRATION ARENA ICE MAINT ARENA ICE MAINT ARENA ICE MAINT Subledger Account Description Continued... CONTRACTED REPAIRS CONTRACTED REPAIRS 10/812013 9:13:37 Page - 12 Business Unit ARENA ICE MAINT ARENA ICE MAINT PROFESSIONAL SERVICES SENIOR CITIZENS 376094 1011012013 132389 GAMCH, KATHLEEN CITY OF EDINA R55CKR2 LOGIS100 116.10 COACH JACKET Council Check Register by GL 326207 REIMBURSEMENT 5511.6201 LAUNDRY ARENA BLDG/GROUNDS Council Check Register and Summary 157.69 EMBROIDERY 10/10/2013- 10/10/2013 Check # Date Amount Supplier /.Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No 376092 1011012013 CLASS SUPPLIES 100768 GARTNER REFRIGERATION & MFG INC 326207 REIMBURSEMENT 5510.6406 433.24 EQUIPMENT REPAIRS 326205 42939 5521.6180 345.43 880.00 ADD BRINE CHEMICAL 326206 42940 5521.6180 368.75 376095 10/1012013 376093 1011012013 118941 GLOBALSTAR USA 132955 GARVES, STEVE 150.00 CHARGED FOR CLASS 325933 CREDIT CARD 1628.6103 57.50 R -91 PHONE FEES 1470.6188 150.00 FIRE DEPT. GENERAL Subledger Account Description Continued... CONTRACTED REPAIRS CONTRACTED REPAIRS 10/812013 9:13:37 Page - 12 Business Unit ARENA ICE MAINT ARENA ICE MAINT PROFESSIONAL SERVICES SENIOR CITIZENS 376094 1011012013 132389 GAMCH, KATHLEEN 116.10 COACH JACKET 326207 REIMBURSEMENT 5511.6201 LAUNDRY ARENA BLDG/GROUNDS 157.69 EMBROIDERY 326207 REIMBURSEMENT 5511.6201 LAUNDRY ARENA BLDG/GROUNDS 71.64 CLASS SUPPLIES 326207 REIMBURSEMENT 5510.6406 GENERALSUPPLIES ARENA ADMINISTRATION 345.43 376095 10/1012013 118941 GLOBALSTAR USA 57.50 R -91 PHONE 325983 5064327 1470.6188 TELEPHONE FIRE DEPT. GENERAL 57.50 376096 1011012013 101103 GRAINGER 149.62 BATTERIES, PAPER PLATES 00005552 325886 9244051935 1552.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES CENT SVC PW BUILDING 210.17 BALL VALVE, NOZZLE 00005498 325887 9247126585 1553.6556 TOOLS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 14.68 BATTERIES 00005554 325888 9246615679 1552.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES CENT SVC PW BUILDING 15.13 GREASE GUN TUBE 00001020 325889 9254194641 1330.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES TRAFFIC SIGNALS 293.86 SAFETY FLARES 00003678 325984 9249290421 1470.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES FIRE DEPT. GENERAL 248.78 ICE PACKS, WIPES, BANDAIDS 00002217 326122 9244759750 5710.6610 SAFETY EQUIPMENT EDINBOROUGH ADMINISTRATION 932.24 376097 1011012013 124711 GRANDVIEW TIRE & AUTO - CAHILL 54.95 ALIGNMENT 00005592 325890 57430 1553.6180 CONTRACTED REPAIRS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 99.95 ALIGNMENT 00005639 325891 57677 1553.6180 CONTRACTED REPAIRS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 154.90 376098 1011012013 102217 GRAPE BEGINNINGS INC 512.75 325835 157535 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 242.25 326020 157640 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 146.25 326021 157641 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING 901.25 376099 1011012013 101518 GRAUSAM, STEVE R55CKR2 LOGIS100 2,500.00' CITY OF EDINA 325985 ED123278 1495.4109 CONSTRUCTION DEPOSIT._ INSPECTIONS Council Check Register by -GL 2,500.00 Co ncil Check Registerand Summary 376102 10110/2013 10/10/2013 -- 10/10/2013 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation' PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger " y_Account Description 376099 1011012013 326123 101518 GRAUSAM,STEVE 5440.5511 Continued... PRO SHOP RETAIL SALES 132.78 MILEAGE REIMBURSEMENT 326170 100413 5840.6107 MILEAGE.OR ALLOWANCE 132.78 376103 10110/2013 376100 1011012013 121536 GRAY MATTER CREATIVE LLC - 50.00 GRAPHIC DESIGN SERVICES 325808 13201 1130.6103. PROFESSIONAL SERVICES PAYMENT 5410.6132 50.00 GOLF ADMINISTRATION 376101. 1011012013 132968 GREAT NEIGHBORHOOD HOMES 10/812013 9:13:37 Page - 13 Business Unit LIQUOR YORK GENERAL COMMUNICATIONS 2,500.00' REFUND ESCROW- 460856TH ST W 325985 ED123278 1495.4109 CONSTRUCTION DEPOSIT._ INSPECTIONS 2,500.00 376102 10110/2013 1021.25 GREG'LESSMAN SALES 168.10 GOLF TEES 326123 50711 5440.5511 COST OF GOODS -,PRO SHOP PRO SHOP RETAIL SALES 168.10 376103 10110/2013 100785:: GREUPNER, JOE 3,360.00 STAFF FOR JR. GOLF PROGRAM 326124 PAYMENT 5410.6132 PROFESSIONALSVCS - GOLF GOLF ADMINISTRATION 3,300.00 376104 10110.12013 ___100787:_GRU_BER'S POWER EQUIPMENT 42.87 CLAMP LEVER 00005624 325892' 124422 1553.6530 REPAIRPARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 42.87 - 376105 1011012013 102320 HAMCO DATA PRODUCTS 131.46 THERMAL ROLLS 326125 120566 5822.6512 PAPER SUPPLIES 50TH ST SELLING 131.46 376106 1011012013. 132980 . HAWK PERFORMANCE SPECIALTIES LLC - 2,318.12 2013 ICE PAINT SERVICE 326171 2689 5500.1720 BUILDINGS ICE ARENA BALANCE SHEET 2,318.12 376107 1011012013 100012 HD SUPPLY WATERWORKS LTD 2,767:50 WATER METER FITTINGS 00001976 325715` B505195 5913.6530 REPAIR PARTS DISTRIBUTION 46902 WATER HEATER REPAIRS 326172' - 8428614 5511.6180 CONTRACTED REPAIRS ARENA BLDG/GROUNDS 3,236.52 376108 10/10/2013 101209 HEIMARK FOODS 153.12 BEEF PATTIES 326126 024793 5421.5510 COST OF GOODS SOLD. GRILL 153.12 R55CKR2 LOGIS100 CITY OF EDINA Council Check Register by GL Council Check Register and Summary 10/10/2013— 10/10/2013 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No 376109 1011012013 100801 HENNEPIN COUNTY TREASURER 740.01 SEPT 2013 BOOKING FEES 325934 1000035339 1195.6170 740.01 376110 10/10/2013 105436 HENNEPIN COUNTY TREASURER 160.31 BUNDLED SERVICE 325893 1000035238 1400.6160 160.31 BUNDLED SERVICE 326127 1000035239 1190.6105 320.62 376111 10/10/2013 116680 HEWLETT - PACKARD COMPANY 1,842.78 REPLACEMENT LAPTOPS 00004350 326173 53349381 1554.6710 1,842.78 376112 10/1012013 103753 HILLYARD INC - MINNEAPOLIS 142.10 FLOOR SEALER 00002219 326128 600862456 5720.6511, 835.52 SOAP, SEALER, MOPS 00002219 326129 600862457 5720.6511 977.62 376113 1011012013 104375 HOHENSTEINS INC. 1,530.25 325836 668730 5862.5514 54.00 325942 669001 5842.5514 2,532.50 325943 668977 5842.5514 1,262.50 326022 668733 5822.5514 5,379.25 376114 1011012013 122916 HOMETOWN RESTORATION 257.00 PERMIT REFUND 325986 ED124287 1495.4111 257.00 376115 10110/2013 100417 HORIZON COMMERCIAL POOL SUPPLY 490.51 CHLORINE, ACID MAGIC 00002216 326130 13091607 5720.6545 490.51 376116 10/10/2013 100808 HORWATH, THOMAS 363.86 MILEAGE REIMBURSEMENT 326174 100213 1644.6107 363.86 376117 10/10/2013 132938 HOT DISH ADVERTISING LLC 1,000.00 ADVERTISING CONSULTING 325716 21246 5820.6103 1,000.00 ADVERTISING CONSULTING 325716 21246 5840.6103 1,000.00 ADVERTISING CONSULTING 325716 21246 5860.6103 Subledger Account Description Continued... COURTCHARGES DATA PROCESSING DUES & SUBSCRIPTIONS 10/812013 9:13:37 Page - 14 Business Unit LEGAL SERVICES POLICE DEPT. GENERAL ASSESSING EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT CENT SERV GEN - MIS CLEANING SUPPLIES CLEANING SUPPLIES COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER BUILDING PERMITS CHEMICALS MILEAGE OR ALLOWANCE PROFESSIONAL SERVICES PROFESSIONAL SERVICES PROFESSIONAL SERVICES EDINBOROUGH OPERATIONS EDINBOROUGH OPERATIONS VERNON SELLING YORK SELLING YORK SELLING 50TH ST SELLING INSPECTIONS EDINBOROUGH OPERATIONS TREES & MAINTENANCE 50TH STREET GENERAL LIQUOR YORK GENERAL VERNON LIQUOR GENERAL R55CKR2 LOGIS100 CITY OF EDINA Council Check Register by GL Council Check Register and Summary 10/1012013- 10/10/2013 - Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account, Description 376117 10/1012013 132938 HOT DISH ADVERTISING LLC Continued... 2,666.67 ADVERTISING CONSULTING 325717 21247 5820.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 2,666.67 ADVERTISING CONSULTING 325717 21247 5840.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 2,666.66 ADVERTISING CONSULTING 325717 21247 5860.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 11,000.00 376118 1011012013 120085 IDEAL SERVICE INC. 457.50 PUMP SERVICE 00001043 325718 6039 5911.6180 CONTRACTED REPAIRS 457.50 376119 1011012013 129508 IMPACT PROVEN SOLUTIONS 370.53 MAIL LATE NOTICES 325809 81979 5910.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES - 370.53 376120 1011012013 1315". INDEED BREWING COMPANY 285.00 326023 .14591 5842.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER 285.00 376121 1011012013 104572 INVISIBLE FENCE CO. OF MN 102.16 FENCE REPAIR4809 TRILLIUM. 325767 169016. 01398.1705.21. CONSULTING INSPECTION 102.16. 376122- 10/1012013 1.29635,- JESSE JAMES CREATIVE INC. 2,600.00 NEIGHBORHOODS MODULE 325812 JJ5290 1130.6124 WEB DEVELOPMENT 79.00 CKFINDER LICENSE RENEWAL 325813 JJ5293 1130.6124 WEB.DEVELOPMENT 3,610.00 WEBSITE MAINTENANCE 325814 JJ5253 1130.6124 WEB DEVELOPMENT 6,289.00 376123 1011012013 102146 JESSEN PRESS 101.53 LETTERHEAD 325810 39357 1550.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES 208.41 LETTERHEAD 325811- 39358 1550.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES 88.71 LETTERHEAD 326131 39356 1100.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES 398.65 376124_ 1011012013 121075 JIMMY'S JOHNNYS INC. 396.66 TOILET RENTAL 00002038 325987 68733 5761.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES 396.66 376125 10110/2013 100741 JJ TAYLOR DIST. OF MINN 1,120.00 325837 2133463 5862.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER 38.80 325944 2133474 5862.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX 10/8/2013 9:13:37 Page - 15 Business Unit 50TH STREET GENERAL LIQUOR YORK GENERAL VERNON LIQUOR GENERAL WELL PUMPS - - GENERAL (BILLING) YORK SELLING LAKE EDINA B COMMUNICATIONS COMMUNICATIONS COMMUNICATIONS CENTRAL SERVICES GENERAL CENTRAL SERVICES GENERAL CITY COUNCIL CENTENNIAL LAKES OPERATING 4 VERNON SELLING VERNON SELLING R55CKR2 LOGIS100 CITY OF EDINA 10/8/2013 9:13:37 Council Check Register by GL Page - 16 Council Check Register and Summary 10/10/2013- 10/10/2013 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit 376125 1011012013 100741 JJ TAYLOR DIST. OF MINN Continued... 3,194.10 325945 2133473 5862.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER VERNON SELLING 11,090.85 326024 2133493 5842.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER YORK SELLING 195.45 326025 2133494 5842.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX YORK SELLING 3,085.45 326026 2133482 5822.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER 50TH ST SELLING 17.55 326027 2133483 5822.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX 50TH ST SELLING 27.65- 326028 2133492 5842.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER YORK SELLING 16,714.55 376126 1011012013 124104 JOHN DEERE LANDSCAPES INC. 5.33 FITTINGS 00001996 325719 66157445 1646.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES BUILDING MAINTENANCE 117.54 IRRIGATION SUPPLIES 00001009 325720 66175700 1646.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES BUILDING MAINTENANCE 122.87 376128 1011012013 100835 JOHNSON BROTHERS LIQUOR CO. 605.20 325946 1677804 5822.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR 50TH ST SELLING 1,785.79 325947 1683718 5862.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR VERNON SELLING 447.65 326029 1683703 5822.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR 50TH ST SELLING 352.83 326030 1683704 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING 378.61 326031 1683705 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING 195.36 326032 1677808' 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING .56 326033 1677809 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING 12,795.39 326034 1683699 5822.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR 50TH ST SELLING 1,588.62 326035 .1683720 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 4,693.83 326036 1683722 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 4,266.27 326037 1683717 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 1.12 326038 1683701 5862.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR VERNON SELLING 9,581.20 326039 1683719 5862.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR VERNON SELLING 2,738.29 326040 1683721 5862.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR VERNON SELLING 1,073.22 326041 1683723 5862.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR VERNON SELLING 7,801.46 326042 1683712 5842.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR YORK SELLING 2,767.60 326043 1683713 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 3,699.69 326044 1683710 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING .28 326045 1683700 5842.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR YORK SELLING 1,306.93 326046 1683716 5842.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR YORK SELLING 2,887.08 326047 1683714 5842.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR YORK SELLING 1,774.52 326049 1683711 5842.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR YORK SELLING 528.29 326050 1683698 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 3,919.88 326051 1683715 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 65,189.67 l R55CKR2 LOGIS100 CITY OF EDINA Council Check Register by GL Council Check Register and Summary 10/10/2013— 10/10/2013 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No 376129 1011012013 102113 JOHNSTONE SUPPLY 121.83 BELTS, LEAK DETECTOR 00001014 325894 015388 1552.6406 121.83 376130 10/1012013 132971 JOY,.MONICA 250.00 WINNING.ENTRY 325988 100313 250.00 376131 10110/2013 122239 KANDIKO, GEORGIA 97.50 . ARTWORK SOLD 325919 100113 97.50 376132 10110/2013 124002 KIML:EY -HORN AND ASSOCIATES INC: 8,001.66, PARKING IMPROVEMENT FEASIBITY 326132 5304498 8,001.66 376133 10/1012013 129666 KINCAID, ROBERT 100.00 JURIED SHOW MUSICIAN 325920 092713 100.00 376134 1011012013, 129942 KNOLL'MAIER,,LAURA„ 273.12 MILEAGE REIMBURSEMENT 326175 100313 273.12 376135 1011012013 131802 - L-APPIN, DANA 62.91 SUPPLIES REIMBURSEMENT 325921 GIFT SHOP 62.91 376136 10110/2013 160852 LAWSON PRODUCTS INC. 818.53 WIRE STRIPPER, DRILL BITS 00005534- 325895 '9301917036 599.73 CRIMP TOOL, FITTINGS, 00005555 325896 9301933364 39.63 HEX KEYS 00005555 325897 9301936990 1,457.89 376137 10/10/2013 103217 LHB PERFORMANCE DRIVEN DESIGN 5,427.00 PENTAGON PARK TIF ANALYSIS- 326133 130270.00 -3 3,612.71 PW SITE, TIF ELIGIBILITY STUDY 326134 130153.00 -1 9,039.71 376138 1011012013 112577 M. AMUNDSON LLP 1,042.82 326052 160864 10/8/2013 9:13:37 Page - 17 Subledger Account Description Business Unit Continued... GENERAL SUPPLIES CENT SVC PW BUILDING 5110.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES ART CENTER ADMINISTRATION 5101.4413 ART -WORK SOLD ART CENTER REVENUES 9232.6133 5110.6103 5760.6107 5120.6406 1553.6530 1553.6530 1553.6556 9232.6136 9234.6136 5822.5515 PROFESS SERVICES - ENGINEERING CENTENNIAL TIF DISTRICT PROFESSIONAL SERVICES MILEAGE OR ALLOWANCE GENERALSUPPLIES REPAIR PARTS REPAIR PARTS TOOLS PROFESSIONAL SVC- OTHER PROFESSIONAL SVC - OTHER COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX ART CENTER ADMINISTRATION ` CENTENNIAL LAKES ADMIN EXPENSE ART SUPPLY GIFT GALLERY SHOP EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN CENTENNIAL TIF DISTRICT GRANDVIEW TIF DISTRICT 50TH ST SELLING R55CKR2 LOGIS100 EDINBOROUGH OPERATIONS CONTRACTED REPAIRS CITY OF EDINA CONTRACTED REPAIRS EDINBOROUGH OPERATIONS CONTRACTED REPAIRS EDINBOROUGH OPERATIONS Council Check Register by GL EDINBOROUGH OPERATIONS Council Check Register and Summary 10/10/2013— 10/10/2013 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No 376138 10/10/2013 112577 M. AMUNDSON LLP 1,042.82 376139 1011012013 130155 MACDONNELL, STEPHEN 324.00 MODEL 325922 092713 5110.6103 324.00 376140 1011012013 100864 MACQUEEN EQUIPMENT INC. 227.87 YOKE, MOLDING, HINGE 00005428 325768 2135543 1553.6530 227.87 376141 10/1012013 105297 MAYER ELECTRIC CORP. 140.00 CHECK FIRE ALARM 326176 15365 5511.6103 140.00 376142 1011012013 125941 MCQUAY INTERNATIONAL 473.20 REPLACE FREEZE STAT 326135 2605218 5720.6180 259.20 FINISH DESERT AIR PROGRAMMING 326136 2605219 5720.6180 3,237.65 REPAIR POOL HEAT EXCHANGER 326137 2605983 5720.6180 4,058.93 REPLACE BOARD ON DESERT AIR 326138 2606072 5720.6180 7,668.00 REPLACE POOL HEATER 326139 2605914 5720.6180 15,696.98 376143 1011012013 101987 MENARDS 112.99 GRASS SEED 00002225 326141 23167 5720.6406 11.04 GRASS SEED, SHARPIES 00002222 326142 23078 5720.6406 124.03 376144 1011012013 100887 METROPOLITAN COUNCIL ENVIRONMENTAL SERV 353,559.94 SEWER SERVICE 325935 0001025929 5922.6302 353,559.94 376145 10/10/2013 102729 METROPOLITAN FORD OF EDEN PRAIRIE 553.31 VEHICLE REPAIRS 325769 226877 1553.6180 553.31 376146 1011012013 124204 METSA, PAUL 300.00 PERFORMANCE FEE 326140 100413 5410.6103 300.00 376147 10110/2013 100019 MIDWESTARTFAIRS 10/8/2013 9:13:37 Page - 18 Subledger Account Description Business Unit Continued... PROFESSIONAL SERVICES ART CENTER ADMINISTRATION REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN PROFESSIONAL SERVICES ARENA BLDG/GROUNDS CONTRACTED REPAIRS EDINBOROUGH OPERATIONS CONTRACTED REPAIRS EDINBOROUGH OPERATIONS ' CONTRACTED REPAIRS EDINBOROUGH OPERATIONS CONTRACTED REPAIRS EDINBOROUGH OPERATIONS CONTRACTED REPAIRS EDINBOROUGH OPERATIONS GENERAL SUPPLIES EDINBOROUGH OPERATIONS GENERAL SUPPLIES EDINBOROUGH OPERATIONS SEWER SERVICE METRO SEWER TREATMENT CONTRACTED REPAIRS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN PROFESSIONAL SERVICES GOLF ADMINISTRATION R55CKR2 LOGIS100 CITY OF EDINA Council Check Register by GL Council Check Register and Summary 10/10/2013— 10/10/2013 Check # : Date Amount Supplier / Explanation': PO # Doc No Inv No Account No 376147 - 1011012013 .100019 MIDWESTARTFAIRS 71:64 CONSIGNMENT SALES 325989 8218 5120.5510 71.64 376148 1011012013 122473 MILLER, CHICHI 487:50 ART WORK SOLD 325923 100113 5101.4413 487.50 376149 1011012013 100913 MINNEAPOLIS& SUBURBAN SEWER & WATER 1,470.00 WATER SERVICE REPLACEMENT 00001046. 325770 34550 5913.6180 857.50. WATER SERVICE REPLACEMENT 00001045 325771 34552 5913.6180 1,347.50 WATER SERVICE REPLACEMENT 00001049 325772 34554 5913.6180 735.00 REPLACE STANDPIPE 00001050 325773 34556 5913.6180 4,410.00 376150 1011012013 103216 MINNEAPOLIS FINANCE DEPARTMENT 33,913.72 WATER PURCHASE 325936 431- 0005.300 -10 5913.6601 /13 33,913.72 376151 10/1012013 103240 MINNESOTA SAFETY COUNCIL 218.85 DEFENSIVE DRIVING CLASS 325937 25478 1628.6103 218.85 376152 10/1012013 128914, MINUTEMAN PRESS 52.56 SHRED IT POSTERS 325938 14112 5842.6575 61.15 50TH /FRANCE POSTCARDS 326143 14034 9232.6102 113.71 376163 10/10/2013 130960. MNCAR.EXCHANGE, THE 225.00 MEMBERSHIP DUES 326144 522954 9232.6105 225.00 376154 1011012013 132956 MONTGOMERY, HERBERT 182.92 UTILITY OVERPAYMENT REFUND 325939 5309 56TH ST W 5900.2015 182.92 376155 1011012013 129667 MORROW, BRUCE 100.00 JURIED'SHOW MUSICIAN 325924 092713 5110.6103 100.00 Subledger Account Description Continued... COST OF GOODS SOLD ART WORK SOLD - CONTRACTED REPAIRS CONTRACTED REPAIRS CONTRACTED REPAIRS CONTRACTED REPAIRS 10/8/2013 9:13:37 Page - 19 Business Unit ART SUPPLY GIFT GALLERY SHOP ART CENTER REVENUES DISTRIBUTION DISTRIBUTION DISTRIBUTION DISTRIBUTION WATER PURCHASED DISTRIBUTION PROFESSIONAL SERVICES SENIOR CITIZENS PRINTING YORK SELLING CONTRACTUAL SERVICES CENTENNIAL TIF DISTRICT DUES & SUBSCRIPTIONS CENTENNIAL TIF DISTRICT CUSTOMER REFUND UTILITY BALANCE SHEET PROFESSIONAL SERVICES ART CENTER ADMINISTRATION R55CKR2 LOGIS100 CITY OF EDINA 10/8/2013 9:13:37 Council Check Register by GL Page - 20 Council Check Register and Summary 10/10/2013- 10/10/2013 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit 376156 10/1012013 100906 MTI DISTRIBUTING INC. Continued... 223.13 IRRIGATION SUPPLIES 00001984 325721 930700 -00 1643.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES GENERAL TURF CARE 79.80 BEARINGS 00006494 325739 930191 -00 5422.6530 REPAIR PARTS MAINT OF COURSE & GROUNDS 1,127.92 MOTOR ASSEMBLY, SPACER 00005499 325898 931172 -00 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 165.03 BRAKE ASSEMBLY, BRACKETS 00005499 325899 931172 -01 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 95.29 IRRIGATION PARTS 00002036 325990 931816 -00 5761.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES CENTENNIAL LAKES OPERATING 71.48 IRRIGATION PARTS 00002035 326145 931552 -00 5761.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES CENTENNIAL LAKES OPERATING 1,762.65 376157 10/1012013 123954 NEIGHBORHOOD NETWORKS PUBLISHING 125.00 EDINA ART CENTER ADS 325991 367065 5110.6122 ADVERTISING OTHER ART CENTER ADMINISTRATION 125.00 376158 1011012013 132509 NOLAN, MARK 216.73 MILEAGE REIMBURSEMENT 325900 100213 1260.6107 MILEAGE OR ALLOWANCE ENGINEERING GENERAL 216.73 376159 1011012013 115616 NORTH IMAGE APPAREL INC. 42.50 UNIFORM PURCHASE 00005604 325774 NIA6233 1646.6201 LAUNDRY BUILDING MAINTENANCE 190.50 UNIFORM PURCHASE 00005604 325775 NIA6517A 1646.6201 LAUNDRY BUILDING MAINTENANCE 233.00 376160 1011012013 102199 NORTHERN SAFETY CO. INC. 280.72 SAFETY EYEWEAR 00003680 325992 900607701 1470.6510 FIRST AID SUPPLIES FIRE DEPT. GENERAL 280.72 376161 10110/2013 100933 NORTHWEST GRAPHIC SUPPLY CO. 111.26 BLACK PENS, CANVAS PANELS 00009281 326177 44561900 5120.6564 CRAFT SUPPLIES ART SUPPLY GIFT GALLERY SHOP 409.39 POTTERY TOOL KITS 00009270 326178 44360502 5120.6564 CRAFT SUPPLIES ART SUPPLY GIFT GALLERY SHOP 520.65 376162 1011012013 132978 OLSON, JENNA 50.00 REFUND FOR CANCELATION 326179 BRAEMAR GC 5401.4553 CLUBHOUSE GOLF REVENUES 50.00 376163 1011012013 101659 ORKIN COMMERCIAL SERVICES 147.57 PEST CONTROL 326146 87090739 1551.6180 CONTRACTED REPAIRS CITY HALL GENERAL 147.57 376164 1011012013 124519 OVERHOLT, JAMES 311.32 MILEAGE REIMBURSEMENT 326180 100213 1644.6107 MILEAGE OR ALLOWANCE TREES & MAINTENANCE • R55CKR2 LOGIS100 Business Unit Continued... COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX CITY OF EDINA YORK SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING BANK SERVICES CHARGES Council Check Register by GL CONSTRUCTION DEPOSIT INSPECTIONS COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX YORK SELLING Council Check Register and Summary 10110/2013- 10/10/2013 Check # Date Amount Supplier I Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No . 376164 1011012013 124519 -'OVERHOLT,'JAMES 311.32 376165 10/1012013 100347 PAUSTIS & SONS 36.25 325948 8418353 -IN 5842.5515 2,576:50. 325949 8418339 -IN 5842.5513 - 2,656.74 326053 8418537 -IN 5862.5513 380.00 326054 8418350 -IN 5822.5513 5;648.49 376166 1011012013 125492 - PAYPAL INC. . 39.95 MONTHLY FEE 325815 26605287 5910.6155 - 39.95 376,167 1011012013 132969 PENNANT CONSTRUCTION LLC e -- 21500.00 REFUND ESCROW- 6104 ASHCROFT 325993 ED121873 1495.4109 2;500.00 376168 1011012013 100945 PEPSI -COLA COMPANY 311.70 325950 17277301 5842.5515 311.70 376169 10110/2013 100948 PERKINS LANDSCAPE CONTRACTORS 422.90 SHRUB PLANTING 325776 207 1500.6406 422.90 376170 10/1012013 117087 PETERSON COMPANIES 43,337.74 GARDEN PK BALL IMPROVEMENTS- 326181 APPL #2 47085.6710 43,337.74' 376171 10110/2013 100743 PHILLIPS WINE & SPIRITS 448.32 325951 2494528 5862.5512 1,893.41 326055 2494525 5842.5512 1,499.38 326056 2494529 5862.5513 163.36 326057 2494523 5862.5513 593.37 326058 2494530 5862.5513 57:12 326059 2494531 5862.5515 132.54 326060 - 2494519 5822.5512 381:74 326061 2494521 5822.5513 383.98 326062 2494520 5822.5513 2,326.41 326063 2494526 '584Z5513 10/8/2013 9:13:37 Page - 21 Subledger Account Description Business Unit Continued... COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX YORK SELLING COST OF -GOODS SOLD WINE. YORK SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING BANK SERVICES CHARGES GENERAL (BILLING) CONSTRUCTION DEPOSIT INSPECTIONS COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX YORK SELLING GENERAL SUPPLIES CONTINGENCIES EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT GARDEN PK BASEBALL FIELD COST OF.GOODS SOLD LIQUOR COST'OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE, COST -OF GOODS SOLD MIX COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING YORK SELLING VERNON SELLING VERNON SELLING VERNON SELLING VERNON SELLING 50TH ST SELLING 50TH ST SELLING 50TH ST SELLING YORK.SELLING R55CKR2 LOGIS100 CITY OF EDINA 10/8/2013 9:13:37 Council Check Register by GL Page- 22 Council Check Register and Summary 10/10/2013- 10/10/2013 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit 376171 1011012013 100743 PHILLIPS WINE & SPIRITS Continued... 1,040.36 326064 2494527 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 388.32 326065 2494522 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 9,308.31 376172 1011012013 100119 PING 557.89 GOLF CLUBS 326182 11991841 5440.5511 COST OF GOODS - PRO SHOP PRO SHOP RETAIL SALES 240.60 METAL WOODS DRIVER 326183 11995509 5440.5511 COST OF GOODS - PRO SHOP PRO SHOP RETAIL SALES 798.49 376173 10110/2013 100958 PLUNKETTS PEST CONTROL 46.30 PEST CONTROL 325994 3877239 7411.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES PSTF OCCUPANCY 46.30 376174 10/1012013 119620 POMP'S TIRE SERVICE INC. 1,553.89 SERVICE CALL FOR #83 00005549 325777 210079245 1553.6180 CONTRACTED REPAIRS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 903.22 TIRES 00005549 325778 210080367 1553.6583 TIRES & TUBES EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 750.22 TIRES 00005549 325901 210080116 1553.6583 TIRES & TUBES EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 3,207.33 376175 1011012013 100961 POSTMASTER - USPS 200.00 STANDARD MAIL PI PERMIT #376 325722 SEPT20 1628.6235 POSTAGE SENIOR CITIZENS 200.00 376176 1011012013 100961 POSTMASTER - USPS 350.00 NEWSLETTER POSTAGE 326184 100713 1628.6235 POSTAGE SENIOR CITIZENS 350.00 376177 10/1012013 127773 PREMIER SPECIALTY VEHICLES INC. 83.00 COT HOOKS 00003681 325995 3354 1470.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES FIRE DEPT. GENERAL 83.00 376178 10110/2013 106322 PROSOURCE SUPPLY 289.61 DISINFECTANT, SQUEEGEES, DOLLV0002189 326147 6293 5720.6511 CLEANING SUPPLIES EDINBOROUGH OPERATIONS 531.79 CAN LINERS, TOWELS 00002215 326148 6546 5720.6511 CLEANING SUPPLIES EDINBOROUGH OPERATIONS 821.40 376179 10/1012013 103094 PROTECTION ONE 193.27 ALARM MONITORING 326185 12743654 -9/13 5511.6250 ALARM SERVICE ARENA BLDG/GROUNDS 193.27 R55CKR2 LOGIS100 CITY OF EDINA 10/8/2013 9:13:37 Council Check Register by GL Page - 23 Council Check Register and Summary 10/10/2013— 10/10/2013 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit 376180 1011012013 120783 R E CARLSON INC. Continued... 892.21 HEAT EXCHANGER GASKETS 325816 0034133 1551.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES CITY HALL GENERAL 892.21 376181 10/1012013 123757 RIECHMANN PEDERSON DESIGN INC 745.50 DASHERBOARD AD SALES COMM 325817 913151 -813 5501.4317 ADVERTISING SALES ICE ARENA REVENUES 745.50 376182 1011012013 100980 ROBERT B. HILL CO. 333.81 SOFTENER SALT 00002221 326149 00289640 5720.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES EDINBOROUGH OPERATIONS 333.81 376183 1011012013 132970 ROCHELEAU, JILL 862.97 PAYMENT SENT IN ERROR 325996 REFUND 5900.2015 CUSTOMER REFUND UTILITY BALANCE SHEET 862.97 376184 1011012013 130930 ROLLOFF, MARYANN 227.50 ART WORK SOLD 325925 100113 5101.4413 ART WORK SOLD ART CENTER REVENUES 227.50 376185 1011012013 102614 ROTARY CLUB OF EDINA 290.00 DUES, MEALS- SCOTT NEAL 326150 2116 1120.6105 DUES & SUBSCRIPTIONS ADMINISTRATION 290.00 376186 1011012013 101963 S & S TREE SPECIALISTS 1,335.94 PEST TURF APPLICATION 326186 73898 1643.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES GENERAL TURF CARE 1,335.94 376187 10/1012013 126409 S & T OFFICE PRODUCTS INC. 563.80 CHAIR REPLACEMENT 326187 01PZ5925 1552.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES CENT SVC PW BUILDING 563.80 376188 1011012013 100988 SAFETY KLEEN 175.17 BRAKE CLEANER DISPOSAL 325902 61710597 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 175.17 376189 10/1012013 104788 SANDY'S PROMOTIONAL STUFF 570.86 GEM AWARD LUNCH BAGS 325818 SH2175 1550.6121 ADVERTISING PERSONNEL CENTRAL SERVICES GENERAL 570.86 376190 1011012013 101431 SCAN AIR FILTER INC. R55CKR2 LOGIS100 CITY OF EDINA 10/812013 9:13:37 Council Check Register by GL Page - 24 Council Check Register and Summary 10/10/2013— 10/10/2013 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit 376190 10/10/2013 101431 SCAN AIR FILTER INC. Continued... 279.42 FILTERS 00001961 325779 125944 1551.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES CITY HALL GENERAL 279.42 1 376191 101 }012013 100995 SEH 924.58 FEASIBILITY STUDY 325780 273221 07119.1705.20 CONSULTING DESIGN S119 YORKAVE SIDEWALK W SIDE 840.85 FEASIBILITY STUDY 325780 273221 07116.1705.20 CONSULTING DESIGN S116 VERNON AVE NORTH SIDE 735.76 FEASIBILITY STUDY 325780 273221 07118.1705.20 CONSULTING DESIGN S118 VERNON AVE SIDEWALK 3,000.41. WATER MODEL UPDATE 325781 272830 5924.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES ENGINEER SERVICES - WATER 412.88 INDUSTRIAL PK LIGHTING PROJ 325782 272970 08060.1705.20 CONSULTING DESIGN INDUSTRIAL PARK LIGHTING 26,827.51 54TH ST PRELIM ENGINEERING 325783 273040 01416.1705.20 CONSULTING DESIGN 54TH ST BRIDGE &STREET REPAIR 8,937.71 RICHMOND HILLS RD PROJ 325784 273145 04387.1705.21 CONSULTING INSPECTION RICHMOND HILLS PK 9,315.16 NORMANDALE ST RECONS 325785 273037 01394.1705.21 CONSULTING INSPECTION NORMANDALE 8,881.31 NORMANDALE ST RECONS 325785 273037 03474.1705.21 CONSULTING INSPECTION NORMANDALE RECON 6,193.09 NORMANDALE ST RECONS 325785 273037 05530.1705.21 CONSULTING INSPECTION NORMANDALE RECON 2,475.54 NORMANDALE ST RECONS 325785 273037 04390.1705.21 CONSULTING INSPECTION NORMANDALE RECON 68,544.80 376192 1011012013 101380 SHAUGHNESSY, SANDRA 93.78 SUPPLIES REIMBURSEMENT 325926 100113 5111.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES ART CENTER BLDG /MAINT 93.78 376193 1011012013 120784 SIGN PRO 95.92 NEW HOURS SIGN 325786 7054 1551.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES CITY HALL GENERAL 197.72 DASHERBOARD 325819 7118 5511.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES ARENA BLDG/GROUNDS 197.72 DASHERBOARD 325820 7128 5511.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES ARENA BLDG/GROUNDS 171.53 MAGNETS FOR HOMECOMING FLOAT 325821 7156 1550.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES CENTRAL SERVICES GENERAL 662.89 376194 1011012013 132195 SMALL LOT MN 487.50 326066 329 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 487.50 376195 1011012013 132972 SMITH, PHIL 1,962.92 PAYMENT SENT IN ERROR 325997 REFUND 5900.2015 CUSTOMER REFUND UTILITY BALANCE SHEET 1,962.92 376196 1011012013 103460 SNAP -ON TOOLS 1,018.04 CODE COMPUTER UPDATE 00005594 325903 0925131824 1553.6556 TOOLS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 1,018.04 CITY OF EDINA 10/8/2013 9:13:37 R55CKR2 LOGIS100 Council Check Register by GL Page - 25 Council Check Register and Summary 10/10/2013- 10/10/2013 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit 376197 1011012013 122368 SOUTH METRO PUBLIC SAFETY Continued... 6,229.00 4TH QTR FEES 325822 8975 1400.6221 RANGE RENTAL POLICE DEPT. GENERAL 4,609.00 4TH QTR FEES 325822 8975 1470.6221 RANGE RENTAL FIRE DEPT. GENERAL 10,838.00 376198 1011012013 127878 SOUTHERN WINE AND SPIRITS 156.23 325838 1076408 5862.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR VERNON SELLING 397.60 325839 1078390 5862.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR VERNON SELLING 1.00 325840 1075805 5862.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR VERNON SELLING 1,022.94 325841 1079346 5862.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR VERNON SELLING 108.40 325842 1078389 5862.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR VERNON SELLING 2,159.50 325843 1081168 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 762.10 325952 1082506 5862.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR VERNON SELLING 3,231.00 325953 1082505 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 4,491.68 325954 1081170 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 2,485.00 325955 1082504 5842.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR YORK SELLING 5,289.12 325956 1079343 5842.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR YORK SELLING 1,511.45 325957 1082503 5842.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR YORK SELLING 1,445.99 325958 1082501 5822.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR 50TH ST SELLING 397.60 325959 1078385 5822.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR 50TH ST SELLING 198.80 325960 1078384 5822.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR 50TH ST SELLING 2,695.50 325961 1082502 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 197.80- 325962 0005046 5822.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR 50TH ST SELLING 996.00 CREDIT TAKEN TWICE 325963 1036877ERROR 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING 140.50 326067 5002697 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 720.00 CREDIT TAKEN TWICE 326089 ERROR REFUND 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 28,012.61 376199 1011012013 101023 SOUTHWEST SUBURBAN CABLE COMMISSION 7,161.44 4TH QTR 325788 201317 1132.6136 PROFESSIONAL SVC - OTHER CABLE COMMISSION 7,161.44 376200 10/1012013 101004 SPS COMPANIES 45.83 PIPE 00001992 325787 52792199.001 1301.6556 TOOLS GENERAL MAINTENANCE 45.83 376201 1011012013 101007 STAR TRIBUNE 721.00 EDINA LIQUOR ADS 325740 1009705332 5822.6122 ADVERTISING OTHER 50TH ST SELLING 721.00 EDINA LIQUOR ADS 325740 1009705332 5842.6122 ADVERTISING OTHER YORK SELLING 721.00 EDINA LIQUOR ADS 325740 1009705332 5862.6122 ADVERTISING OTHER VERNON SELLING 2,163.00 R55CKR2 LOGIS100 172.90 CITY OF EDINA REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN Council Check Register by GL EQUIPMENT OPERATION 131690 STOERZINGER, SHELAGH REPAIR PARTS Council Check Register and Summary GEN CONTRACTED REPAIRS 73.45 10/10/2013 -- 10/10/2013 326208 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description 376201 10/10/2013 101007 STAR TRIBUNE Continued... 376202 10/10/2013 101007 STAR TRIBUNE 101015 STRETCHERS 172.90 SUBSCRIPTION 326188 493121 -9/13 1500.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 10/8/2013 9:13:37 Page - 26 Business Unit CONTINGENCIES MILEAGE OR ALLOWANCE ASSESSING CONFERENCES & SCHOOLS POLICE DEPT. GENERAL REPAIR PARTS 172.90 GEN REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 376203 10/10/2013 EQUIPMENT OPERATION 131690 STOERZINGER, SHELAGH REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN CONTRACTED REPAIRS 73.45 MILEAGE REIMBURSEMENT 326208 100713 1190.6107 73.45 376204 10110/2013 101015 STRETCHERS 684.00 TRAININGAMMO 325823 11046129 1400.6104 684.00 376205 10110/2013 101017 SUBURBAN CHEVROLET 120.81 ARMS 00005631 325904 504135 1553.6530 76.37 SPRINGS 00005634 325905 504506 1553.6530 52.52 ADJUSTERS 00005500 325906 504338 1553.6530 69.56 LAMP 00005596 325907 505047 1553.6530 3,852.94 VEHICLE REPAIRS 00005557 325908 636633 1553.6180 532.28 VEHICLE REPAIRS 00005493 325909 636369 1553.6180 4,704.48 376206 1011012013 105874 SUBURBAN TIRE WHOLESALE INC. 230.40 TIRES 00005589 325910 10120476 1553.6583 333.02 TIRES 00005630 325911 10120525 1553.6583 563.42 376207 10/10/2013 101035 THORPE DISTRIBUTING COMPANY 88.55 326068 780475 5862.5515 161.25 326069 780474 5862.5514 249.80 376208 10110/2013 120700 TIGER OAK PUBLICATIONS INC. 330.00 MAGAZINE ADVERTISING 325741 2013 -88741 5822.6122 330.00 MAGAZINE ADVERTISING 325741 2013 -88741 5842.6122 330.00 MAGAZINE ADVERTISING 325741 2013 -88741 5862.6122 990.00 376209 10110/2013 132615 TIMBERLAND HOMES AND REMODELING 2,500.00 REFUND ESCROV -5721 BERNARD PL 325998 ED123050 1495.4109 10/8/2013 9:13:37 Page - 26 Business Unit CONTINGENCIES MILEAGE OR ALLOWANCE ASSESSING CONFERENCES & SCHOOLS POLICE DEPT. GENERAL REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN CONTRACTED REPAIRS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN CONTRACTED REPAIRS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN TIRES & TUBES EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN TIRES & TUBES EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX VERNON SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER VERNON SELLING ADVERTISING OTHER 50TH ST SELLING ADVERTISING OTHER YORK SELLING ADVERTISING OTHER VERNON SELLING CONSTRUCTION DEPOSIT INSPECTIONS = R55CKR2 LOGIS100 CITY OF EDINA 1018/2013 9:13:37 Council Check Register by GL ' Page - 27 _ Council Check Register and Summary 10/10/2013— 10/10/2013 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit l 376209 10/1012013 132615 TIMBERLAND HOMES AND REMODELING, Continued... 2,500.00 . - 376210 10110/2013 123129 'TIMESAVER OFF SITE SECRETARIAL INC. - . 129.00 .9/26/13 MEETING MINUTES 325999 M20061 5110.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES ART CENTER ADMINISTRATION 129.00 376211 10110/2013 101474 TITLEIST - 448.40 GOLF BALLS 326189 2042598 5440.5511 COST OF GOODS - PRO SHOP PRO SHOP RETAIL SALES 448.40 -_ 376212 10/10/2013 128835 TOWN & COUNTRY CLEANING CO. INC. 2,543.63 INTERIOR WINDOW WASHING 326151 W913744 5720.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES EDINBOROUGH OPERATIONS 2,543.63 ' 376213 10/1012013 103218 TRI STATE BOBCAT 86.86 COUPLERS 00005544 325912 P25437 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 86.86 - 376214 1011012013 100682 TRUGREEN PROCESSING CENTER 91.18 LAWN MAINTENANCE 326000 12050291 1470.6215 EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE FIRE DEPT. GENERAL 91.18 376215 10/1012013 123582 TSCHOSICK, RON - 147.70 DRAIN TILE 325742 REIMBURSEMENT 5422.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES MAINT OF COURSE & GROUNDS 147.70 376216 10110/2013 101360 TWIN CITY HARDWARE CO. _ 990.35 STEEL DOOR, FRAME, LOCK 00001864 -: 325723 598971 47078.6710 EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT COUNTRYSIDE PK PLAYGROUND &PATH 300.00 FOUR DOOR ADJUSTMENTS 325913 601969 1552.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES CENT SVC PW BUILDING 1,290.35 376217 1011012013 120675 ULTRAMAX 268.49 FOF MARKING CARTRIDGES 325824 140182 1400.6104 CONFERENCES & SCHOOLS POLICE DEPT. GENERAL - 268.49 376218 10/1012013 130874 UNITED RENTALS (NORTH AMERICA) INC. 46.19 V -BELT 00005625 325914 114316150 -001 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 46.19 376219 10/1012013 131957 UNIVERSAL ATHLETIC SERVICE INC. R55CKR2 LOGIS100 CITY OF EDINA 10/8/2013 9:13:37 Council Check Register by GL Page - 28 Council Check Register and Summary 10/10/2013- 10/10/2013 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit 376219 10/1012013 131957 UNIVERSAL ATHLETIC SERVICE INC. Continued... 222.26 WHITE FIELD PAINT 00001845 326190 150- 0003894 -01 1642.6544 LINE MARKING POWDER FIELD MAINTENANCE 235.08 WHITE FIELD PAINT 00001886 326191 1501 - 001167 1642.6544 LINE MARKING POWDER FIELD MAINTENANCE 59.84 YELLOW FIELD PAINT 00001911 326192 1501- 001201 1642.6544 LINE MARKING POWDER FIELD MAINTENANCE 517.18 376220 10110/2013 100668 URS CORPORATION 4,544.72 PROMENADE PHASE 4 325789 5622439 01251.1705.20 CONSULTING DESIGN A -251 PROMENADE IV H2O FEATURE 4,544.72 376221 10/1012013 100050 USPS - HASLER 1,000.00 ACCT # TMS- 202739 326001 METER POSTAGE 1400.6235 POSTAGE POLICE DEPT. GENERAL 1,000.00 376222 1011012013 132952 VANRIPER, RON 160.00 SPRINKLER HEAD REPLACEMENT 325825 REIMBURSE 1301.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES GENERAL MAINTENANCE 160.00 376223 10/1012013 101063 VERSATILE VEHICLES INC. 210.60 VOLTAGE REGULATOR, STEERING 00006493 325743 70586 5423.6530 REPAIR PARTS GOLF CARS 210.60 376224 10/1012013 101066 VIKING ELECTRIC SUPPLY 479.49 HINGE COVER 00001919 325724 7644532 1646.6578 LAMPS & FIXTURES BUILDING MAINTENANCE 100.42 BALLAST FOR CAN LIGHT 00001971 325790 7647054 1551.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES CITY HALL GENERAL 579.91 376225 1011012013 119454 VINOCOPIA 147.50 325964 0084200 -IN 5842.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR YORK SELLING 727.83 326070 0084086 -IN 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING 875.33 376226 1011012013 120627 VISTAR CORPORATION 764.95 CONCESSION PRODUCT 326152 37417162 5320.5510 COST OF GOODS SOLD POOL CONCESSIONS 764.95 376227 1011012013 101069 VOSS LIGHTING 157.16 PARTS 00001966 325791 15232710 -00 1551.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES CITY HALL GENERAL 157.16- RETURN 325792 15232785 -00 1551.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES CITY HALL GENERAL 332.69 BULBS OOOt)1966 325793 15232710 -01 1375.6530 REPAIR PARTS PARKING RAMP 332.69 R55CKR2 LOGIS100 , 341745 -00 5842.5513 CITY OF EDINA 341446 -00 5842.5513 326071 341449 -00 Council Check Register by GL 326072 341743 -00 5822.5513 326073, Council Check Register and Summary 5862.5513 326074 341741 -00 5862.5513 1011012013= 10/1012013 Check # Date Amount Supplier/ Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No 376227 1011012013 5862.5513 101069 VOSS LIGHTING 473676 376228 1011012013 121042; WALLACE CARLSON PRINTING 838.97 JURIED SHOW PROGRAM 326002 60098 5110.6122 838.97 376229 10/10/2013 132751 WARNING LITES OF MN 340.93 CHANGEABLE MESSAGE BOARD PART 325794 131631 1553.6530 340.93 376230 10110/2013 101033 WINE_ COMPANY, THE 666.85 584.25 827.55 912.50 2,302.65 5,902.05 376231 10110/2013 101312 WINE MERCHANTS 122.24 _ 1,303.12 3,044.48 1.12 4,470.96 376232 10110/2013 117482 WINECONNECTINC. 159.24 WEB - OCT 2013 159.24 376233 1011012013 124291 WIRTZ BEVERAGE MINNESOTA 9,849.76 448.13 4,439.38- 163.64 2,287.11 943.42 7,841.39 22,909.54 5,958.84 32.00- 325965 341745 -00 5842.5513 325966 341446 -00 5842.5513 326071 341449 -00 5822.5513 326072 341743 -00 5822.5513 326073, 341447 -00 5862.5513 326074 341741 -00 5862.5513 326075 473675 5842.5513 326076 473678 5842.5513 326077 473679 5862.5513 326078 473676 5862.5513 325744 1149 . 5842.6406 325844 1080088831 5862.5512 325845 1080085965 5862.5512 325846'1080090009 5842.5513 325847 2080017906 5862.5512 325967 1080091587 5842.5513 325968 1080091584_ 5822.5512 325969 1080091586 5842.5512 325970 1080088859 5842.5512 325971 1080091461 5862.5512 325972 2080017042 5822.5512 Subledger _ Account Description Continued... ADVERTISING OTHER REPAIR PARTS COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE COST OF GOODS SOLD-.WINE COST OF GOODS -SOLD WINE COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE GENERALSUPPLIES COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR COST OF GOODS!SOLD LIQUOR COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE COST OF GOODS -SOLD LIQUOR COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR 10/8/2013 9:13:37 Page - 29 Business Unit ART CENTER ADMINISTRATION EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN YORK SELLING YORK SELLING 50TH ST SELLING 50TH ST SELLING VERNON SELLING VERNON SELLING YORK SELLING YORK SELLING VERNON SELLING VERNON SELLING YORK SELLING VERNON SELLING VERNON SELLING YORK SELLING VERNON SELLING YORK SELLING 50TH ST SELLING. -YORK SELLING YORK SELLING VERNON SELLING 50TH ST SELLING R55CKR2 LOGIS100 CITY OF EDINA 10/8/2013 9:13:37 Council Check Register by GL Page- 30 Council Check Register and Summary 10/10/2013 -- 10/10/2013 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit 376233 1011012013 124291 WIRTZ BEVERAGE MINNESOTA Continued... 1,689.49 326079 1080091585 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING 1,130.67 326080 1080088854 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING 2,591.43 326081 1080090871 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING 3,168.86 326082 1080091462 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 5,690.85 326083 1080090870 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 1,697.25 326084 1080090008 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 1,041.50 326085 1080092764 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 71,491.98 376234 10110/2013 124529 WIRTZ BEVERAGE MINNESOTA BEER INC 1,326.69 325848 1090116709 5862.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER VERNON SELLING 3,153.60 325849 1090117526 5842.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER YORK SELLING 43.00 325850 1090117528 5842.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX YORK SELLING 358.00 325851 1090117527 5842.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER YORK SELLING 2,466.75 325852 1090116429 5842.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER YORK SELLING 139.40 325853 1090116428 5822.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER 50TH ST SELLING 1,850.55 325654 1090116427 5822.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER 50TH ST SELLING 12.00 326086 1090116462 5421.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER GRILL 310.00 326087 1090116463 5421.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER GRILL 129.60 326088 1090115789 5430.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER RICHARDS GOLF COURSE 9,789.59 376235 10/10/2013 105740 WSB & ASSOCIATES INC. 864.00 FRANCE AVE FED CROSSING 325795 17- 01686 -300 01404.1705.20 CONSULTING DESIGN FRANCE AVE PEDESTRIAN CORRIDOR 1,344.50 2013 MS4 PROGRAM ASSISTANCE 325796 1- 02092 -650 5960.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES ENGINEER SERVICES - STORM 13,455.00 HAZELTON RD DESIGN 325797 3- 01686460 01417.1705.21 CONSULTING INSPECTION HAZELTON RD IMPROVEMENTS 1,468.00 BYERLY'S UTILITY OBSERVATION 325915 1- 01686470 1260.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES ENGINEERING GENERAL 6,030.00 SOUTHDALE MED TRAFFIC STUDY 326003 2- 01686450 1140.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES PLANNING 426.00 6500 FRANCE SR HOUSING 326004 4-01686430 1140.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES PLANNING 23,587.50 376236 1011012013 101726 XCEL ENERGY 7,922.86 51- 9603061 -0 325725 384688578 1552.6185 LIGHT & POWER CENT SVC PW BUILDING 12,009.16 51- 6955679 -8 325726 385009584 1551.6185 LIGHT & POWER CITY HALL GENERAL 39.06 51- 8102668 -0 325727 384852000 1321.6185 LIGHT & POWER STREET LIGHTING REGULAR 894.70 51- 9251919 -0 325728 384872841 5765.6185 LIGHT & POWER PROMENADE EXPENSES 42.46 51- 7567037 -0 325729 385175288 1321.6185 LIGHT & POWER STREET LIGHTING REGULAR 239.92 51- 9337452 -8 325730 385037882 1321.6185 LIGHT & POWER STREET LIGHTING REGULAR 441.27 51- 6046826 -0 325731 384999026 5422.6185 LIGHT & POWER MAINT OF COURSE & GROUNDS 4,288.53 514827232 -6 325732 384979624 5311.6185 LIGHT & POWER POOL OPERATION 76,010.60 376237 10/1012013 . 12,490.00 5,912.00 18,402.00 376238 10110/2013 98.91 98.91 376239 10110/2013 250.00 250.00 1,622,185.67 119647 YOCUM OIL COMPANY INC. DIESEL FUEL 00005497 325800 580201 UNLEADED FUEL 00005501 325916 581897 _,102500 ZIMMERMAN, TIM UNIFORM. PURCHASE 325917 100113 132974 ZINGHOPPERS GROUP LLC, THE EP ENTERTAINMENT 10/17/13 326090 100313 Grand Total 1018/2013 9:13:37 Page - 31 Business Unit BUILDING MAINTENANCE GOLF DOME PROGRAM STORM LIFT STATION MAINT AQUATIC WEEDS GOLF DOME PROGRAM GOLF DOME PROGRAM PSTF OCCUPANCY YORK FIRE STATION WATER TREATMENT RICHARDS GOLF COURSE ' CENTENNIAL TIF DISTRICT ARENA BLDGIGROUNDS 1553.6581 GASOLINE EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN. CITY OF EDINA EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN R55CKR2 LOGIS100 LAUNDRY BUILDING MAINTENANCE Council Check Register by GL Council Check Register and Summary _ 10/10/2013— 10/10/2013 Check # Date Amount Supplier I Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description 376236 1011012013 101726 XCEL ENERGY Continued... 33.99 51- 4151897 -6 325733 385125703 1646.6185 LIGHT & POWER 314.29 51- 6223269 -1 325734 384643472 5210.6185 LIGHT & POWER 631.58 51- 5634814 -2 325735 385147370 5934.6185 LIGHT & POWER 254.53 51- 5938955 -6 325736 384994855 4086.6185 LIGHT & POWER 51.30 51- 0010103585 -7 325798 385059212 5210.6185 LIGHT & POWER 313.40 51- 0010060454 -7 325799 385059213 5210.6185 LIGHT & POWER 3,393.34 51- 4159265 -8 326005 384438223 7411.6185 LIGHT & POWER 660.02 51- 6229265 -9 326193 385314340 1481.6185 LIGHT & POWER 7,581.63 51- 0837548 -4 326194 385232549 5915.6185 LIGHT &!,POWER 854.35 51- 6137136 -8 326195 385313797 5430.6185 LIGHT & POWER 56.48 51- 0010033667 -7 326196 384690225 9232.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES 35 987 73 51- 4888627 -1 326197 385293065 5511.6185- LIGHT & POWER 76,010.60 376237 10/1012013 . 12,490.00 5,912.00 18,402.00 376238 10110/2013 98.91 98.91 376239 10110/2013 250.00 250.00 1,622,185.67 119647 YOCUM OIL COMPANY INC. DIESEL FUEL 00005497 325800 580201 UNLEADED FUEL 00005501 325916 581897 _,102500 ZIMMERMAN, TIM UNIFORM. PURCHASE 325917 100113 132974 ZINGHOPPERS GROUP LLC, THE EP ENTERTAINMENT 10/17/13 326090 100313 Grand Total 1018/2013 9:13:37 Page - 31 Business Unit BUILDING MAINTENANCE GOLF DOME PROGRAM STORM LIFT STATION MAINT AQUATIC WEEDS GOLF DOME PROGRAM GOLF DOME PROGRAM PSTF OCCUPANCY YORK FIRE STATION WATER TREATMENT RICHARDS GOLF COURSE ' CENTENNIAL TIF DISTRICT ARENA BLDGIGROUNDS 1553.6581 GASOLINE EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN. 1553.6581 GASOLINE EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 1646.6201 LAUNDRY BUILDING MAINTENANCE 5710.6136 PROFESSIONAL SVC - OTHER EDINBOROUGH ADMINISTRATION Payment Instrument Totals Check Total 1,622,185.67 Total Payments 1,622,185.67 R55CKS2 LOGIS100 CITY OF EDINA 1018/2013 9:13:51 Council Check Summary Page- 1 10/1012013 - 10110/2013 Company Amount 01000 GENERAL FUND 487,886.57 02500 PEDESTRIAN AND CYCLIST SAFETY 2,501.19 04000 WORKING CAPITAL FUND 222,800.11 05100 ART CENTER FUND 3,683.95 05200 GOLF DOME FUND 678.99 05300 AQUATIC CENTER FUND 5,125.48 05400 GOLF COURSE FUND 14,832.94 05500 ICE ARENA FUND 44,457.74 05700 EDINBOROUGH PARK FUND 22,924.94 05750 CENTENNIAL LAKES PARK FUND 1,964.25 05800 LIQUOR FUND 261,082.83 05900 UTILITY FUND 457,683.20 05930 STORM SEWER FUND 49,123.92 07400 PSTF AGENCY FUND 4,431.34 09232 CENTENNIAL TIF DISTRICT 39,395.51 09234 GRANDVIEW TIF DISTRICT 3,612.71 Report Totals 1,622,185.67 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 polices nd pr�� re s �e _ . �� /0 1,3 + _ PORT • , • w91rr1, o�,M�Ri�Oiif`��0� • ltl04 To: MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL Agenda Item tk IV. C From: Brian E. Olson, Director of Public Works $60 Action Discussion ❑ Date: October 14, 2013 Information ❑ Subjects Authorization to Participate in 2013 -2014 Fuel Consortium Action Requested: Authorize staff to participate in the 2013 -2014 State of Minnesota Fuel Consortium. Information / Background: The City of Edina has participated in the State of Minnesota's Fuel Consortium Purchase Program since 2009, see attached fuel purchasing history. The purpose of the Fuel Consortium Purchase Program is to develop a consistent fuel budget for each budget year. The Fixed Price Fuel Program is similar to the road salt purchasing program, where the City must agree to a certain volume of fuel to be purchased. The City needs to submit our requested amount by October 11, 2012; State of Minnesota will then go out for bids before January. The City in the past few years has committed up to 70% of our total volume of fuel to be purchased through this program. The other 30% is purchased through the Daily Rack Price for that particular day. Staff does not recommend purchasing 100% of our budgeted fuel, since the consumption of fuel can vary. from year to year based on how many miles driven and also how volatile the fuel market has been. There is also a possibility that the Daily Rack Price could go below the Fixed Price making it more advantageous to purchase at a lower cost when possible. Staff has reviewed the information and recommends that City Council authorize Staff to enter a Contract committing to purchase an amount of fuel similar to that of the 2013 - 2014 program. ATTACHMENTS: • Memo of September 23, 2,013 from State of Minnesota Materials Management Division • Past fuel purchasing history City of Edina • 4801 W. 50th St. • Edina, MN 55424 DATE: SEPTEMBER 23, 2013 TO: PERSPECTIVE FUEL CONSORTIUM MEMBERS FROM: JACKIE FINGER — STATE MATERIALS MANAGEMENT DIVISION RE: FIXED PRICE FUEL PROGRAM FOR 2014 -2015 (New Contract Term: February 1, 2014, through January 31, 2015) The State will again lead the 2014 -2015 Fixed Price Fuel Program for qualified participants. The qualification requirements are as follows: Participant must be a CPV member and agree to comply with all terms and conditions of the contract. • Participant must be located in the nine county metropolitan area (Anoka, Carver, Dakota, Hennepin, Scott, Sherburne, Ramsey, Wright and Washington) or as amended. • The tanks must be owned and maintained by the Participant. • Participant must be able to take either gasoline or diesel fuel in the required product type (135, 610, etc.) and as delivered by the Contract Vendor in quantities of at least 500 gallons per delivery. • Participant must take 100 percent of the committed monthly amount at the fixed price contracted on its behalf. • Fill rate must be at least 500 gallons or more. • Once final Contracts are executed, the participating agency or entity will be notified of the price and the name of the Contract Vendor. CAREFULLY REVIEW THE FOLLOWING INFORMATION!!! Only those agencies that wish to participate in the Fixed Price Program must complete the fuel questionnaire and return it to my attention no later than October 23, 2013. ILA TE RESPONSE__ ILL NOT BE CONSIDERED. If you are required to obtain approval by your governing board, plan accordingly. Please be careful to provide accurate information. The Spot Price Program does not require firm quantities to be submitted and the Spot Price Program may be used on an as needed basis by any participants in the Fixed Price Fuel Program if they so choose. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me via E -mail (PREFERRED): jackie.fingerestate.mn.us or by phone at 651.201.2436 or via fax at 651.297.3996. Thank you. RETURN ORDER FORM NO LATER THAN OCTOBER 23, 2013. I, FUEL CONSORTIUM — OVERVIEW IMPORTANT NOTE TO CURRENT PARTICIPANTS;: The current Contract with Yocum Oil does not expire until January 31, 2014. A new solicitation will be issued in October, 2013, to qualify vendors to participate in the 2014 -2015 program. Due to market conditions AND the solicitation process, the Fuel Core Team is exploring its pricing options for a new program that will begin on February 1, 2014..To achieve this, participants MUST submit their quantities for the Fixed Price Program NO LATER THAN OCTOBER 22, —2-0f&. 4m) PRWS P1R)OX31 9►`MI — The agencies participating in the Fixed Price Schedule -are required to take 100% of its monthly_ quantity committed and the Contract Vendor is required to provide 100% of the monthly quantities contracted. The program will be for 12 months beginning February 1, 2014, through January 31, 2015 If the original purchaser is unable to,take all of the monthly committed gallons, the Contract Vendor will be responsible for contacting other locations participating_ in the Fixed Price Contract to determine if they are able to take additional gallons. If the Contract Vendor is able to ship the unused gallons from the original participating purchaser to another participating agency, there will be no cost;to.the original participating agency. If the Spot Price is less than the Fixed Price, participants are not required to take more than the monthly amount they committed to. If the Contract Vendor is unable to ship the'unused gallons from the original participating purchaser to another participating agency, they may sell the unused gallons on the open market and either debit or credit the difference in price back to the original participating purchaser based on the open market sell price. If the Contract Vendor is unable to provide all of the monthly committed gallons.to a participating member by the due date and time, the participating member may purchase the product on the open market and charge the Contract Vendor for any actual additional costs incurred. 1P0T P1R11Ct9; P1ROGiR'A`M. In addition to a Fixed Price program, we will include a Spot Price program for Participants to handle extra fuel needs over and above the committed quantities in the Fixed Price program. Only Participants in the Fixed Price program may use the Spot Prices offered by the Contract Vendor. Participants are not required to use the Spot Price program and may use other State Spot Price programs currently in place or may purchase their additional fuel needs independently. If the Contract Vendor is unable to provide the order quantity to a State agency or CPV member by the required due date and time, the State agency or CPV member may purchase the product on the open market and charge the Contract Vendor for any actual additional costs incurred. The signature below agrees to all terms, conditions and prices of any Contract agreement entered into on its behalf by the State of Minnesota which includes, but is not limited to, taking 100% of the monthly fuel quantities submitted for the Fixed Price Program on the Fuel Order Form. There is no requirement to take any product Using the Spot Price Program. AGENCY NAME: ADDRESS: CONTACT PERSON: PHONE NO.: AUTHORIZED SIGNA TITLE: FAX NO.: E -MAIL: RETURN ORDER FORM NO LATER THAN OCTOBER 22, 2013. CITY OF EDINA FUEL PURCHASING HISTORY September 27, 2013 YEAR FUEL AVERAGE COST PER GALLON DIESEL UNLEADED GAS DIESEL UNLEADED GAS FIXED RACK FIXED RACK 2000 54,378 101,164 Data Not Available 2001 58,549 107,836 Data Not Available 2002 56,669 108,305 Data Not Available 2003 59,522 108,310 Data Not Available 2004 57,021 107,847 Data Not Available 2005 61,985 107,641 Data Not Available 2006 55,968 102,392 Data Not Available 2007 65,059 104,461 Data Not Available 2008 62,986 103,905 Data Not Available 2009 61,450 98,007 $ 1.9442 $ 1.9338 $ 1.4500 $ 1.7552 2010 60,760 91,023 $ 2.2916 $ 2.3271 $ 2.0948 $ 2.1365 2011 58,606 97,046 $ 2.7739 $ 3.2227 $ 2.4758 $ 2.8861 2012 59,180 104,011 $ 3.1341 $ 3.2804 $ 2.6940 $ 2.8495 2013* 47,018 66,719 $ 3.1881 $ 3.2862 $ 2.7627 $ 2.9879 *Notes: Through Sept 27, 2013 G: \PW \ADMIN \BUDGETS \Purchasing \Fuel \2014 fuel contract \Fuel Purchasing History - 2014.xlsx Fk Oi To: Mayor and Council Agenda Item #: IV.D The Recommended Bid is From: Brian E. Olson, Director of Public Works EEO ® Within Budget ❑ Not Within Budget Date: 10/14/2013 Subject: Request For Purchase: Contract For City Facility Refuse And Recycling Collection For 2014 — 2015 With Waste Management Date Bid Opened or Quote Received: Bid or Expiration Date: 10/04/2013 n/a Company: Waste Management, Inc. Recommended Quote or Bid: Waste Management, Inc. General Information: Company Waste Management, Inc. Dick's Sanitation Inc. Aspen Waste Systems Republic Services Amount of Quote or Bid: $ 31,138.00 Amount of Quote or Bid $31,138.00 $33,124.50 $39,450.00 $47,978.93 This contract is for refuse and recycling collection at City of Edina operated facilities. The new contract is for two years, 2014 through 2015, with option for two additional one year extensions. The last contract was $26,439 with Aspen Waste Systems. Waste Management is a reputable contractor and Staff is confident that it will provided quality service for the City of Edina. City of Edina • 4801 W. 50th St. • Edina, MN 55424 EXCLUSIVE CONTRACT FOR THE COLLECTION AND DISPOSAL OF CITY PROPERTIES REFUSE & RECYCLABLES THIS AGREEMENT, entered into this day of October 2013 by and between the CITY OF EDINA, a municipal corporation existing under the laws of the State of Minnesota (hereinafter referred to as the "City "), and (hereinafter referred to as the "Contractor ") WHEREAS, the City wishes to provide for the removal and disposal of garbage and refuse from all designated City properties located within the City of Edina; and WHEREAS, the Contractor, has tendered a quote and such quote has been accepted by the City of such work in an amount satisfactory to the City, NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual covenants herein contained, it is agreed between the parties hereto as follows: 1. Unless otherwise expressly stated, whenever used in this Agreement, the following words shall have the meaning given them by this section: a. "Refuse" shall include all solid waste products which are composed wholly or partly of garbage, trash, rubbish, organic wastes, construction debris, sweepings, cleanings, contaminated recyclables and other waste items normally resulting from the operation of the City. b. "Recyclables" shall include newsprint, corrugated cardboard, boxboard, mixed office paper, magazines and catalogs, glass containers, aluminum foil and cans, steel cans and plastic bottles reasonably free from food, dirt and other contaminants. Also included as a recyclable is any other material that the City may hereafter be required to collect as a recyclable by the County or State. 2. The Contractor shall meet and comply with all the provisions of City Ordinance 705 and 1300 pertaining to the collection and storage of refuse, garbage, swill, rubbish, waste material and recyclables. The provisions of said Ordinances are hereby made a part hereof by reference thereto as if fully set out herein. The Contractor at all times shall have on file with the City Clerk proper insurance policies as required by Section 4 of said Ordinance No. 1300. 3. The Contractor promptly and at his expense shall restore all public property of the City to its former condition to the satisfaction of the Director of Public Works if any such property is damaged by the Contractor or his agents in the course of operating as refuse and recyclable collector. If the Contractor shall fail to make such restoration, the City may make such restoration and the cost thereof to be paid within five (5) days after a statement is given by the City, to be given in the same manner as a notice under Paragraph 11 thereof, made payable upon demand for said restoration and on the same terms. The amount demanded shall bear interest, shall be collectable and may be deducted in the same manner, to the same extent, as charges for collections missed pursuant to Paragraph 6 hereof. Drivers shall .take into consideration the condition of the grass and ground when attempting to reach containers with their trucks; if tracks will be left, they shall not drive across the grass and, grounds. 4. The Contractor shall not cause or permit any vehicle used by it in performing its obligation to stand or remain at or near any building or residence hereunder of upon any street, alley, lot or other public place for any longer time than is actually required for the loading.of refuse and recyclables. 5. The Contractor, shall collect refuse and recyclables from each.of the City:properties as listed in the schedule of properties (Appendix A) attached hereto and hereby made a part thereof. All dumpsters shall be enclosed metal containers. All carts shall be wheeled'and fitted with a lid. Collections shall be made in accordance with a schedule of pickups to'be established by the Contractor which is subject to the approval of the City Manager. When a scheduled collection day occurs on a holiday, the Contractor shall attempt to maintain the normal collection schedule or postpone collection one day. The schedule indicating collection location, container capacity and frequency of collection shall become a part of this license. 6. In the event the Contractor fails to make refuse and recycling collections as provided in Section 5 of this Agreement, the Contractor shall be notified and given until noon of the day following the scheduled collection to correct the situation. In the event collection is not made by that time, the City may charge the Contractor the amount of the average cost per cubic yard per container per location for each collection missed, such sum to be paid within five (5) days in the same manner as a notice under Paragraph 11 hereof, and to bear interest at ten percent (10 %) per annum from and after said five (5) days period, until paid. Also, Contractor agrees to pay. all costs of collection of said fees, with interest, including attorney fees whether suit is brought or not. In addition to any other remedies available to the City for the collection of such charges, the City may deduct such charges with interest from payments then or thereafter due hereunder to the Contractor. 7. It is agreed that if collections additional to those to be made pursuant to Paragraph 5 hereof are required by the City, the Contractor will be reimbursed at the rate set forth in Appendix A attached hereto, but these additional collections shall be performed and paid for only if done at the request of the City Manager or his designee. 8. The Contractor represents, covenants and warrants that it is licensed and authorized to work in the State of Minnesota, that it understands the hazards and risks which are, or may be, presented to persons, property and the environment in performance of work under this Agreement, that it is engaged in the business of handling, storing, treating recycling and disposing of recycling and refuse, and that it has the expertise for handling and disposal of these materials that it will handle store, treat and dispose of recycling and refuse under this Agreement in full compliance with current Hennepin County plan(s). Any Municipal Solid Waste removed from a City of Edina facility under this contract must be disposed of into the Hennepin County Solid Waste System. It may be delivered to the Brooklyn Park Transfer Station, the Hennepin Energy Resource Co., the Elk River Resource Recovery Facility or the Freeway Transfer Station or other sites that may be approved by Hennepin County Solid Waste System. In addition, a receipt(s) from any of the aforementioned facilities that documents delivery to them, must accompany any invoice for service, prior to payment being made by the City. 9. The Contractor shall conduct the work of refuse and recyclable collection in a professional and sanitary manner, all to the satisfaction of the City Council. Drivers shall execute extreme caution when making collections in the park areas. A great many of these areas are playgrounds for children, so the drivers shall conduct themselves accordingly for the safety of these children. 10. The Contractor agrees to provide the City Manager or his designee semi - annual weight reports for recyclables collected at each location served under this agreement. Refuse weight reports fora particular location will also be provided to the City upon request. 11. This Agreement shall be in full.force commencing' January 1,.2014 through December 31, 2Q15.,unless earlier terminated pursuant hereto. The City and Contractor reserve the right to extend this agreement two-additional years upon mutual consent.' -- Economic adjustments, fuel'charges or recycling processing fees will not.be negotiated or adjusted during the term of the contract ;T : he cost of this Agreement, shall be'as_set forth in' Appendix A for the calendar years'2014'through 2015 payable monthly withifi4en (10) days after the City's receipt of a notice from the Contractor itemizing for the then prior month the number of pickups, location of pickups and cubic yards of dumpkers at each pickup location.. This Agreement may be terminated by the City if the Contractor_ fails to fulfill or perform"and comply with the terms and conditions of the Agreement or'the.applicable City Ordinances 'upon at least fifteen (15) days notice in writing to the Contractor mailed to him`at the address set out in the first Paragraph hereof. Notice shall be`deemed given upon deposit of the notice in the United States mail. In the event the Contractor for any reasons, whether or not beyond the Contractor's control, fails to make recycling or refuse collections as agreed by Contractor performed and complied with upon�herein for a period of seven (7) consecutive days, or fails or refuses to perform any other duty or obligation hereunder, or to the applicable City Ordinances, the City may, in addition to the other remedies available to it, and termination hereof as above provided, exercise any one or more of the remedies available to it pursuant to City Ordinances 705, 1300, and 160. The remedies of the City may be exercised together or separately, and the exercise of any one or more of these remedies shall not be deemed a waiver or release of any of those other remedies. In the event this Agreement is terminated prior to December 31, 2016, pursuant to the provisions of this paragraph 11, then the City shall pay within fifteen (15) days after such termination, and after receipt of an itemized notice of the kind specified in this Paragraph, an amount equal to the cost, determined pursuant hereto, of refuse collection by the Contractor up to and including the lass t date of refuse collection by the Contractor; less however, any sums due to the City from Contractor pursuant to this Agreement including, without limitation, any sums and interest due pursuant to Paragraphs 3 and 6, but plus, however, any sums to be paid for extra collections made 1 prior to termination pursuant to Paragraph 7 hereof. 12. Neither this Agreement or any interest hereof shall be assigned,by the Contractor without the prior written consent of the City. In any event, no such assignment shall relieve the Contractor from: any obligations herein. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this instrument to be duly executed the day and year first above written. WITNESSED BY: CITY OF EDINA BY Mayor BY City Manager WITNESSED BY: CONTRACTOR BY Quote Form 2014 -2015 Schedule of Edina City Properties Refuse and Recycling Collection Location Pick -ups per Week Changes /date Number & Size containers Months of Service Monthly cost Annual Cost Extra Pick up Edina City Hall 4801 W. 50th St *3 /wk Refuse ( * *T,TH,S) 1 -3 Yard Dumpster 12 $ 129 $ 1,551 $ 30 1 1wk Single sort recycling (Th) 1 -3 Yard Dumpster 12 $ 30 $ 360 $ 15 Edina Art Center 4701 West 64th St 1 /wk Refuse (T) 1 -2 Yard Dumpster 12 $ 36 $ 432 $ 20 $ Edina Public works 7450 Metro Blvd Hours M -F 7 -3:30 p.m. 1 /wk Refuse (M -TH) 2-6 Yard Dumpster 12 $ 284 $ 3,408 $ 60 2 /wk recycling 2 -4 Yard Dumpster 12 $ 77 $ 924 $ 20 $ Edina Fire Station #1 6250 Tracy Avenue 1 /wk Refuse (W) 1 -2 Yard Dumpster 12 $ 36 $ 432 $ 20 EOW Single Sort recycling 1 -2 Yard Dumpster 12 $ 20 $ 240 $ 10 Edina Fire Station #2 7335 York Ave 1 /wk Refuse (T) 1 -96 Gal. Cart 12 $ 10 $ 120 10/ yd 2 /mo Single sort recycling 1 -2 Yard Dumpster 12 $ 20 $ 240 $ 10 Braemar Ice Arena 75015. Highway 169 3 /wk Refuse (M,W,F) 1 -6 Yard Dumpster. 30 $ 222 $ 2,220 $ 60 2/wk Refuse (Apr/May) 2 $ 149 $ 298 $ 60 1 /wk Single Sort Recycling H 1 -2 Yard Dumpster 12 $ 30 $ 360 $ 10 $ - Courtney Baseball Fields Braemar Blvd & Valley View Rd 2 /wk (T,F 4/1 -8/1) 2 -4 Yard Dum ster 4 $ 201 $ 804 $ 40 1 /wk (8/1- 11 /1) Remove 11/1 2 -4 Yard Dumpster 3 $ 108 $ 324 $ 40 2 /mo Cardboard (4/1 -9/1) Remove 9/1 1 -4 Yard Dumpster 5 $ 30 $ 150 $ 20 *Edina Golf Dome 7420 Braemar Blvd Suspended service due to fire 2012 1 /wk Refuse (11/1 -4/30) 1 -2 Yard Dumpster 6 $ 36 $ 216 $ 20 1 /wk Single Sort Recycling 1 -96 Gal. Cart 6 $ 8 $ 48 NA Remove both 4/30 $ - $ ' Braemar Maint. Building 7400 Braemar Blvd 3 /wk Refuse (M,W,F 4/1- 10/31) 1 -6 Yard Dumpster 6 $ 222 $ 1,332 $ 50 On Call - Refuse (11/1 -3/31) $ 1 /wk Single Sort Recycling 1 -2 Yard Dumpster 12 $ 30 $ 360 $ 30 Braemar Club House 6364 John Harris Drive 3 /wk Refuse (T,TH,S 4/1 -9/30) 1 -8 Yard Dumpster 6 $ 285 $ 1,710 $ 80 1 /wk Refuse (M 10/1 -4/1) 6 $ 100 $ 600 $ 80 1 /wk Single Sort Recycling M 6/1 -3/31 1-4 Yard Dumpster 10 $ 30 $ 300 $ 20 3 /wk Single Sort Recycling M,W,S 4/1 -5/31) 1 -4 Yard Dumpster 2 $ 72 $ 144 $ 20 Kenneth Rosland Park 66th & Valley View Rd (by back parking lot) 4 /wk(M,T,Th,S 4/15- 10/31) 1 -6 Yard Dumpster 7 $ 300 $ 21100 $ 60 Remove 10/31 $ $ Edina Aquatic Center 4301 West 66th St. (early morning pick up) 3 /wk Refuse (M,W,F 4/15 -9/1) 1 -4 Yard Dumpster 4.5 $ 160 $ 720 $ 40 1 /wk Single Sort Recyding 1 -3 Yard Dumpster 4.5 $ 30 $ 135 $ 15 Remove 9/1 $ )er 6 yard •wk= week ••(M) Monday, (T)Tuesday, (W)Wednesday, (TH)Thursday, (F)Friday, (S)Saturday schedule reflects service as of 2124113 Annual Total Amount $ 31,138 Company Name: Waste Management, Inc Authorized Signature: Name Scott Gaupp Address: 10550 Naples St. NE Blaine, MN 55449 S Edina Senior Center & Library 5280 Grandview Square 1 /wk Refuse 11 -2 Yard Dumpster 12, $ 36 $ 432 $ 20 MEOW Single Sort Recycling /paperback books 1 -3 Yard Dumpster 12 $ 30 $ 360 $ 15 $ Edinborough I7700 York Ave. S. Do not collect before 7 a.m. 7 /wk Refuse 1 /wk Recycling 1 /wk Organics (Th) 1 -8 Yard Dumpster 3 -96 Gal. Cart 1 -2 Yard Dumpster 12 12 12 $ 647 $ 25. $ 46 $ 7,764 $ 300 $ 552 $ 80 na $ 20 Grandview Liquor Store 5013 Vernon Ave S 1 /wk Refuse 1 -2 Yard Dumpster 12 $ 36 $ 432 $ 20 1/wk Cardboard baled 12 $ - $ NA EOW Recycling 1 -96 gal cart 12 $ . 8 $ 96 NA Edina Liquor Store 6755 York Avenue 1 /wk Refuse (F 1 /1- 11/14) 1 -2 Yard Dumpster 10.5 $ 36 $ 378 $ 20 2 /wk Refuse (T, F 11/15 - 12/31) 1.5 $ 68 $ 102 $ 20 1 /wk Cardboard baled 12 $ $ - NA EOW Recycling 1 -96 gal cart 12 $ 8 $ 96 NA $ 0 Van Valkenburg Park 4935 Lincoln Drive 1 /wk Refuse (M, 4/1- 11/15) 1 -4 Yard Dumpster 7.5 $ 68 $ 510 $ 40 On call after 11/15 $ Fred Richards Golf Course 1 /wk Refuse (M, 4/15 - 11/15) 1 -4 Yard Dumpster 7 $ 54 $ 378 $ 40 7640 Parklawn Ave 1 /wk Single Sort Recycling 4/15 -11/15 1 -2 Yard Dumpster 7 $ 30 $ 210 $ 10 on -call pick up after 11 /15 •wk= week ••(M) Monday, (T)Tuesday, (W)Wednesday, (TH)Thursday, (F)Friday, (S)Saturday schedule reflects service as of 2124113 Annual Total Amount $ 31,138 Company Name: Waste Management, Inc Authorized Signature: Name Scott Gaupp Address: 10550 Naples St. NE Blaine, MN 55449 To: MAYOR AND COUNCIL From: Mark Nolan, Transportation Planner Date: October 14, 2013 o le • ,n CORPORA�FO � 1888 Agenda Item #: IV. E. Subject: Traffic Safety Report Of August 7, 2013 and September 4, 2013 Action ❑x Discussion ❑ Information ❑ Action Requested: Review and approve the Traffic Safety Committee Reports of August 7, 2013 and September 4, 2013. Information / Background: The Edina Transportation Commission (ETC) reviewed the August 7, 2013, and September 4, 2013, Traffic Safety Committee Reports at their August 15 and September 19 meetings, respectively, and moved to forward the reports to the City Council for approval, see attached final draft minutes. Attachments: Traffic Safety Committee Report of August 7, 2013 Final ETC Meeting Minutes of August 15, 2013 Traffic Safety Committee Report of September 4, 2013 Draft ETC Meeting Minutes of September 19, 2013 G:\ Engineering \infmstructure \Streets \Traffic \Traffic Safety Committee \City Council Reports\2013 \Item IV. E. Traffic Safety Report of Aug 7, 2013 and Sept 4, 2013.doot City of Edina • 4801 W. 50th St. • Edina, MN 55424 TRAFFIC SAFETY COMMITTEE REPORT Wednesday, August 7, 2013 The Traffic Safety Committee (TSC) review of traffic safety matters occurred on August 7. The Director of Engineering, Public Works Director, the Transportation Planner, Sign Coordinator, and Traffic Safety Coordinator were in attendance for this meeting. From these reviews, the recommendations below are provided. On each of the items, persons involved have been contacted and staff recommendation has been discussed with them. They were informed that if they disagree with the recommendation or have additional facts to present, they can be included on the August 15, Edina Transportation Commission and the September 17 City Council agenda. SECTION A: Requests on which the Committee recommends approval: Al. Request for a painted crosswalk at the intersection of Xerxes Avenue and 55`" Street West. The requestor states that vehicles are not stopping for pedestrians as they attempt to cross Xerxes Avenue. Requestor would like a painted crosswalk to alert vehicles to pedestrians crossing. A map and pictures are provided below. This request was recommended for denial at the November 7, 2012 TSC meeting due to lack of warrants, but on December 18, 2012, City Council directed staff to look at area again during 2013 summer. The criterion for placement of crosswalks and type of control is outlined within the City of Edina local Traffic Control list. It states: Marked Pedestrian Crosswalk Map: 55`x' Avenue and Xerxes Avenue • Marked crosswalks are placed at locations that are unusually hazardous or at locations not readily apparent as having pedestrian movement. Traffic Safety Committee Report Page I of 8 August 7, 2013 • Marked crosswalks will only be placed in an area that has in excess of 20 pedestrians crossing for a minimum of two hours during any eight hour period. • Marking for crosswalks will be established by measuring the "Vehicle Gap Time ". This is the total number of gaps between vehicular traffic recorded during the average five minute period in the peak hour. Criteria far markings are: • More than five gaps —pavement marking and signage only. • Four to five gaps — add activated pedestal mounted flasher. • Less than three gaps — add activated overhead mounted flasher Counts of pedestrians were taken at the intersection. A total of 19 pedestrians were recorded walking through the intersection within two hours. This is below the warrants for placing a crosswalk. After discussion, staff concluded that, based on engineering judgment, the crosswalk should be placed on the north leg of the intersection; which will cross Xerxes Avenue. Photo: 551h Street and Xerxes Avenue looking north Photo: 55`h Street and Xerxes Avenue looking west Staff recommendation: Placement of painted crosswalk on the north leg of the intersection of Xerxes Avenue and 55th Street. Will require Hennepin County approval. A2. Request for parking restriction change in the parking lot near 50th Street West and France Avenue. This request comes from the owner of a business at that location; see map. Requestor states that to help with parking availability, the spaces in front of their business should be restricted to shorter times. The requestor specifically states that the time should be changed to "Ten minute parking ". The requestor adds that the shorter times would be a benefit to other businesses in the area as well. Currently, the spaces are not marked with time restrictions. About two spaces would be affected by the change. Traffic Safety Committee Report Page 2 of 8 August 7, 2013 This request was originally included in the June 6, 2013 TSC report as a deferment. This request was deferred to a later date for more discussion. Map: Parking lot near 50`h Street West and France Avenue There are currently no parking restrictions for these spaces. Additional parking is available in other spaces in the lot, and also available in a parking ramp located nearby. Guidelines for parking restrictions are outlined within the City's Traffic Control Policy. There are no relevant guidelines that would prevent this type of parking restrictions. After discussion, staff concluded that I t f k' trictions would be p acemen o par ing res acceptable for two parking spaces in front of Photo 1: Proposed spaces for parking restriction the entrance of both Starbucks and Breadsmith. Traffic Safety Committee Report Page 3 of 8 August 7, 2013 19_'0 TI 21 21 /976 2i 11 M25 � t JNa s k 1J 1100 79]0 ]]21 3922 7906 7902 5011 �1W ]979 ]911 11 ]911 1J ]9/] t1 3012 11 31 ]915 5021 /050 $031 5025 5000 5076 3029 5028 5073 30]2 3050 50]) 5036 �4 Map: Parking lot near 50`h Street West and France Avenue There are currently no parking restrictions for these spaces. Additional parking is available in other spaces in the lot, and also available in a parking ramp located nearby. Guidelines for parking restrictions are outlined within the City's Traffic Control Policy. There are no relevant guidelines that would prevent this type of parking restrictions. After discussion, staff concluded that I t f k' trictions would be p acemen o par ing res acceptable for two parking spaces in front of Photo 1: Proposed spaces for parking restriction the entrance of both Starbucks and Breadsmith. Traffic Safety Committee Report Page 3 of 8 August 7, 2013 Staff Recommendation: Approval of parking restrictions. Photo 2: Spaces for parking restriction A3. Request for stop signs at the intersection of Wooddale Avenue and Garrison Lane. This request comes from a resident who travels this intersection frequently. The requestor states that this intersection is too dangerous to be left without control. Requestor feels that vehicles are not yielding to pedestrians and bikes at the intersection. Requestor feels that placing a stop sign would help assign right - of -way at the intersection. See map below. Map: Wooddale Avenue and Garrison Lane Traffic Safety Committee Report Page 4 of 8 August 7, 2013 The Minnesota Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MNMUTCD) has guidelines that the City of Edina uses. The guideline states: In addition, the use of YIELD or STOP signs should be considered at the intersection of two minor streets or local roads where the intersection has more than three approaches and where one or more of the following conditions exist: A. The combined vehicular, bicycle, and pedestrian volume entering the intersection from all approaches averages more than 2,000 units per day; B. The ability to see conflicting traffic on an approach is not sufficient to allow a road user to stop or yield in compliance with the normal right -of -way rule if such stopping or yielding is necessary, and /or C. Crash records indicate that five or more crashes that involve the failure to yield the right -of -way at the intersection under the normal right -of -way rule have been reported within a 3 -year period, or that three or more such crashes have been reported within a 2 -year period. YIELD or STOP signs should not be used for speed control. Photo: Garrison Lane looking east Photo: Wooddole Avenue looking south Traffic counts and pedestrian counts were conducted at this intersection. This intersection has an Average Daily Traffic (ADT) of 275 vehicles entering. A total of 215 pedestrians, including bikes, entered the intersection during that time. There are no recorded crashes at that intersection. After discussion, staff concluded that stop signs should be placed on Garrison Lane. Staff Recommendation: Approval of stop signs. Traffic Safety Committee Report Page 5 of 8 August 7, 2013 SECTION B: Requests on which the Committee recommends denial: B1. Request for intersection control at the intersection of Hawkes Terrace and Hawkes Drive. This request comes from a resident who lives at the intersection. The requestor states that vehicles are having a hard time determining right -of -way. Requestor also states that the intersection is "dangerous" due to the vegetation present. Requestor would like to see a traffic control device or a speed bump at the intersection. A map and pictures are provided below. The Minnesota Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MNMUTCD) has guidelines that the City of Edina uses. The guideline states: In addition, the use of YIELD or STOP signs should be considered at the intersection of two minor streets or local roads where the intersection has more than three approaches and where one or more of the following conditions exist: A. The combined vehicular, bicycle, and pedestrian volume entering the intersection from all approaches averages more than 2,000 units per day, B. The ability to see conflicting traffic on an approach is not sufficient to allow a road user to stop or yield in compliance with the normal right -of -way rule if such stopping or yielding is necessary, and /or C. Crash records indicate that five or more crashes that involve the failure to yield the right -of -way at the intersection under the normal right -of -way rule have been reported within a 3 -year period, or that three or more such crashes have been reported within a 2 -year period. YIELD or STOP signs should not be used for speed control. Map: Hawkes Terrace and Hawkes Drive Photo: Hawkes Terrace and Hawkes Drive, looking west A traffic count was conducted at the intersection. The intersection of Hawkes Drive and Hawkes Terrace has an ADT of 83 vehicles entering the intersection; with 85th percentile speeds of 19.8 on Hawkes Drive, Traffic Safety Committee Report Page 6 of 8 August 7, 2013 and 20.5 on Hawkes Terrace. The vegetation in the area of the intersection was looked at and was found to be out of compliance for the clear zone. The resident was contacted and the violation was resolved. There are no recorded crashes at this intersection. After discussion, staff concluded that this area does not meet warrants for a traffic control device. A letter will be sent out to the residents informing them of the request along with information regarding a drivers responsibility at a T- shaped intersection. Photo: Hawkes Drive, looking north Staff Recommendation: Denial of request for stop signs. 62. Request for a stop sign at the intersection of Hillside Road and Crescent Drive. This request is from a resident who lives near the intersection. The requestor states that vehicles are not following the right -of -way rules when entering this intersection. Requestor would like to have a stop sign at this intersection. A map and pictures are provided below. The Minnesota Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MNMUTCD) has guidance that the City of Edina uses. The guidance states: In addition, the use of YIELD or STOP signs should be considered at the intersection of two minor streets or local roads where the intersection has more than three approaches and where one or more of the following conditions exist: A. The combined vehicular, bicycle, and pedestrian volume entering the intersection from all approaches averages more than 2,000 units per day; Map: Hillside Road and Crescent Drive B. The ability to see conflicting traffic on an approach is not sufficient to allow a road user to stop or yield in compliance with the normal right -of -way rule if such stopping or yielding is necessary, and /or Traffic Safety Committee Report Page 7 of 8 August 7, 2013 C. Crash records indicate that five or more crashes that involve the failure to yield the right -of -way at the intersection under the normal right -of -way rule have been reported within a 3 -year period, or that three or more such crashes have been reported within a 2 -year period. YIELD or STOP signs should not be used for speed control. A traffic count was taken at the intersection. The intersection of Hillside Road and Crescent Drive has an ADT of 150 vehicles entering the intersection. There are no reported crashes at this intersection. After discussion, staff concluded that this intersection is below warrants necessary for placement of a traffic control device. Staff Recommendation: Denial of request for stop signs. SECTION C: Requests that are deferred to a later date: None SECTION D: Other traffic safety issues handled. Photo: Hillside Road looking north Photo: Crescent Drive looking west. Note intersection alignment. D1. Voicemail from a resident with questions about the proposed light rail in the area. Resident had questions concerning the placement of bike routes in Edina with respect to the proposed light rail station that will be placed in the City of Hopkins. Call was returned and message left for resident. Traffic Safety Committee Report Page 8 of 8 August 7, 2013 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 66th 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 LaForce 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 way to 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 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 70th &76 Ih, 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 TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION ATTENDANCE - 2013 NAME TERM J F I M A M J J A S O N D Work Session tf of Mtgs Attendance % Meetings/Work Sessions 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 9 Bass, Katherine 1 2/1/2014 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 7116 1 8 89% Boett e, Emil 2/1/2014 1 1 100% Braden, Ann* 2/1/2014 1 1 1 1 1 5 56% Franzen, Nathan 2/1/2016 1 1 1. 1 1 1 6 67% I er, Su rya 2/1/2015 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 7 78% Janovy, Jennifer 2/1/2014 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 8 89% LaForce, Tom 2/1/2015 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 9 100% Nelson, Paul 2/1/2016 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 9 100% Schwei er, Steven student 1 1 1 3 33% Sierks, Caroline student 1 1 1 1 1 1 6 67% S anhake, Dawn 2/1/2016 1 1 1 1 4 57% Whited, Courtney 2/1/2015 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 8 89% 3 TRAFFIC SAFETY COMMITTEE REPORT Wednesday, September 4, 2013 The Traffic Safety Committee (TSC) review of traffic safety matters occurred on September 4. The Director of Engineering, Public Works Director, Transportation Planner, and Police Traffic Supervisor were in attendance for this meeting. From these reviews, the recommendations below are provided. On each of the items, persons involved have been contacted and staff recommendation has been discussed with them. They were informed that if they disagree with the recommendation or have additional facts to present, they can be included on the September 19, Edina Transportation Commission and the October 14 City Council agenda. SECTION A: Requests on which the Committee recommends approval: Al. Request for parking restrictions at the end of 53rd Street West. This request comes from the resident who lives on 53rd Street West. Requestor states that vehicles are turning around in the driveway and they are also blocking the driveway. Requestor would like to see parking restrictions to prevent vehicles from blocking his driveway. The requestor specifically stated that weekend parking restrictions would be preferable. The requestor states that vehicles are only parking in the area on the weekend. A map and pictures are provided below. Staff Recommendation: Approval of two no parking (Saturday or Sunday) signs on north side of 53`d St W. Traffic Safety Committee Report September 4, 2013 &Mxo Map: 53rd Street West Photo: 53rd Street West, looking west. Note Dead end sign Page I of 5 Photo: 53rd Street West, looking west SECTION B: Requests on which the Committee recommends denial: None SECTION C: Requests that are deferred to a later date: C1. Request for traffic control at the intersection of Windsor Avenue and Code Avenue. This request is from a resident who lives in the area. The requestor states that vehicles have had "close calls" when entering the intersection. Requestor would like to see some traffic control at the intersection to increase the safety of traffic in the area. There is no relevant history of traffic requests in this area. There are no reported crashes at this intersection from 2001 to 2011. A map and photos are provided below. The Minnesota Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MNMUTCD) has guidance that the City of Edina uses. The guidance states: Map: Code Avenue and Windsor Avenue Traffic Safety Committee Report Page 2 of 5 September 4, 2013 In addition, the use of YIELD or STOP signs should be considered at the intersection of two minor streets or local roads where the intersection has more than three approaches and where one or more of the following conditions exist: A. The combined vehicular, bicycle, and pedestrian volume entering the intersection from all approaches averages more than 2,000 units per day, B. The ability to see conflicting traffic on an approach is not sufficient to allow a road user to stop or yield in compliance with the normal right -of -way rule if such stopping or yielding is necessary, and /or C. Crash records indicate that five or more crashes that involve the failure to yield the right -of -way at the intersection under the normal right -of -way rule have been reported within a 3 -year period, or that three or more such crashes have been reported within a 2 -year period. YIELD or STOP signs should not be used for speed control. Traffic counts and pedestrian counts were taken at this intersection. This intersection has an Average Daily Traffic (ADT) of 237 vehicles entering, with 52 bikes and pedestrians; for a total of 289. Photo: Code Avenue and WindsorAvenue, looking west Photo: Code Avenue and WindsorAvenue, looking west. Note possible clear -zone violation. After discussion, staff concluded that further exploration is needed into a potential clear zone issue as well as additional contact with the requestor before a recommendation is made. C2. Request for a redesign of Edina Industrial Boulevard from Bush Lake Road to Metro Boulevard. This request is from a business owner in the area. The requestor states that vehicles are colliding with each other and potentially leaving the roadway due to a narrow section of Edina Industrial Boulevard. The area in question is not marked for two lanes of travel, but requestor states vehicles are traveling with the assumption that it is. Requestor would like the area of Edina Industrial Boulevard that is not marked for two lanes to be looked ate A map and photos are provided below. Traffic Safety Committee Report Page 3 of 5 September 4, 2013 Map: Edina Industrial Boulevard from Bush Lake Road to Metro Boulevard. Note lane marks. A similar request was made on November 17, 2006. This request was to look at the potential for crashes on Edina Industrial Boulevard. This request was not sent to the TSC at the time. Attached is a map and brief description of reported traffic crashes on Edina Industrial Boulevard between Bush Lake Road and Metro Boulevard. The requestor stated that the curve near crash D is the most dangerous part of the road. Crash report states that the crash was with a vehicle making a left turn and a vehicle traveling along the roadway. There was no contributing factor to the crash. Edina Industrial Boulevard is a minor arterial street with bulkhead curb and gutter on both sides. It is 43 feet wide at the area that is not marked for two lanes. After discussion, staff concluded that since Industrial Blvd is scheduled for seal coat next year, this section of roadway will continue to be studied. Photo: Edina Industrial Boulevard looking east Photo: Edina Industrial Boulevard looking west Traffic Safety Committee Report Page 4 of 5 September 4, 2013 SECTION D: Other traffic safety issues handled. D1. Request for an all -way stop sign at the intersection of York Avenue and Edinborough Way. Requestor states that vehicles have to wait "too long" to enter onto or cross York Avenue. Requestor was forwarded to Hennepin County, who control York Avenue. D2. Request for a "Blind Driveway Ahead" sign to be installed near the 6900 block of Valley View Road. Requestor was informed that those signs are not installed in the City of Edina. D3. Request for speed counts on Ewing Avenue between 60th Street West and 67th Street West. Requestor states that vehicles are going fast in the area. Ewing Avenue has an ADT of 334 vehicles and an 85th speed of 28.5 MPH. A detailed speed.report was forwarded to Edina Police (EP) for enforcement. D4. Two requests for speed counts on Highland Road east of Tracy Avenue. Requestors state that vehicles are speeding through the area. Highland Road has an ADT of 275 vehicles with an 85th speed of 24.5 MPH. A detailed speed report was forwarded to EP of enforcement. D5. Request for speed counts near the 5300 block of Blake Road. Requestor states that vehicles are speeding through the area. Blake Road near the 5300 block has an ADT of 2671 vehicles and an 85th speed of 37.5 MPH. A detailed speed report was forwarded to EP for enforcement. D6. Request for speed counts near the 4600 block of Drexel Avenue and Bridge Street. Requestor states that vehicles are speeding through the area. Traffic counts were conducted on Bridge Street. Bridge Street has an ADT of 534 vehicles and an 85th speed of 25.6 MPH. A detailed speed report was forwarded to EP for enforcement. D7. Request for speed counts near the 5300 block of Interlachen Boulevard. Requestor states that vehicles are speeding through the area. Interlachen Boulevard has an ADT of 10221 vehicles with an 85th speed of 34.3 MPH. A detailed speed report was forwarded to EP for enforcement. D8. Call from a resident about speeds in Edina. Requestor did not give location, and could not be contacted after leaving voicemail. D9. Call from a resident about weight restrictions on Waterman Avenue. Resident was not specific about information. Left voicemail with resident, call has not been returned. D10. Request for "No Parking" sign at 3907 Sunnyside Road. "No Parking" signs are posted on either side of this address but not in front. EP visited the address and recommended adding a "No Parking" sign. A work request was sent to the sign shop. D11. Via the City's Facebook page, a resident stated that the traffic signals at the commercial entrance on W 76th St east of France Ave are difficult to see (from both directions) due to the curve /elevation of the W 76th St. Staff recommended that the existing advisory signs be illuminated and will look into options to do SO. Traffic Safety Committee Report Page 5 of 5 September 4, 2013 MINUTES OF CITY OF EDINA, MINNESOTA TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION COMMUNITY ROOM SEPTEMBER 19, 2013 6:00 P.M. ROLL CALL Answering roll call was members Bass, Boettge, Franzen, lyer, Janovy, La Force, Nelson, Spanhake, Van Dyke and Whited. New student member Jackson Van Dyke was welcomed to the ETC. APPROVAL OF. MEETING AGENDA Motion was made by member LaForce and seconded by member Franzen to approve the meeting agenda. All voted aye.,Motion carried. APPROVAL OF MEETING MINUTES REGULAR MEETING OF AUGUST 15, 2013 — Approved as corrected. Motion was made by member Bass and seconded by member Franzen to approve the amended minutes of August 15, 2013. Eight voted aye; one abstained (Janovy). Motion carried. COMMUNITY COMMENT Mr. Robert Shockwell, resident of Richfield, member of the Richfield Transportation Commission and liaison to the ETC, stopped by to see if there was anything the ETC would like to share with Richfield's Transportation Commission. A brief discussion ensued about Mr. Eastling's presentation last month on his proposed expansion of TH -62 and the importance of improving 66th St. W. REPORTS /RECOMMENDATIONS 2014 Neighborhood Reconstruction Projects Director Houle said a special public hearing meeting is scheduled for Dec. 10 for the City Council to consider approvals. He said the ETC could review and approve the projects tonight or wait until October. Assistant city engineer Millner presented the five neighborhoods: Birchcrest B Current conditions include poor pavement, some utility issues, existing curb and gutter on some streets, some streets are concrete and while others are bituminous. Proposed improvements are new concrete and bituminous pavement, spot repair to curb and gutter, install sidewalk'on Normandale Road (petitioned) and continue to Valley View Road (based on pedestrians count); curbs at three intersections will be narrowed (neck down) to help with speed reduction, and utility improvements. The proposed costs are $1,461,000 (City) and $1,950,000 (residents) for an assessment of $14,000. Member Whited said the survey response showed that residents are not in favor of sidewalks. Mr. Millner said staff will be recommending it to City Council and let them make the decision; he stated further that a sidewalk meeting was held with residents along the proposed route and of the 28 in attendance, most were in favor. Regarding sidewalk maintenance, Mr. Houle said the policy is that the City maintains sidewalks on State Aid roads and in school zones and the rest are maintained by residents. He said one distinction is that City maintained sidewalks are 5 ft. while others are 4 ft. or less and the City does not have the proper equipment to maintain sidewalks that are less than 5 ft. With varying sidewalk widths, the question was asked how wide should sidewalks be and the consensus was that this requires more discussion. Concerns were raised by members Franzen and lyer about the PACS fund not being sufficient to cover all the sidewalk needs and potential inequities. Mr. Millner said the Living Streets Advisory Group is working on creating a sidewalk plan as part of the Living Streets Policy; the plan should be ready by next fall. Member lyer suggested a global plan that includes prioritization and criteria which would eliminate the sidewalk question from the questionnaire. Member Janovy said the Living Streets Policy has criteria. It was noted that some streets were secondary bike routes but Mr. Millner said they do not have a plan in place for secondary routes at this time. Streetlights are not recommended based on feedback but member Bass asked if the lighting is insufficient for people /pedestrians or for drivers and she added that the Living Streets Advisory Group may address this. Member Janovy asked if there is a specific way to measure the level of lighting. -Mr. Houle said a study was done 10 years ago and the decision was made to install lights every 200 ft. He said the cities of Minneapolis and St. Paul install lights every 75 ft. 'He said to meet pedestrian safety lighting standard, they would need to install a lot,more lights and noted that the Country Club with more streetlights, for example, does not meet pedestrian safety standard. Member Janovy asked if they could neck -down the intersection at 60th St. based on traffic speed and counts and Mr. Millner said they are counting again in two weeks and will review and consider it then. On page 3 under Equity, member Bass suggested also addressing health and mobility; and in the Powerpoint, under "What is Included ?" she suggested revising the last bullet point to include '...and City policy.' She also asked if the extra space created by the neck -downs could become rain gardens instead of sod and Mr. Houle said yes; he said they are doing this on Tracy Avenue and residents and have agreed to maintenance. Member Janovy suggested sorting residents' comments by street because it would be easier to read. Member Franzen asked if sump pump is the standard in all projects and Mr. Millner said yes. He said.homeowners often connect during the street project and added that the new building code requires a sump pump in all new construction. Bredesen Park D Current conditions include poor pavement and existing curb and gutter on, some streets. Proposed improvements are new bituminous pavement with pavement being narrowed approximately 1 ft. on each side, and, new barrier - style curb and gutter. The proposed costs are $739,000 (City) and $1,041,000 (residents) for an assessment of $13,500. Member Whited asked about water pooling in the cul -de' -sac and Mr. Millner said the new barrier -style curb and gutter will help; also noted were traffic merging issue at Tamarac and Vernon to which Mr. Millner said there is good sightline because there is a parking lot at the corner; and parking on Tamarac by park users and Mr. Houle said he, Mr. Nolan, and Mr. Eric Boettcher, recreation supervisor, met last week to talk about how to deal with this because it is a problem at all parks throughout the City. Member Janovy asked if traffic- related issues are referred to the TSC and Mr. Houle said Mr. Nolan will review them. Countryside F Current conditions include poor pavement, existing curb and gutter and storm sewer issues. Proposed improvements are new bituminous pavement, spot repair to curb and gutter, and storm sewer improvements. The proposed costs are $394,000 (City) and $384,400 (residents) for an assessment of $13,000 and $12,000. Morningside B Current conditions include poor pavement and existing curb and gutter. Proposed improvements are new bituminous pavement, spot repair to curb and gutter, sidewalk on the north side of 42 "d St. from France to St. Louis 2 Park border and also on Grimes Avenue (petitioned), and complete the missing segments on Scott Terrace and Alden Drive; plus, staff proposed a bituminous path around the park and'Park & Recreation likes the idea. Mr. Millner explained that the 42nd St. sidewalk is proposed for the north side because there are less conflicts and a section of the Grimes Avenue sidewalk will meander into the park behind some trees in order to save them. The proposed costs are $1,326,000 (City) and $1,250,000 (residents) for an assessment of $9,000. After discussion, the consensus is to make the sidewalk 5 ft. on W. 42nd St. and Grimes Avenue. Member Janovy said the area where the Grimes Avenue sidewalk will go behind the trees is filled with buck thorns and Mr. Millner said they will be removed. Scott Terrace and Alden Drive sidewalks would match the existing 3 ft. sidewalk. Strachauer Park B Current conditions include poor pavement and existing curb and gutter. Proposed improvements are new bituminous-pavement, spot repair to curb and gutter, adding a parking bay with a 5 ft. sidewalk along the park and complete a missing segment of sidewalk further down the street. Existing trees would be taken out and new ones planted. This was approved by the Park Board. The proposed costs are $759,000 (City) and $945,000 (residents) for an assessment of $10,500. 60th St. W. and Xerxes Avenue traffic issue was mentioned, and while it is not included in this project area, Mr. Houle said a meeting is scheduled for Sept. 24. He said Hennepin County is proposing bump -outs and a 170 ft. turn lane which would eliminate parking for 3 -4 residents. Member Janovy suggested assessing the City 3 REUs (instead of 2) since the parking bay is being added for the park. After discussion of all five projects, the consensus was to wait until October for final approval. Staff will submit a summary of changes noting the ones they will include. Traffic Safety Committee Report of September 4, 2013 After a brief discussion, the report was approved for forwarding to the City Council. Updates Student Members - None Bike Edina Task Force Member-Janovy said they are having discussions about their purpose, reviewing their bylaws and will be looking for new members and she is the new chair, temporarily. She said they are also working on finding out the status of the group as it relates the City and Mr. Nolan is helping with this; she said the group was started by City Council as a task force but she was told by manager Neal that they are an outside organization. Received minutes of August 8, 2013. Living Streets Working Group The two working groups each'met once to work on schedule and workplan. The $5,000 grant increased to $15,000 and a media company was hired'. One of the groups requested a sidewalk map and it was distributed to the ETC. Communications Committee — no update. CORRESPONDENCE AND PETITIONS - None CHAIR AND COMMISSION MEMBER COMMENTS Member Franzen said he was excited about Mr. Eastlirig's proposed plan to expand TH -62 but,was disappointed when checked and found out that it is not on MnDOT's schedule for reconstruction. Member lyer said he was in Cambridge, MA and was surprised at the number of bikers on the street, even late at 3 night, unlike you would see in Minneapolis which he considers to be a_ biking city. He wondered if this was because Minneapolis' bikers are routed to places like the. Greenway. Member Bass said she saw the draft Active Routes to School plan; Mr. Houle said he needs to follow-up with city manager Neal for an update since their meeting. She said also that she attended the Richfield Open Street Pedestrian Fest on Penn Avenue and it was awesome! Member Whited said she too attended the Fest and will be attending Bloomington's this weekend which is dubbed as an extension of Richfield's. Member Boettge said neighbors brought to her attention a stretch of sidewalk on Cornelia Drive that is not regularly maintained by the City. She asked what can be done for it to get regular maintenance like the one on W. 70th St. Mr. Houle said he would pass this on to Public Works. Member Janovy asked about the video camera on W. 44th St. and Mr. Houle said he would check with Mr. Nolan to see why it was out there. She asked what has happened on Wooddale Avenue since the bike lane was restriped and Mr. Houle said is he is not aware of any accidents and they will be collecting data this fall. Member Whited said there is a group in St. Louis Park called Safety in the Park that would like to give a presentation to the ETC on the Southwest Light Rail because what is happening in. their city could affect rail in Edina. Chair Nelson said Mayor Hovland sent out an email about a, seminar on Monitoring and Modeling Non - motorized Traffic in Minnesota on Oct. 3 and Mr. Houle said Mr., Nolan will be attending. He also said rail usage has increased in Edina and that he can hear the bell as late as 11:30 p.m. Mr. Houle said he has had no success reaching CP Rail so he's contacted MnDOT for assistance. He said they,need to improve the crossings and create a 'no whistle sound' area. STAFF COMMENTS Updates from director Houle: • Lake Edina and Braemar Hills Neighborhood Roadway Reconstruction are just about completed, while Mendelssohn will be completed within two weeks. There have been complaints about the amount of weeds growing with the grass — staff decided to:use a hydro seed method vs. sod; the hydroseed does produce weeds but after mowing, the grass blends in nicely and holds up better than sod. • There was some congestion on France:last week as Centerpoint completed their work at the right -in /right- out lane by Byerly's. The median at 72 "d is being rebuilt. • Vernon Avenue ^ - Hennepin County will be doing the,following: • A bike lane will be stripped.from the traffic signal at Gleason & Vernon to 53`d (they did not go down to TH -62 because a better termini is needed); • Designated left turn lane at certain intersections; • Crosswalk at 53`d and City to install a pedestrian activated stoplight; The bike lane will be 8 ft. with a 1 -2 ft. gutter pan; the City will work to reduce the speed limit from 40 mph to 30 mph after completion. • Edina Promenade Phase 4 (final phase) — URS is designing this final phase which will include designated bike lane from 70th St. to Gallagher and then east; water features; benches and artwork; and a joint water filtration project between the City and Nine Mile Creek Watershed District. The pedestrian path plan will be submitted to the ETC next month for review and comment. Construction is scheduled for summer, 2014. ADJOURNMENT Meeting adjourned. 4 ATTENDANCE TRANSPORTATIQNCOMMISSIONLAT?TENDANCE ;,.2013 }; ..._.__ • 1 NAME TERM J F M A M J J A S O N D Work Session # of Mtgs Attendance % Meetings/Work. Sessions Bass, Katherine 2/1/2014 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 7/18 Boett e, Emil 2/1/2014 100/ °, Braden, Ann* 2/1/2014 1 1 1 1 1 Franzen, Nathan 2/1/2016 1 1 7,00/°; I er, Su rya 2/1/2015 1 1 1 :y`, Janovy, Jennifer 2/1/2014 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 9, _V LaForce, Tom 2/1/2015 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Nelson, Paul 2/1/2016 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 10` V.2 100% .v. Schwei er, Steven student 1 1 1 3t) %, Sierks, Caroline student 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 S anhake, Dawn 2/1/2016 1 1 1 1 1_ ,5 Van Dyke, Jackson student Whited, Courtney 2/1/2015 1 1 •90/01 : �; REQUEST FOR PURCHASE IN EXCESS OF $20,000 /CHANGE ORDER - 0411 To: MAYOR AND COUNCIL From: Wayne D. Houle, Director of Engineering Date: October 14, 2013 A, •,v v • Tj Rroe Agenda Item #: IV. F. The Recommended Bid is © Within Budget ❑ Not Within Budget Subject: Request For Purchase — Wexford Road Storm Sewer Improvements — ENG 13 -21 NB Date Bid Opened or Quote Received: October 1, 2013 Company: G. L. Contracting Valley -Rich Company Palda & Sons, Inc. Northwest Asphalt, Inc. Recommended Quote or Bid: G. L. Contracting Bid or Expiration Date: January I, 2013 Amount of Quote or Bid: $21,548.40 $21,858.00 $22,898.90 $24,950.00 $21,548.40 General Information: This project is for the installation of two additional storm sewer structures and curb at 7032 Wexford Road at the end of the cul -de -sac. There is significant grade change from Down Road along Wexford Road towards 7032 Wexford Road. The resident at 7032 Wexford Road experiences storm water run -off that is greater than the current inlet capacity of the storm sewer. The overflow of the storm water travels through the front yard and at times has washed out the landscaping rock along the south side of the house. This issue has been worse during the fall when leaves fall and partially block the storm sewer inlet. The project is scheduled to be completed prior to winter freeze up. This project will be funded by the Storm Sewer Utility Fund. Staff recommends awarding the project to G.L. Contracting. GAPW\CENTRAL SVCS \ENG DIV\PROJECTS\IMPR NOS \STS405 Wexford Ave Impr\ADMIN\MISC \Item W.F. Request for Purchase - Wexford Rd STS Impr.docx City of Edina • 4801 W. 50th St. • Edina, MN 55424 To: MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL From: Ross Bintner, P.E., Environmental Engineer Date: October 14, 2013 'k O \�8 BB A�-�> Agenda Item ##: IV. G. Action Discussion ❑ Information ❑ Subject: Engineering Services — Flood Protection and Clean Water Improvement Study Action Requested: Authorize City Manager to approve attached proposal for Engineering Services. Information / Background: This project provides preliminary engineering and stormwater planning for -six project areas to help solve flooding and water pollution issues designated in the City of Edina 2011 Comprehensive Water Resources Management Plan ( CWRMP.) This assembly of projects includes those CWRMP priority items intended for study in the ENG -13 -01 1 flood protection and clean water improvement project, and those that synchronize well with existing Capital Improvement Program (CIP) project priorities in the ENG -13 -004 neighborhood reconstruction program. The following is a list of project areas with corresponding neighborhoods, CWRMP priority, CIP item number, and associated project intended for implementation. STS -406 Neighborhood CWRMP Study CIP Project Implementation Project Priority # Area Southdale B, E-1, E -10, E- ENG -13 -01 1 2014 Strachauer Park B, 2015 Flood Concord A, B 14, C -2 I, ENG -13 -004 Protection Strachauer Park B C -31 2 Highlands A E -3 ENG -13 -01 1 None 3 Chowen, Park, EA C -27 ENG -13 -01 1 2014 Strachauer Park B, 2016 Strachauer Strachauer Park Park A, 2018 Chowen Park A,B 4 Cahill E -6 ENG -13 -01 1 2015 Flood Protection 5 Indian Trails E -7, E -8 ENG -13 -01 1 2016 Valley View Road, 2015 Flood Protection 6 Normandale Park E -9 ENG -13 -01 1 None A, B 7 Morningside B C -23 ENG -13 -004 2014 Morningside B 8 Morningside A, E -16 ENG -13 -004 2016 White Oaks C, Morningside A. White Oaks A, B, C CIP item ENG -13 -01 1 initially considered CWRMP priority items E- 1, 3, 5 -10. This project is a slight modification to the CIP priority as it postpones E -3 and E -9 (grey in the table above) and adds projects that synchronize well with the scope of priority items E -I and E -10, in the swimming pool pond and north City of Edina • 4801 W. 50th St. • Edina, MN 55424 REPORT/ RECOMMENDATION Page 2 Cornelia drainage areas and other priority areas (bold in the table above). CIP ENG -13 -01 1 estimated $65,000 in expense in 2013 and 2014. Project areas I, 3, 4 and 5 total $66,545 so the items is slightly over budget. CWRMP priorities described above are bundled with project areas 7 and 8 to provide preliminary design for 2014 . and 2016 projects in the Morningside'and White Oaks neighborhoods these item total $54,605 and supports CIP ENG -13 -004, the neighborhood reconstruction program. Project area 8, The White Oaks neighborhood flood study was reprioritized from 2015 to 2014 at the direction of the City Council at the December 18, 2013 meeting. The total cost of these professional services is $121,150 Attachments: BARR Engineering Co. Proposal G:\PW\CENTRALSVCS\ENG DIV \PROJECTS \IMPR NOS \STS406 2013 -14 Flood Prot &Water Impr \ADMIN \131014 ENG -13 -011 Professional Services.docx resourceful. naturally.. engineering and environmental consultants October 3, 2013 Mr. Ross Bintner Environmental . Engineer City of Edina 7450 Metro Boulevard Edina, MN 55439 Request for Proposal # STS -406 Dear Mr. Bintner: Thank you for the opportunity to submit a proposal for preliminary engineering and stormwater planning services. for flood protection and water quality improvements as identified in Request for Proposal (RFP) Improvement #STS -406, which was received by Barr Engineering Co. on September 26, 2013. Based on Barr's knowledge and familiarity with the City's stormwater management infrastructure, goals, policies, and modeling tools, and Barr's expertise in hydrologic and hydraulic analysis and innovative stormwater design, we feel Barr is uniquely qualified to complete this work in conformance With the project goals identified in the RFP. Barr's project team will consist of Janna Kieffer as Principal -in- Charge, and Sarah Stratton as Project Manager. Janna will serve as a technical resource and oversee the QA/QC of the project deliverables and contractual obligations with Sarah overseeing the day -to -day activities associated with the project. Janna has worked on stormwater projects .within the City for over ten years including the City's 2003 Comprehensive Water-Resource Plan and subsequent update. Sarah worked on the XP -SWMM modeling of Nine Mile Creek 'in conjunction with the Nine Mile Creek Watershed District's 2006 Water Resource Management Plan and'is currently assisting with the City's review and response to the proposed Federal Emergency Management Agency floodplain mapping. Michael McKinney is a water resource specialist and,will be completing the hydrologic/hydraulic modeling for the eight Project Areas. Bob Obermeyer will serve as a technical resource to both the project team_ . and City staff. Additional information on project team members is available upon request. The attached scope of work provides the City with 1) a summary of the work to be completed for each project area, 2) a list of deliverables to be provided for each project area, 3) a schedule for completing the work for each project area and 4) a detailed cost for completing the work tasks described for each project area. We look forward to the opportunity of.working with the City on this project. If you have any questions or suggested modifications to the proposed scope of work, please contact me at 952- 832 -2785. Sincerely, Janna Kieffer P.E. Vice President Barr Engineering Co. A700 West 77th Street, Suite 200, Minneapolis, MN 55435 952.832.2600 www.barr.com Proposed Scope of Work The following pages summarize our proposed scope of work for study and preliminary design of stormwater improvements in six of the eight project areas identified within the September 26, 2013 Request for Proposals (Project Areas 1, 3, 4, 5, 7, 8). Two of the areas included in the RFP (Project areas 2, 6) have been eliminated at this time per instruction of City staff. Detailed modeling analyses will be conducted.for each of the project areas. Survey information collected by the City will be incorporated into the existing stormwater models to verify flood concerns. The models will be used to evaluate a variety of improvement alternatives, with preliminary designs and planning - level costs being developed for selected options in consultation with City staff. While the focus of the analyses will be on improving flood risk in the identified project areas, improvement options will attempt to provide additional benefits and service levels (i.e., volume reduction and/or pollutant removal) and achievement of multiple benefits will be considered in the design recommendations. Stormwater utility service levels to be considered include those identified in the - following permits, plans, and policies: • City of Edina Comprehensive Water Resources Management Plan (CWRMP) • Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL)'phosphorus reductions • Use Attainability'Analysis (UAA) implementation goals • Wellhead Protection Plan: (WHPP).implementation goals • Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan ( SWPPP) Minimum Control Measures (MCM) 5 and 6 o SWPPP MCM 1 and 2- education'and involvement . The design recommendations for the six Project Areas will be informed. by city policy ;summarized in the City's CWRMP, Comprehensive Plan, and Living Streets Policy. We recognize.the importance of engaging nearby residents and project, stakeholders in these projects, and will work;closely with City staff to assist in providing the desired level of public participation, for each of the Project Areas. Project Area #1 North Cornelia Catchments 26, 623 865 889 97 and 132 Project Description Project Area #1 is generally located east of France Avenue, west of Xerxes Avenue and north and south of T.H.62. These areas are tributary to the Mn/DOT T.H. 62 drainage system that discharges into the Swimming Pool Pond/North Lake Cornelia. The T.H. 62 infrastructure is currently the controlling factor in the management of storm water from this area. The primary objective of this evaluation is to identify opportunities within the upstream drainage area to reduce flooding in the identified catchments (NC-26, _62, _86, _88, _97, and _132) and provide runoff volume reduction and/or water quality treatment. Specific opportunities within this project area include upcoming street reconstruction in the Edina Terrace and Edina Bel -Air neighborhoods near Strachauer Park in 2014 and 2016, respectively. Soils within this area appear to have high infiltration potential. Drainage alterations to alleviate capacity issues within the T.H. 62 drainage system and improve flooding in the identified areas will be considered, but the scope of this evaluation does not include a comprehensive reevaluation of the T.H. 62 storm sewer system to Swimming Pool Pond/North Lake Cornelia. Work Tasks Our proposed work tasks, as outlined in Table 1, include evaluating options of providing volume reduction and/or upstream detention, and water quality treatment through the use of infiltration and/or rate control within City rights -of -way, within City owned property, Strachauer Park, and through the reduction of impervious areas through street rehabilitation projects. As part of the proposed work tasks, we will also evaluate revisions to the capacity and operations of the pumping systems in the basin at the southeast corner of York Avenue and West 64`h Street (NC-88). As part of the evaluation, consideration will be given to changes likely to occur as a result of future redevelopment in this area, including increases in the amount of impervious area in residential areas, resulting in increased volumes and rates of stormwater runoff to be managed. The future expansion of T.H. 62 and the potential elimination of the storm water storage that is currently being provided within the center medians of the roadway will be considered. ' Our work tasks include meetings with City staff to discuss opportunities for providing storm water management within this project area and meetings with other stakeholders (Mn/DOT, City-Council), as necessary. 2 Deliverables & Schedule Table 2 identifies the proposed deliverables and schedule for Project Area #1. This schedule assumes that survey data and other applicable information will be provided to Barr by October 15, 2013. Table 2. Summary of deliverables and timeline for Project Area #1 Task Deliverable Timeline Le. Meeting #lwith City staff to discuss existing conditions and potential options October 25, 2013 Li. Meeting #2 with City staff to discuss results of options analysis November 22, 2013 I.I. Draft report to City December 11, 2013 Lm Final report to City December 20, 2013' Ln- Attend City Council meeting As needed Lo Attend meeting with Mn/DOT As needed 3 Project Area #3: Lake Pamela Catchments 24 and 27 Project Description The stormwater model for the area of West 60th Street and Chowen Avenue, Project Area #3, predicts that a flooding problem occurs within this intersection, as well as in the backyard areas in the 5800 block of Chowen Avenue. The City will be providing survey of the storm sewer system in this area (pipe sizes, inverts, and rim elevations), and topographic survey of the low openings and backyard areas in the 5800 block of Chowen Avenue. This information will be used to determine if structures adjacent to these two areas are at risk of flooding. If so, we will investigate options to alleviate potential flooding problems without causing problems further downstream. Work Tasks Our proposed work tasks for Project Area #3, as outlined in Table 1, are divided into two phases, with completion of an alternatives analysis (Phase II) dependent on the outcome of the preliminary investigation (Phase 1). If an alternatives analysis (Phase H) is deemed necessary, options for consideration will include increased pipe capacity, redirection of drainage, installation of storm sewer to drain the backyard depression area, and providing storage and/or infiltration within the watershed. Specific opportunities within this project area include upcoming street reconstruction in the Edina Bel -Air and Harriet Manor in 2016 and 2018, respectively, as well as the potential coordination of volume reduction•benefits with the 2015 Pamela Park parking and field improvement project. The alternatives analysis will include the following special considerations: • Redevelopment within the study area is resulting in increased impervious area and increased runoff rate and volume • The project area is tributary to Lake Pamela, which is a Protected Water Wetland • The potential for flooding may not be transferred elsewhere, including backflow through existing storm sewer, and • Improvement options that involve private property must have the consent of the property owners Deliverables & Schedule Table 3 identifies the proposed deliverables and schedule for Project Area #3. This schedule assumes that survey data and other applicable information will be provided to Barr by October 15, 2013. Table 3. Summary of deliverables and timeline for Project Area #3 Task Deliverable Timeline 3.c. Existing conditions summary to City October 25, 2013 3.g. Meeting with City staff November 22, 2013 3J Draft report to City December 11, 2013 3.k Final report to City December 20, 2013 4 Project Area #4: Cahill and Dewey Hill Road (Southwest Ponds Catchment 46) Project Description The stormwater model for the area near Cahill Road and Dewey Hill Road, Project Area #4, indicates the potential for flooding in the low area on Cahill Road just north of Dewey Hill Road and in the parking lot of 7317 Cahill Road. Stormwater runoff from this area currently drains to the pond just north of Dewey Hill Road in Lewis Park (SWP_35), which discharges southward under Dewey Hill Road through a series of ponds and wetlands. The drainage system ultimately discharges into Nine Mile Creek, south of Interstate 494. We will evaluate opportunities to reduce the flood risk and improve water quality. Work Tasks Our proposed work tasks for Project Area #4 are summarized in Table 1. Our evaluation of flood risk reduction opportunities will include providing storage within the upstream drainage area, alteration/redirection of drainage to the east; modifications to storm sewer configuration, and alterations to the existing conveyance system between the series of ponds in the Southwest Ponds major watershed. Opportunities to incorporate water quality treatment will also lie evaluated. To verify whether ihe:low area along Cahill Road.still remains after recent road reconstruction as was modeled in 2003; the Cffy will provide available survey information' and/or construction plans road profiles along Cahll.Ro.ad: While no road reconstruction projects are anticipated in the,area through 2019, opportunities to provide additional flood protection and/or water quality improvement may exist within nearby Lewis Park, which is owned by the City. The alternatives'analysis will include the following special considerations: • The waterbodies on the north:and south sides of Dewey Hill Road are Protected Water Wetlands • A large portion of Lewis Parkis within the 500 -year floodplain • Impacts to recreational park uses /activities should be minimized, and • Improvement options that involve private property must have the consent of the property owners Deliverables & Schedule Table 4 identifies the proposed deliverables and schedule for Project Area #4. This schedule assumes that survey data and other applicable information will be provided to Barr by November 15, 2013. Table 4. Summary of deliverables and timeline for Project Area #4 Task Deliverable Timeline 4.c. Existing conditions summary to City December 31, 2013 4.g. Meeting with City staff to discuss results March 3, 2014 4.k. Draft report to City April 1, 2014 4.1. Final report to City May 16,2014' 4.m Attend stakeholder meeting As needed Project Area #5: Sally Lane and Paiute Pass Area (Nine Mile South Branch Catchments 70, 83, and 84) Project Description Project Area #5 encompasses the area that drains to the intersection of Paiute Pass and Sally Lane. The stormwater model for this area indicates potential flooding at this intersection as well as in a.backyard depression area at 7009 and 7013 Sally Lane. The City will be-providing a detailed topographic survey of this intersection and backyard depression area, enabling available storage to be determined as well as low entry elevations for the structures adjacent to the low areas and overflow elevations between the street and nearby low areas. This information will be used to determine if structures adjacent to these two areas are at risk of flooding. If so, we will investigate options to alleviate potential flooding problems without causing problems further downstream. Work Tasks Our proposed work tasks for Project Area #5, as outlined in Table 1, are divided into two.phases. In Phase I, we will use survey information provided by the City to re- evaluate flood elevations and determine if structures are at risk of flooding. If the Phase I analysis indicates flooding risk, Phase H will include an alternatives analysis to identify and evaluate options to reduce the risk of flooding in this area and provide water quality treatment. If an alternatives analysis (Phase II) is deemed necessary, options for consideration will include 1) increased pipe capacity, 2) regrading to provide controlled positive overflow swales to alleviate flooding in the low inundation areas, and 3) providing storage and/or infiltration within the watershed. Based on previous modeling, flooding in these areas appears to be a result of localized storm sewer capacity limitations, versus capacity restrictions within the low area west of Sally Lane (Braemar Branch).. However, if the alternatives analysis proceeds, consideration will be taken regarding the Braemar Branch being within the regulatory flood plain and draining to a wetland downstream of the Valley View crossing. The alternatives analysis will also include the following special considerations: • The potential for flooding may not be transferred elsewhere, including backflow through existing storm sewer, and Improvement options that involve private property must have the consent of the property owners As part of this work task, it may be necessary to consult with potentially affected property owners. A meeting with stakeholders has been included in the work task summary. rel Deliverables & Schedule Table 5 identifies the proposed deliverables and schedule for Project Area #5. This schedule assumes that survey data and other applicable information will be provided to Barr by November 15, 2013. Table 5. Summary of deliverables and timeline for Project Area #5 Task Deliverable . Timeline 5.c. Existing conditions summary to City December 31, 2013 5.g. Meeting with City staff March 3, 2014 5j. Draft report to City April 1, 2014 51. Attend stakeholder meeting As needed 5.1 Final report to City May 16, 2014 7 Project Area #7: Morningside Catchment 17 Project Description The stormwater model for Project Area #7 indicates potential flooding in a backyard depression area at 4308 France Avenue. Currently this low area is land- locked and is not. served by City storm sewer. The City will be providing a detailed topographic survey of the backyard depression area, as well as low entry elevations- for the adjacent structures and an overflow elevation between the low area and street. This information will be used to verify if adjacent structures are at risk of flooding. If so, we will investigate options to alleviate the potential flooding problem without causing problems further downstream. Work Tasks Our proposed work tasks for Project Area #7, as outlined in Table 1, are split into two phases. In Phase I, we will use survey information provided by the City to re- evaluate the flood elevation and determine if structure(s) are at risk of flooding. If the Phase I analysis verifies flooding risk, Phase H will include an alternatives analysis to identify and evaluate options to reduce the risk of flooding in this area, including installation of storm sewer to drain the backyard area and providing additional storage and/or infiltration. Specific opportunities within this project area include upcoming street reconstruction in the Morningside neighborhood in 2014. The alternatives analysis for Project Area #7 will include the following special considerations: • Improvement options may require acquisition of easements on private property • The project area ultimately drains to Weber Park Pond, which is currently within the 100 -year floodplain and there are adjacent structures that are currently in an area of potential flooding • France Avenue and the.storm sewer system along France Avenue is owned by Hennepin County and borders both Edina and Minneapolis • The potential for flooding may not be transferred elsewhere, and • Improvement options that involve private property must have the consent of the property owners As part of this work task, it may be necessary to consult with potentially affected property owners. A meeting with stakeholders has been included in the work task summary. Deliverables & Schedule Table 6 identifies the proposed deliverables and schedule for Project Area #7. This schedule assumes that survey data and other applicable information will be provided to Barr by October 15, 2013. Table 6. Summary of deliverables and timeline for Project Area #7 Task Deliverable Timeline 7.c. Existing conditions summary to City October 25, 2013 V. Meeting with City staff November 22, 2013 Th. Draft report to City December 11, 2013 71. Attend stakeholder meeting As needed 7.j. Final report to City December 20, 2013 Project Area #8o White Oaks (Minnehaha North Catchments 1, 11, 65, and 66) Project Description Project Area #8 is The White Oaks Area of Edina that is approximately bounded by Sunnyside Road, on the.north, West 48th Street, on the south, France Avenue, on the east, and Arden Avenue, on the west. There are four wetland/stonn water basins and/or low areas located within this project area identified as MHN_1, MNH_11, MHN_65 and MHN_66 in the City's Comprehensive Water Resources Management Plan. These wetland areas are currently land - locked and have been identified as an area of concern for .flood potential based on the 100-year frequency, 10 -day snowmelt event. In addition, a past City - sponsored drainage alteration and increases in impervious surface from new and re- development within the drainage area have increased the hydrologic loading to MHN_1 wetland, causing a change in the character of the wetland that has been of special concern to nearby residents. Water quality is also a concern, both the quality of water within these wetlands and potential impacts if this water is discharged downstream to Minnehaha Creek. Currently, the phosphorus load allocation identified by the Minnesota Pollution "Control Agency as part of the draft Minnehaha Creek Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL) and the relevant phosphorus load reductions required of the City do not consider this land - locked. area as a contributing area. Therefore, additional discharge and associated phosphorus load to Minnehaha Creekfrom this area would . require treatment (or equivalent treatment elsewhere within the watershed). Work Tasks Given the complexity of the water level fluctuations within these basins, potential for flooding due to their land - locked nature, and water quality considerations, we are proposing a more comprehensive analysis to support multifaceted improvement options. A likely, improvement includes installation of a pumping system to provide flood control to the area, at a minimum. The proposed work tasks are summarized in Table 1 and include completing a water balance for the area, as per the recommendation in Barr's September 10, 2012 correspondence to the City. It is recommended that continuous water level recorders be installed within the four wetland areas and monitored for a minimum of one year to provide information on the interaction of groundwater and surface water in these basins and how water levels in these basins respond to precipitation and runoff events. The work tasks summarized in Table 1 also include evaluation of upstream storage /infiltration, impervious surface reduction, and pumping scenarios to optimize flood control and reduce water level fluctuations. For evaluation of pumping scenarios, alternate directions for discharge of pumped water will be considered in consultation with City staff. C9 We understand that engagement of area residents as part of this analysis is especially important and have included two meetings with residents in the scope of work. Additional special considerations for the alternatives analysis include: • An upcoming road reconstruction project for a portion of Project Area #8 is planned for 2017 (Towns Road and Berkeley Heights neighborhoods) • The project area ultimately drains to Minnehaha Creek, which may require involvement of the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District as a stakeholder • The potential for flooding may not be transferred elsewhere • Improvement options that involve private property must have the consent of the property owners, and o Improvement options may require acquisition of easements on private property Deliverables & Schedule Table 7 identifies the proposed deliverables and schedule for Project Area #8. This schedule assumes that survey data and other applicable information will be provided to Barr by November 15, 2013. Table 7. Summary of deliverables and timeline for Project Area #8 Task Deliverable Timeline 8.e. Meeting #lwith City staff to discuss existing conditions and potential options December 31, 2013 8.1. Meeting #1 with stakeholders to discuss ongoing analysis and options for evaluation Spring 2014 8.j. Meeting #2 with City staff to discuss results of alternatives analysis October 1, 2014 8.1. Meeting #2 with stakeholders to discuss results of alternatives analysis October 15, 2014 8.m. Draft report to City November 11, 2014 8.n. Final report to City December 31, 2014 8.0. Attend City Council meeting As needed ffil Terms of Agreement Barr will complete the proposed scope of work in accordance with the Master Agreement for Professional Engineering Services. 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 schedule and 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. C Janna M. Kieffer Its Vice President Accepted this _ day of , 20_ CITY OF EDINA By Its 11 Table L S.-m— of Work Tasks and Estimated Crris Work Tasks Principal Engineer Senior Engineer/ Scientist Senior Deslgne I Engineer Sp�iRl�Hslt T h [elan n -nvI nmental Scientist Total Hours Elpenses Total Cost P Fl. I 7-7�iuv � K 7I - ", ,- _ Site review and review of existing model I 1 0 0 4 0 0 6 $555 Coiled Information from City (topographic survey at NC 98, NC 89 pumping Info, etc) and update erdstlng conditions model I i 0 0 12 0 0 14 $IASS Run existing conditions model for 1) original modeling assumptions, 2) Increased residential Imperviousness assumptions, and 3) Atlas 14 precipitation. Summarize results. 0 0 0 0 3 0 0 3 S225 Intem.1 discussion and Identification of potential flood Improvement scenarios, including water quality Improvements _ 3 0 0 2 0 0 6 $735 Meet w/City staff to discuss and gain consensus on Improvement options to be evaluated and applicable stakeholders (includes preparation for and attendance at meeting) 4 2 0 0 2 0 0 a $990 Revise and run XP-SW MM model for up to four flood Improvement options (assumes each Improvement option will be evaluated for 2. original model assumptions, 2. Increased residential Impervious assumptions, and 3. Atlas 14 precipitation) 6 4 0 0 40 0 0 so $4,350 Use PIS or other available models to quantify water quality benefits of Improvement option. I 1 0 0 9 0 0 10 $855 Summarize and prepare for presentation of results 3 3 0 0 18 0 0 24 $2.115 Meeting w/City to discuss Improvement scenario results. include stakeholders as Identified by City staff. 1 1 0 0 2 0 0 4 $405 Prepare cost estimatesfor up to four flood Improvement options 9 1 24 a 0 0 0 34 S4,455 Prepare cost estimates for up to two water quality improvemieret options (if Independent of flood Improvements) 3 1 12 0 2 0 '0 is 52,175 Prepare draft report for review by City gaff 8 4 0 1 0 26 1 .24 0 1 S2 $300 1 $4,980 Finalize report based an comments received from the City 3 1 0 0 4 8 0 11 $300 51,785 Attend City Council meeting. If necessary (includes preparation and attendance) 4 2 0 4 0 0 10 $1.1401 Attend meeting with Mn/WT. If necessary (includes preparatin and attendance) 4 2 4 0 0 10 51,140 Project Area 01 Total 51 25 36 121 32 0 265 $600 $27,060 Pro act Area A3: lake Pamela �=-274;�d 27'M, Phase 1• Prenmtnary Investigation Site review and review of existing model 1 0 0 4 0 0 6 $555 Collect Information from City (survey of storm sewer, topographic survey of backyard depression area and low entry elevations) and update existing conditions model I D 0 0 7 0 0 8 $650 Run existing conditions model for 2) original modeling assumptions, 2) Increased residential Imperviousness assumptions, and 3) Atlas 14 precipitation, summarize results and assess/verify flooding risk, In consultation with City staff. 1 2 0 0 6 0 0 9 $935 Subtotal 3 3 0 0 17 0 0 23 $0 $2.040 Phase II: Alternatives Ams"s Internal discussion and identification of potential flood reduction and water quality Improvement scenarios 0 0 0 2 0 0 4 $440 Revise and run XP-SWMM model for up to four food Improvement options (assumes each Improvement option will be evaluated for L original model assumptions, 2. Increased residential Impervious assumptions. and 3. Atlas 14 precipitation)_ -2 1 2 0 0 22 0 0 15 $1,2851 Use PS or other available models to quantify water quality benefits of Improvement option (assumes one water quality BMP will be modeled) 1 0 0 0 4 0 0 S $425 Meeting with City staff to summarize analysts of Improvement options and obtain direction for preparing cost estimates 2 2 0 0 6 0 0 10 060 Prepare cost estimates for flood Improvement options (assumes costs for up to two options) 4 0 14 0 2 0 0 20 SZ450 Prepare cost estimate for water qmllty Improvement (assumes costs for one option) 1 0 4 0 2 0 0 7 5755 Prepare draft report (memo format) for review by City staff 3 2 0 0 8 4 0 17 $1,675 Finalize report based on co, ments recelved from the City 2 2 0 0 4 1 0 8 $100 $895 Subtotal 16 7— IB 0 40 5 0 86 $200 58,885 • Project Area 03 Total 19 10 18 0 57 5 0 109 Table 1_ Summary n/ w,s TaeLe — e—,.. -- -- Senior Senior Work Tasks PrindDal Engineer/ Senior Water Resource Envi m ronental Engineer Sclentbt Designer Engineer specialist Technldan Scientist Total Houm Expenses Total Cost 4 Pro act Area tl4: Cah1i1 and Dewey HWRoad Southwest Ponds Catchment 46 - a Site review and review cf existing model and Southwest Edna Storm Sewer report It Collect Information from City (mad I 1 0 0 5 0 0 7 $630 survey or profiles for Cahill Drive) and update existing odndtlons model 2 0 0 0 5 0 c Run existing conditions model for 1) original modeling assumptions, 2) Increased residential Imperviousness assumptions, and 3) Atlas 14 precipitation. Summarize 0 7 $665 results. 1 Internal 1 1 0 0 5 0 0 7 $630 discussion and Identification of potential Rood Improvement scenarios, Including water quality Improvements 3 1 0 0 2 Revise and run XP -SW MM model for up to four flood Improvement options (assumes each Improvement option will be evaluated for 1. original model assumptions, 2. a D 0 6 $735 Increased residential Impervious assumptlons, and 3. Atlas 14 precipitation) 6 4 a Summarize output and prepare for presentation of results 0 0 32 0 0 42 $3,750 1 Meeting w /atyto discuss improvement scenario rnuits Include stakeholders as Identified by City staff. I 1 0 0 8 0 0 1 Sass Use PS or other available models to quantity water quality benefits of Improvement options (assumes evaluation of up to two BIvIN Identified In consultation with City t staff) 3 2 0 0 3 0 0 8 $940 1 Pre are cost estimates for up to two Rood Improvement options, Identified In consultation with City staff I 0 0 0 6 0 0 7 $575 Prepare cost estimate for water quality Improvement (assumes for 2 1 14 0 2 0 0 19 ,290 $2,290 costs one option, If independent of flood control Improvements) 1 0 4 0 1 0 0 c Prepare draft report for review by City staff 7 Flnallze based 4 1 4 1 0 0 I 12 I 16 0 36 $300 $3,500 report on comments received from the City (Attend additional stakeholder meetlng, as necessary (includes preparation and attendance) 3 1 0 0 4 e 0 16 $300 51,785 2 2 0 0 4 0 0 8 $850 project Area tl4 Total 30 18 18 1 0 90 24 0 190 $600 $27,960 i project Area 05: Sally lane and Paiute Pas area (vine Mlle South Branch Catchments 70,93, and 94 - Phase 1: Preliminary Imrestigadon Site review and review of existing model 1 Collecr Information hots City (topographic survey of low area at InterseNon, backyard depression area, low entry elevations and existing overflow elevations) and u date existing conditlgnI model 1 0 0 2 0 0 4 $q05 1 Run existing conditions model for 1) original modeling assumptions, 2) Increased residential Imperviousness assumptions, and 3) Atlas 14 precipitation, summarize 1 0 0 6 0 0 8 $705 results and assessiverify flooding risk. In consultation with Clry staff. 1 2 0 0 6 0 0 9 $835 Subtotal 3 4 0 0 14 0 0 21 $0 $1,945 Phase II: Alternatives Analyst, Internal discussion and Identification of potential flood reduction and water quality Improvement scenarios Revise and run %P -SWMM motlel for up m three flood Improvement options (assumes each Improvement option will be evaluated for 1. original model assumptions, 2. 1 1 0 0 2 0 0 4 $445 Increased resldentlal impervious assumptions, and 3. Atlas 14 precipitation) 1 2 0 0 10 0 0 13 $1,135 Use P8 or other available models to quantity water quanty benefits of infiltration lmpmvement option (assumes one BMP vAll be modeled) 1 0 0 0 4 0 0 5 425 Meeting with Cry staff to summarize analysis of Improvement options and obtain direction for preparing cost estimates 2 3 0 0 4 0 0 9 940 940Prepare Prepare cost estimates for up to two flood Improvement options, Identified In consultation with City staff 3 E$1,735 1 8 0 2 0 0 14 cost estimate for water gcmlity Improvement( assumes costsfor one option, if independent of flood control Improvements) 1 0 4 0 2 0 0 7 755 Prepare draft report (memo format) for review by City staff 3 2 0 0 8 4 0 17 $1,575 Attend addtlonal stakeholder meeting, if necessary (includes preparation and attendance) 2 2 0 0 4 0 0 e 5850 Finalize report based on comments received from the City and stakeholders 2 1 0 0 4 1 0 8 $795 Subtotal I6 12 12 1 0 40 5 0 85 SD 655 Project Am 115 Total 19 16 12 1 0 54 5 0 106 SO $ID,fi9B Table 1. Summary of Work Tasks and Estimated Costs Senor Senior Work Tasks Prlydpal Engineer/ Senior Water Resource EOWronmemal 7 Prole4 Area R7: MorMngslde CotNmmt.17 - � - - Engineer Scientist Designer Engineer S eciallst Technician Scientist Tohl Hours Expenses Total Cost Phase I: Preliminary Investigation - a Site review, and review of existing model 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 2 $200 bCollect information from City (topographic survey of backyard depression area, low entry elevation, existing overflow elevatlons).0 date existing conditions model. 0 Run existing mndltian, model for 1) original modeling assumptlons, 2) Increased residential Imperviousness assumptions, and 3) Atlas 14 precipitation, summarlxe 0 0 0 3 0 0. 3 $225 c results and assess/verifv flooding risk, in consultation with City staff. 1 0 0 0 4 0 0 0 0 s 10 $0 $bzs $BS0 Subtotal Phase II: Altematives Aw Is 2 0 0 0 8 d Internal discussion and Identifl ®don of potential Rood reduction and water 4ualiry improvement scenarios Revise and run XP -SWMM model for up to two Rood Improvement options assumes each Improvement option will be evaluated for 1. original model assumptions, 2. ( 1 1 0 0 1 0 0 3 $370 e Increased resldemlal imperylous assumptions, and 3. Atlas 14 precipitation) Meeting with ary s[affto summarize analysis of Improvement options and obtain direction forpreparing tort estimates 1 1 0 0 8 0 0 10 $BSS g Prepare cost estimates for flood Improvement options (assumes ars m for up to two options) 3 3 0 0 3 0 0 y $ h Prepare draft report (memo format) for review, by City story 2 1 14 0 2 0 0 19 $2,290 1 Attend stakeholder meeting, ((necessary (Includes reparatlon and attendance) 2 2 0 0 4 4 0 12 $100 $1,250 J Finalize report based on comments received from the pry and stakeholders 2 1 0 0 4 0 0 7 $690 2 Z 0 0 4 1 0 9 $100 53,025 Subtotal 13 11 14 0 26 5 0 69 $200 $5,780 Project Area 07 Tam[ 35 11 14 0 34 5 9 Project Area 49: Flooding Issues In White Oaks (Mlnnehaha North Catchments 1,11, 65, antl 66 0 79 $200 $6,630 Review recent analyses completed for White Oaks (Harts land - locked analysis as part of CWRMP and M1IN_3 malysls In summer 1120121 and existing models (XP- aSWMM and MS Excel spreadsheet for land-locked analysis) Run existing mntlmons model for 1) original modeling assumptions, 2) increased residential Impemlousness assumptions, and 3) Atlas 14 1 2 0 0 6 0 0 9 $835 precipitation. Summarize z results for IOOyeat. l day snowmelt event Internal discussion and Identification of Potential flood Improvement scenarios, Including water 4uallry improvements 1 2 0 0 6 0 0 9 $835 I Wetland delineation and MNRAM assessment of four wetland basins 5 3 0 0 4 0 0 12 $1,475 Meet w/ Clry staff to discuss andgetmnsensm on improvement options to be evaluated and applicable stakeholders (includes for 0 0 0 0 0 0 32 32 $3,360 meeting) preparation and attendanre at FWater batanre,lnciuding monitoring and analysis of data to develop water balance spreadsheet model 5 3 0 0 4 0 0 12 $1,475 =lent Rev6e and run XP -SWMM model for up to four flood Improvement options (assumes each Improvement option will be evaluated for 1. original model 5 3 0 40 4 120 0 172 $]5,675 assumptions, 2. I Increased residential Impervious assumptlons, and 3. precipitation) i Summarize and prepare for presentation of results 5 5 0 0 32 0 0 42 $3,675 I Use P9 or other available models to estimate potential phosphorus laadstp Mlnnehaha Creek resullingfrom pumpingsrenaria(s) 3 3 0 0 12 0 0 18 $1,665 Meeting w /CI to discuss Improvement scenario results 2 2 0 0 8 0 0 12 $1,110 Prepare preliminary cost estimates lmates for up to three flood Improvement options 2 0 0 4 0 0 9 $1,015 Meetings w /stekeholdersto report results of analysis and discuss options (assumes preparation forand attendanre at two meetings) 3 1 24 0 0 0 0 28 $3,465 Prepare draft report for review, by ply story 9 4 0 0 12 8 0 32 $3,190 Finalize report based on comments reed from the Ciry, Including necessary revisions to cost estimates lmates 4 0 4 24 20 1 61 $300 S5.785 Attend CI Council meetln &If necessary (Includes....moon and attentlanre) 3 1 8 0 4 9 0 24 $2,445 8 4 0 0 0 0 0 12 $300 $1,980 Proleci Area n Total 60 39 32 44 120 156 33 484 $600 $47,975 Total Cost for Protect Areas 1, 3.5, 7 -8 RBI' OORT / R COO MM : NDATION o e,f�" m F �O v u ,NCORPOT�`��O o 1668:. To: MAYOR AND COUNCIL .., Agenda Item #: I V. H. From: Lisa Schaefer, HR Director Action Discussion ❑ Date: October 14, 2013 Information ❑ Subject: Human Rights and Relations Commission Request for Training Action Requested: Authorize training expenses for the Human Rights and Relations Commission Information / Background: The Edina Human Rights and Relations Commission's goal is to be on the forefront of Human Rights Issues to provide excellent advice to the Edina City Council on behalf of Edina's residents on issues important to the community. To effectively advocate for basic human rights and ,need in our community, members of the HRRC need to have the most current information available. The Minnesota Department of Human Rights is hosting the 2013 Human Rights Symposium at the University of Minnesota on Thursday, December 56, 2013 as part.of Human Rights Week in Minnesota. The Edina Human Rights and Relations Commission would like three of its Commissioners to attend the event. Registration is $85.00 per participant; the Chair requests that up to $255.00 be allocated to this event. There.are 2013 HRRC funds currently available because fewer funds were spent on the 2013 Days of Remembrance event than anticipated.. ATTACHMENTS: None: ICity of Edina 4801 W. 50'.St Edina, MN 55424 riR �POO RT / R :COO MM ��NDATIOO N To: MAYOR AND COUNCIL Agenda Item #: IV.1. From: Cary Teague, Community Development Director Action 0 Discussion [� Date: October 14, 2013 Information Subject: Resolution No. 2013 -105 Approving the submittal of portions of the 1 -35W/1 -494 Interchange Improvement Project for Consideration by the State of Minnesota 2013 Corridors of Commerce Program. Action Requested: Adopt the attached resolution 2013 -105. Information /Background: The 1 -494 Corridor Commission strongly supports the 135W/1494 interchange improvement project, and requests the City of Edina to also support the project and funding. (See attached letter. from the 1 -494 Corridor Commission.) 1 -494 CORRIDOR COMMISSION lNec(ru itt� "1' -allic Conc;PStron �--�` Bloomington . Eden Prairie . Edina Minnetonka . Richfield October 9, 2013 Charles A. Zelle Commissioner Minnesota Department of Transportation 395 John Ireland Boulevard St. Paul, MN 55155 -1899 Dear Commissioner Zelle: The I -494 Corridor Commission strongly supports the I -35W/1 -494 interchange improvement project for consideration by the State of Minnesota 2013 Corridors of Commerce program. The Corridor Commission believes the project meets the legislative goals for this program by providing additional highway capacity on segments where there are currently bottlenecks in the system and improving the movement of freight and reducing barriers to commerce. • Metro Capacity — Over 500,000 vehicles travel through the interchange daily - The interchange is heavily congested for 4 -5 hours per day - The accident rate is more than double the Metro average crash rate • Interregional Corridor Capacity - Interstate 35 connects states from Minnesota to Texas • Statewide Freight Bottlenecks —Connections to the Metro core, as well as throughout 494 -694 - Both I -35W and I -494 are major freight corridors • IRC System Preservation —The I -35W /I -494 interchange will remain in the top busiest interchanges in the state There have been very few improvements to the interchange since it was constructed over 50 years ago. The I -35W /I -494 interchange improvement project is not included in the State Transportation Improvement Program, though it is consistent with the Minnesota Go Vision, the guiding principles, and the objectives put forth in the Statewide Multimodal Transportation Plan. The I -494 Corridor Commission supports the submittal and funding for the 1 -35W/1 -494 interchange improvement project to the maximum extent possible as a project for the 2013 Corridors of Commerce program. Respectfully, d Aho Chair, I -494 Corridor Commission 5701 Normandale Road, Suite 322 • Edina, MN 55424 • 952 - 848 -4947 . www.494corridor.org RESOLUTION NO. 2013-105 APPROVING THE SUBMITTAL OF PORTIONS OF THE I -35W/I -494 INTERCHANGE IMPROVEMENT PROJECT FOR CONSIDERATION BY THE STATE OF MINNESOTA 2013 CORRIDORS OF COMMERSE PROGRAM BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Edina, Minnesota, as follows: Section 1. BACKGROUND & FINDINGS. 1.01 WHEREAS, the I -494 Corridor Commission supports the funding, building, operating, and maintain of a robust multimodal transportation system that reduces congestion, improves safety, and enables the metropolitan area, and the State of Minnesota to better compete with the other areas of the United States and the world;, and 1.02 WHEREAS, the Minnesota Legislature created the Corridors of Commerce program by authorizing the sale of up to $300 million in new bonds for the construction, reconstruction, and improvement of trunk highways via the 2013 Session Law, Chapter 117; and 1.03 WHERAS; the Corridors of Commerce program establishes two major goals: (1) to provide additional highway capacity on segments where there are currently bottlenecks in the transportation system, and (2) to improve the movement of freight and reduce barriers of commerce; and 1.04 WHEREAS, the I -35W /I -494 interchange improvement project is not currently included in the State Transportation Improvement Program; and 1.05 WHEREAS, the I -35W /I -494 interchange improvement project is consistent with the Minnesota Go Vision, the guiding principles, and the objectives put forth in the Statewide Multimodal Transportation Plan; and Section 2. APPROVAL NOW THEREFORE, it is hereby resolved by the City Council of the City of Edina supports the submittal and funding for the 1-35W /1494 interchange improvement project to the maximum extent possible as a project for the 2013 Corridors of Commerce program. CITY OF EDINA .4801 West 50th Street . Edina, Minnesota 55424 www.EdinaMN.gov . 952 - 927 -8861 • Fax 952- 826 -0390 . RESOLUTION NO. 2013-105 Page Two Adopted this _ day of , 2013. ATTEST: Debra A. Mangen, City Clerk STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF HENNEPIN CITY OF EDINA )SS 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 , 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 Agenda Item V. A. PROCLAMATION EXTRA MILE DAY 2013 WHEREAS, Edina, Minnesota is a community which acknowledges that a special vibrancy exists within the entire community when its individual citizens collectively "go the extra mile" in personal effort, volunteerism, and service; and WHEREAS, Edina,. Minnesota is a community which encourages its citizens to maximize their personal contribution to the community by giving of themselves wholeheartedly and with total effort, commitment, and conviction to their individual ambitions, family, friends, and community; and WHEREAS, Edina, Minnesota is a community which chooses to shine alight on and celebrate individuals and organizations within its community who "go the extra mile" in order to make a difference and lift up fellow members of their community; and WHEREAS, Edina, Minnesota acknowledges the mission of Extra Mile America to create 400 Extra Mile cities in America and is proud to support "Extra Mile Day" on November 1, 2013. NOW THEREFORE, I, James B. Hovland, Mayor of Edina, Minnesota do hereby proclaim November 1, 2013 to be EXTRA MILE DAY And I urge each individual in the community to take time on this day to not only "go the extra mile" in his or her own life; but to also acknowledge all those'who are inspirational in their efforts and commitment to make their organizations, families, community, country, or world a better place. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set by hand and caused the Seal of the City of Edina to'be affixed this 14th day of October in the year of our Lord two thousand thirteen. James B. Hovland, Mayor To: Mayor and City Council From: Laura Adler, Water Resources Coordinator o (Le r� • ,�roRpORp`�SO S 1888 Agenda Item #: VI. A. i. Action Discussion ❑ Date: October 14, 2013 Information ❑ Subject: Aquatic Weeds Improvement No. AQ -13 — Resolution No. 2013 -88 Action Requested: Adopt the proposed special assessments for aquatic vegetation control of: I. Arrowhead Lake 2. Indianhead Lake 3. Minnehaha Creek Mill Pond Information / Background: Each year homeowners' groups request that the City contract for aquatic vegetation management services on their behalf. The groups agree to pay for these services by special assessment. This allows a single company to complete treatments in an efficient and coordinated manner, instead of each homeowner hiring a separate company to complete treatments only in front of their individual property. It also ensures that each property owner is paying for an equal share of the treatments. The three lakes that currently request this arrangement are Arrowhead Lake, Indianhead Lake, and Minnehaha Creek Mill Pond. Laura Adler, Water Resources Coordinator, administers the aquatic vegetation management program. All assessments include a $3.00 per property administrative fee. Staff proposes a one -year assessment period for each special assessment, per the City's Special Assessments Policy. The City contracts for treatment for aquatic vegetation and algae for both Arrowhead and Indianhead Lakes. The treatments include an aquatic herbicide and lake dye, and the City contracts for the maintenance of and electrical service supply for aerators to help further control the aquatic vegetation and to oxygenate the water to help prevent winter fish -kill. The aquatic herbicide and aerator use require permits from the Department of Natural Resources (DNR) each year. The proposed assessment for Arrowhead Lake is $228.63 for each of the 36 adjacent properties. The proposed assessment for Indianhead Lake is $175.27 for each of the 33 adjacent properties. City of Edina • 4801 W. 50th St. • Edina, MN 55424 REPORT / RECOMMENDATION The 36 Arrowhead Lake property addresses are: . 6327 Timber Tr. 2. 6328 Timber Tr. 3. 6318 Mcintyre Pt. 4. 6314 Mcintyre Pt. S. 6310 McIntyre Pt 6. 6401 McCauley Circle 7. 6405 McCauley Circle 8. 6409 McCauley Circle 9. 6416 McCauley Circle 10. 6411 McCauley Circle 11. 6316 Post Lane 12. 6312 Post Lane 13. 6320 Post Lane 14. 6443 McCauley Terrace 15. 6700 Indian Hills Rd. 16. 6804 Indian Hills Rd. 17. 6808 Margarets Lane 18. 6433 Margarets Lane 19. 6437 Margarets Lane The 33 Indianhead Lake property addresses are: . 6617 Dakota Trl. 2. 6613 Dakota Trl. 3. 6901 Dakota Trl. 4. 6905 Dakota Trl. 5. 6909 Dakota Tr1. 6. 6629 Dakota Trl. 7. 6625 Dakota Trl. 8. 6621 Dakota Trl. 9. 6409 Indian Hills Rd. 10. 6405 Indian Hills Rd. 1 1. 6401 Indian Hills Rd. 12. 6620 Cheyenne Trl. 13. 6700 Cheyenne Tr1. 14. 6708 Cheyenne Trl. 15. 6624 Cheyenne Trl. 16. 6704 Cheyenne Trl. 17. 6928 Valley View Rd. 20. 6728 Indian Hills Rd. 21. 6720 Indian Hills Rd. 22. 6708 Arrowhead Pass 23. 6712 Arrowhead Pass 24. 6800 Indian Hills Rd. 25. 6429 Margarets Lane 26. 6616 Indian Hills Cir. 27. 6612 Indian Hills Rd. 28. 6520 Indian Hills Rd. 29. 6436 Timber Ridge 30. 6431 Timber Ridge 31. 6512 Indian Hills Rd. 32. 6516 Indian Hills Rd. 33. 6604 Indian Hills Rd. 34. 6432 Timber, Ridge 35. 6311 McIntyre -Pt, 36. 6322 Mcl "ntyre Pt. 18. 6932 Valley View Rd. 1.9. 6936 Valley View Rd. 20. 6940 Valley View Rd. 21. 6816 Cheyenne Cir. 22. 6812 Cheyenne Cir -23. 6808 Cheyenne Cir. 24. 6804 Cheyenne Tr. 25. 6800 Cheyenne Trl. 26. " 6920 Valley View Rd. 27. 6801 Dakod, Trl. 28. 6805 Dakota Trl. 29. 6809' Dakota Trl. 30. 6813 Dakota Trl. 31. 6817 Dakota Trl. 32. 6926 Valley View Rd. 33. 6820 Cheyenne Cir The City contracts for the mechanical removal of aquatic vegetation on the Minnehaha Creek Mill Pond. Mechanical removal, as opposed to aquatic herbicide treatment, is required on Mill Pond because it is a portion of Minnehaha Creek; any aquatic herbicide applied to the Mill Pond would travel downstream Page 2 f 1 REPORT / RECOMMENDATION Page 3 through Minnehaha Creek. Mechanical removal of aquatic vegetation requires a permit from the DNR each year. The proposed assessment for Minnehaha Creek Mill Pond is $120.79 for each of the 63 adjacent properties. The 63 Minnehaha Creek Mill Pond property addresses are: I . 4507 Browndale Ave. 2. 4509 Browndale Ave. 3: 4511 Browndale Ave. 4 4513 Browndale;Ave. 5. 4504 Browndale Ave. 6. 4601 Sunnyside Rd. 7. 4603 Sunnyside Rd. 8. 4605 Rd. 9. 4701 Sunnyside Rd. 10. 4703 Sunnyside Rd. H. 4705 Sunnyside'Rd. 12. 4707 Sunnyside Rd. 13. 4,801 Sunnyside Rd. 14. 4805 Sunnyside Rd. 15. 4807 Sunnyside Rd. I6. 4901 Sunnyside Rd. 17. 4903 Sunnyside Rd. 18. 4905 Sunnyside Rd. 19: 4907 Sunnyside Rd. .20. 4909 Sunnyside Rd. 21. 4911 Sunnyside Rd. 22. 4518 Browndale Ave. 23. 4800 Sunnyslope Rd. E. 24. 4804 Sunnyslope Rd. E 25. 4805 Sunnyslope Rd. E 26. 4801 Sunnyslope Rd. E. 27. 4800.Sunnysl6pe Rd. W. 28..4804 Sunnyslope Rd. W. 29. 4808 Sunnyslope Rd. W. 30. 4812 ,.Sunnyslope Rd. W. 31. 4506, Browndale Ave. 32. 4808 Sunnyslope Rd. E. Attachments: Resolution 33. 480Q Woodhill Way 34. 4901 Sunnyslope Rd. E. 35. 4909 Sunnyslope Rd. E. 3.6. 4913 Sunnyslope Rd. E. 37. 4917 Sunnyslope Rd. E. 38. 4921 Sunnyslope Rd. E. 39. 4925 Sunnyslope Rd. E. 40. 4929 Sunnyslope Rd. E. 41. 4820 Sunnyslope Rd. W. 42. 4824 Sunnyslope Rd. W. 43. 4828 Sunnyslope Rd. W. 44. 4832 Sunnyslope Rd. W. 45. 4905 Sunnyslope Rd. E. 46. 4907 Sunnyslope Rd. E. 47. 4520 Browndale Ave. 48. 4614 Edgebrook Pl. 49. 4618 Edgebrook PI. 50. 4622 Edgebrook Pl. 51. 4600 Browndale Ave. .52. 4602 Browndale Ave. 53. 4604 Browndale Ave. 54. 4610 Browndale Ave. 55. 4612 Edgebrook Place 56. 4626 Edgebrook PI 57. 4630 Edgebrook PI. 58. 4634 Edgebrook PI. 5% 4638 Edgebrook PI. 60. 4640 Edgebrook PI. 61 4909 Browndale Ave. 62. 4905 'Browndale Ave. 63. 4933 Sunnyslope Rd. E. Cost Summaries for Arrowhead Lake, Indianhead Lake, and Minnehaha Creek Mill Pond RESOLUTION NO. 2013-88 A RESOLUTION LEVYING SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS FOR PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS WHEREAS, pursuant to proper notice-duly given as required by law, the Edina City Council has met and heard and passed upon all written and oral objections to the proposed special assessments for the improvement listed below: Aquatic Weeds Improvement — Improvement No. AQ -13 BE IT RESOLVED by the. City Council of the City of Edina, Minnesota as follows: 1. Each special assessment as set forth in the special assessment roll on file in the office of the City Clerk for each aforementioned improvement is hereby accepted and shall constitute the special assessments against the lands named therein, and each tract of land therein included in herein found to be benefited by the improvement in the amount of the special assessments levied against it. 2. The special assessments shall be payable in equal installments, the first of said installments together with interest at a rate of 6.5% per annum, on the entire special assessments from the date hereof to December 31, 2014. To each subsequent installment shall be added interest at the above rate for one year on all unpaid installments. The number of such annual installments shall be as follows: NUMBER OF NAME OF IMPROVEMENT. INSTALLMENTS Aquatic Weeds Improvement. Levy No. 18590 1 3. The owner of the property so assessed may, at any time prior to certification of special assessment to the County Auditor, partially prepay an amount not less than 25% of the whole assessment to the City Treasurer and no interest shall be charged on the portion of the assessment prepaid; or pay the whole of the special assessments on such property, to the City Treasurer, except that no interest, shall be charged. if the entire special assessment is paid before November 30 following the adoption of this resolution.and they may, at any time thereafter, pay to the City Treasurer the entire amount of the special assessments remaining unpaid. Such payment must be made before November 15. 4. The Clerk shall forthwith transmit a certified supplicate of these special assessments to the County Auditor to be extended on the property tax lists of the County. Such special assessments shall be collected and paid over in the same manner as other municipal taxes. Adopted this 14th day of October, 2013. ATTEST: City Clerk ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT Mayor Resolution No. 2013 -88 Page Two STATE OF MINNESOTA ) COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) 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 14, 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 ARROWHEAD LAKE ASSESSMENT 2013 Xcel Energy (power supply) 096. 0 Subtotal $ 19096.10* Natural Reflections, LLC Maintenance contract work $ 703.77. Compressor repairs 705 Subtotal $1,409.41 Lake Restoration, Inc. Weed and Algae Control #1 $ 1,977.00 Weed and Algae Control #2 $ 1,977.00 Lake Dye Treatment $ 160.00 DNR Vegetation Permit - $ . 809.16 Subtotal. $ 4,92116* DNR Aeration Permit Fee. $ 250.00 D.N.R. Annual Water Use Fee $ 140.00 Subtotal $ 390.00* Administrative Cost $ 304.04* Assessable Units: 36 $3.00 per unit administrative fee $ 108.00* GRAND TOTAL $ 8,230.71 * PROPOSED ASSESSMENT $ 228.63 per home* IN:DIANHEAD LAKE AISESSMf'NT - 2013 Xcel Energy (power supply) Natural Reflections, LLC Maintenance Contract Lake Restoration Weed and Algae Control #I Weed and Algae Control #2 Lake Dye Treatment DNR Permit Fee Subtotal D.N.R. Aeration Permit Fee D.N.R. Annual Water Usage Fee Subtotal Administrative Cost Assessable Units 33 $3.00 per unit administrative fee GRAND TOTAL $ 19135.90* $ 712.86* $ 1,358.00 $ 1,358.00 $ 95.00 496.6 $ 39307.66* $ 250.00 $ 140.00 $ 390.00* $ 138.42* $ 99.00* $ 59783.84* PROPOSED ASSESSMENT $ 175.27 per home* MINNEHAHA CREEK MILL POND ASSESSMENT - 2013 Midwest Weed Harvesting, Inc. First Cutting Brad Stannard Second Cutting Subtotal Less City Share Total Assessable. Harvesting -Cost D.N.R. Permit Fee Administrative Cost $ 2,441.50 S-6,930,00 $ 9,371.50 ( 2441.50 $ 6,930.00* $ 47.00* $ 443.86* Assessable units: 63 $3.00 per unit administrative fee: $__1 89.00* GRAND TOTAL: $ 79609.86* PROPOSED ASSESSMENT 120.79, er home* To: Mayor and Council Agenda.ltem #: VI. A. ii. From: Brian E. Olson, Director of Public Works EEO Action Discussion ❑ Date: October 14, 2013 Information ❑ Subject: Tree Removal Improvement No. TR -13 —Resolution No. 2013 -89 Action Requested: Assess the costs to remove diseased elm tree(s) to the owners of the properties listed below: 4018 W. 44`h Street $1,878.80 1 Elm Tree 30.00 Administrative Fee $1,908.80 (3 year assessment) 3316 W. 56th Street $1,179.20 1 Elm Tree 30.00 Administrative Fee $1,209.20 (3 year assessment) Information / Background: The above 2 properties collectively had a total of (2) trees removed. The diseased elm trees were removed in accordance with City Code Section 1055, Control and Prevention of Shade Tree Diseases. Property owners were first given an opportunity to remove the diseased tree(s) within a three -week (21 days) period of time. If the tree(s) is not removed within that period of time, the City contracts the removal of the diseased tree(s) and assesses the property owner. The property owners at the addresses above chose to have`the City contract the removal of their diseased tree(s) in 2013 and have the cost of removal assessed to their property. This practice prevents the spread of Dutch Elm Disease and Oak Wilt and is mandated by Minnesota State Statutes. The guideline used to set the length of the assessment period is: ❑ Under $500.00 = one year assessment. ❑ $500 to under $1,000 = two year assessment. ❑ $1,000 and up = three year assessment. ❑ Additional years upon request. When the City is requested to (or forced to) contract the removal of a diseased shade tree on private property, the City Forester asks the property owner if they wish to have the tree stump removed at their expense. State and City law does not demand that tree stumps be removed; only the diseased bark must be removed. Minnesota State Statute 18.023 demanded tree stump removal; however, that State law was repealed in 2003. City of Edina 4801 W. 501h St. • Edina, MN 55424 RESOLUTION NO. 2013-89 LEVYING SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS FOR IMPROVEMENT NO., TR -13 TREE TRIMMING WHEREAS, pursuant to proper notice duly given as required by law, the Edina City Council has met and heard and passed upon all written and oral objections to the proposed special assessments for improvements listed below: Tree Trimming Improvement No. TR -13 —Various Properties with the City of Edina BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Edina, Minnesota as follows: 1. Each special assessment as set forth in the special assessments roll on file in the office of the City Clerk for each aforementioned improvement is hereby accepted and shall constitute the special assessments against the lands named therein, and each tract of land therein included in herein found to be benefited by the improvement in the amount of the special assessments levied against it. 2. The special assessments shall be payable in equal installments, the first of said installments together with interest at a rate of 6.5% per annum, on the entire special assessments from the date hereof to December 31; 2014. To each subsequent installment shall be added interest at the above rate for one year. on all unpaid installments. The number of such annual installments shall be as follows: NAME OF IMPROVEMENT Tree Trimming TR -13 NUMBER OF INSTALLMENTS Levy No. 18586 Three Years 3. The owner of the property so assessed, may, at any time prior .to „certification of special assessment to the County Auditor,. partially prepay an amount not less than 25% of the whole assessment to the City Treasurer and no interest shall be charged on the portion of the assessment prepaid; or pay the whole of the special assessments, on such property, to. the City Treasurer, except that no interest shall be charged if the entire special assessment is paid before November 25 following the adoption of this resolution and they may, at any time thereafter, pay to the City Treasurer the entire amount of the special assessments remaining unpaid. Such payment must be made before November 15. 4. The Clerk shall forthwith transmit a certified duplicate of these special assessments to the County Auditor to be extended on the property tax lists of the County. Such special assessments shall be collected and paid over in the same manner as other municipal taxes. Dated: October 14, 2013 Attest: Debra A. Mangen, City Clerk James B. Hovland, Mayor it Resolution No. 2013 -89 Page Two 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 14, 2013, and as recorded in the Minutes of said Regular Meeting. WITNESS my hand and seal of said City this day of , City Clerk 0 To: Mayor and Council From: Brian E. Olson, Director of Public Works 6760 Agenda Item #: VI. A. iii. Action Discussion ❑ Date: October 14, 2013 Information ❑ Subject: Weed Mowing Improvement No. WD -13 - Resolution No. 2013 -90 Action Requested: Assess the following costs to the property owners for weed cutting services provided at the addresses listed below: 1. 6712 West Shore Drive $ 142.50 2. 5833 Vernon Lane $ 517.50 3. 5536 Mirror Lakes Drive $ 105.00 4. 5537 Park Place $ 105.00 5. 5030 Green Farms Road $ 405.00 6. 4917 Poppy Lane $ 330.00 7. 7702 Gleason Road $ 142.50 8. 5125 49th Street $ 292.50 9. 6408 W. Shore Drive $ 142.50 10. 5611 St. Andrews Avenue $ 180.00 11. 5017 Hankerson Avenue $ 105.00 12. 408 Madison Avenue $ 480.00 13. 4905 Ridge Place $ 705.00 14. 4120 France Avenue $ 105.00 15. 5808 Wooddale Avenue $ 180.00 16. 6220 Hansen Road S 330.00 TOTAL $4,267.50 The total includes a $30.00 per property administration fee. Information / Background: The weeds on the 16 properties listed above were cut by the Edina Park and Recreation Maintenance Department during the summer of 2013. The cost of tractor use and personnel needed to cut the weeds is proposed to be assessed to the property owners. There is a $30.00 administration fee for each property, which is included in each total shown above. Taken directly from the City Code: City of Edina • 4801 W. 50th St. • Edina, MN 55424 i REPORT/ RECOMMENDATION 1050.05 Maintenance Standards. Every owner of property shall maintain the vegetation growing thereon according to the following minimum standards: Page 2 Subd. 2 Weeds. Weeds shall obe regularly cut or controlled such that no individual plant shall exceed at any time ten inches in height or length as measured from its base at the ground to the tip of each` stalk, stem, blade or leaf. Noxious wee_ ds as defined by the State Commissioner of Agriculture shall be eradicated. As a matter of practice, our part-time Weed .Inspector employee first attempts to hand - deliver a written notice to the property owner. If the homeowner is not home, the Weed Inspector then attempts to reach the homeowner by phone, which most often takes care of the issue. If the homeowner cannot be reached by`phone, then the Weed Inspector mails to the property owner a certified letter explaining that they have 10 days to comply or the City will cut the weeds /vegetation and assess the property. A one -year assessment period is proposed for all 16 assessments listed:above. Ji RESOLUTION NO. 2013-90 LEVYING SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS FOR IMPROVEMENT NO., WD -13 WEED MOWING WHEREAS, pursuant to proper notice duly given as required by law, the Edina City Council has met and heard and passed upon all written and oral objections to the proposed special assessments for improvements listed below: Weed Mowing Improvement No. WD -13 — Various Properties with the City of Edina BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Edina, Minnesota as follows: 1. Each special assessment as set forth in the special assessments roll on file in the office of the City Clerk for each aforementioned improvement is hereby accepted and shall constitute the special assessments against the lands named therein, and each tract of land therein included in herein found to be benefited by the improvement in the amount of the special assessments levied against it. 2. The special assessments shall be payable in equal installments, the first of said installments together with interest at a rate of 6.5% per annum, on the entire special assessments from the date hereof to December 31, 2014. To each subsequent installment shall be added interest at the above rate for one year on all unpaid installments. The number of such annual installments shall be as follows: NUMBER OF NAME OF IMPROVEMENT INSTALLMENTS Weed Mowing WD -13 Levy No. 18589 1 1 year 3. The owner of the property so assessed may, at any time prior to certification of special assessment to the County Auditor, partially prepay an amount not less than 25% of the whole assessment to the City Treasurer and no interest shall be charged on the portion of the assessment prepaid; or pay the whole of the special assessments on such property, to the City Treasurer, except that no interest shall be charged if the entire special assessment is paid before November 2.5 following the adoption of this resolution and they may, at any time thereafter, pay to the City Treasurer the entire amount of the special assessments remaining unpaid. Such payment must be made before November 15. 4. The Clerk shall forthwith transmit a certified duplicate of these special assessments to the County Auditor to be extended on the property tax lists of the County. Such special assessments shall be collected and paid over in the same manner as other municipal taxes. Dated: October 14, 2013 Attest: Debra A. Mangen, City Clerk James B. Hovland, Mayor Resolution No. 2013 -90 Page Two 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 14, 2013, and as recorded in the Minutes of said Regular Meeting. WITNESS my hand and seal of said City this day of City Clerk 1888.. To: Mayor and Council Agenda .Item #: VI. A. iv. From: Brian E. Olson, Director of Public Works EEC) Action M Discussion ❑ Date: October 14, 2013 Information ❑ Subject: 50th & France Maintenance Improvement No. M -13 — Resolution No. 2013 -91 Action Requested: Approve assessments as proposed for Improvements M -13. Information/ Background: Attached you will find a Resolution, Analysis of Assessment, Final Assessment Roll, and Certificate of Mailing including the Notice of Public Hearing, and other supporting documentation for each proposed assessment. All 'properties were notified per Minnesota State Statute — Chapter 429 for special assessments.. Staff included in the Notice of Public Hearing an invoice for each assessment. The 50th & France maintenance assessment changed from 69.06 cents in 2012 to 68.48 cents in 2013. As of this writing no comments have been submitted or called in. City of Edina 4801 W. 50w St. • Edina, MN 55424 RESOLUTION NO. 2013-91 A RESOLUTION LEVYING SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS FOR PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS WHEREAS, pursuant to proper notice duly given as required by law, the Edina City Council has met and heard and passed upon all written and oral objections to the proposed special assessments for the improvement listed below: 50`h and France Business District — Improvement No. M -13 BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Edina, Minnesota as follows: 1. Each special assessment as set forth in the special assessment roll on file in the office of the City Clerk for each aforementioned improvement is hereby accepted and shall constitute the special assessments against the lands named therein, and each tract of land therein included in herein found to be benefited by the improvement in the amount of the special assessments levied against it. 2. The special assessments shall be payable in equal installments, the first of said installments together with interest at a rate of 6.5% per annum, on the entire special assessments from the date hereof to December 31, 2014. To each subsequent installment shall be added interest at the above rate for one year on all unpaid installments. The number of such annual installments shall be as follows: NUMBER OF NAME OF IMPROVEMENT INSTALLMENTS 501h and France Business District Levy No. 18592 1 3. The owner of the property so assessed may, at any time prior to certification of special assessment to the County Auditor, partially prepay an amount not less than 25% of the whole assessment to the City Treasurer and no interest shall be charged on the portion of the assessment prepaid; or pay the whole of the special assessments on such property, to the City Treasurer, except that no interest shall be charged if the entire special assessment is paid before November 30 following the adoption of this resolution and they may, at any time thereafter, pay to the City Treasurer the entire amount of the special assessments remaining unpaid. Such payment must be made before November 15. 4. The Clerk shall forthwith transmit a certified supplicate of these special assessments to the County Auditor to be extended on the property tax lists of the County. Such special assessments shall be collected and paid over in the same manner as other municipal taxes. Adopted this 14th day of October, 2013. ATTEST: City Clerk Mayor Resolution No. 2013 -91 Page Two STATE OF MINNESOTA ) COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) 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 14, 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 CITY OF EDINA - ANALYSIS OF ASSESSMENT FOR: MAINTENANCE IMPROVEMENT NO. M -13 LOCATION: 50TH & FRANCE BUSINESS DISTRICT CONTRACTOR: CITY OF EDINA (LARRY DIEKMAN) $ 69,897.36 EMPLOYER'S,SHARE OF PERA $ 6,016.76 EMPLOYER'S SHARE OF SOCIAL SECURITY & WORK COMP $ 10,674.06 EMPLOYER'S SHARE OF MEDICAL INSURANCE $ 10,867.96 PUBLIC WORKS CREW AND 1/2 PARKING MONITOR $ 13,092.29 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES $ - CONTRACTUAL SERVICES $ 1,241.41 LAWN`IRRIGATION - CITY OF EDINA UTILITIES $ 288.91 GENERAL SUPPLIES $ 56,459.99 LIABILITY INSURANCE - $ 1,310.69 PARKING RAMP MAINTENANCE (375) $ 73,900.00 EQUIPMENT $ - TOTAL COST $ 243,749.43 ASSESSABLE UNITS: 355,953 SQUARE FEET ASSESSABLE COST: $ 0.6848 PER SQUARE FOOT LENGTH OF ASSESSMENT: 1 YEAR SOTH FRANCE B,' S DISTRICT M -10 ASSESSMENT ROLL PID NAME 1 NAME 2 PROP. ADD. CITY STATE ZIP PROP. NO PROP ADDRESS MAILING ADDRESS CITY 2 ST ZIP 2 GBA =SF TOTAL ASSESSABLE SFL ASSESSMENT 1842844- 14-0016. WILLIAM C KNAPP WILLIAM C KNAPP ATTN: Accounting 4916 France Avenue Edna MN 55434 4916 Franca Avenue 4949 WESTOVMI PARKWAY #200. WEST DES MOINES IA 50266 11,105 4,809 $3293.11 18-028.24- 14-0129 FRANK HOLDINGS LLC FRANK HOLDINGS LLC 4936 France Avenue Edna, MN 55434 4936 France Avenue 5223 EDINA INDUSTRIAL BLVD EDINA MN 55439 18,557 18,557 $12,707.48 18428.24- 14-0020 1 FRANCE AVE PARTNERSHIPS FRANCE AVE PARTNERSHIPS CIO KCS MANAGEMENT 00. 4948 France Avenue Edna, MN 554341 4948 France Avenue 1 18100 12TH AVE S#200 BLOOMINGTON MNI 55425 8.280 4.968 1 S3.401.99 18.028 -24- 14-0118 OMG PROPERTIES LLC OMG PROPERTIES LLC 49W France Avenue Edina. MN 55434 4930 France Avenue 4930 FRANCE AVE S EDINA MN 55410 4 199 3,274 $2,242.11 184282441 -0055 FRANCE AT SOTH LLC FRANCE AT SOTH LLC 5034 France Avenue Edina MN 55434 5030#5034 France Avenue 7800 METRO PKVW; STE 300 BLOOMINGTON MN1 SU251 16.368 13,1681 59.017.18 18028 -2441 -0058 5036 FRANCE PROPERTY LLC 5036 FRANCE PROPERTY. LLC 5036 France Avenue Edina, MN 55434 5036 France Avenue 5036 FRANCE AVE S MINA MN 55410 6,835 6.835 S4,680.47. 18-02824 -41 -0383 5000 FRANCE COMPANY 5000 FRANCE COMPANY 5000 France Avenue Edna, MN 55434 5000 France Avenue 5850 OPUS PARKWAY SUITE 108 MINNETONKA MN 55343 24,130 24,130 $16,523.74 15-02844-41-0237 AMERICANA BANK OF EDINA EXCEL BANK OF EDINA . 5050 France Avenue Edina MN 55434 5050 France Avenue P.O. BOX 1509 MINNEAPOLIS MN 55480 19,102 12,6W 58,627.95 18-02824 -14 -0024 49.5 LLC 49.5 LLC C40 JOHN D GROSS 3918 W 4912 Street Edna, MN 55634 3918.W49 12 Street 4520 ARDEN AVE - EDINA MN 55424 5,307 3,707 $2,538.48 18428.24.14.OM Housing & Redev. AufflotiV of Edna Housing 8 Redevelopment Authority of Edna 3930 W 4912 Street Edna MN 55434 3930 W 4912 Street 4801 W. 50th Street EDINA - MN 55424 1 800 13.400, $9,176.05 18-02824 - 14-0035 SOON YONG & JUNG JA PARK SOON YONG 8 JUNG JA PARK 3944 W 4912 Sheet Edna.. MN 55434 3944 W 4912 Strut 5275 GRANMEW SO. #3308. EDINA IMNI 55438 5.061 1.8w $1.270.54 18-02824- 14-0108 LB 49 12 Street LLC LB 49 12 SL LLC Attn Jennifer Ken 3948 W 4912 Street - Edna, MN 55434 3948 W 4912 Street 4100 W. 50th Street Edna MN 55425 12,084 2,450 $1,677.98 18-028 -24- 14-0021 FRANCE AVE PARTNERSHIP FRANCE AVE PROPERTIES , do KOS MANAGEMENT CO. - 3902 W Wth Street Edina MN 55434 3902 W 50th Street 8100 12TH AVE S #200 BLOOMINGTON MN 55425 13.614 13,614 $9.322.59 18-028 -24. 14-0022 EDINA PROPERTIES INC EDINA PROPERTIES INC 3906 W 50th Street Edna, MN 55434 3908 W 50th Sheet 4100 SOTH ST W #2100 EDINA MN 55424 31,6W 28,480 $19,502.53 18-028 -24- 14-0046 FIRST BUILDING CORP. FIRST BUILDING CORP. do US BANK N.A. 4100 W 50th Sheet Edina. MN 55434 4100 W 50th Sheet 2800 E LAKE ST. MINNEAPOLIS MN 55406 44.776 19.176 $13,131.34 18.02824- 14-0121 JSG COMPANY LLP JSG COMPANY LIP . 3414 W 50th Sheet Edina MN 55434 3924 W 50th Street 5850 OPUS PARKWAY SUITE 108 MINNETONKA MN 55343 12,960 1 960 $8,874.75 18-028 - 24.14-0122 PROP: ADMINISTRATION CO. PROPERTY ADMINISTRATION CO. 3922 W 50th Sheet Edna MN 55434 3922 W 50th Sheet 3922 BOTH ST W EDINA MN 55424 1 862 12,852 S8,907.64 18-028 -24. 14-0126 LA Real Estate Grow o ETAL LA REAL ESTATE GROUP . 3930 W 50th Street Edna MN 55434 3930 W 50th Street 4100 SOTH ST W #2100 EDINA MNI 55424 80,330 59,527 $40.762.75 184282441 -0049 EDINA PROPERTIES INC EDINA PROPERTIES INC ,.. 3917 W 50th Street EcIna. MN 55434 3917 W 50th Street 4100 SOTH ST W 02100 EDINA MNI 55424 31,260 22,924 $15.697.89 18-02824414052 JSG COMPANY LLP JSG COMPANY LLP 3911 W 50th Street Edina, - MN 55434 3911 W 50th Street 5850 OPUS PARKWAY SUITE 108 MINNETONKA MNI 55343 27,290 27.290 $18,687.64 18-0282441 -0178 Lund Real Estate HoldirMs LLC LUND REAL ESTATE HOLDINGS LLC 3945 W 50th Street Edna MN 55434 3945 W 50th Street 4100 50TH ST W#2100 EDINA MN 55424 28.026 14 $9.741.68 1 B-028- 2441 -0181 CITY OF EDINA' CITY OF EDINA 3939 W 50th Street Edna - MN 55434 3939 W 50th Street 4801 SOTH ST W EDINA MN SU241 8,572 6.143 S3.52196 18. 0282441 -0182 A K LARSON FAMILY LLC A K LARSON FAMILY LLC 3939 W 50th Street Edna MN 55434 3939 W 50th Street 3939 50TH ST W #200 EDINA MN 55424. 39,242 29,997 $20,541.48 Assessable Units: 355,953 $243749.31 Assessable Cost $ 0.6848 STATE OF MINNESOTA) COUNTY OF HENNEPIN) SS CERTIFICATE OF MAILING NOTICE CITY OF EDINA ) I, the undersigned, being the duly qualified acting City Clerk of the City of Edina, Minnesota, hereby certify that on the following date September 26, 2013, acting on behalf of said City, I deposited in the United States mail copies of the attached Notice of Public Hearing for the 50th $ France. Business District, Improvement and Maintenance No. M -13 (Exhibit A), enclosed in sealed 'envelopes, with postage thereon duly prepaid, addressed to the..persons_. at the addresses as shown on the mailing list .(Exhibit B), attached to the original hereof, which list is on file in my office, said persons being those appearing on the records of the County Auditor as owners of the r property listed opposite their respective names, as of a date 17 days prior to the date of the hearing.' WITNESS my hand and the seal of said City this 27th day of September, 2013. Edina City Clerk NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING ON PROPOSED SPECIAL ASSESSMENT IMPROVEMENT NO. M -13 The Edina City Council will meet at 7 p.m. Oct. 14, 2013, at City Hall, 4801 W. 50' St., Edina, MN, to approve and adopt the listed special assessments against the described property, which is part of the 50`' & France Business District area: IMPROVEMENT AND MAINTENANCE NO. M -13: 501' & France Property Identification No. 4916 France The special assessment to this property for improvement and maintenance is $3,293.11. The total amount of the proposed special assessment is $243,749.31. The proposed assessment roll is on file with the City Clerk. No invoices will be mailed. This is the only notice you will receive regarding payment. PAYMENT Following the assessment hearing, the owner of any property assessed may pay the whole of the assessment, without interest, to the City, on or before November 25, 2013. If not prepaid by that date, the proposed assessment will be payable together with real estate taxes payable in 2014 with interest on the entire assessment at the rate of 6.5% per annum from October 14, 2013 to December 31, 2014. Partial prepayment of the assessment in excess of 25 percent of the total assessment has been authorized by ordinance. APPEAL Any owner may appeal the assessment to the District Court pursuant to Minnesota Statutes 429.081, by serving notice of the appeal upon the Mayor or Clerk of the City of Edina within thirty (30) days after adoption of the assessment by the City Council, and by filing such notice with the District Court within ten (10) days after service upon the Mayor or Clerk. However, no appeal may be taken as to an assessment unless a written objection signed by the affected property owner is filed with the Clerk of the City of Edina prior to the hearing or presented to the presiding officer at the hearing. DEFERRAL ON HOMESTEADS OWNED BY PERSONS 65 YEARS OF AGE OR OLDER Under provisions of Minnesota Statutes Section 435.193 to 435.195 the City may, at its discretion, defer the payment of assessments for any homestead property owned by a person 65 years of age or older for whom it would be a hardship to make the payments. The procedures to apply for such deferment are available from the Assessor's office. Deferment applications must be filed with the Assessor's office by November 15, 2013. BY ORDER OF THE EDINA CITY COUNCIL September 26, 2013 Debra A. Mangen City Clerk 18- 028 -24 -14 -0016 WILLIAM C KNAPP TN: Accounting -)49 WESTOWN PKWAY #200 WEST DES MOINES, IA 50266 18- 028 -24 -14 -0118 OMG PROPERTIES LLC 4930 FRANCE AVE S EDINA, MN 55410 18- 028 -24 -41 -0383 5000 FRANCE COMPANY 5850 OPUS PARKWAY, #108 MINNETONKA, MN 55343 18- 028 -24 -14 -0129 FRANK HOLDINGS LLC 5223 EDINA INDUSTRIAL BLVD EDINA, MN 55439 18- 028 -24 -41 -0055 FRANCE AT 50TH LLC 7800 METRO PKWY, STE. 300 BLOOMINGTON, MN 55425 18 -028 -24 -41 -0237 EXCEL BANK OF EDINA P.O. BOX 1509 MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55480 18- 028 -24 -14 -0026 18- 028 -24 -14 -0035 Housing & Redevelopment Authority of SOON YONG & JUNG JA PARK Edina 5275 GRANDVIEW SQ. #3308 4801 W. 50th Street EDINA, MN 55436 EDINA, MN 55424 18- 028 -24 -14 -0021 FRANCE AVE PROPERTIES c/o KCS MANAGEMENT CO. 810012TH AVE S #200 ''.00MINGTON, MN 55425 a- 028 -24 -14 -0121 JSG COMPANY LLP 5850 OPUS PKWAY, SUITE 108 MINNETONKA, MN 55343 18- 028 -24 -41 -0049 EDINA PROPERTIES INC 4100 50TH ST W, #2100 EDINA, MN 55424 18- 028 -24 -41 -0181 CITY OF EDINA 480150TH ST W EDINA, MN 55424 18- 028 -24 -14 -0022 EDINA PROPERTIES INC 4100 50TH ST W, #2100 EDINA, MN 55424 18- 028 -24 -14 -0122 PROPERTY ADMINISTRATION CO. 3922 50TH ST W EDINA, MN 55424 18- 028 -24 -41 -0052 JSG COMPANY LLP 5805 OPUS PKWAY, SUITE 108 MINNETONKA, MN 55343 18- 028 -24 -41 -0182 A K LARSON FAMILY LLC 3939 50TH ST W #200 EDINA, MN 55424 18- 028 -24 -14 -0020 FRANCE AVE PARTNERSHIPS C/O KCS MANAGEMENT CO. 8100 12TH AVE S #200 BLOOMINGTON, MN 55425 18- 028 -24 -41 -0066 5036 FRANCE PROPERTY LLC 5036 FRANCE AVE S EDINA, MN 55410 18- 028 -24 -14 -0024 49.5 LLC C/O JOHN D GROSS 4520 ARDEN AVE EDINA, MN 55424 18- 028 -24 -14 -0108 LB 49 1/2 St. LLC Attn Jennifer Kent 4100 W. 50th Street Edina, MN 55425 18- 028 -24 -14 -0046 FIRST BUILDING CORP. c/o US BANK N.A. 2800 E. LAKE ST. MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55406 18- 028 -24 -14 -0126 L.A. REAL ESTATE GROUP 4100 50TH ST W, #2100 EDINA, MN 55424 18- 028 -24 -41 -0178 LUND REAL ESTATE HOLDINGS LLC 4100 50TH ST W #2100 EDINA, MN 55424 To: Mayor and Council . �'�Rpolif�T�• ItltlO Agenda Item P. VI. A. v. From: Brian E. Olson, Director of Public Works EEO Action Discussion ❑ Date: October 14, 2013 Information ❑ Subject: Grandview Business District Maintenance Improvement No. G -13 — Resolution No. 2013 -92 1 Action Requested: Approve assessments as proposed for Improvements G -13. Information / Background: Attached you will find a Resolution, Analysis of Assessment, Final Assessment Roll, and Certificate of Mailing including the Notice of Public Hearing, and other supporting documentation for each proposed assessment. All properties were notified per Minnesota State Statute — Chapter 429 for special assessments. Staff included in the Notice of Public Hearing an invoice for each assessment. The Grandview Business District maintenance assessment changed from 1.44 cents in 2012 to 1.48 cents in 2013. As of this writing no comments have been submitted or called in. City of Edina • 4801 W. 50th St. • Edina, MN 55424 STATE OF MINNESOTA) COUNTY OF HENNEPIN) SS CERTIFICATE OF MAILING NOTICE CITY OF EDINA ) I, the undersigned, being the duly qualified acting City Clerk of the City of Edina, Minnesota, hereby certify that on the following date September 26, 2013, acting on behalf of said City, I deposited in the United States mail copies of the attached Notice of Public Hearing for Grandview Business District, Improvement and Maintenance No. G -13 (Exhibit A), enclosed in sealed envelopes, with postage thereon duly prepaid, addressed to the persons at the addresses as shown on the mailing list (Exhibit B), attached to the original hereof, which list is on file in my office, said persons being those appearing on the records of the County Auditor as owners of the property listed opposite their respective names, as of a date 17 days prior to the date of the hearing. WITNESS my hand and the seal of said City this 27th day of September, 2013. Edina City Clerk NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING ON PROPOSED SPECIAL ASSESSMENT IMPROVEMENT NO. G -13 The Edina City Council will meet at 7 p.m. Oct. 14, 2013, at City Hall, 4801 W. 50' St., Edina, MN, to approve and adopt the listed special assessments against the described property, which is part of the Grand View Business District area: IMPROVEMENT AND MAINTENANCE NO. G -13: Grandview Square Property Identification No. 5200 Interlachen,Blvd. The special assessment to this property for improvement and maintenance is $52.83. The total amount of the proposed special assessment is $6,905.52. The proposed assessment roll is on file with the City Clerk. No invoices will be mailed. This is the only notice you will receive regarding payment. PAYMENT Following the assessment hearing, the owner of any property assessed may pay the whole of the assessment, without interest, to the City, on or before November 25, 2013. If not prepaid by that date, the proposed assessment will•be payable together with real estate taxes payable in 2014 with interest on the entire assessment at the rate of..6:5% per annum from October 14; 2013 to December 31, 2014. Partial prepayment of the assessment in excess of 25 percent of the total assessment has -been authorized by ordinance. APPEAL Any owner may appeal the assessment to the District Court pursuant to Minnesota Statutes 429.081, by serving notice of the appeal upon ,the Mayor or,Clerk of the City of Edina within thirty (30) days after adoption of the assessment by the City Council,'and.by filing such notice,with the District "Court within ten (10) days after service upon the Mayor or Clerk. However, no appeal may be taken as to an assessment unless a written objection signed -by the affected property owner is filed with the Clerk of the City of Edina prior to the hearing or presented to the presiding officer at the hearing. DEFERRAL ON HOMESTEADS OWNED BY PERSONS 65 YEARS OF AGE OR OLDER Under provisions of Minnesota Statutes Section 435.193 to 435.195 the City may, at its discretion, defer the payment of assessments for any homestead property owned by a person 65 years of age or older for whom it would be a hardship to make the payments. The procedures to apply for such deferment are available from the Assessor's office. Deferment applications must be filed with the Assessor's office by November 15, 2013. BY ORDER OF THE EDINA CITY COUNCIL September 26, 2013 Debra A. Mangen City Clerk 28- 11'7 -21 -31 -0004 28- 117 -21 -31 -0007 28- 117 -21 -31 -0010 Holiday Station Stores, Inc. Ken Johnson Properties LLC GFP CO 0 Box 1224 8608 Lakeview Rd P.O. Box 20003 iloomington MN 55440 Bloomington MN 55438 Bloomington MN 55420 28- 117 -21 -31 -0027 28- 117 -21 -31 -0033 28- 117 -21 -31 -0043 Gaertner Family Invest. Partnership TIMCIN Properties LLP Children's HeartLink 246 Albert St S 9110 225th St W 5075 Arcadia Av St. Paul MN 55105 Lakeville MN 55044 Edina MN 55436 28- 117 -21 -31 -0046 28- 117 -21 -31 -0064 28- 117 -21 -31 -0065 McReavy Edina Properties Jerry's Enterprises Inc Vernon Partners LLC 2301 Dupont Ave. So. 5101 Vernon Ave 50 6th St S STE 1480 Minneapolis MN 55405 Edina MN 55436 Minneapolis MN 55402 28- 117 -21 -31 -0067 28- 117 -21 -32 -0014 28- 117 -21 -33 -0004 CSM Investors Inc 5116 LLC ET AL Lakepointe Holdings II LLC 500 Washington Av, Ste 3000 P. 0. Box 2609 555 W. Brown Deer Rd Minneapolis MN 55415 Carlsbad CA 92018 Fox Point WI 53217 28- 117 -21 -33 -0017 28- 117 -21 -34 -0002 28- 117 -21 -34 -0004 Edina Family Physicians Prop LLC Church of Our Lady of Grace School District No. 273 5301 Vernon Av 5071 Eden Avenue 5701 Normandale Rd Edina MN 55436 Edina MN 55436 Edina MN 55424 :8- 117 -21 -34 -0005 28- 117 -21 -34 -0016 28- 117 -21 -31 -0065 Indep. School District No. 273 REALTY INCOME PROPS 3 LLC Vernon Partners LLC 5701 Normandale Rd 600 LA TERRAZA BLVD 50 6th St S STE 1480 Edina MN 55424 ESCONDIDO CA 92025 Minneapolis MN 55402 28- 117 -21 -34 -0024 28- 117 -21 -34 -0025 28- 117 -21 -33 -0048 Drs. Beecher & Rohde Partners Jerry's Enterprises Inc Hennepin County 5301 Vernon Av 5101 Vernon Av 7014TH AVE S SUITE 400 Edina MN 55436 Edina MN 55436 Minneapolis MN 55415 28- 117 -21 -33 -0047 28- 117 -21 -34 -0040 28- 117 -21 -31 -0049 City of Edina Eden Avenue LLC City of Edina 4801 W. 50th 3500 American Blvd #200 4801 W. 50th Edina MN 55424 Bloomington MN 55431 Edina MN 55424 RESOLUTION NO. 2013-92 A RESOLUTION LEVYING SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS FOR PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS WHEREAS, pursuant to proper notice duly given as required by law, the Edina City Council has met and heard and passed upon all written and oral objections to the proposed special assessments for the improvement listed below: Grandview Square Business District — Improvement No. G -13 BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Edina, Minnesota as follows: 1. Each special assessment as set forth in the special assessment roll on file in the office of the City Clerk for each aforementioned improvement is hereby accepted and shall constitute the special assessments against the lands named therein, and each tract of land therein included in herein found to be benefited by the improvement in the amount of the special assessments levied against it. 2. The special assessments shall be payable in equal installments, the first of said installments together with interest at a rate of 6.5% per annum, on the entire. special assessments from the date hereof to December 31, 2014. To each subsequent installment shall be added interest at the above rate for one year on all unpaid installments. The number of such annual installments shall be as follows: NUMBER OF NAME OF IMPROVEMENT INSTALLMENTS Grandview Square Business District Levy No. 18593 1 3. The owner of the property so assessed may, at any time prior to certification of special assessment to the County Auditor, partially prepay an amount not less than 25% of the whole assessment to the City Treasurer and no interest shall be charged on the portion of the assessment prepaid; or pay the whole of the special assessments on such property, to the City Treasurer, except that no interest shall be charged if the entire special assessment is paid before November 30 following the adoption of this resolution and they may, at any time thereafter, pay to the City Treasurer the entire amount of the special assessments remaining unpaid. Such payment must be made before November 15. 4. The Clerk shall forthwith transmit a certified supplicate of these special assessments to the County Auditor to be extended on the property tax lists of the County. Such special assessments shall be collected and paid over in the same manner as other municipal taxes. Adopted this 14th day of October, 2013. ATTEST: City Clerk Mayor Resolution No. 2013 -92 Page Two STATE OF MINNESOTA ) COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) 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 14, 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 FOR: LOCATION: CONTRACTOR: TOTAL COST ASSESSABLE UNITS: ASSESSABLE COST: LENGTH OF ASSESSMENT: CITY OF EDINA - ANALYSIS OF ASSESSMENT MAINTENANCE IMPROVEMENT NO. G -13 GRANDVIEW BUSINESS DISTRICT PAYROLL EMPLOYER'S SHARE OF PERA EMPLOYERS SHARE OF SOCIAL SECURITY & WORK COMP EMPLOYERS SHARE OF MEDICAL INSURANCE CONTRACTUAL SERVICES: LAWN IRRIGATION - CITY OF EDINA UTILITIES GENERAL SUPPLIES 465,101 SQUARE FEET $ 0.0148 PER SQUARE FOOT 1 YEAR $ 2,381.54 $ 10.88 $ 343.62 $ 1,300.00 $ 656.64 $ 2,212.84 $ 6,905.52 GRANDVIEW BUSINESS DISTRICT G13 ASSESSMENT ROLL PID NAME 1 NAME 2 PROPERTY ADDRESS MAILING ADDRESS I I CITY STATE 23P ' SF ASSESSMENT 28- 11721 -31 -0004 1 Holiday Station Stores, Inc. Holiday Stationstores 0217 5200 Intedachen Blvd. P O Box 1224 Bloomington MN. .55440 3,558 52.83 28- 117 - 21314)007 Ken Johnson Properties LLC Ken Johnson Properties LLC 5101 Arcadia Avenue 8608 Lakeview Rd Bloomington MN -. 55438 —3,872 - 57.49 28. 117 - 2141-0010 GFP CO GFP CO 5100 Eden Avenue P.O: Box 20003 Bloomington MN 55420 35,199 522.61 28-117-21-31-0027 Gaertner Family Invest Partnership Gaertner Family Invest. Partnership 5000 Vernon-Avenue 246 Albert St S SL Paul MN 55105 5,287 78.50 28 -117- 2131.0033 TIMCIN Properties LLP TIMCIN Properties LLP 5100 Vernon Avenue 9110 225th St W Lakeville MN 55044 10,544 $ 156.55 28-117- 2131 -0043 Children's Heartl-ink Children's HeartUnk 5075 Arcadia Avenue 5075 Arcadia Av Edina MN 55436 3,710 55.08 28- 1172131 -0046 IMcReavy Edina Properties Washburn McReavy 5001 Vernon Avenue 2301 Dupont Ave. So. Minneapolis MN 55405 . 20 338 $ 301.97 28-117-21-31-0064 J s Enterprises Inc Jenrys Enterprises Inc 5125 Vernon Avenue 5101 Vernon Ave Edina MN -- 55436 116,512 $ 1,729.90 28 -117- 2131 -0065 Vernon Partners LLC Vernon Partners LLC Capital R E Investments 5035 Vernon Avenue 50 6th St S STE 1480 Minneapolis MN 55402 19,089 283.42 28- 1172131 -0067 CSM Investors Inc CSM Corporation 5101 Gus Young Lane 500 Washington Av. Ste 3000 Minneapolis MN 55415 25,300 $ 375.64 28 -117- 2132.0014 5116 LLC ET AL Wells Fargo Bank cJo Deloitte Tax LLP 5116 Vemon Avenue P. 0. Box 2609 Carlsbad CA 92018 8 672 $ 128.76 28- 11721334= ILakepointe Holdings 11 LLC Lakepointe Holdings II LLC Attu: William Elliott 5209 Vernon Avenue 655 W. Brown Deer Rd Fox Point IWI 53217 997 S 14.80 28. 117 - 2133-0017 Edina Family Physicians Prop LLC Edina Family Ph sldans Prop LLC 5301 Vernon Avenue 5301 Vernon Av Edina MN 55436 9.885 $ 146.77 28- 117 - 2134-0002 Church of Our Lady or Grace Church of Our Lady of Grace 5145 Eden Avenue 5071 Eden Avenue Edina MN 55436 5,210 77.35 28. 117 - 21340004 School District No. 273 Independent School District No 273 Edina Public Schools 6220 Eden Avenue 5701 Nonmandale Rd Edina MN 55424 19,005 282.17 2 8-117- 2134-0005 Inds . School District No. 273 Independent School District No 273 Edina Public Schools 5150 Brookside Avenue 6701 Normandale Rd Edina MN - 55424 7,380 $ 109.57 28 -117- 2134-0016 REALTY INCOME PROPS 3 LLC PORTFOLIO MANAGEMENT - 5205 Vernon Avenue 600 LA TERRAZA BLVD ESCONDIDO CA 92025 2.740 $ 40.68 2 8-117 - 2131-0065 Vernon Partners LLC Vernon Partners LLC Capital R E Investments 5035 Vernon Avenue S 50 6th St S STE 1480 Minneapolis MN - 55402 0 $ 28.117- 2134-0024 Drs. Beecher & Rohde Partners Drs. J T Beecher & J A' Rohde _ Edna Family Physicians PA WW Vernon Avenue, 5301 Vernon Av Edina - MN 65436 - 6.131 91.03 28 -117- 21344)025 Jerrys Enterprises Inc Jerrys Enterprises Ine 5201 Vernon Ave. S - 5101 Vemon Av Edina MN 55436 2,320' 34:45 28-117-21-334M Hennepin County County of Hennepin Attn: Real Estate Manager 5280 Grandview S uare *2 7014TH AVE S SMITE 400 Minneapolis MN 55415 20 000 296.95 28 -117-21-33-0047 City of Edina Ci of Edna 5280 Grandview are #1 4801 W. 50th _ Edina MN 55424 .. 20.000 S. 29695 28- 117 - 2134-0040 Eden Avenue LLC Eden Avenue LLC do North Marg 5201 Eden Avenue 3500 American Blvd #200 Bloominoton 1MN 55431 115,952 $ 1 721.57 2 8-117- 21314)049 City of Edina City of Edina 5013 Vemoo Avenue 4801 W. 50th- Edina 1MN 55424 3,400 $ 50.48 Assesmble Urdhs 465,101 $ 6,905.5200 Assessable cat $ 0.0148 i 6 6 REPORT /RECOMMENDATION r- ryl�l� To: MAYOR AND COUNCIL �RPORp`� IBBB Agenda Item #. VI. A. vi -xiv From: Wayne-D. Houle, PE, Director of Engineering Action Discussion ❑ Date: October 14, 2013 Information ❑ Subject: Public Hearing —Special Assessments Action Requested: Approve special assessments as proposed for the following improvements: I . Tracy Avenue Improvements — Improvement No. BA -368 2. Countryside Neighborhood Reconstruction — Improvement No. BA -385 3. Viking Hills Neighborhood Reconstruction — Improvement No. BA -386 4. Viking Hills Neighborhood Reconstruction (Glacier Place) — Improvement No. BA -400 5. Viking Hills Neighborhood Reconstruction (Gleason Court) — Improvement No. BA -401 6. Viking Hills Neighborhood Reconstruction (Polar Circle) — Improvement No. BA -402 7. Viking Hills Neighborhood Reconstruction (Vernon Court & Hills Rd) — Improvement No. BA -403 8. Valley Estates Neighborhood Reconstruction — Improvement No. 387 9. Richmond Hills Park Neighborhood Improvements — Improvement No. BA -388 Information / Background: Attached you will find the Final Project Costs Analysis, Final Assessment Roll, Certificate of Mailing, Notice of Public Hearing, Mailing List and other supporting documentation for each proposed assessment. All properties were notified per Minnesota State Statute Chapter 429 for special assessments. Staff included in the Notice of Public Hearing an invoice for each assessment. Some homeowners took advantage of the opportunity to fund their sanitary sewer service and water service replacements through special assessments and those assessments are reflected on each respective Final Assessment Roll. Additionally, the following comments are submitted for consideration: Staff received three letters of objection in regards to the assessments from 5009 Normandale Court of the Richmond Hills Park Neighborhood Project and 6305 Hillside Road and 6241 Crescent Drive of the Countryside Neighborhood Project. The three letters are attached. Please recall that a sidewalk was constructed along Creek Valley Road near Creek Valley Elementary School. The cost for the sidewalk was $10,091.32 and will be funded by the PACS fund. This cost was included in the original Notice of Public Hearing on Proposed Special Assessment mailed to the residents. The special assessment will be reduced by $118.72 from $7,393.34 to $7,274.62 to reflect these changes. r;ft, ^f rAin . AQA1 W SAth Cr . Pt ino Mnl ggA)A REPORT/ RECOMMENDATION Attachments for each improvement: • Resolution • Final Project Costs Analysis • Final Assessment Roll • Certificate of Mailing • Notice of Public Hearing 0 Mailing List - 0 5009 Normandale Court Assessment Objection Letter 0 6305 Hillside Road Assessment Objection Letter 0 6241 Crescent Drive Assessment Objection Letter 0 2012 Neighborhood Roadway Reconstruction Survey GAPMADMIMASSESSMENTS12013 ASSESSMENTS11tem VI.A vi -)iv Public Hearing - Special Assessments.dooc f ` J Page 2 RESOLUTION NO. 2013-93 A RESOLUTION LEVYING SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS FOR PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS WHEREAS, pursuant to proper notice duly given as required by law, the Edina City Council has met and heard and passed upon all written and oral objections to the proposed special assessments for the improvement listed below: Tracy Avenue. Reconstruction — Improvement No. BA -368 BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Edina, Minnesota as follows: 1. Each special assessment as set forth in the special assessment roll on file in the office of the City Clerk for each aforementioned improvement is hereby accepted and shall constitute the special assessments against the lands named therein, and each tract of land therein included in herein found to be benefited by the improvement in the amount of the special assessments levied against it. 2. The special assessments shall be payable in equal installments, the first of said installments together with interest at a rate of 3.4% per annum, on the entire special assessments from the date hereof to December 31, 2014. To each subsequent installment shall be added interest at the above rate for one year on all unpaid installments. The number of such annual installments shall be as follows: NUMBER OF NAME OF IMPROVEMENT INSTALLMENTS Tracy Avenue Levy No. 18600 15 3. The owner of the property so assessed may, at any time prior to certification of special assessment to the County Auditor, partially prepay an amount not less than 25% of the whole assessment to the City Treasurer and no interest shall be charged on the portion of the assessment prepaid; or pay the whole of the special assessments on such property, to the City Treasurer, except that no interest shall be charged if the entire special assessment is paid before November 25 following the adoption of this resolution and they may, at any time thereafter, pay to the City Treasurer the entire amount of the special assessments remaining unpaid. Such payment must be made before November 25, 2013, 4. The Clerk shall forthwith transmit a certified supplicate of these special assessments to the County Auditor to be extended. on the property tax lists of the County. Such special assessments shall be collected and paid over in the same manner as other municipal taxes. Adopted this 14`h day of October, 2013 ATTEST: City Clerk Mayor ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT 7450 Metro Boulevard o Edina, Minnesota 55439 Resolution No. 2013 -93 Page Two STATE OF MINNESOTA ) COUNTY OF ]HENNEPIN ) 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 14, 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 Tracy Avenue Reconstruction Improvement No. BA -368 Final Project Cost Analysis Project: BA -368 Amount Assessment Utilities Project Street Sidewalk/X -Walk Landscaping .. Lighting Storm Sewer Sanitary Sewer Water Main Total Amount Tracy Avenue Proposed 485 600.00 $ - $ - $ - $ 240,000.06' •.$ 165 000.00 $ 90 000.00 $ 980 600.00 Actual $493,877.26 $57,241.89. $72,997.79 $8,613.31 $381 310.57 $308,263.48. $193,327.53 $1,533,631.83 Misc. Expenses above_contractor Pavments - added to Utilitlesl Consulting Design Consulting Inspection Other (Faucet Repairs) Labor (Staff) Misc. Expenses (above contractor Payments - added to Assessment) Consulting Design $ 66,241.59 Consulting Inspection $ 111,910.51 Materials/Supplies $ 46.75 Street Name Signs $ 462.08 $ 178,660.93 Labor (Staff) $ 13,707.66 $ 31,554.59 $ 14,011.04 $ 8,467.48 $ 33,033.99 $ 27,173.92 $ 13,462.82 $ 761.00 $ 319.72 $ 269.27 $ 308.91 $ 64,908.30 $ -41;454.23 $ 23,000.21 M9dd nansn. nelcc naA7e Pa ment Nos. Actual Month) Pa ments Street Sidewalk/X -Walk Landsca In LI htln Storm Sewer Sancta Sewer - ,. Water Main 1 $ 90 308.66 $ 924.15 $ 1 250.00 $ 500.00 $ 11 517.45' $ 4'750.00" $ -80 316.22 2 $ 15 362.73 $ $ - $ $ 13 832.95 $ 15 187.75 3 $ 251,279.82 $ 6,813.50 $ 7.413.51 $ 15 293.40 $ 229 468.40 $ 176 918.30 $ 24 105.20 .4 $ 97,014.38 $ 49124.76 .$ 37 088.72 $ 7,092.15. $ 48.605'61 '$ 44,631.16- $ 27 362.73 5 9 4 737.18 $ 9,272.95 $ 28.50 $ 5,570.80. $ 12 009.62 $ 14 476.77 6 1 19 726.82 $ 16 430.96 $ 3.072 * 30 $ 15 511.07 $ 10 663.86 $ = 5.816.65' Final Pa ent $ 15,447.67 .$ 379.48 $ 1,541.65 $ 626.96 $ 5,733.94 1 $ 4;003.36 $_ _' 3,062.00 TOTALI $493,877.261 $57,241.89 $72,997.79 $26,613.31 $316,402.27 $266,809.25 $170,327.32 Monthly Total 189,566.48 44,383.43 711,292.13 310,914.51 46,095.82 71,221.66 30,795.06 1,404;269.09 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 Tracy Avenue Reconstruction Improvement No. BA-368 Assessment Roll PID 3211721420004 3211721420054 3211721130014 3211721420029 3211721420006 3211721130023 3211721130031 3211721130018 3211721130040 3211721130069 3211721130041 3211721130070 3211721130042 3211721130071 3211721130060 3211721130082 3211721130076 3211721130057 3211721130056 3211721130066 3211721130001 3211721130002 3211721130009 3211721130063 3211721130073 3211721420038 3211721420028 3211721420037 3211721420039 3211721420040 3211721420041 3211721420042 3211721420043 3211721420056 3211721130008 OWNER STEVEN J ENCK ISO 273 (Countryside School GREG & ROSEMARY K RUSTED WAYNE V FRIDLUND KENNETH J FRANK & LINDA M KLAVER KRISTA ERICKSON CHRISTINE EHRLICH DAVID &SUSAN NELSON KENNETH & JEANNINE KJELLAND R JONATHAN BARTLING MICHAEL & LYNDA SONNEK RICHARD CONKEY KENT GRAVELLE THOMAS CCIO J HT JAMES SUCCIO JR PATRICK & GWEN GOONEY CARLEEN MICHUDA MICHAEL & KRISTI CURTIS NEVADA LLC BARREL HART THOMAS &JANE WIDMARK SHASHIDHAR JOSHI & KASTURI JOG MARLIN SUNDERMAN WAYNE JAMES NELSON MICHELLE & JASON KALENBORN WAYNE & JANE FRIDLUND SHERI &ANDREW LANGFIELD ANTHONY & SAMANTHA LEITZ IBTISAM ALKAM SCOTT ROSEQUIST ROCHELLE LACKNER DENNIS DAHLIEN CLARICE &DONALD NOLTE VIVIAN POWLESS RICHARD & LAINE WEINBERG HOUSE NO 5700 5701 5616 5712 5701 5700 5701 5701 5600 5601 5604 5605 5608 5609 5612 5615 5621 5625 5629 15400 5708 5712 5715 5716 5617 5801 5712 5805 5809 5813 5817 ITRACY 5821 5825 5901 5616 5700 STREET BENTON AVENUE NORMANDALE RD GROVE STREET GROVE STREET GROVE STREET HAWKES DRIVE HAWKES DRIVE HAWKES TERRACE TRACYAVENUE TRACY AVENUE TRACY AVENUE ITRACY AVENUE TRACYAVENUE TRACY AVENUE TRACY AVENUE TRACY AVENUE TRACY AVENUE TRACY AVENUE TRACY AVENUE STATE HWY NO. 7 #400 TRACY AVENUE TRACY AVENUE TRACY AVENUE TRACY AVENUE TRA TRACY AVENUE TRACY AVENUE GROVE STREET TRACY AVENUE TRACY AVENUE TRACY AVENUE AVENUE LTRACY AVENUE AVENUE AVENUE N AVENUE N AVENUE CITY /STATEOP EDINA MN 55436 EDINA MN 55424 EDINA MN 55436 EDINA MN 55436 EDINA MN 55436 EDINA MN 55436 EDINA MN 55436 EDINA MN 55436 EDINA MN 55436 EDINA MN 55436 EDINA MN 55436 EDINA MN 55436 EDINA MN 55436 EDINA MN 55436 EDINA MN 55436 EDINA MN 55436 EDINA MN 55436 EDINA MN 55436 EDINA MN 55436 MINNETONKA MN 55345 EDINA MN 55436 EDINA MN 55436 EDINA MN 55436 EDINA MN 55436 EDINA MN 55436 EDINA MN 55436 EDINA MN 55436 EDINA MN 55436 EDINA MN 55436 EDINA MN 55436 EDINA MN 55436 EDINA MN 55436 EDINA MN 55436 EDINA MN 55436 EDINA MN 55436 EDINA, MN 55436 1 ASSESSABLE REU 1/3 4.0 1/3 1/3 1/3 1/3 1/3 1/3 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 . 10 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1/3 1/3 SEWER/ WATER $ 91247.23 $ 1 864.03 ROADWAY $ 142797 $ 17 135.59 $ 1,427.97 $ 1,427.97 $ 1,427.97 $ 1 427.97 $ 1 427.97 $ 1,427.97 $ 4 283.90 $ 4,283.90 $ 4,283.90 $ 4,283.90 $ 4,283.90 $ 4 283.90 $ 4,283.90 $ 4,283.90 $ 4 283.90 $ 4 283.90 $ 4,283.9 0 $ 4,283.90 $ 4 283.90 $ 4 283.90 $ 4 283.90 $ 4 283.90 $ 4 283.90 $ 4,283.90 $ 4,283.90 $ 4 283.90 $ 4 283.90 $ 4,283.90 $ 4,283.90 $ 4 283.90 $ 4 283.90 $ 4,283.90 $ 1 427.97 $ 1,427.97 TOTAL ASSESSMENT $ 1,427.97 $ 17 135.59 $ 1 427.97 $ 1,427.97 $ 1,427.97 $ 1 427.97 $ 1 427.97 $ 1 427.97 $ 4 283.90 $ 4,283.90 $ 4,283.90 $ 4,283.90 $ 4,283.90 $ 4 283.90 $ 4 283.90 $ 4.283.90 $ 4 283.90 $ 4 283.90 $ 4 283.90 $ 13 531.13 $ 4 283.90 $ 4.283.90 $ 4 283.90 $ 4 283.90 $ 4 283.90 $ 4 283.90 $ 6 147.93 $ 4 283.90 $ 4 283.90 $ 4,283.90 $ 4,283.90 $ 4 283.90 $ 4 283.90 $ 4 283.90 $ 1 427.93211721130032 $ 1 427.97 Total 33 PRELIMINARY ROADWAY COST (20 %) $ 141 368.62 TOTAL ASSESSMENT REU 33 ASSESSMENT COST (20 %) $141,368.62 AVERAGE COST PER REU $ 4,283.90 STATE OF MINNESOTA) COUNTY OF HENNEPIN) SS CITY OF EDINA ) CERTIFICATE OF MAILING NOTICE I, the undersigned, being the duly qualified acting City Clerk of the City of Edina, Minnesota, hereby certify that on the following dates September 26, 201.3, acting on behalf of 'said City, I deposited in the United States mail copies of the attached Notice of Public Hearing for Tracy Avenue Reconstruction, Improvement No. BA -368 (Exhibit 'A), enclosed in sealed envelopes, with postage thereon duly prepaid, addressed to the persons at the addresses as shown on the mailing list (Exhibit B), attached to the original hereof, which list is on file in my office, said persons being those appearing on the records of the County Auditor as owners of the property listed opposite their respective names, as of a date 17 days prior to the date of the hearing; and that I also sent said notice to the following corporations at the indicated addresses whose property is exempt from taxation and is therefore not carried on the records of said County Auditor. NAME ADDRESS WITNESS my hand and the seal of said City this 26th day of September, 2013. 11,19 ZIA �,W. I nn) NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING ON PROPOSED SPECIAL ASSESSMENT IMPROVEMENT NO. BA -368 The Edina City Council will meet at 7 p.m. Oct. 14, 2013, at City Hall, 4801 W. 50`' St., Edina, MN, to approve and adopt the listed special assessments against the described property, which is part of the Tracy Avenue' Reconstruction: Property Identification No. 321 1721420004 The special'assessment to this property for roadway reconstruction is: $1,427.97. The total amount of the proposed special assessment for the project is $141,368.62. The proposed assessment roll is on file with the City Clerk. No'invoices will be mailed. This is the only notice you will receive regarding payment. Payment Options l annual principal installments extending over a period of 15 years The proposed assessment is payable in equa at -the rate of 3.34 percent. Should the City Council adopt the assessment roll at the Oct. 14 meeting, you may pay the assessment in one of these ways: 1. Tay the whole of the assessment without interest to the City to the Assessing Office, 4801 W. 5e St, Edina, MN 55424 on or before Nov. 2.5, 2013. 2. Pay a minimum of 25 percent of the assessment to the Assessing Office, 4801 W. 50`x' St, Edina, MN 55424 on or before Nov. 25. The remaining balance will be certified to the County Auditor and your first year's payment will be payable with your real estate taxes in 2014, with interest on the remaining assessment at the rate of 3.34 percent per annum from Oct. 14, 2013 to Dec. 31, 2014. 3. Pay the assessment with your real estate taxes. If the special assessment is not paid in the Assessing Office by Nov. 25, 2013, it will be certified:to the County Auditor and your first year's payment will be payable with your real estate taxes in 2014, with interest on the entire assessment at the rate of 3.34 percent per annum from Oct. 14, 2013 to Dec. 31, 2014. Deferment The City Council may, at its discretion, defer the payment of assessments for a homestead property owned by a person age 65 or older for whom it would be a hardship to make payments. The. procedures to apply for such deferment are available from the Assessor's Office at Edina City Hall. Deferment applications must be filed with the Assessor's Office by Nov. 15, 2013. Your payment over 15 years: Beginning Balance Payable I I I 63.96 Principal I Installment # Year Principal Interest Total Balance Beginning Balance 1427.97 1 2014 63.96 59.61 123.57 1,364.01 2 2015 78.01 45.56 123.57 1,286.00 3 2016 80.62 42.95 123.57 1,205.38 4 2017 83.31 40.26 123.57 1,122.07 5 2018 86.09 37.48 123.57 1,035.98 6 2019 88.97 34.60 123.57 947.01 7 2020 91.94 31.63 123.57 855.07, 8 2021 95.01 28.56 123.57 760.06 9 2022 98.18 25.39 123.57 661.88 10 2023 101.46 22.11 123.57 560.42 11 2024 104.85 18.72 123.57 455.57 12 2025 108.35 15.22 123.57 347.22 13 2026 111.97 11.60 123.57 235.25 14 2027 115.71 7.86 123.57 119.54 15 2028 119.54 3.99 123.53 0.00 Totals 1 1,427.97 1 425.54 1 1,853.51 1 Objections /Appeals If you wish to object or appeal to this assessment I . File a signed, written objection with the City Clerk prior to the assessment hearing, or present the written objection to the Mayor at the assessment hearing. 2. Serve notice of the appeal to the Mayor or the City Clerk within 30 days after the adoption of the assessment and file such notice with the District Court within 10 days after the notice was served to the Mayor or the City Clerk. To comment on the special assessment, you may: o Write to City of Edina, Engineering Department, 7450 Metro Blvd, Edina, MN 55439. o Email to mail EdinalY N.gov, attention City Council and Engineering. o Attend the Oct. 14 public hearing and offer comments. If you have questions regarding the project, please call the Engineering Department at 952 - 826 -0371. If you have questions about paying your assessment, please call the Assessing Division of the Community Development Department at 952 - 826 -0365. September 26, 2013_ Debra A. Mangen City Clerk 2 Cut the bottom section and mail in with your payment if paying on or before November 25, 2013: PAYMENT PROCEDURE • If paying on or before Nov. 25, 2013, please cut and return this stub with your payment. • Make check payable to the City of Edina. • Mail payment or pay in person: Edina City, Hall, Assessing Division, 4801 W. 50`x' Street, Edina, MN 55424. Amount Enclosed: Name: 3 l Pay this amount by If not paid on or before Nov. 25, 2013, PID Impr. No. November 25, 2013, to the assessment will be placed on your I void interest charges. property taxes at 3.34% annual interest rate, spread out over 15 years. 3211721420004 BA -368 $1,427.97 Amount Enclosed: Name: 3 l LEFT BLANK INTENTIONALLY 3211721420004 3211721420054 3211721130014 STEVEN J ENCK ISD 273 (Countryside School) GREG & ROSEMARY K RUSTED 5700 BENTON AVENUE 5701 NORMANDALE RD 5616 GROVE STREET EDINA, MN 55436 EDINA, MN 55424 EDINA, MN 55436 3211721420029 3211721420006 3211721130023 WAYNE V FRIDLUND KENNETH J FRANK & LINDA M KRISTA ERICKSON 5.712 GROVE STREET KLAVER 5.700 HAWKES DRIVE EDINA, MN 55436 5701 GROVE STREET EDINA, MN 55436 EDINA, MN 55436 3211721130031 3211721130018 3211721130040 CHRISTINE EHRLICH DAVID & SUSAN NELSON KENNETH & JEANNINE KJELLAND 5701 HAWKES DRIVE 5701 HAWKES TERRACE 5600 TRACY AVENUE EDINA, MN 55436 EDINA, MN 55436 EDINA, MN 55436 3211721130069 3211721130041 3211721130070 R JONATHAN BARTLING MICHAEL & LYNDA SONNEK RICHARD CONKEY 5601 TRACY AVENUE 5604 TRACY AVENUE 5605 TRACY AVENUE EDINA, MN 55436 EDINA, MN 55436 EDINA, MN 55436 3211721130042 3211721130071. 3211721130060 TRENT DAVIS & ALLYSON BETH KENT GRAVELLE THOMAS SHANIGHT PEARSON 5609 TRACY AVENUE 5612 TRACY AVENUE 5608'TRACY AVENUE EDINA, MN 55436 EDINA, MN 55436 EDINA, MN 55436 3211721130082 3211721130076 3211721130057 JAMES SUCCIO JR PATRICK &'GWEN CO.ONEY CARLEEN MICHUDA 5615 TRACY AVENUE 5621 TRACY-AVENUE 5625 TRACY AVENUE EDINA, MN 55436 EDINA :MNZ5436 EDINA, MN 55436 3211721130056 32117211.30066 3211721130001 MICHAEL & KRISTI CURTIS NEVADA LLC DARREL HART 5629 TRACY AVENUE 15400 STATE HWY NO. 7 #400 5708 TRACY EDINA, MN -55436 MINN,ETONKA, MN 55345 EDINA, MN 55436 3211721130002 3211721.130009 3211721130063 THOMAS & JANE WIDMARK SHASHIDHAR JOSHI & KASTURI MARLIN SUNDERMAN 5712 TRACY AVENUE JOG 5716 TRACY AVENUE EDINA, MN 55436 5715 TRACY AVENUE EDINA, MN 55436 EDINA, MN 55436 3211721130073 3211721420038 3211721420028 WAYNE JAMES NELSON MICHELLE & JASON KALENBORN WAYNE & JANE FRIDLUND 5617 TRACY AVENUE 5801 TRACY AVENUE 5712 GROVE STREET EDINA, MN 55436 EDINA, MN 55436 EDINA, MN 55436 3211721420037 3211721420039 3211721420040 SHERI & ANDREW LANGFIELD ANTHONY & SAMANTHA LEITZ IBTISAM ALKAM 5805 TRACY AVENUE 5809 TRACY AVENUE 5813 TRACY AVENUE EDINA, MN 55436 EDINA, MN 55436 EDINA, MN 55436 3211721420041 3211721420042 3211721420043 SCOTT ROSEQUIST ROCHELLE LACKNER DENNIS DAHLIEN 917 TRACY AVENUE 5821 TRACY AVENUE 5825 TRACY AVENUE TINA, MN 55436 EDINA, MN 55436 EDINA, MN 55436 3211721420056 3211721130008 3211721130032 CLARICE & DONALD NOLTE VIVIAN POWLESS RICHARD & LAINE WEINBERG 5901 TRACY AVENUE 5616 WARDEN AVENUE 5700 WARDEN AVENUE EDINA, MN 55436 EDINA, MN 55436 EDINA, MN 55436 RESOLUTION NO. 2013-94 A RESOLUTION LEVYING SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS FOR PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS WHEREAS, pursuant to proper notice duly given as required by law, the Edina City Council has met and heard and passed upon all written and oral objections to the proposed special assessments for the improvement listed below: Countryside Neighborhood Reconstruction — Improvement No. BA -385 BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Edina, Minnesota as follows: 1. Each special assessment as.-set forth in the special assessment roll on file in the office of the City Clerk for each aforementioned improvement is hereby accepted and shall constitute the special assessments against the lands named therein, and each tract of land therein included in herein found to be benefited by the improvement in the amount of the special assessments levied against it. 2. The special assessments shall be payable in equal installments, the first of said installments together with interest at a rate of 3.4% per annum, on the entire special assessments from the date hereof to December. 31, 2014. To each subsequent installment shall be added interest at the above rate for one .year on all, unpaid installments. The number of such annual installments shall be as follows; NUMBER OF NAME OF IMPROVEMENT INSTALLMENTS Countryside Neighborhood Levy No. 18594 15 3. The owner of the property so assessed may, at any time prior to certification of special assessment to the County Auditor, partially prepay an amount not less than 25% of the whole assessment to the City Treasurer and no interest shall be charged on the portion of the assessment prepaid; or pay the whole of the special .assessments on such property, to the City Treasurer, except that no interest shall be charged. if the entire special assessment is paid before November 25 following the adoption of this resolution and they may, at any time thereafter, pay to the City Treasurer the entire amount of the special assessments remaining unpaid. Such payment must be made before November 25, 2013. 4. The Clerk shall forthwith transmit a certified supplicate of these special assessments to the County Auditor to be extended on the property tax lists of the County. Such special assessments shall be collected and paid over in the same manner as other municipal taxes. Adopted this 14`h day of October, 2013 ATTEST: City Clerk Mayor ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT 7450 Metro Boulevard . Edina, Minnesota 55439 Resolution No. 2013 -94 Page Two STATE OF MINNESOTA ) COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) 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 14, 2013, and as recorded in the Minutes of said Regular Meeting. WITNESS my hand and seal of said City this day of 920. City Clerk ..Countryside, Neighborhood,Roadway =Reconstruction Improvement °No:. BA85 Final Project Cost Analysis Project: BA -385 Amount Assessment Utilities Project . Street Storm Sewer - Sanitary Sewer Water Main Total Amount. Countryside Proposed $1,433,725.00 $ 530 000.00 $ 400;000.00: $1 470,000.00: $ 2i833,725.00 Actual $1,180,835.031 $522234.72 $263,400:35 $410,006:66 -$ 2,376;476:76 Misc. Expenses (above contractor Payments - added to Utilities) Consulting Design $ 139.10 $ 3,403.96 $ 472.50 Consulting Inspection Labor (Staff) $ 10,257.55 $ 2,955.71 $ 8,685.32 $ 10,396.65 $ 6,359.67 $ 9,157.82 Misc. Expenses (above contractor payments - added to Assessment Consulting Design $ ' 13,720.50 Consulting Inspection $ 20,735.64 Materials /Supplies $ 857.15 Street Name Signs $ Sanita Sewer . .. $ $ 35,313.29 Labor (Staff) $ 68,996.08 Payment Nos. Actual CS Payment $ 276,856.21 -- Actual Morfi Iv Pa ments $ 499,019.38 $ 499,019.38 Street•. $ Storm Sewer Sanita Sewer . .. $ Water Main. 1 $ '33,498.75 ;$- 5,955.55 $ 167713.71 $ ' 69,688.20 2 $ 212746:14 $ 169,572.01 $- 36,833.88 $ 79,867.36 3 $ 158,217.75 $ 2,872.33 $ 14,225.30 $ 16,025.55 4 $ 52,595.39 $ 93,066.05::$ 1,223.13 $ 219,050.05 5 $ 266,956.17 $ . ': 221,56121 $ 876.38 $ 1,485.80 6 $ 214 636.70 $ $ 28,474 - 35 $ 7 $ 218;678.50 $ 18 810.93 $ 9,446.69 $ ' 14,731.88 Final Payment $ 23,505.63 TOTAL $1,180,835.03 $511,838.07 $257,040.68 $400,848.84 Monthly Total Actual CS Payment $ 276,856.21 -- $ . 276,856.21 $ 499,019.38 $ 499,019.38 $ 191,340.93 $ 191,340.93 $ 365,934.61 $ 365,934.61 $ 489,126.81 $ 489,126.81 $ 243,111.05 $ 243,111.05 $ 261,668.00 $ 261,668.00 $ 23,505.63 $ 23,505.63 $ 2,350,562.62 $ 2,350,562.62 1 1 1 1 1 1 1� 1' 1. 1� 21 2 Z 2; 2, 21 LI 21 3( 3' 3: 3' 3d 3! 3E 3i 3E 3E 4C 41 4e 42' 44 4E 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 bu 59 60 61 62 63 Countryside Neighborhood Roadway Reconstruction Improvement No. BA -385 Assessment Roll PID OWNER NO STREET CITY /STATE/ZIP ASSESSABLE REU ASSESSMENT AMOUNT 1 3211721410021 P ANDERSON & F NORDAHL 5421 COUNTRYSIDE RD EDINA,.MN 55436 113 $ 3,789.79 2 3211721410022 ZACHERY & LINDSAY ATHERTON ELY 5501 COUNTRYSIDE RD EDINA, MN 55436 1/3 $ 3,789.79 3 3211721440052 HARRIETT HERB 6001 CRESCENT DR EDINA, MN 55436 1.0 $ 11,369.37 4 3211721440053 STEPHEN & ELLEN DOSDALL 6005 CRESCENT DR EDINA, MN 55436 1.0 $ 11,369.37' 5 3211721440054 PETER & MARGARET KOETS 6009 CRESCENT DR EDINA, MN 55436 1.0 $ 11,369.37 6 3211721440055 ROBERT &.CARMEN EIDE 6013 CRESCENT DR EDINA, MN 55436 .1.0 $ 11,369.37 7 3211721440056 JOHN & JEANIE MURPHY 6017 CRESCENT DR EDINA, MN 55436 1.0 $ 11,369.37 8 .3211721440057 MICHAEL BENNETT 6101 CRESCENT DR EDINA, MN 55436 1.0 $ 11,369.37 9 3211721440049 ERIC SCHNEIDER 6104 CRESCENT DR EDINA; MN 55436 1.0 $ 11,369.37 0 3211721440058 MARJORIE MEESTER 6105 CRESCENT DR EDINA, MN 55436 1.0 $ 11',369.37 1 3211721440048 SHANNON & EMIL BUSSE III 6108 CRESCENT DR- EDINA, MN 55436 1.0 $ 11,369.37 2 3211721440059 MARK & HELENE ROBACK 6109 CRESCENT DR EDINA, MN 55436 1.0 $ 11,369.37 3 3211721440047 MELISSA KOENING, &.ITAI SHER 6112 CRESCENT DR EDINA, MN 55436 7.0 $ 1.1,369.37 4 3211721440060 ADA W LI_STRACHOTA 6113 CRESCENT DR EDINA, MN 55436 1.0- $ 11;369.37 5 3211721440046 KOULA E•TRIANTAFYLLOU 6116 CRESCENT DR EDINA, MN 55436.: 1.0 $ 11;369.37 8 3211721440061 DUANE A SCHLEY 6117 ICRESCENT DR EDINA, MN 55436 1.0 $ 11,369.37 7 3211721440045 WALTER &.ALICE LEHRKE P.O. BOX 39158 EDINA, MN 55439 1.0 $ 11,369.37 B 3211721440062 ROSEMARY& PATRICK MANION 6121 CRESCENT DR EDINA, MN 55436 1.0 $ 11,369.37 9 3211721440063 DENISEA CLARK SMITH- 6125 CRESCENT DR EDINA, MN 55436 1.0 $ 11,369.37 0511621110052 ALEXANDER A GIACOMUZZI 6200 CRESCENT DR EDINA, MN 55436 1.0 $ 11,369.37 1 0511621110054 TIMOTHY & LAUREN MCNAMARA 6201 CRESCENT DR EDINA, MN 55436 1.0 $ 11,369.37 2 0511621110053 BERNARD BJERKEN 6204 CRESCENT DR EDINA, MN 55436 1.0 $ 11,369.37 3 0511621110055 LISA HEIM 6205 CRESCENT DR EDINA, MN 55436 1.0 $ 11,369.37 t 0511621120048 THOMAS & ELIZABETH BENNETT 6208 CRESCENT DR EDINA, MN 55436 1.0 $ 11,369.37 i 0511621110056 ALLEN D MILLER 6209 CRESCENT DR EDINA, MN 55436 1.0 $ 11,369.37 1511621110057 SAVINA.GHELFI & DAVID LOWE 6213 CRESCENT DR EDINA, MN 55436 1.0 $ 11,369.37 511621110058 ROBERT GRANSON 6217 CRESCENT DR EDINA, MN 55436. 1.0 $ 11,369.37 0511621120037 PAUL & JANE SCHLUTER 6220 CRESCENT DR EDINA, MN 55436 1.0 $ 11,369.37 0511621120036 ANTHONY - JACHIMOWICZ 6228 CRESCENT DR EDINA, MN 55436 1.0 $ 11,369.37 0511621120020 JENNY COVINGTON & B CRAGGS 6229. CRESCENT DR EDINA, MN 55436 1.0 $ 11,369.37 1 0511621120019 RICHARD METZGER 6233 CRESCENT DR EDINA, MN 55436 1.0 $ 11,369.37 > 0511621120035 DAVID STRAND 6236 CRESCENT DR EDINA, MN 55436 1.0 $ 11,369.37 3 0511621120018 TIMOTHY`& ANNE.TINBERG 6237 CRESCENT DR EDINA, MN 55436 1.0 $ 11,369.37 1 0511621120017 STACY L JOHNSON 6241 CRESCENT DR EDINA, MN 55436 1.0 $ 11,369.37 i 0511621120041 MARIA A RUZICKA 6201 CREST LN EDINA, MN 55436 1.0 $ 11,369.37 i 0511621120045 MARY & GORDON CLEAVELAND 6204 CREST LN EDINA, MN 55436 1.0 $ 11,369.37 0511621120044 LYNN CEDERGREN c/o CYNDI JOHNSTON 20363 INDIO PATH LAKEVILLE, MN 55044 1.0 $ 11,369.37 1 0511621120042 SHARON & LEE HARRISON 6209 CREST LN EDINA, MN 55436 1.0 $ 11,369.37 1 0511621120043 ISAAC HAACOB 6212 CREST LN EDINA, MN 55436 1.0 $ 11,369.37 1 3211721440026 JUDITH & GEORGE ROOT 5500 HIGHLAND RD EDINA, MN 55436 1.0 $ 11,369.37 3211721440034 LARRY & BETH FORBORD 5501. HIGHLAND RD EDINA, MN 55436 1.0 $ 11,369.37 3211721440025 MARY:E KALB ' . 5504 HIGHLAND RD EDINA, MN 55436 1.0 $ 11,369.37 3211721440035 RICHARD & CARI KAPSNER 13719 ASHCROFT RD SAVAGE, MN 55378 1.0 $ 11,369.37 3211721440024 ROBERT.& MARILYN SEDOFF 5508 HIGHLAND RD EDINA, MN 55436 1.0 $ 11,369.37 3211721440066 M LISTVAN & J GAASEDELEN 5509 HIGHLAND RD EDINA, MN 55436 1.0 $ 11,369.37 3211721440023 MICHAEL & LISA ECKROTH 5512 HIGHLAND RD EDINA, MN 55436 1.0 $ 11,369.37 32117214400.67 SARA & MATTHEW MCLENIGHAN 5513 HIGHLAND RD EDINA, MN 55436 1.0 $ 11,369.37 3211721440022 TODD & JENNIFER MILLER 5516 HIGHLAND RD EDINA, MN 55436 1.0 $ 11,369.37 3211721440038 SCOTT & AMANDA CORELD 5517 HIGHLAND RD EDINA, MN 55436 1.0 $ 11,369.37 3211721440021 SEAN T KELLENBERGER 5520 HIGHLAND RD EDINA, MN 55436 1.0 $ 11,369.37 3211721430061 Y ORANDI & D SLUZEWSKI 5600 HIGHLAND RD EDINA, MN 55436 1.0 $ 11,369.37 3211721430060 ROBERT & LORI LOMICKA 5604 HIGHLAND RD EDINA, MN 55436 1.0 $ 11,369.37 3211721430051 RICHARD & ANGELIA PERRIN 5608- HIGHLAND RD EDINA, MN 55436 1.0- $ 11,369.37 0511621120029 TIMOTHY& MARIAN E OLSON 6201 HILLSIDE RD EDINA, MN 55436 1.0 $ 11,369.37 0511621120004 ALFREDA TERRY 6204 HILLSIDE RD EDINA, MN 55436 1.0 $ 11,369.37 '511621120030 MARY & JOHN LAMB 6205 HILLSIDE RD EDINA, MN 55436 1.0 $ 11,369.37 il1621120005 S A TURNER 6208 HILLSIDE RD EDINA, MN.55436 1.0 $ 11,369.37 J511621120031 ANTHONY D OLSON 6209 HILLSIDE RD EDINA, MN 55436 1.0 $ 11,369.37 0511621120006 EVELYN THOMPSON 6212 HILLSIDE RD EDINA, MN 55436 1.0 $ 11,369.37 0511621120032 SUSAN S PETERSEN 6213 HILLSIDE RD EDINA, MN 55436 1.0 $ 11,369.37 0511621120033 MARC SANDLER 6217 HILLSIDE RD EDINA, MN 55436 1.0 $ 11,369.37 0511621120034 TIMOTHY & SARAH ROBB 1 6221 IHILLSIDE RD JEDINA, MN 55436 1.0 $ 11,369.37 0511621120007 MARY & MARK VIDELE 1 6300 IHILLSIDE RD I EDINA, MN 55436 1.0 $ 11,369.37 I I I 1 I f i i i i i i i i i E E E E 8 8 8 8 8 8 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9, 10 10 10: 10: 10, 10; 101 10' 101 10! 111 11' 11: 11: 11� IV 11( Ili 11F 11E 12( Countryside Neighborhood Roadway Reconstruction Improvement No. BA -385 Assessment Roll PID OWNER NO, STREET CITY /STATE121P ASSESSABLE REU ASSESSMENT AMOUNT - 14 051. 1621120008 D W & RM ANDERSON 11727 TANGLEWOOD DR EDEN PRAIRIE,';MN 55347 1.0 $ 11,369.37 ;5 :0511621120028 JEAN & DAVID WIKOFF 6305 HILL'SIDE'RD, EDINA: MN"'55436 1:0 .$ 11;369.37 6 051;1621120009 DELORES R STROM. 6308.. HILLSIDE RD EDINA, MN 55436 . 1.0 $ 11369.37 7 0511621120027 KATHERINE& JAMES OSTLUND 6309 HILLSIDE RD EDINA; MN 55436:.-' 1.0 $ 11 :369:37 �8 0511621120065 BURKE & CRAIG LIPPERT 6312' HILLSIDE RD EDINA, MN 55436 1.0 $ 11,369.37. 9 0511621120026 TODD &SANDRA WAKEFIELD 6313 HILLSIDE RD EDINA „MN 55436 1.0 $ 11,369.37. 0 3211721440033 MICHAEL J MCDERMOTT 7501 NORTH AVE E SCOTTSDALE;AZ 85258 .1.0 $ 11,369.37 1' 3211721440050 JOHN J & LAUREN�J MADDEN 5501 HUNTER ST EDINA, MN155436 1.0 _ $ 11,369:37' 2 3211721440032 RICK & CAMERON`ROMER 5504 HUNTER ST EDINA; MN 55436 1.0 $ ' 11',369:37 3 3211721440031 BETH R MOORHEAD 5508 HUNTER ST EDINA, MN 55436 1.0 $ 11,369.37. 4 321:1721440051 MARK & JILL GIERACH 5509" HUNTER ST EDINA, MN 55436 1.0 $_ 11,369.37 5 3211721440030 MITCHELL & ERIN BLESKE .5512 HUNTER ST EDINA, MN 55436 1.0 $ 11,369.37 6 '321.1721440029 STEVEN & JULIA SCHOONMAKER 5516 HUNTER ST EDINA, MN 55436 1:0 $ 11,369.37 7 .3211721430033 BRICEMARTINSON 6100 RIDGEWAY RD EDINA, MN 55436 1.0 $ 11,369.37 B :3211721430032 KIMBERLY & CHAD NYBERG 6104. RIDGEWAY RD EDINA: MN 55436- 1.0 $ 11,369.37 9 321,1721430040 EDINA DESIGN:BUILD LLC 5201. EDEN AVE #100 EDINA, MN 55436 1.0 $ 11,369.37 D 3211721430031 JENNIE & GREGORY JOHNSON 6108 RIDGEWAY RD EDINA, MN 55436 1:0 $ 11,369.37 1 321,1:721430041 PETER V-& PAN F HALL 6109.: RIDGEWAY RD EDINA, MN 55436 1.0 $ 11,369.37 2 3211:721430030 PAUL FREDRICKSON 6112 RIDGEWAY RD EDINA, MN 55436' 1.0 $ 11,369:37 3 3214721430042 THOMAS & -MARY BATES 6113;; RIDGEWAY RD EDINA, MN 55436 1.0 $ 11,369.37 4 3211721430029 WALDEMAR DANIELSON 611&- RIDGEWAY RD EDINA, MN 55436 1.0. $ 11,369.37 5 321,172143.0043 RICHARD& KRISTA PETERSON RD EDINA,-MN 55436 1.0 $ 11,369.37 3 ;3211721430028 _:6117-. K C FISCHER & P M SULLIVAN 6120'• RIDGEWAY RD' EDINA, MN 55436 1.0 $ 11,369.37 . 7 32,11721440016 MARK LIDKE & BETSY KITSLAAR 6121 . RIDGEWAY RD EDINA, MN 55436 1.0 $ 11,369.37 3 3211721430027 DAVID & ALISON MIRELEZ 6124:: RIDGEWAY:RD EDINA, MN 55436 1.0 $ 11,369.37 ) !3211721430026 MICHELLE & ANGEL ARREOLA 6128' RIDGEWAY RD EDINA, MN 55436 1.0 $ 11,369:37 ) ,3211721440015 STEPHEN CLARK & K COLLINS -CLARK 6132; RIDGEWAY RD EDINA, MN 55436 1.0 $ 11,369.37 I 321,1721430050 CATHY& BRUCE UTNE 6013. TRACY -AVE:. EDINA, MN 55436:- 1/3 $ 3,789.79 > 3291721430039 HERMAN BAINS .6101.: TRACY AVE. EDINA, MN 55436 =:, 113 $ 3,789.79 3 •0511621120003 ALEXANDRE PIMKINE 620V TRACYAVE' EDINA; MN 55436• '; 1/3 $ 3,789.79 3 0511621120022 CAROL VOGT 8445; POWERS PLACE CHANHASSEN,:MN 55317 113 $ 3,789.79 i 3211721430046 SANDRA & BRIAN.BARRY 6100 WESTRIDGE BLVD EDINA, MN 55436. 1.0 $ 11,369.37 i 3211721440027 BRIGID & ALEXANDER SCOTT 6101 WESTRIDGE BLVD EDINA; MN 55436` ;.. " •1.0 `$. ;1 11,369.37 3211721430045 SCOTT & TAYVA BANCROFT 6104. WESTRIDGE BLVD EDINA, MN 55436:. 1.0 $ 11,369.37 1 3211721440028 SUMA & BADRINATH KONETY 6105 WESTRIDGE BLVD EDINA, MN 55436 1:0 4 11,369.37 I -3211721430044 RHONDA &• GERARD GREENE :6108 WESTRIDGEBLVD . EDINA, MN 55436 1.0 $ _ 11,369.37 1 13211721440020 LISA S HAWKS : 61.12 WESTRIDGE BLVD ; EDINA, MN 55436: 1.0 $ 11,369.37. 321.1721440039 GERALD KOCH 6113 WESTRIDGE BLVD EDINA, MN 55436 1.0 $ • 11,369.37 - 3211721440019 SHARON ,& RODGER PEISSIG 6116 WESTRIDGE BLVD EDINA, MN 55436 1.0 $ 11,369.37 3211721440040 PETES & AMANDA DUPONT 6117, WESTRIDGE BLVD EDINA, MN 55436 1.0 $ 11,369.37 3211721440018 THEODORE &'KAREN OLSON 6120 WESTRIDGE. BLVD EDINA, MN 55436 1.0 $ 11,369.37 3211721440041 PAUL &JULIE ANDERSON 16121 WESTRIDGE BLVD EDINA, MN 55436 1.0 $, 11,369.37 3211721440017 ROBERT W SIT 6124 WESTRIDGE BLVD EDINA, MN 55436 1.01 $ 11,369.37 3211721440042 AARON &_AMBER KOEHLER 6125; WESTRIDGE BLVD EDINA, MN 55436 1.0 ' $ 11,369.37 3211721440014 ELIZABETH & CHRISTOPHER PSIHOS 6128 WESTRIDGE BLVD EDINA, MN 55436 1.0 $ 11,369.37 3211721440043 BONNIE L WEYNARD 6129 WESTRIDGE BLVD EDINA, MN 55436 1.0 $ 11,369.37 3211721440044 KIMBERLY & ANDREW NOOLEEN 6133 WESTRIDGE BLVD EDINA, MN 55436 1.0 $ 11,369.37 0511621120046 JOHN P & JENNA C FARRELL 6200. WESTRIDGE BLVD EDINA, MN 55436 1.0 $ 11,369.37 0511621120047 NANCY & GEORGE WINTER 6201 WESTRIDGE BLVD EDINA, MN 55436 1.0 $ 11,369.37 0511621120040 JEFFREY & BARBARA MANDEL 6204 WESTRIDGE BLVD EDINA, MN 55436 1.0 $ 11,369.37 0511621120039 STEPHEN E MCLANE 6208 WESTRIDGE BLVD EDINA, MN 55436 1.0 $ 11,369.37 0511621120038 JEFFREY KAHRMANN & EILEEN WHELAN 6212 WESTRIDGE BLVD EDINA, MN 55436 1.0 $ 11,369.37 0511621120049 CHARLOTTE M SEGUIN 6215 WESTRIDGE BLVD EDINA, MN 55436 1.0 $ 11,369.37 0511621.120050 NYDIA CARVER 6219 WESTRIDGE BLVD EDINA, MN 55436 1.0 $ 11,369.37 0511621120021 SCOTT SAKAGUCHI & LAURIE MILLER 6220 WESTRIDGE BLVD EDINA, MN 55436 1.0 $ 11,369.37 0511621120051 ROBERT ARTHUR REED II 6223 WESTRIDGE BLVD EDINA, MN 55436 1.0 $ 11,369.37 05116211200521 TONY JONES & MICHELLE FROST -JONES 6227 IWESTRIDGE BLVD JEDINA, MN 55436 1.0 $ 11,369.37 I Ota1 115 PRELIMINARY TOTAL ROADWAY COST $ 1,318;847.09 TOTAL ASSESSMENT REU 116 AVERAGE COST PER REU $ 11,369.37 STATE OF MINNESOTA) COUNTY OF HENNEPIN) SS CERTIFICATE OF MAILING NOTICE CITY OF EDINA ) I, the undersigned, being the duly qualified acting City Clerk of the City of Edina, Minnesota, hereby certify that on the following dates September 26, 2013, acting on behalf of said City, I deposited in the United States mail copies of the attached Notice of Public Hearing for Countryside Neighborhood Roadway Reconstruction, Improvement No. BA -385 (Exhibit A), enclosed in sealed envelopes, with postage thereon duly prepaid, addressed to the persons at the addresses as shown on the mailing list (Exhibit B), attached to the original hereof, which list is on file in my office, said persons being those appearing on the records of the County Auditor as owners of the property listed opposite their respective names, as of a date 17 days prior to the date of the hearing; and that I also sent said notice to the following corporations at the indicated addresses whose property is exempt from taxation and is therefore not carried on the records of said County Auditor. NAME ADDRESS WITNESS my hand and the seal of said City this 26th day of September, 2013. l� ON PROPOSED SPECIAL ASSESSMENT IMPROVEMENT NO. BA -385 The Edina City Council will meet at 7 p.m. Oct. 14, 2013, at City Hall, 4801 W. 50th St., Edina, MN, to approve and adopt the listed special assessments against the described property, which is part of the Countryside Neighborhood Roadway Reconstruction: Property Identification No. 3211721410021 The special assessment to this property for. roadway reconstruction is: $3,789.79. The total amount of the proposed special assessment for the project is $1,318,847.09. The proposed assessment roll is on file with the City Clerk. No. invoices will be mailed. This is the.only notice you will receive regarding payment. Payment Options The,proposed assessment is payable in equal annual principal installments extending over a period of 15 years at the rate of 3.34 percent. Should the City Council adopt the assessment roll at the Oct. 14 meeting, you may pay the assessment in one of `these ways: Pay the whole of the assessment without interest to the City to the Assessing Office, 4801 W. 50`'' St, Edina, MN 55424 on or before Nov. 25, 2013. 2. Pay a minimum of 25 percent of the assessment to the Assessing Office, 4801 W. 50' St, Edina, MN 55424 on or before Nov. 25. The remaining balance will be certified to the County Auditor and your first year's payment will be payable with your real estate taxes in 2014, with interest on the remaining assessment at the rate of 3.34 percent per annum from Oct. 14, 2013 to. Dec. 31, 2014. 3. Pay the assessment with your real estate taxes. If the special assessment is not paid in the Assessing Office by Nov. 25, 2013, it will be certified to the County Auditor and your first year's payment will be.payable with your real estate taxes in 2014, with interest on the entire assessment at the rate of 3.34 percent per annum from Oct. 14, 2013 to Dec. 31, 2014. (Deferment The City Council may, at its discretion, defer the payment of assessments for a homestead property owned by a person age 65 or older for whom it would be a hardship to make payments. The procedures to apply for such deferment are available from the Assessor's Office at Edina City Hall. Deferment applications must be filed with the Assessor's Office by Nov. 15, 2013. Your payment over 15 years: BeRinning Balance Payable I I I 169.72 Principal I Installment # Year Principal Interest Total Balance BeRinning Balance 3,789.79 1 2014 169.72 158.22 327.94 3,620.07 2 2015 207.03 120.91 327.94 3,413.04 3 2016 213.94 114.00 327.94 3,199.10 4 2017 221.09 106.85 327.94 2,978.01 5 2018 228.47 99.47 327.94 2,749.54 6. 2019 236.11 91.83 327.94 2,513.43 7 2020 243.99 83.95 327.94 2,269.44 8 2021 252.14 75.80 327.94 2,017.30 9 2022 260.56 67.38 327.94 1,756.74 10 2023 269.27 58.67 327.94 1,487.47 11 2024 278.26 49.68 327.94 1,209.21 12 2025 287.55 40.39 327.94 921.66 13 2026 297.16 30.78 327.94 624.50 14 2027 307.08 20.86 327.94 317.42 15 2028 317.34 10.60 327.94 0.08 Totals 1 3,789.711 1,129.39 1 4,919.10 1 Objections /Appeals If you wish to object or appeal to this assessment: I. File a signed, written objection with the City Clerk prior to the assessment hearing, or present the written objection to the Mayor at the assessment hearing. 2. Serve notice of the appeal to the Mayor or the City Clerk within 30 days after the adoption of the assessment and file such notice with the District Court within 10 days after the notice was served to the Mayor or the City Clerk. To comment on the special assessment, you may: . o Write to City. of Edina, 'Engineering Department, 7450 Metro Blvd, Edina, MN 55439. • Email to mail __EdinaMN.gov, attention City Council and Engineering. • Attend the Oct. 14 public hearing and offer comments. If you have questions regarding the project, please call the Engineering Department at 952 - 826 -0371. If you have questions about paying your assessment, please call the Assessing Division of the Community Development Department at 952 - 826 -0365. September 26, 2013 Debra A. Mangen City Clerk 2 Cut the bottom section and mail in with your payment if paying on or before November 25, 2013: PAYMENT PROCEDURE o If paying on or before Nov. 25, 2013, please cut and return this stub with your payment. o Make check payable to the City of Edina. o Mail payment or pay in person: Edina City Hall, Assessing Division, 4801 W. 50' Street, Edina, MN 55424. Amount Enclosed: Name: 3 Pay this amount by If not paid on or before Nov. 25, 2013, PID Impr. No. November 25, 2013, to the assessment will be placed on your avoid interest charges. property taxes at 3.34% annual interest rate, spread out over 15 years. 3211721410021 BA -385 $3,789.79 Amount Enclosed: Name: 3 LEFT BLANK INTENTIONALLY 3211721410021 3211721410022 3211721440052 P ANDERSON & F NORDAHL ZACHERY & LINDSAY ATHERTON HARRIETT HERB 5421 COUNTRYSIDE RD ELY 6001 CRESCENT DR EDINA, MN 55436 550,1 COUNTRYSIDE RD EDINA, MN 55436 EDINA, MN 55436 3211721440053 3211721440054 3211721440055 STEPHEN & ELLEN DOSDALL PETER & MARGARET KOETS ROBERT & CARMEN EIDE 6005 CRESCENT DR 6009 CRESCENT DR 6013 CRESCENT DR EDINA, MN 55436 EDINA, MN'55436 EDINA, MN 55436 3211721440056 3211721440057 3211721440049 JOHN & JEANIE MURPHY MICHAEL BENNETT ERIC SCHNEIDER - 6017 CRESCENT DR 6101 CRESCENT DR 6104 CRESCENT DR EDINA, MN 55436 EDINA, MN 55436 EDINA, MN 55436 3211721440058 3211721440048 3211721440059 MARJORIE MEESTER SHANNON & EMIL BUSSE III MARK & HELENE ROBACK 6105 CRESCENT DR 6108 CRESCENT DR 6109 CRESCENT DR EDINA, MN 55436 EDINA, MN 55436 J EDINA, MN 55436 3211721440047 3211721440060 3211721440046 MELISSA KOENING & ITAI SHER ADA W LI- STRACHOTA KOULA E TRIANTAFYLLOU 6112 CRESCENT DR 61,13 CRESCENT-DR 6116 CRESCENT DR EDINA, MN 55436 EDINA,_MN 55436 EDINA, MN 55436 3211721440061 im 321:1721440045' 3211721440062 DUANE A SCHLEY WALTER & ALICE LEHRKE ROSEMARY& PATRICK MANION 6117 CRESCENT DR P.O. BOX 39158 6121 CRESCENT DR EDINA, MN 55436 EDINA, MN 55439 EDINA, MN 55436 3211721440063 051'1621110052 0511621110054 DENISE & CLARK SMITH ALEXANDER A_GIACOMUZZI TIMOTHY & LAUREN MCNAMARA 6125 CRESCENT DR 6200CRESCENTDR 6201 CRESCENT DR EDINA, MN 55436 EDINA, MN 55436 EDINA, MN 55436 0511621110053 0511621110055 0511621120048 BERNARD BJERKEN LISA HEIM THOMAS & ELIZABETH BENNETT 6204 CRESCENT DR 6205 CRESCENT DR 6208 CRESCENT DR EDINA, MN 55436 EDINA,.MN 55436 EDINA, MN 55436 0511621110056 0511621110057 0511621110058 ALLEN D MILLER SAVINA GHELFI & DAVID LOWE ROBERT GRANSON 6209 CRESCENT DR 6213 CRESCENT DR 6217 CRESCENT DR EDINA, MN 55436 EDINA, MN 55436 EDINA, MN 55436 0511621120037 0511621120036 0511621120020 PAUL & JANE SCHLUTER ANTHONY JACHIMOWICZ JENNY COVINGTON & B CRAGGS 6220 CRESCENT DR 6228 CRESCENT DR 6229 CRESCENT DR EDINA, MN 55436 EDINA, MN 55436 EDINA, MN 55436 0511621120019 0511621120035 0511621120018 RICHARD METZGER DAVID STRAND TIMOTHY & ANNE TINBERG 33 CRESCENT DR 6236 CRESCENT DR 6237 CRESCENT DR ,INA, MN 55436 EDINA, MN 55436 EDINA, MN 55436 0511621120017 0511621120041 0511621120045 STACY L JOHNSON MARIA A RUZICKA MARY & GORDON CLEAVELAND 6241 CRESCENT DR 6201 CREST LN 6204 CREST LN EDINA, MN 55436 EDINA, MN 55436 EDINA, MN 55436. 0511621120044 0511621120042 0511621120043 LYNN CEDERGREN do CYNDI SHARON & LEE HARRISON ISAAC H JACOB JOHNSTON 6209 CREST -.LN 6212 CREST LN 20363 INDIO PATH EDINA, MN 55436 EDINA, MN 55436 LAKEVILLE, MN 55044 3211721440026 3211721440034 3211721440025 JUDITH & GEORGE ROOT LARRY & BETH FORBORD MARY'E KALB . 5500 HIGHLAND RD 5501 HIGHLAND RD 5504 HIGHLAND RD EDINA, MN 55436 EDINA, MN 55436 EDINA, MN 55436 3211721440035 3211721440024 3211721440066 RICHARD & CARI KAPSNER ROBERT & MARILYN SEDOFF M LISTVAN & J GAASEDELEN 13719 ASHCROFT RD 5508 HIGHLAND RD 5509 HIGHLAND RD SAVAGE, MN 55378 EDINA, MN 55436 EDINA, MN 55436 3211721440023 3211721440067 3211721440022 MICHAEL & LISA ECKROTH SARA & MATTHEW MCLENIGHAN TODD & JENNIFER MILLER 5512 HIGHLAND RD 5513 HIGHLAND RD 5516 HIGHLAND RD EDINA, MN 55436 EDINA, MN 55436 EDINA, MN 55436 3211721440038 321.1721440021 3211721430061 SCOTT & AMANDA COFIELD SEAN T KELLENBERGER Y ORANDI & D SLUZEWSKI 5517 HIGHLAND RD 5520 HIGHLAND RD 5600 HIGHLAND RD EDINA, MN 55436 EDINA, MN 55436 EDINA, MN 55436 3211721430060 3211721430051 0511621120029 ROBERT & LORI LOMICKA RICHARD & ANGELIA PERRIN TIMOTHY& MARIAN E OLSON 5604 HIGHLAND RD 5608 HIGHLAND RD 6201 HILLSIDE RD EDINA, MN 55436 EDINA, MN 55436 EDINA, MN 55436 0511621120004 0511621120030 0511621120005 ALFREDA TERRY MARY & JOHN LAMB S A TURNER 6204 HILLSIDE RD 6205 HILLSIDE RD 6208 HILLSIDE RD EDINA, MN 55436 EDINA, MN 55436 EDINA, MN 55436 1621120031 0511621120006 0511621120032 JTHONY D OLSON EVELYN THOMPSON SUSAN S PETERSEN 6209 HILLSIDE RD 6212 HILLSIDE RD 6213 HILLSIDE RD EDINA, MN 55436 EDINA, MN 55436 EDINA, MN 55436 0511621120033 0511621120034 0511621120007 MARC SANDLER TIMOTHY & SARAH ROBB MARY & MARK VIDELE 6217 HILLSIDE RD 6221 HILLSIDE RD 6300 HILLSIDE RD EDINA, MN 55436 EDINA, MN 55436 EDINA, MN 55436 0511621120008 D W & P M ANDERSON 11727 TANG LEWOOD DR EDEN PRAIRIE, MN 55347 0511621120027 KATHERINE & JAMES OSTLUND 6309 HILLSIDE RD EDINA, MN 55436 3211721440033 MICHAEL J MCDERMOTT 7501 NORTH AVE E SCOTTSDALE,, AZ 85258 3211721440031 BETH R MOORHEAD 5508 HUNTER ST EDINA, MN 55436 3211721440029 STEVEN & JULIA SCHOONMAKER 5516 HUNTER ST EDINA, MN 55436 3211721430040 EDINA DESIGN BUILD LLC 5201 EDEN AVE # 100 EDINA, MN 55436 321172 1 430030 PAUL FREDRICKSON 6112 RIDGEWAY RD EDINA, MN 55436 3211721430043 RICHARD & KRISTA PETERSON 6117 RIDGEWAY RD EDINA, MN 55436 0511621120028 JEAN & DAVID WIKOFF 6305 HILLSIDE RD EDINA, MN 55436 0511621120065 BURKE &CRAIG LIPPERT 6312 HILLSIDE RD EDINA, MN 55436 . 3211721440050 JOHN J & LAUREN J MADDEN 5501 HUNTER ST EDINA, -MN 55436 321 172144005.1, ,- . MARK &JIL'LGIERACH 5509' H UNT, ER' ST EDINA, MN 55436 3211721430033 BRICE- MARTINSON. 61wO RIDGEWAY'RD EDINA; MN 55436 321:1721430031 JENNIE & GREGORY JOHNSON 6108 RIDGEWAY RD . EDINA, MN 55436 3211721430042 THOMAS & MARY BATES 6113 RIDGEWAY RD EDINA, MN 55436 3211721430028 K C FISCHER & P M SULLIVAN 6120 RIDGEWAY RD EDINA, MN 55436 0511621120009 DELORES R STROM 6308 HILLSIDE RD EDINA, MN 55436 0511621120026 TODD & SANDRA WAKEFIELD 6313 HILLSIDE RD EDINA, MN 55436 3211721440032 RICK & CAMERON ROMER 5504 HUNTER ST EDINA, MN 55436 3211721440030 MITCHELL & ERIN BLESKE 5512 HUNTER ST EDINA, MN 55436 3211721430032 KIMBERLY & CHAD NYBERG 6104 RIDGEWAY RD EDINA, MN 55436 3211721430041 PETER V & PAN F HALL 6109 RIDGEWAY RD EDINA, MN 55436 3211721430029 WALDEMAR DANIELSON 6116 RIDGEWAY RD EDINA, MN 55436 3211721440016 MARK LIDKE & BETSY KITSLAAR 6121 RIDGEWAY RD EDINA, MN 55436 3211721430027 3211721430026 3211721440015 DAVID & ALISON MIRELEZ MICHELLE & ANGEL ARREOLA STEPHEN CLARK & K COLLINS- 6124 RIDGEWAY RD 6128 RIDGEWAY RD CLARK EDINA, MN 55436 EDINA, MN 55436 6132 RIDGEWAY RD EDINA, MN 55436 3211721430050 3211721430039 0511621120003 CATHY& BRUCE UTNE HERMAN BAINS ALEXANDRE PIMKINE 3 TRACY AVE 6101 TRACY AVE 6201 TRACY AVE MINA, MN 55436 EDINA, MN 55436 EDINA, MN 55436 0511621120022 3211721430046 3211721440027 CAROL VOGT SANDRA & BRIAN BARRY BRIGID & ALEXANDER SCOTT 8445 POWERS PLACE 6100 WESTRIDGE BLVD 6101 WESTRIDGE BLVD CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 EDINA, MN 55436 EDINA, MN 55436 3211721430045 3211721440028 3211721430044 SCOTT & TAYVA BANCROFT SUMA & BADRINATH KONETY RHONDA & GERARD GREENE 6104 WESTRIDGE BLVD 6105 WESTRIDGE BLVD 6108 WESTRIDGE BLVD EDINA, MN 55436 EDINA, MN 55436 EDINA, MN 55436 3211721440020 3211721440039 3211721440019 LISA S HAWKS GERALD KOCH SHARON & RODGER PEISSIG 6112 WESTRIDGE BLVD 6113 WESTRIDGE BLVD 6116 WESTRIDGE BLVD EDINA, MN 55436 EDINA, MN 55436 EDINA, MN 55436 3211721440040 3211721440018 3211721440041 PETES & AMANDA DUPONT THEODORE & KAREN OLSON PAUL & JULIE ANDERSON 6117 WESTRIDGE BLVD 6120 WESTRIDGE BLVD 6121 WESTRIDGE BLVD '-NINA, MN 55436 EDINA, MN 55436 EDINA, MN 55436 3211721440017 3211721440042 3211721440014 ROBERT W SIT AARON & AMBER KOEHLER ELIZABETH & CHRISTOPHER 6124 WESTRIDGE BLVD 6125 WESTRIDGE BLVD PSIHOS EDINA, MN 55436 EDINA, MN 55436 6128 WESTRIDGE BLVD EDINA, MN 55436 3211721440043 3211721440044 0511621120046 BONNIE L WEYNARD KIMBERLY & ANDREW NOOLEEN JOHN P & JENNA C FARRELL 6.129 WESTRIDGE BLVD 6133 WESTRIDGE BLVD 6200 WESTRIDGE BLVD EDINA, MN 55436 EDINA, MN 55436 EDINA, MN 55436 0511621120047 0511621120040 0511621120039 NANCY & GEORGE WINTER JEFFREY & BARBARA MANDEL STEPHEN E MCLANE 6201 WESTRIDGE BLVD 6204 WESTRIDGE BLVD 6208 WESTRIDGE BLVD EDINA, MN 55436 EDINA, MN 55436 EDINA, MN 55436 0511621120038 0511621120049 0511621120050 JEFFREY KAHRMANN & EILEEN CHARLOTTE M SEGUIN NYDIA CARVER WHELAN 6215 WESTRIDGE BLVD 6219 WESTRIDGE BLVD 6212 WESTRIDGE BLVD EDINA, MN 55436 EDINA, MN 55436 EDINA, MN 55436 1621120021 0511621120051 0511621120052 SCOTT SAKAGUCHI & LAURIE ROBERT ARTHUR REED 11 TONY JONES & MICHELLE FROST - MILLER 6223 WESTRIDGE BLVD JONES 6220 WESTRIDGE BLVD EDINA, MN 55436 6227 WESTRIDGE BLVD EDINA, MN 55436 EDINA, MN 55436 RESOLUTION NO. 2013-95 A RESOLUTION LEVYING SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS FOR PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS WHEREAS, pursuant to proper notice duly given as required by law, the Edina City Council has met and heard and passed upon all written and oral objections to the proposed special assessments for the improvement listed below: Viking Hills Neighborhood Reconstruction — Improvement No. BA -386 BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Edina, Minnesota as follows: 1. Each special assessment as set (forth in the special assessment roll on file in the office of the City Clerk for each aforementioned improvement is hereby accepted and shall constitute the special assessments against the lands named therein, and each tract of land therein included in herein found to be benefited by the improvement in the amount of the special assessments levied against it. 2. The special assessments shall be payable in equal installments, the first of said installments together with interest at a rate of 3.4% per annum, on the entire special assessments from the date hereof to December 31, 2014. To each subsequent installment shall be added interest at the above rate for one .year on all unpaid installments. The number of such annual installments shall be as follows:. NUMBER OF NAME OF IMPROVEMENT INSTALLMENTS Viking Hills Neighborhood Levy No. 18595 15 3. The owner of the property so assessed may, at any time prior to certification of special assessment to the County Auditor,' partially prepay an amount not less than 25% of the whole assessment to the City Treasurer and-no interest shall be charged on the portion of the assessment prepaid; or pay the whole of the special assessments on such property, to the City Treasurer, except that no interest shall be charged if the entire special assessment is paid before November 25 following the adoption of this resolution and they may, at any time thereafter, pay to the City Treasurer the entire amount of the special assessments remaining unpaid. Such payment must be made before November 25, 2013. 4. The Clerk shall forthwith transmit a certified supplicate of these special assessments to the County Auditor to be extended on the property tax lists of the County. Such special assessments shall be collected and paid over in the same manner as other municipal taxes. Adopted this 14th day of October, 2013 ATTEST: City Clerk Mayor ...ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT 7450 Metro Boulevard • Edina, Minnesota 55439 Resolution No. 2013 -95 Page Two STATE OF MINNESOTA ) COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) 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 14; 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 Viking Hills Neighborhood Roadway, Reconstruction - Improvement Nos ,BA- 386, BA -400; BA 401; BA= 402,`BA -403. Final, Project Cost,Analysis.' Jlise Expenses (above contractor Payments added to Utilities) Assessment Utilities Project BA-386 BA-400 BA-401 BA-402 BA-403 BA -401. :9A-402. BA-403 Storm Sewer , Projects Water Main dli_se. Expenses (above contractor Payments - added to Assessment) $ 6,355.50 Arctic Way Glacier PI Gleason Ct Polar Cir • Vemon Ct & Vemon Hills Ct Storm Sewer San I itary Sewer Water Main Total Amount Vikings Hill Proposed $ 342,000.00 $ 70 000.00 $ 17s 000.00 :$ 73,000.00 $ 157 060.00 $ 100 000.00 $ 80,000. $ 50 000.00 $ 1,047,000.00 Actual $ 265,751.30 . $ 56,343.18 $ 132,341.34 $ 51,192.70 $ 100,988.69 $ 284,878.23 $ 54,554.07 $ 37,067.49 1 $ 983,117.00 34.34 Jlise Expenses (above contractor Payments added to Utilities) Actual Mont Iv Pa mants BA-386 BA-400 • BA -401. :9A-402. BA-403 Storm Sewer , : Sanita Sewer Water Main dli_se. Expenses (above contractor Payments - added to Assessment) $ 6,355.50 $ ° _ $ $ $ c :' $ .. 75.717:57 :onsulting Design $ 2,649.73 $ 779.28 $ 958.71 $ 779.28 $ 1,059.30 $ $ 2,350.17 $ :onsulting Inspection $ 11,245.40 $ 890.00 $ 1,002.21 $ $ - $ $ 150.00 $ 677.00 4aterialstSupplies $ 341.52 $ 7 • 63,538.85 $ 1. 878.75 $ - $ $ $ 18;116.58 $ _ Street Name Signs $ 62.03 $ 34.34 $ 62.03 $ 32.98 $.. - 96.20 $ $ $ 96 560.03 $ $ 14,298.68 $ 1,703.62 $ 2,022.95 $ 812.26 $ 11155.50 $ $ 2,500.17 $ 677.00 ,- .abor(Staff) $ 24,377.22 $ 2,390.51 $ 2,572.83 $ 1,726.92 $ 2,610.62 $ 3,714.02 $ 1,383.59 $ 1,486.64 ment Nos. Actual Mont Iv Pa mants BA-386 BA-400 • BA -401. :9A-402. BA-403 Storm Sewer , : Sanita Sewer Water Main 1, $ 6,355.50 $ ° _ $ $ $ c :' $ .. 75.717:57 $.: ".5 420.70 $ 47,366.05 2 $ 5,606.52 $ 636.50 $ '3,419.24 $ - 138.10 1, 3,783.04 $ 145 870.79 $ <;, 25,643.54 $ �- - 78 538AO 3 $ 51 433.91 $ :5197.72 $ 36 572.44 '$ 4,866.49 $ 30,173.04 $ 7 • 63,538.85 $ 1. 878.75 $ - 285.00 4 $ 92,28314 $ 18;116.58 $ 27,122;349, $ 17,917.62 � $ 20,867:86- $ 18 485.10 $ 1,805.00 $ 5 $ 96 560.03 $ 29 519.12 $ 58 494.80 '$ 24 670.84 :$.. " 41'036.41 $ (33,200:60) $ 18,035. $ 91 004.30 Final .$ 837433.215 6,732.54 $..2;5929.6, 52 a$ 24,270.33 1,882:34 TOTAL $ 25,75120 $ 8 $ 132,341:34 $:'5 119 ;$$ 988.69 0, .4,47686. $ 284;8 23 $ 554.07 ' $ 37,067.49 Monthly Total $ 134,859.82 $ - 264,638.13 $ 192,946.20 $ 196,597.64 $ 144,112.04 $ 49.965.17 $ 983,119.00 Actual CS Payment $ 134,859.82 $ 264,636.13 $ 192,946.20 $ 196,597.64 $ 144,112.04 $ 49.965.17 $ 983,117.00 Viking Hills. Neighborhood Roadway Reconstruction Improvement No. BA -386 Assessment Roll PID # OWNER STREET NO STREET CITY /STATE/ZIP ASSESSABLE REU ASSESSMENT COST 3111721430024 Christopher R & Sarah E Moms 6100 Artic Way Edina, MN 55436 1.00 .$6.951.16 3111721430039 Carlos Fernandez 6101 Artic Way Edina, MN 55436 1.00 $6,951.16 3111721430025 Gregory Ettinger 6102 Artic Way Edina, MN 55436 1.00 $6,951.16 3111721430038 John R & Karen L Cardwell 6103 Artic Way Edina, MN 55436 1.00 $6,951.16 3111721430026 Jeaneen M Jensen 6104 1 Artic Way Edina, MN 55436 1.00 $6,951.16 3111721430027 Lisa, Robert &Donna Dalton 6106 Artic Way Edina, MN 55436 1.00 $6,951.16 3111721430056 Lowell V &,Debra K'Stortz 6108 Artic Way Edina, MN 55436 1.00 $6,951.16 3111721430057 Kathryn A Wright 6110 Artic Way Edina, MN 55436 1.00 .$6,951.16 3111721430058 Peggy McNamee 6112 Artic Way Edina, MN 55436 1.00 $6,951.16. 3111721430048 Thomas & Regina Neville 6113 Artic Way Edina, MN 55436 1.00 $6,951.16 3111721430059 Stephen Leverentz 6114 Artic Way Edina, MN 55436 1.00 $6,951.16 3111721430049 Yiming Sht & Jiangting Cheng 6115 Artic Way Edina, MN 55436 1.00 $6,951.16 3111721430060 Mary C Brunet 6116 Ark Way Edina, MN 55436 1:00 $6,951.16 3111721430050 Jane K Ashenbrenner 6117 Artic Way Edina, MN 55436 1.00 $6,951.16 3111721430061 Daniel R & Christine F Sweeney 6118 Artic Way Edina, MN 55436 1:00 $6,951.16 3111721430051 Michael J &Patricia N Mcfarlane 6119 Artic Way Edina, MN 55436 1.00 $6,951.16 3111721430062 Ira M Isbin &'Arnie R Noun 6120 Artic Way Edina, MN,55436 1.00 $6,951.16 3111721430052 David R & Sheri L Peterson 6121 Artic Way Edina, MN 55436 1.00 $6.951.16 3111721430063 Robert F & Linda A King 6122 Artic Way Edina, MN 55436 1.00 $6,951.16 3111721430053 Arthur Dahl uist 6123 Artic Way Edina, MN 55436 1.00 $6,951.16 3111721430064 Scot C Sticha & Kad L Dahl uist 6124 Artic Way Edina, MN 55436 1.00 $6,951.16 3111721430054 C Edward & Kay Gray 6125 Artic Way Edina, MN 55436 1.00 $6,951.16 3111721430065 Huh B &:Francine B Thompson 6126 Artic Way Edina, MN 55436 1.00 $6,951.16 3111721430055 Thomas Schauerman 6127 Artic Way Edina, MN 55436 1.00 $6,951.16 3111721430066 Joseph R & Kristin N Hayes 6128 Artic Way Edina, MN 55436 1.00 $6,951.16 3111721430067 Martin B & Jill S Weber 6130 Artic Way Edina, MN 55436 1.00 $6,951.16 3111721430068 J Richard Hamm 6132 Artic Way Edina, MN 55436 1.00 $6,951.16 3111721430028 Suzanne Chochrek 6134 Artic Way Edina, MN 55438 1.00 $6,951.16 3111721430029 Steven C & Lisa M Neison 6136 Artic Way Edina, MN 55436 1.00 $6,951.16 3111721430030 Si round J Helle 6138 Artic Way Edina, MN 55436 1.00 $6,951.16 3111721430047 Mark A & Shirley O Lerner 6139 Artic Way Edina, MN 55436 1.00 $6,951.16 3111721430031 Channel Drive Real Estate Services LLC 2305 Penn Ave So Minneapolis, MN 55405 1.00 $6,951.16 3111721430046 Ralph R Kdesel Jr 6141 Artic Way Edina, MN 55436 1.00 $6951.16 3111721430032 John & Kathryn Denn 6142 Artic Way . Edina, MN 55436 1.00 $6,951.16 3111721430045 Daniel J & Julie KAmen 6143 Artic Way Edina,. MN 55436 1.00 $6,951.16 3111721430033 Carter & Jill Freeman 6144 Ar is Way Edina, MN 55436 1.00 $6,951.16 3111721430044 Cary D & Inna Geller 6145 Artic Way Edina, MN 55438 1.00 .$6,951.16 3111721430034 Joseph L Carpenter 6146 Artic Way Edina, MN 55436 1.00 $6,951.16 3111721430043 Robert J & Sheilah E Stewart 6147 Artic Way Edina, MN 55436 1.00 $6,951.16 3111721430035 Arthur J & Janet P Erdall 6148 Artic Way Edina MN 55436 1.00 $6,951.16 3111721430042 Juan Pablo Garduno 6149 Artic Way Edina, MN 55436 1.00 $6,951.16 3111721430036 Daniel R & Mary Pate 6150 Artic Way Edina, MN 55436 1.00 $6,951.16 3111721430041 Robert R & Holly S Levy 6151 Artic Way Edina, MN 55436 1.00 $6,951.16 3111721430037 Andrea & Bria Shea 6152 Artic Way Edina, MN 55436 1.00 $6,951.16 3111721430040 Edward C Maeder, Jr 6153 Artic Way Edina, MN 55436 - 1.00 $6,951.16 Arctic Way Total REU's 45.00 AKU I lU WAY t'KtLIIVIINAKY I U I AL KUAUVVAT GUJ I * al Z,tfuz.1 b BA -386 ASSESSMENT PER REU $ 6,951.16 STATE OF MINNESOTA) COUNTY OF HENNEPIN) SS CERTIFICATE OF MAILING NOTICE CITY OF EDINA ) I, the undersigned, being the duly qualified acting City Clerk of the City of Edina, Minnesota, hereby certify that on the following dates September 26, 2013, acting on behalf of said City, I deposited in the United States mail copies of the attached;Notice of Public Hearing for Viking Hills Neighborhood Roadway Reconstruction, Improvement, No. BA -386 (Exhibit A), enclosed in sealed envelopes, with postage thereon duly prepaid, addressed to the persons at the addresses as shown on the mailing list (Exhibit B), attached to the original hereof, which list is on file in my office, said persons being those appearing on the records of the County Auditor as owners of the property listed opposite their respective names, as of a date 17 days prior to the date of the hearing; and that I also sent said notice to the following corporations at the indicated addresses whose property is exempt from taxation and is therefore not carried on the records of said:County Auditor. NAME. ADDRESS WITNESS my hand and the�seal of said City this 26th day of September, 2013. Edina ity dfork NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING ON PROPOSED SPECIAL ASSESSMENT IMPROVEMENT NO. BA -386 The Edina City Council will meet at 7 p.m. Oct. 14, 2013, at City Hall, 4801 W. 50' St., Edina, MN, to approve and adopt the listed special assessments against the described property, which is part of the Viking Hills (Antic Way) Neighborhood Roadway Reconstruction: Property Identification No. 3111721430024 The special assessment to this property for roadway reconstruction is: $6,951.16. The total amount of the proposed special assessment for the project is $312,802.16. The proposed assessment roll is on file with the City Clerk. No invoices will be mailed. This is the only notice you will receive regarding payment. Payment Options The proposed assessment is payable in equal annual principal installments extending over a period of 15 years at the rate of 3.34 percent. Should the City Council adopt the assessment roll at the Oct. 14 meeting, you may pay the assessment in one of these ways: 1. Pay the whole of the assessment without. interest to the City to the Assessing Office, 4801 W. 50 h St, Edina, MN 55424 on or before Nov. .25, 2013.. 2. Pay a minimum of 25 percent of the assessment to the Assessing Office, 4801 W. 50`'' St, Edina, MN 55424 on or before Nov. 25. The remaining balance will be certified to the County Auditor and your first year's payment will be payable with your real estate taxes in 2014, with interest on the remaining assessment at the rate of 3.34 percent per annum from Oct. 14, 2013 to Dec. 31, 2014. 3, Pay the assessment with your real estate taxes. if the special assessment is not paid in the Assessing Office by Nov: 25, 2013, it will be certified to.the County Auditor and your first- year's payment will be' y_ a able wi'th o_ p __ your estate taxes_ in 201.4,_with.interest on the entire assessment at-the-rate of _ 3.34 percent per annum from Oct. 14, 2013 to Dec. 31, 2014. Deferment The City Council may, at its discretion, defer the payment of assessments for a homestead property owned by a person age 65 or older for whom it would be-a hardship to make payments. The procedures to apply for such deferment are available from the Assessor's Office at Edina City Hall. Deferment applications must be filed with the Assessor's Office by Nov. 15, 2013. Your payment over 15 years: Beginning Balance Payable I I I 1 321.54 Principal I Installment # Year Principal Interest Total Balance Beginning Balance 6,951.16 1 2013 1 321.54 269.36 590.90 6,629.62 2 2014 385.38 205.52 590.90 6,244.24 3 2015 397.33 193.57 590.90 5,846.91 4 2016 409.65 181.25 590.90 5,437.26 5 2017 422.35 168.55 590.90 5,014.91 6 2018 435.44 155.46 590.90 4,579.47 7 2019 448.94 141.96 590.90 4,130.53 8 2020 462.85 128.05 590.90 3,667.68 9 2021 477.20 113.70 590.90 3,190.48 10 2022 492.00 98.90 590.90 2,698.48 11 2023 507.25 83.65 590.90 2,191.23 12 2024 522.97 67.93 590.90 1,668.26 13 2025 539.18 51.72 590.90 1,129.08 14 2026 555.90 35.00 590.90 573.18 15 2027 573.13 17.77 590.90 1 0.05 I Totals 6,951.111 1,912.39 1 8,863.50 1 Objections /Appeals If you wish to object or appeal to this assessment: I. File a signed, written objection with the City Clerk prior to the assessment hearing, or present the written objection to the Mayor at the assessment hearing. 2. Serve notice of the appeal to the Mayor or the City Clerk within 30 days after the adoption of the assessment and file such notice with the District Court within 10 days after the notice was served to the Mayor or the City Clerk. To comment on the special assessment, you may: • Write to City of Edina, Engineering Department, 7450 Metro Blvd, Edina, MN 55439. • Email to maiICqD-EdinaMN.gov, attention City Council and Engineering. • Attend the Oct. 14 public hearing and offer comments. If you have questions regarding the project, please call the Engineering Department at 952 - 826 -0371. If you have questions about paying your assessment, please call the Assessing Division of the Community Development Department at 952 - 826 -0365. September 26, 2013 Debra A. Mangen City Clerk 01 Cut the bottom section and mail in with your payment if paying on or before November 25, 2013: PAYMENT PROCEDURE • If paying on or before Nov. 25, 2013, please cut and return this stub with your payment. • -Make - check payable to the City of Edina. • Mail payment or pay in person: Edina City Hall, Assessing Division, 4801 W. 50"' Street, Edina, MN 55424. Amount Enclosed: Name: Pay this amount by If not paid on or before Nov. 25, 2013, PID Impr. No. November 25, 2013, to the assessment will be placed on your avoid interest charges. property taxes at 3.34% annual interest rate, spread out over 15 years. 3111721430024 BA -386 $6,951.16 Amount Enclosed: Name: LEFT BLANK INTENTIONALLY 3111721430024 3111721430039 Christopher R & Sarah E Morris Carlos Fernandez '00 Artic Way 6101 Artic Way .na, MN 55436 Edina, MN 55436 3111721430038 3111721430026 John R & Karen L Cardwell Jeaneen M Jensen 6103 Artic Way 6104 Artic Way Edina, MN 55436 Edina, MN 55436 3111721430056 3111721430057 Lowell V & Debra K Stortz Kathryn A Wright 6108 Artic Way 6110 Artic Way Edina, MN 55436 Edina, MN 55436 3111721430048 3111721430059 Thomas & Regina Neville Stephen Leverentz 6113 Artic Way 6114 Artic Way Edina, MN 55436 Edina, MN 55436 3111721430060 3111721430050 Mary C Brunn Jane K Ashenbrenner 6116 Artic Way 6117 Artic Way Edina, MN 55436 Edina, MN 55436 3111721430051 3111721430062 Michael J & Patricia N Mcfarlane Ira M Isbin & Arnie R Noun 6119 Artic Way 6120 Artic Way Edina, MN 55436' Edina, MN 55436 3111721430063 3111721430053 Robert F & Linda A King Arthur Dahlquist 6122 Artic Way 6123 Artic Way Edina, MN 55436 Edina, MN 55436 3111721430054 3111721430065 C Edward & Kay Gray --- Hugh B & Francine-B Thompson 6125 Artic Way 6126 Artic Way Edina, MN 55436 Edina, MN 55436 3111721430066 3111721430067 Joseph R & Kristin N Hayes Martin B & Jill S Weber 6128 Artic Way 6130 Artic Way Edina, MN 55436 Edina, MN 55436 721430028 3111721430029 Suzanne Chochrek Steven C & Lisa M Nelson 6134 Artic Way 6136 Artic Way Edina, MN 55436 Edina, MN 55436 3111721430025 Gregory Ettinger 6102 Artic Way Edina, MN 55436 3111721430027 Lisa, Robert & Donna Dalton 6106 Artic Way Edina, MN 55436 3111721430058 Peggy McNamee 6112 Artic Way Edina, MN 55436 3111721430049 Yiming Shi & Jiangting Cheng 6115 Artic Way Edina, MN 55436 3111721430061 Daniel R & Christine F Sweeney 6118 Artic Way Edina, MN 55436 3111721430052 David R & Sheri L Peterson 6121 Artic Way Edina, MN 55436 3111721430064 Scot C Sticha & Karl L Dahlquist 6124 Artic Way Edina, MN 55436 3111721430055 Thomas Schauerman 6127 Artic Way Edina, MN 55436 3111721430068 J Richard Hamm. 6132 Artic Way Edina, MN 55436 3111721430030 Sigmund J Helle 6138 Artic Way Edina, MN 55436 3111721430047 3111721430031 3111721430046 Mark A & Shirley O Lerner Channel Drive Real Estate Services Ralph R Kriesel, Jr 6139 Artic Way LLC 6141 Artic Way Edina, MN 55436 2305 Penn Ave So Edina, MN 55436 Minneapolis, MN 55405 3111721430032 3111721430045 3111721430033 John & Kathryn Denn Daniel J & Julie K Amen Carter & Jill Freeman 6142 Artic Way 6143 Artic Way 6144 Artic Way Edina, MN 55436 Edina, MN 55436 Edina, MN 55436 3111721430044 3111721430034 3111721430043 Cary D & Inna Geller Joseph L Carpenter Robert J & Sheilah E Stewart 6145 Artic Way 6146 Artic Way 6147 Artic Way Edina, MN 55436 Edina, MN 55436 Edina, MN 55436 3111721430035 3111721430042 3111721430036 Arthur J & Janet P Erdall Juan Pablo Garduno Daniel R & Mary K Pate 6148 Artic Way 6149 Artic Way. 6150 Artic Way Edina, MN.55436 Edina, MN 55436 Edina, MN 55436 3111721430041 3111721430037 3111721430040 Robert R & Holly S Levy Andrea &`Bria Shea Edward C Maeder,'Jr, 6151 Artic Way 6152 Artic ''Way 6.153•'Artic Way Edina, MN 55436 Edina, MN 55436 Edina; MN 55436 RESOLUTION NO. 2013-96 A RESOLUTION LEVYING SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS FOR PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS WHEREAS, pursuant to proper notice duly given as required by law, the Edina City Council has met and heard and passed upon all written and oral objections to the proposed special assessments for the improvement listed below: Viking Hills Neighborhood (Glacier Place) Reconstruction — Improvement No. BA -400 BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the-City of Edina, Minnesota as follows: 1. Each special assessment as set forth in the special assessment roll on file in the office of the City Clerk for each aforementioned improvement is hereby accepted and shall constitute the special assessments against the lands named therein, and each -tract of land therein included in herein found to be benefited by the improvement in the amount of the special assessments levied against it. 2: The special assessments shall be payable in equal installments, the. first of said installments together with interest at a rate of 3.4% per annum, on the entire special assessments from the date hereof to December. 31, 2014. To each subsequent installment shall be added interest at the above rate for one year 'on all unpaid installments. The number of such annual installments shall be as follows: NUMBER OF NAME OF IMPROVEMENT INSTALLMENTS Viking Hills Neighborhood Levy No. 18596 15 (Glacier Place) 3. The owner of the property so assessed may, at any time prior to certification of special assessment to the County Auditor, partially prepay an amount not less than 25% of the whole assessment to the City Treasurer and no interest shall be charged on the portion of the assessment prepaid; or pay the whole of ile,.spircial. assessments on such property, to the City Treasurer, except that no interest shall be' charged if the entire special assessment is paid before November 25 following the adoption of this resolution and they may, at any time thereafter, pay to the City Treasurer the- entire - amount of -the- special- assessments remaining unpaid, Such payment -must be made before November 25, 2013. 4. The Clerk shall forthwith transmit a certified supplicate of these special assessments to the County Auditor to be extended on the property tax lists of the County. Such special assessments shall be collected and paid: over in the same manner as other municipal taxes. Adopted this 14th day of October, 2013 ATTEST: City Clerk Mayor ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT 7450 Metro Boulevard .Edina, Minnesota 55439 wwwF,dinaMTi.gov ..952- 826 -0371 • Fax 952 - 826 -0392 Resolution No. 2013 -96 Page Two STATE OF MINNESOTA ) COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) 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 14, 2013, and as recorded in the Minutes of said Regular Meeting. WITNESS my hand and seal of said City this day of , 20 Viking Hills (Glacier Circle) Neighborhood Roadway Reconstruction Improvement No. BA -400 Assessment Roll PID # OWNER STREET NO. STREET CITY /STATE/ZIP ASSESSABLE REU ASSESSMENT COST 3111721430078 Joyce S Frys 6400 Glacier Place Edina, MN 55436 1.00 $6251 ' 11 3111721430069 John Simon & Lisa Grossman 6401 Glacier Place Edina, MN 55436 1.00 $6,251.11 3111721430077 Heather Tietz 6404 Glacier Place Edina, MN 55436 1.00 $6,251.11 3111721430070 Diane L Harr 6405 Glacier Place Edina, MN 55436 1.00 $6,251.11 3111721430076 Phyllis J Anderson 6408 Glacier Place Edina, MN 55436 1.00 $6,251.11 3111721430071 Sharon L Christenson 6409 Glacier Place Edina MN 55436 1.00 $6,251.11 3111721430075 Sanford E & Toni R Raihill 6412 Glacier Place Edina, MN 55436 1.00 $8,251.11 '3111721430072 William & Carol Rose 6413 Glacier Place Edina, MN 55436 1:00 $6,251.11 3111721430074 Brent L & Sandra L Reichert 6416, Glacier Place Edina ,MN 55436 1.00 $6,251.11 3111721430073 Richard E & Joyce M Bennett 6417 Glacier Place Edina, MN 55436 1.00 $6,251.11 Glacier Place Total REU's 10.00 ULAUILK PLAGt PKLUMINAKY 1 U IAL KUAUVVAY GU, I 62,511.05 BA -400 ASSESSMENT PER REU $ 6,251.11 STATE OF MINNESOTA) COUNTY OF HENNEPIN) SS CITY OF EDINA ) CERTIFICATE OF MAILING NOTICE I, the undersigned, being the duly qualified acting City Clerk of the City of Edina, Minnesota, hereby certify that on the following dates September 26, 2013, acting on behalf of said City, I deposited in the United States mail copies of the attached Notice of Public Hearing for Viking Hills (Glacier Place) Neighborhood' Roadway Reconstruction, Improvement No. BA -400 (Exhibit A), enclosed in sealed envelopes, with postage thereon duly prepaid, addressed to the persons at the addresses as shown on the mailing list (Exhibit B), attached to the original hereof, which list is on file in my office, said persons being those appearing on the records of the County Auditor as owners of the property listed opposite their respective names, as of a date 17 days prior to the date. of the hearing; and that I also sent said notice to the following corporations at the indicated addresses whose property is exempt from taxation and is therefore not carried on the records of said County Auditor. NAME ADDRESS a WITNESS my hand and the seal of said City this 26th day of September, 2011 NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING ON PROPOSED SPECIAL ASSESSMENT IMPROVEMENT NO. BA -400 The Edina City Council will meet at 7 p.m. Oct. 14, 2013, at City Hall, 4801 W. 50`s St., Edina, MN, to approve and adopt the listed special assessments against the described property, which is part of the Viking Hills (Glacier Place) Neighborhood Roadway.Reconstruction: Property Identification No. 311 1721430078 The special assessment to this property for roadway reconstruction is: $6,25 1.11. The total amount of the proposed special assessment for the project is $62,511.06. The proposed assessment roll is on file with the City Clerk. No invoices. will be mailed. This is the only notice you will receive regarding payment. Payment Options The proposed assessment is payable in equal annual principal installments extending over a period of 15 years at the rate of 3.34 percent. Should the City Council adopt the assessment roll at the Oct. 14 meeting, you may pay the assessment in one of these ways: 1. Pay the whole of.the assessment without interest to the City to the Assessing Office, 4801 W. 50`s St, Edina, MN 55424 on or before Nov. 25, 2013. 2. Pay a minimum of 25 percent of the assessment to the Assessing Office, 4801 W. 50' St, Edina, MN 55424 on or before Nov. 25. The remaining balance will be certified to the County Auditor and your first year's payment will be payable with your real estate taxes in 2014, with interest on the remaining assessment at the rate of 3.34 percent per annum from Oct. 14, 2013 to Dec. 31, 2014. 3. Pay the assessment with your real estate taxes. If the special assessment is not paid in the Assessing Office by Nov. 25, 2013, it will be certified to the County Auditor and your first year's payment will be payable with your real estate taxes in 2014, with interest on the entire assessment at the rate of 3.34 percent per annum from Oct. 14, 2013 to Dec. 31, 2014. Deferment The City Council may, at its discretion, defer the payment of assessments for a homestead property owned by a person age 65 or older for whom it would be a hardship to make payments. The procedures to apply for such deferment are available from the Assessor's Office at Edina City Hall. Deferment applications must be filed with the Assessor's Office by Nov. 15, 2013. Your payment over 15 years: Beginning Balance Payable I I I 1 289.16 Principal I Installment # Year Principal Interest Total Balance Beginning Balance 6,251.11 1 2013 1 289.16 242.23 531.39 5,961.95 2 2014 346.57 184.82 531.39 5,615.38 3 2015 357.31 174.08 531.39 5,258.07 4 2016 368.39 163.00 531.39 4,889.68 5 2017 379.81 151.58 1 531.39 4,509.87 6 2018 391.58 139.81 531.39 4,118.29 7 2019 403.72 127.67 531.39 3,714.57 8 2020 416.24 115.15 531.39 3,298.33 9 2021 429.14 102.25 531.39 2,869.19 10 2022 442.45 88.94 531.39 2,426.74 11 2023 456.16 75.23 531.39 1,970.58 12 2024 470.30 61.09 531.39 1,500.28 13 2025 484.88 46.51 531.39 1,015.40 14 2026 499.91 31.48 531.39 515.49 15 2027 515.41 15.98 531.39 0.08 Totals 1 6,251.03 1,719.82 7,970.85 Objections /Appeals If you wish to object or appeal to this assessment: 1. File a signed, written objection with the City Clerk prior to the assessment hearing, or present the written objection to the Mayor at the assessment hearing. 2. Serve notice of the appeal to the Mayor or the City Clerk within 30 days after the adoption of the assessment and file such notice with the District Court within 10 days after the notice was served to the Mayor or the City Clerk. To comment on the special assessment, you may: • Write to City of Edina, Engineering Department, 7450 Metro Blvd, Edina, MN 55439. • Email to mail(aEdinaMN.gov, attention City Council and Engineering. • Attend the Oct. 14 public hearing and offer comments. If you have questions regarding the project, please call the Engineering Department at 952 - 826 -0371. If you have questions about paying your assessment, please call the Assessing Division of the Community Development Department at 952 - 826 -0365. September 26, 2013 Debra A. Mangen City Clerk 2 Cut the bottom section and mail in with your payment if paying on or before November 25, 2013: PAYMENT PROCEDURE, If paying on or before Nov. 25, 2013, please cut and return this stub.with your payment. o Make check payable -to the City of- Edina. - - o Mail payment or pay in person: Edina City Hall, Assessing Division, 4801 W. 50`' Street, Edina, MN 55424. Amount Enclosed: Name: Pay this amount by If not paid on or before Nov. 25, 2013, PID Impr. No. November 25, 2013, to the assessment will be placed on your avoid interest charges. property taxes at 3.34% annual interest rate, spread out over 15 years. 3111721430078 BA-400 $6,250.11 Amount Enclosed: Name: LEFT BLANK INTENTIONALLY 4 3111721430078 3111721430069 3111721430077 Joyce S Frys John Simon & Lisa Grossman Heather Tietz '00 Glacier Place 6401 Glacier Place 6404 Glacier Place ;na, MN 55436 Edina, MN 55436 Edina, MN 55436 3111721430070 3111721430076 3111721430071 Diane L Harr Phyllis J Anderson Sharon L Christenson 6405 Glacier Place 6408 Glacier Place 6409 Glacier Place Edina, MN 55436 Edina, MN 55436 Edina, MN 55436 3111721430075 3111721430072 3111721430074 Sanford E & Toni.R Raihill William & Carol Rose Brent L & Sandra L Reichert 6412 Glacier Place 6413 Glacier Place 6416 Glacier Place Edina, MN 55436 Edina, MN 55436 Edina, MN 55436 3111721430073 Richard E & Joyce M Bennett 6417 Glacier Place Edina, MN 55436 RESOLUTION NO. 2013-97 A RESOLUTION LEVYING SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS FOR PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS WHEREAS, pursuant to proper notice duly given as required by law, the Edina City Council has met and heard and passed upon all written and oral objections to the. proposed special assessments for the improvement listed below: Viking Hills Neighborhood (Gleason Court) Reconstruction — Improvement No. BA -401 BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Edina, Minnesota as follows: 1. Each special assessment as forth in the special assessment roll on file in the office of the City Clerk for each aforementioned improvement is hereby accepted and shall constitute the special assessments against the lands named therein, and each tract of land therein included in herein found to be benefited by the improvement in the amount of the special assessments levied against it. 2. The special assessments shall be payable iri .. equal installments, the first 'of said installments together4ith interest at a rate of 3.4% per annum, on the entire special assessments from the date hereof to December 31, 2014. To each "subsequent installment shall be added interest at the above rate for one year on aII fun paid installments. The number of such annual installments shall be as follows; NUMBER OF NAME OF IMPROVEMENT INSTALLMENTS Viking Hills Neighborhood, Levy No. 18597 15 (Gleason Court) 3. The owner of the property so assessed may, at any time prior to certification of special I ssessment to the County Auditor,'partially prepay an amount not less than 25% of the whole assessment to the City Treasurer and, nQ interest shall be charged on the portion of the assessment prepaid; or pay the whole of the special assessments on such property, to the City Treasurer, except that no interest shall be charged if the entire special assessment is paid before November 25 following the adoption of this resolution and they may, at any time thereafter, pay to the City Treasurer. the entire amount of the special assessments remaining unpaid. Such payment must be made before November 25, 2013. 4. The Clerk shall forthwith transmit a certified supplicate of these special assessments to the County Auditor to be extended on the property tax lists of the County. Such special assessments shall be collected and paid over in the same manner as other municipal taxes. Adopted this 141h day of October, 2013 ATTEST: City Clerk Mayor ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT 7450 Metro Boulevard • Edina, Minnesota 55439 ..,..n..PA;i UXT nhv. oC7_R74_ng71 . Rov QS7_R,74_nAo7 Resolution No. 2013 -97 Page Two STATE OF MINNESOTA ) COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) 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 14, 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 Viking Hills (Gleason Court) Neighborhood Roadway Reconstruction Improvement No. BA-401 Assessment Roll PID # OWNER STREET O STREET CITY /STATE/ZIP ASSESSABLE REU ASSESSMENT COST 0611621120017 John M & Sharon A Nash 6400 Gleason Court Edina, MN 55436 0.80 $5,035.23 0611621120016 Dolores M Champ 6402 Gleason Court Edina MN 55436 0.80 $5,035.23 0611621120019 Jane H Du - Durrett & Harold W Durrett 6404 Gleason Court Edina; MN 55436 0.80 $5,035.23 0611621120018 Robert J & Sally D Schultz 6406 Gleason Court Edina, MN 55436 0.80 $5,035.23 0611621120021 Daniel K'& Nancy C Peterson 6408 Gleason Court Edina, MN 55436 0.80 $5.035 - 23 0611621120020 Ann M Pohlad 6410 Gleason Court Edina, MN 55436 0.80 $5,035.23 0611621120023 James E &Christina Peterson 6412 Gleason Court Edina; MN 55436 .0.80 $5,035.23 0611621120022 Michael D & Cheryl L Boe 6414 Gleason Court Edina MN 55436 0.80 $5 035.23 0611621120024 Ann Marx • r 6500 Gleason Court Edina, MN 55436 0.80 $5,035.23 0611621120026 John E -'& Mary Jane T, Houlihan 6501 Gleason Court Edina, MN 55436 0.80 $5,035.23 0611621120025 H unsook Cheong Lee 6502 Gleason Court Edina; MN 55436 0.80 $5,035.23 0611621120027 John P & Sonja R England 6503 Gleason Court Edina, MN 55436 0.80 $5,035:23 0611621210052 Franklin& Sharon A Stickel 6504 Gleason Court Edina, MN 55436 0.80 $5,035.23 0611621210077 Phil '& Mar- aret McLaughlin 6505 Gleason Court Edina MN 55436 0.80 $5,035.23 0611621210051 Ruth H Busta 6506 Gleason:Court Edina, MN 55436 0.80 $5,035:23 0611621210076 Wilbert D & Sheila L Zimmerman 6507 Gleason Court Edina, MN 55436 0.80 $5,035.23 0611621210023 Neil & Barbara N Boderman 6508 Gleason Court Edina, MN 55436 0.80 $5;035.23 . 0611621210054 Michele M Carlson 6509 Gleason Court Edina, MN 55436 0.80 $5,035.23 0611621210024 Charles R & Elaine G Hanna 6510 Gleason Court Edina; MN 55436 0.80 $5 035:23 0611621210053 Joanne Tollefson 6511 Gleason Court Edina, MN 55436 0.80 $5,035.23 0611621210026 Bemiss:& Betty Rolls 6512 Gleason Court Edina, MN 55436 0.80 $5,035.23 0611621210025 Wilbur W Thomas III 6514 Gleason Court Edina, MN 55436 0.80 $5,035.23 0611621210048 Maurice W Dixon 6515 Gleason Court Edina, MN 55436 0.80 $5,035.23 0611621210044 Jerry R Clifford,,,.,: 6516 Gleason Court Edina, MN 55436 0.80 $5,035.23 .0611621210047 Joyce C Canfield 6517 Gleason Court Edina, MN 55436 0.80 $5,035.23 0611621210043 William R Stoner 1 6518. jGleason Court Edina, MN 55436 0.60 --$5,035.23 0611621210046 Dehong Ma & Rulyun Wang 6519 1 Gleason Court Edina, MN 55436 0.80 $5,035.23 0611621210045 Timothy J Steffenha en 6521 1 Gleason Court Edina, MN 55436 0.80. $5,035.23 Gleason Court Total REU's 22.40: $140,986.53 ULtA5UN UUUK'I.FKtLIIVIINAKY IUTAL KUAUVVAY UU51 $ 140,955.53 BA-401 ASSESSMENT PER REU $ 6,294.04 STATE OF MINNESOTA) COUNTY OF HENNEPIN) SS CERTIFICATE OF MAILING NOTICE CITY OF EDINA ) I, the undersigned, being the duly qualified acting City Clerk of the City of Edina,. Minnesota, hereby certify that on the following dates September 26, 2013, acting on behalf of said City, I deposited in the United States mail copies of the attached Notice of Public Hearing for Viking Hills (Gleason Court) Neighborhood Roadway Reconstruction, Improvement No. BA -401 (Exhibit A), enclosed in sealed envelopes, with postage thereon duly prepaid, addressed to the persons at the addresses as shown on the mailing list (Exhibit B), attached to the original hereof, which list is on file in my office, said persons being those appearing on the records of the County Auditor as owners of the property listed opposite their respective names, as of a date 17 days prior to the date of the hearing; and that I also sent said notice to the following corporations at the indicated addresses whose property is exempt from taxation and is therefore not carried on the records of said County Auditor. NAME ADDRESS WITNESS my hand and the seal of said City this 26th day of September, 2013. NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING ON PROPOSED SPECIAL ASSESSMENT IMPROVEMENT NO. BA -401 The Edina City Council will meet at 7 p.m. Oct. 14, 2013, at City Hall, 4801 W. 50`' St., Edina, MN, to approve and adopt the listed special assessments against the described property, which is part of the Viking Hills (Gleason Court) Neighborhood Roadway Reconstruction: Property Identification No. 0611621120017 The special assessment to this property for roadway reconstruction is: $5,035.23. The total amount of the proposed ,special assessment for the project is $140,986.53. The proposed assessment roll is on file with the City Clerk.. No,invoices will be mailed. This is the only notice you will receive regarding payment. Payment Options The proposed assessment is payable in equal annual principal installments extending ,over a period of 15 years at the rate of 3.34 percent: , Should the City Council adopt the assessment roll at the Oct. 14 meeting, you may pay the assessment in one of these ways: 1. Pay the whole of.the assessment without., interest to the City to the Assessing Office, 4801 W. 50`h St, Edina, MN 55424 on or before: Nov. :25, 2011. 2. Pay a minimum of 25 percent of ,the assessment to the Assessing Office, 4801 W. 50`' St, Edina, MN 55424 on or before Nov: 25. The remaining balance will be certified to the County Auditor and your first year's payment will be payable with your real estate taxes in 2014, with interest on the remaining assessment at the rate of 3.34 percent per annum from Oct. 14, 2013 to Dec. 31, 2014. 3. Pay the assessment with your real estate taxes.-if the special assessment is not paid in the Assessing Office by Nov. 25, 2013, it will be certified to the Co. unty Auditor and your first year's payment will be payable with your real estate taxes in 2014, with interest on the entire assessment at the rate of 3.34 percent per annum from Oct. 14, 2013 to Dec. 31, 2014. Deferment The City Council may, at its discretion, defer the payment of assessments for a homestead property owned by a person age 65 or older for whom it would be a hardship to make payments. The procedures to apply for such deferment are available from the Assessor's Office at Edina City Hall. Deferment applications must be filed with the Assessor's Office by Nov. 15, 2013. Your payment over 15 years: Beginning Balance Payable I I I 1 232.92 Principal I Installment # Year Principal Interest Total Balance Beginning Balance 5,035.23 1 2013 1 232.92 195.11 428.03 4,802.31 2 2614 279.16 148.87 428.03 4,523.15 3 2015 287.81 140.22 428.03 4,235.34 4 2016 296.73 131.30 428.03 3,938.61 5 2017 305.93 122.10 1 428.03 3,632.68 6 2018 315.42 112.61 428.03 3,317.26 7 2019 32520 102.83 428.03 2,992.06 8 2620 335.28 92.75 428.03 2,656.78 9 2021 345.67 82.36 428.03 2,311.11 10 2022 356.39 71.64 428.03 1,954.72 11 2023 367.43 60.60 428.03 1,587.29 12 2024 378.82 49.21 428.03 1,208.47 13 2025 390.57 37.46 428.03 817.90 14 2026 402.68 25.35 428.03 415.22 15 2027 415.16 12.87 428.03 0.06 Totals 1 5,035.17 1 1,385.28 1 6,420.45 1 Objections /Appeals If you wish to object or appeal to this assessment: 1. File a signed, written objection with the City Clerk prior to the assessment hearing, or present the written objection to the Mayor at the assessment hearing. 2. Serve notice of the appeal to the Mayor or the City Clerk within 30 days after the adoption of the assessment and file such notice with the District Court within 10 days after the notice was served to the Mayor or the City Clerk. To comment on the special assessment, you may: o Write to City of Edina, Engineering Department, 7,450 Metro Blvd, Edina, MN 55439 o Email to mail(d-)EdinaMN.gov, attention City Council and Engineering. o Attend the Oct. 14 public hearing and offer.comments. If you have questions regarding the project, please call the Engineering Department at 952- 826 -0371. If you have questions about paying your assessment, please call the Assessing Division of the Community Development Department at 952 - 826 -0365. September 26, 2013 Debra A. Mangen City Clerk 2 Cut the bottom section and mail in with your payment if paying on or before November 25, 2013: 0 PAYMENT. PROCEDURE • If paying on or before Nov. 25, 2013, please cut and .return this stub with your payment. • Make check payable to the City of Edina. • Mail payment or pay in person: Edina City Hall, Assessing Division, 4801 W. 50' Street, Edina, MN 55424. Amount Enclosed: Name: 3 Pay this amount by If not paid on or before Nov. 25, 2013, PID Impr. No. November 25, 2013, to the assessment will be placed on your avoid interest charges. property, taxes.at 3.34% annual interest rate, spread out over 15 years. 0611621120017 BA-401 $5,035.23 Amount Enclosed: Name: 3 LEFT BLANK INTENTIONALLY 611621120017 611621120016 611621120019 John M & Sharon A Nash Dolores M Champ Jane H Duffy- Durrett & Harold W 6400 Gleason Court 6402 Gleason Court Durrett Edina, MN 55436 Edina, MN 55436 6404 Gleason Court Edina, MN 55436 611621120018 611621120021 611621120020 Robert J & . Sally D Schultz Daniel K & Nancy C Peterson Ann M Pohlad 6406 Gleason Court 6408 Gleason Court 6410 Gleason Court Edina, MN 55436 Edina, MN 55436 Edina, MN 65436 61.1621120023 611621120022 611621120024 James E & Christina Peterson Michael D & Cheryl L Boe Ann C Marx 6412 Gleason Court 6414 Gleason Court 6500 Gleason Court Edina, MN.55436 Edina, MN 55436 Edina, MN 55436 611621120026 611621120025 611621120027 John E & Mary Jane T Houlihan Hyunsook Cheong Lee John P & Sonja R England 6501 Gleason Court 6502 Gleason Court 6503 Gleason Court Edina, MN 55436 Edina, MN 55436 Edina, MN 55436 611621210052 611621210077 611621210051 Franklin &Sharon A Stickel l PhiMargaret McLaughlin Ruth H Busta & 6504 Gleason Court 6505 Gleason Court 6506 Gleason Court Edina,;MN 55436 Edina, MN 55436 Edina, MN 55436 611621210076 611621210023 611621210054. Wilbert,Ds& Sheila L Zimmerman Neil& Barbara N Boderman Michele M Carlson 6507 Gleason Court 6508 Gleason Court 6509 Gleason Court Edina, MN 55436 Edina, MN'55436 Edina, MN 55436 611621210024 61162 . 1210053 611621210026' Charles.R &Elaine G Hanna Joanne Tollefson Bemiss & Betty Rolfs 6510 Gleason Court 6511 Gleason Court 6512 Gleason Court Edina, MN 55436 Edina, MN -55436 Edina, MN 55436 611621210025 611621210048 611621210044 Wilbur W Thomas III Maurice W Dixon Jerry R Clifford 6514 Gleason Court 6515 Gleason Court 6516 Gleason Court Edina, MN 55436 Edina, MN 55436 Edina, MN 55436 611621210047 611621210043 611621210046 Joyce C Canfield William R Stoner Dehong Ma & Ruiyun Wang 6517 Gleason Court 6518 Gleason Court 6519 Gleason Court Edina, MN 55436 Edina, MN 55436 Edina, MN 55436 611621210045 Timothy J Steffenhagen 6521 Gleason Court Edina, MN 55436 RESOLUTION NO. 2013-98 A RESOLUTION LEVYING SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS FOR PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS WHEREAS, pursuant to proper notice duly given as required by law, the Edina City Council has met and heard and passed upon all written and oral objections to the proposed special assessments for the improvement listed below: Viking Hills Neighborhood. (Polar Circle) Reconstruction- Improvement No. BA -402 BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Edina, Minnesota as follows: 1. Each. special assessment asset forth in the special assessment roll on file in the office of the City Clerk for each aforementioned improvement is hereby accepted and shall constitute the special assessments against the lands named therein, and each tract of land therein included in herein found to be benefited by the improvement in the amount of the special assessments levied against it. 2. The special assessments . shall be payable in equal installments, the first of said installments together with interest at a rate of 3.4% per annum, on the entire special assessments from the date hereof to December 31, 2014. To each subsequent installment shall be added interest at the above rate for one year on all unpaid installments. The number of such annual installments shall be as follows: NUMBER OF NAME OF IMPROVEMENT INSTALLMENTS Viking Hills Neighborhood Levy No. 18598 15 (Polar Circle) 3. The owner of the property. 5o. assessed may, at any time prior to certification of special assessment to the County Auditor; partially prepay an amount not less than 25% of the whole assessment to the City Treasurer and no interest shall: be charged on the portion of the assessment prepaid; or pay the whole of the special assessments on such property, to the City Treasurer, except that no interest shall be charged if the entire special assessment is paid before November 25 following the adoption of this resolution and they may, at any time thereafter, pay to the City Treasurer the entire amount of the special assessments remaining unpaid. Such payment must be made before November 25, 2013. 4. The Clerk shall forthwith transmit a certified supplicate of these special assessments to the County Auditor to be extended on the property tax .lists of the County. Such special assessments shall be collected and paid over in the same manner as other municipal taxes. Adopted this 14th day of Oct*ober, 2013 ATTEST: City Clerk Mayor ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT .7450 Metre Boulevard . Edina, Minnesota 55439 www EdinaMN.eov • 952 - 826 -0371 . Fax 952 - 826 -0392 Viking Hills (Polar Circle) Neighborhood Roadway Reconstruction Improvement No. BA-402 Assessment Roll PID # OWNER STREET O STREET CITY /STATE /ZIP ASSESSABLE EU ASSESSMENT COS 3111721430015 Vaughn Q Johnson 6505 Polar Circle Edina, MN 55436 1.00 $6;182.38 3111721430016 Charles N & Andrea M Kibort 6509 Polar Circle Edina, MN 55436 1.00 $6,182.38 3111721430017 Dawn R Montez 6513 Polar Circle Edina, MN,55436 1.00 $6,182.38 3111721430018 Michael & Angle Koelbl 6517 Polar Circle Edina, MN 55436 1.00 $6,182.38 3111721430019 Inder S & Chandana Anand 6521 Polar Circle Edina, MN 55436 1.00 $6,182:38 3111721430020 John & Elizabeth Boylan 6525 Polar Circle Edina, MN 55436 1.00 $6;182:38 3111721430021 Patricia J & Leslie H Suomela 6529 Polar Circle . Edina, MN 55436 1.00 $6,182.38 3111721430022 Ed & Eileen M Schaefer 6533 Polar Circle Edina, MN 55436 1.00 $6,182:38 3111721430023 Scott & Christina Sans 6537 Polar Circle Edina, MN 55436 1.00 $6,182.38 Polar Circle Total REU's 9.00 F'ULAK GIKGLt F'KtLIMINAKY TUTAL ROADWAY COST $ '65,632.46 BA-402 ASSESSMENT PER REU $ 6,181.38 Resolution No. 2013 -98 Page Two STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF HENNEPIN 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 14, 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 STATE OF MINNESOTA) COUNTY OF HENNEPIN) SS CERTIFICATE OF MAILING NOTICE CITY OF EDINA ) I, the undersigned, being the duly qualified acting City Clerk of the City of Edina, Minnesota, hereby certify that on the following dates September 26, 2013, acting on behalf of said City, I deposited in the United States mail copies of the attached Notice of Public Hearing for Viking Hills (Polar Circle) Neighborhood Roadway Reconstruction, Improvement No. BA -402 (Exhibit A), enclosed in sealed envelopes, with postage thereon duly prepaid, addressed to the persons at the addresses as shown on the mailing list (Exhibit B), attached to the original hereof, which list is on file in my office, said persons being those appearing on the records of the County Auditor as owners of the property listed opposite their respective names, as of a date 17 days prior to the date of the hearing; and that I also sent said notice to the following corporations at the indicated addresses whose property is exempt from taxation and is therefore not carried on the records of said County Auditor. NAME ADDRESS WITNESS my hand and the seal of said City this 26th day of September, 2013. Edina City d4erk NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING ON PROPOSED SPECIAL ASSESSMENT IMPROVEMENT NO. BA -402 The Edina City Council will meet at 7 p.m. Oct. 14, 2013, at City Hall, 4801 W. 50`' St., Edina, MN, to approve and adopt the listed special assessments against the described property, which is part of the Viking Hills (Polar Circle) Neighborhood Roadway Reconstruction: Property Identification No. 3111721430015 The special assessment to this' property for roadway reconstruction is: $6,182.38. The total amount of the proposed special assessment for the project is $55,632.46. The proposed assessment roll is on file with the City. Clerk. No invoices will be mailed.. This is the only notice you will receive regarding payment. Payment Options The proposed assessment is payable in equal annual principal installments extending over a period of 15 years at the rate of 3.34 percent. Should the City Council adopt the assessment roll at the Oct. 14 meeting, you may pay the assessment in one of these ways: Pay the whole of the assessment without interest to the City to the Assessing Office, 4801 W. 50th St, Edina, MN 55424 on.or before Nov. 25, 2013. 2. Pay a minimum of 25 percent of the assessment to the Assessing Office, 4801 W. 50`s St, Edina, MN 55424 on or before Nov. 25. The remaining balance will be certified to the County Auditor and your. first year's payment will be payable with your real estate taxes in 2014, with interest on the remaining assessment at the rate of 3.34 percent per annum from Oct. 14, 2013 to Dec. 31, 2014. 3. Pay the assessment with your real estate taxes. If the special assessment is not paid in the Assessing Office by Nov. 25, 2013, it will be certified to the County Auditor and your first year's payment will be payable with your real estate taxes in 2014, with interest on the entire assessment at the rate of 3.34 percent per annum from Oct. 14, 2013 to Dec. 31, 2014. Deferment The City Council may, at its discretion, defer the payment of assessments for a homestead property owned by a person age 65 or older for whom it would be a hardship to make payments. The procedures to apply for such deferment are available from the Assessor's Office at Edina City Hall. Deferment applications must be filed with the Assessor's Office by Nov. 15, 2013. Your payment over 15 years: Beginning Balance Payable 1 FInterest 1 285.99 Principal I Installment # Year Principal 2014 Total Balance Beginning Balance 6182.38 1 2013 1 285.99 239.56 525.55 5,896.39 2 2014 342.76 182.79 525.55 5,553.63 3 2015 353.39 172.16 525.55 5,200.24 4 2016 364.34 161.21 525.55 4,835.90 5 2017 375.64 149.91 525.55 4,460.26 6 2018 387.28 138.27 525.55 4,072.98 7 2019 399.29 126.26 525.55 3,673.69 8 2020 411.67 113.88 525.55 3,262.02 9 2021 424.43 101.12 525.55 2,837.59 10 2022 437.58 87.97 525.55 2,400.01 11 2023 451.15 74.40 525.55 1,948.86 12. 2024 465.14 60.41 525.55 1,483.72 13 2025 479.55 46.00 525.55 1,004.17 14 2026 494.42 31.13 525.55 509.75 15 2027 509.75 .15.80 525.55 (0.00) Totals 1 6,182.38 1 1,700.87 1 7,883.25 1 Objections /Appeals If you wish to object or appeal to this assessment: I. File a signed, written objection with the City Cleric prior to the assessment hearing, or present the written objection to the Mayor at the assessment hearing. 2. Serve notice of the appeal to the Mayor or the City Clerk within 30 days after the adoption of the assessment and file such notice with the District Court within 10 days after the notice was served to the Mayor or the City Cleric. To comment on the special assessment, you may: • Write to City of Edina, Engineering Department, 7450 Metro Blvd, Edina, MN 55439. • Email to mail EdinaMN.gov, attention City Council and Engineering. • Attend the Oct. 14 public hearing and offer comments. If you have questions regarding the project, please call the Engineering Department at 952 - 826 -0371. If you have questions about paying your assessment, please call the Assessing Division of the Community Development Department at 952 - 826 -0365. September 26, 2013 Debra A. Mangen City Clerk 2 Cut the bottom section and mail in with your payment if paying on or before November 25, 20.13: PAYMENT PROCEDURE • If paying on or, before Nov. 25, 2013, please cut and return this stub with your payment. • Make check payable to the City of Edina. • Mail payment or pay in person: Edina City Hall; Assessing Division, 4801 W. 50`h Street, Edina, MN 55424. Amount Enclosed: Name: Pay this amount by If not paid on or before Nov. 25, 2013, PID Impr. No. November 25, 2013, to the assessment will be placed on your avoid interest charges. property taxes at 3.34% annual interest rate, spread out over 15 years. 31 11721430015 BA-402 $6,182.38 Amount Enclosed: Name: LEFT BLANK INTENTIONALLY 4 3111721430015 3111721430016 3111721430017 Vaughn Q Johnson Charles N & Andrea M Kibort Dawn R Montez 5505 Polar Circle 6509 Polar Circle 6513 Polar Circle Ina, MN 55436 Edina, MN 55436 Edina, MN 55436 3111721430018 Michael & Angie Koelbl 6517 Polar Circle Edina, MN 55436 3111721430019 Inder S & Chandana Anand 6521 Polar Circle Edina, MN 55436 3111721430020 John & Elizabeth Boylan 6525 Polar Circle Edina, MN 55436 3111721430021 3111721430022 3111721430023 Patricia J & Leslie H Suomela Ed & Eileen-M Schaefer Scott & Christina Sans 6529 Polar Circle 6533 Polar Circle 6537 ,Polar Circle Edina, MN 55436 Edina, MN 55436 Edina, MN 55436 RESOLUTION NO. 2013-99 A RESOLUTION LEVYING SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS . FOR-PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS WHEREAS, pursuant to proper nofice duly given as required by law, the Edina City Council has met and heard and passed upon all written and oral objections to the proposed special assessments for the improvement listed below: Viking Hills Neighborhood (Vernon Court & Vernon Hills Road) Reconstruction — Improvement No. BA -403 BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Edina, Minnesota as follows: 1. Each special assessment as set forth in the special assessment roll on file in the office of the City Clerk for each aforementioned improvement is hereby accepted and shall constitute the special assessments against the lands named therein, and each tract of land therein included in herein found to be benefited by the improvement in the amount of the special assessments levied against it. 2. The special assessments shall be payable in equal installments, the first of said installments together with interest at a rate of 3.4% per annum, on the entire special assessments from the date hereof to December 31, 2014. To each subsequent installment shall be added interest at the above rate for one year on all unpaid installments. The number of such annual installments shall be as follows: .. NUMBER OF NAME OF IMPROVEMENT INSTALLMENTS Viking Hills Neighborhood , ' Levy No. 18599 15 (Vernon Court & Vernon Hills Road) 3. The owner of the property so assessed may, at any time prior to certification of special assessment to the County Auditor, partially prepay an amount not less than 25% of the whole assessment to the City Treasurer and no interest shall be charged on the portion of the assessment prepaid; or pay the whole of the special assessments on such property, to the City Treasurer, except that no interest shall be charged if the entire special assessment is paid before November 25 following the adoption of this resolution and.they may, at any time thereafter, pay to the City Treasurer the entire amount of the special assessments remaining unpaid. Such payment must be made before November 25, 2013. 4. The Clerk shall forthwith transmit a certified supplicate of these special assessments to the County Auditor to be extended on the property tax lists of the County. Such special assessments shall be collected and paid over in the same manner as other municipal taxes. Adopted this 10 day of October, 2013 ATTEST: City Clerk Mayor ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT 7450 Metro Boulevard • Edina, Minnesota 55439 [.1nA.[UF�i1T9T\dN RA[l . QS7_A7(_l1�71 . F�v QS7_R7F_f1�Q7 Resolution No. 2013 -99 Page Two STATE OF MINNESOTA ) COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) 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 14, 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 Viking Hills (Vernon Court and Road) Neighborhood Roadway Reconstruction Improvement No. BA403 Assessment Roll PID # OWNER STREET STREET CITY /STATE/ZIP ASSESSABLE ASSESSMENT NO. REU COST 0611621220033 Constance Fukuda 6200 Vernon Court Edina, MN 55436 0.50 $3,312.06 3111721340025 Randall and Robin Stem 6201 Vernon Court Edina; MN 55436 1.00 $6,624.12 0611621220034 John Wtzelr 6204 Vernon Court Edina, MN 55436 0.50 $3,312.06 0611621220035 Laura Gustafson 6208 Vernon Court Edina, MN 55436 0.50 $3,312.06 0611621220036 Emily Gustafson 6212 Vernon Court Edina, MN 55436 0.50 $3,312.06 0611621220037 Maral nn Rye 6216 Vernon Court Edina, MN 55436 0.50 $3,312.06 0611621210109 George MA Del ha M Hams 6520 Vernon 'Hills .Rd Edina, MN 55436 0.80 $5,299.29 061.1621210108 Lawrence P & Carol D Goode 6530 Vernon Hills Rd Edina, MN 55436 0.80 $5,299.29 0611621210107 Joan W Maynard 6540 Vernon Hills Rd Edina, MN 55436 0.80 $5,299.29 0611621210106 BarbourTZanin, 6550 Vernon Hills Rd Edina, MN.55436 0.80 $5,299.29 0611621210105 Rebecca McKenna & Jane Ellis 6560 Vernon Hills Rd Edina, MN 55436 0.80 $5,299.29 0611621210104 Robert Heiser & Sharon Stephenson-Heiser 6570 Vernon Hills Rd Edina MN 55436 0.80 $5,299.29 0611621210103 Jerome D Dulac 6580 Vernon Hills Rd Edina, MN 55436 0.80 $5,299.29 0611621210102 Richard,C &,Robin A Cohan P.O. Box 1473 Sanibel, FLL'33957 0.80 $5,299.29 0611621210101 Marilyn Hoch 6610 Vernon Hills Rd Edina, MN 55436 0.80 $5,299.29 0611621210100 Janet A Zin ale '6620 Vernon Hills Rd Edina, MN 55436 0.80 $5,299.29 061.1621210099 Terri Sue Johnson 6630 Vernon Hills Rd Edina, MN 55436 0.80 $5,299.29 0611621210098 Louis A & Joan M Buie 6640 Vernon Hills Rd Edina, MN 55436 0.80 $5,299.29 061.1621210097 Arlene J Joem -Peter 6650 Vemon Hills Rd Edina, MN 55436 0.80 $5,299.29 0611621210096 Clifford A & Mary K Straka 6660 Vernon Hills Rd Edina, MN 55436 0.80 $5,299.29 0611621210095 Gail M Berglund 6670 Vernon Hills Rd Edina, MN 55436 0.80 $5,299.29 06116212100941 Robert L & Nathalie J Wilcox 6680 Vernon Hills Rd I Edina, MN 55436 0.80 1 $5,299.29 Vernon Count and Vernon'Hills Road Total REU's 16.30 VERNON COURT AND VERNUN BILLS ROAD PRELIMINARY TOTAL ROADWAY COST $ 7107,973.09 BA-403 ASSESSMENT PER REU $6,624.12 STATE OF MINNESOTA) COUNTY OF HENNEPIN) SS CITY OF EDINA ) CERTIFICATE OF MAILING NOTICE I, the undersigned, being the duly qualified acting City Clerk'of the City of Edina, Minnesota, hereby certify that on the following dates September 26, 2013,. acting on behalf of said City, I. deposited in the United States mail copies of the attached Notice of Public Hearing for Viking Hills (Vernon Court & Vernon Hills Road) Neighborhood Roadway Reconstruction, Improvement No: BA -403 (Exhibit A), enclosed in sealed envelopes, with postage thereon duly prepaid, addressed to the persons at the addresses as shown on the mailing list (Exhibit B), attached to the original hereof, which list is on file in my office, said persons being those appearing on the records of the County Auditor as owners of the property listed opposite their respective names, as of a date 17 days prior to the date of the hearing; and that I also sent said notice to the following corporations at the indicated addresses whose property is exempt from taxation and is therefore not carried on the records of said County Auditor. NAME ADDRESS WITNESS my hand and the seal of said City this 26th day of September, 2013. Edina _1 , , NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING ON PROPOSED SPECIAL ASSESSMENT IMPROVEMENT NO. BA -403 The Edina City Council will meet at 7 p.m. Oct. 14, 2013, at City Hall, 4801 W. 50,x' St., Edina, MN, to approve and adopt the listed special assessments against the described property, which is part of the Viking Hills (Vernon Court and Vernon Hills Road) Neighborhood Roadway Reconstruction: Property Identification No. 0611621220033 The special assessment to.this property for roadway reconstruction is: $3,312.06. The total amount of the proposed special assessment for the project is $1.07,973.09. The proposed assessment roll is on file with the City Clerk. No invoices will be mailed. This is the only notice you will receive regarding payment. Payment `Options The proposed assessment is payable in equal annual principal installments extending over a period of 15 years at the rate of 3.34 percent. Should the City Council adopt the assessment roll at the Oct. 14 meeting, yo.0 may. pay, the assessment in one of these ways: I. Pay the whole of the assessment without interest to. the City t6the Assessing Office, 4801 W. 50�' St, Edina, MN 55424 on or before Nov..;2.5, 20.13: 2. Pay a minimum of 25 percent of-the assessment to the Assessing Office, 4801 W. 50' St, Edina, MN 55424 on or before Nov. 25. The - rema'ininglbalance will be:certified to the County.Auditor and your first year's payment will be payable with your real estate taxes in 2014, with interest,on the remaining assessment at the rate of 3.34 percent per annum from Oct. 14, 2013 to Dec. 31, 2014. 3. Pay the assessment with your real estate .taxes. If the special assessment is not paid in the Assessing Office by Nova 25, 2013, it will be certified to the County Auditor and your first year's payment will be payable with your real estate taxes in 2014, with interest on the entire assessment at the rate of 3.34 percent per annum from Oct. 14, 2013 to Dec. 31, 2014. Deferment The City Council may, at its discretion, defer the payment of assessments for a homestead property owned by a person age 65 or older for whom it would be a hardship to make payments. The procedures to apply for such deferment are available from the Assessor's Office at Edina City Hall. Deferment applications must be filed with the Assessor's Office by Nov. 15, 2013. Your payment over 15 years: Be innin Balance Payable 1 I 153.21 Principal I Installment # Year I Principal Interest Total Balance Be innin Balance 3 312.06 1 2013 153.21 128.34 281.55 3,158.85 2 2014 183.63 97.92 281.55 2,975.22 3 2015 189.32 02.23 281.55 2,785.90 4 2016 195.19 86.36 281.55 2,590.71 5 2017 201.24 80.31 1 281.55 2,389.47 6 2018 207.48 74.07 .281.55 2,181.99 7 2019 213.91 67.64 281.55 1,968:08 8 2020 220.54 61.01 281.55 1,747.54, 9 2021 227.38 54.17 281.55 1,520.16 10 2022 234.43 47.12 281.55 1,285.73 11 2023 241.69 39.86 281.55 1,044.04 12 2024 249.18 32.37 281.55 794.86 13 2025 256.91 24.64 281.55 537.95 14 2026 264.87 16.68 281.55 273.08 15 2027 273.08 8.47 281.55 (0.00) Totals 3,312.06 911.191 4,223.251 Objections /Appeals If you wish to object or appeal to this assessment: I. File a signed, written objection with the City Clerk prior to the assessment hearing, or present the written objection to the Mayor at the assessment hearing. 2. Serve notice of the appeal to the Mayor or the City Clerk within 30 days after the adoption of the as and file such notice with the District Court within 10 days after the notice was served to the Mayor or the City Clerk. To comment on the special assessment, you may: o'Write to City of Edina, Engineering Department, 7450 Metro Blvd, Edina, MN 55439. o Email to mail(a)EdinaMN.gov, attention City Council and Engineering. a Attend the Oct. 14 public hearing and offer comments. If you have questions regarding the project, please call the Engineering Department at 952 - 826 -0371. If you have questions about paying your assessment, please call the Assessing Division of the Community Development Department at 952 - 826 -0365. September 26, 2013 Debra A. Mangen City Clerk 01 J Cut the bottom section and mail in with your payment if paying on or before November 25, 2013: PAYMENT PROCEDURE • If paying on or before Nov. 25, 2013, please'cut and return this stub with your payment. • Make�check payable to the City of Edina. • Mail payment or pay in person: Edina City Hall, Assessing Division, 4801 W. 50' Street, Edina, MN 55424. Amount Enclosed: Name: 3 Pay this amount by If not paid on or before Nov. 25, 2013, PID Impr. No. November 25, 2013, to the assessment will be placed on your avoid interest charges. property taxes at 3.34% annual interest rate, spread out over 15 years. 061 1621220033 BA-403 $3,312.06 Amount Enclosed: Name: 3 LEFT BLANK INTENTIONALLY 611621220033 3111721340025 611621220034 Constance Fukuda Randall and Robin Stern John Witzel 6200 Vernon Court 6201 Vernon Court 6204 Vernon Court Edina, MN 55436 Edina, MN 55436 Edina, MN 55436 611621220035 611621220036 611621220037 Laura Gustafson Emily Gustafson Maralynn Rye 6208 Vernon Court 6212 Vernon Court 6216 Vernon Court Edina, MN 55436 Edina, MN 55436 Edina, MN 55436 611621210109 611621210108 611621210107 George M & Delpha M Harris Lawrence P & Carol D Goode Joan W Maynard 6520 Vernon Hills Rd 6530 Vernon Hills Rd 6540 Vernon Hills Rd Edina, MN 55436 Edina, MN 55436 Edina, MN 55436 611621210106 611621210105 611621210104 Barbour T Zanin Rebecca McKenna & Jane Ellis Robert Heiser & Sharon Stephenson - 6550 Vernon Hills Rd 6560 Vernon Hills Rd Heiser Edina, MN 55436 Edina, MN 55436 6570 Vernon Hills Rd Edina, MN 55436 611621210103 611621210102 611621210101 Jerome D Dulac Richard C & Robin A Cohan Marilyn Hoch 6580 Vernon Hills Rd P.O. Box 1473 6610 Vernon Hills Rd Edina, MN 55436 Sanibel, FL 33957 Edina, MN 55436 611621210100 611621210099 611621210098 Janet A Zingale Terri Sue Johnson Louis A & Joan M Buie 6620 Vernon Hills Rd 6630 Vernon Hills Rd 6640 Vernon Hills Rd Edina, MN 55436 Edina, MN 55436 Edina, MN 55436 611621210097 611621210096 611621210095 Arlene J Joern -Peter Clifford A & Mary K Straka Gail M Berglund 6650 Vernon Hills Rd 6660 Vernon Hills Rd 6670 Vernon Hills Rd Edina, MN 55436 Edina, MN 55436 Edina, MN 55436 611621210094 Robert L & Nathalie J Wilcox 6680 Vernon Hills Rd Edina, MN 55436 RESOLUTION NO. 2013-100 A RESOLUTION LEVYING SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS FOR PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS VWIIEREAS, pursuant to proper notice duly given as required by law, the Edina City Council has met and heard and passed upon all written and oral objections to the proposed special assessments for the improvement listed below: Valley Estates Neighborhood Reconstruction — Improvement No. BA -387 BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Edina, Minnesota as follows: 1. Each special assessment as' set forth in the special assessment roll on file in the office of the City Clerk for each aforementioned improvement is hereby accepted and shall constitute the special assessments against the lands named therein, and each tract of land therein included in herein found to be benefited by the improvement in the amount of the special assessments levied against it. 2. The special assessments shall be payable in equal installments, the first of said installments together with interest at a rate of 3.4% per annum, on the entire special assessments from the date hereof to December 31, 2014. To each subsequent installment shall be added interest at the above rate for one year on all unpaid installments. The number of such annual installments shall be as follows: NUMBER OF NAME OF IMPROVEMENT INSTALLMENTS Valley Estates Neighborhood Levy No. 18602 15 3. The owner of the property so assessed may, at any time prior to certification of special assessment to the County Auditor, partially prepay an amount not less than 25% of the whole assessment to the City Treasurer andmo interest shall be charged on the portion of the assessment prepaid; or pay the whole of the special assessments on such property, to the City Treasurer, except that no interest shall be charged if the entire special assessment is paid before November 25 following the adoption of this resolution and they may, at any time thereafter, pay to the City Treasurer the entire amount of the special assessments remaining unpaid. Such payment must be made before November 25, 2013. 4. The Clerk shall forthwith transmit a certified supplicate of these special assessments to the County Auditor to be extended on the property tax lists of the County. Such special assessments shall be collected and paid over in the same manner as other municipal taxes. Adopted this 14`x' day of October, 2013 ATTEST: City Clerk Mayor ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT 74 50 Metro Boulevard • Edina, Minnesota 55439 Resolution No. 2013 -100 Page Two STATE OF MINNESOTA ) COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) 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 14, 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 Valley Estates Neighborhood Roadway Reconstruction Improvement No. BA -387 Final Project Cost Analysis Project: BA -387 Amount Asses °sment Utilities. Project Street ` Sidewalk (PACS) Storm Sewer Sanitary Sewe WaterValin Total Amount Valley Estates Proposed $ 760 000.00 $ 150 000.00 $ 60 000.00 $ M000.00: $ 1,050,000.00 Actual $548,219.25 $10,091.32 $407,795.61 $79,070.73 $94,79397 .$1,139,970.88 Misc. Expenses (above contractor payments - added to Utilities) Other Labor (Staff) - Misc. Expenses (above contractor Payments - added to Assessment) Consulting Design $ 6,335.65 Consulting Inspection $ 12,886.10 Materials/Supplies/DO -Good $ 779.61 Street Name Signs $ 561.94. $ 20,563.30 Labor (Staff) $ 33,231.38 $ - $ 3,417.07 $ 2,382.54 $ 3,014.62 $ 1,308.63 $ - - 1,488.51 $ 3,014.62 $ 4,725.70 $ 3,871.05 Payment Nos. Actual Monthl Pa ments $ 162,325.17 Stree Sidewalk Storm Sewer Sancta Sewer Water Main 1 $ 24,726.6 343,767.73 1 $ 79,810.07 $ 23 645.50 $ 34 143.00 2 $ " 93 335.15 $ 10 091.32 $ 186,761.45 $ 16 468.25 $ 52 122.51 3 $ 187 439.15 $ $ 124 970.03 $ 31 358.55 $ 4 $ 46'962.18 $ $ 18 958.20 $ $ 5 $ 173 348.26 $ 31 176.48 $ (2,375.00) $ (1.507.65 6 $ 019.55 $ 51937.50 $ 1.662.50 $ 1' 900.00 Final Payment* $ 26;816:47 $ 19 520.22 $ 3,585.23 $ 4,265.06 Revised Final $ 2,611.00 TOTAL $548,219.25 $10,091.321 $404,780.99 $74,345.03 $90,922.92 Monthly Total Actual CS Payment $ 162,325.17 $ 162,325.17 $ 358,778.68 $ 358,778.68 $ 343,767.73 $ 343,767.73 $ 65,920.38 $ 65,920.38 $ 138,289.13 $ 138,289.13 $ 2,480.45 $ 2,480.45 $ 54,186.98 $ 54,186.98 $ 2,611.00 $ 2,611.00 $ 1,128,359.51 $ 1,128,359.51 *Only row that is hard entered because the final payment most often is the 5% retainage and it is split amongst impr # by % of actual cost e e 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4' 4 4' 51 5 5: 5: b 5 51 5; 51 5! 63 6' 6; 6i Valley Estates Neighborhood Roadway Reconstruction Improvement No. BA -387 Assessment Roll PID OWNER HOUSE NO STREET CITY /STATEIZIP ASSESSABLE REU ASSESSMENT AMOUNT 1 0611621140010 FRANK D LERMAN & CAROL SIMON 6112 CREEK VALLEY RD EDINA, MN 55439 1 $ 7,274.62 2 0611621140011 SHARON & LOWELLE HAWKINS 6116 CREEK VALLEY RD EDINA, MN 55439 1 $ 7,274.62 3 0611621140012 TERRY & CAROLYN KORUPP 6200 CREEK VALLEY RD EDINA, MN 55439 1 $ 7,274.62 4 0611621140025 STEVEN & CATHERINE THATCHER 6201 CREEK VALLEY RD EDINA, MN 55439 1 $ 7,274.62 5 0611621140003 LISETTE GLUEK & JAMES KELLEY 6204 CREEK VALLEY RD EDINA, MN 55439 1 $ 7,274.62 6 0611621140024 RICHARD & REBECCA WEMER 6205 CREEK VALLEY RD EDINA, MN 55439 1 $ 7,274.62 7 0611621140023 WALTER C LARSEN 6209 CREEK VALLEY RD EDINA, MN 55439 1 $ 7,274.62 8 0611621140022 MARK & KRISTINE MARSHALL 6213 CREEK VALLEY RD EDINA, MN 55439 1 $ 7,274.62 9 0611621140021 RICHARD & JEANNE HOFFMAN 6217 CREEK VALLEY RD EDINA, MN 55439 1 $ 7,274.62 0 0611621140020 LARRY & ELIZABETH WOLFF 6221 CREEK VALLEY RD EDINA, MN 55439 1 $ 71274.62 1.0611621140019 DOUG & ANDREA HAWKINSON 6225 1 CREEK VALLEY RD EDINA, MN 55439 1 $ 7,274.62 2 0611621140018 JAMES L. ARNOLD 6229 CREEK VALLEY RD EDINA, MN 55439 1 $ 7,274.62 3 0611621140026 RUTH & PAUL STORMO 6200 BALDER LN EDINA, MN 55439 1 $ 7,274.62 4 0611621140054 TIMOTHY & COLLEEN BAER 6201 BALDER LN EDINA, MN 55439 1 $ 7,274.62 5 0611621140027 JOAN & ERIC WELLAND 6204 BALDER LN EDINA, MN 55439 1 $ 7,274.62 6 0611621140053 PETER & CAROLYN PIERCE 6205 BALDER LN EDINA, MN 55439 1 $ 7,274.62 7 0611621140028 WESLEY & ANNE ANDERSON 6208 BALDER LN EDINA, MN 55439 1 $ 7,274.62 8 0611621140052 STEVEN & STACEY EIDSVOLD 6209 BALDER LN EDINA, MN 55439 1 $ 7,274.62 9 0611621140029 SUE & MICHAEL HOLMES 6212 BALDER LN EDINA, MN 55439 1 $ 7,274.62 0 0611621140051 KATHERINE FREY 6213 BALDER LN EDINA, MN 55439 1 $ 7,274.62 1 0611621140030 WILLIAM & ANN JOHNSTON 6216 BALDER LN EDINA, MN 55439 1 $ 7,274.62 2 0611621140050 KEVIN & KATHLEEN BONTHIUS 6217 BALDER LN EDINA, MN 55439 1 $ 7,274.62 3 0611621140031 Z. XIANGWEN & DAWEI TIAN 6220 BALDER LN EDINA, MN 55439 1 $ 7,274.62 4 0611621140049 PETER J SCHNORBACH 6221 BALDER LN EDINA, MN 55439 1 $ 7,274.62 5 0611621140032 THOMAS & THEMLA BUSS 6224 1 BALDER LN EDINA, MN 55439 1 $ 7,274.62 5 0611621140048 MARGARET & DAVID DUNNIGANrrRUSTEE 6225 BALDER LN EDINA, MN 55439 1 $ 7,274.62 7 0611621140004 RICHARD & MARY CHENG 6405 NORIDC CIR EDINA, MN 55439 1 $ 7,274.62 3 0611621140005 LINDA & JEFFREY SJOLANDER 6409 NORIDC CIR EDINA, MN 55439 1 $ 7,274.62 3 0611621140006 TODD FREEMAN 6413 NORIDC CIR EDINA, MN 55439 1 $ 7,274.62 3 0611621140007 SUZANNE ZUIDEMA & J. JENKINS 6417 NORIDC CIR EDINA, MN 55439 1 $ 7,274.62 1 0611621140013 NANCY MEADLEY 6420 NORIDC CIR EDINA, MN 55439 1 $ 7,274.62 0611621140008 JOHN & CAROL TRELSTAD 6421 NORIDC CIR EDINA, MN 55439 1 $ 7,274.62 3 0611621140014 JOHN & JOANNA SWANSON 6424 NORIDC CIR EDINA, MN 55439 1 $ 7,274.62 1 0611621140009 MARYELLEN & EUGENE NORD 6425 NORIDC CIR EDINA, MN 55439 1 $ 7,274.62 i 0611621140015 ORN & MARGARET ARNAR 6428 NORIDC CIR EDINA, MN 55439 1 $ 7,274.62 3 0611621140045 MICHAEL PETERSON & SARAH RAY 6500 NORDIC DR EDINA, MN 55439 1 $ 7,274.62 r0611621140064 JOHN & BARBARA ERLANDSON 6501 NORDIC DR EDINA, MN 55439 1 $ 7,274.62 30611621140044 LYNN & JAMES WANGEN 6504 NORDIC DR EDINA, MN 55439 1 $ 7,274.62 ) 0611621140063 DAN & ALISON AROM 6505 NORDIC DR EDINA, MN 55439 1 $ 7,274.62 ) 0611621140043 JONATHON & STELLA CHAFEE 6508 NORDIC DR EDINA, MN 55439 1 $ 71274.62 1 0611621140062 JANET NORTHFIELD 6509 NORDIC DR EDINA, MN 55439 1 $ 7.274.62 !0611621140042 JAMES & DOROTHY KRUGER 6512 NORDIC DR EDINA, MN 55439 1 $ 7,274.62 10611621140061 LOIS & JERRY EDWARDS 6513 NORDIC DR EDINA, MN 55439 1 $ 7,274.62 40611621140041 RANDALL & ANDREA LENTZ 6516 NORDIC DR EDINA, MN 55439 1 $ 7,274.62 . 0611621140060 KELLY & DANIEL BALLARD 6517 NORDIC DR EDINA, MN 55439 1 $ 7,274.62 10611621140040 SUSAN & ROAR LUND 6520 NORDIC DR EDINA, MN 55439 1 2 '0611621140059 PERRY J BERGREN 6521 NORDIC DR EDINA, MN 55439 1 2 1 0611621410008 CRAIG & ANDREA BRANDT 6524 NORDIC DR EDINA, MN 55439 1 2 10611621140058 NANCY & MARK SCHAEFER 6525 NORDIC DR EDINA, MN 55439 1 2 "$7.274.*62 0611621410007 LINDA A BJERKE 6600 NORDIC DR EDINA, MN 55439 1 2 0611621410031 SCOTT & JEAN LASTINE 6601 NORDIC DR EDINA, MN 55439 1 2 0611621410006 ARLETTE J' POTTER 660'4 NORDIC DR EDINA, MN 55439 1 0611621410030 GOPAL KHANNA 6605 NORDIC DR EDINA, MN 55439 1 $ 7,274.62 0611621410005 SCOT ZIMMERMAN & E. KOYAMA 6608 NORDIC DR EDINA, MN 55439 1 $ 7,274.62 0611621410029 REBECCA & MARK KUCK 6609 NORDIC DR EDINA, MN 55439 1 $ 7,274.62 0611621410028 RUTH HAMILTON & C. PALMSTROM 6613 NORDIC DR EDINA, MN 55439 1 $ 7.274.62 0611621410027 GEOFFREY & ANN MICHEL 6617 INORDIC DR EDINA, MN 55439 1 $ 7,274.62 0611621410026 TIM L ARMBRUSTMACHER 6621 INORDIC DR EDINA, MN 55439 1 $ 7,274.62 0611621410025 TRACY & MICHAEL SLAUGHTER 6625 NORDIC DR EDINA, MN 55439 1 $ . 7,274.62 0611621140033 KAREN & CHARLES HAFF 6501 SCANDIA RD EDINA, MN 55439 1 $ 7,274.62 0611621140034 SHERRILL & MARK NELSON 6505 SCANDIA RD EDINA, MN 55439 1 $ 7,274.62 0611621140035 1 LESTER & JOLENE FUJITAKE 6509 SCANDIA RD JEDINA, MN 55439 1 $ 7,274.62 0611621140038 INED GUSTAFSON & J. BARTHELL 6513 SCANDIA RD I EDINA, MN 55439 1 $ 7,274.62 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 Valley Estates Neighborhood Roadway Reconstruction Improvement No. BA -387 Assessment Roll PID OWNER HOUSE NO STREET CITY /STATE/ZIP ASSESSABLE REU ASSESSMENT AMOUNT 0611621140037 SUSAN & PAUL ARNESON 6517 SCANDIA RD EDINA, MN 55439 1 $ 7,274.62 0611621140036 RICHARD & JUDITH KRZYZEK 6521 SCANDIA RD EDINA, MN 55439 1 $ 7,274.62 0611621140055 JENNIFER RONDESTVEDT 6524 SCANDIA RD EDINA, MN 55439 1 $ 7.274.62 0611621140039 JAMES & KATHRYN DOWNEY 6525 ISCANDIA RD EDINA, MN 55439 1 $ 7,274.62 0611621140056 JOHN & ANDREA WAGENAAR 6526 SCANDIA RD EDINA, MN 55439 1 $ 7,274.62 0611621140057 STEVEN & ELIZABETH KLOIBER 6628 SCANDIA RD EDINA, MN 55439 1 $ 7,274.62 0611621410017 TERRANCE & CAROL KAPSEN 6600 SCANDIA RD EDINA, MN 55439 1 $ 7,274.62 b611621410018 GARRY. L WOESSNER 6602 SCANDIA RD EDINA; MN 55439 1 $ 7,274:62 0611621410019 AMY L SELLS 6604 SCANDIA RD EDINA,.MN 55439 1 $ 7,274.62 0611621410002. VICKI & THOMAS HURWITZ 6605 SCANDIA RD EDINA, MN 55439 1 $ 7,274.62 0611621410020 ANN M LEFLEM 6606 SCANDIA RD EDINA, MN 55439 1 $ 7,274.62 0611621410021 SUZANNE & MATTHEW KLEIN 6608 SCANDIA RD EDINA, MN 55439 1 $ 7274.62 0611621410003 ANDREW & JESSICA CARTER 6609 SCANDIA RD EDINA, MN 55439 1 $ 7,274.62 0611621410022 ROBERT & MARY WILKINS 6612 ISCANDIA RD EDINA, MN 56439 1 $ 7,274.62 0611621410004 ANDREW & ELIZABETH LEMING 6613 SCANDIA RD EDINA, MN 55439 1 $ 7,274.62 0611621410023 JANET& HARRY SUTTON 6616 SCANDIA RD EDINA, MN 55439 1 $ 7,274.62 0611621410024 RANDY MICHELLE TRESSEL 6620 SCANDIA RD EDINA, MN 55439 1 $ 7,274.62 �36,373.10 0611621140001 EDINA PUBLIC SCHOOLS - ISD 273 5701 NORMANDALE RD EDINA, MN 55424 5 $ 85 PRELIMINARY TOTAL COST $ 618,342.65 TOTAL ASSESSMENT REU 85 AVERAGE COST PER REU $ 7,274.62 STATE OF MINNESOTA) COUNTY OF HENNEPIN) SS CERTIFICATE OF MAILING NOTICE CITY OF EDINA ) I, the undersigned, being the duly qualified acting City Clerk of the City of Edina, Minnesota, hereby certify that on the following dates September 26, 2013, acting on behalf of said City, I deposited in the United States mail copies of the attached Notice of Public Hearing for Valley Estates Neighborhood Roadway Reconstruction, Improvement No. BA -387 (Exhibit A), enclosed in sealed envelopes, with postage thereon duly prepaid, addressed to the persons at the addresses as .shown on the mailing list (Exhibit B), attached. to the original hereof, which list is on file in my office, said persons being those appearing on the records of the County. Auditor as owners of the, property listed opposite their respective names, as of a date 17 days prior to the date of the hearing; and that, I also sent said notice to the following corporations at the indicated addresses whose property is exempt from taxation and is therefore not carried 6,n1he records of.'said County Auditor. NAME ADDRESS WITNESS my hand and the seal of said City this 26th day of September, 2013. Edina City Clerk NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING ON PROPOSED SPECIAL ASSESSMENT IMPROVEMENT NO. BA -387 The Edina City Council will meet at 7 p.m. Oct. 14, 2013, at City Hall, 4801 W. 50`' St., Edina, MN, to approve and adopt the listed special assessments against the described property, which is part of the Valley Estates Neighborhood Roadway Reconstruction: Property Identification No. 061 1621140010 The special assessment to this property for roadway reconstruction is: $7,393.34. The total amount of the proposed special assessment for the project is $628,433.97. The proposed assessment roll is on file with the City Clerk. No invoices will be mailed. This is the only notice you will receive regarding payment. Payment Options The proposed assessment is payable in equal annual principal installments extending over a period of 15 years at the rate of 3.34 percent. Should the City Council adopt the assessment roll at the Oct. 14 meeting, you may pay the assessment in one of these ways: 1. Pay the whole of the assessment without interest to the City to the Assessing Office, 4801 W. 50' St, Edina, MN 55424 on or before Nov. 25, 2013. 2. Pay a minimum of 25 percent of the assessment to the Assessing Office, 4801 W. 50' St, Edina, MN 55424 on or before Nov. 25. The remaining balance will be certified to the County Auditor and your first year's payment will be payable with your real estate taxes in 2014, with interest on the remaining assessment at the rate of 3.34 percent per.annum from Oct. 14, 2013 to Dec. 31, 2014. 3. Pay the assessment with your real estate taxes. If the special assessment is not paid in the Assessing Office by Nov. 25, 2013, it will be certified to the County Auditor and your first year's payment will be payable with your real estate taxes in 2014, with interest on the entire assessment at the rate of 3.34 percent per annum from Oct. 14, 20'13 to Dec. 31, 2014. Deferment The City Council may, at its discretion, defer the payment of assessments for a homestead property owned by a person age 65 or older for whom it would be a hardship to make payments. The procedures to apply for such deferment are available from the Assessor's Office at Edina City Hall. Deferment applications must be filed with the Assessor's Office by Nov. 15, 2013. Your payment over IS years: Beginning Balance Payable I I I 331.10 Principal I Installment # Year Principal Interest Total Balance Beginning Balance 7,393.34 1 2014 331.10 308.67 639.77 7,062.24 2 2015 403.89 235.88 639.77 6,658.35 3 2016 417.38 222.39 639.77 6,240.97 4 2017 431.32 208.45 639.77 5,809.65 5 2018 445.73 194.04 639.77 5,363.92 6 2019 460.62 179.15 639.77 4,903.30 7 2020 476.00 163.77 639.77 4,427.30 8 2021 491.90 147.87 639.77 3,935.40 9 2022 508.33 131.44 639.77 3,427.07 10 2023 525.31 114.46 639.77 2,901.76 11 2024 542.85 96.92 639.77 2,358.91 12 2025 560.98 78.79 639.77 1,797.93 13 2026 579.72 60.05 639.77 1,218.21 14 2027 599.08 40.69 639.77 619.13 15 2028 619.09 20.68 639.77 0.04 L Totals 1 7,393.30 1 2,203.25 1 9,596.55 1 Objections /Appeals If you wish to object or appeal to this assessment: 1. File a signed, written objection with the City Clerk prior to the assessment hearing, or present the written objection to the Mayor at the assessment hearing. 2. Serve notice of the appeal to the Mayor or the City Clerk within 30 days after the adoption of the assessment and file such notice with the District Court within 10 days after the notice was served to the Mayor or the City Cleric. To comment on the special assessment, you may: • Write to City of Edina, Engineering Department, 7450 Metro Blvd, Edina, MN 55439. • Email to mail _EdinaMN.gov, attention City Council and Engineering. • Attend the Oct. 14 public hearing and offer comments. If you have questions regarding the project, please call the Engineering Department at 952 - 826 -0371. If you have questions about paying your assessment, please call the Assessing Division of the Community Development Department at 952 - 826 -0365. September 26, 2013 Debra A. Mangen City Clerk 2 Cut the bottom section and mail in with your payment if paying on or before November 25, 2013: Y,e<°e<Y, <X a<°e<°e <Q« ««<X X X< <e«<e <X X a««<°e « «<X X e «<X yl «< PAYMENT PROCEDURE If paying on or before Nov. 25, 2013, please cut and return this stub with your payment. Make check, payable to the City of Edina. Mail payment or pay in person: Edina City Hall, Assessing Division, 4801 W. 50`h Street, Edina, MN 55424. Amount Enclosed: Name: Pay this amount by If not paid on or before Nov. 25, 2013, PID Impr. No. November 25, 2013, to the assessment will be placed on your avoid interest charges. property taxes at 3.34% annual interest rate, spread out over 15 years. 0611621140010 BA -387 $7,393.34 Amount Enclosed: Name: LEFT BLANK INTENTIONALLY U, 0611621140010 0611621140011 FRANK D LERMAN & CAROL SIMON SHARON & LOWELLE HAWKINS 6112 CREEK VALLEY RD 6116 CREEK VALLEY RD 'INA, MN 55439 EDINA, MN 55439 0611621140025 STEVEN & CATHERINE THATCHER 6201 CREEK VALLEY RD EDINA, MN 55439 0611621140023 WALTER C LARSEN 6209 CREEK VALLEY RD EDINA, MN 55439 0611621140020 LARRY & ELIZABETH WOLFF 6221 CREEK VALLEY RD EDINA, MN 55439 0611621140026 RUTH & PAUL STORMO 6200 BALDER LN EDINA, MN 55439 ,,., 1 1 621 1 40053 PETER & CAROLYN PIERCE 6205 BALDER LN EDINA, MN 55439 0611621140029 SUE & MICHAEL HOLMES 6212 BALDER LN EDINA, MN 55439 0611621140050 KEVIN & KATHLEEN BONTHIUS 6217 BALDER LN EDINA, MN 55439 0611621140032 THOMAS & THEMLA BUSS 6224 BALDER LN EDINA, MN 55439 0611621140003 LISETTE GLUEK & JAMES KELLEY 6204 CREEK VALLEY RD EDINA, MN 55439 0611621140022 MARK & KRISTINE MARSHALL 6213 CREEK VALLEY RD EDINA, MN 55439 0611621140019 DOUG & ANDREA HAWKINSON 6225 CREEK VALLEY RD EDINA, MN 55439 0611621140054 TIMOTHY & COLLEEN BAER 6201 BALDER LN EDINA, MN 55439 0611621140028. WESLEY & ANNE ANDERSON 6208 BALDER LN EDINA, MN 55439 06116211400.51 KATHERINE FREY 6213 BALDER LN EDINA, MN 55439 0611621140031 Z. XIANGWEN & DAWEI TIAN 6220 BALDER LN EDINA, MN 55439 0611621140048 MARGARET & DAVID DUNNIGAN/TRUSTEE 6225 BALDER LN EDINA, MN 55439 061.1621140012 TERRY & CAROLYN KORUPP 6200 CREEK VALLEY RD EDINA, MN 55439 0611621140024 RICHARD & REBECCA WEMER 6205 CREEK VALLEY RD EDINA, MN 55439 0611621140021 RICHARD.& JEANNE HOFFMAN 6,217 CREEK VALLEY RD EDINA, MN 55439 0611621140.018 JAMES L. ARNOLD 6229 CREEK VALLEY RD EDINA, MN 55439 0611621140027 JOAN & ERIC WELLAND 6204 BALDER LN EDINA, MN 55439 0611621140052 STEVEN & STACEY EIDSVOLD 6209 BALDER LN EDINA, MN 55439 0611621140030 WILLIAM & ANN JOHNSTON 6216 BALDER LN EDINA, MN 55439 0611621140049 PETER J SCHNORBACH 6221 BALDER LN EDINA, MN 55439 0611621140004 RICHARD & MARY CHENG 6405 NORIDC CIR EDINA, MN 55439 '621140005 0611621140006 0611621140007 )A & JEFFREY SJOLANDER TODD FREEMAN SUZANNE ZUIDEMA & J. JENKINS 6,409 NORIDC CIR 6413 NORIDC CIR 6417 NORIDC CIR EDINA, MN 55439 EDINA, MN 55439 EDINA, MN 55439 0611621140013 0611621140008 NANCY MEADLEY JOHN & CAROL TRELSTAD 6420 NORIDC CIR 6421 NORIDC CIR EDINA, MN 55439 EDINA, MN 55439 0611621140009 0611621140015 MARYELLEN & EUGENE NORD ORN & MARGARET ARNAR 6425 NORIDC CIR 6428 NORIDC CIR EDINA, MN 55439 EDINA, MN 55439 0611621140064 JOHN & BARBARA ERLANDSON 6501 NORDIC DR EDINA, MN 55439 0611621140043 JONATHON'& STELLA CHAFEE 6568 NORDIC DR EDINA, MN 55439 0611621140044 LYNN & JAMES WANGEN 6504 NORDIC DR EDINA, MN 55439 061.1621140062 - JANET NORTHFIELD 6509-,NORDIC DR EDINA, MN 55439 0611621140061 0611621140641. LOIS & JERRY EDWARDS RANQALLA ANDREA LENTZ 6513 NORDIC DR 6516 NORDIC DR EDINA, MN 55439 EDINA, MN 55439 0611621140040 0611621140059 .: SUSAN & ROAR LUND PERRY J BERGREN 6520 NORDIC DR 6521 NORDIC DR EDINA, MN 55439 EDINA, MN 55439 0611621140058 061.1621410007 NANCY & MARK SCHAEFER LINDA A.BJERKE 6525 NORDIC DR 6600 NORDIC DR EDINA, MN 55439 EDINA, MN 55439 0611621410006 0611621410030 ARLETTE J POTTER GOPAL KHANNA 6604 NORDIC DR, 6605 NORDIC DR EDINA, MN 55439 EDINA, MN 55439 0611621410029 ' 0611621410028 REBECCA & MARK KUCK RUTH HAMILTON & C. PALMSTROM 6609 NORDIC DR 6613 NORDIC DR EDINA, MN 55439 EDINA, MN 55439 0611621410026 0611621410025 TIM L ARMBRUSTMACHER TRACY & MICHAEL SLAUGHTER 6621 NORDIC DR 6625 NORDIC DR EDINA, MN 55439 EDINA, MN 55439 0611621140014 JOHN & JOANNA SWANSON 6424 NORIDC CIR EDINA, MN 55439 0611621140045 MICHAEL PETERSON & SARAH RAY 6500 NORDIC DR EDINA, MN 55439 0611621140063 DAN & ALISON AROM 6505 NORDIC DR EDINA, MN 55439 0611621140042 JAMES & DOROTHY KRUGER 6512 NORDIC DR EDINA, MN 55439 0611621140060 KELLY & DANIEL BALLARD 6517 NORDIC DR EDINA, MN 55439 0611621410008 CRAIG.& ANDREA BRANDT 6524 NORDIC DR EDINA,' MN; 55439 0611621410031 SCOTT & JEAN LASTINE 6601 .NORDIC DR EDINA, MN 55439 0611621410005 SCOT ZIMMERMAN & E. KOYAMA 6608 NORDIC DR EDINA, MN 55439 0611621410027 GEOFFREY & ANN MICHEL 6617 NORDIC DR EDINA, MN 55439 0611621140033 KAREN & CHARLES HAFF 6501 SCANDIA RD EDINA, MN 55439 0611621140034 SHERRILL & MARK NELSON 6505 SCANDIA RD 'INA, MN 55439 0611621140037 SUSAN & PAUL ARNESON 6517 SCANDIA RD EDINA, MN 55439 0611621140039 JAMES & KATHRYN DOWNEY 6525 SCANDIA RD EDINA, MN 55439 0611621410017 TERRANCE & CAROL KAPSEN 6600 SCANDIA RD EDINA, MN 55439 0611621410002 VICKI & THOMAS HU_RWITZ 6605 SCANDIA RD EDINA, MN 55439 u,, 11621410003 ANDREW & JESSICA CARTER 6609 SCANDIA RD EDINA, MN 55439 0611621410023 JANET& HARRY SUTTON 6616 SCANDIA RD EDINA, MN 55439 0611621140035 0611621140036 LESTER & JOLENE FUJITAKE NED GUSTAFSON & J. BARTHELL 6509 SCANDIA RD 6513 SCANDIA RD EDINA, MN 55439 EDINA, MN 55439 0611621140038 0611621140055 RICHARD & JUDITH KRZYZEK JENNIFER RONDESTVEDT 6521 SCANDIA RD 6524 SCANDIA RD EDINA, MN 55439 EDINA, MN 55439 0611621140056 0611621140057 . JOHN & ANDREA WAGENAAR STEVEN & ELIZABETH KLOIBER 6526 SCANDIA RD 6528 SCANDIA RD EDINA, MN 55439 EDINA, MN 55439 0611621410018 0611621410019 GARRY L WOESSNER AMY L SELLS 6602 SCANDIA RD 6604 SCANDIA RD EDINA, MN 55439 EDINA, MN 55439 0611621410020 0611621410021 ANN M LEFLEM SUZANNE & MATTHEW KLEIN 6606 SCANDIA RD 6608 SCANDIA RD EDINA, MN 55439 EDINA, MN 55439 0611621410022 0611621410004 ROBERT & MARY WILKINS ANDREW & ELIZABETH LEMING 6612 SCANDIA RD 6613 SCANDIA RD EDINA, MN 55439 EDINA, MN 55439 0611621410024 0611621140001 RANDY & MICHELLE TRESSEL EDINA PUBLIC SCHOOLS -ISD 273 6620 SCANDIA RD 5701 NORMANDALE RD EDINA, MN 55439 EDINA, MN 55424 RESOLUTION• NO.2013 -101 A RESOLUTION LEVYING SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS FOR PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS WHEREAS, pursuant to proper notice duly given as required by law, the Edina City Council has met and heard and passed upon all written and oral objections to the proposed special assessments for the improvement listed'below: Richmond Hills 'Neighborhood Reconstruction — Improvement No. BA -388 BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Edina, Minnesota as follows: 1. Each special assessment as set forth in' the special assessment roll on file in the office of the,, City Clerk for each aforementioned improvement is hereby accepted and shall constitute the special assessments against the lands named therein, and each tract of land therein included in herein found to be benefited by the improvement in. the amount of the special assessments levied against it. 2. The special assessments shall be payable_. in equal installments, the first of said installments together with interest at a rate of 5.404 per annum, on the entire special assessments from the date hereof to December 31,. 2014. To each subsequent installment shall be added interest at the above rate for one year on all unpaid - installments. The number of such annual installments shall be as follows: NUMBER OF NAME OF IMPROVEMENT INSTALLMENTS Richmond Hills Neighborhood Levy No: 18601 15 3. The owner of the property so assessed may., at any time prior to certification of special assessment to the County Auditor, partially prepay an amount not-less than 25% of the whole assessment to.the City Treasurer and nointerest shall be charged on the portion of the assessment prepaid; or pay the whole of the special as sessments on such property, to the City Treasurer, except that no interest shall be charged if the entire special assessment is paid before November 25 following the adoption of this resolution and they may, at any time thereafter, pay to the City Treasurer the entire amount of the special assessments remaining unpaid. Such payment must be made before November 25, 2013. 4. The Clerk shall forthwith transmit 'a certified supplicate of these special assessments to the County Auditor to be extended . on the property tax lists of the County. Such special assessments shall be collected and paid over in the same manner as other municipal taxes. Adopted this 14th day of October, 2013 ATTEST: City Clerk Mayor ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT 7450 Metro Boulevard • Edina, Minnesota 55439 Resolution No. 2013 -101 Page Two STATE OF MINNESOTA ) COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) 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 14, 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 Richmond Hills Neighborhood Roadway Reconstruction Improvement No. BA-388 Final Project Cost Analysis Misc. Expenses (above contractor payments - added to Utilities) Assessment Utilities Project 451,914.14 Street Consulting Design Sanitary Sewer $ 78,234.77 $ 49,308.97 Project: BA -388 Amount Consulting Inspection $ 191,0 2.69 $ 100,866.14 $ 80,308.26 $ Service Labor(Staft) $ 147,978.18 $ 1,547.18 $ 1,331.06 Street Storm Sewer Sanitary Sewer Upgrades Water Main Total Amount $ 139,032.37 Misc. Expenses (above contractor payments - added to Assessment) $ 184 040.42 $ 33,839.61 5 Consulting Design Richmond Hills Proposed $ 2,300,000.00 $ 1,200,000.00 $ 1,593,000.00 $ 1,490,000.00 $ 65830 . 0 Actual $1,391,206.46 $1,067,315.10, $778,828.23 $161 141.00 $1,183,520.99 $4,582,011.781 $ 41 779.54 Misc. Expenses (above contractor payments - added to Utilities) Monthhr Pa ments $ 451,914.14 Street Consulting Design Sanitary Sewer $ 78,234.77 $ 49,308.97 $ 62,587.82 Consulting Inspection $ 191,0 2.69 $ 100,866.14 $ 80,308.26 $ 74,388.54 Labor(Staft) $ 147,978.18 $ 1,547.18 $ 1,331.06 $ 2,056.01 $ 235,834.02 $ - $ 180,648.09 $ 130,948.29 $ 139,032.37 Misc. Expenses (above contractor payments - added to Assessment) $ 184 040.42 $ 33,839.61 5 Consulting Design $ 131,758.04 $ 164,630.39 $194,980.61 6 Consulting Inspection $ 171,720.55 $ 68 152.52 $ 23,292.T7 7 Materials /Supplies $ 301.88 $ 45 096.53 $ 41 779.54 Final Payment Street Name Signs $ 1,048.72 1 $ 8,090.21 $ 10,444,89 TOTAL $1,391,206.46 $ 304,829.19 $809,020.94 $1,044,488.62 Labor (Staff) 20,679.13 Pa ment Nos. Actual Monthhr Pa ments $ 451,914.14 Street Storm Sewer Sanitary Sewer $ 542,336.27 Water Main 1 $ 84 665.41 $ 20 691.24 $ 191,0 2.69 $ 574,776.41 $ 155 524.80 2 $ 81 295.67 $ 213,897.50 $ 147,978.18 $ 413,000.38 $ 273 712.63 3 $ 282 964.08 $ 235,834.02 $ - $ 4,131,383.03 $ 23 538.17 4 $ 133,999.14 $ 46,648.42 $ 184 040.42 $ 364 813.18 5 $ 81699.66 $ 177,063.72 $ 164,630.39 $ 151382.64 6 $ 422,012.81 $ 148,198.76 $ 68 152.52 $ 23,292.T7 7 $ 290 657.63 $ 35 466.68 $ 45 096.53 $ 41 779.54 Final Payment $ 13,912.06 $ 8,866.67 1 $ 8,090.21 $ 10,444,89 TOTAL $1,391,206.46 $886 667.011 $809,020.94 $1,044,488.62 i n I .vin $647,879.94 Monthly Total Actual CS Payment $ 451,914.14 $ 451,914.14 $ 716,883.98 $ 716,863.97 $ 542,336.27 $ 542,336.28 $ 729,501.16 $ 729,501.15 $ 574,776.41 $ 574,776.41 $ 661,656.86 $ 661,656.87 $ 413,000.38 $ 413,000.38 $ 41,313.83 $ 41,313.83 $ 4,131,383.03 $ 4,131,383.03 Richmond Hills Neighborhood Roadway Reconstruction Improvement No. BA-388 Assessment Roll 3311721210004 P21 3311721240030 3311721210005 3311721240031 3311721210006 3311721240032 3311721210007 3311721240033 3311721210008 3311721240034 3311721240035 3311721210009 3311721240036 3311721210010 3311721240037 3311721210011 3311721240038 3311721210012 3311721240039 3311721210033 3311721210013 3311721210026 3311721240042 3311721210027 3311721240043 3311721210030 3311721220042 3311721210029 3311721220043 3311721210028 3311721220044 3311721220002 3311721210079 3311721210080 3311721210022 3311721210081 3311721210021 3311721210082 3311721210020 3311721210083 3311721210084 3311721210019 3311721210085 3311721210018 3311721210086 3311721210017 3311721210087 3311721210016 Taxpayers Name James Kathleen Lane Matthew A & Alissa L Movem Jill Emanuel' Darwin F & Margaret M Dahl III James & Patricia Mobe Judith M Hawley Michael S & Suzanne V Robb Ronald E & Susan Pray Nancy J Litwin Theodora & Leonard En man Thomas J Wurst Thomas John Wurst William & Dorenne R Just Jr Christo her J & Kristin L Mo uist Lori A Sandvi Peter S & Pffany G Bils Chris & Dawn Rofdal Gary L & Lisa 'A Wi nes Genevieve M'Grove Ma T Dunphy Herbert Royce David R Braun Gregory H & Susan M Keane Scoff L Thorp Thomas A & Judith E Forker. Neva B Waters David C & Lori A Kunz Scott R Strand & Katherine Thomson Gerald Pe lin Keith Curtin Mark A & Lisa E Cox James A Ankeny & Lucinda A Winter Mark L Van Sloun Ann & Michael Hanson Sumner Adam & Jennifer I Musolf Jamie & Benjamin Bastian E Jean Smith Damod L Anna Suzanne & Ruth S Potts Donald L & SuzanneL Reading Stephanie M Porter William .& Shawn Buss Patrick J & Ma Bret B Huber Stanley & Katherine. Wasle Anthony Schroe fer Norman D & Debra A Mead Gerard & Elizabeth Shannon Teric M & Katherine A Steiner Harold & Ma A Schwind Mailing Address 5004 56TH ST W. 5005 56TH ST W :_ _ 5008 56TH ST:.W - 5009 56TH ST W 5012 56TH ST W 5013 56TH ST W 5016 56TH ST W 5017 56TH ST W 5020 56TH ST W 502156TH ST W 5025 56TH ST W 5028 56TH ST W 5029 56TH ST W 5032 56TH ST W 5033 56TH ST W 5036 56TH ST W 5037 56TH ST W 5040 56TH ST W 5041 56TH ST W 5044 56TH ST W 5048 56TH ST W 5104 56TH ST W 5105 56TH ST W 5108 56TH ST W 5109 56TH ST W 5517 CODE AVE 5520 CODE AVE 5521 CODE AVE 5524 CODE AVE 5525 CODE AVE 5528 CODE AVE 5532 CODE AVE 5004 KENT AVE 5008 KENT AVE 5009 KENT AVE 5012 KENT AVE 5013 KENT AVE 5016 KENT AVE 5017 KENT ` 5020 KENT AVE 5024 KENT AVE ' 5025 KENT AVE 5028 KENT AVE 5029 KENT AVE 5032 KENT AVE 5033 KENT AVE 5036 KENT AVE 5037 KENT AVE City /State/Zip EDINA MN55436 EDINA MN 55436 EDINA MN,55436 EDINA MN 55436 EDINA MN 55436 EDINA MN 55436 EDINA MN 55436 EDINA MN 55436 EDINA MN 55436 EDINA MN 55436 EDINA MN 55436 EDINA MN 55436 EDINA MN 55436 EDINA MN 55436 EDINA MN 55436 EDINA MN 55436 EDINA MN 55436 EDINA MN 55436 EDINA MN 55436 EDINA MN 55436 EDINA MN 55436 EDINA MN 55436 EDINA MN 55436 EDINA MN 55436 EDINA MN 55436 EDINA MN 55436 EDINA MN 55436 EDINA MN 55436 EDINA MN 55436 EDINA MN 55436 EDINA MN 55436 EDINA MN 55436 EDINA MN 55436 EDINA MN 55436 EDINA MN 55436 EDINA MN 55436 EDINA MN.55436 EDINA MN 55436 EDINA MN 55436 EDINA MN 55436 EDINA MN 55436 EDINA MN 55436 EDINA MN 55436 EDINA MN 55436 EDINA MN 55436 EDINA MN 55436 EDINA MN 55436 EDINA MN 55436 Street $ 10 337.37 $ = 10 337.37 $ 10 337.37 $ 10 337.37 $ 10 337.37 $ 10 337.37 $ 10 337.37 $ . 10 337.37 $ 10 337.37 $ 10 337.37 $ 10 337.37 $ 10 337.37 $ 10 337.37 $ 10 337.37 $ 10'337'.37 $ 10 337.37 $ 10 337.37 $ 10,337.37 $ 10 337.37 $ 10 337.37 $ 10,337.37 $ 10,337.37 $ 1033737 $ 101337!37 $ 10 337.37 $ 10 337.37 $ 10 337.37 $ 10 337.37 $ 10 337.37 $ 10 337.37 $ 10 337.37 $ 10 337.37 $ 10 337.37 $ 10 337.37 $ 10 337.37 $ 10 337.37 $ 10 337.37 $ 1033737 $ 10 337.37 $ 10 337.37 $ 10 337.37 $ 10.337.37 $ 10 337.37 $ 10 337.37 $ 10 337.37 $ 10 337.37 $ 10 337.37 Sewer Services Completed by Palda& Sons .$ 1.75&58 $ 1 756.58 $ 1.756.58 $ 1 756.58 $ 1 756.58 $ 1 756.58 $ 1 756.58 $ 1,756.58 Sewer/Water Services Completed by other .Contractors $ 5.950.00 Total Sewer/Water $ 1,756.58 Total Assessment REU $ 12 093.95 1 $ 5,950.00 $ 16 287.37 1 $ 5.000.00 $ 1 756.58 $ 12 093.95 1 $ 5,000.00- $ 1533737 1 1 756.58 $ 12,093.95 1 $ 1,756.58 s. 12 093.95 1 $ 1.756.58 $ 12 093.95 1 $ 6.925.00 $ 6,925.00 $ 17262.37 .1 $ 1756.58 $ 12 093.95 1 $ 1 756.58 $ 12 093.95 1 $ 1 756.58 $ 12 093.95 1 $ 1 756.58 $ 12 093.95 1 $ 5 275.00 $ 5 275.00 $ 15 612.37 1 $ 5840.00 $ 5 840.00 $ 16 177.37 1 $ 6,580.00 $ 6 580.QO $ 16 917.37 1 5 $ 5 390.00 $ 5,390.00 $ 15;727.37 1 $ 265.00 $ 6,265.00 $ 16 602.37 1 $ $ 1 756.58 $ 1 756.58 $ 1,756.58 $ 1,756.58 $ $ 10 337.37 1 $ 1 756.58 $ 12 093.95 1 $ 1 756.58 $ 12 093.95 1 $ 1,756.58 $ 12 093.95 1 $ 1,756.58 $ 12.093.951 1 $ 1,756.58 $ 1 756.58 $ 1 756.58 $ 1 756.58 $ 1 756.58 $ 1 756.58 $ 1 756.58 $ 6,250.00 $ 6,250.00 $ 16 587.37 1 $ 7.185.00 $ 7 185.00 $ 17 522.37 1 $ 6. $ 6 825.00 $ 17 162.37 1 $ 1 756.58 $ 12 093.95 1 $ 1756-58 $ 12 093.95 1 $ 1 756.58 $ 12 093.95 1 $ 4'950:00 $ 4 950.00 $ 15 287.37 1 $ 1 756.58 $ 12 093.95 1 $ 1,756.58 $ 12 093.95 1 $ 4.300.00- $ 4,300.00 $ - 14 637.37 1 $ 5765.00 $ 7 521.58 $ 17858.95 1 $ 1,756.58 $ -12,093.95 1 $ 1 756.58 $ 1,756.58 $ 6.210.00 $ 7.966.58 $ 18 303.95 1 $ 175658 $ 12 093.95 1 $ 1,756.58 $ 11756!58 $ 12 093.95 1 $ 1.756.58 $ 1,756.58 $ 1209395 1 $ 1 756.58 $ 1 756.58 $ 12093.95 1 $ 1.756.58 1 $ 1 756.58 $ 12 093.95 1 $ 1 756.58 $ 4 850.00' $ 606.58 $ 16 943.95 1 $ 6 325.00 $ 6 325.00 $ 16 662.37 1 $ 1 756.58 $ 1 756.58 $' 1.756.58 $ 12 093.95 1 $ 1,756.58 $ 12 093.95 $ 1 756.58 $ 1 756.58 $ 12 093.95 $ 1 756.58 $ 1 756.58 $ 12 093.95 11, $ 1 756.58 $ 1,756.58 $ 12 093.95 $ 1 756.58 $ 1 756.58 $ 12 093.95 Richmond Hills hood Roadway Reconstruction Improvemant No. BA- 388: Assessment Roll- - Qi (1) (1) (1) (1) (2) (2) (3) '1) ;1) ;2) :1) 1) Sewer/Water - Sewer. Services Services Completed. PID 3311721210015 3311721210088 3311721210089 3311721210090 3311721240048 3311721240050 3311721240028 3311721240051 3311721240052 3311721240053 3311721240027 3311721240026 3311721240029 3311721240025 3311721240022 3311721240024 3311721240021 3311721240023 3311721210041 3311721210040 3311721210039 3311721210038 3311721210037 3311721210001 3311721210053 3311721210002 3311721210052 3311721210051 3311721210061 331.1721210050 3311721210060 3311721210049 3311721210059 3311721210048 3311721210058 3311721210047 3311721210057 3311721210046 3311721210056 3311721210045 3311721210055 3311721210044 3311721210043 3311721210042 3311721210073 3311721210072 3311721210071 3311721210115 ISteven Taxpayers Name Mary L Throndrud Erik & Joanna Engstrom Beniamin S Fife Justin Malser & Elizabeth Cutshall Grant & Susan Johnson Lindsey Grill Chad Freeman Jordan M Mauer Dale R & Mardi A Lorge Jeffrey S Skoog & Annick H L Pelletter -Skoog Don Henderson James M Ostlund Paul A & Diane S Schroeder Kristen Grego Gary L'Domann & Brian P Ellingson Don E & Virginia L Washburn Patricia H Brodsky Morgan S &.Susan M Brown Daniel J & Joanne F Kersten Almon & Psyche Hoe Candace Severson & Willard Raymond Kermit F Johnson Jerome H Schiink S ed Mohib Hussian Susan C R Khatd Loretta G Knab Steven & Kristen Jacobson Christopher W & Kathryn F Jones INathaniel S & Chelsea A Dick Keith B Thompson & Renate M Vi'ums Douglas Erickson Frank W & Rennetta A Barr John W & Beverly H Haw II Douglas G & Andrea L Doebbert Colin J & Abi ail K Rooney Eric & Anne Bul o Jaconda Hawkins/ Wm & Jennifer Finn Yuri 'Malinin Nicholas E Engels Charles Spear Christopher M Johnson John P & Lucille F Schneider Et Al John Hatch Terrence G & Karen Ann Roach Timothy J & Sarah K Sullivan Thomas D & Rochelle F Crowle Richard Roone Martha H'& Larry J Dover 15113 J Stroncek & Pamela E Erickson 15117 Mailing Address.. 5041 KENT AVE 5044 KENT AVE 5048 KENT AVE 5056 KENT AVE 5004 NORMANDALE CT 5008 NORMANDALE CT 5009 NORMANDALE CT 5012 NORMANDALE CT 5016 NORMANDALE CT 5018 NORMANDALE CT 5020 NORMANDALE CT, 5024 NORMANDALE CT,.'- 5025 NORMANDALE CT 5028 NORMANDALE CT ` 5029 NORMANDALE CT 5032 NORMANDALE CT 5033 NORMANDALE CT 5036.NORMANDALE CT 5100 RICHMOND'CIR 5104 RICHMOND CIR.:. 7002 AUTUMN TER-v, 6596 PENNICALE DR .° 17615 48th Ave N. - ° ' = 5005 RICHMOND DR"' 5008 RICHMOND. DR" 5011 RICHMOND DR 5012 RICHMOND DR 5016 RICHMOND DR 5017 RICHMOND DR 5020 RICHMOND DR -_ 5021 RICHMOND DR 5024RICHMOND DR 5025 RICHMOND DR 5028 RICHMOND DR. 5029 RICHMOND, DR 2931 W 87TH STREET 5033 RICHMOND DR" 5036 RICHMOND DR 5037 RICHMOND DR 5040 RICHMOND-DR 5041 RICHMOND DR'. .:. 5044 RICHMOND DR" 5048 RICHMOND DR . 5052 RICHMOND DR 5105 RICHMOND DR..._ 5109 RICHMOND DR RICHMOND DR RICHMOND DR City /State/Zip EDINA MN 55436 EDINA MN 55436 EDINA MN 55436 EDINA MN 55436 EDINA MN 55436 EDINA MN 55436 EDINA MN 55436 EDINA MN 55436 EDINA MN 55436 EDINA MN 55436 EDINA MN 55436 EDINA MN.55436 EDINA MN 55436 _ . = EDINA MN 55436 EDINA MN 55436 " EDINA MN 55436 EDINA MN 55436 EDINA MN 55436 EDINA.MN 55436 EDINA MN 55436 EDEN- PRAIRIE MN 55346: EDEN-PRAIRIE MN 55346 Plymouth MN,55446 " EDINA MN 55436 EDINA MN 55436 EDINA MN 55436 EDINA MN 55436 EDINA MN 55436 EDINA MN 55436 EDINA�MN 55436. EDINA MN 55436 EDINA MN 55436 EDINA MN 55436: EDINA MN 55436 EDINA MN 55436 BLOOMINGTON MN 55431 EDINA MN 55436 EDINA MN 55436 EDINA MN 55436 EDINA•MN 55436 EDINA MN 55436 EDINAMN -55436 EDINA MN 55436 EDINA MN 55436 EDINA MN-55436 - EDINA MN 55436 EDINA MN 55436 EDINA MN 55436 Street $ 10 337.37 $ 10 337.37 $ 10 337.37 $ 10337.37 $ 10 337.37 $ 10 337.37 $ 10 337.37 $ 10 337.37 $ 10 337.37 $ 10 337.37 $ 10 337.37 $, 10 337.37 $: 10 337.37 $ 10337.37 $ 10 337.37 $ 10 337.37 $ 10 337.37 $ 10 337.37 $ 10 337.37 $ 1033737 $ ' - -101337!37 '$ _: 10 337:37 '$ 10 337.37 $ :. 10 337.37. $- 10 337.37 $ 10 337.37 $- 10 337.37 $ 10 337.37 $ 10 337.37 7 7 7 M1O,337.37 7 7 37 $ 10 337.37 $ 10337.37 $ 10 337.37 $ 10 337.37 $ 10 337.37 $ 10 337.37 $ 10 337.37 $ 10 337.37 $ 10 337.37 $ ­10,337.37 $ 10 337.37 $ 10 337.37 $ 10337.37 1 Completed by Palda & Sons $ 1,756.58 $ 1,756.58 $ 1,756.58 $ 1,756.58 $ $ 1,756.58 $ . 1756.58 $ 1.756.58 $ 1,756.58 $ 1,756.58 $ 1,756.58 $ 1,756.58, $ 1 756.58 $ 1,756.58 $ 1 756.58 $ 1,756.58 $ -.1 756.58 $ 1,756.58 $ 1,756.58 $ 1,756.58 $ 1.756.58 $ 1,756.58 $ 1.756.58 $ 1,756.58 $ 1,756.58 $ 1.756.58 $ 1.756.58 $ 1.756.58 $ 1,756.58 $ . 1,756.58 $ 1,756.58 $ 11756.58 by other Contractors.: $ 6 925.00 $ 2 295.00 $ 7 125.00 $ 5,825.00 $ 4.535.00 $ 4570.00 $ 4,800.00 $ 5 210.00 $ 1.995.00 $ -71170.00 Total SewerNllater $ 1 756.58 $ 1,756.58 $ 1 756.58 $ 1:756!58 $ - $ 1,756.58 $ 1.756.58 $ 1 756.58 $ $ 1,756.58 $ 6 925.00 $ $ 1.756.58 $ $ $ 1 756.58' $ 4 056 58 $ 8 881.58 $ 1,756.58 $ 1,756.58 $ 1 756.58: $ 1,756.58 $ 1,756.58 $ $. 5,825.00 $. 1,756.58 $ 4,535.00 $ 1.756.58 $ $ 1.756.58':.$ •$ 4.570.00 $ 4.800.00 $ 1,756.58 $ 5 210.00 $ - $ 1.756.58 $ 1.756.58 $ '3 751.58 $ 1,756.58 $ 7,170.00 $ $ 1 756.58 $ 1 756.58 $ 1,756.58 $ 1,756.58 $ 1,756.58 $ 1,756.58 $ . 1 Total Assessment $ 12 093.95 $ 12 093.95 $ 12 093.95 $ 12 093.95 $ 10 337.37 $ 12 093.95 $ 12 093.95 $ 12 093.95 $ 1033737 $ 12:093!95 $ : 17 262.37 $ 10 337.37 $ 12 093.95 $ 10 337.37 $ 10 337.37 $ 12 093.95 $ 14 388:95 $ 14 218 :95 $ 12 093.95 $ 12 093.95 $ 12 093.95 $ 12 093.95 $ 12 093.95 $ 10 337.37 $ 16 162.37 $ 12 093.95 $ 14 872.37 .$ 12 093.95 $ 10 337.37 12 093.95 '$ 14 907.37 $ ' 15 137.37 $- - 12,093;95 $ 15 547.37 $> 10 337.37 $ ' 12,093;95 $ 12 093.95 $ "' 14 088.95 $ 12 093.95 -$ 17 507.37 $ 10 337.37 $ 12 093.95 $ ' 12 093.95 $ 12 093.95 $ 12 093.95 $ 12 093.95 REU 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 - 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 $ 1209395 $ 10 337.37 1 1 Qi (1) (1) (1) (1) (2) (2) (3) '1) ;1) ;2) :1) 1) Richmond Hills Neighborhood Roadway Reconstruction Improvement No. BA-388 Assessment Roll PID Taxpayers Name Mailing-Address . City/State /Zip Street Sewer Services Completed by Palda & Sons Sewer/Water Services Completed by other Contractors Total Sewer/Water Total Assessment REU 3311721210036 Eric E & Meredith K Wold 4912 HIBISCUS AVE EDINA MN 55435 $ 10 337.37 $ 1,75&58 $ 1756.58 $ 12 093.95 1 3311721210035 John W & Karin Marshall 1817 49TH ST W" MINNEAPOLIS MN 55419 $ 10 337.37 $ 1,756.58. $ 11756.58 $ -12,093.95 1 3311721210034 Thomas W Lasalle 3209 GALLERIA #1604 EDINA MN 55435 $ 10,337.37 $ 1;756.58 $ 1 756.58 $ 12 093.95 1 3311721220007 June B Regan 5132 RICHMOND DR EDINA MN 55436 $ 10 337.37 .$ 1,756.58 $ 1,756.58 " $ 12 093.95 1 3311721210074 Richard D Stresnak 5400 RICHMOND LA EDINA MN 55436 $ 10 337.37 $ 1,756.58 $ 1,756.58 $ 12 093.95 1 3311721210054 Gregory A Bassett 5401 RICHMOND LA EDINA MN 55436 $ 10 33T.37 $ 1,756.58 $ 1,756.58 $ 12 093.95 1 3311721210075 Carrie E Wikman 5404 RICHMOND LA EDINA MN 55436 $ 1 756.58 $ 3 250.00 $ 5 006.58 $ 15 343.95 1 3311721210069 James & Ellie Clifford 5405 RICHMOND LA EDINA MN 55436 $ 1 756.58 $ 1 756.58 $ 12 093.95 1 3311721210023 Geo a Fre Jr 5516 WARWICK PL EDINA MN 55436 $ 1 756.58 $ 1,756.58 $ 12 093.95 1 3311721210014 Michael A Ennis & Linda L Tate 5517 WARWICK PL EDINA MN 55436 U1O,337.371$ 7 $. $ 10 337.37 1 3311721210024 DeEtta Goodmanson 5520 WARWICK PL EDINA MN 55436 $ 8 350.00 $ 8 350.00 $ 18 687:37 1 3311721210025 Robert & Katherine Gru s 10461 Hollister Ave. NW Ma le Lake MN 55358 7 $ 1,756.58 $ 1,756.58 $ 12 093.95 1 3311721240041 Carol L Bros 5600 WARWICK PL EDINA MN 55436 $ 10 337.37 $ 1,756.58 $ 1,756.58 $ 12 093.95 1 3311721240040 Jerril A & Ma J Palmer 5601 WARWICK PL EDINA MN 55436 $ 10 337.37 $ $ 10 337.37 1 3311721210101 Michael W &Janis A Kimmel 5005 WINDSOR AVE EDINA MN 55436 $ 10 337.37 $ $ 10 337.37 1 3311721210031 Marc E & Margaret Grossman 5008 WINDSOR AVE EDINA MN 55436 $ 10 337.37 $ $ 10 337.37 1 3311721210100 Neil A & Bridget M Murphy 5009 WINDSOR AVE EDINA MN 55436 $ 10 337.37 $ $ 10 337.37 1 3311721210032 Robert J & Sharon A Hartung 5012 WINDSOR AVE EDINA MN 55436 $ 10 337.37 $ $ 10 337.37 1 3311721210062 Richard D Becker & Mitchell Becker 5016 WINDSOR AVE EDINA MN 55436 $ 10 337.37 $ 1.756.58 $ 1.756.58 $ 12 093.95 1 3311721210099 Todd F & Sydney S Taggart 5017 WINDSOR AVE EDINA MN 55436 $ 10 337.37 $ $ 10 337.37 1 3311721210063 Ray E Nelson & Sally A Dunn 5020 WINDSOR AVE EDINA MN 55436 $ 10 337.37 $ 5,730.00 $ 51730.00 $ 16 067.37 1 3311721210098 David & Alison Auerbach 5021 WINDSOR AVE EDINA MN 55436 $ 10 337.37 $ $ 10 337.37 1 3311721210064 Kellianne B Williamson 5024 WINDSOR AVE EDINA MN 55436 $ 10 337.37 $ 1,756.58 $ 1,756.58 $ 12 093.95 1 3311721210065 Linda Moen 5028 WINDSOR AVE EDINA MN 55436.. $ 10 337.37 $ 1,756.58 $ 1:756.58 $ 12 093.95 1 3311721210097 Lorie Mahoney 5029 WINDSOR AVE EDINA MN 55436 $ 10 337.37 $ 1,756.58 $ 1,756.58 $ 12 093.95 1 3311721210066 Matthew E W & Dina K Scholl 5032 WINDSOR AVE EDINA MN 55436 $ 1033737 $ $ 10 337.37 1 3311721210096 Michael R &Janice K Bolin 5033 WINDSOR AVE EDINA MN 55436 $ 10:337!37 $ 1,756.58 $ 1,756.58 $ 12 093.95 1 3311721210067 Janice Joshua 5036 WINDSOR AVE EDINA MN 55436 $ 10 337.37 -$ 1,756.58- $ 3,500.00 $ 5,256.58 $ 15 593.95 1 3311721210095 Alan Schrade & Rose Marie French 5037 WINDSOR AVE EDINA MN 55436 $ 10 337.37 $ 1,756.58 $ 1,756.58 $ 12 093.95 1 3311721210068 Gordon A Brown Jr 5040 WINDSOR AVE EDINA MN 55436 $ 10 337.37 $ 1,756.58 . $ 1.756.58 $ 12 093.95 1 3311721210094 Richard J & Madonna B Loeffler Trustee 5041 WINDSOR AVE EDINA MN 55436 $ 10 337.37 $ 1,756.58 $ 1,756.58 $ 12 093.95 1 3311721210093 John Basill 6208.OXFORD ST ST LOUIS PARK MN 55416 $ 1033737 $ 1,756.58 $ 1;756.58 $ 12 093.95 1 3311721210092 Robert D & Suzanne K Carman 5049 WINDSOR AVE EDINA MN 55436 $ 10:337!37 $ 1,756.58 $ 1,756.58 $ 12 093.95 1 3311721210091 John D Shively 5053 WINDSOR AVE EDINA MN 55436 $ 10 337.37 $ 1,756.58 $ 1 756.58 $ 12 093.95 1 3311721210102 Steven L & Susan B Me er 5100 WINDSOR AVE EDINA MN 55436 $ 10 337.37 $ 5,260.00, $ 5,260.00 $ 15 597.37 1 3311721210107 Lambert Meidin er Jr 5101 WINDSOR AVE EDINA MN 55436 $ 10 337.37 $ 1.756.58 $ 1.756.58 $ 12 093.95 1 3311721210108 David C & Susan L Arenson 5103 WINDSOR AVE EDINA MN 55436 $ 10 337.37 $ 1,756.58 $ 1,756.58 $ 12 093.95 1 3311721210103 William S Steinke 5104 WINDSOR AVE EDINA MN 55436 $ 10 337.37 $ 1,756.58 $ 61240.00 $ 7,996.58 $ 18 333.95 1 3311721210109 Caral Heffernan 5105 WINDSOR AVE EDINA MN 55436 $ 10 337.37 $ - $ 10 337.37 1 3311721210104 Florence A O sahl & Cecilia Cofield 5108 WINDSOR AVE EDINA MN 55436 $ 10 337.37 $ 1,756.58 $ 1.756.58 $ 12 093.95 1 3311721210110 Saharla A Jams 5109 WINDSOR AVE EDINA MN 55436 $ 10 337.37 $ - $ 10 337.37 1 3311721210105 Todd W & Mary Peterson 5112 WINDSOR AVE EDINA MN 55436 $ 10 337.37 $ 1,756.58 $ 5,725.00 $ 7,481.58 $ 17 818.95 1 3311721210111 Richard J & Maggie A McCracken 5113 WINDSOR AVE EDINA MN 55436 $ 10 337.37 $ 1,756.58 $ 1,756.58 $ 12 093.95 1 3311721210112 Eve S Schnell Clarke 5117 WINDSOR AVE EDINA MN 55436 $ 10 337.37 $ 1,756.58 $ 1,756.58 $ 12 093.95 1 3311721210114 Nicholas Simpson 5120 WINDSOR AVE EDINA MN 55436 $ 10 337.37 $ 1,756.58 $ 1,756.58 $ 12 093.95 1 3311721220063 Kim Kuffel 5200 WINDSOR AVE EDINA MN 55436 $ 10 337.37 $ 1,756.58 $ 1,756.58 $ 12 093.95 1 3311721220058 Am &Daniel Mums 5201 WINDSOR AVE EDINA MN 55436 $ 10 337.37 $ 1756,18 $ 1 756.58 $ 12 093.95 1 3311721220064 Duane N Hall & Patricia Korth 5904 WINDSOR AVE EDINA MN 55436 $ 10 337.37 $ 1 756.58 $ 1 756.58 $ 12 093.95 1 (2) (4) (1) (1) (1) (1) (1) (1) (1) (1) (1) (2) (2) (5) (1) (2) Richmond Hills Neighborhood Roadway Reconstruction Improvement No. BA -388 Assessment Roll PID 3311721220059 3311721220065 3311721220060 3311721220061 3311721220062 3311721240080 3311721240076 3311721240056 3311721240075 3311721240057 3311721240074 3311721240058 3311721240073 3311721240059 3311721240072 3311721240060 3311721240071 3311721240061 3311721240070 3311721240062 3311721240063 3311721240078 3311721240064 3311721240079 3311721240067 3311721240066 3311721240065 fWarren Taxpayers Name Jason R-& Breann A Robinson James T &Victoria A Seveiand Radoslav Atanasoski Michael J & Sheryl A Bertrand Pauline T Sateren Richard D Borland & L nda L Lorenz Dorothy M Krue er Kurt K Knutson & Clara Case Joe & B an Trotter Jr Kathleen Galameau Raymond J Kenning, Mary E Kenning & Piper K Webb Paul A & Paula L Joy Dianne S Blake & Thomas Tessman Ran Ballin er & Angie McConnell David R & Ann K F Dickey Mark D & Ma Ann Grovak Robert Fitzsimmons Jr Matthew B & Am C Olson Andrew E & Laura R Giertsen lKurt M & Nancy O Dalsin Krajo D Knutson & Bridget Towey Janice B Be ren Susan T & Barbara A Meyer Susan N Keator Philip A & Dorinda K Johnson James D & Nancy L Jaeckels D & Joann G Snyder Mailing Address 5205 WINDSOR AVE 5208 WINDSOR AVE 5209 WINDSOR AVE 5213 WINDSOR AVE 5217 WINDSOR AVE 5004 YVONNE TER 5005 YVONNE TER 5008 YVONNE TER 5009 YVONNE TER 5012 YVONNE TER 5013 YVONNE TER 5016 YVONNE TER 5017 YVONNE TER 5020 YVONNE TER 5021 YVONNE TER 5024 YVONNE TER 5025 YVONNE TER 5028 YVONNE TER 5029 YVONNE TER 5032 YVONNE TER 5036 YVONNE TER 5037 YVONNE TER 5040 YVONNE TER 5041 YVONNE TER 5045 YVONNE TER 15049 YVONNE TER 15053 YVONNE TER City /State/Zip EDINA MN 55436 EDINA MN 55436 EDINA MN 55436 EDINA MN 55436 EDINA MN 55436 EDINA MN 55436 EDINA MN 55436 EDINA MN 55436 EDINA MN 55436 EDINA MN 55436 EDINA MN 55436 EDINA MN 55436 EDINA MN 55436 EDINA MN 55436 EDINA MN 55436 EDINA MN 55436 EDINA MN 55436 EDINA MN 55436 EDINA MN 55436 EDINA MN 55436 EDINA MN 55436 EDINA MN 55436 EDINA MN 55436 EDINA MN 55436 EDINA MN 55436 EDINA MN 55436 EDINA MN 55436 Street $ 10 337.37 $ 10 337.37 $ 10 337.37 $ 10 337.37 $ 10 337.37 M10.337.37 $ 10 337.37 $ 10 337.37 $ 10 337.37 $ 10 337.37 $ 10 337.37 $ 10 337.37 $ 10 337.37 $ 10 337.37 $ 10 337.37 $ 10 337.37 $ 10 337.37 $ 10 337.37 $ 10 337.37 $ 10 337.37 $ 10 337.37 $ 10 337.37 $ 10,337.37 Sewer Services Completed by Pala & Sons $ 1,756.58 $ 1,756.58 $ 1,756.58 $ 1,756.58 $ 1,756.58 $ 1 756.58 $ 1 756.58 $ 1,756.58 $ 1,756.58 $ 1,756.58 $ 1,756.58 $ 1,756.58 $ 1.756.58 Sewer/Water Services Completed by other Contractors $ 8 625.00 $ 5 500.00 $ $ 7 110.00 $ 7 350.00 $ 8 230.00 $ 2 800.00 $ 6,925.00 1 $ 2,300.00 Total Sewer/Water $ 1.756.58 $ 1 756.58 $ 1 756.58 $ 1 756.58 $ 1 756.58 $ 8,625.00 $ 1 756.58 $ 5 500.00 $ $ 1 756.58 $ 1,756.58 $ 1.756.58 $ 1 756.58 $ 7,110.00 $ - $ $ 7.3 50.00 $ $ $ 1.756.58 $ 8 230.00 $ 1 756.58 $ 2 800.00 $ 6,925.00 $ $ 1,756.58 $ 2,300.00 Total Assessment $ 12 093.95 $ 12 093.95 $ 12 093.95 $ 12 093.95 $ 12 093.95 $ 18 962.37 $ 12 093.95 $ 15 837.37 $ 10 337.37 $ 12 093.95 $ 12 093.95 $ 12 093.95 REU 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 $ 12 093.95 $ 17 447.37 $ 10 337.37 $ 10:337!37 1 1 1 1 $ 17 687.37 $ 10 337.37 1 1 $ 10 337.37 1 $ 12 093.95 1 $ 18 567.37 1 $ 12 093.95 1 $ 13 137.37 1 $ 17 262.37 $ 10 337.37 1 1 $ 1209395 1 $ 12,637.37 1 W -v .v.uo .y 401'zau.uu 3 43Z,Z1u.3t5 171 $ 10,337.37 Total Assessment $ 2,199,900.10 (1) Palda did not complete sanitary sewer service. Assumes the property owner completed their sanitary sewer service work privately and did not submit the cost to the City. (2) City entered cost for private utility service work. Palda did the sanitary sewer service within the ROW. (3) Cast Iron service all the way to the main. No sanitary sewer assessment (4) New sewer and water from house to curb. 4" SCH 40 PVC from house to 6" clay tile at curb. New Main moved to CL of roadway. Palda completed sanitary sewer service connection. No sanitary sewer assessment. (5) F)dsting 4" HDPE at main that Palda connected to. No sanitary sewer assessment. (6) Sanitary service is off to side yard, reviewed by Millner and Schulze 3112. No sanitary sewer assessment. STATE OF MINNESOTA) COUNTY OF HENNEPIN) SS CERTIFICATE OF MAILING NOTICE CITY OF EDINA ) I, the undersigned, being the duly qualified acting City Clerk of the City of Edina, Minnesota, hereby certify that on the following dates September 26, 2013, acting on behalf of said City, I deposited in the United States mail copies of the attached Notice of Public Hearing for Richmond Hills Neighborhood Roadway Reconstruction, Improvement No. BA -388 (Exhibit A), enclosed in sealed envelopes, with postage thereon duly prepaid, addressed to the persons at the addresses as shown on the mailing list (Exhibit B), attached to the original hereof, which list is on file in my office, said persons being those appearing on the records of the County Auditor as owners of the property listed opposite their respective names, as of a date 17 days prior to the date of the hearing; and that I also sent said notice to the following corporations at the indicated addresses whose property is exempt from taxation and is therefore not carried on the records of said County Auditor. NAME ADDRESS WITNESS my hand and the seal of said City this 26th day of September, 2013. Edina Ci* Cl-47 NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING ON PROPOSED SPECIAL ASSESSMENT IMPROVEMENT NO. BA -388 The Edina City Council will meet at 7 p.m. Oct. 14, 2013, at City Hall, 4801 W. 50`h St., Edina, MN, to approve and adopt the listed special,assessments against the described property, which is part of the Richmond Hills Neighborhood Roadway Reconstruction: Property Identification No. 3311721210004 The special assessment to this property for roadway reconstruction is: $10,337.37; for sewer and /or water improvement is: $1,756.58;.for a combined total of: $12,093.95. The total amount of the proposed special assessment for the project is $1,767,689.72. The proposed assessment roll is on file with the City Clerk. No invoices will be mailed. This is the only notice you will receive regarding payment. Payment Options The.- proposed assessment is payable in equal annual principal installments extending over a period of 15 years At the rate of 3.34 percent. Should the City Council adopt the assessment roll at the Oct. 14 meeting, you may pay the assessment in one of these ways: -1. Pay the whole of the assessmenrwithout interest to the City to the Assessing Office, 4801 W. 50`' St, Edina, MN 55424 on or before Nov. 25, 2013. 2. Pay a minimum of 25 percent of the assessment to the Assessing Office, 4801 W. 50`x' St, Edina, MN 55424 on or before Nov. 25. The remaining balance will be certified to the County Auditor and your first year's payment will be payable with your real estate: taxes in 2014, with interest on the remaining assessment at the rate of 3.34 percent per;annum from Oct. 14, 2013 to Dec. 31, 2014. 3. Pay the assessment with your real estate taxes. If the special assessment is not paid in the Assessing Office by Nov. 25, 2013, it will be certified to,the County Auditor and your first year's payment will be payable with your real estate taxes in 2014, with interest on the entire assessment at the rate of 3.34 percent per annum from Oct. 14, 2013 to Dec. 31, 2014. Deferment The City Council may, at its discretion, defer the payment of assessments for a homestead property owned by a person age 65 or older for whom it would be a hardship to make payments. The procedures to apply for such deferment are available from the Assessor's Office at Edina City Hall. Deferment applications must be filed with the Assessor's Office by Nov. 15, 2013. Your payment over 15 years: Beginnin& Balance Payable I I I 559.44 Principal I Installment # Year Principal Interest Total Balance Beginnin& Balance 12 093.95 1 2013 559.44 468.64 1,028.08 11,534.51 2 2014 670.51 357.57 1,028.08 10,864.00 3 2015 691.30 336.78 1,028.08 10,172.70 4 2016 712.73 315.35 1,028.08 9,459.97 5 2017 734.82 293.26 1,028.08 8,725.15 6 2018 757.60 270.48 1,028.08 7,967.55 7 2019 781.09 246.99 1,028.08 7,186.46 8 2020 805.30 222.78 1,028.08 6,381.16 9 2021 830.26 197.82 1,028.08 5,550.90 10 2022 856.00 172.08 1,028.08 4,694.90 11 2023 882.54 145.54 1,028.08 3,812.36 12 2024 909.90 118.18 1,028.08 2,902.46 13 2025 938.10 89.98 1,028.08 1,964.36 14 2026 967.18 60.90 1,028.08 997.18 15 2027 997.17 30.91 1,028.08 0.01 Totals 1 12,093.94 1 3,327.26 1 15,421.20 Objections /Appeals If you wish to object or appeal to this assessment: I. File a signed, written objection with the City Clerk prior to the assessment hearing, or present the written objection to the Mayor at the assessment hearing. 2. Serve notice of the appeal to the Mayor or the City Clerk within 30 days after the adoption of the assessment and file such notice with the District Court within 10 days after the notice was served to the Mayor or the City Clerk. To comment on the special assessment, you may: o Write to City of Edina, Engineering Department, 7450 Metro Blvd, Edina, MN 55439. o Email to mailAEdinaMN.gov, attention City Council and Engineering. o Attend the Oct. 14 public hearing and offer comments. If you have questions regarding the project, please call the Engineering Department at 952 - 826 -0371. If you have questions about paying your assessment, please call the Assessing Division of the Community Development Department at 952 - 826 -0365. September 26, 2013 Debra A. Mangen City Clerk 2 Cut the bottom section and mail in with your payment if paying on or before November 25, 2013: 0 PAYMENT PROCEDURE • If paying on or before Nov. 25, 2013, please cut and return this stub with your payment. • Make check payable to the City of Edina. • Mail payment or pay in person: Edina City Hall, Assessing Division, 4801 W. 50" Street, Edina, MN 55424. Amount Enclosed: Name: 3 Pay this amount by If not paid on or before Nov. 25, 2013, PID Impr. No. November 25, 2013, to the assessment will be placed on your avoid interest charges. property taxes at 3.34% annual interest rate, spread out over 15 years. 3311721210004 BA -388 $12,093.95 Amount Enclosed: Name: 3 LEFT BLANK INTENTIONALLY 3311721210004 3311721240030 3311721210005 James & Kathleen Lange Matthew A & Alissa L Movern Jill Emanuel 5004 56TH ST W 5005 56TH ST W 5008 56TH ST W EDINA MN 55436 EDINA MN 55436 EDINA MN 55436 3311721240031 3311721210006 3311721240032 Darwin F & Margaret M Dahl, III James & Patricia Klobe Judith M Hawley 5009 56TH ST W 5012 56TH ST W 5013 56TH ST W EDINA MN 55436 EDINA MN 55436 EDINA MN 55436 3311721210007 3311721240033 3311721210008 Michael S &Suzanne V Robb Ronald E & Susan Pray Nancy J Litwin 5016 56TH.ST W- 5017 56TH ST W 5020 56TH ST W EDINA MN 55436 EDINA MN 55436 EDINA MN 55436 3311721240034 3311721240035 3311721210009 Theodora & Leonard Engman Thomas J Wurst Thomas John Wurst 5021 56TH ST W 5025 56TH ST W 5028 56TH ST W EDINA MN.55436 EDINA MN 55436 EDINA MN 55436 3391721240036 331172.12.10010 3311721240037 William & Dorenne R Just, Jr Christopher.) &'Kristin.L Moquist Lori A Sandvig 5029 5H ST W 6T 5032 56TH ST W 5033 56TH ST W EDINA.MN 55436 EDINA MN 515,436 EDINA MN 55436 3311721210011 3311721240038 3311721210012 Peter S & Tiffany G Bils Chris & Dawn Rofdal Gary L & Lisa A Wignes 5036 56TH`ST.W 5037 56TH ST W 5040 56TH ST W EDINA'MN,55436 EDINA MN 55436 EDINA MN 55436 3311721240039 3311721210033 3311721210013 Genevieve M Grove Mary T Dunphy Herbert Royce 5041 56TH ST W 5044.56TH ST W 5048 56TH ST W EDINA MN 55436 EDINA MN 55436 EDINA MN 55436 3311721210026 3311721240042 3311721210027 David R Braun Gregory H & Susan M Keane Scott L Thorp 5104 56TH ST W 5105 56TH ST W 5108 56TH ST W EDINA MN 55436 EDINA MN 55436 EDINA MN 55436 3311721240043 '3311721210030 3311721220042 Thomas A & Judith E Forker Neva B Waters David C & Lori A Kunz 5109 56TH ST W 5517 CODE AVE 5520 CODE.AVE EDINA MN 55436 EDINA MN 55436 EDINA MN 55436 3311721210029 3311721220043 3311721210028 Scott R Strand & Katherine Thomson Gerald Peplin Keith Curtin 5521 CODE AVE 5524 CODE AVE 5525 CODE AVE EDINA MN 55436 EDINA MN 55436 EDINA MN 55436 3311721240029 3311721240025 3311721240022 Kristen Gregg Gary L Domann & Brian P Ellingson Don E & Virginia L Washburn 5025 NORMANDALE CT 5028 NORMANDALE CT 5029 NORMANDALE CT EDINA MN 55436 EDINA MN 55436 EDINA MN 55436 3311721240024 Patricia H Brodsky 5032 NORMANDALE CT EDINA MN 55436 3311721210041 Almon & Psyche Hoye 5100 RICHMOND CIR EDINA MN 55436 3311721210038 Jerome H Schlink 6596 PENNICALE DR EDEN PRAIRIE MN`55346 3311721210053 Loretta G Knab 5008 RICHMOND DR EDINA MN 55436 ;11721210051 . -4athaniel S & Chelsea A Dick 5016 RICHMOND DR EDINA MN 55436 3311721210060 Frank W & Rennetta A Barr 5021 RICHMOND DR EDINA MN 55436 3311721210048 Colin J & Abigail K Rooney 5028, RICHMOND DR EDINA MN 55436 3311721210057 Yuriy Malinin 5033 RICHMOND DR EDINA MN 55436 3311721240021 Morgan S & Susan M Brown 5033 NORMANDALE CT EDINA MN 55436 3311721240023 Daniel J & Joanne F Kersten 5036 NORMANDALE CT EDINA MN 55436 3311721210040 3311721210039 Candace Severson & Willard Raymond Kermit F Johnson 5104 RICHMOND CIR 7002 AUTUMN TER EDINA MN 55436 EDEN PRAIRIE MN 55346 3311721210037 Syed Mohib Hussian 17615 48th Ave N Plymouth MN 55446 3311721210002 Steven & Kristen Jacobson 5011 RICHMOND DR EDINA MN 55436 3311721210061 Keith B Thompson & Renata M Vijums 5017 RICHMOND DR EDINA MN 55436 3311721210049 John W & Beverly H Haw II 5024 RICHMOND DR EDINA MN 55436 3311721210058 Eric & Anne Bulygo 5029 RICHMOND DR EDINA MN 55436 3311721210046 Nicholas E Engels 5036 RICHMOND DR EDINA MN 55436 3311721210001 Susan C R Khatri 5005 RICHMOND DR EDINA MN 55436 3311721210052 Christopher W & Kathryn F Jones 5012 RICHMOND DR EDINA MN 55436 3311721210050 Douglas Erickson 5020 RICHMOND DR EDINA MN 55436 3311721210059 Douglas G & Andrea L Doebbert 5025 RICHMOND DR EDINA MN 55436 3311721210047 Jaconda Hawkins/ Wm & Jennifer Finn 2931 W 87TH STREET BLOOMINGTON MN 55431 3311721210056 Charles Spear 5037- RICHMOND DR EDINA MN 55436 3311721210045 3311721210055 3311721210044 ristopher M Johnson John P & Lucille F Schneider Et Al John Hatch 40 RICHMOND DR 5041 RICHMOND DR 5044 RICHMOND DR EDINA MN 55436 EDINA MN 55436 EDINA MN 55436 3311721220044 3311721220002 3311721210079 Mark A & Lisa E Cox James A Ankeny & Lucinda A Winter Mark L Van Sloun 5528 CODE AVE 5532 CODE AVE 5004 KENT AVE EDINA MN 55436 EDINA MN 55436 EDINA MN 55436 3311721210080 Ann & Michael Hanson 5008 KENT AVE EDINA MN 55436 3311721210021 E Jean Smith 5013 KENT AVE EDINA MN 55436 3311721210083 Stephanie M Porter 5020 KENT AVE EDINA MN 55436 3311721210085 Stanley, & Katti'erine Wasley 5028 KENT AVE EDINA MN 55436 3311721210017 Gerard & Elizabeth Shannon 5033 KENT AVE EDINA'MN 55436 3311721210015 Mary LThrondrud 5041 KENT AVE EDINA MN 55436 3311721.210090 Justin Malser & Elizabeth Cutshall 5056 KENT AVE EDINA MN 55436 3311721240028 Jordan M Mauer 5009 NORMANDALE CT EDINA MN 55436 3311721210022 Sumner Adam & Jennifer I Musolf 5009 KENT AVE EDINA MN 55436 3311721210082 Damodara Annareddy & Ruth S Potta 5016 KENT AVE EDINA MN 55436 3311721210084 William & Shawn Buss 5024 KENT AVE EDINA MN 55436 3311.7212:10018 Anthony;Schroepfer 5029 KENT AVE EDINA MN 55436 331172.1210087 Teric M & Katherine A Steines, 5036KENT AVE. EDINA MN 55436 3311721210088 Erik & Joanna Engstrom 5,044 KENT AVE EDINA MN 55436 3311721240048 Grant &,Susan Johnson 5004 NORMANDALE CT EDINA MN 55436 3311721240051 Dale R & Marci A Lorge 5012 NORMANDALE CT EDINA MN 55436 3311721210081 Jamie & Benjamin Bastian 5012 KENT AVE EDINA MN 55436 3311721210020 Donald L & Suzanne L Reading 5017 KENT AVE EDINA MN 55436 3311721210019 Patrick J & Margaret B Huber 5025 KENT AVE EDINA MN 55436 3311721210086 Norman D & Debra A Mead 50,32. KENT AVE EDINA MN 55436 3311721210016 Harold & Mary A Schwind 5037 KENT AVE EDINA MN 55436 3311721210089 Benjamin S Fife. 5048 KENT AVE EDINA MN 55436 3311721240050 Lindsey,Grill & Chad Freeman 5008 NORMANDALE CT EDINA MN 55436 3311721240052 Jeffrey S Skoog & Annick H L Pelletter -Skoog 5016 NORMANDALE CT EDINA MN 55436 3311721240053 3311721240027 3311721240026 Don Henderson James M Ostlund Paul A & Diane S Schroeder 5018 NORMANDALE CT 5020 NORMANDALE CT 5024 NORMANDALE CT EDINA MN 55436 EDINA MN 55436 EDINA MN 55436 3311721210043 3311721210042 3311721210073 Terrence G & Karen Ann Roach Timothy J & Sarah K Sullivan Thomas D & Rochelle F Crowley 5048 RICHMOND DR 5052 RICHMOND DR 5105 RICHMOND DR DINA MN 55436 EDINA MN 55436 EDINA MN 55436 3311721210072 Richard Rooney 5109 RICHMOND DR EDINA MN 55436 3311721210036 Eric E & Meredith K Wold 4912 HIBISCUS AVE EDINA MN 55435 3311721220007 June B Regan 5132 RICHMOND DR EDINA MN 55436 3311721210075 Carrie E Wikman 5404 RICHMOND LA. EDINA MN 55436 3311721210014 Michael A Ennis & Linda L 5517 WARWICK PL EDINA MN 55436 3311721240041 Carol L Bros 5600 WARWICK:PL EDINA MN 55436 3311721210071 Martha H & Larry J Dover 5113 RICHMOND DR EDINA MN 55436 3311721210035 John W & Karin Marshall 1817 49TH ST W MINNEAPOLIS MN 55419 3311721210074 Richard D Stresnak 5400 RICHMOND LA EDINA MN 55436 3311721210069 James & Ellie Clifford 5405 RICHMOND LA EDINA MN 55436 3311721210024 Tate DeEtta Goodmanson 5520 WARWICK PL EDINA MN 55436 3311721210031 Marc E & Margaret Grossman 5008 WINDSOR AVE EDINA MN 55436 3311721210062 Richard D Becker & Mitchell Becker 5016 WINDSOR AVE EDINA MN 55436 3311721240040 Jerril A & Mary J Palmer 5601 WARWICK PL EDINA MN 55436 3311721210100 Neil A & Bridget M Murphy 5009 WINDSOR, AVE EDINA MN 55436 3311721210099 Todd F & Sydney S Taggart 5017 WINDSOR AVE EDINA MN 55436 3311721210115 Steven J Stroncek & Pamela E Erickson 5117 RICHMOND DR EDINA MN 55436 3311721210034 Thomas W Lasalle 3209 GALLERIA #1604 EDINA MN 55435 3311721210054 Gregory A Bassett 5401 RICHMOND LA EDINA MN 55436 3311721210023 George Frey, Jr 5516 WARWICK PL EDINA MN 55436 3311721210025 Robert & Katherine Gruys 10461 Hollister Ave. NW Maple Lake MN 55358 3311721210101 Michael W & Janis A Kimmel 5005 WINDSOR AVE EDINA MN 55436 3311721210032 Robert J & Sharon A Hartung 5012 WINDSOR AVE EDINA MN 55436 3311721210063 Ray E Nelson & Sally A Dunn 5020 WINDSOR AVE EDINA MN 55436 211721210098 3311721210064 3311721210065 Avid & Alison Auerbach Kellianne B Williamson Linda Moen 5021 WINDSOR AVE 5024 WINDSOR AVE 5028 WINDSOR AVE EDINA MN 55436 EDINA MN 55436 EDINA MN 55436 3311721210097 3311721210066 3311721210096 Lorie Mahoney Matthew E W & Dina K Scholl Michael R & Janice K Bolin 5029 WINDSOR AVE 5032 WINDSOR AVE 5033 WINDSOR AVE EDINA MN 55436 EDINA MN 55436 EDINA MN 55436 3311721210067 Janice Joshua 5036 WINDSOR AVE EDINA MN 55436 3311721210094' Richard J &.Madonna B Loeffler Trustee 5041 WINDSOR AVE EDINA MN 55436 3311721210091 Jolin b' Shively 5053 WINDSOR AVE EDINA MN 55436 3311.721210108 David C & Susan L Arenson 5.103 WINDSOR AVE EDINA MN 55436 3311721210104 Florence A Opsahl & Cecilia Cofield 5108 WINDSOR AVE EDINA MN 55436 3311721210111 Richard SA, Maggie A McCracken 5113 WINDSOR AVE EDINA MN 55436 3311721220063 Kim Kuffel 5200 WINDSOR AVE EDINA MN 55436 3311721220059 Jason R & Breann A Robinson 5205 WINDSOR AVE EDINA MN 55436 3311721210095 Alan Schrade & Rose Marie French 5037 WINDSOR AVE EDINA MN 55436 3311721210093 John Basil[ 6208 OXFORD ST ST LOUIS PARK MN 55416 3311721210102 Steven L & Susan B Meyer 5100.WINDSOR AVE EDINA MN'55436 3311.721210103`, - William;S Steinke 5,104 WINDSWR AVE EDINA MN 55436 3311721210110 Saharla A Jama 5109 WINDSOR AVE EDINA MN'55436' 3311721210112 Eve S Schnell' Clarke 5117 WINDSOR AVE EDINA MN 55436 3311721220058 Amy & Daniel"Mugge 5201 WINDSOR AVE EDINA MN 55436 3311721220065 James T & Victoria A Seveland 5208 WINDSOR AVE EDINA MN 55436 3311721210068 Gordon A Brown, Jr 5040 WINDSOR AVE EDINA MN 55436 3311721210092 Robert D & Suzanne K Carman 5049 WINDSOR AVE EDINA MN 55436 3311721210107 Lambert Meidinger, Jr 5101 WINDSOR AVE EDINA MN 55436 ;3311721210109 Caral Heffernan 5105 WINDSOR AVE EDINA MN 55436 3311721210105 Todd,W & Mary Peterson 5112 WINDSOR AVE EMNAMN .55436 31311712 .A Nicholas Simpson 5120 WINDSOR AVE EDINA MN 55436 3311721220064 Duane N Hall & Patricia Korth 5204 WINDSOR AVE EDINA MN 55436 3311721220060 Radoslav Atanasoska 5209 WINDSOR AVE EDINA MN 55436 3311721220061 3311721220062 3311721240080 Michael J & Sheryl A Bertrand Pauline T Sateren Richard D Borland & Lynda L Loren 5213 WINDSOR AVE 5217 WINDSOR AVE 5004 YVONNE TER EDINA MN 55436 EDINA MN 55436 EDINA MN 55436 3311721240076 Dorothy M Krueger 5005 YVONNE TER 'DINA MN 55436 3311721240057 Kathleen Galarneau 5012 YVONNE TER EDINA MN 55436 3311721240073 Dianne S Blake & Thomas Tessman 5017 YVONNE TER EDINA MN 55436 3311721240060 Mark D & Mary Ann Grovak 5024 YVONNE TER EDINA MN 55436 3311721240070 Andrew E & Laura R Giertsen 5029 YVONNE TER EDINA MN 55436 3311721240078 Janice B Bergren 5037 YVONNE TER EDINA MN 55436 3311721240056 3311721240075 Kurt K Knutson & Clara Case Thomas Divine 5008 YVONNE TER 5009 YVONNE TER EDINA MN 55436 EDINA MN 55436 3311721240074 3311721240058 Raymond J Kenning, Mary E Kenning Paul A & Paula L Joy & Piper K Webb 5016 YVONNE TER 5013 YVONNE TER EDINA MN 55436 EDINA MN 55436 3311721240059 Ryan Ballinger & Angie McConnell 5020 YVONNE TER EDINA MN 55436 3311721240071 Robert Fitzsimmons, Jr 5025 YVONNE TER EDINA MN 55436 3311721240062 Kurt M & Nancy O Dalsin 5032 YVONNE TER EDINA MN 55436 3311721240064 , Jeffrey T & Barbara A Meyer 5040 YVONNE TER EDINA MN 55436 3311721240072 David R & Ann K F Dickey 5021 YVONNE TER EDINA MN 55436 3311721240061 Matthew B & Amy C Olson. 5028 YVONNE TER EDINA MN 55436 3311721240063 Kraig D Knutson & Bridget Towey 5036 YVONNE TER EDINA MN 55436 3311721240079 Susan N Keator 5041 YVONNE TER EDINA MN 55436 3311721240067 3311721240066 3311721240065 Philip A& Dorinda K Johnson James D & Nancy L Jaeckels Warren D & Joann G Snyder 5045 YVONNE TER 5049 YVONNE TER 5053 YVONNE TER EDINA MN 55436 EDINA MN 55436 EDINA MN 55436 Jordan Mauer " 5009 Normandale Court SEAL Edina, MN 55436 OCT 7 7013, Phone: 952- 922 -5797 RECEI Email: Jmmauer@comcast.net Property Identification No. 3311721240028 Date: October 7, 2013 Debra A. Mangen City Clerk City of Edina, Minnesota 4801 West 50'h Street Edina, MN 55424 James Hovland Mayor City of Edina, Minnesota 4801 West 50' Str eet Edina, MN 55424 Dear Clerk Mangen and Mayor Hovland: As the property owner of the property located at 5009 Normandale, Court, Edina, MN 55436 with the Property Identification No. 3311721240028 and legal description: Lot 11 Blockl, Normandale Court Brynes Replat, I herby am providing the City Clerk, the Mayor, and the City of Edina, Minnesota with a written objection to the Proposed Special Assessment for Improvement No. BA- 388; also known as the Richmond Hills Neighborhood Roadway Reconstruction for the above named property. On September 26, 2013 I received the'Notice of Public Hearing on Proposed Special Assessment from Debra A. Mangen set for October 14, 2013. The notice provided the following information related to the above named property for proposed assessments: roadway reconstruction $10,337.37; sewer and/or water improvements $1,756.58; for a combined total of $12,093.95.. As for Proposed Special Assessments specific to the. sewer and/or water improvements I herby raise the following objections: 1. The city provided no evidence that such improvements-were necessary for the named property. 2. The city provided no evidence that improvements were actually made to the named property. 3. If in fact improvements were made, the city provided no evidence that the proposed assessments are directly related to the named property. As such, I request that the City of Edina provide specific details regarding the sewer-'and/or water improvements to the named property so that I may fully understand the costs and benefits provided to the property prior to making any agreement to pay for such costs. According to the Minnesota League of Cities, Information Memo, Special Assessment Guide, dated 9/22/2011, "Especially with regard to street improvements, it may be very difficult to demonstrate that there is any significant increase in market value as a result of the resurfacing or reconstruction." The memo further states, "A special assessment that exceeds the special benefit is a taking of property without fair compensation and violates both the Fourteenth Amendment of the United States Constitution and the Minnesota Constitution. Property assessed must enjoy a corresponding benefit from the local improvement." Thus, as for the Proposed Special Assessments specific to the roadway reconstruction I herby raise the following objections: Jordan Mauer Property Identification No. 3311721240028 1. The city provided no evidence that such improvements were divided appropriately, fairly and uniformly across the affected properties impacted by the Richmond Hills Neighborhood Roadway Reconstruction project. 2. The city provided no evidence that the improvements provided any special benefit to the named property as required under Minnesota Statutes Chapter 429, special benefit test. 1 The city provided no evidence that the improvements provided any increase in the market value of the land as required under Minnesota Statutes Chapter 429, special benefit test. As evidence that the said improvements provided no increase in the market value for the property located at 5009 Normandale Court, Edina,-MN 55436 with the Property Identification No. 3311721240028 and legal description: Lot 1, Blockl, Normandale Court Brynes Replat, I hereby submit to the City Clerk and Mayor two independent appraisal reports, see attached documents. 1. The first appraisal report was conducted on January 27, 2012 by Thomas R O'Brien, Rels Valuation, 8009 30 Avenue South, Suite 1300, Bloomington, MN 55425. This appraisal was conducted prior to the Richmond Hills Neighborhood Roadway Reconstruction project. The appraisal states the market value of the land was $175,000.00 on January 27, 2012. 2. The second appraisal report was conducted on January 18, 2013 by Lakewood Appraisal Services LLC, PO Box 427 Prior Lake, MN 55372. This appraisal was conducted after the Richmond Hills Neighborhood Roadway Reconstruction project. The appraisal states the market value of the land was $171,000.00 on January 18, 2013. Therefore, I request that the proposed assessment for roadway reconstruction be reduced to $0.00 as there is no evidence that the improvements provided any increase in the market value of the land as required under Minnesota Statutes Chapter 429, special benefit test. Sincerely, Jor an Ma Enclosures i ! APPRAISAL REPORT OF f 5009 Normandale Court Edina, MN 55436 -2420 PREPARED FOR Rels Valuation Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. - PMB0036907 ATTN: Christoph Pritchett Minneapolis, MN 55402 AS OF 01/2712012 PREPARED BY Thomas!R. O'Brien - Rels Valuation 8009 34th Avenue South, Suite 1300 Bloomington, Minnesota 55425 B- 368/10159 Thomas R. aBrten - Reis Valuation 8009 34th Avenue South, Suite 1300 Bloomington, Minnesota 55425 01/28/2012 Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. - PMB0036907 ATTN: Christoph Pritchett Minneapolis, MN 55402 RE: Jordan Mauer 5009 Normandale Court Edina, MN 55436 -2420 File No. 62216509 Case No. Dear Mr. Pritchett: In accordance with your request I have personally Inspected and prepared an appraisal report of the real property located at: 5009 Normandale Court, Edina, MN 55436 -2420 The purpose of this appraisal is to estimate the market value of the property described In the body of this appraisal report Enclosed, please find the appraisal report which describes certain data gathered during our investigation ofthe property. The methods of approach and reasoning in the valuatidn of the various physical and economic factors of the subject property are contained In this report. An inspection of the property and a study of pertinent factors, including valuation trends and an analysis of neighborhood data, led the appraiser to the conclusion that the market value, as of 01/27/2012 Is: $ 522,500 The opinion of value expressed in this report is contingent upon the limiting conditions attached to this report It has been a pleasure to assist you. If I may be of further service to you in the future, please let me know. Respectfully submitted, Signature: ✓� /{ . ".. Thomas R. C'Brien RELS Valuation, Staff Appraiser n B- 368/10160 Reis Valuation File No. 62216509 Case No. I Inlfnrm P&Q'Ition+l -M Annrnicni Rannrt The ose of this summary racal report is to rovide the lendeddient Wth an accurate and adequately supported, opinion of the market value of the sub'ecl . Pr AdaYess 5009 Normandale Court city Edina State MN Zi Coda 55436 -2420 Borrower :Jordan Mauer owner of Pudic Record Jordan Mauer County Hdnne In Legal Desai tion Lot Block 1 Normandale Court roes Re plat Assessor's Pardd # 33- 117 -21 -24 -0028 Tax Year 2011 RE Texas $ 3,326 . Nei hborhood Name Normandale Court B es Re lat : M Reference 119-E3 CersusTract 0237.00 Occupant X Owner Tenant Vacant Special Assessments $ : 0 PUD HOA $ 0 r ear er month " P R N raised X Fee Sim a Leasehold Other describe Assl nment T e Purchase Transaction X Refinance Transaction Other (describe) Lender /Client Wells Faro Bank N.A. - PMB0036907 Address ATTN: Chrlsto h Pritchett Minneapolis, MN 55402 Is the sub ecl pkoperty currenUv offered for sele or has it been offered for sale In the twelve months prior to the effective date of this appraisal? Yes I X I No Report data sources used offerings rice s and date(s). MLS /Owner I did LJ did not analyze the contract for sale for the subject purchase transaction. INplain the results of the analysis of the contract for sale orwhy the analysis was not performed Contract Price $ Dale of Contact Is the PiDperty seller the owner of public record? I IYes I I No Data Source(s) Is there any financial assistance goan charges, sale concessions, gift or downpayment assistance, etc.) to be paid by any party on behalf of the borrower? 0YesLJNo • If Yes report the total ddiar amount and describe the Items to be paid Note: Race and the racial sX composition of the neighborhood Suburban Rural are not appraisal Fropenyvalues factors. lu- Increasin X Stable —bedining PRICE AGE One -Unit 85 % Location Urban Bult-Up I X 10ver 75% 1 125-75% 1 1 Under 25% Demandisu Shoria e X InBelance ovens $ 000 2-4 Unit 5 % Growth Red X Stale Slow Marketing Time X Under3mths 36mths Over6mb 150 Low 1 Mull -Famtl 5 % Nei hborhood Boundaries Vernon Avenue on the East Hl_qhway #100 on the East Highway #62 on the 800 HG h 80 Commercial 5 % • South RR Tracks on the West. 300 Pred 50 Other °% Neighborhood Description See comments - Neighborhood Descdibtlon Market Conditions anducling s od for the above condustons See comments -Market Conditions Dimensions 80.4x111x79.9x123.08 Area 9381 sf Shape Irregular Yew N•Res' S edficZonin Classification R1 Zonin :Descd Eon Sin le Fami Residential Zonin Com i e X Le al Legal Nonoonformtn GrandfalheredUse NoZoni ll al describe Is the highest aid best use of subiect property as Improved or as proposed ' Per plans andspecifications) the present use? I X es No If No describe. Utilities Public Other describe Public .Other describe OH•sita Im rovements -T a Public Private Bechid X .200 Amps Water X Street Asphalt 1XI Gas 1XI I I 1 anilarvSevver IXI J I I Aley None FEMA Special RoodHazardArea Flyes X No FEMARocdZone X FEMAMa # 27053C0363E FEMA Map Date 09/022004 Are the utilities and/or off -site improvements typical for the market areal JXIYes No If No dmcnbe. Are there any adverse site conditions or external factors easements encroachments emrironmental condi tions land uses etc. 7 Yes X No IIYe descnbe. The sub ect is the first lot in from the frontage road next to Hi hwa #100. The bac and is fenced and landscaped so the highwaV is not seen. Units X One One Wth Accessory Unit sec,^ :x.. .9 c�Y` -cw•� a, ti ..g Foundalon Walls Concrete BlocksNG �� 14e� .����4 .d. Floors HOWD /C W Concrete Sab Crawl Space #ofslories 1.00 771 Full Basement Par6alBasement Exterior Walls StuccoNG Walls DrywalING T X DPL Att S- DetJEndUnit BasementArea 1660 s .ft. RoofSudace Asp Shin les/VG Trim/Finish HDWDNG X E,dsfin qJ JProposed Under Cwst. BasementFinish 95 °% Gutters & Downs is MetaING Bath Roor CTNG Design (S Me) Split Level 5 X I Outside Enbv/E)dtl JSumpPump WindowT ' Casements/New BafhWainscot CTNG Year Bul1 1958 Evidenceofl linfestation . Storm SashllnsulatedCombo/New CarSlaa a I lNon e EffecfiveA rs 5 Dampness I I Settlement Screens Combo /New 1XIDrivevviv #cfCars 2 Attic I None Hearm X FWA HWB RacrA Amenities I Woodstove s # 0 Driveway Surface Concrete Dron Stein I Stairs Other IFuel Gas I X Fire laces # 1 1 X I Fence X Gare a #of Cars 2 Floor X Scutle Collin X CenfralAirCondtionin X PatiolDeck X Porch O en Carport #offers 0 Finished Heated Indnrldual Other Pool None Other None AtL [)at X I Bult4n lanced X I Refi erator Xj ten e/Oven I X hphvvashe r X Dis osal X Microwave X Weshe/D er Other describe Finished area above gradecontaln97 8 Rooms 4 Bedrooms 2.0 Beth (s) 2,610 Square Feet of Gross Living Area Above Grade Additional features (special energy efticient items etc. See comments- Additional Features • Describe thecondtion of the property oncluding needed repairs, deterioration renovation remodelin 'etc.. C2•Kitchen -u ated -one to five years a o'Bathrooms -u datedons to five years a o•The sub ect is in very good condition with less than typical physical depreciation noted. No functional or locational obsolescence noted. Are there any physical defidencies or adverse conditions that affect the livability, soundness or structural rote d of the property? Yes X No If Yes descnbe Does the propertyaenerelly conform to the neighborhood functional utility, style, condition us construction etc. ? FX-lYesl I No If No describe Freddie Mac Form 7O March 2005 rmnuo moo ran ui ;w ma UAD Version 9/2011 Produced by CIIckFORMS Software 800.622 -8727 B_395A Olt-pf 25 Rels Valuation ' File No. 62216509 Uniform Residential Appraisal Report Case No. _.1: —. - „:—...:...,.a ; 4 .— a Ana arm F. s R19 Onn ReDorttheresultsoftheresearc rnefaafe o —W.. . WW. — ..—” . There are 11 co arable sales in the sub'ect net hborhood within the past twelve ... _ months ranging t 4ke ce from $ 400.000 to $ 1 050 000 una nu amts vn a o v . FEATURE SUBJECT COMPARABLE SALE #1 COMPARABLE SALE #2 COMPARABLE SALE #3 COMPARABLE SALE #3 Address 5009 Normandale Court Edina MN 55436 -2420 6009 Virginia Avenue South Edna MN 55424 5504 urie Road Edina MN 55439 5037 66th Street West Edina MN 55439 Pro)dffdlv to Su 'ect " a 'a I 0.55 miles SE 1.&iniles SW 1.17 miles S Data Source(s) Sale Price MLS/County Records $ 575 000 3 520 000 $ 200.00!.1' s . fL I $ 500.0 00 01/28/2012 Sale PricelGross Uv. Area $ 0.00 so. it $ 260.89 s ft. ',' > 3 $ 168.33 s . fL ` ` Data Sources . 2.e , : t .1 i MLS#4047284•DOM 40 MLS#40 5673•DOM.18 MLS#3952680�DOM 402 Verification Sources CitWV Record Driveby City R466rdd riveby Citv Records /Driveb VALUEADJUSTMENTS DESCRIPTION DESCRIPTION +f-Mclustmen t DESCRIPTION . +- $Adustment DESCRIPTION +- $Adustment Sale or-Flnancin °*'�`iYi" d. n''`�". " Arml-th ArmLth,,* ArmLth Concessions Conv0 Cornr0` Corn 0 Date s07/11 •e06/11 C 509111 •C08111 C x09/11'009/11 Location N•Res• B•Res* -2500 N•Res'•f NERes• Leasehold/FeeSimile Fee Simple Fee Simple Fee Simple Fee Sim le Site 9381 sf 10890 sf 21780 sf' -15.00 13504 sf View N•Res• N'Res• N•Res•i N•Res• Desi n Wel Split Level 5 Split Level 4 C Split Level 4 2-Story Quality of Construction 03 03 03 03 ActudA a 54 57 C 53 C 20 Condifion C2 C2 C2 C3 +50,00C Above Grade Total Bdnns Baths Total Bdrms Baths +2 0 Total Bd•ms Baths Tole) 8drms Baths +2,001 Room Count Gross Livina Area 8 4 2.0 7 1 3 1 2.0 8 1 4 1 2.0 8 1 3 1 2.1 -200 2,610 sq. fi 2,204 sq it +16,241 2,600 s . R C 3.006 sci. fl. -15,901 BasementBFinished Rooms Below Grade 1660sfl577sfwo 1rrObrl.Obalo 1604sf658sfrn 1rr1br1.Oba0o +1 8.40C 1760sf686sftn 1rrObr0.1ba10 +17,80 +200 1590s1`1580sfin 1rr1brl.Obalo Functional Ulli Good Good Good ; Good Healln-cf/Coding FA/CAC FA/CAC FA/CAC FA/CAC - Energy Efficient Items Insulation Insulation Insulation Insulation Garaqe/Camort Garage-21311 Gara a -2ATT -500 Garage-2811 C Gara e-3ATT -7.50 • Porch/Patio/Deck Patios Patios Deck:.'` d _ Deck Fireplaces 1 Fire lace I 2 -Fire laces -4 00 2 -Fire laces -4 00 2-Fireplaces 400 • NetA ushnent Told / / f:k,. -TX-F+ $ 2640 X + $ 800 X $ 22,600 i�Co etl tablesrice ': $ 577 640SEd :l ^1 `+ ii$ 520 800 522 600 131 1XI&A V 1AA not research the sale or transfer history of the sub'ect Property and com arahie sales. If not explain ReDorttheresultsoftheresearc h and anal xis of the riot sale or sternisiorymmesuplecipropeny noconiparaLme5wejtlt:LVILtSLVUJU una nu amts vn a o v . ITEM I SUBJECT I COMPARABLE SALE #1 COMPARABLE SALE #2 COMPARABLE SALE #3 Date of Prior Sale/rransfer Price of Prior Sale/rransfer Data Source(s) IVILS/County Records MLS/County Records MLS/County Records MILS/CountV Records Effective Date of Data Sources 01/28/2012 01/28/2012 01/28/2012 01/28/2012 Freddie Mac Form 70 March 2005 rarge3WyjfOT5Z1mW 4- LIAD Version 9/2011 Produced by ClickFORMS Software 800 -622 -8727 Page 2 of 25 Reis Valuatiori File No. 62216509 Case No. Iinifnrm Residential Annralsal Reeort Clarification of Intended Use and Intended User.The Intended User of this apprals aI report Is the LendeUCfient. The Intended Use is to evaluate the Property that is the sub ect of this appraisal for a mortgage finance transaction sub ect to the stated Scope of Work purpose oft e appraisal, re rti re uirements of this appraisal report forrrk and Definition of Market Value. No additional Intended Users are Identified by fhe appraiser. Fredde Mac Form 70 March 2005 ranme Mae ram ium Marcn zuuo UAD Version 9/2011 Produced by CIIckFORMS Software 800 -622 -8727 E3-3W O %Sf 25 rpO Rate Valuation EXTRA COMPARABLES 4-5-6 ;s '•v File No. 62216509 Case No. FEATURE SUBJECT COMPARABLE SALE # - 4 COMPARABLE SALE # 5 COMPARABLE SALE # 6 Address •5009 Normandale Court Edina MN 55436 -2420 5221 Richwood Drive Edina • MN 55436 -2420 6124 Virgi{ria Avenue South Edtna MN 55424 Proprtu to SU 'ect .aww y: � 0.44 miles NW 0.69 miles S u � Sale Price SalePdcelGrossLiv.Area $ $ 0.00,> sq R 400 000 $ 185.10 . s fL ,^ 4,900 $ 255.15:: s .fl.7f"`` "� _ sN $ $ R, Data Sources &;! , a J c. r ' : '' MLS#4074958:DOM 165 MLS#4097608•DOM 97 Verification Sources Citv Records/Ddve Citv Record Drive VALUE ADJUSTMENTS ' DESCRIPTION DESCRIPTION +- $p ustment DESCRIPTION +- SAdustmenl DESCRIPTION +- $Ad'uslment Sale orFnancin � x '° ' K }� Listing LisUn : Concessions 1" Norie',O Nobe'0 Date SateRme } "�'� .' Active -20 00 Active. • • 37 50 Location N•Res' N'Res' B'Res -25.00q-' LeaseliddlFeeSim a Fee Sim le Fee Simple Fee Sim le Site 9381 sf 9880 sf 11761 if V6W N'Res' N'Res' N-Res . De'si n (S Me) split Level 5 1.5StorV So Level 3 Quality of Construcfion 03 Q4 +40,00( Q3 Actual Age 54 59 58 ' Condition C2 C2 C2 ` Above Grade Total Bdrms Baths Total Bdrms Baths I +21OOC Total k6sl Baths Room Count Gross LIAn Area 8 1 4 2.0 7 1 3 1 2.0 8 4 : 21 -2,00C 2,610 s . ft. 2,161 s 1 +18 00 2,410 . s . fL +8,00 s ft. Basement BFinished Rooms Below Grade 166Osf1577sfwo 1rrObr1.0ba10 1232sf740sfin lr2brl.Obalo +16,80 CC 2410sf1435sfin 1rr1br1.OIJaOo +2,80 Functional Utility Good Good Good Heating/Cooling FA/CAC FA/CAC FA/CAC? Energy Efficient Hems Insulation Insulation Insulatiorf. Gars e/Ca rport Gara a -2131 Gara e-2ATT -5,00C Garage- FT EA -10.00C PorchlPetiolDeck Patios Deck DecWPatl4 -4,00C y Fireplaces 1 Fireplace 2-Fireplaces -4,00 3—Fireplaces -8,00 NetA ustment Total ORION—., p,gM�r�f'r f .. %'2 ? X + $ —47.800 + X -' `. $ -75 700 + $ 0 A,�usled Sale Price of Co es Ngt Rdki"I`2 :,=_ - Gfo .A�;., 6ti/o<- $ 447 800 L�fe¢;lC ".` ? °f z °_: tis,6li f6 $ 539 200 N R ¢ _ - t Gss(ii1?.i)'�a $ 0 Report the results of the research andanalysisoftheoriorsaleor transfer historyof the sub'ect Drooertv and com arable sales ITEM SUBJECT COMPARABLESALE# 4 COMPARABLESALE# 5 COMPARABLESALE# 6 Date of Prior Sale/Transfer Price of Prior Saleffransfer Data Sources MLS/County Records MLS/Coun Records MLS /Coup Records Effective Date of Data Sources 01/28/2012 01/28/2012 01/28/2012 Anal is of dor sale or transfer hislorV of the su Nett and comparable sales Summary of Sales Comparison A h UAD Version 9/2011 Produced by ClickFORMS Software 80022 -8727 Page 4 of 25 B- 368/10164 Refs Valuation COMMENT ADDEND_ UM File No. 62216509 Case No. NEIGHBORHOOD DESCRIPTION The subject is located in the City of Edina, a western suburb to the City of Minneapolis. The subject is located In an established residential neighborhood of comparable and higher priced homes. The subject is located near all related conveniences via a short drive. Good access to all highways, freeways and public transportation. ,Located 10 -20 minutes from the downtown Minneapolis -St. Paul, the major employment centers. Located 10 -20 minutes from the International Airport and the Mall of America No adverse Influences noted MARKET, CONDITIONS The 'subject is located in a neighborhood of stable demand The average marketing time for homes similar to the subject property typically range between, 30 to 180 days when properly marketed and when entered into the Regional Multiple Listing Services of Minnesota. Conventional and FHAIVA financing is readily available at rates that are attractive to many potential buyers. Sellers typically do need to make concessions In this market Three percent of the sale price is a typical ooncession .• - The subject area is considered to be stable. According to MLS data, the median sales price,in December 2011 was $300,000, which Is down 11.1 % compared to December 2010 which was $337,500. Looking at YTD data; the median sales price was $340,000 YTD which is up 0.3% compared to 2010 YTD which was $339,000. In terms of inventory, there are 334 homes on the market at the present time and 65 closed sales in December which Is an it balance 'supply of homes (under 6 months) ADDITIONAL FEATURES BASEMENT (Level #1) Recreation Room with a rough in (wood) fireplace. New cherry wood bar in the recreation room Cherry wood cove ceilings Finished shop area. _ Rougli In 1/2 bath Mechanical Room (2) Two forced air furnaces with one CAC unit One, furnace was new In 2006 and the other in 2009. 200 amps electrical service. BASEMENT (Level #2) 20x22FTTuckunder Garage Insulated with sheetroekedwalls and ceilings. New electrical and new concrete driveway in 2009: Entrance from the front and back of the house Laundry Room Family Room with a built In entertainment'center (Birch)' .75 Bath New fbdures FIRST FLOOR (Level 93) New Kitchen in the fall of 2011 New annagrey custom built cabinets and cupboards Caesar Stone connter tops. (New) Maple floors The cost of the new kitchen was $70,000. Dinette has a maple floor Living Room and Dining Room has hardwood floors Living Room has a gas fireplace. FIRST FLOOR (Level #4) Hardwood Floors on level 94 The typical bedroom Bathroom with new fodures, heated floors. Master Bedroom Master bath has a Jacuzzi tub with a shower stall. (Combination unit) Remodeled 2008. SECOND FLOOR (Level #5) Bonus Room with a gas space heater andwali air AC. OTHER INFORMATION New front entrance with open porch Fenced backyard Two concrete patio's Owner estimates a total of $450,000 in new Improvements. UAD Version 9/2011 Produced by ClickFORM5 5ottware twu- brt -aizr rage o of zo B- 368/10165 Af Rels Valuation ' Re No. 62216509 nn...r...a /a..mP1;frnnc Arlrbsnrlum to fhe Anoraisal Retort Caee No The purpose of this addendum is to provide the lender/dient with a dear and accurate understanding of th9 market trends end conditions prevalent in the subject nei hborhood This Is arequired addendum for all appraisal reports Wth an effective dale on orafterApdi, 2009. Pro Address 5009 Normandale Court city Edina State MN ZIP Code 55436 -2420 Borrower Jordan Mauer Instructions: The appraiser must use the information required on this form as the basis for his/her conddslons and must provide support for those conclusions, regarding housing trends and overall market conditions as reported In the Neighborhood section of the appraisal report form. The appraiser must fill in all the Information to the extent it is available and reliable and must provide analysis as indicated below. If any required data is unavailable or Is considered unreliable, the appraiser must provide an explanation. It is recognized that not all data sources will be able to provide data for the shaded areas below; if it is available, however, the appraiser must indude that data in the analysis. If data sources provide all the required information as an average instead of the medan, Ulb appraiser should report the available figure and identify it as an average. Sales and listings must be properties that compete with the subject property, determined by applylpg the criteria that would be used by a prospective buyer of the sublect DroDertv. The appraiser must explain any anomalies in the date such as seasonal markets new cohstruction faredosures eta Prior 7 -12 Months Prior 4.6 Months Current- 3 Months Overall Trend Total #of Co eSales Settled Absorption Rate Total Sales/Monlhs Total # of Comparable Acve listings Total Usn slAb Rate Months of Housin S 7 1.17 3,I 2 s 3 1.00 1?c ` . Cfflfi(r Prior 4-6 Months : 1 0;33 :8 Increaelri Increasin feel rnur n i X X Stable I ` Stable ' rSfa .f3 .. ''. Declining Declining lac s'�s j 2 .2 4 .,yf a e & fie P,rfce , OM S cyst <94 Median Comparable Sales Pdce Pdor 7.12 Months Current Ia Months Overall Trend 465000 520,000 596'100 Increasinci I X I Stable Dedinin Median Comparable Saes Da on Market Medan Comparable List Pelee: Medan Comparable Listing Da on Markel 84 `.: , i+ ; _ +�,1' A' tlAr 63 �. ; 48 494 000 lh s5.% Dedinin n Wile usnS Increasing X X Stable Stable ' E Increasin ri �;+ S C�S1 ,: Dedinin Median Sale Price as %of List Price 95% 97116 95% " Seller-(developer, builder etc id financial assistance prevalent? X Yes No Dedinin X Stable Increasin Explain in detail seller concessions trends for the past 12 months (e.g. seller contributions increased tort '3%lo 5% increasing use of buydowns, closing costs condo fees, options etc. Seller paid concessions are tVpical in this market Are foreclosure sales RE0 sales a factor in the market? X Yes No If es explain (including the trends in listings and sales of foreclosed o erles . REO sales are tVpical and common in this market and are contributing to declini pro i5erty values. Cite data sources for above information. MI S I' Summarize the above information as support for your conclusions in the Neighborhood section of the appraisal report form If you used any additional jnfornation, such as an anal is of pending sales and/or expired and Wthdrewn lislincls, to formulate your condusions provide both an explanation and sulport for your conclusions. There were a total of 11 Comparable Settled Sales in the past 12 months. b The Median Sales Price for the prior 7 -12 months was $465,000 and for the current to rior 3 months is $596,100. The Months Supply for the prior 7 -12 months was 3 and 24 for the current to prior 3 month period. The Median Days on Market for the prior 7 -12 months was 84 and 46 for the current to Odor 3 month period Die statistics above were generated from an exported MLS market search. Details reg6riling the calculations and process can be found online at http://bradfordsoftware.com/1004mc/Cale.shtmi. If the subject is a unit in a coridomintum or coopera tNe oroiect. complete the fdloWn : Pr 'edl Name: Subject Project Data - Prior 7 -12 Months Prior 4 6 Months Current -3 Months Overall Trend Total #of Com able Sales Settled increasing Stable Dedinin Absorption Rate Total Sales/Months) Increasrn Stable Dedinin Total # of Active Comparable Listings ,''�3saz�` Kla`�[es Lizl Months of Unit Su olal Ustin s/Ab Rate ' T31 eaih r Are foreclosures sales (REO sales) a factor in the project? Lj Yes Lj No If yes, indicate the number of REO listings and explain the trends in listings and sates of foreclosed Properties. • Summarize the above trends and address the impact on the subject unit and prolecl. Signature Signature' Appraiser Name Non) asR: Brien Su ervisorName Company Name Rels Valuation Company Name Company AcEM9 34th Avenue South Suite 1000 Bloomln-qtog MN 55811 a Address State License/Certification# 4001142 State MN State License/Cerlification# Slate Email Address on file w /Refs Email Address Freddie Mac Form 71 March 2009 UAD Version 92011 Producea try UmccKrUttms aomnare our- oct-orcr V.I.- I. ao Ef-516-8/1016615 Reis Valuation File No. 62216509 Uniform Residential This report form Is designed to report an appraisal of a one-unit property or a one -unit property with an accessory unit; including a unit In a planned unit development (PUD). This report form Is not designed to report an appraisal of a I manufactured home ore unit Ina condominium or cooperative project j This appraisal report Is subject to the following scope of work, Intended use, Intended user, definition of market value, statement of assumptions and limiting conditions, and certifications. Modifications, additions, or deletions to the Intended use, Intended user, definition of market value, or assumptions and limiting conditions are not permitted. The appraiser may expand the scope of work to include any additional research `or analysis necessary based on the complexity of this appraisal assignment Modifications or deletions to the certifications are also not permitted. However, additional certifications that do not constitute material alterations to this appraisal report, such as those required by law or those related to the appraisers continuing education or membership in an appraisal organization, are permitted. SCOPE OF WORK: The scope of work for this appraisal Is defined by the complexity of this appraisal assignment and the reporting requirements of this appraisal report form, Including the following definition of market value, statement of assumptions and limiting conditions, and certifications. The appraiser must, at a minimum: (1) perform a complete visual inspection of the interior and exterior areas of the subject property, (2) Inspect the neighborhood, (3) Inspect each of the comparable sales from at least the street, (4) research, verify, and analyze data from reliable public and/or private sources, and (5) report his or her analysis, opinions,.and conclusions in this appraisal report. INTENDED USE: The intended use of this appraisal re port is for the lender /client to evaluate the property that is the subject of this appraisal for a mortgage finance transaction. INTENDED USER: The Intended user of this appraisal report Is the lender /client DEFINITION OF MARKET VALUE: The most probable price which a property should bring Ina competitive and open market under all conditions requisite to a fair sale, the buyer and seller, each acting prudently, knowledgeably and assuming the price is not affected by undue stimulus. Implicit in this definition is the consummation of a sale as of a specified date and the passing of title from seller to buyer under conditions whereby: (1) buyer and seller are typically motivated; (2) both parties are well Informed or well advised, and each acting in what he or she considers his or her own best Interest; (3) a reasonable time is allowed for exposure in the open market; (4) payment is made in terms of cash in U. S. dollars or in terms of financial arrangements comparable thereto; and (5) the price represents the normal consideration for the property sold unaffected by special or creative financing or sales concessions• granted by anyone associated with the sale. 'Adjustments to the comparables must be made for special or creative financing or sales concessions. No adjustments are necessary for those costs which are normally paid by sellers as a result of tradition pr law in a market area; these costs are readily identifiable since the seller pays these costs in virtually all sales transactions. Special or creative financing adjustments can be made to the comparable property by comparisons to financing terms offered by a third party institutional lender that is not already Involved in the property or transaction. Any adjustment shpuld not be calculated on a mechanical dollar for dollar cost of the financing or concession but the dollar amount of any adjustment should approximate the markets reaction to the financing or concessions based on the appraisers judgment. STATEMENT OF ASSUMPTIONS AND LIMITING CONDITIONS: Theappraisers certification inthis report is subject to the following assumptions and limiting conditions: 1. The appraiser will not be responsible for matters of a legal nature that affect either the property being appraised or the title to it, except for information that he or she became aware of during the research involved in performing this appraisal. The appraiser assumes that the tide is good and marketable and will not render any opinions about the title. 2 The appraiser has provided a sketch in this appraisal report to show the approximate dimensions of the Improvements. The sketch is included only to assist the reader in visualizing the pfoperty.and understanding the appraisers determination of its size. 3. The appraiser has examined the available flood reaps that are provided by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (or other data sources) and has noted in this appraisal report whether any portion of. the subject site, Is located In an identified Special Flood Hazard Area. Because the appraiser Is not a surveyor, he or she makes no guarantees, express or Implied, regarding this determination. _ 4. The appraiser will not give testimony or appear in court because he or she made an appraisal of the property in question, unless specific arrangements to do so have been made beforehand, or as otherwise required by law. 5. The appraiser has noted In this appraisal report any adverse conditions (such as needed repairs, deterioration, the presence of hazardous wastes, toxic substances, etc.) observed during the inspection of the subject property or that he or she became aware of during the research involved in performing this appraisal. Unless otherwise stated In this appraisal report, the appraiser has no knowledge of any hidden or unapparent physical deficiencies or adverse conditions of the property (such as, but not limited to, needed repairs, deterioration, the presence of hazardous wastes, toxic substances, adverse environmental conditions, etc.) that would make the property less valuable, and has assumed that there are no such conditions and makes no guarantees or warranties, express or implied. The appraiser will not be responsible for any such conditions that do exist or for any engineering or testing that might be required to discover whether such conditions exist Because the •appraiser is not an expert in the field of environmental hazards, this appraisal report must not be considered as an environmental assessment of the property. 6. The appraiser has based his or her appraisal report and valuation conclusion for an appraisal that Is subject to satisfactory completion, repairs, or alterations on the assumption that the completion, repairs, or alterations of the subject property will be performed in a professional manner. Fredde Mac Forth 70 March 2005 Fannie mae Form tuua March NW UAD Version 9/2011 Produced by ClickFORMS Software 800- 622 -8727 MM 005 Reis Valuation File No. 62216509 Res APPRAISER'S CERTIFICATION: The Appraiser certifies and agrees that: 1. 1 have, at a minimum, developed and reported this appraisal in accordance with the scope of work requirements stated in this appraisal report 2. 1 performed a complete visual inspection of the interior and exterior areas of the subject property. I reported the condition of the improvements in factual, specific terms. I identified and reported the physical deficiencies that could affect the livability, soundness, or structural integrity of the property. 3. 1 performed this appraisal In accordance with the requirements of the Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice that were adopted and promulgated by the Appraisal Standards Board of The (Appraisal Foundation and that were in place at the time this appraisal report was prepared. 4. 1 developed my opinion of the market value of the real property that is the subject of his report based on the sales comparison approach to value. I have adequate comparable market data to develop a feliable sales comparison approach for this appraisal assignment I further certify that I considered the cost and income approaches to value but did not develop them, unless otherwise indicated in this report ;� 5. 1 researched, verified, analyzed, and reported on any, current agreement for sale for-the subject property, any offering for sale of the subject property in the twelve months prior to the effective date of this apprassal, and the prior sales of the subject property for a minimum of three years prior to the effective date of this appraisal, unless otherwise Indicated in this report. 6. 1 researched, verified, analyzed, and reported on the prior sales of the comparable sales for a minimum of one year prior to the date of sale of the comparable sale, unless otherwise indicated in this report ' 7. I selected and used comparable sales that are locationally, physically, and functionally the most similar to the subject property. 8. 1 have not used comparable sales that were the result of combining a land sale with the contract purchase price of a home that has been built or will be built on the land. 9. 1 have reported adjustments to the comparable sales that reflect the market's reaction to the differences between the subject property and the comparable sales. 10. 1 verified, from a.disinterested source, all information in this report that was provided by parties who have a financial interest in the sale or financing of the subject property. 11. 1 have knowledge and experience in appraising this type of property in this market area. 12. 1 am aware of, and have access to, the necessary and appropriate public and private data sources, such as multiple listing services, tax assessment records, public land records and other such data sources for the area in which the property is located 13. 1 obtained the information, estimates, and opinions furnished by other parties and expressed in this appraisal report from reliable sources that I believe to be true and correct. 14. 1 have taken into consideration the factors that have an impact on value with respect to the subject neighborhood, subject property, and the proximity of the subject property to adverse influences in the development of my opinion of market value. I have noted in this appraisal report any adverse conditions (such as, but not limited to, needed repairs, deterioratlon, the presence of hazardous wastes, toxic substances, adverse environmental conditions, eta.) observed during the inspection of the subject property or that I became aware of during the research involved in performing this appraisal. I have considered these adverse conditions in my analysis of the property value, and have reported on the effect of the conditions on the value and marketability of the subject property. 15. 1 have not knowingly withheld any significant information from this appraisal report and, to the best of my knowledge, all statements and information in this appraisal report are,true and correct. 16. I stated in this appraisal report my own personal, unbiased, and professional analysis, opinions, and conclusions, which are subject only to the assumptions and limiting conditions in this appraisal report. 17. 1 have no present or prospective interest in the property that is the subject of this report, and I have no present or prospective personal Interest or bias with respect to the participants in the transaction. I did not base, either partially or completely, my analysis and/or opinion of market value in this appraisal report on the race, color, religion, sex, age, marital status, handicap, familial status, or national origin of either the prospective owners or occupants of the subject property or of the present owners or occupants of the properties In the vicinity of the subject property or on any other basis prohibited by law. 18. My employment and/or compensation for performing this appraisal or any future or anticipated appraisals was not conditioned bn any agreement or understanding, written or otherwise, that I would report (or present analysis supporting) a predetermined speck value, a predetermined minimum value, a range or direction in value, a value that favors the cause of any party, or the attainment of a specific result or occurrence of a specific subsequent event (such as approval of a pending mortgage loan application). 19. 1 personally prepared all conclusions and opinions about the real estate that were set forth in this appraisal report If I relied on significant real property appraisal assistance from any individual or individuals in the performance of this appraisal or the preparation of this appraisal report, I have named such individuals) and disclosed the specific tasks performed In this appraisal report I certify that any individual so named is qualified to perform the tasks. I have not authorized anyone to make a change to any item in this appraisal report; therefore, any change made to this appraisal is unauthorized and I will take no responsibility for it 20. 1 Identified the lender /client in this appraisal reportwho is the Individual, organization, or agent for the organization that Freddie Mac F;Dm 70 March 2005 Fannie Mae Form 1004 March 2005 UAD Version 9/2011 Produced by ClickFORMS Software 800 - 622 -8727 DM891 M 6V Rels Valuation File No. 62216509 Case No. Uniform Residential Appraisal Report 21. The lender /client may disclose or distribute this appraisal report to: the borrower, another lender at the request of the borrower the mortgagee or its successors and assigns; mortgage Insurers; government sponsored enterprises; other seconda .market participants; data collection or reporting services; professional appraisal organizations; any department, agency, k,instrurkentality of the United States; and any state, the District of Columbia, or other jurisdictions; without having to obtain the ppraiser's or supervisory appraiser's (if applicable) consent Such consent must be obtained before this appraisal report may be disclosed or distributed to any other party Qncluding, but not limited to, the public through advertising, public relations, news, sales,, or other media). 22. 1 am aware that any disclosure or distribution of this appraisal report by me or the lender /client may be subject to certain laws and regulations. Further, I am also subject to the provisions of the Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice that pertain to disclosure or distribution by me. 23. The borrower, another lender at the request of the borrower, the mortgagee or its successors and assigns, mortgage insurers, government sponsored enterprises, and other secondary marketparticipants may rely on this appraisal report as part of any mortgage finance transaction that involves any one or more of these parties. 24. If this appraisal report was transmitted as an "electronic record' containing my "electronic signature," as those terms are defined In applicable federal and/or state laws (excluding audio and video recordings), or a facsimile transmission of this appraisal report containing a copy or representation of my signature, the appraisal report shall be as effective, enforceable and valid as if a paper version of this appraisal report were delivered containing my original hand written signature. 25. Any Intentional or negligent misrepresentation(s) contained in this appraisal report may result in civil liability and/or criminal penalties including, but not limited to, fine or imprisonment or both under the provisions of Title 18, United States Code, Section 1001, et seq., or similar state laws SUPERVISORY APPRAISER'S CERTIFICATION: The Supervisory Appraiser certifies and agrees that: 1. 1 directly supervised the appraiser for this appraisal assigi6ment, have read the appraisal report, and agree with the appraiser's analysis, opinions, statements, conclusions, and the appraiser's certification. 2. 1 accept full responsibility for the contents of this appraisal report including, but not limited to, the appraiser's analysis, opinions, statements, conclusions, and the appraisers certification. 3. The appraiser identified in this appraisal report is either a sub-contractor or an employee of the supervisory appraiser (or the appraisal firm), is qualified to perform this appraisal, and is acceptable to perform this appraisal under the applicable state law. 4. This appraisal report complies with the Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice that were adopted and promulgated by the Appraisal Standards Board of The Appraisal Foundation and that were In place at the time this appraisal report was prepared. ; 5. If this appraisal report was transmitted as an "electronic record" containing my "electronlc signature," as those terms are defined In applicable federal and/or state laws (excluding audio and video recordings), or a facsimile transmission of this appraisal report containing a copy or representation of my signature, the appraisal report shall be as effective, enforceable and valid as if a paper version of this appraisal report were delivered containing my original hand written signature. APPRAISER Signature Name Thornas`f2.—d9rfeo Company Name Rels Valuation Company Address 8009 34th Avenue South, Suite 1300 Bloomington, Minnesota 55425 Telephone Number 866 - 793 -3228 Email Address on file w/Rels Date of Signature and Report 01/28/2012 Effective Date of Appraisal 01/27/2012 State Certification # 4001142 or State License # or Other (describe) State # State MN Expiration Date of Certification or License 08/31/2013 ADDRESS OF PROPERTY APPRAISED 5009 Nonnandale Court Edina MN 55436 -2420 APPRAISED VALUE OF SUBJECT PROPERTY $ 522.500 LENDER/CLIENT Name Rels Valuation Company Name Wells Fargo Bank N.P. • PMB0036907 ComparryAddress ATTN: ChristophPritchett Minneapolis, MN 55402 Email Address Fredde Mac Form 70 March 2005 SUPERVISORY APPRAISER (ONLY IF REQUIRED) Company Name _ Company Address Telephone Number Email Address _ Date of Signature State Certification # or State License # Date of Certification or License SUBJECT PROPERTY ®Did: not inspect subject property Did Inspect exterior of subject properly from street Date of Inspection Did Inspect Interior and exterior of subject property Date of Inspection COMPARABLE SALES HDid not inspect exterior of comparable sales from street Did Inspect exterior of comparable sales from street Date of Inspection Fannie Mae Form 1004 March 2005 UAD Version 9/2011 Produced by CIIckFORMS Software 800 - 622 -8727 X58/10116 1'5 Rels Valuation SUBJECT PHOTO ADDENDUM File No. 62216509 Case No. Borrower Jordan Mauer Property Address 5009 Normandale Court l Cilv Edina County Hennepin State MN Zip Code 55436 -2420 f� FRONT OF SUBJECT PROPERTY 5009 Normandale Court Edina, MN 55436 -2420 REAR OF SUBJECT PROPERTY STREET SCENE UAD Version 9/2011 Produced by GI1cKfU4{MS Jonware ouu- o« -nrzr Page 10 of 25 B-368/10170 _ A^ Pl9 o i Wr d t r f� FRONT OF SUBJECT PROPERTY 5009 Normandale Court Edina, MN 55436 -2420 REAR OF SUBJECT PROPERTY STREET SCENE UAD Version 9/2011 Produced by GI1cKfU4{MS Jonware ouu- o« -nrzr Page 10 of 25 B-368/10170 Rels Valuation File No. 62216509 Case No. Borrower Jordan Mauer ProperNAddress 5009 Normandale Court na,. —h-- i Llonncnin CtM. MN Al r ip .1;1,410 -949n i Level #2 Walkout Concrete Patio/Hot Tub Level #1 Recreation Room Finished Shop Area Level #2 Hallway and Rear Walkout Laundry Closet Level #2 Family Room w /Entertainment Center Level #2 Basement (0.75 Bath) - Bath #1 Same Bath Shower Stall (Bath #1) Level #3 Dining Room Kitchen Kitchen Living Room w /Gas Fireplace Level #4 Bathroom (Bath #2) Same Bathroom (Bath #2) Master Bedroom UAD Version 9/2011 Produced by ClickFORMS Software 800 -622 -8727 Page 11 of 25 B- 368/10171 Rels Valuation File No. 62216509 Case No. Borrower Jordan Mauer PropertyAddress 5009 Nonnandale Court City Edina County Hennepin Slate MN Zip Code 55436 -2420 Lender/Client Wells Fargo Bank N A PMB0036907 Address ATTN: Christoph Pritchett Minneapolis, MN 55402 Master Bath (Bath #3) Bedroom is Bedroom Bedroom Level #5 Bonus Room UAD Version 9/2011 Produced by ClickFORMS Software 800 -622 -8727 EPIS8 A (M V Borrower Jordan Mauer Rels Valuation COMPARABLES 1 -2 -3 File No. 62216509 Case No. COMPARABLE SALE # 1 6009 Virginia Avenue South Edina, MN 55424 COMPARABLE SALE # 5504 McGurie Road Edina, MN 55439 COMPARABLE SALE # 3 5037 66th Street West Edina, MN 55439 UAD Version 9/2011 Produced by ClickFORMS Software 800- 622 -8727 Page 13 of 25 B- 368/10173 P " Rels Valuation COMPARABLES 4-5 -6 File No. 62216509 Case No. Borrower Jordan Mauer Property Address 5009 Normandale Court City Edina County Hennepin Stale MN Zip Code 55436 -2420 Lender/Qient Wells Fargo Bank N A - PM80036907 Address ATTN: Christoph Pritchett, Minneapolis, MN 55402 COMPARABLESALE# 4 5221 Richwood Drive Edina, MN 55436 -2420 COMPARABLE SALE # 5 6124 Virginia Avenue South Edina, MN 55424 COMPARABLE SALE # 6 UAD Version 9/2011 Produced by ClickFORMS Software 800 -622 -8727 Page 14 of 25 B- 368/10174 - PA t„ 3�V i 451 % J y •,., ,. . it ice" 1'0. l Y � r � � -i-'� 7 tt'2rr1 M p, hE Ski COMPARABLESALE# 4 5221 Richwood Drive Edina, MN 55436 -2420 COMPARABLE SALE # 5 6124 Virginia Avenue South Edina, MN 55424 COMPARABLE SALE # 6 UAD Version 9/2011 Produced by ClickFORMS Software 800 -622 -8727 Page 14 of 25 B- 368/10174 Rels Valuation LOCATION MAP ADDENDUM File No. 62216509 Case No. Borrower Jordan Mauer Property Address 5009 Normandale Court CiN Edina County Hennepin State MN Zip Code 55436 =2420 UAD Version 9/2011 Produced by ClickFORMS Software 800 - 622 -8727 84§8/1WRi 25 Fa;.4 Reis Valuation PLAT MAP Fie No. 62216509 Case No. Borrower Jordan Mauer Property Address 5009 Normandale Court City Edina County Hennepin State MN Zip Cade 55436 -2420 Lenderfaient Wells Fargo Bank N.A. - PMB0036907 Address ATI-N: Christoph Pritchett Minneapolis, MN 55402 NEI- Om ........ . . ..... . oafC� .• :.s[ ... .. ... .' ' ........... ............................... I ]An Version 912011 Produced by ClickFORMS Software 800 -622 -8727 Page 16 of 25 B- 368/10176 Reis Valuation SKETCH ADDENDUM File No. 62216509 Case No. Borrower Jordan Mauer Property Address 5009 Normandaie Court Cily Edina County Hennepin Slate MN Zip Code 5543 -2420 1 —ve.iA.M W.11. P-- P—L, N n _ PmRnnaF4n7 Address ATTN- Christooh Pritchett. Minneapolis. MN 55402 30' p 32' Level #2 Entrance Level #1 Furnace Finished Room Shop Area 16' Family Room 22' by apex Medina^' Comments: jjWEntrance 8' 20' 10' Garage swncr� Recreation Room 32' 30' UAD Version 912011 Produced by ClickFORMS SOttware dUU- b22 -bl2 t gage i r of 2b B- 368/10177 P. r Rels Valuation SKETCH ADDENDUM File No. 62216509 Case No. Borrower Jordan Mauer Property Address 5009 Norma ndale Court ritj Edna Countv Hennepin State MN Zip Code 55436 -2420 Lender /Oienl Wells Fargo Bank N A - PMB0036907 Address ATTN: Christoph Pritchett, Minneapolis, MN 55402 32'; 15' Stairs Bonus Room 15' Level #5 32'. 1 r: 62' Bedroom Bedroom Kitchen Dinette Dining Room Bath Stairs 30' 30' 39' Master Stairs Bath Living Room Entrance Level #3 Master 14' 18' Bedroom Bedroom 9' Level #4 30' FIRST FLOOR PLAN %k hby Apex Medina- Comments: EACALCI�TJON3 S�jMNJAR�'z�c L Vf �R�A BR KDD Q�IV .,ys s �7 �.t t.r •c c7 +w ti77 �`Tr�. LCOde.���rDescripBo�F�`y�,�� �Sy'�K^� Net,5tze����t�efTot�'tl „ &eakdmMrq��d€��ktoal�'ax 1`irsk Floor ! t 2],30 .0. ' h-. 2 3Q Oil F�s1~ F]:oort'° •,1- - a w�o— d IN �� Second F�.00r 1 f ' 480�Q�� � ti5�G80�''�O+�S � f 9 0'xx ' 30 0 e� j lv r270 0 .SP y,'N .✓ x Nif "i' 1t p +. E. $ x•-Jn A j x.S. a t .yy. -- f ° spa 'S3 MKt w. A�E�e�rjr�fQUpTMF'26 0, ,3remrF x �`FYU�t� ;ndeS..i�: IJAU Version `J /ZUII F'(oaUCea Dy UICRrVKMA Wi1WGIC ouu- oil -oIcr ray. lu ur c� B- 368/10178 Reis Valuation FLOOD MAP ADDENDUM File No. 62216509 Case No. Borrower Jordan Mauer Prop" Address 5009 Normandale Court Citv Edina i County Hennepin State MN Zip Code 55436-2420 '.mn Pank, N A - PMR0036907 Address ATTN: Christoph Pritchett, Minneapolis, MN 55402 .......... . Dr.. W u. . VVIAWr Ja 'Y 000, IZ 'VS -ay C4, Ism, . . .... 40 ........... lic Or. 16, SFHA M 6d. :Zon r ... ... in '61'M-OtOt Mdfllf Za te 6410+ 2 SW O SriS S gdib did d' rd 16 - beqm. li64 pw Owl ace *.',11.Efftf.EK FIRST A CAW1100D t RL T. t'.46"mm'" Pomm 9** CaR�ftk# C fit��'TQAM THIE. 'ARM I GAMMA -TY'Olt- Mt TA.i�IU-TY0.1t,F]Tgtt5 UAD Version 9/2011 Produced by ClickFORMS Software 800-622-8727 Page 19 of 25 B-368/10179 f Elf !Li File No. 62216509 Case No. Borrower Jordan Mauer Property Address 5009 Norma ndale Court City Edina County Hennepin State MN ZlpCode 55436-2420 Lender/Client Wells Fargo Bank N - PMB0036907 Address ATTN: Christoph Pritchett, Minneapolis, MN 55402 THOMAS R -dbi:fMN 11 . FLAGAVE-S.- Ppp AtMed m Tt d - - 'Mr - - d- qp!��MME —n- -Bp &ey!b 85711 Pialo�Eas[;;:Su+6e;fi0q! n GE RQntt �irieiiL 'F4o�_:.ri�E'At�uied�Hdtr� Td _4,6& ad Nag wow. . &ihk Maw OX ffmWI"I—,.x9r9S,-,jM3",, mpmr i inn Vominn Q/9011 Produced by ClickFORMS Software 800-622-8727 25 File f b. 622165U9 Case No. Borra ,er. Jordan Mauer Property Address 5009 Norrrand�!e Court City Edine Ccunry Hennepin Stete MN Zip Code 55436 -2420 Lender /Cl'ent Wells Fargo Bank N A - PrM0036907 Address ATM: Chrlstoph Pritchett %lmmeapol s ',IFJ 55402: f� Q A LTFICAT IOZVS OF �1�1J ` Cficd 7virnnesota Property Appraiser FI�A> ee r�Ppraiscr The, types of ,Appraisals that have performed are ?Singlcl'arnily a: s Rcsidenttal 2 to 4 Family Dvvcllmgs, Condoniirnums, `;Vacant land, p as wells detailed °appraisals of Schools, J�tur ingl- ionte5 and'i � ospitak liuddtn A gs and equipment:_ , a fe8 apprwlser, appraisals have been completed roe - carious, �t lending institutions and private rnditiiduals .� s.a foriner city and cou nty 5tatfappra su, appratssls,6avc hrxa completed for ! i the State ofMinne bta, Anoka and Waseca counti6-, and tho, cites of Eder) Prairie and �tiURnc.tonka�. PROFESSION tL EXTERMNCE - 1999-- PreseOt Value =lT UtiWAppmser 1991 - PT4�e t ai7als ,n �ner /P ppraiser 1997 'The AppraisA'Crfoup, LTD. J•1,91, '1997 1 '� - Norn r t1/91 City, ofEden Prairie N N - fall Appraiser Ft t_ A Full List Available Upon Request- CFI2T.LIF A ��'T'Rt1.�Sr CQCiIRSE ti�'OR�C. App � l 2QDl Wck _013asicsyI�!ith 1�'cw'frY�sts ]ul} �OQI, K 3 } Houses: From the Ground Lrp fitly -20fJ L �c FRAAgprai 's.als wit hlNe4Y.HVIDGuidelines NOQTpbec`99 _ ��, [ ASP, P Standards�and Ethics l plate t 1999' J BusincssSTI nuig for Appraisal Profc siona]s _ July ; in - Pro source Com uterized cpp rais J 149T A , ., l[3 t Seminar ; Au`gusl 1996 = ++ 9F Standards ofProfesslo,nal'Yractice lane 7995 = A" Qciobcr 1994 - °,� Narra�vclLepflrt WnUn� ' , . *Te w. URAIt & MREA Decenibcr, 093 i Complete Course List Available On- Request �wt�c tT�o�v° 1973 Mani ato Crgminerctal;Coffege; :�tisociate,'pf r�rt , i Accounting, and Manai eme,it Nfank;ito, Nlinncsota { X414 ENSE Certified Reaf NopertyAppraiser- 2V6nneSOta'1D iao61.1 42 UAD Version 9 /2011 Produced by C'ickFORMS So(hvare 800 -622 -8727 ge 2 of 25 Reis Valuation UNIFORM APPRAISAL DATASET (UAD) Property Condition and Quality Rating Definitions File No. 62216509 Requirements - Condition and Quality Ratings Usage Appraisers must utiiae the fallowing standardized conditions end qualify ratings within the appraisal report. Condition Ratings and Definitions Ct The improvements have been very recently constructed and have not previously been occupied The entire structure and all components are new and the dwelling features no physical depreciation. • - •Note: New N constructed im Yemen Is that feature recycled materials and/or components can be considered new dwellings provided that the dwelfing fs placed on a 100% new foundat on and recycled aterials and file recycled components have been rehabilitated/re- manufactured into like -new condition. Recently consructed improvements that have notbeen previously occuppied are not considered 'new' iffheyhave significant physical depreclation (i.e., newy consbucfed dwellings that have been vacant loran extended period of dime wlthoutadeq'ate maintenance or upkeep). C2 The improvements feature no deferred maintenance, little or no p tcd deprectafion, and require'no repairs. Virtually all bwldmg components are new or have been recently repaired, refinished, or rehabilitated. All outdated components and�n'ishes have been dated and/or replaced Wth componentslhat meet current standards. Dwellings in this category either are almost new or have been recently completely renovated and are sim�ar in condition to new construction. C3 Thai mprovements are well maintained and feature limited physical depreciation due to normal wear and tear. Some components, but not every major building component, may be updated or recently rehabilitated The structure has been well maintained. C4 The improvements feature some minor deferred maintanence and physical deterioration due to normal wear and, tear. The "IIng has been adequatelyy malnlained and requires orgy minimal repairs to building components /mechanical systems and cosmetic repairs. All major building components have been adequately maintained and are functionally adequate. C5 The improvements feature obvious deferred maintenance and are In need of some significant repairs Some buDdngg components need repairs, rehabilitation, or updating. The functional utility and overall livability is somewhat diminished due to condition, but the dwelling remains useable art functional as a residence. C6 The improvements have substantial damage or deferred maintenance with deficiencies or defects that are severe enough to affect the safety, soundness, or structural integrity of the improvements. The improvements are in need of substantial repairs and rehabilitation, inducing many or most major components. Quality Ratings and Definitions Dwellings with this quality rating are usually unique structures that are individually designed by an architect for a specified use. Such residences typically are constructed from detaredarchitecturalplansendspecificalions and feature an exceptionally high level o f workmanship and exceptionally hi h- gradematerialslhroughoutthainteriorandexterior of the structure. The design features excepptionally high - quality exterior refinements and ornamentation, and exceptionally high - quality, interior refinements. The workmanship, materials, and finishes throughout the dwetlIng are exceptionally high quality. Q2 Dwellings with this quality rating are often custom designed for construction on an indnridual property owner's site. However, dwellings in this qualiy grade are also found in higgh -quality tact developments featuring residences constructed from individual plans or from highly modified or upgraded plans. The design features detailed, high- quality exlenor omamenlalion,high- quality interior refinements, and detail. The workmanship, materials, and finishes throughout the dwelling are d exceptionally high quality. 03 Dwellings with this yuality rating are residences of higher quality bull from individual or readily available designer plans in above- standard residential tract developments or on an indmdual property owners site. The design induces significant exterior ornamentation and interiors that are well finished. The workmanship exceeds acceptable standards and many mallenals and finishes throughout the dwelling have been upgraded from 'stock' standards. Q4 Dwellings with this quality rating meet or exceed the requirements of apolcable building codes. Standard or modified standard building Pans are utilized and the design includes adequate fenestrationand some exterior ornamentation and interior refifinements. Materials, workmanship, finish, and equipment are of stock or builder grade and may feature some upgrades. 05 Dwellings with this quality rafingfeature economy of construction and basic functionality as main considerations. Such dwellias feature qqam desin using read available or basic flooransfeatunng minimal fenestration and basicfinishes with minimat exterior ornamentation and limited interior del Thesedeingsmee minimum bui f ding codes and are consted with inexpensive, stock materials with limited refinements and upgrades. Q6 Dwellings with this quality rating are of basic quality and lower cost some may not be suitable for year-round occupancy. Such dwellings are often built W th simple plans or without Pans, often utilizing Ihelowest quality building materials. Such dwellings are often built or expanded by persons who arecapfessionally unskilled orpossess only minimal construction shills. Electrical plumbing and other mechanical systems and equipment may be minimal or non - existent. Older dwellings may feature one or more substandard non - conforming additions to the original structure. Definitions of Not Updated, Updated, and Remodeled Not Updated Little or no updating or modernization. This description Includes, but Is not limited to, new homes. Residential properties of fifteen years of age orless oaten reflect an original condition with no updating, if no major components have been replaced or updated. Those over fifteen Years of age are also considered not updated if the appliances, factures, and finishes are ppredommatdYy dated An area that is 'Not Updated' may still he wait maintained and fully functional, and this rating does not necessarily in y deferred maintenance orphysicalifunctional deledoration. Updated The area of the home has been modifledto meet current market expectations. These modifications are limited in terms of both scope and Cost. An updated area of the home should have an improved look and feel, or functional utility. Changes that constitute updates include refurbishment and/or replacing components to meet existng market expectations. Updates do not include significant alterations to the existing structure. Remodeled Significant finish andfor structural changes have been made that increase utility and apppeal through complete replacement andfor �panslon A remodeled area reflects fundamental changges that indude multiple alterations. These alferations maayy ind Lida some or all d the following: re 1p acemenl of a maJor component 4cetinel(s bathtub, or bathroom Me), relocation of plumbing gas fixtures/appliances, significant structural alterations (relocating walls, andfor the addition oQ square footage. his wodu include a complete gutting and rebuild Explanation of Bathroom Count Three.quarter baths are counted as a full bath in all cases. Quarter baths (baths that only feature a toilet) are not included in the bathroom count. The number d full and half baths is reported by separating the two val use using a period. where the full bath count is represented to Ore left of the period and the half bath count Is represented to the right of the period UAD Version 9/2011 Produced by ClickFORMS Software 800 -622 -8727 B- 36MEDI V of 25 UNIFORM APPRAISAL DATASET (UAD) Properly Description Abbreviations Used in This Report File No. 62216509 Y , ac Acres Area Site Ad Prk Ad'acent to Park Location AdIPwr Ad acent to Power Lines Location A Adverse Location & View Arml -th Arms Length Sale Sale or Financin Concessions baf Bathrooms Basement & Finished Rooms Below Grade br Bedroom Basement & Finished Rooms Below Grade B ' Beneficial Location & View Cash Cash Sale or Financing Concessions CtvSky City View Skyline VIeW View Str CitV Street View I View Comm Commercial Influene0 Location C Contracted Date Date of SaleMme Conv Conventional Sale or Financing Concession CrtOrd Court Ordered Sale Sale or Financing Concession DOM Dave On Market Data Sources e Expiration Date Date of Sale/Time Estate Estate Sale Sale or Financing Concessions FHA Federal Housing Administration Sale or Financing Concessions GlfCse Golf Course Location Glfvw' Golf Course View View Ind Industrial Location &View in Interior OnIV Stairs Basement & Finished Rooms Below Grade Lndfl Landfill Location LtdS ht Limited Sight View Llstlnq Listina Sale or Financina Concessions Mtn Mountain View View N • Neutral Location &View NoriArm Non -Arms Length Sale Sale or Financing Concessions BsYRcI Busy Road Location o Other Basement & Finished Rooms Below Grade Prk' Park View ! View Petri Pastoral View. View PwrLn Power Lines View PubTrn Public Trans ortatlo ' Location rr Recreational Rec Room Basement & Finished Rooms Below Grade Relo Relocation Sale Sale or Financing Concessions REO REO Sale Sale or Financinq Concessions Res Residential Location & View RH USDA - Rural Housing Sale or Fnancin Concessions e Settlement Date Date of Sale/Time Short Short Sale Sales or Financing Concessions sf Square Feet Area Site Basement Link Unknown Date of Sale/rime VA Veterans Administration Sale or Financing Concessions w Withdraw Date Date of Sale/Time wo Walk Out Basement Basement & Finished Rooms Below Grade wu Walk Up Basement Basement & Finished Rooms Below Grade WlrFr Water Frontage Location Wtr. Water View View Woods I Woods View View Wtr Water View Petri Pastoral View Woods Woods View Prk Park View Glfvw Golf Course View CtvSI(v Citv S line View Mtn Mountain View ' Res Residential View CtvStr CitV Street View Ind Industrial View PwrLn Power Lines LtdS ht Limited SI ht See Instruction Below Other - Appraiser to enter a description of the view* ABBREVIATED ENTRY. OVERALL VIEW RATING, • Other. If Ir view factor not on this list materially affects the value of the subject property, the appraiser must enter a description of the view associated with the properly. The descriptlon entered must -allow a reader of the appraisal report to understand what the view associated with the property actually is. Descriptorgsuch es 'Nond,'NIN.'Typicel','Average, etc., are unacceptable. Descriptions should be entered carefully because the same text will be represented in both the Site section and the comparable sales grid for the subject properly. The text must fit in the ellowahle space. UAL) version Mr[ul l t roaucea oy %,urKrvmwia,amLwam ou - z-a. 1 t "ObTTUTSY' -- it AlL., Reis Valuation MEDIAN PRICE - BROKEN DOWN File No. 62216509 Case No. Bamer Jordan Mauer ProperlyAddress 5009 Normandale Court City Edna County Hennepin State MN Zip Code 55436 -2420 _ Lended0ient Wells Fargo Bank N A PMB0036907 Address ATTN: ch. nstoph Pritchett, Minneapolis, MN 55402 MEDIAN PRICE BROKEN INTO MARKETING TIME (DAYS ON MARKET) Days On Market Median Price 351+ Days $0 301350 Days $450,000 251300 Days $0 201 -250 Days ' $0 151 -200 Days $0 101 -150 Days 1; $643,264 51 -100 Days $455,000 0 -50 Days $519,000 The table displays the market's change in median sales price on a monthly basis. This chart shows the relationship between marketing time (how long a property is left on the market) and sales price. This chart is especially useful for determining typical marketing times and how long it will take to sell for a given price. UAD Version 9r1U1 1 F'rooUCea oy t ucro-UKMa AUILWd[U oUU -Uzzrof At I oy� — B- 368/10184 Rels Valuation TIME ADJUSTMENT FACTOR File No. 62216509 Case No. TIME ADJUSTMENT FACTOR BY MONTH FOR THE LAST 12 MONTHS Time Period Median Sales Price Current Month's Median Time Adjustment Factor 12 months ago $668,264 $596100 -11% 11 months ago $1.050,000 $596100 A3% 10 months ago WA • $696,100 N/A* 9 months ago $400,000 $596100 49% 8 months ago $455,000 $596100 31% 7 months ago $520,000 $596100 15% 6 months a o $750,000 $596100 -21% 5 months ago $510,500 $596,100 17% 4 months ago N/A • $596100 NIA* 3 months ago N/A • $596100 N /A• 2 months a o WA • $596100 NIA* Current month $596100 $596100 0% The table displays the market's change in median sales price on a monthly basis. TIME ADJUSTMENT FACTOR BY MONTH FOR THE LAST 12 MONTHS A Tlma':'adj.ustmen.G:factor °=� TI�•ri�i iri�� . LOOOA — ed�a.......................................::...................................::................................................ ............................... ...- ....... .............................................................. ............................... , O - — = - 40% .r. ^,.y.L..u' _1•:�c x_11 ':'h~�= ;✓::J':"l - �.1 ..2..r :J:.'lli :'J�:ll +. L�1. ✓.... 7x!k�' :::•:r':'��r ..,��'�F�':r•.: %'r :1 -..1. Y%_� J•: - e.: %.V- �-f� =� �7' :1_s::r.��:��.._�.:- - =mss r. - - - - - r' 1:,,.,,e -:v T: =�:_ .v:e�: >:�.r }= ,.r:.__- .,v�.i =': :i /- .ti'r_ •_Nf,•': - - .7 /,iSr;:•,.- _ _ y.� %v Rig t!`11�J6 `.l,pr,,l�' Its, xi ''� r €` �` i l / •r5 Jai ,,,f o t,�,r^`�Y� � fyl •y � 1. h�2 "�" .e��� J"r' � sw �' t F�i� Yy'� �m a y7•i � � iCl vd,�d' 1'i f+ Si a � } l:lzg t rr .sF Y 80 � 3�J,c���df a*�" ��a �`'�. ��s yr' �� '-'��c �„r,,�„- tr�e�}� -a r� P �"� r S ��s�p'J¢. 'SrF; �'d� } ,1��•' �f�� �� -, {t �r� .�O��jj- �.•{.. ,u,ra } ?,:{: w'4� �� � i•��s:.�r.°- .'.<... +i�k�n,__#i �.�u.`^i 1�ti`.K..M1a'�'la?Pa �.o-^•. ki..�.... i:,�C.:�,. s` t. ,�l d .. _ +:e- -- ,. -��•. It 11 � :3r 9 �J` '6' S 4: 3 ` M �'CUf.�2�1L`;R30'Dtl1 Notes: (7 Data Is not available for this period. The time adjustment factor of the previous month will be applied. (•) When the time adjustment factor Is greater than 100 %, the value on the graph is limited at 100 %. (—I When the time adjustment factor is less than -100 %, the value on the graph Is limited at -100 %. (*" The Current Month's Median has been derived from 2 and 3 current months. UAD Version 9/2011 Produced by CIfcKFORMS Sortware auu- ozz -orzr rage <a or e B- 368/10185 File No.: 65470827 APPRAISAL OF REAL PROPERTY Date of Valuation: 01/18/2013 Located At: 5009 Norm andale Ct Lot 001 Block 001 Normandale Court Byrnes Replat Edina, MN 55436 For: Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. - PMB0036907 , Minneapolis, MN 55402 Letter of Transmittal .................. ............................... URAR....................................... ..............................I Additional Comparables 4-6 ....... ............................... General Tad Addendum ............. ............................... Market Conditions Addendum to the Appraisal Report Subject Photos.._ ...................... ...................._.......... Photograph Addendum .............. ............................... Subject Photos Interior ....... .......... ............................ Comparable Photos 1-3 .............. ............................... Comparable Photos 4.6 .............. ............................... Building Sketch (Page -1) .......... ............................... UAD Definitions Addendum ....... ............................... E & 0 Insurance ......................... ............................... E & 0 Insurance - Page 1 ........... ............................... E & 0 Insurance - Page 2 ........... ............................... LocationMap .............................. ............................... Table of Contents: ......................................................................................... ............................... 1 .......................................................................................... ............................... 2 ........................ : ...................................................... ................... ... .................... 8 ..............................................................:........................... ..............I................ 9 .....................................................................-.............:.... ............................... 11 ........................................ . .... _ .... ........................... .......................................... 12 .......................... . ...................... .._.................................................................. 13 ......................................................................................... ............................... 14 ....................................... _ ............................ . ........ .......................................... 15 ......................................................................................... ............................... 16 ......................................................................................... ............................... 17 ........................................................................................ ............................... 18 ........................................................................................ ............................... 21 ....................................................................................... ............................... 22 ............................................................... _ ............. .......................................... 23 ....................................................................................... ....................._......... 24 Lakewood Appraisal Services (952) 292 -3540 Form TCG — WWinTOTAV appraisal software by a la mod% Inc. —1- 800- ALAMODE B- 1118/31659 4r -rte Lakewood Appraisal Services LLC PO Box 427 Prior Lake MN 55372 952 - 292 -3540 Wells Fargo Bank, NA - PMB0036907 Re: Property: 5009NornandaleCt Edina; MN 55436 Borrower. JORDAN MAUER File No.: In accordance with your request, we have appraised the above referenced property. The report of that appraisal is attached. The purpose of this appraisal is to estimate the market value of the property described in this appraisal report, as Improved, in unencumbered fee simple title of ownership. This report is based on a physical analysis of the sde and Improvements, a locational analysis of the neighborhood and city, and an economic analysis of the market for properties such as the subject The appraisal was developed and the report was prepared in accordance with the Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice. The value conclusions reported are as of the effective data stated in the body of the report and contingent upon the certification and limiting conditions attached. It has_been a pleasure to assist you. Please do not hesitate to contact me or any of my staff if we can be of additional service to you Sincerely, v Mark Hannan Xzlx—"� B- 1118/31660 Lakewood Appraisal Services (952) 292 -540 Wain File 0 Pa e Uniform Residential Auuraisal Report ate# 65470827 The purpose of this summary 'sal report Is to pruOde the lender /client with an acnnate, and adequately supported, opinion of the market value of the subject r Pro Address 5009NormandaleCt i City Edina • State MN Zip Code 55436. Borrower JORDAN MAUER Owner of Qubllc Record JORDAN MAUER C Hennepin Legal Descri on Lot 001 Block 001 Normandale Court Byrnes Re plat Assessor's Parcel # 3311721240028 Tax Year 2012 ILE Taxes $ 3,325 Nel hborhood Name NOR MANDALE COURT BYRNES REPLAT Ma Reference E3119 - CarsusTract 0237.00 Occupant Owner Tenant Vacant Special Assessments $ 0 PUD HOA $ 0 per ear er month " Pro RI s raised Fee Sim le Leasehold Other describe Assi nmentT a Purchase Transaction Refinance Transactlon Other (describe) Lender/CGant Wells Fargo Bank N.A. - PMB0036907 Address Minnea rrs MN 55402 Is the subject offered for sale or has it been offered for sale In the twelve months prior to the effective date of this 'sal? Yes No Report data smuts used offering price(s), and date(s). Tax Rods/Owner. I ❑ did ®did not analyze the contract for sale for the subject purchase transaction. Explain the results of the analysis of the contract for sale or why the analysis was not performed. *NIA Contract Price $ 0 Date of Contract NIA Is the prop" seller the owner of public record? ZYes ❑ No Dala Sources countyRods Is there any financial assistance poan charges, sale concessions, gift or downpaymant assistance, eta) to bb paid by any party on behalf of the borrower? ❑ Yes ® No If Yes, report the total dollar amount and describe the items to be Od. $0m•N /A Note: Race and the raclalcom oshlonofthanelghborhoodamnot appraisal factors. '�`. ray' k�Nel9htigrh39d�5ejariterlstle `s'3��"�C�jt�R Location Urban N Suburban Rural � .; ' 3. ohe�U'iJfb�oirs- :9tTre�41 @s . � 'S�� Pro Values U. Increasing Stable : Declining P.�OiIF:.Un�:klo _sIO PRICE AGE PreseM(aliE_UsB _` i One-Wt 70% Built - Over 75% 25.75% Under 25% Demand/Supply Shortage N In Balance Ll Over S $ 000 24 Unit 10% Growth Lj Rid N Stable F1 Slow I Marketing Time • . Under 3 mfrs N 3 -6 mihs H Over 0 mft 199 Low 1 Mullf-Fermi 10% Neighborhood Boundaries County Rd 158 to the North Wooddale:Ave S to the East to the East Highway 549 High 80 Commercial 10% 62 to the South and Olinger Rd to the West. 422 Pred. 48 Other % Neighborhood Description Nei hborhood of sin le fa Ily homes t corn atble designs and values. Police and fire protectlon are adequate. Aocess to shopping/recreational faciliffes/em b ment centers Is nearby, Employment stability and market appeal are both good. The subject is Located on a clufte street wffh access to Hichway 100 within 1/4 mile. • Market Conditions (incIffing support for the above conclusions The Edina neighborhood has had a Increase in new listings from the previous year 1.9% and dosed sales up 36.2 %. There are currently 1280 single family homes fisted in Edina there Is a 2.6 month supply of homes in inventorywhich was down 47.1 % from last year and the average exposure time is 135 days, Dimensions 80x111x80x123 Area 9,583 sf Shape Irre ular Mew N&Res• Specific Zonin ClassificationRl Zoning Description Single Famil Residential Zoning Compliance N Legal Ej Legal Nortcordorain andfalhered Use No Zoning Illegal descnbe Is the highest and best use of subject property as Improved or as proposed per plans and specifications) the present use? H Yes 0 No fi No describe Utilities Public Offer(describe) Pub6o Other(describe) OB-alle Improvements - Ve Public Private Electric Water 0 El Street Asphalt Gas 29 U Sanitary Sewer Allay None El El FEMA Special flood Hazard Area Yes M No FEMA Rood Zone X , ' FEMA Map # 27053CO363E FEMA Map Dale 09/022004 Are the nGfities and off -site Improvements typical for the market area? Z Yes No B No, describe Are there arry adverse site conditions or extemal factors easements encroachments, andronmmtal conditions, land uses etc.)? ❑ Yes 0 No B Yes, describe No adverse easements were noted no encroachments were readily observable no slide area were observed zoning was verified with the subject's municipality and the sub eofs use was found to be legal and conforming. j QeperalDe6c "tCti, aL f MF4 datlo.`•'f; z :Elite AiDes'a�'tfo` 1� ete�Fitscdri kii;" Foundation Wells Concrete BlocWAyn Ee 'tails @ /coiidNi6ni floors C t/HW/TUA Units N One 0 One with Accessory Lht Concrete Slab Crawls ace # of Stories 1 M RM Basement Partial Basement Exterior Walls Stu000/StonetAya Wags DrywallfAya Type N Det ❑ Att S- DetJEndUnit Basement Area 1,690 s .fL Hoot Sraface AsphaftlAyn Asphalt/A Trm&lsh Ma le/Av Existing Proposed FI Under Const Basement Finish , 80 % Gutters & Downs outs Yes/Ay Bath floor Tile /Av Design (Style) 4 Level Split ® Outside EntrylEA 0 Sump Pwnp window T e ' CEi Bath Wainscot Tile/Avg Year Built 1958 Evidence of Infestation Sturm Sas ulated In Car Stan. a None Effective Age rs 12 ❑ Dampness Settlement Screens YDriveway # of Cars 2 Attic None Healing FWA HWBB Radiant Amenities # 0 Driveway Surface As haft Drop Stair Stairs Other Fuel Gas Fre laces # 2 l Garage # of Cars 2 Floor Scuttle Cooling Central Air Condidonin Pago/Deck 2 Carport # of Cars 0 ❑ Finished Healed ❑ Ndividual ❑ Other ❑Pool None e ® Aft Det 0 Built -in Appliances N Refrigerator N Ran e/Ovm ® Dishwasher N Disposal- ® Microwave Washer/Dryer Ej Other describe finished area above grade contains: 8 Rooms 4 Bedrooms 2.0 Balh s 2,610 Square Feet of Gross Living Area Above trade . Additional featifes (special energy effidmt ftems etc.. Home has typical features of other homes of this styfeandage. Describe the condition of the a (including needed repairs, deterioration renovations remodeling, etc..: C3•Kitchen -u datedone to five years ago* Bathrooms-u dated -six to ten years a o•The property is in average to good condition for a home of this a e. There was no external nor functional depreciation observed. The Physical Depreciation of the appurtenances is noimal due to the average overall condition and continued maintenance of the subject property, Are there any physical de5dercles or adverse conditions that affect the Ivabilfty, soundness or structural Integrity of the 7 El Yes 19 No It Yes, describe The sub'ed Is a average to good quality improvement in average to nood condition. No apparent external or functional de reclatlom Physical depreciation was taken for the building components and age of interior finish. Does the generally cadorm to the neighborhood nalutility, slyfe, condition, use, construction etc.)? Yes n No ff No describe The sub'ed is a residential improvement, built in a neighborhood of similar improvements. No apparent adverse conditions. Freddie Mac Form 70 March 2005 UAD Version 9/2011 Page 1 of 6 Fannie Mae Form 10D4 March 2005 Forth 1004UAD — `Wm1DTAL' appraisal software by a la mode, Inc. —1- 600 - ALAMODE B- 1118/31661 IMaln File No. 654708 a e 3 I Inifnrm Rpniflantial Annralsal Ranott rba AU Ma27 There are 4 comparable properties offered for sale in the subject nei hborhood ranging in Pdce from $ 439,900 to $ 579,900 There are 17 le sales In fie sub'eht FEATURE SUBJECT neighborhood within The ast twelve morhth9 COMPARABLE SALE # 1 ran in in sale price from $ 405 000 COMPARABLE SALE # 2 to $ 546 000 COMPARABLE SALE # 3 Address 5009 Normandale Ct Edina MN 55436 5602 Dalrymple Rd Edina MN 55424 5008 Normandale Ct Edina MN 55436 5717 Dale Ave Edina MN 55436 proximity to Subject r. r ikG- $• 0'' s It 0.20 miles NE 0.05 miles N;, 0.41 miles W Sale Pdce Sale Price/Gross liv. Area ` ; $ 530 000 165.63 s .ft RMLS#43269260DOM 2 RML&Sd Insrrx Rcds DESCRIPTION + $Ad' bnent ,....,, _ ;< - •.. $ 405 000:,. $ 234.38 S it W " MW-ROW,,, ��.a, _.,,. n • .+, ,�,: •;r � $ 219.43 S L $ 463.000 I ' • ; Data Sources " n = s I RMLS#4197743.DOM 58 RMLS#41490926DOM 55 Verification Sources VALUE ADJUSTMENTS RMLS/Ext Ins/rx Reds DESCRIPTION +- $Ad'usbnmt RMLS/Fxd Ins/rx Rods DESCRIPTION +• $Adjustment Sales or financing Concessions Lth nv-9 ArmLth Comr10000 Arml-th Corivt) Date ofSale/Tme WsfJ3,504 1/13:cO1/13 sO1113*c01/13 s07/126cO7/12 Location Rd, Res' - 10000A•B d; N•Res' -10000 Leasehdd/Fee Simple e Sim le Fee Simple Fee Sim Is Site 504 sf 0 19166 sf 0 11326 sf 0 Yew ' N:Res N:Res N'Res N•R es Design S e 4 Level S iit I Two Story Col 0 Ranch 0 4 Level Siolit Ouality of Construction 03 103 03 03 Actual Age 055 1063 0 057 0 055 Condition C3 IC3 C3 C3 Above Grade Room Count Total lBdrms.1 Baths Toler Bdrms. Baths Total [Bdms.l Balm Total Bdrms. Baths 8 1 4 12.0 8 1 4 13.0 -5.00 7 1 3 12.0 0 7 1 3 12.0 0 Gross I. in 'Area Basement & UAW ReomskawGrade 2,610 s Jt 3,200 s .fL -14.75 1,728 s -ft. +22.050 2.110 s .fL +12,500 169Osf1352sfvvc 2nObrl.ObaOo 1600sf400sfin 1rrObr1.ObaOo 0 02rr1br1.ObaOo 1728sf1578sTwo 0 O1rrObrl.ObaOo 1356sf886sfln 0 0 Fme6onal Utility Averse Averse Averse Average Heating/Cooling GFA/Central GFAfCentral GFA/Central GFA/Central Enerav EffideM hems TvDical I Equal 0 E ual 0 E ual 0 : GaraW. ort 2 Car Attached 2 Car Attached 2 Car Attached 2 Car Attached PoWN11offleck Deck/Patio/Por Deck/Porch +2,500 Porch +5.000 Deck/Patio +5,000 • Rreplace, 2 Fireplaces 2 Fireplaces 2 Fire laces 3 Fireplaces -2,000 Oulbuildin s ` None None None None Pool • Net Ad' stment ffiotal) None None El + $ -27.2501 None + ❑ - 8 27,050 None ®+ $ 5.500 Adjusted Sale Pdce of C arables r7�''! Net Ad} ' 5.1% Gross Ad . 6.1%1$ 502 750 Net Adj. 6.7 % Gross Ad 6.7 % $ 432 050 Net Ad} 1.2 % Gross Ad . 6.4%,$ 468.500 1 Mdld H did not research the sale or transferhIstory of the sub act property and comparable sales. B not ioplain The subject is not currently under contract All of the oom s have sold and closed. See above for the 3-year history, e sub ect has not sold in the last 3 years. The sub ect has not been rested In the last 12 months. research El did DQ did not reveal any prior sales or transfers of the subject property for the tvee years prior to the effective date of this appraisal. Data Sohuc s - County Rods /MLS My research'. El did ej did riot reveal any pflor sales or transfers of the comparable sales for the year pdor to the date of sale of the comparable sale. Data Source(s) County Rods/ MLS Report the results of The research and anaIvsI9 of the Prior sale or transfer history of the sub e:t DrODertv and ca mparable sales (report additional D fTEM SUBJECT COMPARABLE SALE #1 COMPARABLE SALE #2 or sales on Page 3). COMPARABLE SALE #3 Date of Pdor Sale/rransfer Price of Nor Sale/rransfer Data Sources Cou Rcds/MLS JCountyRods1MLS County Rods/MLS County Rods/MLS Effective Date of Data Sources 01/182013 01/18/2013 01/18/2013 01/18/2013 Analysis of prior sale or transfer history of the subject property and comparable sales The sub ect is not currently under contract The subject has not sold in the last 36 month. The cob arables have not sold in the last 12 months prior to the last sale. Summary of Sales Comparison Approach See attached addenda. Indicated Value by Sales Comparison Approach $ 468 000 Indicated Value by: Sales Comparison A roach $ 468,000 Cost Approach (If develo $ 475,240 Income Approach (If developed) $ Most weight was civen was to the sales cob parison analysis as it is the most reliable Indicator of value. Incom e approach was not used due to lack of reliable data in this area. • This appraisal is made ® 'as IV. ❑ subject to completon per plans and specifications on the basis of a hypohedcal condition that The improvements have been completed, ❑ subject to The following repairs or alterations on the basis of a hypothetical condition that the repairs or akeaations have been completed, or ❑ subjectto the • followino re uired Inspection based on the aftordinary assumpgon That the condition or deficiency does'not require ire alienation or repair Sub ect appraised "as is" not sub ect to repairs, alterations Inspections, conditions. Based on a compilers visual inspection of the interior and exterior areas of the subjeot prope�y, deffned scope of work statement of assumptions and ilmitfng conditions, and appralser's certification, my (our) opinion of the market value, as defined, of the real property that Is 6 subject of this report Is $ 468,000 asof 01/182013 which Is the date of Inspection and the effective date of this apprelsal. Freddie Mac Form 70 March 2005 UAD Version 9/2011 Page 2 of 6 ramme mae rorm h uuq nharcn euuu Form 1004UAD — WnTDTAV appraisal software by a la mode, ink. — 1 -80D- ALAMODE 6- 1118/31662 Main File o . 654708271 FaiTR Uniform Residential Appraisal Report FIeM 65470827 See attached addenda. Cl)ST# PER6gc`R ;ON n4!'ie'j Ireslti fannl_Nlae O W- ,° ,�.'.� .: �u 1 Provide adequate infomiation for the lender /cunt to r icate the below cost figures and calculations. Support for the opinion of site value (surimary of co arable land sales or other methods for estimating site value The extraction method was used to determine the site value since there not sufficient land sales from the subject area. ESTIMATED ❑ REPRODUCTION OR 0 REPLACEMENT COST NEW - OPINION OF SITE VALUE--.—.-- = 171.000 Source of cost -data Marshall & Swift DWELLING 2,610 S .R $ 130.00--- =$ 339,300 Ouafi rating from cost service Average Effective date of cost data 01/13 1,690 S .Ft $ 20.00--- =$ 33 800 - Comments on Cost Approach (gross livIng area calculations depreciation, etc. — =$ Marshall & Swift cost handbook was used for the cost approacliand Gars dCa ort . 480 S .Ft @ $ 15.00 — =$ 7,200 de recration. Site value was obtained from county records and estimates Total Estimate of Cost -New _ =$ 380,300 from similar sold lots. Estimated remaining eoonomfe life is based on Less P cal Functional Extemal 100 total ars. See sketch addendum. De elation : 76,0601 =$ 76060 Depreciated Cost of bprovemn =$ 304,240 'As4v Value of Site Igmemeft —_ =$ - Estimated Ranalning Economic Ule (HUD and VA a 48 Years INDICATED VALOE BY COST APPROACH =$ 475,240 Estimated Monthly Market Rent $ X Gross Rent Multiplier = $ Indicated Value by InmmeApproach Summary of Income Approach (including support for market rend and GAM pA0G 1NFOH T QPg {I'?tiYl�eb� Is the developer/builder In control of the Homeowners' Association (HOAR OYes 0 No Uri t e s Detached 0 Attached Provide the follawing information for PUDs ONLY if the devil er/WIder is in cdrmd of the HOA and the subject property is an attached dwelling unit Legal Name of Project Total number of phases Total number of units Total comber of urdts sold Total comber of units rased Total number of units for sale Data source (s) Was the proje6t created by the conversion of existing building(s) into a PUD7 Ll Yes 0 No If Yes date of conversion. Does the prolect coidain any multi-dwelling Ldts7 Lj Yes Ej No Data Source Are the units common demerits, and recreation facilities complete? Yes 0 No 11 N describe the status of completion. Are the common elements leased to or by the Homeowners' Associatlon7 Yes 0 No If Yes describe the rental terms and options. Describe comnm elemads and recreational facilities. Freddie Mac Form 70 March 2005 UAD Version 9/2011 Page 3 of 6 Fannie Mae Form 1004 March 2005 Form 1004110 — WmTOTAL' appraisal software by a la mode, Inc. — 1-800-ALAMODE B- 1118/31663 �_ 300WVIV-M-I —11 09pow q e fq angos lesieJdde ,1VjMuW4 — Gn0001 uuaJ nnm umew J,nm wJOa Sew BIUU94 910 q e6ed I•l0Z /6 uolsJaA CIM SOOZ 4weW OL wJaj 0eW a!Ppwj •Jauuew lBuolssetaud a uI pewroped eq Him ApadoJd loafgns eql to suopjap Jo 'slpedaJ 'uopaldwoo ayl ie41 uopdwnsse mg uo suop iep Jo 'srledaJ 'uolleldwoa AJOloptspps of loafgns sl legl pesleJdde ug Jot uolsnlouoo uollgnleA PUB podau pespuddg Jay Jo siq paseq sg4 uaslwdde 941 '9 •A jeclord sy1 to luawSSSSSp pquawuoJlAUa uE se paJaplsuoo eq lou lsnw podej Ieslaidde s141 'spJeze4 IgluawuoJlnua to plait ayl UI padxe ue lou sl Jasiwdde aw esneoag •lsIxe suopipuoa vans Ja4lagm Janooslp of paJlnbei eq 146Iw legs 6upsol Jo 6upaeul6ue Aue Jot Jo lspca op 1843 suopipuoo gans Aug 101 elgisuodsai eq lou Him Jaspuddg 941 •Palldwl Jo sseJdxe 'sewigi em Jo saailueJen6 ou senew PUB suopipuoo flans ou am Shill 1841 P81unssB se4 pue 'algenleA ssal ApadoJd e4l epw pinom 1e41 ('319 'suol4Puo3 pqu8wuoJlAU8 BSJaAPE 'seouulsgns opml 'soMm snopmzeq to eouaswd e4i 'uopwopalap 's ludaJ papeau '01 pagwH lou lnq 'se gans) Apadoid 814 10 SUOINPU03 SWAPS Jo saioualapap peolsAgd luamddeun Jo ueppiq Aug to e6palmoLq ou seq Jaspuddu a4l 'podej pesp:Jdde slgi ul palels esimJa4lo ssalutl •pesfwddg 941 6uiuuaped.ul peAloAul pigeseu e41 6ulinp to Sugme aweoaq ails Jo e4 1g41 Jo ApadoJd loafgns e44 to uopoadsui eql 6uunp pamesgo (•o1a 'saouemns olxol 'salsem snopJezeq 10 aouasard e4i 'uopgJopalep 'sJpedaJ papeou se flans) suoplpuoo esieApe Aue lJodeu peslprddE slUl ul palou se4 Jaspuddu ag1 •g •mel Aq paJlnbeu espuetpo sg Jo 'puegarolaq Bpew uaaq' aA84 os op of sluawa6Ueue offloads sselun 'uopsenb ul AlJadord 0yl to peslpJdde ue Spew ails Jo e4 esneoaq lJnoo ul Jpadde Jo Auowilsel eni6 lou Him Jaslwdde e41 'b uollBulwjalap sWl 6uipJe6aJ 'papdwl Jo ssaidxa 'seelumBn6 ou sopw e4s Jo 04 'JOAaNns E lou sl JaspeJddu a4t esnwag gSiV piezeH poor peiaads peWluepl Ue ul peleool sl ells loafgns a44 to uolpod Aue Ja4lagm lJodaJ pesierddp si4t ul.pelou seq pug (secunos gpep imito Jo) Aoue6V luawaftaIN Aauafu=3 papej a g Aq paplAoJd Big le4l sdew poop aigpHBAE 841 Pouiu mm se4 Jasodde 041 •£ azis sit 10 uogeuluualap s,JaslpJddg agl 6ulpuepepun PUB AlJadoud e41 6uizIIBnsiA III JapeaJ a41 isissB of Aluo•papnloui sl 43194s aril •sluaweAwdwI Sill to suolsuawip elewproudde e4l moos of lJodaJ lesluidde sl4l ul Llcp4s g poplAcud se4 Jasierdde apt- 'Z •app a41 lnoge suoluido Aue Japuej lou Him pue eIggje4ww pUe pooh sl eM eltl legl sewnsse JasleJdde eU1 •lesluidde slgl 6uiwroped ul panlonul pigasaJ a4t 6upnp to awme ewgaaq 84S Jo e4 M11 uollewJOlul 101 ldaoxa I of app alp Jo pespeJdde 6ulaq Apeclaid eqj Jagga loetle 1E41 9Jnigu 1:6al g to sieHew Jot elglsuodsoi eq lou Him JasipiddE eLLL 't :suoplpuoo 6ulgwll pug suolldwnsse 6uimollot e1p of loafgns si podaJ slyl ul uolp oHllJao s,Jasleudde ay1 :SNOLLION00 9NI11WIl 0NV SNOI1dWflSStl dO 1N3W31tl1S •lu9w6pnf sJaspuddg ma uo paseq suoissaouoo Jo 6ulaugup 841 01 110113M s,loWw a41 apewlXoJdde pinogs luewlsnfpe Aue to lunowg JeHap apt lnq uolsseouoo Jo 6uloueup ag1 10 lsoo JBHop Jot Jgnop peoiuegoaw g uo peWInopeo aq lou pinogs luaugsnfpg AuV uolpBsup4 Jo Apadoid e4l ul panloAul ApeaJpe lou si le41 Jewel Ieuoprgpsul Aired pJi4l a Aq paJap suual 6uloueup of suoslJgdwoo Aq ApadoJd algRmdwoo eql of apew eq ueo sluougsnfpg 6u13ueup GAUB O Jo peiaads •suolloesueJl sages HE AIJErWJA ui slsoo ese4l sAed Japes e4t Souls alCIBIPIaPI NIPeaJ am sisoo esagl :eana impew g ul Awl Jo uopipeJl to gnseJ u se Wailes Aq pied Alp:uuou am yol4m Woo aso41 Ja1 AJesseoau am sluawlsnjpe ON 'suolssaouoo sales Jo 6uloueup eApgalo Jo peloads Jot apew eq lsnw selgamclwoo a4t of spJaugsnfpV,. •ales a41 qgm pateloosse auoAue Aq paNwJ6..suolssaouoo sales Jo 6uloueup enlpeaJo Jo peloads Aq paioatteun plos Apadoid a4i Jot uopgJapisuoo p:wJou a43 sluasardej solid eql (9) PUB :olaimp elgpmdwoo sluawaoueue peioueup 10 swJai uI Jo siguop -s •fl ul 4suo to suJJat ul apew sl luawAed (q) :p4jew uado a p ul einsodxo Jot pamollu si :awll olgeuoseaJ e (g) asaJelul iseq umo Jay Jo siq srapisuoo 04s Jo e4 peym uI 6uilae 4aga pug 'pasinpe Gam Jo pauuolul Hem Sig sallied 41oq (Z) :papenilow AHeoJdAt ere Ja6as pug JaAnq (l) :AgaJagm suoigpuoo Japun JaAnq of Japes wait - ellil;o bulssed a41 PUB ejup paploads a to se SIBS g to uopewwnsuoo 04181 uolugep sl4l ul go0dwl •sninwils enpun Aq paloeng loo -si solid etll 6ulwnsw PUB Alque6peImoLq 'Apueprud 6ulloe 4oea 'Ja6as pue JaAnq e4l 'apes JJgt a of alisinbei suoigpuoo He Japun' p4mw uado -pus enplledwoo a ul 6upq pino4s ApadoJd p 4olgm solid elgBgoJd 1sow eg1 :3nivA 13HNbW 40 NOI11NId30 •luapopapuai 841 si lJodaJ pesieidde si4l to Jasn papualul 041 :U3Sfi 030N31N1 •Ugppsug4 soupU11 e6uopow a Jot I. spudde s141 to loafgns e41 sl 1841 MadoJd egl elgnp:Aa of luallo /Japual Sill Jot sl-llodaJ lespidde s141 to esn papualul eql :3sn 030N31Ni •podai pesluidde si43 ul suolsnlouoo pup 'suoluldo 'slsApeue J84 Jo siq 11odej (9) pus 'saounos 91BAlid Jo/pug oll9nd elgeilaJ wait 8lep azAleue pus '/41JaA '43JeasaJ (y) 'hails e4l lseal lE woJ1 sales elggJedwoo etU to goes loadsui (g) 'pooglog46iau eql loadsui (Z) 'AliodoJd laajgns a4l to seam Jolralxa pug JoiJalul a4l to uopoodsul penSIA elaldwoo 8 uuopad (l) :wnwlulw p le 'isnw Jaspuddg 841 •suopeaHllJao pup 'suoll.puo3 6ulgwH PUB suopdwnsw .to JUBwalglS 'BnIBA 184Jew 10 uoplupap 6ulmopol 941 6ulpnioul 'wrol lJodaJ Ipspudde sl4i to sluaweilnbaJ 6ulpodej e44 PUB luewu6isse IespeJdde s141 to AUxeidwoo Bill Aq paullop si p:slpJdde si4l Jot Miom to edoos e41 :MHOM 40 3d00S •pagluuad an 'uoppziupfuo peslaidde ue ul dlgsragwaw Jo uopgonpe 6uinupuoo sdagwdde eta of paleleJ eso41 Jo Awl Aq pailnbaJ eso41 se gans 'llodaJ p:slwdde sl4l of suoriew IBIJap:w SM. suoo loo op iegl suopg3tWG3 IBUOINPPE 'JanamoH 'palyUUad lou ospe eJe suopgopipao 84103 suopalap Jo suopeoplpoW -lu8wu6lsse leslaidde slgl to Av.xeldwoo e4i uo peseq kBsseoau slsAleue Jo piesseu peuopippg Aue epnpul of >IJOm to edoas ayl puedxa Aew JasleJdde e41 -pagluued lou are suopipuoo 6upiwfl PUB suolldwnsse Jo 'snIBA 18418w to uoplupap 'Jasn papualul 'esn papUSA a4l 01 suopalap Jo 'suopippg 'suogeopipoW 'suopeoppjao pug 'suopipuoa 6upiwo pue suopdwnssg to lueuJalets 'ania jwpw to uoplupap 'Jasn papuequl 'esn papualul '>Pom to edoas 6ulmollOt e4l of loafgns sl llodei iBspeJdde s141 •loafoJd enpgradoao Jo wniulwopuoo g ul gun p Jo ewo4 paJrltv4nugw e to pesieJdde ue podw of pau6isep lou sl uuot lJodeJ sI111 •(and) >uawdo►anap gun pauugld g ul gun g 6ulpnpul :gun Noss000B Ue 44m Aliedoud gun -auo g Jo Apedoud gun -auo a to pespdde Ue lJodej of pau6lsap sl wj% 4iodaJ sI41 CIO as jESiEaddy leguapissm waomun Main I o . 654708271 Pace #6 Uniform Residential Appraisal Report FIeLf 65476827 APPRAISER'S CERTIFICATION: The Appraiser certiffes and agrees that 1. 1 gave, at a minimum, developed and reported this appralsal in accordance with the scope of work requirements stated in this appraisal report 2. 1 performed a complete visual inspection of the intddor and exterior areas of the subject property. I reported the condition of the improvements in factual, specific terms. I identified and reported the physical deficiencies that could -affect the livability, soundness, or structural integrity of the property. 3. 1 performed this appraisal in accordance with the requirements of the Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice that were adopted and promulgated by the Appraisal Standards Board of The Appraisal. Foundation and that were in place at the time this appraisal report was prepared. 4. 1 developed my opinion of the market value of the'real property that Is the subject of this report based on the sales comparison approach to value. 1 have adequate comparable market data to develop a reliable sales comparison approach for this appraisal assignment. I further certify that I considered the cost and Income approaches to value but did not develop them, unless otherwise Indicated In this report. 5. 1 researched, verified, analyzed,. and reported on any current agreement for sale for the subject property, any offering for sale of'the subject property In the twelve months prior to the effective date of this appraisal, and the prior sales of the subject property for a minimum of three years prior to the effective date of this appraisal, unless otherwise indicated in this report. 6. 1 researched, verified; analyzed, and reported on the prior sales of the comparable sales for a minimum of one year prior to the date of sale of the comparable sale, unless otherwise Indicated in this report. 7. 1 selected and used comparable sales that arelocationally, physically, and functionally the most similar to the subject property. S. I have not used comparable sales that were the result of combining a land sale with the contract purchase price of a home that has been built or will be built on the land. 9. 1 have reported adjustments to the comparable sales that reflect the market's reaction to the differences between the subject properly and the comparable sales. 10. 1 verified, from a disinterested source, all Information in this report that was provided by parties who have a financial Interest In the sale or financing of the subject property. 11.. 1 have knowledge and experience in appraising this. type of property, in this market area. , 12. 1 am aware of, and have access to, the necessary and appropriate public and private data sources, such as multiple listing services, tax assessment records, public land records and other such data sources for the area In which the properly Is located. 13. I obtained the Information, estimates, and opinions furnished by other parties and expressed in this appraisal report from reliable sources that I believe to be true and correct. 14. 1 have taken Into consideration the factors that have an impact on value with respect to the subject neighborhood, subject property, and the proximity_ of the subject property to adverse Influences in the development of my opinion of market value. I have noted In this appralsal'report any, adverse conditions (such as, but not limited to, needed repairs, deterioration, the presence of hazardous wastes „toxic'substances, adverse "environmental conditions, etc.) observed during the Inspection of the subject property or that I became aware of during the research Involved In performing this appraisal. I have. considered these adverse conditions in my analysis of the properly value, and.have reported on the effect of- the conditions on the value and marketability of the subject property. 15. 1 have not knowingly withheld any signff[cant information from this appraisal report and, to the best of my knowledge, all statements and information In this appraisal report., are true and correct. 16. 1 stated in this appraisal report my own personal, upbiased, and professional analysis, opinions, and conclusions, which are subject only to the assumptions and limiting conditions in this appraisal report . 17. I have no present or prospective Interest In the property that is the subject'of this report, and I have no present or prospective, personal Interest or bias with respect to the participants in the transaction. I did not base, either partially or completely, my analysis and/or opinion of market value in this appraisal report on the race, color, religion, sex, age, marital status, handicap; familial status, or national`odgln of either the prospective owners or occupants of the subject property or of the present owners or occupants of the properties to the vicinity of the subject property or on any other basis prohibited by law. 18. My employment and/or compensation for performing this appraisal or any future or anticipated appraisals was not conditioned on any agreement or understanding, written or otherwlse,'that I would report (or present analysis supporting) a predetermined specific value, a predetermined minimum value, a range or direction In value, a value that favors the cause of any party, or the attainment of a specific result or occurrence of a specific subsequent event (such as approval of a pending mortgage loan application). 19. 1 personally prepared all conclusions and opinions about the real estate that were set forth In this appraisal report If I relied on significant real property appraisal assistance from any Individual or Individuals In the performance of this appraisal or the preparation of this appraisal report, I have named such Individual(s) and disclosed the specific tasks performed in this appraisal report. 1 certify that any Individual so named is qualified to perform the tasks. I have not authorized anyone to make a change to any Item in this appraisal report; therefore, any change made to; this appraisal is unauthorized and I will take no responsibility for lt. 20. I Identified the lender /cllent in this appraisal report who is the Individual, organization, or agent for the organization that ordered and will receive this appraisal report. Freddie Mac Form 70 March 2005 UAD Version 9/21111 . Page 5 of 6 . Fannie Mae Forth 1004 March 2005 Form 1004UAD — 'WinTOTAV appralsal software by a la mode, Inc. — 1.800- AIAMODE B- 1118/31665 10 [Main le No. 65470g2_7755M Uniform Residential Appraisal Report 21. The lender /clierd may disclose or distribute this appraisal report to: the borrower, another lender at the request of the borrower, the mortgagee or its successors and assigns; mortgage Insurers; government sponsored enterprises; other secondary market participants; data collection or reporting services; professional appraisal organizations; any department, agency, or instrumentality of the United States; and any state, the District of Columbia, or other jurisdictions; without having to obtain the appraiser's or supervisory appraiser's (if applicable) consent. Such consent must be obtained before this appraisal report may be disclosed or distributed to any other party Qncluding, but not limited to, the public through advertising, public relations, news, sales, or other media). 22. 1 am aware that any disclosure or distribution of this appraisal report by me or the lender /client may be subject to certain laws and regulations. Further, l am also subject to the provisions of the Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice that pertain to disclosure or distribution by me. 23. The borrower, another lender at the request of the borrower, the mortgagee or as successors and assigns, mortgage Insurers, government sponsored enterprises, and other secondary market participants may rely on this appraisal report as part of any mortgage finance transaction that involves any one or more of these parties. 24. If this appraisal report was transmitted as an "electronic record" containing my. "electronic signature," as those terms are defined In applicable federal and/or state laws (excluding audio and video recordings), or a facsimile transmission of this appraisal report containing a copy or representation of my signature, the appraisal report shall be as effective, enforceable and valid as If a paper version of this appraisal report were delivered containing my original hand written signature. 25. Any Intentional or negligent misrepresentation(s) contained In this appraisal report may result in civil liability and/or criminal penalties Including, but not limited to, fine or imprisonment or both under the provisions of Title 18, United States Code, Section 1001, et seq., or similar state laws. Sl1R;:RJ11SQRY APPRAreEodERTIFI ATIO ; Ths Sup ...+..Gq eppFaIser:certaies and agrees that: 1. ['directly supervised the appraiser for this appraisal assignment, have read the appraisal report, and agree with the appraiser's analysis, opinions, statements, conclusions, and the appraiser's certification. 2. 1 accept full responsibility for the contents of this appraisal report Including, but not limited to, the appraiser's analysis, opinions, statements, conclusions, and the appraiser's certification. 3. The appraiser identified in this appraisal report Is either a sub - contractor or an employee of the supervisory appraiser (or the appraisal finn), Is qualified to perform this appraisal, and Is acceptable to perform this appraisal under the applicable state law. 4. This appraisal report complies with the Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice that were adopted and promulgated by the Appraisal Standards Board of The Appraisal Foundation and that were in place at the time this appraisal report was prepared. 5. If this appraisal report was transmitted as an "electronic record" containing my "electronic signature" as those terms are defined In applicable federal and/or state laws (excluding audio and video recordings), or a facsimile transmission of this appraisal report containing a copy or representation of my signature, the appraisal report shall be as effective, enforceable and valid as If a paper version of this appraisal report were delivered containing my original hand written signature. APPRAISER Signfitore Name Mark Hennen Company Name Name Lakewood AbDralsal Services LLC Company Address PO Box 427 Prior Lake Mn 55372 Telephone Number 9522923540 Email Address markhennen(fgmal.00m Date of Signature and Report 011242013 Effective Date of Appraisal 01/182013 State Certffication # or State License # 20594164 or other (describe) State # State MN Expiration Date of Certification or License 086312014 ADDRESS OF PROPER _TYAPPRAISED 500''Vormandals Ct Edina MN 55436 APPRAISED VALUE OF SUBJECT PROPERTY $ 468.000 LENDERICLIENT Name Reis Valuation Company Name Wells Fargo Bank N.A. - PMB0036907 Company Address Minneapolis MN 55402 Email Address SUPERVISORYAPPRAISER (ONLY IF REQUIRED) Signature Name Company Name Company Address Telephone Number EmailAddress Date of Signature State Certification # or State License # State Expiration Date of Certification or License SUBJECT PROPERTY ❑ Did not inspect subject property ❑ Did inspect exterior of subject property from street Date of Inspection ❑ Did Inspect Interior and exterior of subject property Date of Inspection COMPARABLE SALES ❑ Did not Inspect exterior of comparable sales from street ❑ Did Inspect exterior of comparable sales from street Date of Inspection Freddie Mac Form 70 March 2005 UAD Version 9/2011 Page 6 of 6 Fannie Mae Form iuu4 marcn zuuo Form 1004UAD — WnMTAV appraisal software by a Is mode, inc. —1- 800- ALAMODE B- 1118/31666 Uniform Residential Aooraisal Report Rb # 65470627 FEATURE I SUBJECT COMPARABLE SALE #4 COMPARABLE SALE #5 COMPARABLE SALE #6 Address 5009 Normandale Ct i Edina MN 55436 5615 Concord Ave . Edlna MN 55424 5415 Interlachen Blvd Edina MN 55436 5812 Bernard PI Edina MN 55436 Proodmily to Subject : 0.34 miles E 1.0.1_ miles NW 0.42 miles SW Sale Price S 0 $ ' 545.000 .. S 549 900: S 575 000 Sale Piica Gross Liv. Area S s .fL $ 264.82 !t .' $ 180.89 s .ft L ' `_€ H'0,W $ 294.87 SQ10WE ` Data Sources MLS#4328471'DOM 9 MLS#4325658'DOM 16 MLS#4313594'DOM 87 Verification Source(s) MLS/rx Rods MLSrrx Rcds MLS[rx Rods VALUE ADJUSTMENTS DESCRIPTION DESCRIPTION + - $ Ad' stmad DESCRIPTION I + $ Ad'usbnent DESCRIPTION + - $ Ad' spent Sales or Rnancing Concessions ,+� wikA�.' _ : ; Arml-th Conv5000 0 Listing Listing Data of Salome '' d sO8/12'c08/12 Active -10.90 Active -11500 Location A'B d• N'Res• - 10000A'Bs d' N'Res -10000 Leasehold/Fee Simple Fee Simple Fee Simple Fee Sim le Fee Simple Site 9,583 sf 9.148 sf 0 16,117s; f 0115.246 sf 0 Yew N'Res• N'Res• N•Res• - N'Res• Design S le 4 Level Split 1.5 Story 0 Two Story Col 0 Two Story Col 0 • Quality of Construction 03 03 Q3 Q3 AdualAge 055 064 0 049 0 080 0 Condition C3 C3 C3 C3 • Above Grade Room Count Total lBdrms.1 Baths Tot# Bdrns. Baths Total Bdrms. Baths 0 Tolal Bdrns Baths B 4 2.0 8 4 2.0 8 4 3.0 -5000 7 3 2.0 0 Gross Living Area 2,610 s .ft. 2,058 sq.fl. +13,8 3 OAO s .11 -10.75 1,950 sq.fL +16,500 Basement & Rdshed Rooms Below Grade 1690sfl352sfwo 2nObr1.ObaOo 1200sf600srwo 2rrObrl.ObaOo 0 10DOsf800sfin 2rrObr1.ObaOo 0 115Osf800sfin 2rObf1.ObaOo 0 Functional Iltilly Averse Averse Averse Avers e Heating/Coorin GFA/Central GFA/Central GFA/Cerdral GFA/Centret Energy Effdent gams Typical Equal O Equal 0 E ual 0 Garage/Carport 2 Car Attached 2 Car Attached 2 Car Attached 2 Car Attached Pordt/PatWeck DeCWPatio/POf Porch/Patio +5000DecWPato/Por Deck/Patio +5000 Foe ace 2 Fireplaces 2 Fire laces 2 Fireplaces 1 Fireplace +2,000 Outbuildings None None None None Pod None None Yes -5,000 None Net Ad' stment otal + $ *. 8,800 + - $ -31.650 + Is 2,000 Adjusted Sale Price of Co arables : NetAdJ. 1.696 Gross Ad). 5.3%11$'m 553,800 NdAdJ. 5.8% Gross Ad , 5.8%1$ 518.2 Q NetAdJ. 0.3% Gross Ad . 7.8 % $ 577,000 ReporttheresuItsoftheresearchan d an sis of the prior sale or transf istbry of the subject property and m mparable sales (report additional prior sales on page 3 ITEM SUBJECT I COMPARABLE SALE #4 COMPARABLE SALE # 5 COMPARABLE SALE.# 8 Date of Prior Sala/rransfer Price of Prior Sal rooster : Data Sources County RodsIMLS CoJn Rods/MLS County Rods/MLS Coo Rcds/MLS Effective Date of Data Sources 011182013 01/18/2013 01/18/2013 01118/2013 Analysis of prior sale or transfer history of the subject property and comparable sales Analysis/Comments See above comments Freddie Mac Form 70 March 2005 UAD Version 9/2011 Fannie Mae Form 1004 March 2005 Form 1004UAD.0C)— 'WmTOTAL' appraisal software by a la mode, Inc. — 1- 800•ALAMODE B- 1118/31667 M IMaIn File No. 654TO827 Page C..nnlomnnfal Addendum M.Un aFeznr07 Bonawer ad JORDAN MAUER property Address 5009 Normandale Ct city Edina C Hennepin State MN Zip Code 55436 Lender Wells Fa o Bank N.A. - PM130036907 • URAK : ACCrronal commenas URAR : Additional Comments Final Reconciliation This Is an appraisal completed in summary form. The Sales Comparison Approach is the most reliable indicator of value, as it reflects the actions of buyers and sellers. The cost Approach was considered but not included or considered meaningful to an existing property. There was lack of rental data to determine a value by the Income Approach. The scope of this appraisal Is as follows: The appraisal problem was defined and analyzed. The real estate was Identified by legal description, by PIi # and by street address within the body of the appraisal, unless otherwise noted The appropriate inspection type was established as set forth herein. The appraisals use, Intended purpose and function, as well as the appraisal's defined users were set forth herein as well as the appraisal's effective date. The property rights to be appraised as well as the type of value sought and the definition of the value relative thereto are set forth herein. An appropriate appraisal reporting format was determined and utilized in the analysis. The Intended User of this appraisal is the Lender /Client The Intended use is to evaluate the property that is the subject of this appraisal for a mortgage Finance transaction, subject to the state Scope of Work, purpose of the appraisal, reporting requirements of this appraisal report form, and the Definition of Market Value. No additional intended Users are identified by the appraiser. An appropriate market analysis was performed to determine market trends, market Influences, and other significant factors pertinent to the subject propertys valuation. A highest and best use analysis appropriate to the assignment type was done for the subject property. The subject propertys current zoning parameters together with its site size and location Influences were examinecialong with current uses of other properties in the area in determining the subject property's highest and best use which is set forth elsewhere herein. A physical Inspection was made of the subject property to determine the size and characteristics of the property. This inspection Is for valuation purposes and is not intended to discover defective components: The roof was Inspected from the ground only with only those areas visible from the ground being observed. Mechanical inspection are limited to an exterior visual inspection only. The appraiser is not an engineer, a heating contractor, an electrician,' a plumber, an environmental expert, nor a similar housing construction expert No detailed mechanical or structural analysis is deemed to be implied. A more detailed review of the collected data was then performed with all known relevant factors extracted and considered. Sales were examined and confirmed as closed transactions from one or more data sources having sufficient indicia of reliability for this use. Appraiser has personally drivin all comps. Data research included examination of office files, available on -line county records, the applicable area multiple listing services, interviews with local market participants (agents), interviews with county surveyor and recorder's office where supplemental information is required, Plat Systems, Inc. and other sources are deemed appropriate. Market Factors were weighted and their influences on the subject property were determined and appropriately utilized in the subject's final value analysis. All appropriate valuation methods were considered, analyzed and reconciled to form a basis for the derived opinion of value. The reasons for excluding a valuation approach, If any were excluded, are set forth in the body of this report The market sales approach to value was given complete analysis. The cost approach Is not considered a meaningful method of valuing a home of this vintage, given the subjective nature of estimating their physical depreciation. The Income approach is deemed unreliable due to insufficient rental data. PRIVAVY POLICY All client personal information is maintained so as to ensure Its Integrity, security and confidentiality in compliance with the Gramm - Leach - Bililey Act and the provisions of the Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice. We restrict access to non - public personal information to authorized Individuals with a "need -to- know" status in providing the contracted service to the client. We maintain physical and procedural safeguards that comply with Federal Standards to protect all non - public personal data obtained in the course of the service contracted for and do not disclose any such infoermation to anyone except as permitted by law. Such non - public Information may be disclosed to the client and any identified intended users of the specific appraisal, appraisal review or appraisal consulting assignment Cllents/customers have the right to limit the use (or the re -use) of the non - public personal information gathered during the course of the appraisal process. The customer may notify this firm within a reasonable time that public disclosure, the use and/or the re -use of such Information is prohibited except as otherwise required by applicable law, regulation or USPAP standard. The subject's sketch is used for representational purposes only. The subject's sketch is to comply with The American National Standard Institute process for calculating gross living area; however, due to the complexity of the subject property and the limitations of the appraisal software it is not possible to develop a blue print of the subject property. The subject's sketch is not Intended to be used for any other purpose. The subject's sketch and actual dimensions will vary The appraiser is not a structural engineer. If the lender requires a precise blue print of the subject property it is the lenders responsibility to have the building surveyed by a structural engineer. See Statement Of Assumptions And Limiting Conditions. In compliance with USPAP and the Ethics Rule, I have not provided a service regarding the subject property within the past 36 months. At the request of the client, development of a land value has been attempted by the appraiser The use of this data, in whole or in part, for other purposes is not intended by the appraiser. Nothing set forth in the appraisal should be relied upon for the purpose of determining the amount or type of insurance coverage to be placed on the subject property. The appraiser assumes no liability for and does not guarantee that any insurable value estimate Inferred from this report will result in the subject property being fully insured for any loss that may be sustained. Further, the land value may not be reliable indication of ` replacement or reproduction cost for any data other than the effective date of this appraisal due to changing costs of labor and materials and due to changing building codes and governmental regulations and requirements. The 1004MC uses the subjects - defined neighborhood, with defined parameters for square footage and sales prices. The 1004MC data was used for the one unit housing trends in this report. • URAR : Sales Comparison Analysls - Summary of sales comparison Approach All sales are located within the subject's neighborhood or from a competing neighborhood affected by similar market influences as the subject. Comparable sales are selected on the basis of nearest similarity to the subject property as to time of safe, proximity of location and similarity as to age, condition, gross living area, bedroom and bathroom count, basement, garage size and updated and upgraded features. Potential buyers in the market place would view the comparable sales and the subject equally. The market indicates that potential buyers in the marketplace mostly consider the improvements on a property rather than site size when comparing properties on city lots. Condition reflected the amount of remodeling, upgrading, amenities, additional features, and overall maintenance patterns exhibited by each property. All factors were taken into consideration, the comparable selected represent the available neighborhood sales data that were most like the subject all of the comparables were used In determine the appraised value of the subject this report and Its conclusion are an opinion of market value. Gross living area adjustments are based on the differences of above grade square footage. Adjustments applied are made on a dollar-amount per square foot basis. These adjustments were made at twenty-five dollars per square foot. Generally, the typical buyer does not differentiate between homes that are within hundred square feet of each other. No adjustments are applied In Form TADD— 9MmTOTAL' appraisal software by a la mode, Inc. — 1- 80D- ALAMODE B- 1118/31668 Sunnlemental Addendum FleNn MAIMa77 Borroxer Iad JORDAN MAUER Pro Address 5009 Normandale C t CA 0. Edina Coiiit Henne in State MN ZIP Code 55438 Lender Wells Fa o Bank N.A. - PMB0036907 MIS 13I11=10n. A separate aalusurleni may oe apprlea Ioi FOU FM ueiuw yi cuc. io aujuxuci ua aNNucu ago wow..... ...o contributory value of the Improvements, not the cost td construct Adjustments for updates and upgrades reflect updating a property has recently received. Examples are new carpet, paint, windows, furnace, roof, landscaping, etc. Upgraded features generally reflect the amount of added features Installed by the builder of newer homes. Site adjustments are based on the differences of lot size between the subject and the sales. Adustments applied are based on the contributory value of the added land, not the actual cost The construction quality adjustments recognize differences in building construction and the amount and quality of exterior and Interior finish. The age and condition adjustments consider observable differences in actual age and condition oththe comparables and the subject with reg rd to periodic routine maintenance and deferred maintenance. Adjustments for bedroom and bathroom count reflect the market reaction of importance of these features. Additional adjustments are made for heating and cooling types, garage sizes, decks, patios, porches, fireplaces, etc. Adjustments made are based on the market reaction to these features in the subject's neighborhood. We have attempted to provide 2 comparable sales that have closed within 0 L 3 months of the effective date of this appraisal. However, the sales used are the best available and reflect current market conditions. Non comparable sales that may meet the sales date criteria, would require several excessive adjustments in other areas, that could be considered misleading to the reader or the Appraisers peers. This would be in direct conflict with the Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice (USPAP) and The Financial Institutions Reform Recovery and Enforcement Act of 1989 (FIRREA). A search was made In the subject properties area/neighborhood to locate sold, pending,.and /or active comparable sales in a similar and competing area, this information will be used to estimate market value of the subject property: The subject property and comparable sales are considered to be in a similar and competing neighborHood/market I have performed no services, as an appraiser or in any other capacity, regarding the property that is the subject of this report within the three year period immediately preceding acceptance of this assignment. • URAR • Sales Comparison Analysis - Summary of Sales Comparison Approach The subject property is a 4 bedroom 2 bathroom above grade 4 level split entry home. The exterior of the subject is stucco, with a porch, deck, and a patio. The interior of the subject has maple cabinets and millwork, Granite countertops, ceramic file floors, hardwood floors, and the 3rd and 4 levels are finished with 2 large rec rooms, 1 bathroom, and a laundry room. The subject has been completely updated in 2006 with new windows, stucco, cabinets, and the bathrooms all have been updated. Adjustments were made as follows, bathroom above grade $5,000 deck -patio $2,500, porch $5,000, pool $10,000,and a fireplace $2,000. Comps 5 & 6 were active listings and were adjusted for being active based on the market analysis. When selecting comparables condition and quality were taken into considereation since the subject has been updated and remodeled which adds value in the.area. The most weight was given to comp 3 since it is similar in function, age,; and ammenities. There was no adjustment for lot size since there was no evidence a larger lot adds value in the area. There was no adjustment for age difference and the effective age was considered similar. A reasonable exposure time in the subjects neighborhood is 129 Days. Comp 2 exceeds guidelines on size difference however was used because of the lack of listings of similar homes as the subject and is located across the street from the subject and was used to bracket the subjects location near Highway 100.. Comps 1 & 4 were located on the East side of Highway 100 where property values are similar and a typical buyer would consider a similar location influence. There were 2 story homes used as comparables because of the subjects GLA, a seach was done 12 months back and there were no 4 level split entry homes with a similar GLA that sold near the subject and going outside the neighborhood could mislead the lender. All the comps used in this report had finished basements with a bathroom, therefore were considered similar and no adjustment was made. Form TADD — 'WinTOTAL- appraisal software by a la mode, hr. — 1- 80D- AIAMODE B- 1118/31669 Market Conditions Addendum to the Appraisal Report frill N.. 65470827 The purpose of this addendum is to provide the lender /diem with a clear and accurate understanding of the market trends and conditions prevalent in the subject neighborhood. This is a required fired addendum for all appraisal reports with an effective date on or aftbr Ap dl 1 2009. Property Address 5009 Normandale Ct City Edina Stale MN ZIP Code 55436 Borrower JORDAN MAUER Inetructiore: The appraiser must use the Information required on this form as tine basis for his/her concluslons, and must provide support for those conclusions, regarding houising trends, and overall market conditions as reported in the Neighborhood section of the appraisal report form. The appraiser must fill in all the information to the a derd it is available and reliable and must provide analysis as indicated below. If arty required data is unavailable or is considered unrefabfe, the appraiser must provide an oplanatiom it is recognized that not all data sources wig be able to provide data for the shaded areas below; I it is available, however, the appraiser must Include the data in the analysis. I data sources provide the required irdormallon as an average instead of the median, the appraiser should report the available figure and Identify it as an average. Sales and listings must be properties that compete with the subject property, determined by applying the criteria that would be used fly a prospective buyer of the subject property. N appraiser must explain any anomalies in the data, suhdi as seasonal markets, new consbuction foreclosures, etc. I Prior 7 -12 Months Prior 4-8 Months ..I Current- 3 Mordits Overall Trand Total # of Comparable Sales Sallied 15 15 • 8 Increas ing Stable Declining Absorption Rate otai Sees/Months 2.50 5.00 2.67 IN Increasing Stable Declining Total # of arable Active Listin s r FW - 1 :�,� i •'.A~ " f)Mffi "4„ ) =Dec In .$fatale Si Months of Housing Supp frotal Ustin s/Ab.Rate ) . 1:5' NO . in v t'a61e 5 {nc[ stn ' N2 .... ale &xllil.. gey0t161,> 31e1L eF1� j Median Comparable Sale Price Prior 7 -12 Months, Pdor 4-6 Months Ctarert- 3 Months Overall Trend 449.900 476.250 473,000 IN Increasing Stable .' Declining Median Comparable Sales Days on Market 65 11 :58 ning Stable'. Increasing Medan Co arable Ust Price s 4A71A93596Q�+ 554.500 a . nj7 Ew- Median Com arable Ustings Days on Market4tfJ1. ec ?T u'S atile1� slociiri i Median Sale Price as % of I Price 97 - 98 " "98 ® Increasing ❑Stable Decfnin .. Ye No Seller-(developer, builder, eh )paid finandal assistance prevalent? Decfnln - Stable Increasfn B#An in detag the safer concessions trends for the past 12 months (ell.; seller contributions increased from 3% to 5 %, Increasing usebf buydowns, closing costs, condo fees, options, etc.. Seller concessions in the past 12 months are between 24% of the sale I The concessions are being used for closin costs. Rates are low so not as many rate b` owns are being done with current market Are foreclosure sales (REO sales a factor in the market? ❑ Yes No If yes, explain (Inctudlirg the trends in listings and sales of foreclosed properties). Cite data sources for above Information. MLS and county records were used for the data. Also the reaftor association was for additional information Surmnarize the above bdormatim as support for your conclusions in the Neighborhood section of the appraisal report form. I you used any additional information, such as an analysis of pending sales and/or expired and withdrawn listings, to fomadate your conclusions provide both an eplimation and support for your conclusions. The statistics used for this portion of the appraisal were taken from the MLS with the parameters of similar style (homes from what would be considered the sub ect neighborhood, with similar style and other characteristics which would make them oom petinrl listings to the subject In the current market The aeneral market conditions for the subjects area is considered stable. Sales and listings slow down in the winter months and rebound dudna the sI s ' and summer. Iftihesub ctieeuNtIn acondominlumorco erative ro ct completetthe HOwin . Pm ctfJane: Subject Project Data Prior 7 -12 Months Prior 4-6 Months Current- 3 MoMihs Overall Trm Total #at arable Sales Settled ❑Increasing Stable . Declining o 'on Rate otal Sales/Months Told #ofActive Comparable Ustin s ❑ bhcreasi ?enS IBM419 Stable ❑ Declining Months of Unit Su otal Ustin s/Ab.Rate Qecfnin . r :Stable _' if 'rie�sin Are foreclosure sales (REO sales) a factor in the pro )ect? Yes No If yes, indicate the number of REO listings and ehpla n the trends in listings and sales of foreclosed properties. . Srmumarize the above trends and address the impact on the subject unit and project Si rebre Signature. Appraiser Name Mark Hennen Supervisory raiser Name Company Name Lakewood Appraisal Services LLC Comoariv Name Company Address PO Box 427 Prior Lake Mn 55372 Company Address State UcensWCertifncation # 20594164 State MN State 1.1cens6ertification # State EmaflAddress markhennen@gmail.00m Email Address Freddie Mac Form 71 March 2009 Page 1 d 1 Fannie Mae Form 1p04Ma March zoos Form 1004MC2— 'Win10TAL' appraisal software by a la mode, ine. — 1 -800-ALAMODE B- 1118/31670 Subject Photo Page Borrower riait JORDAN MAUER Property Address 5009 Normandale Ct Li , Edina Co Hennepin State MN Zip Code 55436 Len er Wells Farno Bank, N.A - PMB0036907 i Form PIC4x8.SR — 'WmTOTAL' Oprafsd software by a la mode, inc. — 14aALAMOOE Subject Front 5009 Nonmandale Ct Sales Price 0 G.LA 2,610 Tot Rooms 8 Tot Bedrms. 4 Tol. Badvms. 2.0 Location A;BsyRd; Yew N;Res; Site 9,583 sf Gaily Q3 Age 055 Subject Rear Subject Street B- 1118/31671 ME A2%r Photograph Addendum Sorrava Ilan JORDAN MAUER Property Address 5009 Normandale Ct city Edina C "Henn in State MN II Code 55436 Leidy Wells Fargo Bank N.A - PMB0036907 Bath 1 Bath 2 Basement Bath 1 Mtchen Living Room Basement Roc Room Form PHSD2— %rhTOTAV appraisal sofbrare by a la mode, Inc. — 1- 80D•ALAMODE B- 1118/31672 WaIn File No. 654708271 a Subject Interior Photo Page Bonower gad JORDAN MAUER Property Address 5009 Normandale Ct City. Edina Co Hennepin State MN Zip Code 55436 Lmda Wells Far no Bank N.A - PMB0036907 • i i Subject Interior 5009 Normandale Ct Sales Price 0 ; Gross Living Area 2,610 Total Rooms 8 Total Bedrooms 4 Total Bathrooms 2.0 Location A;BsyRd; View N;Res; Site 9,583 sf Quality Q3 Age 055 Right side of Subject Form PEMSI — VmTOTAV appraisal software by a Is mode, Inc. — 1- 80aALAMODE Subject Interior Bonus Room Subject Interior B- 1118/31673 F.M. Comparable Photo. Page Borrower Bent JORDAN MAUER Pro Address 5009 Normandale Ct Uy Edirm Comity Hennepin State MN Zip Code 55436 Lards Wells Famo Bank N.A - PMB0036907 form P104)UR — 'WrnTOTAL' appraisal software by a Is mode, Inc. — 1-800-ALAMODE Comparable 1 5602 Dabymple Rd Prox to Sub]. 0.20 miles NE Sales Pdce 530,000 G.LA 3,200 Tot Rooms 8 Tot. Bedrms. 4 Tot Batiams. 3.0 Location N;Res; Yew N;Res; Site 13,504 sf Quality Q3 Age C63 MIS Photo Comparable 2 5008 Nonnandale Ct Prox to Subt 0.05 miles N Sales Pdce 405,000 G.LA 1,728 Tot Rooms 7 Tot. Bedrms. 3 Tot. Batiums. 2.0 Location A;BsyRd; View N;Res; Site 19,166 sf Quality Q3 Age 057 Comparable 3 5717 Dale Ave Prox to Subs. 0.41 miles W Sales Price 463,000 G.LA 2,110 Tot Rooms 7 Tot. Bedrms. 3 Tot. Baftms. 2.0 Location N;Res; View N;Res; Site 11,326 sf Quality 03 Age 055 B- 1118/31674 Comparable Photo Page Borrows Berd JORDAN MAUER ' Property Address 5009 Normendale Ct Ci Ed'ma C Hennepin State MN Zip Code 55436 Lena Wei Fa o Bank N.A - PMB0036907 Comparable 4 5615 Concord Ave Prox. to Subject 0.34 miles E Sales Price 545,000 Gross living Area 2,058 Total Rooms 8 Total Bedrooms 4 Total Bathrooms 2.0 Location N;Res; Mew N;Res; Site 9,148 sf Quality Q3 Age 064 Comparable 5 5415 Interlachen Blvd Prox to Subject 1.01 miles NW Sales Price 549,900 Gross L'nring Area 3,040 Total Rooms 8 Total Bedrooms 4 Total Bathrooms 3.0 Location A;BsyRd; Yex N;Res; Site 16,117 sf Quality Q3 Age 049 Comparable 6 5812 Bernard PI Prox to Subject 0.42 miles SW Sales Price 575,000 Gross Living Area 1,950 Total Rooms 7 Total Bedrooms 3 Total Bathrooms 2.0 Location N;Res; Mew N;Res; Site 15,246 sf Warily 03 Age 080 Fbrm PICPBCCR— WmTOTAL• appraisal software by a la mode, inc. — 1- BOD•ALAMODE B- 1118/31675 FFM • Wahl File No. 6 08 Building Sketch Borrower Client JORDAN MAUER Property Address 5009 Normandale Ct cay Edina Covey Hennepin State MN Zip Code 55436 Lander Wells Farno Bank N.A. - PMB0036907 Fun SKINSM — 'V(nTOTAL' appraisal software by a la mode, inc. —1 -800- ALAMODE B- 1118/31676 32' Stairca a Bonus Room n .a 32' 62' Bedroom Bedroom IGtchen Dining 24' Bath Staircase 0 m W Living Master Bath 32' 2 Car Att Garage C! ' Master Bedroom Bedroom 30' 24' TOTIaek•^h 6/ 312 mesa I- Area Calculations Summary ;L n9 Ares °. ix..;x- a'L�i. ,. :xn '�f &w*.'WCCw4�i� 'aE��+� 7etl°n Geti•s 1 �@ LAY ,. F"t Boor 2130 Sq k 30 x 32 = 960 39 x 30 = 1170 Second floor 490 Sq ft 15 x 32 = 490 Total UvInOArea (Rounded): t 05.11 2610 sa ft , ; 2 2 car Attached D x 24 _ Fun SKINSM — 'V(nTOTAL' appraisal software by a la mode, inc. —1 -800- ALAMODE B- 1118/31676 Hie No. 65470827 UNIFORM APPRAISAL DATASET (UAD) DEFINITIONS ADDENDUM (Source. • Fannie Mae VADAppenddrD. UAD Fiel d- SpecfcStandMaationRequhements) CondlUon Ratings and Definitions C1 The improvements have been recently constructed and have not been previously occupied. The entire structure and all components are new and the dwelling features no physical depreciation. Note• Newyconstroded Impro vements Mat feature recycled orpre vlously usedmaterials and/or components can be cons /derednewdwelfts provided that the dwelling is placed on a toopercent new foundation and therecyc /edmatedafs and the recycledcomponents have been rehaNitatedhemanufactured into l &e-new condrton, lmprovgments that have not been previously occupied are not considered °new "r7 they have any signfcantphysicatdepreciation (that k, newly cons1ructeddwe0ings thathave been vacantforan extended pedodoftime wahout adequate maintenance or upkeep). C2 The improvements feature no deferred maintenance, We or do physical depreciation, and require no repairs. Virtually all building components are new or have been recently repaired, refinished, or rehablihated. All outdated components and finishes have been updated and/or replaced with components that meet current standards. Dwellings in this category are either almost new or have been recently completely renovated and are similar in condition to new construction. Note. The improvements rsprssentarelativeynew property thatis well maintained with no defenedmafnlenanceandli7tie orno physical depreciation, Oran olderproperty that has been recent/ycomp/etely renovated. C3 The improvements are well maintained and feature limited physical depreciation due td normal wear and tear. Some components, but not every major bulding component may be updated or recently rehabilitated. The structure has been well maintained. Note. The improvementis in its first -cycle ofrep /acing short-lived buiiding components (appliances, f/oorcovering4 HVAC, etc.) andis being wegmaintained. Its estimated effective age is less than 'Its actual age. ft also may reflect a property in which the ma)odly of short-lived bulding components have been replaced but not 6 the level ofa complete.renovathon. C4 The improvements feature some minor deferred maintenance,and physical deterioration due to normal wear and tear. The dwelling has been adequately maintained and requires only minimal repairs to building components/mec(tanical systems and cosmetic repairs. All major building components have been adequately maintained and are functionally adequate. Note. The estimated effective age maybe close to orequal tails actualags ft relfects'a pro oeryfn which some alike shoR- livedbm7ding components have been replaced, andsome shorNivedbmiding components are at ornear the end oftheirphysicallffe expectancy; however theysblf function adequately. Mostmfnorrepairs have been addressedon an ongoing basis resu/dng irr an adequ&lymaintafnedpropedy. C5 1 The improvements feature obvious deferred maintenance anOre in need of some significant repairs. Some building components need repairs, rehabilitation, or updating. The functional utility and overall 11v4blly is somewhat diminished due to condition, butthe dwelling remains useable and functional as a residence. Nota Some siouricant repairs are neededto the mriorovements due to the larkoladequate maintenance. ltregecm a properyin which many offts short- ffvedburid2ng components are at tha end ofor have exceeded theirphysicallde eVectancy but remain functional. C6 The improvements have substantial damage or deferred maintenance with deficiencies or defects thatare severe enough to affect the safety, soundness, or structural integrity of the improvements. The improvements are in need of substantial repairs and rehabilitation, including many or mostmajor components. Note: Substantial repairs are needed to the improvements due to the lackofadequale maintenance orpropertydamage. It reNectsa propery with conditions severe enough to affect the safey, soundness, or structural integrity of the improvements. Quality.Ratings and Definitions all Dwellings with this quality rating are usually unique structures that are individually designed by an architect for a specified user. Such residences typically are constructed from detailed architectural plans and specificadoris and feature an exceptionally high level of workmanship and exceptionally high -grade materials throughout the interiorend exterior of the structure. The design features exceptionally high - quality exterior refinements and ornamentation, and exceptionally high - quality interior refinements. The workmanship, materials, and finishes throughout the dwelling are of exceptionally high quality. 02 Dwellings with this quality rating are often custom designed for construction on an individual property owner's site. However, dwellings in this quality grade are also found in high - quality tract developments featuring residence constructed from individual plans or from highly modified or upgraded plans. The design features detailed high quality exterior ornamentation, high - quality Interior refinements, and dotal. The workmanship, materials, and finishes throughout the dwelling are generally of high or very high quality. UAD Version 9/2011 (Updated 4/2012) Form UADDEFlNEi — 'WinTON! appraisal software by a la mode, inc. —1- 800- ALAMODE B- 1118/31677 W."t Wain File No. 8 ae 9 UNIFORM APPRAISAL DATASET (UAD) DEFINITIONS ADDENDUM (Sorace: Farris Mae t/ADAppendcvD. UADReldLSpecd<c Stwdard236bn Requirements) Quality RaUngs and Definftions (continued) Q3 Dwellings with this quality rating are residences of higher quality bu0tfrom individual or readily available designer plans in above - standard residential tract developments or on an individual property owner's site. The design includes significant exterior ornamentation and interiors that are well finished. The workmanship exceeds acceptable standards and many materials and finishes throughoutthe dwelling have been upgraded from "stock° standards. 04 Dwellings with this quality rating meet or exceed the requirements of applicable building codes. Standard or modified standard building plans are utilized and the design includes adequate fenestration and some exterior omamerdation and interior refinements. Materials, workmanship, finish, and equipment are of stock or builder grade and may feature some upgrades. Q5 Dwellings with this quality rating feature economy of construction and basic functionality as main considerations. Such dwellings feature a plain design using readily available or basic floor plans featuring minimal fenestration and basic finishes with minimal exterior ornamentation and limited interior detail. These dwellings meet minimum building codes and are constructed with Inexpensive, stock materials with limited refinements and upgrades. Qe Dwellings with this quality rating are of bask: quality and lower cost; some may not be suitable for year -round occupancy. Such dwellings are often built with simple plans or without plans, often utilizing the lowest quality building materials. Such dwellings are often built or expanded by persons who are professionally unskilled or possess only minimal construction skills. Electrical, plumbing, and other mechanical systems and equipment may be minimal or non - existent Older dwellings may feature one or more substandard or non - conforming additions to the original structure Deflnfllons of Not Updated, Updated, and Remodeled Not Updated Little or no updating or modernization. This description includes, but is not limited to, new homes. Residential properties of fifteen years of age or less often reflect an original condition with no updating, it no major components have been replaced or updated. Those over fifteen years of age are also considered not updated If the appliances, fixtures, and finishes are predominantly dated. An area that is 'Not Updated' may still be well maintained and fully functional, and this rating does not necessarily imply deferred maintenance or physical/functional deterioration. Updated The area of the home has been modified to meet current market expectations. These modifications are limited in terns of both scope and cost An updated area of the home should have an improved look and feel, or functional utility. Changes that constitute updates Include refurbishment and/or replacing components to meet existing market expectations. Updates do not include significant alterations to the existing structure. Remodeled Significant finish and/or structural changes have been made that increase utility and appeal through complete replacement and/or expansion. A remodeled area reflects fundamental changes that include multiple alterations. These alterations may include some or all of the following: replacement of a major component (cabinet(s), bathtub, or bathroom ble), relocation of plumbing/gas fbdums/appliances, signthcant structural alterations (relocating walls, and/or the addition of) square footage). This would include a complete gutting and rebuild. Explanation of Bathroom Count Three - quarter baths are counted as a full bath in all cases. Quarter baths (baths that feature only a toilet) are not included in the bathroom count The number of full and half baths is reported by separating the two values using a period, where the full bath count is represented to the left of the period and the half bath count is represented to the right of the period. Example: 3.2 indicates three full baths and two half baths. UAD Version 9/2011 (Updated 4/2012) Form UADDEFlNEi — 'WinTOTAV appraisal software by a la mode, Inc. — 1- 80D•ALAMODE B- 1118/31678 WaIn File No. 8 a 0 UNIFORM APPRAISAL DATASET (UAD) DEFINITIONS ADDENDUM (Source: fannieMae DADAppendkD., UA aid- specdic Srandard&ar/onRequkemen&) Abbn vlatlons Used In Data Standardization Te)d A b. Vlatiorin909M&M1f Apg and Area, Site ac Acres Ad'Prk Adjacent to Park Location AdjPwr Ad'acent to Power Lines Location A Adverse Location & View Arml.th Arms Length Sale Sale or Financing Concessions be Bathrooms . Basement & Finished Rooms Below Grade br Bedroom Basement& Finished Rooms Below Grade B Beneficial Location & View Cash Cash Sale or Financing Concessions CtySky City View Skyline View View Ctystr City Street View View Comm Commercial influence Location c Contracted Date ! Date of Safe/Time Conv Conventional Sale or Financing Concessions CrtOrd Court Ordered Sale I Sale or Financing Concessions DOM . Days On Market Data Sources e Expiration Date Date of Sale/Time Estate Estate Sale Sale or Financing Concessions FHA Federal Housing Authority Sale or Financing Concessions GlfCse: Golf Course i Location Gifvw , Golf Course View View Ind Industrial Location & View in Interior Only Stairs Basement& Finished Rooms Below Grade Lndff Landfill Location LtdS ht Limited Sight View Listing Listing Sale or Financing Concessions Mtn Mountain View View N Neutral Location & View NonArm Non -Arms Length Sale Sale or Financing Concessions Bs Rd Busy Road Location o Other Basement & Finished Rooms Below Grade Prk Park View View Petri Pastoral View View Pwrl-n Power Lines View PubTm Public Transportation Location rr Recreational ec) Room Basement & Finished Rooms Below Grade Relo Relocation Sale Sale or Financing Concessions REO REO Sale Sale or Financing Concessions Res Residential Location &View RH USDA - Rural Housing Sale or Financing Concessions s Settlement Date Oate of Sale/Time Short . Short Sale Sale or Financing Concessions sf Square Feet Area, Site, Basement sqm SquaraMeters Area, Site Unk Unknown Date of Safe/rime VA Veterans Administration Sale or Financing Concessions w Withdrawn Date Date of Sale/Time wo Walk Out Basement Basement & Finished Rooms Below Grade wu Walk Up Basement Basement & Finished Rooms Below Grade WtrFr Water Frontage Location Wtr Water View View Wood$ Woods View View Other4praiser- Defined Abbreviations "Isi=Abhrev atlon':IVIa 'MA— "' irAM UAD Version 9/2011 (Updated 4/2012) Form UADDERNEI — 'WinTOTAL' appraisal software by a la mode, inc. — 1.800- ALAMODE B- 1 118/31679 JjF MARKWIL•ARD HENNEN FiDBOX:427:* PRIORi��.* S5370 License The Undersigned COMMISSIONEFLOF COMMERCE fbrtbe State-of NUnnosota.her0by:clortiftes.that- MARK'V6qLLARD HENNEIN PO. BOX 427' PRIOR1WEi-MU'55372. t a cpmplled -.� with . the .... ,la S.o. fth. e- Sta. tep. f.Ml m eso.ta.an. d:i. s.hem. bygcpnse.dlctransaq."tuOp3sa.9f- Memo- NUMber: 20504164 unless thls-au0mft..js-suspandecr, revoked,---crotherAiajbgailyfiwHfiatecL-T.hts-ut.ense:shafl.be.im-effect -ung AUpst3l...2014. _N:TEPPMPNYWHERR0F,.1 !mvq hpropq".69t my "noffil"upst-29, ?01.2j ... . . ............... ............ 7. Z O0mMI$Sf0ERPFC6MMM0E UriftWtaDep-arandtit-.'olCtitnnifte Pqq0ng:DI.WsI.od., 857th PlaME&s0tdI%.500. .St.-aul,MN 55161-3165 Tefoho6k (651) 28[3-6310 .Emi 7l! Scenting.Scommord6@sWto.mrt;tm WabsitmAmiftemekstateLmmus. Notes: dondming Education? QE;ffiMulmmentj= CE Raquired Hours TbUd'-App.mliket 3100 U WAR i 60:' ;Omtlnulnl,Educdl=.16.hours=,Iret-IrtWr r=r whlVdudes a 7.tmff:USPAP:oourm. 30 hours - ChIn 7g. 'Wi0quited dreactr4lbsoVerdre Woct W!j p qpUmd, A... wj " id tf, or uttINZY r-Qfn""iHCWorkItx kWI13 hififitA�Mj�pIesservIsWW Ve e� !IBW ti8,IS9Wor&-TrWiei*dQ not-qu t Ng h? bommL4c�,Siateinnus:: Form SGNLGL — WinMTAV appraisal software by a la mode, int — 1-800-ALAMODE B- 1118/31680 Wain I 654708271 a e E & 0 insurance - Page 1 NAVIGATORS INSURANCE•.COMPANY THISJS BOTH A CLAIMS-.MADEAND REPORTED INSURANCE•POUGY. THIS = POLICY APPLfE$ �TATIIOSt: CLAIMSTHAT. ARE.PIRST: MAD9AGAINSTTHE .INSUREU.-AND`_REPORTED:IN N(RITIfl.G°'T..d THE;C.6MRAWY PtJRIR'd 2HE.POLI6YPERIOO.. PLEASE.:READ :TH..IS P.OLJGYZAREFULL•Yr. REAL ESTATE.APPRAI$ERS:ERRORS AND;DMISSIONSANS.U.RANCE:POLIGY D)= C,Li4i7i4TI0N$ ; POLICY NUMBER:: PWRAL1212851V' RENEWAL ;OF: PE12RAL121285W.- 1., NAMED INSURED., Madcile�gn Z. ADDR @$S: POBON427 Pnortet� l�f 55372 3: POLICY PERIOD: FROM:. 01/09/2013 Ti7: Ol ffl •2014 12:01 A M�Sfaritletd.Tilfi9 9t the;Otidte8si0f1he 1Jeifted llil;uyed a9stated in Numt�er:2 above. 4.. LIMIT&O —U ILIV. X. �20.1t00' D�R7agesL (inf4.otjtAblliry— �aChCtat►t►: B. �', SOD:OOIf . Claim!' Ezpensa�Lirriihoftiabifdy `— Eat:li':Claim C, �p]►,Q¢p._. .fSamagesLtrnitofl lability— PolCcy ggrega?e O: g: 1: o00A0�CI0ihi: Exp�rtttt3sLJrfiitof., L'7ab0itl/- PiilfcyAggcegatb. 5 DEb.((6710LE 9ndusfvp of claii texpenses); X.A. 500 -• Each Claim 8.;;1.000... Avgtegate- 61. PREMIUM:. S 611.'00 7:. RMOACTIVE DATE: 01/0912009 (f.. FORMS'ATTACkiED: NWRALA OPB(OV11) NAV:RAW0E NNO a11). $A'+IR►L692►) t�nYRALOOSt(oz1i7 l?ROGRAMADMINISTRATOR: 1 4fiert f�atfyfiysmmce geecylua 75.Secoed Aye Seite 410r.1Veedlmre,AU- 02494- 28.76: By.Atmptancaof thlb%poiicy thet.lnsured:agrees thpt:tlie slatementS.Jh-the.Pectaradons and the.Applicadon and:any ab6birndhfs:fiere10 am:ithe'' Insured's:agreetttents-and. represerifaflons and ih t f &policy errbodie's ah';Agreernents e4d6gl efweeniha,Inspredand the: Company:: orany -ef.iisrepresentatves:retapng fbtt ls:tnsurpnee. IN-WITNESS11 ktkiOF,we. have: oausedt hspplicyfo•. hes[ gnec6yoprPresiderr tand:Secretary,- • � [Ltd ; VYri!uire --�; [EmOyMiner] [Stanley A _Galanski[: 5etxetary ?tesideisi° ..yy.� ss wzwm a NAV RAL.DEC.(0211) Page 1,of 1 !i WAd!%f Form SCNLGL — 'WiniOTAL• appraisal software by a la mode, inc. —1- 800- A1AM00E B- 1118/31681 E & 0 insurance - Page 2 7Li9 endorsement #3seffedtve 01/09/2013 forma padefYollcyk PHI3RALUM51Y leaped io.MeilrHcnuen ADDMONALJNNSMED ENDORSEMENT• TMS:ENDORSKMF-NT CHANGES TJMPOLICY ,PLEASE :READ.IT CAREFULLY: 7Liaendorsement -moMes inwrmrce provided under the fallowing.•. REAL ESTATE APPRMSER.4ERRORS AIyD OM73SIONS;iNSURANCE P.OLIC-Y. )•n �eonsidentdop ofYtio- pnmritoa .epnwged,.[tlsageeed,tbep�eaon orentlty$esig�betowis lr�nn:d;wr)er. )i rispoLegsole( yfarvicdiamlie6iil( ya. iii4fiom prowonaleervi&gpeifornvdV &.- Nowedlneared.Noeing cozfilnedin -tldeRndnr>emeatwIDseff0 oln& wetbeCompanY!$. irdtitfItnblHW.. lame gfperson ormfityp Lakewood Appraisal services I�kew9odAppiiilpel §eryfces:LLC; All otherpmvislons of Ah- pollcy:mmaln unchmgq& NAY.RAL.002,(0b11) Page 1.Af1 EEVM81 -7 Form SCNLGL — 'WinTOTAL' appraisal software by a la mode, inc. —1- 800- ALAMOOE B- 1118/31682 h',D�7I 0� M. iY��ii Location Map Borrower (lent JORDAN MAUER Property Address 5009 Normandale Ct Ci Edina Cb Hennepin State MN Zip Code 55436 Lender Wells Fa o Bank N.A - PM130036907 Form MAROC — 'WinTOTAL' appraisal software by a la mode, Inc. — 1.800•ALAMODE B- 1118/31683 IM - ' David Wi kbff 6305 Hillside Rd. MN 554316 October 7, 2013 b6bia Mangers City Clefk y c4y OP., . O - � �- §.. s 48n:�-Wt % 4, .4 Edina; MCI Re: SPkidi Asses�ffiofit' Ad&s�s':-'68'0­5--� Hillside -27, �Ar Property erty ID.- Nd.- 0511.621120028 Dear . Ms, Mapgen; My wife, jean Wikoff, and I resid& at 63O` s I . jillside Rcl.,.Edina, MN and w e are in r6edptpnotice 1 "the f the of a special assessment on our n amount of 1 A This letter shall serve as our written . objection i6 the special assessment, because the amount of the' assessment exceeds" the special benefit to the property. Call me at 612-599-7665 if you hAVe any questfdfig. Thank You. Sincerely, id Wikoff .M. - . I David Wikoff 6305 Hillside Rd. Edina, MN 554136 October 10, 2013 Debra Mqngen City . t Clerlc . Cit .of Edina 4801 — W., 50th St 9ohn a, MN 554.24 Re: Special Assessment Add:r'6ss'- 624'1 Crescent Drive, Eaftfa, MN 55436 Property ID. No. i 0511621120017 Dear Mangen: I am an attorney and have been retained by Dorothy Pool regarding the special assessment Oxiher former residence located at 6241 Crescent Drive, Edina, MN 55436. The special assessment was appkoAmat&ly in the amount of $11,0001.00. Ms. Pool sold her the residence to a Stacey Johnson on January 24, 2013. As a condition of the sale, Ks. Pool placed $16,000 in an escrow account to cover any potential assessment. Ms.. Pool currently resides in Friendship Village, 8100 Highwood Drive, Bloomington, . MN. Without notice or Authorization to my client the escrow company paid the City of Edina the full amount of the spodAlassessment claimed by the City of Edina. This letter shall serve as Dorothy Pool's written objection to the special Assessment because the amount of the messment exceeds the special benefit to the property. The City of Edina also needs to reimburse Dorothy Pool for the amount paid by the escrow c6 : mpAhY, b6eause $h6 obj6cts to amount withheld to pay the special assessment Call meat 612 -599 -7665 if you have any questions. Thank you. Sincerely, EDC-2) �� David. Wikoff cc: Dorothy Pool 201.2 Neighborhood,,- Roadway Reconstruction- Survey Result 1. How- effective was the communication you received prior to construction? Answer Options City Meetings and Open Houses Mailed Correspondence Weekly Email Update Monthly Mailed Updates City of Edina Website Comments - see below Neither Very Somewhat effective effective effective or ineffective Somewhat Not at all ineffective effective N/A I do not remember receiving any infomation prior to the start of the project. Rating Response Average Count 42 39 13 8 13 14 2.23 129 56 47 7 14 4 11 1.93 139 59 34 10 17 5 20 1.83 135 46 33 14 14 6 22 2.12 135 27 28 27 9 14 26 2.57 131 35 Comments: 1. Didn't use the website. 2. I do not have web or email. 3. Very good communications. 4. It was very frustrating for all of the Valley Estates residents that none of our feedback mattered on a project where the costs are coming directly out of our pockets. 5. 1 think they could have communicated better with the people directly involved with project. 6. The street looks great. However, the cars are usually driving between 31 - 35 mph some at 41 mph. Our lawn looks terrible.... full of weeds and bald spots. 'We had a much nicer looking lawn before. Will they be fixing it. Also George Bender said that he would be planting some trees to hide a meter box for the light signal. I have contacted him so hopefully it will get completed. Also, we have a crack in our hallway ceiling that got worse during the-construction. Will the city be fixing that? 7. 1 signed up for emails but never receivedany. Y ,I 8. Far too many of us had to stand during that very long community meeting about a year before the project. No reason we should have to stand. 9. 1 do not recall any weekly email prior to construction. The city hall meeting I attended was not satisfactory (the meeting where public comment about the project, project costs, and payment terms). 10. The mail updates seem to not give as much information on the project. 11. Do not recall receiving e-mail updates. Never use Edina website. 12. The weekly email was extremely helpful. The one thing I might recommend was to continue to remind homeowners how to subscribe to the email. Many of my neighbors never found out about or saw the emails. 13. Emails were vague. Meetings were not at convenient times. The emails gave information that was already known. 14. We moved in right before construction started, but could never find out how to get onto or contact any of the staff /or people for the project or how to get onto the -email lists. 15. Did not attend city meetings or open houses. 16. We received communications, but things frequently changed. 17. It seemed to me the meetings and subsequent plans did not take into account the majority desires of the neighborhood. We did not receive any e-mail updates and the city web site did not have this project listed at the start of the project. Also, I do not recall seeing.any monthly mailed updates. 18. The Pavement index showed that our road on Balder Lane was in good condition. What a waste. The current new road looks worse than the old road. In addition, the neighborhood did not want the sidewalks. The - sidewalks around Creek Valley Elementary are not kept up, and in bad condition. Why would the city create more sidewalks if they can't keep up with the old sidewalks. _. 19. City meetings and open houses are pointless because it is clear that the City has made up its' mind and is simply going through the motions and charade of listening to the people. 20. The information from the meeting we attended turned out to be incorrect as to the cost to residents for the project. 21. 1 was disappointed that we did not learn two years in advance that our street was going to 'be replaced. We would have postponed some repairs had we known. 22. Looking back, "you don't know what you don't know "; hence, there are questions I would have -asked if know what I know now (see below). 23. Did not go to meetings or use website 24. The rudeness of our mayor to one of our.citizens was totally inexcusable and unacceptable. 25. We were thoroughly informed throughout the process. 26. 1 read the mail and attended one meeting on behalf of my 95- year -old mother. I felt confident in explaining the project to her. K 27. Info re: Cost of project went from 6,000 to 12,000 and up to 20,000. 28. 1 was sorry to see what the heavy machinery did to the culde sac on Warden. gauges and cracks where it used to be in rather smooth condition for walking. 29. The letters were very poorly worded. After being on a committee to discuss how to make them better there was no change. They were filled with jargon and not understandable. Also there was false information and the City has no credibility anymore as far as I can tell. 30. The city meetings were completely ineffective because the city council had already made up their mind before the meeting began. Also, the projection of the cost was much different than the actual cost of the project which is good that it was lower, but when planning financial it is important to have an accurate number. In addition, more leg time would help families plan for this large amount rather than taking out a loan with the city. Our project had been moved up in the planning so we had less time than we most which was frustrating. I also did not appreciate that the reason that the intersection of kent and warwick was changed was so that a developer could demolish a home and build a large ridiculous home and then double the front yard because of the intersection change. The house does not fit with the neighborhood and it ruins the privacy of the homes around it because of its size, it also causes drainage issues. 31. 1 felt like it was handled great! 32. Strange letters, mentioned things would happen (like a meeting!) that never happened and was never scheduled, very misleading and even untrue information, really dropped the ball. 33. Need help with your communication as i was screwed! 34. We bought our house the week prior to construction start so the above questions are not applicable to us. 35. We are out of town but manage the affairs of our parents in Edina so we were not around for the Open House. 3 2. Flow effective was the communication you received during construction? Comments: 1. Didn't use the meetings /open houses or the website. 2. Excellent communications. 3. 1 do not have a computer at home. I need everything mailed. 4. Need more communication on what roads or which sides of the streets wouldn't be accessible..' This was not provided on a daily or weekly basis. 5. Some of.the correspondence that we received seemed to arrive on short notice - either the same day or just a day in advance. It would be nice to have a little more notice on days when water is going to be completely shut off, etc. 6. George was phenomenal at communicating. 7. Not sure I received monthly info but did get correspondence. No emails even though I had signed up. 8. The correspondence during the project was rather vague in terms of timing of activity. Particularly when the street demo and paving activity finally took place on our street, on several occasions I was compelled to email the project manager to gain clarity on what was actually happening and when. Thank goodness I did not have any events planned at my home in the fall. 9. only marked apply 10: The weekly emails were a great way to communicate! 11. Do not use Edina website. Was not on weekly e-mail. 12. Never knew what was going on, when street would be closed or what exactly was occurring under the ground. 13. Weekly emails were often inconsistent with what actually took place. 14. Did not attend meetings L, N/A I do not Neither Not at remember Answer Options Very Somewhat effective Somewhat all receiving Rating Response effective effective nor ineffective effective any Average Count ineffective information during the project. City Meetings and Open 23 27 16 4 15 41 2.54 126 Houses Mailed Correspondence 48 46 9 4 10 15 1.99 132 Weekly Email Updates 73 29 5 6 8 13 1.74 134 Monthly Mailed Updates 41 38 18 6 7 22 2.09 132 City of Edina website 25 27 24 5 16 31 2.59 128 Comments - see below 31 Comments: 1. Didn't use the meetings /open houses or the website. 2. Excellent communications. 3. 1 do not have a computer at home. I need everything mailed. 4. Need more communication on what roads or which sides of the streets wouldn't be accessible..' This was not provided on a daily or weekly basis. 5. Some of.the correspondence that we received seemed to arrive on short notice - either the same day or just a day in advance. It would be nice to have a little more notice on days when water is going to be completely shut off, etc. 6. George was phenomenal at communicating. 7. Not sure I received monthly info but did get correspondence. No emails even though I had signed up. 8. The correspondence during the project was rather vague in terms of timing of activity. Particularly when the street demo and paving activity finally took place on our street, on several occasions I was compelled to email the project manager to gain clarity on what was actually happening and when. Thank goodness I did not have any events planned at my home in the fall. 9. only marked apply 10: The weekly emails were a great way to communicate! 11. Do not use Edina website. Was not on weekly e-mail. 12. Never knew what was going on, when street would be closed or what exactly was occurring under the ground. 13. Weekly emails were often inconsistent with what actually took place. 14. Did not attend meetings L, 15. There was no communication formm the city,. the only >way we ,learned.,anything was talking to the - project supt. 16. The weekly email was very very-well done. I really appreciated feeling, informed -about what was going on. 17. Very deceptive. The pavement index was near 50 (no repair needed), the neighborhood petitioned and 90% said no. The building department said our neighborhood fit nicely into their budget. 18. The project leader, carter, was very good about keeping us up=to -date and was amazingly responsive when we needed him in various situations! 19. 1 didn't sign up for e-mail updates - I got info elsewhere. 20. Again, did not go t meetings or use website 21. WE were kept informed. 22. E -mail communication was the best! We really knew what to expect. 23. At least 3 times a construction worker knocked on the door before 7:30 a.m. to tell us to get our cars out of the driveway immediately. We had not gotten notice the day before that this would be happening. 24. See above - lousy all around. 25. Adequate 26. Weekly or recurring -emails -work really well. 27. Again, wonderful 28. What was stated and what was actually done were often times not the same. 29. Email updates were great 30. Don't get answers at city meetings. you don't care ;about:what people say in the,ne.ighborhood. 31. We are out of town but manage the`affairs`:of our parents in Edina;so }we 'were,not`around,for the Open House. 5 3. The project is funded between City Utility Funds (approximately 60 percent) and Special Assessments (approximately 40 percent). Were the specific project costs explained to you in a. manner that you could understand? Answer Options Response Response Percent Count Yes 41.6% 57 No 23.4% 32 Unsure 8.8 % 12 1 did not attend the Open House. 26.3% 36 Comments 35 Comments: 1. We were out of town on vacation. 2. 1 understood the information presented but the cost was a moving target. Not sure how we couldn't get more accurate cost information. Asking residents to sign off on an estimate and then agree to pay 50 -100% more doesn't seem reasonable. We haven't seen the bill yet - hoping to be pleasantly surprised but expecting something different. 3. Very unclear, kept changing. 4. The costs were explained to us, but we still didn't see the need for the project and our feedback didn't matter. 5. Unclear as to why such things as street lights (replacement of the old and frequently defective lighting) were positioned as Special Assessment items. Later, as the project was nearing completion, the City reversed that position -for future projects but now we continue to deal with ineffective and unsafe street lighting throughout the Valley Estates neighborhood. 6. 1 did not realize that SA's only accounted for 40% of the project's cost. Thus, I guess the project was more expensive than realized. 7. We still, months later, do not know how much we will be charged. Only estimates were given. Also we are unsure about the changes in funding these projects, if any, made by the City Council. Continued communication in this would be appreciated 8. Yes. However, it has come to my attention that we are now paying for the sidewalk by the school. That was something that wasn't explained up front. Shouldn't that be an expense the school pays? 9. Still think the city should assess all residents in the City of Edina since all streets are or will be in need ofrepair. Easier to make small payments than $12,000- $16,000. 10. 1 attended 2nd meeting 11. What could be effective is a one - sentence statement like: You live at XXX, your cost will be $YYYY and billed this exact way QQQQ at this exact time or times BBBB. 12. 1 believe I understand the funding mechanism but I do not agree with its structure. 13. It was confusing and it seemed to change depending on the meeting:( 14. 1 am concerned about us being assessed for the "school sidewalk ". The city now decided not to charge residents for sidewalks after ours was completed. Would like to see this issue retroactive to include the school sidewalk. Thank you. 15. This is the first I remember hearing that 60% of the funding coming from City Utility Funds. That's a good thing. 16. Estimates were off by about 50 %. Started out at 6 -8 Thousand but ended up over 12 thousand !! 17. 1 do not understand why we are charged for sidewalks that are on school property that the members of the neighborhood do not use, but are used by the school and families to drop off and pick up kids. 18. I'm still not sure of the final assessment 19. 1 still am unsure what the special assessments will be. They kept changing their mind as to how much it would cost if the city did something vs. us finding our own plumber to do the work. 20. But we still haven't gotten the final assessment amount so this is a difficult one to answer right now. 21. The Edina building department's presentation was poor, reiterating irrelevant facts that droned on forever to bore the audience and force their agenda down our throats. 22. 1 assume with the new city council decision we will pay less. 23. COSTS CHANGED ALL THE TIME STILL NOT SURE WHAT THEY ARE 24. Some communications indicated the full project was paid via special assessment; other communications that it was a split. There remains some confusion over how our project is handled now that Edina changed the way is assesses for projects. 25. It appeared to be explained in a manner that would cause a response that could be interpreted used as a gauge for the city to figure out how much our neighborhood would be willing to tolerate in Special Assessments. 26. Final project cost unknown to us as yet we only had an estimate 27. We were mis- informed and talked down to however. And frankly, lied to, about the costs. 28. Where are our tax dollars no other city charges this much for an assessment I didnt want curves the road is that great 29. Info changed several times.... amount should have been settled sooner... financing model should be changed so it doesn't rely entirely on assessments 30. Costs changed drastically. 31. Yes but there was confusion about the part we pay for and when the city bid that portion it came back less than us going on our own. Caused issues. 32. According to the newspaper clipping I have, each homeowner will pay about $4,500. 33. Explanation was clear although at times self serving. 34. Screwed. my house is worth 260,000 and i will have and an assessment of 17K or a 6% assessment on my house. thanks Edina. fyi i don't live in the county club area and make the money they do. 35.. We are out of town but manage the affairs of our parents in Edina so we were not around for the Open House. 7 4. Did you find the Open House to-be beneficial in answering your questions or addressing your concerns? Answer Options Response Response Percent Count Yes 28.7% 39 No 22.8% 31 Unsure 5.9% 8 1 did not attend the Open House. 42.6% 58 Comments 19 Comments: 1. Neighbors filled us in. 2. Several people in my neighborhood didn't feel we needed the roads redone. It was clear the decision had already been made. 3. Yes, but it seemed to be more of a sales pitch to convince the residents of what was already decided. 4. Many including myself had questions about the initial cost info and what was presented at the meetings. 5. none of my concerns were addressed (funding mechanism which is broken). The meeting was an opportunity to vent and observe our city leaders in 'action'. 6. But at times I still was unsure on some of the next steps in the project. 7. 1 always find those -types of formats to be a difficult way to get specific questions answered 8. They didn't listen to the desires of the majority. 9. Only because we-stayed after to ask specific questions. 10. Somewhat 11. The pavement index the was completed by engineers showed that a new road was not needed, and the Edina Building Department said they wanted it since it fit in their budget. 12. After construction completed, I wished I had asked about all the stuff that could be put on my property; I didn't know to ask the questions. 13. they were very informative and answered all questions. 14. Somewhat. The Open Houses, again appear to be used as a gauge of sentiment towards a direction the city has already chosen. More of a pitch session disguised -as Citizen Input. 15. Somewhat - some answered, some not. Wayne Houle's manner is awful - condescending at best. We are not stupid! 16. 1 do not feel that concerns were addressed 17. Not so much, degree of care taken and concern shown in OUR neighborhood was much..less than in more wealthy neighborhoods. We got-the second rate treatment all the way through from quality of work to care re landscape damage to responsiveness. 18. Out of town M. 19. We are out of town but manage the affairs of our parents in Edina so we were not around for the Open House. 5. How effective were the crews in working to minimize your level of inconvenience during the project? Construction: Phase Neither .t r Answer: Options Very Somewhat effective Somewhat Not at`aff' Rating = " Response effective effective nor ineffective effective Average; Count:, ineffective = 43% 33% 7% 9% 8% 2.07 133 6. During construction, did you know the name of your City representative? Answer Options Yes No If "yes," name of City representative: If "yes," name of City representative: 1. Aaron Kuznia - He did a good job! 2. Aaron 3. Don't remember. 4. Jeff 5. Jeff 6. Aaron 7. kept in correspondence 8. Aaron Kuznia Response Percent 50.4% 49.6% 7 Response Count 69 68 56 9. For us George Bender was a great representative. 10. Can't remember his name now! 11. now forgotten 12. 1 cannot remember that was a year ago. 13. Jeff Frahm 14. Aaron Kuznia 15. George 16. 1 think we had to dig up the info initially however. Not sure if we missed a correspondence where he was introduced or what, but didn't know who- he was initially. Jeff Frahm 17. Andrew Plowman ? ? ? ? ?? 18. Don't remember now 19. Aaron 20. Carter Schultze 21. Aaron Akuznia -- Deserves a "star ". 22. 1 can't remember -the project manager's name, but it was sent to us several times (via email and letter). 23. Jeff Pfram ( Spelling ?) 24. George 25. Jeff Frahm 26. Ploughman 27. Don't remember now 28. Have since forgotten 29. 1 did a year agobut can't remember for sure now. Maybe Brandon ?? 30. Can't recall his name, but he was excellent and very responsive. 31. Carter 32. Can't remember now. 33. Aaron 34. AARON 35. George 36. Aaron Kuznia 37. Aaron Kuzio 38. sorry, I forgot his name, but very helpful! 39. Aaron 40. arron? big blonde guy had his cell # 41. 1 have forgotten but he was great. Terrific. 42. Aaron 43. Don't recall now. 44. what is a city representative? 10 45. aaron k. 46. 1 can't remember it now but it was a strange name, .he,was the managerfror the company and I did call with questions and concerns 47. Andy something 48. 1 don't recall, but he introduced himself via email. 49. Don't remember anymore 50. Carter from SEH and of course Wayne Houle 51. can't remember now 52. Carter 53. Cannot Remember at this time but he was good- Viking Hills 54. 1 think he was Carter from SEH. 55. george bender 56. don't remember the name now 7. During construction, aside from weather - related delays, did the crew provide you with ample notices of water shut -offs, driveway access;: etc.? Answer Options `Response _ Response ; Percent' Count Yes 69.6% 96 No 24.6% 34 Unsure 5.8% .. 8 Comments 35 Comments: 1. Driveway access crew did not give advance notice. 2. The work crews were very accommodating. 3. Water shut off was not well communicated.. When.we.got notices, the construction was often delayed or modified and several times we were not even informed. Only to find we, wouldn't have water for the next 8 hours - that was amavoidable challenge. 4. We were not notified in advance every time the water was shut off. 5. It would have been helpful to have access to street-- via-one way during the project to.make fora safer driving during the construction phase. We were told we would have daily updates via notes left at the door to inform when streets would be blocked - -this didn't happen. 11 6. There was a day when they created a 3 foot high berm blocking my driveway for whatever they were doing that day. received no advance warning of this, though they must have known at least the day before that they would be doing this work. I was out on a bike ride, so was not home when they knocked on my door to say they were about to do this. Thus my car was in the garage, not accessible. I could have easily moved it out ahead of time had I been given a little more notice.This was not during one of the weeks when we were warned to move our cars out-to the frontage road. 7. If I recall correctly, the first water shut off was a little short on notice, but notice was great after that. 8. 1 had no advance notice- my gas would be shut off. This was a huge inconvenience when I got home from work at 8pm. Once the water shut -off notice was stuck to my garage door, rather than my front door. As a result I had to finish my shower with bottled water. 9. And these were often provided ON THE SAME day as the issue, and even then changed that day. I work evenings, and at times woke up at 10 AM (due to working until 3 AM), finding a notice on the door saying my driveway-access was limited that day after 9 AM. Surprise! 10. The composite of notices: emails from the city( ?) project manager, doorknob notices (which sometimes blew off doors) and mailed notices resulted in a complicated communication stream for homeowners. 11. My car would have been stranded in the driveways had my neighbor had not told me about the driveway tear out. 12. Except for one time they put something on my door later in the evening and I was unable to get out of my driveway the next Sometimes notice was only hours prior. I work night shift so I would be asleep when notice was placed in the AM and shutoffs would occur in the PM and I wouldn't know. Same with cutting off driveway access 13. Sometimes notice was only hours prior. I work night shift so I would be asleep when notice was placed in the AM and shutoffs would occur in the PM and I wouldn't know. Same with cutting off driveway access 14. Most of the time ....a few days we were "surprised" to learn we had no water. 15. there were times that they said they would be at our house and didn't show up and then there were times they didn't give us amp I don't live in the immediate area so I was not impacted by no -water or driveway access.le time to change schedules less than 6 hours notice; very inconvient 16. 1 don't live in the immediate area so I was not impacted by no -water or driveway access. 17. Did not receive hang tag on door when water was turned off. 18. We recieved several shutoff notices (upwards of 8) but mosdt were false alarms, meaning we were told of the shutoff but the shutoff never occurred. Left us feeling they were crying wolf. 19. There was one time we received no notice of losing driveway access - -we were stuck home: until crews came and created a way to get out. 20. No, our property was not accessible without notice! 21. The crew was wonderful and hard working! 22. Though if there's any way to have more lead time about water shut -off, that would be helpful. 23. Aaron was awesome!!! Very efficient! He was on site everyday, answered questions and communicated what we could expect in the next day or 2, by email - glad he was our Rep! The crew was very friendly and courteous! 24. usually but not always - trouble getting water turned back on - delayed until almost 6:00 pm 25. We were kept well informed 12 26. City ought to have given day time parking for residents some thought. Tracy can't be parked on, neither could Westridge or other blocks since all being -done at the same time. 27. As stated above, there were days they would,knock on the door before 7:30 -a.m. to tell us to get out. We had no prior notice of that and it disrupted our morning schedule as far as getting ready for and going,to-work. 28. They notified ,but often did not follow what they told usw. 29. times they left our -gate open and our dog got -out because they did not give notice that they had been in the yard 30. ONCE THERE WAS NO ADVANCE WARNING TO ME. 31. they did a good job. 32. one night notice wasn't enough. And then they change the schedule without telling you. 33. Except for the very start of digging in front of our driveway, after than very good communication 34. No they did not. About 15 minutes notice or less re driveway access and street exit. 35. worst experience i ever had. Waste of a great summer. Project took-way to long, dust, dirt everywhere. 8. During any phase of the project; -did you--experience. any conflicts in dealing with the project? Answer Options Response Response Percent Count Yes 41.3% 57 No 50.0% 69 Unsure 8.7% 12 Comments 55 Comments: 1. 1 Our driveway was cracked. 2. When we could not park in our driveway - cannot walk very far! 3. No one likes the inconvenience of this type of project. No one wants to pay the assessment for streets that don't really appear to be that bad. Neighbors got crabby with the inconvenience and contractors did some poor quality work in the neighborhood that had to be corrected ... that only made things worse. I expected more updates or work to be done to mandate new, streets but the utility work was very minimal and may have been easily completed,without the streets. The big gain for us was the water shut offs, but it didn't seem to be a problem for us in the previous 15 years ... so really seemed like a expensive resident funded resurfacing. 4. The crews were very nice, but often would work in multilple spots that -would block both entrances /exits to our neighborhood. 13 5. Clarity on certain issues became problematic throughout the project. It sometimes appeared as though the responses to our questions had either not been encountered in previous similar projects or that the City did not have a precedent or position established as to how to deal with certain issues. 6. Could not get out of neiborhood to get to work multiple times 7. Early morning noise - called a few times to discuss the true start time. Trucks running non -stop. 8. How do you define "conflict "? with the city, with the crew, with carrying on one's normal life? 9. parking when my driveway wasn't accessible 10. Yes, the crew damaged our driveway. The crew was not carefully and drove trucks on fresh concrete damaging curbs and had to be redone. Still pointed out damaged and said asphalt would cover the damage but the damaged concrete is visible. The asphalt at the bottom of the apron is higher and it makes it difficult to clear snow and creates a tripping hazard. 11. See above comment 12. The crew that came through did a pretty rough job of cutting our driveway concrete and went -ahead an poured new concrete up against it. We brought it to the attention of our city rep�and it was redone the next day. 13. They did not take responsibility when they damaged property. 14. The painting of our house could not be completed til this spring. Very frustrating as their was too much dust and dirt in the air. 15. see above 16. One day unable to get out, notified too late. 17. 1 was fortunate in my family's personal physical mobility and lack of significant events at my home during: the street tear up on Richmond Drive. We were at the end of the project and there was considerable delays (not weather related) at the end which resulted in work barely completing before snow flew. 18. The grass was damaged by the equipment and not restored 19. When they changed the project from sodding to seeding. 20. See above -I did find someone who was kind enough to come and backfill it for me so I could get out and go to work 21. The end of my driveway is all messed up. The people laying the curb cut the end off too close and now the radius from the apron is actually in the drive way. 22. There was damage to the drywall, ceilings inside of our home as well as the seals on our windows due to the constant pounding on the ground. This pounding sent shock waves through the ground which damaged our home. 23. My sprinkler line was ruptured 24. My sprinkler line was ruptured 25. returning our yard to its original form 26. the sod they installed was NOT being watered-and I called three times to tell them it was going to die .... guess what it died. 27. Yes, when we started to ask questions to the contractors we would get conflicting information w what was happening and what we needed to do or when we needed to be home. 28. Blocked roadways due to trucks /vehicles parked on both sides. 29. They still haven't fixed my sprinkler head 30. Water issues in my basement, erosion of driveway. Evacuated when the hit a gas line outside my house. 14 31. Late nights. It was very clear there was to be no construction activity past 9:00 pm but there were more than one occasion that the crews worked well past that time frame. 32. removal of apron was not satisfactory 33. People said they would be dong work and we needed to be home and then they wouldn't show up and this happened more than once. 34. There were instances when I was unable to get out of my driveway. But they were short- lived. 35. 1 found it interesting that the city would give us a survey, but then do what they wanted to do "in the best interest of the city" instead of what the neighborhood overwhelmingly wanted. Why bother with the survey or the microphones at the city hall meetings. Just wanting us to feel like we've been heard? Hmmm... 36. Sprinkler system and pet containment were disrupted but eventually repaired for us. 37. The fire hydrant is not within the Edina Fire Department specifications, and has not been corrected. My sprinkler system was broken and I had to fix it, and pay for it. I had to get a new driveway. 38. The crews cut my cable line and I had trouble getting it back on line. The City rep was very helpful at problem - solving and getting the subs to take responsibility for it. 39. at one point, i found that i couldn't get to the driveway, and someone had a pile of dirt moved so i could drive in. 40. 1 don't have a basement sump pump or roof drain tie -in for my property (nor do neighbors), so why all the drainage line work, joint, cleanout, etc. on my property? 41. All went well and most of the neighbors were also pleased. 42. My mother whose home was affected by the reconstruction; declined and died during the project. Both city employees and construction crew members were extremely helpful both to our family and to the people from hospice. They were available when we had questions, helped us navigate a way to and from the house a number of times, kept us informed, and cooperated by avoiding work on her corner when we had a family gathering following the memorial service and later when we had a 1/2 day sale. I have nothing but positive things to say about how the project was handled. 43. Water shut -off received same day. 44. My existing drivway and sidewalk had rebar, I had to provide it for the new pours. My depths were 8 and 6 inches, now they are less. 45. Water was turned off (w /my knowledge) but not turned on again when they left for the day. Also, when they installed a pipe they dug up the yard and after they were done, did not replace the grass. 46. There were several reports around the neighborhood of run ins with the Front End Loader driver, but she was a bit accommodating to the locals later in the Summer. But again she worked her ass off like no one else. The Bulldozer driver was a bit gruff and unyielding but again, if I had to drive that loud, rumbling, nerve racking piece of shit around all day do I would be a complete and total belligerent ass by the end of the Summer too! 47. We have a special needs child, who needed access to the street, and the city was very accomodating. 48. cut wires multiple times 49. See 7 50. Sometimes off -site parking was difficult to find. 51. Sump pump hook up was a little confusing on timing, but it was resolved 15 52. children nearly hit from equipment, bobcats nearly backing into my vehicle, trucks blocking the street access, crews throwinglarge concrete blocks in yards, sod crews completely missing some areas, etc., etc. 53. not sure what this question means - there was damage and unresponsiveness but not conflicts third rate quality concrete work, sidewalk damage, tree damage, unfinished business, project still incomplete 54. Irrigation 55. 1 requested a longer slope for the end of our driveway so that we would not get ice dams as we had in the past, and they redid it. 9. What aspects of the project process did you like? 1. The finish! Good communication. 2. None. 3. NONE. 4. 1 feel project went well - of course there were minimal times of inconvenience but all in all I'd give them an A +. 5. Advance warning 6. Fixes to sprinklers and dog fence were repaired as promised 7. Project Lead and crew were very helpful and responded to concerns in a timely manner. 8. bike lane and slower speed 9. Friendly crew and project manager. 10. Considering the scope of the project, it was completed in a relatively short time frame. Having said that, the weather cooperate extremely well in 2012 and this spring /summer may have caused significant delays that we were able to avoid last year. 11. An 12. The finished project looked great. However, it was finished so late in the season that the suggested watering schedule could not be fully accomplished prior- to bad weather setting in. 13. New sidewalk on Creek - Valley is greatly appreciated and well used. Underground storm -runoff tie -in; a big improvement. Maintained access to driveways. Replaced sod, eventually. 14. it was relatively quick. The crews worked hard, long hours and made visible progress daily. 15. The street needed to be fixed and it looks quite nice now. 16. Aaron Kuznia was excellent... prompt, attentive, professional 17. The workers generally tried to make it as unobtrusive as they could. 18. George the head guy is really good to work with 19. 1 thought the crew was very curious and professional for the most part. 16 20. Did not like the project from start to finish. 21. The street is quieter just wish the police would enforce the posted speed, limit. 22. Mailings were informational. If [did have.a question, l.called =and it was: answered to my satisfaction. 23. 1. Sidewalks were not added. 2. nothing else 24. Excellent work done, very.nice result. Fantastic fix of all the driveways impacted. The city listened to our idea about no curbs. Water impact minimal. Noise level acceptable. Friendly crews. 25. Really? 26. communication plus Aaron was around every day or so 27. n/a 28. None 29. The design of the new street. 30. Not much -It was a huge inconvenience to say the least -The people that worked on the project were very nice and respectful EXCEPT for one woman crane driver that drove much to fast in the neighborhood and did not care who was in her way!H 31. Final product 32. The street looks very nice (narrowerbut-nice). 33. None 34. 1 appreciate.it is done. I like the lower, speed= limit =to protect the :school =age kids,. 35. That we have new road, new drainage,= new -fire- hydrants 36. the construction crew- ,was�'respectful; very:.communicative, .worked withe our'special needs' pleasantly and timely, went the 'extra mile' when heeded, and kept-things' clean_;and rubbish free:" 37. Nothing. 38. was not in favor of project but was- handled well 39. the workers were polite (aside from the dog one oUthe workers stole a block away) 40. Good communication from start to finish. 41. None 42. The ability to drive through the site to reach Vernon from Benton. 43. The workers were great with my boys as long as we kept a safe distance we got to watch the trucks in action! The guys even explained a few things a few times they were nice. 44. New road is nice. Sidewalk needs repair on Tracy and Hawkes on east side of road. 45. None. 46. None. 47. Posting of detour routes 48. really nothing. as expected it was inconvenience after inconvenience 49. The open, friendly attitude of the crews handling the project. Willingness to answer all questions asked. 50. None 51. tyhe project supt (George Bender) was a great communicator. 52. None 17 53. Nothing 54. Seemed to be well- organized. 55. The actual crew and workers. They were marvelous all around. 56. The construction workers were very courteous, paying attention when I needed to get out of Hawkes Drive and on to Tracy. 57. Nothing, a huge waste. 58. The end. 59. i liked that the city had a representative- available to the residents. it made things smoother than i thought possible. 60. The professionalism. 61. accommodated our wedding plans 62. The couirtesy of the construction crews in allowing and facilating my use of the street. 63. CONTRUCTION CREW 64. The effort at communicating to the residents!. 65. Safety appeared-to be important at all times. I was pleased that contractor kept watering sod rest of summer /fall. 66. Well done. Good work crews and great communication from the city. 67. All of the construction crews were very friendly and very accomodating. Hats off to George Bender and his crew. 68. Communication was very good. The workers did the best they could to allow access to our home. Very professional all the way around. 69. The communication from Aaron. In person, by phone, or email, always accessible. The friendly, hard working crew, keeping the road open for daily traffic. 70. Aaron's,prompt response to the few problems we had 71. Being kept informed during the entire project. 72. The city worker, too long ago to-remember his name, was very professional and helpful. His name and phone # was on all of the emails and written mailings. Jeff ? ? ?? Caucasian male, in his 30's ? -- he was perfect for dealing with the public. 73. Crews were respectful mostly. One man though would not take NO as an answer from my wife on access to our house. 74. 1 liked the communication and attentiveness of our project leader. 75. Always informed and excellent response to questions. 76. Nothing. 77. Always informed and excellent response to questions. 78. Our special needs were tended to. 79. The finish. 80. Good communication and reaction to our individual concerns 81. road looks good 82. friendly workers. keeping us informed, weekly updates 83. Got some pretty rocks. 84. none We didnt want to go through iy 85. When it was over 86. Strong Effort To Keep Us Informed. 18 87. Weekly a =mails and twitter updates 88. NONE OF IT PARTICULARLY. IT DISRUPTED MY SUMMER. 89. we worked with a city guy who helped us with our driveway ... very helpful 90. 1 have always wanted to watch a construction project. I absolutely loved it. The workers could not have been nicer or more accomodating. One even offers to carry my groceries from my car to my house for me. 91. The result is great. 92. End result looks great, but I would move before going through it again. As bad as I anticipated the process; the reality was much worse. I am still cleaning up from the dust. I had to scrub my gutters by hand last summer and had to have the siding professionally power washed this spring ... the grit was ingrained in the siding. I have not been able to thoroughly clean my windows, so may have to have those professionally done, too. These are unexpected costs, which became unavoidable due to the project. 93. Appearance of the finished project. 94. Communication and your team was top notch 95. none. at the end of the day i have the:.exact same things as i did before it started and will get a bill for it. 96. Speed of completion. Minimal water shut -offs. Good notice from the city of project developments affecting me. 97. the new pavement 98. Street look much nicer 99. Weekly updates on what to expect 100. not much 101. Looks great 102. We like it now that it is done! 103. nothing. i want my old prefectly working road back 104. Very pleased with final result. 105. Friendly workman and almost no street closure 10. What aspects of the process would you recommend be-improved? 1. The sodding was done poorly. 2. Took too much time. 3. None 4. More timely information. 5. 1 have no suggestions. 6. Several homes had much more inconvenience than others ... equipment storage, lunching workers in the yard, lunch garbage, our neighborhood was the staging area for the whole Viking Hills project with equipment, materials and crews 19 meeting, work crews seemed to like to gather and block traffic in a few spots while other neighborhoods got the benefit of new streets but no inconvenience ...Glacier Place, for example which appeared to experience about 3 days of inconvenience while our neighborhood was torn -up for months. 7. Communication to homeowners anddriput from homeowners on project. Felt we did not have any say in the decision, we were offered our input in:theform of a-city council meeting, but -it did not have any impact on decision to do the project. No solid proof of why the streets. needed repair, there was.minimial issues with the streets. 8. None. 9. Take residents, feedback into account for projects that they are paying for'directly. 10. Repairs to damages caused by the project -took too long. and required repeated calls and visits to the site in order to return wiring, sod and soil levels back to original condition. 11. Better communication ong workers to not.block off streets at same time 12. Perhaps better detours so only residence can travel through work area 13. It was too protracted! I feel the work could and should have been done much more quickly once construction started. My heart went out to the folks living on Tracy. The work in front of their homes took about six - months. My humble opinion is that the contractors bit off more work than they could efficiently accomplish during the summer. I saw their crews working on other projects all around the metro area. 14. Anticipate or avoid discoveries during construction that significantly delay the schedule. Very - frustrating to be told over and over that more delays resulted from newly- discovered problems. 15. The sod. I am still waiting for a section of my sod to be replaced. 16. We had no access to our drive, for 3 and a half months' , along with all of the other inconveniences. This made if very difficult to find anywhere to park. And to then have to walk through the construction to get to our house. 17. Do not.spray paint driveway sections not being torn out. The marks are still visible. Do not spray pant tree bases with. neon paint still visible. Have access to the streets via one way for safety. 18. Much of the equipment was parked in front of our home and our neighbors for the duration of the project. It would have been nice to be warned about this or had the equipment = relocated periodically. 19. 1 don't know how people got-on-.the email list,for updates initially. I wasn't on the list,to begin, but would like to have been. Again - not sure if I missed a:communication at the beginning of the process -or what. 20. Communication to the whole community of the cost of the project. 21. Put another 25 mph light on the east side as drivers head towards Vernon. 22. It was my 1st time going4hrough anything like this and I can't think of anything. 23. 1. better notice about turning off -water or gas; 2. don't take a larger project than can be completed within perhaps 3 months; 3. don't work in the evenings. My yard was unusable due to the amount of dust in the air. Who could breathe? 4. Too much cost is put on the homeowners. I understand the funding arrangement for future street projects is being reviewed now. Spreading.the cost across the community. But toolate: for us huh? But we may get to pick up a part of the tab for others' streets in the future. Talk about lose -lose. 24. Better timelines provided. Better warnings about upcoming access issues and length. of issues. 20 25. Aside from the funding issue...... More communication on progress and the delays. Since I am paying for work being completed, I am entitled to know what is going on. The weekly emails and the mailings need the attention of a technical writer to clarify content and ensure the customer (residents) can make applicable decisions on manager their vehicles /personal plans. The details of how the project is being executed and causes of delays are also important. I would hope, no, I would expect the city to publish a lessons learned summary of the project for the residents to digest as well as for the city engineering dept and city council to understand to avoid some of the mistakes made (ref. my comments in question 13) 26. Cost ?? 27. 1. Get the approval of the residents before the reconstruction starts - we are majority shareholders in the project; 2. Hire companies that can do the work efficiently; 3. Shorten the timeframe - the project lasted for 5 months instead of 2 months. 28. Starting on time. 29. There was a big delay in some of the sprinkler system work which resulted in sod being layed late. 30. 1 think the curbs should all have been replaced -- there is one on our property that is flaking and when I pointed it out -- no go -- also the "repair" that was done on our blacktop driveway is already showing flaking. Poor job of sodding on our lot. 31. Hard to know - the inconvenience (dirt roads, water shut -off, etc.) was more significant than I thought. I might be extremely clear about the length of time the raods would be out, dirt/dust would be prevalent, etc. 32. Need to have the end of my drive way fixed! 6116 Westridge Blvd. 33. the city should pay for it fully. it took way too long. 34. The quality of the paving, there are spots that are already loosing asphalt after the first winter. Not paying for the sidewalks that are part of school property not part of the neighborhood 35. Better communication as to what is happening each day. 36. would like to know what the costs came out to be. 37. better job watering the sod they installed. 38. better communication, less disruption and property damage 39. Much shorter interval to complete the project. This took almost the entire summer which I feel could have been greatly reduced had they worked everyday and for longer durations. There was a long period of time when nothing was being worked on or progressing. I highly suspect another proiect took priority 40. Road closed sign was posted too far into roadway on warden avenue (between Johnson and Tracey) we moved it to the end of the road so it was more visible by cars on Johnson before turning onto warden and realizing they could not get to Tracey. There were no signs on Johnson letting people know they needed to go all the way to Benton to get back on Tracey or even go farther around. We had a lot of cars before we moved the sign driving up and down our little leg or warden 41. Curb crews did just average work. 42. Could someone please tell us ahead of time what's going to happen? We can't all make it to evening meetings. 43. Email updates with images 44. ength of time. 2 hours of work on nice days is not a work day. It stretched the project because workers were slow and not working on nice days. 45. None 21 46. 'd like the city to stand by their worlk. Our home, along with several others, were impacted by the vibration as we now have several walls in ourt house which are cracked. The insurance company emplotyed by the construction crew denmoied the clainm even though the cracks are the direct result of the construction. Furthermore, we cannot mow the new boulevard clean black dirt was not laid down before the hydrosseedinmg. The boulevard is strew with large rocks and construction debris which prevent us from mowing safely. 47. 1 recommend a "Round About!" This is the only way to help the Tracy / Benton intersection. 48. Not working in Nov. 49. While I did not like the process -- noise, dust..etc, it went as smoothly as it could. The only thing that could have been improved is timeliness, though] know there�were some unforeseen problems: 50. Disruption to home.owners, damage to property and follow up 51. The landscaping of my yard. It filled in with soil containing rocks, stones and pieces of concrete, then seeded with grass. 52. Speaking to the actual residents who live there. There were some intersections-that were-deemed "dangerous" on which there is very little travel. 53. It sometimes seemed like aspects of the project-took a very long time and I didn't understand why something would be dug up and then left alone for a long time. 54. If a pavement condition index shows a result near 50, a new road should not be put in. Listen to the neighborhood: no one wanted the new road.: Also, no one wanted new sidewalks. 55. Our neighborhood didn't -need the repair, we were just a "filler" in the budget. Yet, the City refused to listen. Our petition and comments fell on deaf ears. To add insult to injury, we are being charged for a sidewalk that is: on school property that adds no value to our neighborhood. Valley Estates. 56. i can't think of anything. i was so'impressed with the helpfulness of all the people. it could have been so unpleasant, and the attitude of the workers made it tolerable! i can't say too many good things about carter! 57. Advance communication, at least two or more years. 58. took too long. There were weeks with no construction. 59. The continuous placement of flags on my lawn by the subcontractors and the lack of removal when they finished. 60. WHY ARE STREET NEEDED DOING WHEN SOME AREAS IN EDINA NEEDED IT MORE 61. 1 would like to have known that the sump pump drainage line would be run through my frontage yard and joint/cleanout would be installed in grass; :and that Xcel Energy was going to install a large aboveground electrical unit/box on our property as well. I thought with belowground electric there would not be such stuff appearing on our property! 62. Traffic and dust raised by traffic. During the construction people from other areas would drive through like they were racing in the Baja. 63. 1 don't know whether it could -have been done faster, but I doubt it. Road construction made for a very long, dusty summer. 64. We were pleased with all aspects of the project. 65. Water shut off notice with more notice, also get the bill by now!! Get this survey out sooner -- it is almost a year ago that the project began. Does Edina REALLY want to know what we think? If so, why didn't this survey get set up immediately after the work was done when things were more fresh in people's minds -- complaints and compliments. 66. Project started in June and went into November, way too long for such a small section of street. 22 67. When the sidewalk was added during the process, there was alot of angst amoungst the neighbors that we would have to pay for it when it wasn't requested by us,but rather by the grade school. 68. the city was going to rebuild our road with poor drainage again. I had to call the city and make sure that they knew they were going to have a drainage problem. 69. Do the same process every time 70. Communication about driveway access. Better info about cost. 71. That accurate records of where everything is underground be kept in a vault so that the next time this or something else happens, engineers can pull up what is hiding where? 72. Wait until 7:30 to start construction ... lots of little kids being woken up. 73. sod problem 74. Just about everything! 75. Listening and addressing concerns before decisions are decided. Not allowing developers to change roads to their benefit. 76. Notify citizens about the project. The City moved up the start date by a year and we were caught short handed. 77. Dust control 78. Earlier communications about times when we couldn't get out our driveways. Two hour notices weren't always enough time. 79. drainage on Crescent Rd near 6005 isn't the best, but overall the project improved the area 80. The dust was pretty bad. Maybe they could have sprinkled it down more to reduce the blowing dust. 81. Not doing the roundabout was a major miss. You should not let those local residents influence such an important safety decision. The street is great ... that intersection is pathetic. 82. Have the City pay more of the cost. Communicate more the extra costs, such as power washing and possible professional window cleaning. Also, I live on West 56th St., so had all the dust and grit coming over from Phase II, after our phase was completed. The mess went on for 6 months. 83. Less Dust, but not sure how you can get that better 84. all items in # 8 85. COST The workers drove very fast up and down our street and did not slow down after multiple complaints to the city 86. At the present time, I think the grass seeding on the blvd was a mistake. I have watered it regularly but am getting about 50% weeds. Grass is now coming through the seam between my old blacktop and new blacktop - -I can buy some black tar caulking but I think they should have done that, since I had a perfect black driveway before the construction. 87. Notice of water shut -offs and the specific times of the shutoff seemed to be irregular. More specific notices and times would have been helpful. 88. the addiiton of the drain system for sump pumps /gutters seemed to cause the most disruption and damage to yards and driveways for little or no benefit. 89. Still not happy about the funding model. I pay taxes for police /Fire and streets /utilities. I feel to be assessed for projects like this is unacceptable 90. funding method is fundamentally unfair despite mayor's Disneyland view; I agree it is hard to change the funding method 91. None 92. PR 23 93. The addition of sidewalks would have greatly improved neighborhood walkability and provided safety for children. 11. Were you satisfied with the end result and final :design? Answer Options Response Response Percent Count Yes 55.8% 77 No 34.1% 47 Unsure 10.1% 14 Comments 71 1. The concrete was breaking up near peoples' lawns. 2. Tony - supervisor of the construction co. always available - we think they did a wonderful job. 3. Although it's not really noticeable, streets-were fine to start with. 4. 1 expected better grass. Not so many weeds. 5. Still a little difficult to see traffic coming from the north when making a turn off of Grove St. You need to pull into the bike line to get a clear line of vision. 6. With the exception of the street lighting not having been upgraded primarily because the neighborhood felt that should be a City paid expense (and going forward it is!), the improvements in the roadway and storm drainage appear to be effective. Electrical problems in the area have been greater than usual post - project and that too is a serious issue that has yet to be completely dealt with. 7. Sewers grates are already rusted out. Did we get these on clearance? 8. We won't know how well the pavement holds up for several years. Already this spring it is heavily pitted. Is this normal? It looks like the pitting will lead to larger holes soon. 9. But the end result is not worth the cost. 10. It wasn't a quality construction crew with many defects still present. We are paying for an inferior product. We received inferior concrete. I hate the re- designed intersections and it makes it difficult to stop on the hill at Crescent & Westridge and the water pools up at the stop sign. Should have had another drain oposite the house next to the stop sign. Still have damaged concrete. The asphalt is higher than the concrete creating a tripping hazard, Homeowners should have received a break on their water bill for water the lawn in the fall we moved into tier three. Traffic is now speeding down the street, Do not like the fact the streets are narrower creates parking issues when their are parties. 11. 1 was very satisfied unti[huge areas of sinkage appeared. The one on Normandale Court was gargantuan! For there to be such a large area of sinkage, plus others on the other streets in the project, someone seems -to have really messed up. It's 24 frustrating to have our beautiful new street,already having=areas':dug up. and patched, which must have a negative impact on the expected life of the new pavement.job .that.we are,,paying,so dearly for. 12. 1 think the "grass" looks terrible. I now -have a bunch' of weeds;growing-where-1. used-to have ±nice grass. 13. think overall- it looks great and I personally prefer the curb and gutters. I do wish -the streets were designed to be wider. It feels tight with parking and tight on the road with walkers and bikers especially with so-many young kids in the neighborhood. I also would -have liked better street lights. 14. We-have commented that the road itself seems more narrow than the old but I don't recall being told directly that this would be the case. 15. The end of my driveway was re-paved-at ,a steeper angle than it had been, so now there is a kerplunk when entering the drive. The lack of a smooth transition makes it more difficult to navigate up during: snowy or icy conditions. This was not necessary. 16. Completely satisfied. 17. from a design perspective, I am satisfied (with the exception of street width reduction) 18. It does look nice 19. Street looks uneven like it needs one more coat. No street lights were replaced after we were asked which we would prefer ?? 20. Crew and project management did a nice job with the design, quality of sod replacement, sprinkler head replacement, etc. 21. Now that it is finished, we do not -see. people using the bike lane, but instead using it as a sidewalk. Traffic speeds have not slowed. The pedestrian crossing, lane hasn't made it easierto cross Tracy. 22. Corner of Crescent and Highland is difficult.to negotiate with �a largewehi pie -even when no other car is present. 23. some of the intersections have odd curves to them 24. my lawn I had was beautiful, but the sodi hey installed iv�mostly dead. i I'll have to pay over a thousand to have-the sod they installed ripped out and new sod installed' ' 25. Speed limit to 25 is too slow Everybodyexceedsthe -speed limit now. 26. The school intersection is horrible-during drop off and pick up time, just ask a bus driver! The intersection should have been straightened out and Benton widened on the west side of Tracey. Bt I understand the people of Tracey did. not want to be assessed-with that amount added on. The Benton section west of Tracey should be done by the city to make the school zone safer. If possible this summer! At least please post no, parking signs during drop off and pic up times on Benton west of Tracey. people who abandon their cars on the north side of the.;Benton road during pick up time really make the whole mess so much worse. Buses cannot get in and through, the line ,of pick up cars can't move, it's a mess. Cars n the intersection do not treat it as a fur way stop, they stop and go,if,no one is directly in.front of them. I would like to see it fixed somehow, we just started our first of three boys in:kindergarden this past -year I have a long way to go at countryside: It would be nice to see some changes to make that intersection and pickup process safer and easier. 27. Substandard work. 28. 1 want sidewalks on both sides of the street after seeing the finished project 29. roads are sinking and TONS of dirt ran into theaake when it rained. The entire lake was the color of mud and they said there wasn't anything they could do about it until I said [would call the DNR and see if they could help and then all the sudden they put in floating, barriers to catch the'mud. 25 30. Mostly. 31. Rodayway is nice and smooth, whihc encourages speeding. 32. Wish we would have gotten street lighting. 33. It did not take care of the problem. The 4 way stop by Countryside is still the same. Cars still don't take turns at the Tracy / Benton intersection. Very dangerous! I thought this was the main concern. All that work and the problem is still there. I don't know why bike paths were the main concern and are unnecessary. 34. We now have a large patch in due to sedttling 35. There are sunken areas on West 56th street where water now pools and never did before. We received a letter stating some of the areas were being monitored, but it didn't state which areas or what would be done to correct it and when. How can we know if this area is one of the areas being monitored? And when will it be fixed? 36. 1 oppose the parking lane. It is completely unnecessary-- please note how few cars ever use it. It created extra expense, took yard away from houses on the west side of Tracy, and made the street wider than it should be. 37. For the most part yes 38. Horrible waste. Criminal. The city council was very rude. The majority of the neighborhood was very clear that we did not want the new road. The building department is only interested in their budget. 39. On Polar Circle, just short of the intersection with Vernon, there is flooding after every rain. 40. 1 would like to have,known Xcel Energy was going to install a large aboveground electrical unit/box on our property as well. I thought with belowground electric there would not be such stuff appearing on our property! What am I supposed to do to 'mask' this unit and maintain the esthetics of the front yard and property value now? 41. Yes, other than we have the original 1965 light posts which now look archaic. However, I believe that was a "majority rules" decision based upon the neighborhood survey. 42. 1 lost 4 feet off the front of my yard to make way for a bike lane, and to date, I have not seen 1 BIKE on Tracy Ave. 43. The exception being the signage. Sign pollution at it finest. Another example of Edina excess. 44. Yes, with all of the potholes on our roads, turning onto Arctic way is wonderful- we have a very nice street! 45. The street looks great. 46. Though we sold the property in the fall, we thought the end result was excellent. Keeping the curving streets was great! Installing curbing gave the neighborhood a cleaner look. The overall effect certainly didn't hurt when it came to selling the property. 47. Street was narrowed. What idiot decided that? Got yet another McMansion going in down the block. When the trucks park on the road there - -on both sides -- sometimed directly across from each other, it presents a tight traffic situation for residents. As people turn the corner from Tracy fast, and most do frive fast, you almost get hit leaving Ridgeway Rd. Dangerous. Speed bumps would have been good. Also why did the city give residents the option- of sidewalks - -they are needed. Lots of kids and dog walkers. I am sick of drunk kids driving at night and in the afternoon, and tossing -beer and hard liquor bottles at walkers in the road. Also, NO where to get out the way of snowplows when walking dogs in winter. If there were sidewalks, it would not be a problem. If Edina City workers were required to live in Edina, and there still is affordable housing here, they would see what we. are talking about - -every day, and not from planning meetings in a city conference room. 26 48. Smooth street much quieter 49. Loved being able to tie our sump pump into the storm sewer. "We were very happy that our paver driveway came thru the process without getting. damaged. 50. Streets are too narrow and designs were not shared with the neighborhood before the project. 51. Big dip in our street - Kent Avenue. Has been patched but looks bad in comparison with rest of street. 52. 1 am unhappy with the narrow streets. They raise the level of tension while calmly driving down the street. There is less time to react to children popping out from behind parked vehicles and for the first time -in 62 years, we have to wait for cars to pass in the opposite direction before proceeding because of parked vehicles or garbage cans in the road. I find the city's reason for narrowing streets around town miss guided and'hard to swallow at best. 53. Beautiful work, but seems like the streets are a bit narrower, correct? 54. city needs to replace some of the new sod 55. Had to completely re -do my garden myself after they ruined it and it still is not right - dirt they gave resembled ground asphalt in testure and smell - full of broken .glass. Dirt does not drain - standing water in many yards. 56. Its fine 57. it is difficult to drive down our street to narrow 58. It looks nice but not worth the money that was spent. 59. The intersections - are:dangerous and there is inadequate parking space on the street. The,City also cheated our neighborhood out.of new street-lights, even though the City increased the utility rate for citizens to pay for those items. Another example of disparate treatment of the City towards my neighborhood. 60. THE HIGHLAND /CRESCENT INTERSECTION IS TOO RADICAL. IF YOU MEET ANOTHER CAR YOU HAVE TO-ALMOST COME TO A COMPLETE STOP TO NAVIGATE IT. 61. 1 had no idea how quiet the finished. road would be or how effective the 25 mph speed -limit would be. What a big improvement to my quality of life. 62. Should have done a roundabout. 63. Yes, for the most part, but I am seeing chunks already broken off the curbs. 64. CURBS CURBS CURBS 65. No, there is a large dip in the street outside of my house 66. One small piece of my driveway at 5609 Tracy broke off near the mailbox for no apparent reason. Grass is now coming through the seam between my old blacktop and new blacktop - -I can buy some black tar caulking but I think they should have done that, since I had a.perfect black driveway before the construction. See above regarding grass on blvd. 67. sloppy concrete work, lines and seams in blacktop look funny 68. Beautiful 69. but not for the amount i will be paying over the next 15 year. 70. Again, sidewalks would have been a plus. 71. 1 would have liked the round a bouts to be included in the reconstruction of Tracey Avenue and to have better pedestrian access walkways across the street.- 27 Question 12. Which project is this survey in response to? Answer; Options: Response „Response Count Bike and - Pedestrian Way Phase I 0 0% 0; =' Countryside Neighborhood Roadway Reconstruction :221: 0/( : :. "3:1: . Gallagher Drive. Reconstruction 0:7 %. 1- Richmond -Hills Park - Neighborhood Roadway Reconstruction 21:4% . 30 Tracy Avenue Reconstruction 22.9% 32 Valley Estates Neighborhood Roadway Reconstruction 153% Viking-Hills Neighborhood Roadway Reconstruction 17.1% '24 Question 13. Do you have any other comments, input or suggestions for the City staff or City Council? 1. 1.) What was the estimate before the project began? 2.) When will we receive an assessment for the project and info on financing it with what time? Thank you. 2. We don't feel we should have to pay for the sidewalk project by Creek Valley school! The sidewalk benefits only the school and was requested by the school not the neighborhood. Since the completion of the sidewalk last fall we have only seen 2 students using it. The neighborhood kids still walk in the street. This would be a good time for the City to pay for the sidewalks, especially since it is our understanding that hereafter, the City will pay for sidewalk projects!! In checking with our friends, we find that in many surrounding suburbs, these projects are paid for by the city. 3. The workmen had to work thru record heat in July. Did a wonderful job! 4. Another time use the correct size envelope for the material being sent to the City of Edina. I had to cut this questionairre /survey so that it would fit in the envelope. 5. Do not do any more construction on Hillside Rd. 6. 1 understand being inconvenienced for a big truck to move through but the repeated delays because City and /or Construction workers were chatting in the middle of the street got silly. 7. Decision to add sidewalk on school property and assessing it to homeowners was added late and homeowners had now say in decision. 8. No. 9. Would appreciate if police could enforce the 25mph. The sign helps but would like to see some surprise enforcement. M 10. The city staff and council were very condescending when asked about the need for the project. One of the councilmen even admitted that our project was a "filler", to even though it wasn't yet needed, the size of the project fit the city budget for the year. 11. Improve long range planning for these types of projects and deal more effectively with the changes evolving within our community such as strict standards for tear -downs and reconstruction, etc. 12. Neighborhood should not have to pay for sidewalk for creek valley. That total cost should be paid by school 13. We are grateful to the Mayor and Council Members for hearing the residents' voices. 14. if you really care what we thinbk, why send this out now? the project finished in september 2012. 15. During the winter, snowplows jumped our curb and messed up some of our newly laid sod. Someone evidently made an attempt to patch it up, but it was only a half - hearted effort. Still looks bad in some places. Also, our concrete driveway apron has already developed a crack from front to back. I envision it getting worse with time. Is there a warranty that you could use to get it repaired or replaced? I'm Brice Martinson at 6100 Ridgeway Road. (952) 926 -1436. QUESTION: When will the Tracy Avenue reconstruction between Benton and the fire station be accomplished? It really needs attention soon. It appears 2013 is out of the picture. Hopefully, 2014? 16. This project was completely unnecessary in our neighborhood, as our streets were in acceptable condition before. In addition, the lack of curbs was a main draw to the neighborhood as it had less of a "city" feel. Finally, assuming that families can handle the burden of the assessment.is outrageous! Even if we opt to finance our assessment through the city, we will barely make ends meet. Edina is discouraging young families from moving in and /or staying when we are unexpectedly saddled with huge assessments. 17. Why wait so very long to provide this survey? Waiting until we forget all of the inconveniences? 18. The final cutting of expansion seams ( ?) in the pavement left ugly brown marks that lasted until the snow. Small matter, but should not have occurred. The finished pavement looked ugly for months. 19. We are asked to fill out a survey; yet, we haven't been given our final bill. The survey should be done after the total costs have been billed. You should take a visual inspection of what was completed. This was not a quality project done like in other areas of the City. Inferior concrete. Sloppy work by the construction crew. The crews damaged fresh concrete and had to be redone. If you walk the sections on Crescent Drive you will notice many defects, cracks, large chips in the concrete. The asphalt is uneven where it meets the concrete of the street and it creates a tripping hazard to walkers. The crews spray painted concrete sections with pant that wasn't removed from the concrete. Also the crews spray painted large dots at the base of trees with neon green paint which is still visible and should have been corrected. I had a Hage concrete driveway and now have an inferior product. The concrete quality was not the same as what Hage used nor was the workmanship. I was told in the meetings to note if you had a Hage driveway in the survey which we did. I would have like the option to have Hage replace their work. I had better sub base than what the construction crew dug out of our driveway and put more dirt instead of the sub base the removed. Most of the neighbors are unhappy with the work quality results we see after the project has been completed. I have areas my lawn that are now sinking -- creating a tripping hazard. The City of Edina was know for having great roads. Everyone in the City should pay for roads and not access only the home owners for the road being reconstructed. Give the homeowners a break on their water bill during the construction phase. We were left notes to water to ensure the lawns would take. We were still watering in November and we moved to the tier three level. 29 20. Please, please move to a system of just one trash hauler. The number of trucks coming through on trash day must be taking a huge toll on the life expectancy of our roads. Plus, it makes trash day quite unpleasant with the parade of noisy trucks coming through for several hours. 21. You kinda waited a long time to send this survey out. I would have never remembered Jeff Frahm's name if I hadn't found his name in an old email. 22. Please just answer my questions in this surgery. 23. As my husband has lived here since the early 60's, he doesn't understand why the cost to residents is so high. For all the taxes his mother & now we have been paying since then, we would have thought the city would have reserved more over the years so it would impact residents less. 24. Shouldn't we know by now what our cost will be and when it will be due? I haven't heard a thing since construction was completed. 25. This project is analogous to a neighborhood being told they have to replace the old family car. They had no choice in the brand or model and would not find out the price until they had received the car. Some residents were getting new cars even though they were going to quit driving and some were getting new cars they couldn't afford. The cars were delivered late, but they looked pretty nice for the first couple months. When the dealership changed the oil, they dinged the doors and stained the carpet (not the numerous deep snowplow scars in new curbs and asphalt). After 6 months, rust started showing in sheet metal. The dealership promised to fix the rust but the paint job is wavy and is a different color. If more rust occurs, the dealer will continue to make patches. One neighborhood couldn't help but notice that the cars in another neighborhood didn't have the rust problem, even though that neighborhood is paying the same price for their car. What new car owner would not to be satisfied with that kind of new car. 26. Not enough room 27. 1 knew Andrew Plowman project engineer from outside firm and George Bender on site supervisor were both great but I could NOT tell you the city council or city staff who was suppose to be my representative ... pretty sad when the city is not very present on the project. Both Andrew &George were very helpful and great to work with. 28. When repairs to property was done, specifically our driveway, it looked good but this spring not good. There should be some kind of contract-that they come and redo these patch jobs. Recheck edge next to curbs for flaking. 29. 1 would like a meeting with the contractor and the city engineer! 30. Stop spending money on studies, $1 Million on park renovations, bike lanes and $100,000 salaries for inspectors and pay for these projects instead of making us pay more than we already do in property taxes. Find a way to make these projects faster. 31. We would like someone to work with us to resolve the damage our home received as a result of last summer's construction. 32. 1 understand, that the size of the - project and the impact of weather can greatly change the'.dynamics of a road construction project, but more and earlier communication needs to happen so that residents can plan for inconveniences. 33. we are expected to pay for new sidewalks at the school. since this cost was assigned to us the city council has determined that sidewalk costs would be born by the city. as costs have not been assigned to us at this point they should not include the sidewalk costs. 30 34. Our gravel driveway (6121 Ridgeway rd.) never received the.replacement gravel fill where it was dug up next to the street. Can this be done`yet for us? 35. get rid of the damn bike lanes in the city.... everyone one I've talked to hates them. They are TERRIBLE. Oh yeah and the Cedar Apartments are a crime haven and you need to do something'to stop the weekly drugs and-crime coming out of that area. 36. Overall, a good process & we are pleased with the results. 37. When will Tracy from Benton to '62 take place? 38. We were told that storm sewer - connections would be available (for sump hole discharge): at the street when in fact that was only true.on one side of the street (I'm at 6208 Hillside Rd). I spent $1600 to have a an underground line run from my discharge pipe to the front yard where it discharges..into the yard. This creates as problem for me and my neighbor when ,there is heavy. discharge. -In addition the"line is frozen into the spring: but the-:sump pump works even if the ground is frozen. I'm not happy with either the expense or the result. 39. I would .rattier everyone pay a small amount perpetually than get a large special assessment. 40. For the cost of this _project to the,homeowners it is a.Aisgrace. 41. None 42. The end result is necessary and nice to have, however�the process'is. very stressful and expensive for the residents. My personal communications to the city were never addressed. 43. UI tried to -ask questions directly to-the city staff buit b =never received a retrun phone- call. We are looking at a $11,000 estimate for repairs required due to the construction. The boulevard is a mess and cannot be mowed. I sent a note to Wayne Houle regarding the, boulevard-issue and am awaiting a response. Twill not hold my breath. The electronic speed monitoring device was a great speed:.limiter. The new speed limit_of 25 . mph, is great if followed =but we just noticed -this new speed limiter changed its warning limit-(the speed at which the signal turns from;amber to red) was rtaised from the speed limit -(25 mph) to 30 mph as though the speed limit-is 30 rrmph. 44. Why are -bike paths everywhere? 45. No, In their mind - everything is a done deal,and they simply nod to input. 46. Our property still has damage that hasn't been fixed and the grass they put down has not grown. 47. Again, most unsatisfied with appearance of my front yard. Not only shortened 4 feet, but an additional 8 feet now looks very poor due to unsatisfactory landscaping. . 48. Please notify us if the West 56th area where water is pooling is on your radar and when it will be fixed. Whatever was the final $ amount for the assessment? It kept changing! 49. 1 live on Hawkes Drive, and Tracy is the only outlet for us. I appreciate that we were included on communication for the Tracy Ave project. 50. Not related to this project but it does relate to the Countryside neighborhood. We are concerned-about increased traffic when the Waters project is completed. Especially the intersection of Valley View road and Tracy (near Fire Station). Is the city considering a traffic light there? 51. Please do not have us pay for the sidewalks. We did not want them and they are on school property. The old sidewalks are in disrepair, and it did not make sense to add on to them. The new sidewalks are not being used. 31 52. The City decided to add a sidewalk on school property along Creek Valley Road, and to charge our neighborhood for the work, even though it adds little value to our residents. I understand that since our work was completed, the City decided that sidewalks like this one will not be part of the special assessments in the,future. If this is the case, the decision should be retro and we should not be charged for the sidewalk that only benefits the school. Please consider this when making final calculations. 53. Will our assessment be less than determined, based on the city council. decision to,fund more of these projects as other cities do? 54. AS A SENIOR, THESE ASSESSED COSTS ARE VERY DIFFICULT.WE HAD NO CHOICE. ITS A LIEN ON THE PROPERTY.WE SHOULD HAVE BEEN GIVEN MORE NOTICE. THESE COSTS WORKED INTO PROPERTY TAXES OVER TIME THEN EVERYONE PAYS FAIR AMOUNT. 55. It would help if the utilities told specific property owners ahead of time (during early communication phase, before construction) what they were planning to do on their property. 56. 1 know of several Valley Estates neighbors that registered frequent complaints and petitions to the city over normal project items. Based upon some of their comments to you (as they relayed to me) I felt they were ignorant and disrespectful toward you. I appreciate your professionalism and encourage you all to keep up the good work! Wes & Anne Anderson, 6208 Balder Lane. 57. At city meetings and open houses the staff did not listen to the people. They just rammed it down our throat. 58. The road is very noticeably quieter - especially nice with the large number of emergency vehicles and school buses that use our street. 59. See comments to #1 60. We appreciate all the work that the City staff and the City Council do for the residents of Edina. Keep up the good work! 61. Engage your brains, & send out letters asking for input ... you sent the what kind of lights do you want mailing... where was the mailing asking about daily useage? Edina is too into things being just so -- the flags on the Promenade, the fences being painted on Vernon -- how about real life issues that affect the quality of life in Edina every day? I wish I did not reside here. Poor choice. With all the McMansioning going on, and the noise from the Colonial Church .project -- how many people will reside there... 10,000? ...that place is HUGE. With all of the noise it is not a great'place to reside. The booms and dirt and ground vibrations and the truck traffic and parking issues around here is just awful. EDINA— Every Day I Need Aggravation. 62. We thought Aaron did a terrific job! 63. If you are not going to listen to Petitions from the majority of citizens with the project areas then make it clear so peolpe do not have to waste their time putting petitions together. This survey is probably another waste of, my time. Mike Slaughter 612- 328 -2559 64. Thanks for a very professional job, and for keeping us informed. 65. 1 don't remember the name of the city person who was the point person for all the communications, but he was always very responsive to issues and concerns. 66. Have a rep personally contact each homeowner at end of project to conduct inspection of property following the project. 67. 1 believe the garbage cans put in the street, (some putout a day early and 'Ieft out until a day-after), by residents now (it is far more prevalent than pre reconstruction) is a new eyesore. When we first-moved here JW96 we received notices from the city 32 that we were, putting our trash out "To Far From The House ". Now it certain that We work for the garbage companies instead of them working for us. My biggest concern is that people are leaving their garbage cans on the street or out by the curb for sometimes 4 or 5 days. I'm really not exaggerating. I think it should be addressed along with recycling returning to every week for the same price we used to pay for every week. The rolling no sort containers hold no more than what we used to pile up in the green tubs and now we pay roughly 100% more for recycling and get 50% less or 1/2 the service for a lot less labor on the pickup side of things. It's just not right. Thanks for listening. 68. 1 think we are lucky to have people on staff who care so much about our city! TV meetings helpful. 69. All around it was awful _palda is crummy - their work stinks - my driveway is a mess - apron higher than rest of it so water ponds. Never do business witht them again. 70. there was nothing wrong with our street you added to much property to some house bring down our assessment alot where is our tax money going 71. Had To Delay My Retirement To Pay For It. 72. NO 73. Since the lightning strike to the power pole last Saturday the sign that monitors the speed of approaching vehicles turns red at 30 mph instead of at 25 mph 74. Lower the cost. 75. Thanks for everything. Not excited about paying the SA, but for now this policy is workable. DO NOT change it going forward or you will impact people who already paid. Thanks for lowering the interest rate on SA 76. hire other contractors as they didn't seem to care about the job. 77. 1 hope they do south Tracy soon. I worry my wife's car will not be able to take the condition of that road. 78. The city did a fine a job and put a lot of effort into homeowner and neighborhood relations. 79. best part was the temporary water connection crew - they were helpful and they knew what they were doing 80. stop spending the tax payers money on dumb crap ... bike lanes on woodale. 81. 1 thought the email messaging was great. 33 Debra Mangen City Clerk City of Edina 4801 West 50th Street Re: Special Assessment Address: 6233 Crescent'Drive, Edina, MN 55436 Property ID. No. 0511621120019 Dear Ms. Mangen I own the property located at 6233 Crescent Drive, Edina, MN and I have received a notice of a special assessment on my property in the amount of $11,369.37.. This letter is -my written objection to the special assessment, because the stated amount of the assessment exceeds the special benefit to the named property. - If you have any further questions you may reach me at the following phone numbers: Richard B. Metzger: Home: 952- 929 -2749 Cell: 612- 396 -4343 Sincerely, Richard B. Metzger 6233 Crescent Drive, Edina, MN 55436 SO ���� lo1a1 13 Re: Special Assessment Address: 6237 Crescent Drive, Edina, MN. 55436 Property ID. No. 0511621120018 Dear Ms. Mangen Timothy Tinberg and myself own. the property located at 6237 Crescent Drive, Edina, MN and we have received a notice of a special - assessment on our property in the amount of $11,369.37. This letter is our written objection to the special assessment, because the stated amount of the assessment exceeds the special benefit to the named property. If you have any further questions you may reach us at the following numbers: Timothy Tinberg 952 - 200 -9201 Anne Tinberg 952 -486 -3892 Sincerely, Anne Tinberg 6237 Crescent Drive, Edina MN. 55436 M SEA- Debra Mangen City Clerk F�E►� City of Edina 4801 West 50th Street Edina, MN 55424 _ Re: Special Assessment Address: 6237 Crescent Drive, Edina, MN. 55436 Property ID. No. 0511621120018 Dear Ms. Mangen Timothy Tinberg and myself own. the property located at 6237 Crescent Drive, Edina, MN and we have received a notice of a special - assessment on our property in the amount of $11,369.37. This letter is our written objection to the special assessment, because the stated amount of the assessment exceeds the special benefit to the named property. If you have any further questions you may reach us at the following numbers: Timothy Tinberg 952 - 200 -9201 Anne Tinberg 952 -486 -3892 Sincerely, Anne Tinberg 6237 Crescent Drive, Edina MN. 55436 Jeff & Susan Petersen 6213 Hillside Road Edina, MN 55436 October, 10, 2013 Debra Mangen City Clerk City of Edina 4801— W. 50`' St. Edina, MN 55424 Re: Special Assessment Address: 6213 Hillside Road, Edina, MN 55436 Property ID. No.: 0511621120032 Dear Ms Mangen: My wife Susan and I reside at 6213 Hillside Road, Edina, MN and we are in receipt of the notice of a special assessment on our property in the amount of $11,369.37. This letter shall serve as our written objection to the special assessment, because the amount of the assessment exceeds the special benefit to the property. Call me at 952- 657 -5431 if you have any questions. Thank you. Sincerely, Je Petersen October 11, 2013 Ms. Debra A. Mangen City Clerk City of Edina 4801 West 506' Street Edina, Minnesota 55424 RE: Objection and appeal of the special assessment for the Countryside street reconstruction project. Ms. Mangen: We are writing to object and appeal the special assessment for the Countryside street reconstruction project. First and foremost, the appropriate due process was not followed to begin the street reconstruction project. The legal process requires that the city have a current appraisal that demonstrates that the homes within the project area will increase in value as much or more than the. assessment amount due to the project improvements. We contacted the City of Edina and were provided a copy of the study /appraisal on which you were relying. It not only fails demonstrate an increase in property values based on the project, it does not address the Countryside neighborhood specifically, and it was completed in 2005. Based on the recent volatility of the real estate market, a 2005 appraisal is not considered current. According to the Special Assessments Information Brief conducted by the Minnesota House of Representatives Research Department in 2008, "In order for a special assessment to be valid: • the property must receive a special benefit from the improvement being constructed, • the assessment must be uniform upon the same class of property, and • the assessment may not exceed the special benefit. Special benefit is measured by the increase in the market value of the land owing to the improvement. A special assessment that does not meet these requirements is an unconstitutional taking., The benefit is measured by the difference between what a willing buyer would pay a willing seller for the property before and after the improvement, based on the highest and best use of the land.z" The 2005 appraisal that we were provided is not current nor did it demonstrate an increase in market value equal or greater to the amount of the assessment because of the project. In addition, we believe the condition of our street, Hillside Road, was completely acceptable before the project. We deemed the project unnecessary and a waste of our time and money. We liked the look and feel of the neighborhood without curbs. It didn't feel like just another city block, it had a country feel to it. We understand that the city thinks that streets with curbs are easier to snow plow; however, in the same outdated appraisal referenced above, it states that basically all of Edina will get curb and gutter except Rolling Green, to "maintain its country/estate feel." If the necessity for curb and gutter was based on ease of snow plowing, then the whole city of Edina should get them. If the need for curb and gutter was based on neighborhood feel, that is simply not a fair or viable method of determination. Finally, the craftsmanship of the work that was completed is sub -par. There are portions of curb around the neighborhood that are already crumbling just one year into their life. If 'we are forced to pay for this street, curb, and gutter project that the majority of the neighborhood deemed unnecessary and unwanted, then at the very least, it should be good quality. In summary, we believe that the legal process was not followed to justify the Countryside street reconstruction project. In addition, curbs, specifically, were an unnecessary improvement for the neighborhood. Finally, the quality of the project does not justify the cost of the assessment. Respec , r Dave and Kate Ostlund 6309 Hillside Road Edina, Minnesota 55436 612- 747 - 0212 612 -760 -4589 i Southview Country Club v City oflnver Grove Heights, 263 N.W.2d 385, 387 -388 (Minn. 1978) (citing Carlson -Lang Realty Co. v City of Windom, 307 Minn. 368, 369, 240 N.W.2d 517, 519 (1976); Quality Homes, Inc. v. Village of New Brighton, 289 Minn. 274, 183 N.W.2d 555 (1971); In re Improvement of Superior Street, Duluth, 172 Minn. 554, 559,216 N.W. 318, 320 (1927)). i Eagle Creek Townhomes, LLP v City of Shakopee, 614 N.W.2d 246,250 (Minn. App. 2000) review denied (Sept 13, 2000) (citing EHW Properties v City of Eagan, 503 N.W.2d 135, 139 (Minn. App. 1993) and Buzick v City of Blaine, 491 N.W. 2d 923,925 (Minn_ App. 1992), aff'd 505 N.W. 2d 51 (Minn 1993)). Debra Mangen City Clerk City of Edina 4801 West 50th Street Edina, MN 55424 Re: Special Assessment Address: 6237 Crescent Drive, Edina, MN. 55436 Property ID. No. 0511621120018 Dear Ms. Mangen Timothy Tinberg and myself own the property located at 6237 Crescent Drive, Edina, MN and we have received a notice of a special assessment on out property in the amount of $11,369.37. This letter is our written objection to the special assessment, because the stated amount of the assessment exceeds the special benefit to the named property. If you have any further questions you may reach us at the following numbers: Timothy Tinberg 952 - 200 -9201 Anne Tinberg 952 - 486 -3892 Sincerely, Anne Tinberg 6237 Crescent Drive, Edina MN. 55436 101g1 1-3 i SEAL rJCT 11 2013 Jeff & Susan Petersen 6213 Hillside Road Edina, MN 55436 October, 10, 2013 Debra Mangen City Clerk City of Edina 4801— W. 50`h St. Edina, MN 55424 Re: Special Assessment Address: 6213 Hillside Road, Edina, MN 55436 Property ID. No.: 0511621120032 Dear Ms Mangen: My wife Susan and I reside at 6213 Hillside Road, Edina, MN and we are in receipt of the notice of a special assessment on our property in the amount of $11,369.37. This letter shall serve as our written objection to the special assessment, because the amount of the assessment exceeds the special benefit to the property. Call me at 952 - 657 -5431 if you have any questions. Thank you. Sincerely, Je .Petersen October 11, 2013 Ms. Debra A. Mangen City Clerk City of Edina 4801 West 50'b Street Edina, Minnesota 55424 RE: Objection and appeal of the special assessment for the Countryside street reconstruction project. Ms. - Mangen: We are writing'to object and appeal the special assessment for the Countryside street reconstruction project. First and foremost, the appropriate due process was not followed to begin the street reconstruction project. The legal process requires that the city have a current appraisal that demonstrates that the .homes within the project area will increase in value as much or more than the. assessment amount due to the project improvements. We contacted the City of Edina and were provided a copy of the study /appraisal on which you were relying. It not only fails demonstrate an increase in property values based on the project, it does not address the Countryside neighborhood specifically, and it was completed in 2005. Based on the recent volatility of the real estate market, a 2005 appraisal is not considered current. According to the Special Assessments Information Brief conducted by the Minnesota House of Representatives Research Department in 2008, "In order for a special assessment to be valid: • the property must receive a special benefit from the improvement being constructed, • the assessment must be uniform upon the same class of property, and • the assessment may not exceed the special benefit. Special benefit is measured by the increase in the market value of the land owing to the improvement. A special assessment that does not meet these requirements is an unconstitutional taking., The benefit is measured by the.difference between what a willing buyer would pay a willing seller for the property before and after the improvement, based on the highest and best use of the land.z" The 2005 appraisal that we were provided is not current nor did it demonstrate an increase in market value equal or greater to the amount of the assessment because of the project. In addition, we believe the condition of our street, Hillside Road, was completely acceptable before the project. We deemed the project unnecessary and a waste of our time and money. We liked the look and feel of the neighborhood without curbs. It didn't feel like just another city block, it had a country feel to it. We understand that the city thinks that streets with curbs are easier to snow plow; however, in the same outdated appraisal referenced above, it states that basically all of Edina will get curb and gutter except Rolling Green, to "maintain its country/estate feel." If the necessity for curb and gutter was based on ease of snow plowing, then the whole city of Edina should get them. If the need for curb and gutter was based on neighborhood feel, that is simply not a fair or viable method of determination. Finally, the craftsmanship of the work that was completed is sub -par. There are portions of curb around the neighborhood that are already crumbling just one year into their life. If we are forced to pay for this street, curb, and gutter project that the majority of the neighborhood deemed unnecessary and unwanted, then at the very least, it should be good quality. In summary, we believe that the legal process was not followed to justify the Countryside street reconstruction project. In addition, curbs, specifically, were an unnecessary improvement for the neighborhood. Finally, the quality of the project does not justify the cost of the assessment. Respectfu r Dave and Kate Ostlund 6309 Hillside Road Edina, Minnesota 55436 612- 747 -0212 612- 760 -4589 i Southview Country Club v City of Inver Grove Heights, 263 N.W.2d 385, 387 -388 (Minn. 1978) (citing Carlson -Lang Realty Co. v City of Windom, 307 Minn. 368, 369, 240 N.W.2d 517, 519 (1976); Quality Homes, Inc. v Village of New Brighton, 289 Minn. 274, 183 N.W.2d 555 (1971); In re Improvement of Superior Street, Duluth, 172 Minn. 554, 559, 216 N.W. 318,320 (1927)). i Eagle Creek Townhomes, LLP v City of Shakopee, 614 N.W.2d 246,250 (Minn. App. 2000) review denied (Sept 13, 2000) (citing EHW Properties v City of Eagan, 503 N.W.2d 135,139 (Minn. App. 1993) and Buzick v City of Blaine, 491 N.W. 2d 923,925 (Minn. App. 1992), aff V 505 N.W. 2d 51 (Minn. 1993)). David Wikoff 6305 Hillside Rd. Edina, MN 55436 October 10, 2013 Debra Mangen City Clerk City of Edina 4801- W. 50th St. Edina, MN 55424 Re: Special Assessment Address: 6241 Crescent Drive, Edina, MN 55436 Property ID. No.: 0511621120017 Dear Ms. Mangen: I am an attorney and have been retained by Dorothy Pool regarding the special assessment on her former residence located at 6241 Crescent Drive, Edina, MN 55436. The special assessment was approximately in the amount of $11,000.00. Ms. Pool sold her the residence to a Stacey Johnson on January 24, 2013. As a condition of the sale, Ms. Pool placed $16,000 in an escrow account to cover any potential assessment. Ms. Pool currently resides in Friendship Village, 8100 Highwood Drive, Bloomington, MN. Without notice or authorization to my client, the escrow company paid the City of Edina the full amount of the special assessment claimed by the City of Edina. This letter shall serve as Dorothy Pool's written objection to the special assessment, because the amount of the assessment exceeds the special benefit to the property. The City of Edina also needs to reimburse Dorothy Pool for the amount paid by the escrow company, because she objects to amount withheld to pay the special assessment. Call me at 612- 599 -7665 if you have any questions. Thank you. Sincerely, CI 20David Wikof 00T l s R 3 cc: Dorothy Pool Lam. Marci A. Lorge Dale R. Lorge 5012 Normandale Court Edina, MN 55436 Phone: 952- 926 -7831 Email: d3mlorge @q.com Property Identification No. 33-117-2124 0051 Date: October 14, 2013 Debra A. Mangen City Clerk City of Edina, Minnesota 4801 West 50th Street Edina, MN 55424 James Hovland Mayor City of Edina, Minnesota 4801 West 50th Street Edina, MN 55424 Dear Clerk Mangen and Mayor Hovland: SEAL OCT 1 4 2013 RECEIVED As the property owner of the property located at 5012 Normandale Court, Edina, MN 55436 with the Property Identification No. 33- 117 -21 24 0051, I herby am providing the City Clerk, the Mayor, and the City of Edina, Minnesota with a written objection to the Proposed Special Assessment for Improvement No. BA -388; also known as the Richmond Hills Neighborhood Roadway Reconstruction for the above named property. On September 26, 2013 I received the Notice of Public Hearing on Proposed Special Assessment from Debra A. Mangen set for October 14, 2013. The notice provided the following information related to the above named property for proposed assessments: roadway reconstruction $10,337.37; sewer and/or water improvements $1,756.58; for a combined total of $12,093.95. As for Proposed Special Assessments specific to the sewer and/or water improvements I herby raise the following objections: 1. The city provided no evidence that such improvements were necessary for the named property. 2. The city provided no evidence that improvements were actually made to the named property. 3. If in fact improvements were made, the city provided no evidence that the proposed assessments are directly related to the named property. As such, I request that the City of Edina provide specific details regarding the sewer and/or water improvements to the named property so that I may fully understand the costs and benefits provided to the property prior to making any agreement to pay for such costs. According to the Minnesota League of Cities, Information Memo, Special Assessment Guide, dated 9/22/2011, "Especially with regard to. street improvements, it may be very difficult to demonstrate that there is any significant increase in market value as a result of the resurfacing or reconstruction." The memo further states, "A special assessment that exceeds the special benefit is a taking of property without fair compensation and violates both the Fourteenth Amendment of the United States Constitution and the Minnesota Constitution. Property assessed must enjoy a corresponding benefit from the local improvement." Thus, as for the Proposed Special Assessments specific to the roadway reconstruction I herby raise the following objections: Marci Lorge Property Identification No. 33- 117 -21 24 0051 1. The city provided no evidence that such improvements were divided appropriately, fairly and uniformly across the affected properties impacted by the Richmond Hills Neighborhood Roadway Reconstruction project. 2. The city provided no evidence that the improvements provided any special benefit to the named property as required under Minnesota Statutes Chapter 429, special benefit test. 3. The city provided no evidence that the improvements provided any increase in the market value of the land as required under Minnesota Statutes Chapter 429, special benefit test. Therefore, I request that the proposed assessment for roadway reconstruction be reduced to an amount no greater than the increase in the market value of the land specific to my property as required under Minnesota Statutes Chapter 429, special benefit test. Sincerely, q A-aetc W, e& � e Mara A. Lorg Grant H. and Susan S. Johnson 5004 Normandale Ct. Edina, MN 55436 952 - 929 -0745 Johnson.Grant.H(cD-g mail. com October 14, 2013 Property Identification No. 33- 117 -21 -24 -0048 , Debra A. Mangen City Clerk City of Edina, Minnesota 4801 West 50th Street Edina, MN 55424 Dear Clerk Mangen and Mayor Hovland: James Hovland Mayor City of Edina, Minnesota 4801 West 50th Street Edina, MN 55424 V- S� e OCT 7 4 2013 wECEIfp As the property owner of the property located at 5004 Normandale Court with the Property Identification No. 33- 117 -21 -24 -0048 , 1 herby am providing the City Clerk, the Mayor, and the City of Edina, Minnesota with a written objection to the Proposed Special Assessment for Improvement No. BA -388; also known as the Richmond Hills Neighborhood Roadway Reconstruction for the above named property. On or about September 26, 2013 1 received the Notice of Public Hearing on Proposed Special Assessment from Debra A. Mangen set for October 14, 2013. The notice provided the following information related to the above named property for proposed assessments: roadway reconstruction $10,337.37 sewer and /or water improvements $0.00; for a combined total of $10,337.37. According to the Minnesota League of Cities, Information Memo, Special Assessment Guide, dated 9/22/2011, "Especially with regard to street improvements, it may be very difficult to demonstrate that there is any significant. increase in market value as a result of the resurfacing or reconstruction." The memo further states, A special assessment that exceeds the special benefit is a taking of property without fair compensation and violates both the Fourteenth Amendment of the United States Constitution and the Minnesota Constitution. Property assessed must enjoy a corresponding benefit from the local improvement." Thus, as for the Proposed Special Assessments specific to the roadway reconstruction I herby raise the following objections: Grant H. and Susan S. Johnson Property Identification No. 33- 117 -21 -24 -0048 1. The city provided no evidence that such improvements were divided appropriately, fairly and uniformly across the affected properties impacted by the Richmond Hills Neighborhood Roadway Reconstruction project. 2. The city provided no evidence that the improvements provided any special benefit to the named property as required under Minnesota Statutes Chapter 429, special benefit test. 3. The city provided no evidence that the improvements provided any increase in the market value of the land as required under Minnesota Statutes Chapter 429, special benefit test. Therefore, I request that the proposed assessment for roadway reconstruction be reduced to an amount no greater than the increase in the market value of the land specific to my property as required under Minnesota Statutes Chapter 429, special benefit test. Sin rely, Grant H. Joh son Susan S Johnson From: Deb Mangen <DMangen @EdinaMN.gov> Subject: RE: Objection to Special Assessment Date: October 8, 2013 7:37:23 AM CDT To: 'David WikofP <djwikoff @comcast.neb sr �At OCT 1 q 2013 CE /OFD Mr. Wikoff, I have noted receipt of your letter and forwarded it to Engineering for inclusion with the Council's packet materials for the Oct. 14th meeting. Debra Mangen, MMC, City Clerk 952- 8264MB I Fax 952 -826 -0390 DMangen @EdinaMN.gov I www.EdinaMN.gov ...For Living, Learning, Raising Families & Doing Business - -- Original Message---- - From: David Wikoff [mailto:djwikoff @comcast.netj Sent: Monday, October 07, 2013 6:58 PM To: Deb Mangen Cc: Jean Wikoff Subject: Objection to Special Assessment Ms. Mangen: Attached is a copy of the letter we sent in the mail to you objecting to the special assessment on our property located at 6306 Hillside Rd, Edina, MN 55436. David Wikoff From: David Wikoff <djwikoff @comcast.nebLf Subject: Objection to Special Assessment Date: October 7, 2013 6:57:58 PM CDT To: DMangen @EdinaMN.gov Cc: Jean Wikoff <djwikoff @comcast.neb 1 Attachment, 432 KB Ms. Mangen: Attached is a copy of the letter we sent in the mail to you objecting to the special assessment on our property located at 6306 Hillside Rd, Edina, MN 55436. David Wikoff David Wikoff 6305 Hillside Rd. Edina, MN. 55436 October 7, 2013 Debra Mangen City Clerk City of Edina 4801- W. 50th St Edina, MN 55424 Re: Special Assessment Address: 6305 Hillside Rd., Edina, MN 55436 Property ID. No.: 0511621120028 Dear Ms. Mangen: My wife, Jean Wikoff, and I reside at 6305 Hillside Rd., Edina, MN and we are in receipt of the notice of a special assessment on our property in the amount of $11,369.37. This letter shall serve as our written objection to the special assessment, because the amount of the assessment exceeds the special benefit to the property. Call me at 612 - 599 -7665 if you have any questions. Thank you. Sincerely, David Wikoff Properties in Richmond Hills needing repairs to driveway /street /curb & gutter SEAL OCT 14 2013 RECEIVED Yvonne Terrace 5004 — gutter cracked, also concrete missing - 5020 — driveway apron higher than driveway — triphazard, does not drain properly, moss growing. Also, plants removed not replaced as promised. Gutter has settled, resulting in damage by plow. 5032 — curb /gutter settled, E of driveway 5041— driveway apron higher than driveway, moss growing. Original driveway cracked during removal of apron, not replaced. Gutters W of drive settled, causing ponding of water and debris. 5049 — two lengths of curbing settled, pulled up resulting in cracks — sinking again 56`h Street 5017 — curb /gutter cracked W of driveway 5037 -5033 — curb settled between the driveways and broken 5041— curb /gutter settled W of driveway 5109 — curb /gutter settled E of drive, causing ponding 5040 - curb /gutter settled and damaged by plow, E of driveway 5036 -5032 — curb /gutter settled between driveways and damaged by plow 5032 — curb /gutter settled E of drive, causing ponding Kent Avenue 5048 — curb /gutter cracked E of drive 5044 — curb /gutter cracked just W of hydrant, 5 feet from recent road redo 5032 — low spot in apron, causing ponding 5028 — gutter settled E of drive, causing ponding 5024 — gutter settled E of drive, causing ponding Page 2 — Richmond Hills Kent Avenue 5004 — 2 cracks in curb /gutter W of drive 5013 — curb /gutter cracked W of drive within 20 feet of road redo 5029 curb /gutter crack W of drive. 5033 — gutter settled at drive— ponding 5041— curb broken and settled W of drive, at recent redo Windsor Drive '; 5517 — 3 cracks E of drive, curb /gutter settled at drive, causing ponding 5201- curb /gutter sunk just W of drive, causing ponding 5217 — plow damage E and W of drive due to settlement, also several (4 +) cracks in gutter in cul de sac 5045 — curb /gutter settled E of drive, causing ponding 5016 -5020 curb /gutter cracked between drives Richmond 5021— curb /gutter cracked W of drive 5029 — curb out of line W of drive — causing plow damage 5041— curb /gutter settled W of drive 5100 Richmond Lane — crack in curb /gutter next to recent redo W of the patch (nearly every house in this area has curb damage) 5130 — curb /gutter cracked W of drive and gouges in concrete (not plow ?) 5120 — 6 cracks at joints E of drive 5108 curb and pavement cracked about 10 feet from hydrant 5100 Richmond Circle — 6 cracks in curb Page 3 - Richmond Hills Richmond Drive 5036 — sunk at joint W of drive, causing plow damage 5032 — sunk at joint W of drive, causing ponding and plow damage 1=pwRT / R : COMMr :�NDATI ©N To: MAYOR AND COUNCIL 0 �o YOR 18B6 Agenda Item #: VI. B. From: John Wallin, Finance Director Action Discussion ❑ Date: October 14, 2013 Information ❑ Subject: PUBLIC HEARING - Certification of Delinquent Utilities - DU -13 — Resolution No. 2013 -102 Action Requested: Adopt Resolution 2013 -102. 0 e Information / Background: Minnesota Statute 444.075 allows Cities to "charge a charge against the owner, lessee, occupant or all of them and may provide and covenant for certifying unpaid charges to the county auditor with taxes against the property served for collection as other taxes are collected ". City of Edina code sections 1 100.05, 1 1 10.05 and 716.03 allows for the certification of water, sanitary sewer, storm sewer and recycling delinquent accounts. The City of Edina has certified unpaid utility bills to the county for collection for many years. Hennepin County requires council resolution prior to certification. Utility accounts (water, sanitary sewer, storm sewer, and recycling) with.balances over $50 and delinquent one month or longer were notified in writing of the pending certification and the time and date of the hearing in a letter dated September 10. A $30 administrative fee is added to delinquent accounts to cover the additional costs associated with the certification process. As with the special assessments, certified amounts would also include an interest rate of 6.5 %. The actual numbers of accounts and amounts certified to the county will be less than the amounts indicated here as customers will continue to have the opportunity to pay the overdue rbalances up until November 15, leaving time to detect NSF checks. The delinquent utility list is a list of properties in Edina that remain on the certification list as of Tuesday, October 8. In September, 688 properties were sent notices for a total of $435;558.15. Last year, notices were sent to 952 properties totaling $382,971.51 with the final certification of 318 properties for $203,679.43. In 2011, 688 properties received notices totaling $439,641.05 with 3,15 properties being certified for $291,514.01. Last year the hearing was moved up two weeks in comparison with current and prior years hearings and as a result a number of accounts that had just become delinquent were sent the certification notice. These accounts would have had two more weeks to pay comparing with the current and prior years, making last year's number of notices and amount higher in comparison. The number of accounts on the certification list as of October 8, 2013 is 444 compared with 534 as of the public hearing in 2012 and 468 in 2011. The attached :list includes a large delinquency which is for 4500 France Ave and is not the same business that has been the concern of the Council the past several years. The business that had large balances in the past was not delinquent when the letters were sent. City of Edina • 4801 W. 50th St. - Edina, MN 55424 REPORT / RECOMMENDATION, Page 2 The City has received a list of 6 properties that receive St. Louis Park utility services but are located in Edina and pursuant to agreement between the City of Edina and the City of St. Louis Park, these 6 properties are also included in the delinquent list to be certified by the City of Edina. There are 2 properties that have Edina utility service but are located in Richfield and pursuant to the agreement between the City of Edina and the City of Richfield will be certified by the City of Richfield. The City has been notified that there is one property that-receives Richfield utility services but is located in Edina to be included in the delinquent list to be certified by the City of Edina. To respect the privacy of delinquent customers, the attached list omits the names and addresses. The detailed list of properties and delinquent amounts to be certified is available in the Clerk's. Office and the Finance Department. ATTACHMENT: Resolution No. 2013 -102 Delinquent Utility List RESOLUTION NO. 2013-102 RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE CERTIFICATION OF DELINQUENT UTILITY CHARGES TO THE HENNEPIN COUNTY AUDITOR WHEREAS, the Edina City Council duly adopted Ordinances No. 1100.05 1110.05, and 716.03 providing for the certification of delinquent utility charges (water, sanitary sewer, storm sewer, and recycling) to the County Auditor for collection pursuant to the provision of MN Statute 444.075. WHEREAS, the Finance Department has prepared a list of delinquent utility charges together with the legal description of the premises served, the official copy of which is on file with the City Clerk and attached to this resolution. WHEREAS, all parties have been notified by mail of the certification. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Clerk shall transmit a certified duplicate copy of this resolution and the list of delinquent accounts to the County Auditor to be extended on the proper tax list of the County, and such delinquent accounts shall be collected and paid over the same manner as other municipal taxes with interest from the date of this resolution at the rate of 6.5 percent (6.5 %) per annum and including a $30.00 administrative penalty pursuant to the provisions of MN Statute 444.075. The description of the certification is: NAME OF CERTIFICATION INSTALLMENTS Delinquent Utilities ; DU -13 Levy No. 18591 1 Year Passed and adopted by the City Council on October 14, 2013. ATTEST: City Clerk Mayor STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF HENNEPIN CITY OF EDINA )SS 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 14, 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 CITY OF EDINA 4801 West 50th Street • Edina, Minnesota 55424 www.EclinaMN.gov . 952 - 927 -8861 • Fax 952 - 826 -0390 Certification List as of 10/8/13 Account.# Property ID #_ - Certification Balance Customer # .Account # Property ID.# -- Certification Balance 0110072000 1902824140045 $1,213.81 00077214 0111655003 2002824340058 $389.36 0110073009 1902824140046 $501.36 00099719 0111665001 2902824220046 $488.42 0110073009 1902824140046 $360.60 00077234 0111736006 2902824220052 $1,887.86 0110113001 1902824140091 $305.26 00117998 0111752005 2902824220055 $1,375.10 0110158007 1902824410022 $448.00 00111750 0111871001 2902824220048 $245.32 0110180009 1902824440048 $1,396.84 00114693 0112206005 2902824120124 $349.28 0110181008 1902824440047 $526.08 00099036 0112210009 2902824120120 $340.73 0110237002 1902824410009 $503.09 00117085 0113402005 3202824310024 $982.63 0110241006 1902824410048 $278.30 00117095. 0120020100 1902824440064 $306.80 0110252002 1902824440058 $526.45 00111763 0120050005 1902824430108 $232.63 0110331007 2002824230017 $214.69 00114022 0120202002 1902824420100 $502.83 0110350012 2002824230014 $473.06 00104242 0120207007 1902824420104 $94.68 0110363008 2002824320136 $810.41 00077643 0120225005 1902824430068 $476.20 0110370009 2002824330036 $109.46 00077657 0120237001 1902824430079 $512.84 0110386001 2002824330008 $244.97 00107577 0120245010 1902824430019 $125.87 0110398016 2002824320089 $525.29 00113032 0120259004 1902824420112 $898.69 0110405008 2002824320075 $251.51 00115695 0120314007 1902824430054 $792.57 0110410001 2002824230049 $142.19 00113882 0120330007 1902824430065 $702.27 0110421008 2002824230078 $630.85 00077749 0120335002 1902824430046 $963.49 0110423006 2002824230120 $897.63 00113405 0120342003 1902824420086 $348.14 0110492002 2002824320062 $236.52 00077779 0120368002 1902824310003 $945.18 0110538008 2002824230037 $489.60 00101053 0120370008 1902824310005 $113.80 0110554007 2002824320038 $148.83 00118371 0120407005 1902824310166 $348.62 0110577000 2002824330031 $845.43 00103030 0120447007 1902824310138 $149.01 0110592001 2002824320019 $360.90 00116739 0120494009 1902824310035 $394.62 0110637008 2002824320001 $103.71 00114509 0120496007 1902824310037 $481.00 0110656004 2002824320035 $639.89 00077896 0120497006 1902824310038 $380.33 0110660008 2002824330027 $183.81 00101942 0120515004 1902824310056 $963.74 0110664004 2002824340017 $436.51 00107478 0120518001 1902824310113 $176.18 0110682002 2002824310111 $500.82 00077941 0120547006 3002824210064 $1,001.31 0110683001 2002824310112 $611.10 00077944 0120551009 3002824210057 $672.18 0110698004 2002824310093 $512.82 00077969 0120576000 1902824340057 $1,515.49 0110756003 2002824240082 $147.44 00077970 0120577009 1902824340056 $815.71 0110851007 2002824240079 $1,130.65 00091736 0120606004 1902824310074 $236.85 0110864002 2002824210132 $793.66 00118339 0120609010 1902824310077 $445.06 0110890000 2002824310052 $194.26 00114103 0120614004 1902824310092 $67.33 0110970003 2002824240129 $396.25 00105065 0120617001 1902824310095 $122.39 0111001004 2002824340029 $601.44 00081033 0120627009 1902824340068 $235.21 0111008007 2002824310144 $332.11 00110117 0120656003 1902824310105 $294.56 0111012001 2002824310140 $355.94 00115682 0120657002 1902824310106 $794.52 0111016007 2002824310033 $605.96 00117543 0120667000 1902824310085 $677.96 0111023008 2002824310026 $616.65 00109667 0120714003 3002824210052 $1,245.53 0111036003 2002824240028 $51.00 00091886 0120715002 3002824210053 $472.09 0111064008 2002824210034 $683.21 00078143 0120768008 3002824220005 $877.42 0111083005 2002824210082 $294.52 00078149 0120774000 3002824220042 $637.06 0111346008 2002824220039 $71.79 00110282 0120825009 3002824230065 $422.57 0111383002 2002824220026 $85.65 00117791 0120845005 3002824220015 $1,328.76 0111423004 1902824110009 $390.83 00078189 0120865000 1902824320018 $171.35 0111424003 1902824110038 $171.28 00113859 0120995003 1902824330037 $557752 0111440003 1902824110039 $452.65 00078308 0121046000 1902824330047 $517.32 0111546006 2002824330088 $293.51 00117291 0121106025 3002824230034 $140.34 0111622003 2002824340011 $378.87 00114782 0121205007 3002824210093 $1,007.48 0111629006 2002824340057 $829.56 00078353 0121218002 3002824210082 $701.39 0111635008 2002824340064 $559.87 00105478 0150749009 0611621140049 $1,206.94 0111645006 2002824340040 $423.00 00091188 0151100000 0511621310088 $266.85 0111647004 2002824340042 $141.65 00118325 0151615008 0511621110004 $123.61 0111649002 2002824340066 $605.96 00101943 0151617006 0511621140002 $400.31 00106012 0152640005 0511621130008 $837.03 00083523 0162367005 3211721220052 $931.53 00078690 0152655007 0511621130024 $466.89 00114130 0162399007 3211721230012 $19 *.23 00117954 0152726002 0511621420051 $615.59 00104678 0362412000 3211721230067 $668.76 00117016 0153070002 0511621340001 $115.51 00080877 0162500138 0611621210023 $1,137.83 00078830 0153095003 0511621440046 $786.27• 00104713 0162549328 0611621210061 $247.67 00113209 0153110004 0511621420054 $327.80 00118128 0162558059 0611621220015 $75.7' 00112448 0153170001 0511621430059 $410.72 00080953 0162558102 0611621230039 $130:3`. 00078930 0153419002 0511621430026 $638.25 00116440 0163222008 0611621230058 $1,167.62 00104862 0153509003 0511621330006 $115:51 00077151 0163227003 0611621230014 $2,397.46 00097027 0153701018 0611621440044 $883.43 00116165 0163230026 0611621230018 $752.82 00095391 .0153718000 0711621110005 $714.417 '00118558 0163351001 0611621130025 $195.06 00079114 0153722004 0711621120030 $2,098.00 00108886 0163374004 0611621130038 $174.48 00079144 0153750009 0711621110033 $1,547.64 00114851 0165008236 0611621340009 $1,012.16 00097960 0153752043 0711621110070 $831.72 00081264 0165016227 0611621320005 $400.22 00110170 0153752196. 071162111005.5. .$182.42 00093431 0165040003 0611621320057 $1,124.91 00106580 0153787006 0711621120013 $665:84 00091023 0165064013 0611621330029 $173:87 00096924 0153788005 0711621120014 $666.21 00111984 0167004021 0711621220028 $503:22 00102230 0153827017 0711621120058 $2,326.57. 00081394 0167007000 0611621330053 $2,101.88 00114577 0153829015 0711621120070 $474.48 00081528 0200047001 1802824120033 $111.32 00117512 0153855021 0711621210005 $256.07 .. 00112189 0200051004 1802824120037 $176.50 00114067 0153859009 0711621120051 $100.38 •00102954 0200145002 1802824120074 $799.86 00115929 0157506007 0811621210019 $548:55 00102828 0200180008 1802824130064 $144.93 00109278 0157508041 0811621210043 $141.65 00108022 0200220000 1802824120101 $185.59 00109678 0157508229 0811621210050 $868.97-' ' 00115854 0200394000 1802824210066 $238.39 00117515 0157508292 0811621210037 $377.57 , 00092725;._ 0200488007 1802824240078 $951.33 00101971 0157515015 0811621210005 $48437;;; - 00113192 0200658001 1802824230046 $1,944.35 00112625 0157962004 0811621240060 $264.68, 00118713, 0200750008 1802824410166 $125.73 00107316 0158008115 0811621210030 $729:98.,• 00114837 0200835016 1802824140020 $312.82 00079589 0158008133 0811621210027 $968:81 00117806 0200920003 1802824440095.. $289.51 00103822 0158054001 0811621230002 $1;540.97 00108115; '0200993005 1802824410124 $135.18 00104926 0158980108 0811621430047 $48809 00116895 0201039009 1902824120096 $649.4f 00094189 0159011127 0811621310008 $136.14 00094552 0201087000 1902824120033 $1,259.44 00117038 0159090531 0811621340027 $766.67 00082186 0201203009 1802824420092 $1,809.31 00079926 0159090693 0811621340099 $959.73 00111598 0201232004 1802824430053 $784.61 00091749 0159090737 0811621330123 $537.62 t 00112573 0201246008 1902824120068 $1,097.57. 00106154 0159091068 0811621330159 $901.19 00101037 _ 0201269000 1902824130007 $1,590.64 00105645 0159091184 0811621330132 $2,036.95 00113632 0201285000 1902824130091 $304.57 00111799 0160326009 3111721310031 $1,067.97 00117871 0201326001 1902824120079 $77.22 00111797 0160328007 3111721310029 $1,027.40 00102596 0201401009 1802824420005 $147.12 00107031 0160544005 3111721240069 $707.28 00094198 0201475019 1802824110003 $135.12 00115938 0160561076 3011721330020 $9.4.42 00115897 0201485008 1802824110010 $280.93 00118167 0160561076 3011721330020 $484.61 00082902 0201547004 1802824140042 $492.53 00117373 0160561183 3011721330005 $1,116.73 00117142 0201548003 1802824140043 $687.09 00112228 .0160561192 3011721330005 $294.34 00111664, 0201548012 1802824140043 $739.81 00118606 0160561192 3011721330005 $252.51 00082969 0201660005 1802824440081 $245.25 00080091 0160561450 3111721220009 $678.09 00110376 0202040004 1902824210066 $134.90 00080181 0160647154 3111721240013 $1,721.39 00100517 0202139006 1902824210086 $1,348.09 00118813 0160802002 3111721410048 $111.72 00111666 0202245007 1902824240012 $192.79 00117609 0160820000'3111721440040 $467.98 00104895 0202246006 1902824240011 $107.99 00080445 0160823007 3111721410015 $228.39 00104325 0202249003 1902824240024 $522.20 00117796 0160835003 3111721410009 $426.21 00111668 0202259000 1902824240029 $810.02 00104639 0160855008 3111721410066 $479.45 00090393 .0202278007 1902824320012 $343.73 00111816 0161067000 3111721430005 $175.09 00106180 0202281002 1902824320010 $611.94 00098254 0161230002 3111721310027 $520.50 00114525 .0202281039 1902824320043 $413.68 . 00080650 0161237005 3111721340019 $1,550.93 00090879 0202298003 1902824320029 $160.91 00080676 0161262003 3111721340025 $531.98 00077907 0202309000 1902824230047 $492.7 00093556 0161519004 3111721320002 $7,037.27 00083273 0202315002 1902824230041 $555.61 00093556 0161519022 3111721320002 $544.24 00083314 0202357001 1902824230011 $643.84 00093556 0161519031 3111721320002 $50.67 00083385 0202683006 2811721220012 $658.96 00107244 0161945008 3211721220010 $398.66 00111671 0202755009 2811721210049 $566.36 00114988 0162358006 3211721210009 $636.62 00116249 0202760002 2811721210058 $889.00 00101146 0202763009 2811721210200 $763.42 00105238 0304975007 3211721210029 $807.67 00112030 0202780008 2811721210198 $280.58 00085532 0305040005 2911721110005 $1,279.52 00105016 0202846028 2811721310036 $754.87 00098217 0305043002 2911721140038 $1,512.72 00118378 0202849016 2811721310038 $134.90 00117633 0305065005 2911721140005 $118.67 00113427 0202917004 2811721240035 $852.00 00085604 0305129009 2911721310004 $625.23 3952 0202979009 2811721230066 $478.59 00085686 0305378007 3011721110032 $632.43 .7848 0202992002 281 - 1721230009 $897.40 00111896 0305383000 3011721110026 $592.37 00111451 0203131002 2811721320144 $111.25 00093615 0305398003 3011721120053 $649.04 00113553 0203211005 2811721320004 $491.74 00104516 0305449039 3011721120088 $914.87 00106695 0203229005 2811721320142 $245.57 00109042 0305489003 3011721120097 $629.86 00093017 0203245005 2811721320152 $210.78 00090605 0305518008 3011721210022 $961.08 00083754 0203298001 2811721330026 $743.88 00104014 0305519007 3011721210023 $915.39 00118685 0203299000 2811721330025 $172.77 00111190 0305533009 3011721210037 $285.86 00102732 0203307000 2811721320132 $1,979.08 00105040 0305555002 3011721210165 $630.30 0011.1686 0203375016 2811721320112 $199.46 00085840 0305570003 3011721210049 $195.92 00083823 0203400006 2811721320086 $514.37 00110497 0305602005.3011721210112 $1,056.37 00118359 0203517024 3311721220006 $766.85 00109011 0305634007 3011721210074 $461.76 00111689 0203532007 3311721220088 $500.10 00102684 0305684006 3011721220142 $542.20 00088119 0203603001 3311721220074 $244.19 00104735 0305700006 3011721220014 $154.16 00113448 0203612000 3311721220076 $285.59 00085940 0305701005 3011721220015 $515.78 00115168 0203709004 3311721210046 $11032 00085966 0305729003 3011721220122 $460.32 00083971 0203727002 3311721210074 $619.16 00102883 0305744004 3011721220031 $350.14- 00083986 0203748007 3311721210065 $146.78 00099460 0305771000 3011721220100 $559.37 00083988 0203750002 3311721210067 $218.31 00116124 0305782007 3011721220110 $538.62 00107387 0203761009 3311721220065 $734.14 00084768 0305826005 3011721220086 $303.25 00084030 0203795009 3311721210086 $722.37 00113021 0305829002 3011721220089 $447.71 00104323 0203827001 3311721210028 $550.01 00100284 0305906017 3011723130085 $116.89 00104550 0203877000 3311721240063 $545.71 00107807 0306571019 3011721440010 $394.45 00116035 0203888007 3311721240074 $143.19 00098125 0306706008 3011721420021 $822.10 00107876 0290012003 0702824430078 $209.37 00090991 0306717005 3011721430019 $388.27 0576 0290029004 0702824430136 $1,192.67 00104563 0306849015 3011721130088 $228.44 �. --0 682 0290045004 0702824430048 $166.04 00118549 0306885001 3011721420006 $170.83 00117655 0290072000 0702824430129 $118.48 00116123 0307503001 3111721230004 $138.74 00097149 0290181062 0702824140032 $120.05 00113352 0330091001 3002824110054 $369.96 00105283 0290183113 0702824410134 $610.92 00086576 0330132002 3DO2824110036 $167.64 00111315 0290289009 0702824420002 $993.93 00086610 0330193017 3002824110076 $1,541.60 00110428 0290385002 0702824420093 $309.89 00095138 0330214003 3002824110034 $1,437.22 00084533 0290396009 0702824440120 $1,104.17 00114279 0330227008 3002824110025 $195.26 00084540 0290405008 0702824440087 $101.00 00107385 0330303005 3002824120074 $534.99 00114244 0290450002 0702824440065 $150.30 00086727 03305250073002824210003 $377.35 00111701 0290457032 0702824440067 $108,684.94 00099233 0330721009 3002824440013 $460.74 00111701 0290457033 0702824440067 $676.44 00093057 0330761000 3002824440040 $496.59 00084608 0290463007 0702824440048 $625.51 00086822 0330774005 3002824440038 $702.17 00084624 0290480006 0702824440024 $416.73 00086874 0330828001 3002824410024 $452.61 00102918 0290511009 0702824420120 $985.25 00098393 0330852000 3002824430007 $202.23 00084720 0290572005 0702824130014 $98.04 00086936 0330916004 3002824430073 $991.52 00084753 0290601000 0702824130043 $161.93 00114443 0330935001 3002824430055 $1,574.93 00099401 0304013001 3311721310062 $505.00 00086973 0330953008 3002824420029 $190.08 00114134 0304164008 3311721230079 $152.32 00108454 0330969000 3002824340011 $288.08 00085007 0304193003 3311721320036 $119.64 00117502 0330975002 3002824340017 $191.44 00106825 0304210002 3311721310037 $796.13 00103442 0330989006 3002824340043 $1,123.92 00104071 0304220000 3311721310051 $570.39 00108561 0331013004 3002824340030 $2,293.79 00085041 0304222008 3311721310049 $1,314.72 00117362 0331042009 3002824340068 $123.76 00094241 0304233005 3311721310005 $800.03 00105233 0331054004 3002824310044 $208.83 r^ 196098 0304250003 3311721310013 $700.63 00087188 0331232009 3002824330065 $240.47 7076 0304259004 3311721310022 $538.56 00091856 0331262002 3002824330013 $617.49 u;: 11384 0304282005 3311721320058 $906.94 00085182 0331625013 3102824110031 $460.45 00085225 0304563005 2911721440052 $641.04 00094151 0331702000 3102824110076 $615.26 00114125 0304632002 3211721120056 $767.62 00087379 0331734002 3102824120019 $1,574.60. 00109411 0304873000 2911721340042 $1,181.76 00087405 0331737205 3102824130123 $190.36 00085464 0304913002 3211721210032 $809.27. 00118285 0331737269 3102824130017 $373.20 00112762 0331785000 3102824120011 $197.04 00105598 0331805006 3102824130062 $953.11 00109212 0331915003 3102824210083 $761.44 00087578 0331969008 3102824130115 $459.80 00111925 0332113001 3102824210037 $1,071.68 00087613 0332131009 3102824210022 $625.21 00113367 0332174007 3102824130065 $986.44 00092776 0332175006 3102824130064 $1,095.35 00087681 0332197000 3102824240006 $50.76 00111927 0332286002 3102824240061 $1,454.16 00087793 0332618001 3102824320006 $93.95 00087825 0332643046 3102824320046 $125.73 00098061 0332647006 3102824320044 $1,316.08 00117389 0332720006 3102824220033 $575.31 00100760 0332729007 3102824220045 $972.28 00087968 0332781002 3102824230019 $538.66 00083399 0340123002 3311721340075 $72.27 00118399 0340129006 3311721340059 $125.27 00105623 0340194006 3311721330074 $317.24 00110566 0340204004 3311721340031 $938.41 00095924 0340336005 3311721330085 $1,382.00 00103436 0340442006 0411621240050 $287.62 00114496 0340464009 0411621240005 $520.65 00114850 0340504001 0411621210019 $556.01 00104202 0340521000 0411621240010 $131.86 00102384 0340529002 0411621240097 $635.90 00117364 0340555009 0411621240030 $920.66 00096968 0340559005 0411621210028 $103.80 00104506 0340604000 0411621210069 $720.73 00114240 0340613009 0411621240042 $754.06 00088443 0340617005 0411621240039 $373.78 00106600 0340624006 0411621240072 $398.38 00111941 0340741004 0411621220072 $182.04 00113658 0340840004 0411621220078 $589.75 00116555 0340884001 0411621220086 $604.03 00088700 0341134007 0511621410059 $1,385.84 00099063 0341135006 0411621320082 $1,058.30 00111553 0341165009 0411621320071 $464.14 00090452 0341193005 0411621340009 $554.80 00085339 0341319004 0411621330025 $662.01 00088832 0341348018 0411621330013 $567.76 00115285 0341432006 0911621220005 $183.18 00100338 0341639007 3211721140029 $509.76 00108802 0341724021 3211721130072 $61.23 00089065 0341800019 3211721310039 $463.13 00114550 0341803016 3211721310033 $1,081.10 00089119 0341829007 3211721240022 $137.81 00113787 0341944007 3211721440008 $1,099.62 00112752 0341972002 0511621110063 $277.06 00118358 0341996004 0511621110085 $477.71 00117717 0341996004 0511621110085 $476.36 00097900 0342001005 0511621110060 $454.36 00107401 0342018006 3211721440057 $308.28 00098747 0342041007 3211721440040 $956.25 00105917 0342087002 0511621120026 $915.12 00105508 0342114009 3211721430026 $403.54 00114925 0342129002 3211721430021 $434.57 00116775 0342216006 3211721410058 $429.11 00102003 0342227012 3211721410005 $475.04 $249,070.76 00089455 0342291004 3211721410027 $620.05 00089482 0342354008 3211721420041 $891.61 00111882 0342502009 3211721340014 $477.24 00109608 0342545008 3211721340072 $471.30 00109867 0342550055 0511621220007 $374.07 00115273 0342550144 0511621220018 $536.1 00112560 0342550297 0511621220032 $960.55 00089646 0342551250 0511621220066 $411.05 00109272 0342552277 0511621220112 $107.26 00089733 0342635009 0511621110019 $469.54 00102284 0342663004 0511621110036 $535.84 00115323 0342730003 3211721310056 $422.04 00111883 0342998000 3211721230025 $96.16 00105742 0343042004 3211721320042 $617.96 00098604 0343044002 3211721320044 $1,297.04 00090021 0345070120 0811621430006 $476.85 00102380 0345070549 0811621340084 $737.09 00118490 0345898200 0811621340065 $106.47 00116326 0348040005 1711621220029 $359.30 00113059 0350025385 2911721130025 $99.22 $116,945.80 ST LOUIS PARK DELINQUENT WITH EDINA ADDRESS 00047942 0023483001 2811721210003 $176.23 00053279 0021822002 0702824130075 $384.54 00017596 0022861009 1802824220026 $106.85 00016099 0023566003 2811721210019 $334.90 00017593 0022846000 1802824220029 $588.88 00039658 0022388508 1802824210014 $409.58 $2,000.98 RICHFIELD DELINQUENT WITH EDINA ADDDRESS 00024959 0111064320 2902824240118 $119.58 $119.58 CERTIFICATION BALANCE 10/8/13 $368,137.12 To: From: Date: Subject: MAYOR AND COUNCIL Cary Teague, Community Development Director October 14, 2013 ' A ZN o e I - 0 1968 Agenda Item #: VI.C. Action 0 Discussion ❑ Information ❑ PUBLIC HEARING — Resolution No. 2013 -82 & 2013 -83, Preliminary Plat & Front Yard Setback Variance, 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 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: A subdivision; 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. 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. Planning_ Commission Recommendation: The planning commission recommend denial of the preliminary plat and variance 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. 50`' 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 and No.. 2013-83 •. 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 6,609 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 55.424 wwwEdinaMN.gov . 952- 927 -$861 • 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: 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. 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 would 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 , 2013. 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 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 RESOLUTION NO. 2013-83 APPROVING A FRONT YARD SETBACK VARIANCE 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 a front yard setback variance from 100 feet to 45 feet for proposed Lot 2 of the Subdivision of 6609 Blackfoot Pass. 1.02 The purpose of the variance is to locate the home.on Lot 2 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. 1.02 The following is the legal description of land: Lot 2, Block 1, Great Neighborhood Homes. 1.06 On July 24, 2013, the Planning Commission recommended denial of the Preliminary Plat finding that the variance and development of this lot would be out of character with the neighborhood. Vote: 6 -2. Section 2. FINDINGS 2.01 Approval is based on the following findings: 1. The proposed building pad has been located on the site to cause the least amount of impact on the sites mature trees and slopes. 2. 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: .3. Conservation easements would be located over the steep slopes and mature Oak Trees 4. An additional 10 -foot wide conservation easement is proposed along the north, west and south lot lines to preserve the wooded feel of the lot. 5. 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 riJft+b]pfine. 4801 West 50th Street:. Edina, Minnesota 55424 www.EdinaMN.govo 952..- 927 -8861 • Fax 952 -826 -0390 RESOLUTION NO. 2013-83 Page Two 6. 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. 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. Section 3. APPROVAL NOW THEREFORE, it is hereby resolved by the City Council of the City of Edina, approves a front yard setback variance for Lot 2 of the proposed Great Neighborhood Homes Subdivision of 6609 Blackfoot Pass. Approval is subject to the following Conditions: 1. 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 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. e. The applicant work with the city forester in regard to tree preservation and removal of Buckthorn. 2. Any new home on Lot 2 would be limited to a ridge line height of 35 feet. 3. 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. 4. 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. RESOLUTION NO. 2013-83 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. 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 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 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 Hearin 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 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_testingsupported 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 September 26, 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 both 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 193, 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, experienceDforgetfulness 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 an hard about that but decided that the builder, Mr. Busyn,was an eco-friendly person and that the sub - division as proposed especially with the variance 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 r diameter oak because they were shading a neighborb grass. She has no trees. I do not know if non - technical factors are a consideration in y 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. Johnson 'w9S�11'r�, PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT Originator Meeting Date Agenda #, Cary,Teague September 11, 2013 VI.B 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 Al, 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.) 4 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.) 4 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 for a variance for the building pad for Lot 2 would be met. Per state, law and the Zoning Ordinance, a variance should not be granted unless it is found that the enforcement of the ordinance would cause practical difficu_Ities 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 Al 4.) Staff would recommend requiring a conservation easement over the slope and Oak trees that are to be preserved to permanently preserve those resources. b) There are circumstances #hat 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 5 Interactive Property Maps/ Map U 6Al 1A f , 7 As INDIANN6 } �i Parcel 06-116-21-42-0010 ID: K, r. a- ID LAf�E l Map Scale: 1" = 400 ft. N Print Date: 9/5/2013 - Parcel 6609 Blackfoot Pass Address: Edina, MN 55439 Property Residential Type: Home- Homestead stead: Parcel 1.76 acres Area: 76,6652 sq ft 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. Sale Code: COPYRIGHT @ HENNEPIN COUNTY 2013 A Tih•irtk Green! InteractlVe ,J'; r: Maps,, C• rib . i; 1 'ao4 C•4uo N _ � 1 0600 S , l 6617 y ,.. i 6401 \, •�� E6 � 1 J � ,yam +. JQQ' rf,2n ;4 24 6624 C,70C, Parcel 06- 116 -21 -42 -0010 ID: Owner D L Johnson Etal Name: Parcel 6609 Blackfoot Pas Address: Edina, MN 55439 Property Residential Type: Home- Homestead stead: Parcel 1.76 acres Area: 76,652 sq ft 6001 6605 670 5 6704 6705 �I� 671 Property Mar 6600 6605 t 6609 156 ( 6604 6613 Cr -,17 6612 6616 ff - 'I 6608 6r -2p GLFAS0t•J ILI` 1 __ 6,624 6618 6632 6,11 6203 6`04 6216 6200 OF, j 6215 6209 6205 r 6701 h i Map Scale: T' = 200 ft. N Print Date: 9/512013 AY 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 O HENNEPIN COUNTY 2013 A Think Green! Interact a e Maps i/ ka, Property Map r N Map Scale: 1" =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 20113 .A Tifimk Green! Parcel 06- 116 -21 -42 -0010 ID: Owner D L Johnson Etal Name: Parcel 66D9 Blackfoot Pass Address: Edina, MN 55439 Property Residential Type: Horne- Homestead stead: Parcel 1.76 acres Area: 76,652 sq ft ka, Property Map r N Map Scale: 1" =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 20113 .A Tifimk Green! _ ��,_ � s� � ..�- Y y> >. '� F. �� t + r �� } - .... �� � Q � �' r�' -'* ., {�. _% • A.' ;,,; ��: � � r* R {� T' sir�'tt`^�`7� ,��r�.•`�pti��r� ��y�� ��� �"33�4.��j +i�k' ''� I ��t � '� � µ. � I. -two _, -. � � ,.� .. _ . -. w , _.. .. n y,w• ^�,.�+F•,..�w+�►^�' . `a - ON i<AUT tjfi Rt A 7 N f,- 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 17, 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 neighborhood. 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 ftont 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 wdI 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 of Blackfoot Pass 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 i.� 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 611 homeowners within 500' and held a neighbor meeting at the site on August 8`h. 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 4 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 4 10 "co , liseNiition easement to maintain the wobd6d look of the property frolialhe 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_ n- on the survey. The only excdptions,ti) this easement will be the driveway entrances for Ldis I and Lots 2; Please let me know if you have any questions about this application. 1 can be reached at 952 -8,00-8765 or sc6tt@ i,eatiieighbbr1ibOdhonies:coiii. 'Thank you for reviewing this application. g',- 4 j 6609 Blackfoot Pass Variance Application Great Neighborhood Homes We are proposing a variance for the front yard setback for the proposed 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 l 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). �b 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, I can .limit the building height to 35' if we build on this more level location, A7 z I F-I / I -,? /- L- p -1 A - - 6 G7;41 ; h, -�-c SRE ADDRESS 6609 BULWO0T PASS MINA SIR 66439 PRELIMINARY PLAT FOR: 126_13 REF: 31 -13 128/63 GREAT NEIGHBORHOOD HOMES Leg—d vw„r. o tgnt M. e pemm I K� R<any ra ) y.mm x.meav va I Prvp..w p.NhNV 1161 "Anc r 1 1 -' m rtva 7.w s.w.<n sn sa, rw s.0 «a Rrs Pn. nb s,udr I u be'b�RIS IfL0.� 1 - I ' ° 27 t_ PLAS. A PLAN 27 7 cl, /( 40'4s'W 48 J 1 w R na Q °dos Bt1Gr10Gr YASS - 220' a Od11 li[Y4ML 1NA - 4SD'3 ' rRaPmrc °rscxrnue Vt ., e.a !. °v+al 1nls, �i x..,..>. u..ty. \ ascxvduc m•. l� ,vet sd. er m.r�.<� e.n.v. � smc: m s..,a w<. u.d. r. r � u•..«,1, - M "rw ca nneba <:nry trot av ....y. p<n r r,p.rt ... r•.w.•d M \ >+ or .>`IV ray a',.a m•ww, �ib1 i <... � ..y,1.rw '"' N. fiiMl 4 SURhYY'L, VI rvn n.s • Puo srsn' � w u..t °tldi x.w ,y,nr:l. v1u) ]270 PUTS `!''- 22- f PLAT 22.66 ur7 r N. - Po ro-/ x•rJ�t V ras.v.. - ry'�. l•f Wq ow. (raf. u.n <o') m Rk - ° 27 t_ PLAS. A PLAN 27 7 NdA (d S°'s.lsaal - 153E R 'Y L. v I 40'4s'W 48 J 1 P<.p.•w Id S - 5p.M W w -1 raw (d so' s.ww) - °dos Bt1Gr10Gr YASS - 220' a Od11 li[Y4ML 1NA - 4SD'3 ' rRaPmrc °rscxrnue Vt ., e.a !. °v+al 1nls, �i x..,..>. u..ty. \ ascxvduc m•. l� ,vet sd. er m.r�.<� e.n.v. � smc: m s..,a w<. u.d. r. r � u•..«,1, - M "rw pw is W <.rvpni.. .Mla n.° _ l.r .m<1 i.<uL„ blr.. ding xry ..c.wb.n r l \ rr nneba <:nry trot av ....y. p<n r r,p.rt ... r•.w.•d M \ >+ or .>`IV ray a',.a m•ww, �ib1 i <... � ..y,1.rw '"' N. fiiMl 4 SURhYY'L, VI rvn n.s • Puo srsn' � w u..t °tldi x.w ,y,nr:l. v1u) 1a;.e ] cp. ru1q. J Cwa. iR v ov - Aplt G tsagv. Fw'n• A<.au W+ s e 1 • r N. - Po ro-/ x•rJ�t V ras.v.. - ry'�. l•f Wq ow. (raf. u.n <o') W..dr.r A Vm.n. R-LS- IRI REG 151](1 Dor,o- DI- DF101> ldd S.w. Fe:V :yurww VV s s x ./ V a M... Mbw .1 1W.9 lM SdN� s ... C•%••) - Is,s.la1.. a.ir rr.t . P11v wit. W..�.. et f a.a.n. 11e, � J d ] '.9 xyt� 1� -v •wa7. A(( NOT TO SCALE LJ 1I t t_ C1 6.) - t- L1J n _ c] . Lr, t- LvSNS7 I s�¢ °n I VI -IN(C/ ILW W, � C) <C t- t- n V) <( Concrete Curb I I GO Timber Retaining Ylull Keystone Retaining YIa11 Proposed Retaining Wall I ExhUng Elevallon Top of Wall Elevation I __ Existing Contour - Proposed Contour Front Yard Setback -L Side Yard Setback ' Rear Yard Setback I I oee 1 Idonument Found 1 /2" x 14' PlasBc Cap - LS. 15230. I vaa.l ..aa rt l 1 8 I S /� SMA I v, I I 2467x,10 pLAT f� F (/� ,�' — 56.93 MEAS. � uaor ao r ..ma = 420 SF Q de6Y __ »nom .r.- 45t SF • / 0 Q peA. nor OOT PASON S Q I5: 927.6 e 918.0 4 / 6/jnh 1 , x s e v es p / a � iii.' •. ^: •: ;},y ,a g NW14'38 22.70 PLAT---- 22.56 MEAS. �\ Na " a; —41 4 raT'7a a' b -1 0• OQ — \ P o �� � °o �A � .'ice, •�./ .e a�,sa,..�, ., tir �Z \C,•A� � 27 01 1AEIS. 1 /�/ •*, a. `�i 27 .40 or 1.07 Mee I ♦ 48'45W It -'153.8 Ft /�/ I n T r- m. ru L. V I —A 5 1 � or 50. Aeree ....a - 150.1 Ft. 4. • wre Block 3, INDIAN HILLS, w \ \ / Pepin County, Llinnesolo. / ' Imi, Side of Chaymno Tr. Between N \ �� 08. Elovalion - 891.08. 1 VICINITY NOT TO S II I SS 1,4 X 143T 22.i t2.6f iwr ux ixwai • 1.07 A 153.8 r 0.71 A 150.1 1 H can !'u 1 • ce _ � ns 1— I VICINITY NOT 70 5C 61 f � Yrall Ckvalfnn 1 � _ , Glock 3, .NOW! f \ .pin LGIAIy, hIIMILoto. OIO. \ \\ do or Oheyeane Tr. Qelwaen \ Elavnllon - 891,03. \ 'cr Any Eot Ernanta Ito, shewn ore Item plat, eampanles and ore \ rmpona. lheUIJ Le ,Dolled vo deln9 any ezcavolion. � ns 1— I VICINITY NOT 70 5C 61 f � Yrall Ckvalfnn 1 � _ 011 E1.01o1, I :dolour I Contour d Selbock Satbock i Selba.k 1 I Found p I rP 1 ' rs co S) Q i Q ' f n ��t all ti co,h A �o� ,- ! ^h^ uJ#jj �tJ ( J d ` WE ]LqT- z - EAS. ♦ �r N 6E / 01 es 00 .r g'lY r" «^ T cua 11 H LL5. \ ncsota. enne Tr. Oetrre[n e91.oe. \ c \ td rocnod :oYOlion, _ L ofil ra. i I �I 1 1 1 Y , sarsa'45'w 247.10 n� 46.83 MPUi E4S, �` T �yCgCb JA] NaanD 276.01 All AS. 1 27 .40 PLAT 1 !♦ r S 48'4514 ill .vi] ua .e, I 5 V� eA Al� n� D C� L � (,r) LIJ F- �C E- V ) LIJ S i- Ld a I VICINITY MAP NOT TO SCALE 6r _ a00 _ I gob o�o 4 0 to <� VICINITY MAP NOT TO SCALE 6r _ beck � I rock oOCk 1 n a,; D (% + S87'4845 -w 247.10 PLAT (/) / ,• 246.93 MEAS• ,o n .. +� A loss^ •� >•1]s O•N.1 _ %mil /_ 1� c•J. ?���. �\ -` r n WD�11)I! / /I / -'1 \•.: ,• °If ,l. .Sll.! .1141 ll.t / / ////''' ' 1 �.7 ' +,Y • i A li 4i• FAOFOSm HOUESE FIASt FLOOR-(01E,0) N- -7`.D s \ / . hi.• wl' .ti \ N87• T1 R1 'E / +n;K loo • ~� 1 / 01 rC w:s .uRl , "'l•y Rlr ,J 4 .li11 000, �l •. t •,,y 4i `lye la �+ •lrl 'W �� 0 t4 'U�,`7''IC�:.. d0;� 1 u '` n 1 e• ]n .IP n ,�i�l � nla. '�' la• e:a, .lvc.l Ir; >, � n 1 y9 it f.003f11S 4?I oo til v ^II ;jam p41 4 WR jl� 1W � QY Vv Q•1 \ ���.i �EUC ° �9,•' O+x V� .f03. 1 1 114 .Il1.t \ lq"' •�l(1L /SVx �tl.- a ltaa. ». .1f1.1 // a ou. 4ma— t #. -fi` s 4.4 \� )�poc?4°�i / / %y r.J '�,s: vv-., •.� 1' -` ..,. !. 1.• to ,.,n.l n le1,a •' 27 .O1 WAS' I 27 .4C PLAT �/ •y % _ S 7'4E'451•Yf pi 11la. .nsl wu A el— lull �` 1lI,.D + .Sl! c.s _. 17 . _ J I .!1¢a I4` f L — �L PROPERTY AREA, LOT DEPTH, LOT WIDTH & MEDIAN VALUE EXHIBIT FOR POSSIBLE LOT SPILT OF 6609 BLACKFOOT PASS, LOT 4, BLOCK 3, INDIAN HILLS ca CORRESPONDEN SEAL September 26, 2013 , 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. 7 In 19/3, 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 Both . 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 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. 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 f deeply appreciate those of you who took time to, come to view the properties in person.. Most respectfully, Pat Kreuziger Jackie Hoogenakker From: dusen001 @umn.edu Sent: Wednesday, September 25, 2013 11:52 AM To: Jackie Hoogenakker Subject: proposed subdivision of 6609 Blackfoot Pass Dear Ms Hoogenakker 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 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 neigh borhoods.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 Deb Mangen prom: Tara Dev <taradev @gmail.com> ant: Tuesday, September 24, 2013 4:01 PM. ,o: 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 anew home fitting of the lot. Though Mr. Busyn has in fad-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 cell. 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 contraction, 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. '.usyn 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.. 1 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 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 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(aD-gmaiLcom cell: 612.227.7711 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 SUBDIVISION 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 to not one but two homes (Cheyenne Circle) as well - into driveways and homes. 1 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 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 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: taradevAgmail.com cell: 612.227.7711 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. ,Q o9'O1 G 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 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 i 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 z Mayor James Hovland and Members of the Edina City Council Re: 6609 Blackfoot Pass — Applications for Subdivision and Variance Dear Mayor Hovland and City Council, October 10, 2013 This purpose of this letter is to offer support for subject applications. I am the son of Douglas Johnson, . the current owner. of the property. I lived there from 1969 to 1980, and am currently an Edina resident. As was made clear by the City Attorney at the October 1 City Council meeting, the decision for subdivision.is to-be based on fact, not.subjective matters. As the only objective factors in Ordinance 810:11 are the subdivided lot dimensions and whether these dimensions exceed the median values of properties within 500 feet, the City Council made clear on October 1 this is the determining factor. The dimensions of the proposed subdivided lots in this case meet the requirements set forth in 810.11, so the subdivision should be approved. I would, however, like to address some concerns and objections expressed by neighbors. There is objection to the anticipated removal of trees in order to build on the lower lot. If the variance is granted, the house would be placed in an area away from most of the oak trees. To the extent some. (mostly cottonwood and elm) trees would still be removed, it should be noted this lot is currently at least 80% forested, and even with some tree removal, the two new lots are likely to be as forested as one sees on nearby properties. The buyer has made efforts to solicit neighbors' input, and I believe their best .way to influence the vegetation on this property is with the current proposal: if this property were to remain one lot, they could not presume to have input to either my father's decisions regarding the trees and landscaping, or a subsequent owner's plains. There is objection'to placing a house on the slope and using retaining walls. If the variance is granted, the house would not be on the slope. The plans put forth by the builder do show some retaining walls if the variance is granted, however.this would not be out of character for the neighborhood. The houses at both 6709 and 6713 Cheyenne Trail are dug'into steep hillside and use large retaining walls. I cop ht at least 10 other lots in the 500 foot area with notable retaining walls, many of those as part of extensive landscaping and others to accommodate driveways cut into the hilly topography. There is worry by the neighbor to the south about basement flooding. With the variance, the-hillside above that house would be little changed. In any case, that house in a local low area, with significant hillsides on other bordering properties draining into it as well. There is concern about traffic safety at the corner of Cheyenne Trail and Blackfoot Pass, with the addition of a second driveway. As proposed, the ingress /egress would be located about.the same as the existing driveway. My father and I can state from personal experience, in the 45 years since that driveway was built, there has not been a single accident involving a vehicle entering or exiting. I must address a fallacy in the letter submitted by the neighbors' attorney Mr. Keane. He seems to be suggesting the subdivision of this property will qualify more lots in the area for subdivision. This is plainly incorrect. The closer the lots in a 500 foot area are to equal in size, the less likely any one of them will meet the dimensional requirements for subdivision. I believe the only other lot in the neighborhood which would qualify for subdivision is 6601 Blackfoot Pass. it may be noted that property was originally platted as two lots. 5o to the extent one wants to presume to know the intent of those who platted the area, as Mr. Keane does, I'll suggest they did not intend there be a lot that large. I would like to address the issue of "neighborhood character ", subjective as it is. The character of this neighborhood is not static, having evolved substantially in the last 45 years. The two cul -de -sacs facing Gleason Road have been developed. Most of the nearby Indian Hills houses have been either extensively remodeled and enlarged, or torn down for larger houses, along with a significant increase in high -end landscaping. It can easily be stated this property is currently out of character with the rest of the neighborhood. Years ago, there was significantly more lawn on this property, my father having let much of it go back to forest in the last 15 years as he devoted his time and attention to my mothers care. It is fair to say the current proposal will bring it more in character with the neighborhood. I suppose some neighbors view this property as their own 1 -3/4 acre wilderness park down the block, a complement to their own highly landscaped properties. It is fair to say there is nothing unique about this subdivision and variance application. It conforms to the letter and spirit of existing ordinance. Please approve it. Respectfully submitted, Christopher Johnson 5308 Highwood Drive W., Edina Jackie Hoogenakker :rom: Kristin Wilkowske <kspwl @aol.com> Sent: Friday, October 11, 2013 1:26 PM To: Jackie Hoogenakker Subject: Subdivision at Blackfoot pass City Hall, We live at 6621 Cheyenne trail which is across the street from the proposed subdivision. I am writing to say we are opposed to this subdivision. We moved from Eden Prairie to Edina eigt years agoyears ago 1 Jackie Hoogenakker From: Kristin Wilkowske <kspwlCaaol.com> Sent: Friday, October 11, 2013 1:29 PM To: Jackie Hoogenakker Subject: 6609 Blackfoot Pass subdivision City Hall, Good afternoon. My name is Kristin Wilkowske. My husband, and three children live at 6621 Cheyennne Trail across the street from the proposed subdivision property. We are strongly against subdividing of this wonderful lot. We moved from Eden Prairie to Edina almost 8 years ago to Indian Hills to live in a more private, wooded area with mature trees. We moved from an area where homes were close to one other and trees just seedlings. We were drawn, and still are to the. beautiful nature and mature trees in our neighborhood. We feel very fortunate and blessed to live in our home with our surrounding neighbors, now friends. I am worried that by making a subdivision we will be changing that very character of our neighborhood. The very thing that brought us,to Indian Hills! There will have to be multiple trees and vegetation disrupted and destroyed in order to do. this. The character of our neighborhood will be changed in taking down so many trees. And this makes me sad. Our neighborhood will begin to look like any other neighborhood with this 500 ft. median. Thank you for your time. Respectfully, Kristin Wilkowske 1 Jackie Hoogenakker rom: Kristin Wilkowske <kspwl @aol.com> Sent: Friday, October 11, 2013 1:51 PM To: Jackie Hoogenakker Subject: Subdivision at Blackfoot pass Dear City Hall, My family andl live across the road from the proposed subdivision at Blackfoot pass. We are opposed to this subdivision. We love the mature trees and vegetation of our neighborhood which makes this neighborhood so unique and beautiful. We moved from a cookie,cutter environment to Indian hills for that very reason. We are fortunate to have found this home in is very beautiful area. I am worried by changing the lot into two homes, many of the trees will be cut down and lost. Instead we will be looking at three potential 16ft retaining walls outside of window. Gone will be the privacy we have coveted. The character of our neighborhood will be forever changed. This 500 ft mean will impact future homeowners as well. There will be many trees taken down with potential after effects (as in water and soil erosion and flooding to neighbors). Obviously I cannot speak knowingly of these matters, but it does seem to me the integrity of the property will be challenged. I do know Mrs. Pat Kreiziger has several water issues after the St.Alban's division back the 1980's. I think that is why I worry there will be another change in the environment. If water damage after one subdivision, with every intent for it to to happen, who is to say it won't happen again to Pat? I am sure great plan ing and thought into all of these details have been thought out by Mr. Busyn. I still worry that even with the best intentions, things happen. And by the time drainage issues pose as a problem, it wil be too late. Al of the trees and vegetation will be gone and we will have two properties and three large retaining walls. I believe the character of Indian Hills will be changed should this subdivision occur Thank you very much for your time Kristin Wilkowske 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 I" v 952 - 826 -0461 1 Fax 952 - 826 -0389 KAakerC_EdinaMN.gov l.www.EdinaMN.gov /Planning For Living, Learning, Raising Families & Doing Business From: dmswan2124 @aol.com [mailto:dmswan2124 @aol.com] Sent: Friday, September 06, 2013 5:12 PM To: dmswan2124 @aol.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 Ahe: 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 6609.13lackfoot 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 We cry when we see all the trees cut down - on Indian Hills Rd ....._.__ _. _. 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 Jackie Hoogenakker From: Kris Aaker Sent: Monday, September 09, 2013 8:16 AM To: , Jackie Hoogenakker Subject: FW: proposed subdivision of 6609 Blackfoot Pass l =° Kris Aaker, Assistant City Planner c l i A' , 952-826-04611 Fax 952-826-0389 �' J F+jf,' KAakerCa.EdinaMN.gov I www.EdinaMN.gov /Planning For Living, Learning, Raising Families & Doing Business From: Lynn Laaksonen rmailto:goldielax @comcast.net] Sent: Friday, September 06, 2013 11:12 PM To: Kris Aaker Subject: FW: proposed subdivision of 6609 Blackfoot Pass From: Lynn Laaksonen [ mailto: gold ielaxCalcomcast.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 From: 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.net] 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 m_ ay 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 "feel" please up hold Indian Hllls "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 Kelly Jungels 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 fly 952 -826 -0461 1 Fax 952 - 826 -0389 KAaker(o)EdinaMN.gov I www.EdinaMN.gov /Planning ...For Living, Learning, Raising Families & Doing Business From: Susan Brunn [ma ilto:sbrunn(a)me.com] 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 z Jackie Hoogenakker ,:rorn: 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 I 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 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 Cary Teague From: Lynn Laaksonen <goldielax @comcast.net> Sent: Tuesday; September 24, 2013 5:05 PM To: Edina Mail; jonibennettl2 @c6mcast.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- l 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. butthere 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,1 0- 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[Jhe cirainage,area of the upper property. Any fill on the lower property Will have :a major impact -onthe.. 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 1 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 TIM. KL-ANE @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. {160119,DOC- 9/25/2013) 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 850 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.Aecade 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- 9/25/2013) 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 huh 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. 1160119,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 cons_ istency 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. 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 Findins_s: 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- 9/25/2013) 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. Finding 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 wig 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 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 afthe 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 Deb Manaen 'nom: james schwender <jdschwender @yahoo.com> ent: Tuesday, September 24, 2013 6:49 PM ro: 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> 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 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. Sincerely, Susan Harker Brunn 6601 Blackfoot Pass Edina MN 55439 Deb Mangen 7rom: deanandmary@aol.com nt: 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 Kook like. every other neighborhood, manicured lawns, boblders, 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 vill 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 1 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 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 Deb Mangen --om: Bert Ledder <Isledder @aol.com> nt: Wednesday, September 25, 2013 10:29 AM ,o: 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. Safet 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 1 Deb Mangen -.am: glmarshaII07 @comcast.net nt: Wednesday, September 25, 2013 11:47 AM ,o: 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 si,gnificant 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 Man en 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. 501h 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 water falls 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 Man en 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 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 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. Bert Ledder 6709 Cheyenne Trail Edina, MN 55439. �NA, PA S �1 s r r The City Council City of Edina P etition O 4�S A. A City of Edina, Minnesota DATE RECEIVED: o G . t... CITY COUNCIL y 4801 West 50th Street • Edina, Minnesota 55424 (952) 927 -8861 • (952) 927 -7645 FAX • (612) 927 -5461 TDD PETITION TO THE CITY COUNCIL ❑ SIDEWALK ❑ ALLEY PAVING ❑ WATER MAIN ❑ STORM SEWER ❑ SANITARY SEWER ❑ STREEET LIGHTING ❑ CURB AND GUTTER ONLY ❑ PERMANENT STREET [ OTHER- SURFACING WITH �2e� 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. LOCA'ITON: 6609 Blackfoot Pass, Edina Minnesota 55439 • No Subdivision of property PROPERTY OWNER'S OWNER'S NAME ^SIGNATURE p (PRI�N/TED) r\ �Vt wLj0vVj4L- V—V \A/, 1 Its -\Aj . . PROPERTY ADDRESS (PRINTED) &�6 R� This petition was'circulated by: -4a A° 4&o ooq NAME AD RESS PHONE There is space for more signatures on the back. APRIL 2008 PROPERTY OWNER'S OWNER'S NAME SIGNATURE (PRINTED) �� - z Nf\j CH 7) - - -- _ K6 IAS 6- -�-- R 0 W PROPERTY ADDRESS (PRINTED) Lo to i) I W C140o i PROPERTY OWNER'S SIGNATURE e OWNER'S NAME (PRINTED)' i/yoy -/?, a,f, e 6X ,yh,,,4 �'1Grk 11'yi f lr�ows(ce� A-a Ids _ lr1 Ss�l; ll� b f�J a fan e f -e S5W; k .MA IJ4 filp 4 C) ° F-- tt -q vl s f*dj A N/vi 0 1, h9t �;(fsnuer f o�nr CIS PROPERTY ADDRESS (PRINTED) ,.4B,�Dey -e���c o Pfd 4,317 ZvcrF Aoog-L V iuZ %O C(ne Tgf -a r 8zo C vI e C vd } - This petition was circulated by: NAME ADDRES9 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 OWNER'S SIGNATURE OWNER'S NAME RENTED) .rte vU �r5�y.3zc r Lim. PROPERTY ADDRESS (PREMUD) Chis petition was circulated by: ADDRE 9`S" /`� The Minnesota Data Practices Act requires that we in orm ou o PHONE Under the law, your telephone number is private data. This petition when submitted will become public in information... Y f your rights about the private data we are requesting on this form. consequence for refusing to supply this information. f ion•. There is no You may attach extra pages with signatures. APRIL 2008 lek PROPERTY OWNER'S SIGNATURE �6GC OWNER'S NAME PROPERTY ADDRESS (PRINTED) (PRINTED) cc, y� l �� S 04 / r � D&, C.. 636Y (-Iprcu 6-70 q fo7D9 C-R ¢.� liar es i Leda tp�� f Jv This F50'ttiyn was c c ated by: ffwzz-v �- (6 NAME ADD S 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 Jackie Hoogenakker From: kspwl @aol.com Sent: Tuesday, October 08, 2013 2:20 PM To: Jackie Hoogenakker Subject: Fwd: Subdivision Indian Hills - - - -- Original Message---- - From: Kristin Wilkowske <kspw1(a-)-aol.com> To: jonibennettl2 <jonibennett12 a().comcast.net> Cc: jonibennettl2 <ionibennett12 a comcast.net> Sent: Tue, Sep 24, 2013 1:27 pm Subject: Subdivision Indian Hills Good afternoon Mayor Hovland, My name is Kristin Wilkowske and my husband and 3 children live at 6621 Cheyenne trail across from the proposed subdivision on Blackfoot pass. I am writing to say that I am opposed to such division for various reasons. First off, we moved from Eden Prairie to Edina (almost 8 years ago) to Indian Hills to live in a more private, wooded area where are neighbors weren't on top of one another (like in our development on Shetland road in EP). We were drawn and still are to the beautiful nature and mature trees. We feel very fortunate and blessed to live in our home with our surroundings neighbors, now friends. I am worried that by making a subdivision we will be changing that very character of our neighborhood. The very thing that brought us to Indian hills. I am all in favor of building another lovely home onto the lot, but am hoping it could be one rather than two homes. I know the law constitutes the 500 ft. median,but I ask to challenge this law. If not for this subdivision, then the next and our future neighborhoods. We will have neighborhoods that keep getting smaller and smaller and soon we, Indian Hills will look just like every neighborhood. Again, I respect the law as being our governing body... So with that note, when this lot is divided the character of our neighborhood will be altered, and not for the better in my belief. There will be many trees taken down with potential after effects (as in water and soil erosion and flooding to neighbors). Obviously I can't speak knowingly of these matters, but it seems to me the integrity of property will be challenged. I do know, Mrs. Pat Kreiziger had several water issues after the St. Albans division back in 1980's. I think that is why I worry there could be a change in the environment. If water drainage happened after one subdivision with every intent for it not to happen, who is to say it won't happen again to Pat. I am certain Mr. Busyn has every intent and has put great thought and detail to all of his planning. I still worry that it won't be enough. And by the time drainage issues are a problem, it will be too late. All of the trees and vegetation will be gone and we will have retaining walls. Again, I challenge the 500ft. median! (Had we not had that darn thing, I wouldn't be taking up your time!) I appreciate your time in reading this letter. I also want to thank Josh Sprague, Mary Brindle, and Joni Bennett from taking time out of their busy schedules to look at Mrs. Pat's property. I want to challenge this law if it can not be for now, then for the next person. The character of Indian hills will be changed by this subdivision. For that, I am sad. Respectfully, Kristin Wilkowske Mark Wilkowske 1 Jackie Hoogenakker From: jjlalim @comcast.net Sent: Monday, October 07, 2013 11:28 AM To: jjlalim @comcast.net Cc: Jackie Hoogenakker Subject: Subdivision This letter is regarding the subdivision of 6609 Blackfoot Pass, Edina. My property is: 6600 Blackfoot Pass, Edina. As can be seen in an old Indian Hills Directory, there is a boundary map of this area drawn by a Hennepin County Surveyor, Mr. Peterson. Let's.:preserve this beautiful community of well designed homes, large lots,.. winding roads, mature trees and thick foilage. It is my understanding that there are restrictions that apply to Indian Hills. Please do not ignore their importance in protecting the beauty and value of our neighborhood. Indian Hills is a small unique established community that helps make Edina look good. I object to the subdivision of the property at 6609 Blackfoot Pass, Edina. Respectfully, Jewel Lalim Jackie Hoogenakker From: jjlalim @comcast.net Sent: Wednesday, October 09, 2013 2:15 PM To: Edina Mail Cc: Jackie Hoogenakker Subject: Subdivision This letter is regarding the subdivisin of 6609 Blackfoot Pass, Edina. My property is: 6600 Blackfoot Pass. As can be seen in an old Indian Hills Directory, there is a boundary map of this area and each lot drawn by a Hennepin County Surveyor, Mr. Peterson. Let's preserve this beautiful community of well designed homes, large lots, winding roads, mature trees and thick foilage. It is my understanding that there are covenants that apply to Indian Hills. Please do not ignore them and their importance in protecting the beauty and value of our neighborhood. Indian Hills is a small unique established community. I object to the subdivision of the property at 6609 Blackfoot Pass, Edina. Respectfully, Jewel Lalim RiPOORT /RsCOOMM:�NDATIOON To: MAYOR AND COUNCIL Agenda Item #: VI.D. From: Cary Teague, Community Development Director Action ❑X Discussion ❑ Date: October 14, 2013 Information ❑ Subject: PUBLIC HEARING _Resolution No. 2013 -103 — Preliminary Plat and Variances, 5820 Brookview Avenue; AKARE Companies LLC on behalf of John Peterson. Action Requested: Adopt the attached resolution. Information / Background: AKARE Companies LLC on behalf of John Peterson is proposing to subdivide the property at 5820 Brookview Avenue 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 A5 —Al2 of the Planning Commission staff report.) To accommodate the request the following is required: 1. A subdivision; 2. Lot width variances from 75 feet to 50 feet for each lot; and 3. tot area variances from 9,000 square feet to 6,711 square feet for each lot. Both lots would gain access off Brookview. Avenue. Within this neighborhood, the median lot area is 6,725 square feet, median lot depth is 134 feet, and the median lot width is 50 feet. (See attached median calculations on pages A10 -Al2:) The new lots would meet the median width and depth, but would just fall short of the median lot size. Planning Commission Recommendation: On July 24, 2013, the Planning Commission recommended approval of the Preliminary Plat. (Vote: 8 -1.) ATTACHMENTS: • Resolution No. 2013 -103 • Draft minutes from the September 25; 2013 Edina Planning Commission meeting • Planning Commission Staff Report, September 25, 2013 City of Edina 4801 W. 50`h St. Edina, .MN 55424 RESOLUTION NO. 2013-103 APPROVING A PRELIMINARY PLAT WITH VARIANCES AT 5820 BROOKVIEW AVENUE BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Edina, Minnesota, as follows: Section 1. BACKGROUND. 1.01 AKARE Companies on behalf of John Peterson is requesting a Preliminary Plat of 5820 Brookview Avenue divide the existing parcel into two lots. 1.02 The following described tract of land is requested to be divided: Lots 6 and 7, Block 2, FAIRFAX Addition, 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, Eldridge 6th Addition. 1.04 The proposed subdivision requires the following variances: 1. Lot width variances from 75 feet to 50 feet for each lot. 2. Lot area variances from 9,000 square feet to 6,711 square feet for each lot. 1.05 On September 25, 2013, the Planning Commission recommended approval of the Preliminary Plat and Variances on a Vote of 8 -1. Section 2. FINDINGS 2.01 Approval is based on the following findings: 1. Except for the variances, the proposal meets the required standards and ordinance for a subdivision. 2. The subdivision would meet the neighborhood medians for lot width and depth and nearly meet the median area. 3. The proposal would restore the property back to the form of the original plat, which included two lots. 4. The proposal meets the requir -1 riNgy variance, because: 4801 West 50th Street • Edina, Minnesota 55424 www.EdinaMN.gov • 952 - 927 -8861 • Fax 952 - 826 -0390 l RESOLUTION NO. 2013 -103 . Page Two a. The practical difficult unique to the property is caused by the existing size of the property which is two times the size of every lot on the block. This is caused by the original property owner, who combined two lots into one. b. The requested variances are reasonable in the context of the immediate neighborhood. The existing lot is both larger and wider than most properties in the area, including nearly every lot on the block. The proposed subdivision would result in two lots more characteristic of the neighborhood. . C. The proposed lots would be the same size as the lots were originally platted. d. The variances would meet the intent of the ordinance because the proposed lots are of similar size to others in the neighborhood.. e. If the variances were denied, the applicant would be denied a use of his property, a 50 -foot wide lot, which is common to the area. In addition, the applicant would be denied a subdivision with variances that has been previously approved by the City, including the same request for, a subdivision with variances that were approved right across the street in 2011. Section 3. APPROVAL NOW. THEREFORE, it is hereby resolved by the City Council of the City of Edina, approves the Preliminary Plat and requested Variances for the proposed subdivision of 5820 Brookview Avenue. Approval is subject to the following Conditions: 1. The city must approve the final plat within one year of preliminary approval or receive a written application for a time extension or the preliminary approval will be void. 2. Prior to issuance of a building permit, the following items must be submitted: a.. Submit evidence of Minnehaha Creek Watershed District approval. The City may require revisions to the preliminary plat to meet the district's requirements: b. A curb -cut permit must be obtained -from the Edina Engineering department. C. Utility hook -ups are.subject to review of the city engineer. 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 Brookview Avenue. RESOLUTION NO. 2013-103 Page Two Adopted this _ day of 2013. ATTEST: Debra A. Mangen, City Clerk STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF HENNEPIN CITY OF EDINA )SS 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 , 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 w91�1�� o e y PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT v .a Originator Meeting Date Agenda # Cary Teague September 25, 2013 VLA Director of Planning INFORMATION & BACKGROUND Project Description AKARE Companies LLC on behalf of John Peterson is proposing to subdivide the property at 5820 Brookview Avenue into two lots. (See property location on pages Al —A4.) The existing home would be torn down, and two new homes built on the new lots. (See applicant narrative and plans on pages A5 —Al2.) To accommodate the request the following is required: 1. A subdivision; 2. Lot width variances from 75 feet to 50, feet for each lot; and 3. Lot area variances from 9,000 square feet to 6,711 square feet for each lot. Both lots would gain access off Brookview Avenue. Within this neighborhood, the median lot area is 6,725 square feet, median lot depth is 134 feet, and the median lot width is 50 feet. (See attached median calculations on pages A10- Al2.) The new lots would meet the median width and depth, but would just fall short of the median lot size. Surrounding Land .Uses The lots,on all sides of the subject properties are zoned and guided low - density residential. Existing Site Features The existing site contains a single - family home and detached garage. (See pages A4 and A6.) These structures would be removed. r Planning Guide Plan designation Zoning: Lot Dimensions Single- dwelling residential R -1, Single- dwelling district * Variance Required 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 Brookview Avenue. 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 Minnehaha Creek Watershed District permit would also be required. History of Subdivision Requests in the Area The City of Edina has considered several subdivision requests with variances in this area. (See attached area map showing this locations of these requests on page Al 3.) The following is the history in the past seven years: Requested Subdivisions in the last seven years 1. In 2006, the property at 5901 France Avenue received variances to build four (4) 66 -foot wide lots consistent with the area. (Median = 9,269 s.f. & 73 feet wide.) 2. In 2008, 6120 Brookview Avenue was proposed to be divided into two (2) 50 -foot lots by Bravura Construction; however, the applicant withdrew the request before action was taken. (Median = 6,700 s.f. & 50 feet wide) 3. In 2009, a 100 -foot lot at 5920 Oaklawn was granted variances to divide into two (2) 50 -foot lots. (Median = 6,699 s.f. & 50 feet wide.) Area Lot Width Depth REQUIRED 9,000 s.f. 75 ft 134 ft Lot 1 6,711 s. f. * 50 ft* 134 ft Lot 2 6,711 s. f. * 50 ft* 134 ft * Variance Required 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 Brookview Avenue. 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 Minnehaha Creek Watershed District permit would also be required. History of Subdivision Requests in the Area The City of Edina has considered several subdivision requests with variances in this area. (See attached area map showing this locations of these requests on page Al 3.) The following is the history in the past seven years: Requested Subdivisions in the last seven years 1. In 2006, the property at 5901 France Avenue received variances to build four (4) 66 -foot wide lots consistent with the area. (Median = 9,269 s.f. & 73 feet wide.) 2. In 2008, 6120 Brookview Avenue was proposed to be divided into two (2) 50 -foot lots by Bravura Construction; however, the applicant withdrew the request before action was taken. (Median = 6,700 s.f. & 50 feet wide) 3. In 2009, a 100 -foot lot at 5920 Oaklawn was granted variances to divide into two (2) 50 -foot lots. (Median = 6,699 s.f. & 50 feet wide.) 4. In 2011, the property at 5829 Brookview was granted variances to divide into two (2) 50 -foot lots. (Median = 6,769 s.f. & 50 feet wide. 5. In 2012, the property at 6109 Oaklawn was denied their request to subdivide the property into two (2) 50 -foot lots. (Median = 6,701 s.f. & 50 feet wide.) 6. In 2012, 6120 Brookview was again proposed for subdivision. That request was denied. (Median = 6,700 s.f. & 50 feet wide.) 7. In 2012, the property at 5945 Concord Avenue was. denied their request to subdivide the property into two (2) 50 -foot lots. (Median = 10,028 s.f. ;& 50 feet wide.) Within the above requests 1 -6, the medians were similar in size to that of the subject request. The request highlighted in red and' underlined above ( #4) was the property that was subdivided across the street from the subject property. Primary Issue Are the findings for a variance met? Yes. Staff believes that the findings for a Variance are met with this proposal. Per state law and the Zoning Ordinance, a variance should not be granted unless it is found that the enforcement of the ordinance would cause practical. difficulties in complying with the zoning.ordinance'and that the Juse is reasonable. Asdemonstrated 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. Reasonableuse -does not mean that the applicant must show the land cannot be put to. any reasonable use without the variance. Rather, the applicant must show that there are practical difficulties in complying with the code and that the proposed use is reasonable. "Practical difficulties" may include: functional and aesthetic concerns. The practical difficulty is due to the fact that the subject property is double the size of all nearly all the lots on this block. This area was originally plated with 3 50 -foot lots, including the subject property. (See page A14.) There are a couple of 75 foot wide lots to the east. (See page A2.) The requested variances to split this lot are reasonable in the context of the immediate neighborhood. The existing lot is both larger and wider than other properties in the immediate area. The proposed subdivision would result in two lots more characteristic of the neighborhood and original plat. If the variances were denied, the applicant would be denied a subdivision of his property of which the lots would be the same as existing lots in the area. In 2011 a property across the street at 5829 Brookview was approved for the exact subdivision and variances requested by the applicant. Additionally, in 2009, a similar subdivision and variances were granted at 5920 and 5924 Oaklawn. Therefore, to deny these variances would deny the applicant a subdivision that has been recently approved by the City. (See approved subdivisions on page A13.) b) There are circumstances that are unique to the property, not common to every similarly zoned property, and that are not self - created? The condition of this oversized lot is generally unique to Brookview Avenue. The vast majority of the lots on Brookview are 50 feet wide and roughly 6,700 square feet in size. The circumstance of the oversized lot was not created by the applicant. C) Will the variance alter the essential character of the neighborhood? No. The proposed improvements requested by the variance would not alter the essential character of the neighborhood. The neighborhood includes a vast majority of single - family homes on 50 -foot lots as proposed. Staff Recommendation Recorririiond that the City Council approve the proposed two lot subdivision of 5820 Brookview Avenue and the lot width variances from 75 feet to 50 feet and lot area variances from 9,000 square feet to 6,711 square feet. Approval is based on the following findings: Except for the variances, the proposal meets the required standards and ordinance for a subdivision. 2. The subdivision would meet the neighborhood medians for lot width and depth and nearly meet the median area. rd 3. The proposal would restore the property back to the form of the original plat, which included two lots. 4. The proposal meets the required standards for a variance, because: a. The practical difficult unique to the property is caused by the existing size of the property which is two times the size of every lot on the block. This is caused by the original property owner, who combined two lots into one. b. The requested variances are reasonable in the context of. the immediate neighborhood. The existing lot is both larger and wider than most properties in the area, including nearly, every lot on the block. The. proposed subdivision would result in.two lots .more characteristic of the neighborhood. C. The proposed lots would be the same size as the lots�were originally platted. d. The variances would meet the intent of the ordinance because the proposed lots are of similar size to others in the neighborhood. e. If the variances were denied, the applicant would be denied a use of his property, a 50 -foot wide lot, which is common to the area. In addition, the applicant would be denied a subdivision with variances that has been previously approved by the City, including the same request for a subdivision with variances that were approved right across the street in 2011. 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 ap p roval will be void. 2. Prior to issuance of a building permit, the following items must be submitted: a: Submit evidence of Minnehaha Creek Watershed District approval. The City may require revisions to the preliminary plat to meet the district's requirements. b. A curb -cut permit must be obtained from the Edina Engineering department. C. Utility hook -ups. are subject to review of the city engineer. 5 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 Brookview Avenue. Deadline for City Decision: November 1, 2013 6 _ Interact a Property Maps Map r s 55TH ST 45. w J ry 4 i 55TH ST'.' 24 Q4f; 6fi se ` i LLX IGTGN A'.'E LEXINGTON g5rp i� 5532 24 j a _ cc v 56TH Si 4'1 Q- 5605 L 5605 w FELL -,C Pll ' w TOWER ST a stiff I u i J 15 84 J ` ' 141 L., 5655 6 11 56 i W.100DU,11D 17 .r1 r".' G 4 S 22 57TH ST 1, 2 -0 _ �14 c��n_ur•:n ILF 14 15 I i _. 5701 PHILBPD011, Lam. 24 i F-7---- r_ u Uj' S_TH r t r } , 4 ST' ' M11 H ` :l 11 %, r s, � J- r _ 24 4810 F ^I 24 + j w r �,. ;? __ Pamela Park i Gr 67TH ST ,•s' J 430 x - ..__ 60TH S7 4Y ID w 24 _ ni \id (AST ST . 24 24 4E08 L _ w 24 Y;t n 4545 Y I 24 24 ND ST 451' — W 62ND 5T 4V Parcel 19.028 -24 -42 -0016 Map Scale: 1" 800 ft. N ID. Print Date: 9/16/2013 Owner John S Peterson Etal Name: Parcel 5820 Brookview Ave Address: Edina, MN 55424 Property Residential Type: Home- Homestead stead: Parcel 0.31 acres Area: 13,444 sq ft 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! - - ---r a Interact Property _. Maps Map - - _/ - _ . 4420 4416 4412 4408 4404 440014328 4324 4320 4316 431214308 4304 4300 4208 ; P 4204 24 e( 4420 4416 4412 4408 4404 4400 4328 4324 4320 4316 4312 4308 4304 4201 - 0 4200 U n= c3 58TH ST W J 24 Parcel 5801 5800 19- 028 -24 -42 -0016 5801 5800 !, 5801 5800 John S Peterson Etal Name: Parcel 5820 Brookview Ave 5605 5804 Edina, MN 55424 5805 5804 Residential 5805 5806 This map is a compilation of data from various 5808 `809 5808 Homestead representation or warranty expressed or stead: _ c 809 purpose, merchantability, or the accuracy and 5809 I 5812 0.31 acres 5812 13,444 sq ft 5813 5812 ---- _ 5816 5816 5816 W 5817 - > 5817 5817 5524 0 5826 5821 V 5821 5820 3 — U 5825 5824 ? O 5825 5828 LU 5829 5829 5828 5828 ua 5829 -- - -- t _ - 5832 5832 0 5833 5832 5833 5836 5837 5836 5637 5836 5837 5840 5840 5840 5841 - - - - -- 5845 - -- 5841 _ 5844 5844 5844 - - -- --- � - - -- 5845 i 59TH ST :4r 5m0 -- 5901 5900 5901 59-04 5905 5904 5905 _ . -- 4303 5908 5909 5908 24 5912 5913 5912 5916 5917 5916 24 Parcel Map Scale: 1" = 200 ft. N 19- 028 -24 -42 -0016 ID: !, Print Date: 9/16/2013 Owner John S Peterson Etal Name: Parcel 5820 Brookview Ave Address: Edina, MN 55424 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 0.31 acres Area: 13,444 sq ft COPYRIGHT © HENNEPIN COUNTY 2013 A Tifiofk Green! li� Interactive Maps/ "f' V i Parcel 19- 028 -24 -42 -0016 ID: Owner John S Peterson Etal Name: Parcel 5820 Brookview Ave Address: Edina, MN 55424 Property Residential Type: Home- Homestead stead: Parcel 0.31 acres Area: 13,444 sq ft 11 .. �i• Property Map I� i 5 5 -i Map Scale: 1" = 100 ft. N Print Date: 9/16/2013 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 AP, iink Green! A3 Interactive Maps, /, i Parcel 19- 028 -24-42 -0016 ID: Owner John S Peterson Etal Name: Parcel 5820 Brookview Ave Address: Edina, MN 55424 Property Residential Type: Home- Homestead stead: Parcel 0.31 acres Area: 13,444 sq ft A4� Property Map • :�" . t±. 7i},. eta d A Y,. Map Scale: 1" = 50 ft. N Print Date: 9/16/2013 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! AtUI(AIA NAP RAI 1VL AAk"'o CUSTOM HOMES PROJECT NARRATIVE The project is located in the City of Edina at 5820 Brookview Avenue (lots 6 and 7, Block 002, Fairfax). We are proposing to subdivide the current 100 -foot wide lot into the originally platted (2) 50 -foot wide lots. Our intention is to build two homes on this site that fit seamlessly with the existing character of the neighboring homes and community. There has been a recent, similar project on Brookview Avenue at 5829 and 5833; these two 50 -foot wide properties were also once a single 100 -foot wide property. Two new homes were built on this site in 2012; both homeowners (as well as others in the community) have given full support of our proposed project at 5820. CER F LATE OF SURVEY PROPERTY ADDRESS: 5820 Brookview Ave Edina, MN FOR: Ridge Creek Custom Homes U 20 RW I tl I s. R 874.31 I I I I ; I° I I I � 1— o- I I I I 1 inch = 20ft. ( IN FEET ) (��Y Q� ------ - - - - -- LEGEND 1 I EXISTING PROPERTY DESCRIPTION (Per Tax Legal) Lots 6 & 7, Block 2, FAIRFAX, Hennepin County, Minnesota. BENCHMARK Top nut of fire hydrant at SE quadrant of 58TH Street and Brookview Ave. Elev.= 869.22 Nl1TTi' C • DENOTES IRON MONUMENT FOUND —■ DENOTES EXISTING FENCE ■1011.2 DENOTES EXISTING ELEVATION. 0 DENOTES CONCRETE — °" DENOTES OVERHEAD WIRE �T— DENOTES BITUMINOUS ' DENOTES SANITARY SEWER >: © DENOTES EXISTING TREE DENOTES STORM SEWER I hereby certify that this plan, survey or report was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that 1 am a duly Licensed Land Surveyor under the laws of the State of Minnesota. — Bearing's shown are on assumed datum. 0—`, — Field survey conducted on July 12th, 2013. JO HUA P. SCHNEIDER Date: 7 -15 -13 Reg. No. 44655 — This survey was prepared without the benefit of E763-458-2997 CRE LAND SU13VEYING 1 titlework. Easement, appurtenances and encumbrances Serving _ may exist in addition to those shown hereon. This Twin Cities Metro , , •• III survey is subject to revision upon receipt of a title area and beyond insurance commitment or attorneys title opinion. acrelandsurve�Egmail.com — Curb shots taken at top and back of curb. JOB ##13448bs 11 I' 'Z " 14 j1 " '7 " " "° n+ p n, V, ns 1.11 —A OMO \1pAA0 \d..... \ »AAOA..... 7H7/OM9 O.AGA7 ou rnT . 0 PRELIMINARY PLAT FOR: Ridge Creek Custom Homes Rob Eldridge, 4820 W 77th St #125 Edina, MN (612) 250 -5820 i DRIDGE 6TH- ADDITION Owner: John S. Peterson and Sheila A. Peterson PROPERTY ADDRESS: 5820 Brookview Ave Edina, MN SITE DATA Total Area --- - - - - -- -0.31 Acres NUMBER'OF LOTS - - - - - -2 LOT 1 ------ - - - - -- -6711 Sq. Ft. LOT 2 ------ - - - - -- -6711 Sq. Ft. Existing Zoning ---- - - -R -1 Proposed Zoning --- - - -R -1 Utilities ------ - - - - -- Available SETBACK DATA Front Yard - - - - -- Average of NORTH Adjacent Lots a 20 Side Yard ---- - - - - -- Varies with Building Height (5 Ft. Minimum) Rear Yard -- --- - - - -25 Ft. ( IN FM ) 1 inch = 20fL CAFFT 1TTnF.X 1. PRELIMINARY PLAT 2. EXISTING CONDITIONS 3. GRADING, DRAINAGE, UTILITY & TREE PLAN DRAINAGE AND UTILITY EASEMENTS SHOWN THUS: Owner . I Bradley & I . Kathleen — — — — — — 1 _ Beyley_ r — I I I l a .2 „ I I Existing House I c I 5816Brookvlew I \ o B W I Avenue t Owner 0 o I George Raichert I ZI — — — — — — - 134.24 Fairfax . N 89 °55'43" E 134.19 Meas. 30� Cn U- a0 O 0 o 0 O2cN z aN ,2. 3 a V) O u `w F J I I 5 - -� �- 5 — .— .— .— .— )— . —. —.-J L-.- — I — — — — — 1/2° OF N NO SCALE a Lt BEING 10 FEET IN WIDTH AND ADJOINING RIGHT -OF -WAY LINES a AND REAR LOT LINES AND BEING 5 FEET IN WIDTH AND ADJOINING SIDE LOT LINES, UNLESS OTHERWISE SHOWN ON THE PLAT: 1 hereby certify that this plan, survey or report was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that I am a duly Licensed Land Surveyor under the laws of the State of Minnesota. P-a _ JO HIJA P. SCHN,' Date: 8 -19 -13 Req. No. 44655 RLS 6508 �. : 134.2 10 F 1 I � I \ I 1 G I876.3 1/4, qE PLE 12r I i\ e\ r,7 ,n w - I x F< I I I l� I - I I C I 1- F 0.9' E&T OF Clip - o L.— �, 1 o O. . .— .— .— .— .— .— .— .— .— .— .— .— . —. —.— ---------- I 'n °' . 1/2" RBR I /� 10 LQV�A— I 10 o0 o o ^.. 1— . —.. — . — . —.. — . — . — . — . — . — . — . — . J � L` N. Lr) �. : 134.2 10 1 I � I I � 10 I % M r,7 ,n w - I - I I C I 1- o L.— - 10 O. . .— .— .— .— .— .— .— .— .— .— .— .— . —. —.— ---------- -- .V) 'n °' . 1/2" RBR I i S 89°59'55" W 134.27 Meas. r'- - - -- - 134.21 Fairfax `C Owner I Gary Koktovy I I IN Existing House I `J 5816 Brookvlew I I Avenu I I FFE- -878.2 I I I I 60 60 I 1 I L1J L1J iI L1J ivy LiJ I I I I ` 0 v..m I O75K I o�. Ma I I I I I I I I I C � ° 3i I o I I I I I I I 3N 0. I °o I I I c o - I I;Uo I° a d o I oa I �Ad EXISTING PROPERTY DESCRIPTION BENCHMARK ACRE LAND SURVEYING , To nut of fire hydrant at SE (Per Title Commitment HB- 26478) P y Serving Twin Gilles Metro = � III quadrant of 58TH Street and Lots Six (6) and Seven (7), Block Two (2 ` Irfax, Hennepin Brookview Ave. Elev.= 869.22 Brea and beyo', r County,, Minnesota ", according to the rec 'at thereof. 763- 458-2997 aCl alai /eyl *gmail. om JOB#13448bs 10 . 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 13 1 110 111 112 n4 115 - 111 n" „a nn GRADING, DRAINAGE, UTILITY & TREE PLAN FOR: Ridge Creek Custom Homes Rob Eldridge, 4820 W 77th St #125 Edina, MN (612) 250 -5820 Rw ELDRIDGE 6TH ADDITION Owner: John S. Peterson and Sheila A. Peterson 87 .3 PROPERTY ADDRESS: 5820 Brookview Ave Edina, MN _ SEDIMENT AND EROSION CONTROL NOTES CONSTRUCTION SEQUENCING 1. INSTALL STABILIZED ROCK CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCE 2. INSTALLATION OF SILT FENCE OR BIO -RCM AROUND SITE 3. DEMOLITION OF COSTING STRUCTURES IF ANT. 4. CLEAR AND GRUB. S STRIP AND STOCKPILE TOPSOIL 6. ROUGH GRADING Or SITE 7. STABILIZE DENUDED AREAS AND STOCKPILES B. EXCAVATE FOR NEW HOME FOUNDATION 9. CONSTRUCT h BACKFRL FOUNDATION 10 CONSTRUCT NEW STRUCTURE 11. WHEN ALL CONSTRUCTOR ACTNTY IS COMPLETE AND ME SITE IS STAI UZED BY EITHER SEED OR SOD/LAMDSCAPMG. REMOTE SILT FENCE AND RESEED ANY AREAS DISTURBED BY ME REMOVAL EROSION PREVENTION ME CONTRACTOR IS RESPONSIBLE FOR PLANING FOR AND IMPLEMENTING APPROPRATE CONSTRUCTION PHASDIG. VEGETATIVE RW .6 BUFFER STRIPS. HORIZONTAL SLOPE GRADING. AND OTHER CONSTRUCTION PRACTNES THAT MINWIZE EROSION. ALL EXPOSED SOIL AREAS MUST BE STABILIZED AS SOON AS POSSIBLE TO MIT SON. EROSION BUT IN NO CASE LATER MAN 14 DAYS AFTER THE CONSTRUCTION ACTIMTY IN THAT PORTION OF THE SITE HAS TEMPORARILY OR PERMANENTLY CEASED. ME NORMAL WETTED PERIMETER OF ANY TEMPORARY OR PERMMIENT ORAINAGE DITCH OR SWALE MAT DRAINS WATER FROM ANY PORTION OF ME CONSTRUCTION SITE. OR DIVERTS WATER AROUND THE SITE. MUST BE STABILZED WITHIN 20 LINEAL FEET FROM THE PROPERTY EDGE. OR FROM THE PONT OF DISCHARGE INTO ANY SURFACE WATER. STABILIZATION OF ME LAST 20 LINEAL FEET MUST BE COMPLETED WITHIN 24 HOURS AFTER CONNECTING M-A SURFACE WATER. STABILIZATION OF ME REMANINC PORTIONS OF ANY TEMPORARY OR PERMANENT OITOHES OR SWALES MUST BE COMPLETE 877": MTHN 14 DAYS AFTER CONNECTING TO A SURFACE WATER AND CONSTRUCTION IN NAT PORTION OF ME DITCH HAS RW TEMPORARILY OR PERMANENTLY CEASED. - - TEMPORARY OR PERMANENT DITCHES OR SMILES MAT ARE BEING USED AS A SEDIMENT CONTAINMENT SYSTEM (WITH PROPERLY DESIGNED ROCK DITCH CHECKS 810 ROLLS SILT DIKES ETC) 00 NOT NEED TO BE STABUZED. THESE AREAS MUST BE STABILIZED WITHIN 24 HOURS AFTER NO LONGER BEING USED AS A SEDIMENT CONTAINMENT SYSTEM. PIPE OUTLETS MUST BE PROVIDED WITH TEMPORARY OR PERMANENT ENERGY DISSPATION WITHIN 24 HOURS AFTER CONNECTION O A SURFACE WATER. SEDIMENT CONTROL SEDIMENT CONTROL PRACTICES MUST MINIMIZE SEDIMENT FROM ENTERING SURFACE WATERS, DICLUDING CURB AND GUTTER SYSTEMS AND STORM SEWER INLETS SEDIMENT CONTROL PRACTICES MUST BE ESTABLISHED ON ALL DOWN GRADIENT PERMETERS BEFORE ANY UPGRADIENT LAND DISTURBING ACTIVITIES BEGIN. THESE PRACTICES SMALL REMMN IN PLACE UNTIL FINAL STABKIZATKW HAS BEEN ESTABLISHED. ALL STORM DRAM INLETS MUST BE PROTECTED BY APPROPRIATE BMPS DURING COW_ RUCTDM UNTIL ALL SOURCES WITH POTENTIAL FOR DISCHARGING TO ME INLET HAVE BEEN STAMZED. TEMPORARY SOIL STOCKPILES MUST HAVE SILT FENCE OUR OTHER EFFECTIVE SEDIMENT CORNCS AND "TOT BE PLACED W I .....877............ x876.6 876.4 X '.,. VEHICLE MACUNG OF SEDIMENT FROM THE CONSTRUCTION SITE MUST BE UNMIZCD BY A ROCK CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCE. STREET SWEEPWG MUST BE USED P THE ROC( ENTRANCE 6 NOT ADEOUATE TO PREVE NT SEDIMENT FROI BEING TRACKED RID M-N RIDGE CPr.. CMSIOU ROUES 875.7 875.6 SPR 12 877.3 x . x .......�' CONTROL FACILITIES. ME CONTNn� S!AU AT A w.MUM, INSPECT, MAINTAIN AND REPAIR AL DISTURBED SURFACES AND ALL EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL RwV. I S AND SO. STABILIZATION MEASURES I _ ' 877.1 MAPLE 24 876.1 875.2 . x 872.5 ' _ '•. ' 865.9a I; ASH 24�, DENOTES PROPOSED RETAINING WALL ' FINAL GRADING OF THE LOT SHALL PROMOTE SHEET DRAINING AND AVOID CONCENTN..' = "I OF STORM WATER FLOWS. NORTH FINAL GRADING SHALL MAINTAIN THE EXISTING STORM WATER DRAINAGE PATTERNS 10 ME EXTENT POSS8LC :. :- PRACTICAL AS TO NOT CAUSE ANY DAMAGE TO ADJACENT PROPERTIES. DENOTES EXISTING TREE O 20 869 x:RW ?:: ......... MD S 5 587 5� ;' N'., Bias 10 I 876.6 872. 1 do 1 I 876.3 PINE 13 .may 876.1 16 BIRCH 12' 1D 8 APLE 12,, 876.5 x I S. C I FB /TUC NLID x(FFE= 878.8) 87a. I B 6.8 W�B 616 876.4 .0: W l0 DO I/M�JyLJ�Yy1 * Z2 i * X 87417 : OD 108 L 8748 .10 In . 876.1 •, _ . "• .. 870. 9 889.2 . ........ ..... .. 893.5 :RW _ W . N 8j �. -! C0 I CK 676.0 12 !PR' ....................876 I VEHICLE MACUNG OF SEDIMENT FROM THE CONSTRUCTION SITE MUST BE UNMIZCD BY A ROCK CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCE. STREET SWEEPWG MUST BE USED P THE ROC( ENTRANCE 6 NOT ADEOUATE TO PREVE NT SEDIMENT FROI BEING TRACKED RID M-N RIDGE CPr.. CMSIOU ROUES 875.7 875.6 SPR 12 ­77 169I123 um Mn LEGEND . I 10 .........875•.... ". .......L IL�N X873.8 ''ej 4 .... 876.2% FB /TUC (FFE= 878.8) 875.4 PINE 14 4� �1 87% x - -S 5 u 875.Bx SURFACE WATERS INCLUDING STORMWATER CONVEYANCES SUCH AS CURB AND CUTTER SYSTEMS. OR CONDUITS : OITCNES UNLESS THERE IS A BYPASS IN PLACE FOR ME STORHWATER. STORMWATER, SEDIMENT 8 EROSION CONTROL CONTACT: VEHICLE MACUNG OF SEDIMENT FROM THE CONSTRUCTION SITE MUST BE UNMIZCD BY A ROCK CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCE. STREET SWEEPWG MUST BE USED P THE ROC( ENTRANCE 6 NOT ADEOUATE TO PREVE NT SEDIMENT FROI BEING TRACKED RID M-N RIDGE CPr.. CMSIOU ROUES ONTO THE STREET. INSPECTIONS AND MAINTENANCE ­77 169I123 um Mn LEGEND ' ME CONTRACTOR IS N...'� -STILE AT ALL TARES FOR ME MAINTENANCE AND PROPER OPERATION OF EROSION AND SEDIMENT -,'O R6I:,26o-3,:6 O2 DENOTES PROPOSED ELEVATION CONTROL FACILITIES. ME CONTNn� S!AU AT A w.MUM, INSPECT, MAINTAIN AND REPAIR AL DISTURBED SURFACES AND ALL EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL RwV. I S AND SO. STABILIZATION MEASURES DENOTES DIRECTION OF DRAINAGE BASED ON DISPECTION RESULTS THE CONTRACTOR MA. AND SMALL GN AND SEDIMENT CONTROL PLAN IN x1011.2 DENOTES EXISTING ELEVATION. ORDER TO PREVENT POLLUTANTS FROM LEAVING ME SITE r�. WRIER RUNOFF. STORMWATER o00000o DENOTES EXISTING RETAINING WALL DENOTES PROPOSED RETAINING WALL FINAL GRADING OF THE LOT SHALL PROMOTE SHEET DRAINING AND AVOID CONCENTN..' = "I OF STORM WATER FLOWS. NORTH FINAL GRADING SHALL MAINTAIN THE EXISTING STORM WATER DRAINAGE PATTERNS 10 ME EXTENT POSS8LC :. :- PRACTICAL AS TO NOT CAUSE ANY DAMAGE TO ADJACENT PROPERTIES. DENOTES EXISTING TREE O 20 1 hereby certify that this plan, survey or report was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that I am a duly Licensed Land Surveyor under the laws of the State of Minnesota. 0 Pv"-, JO HUA P. SCHNEIDER Date: 8/19/13 Reg. No. 44655 W DENOTES TREE TO BE REMOVED -oh- DENOTES OVERHEAD WIRE > DENOTES SANITARY SEWER ( IN FEET ) >> DENOTES STORM SEWER 1 inch = 20ft. DENOTES DIRECTION OF DRAINAGE FB /TUC DENOTES FULL BASEMENT/TUCK -UNDER GARAGE 5 DENOTES PROPOSED SILT FENCE N N X 875. D 876.5 I I 1 L1J - a 1 I 1 L1J f M; 866.5 v. 850.4 SY`'b ^ CL Q: � I I I M ^ L1J -5 Go 11 n _ A 872Z.2: 10: L i . Ld8R8Y 2.5 B6B.1 rYl BENCHMARK Top nut of fire hydrant at SE quadrant of 58TH Street and Brookview Ave. Elev.= 869.22 : x6'71.6; LiJ A I I c : PROPOSED ELEVATIONS -LOT 1 GARAGE FLOOR = 868.0 (Tuck -under TOP OF BLOCK = 877.0 LOWEST FLOOR = 868.0 (9' CEILING) FIRST FLOOR = 878.8 PROPOSED ELEVATIONS -LOT 2 GARAGE FLOOR = 869.0 (Tuck -under TOP OF BLOCK = 877.0 LOWEST FLOOR = 869.0 (8' CEILING) FIRST FLOOR = 878.8 JOB #13448bs ACRE LAND SURVEYING ; Serving TWIn Itiea Metro area and beyond III 763- 458 -2997 acrelandsurveyrC�Lgmall.com ID 11 12 13 14 13 18 17 II 19 110 111 112 113 04 P3 115 117 Ile In 12o co 878.8) .877 x 876.6 ... 876.4 X SION CONTROL CONTACT: x(FFE= DENOTES PROPOSED ELEVATION DENOTES DIRECTION OF DRAINAGE IN 8 6.8 00 SS 18 876.4 00 ' NORTH 877.3 877.1 MAPLE 24 x 876.1 x 875.2 x 872.5 ' . I '. 86S.S:X - DENOTES OVERHEAD WIRE - DENOTES SANITARY SEWER ASH 24 1 h = 20 ft i 874.8.' 10 876.1 - ' LM--�2. -1 :870.9 '$69:0 X 867.4; :8 5.5 � ... s 7 . S s 5- � . RW'. 8Z6-6. -. -. - .,� ,:� 10 874.8 876.6 �ti T� 872. 1 '. F 1 I 876.3 PINE 13 876.1 cti BIRCH 12 70, e O '•. APLE 12 876.5 I ° x S T- S . ' coo . FB /TUC co 878.8) : -87:3 o 874.5 I SION CONTROL CONTACT: ti x(FFE= DENOTES PROPOSED ELEVATION DENOTES DIRECTION OF DRAINAGE IN 8 6.8 00 SS 18 876.4 00 � 1 NORTH DENOTES EXISTING TREE 0 20 *� iM o x87:47 I - DENOTES OVERHEAD WIRE - DENOTES SANITARY SEWER ( IN FEET ) 1 h = 20 ft 10 .., 874.8.' 10 876.1 - ' LM--�2. -1 :870.9 869.2 RW i Fill I:!, CPS � 87 � N . .� .� . � - 876.6 00 876.0 SPR 12 ' ....................,$7g..... x .......... ........... 876.2 FB /TUC .... .................. 5 ' 875.7 V875.6 (FFE= 878.8) SPR 12 10 II ...............8 %Jr•.. + V PINE414 87576. - s -S 6......... S d69 Go CP } 1'0 ( . cfl `0 �� &b LID co ` x * 9 Ssi:4 o .. X87 875. I SJR X14 00 S ' 00 � J 875. �^ x 875.7: 87 .2 � 1 n - - • = RRY 2.5 X 876.1 5 876.5 X 87 � BENCHMARK Top nut of fire hydrant at SE quadrant of 58TH Street and Brookview Ave. Elev.= 869.22 X 871.6 Q �I PROPOSED ELEVA GARAGE FLOOR = 86 TOP OF BLOCK = 87'. LOWEST FLOOR = 8& FIRST FLOOR = 878.E PROPOSED ELEVA GARAGE FLOOR = 86 TOP OF BLOCK = 87' LOWEST FLOOR = 861, FIRST FLOOR = 878.E JOB #134 _NOTES STORM SEWER ln� ACRE LAND SURVEY DENOTES DIRECTION OF DRAINAGE Serving Twin Cities Metro DENOTES FULL BASEMENT /TUCK -UNDER GARAGE area and beyond - DENOTES PROPOSED SILT FENCE 763- 458 -2997 acrelandsury 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 110 111 112 113 114 m1.-i 10. 23am 875.8x x 873.8 8� I A. SION CONTROL CONTACT: LEGEND DENOTES PROPOSED ELEVATION DENOTES DIRECTION OF DRAINAGE 1.2 DENOTES EXISTING ELEVATION. DENOTES EXISTING RETAINING WALL DENOTES PROPOSED RETAINING WALL NORTH DENOTES EXISTING TREE 0 20 DENOTES TREE TO BE REMOVED - DENOTES OVERHEAD WIRE - DENOTES SANITARY SEWER ( IN FEET ) 1 h = 20 ft d69 Go CP } 1'0 ( . cfl `0 �� &b LID co ` x * 9 Ssi:4 o .. X87 875. I SJR X14 00 S ' 00 � J 875. �^ x 875.7: 87 .2 � 1 n - - • = RRY 2.5 X 876.1 5 876.5 X 87 � BENCHMARK Top nut of fire hydrant at SE quadrant of 58TH Street and Brookview Ave. Elev.= 869.22 X 871.6 Q �I PROPOSED ELEVA GARAGE FLOOR = 86 TOP OF BLOCK = 87'. LOWEST FLOOR = 8& FIRST FLOOR = 878.E PROPOSED ELEVA GARAGE FLOOR = 86 TOP OF BLOCK = 87' LOWEST FLOOR = 861, FIRST FLOOR = 878.E JOB #134 _NOTES STORM SEWER ln� ACRE LAND SURVEY DENOTES DIRECTION OF DRAINAGE Serving Twin Cities Metro DENOTES FULL BASEMENT /TUCK -UNDER GARAGE area and beyond - DENOTES PROPOSED SILT FENCE 763- 458 -2997 acrelandsury 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 110 111 112 113 114 m1.-i 10. 23am 51 F 10'' f VERLAP SKETCH FOR: Ridge Creek Custom Homes I� 20 ( IN FEET ) 1 inch = 120 M *SEE ADDITIONAL SHEETS FOR LOT TABULATION* NORTH .I n6) C I ur � V /111 I : I - ,as ,sp 1 _ - 0 _ _ _ _ _ !p _ _ a4 I m I m ( m 1 m 1 e4 (79) (60) (91) (92) O (93) (94) 195) - (86) (97) (66) (89) n (90) _ (97) ED n 328 X33°. �2.{I -m� — — — 312 - — 4308 s r n m e eo m m Ns a, 40 m m 1]0]9 A 5805 (50) IYa wJ m m )s rs 5809 + m� A 5825 ) R (5 R (75) 5812 R A (49) ,J< A n (98) 5900 A wss g (36) 5816 A 5817 (12) 5804 A R 5805 (g) A ] 8 (37) 5820 5 A •.. (ee) u..a 2 5825 (4'7) ��jj 3 ,Yn 8 (38) 5824 p 13e.21 5 _ 1 g n9) 5828 51 (446) 6) - _ - -- - - -- 9____ _a____A (40) 5832 g 1 — - -- 583Ts r. (45) I w i° 8 (41) 5836 fl (15)5816 e 584021 A a ♦ � 58451 'e77____- 0 A ♦ tidis (100)•x, A (13) SB44 8 Y.ta I „e . xaa R Y" 5837 (23) ,e 5836 f (79) s+] 5837 (3) A' � Ill ' 8 + n +4.1 A (776) ani !I (102) ® R R a ( � l20) SB40 S 4412 4# 4408 (95) (99) (100) (101) (102) (103) (104) (105) (106) (107) A ;] (27) 5844 m 4404 4400 4328 4324 4320 4316 4312 4308 4304 4201 t.! m e4 c9 m m m m JS 3 is s rs 4a.a ��— �Jrt3TFfi ST— v— R 1 I I g / 1/ s j t II 1 1 I' £ 1 1 _ 1 $ 1 R IQ II1 1 1 1 A 1 f S ", V 1 °1 58014](51) 8 x 5821 1(32) 58008 1N]a 1]0]9 A 5805 (50) IYa wJ A (33) 5804 g u,sr A - a +] ,Y.n R (34) 5808 8 5809 + m� A 5825 ) R (5 R (75) 5812 R A (49) ,J< A n (98) 5900 A wss g (36) 5816 A 5817 (12) 5804 A R 5805 (g) A ] 8 (37) 5820 5 A •.. (ee) u..a 2 5825 (4'7) ��jj 3 ,Yn 8 (38) 5824 p 13e.21 5 _ 1 g n9) 5828 51 (446) 6) - _ - -- - - -- 9____ _a____A (40) 5832 g 1 — - -- 583Ts r. (45) I w i° 8 (41) 5836 fl (15)5816 e 584021 A a ♦ � 58451 'e77____- . A ♦ tidis (100)•x, A (13) SB44 8 Y.ta i 5801 4 f311 ' :N30 R 5805 (jp) R R 58094 (29) w 2e 5813 -- - -- . -" -.. 11 (73) IN �I s I r= s (75) ♦ 5845 J. ' JiL,4,n -sa S 8 x 5821 a R`i S p c IYa wJ R 1 1 a +] g _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ° 5800 7 (11) a SB01 (10) 0 + m� A 5825 ) R (5 ? Z i E 59D7 (720) ♦% (98) 5900 A (124) (12) 5804 A R 5805 (g) A ] Q RO' 58291_ fl I (73) 5608 ' i 580 B) E; _ 1 w(19)5812 7R) - _ - -- - - -- 9____ _a____A G�lyOT 1 wn I 1 (15)5816 e SB33(2a1 A ♦ 5845 J. ' JiL,4,n -sa S 8 x 5821 a R`i S p c 8 .. 5821 cei .v n^ •YS 1! : 1 9i v 11 !/ pp 1 1 g _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ° SB2 � R s♦ A 5825 ) R (5 ? Z i E 59D7 (720) ♦% (98) 5900 A (124) ' Q RO' 58291_ fl I s A - 1 1 . (17) 5828 g ] Q e (728) O I - _ - -- - - -- +Y.x ' 589 +Y.x I 0 5832 L 5((1127)p e SB33(2a1 A 1Y1 (z1 ' _ - - e ] (- 11 8) (100)•x, 'Y90 I „e . xaa R Y" 5837 (23) ,e 5836 f (79) s+] 5837 (3) A' � Ill 8 + n +4.1 A (776) ani !I (102) ® R R a ( � l20) SB40 S O •' 5841 (2i A / I 5841 F. O A ;] (27) 5844 m ♦ 5845 J. ' JiL,4,n -sa S AUG 0 3 2013 1 hereby certify that this plan, sketch or report was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that I am a duly Licensed Land Surveyor under the laws of the State of Minnesota. P- SHUA P. SCHNEIDER Date: 8 -02 -13 Reg. No. 44655 CRE LAND SURVEYING_ Blaine, MN 55449 r I 763 - 238-62!8 js.acrelandsurvey�gmail.com hio 1 i]iis xu s♦ n, +] i E 59D7 (720) ♦% (98) 5900 A (124) ' ,]0.,4 _� -• tN.tO ♦4 R 5901 (779) ♦ (99) (123) ] I I Qi o 8 +Y.x I :_x A 5900 n e 1Y1 (z1 ' _ - - e ] (- 11 8) (100)•x, A g 59X)r - (122) S e I 1}1.11 ��� 5]451 1N.11 5912 A' 5i 8 + n +4.1 A (776) ani !I (102) ® R R ]J 8 gi iR AUG 0 3 2013 1 hereby certify that this plan, sketch or report was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that I am a duly Licensed Land Surveyor under the laws of the State of Minnesota. P- SHUA P. SCHNEIDER Date: 8 -02 -13 Reg. No. 44655 CRE LAND SURVEYING_ Blaine, MN 55449 r I 763 - 238-62!8 js.acrelandsurvey�gmail.com hio 500 FT STUDY 5820 Brookview Ave., EDINA Peterson PROPERTY; FAIRFAX, HENNEPIN COUNTY MINNESOTA STREET ADDRESS NAME 8/2/2013 By: Joshua Schneider, Acre Land Surveying, Inc. RLS #44655 LOT LOT LOT WIDTH (FT) AREA (SF) DEPTH (FT) 58th St. W. 4304 Iwanin 75.0 9,370 58th St. W. 4308 Anderson �.� 75.0 9,370 58th St. W. 4312 Probst d 75.0 9,370. 58th St. W. 4316 Figarella et al o- 75.0 9,370 58th St. W. 4320 Arrieta et al 75:0 9,370 58th St. W. 4324 Thompson 3 P.Aa 80.0 9,995 58th St. W. 4328 Luskin pia 80.0 9,995 58th St. W. 4400 Sitek 80:0 9,995 58th St. W. 4404 Lindgren _ 80.0. 9,995 58th St. V1/. 4408 Holst & Nissen 80.0 9,995 58th St. W. _ 4412 Bestrom 80.0 9,995 Brookview Ave. 5800 Glatzel 48.4 6,505 Brookview Ave. 5801 Kingston 48.4 '.6,509 Brookview Ave. 5804 Rehm & Johnson 50.0 6,725 Brookview Ave. 5805 Caron 50.0 6,723 Brookview Ave. 5808 Johnson 50.0 6,724 Brookview Ave. 5809 Goldberg 75.0 10,084 Brookview Ave. 5812 Berscheid 50.0 6,723 Brookview Ave. 5816 Raichert 50.0. 6,723 Brookview Ave. 5817 Hultmann & Bates 75.0 10,082 Brookview Ave. 5820 Peterson etal 100.0 13,444 Brookview Ave. 5821 Duquette 50.0 6,721 Brookview Ave. 5825 Storey 50.0 6,720 Brookview Ave. 5828 Koktavy 50.0 6,721 Brookview Ave. 5829 Chamberlin & Oberstar 49.9. 6,720 Brookview Ave. 5832 Heath 50.0 6,721 Brookview Ave. 5833 Lapensky 49.9 6,719 Brookview Ave. 5836 Yannapoulou 50.0 6,720 Brookview Ave. 5837 Hurley 50.0 6,718 Brookview Ave. 5840 Braun 50.0 6,719 Brookview Ave. 5841 Grage 50.0 6,718 Brookview Ave. 5844 Bergren 50.0 6,719 Brookview Ave. 5845 Sullivan 80.0 10,747 Kellogg Ave. 5801 Wallen 48.5 6,532 Kellogg Ave.. 5805 Jacobson 50.0 6,728 Kellogg Ave. 5809 Engbretson & Pratt 100.0 13;453 Kellogg Ave. 5817 Aksamit etal 100.0 13,450 Kellogg Ave. 5825. Miller . 50.0 6,724 Kellogg Ave. 5829 Phernetton et al 75.0 10,084 Kellogg Ave. 5837 Cowan 75.0 10,083 Kellogg Ave. 5845 Hee -yoon & Young Kim Trustee 100.0 13,441 Kellogg Ave. 5901 Fisher 48.5 '6,522 . - Kellogg Ave. 5905 Nrfp Holdings llc 50.0 6,718 Oaklawn Ave. 5905 Amundson 20,0 1,700 Oaklawn Ave. 5800 Dekleyn & Gerring 48:5 6,527 Oaklawn Ave. 5801 Jahn 48.5 .6,520 Oaklawn Ave. 5804 Schill & Sheehan 50.0 6,727 Oaklawn Ave. 5805 Bergman 50.0 6,726 Oaklawn Ave. 5808 Stasney 50.0 6,726 Oaklawn Ave. 5809 King etal 50.0. 6,725 Oaklawn Ave. 5812 Fleming & Scholes 50.0 6,725 Oaklawn Ave. 5813 Begley III 60.0 8,067 Oaklawn Ave. 5816 King .V ( 50.0 6,724 125.0 12.5.0 125.0 125:0 125.0 125.0 125.0 125:0 125.0 125.0 125.0 134.3 134.3 134.3 134.3 134.3 134.3 134.3 134.2 134.3 134.2 134.2 134.2 134.2 134.3 134.2 134.3 134.2 134.2 134.2 134.2 134.2 134.2 134.3 - 134.3 134.3 134.2 134.2 134.2 134.2 134:2 134.1 134.1 85.0 134:3 134.3 134.3 134.3 134.3 134.3 134.3 134.3 134.2 Oaklawn Ave. 5817 Everist 60.0 8,066 134.2 Oaklawn Ave. 5820 Bergseth 50.0 6,724 134.2 Oaklawn Ave. 5821 Olson & Stanislav 60.0 8,077 `134.2 Oaklawn Ave. 5824 Hook 50.0 6,723 134.2 Oaklawn Ave. 5828 Schlecht & Erickson 50.0 6,722 134.2 Oaklawn Ave. 5829 Fraser trustee 60.0 8,053 134.2 Oaklawn Ave. 5832 Dick 50.0. 6,721 134.2, Oaklawn Ave. 5833 Regan 60.0 8,075 134.2 Oaklawn Ave. 5836 Schleimer trustee 50.0 6,721 134.2 Oaklawn Ave. 5837 Mitchell 50.0 6;721 134.2 Oaklawn Ave. 5840 Kleinjan 50.0 6,720 134.2 Oaklawn Ave. 5841 Sandberg 115.0 15,438 134:2 Oaklawn Ave. 5844 Beson 50.0 6,719 134.2 Oaklawn Ave. 5900 Aura 48.5 6,517 134.1 Oaklawn Ave. 5901 Learn 63.5 8,547 134.2 " Oaklawn Ave.. 5904 Parker 50.0 6,717 134.1 Oaklawn Ave. 5905 Amundson etal 50.0 6,718 134.1 Oaklawn Ave. 5908 Ideal Apartments Ilc 50:0 6,716 134.1 " Oaklawn Ave. 5912 Kaiser 50.0 6,715 134.1 . ' Oaklawn Ave. 59XX Hennepin County- Forfeited 40.0, 5,017 125.4 Philbrook Ln. 4200 Stussy 75.0 9,31.1 125.0 Philbrook Ln. 4201 Engelke 81.4 ' '9,568 125.0 Philbrook Ln. 4308 Egger 80.0 10,003 125.0 Philbrook Ln. 4312 Swoap 80.0 10,003 125.0 Philbrook Ln. 4316 Brown 80.0 10,002 125.0 Philbrook Ln. 4320 Jacobs 80.0 10,002 125.0 Philbrook Lh. 4324 Jchang & Orr 86.0 10,002 125.0 Philbrook Ln. 4328 Miller 80.0 10,001 125.0 MEAN 61.7 8098.1 131.3 81 Total MEDIAN 50.0 6725.0 134.2 PLAN1,MN01 DE MTMENT AUG 0 3 2013 MY OF EDINA �I'`�1�L• ?3- s� ?�::I "s`!- a 13 54s "ae'e !tl CO 4 e A. 112 SE. 114 SEC 19 T. 028 A 24 ('06) m) (.7) (10 58TH ST w (31) ('0) (3.) (12) �21 > — L 7 T -I'- (6) '(25) (21 Z- (17) 1.2 1.2 6 (24) (4) (23) (3) (2� (2) 59TH ST W (4.) S/NE/ 19 (50) N SW 19 (1x161 (34) (117) S/SE/ 19 S (3,) :1 (103) (38; (46) (3.) a—L 2 (40) (41)' S (4l) (w) (4) (41). 1� (31) ('0) (3.) (12) �21 > — L 7 T -I'- (6) '(25) (21 Z- (17) 1.2 1.2 6 (24) (4) (23) (3) (2� (2) 59TH ST W (4.) S/NE/ 19 S/NW/ N SW 19 (1x161 Ooo) (117) S/SE/ 19 S (102) :1 (103) 7 3) (112) (105) (w) (lN) (123) as a (121)y a 21 '122 lull i 21 ------- lam ------ - IAE S 13 R TH ST W v 'W 1'1 O's) 2�) (7; 2 7- N.112 SE. 114 SEC. 19 T 028 R.24 rrleA map. It represents lion and data from city, -8:38:15 200 200 400 Feet S/NW/ 19 S/NE/ 19 S/NW/ N SW 19 N/SW/ S/SW/ 19 S/SE/ 19 S/Swl zo !0 0 Eighth/Quarter/Seption Jackie Hoogenakker From: Jan Storey <janostorey @gmail.com> Sent: Wednesday, October 09, 2013 8:33 PM To: Jackie Hoogenakker Cc: Jan Storey; Jon Swanson Subject: Case file 2013.018 5820 Brookview Hello I am a neighbor at 5825 Brookview ave and am unable to attend the meeting on Oct 14 as I am traveling for work. I did attend the city planning meeting and spoke about my support for this project. My partner Jon Swanson and I fully support the subdivision of the 5820 property currently owned by the Petersons. We live next door to. the previous subdivision on the block and had a great experience, and now have 2 new families on the block that are wonderful neighbors.. We feel that having the lot subdivided will maintain the integrity of the neighborhood. If the subdivision is not allowed, we fear that an enormous house will be built on that lot (the only 100 ft lot remaining on the block) and it will'spoil the look and feel of the neighborhood we know and love. I have lived here for 11 years and.have seen a lot of changes on the block. This is absolutely a positive one even though we will miss the Petersons very much. The other thing to mention is how thorough the Petersons did their research on picking the right contractor for the . neighborhood. I trust them and the decisions they have made related to the subdivision. Please feel free to reach out to me or my partner Jon. We are happy to provide any other information needed to support this. Thank you. Jan and Jon Jan Storey ianostorey @gmail.com 612.963.4383 1 MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION CITY OF EDINA, MINNESOTA CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS SEPTEMBER 25, 2013 7:00 PM CALL TO ORDER ROLL CALL Scherer, Schroeder, Potts, Fischer, Kilberg, Halva, Carr, Platteter, Forrest, Grabiel, Staunton. III. APPROVAL OF MEETING AGENDA Commissioner Potts moved approval of the September 25, 2013 meeting agenda. Commissioner Platteter seconded the motion. All voted aye; motion carried. IV. APPROVAL OF CONSENT AGENDA Commissioner Scherer moved approval of the September 11, 2013 meeting minutes. Commissioner Potts seconded the motion. All voted aye; motion carried. V. COMMUNITY COMMENT During "Community Comment," the Planning Commission will invite residents to share new issues or concerns that haven't been considered in the past 30 days by the Commission or which aren't slated for future consideration. Individuals must limit their comments to three minutes. The Chair may limit the number of speakers on the same issue in the interest of time and topic. Generally speaking, items that are elsewhere on this morning's agenda may not be addressed during Community Comment. Individuals should not expect the Chair or Commission Members to respond to their comments today. Instead, the Commission might refer the matter to staff for consideration at a future meeting. No public comment. VI. PUBLIC HEARINGS A. Preliminary Plat with Variances. AKARE Companies. 5820 Brookview Avenue, Edina, MN Planner Presentation Planner Teague informed the Commission AKARE Companies LLC on behalf of John Peterson is proposing to subdivide the property at 5820 Brookview Avenue into two lots. The existing home would be torn down, and two new homes built on the new lots. Planner Teague noted the following is Page 1 of 10 required; subdivision approval, lot width variances from 75 feet to 50 feet for each lot; and lot area variances from 9,000 square feet to 6,711 square feet for each lot. Teague explained that both lots would gain access off Brookview Avenue. Within this neighborhood, the median lot area is 6,725 square feet, median lot depth is 134 feet, and the median lot width is 50 feet. The new lots would meet the median width and depth, but would just fall short of the median lot size. Teague concluded that staff recommends that the City Council approve the proposed two lot subdivision of 5820 Brookview Avenue and the lot width variances from 75 feet to 50 feet and lot area variances from 9,000 square feet to 6,711square feet based on the following findings: 1. Except for the variances, the proposal meets the required standards and ordinance for a subdivision: 2. The subdivision would meet the neighborhood medians for lot width and depth and nearly meet the median area. 3.. The proposal would restore the property back to the form of the original plat, which included two lots. 4. The proposal meets the required standards for a variance, because: .a. The - practical difficult unique to the property is caused by the existing size of the property which is two times the size of every lot on the block. This is caused by the original property owner, who combined two lots into one. b. The requested variances are reasonable in the context of the immediate neighborhood. The existing lot is both larger and wider than most properties in the area, including nearly every lot on the block. The proposed subdivision would result,in two lots more characteristic of the neighborhood. C. The proposed lots would be the same size as the lots were originally platted. d. They ariances would`rheet the intent of the ordinance because the proposed lots are of similar size to others in the neighborhood. e: If the variances were denied, the applicant would be denied a use of his property, a 50- foot wide lot, which is common to the area. In addition, the applicant would be denied a subdivision with variances that has been previously approved by the City, including the same request for a. subdivision with variances that were approved right across the.street in-2011. Approval is subject to the following conditions: 1. The city must approve the final plat within one year of preliminary approval or receive a written application for a time extension or the preliminary approval will be void. 2. Prior to issuance of a building permit, the following items must be submitted: a. Submit evidence of Minnehaha Creek Watershed District approval. The City may require revisions to the preliminary plat to meet the district's requirements. Page 2 of 10 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 Brookview Avenue. Appearing for the Applicant Rob Eldridge of Ridge Creek Custom Homes and John Peterson, property owner. Applicant Presentation Mr. Eldridge addressed the Commission and gave a brief history of his work, adding in his opinion the subject lot subdivided into two smaller lots creates building pads for homes that are affordable to more people, especially families. Continuing, Eldridge stated he prepared a power point presentation; however, Planner Teague's presentation was similar to his and to avoid duplication he would stand and answer any questions the Commission may have. Chair Staunton opened the public hearing. Public Testimony John Peterson, 5820 Brookview Avenue, addressed the Commission and informed the Commission he purchased the subject property in the 1960's when Pamela Park was a swamp. Peterson said he and his wife have thought long and hard about subdividing their property and felt that the subdivision would provide new families with the opportunity to purchase new homes in Edina. Peterson added that the builder they picked, Mr. Eldridge met the criteria they wanted for the new homes. The following residents spoke in support of the proposed subdivision: George Raichert, 5816 Brookview Avenue, Edina, MN 60+ year Edina resident. John Raichert, 5116 Indianola Avenue, Edina, MN Jan Storey, 5825 Brookview Avenue, Edina, MN Chair Staunton asked if anyone else would like to speak to the issue; being none, Commissioner Platteter moved to close the public hearing. Commissioner Scherer seconded the motion. All voted aye; motion carried. Page 3 of 10 Discussion Commissioner Fischer stated he recalls that the Commission heard a number of subdivision requests in this area; some were approved, some were denied, adding the reasons for approval or denial was mostly based on the immediate neighborhood and if the block contained lots in excess of 50 -feet or didn't. Planner Teague said he agrees with that observation. Teague reported there were six subdivision requests in the area; three were approved and three were denied. Teague explained the reasons for denial had to do with lot size on the block, adding the subdivision requests that were denied tended to be on blocks containing multiple lots in excess of 50 -feet in width. Motion Commissioner Fischer moved to recommend Preliminary Plat approval with variances based on staff findings and subject to staff conditions. Commissioner Grabiel seconded the motion. Commissioner Grabiel said it was interesting to him to hear positive comments from neighbors on the proposed subdivision and the addition of new homes to the neighborhood. Commissioner Forrest said that while she understands the issue; and is not averse to subdividing the property she has difficulty supporting the variances because in her opinion the variance requirements were not met. Forrest added she would like the Zoning Ordinance to better reflect the City's preferences in the smaller lot neighborhoods. Chair Staunton commented the Commission has experienced on subdividing larger lots into two lots in the smaller lot neighborhoods, noting to some on the Commission a two lot subdivision is better than retaining the one large . lot because it ensures that the area remains consistent and the houses constructed are smaller than what could be constructed if it remained one lot. Chair Staunton called the vote; Ayes, Scherer, Schroeder, Potts, Fischer, Platteter, Carr, Grabiel, Staunton. Nay, Forrest. Motion carried 8 -0. VII. REPORTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS A. Sketch Plan — 5 Hazelt Road, Edina, MN Planner Presentation Planner Teague informed fie Commissio hey are being asked to consider a sketch plan proposal to redevel p the property at 3K5 Hazelton Road. The proposal is to tear Page 4 of 10 i f To: Mayor and City Council o 8 o ,N�RPORP`'�v- o 1886 Agenda Item #: VIII.A. From: Ann Kattreh Action Parks & Recreation Director Discussion ❑ Date: October 14, 2013 Information ❑ Subject: Proposals for Sports Dome, Outdoor Refrigerated Rink and Pamela Park Improvements Action Requested: Approve a motion to: 1) Direct staff to proceed with the development of plans and specifications for a sports dome and outdoor refrigerated rink at the Braemar Arena site and field renovations and improvements at Pamela Park; 2) Direct staff to proceed with the development of a finance plan to fund capital construction and annual operating needs of the projects at Braemar Ice Arena and Pamela Park Information / Background: The City of Edina is faced with a daunting challenge: How does the City stay responsive to the evolving recreational and athletic needs of its residents in a fiscally responsible manner? We are experiencing consistent annual increases in both the numbers of both organized outdoor youth sports activities and the total number of youth participants in these activities. We are grappling with both of these forces with a static number of outdoor athletic playing fields and limited financial and physical resources. The impact of increasing number of activities and participants combined with a finite supply of resources has produced a strain on those limited resources through over -use, despite our best efforts at maintenance, which is causing persistent frustrations for participants and staff. At the end of the day, we are left with facilities that do not match our brand promise and disappointed customers a true lose -lose scenario. We see no signs of Edina's current redevelopment phase coming to a close. And with recent Metropolitan Council estimates for Edina's 2040 population topping 70,000 people, we believe it is imperative for the City to actively invest now in new parks and recreation facilities that will not only address our current facility needs, but also set us on course to sustain our reputation as the most desirable city in the Twin Cities metro area. We believe the proposed sports dome and Pamela Park improvements are a good start to meeting the facility challenge we are facing today and preparing us to meet the community brand commitments we want to make for the future. The decisions we are asking the Council to make tonight will accomplish two separate, but equally important, actions. First, we are asking the Council to approve the proposed project scope and give direction to staff to proceed with the development of the plans and specifications to take the project to the public bidding process. The cost of taking the project through this phase is estimated to be $649,000. This includes 80% of the consultant fees for the entire project proposed. If the Council ultimately approves the project for construction, City of Edina • 4801 W. 50th St. • .Edina, MN 55424 REPORT / RECOMMENDATION Page 2 the design costs to prepare the plans and specifications would be wrapped into the construction financing for the projects. If, however, the City proceeds with the preparation of project plans and specifications but decides not to go forward with the ultimate projects, the costs incurred to prepare the plans and specifications would be "stranded costs ", meaning that we would need to alter the City's Capital Improvement Plan in order to cover those costs. When the project plans and specifications are prepared, staff would advance them to the City Council for approval and seek your authorization to solicit competitive bids for the projects. After the bids are received, they would be processed and analyzed by staff and our consulting team. When staff has reached a recommendation on contract awards, we would advance that recommendation to the Council for approval. Following Council the Council action to award the contracts, staff would manage the project to completion, which we believe can occur in November - December 2014, if the Council acts on the staff s recommendation before the end of November. As background, a brief review of the history of the development of this project is useful: April 5, 2011 - The City Council expressed an interest in hearing more about a sports dome presentation developed by a group of Edina residents. August 3, 2011 - The City Council directed staff to conduct a feasibility study of an indoor athletic facility under the guidance of the Park Board. $20,000 was budgeted for this purpose. August 9, 2011 - The Park Board approved the Sports Dome Study Working Group. February 14, 2012 - Parks & Recreation Consultants presented the findings of their preliminary seasonal sports dome study to the Park Board. April 3, 2012 - The City Council authorized the Cuningham Group to begin the location phase of the study by studying the site south of the South Metro Public Safety Training Facility as a possible site to co- locate the sports dome and golf dome. June 5, 2012 - The South Metro Public Safety Training Facility site was determined to be too small and too expensive. The City Council authorized the Park Board Sports Dome Working Group to reconvene to recommend alternative sites. October 12, 2012 - The Park Board made a motion to continue to study the Braemar athletic field site but that the forward motion of the dome should not occur until the issue of expanded playing fields is addressed, solved and budgeted for. November 20, 2012 - The City Council received the Park Board recommendation of the Braemar Athletic Field site and authorized a feasibility study of the Braemar site and also asked for the study of the issue of expanded playing fields and the financing for those expanded playing fields. July 9, 2013 - The Park Board provided review and comment on the proposed sports dome at the Braemar Athletic Field site as well as an option for constructing an outdoor refrigerated sheet of ice at the Braemar Arena and the option of renovating athletic fields at Pamela Park and Creek Valley Park. August 20, 2013 - The City Council received the Braemar Athletic Field sports dome proposal, along with the outdoor refrigerated rink and field renovation proposals for Pamela Park and Creek Valley Park SPORTS DOME RECOMMENDATION Staff worked with the Cuningham Group, RJM, Anderson Johnson and Parks & Recreation Consultants to prepare a site and financial feasibility study of the Braemar Athletic Field location for a sports dome. Four different seasonal dome configurations were considered. Each of the four were also considered with a 230' REPORT / RECOMMENDATION Page 3 wide dome option and a 250' wide dome option. In order to comply with fire codes for a seasonal dome and not require full sprinkling with water cannons, the dome would need to be up for less than 180 days. This 180 day scenario works very well with our projected sports dome and athletic field needs. A comprehensive field needs study was completed as part of this project both by staff and Parks & Recreation Consultants. It was determined that we do not have the need for a year -round dome; however, a seasonal dome, with an artificial turf field available from May through October meets our needs perfectly. The following seasonal dome options were considered: Option A Sports dome only. No outdoor artificial ice sheet. Option B Sports dome and a 130' X 65' ice sheet. Option C Sports dome and a 200' X 85' outdoor artificial ice sheet. Option D Sports dome turned in an east /west orientation. This option could have been constructed with or.without the outdoor ice sheet. Option B was eliminated right away due to the small rink. If we were going to have a rink, it would be much more marketable if it was a full size rink. Option D was also eliminated due to cost, the elimination of approximately 50 parking spaces and the undesirable east /west orientation of the artificial turf field during the non -dome season. It would be ideal to maximize the field space with a 250' wide dome. This would be a benefit to teams practicing during the dome and non -dome seasons to split the field and play in an east /west orientation. The additional 8000SF to go from a 230' to a 250' dome will cost an additional $256,000. The majority of that additional cost is in artificial turf and dome fabric. Staff recommends Option C with a 250' wide dome. The athletic field in this dome would be 215'x 320'. SPORTS DOME PRO FORMA Staff has worked closely with the athletic associations to secure commitments for dome utilization. The Edina Soccer Club (ESC), Edina Baseball Association (EBA), Edina Lacrosse Association (ELA) and Edina Football Association (EFA) have all made contractual commitments to dome usage (including a schedule) and a $30 per person priority scheduling fee. The $30 priority scheduling fee would be charged to the user groups wanting to have priority in scheduling of the dome. This would be a per athlete charge for every athlete in the association /club. Staff worked with City Attorney Soren Mattick to prepare contracts for the priority scheduling fee and for a commitment of dome hours purchased. The term of the contract is 20 years. Copies of the signed contracts are attached. We have a commitment of 819 hours from the ESC (346 hours), EBA (250 hours), ELA (88 hours),.EFA (34 hours) and CSC Sports (101 hours). In lieu of a capital donation, the $30 priority scheduling fee will raise an estimated $95,310 annually or $1,429,650 over fifteen years. For the guaranteed success of the sports dome, it is essential that the pro forma be based solely on Edina residents. We know that Edina residents will be committed to the success of the dome in their community. Non -Edina users will be valuable assets to the dome as well, but we realize that their commitment to our dome will not necessarily be longstanding as will the commitment from our resident associations. In the first year, the sports dome is anticipated to operate at a level of 1,31% cost recovery with net operating income of over $85,000. The pro forma also includes an annual amount of almost $25,000 for "unanticipated items ", which if not needed would increase our net income to over $110,000 in year one. This line item was added to provide a very conservative budget. At year 15 the net revenues are anticipated to be $28,791 including the "unanticipated items" budget line item of $38,015. The pro forma assumes an annual increase of t REPORT/ RECOMMENDATION Page 4 3% in expenses and. 2% in turf rentals. Excess revenues could be banked to pay for eventual turf and dome replacements. After 15 years, the fund balance is anticipated to be approximately $900,000. The artificial turf will need to be replaced in approximately 12 years ($600,000) and the dome fabric will need to be replaced in approximately 20 years ($650,000). Tedlar coating will extend the life of the dome fabric for 5 years. This pro forma also leaves over 300 prime time hours available to rent. If we rent just 150 of those hours, we would generate an additional $52,500, or $787,500 over 15 years. The sports dome would have the following rental rates and classifications: Shoulder season (October — December) $320 /hour Prime season including the months of January 1 Prime time weekday (5 p.m. 10 p.m.) Prime time Saturday (8 a.m. — 10 p.m.) Prime time Sunday (8 a.m. — 5 p.m.) Non -prime time /prime season Late Night Rentals — after 10 p.m. hrough April: $350 /hour $350 /hour $350 /hour $280 /hour $275 /hour With the $30 per athlete, priority scheduling fee we need just 693 hours to break even. Without the priority scheduling fee we would need to rent over 1020.hours to break even. Another identified partner is CSC Sports. CSC Sports is a metro based adult recreational sports league provider, currently utilizing domes and athletic fields across the metro. The centralized location 'of our dome in the metro area and our commitment to,;` provide them regularly scheduled hours is appealing to CSC Sports. They would be a quality, long term: partner for our project. SPORTS DOME PUBLIC USES A sports dome -would provide an asset for all members of the community. The sports dome would include a walking track around the outside of the athletic field that residents would be able to use free of charge. Seniors would be able to utilize the dome for a variety of programming during the day. Bocce, ladder ball, croquet, badminton, softball and a walking club are a few ideas for daytime programming. The school district could use it for community education classes and programming from band to athletics. The Parks &Recreation Department could utilize it for programming for residents of all ages and for special events. Some programming opportunities are daytime preschool programs, daytime /late evening adult sports leagues, fitness boot camps or other fitness classes, archery, glow dodge ball, cricket, teen challenge days, Friday night out at the dome, health and fitness expos, family challenge nights, badminton leagues, ladies night, Snag (Starting. New At Golf) Golf, ultimate Frisbee, rugby, batting cages for senior softball, movies in the dome, sports camps and large expos. The dome could also be rented to residents for birthday parties or other private rentals. In 2015 Braemar Arena is hosting the US Figure Skating Midwest Regionals. Events such as these would likely rent the dome. A sports dome would also help to free up gym time, particularly during the busy spring season when basketball season is still playing and the outdoor sports are getting started. The traditional outdoor sports would utilize the dome, freeing up gym time for basketball. OUTDOOR REFRIGERATED RINK The addition of an outdoor ice rink at the Arena would be a benefit to Arena operations, the Edina Hockey Association (EHA), the Braemar City of Lakes Figure Skating Club (BCLFSC) and the residents of Edina for REPORT / RECOMMENDATION Page 5 additional programming opportunities. In 2013/14 Braemar Arena will provide approximately 43% of the ice needs for the Edina Hockey Association. EHA purchases approximately 2150 of its 5000 total hours purchased at the Arena. If EHA purchased an additional 720 hours at the Braemar outdoor rink, they would be purchasing 58% of their ice at Braemar, significantly reducing the amount of time Edina families spend traveling around the metro for ice hours. An outdoor refrigerated rink would be operational from approximately November 1 through March 15. The cost of an outdoor refrigerated rink is conservatively estimated at $2.875 million, but this cost also includes the replacement of the refrigeration system at the East Arena. It also includes concrete, boards, glass and heated benches. A roof over the rink is needed to keep snow and sun from negatively impacting ice conditions. It is also included in the total rink estimate. An outdoor covered walkway is also proposed to provide access from the sports dome and outdoor refrigerated rink into the East Arena. The cost for the covered walkway is included in the outdoor rink portion of the budget. Another included option, if approved by the fire marshal, is an outdoor natural gas fire pit. It would be located just outside of the East Arena door, adjacent to the outdoor rink and protected from the wind by a new, retaining wall. The East Arena is the last ice sheet utilizing R22 refrigerant at Braemar. The West and South Arenas use ammonia as a refrigerant. R22 will no longer be produced after 2020. In the conversion of R22 to ammonia, 800 — 12001bs of R22 will be replaced by 400 — 600 lbs of ammonia refrigerant. R22 contains high amounts of ozone with global warming potential. Ammonia has no ozone or global warming potential. The cost to replace the refrigeration system on the East Arena alone is $750,000. Interior improvements in the East Arena would also be required. This would include adding two basic locker /changing rooms, renovate two non -ADA compliant restrooms and add ADA compliant unisex restrooms. Renovations to the equipment room will be needed to accommodate the new refrigeration system. These renovations are estimated at $495,500 and are not included in the total cost of the rink addition. Currently $100,000 is budgeted in the CIP in 2016 for locker room and restroom upgrades. Part of this budget is allocated for the non -ADA compliant restrooms in the lower East Arena. The $750,000 refrigeration replacement needed by 2020 is not currently in the CIP. OUTDOOR ICE SHEET PRO FORMA Two pro formas for the operations of an outdoor refrigerated rink are attached. One is based on a 17 week season and the other is based on a 19 week season. The ideal season would be 19 weeks. The 17 week budget is prepared conservatively in case warm weather conditions in early November would prohibit ice production. This pro forma, like the sports dome pro forma does not support the re- payment of construction costs in the form of bond payments, but does cash flow positively. The Arena would be better positioned to meet the needs of the EHA athletes, provide a unique skating opportunity for residents and continue to improve on the Braemar Arena-brand. Based on a 17 week season we project a positive cash flow in the-first year of approximately $65,000 from EHA ice purchased. There is an additional $19,000 in prime time ice hours available. Assuming we sell 50% of those hours, the outdoor rink would have a positive cash flow of newrly $75,000. The estimated cost recovery percentage in year one is 304 %. A cash balance of over $1 million is anticipated after 15 years. These funds could be utilized to help offset the annual operating deficit of the . Arena. This rink would also be utilized for tournaments and Parks & Recreation programming for youth and adults. There would be no additional staffing costs because existing Arena staff would be able to maintain and supervise the outdoor rink. The East Arena Zamboni would be used for ice resurfacing. This rink is also in an ideal location because it is protected from the sun and wind, neatly tucked between the Hornets Nest, sports REPORT /RECOMMENDATION Page 6 dome, West Arena and East Arena. Staff has received commitments (40 hours per week) for ice rental from the EHA for this amenity. ERA's signed contract is attached. The Edina Soccer Club in interested in utilizing the concrete hockey rink surface during the non- ice.season as a futsal training facility. Futsal is a variation of soccer that is played on a smaller surface and mainly indoors. The playground above Courtney Fields at Braemar Park and the gazebo would need to be relocated..The playground equipment was installed in 1997, but is still in good condition. It is not a heavily used playground. GEOTHERMAL Another option for consideration is the addition of a geothermal heat pump system. This unit would take heat out of the ground to heat the dome during the winter and return heat to the ground from ice- making during the summer. Investigation of soils is required to determine if they are compatible with a geothermal system. The geothermal well would be located under the turf field. This concept would need further study, to determine site feasibility, actual cost and return on investment. Rough estimates for geothermal are $1.9 million - $2.1 million with $20,000 needed for soil and well testing. The payback depends upon soils and utility costs, but would probably match'the life expectancy of 20 — 30 years. Geothermal would provide annual energy savings for the sports dome and would reduce the carbon footprint of the dome. PAMELA PARK RENOVATION RECOMMENDATIONS A master plan of Pamela Park wasi completed in 2009.This information was updated in 2013 and -is attached. In order to ease the issue of field shortages'staff recommends the addition of a 300' x 160' sand= peat-athletic field (south) with drain tile and irrigation directly west of the senior lighted field; the renovation of the senior (southeast) lighted field (380'x 225') to an,artificial turf field; and the renovation of the senior (north) field (approx. 300'x 200') to a new sand -peat field with.new drain the and irrigation. This would' significantly improve the playability and utilization of these fields. The' parking lots are in very rough shape and :need renovation as well. The Pamela Park shelter building was built in..1970 and is also in need. of replacing. The Pamela shelter building also houses Well 17, which was also drilled in 1970. Based on recent pricing to replace the Countryside shelter building, an approximate cost-loi replace the shelter building would be $400;000 $500,000, plus architectural and engineering fees. A paved "environmental trail" could also be added around the park to provide an accessible recreational. amenity and to. support environmental discovery and learning. The additional cost for this trail would be approximately $115,000. The proposed Pamela Park project costs are: South athletic field addition $ 498,000 Artificial turf at southeast senior field $1,396,000* North athletic field renovation $ 521,000 North parking lot renovation $ 130;000 West parking lot renovation $ 87,000 South parking lot renovation $ 106,000 Paved trail access to playground $ 39,000 Pamela Project Total with Artificial Turf $2,777,000 Pamela Project Total without Artificial Turf $2,027,000 REPORT / RECOMMENDATION Page 7 *$750,000 could be deducted from the project cost sand peat field senior field renovation instead of artificial turf. The City of Minneapolis currently has five outdoor artificial turf fields (Currie, Phelps, Folwell, East Phillips, Stewart). Elliot Park will be adding an artificial turf field in the next two years. The City of St. Paul (McMurray) has three artificial turf athletic fields. Maple Grove, Plymouth and Savage are seasonal municipal domes with artificial turf. Artificial turf provides the ability to utilize the fields two to three times as much as a grass field without any rest periods. It reduces the wear and tear on natural grass fields, especially from football and lacrosse. It requires no mowing, weeding, watering, or chemical applications and is cleaner (no mud). Conversely, artificial turf is warmer (on average 5 — 10 degrees warmer but up to 20 degrees warmer depending upon infill), more expensive to replace and costs two and a half times as much as a sand peat field. The life expectancy of an artificial turf field is a minimum of 10 — 12 years, depending upon use and maintenance. Artificial turf needs regular maintenance including cleaning and stain removal, brushing, aerating, raking, sweeping and the addition of infill. Perimeter protection would also be required for the field to deter vehicles from driving on the field. Options would be a stone bench system similar to Edina High School or a bollard system. With the, addition of the seasonal sports dome, an artificial turf field at Braemar would give us the ability for football and soccer to swap fields and have Lewis become a soccer facility, while moving football from Lewis to Braemar. With proper scheduling and rotation, we will be able to eliminate the resting of one of the Lewis fields annually, essentially putting another field into play. The addition of an artificial turf field at Pamela would also be a great benefit to football and lacrosse. Moving football to artificial turf fields would limit the damage to the.natural grass fields and improve playing conditions and safety for all field users. Our goal is to have baseball/softball fields available at VanValkenburg and Courtney to enable fall softball and baseball leagues. Currently in the fall there are football fields striped in the outfields at those facilities. This spring and early summer the Edina Soccer Club lost over 825 practices and games due to rain and poor field conditions. A sports dome and renovated fields would have significantly improved the chances of getting in a good percentage of those games cancelled due to poor field conditions. Field space is a major limitation for Edina Soccer Club. Two years ago the soccer club turned away over 60 kids at the U9 age group that would have been placed if fields were available. Today the ESC is not only looking at whether or not they can grow Edina Soccer, but if they need to shrink the program based on the condition of the fields. With the deterioration of Creek Valley, we are actually losing fields while both the soccer and lacrosse programs have been stretching for growth. We have completely lost one of our four junior fields at Creek Valley. This year due to heavy,spring rains, we were down to just two (of four) for most of the.year. The only full sized intermediate field for the ESC is at Creek Valley and it was also unplayable all year Staff did not receive estimates or hire a consultant to study the feasibility of improving the fields at Creek Valley School Park. The cost of hiring a consultant to study the feasibility of renovating these fields would cost approximately $9,000 - $10,000. Edina Public Schools is also currently completing an assessment of their athletic fields and are preparing a report of recommended field replacements and renovations. Parks & Recreation Department staff is applying for a Hennepin Youth Sports Grant of $325,000 for the sports dome part of the project. The application will be submitted on 10/14/13. If the dome project continues REPORT / RECOMMENDATION Page 8 to move forward, staff will present a grant resolution to the Council for approval in November. Grants will be awarded in December 2013. There may be opportunities for naming rights for the dome and the ice rink. The next steps in the process would be to hire the architects and engineers to begin the plan and design phases for all projects. The Braemar projects could be ready for bidding in February/March 2014 with construction starting in May and anticipated completion in November /December 2014. The Pamela Park project would need watershed district input and approval next spring, but the design phase could be completed over the winter. Construction could begin in June. The Pamela Park project would be completed next summer with anticipated completion in November 2014. SUMMARY Options for consideration: Project Estimate Sports Dome Option C - 250' width - Dome Only $ 6,370,000 Sports Dome Option C - 250' width with 200'X 85' outdoor ice sheet $10,378,600 and East Arena improvements Pamela Park Field and Parking Renovations $ 2,777,000 (Including artificial turf field) TOTAL PROJECT ESTIMATE $13,155,600 PROTECT CAPITAL FINANCE There are multiple ways to arrange the capital finance of this project. The Council could direct staff to prepare for a process that would commit the City's full faith and credit to repaying General Obligation (GO) bonds with property taxes. The GO bond issue option is likely to provide the lowest cost of borrowing for the project because the pledge of the City's tax base for repayment offers extremely low risk to purchasers of our bonds. Because sports dome and park improvements are not an essential corporate purpose of the City, according to State Statute, an affirmative vote of residents in a public referendum would be necessary to use this financing method, which adds complications to both the project timeline and feasibility. Another option available to the City is to organize the capital finance as a Leave Revenue Bond through the City's Housing & Redevelopment Authority (HRA). While this option offers a slightly higher cost of borrowing, it does not require a public referendum for approval. After some initial discussions with Ehlers, we can project that a hypothetical borrowing of $14 million over a 20 year repayment period would create a new average annual debt service requirement of approximately $1.37 million if we organize the repayment with roughly twenty equal payments. If the repayment period was laddered to backload the payments toward the end of the repayment period, new annual debt service would start at approximately $950,000 /year at the beginning of the term and $1.45 million at the end of the tern. Estimated interest rates for this funding vehicle are 4 -5 %, depending on the market at the time. The estimated impact to our Total Tax Levy, under either financing option, is an increase of 5 -7% for the annual debt service for this project. The estimated impact of this increase in our tax levy on the median single family home, based on 2014 tax levy and valuations, would be an increase of approximately $60 -$75. REPORT/ RECOMMENDATION Attachments: Page 9 Edina Sports Dome and Outdoor Ice Rink at Braemar Addendum to Feasibility Study - Cuningham Group and RJM Construction July 9, 2013 Park Board Minutes Edina Dome Pro Forma - Staff & Athletic Association Version including dome schedule 17 Week Outdoor Refrigerated Rink Pro Forma 19 Week Outdoor Refrigerated Rink Pro Forma Outdoor Rink Sample Schedule Pamela Park Improvement Opinion of Probably Construction and Project Costs Including Site Map Edina Baseball Association Sports Dome Contract Edina Soccer Club Sports Dome Contract Edina Football Association Sports Dome Contract Edina Lacrosse Sports Dome Contract Edina Hockey Association Outdoor Rink Contract Athletic Association Participation Numbers .. June 24, 2013 Braemar Athletic Field Feasibility Study III Edina Sports Dome and Outdoor Ice Rink at Braemar G u R i NH HtA P Addendum to Feasibility Study AIA Minnesota October 8, 2013 firm Award Recipient Consultant Team: Cuningham Group Architecture, Inc. (Cuningham) Anderson- Johnson Associates (AJA) Hallberg Engineering, Inc. (Hallberg) Stevens Engineers (Scott Ward) RJM Construction (RJM) Cuningham Group Purpose Architecture, Inc. As follow -up to the feasibility study of a Sports Dome in Edina, the Consultant Team was asked to further develop one dome and ice rink option (Option C -250) with some additional St. Anthony Main items. This memo and attached images are the result of this study. 201 Main street SE Suite 325 Caveats Minneapolis, MN Study was based on the available site topographic and utility information. However, we 55414 anticipate finding some discrepancies when the site is surveyed. This planning also made Tel: 612 379 3400 certain assumptions related to zoning, fire code and engineering. If/when the project moves Fax: 612 3794400 forward into design, direct discussions with authorities having jurisdiction will be needed to confirm assumptions. www.cuningham.com Approach to Study Several aspects of the site are challenging in use for a dome: width constraints, including existing buildings,.grade, retaining walls and wooded slopes. The approach taken has been to study the feasibility and costs associated with a specific dome /field width, then consider alternatives that could betaken further during a future design phase. The emphasis of this study has been to identify approximate costs, rather than to refine a design. Site Characteristics The existing lighted athletic. field is in a `bowl' defined by buildings and grade on south and east side, a tree - covered slope on east, and a ridge with playground and memorial picnic pavilion on north. The field is approximately 7' below the floor elevation of the ice arena buildings, with sloping grass area on all sides, together with a few retaining walls. Further north is a steep slope down to the Courtney ball field complex. There is a rapid, drop -off in the northeast corner, also covered with trees and shrubs. Program of Spaces and Amenities These are laid out in Plan Diagram on page S Dome and Support Structures: e 250' x 400' dome with 10' clearance on all sides for snow removal. This width/length provides for a 215' x 320' soccer /athletic field wrapped by a walking track, with space at end(s) for batting cages. • Drop -off within existing parking lot, near Lobby /Support • Fire department and service access from west and from southeast comer. • 2400 sf Lobby /Support building connected to the dome • Enclosure for mechanical equipment and off - season storage of some dome C U N I N G H A M components. R O u P • Additional fabric liner to achieve a higher - insulating value for Dome. This more than AIA Minnesota doubles the R- value, from approximately R1.5 to R4 Firm Award Recipient • Energy efficient and long- lasting lighting: the.technology is evolving rapidly and it is expected that LED fixtures equivalent to the industry- standard 1000W metal halides will be available, and would be utilized Outdoor Ice Sheet: • 85' x 200' outdoor ice sheet, with dasher boards • Roof canopy over ice sheet • Player benches and spectator standing areas, with a heat source. Cuningham Group • Modifications to existing east arena mechanical equipment to upgrade to ammonia Architecture, Inc. refrigerant St. Anthony Main Arena Remodeling associated with Outdoor Ice Sheet 201 Main Street SE • Access via stairs from Arena Lobby to East Arena lower level doorway Site 325 • Two indoor changing/bench areas for skaters '. Minneapolis, MN • Toilets remodeled to meet ADA codes for.use by outdoor rink skaters 55414 Sustainabllity Enhancements Tel: .612 379 3400 • In addition to additional liner and lights, above, the team investigated a geothermal Fax: 6123794400 heat pump system. A geothermal system that takes heat out of the ground to heat the www.cuninghem.coo, dome during the winter and returns heat ta the ground from ice - making during the summer could be an effective system.for tliis project: Investigation of soils is required to determine if they are compatible with a geothermal system. • Geothermal well field is assumed.to be-located under the,turf field. Vertical wells are recommended to avoid heating up the field during the summer • . Building required to house equipment would probably be located on East side, adjacent other dome mechanical equipment. • Seepage 4 for summary ofgeothermal system and costs. Givens and Assumptions for utilization of site: (based on cost and importance to City): • East boundary for development is the wooded edge, to avoid triggering substantial Watershed requirements • Existing drives may serve Dome traffic • Existing parking may serve the Dome, if not reduced in quantity • 50' separation should be maintained between Dome and buildings to meet fire code requirements — This requirement may also apply to the ice arena roof, and requires additional discussion with Code and Fire officials. • Playground may be eliminated. • Retain hill with mature oaks west of mid -field Three Dimensional Impact — Earthwork, Retaining Walls, Demolition The current field's flat area must be widened and lengthened (up to 150' beyond north end of existing field) for the dome and ice rink. To ininimize exported soils, the elevation of the field would be raised 4 -6', which will require retaining walls at the north and west. Existing Edina Sports Dome & Outdoor Ice Rink- Braemar Location Page 2. ui features that will need to be removed include the playground and the picnic gazebo north of C U N I N G H A M the athletic field, the stepped concrete seating at the west edge of the existing field, the light G R O U P poles, and some of the natural features at east and west. • AJA anticipates addressing stormwater issues with a holding area within the dome Firm AA Minnesota Award Recipient footprint. • Fire Code requires that combustible vegetation be removed within 30' on all sides during the period when the membrane structure is up. The impact will be mowing grass and clearing leaves, and some tree branches within that zone, but may also include removal of some trees, particularly at the southeast corner. • Extension of flat Dome area north due to ice sheet requires substantial regrading work and a retaining wall as high as 10' at north/northeast corner. • Lobby /Support building is proposed located at the west of the dome. Some ramping is Cuningham Group needed to make a more rapid transition to the parking area. The north comer is Architecture, Inc. preferred for interior layout so that people do not enter directly onto the walking track. • Scope was included for a 25' drive lane at the east edge of the dome. St. Anthony Main 201 Main Street SE Preliminary grading plans were developed to determine rough grading volumes, potential Suite 325 retaining wall heights, and impact on adjacent features. Minneapolis, MN See diagrams on pages 5-7 55414 Projected Costs Tel: 612 379 3400 Based on the program modifications, RJM worked with the consultant team to develop Fax: 612 379 4400 projected costs; these are recorded in their cost summary, and include construction costs, soft costs, contingency and furnishings /equipment allowances. Approximate total Project cost for W"""'' "' "'ngham.c °"' all items, excluding geothermal, is $10.4 million (see sheet for alternates). • See last 2 pages for RJM cost breakdown Sustainability: Geothermal Add -on Costs Geothermal system, if soils are found to be compatible, would cost on the order of $1.9 -S2.2 million; including A/E fees and geotechnical costs. Payback time frame is likely to be similar to the system life expectancy, or 20 730 years. • Seepage 4 for description of geothermal system and costs Edina. Sports Dome & Outdoor Ice Rink - Braemar Location Page 3 Edina Sports Dome & Outdoor Ice Rink — Braemar G R oG ",A M Location — Geothermal Heating /Cooling AIA Minnesota Intent: Provide Ground Source Heat Pump. System sized to heat the proposed dome; also Firm Atvord Recipient used during May - October to augment ice making for existing ice sheets (when the seasonal dome is down). Based on similar domes the heating load would require approximately eight 70 ton each modular heat pumps. Note: Some savings could be realized if the heating coils can be installed into the inflation provided by the Dome supplier instead of having a separate air handler. Cuningham Group Elements included: Architecture, Inc. • Well field — assumed to be under field • Well field pumps, piping and controls St. Anthony Main 201 Main Street SE • Dome load side piping, pumps, and controls Suite 325 • Condensing boiler, pumps, piping and controls to augment Dome -load side system Minneapolis, MN • Ice sheet -load side piping, 3 -way diverter valves and controls 55414 • Outdoor heating -only recirculation air handler with heating coils, fan, filters, access doors and controls. Note separate units that are part of the dome package will maintain Tel: 612 379 3400 inflation pressure and control. Fax: 612 379 4400 • Supply and return ductwork www.cuningham.con. • Electrical work required • 600 square foot building enclosure to house heat pumps, boiler, pumps, controls and electrical gear. • For ice system, additional condenser, pump, high pressure receiver, piping, controls, etc. (added to the proposed new ammonia refrigeration system). This additional equipment will potentially require an addition to the East Arena mechanical room. Probable Construction Cost: $1.8 million — $2.1 million Initial Soils testing cost: $1OK initial testing for soil compatibility; $IOK for test well. A/E Fees: $135K -$155K Life expectancy: 20 -30 years Payback: depends on soils, utility costs, etc. but probably 20 -30 years Recommendation: If there is interest in geothermal, we suggest that the option be further explored during schematic design, after initial soil compatibility testing is done, at which a more informed decision can be made. This will permit coordination with a dome supplier to determine if dome inflation units can be modified to avoid the cost of separate units. Edina Sports Dome & Outdoor Ice Rink - Braemar Location Page 4 m ui Edina Sports Dome & Outdoor Ice Rink — Braemar G" R 10� UAM Location — Exhibits Plan Diagram Showing Proposed Dome and Ice Rink Layout AIA Minnesota Firm Award Recipient Cuningham Group Architecture, Inc. St. Anthony Main 201 Main Street SE Suite 325 Minneapolis, MN 55414 Tel: 612 379 3400 Fax: 612 379 4400 www.cuningham.com Edina Sports Dome & Outdoor Ice Rink- Braemar Location Page 5 C U N I N G H A M G R O U P Cuningham Group Architecture, Inc. St Anthony Main 201 Main Street SE Suite 325 Minneapolis, MN 55414 Tel: 612 379 3400 Fax: 612 379 4400 Image of Outdoor Ice Rink between East Arena and Dome White,lat areas are concrete paving providing walks and spectator areas around the Ice. www.cuningham.com Long white boxes in Dome represent Batting Cages. Image of Dome and Ice Rink (Covered) from Northwest Edina Sports Dome & Outdoor Ice Rink - Braemar Location Page 6 CUNINGHAM G R 0 U P AJIA Minnesota Firm Award Recipient Cuningham Group Architecture, Inc. St. Anthony Main 201 Main Street SE Suite 325 Minneapolis, MN 55414 Tel: 6123793400 Fax: 612 379 4400 Image of Canopy Link (tan) between Dome and East Arena Lower Level Door www.cuningham.com Image Showing Extent of North Retaining Walls (orange w/ red stripes) Edina Sports Dome & Outdoor Ice Rink - Braemar Location Page 7 itl V, I La CONSTRUCTION October 8, 2013 Edina Sports Dome Dome Layout (250' x 400' Dome) HINNEAPOLIS 1 PHOENIX i DENVER Owner Costs Quantities Cost /Unit Total Dome foundations 1,300 LF $250 $324,000 Dome (250'x 400') 100,000 SF $13.50 $1,350,000 Synthetic turf field (Includes soil prep) 1 LS $926,000 $926,000 Site hardscapes 1 LS $120,000 $120,000 Mechanical /Electrical 100,000 SF $4 $400,000 Landscaping 1 LS $40,000 $40,000 Retaining walls 1 LS $80,000 $80,000 Utilities 1 LS $100,000 $100,000 Earthwork 1 LS $650,000 $650,000 Accessory Building 2,500 SF $250 $625,000 Storage and maintenance buildings 2,500 SF $100 $250,000 Construction Contingency 5% Total $243,000 Total $5,108,000 Alternates: Upgrade fabric from PVDF coating to a Tedlar coating 100,000 SF $2.50 $250,000 Added Dome Liner for Higher Insulating Value 100,000 SF $1.00 $100,000 Sports Lighting (4 EA) (Pole Mounted) 4 EA $37,500 $150,000 Owner Costs Total $6,370,000 The project estimates provided are based on conceptual development of facility size, components and location on site. The values that have been established are conceptual in nature, providing anticipated magnitude of costs based on historical construction cost information from previous facilities. Upon final design, bids will be received for all areas of work that will at that time provide more detailed and accurate construction costs. Quantities Cost/Unit Total A/E Fees 7.4% LS $378,000 CM Fee 2.85% LS $146,000 Soil Borings (Allowance) 1 LS $15,000 $15,000 Dome FFE (Allowance) 1 LS $100,000 $100,000 Building FFE (Allowance) 1 LS $20,000 $20,000 Technology (Allowance) 1 LS $100,000 $100,000 Utility Relocation (Allowance) 1 LS $75,000 $75,000 SAC /WAC (Allowance) 1 LS $15,000 $15,000 Watershed (Allowance) 1 LS $3,000 $3,000 Owner Contingency 4% $205,000 Design Contingency 4% $205,000 Total $1,262,000 Total $6,370,000 The project estimates provided are based on conceptual development of facility size, components and location on site. The values that have been established are conceptual in nature, providing anticipated magnitude of costs based on historical construction cost information from previous facilities. Upon final design, bids will be received for all areas of work that will at that time provide more detailed and accurate construction costs. NtNNEApbLIS r PHOtNIX btNVtP CONSTRUCTION October 8, 2013 Edina Sports Dome, Outdoor Ice Sheet and Interior Renovation of East Arena Dome Layout (250' x 400' Dome) Outdoor Ice Sheet Earthwork Retaining walls Utilities Demo existing East Rink refrigeration system New indirect ammonia refrigeration system Concrete footing around rink Concrete paving around rink Outdoor concrete rink floor with subfloor heating system Exterior dasher boards with full boxes and glass Roof structure w/ fabric roof Covered walk -way w/ fabric roof Walk off mats Construction Contingency Interior Renovation of East Arena Total $324,000 $1,350,000 $926,000 $120,000 $400,000 $40,000 $80,000 $100,000 $650,000 $625,000 $250,000 $243,000 $5,108,000 Quantities Quantities Cost/Unit Cost /Unit Dome foundations 1,300 LF $250 Dome (250' x 400') 100,000 SF $13.50 Synthetic turf field (Includes soil prep) 1 LS $926,000 Site hardscapes 1 LS $120,000 Mechanical /Electrical 100,000 SF $4 Landscaping 1 LS $40,000 Retaining walls 1 LS $80,000 Utilities 1 LS $100,000 Earthwork 1 LS $650,000 Accessory Building 2,500 SF $250 Storage and maintenance buildings 2,500 SF $100 Construction Contingency 50/0 $22 $55,000 5% Total Outdoor Ice Sheet Earthwork Retaining walls Utilities Demo existing East Rink refrigeration system New indirect ammonia refrigeration system Concrete footing around rink Concrete paving around rink Outdoor concrete rink floor with subfloor heating system Exterior dasher boards with full boxes and glass Roof structure w/ fabric roof Covered walk -way w/ fabric roof Walk off mats Construction Contingency Interior Renovation of East Arena Total $324,000 $1,350,000 $926,000 $120,000 $400,000 $40,000 $80,000 $100,000 $650,000 $625,000 $250,000 $243,000 $5,108,000 Quantities Quantities Cost/Unit Total 40,000 SF $5 $200,000 170 LF $650 $110,500 40,000 SF $4 $160,000 1 LS $20,000 $20,000 1 LS $725,000 $725,000 1 LS $22,000 $22,000 6,600 SF $5 $33,000 1 LS $375,000 $375,000 1 LS $160,000 $160,000 24,200 SF $28 $677,600 2,500 SF $80 $200,000 2,500 SF $22 $55,000 5% $137,000 Total $2,875,100 Quantities Demolition 2,500 SF $25 $62,500 Locker /Changing Rooms (2) - renovation 1,800 SF $60 $108,000 ADA compliant restrooms (2) 2 EA $40,000 $80,000 Structural reinforcing 1 LS $50,000 $50,000 Equipment room renovation 1 LS $150,000 $150,000 Walk off mats 1,000 SF $22 $22,000 Construction Contingency 5% $23,000 Total $495,500 Edina Sports Dome, Outdoor Ice Sheet and Interior Renovation of East Arena Owner Costs Quantities Cost/Unit Total A/E Fees 7.4% LS $627,000 CM Fee 2.85% LS $242,000 Soil Borings (Allowance) 1 LS $15,000 $15,000 Dome FFE (Allowance) 1 LS $100,000 $100,000 Building FFE (Allowance) . 1 LS $20,000 $20,000 Technology (Allowance) 1 LS $100,000 $100,000 Utility Relocation (Allowance) - 1 LS $100,000 $100,000 SAC/WAC (Allowance) 1 LS $15,000 $15,000 Watershed (Allowance) 1 LS $3,000 $3,000 owner Contingency 4% $339,000 Design Contingency 4% $339,000 Total $1,900,000 Total $10,378,600 The projectesti mates provided are based on conceptual development of facility size, components and location on site. The values'thk have been established are conceptual in nature, providing anticipated magnitude of,costs based on historical construction cost information from previous facilities. Upon final design, bids will be received for all areas of work that will at that time provide more detailed and accurate construction costs. *.`. MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE EDINA PARK BOARD HELD AT CITY HALL July 9, 2013 7:00 PM I. CALL TO ORDER Chair Steel called the meeting to order at 7:03 p.m. II. ROLL CALL Answering roll call were Members Deeds, Jacobson, Gieseke, Steel, Cella, Jones, Dan Peterson. Ill. APPROVAL OF MEETING AGENDA Member Dan Peterson made a motion, seconded by Member Gieseke, approving the meeting agenda. Ayes: Members Deeds, Jacobson, Gieseke, Steel, Cella, Jones, Dan Peterson. Motion carried. IV. ADOPTION OF CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS REMOVED FROM THE CONSENT AGENDA W.A. REGULAR PARK BOARD MEETING MINUTES OF JUNE 1, 2013 —APPROVED AS AMENDED. Chair Steel made a motion, seconded by Member Dan Peterson, correcting the regular meeting minutes of June 11, 2013, page three, paragraph 10, during Chair Steel's discussion of accessibility to parks via sidewalks, add the phrase: "because the policy only talks about every child's access to a school, not a park ". Chair Steel requested a second change on page four, paragraph one, immediately after the phrase "Chair Steel asked about putting in a pedestrian bridge" to add: "for the Richfield School District children ", followed by the existing "to access Strachauer Park ", with a final addition of: "since the closest park is Rosland in that area ". Ayes: Members Deeds, Jacobson, Gieseke, Steel, Cella, Jones, Dan Peterson. Motion carried. Member Dan Peterson made a motion, seconded by Member Celia, approving the regular minutes of June 11, 2013, as corrected. Ayes: Members Deeds, Jacobson, Gieseke, Steel, Cella, Jones, Dan Peterson. Motion carried. V. COMMUNITY COMMENT None. Vt. REPORTS /RECOMMENDATIONS VI.A. 54`h Street and Arden Park Stormwater Management Plan Ms. Kattreh introduced the two consultants present to assist in the discussion, Paul Pasko and Caitlin Badger. Mr. Pasko introduced Ms. Badger noting she will provide an overview of the 54th Street project as well as the Stormwater Management Plan. She noted the first topic under discussion is 54th-Street from Wooddale to France and she asked for the Park Board to raise issues and questions of concern. Mr. Pasko noted that tonight's meeting is not the time for offering solutions, but rather is primarily about getting questions and concerns on the table. Member Gieseke,asked about the issue of access to the creek, specifically those wanting to canoe, as well as parking space challenges. He also brought up traffic issues in the area. Member Jones brought up the issue of access safety thinking, specifically getting out of the water safely and getting from one side to the other safely. Member Deeds brought up trail access and float access, as well as improved aesthetics in the area. Member Cella asked about impact on the parkland.that is already present. Mr. Pasko stated that is still undetermined. The emphasis for 54th Street'seems to be on the right -of -way; everything is on the table as data is collected. Member Dan Peterson asked if Arden Park is part of a flood plain. He recalled that over 30 years ago the city installed a bigger, better bridge. He also. asked what legal entities will be involved. Mr. Pasko responded that Minnehaha Creek ::Watershed District is involved as Well as the DNR and the Corp of Engineers. Member Dan Peterson brought up'the issue of limited parking as well as speeding. He noted that he has also seen kids fishing in that area. Member Deeds asked about the amenities'at Arden Park to which Ms. Kattreh responded there is a hockey rink, free - skating rink, shelter building, canoe landing, playground and a trail through the park. Chair Steel stated she used to tube, down there quite a bit when she was younger; especially when she was a nanny for two younger kids. The main issues were finding a spot to park bikes and getting there safely while both walking and biking. Member Deeds stated this might be an opportunity to use potential native filtration, marshes, plants and other things that would encourage wildlife around the park. Member Jones stated it looks as if the area north of the bridge is flooded. Mr. Pasko summarized that one question might be how to make the flood waters a feature rather than an impediment when they are present. Member Jones stated the bridge is not wide enough for pedestrians, bikes and cars. It would be ideal to not have a bike lane disappear while getting on the bridge. Member Deeds encouraged thinking about how to get off the bridge. He stated it is a safety and aesthetic issue. The more the bike lanes can be separated from the walking paths the better. Mr. Pasko noted that on Minnetonka Boulevard there is a separate bridge of 10 or 15 feet for bikes only. 2 Chair Steel asked if there is a lot of biking activity for children in that area to which Ms. Kattreh replied there are some bikes going through there. The majority of activity she has seen is mothers with strollers as well as dog walkers. Chair Steel asked about the trail composition and Ms. Kattreh responded it is asphalt. Member Deeds,stated there is a larger discussion in the city about bike paths, so what happens here should be built in consideration of those discussions of the non - auto -based transportation system. Member Gieseke stated there is a greater need for recreational programming Member Jones stated there are.a lot of needs for the park but that can be left for future discussion of aging shelter buildings. All research shows it is good to put in painted lanes,on streets, but those painted lanes do not increase the number of people biking. The way to increase biking is to have protected bike lanes. She noted that is a very narrow street and as a mother she is not sure about the comfort level of letting children biking on that street. She encouraged the design to have either protected bike lanes or a wide enough sidewalk to be a multi- use`trail. She wants people to feel comfortable about biking to parks and to the Edina Aquatic Center. Member Cella echoed comments about a separate biking trail, particularly since 54`h Street takes traffic from- east -to west in Edina and is used significantly during rush hour for commuter traffic. Member Jacobson brought up the issue of being very purposeful about lighting, as there is currently not a lot of lighting in that area. Member Deeds stated it is important to have properly focused lighting, as there is often so much energy wasted in street lighting. Mr. Pasko stated as plans start to take shape, he encouraged the Park Board to consider the long -term plan of the park. That will impact where things get placed. Member Jones stated as far as she knows there are no plans for design on the park: The shelter building is at least 20 years old. Ms. Kattreh stated it was probably built in the 1970s. Member Cella suggested there should be a subcommittee to think through the park layout. Chair Steel stated this is a unique feature and she would like to see what the consultants can propose and then what can be accommodated in the city's plan. Member Jones noted that the Park Board has never had this opportunity during a street reconstruction to make comments, so this is unusual. This is a time when the city is bringing the community together to discuss needs and desires with respect to streets. This may also be a good time to re- evaluate parks. It may be that this is a perfect time for the community to say what they would like in their parks so that plans for redevelopment of neighborhood parks can have the same type of calendar for streets. Both streets and playgrounds have approximately 20 -year life cycles, so perhaps they could be scheduled on a similar timeline. Ms. Badger stated feedback is being collected on the park as well and that information will be available to the city for now or later. 3 Member Gieseke noted that the River Walk in San Antonio has interesting, bold ideas that could be incorporated, whether it is a boardwalk, seasonal entertainment or a community gathering space. Member Jones stated it looks like the street has already been reconstructed to France. Mr. Pasko noted that a few years back curb and gutter were added and there was an overlay rather than a complete reconstruction. Ms. Badger thanked the Park Board for their feedback. She encouraged any further comments or concerns as they may come to mind. Mr. Pasko concluded with a brief overview of the timeline of the projects moving forward. VI.B. Sports Dome and Athletic Field Recommendation Ms. Kattreh introduced Susie Miller, Braemar Arena Manager, who has worked on the pro forma for the Sports Dome and provided a lot of information on the potential for an outdoor refrigerated rink. Ms. Kattreh also introduced Kathy Wallace, an architect from the Cunningham Group, who has provided architectural services for the Sports Dome as well as the Golf Dome. Ms. Kattreh outlined the four renderings of the options for the Sports Dome, noting all options are at the Braemar athletic field site. Options A and C, as outlined in the Power Point presentation and board packet, are the two viable options still under consideration, as Options B and D were quickly eliminated from consideration. She noted the details are not yet worked out with the Fire Department. Staff believes there is sufficient room to meet fire code requirements, but some adaptations might be needed as the process moves along. Ms. Kattreh noted staff was pleased to find out that the cost estimates do not vary much between Options A and C; the range is $5.3 million to $6 million, with an approximate additional $2 million for a refrigerated outdoor ice rink. Ms. Kattreh noted they wanted to maximize the space available and also allow for a wider field, making it more marketable and with the ability to run games east /west as well as north /south. Member Cella asked about the additional costs for Option C. Ms. Kattreh noted those costs are higher due to the retaining walls and grading as well as a higher cost in the extra fabric in a 250 -foot dome. Member Jacobson asked whether plans include a walking or running track around the edge to which Ms. Kattreh responded affirmatively. She noted it would be very similar to the Maple Grove dome, which was included in the Park Board packet. Ms. Kattreh noted that the costs presented in the report are just construction costs and do not include anything related to operations. The included pro forma covers operational revenues and expenses. She stated the goal for this pro forma was to ensure the dome would be sustainable without additional funding from the city. Therefore, staff has discussed with Edina athletic associations implementing a $30 per participant priority use fee for scheduling the dome. She has worked with Lacrosse, Soccer, Baseball, and Football to agree to give them priority scheduling of the dome, with the $30 per person fee, which would guarantee the City $95,310 in annual dome operations. Staff will also go out to secure non -Edina groups, but this was a way to secure finances with groups who have the most interest in the dome. 4 Ms. Kattreh discussed a variety of future programming options as well as the business plan to develop relationships with non - residents who will use the dome. Chair Steel asked about the possibility of event rentals at the dome. Ms. Kattreh responded affirmatively, noting rentals are something that will be considered for the dome. She also noted that over 15 years the priority use access fees would accumulate to over $1.4 million. Chair Steel encouraged the priority use policy to be created in such a way to encourage equity, with the goal of avoiding some of the same difficulties being faced right now. Ms. Kattreh informed the Park Board that at the guidance of Parks and Recreation consultants, staff worked with the athletic associations to revise and enhance the pro forma. She highlighted some of those changes, noting the expenses are conservative and revenues are confirmed. The hours and schedule are confirmed as well as the priority use fee. She also noted that at year 15 the dome will have reached a 115% cost recovery. Chair Steel asked about the ages of players and whether there will be enough space for families to visit, particularly as it relates to playgrounds or other amenities. Ms. Kattreh stated there will be a wide age range of players from little kids to older kids. She pointed out the site might be very tight if the option that eliminates the current playground is selected; however, amenities are something to consider. She noted there is a very welcoming common area and concession stand for parents who might want to hang out while kids are practicing. Discussion ensued regarding the life expectancy of the turf and the dome itself and whether the sinking fund would be able to cover those replacement costs. Ms. Kattreh discussed the outdoor refrigerated rink, and that the east arena needs to be switched from R22 to ammonia for refrigeration by the year 2020. She noted the pro forma is based upon a 17 -week season though favorable weather would allow for a 19 -week season. Member Deeds asked about a warming house. Ms. Kattreh responded staff has not vetted all the options, including a heated bench, a roof, and access to restrooms. Member Cella asked whether an additional outdoor piece of ice was on the original list of priorities. Ms. Kattreh responded that it was not, though staff wanted to ensure they did not miss out on any opportunities and wanted to at least consider any options while working with the consultants. Member Jacobson asked whether the ice rink area can be used fora potential field in the summer. Ms. Kattreh,stated a concrete base will give the rink the longest life; some cities use it as a BMX or a skateboard park. Member Jones asked what makes up the $2 million price tag for the ice rink. Ms. Kattreh explained a large portion of it would be connecting the refrigeration mechanism from the east arena as well as the rink, as well as tubing, boards, engineering and architect fees and other soft costs. She stated the $2 million is a realistic cost unless something like a roof over the ice arena is considered. Member Jacobson asked how this would impact the scheduling issues with the hockey and figure skating club. Ms. Kattreh said it might help alleviate the situation, but would not solve it as hockey rents such a large number of hours. 5 Member Deeds asked about space for parking if the dome and ice rink are fully booked. Ms. Miller replied the big high school games present the most parking challenges, which happen about six times per season. Ms. Kattreh noted there might be a 10 percent savings if one construction contract included both the dome as well as the outdoor refrigerated rink. Various possible economies of scale were discussed. Chair Steel stated choices need to be made regarding whether this is a great place for kids and parents to come together or whether it is just a place for kids to be dropped off. Those other possible amenities could be discussed down the road. Ms. Kattreh asked the Park Board to voice whether there is interest in the outdoor refrigerated ice. Member Deeds stated the dome and the athletic field improvements are top priority. He stated most of the problem is that most of the fields are not built to withstand most of our weather and are not built to drain. Member Jones thanked staff for thinking about the.outdoor ice rink; she does not know where it fits in with the priorities of Braemar Arena and whether this is a need that should be acted on this year and whether there is funding for it. She is intrigued by it; since other communities do have a lot of ice time, but she does not know if this is going to be in the budget. Ms. Kattreh noted that ties in with Member Deeds' point — if there was $2 million to spend, should it be spent on an ice rink or spent on renovating five athletic fields? Member Cella commented that renovating more fields is a priority over ice. But if plans for the dome proceed, it makes sense to leave space for the ice rink. Member Gieseke asked whether discussions have been had with the hockey folks who are raising money for the Hornet's Nest. Ms. Kattreh stated no, those conversations have not been had due to lack of time, but,it is a good idea. Ms. Kattreh stated one point worth noting is that if- the'city is going to put a rink there, it is an ideal location because it is very shaded and protected. Member Deeds stated the space should definitely be reserved for an ice rink, but the timing is unknown. Ms. Kattreh indicated staff has spent time studying the current field use and field needs and has determined there is a need for a minimum of two.full -sized rectangular fields. Sometimes associations limit numbers of players because of lack of field availability; city programming is also limited due to field space limitations. Inclement weather significantly impacts the majority of the fields due to poor drainage and proximity to creeks and lakes. The Edina Soccer Club cancelled 825 practices and games due to the unusually wet spring. Ms. Kattreh highlighted some significant facilities needing improvement that would greatly impact programs and associations. The first field highlighted is Creek Valley School Park, which happens to be on School District property but is maintained by the city. She estimated that changing to sand fields would cost $450,000 per field. This is a primary facility for youth soccer programs. She also highlighted Cornelia School Park, where playability could be improved as well. She also highlighted Pamela Park, where $2.3 million of improvements are needed, including a sand -peat field, a turf field, parking lots and lighting. Those improvements were originally slated within the city's CIP but were then removed. Member Deeds thanked Ms. Kattreh for all the work put into the study of the fields. He expressed support in a combination of the two -- investments in the fields as well as the dome. Ms. Kattreh provided an overview of the timeline moving ahead. She noted that City Council will have to decide whether bonding would be an option for the project. She added in 2017 the last park bond referendum will be paid off that was originally issued in 1997. Ms. Kattreh stated there is the potential to add a couple athletic fields on the east side of Fred Richards Golf Course if the golf course is turned back into a park, but that is still very premature. Member Jones agreed with Member Deeds' comments that this is an important thing to move forward on, but she does not want to see a net loss of playing fields; looking at it as a package is important. She encouraged looking into geothermal options to help reduce energy costs. She suggested a subcommittee within the Park Board to pursue other energy options and in particular what other communities are doing. Member Jones proposed the city seriously look into other funding methods or for a capital campaign. She noted the Hornet's Nest was a good example of private funding to the city and providing 25 percent of the project. That enabled the city to create a really nice facility. She suggested looking into private funding or naming rights so the city is not the only option for paying for capital expenses. She commended the work of the Parks and Recreation consultants; all of the recommendations from the June 18 feasibility study make a whole lot of sense. Chair Steel thanked Ms. Kattreh and Ms. Miller for their efforts in putting all this information.together. Member Dan Peterson asked about rounds of golf played at the Fred Richards Golf Course. Ms. Kattreh stated that she does not know but that staff can obtain those numbers. VII. CORRESPONDENCE AND PETITIONS VILA. Council Updates None. Vlll. CHAIR AND BOARD MEMBER COMMENTS Member Cella asked whether the summary results of the community survey will be included on the next agenda. Ms. Kattreh responded affirmatively. IX. STAFF COMMENTS Ms. Kattreh.stated the Countryside Park project is'moving along, after a delay due to the weather. The Golf Dome project is on schedule. The next project is storm sewer and water retention. The dome is still on schedule for a November 1 opening. Pre - construction meetings for the Garden Park baseball field are starting soon. The Community Garden parking lot construction starts the week of July 29. The other big project right now is the two -year budget, which is due on July 17. X. ADJOURNMENT Chair Steel made a motion, seconded by Member Dan Peterson, to adjourn the meeting at 8:50 p.m. Ayes: Members Deeds, Jacobson, Gieseke, Steel, Cella, Jones, Dan Peterson. Motion Carried. Meeting adjourned at 8:50 p.m. 7 'EDINA DOME - -- Income Statement Pro Forma For Period Ending � - :NINA IK� Assume 2% Increase in Turf Rentals and Others Flat venue Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 Year 6 Year 7 Year 8 Year 9 Year 10 Year 11 Year 12 Year 13 Year 14 Year 15 Edina Turf Rentals $ 258,815 $ 263,991 $ 269,271 $ 274,657 $ 280,150 $ 285,753 $ 291,468 $ 297,297 $ 303,243 $ 309,308 $ 315,494 $ 321,804 $ 328,240. $ 334,805 $- 341,501 Participant Priority Access Fees 95,310 95,310 95,310 95,310 95,310 95,310 95,310 95,310 95,310 95,310 95,310 95,310 95,310 95,310 95,310 Vending 1,000 1,000 1,000 1,020 1,040 1,061 1,082 1,104 1,126 1,149 1,172 1,195 1,219 1,243 1,268 Recreation Programs $5,000 $6,000 $7,000 $7,140 $7,283 $7,428 $7,577 $7,729 $7,883 $8,041 $8,202 $8,366 $8,533 $8,704 $8,878 Operating Income /Net Sales $ 360,125 $ 366,301 $ 372,581 $ 378,127 $ 383,783 $ 389,552 $ 395,437 $ 401,440 $ 407,562 $ 413,807 $ 420,177 $ 426,675 $ 433,302 $ 440,062 $ 446,957 Assume 3% Increase Year - Over -Year Expenses Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 Year 6 Year 7 Year 8 Year 9 Year 10 Year 11 Year 12 Year 13 Year 14 Year Fifteen Heat $ 77,000 $ 79,310 $ 81,689 $ 84,140 $ 86,664 $ 89,264 $ 91,942 $ 94,700 $ 97,541 $ 100,468 $ 103,482 $ 1.06,586 $ 109,784 $ 113,077 $ 116,469 Light and Power 38,500 39,655 40,845 42,070 43,332 44,632 45,971 47,350 48,771 50,234 51,741 53,293 54,892 56,539 58,235 Dome Set Up/Take Down 35,000 36,050 37,132 38,245 39,393 40,575 41,792 43,046 44,337 45,667 47,037 48,448 49,902 51,399 52,941 Part Time 33,915 34,932 35,980 37,060 38,172 39,317 40,496 41,711 42,963 44,251 45,579 46,946 48,355 49,805 51,299 Full Time 21,240 21,877 22,534 23,210 23,906 24,623 25,362 26,123 26,906 27,713 28,545 29,401 30,283 31,192 32,127 Prof Services 8,000 8,240 8,487 8,742 9,004 9,274 9,552 9,839 10,134 10,438 10,751 11,074 11,406 11,748 12,101 Dome Insurance 8,000 8,240 8,487 8,742 9,004 9,274 9,552 9,839 10,134 10,438 10,751 11,074 11,406 11,748 12,101 Benefits 7,434 7,657 7,887 8,123 8,367 8,618 8,877 9,143 9,417 9,700 9,991 10,290 10,599 10,917 11,245 Services Contracts Equip 6,000 6,180 6,365 6,556 6,753 6,956 7,164 7,379 7,601 7,829 8,063 8,305 8,555 8,811 9,076 Central Services Personal 4,200 4,326 4,456 4,589 4,727 4,869 5,015 5,165 5,320 5,480 5,644 5,814 5,988 6,168 6,353 Other Payroll Costs 3,100 3,193 3,289 3,387 3,489 3,594 3,702 3,813 3,927 4,045 4,166 4,291 4,420 4,552 4,689 Security 1,800 1,854 11910 1,967 2,026 2,087 2,149 2,214 2,280 2,349 2,419 2,492 2,566 2,643 2,723 General Supplies 1,500 1,545 1,591 1,639 1,688 1,739 1,791 1,845 1,900 1,957 2,016 2,076 2,139 2,203 2,269 Prof Services Audit 700 721 743 765 788 811 836 861 887 913 941 969 998 1,028 1,059 Cleaning Supplies 500 515 530 546 563 580 597 615 633 652 672 692 713 734 756 Printing 500 515 530 546 563 580 597 615 633 -652 672 692 713 734 756 - -fining 300 309 318 328 338 348 358 369 380 391 403 415 = 428 441 454 ,bish Removal 300 309 318 328 338 348 358 369 380 391 403 415 428 441 454 telephone 300 309 318 328 338 348 358 369 380 391 403 415 428 441 454 Sewer/Water 300 309 318 328 338 348 358 369 380 391 403 415 428 441 454 Mileage or Allowance 250 258 265 273 281 290 299 307 317 326 336 346 356 367 378 Office Supplies 250 258 265 273 281 290 299 307 317 326 336 346 356 367 378 Postage 250 258 265 273 281 290 299 307 317 326 336 346 356 367 378 Dues and Subscriptions 100 103 106 109 113 116 119 123 127 130 134 138 143 147 151 Contracted Repairs - - 2,000 2,060 2,122 2,185 2,251 2,319 2,388 2,460 2,534 2,610 2,688 2,768 2,852 Total Operating Expenses $ 249,439 $ 256,922 $ 266,630 $ 274,629 $ 282,868 $ 291,354 $ 300,094 $ 309,097 $ 318,370 . $ 32.7,921 $ 337,759 $ 347,891 $ 358,328 $ 369,078 $ 380,150. Operating Income (Loss) 110,686 109,379 105,951 103,498 100,915 98,199 95,343 92,343 89,192 85,886 82,419 78,783 74,974 70,984 66,806 Unanticipated Items 24,944 25,692 26,663 27,463 28,287 29,135 30,009 30,910 31,837 32,792 33,776 34,789 35,833 36,908 38,015 Net Operating Income (Loss) $ 85,742 $ 83,687 $ 79,288 $ 76,035 $ 72,629 $ 69,063 $ 65,334 $ 61,433 $ 57,355 $ 53,094 $ 48,643 $ 43,994 $ 39,141 $ 34,076 $ 28,791 Estimated Cost Recovery Operating Exp( Fund Balance as of Beg of Year Fund Balance as of End of Year 131 %. 130% 127% 125% 123% 122% 120% 118% 116% 115% 113% 111% 110% 108% 107% Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 Year 6 Year 7 Year 8 Year 9 Year 10 Year 11 Year 12 Year 13 Year 14 Year Fifteen $ - $ 85,742 $ 169,429 $ 248,717 $ 324,752 $ 397,381 $ 466,444 $ 531,778 $ 593,211 $ 650,566 $ 703,660 $ 752,303 $ 796,297 $ 835,438 $ 869,514 $ 85,742 $ 169,429 $ 248,717 $ 324,752 $ 397,381 $ 466,444 $ 531,778 $ 593,211 $ 650,566 $ 703,660 $ 752,303 $ 796,297 $ 835,438 $ 869,514 $ 898,305 EDINA DOME Hours and Billing Summary C�D�G�IQ EBA Practice 248 - - 5 -10p - - - - 248 EBA Practice 62 - - - - - - 62 - 62 EBA Legion 12 - - $ - - - - 12 EBA Legion 3 - - - - - - 3 - 3 EBA Blizzard Ball 86 - - - 48 38 - - EBA Blizzard Ball 22 - - - 12 10 - - - 22 EBA Legion 42 - - - 24 18 - - EBA Legion 11 - - - 6 5 - - - 11 EBA General 454 14 60 104 60 130 86 - EBA General 114 4 15 26 15 33 22 - 45 69 EBA Tryouts 150 - - - - 72 66 12 EBA Tryouts 38 - - - - 18 17 3 - 38 EHS BB /FP EHS BB /FP - - - - - - - - - - EFA 136 - 32 24 16 32 32 - EFA 34 - 8 6 4 8 8 - 14 20 ESC 1,384 24 240 240 252 240 256 132 ESC 346 6 60 60 63 60 64 33 126 220 ELAX 350 8 48 40 48 48 72 86 ELAX 88 2 12 10 12 12 18 22 24 64 CSC Sports 408 - 16 - 64 - 56 - 80 - 64 - 64 - 64 - CSC Sports 102 - 4 - 16 - 14 - 20 - 16 - 16 - 16 - 34 - 68 - Grand Total - 3,270 - 62 - 444 - 464 - 528 - 642 - 696 - 752 Grand Total - 818 - 16 - 111 - 116 - 132 - 161 - 174 - 188 - 243 - 655 Days 184 3 30 31 31 28 31 30 Days 184 3 30 31 31 28 31 30 64 120 slots 64 64 64 64 64 64 64 64 Hours 16 16 16 16 16 16 16 16 16 16 Max Capacity 11,776 192 1,920 1,984 1,984 1,792 1,984 1,920 Max Capacity 2,944 48 480 496 496 448 496 480 1,024 1,920 Utilized 28% 32% 23% 23% 27% 36% 35% 39% % Utilized 28% 32% 23% 23% 27% 36% 35% 39% 24% 34% EBA totals 992 14 60 104 132 258 152 272 EBA totals 248 4 15 26 33 65 38 68 45 204 Billing Rates - Wtd Average October November December January February March April Revenue - Total October November December January February March April Oct - Dec Jan - Apr Total _ _A Practice $ 321 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 321 EBA Practice $ 19,915 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 19,915 $ - $ 19,915 EBA Legion 280 - - - - - - 280 EBA Legion 840 - - - - - - 840 - 840 EBA Blizzard Ball 280 - - - 280 280 - - EBA Blizzard Ball 6,020 - - - 3,360 2,660 - - - 6,020 EBA Legion 280 - - - 280 280 - - EBA Legion 2,940 - - - 1,680 1,260 - - - 2,940 EBA General 322 320 320 320 317 340 300 - EBA General 36,500 1,120 4,800 8,320 4,760 11,060 6,440 - 14,240 22,260 EBA Tryouts 333 - - - - 333 344 280 EBA Tryouts 12,495 - - - - 5,985 5,670 840 - 12,495 EHS BB /FP - - - - - - - - EHS BB /FP - - - - - - - EFA 336 - 320 320 350 341 350 - EFA 11,410 - 2,560 1,920 1,400 2,730 2,800 - 4,480 6,930 ESC 322 320 320 320 323 323 315 338 ESC 111,405 1,920 19,200 19,200 20,370 19,390 20,160 11,165 40,320 71,085 ELAX 334 320 320 320 350 327 342 339 ELAX 29,240 640 3,840 3,200 41200 3,920 6,160 7,280 7,680 21,560 CSC Sports 275 275 275 275 275 275 275 275 CSC Sports 28,050 1,100 4,400 3,850 5,500 4,400 4,400 4,400 9,350 18,700 Total $ 317 $ 308 $ 314 $ 315 $ 313 $ 320 $ 262 $ 236 Total $ 258,815 $ 4,780 $ 34,800 $ 36,490 $ 41,270 $ 51,405 $ 45,630 $ 44,440 $ 76,070 $ 182,745 EBA totals $ 317 $ 320 $ 320 $ 320 $ 297 $ 325 $ 319 $ 318 EBA totals $ 78,710 $ 1,120 $ 4,800 $ 8,320 $ 9,800 $ 20,965 $ 12,110 $ 21,595 $ 14,240 $ 64,470 Billing Class Primetime Primetime time yours Shoulder CSC Times Rate /Hour Months Days 5 -10p $ 350.00 Jan - Apr Mon -Fri 8a -10p $ 350.00 Jan - Apr Sat 8a -5p $ 350.00 Jan - Apr Sun All Other $ 280.00 Jan - Apr All All $ 320.00 Oct - Dec All All $ 275.00 All All 2012 October October October 29 30 31 2012 October October October 29 30 31 M T W Total EDINA DOME Scheduling Proforma jEDINA November 7:00 AM 8:00 AM November 1 - November 2 Fr November 3 Sat November 4 Sun November 5 November 6 T November 7 W November 8 Th November 9 Fr November 10 Sat November 11 Sun November 12 M November 13 T November 14 W November 15 Th November 16 Fr November 17 Sat November 18 Sun November 19 M November 20 T November 21 W November 22 Th November November November 23 24 25 Fr Sat Sun November 26 Iht November 27 T November 28 W November 29 Th November 30 Fr Total ROOM :- � m® mmi■� ®iii =' ®m��� m ��� �'� m ■� �® ago= �m EPS NS EPS NS EPS NS EPS NS EPS NS NOTES November November 1 Th November November November November 2 3 4 5 Fr Sat Sun M November 6 T November 7 W November 8 Th November 9 Fr November 10 Sat November 11 Sun November 12 M November 13 T November 14 W November 15 Th November 16 Fr November 17 Sat November 18 Sun November 19 M November 20 T November 21 W November 22 Th November November November November 23 24 25 26 Fr Sat Sun M ®© November 27 T November 28 VV November 29 Th November 30 Fr :- � m® mmi■� ®iii =' ®m��� m ��� �'� m ■� �® EDINA DOME Scheduling Proforma 17E15)xmz�� 7z�� rA-%t ecember 2012 7-00 AM 7:30 AM 00 AM December December 1 2 Sat Sun December 3 M - December 4 T - December 5 W - December 6 Th -_ December 7 Fr December December 8 9 Sat Sun December 10 M ---------------- December 11 T December 12 N December 13 Th December 14 Fr December 15 Sat December 16 Sun December 17 M December 18 T December 19 bV December 20 Th December 21 Fr December 22 Sat December 23 Sun December 24 M December 25 T December 26 W -- December 27 Th December 28 Fr - December 29 Sat - December 30 Sun - December 31 M - -� Totaf 1 ---- 1 ---------------------- - - - - - - - -_ -� ---------------------- 1 1 - - - -- ------------------ - - - - -� ------------------ - - - -�MMMME� 1 1 • ®_®_-___--_-_® ®- ®_ ®_- -_ ®_ ®_ MMMMH�_ __ ___- _- _- _ _- _- __- 11 ' 1 • ® ®- 1 1 • ®® - - ® ® - -- - : • ® -- ®- _-- - ® ® - -� 1 ® ® 11 �- - ® ® - -- - ® ® -- - - - - ® ® - -� -- -__- -_ -_�_ -- - - -_ - -_ -_ MMMMZ�_ IBM" _� _�_�_ MOMMIN 1w. MM�IMMM�10 00�10 •� 11 11 '... Z �- -- 7 ..�i� mm®" m -- m��m '_,:.711' �m®" - - - - - - -®" - m - - -- - - _M�!Mff MOMMIN l07 �- 1 1 1 • - -� �" -®" tt7 - - - -- 1 --- - - - - -- NOTES EPS NS EPS NS EPS NS December 2012 7:00 December 1 Sat December 2 Sun December 3 M December 4 T December 5 W ------------------ December 6 Th December 7 Fr December 8 Sat December 9 Sun December 10 M December 11 T December 12 W December 13 Th December 14 Fr December 15 Sat December 16 Sun December 17 M December 18 T December 19 W December 20 Th December 21 Fr December 22 Sat December 23 Sun - December 24 M -- December 25 T December 26 W - December 27 Th -- December 28 Fr December December 29 30 Sat Sun December 31 M 1 ---- 1 ---------------------- - - - - -- - -� 11 ' 1 • ® ®- 1 1 • ®® - - ® ® - -- - ® ® -- ®- _-- - ® ® - -� 1 ® ® -- - - ® ® - -- - ® ® -- - ® ®---- - ® ® - -� IBM" 1w. MM�IMMM�10 00�10 •� 11 Timm®" �- 7 ..�i� mm®" m -- m��m - - - -� .. ® - - - - -� EDINA DOME Scheduling Proforma 7 IEMEk A 111 17 January 2013 January 1 T January 2 W January 3 Th January 4 Fr January 5 Sat January 6 Sun January 7 M January 8 T January 9 W January 10 Th January 11 Fr January 12 Sat January 13 Sun January 14 M January 15 T January 16 W January 17 Th January 18 Fr January 19 Sat January January 20 21 Sun Al January 22 T January 23 W January 24 Th January 25 Fr January 26 Sat January 27 Sun January 28 M January 29 T January 30 VV January 31 Th Total 11 - - -- - - - - -- - - - -- EBA -- -- __- - _ 1 1 / , -- - - - - -- -_- EBA BB - - -- - - - -© - -- • 1 - - -- -- =- - - - - == -- - - - - A -�© C' c'. - -- • • � ®�� m® ®�� ®m�m�� _ ® ®�m��■ ®mom ON• • 1 • �c��e����mm ®�m���� c�� � mm�m� mm�m • • • ������� comae ���� � ������ �� ������ NOTES EPS NS EPS NS January 2013 January 1 T January 2 W January 3 Th January 4 Fr January 5 Sat January 6 Sun January 7 M January 8 T January 9 W January 10 Th January 11 Fr January 12 Sat January 13 Sun January 14 M January 15 T January 16 W January 17 Th January January 18 19 Fr Sat January 20 Sun January 21 M January 22 T January 23 W January 24 Th January 25 Fr January 26 Sat January 27 Sun January 28 M January 29 T January 30 VV January 31 Th 11 - - -- - - - - -- - - - -- EBA -- -- __- _ 1 1 / -_ -- - - - - -- -_- EBA BB - - -- - - - -© - -- - - - - -- 1 1 - - - -- - - - -�© C' c'. - -- EDINA DOME Scheduling Proforma February 2013 February 1 Fri February 2 Sat February 3 Sun February 4 M February 5 T February 6 W February 7 Th February 8 Fr February 9 Sat February 10 Sun February 11 M February 12 T February 13 W February 14 Th February 15 Fr February 16 Sat February 17 Sun February 18 m February 19 T February 20 W February 21 Th February 22 Fr February 23 Sat February 24 Sun February 25 M February 26 T February 27 W February 28 Th February February Total MOM - - - -_- - - - - -- ---- - -ya7" -- - -_ - -- �, -_ -- 11111H111 ME - nx - - - - - -- - -- - - - - -- - - -- - - - -_. -- - - - - -- �I / 1 EBA BB - - -- 68; EBA LW - - - - -- - -- -_ - - -- 100051wers "M EBA TO EBA EFA mom "M NOTES EPS NS EPS NS February 2013 February 1 Fri February 2 Sat February 3 Sun February 4 M February 5 T Feb,.;ary 6 W February 7 Th February 8 Fr February 9 Sat February 10 Sun February 11 M February 12 T February 13 W February 14 Th February 15 Fr February February 16 17 Sat Sun February 18 M February 19 T February 20 W February 21 Th February 22 Fr February 23 Sat February 24 Sun February 25 M February 26 T February 27 W February 28 Th February February MOM EBA 33 -_ -- EBA B13 - - - -- - - - -- -- 5 - - -- / 1 EBA BB - - -- 68; EBA LW - - - - -- - -- -_ - - -- EDINA DOME Scheduling Proforma EDINA EDINA DOME Scheduling Proforma IP NOTES EPS NS EPS NS EPS NS EPS NS EPS NS Association Edina Baseball Association Edina Soccer Club Edina Lacrosse Association Edina Football Association Total Priority Scheduling Fees Participants Fee Total Fees 1;307 $30 $39,210 757 $30 $22,710 463 $30 $13,890 650 $30 $19,500 $95,310 OUTDOOR ARENA - 17 Week Proforma Income Statement Pro Forma Period Ending 3/15 9 Assume $5. increase in ice costs every 2 years Revenue -Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 YearZ Year 7 Year 8 Year 9 Year 10 Year 11 Year 12 Year =13 Year 14 Year 15 Ice Rental Revenues $ 85000 $ 85,000 $ 88,400 $ 88,400 $ 91,800 $ 91,860 $ 95,200 $ 95,200 $ 98,600 $ 98,60.0 $ 102,000 $ 102,000 $ 105;400 $ 105,400 $ 108,800 Concessions $ 10,000.00 $ 10,000.00 $ 10,000.00 $ 10,000.00 $ 10;000.00 $ 11,000:00 $ 11,006.00 $ 11,000.00 $ 11,000.00 $ 11,000.00. $ 12,000.00 $ .12,000.00 $ 12,000:00 $ 12;000:00 $ 12,000.00 Open Skating ,$3,000 $3,000 $3;300 $3,300 $3,600 $3,600 $4 ;000 $4,000 $4,000 $4,300 $4,300. $4,300 $4;600, $4;600 $4,600. Operating Income /Net Sales $ 98,006 $: 98,000 $ 101,700 $. 101 ;700 $ 105,400 $ 106,400 $ , 1-10,200 $ 1101200 $ 113,600 $ 113,900 . $ 118,300 $ 118;300 $ „ 12200 , $ 122,000 $. 125,400.. Assume 3% Increase Year - Over -Year Expense's -. Year_ i Year 2 Year Year 4 Year 5 Year 6 Year =7" - Year 8 Year 9 Year 10 Year 11 Year 12 Year'13 ; Year 14 Year"Fifteen Utilities 29,750 30,345 30,952 31;571 32,202 32,846 :33;503 34;173 34;857 35,554 36,265 36,990 37,7,30 38;485 39,254' Ice Set Up - Full Time 2;500 2,500 2,500 2,500 2;500 2,750 2,750 2,750 2,750 2,750 3,000 . 3,000 3,000" 3,000 3,000' Contracted Repairs - - 1,000 1,030 1,061 1,093 1,126 1,159 1,194 1,230 1,267 1,305 1,344 1,384 1,426 Total Operating Expenses $ 32,250 $ 32,845 $_ 34,452 $ 35,101 $ 35,763 $ 36,689 $ 37,379 $ 38,083 $ 38,801 $ 39,534 $ 40,532 $ 41,295 $ 42,074 $ 42,869 $ 43,680 Operating Income.(Loss) 65,750 65,155 67,248 66,599 69,637 69,711 72,821 72,117 74,799 74,366 77,768 77,005 79,926 79,131 81,720 Estimated Cost Recovery Operating Exp 304% 298% 295% 290% 295% 290% 295% 289% 293% 288% 292% 286% 290% 285% 287% Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 Year 6 Year 7 Year 8 Year 9 Year 10 Year 11 Year 12 Year 11 Year 14 Year Fifteen Fund Balance as of Beg of Year $ - $ 65,750 $ 130,905 $ 198,153 $ 264,752-$ 334,389 $ 404,100 $ 476,921 $ 549,038 $ 623,837 $ 698,203 $ 775,972 $ 852,976 $ 932,902 $ 1,012,033 Fund Balance as of End of Year $ 65,750 $ 130,905 $ 198,153 $ 264,752 $ 334,389 $ 404,100 $ 476,921 $ 549,038 $ 623,837 $ 698,203 $ 775,972 $ - 852,976 $ 932,902 $ 1,012,033 $ 1,093,753 9 OUTDOOR ARENA -19 Week Proforma 1- ^ome Statement Pro Forma )eriod Ending 3/15 Operating Income (Loss) Estimated Cost Recovery Operatic 72,973 72,322 74,759 74,052 77,431 77,445 80,894 80,127 83,145 82,647 86,383 85,552 88,804 87,939 90,856 308% Year 1 Fund Balance as of Beg of Year $ - $ Fund Balance as of End of Year $ 72,973 $ 303% Assume $5 increase in ice costs every 2 years 295% 300% 295% 300% 294% 298% 293% 297% 291% 295% 289% 292% Year 2 Revenue Year 4 Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 Year 10 Year 6 Year 7 Year 8 Year 9 Year 10 Year 11 Year 12 Year 13 Year 14 Year 15 EHA Ice Rental Revenues $ 95,000 $ 95,000 $ 98,800 $ 98,800 $ 102,600 $ 102,600 $ 106,400 $ 106,400 $ 110,200 $ 110,200 $ 114,000 $ 114,000 $ 117,800 $ 117,800 $ 121,600 Concessions $ 10,000.00 $ 10,000.00 $ 10,000.00 $ 10,000.00 $ 10,000.00 $ 11,000.00 $ 11,000.00 $ 11,000.00 $ 11,000.00 $ 11,000.00 $ 12,000.00 $ 12,000.00 $ 12,000.00 $ 12,000.00 $ 12,000.00 Open Skating $3,000 $3,000 $3,300 $3,300 $3,600 $3,600 $4,000 $4,000 $4,000 $4,300 $4,300 $4,300 $4,600 $4,600 $4,600 Operating Income /Net Sales $ 108,000 $ 108,000 $ 112,100 $ 112,100 $ 116,200 $ 117,200 $ 121,400 $ 121,400 $ 125,200 $ 125,500 $ 130,300 $ 130,300 $ 134,400 $ 134,400 $ 138,200 Assume 3% increase Year- Over -Year Expenses Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 Year 6 Year 7 Year 8 Year 9 Year 10 Year 11 Year 12 Year 13 Year 14 Year Fifteen Utilities 32,5271 33,1781 33,8411 34,5181 35,2081 35,9121 36,6311 37,3631 38,1111 38,8731 39,6501 40,4431 41,2521 42,0771 42,919 Ice Set Up - Full Time 2,500 2,500 2,500 2,500 2,500 2,750 2,750 2,750 2,750 2,750 3,000 3,000 3,000 3,000 3,000 Contracted Repairs - - 1,000 1,030 1,061 1,093 1,126 1,159 1,194 1,230 1,267 1,305 1,344 1,384 1,426 Total Operating Expenses $ 35,027 $ 35,678 $ 37,341 $ 38,048 $ 38,769 $ 39,755 $ 40,506 $ 41,273 $ 42,055 $ 42,853 $ 43,917 $ 44,748 $ 45,596 $ 46,461 $ 47,344 Operating Income (Loss) Estimated Cost Recovery Operatic 72,973 72,322 74,759 74,052 77,431 77,445 80,894 80,127 83,145 82,647 86,383 85,552 88,804 87,939 90,856 308% Year 1 Fund Balance as of Beg of Year $ - $ Fund Balance as of End of Year $ 72,973 $ 303% 300% 295% 300% 295% 300% 294% 298% 293% 297% 291% 295% 289% 292% Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 Year 6 Year 7 Year 8 Year 9 Year 10 Year 11 Year 12 Year 13 Year 14 Year Fifteen 72,973 $ 145,295 $ 220,054 $ 294,106 $ 371,537 $ 448,982 $ 529,876 $ 610,003 $ 693,149 $ 775,796 $ 862,179 $ 947,731 $ 1,036,535 $ 1,124,474 145,295 $ 220,054 $ 294,106 $ 371,537 $ 448,982 $ 529,876 $ 610,003 $ 693,149 $ 775,796 $ 862,179 $ 947,731 $ 1,036,535 $ 1,124,474 $ 1,215,329 .mple Weekly Schedule 7:30AM 1 hr 8:40AM 1 hr 9:50AM 1 hr 11:OOAM 1 hr 12:10PM 1 hr 1:20PM 1.5 hr 3:OOPM 1 hr 4:10PM 1hr 5:20PM 1hr 6:30PM 1hr 7:40PM 1.5 hr 9:20pm 1.S hr Sunday EHA EHA EHA EHA EHA OPEN SKATING EHA EHA EHA EHA Adult Adult Adult Monday Tuesday Wednesday Thursday Friday EHA EHA EHA EHA EHA EHA EHA EHA EHA EHA EHA EHA EHA EHA EHA EHA Adult Adult Adult Adult *Proforma is only based on confirmed rental ice from EHA *We would be able to sell additional hours. EHA EHA EHA TEEN OPEN SKATE Saturday EHA EHA EHA EHA EHA OPEN SKATING EHA EHA EHA EHA EHA ANDERSON - JOHNSON ASSOCIATES, INC. 44M' L-02264val LANDSCAPE ARCHITECR)RE SITE PLANNING • CIFIL ENGINEERING 7575 GOLDEN VALLEY ROAD SUITE 200 MINNEAPOUS MN 55427 FAX (763) 544 -0531 PH (763) 544 -7129 October 8, 2013 Ann Kattreh, Parks & Recreation Director Parks & Recreation Department 4801 W. 50th Street Edina, MN 55424 RE: . Proposed Improvements at Pamela Park 4301 W. 58th St., Edina, MN 55424 Dear Ann: As requested, we are pleased to provide this updated Opinion of Probable Construction Cost for the proposed improvements at Pamela Park. Also attached is the Schematic Plan which generally illustrates the proposed improvements and serves as the basis for the cost estimate. As noted, we've included survey and soil boring costs in each "project cost ". If projects are combined, the overall cost for survey and borings will likely be lower. .Also, it is worth noting that a wetland delineation will be necessary as the proposed field construction may directly or indirectly impact adjacent wetlands. The `window' for accomplishing wetland delineation services has `closed' for the season, so it is important to understand that final permit approval from the watershed may not be able to occur until next May. We recommend bidding the project(s) this Winter/ Spring, however, there may be revisions required due to based on final review comments by the watershed. OPINION OF PROBABLE CONSTRUCTION & PROJECT COSTS 1. Grass (South) Athletic Field Renovation Construct a sand -peat athletic field (160'x 300') north of the South Parking Lot to support football, soccer, lacrosse and rugby. The field would be smaller than a regulation football field and would be used primarily as, a practice field (which is how the area is currently used); however, this smaller_ field can also be scheduled for younger athletic game events. As a note, due to the existence of delineated wetlands and taking into account the elevation of the established storm watei flood plain it has been determined that the field can be constructed, although the field size would need to be smaller in size than the existing field to the east. Estimated Construction Cost............ $ 440,000. 5% Contingency: . ................ $22,000. Engineer's Design Fees (6 %):....... $26,000. Survey, Soil Borings :............... $8,000. Testing, Permits, Etc.: .............. $2,000. Estimated Project Cost ......................... $ 498,000. 2. Synthetic Turf at Southeast Athletic Field Construct artificial turf over the footprint of the existing (380' x 225') natural grass athletic field with. lights. Install perimeter protection around the field to deter vehicles - the preferred protection barrier would be either a stone bench system (similar to that at the Edina High School artificial turf field) or bollard system (similar to bollards with chains at Arden Park and Creek Valley.Park. Estimated Construction Cost........... $ 1,250,000. 5% Contingency: ................. $62,500. Engineer's Design Fees (5.5 %) .... $68,500. Survey, Soil Borings: .............. $11,000. Testing, Permits, Etc.: ........... $4000. Estimated Project Cost .................... $ 1,396,000. Alternate: Construct Southeast Athletic Field with sand =peat in lieu of synthetic turf: Renovate the existing field including excavation and import of new sand/peat topsoil. Provide new drain tile system, irrigation system and seed (Similar to Items I and 3). Estimated Project Cost ...... . ............ .... �$- 5009000. 3. Senior (North) Athletic Field Renovation Renovate the existing field including excavation and import of new sand/peat topsoil. Provide new drain tile system, irrigation system and seed. Estimated Construction Cost........ . $ 460,000. 5 %Contingency :.................. $23;000. Engineer's Design Fees (6 %):....... $229500. Survey, Soil Borings:................ $8,000. Testing, Permits, Etc.: ............... $2,500. Estimated Project Cost ................... $ 5211000. 4. North Parking Lot Renovation and Expansion Reclaim and re -pave the North Drive (off 58`' Street) and Parking Lot. Construct new concrete curbing along the drive and around the perimeter of the lot to improve the flow of traffic into the north parking lot (near the park shelter building), create more parking capacity where possible and stripe the Jot to make parking safer and more efficient. Expand the lot immediately. west-of the park building to gain an additional 15 stalls. Estimated Construction Cost............ $ 115,000. 5% Contingency: ................ $5,000. Engineer's Design Fees (6 %):........ $75000. Survey, Soil Borings: ............... $3,000. Estimated Project Cost ..................... $ 130,000. la 5. West Parking Lot Renovation and Expansion Reclaim and re -pave the West Parking Lot (off Oaklawn Avenue) including new concrete curbing around the perimeter of the lot and a short ( -2' high) retaining wall to transition grade along the west edge of the lot. The improvements: will afford —37 more parking stalls. Estimated Construction Cost ............. $ 75,000. 5% Contingency: .................. $4,000. Engineer's Design Fees (6 %):...... $4,500. Survey, Soil Borings : ............... $3,500: Estimated Project Cost .......... $ 87,000. 6 South Parking Lot Renovation and Expansion Repair, crack seal and seal coat the South Parking Lot and Drive (off 62`d Street). Redesign the existing lot configuration to be more efficient (add about 20 -23 stalls) and expand the lot northward and westward to gain an additional 43 stalls. Note, young trees would have to be relocated. Estimated Construction Cost ............. $ 95,000. 5% Contingency: .................. $5,000. Engineer's Design Fees (6 %):........ $6,000. Estimated Project Cost . ..................... $ 106,000. 7. Paved Trail Access to Playground Construct a paved trail between the south and west parking lots and to the playground equipment. Estimated Construction Cost ............. $ 35,000. 5% Contingency: .................. $2,000. Engineer's Design Fees (8 %):........ $3,000. Estimated Project Cost ...................... $ 39,000. 8. Paved and Environmental Trails Construct a paved and `environmental' trail around the perimeter of the park for better, easier, and accessible access to the park amenities and to support environmental discovery and learning. Estimated Construction Cost............ $ 102,000. 5 %o Contingency: . ................. $5,000. -Engineer's Design Fees (8 %):......... $8,000. Estimated Project Cost ..................... $ 115,000. 9. Park Shelter Building Improvements In 2009, four concept drawings were proposed for consideration, all of which included much needed additional storage, plus a larger and more user - friendly room for community gatherings, meetings and skate changing, plus a kitchen/concessions area, drinking fountain and outdoor picnic patio space. If funding is available, the expansion will require more study and community input before a final plan is selected. Ann, we trust the above information is clear and understandable. If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact me. Respectfully Submitted, Anderson- Johnson Asso ' Inc. ,LLA Attachment - Pamela Park Master Plan Study (updated October 8, 2013) PAMELA PARK MASTER PLAN ORIGINALLY APPROVED BY CITY COUNCIL OCTOBER 6, 2009 R off LL I 0= L.1 .1-_1J OCTOBER 8, 2013 MASTER PLAN STUDY PAMELA PARK, EDINA MINNESOTA SPORTS DOME RFNTAI.AGRFFIIIF.NT This Rental Agreement ( "Agreement "). made and entered into this Mh day of pct 2013, by and betweenthe City of Edina (the "City") and Mina Baseball Association (the „Club" j. 1. Dates and Tiefes. The City hereby leases to the Club and the Club hereby leases from.thc City i5Q.. hours for the dome facility. The.date(s) end.time(s)aisted on Exhibit "A" will be when the 25Q hours are reserved for the Club and will be updated annually. The City and Club will work to create a mutually agreeable schedule regarding dates and times by February V each year. In'the event an agreement cannot be reached by February 14, the schedule from the _ previou's year shall be utilized regarding the times and days of the week. 2. i= 'rhe term of this Agreement shall be twenty (20) years commencing on October 30- 2014, 3. Payment Terms and C'onditinns- The rent to be paid the City shall be based on - the annual fee schedule, attached as Exhibit "B", which maybe amended unilaterally by the City,-- for Prime Time and Non -Prime Time hours (sales tax included). However, the City will not increase the rate by more than three (3 %) percent per year. City will invoice the Club thirty (30) days in advance of the due date. Payment shall be due in advance on the first day of each month. Failure to remit payment as required on the datc(s) due shall be grounds for denial of time in the dome until payment is made in full, or a payment plan is worked out between the City and Club. Club shall pay a fee of'rhirty mid no/100ths Dollars ($30.00) per participant by December 31" each year. Club shall provide City with a membership list by December 3 V of each year. 4. Interest The City reserves the right to charge a 1.5% finance charge per month for any unpaid bill that extends thirty (30) days beyond the due date. 5. Definitions of Prime Time and Non -Prime Time Soc; Exhibit "C." G. Anslonment Club may assign time leased in paragraph 1 above to any other club or private party that has entered into a rental - Agreement with the City of Edina. In such casc(s), the City will invoice the assignee directly for such time and charges. In the event assignee does not make payment as required pursuant to Paragraph 3, Club shall be responsible for the outstanding balance. 7. Cancellations. When the City is unable to provide the dome facilities due to breakdown or an act of nature, the Club will not be charged for the time scheduled on Exhibit 1719640 "A" that is lost due to the breakdown or act of nature. 8. Rues and Rtgniallons, The rules and regulations of the Sports Dome shall be and are apart of this rental agreement as though they were set out in full herein,'and:are specifically incorporated as a part hereof by reference. The Club hereby'acknowled&c receipt of a copy ofthe rules and regulations currently in place and by. signed addendum "will acknowledge receipt of any additional rules and regulations. Violation of any of.ihe.rutes'and regulations by any player, volunteer or employee: of the Club shall be grounds to bar, future use of the Sports Donne by that person, according to the Sports Dome's zero tolerance and disciplinary action program's: 9. Indemnitiration and Hoid llarmlLm. The Club shall defend, indemnify and hold the City, its officers , employees and agents harmless from and against any and all liability, loss, expense (including attomcys' fccs and costs) or claims for injury or damage arising out of the performance of this Agreement, caused solely by or resulting solely from the negligent or intentional acts or omissions of the Club, its officers, directors, volunteers, agents or employees. This Release and Indemnification does not apply to intentional, willful, or wanton acts by die City. 10. Admission Fees, 7 he Club shall have the right to charge admission for spectators for purposes of special events with prior written approval. from the Sports Dome manager or appropriate City official. Both the,City and the Club shall have the right to admit, control or eject spectators during any evcnia -i ,ihe Sports Dome. .11, Insurance_ The Club shall, at its own expense, provide such general liability insurance as will protect the Club and'the City from all claims for damages to property and persons, including death and the use'ofproducts, giving_ cause for claims or damages, which may arise from the operation of the business conducted under: this'Agreemcnt or from anyone directly or indirectly employed by the Club.- Such general liability insurance shall provide limits of not less than One Million Dollars (S1,000,000.00) for any number, of persons per occurrence injured or killed. Property damage liability - insurance shall provide a limit of not less than Threc Hundred Thousand Dollars ($300,000.00) per occurrence. 'Ilene City shall be named an additional insured in said policy or policies and the Club shall furnish to the City evidence of insurance by a certificate of insurance of required coverage. 12. Termination. The City may terminate this Agreement in the event any payment herein agreed to be made is in arrears and remains unpaid for a period of sixty (60) days after die same is due. Either the City or the Club may terminate this Agreement in the event any of the material provisions, terms or conditions of this Agreement have been violated upon giving thirty (30) days' written notice to the other party to cure the violation and of the intention to so terminate and, at the end of said thirty (30) days, all the rights of the party in breach hereunder shall terminate unless said violation is cured to the satisfaction of the party that provided notice of the intention to terminate the agreement. 1719648 Such termination shall not waive the right of a party to recover damages from the other party for its failure to comply with the terms of this Agw.cmcnt. The acceptance of monies due the City for any period or pedods after a default of any of the terns, covenants or conditions of this Agreement shall not be deemed a waiver on the pad of the City. No waiver of default by either party of any of the terms, covenants or conditions hereof shall be construed to be or act as a. waive r of any subscquent default of any of the terms, covenants and conditions herein oontainod to be perrornrod, kept and observed. 13. Severablill If any provisions of this Agreementshall be invalid for any reason, such invalidity shall: not of fei6fthc ichWning provisions herein the "pWCi ' to this Agreement hereby declaring that they would have agreed to the other provisions of this Agreement notwithstanding such invalidity. WITNESSET11, the parties hereto execute this Agreement on the SS��` day of &. tr , 2013. CITY OF EDINA Ry: v-- --- Its CLUB: I EWA �A-g:%fitL Assoc. (E7Sr) i3y: v-- --- Its ni9er.s EXHIBIT "A" Schedule of Dates and Times See Attached Proforma 171964v8 EXHIBIT "B" Annual Fee Schedule 2014-15 EBA Practice 62 $ $ $ - 19,915 7 7 $ $ 19,915 EBA Leii6n 640 840 840 EBA Blizzard Ball 6,020 3,360 2,660 EBA Legion 3 2.9 . .. I...,-:-. 1,680 1,260 - : -: ....... .... . .. I 2,940 EBA General 30,600 1,120 4,800 8.320 4,760 11,060 6,440 - 3 EBA Tryouts i 3 EBA Biliz Ball 22 UiS WF0' 1 2 1 0 22 EBA Legion 11 ELAX ... ... ... .. .CSC Sports EBA General . 114 4 15 26 is 33 22 : 45 6.9 - -.. -.- ... EBA Tryouts . I 38, � . is . . 17 . .. .. 3 .. _ _ 38 EHS BB/FP ESC 7,. ELA)( 7 ............ Grand Total 248 16 111 116 132 161 174 188 243 655 31 'at 28 31 30, 64 120 Hours 16 16 16 1 6 f6 16 16 16 16 16 48 480 496 496 448 490 460 • 1,024 1,920 (AdIzed WS 32% 231. 23% 27% 36% 35-6 39% 24Y. 34. FBA.1ofals 15 ?6 23 as in 08 J5 204 Nou-inher.,�TDeceiylbefi7eJantiarv�-1 -"Febivarv:al;.', Mai chK.t1. '--'.,,A oril,'-... Oct - DE EBA Practice $ 19,915 $ $ $ $ $ - 19,915 7 7 $ $ 19,915 EBA Leii6n 640 840 840 EBA Blizzard Ball 6,020 3,360 2,660 6,020 EBA Legion 2.9 . .. I...,-:-. 1,680 1,260 - : -: ....... .... . .. I 2,940 EBA General 30,600 1,120 4,800 8.320 4,760 11,060 6,440 - 14,240 22,280 EBA Tryouts i 12,495 - 5.085 5,670 840 12,495 UiS WF0' EFA ELAX ... ... ... .. .CSC Sports Total S 78,710 $ 1,120 $ 4,600 $ 8,320. $ 9.800 $ 20.965 $ 12,110 $ 21,-595-:; $ 14, 240 $ 64,470 EPA lotals 3 73.710 5 1.120..1 U00 1 0. 3 2 D S 9,SU0 S 20.965 4; 12,110 i 27.595 b 14 NO S 64,470 171964v8 EXHIBIT "C" Prime Time and Non -Prime Time Definitions Annual Fee Schedule Billing Class Times Rate /Hour. Months Days Primetime 5 -10p $ 350.00 Jan - Apr Mon -Fri :. Primetime 8a -10p $ 350.00 Jan - Apr Sat Primetime 8a-'5' p $ 350.00 Jan - Apr Sun Off hours All, Other $ 280.00: Jan - Apr All Shoulder All ; $ 320.00. Oct - Dec All 1719648 SPORTS DOME RENTAL AGREEMENT This Rental Agreement ( "Agreement "), made and entered into this 8th day of_ October, 2013, by and between the City of Edina (the "City") and Edina Soccer Club (the "Club "). 1. Dates and Times. The City hereby leases to the Club and the Club hereby leases from the City 346 hours for the dome facility. The date(s) and time(s) listed on Exhibit "A" will be when the 346 hours are reserved for the Club and will be updated annually. The City and Club will work -to create a mutually agreeable schedule regarding dates and times by February 1' each year. In the event an agreement cannot be reached by February l �', the schedule from the previous year shall be utilized regarding the times and days of the week. 2. Term. The term of this Agreement shall be twenty (20) years commencing on _October 30, 2014. - -- 3.- -- - Payment- Terms- and - Conditions. - The rent to be paid- the -City shallbe.based on -- the annual fee schedule, attached as Exhibit `B ", which may be amended unilaterally by the City, for Prime Time and Non -Prime Time hours (sales tax included). However, the City will not increase the rate by more than three (3 %) percent per year. City will invoice the Club thirty (30) days in advance of the due date. Payment shall be due in advance on the first day of each month. Failure to remit payment as required on the date(s) due shall be grounds for denial of time in the dome until payment is made in full, or a payment plan is worked out between the City and Club. Club shall pay a fee of Thirty and no /l00ths Dollars ($30.00) per participant by December 3151 each year. Club shall provide City with a membership list by December 31' of each year. 4. Interest. The City reserves the right to charge a 1.5% finance charge per month for any unpaid bill that extends thirty (30) days beyond the due date. 5. Definitions of Prime Time and Non -Prime Time. See Exhibit "C." 6. Assignment. Club may assign time leased in paragraph 1 above to any other club or private party that has entered into. a rental Agreement with the City of Edina. In such case(s), the City will invoice the assignee directly for such time and charges. In the event assignee does not make payment as required pursuant to Paragraph 3, Club shall be responsible for the outstanding balance. 7. Cancellations. When the City is unable to provide the dome facilities due to breakdown or an act of nature, the Club will not be charged for the time scheduled on Exhibit "A" that is lost due to the breakdown or act of nature. 8. Rules and Regulations. The rules and regulations of the Sports Dome shall be 1719648 and are a part of this rental agreement as though they were set out in full herein, and are specifically incorporated as a part hereof by reference. The Club hereby acknowledges receipt of a copy of the rules and regulations currently in place and by signed addendum will acknowledge receipt of any additional rules and regulations. Violation of any of the rules and regulations by any player, volunteer or employee of the Club shall be grounds to bar future use of the Sports Dome by that person, according to the Sports Dome's zero tolerance and disciplinary action programs. 9. Indemnification and Bold harmless. The Club shall defend, indemnify and hold the City, its officers, employees and agents harmless from and against any and all liability, loss, expense (including attorneys' fees and costs) or claims for injury or damage arising out of the performance of this Agreement, caused solely by or resulting solely from the negligent or intentional acts or omissions of the Club, its officers, directors, volunteers, agents or employees. This Release and Indemnification does not apply to intentional, willful, or wanton acts by the City. 10. Admission Fees. The Club shall have the right to charge admission for spectators for purposes of special events with prior written approval from the Sports Dome manager or appropriate City official. Both the City and the Club shall have the right to admit, control or eject spectators during any event at the Sports Dome. 11. Insurance. The Club shall, at its own expense, provide such general liability insurance as will protect the Club and the City from all claims for damages to property and persons, including death and the use of products, giving cause for claims or damages, which may arise from the operation of the business conducted under this Agreement or from anyone directly or indirectly employed by the Club. Such general liability insurance shall provide limits of not less than One Million Dollars ($1,000,000.00) for any number of persons per occurrence injured or killed. Property damage liability insurance shall provide a limit of not less than Three Hundred Thousand Dollars ($300,000.00) per occurrence. The City shall be named an additional insured in said policy or policies and the Club shall furnish to the City evidence of insurance by a certificate of insurance of required coverage. 12. Termination. The City may terminate this Agreement in the event any payment herein agreed to be made is in arrears and remains unpaid for a period of sixty (60) days after the same is due. Either the City or the Club may terminate this Agreement in the event any of the material provisions, terms or conditions of this Agreement have been violated upon giving thirty (30) days' written notice to the other party to cure the violation and of the intention to so terminate and, at the end of said thirty (30) days, all the rights of the party in breach hereunder shall terminate unless said violation is cured to the satisfaction of the party that provided notice of the intention to terminate the agreement. Such termination shall not waive the right of a party to recover damages from the other party for its failure to comply with the terms of this Agreement. The acceptance of monies due the City for any period or periods after a default of any of the terms, covenants or conditions of this Agreement shall not be deemed a waiver on the part of the City. No waiver of default by either party of any of the terms, covenants or conditions hereof shall be construed to be or act as 171964v8 a waiver of any subsequent default of any of the terms, covenants and conditions herein contained to be performed, kept and observed. 13. Severability. If any provisions of this Agreement shall be invalid for any reason, such invalidity shall not affect the remaining provisions herein, the parties to this Agreement hereby declaring that they would have agreed to the other provisions of this Agreement notwithstanding such invalidity. WITNESSETH, the parties hereto execute this Agreement on the ?s f� day of DC -roi3ex- 92013. CLUB: c By: Its %u &Jr D Fes/' 171964v8 EXHIBIT "A" Schedule of Dates and Times See Attached Proforma 17196ays EXHIBIT "B" Annual Fee Schedule 2014 -15 I ( iEBA Practice i i _., -- -._ ;EBA Le ion ._ _I. E EBA Blizzard Ball EBALesioq... .'.. I.. I I i ._... - -------- i ..... _ .... EBA General - �EBA EHS BB /FP i - . _. �_.._ i ;ESC 3461 8 60 i 60 63_ 60_ .. 64 33 126 I 220, :ELAX 1. I i I - CSC Sports i Grand fetal 346 ' 16! 111 116 i _ 132! 143: 2.1- 3­ 197 i 243 685 ! EBA Practice ,EBA Leglen 17I9G4v8 EXHIBIT "C" Prime Time and Non-Prime Time Definitions Annual Fee Schedule ... . ...... Billing Class i Times ;Rate/Hour;' Months Days Primetime 5-10p $ 350.00 Jan -Apr Mon Fri Primetime 8a-10p $ 350.00 Jan - Apr Sat Primetime J 8a-5p $ 350.001 Jan -Apr Sun 6# -hours All Other $ 280.00 1 Jan - Apr All Shoulder All $ 320.00 Oct - Dec All 171964v8 l^ SPORTS DOME RENTAL AGREEMENT This Rental Agreement ( "Agreement "), made and entered into this 8th day of _ October, 2013, by and between the City of Edina (the "City ") and Edina Football Association (the "Club"). 1. Dates and Times. The City hereby leases to the Club and the Club hereby leases from the City 34 hours for the dome facility. The date(s) and time(s) listed on Exhibit "A" will be when the 34 hours are reserved for the Club and will beupdated annually. The City and Club will work to create a mutually agreeable schedule regarding dates and times by February 0 each year. In the event an agreement cannot be reached by February lay, the schedule from the previous year shall be utilized regarding the times and days of the week. 2. Term. The term of this Agreement shall be twenty (20) years commencing on October 30.2014. 3. Payment Terms and Conditions. The rent to be paid the City shall be based on -the annual -fee - schedule-, attached -as Exhibit "B ";- which maybe amended - unilaterally by the City, for Prime Time and Non -Prime Time hours (sales tax included). However, the City will not increase the rate by more than three (3 %) percent per year. City will invoice the Club thirty (30) days in advance of the due date. Payment shall be due in advance on the first day of each. month. Failure to remit payment as required on the date(s) due shall be grounds for denial of time in the dome until payment is made in full, or a payment plan is worked out between the City and Club. Club shall pay a fee of Thirty and no /100ths Dollars ($30.00) per participant by December 315 each year. Club shall provide City with a membership list by December 315 of each year. The Edina Football Association shall be entitled to priority scheduling of the Braemar Field turf from August 1 through October 31 annually for the duration of the contract term. 4. Interest. The City reserves the right to charge a 1.5% finance charge per month for any unpaid bill that extends thirty (30) days beyond the due date. 5. Definitions -of Prime Time and Non -Prime Time. See. Exhibit "C." 6. Assignment. Club may assign time leased in paragraph 1 above to any other club or private party that has,entered into a rental Agreement with the City of Edina. In such case(s), the City will invoice the assignee directly for such time and charges. In the event assignee does not make payment as required pursuant to Paragraph 3, Club shall be responsible for the outstanding balance. 7. Cancellations. When the City is unable to provide the dome facilities due to breakdown or an act of nature, the Club will not be charged for the time scheduled on Exhibit "A" that is lost due to the breakdown or act of nature. 171964v8 8. Rules and Reulations. The rules and regulations of the Sports Dome shall be and area part of this rental. agreement as though they were set out in full herein, and are specifically incorporated-as a part hereof by reference. The Club hereby acknowledges receipt of a .copy of the rules and regulations currently in place and by signed addendum will acknowledge receipt of any additional rules and regulations. Violation of any of the rules and regulations by any player, volunteer or employee of the Club shall be grounds to bar future use of the Sports Dome by that person, according to the Sports Dome's zero tolerance and disciplinary action programs. 9. Indemnification'and:Hold Harmless. The Club shall defend, indemnify and hold the City, its officers; employees and agents harmless from and against any and all liability, loss, expense (including attorneys' fees and costs) orclaims for injury or damage arising out of the performance of this Agreement„ caused solely by or resulting solely from the negligent or intentional acts or omissions of the Club, its officers, directors, volunteers, agents or employees. This Release and Indemnification,does not apply to intentional, willful, or wanton acts by the City. 10. Admission Fees. Thee lub shall have the right to charge admission for spectators for purposes of special -events-wiftrior written- approval-from the Sports Dome manager or appropriate City official. Both,the City and the Club shall have the right to admit, control or eject spectators during any event- at the. Sports Dome. 11. Insurance. The -Club shall, at its own expense, provide such general liability insurance as will protect the Chub andthe City from all claims for damages to property and persons, including death and the use' of products, giving cause for claims or damages, which may arise from the operation of the business conducted under this Agreement or from anyone directly or indirectly employed by the Club. ;Su ch °general liability--insurance shall provide limits of not less than One Million Dollars,($1,000000:00) for any number of persons per occurrence injured or killed. Property damage liability insurance shall provide", a limit of not less than Three Hundred Thousand Dollars ($300,000.00)`per occurrence. The City shall be named an additional insured in said policy or policies and 'the Club shall furnish to the City evidence of insurance by a certificate of insurance of required coverage. 12. Termination. The City may terminate this Agreement in the event any payment herein agreed to be made is in arrears and remains:unpaid for a. period of sixty (60) days after the same is due. Either the City or the Club may terminate this Agreement in the event any of the material provisions, terms or conditions of this Agreement-have been violated upon giving thirty (30) days' written notice to the other.party to cure the violation and of the intention to so terminate and, at the'end of said thirty (30) days,. all the rights of the party in breach hereunder shall terminate unless said violation is cured to the satisfaction of the party that provided notice of the intention to terminate the agreement. Such termination shall not waive the right of a party to recover damages from the other party for its failure to comply with the terms of this Agreement. The acceptance of monies due the City for any period or periods after a default of any of the terms, covenants or conditions 1719648 of this Agreement shall not be deemed a waiver on the part of the City. No waiver of default by either party of any of the terms, covenants or conditions hereof shall be construed to be or act as a waiver of any subsequent default of any of the terms, covenants and conditions herein contained to be performed, kept and observed. 13. Severability. If any provisions of this Agreement shall be invalid for any reason, such invalidity shall not affect the remaining provisions herein, the parties to this Agreement hereby declaring that they would have agreed to the other provisions of this Agreement notwithstanding such invalidity. WI EE.S TH.i the parties hereto execute this Agreement on the. day of — ; 2013. 1719608 CITY OF EDINA By: Its CLUB: 6P Its l "PET07- M EXHIBIT "A" Schedule of Dates and Times See Attached Proforma 171964v8 EXHIBIT "B" Annual Fee.Schedule 2014 -15 . ESA Pmc*a E 2A L"im ESA Mug 887 ESA I" 98A Ci4newl _ EBATrrM . Et43 88/FP . EFA 34 d 8 4 8 8 14 20 ESC ELAX CSC 8J7ore7 Orsnd TOW 34 1e 1t1 t16 132 143 213 197 243 088 R}, wenurr�Tnta (?2•s��y�'��sc�EF2t�"e 1..2i7�1 $ ����I'/xa?A}iiaih�3;r�jp� fife, €c7S CAP ,I3�`41(,�: `. r .�s,.. lr.rs _..iJ.•_ '� .� .�, r .. _ ..: _ st;': EFA 11.410 2,..W 1.920 1.400 2.7,10 2,800 11420 0,930 TOW S ,1,410 5 S 2.'rt'0 S t,9� 3 1AN S 2.730 S 21900. $ S 4.470 S em 171964v8 i r. EXHIBIT "C" Prime Time and Non -Prime Time Definitions Annual Fee Schedule Billing Class Times Rate /Hour: Months : Days Prlmetime 5-10p $ 350.00 Jan-Apr , Mon -Fri Prim etime 8a -10p $ 350.00 i Jan -Apr Sat i Primetime 8a =$0 $ 350.00. Jan - Apr Sun Off.hours All Other $ 280.00. Jan - Apr All Shoulder All $ 320.00 : Oct - Dec All 171964v8 SPORTS DOME RENTAL AGREEMENT This Rental Agreement ( "Agreement "), made and entered into this 8th day of _ October, 2013, by and between the City of Edina (the "City") and Edina Lacrosse Association (the "Club "). 1. Dates and Times. The City hereby leases to the Club and the Club hereby leases from the City 88 hours for the dome facility. The date(s) and time(s) listed on Exhibit "A" will be when the 88 hours are reserved for the Club and will be updated annually. The City and Club will work to create a mutually agreeable schedule regarding dates and times by February I" each year. In:the event an agreement cannot be reached by February I", the schedule from the previous year shall be utilized regarding the times and days of the week. 2. Term. The term of this Agreement shall be twenty (20) years commencing on October 30. 2014. - 3. Payment -Terms and Conditions. The rent to be paid the City shall.be.based on the annual fee schedule, attached as Exhibit "B ", which may be amended unilaterally by the City, for Prime Time and Non -Prime Time hours (sales tax included). However, the City will not increase the rate by more than three (3 %) percent per year. City will invoice the Club thirty (30) days in advance of the due date. Payment shall be due in advance on the first day of each month. Failure to remit payment as required on the date(s) due shall be grounds for denial of time in the dome until payment is made in full, or a payment plan is worked out between the City and Club. Club shall pay a fee of Thirty and no /100ths Dollars ($30.00) per participant by December 31" each year. Chub shall provide City with a membership list by December 315` of each year. 4. Interest. The City reserves the right to charge a 1.5% finance charge per month for any unpaid bill that extends thirty (30) days beyond the due date. 5. Definitions of Prime Time and Non -Prime Time. See Exhibit "C." 6. Assignment. Club may assign time leased in paragraph 1 above to any other club or private party that has entered into a rental Agreement with the City of Edina. In such case(s), the City will invoice the assignee directly for such time and charges. In the event assignee does not make payment as required pursuant to Paragraph 3, Club shall be responsible for the outstanding balance. 7. Cancellations. When the City is unable to provide the dome facilities due to breakdown or an act of nature, the Club will not be charged for the time scheduled on Exhibit "A" that is lost due to the breakdown or act of nature. 8. Rules and Regulations. The rules and regulations of the Sports Dome shall be 1719648 and are a part of this rental agreement as though they were set out in full herein, and are specifically incorporated as a part hereof by reference. The Club hereby acknowledges receipt of a copy of the rules and regulations currently in place and by signed addendum will acknowledge receipt of any additional rules and regulations. Violation of any of the rules and regulations by any player, volunteer or employee of the Club shall be grounds to bar future use of the Sports Dome by that person, according to the Sports Dome's zero tolerance and disciplinary action programs. 9. Indemnification and Hold Harmless. The Club shall defend, indemnify and hold the City, its officers, employees and agents harmless from and against any and all liability, loss, expense (including attorneys' fees and costs) or claims for injury or damage arising out of the performance of this Agreement, caused solely by or resulting solely from the negligent or intentional acts or omissions of the Club, its officers, directors, volunteers, agents or employees. This Release and Indemnification does not apply to intentional, willful, or wanton acts by the City. 10. Admission Fees. The Club shall have the right to charge admission for spectators for purposes of special events with prior written approval from the Sports Dome manager or appropriate. City official. Both-the City-and the Club.shall have the right to admit,-control or eject spectators during any event at the Sports Dome. 11. Insurance. The Club shall, at its own expense, provide such general liability .insurance as will protect the Club and the City from all claims for damages to property and persons, including death and the use of products, giving cause for claims or damages, which may arise from the operation of the business conducted under this Agreement or from anyone directly or indirectly employed by the Club. Such general liability insurance shall provide limits of not less than One Million Dollars ($1,000,000.00) for any.-number, of persons per occurrence injured or killed. Property damage liability, insurance, shall provide a limit of not less than Three Hundred Thousand Dollars ($300,000.00) per occurrence. The City shall be named an additional insured in said policy or policies and the; Club shall furnish to the City evidence of insurance by a certificate of insurance of required coverage. 12. Termination. The City may terminate this Agreement in the event any payment herein agreed to be made is in arrears and remains unpaid for a period of sixty (60) days after the same is due. Either the City or the Club may terminate this Agreement in the event any of the material provisions, terms or conditions of this Agreement have been violated upon giving thirty (30) days' written notice to the other party to cure the violation and of the intention to so terminate and, at the end of said thirty (30) days, all the rights of the party in breach hereunder shall terminate unless said violation is cured to the satisfaction of the party that provided notice of the intention to terminate the agreement. Such termination shall not waive the right of a party to recover damages from the other party for its failure to comply with the terms of this Agreement. The acceptance of monies due the City for any period or periods after a default of any of the terms, covenants or conditions of this Agreement shall not be deerned a waiver on the part of the City. No waiver of default by either party of any of the terrns, covenants or conditions hereof shall - be construed to be or act as 1719648 a waiver of any subsequent default of any of the terms, covenants and conditions herein contained to be performed, kept and observed. 13. Severability. If any provisions of this Agreement shall be invalid for any reason, such invalidity shall not affect the remaining provisions herein, the parties to this Agreement hereby declaring that they would have agreed to the other provisions of this Agreement notwithstanding such invalidity. WITNESSETH, the parties hereto execute this Agreement on the day of D l Y & ti , 2013. C1 NA By. Its CLUB: By: Its ?V t e7 1719648 EXHIBIT "A" Schedule of Dates and Times See Attached Proforma 1719648 EXHIBIT "B" Annual Fee Schedule 0, Cliwnt.Nnurc .. _ "`. �� :r;: October..!- 'S.Nn��mher JlDeremher .,'Zaanuanr - _:'- :Fehruary =. "March <:::. ;- :April:. - .:._a.�-,Oct- De EBA Practice EBA Legion EBA Blizzard Ball EBA Legion EBA General EBA Tryouts EHS BB /FP EFA ESC ELAX 88 2 12 10 12 12 18 22 24 64 CSC Sports Grand Total 88 16 111 116 132. 143 213 197 243 685 Revenue Total�'r' pCtohe�No�errttier p4Err11hrrJ7tluary„3Febntaryys- Y(arch�. �� Apnl s C)ct Dec -Jan Apr i {� � �"�"Ii.�'s�E.1.�Lt �—� J.��. =:si._ �.l.�rir� _:f'- v�..t' vi �:-.- .-YVYY' = vLL:3'L rrC-: _..�vN rs -a::f —r -�-. �A.a- _ -_�- 't'Y..C� F_':F�- �1_• - _ _ _ -- ELAX 29,240 640 3,840 3,200 4,200 3,920 6,160 7,280 7,680 21,560 Total $ 29,240 $ 640 $ 3,840 $ 3,200 $ 4,200 $ 3.920$ 6,160 $ 7,280 $ 7,680 $ 21,560 171964v8 EXHIBIT "C" Prime Time and Non -Prime Time Definitions Annual Fee Schedule Billing Class Times Rate /Hour Months Days Primetime 5 -10p $ 350.00 Jan - Apr Mon -Fri Primetime 8a -10p $ 350.00 Jan - Apr Sat Primetime Ba -5p $. 350.00 Jan - Apr Sun Off hours All Other $ 280.00 Jan - Apr All Shoulder All $ 320.00 Oct - Dec All 171964v8 r�l OUTDOOR ICE RENTAL AGREEMENT This Rental. Agreement ("Agreement"), made and entered into this 8th day of _ October, 2013, by and between the City of Edina (the "City") and the Edin; Hockev. Association (the "Club "). 1. Dates and Times. The City hereby leases to the Club and.the Club hereby leases from the City 40 hours/week for the.,Outdoor Ice facility November 1— the Minnesota Hockey ..._ State_ Tournament, weather..dependent....The days) and time(s) listed.on Exhibit `.`A" wil.Lbe when the 40 hours/week'are reserved for the Club and will be updated annually. The City and Club will work to create a mutually agreeable schedule regarding dates and times by February I St each year. In ahe event an agreement cannot be reached by February l ", the schedule from the previous year shall -.be utilized regarding the times and days of the week.. 2.- Term. The term of this Agreement shall be twenty (20) years commencing on October 30, 2014. - - 3.- - - - Payment Terms and Conditions: The rent to be paid the City shall be based on the annual fee schedule, attached as Exhibit "B ", which may be amended unilaterally by the City, for Prime Time and Non - Prime Time hours (sales tax included). However, the City will not increase the -rate by more than three (3 %) percent per year. City will invoice the Club thirty (30). days in advance of the due date. Payment shall be due in advance on the first day of each month. o+\ - `� Failure to remit payment as required on the date(s) due shall be grounds for denial of time ink �,'V' until payment is made in full, or a payment plan is worked out between the City and Club. f``�, 4. Interest. The City reserves the right to charge a 1.5% finance charge per month for any unpaid bill that extends thirty (30) days beyond the due date. 5. Definitions of Prime Time and Non -Prime Time. See Exhibit "C." 6. Assignment: Club may assign time leased in paragraph 1. above to any other, club or private party that has entered into a rental Agreement with the City of Edina. In such case(s), the. City will invoice the: assignee directly for such time and charges. In the event assignee doe_ s not make payment as required pursuant to Paragraph 3, Club shall be responsible for the outstanding balance. 4 - 7.. Cancellations. When the City is unable to provide the outdoor rink facilities due to breakdown, unsafe ice conditions and temperature of -15 below and wind chill of -25 below, or an act of nature,. the Club will not be charged for the time scheduled that is lost due to the breakdown or act of nature. 8. Rules and Regulations. The rules and regulations of the Outdoor Arena shall be and are a part of this rental agreement as though they were set out in full herein, and are specifically incorporated as a part hereof by reference. The Club hereby acknowledges receipt of 1719648 a copy of the rules and regulations currently in place and by signed addendum will acknowledge receipt of any additional rules and regulations. Violation of any of the rules and regulations by any player, volunteer or employee of the Club shall be grounds to bar future use of the Outdoor Arena by that person, according to the Outdoor Arena's zero tolerance and disciplinary action programs. 9. Indemnification and Hold Harmless. The Club shall defend, indemnify and hold the City, its officers, employees and agents harmless from and against any and all liability, loss, expense (including attorneys' fees and costs) or claims for injury or damage arising out of the performance of this Agreement, caused solely by or resulting solely from the negligent or intentional acts or omissions of the Club, its officers, directors, volunteers, agents or employees. This Release and Indemnification does not apply to intentional, willful, or wanton acts by the City. 10. Admission Fees. The Club shall have the right to charge admission for spectators for purposes of special events with prior written approval from the Arena manager or appropriate City official. Both the City and the Club shall have the right to admit, control or eject spectators during any event at the Outdoor Arena 11. Insurance. The Club shall, at its own expense, provide such general liability insurance as will protect the Club and the City from all claims for damages to property and persons, including death and the use of products, giving cause for claims or damages, which may arise from the operation of the business conducted under this Agreement or from anyone directly or indirectly employed by the Club. Such general liability insurance shall provide limits of not less than One Million Dollars ($1,000,000.00) for any number of persons per occurrence injured or killed. Property damage liability insurance shall provide a limit of not less than Three Hundred. Thousand Dollars ($300,000.00) per occurrence. The City shall be named an additional insured in said policy or policies and the Club shall furnish to the City evidence of insurance by a certificate of insurance of required coverage. 12. Termination. The City may terminate this Agreement in the event any payment herein agreed to be made is in arrears and remains unpaid for a period of sixty (60) days after the same is due. Either the City or the Club may terminate this Agreement in the event any of the material provisions, terms or conditions of this Agreement have been violated upon giving thirty (30) days' written notice to the other party to cure the violation and of the intention to so terminate and, at the end of said thirty (30) days, all the rights of the party in breach hereunder shall terminate unless said violation is cured to the satisfaction of the party that provided notice of the intention to terminate the agreement. Such termination shall not waive the right of a party to recover damages from the other party for its failure to comply with the terms of this Agreement. The acceptance of monies due the City for any period or periods after a default of any of the terms, covenants or conditions of this Agreement shall not be deemed a waiver on the part of the City. No waiver of default by either party of any of the terms, covenants or conditions hereof shall be construed to be or act as a waiver of any subsequent default of any of the terms, covenants and conditions herein contained to be performed, kept and observed. 17196ava 13. Severability. 'If any provisions of this Agreement shall be invalid for any reason, such invalidity shall not affect the remaining provisions herein, the parties to this Agreement hereby declaring that they would have: agreed to the other provisions of this Agreement notwithstanding such invalidity. WITNESSETH, the parties hereto execute this Agreement on the � day of 0 2011 171964v8 CITY OF EDINA - - By: Its CLUB:-- - �c�,n� By: Its Y� 1�6 N� EXHIBIT "A" Schedule of Dates and Times Sample Weekly Schedule *Proforma is only based on confirmed rental ice from EHA *We would be able to sell additional hours. Prime Time $125 per hour Non -Prime Time $100 per hour EXHIBIT "B" EXHIBIT "C" Prime Time and Non -Prime Time Definitions Annual Fee Schedule Billing Class Times Sunday Monday Tuesday Wednesday Thursday Friday 7:30AM 1 hr EHA Sat -Sun Non - Primetime 6am - 4pm $100 Mon -Fri 8:40AM 1 hr EHA Everyday 9:50AM 1 hr EHA 11:00AM 1 hr EHA 12:10PM 1 hr EHA OPEN 1:20PM 1.5 hr SKATING 3:OOPM 1 hr EHA 4:10PM 1hr EHA EHA EHA EHA EHA EHA 5:20PM 1hr EHA EHA EHA EHA EHA EHA 6:30PM 1hr EHA EHA EHA EHA EHA EHA 7:40PM 1.5 hr Adult EHA EHA EHA EHA TEEN 9:20pm 1.5 hr Adult Adult Adult Adult Adult OPEN Adult SKATE *Proforma is only based on confirmed rental ice from EHA *We would be able to sell additional hours. Prime Time $125 per hour Non -Prime Time $100 per hour EXHIBIT "B" EXHIBIT "C" Prime Time and Non -Prime Time Definitions Annual Fee Schedule Billing Class Times Rate Days Primetime 4 -10pm $125 Mon -Fri Primetime lam - 10pm $125 Sat -Sun Non - Primetime 6am - 4pm $100 Mon -Fri Non - Primetime 10pm - Midnight $100 Everyday 171964v8 Saturday EHA EHA EHA EHA EHA OPEN SKATING EHA EHA EHA EHA EHA (EBA) Edina Baseball Assoc (EFA) Edina Football Assoc (ESC) Edina Soccer Club (ELA) Edina Lacrosse Assoc Athlet .Ssociation Participation Numbers 2013 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008 2007 2006 2005 2004 2003 2002 2001 1207 1307 1451 1415 1358 1388 1306 1196 1203 1165 1142 780 1000 650 700 800 850 880 814 701 697 697 739 825 758 - 650 778 1 757 1 775 1 730 635 1 675 1 651 1 665 1 664 f 701 1 575 1 400 400 552 1 463-1 507 435 1 393 . 338 1 338. 1 239 1 236 1 280 1 200 1 200 1 NA Edina Sports Dome — Feasibility Study — Location Phase G u R i oG HAM Braemar Athletic Field Location June 24, 2013 Consultant Team: Park and Recreation Consultants (PARC) Cuningham Group Architecture, Inc. (CGA) Anderson- Johnson Associates (AJA) Purpose As follow -up to the feasibility study of a Sports Dome in Edina, the Consultant Team was asked to explore the possibility of locating a Sports Dome on the City-owned property north Cuningham Group of the Braemar ice arena, including the Braemar Park Athletic Field and other park land. This Architecture, Inc. memo and attached images are the result of this study. St. Anthony Main Process 201 Main Street 5E The consultant team met with Ann Kattreh of Edina Parks and Recreation to review the site Suite 325 and discuss possible options for locating a seasonal dome, some including space allowing for Minneapolis, MN a future outdoor refrigerated ice sheet. Diagrams were generated, reviewed for pros and cons, 55414 and narrowed down to two options. Site data available to the team was not all up -to -date. Thus, the topographic data used was assembled from information from the City, drawings Tel: 612 379 3400 from the athletic field and the Hornet's Nest construction, and on -site observations. This Fax: 61 2 379 4400 information has made it possible to perform preliminary analysis of the site's existing three- www.cuningham.com dimensional features and use these to determine order -of- magnitude costs. Planning also utilized available information related to zoning, fire code and engineering, and was augmented, late in the process, with a preliminary discussion with the Fire Marshall. If/when the project moves forward into design, further conversations will be necessary. Approach to Study Several aspects of the site were of immediate concern in potential use for a dome: width constraints, including existing buildings, grade, retaining walls and potentially protected wooded slopes. The approach taken has been to study the feasibility and costs associated with a specific dome /field width, then consider alternatives that could be taken further during a future design phase. The emphasis of this study has been feasibility, rather than refinement of a design. Site Characteristics See aerials and photos of existing site, on pages 1-3 of Exhibits document. The existing lighted' athletic field is in a `bowl' defined by buildings and grade on south and east side, a tree- covered slope on east, and a ridge with playground and memorial picnic pavilion on north. The field is approximately 7' below the floor elevation of the ice arena buildings, with sloping grass area on all sides, together with a few retaining walls. Further north is a steep slope down to the Courtney ball field complex. There is a rapid drop -off in the northeast comer, also covered with trees and sluubs. COT CUNINGHAM Site Plan Layout G R o u P Different layouts were considered to maximize what could be included on site, working within the given constraints. Four options were initially considered. See diagrams on p. 4 of Exhibits document Option B (smaller ice - sheet) was set aside in favor of Option C, as it is effectively included within Option C. Option D (East -West orientation) was eliminated because it displaces as many as 50 existing' parking spots. Options A and C were studied further to establish costs. Basic Program: • 230' x 400' dome with 10' clearance on all sides for snow removal. This width/length provides fora 200' x 320' soccer /athletic field wrapped by a walking track, with space at ends for batting cages. • Enclosure for mechanical equipment and off - season storage of some dome components. . • Fire department access from west and from southeast comet (drive adjacent to east . arena). A'longer drive up the east;side may be required. • 2400 sf Lobby /Support building connected to the dome but not to other buildings • Drop -off within existing parking lot,'near Lobby /Support Options: • Allowance for 85' x 200''outdoor ice „sheet (Option C) • Dome width of 250' to allow for a 220' wide soccer field (15' each side for walkway and buffer) Sustainability Add -ons. • A higher insulating value for Dome can be achieved via an additional fabric liner. This more'than doubles the R- value, from approximately R1.5 to R4 • Energy efficient, and long - lasting lighting: the technology is evolving rapidly and it is expected that LED fixtures equivalent to the industry- standard .1000W metal halides will be available, and would be utilized Givens and Assumptions for utilization of site: (based on cost and importance to City): • East boundary. for development is the wooded edge, to. avoid triggering substantial Watershed requirements • Existing drives may serve Dome traffic • Existing parking may serve the Dome and should not be reduced in quantity • 50'.separation should be maintained between Dome and buildings to meet fire code requirements • Playground may be eliminated. Relocation would be a plus • Retain hill with mature oaks west of rnid -field Three Dimensional Impact — Earthwork, Retaining Walls, Demolition The current field's flat area must be widened and lengthened for a dome and support features, for both proposed dome widths. To minimize exported soils, the elevation of the field would be raised 34'. Existing features affected include the playground and the picnic gazebo north of the athletic field, the stepped concrete seating at the west edge of the existing field, the light poles, and some of the natural' features at east and west. In all options, the playground, gazebo and seating are eliminated. Lights would need to be removed and replaced. Edina Sports Dome— Feasibility Study— Braemar Park Athletic Field Location Report— Page 2 Preliminary grading plans were developed to determine rough grading volumes, potential retaining wall heights, and impact on adjacent features. See diagrams on pages S -7 of Exhibits document. Summary of Impacts: All options: • AJA is quite confident that stormwater issues can be addressed, most likely with a holding area within the dome footprint. • Fire Code requires that combustible vegetation be removed within 30' on all sides during the period when the membrane structure is up. The impact will be mowing grass and clearing leaves, and some tree branches within that zone, but will also include removal of some trees, particularly at the southeast corner. Option A -230' and A -250' widths: • Extended width and length requires grading and some retaining walls. The dome does not cross the ridge between the soccer /athletic and ball fields in the two versions of Option A. • Wider dome, from 230' to 250', increases grading and retaining walls somewhat, but the primary costs are related to 8,000 additional square feet of turf and dome area. • Although diagrams do not show a drive lane at the east edge of the dome, a modest shift of the dome north would permit a drive to be added, as in C options. Costs do reflect the additional paving. Option C — 230' and 250' widths: • Extension of flat Dome area north due to ice sheet requires substantial regrading work and a retaining wall as high as 10' at north/northeast comer. Extra width increases the impact, as shown in earthwork and retaining wall costs. • Lobby /Support building was located to the west of the dome. Some ramping is needed to make a more rapid transition to the parking area. • Scope was included for a 25' drive lane at the east edge of the dome. Order of Magnitude Costs Based on the preliminary grading plan, the consultant team developed `order of magnitude' costs specific to each option to use in connection with an estimate for basic dome development costs. The spread among the options is surprisingly small. Option A -250' width Option A -230' width Option C -250' width* Option C -230' width* *Estimates for C -250 and C -230 do not include any ice sheet costs. $5.6 -5.8M $5.3 -5.6M $5.7 -6.OM $5.4 -5.6M CUNINGHAM G R O U P Edina Sports Dome —Feasibility Study— Braemar Park Athletic Field Location Report — Page 3 Notes: These are rough costs and.some assumptions have been conservative, as current C U N I N G H A M information was not available for some components.The range shown addresses the potential G R o U P of additional costs. These include $100,000 for the more energy efficient double liner, and $150,000 if existing field lights are upgraded as part of the project. Sustainability Add -on Costs A higher insulating value for Dome can be achieved via an additional fabric liner. This more than doubles the R- value, from approximately R2 to,,R4.5. Approximate upcharge for the additional liner: $75,0004100,000 Increase in annual installation cost (more fabric to handle) $2,000 Annual energy savings (estimated) ($20- 30,000). Another option to consider for sustainability is a Tedlar coating for the dome fabric, which runs $1.50 /sf, or approximately $100,000. It will extend the life of the membrane by about five years, approximately $20,000 /year less than the pro -rated cost of a new membrane for each of those five years. Operational Issues PARC has reviewed the options at the Braemar Athletic Field site for differences to the assumptions in their 1/26/12 study. An addendum.to their stiidy:is included with this report, and dated 6/18/2013. Conclusions The site development for each of the option studies indicated that each of the considered options is possible, though costs vary: The options with greater width come with greater risk of uncovering additional challenges and costs. Ii will be up to the City of Edina to select an option based.on opportunities and related costs. Next Steps — Project Development. • Decision on which option to pursue and determination of funding; • Design of project; • Before construction, because of its size and potential impact, the project will require'a site plan review, code reviews; and watershed submittal. Edina Sports Dome — Feasibility Study— Braemar Park Athletic Field Location Report — Page 4 ,i r � .; iN � r A.W 0 Photos of Existing Site Edina Sports Dome — Feasibility Study— Braemar Park Athletic Field Location Exhibits p. 3 4. Initial Options for Sports Dome: OPTION A - 230'X400' DOME OPTION B - 230'X400' DOME, 130'X65' ICE RINK OPTION C - 230'X400' DOME. 200'X85' ICE RINK OPTION D - 230'X400' DOME (ROTATED), 200'X85' ICE RINK Edina Sports Dome - Feasibility Study - Braemar Park Athletic Field Location Exhibits p. 4 5. Options for Sports Dome - Developed A & C: OPTION A - 230`X400' DOME Option A - Views showing locations of dome relative to existing buildings. Edina Sports Dome - Feasibility Study - Braemar Park Athletic Field Location Exhibits p. 5 OPTION C - 230'X400' DOME, 200'X85' ICE RINK Option C - Views of dome from Northeast, showing potential ice sheet (upper left), and additional grading at north edge: retaining walls near ball fields and in SW corner. Accessory building shown in two potential locations; costs are based on location near parking at right. Edina Sports Dome — Feasibility Study — Braemar Park Athletic Field Location Exhibits p. 6 CONSTRUCTION June 24, 2013 Braemar Soccer Field Dome Options Option A Layout (250'x 400' Dome) MINNEAPOLIS i PHOENIX / DENVER Quantities Unit Cost /Unit Dome foundations 1,300 LF $250 Dome (250'x 400') 100,000 SF $13.50 Synthetic turf field (Includes soil prep) 1 LS $926,000 Site hardscapes 1 LS $120,000 Mechanical /Electrical 100,000 SF $4 Landscaping 1 LS $40,000 Retaining walls 1 LS $30,000 Utilities 1 LS • $100,000 Earthwork 1 LS $580,000 Accessory Building 2,500 SF $250 Storage and maintenance buildings 2,500 SF $100 Contingency 7% $100 $250,000 SAC /WAC 1 $100,000 Architectural /Engineering Fees 7.5% $100,000 $100,000 7.5% Total Added Dome Liner for Higher Insulating Value Sports Lighting (4 EA) Option A Layout (230' x 400' Dome) Dome foundations Dome (230'x 400') Synthetic turf field (Includes soil prep) Site hardscapes Mechanical/Electrical Landscaping Retaining walls Utilities Earthwork Accessory Building Storage and maintenance buildings Contingency SAC /WAC Architectural /Engineering Fees Added Dome Liner for Higher Insulating Value Sports Lighting (4 EA) 100,000 SF $1.00 4 EA $37,500 Total $324,000 $1,350,000 $926,000 $120,000 $400,000 $40,000 $30,000 $110,000 $580,000 $625,000 $250,000 $330,000 $100,000 $390,000 $5,575,000 $100,000 $150,000 Quantities Unit Cost /Unit Total 1,260 LF $250 $314,000 92,000 SF $13.50 $1,242,000 1 LS $830,000 $830,000 1 LS $120,000 $120,000 92,000 SF $4 $368,000 1 LS $40,000 $40,000 1 LS $30,000 $30,000 1 LS $100,000 $110,000 1 LS $570,000 $570,000 2,500 SF $250 $625,000 2,500 SF $100 $250,000 7% $330,000 1 $100,000 $100,000 7.5% $390,000 Total $5,319,000 100,000 SF $1.00 $100,000 4 EA $37,500 $150,000 Option C Layout (250' x 400' Dome) Total $324,000 $1,350,000 $926,000 $120,000 $400,000 $40,000 $80,000 $110,000 $650,000 $625,000 $250,000 $340,000 $100,000 $400,000 $5,715,000 $100,000 $150,000 . Tota I $314,000 $1;242,000 $830,000 $120,000 $368,000 $40,000 $76,000 $110,000 $590,000 $625,000 $250,000 $320,000 $100,000 $370,000 $5,355,000 $02,000 $150,000 Quatities Cost /Unit Dome foundations 1,300 LF $250 Dome (250'x 400') 100,000 SF $13.50 Synthetic turf field (Includes soil prep) 1 LS" $926,000 Site hardscapes 1 LS $120,000 Mechanical /Electrical 100,000 SF $4 Landscaping 1 LS $40,000 Retaining walls 1 LS $80,000 Utilities 1 LS $100,000 Earthwork 1 LS $650,000 Accessory Building 2,500 SF $250 Storage and maintenance buildings 2,500 SF $100 . Contingency 7% SAC /WAC 1 $100;000 Architectural /Engineering Fees 7.5% Total Added Dome Liner for Higher Insulating Value 100,000 SF $1.00 Sports.,Lighting (4 EA) 4 EA $37,500 Option C Layout (230' x 400' Dome) Quatities Cost /Unit Dome foundations 11260 LF $250 Dome (230'x 400') 92,000 SF $13.50 Synthetic -turf field (Includes soil prep) _ 1` LS $830,000 Site hardscapes 1 LS $120,000 Mechanical /Electrical 92,000 SF $4 Landscaping: 1 LS $40,000 Retaining walls 1 LS $76,000 Utilities 1 LS $100,000 Earthwork 1 LS $590,000 Accessory Building 2,500 SF $250 Storage and maintenance buildings 2,500 SF $100 Contingency 7% SAC/WAC 1 $100,000 Architectural /Engineering Fees 7.5% Total Added Dome Liner for Higher Insulating Value 92,000 SF $1.00 Sports Lighting (4 EA) 4 EA $37,500 Total $324,000 $1,350,000 $926,000 $120,000 $400,000 $40,000 $80,000 $110,000 $650,000 $625,000 $250,000 $340,000 $100,000 $400,000 $5,715,000 $100,000 $150,000 . Tota I $314,000 $1;242,000 $830,000 $120,000 $368,000 $40,000 $76,000 $110,000 $590,000 $625,000 $250,000 $320,000 $100,000 $370,000 $5,355,000 $02,000 $150,000 The project estimates provided are based on conceptual development of facility size, components and location on site. The values that have been established are conceptual in nature, providing anticipated magnitude of costs based on historical construction cost information from previous facilities. Upon final design, bids will be recevied for all areas of work that will at that time provide more detailed and accurate construction costs. The value provided for the fire protection of the dome is based on a water deluge system that would be similar in design to the system being provided at the Braemar Golf Dome. The value for this system was developed based upon the final costs of the golf dome system, which includes a dedicated generator and utility costs for a dedicated water supply line. EDINA SPORTS DOME FINANCIAL FEASIBILITY'STUDY June 18, 2013 With the decision by the Park and Recreation Board to further explore the Braemer Park site for the future location of a proposed Sports Dome, Park and Recreation Consultants, LLC prepared an addendum to the financial.feasibility study presented on February 14, 2012. Park and Recreation Consultants, LLC are using the original pro forma based on 2012 data. However, we have modified the pro ,forma in two instances. One, the replacement life of the artificial turf has been extended from 10 to 12 years and two; we increased the cost of utilities to account for the additional 8000 square feet_ of the dome. The results of these two modifications will increase the cost of utilities by $7,000 and the renewal /replacement line item by $3,136 annually for years 1 -12 and $7,681 in years 13 -15. According to information from dome suppliers, if the City accepts the optional added membrane at an additional cost of $100,000, utilities could be decreased by $20,000 430,000 annually and increase the cost of,putting.up and taking down the dome by approximately $4,000. per'year. As noted in the 2012 study, one of the performance risks was competition from the privately owned Champions Hall sports facility located at 7000 Washington Avenue in Eden Prairie. Champions Hall is located only. °half mile and minutes from Edina's' proposed site. The Hall is already operational and has trampoline, pickle ball; table tennis, and volleyball organizations renting the facility. The 290 x 200 square foot turf field area is scheduled to be completed by August 201.3 and will be competing for rentals with the City of:Edina. Therefore, before the City proceeds, we strongly urge the City follow through'on the study's recommendations as restated below: 1. Park and Recreation staff should meetwith:the representatives "of .the Soccer Club, Lacrosse Association, Edina High School:and'the Baseball Association to commit to an actual 2013 -14 schedule of 8.20 hours of the full dome, before moving forward with any final recommendation toy the City Council. 2. Park and Recreation staff should meet with the representatives of the Nevers Baseball, Simon Soccer, and St. Louis Park Soccer Association to complete an actual 2013 -14 schedule. The City should also attempt to secure commitments from others of sufficient hours to ensure revenues would exceed operational and replacement costs, before moving forward with any final recommendation to the City Council. 3. The business plan should include a long -term strategy for the development of programs and services that will use non -prime daytime hours. The revenues from these hours will greatly increase the long -term financial success of this facility. Park and Recreation Consultants LLC EDINA SPORTS DOME FINANCIAL FEASIBILITY STUDY June 18, 2013 4. The business plan should include a strategy that develops a strong relationship with non - resident groups that are likely to be long -term renters. Turf renters that will take hours in the shoulder season ,(October- December) should be given preference for time in the peak demand periods. 5. The business plan should include a comprehensive advertising policy that addresses all park and recreation operations. 6. The City should annually review its dome rates, as upward adjustments may be required to keep pace with rising costs. In fact, due to Champions Hall's location to the Braemar site, PARC, LLC strongly encourages the City, after meeting the first two recommendations, to mitigate this issue by having all Edina youth and adult sports associations enter into a 5 year signed agreement and all private youth groups enter into a 3 year signed agreement before any serious public discussion of an Edina Sports Dome continues. As for the third recommendation, we encourage the Park and Recreation staff to immediately develop a 5 -year strategic plan to program the use of the dome with existing and proposed recreation programs during shoulder season and non -prime time hours. All the above actions will be critical in providing a solid revenue stream as well as inclusive programming for community residents. Parr and Recreation Consultants LLC Edina Dome Income Statement Prororma For Period Ending: Revenue - Year One Year Two Year Three Z% Year Four Z% Year Five - Z% Year Six 2% Year Seven 2% Year Eight. 2% Year Nine. Z% Year Ten 3 %. Year Eleven Z% Year Twelve 2% Year Thirteen 2% Fourteen 2% Year Fifteen Edina Turf Rentals $ 280,550 $ 285,000 $ 290,000 S 295,800 $ 301,716 $ 307,750 $ 313,905 $ 320,183 $ 326,587 S 333,119 $ 343,112 $ 349,975 $ 356,974 S 364,114. $ 371,396 Other Program P &Recreation 5 5,000 S 6,000 S 7,000 5 7,140 S 7,283 5 7,428 S 7,577 $ 7,729 $ 7,883. $ 8,041- $ 8,282 $ 8,448 $ 8,617 $ 8,789 $ 8,965 Vending $ 1,000 S 1,000 S 1,000 5 1,020 $ 1,040 S 1,061 $ 1,082 $ 1,104 $ 1,126 $ 1;149 S 1,183 -$ 1,207 S 1,231 $ 11256 $ 1,281 Operating Income /Net sales $ 286,550 $ 292,000 $ 298,000 S 903,960 $ 310,039 $ 316,240 $ 322,565 - $ 329,016 $ 335,596 $" 342,308 $ 352,578. - $.959,629 9,000 S $ 366,822 $. 374,158 $• 381,641 - Expenses $ 241,024 $ 247,530 $ 249,586 Year One Year Two Year Three 3 %- Year Four 3% Year Five. 3% Year Six. j%" Year Seven- 3% Year Eight .3% Year Nine.- 3 %- .Year Ten 3% Year Eleven -3% Year Twelve 3% Year Thirteen 3% Fourteen 3% Year Fifteen Full Time $ 21,240 S 21,880 $ 22,536 $ 23,212 - $ 23,908 - S 24,626 - $ 25,364` - $ 26,125 $ 26,909 $ 27,716 $ 28,548 $ 29,404- $ 30,286 $ 31,195 $ 32,131 Part Time -$ 25,500 S 26,500 $ Z7,0D0 $ 27,810 - S 28,644 - S 29,504 S 30,389- $ 31,300 .$ 32,239 - $. 33,207 $ 34,203 5 35,229 $ 36,286 $ 37,374 $ 38,496 Benefits - $ 7,434 S' 7,500 $ 7,600 S 7,828 S. 8,063 $ 8,305 S 8,554 _ _$ 8,810 S 9,075 $ 9,347 $ 9,627 $ 9,916 $ 10,214 $ 10,520 S 10,836 " Other Payroll Costs $ 3,100 S - 3,200 S 3,300 S 3,399 S 3,501 5 .3,606 $ 3,714 5 3,826 S 3,940 $ 4,059 $ 4,180 $ 4,305 $ 4,435 $ 4,56B S 4,705 Prof Services $ 9,000 S 8,000 S 8,000 $ 8,240 5 8,4871 S -- 8,74Z S 9.004 $ 9,274,. $ 91552 59,839 $ - 10,134 $ 10,438 $ 10,751 5 . 11,074 S 11,406 ;Training $ 300 $ 300 S 300 S 309. S 318'. S 328 $ 338 - 5 348' $ 358 $ 369 $ 380 $ .391 S 403 5 415 S 428 Dues and Subscriptions S 100 S 100 $ 100 S 100 S 103 S 106 $ 109 .5 113 $ 116 $ 119' $ 123 $ '127 S 130 S 134 S 138 - Mileage or Allowance - S Z50 S 250 $ 250 S 258 S 265 $ 273 - $. 281 $ 290 $ 299 - S 307 S 317 - 5 326` S 336 S 346 $ 356 Pm Services Audit $ 700 S 700 S - 700 $ 721 $ 743 $ 765 S - 788 $ .., 811 $ 836 S 861 S 887 $ - 913_ S 941 $ 969 5 998 - Contracted Repairs $ - S 2,000 $ 2,000 - . $ 2,060 $ 2,122 $ 2,185 $ 2,251 -$ 2,319 $ 2,388 $. 2,460 $ 2,534 $ 2,610 S 2,688 $ 2,768 Rubbish Removal .$ 300 $ ,300 $ 300 $ 309 $ 318 ,. $ 328 $ -338 S 348 $ 358 $ 369 $ 380 $ 391$ 403 S 4155 428 Light and Power $ 38,500 $ 38,500 $ 38,500- $ 39,655 S 40,845 S 42,070 S 43,33Z $' 44,632 $ 45,971 $ 47,350 $ 48,771 S 50,234 $ 51,741 - $ 53,293 $ 54,892 Heat $ 77,000 5 77,000 S 77,000 - 5 79,310 S 81,689 $ 84,140 S 86,664 $ - 89,264 $ 91,942 $ 94,700 $ 97,541. 5 100,468 $ 103,482 $ 106,586 _ 5 - - 109,784 Telephone S 300 $ 300. $ 300 S 309 5 318 S 328. $ 338 S 348 S 358 $ 369 $ 380 $ 391 S 403 $ 415 $ 428 Sewer/ Water $ 300 S 300- S 300 $ 309 $ 318 $ 328 $ . 338 - $ 348 5 358 $ 369 $ 380 $ 391. $ 403 $ 415 S 428 - Security $ 1,800 $ 1,800 $. 1,800 S 1,854 $ 1,910 $ 1,967 S 2,026 $ 2,087 S 2,149 $ 2,214 S 2,280 S 2,349 S 2,419 - $ 2,492 S 2,566 - Dome Set Up /Take Down S 35,D00 $ 35,500 S, 36,000 S ", 37,080 S 38,192 $ 39,338 S 40,518 S 41,734 S 42,986 S 44,275 S 45,604 S 46,972 $ .48,381 S 49,832 S 51,327 Service Contracts Equip $ 6,000 $ 8,000 S - 8,000 S 8,240 S 8,487 S - 8,742 $ 9,004 $ 9,274 $ 9,552 $ 9,839 $ 10,134 S 10,438 $ 10,751 $ 11,074 S .11,406. - General Supplies ' S 1,500 $ 1,500 S. 1,500 $ 1,545 $ 11591 $ 1,639 $ 1,688 $ 1,739 $ 1,791 $ 1,845 $ 1,900 $ 1,957 $ 2,016 - $ 2,076 $ _2,139 Cleaning Supplies - S 500 $ 500 $ SOD $ 515 S 530 $ 546 $ 563 5 580 S 597 S -615 S 633 $ 652 $ '672 ` $ 692' S 713 Office Supplies $ 250 $ 250 S 250 $ 258 $ 265 $ Z73 S 281 $ 290 S 299 $ 307 $ .317 $ 326 $ 336 $ 346 - $ •- 356 „ Printing 5 500 $ 500 $ 500 $ 515 $ - 530 $ 546 $ 563 S 580 5 597 $ 615 $ 633 $ 652 $ 672 $ 692 $. 713. Postage - $ 250 $ 250 $ 250 $ 258 S 265 $ 273 $ 281 $ 290 5 299 $ 307 5 317 $ 326 $ 336 $ 346 $ - 356 Central Services Personal S 4,200 S 4,40D S 4,600, S 4,738 $ 4,880 $ 5,027 S" 5,177 - $ 5,333 $ 5,493 $ 5,657 $ 5,827 S 61002 $ 6,182 S 6,367 5 6,559 Dome Insurance $ 8,000 S 8,000 $ 8,000 - S 8,240 $ 8,487 $, 8,742 - S 91004 5 9,274 S 9,552 S 9,839 S 10,134 $ 10,438. $ 10,751 S 11,074 $ - 11,406 Total Operating Expenses - $ 241,024 $ 247,530 $ 249,586 $ 257,071 - $ 264,783 $ 272,726 $ 280,908 $ 289,335 $ 298,015 $ 306,956 $ 316,164 $ 325,649- - $ 335,419 $ 345,481'• $ 355,846. - Net Operating Income (loss) ; S 45,526 S 44,470 $ 48,414 . $ 46,889 $ 45,257 $ 43,514 $ 41,657 $ 39,681 $ 37,581 $ 35,353 $ 36,413 5 33,980 $ 31,403 $. 28,677 S 25,196 Other Revenue & Expenses Year One Year Two Year Three ?3% Year Four. 3% Year Five 3% Year Six 3% Year Seven 3% Year Eight 3% Year Nine -:3% Year.Ten 3% Year Eleven 3% Year Twelve 3% .Year Thirteen -3% Year Fourteen 3% Year Fifteen General Fund Support Transfer In - - - - - Renewal /Replacement $ (127,300) S: (127,300) $ 1127,300) $ 1127,300) S (127,300) $ (127,300) $ (127,3001 $ (127,300) _$ (127,3001 S (127,300) S (127,300), - S (127,300) - $ (152,700) $ (152,700) $ (152,700) Capital Improvements Other Income Total Other Income &Expense $ (127,300) $ (127,300) $_(127,300) $ (127,300) $ (127,300) $ (127,300) $ (127,300) $ (127,300) $ (127,300) $(127,300) S (127,300), $;(127,300). $ (152,7001 $'(152,700) $'1152,700) Net Profit(Loss) $ (81,774) $ (82,830) $ 178,8861 $ (80,411) $ (82,043) - $ (83,786) $ 185,643) $ (87,619) $ .(89,719) $° (91,947) $ (90,887) r $ (93,320) $ (121,297) S (124,023) $ (126,904) Fund Balance as of Beg of Year $ - $ (81,774) $ 1164,604) $ (243,490) $ (323,901) $ (405,944) $ (489,730) $ (575,373) $ (662,993) $ (752,7111 S (844,659) - S (935,546) $(1,028,566) $(1,149,863) 5(1,263,886) Fund Balance as of End Year S (81,774) S (164,604) $ (243,490) $ (323,901) $ (405,944) $ (489,730) S (575,373) $ (662,993) $ (752,711) $ (844,659) S (935,546) $(1,028,566) $(1,149,863) � S (1,263,886) $(1,390,790) 6/24/2013 To: MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL From: Scott H. Neal, City Manager Date: October 14, 2013 Subject: Ordinance No. 2013 -10 Regarding Chapter 9 Liquor Action Requested: Adopt Ordinance No. 2013 -10 Regarding Chapter 9 Liquor A, ode �.1�� Agenda Item #: VIII. B. Action Discussion ❑ Information ❑ Information I Background: City Code section 900.08 prohibits any single person or entity from possessing more than three On Sale Intoxicating Liquor Licenses simultaneously. This municipal code provision was common during the regulatory era when State Statute proscribed a defined number of On Sale licenses to city governments based on population. The intent of the provision was to limit any one person or business entity from controlling a majority of the available On Sale liquor licenses in a city. When that.element of State Statute was eliminated in 1990's, many cities deleted the provision of their codes. The City has been approached by Parasole with a request to eliminate the liquor license limit in 900.08. If the provision is eliminated, Parasole plans to make application for an On Sale Intoxicating Liquor License as part of a plan to open a new restaurant in Edina in 2014. I have reviewed this request with City staff and the City Attorney. We support the request to eliminate section 900.08 from City Code. We recommend the City Council adopt Ordinance No. 2013 -10. Further, we recommend the Council consider waiving second reading to make the amendment to the Code effectively immediately. ATTACHMENTS: Ordinance No. 2013 -10 City of Edina • 4801 W. 501h St • Edina, MN 55424 ORDINANCE NO. 2013 -13 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE EDINA CITY CODE CONCERNING LIQUOR THE CITY OF EDINA ORDAINS: Section 1. Section 900.08 of the Edina City Code is hereby amended by deleting Paragraph M. - ru - - - - - - MR Section 2. This ordinance is effective immediately upon its passage and publication. First Reading: Second Reading: Published: Attest Debra A. Mangen, City Clerk Doc. #172687v.1 RNK: 9/30/2013 James B. Hovland, Mayor To: MAYOR & COUNCIL From: Debra Mangen City Clerk Date: October 14, 2013 Subject: Resolution No. 2013 -104 Accepting Various Donations Action Requested: Adopt Resolution. Information / Background: u 9" E,;�3 Lt-7,-- Agenda Item #: VIII. C. Action Discussion ❑ Information ❑ 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 -104 City of Edina • 4801 W. 50Th St • Edina, MN 55424 RESOLUTION NO. 2013-104 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: 50th & France Business Assn. $1,5000 Nancy Ward Jim Bentle Lisa Wang Wallace Carlson Printing Donna Dehn Edina Park & Recreation Department: Edina Baseball Association $23,128.00 Kelodale Garden Club $2000.00 Energy & Environment Commission $1,058.00 Edina Community Foundation $200.00 Sign Pro Edina Signage Starbucks 3939 West 50`h Street Coffee Dated October 14, 2013 Attest: Debra A. Mangen, City Clerk 12 Fireboxes and Raku Glaze Sticks Bundle Of Loose Frames Kiln Donation Discount On 2013 Juried Show Program Printing Griffin Grip Pottery Tool Countryside & Garden Parks' Baseball Field Warning Track Additions Edina Art Center Buckthorn Removal, Noxious Weed Control & Planting Of Native Plants Planting Three Trees At Lewis Park Barnyard Boogie Event Barnyard Boogie Event Barnyard Boogie Event James B. Hovland, Mayor To: MAYOR AND COUNCIL From: Debra Mangen City Clerk Date: October 14, 2013 Subject: CORRESPONDENCE Action Requested: Attached is correspondence received since the last Council Meeting. No action is requested. w9� A,r� C, Ce:. V1 v � �y 1BB8 Agenda Item #: IX. A. City of Edina • 4801 W. 50th St. • Edina, MN 55424 Action ❑ Discussion ❑ Information Deb Mangen From: Josh Garber <joshuaadamgarber @gmail.com> Sent: Monday, October 07, 2013 10:30 PM To: Edina Mail Subject: No Freight Rail Re -Route James - Hovland, As you know, there are currently 8 options to resolve the freight rail issue. There are 6 co- location options (freight rail and light rail in Kenilworth freight rail corridor) and 2 re- location options (freight rail re- routed through heart of St. Louis Park neighborhood on two story berms that require the destruction of multiple homes and businesses as well as running directly next to hundreds of homes and multiple schools). Here's a quick breakdown.of the facts. • 5 of the 6 co- location options are less expensive than the re- location options o The least expensive option is to adjust the bike trail for $35M (re- route options are +$200M) • Co- location does not require the acquisition and destruction of homes o Re -route requires the acquisition and destruction of numerous homes Co- location does not require the acquisition and destruction of businesses o Re -route requires the acquisition and destruction of numerous businesses • Co- loaction will run freight rail at grade "level o Re -route requires freight rail to run on two story berms • Co- location will not run freight rail next to any schools o Re -route requires freight rail to run next to multiple schools ■ One option takes out the.SLP football field while the other option takes out a school playground • Co- location will provide a significantly larger right -of -way to home property lines o Re -route requires freight rail to run very close to homes • Co- location will run freight on straight rail lines o Re -route requires freight to run a curved rail lines • Co- location will continue running freight traffic in a freight rail corridor o Re -route will move freight traffic to the heart of a.St. Louis Park neighborhood on two story berms Based on the facts that co- location-is less expensive, doesn't require the destruction of homes and businesses, can run at grade level, will not run next to multiples schools, has a larger right -of -way, runs on straight rail lines and will continue to keep freight rail traffic in a freight rail corridor, i see no reason to keep the 2 re- location options on the table. I encourage you to advocate for .the immediate removal for the re- location options. Thank you for you valuable time. I appreciate your attention and dedication to resolving this issue in the.best interests of the Twin Cities and Minnesota. Josh Garber 1 Deb Mangen From: Katherinemcmanus <kathedne @itreasures.biz> Sent: Sunday, October 06, 2013 3:00 PM To: Edina Mail Suboct: Remove Brunswick Central from Consideration Dear Mayor Hovland, We want to thank you for your efforts on the Corridor Management Committee. Your calls to know the pros and cons of all eight freight rail options is important to the entire metro area, but especially important to the residents of St. Louis Park. As you are well aware, four of the six co- location options were shelved because of property acquisitions, above grade structures and community opposition. Despite repeate requests by St. Louis Park residents for fair and equal treatment by the Southwest Planning Office (SPO) the Brunswick Central relocation option remains on the table. Our concern is that if co- location is chosen and then in a few months it is determined that the tunneling options are technically impossible, the Met Council, with no other options on the table, will consider Brunswick Central the only option. The children and community of St. Louis Park need to be treated with the same respect as all the other communities on the SWLRT line and your request for more information has that effect. Thank you for your very visible support for the community of St. Louis Park! Katherine & Damian McManus 3106 Zarthan Avenue S. St. Louis Park, MN 55416 Deb Manaen From: Steven J. Timmer <stimmer @planetlawyers.com> Sent: Tuesday, October 01, 2013 9:00 PM To: Edina Mail Cc: carrfran @gmail.com Subject: the hitching posts ... To: Mayor Hovland, members of the Council, City Manager Neal, and members of the Public Works Department Ladies and Gents, One of the things I really did not focus on last evening — because I was absorbed by the location of the footprint of the project and the width of the sidewalk,.and the need to leave because of an illness in my family.— was the hitching posts. In thinking about them, though, there is no water trough for the horses to drink from while tied there and their owners have taken the bus downtown. This is, of course, a serious oversight and it is also potential animal cruelty. Seriously, or as seriously as one can take such a foolish idea,- if a bike rack is needed, put it next to the creek, where it can serve double duty, or in Utley Park, not on a private property owner's lawn. There.must be limits, even to the rapacity of the Public Works Department. It has perhaps also escaped everyone's attention that you can take you bike with you on the bus. The proposal for bus stop pads and the hitching posts is completely ludicrous. I looked at scenario two for the west end of the street last night, and thought to myself: this isn't perfect, but we can probably work with it. But it is as though the basic idea had to pass through one more review: the Ugly Committee. And the Ugly Committee said, "No way, there are not nearly enough geegaws and claptrap for us to sign off. Come back when it is offensive enough to suit even us. So let it be written; so let it be done." And it was. There are many reasons why the bus stop pads and hitching posts are a bad. idea. First, the pads are just more unnecessary impervious surface. I still stand in slack -jawed awe of building more impervious surface.andthen having to figure out away to deal with the extra runoff. Not that the proposed runty. little ponds are likely to do it. It is also altogether likely that the one person waiting for the bus can manage to squeeze on to the sidewalk. The hitching posts.will also be a hazard to navigation for pedestrians in times of low visibility, or for pedestrians with vision or attention span limitations. Has anyone every walked into a parking meter? It is actually pretty easy to do. These . would be easier. Or for a younger child riding a bike on the sidewalk (they do that, you know) to ilit.-I'll bet the city's sidewalk snowplow operators would love 'em, too. But there is another even more serious problem with the bus stop pads and the hitching posts. They are not within -the scope of the right of way grant by the platter of South Harriet Park. If the right of way is unlimited, then the city could as well set up a series of slender travelers' aid stations or city enterprise lemonade stands in the right of way. Clearly, it cannot. If the city is really serious about these things, then I submit it better get an iron -clad, no- escape legal opinion from the city attorney that it may usurp private property owners' property in this way. And I'd be very interested to see it. Sincerely, Steve Timmer Steve Timmer stimmerC@Planetlawyers.com 1 ,. 3 Deb Manaen From: Josh Garber <joshuaadamgarber @gmail.com> Sent: Tuesday, October 01, 2013 9:20 PM - To::. Edina Mail Subject: Freight Rail Solution Jim Hovland, THANK YOU FOR YOUR LEADERSHIP ON THIS - IMPORTANT ISSUE! There are 8 options to resolve the freight rail issue that's impacting the future of the 'Southwest.Light -Rail Corridor. The logical choice, and least expensive choice, is to MOVE A SMALL SECTION OF THE BIKE TRAIL however here are all 8 options and the costs associated with each option. Co- Location Options 1. Relocate a section of the bike trail. in the Kenilworth freight rail corridor. Avoids residential property acquisitions. $35M. 2. Elevate a section of the -bike trail in the Kenilworth freight rail corridor.. Avoids residential•property acquisitions. $50M. 3. All modes (freight, light rail, trail) run at grade level in the Kenilworth freight rail corridor. Residential property acquisition = 32. $50M. 4. Light rail elevated in the Kenilworth freight rail corridor. Avoids residential property acquisitions. $105M. 5. Light rail ,in a shallow tunnel in the Kenilworth freight rail corridor. Avoids residential property, acquisitions. $150M. 6. Light rail in a deep tunnel in the Kenilworth freight rail corridor. Avoids residential property acquisitions. $320M. Re- Location Options 7. Re -route freight trains from Kenilworth freight rail corridor and run them through a quiet residential St. Louis Park neighborhood on two story elevated berms. Requires the destruction of 46 homes and businesses, runs directly next to multiple schools, requires destruction of St. Louis Park football field, requires construction of freight rail bridge structures, requires reconfiguration of Highway 7 and local roads. $210M. 8. Re -route freight trains -from Kenilworth freight rait-corridor and run them through a quiet residential St. Louis Park neighborhood on two -story elevated berms. Requires the destruction of 32 homes and businesses, runs directly next to multiple schools, requires construction of freight rail bridge structures, requires reconfiguration of Highway 7 and local roads. $200M. The best choice, in terms of safety and financial. considerations, is to simply adjust a small section of the bike trail. The railroad companies have no concerns with this option, freight rail traffic will keep running as usual. The development of the Southwest. Light Rail project will continue as planned. The cost savings will help transportation needs of other parts of the metro: The bike trail will still exist. Up to 46 homes will be saved. The safety of the St. Louis Park students will be unharmed. Please make the logical choice and advocate to keep freight rail traffic in the Kenilworth freight rail corridor. Thank you, Josh Garber. 1 Deb Mangen From: Jean Colwell <jeancolwell13 @gmail.com> Sent Wednesday, October 02, 2013 8:30 AM To: Ann Swenson; Anne Carroll; Edina Mail; Joni Bennett; Josh Sprague; Mary Brindle (Comcast); Wayne Houle, Anne Jennen; Ann Kasid; Anne Epple; Carol Kaliebe; Dennis La France; Gary Hanus; Gloria Sullivan; Jamie Sullivan; Jim Grotz, John Adams; John Crabtree; Kathryn A Bennett; Kathryn Green; Kathryn Koessel; Kevin Green; Kris Ross; Lisa O'Brien; Lori Grotz; Lou Gilbert; Mark Epple, Mary Dykstra; Mary Ryder, Nancy Fergensen; Pam Starky; Rick Fergensen; Shari La France; Steve Jennen; Steve Timmer, Teri Whaley; Tom Brower, Trudy Hanus; Sharon Allison; Chad Millner Subject 54th Street Reconstruction Dear Mayor, City Council Members, and Engineering Department: i We attended the meeting at City Hall Monday night to view the proposedl layouts for the Reconstruction of 54th Street. Although we appreciate the chance to weigh in on the proposals we were disappointed with inaccurate renderings of plot lines and the lack of any formal way to provide feedback on Monday night other then post it notes. We were told that there would be a survey to fill out following they meeting and that the survey was only going to be available till October 5th. Because no handouts were provided and there is nothing yet on the city web site, our comments are from what we learned from the proposals shown to us on onday night. The most alarming statement we heard from a couple of city officials wac, that even though they valued the opinion of those of us who live along 54th street, they have to look at the big picture and consider everyone who uses the road. We are concerned that we will lose five to ten feet of our lawn anc driveway, our privacy, our quality of life (additional noise, closeness to moving traffic), and our house value. Thee considerations seem to be less important then providing a wider street for people accessing our neighborhood as drive through to another part of town, a faster route to Highway 100 or 62, or a by pass around 50th and France. One city official said how "unfortunate" it was that the developers at the time (1930- 1940's) built our homes so clo a to the road. There were elements of the designs that were unnecessary, such as the landing pads for bus riders and the bike racks. Our neighborhood does not need bike racks and it is out of chara ter for any residential area. Proposal One for the west side of 54th Street called for elevating the road outside our iriveway, installing storm drains that are inefficient in the winter, and even removing our neighbors garage and tr es. There seem to be no budget constraints for this project. If there is money to be spent, put it into the bridge-desigi i, using stone and natural materials that will enhance the look and feel of our neighborhood. - As for bike lanes - we have many large signs on 54th street that show 1 wonder how folks figured that out before these signs were in place. An of small signs that say "Edina shares the road" with a small bike icon u and no bike drawings painted on the road. We also notice that there -we or crosswalks. And neither bridge design included a sidewalk or an are been there and is a chance to view the beauty of the creek. We object to any proposal that is going to substantially widen the road, surfaces. Proposal Two h@d the better scenario, but-still needs refinem We are the most important "stakeholders" in this project and hope that Jean and Bryan Colwell Click here to Reply or Forward ._I way to 44th Street as a biking route. I yet, on 44th street, there are only a couple er it. There are no stripes for bike lanes no mention of speed limits for viewing the creek which has always trees, or put in more impervious will respectfully listen to our feedback. Deb Mangen From: Joel Stegner <joel.r.stegner @gmail.com> ient: Wednesday, October 02, 2013 12:48 PM to: Edina Mail Subject: Listening to the public Mayor Hovland - I ran across this article that suggests that there are some pretty interesting ways for city government to get input from ordinary citizens, without an elaborate process. While I can see issues with this specific approach, I thought its creativity might engender some new ideas as to how to better get public input, without having it take more of the precious meeting time of the City Council. Thanks, Joel Stegner Seoul government's giant ear sculpture actually listens to the public's opinion Yobosayo is a large sculpture that records the opinions of passersby and relays it over speakers in City Hall. �. -_ 2nd October 2013 in Fashion & Beauty, Government, Non - profit, Social cause. In a true democracy every citizen has a voice, but it can be the case that many don't feel like politicians actually listen to it. In order to promote itself as open to what the public has to say, the Seoul government has installed Yobosayo — a large, ear - shaped sculpture that records the opinions of passersby and relays it over speakers in City Hall. Designed by artist Yang Soo -in, the sculpture's title means `Hello?' in Korean and is situated outside City Hall, where disgruntled citizens would normally head to lodge a formal civic complaint by filling out a form. Instead, the big ear sounds a message when someone walks past, inviting them to leave a message for officials. 'Passersby can lean into the sculpture to offer criticism or praise of the government's services, their opinions on current political events or even just air their thoughts. Whatever they have to say is recorded by a microphone located inside the ear and each message is then relayed through speakers located around City Hall. Sensors on each speaker detect how many officials are listening at the time and the soundbites that attract the biggest audience are saved for posterity — hopefully for authorities to take into consideration. We've seen how Textizen in the US has been using community noticeboards and text replies to gather the views of the public, and this is another project that empowers members of the community. The project acts both as a public art installation and a quirky, engaging way for those sole voices to be heard — literally. How else can governments instil confidence that they really do serve the people by giving them a platform for direct communication with representatives? Website: www.fifethings.in Contact: lifeV ifethings.in Spotted by: Murray Orange Deb Mangen From: Peyton Robb <to- from @att.net> Sent Wednesday, October 02, 2013 1:32 PM To: .. Edina Mail Subject Robb Trees Resolved Council Members and Scott, Thank you very much for bringing a satisfactory result to my request... Peyton Robb Deb Mancien From: trisha @signumgraphics.com Sent Wednesday, October 02, 2013 5:22 PM To: JoniBennettl2 @comcast.net; JoshSprague @edinarealty.com; SwensonAnnl@gmail.com Cc: Edina Mail; Mary Brindle (Comcast) Subject: Hooten Cleaners Dear Council Members Bennett, Swenson and Sprague... I wish to give you my opinion about the Council's taking of the property belonging to the Parks family. Your actions are a disgrace to our Edina history of strong business and family life. You behaved no differently than a lynch mob. You ignored the law and your obligation of due diligence as council members. Your action will have a chilling effect on our city's ability to attract new businesses and the cavalier way you treated such fine citizens is reprehensible. I commgnd Mayor Hovland and Council Member Mary. Brindle for your prudent, lawful approach taken on this issue. I wish you had Thank u and regards, Trisha Aelson Trisha qelson l SIG•Num Graphics PO Box 2 165 1 Edina MN 55424 952 - 484 -9274 ph 1 952- 938 -5498 fax 1 Deb Manden From: Bob Strachota <value @shenehon.com> Sent: Thursday, October 03, 2013 9:59 AM To: Edina Mail; James Hovland Cc... ronpeltier @homeservices.com Subject: October 7 UST Real Estate student project - building permit Jim, On Monday, October 7, students from the University of St. Thomas Real Estate Program will be pulling a building permit for their Luxury Home Fundraising Project. All profits from the construction of this house will go towards student. . scholarships in Real Estate. The students are doing this at 11:30AM at City Hall in case you are around for a photo with the students. JMS Custom Homes is volunteering all of their services towards the construction of this home which will be in the Spring Parade... Best Regards; Bob Strachota Co -Chair of the UST Real Estate Advisory Board cc: Ron Peltier, Co -Chair UST Real Estate Advisory Board 1 Deb Man en From: Extra Mile America <extramileamerica .foundation @yahoo.com> Sent Thursday, October 03, 2013 10:01 AM To: Edina Mail Subject. From Extra Mile Day Founder, Shawn Anderson Follow Up Flag: Follow up Flag Status: Completed Dear Mayor Hovland, "Extra Mile Day" is almost here, and I'd like to introduce myself. My name is Shawn Anderson, and I am the Founder of "Extra Mile Day." As of this email, I am happy to report that 370 inspirational mayors have declared "Extra Mile Day" and are recognizing the value "extra mile" heroes have in making their local community stronger. I still have my fingers crossed that you will also honor this November 1, extra -mile date with a proclamation. "Extra Mile Day" acknowledges the power we each have to create positive change in our communities when we personally go the extra mile. Of course, it's easy to feel that our single voice doesn't matter. "Extra Mile Day," however, is about declaring the opposite. Whether it is one elected official or one non - elected government employee, whether it is one citizen, one business, or one organization... ONE going the extra mile does make a difference. When I first envisioned "Extra Mile Day" in 2009, I was pedaling a bike across the 110 degree Nevada desert as a part of an ocean-to -ocean bike ride symbolizing what it means to "go the extra mile" in life. Thankfully, our team was able to share the power of that sun - assisted vision with 23 mayors who thought the idea was pretty good. This year on November 1, we are confident that 400+ cities will join the cause and recognize those in their communities who give so generously of their time, passion, and resources to make the community stronger. I hope you give "Extra Mile Day" one final consideration; I hope that we can count on your city to make this unique declaration. (Declaration language is below.) With gratitude, Shawn Anderson Founder Extra Mile America Here is sample wording you could use in your proclamation: WHEREAS, (city, state) is a community which acknowledges that a special vibrancy exists within the entire community when its individual citizens collectively "go the extra mile" in personal effort, volunteerism, and service; and WHEREAS, (city, state) is a community which encourages its citizens to maximize their personal contribution to the community by giving of themselves wholeheartedly and with total effort, commitment, and conviction to their individual ambitions, family, friends, and community; and WHEREAS, (city, state) is a community which chooses to shine a light on and celebrate individuals and organizations within its community who "go the extra mile" in order to make a difference and lift up fellow members of their community; and WHEREAS, (city, state) acknowledges the mission of Extra Mile America to create 400 Extra Mile cities in America and is proud to support "Extra Mile Day" on November 1, 2013. NOW THEREFORE, I, Mayor of (city, state) do hereby proclaim November 1, 2013 to be Extra Mile Day. I urge each individual in the community to take time on this day to not only "go the extra mile" in his or her own life, but to also acknowledge all those who are inspirational in their efforts and commitment to make their organizations, families, community, country, or world a better place. Proclamations can be scanned and emailed to us or mailed to: -Extra Mile America Foundation 5034 Runway Drive Fair Oaks, CA 95628 PS: If you need additional information, please contact our own superstar volunteer, Christine Ott at Christine@ExtraMileAmerica.org or call her at 310- 619 -3205 Deb Man en From: Mark Bray <MARK_BRAY @edenpr.kl2.mn.us> Sent: Thursday, October 03, 2013 3:23 PM To: Edina Mail Cc: jonibennettl2 @comcast.net; swensonannl @gmail.com; Mary Brindle ( Comcast );joshsprague @edinarealty.com Subject: Chief Jeff Long Query Officer Concern Dear Chief Long, I am writing about an action of Officer D. Cizek Officer Number 178. He stopped me right at the intersection of 169 and 494. 1 had been evading an older Infiniti Q -56 that had been riding my rear bumper including bumping my much smaller convertible Chrysler Crossfire Convertible. This started on 169 North. I explained to the Officer Cizek what had been happening with several details. My 25 year old son who is a Luther Finance Manager was in the car with me as we were going downtown. When I saw the Officer's Vehicle in the middle of the road at the spot near where 494 goes West towards Eden Prairie, I slowed and the Infiniti Q -56 veered across the several lanes and went West. I could have done that if I were speeding for time sake, but I was speeding to elude the danger from the driver in the Infiniti. The officer told me when he wrote the ticket that he had written all of the details of this in his database. He saw the Infiniti on my bumper as we both came into his view and then saw the Infiniti cross several lines of traffic. My Cadillac allows me to call from my mirror, but the Crossfire has no such ability nor did I have my phone available to make such a call. We had gone to the shoulder to let the Q56 pass but it veered over to us and came up and started pushing on the Crossfire South of the spot we encountered the officer. I am being told by Hennepin County that this shows up nowhere in their notes. I would like to know if these notes are present somewhere else, or if the officer lied to me. Please advise. I am Social Studies Department Chair at Eden Prairie High School, and I am appalled if he chose to deceive me this way. Please advise. Sincerely, Mark Bray, M.Ed. Deb Manqen From: arthur higinbotham <ahiginbotham @msn.com> Sent: Thursday, October 03, 2013 9:06 PM To: O'Connell, Sam. cc: mark.fuhrmann @metc.state.mn.us; mark.fuhrmann @metrotransit.org; peter.mclaughlin; Gail.Dorfman; jan.callison; peter.rogoff fta; peter .wagenius @ci.minneapolis.mn.us; thomas Johnson @gpmlaw.com; Stuart A Chain; Eldonlohn; Jeanette Colby; jennifer.munt @metc.state.mn.us; jeff.rjohnson; slfelicity, cwreg w, Nancy Green; mikeerlandson @gmail.com; anita; lisa Goodman; David Lilly; MNRealtors; Fitzmaurice, Shelley,julieannsabo; courtneyck @comcast.net; susan.haigh; brian.lamb; brimgroup; Edina Mail Subject RE: SWLRT Open House October 10 How many Met Council members have committed to attend? Their presence is very important. There are several issues that remain unanswered if the recommendation for a shallow tunnel for the LRT is approved for presentation to the Met Council: 1. Jim Alexander keeps referring to the proposal as taking no structures or residences, but only a sliver of CLSHA property to temporarily move the freight tracks to excavate the LRT tunnel. That will move the freight rail to within 10 feet of homeowner bedroom windows for 2 years of construction, will cause many sleepless nights and sleep medication for residents, will cause increased vibrational damage to the homeowners' buildings, 7will bring noise and dust from the excavation to the entire neighborhood, and will interrupt.the run- off of rain water to CLSHA's sump in the forested area just southwest of the townhome association on association property. It will also result in the deforestation of this narrow strip, which contains many mature. trees that shield the townhomes from the noise of the freight rail and reduce the visibility of the freight to the residents. For Commissioner McLaughlin's information, there is no buckthorn in this sliver; if we find any, we will be glad to ship it to his office. The trees that shield the townhomes are controlled plantings and have reached 100 feet in height in many cases. 2. The Project Office has not responded to the Calhoun Isles Condominium concerns about the so- called abandoned 10 foot strip on their side of the corridor; where is the title? If Calhoun Isles has used this strip as a buffer from freight noise to its residents, do they not have de facto title to this strip? The Project Office has been advised that the foundations of the grain elevator tower extend three feet from the base of the tower; Jim Alexander's drawing:show -one of the tunnels coming to within one foot of the base of the tower. Is the Met Council prepared to accept liability for shifting of the tower base, including collapse of the tower? 3. The environmental impact of running 250 LRT trains and an ever increasing number of freight trains at grade across the Cedar /Isles channel has not been assessed. Users of the channel will be exposed to 1000 feet of rail traffic visible to channel users as the rail emerges from the south tunnel and re- enters the north tunnel. The concrete bridges for LRT, freight and trails will be 145 feet wide and will require channel users to pass under45.feet of concrete structure as they pass through the channel. This scenario qualifies as a worst example of urban degradation of our park system. Bury it deep! 4. Last but not least is the two year diversion of the bike and pedestrian trails onto busy city streets for the 1.4 mile length 6f the corridor. The Dean Parkway /Cedar Lake Parkway intersection is currently being reconstructed because of safety hazards to drivers and trail users; adding diverted Kenilworth trail users will make this intersection more hazardous than it was to begin with. 567,000 people use the Kenilworth corridor. today from all over Hennepin County. Working so.hard to satisfy the needs of commuters from low density suburbs to the disadvantage of trail users is a travesty: _,,... 5. Co- locating freight and light-rail through the West Lake St. station, where two light rail tracks, a freight track, pedestrian and bicycle trails and a proposed street car from Uptown will all have to be accommodated is a joke - -if it weren't part of this proposal. Even though an elevator is included in the capital costs to get riders from the Lake Street viaduct down to the station, no provision is made for bus drop -off pullouts on the bridge, nor is there any provision for access to the station from areas north of Lake Street. $1.553 billion will not get the job done. 6.. To ask municipalities for consent to this proposal before completing the preliminary engineering on the project or before complete environmental assessments are submitted has the cart before the horse. Any private corporation would toss this proposal back to the drawing board when consent decisions are requested without total informational input; the excuse that time is of the essence in view of competing new starts proposals is erroneous. What should matter is what is best for the nation's transit needs, not to slop Minnesota's hogs at the federal trough before anyone else can get their snouts into the feeder. To have unelected volunteers with no prior engineering experience making decisions on freight and LRT location is irresponsible, if not dangerous. Art Higinbotham From: sam.oconnell @metrotransit.org To: sam.oconnell @metrotransit.org Subject: SWLRT Open House October 10 Date: Fri, 4 Oct 2013 00:18:27 +0000 Good Evening SWLRT CIVIC, BAC, CAC, TPAC Members and Alternates: The Southwest LRT Project Office presented a draft recommendation for the scope and basic design of the light rail line to the project's Corridor Management Committee on October 2. The draft recommendation includes building shallow tunnels for LRT trains through the Kenilworth Corridor in Minneapolis, eliminating the proposed LRT station at 21st Street and keeping existing freight rail service in the area. We want to share with you that the Metropolitan Council will host a public open house on Thursday, October 10, 2013 to receive public input on the project office's draft recommendation for the scope and basic design of the Southwest LRT (Green Line Extension) project in Minneapolis. This open house will provide an opportunity for community members to ask questions and provide feedback on the draft recommendation before the Metropolitan Council considers it. At this open house, the, public will be able to talk with Council members and project staff one -to -one and view engineering drawings of the shallow tunnels. No testimony or formal presentations are planned; however, comment cards and sticky notes will be provided to share thoughts and ideas on the proposed plans. Please help us spread the word to others that would benefit in participating in the open house by sharing the attached flyer. Thank you and we look forward to seeing you next week. Open House Date, Time & Location: Thursday, October 10, 2013 5:30 — 7:30 p.m. Kenwood Community Center 2101 West Franklin Avenue, Minneapolis map: httg: / /-qoo.gl /maps/Tkg84 Sam O'Connell, AICP Manager I Public Involvement J sam.oconnell@metrotransit.org A. =P. 612373:3815 1 F. 612.373.3899 ': Southwest LRT Project Office METROroirT/W 6465 Wayzata Blvd :, Suite 500 1 St. Louis Park, MN 55426 1 swlrt.org C O U N C I L I CONNECT WITH US � - �.� •. � e -news Deb Mangen From: julie sabo <julieannsabo @yahoo.com> Sent Thursday, October 03, 2013 9:15 PM To: arthur higinbotham; O'Conneff, Sam Cc: mark.fuhrmann @metc.state.mn.us; mark.fuhrmann @metrotransit.org; peter. mclaughlin; Gail. Dorfman; jan. callison; peter. rogoff fta; peter.wagenius @ci.minneapolis.mn.us; thomas Johnson @gpmlaw.com; Stuart A Chazin; EldonJohn; jeanette Colby, jennifer.munt @metc.state.mn.us; jell. r.johnson; sifelicity; cwreg w; Nancy Green; mikeerlandson @gmail.com; anita; lisa Goodman; David Lilly, MNRealtors; Fitzmaurice, Shelley; courtneyck @comcast.net; susan. haigh; brian. Iamb; brimgroup; Edina Mail Subject Re: SWLRT Open House October 10 Important the Met Council members attend? What are they able or willing to do? What exactly is their intention? What are they expecting to hear that hasn't already been said over and over to them before? They have already blown the bank on Eden Prairie. Good grief! This is scheduled for after their vote, or has it been postponed again? Julie From: arthur higinbotham <ahiginbotham @msn.com> To: "O'Connell, Sam" <sam.oconnell @metrotransit.org> Cc: "mark. fu h rmann@metc. state. mn. us" <mark.fuhrmann @metc.state.mn.us >; mark.fuhrmann @metrotransit.org" < mark .fuhrmann @metrotransit.org >; peter. mclaughlin < peter .mclaughlin @co. hen nepin.mn.us >; Gail. Dorfman < gail .dorfman @co. hen nepin.mn.us >; jan. callison < jan .callison @co.hennepin.mn.us >; peter. rogoff fta <peter. rog off@dot. gov>; "peter.wagenius @ci.minneapolis.mn.us" < peter. wagenius @ci.minneapolis.mn.us >; "thomas.johnson @gpmlaw.com" < thomas.johnson@gpmlaw.com>; Stuart A Chazin <stuart@chazingroup.com >; EldonJohn <eldonjohn @hotmail.com >; jeanette Colby <jmcolby @earthlink.net >; "jenn ifer. m u nt@metc. state. mn. us" < jennifer .munt @metc. state. mn.us >; jeff. r. johnson <jeff.r.johnson @co.hennepin.mn.us >; slfelicity <slfelicity @aol.com >; cwreg w <cwreg @msn.com >; Nancy Green <nancygreenl @comcast.net >; "mikeerlandson @gmail.com" <mikeerlandson @gmail.com >; anita <anita @robtabb.com >; lisa Goodman < lisa .goodman @ci.minneapolis.mn.us >; David Lilly <dlilly @danburygroup.com >; MNRealtors <mnrealtors @aol.com >; "Fitzmaurice, Shelley" <sfitzmau @tcfbank.com >; julieannsabo <julieannsabo @yahoo.com >; "cou rtneyck@comcast. net' <courtneyck @comcast.net >; susan. haigh <susan.haigh @metc.state.mn.us >; brian. Iamb <brian. lam b @metc. state. mn.us >; brimgroup <brimgroup @aol.com >; "edinamail @ci.edina.mn.us" <edinamail @ci.edina.mn.us> Sent: Thursday, October 3, 2013 9:06 PM Subject: RE: SWLRT Open House October 10 How many Met Council members have committed to attend? Their presence is very important. There are several issues that remain unanswered if the recommendation for a shallow tunnel for the LRT is approved for presentation to the Met Council: 1. Jim Alexander keeps referring to the proposal as taking no structures or residences, but only a sliver of CLSHA property to temporarily move the freight tracks to excavate the LRT tunnel. That will move the freight rail to within 10 feet of homeowner bedroom windows for 2 years of construction, will cause many sleepless nights and sleep medication for residents, will cause increased vibrational damage to the homeowners' buildings, will bring noise and dust from the excavation to the entire neighborhood, and will interrupt the run- off of rain water to CLSHA's sump in the forested area just southwest of the townhome association on association property. It will also result in the deforestation of this narrow strip, which contains many mature trees that shield the townhomes from the noise of the freight rail and reduce the visibility of the freight to the residents. For Commissioner McLaughlin's information, there is no buckthorn in this sliver; if we find any, we will be glad to ship it to his office. The trees that.shield the townhomes are controlled plantings and have reached 100 feet in height in many casess. 2. The Project Office has not responded to the Calhoun Isles Condominium concerns-about the so- called abandoned 10 foot strip on their side of the corridor; where is the title? If Calhoun Isles has used this strip as a buffer from freight noise to its residents, do they not have de facto title to this strip? The Project Office has been advised that the foundations of the. grain elevator tower extend three feet from the base .of the tower; Jim Alexander's drawing show one of the tunnels coming to within one foot of the base of the tower. Is the Met Council prepared to accept liability for shifting of the tower base, including collapse of the tower? 3. The environmental impact of running 250 LRT trains and an ever increasing number of freight trains at grade across the Cedar/Isles channel has not been assessed. Users of the channel will be exposed to 1000 feet of rail traffic visible to channel users as the rail emerges from the south tunnel and re- enters the north tunnel. The concrete bridges for LRT, freight and trails will be 145 feet wide and will require channel users to pass under 45 feet of concrete structure as they pass through the channel. This scenario qualifies as a worst example of urban degradation of our park system. Bury it deep! 4. Last but not least is the two.year diversion of the bike and pedestrian trails onto busy city streets for the 1.4 mile length of the corridor. The Dean Parkway /Cedar Lake Parkway intersection is currently being reconstructed because of safety hazards to drivers and trail users; adding diverted Kenilworth trail users will make this intersection more hazardous than it was to begin with. 567,000 people use the Kenilworth corridor today from all over Hennepin County. Working so hard to satisfy the needs of commuters from low density suburbs to the disadvantage of trail users is a travesty. 5. Co- locating freight and light rail through the West Lake St. station, where two light rail tracks, a freight track, pedestrian and bicycle trails and a proposed street car from Uptown will all have to be accommodated is a joke - -if it weren't part of this proposal: Even though an elevator is included in the capital costs to get riders from the Lake Street viaduct down to the station, no provision is made for bus drop -off pullouts on the bridge, nor is there any provision for access to the station from areas north of Lake Street.. $1.553 billion will not get the job done. 6. To ask municipalities for consent to this proposal before completing the preliminary engineering.on the project or before complete environmental assessments are submitted has the cart before the horse. Any private corporation would toss this proposal back to the drawing board when consent decisions are requested without total informational input; the excuse that time is of the essence in view of competing new starts proposals is erroneous. What should matter is what is best for the nation's transit needs, not to slop Minnesota's hogs at the federal trough before anyone else can get their snouts into the feeder. To have unelected volunteers with no prior engineering experience making decisions on freight and LRT location is irresponsible, if not dangerous. Art Higinbotham From: sam.oconnell@metrotransit.org To: sam.oconnell@metrotransit.org Subject: SWLRT Open Hose October. 10 Date: Fri; 4 Oct 2013 00:18:27 +0000 Good Evening SWLRT CMC, BAC, CAC, TPAC Members and Alternates: The Southwest LRT Project Office presented a draft recommendation for the scope and basic design of the light rail line to the project's Corridor Management Committee on October 2. The draft recommendation includes building shallow tunnels for LRT trains through the Kenilworth Corridor in Minneapolis, eliminating the proposed LRT station at 21st Street and keeping existing freight rail service in the area. We want to share with you that the Metropolitan Council will host a public open house on Thursday, October 10, 2013 to receive public input on the project office's draft recommendation for the scope and basic design of the Southwest LRT (Green Line Extension) project in Minneapolis. This open house will provide an opportunity for community members to ask questions and provide feedback on the draft recommendation before the Metropolitan Council considers it. At this open house, the public will be able to talk with Council members and project staff one -to -one and view engineering drawings of the shallow tunnels. No testimony or formal presentations are planned; however, comment cards and sticky notes will be provided to share thoughts and ideas on the proposed plans. Please help us spread the word to others that would benefit in participating in the open house by sharing the attached flyer. Thank you and we look forward to seeing you next week. Open House Date, Time & Location: Thursday, October 10, 2013 5:30 — T-30 p.m. Kenwood Community Center 2101 West Franklin Avenue, Minneapolis map: http: / /goo.gl /maps/Tkg84 METROPOLITAN C 0 U N C I L Sam O'Connell, AICP Manager I Public Involvement sam.oconnefl@metrotransft.org P. 612.373.3815 1 F. 612.373.3899 Southwest LRT Project Office 6465 Wayzata Blvd., Suite 500 1 St. Louis Park, MN 155426 1 swlrt.org CONNECT WITH US_ `�� Deb Man en From: Jack Rice <ricecompany @aol.com> Sent Friday, October 04, 2013 10:13 AM To: Superintendent @EdinaSchools.org; James Hovland Subject Parades Gentlemen, The arrival of the Sun Current yesterday reminded me to send you my concerns about parades in Edina. I love and support both the Homecoming and Fourth of July parades. However, I hope that someday the pictures and the story in the Sun Current don:.t.have to report some tragedy along the lines of a child being hurt or killed by a vehicle while the child [or children] were chasing some candy randomly thrown into the crowd. The throwing of objects [mostly candy] causes the young kids, say ages 3 to 10, to act like beggars in some third world country. They throw caution to the winds and run any place in the street to retrieve a piece of candy, none of them need. There are various motorized vehicles-from fire trucks to private cars driven by drivers of all ages and experience in both parades. It must be almost impossible to see everybody in the path of the vehicles. I would not. have wanted to have had the responsibility of being one of the drivers last Friday. In my perfect world, the banning of throwing anything would be the norm.But, I recognize I'm a curmudgeon and in my perfect world there wouldn't be a lot of fun. Perhaps a reasonable alternative would be to allow candy. or footballs or whatever to be distributed by hand at the curbs. How this could be controlled is another question. I think the city has a Fourth of July parade committee. Maybe the district has a Homecoming Parade committee. I saw you two sharing a car in the Homecoming parade. Maybe it looks different from that perspective, but I encourage you both to think about whether we are continuing a standard pattern for the parades that may someday lead to a tragedy. Thanks, Jack Jack Rice .1612-341-2464 4900 IDS Center Mpls, MN 55402 ricecompany @aol.com 1 0 Deb Mangen From: Gopal Khanna <gopal.khanna @gmail.com> Sent Friday, October 04, 2013 3:57 PM To: Edina Mail Subject VIP Reception Invitation Attachments: CSS.VIP. Reception lnvite.pdf Dear James, I trust you have had a nice summer with family and friends. I would be honored and pleased if you would join me as my personal guest at the VIP Reception scheduled October 21 st from 5:00pm to 7:30pm at the Minneapolis Club. This registration is in launch of Cyber Security Summit 2013 (bq://cybersecurilysummit..org/agenda.html you can see, we are taking an approach of bringing technical staff, senior business, government leaders, and a broad spectrum of decision makers in order to understand each others viewpoints and secure out vital data assets in the country. Attached is a PDF for an invite, please use the discount code provided to register for the reception (htti)://cybersecuritysummit.org/repoi)tions.html . Please follow the link to my recent article I have written for the Star Tribune, referencing our vulnerabilities to cyber attacks (hqp• / /www startribune com/ opinion / commentaries /164666376.html ?pap,e= all &proage= 1 &c= y#continue). Please do not hesitate to call me on my mobile number if you would like to discuss the issue of cyber attacks on our business and government assets, or any other questions you may have. You may also reach out to my Policy and Strategy Assistant Matt Cleghom via email (clel?h007().umn.edu) or his cell (507- 273 - 4562). I'm looking forward to seeing you soon. Best regards, Gopal Gopal Khanna Cell: 952- 484 -5123 Email: gopal khannaggmail.com Bao•iiwwns4unDasaaqAD-&A m E LOZ'EZ- �Z aagojDO F60Z I!wwnS Al!jn3as aagA:) +w CYBER SECURITY SUMMIT 2013 VIP Reception Sponsored by Deloitte. Dr. Ron Ross Fellow, National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) Member responsible for developing and ruling out guidelines to meet the Presidential Executive Order Lt. General Harry D. Raduege, Jr. Chairman, Deloitte Center for Cyber Innovation. Internationally recognized expert on developing and implementing cyber security strategies for public and private sectors Please join me at the Cyber Security Summit 2013 VIP Reception to meet Dr. Ron Ross, Lt. General Harry and other distinguished speakers and guests. The focus of Cyber Security Summit 2013 is to bring together business leaders and IT /cyber security technologists to construct actionable solutions. Dr. Ross will preview his.Summit presentation on the implications from the Presidential Executive Order as well as highlight the cross - sector framework being developed to reduce cyber risks. General Raduege will share his insights regarding the latest domestic and global cyber security implications for C -suite executives and government leaders. The VIP Reception will be held on Monday, October 21, 2013 from 5:30 -7:30 p.m. at the Minneapolis Club in Downtown Minneapolis. Please visit cybersecuritysummit.org and use code VIP13GST for your complimentary registration to the VIP reception. Gopal Khanna Co- Founder and Chair, Cyber Security Summit 2013 Senior Fellow, Technological Leadership Institute, University of Minnesota Former CIO I State of Minnesota Deb Manaen From: KB.Mandil <kbmusalla @yahoo.com> Sent Saturday, October 05, 2013 3:13-PM To: Edina Mail Subject Evicition from Apartment How are you Mr. Hovland, I am one of Edina residents and I moved to Edina since 2005 from Egypt. I am from South Sudan native, the new nation country in Africa and i live here with my wife and four kids. All of us are neutralize US Citizen. For past few months i was working as biomedical technician with biomedical company herein Edina and, was laid off from my job. Due to my unemployment during few.months i had faced a financial problems and especially paying my rent, currently i have back rent for Sept.2013 which is $985 +$60 late fees and utilities. Also, I have not paid my Oct.2013 rent yet. I got a job two weeks now and my first paycheck came out on Friday Oct.4th.2013 and is not enough to cover my rent balances. My landlord already serve me with eviction paper and the hearing is on Monday. Oct.7th.2013: . I have tried very hard with so many places but without success. Also my emergency assistance application with Hennepin county is not reviewed. I have no friends who. can help me nor I don't have any relatives in USA to help my situation. I am worry about my situation on Monday because I met with legal aid Attorney on Friday and he advised me to bring two months rent to the court otherwise he is worry also the Judge will order eviction. I have four under age kids, the older one is 12 year and the younger one is 1 year seven months and i don't know what our situation will.be from Monday. Two my kids going to schools in Edina and they are going to be force to drop out. My wife threaten she cannot live in homeless situation and she will go back to Africa without kids and if that happen my family will get apart and my condition will be worse with four kids. Please if there any way you can help my situation let me know soon. I can be reached at the numbers below. Thanks Karlo Ucalla . 7150 Cahill Road #209 Edina, MN 55439 - Phone: 952- 200 -8675 612- 666 -3619 1 Deb Man en From: carol dines <chdines @hotmail.com> Sent: Saturday, October 05, 2013 3:35 PM To: Edina Mail Subject RNAV Dear Mayor Holvand, I was at our annual neighborhood meeting last night with three hundred of my neighbors, and I was informed about the FAA's new RNAV plan for Minneapolis, and I appreciate your support in helping us fight the implementation of this program. With the proposed hundred flights daily descending over the east side of Lake Calhoun, my neighborhood would be greatly impacted. I run a business in my home as a therapist and yoga teacher, and this would greatly impact my ability to serve my clients. My husband, a University of Minnesota professor, and I moved to this neighborhood because we love the lakes and we are avid outdoor people, enjoying daily walks around the lake in the summer and cross country skiing in the winter. With a "flight highway" over our house, these activities would be prohibitive due to the noise pollution, not to mention having to keep our windows closed year around. Having heard the presentation last night by Fairskies, none of the goals of this plan are necessary at the Minneapolis airport, and the impact would completely change how we live in south Minneapolis. Please do not let the FAA implement this program. Realize that for many of us, this is a huge issue and we are watching to see how you respond and represent your constituents. Thank you for your time. Sincerely, Carol Dines Jack Zipes Deb Manaen From Mark De Boer <markde12000 @yahoo.com> Sent: Tuesday, October 08, 2013 12:42 AM To: susan.haigh@metc.state.mn.us;james.brimeyer@metc.state.mn.us Cc: jacobsjeffrey @comcast.net; Edina Mail Subject: 'support for SWLRT and colocation options I am writing to ask you to share my support of SWLRT and opposition to the Brunswick Central relocation plan with the rest of the Met Council. From all that I've heard co- location makes the most sense. Frankly,' I think the Brunswick Central relocation option should be taken off the table. My concern is that if co- location is chosen and then in a few months it is determined that the tunneling options are technically impossible, the Met Council, with no other options on the table, will consider Brunswick Central the only option. The children and community of St. Louis Park need to be treated with the same respect as all the other. communities on the SWLRT line and your request for more information has that effect. Thanks for your work on this complex issue. Please bring it to its logical conclusion and let's move forward with the SWLRT. Mark De Boer 3029 Jersey Ave S St Louis Park 1 Tom Cremons 3035 Brunswick Ave. So. St. Louis Park, MN 55416 Oct. 8, 2013 Dear Committee Member: As the time approaches for your committee to make a recommendation on the LRT route and the routing of freight traffic, I would like to encourage you to recommend the shallow tunnel option with freight co- located in the existing rail corridor and also to permanently remove any rerouting of freight traffic in St. Louis Park from consideration. While I feel that a reexamination of the LRT route in Minneapolis would produce a better route for LRT and a final product that better meets the transit needs of the community, I realize that this most likely won't happen. While I am aware that there are very workable and far less expensive options for co- location that have been removed from consideration, I realize that these are probably politically unfeasible. Of the remaining options, I feel that the shallow tunnel with freight remaining in the Kenilworth rail corridor best protects St. Louis Park from the safety and quality of life impacts of a freight reroute while addressing the most serious concerns of my friends and neighbors in Minneapolis. I would also urge you to resist allowing the recent union "study" to further confuse the issues and delay your decision. The "study" was assembled by people with no real engineering expertise. To say that they have the qualifications to make design recommendations because they are lobbyists for a railroad union is like saying that I am qualified to judge the safety of a highway design because I drive a car on the highways. Sincerely, Tom Cremons Deb Manaen From: Brimeyer, James <James. Bri meyer@ metc.state. mn.us > Sent Tuesday, October 08, 2013 8:51 AM To: Mark De Boer, Haigh, Susan Cc: jacobsjeffrey @comcast.net; Edina Mail; Ginis, Sophia Subject RE: support for SWLRT and colocation options Thanks for the note Referring your comments to the project office staff CBrimeyer . From: Mark De Boer [markdel2000 @yahoo.com] Sent: Tuesday, October 08, 2013 12:42 AM To: Haigh, Susan; Brimeyer, James Cc: jacobsjeffrey @comcast. net ;:edinamail(&ci.edina.mn.us Subject: support for SWLRT and colocation options I am writing to ask you to share my support of SWLRT and opposition to the Brunswick Central relocation plan with the rest of the Met Council. From all that I've heard co- location makes the most sense. Frankly, I think the Brunswick Central relocation option should be taken off the table. My concern is that if co- location is chosen and then in a few months it is determined that the tunneling options are technically impossible, the Met Council, with no other options on the table, will consider Brunswick Central the only option. The children and community of St. Louis Park need to be treated with the same respect as all the other communities on the SWLRT line and your request for more information has that effect. Thanks for your work on this complex issue. Please bring it to its logical conclusion and let's move forward with the SWLRT. Mark De Boer 3029 Jersey Ave S St Louis Park Deb Man en From: Gail Miller <googi001.gail @gmail.c0m> Sent Tuesday, October 08, 2013 11:49 AM To: susan.haigh @metc. state. mn. us; james.bhmeyer @metc.state.mn.us; jan.callison @co.hennepin.mn.us; Edina Mail; cherylyouakim @hotmail.com; tschneider @minnetonka.com; gail.dorf man @co.hennepin.mn.us; commissioner .mclaughlin @co.hennepin.mn.us; mark.dayton @state.mn.us; rep.steve.simon @house.mn; rep.ryan.winkler @ house.mn; jacobsjeffrey @comcast.net; hallfinslp @gmail.com; lake Spano; suesanger @comcast.net; AnneMavitySLP @comcast.net; susansanta@aol.com;juliaross.sl@gmaii.com Subject: SWLRT & Freight Re -Route Dear Chair Haigh, We were with greatly dismayed when the Corridor Management Committee again decided to delay a decision on where freight traffic should be routed to accommodate the SWLRT. No amount of study will yield a reasonable re -route alternative through St. Louis Park which would be acceptable to the residents and leaders of the city. Keeping this alternative on the table, even as a fall back position when the inevitable problems arise. with the Kenilworth tunnels, is unacceptable. Do not spend more time and resources investigating /studying/wishing for such an option; it doesn't exist. Any re -route through St. Louis Park will destroy many homes and businesses, imperil schools and children, and totally disrupt the lives of thousands of people. This is not an acceptable sacrifice to develop this 'regional asset'. So, do your job and make a wise decision, one that you should have done last week. Move forward with the tunnels and take re- routing freight completely off the table. Sincerely, Gail Miller & Duane Googins 3380 Library Lane St. Louis Park Deb Mangen From: Christopher Kelly <ckelly @maig.org> _. Sent? Tuesday, October 08, 2013 3:41 PM _To: Edina Mail Subject: Re: Mayors Against Illegal Guns - Minnesota Attachments: statement of_principles.pdf Mayor- - I just wanted to let you know that Mayor Maguire of Eagan has joined Mayors Against Illegal Guns. We would be honored to have you a part of the group. Please let me know if you have any'questions. Also if you are available, I would love to discuss any concerns you may have in person. Thanks, Chris On Tue, Sep 10, 2013 at 2:33 PM, Christopher Kelly < ckelly maig.org> .wrote: . Mayor Hovland, I wanted to follow up from the Regional Council of Mayors meeting yesterday. Mayor Lindstrom suggested I email you. I hope you will consider joining Mayors Against Illegal Guns. As you may already know, MAIG is the largest grassroots gun violence prevention organization in the nation with more than 1,000 mayors and over 1.5 million active supporters. The current coalition in Minnesota includes Mayor Ness of Duluth, Mayor Lindstrom of Falcon Heights, Mayor Rybak of Minneapolis, Mayor Martin of Shoreview, and Mayor Coleman of St. Paul. We are Democrats, Republicans, Independents and gun owners who respect the second amendment and are dedicated to keeping guns out,of the hands of criminals and the dangerously mentally ill. I am happy to provide, more information if you like. I have attached the Statement of Principles mayors sign to join. Please, email a PDF of the signed statement to me at ckelly @maig.org. We would indeed be honored to welcome you into the MAIG Coalition and thank you'for your thoughtful consideration. Sincerely, Chris Kelly MAIG -MN STATEMENT OF PRINCIPLES Whereas: 30,000 Americans across the country are killed every year as a result of gun violence, destroying families and communities in big cities and small towns; and Whereas: As Mayors, we are duty -bound to do everything in our power to protect our residents, especially our children, from harm and there is no greater threat to public safety than the threat of illegal guns; Now, therefore, we resolve to work together to find innovative new ways to advance the following principles: o Punish — to the maximum extent of the law — criminals who possess, use, and traffic in illegal guns. • Target and hold accountable irresponsible gun dealers who break the law by knowingly selling guns to straw purchasers. • Oppose all federal efforts to restrict cities' right to access, use, and share trace data that is so essential to effective enforcement, or to interfere with the ability of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms to combat illegal gun trafficking. • Keep lethal, military -style weapons and high capacity ammunition magazines off our streets. • Work to develop and use technologies that aid in the detection and tracing of illegal guns. • Support all local, state, and federal legislation that targets illegal guns; coordinate legislative, enforcement, and litigation strategies; and share information and best practices. • Invite other cities to join us in this new national effort. (Signature) (Date) (Mayor's Office Address) (Mayor's Telephone) (Staff Contact Name) (StaffPosition) (Mayoral Term -- MMMYYYY to MM/YYM (Mayor's Name — please print) (City, State, Zip) (Mayor's Email Address) (Staff Member's Telephone) (Staff Email) (Elected as —e.g. Rep., Dem., non-partisan, independent) To join Mayors Against Illegal Guns, please fill in the information above and return this form to the coalition via fax at 212 - 312 -0760. Alternatively, you can email a PDF of the signed statement to statement ,mayorsagainstillegalguns.org. J Deb Mangen From: Mark Walinske <mwalinske @gmail.com> Sent Tuesday, October 08, 2013 6:22 PM To:.. jhovland @krausehovland.com; Edina Mail Cc: Charles Aaron Subject: CycleHealth -Jim -- It was a pleasure meeting you last week to discuss the potential for a CycleHealth event in Edina next year! Edina is a perfect place to showcase an urban pro -am cycling event (for all ages), that could fuse personal health + urban planning + education into a high value program. I think such an event cold be a platform for' bikes as- affordable medical devices" and how progressive, health conscience cities are identifying ways to enable this next generation of health cost Rx to unfold. As I noted to you, my CycleHealth partner brings deep pro - cycling and event experience to the equation whereas my healthcare 'background lends itself well to building critical partnerships and sponsorships. Likewise our non - profit approach lends itself well to a variety of benefactor ideas that could become a national template. Suffice to say, we would welcome the opportunity to talk more with the City of Edina thought - leaders /managers around building a 2014 program. Please let me know how we can take the next steps and /or who I need to reach out to'. Thanks again for helping out. Be sure to click here to learn more about CycleHealth and click here video about our mission. MARK WALINSKE I CEO/CO- FOUNDER CycleHealth www.cyclehealth:ora 952- 994 -7750 1=HEALTH 1 Deb Mangen From: West, George <gwest @asap.net> Sent: Monday, October 07, 2013 7:15 AM To: Edina Mail Subject Hooten's Cleaners Decision -Note to Jim Hoveland Jim, Just wanted to contact you thank you for your efforts at the recent City Council meeting to steer the Council's decision to a more moderate position. I don't know the facts in terms of past negotiations, nor the history behind the dealing with Hooten's owners, but I did find that your suggestion - -to make one last effort (and to get personally involved) without bringing eminent domain into the mix to be reasonable. Have enjoyed and appreciated your work on behalf of the City of Edina. George West ASAP, Inc 952.564.2621 Deb Manqen From: Ken Potts <KPotts @mcgough.com> Sent: Monday, October 07, 2013 8:31 AM To Edina Mail Subject: Property damage from adjacent construction Jim, Heather and I would like-to invite you to stop by our house at 4236 Crocker Ave to see how the construction project next door is damaging our property. Today would be ideal as the impacts of stormwater drainage are still evident after the weekend rain. Either Heather or one of our sons (Karsten or Keagan) will be home today, but if no one answers the door, you are welcome to walk around the house and see things far yourself from the back yard (north side is probably best). Our concern is not just with what is happening during construction, but with ongoing damage due to poor design and design review. Thanks, Ken Potts and Heather Beal 4236 Crocker Ave Ken's cell: 651253 0076 Heather's cell: 612 432 0916 Deb Mangen From: Janet Williams <1Williams @ci.savage.mn.us> Sent: Wednesday, October 02,2013 11:52 AM To: Mayor's Association Cc: Mayor's Association Subject: Re: [mayorassoc] Budget Comparisons Greetings, I believe that it is very dangerous to try to compare budgets of cities and all of us do it differently. Janet Williams Mayor, City of Savage Sent from my IPad On Oct 2, 2013, at 9:10 AM, "Jennifer Gumbel" < jenniferguumbelgginail.com> wrote: Thanks to all who responded! The League gave me a link to a State Auditor's report that I find to be very enlightening. http: / /www.osa. state. mn. us / Reports /tzid/2013 /ciBudget/ciBudget 13 report.pdf I'm sending it out in case anyone else finds this helpful. Jennifer Gumbel Mayor LeRoy You are currently subscribed to mayorassoc as: jwilliams @ci.savage.mn.us To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave- 233637- 120128. 87b436d56f775638f224b49bb50c48d4 @listserv.lmc.org You are currently subscribed to mayorassoc as: mail @edinamn.gov To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave- 233797- 16117. albl3753fl5a08480abdb5acceOc6eaf @listserv.lmc.org Deb Man en From: Johnson, Troy <tjohns2l @runestone.net> Sent: Thursday, October 03, 2013 10:17 PM To: Mayor's Association Subject: Re: [mayorassoc] New fire truck purchase split Hi Doug, In Barrett about 3 years ago we meet with the 3 townships we protect, 1 of them we protect in full. we needed another truck at that time as well. after meeting with them the city decided we would pay half the budget even though value wise we are much smaller, the city is about 25% of total value. the other 50 % -is split between the townships based on value. the reasoning behind the city paying more than value share is in that the city is the primary owner of the department and has rules about keeping at least one truck in town at all times. I would recommend meeting with the townships and getting there input before any action, let them have a say even if you don't go with there recommendations. you can also remind the townships and there constituants that fire insurance is based on the departments equipment and the response time, so there insurance would probably go up. As far as.another town picking them up I know around here other towns have said they are not interested because they work with other local departments. the township also has a history of not being reliable to the city, they may leave if they don't get what they want, talk to other cities about it. finally if they chose not to sign an agreement and or pay add fire calls to your fee schedule that covers calls to non - contract people /areas, our fee for such a call is more than the contract amount for one township and after the first call to that township the contract was hand delivered the next day with payment. Its a tough spot you are in and have to look out for your city, same with the townships, offer them mulitiple year contracts so they can budget easier. If you have any other questions or would like to discuss further please just ask Troy Johnson Mayor of Barrett On Wednesday 25/09/2013 at 12:01 pm, Doug Munsch wrote: I am the mayor of a community of 450 people, with no major businesses in town. We are looking at purchasing a new fire truck. Our fire service currently includes our city and two townships. The last major truck purchase was in 2006. The split was based on a fair market value split for the year 2005 of 18% for one township, 41% for the other township and 41% for the city. The new fair market values as of 2012 changed that to a little over 20% for one township, just under 50% for the other township and just under 301/o for the city. As you can see if we base the purchase off of fair market val ues the city saves a considerable amount of money; my concern is losing one of the townships to another fire service. If any city of comparable size and business make up made a purchase similar to this in the past four years, I would really appreciate any information you can forward to me on how you did the split. Thanks in advance for your help. Doug Munsch Mayor of New Auburn, Mn You are. currently subscribed to mayorassoc as: t�ohns2l @runestone.net Deb Manoen from: Mary Gaines <marybethgaines @gmail.com> ;ent: Monday, October 07, 2013 11:21 AM To: Edina Mail Subject Mr Hovland ... please vote FOR Great schools Dear Mr Hovland, Please save our schools. Vote FOR co- location options for the SWLRT project. There are alternatives that do not destroy school property, or unnecessarily add trains to tracks near schools. The co- location options are also less expensive making them a better use of taxpayer money. Thank you, Mary Beth Gaines Deb Manaen From: mnrealtors @aol.com Sent Monday, October 07, 2013 12:22 PM To: susan.haigh @metc.state.mn.us; commissioner. mclaughlin @co.hennepin.mn.us;jan.callison @co.hennepin.mn.us; gail.dorfman @co.hennepin.mn.us; lisa.weik @co.washington.mn.us; peter .wagenius @minneapolismn.gov; james .brimeyer @metc.state.mn.us; Edina Mail; tschneider @eminntonka.com; allcouncil @edenprair.org; cherylyouakim @hotmail.com;jjacobs1956 @yahoo.com; bjames @q.com Cc: lisa.goodman@ minneapolismn. gov; jennifer.munt @metc.state.mn.us; adam.duininck @metc.state.mn.us; lona.schreiber @metc.state.mn.us; gary.cunningham @metc.state.mn.us; kevin.reich @minneapolismn.gov; cam.gordon @minneapolismn.gov; diane .hofstede @minneapolismn.gov, barbaraJohnson @minneapolismn.gov, don.samuels @minneapolismn.gov, robert.lilligren @minneapolis.mn.gov; elizabeth .glidden @minneapolismn.gov; gary.schiff @minneapolismn. gov ;john.quincy @minneapolismn.gov; sandra.colvin.roy @minneapolismn.gov Subject: Thank you for your support of shallow tunnels .... 2 key items Per last week's CIVIC meeting, I want to specifically thank those who verbalized support of the shallow tunnels through the Kenilworth Corridor. Thank you, most importantly, for your consideration of preserving the Kenilworth Corridor as closely as it exists today and for seeing it as a vital community and Regional asset. As it currently exists the Kenilworth Corridor is already playing a vital role in the long term goal of multi -modal transportation, taking an average of 3000 cars off the road daily. The appeal for the use of the Kenilworth Corridor by bicyclists, pedestrians, neighbors, suburban residents, and tourists is based on it's tranquility, greenspace, safety, and its connectivity to the Chain of Lakes and other regional trails. Two key items: At last week's meeting, Commissioner McLaughlin commented on the need to have included in the SW LRT Resolution wording that guaranteed the tunnels would be built (to paraphrase his words... "so as to not have a situation similar to what happened with the U of M "). If I may suggest an additional item that would be pertinent as well to the Kenilworth Corridor ... a guarantee that the freight would be shifted back to it's current location after the tunnels are built. As you know, there is a cost (indicated by SW LRT engineers from a prior meeting) of approximately $48m to shift freight temporarily West by 4' during construction and then back to it's original location. If funding would be used in other ways and freight would NOT be shifted back, multitudes of issues would arrise including putting freight dangerously close to Cedar Lake Shore Townhomes, apartments, and residences. Another key factor, of course, in the shallow tunnel(s) option is the acquisition of 10' from the Calhoun Towers Condominiums ... allowing for enough space for freight at -grade AND bicycle /pedestrian right -of -way at the 'pinch - point'. SW LRT engineers have briefly touched on this key requirement. If a vote is made to go forward with the shallow tunnel(s), and the land is not able to be acquired (i.e. because the 10' would bring the tunnel too- close to the footings of the condominium and /or garage structures) and; therefore, it would be determined at a later timeframe that LRT would be at -grade or there would have to be co- location of LRT and freight in that part of the Kenilworth Corridor... you'd be back to ground zero with the various neighborhoods and organizations. Can SW LRT engineers give assurances that the land can be acquired, and that such acquistion would not put the entire project damagingly close to the Calhoun Towers structure? Looking forward to attending the meeting this Wednesday. Regards, Cheryl and Paul LaRue CIDNA Deb Mangen From: - Valentine David <foxboyl @earthlink.net> Sent: Monday, October 07, 2013 12:35 PM Subject: who wins at bigness? no one? Attachments: Hankerson2 9- 7- 13.JPG; Hankerson2 9- 7- 13.JPG; Hankerson3 9- 7- 13.JPG . at least the tree is pretty ... the new, the proud, the insane ... 5024 Hankerson MNNUJn snKme lw iI.l AMEN, AMMLIMMW.-� dh tv t'' a • 4.�. 11 4 pj'k' 14 }r • ' �. r ,,;,, tit. •i ,•, pr :r , `. j "" • �. '+A. -'i ♦ �•• Al J c�.� "4�'y• •yak.,. wi. kX 1, •.r�! .f' ►•�+tv.,ti: i. .�' 19r�:Y•:t• d,t '7`�b'` yr. • ��. !'4�, �' , � tI • y .. '� � ^t �•��.: • y `� � ip.• W_-•ZZ .. "� - �"' rf ', �.••� ^• �"fi_GG��'� fir' :4q+• � • - ��' I I 1 • � • rte. r rt ` ` \ Mc — • r t r ,t �r�. 1A•y�� � Ca•�'•1'�y1•• �'�� + °�w..,m•. S i�j�•R� _'(Y+,� ,,�K " • i 11 r �,. 41��r'�i 1 i t, hjl. �. / - r I tier. w� t 1 ./) 'i{+� I'•• Hi r' j dJNol ',,.,x. ' � y�r.�' .ff ;�� a�;','rl •. •rig' �'; ���n r., � �� r pt �s "��7�e� *'�'` 1 .I I 711 ! i. � �.) � •.'� •11�tV PP ..(; v :art• ,` 1 , .� 1,- • _ 1 w ; dMENIM7. mmm .der• Deb Mangen From: Jennifer Simmons <jsimmons @iptci.com> Sent: - - -- - — _Monday, October - 07,2013 1:42 PM_ To: SwensonAnnl @gmail.com; JoshSprague @edinarealty.com; JoniBennettl2 @comcast.net Cc: Edina Mail; Mary Brindle (Comcast) Subject: Edina Vote of forced sale How can you forcibly abuse your power to steal someone's business and property. You didn't do anything but what you thought was best for you. You stole the livelihood of another person. This is an example of governments believing they can do exactly what.,they want without repercussions for their actions. How is this right? Only 2 of your council felt this was not the appropriate thing to do. I think the problem is government (large and small) feeling like they can do what ever they want to at anyone else's expense. What gives you the right to make the rules and play by your own rules when the rest of us are required to follow the law accordingly. I hope you loose sleep over this. What kind of example are you being to people? to your kids? Take from people and do what you want until you get your way? http://sd49gop.com/news/364-edina-council-votes-to-f orce-sale-of -building-through-eminent- domain.html Jennifer Simmons Edina Resident 1 Deb Mangen From: Tracy Mena <trary mena @hotmail.com> Sent: Monday, October 07, 2013 2:50 PM To: susan.haigh @metc.state.mn.us; james. bhmeyer@ metc. state. mn. us; jan.callison @co.hennepin.mn.us, Edina Mail; cherylyouakim @hotmail.com; tschneider @minnetonka.com; gail.dorfman @co.hennepin.mn.us; commissioner.mclaughlin @co.hennepin.mn.us Cc: mark.dayton @state.mn.us; sen.ron.latz @senate.mn; rep.steve.simon @house.mn; rep.ryan.winkler @ house.mn; jacobsjeffrey @comcast.net; hallfinslp @gmail.com; spanoslpcouncil @gmail.com; suesanger @comcast.net; AnneMavitySLP @comcast.net; susansanta @aol.com;juliaross.sl @gmail.com Subject: CIVIC Meeting 9/9 October 7, 2013 Dear Chair Haigh, First, let me thank you for all your efforts to hear both sides of the freight rail issue. At the meetings that I attended I witnessed lively discussion covering a variety of concerns around the Southwest Light Rail Transit Line. I am writing to communicate with you my concern after attending the SWLRT Corridor Management Committee meeting in St. Louis Park on Wednesday October 2. Once again the decision was delayed until the next meeting. Now I find that there is a new study (referred to in the Star Tribune) being brought to the table by another supposed expert in the field that may possibly delay the issue again? Enough is enough. Too much energy has been spent trying to find a solution to move the freight traffic to St. Louis Park. It is not only the cost of the re -route that needs to be considered but also the schools, neighborhoods, and businesses that will be impacted by this recommendation. The idea of building two story berms for train traffic on an elementary school playground on one side and level with the press box of the high school football field on the other is ludicrous. I can't believe that we are considering a transportation decision like this. Both routes that were put forward since May, Brunswick Central and Brunswick West are not acceptable. It is time to face the facts. Brunswick Central should have been eliminated when Brunswick West was taken off the table. There have been many studies and testimonials over the years. You have the information needed to make a decision. Bad transportation options need to be eliminated. You need to tell the Met Council that Brunswick Central is a no. Do not let it become the fall back option because I believe that somehow, someway the reroute will end up in St. Louis Park. Thank you for your time. . Sincerely, Tracy Mena 952 - 922 -6784 Phillip J. Quaiy_ Legislative Director, Chairperson Daniel M. Paradise Assistant Dixectnr Brian L. Hnnsted Secretary MAI Minnesota Legislative Bard A Division of SMART, Sheet Metal, Air, Rail, Transit Union October 7, 2013 The Honorable Senator Scott Dibble State of Minnesota 111 State Capitol St. Paul, MN 55155 The Honorable Representative Frank Hornstein State of Minnesota 471 State Office Building St. Paul, MN 55155 VIA: Electronic Mail PDF Scan.- L� L� � z a ra .� •NRrrj6 °, JP Labor and Professional COAM .. 411 Main Stmet St. Paul, MN 55102 She 212 651- 2224500(o) 651- 222- 7828(f) E -MAIL: UTUMNLE.GBDQVISLC0M RE: Southwest Light ject, Freight Reroute-, Rail Labor Analysis Clarification. Dear Chairmen Dibble and Hornstein, Please reference our letter dated October 4`s, 2013, regarding the Southwest Light Rail Project, Freight Reroute, Rail Labor Alternative Analysis. This letter will serve to clarify that with any proposed and actual rerouting of freight train traffic through the CP -MNS Theodore Wirth Corridor and Nesbitt Yard, reconstruction with replacement of track at CP -MNS Nesbitt Yard would need to occur. Specifically, replacement of the south leg of the Nesbitt wye track from the Wirth mainline _to the southbound MNS mainline. At this time, trains routing through this area must use the north bound approach to Nesbitt Yard and then perform a switching task to reverse direction for a southerly movement. Absent a modified interchange arrangement within the Twin Cities consolidated terminal, this type of switching movement may well be excessive for daily terminal train movements. Please reference our letter bullet -items twenty seven and twenty eight. At this time, it is unclear as to when CP abandoned the MNS south leg of the wye track or whether the removal was noticed and approved by the Surface Transportation Board. Please see the attached satellite image with highlight, sent prior via our email on October 5th, showing this area with inspection photographs. - The Honorable Chairmen Dibble and Hornstein October 7, 2013 Page two. UTU- SMART fully supports the construction and operation of SW -LRT service. At the same time, it is essential that all parties accept that freight rail service levels through central Minnesota must continue at current levels with reasonable expectation for increased traffic capacity levels in the future. UTU -SMART submits this letter with the hope that our perspective may assist decision makers within this difficult matter. UTU -SMART is the exclusive representative of the Conductor's, Switchmen, Yard - master's, and Remote Control Locomotive Operator's contracts nationwide. The UTU - Minnesota Legislative Board is vested with the responsibility to protect the safety, welfare, and governmental interests of our membership within the State of Minnesota. Thank you for your review of this letter of amendment. Please do not hesitate to contact this State Committee office if we can answer any questions or address your concerns. Y, P. J. y esota Le alive Director United T rZon Union -SMART enclosure: Mapping and corridor photographs cc: Governor Mark Dayton, State of Minnesota. Representative Ron Erhardt, Chairman, House Transportation Policy Committee. Ms. Shar Knutson, President, Minnesota AFL -CIO. Ms. Susan Haigh, Chairperson, Metropolitan Council. Mr. Mark Fuhrman, Metropolitan Council Project Engineering. Commissioner Peter McLaughlin, Hennepin County Board. Commissioner Gail Dorfman, Hennepin County Board. Mr. James G. Pearson, Excel Energy. Ms. Nelrae Succio, Hennepin County Transportation Engineering. Mr. R. T Rybak, Mayor, City of Minneapolis. Mr. Sheppard Harris, Mayor of Golden Valley. Mr. Jeff Jacobs, Mayor, City of St. Louis Park. Mr. James Hovland, Mayor, City of Edina.. Ms. Lisa Goodman, Council Member, City of Minneapolis. Mr. Joseph Nigro, SMART International President. Mr. John Prevesich, UTU -SMART Rail Division President. Mr. James Stem, UTU -SMART National Legislative Director. Mr. Kevin.Brodar, UTU -SMART General-Counsel. Mr. Jim Nelson; UTU -SMART CP- Soo/Milwaukee Lines GCA. Mr. Jay Schollmeyer, UTU -SMART BNSF -GN/NP Lines GCA. UTU -SMART Local Representatives, Locals 650, 911, 1000, 1177, and 1976. N JP CP-MANS Nesbitt Yard: South End/ Wirth Main-industrial Lead. r Ob Exhibit Exhibit 20 t ►• i r .. 17 UO e ZI i r ...E `. �+' ., — -•� � •+tar -° — � • •. -r... .>,�,�„ ��..' ♦'tea' ,�,� .....�. Afto ,, . f ' .� ' r - � J w'yY�� i`. j ��► s Al� RW Moak a. MhL ;► lilt r 14 f . R POP -y 0 4e law r o 0-b- . 406 ' . ^ I'+►' fro r.- — , •...i -rj� ,i I �' • ;. Aye <� �'. cif r� s!►'�� w4;: �. .� Psi.. Ab UN •' a--. t ow Exhibit low ►a ' - 7 . i }� f. j jp ' r i j� h (' 'j L ti t •T► .� _ �,il» �,,A r A. 01 .+ i � � � � `' • i Mf � fP � `# s . ' 40 .'�= "} �t '�'°'�1►�. TURNERS CROS!"' �� p_� ±R M N MP 1043 &sjore p1pasf,% contact C Cp pilli Digger HOW Mir.. .jN Exhibit � J, .4 ' �♦L,y '•'try "1' --• r ., pR�/ .,y ., • f 'gym•: ��" ��7,,.` `a „ a�.P �}� � _ _ r C ,MN,9 w�itl► �iAL ors. -; Exhibit to :1F , -;,v . •�.. -_ . . �• -� • ;. tit,;; i; C. . .`M. r•, . s „ aft 1 ,�. j .,,�f wail \y { ,�jir�( mot. _ ieF- Ir 5-law , I + i R, \1��, F" '�"• !•,'jfi rte- �' .\ •• ��, y ._ i• °" *• dye r_yy�i ,�• �,• ,�.i.{� V •_ JJJiVVV \ !' _ r.'�\ti 1'1 rr �t L° ..11�� 1: ✓1 4� �"� t t .i •,�jt- rfpM}�P'Iq�;111a{tic4` 1. '� 41�r ,; }f� c• M Y�*r! .',��"'"'' i t�t�l t �YI, �I ydJ / 1 1• .�.I °,1L"L'L� .L—\ , I y Y 7 • !r} f� r' ;� t „' I if�'I6 �. _ +M,�,l !L.!��� .!►,;N•. ; _ j'. * �11 ,!� :i�r' .'' + rt•Tf• ft''''T'1 i- N•='j`�/ �'� �S "!•1j!f 7 ; Vol 0 , �1" yr•. f , z, -� = y Vj -i Tr; 7. i f �. ": i i. i• �'.`,� .. i%' .r '- •'., _ �. '1` is o' r. I ! ~- '�."N:i.%,L.� _ ��.1 .♦ IJ"r• .r .',� .,_ ,i r,y• �all,li:• {1y •t ♦'. . � ' 1 .:,�.�, 1 % •. •.1. �i 4'I'•%1�L /�`.7 ,' r' � }! r, r � - '� � 1 •' p '�`•, _ ' _ Ytr. ile Y _ Exhibit r `7,,, �..lir " ' . � ' - ; •r •• I ' �� {�'.�� �� �C�y�{;�. I� �17M'rr,�� .: i�ls'ti` 1 • _ ..�� ~1 1� r i r� '` a..�... �..-_ ,tom ' � ' � .�,• - T -�� �� Jn_ +1 � ,' ,++!'1�� is _ x � `+• T •, r J3 c� .. ' r +. � \._ rte- � �� �� •{I � � , * 7r * � •F . tie .4 Exriibit ,- J L-1-11hibit, mPRk' _ s �I F � err T w � r M . _ 14. Is r Exhibit fpwwo" folt `.Y �`'i�.11�ati Iyr.l�rr xeu�. � � Y + ��`,• ��'� �1 �.,- i�1•�l` � �1 ref '+f� •.� . + is," wt A- A 1 M10 Exhibit �1 t4wAnow6ox) 1 ii VW a v. _ y T •i4ti�i � —1y t; i I� 1%*S. tAlis6!/I- "COVOIlAfth is1. Exhibit #40 t • F 1� lv r YI ^ i • r r1 1 ii VW a v. _ y T •i4ti�i � —1y t; i I� 1%*S. tAlis6!/I- "COVOIlAfth is1. Exhibit #40 t • Brian L. Hunstad Se:m:tary Minnesota Legislative Board A Division of SMART, Sheet Metal, Air, Rail, Transit Union October 4, 2013 The Honorable / Senator Scott Dibble d State of Minnesota 111 State Capitol St. Paul, MN 55155 The Honorable Representative Frank Hornstein State of Minnesota 471 State Office Building St. Paul, MN 55155 VIA: Hand Delivery and Electronic Mail PDF Scan. Labor and Professional C=ft 411 Main Street St Pmd, MN 55102 Suite 212 651- 222- 750D(o)651- 222- 7828(f) E-MAIL- UTUMNLEGBD@VI.SLCDM RE: Southwest Light Rail Project Freight Reroute• Rail Labor Alternative Analysis. Dear Chairmen Dibble and Hornstein, Thank you for contacting the United Transportation Union Minnesota Legislative Board regarding the Southwest Light Rail Transit and Freight Railroad Reroute (SW -LRT) matter that is before various government authorities and the general public at this time. Please be informed that the United Transportation Union is now the Rail Division of the newly created Sheet metal, Air, Rail, and Transit Union (UT'U- SMART). This UTU -SMART State Committee office has monitored the emerging SW -LRT recommendations regarding the Freight Reroute alternatives. With this letter, we wish to share our rail service analysis for viable alternative(s) to resolve this controversial matter. The information contained herein is compiled fi om our decades of actual experience operating the railroads in Minnesota and specifically, the routes that are a part of the Freight Reroute study area in the west Twin Cities Metropolitan area. This letter will serve to review historical, operational and engineering perspectives from UTU- SMART. So as to be clear, UTU -SMART fully supports the construction and operation of SW- LRT service. At the same time, it is essential that all parties accept that freight rail service levels through central Minnesota must continue at current levels with reasonable expectation for increased traffic capacity levels in the future. v Chairpason Daniel M. Paradise 4 r _n. r Brian L. Hunstad Se:m:tary Minnesota Legislative Board A Division of SMART, Sheet Metal, Air, Rail, Transit Union October 4, 2013 The Honorable / Senator Scott Dibble d State of Minnesota 111 State Capitol St. Paul, MN 55155 The Honorable Representative Frank Hornstein State of Minnesota 471 State Office Building St. Paul, MN 55155 VIA: Hand Delivery and Electronic Mail PDF Scan. Labor and Professional C=ft 411 Main Street St Pmd, MN 55102 Suite 212 651- 222- 750D(o)651- 222- 7828(f) E-MAIL- UTUMNLEGBD@VI.SLCDM RE: Southwest Light Rail Project Freight Reroute• Rail Labor Alternative Analysis. Dear Chairmen Dibble and Hornstein, Thank you for contacting the United Transportation Union Minnesota Legislative Board regarding the Southwest Light Rail Transit and Freight Railroad Reroute (SW -LRT) matter that is before various government authorities and the general public at this time. Please be informed that the United Transportation Union is now the Rail Division of the newly created Sheet metal, Air, Rail, and Transit Union (UT'U- SMART). This UTU -SMART State Committee office has monitored the emerging SW -LRT recommendations regarding the Freight Reroute alternatives. With this letter, we wish to share our rail service analysis for viable alternative(s) to resolve this controversial matter. The information contained herein is compiled fi om our decades of actual experience operating the railroads in Minnesota and specifically, the routes that are a part of the Freight Reroute study area in the west Twin Cities Metropolitan area. This letter will serve to review historical, operational and engineering perspectives from UTU- SMART. So as to be clear, UTU -SMART fully supports the construction and operation of SW- LRT service. At the same time, it is essential that all parties accept that freight rail service levels through central Minnesota must continue at current levels with reasonable expectation for increased traffic capacity levels in the future. The Honorable Chairmen Dibble and Hornstein October 4, 2013 Page two. In the interest of disclosure, please be advised that UTU- SMART does not represent light rail operating personnel. UTU -SMART does. represent railroad workers in the operating crafts of conductor, yardmaster, switch - person, remote control .locomotive engineer and locomotive engineer on the Burlington .Northern, Santa Fe, '(BNSF), Canadian Pacific Railway (CPR) and Union Pacific Railway (UPR) in Minnesota. The United Transportation Union and predecessor organizations represented 'railroad .workers operating on the Chicago & Northwestern Railway (including Minneapolis & St. Louis Cedar Lake' Yard), Milwaukee Road, Soo Line, and Minneapolis, Northfield and Southern Railways for decades prior to 1987. and 1991 respectively. The-undersigned herein and the United Transportation Union have enjoyed an informal relationship supporting the Cedar Lake Park Committee (CLPC) from 1989 to present. Our potential conflict of interest in the SW -LRT freight reroute arena has been represented to the CLPC prior. (Copy enclosed as Exhibit One). Before proceeding with this analysis and so as to present a level of context to the proposed freight rail improvements, we must remind all interested parties of an important historical reality regarding the Canadian Pacific Railway's ownership of all trackage in this matter. The tracks from Lake Street in Minneapolis to western Minnesota now operated by the Twin Cities and Western Railway (TC &W) were originally a mainline segment of the Milwaukee Road Railway, a Class One Carrier, for over ninety years. In the late. 1980's following remarkable levels of federal financial assistance and with a subsequent judgment to sell the bankrupt: Milwaukee Road, the Soo Line Railway, a subsidiary of CPR, was awarded the Milwaukee Road which then merged operations. CPR formally took over the merged Soo Line in the early 1990's and purchased, the Minneapolis & Northfield Railway. CPR then created the TC&W in 1991 which assumed nearly all operations on the former Milwaukee and downgrraded the current line to a Class Two rail carrier. (Source: American Association of Railroads, AAR; classification and MnDOT Rail Map designations. Exhibit Two, A -D). Clearly, CPR owns all trackage that is subject to improvement in the SW -LRT freight reroute, retains a right to operate or diverge CPR originating line -haul traffic on this trackage in the future, and stands to gain significantly once again from the United States taxpayer. UTU -SMART believes this history must be considered moving forward today. This UTU -SMART state committee finds the SW -LRT St. Louis Park freight alternative route proposal as presented to date to be overreaching. We fail to understand that while one freight route currently exists for the TC&W for access to the consolidated BNSF CP, and UP Twin Cities Terminal, the SW -LRT freight reroute provides construction for operation of a second route accessing the Terminal. We respectfully disagree with track geometrical assumptions and engineering recommendations as presented at this time. We believe that a third alternative route north of the BNSF Wayzata Subdivision and through western Minneapolis must be considered within any comprehensive analysis. The Honorable Chairmen Dibble and Hornstein October 4, 2013 Page three From our experience running the railroads, please be advised that we analyze the SW- LRT Freight Rail Reroute based on the following criteria and principals: a) Maintain current and existing freight access subject to physical plant standards that reflect what CP and TC&W have invested and maintained to date, b) Maintain or improve current safety standards for freight rail service, c) Preservation and best use of federal and local taxpayer rail investment funding, d) While TC&W does not operate one hundred car loaded unit trains frequently, for the purpose of our analysis we base our assumptions on the dynamic move- ment and train handling characteristics of a one hundred car unit train without distributed power, and, e) We have not incorporated computer or other simulation models in our analysis. Members of UTU -SMART have reviewed specific sites and estimate operations based on our knowledge of motive power traction and train handling principles. From our experience running the railroads in Minnesota: 1) For an alternative route to move freight traffic out of Minneapolis' Kenilworth Corridor, UTU- SMARM' assumes that the former Milwaukee Road .connection at Cologne routing southeasterly to Shakopee, Minnesota, with C &NW and Union Pacific, abandoned in 1978 *, is no longer a viable alternative for consideration. 2) For an alternative route to move freight traffic out of Minneapolis's Kenilworth Corridor, UTU -SMART assumes that the former Great Northem/BN connection at Hopkins routing northeasterly to Great Northern BN Wayzata Subdivision at St. Louis Park, abandoned in the early 1970's *, is no longer viable for consideration. From our experience running the railroad in the Kenilworth Corridor, former C &NW and M &StL Cedar Lake Yard: 3) It is reasonable to expect considerable brown -field issues from an area south of Dean Boulevard to an area north of West 213` Street. 4) It is our opinion that any residential concerns regarding potential ambient noise issues originating from the surface operation of SW -LRT based from the ambient and critical noise issues of freight switching operations during the 1980's and prior, are misguided. Federally regulated grade crossing "quiet zones" standards are available to eliminate any non - emergency train whistles. * UTU Minnesota Legislative Board, State Director Elmer Berglund, protested these line'ments. The Honorable Chairmen Lhbble and Hornstein October 4, 2013 Page three (b) From our experience running the railroad on the CP's Minneapolis, Northfield and Southern Railway in the western suburbs of Minneapolis: 5) The proposed St. Louis Park southerly freight turn -out to Edina and Bloomington, curve identified as Five Degree -RH, is unnecessary and excessive. 6) Freight train movements that must move southward to Edina and Bloomington can accomplish that work task by routing northward on the proposed freight re- location connection, Curve Number Six, moving north to'recently downgraded CP -MNS Nesbbit Avenue Yard. Recently, CP intentionally removed several Nesbitt Yard tracks and the north switching lead. Nesbitt Yard had approximately seventy five cars of track capacity and was a location trains could arrive, leave train cars standing on one or multiple tracks, and then move locomotives to the opposite end of the standing cars, couple to, and proceed south or in an opposite direction. This is a standard railroad operating move for way - freight switching operations. Please see Exhibit Three. 7) At this time, industries in Edina, Bloomington, and the Lyndale Spur northward to Minneapolis, do not order or move more than seventy five cars total per day. 8) The proposal St. Louis Park southerly freight turn -out may also provide access to Port Savage, a major train to river terminal, and the Union Pacific Railway. At this time, the Minnesota River swing -bridge providing direct access to the river terminal remains out of service due to structural deficiency. Connecting rail yards at Savage are owned by the Cargill and Bunge Grain Companies. How- ever, TC &W has interchange and service access. PIease see Exhibit Four,A to E. 9) The proposed St. Louis Park southerly freight turn -out with repair of the the Minnesota River swing -bridge may. also provide access to Northfield, Minnesota, and the Union Pacific Railway mainline to Des Moines; Kansas City, and terminal destinations in the southern United States. At this time, the former CP -MNS Line is also severed Lakeville, Minnesota. However this segment could be reopened with minimal upgrade for overhead CP -UP trains. 10) While the proposed St. Louis Park southerly freight turn-out with repair of the - Minnesota River swing -bridge may also provide access for TC &W trains to the consolidated Twin Cities Terminal and interchange at Port Savage, this routing would cause significant train delays due to traffic capacity constraints that already exist on Union Pacific between Shakopee and St. Paul Hoffman Yard. 11) It is reasonable to expect that with the construction of the proposed St. Louis Park southerly freight turn -out, the cities of Edina, Bloomington, and Lakeville will experience.a significant increase in local and overhead freight train traffic. The Honorable Chairmen Dibble and Hornstein October 4, 2013 Page four Once again, UTU -SMART believes the reasonable question becomes, while one freight route currently exists for the TC&W for access to the consolidated Twin Cities Terminal, why is the proposed and current SW -LRT freight reroute project being held to provide a second route accessing the same? Further, UTU -SMART questions why the United States tax payer should have to provide the cost of providing access to terminal destinations, both regional and international, that CPR and TC&W have not invested to provide for themselves? Elimination of the proposed St. Louis Park southerly turn -out can reduce the overall project cost of SW -LRT. From our experience running the railroads and estimations regarding the proposed SW- LRT turn -out to a northerly route (Curve Number Six): 12) UTU -SMART acknowledges the primary concern of operating trains without excessive lateral in -train forces and/or throttle amperage that could cause draw- bar or coupling failure during train movements on an ascending grade. 13) UTU -SMART fails to see the benefit of building the proposed northerly turn- out to the design standard of a Class One route enabling speeds at thirty to forty miles per hour through St. Louis Park. 14) UTU -SMART asserts that as designed, trains traveling northward from the proposed northerly turn -out through St. Louis Park will be subject to compliance with track signal systems when approaching to, or after departure from, the BNSF Wayzata Subdivision. With an estimate that restricting, approach diverging, and holding signals may actuate before thirty percent of all train movements due to rail traffic congestion, particularly approaching the Inter- change Station, UTU -SMART questions why the design of a Class One northern turn -out at St. Louis Park is necessary. 15) UTU -SMART acknowledges that when constructing new segments of railroad, a "one- hundred year" design should be implemented. However, CP has already downgraded the former Milwaukee Road and M &NS mainlines to Class Two carrier operations. We respectfully submit that a 20 MPH turn -out and northerly track segment design is consistent with CP's current operational standard and sufficient to provide safe and efficient train movements. Further, 20 MPH train movements are fast enough to deter pedestrians from jumping on moving equipment, deter automobile delay and discretion at grade crossings, will cause less vibration, and will increase train crew reaction time with track obstruction *. 16) UTU -SMART respectfully submits that the northerly turn-out, Curve Six, can *The American railroad industry engages in a reasonable on -going debate regarding safety and train speeds through populated areas and over public crossings. Arguments range from the position that: a) it is better for the public to transverse grade crossings faster so as avoid any discretion for the approaching public with train movement off of the public access area sooner, or, b) slower train movements provide more reaction time for train crews and cause less damage at collisions. The jury remains out; both positions have merit The 5W -LRT freight reroute matter will not bring clarity to these policy positions. The Honorable Chairmen Dibble and Hornstein October 4, 2013 Page five -can be built with a tighter radius so as to lessen the need for land acquisition south of Highway Seven and in downtown St. Louis Park. We assert that. motive power traction, tolerant in -train lateral forces, and train handling capabilities remain the primary consideration for safety and efficiency. We believe that an ascending grade from the CP/TC&W grade-crossingat Blake Road`on the former C &NW mainline, with construction of a berm or wall, ;to a 5:25' degree turn -out through the area that is currently the Excel St, Louis - Park Substation, can align to the existing angle of CP/MNS track at.MP 15.59, Lake and Library street We recommend a maximum speed limit-of;20 MPH with a mainline switch to continue southbound access. As well, relocation of the bike path and substation. Please see attached Exhibit Five, A through I. 17) UTU -SMART respectfully submits that the CP/MNS track north of MP 15.59 will need some level of route realignment and surfacing to defeat potential excessive lateral in -train forces with vertical stress on draw bar and - couplers. However, while some commercial property acquisition may be necessary, we estimate that with a track speed limit of 20 MPH and a longer ascending,grade from ,Blake Road with minor elevation of the outside rail of the 5.25'degree turn -out, a one hundred car unit train with sufficient and leading motive power can traverse this track segment without train failure. Please see Exhibit Six, A through C. 18) UTU -SMART fails to understand the need for the construction of a berm on the CP/MNS mainline from St. Louis Park Walker Street to Minnetonka Boulevard bridge or north therefrom. An inspection of this track area resembles other main - line railroad with medium grade and curvature. With respect to motive power traction and in -train forces, it must be noted that this area is twenty to fifty car lengths north of the critical northerly turn -out. Therefore, the maximum force transmitted from motive power amperage stabilizes within the first half of the train while the in- train stress is lessened on couplers and draw bars as the rear portion `of train traverses through the ascending turn -out. 19) UTU -SMART concurs with presently designed and minor straightening of the CP/MNS right -of -way from Walker Street to north of Minnetonka. Boulevard Bridge. We believe that by broadening the curve 800 feet north -of Walker Street, the mainline track can be aligned to the east several feet to move the tracks away from existing homes and align oorrectly with the bridge. Pleas_ e see Exhibit Seven, A though F. 20) UTU -SMART asserts that historical and existing precedent exists for a lower track speed with tighter radius at the northerly turn -out Curve Six. On the existing and continuous CP/MNS mainline at Northfield, Minnesota, built circa 1920 and modified in the 1980's, track geometry leading from the CP -Union Pacific mainline at MP -313.6 junction switch, northward to the CP/MNS main- Line to Farmington, is constructed with the similar radius recommended herein. The Honorable Chairmen Dibble and Hornstein October 4, 2013 Page six. 21) UTU -SMART directs interested parties to the Union Pacific Mankato Subdivision as existing and comparable mainline track geometry for the CP/MNS northerly turn -out, Curve Six,as proposed herein. Specifically, please reference UP Mankato Subdivision MP 46.3. (5.25'Degree) at Belle Plaine, and MP 84.2 (6.4'Degree) and 85.3 (5.59' Degree) at Mankato, MN. Please see Exhibit Eight, A through D. 22) UTU -SMART reminds interested parties that our analysis of the northerly turn- out, Curve Six, - assumes that distributed power, a new industry standard for 100 car loaded unit trains, is not factored into our proposal for a tighter radius. 23) UTU -SMART recognizes that the TC&W Division and crew change point exists at CPfTC&W Hopkins Depot immediately west of Highway 169. We assert that if there are motive power, operational, or weather related conditions that may potentially lead to eastward train issues, locomotives can be positioned as pusher - power for loaded unit trains. We assert that while not preferable, train move- ments with trailing pusher -power is a standard and daily operating procedure with heavy trains on many railroads including Union Pacific train movements from So. St. Paul through East St. Paul in the Twin Cities Terminal. Redesign of the proposed St. Louis Park northerly turn -out, Curve Six, with a 20 MPH track speed at 5.25' degree,, resurfacing and minor straightening of curves north of Lake Street, will lead to significantly less land acquisition. This important design modification y&'can lower the overall project cost of SW -LRT. From our experience running the railroads and estimations regarding the proposed SW- LRT turn -out from the CP/MNS to the BNSF Wayzata Subdivision, (Curve Number Eight): 24) UTU -SMART recognizes that the turn -out from the CP/MNS to BNSF Wayzata Subdivision will have minimal impact on existing residential areas. The angle of approach of the CP/MNS mainline from the south is favorable for design of a tum -out at grade. Please see Exhibit Nine, A-C. 25) UTU -SMART asserts that with any turn -out and connection between the CP- MNS and BNSF Wayzata Subdivision, and with any project cost savings, a second mainline or auxiliary track on the BNSF Wayzata Subdivision is recommended to relieve traffic congestion from Harrison Street westward. 26) UTU -SMART asserts that the CP/MNS turn -out to the BNSF Wayzata is not necessary due to the existing northern route connecting CP -MNS mainline to the BNSF Wayzata Subdivision through the current CP Wirth Park route to BNSF MW Junction, Monticello Subdivision to BNSF Lyndale Junction. Elimination of the proposed St. Louis Park turn -out CP/MNS to BNSF Wayzata Subdivision, Curve Eight, can lower the overall project cost of SW -LRT. The Honorable Chairmen Dibble and Hornstein October 4, 2013 Page seven. From our experience running the railroads in western Minneapolis: 27) UTU -SMART recognizes that current CP/MNS trackage runs parallel to Highway 100 with Nesbitt Yard immediately south of Highway 55. This. 20 MPH mainline proceeds northward to CP Humboldt Interchange Yard and- holds a diverging route under Highway 55, through the Theodore Wirth Park Golf Course at 10 MPH, with complete grade separation. Please see Exhibit Ten' A -F. 28) With this northerly routing on the CP/MNS, all trains pass Nesbitt Yard which will provide trains with destinations south of St. Louis Park to stop their train and change directions to operate southward as described prior herein. UTU -SMART wishes to express our disappointment with the CP/MNS. At the same time CP tore out Nesbitt Yard, within the SW -LRT Freight Reroute the same parties claim to now require the needlessly expensive southerly turn -out at St. Louis Park. 29) UTU -SMART recognizes that the current CP/MNS trackage junctions with the BNSF Monticello Subdivision at MW Junction. For routing of daily through freight train service between St. Louis Park Nesbitt Yard and MW Junction, we recognize that raising ballast, resurfacing, new rail with minor curve alignment . may be necessary to raise trackage to 20 MPH. Please see Exhibit Eleven A -B. 30) UTU -SMART recognizes that from CP/MATS and BNSF MW Junction, the Monticello Subdivision mainline proceeds south easterly at 30 MPH for 1.75 miles to BNSF Lyndale Junction, Wayzata Subdivision. Please see Exhibit Twelce A -B. 31) BNSF Lyndale Junction is less one -half mile from the current Interchange Station location on the BNSF Wayzata Subdivision. The. junction is one -half mile east of the current entrance of TC &W freight trains to the mainline at Cedar Lake Jet 32) UTU -SMART asserts that this route from the CP/MNS in St. Louis Park to the BNSF Minneapolis achieves the rerouting of freight traffic out of the Kenilworth Corridor. It is essential nterested parties accept that trains qpn operate on this route now from BNSF Minneapolis to CP/MNS Bloomington 111`h Street Yard. At this time, only, two way - freight trains in each direction operate in. this dedicated, grade separated and underutilized corridor. Further, this corridor has only two grade_ crossings on the four mile route. The BNSF and CP/MN,S trackage ascends a well - designed grade following the contour of the land consistent with industry engineering standards. 33) UTU -SMART recommends that a CP/MNS test -train be ordered to operate in the aforementioned track territory with two locomotives, (6,000 HP), fifty loaded cars, (8,000 tons) at 10 MPH immediately to demonstrate that this routing is viable now. The Honorable Chairmen Dibble and Hornstein October 4, 2013 Page eight. 34) As there will be significant SW -LRT Freight Reroute cost savings with the routing through the CP -MNS Theodore Wirth and BNSF Monticello corridor, we respectfully submit investment and construction of a second mainline or auxiliary track should be considered for the BNSF Wayzata Subdivision between the Interchange Station west to Hopkins to reduce rail traffic congestion and assure freight trains do not hold at, or near, the Interchange Transit Station. UTU -SMART believes that elimination of the CP/MNS turn-out to BNSF Wayzata Subdivision, Curve Eight, with continued routing on the CP/MNS to Nesbitt Yard, through the CP/MNS Theodore Wirth and BNSF Monticello Corridors is a third alternative that must be considered as the most inexpensive and viable overall route for the -SW -LRT Freight Reroute project. Again, UTU -SMART asserts that this route is available today, removes freight trains from the Kenilworth Corridor, and will reduce overall SW -LRT costs significantly. UTU -SMART does not stand to benefit nor suffer harm from the proposed SW -LRT Freight Reroute. However, there is a limit to federal rail improvement funding and the cost benefit analysis of what is proposed today by CP/TC&W may well be found to be excessive by federal authorities. As veterans of this industry who actually operate the railroads, we find the current CP/I'C&W proposal to operate through St. Louis Park overreaching if not disingenuous. All interested parties must expect that if the currently proposed CP and TC&W's alignment through St. Louis Park is constructed, significant increases in regional and transcontinental freight train traffic through St. Louis Paris, Edina, Bloomington, Lakeville and points south will occur. We fail to accept that a federal transit project can be held captive to a Class One railroad's absence of strategic planning representation, a Class Two railroad's ambition, while reasonable engineering to scale and identifiable freight train rerouting is available today: In summary, UTU -SMART submits this letter of rail labor analysis with the hope that our operating experience and perspective may assist decision makers within this difficult matter. Ultimately, we hope all parties can reach consensus from readily achievable and common sense alternatives for the SW LRT Freight Reroute project. UTU -SMART is the exclusive representative of the Conductor's, Switchmen, Yard - master's, and Remote Control Locomotive Operator's contracts nationwide. The UTU- SMART Minnesota Legislative Board is vested with the responsibility to protect the safety, welfare, . and governmental interests of our membership within the State of Minnesota. Thank you for your review of this letter of consultation. Please do not hesitate to contact this State Committee office if we can answer any questions or address your concerns. The Honorable Chairmen Dibble and Hornstein October 4, 2013 Page nine. Sincerely, z�/ /PP . Qualy Minnesota gislative Director United Transportation Union -SMART enclosure: SW -LRT diagrams, mapping, AREMA formula, and corridor photographs cc: GOVernoF Mark Dayton, State of Minnesota.. Representative Ron Erhardt, Chairman, House Transportation Policy Committee. Ms. Shar Knutson, President, Minnesota AFL -CIO. Ms. Susan Haigh, Chairperson, Metropolitan Council. Mr. Mark Fuhrman, Metropolitan Council Project Engineering. Commissioner Peter McLaughlin, Hennepin County Board. Commissioner Gail Dorfman, Hennepin County Board. Ms. Nelrae Succio, Hennepin County Transportation Engineering. Mr. R. T Rybak, Mayor, City of Minneapolis. Mr. Jeff Jacobs, Mayor, City of St. Louis Park. Mr. James Hovland, Mayor, City of Edina. Ms. Lisa Goodman, Council Member, City of Minneapolis. Mr. Joseph Nigro, SMART International President. Mr. John Prevesich, UTU- SMART Rail Division President. Mr. James Stem, UTU -SMART National Legislative' Director. Mr. Kevin Brodar, UTU -SMART General Counsel: Mr. Jim Nelson, UTU -SMART CP- Sod/Milwaukee Lines GCA. Mr. Jay Schollmeyer, UTU -SMART BNSF -GN/NP Lines GCA. UTU -SMART Local Representatives, Locals 650,.911, 1000,1177, and 1976. Page 1 of 3 UTU Minnesota: From: "UTU Minnesota:" < 9x mniegbd@visi.com> Date: Wednesday, July 10, 2013 4:12 PM To: 'Neil Trembley" <neil.tmmbley @gmail.com >; "Richard Adair" <adair001 @umn.edu >; "Margaret Anderson Kelliher" <maimiimesota@gmail.com >; "Fred Appell" <appe1006 @umn.edu >; "Minneapolis Parks Legacy Society" < Minneapo lisPaftLegacySociety@msn.com >; "Jan Borene" <borenejan@aoLcom >; "Ron Bowen" <info@prairieresto.com >; "Chamberlain, Bruce" < BChamberlain @minneapolisparks.org >; "Tony Chevalier" <tonychevalier@gmail.com >; <DPConDREW @aol.00m >; "Jeanette Colby" <jmcolby @earthlink.net>; <natec@svrdesign com >; "Dan Dailey" <sowelo@sbcglobal.net>; 'Bob Day" <mplsbob52 @gmaiLcom >; "Jean Deatrick" <deatrick @bitstream.net>; "Curt Dederich" <goodnightkourt@earthlink.net>; "Vida Y. Ditter" <vyditter@vyditter.cnc.net>; <gall.dorf nan@co.hennepin.mn.us>; "Steve Durrant" < stevedurrant@attapianning.com >; <norbertCabbci.com >; "Judy Gilats" <jg9.ats @comcast.net>; "JoAnn Hanson & Bob Glancy" <glanhan @comcast.net>; <passion06 @comcast.net>; "Goodman, Lisa R." < Lisa .Goodman @ci.minneapolis.mn.us>; "Rob Harris" <robjharris@hotmail.com >; "John Herman" <jherman @faegre.com >; "Art Higinbotham" <ahiginbotham@msn com >; "Ruth Jones" <ruthjones73 @q.com >;'David Klopp" <dkloppl(crmsn.com >; "John Koepke" <koepk002 @urnn.edu>; "Charlie Laver" <charlie @lazoroffice.com >; "Laurie Lundy" <laurie@lundys.us>; < commissioner .mclaughlin @co.hennepin.mn.us>; "Stacy McMahon" <stacy.a mcmahon @earthlink.net>; "Jim McPherson" <moonmanjim @gmail.com >; "thomas meyer" <TbDmas@msrltd.com >; "Miller, Jayne S." <jmiller@minneapolisparks.org >; "Meredith Montgomery" <mmont@scc.net>; "Deborah Morse -Kahn" <dmk@regionalresearch.net>; "Munt, Jennifer" <jennifer.munt@metc.state.mn us>; "Rebekah Padilla" <bekahap@yahoo.com >; "CP Minneapolis" <cpminneapolis @gmail.com >; 'Dr. Keith Pnrssing" <info @drkeithprussing.net>; "George Puzak" <GreenParks @comcastnet>; "Jennifer B. Ringold" < jringold@minneapolisparks.org >; "Winthrop Rockwelll" <winthrop rockwell@faegrebd.com >; "Erik Roth" <erik.roth@earthlink.net>; "Joseph Schmitz" <schm0652@umn.edu >; <aLsinger@co.dakota.mn.us>; "Dave Smith" <dave.smith @q.com >; "Anita Tabb" < Anita a(�? obtabb.com >; "D'Ann Topoluk" <dann.topoluk @state.mn.us>; < Katie .Walker @co.hennepin mn us>; "Brian Willette" Qbjwillette@hotmail.com >; "Ben Wright" <cbenwright@gmaiLcom >; <ayoung@minneapolisparks.org >; "Jack Yuma" <Jack.Yuzna@ci.minneapolis.mn.us>; "Marilyn Ziebarth" <casazp@comcastnet> Subject: Re: SW LRT and Cedar Lake Hello Neil and All, Great work and clear message. As an early attendee to the Save Cedar Lake Park group in 1989, and a rider in the park, my heart Is with the park. That said, the United Transportation Union, a Division of SMART, (Sheet metal, Air Rail and Transit Union), may have a conflict of interest in this matter. While we may, or may not, agree with Cedar Lake Park, UTU-SMART represents railroad workers on the BNSF, CP, and UP Railways. Therefore, we must remain neutral regarding debate. However, on any issues regarding railroad operational or public safety, please resource. Thank you. Regards, P. J. Qualy UTUSLD Minnesota 651 -222 -7600 the west metro and SW LRT right-of -way alignment pocky do consider this UTU-SMART State Committee office as a From: Neil Trembley Exhibit Sent: Wednesday, July 10, 2x13 2:33 PM MOO -rr WF -7 Or A-� 41, fT, Z A 0 - IV A ip; 1 U All 1V LIM. MIT1w 41 ZY vp rL 4,41 !e � �� _ .� ' � � �vt< r.�' ! ' rtr i'i`i,' ' y �. 1'�, �f �I� �tl�','�' � '" � R � � � IL TI w Off If killf! QQQQ /v 4 i 1h I FIR I[ was a candy store them It Is candy store now," — Forbes magazine THE NATION YO/W N Thomas H. Ploss 00A0 THE NATION PAYS AGAIN Copyright Q 1983, 1994 Thomas H. Ploss Table of Contents INTRODUCTION........................... ............................... i Chapter I: Youth, Ambition, and Opportunity Meet ............ . . .............. 1 II: Max Lowenthal and his Legacy ...... ............................... 7 III: The Roaring Thirties ................. ............................... 11 IV: The More Things Change, the More They Staythe Same ...................... ............................... 23 V: Our Gang ............................. ............................... 35 VI: The "Chicago, Milwaukee, & North Western Transportation Company" That Never Came To Be ............. 57 VII: The Failing Struggle to Change Management ...................... 76 VIII: The "Ratemaking Transcontinental Railroad" That Never Was .................... ............................... 81 IX: The Louisville Sluggard ............ ............................... 92 X: The Outlaw Management ............ ............................... 101 -' XI: The Final Mailings ................... ............................... 111 'I X-11: The Last Bankruptcy .......................... . ..................... 129 EPILOGUE.................................. ............................... 155 ANNOTATIONS............................ ............................... 157 ISBN No. 0- 9613788 Library of Congress Catalog Card No. 84 -90651 Exhibit �'�► MINNEAPOLIS NORTHFIELD & SOUTHERN RAILWAY MINNESOTA DAKOTA & WESTERN RAILWAY See page 225 for legends • rr.. MN&S .... Moiw _ .... cmrtompiat.d Nines F c i •'1} 7 t� 1 N W l y 4..., r �i ff.'s..: • .i _�, R. ^- f. .��1T � :.r _�yl.� �N t l �vi .F . •- _ _.. r .� z WT kfa;�*%wa '..a �N t l �vi 4r, 0 I > . A m d NIW- T^ �f �rt _Y -`_ *` ...' �'r * -, � s ��.� � i. � Tti� .� �� � r4�.•j ' r ,� _ s ''.%1 � ! �r E 6 M1 �.. t p ,; � 4 ' � � �� r�! �,r� �}('+ �Ai f � t'•� �4 rF`� � r-, F #. ,; , 'fie . �'i!' 1� r,�rtt, � s � � 1��� ,5 � �e �. �� �� � �� �, "� �C'1' W •nom it Fill CFO A *14 fft f1.6 S. as -Z NL t , opt 4A, 4th t , opt t / .r' l I m:.- , • crr la� rw --=13L..�, - = 7�= .�c - , _ ., " rtT•`r� R1 ^! t ..� 1,� 11.E ;1, }I�;�y,�1��1�11 . 1.�l1����� ±��.�,:R ,y��sR �7Rti— ��-'.. --t Tl cr r+ i 9 r !PF� rC�C4' :_ 7F „r �7 I Y. wl a �Jr •r wd #aT.'- �� � _ - _�afL• T _ � • • Yew. , y - _ - _�� _ �____ � =y�� •�nr. l,�� ��i �J ��- -��w.� y °;t' `�• � • -ire �,� AAMLc pp IL lab' wis"aa porip --A �Wz Lli�oll •`r te•. .� R• . e • • r1, '" ` 41 w•q_ .:T y �;M ~� 1, _ room cr Milk 1Q — � � •�� s` ♦ `� •'• "�.��Y 'aC: .�Ii `r .. - ,1111�a.o���i i. I. ay '�• `�! kil m x =r cr F Amw 2 3 Q rt 4 ~•mss. �.'� tip.: :yq ,. .I �� `�y�Y� J• i1Y•1 +�.� f I4.. . :,:..ter c�� ` .`�� ` - �Ig4�1�_�`� � � ?� ,� �.�~`.'�.•"= .''O'NtOIr `� ... •.:I,�+` � ,� ".`1C i ,� .t F�►• • �i - - j= '"'�`•_ fi=t -.��/ r .�• �.,, .. � ff .., .'. •� tl� '.f �� •� \ 1 yl �- �i�%{- X11 �, � ��„ �.. r. � ` `� +' .- •w^ v. �"'� � r� I %`,� F� ' .'�[� - l ta� \ ���� 'tl. Y 1 �11�� }�'IS r. ;Tip 47 om-11 look, C P RAILWAY DOT # 8542368 LAKE & LIBRARY MN & S SPUR fm^ MP 15.w 6. MIN M a Exhibit LAW- tb m cr VOOL , 0 t i 1 .4 N6 lie IM �: IM �► J �► t. ���� � � �, �'� �� ,� � i r,�; �f ;'' �. �, �y J� 44W A4 3WA 00 41 lw r7lp IL vr —For tL lot ka W�k� pop '16 w., IBM, Rye r rY I VI oo- %: r-: trim W4, Pim Oda OU449-PR - - cr Pull. 1 41 S'., 41 A circular curve is often specified by its radius. A small circle is easily laid out by using the radius. In a mathematical sense, the curvature is the reciprocal of the radius, so that a smaller curvature implies a large radius. A curve of large radius, as for a railway, cannot be laid out by using the radius directly. We will see how the problem of laying out a curve of large radius is solved In American railway practice, the radius is not normally used for specifying a curve. Instead, a number called the degree of curvature is used. This is indeed a curvature, since a larger value means a' smaller radius. The reason for this %T4�tLlI-l; I R tangent R I 2 2 C =2Rs 1 d =2 direction of PT stationing d I t.= R (1 - cos 2) = R vers 2 tangent PC T V E=R 1 -1) = R exsec I =Rtan2 cost 2 CireUar Curve choice is to facilitate the computations necessary to lay out a curve with surveying instruments, a transit and a 100 - ft engineer's tape. It is more convenient to choose round values of the degree of curvature, rather than round values for the radius, for then the transit settings can often be calculated mentally. A curve begins at the P.C., or point of curvature, and extends to the P.T., or point of tangency. The important quantities in a circular curve are illustrated above. R The degree of curvature is customarily defined in the United States as the C pn 50 1 0,0, central angle D subtended by a chord of 100 feet. The reason for the choice of the chord rather than the actual length of circumference is that the DefinWwn of Degree of Curve o chord can be measured easily and directly simply by stretching the tape . between its ends. A railway is laid out in lengths called stations of one tape length, or 100 feet. This continues through curves s, so that the length is always the length of a series of straight lines that can be directly measured. The difference between this length, and the actual length following the curves, is inconsequential, while the use of the polygonal length simplifies the calculations and measurements greatly. The relation between the central angle d and the length c of a chord is simply R sin(dl?) = cj2, or R = c /(2 sin d/2). When c = 100, this becomes R = 50/siu D /2, where D is the degree of curvature. Since sin D/2 is approximately D /2, when D is expressed in radians, we have approximately that R = 5729.65/1), or R = 5730/D. Accurate values of R should be calculated using the sine. For example, a 2° chive has R = 2864.93 accurate T, —wblr 5730/1) = 2865 ft. If some other value and length unit are chosen, simply replace 100 by the new value. In the metric system, 20 meters is generally used as the station interval instead of 100 ft, though stations are numbered as multiples of 10 m, and these equations are modified accordingly. With a 20 m chord, R = 1146/D m,or about 3760/D ft. Of course, a given curve has different degrees of curvature in the two systems. There are several methods of defining degree of curvature for metric curves. D may be the central angle for a chord of 10 m instead of 20 in The deflection from the tangent for a chord of length c is half the central angle, or S = d/2. This is a general rule, so additional 100 ft chords just increase the deflection angle by D /2. Therefore, it is very easy to find the deflection angles if a round value is chosen for D, and usually easy to set them off on the instrument. For example, if a curve begins at station 20+34.0 and ends at station 28 +77.3, the first subchord is 100 - 34.0 = 66.0 ft to station 21, then 7 100 ft chords, and finally a subchord of 77.3 ft. The deflection angle from the P.C. to the P.T. for a 2° curve is 0.660 + 7 x 1.0 + 0.773 = 8.433 °, or 8° 26'. I have used the approximate - relation S = (c /100)(D /2) to find the deflection angles for the subchords. The'long chord C from P.C. to P.T. is a valuable check, easily determined with mode rrrysita.du.edul -j caJ%eiVraitwa�ddeg cure him 1rz vuuxe equipment. It is C = 2R sin (I/2), where I the total central angle. For the example, C = 2(2864.93)sin(8.433) _ 840.32 ft. The length of the curve, by stations, is 843.30 ft. This figure can be checked by actual measurements in the field. The actual arc length of the curve is (2864.93)(0.29437) = 843.34 ft. Note that this is the are length on the centre line; for the rails, use R f g/2, where g = 4.7083 ft = 56.5 in = 1435 mm for standard gauge. Before electronic-'calculators, small -angle approximations and tables of logarithms were used to carry out the computations for curves. Now, things are much easier, and I write the equations in a form suitable for scientific pocket calculators, instead of using the traditional forms . that use tabular values and approximations. A l" curve has a radius of 5729.65 feet. Curves of P or 2° are found on high -speed lines. A 6" curve, about the sharpest that would a be generally found on a main line, has radius of 955.37 feet. On early American railroads, some curves were as sharp as 400 ft radius, or 14.41. Street railways have even sharper curves. The sharpest curve that can be negotiated by normal diesel locomotives is not less than 250 ft radius, or 230. It is not difficult to apply spirals, in which the change of curvature is proportional to distance, to the ends of a circular curve. Circular curves are a good fast approximation to an alignment. The centrifugal acceleration in .a curve of radius R negotiated at speed v is a = v2/R. 1.t v is in mph, a = 2.1511 v2/R 3.754 x 10 -4Dv2 ft /s2, where D is degrees of curvature. This is normal to the gravitational acceleration of 32.16 ft/s2, and the total acceleration is the vector sum of these. For comfort, a maximum ratio of a to g may be taken as 0.1 (tan l 5.71'). The overturning speed depends on the height of the centre of gravity, and occurs when a line drawn from the centre of gravity parallel to the resultant acceleration passes through one rail. The height of the centre of gravity of American railway equipment is 10 ft or less. Taking 10 ft as the height of the centre of gravity, a/g = 0.2354 (tan ' 13/25 °). Therefore, the overturning speed vo can be estimated by Dvo2 = 20,000 and the comfort speed v,, by DVC2 = 8500. A curve may be supereievated by an amount s so that the resultant acceleration is more normal to the track. Exact compensation occurs only for one speed, of course. This angle of bank is given by tan 0 = a/g = 1.167 x 10 -5Dv2, and sin 0 = s /gauge. Consider a 2 curve. For v = 60 mph, tan 0 = 0. 09404, sin 0 = 0.08375 and s = 4.73 is If the speed is greater than this, there will be an unbalanced acceleration, which will have a ratio of a/g of 0.1 at a speed V given by 0.1 = 1.167 x 10-SD(V2 - v2), or V = 89 mph. The overhnning speed on this curve is given by (0.2354 + 0.08404) _ (1.167 x10- 5)Dv2, or v = 117 mph- Note that a large superelevation will cause the flanges of a slow - moving train to grind the lower ral Supereievation is generally limited to 6 to 8 in m�xirrnirn Retam to Composed by James B. Calvert Crealed 1 June 1999 Last Revised 20 June 1004 r e Ft V m)site. du.edW- jcamNVrailwayldegaay.htm . 212 I SP- PB- j I2 1 °30' IB 77.0 2 SP PS X HUBBELL AVE. Y 6.® 8FG UWAT"A S T. 0. A 421-1/2 -+HWY X159 ++OHB 421 -36' DUP. 7— JPB,6-JP B ® W 428 2 -12-121 11' RCC 419 . 16' SA .776.01 i w OD '418" 1:5'X 2' SBC 0) 417. 42° CP 415-3/4 4' 'X 3' SBC 774' �.�� a 5.27, �� 415 -112 TX 3' SBC 78W t 415 3X 3 SBC ® � ��, I A 8FG ELM ST. t7 1� am 14 J'SBC ' .,. .� e v BFG ST. 3'X ' 412 1!. 2 8'X 8' RRC -%y . . -412 '2 -3.5'X 4' S8C L -. 85.3 b�-5 2R LUBR, I'M . Ql . 864.7 (� X SIM & PINE 9C 3 8FG Yaa AVE, 1990. . 410 21' SA @FG iST.AVE. a� �1 829.7 m A c t e�p �Qy 64.4 M-s 2R LUOR. ! 7®/ r N 4 09 -31r CIP A . CP 824.7 .� ca s OD 4 08 -1/2 -HW!- °4 ® ..OHB — 4 ®7 3 °72° RCC 825. ®� _ OD v - w - - 484 1 -SP PB 831.6 X MISTRIAL RD. . a m 821.6 P i - A /JD` sa �i I : J.0 l.Lr tJi .10 1/2 2-68, CP r r e� 36 0 Ci 2 :19 3 -SP P6 123.18 148 :�18 36 °CIP � 217 36` CIP 3.18 3 °. P .� r 215 11 24 CIP 7240 66 �,ge w �, � - 214— 30' ` CIS I� CP - rz7.t� ®a�® ° • , 2l x N. t ST. 212 ill ° CPS 724.10 0. ®s �. 212 36° CIF' �' S.TA a L 211 24% MCIP °24 GIP ;+ 21®. 31r CIP I 09 '5-SP P8 208 360 CIP I 2 07 I —SP PS 206-.3/4 36' CP 206 1/2, 24' CIP. 2 06 31° TPG 205 1/2 24' CIP 205. 4S® CP 209 16a GIP 205, 37 4' -6' SBC - -: 146A�O ® • . 8.278.8- 745.M N 74 8 14 9.AMB 8.23 74UI I_ 201 42° CIP 732.1 ®� '26 W- CIP 73019 �a 199 3r. CIP 738.18 198 307 CIP 738.1 9 197 15FX 51 SGC 742.18 8.45 196 '.3G' CIP 743.60 087 195 36° CIP 194 1/2 36° CIP 194 1/4 -30' CIP 194 '30' CIP is - -: 146A�O ® • . 8.278.8- 745.M N 74 8 14 9.AMB 8.23 74UI I_ 732.1 ®� 73019 �a .� 738.18 738.1 9 .� y- ® e 742.18 8.45 743.60 087 "� - -: 146A�O ® • . 8.278.8- 745.M N 74 8 14 9.AMB 8.23 74UI I_ IMF' a it , - �w Li: I er An maim i 4 Z '4 /m w■ IN rfi NAW Was .'t ��� �,� s - .fir- ' ' , _ •?� } r I t c v �S IA Eggs 4* &-rff sf__ J-1 hp. :K C�i:..R� d:,y� ..w ,. ;gyp• ..., �� A�',,:��1 ��. TP!."•_`' PR appow;- a :✓E .� ` r� r �A .I I1 �I iy s ,r 0 Wi 'd - 5,-- 1 t c v �S IA Eggs 4* &-rff sf__ J-1 hp. :K C�i:..R� d:,y� ..w ,. ;gyp• ..., �� A�',,:��1 ��. TP!."•_`' PR appow;- a :✓E .� ` r� r �A .I I1 �I iy s ,r 0 *a" AbkA s IR`•. r a �- •.n { ATM pulp lkl- lit C � nit. . Osy 1 • r♦ �le� .�i '1 ' 41 t . � t /• y �,• t 1 : 1 t, ` +` • � 1 Ir.w . -F -gip Cr Y*tA' low W-F WIN ,... J� 1 '� yam. �. � I��� T, ?r:• i. � AP M i v A txi'• �1�'�,, t�* a FY•.,.n, Ar j /J( IL S a t s } , M� �;►hibit .1 i LA Exhibit Vf- W ic Awl- IF 0`5, 1.lai� - ■ w `7 F3 i t h E 'iii:.° � • I ��11 � x K JA 74 cr fp lu _.. 'fir �'•� '�.. { • .. Fyn' � • ' ' { "i a � .'aR f� '} • Syr .� ♦ .' ` r .. �' a �t :. at .,.Air . 4 ':.. .'Si sk • • 1'- cr 4Z .7�"'i ml, AM% Phillip I Qualy zte tZ Legislative Director, 7 2 Chairperson a Daniel M. Paradise law/ Assistant Director �' "*•p^°' Brian L. Hunstad Labor and Professions Centre S� 411 Main Street MW St Pmd, MN 55102 - Suite 212 651- 272 - 7500(0)651- 222 - 78280 Minnesota Legislative Bard A Division of SMART, Sheet Metal, Air, Rail, Transit Union LRUMNIEGBD@VISLCOM October 4, 2013 The Honorable Governor Mark Dayton State of Minnesota 130 State Capitol St. Paul, MN 55155 VIA: Hand Delivery and Electronic Mail PDF Scan. C /O: Ms. Joanna Dornfeld and Ms. Amy Hang RE: Southwest Light Rail Project. Freight Reroute, Rail Labor Alternative Analysis. Dear Governor. Dayton, Enclosed herewith, please find our United Transportation Union letter of analysis addressed to Legislative Chairperson's Dibble and Hornstein regarding the Southwest Light Rail Freight Reroute Project. We hope this letter of rail labor analysis from our operating experience and perspective may assist decision makers with this difficult matter. Ultimately, we hope all parties can reach consensus from readily achievable and common sense alternatives for the SW LRT Freight Reroute project. Thank you for your review of this letter of consultation. Please do not hesitate to contact this State Committee office if we can answer any questions or address your concerns. Sincerely, 2=y L slative Director United T ortation Union -SMART enclosure gislative Director, ` @ - Daniel M. Paradise q, ' Anist = Direatnt `°G +►.p�+, `' Brian ILv Hassled Labor and Pmfesdonal Cem�e 411 Msin Sma St Pant, NAT 55102 Suite 212 • 651- 222- 75DO(o)651- 222 -78Mf) Minnesota Legislative Board &MAID A Division of SMART, Sheet Metal, Air, Rail, Transit Union UTUMNLEGHI @VISLOOM October 4, 2013 Mr. Robert Johnson Vice President, U.S. Operations Canadian Pacific Railway 120 South Sixth Street Ste. 1000 Minneapolis, MN 55402 VIA: U.S. Mail. RE: Southwest Light Rail Project, Freight Reroute: Rail Labor Alternative Analysis. Dear Mr. Johnson, Enclosed herewith for your review, please find our United Transportation Union letter of analysis addressed to Minnesota Legislative Leadership regarding the Southwest Light Rail Freight Reroute Project. Referencing our meeting at your office scheduled for September 221, , 2013,- 10 AM, which did not occur and which has not been rescheduled to date, this document encompasses our review of the proposed SW -LRT St. Louis Park Freight Reroute area. In short summary, we believe that the Canadian Pacific and Twin Cities and Western Railways are overreaching in this matter. Please do not hesitate to contact this UTU -SMART State Committee office if we can address your concerns. Thank you for your review of this letter of consultation. Sincerely, 4P,. J only Minnesota L slative Director United Transportation Union -SMART enclosure - Phillip a. Qualy Legislative Director, Chairperson Daniel M. Paradise Assistant Du=tor Brian L. i3unstad Secretary October 4, 2013 F //t/I �,/ Minnesota Legislative Board A Division of SMART, Sheet Metal, Air, Rail, Transit Union Mr. Mark Wagner President, Twin Cities & Western Railroad Company 2925 12 Street East. Glenco, MN 55336 VIA: U.S. Mail n1r Labor and Professional Came 411 Main Street St Pail, MN 55102 Suite 212 651 - 222 - 7500(0) 651- 222- 7828(f) E-MAIL UTUMNI EGHD@VISLCDM RE: Southwest Light Rail Project. Freight Reroute: Rail Labor Alternative Analysis. Dear Mr. Wagner, Enclosed herewith for your review, please find our United Transportation Union letter of analysis addressed to Legislative Chairperson's Dibble and Hornstein regarding the Southwest Light Rail Freight Reroute Project. Referencing our conversation from September 2e at the University of Minnesota Freight Rail Symposium, this document encompasses our review of the proposed St. Louis Park Freight Reroute area. Please do not hesitate to contact this UTU -SMART State Committee office if we can answer address your concerns. Thank you for your review of this letter of consultation. Sincerely, P. J Mlnnesotz United Tr. enclosure Director Union -SMART �,, Fs� a';S t pcz -Y - Mayor James Hovland and - Members of the Edina City Council Re: 6609 Blackfoot Pass — Applications for Subdivision and Variance Dear Mayor Hovland and City Council, October 10, 2013 This purpose of this letter is to offer support for subject applications. I am the son of Douglas Johnson, the current owner of the property. I lived there from 1969 to 1980, and am currently an Edina resident. As was made `clear by the City Attorney at the October 1 City Council meeting, the decision for subdivision is to be based on fact, not subjective matters. As the only objective factors in Ordinance 810.11 are the subdivided lot dimensions and whether these dimensions exceed the median values of properties within 500 feet, the City Council'made clear on October 1 this is the determining factor. The dimensions of the proposed subdivided lots in this case meet the requirements set forth in 810.11, so the subdivision should be approved. I would, however, like to address some concerns and objections expressed by neighbors. There is objection to the anticipated removal of trees in order to build on the lower lot. If the variance is granted, the house would be placed in an area away from most of the oak trees. To the extent some (mostly cottonwood and elm) trees would still be removed, it should be noted this lot is currently at least 80% forested, and even with some tree removal,:the two new lots are likely to be as forested as one sees on nearby properties. The buyer has made efforts to solicit neighbors' input, and I believe their best way to influence the vegetation on this property is with the current proposal. If this property were to remain one lot, they could not presume to have input to either my father's decisions regarding the trees and landscaping, or a subsequent owner's plans. There is objection to placing a house on the slope and using retaining walls. If the variance is granted, the house would not be on the slope. The plans put forth by the builder do show some retaining walls if the variance is granted, however this would not be out of character for the neighborhood. The houses at both 6709 and 6713 Cheyenne Trail are dug into steep hillside and use large retaining walls. I count at least 10 other lots in the 500 foot area with notable retaining walls, many of those as part of extensive landscaping and others to accommodate driveways cut into the hilly topography. There is worry by the neighbor to the south about basement flooding. With the variance, the hillside above that house would be little changed. In any case, that house in a local low area, with significant hillsides on other bordering properties draining into it as well. There is concern about traffic safety at the corner of Cheyenne Trail and Blackfoot Pass, with the addition of a second driveway. As proposed, the ingress /egress would be located about the same as the existing driveway. My father and I can state from personal experience, in the 45 years since that driveway was built, there has not been a single accident involving a vehicle entering or exiting. I must address a fallacy in the letter submitted.by the neighbors' attorney Mr. Keane. He seems to be suggesting the subdivision of this-property will qualify more lots in the area for subdivision. This is plainly incorrect. The closer the lots in a 500 foot area are to equal in size, the less likely any one of them will meet the dimensional requirements for subdivision. I believe the only other lot in the neighborhood which would qualify for subdivision is 6601 Blackfoot Pass. It may be noted that property was originally platted as two lots. Soto the extent one wants to presume to know the intent of those who platted the area, as Mr..Keane does, I'll suggest they did not intend there be a lot that large: I would like to address the issue of "neighborhood character", subjective as it is. The character..of this . neighborhood is not static, having .evolved %substantially in the last 45 years. The two cul -de -sacs facing Gleason Road have been developed.. Most of the nearby Indian Hills houses have been either extensively remodeled and enlarged, or torn down for larger houses, along with a significant increase in high -end landscaping. It can easily -be stated this, property is currently out of,character with the rest of the neighborhood. Years ago, there was significantly more lawn on this property, my father having let much of it go back to forest in the last 15,years as he devoted his time and attention to my mother's care. it is fair to say the current.proposal will bring it more in character with the neighborhood. I suppose some neighbors view this property as their own 1 -3/4 acre wilderness park down'the block, a complement to their own highly landscaped properties. It is fair to say there is nothing unique about this subdivision and variance application. It conforms to the letter and spirit of existing ordinance. Please approve it. Respectfully submitted, Christopher Johnson 5308 Highwood Drive W., Edina Deb Mangen From: Sue Keator <chickadeedee55 @gmail.com> Sent: Friday, October 11, 2013 9:32 AM To: Edina Mail; Sue Keator Subject: Richmond Hills Road Reconstruction Mayor Hovland and Members of the City Council, I am writing to you to point out several things about last year's road reconstruction in the Richmond Hills area. At the meetings held prior to the work Wayne Houle said that the roads /curbs /gutters were 50 years old and the new work would be good for the next 50 (or so) years. However, with the shoddy workmanship by Palda and their subcontractors the roads and curbs are already breaking. I walk my dog daily in the neighborhood and have made note of many flaws that are in evidence. By my last count there are over a dozen items, mainly cracks in curbs and gouges in concrete, that need fixing. (I could provide you with a listing of all of these if you would like). There are also innumerable spots where expansion joints are not flush, causing damming in the gutters and pooling of water. Many of these uneven spots have led to City snowplows catching on the curbs and breaking them in the first winter! Surely these new curbs will not last anywhere nearly as long as the old ones. The construction also did serious damage to Melody Lake. Booms were not in place to prevent storm runoff until neighbors complained after a rain when the lake was suddenly the same color as the street. Common sense, and laws, would tell someone that runoff should be prevented. To date, the damage done to the lake has not been mitigated. Additionally, a beautiful perennial garden that I had created and tended for nearly 15 years was destroyed. I moved my plants to accommodate the work but when the replacement `dirt was brought in it was filled with large pieces of broken glass. This is the same dirt that was used to fill all the yards where work was done. The dirt did not drain as the workers had compacted the sub -clay too hard. It had a greasy oily feel to it and a foul smell. I gave samples of the dirt to a couple friends who are Master Gardeners and was told to get a soil test at the University as they thought it was ground -up asphalt. When I mentioned all this to the supervisor the workers quickly came and took away all the dirt. They did give me a bale of peat moss to mitigate the damage. My brother and I spent many hours digging to correct to drainage and started over with new dirt. The garden is OK today but certainly no thanks to the workers. I wonder how much broken glass is in everyone else's yards. And I really do wonder if it was just ground up asphalt. All in all it was a terrible experience and to have to pay such a huge assessment is ridiculous. The City staff was rude to deal with (we were once told that we should be happy we did not get assessed as much as Country Club!) and timely communications were not always forthcoming. All in all, this project was awful. I know it is far too late for us but hopefully somewhere along the way the people involved with this will learn to treat homeowners with respect and kindness. I expect far more from my City. Susan Keator 5041 Yvonne Terrace ` I Deb.Mangen ,From: Sandi Genau <sgenau79 @gmail.com> Sent: Thursday, October 10, 2013 6:58 PM To: Edina Mail Subject: 5 Merilane Subdivision, Edina Dear Mayor Hovland and Council Members, I was curious what steps are being taken to verify that correct lot sizes and information was used by John Adams when calculating the subdivision criteria? As pointed out during the last meeting, there are several discrepancies. I noticed a surveyor crew on the Warner's property but have not seen anything else. I am also wondering how the large pond is being calculated into the numbers? I would appreciate an update. Thank you, Sandi Genau 6 Merilane Avenue Edina, MN 55436 i Deb Mangen From: jjlalim @comcast.net Sent: Wednesday, October 09, 2013 2:15 PM To: Edina Mail Cc: Jackie Hoogenakker Subject: Subdivision This letter is regarding the subdivisin of 6609 Blackfoot Pass, Edina. My property is: 6600 Blackfoot Pass. As can be seen in an old Indian Hills Directory, there is a boundary map of this area and each lot drawn by a Hennepin County Surveyor, Mr. Peterson. Let's preserve this beautiful community of well designed homes, large lots, winding roads, mature trees and thick foilage. It is my understanding that there are covenants that apply to Indian Hills. Please do not ignore them and their importance in protecting the beauty and value of our neighborhood. Indian Hills is a small unique established community. I object to the subdivision of the property at 6609 Blackfoot Pass, Edina. Respectfully, Jewel Lalim 1 Deb Mangen From: Rosemary Schwedes <rgschwedes @gmail.com> Sent: Thursday, October 10, 2013 7:39 AM To: Edina Mail; Joni Bennett;joshsprague @edinarealty.com Cc: Jeff Schwedes . Subject: Soon and Jenny Park I am distressed - appalled might be the better term - at the treatment of the Soon and Jenny Park regarding their property on 49 1/2 street. I think it is cruel of the City of Edina to take their property by eminent domain. Destroying the couple's, ability to have a comfortable retirement to get more parking is a terrible trade -off. There has to be another solution. I have parked in the 50th and France area for 20 years. I have never had any difficulty whether I went there to shop, to dine, to see the dentist, to shop for groceries, to see a movie, to attend the art fair. When I park my car in a lot or ramp, there are other spaces available. I have never left a parking lot or ramp at 50th and France because it was entirely full. I don't see much of an immediate need for more parking. If more. parking is needed in the future; I think the City could find solutions other than forcing the Park couple to give up their- property. I understand that the city is already planning to build parking on the east side of the current parking ramp on 49 1/2 street. Maybe make it a taller ramp or one that goes below as well as above ground. Or_.build a ramp on the flat lot at 51 st and Ewing. Or build a ramp on the open lot next to Lund's. Or on the open lot next to and behind the US Bank builiding. Or add a floor to all of the existing ramps. Or otherwise get creative. The Soon's building cannot be the only solution available to solve a projected parking problem. Does all of life have to be bartered, for more ,cars and more concrete? I wonder what kind of community we are that the newspaper report on the.Park building, says: "His parents worked at the cleaners 'seven days a week for 15 hours for 20 years to serve Edina, he [Tony Park] said. He I asked the city to. find away to help his parents How_ ever, council members countered that there is a greater public need for the site:". What greater public need justifies crushing Soon and Jenny Park? Let's get creative here and find another solution. Leave the Park couple and their property alone. Rosemary Schwedes 5828 Kellogg Ave., Edina Deb Manaen From: Kelly Streit <kellymstreit @gmail.com> Sent: Thursday, October 10, 2013 11:10 AM To: Edina Mail Subject: Route To - Mayor, City Council and Environmental and Energy Council Re: Trees Hi, My name is Kelly Streit. I live at 5421 Kellogg Ave. We have just had the second teardown and third large tree cut down on our block. It concerns me that there is no regulation for developers regarding cutting down these trees. Replacing a 30+ foot tree with a spindly new tree isn't really the same. One of the reasons that Edina is so beautiful is the large trees that line our streets and provide shade and shelter for birds. I think that there should be an ordinance that addresses this. I hope that this is addressed soon before more trees are lost. Thank you, Kelly Streit 1 Deb Mangen From: Joel Stegner <joel.r.stegner @gmail.com> Sent: Thursday, October 10, 2013 3:24 PM To: Edina Mail Subject: Edina City Council - a new scientific study that backs up Edina's concerns about airplane noise http://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/812312?nlid=35463 1882&src =wnl edit dail &uac= 26990BG Susan Howl From: Jennifer Bennerotte ;ent: Thursday, October 10, 2013 1:57 PM` "'` o: ED Everyone; Ann Swenson; James Hovland ohovland @krausehovland.com); Joni Bennett; Josh Sprague; Mary Brindle (Comcast) Subject: September Website Report Good afternoon! We use Google Analytics to monitor activity on our website. Activity on the City of Edina website reflected the following activity during the month of September 2013: Total visits: 61,863 Number of unique visitors: 42,854 Average time of each visit: 2 minutes, 15 seconds Total page views: 163,389 Nearly 54 percent of visitors came just one time. About 46 percent visited more often. Besides the home page, the most visited page was the Braemar Golf Course home page with 7,719 page views. Other top pages included the following (with number of page views): Fall into the Arts Festival —7,163 Centennial Lakes Park -7,088 Edinborough Park -6,402 Edinborough Park General Information — 2,938 Edina Art Center — 2,795 Job Opportunities — 2,792 Edinborough Park Adventure Peak — 2,598 Centennial Lakes Park Attractions — 2,380 Centennial Lakes Events — 2,082 The most frequently.accessed PDF among visitors was Section 850 of the Zoning Code. Other frequently downloaded files included the following: 2012 Edina Film Festival poster Homestead Application Park & Facilities Map City Code Chapter 14, Section 1425 on Bike Registration Senior Center October Calendar of Events Phase One Rezoning Development Review City Code Chapter 7, Section 705 on Storage & Disposal of Refuse April 8, 2013 Crime Report Curb Cut Application The most popular blog category was Police Chief Jeff Long's blog, followed by the Parks & Recreation and City Manager Scott Neal's blogs. The most popular blog posts were "We Have a Shift in Heaven," "Save 9 -1 -1 For Emergencies," "Social Security — The Other Public Pension," "Join the City's Adult Co -Rec Kickball League" and "Civility Under Stress." The terms people uses to find our site were braemar golf, city of edina,' braemar golf course, centennial lakes, "edin borough. park edina," "edina art center," "centennial lakes art fair," " edina mn," "city of edina mn" and "Braemar ice arena." The most searched for words or phrases people used once people arrived at our site were "zoning map," "employment," "jobs," "permits," "zoning," "homestead," "recycling," "Fred Richards," "parking" and "wedding." Speak Up, Edina Activity on the "Speak Up, Edina" website reflected the following activity during the month of September 2013: Total visits: 376 Number of unique visitors: 285 Average time of each visit: 2 minutes, 26 seconds Total page views: 1,019 More than 64 percent of visitors came just one time. About 36 percent visited more often. The most popular discussions on the site were community gardening and the construction process in Edina. E- commerce E- commerce on our sites totaled $132,064.14 in September. Top sellers were building permits, $112,619.67 (544 permits); Art Center class registration, $6,778; dasherboard sales, $5,815; and About Town advertising sales, $1,350. Webstreaming We have been streaming video on our website through Granicus for several years. The most requested videos on Granicus in September were the Sept. 17 City Council meeting,163 views; Sept. 3 City Council meeting, 116; Sept. 11 Planning Commission meeting, 47; Edina School Board Candidate Forum presented by the League of Women Voters of Edina, 41; League of Women Voters of Edina Election Reform Discussion, 19; June 4 City Council meeting, 19; Sept. 25 Planning Commission meeting, 10; Aug. 20 City Council meeting, 8; and Aug. 28 Planning Commission meeting, 8. About 90 percent watched on a.desktop, while 10 percent watched from some sort of mobile device. We have been streaming all programming on YouTube since January 2011. In September, there were 3,626 views of an estimated 8,613 minutes on the City's YouTube channel. The most requested videos on YouTube in September were the Fall into the Arts Festival segment on "Beyond the Badge," 154 views; Edina School Board.Candidate Forum presented by the League of Women Voters of Edina, 136; segment on new squad cars in the September episode of "Beyond the Badge," 132; Edina Police Department overview, 81; Grandview development update in the late September episode of "agenda: Edina," 77; segment on theft in the September episode of "Beyond the Badge," 69; Welcome to Edina video, 69;- Braemar Golf Course "Pro Tip" on golf grips, 61; and the September episode of "Beyond the Badge," 58. The majority of YouTube viewers` — 71 percent — watched on a computer; 16.3 watched on a mobile phone and 11.2 percent watched on a tablet. Suggestions, Comments Please continue to review our new website and think about ways to improve it. If you have suggestions or questions, please contact me. If you have things that need to be fixed, please write to helpdesk @EdinaMN.gov. 'sue Jennifer Bennerotte, Communications & Technology Services Director 952- 833 -9520 ( Fax •952-826-0389 1 ri JBennerotte(&EdinaMN.gov I www.EdinaMN.gov ;�`'' ...For Living, Learning, Raising Families 6i Doin- Business CenterPoint. Energy Ms. Debra Mangen Edina - City Clerk 4801 W 50th St Edina, MN 55424 -1330 Dear Ms. Mangen: 800 LaSalle Avenue PO Box 59038 Minneapolis, MN 55459 -0038 September 23, 2013 On August 2, 2013, CenterPoint Energy filed a request with the Minnesota Public Utilities Commission (MPUC) for an increase in natural gas rates of $44.3 million annually or 5.0 percent. On September 12, 2013, the Commission accepted our filing as complete and approved an interim (temporary) rate increase of $42.9 million annually or 4.88 percent. This interim rate increase for CenterPoint Energy customers takes effect October 1, 2013, and continues until the MPUC issues a final order and the company implements new rates in mid 2014. State law requires us to distribute a Notice of Application for Rate Increase and Notice and Order for Hearing to all counties and municipalities in our service area (enclosed). We will send you the public hearing notices with details of the public hearing dates, times and locations once they are scheduled. That information will also be advertised in the newspapers of record for each county seat in our service area and in the communities where hearings are to be held. If you have questions or comments, please visit our Web site at www.CenterPointEnergy.co.m/ratecase. Sincerely, 4 rAn�E� Joe Vortherms Division Vice President CenterPoint Energy Regional Gas Operations Enclosures: Notice of Application for Rate Increase Notice and Order for Hearing FOR CENTERPOINT ENERGY CUSTOMERS Notice to Counties and Municipalities Under Minn. Stat. §216B.16, Subd. 1 BEFORE THE MINNESOTA PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION — STATE OF MINNESOTA In the Matter of an Application by CenterPoint Energy for Authority to Increase Natural Gas Rates in Minnesota. NOTICE OF APPLICATION FOR RATE INCREASE MPUC Docket No. G- 008 /GR -13 -316 On August 2, 2013, CenterPoint.Energy,.;a division of CenterPoint Energy Resources Corp., (CenterPoint Energy), filed a request with the Minnesota Public, Utilities Commission (Commission) for a general rate increase of $44.3 million or 5.0 percent. At its meeting on September 12, 2013, the,Commission accepted CenterPoint Energy's filing as complete. In accordance with Minn. Stat. § 216B.16, Subd. 3, the Commission has approved a total interim increase of $42.9 million or 4.88 percent. CenterPoint Energy customers will receive a 4.88 percent increase on their bills. Below are examples of the affect of the proposed and interim increase on typical bills for CenterPoint Energy customers. Individual changes may be higher or lower depending on actual natural gas usage. Rate Type Average,: Average Average Average (usage in therms) monthly monthly bill: monthly bill: monthly bill: usage in current rates interim rates proposed therms Residential 73 $58- $6,1„ $61 Commercial /Industrial - up to 1,499 /year 60' $52; _ $55 , $55 - 1,500 to 4,999 /year 226 .. $166. $174, $1.67 - 5;000 or more/ ear 1,136 $774 $812 $788 Small Volume Dual Fuel - up to l 19,999 /year 3,799. $2; l 14 $-2,217 $2;161 - 120,000 or more / ear 13,743 $7,4.49 $7,813 $7,617 Large Volume Dual Fuel 125,750 $59,200 $62,089 $60,737 The Commission will determine the amount of the final rate increase on or before June 2, 2014. If the final approved rates are less than the interim rates, the difference will be refunded to customers, with interest. To examine . the current and proposed rate schedules, visit CenterPoint Energy's office at 800 LaSalle Avenue, 14`il Floor, Minneapolis, Minn., 55402. The Company's business office hours are 8 a.m. to 5 p.m. Monday through Friday. The filing may also-be examined at the Minnesota Department of Commerce, 85 Seventh Place East, Suite 500, St. Paul, Minn., 55 10 1, telephone 651- 539 -1886 or your preferred Telecommunications Relay Service or at the eDockets Web site at www.edockets.state.mn.us. The current and proposed rate schedules and filing for new rates may also be examined by visiting the Company's Web site at www. CenterPointEnergy.com /ratecase. An administrative law judge will schedule public hearings. Public notice of the hearing dates and locations will be published in local newspapers in CenterPoint Energy's service areas. Persons who wish to intervene or testify in this case should contact the Administrative Law Judge, the Honorable Laura Sue Schlatter, Office of Administrative Hearings, Post Office Box 64620, St. Paul, MN 55164 -0620. BEFORE THE MINNESOTA PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION Beverly Jones Heydinger David C. Boyd Nancy Lange J. Dennis O'Brien Betsy Wergin In the Matter of an Application by CenterPoint Energy Resources Corp. d/b /a CenterPoint Energy Minnesota Gas for Authority to Increase Natural Gas Rates in Minnesota Chair Commissioner Commissioner Commissioner Commissioner ISSUE DATE: September 23, 2013 DOCKET NO. G- 008 /GR -13 -316 NOTICE AND ORDER FOR HEARING PROCEDURAL HISTORY On August 2, 2013, CenterPoint Energy Resources Corp., d/b /a CenterPoint Energy Minnesota Gas (CenterPoint or the Company) filed a general rate case seeking an annual rate increase of some $44.322 million, or approximately 5 percent. On August 5, 2013, the Commission issued a notice to potentially interested parties requesting comments on whether the Commission should accept the filing as substantially complete and whether it should refer the case to the Office of Administrative Hearings for contested case proceedings. The only party to file comments was the Minnesota Department of Commerce, Division of Energy Resources (the Department), which filed comments on August 12, 2013, , recommending that the Commission accept the filing as complete and refer the case for contested case proceedings. On August 15, 2013, CenterPoint filed a letter agreeing with the Department's recommendation. On September, 12, 2013, the Commission met to consider the matter. Contemporaneously with this order, the Commission issued two other orders in this case —one finding the rate case filing to be substantially complete, and suspending the proposed rates, and one setting an interim rate schedule for use during the suspension period. FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS I. Jurisdiction and Referral for Contested Case Proceedings The Commission has jurisdiction over proposed rate changes under Minn. Stat. § 216B.16. If the Commission is unable to resolve all significant issues regarding the reasonableness of the proposed rates on the basis of the filing itself, the Commission is to refer the matter to the Office of Administrative Hearings for contested case proceedings. Minn. Stat. § 216B.16, subd. 2. The Commission finds that it cannot satisfactorily resolve all questions regarding the reasonableness of the proposed rates on the basis of the'Company's filing. The Commission will therefore refer the matter to the Office of Administrative Hearings for contested case proceedings. II. Issues to be Addressed Parties shall specifically and thoroughly address the following issues (e.g., in testimony, at hearing, and, if applicable, in settlement documents) in the course of the contested case proceedings ordered herein: (1) Is the test year revenue increase sought by the Company reasonable or will it result in unreasonable and excessive earnings by the Company? (2) Is the rate design proposed by the Company reasonable? (3) Are the Company's proposed capital structure, cost of capital, and return on equity reasonable? (4) What is the appropriate number to be used for 2012 operating income in the rate. case -- the number included in Schedule C -2(b) of the Company's rate case filing ($33,947,000), or the number included in the Company's 2012 Jurisdictional Annual Report ($36,900;000) filed in Docket No., E,G- 999/PR- 13 -04? (5) How much of CenterPoint's aging infrastructure scheduled to be replaced.will be abandoned, and how will that comply. with. current regulations? (6) What'is the design of the Company's billable hourly rate as it relates to corporate costs? The Commission also asks for an explanation of the billable hourly rate's {, component parts. (7) What additional,information does. CenterPoint have regarding the Company's rate case'expense recovery tracking and the handling of the over - collection of such expenses arising from,its last rate case — Docket No. G- 008/GR- 084'075? (8) What is the financial impact to ratepayers, based upon the Company's actual experience, of CenterPoint's extended or shortened billing periods due to accelerated or delayed meter readings? In its order accepting the filing and suspending rates, the Commission will also require CenterPoint to file supplemental testimony regarding warning letters and notices of probable violation issued by the Nfinnesota Office of Pipeline Safety (MNOPS),1 updated sales forecasts in its per dekatherm demand cost of gas rate, and an analysis of the impact of various decoupling scenarios. The parties may also raise and address other issues relevant to the Company's proposed rate increase. 1 See, MNOPS Case Number 1299473 - 1(2011 -13 NS and MNOPS Case Number 1307070 -2 (2013). 2' M. Procedural Outline A. Administrative Law Judge The Administrative Law Judge assigned to this case is Laura Sue Schlatter. Her address and telephone number are as follows: Office of Administrative Hearing, 600 North Robert Street, St. Paul, Minnesota 55101 and (65 1) 361 -7872. Her mailing address is P.O. Box 64620, St. Paul, Minnesota 55164 -0620. B. Hearing Procedure Controlling Statutes and Rules Hearings in this matter will be conducted in accordance with the Administrative Procedure Act, Minn. Stat. §§ 14.57 — 14.62; the rules of the Office of Administrative Hearings, Minn. Rules, parts 1400.5100 to 1400.8400; and, to the extent that they are not superseded by those rules, the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure, Minn. Rules, parts 7829.0100 to 7829.3200. Copies of these rules and statutes may be purchased from the Print Communications Division of the Department of Administration, 660 Olive Street, St. Paul, Minnesota 55155; (651) 297 -3000. These rules and statutes also appear on the State of Minnesota's website at www.revisor.=.gov /pubs. The Office of Administrative Hearings conducts contested case proceedings in accordance with the Minnesota Rules of Professional Conduct and the Professionalism Aspirations adopted by the Minnesota State Bar Association. • Right to Counsel and to Present Evidence In these proceedings, parties may be represented by counsel, may appear on their own behalf, or may be represented by another person of their choice, unless otherwise prohibited as the unauthorized practice of law. They have the right-to present evidence, conduct cross - examination, and make written and oral argument. Under Minn. Rules, part 1400.7000, they may obtain subpoenas to compel the attendance of witnesses and the production of documents. Parties should bring to the hearing all documents, records, and witnesses necessary to support their positions. Discovery and Informal Disposition Any questions regarding discovery under Minn. Rules, parts 1400.6700 to 1400.6800 or informal disposition under Minn. Rules, part 1400.5900 should be directed to Robert Harding, Financial Analysis Unit Supervisor, Minnesota Public Utilities Commission, 121 7th Place East, Suite 350, St. Paul, Minnesota 55101 -2147, (651) 201 -2237. • Protecting Not - Public Data State agencies are required by law to keep some data not public. Parties must advise the Administrative Law Judge if not - public data is offered into the record. They should take note that any not - public data admitted into evidence may become public unless a party objects and requests relief under Minn. Stat. § 14.60, subd. 2. • Accommodations for Disabilities; Interpreter Services At the request of any individual, this agency will make accommodations to ensure that the hearing in this case is accessible. The agency will appoint a qualified interpreter if necessary. Persons must promptly notify the Administrative Law Judge if an interpreter is needed. • Scheduling Issues The times, dates, and places of public and evidentiary hearings in this matter will be set by order of the Administrative Law Judge after consultation with the Commission and intervening parties. • Notice of Appearance Any party intending to appear at the hearing must file a notice of appearance (Attachment A) with the Administrative Law Judge within 20 days of the date of this Notice and Order for Hearing. • Sanctions for Non - compliance Failure to appear at a prehearing conference, a settlement conference, or the hearing, or failure to comply with any order of the Administrative Law Judge, may result in facts or issues being resolved against the party who fails to appear or comply. C. Parties and Intervention The current parties to this case are the Company and the Department of Commerce's Division of Energy Resources. Other persons wishing to become formal parties shall promptly file petitions to intervene with the Administrative Law Judge. They shall serve copies of such petitions on all current parties and on the Commission. Minn. Rules, part 1400.6200. D. Prehearing Conference A prehearing conference will be held on Wednesday, October 2, 2013 at 1:30 p.m. in.the Small Hearing Room at the offices of the Public Utilities Commission, 121 Seventh Place East, Suite 350, St. Paul, Minnesota 55101 -2147. Persons participating in the prehearing conference should be prepared to discuss time frames, scheduling, discovery procedures, and similar issues. Potential parties are invited to attend the pre - hearing conference and to file their petitions to intervene as soon as possible rd E. Time Constraints The Commission is required to act on substantially complete rate case filings within ten months, although this ten -month period can be extended under certain circumstances. The Commission asks the Office of Administrative Hearings to conduct contested case proceedings in light of these time constraints and requests that the Administrative Law Judge submit her final report on or before April 2, 2014, to permit adequate consideration of the case by the Commission. If the statutory deadline for the Commission's decision is extended beyond the normal ten months at any point during this proceeding for any reason (e.g., settlement discussions, waiver, etc.), the Commission requests the ALJ's report be submitted at least two months before the extended deadline for the Commission's decision. IV.. Application of Ethics in Government Act The lobbying provisions of the Ethics in Government Act, Minn. Stat. § 10A.01 et seq., apply to general rate cases. Persons appearing in this proceeding may be subject to registration, reporting, and other requirements set forth in that Act. All persons appearing in this case are urged to refer to the Act and to contact the Campaign Finance and Public Disclosure Board, telephone number (651) 296 -5148, with any questions. V. Ex Parte Communications Restrictions on ex parte communications with Commissioners and reporting requirements regarding such communications with Commission staff apply to this proceeding from the date of this Order. Those restrictions and reporting requirements are set forth at Minn. Rules, parts 7845.7300 — 7845.7400, which all parties are urged to consult. VI. Notices Required; Delegation of Authority Finally, the rate case statute and the Commission's rules require comprehensive notice of proposed general rate increases. Those notices are required in the ordering paragraphs below, and to promote administrative efficiency, the Commission will delegate to the Executive Secretary the authority to approve customer notices, bill inserts, and bill format for the duration of this proceeding: The Commission hereby refers this case to the Office of Administrative Hearings for contested case proceedings, as set forth above. 2. The Company shall promptly mail copies of this Order to all municipalities, counties, and local governing authorities within its Minnesota service area. 3. Public hearings shall be held in this case at locations within the service area of the company; those locations shall be set by the Administrative Law Judge after consultation with the parties and Commission staff. 4. The Company shall give the following notices of the evidentiary and public hearings: A. Individual written notice to each customer, which may be in the form of a bill insert, and shall be served at least ten days before the first day of hearings. B. Written notice to the governing bodies of all municipalities, counties, and, local governing bodies in the area affected and to all parties in the Company's last two rate cases. These notices shall be mailed at least ten days before the first day of hearings. C. Display advertisements in legal newspapers of affected counties and other newspapers of general circulation within the Company's Minnesota service area. These advertisements shall appear at least ten days before the first day of hearings. They shall include the heading RATE INCREASE NOTICE, which heading shall appear.in bold face type no smaller than 30 points. 5. The Company shall submit proposed notices for Commission approval prior to publication or service. 6. The Commission delegates to the Executive Secretary the authority10 approve customer notices, bill inserts, and bill format for the duration of this proceeding. This Order shall become effective immediately. BY ORDER OF THE COMMISSION Burl W. Haar Executive Secretary c • r . o This document can be made available in alternative formats (e.g.,.large print or audio) by calling 651.296.0406 (voice). Persons with hearing loss or speech disabilities may call us through their preferred Telecommunications Relay Service. 3 Y 'I ATTACIB ENT A BEFORE THE MINNESOTA OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS 600 North Robert Street St. Paul, Minnesota 55101 FOR THE MINNESOTA PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION 121 Seventh Place East Suite 350 St. Paul, Minnesota 55101 -2147 In the Matter of an Application by CenterPoint MPUC DOCKET NO. G- 008 /GR -13 -316 Energy Resources Corp. d/b /a CenterPoint Energy Minnesota Gas for Authority to Increase OAH Docket No. 80- 2500 -30979 Natural Gas Rates in Minnesota e Name, Address and Telephone Number of Administrative Law Judge: Laura Sue Schlatter, Office of Administrative Hearings, 600 North Robert Street, St. Paul, Minnesota 55101 and (651) 361 -7872. Her mailing address is P.O. Box 64620, St. Paul, Minnesota 55164 -0620. TO THE ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE: You are advised that the party named below will appear at the above hearing: NAME OF PARTY: ADDRESS: TELEPHONE NUMBER AND E -MAIL ADDRESS: PARTY'S ATTORNEY OR OTHER REPRESENTATIVE: OFFICE ADDRESS: TELEPHONE NUMBER: SIGNATURE OF PARTY OR ATTORNEY: DATE: r G REPORT / RECOMMENDATION • e To: -MAYOR AND COUNCIL From: Debra Mangen City Clerk Date: October 14, 2013 Subject: CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED AFTER PACKETS �RYOPA� �eee Agenda Item #: IX. A. Action Requested: Attached is correspondence received after the packets were delivered to you. No action is necessary. Action ❑ Discussion ❑ Information X❑ Deb Mangen From: Debra R Brisk <Debra.Brisk @hennepin.us> Sent: Saturday, October 12, 2013 11:14 AM To: Edina Mail Cc: David Hough Subject: RE: Xerxes - improvements / meeting with Hennepin County Oct 11, 2013 Mayor Hovland — Based on the public meeting last night that was held with staff from Hennepin County and Commissioner Dorfman the following actions will occur based on Jim's email. Thanks — for your support to Hennepin County ! Deb From: James Grube Sent: Saturday, October 12, 2013 11:11 AM To: Janis Callison; Gail Dorfman Cc: Debra R Brisk; Gregory M. Chock Subject: Xerxes Avenue - TH 62 to 60th Street Commissioners, We have now completed the neighborhood engagement related to the proposed installation of temporary bumpouts along both sides of Xerxes Avenue between TH 62 and 60th Street yet this fall, and pending the outcome of the temporary bumpout evaluation, placement of permanent bumpouts in 2014 as part of the county's overlay of Xerxes Avenue between TH 62 and Minnehaha Creek. The two engagements yielded acceptance by those in attendance and the city representatives. The process now involves two separate actions — a different path for each city. For Minneapolis, the City Council Member's office needs to work with city staff to put together a traffic order that prohibits parking on the east side along the southerly 170' then removes the peak hour restrictions along the rest of the length until 6005/6007, a duplex, where the northerly bumpout will be installed. Northerly of that point to the intersection with 60th Street, parking will be prohibited to let drivers develop a right turn use from northbound Xerxes Avenue to eastbound 60th Street. This is an internal process that is straightforward. Edina, proposal`for parking prohibition along the.southerly 170: and` related bumpout installations will be placed on staffs.Traffic Safety Committee agenda. Assuming city;staff supports, the�concept, it will then go to the.city's spgrtatiop Commission and. assuming acceptance, on tathe City Council on November 5th. If all'goes as panned w At this point I will be advising both city staffs that we appear to have public acceptance of the concept — with a minor modification occurring at Friday's meeting with Minneapolis neighbors — and will lay out for them the two processes I offer above. I will also be sending letters out to each side of the street — each with its own process description so the neighbors know what will be transpiring within their city process. The letters will advise the neighbors to contact their city if there is a desire to impact the city thinking. Please let me know if there is anything else I can do for you in the meantime. Jim From: Debra R Brisk Sent: Friday, October 11, 2013 5:08 PM To: 'mail@EdinaMN.gov' Cc: David Hough Subject: Xerxes - improvements / meeting with Hennepin County Oct 11, 2013 Mayor Hovland Mr. David Hough noted to me today that you had dialogue related to Xerxes and the work that we've been doing with the abutting land owners and the need to facilitate movement of cars / vehicles in the area. For your information, attached is a document and meeting notice for tonight — regarding Xerxes and Crosstown area Thanks —Debra Brisk Disclaimer: Information in this message or an attachment may be government data and thereby subject to the Minnesota Government Data Practices Act, Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 13, may be subject to attorney- client or work product privilege, may be confidential, privileged, proprietary, or otherwise protected, and the unauthorized review, copying, retransmission, or other use or disclosure of the information is strictly prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient of this message, please immediately notify the sender of the transmission error and then promptly delete this message from your computer system. Deb Mangen From: Kathy Frey <kathy.r.frey @gmail.com> Sent: Sunday, October 13, 2013 12:37 PM To: James Hovland Subject: Re: Hooten Dry Cleaners Dear Ann, This is not consistent with what I heard at my meeting. If the Parks had been involved in the talks with the city, why would they have put $$$ into remodeling it for their new tenant, Jimmy John's ? ?? This does not add up. It does't appear that the city council proceeded professionally. j On Thursday, September 26, 2013, James Hovland 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] 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 .his 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 from theln 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 hi.s parents oftheir 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? Undo this mess you created and remember, "Thou shalt not steal ". z Katherine Frey 6021 Killarney Lane, Edina, MN 55436 cell: 952 -412 -3515 Definition of a bully: bu.l - ly' (b 11 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.bul•lied, bul•ly•ing, bullies v. tr. 3 1. To treat in an overbearing or intimidating manner. See Synonyms at intimidate. 2. To make (one's way) aggressively. v. intr. 4 Deb Mangen From: Laura Nisi <Inisi @me.com> Sent: Sunday, October 13, 2013 7:26 PM To: Edina Mail; bennettjoni; Mary Brindle (Comcast); Josh Sprague; swensonannl @gmail.com; Jim and LaRae Hovland Cc: Kurt Nisi Subject: Thoughts on Sports Dome Attachments: SportsDomeLetter.pdf, ATT00001.htm Greetings Council Members I have some thoughts on the sports dome proposal before you that I'd like to sharer They are both attached as a PDF and pasted below. - Thanks for the work you do Laura Nisi Inisi@mac.com 612.834.4034 To the City Council of Edina We understand you will be considering at your next meeting a proposal to begin the process of developing a sports dome and extra ice rink at Braemar. We see that the primary use of this will be for the youth sports associations, with some possible use by other groups, including seniors and the school district. As we read the proposal, it seems that this is the seed of a great idea. Why not expand on it, and use this opportunity to create a true recreation, fitness, and health facility for the city? You have heard from Laura before on the desire for such a place to go at the Public Works site, but possibly the city could have a better facility over at Braemar. Yes, have the sports dome, but make sure it is available not just during weekdays for seniors, but for preschoolers and parents as well. And that there is plenty of time on the weekends for youth who may not be elite traveling athletes, but just might enjoy some kickball in the middle of winter. Why not have some gyms that are rented out sometimes but also have plenty of open gym time? And an area for the under 5 set to stretch their legs during the long winter months? An indoor aquatic center like many of our neighboring suburbs have would surely be a great asset to the recreation and fitness of the community. In short, reading the proposed plan makes us want to ask you to think bigger! Think beyond what is being asked for by the sports associations and think towards what could benefit the entire community. It might be harder and take longer but it would certainly be a larger value to the city as a whole. Respectfully, Kurt and Laura Nisi P.S. On a separate but important note, the school district use of the facilities built for and maintained by the city continues to be an issue for us, when one quarter of the households in Edina are not in the Edina Public School district. If a sports dome is built and often leased out to the schools, the many citizens who are not served by the schools would be missing an amenity. KURT AND LAURA NISI + 5201 BLAKE ROAD + EDINA MN + 55436 October 13, 2013 To the City Council of Edina We understand you will be considering atyour next meeting a proposal to begin the process of developing a sports dome and extra ice rink at Braemar. _- -We see that.- the_ primary use- of_this_will -be. for . the. youth sports associations, with some possible- - - - -- use by other groups, including seniors and the school district. As we read the proposal, it seems that this is the seed of a great idea. Why not expand on it, and use this opportunity to create a true recreation, fitness, and health facility for the city? You have heard from Laura before on the desire for such a place to go at the Public Works site, but possibly the city could have a better facility over at Braemar. Yes, have the sports dome, but make sure it is available not just during weekdays for seniors, but for preschoolers and parents as well. And that there is plenty of time on the weekends for youth who may not be elite traveling athletes, but just might enjoy some kickball in the middle of winter. Why not have some gyms that are rented out sometimes but also have plenty of open gym time? And an area for the under 5 set to stretch their legs during the long winter months? An indoor aquatic center like many, of our neighboring. suburbs have would surely be a great asset to the recreation and fitness of the community. In short, reading. the. proposed plan makes us want to ask you to think bigger! Think beyond what is being asked for by the.'sports-.ass,ociations and think towards what could. benefit the entire community. It might be harder and take longer but it would certainly be a larger value to the city as a whole. Respectfully, Kurt and Laura Nisi P.S. On a separate but important note, the school district use of the facilities built for and maintained by the city continues to be an issue for us, when one quarter of the households in Edina are not in the Edina Public School district., If a sports dome is built and often leased out to the schools, the many citizens who are not served by the schools would be missing an amenity. October 14, 2013 Dear Mayor Hovland and Edina City Council Members, Tonighf you are being asked to consider approval of a sports dome in Edina. The request states that a new dome would largely serve "youth sports activities ". Edina has virtually no recreation facilities as a City, yet the City is continually called upon to bear the financial burden of youth sports. To be sure, youth sports add enrichment to our community; we can leverage scarce dollars with a smarter model that covers youth sports and recreation for all Edina citizens. Asyouu know, the. City_. embarked upon atwo. -year, $100, 000 study of Grandview -yet- never vetted the Grandview area, specifically the former public works site, for recreational use. One has to ask why not? The former public works site is publicly owned and centrally located. A smart. public development on the site will promote private redevelopment in the surrounding Grandview area. A Braemar Sports Dome does not meet those critical criteria. Why not consider a city owned, field house with a social/recreational and cultural component on the old public works site? If you approve a sports dome today you will: 1. Continue to invest in sports, not recreation (a dome based walking track is an inadequate response to Edina's many recreational needs). 2. Invest in only a percentage of the population (School aged children make up less than 20% of Edina's population according to the 2010 census date on the City's web site). 3. Build another stand - alone, single purpose facility in one of the least densely populated parts of town (doing nothing for surrounding economic development). 4. Put major financial resources into a corner of the City vs. a transit accessible, central location. 5. Continue the legacy of making recreation and culture in Edina fee based, for a privileged part of our community. When are we going to address the recreational /social and cultural needs of the 9% of our population at the poverty level? Or for the struggling middle class? It is time to take a 2lst century view of the entire City of Edina, both demographically and geographically. A field -house concept has synergy with recreation and arts. A combined field -house recreation/arts /social center in the middle of the City will address cradle to grave needs thus enabling a healthy and desirable quality of life for all residents. Your predecessors built a number of single purpose facilities on the City's periphery using a 20th century model. Each of these facilities now needs significant capital investments. A. sports dome, serving a small part of the population, continues that outdated model. A field - house strategy combining recreation/sports /arts and meeting space will leave a lasting 21 st century legacy. Respectfully, Kim Montgomery Deb Manoen From: Crabtreejr @aol.com Sent: Monday, October 14, 2013 10:59 AM To: Edina Mail; jonibennettl2 @comcast.net; Mary Brindle (Comcast);joshsprague @edinarealty.com; swensonannl @gmail.com Subject: Fwd: Minnehaha Woods - street observations Attachments: RE: Minnehaha Woods - street observations Dear Mayor Hovland and Members of City Council Re: Minnehaha Woods street reconstruction I am following up the email which I sent to you on 2013/08/29 titled "Minnehaha Woods - street reconstruction - observations ". I have recently received this response from Mr. Toby Muse at SEH., which I am forwarding directly to you. Most of my original comments fell under four main headings.: 1. Roadway settlememt In many cases the response from SEH reported "None found ". I believe that there are dips, some minor, at the indicated places. I was not asked by SEH or the City Engineering Department to show them what I had seen, or felt as I was driving the strrets. In the cases where the roadway settlement was acknowledged, it was described as being "Within standard construction tolerances ". I don't know what those are. I don't know why the roads have settled (I can guess), but it begs further questions: What are the tolerances? Why has settlement happened? Will it continue to happen? Who pays for any future repairs? That will fall back on all the residents of the City, this after the neighbourhhod residents ahve already been assessed over $10,000 for street reconstruction. 2. Roadway cracking This has been acknowledged in several places. Again further questions come to mind: Why has this happened? I don't know but I can guess. The proposed repairs are surface repairs only. Will the cracks continue to occur? Again who pays the cost of any future repairs ? 3. Curb and driveway settlement Most cases are described as being " "Within standard construction tolerances ". Is this really what we are to expect two years after construction? Again why has the settement occurred? Will it continue to happen? Who will pay for the cost of future repairs? The City residents will, having already paid once for the curb anf gutter What happens when a homeowner wants to sell a home and a purchaser insists upon repairs to concrete poured as part of this project as part of the purchase agreement? 4. Curb and driveway cracking. Similar comments and questions apply to as for "Curb and driveway settlement" above. In closing, the residents of Minnehaha Woods paid dearly ( >$10,000 per REU) for the street reconstruction. The City residents at large paid for the curb and gutter. Issues remain which are not getting the attention which they merit. Collectively as a Council please determine what should have been done as part of the project, and ensure that it is done. I am prepared to walk the streets with you if you wish. Thank you, and sincerely John Crabtree 5408 Oaklawn Avenue Edina, MN 55424 -1609 tel. 952 - 928 -8434 2 Deb Maniaen From: Toby Muse <tmuse @sehinc.com> Sent: Monday, October 07, 2013 3:36 PM To: Crabtreejr @aol.com Cc: Chad Millner, Paul J. Pasko, a Wayne Houle Subject: RE: Minnehaha Woods - street observations Attachments: .20131007 Ltr Crabtree 5408 Oaklawn.pdf Mr. Crabtree, Attached is the response you requested below. Please feel free to contact me if you would like to discuss further. Thank you. Toby Muse, PE I Project Manager SEH 1 10901 Red Circle Drive, Suite 300 1 Minnetonka, MN 55343 952.912.2616 direct 1888.908.8166 fax www.sehinc.com SEH — Building a Better World for All of UsTm From: Wayne Houle <WHoule @EdinaMN.gov> To: "'Crabtreejr @aol.com "' <Crabtreejr @aol.com >, Cc: Chad Millner <cmiillner @EdinaMN.gov >, "Toby Muse (tmuse @sehinc.com)" <tmuse @sehinc.com >, "Paul J. Pasko, III" <ppasko @sehinc.com> Date: 10/0712013 12:04 PM Subject: RE: Minnehaha Woods- street observations, John Thank you for.your,email. Chad and I did speak earlier this morning about where SEH was on responding to your email; I understand that they will respond within the next couple of days. I will respond to this email in more detail today or tomorrow. Sincerely, ;y.i. Wayne Houle, Director of Engineering 952- 826 -0443 1 Fax 952- 826 -0392 WHoule @EdinaMN.gov I www.EdinaMN.00v ...For Living, Learning, Raising Families & Doing Business . From: Crabtreejr @aol.com [mailto:Crabtreejr @ aol.coml Sent: Monday, October 07, 2013 11:45 AM To: Wayne Houle Subject: Re: Minnehaha Woods - street observations Dear Wayne 1 Nearly six weeks have gone by since I first wrote to you with a list of apparent defects with the Minnehaha Woods street reconstruction. A small amount of rectification work was in process by the contractor at that time. Otherwise I do not see any further work,-and nor have I had a point by point response to my list. The email from Toby Muse of SEH on 2013/08/29 indicated that a review would take place, and that I would then be updated. This lack of action begs several questions about the management of this project, particularly about the role of SEH in the construction process. Were SEH responsible for ensuring that the contractor used either the procedures laid down in the construction contract, or used industry standard techniques? If they were not, then what were two site engineers from SEH doing? If SEH were responsible, then there is a bigger problem. Quite simply, industry standard construction practices were not used on this project. I now understand that when the hole, which was dug for new sewer connections and water supply laterals, outside my house at 5408 Oaklawn Avenue, was filled , the clay was not properly compacted, ie in "lifts ". This was witnessed by myself and another. It should not then come as a surprise that that the road settled and there was a long settlement crack at the southern edge of the hole.- Also, there are what could be settlement cracks elsewhere on the project. I also note that the rectificataion work outside 5408 Oaklawn Avenmue consisted merely of removing the blacktop, rolling in some road building material, and then resrufacing. No deep compaction, which would have required digging out and recompacting the original hole was done. Will the road continue to settle? Who bears the cost of later repairs? If SEH had any responsibilities in this area, you are now asking them to acknowledge and rectify their lack of effective work. Then the apparent lack of action comes as no surprise. SEH would have to go back to the contractor to tell the contractor that they need to redo the work which SEH had already oiverseen and approved ! How does this work? I also note that Chad Milner, now the assistant City Engineer, was the one of the two SEH site engineers on this project (I have a picture of him in the hole outside my house). It seems to me that he should not play any further role in this project if SEH had any relevant responsibilities. The confilct of interest is apparent, and it would be a classic case of poacher turned gamekeeper. Have the final payments been made to SEH and the contractor for this project? If you wish to walk through my list of observations, then I am happy to do it with you, but not with any other personnel connected with the engineering for the project. I look forward to your reply with an update and answers to my specific questions. Sincerrely John Crabtree 5408 Oaklawn Avenue Edina, MN 55424 tel 952 - 928 -8434 PS. Please inform me if this email is forwarded, by yourself or others, outside the City of Edina. In a message dated 8/29/2013 1:05:53 PM Central Daylight Time, tmuse(Qsehinc.com writes: Subj:Re: Minnehaha Woods - street observations Date:8/29/2013 1:05:53 PM Central Daylight Time From:tmuseOsehinc.com To:WHoule(a-)_EdinaMN.gov CC: Crabtree*r(a),aol.com, ppasko(a)sehinc.com, cmillner _edinaMN.gov_, iclement(c)-sehinc.com Mr. Crabtree, We have received your email containing the list of items you noticed during your review of the neighborhood. The warranty period for this project expires in mid - November 2013. Several of the items you noted are already included on the warranty punchlist. We will review your list and note the items that are justified as additional warranty items, if applicable. We will then provide you an update following our review. In the meantime, please contact me if you have any additional concerns. Toby Muse, PE I Project Manager SEH 1 10901 Red Circle Drive, Suite 300 1 Minnetonka, MN 55343 952.912.2616 direct 1888.908.8166 fax www.sehinc.com SEH— Building a Better World for All of UsTA° From: Wayne Houle <WHoule(cDEdinaMN.gov> - To: -- " Crabtreei r( cbaol- com"-<Crabtreejr@aol.com>;- - Cc: "Paul J. Pasko III" <ppasko(cDsehinc.com >, Toby Muse <tmuse(ccD,sehinc.com> Date: 08126/2013 10:16 AM Subject: Re: Minnehaha Woods - street observations Thanks John, I will have Paul or Toby with SEH get back to us with a response. Wayne Houle, Director of Engineering 952 - 826 -0443 1 Fax 952 - 826 -0392 Whoule@ EdinaMN. gov <mailto:Whoule(a)_EdinaMN.gov> I www. EdinaMN .qov <http: / /www.EdinaMN.gov> On Aug 26, 2013, at 10:00 AM, " Crabtreejr @aol.com <mailto:Crabtreeir (Daol.com >" <Crabtreej r@aol. com < ma i Ito: C rabtreei raaol. com >> wrote: To Wayne Houle, Edina City Engineer Dear Wayne 1. Introduction At the meeting to discuss the reconstruction of 54th Street last monday, I asked about warranty work on the Minnehaha Woods street reconstruction. I said that I had seen apparent defects, icluding significant roadway cracks, which had not, been marked for repair. I have now cpmpleted a walk of the strrets which were included in the project, namely Kellogg Avenue, Oaklawn Avenue, Br000kview Avenue, Park Place, and Woodcrest Drive, between 54th and 56th streets. Also included were Kellogg Circle, Dever Drive, part of 54th Street at Park Place, 55th Street from Wooddale Avenue to Park Place, and part of 56th Street. The things which I were looking for were: i) signs of roadway settlement ii) cracks in the asphalt iii) cracks in curbs and driveway concrete which was part of the project iv) settlement of curbs, particularly where there is a step from the top of one curb to the next. In some cases this is quite small, and these are noted as "slight" in the following notes. There is no doubt some type of standard which should be applied to this. In addition I noted where there is noticeable damage to expansion joints. 2. Roadway Settlement The checks were made by driving along the streets at night. Dips can be felt. They can be seen from changes in the light reflection. Roadway settlement was noticed across the road (unless otherwise noted) at: 5404 Kellogg Ave 5408 Kellogg Ave 5416 Kellogg Ave 5424 Kellogg Ave 5432 Kellogg Ave 5532 Kellogg Ave 5404 Oaklawn (marked for repair, but cut for one side of street only). Curb replacement done 5408 Oaklawn Avenue - repair ongoing. Curbs already replaced on both sides of street 5424 Oaklawn Avenue 5428 Oaklawn Avenue 5436 Oaklawn Avenue 5500 Oaklawn Avenue 5504 Oaklawn Avenue 5516 Oaklawn Avenue 5524 Oaklawn Avenue 5417 Brookview Ave 5437 Brookview Ave - east side only,. NB new house construction 5427 Woodcrest Dr - east side only, other issues at same location - see below 3. Kellogg Avenue 5433 Kellogg - half of apron already replaced. Saw cut needs to be filled 5437 Kellogg - low spot in curb on section to the south of the path, - curb settlement at joint nearest fire hydrant - curb settlement either side of the storm drain, to the south oif the house on 55th street. 5504 Kellogg - curb settlement just north of driveway 5513 Kellogg - two slabs of driveway already replaced 5516 Kellogg - house under construction, apron not visible 5536 Kellogg - slight curb settlement north of storm drain 5537 Kellogg - curb settled just south of driveway 4. Kellogg Place 5604/ 5605 / 5608 / 5612 Kellogg Place - expansion joint damage to several joints. construction at 5608 was noted, along with a large dumpster in the yard. 5616 Kellogg Place - driveway slab already replaced 5617 Kellogg Place - curb settlement, previously marked for repair. Not (yet) done. 5625 Kellogg Place - curb settled by storm drain south of house possible curb settlement on east side of house in line with south wall 5628 Kellogg Place - curb settlement west of storm drain 5. Oaklawn Avenue 4 5404 Oaklawn - curb section already replaced. Street cut for asphalt replacement to middle of street only 5408 and 5409 Oaklawn - curb sections already replaced on both sides of street. Road settlement being corrected 18' crack across road roadway being repaired. 5413 Oaklawn - slight drop in curb joint just north of driveway 5416 Oaklawn - curb section already replaced 5417 Oaklawn - curb section already replaced 5420 Oaklawn - curb settled south of drvieway 5421 Oaklawn - curb settled north of driveway - curb settled south of'driveway 5424 Oaklawn - curb settled south of drvieway 5425 Oaklawn - curb cracked 5428 Oaklawn - driveway slab lifted on south. side 5429 Oaklawn - curb settled south of drvieway. 5433 Oaklawn - crack across roadway, almost curb to.curb, ca. 22' long J 5437 Oaklawn - crack in roadway by fire hydrant - 9' crack in roadway to south of house in 55th street 5500 Oaklawn - step from drivweay apron to drive at east edge. Which is newer? 5505 Oaklawn - curb cracked 5509 Oaklawn - slight curb settlement south of,driveway 5512 Oaklawn - curb settled south of drveway - curb settled south of storm drain 5513 Oaklawn - curb settlement south of drveway - slight curb settlement south of storm drain 5520 Oaklawn - curb cracked at south end of driveway 5529 Oaklawn - two driveway slabs already replaced 6. Brookview Avenue 5400 Brookview - cracked curb north of house on 54th street - pooling water in curb at north east corner of lot 5404 Brookview - cracked curb south of driveway 5408 Brookview - curb settlement south of drveway 5416 Brookview - curb settlement south of drveway 5417 B000kview - curb settlement south of drveway 5420 Brookview - slight curb settlement south of drveway 5 5421 Brookview - slight curb settlement south of drveway 5433 Brookview - curb settlement north of drveway - 8' crack in roadway 5437 Brookview - apparent road settlement and othe road wear. House just cmpleted 5526 Brookview - crack in driveway apron 7. Park Place NB. There was a lot of debris (oak leaves, acorns etc) in the gutter along the east side of Park Place at the north end. Junction with Woodcrest drive - 10' crack in roadway at SE corner 5428. Park - curb settlement south of drveway 5429 Park - 3' crack in road - also a gash in the road 5500 Park - chips on edge of driveway apron. NB, house is new 5504 Park - gash in road. NB construction at 5500 Park 5513 Park- cracked curb, just north of the SW corner of the lot - cracked driveway apron on west side of driveway - cracked driveway apron on east side of driveway - tree dying on SW corner of the lot 5520 Park - crack in driveway apron 5524 Park - step at transition from driveway apron to driveway. Which is newer? 5528 Park - cracks in driveway apron on the north side 5537 Park - curb settlement south of driveway - curb already broken out for repair to south of house on 56th street. Junction with 56th street - roadway crack on west side of manhole 8. Dever Drive 5508 Dever - curb settlement west of driveway 9. Woodcrest Drive 5420 Woodcrest - crack in curb at end of path 5427 Woodcrest - 12' crack in roadway, north of driveway - 4 'crack in roadway, at end of driveway - cracks in driveway apron settlement on east side of the street only 5432 Woodcrest - curb settlement south of drveway 5433 Woodcrest - curb settlement north of driveway 5441 Woodcrest - 8' crack in roadway by driveway - check further north for a possible additional crack 5440 Woodcrest - cracks in driveway apron 6 - many marks on the street - new_construction taking place 5500 Woodcrest - 6', crack in roadway - crack in curb 5505 Woodcrest - cracked curb south of driveway 5512 Woodcrest - slight curb settlement south of drveway 5520 Woodcrest 7 slight curb settlement south of drveway 10. 54th Street north side of 5400 Brookview - cracked curb -- -1-1 -- 56th - Street bridge - - - - - - - -- _ -- _ __.._ _ - - .. __ . _._. - -- -- -- ._. - - - -- - - - - -- - - Bridge - cracks in concrete "sidewalks" on north and south sides of the bridge. This list is almost certainly incomplete. Please tell me which of the noted incidents of curb settlement do not justify repair. Then the neighbourhood expects that all other items will be rectified. Sincerrely John Crabtree 5408 Oaklawn Avenue Edina, MN 55424 tel 952 - 928 -8434 7 -A SEH October 7,.201.3 RE: City of Edina Minnehaba Woods Neighborhood Roadway Improvements -5408 Oaklawn Avenue SEH No.113734 .14.00 -Mr. John Crabtree 5408 Oaklawn Avenue Edina, MN 55424 Dear Mr: Crabtree: Thank you for your compilation of comments regarding perceived defects associated with the Minnehaha Woods.neighborhood project. We received your list of comments submitted by email on August 26, 2013. Your email is attached to this letter as Exhibit 1. We are continually reviewing the project area_to keep our punchlist up -to -date prior to the November 22, 2013 warranty expiration date. The items listed in Exhibit 1 were reviewed in conjunction with our on- going: site visits. Many of the items you noted .in Exhibit 1 were already included. in the warranty punchlist. Some 'items were not. Again, we appreciate your thorough review of the neighborhood. Attached to this letter as Exhibit 2 is a table that contains the following: •: Column D lists the: items we: received in•Exhibit 1 • Column E contains our observations of the. item •: Column F identifies the'proposed repair for the item, if warranted, highlighted in yellow. Our. comments regularlyrefer to standard construction tolerances based "both. on- .City and State street reconstruction.specifications as well as tolerances - gained from experience in the construction industry. These tolerances dictate the selection of an appropriate repair, if warranted. The City's contractor will complete all required repairs: prior to the November 22, 2013 warranty expiration date: Again, thank you for your interestand. the time spent r eviewing this important project. Sincerely, A 1W, To' Muse, PE Proj t Manager c: Wayne Houle, City of Edina Chad IViillner, City of Edina Paul Pasko, SEH Joe :Clement, SEH Jay Palda, Palda &.Sons Inc. ptaMcdilrM 1373417ca1ci btrec'rtsponsc120131007 Itr clubtrce 540B,oaU2ivnA=X Short Elliott Flendricleson Inc., 1090:1 Red Circle Drive, Suite 300, Minnetorilia,.MN 55343 -9302 SEH is an equal.opporumity employer w.ww.sehinc.com 1 952,91212600 1 800.734.6757 1 952.912.2601 fax' EXHIBIT 1 from: WaMozHoule To: Crabtreeirfulaol.com Ct: Paul 3. Pasko III: Toby Muse Subject:. Re: Minnehaha Woods - street observations Dater 08126 /2013 10:i6 AM Thanks John, I will have Pahl or Toby with 8EH get back to :us with a response: Wayne Houle, Director of Engineering 952- 826 -0443 1 Pax 952 - 826 -03.92 Whoule@ EdinaMN. qov <mailto:Whoule @,EdinaMN.gov> I www.. Cdinat4N .gov<http:.b /[awia.EdinaMN.gov> On Aug 26;. 2D13, at 10:00 AM, "Crabtre.eir@aol.com <ma lto:;Crabtreejr @aol.:com>" ECrab£ reejr@ aol .com<mailto:Crabtreejr @abl.com>> wrote: To Wayne :Houle,. Edina City Engineer Dea'z Wayne 1.. Introduction At the. meeting to. discuss the reoonstrticti.on of 54th Street last monday,, I asked about warranty work on the Minnehahn Woods street reconstruction. I said that I had seen apparent defects, i•cluding significant roadway cracks, which had not been marked for repair. I have now cpmpleted a walk of the streets which were included.in the project, namely Kellogg Avenue, Oaklawn. Avenue, Br000kview Avenue;. Park Place, and Woodciest Drive, between 54th and 56th streets.. Also included were Kellogg Circle, Dever Drive; part of 54th Street at Park Place, 55th Street from Wooddale Avenue to Park Place, and part of 56th Street. The things. which .I were: looking for were ) signs of roadway settlement ii). cracks in the asphalt iii) cracks in curbs and - driveway concrete. which was, part of :the :, project iv) settlement of curbs, particularly where there is a step from the top of one curb ^to the next. in some cases this is quite small, and these are noted as 'slight" in the following notes. There °s no. doubt some type. of standard which should be applied to 'this. In :addition I noted where '.there is noticeable damage to expansion joints.: 2. Roadway Settlement The checks were made by driving along the streets at night. Dips. can be felt. They can be seen from changes in the .light reflection. Roadway settlement was noticed across the road (unless otherwise noted) ati 5:404 Kellogg Ave 54'09 Kellogg Ave 5416 'Kellogg Ave 5424 .Kellogg Ave 5482 Kellogg Ave 5532 Kellogg Axle 5464 Oaklawn (marked for repair, but cut for one side of street only). Curb replacement done &906 Oaklawn 'Avenue - repair ongoing. Curbs already replaced on .both aic)e.s. -of street 5424 Oaklawn Avenue 5428 Oaklawn Avenue. 5436 Oaklawn Avenue. 5500 Oa),lawn Avenue .5504 Oaklawn Avenue 5516 Oaklawn Avenue 5524 Oaklawn Avenue 5417 .Br.00kview Ave 5437 Brookvi-ew Ave - east side only,, NB new house construction 5421 Ooodcrest -Di. - .east side .only, other . issues at same location - see below 3. Kellogg- Avenue 5433 .Kellogg - half of apron .already replaced. :Saw cut. needs to be filled 5437 Kellogg - low spot in curb on section to the south of the path, - curb .settlement at joint nearest fire hydrant - curb settlement either side of the storm drain, to the south oif the house on 55th 'street. 5504 Kellogg - curb settlement just north of driveway 551.3 Kellogg - two slabs of driveway already replaced 5516.K'e11ogg - house under construction, apron .not; :visible. 5536 Kellogg slight curb settlement north. 'of storm drain. 5537 Kellogg - curb settled just south• pf drive ay 4. Kellogg Place 5604 / 5605 / 5608 / 5612 Kellogg _Place - expansion . j_oint daidage to :several joints. - construction at 5608 was noted, along with .a large dumpster in the 'yard. 5616 Kellogg Place. - driveway slab already replaced 5617 Kellogg Place - curb settlement, previously marked for repair. Not (yet), done. 5625 Kellogg Place - curb settled by, storm drain south of house possible curb settlement an east side of house in line with south wall 5626 Kellogg Place; - curb settlement west of storm drain. 5. Oaklawn Avenue' 5404 Oaklawn - curb section already replaced. Street cut for asphalt replacement to middle of street, only 5408 and 5409 Oaklawn - curb sections :already replaced on both sides of street. Road ;settlement being corrected 18,1 crack across .road roadway being repaired. 5413 Oaklawn - slight drop. in curb joint just north of driveway 5.416 Onk.lawn - curb section already replaced 5417 Oaklawn - curb section already replaced 542D pakl,awn curb settled south of drvietcay 5421 Oaklawn - curb settled :north of driveway - curb settled south of driveway 5424 Oaklawn - curb settled south of drvveway 5.425 Oaklawn - curb cracked 5428 Oaklawn - driveway slab lifted on south side 5429 Oaklawn - curb settled south of drviewa.y 5433 Oaklawn - crack across roadway, :almost curb. to curb, ca. 22' long 5437 Oaklawn. - crack, in roadway by fire hydrant -- V -cack in roadway to south of house in 55th .street 5500 Oaklawn - step from drivweay apron to drive `at east edge. Which is newer? 5505 Oaklawn - curb cracked 5509 Oaklawn - slight curb settlement south of driveway 5512 Oaklawn - curb settled south of drveway - curb settled south of storm drain 5513 Oaklawn - curb settlement south of. drveway slight curb settlement :south of storm drain. 5520 Oaklawn - .curb cracked at south end, of driveway' 5529 DakIlawn - two driveway :slabs already replaced 6. Broo.kyiew avenue 5406 Brookview - .cracked curb north of house on S4th- street - pooling water in curb at north east corner of lot 5404 Brookview - cracked curb south of driveway 5408, Brookview - curbi settlement south '._of - drveway 5416 Brookview - curb settlement south. - qf ;drveway 51i.7 B000kview - curb settlement south of drveway 5420 Brookview - slight curb settlement south of. drveway 5421 Brookview - slight curb settlement south' of drveway 5433 'Brookview - curb settlement north of drveway 8' crack in roadway 5437 Brookview - apparent road settlement and -othe. road wear. House just cmpleterd 5526 Brookview - crack in driveway apron 7. Park Place NB. There was a lot of debris (!oak leaves_, acorns etc) in the gutter along the east side of Park Place at the north end. Junction with Woodcrest drive - 16'' crack. in roadway at sE corner 5428' Park - curb settlement south of. drveway 542.9 Park - 3' crack in road - also al gash in the road 5500 :Park - :chips on edge of driveway apron. 'NB, ,House is new 550,4 Park gash in road. NB construction at 550.0. Park 5513 Park,- cracked curb, just north of the SW corner, of the lot cracked driveway apron on west side of driveway cracked driveway apron on east side of driveway tree dying on SW corner of the, lot 5520 .Park - ,crack in driveway `apron 5529 Park — step at transition from.driveway apron to driveway. Which is newer? 5528 Park - .cracks in .driveway apron on the north side 5537 Park - curb settlement south of driveway - curb already broken out for repair to south of house on 5Gth .street. Junction with 56th street- - roadway crack, on west side. of manhole 8. Dever Drive 5508 Dever.- curb settlement west of driveway 9. Woodcrest Drive 5920 Woodcrest - crack in curb at end. of :path 5927 Woodcrest - 12' crack in roadway., ,north of driveway -'4' ' crack in roadway, at and of driveway cracks in driveway apron - settlement on east side of the street only 5932 Woodcrest - curb settlement south of.drveway 5133 Woodcrest _ curb settlement north of driveway 5991 Woodcrest 8' crack in roadway by driveway check further north for a possible additional crack 5994, Woodcrest - cracks in driver >ay apron - many marks on the. street - new construction taking place 5500 Woodcrest - 6' .crack in roadway - crack in curb 5505 Woodcrest- - cracked curb south of driveway 5512 Woodcrest - slight curb settlement south of drveway 5520 ioodcrest - slight curb settlement south of drveway 10. 59th Street north side of 5400 Brookview cracked curb 11. 56th Street brddge Bridge - cracks in concrete "sidewalks" on north and south sides of the, bridge, This. list is .almost certainly incomplete. Please tell me which of the .noted incidents of curb settlement do not justify repair. Then`the neigbbourhood' expects that all other items oiill be rectified, Sincerrel.y John Crabtree 5,908 Oakleft Avenue Edina, M4 .56424 tel 952:- 928 -8934 EXHIL -LT 2 Page 1 of 4 A B E D E I F i i SEH CITY OF EDINA ' ENG 11 -5 MINNEHAHA WOODS NEIGHBORHOOD ROADWAY IMPROVEMENTS CITY IMPROVEMENT NO. BA -334; SS -460; STS -375; WM -511; BR -7 John Crabtree Warranty Punch List SEH NO. EDINA113734 I 10/04/2013 P:\NE \E \Edina \113734 \7CA \Crabtree Response\(Minnehaha Woods Punch List (email).xlsx]Sheetl � z 3 4 5 6 7 s 9 10 11 12 13 Item Address Street John Crabtree 8126 Email Comment SEH Observation Proposed Repair 14- 1 54th Street North side of 5400 Brookview - cracked curb At joint, plow damage, not contractor's responsibility None 15.1 2 56th Street Bridge Bridge - cracks in concrete "sidewalks" on north and south sides of the bridge. Minor shrinkage cracks, within standard construction tolerances None 16 3 5417 Brookview Avenue Roadway settlement Not found None 17 4 5437 Brookview Avenue Roadway settlement. East side only, NB new house 'Within construction. standard construction tolerances i None is 5 5400 Brookview Avenue Cracked curb north of house on 54th street. Pooling water in curb at north east comer of lot. Very slight puddle before water drains out across street, crack is from plow damage and is not contractor's responsibility. None, this portion of street will be redone when 54th is reconstructed. 19 6 5404 Brookview Avenue Cracked curb south of driveway Crack is from plow damage and is not contractor's responsibility None zo 7 5408 Brookview Avenue Curb settlement south of driveway Within standard construction tolerances one 21 8 5416 Brookview Avenue Curb settlement south of driveway Within standard construction tolerances None 22 9 5417 Brookview Avenue ' Curb settlement south of driveway Within standard construction tolerances None 23 10 5420 Brookview Avenue Slight curb settlement south of driveway Within standard construction. tolerances None 24 11 -5421 Brookview Avenue - Slight curb settlement south of.driveway Within standard construction tolerances I None 25 12 5433 Brookview Avenue Curb settlement north of driveway. 8' crack in roadway. Curb settlement within standard construction tolerances crack in pavement noted Hot seal crack in pavement z6 13 5437 Brookview Avenue Apparent road-settlement and other road wear. House just completed. No visible settlement, road damage typical of new house . construction and is not contractor's res: onsibilil None 27 14 5526 Brookview Avenue Crack in driveway apron This is at 5525 Brookview Avenue, within standard construction tolerances None zs 15 5508 Dever Avenue Curb settlement west of driveway Within standard construction tolerances None Page 1 of 4 Pap-') of 4 A B C D E F 13 Item Address Street John Crabtree 8126 Email Comment SEH Observation Proposed Repair 29 16 5404 Kellogg Avenue Roadway settlement Not found None 30 17 5408 Kellogg Avenue Roadway settlement Within standard construction tolerances None 31 18 5416 Kellogn Avenue Roadwav settlement Not found ! None 32 19 5424 Kellogg Avenue Roadway settlement Within standard construction tolerances None 331 20 1 5432 Kellogg Avenue Roadway settlement Not found None 21 5433 Kellogg Avenue Half of apron already replaced. Saw cut needs to be Concrete sawcuts are not sealed as part of typidal None 34 filled. construction practice 22 5437 Kellogg Avenue Low spot in curb on section to the south of the path. Low spot in curb is 1/2 -inch deep, curb settlement at Remove and replace 2 curb pieces at Curb settlement at joint nearest fire hydrant. Curb hydrants and storm drain is within standard low spot in curb between the hydrant settlement either side of the storm drain, to the south construction tolerances. and the walk 35 of the house on 55th street. 361 23 1 5504 Kellogg Avenue Curb settlement just north of driveway Within standard construction tolerances lNone 37 24 5513 Kellong Avenue Two slabs of driveway already replaced None 38 25 5516 Kellogg Avenue House under construction, apron not visible None 39 26 5532 Kellogg Avenue Roadway settlement Not found None 40 27 5536 Kellogg Avenue Slight curb settlement north of storm drain I None 41 28 5537 Kellogg Avenue Curb settled just south of driveway Within standard construction tolerances None 29 5605 Kellogg Place Expansion joint damage to several joints. Construction None, to be resealed with future at 5608 was noted, along with a large dumpster in the scheduled sealcoat 42 1 1 yard. 30 5604 Kellogg Place Expansion joint damage to several joints. Construction None, to be resealed with future at 5608 was noted, along with a large dumpster in the scheduled sealcoat 43 yard. 31 5608 Kellogg Place Expansion joint damage to several joints. Construction I None, to be resealed with future at 5608 was noted, along with a. large dumpster in the scheduled sealcoat 44 yard. 32 5612 Kellogg Place Expansion joint damage to several joints. Construction Nong, to be resealed with future at 5608 was noted, along with a large dumpster in the scheduled sealcoat 45 yard. 46 33 5616 Kellogg Place Driveway slab already replaced None 34 5617 Kellogg Place Curb settlement, previously marked for repair. Not Curb has settled at driveway felt Remove and replace 2 short pieces of (yet) done. curb and the adjoining wing section of driveway at manhole 47 35 5625 Kellogg Place Curb settled by storm drain south of house. Possible Curb at catch basin heaved .07', curb settlement on Remove and replace a piece of curb curb settlement on east side of house in line with south east of house not found and gutter on the west side of the catch wall. basin that is directly south of the house 48 49 36 5628 Kellogg Place Curb settlement west of storm drain Within standard construction tolerances I None 37 5404 Oaklawn Avenue Roadway settlement. Marked for repair, but cut for Pavement accidentally sawcut for removal Hot seal sawcuts one side of street only. Curb replacement done 50 39 5408 Oaklawn Avenue Curb sections already replaced on both sides of street. Completed Saw and hot seal Road settlement being corrected. 18' crack across 51 road roadway being repaired. 52 41 5413 Oaklawn Avenue Sli ht dro in curb joint just north of driveway Within standard construction tolerances I None 53 42 5416 Oaklawn Avenue Curb section already replaced None 54 43 5417 Oaklawn Avenue Curb section already replaced None 55. 44 5420 Oaklawn Avenue Curb settled south of driveway Within standard construction tolerances . None Pap-') of 4 Page 3 of 4 A B C D E F 13 Item Address Street John Crabtree 8126 Email Comment SEH Observation Proposed Repair 56 45 5421 Oaklawn Avenue Curb settled north of driveway. Curb settled south of driveway. Within standard construction tolerances None 57 46 5424 Oaklawn Avenue Roadway settlement Within standard construction tolerances None 58 47 5424 Oaklawn Avenue Curb settled south of driveway Within standard construction tolerances None 591 48 5425 Oaklawn Avenue Curb cracked Damage from new house construction and is not contractor's responsibility None 60 49 1 5428 Oaklawn Avenue 'Roadway settlement Not found None 61 50 5428 Oaklawn Avenue Driveway slab lifted on south side Within standard construction tolerances None 62 51 5429 Oaklawn Avenue Curb settled south of driveway Within standard construction tolerances None 63 52 5433 Oaklawn Avenue Crack across roadway, almost curb to curb, ca. 22' Ion Router and ' hot seal crack in pavement 64 53 5436 Oaklawn Avenue Roadway settlement Not found None 65 54 5437 Oaklawn Avenue Crack in roadway by fire hydrant. A 9' crack in roadway to south of house in 55th street. Router,.arid hot seal crack in pavement 66 55 5500 Oaklawn Avenue Roadway settlement Not found None 67 56 5500 Oaklawn Avenue Step from driveway apron to drive at east edge. Which is newer? Within standard construction tolerances None 68 57 5504 Oaklawn Avenue Roadway settlement Not found None 69 58 5505 Oaklawn Avenue Curb cracked Within.standard construction tolerances None 70 59 5509 Oaklawn Avenue Slight curb settlement south of driveway Within standard construction tolerances None 71 60 5512 Oaklawn Avenue Curb settled south of driveway. Curb settled south of storm drain. Within standard construction tolerances None 721 61 5513 1 Oaklawn Avenue Curb settlement south of driveway. Slight curb settlement south of storm drain. Within standard construction tolerances near drive .O8' settlement at catch basin and Replace'one.:piece of curb and gutter at catch', basin on west side of street 73 62 5516 Oaklawn Avenue Roadway settlement Within standard construction tolerances. None 74 63 5520 Oaklawn Avenue Curb cracked at south end of driveway Within standard construction tolerances . None 75 64 5524 Oaklawn Avenue Roadway settlement Within standard construction tolerances None 76 65 5529 Oaklawn Avenue Two driveway slabs already replaced None 77 67 5428 Park Place Curb settlement south of driveway Within standard construction tolerances None 781 68 5429 1 Park Place A 3' crack in road. Also a gash in the road. Gash is recent and is not contractor's responsibility 1 Router and hot seal crack in pavement 79 69 5500 Park Place Chips on edge of driveway apron. NB, house is new New house construction probable cause of dami not contractor's res onsibili ge, None 80 70 5504 Park Place Gash inroad. NB construction at 5500 Park New house construction probable cause of damage, not contractor's res onsibili None 81 71 5513 Park Place Cracked curb, just north of the SW comer of the lot. Cracked driveway apron on west side of driveway. Cracked driveway apron on east side of driveway. Tree dying on SW corner of the lot. Crack at sidewalk caused by tree root and is not contractor's responsibility, apron cracks are.within standard construction tolerances, stressed tree previously addressed by the City. the None 82 72 5520 Park Place Crack in drive_ way apron New house construction probable cause of damage, not contractor's responsibility I None 83. 73 5524 Park Place Step at transition from driveway apron to driveway. Which is newer? New driveway by owner probable cause of damage, not contractor's responsibility None 84 74 5528 Park Place Cracks in driveway apron on the north side Within standard construction tolerances None 85 75 5537 Park Place Curb settlement south of driveway. Curb already broken out for repair to south of house on 56th street. New house construction probable cause of damage, not contractor's responsibility None Page 3 of 4 Page 4 of 4 A B C D E F 13 Item ' Address Street John Crabtree 8126 Email Comment SEH Observation Proposed Repair 76 Park Place NB. There was a lot of debris (oak leaves, acoms etc) Not a contractor issue None in the gutter along the east side of Park Place at the 86 north end. 77 Park Place Junction with Woodcrest drive - 10' crack in roadway Router and hot seal crack in pavement 871 1 at SE comer 78 Park Place Junction with 56th street - roadway crack on west side Hot seal crack in pavement 88 of manhole 79 5427 Woodcrest Drive Roadway settlement. East side only, other issues at Within standard construction tolerances None 89 same location - see below 90 80 5420 Woodcrest Drive Crack in curb at end of path Within standard construction tolerances None 81 5427 Woodcrest Drive A 12' crack in roadway, north of driveway. 4 'crack in New house construction probable cause of drivel Hol seal crack in pavement roadway, at end of driveway. Cracks in driveway damage and is not contractor's responsibility, street apron. Settlement on east side of the street only. settlement is within standard construction tolerances. 91 1 92 82 5432 Woodcrest Drive . Curb settlement south of driveway Within standard construction tolerances None 93 83 5433 Woodcrest Drive Curb settlement north of driveway Within standard construction tolerances None 84 5440 Woodcrest Drive Cracks in driveway apron. Many marks on the street. New house construction probable cause of dami ge, None 94 New construction taking lace. not contractor's responsibility 85 5441 'Woodcrest Drive A 8' crack in roadway by driveway. Check further north Not found None 95 fora Dossible additional crack. 86 5500 Woodcrest Drive A 6' crack in roadway. Crack in curb. Curb crack within standard construction tolerances Hot seal crack in pavement 96 97 87 5505 Woodcrest Drive lCracked curb south of driveway Within standard construction tolerances None 98 88 5512 Woodcrest Drive ISlight curb settlement south of driveway Within standard construction tolerances None 99 89 5520 Woodcrest Drive ISlight curb settlement south of driveway Within standard construction tolerances I None Page 4 of 4 Deb Manaen From: Tim Amundson <tim.amundson @gmail.com> Sent Monday, October 14, 2013 3:54 PM To: Edina Mail Subject: Airplane Noise Mayor Hovland, I live in Edina (near 56th & Beard Ave.) and we have a significant amount of airplane traffic overhead on a regular basis. The airplanes are flying so low that the noise is very loud and frequently disrupts our normal activities (e.g., conversations). Please be my and my neighbors' collective voice and consider recommending that airplanes be re- routed over a different area and/or consider using different runways. Regards, Tim Amundson 1 o e rddo To: City Council From: Energy and Environment Commission Date: 10/14/2013 Subject: Advisory Communication — Energy and Environment Commission, Comprehensive Plan Chapter 10 Carbon Reduction Goal Attachments: None Action Requested: The EEC request City Council to ask the City Manager to Perform a rough quantitative analysis of the Green House Gas (GHG) impact of proposed new City facilities including: • A new sports dome • New outdoor refrigerated ice rinks • New parking structures at 50th and France Review how addition of these structures will impact Edina's goal of 25% GHG gas reduction by 2025, and the likelihood of achieving that goal. Situation: Background: GHG goal is from Comprehensive Plan Chapter 10.2.3. Assessment: Recommendation: I: \Energy and Environment Commission \Projects \2013 \CC Advisory Communication \131014 EEC Carbon Gools.docx MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE EDINA PARK BOARD HELD AT CITY HALL September 10, 2013 7:00 PM 1. CALL TO ORDER Chair Steel called the meeting to order at 7:05 p.m. X WAR COME A /CIA/ QTI ►ACAIT USURER$ This item was rescheduled to the October Park Board meeting, since student members were absent. Ill. ROLL CALL Answering roll call were Members Deeds, Cella, Gieseke, Steel, Segreto, Jones, Hulbert, Jacobson, Peterson. IV. APPROVAL OF MEETING AGENDA Member Peterson made a motion, seconded by Member Hulbert, approving the meeting agenda. Ayes: Members Deeds, Cella, Gieseke, Steel, Segreto, Jones, Hulbert, Jacobson, Peterson. Motion carried. V. ADOPTION OF CONSENT AGENDA Member Peterson made a motion, seconded by Member Hulbert, approving the consent agenda as follows: V.A. Approval of Minutes — Regular Park Board Meeting of August 13, 2013 Ayes: Members Deeds, Cella, Gieseke, Steel, Segreto, Jones, Hulbert, Jacobson, Peterson. Motion carried. Vl. COMMUNITY COMMENT None. Vll. REPORTS /RECOMMENDATIONS VII.A. Weber Park Sidewalk Proposal Ms. Kattreh introduced Wayne Houle, Director of Engineering. Mr. Houle provided an overview of the sidewalk proposed on 42nd Street. The proposal would bring the sidewalk from France Avenue to the park. Staff is proposing to put in a park pathway, and he suggested starting the discussion with the public about the pathway around the park. He asked for discussion and recommendation to move ahead with the park pathway as well as the Grimes Avenue sidewalk. Member Hulbert expressed support for the pathway and sidewalk due to close proximity to a school. Member Deeds asked about bicyclists using the pathway, especially for kids on bikes going to and from school. Mr. Houle stated an expansion of the proposed Grimes Avenue sidewalk could be considered to accommodate young bicyclists. Member Peterson stated he appreciates the staffs effort to avoid removal of mature trees. He also asked about a connection between active lifestyles with more sidewalks. Mr. Houle concurred sidewalks do help residents choose walking rather than automatically driving places. Member Jones asked about the distance between the street and the proposed path. Mr. Houle responded the trees are about 8 feet off the curb and about 4 feet below the roadway, so about a 10- foot area would still be heavily vegetated. Member Jones asked why there is a sidewalk on the west end and a park path on the other end. Mr. Houle stated the project is tying into an existing sidewalk by the Montessori School. Chair Steel asked whether the path will be funded with the Pedestrian Cycling Safety Fund. Mr. Houle responded affirmatively. The path along 42nd Street would be funded with the tax fund. The funding for the other pathways is up in the air. Member Jones stated it seems to be functioning as a sidewalk, not a path, and it would not get put into the Parks budget for maintenance. Member Jones suggested continuing the sidewalk as a boulevard sidewalk all the way down on 42nd Street. She asked that staff keep in mind how bikes use this area when considering these sidewalks. Member Peterson made a motion, seconded by Member Hulbert, to approve the Weber Park Sidewalk Proposal as written. Ayes: Members Deeds, Cella, Gieseke, Steel, Segreto, Jones, Hulbert, Jacobson, Peterson. Motion carried. VI.B. Centennial Lakes Promenade Final Phase Mr. Houle presented the final phase of the Promenade project. The Byerly's store is being redeveloped right now and actually they put in the right -in /right -out off of France Avenue, retaining walls, and the parking lot is all underway. The city has been working with Byerly's for quite some time along with the water feature on the Promenade as well as the redo of the Hazelton Roadway. He focused on the Promenade area, recalling that the original plans for the water feature have been changed to something more modest today. For this phase of the project, an easement was given by Byerly's to put in the pond; the pond will complete the trail on the Promenade and will also provide swinging benches and other key items. He also pointed out the proposed babbling brook. Also included will be trees and perennial plantings. Mr. Houle stated staff has worked with the Nine Mile Creek Watershed District on the water infiltration and the creek. He pointed out the four different ways to handle infiltration on this project. Staff has agreed on a combination of a couple options, which would create more of a shallow system. He noted pumping would only occur after it rains a little bit. Greg Brown, URS, provided an introduction to the surface element of the Promenade. He noted phase II was completed two years ago, and some temporary features were established at that time. None of that work will be thrown away, but rather will be incorporated into this new phase. He highlighted the main elements of the water feature, including the intention to have it function as a recirculation system. There is space for a sculpture piece at the introduction of the water feature. People will not be allowed to go play in the water, so it will be a bit more of a rough edging to it. Mr. Brown noted there will be two or three crossings where trails will intersect with the babbling brook. He noted the bike trail and the lighting associated with the bike trail will not be rebuilt and will remain as is. He pointed out a future water feature and trail which is located on current Macy's property. It is not included in this design but is a future consideration. He noted the northern babbling brook is more 2 of a formal channel; the southern babbling brook will have more of a natural feel to it. Similar stones, probably river rock, will be used on both babbling brooks. Mr. Houle stated the Nine Mile Creek Watershed is looking at about a 50 percent contribution towards this water filtration system, which will be approximately $200,000 to $250,000. He noted staff will be back before the Park Board for approval in October or November. Staff will then present the plan to the City Council in October or November. Member Hulbert noted the walking trails in the Promenade are lovely, and a babbling brook would be a nice addition rather than having to look at the back of buildings. Member Segreto asked about the tree plantings that lose their leaves in the fall and drop into the stream. Mr. Brown stated this pond would be lined with some type of concrete, so it would facilitate cleaning in the fall or multiple times a year if desired. Kathy Ryan, URC, added that the exact plantings are not decided yet, but it will be designed to be easily cleanable. Member Segreto asked if there is any concern about extended high summer temperatures and the algae it produces. Mr. Houle responded that clean water will be pumped from Centennial Lakes through the pond; it will not be a settling pond with algae growing on it. Member Segreto asked whether agitation will be required in the pond. Mr. Brown indicated that part of the babbling brook will help aerate the water. Member Segreto commented it becomes a mosquito breeder when the water is too still. Member Segreto asked about lighting selections. Mr. Brown stated there will be a lot of opportunity with accent lighting as well as similar lighting with the rest of the Promenade. Ms. Ryan concurred about the accent lighting. Mr. Brown added the possible two sculptures will also have attractive lighting. Member Segreto asked when the water features shut down for the season. Mr. Houle responded the water features will come online in early May and will shut down in early October, depending on the frost. Member Segreto stated this would be an excellent opportunity to work with the Arts Commission onthe sculptures. Mr. Houle stated discussions have already begun with that group. Ms. Kattreh added that she has already shared this plan with Barbara La Valleur, the chair of the Edina Public Art Committee. Member Gieseke asked if there is a place to interact with the water. Mr. Houle stated discussions have been had about it; but water cannot be pumped out of Centennial Lakes because it would have to be potable water. The intent is not to have that interaction here because of bacteria. Member Peterson asked if there is thought to using solar or wind power for the energy for the lighting. Mr. Houle responded that can be considered. Member Jones noted that no financial aspects of this project have been presented yet. She knows how many people walk the Promenade path, so this is an important project. She asked about boundaries between the public and private land. Mr. Houle pointed out the boundaries on the overhead maps. lk Member Jones asked whether it is possible to see a copy of where the existing path is and where the proposed path runs. She noted she was dismayed that the Park Board was not given the opportunity to discuss and comment on the six -story building that is so close to the Promenade. That changes the way the space will feel as a biker and a pedestrian. She noted the path is hugging up against a building; she would prefer the water feature to be on the other side. Mr. Houle noted the grass area to the building is 6 feet; it is a sloped area that is not well reflected on the overhead projections. Member Jones stated she would prefer the path go on the other side rather than to be so close to the building. Mr. Houle commented the master plan had a pond located in this area, which is why it was included in this plan. Member Jones asked about funding. Mr. Houle stated the funding will come from Centennial Lake TIF funds, which is funding coming from the surrounding property owners with Tax Increment Financing. How much it will be exactly remains to be seen. Chair Steel commented this would become a very busy area with the bike trail. She expressed concern about any intermingling of pedestrians and bicyclists. She likes the pedestrians being on the west side because they are closer to the stores they might travel to. She would like to know more at the next meeting about how this would all play out. Mr. Houle stated the main access from the bike trail would be a crossing through a pedestrian movement and through a sidewalk system near Byerly's. There will have to be signage, perhaps cautioning people to walk their bikes, especially as they get close to Byerly's. Chair Steel asked about bike racks. Mr. Houle responded that Byerly's has bike racks, but there needs to be further discussion about other locations for bike racks. Member Jones asked if the Park Board can talk with other cities who may have installed ponds and trails similar to this. Mr. Brown responded that a couple reasons led to the decision on the location of the trails: the natural rhythm of the Promenade and this location of trails give the best opportunity for city ownership being the primary one. He noted he has also worked on constructing ponds and trails on the north side of Minneapolis, Humboldt- Greenway, Shingle Creek and the Midtown Greenway, whose ponds tend to have a more natural feel. He stated the location of the trails can still be reconsidered. Typically, eyes (from surrounding buildings) on the trails are good from a safety perspective. Chair Steel asked about the benefit for the infiltration system. Mr. Houle stated a system will be built to accommodate the water quality standards, and the city also will be able to bank credits so when the city does other projects, those credits can be sold or used for other capital projects. Member Segreto asked about the little island. Mr. Houle responded that in order to keep those two manholes accessible, an island will be built on it. Another way to do it is cap them off and seal them so no access is available. 4 Member Cella commented to Mr. Houle that every time he talks about the infiltration system he says this is great because we are going to bank those credits and then when other projects need to be done in Edina they will have credits to use. She stated if you are tinkering too much with the way the beauty of Centennial Lakes is supposed to look just so you can bank credits for other projects; is that necessarily the right way to approach it. She asked should they not be looking at those projects individually in saying how are we going to deal with those rather than putting all the ownness of all of our water issues and solving it through what we are doing at Centennial Lakes because that concerns her. Mr. Houle explained there are two ways of looking at accommodating rain water; one is to do it on individual sites and the other is doing it as a regional level. He pointed out that for a while watersheds were doing that on individual sites and they found that doesn't work because people don't maintain those sites on private developments and therefore would much rather have it at a regional level. He explained when you look at a regional level the only time that banking stuff comes into play is when it's raining out so that is the only time that infiltration system would come into play. Chair Steel asked whether there is additional runoff from the Byerly's new construction. Mr. Houle responded that is not really an issue. Member Jones stated she would love to see more play space on this plan and more interface between the area and the people utilizing it. She is disappointed this plan continues to build the no -touch feature of the Promenade. She also expressed concern about the cost of the project. Mr. Houle stated the Byerly's housing has park dedication fees associated with it, but public discussion also needs to occur as France Avenue is completed with the boulevards and medians regarding whether to create a maintenance fund for these areas. Member Jones stated that type of assessment makes sense. This is a beautiful park, and it is really expensive to maintain. She would prefer a plan with less water because it is easier to maintain and provides more opportunity for interaction. Member Deeds suggested leaving some spaces for carts, such as a coffee cart. VI.C. 2014 Park Board Work Plan Chair Steel noted she has worked on the Board Work Plan with Ms. Kattreh. Ms. Kattreh provided an overview of the work plan. She discussed strategic planning with the comprehensive needs assessment. Member Segreto and Member Hulbert asked to join the subcommittee. Ms. Kattreh highlighted the Arneson Acres Master Plan. She noted the Edina Garden Council is willing to contribute $25,000 to $30,000 towards this project. They want to make sure they have a specific plan and purpose for this area. Member Jones asked to join the work group. Ms. Kattreh went on to discuss the Cost Recovery Goals for Enterprise Facilities, followed by the Barrier - Free Replacement Playground Equipment at Wooddale Park. She explained that traditionally, this park would not be at the top of the list to replace equipment. However, a resident has approached staff and Council members, volunteering to do fundraising to replace equipment. That is how it got moved on to the priority list for the CIP. It would be a matching -type project, with a possibility of a $100,000 contribution. Member Deeds stated there is a heavy bias towards the higher -end neighborhoods rather than the lower -end neighborhoods, if this type of policy continues. Chair Steel stated nothing has been done with the donations policy, because that should set the overarching policy for projects like these. Member Cella stated it is a frustrating way to do strategic planning when things like this get bumped to the front of the line through external forces. Member Jones proposed the "Barrier Free Replacement Playground Equipment at Wooddale Park" be removed from the Park Board work plan until the donations policy is passed. Member Deeds asked if this is a potential ADA issue. Ms. Kattreh stated that is not the reason for this. There is a neighbor with a child who is disabled, and that is the reason for the request and potential donation. Member Jones asked about the new park at Countryside. Ms. Kattreh stated that park is not technically a universal playground. The playground proposed at Wooddale is barrier -free. However, Countryside will be the most accessible playground in the system, primarily because of the rubber safety surface. She noted most of the parks have pea gravel as a safety surface. Member Segreto suggested the Wooddale Park remain on the work plan for 2014, because a resident of Edina is trying to make a park barrier -free. Chair Steel stated she would prefer adding the caveat "pending approval of a donations policy by the City Council, select members of the Park Board." Member Segreto stated she does not want to use the donations policy as a way to stall out well - intentioned residents of the City. Member Peterson commented the Park Board should move ahead with this park, and it should be designated as the first city -wide accessible park. Ms. Kattreh noted that an average playground costs between $100,000 to $200,000. In this case for Wooddale, $100,000 would likely be donated and the city would contribute $100,000. She noted if the donation was not reached, it could be bumped back to 2015 to complete the project. Member Segreto asked about approval of the donations policy to which Ms. Kattreh replied it will happen before the end of the year. Chair Steel stated if it happens before the end of the year, and this fits, then it should remain in the plan. Member Segreto stated this should be grandfathered in and should be viewed as an ADA donation. Member Deeds stated he is concerned that the donations policy will not be worth the paper it is printed on. He does not like the precedent being set, and he suspects the Park Board will see more of this every year. Member Jacobson expressed a desire to have a park renovation plan. Ms. Kattreh stated there is a prioritized plan for replacement of playgrounds, and the goal is to have that in place by the end of 2014. 6 Chair Steel expressed strong feeling for including the condition of an approved donations policy. Member Segreto made a motion, seconded by Member Deeds, to leave the new initiative regarding a barrier -free replacement playground equipment at Wooddale Park in the 2014 Park Board Work Plan Without any amendments. Member Jones stated until there is a donations policy, it is hard to know when to begin a project like this. Ms. Kattreh stated the current agreement is 50% must be raised, and the city will then also spend up to $100,000. Member Deeds proposed an amendment to the motion, seconded by Member Peterson, that is contingent on the residents in the neighborhood raising SO% of the funds needed for this replacement. Ayes: Deeds, Cella, Gieseke, Steel, Segreto, Jones, Hulbert, Jacobson, Peterson. Motion carried. Vote on motion: Ayes: Deeds, Cella, Gieseke, Steel, Segreto, Jones, Hulbert, Jacobson, Peterson. Motion carried. Member Cella stated a large portion of the Cornelia School playground is barrier -free. Ms. Kattreh added another example is Miller Park in Eden Prairie. Ms. Kattreh continued that if the Council moves ahead with the Sports Dome, there may also be interest in the Pamela Park master plan renovation. If that is included as part of the Sports Dome project, she would need assistance from the Park Board on finalizing the Pamela Park master plan. Ms. Kattreh highlighted the green initiatives, with possible potential partnership with the Energy and Environment Commission. Ms. Kattreh introduced the idea of working on fundraising for the Parks & Recreation Department. Member Jones suggested perhaps getting started, even if it is on a small scale. Ms. Kattreh discussed the mountain bike paths initiative. Member Segreto recalled a Park Board discussion about mountain bike paths earlier in the year. She suggested deferring this until the needs assessment and possibly deferring to 2015. Member Peterson suggested this be postponed because millions of public money will be spent to complete the Edina section of the Three Rivers /Nine Mile Creek bike path. He noted it could be closed four or five times a year for mountain biking as opposed to family biking. He commented that it is very hard to find space in a built -out city. Member Segreto made a motion, seconded by Member Peterson, to take the Mountain Bike Initiative off the 2014 Work Plan and put it on the 2015 Work Plan. Ayes: Deeds, Cella, Gieseke, Steel, Segreto, Jones, Hulbert, Jacobson, Peterson. Motion carried. 7 Member Jones commented that she would like to develop programming in Edina in the area of disabled or older people renting bicycles to revitalize their health. The City of Minnetonka has such a program up and running. Ms. Kattreh stated staff will be happy to work with Member Jones on that. Ms. Kattreh highlighted ongoing responsibilities on the work plan. Member Jones asked about the Grandview project. Ms. Kattreh stated Grandview has its own Citizen Advisory Team. Member Jones stated it seems the Park Board should be involved in that process. Chair Steel commented she is struggling to understand why the Grandview CAT is pushing ahead with their needs assessment, because it is more important to get an overarching city -wide needs assessment. Member Deeds encouraged movement on the cooperative agreement between the school district and the City to maximize efficiencies and use of spaces. Member Cella stated the School Board and City Council is having one of their quarterly joint meetings next week, and that is one of their agenda items. Chair Steel stated she hopes the city will do a park -wide, community -wide needs survey rather than one just for Grandview. Chair Steel made a motion, seconded by Member Jones, to approve the 2014 Work Plan as amended. Ayes: Deeds, Cella, Gieseke, Steel, Segreto, Jones, Hulbert, Jacobson, Peterson. Motion carried. Vlll. CORRESPONDENCE AND PETITIONS VIII.A. Council Updates None. VIII.B. Other Correspondence None. VIII.C. Veterans Memorial Committee, June 21, 2013 Minutes Noted. IX. CHAIR AND BOARD MEMBER COMMENTS Member Peterson asked if anyone has any interest in the Veterans Memorial. He asked whether what part of the City can help the committee, as it is languishing. Ms. Kattreh stated the next step in the process is to hire a consultant to do the plan design. What the Veterans Memorial Committee wants to do is get the plans and specs drawn up so they are actually able to take those plans and start to solicit in -kind donations. They feel very strongly that without the plans and specs, they do not have anything to actually go out and sell. Therefore, the process is underway to try to select a consultant to complete those plans. Member Jones asked whether the proposed sculpture has been changed. She is reluctant to have the committee just choose another sculpture, as it just happens to be a friend of someone on the committee. Perhaps the Park Board needs to relook at the plan and downsize it since the budget is smaller. Ms. Kattreh noted she is attending the Veterans Committee meeting on September 20, and she will report back to the Park Board in October. Member Jones asked about future advertising for alcohol in the arena. Ms. Kattreh stated she is unaware of it. Member Jones pointed out that all the research done on the effect of advertising in youth points out that it can help youth to start drinking earlier and also have a different attitude toward alcohol. Schools understand that, and all the research supports it. Ms. Kattreh indicated she will look into it. X. STAFF COMMENTS Ms. Kattreh made the following comments: the Park Board is invited to an open house for feedback on the 54th Street reconstruction and Arden Park storm water management plan; the Garden Park baseball field renovation is completed; Fall into the Arts Festival is this week at Centennial Lakes; the Countryside Park renovation project is coming along well and will be completed this fall. Xl. ADJOURNMENT Chair Steel made a motion, seconded by Member Deeds, to adjourn the meeting at 9:20 p.m. Ayes: Members Deeds, Cella, Gieseke, Steel, Segreto, Jones, Hulbert, Jacobson, Peterson. Motion Carried. The meeting adjourned at 9:20 p.m. MINUTES Regular Meeting of the Edina Heritage Preservation Board Edina City Hall — Community Room Tuesday, September 10, 2013 7:00 p.m. I. CALL TO ORDER 7:00 P.M. II. ROLL CALL Answering roll call was Chair Moore and Members Mellom, Christiaansen, O'Brien, Weber, Sussman, McDermott, Holtan, Birdman, Johnson and Brandt. Staff present was Senior Planner, Joyce Repya. Ill. APPROVAL OF MEETING AGENDA Member McDermott moved to approve the meeting agenda. Member Birdman seconded the motion. All voted aye. The motion carried. IV. APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES August 13, 2013 Member Birdman moved to approve the minutes from the August 13, 2013 meeting. Member Christiaansen seconded the motion. All voted aye. The motion carried. V. COMMUNITY COMMENT — None VI. REPORTS & RECOMMENDATIONS A. H -13 -6 4621 Arden Avenue — Certificate of Appropriateness (COA) for changes to the street facing fa4ade Planner Repya explained that the subject property is located on the east side of the 4600 block of Arden Avenue. The home, constructed in 1927 is .identified in the 1980 survey of the district as the only "Cubiform" style in the neighborhood. A detached 2 -car garage accessed by a driveway on the north side of the property is located in the southeast corner of the property, 5 feet from the side lot line and 18.3 feet from the rear lot line. The proposed plan involves: • Adding a new front entry porch and boxed -bay window projection on the front street facing elevation; and • A 2 -story addition and basement to the rear of the home. The addition will increase the footprint of the home by 497 square feet and project five feet beyond the existing south wall of the home. The intent of the project is to embrace characteristics of Italian Renaissance, Mission Edina Heritage Preservation Board Minutes September 10, 2013 and Spanish Eclectic design and elaborate upon those elements with the proposed changes. Changes to the street facing fagade include: • A front entry porch measuring 4'x 8' (32 sf) with square wood columns, a wider entry stoop and a timber - framed, gable end roof. • A boxed -bay of three double hung windows spaced with wood trim, wider corner trim and a panel trimmed wall finish below the window sills which is shown to the right of the front porch. Ms. Repya pointed out to the board that since the proposed plans were submitted the bay window has come into question due to the home having a non - conforming front setback that had been overlooked. Houses on either side are set back further than the subject home, thus the required setback must be the average of the two neighboring homes requiring 37.8 feet; yet only a 32 foot setback is provided. Due to the non - conforming front setback, nothing can be constructed to extend beyond the existing front building wall, thus the bay window projecting two feet into the setback would require a variance. Ms. Repya noted that standard procedures for COA requiring a variance is for the COA to first be heard by the HPB; then if conditionally approved pending receipt of a variance, the request would then move to the Planning Commission for consideration of the variance with the recommendation for approval from the HPB. Completing an explanation of the proposed project, Ms. Repya added that the addition to the rear of the home proposes to continue many of the features introduced on the front facade. Additionally, the project will also include repairing and refreshing the stucco; replacing existing double hung windows; new window sill trim; and installing new roof shingles and wood dentil brackets at the undersides of the existing roof overhangs on the front elevation. Ms. Repya pointed out that Preservation Consultant Robert Vogel provided an evaluation of the project and has recommended approval; however he was unaware that the bay window did not comply with the setback requirements. In closing, Ms. Repya advised the board that there are several approaches they could take when considering the COA request. If deemed appropriate, they could approve the COA as presented pending the owners then apply for a variance to allow the bay window projection into the front setback; or the board could approve the COA with the exception of the front window which the applicant could redesign and return to the October 8' HPB meeting for consideration of the new window. Ms. Repya also pointed out that earlier in the day from Kitty O'Dea, 4610 Bruce Avenue submitted an email expressing concerns about the proposal. (Members of the board received a copy of the email.) Edina Heritage Preservation Board Minutes September 10, 2013 Mr. Michael Eckhardt, architect with Archos Architecture & Design, P.A. was present to represent the homeowners. Member Mellom commented that she found this home with the cubiform design to be unique in the District, and there were elements of the proposal that she liked; however she was glad to hear that the boxed bay window would not work. Addressing questions regarding the design plan, Mr. Eckhardt explained that -the proposal is designed to capture the essence of several architectural styles found in the district (Italian Renaissance, Mission and Spanish Eclectic). The property owners feel that the home is plain and boring, and they hope to add style reminiscent with their former home in California. Member Sussman observed that there are design elements introduced on the front faeade such as dentil brackets, and horizontal sill trim that are not continued on other elevations ofthe home. Mr. Sussman recognized that some of the elements may found in the architectural styles inspiring the plan; however by only introducing them on the front, the plan appears incomplete. Member Christiaansen questioned the standing metal seamed roof on the front porch; commenting that it appeared modern and inconsistent with the other design elements being introduced. She inquired as to whether they had considered an asphalt shingled roof on the front porch. Mr. Eckhardt responded that metal roofs can be found in the district and he does not believe that it is a modern application, but rather the introduction of an element at a human scale. Member Sussman informed Mr. Eckhardt that the HPB has had experience in the past with the approval of a metal roof on a front porch. An earlier approval of such a roof was appealed to the City Council, who overturned the approval and ordered the metal roof not,be included in the plan. Mr. Sussman added that considering.the previous experience with the metal roof, they may want to reconsider, its application. Member Weber commented that it appears design elements have been chosen from 3 historic architectural styles, and wondered if it wouldn't have been better to choose one style. Mr. Eckhardt responded that the elements he has introduced are of one style — Spanish Eclectic. A brief discussion then ensued regarding the varied design elements introduced with the proposed plan. Member Christiaansen observed that plans at a schematic level are difficult to evaluate; perhaps samples of the materials being used would have been helpful. She added that while new windows, a front entry and shutters make sense with plans for a redesign, the additional design elements cause angst. Edina Heritage Preservation Board Minutes September 10, 2013 Michael Birdman observed that consistency is the key to a successful project, and when reviewing a plan one needs to determine how the elements presented work together. Member Mellom agreed, pointing out that there are positive elements to the proposal, and she would be willing to move approval subject to the removal of the dentil blocks on the front eave; removal of the horizontal sill trim on the front; and removal of the boxed bay window. Discussing the need for the HPB to review a replacement window if the boxed bay were deleted from the plan, the board suggested that a motion for approval include a provision that the revised front window plan come back to the HPB for consideration at the October 8th meeting. Ms. Mellom agreed with the board and offered a motion for approval of COA subject to the removal of the dentil blocks and horizontal sill trim on the front elevation, and a new front window plan presented for consideration at the October 8th HPB meeting. Member McDermott seconded the motion. All voted aye. The motion carried. B. Midcentury Modern Historic Context Study Copies of the newly completed context study entitled "Suburban Development in Edina Since 1935: A Historic Context Study" were provided for the HPB to review prior to the meeting. Planner Repya pointed out that the study will assist the HPB in establishing a framework for making consistent, informed decisions about the preservation, protection and use of the city's modern architecture and landscapes. She added that in light of the fact that a majority of Edina's built environment falls within the purview of this context study it will serve as an important foundation to guide the preservation of properties built within the midcentury period. Expressing their impressions of the context study, board members offered the following feedback: Chair Moore — Found the study to be fascinating, and particularly liked the listing of plats or subdivisions created during the period. He suggested that it would be interesting to see the subdivisions imposed on top of the city map. Member Mellom — Found the study to be very thorough; adding that it will be a helpful resource to use as foundation for addressing the suburban development of Edina. Member McDermott — Commented that she didn't realize that there was such a breadth of home styles built during the context time frame. Member Sussman — Found the study to be well done. He suggested that Appendix B. which is a listing of the subdivisions in chronological order would be useful in an alphabetical format as well. Board members agreed. 4 Edina Heritage Preservation Board Minutes September 10, 2013 Member Holtan — Commented that she found the "Age Built" map of the city of page 58 to be very interesting: Member Birdman — Found that the summer tour of West Minneapolis Heights highlighted many of the elements outlined in the context study; adding that the neighborhood will be an interesting area to evaluate with the use of the study. Member Christiaansen — Found the study to be very interesting and a useful tool for the H PB. Cory Strickland, a representative from Twin Cities Midcentury Modern Facebook having had an opportunity to review the study earlier in the meeting asked about the intent of the study. He pointed out that he is of the opinion that Midcentury Modern is an architecture style, and the period covered in the study encompasses Midcentury Modern, but also Ramblers,-Cape Cods, Split- levels, etc. The board thanked Mr. Strickland for his interest and agreed that Midcentury Modern is indeed one of the architectural styles typical of the time period covered by the context study. However, the term "midcentury modern" is also commonly used as a generic classification for the post WWII era when much of the suburban development occurred. Member Weber - Commented that the purpose of the study includes an evaluation of all the architectural styles constructed during the period; of which Midcentury Modern is one. Member Christiaansen agreed, adding that finding the pure Midcentury Modern style homes will occur on a case -by -case basis, since that style of home is most likely found in every neighborhood of the era. Following a brief discussion when the board agreed that the context study will be a most helpful planning tool, Member Birdman moved for adoption of the "Suburban Development in Edina Since 1 935: A Historic Context Study" Member Mellom seconded . the motion. All voted aye. The motion carried. VII. OTHER BUSINESS A. Plan for City Council Work Session: September 17`" Planner Repya provided the board with a draft agenda for the upcoming 'September 17``' work session with the City Council. She explained the purpose of the work session will be to review the 2013 work plan approved by the City Council — providing them with the status of each initiative identified. Ms. Repya added the since the boards and commissions are advisory to the Edina Heritage Preservation Board Minutes September 10, 2013 City Council, the work session provides an opportunity for the board to engage the Council in a conversation regarding identified preservation efforts to insure that the work identified is in sync with the city's preservation goals. The board then engaged in a discussion of the role preservation should play in Edina's future. Member Weber opined that the activities of the HPB shouldn't just be about houses, but rather focus on all that makes Edina a desirable community — neighborhood appeal, shopping, parks, etc. Member Holtan asked the student HPB members what they find of value to preserve in the community for residents 20 years from now. Student Member Brandt commented that he finds the city's parks and greenspace to be very important. Member Birdman added that it is also important to keep an eye on community values that are important to preserve in Edina. Member Weber agreed pointing out that he attended the public meetings where the results of the recent community survey were released, and he found the results to be positive and enlightening. He then observed that as the HPB looks to the future, it might be helpful to include some questions about the importance of heritage preservation the next time the survey is conducted. The questions could be posed to determine what existing elements in the community will be valuable to the future of the city. B. 2014 Work Plan Proposal Planner Repya advised the board that the HPB's proposed 2014 work plan is due to Karen Kurt, Assistant City Manager on September 24`h in preparation for a meeting of the board and commission chairs with the City Council on October I5`. She explained that the items to be included will be those identified in 2013 which have yet to be accomplished, as well as work items which may be identified in the upcoming work session with the City Council. Ms. Repya also recommended that the following initiatives which had been included on the 2013 work plan be moved to the "Ongoing Responsibilities" section: • Voluntary Heritage Landmark Designations, and • Increase Board Member Participation at State & National Preservation Conferences She also suggested that the initiative to update accessibility to the Cahill School and Grange Hall be postponed until the lifespan of the existing ramping system has been evaluated, so the Edina Heritage Preservation Board Minutes September 10, 2013 replacement takes place when necessary. Board members agreed that those suggested changes made sense. VIII. CORRESPONDENCE & PETITIONS - None IX. CHAIR AND BOARD MEMBER COMMENTS Member Sussman observed that the Edina Historical Society has done an outstanding job of planning and advertising the upcoming Historic House Tour on September 15`h with several great articles placed in the Minneapolis Star Tribune, Edina Sun Current and Edina Magazine. The articles each included photographs and descriptions of homes with an explanation of their renovation projects. Mr. Sussman added that docents for the tour include volunteers from the League of Women Voters of Edina, Edina Garden Council and the Morningside Women's' Club. The board agreed that the tour will not only celebrate Edina's past in recognition of this Quasquicentennial year, but also provide an excellent showcase of the preservation efforts the homeowners have undertaken to maintain and enhance their homes. Member Sussman then presented a motion to send the Edina Historical Society a letter applauding the excellent planning and marketing undertaken to promote the Historic Housing Tour that celebrates Edina's past and fosters an appreciation for Edina's historic housing stock. Member Mellom seconded the motion. All voted aye. The motion carried. Member Mellom announced that her home at 4506 Arden Avenue will be one of the three homes included on the historic housing tour. She encouraged fellow board members to attend the tour; pointing out that she will have an accordion player serenading the attendees in the back yard as she serves spa water. Board members thanked Ms. Mellom for opening her Country Club District home to the public, and agreed that they looked forward to receiving feedback on the tour at the October meeting. X. STAFF COMMENTS Annual Work Session with the City Council will take place on Tuesday, September 17`' at 6:00 p.m. in the Community Room at City Hall. Ms: Repya added that attendance at the work session is included when calculating a board member's attendance record. Board members thanked Ms. Repya for the reminder. Draft 2014 Work Plans must be completed by Tuesday, September 24`h. The City Council will meet with the Chair of all the boards and commissions to discuss their respective plans on Tuesday, October I'. Chair Bob Moore stated that he has the date on his calendar and will report on the City Council's response to the proposed 2014 plan at the. October 8th HPB meeting. 7 Edina Heritage Preservation Board Minutes September 10, 2013 XI. NEXT MEETING DATE October 8, 2013 XII. ADJOURNMENT 8:52 p.m. Member McDermott moved for adjournment at 8:52 p.m. Member Mellom seconded the motion. All voted aye. The motion carried. Respectfully submitted, Joyce Repya 8 Edina Arts and Culture Commission Meeting Meeting Minutes H City of Edina, Minnesota Media Studios of the Edina Art Center September 26, 2013 4:00 P.M. I. Call to Order Mr. Bouassida called the meeting to order at 4:07 p.m. II. Roll Call Members Present: Hafed Bouassida, Kandace Ellis, Dana Lappin, Barbara La Valleur, Ray Meifert, Colin Nelson, Kitty O'Dea, Paul Peterson, Thomas Raeuchle, and John Swon. Staff Present: Michael Frey, General Manager, Edina Art Center. Student Members Present: Sophia Munic and Jack Ready Members of the Public'Present: Bob Kojetin III. Introduction Chair Bouassida welcomed the new student members to introduce themselves to the Commission. Jack Redy introduced himself to the Commission and advised that he is a sophomore at Edina High School. Sofia Munic also introduced herself to the Commission and noted that she is a junior at Edina High School. IV. Approval of Meeting Agenda hair 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. V. Adoption of Consent Agenda A. Approval of Minutes of August 22, 2013 B. Music in Edina Group Report C. Art Center General Manager Monthly Report — September 2013 Chair Bouassida asked if there were changes or corrections to the minutes of the Regular Meeting of August 22, 2013. No changes voiced. The minutes were approved as circulated. The consent agenda was approved as presented. VI. Community Comment There was none VII. Reports /Recommendations A. Arts and Culture Commission Working Groups Chair Bouassida explained that the by -laws of the Commission require that all Working Groups be in working order, and noted that is why he requested a list of all the prior Committees and Working Groups, including the members of each group. He explained that a review can now be completed to ensure that all the groups are necessary and contributing. He explained that during the next month the process can begin to look at every working group, current and previous, to determine if the group still works under the Commission. He noted that even new Working Groups, such as music, could gain benefit from this process in the form of new membership. He explained that the process could occur over the next ,vo to three months to fully investigate each Working Group. Commissioner Peterson stated that he is attempting to hold a meeting of the Music Working Group on October 15th but needed input on how to notice and where to hold the meeting. Mr. Frey confirmed that Commissioner Peterson would be flexible with the date, as the meeting would need to be properly noticed. Commissioner Raeuchle stated that he believed the Commission would need to determine the difference between a Working Group and a group of people talking together about a similar interest. Sofia Munic questioned the definition of a Working Group. Chair Bouassida explained that a Working Group is a group that is developed by the Commission to discuss and work on a certain subject matter. He advised that the Working Group is run by a Commissioner who works with volunteers from the community. He explained that some of the Working Groups have been formally approved by the Commission while some Committees are still i-n existence from before the Commission formally began. Mr. Frey explained that a Committee is composed of only Commissioners, while a Working Group is composed of at least one Commissioner, but less than a quorum, and other resident volunteers. Chair Bouassida explained that since becoming a formal Commission this review is needed to get all of the Working Groups in order to determine the necessity and benefit for each group. He noted that it may be determined that some of the Working Groups want to no longer exist in that form and instead go their own way and could return to make recommendations in the future. Commissioner Raeuchle stated that he believed it would be beneficial for the Commission to further continue the discussion that was facilitated by the consultant when the Commission began, as to what the view of the Commission is for the future. Commissioner Nelson questioned if the Mission Statement did not accomplish that. Commissioner Swon explained that there are specific actions that can be taken in order to accomplish and reach the Mission Statement. Commissioner Raeuchle agreed that there are steps that need to be further defined under the Mission Statement and what ultimately it would mean to be a Working Group or no longer be a Working Group. Commissioner Swon stated that it would be nice to have additional information regarding the benefits and risks of bein or not being, a Working Group. Commissioner Raeuchle questioned if the discussion regarding Working Groups in general could occur at the next meeting with the specific Working Groups being discussed at the following meeting. Chair Bouassida stated that his concern with postponing the discussion would be that in the interim there are Working Groups that are uncertain and unclear on their direction. Commissioner O'Dea stated that she did not believe the decision to postpone would make a difference. She advised that Working Groups could continue to meet and move forward during the review process. Commissioner Ellis stated that the by -laws appear to be pretty specific regarding Working Groups. Commissioner O'Dea was confused on the rushed timeline. Chair Bouassida stated that he would like to have things lined up going into 2014. Commissioner Nelson noted that once the prototype for the Working Group is created, the rest could be done relatively quickly. Commissioner Raeuchle agreed that the development of the prototype would be the most time consuming portion of the process. Commissioner La Valleur clarified that at the next meeting Chair Bouassida would like to have the discussion regarding the template for the Working Groups and also a presentation from the existing Working Groups or continued Committees. Commissioner Peterson stated that separate of this discussion he would like to hold a meeting of the Music Working Group in October as proposed. Mr. Frey confirmed that the Music Working Group is a formally approved Working Group and can hold a meeting in October, noting that he simply needs to ensure enough time to publish the meeting notice. B. Film Festival Report— Discussion of Working Group Status �. Chair Bouassida noted that the decision about Working Group status would be further discussed at the next meeting and asked for an update on the Film Festival planning. „ommissioner Swon provided an update on the fundraising, noting that they are on pace hot only to meet the fundraising goal but to exceed that. Commissioner O'Dea displayed a version of the advertisement that will be published in the Sun Current that features four of the films that will be included in the festival. She stated that she is also working on securing a venue for an after pa rty. Commissioner Swon stated that they are working in conjunction with as many local restaurants and bars that could host after party events following showings of the films. He noted that the events could be coordinated by film so that people who watched the film could gather following the filmto discuss and participate. He stated that the event is gaining attention and believed that there will be more participation than there has been in the past. The Film Festival Report was approved as presented. C. Edina Public Art Committee Report— Discussion of Working Group Status Chair Bouassida noted that the discussion of Working Group status will be continued at the next meeting and asked for a general update. Commissioner La Valleur provided an update on the event the previous week to Save Spaulding which was very successful, noting that over $4,000 was received towards the cost of $7,500. She advised that there has been $2,500 donated in advertising for this from Salut. She explained that this was a fundraiser that was started to keep this sculpture, explaining that in order to keep the sculpture it must be purchased. She advised that if further funds are received from this effort, those funds could be used to purchase additional sculptures. Commissioner Raeuchle clarified that the group is raising money in order to purchase sculptures for the City. He confirmed that ongoing maintenance and repair would be funded from the City. He believed a future discussion should -)ccur as to how best to do this, as $7,000 would fund half of the budget for the Edina Public Art Committee (EPAC). Commissioner La Valleur explained that the public has generated this campaign to purchase this sculpture. Mr. Frey explained that this really is a public campaign and noted that Salut has contributed quite a bit for this endeavor. Chair Bouassida stated that this item should be further discussed, as the Commission was not made aware of this endeavor at the last meeting. Commissioner La Valleur explained that EPAC was brought into the endeavor after the public campaign began. Commissioner Ellis also believed that the item should be presented to the Commission at a meeting. Commissioner La Valleur apologized for the mix -up, as she had a recent injury prior to, the last meeting though she had sent an e-mail to Commissioners prior to the event. Chair Bouassida noted that none of the other Commissioners were aware of the event and therefore could not participate in the event at which other public figures, including the Mayor, were present. Several Commissioners noted they had seen:the e-mail. Commissioner O'Dea noted that it would also be nice to have a process for things or events that occur between Commission meetings. Commissioner Meifert stated that the groups would have to have some freedom to move forward between meetings and that the Commission not become a roadblock. Mr. Frey stated that the reason the Edina Arts and Culture Commission was created was to create a unified support for the arts in Edina. He noted that he and Commissioner La Valleur met with Fairview Southdale Hospital and they are interested in placing a sculpture outside the new emergency,room expansion. he Edina Public Art Committee Report was approved as presented. VIII. Correspondence and Petitions Chair Bouassida asked if there was any correspondence or petitions. None voiced. IX. Chair and Board Member Comments No additional comments made. X. Staff Comments Mr. Frey advised that the Communications Department is asking to photograph the Arts and Culture Commission and noted that he has scheduled that to occur at the October meeting. He advised that the November and December meetings would be rescheduled to the third Thursday of each month because of the conflicting holidays. He noted that the exact day is not decided at this time but noted that the meetings could be canceled if needed. XI. Adjournment The meeting was adjourned by the Chair at 5:07 p.m. I